Cinema | Discussão Geral

[Almeno]

Só ontem é que vi o Le Mans 66. Gostei muito. 

[bmfpcdm]

“Ali: Fear Eats the Soul”

A nível de cinematografia é do mais impressionante que já vi, com uma atenção ao detalhe excelente.

Spoiler

O imdb dá a informação de que é um spin-off de "The American Soldier", e é verdade que nesse filme uma personagem conta, de passagem, a história da Emmi e do Ali. Portanto, caso spoilers vos afetem, recomendaria ver primeiro "Ali: Fear Eats the Soul".

[FabioK]

Citação de Lebohang, Em 08/02/2020 at 09:20:

Ou então o clássico viu uma tampa de esgoto, tirou-a e saltou lá para dentro. 😆

Ou então (ya venho uma beca atrasado)

Depois de se descobrir que o Dom tem um irmão, também se descobre que o Han tem um irmão que até é gémeo e como tal quer lugar ao lado do Dom.

Badum tss

[jean-luc godard]

não temos criterion channel mas vai ser bacano sacar alguns dos mais obscuros em 1080p

[Hammerfall]

Citação de jean-luc godard, há 2 horas:

não temos criterion channel mas vai ser bacano sacar alguns dos mais obscuros em 1080p

Pensava que só fazias filmes pra adultos 🙄

[jean-luc godard]

Citação de Hammerfall, há 6 minutos:

Pensava que só fazias filmes pra adultos 🙄

 

[Hammerfall]

unfunny Woody Allen  

😆😆

[Keef]

 

[Longineu]

 

[Pablo Honey]

"You Were Never Really Here" é boa cena. Consegue ser etéreo, hipnótico, calmo, mas também frenético e desconfortável - principalmente graças à banda sonora top. O engenho com que o filme balanceia estes dois moods é realmente impressionante. Não vão achar o melhor filme que viram nas vossas vidas, mas é algo muito bem feito. 

[Solero]

Adorei o Gentlemen.

[Pablo Honey]

@bmfpcdm Parceiro, vi no letterbox q finalmente viste o Joker. Podes deixar uns comentários? Curtia saber oq achaste

[bmfpcdm]

Citação de Pablo Honey, há 7 horas:

@bmfpcdm Parceiro, vi no letterbox q finalmente viste o Joker. Podes deixar uns comentários? Curtia saber oq achaste

Coincidência das coincidências planeava escrever as minhas conclusões sobre o filme hoje, pois tenho estado a pensar sobre ele nos últimos dias e ontem à noite enquanto estava deitado na cama fez-se luz.

Considero-o conceptualmente com potencial, contudo a execução não me convenceu. Inicialmente pensei que pudesse ter sido a interpretação do Joaquin Phoenix, que admito não me ter impressionado, conjugada com a fraca caracterização de personagens secundários; porém vim a concluir que é algo mais profundo. 

Spoiler

A primeira pista foi um evento logo ao início do filme, que imediatamente não me caiu bem: a maneira como o revólver vai parar às mãos do Arthur. Em termos de escrita é do mais preguiçoso que há: um colega de trabalho simplesmente dá-lhe uma arma de fogo. O catalisador? O Arthur ter sido aleatoriamente atacado por um bando de delinquentes na cena de abertura do filme. Dois acontecimentos em que o protagonista é um agente passivo, pois ele não procura ativamente confrontação, muito menos uma arma.

Isso levou-me a pensar sobre os momentos em que o Arthur é um agente ativo. Ignorando o enredo da sua fantasia com a vizinha, ele só é proativo a respeito do passado da sua mãe; começando por invadir a sua privacidade ao abrir a carta, confrontando-a logo de seguida, e descobrindo que o seu pai, de acordo com a sua mãe, é o Thomas Wayne; depois disso, ativamente, procura o Thomas Wayne e quando uma oportunidade lhe cai aos pés para o confrontar, leva um murro na cara pelos seus esforços (que não é único momento em que o Thomas Wayne é caracterizado negativamente), tal como a informação de que a sua mãe esteve institucionalizada e de que ele foi adotado; para aferir a veracidade dessa informação ele desloca-se ao hospital psiquiátrico e depois de uma altercação lá consegue os documentos referentes à sua mãe e descobre os papéis de adoção, tal como o facto de na sua infância ele ter sido vítima de negligência e maus-tratos; este único enredo em que ele é um agente ativo é concluído com o Arthur a cometer matricídio, mas para mim essa conclusão não deteve grande impacto emocional, provavelmente porque a Penny nessa altura mal conseguia formar uma frase depois da apoplexia que sofreu fora de cena.

