Confessions of a Cinephile

9 1/2 Weeks

2009-06-22T19:06:00.000-07:00

Reaction when first viewed at the age of sixteen: confusion, shock, embarrassment, but secretly quite thrilled and strangely aroused.

Reaction when viewed twenty years later: great soundtrack!!

Nuremberg

2009-06-04T11:03:00.000-07:00

I'm writing this with a bad taste in my mouth and a knot in my stomach. The documentary Nuremberg: The Nazi's Facing their Crimes is for those truly interested in international justice, Word War II or human rights, it is just what the title says, an overview, using actual footage, of the Nuremberg trials in which twenty-one Nazi ringleaders stood trial for "crimes against peace" and "crimes against humanity". The first time in history such charges had ever been tried in a criminal hearing. The word "genocide" was also coined for the first time during this ten month long proceeding. There are no plot twists and turns, the outcome is already known, or quite obvious but it is still a fascinating film. While I was aware of the Nuremberg trial I was not aware of the use of documentary films submitted as evidence, in fact the judges' bench was relocated to make room for the film screen!

And it is this film evidence that really provides the gut-wrenching reality of the situation. This is a two disc set, the first being the film itself the second has three films of which I have so far only seen two. One of these is an American documentary film submitted for evidence a few days into the trial and entitled Nazi Concentration Camps is a compilation of filmed evidence taken shortly after the seizure of a number of prison/elimination/concentration camps throughout the Nazi territories. What they portray is so stark, so real, that I could not watch any further (for now). I have seen many films, fiction and non-fiction, about WWII and the human rights atrocities committed in the name of National Socialism, but these evidentiary images are not neatly edited for time or content but offer fifty-eight straight minutes of cruelty, inhumanity and delusion on the part of the German people. After the liberation of many camps local German citizens were brought in to tour the horrors that had been committed in their name and from which they benefited. The change of attitude from the start to the finish of these tours was marked. I have German blood in me, luckily my people were in Canada before the rise of Hitler but there is still part of me that feels guilt for what was done. My mother was born here in 1945, the year the war ended, so obviously I can hold no direct responsibility but watching this film, seeing what happened to these people and what the majority of German "Aryan" citizens allowed to happen to their neighbours, and knowing that right now in the world banishment, genocide, torture and mass murder is happening, well that is a realization that can leave a bad taste in anyone's mouth.

Though not for the weak of stomach or overly sensitive, these images are vital. They can change one's attitude about they're own life and the world around them. It is that "slap in the face" awareness that while watching Nurmenberg, borrowed from a publicly funded library, sitting in my comfy chair, in my nice little apartment, with food in the cupboard, and all of my loved ones a phone call away, that my life is abundant and blessed. Petty insecurities and desires vanish when faced with the truth of what fear can do to the human race. How desperate life can be, and how fragile. Not just for the persecuted, which is obvious and horrifying, but also those doing the persecuting. How full of fear, the terror the people of Nazi Germany must have felt in order to carry out such orders, to feel nothing as they tortured and killed men, women, children, the elderly and sick. To believe that a five year old child, or an old man with a cane could ruin their lives. One defendant at the Nuremberg trial tried to plead self defence, believing that those herded into the camps were a real and present threat to all of Europe and the world. A threat so real that a pre-emptive strike was justified (where have I heard that before?). Of course we can never fully understand just what happened in Germany in those years, we can talk about economic, psychological, socio-political, aesthetic and geographic reasons but to really understand the mindset of every individual ;Hitler, Himmler, and their ilk within the Third Reich, the SS, the active Nazi party members and the citizenry, well that will be forever beyond us. Films such as Nuremberg: The Nazis Facing their Crimes can only scratch the surface and create more questions, but I think they are good questions and I will keep asking them for as long as my stomach and my heart will allow.

J.

