THE SCHOOL OF CHANTAL AKERMAN PART 9: GUS VAN SANT

When we made Last Days in particular, we were inspired by Jeanne Dielman - Gus Van Sant (I Dont Belong Anywhere: The Cinema Of Chantal Akerman)

It's no mystery at this point that between the years 2002 (Gerry) through 2005 (Last Days) Gus Van Sant was heavily influenced by Bela Tarr. He, along with countless other critics & bloggers, said this over & over. If you're not familiar at this point just use google. But what got slightly downplayed was the influence of Chantal Akerman which Van Sant cited just as much as he did Bela Tarr.

Below is a slightly focused look on Akerman's influence on a specific period in Gus Van Sant's career ("the minimalist era")

Enjoy...

I am also a big fan of Chantal Akerman’s Jeanne Dielman, and when I was planning Last Days, Jeanne Dielman was a figure for what kind of movie I was making since it was all taking place around a home - Gus Van Sant (Filmmaker Magazine)

Jeanne Dielman / Last Days

Harris announced that he cracked the code of Jeanne Dielman. I had never noticed myself that there was one. He had watched the film the night before and noticed that there were set angles for each room - Gus Van Sant (Filmmaker Magazine)

Jeanne Dielman / Last Days

Jeanne Dielman / 
Last Days

Michael Pitt told me that Gus van Sant screened Jeanne Dielman before shooting the film - Chantal Akerman (LolaJournal.com)

Jeanne Dielman / 
Last Days

Jeanne Dielman / 
Last Days

BONUS COMPARISONS...

Gerry, too, was a weird one because we were making it up as we went along. So there wasn't anything preconceived. We would discuss Tarkovsky and Béla Tarr and Chantal Ackerman. We screened Jeanne Dielman as a preparation - Gus Van Sant (The Guardian)

Jeanne Dielman / 
Gerry

I've been impressed by many of her films, as well as incredible installations she has made for museums, but above all it's the discovery of Jeanne Dielman that immeasurably marked me when I was a student. in cinema. I see it often since, at home, and I remain amazed of the borders that it explodes in this film, what it invents in terms of narration, report to the character. When I made films like Gerry, Elephant and Last Days , it was a very important influence for me: there was Bela Tarr and Chantal Akerman for me - Gus Van Sant

Leas Rendezvous D'Anna / 
Elephant

Les Rendezvous D'Anna /
Gerry

Saute Ma Ville / 
Last Days

Saute Ma Ville / 
Last Days

Saute Ma Ville / 
Last Days

Saute Ma Ville / 
Last Days

Jeanne Dielman /
Elephant

Je Tu Il Elle / Last Days

Jeanne Dielman /
Elephant

BOY MEETS GIRL (FORGOTTEN FILM CAST'S 1984-A-THON)

Leos Carax's productivity as a filmmaker has been spotty at best over the last three decades. While people always make a big deal about every Terrence Malick resubmergence every few years or so, they neglect to realize that since the late 90's, Malick has actually released four films with two more unreleased films currently in post-production. That's pretty steady work if you ask me (plus if you actually read any legitimate/researched literature on the man you'd know he was pretty active behind the scenes during the 20 year period, '78-'98, that people always like to fantasize as him being in hiding or something). Terrence Malick is often mislabeled as the JD Salinger of movie directors. In the last two decades alone Leos Carax has only put out two feature films, with a thirteen year gap between them (Pola X & Holy Motors), and one short film (Tokyo). If anyone is like JD Salinger it's Leos Carax.
I know some of you reading this piece alongside the other write-ups of more popular films in this 1984 blog-a-thon are probably wondering who the fuck Leos Carax is. And that's fine. Not every important art-house filmmaker is known outside of their own little bubble. But if you've seen anything by Harmony Korine, Jonathan Glazer or Noah Baumbach - chances are you've seen his influence in some shape or form.

Remember that scene of Greta Gerwig dancing down the streets set to David Bowie's "Modern Love" in Frances Ha? That's an obvious homage to Carax's Bad Blood (1986)...

Jonathan Glazer went so far as to use Denis Lavant in his music video for Unkle's Rabbit In Your Headlights to recreate certain moments from Leos Carax's The Lovers On The Bridge (which also co-stars Lavant)

The Lovers On The Bridge / Rabbit In Your Headlights

even James Cameron borrowed a shot from his work...

The Lovers On The Bridge, Carax (1991) / Titanic, James Cameron (1997)

Before becoming a filmmaker, Carax was a critic for the legendary French publication; Cahier Du Cinema (a magazine where filmmakers like Goodard, Rhomer, Truffaut & Assayas have all written for before turning to directing). Some critics are unfairly judged by filmmakers (usually at convenient times when they don't give out a good review) as untalented trolls who couldn't make it as filmmakers themselves so they turned to criticism in an effort to still participate in the world of cinema in some form all while being extra critical of people (filmmakers) who actually have the talent & drive to make movies. You all know this is kinda true. It's unspoken, but true.