Em tudo o resto o Arthur é um agente passivo ou reativo. Ele não procura a confrontação no comboio. Ele vai parar ao programa do Murray porque coincidentemente alguém filmou o seu ato de stand-up, enviou as imagens para o programa e estas foram consideradas engraçadas o suficiente para merecerem um segmento; por alguma razão as imagens ressoaram com a audiência, levando os produtores a, ativamente, procurar e contactar o Arthur para o convidar para o programa. No dia do programa, o colega de trabalho visita o seu apartamento, oferecendo-lhe, desta vez, a oportunidade para o matar. Nesse mesmo dia, coincidentemente, foram organizados protestos na rua (isto porque o Arthur inadvertidamente despoletou todo um movimento político-social), e enquanto o Arthur está a dançar por uma escadaria abaixo é reconhecido por detetives que o querem questionar; uma perseguição pedestre tem lugar que culmina com os detetives a se embrulharem com uma multidão, não acabando bem para eles. Finalmente o Arthur chega ao programa e a grande confrontação com o Murray tem pouco ou nada de pessoal e emocional, lembremo-nos que Murray é o personagem que no início do filme, através de uma fantasia, é introduzido como a figura paternal do Arthur, porém o Arthur escolheu reprimir esses sentimentos no seu ato final de emancipação, imputando o Murray com o crime de alguém que o usou para sacar umas gargalhadas. Eu entendo que matar o Murray, em vez do Thomas Wayne, é o verdadeiro ato de patricídio, com um grande potencial catártico para o personagem do Arthur, pois como já afirmei é o ato final de emancipação, porém a execução dessa cena é feita de uma forma tão crua, com uma troca de palavras vazia de sentimento, acabando por se tornar inane. Continuando, o Arthur é apreendido pelas autoridades; uma ambulância conduzida por um protestante choca com o carro de polícia que o transporta; ele é libertado e adulado momentaneamente pela multidão de protestantes…

Título alternativo do filme: “Shit Just Keeps Happening to Arthur". O que faz todo o sentido quando nos lembramos de que o Todd Phillips é o realizador dos filmes “The Hangover”, em que essa é a fórmula. Quiçá a intenção dele era contrastar o agente ativo que é o Travis Bickle em “Taxi Driver”, com o agente passivo que é o Arthur em “Joker”, dou-lhe esse benefício da dúvida. Todavia, mesmo aceitando esse exercício e estudo de caráter, o filme continua a não me entusiasmar, pois estruturalmente não é mais do que uma série de coincidências e conveniências que propelam o protagonista para a conclusão do filme, continuando a existir uma flagrante negligência à caracterização dos personagens secundários.

Longe de ser um mau filme, pois tem uma visão estilisticamente boa e consistente; em termos de história, apesar da execução colapsar ao escrutínio, também se sente que existia potencial. Em suma, sinto que o filme é, intencionalmente, pouco mais do que um veículo para o Joaquin Phoenix representar irrestritamente.

[Keef]

 

[Keef]

No Time To Die estava tão perto, mas foi adiado para Novembro 😕

[Augusto]

Citação de Keef, há 3 horas:

No Time To Die estava tão perto, mas foi adiado para Novembro 😕

Não é hora para morrer, é engraçado porque é verdade.

