Touches of Evil, Interesting Villians

Loathsome.

Awful people who you want to see vanquished, killed, put in their place, exposed, got rid of, reformed, defeated or just given their comeuppance.

Thankfully films are full of them. Sadly the vast majority are veritable cardboard cutouts. Sneering Simon Lagrees or moustache twirling Captain Hooks. Not really odious at all. The truly frightening or sickening ones feel quite genuine. They either recall actual people we have known or who are infamous enough for us to have heard of. Or there's something in them that strikes a chord. A chord of doom, disaster or dastardly diabolical deeds.

What makes a vivid film character, whether good or evil, is the same thing that makes  for a good movie -- truth. Art is best when it is shining a light on the reality of our existence. The truth is that evil, however we choose to define it, lurks everywhere. There are small doses of it in everyone. By infusing characters with a more evident evil, we can understand better that which we have experienced or even, perhaps, felt within ourselves.

I've been blogging frequently enough these past three years that I've actually already written a post on some of film's best villains. Indeed I followed up with another post focusing on evil women. Suffice it to say there are plenty more worth looking at, which this writing I hope will prove.

Bishop Edvard Vergerus as portrayed by Jan Malmjso in Fanny and Alexander (1982). Worse step father ever. Strictness squared. We come to love the title characters of the film. They are two children who excel at just being kids. Exploring, laughing, discovering and playing. Then their widowed Ma marries this repressive oppressive man of the cloth. He specializes in stifling imagination and meting out punishment.
Hans Landa as portrayed by Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds (2009). Nazis were some of the worst creatures to walk the Earth but they've been a positive boon to films. They're ready made villains. The evil Nazi has been a film staple since before the second world war even started. Remarkably, Waltz was able to bring the arch type to a whole new level. He was charming, intelligent -- spoke four languages -- and other than the uniform, a handsome bloke. That sort of skill set in the service of evil is particularly frightening.
Anton Chigurh as portrayed by Javier Bardem in No Country For Old Men (2007). Glory be to first Cormac McCarthy and then to the Coen Brothers that they didn't kill him off. Chirgurh is ever so much more interesting still out there. He is also destined to be an iconic character for generations to come. What the deuce is he? A relentless, merciless and uncompromising killing machine for one. A killer with his own peculiar moral code who cannot be bargained with. He's like a great white shark: equally fascinating and frightening.

Hans Beckert as portrayed by Peter Lorre in M (1931). Like many of those who commit heinous acts, Beckart is pitiful. It doesn't serve to make him any less awful, just adds creepiness to the package. This is as bad a package as exists, someone who preys on little girls. An able bodied adult would have nothing to fear from Beckert, but it is our children he makes us fear for.
Done Lope de Agurirre as portrayed by Klaus Kinski in Agurirre: The Wrath of God (1972). A little megalomania brings out the worst in anyone. Kinski's Aguirre is utterly mad with evil. His lust for gold and power and his willingness to sacrifice others in the pursuit of it, make Aguirre deserving of the fate that ultimately befalls him.
Dan Logan as portrayed by Ben Kingsley in Sexy Beast (2000). This is the same guy who played Ghandi, for crying out loud. It's a striking performance because it verges on being over the top. As a lesser actor would have made a meal of it. Sir Ben's Logan is one scary m*therf*cker and his raw anger and eccentric persistence is a personification of evil.
Marcus Licinius Crassus as portrayed by Laurence Olivier in Spartacus (1960). He may have plied his trade in Ancient Rome, but this is a textbook power mad dictator the likes of which still walk the Earth. He rules his people ruthlessly and cruelly. And Antoninus unhesitatingly exploits anyone at his disposal. For him, this is virtually everyone. Olivier gives the character dollops of rage to go with an articulate and even philosophical evil man.

