Archive for the ‘Film Culture’ Category

#358 – Hope I Get Old Before I Die

Saturday, January 23rd, 2010

from mockumentary to best rockumentary ever: young@heart.

For the comic perspective, which sees us all as ineluctably enmeshed in history, ultimately subsumes the revolutionary utopian perspective simply by locating it in the ebb and flow of history’s tides. After all, tomorrow never knows. …It remembers. – Nick Bromell

The documentary Young@Heart seems to be about old age, but as the film unfolds, it turns out that it is really about rock ‘n’ roll.

At first, you think the film is a gag. Is it mocking these retirees who dare to sing rock songs and other pop hits? It sure seems like it when director Walker George intersperses silly MTV-style videos of the chorus members in between his cinéma vérité.

But slowly, you start to realize that a deeper, more substantive comedy is at work in this film as it moves between the brink of death and the absurdity of life.

The film begins to display precisely the comedic perspective that Nick Bromell argues rock music acquired in the 1950s and 60s. Bromell contends that rock became the crucial cultural medium in which baby boomers developed a particular structure of feeling: an adolescent “double consciousness” that drew upon African-American expressive traditions to transform alienation into a deeper understanding of history and struggle. Rock, for Bromell, was not only about the tragically-messianic utopianism of 60s anti-authoritarianism, but also about a more profound “comic vision of reconciliation.”

Recovering his memories of coming of age to the sounds of Elvis, the Beatles, Dylan, and the whole rock tradition, Bromell writes about how the music awakened a consciousness of time, mortality, fluidity, and (with a nod to William James) all the implications of lifting the veil on the radically destabilizing pluralism of human experience.

From a later moment in the life cycle, trying to remember the 60s and why they were important in ways that are so easy to forget, Bromell writes that, “It is as if these songs’ own consciousness of the brevity of their vision and the futility of adolescence created a genie who could fly forward through time and greet me when I arrived here.” The music in Young@Heart shows how the awareness of “brevity” and “futility” that rock revealed to Bromell can even reappear later in life than middle age. In this case, it reappears for retirees who are older than the baby boomers themselves.

Reinvigorating what Lawrence Grossberg has called the rock formation when they sing everything from the Rolling Stones to James Brown to the Ramones to Cold Play to Sonic Youth, the members of this retiree chorus reverse the famous dictum from the Who: to rock is to in fact hoping to get old before you die. But you can only do this by embracing an adolescent defiance that, as Bromell contends, is busy being born precisely from the realization that it will fade, like the last notes of a song, into the flow of history itself.

#356 – Forever Young

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

a gun that shoots & a tree with roots: dylan vs. young in old age.

The concert film Neil Young: Heart of Gold reminded me of the differences between Bob Dylan and Neil Young. While Dylan has responded to old age by becoming a ghost, a spook, a wraith, a shadowy riverboat gambler, a will-o’-the-wisp, melting into some murky myth and vanishing into history, Young has managed to grow evermore solid and present.

Dylan rolls with no direction home, but Young has been able to rock his way to something more stable. In the concert film, a quiet, regal affair filmed in 2005 by Jonathan Demme at the Ryman Auditorium in Nashville, home of the Grand Old Opry, the rocker leans over the stage like a tree, hulking and gnarled, spreading his limbs, timeworn and sturdy, in it for the long run.

Neil Young in Heart of Gold.

While Dylan’s recent songs are evasive, referential, lost in the shards of an old-timey blues past, Young’s songs in Heart of Gold, mostly drawn from the album Prairie Wind, are simple and direct, reduced to their grainy essences by Young’s confrontation with a brain aneurysm that year.

It’s as if Dylan, facing old age and mortality, wants to explore absence—how far one might disappear into the light itself, saturated by a history beyond history, time out of mind. Young, by contrast, has embraced presence, trying to tell it like it is from his own little corner of the redwood forest, where the 1960s dream is still alive, cobbled together out of creaky bones, grandkids, and a faded glory.

The songs from Prairie Wind use every trick in the Neil Young songwriting book: perfectly-placed major-seven chords, little passing notes in the open guitar chords, a bit of steel-guitar crying out, a harmonica note bending, a delayed backbeat on the drums, haunting backup vocals from the usual crew (Emmylou Harris, Peggy Young, etc.), Young’s strained-yet-celestial-yet-strained falsetto, and lots of lyrics about dreams, love, loss, appreciation, memory, and hope. You’d think this would get old, but somehow it doesn’t. Instead, Young finds a way to get old.

The music—and Demme’s classy camera work in Heart of Gold really brings this out—discovers grace, sadness, elegance, truth, weariness, and renewed energy where one would think there could only be cringes and cliches. It reminds me of a brief exchange between Young and a fan at the start of the live album Year of the Horse, which went something like this. Fan: “It all sounds the same.” Young: “It’s all one song.”

