tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-58580527517725987342024-02-07T09:36:45.677-08:00Film as Folk ArtA blog dedicated to underground narrative film, homemade movies, DIY filmmaking, independent film, absurdist enterprises, and whatever else.Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-15298241456638484502016-10-07T16:12:00.000-07:002016-10-07T16:12:23.953-07:00<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I'm not sure if anyone actually still checks this blog, but I've moved to wordpress.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://filmasfolkart.wordpress.com/">filmasfolkart.wordpress.com</a>. </div>
Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-79191486885441756422013-03-05T22:34:00.001-08:002013-03-05T22:34:34.930-08:00Creative Nonfiction (Lena Dunham, 2009)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsO4jehyNg49CIHYz97_SjZvqNueSlhrtCu7mMDiPqz9dGVZLSjjLNb1f2b_e45yRtCr_YKB6mfp1SbMJrEja5xI56SxQtB84aSWrHF2aCp6qNY5BtQHp-T2PLjf-Nhz-Nm5Tcn0Hrl-g_/s1600/vlcsnap-CNR.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsO4jehyNg49CIHYz97_SjZvqNueSlhrtCu7mMDiPqz9dGVZLSjjLNb1f2b_e45yRtCr_YKB6mfp1SbMJrEja5xI56SxQtB84aSWrHF2aCp6qNY5BtQHp-T2PLjf-Nhz-Nm5Tcn0Hrl-g_/s1600/vlcsnap-CNR.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I have to admit: I initially wrote off Lena Dunham after seeing the awful trailer for her second feature <i>Tiny Furniture</i>. Sure that I would come away from the experience with a new indie pseudo-auteur earning my scorn, I expected the appearance of Alex Karpovsky to be the film's only saving grace. To my surprise, I thought it was a wonderful film, one of the best independents of recent years. While the trailer had suggested a cloying, "quirky" indie movie about one film graduate's post-college home life, replete with obnoxious non-sequitur dialogue, the film itself was sharply observed and genuinely funny. (In retrospect, perhaps that trailer wasn't so awful.) Dunham has continued to show herself to be an artist of consistent talent with HBO's <i>Girls</i>, whose second season has so far been brilliant.<br />
<br />
Her very first feature, <i>Creative Nonfiction</i>, lacks the stylistic sophistication of <i>Furniture</i> (instead of carefully composed HD widescreen shots, we get shaky academy ratio DV), and I wouldn't be surprised if people were as turned off by this film as I had been by that trailer. <i>Creative Nonfiction</i> is, as much as I hate to use the term, full-on mumblecore. But after a recent second viewing, I was convinced that it's a very fine debut. Dunham herself seems to possess a little more charm here, before she decided to make her surrogates a little (or a lot) less likeable.<br />
<br />
Lena plays Ella, a creative writing major who is writing a screenplay about a girl who is kidnapped and forced to write before escaping. Ella is also determined to lose her virginity, and begins trying to seduce her friend Chris who has been sleeping in her dorm room because of mold growing under his bed. Dunham's talent is already apparent in showing the nuances of Ella's interactions between her friends and classmates, particualrly with Chris, who betrays her by sleeping with one of her friends. Her loss of virginity finally happens with someone she is far less acquainted with than Chris, and the way she awkwardly turns down her his desire for a relationship is the same sort of self-centered behavior we'll see much more of in Dunham's later characters, and eventually become more critical of (I think). </div>
Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-48659024955221941432012-09-18T02:43:00.002-07:002012-09-18T02:43:43.460-07:00New Frank V. Ross website<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://frankvross.com/">Frank V. Ross's new website</a> just launched today, if my google alerts are to be believed. There's a page for the new film, <i>Tiger Tail in Blue</i>, along with a PDF that contains press/festival info.<br />
<br />
I know I've kind of dropped off the map, for anyone reading. My internet access is not what it was a few months ago, but that's not really a valid excuse. I still plan on finishing the essays for the 9@Night series, and I have another post planned for something completely different. </div>
Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-11531034497818276562012-07-24T22:31:00.000-07:002012-07-24T22:45:36.304-07:00Hohokam (Frank V. Ross, 2007)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfOYxzz3zeD1iqCrBSFuHQjP23FVLYnU6JfN5e79Q4HWwsl02ViTnpj9xZgrBWzKEcWfuFu_FsSl562wQhnvRWp8U6bzBg-xivGq4phkoc65EBqjMOICKAsUIZ-7RUjddB8BmNRlXPPcME/s1600/hohokam.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfOYxzz3zeD1iqCrBSFuHQjP23FVLYnU6JfN5e79Q4HWwsl02ViTnpj9xZgrBWzKEcWfuFu_FsSl562wQhnvRWp8U6bzBg-xivGq4phkoc65EBqjMOICKAsUIZ-7RUjddB8BmNRlXPPcME/s1600/hohokam.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #eeeeee; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px;"></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #eeeeee; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: small;"></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #eeeeee; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><div style="font: 16.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"></span></div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><div style="font: 16.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
</div>
