News from Home (1977)

Recently, one of my fellow bloggers (as well as film analyst) talked about the age old gripe that Ozu's cinema is slow. He argues that the slowness felt in Ozu's films is "closer to the grammar of classic film style, the study deliberate quality and the quiet stateliness joining in deep harmony with the themes". While my opinion of Ozu is similar, I would also find other filmmakers that fit well within this comment. One specifically being Chantal Akerman. Having just discovered, and enjoyed, the three-hour, nearly monotonous, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles, I knew that Ackerman's style was polished, detailed, and camera-driven. Meaning, that she relied on the camera to discover the discover the nuances of day to day in the life of Ms. Dielman. News from Home, a pseudo-documentary involving letters from her mother along a backdrop of late 1970s New York City, Akerman again leaves the camera running, at times with nothing more than the people of NYC staring deeply into the lens, and the result is one of the most honest images of a great city, a time capsule for the future, and a true portrait of family.

Beginning in the early hours of the morning, lasting until the sun finally sets, Akerman's camera takes us to all the famous locations, and in a brief 85 minutes provides more emotion, more insight into her life than your average modern documentary.
News from Home begins with a long, strolling camera shot into the inhabited streets of an overpopulated city. The 1970s images slowly come into frame as the "city that never sleeps" emerges from the unknown accompanied by Akerman reading letters from her mother informing us that she misses her daughter as she has just arrived to this foreign land. As the film progresses, the style doesn't change, Akerman takes the subway, takes us to Times Square, takes us to 5th Avenue, but instead of narrating throughout, merely allows the camera to show us time, date, style, and structure. What would seem like one boring shot after the next, slowly becomes relate-able to the "reality" mind. We cannot help but watch those sitting down on the Metro, those passing by on the streets, our eyes focus in to those living their lives as Akerman merely places her camera directly in front of traffic. Clothing, sounds, cars, marketing, dirt, and trash all compose her image of NYC, and the worry of separating from her family rises to the surface. As Akerman reads her letters, the images coupled with the words, speak further than just an over-manipulative mother always asking when her daughter will return, but the daily flight of anyone leaving the coop for the first time into a bohemian city. Even today, in 2011, the nervousness inside of mother's voice coupled with being lost in a sea of people feel relevant and utterly frightening.

Jen mentioned while watching this slice of history that if she was older during this time in the 70s, she would have traveled to NYC. What makes News from Home more detailed than today's images of New York City is how real this city feels. In modern cinema, NYC is always bright, it is always clean, there is a awe of glamor around every turn, but with Ackerman, the focus is on the truth, and during this time, New York City wasn't pretty. It wasn't like watching episodes of "Sex & the City", but instead trash littered the streets, graffiti was too popular, and the less-glossed truth became clear. It felt tired. It felt used. It felt nowhere close to modern. Akerman captured a habitable city, not the monolith of culture. That is what drew me into this film. Akerman's lingering camera captures everything, and it is impressive to see the honesty that it produces.

A big part of this film are the letters that Akerman reads. As the images of NYC swirl around us, nearly engulfing our attention away from the words brought to us from another place. These letters are important to digest, because it gives us a personal glimpse into Akerman's world, into her family dynamic, and her decision to leave the "nest" and take strides on her own. With infrequency happening between letters, a pressuring mother continually asks why she hasn't returned home yet, combating these dreams with the reality that home life is a mixed bag of joy and heartbreak. As we are granted access into some of her mother's deepest worries and feelings. This adds a full-course of realism to this film. As I watched, I couldn't help but remember the first time I left the house, the quickness of my first letters home only to find months later, as my life eventually took shape, that my letters home became less and less frequent. That is what we watch here, and despite the 1970s time, the realism of what Akerman is doing (documenting her steps into her life), the overall message and what Akerman chose to accomplish was successful. It is a timeless film, and despite the Ozu pacing of this film, there is a point to the length of scenes. It gives us a date between letters (the long the scene we begin to feel Akerman's growth personally) and even without seeing Akerman at all, we are shown her levels of growth. How do you watch a subject grow without showing the subject? Watch News from Home to see this technique in action!

