Obligatory Film Blog Entry Post-Life Itself

I remember the first time I actually cried reading a book. There are some good works of fiction out there right? Stuff that moves us, stuff that changes us. But up until that point I hadn't been hit as such.

It was actually for a work of non-fiction. Most would might consider it journalism? Maybe academia? I'm not too sure. But it was at the end of the intro of my very first book penned by Roger Ebert: The Great Movies. Here it is for your reading pleasure:

       "What happens when you see a lot of good movies is that directorial voices and styles begin to emerge. You see that some movies are made by individuals, and others by committees. Some movies are simply about the personalities they capture (the Marx Brothers and Astaire and Rogers). Others are about the mastery of genre, from Star Wars, which attempts to transcend swashbuckling, to Detour, which attempts to hide in the shadows of noir. Most good movies are about the style, tone, and vision of their makers. A director will strike a chord in your imagination, and you will be compelled to seek out the other works. Directors become like friends. Buñuel is delighted by the shamelessness of human nature. Scorsese is charged by the lurid possibilities of Catholic guilt. Kurosawa celebrates individuals in a country that suspects them. Wilder is astonished by the things some people will do to be happy. Keaton is about the struggle of man's spirit against the physical facts of the world. Hitchcock creates images that have the quality of guilty dreams. Sooner or later every lover of the film arrives at Ozu, and understands that the movies are not about movie, but about whether to move."

ROGER EBERT

Yes, that little passage right there struck me to the very core of my film fanaticism. Yasujiro Ozu had been a director that I was already a fan of and Ebert talks about his a bit in the full intro, citing that often times in our education we leave out the foreign films.

I mean, it held true when I attended Florida State College at Jacksonville and Florida State University. Which is strange right? A lot of great directors often cite foreign films as their favorites. 

People love French New Wave and all that jazz.

Which is not to say American cinema is inferior. Citizen Kane is what American cinema could be right? aka the best the world has ever seen, which Ebert agrees with.

Rather, it was an acknowledgement that I was right to appreciate this cinema and that I was right to want to show it to others.

But it wasn't just that, although if you know me I do love to self-indulge.

It's more so that he had some things to say about films that either 

1) I couldn't have said it better.

2) I hadn't seen or felt before.

You know the adage a person with talent hits a target that no one else could hit and a person who's a genius hits a target no one else can see?

That applies here. Ebert was a genius at viewing films as an audience member. It wasn't that it was purely the correct way to view. Rather it was the way he saw it and the way he conveyed it to others that either hadn't seen it or had seen it and were looking for new insight.

As I write this I keep realizing more and more how much I miss him.

Remember that time I thought Tree of Life was only okay, but then you compared it to a prayer and it evoked a feeling inside that I hadn't realize just upon my first viewing?

Remember when the very first quote I put up on my Facebook quotes section was:

 "Many films diminish us. They cheapen us, masturbate our senses, hammer us with shabby thrills, diminish the value of life. Some few films evoke the wonderment of life’s experience, and those I consider a form of prayer. Not prayer “to” anyone or anything, but prayer “about” everyone and everything. I believe prayer that makes requests is pointless. What will be, will be. But I value the kind of prayer when you stand at the edge of the sea, or beneath a tree, or smell a flower, or love someone, or do a good thing. Those prayers validate existence and snatch it away from meaningless routine."

Remember that time when I showed my friends Chungking Express and Copie Conforme, partially because I'm still thinking about that statement you made about the film student and Yasujiro Ozu?

No, you don't.

And you never will.

It was a dream of mine that one day, when I become that feature film director, you would watch my films and you would criticize me.

And I mean it in the sense that criticize should be portrayed. God, criticism is such a nasty word in our society today.

Critical thinking. That's what it is. I could only hope that you would have critically thought about my films, that my films would be worth a critical thought.

Unfortunately I'll never know.

But what I do know is that you have had a profound experience on Asher's life (Itself).

So…

Cheers

RIP ROGER EBERT.

Review: Snowpiercer

It's a difficult task to truly capture the essence of another medium. Something will always get lost in the translation. Look at some of the other major blockbuster films of the past decade. Everyone is always gonna complain about what they left out from the Harry Potter films. Snowpiercer though, seems to do what other films recently couldn't: really get the feel of it's source material and balance it seamlessly within the confines of the medium that is cinema.

So, how does it swing this? Well, the original story is Le Transperceneige, a French graphic novel published 1982.

Now, whether or not it adheres to the story fully isn't the point. What I appreciate here is the feeling it captures.

Curtis' progression through the train plays like a graphic novel. Each car is a new panel of the story. As such, the panels have different aesthetics that create a gallery of wonderfully tense moments with appropriate breaks in between. It also creates a sense of journey. It's a story we've heard before right? It's a hero from the slums (or whatever poorer location you can imagine) trying to get to the all-knowing entity with a group of extreme characters.

We've had our Wizards of Oz and now we have our Snowpiercers.

Sure, they're very different in style and story. The fact of the matter is that the characters in both films are looking to solve their problems by going on a journey. It just so happens that along the way we get a sense of heart and courage.

Now, aside from it's brilliant capture of the graphic novel aesthetic, we also have a self-embodiment of theme.

The film has a consistent "machine" theme. It runs the audience through it's cogs introducing us to another piece of the ironwork. One could call it methodical in it's approach. This is no surprise. Joon-ho Bong has long been able to weave humor into horror then back into humor with the precision of a true master. It keeps us at the edge our seat without the worry that these characters will fall flat.

Oh boy. Those characters.

The characters that we embrace this journey with never lose even a twinge of humanity. They're extreme, yes, but that lends itself even more to the fact that it feels like a graphic novel. They still take on the actions that I genuinely feel these characters would take.

There's a pivotal moment about halfway through the film where Curtis has to make a choice. It's a choice that has gone either way in the history of story-telling. What matters though is what Curtis would do. Where does Curtis fit in with all those prior heroes? Once the choice is made, the film continues, validating the choice and creating an understanding.

It's character development by not necessarily adding new knowledge to the character mind, but rather revealing what the character already knew. It takes a master craftsman to present this cleanly. Joon-ho Bong does just that.

So in a sea of people clamoring for something original I implore you to watch Snowpiercer. It makes use of a unique dystopian back drop. It provides us with action sequences that are fresh and engaging. It satiates a want to know that filmmakers understand some of our great fears as well as our great hopes. The film is soaring. Join it for a truly wonderful ride.

★★★★★