<div style="font: 16.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Frank Ross's <i>Hohokam</i> is the most minimal of his four released films. Whereas <i>Quietly on By</i> focused on one main character and his relationship with both his family and his close knit group of friends, <i>Hohokam</i> focuses on about a week in one couple's relationship. <i>Queitly</i> didn't have a conventional plot in the Hollywood sense, but it was apparent that Ross took great attention to detail about his characters' relationships and where things were heading. <i>Hohokam</i> still exists in that same space, giving off a sense that, for all the apparent improvisation and lack of plot, there is a perceptive eye behind it all, making sure that what we see is important. And what we see is a week in the life of a couple, enjoying each other's company, slogging through their nine-to-fives, fighting over things real people fight over, making up, and essentially making things work. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 16.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<i>Hohokam</i> is Ross's shortest film to date, and so deceptively simple it seems to resist any sort of analysis. Or maybe I'm just letting myself off the hook. Whichever the case, I highly recommend it. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 15.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 16.0px Times New Roman; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
Also: It was Frank Ross Week on Kentucker Audley's <a href="http://nobudgefilms.com/"><span style="color: #0032dc; text-decoration: underline;">No Budge</span></a> site a couple weeks back. I would have participated, but my internet was restricted to an iPhone until a few days ago. No Budge screened his new one, <i>Tiger Tail in Blue</i>, and it looks like the wheels are turning and more screenings will start to pop up in the months ahead. <a href="http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/news/2012/07/five-questions-for-tiger-tail-in-blue-director-frank-v-ross/"><span style="color: #0032dc; text-decoration: underline;">Here's</span></a> a brief interview at Filmmaker.</div>
</span></span></div>
</div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-77716426843353940962012-03-13T03:21:00.001-07:002012-05-03T22:43:17.662-07:00Sam Neave's Almost in Love<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGeX0BHHRoM1jvr7K59_ovCYPOH3Tir34RsR2LHv55TGXEXn8_kTjXhVfnx9U7j52jQ_ufZ2QaPUlj_h70PwyOoz442CpXt6XPjVYhVCaiO5k_ygZ9UF1bR7ctaFZtfZ_ARvfydFKlj9sr/s1600/AlmostInLove.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGeX0BHHRoM1jvr7K59_ovCYPOH3Tir34RsR2LHv55TGXEXn8_kTjXhVfnx9U7j52jQ_ufZ2QaPUlj_h70PwyOoz442CpXt6XPjVYhVCaiO5k_ygZ9UF1bR7ctaFZtfZ_ARvfydFKlj9sr/s1600/AlmostInLove.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Last week I was fortunate enough to be offered a ride from Sam Neave himself to San Jose to see his newest, <i><a href="http://www.almostinlovefilm.com/">Almost in Love</a></i>, which was playing as part of the local <a href="http://www.cinequest.org/indexCQ.php">Cinequest</a> film festival. Having been a fan of <i>Cry Funny Happy</i> for a number of years now, it was great to finally see a new work from Neave. His one film since <i>Cry</i>, <i><a href="http://vimeo.com/2826472">First Person Singular</a>,</i> was not released on DVD, and I wasn't sure what the fate of the new one would be (according to Neave, both will get DVD releases, pending song clearances).<br />
<br />
I don't normally write about films on here until I've seen them twice (being a critic is surely a tougher job than it seems), but I thought a few words were in order, especially since the film was so good. <i>Almost in Love</i> is a film about a love triangle of sorts between three friends. I say "of sorts" because the girl never really seems to be in love with either of the male characters, although she may have been once. The film consists of two 40-minute continuous takes. In the first, Sasha (Alex Karpovsky, the best I've seen him yet) is throwing a barbecue on his balcony on Staten Island, and has invited his old flame Mia (Marjan Neshat). Shasha's sometimes friend Kyle (Gary Wilmes) is mistakenly invited, and having briefly dated Mia after her breakup with Sasha, creates an awkward scene and nearly ruins the barbecue. At this point I was reminded of <i>Cry Funny Happy</i>'s party-ruining breakdown scene, but Neave isn't intent on repeating himself; this one ends on a much different note. The second part takes place during a party on Long Island, roughly a year and a half later. It is Sasha's wedding night, but he's not married to Mia. All his friends are there, including some new ones, and the party has gone on through the night and is approaching dawn. Without revealing or summarizing too much, I will say that Sasha comes to terms with his heart's unmet desire, while we hope Kyle, who is shown to be a kinder person than we may have initially assumed, can do so with the same sort of grace.<br />
<br />
The film is extremely well acted, and recalls Altman's 70's films using multiple mics and overlapping dialogue. The second part is particularly impressive, given the choreography involved. There is never a dead or false moment during this scene, and DP Daniel McKeown makes it all look so easy with his agile camerawork. I'm forgetting a lot of nuance that would make this a better piece, but I'm hoping I've at least aroused some interest from any readers I might have, and maybe after a second viewing I'll post a better piece.</div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-22241617999868933852012-03-08T16:06:00.002-08:002012-03-08T16:08:29.227-08:00Links, 3/8/12<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Here's an interview with Joe Swanberg. I did purchase the Collected Films 2011 box set and plan on writing about <i>Silver Bullets</i> after I give it a second viewing.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="435" mozallowfullscreen="" src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/37697050?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="580"></iframe><br />