While I'm sure that's the case with a few critics, that's still a ridiculous generalization (I myself have zero ambition to ever make a movie). Some people, like myself, are just passionate about film analysis & dissecting movies. Carax was also like that but he loved film so much that he eventually felt the need to participate. Seeing former critics-turned-filmmakers like Paul Schrader, Olivier Assayas & Leos Carax find success in cinema has always kind of shat on that theory of critics being wannabe/failed directors.
And think about the pressure of becoming a filmmaker after years of being a critic. You've spent all this time criticisizing, sometimes insulting, films safely behind a typewriter or a laptop and now its your turn to try it. Imagine how many people are doubting you and waiting for you to fail.

In my opinion, Carax has yet to fail, and he made the transition from criticism to filmmaking rather seamlessly.

In Boy Meets World, we follow "Alex" (Denis Lavant) - an aspiring young filmmaker who has yet to actually make a movie, and "Mireille" (Merielle Perrier) - a failed actress who is borderline suicidal. Both Alex & Mireille have just been dumped by their significant others and they're taking it pretty rough. After Alex overhears Mireille's voice by chance, without actually knowing what she looks like at first, he instantly falls in love with her. They eventually meet in person, and for the rest of the film we watch Alex & Mirielle try to make their new relationship work.

Although Boy Meets Girl is considered "arthouse", it transcends that label and can pretty much be enjoyed by anyone who likes offbeat romantic stories with a touch of drama & dry French quirkiness. Seriously tho - doesn't the basic plot sound like your typical romcom?

Unlike Carax's later work (Lovers On The Bridge & Holy Motors), Boy Meets Girl is a fairly minimalist work with a meager budget much like Jarmusch's Stranger Than Paradise. The acting is very low key & monotone (like one notch above the emotion in a Bresson film), a lot of the cinematography is made up of single long takes, and even the actors' wardrobes are mostly plaid & pinstripe patterns to further play on the black & white imagery of the film (you get the feeling that even if this movie was shot in color, the clothes worn by the actors in Boy Meets Girl would've still been primarily black & white).

Given Carax's Cahier Du Cinema background, it only makes sense that the young filmmaker would borrow heavily from the French new wave directors who came before him at Cahiers, along with the older French auteurs who predate the French new wave. Carax's black & white deadpan feature is similar to Godard (the quirkiness & exploration of young French romance) mixed with Bresson (the minimalistic qualities & deadpan delivery of the actors). Mireille Perrier & Denis Lavant sometimes come off like another version of Anna Karina & Jean Paul Belmondo under the direction of a matured Robert Bresson.

Boy Meets Girl / A Woman Is A Woman

The scene in Boy Meets Girl where Mireille tap dances to comes off like something Anna Karina would do in a Godard film...

Boy Meets Girl / Band Of Outsiders

Denis Lavant went on to play the Alex character in two more lose sequels (Bad Blood & The Lovers On The Bridge). My one & only gripe with Boy Meets Girl is that Lavant is way more laid back and he doesn't flex his amazing physical ability until Bad Blood.

Leos even references his work in later films...

Lovers embrace on the bridge in Carax's Boy Meets Girl (1984) & The Lovers On The Bridge (1991)

Most great directors have their regular troop or that one actor or actress they  use regularly. We all know Scorsese had Deniro, Herzog had Kinski, Claire Denis has Alex Descas, Cassavetes had his gang of actors etc. Leos Carax & Denis Lavant are synonymous with each other. With the exception of the underrated/misunderstood Pola X, Lavant has been in every film directed by Carax. Many people, Carax included, consider Denis Lavant to be Carax's on-screen alter ego (it makes sense that Alex is an aspiring filmmaker/cinephile in Boy Meets Girl). This collaboration is obviously the most iconic because it started the three decade long relationship between the two.

Carax hadn't completely found his signature style yet (how many directors do on their first try?) but little bits & pieces were starting to poke through. The theme of break-ups & broken hearts, something Carax explored extensively in the years to come, all started with Boy Meets Girl. And the emphasis of a dance number or a musical sequence, something found in every single Carax feature, can also be traced right back to his feature debut.

Boy Meets Girl isn't the easiest to come by, but if you have a multi-region DVD player or a VCR, you can get it on amazon, which I highly recommend doing if you're in to minimalist quirky darkly comical French art house cinema.

MR. TURNER TRAILER (NEW MIKE LEIGH!)

BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR

Blue Is The Warmest Color is a great film (it'll probably end up in my top 10 at the end of the year). But like anything directed Abdellatif Kechiche, its tough to sit through at times and takes some commitment. Its three hours long (and the time doesn't breeze by), it's filled with a lot of scenes that some may consider to be banal and the infamous sex scenes seem to overshadow the rest of the story (that's all anyone has to talk about with this whether they liked it or not). When you take a movie that's three hours long, 15 minutes worth of sex scenes really isn't that big of a deal. This film has so much more to offer than that. Its one of the most raw relationship/coming of age dramas in recent years yet all some people have to talk about is a sex scene that pales in comparison to what everyone has probably already seen on porn sites. The only worthy topic of discussion regarding the sex in Blue Is The Warmest Color is that these are in fact pretty graphic sex scenes involving two young women directed by an older straight man. People, especially feminists (who have been quite critical of this film), have a right to raise an eyebrow at this monetarily as long as they're willing to keep an open mind and give it a chance. What could a straight man possibly know about love making between two lesbians? Straight male directors who've explored gay women on film in the past haven't exactly paved a way for Kechiche. In Chasing Amy we had a film about a gay woman who falls for a straight man. In She Hate Me, not only does our straight male character turn lesbians "momentarily straight" due to the size of his dick, but he gets two (lesbian) women at the end of the movie (seriously, why did they have to have sex with him? They couldn't get his sperm any other way?).

A science fiction movie? I don't know. I think I have made one already. Chasing Amy. Because you go ask any lesbian - that'll never happen - Kevin Smith

There's something very "masculine" about the sex in Blue Is The Warmest Color. I definitely wouldn't call it pornographic but there's something questionable about it at first. The two main characters are "fucking" in the film more than they're making love or having sex. Are these sex scenes genuine & raw or is this just some male lesbian fantasy?
But Abdellatif Kechiche is far too mature to suddenly start exploring sex like an immature little boy. This isn't even his most "shocking" or unapologetic look at sex & sexuality. Has anyone seen Black Venus (2010)? That film is way more graphic in my opinion.

If you actually pay attention to Blue Is the Warmest Color you'll see that Abdellatif Kechiche takes his time developing the relationship between our two main characters; "Adele" (Adele Exarchopoulos) & "Emma" (Lea Seydoux). They don't just jump right in to fucking each other. Kechiche crafts numerous scenes of them getting to know one another, sharing personal stories, finding unique common interests and becoming friends first. The scene when Adele & Emma first walk past each is cliche but still my favorite moment in the film. All of this is what makes Blue Is The Warmest Color genuine.

This film is also genuine because it stays true to the title & art of the graphic novel (there were some changes made to the actual story tho). Abdellatif doesn't do a shot for shot copy like Robert Rodriguez tried to do with Sin City, but he still incorporates the color blue in the same slick yet obvious fashion as the graphic novel...

Based on the French graphic novel; "Blue Angel", Blue Is The Warmest Color is the story of Adele - a high school senior who falls in love in with Emma - a slightly older art student. Emma is openly gay while Adele keeps her attraction to women quiet at first but eventually comes out (although it's made unclear if her family ever finds out). It's difficult to tell at certain points but the film spans several years and as time progresses we watch our two main characters mature, form a real relationship and ultimately start to grow apart. This movie really didn't have to be three hours long but at the same time it kinda did (I don't think Kechiche has ever made anything under 2-1/2 hours). Adele's growth throughout the story is key and you really can't convey her kind of transformation in a 90 minute movie. Three hours is the perfect length for a coming of age tale because you can take your time and not rush things. As you watch Blue Is the Warmest Color you may think a lot of the scenes seem pointless at first but by the end of the film you'll realize that those pointless scenes are just as important as the explosive & emotionally heavy scenes because we're getting to know Adele & Emma intimately. This gave me an even greater appreciation for recent French coming of age films like Goodbye My First Love, Something In The Air and even A Kid With A Bike (a movie we'll be dissecting in 2014). I'd like to see more filmmakers take their time in developing young characters.

Outside of his signature documentary-style look, Blue Is The Warmest Color is quite different from everything else Abdellatif Kechiche has done (all of his films prior to this focused almost exclusively on Africans in France). But this isn't his first foray in to young love or coming of age. His sophomore feature; Game Of Love And Chance, was a relationship drama centered on a group of young teens. But it is his most intense & in depth film on both subjects. He takes his young characters very seriously in Game Of Love And Chance but he really dissects Adele & Emma and we get to see their lives outside of the relationship (Adele is studying to become an elementary school teacher while Emma is trying to make a living as an artist).