Hank Quinlan as portrayed by Orson Welles in Touch of Evil (1958). The corrupt cop. There is very little in this world as distasteful. And my goodness Quinlan, the fat mumbling slob, is as noxious as they come. Welles the actor was surpassed only by Welles the director in this film.
Senator Ralph Owen Brewster as portrayed by Alan Alda in The Aviator (2004). There's one moment alone in The Aviator that qualifies Alda's Brewster for this list. Knowing that Howard Hughes, who he's about to have a business lunch with, is germophobic, he methodically places a large finger print on Hughes's drinking glass. What a rat. Brewster is of course based on the real Senator of the same name. He is portrayed as being in the pocket of a major corporation. Now I ask you, who ever heard of such a thing?
Judah Rosenthal as portrayed by Martin Landua in Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989). One of the worst things about Rosenthal is that he suffers no consequence for his actions. Indeed at the end of the film he is still a happily married wealthy and highly respected member of his community. With a clear conscience no less. He's the kind of evil who really commits only one horrible act (okay, two if you count the infidelity) and is otherwise clean as a whistle. Director/writer Woody Allen asks: How many of us are capable of the same? Chilling.

I Wish That Just Once I Could Say: "According to My Contacts in the Underground" Anyway, Herein is a Weather Report, Audience Complaints, and Discussion of Another World War II Movie

We've had a lot of rain here lately. Unlike most everyone else, I've loved every drop. I just now enjoyed some of the fruits of all that precipitation. I sat in the backyard under a clean blue sky. The ground was still damp from all the rain and the ground was a lustrous green. In spots bare of grass there was moss. Birds sang happily and a squirrel cavorted about. The air was warm and felt soft and caressing. I alternately enjoyed my surrounding and read Christopher Isherwood's Lion and Shadows, an autobiography as novel or novel as autobiography, I forget which.

This was time too perfect. So somewhere on our block a car alarm went off. Wonderful invention the car alarm. I wonder what the ratio is to the number of times they go off inadvertently to the number of times they prevent auto thefts. Anyway it was time for me to come in and write something. One occasionally just feels a strong urge to put pen to paper or rather to put finger to keyboard. So here we are....

Yesterday I saw Winter in Wartime (2008) a highly acclaimed Dutch film just now being released in this country. I hadn't been in a theater in a couple of months and forget how different it is to watch a film in public as opposed to the comfort of one's own home. A gentleman sat behind who insisted upon digging treats out of a large paper bag. Judging from the cacophonous munching, he had brought homemade popcorn. To my right was a couple who intermittently dug through a plastic bag for their vitals. In front of me was someone struggling to open a candy wrapper. Further back there was a couple who loudly whispered a few times until finally someone shushed them.

None of these vexations afflict the home movie goer. Then again the screen is bigger....

I believe it was Brad Pitt who said that Quentin Tarantino had effectively killed of World War II movies with Inglourious Basterds (2009). He, of course, meant it as a compliment and testimony to the exclamation point that Basterds put on the genre.

In fairness Winter in Wartime was released before Basterds and it's safe to assume that WWII movies will continue to be released (books on the Nazis alone had their biggest year in 2010, a testament to the everlasting fascination we have with Third Reich). But surely there's less and less material to explore. I felt I'd seen most elements of Winter in Wartime several times before.

Based on true events (when it comes to WWII who needs to make anything up?) the story revolves around a male adolescent in occupied Holland in January of 1945. The war was all but lost but the Nazis did a lot of their killing in the war's waning months, just ask any Holocaust scholar.

Our young hero, Michiel, becomes involved with the rescue of a downed British flyer. Indeed, after a series of arrests he's the whole show until he finally enlists the aid of his older sister.

There is much daring do, near escapes, mean Nazis (they really were, you know) betrayals, tensions and yes of course, our hero coming of age. This was a much celebrated film in The Netherlands and that's understandable. it's a compelling tale well told. For me it was just all a bit too familiar.