<br />
Here's a video for the new School of Seven Bells single "Lafaye," co-directed by Swanberg's occasional DP David Lowery and Toby Halbrooks.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="435" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dUrQnDVWXvo" width="580"></iframe><br />
<br />
Also, Kentucker Audley is <a href="http://www.kentuckeraudley.com/open-five/">selling DVD copies</a> <a href="http://www.kentuckeraudley.com/open-five/"></a>of Open Five. Only 50 will be sold.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-70594948755248433002012-02-29T02:26:00.001-08:002012-02-29T02:36:02.160-08:00Quietly on By (Frank V. Ross, 2005)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRAwgNnLulZFbjUaWbWY55yg66WI6AOLk8-q1vkTtqEIIxj64DL-jhojQesAeOEB0XmB6E_ACaGWzdSGE2I2pu7Nm0sLyeaZkjbYapL92HfazOvj_kTCy1yCP7TX71ey7rHwTcVCxw3tB2/s1600/QoB.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRAwgNnLulZFbjUaWbWY55yg66WI6AOLk8-q1vkTtqEIIxj64DL-jhojQesAeOEB0XmB6E_ACaGWzdSGE2I2pu7Nm0sLyeaZkjbYapL92HfazOvj_kTCy1yCP7TX71ey7rHwTcVCxw3tB2/s1600/QoB.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I had been meaning to see Frank V. Ross's movies for years -- I had heard of <i>Quietly on By</i> and<i> Hohokam</i> as far back as 2006, and I knew him as one of Joe Swanberg's regular actors -- when I finally shot him an email asking if I could buy any of his work on DVD. I ended up buying all four of his releases, although his website for the films seems to have disappeared since then. I'm glad I got through to him during that window. The films are wonderful. Like a lot of the "mumblecore" (a term I resent, by the way) from mid-last decade, they're shot on DV, and often feature twenty-somethings during aimless or stagnant periods in their lives. And yet, Ross's films lack neither purpose nor meaning. Refraining from the urban anomie that is often associated with this type of filmmaking, Ross focuses on small town suburbanites, the kind that are rarely represented in films of any type. An intense interest in the behavior and interactions between the characters shines through in each film.<br />
<br />
<i>Quirtly on By</i> focuses on Aaron, who lives at home with his younger sister Erin and their mother. A recent breakup with a long-term girlfriend and subsequent breakdown has left him in limbo, unsure of where to go or what to do next. He's neurotic, somewhat paranoid (he suspects a white SUV is following him around, but it's probably all in his head), and his behavior is often erratic and born out of desperation. But he does have friends, and his family is always there as a tether. His mom provides him with some advice ("It's what you do everyday"), and when Aaron repeats it to a friend at a party, it shows that he takes it seriously, cliched though it may be, and that he is trying.<br />
<br />
Though Ross's films may be largely improvised, they feel focused and nuanced. His scenes are a balance of looseness and structure. He's also not afraid to break with the realism that digital video conveys and put in an effects shot, for instance, where Aaron imagines a past moment with his ex-girlfriend while talking to her on the phone in the present. It's a really nice touch (especially how it "fades out" of the current scene) in a film full of them, establishing Ross's idiosyncratic yet subtle style. The aforementioned white SUV is another such touch, something I didn't even notice as a thread in the film until my second viewing.<br />
<br />
In addition to being a good stylist, Ross proves himself to have a great eye for behavior, and his superb cast of non-actors (I'm assuming) always feel natural. In the film's best scene, or at least its funniest, Aaron is nearly caught spying on a girl he likes, and after running back to his car he calls another girl whose number he'd gotten days before. The ensuing conversation is both pathetic and hilarious. But for all of Aaron's awkward moments, Ross is not making fun of him or looking down on him. Aaron ultimately proves to be likable; the film ends with a touching moment between him and his sister. I took it to be optimistic about his future without being sentimental.<br />
<br />
Frank Ross is doing something that is not too far off from Mike Leigh's 1970s BBC work. Perhaps not as brilliant or insightful, but damn near close. It's always refreshing for me to see these types of down-to-Earth films. This isn't simply a slice of life; there's nuance and insight here.<br />
<br />
I'll have a piece up soon on his next film, <i>Hohokam.</i><br />
<br />
<br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-78701194340252609412012-01-27T01:59:00.000-08:002015-03-10T18:14:50.917-07:00CBoyardee's genius YouTube work<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/q1iKiX-58Ao" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-48784157248153665172012-01-25T03:23:00.000-08:002012-02-02T22:45:22.561-08:00"I don't want my pizza burning"<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="435" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ERXq3r1Kq0Q" width="580"></iframe><br />
<br />
I don't really know what to say about this. Maybe the people at <a href="http://absurdistvideoart.com/">Absurdist Video Art</a> can take a crack at it. What is there to say? It obviously has no subtext behind it, the way <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffu9tQeY7xc">The Commercial Network</a> does, for instance. I find it pretty amusing, if not quite hilarious. Many will find it cringe inducing. That's just the nature of this sort of thing, I guess. I'll never hear the Stones song again without thinking of this video, that's for sure.
