Translated material
Hopscotch games
Yuri Gladilshchikov
New films on the big screen and on video. A huge number of films shot by master directors and even classics suddenly appeared in the box office and on video. But the result, of course, is different.
New films on the big screen and on video. A huge number of films shot by master directors and even classics suddenly appeared in the box office and on video. But the result, of course, is different.
"Deep blue Sea"
USA * * * 1/2
Directed by Renny Harlin
Stars: general public
little-known
Kinoprava - "Pushkinsky"
“Deep Blue Sea”: that very tragic moment when an evil shark politically incorrectly devoured a parrot (Photo: “Karo-Premier” )
About what . About irresponsible scientists who, at a goddamn ocean station, instill intelligence in the most vicious sharks, in order to then make medicines useful to people from their brains. Sharks, of course, are breaking out of the clutches of scientific totalitarianism. What follows is not silence at all, but a natural “Jurassic Park”, only not on land, but under/above the water and in the water itself. According to tradition, only two survive. He and, I note, another one.
Advantages and disadvantages. The film by the Hollywood Finn Harlin is similar to everything at once, and this secondary nature in the first half hour is incredibly annoying. It looks like primitive horror films like the Japanese “Gamera” and “Legend of the Dinosaur” (“Captain, I report: everything is calm!” - and then the surveillance device gives out an alarming: “Tut-tu-tu-oo-oo-oo!”). Similar to typical disaster films, where they always tell the stories of the heroes at first, so that it is more pity when they are devoured. Similar to marine disaster films like "Jaws" or (a more primitive version) "Orcs - Killer Whale", familiar to our public in the early 80s under the name "Death among the Icebergs". The echoes of “Jurassic Park” and its idea of the impossibility of controlling the uncontrollable, that is, monsters (in “The Park” the uncontrollable were called “moving systems”), are transparent to the point of indecency. The subtext is a topic that Hollywood directors adore so much that they are simply sickened by it - the responsibility of scientists for their experiments.
"Harleen - what should I take from him?" - you think with some (even!) satisfaction. Almost ruined Die Hard by making the second - the dumbest - part of it. Disgraced himself with Cutthroat Island. A meticulous craftsman, Harlin somehow managed only one expensive action movie - "The Cliffhanger"...
And suddenly - after half an hour - the surprises begin. It was a pleasant surprise for the author of these lines that he - almost for the first time in recent years - managed not to guess which of the main characters would survive. I guessed one, but not the other. Next: plot and effects. In general, the film is really cool, and there are a lot of spectacular ideas and twists. The closer to the finale, the more it resembles not “Jurassic Park”, but “Aliens” - the best science-fiction thriller of all time. “Aliens” are mixed with “Titanic” (water floods the underwater laboratories).
Again, it’s nice that the film is emphatically politically incorrect. At one point, the shark eats not just anyone, but a parrot. And offending parrots in movies is even riskier than offending... (crossed out by self-censorship). In addition, the film is politically incorrect in relation to the sharks themselves. Harlin’s are so vile!.. So bad!.. Just like pedophiles.
Key phrase. A hybrid of "Aliens" and "Jurassic Park", only water, water, water all around.
"Insider"
USA * * *
Directed by Michael Mann
Stars: Al Pacino and Russell Crowe
Kinoprava - "Cascade"
“The Insider”: the producer of the program “60 Minutes” (Al Pacino) is deeply worried about the fact that he can’t manage to air a scandalous interview with a courageous doctor exposing tobacco companies (in the background is a still from an interview with Russell’s character Crow)
(Photo: AP )
About what. About a doctor of chemistry who was kicked out of the famous tobacco company Brown & Williamson in the mid-90s because he told its bosses that they were poisoning the nation. He was immediately contacted by the producer of the ratings program of the CBS television company 60 Minutes, which supplies the public with sensational reports. At first the doctor refused to talk (he was bound by corporate obligations), but then he decided that the life of the nation was still more important. Therefore, firstly, he acted as a witness in one of the court cases against the tobacco industry, and secondly, he gave an interview to “60 Minutes”, where he presented shocking facts. For example, that nicotine is addictive. (And also that nicotine is definitely a drug, that in the manufacture of cigarettes ammonia is used, which promotes more efficient absorption of nicotine into the blood, and some other nasty thing that leads to lung cancer.)