As I've detailed here any number of times, particularly in this post from several years ago, which I followed up with this post a few months later, the Second World War is a never ending source of films. The scripts write themselves. There are ready-made heroes and villains and all manner of dramatic material replete with explosions, gunfire and blood.

At this point, with so many stories having been told, one really needs something new, mostly in the way of telling it. As Tarantino did. He had the wonderful audacity to create a separate reality. It's hard to see anyone daring to try that again. Then again Hollywood is positively teeming with people who make a fortune recycling really good ideas and turning them into rot. I'd never underestimate those bastards with two"a"s.

I've spent a lifetime watching WWII films and reading non-fiction books about the Nazis. I'll reiterate a point recently made on this blog that its instructive for anyone to make at least a cursory study of the crimes of the Nazis and to engage in some serious reflection about them.

In terms of WWII films,  I can't say that I've had my fill yet but I rather doubt there's much else I can be moved by. Go ahead filmmakers, prove me wrong.

I Answer the Question: Is it Ever to Early to Talk About Next Year's Oscars? (Hint: YES!!!!)

c

According to my calender today is July 2nd. Nonetheless in today's San Francisco Chronicle there is an article by film critic Mick LaSalle about the year in film's so far. Fair enough. But the article also includes numerous sidebars about which films have a chance at receiving an Oscar nomination.

With six months left in the calendar year.

Seven months before the nominations are announced.

Eight months before the awards are presented.

Is is ever to early to discuss the coming year's Oscars? I think the day before the show is too early. Eight months? Gimme a break....

I'm open to any discussion on the state of films over the last few weeks, months, years or any other arbitrary time period you care to introduce. While the fact is that there have been more than enough great films released over the past 100 years to keep me busy for as long as I inhabit this planet, I'm always willing to enjoy another terrific new film.

If new pictures had stop being released a year ago at this time I'd have missed out on Inglourious Basterds and A Serious Man, two of my all time favorites. So as much as it cuts into my valuable time, bring me more.

But please, once and for all can we put an end to this fallacy that the Academy Awards have the slightest thing to do with determining the best achievement in films over the course of a year?

And for God's sakes, we're stuck with enough Oscar hype from November through March, can we at least be spared from it in July?

While I'm badly beating a dead horse (God forbid PETA should find out) let me refer  you to last Tuesday's list on the wonderful website, Listserve. It is titled Top 10 Biggest Travesties of the Oscars. It only really scratches the surface and in fact I did a better job a couple of years ago, but it's worth a look in any case.

I better ask my daughters never to name any of their children, Oscar.

I Enter an Oscar Competition and You Get to See My Picks (Wish Me Luck)

My ambivalence about the Academy Wards has been well documented on this blog. But that doesn't mean I can turn away from the show when it rears its humongous head every year. Nor can I resist the notion of a little competition, especially when there's a gift certificate to Amazon to be won and nothing to lose.

The rules of the competition call for participants getting one point for every correct prediction but a minus one for every one that is wrong. I can make as many or as few picks as I want.

Please note that I'm in it to win so the following DO NOT REFLECT MY PREFERENCES but my best guesses as to how voters were thinking when they filled out their ballots. Here goes nuthin.'

Best Picture - Hurt Locker
Best Supporting Actor - Christoph Waltz
Best Supporting Actress Mo'Nique
Best Foreign Language Film - Das weisse Band - Eine deutsche Kindergeschicte
Best Original Screenplay - Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds
Best Adapted Screenplay - Jason Reitman & Terri Tatchell, Up in the Air
Best Animated Feature - Up
Best Achievement in Visual Effects - Avatar

The *Cough* Films *Cough* That Got Me *Cough* Through My *Cough* Bronchitis *Cough*