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-77604773386584839692012-01-20T02:19:00.000-08:002012-01-20T18:19:46.692-08:00Kentucker Audley's No Budge<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://nobudgefilms.com/">No Budge</a> is a website run by <a href="http://www.kentuckeraudley.com/">Kentucker Audley</a>, director of<i> Team Picture</i>, <i>Open Five</i>, and <i>Holy Land</i>. He's got some interesting looking films uploaded for free viewing on the site, including his own <i><a href="http://www.nobudgefilms.com/post/8385226026">Holy Land</a></i>, which I just watched and found to be his strongest yet. I have to admit, I'm a bit burnt out by the whole aimless twenty-something genre of so many independent films of the last few years, but Kentucker really does something fresh with it. It's even self reflexive at one point, something that might not have worked so well if Cole Weintraub (the film's main actor) wasn't so hilarious. I'll be checking out more of the website soon.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-27355239273349437442012-01-19T18:14:00.000-08:002012-01-20T02:54:59.178-08:009@Night #2: Used (Rob Nilsson, 2007)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3nh4-Sq7Vp8xLY2vxFXuzlCAAm9MIlsAq1vPNEJCgeRgoiyuMhyphenhyphengZLOiFBfq128JbBM8dxwrD478fv4dKwIq0cGergNP5UhZM9lsceySx82-bVSYiLORfVxdnrJs2Q14deMj6TpVdJr4z/s1600/Used2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3nh4-Sq7Vp8xLY2vxFXuzlCAAm9MIlsAq1vPNEJCgeRgoiyuMhyphenhyphengZLOiFBfq128JbBM8dxwrD478fv4dKwIq0cGergNP5UhZM9lsceySx82-bVSYiLORfVxdnrJs2Q14deMj6TpVdJr4z/s1600/Used2.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
Whereas the first film in the series seemed to deal with the fractured memories and experiences of its main character, <i>Used</i> finds that character dealing with his uncertain prospects for the present and future, and even finds him abandoning his past altogether. The film again introduces us to Ben Malifide, now living with the woman who befriended him in the previous film. That woman, St. Tre, is the owner of a strip club, and she's seemingly well off -- she owns a house with a great view in the hills, and she takes Malifide to her high-stakes poker games, where she loses and ends up owing Kenny, a photographer played by Nilsson, 90 grand. Thus, the smallest semblance of a plot is set in motion: Tre ends up taking Malifide's counterfeit money plates (a significant item in the last film) and making her own copy, after which Malifide suspects ill of her and ends up leaving for Nevada to find an old friend he knew in prison.<br />
<br />
If <i>Noise</i> was an experimental film with a skeletal narrative, <i>Used</i> is very nearly a genre film, a mixture of crime drama and road movie (the slide guitar soundtrack recalls Wim Wenders' <i>Paris, Texas</i>). As always with Nilsson films, matters of plot don't quite matter so much as the emotional lives of the characters, and nothing is resolved, or even even left unresolved, in the way one might expect. So while film's story arc might seem weak to anyone who thinks film is primarily for telling stories, it's the emotional arcs that are the film's strength. If I mention plot (or lack thereof) often, it is because I think it is central that art film, independent film -- call it what you want -- abandons plot, the idea that a film's ultimate purpose is storytelling, in order to get down to what really matters. This is nothing new, of course. (Any of my anti-plot diatribes can probably be blamed on film school, but that's another story.)<br />
<br />
When the film begins, Malafide is bathing outside Tre's house, proclaiming that he's on a vision quest. It's a half-serious joke, and when the time comes for him to leave, he sets out to meet up with an actual mystic, People T. It's unclear how much time has passed between this film and the last, but Malafide is nearly a different character; he has a different haircut, has grown a full beard, and at times seems psychologically unhinged, if only slightly. After leaving Tre's he tries to get rid of his bag, and even begins talking to it. It seems to have been with him quite a while, but it's clear that he would like to be rid of it and his past altogether. After having experienced some luxury for once in his life, he's trying his hand at the life of a tramp, the kind who hops trains. And he does just that, after meet Johnny, played by Edwin Johnson. It's unclear why Johnny is sleeping on railroad tracks when Ben meets him, and we're given few details about his life, but his is another recurring character in the series, and so far one of its strongest performers.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile Tre convinces Kenny, to whom she owes the 90 grand, to go to Reno with her where perhaps her nephew will know how to turn her templates into counterfeit bills. I think that's the plan, anyway -- I've watched the movie twice and I'm still a little unclear on the details during these scenes. It's here that <i>Used</i> resembles a more conventinal crime drama -- Tre's nephew is even involved with some shady neo-nazi types who own the bar where he works. His plan to deliver them some free cigarettes via a freght train car fails to come through, and he crosses paths with Malafide and company at the freight station. It is here that Malafide meets an Aldo Modisco, played by David Hess, and over campfire in a homeless encampment they decide to trade identities. Malafide becomes Modisco and hands over the bag, which also contains a package addressed to the Parkway Theater in Oakland. I presume this is an important puzzle piece in the series.<br />
<br />
In the end, no one really accomplishes what they had set out to do. Certainly Malafide hoped for something more with People T, who takes him and Johnny to his old spot in the Nevada desert, where he gives them some of his old horse riding mementos, including a chain whose purpose is unclear. Shortly thereafter, People T commits suicide by jumping off the train heading back to California -- it's this that finally pushes Malafide to give up his past for good. Tre's situation, on the other hand, concludes in a less-than-spectacular fashion, with Kenny cancelling the debt but admitting feelings for Tre, who doesn't feel the same. Malafide returns to Tre's, where they reconcile, and there's a montage of People T on his horse that gives emotional closure to Malafide's journey. A shot of the chain that locks the horses pen is a subtle and poetic touch: we recognize it as the chain he gave to Malafide. <br />
