La Jetee (1962)

12 Monkeys attempts to be La Jetee, but La Jetee is no 12 Monkeys. Wrap your mind around that for a moment. Gilliam's powerful, over-budgeted sci-fi apocalypse love story is intense. The Willis // Pitt // Stowe casting proves that with stark imagery, you too can polish old brass to make it look new. BUT, it comes nowhere near the original. Having just finished watching La Jetee, I wish that I could travel back in time to erase my 12 Monkeys viewing and uniquely watch this 1962-short film instead. While Gilliam pulls out his bag of surrealist-charm, what director Chris Marker does is create a whole new cinematic experience. The use of freeze frames, the shot-by-shot storytelling allows you to visit the bleak nature of the current world, the lighted happiness of the past, and the starry future without delving into too much acting. With that said, the strongest element of this film is our characters. WHA...? A film merely using the technique of narration allows for strong characters? Andy, is it possible? La Jetee is nothing short of brilliant. The use of dated sci-fi and obvious lacking budget proves that with an amazing story, and a unique way to present that story, audiences can be captured. Interests can be peaked. History can be created.

In the short 25-ish minutes that this experience lasted, more definition was determined, creativity flowed, and a simplistic (yet complex?!?) story was born -- and in 1962 no less. Knowing the story already, I was concerned that I wouldn't be enthralled with this original - but the technique alone is worth a thousand words. Then, from out of nowhere, just as we are falling for the same woman our traveler has seen from his dreams, she moves. In a film with no motion, only still shots, to have that instance where we transcend the original feel of the film, it just pulls you in further. It demonstrates that director Chris Marker has more in his grasp than just a low-budget movie - he has a vision. He knows that within the short time he must not only tell a convincing sci-fi tale, but at its core, a believable love story. He does it. When the woman blinks on screen, pulling us from the original focus, we swoon (or at least I did). I see instantly Marker's vision and focus for this film. This singular scene is stronger and more defining than any vision that Gilliam could produce.

Found in my "Defining Moments in Movies" book, this is my second unseen film AND my second Criterion film in two weeks ... and guess what - I still have another coming! This run through the "J"s has been impressive and continually show me new images and creative cinema that has been unmatched in today's world. Could you imagine an entire film with merely screen shots instead of motion being delivered today instead of the wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am current mentality. It would be unwatched by the masses but loved by us cinephiles. La Jetee proves that with a smaller budget, a creative plan, and a strong catch ... anything is possible. There is no question in my mind that this film is getting a green highlight with blue star. I will watch this film again. I will suggest it to friends and family - and be prepared - this is the type of film that I think is giftable!

Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1975)

Chantal Akerman's Jeanne Dielman could be considered the ultimate film about voyeurism. Through the course of three days, we watch; nay, we peek, into the world of a widowed woman and her now-iconic daily rituals. Wake up, take care of Sylvain (her son), clean up, do groceries, babysit, have sex with regular "john", have dinner ready for Sylvain, go to sleep. Rinse, wash, repeat. For countless number of years, this has been the ritual for our title character, now Akerman gives us three-defining days to witness how one random instant can change the course of one woman. Combining feminism, sexuality, domesticity, and pioneering reality-television-esque cinematography, Akerman keeps us on the edge of our couches with nothing more than the drop of a brush, the burning of potatoes, and leaving the lid off the money-jar (ok, throw in a shaking baby scene for fun). Think this sounds boring? Then you have never quite experienced the power of this movie, and I cannot wait to involve myself with another Akerman triumph. She took a genre; French and over three-hours; and crafted a story that is everyday, and made it riveting.

Having such a long break between films and less-Criterion based cinema, I was nervous walking into this. Understanding the twist, reading the reviews, preparing for the mundane, Jeanne Dielman on all accounts, should have been a slice of difficult cinema to swallow - but Akerman's use of camera, the minutes-over-minutes of "my life" happening on screen, I was captured from the first frame. This is one of those rare films that is so monotonous, that when something - like overcooking the potatoes - happens ... well, it becomes nerving. The character, Jeanne, that you once knew and understood transforms into something less comfortable. The cracks in this normal life begin to show, and it is spookier than any modern horror movie. Akerman creates passion in the dispassionate. She creates comfort in the mundane, and within three hours, when it begins to break - you feel it. Tension rises, you feel like screaming at Jeanne when she can't write a letter - the passion erupts in this film. It, continuing the same lines, was refreshing and intrinsic all at the same time.