What makes this one of the more progressive films in recent years is that it's more of a love story than it is a gay rights issue movie. Yes there's a moment where Adele is confronted about her sexuality and there's a scene where our two main characters march in a gay pride parade but that's it. Homosexuality isn't really the "issue" in the film. Its about a relationship between two people who happen to be of the same sex (and as you watch the story unfold, Adele appears to be more bisexual than gay). Rainer Werner Fassbinder & Gus Van Sant were making films similar to this decades ago but for whatever reason it didn't really catch on. Fox & His Friends (Fassbinder) & Mala Noche (Van Sant) featured main characters who just so happened to be gay but didn't face any real discrimination or persecution. Gay civil rights will continue to be a social issue but it's nice to see a same sex love story that focuses more on the relationship internally and less on the struggles they face due to the outside world. Instead of battling homophobes for three hours we get a real relationship film. Adele struggles with her insecurities (mostly due to her inexperience & young age) and Emma is forced to deal with Adele's betrayal later on in the story.

The success of Blue Is The Warmest Color must feel bitter-sweet for Abdellatif Kechiche. There's been some internal post-production beef between Kechiche, co-stars; Adele Exarchopoulos & Lea Seydoux and some of the crew. Additionally, the author of the graphic novel doesn't support the film (but that almost always happens in the case of a graphic novel being turned in to a film, so whatever). Outside of The Secret Of The Grain, Kechiche's work has generally been overlooked by non-French audiences. Personally, I think Black Venus, his most hated work, is his best film. He finally makes something that's considered a universal success (he won the Palme D'or at this years' Cannes film festival) and everything is tainted with behind the scenes nonsense. 

Abdellatif's films aren't the most mainstream when compared to other filmmakers based out of France so I imagine Blue Is the Warmest Color will be an introduction to his cinema for a lot of non-french movie-goers and I'm perfectly fine with that (although his third film, The Secret Of The Grain, is easier to come by now that it's part of the criterion collection). It's nice to see an underrated filmmaker that I've been a fan of for so long finally get the recognition they deserve without having to compromise their style. 

This is another one of the very few films from this year that's managed to stay with me since I saw it along with Stories We Tell, 12 Years A Slave & Hors Satan so that counts for something...

AN INTERVIEW WITH ALICE HOURI

Not many actresses or actors take their fans out to old school hip-hop parties, mail them rare French movies or invite them in to their home for dinner but that’s what sets Alice Houri apart from everybody else. I recently caught up with her (via email) to discuss last years' The Rabbi's Cat (an animated film that she lent her voice to), Claire Denis' latest, the importance of short films and Americas growing appreciation for (good) French cinema.

Enjoy...

PINNLAND EMPIRE: What was it like doing voiceover for The Rabbi’s Cat? That was your first time working on an animated film, right?

ALICE HOURI: Yes it was my first time working on an animated film and I really enjoyed it. It was a famous comic book before becoming a cartoon. It was full of humor (Jewish humor!) so I was honored to participate in the movie.

PE: Do you see yourself doing more voiceover/cartoons in the future?

AH: I would love to do more.

PE: Are cartoons/animated films becoming more popular within French art house & indie cinema?

AH: I don't really know if animated films are becoming more popular in France (The Rabbi's Cat, the book, was already famous in France). What I know is these kinds of films are expensive to make so for the art house/independent cinema, money is the main problem...

The Rabbi's Cat (2011)

PE: I still have not seen Face La Mere (there’s only one small clip on the Internet). Can you tell us what it’s about?

AH: Face La Mere is a short film about fisherman. We shot it in Sete - a little town in the south that use to be a big fishing port, but not anymore. The profession is dying. It’s really hard to keep the independent way. Sete is now becoming a touristic place and the fishermen have to fight hard to survive...it's sad.

PE: In the last couple of years you’ve acted in a few short films - Do you think short films are a way to work out techniques & ideas for future full length films or do you feel some stories just don’t need to be that long?

AH: Short films are, traditionally in France, a way to access long movies. Like a visit card. So on one hand it's a way to work out techniques and ideas. A way to develop your own universe. And on the other hand, it's hard to tell a story in a short time frame. That's the difficulty of the exercise.

US Go Home (1994)

PE: It seems that films about youth & "coming of age" are more common in French cinema than anywhere else (400 blows, Small Change, Murmur Of The Heart, Au Revoir Les Enfants, Zazie Dans La Metro, A nos Amours, US Go Home, Something In The Air, etc). 

You’ve acted in a few films on that subject yourself (US Go Home, Nenette & Boni, Du Poil Sous Les Roses). Why do you think that is in French cinema?

AH: Well I don't think films about youth and growing up are a French specialty. The subject is universal: Dakota Fanning, Shirley Temple, Macaulay Culkin, Drew Barrymore, etc. The Kid by Chaplin is my favorite. It’s the most poetical look at the topic of childhood

PE: French-based films are starting to become more popular over here in America (Amour, Holy Motors, Carlos, etc). Is this a surprise to some French people? How does it make you feel?