Last Friday I finally returned to blogging after an unplanned and unwanted hiatus that had Riku Writes fans all over the globe saying: "his blog isn't so bad when he's not updating it." I wrote about my horrific illness (actually it was just a cold that morphed into bronchitis) and also about the more serious health woes my big brother was surviving. I also mentioned that there were many films that helped get through and that I would write a word to two about them the next day. I didn't. Nor the day after that nor the day after that. But I am today as I'm finally catching up with my life (does that even make sense -- "catching up with my life"?). Here they are:

The Maltese Falcon (1941). Mary Astor's Brigid O'Shaughnessy is one of the most complex and interesting female characters of her era. She's a liar of the bald faced variety, can't contain herself. She's evil, a temptress, but weak and oh so vulnerable. You don't know whether to make love to her or send her to the gallows. But a man's parter has been killed and he has to do something. Has to do the right thing. Bogie's in all but one short scene of the film (Miles Archer's murder) yet I doubt this would have been a classic without Astor as Brigid. Astor was a delight in all manner of film. From Dodsworth (1936) to The Palm Beach Story (1942) from Red Dust (1932) to Midnight (1939). She made a lot of good films even better. Maltese Falcon is a -- pun intended -- classic example.

Army of Shadows (1969). Director Jean-Pierre Melville was the master of let us say French New Wave Film Noir. But his masterpiece was this story of the French resistance. Well after all the Nazis were criminals and in a sense so too were the Resistance fighters. They were playing their little games of hide and seek and kill and destroy. The stakes were impossibly high for the French. Cyanide tablet anyone? It's an utterly compelling film from start to finish because it all seems so damn real. You hardly need to embellish such stories. So Melville had his heroes as rather plain looking folk acting like middle management employees doing a day's work. Thus an inherently fascinating tale is allowed to stand on its own terms and as such is one of the great movies of all time. It's only been on DVD for a few years and not enough people are aware of it. If you're unfamiliar with Army of Shadows, do yourself a favor. I wrote about in July '08.

The Seal Wolf (1941) and Smart Money (1931). Back-to-back Edward G. Robinson. Smart Money is a relatively forgettable picture except for the fact that is the only film pairing of Robinson and James Cagney. Their scenes together do not disappoint, just the overall movie does, though its still well worth the time for fans of either or both stars. (Put me solidly in the both category.) Films give us a lot of what-ifs such as what if two stars had been paired on screen or more often? I don't know that Cary Grant and Bogie sharing the screen would have worked especially well but Cagney and Robinson were a good fit both being tough guys with smarts who were comfortable with physical movements. They, like Burt Lancaster and and Marlin Brando, are interesting to watch for every step they take, every hand gesture every punch thrown. Oddly, in Sea Wolf Robinson is a lot more self contained, his hands often in his pocket, his gestures small. But its one of the best of his many great performances. I love the film and see it more and more as warning against fascism. Robinson is in sharp contrast to co star John Garfield who I always find so wooden and uninteresting. Ida Lupino is in it too and she'll forever be linked in my mind with the word underrated. What an actress!

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977). It might have been 20 years since I last saw this film. I was struck by how realistic it seems. I mean that of all the cinematic efforts to predict what human encounters with celestial beings will be like this one seems damn near scientific. (Maybe this speaks more to my peculiarities than to the film.) I'll have to watch it again soon to figure out why, but the movie comes tantalizingly close to brilliance and falls just short. I guess you could say that's praising it with faint damnation. It's of course elevated by the mere presence of Francois Truffaut who was an inspired choice as the French scientist (he wouldn't do as a Bolivian one). Dreyfuss was amid a run of great performances and the rest of the cast ranges from good to exemplary. As a story CEOTTK has all kind of elements and themes going for it, not the least of which is as a story of obsession. There are a lot of excellent films about obsessed people and sooner rather than later I'll devote a lengthy post to that topic. (Promise.) themselves.