But it turned out that the industry is stronger, and the system protects it. “60 Minutes” with nicotine was not aired, fearing a lawsuit from tobacco companies. They began to threaten the doctor, the tobacco industry collected false incriminating evidence against him and passed it on to the Wall Street Journal. A Kentucky state court officially prohibited him from disclosing corporate secrets. As a result, the doctor lost not only his job (and with it a good car and house), but also his family, since his wife took her daughters and left. That's how terrible they are there. The man almost committed suicide, but a 60 Minutes producer brought the truth about the attacks on freedom of speech to the New York Times, the cigarette story was aired, and fifty American states sued the tobacco industry for $246 billion. The story is based on real events.
Pros (no cons). Suspense, editing, close-ups that allow the audience to focus on the psychology of the characters. Russell Crowe (the doctor) was not afraid to look middle-aged and in general - with glasses - resembles ex-prime minister Sergei Stepashin (despite the fact that he is about to appear in the leading role of a gladiator in the film of the same name by Ridley Scott). Al Pacino, the honest producer of 60 Minutes, is given his trademark emotional outburst in one scene. Quality director Michael Mann, about whom it is known (after the recent dramatic action film "Heat") that he loves long, detailed, corrosive films, again made a film that is not short - more than two hours and thirty minutes. As a result, “The Insider” was nominated for as many as seven Oscars, but probably still for the theme (that’s why they didn’t give any Oscars). After all, the problem of smoking worries Americans more than anything else.
To the side. “An Insider” is interesting for those who are interested in the country of the USA. Two observations. First. And there the person who encroaches on the system turns out to be sort of a dissident. But if in our country the party and the State Security Committee crushed dissidents, then there the democratic justice system crushes them. By court decision, the truth may be hidden. A strange paradox: it seems that legal proceedings should guarantee all sorts of freedoms, but legal costs are high, so those who have more money win. No one - not even CBS - risks getting involved with a rich company that can hire crooked lawyers, drag it through the courts and simply ruin it. By the way, it’s funny that the tobacco company Brown & Williamson, which was introduced in “The Insider,” now wants to sue the film’s producer, Disney.
Second. Although the author of these lines does not smoke, the American anti-tobacco hysteria worries him too. In “One of Our Own,” a cigarette (they call it a nicotine capsule) does not appear on the screen even once! This is funny! The film is considered progressive, but to the same extent it can be called reactionary. After all, if it all ends with smoking (poisoning the health of the nation) being recognized as politically incorrect, and cigarettes being outlawed, depriving smokers of their rights to poison themselves and have fun, then this will be a clear act of totalitarianism.
Key phrase. The US Department of Health warns for the last time!..
"Simple Story"
USA, not rated
Directed by David Lynch
Actor: Richard Farsworth
Rental - "Central Partnership"
“A Simple Story”: Richard Farsworth’s hero at the very beginning of his journey to his brother (Photo: Cannes Film Festival Press Office )
About what. About a crippled old man from the cowboy wilderness, who suddenly learned that his brother, with whom he once loved to look at the stars, had a stroke. His brother lives in the same hole, but a thousand miles away. The old man decides to visit him, but, since he is distinguished by healthy rural conservatism, he sets off not by plane or even by bus, but on a tiny slow-moving tractor. The whole film is about this journey, which lasted, it seems, a month and a half. The old man is distinguished by: a fantastic love of life, incredible endurance, boundless kindness, a front-line background, southern obstinacy, a rare sense of self-esteem and crystal honesty. The entire film is characterized by a belief in freedom, democracy and individualism. Actor Richard Farsworth was nominated for an Oscar for Best Actor, but received nothing. And that’s true: he plays pretty well, but the nomination was more a tribute to political correctness.
Advantages and disadvantages. Everything would be fine. Certainly, the film would not have caused any sensation. Someone would quietly praise him, someone would sluggishly scold him... if not for the name of the director. “A Simple Story” was made by the author of “Eraserhead”, “The Elephant Man”, “Dune”, “Blue Velvet”, “Wild at Heart” and “Twin Peaks” - the main cult director of the turn of the 80-90s. The last picture Lynch made in the mid-90s, Lost Highway, was not outstanding, but it turned out to be almost more complex and darker than the previous ones. And here you go: a super-simple “simple story.”