AH: It’s kind of a surprise and maybe there's a sense of pride for some French people to see that some movies have succeeded in America. You know, here, we humbly call this industry "the French exception". I think your country is amazing because you have a long tradition of cinephilia and films like Holy Motors find a larger public there than in France. But at the same time a movie like La Vie En Rose was a huge success (and it's not the same public at all). Woody Allen says he's more famous in France than in his own country. To be recognized here first you have to find the glory in America.

Holy Motors - Leos Carax (2012)

PE: You’re a cinephile so I know you saw a bunch of movies in 2012. What were your favorite films from last year?

AH: The best film I’ve seen lately is Tey made by Alain Gomis. So poetic. I loved it!

PE: What films are you looking forward to watching this year?

AH: I don't know - The next Djinn Carrenard, Kechiche, Claire Denis, Farhadi…

Blue Is The Warmest Color - Kechiche (2013)

PE: Speaking of the new Claire Denis - what was it like working with her again, even if it was a small part?

AH: I was touched to work with Claire (last time I was 15). It was kind of nostalgic. But my little scene in Les Salauds was cut at the end! I'm very curious to see this next opus! It will be done on Saturday...



PE: Now that Vincent Lindon has made two films with Claire Denis is he considered part of the "family"?

AH: Yep I think Vincent Lindon is for sure part of the family. They seem to love and respect each other really deeply



PE: In the future do you ever see yourself moving away from acting completely to become a director or would you like to do both?


AH: I would like to work as a director, actress or scenarist…

L'HUMANITE: MISUNDERSTOOD MASTERPIECE

Most people I know that have seen Bruno Dumont's sophomore feature, L'Humanite, tend to consider it a slowly-paced pretentious mess. And to be quite honest, as much as I love this movie (its actually one of my recent favorites) I can kinda understand how someone would feel that way. The pace of the film IS a bit slow at times, the mannerisms of the (non-professional) lead actor are odd and the overall vibe is a lil' off. But if you're like me and happen to enjoy L'Humanite you'll see it’s the kinda movie that'll have you talking & debating for hours (especially the final scene). On the surface L'Humanite, which has the atmosphere of Bresson, a touch of Bela Tarr, Lodge Kerrigan & Haneke mixed with an episode of Law & Order: SVU, is a noir/mystery about a lonely police officer ("Pharaon" - played by Emmanuel Schotte) investigating the brutal murder of a little girl who went missing after she was dropped off at her bus stop after school. What's strange is that outside of the opening moments of the film, the death of the little isn’t even really mentioned again for another 45 minutes (almost half way in to the story). Instead, Dumont probes in to the life of Pharaon - he seems borderline autistic, somewhat childlike (yet mature), lives with his mother after being left by his wife and daughter (their absence is a little vague and it’s not clear if they left him, died or ever existed in the first place), constantly plays the third wheel to his friends; Domino (a factory worker) and her bus driver boyfriend Joseph and randomly zones out (which in my opinion is an important element to the story that we'll get in to later). Pharaon's relationship with Domino is kinda cloudy. Even though he spies on her having sex with Joseph and clearly has some type of love for her, it’s more like he's just fascinated by Domino (and all people for that matter) than he is attracted to her. The actress who plays Domino (played by then non-professional actress: Severine Caneele) was a great choice and she did an amazing job for someone who's never acted before in her life (especially given her role has many scenes where she's completely naked having soft-core/borderline pornographic sex scenes). Unlike most first-time or non-professional actors, there’s no awkward or cringewrothy moments. She's a natural. And speaking of natural, her curvy physique is another noticeable element. Instead of a typical, skinny, long haired "traditionally attractive" leading lady, we have a curvaceous woman with thick thighs and "meat on her bones". Both Schotte and Caneele went on to win best actor & actress at Cannes in '99.
Domino's boyfriend Joseph is pretty much the opposite of Pharaon - he's handsome (Pharaon is bug-eyed and odd looking). Joseph is loud, lively and has a sense of humor (Pharaon is quiet, dry and monotone). Right off the bat the differences between Pharaon and Joseph seem to be deliberate on Dumont's part and in my opinion it also plays a major part in the story.