Inglourious Basterds (2009). I've seen it four times now, twice in the theater and twice on DVD and it gets better with each viewing. Director Quentin Tarantino made this film like Michael Jordan scoring 56 points in a playoff game. Everything he tried was right on the money. The casting was inspired. There are so many roles that are and will remain memorable. Scenes resonate. The score was perfect and the whole audacious premise is inspired. Tarantino never needs to top this but if he comes close he'll have created a most impressive legacy. Hell, maybe he already has.

Foul Play (1978). I saw this in the theater shortly after it came out. I should have left it at the one viewing. How on Earth did Chevy Chase get any more film roles after his disastrous performance in this very foul movie? On the other hand the film launched the "Hollywood Star" portion of Dudley Moore's career and Goldie Hawn was as delightful as ever. It's one of those ridiculous crime comedies that somehow finds a large enough audience to make a buck and thus inspires other similar disasters. Real question is: why did I sit through the whole thing a second time? How sick was I?

Manhattan (1979). One of my top ten films of all time and the first I watched on our new DVD player. I never know what to say about it because if I start I may not be able to finish. To me it has the wittiest and most intelligent screenplay of the last 4,000 years. There are lines that I still laugh at loud (that's LOL to you kids) at. I think Diane Keaton is even more impressive here than in Annie Hall. The opening shots of New York with Allen's narration and the strains of Gershwin comprise one of the great starts to a film ever. Period.

Chinatown (1974). I watched it paying particular attention to Faye Dunaway. It's interesting to look at her knowing that the whole sister/mother business. We don't know but she does. It makes her performance all the more impressive. Dunaway had a great run from 1967 through 1976: Bonnie & Clyde (1967), The Thomas Crown Affair (1968), Little Big Man (1970), Chinatown (1974), Three Days of the Condor (1975) and Network (1976). She played opposite Warren Beatty, Steve McQueen, Dustin Hoffman, Jack Nicholson, Robert Redford and William Holden. Not too shabby. Neither is Chinatown, one of those rare films that is not diminished the least in knowing its secret. In other words you could watch it again and again should you want to. Count me in. 

George Washington Slept Here (1942). The wife and I are were talking the other night about how there are always some movies that people like way more than they know they should. Not guilty pleasures really. It's more like how my discussion on this blog about how seeing a movie is like a date. Sometimes you fall in love, other times not so much. Sometimes the movie or date is great but there's no connection. GWSH is like a date with someone who's got flaws that are plain to see but you feel a connection and go gaga. Part of my attraction to GWSH is my attraction to Ann Sheridan who I'm nuts about (someone build me a time machine). There's also Jack Benny who I really like but in a totally different way -- like I needed to tell you. I'm not going to apologize for loving this film nor defend my love. It's just one of those things. Anyway, it was the perfect film to enjoy when I needed a little comfort from feeling like poop. Besides Sheridan and Benny you get Charles Coburn, Franklin Pangborn, Hattie McDaniel and Percy Kilbride. But mostly there's Ann.....(sigh)

Okay, Okay, My Top Twenty Films of the Last Decade

I'm yielding to overwhelming and unrelenting pressure (okay a couple of people mentioned it in passing) and publishing a top 20 of my favorite films from the preceding decade. The oughts.

Initially I had balked because I felt there weren't a score of movies worthy of a best decade list. But upon further reflection, there were some excellent efforts, surely enough for a passable top twenty. And indeed this past decade is probably far better than either the 80's or 90's. (Still, this list is in no way comparable to the decade bests from the 1930's and 1970's that I recently published here.)

So here at last are my top 20 films of the oughts.

