All Purpose NYC ILX Film Snob Thread

made me effusive for digital, too

i'm off to see waterface
i mean watermark

x-post: Oh, cool! Is that festival going on right now? I saw Story of my Death today, it's... long... and different. But also beautiful and with images I can't get out of my head. But my god it's long.

I suspect I will go see this low-budget '64 comedy by Theodore J Flicker and Buck Henry at Anthology at 7:30 bcz Letterboxd reports "No one has seen this film."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058690/

Some stathound at 538 should whip up year by year analysis of IMDB ratings and Rotten Tomatoes scores and such to determine the greatest year in film, worldwide.

(post inspired by What’s The Greatest Year In Film? - http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/14/freedom-to-fail/ )

Linklater's Boyhood opens BAMCinemafest on June 18

http://www.bam.org/film/2014/bamcinemafest2014

http://www.indiewire.com/article/richard-linklaters-much-loved-boyhood-will-open-bamcinemafest

I can't skip any '30s (or '20s) John Barrymore film I haven't seen, so Reunion in Vienna tonight:

http://www.moma.org/visit/calendar/film_screenings/20463

I just saw Morgiana last week and liked it quite a bit. The only other Juraj Herz film I can find on dvd is Cremator but I heard mixed things about that. I think he might have some short films on YouTube. Anyone seen his films much?

Keep an eye out for the Obergammergau players, Morbs.

I should know that quote, but don't. The middle act of RiV is hilarious tho.

First of 2-part Fassbinder (plus) retro at FSLC in May:

http://www.filmlinc.com/daily/entry/rainer-werner-fassbinder-retrospective-film-society-of-lincoln-center

MARKETA LAZAROVA looked and sounded really good but somehow I didn't manage to understand what was going on for two and a half hours.

SZINDBAD. A guy walks around talking to women (and one guy, if I remember correctly) about his relationships with women across his life. I'm not sure if his observations are supposed to be particularly good but the film has some nice sequences. Constant close-ups on food, flowers and anything with nice colours and textures. I liked the general approach of this film in terms of the non-linear structure and how the camera seeks out pretty things.

LEGEND OF THE SURAMI FORTRESS. I really love Parajanov's style and approaches but I never love the films as a whole. Some really great shots in there with the repetitive rhythmic movements and dances. Obviously great costumes.

I have to say that I don't understand the ejaculatory praises for most of the arthouse canon I've seen. I vastly prefer the style of these directors to most films but I often think that critics overrate films because they want to encourage the more interesting things (even if they aren't totally great) because they have to see so much slush, so they cultivate the approaches they prefer.
Does anyone really watch Bergman, Tarkovsky etc.. saying to themselves "this is fucking amazing!"?

yes

Lucky them (you?)

Very much so.

But even then, I think it's completely right for critics to talk up interesting and different things even if they aren't totally great. Film - and culture in general - should be seen more like a stream, rather than as a collection of separated entities. Criticism should be a companion to film, a way to follow up after people have left the cinema, rather than just saying 'this is great' / 'this is a bit less than great'. IMO. Otherwise, you end up with nit-picking ridiculousness, such as critics arguing over whether that penultimate shot in Stray Dogs would have been better at 11 min rather than 13, etc.

Does anyone really watch Bergman, Tarkovsky etc.. saying to themselves "this is fucking amazing!"?

― Robert Adam Gilmour, Sunday, April 27, 2014 8:18 AM (17 minutes ago)

I consider myself a very poor "reader" of films -- I pretty much have to have my hand held through any level beyond the most basic narrative/textual level -- and I definitely do. Especially Bergman and Ozu.

But the dvd boxes are always covered in words like "astonishing masterpiece!", "an overwhelmingly emotional revelation!" and to be honest, I'm not sure I've seen more than a small handful of films that merit that kind of praise. Even when I enjoy them, I sit wondering where all this pleasure comes from.

I think nitpicking can be constructive.