<br />
<i>Used</i> concludes with us knowing that Malafide will soon be living under an assumed identity. However, the series' next film, <i>Attitude</i>, features Malafide as himself. As such, it is very possible that <i>Attitude</i> occurs within the events of <i>Used</i>. More on that next time.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-71847356403187264302011-12-29T03:22:00.000-08:002012-01-20T02:20:49.380-08:00Absurdist Video Art<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7GBIhqe8B0s7_grfuVER-HjXRkrRR6I6JypXYDfzM0YRORyDjpGUYzHCtKx-R4WxAEica_kZ97TdDRdqLKa68qpXT8AwSUXCSbAbrDDOUuKBeAQ4cyKdJw9zEjUG8FA2jks4Y_j-yoT_T/s1600/bouquet-shaye.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="367" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7GBIhqe8B0s7_grfuVER-HjXRkrRR6I6JypXYDfzM0YRORyDjpGUYzHCtKx-R4WxAEica_kZ97TdDRdqLKa68qpXT8AwSUXCSbAbrDDOUuKBeAQ4cyKdJw9zEjUG8FA2jks4Y_j-yoT_T/s400/bouquet-shaye.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Via <a href="http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/tcn_the_commercial_network_will_haunt_your_waking_dreams">Dangerous Minds</a>, here is a link to <a href="http://absurdistvideoart.com/">Absurdist Video Art</a>, which looks to be an awesome website dedicated to "the new cinematic absurdism movement." I just discovered the site, so I haven't had time to go over it yet, but I do hope there actually is an absurdism movement out there. They're fans of Shaye Saint John, who I've <a href="http://filmasfolkart.blogspot.com/2011/09/shaye-saint-john.html">posted about</a> before (and who they designate as the "godmother of the movement"), and Ryan Trecartin, whose films I've seen via youtube, although not in their entirty -- they're a bit of an overload. I'm sure I'll be posting more about this site and these filmmakers in the future.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-81869455406065188942011-12-13T01:57:00.000-08:002012-01-20T02:20:57.858-08:009@Night #1: Noise (Rob Nilsson, 2002)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8VxhSO-TAi33QVu2AlpQi5_2J3f9H35eEPWeIxQ8m5cGtvP0YA3Nb_lfJ6t7IBcuz4ZDfP53lUF8kOMl2wE0PviyqKnRC8kHg-aSxG4kudWYVBxUxQiMaWFyaV3KzX84h-MBI_VF_24gZ/s1600/Noise3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8VxhSO-TAi33QVu2AlpQi5_2J3f9H35eEPWeIxQ8m5cGtvP0YA3Nb_lfJ6t7IBcuz4ZDfP53lUF8kOMl2wE0PviyqKnRC8kHg-aSxG4kudWYVBxUxQiMaWFyaV3KzX84h-MBI_VF_24gZ/s1600/Noise3.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
As I noted a few posts back, I've been planning on purchasing a set of Rob Nilsson's 9@Night film series and writing about each film individually. I'd been wanting to buy the set since late 2008, when I caught a couple of the films from the series at SF's Roxie. Well, I finally took the plunge, and my set arrived a few days ago. <a href="http://citizencinema.net/9-at-night/">Here</a> is a description of the series on Nilsson's website, and <a href="http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/aboutrc/FilmCommentNilsson.pdf">here</a> is a pdf of the 2009 Film Comment article on the series. <br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The first film from the set, <i>Noise</i>, caught me completely off guard. Having previously seen both <i>Need</i> and <i>Go Together</i><i>,</i> I knew that Nilsson's series contained moments of lyricism (one might even be inclined to use the term "magical realism") in addition to the rawness that characterizes his approach. But <i>Noise</i> is something else entirely, a film that blends those two elements until they're inseparable, resulting in a nearly backwards-told narrative related through the use of split-screen, text, and multiple audio tracks, sometimes all at once. It could all be such a mess, and indeed on some level it is, yet it's absolutely compelling. What's more impressive is that there was no traditional script to provide any kind of predetermined structure. In addition to the performances, the film's construction in the editing room was also improvised; we are informed at the beginning of each film that "the editor frees the genie from the bottle." Out of the five films of Nilsson's that I've seen so far, this is the most stylish, yet it still feels as grounded and tethered to the here-and-now of human experience as any of his others -- to not be would betray his sensibility. The style never overpowers the actors and their performances. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The film begins and ends with a spinning, box-like object which contains seemingly thousands of black-and-white images, the audio and visuals all playing against each other and creating a near white noise as a percussive beat plays on the soundtrack. Most of the time I'm at a loss to tag a meaning on this sort of thing, but about two or three ideas ran through my head: perhaps it's a visual representation of the film's title, or the world its characters inhabit (or both). Or maybe it's a visual way of representing the stories of the series as a whole, jumbled together, playing all at once, like some sort of cosmic hologram. I may be going overboard here, but knowing that the series does share characters and intertwines in various ways, it doesn't seem so much of a stretch.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ben Malafide, the film's main character, has just been released from prison and makes his way into San Francisco via the ferry. He's introduced to the confusion and cacophony of the modern information age, and it becomes apparent that the film's style is also a reflection of his psyche's response to this new world. In addition to that, it is as though the film's narrative, which takes place out of order, is Ben's memories of these events, his attempt to make sense out of them. It's a memory haunted by the past: at various points we're shown an ethereal image of Ben with a woman, someone he presumably once knew. We know he carries guilt over someone named Julie. It makes for a more interesting film (and character) that we never learn why. The film ends with Ben seeming to have a brief epiphany -- if nowhere else, he finds meaning in a moment shared by him and a dancing panhandler. <br />
<br />