Pharaon

For a police officer Pharaon is just downright weird. He looks more like an accountant or a creepy librarian than a cop. He has absolutely NONE of the characteristics of a police officer/protagonist you'd find in a modern day noir (especially during the late 90's/early 2000's with popular noir's like Memento). And he just has this intense, slightly "off" gaze through out the whole movie. Another aspect of L'Humanite that seems deliberate is the complete absence of guns, fighting, or some kind of a climactic chase scene where we see our main character tracking down the killer. Yet strangely enough L'Humanite still has its moments of suspense. Besides being an existential character study of Pharaon, the film is more like an unconventional cop drama instead of a thriller. Had the same story landed on the lap of an American filmmaker it woulda been a more traditional cop thriller full of jump cuts and shoot outs. Pharaon's investigation techniques are odd. Like our main character in The Element Of Crime (another neo-noir about a cop who has strange methods of solving crimes) Pharaon goes above and beyond trying to simply solve the case. When he investigates the crime scene of the murdered girl he reenacts, role plays and tries to put himself inside the mind of both the murdered girl and the killer. His investigative techniques coincide with his mannerisms and the way he carries himself around other people. Pharaon is fascinated by all human beings and tries to make sense of everything. This explains why he stares so much and focuses in on little details - the scene where he stares intensely at the beads of sweat on the back of his partners neck, the scene where he stares out the window at the traffic jam in the street while he's questioning potential witnesses and the time when he spies on Domino and Joseph having sex.
With the exception of 29 Palms, which I still haven’t seen, Dumont's work seems to always focus on "humanity", human beings making some kind of a connection or trying to understand each other (I know that sounds vague). All of his films have some key moments or similar shot where we see our characters embrace one another...

Top to bottom: Hadewicjh, L'Humanite, Hors Satan , La Vie De Jesus

Pharaon confronts Jospeh at the police station                              Pharaon in handcuffs in the final scene

Like I said earlier, the final scene of L'Humanite is the most talked about moment of the movie and is up for speculation (yes, it’s one of those open endings where the viewer can come to their own conclusion). In the final scene we see Joseph (Pharaon's friend and Domino's boyfriend) in handcuffs at the police station. As it turns out, Joseph murdered the girl. This makes sense as the little girl was last seen at her bus stop and Joseph, a bus driver, turned out to be the driver on the little girl’s route that day. There's even a scene where Joseph violently explodes at a table of people sitting next to him for being too loud and the way he has sex with Domino is always angry and aggressive. I guess these moments were placed in the film to show Joseph's dark side. Seems simples enough, right? Open & shut case. BUT...Dumont tosses a monkey wrench in to the spokes and fucks with our minds in the very last shot where we now see Pharaon in handcuffs sitting by himself. Is Pharaon really the killer? Was this whole movie a daydream of a twisted murderer who was never really a police officer to begin with? He's got all the generic characteristics of a serial killer: he's a lonely, somewhat creepy individual who lives with his mom (like Norman Bates) that zones out and stares intensely at the bodies of his friends and peers. Plus, when that final moment of Pharaon sitting in handcuffs sinks in, you think back and realize her never dressed like any of the other police officers and never even had a gun. Now there's some people that think Pharaon, who as we already discussed is fascinated by humans and takes his job to another level by putting himself in the shoes of both the victim and killer when trying to solve the crime, is doing just that by putting on the handcuffs to feel what it’s like to be in the murderers position. Sounds like B.S. to some, but I’m fascinated by this scenario and kinda hope that’s what Bruno Dumont was going for as an attempt to do something different and new as opposed to just a typical plot twist of; "the good guy was really the killer all along!"
Now...I've mentioned the (sometimes) slow pace of L'Humanite more than once in this write-up but at the same time it IS part of the New French Extremity (Trouble Every Day, The Pornographer, In My Skin, Demonlover, etc). So this film is not without its scenes of raw sex scenes (between Domino & Joseph), gruesome images (the little girl's dead body) and random moments (like the scene where Pharaon interrogates the Algerian suspect) that'll keep your attention and/or make you go; "what the fuck?". I highly recommend this movie to anyone looking for something different. People with an equal love of art house cinema and Law & Order (like myself) will enjoy this movie more than the average person.

ANTICHRIST: CHAOS REIGNS

I know this is the third movie in a row but all of the recent Lars Von Trier press (the nazi comment at Cannes, beef with Drive director and fellow Dane; Nicolas Winding Refn, Shia Lebouf apparently having unsimulated sex in his upcoming film) just so happens to coincide with the phase I'm in at the moment. Between my write-up of Nicolas Roeg's Don't Look Now and The Cinema Of Lars Von Trier, I think its time we actually get in to this movie and how its grown on me in the last two years. Not to say I disliked the movie when I first saw it or anything but I was more caught up in how disoriented and fucked up it left me feeling that I didn't really pay attention to the acting, imagery and possible messages behind the movie. Trust me, even a movie fanatic like myself rolls my eyes when I hear people talk about how moved or affected they were from a movie or a particular scene (just sounds like they're exaggerating). But Antichrist did kinda mess with me - from demonic talking foxes to the flashback scene when Charlotte Gainsbourg notices sounds coming from the baby monitor yet does nothing to prevent her son's death. Like many other Von Trier films (Europa, The Idiots, Manderlay, etc) Antichrist was also shrouded in controversy before it even reached the general public. To this day I think people are STILL too caught up in scenes of penises ejaculating blood to realize that this is a really good film with great imagery and acting (especially from Gainsbourg). Lets also not forget that Lars was able to keep our attention for two hours with a cast made up of only two people. Not since What Happened Was has there been such an entertaining movie with only two actors. Gainsbourg's performance is both awesome and kinda tough to watch at times. She really goes all out in her performance from masturbating completely naked in the middle of the woods with her legs spread wide open to her ability to display grief & sadness.