I am a big fan of alternative animation sometimes. A lot of it from Russia, Hungary and Belarus in 60s-early 90s. Last year I discovered Gyorgy Kovasznai and I was hugely impressed but I can imagine it boring some people.

Would anyone be interested in a animation for snobs thread? No Disney, Pixar, mainstream anime; Stuff like Quay Bros, Svankmajer, Russian guys?

Another vote for "amazing!" And Frederik B. otm.

Can't speak to what goes on in the bemused poster's mind but I seem to remember what went in on in my own when I first started to watch this stuff and was feeling uncomfortable, felt like it might be a con, or that it was attacking the classic Hollywood style or questioning my existence or something. Eventually came to think- if there are boring moments in the film-there are plenty of boring moments in life, and without those you wouldn't get the epiphanies, such as they are. The existence that it is being challenged, if that is what is going on, is not necessarily mine, but that of the characters or the director or his proxy. Finally I don't view it as a threat to the Classic Hollywood Style but the other side of the same coin, one which needs to be flipped over every now and then.

also, Manakamana has ice cream

Basically you, RAG, are expressing some kind of fear of an aesthetic elitism and arguing against it with a simplistic arithmetic elitism -"there is only room at the top for a handful of masterpieces, thereby these guys must be overreacting."

Your proposed thread seems interesting however, although I don't know much about that stuff.

Lol, the icecream scene in Manakamana was so amazing to watch at the theater. First, a bit of uncertain laughter - we're supposed to be watching art, you know. Then, as the scene becomes more and more absurd, it slowly spread. And as the two women themselves starts laughing, the whole theater errupts in relief. Such an astonishing masterpiece. Also: goat-butt!

I wouldnt use the M word, but tons better than Leviathan

http://grandoldmovies.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/lorre-agent.jpg

Peter Lorre as anticipatory plagiarist of Biz Markie.

"You say she's just a friend, don't you, Rick?"

Sorry.

Anyway, not in the business of using the M word myself- for one thing, don't want get into those "Is! Is not!" discussions, but I am aware that others use it and try to take it with a grain of salt if I have to.

is RAG secretly Dan Kois attempting to reignite the "cultural vegetable" shitstorm?

Don't know how anyone can watch the Bell sequence in Andrei Rublev and not be overwhelmed.

James Redd and the Blecchs says "Basically you, RAG, are expressing some kind of fear of an aesthetic elitism"

I wouldn't say so at all, the world needs far better aesthetic standards and I'm always complaining about it. I was way more perplexed and frustrated as a teen but now I'm just a bit more curious about how and why other people enjoy this stuff.
Kim Ki Duk does long slow quiet scenes, many characters never speak but I've never found him remotely boring. Everything seems so tight and disciplined.
The general aesthetics of "snobby" films are rarely a problem for me. It's usually the clarity of the story and the tightness of the pacing that I have problems with, but I'm more than happy to be told that I just don't get some films. I generally don't enjoy the social realist approach, I prefer films that are closer to purely visual and don't really have to make much sense.
I really liked Malle's Black Moon but I've got the impression that most of his fans hated it.

I really do love that ending semi-famous scene from Shadows Of Forgotten Ancestors. That is precisely the kind of thing I want from films.

I haven't seen Andrei Rublev yet.

Really? You should give it a try if you have time although be forewarned that you might have problems with the clarity of the story and the tightness of the pacing.

I wouldn't say so at all, the world needs far better aesthetic standards and I'm always complaining about it.

I made the animation thread with an appropriately snobby title.

i'd like to see manakamanamakanmanaana soon

I was just glad IFC Center hasn't put it in one of the 40-seat 'galleries' yet

yeah, shit. i gotta get on that now before that happens.

double dose of '70s Holmes revisionism tomw night

http://www.filmlinc.com/films/on-sale/sherlock-holmes-debunked

Mizoguchi in Astoria

http://www.movingimage.us/films/2014/05/02/detail/mizoguchi/

Mizoguchi Time!