As I wrap my thoughts on this film, I applaud Criterion's sister set, Eclipse, for releasing this obscure title. What would have otherwise fallen into obscurity, finally has a life to breath as others discover this set and the compassionate voice that Akerman defiantly showed in the 70s. Dielman is the voice of femininity, while this is the voice of age and trust. As I watched this film, I couldn't help but wonder if anyone realized who they were being filmed by, and if they even realize they are in an Akerman film. Were they just witnessing another potential film dropout point a camera, or did some of them realize that perhaps they were becoming a part of film history? Watching these ghosts walk by (as many of them are probably dead), it changes the perspective of what our lives look like. News from Home is unlike any documentary that you will watch, and Akerman's artistic style is relevant from the beginning. The choices made, the images shown, the letters read accomplish something very few filmmakers have done, which is give us emotion without a person. Her camera work is outstanding (several images feel like 60s Godard with the colors and realism), and the overall product is amazing.

Akerman has again impressed me, giving this film a green mark with blue stars. I will watch this movie again and definitely suggest it to friends and family. Do not miss this haunting tale of family and uncertainty. Witness the birth of one of our greatest filmmakers. Enjoy, I am off to another Eclipse. This is already shaping up to be a great journey!

Man of the West (1958)

"Man of the West" is not your typical western. Absolutely, it takes place during the times that most western films take place, it has all the markings of a western with the ten gallon hats, the unshaven bad guys, the beautiful Technicolor landscape populated by horses, and why not, there is even a covered wagon. So, but every account this is and should be labeled a western with Gary Cooper. But watching this film, truly viewing what is happening in front of the camera as well as the words from our actors, it quietly, very quietly, transforms into a dark drama with a western background. This is done through various avenues that direction Anthony Mann is not afraid to explore with this genre that rarely likes to go out of the box. With introductions into modern technology, the purest sense of an anti-hero, as well as a fight that borders between the lines of eerily sexual and the foundation for the legendary fight in "They Live", "Man of the West" boldly changes the typical dynamic of a tired genre and produces a film far from perfect, but wildly entertaining to watch from a cinematic standpoint.


To begin, what can you say about Gary Cooper, despite being in other westerns - "High Noon" comes to mind - he just doesn't seem to fit the typical mold for western superhero. He is tall, he is not as gruff around the outsides, and his emotion seems to capture the better of him. When he spews those last minute call lines, those bits of anger for the life that he chose, it never quite has that gruff demeanour about it, instead, it feels like a struggle via the eyes of an everyman. Is Gary Cooper an actor? Can he carry roles? Absolutely. Was the a powerful choice for the internally decommissioned Link Jones? I think Anthony Mann made a brilliant choice for casting Cooper as the lead. He is what pulled me into this film, and while I lean the further direction from westerns, it was because of him that I found myself captivated by the screen. His name changes as he enters the film, the seemingly funny but poignantly true account of him fitting onto a train, and finally the revelation of what his life is like outside the gang added to his mystique. The fight, well, the fight is an entirely different situation that demands its own paragraph, so I will leave it there. Accompanying Cooper are Julie London as a "love interest" (in the vaguest sense of the word) and Lee Cobb as Dock Tobin. London exudes sex as she briskly walks from scene to scene, while Tobin is way over the top as the curmudgeon old villain who is neither drunk nor blind, but acts like both. Yet it feels like our side characters are merely that, sideline characters. Your eyes, the viewers eyes, focus almost entirely on Gary Cooper due to what he brings to this film. His level of humanism brought to the character of a man who loves to kill, but hates the lifestyle (I will argue this point), is brilliant.

The fight. The seemingly elephant in the room when it comes to this film. For nearly five minutes smack dab in the center of this film we are given two fights. The first is between Tobin and the cousin, Claude. This is a peculiar fight because it seems like they are arm wrestling without a table. Like a fight to see who has the firmer handshake, Claude eventually loses and Cooper instigates a duel between him and the emotionally and sexually deprived Coaley. Let us not forget the scene earlier in which he requested that Billie Ellis to remove her clothing, in what became a very awkward scene quickly. This leads to this fight, there are fists thrown, there are tree branches used to disarm, there are horses nearly caught in the cross fire of this battle as innocent bystanders. It is an epic battle, and eventually, when Cooper gets the upper hand, he begins removing Coaley's clothing in reference to what happen to his not-woman earlier. This makes sense, but it is still extremely awkward. As Mann directs, he puts the focus not only on the fight, but also onto the faces of those watching, which eerily reminded me of what I looked like as I viewed. This is a powerful fight. This is a cinematic fight. This is a fight that just goes from strange to even stranger, yet I could not remove my eyes from the screen. When the eventual climax of the scene happens, it pulls you back into reality because, well, they didn't have the budget for a big death. Needless to say, post fight was a let down.