[bmfpcdm]

HERE AND THERE

Yomota Inuhiko traces the life course of a most radical filmmaking figure

BY YOMOTA Inuhiko

Citação

IN 1968, as political and cultural turmoil gripped many parts of the world, a series of murders took place in Tokyo, Kyoto, Hakodate and Nagoya. The victims–security men and taxi drivers–were all shot to death with a weapon stolen from the U.S. navy base at Yokosuka, outside Tokyo. When the perpetrator, Nagayama Norio, was arrested the following year, people were amazed to discover he was only 19 years old. But the wretched circumstances of this teenager's life came as an even greater shock. He had been born in a remote part of Hokkaido, the seventh of eight children. Both parents had abandoned the children and disappeared. One of his sisters became mentally deranged after being raped. The children managed to survive but were always little short of starving. After finishing junior high school, Nagayama made his way to Tokyo, where he moved from job to job and often got involved in small-time robberies. He twice tried to smuggle himself to the United States, and twice failed. Faced with the realization that he had run out of options, he resorted to murder on impulse. While in prison he developed his writing skills and later won a literary award. But having received a death sentence, he was granted no leniency and was executed in 1997.

The Nagayama case impacted in no small way on the intelligentsia and artist circles of late 1960s Japan. Nakagami Kenji, later to be known as a novelist of Faulkner-style sagas, was the same age as Nagayama. He immediately set about writing of the explosive feelings he had inside, using as far as possible language that overlapped with Nagayama. As he brandished a gun, I'll brandish a pen, Nakagami declared, in this way marking the start of his literary career.

Shindo Kaneto, a disciple of Mizoguchi Kenji and an advocate of Japan's independent film movement, chose to portray the tragedy of Nagayama's life with the realism of dramatic cinema. In Live Today, Die Tomorrow!, completed in 1970, Nagayama and his family were faithfully represented by professional actors, in a performance that seemed both to indict and edify an audience born into an age of plenty. Under the postwar democratic system Shindo has consistently professed humanism. He saw the poverty of Japan's lower classes that had led to the Nagayama case as something that thrust powerful drama at him.

There is one further film on this subject, with the title A.K.A. Serial Killer. It was made as a documentary immediately after Nagayama's arrest, but was not shown publicly until 1975. I have called it a documentary, but I'm not sure that's the appropriate term. Not only does Nagayama not appear in the film, there's not a single interview with anyone involved in the case, either. For the whole of its 86 minutes, the film shows only a series of scenes, one after another, of various places around Japan. The audience slowly realizes that what they are watching is the visual environment of Nagayama's 19 years of life. The outskirts of some down-at-heel provincial town way up north. A poorly attended village festival. A bustling nightlife district in Tokyo. A dry cleaners in a residential street. Yokohama port. The setting sun reflected on waves far out to sea... The scenes are soundless except for occasional unrelated jazz improvisation that overlays the visual images. Only a narrator's expressionless voice relating the facts of the case drones on endlessly.

Involved in the making of this film was Adachi Masao, the subject of this article, together with the critic Matsuda Masao and screenwriter Sasaki Mamoru. In contrast to Shindo, they already were skeptical of the edifying power of drama. They feared that putting together images of poverty and misery to tell a story of postwar Japan, would be nothing more than reproducing the same sort of films of sweet, curious stories, produced in quantity for quick consumption, that could be seen anywhere. And in the cultural system of the present capitalist society, such films would end up being assigned moderate status. If this were so, then surely offering images without contrivance of the scenery that enclosed Nagayama like his fate, and leaving its semantic judgement to the audience, should work at a deeper level. On the basis of this logic, they proclaimed the value of scenery over story, and tried to identify some political thread running behind it all.

Another look at this film more than 30 years later, and after Nagayama's execution, reveals it as a fine record of commonplace scenes from all over Japan around the year 1970. The wooden telegraph poles and the signboards, the clothes of people walking in the streets seem to whisk one away to a different time and place. A few years after Adachi and his colleagues were preoccupied with the ordinary provincial scene, Japanese National Railways (now JR Corporation) launched a large-scale advertising campaign to promote domestic tourism under the name 'Discover Japan.' 'Scenery as message' had been absorbed into the channels of state capitalism.