1. Inglourious Basterds (2009) Tarantino U.S.
2. The Aviator (2004) Scorsese U.S.
3. No Country For Old Men (2007) Coen Brothers U.S.
4. Barbarian Invasions (2003) Arcand French Canada
5. Y Tu Mama Tambien (2001) Cuaron Mexico
6. Zodiac (2007) Fincher U.S.
7. Minority Report (2002) Spielberg U.S.
8. A Serious Man (2009) Coen Brothers U.S.
9. Downfall (2004) Hirschbiegel Germany
10. City of God (2002) Meirelles/Lund Brazil
11. Lives of Others (2006) von Donnersmarck Germany
12. Wonder Boys (2000) Hanson U.S.
13. Gangs of New York (2002) Scorsese U.S.
14. The Man Without a Past (2002) Kaurismaki Finland
15. Vicky Christina Barcelona (2008) Allen U.S.
16. Amores perros (2000) Inarritu Mexico
17. Bamboozled (2000) Lee U.S.
18. Milk (2008) Van Sant U.S.
19. The Class (2008) Cantet France
20. Bad Education (2004) Almodovar Spain

Defending Our Movies, Defending Ourselves

Those of us with even the teeniest amount of self awareness all know one thing about ourselves: we are not perfect. We all have varying degrees of acceptance of this fundamental fact, but there is no getting around at least some of our imperfections. We therefore seek transcendence in other things.

Looking for it in other people is futile. Our most celebrated athletes, entertainers, politicians and writers may have a special talent but are, without exception, just as unalterably human as we are. In case this should be forgotten the media is always quite ready, willing and able to report blemishes as they become apparent.

So we look to things. Many people find perfection in their country. This is not patriotism but blindness. A nation state and its government is a construct that even in the best of circumstances will at some (or perhaps for that matter all) times will be exploited by the few for their benefit or in other ways not best serve the many. And of course countries rely upon leaders who are human... and well you know where this is going.

So we look to art. Through songs, paintings and films we can find beauty. Some works of art we enjoy or admire but acknowledge could have done with a change here or there. But others, albeit a precious few, we celebrate, revere, worship. Here at last is perfection. And we adopt it. It is part of our identity. It is of us.

No bloody wonder many react so angrily to criticism of their favorite movie.

The more fragile our ego, the weaker our self esteem, the more angrily we may react. Not surprsingly older teens and fanboys breath fire when one of their chosen ones is blasted by a critic. Film critics who dared question the perfection of The Dark Knight (2008) last Summer were vilified by angry emails, blog posts and the like. A few months ago the Transformers sequel was roasted by critics far and wide. The near unanimity of opinion of the film did not stop the films legions of devotees from screaming foul at critics. Teens and the typical fan boy is at a vulnerable age, struggling for identity. When something they love is not universally adored they feel the self they are just now forging is being questioned.

One would assume that an old coot like yours truly would gladly avail himself of criticism of a favorite film, want to entertain all views. One would be wrong. I have fallen head over heals in love with Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds. If a writer has harsh words for it I don't want to know. And it's not just about current stuff. All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) has been around for 79 years and if someone has written anything negative about it, whether upon its release or yesterday, I ain't interested.

So, how, you ask, am any different than those keening teens? By the very fact that I don't concern myself with attacks on what I love. If I happen to come across some harsh words for a favored film I hurry along to something else. Others will take the time to read opposing opinions and my even engage with civil debate. Bully! Depending upon how you look at it I either don't have the time, inclination or self security to hear what's wrong with what I find infallible. (Hey, I just assume not hear what you don't like about my wife and kids either.) On the other hand I'll gladly indulge every word of praise from others I can find. Let us share our love. Give me more insight into why I love this movie. Let me find new prisms though which to view and love it.

Of course this is movies. When it comes to political systems and philosophies, leaders, programs and aims, it is incumbent on all of us to remain detached and willing to hear all sides. Not that many people are capable of such rational behavior. The right has been particularly guilty of interpreting any dissent against government policy as sedition when it is in fact the privilege if not the duty of all citizens. Indeed some American patriots are quite evidently the most insecure people you'll ever see. The constant yammering about how great America is (Fox News' Sean Hannity even did a series of shows on how America is the greatest country in the world) is positively bizarre. Imagine a relatively young and successful person bellowing to one and all that he is the greatest person in the world and then brooking no criticism. Madness!