Nilsson's work is as DIY as it gets, and yet he is so far ahead of most of the current generation of no-budget filmmakers, who would do well to take a look these films. Whereas the current generation is often accused of self-absorption and narcissism, Nilsson humanizes his characters, the types of figures that are most often marginalized, on screen and off. <i>Noise</i> is pretty masterful, as far as I'm concerned, and sets the bar high. I'm hoping the rest of the series is at least almost as good.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
</div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-23515088313568953222011-12-01T00:20:00.000-08:002012-09-26T21:49:52.521-07:00Balancing Script and Improvisation<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I've recently discovered that the Filmmaker Magazine blog features a regular column called <a href="http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/news/author/fewthousand/">The Microbudget Conversation</a>. I just read <a href="http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/news/2011/08/the-microbudget-conversation-script-v-story/trackback/">this piece</a> written back in August by guest writer <a href="http://www.bluepaperfilm.com/intro.html">Nicole Elmer</a> about the limitations of scripting micro-budget films and the avenues opened up by using improvisation:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span class="Apple-style-span"><i>It was a creative choice as much as a budgeting choice. Because of the specificity involved, a script would have required the costly fabrication I mentioned earlier. Instead, the writer created a very basic outline that was broken down into scenes. Locations were replaceable and everything could be moved as needed, as long as the general symbol of the moment was still expressed. A script would have also forced us to shove dialogue in the actors’ mouths. Instead, we gave the actors their goals, they developed their characters WITH the writer, and we gave them responsibility for their dialogue, a creative choice normally made by a screenwriter.</i></span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Of course, many filmmakers from Mike Leigh to Rob Nilsson to Terrence Malick work by balancing structure and improvisation. Elmer says that it was a creative and budgetary choice, but I know if one were to ask any of the filmmakers listed above, they would reply that their choice was purely aesthetic. Nilsson even has a <a href="http://citizencinema.net/direct-action/">brief manifesto</a> on his website ("Create a poetic cinema based not on writing but on observing. Mistrust your ideas and trust your experiences. Discover, don’t prescribe"). Personally, I think films made in such a fashion are, at their best, some of the most profound in cinema. They show life happening and us happening back, to paraphrase Nilsson's manifesto.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
It all goes back to what I said about meaning in my last post. And this is not to say that I reject scriptwriting out of hand, of course. All of this is too much for a brief post, and I've been planning an essay-length post on it all sometime in the near future. And also, if that Nilsson manifesto is too brief, there's always <a href="http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/indievision/pa1.shtml">The Path of the Artist</a> by Ray Carney.</div>
</div>
Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-50388367895514495452011-11-29T00:19:00.000-08:002011-11-29T03:17:54.515-08:00The "M" Word, and Meaning in Independent Film<a href="http://www.cineaction.ca/issue85sample.htm">Here's</a> an article from the film journal Cine Action on the "mumblecore" movement of the last few years. I'm glad the author is in support of DIY cinema, but it's always frustrating to me that these types of articles always stay within the confines of what has been deemed as "mumblecore" and all but ignore the larger independent, digital, no-budget movement out there. The title of this particular article is, after all "Micro-Budgeting, Micro-Drama, and the 'Mumblecore' Movement," The "m" word being only one of those three terms. Perhaps I'm being too harsh. One can only write about so much in the space of an article, of course. I guess I just wish American independent film was a little more unified and a certain section of it not fenced off and given a funny name. And although the author does not do it here, the part is often mistaken for the whole. <div><br /></div><div>Also to her credit, the author does try to fit the movement within a larger context she dubs "slow film." I'm not quite sure it works. It's much too broad a descriptor, but it touches upon what I think is central to independent film, which is how these films create meaning, and how much richer, more complex they often are in that regard than middle-minded masterpieces. In other words, termite art versus white-elephant art, to paraphrase Manny Farber. And to paraphrase Ray Carney, whom I regard as the authority <i>par excellence</i> on this subject, these films take away the <i>aboutness</i> of experience and force the viewer to <i>undergo</i> the experience. That's why independent film (and indeed all "art film") is important. Film should nourish the soul. Anything less is a diversion.<div><br /><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-75594872279729496182011-11-18T03:34:00.000-08:002011-11-18T04:10:09.121-08:00Trailer for Frank V. Ross's Tiger Tail in BlueVia <a href="http://www.road-dog-productions.com/weblog/2011/11/tiger_tail_in_b.html">David Lowery</a> and the film's own <a href="http://www.facebook.com/TIGERTAILinBLUE">Facebook page</a>, here's the trailer for Frank V. Ross's new film <i>Tiger Tail in Blue</i>. I recently purchased Frank's four previous films from him directly, and each one is an uncommonly nuanced, emotionally simple yet complex slice of daily American life the likes of which is rarely achieved in contemporary independent film. Maybe I'm exaggerating a little; all I know is that I loved them. Anyway:<div><br /></div><div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/I1XljwwAavQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-50326976236112480132011-10-24T02:08:00.000-07:002011-10-24T02:13:41.106-07:00Trailer for Sam Neave's Almost in Love<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/u1y6F76Ht-o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe><div><br /></div><div>Here's the trailer for Sam Neave's newest, which is featured on the <a href="http://www.abudhabifilmfestival.ae/en/program/films/2011/detail?f=5800">film's page</a> for the Abu Dhabi Film Festival.