POINTS OF VIEW

Anyone now wanting to write about Adachi Masao will inevitably be drawn back to this film. Adachi was 10 years older than Nagayama, having been born in Fukuoka in 1939. He went on making films for some years after this, before joining the Japanese Red Army and devoting himself to the Palestinian struggle for liberation. He was arrested in Beirut several years ago, and is now in Tokyo awaiting trial on a number of charges including contravention of the Passport Law. To coincide with his unintended return home, many of his films were shown in Tokyo and several magazines published special editions. All sorts of people who knew him, starting with Oshima Nagisa, and ranging from former parliamentarians to former members of the Japanese Red Army, discussed the choices Adachi had made and their consequences. But in all this Adachi himself was absent, in an interesting parallel with the film A.K.A. Serial Killer, in which the central character Nagayama never appears on the screen.

Adachi is one of the most important Japanese cinema directors of the 1960s. He became a legendary figure in the world of student cinema after co-directing the film Sain at the beginning of the decade. This short film depicts the days of idleness and despair suffered by a couple of which the woman is congenitally deformed with a sealed vagina. Its topic is sexual, but it seems to be suffused with powerful political allegory. Students at that time were extremely frustrated, confined in a closed mental world, due to their defeat in the struggle in 1960 over the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty. Adachi subsequently worked in film production with Wakamatsu Koji, who was an established figure in the world of B-class erotic "pink movies." Together they directed several sex comedies that were grotesque as well as humorous. The issue that obsessed Adachi during this period was investigating how the sexual energy latent at the deepest levels of Japanese unconsciousness would appear in the present age in subversive form. In Gingakei (Galaxy)(1967) we can see in a chain of absurd images that at first glance suggest surrealism, his intention of trying to integrate his ideas in a cosmological way.

Together with Wakamatsu, Oshima Nagisa had a decisive influence on Adachi. In one of Oshima's most well-known films, Death by Hanging (1968), Adachi was made to play the part of a young policeman. Further, he was given the task of writing screenplays for two films that used radical types of expression. Oshima convinced Adachi of the need for something Wakamatsu didn't have, a necessity of theory based on an awareness of history. The film A.K.A. Serial Killer grew naturally out of such blending of personal contacts. The political quality of looking at scenery was something that also fascinated Oshima, and immediately afterwards he made the film The Battle of Tokyo, or the Story of the Young Man who Left his Will on Film (1970), the story of a high school student's suicide, for which he filmed ordinary everyday scenes in a Tokyo residential neighborhood.

Adachi became directly involved in politics only in the 1970s, after the demise of the student movement that had stirred up so much commotion, when Japan was materializing from stagnation and lethargy as a mass consumer society. On their way home after attending the Cannes Film Festival, Adachi and Wakamatsu had occasion to visit a Palestinian refugee camp. They stayed there for some time and shot some film, with the result that in 1971 the film The Red Army/PFLP: Declaration of World War was made.

After the Third Middle East War of 1967, Israel occupied extensive stretches of territory including Gaza and the Golan Heights. The following year Yasser Arafat was appointed leader of the PLO, but the illusion of pan-Arab nationalism had been shattered. The refugees involved in the liberation struggle felt impatient at their international isolation and the world's deafness to their appeals, and some among them embarked on hijacks and other extremist action.

During the early 1970s many from artistic circles of the capitalist countries of the so-called First World visited the refugee camps, and it became the vogue among them to use what they had seen and heard as fuel for their creative talents. Jean Genet was, as a result, sympathetic to the Palestinians his whole life. Jean-Luc Godard attempted to shoot a film in the Golan Heights, but suddenly suffered a theoretical setback. In the film Here and There that he later produced by re-editing the aborted rushes, he poses the following question: considering the enormous gulf that exists between the Palestinian refugees appearing in the film and the TV viewers who will watch it in safe surroundings, surely it's more important to consider the implications of that gulf, than to film the refugees? In Japan there was Yamaguchi Yoshiko, who subsequently became a parliamentarian responsible for Arab relations. She visited refugee camps and made documentaries lamenting the tragedy that war visits on women and children. Her series of documentaries, made over a three-year period, won her an individual TV award.