What makes the film so moving is precisely that you think you’re headed toward the familiar, and indeed you find yourself in the familiar, only to find yourself crying and moved at how new it all feels. One little cracked vocal note electro-shocks nostalgia into catharsis (Young singing the word “heart” in his parental message to his daughter headed off to adulthood in the song “Here For You,” for instance).

You can see the differences between Dylan and Young in the films that each artist made during the 2000s. Dylan’s Masked and Anonymous, as the title suggests, is elusive, fragmentary, slippery, at the edge of coherence: things don’t quite add up; you’d piece together a story only to see it crumble in the earthquake rumble of an electric-guitar chord on “Cold Irons Bound.” We’re somewhere between the Civil War and a nightmarish noir murder mystery from the 1940s. We’ve left the building and entered some other realm of surreal myth.

By contrast, Young’s Greendale was homemade, in place, rickety, and splintered: a little allegorical tale about hippies in their golden years, an alternative history of America channeled through one town’s struggles. It was amateurish, like a summer-camp drama. But as only Neil Young can do, it linked the close-by to something transcendent: the film’s songs connected its zany crew of locals to bigger stories; a spotlight shined on life outside the limelight.

Bringing the grounded into the electronosphere of mass culture is Young’s special skill. He plugs in, but never gets lost. His roots spread as the wind shivers his timbers. Searching, he lifts us up his trunk to glimpse that elusive place where we all might gather on the hillside, somewhere between Hollywood and Redwood.

#353 – The Dude Abides

Wednesday, December 30th, 2009

hey, careful, man, there’s a beverage here — a refreshing look at how the dude abides in academia.

At long last, a New York Times article that does not simply dismiss academic efforts to take pop culture seriously.

In  “Dissertations on His Dudeness,” book critic Dwight Garner earnestly engages scholarly analyses of the cult film The Big Lebowski while also, with congenial subtlety, poking fun at the attempt to philosophize alongside the Dude.

This is a cause for celebration. For even if you’re into the whole brevity thing, and you don’t like mixing your highbrow and your lowbrow, Garner let’s you enjoy the fun of taking this strange, absurd, borderline-insane/borderline-profound Coen Brothers film seriously. This approach of twinkling and rolling the critic’s eye all at once is so much more refreshing than the umpteenth version of the typical New York Times reactionary response to academic studies of popular culture.

In the typical Times article, the reader, the film, popular culture, the academy all get bashed repeatedly by a “can you believe those daffy professors are writing about American Idol?” tone of incredulity that has become even more tiresome and limiting than the worst mismatches between high theory and low culture could ever be. What started out as a healthy guarded skepticism in profiles of the ivy tower gone prime time became nothing more than a long line of gimmicky, close-minded, clichéd puff pieces-in-reverse: one loud lazy whine of hack-job elitism masquerading as populist outrage.

In Garner’s review, which makes fabulous use of Umberto Eco’s essay “Casablanca: Cult Movies and Intertextual Collage,” we can have our white Russians and learn how new shit has come to light too. And this, thankfully, is how the whole durned human comedy can keep perpetuatin’ itself.

#321 – It Was a Dark Night in the (Crunch) City

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

film noir chip bag.

dorritos

#307 – Sign of the Apocalypse

Monday, April 20th, 2009

exit only, indeed.

resurrection healthcare

#292 – The Daily News

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009

graphic displays of the everyday.

My work comments on experiences in daily life — through dialogue, humor, mistakes, shapes & spaces, the way people are & constant conversation. — Kelly Lasserre

There remains a vernacular art of the cracks, spaces, and fissures of everyday life, even in the relentless online flow of digital networks and systems. Kelly Lasserre’s homemade prints, which view well online (and were featured on the gold mine of a website, Lost At E Minor), carry vital information from those spaces off the grid.

Initially, Lasserre’s prints appear innocent and playful, like some goofy Dr. Seuss-inspired sweater at a hipster craft fair, but their images and phrases stick with you. They speak in that voice inside one’s head, the one that whispers the truth even when one doesn’t want to hear it, the observation or revelation that is at once coming from somewhere else and welling up from deep within one’s core.

How Lasserre translates this voice into visual form is rather remarkable. Using the iconographies of the folkloric, the handmade, the cutesy, the antique store, the summer camp, she works with off-kilter, simple shapes, uneven, cursive letters, and one-size-does-not-fit-all organizations of the visual field. But these signals and symbols of the relic, the nostalgic, the rustic, the folksy somehow become scathing, wry, sometimes scary, and always uber-contemporary personal and social commentary. It’s as if an organic wax candle dripped with the light of a flourescent glare in an interogation room or the digital beam of a computer screen.

The apparent easy-going innocence and safety of Lasserre’s prints turns out to be haunted by insinuations of unease, intense scrutiny, concern, and vulnerability. This seems particularly the case with issues of gender and sexuality, but it applies to the broader terrain of the everyday that she investigates in her work.