</div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-11306607841969966512011-10-19T22:09:00.000-07:002011-10-24T02:37:31.596-07:00Cry Funny Happy (Sam Neave, 2003)<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5q7U7TRfcxI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></div><div><br /></div>I recently rewatched Sam Neave's 2003 film <i>Cry Funny Happy</i>, which I first saw a few years ago. That initial viewing pretty much floored me -- I wasn't expecting the film to come anywhere close to the emotional terrain it ended up in. The film focuses on several friends, one of whom, Wes, is turning 30 and has decided to throw a party at his and his girlfriend's apartment. Several of Wes's friends have made the trip to New York City to attend his party. We are introduced to them in a series of intercutted scenes, and eventually it all converges at Wes's apartment, where the party gets underway. <div><br /></div><div>Up until this point, the film is very well acted, and I would add very well written, but I learned via the DVD's commentary that it was almost totally improvised, which isn't surprising, except that it <i>feels</i> written with perhaps the characters given the freedom to ad lib as needed. The whole film has the feel of Cassavetes <i>Husbands</i>, or a Mike Leigh film, where the improvisation was done beforehand, and then "locked down" with a script. In other words, very little from the performances feels extraneous. This is due to another fact revealed in the commentary: the actors were given time to work on their characters and relationships to each other before shooting began, and as a result the film feels both spontaneous and focused.</div><div><br /></div><div>My initial impression was that Neave was simply going to show us some interesting characters, give them a party to attend during which some skeletons might be revealed, and then send them on their way. Instead, almost on a dime, Wes has a breakdown and the party derails. It is here that the focus I mentioned above becomes more apparent (especially during a second viewing). Wes's character is harboring some sort of pain that up until this point is hinted at through his humor and his passive-aggressive arguments with his girlfriend. We are never given a concrete reason as to why he feels this way or why he loses it during his party. Neave says in the commentary that there were some deleted scenes having to do with Wes gambling, perhaps losing some money or something. I think it was wise to leave these scenes out. Not being able to pin Wes's behavior on any specific event forces us to not only observe Wes more acutely, but perhaps realize that these feelings and behaviors aren't quite so foreign to our own lives, either. When all is said and done, it's pretty much a tour de force of independent filmmaking. I've seen very little in the no-budget movement from the last decade that matches its sharp observations and intensity. </div><div><br /></div><div>Neave's new film, <a href="http://almostinlove.squarespace.com/">Almost in Love</a>, is just beginning to be shown at film festivals, and I'll being seeing it for sure when it makes its way to the Bay Area.</div><div><br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-11327029064741593162011-09-23T01:18:00.000-07:002011-09-23T03:15:03.453-07:00Two Box Sets: Swanberg's Collected Films 2011 and Nilsson's 9@Night seriesSo, <a href="http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/news/2011/09/joe-swanberg-factory-25-announce-new-dvd-subscription-series/">Joe Swanberg is releasing his last four films as a box set</a>, via <a href="http://www.factorytwentyfive.com/">Factory 25</a> and employing a unique distribution plan by releasing each film quarterly along with extras. I have to admit, I haven't seen a Swanberg film since <i>Hannah Takes the Stairs</i>, but not because I didn't like his films. I thought his film before that, <i>LOL</i>, was very good. I saw it in a packed theater in San Francisco's Mission district, and the crowd loved it. Since then he's seemed to garner a lot of critical derision. I can recall an audience member being quoted after attending of his more recent films as saying something like, "These films are the product of a culture with nothing left to say." (I can't find the article that contained the quote.)<div><br /></div><div>I find I'm often attracted to polarizing artists. Sometimes, they're misunderstood or unfairly maligned, and sometimes, well, the work just happens to suck. I'd like to take a look at these films, and I am intrigued by the distribution method. But at one hundred dollars, the price is a bit steep, especially if I end up not liking the films. <a href="http://cinemasparagus.blogspot.com/2011/03/silver-bullets.html">Here's a post</a> at <a href="http://cinemasparagus.blogspot.com/">cinemaspragus</a> that makes one of the films in the set, <i>Silver Bullets</i>, look interesting -- certainly a departure from anything I've seen by Swanberg in the past.</div><div><br /></div><div>On a somewhat related note, there is a box set I've been meaning to buy for a long time now -- <a href="http://citizencinema.net/store/9-at-night-box-set">Rob Nilsson's 9@Night series</a>, and before I even consider buying Swanberg's set, I'm definitely getting Nilsson's first. I saw two of the films in the series when they played at the San Francisco Roxie in 2008, and was pretty blown away by how good they were. A filmmaker friend once told me Nilsson's movie's were sloppy, and I could see what he meant by that; Rob didn't seem to care much for aesthetics, at least not in a superficial sense. I got the feeling he didn't sweat the details because he was reaching for something higher. Most of the time, he got there. I thought it was everything independent film should be. I plan on getting the set soon, and writing about each film in length.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-5906046659539364912011-09-16T02:01:00.000-07:002011-09-24T02:05:19.275-07:00Microcinema<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/movies/microcinemas-pack-a-special-mission-in-a-small-space.html?