As I pointed out in my School Of Tarkovsky series, Antichrist is one of the best dedications to the filmmaking style of Andrei Tarkovsky since Carlos Reygadas' Japon (Von Trier even dedicated Antichrist to him)...

Solaris (1972)                                                                             Antichrist (2009)

Antichrist isn't exactly a horror movie yet strangely enough its more "scary" than any recent actual horror movie I've seen in years. Besides Tarkovsky, Von Trier draws elements from classic horror films like The Exorcist and The Shining with quick flashes of demonic & horrific images across the screen (for years I've been saying more modern horror films could use more elements like this)...

Top: Images from The Exorcist, Bottom: Images from Antichrist (shout out to Matt Reddick for the two print screens)

Von Trier also subtly distorts the visuals from time to time with a kind of water drop effect on the screen. Additionally, Antichrist draws some similarities to films like Eraserhead & Lost Highway (Lynch) as well as Irreversible & Enter The Void (Noe) with its disorienting, droning & base-heavy soundtrack that just adds an extra level of eeriness (see video clips at the end of the blog)

So lets do a quick tally: unexpected flashes of demonic faces on a distorted screen combined with droning audio, evil talking animals, penises ejaculating blood and an amazingly intense performance (Charlotte Gainsbourg).

 It’s hard for me to actually rate this movie with something like a 4 outta 5 stars or a "good" or "bad". Antichrist feels more like an “experience” than just a movie. I don’t mean to sound so dramatic but that’s the best I can do when someone asks if this movie is good or not. In the film Willem Dafoe ("Him") and Charlotte Gainsbourg ("Her") play a married couple trying to get past the loss their son (he fell out of window). Things get complicated when Dafoe’s character tries to play double duty as the supportive husband AND psychiatrist to his wife who seems to be taking the loss much harder than him. So they go off to their cabin in the woods for some progressive new-age psychotherapy. But as the story unfolds Dafoe starts to discover some disturbing things about his wife and what she’s been up to behind his back. As it turns out she was getting in to the world of witchcraft (when she was supposed to be working on her masters). The longer they stay at the cabin, more and more strange occurrence happen - Talking animals, vicious hail storms and Gainsbourg's behavior becomes more and more violent to the point where she's practically possessed. These days people tend to site recent films like Blue Valentine or A Separation as an example of why marriage and relationships can be tough. But in my opinion Antichrist kinda takes the cake as far as stories about a marriage or relationships put to the ultimate test. What the hell was Lars trying to say with Antichrist? To this day I’m still not exactly sure but part of me thinks he might be trying to say something dark & disturbing about women as a whole. I know I may be reaching and some of you may not feel the same way but the final scene where we see Willem Dafoe walking through a sea of ghostly women on their way to the cabin along with the very powerful flashback scene where its implied that Gainsbourg could have done something to prevent the death of her son kinda gave me this strange feeling that Von Trier has a bone to pick with women or he doesn't trust them (and lets not forget the scene where Charlotte Gainsbourg takes a pair of scissors to her genitals). I'd love for any women that've seen Antichrist to chime in on my lil' theory. This movie will do nothing to shake the misogynist label that many people have tagged Von Trier with. Damn near all his films show a female character either; murdered, beaten, raped or all 3 (although in this movie its Willem Dafoe that gets this treatment minus the murder part).
Now there's a lot more to Antichrist than the possible implication that Lars has issues with women (which is a theory that I could be WAY off on). Antichrist is also about depression and how it can be crippling, especially when dealing with the loss of a child (in the first have of the film Gainsbourg pretty much blames herself for her sons death). Anyone who knows anything about Von Trier knows about his battles with depression, phobias and anxiety (something Gainsbourg's character battles with in the film). So while on one hand Gainsbourg's character could be seen as "evil", on the other hand Gainsbourg's character could be an extension of Von Trier himself. Religion also played a heavy part in Von Trier's upbringing (he was raised Jewish but eventually converted to Catholicism). Besides the obvious the title, Antichrist (along with many of his other films like Breaking The Waves) is filled with a ton of religious guilt and symbolism.
I recommend that this not be the last thing you watch before you go to sleep. It’s a good idea to have a “happy” movie on deck right after you’re finished watching this.