Shakespeare on Screen

2009-05-29T20:32:00.000-07:00

Can Americans do Shakespeare? That seems to me the real question behind Al Pacino's quest to understand and make accessible, William Shakespeare's play Richard III. As you can guess I am a fan of Shakespeare and particularly Shakespeare on film. As one of the scholar's in this documentary explains, film allows an actor to forgo the problem of projection and instead focus on the feeling and meaning within the words. The ability to whisper is the defining difference between stage and celluloid. To hear Shakespeare's characters actually soliloquize to themselves, to feel that this really is a secret between the character and the audience, to have intimate conversation played in an intimate way, allows people who would normally not "follow" Shakespeare's lines to get a better feeling of what is really being said and done. Of course I don't deny the power of stage productions, but film allows Shakespeare to reach a greater audience and introduce new generations to the wonderful worlds that The Bard presents.

Another wonderful point that Mr. Pacino (and I told my niece this years ago when we saw Shakespeare in the Park)makes is that it's not necessary to understand every word that is uttered but instead to allow the story to unfold, to see the bigger picture and be swept along with the story. For this and many reason's I wish Looking for Richard, made in 1996, was available back when I was in High School. There was nothing worse than reading Romeo and Juliet, Taming of the Shrew, or King Lear,. These are plays and meant to be said aloud, meant to be acted out.

Anyway, can Americans do Shakespeare? Well, of course they can, I mean it's a free country, but the way in which Americans approach a play like Richard III will be quite different from a British production. England has the luxury of history, William Shakespeare wrote his plays there in the late sixteenth, early seventeenth century, you can still see where he was born, where his plays were originally produced, and Richard III was a real monarch of the realm. These facts, I feel, allow the British to feel at easy with the language, to feel a communal history for not only the playwright but his subjects as well. Americans no longer share in this history (well, haven't for a while!)but have created their own. In Looking for Richard I enjoyed hearing Richard and his supporters described as gangsters and mob bosses. In fact throughout the documentary scenes from the play are acted out by well known American actors, Alec Baldwin, Winona Ryder and Kevin Spacey for example, and they bring to Shakespeare's world a certain, well, New York, LA attitude that in no way hinders the storytelling but certainly changes it, giving the story a new casualness. Let's face it, Americans simple don't have the posture!

Overall, this is a favourite of mine, and represents a turn point in my opinion
of Al Pacino. Scarface, Serpico, The Godfather were all I really knew of him, oh and the one were he's blind and sniffs women. But in my elitist and snobby mind any actor willing to tackle Shakespeare and especially Richard III is worth consideration. I was happy to see him as Shylock in the film version of The Merchant of Venice, and I enjoy the idea of an actor known for his "tough guy" roles who can slip so easily into Shakespeare's vulnerable, selfish and flawed characters.

J.

Graphic Novel to Film.

2009-05-28T14:21:00.000-07:00

I am a huge fan of book-to-film adaptations. I know how people feel about it, they hate it, "it was nothing like the book!" they cry. But sometimes these two very different mediums can come together to create something that blurs the line between them. Books are private (after the age of seven, anyway), usually written by one person in private to be read by one person in private who is left to use their own imagination, picturing the characters and scenery in a very personal way. It is a conversation between two people, the author and the reader. Movies, on the other hand are a communal experience. They are created by a large group of people and experienced by the public, whether in a crowded movie theater, or in a living room, the images are the same. While different people may take different things from the same movie, on the whole, the experiences, the imagery, the dialogue is exactly the same. Then, there is the graphic novel, picture books for grown ups. But, even with pictures, the images are never photo-real, instead they create atmosphere, a glimpse into the imagination of the author, the reader is still left with plenty of room to fill in the blanks.

I finally saw "Sin City"!! "Shot and Cut by Robert Rodriguez" there is no better way to put it. How can one forget the special features from "Once Upon a Time in Mexico" where Rodriguez takes you on a tour of his garage where he edits, adds visual effects, and scores his films? Fabulous! Rodriguez's style of film making, digital worlds being nothing new for him, is brilliant and, in my humble opinion, there is no one else who could have done Frank Miller's world justice. Of course having the author as a co-director can't hurt either. I'm a mild graphic novel geek, who has not read Miller's Sin City series (yet), but I know that the translation of the graphic novel medium to film can be either fantastic ("300") or down right ridiculous ("League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"). Luckily this movie rocks the genre. I'm not a film critic, I don't know the technical terms, but I know what I like. Sin City was surprisingly funny, for such a gritty world. I never thought I would find serial murder, cannibalism and corruption so entertaining.

J.