Wendy and Lucy made me want to dig up all of Kelly Reichardt’s work and study it to see if I could learn how she creates “tension” or at least a sustained engagement out of thin air, seemingly. It is possible, of course, that one could watch Michelle Williams read a book and find it compelling. Anyway.
Got to follow the Film Society of Lincoln Center in your mode of choice, blog, twit, whatevs. Stuff like this is why:
All story all the time. Well, and stunning performance from the surveillance guy. Major pageturner. Couldn’t help but reflect on Stephen Harper’s views on the arts in Canada, watching this. Extra impressive as a first feature. Here’s the director on Charlie Rose.
The movie, while not exactly schlongfull, does contain 100% more schlong than the trailer. But I am misleading you as to the greatest virtue of this movie. The Man Who Fell To Earth? Endless marvelosity. And the pee shooting out of the pink microdress! Movies I felt, at least for a moment, while watching this: Logan’s Run, Easy Rider, L’eclisse, Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant. I guarantee if you try to tally your favorite visuals in this thing, you will lose count.
I can contemplate, graphically, serial murder. I can appreciate a 90-minute depiction of slaughter. Movies I have enjoyed: Natural Born Killers, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, Scarface, Aliens, Tarantino’s, etc. I just need a ripping yarn. Or a big idea. Or a weird idea. Or wailing special effects and stunts.
Well, there are no effects or stunts to speak of in No Country For Old Men. There are no big or weird ideas, at least not presented in any way you could sink your teeth into. The official tagline is “there are no clean getaways”, which I would paraphrase as “no free lunch”, and hope for a commentary on “America”, or greed, or laziness, or the Buddha’s first noble truth. Instead, I get a video game. A guy finds money and another guy hunts him for it, killing everyone in his path. I don’t know why the first guy is trying to keep the money. I don’t know anything about him. No external forces bear on them. There are two other characters who appear to be pointless. Woody Harrelson’s character appears to be intentionally pointless. Tommy Lee Jones may be intended to provide a philosophical and/or moral input, which could be good, except that it goes something like this:
-“Anytime you quit hearin ‘sir’ and ‘ma’am’ the end is pretty much in sight”
Or maybe he’s intended to provide wry witticisms, which could be good, except that it goes something like this:
-“(It’s a mess, ain’t it.) Well if it ain’t, it’ll do til the mess gets here.”
I haven’t read the novel, but I’ve read that it’s about causality and fate. And indeed, the film has characters say, on several occasions, some variation of “you can’t stop what’s coming”. Now this could be an interesting idea, but as part of a “keep the psycho druglord away from his $2 million” plot, it’s kind of a no-brainer.
So you watch this series of murders of innocent bystanders, wrapped in absolutely nothing but the natural suspense of hunting, interrupted occasionally by the confusing pointlessness of Tommy Lee Jones, and for a brief time by the confusing pointlessness of Woody Harrelson.
And you say to yourself: Javier Bardem’s hairdo and method of shooting people is not enough to carry this material.
Surprising from the Coens.
Notes On A Scandal? I mean. Delicious writing. Jaw-dropping performances. I wish Cate Blanchett was my mom.
Like a collaboration between Terrence Malick and Harmony Korine. Criterion packs sublime 1969 short A Day With The Boys in with it. This monologue (above) kills me.
When I die, this is where I will go. Meanwhile, I want this looped, playing on my wall.
Loren seduces gay guy Mastroianni: that’s a heat we cannot yet measure with our crude technologies. FFWD the opening news reel the moment you get the point, because it goes on for a long long time.
For some reason I thought Babel was a handheld, doc-looking political statement about terrorism. Maybe a lot of the marketing used big gun Brad, whose story would most match that description. Anyway, I wasn’t terribly interested in that, so only got around to this last night. Goodness! There is so much more to this than that. So much beauty. Technically pleasing. Some ideas to consider. My only complaint is that I didn’t feel it as much as I would have liked, and this movie seems to have the potential to make you feel deeply. I’m not sure if this is a performance problem, or a story problem. I suspect the former, since the character you feel the most for, the nanny, is no more revealed through story than the other characters. Whatever, it’s a great piece of work that did inspire me.
Love it when it feels like In the Bedroom, that suspense coming from seemingly nowhere, the quiet stillness. Hate the narration. Can’t buy Kate Winslet as dowdy. Something too pat and cop-out about the ending for the lovers.
Even More Legendary 
You must be logged in to post a comment.