TIFF HIGHLIGHT #1: MELANCHOLIA (Lars Von Trier's 'Armageddon')

Starting off this years Toronto International film festival (for me, at least) was Lars Von Trier's latest; 'Melancholia'. After watching the film and then sleeping on it for a night i realized that i actually do like it (something i wasn't sure of on Thursday when the credits rolled). My favorite thing about 'Melancholia' is that this may be the first film Von Trier has directed since 'Dancer In The Dark' (11 years ago) that wasn't made strictly to piss people off or to push buttons. With 'Dogville' (2003) he set out to piss off Americans. In Manderlay (2005) he set out to piss off white Americans (and ended up pissing them off as well as black people). 'The Boss Of It All' (2007) felt like we'd all been "had" and 'Antichrist' (2009) pissed just about EVERYONE off.
In 'Melancholia', the story of 2 sisters (Kirsten Dunst & Charlotte Gainsbourg) trying to mend their relationship with each other and battle depression before the "end of the world" (a planet known as "melancholia" is headed towards earth to destroy it), it seemed like Von Trier simply set out to make a great film. And for the most part he did. Von Trier didn't go too deep in to Dunst & Gainsbourg's history as sisters or why Dunst is so depressed and unstable, but in the opening wedding sequence when we're introduced to their family (specifically their mother played by Charlotte Rampling) we see why they have so many issues. Through out the film the sisters' roles with each other switch. In the first half, Dunst becomes depressed to the point where she can barely move and its her older sister (Gainsbourg) taking care of her. But by the end of the film, fear takes over Gainsbourg (due to planet earth's inevitable destruction) and its Dunst who takes control.
'Melancholia' DID have a few problems (that some of you may not even find as troublesome as i did).
Lars throws his depression all in our faces (mainly through Kirsten Dunst's character) to the point where we almost cant take it anymore. Its SO drab and depressing at times (although Udo Kier's presences is a great comic relief). When you look at it one way, i guess Von Trier succeeded (i mean, the title of the film IS 'Melancholia'). Its a movie about the end of the world. But the problem is that not everyone wants to sit through a film that's SO depressing and draining. So beware. Also, some of you may find parts of the film a bit boring.
But if you hang in their until the end, everything pays off. In my opinion, the ending of 'Melancholia' is one of the top 3 things Lars Von Trier has ever done. Along with the final sequence, the opening of 'Melancholia' (featuring some very memorable images) and Charlotte Rampling's speech during the wedding were some of my favorite scenes.
Von Trier's last 2 films have a lot more visual effects then his other stuff. In 'Antichrist' we had the talking fox and the ghostly faceless women walking up the hill towards Willem Dafoe at the end. In 'Melancholia' there's even more visual effects.

the planet "melancholia"

the planet "melancholia" next to the moon

scene from the opening sequence where tree branches cling to Dunst

another scene from the opening sequence

Normally Von Trier will throw in a reference to Tarkovsky or Bergman. But in 'Melancholia' it looks like he's referencing shots from his OWN work (specifically 'Antichrist'). Some scenes and shots look identical. There's a scene in 'Melancholia' when Dunst looks directly in to the camera as dead birds are falling from the sky. That shot is directly out of a scene in 'Antichrist' when Willem Dafoe looks in to the camera as acorns fall down in front of him in slow motion. Even the title cards in both films look alike...

Antichrist Opening Credits

Melancholia Opening Credits

Dafoe in 'Antichrist'

similar shot Dunst in 'Melancholia'

'Antichrist'

similar shot in 'Melancholia'

Outside of Lars's controversial statement at Cannes this year, there was a lot of hype about Kirsten Dunst's award winning performance. I was sceptical, but i have to give her credit now that I've seen it. I seriously thought she was way too fragile to work with a guy like Lars but she did a great job. Other standout performance came from Charlotte Gainsbourg, Charlotte Rampling and surprisingly...Keefer Sutherland (especially during the first half).
Lars Von Trier continues to be more and more destructive with each film. Blowing up a train full of people in 'Europa' wasn't enough for him, so he moved on to murdering an entire village of people in 'Dogville'. Apparently that wasn't enough either, so now he wants to blow earth up. In a way, 'Antichrist' feels like an unofficial prequel to 'Melancholia'. Its almost like the talking fox in 'Antichrist' was warning us of things to come when he delivered the famous line: "chaos reigns". Both films have a bleak outlook on life with depressed characters struggling to find meaning.
It looks like Terrance Malick started the movie year off with a film about creation and Von Trier is gonna end it with a film about total destruction.

A still from the creation scene in 'The Tree Of Life'

The Planet "Melancholia" headed for planet earth

'Another Earth'

Between 'The Tree Of Life', 'Another Earth' and 'Melancholia', planets seem to be the "in" thing in cinema this year.
OK, its been a long day. In addition to 'Melancholia', I also got a chance to see the new George Clooney political thriller 'The Ides Of March' (which you'll be reading about soon), Aki Kaurismaki's 'Le Havre' and Lynne Ramsay's 'We Need To Talk About Kevin'.