Let us all be willing to hear all sides on key issues of the day. Except of course if someone is talking mess about a beloved movie, them we can ignore.

Excuse My Continued Exuberance and How About Some Cake With Your Movie?

In writing about Inglourious Basterds (again) on his Scanners blog, Jim Emerson referenced an Alfred Hitchcock quote in which Hitch said that his films are not slices of life but slices of cake.

I am a big fan of neo realism and gritty tales of everyday life. Whether from the Pre Code Era or a recent independent film, I like a good movie that shines a light on life's truths, however unseemly they may be.

But I also like ice cream and dancing and raucous celebrations and a toe tapping rock songs from the 60's. Most of all I like art, in whatever form, that wakes me up, shakes me up and takes me up, up, up. Move me, man, move me. I don't always wanna just sit here, mind alert but feelings numb. A bite of good rich chocolate, The Who singing Behind Blue Eyes, watching His Girl Friday (1940) things that make my senses stand up and shout, "yipeee!"

Why am I addicted to working out? The endorphins, man. Totally high off them for hours after. I don't walk after a work out, I strut. Hear the music before turning on my iPod.

What good is sitting alone in your room? Come hear the music play. I don't know if life really is a Cabaret (1972), old chum, but it can be a real gas. Sometimes you've got to touch it. Grab it. Then hold on for dear life. Cool ride.

Tarantino totally did it. Right up there with his own Pulp Fiction (1994) and works of so many auteurs, he did it with Inglorious. Not off the high yet, 24 hours later. A work out in between so I'm buzzing. Bees be jealous. Oh sure I'll come down. Come down and sit for a bit. Gotta get a dose of reality. Read the news and see what...but not yet. Not now....

See, this is what movies can do. Be the cake. But no calories, no starch, no fat just the deliciousness. The yummy. You get it from the Marx Brothers, from Preston Sturges, Ernest Lubitsch, Cary Grant, Bonnie & Clyde (1967), Goodfellas (1990). The nerve and the verve. They dared to be different. They dared to be good. And they were. No they ARE. Great art is eternal. The paintings of Jan van Eyck and Sandro Botticelli ain't going nowhere. They, like ET are right here.

A terrific film like Inglourious Basterds will have me appreciating other films, and music, dark chocolates all kinds of stuff. It's like its contagious. Our senses are heightened and we want more. The soul is hungry and must be fed. Nourish it. With cake!

Great art offers the unexpected or gives you a different look at the expected. That's it! It's different. Sturges, the Beatles, Ben & Jerry's ice cream. Unexpected. Different. Not just rock n roll or vanilla or a comedy. Not just anything. You know where else you get that feeling? From love. That's why falling in love can be so scary. You've got the rush of the roller coaster and you're not sure its safe. It's actually riskier than a roller coaster, more danger of getting hurt. But the ride is sooooo fun. Thing with love is, that it may hurt you but the rewards! Love makes you experience your life. You're not walking by it anymore. You're in it. Deeply involved with your existence. Great art (and you and only you can be the judge of what's great) involves you. Can't just watch or listen or taste or feel. It's more.

Am I serious that a movie can be so profound? Maybe not for you. Maybe you don't like chocolate. We're all different. Me I don't go backpacking. I don't listen to punk. Don't do it for me. But a great film touches a part of me that's not easy to access. If you've spent some time on this planet and you've seen some difficult times (affirmative to both for me) then you really, really appreciate what you love. I mean it lingers after the moment. And I don't want to go all R rated on you but its the difference between making love and just having sex. Sex good. Love making goes beyond the moment of apogee.

So all this from a Quentin Tarantino movie? No, no, no that was the spark, great on its own terms but of a larger picture. One in which the senses are alive and enjoying. Let us eat cake!