The Red Army/PFLP is certainly a strange film. Despite figuring prominently in the title, the Japanese Red Army puts in only the briefest formal appearance at the beginning. Most of the film is made up of scenes from the daily lives of PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) guerrillas that Adachi and Wakamatsu shot with hand-held 16-millimeter cameras. The same hands of a PFLP member that shell beans in readiness for a meal are shown cleaning a gun. The deft cooking of food in a small frying pan. There are discussions and interviews. Calls mount for armed conflict, and it is repeatedly stated that the film is a joint propaganda effort of the two political groups. The commands heard on the soundtrack don't properly match the content of the visuals, and it is certainly not easy to understand the relation to the Palestinians of the part showing the activities of the Red Army in Japan. People familiar with the quietness that pervades the film A.K.A. Serial Killer are certain to be surprised at the almost hysterical barking of orders and declarations that dictate the atmosphere of this film. Adachi earlier offered only scenery, without putting in any message, but here he makes clear his political standpoint, and he shows not a moment's hesitation in using the visual image as a tool of conflict.

This film, however, fulfilled a major historical role. Film anthropology these days requires that, as a matter of ethics, completed films are taken back to be shown to the people who appear in them, but at that time documentary makers had little such consciousness. However the staff who worked on this film prepared a version with English subtitles and went back to the refugee camp again, at some risk, to show it to the families of PFLP fighters. During a year of conflict, more than half of those appearing in the film had been killed by Israeli forces. The families expressed their deep appreciation to Adachi and Wakamatsu.

But the most significant event of all brought about by this film was that some time after returning to Japan Adachi abandoned the cinema and set off again for the Middle East. A sense of restlessness and an acceptance that cinema could not after all accomplish liberation drove him to be a member of the Japanese Red Army. I would not presume here to debate the rights and wrongs of this. It is not my intention to censure the Japanese Red Army as international terrorists, nor to exalt them as the latest spearhead of world revolutionary thinking. No doubt in coming to his his decision Adachi thought about volunteers such as Earnest Hemingway or André Malraux taking part in the Spanish Civil War. What I suspect is needed for the fullest understanding of his actions not Marxist-Leninist theory, but something like the nationalist fervor of Kita Ikki, who sought to participate in China's Republican Revolution of 1911. We can safely leave it to future generations to pass judgment on Adachi and the historical significance of the Red Army.

According to his long-time friend Wakamatsu Koji, Adachi is currently working on screenplays while in prison. Turkish director Yilmaz Güney was imprisoned as a result of anti-government activities, but whipped out instructions to his staff and managed to direct a film. And while in a Soviet jail Armenia's Sergei Parajanov kept himself busy creating collages as preparation for his next work. We can't know what sort of film Adachi will direct once he's out, but whatever happens, Japanese cinema would certainly be revitalized by the return of one of its most precious film-making talents.

Disillusioned with the world of film, Adachi set off to find his own reality. His return to screen would be a striking moment.

 

[jean-luc godard]

leio quando tiver de quarentena

[jean-luc godard]

morreu max von sydow 😞

[bmfpcdm]

 

[bobzz]

https://www.rogerebert.com/chazs-blog/vitalina-varela-wings-of-desire-and-solitude

[Longineu]

 

[bmfpcdm]

 

[Pablo Honey]

12 Angry Men é top xuxa, só vi hj pela primeira vez. 

12 gajos a falar durante uma hora e meia e deixou-me cativado. Muitíssimo bem escrito. Sidney Lumet com um engenho incrível sobre o que é a posição e movimento da câmara e disposição dos (incríveis) atores.  Adoro este tipo de sentimento após ver um filme, em que sinto que levei uma masterclass do crl sobre Cinema. 

[Eden Hazard]

Vi ontem o Knives Out e, apesar de ter gostado bastante, acho que

no fim do filme há um excesso de reviravoltas e acaba por descambar um bocado. Muito forçado.

Concordam?