ampersandology: film. culture. words.

Showing posts with label renoir. Show all posts
Showing posts with label renoir. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

The Keys to the Kingdom: Hollywood Tell-Alls

I’ve got a new buzz in my brain: Mark Harris’ Pictures at a Revolution. It was only published in the last year or so, and I can remember going to purchase it but being coldly informed by Amazon that this title had not yet been released. Since then, I’ve almost ordered it a dozen times, but given that my apartment is a glorified walk-up with nowhere to leave packages, my love of online shopping has waned.

And then today, it was there at the bookstore, winking at me with its white on orange, sans-serif type: the picture of Dunaway and Beatty on its cover seemed to be smiling at me in joyous anticipation: we will finally be together.

(...what? You guys don’t carry on imaginary conversations with books you’re about to buy slash already own? Well, let me tell you: you are missing out! Of all the inanimate things I talk to on a regular basis, I find that future or current books in my possession are the most forthcoming.)

Pictures at a Revolution takes the Best Picture nominees of a pivotal year in cinema—1968—and examines those five pictures. Which, trust me, is the only way that Doctor Dolittle will ever be mentioned alongside The Graduate, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?, In the Heat of the Night and Bonnie and Clyde. The format is designed around one central concept: that after 1968, the game had changed for Hollywood, as the generational gap became yawning and more than ever in Tinsel Town, the old guard was being edged out by the ways of the new.

[There’s one moment in particular, at a party thrown at Jane Fonda’s beachhouse that’s particularly poignant. Fonda, being the Hollywood royalty that she was, was the bridge between the old and the new, inviting her father Henry, and old family friends like William Wyler and George Cukor to a party attended by her (stoner) brother Peter, Jack Nicholson, Sidney Poitier, and Andy Warhol (miserable bastard). A moment frozen in time, commemorated on a cosmic plate somewhere, almost unbelievable.]

In my mind, the history of film is an abstract form that makes the most sense to me in the written word: combine movies with words, that’s a two-for that makes me smile. Sure, documentaries have the added bonus of being able to directly reference the films they talk about, but seeing the hi-jinks of my film heroes on paper adds a delicious layer of divorced narrative, an element of the fictional to the real. So what better list to make than of the film books that inspire me?

There are many industry tell-alls, but few that really marry the investigation of biography with the comprehensive critique of film history better than these:


Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex, Drugs and Rock n' Roll Generation Saved Hollywood by Peter Biskind
Hands down my favorite film history book. Why? Because it’s basically 700 pages of gossip about the most screwed up people on the planet: filmmakers. I learned things that simultaneously blew my mind and comforted me like an old security blanket about the crucial New Hollywood moviemakers in the late 60s/early 70s. This isn’t even touching on how brilliantly it traces the rise of this new movement to its death at the hands of the summer blockbuster, or how it paints cunning portraits of people who I thought I already knew (Spielberg as the nerd who finally got a girl and became a jerk? Scorsese as the twerp who turned to drugs to keep his creative high? George Lucas as the bizarre voice of reason?!?). If you want anecdotes, you’ll find them here. (see also: The Kid Stays in the Picture by Robert Evans)




The Film Snob’s Dictionary by David Kamp and Lawrence Levi

At first glance, it's just a reference guide, but the more I reference it, the more I realize it's basically a history book, and a pretty bitchy one at that. Just read the entry on Ingmar Bergman or Jean Renoir. Me-OW!



Brando by Patricia Bosworth; Somebody: The Reckless Life and Remarkable Career of Marlon Brando by Stefan Kanfer.
Anyone who knows me knows that I pride myself on delivering a Brando story for every occasion. Well, I owe it all to the fact I’ve read many a biography and watched many a documentary on the man. He fascinates and repulses me. These two in particular are like two flip sides of a coin: if you want a healthy overview tracing Brando’s career, go with the Bosworth. It's largely devoid of the kind of damning anecdotal evidence that inflates Brando's legend...which brings us to Somebody, which in the title alone is already delivering the kind of grit I want to see in Brando bios . But as always, when it comes to Brando, you rarely have to embellish: the truth is usually juicier than fiction.



I Lost It At the Movies by Pauline Kael
My hero. Her ability to sum up not only a film, but also its cultural context and creative ancestors in a single paragraph never fails to astound me. She may have been a tough old broad, but damn if she didn't know what she was talking about.



Down and Dirty Pictures: Miramax, Sundance and the Rise of the Independent Film by Peter Biskind
The second and less salacious of my Biskind books. The man knows his stuff (but don't seek out his film reviews unless you're willing to put up with a little bit of datedness) and it's shown in the way he deftly weaves the rise of indie films into a self-contained narrative with foreshadowing, character development and hubris. I love his portrait of Robert Redford. Slightly kinder than Easy Riders--but only slightly.