The Glories of Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds

I saw Quentin Tarantino's new film Inglourious Basterds this afternoon. As you will read, I loved it. I felt compelled to write about forthwith but hardly am up to the task of a full blown review. The experience of this particular film is too immediate. To write anything truly meaningful of any sort of length would require more perspective and perhaps a second viewing (can't wait). There is quite enough about it on the internet to keep you busy anyway. However, I did want to share some scattered thoughts of mine and have done so below. Since the movie has only been in theaters for a few days I've been careful to avoid spoilers.

The biggest risk Tarantino takes in Inglorious Basterds is in the length of some scenes and the amount of dialogue in those scenes. It is a risk that pays off handsomely. Far too many modern directors like to jump hither and yon, not confident that they can direct a long scene or that their audience will sit through one. Tarantino has no such fear. In fact the movie's first scene contains a lengthy dialogue between two men, a French farmer and an SS officer. It is totally compelling because of the true nature of their discussion ( the farmer is hiding a Jewish family) and the bravura performance of Christopher Waltz as the officer.

Tarnatino is clearly a man very much in love with cinema. There is thus an exuberance to his film making and its never been more evident than with this film. He positively loves the story he is telling and the characters he has created. He wants us to love the film too but doesn't pander, he trusts in that story and in those characters. He doesn't manipulate scenes but let's them play out. I love it when a director trusts his story because it also means he trusts me. Tarantino is a true auteur.

The previews are misleading. The focus of the film in not on Brad Pitt and his merry band of Jewish American Nazi hunters. Their escapades are certainly central to the story but they are but one part. They in fact never even cross paths directly with a few other featured characters.

Roger Ebert had a great line about the film. He said the actors didn't chew the scenery but they did lick it. I couldn't have said it better myself but I sure as well wish I had said exactly that first. Waltz is especially mannered. It's one of those boundary pushing performances that is so good for being so daring. I love it when actors challenge conventions without lapsing into parody or caricature.

One of the things that I particularly like about Tarantino is that he is so good with his female stars. First Uma Thurman and Pam Greier and now Melanie Laurent and Diane Kruger. It's surprising to learn that he has only recently come to the films of Joseph von Sternberg who veritably made love to Marlene Dietrich with his camera in their many collaborations. Tarantino knows how to utilize, direct and film women. There are many great directors who never worked particularly well with female stars.

When going to see a film for the first time we cannot divorces ourselves from our preconceptions or current mood. Being exceptionally happy, anxious, sad or preoccupied can and often will be a filter through which we see a movie. I always go to a movie hopeful that I'm going to see something fantastic (seriously, who goes to a movie thinking they're going to hate it other than, perhaps, professional reviewers?). I was in a good movie viewing mood today, glad to be taking oldest daughter to a film. However I carried the burden of extremely high expectations. This is often death to a movie. Anything less than perfection can ruin a perfectly good movie saddled with unrealistic expectations. But Inglourious Basterds was so good it didn't matter. It's the best film I've seen in theaters since No Country for Old Men (2007).

Films based on actual events often get blasted for straying from those actual events. Inglourious Basterds doesn't so much stray from history as re-write it in toto. Don't know that anyone has squawked about it so far but anyone who does shouldn't be taken seriously. As Tarantino has explained, he was letting the story be driven by the characters. Good for him. Artists often feel too hemmed in by empirical fact. Live a little. There is a time and place for historical accuracy. This film was clearly not one of them.

Nice to see Mike Myers in something other than one of his own disasters. Maybe he'll settle in for awhile as a character actor. He clearly needs to stop writing and directing for a bit (he hasn't made a really good movie since the first Austin Powers film, though the second was passable). He's too good to go away entirely for any length of time.

There is the small part of a waitress played by a young French actress named Anne-Sophie Franck. She's got such a captivating face that I'll bet you a donut you'll be seeing her in more prominent roles in years to come.

I love the shot of the cream and the strudel. That was a nice touch that shows a film maker who is patient and meticulous. Reminds me of the Coen brothers shot of the uncrinkling wrapper in No Country.