Before, Lynch constantly explored the nature of evil, which, in his opinion, was rooted in the outwardly calm and prosperous American province. The most real evil - demonic. Now he decided to explore the nature of provincial goodness. Lynch, unlike Spielberg, has not yet gotten to the American flag in close-up - and that’s just bread. But still, he made a film that was clearly Hollywood - even if it was not a box office success.
The shortest review of the film fits into the phrase: “This is not Lynch.” I’ve seen movie fans who even like this metamorphosis of a classic. “Well, it’s good that it’s not Lynch,” they say. “After all, I’ve been tired of Lynch for a long time” (not to me, I note). One might add that this is “not Badalamenti,” because Lynch’s regular composer, who became quite fashionable in our country after the music for “Twin Peaks,” wrote a standard Hollywood lyrical soundtrack for “A Simple Story.”
Some good critics try to understand and justify Lynch's incidents, arguing that the cult of ugliness did not accidentally give way to the cult of normality in his films. I remain at a loss. I feel sorry for the old Lynch. There is nothing else like it in cinema, and there are more than enough masters to invent “simple stories.” It happens that too many sick films spill onto the screens. The overall sad (for me) trend now is that many good directors have begun making films that are too healthy and politically correct. Even the inventor of Freddy Krueger, director Wes Craven - and he, distracted from films like "Scream", suddenly made a film about a white woman who teaches African and Latin American children to play the violin, and called it simply wildly (for himself, of course): " Music of the Heart". So Lynch may indeed continue to be a trendsetter in cinematic fashion. More precisely, the cinematic conjuncture.
Key phrase. Lynch is not at all what he once seemed.
"Henry Full"
USA * * * *
Directed by Hal Hartley
Actors: unknown,
except Parker Posey
Rental - "Carmen"
“Henry Full”: “Salieri” is upset that he didn’t make “Mozart” (Photo: “Carmen” )
About what. A deliberate, ironic, intellectual, vulgar, naturalistic, coldish, quite erotic (all appearances by Parker Posey) film about the life of the simplest provincials - garbage men, grocers, single mothers, nymphomaniacs and poets. People drink beer, compact garbage, read books, make love, run to the toilet - and at this time their destinies change and their lives are ruined.
Pros. Hartley is perhaps the most independent of the famous "American independent" (that is, non-Hollywood) directors. Even the films of Jarmusch, who dissect either the Western genre or the action genre, can, if desired, be accused of “commercialization.” Look, Jarmusch (like Soderbergh) will someday make a film in Hollywood. Hartley - hardly. He makes paintings for and ultimately about himself. About love, coldness, loneliness, the disease of creativity. Good “independent” cinema differs from Hollywood even (or maybe not even, but above all) in its voice-over music. The voice-over sounds of "Henry Fool" are appropriate, pleasant and not cheesy. By the way (it’s good to praise our people sometimes), they are akin to the sounds for cinema that Aleksey Aigi and especially Anton Batagov invent. Do you know who the author of the music is? Hartley himself!
"Henry Full" is the sixth feature film by Hartley (b. 1959). The previous five: The Unbelievable Truth, Trust, Simple Men, Amateur, Flirt. I give the original titles because Hartley is the most unknown of the good American directors among us. However, articles about him were published regularly, and one nervous critic even once wrote that Hartley was his undoubted alter ego, who managed to look into his (the critic’s) inconsolable soul. It doesn't matter where Hartley actually looked. It is important that in his paintings everyone really sees their own. For example, it seemed to me that “Henry Full” develops the theme of Mozart and Salieri. “Salieri” (who writes the grandiose novel “Confession” in the film, which is intended to revolutionize world literature) recognizes “Mozart” in an infantile scavenger, encourages him to write, provides him with fame, while he himself - as is typical for a typical “Salieri” - turns out to be a graphomaniac . But one can understand that, according to Hartley, a truly creative person is precisely Salieri. Mozart lives not only by creativity, Salieri - only. He has a flair for true art, he is unhappy, lonely, unbearable to those around him, unable to live a different life, earn money, be a good husband and father... He just doesn’t know how to write. As a result, it is “Mozart” who destroys “Salieri” in the film, explaining to him what he is worth. The "Mozarts" (called Simon in the film) are unintentionally cruel.
Minuses. None. But when going to see “Fula” or buying a cassette, be aware that this is a typical film from the category “cinema is not for everyone” - so as not to have any complaints later against Hartley or the author of these lines.
Key phrase. You, Simon, are a god, but you drank without me.
"The End of the Affair"
UK - USA * * * *
Director Neil Jordan
Stars: Ralph Fiennes, Julianne Moore, Stephen Rea, Ian Hart
Prokat - "Cascade"
(Photo: "Cascade" )
Two shots from "The End of the Affair": Julianne Moore and Ralph Fiennes' characters would like to be together, but we must keep our promise to God
(Photo: "Cascade" )
About what. A beautiful film adaptation of Graham Greene's novel of the same name about a love affair, based on the play of shadows. On one of the black, cold London evenings in 1946, a certain writer meets an old friend who is tormented by the fact that his wife is in an unknown place and is clearly cheating on him. The writer decides to help his friend and turns to a detective agency. But in fact, not for the sake of a friend, but for myself. After all, in wartime 1944, he had an affair with this same wife, which she suddenly broke off when a bomb exploded near the house where they had a date, and the writer (he was thrown away by the blast wave) lay lifeless for several minutes. The still jealous writer is curious to know who left him behind. Four good actors: he is Fiennes, she is Moore, nominated for this year's Oscar for her role, the friend is the eternal Jordan Rea, the detective is the characteristic Hart.
Pros. One can consider "The End of the Affair" as a mystical film (all fogs and mysteries). Possibly - as melodramatic. You can - like a Catholic. The writer Green himself (as has already been written about) defined the theme of the “Novel” as “the terrible strangeness of God’s mercy,” since God responds to the plea of a loving woman to resurrect her beloved, but vigilantly ensures that she is able to fulfill the harsh vow that she made.
However, it seems that director Jordan was more concerned with the paradoxes of the love relationship between a man and a woman. The film seems to be about how a man is smaller in love than a woman. He is afraid to surrender to feelings and happiness, because he is inclined to protect himself from blows and betrayal. Therefore, trying to understand the motives for a woman’s sudden actions, first of all I am ready to consider the version that she is b... But she is not b... at all - she cares about him.
"The End of the Affair" is Jordan's hidden satire on the male sex: the hero is able to understand a woman only with the help of a private detective. However, the film is structured cunningly, and Jordan’s gaze seems distant, so you are constantly expecting a catch. For example, you suspect that the hero really died at the time of the bomb explosion, and everything that follows (Jordan knows that we know that such a move has already been used in the movie) is his posthumous fantasy about ideal love and a faithful woman.
About Jordan: His case is unique. He manages to make auteur cinema (as they now say, “art-house films”), even working in the large-scale production system (“Interview with the Vampire,” “The Game to Tears,” “The Butcher Boy,” “Michael Collins”) . At the same time, all great directors - even the level of von Trier, even Carpenter or Craven - have their own themes, image and circle of fans. Jordan manages not only to fool the producers, but also to do without regular fans. He is more self-sufficient than Hartley: he works only for self-entertainment and self-expression.
Disadvantages (more precisely, incidents - not of the picture, but of the audience). Judging by the reactions, the public probably likes the film, but they still don’t find an approach to it. When the lights come on, laughter is heard in the hall - but confused. The public is spoiled by soap operas, trained to see only melodrama in melodrama, and knows that melodrama is supposed to be despised in public. Especially if the heroine turns out to be almost a natural saint who works miracles, and the film itself, towards the end, begins to look almost like religious propaganda, a text about the fact that God exists. By the way, Jordan's The End of the Affair is indeed the second modern film apocrypha after Lars von Trier's The Breaking Wave. But the audience laughs in confusion, because it leaves the hall with a feeling of a catch. Everyone feels that there is a lot in the film that clearly escaped.
Key phrase. Love and death with a catch.
"Girl on the Bridge"
France * * *
Directed by Patrice Lecomte
Stars: Danielle Auteuil and Vanessa Paradis
Rental - "Carmen", cassette - "Pyramid"
“The Girl on the Bridge”: Vanessa Paradis’s heroine waits for the knives that Daniel Auteuil’s off-screen hero will throw at her. This is how love is now in France (Photo: "Carmen" )
About what. Pleasant, black and white, black and white, effectively edited, theatrical cinema is not for children (since there is a lot of sex and talk about it). When telling “what the film is about,” we should first warn that there is no realism in it. This is a parable, a fantasy/improvisation on a given topic. But, in general, the point is that a professional knife thrower, performing in circuses and cabarets, finds for himself another girl-assistant-model-target on a Parisian bridge, where she, having lost faith in men and happiness, tried to commit suicide. It turns out that these two are like two halves of a torn banknote, and there is even a telepathic connection between them. Together they attract luck - be it on stage (where he can throw knives at her even blindly), or in a casino. What follows is the story of their wonderful love, in which throwing knives does not quite (for me) convincingly replace traditional sex. Sex, I repeat, is also plenty, but the heroine stubbornly continues to have it with anyone, just not with the hero.
Leconte is a good and famous director, but nothing more. Very good films like "Monsieur Ire" are rare from him. "Girl on the Bridge" with its conventions and light wit is reminiscent of the films of another - very good - French director Bertrand Blier. When a strange young girl naively and theatrically tells directly into the camera why she can’t help but give if a man asks, this is typical Blier. Well, let the French masters of directing sort it out among themselves.
Pros. Another thing is that “The Girl on the Bridge” is a kind of Montaigne adapted for the mass consciousness. True, spoiled by the stupid Carnegie. You shouldn’t look for luck, but simply take it. If you believe in luck and focus on it, your number will definitely come up. We always believe that luck is something we don’t have, but we need to understand that it is we and our life that are luck, etc. The film (with the help of slightly different phrases) hammers home a single message so that the viewer learns a lesson. However, useful.
Minuses. Although the film runs for less than an hour and a half, already about twenty minutes before the finale you feel that all the moves and themes invented by the director have been eaten away. The only question that continues to worry the forward-looking viewer: will everything end well? Since everything is too good as the film progresses, and the plot needs to move somewhere dramatically, you expect final nasty things, especially since for European cinema a happy ending is not the law. But the characters are charming, the viewer would not forgive a bad ending, so Lecomte got out of it in such a way that about twenty minutes before the final everything unmotivatedly becomes bad, but in the last episode it is fabulously good again. (To be completely honest, the last twenty minutes of the film are pretty nonsense.)
Key revelation. Now you understand why "The Girl on the Bridge" was a favorite of the recent Cesar (French Oscar), but it flew miserably.
"Snow-covered cedars"
US * 1/2
Directed by Scott Hicks
Stars: Ethan Hawke, Yuki Kudo,
Max von Sydow
Kinoprava - "East-West"
“Snow-Capped Cedars”: another couple separated by fate. Ethan Hawke's character looks sadly at his ex-lover, portrayed by Yuki Kudo (Photo: Universal Studios )
About what. About mutual distrust among American fishermen living on a harsh Pacific island in the 50s. All of them are citizens of the States, but some of them are Japanese (the other part, respectively, are not). The case takes place in the courtroom, where the “moment of truth” occurs in every fifth Hollywood film. A white man, that is, one hundred percent American, died, and the investigation believes that, of course, he was killed by a yellow man, because all Japanese are bloody bastards. The process is observed by him and her: a chronicler journalist (not a Japanese, or Ethan Hawke in general) and the wife of the accused (a Japanese woman, and generally Yuki Kudo, who once played Jarmusch in Mystery Train). Watching, they remember, remember, remember. About his old love on the fragrant mosses under the spreading cranberries of the cedars, which was destroyed by the American war with Japan, xenophobia and racial prejudice.
Pros. Beautiful movie.
Minuses. Politically correct literary fiction. Or Hollywoodism, which is the same thing. Recently, while still working in Australia, director Scott Hicks made the film "Shine" (aka "The Shining"), which explained to the public that strange people should be treated with respect, even if they like to run around the streets without panties, because every one of them may turn out to be a brilliant pianist. There is no doubt that this is how it should be treated, but Glitter (a good film, but nothing more) should not have been nominated for seven Oscars. “Glitter” opened the door for Hicks to Hollywood and probably strengthened his mind to continue making films only about the dangers of intolerance towards strangers and strange people. But this time it didn't work. "Cedars" had no effect on American academics.