I want to come back to what I was talking about above a bit. This isn't just a thing I get with the art house canon, I feel a similar disillusionment with culture in general, it's kind of like that Absurd Child Sydrome thing that was discussed in another thread, it's kind of a constant way I feel about most culture.
I think sometimes the critical assessment of some things need to be downgraded significantly. Especially when I'll admit even many of my favourite things are severely flawed and need to be recommended with major cautions and reservations.
My problem with hyperbole and words like "master" and "masterpiece" is that it creates totally unreal expectations with people who are unfamiliar with whatever genre/medium the piece of work is in and almost inevitably results in a bad comedown that can leave a sour taste that makes you reluctant to come back.
I think calling creators "a master" is particularly bad one because it suggests to me that a creator does something about as well as it could be done and rarely puts a foot wrong. I can't think of anyone in any medium who can live up to that. Even the very best of creators struggle to get their best results and it usually doesn't work out that well most of the time.

I can see how it might be a necessary evil to overrate things because I could imagine being a critic who thinks a director is extremely promising compared to most of the crap they have to sit through and would like more films like this but doesn't truly feel is the sort of revelation they say but maybe that is a white lie that is needed to push against the blockbuster fluff. But again I think it can turn people away from alternative cinema when you keep promising orgasmic epiphanies.

I'm not sure why films seem to me like more of a minefield than other things. Every now and then I'll be pleased about something like Piano Teacher, Page Turner, Innocence, The Hunt; some bits of directors like Fellini, Maya Deren, Brakhage, Maddin, Parajanov, Wim Wenders and Kim Ki Duk. But most of the time I feel like for the time and money is far more of a risk than music(probably the most rewarding, beautiful medium there is).

There is quite a lot of stuff I'm still curious about but I'm always tempted to spend the time/money on books instead. It's really daunting.

Can anyone recommend directors closer to pure visual pleasure without story concerns? Does Kenneth Anger fit that?

Who cares about your hypothetical straweveryman, doesn't he already have enough incoherent but easy to follow junk to gorge on?

manakamana was superb
it shifted to one of the shoeboxes btw

Sorry, not saying The Enterprise should be hauling garbage that everything out there is incoherent junk, some stuff might be coherent junk, some incoherent non-junk, some neither. Maybe I should ask, which exact masterpiece mavens are causing this alleged problem? Name names. Gavin Smith? Kent Jones?

RAG, you like Apichatpong Weeraseethakul?

Or more rambunctiously, Stephen Chow?

Gavin Smith is at p much every movie i've gone to this week

Ellen Burstyn did a v nice pre-film interview at Resurrection last night.

Ha, I used to see him all the time at screenings too.

The plentiful junk isn't something I enjoy and I don't know how I gave the impression I ever wanted that.
Name critics? Whoever's quotes cover the disc boxes. Obviously all sorts of films and books have unreasonably high praise covering them but I thought that better film labels would resist that.

Boonme and Tropical Malady are on my list.

The only Chow film I've seen is Kung Fu Hustle(some lovely moments but too much fakey special effects), but I didn't think he would be considered non-mainstream.

If you don't see a name you recognize who cares what the blurb says?

I know very few critics. Many of the people picking up these boxes won't know either. I think it's just kind of a natural assumption that a label that deals with higher quality films would want to be more fair and sensible about the quotes they use.
When you know more about the stuff you are buying, you tend to not even look at the blurbs.

I refer you to the thread title- this is the official NYC Film Snob thread, not the random timid seeker of challenging but not too challenging cinematic fare - challoptics.

But then the problem really isn't with critics but with marketing.

Boonme is the biggest masterpiece of the decade. Apichatbong Weeresethakul is a master who never puts a foot wrong. Well, except for Mekong Hotel. And Blissfully Yours is a bit long as well, though it's obviously a masterpiece.