Is this the power of an orgasm? Had Jeanne never felt that pleasure before? Two things stand out after watching this film. First, she must have semi-felt it with her second "john", as that was when the walls began to crumble. Why was her result violence? Did her final "john" remind her of her husband, or was there something less passionate about their relationship? The final scene, in the dark, bloodied hands, just stands out - and remains that moment where I questioned everything I just watched. Who was this woman? Also, my second feeling upon watching this was ... why was there no conversation between any characters in this film? Jeanne and Sylvain don't even speak, they just mutter thoughts at each other - creating no conflict or resolution. Even the woman who has the baby she drops off, there are words spoken, but we never see here. There is no connection between anyone in this film, and it creates this stark, void environment where we are forced to see all of Jeanne. Again, the fear is always there - lurking in the background, haunting you both visually and psychologically.

Found in my "Defining Moments in Movies" book - this was a return to seeing things that had not been viewed before. I had not seen Akerman's work prior, so this was a bold, exciting entry. I cannot, oddly, wait to see this again - but it would be a bit before I can sit through the entirety. This film was engaging, important, and a surreal story of the unknown. Can I suggest it? You betcha. Is it for everyone? I'll let you decide. In my book, it gets a green highlight with blue star. Mesmerizing.

Great American Re-watch #6: Jaws (1975)

The last (I promise) of this series of re-watching some of the great films that have already been discussed on this blog, and I must admit - I loved them all again. Z was sheer brilliance this second time viewing it, discovering more and more about Costa-Gavras' style and form of storytelling. Jason and the Argonauts was pure fun - exciting, passionate, and complete Ray Harryhausen. This was a film my children will grow up viewing. Now, we come to Jaws. Jaws remains, in my eyes, one of Spielberg's greatest achievements. In this singular horror film (yep, I'm going to label it that way) he single-handedly creates fear merely by putting a camera underwater and looking up. Iconic and well placed, this continues to be used today by both every genre as a way to institute fear from below. Also, like Jason and the Argonauts, Spielberg doesn't use CGI. These were all hand-made sharks and detailed special effects. The boat did explode, the shark did as well, and that scene in the "pond" where the shark is seen underwater about to eat the man's leg, is stapled into my mind. Fear, combined with true horror, is what makes this PG-rated film an all-time favorite. Absolutely, it is played over and over and over again on nearly every late night cable channel, but watching it today, on my HD-TV, with pure Dolby sound, it was just beautiful.

I also watched the "Making Of" special feature, which, well, was mediocre at best. Having been around for 35 years, the special secrets of this film have already been discovered. It is like watching special features on any Star Wars DVD, you already know most walking into it. The "Making Of" felt boring for some reason, and I just wasn't inspired by what our major players discussed. BUT, what made me uber upset with Jaws (at least this edition) was the lacking audio commentary. I put this in hoping to get one of those by anyone involved, but nothing. This is a film that could use Spielberg or Dreyfuss in the background discussing the hardships of this production, or a funny tale about the shark. Anything would have added to this disc, but honestly, this 30th Anniversary edition seems rather bare bones. Urg.

Found in the same book that I found this one originally, "Defining Moments in Film", and I must admit - I loved, feared, was impressed with Jaws just like the first time I watched it when I was a kid. This movie doesn't age. I think that is what makes the fear remain - sure, there could be bigger guns if filmed today or bigger explosions or fancier clothes, but when you watch Jaws, it just doesn't feel like the 70s is stamped on it. That is what makes Jaws a favorite, that is what makes Jaws more than your average monster movie, and that is why Spielberg has never quite accomplished the same again. Green mark with blue stars again - I cannot wait to see this again and again and again - but PLEASE, could we get some better DVD special features?!?