This wraps up my "501 Must See Movies" book and for the first time, I drew the slip for some Eclipse series of films (a subset of the Criterion collection) and I cannot wait to see where in the world I get to travel next. Until then, let me score this film. "Man of the West" was a strong film. There were scenes that I LOVED, the color of the background and the lush, lush Technicolor was perfect. This movie stands at attention. Gary Cooper was a wise chose of a character, and while the ending seemed haphazard at best, the steps to get to that point was fun. I also appreciated how "new" the train system was in this film. Two scenes particularly stand out. One is when Cooper isn't comfortable on the train and cannot understand the logic of why people prefer that way to travel. The second is when Tobin talks about taking a covered wagon as if it is 1,000 years old. It is the details of this film that make it more than your average western, but I cannot give it that almighty green. I liked it, but I don't think I could watch it again. I could easily suggest it, and if it were on at a party I would not complain, but pink is where I stand.

Great job Gary Cooper. Amazing choices Anthony Mann!

The Man in the White Suit (1951)

How to remain clean in an all-too dirty world?

"The Man in the White Suit" takes its 1950s world and opens its doors into today's modern society. With ideas blossoming daily by young entrepreneurs, and ultimately being purchased or "gobbled up" by bigger business, this film released in 1951 feels more adept today then perhaps it did upon its initial run. With industry standards like the Kindle or the Nook, reaching to greater heights, one cannot help but wonder which company will finally stand victorious. Which big business will emerge with the larger wallet to ensure product safety? If one cannot answer that question, perhaps a viewing of this film will tighten the bootstraps. "The Man in the White Suit" is part comedy, part social economic commentary, and part imagination. IMDb uses the phrase sci-fi to promote this film, but they couldn't be utterly wrong. There is a complacent element of science within this film, but overall it is the story of a small man with brains being downtrodden by big business.

Watching Alec Guinness stumble from factory to factory, draining funds from each department, to merely fuel his idea on creating a fabric that could never be destroyed, could never get dirty, and would never need replaced, is funny. This is an economic film with comedy wrapped tightly around it, there is no doubt about it, and Guinness at the top of his game. One could reasonably argue that everyone involved with this film was reaching their potential. There is a scene where director Alexander Mackendrick merely shows this device in one place to another, letting us know that Guinness has made his mark on this plant already. Instantly, this feature transforms into a dystopian world where humans would only have one piece of clothing, where dry cleaners would slowly not exist, and those without the cash to produce would ultimately become rubble. The new world would literally embrace the phrase, "One should always have one good suit". The film becomes eerily, and surprisingly darker as the head honchos of each of these fabric factories fights, literally, over who will control the rights to this idea. Like witnessing a British version of "Shark Tank", the old men with money attempt to take Guinness' idea from him and slowly keep it from the world. Guinness runs, but can you really run from ultimate economics?

There is a love story within the mix of this film, it is light - nearly unnecessary, but helps build some character into Guinness. This is his complete ride. The visual of him running through the streets of London with this impermeable white suit on was both brooding and hilarious at the same time. Mackendrick, known for the quick-talking, powerhouse of a film "Sweet Smell of Success" is able to balance the anti-capitalism remarks and the early Peter Sellers-esque antics of Guinness very tight. This is a quick film, running at nearly 85 minutes (I think shorter), it doesn't bumble on itself during the course of time. There is a story, it continues with it, and grows the horrors of small business at the same time. This is a powerful film merely due to its simplistic nature. The special effects are mediocre, the story is amazing, and Guinness is top hen of the hen house with his portrayal of Sidney Stratton. Despite that Mackendrick did also direct "The Ladykillers", a much more morbid slice of comedy, "The Man in the White Suit" (even with its darkness) feels almost whimsical. One can easily follow Guinness from factory to factory without a care in the world. His likability as well as detailed character development of Stratton creates a stronger viewing experience. "The Man in the White Suit" is a film that can be viewed again and again and again, discovering more about it during each viewing.

If you can't tell, this was a cinematic highlight during my week. I loved Guinness in this role, and he provided just enough social commentary with comedy to allow the brain to function at a higher level. The characters are spooky (when they need to be), the explosions are detailed, and the story knows what it wants to accomplish and does just that. To the untrained eye, Guinness could have easily been Sellers' understudy. This is a highly recommended film, enjoyable for both adults and children. Never have I watched a film and wanted something so badly (well, maybe never say never), but that white suit looked amazing! Found in my "501 Must-See Movies", this is getting a green highlight with blue stars. I cannot wait to watch this film again and add it to the Cinema Underground collection.