_r=1&smid=fb-share">Here's</a> a recent article about microcinemas in New York City, and <a href="http://www.cineaste.com/articles/cinemas-of-the-future.htm">here's</a> another, better article about microcinemas across the country that appeared in Cineaste a couple years ago. I attended an open screening at SF's own <a href="http://www.atasite.org/">ATA</a> once. I liked some of the films -- I remember an abstract, computer generated one in particular that was pretty great -- but the volume was turned up so high during every film that it hurt my ears (remember: these are small, DIY films and don't have the best sound mixes to begin with), and they played a Hendrix live album loudly during the intermissions which made it hard to socialize. It was such an alienating experience that I never went back. I suppose I'll suck it up one day and attend another screening, or maybe check out Craig Baldwin's Other Cinema, mentioned in the Cineaste article. I don't mean to sound like I'm complaining; I love the idea of microcinemas, of course. I just hope they don't all need to have the atmosphere of a dive bar to bring in an audience.Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-4642062570720144722011-09-06T03:33:00.000-07:002011-09-23T02:33:29.631-07:00Squaw Hootnanny<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Hqoy2QeFZQA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe><div><br /></div><div>"In 1987, my sis and her best friend Brandy formed a two-girl rock band in our backyard. It lasted about a week and spawned one album. 'Squaw Hootnanny' was the title track and my brother was recruited to provide pot-and-pan percussion."</div>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-17487731293415979812011-09-01T01:33:00.000-07:002011-09-23T03:09:55.451-07:00Shaye Saint John<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NtSgWZbL_kE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe><br /><br />Shaye Saint John was a character/art project created by Eric Fournier, who posted videos of himself as his creation on <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/ShayeSaintJohn">Youtube</a> and his own <a href="http://www.shayesaintjohn.net/">website</a> about four or five years ago. I missed them the first time around, and Fournier is now <a href="http://beeteedee.com/wp/?p=340">unfortunately deceased</a>, but his videos are still up on Youtube, and a DVD compilation he released is <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FShaye-Saint-John-Triggers-Compilation%2Fdp%2FB000B7MXFC&ei=tkdfTv3IL-XkiAL0hKmrDg&usg=AFQjCNFat6QDa8DDmNBAesAZ3U6AMkdaCQ">still for sale on Amazon</a>. It's difficult to explain this sort of humor to anyone that doesn't immediately get it, and I don't even really laugh at the video above -- it elicits more a silent admiration. Note the music and how it changes back and forth from shot to shot -- the video wouldn't work quite as well without it. For an example of something that <i>does</i> make me laugh until I cry: "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUxjG4VBTag&feature=related">Stumpwater Salad</a>" and "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-GdiIYI-iA">TWENTY4SEVEN REDUX</a>." I'm actually a little envious that someone could come up with something so weird and original and implement it in such a simple way (i.e., using a DV camera with an on-board mic). Inspired and inspiring stuff.Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-18071431419517276202010-08-15T02:08:00.000-07:002010-08-15T20:30:30.578-07:00Malick and Molina at the Destruction Derby<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D93xc7p_yKw?fs=1&hl=en_US"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D93xc7p_yKw?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object><br /><br />I'm preparing a decently sized post for tomorrow night (at least two paragraphs, maybe even three!), but until I finish that, I thought I'd post this footage I came across on YouTube a while back. I thought the song and the slow motion footage of a destruction derby at dusk melded together perfectly -- it gave the scene an emotional subtext. Perhaps, had David Gordon Green made a no-budget micro indie that took place in the Midwest, this would serve as a cathartic final scene to his film. Or perhaps the filmmaker responsible for this footage could create a whole film in order to end it with this scene, assuming that obtaining the song rights wasn't the bigger obstacle. It is, at the least, very nice work.Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-12316915754800007052010-07-17T02:40:00.000-07:002010-07-17T04:26:19.398-07:00Country MattersLast night I contributed a few bucks toward <a href="http://lmcnelly15.blogspot.com">Lucas McNelly's</a> new project <span style="font-style:italic;">Up Country</span>, which is being funded via <a href="http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lmcnelly/up-country-a-film-about-a-maine-fishing-trip-gone">Kickstarter</a>. If he didn't reach the goal of $4,000 by midnight on June 16th, his project would not get funding, and at $500 to go, it looked like it might not happen, but in the last few hours the money came in. With this good news, and the new redesign, I think I've gotten some more enthusiasm toward getting this blog off the ground. I'll be keeping an eye on <span style="font-style:italic;">Up Country</span>'s progress, at any rate. <br /><br /><a href='http://kck.st/da6gYW'><img border='0' src='http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lmcnelly/up-country-a-film-about-a-maine-fishing-trip-gone/widget/card.jpg' /></a>Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5858052751772598734.post-2346521745614033322010-05-30T00:25:00.000-07:002010-05-30T00:34:13.812-07:00Possibly film-related linksI might start attending this monthly, this particular show featuring musical artists Portraits, Danny Paul Grody, Barn Owl and Daniel Higgs:<br /><br /><object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/G-G0jQ-hCj0&hl=en_US&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/G-G0jQ-hCj0&hl=en_US&fs=1" width="480" height="295" allowScriptAccess="never" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><br /><br />Also, it's hardly "Film as Folk Art," but this is my most anticipated film realease ever: <br /><br /><a href="http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/126160-the-calm-before-the-tree-of-life">http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/126160-the-calm-before-the-tree-of-life</a><br /><br />I wish underground independent films were as easily accessible and as abundant as underground music is. I'd post more.Michael M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08315787358557335119noreply@blogger.com0