Great American Re-watch #5: Jason and the Argonauts (1963)

It has happened, the second in a small run of "Great American Re-watch" films, as I am finding myself on a film book that I have used before. Yet, it seems that these re-watch films have only grown into stronger entries over time. Recently devouring Costa-Gavras' Z was just the beginning, as I found myself like a kid in a candy shoppe while escaping to the world of Ray Harryhausen and his pre-CGI creations in Jason and the Argonauts. I remember watching this for FILM CLUB, I remember watching this as a child, and I remember watching this just a few hours ago as I only hoped that the most recent Clash of the Titans could come at least 1/8th near what this singular film has accomplished. From the engrossing stop-motion Harryhausen animation to the childish-fun of Hercules, this movie has everything and more. For this viewing, I watched the Leonard Maltin // Harryhausen interview which was staged, a bit awkward, and very short (why couldn't this amazing slice of cinema get an audio commentary??), but still informational about the production of some of these cult creations.

What else can be said about this unsung classic? I mention "unsung" because I don't think Jason and the Argonauts finds its way into the world of youthful viewing. Are dads saying to their children, their young boys, "Let's watch this jagged little movie that is a stone's throw away from modern special effects tonight!" I just don't think these words are being said, and with that Jason is merely going to remain one of my favorites for a long time. It is a cool Sunday afternoon, you just need something entertaining, THIS is the movie to watch. Sure, 80s action is always of value, but Harryhausen always takes the cake. The lines are great, the chemistry between Hercules and his cohort is sincere, and those monsters - the monsters (and Zeus playing human chess) are a sole reason to keep this film in heavy rotation.

Found in my "Defining Moments in Movies", there is one more movie to watch that I have reviewed already, then it is off to something new. This is going to get interesting. There is no score change for this movie, Jason and the Argonauts will continue to get a solid green mark with blue stars in my book. I cannot wait until it makes it back to the rotation again.

Great American Re-watch #4: Z (1969)

It has been a long time since one of these "Great American Re-Watch" moments, and I was impressed to see how time improved my viewing of Costa-Gavras' Z. It has been since January since my last in this series in which I watch a film that I have already enjoyed again to see if time allows for a stronger viewing, and since April when I originally watched this film. Now, watching Z again, this time with the audio commentary by film historian Peter Cowie, it adds a whole new level of enjoyment for a film whose subject seemed foreign to me at the time, but now, with a bit of historical perspective, adds a new light on this Greek tale. The most interesting point about this commentary was how Cowie discusses side-by-side what makes Gavras' film nearly identical to that of the events that took place in Greece, BUT he doesn't place his film in Greece. Oddly, watching this film back in April, I knew that it was due to events that took place - I thought Gavras set it in Greece, but did not - and that merely shows his power of storytelling. These were French actors filling in for other worldly events. Rarely does this happen in American cinema, where we - as Americans - attempt to tell a tale of political corruptness in other land. There are plenty of films with American troops in Iraq, but no stories that translate from what Hussain did told from a US perspective. Interesting.

Watching this film this time I loved it even more. Looking back on my past review of Z in April, it seemed to take forever to watch. I remember not being able to fully appreciate what Gavras was attempting to accomplish, and discussing the polar slowness near the center of this film. Seeing it now, I semi-disagree with myself. The introduction of the Prosecutor adds a different tone to the film, one that is different from the political upheaval started at the beginning. This transition takes a bit of time to understand, but once you see that Gavras has motive and a social point, than Z takes on a whole new level. With the addition of the audio commentary, I must admit, I love this film even more. I haven't had the opportunity to re-watch my other Gavras experience, Missing, but I cannot wait until Z comes back into rotation. This has become a gifting film.

Found in my "DVD Savant" book this time, I wholeheartedly give this film a green highlight with blue stars. I cannot wait to watch it again, and while Cowie merely reads from a pre-set paper, the words and history that he provides becomes important information to fully appreciate this cinematic triumph. Criterion has done a fantastic job yet again with the packaging and special features. When I revisit this film again, I look forward to a couple of the interviews presented and finalize my exploration of this disc. Z was fantastic, a strong recommendation to anyone following this blog or just looking for a fashionable political who-dun-it.