These prints giggle and worry in equal turns. They express exhaustion and exhilaration, relief one moment and alarm the next. They seem filled with love, and also with a kind of gnawing pain. The iconographic form signals authenticity, domesticity, at-homeness, a comfort with the world, but the content communicates alienation and uncertainty.

Lasserre’s prints are most of all about the daily, funny, and often fraught negotiations one makes with other people, things, and activities: with friends, strangers, art-making, skylines, dishes, ice cream cones, animals, letters, language, counting, jealousy, shoes, hats, hoping, worrying, skin, hair, eyes, feet, failure, progress and — most especially — with oneself.

lasserredishes

lasserreavoidingyou

lasserreperspective1

lasserrelegs

hate_your_hands_and_shoes

lasserrebeardedmen

creepyoldmen

lasserrestoptouchingme

Images: Kelly Lasserre website

#269 – If I Was Any Closer, I’d Be Behind You

Thursday, January 15th, 2009

woody allen and scarlett johansson in a marx brothers movie.

From Woody Allen’s reputed film diary for Vicky Cristina Barcelona:

3 July

Scarlett came to me today with one of those questions actors ask: “What’s my motivation?” I shot back: “Your salary.” She said fine but that she needed a lot more motivation to continue. About triple. Otherwise she threatened to walk. I called her bluff and walked first. Then she walked. Now we were rather far apart and had to yell to be heard. Then she threatened to hop. I hopped, too, and soon we were at an impasse. At the impasse I ran into friends, and we all drank, and of course I got stuck with the check.

- Woody Allen, “Scarlett: ‘What’s my motivation here?’ Woody: ‘Your salary’,” The Guardian, 12 January 2009 (by way of the New York Times Ideas blog)

#249 – Haunted

Sunday, November 2nd, 2008

phantom vs. ghost.

Halloween special: in the bonus features of the DVD The Story of Marie and Julien, Jacques Rivette’s 2003 film, the director insists vehemently to an interviewer that his movie is not about a phantom, but a ghost.

Jacques Rivette in The Story of Marie and Julien

Culture Rover has been haunted ever since. What is the difference? Is it something in the French terms for phantom and ghost that gets lost in translation?

Jerzy Radziwilowicz (Julien) and Emmanuelle Béart (Marie)

It is such a tantalizing distinction: are you a phantom or a ghost? But what does the distinction mean?

Images: The Story of Marie and Julien

#235 – The Pervasive Ghost of 9/11

Saturday, September 13th, 2008

cultural permutations of terror in film, art, & television.

The ghost of 9/11 and the response of the so-called War on Terror haunt many cultural artifacts of the last seven years. Among them, the anniversary of 9/11 this year made me think of three: the film Tickets, the television series Foyle’s War, and the photographs of the Border Film Project.

Tickets was a quiet little collective movie comprised of three film-vellas by the directors Abbas Kiarostami, Ken Loach, and Ermanno Olmi. These directors follow three discrete stories on board a train toward Rome. All three tales emphasize difference and conflict, private fantasies and public spaces, meglomania and deep empathy, disconnection and the effort to overcome it. And all the activities feel haunted by an anxiety that something terrible is about to happen…and yet it never does. In fact, the film seeks out alternative visions of a cosmopolitan Europe besides the post-9/11 one.

Tickets

Folye’s War similarly takes place in Europe, this time in England during World War II. Though not a BBC drama, it has all the airs of one: it’s middlebrow to the core. And yet it is also a wonderful show. Seeming at first to be an escapist period piece that draws upon true events from the World War II era, the show resonates more and more with contemporary British anxieties the more one watches it. As we follow a chief police detective (played marvelously by Michael Kitchen) strive to prevent the ends of victory in the war from compromising values of justice and fair rule by law, the shows increasingly seem to take stock of how Britain is fairing in the current War on Terror. How is the country holding up in preserving freedom when it has compromised this freedom in response to terrible tragedies such as the Tube bombings as well as anxieties about a growing immigrant population? Foyle’s War seems to look back to the World War II period in order to take an emotional accounting of the current British war.

Foyle’s War

Finally, in the Border Film Project, Victoria Criado and other artists sent out disposable cameras to “migrants and Minutemen on the U.S.-Mexico border,” who then packed the cameras into envelopes and anonymously mailed them back to the artists. The resulting images are artful and fascinating, furtive glimpses into the shadow life of borders under the blazing sun. Their strangely intertwined tales of liberty and security seem to identify the competing elements of the 9/11 collective imagination.

Border Film Project

#234 – Once Is the Loveliest Number

Saturday, September 13th, 2008

love the title, but please explain.

Why is the lovely film Once called Once?

Is it because the film chronicles a relationship that, for once, does not get consummated? Is it because all stories begin “once upon a time”? Is it because the film is about how the stars align sometimes in ways that amaze? Or is it, ultimately, because the more you write and say and think about the word once, the more its strangeness starts to multiply?