The story itself, by the way, is interesting, but we are little familiar with it, although in 1990 Alan Parker made the film “Come See Paradise” on the same topic. I don’t know what opportunities the original source (David Guterson’s bestseller of the same name, originally called Snow Falling on Cedars) provided Hicks, but it would have been possible to make a real - tough - movie. It turns out that internal enemies were not only interned here. After the defeat of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, Roosevelt's Order #9066 appeared, according to which in 1942 about one hundred thousand Japanese Americans - as potential spies - were relocated to concentration zones. Japanophobia has been ingrained in the country for years. But Hicks again turned a real tragedy into a melodrama, somewhat harsh, but still pleasant - with straightforward humanistic summaries accompanied by beautiful voice-over music.
Key phrase. Snow is on the cedars, and suspicion is on the Japanese.
"A soldier's daughter never cries"
Great Britain * *
Directed by James Ivory
Stars: Kris Kristofferson,
Barbara Hershey, Lily Sobieski et al.
Cassette - West
"A soldier's daughter never cries": the story of a happy family. The surname of the young actress “Itogi” is written a little differently
About what. You don’t immediately guess what the film is about, and to be honest, not until the end. Since I can’t believe that a classic director could take and make a film simply about the life of a strong family, you are looking for a super task. At first you think that this is a film on a common (but, by the way, always interesting for me) topic - “American intellectuals in Europe.” We are invited to observe the Parisian life in the early 60s of a certain apparently serious and progressive American novelist (not like Henry Miller, but more like Hemingway), his wife, little daughter and adopted French son. But the common motives - “Americans in Europe in search of paradise, a different, non-pragmatic life, etc” and “Paris of the 60s as the cultural capital of the world” - are not in the film. Both the hero-writer and the director himself clearly do not like the French. Dialogue: “Did you like this girl? - No. Too cold. Too French.” Why Paris then?
Then, keeping the title of the film in your head, you begin to think that trials await the heroes. But nothing particularly tragic happens. In general (perhaps!), this is a picture of how a girl, turning into a woman, gradually understands what a man is. In the first of the three short stories into which the film is divided, the “soldier’s daughter” (and in fact the writer) is approximately six years old, in the last she is approximately seventeen, and in the course of the plot she comes into contact with a variety of boys, young men, and men. However, all the other characters in the film also have a lot of contact - and with anyone.
Pros. Director James Ivory is considered the main representative of modern film academicism. Like Mikhalkov, but more boring, although the famous “Room with a View” is quite funny. All of his most titled films, including Howard's End and The Remains of the Day, tell (that's right!) about life in good old England, which is why Ivory himself is perceived as a good old English director. The humor is that he is actually an American. Regularly forgetting about this fact and periodically remembering it, you are sincerely amazed each time.
This time, the unusual thing is that Ivory chose his fellow tribesmen as heroes and plunged them into not so distant times. Alas, the signs of close days do not fascinate him. The signs in the film are too predictable. The 60s give way to the 70s, and Europe (in the third novel) to America. Accordingly, instead of “parents’ house parties listening to jazz”, the signs of “Clint Eastwood”, “Woody Allen”, “Deep Purple” and “teenage sex in used cars” appear on the screen. But there are two good episodes when academician Ivory allows himself to break away and fall first into formalism and then into sarcasm. In the first case, showing the French fool-headmistress, Ivory builds the mise-en-scène as if the headmistress is hovering pompously around the classroom without touching the floor. In the second, he shows all his hatred of modernism, depicting a modern production of the classical opera “Salome”, where the artists, dressed in the uniform of sadomasochists, massage their private parts while singing, snort cocaine, widen themselves, etc.
Minuses . And yet it's boring. The only real attraction is the opportunity to look at Leelee Sobieski, portraying the “soldier’s daughter” (in short stories #2 and #3). Sobieski starred in Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut in a fleeting role as the "Lolita" temptress, she is predicted to have a great Hollywood future and it is interesting to see what she is like. It's not clear yet.
Key phrase. All happy families are alike.