Conversations with Wilder by Cameron Crowe

In a word, this book is a revelation. It's basically one massive, candid interview with frequent screenwriter, sometimes director and forever legend Billy Wilder as his career was winding down. Full of juicy behind the scenes stories with a mensch who's too old to pull any punches, his insight into the business he devoted his life to is at once touching, heartbreaking and terribly cynical. I re-read this often. (see also Hitchcock by Francois Truffaut for a more film-y approach to interviewing a legend)

Sunday, December 28, 2008

The Pop Culture Unfortunates


Don’t let the brows fool you: every Ibsen-reading, wine-drinking, Truffant-quoting fancy pants has a store of Pop Culture Unfortunates in their past: those little blemishes on the hull of any perfectly cultivated intellectual inner life. It happens to the best of us: the five-star restaurant foodie who secretly devours Doritos; the opera connoisseur who watches Two and a Half Men; the hipster poet who digs Phil Collins without a trace of irony (he’s got two ears and a heart, doesn’t he?). They’re all alike. And I happen to have it on good authority. What’s that good authority, you may ask? Well, my own sordid past, of course. Full disclosure, kids. That’s what I’m all about.  

 I know all the words to Hungry Like the Wolf. On purpose.

Look, you can’t help love, right? And I happen to love Duran Duran. More than a little. Actually, more than a lot. I think that not only are they great artists, they also constantly redefine the word ‘awesome.’ Also? Their poetics put a tear in my eye, yet a song remains in my heart. Look no further than the exotic seduction found in Hungry Like the Wolf, the stylish yearning of Rio, the tense, moody staccato of Wild Boys, and you’ll see why Duran Duran is the word. . True science fact: Simon Le Bon is a dreamboat.

Nearly everything on the list of Stuff White People Like applies to me.

No, like, everything. Brunches, girls with bangs, gentrification--I am guilty, guilty, guilty. And I accept this accomplishment with equal parts pride, shame and resignation. But, like most White People, it’s mostly pride.

Stayin’ Alive.

Yeah. The real shame from this admission comes from the fact that not only do I like it better than its predecessor (Saturday Night Fever, and I don’t know WHY you would not know that already). It’s from the fact that I…what’s the word? Like it at all. No, I’m sorry. Like isn’t strong enough. I kind of love it. I just…man, when he puts that snooty British lady in her place by letting her fall during the big dance number? I’m all , “LAWYERED, baby. Outstanding.” In fact…

Just say three words: bad. Dance. Movies.

There’s like my Achilles heel, but instead of leaving me dead on a Greek island, these “films” leave me soaring on clouds of rhythm and joy. Ain’t a terribly crafted, shoddily plotted dance movie that I don’t love with the fire of a teenage poet. Bad dance movies teach me how to live my life (Fight for your dreams, says Flashdance. Never give up, says Step Up. Kevin Bacon should have a place in your heart forever, says Footloose). Do you demand more proof? HAVE IT: I paid money to see Take the Lead. In theatres. WHERE OTHER PEOPLE COULD SEE ME.

(UPDATE! On December 29th, I was in a store that had cruelly placed Footloose and Stayin' Alive next to each other, both for seven dollars and ninety nine cents. Seven dollars and ninety nine cents! I don't know how this store stayed in business, charging next to nothing for the greatest films of my whole life. Y'all, it was like Sophie's Choice up in here. I left empty handed becuase the weight of that choice would haunt me like, for at least twenty minutes.) 

Gossip Girl.

Do I need to say any more? Of course not. Because I still totally don’t watch it. (BLAIR + CHUCK 4EVAH!!!1!!)

 More like The Rules of the LAME.

Okay. I know The Rules of the Game (or La Règle du jeu, 1939) is supposed to be this amazing, benchmark film. But um. Okay. It kind of…sucks. Like, not a lot: it’s not like Showgirls or anything. But I don’t really get the big deal. It seems pretty standard to me. Madcap servants, delusional rich people. Isn’t that, like, the whole point of European cinema? Also, I detest Christine, the quasi-protagonist: I fail to understand how one man would be interested in a stale, boring old prune like her, let alone three (that was the final tally, wasn’t it?). I don’t want to say hackneyed but…okay, I kind of do want to say hackneyed. But I won’t! Because I’m pretty sure they’d take away my White Person membership (see above).

She may be the Man, but I AM THE SHAME.

Okay, this one is hard to admit. But DAMN IT. I have to say it. She’s the Man (starring Amanda Bynes and Channing Tatum) is a good movie and a clever adaptation of Shakespeare! I won’t stop there: Amanda Bynes is charming in it and Channing Tatum actually comes close to emoting. Also, I’ve seen it more than once. There. I said it. Okay? Stop LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT!


Clint Eastwood? No thank you.

For some reason, I made up my mind to never, ever willingly watch a Clint Eastwood film. Not that ones he’s in, mind you, only the ones he directs. It has something to do with the fact that he makes the most depressing, life-sucking movies of all time. It’s like the feud between the Capulets and the Montagues: it goes back so far I don’t even remember what started it (OH WAIT. I do. Unforgiven. Do you know who emerges from that stupid film unforgiven? Clint Eastwood.) So that means I haven’t seen any of his blasted critical darlings—a list that includes Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby and Letters from Iwo Jima. And God-willing, I never will. I REALIZE THE ERROR OF MY WAYS. I just refuse to change, that’s all. Isn’t that the best possible way of ensuring personal growth?

 I just saw The Shawshank Redemption for the first time.

No, yeah. I know.   

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails