Two pieces in the New York Times today, and boy are my fingers tired: Revisiting “The French Connection” in the company of William Friedkin (whose controversial remastering of the film for Blu-ray arrives this Tuesday) and the usual bunch of reviews, including the influential 1978 indie “The Whole Shootin’ Match” from the spectacularly self-destructive director Eagle Pennell, Katsuhiro Otomo’s game-changing 1988 anime “Akira,” and Francine Parker’s 1972 documentary on Jane Fonda’s touring anti-war revue, “FTA.”
VANISHING POINT (71): Cited in THE CELLULOID CLOSET for its particularly noxious homophobia. Very little “glamah” in this week’s roundup.
The homophobia of VANISHING POINT truly is noxious, though the gay characters perhaps function as a commentary on what is concealed/repressed by the protagonist’s macho posing. On the whole, this is a film that indulges all those impulses about “freem onna road” that TWO-LANE BLACKTOP (released the same year) subjected to such uncompromising critique. It’s certainly not without interest, though, and the restored version (which I assume is on the Blu Ray DVD) includes a scene with Charlotte Rampling which genuinely deepens the film.
Brad, both the standard def. edition and the Blu-ray feature the “U.K. version,” which restores the Rampling sequence. I’d say “not without interest” is right on the money, although the interest goes up if you’re a car nut, a Tarantino enthusiast, a Cabrera Infante fan, and so on…
I remember seeing “Akira” as a kid, thinking it would be like a Disney cartoon, and finding it totally mystifying and freaky. I really want to have another look, though, so thanks for bringing attention to this release.
Speaking of Japanese cinema, can we talk about the Oscars for a minute? Turns out the biggest surprise of a very predictable evening was in the Foreign Film race. Everyone thought it was between “The Class” and “Waltz with Bashir”, but Japan’s “Departures” edged out a victory, becoming the first(!) Japanese film to win a competitive Oscar in that category. Has anybody here seen the film? I know both the French and Israeli entries had passionate partisans, but word on “Departures” has been pretty positive too, though, by all accounts, it was by far the most formally conventional nominated film.
Sigh for everything else, especially the “Slumdog” sweep. I fully agree with the sentiment that Boyle’s film is fulfilling a weird, Zeitgeist-y role for current moviegoers, and that everyone will look back on this film in a few years with a collective shrug.
Here’s a little O/T aside, though: You know who’s not a fan? Salman Rushdie. At a recent event, he said of “Slummy”: “The movie piles impossibility on impossibility.” He also spewed some bile on the other nominated films, like “The Reader” (“…a leaden, lifeless movie killed by respectability.”) and “Benny Button” (“It doesn’t finally have anything to say.”) Sir Salman, movie critic. Who knew?!
I figured this would be the place to ask: does anyone know the state of New Yorker’s library given the distressing, depressing news?
http://www.indiewire.com/article/end_of_the_road_for_new_yorker_films_legendary_distributor_of_difficult_cin/
Scott, Rushdie turned up at the New York Film Critics Circle awards this year to present the best director prize to Mike Leigh for “Happy-Go-Lucky.” So apparently he didn’t have a horse in the Oscar race.
No one I’ve spoken to has any idea what will happen to the New Yorker library, though it seems likely that someone will snatch it up — IFC, maybe? — in the bankruptcy settlements. The sad part is that this means one less company even marginally interested in “difficult” foreign titles, like “Woman on the Beach” and “Still Life.” Not good.
Rushie is enchanted by the THE WIZARD OF OZ (BFI Film Classics, 1997). Not much else in the fantasy realm floats his boat, it seems.
Slumdog= Millions’ adorable kids + Trainspotting’s grotty impoverishment + Bollywood musical + Obama triumph. Catnip for aging Academy voters considering themselves “with it.”
Departures –
I was tipped off that this was Bashir’s only competition (The Class was forced into the final 9, the initial committee did not like it, resented its inclusion).
It is directed by Takita Yojiro, best known in the US for Comic Magazine (which I acquired for distribution a lifetime ago when Takita was an early sign of resurgent genre Japanese cinema; it featured an early Kitano Takeshi performance). Later Made in Japan and Onmyoji later had some exposure.
Departures is about an young unemployed worker who returns from Tokyo needing work, and accidently ends up learning the ritual trade of the various stages of dressing and displaying the body in funeral rites. It seems to not be remotely the cutting edge/quasi-outlaw Takita I recall.
It apparently has an effective swelling score (always important in this category). It won the top prize at the Montreal Festival, played one in Hawaii, did not show much elsewhere (likely was turned down by Cannes, Venice, Toronto).
Regent – which normally releases gay-related films, has the US rights.
I’m told, based on the # of NY voters (one needs to see all five to vote in the category) that likely fewer than 200 people voted (which is more than vote on the docs usually).
Bashir actually got a strong initial critical response, and someone I know who is a conscientious committee member, with solid judgment, thought Bashir would win, but said Departures (which she also liked) had a solid chance as well.
Expect it though to be a punching bag for the sins of this category when it does open (likely to limited exposure) with Bashir, Class and initially Gomorrah all alternatives.
Years ago, Daniel Toscan du Plantier asked me what could be done to improve the category. I suggested he talk to his Italian counterpart and both countries refuse to participate – that would get their attention.
I was lucky enough to attend a Jean-Pierre Gorin lecture back in November and the two recent movies he ranted (read: cursed vociferously) about were the new Batman and Slumdog Millionaire. This was before most people had heard about it here in the US; it was a little thrilling that he wasn’t waiting until it was well-known and successful for it to offend him with, in his words, its bullshit. (Context key: this was after a screening of Le Gai Savior)
Tom B.: great suggestion to Toscan, but actually ALL foreign countries should band together and refuse participation in the AA unless the absurd, insulting rules of the foreign category be drastically changed.
Can you imagine a civilized country outside of the USA dividing cinema into two categories: American and Foreign, the latter a kind of afterthought occupying less than one per cent of the space?
Jean=Pierre -
They aren’t divided; foreign (and foreign language) films are eligible like any other films (unless they were nominated for FL film one year and open in LA the next) as long as they meet other eligibility rules.
I explained the system like this:
What if each studio, whether it is Paramount or Kino Releasing, got to qualify one film for best picture.
If it was made by several studios, it could not be submitted.
Then the people deciding who was to be nominated saw the films submitted on double features, had to see at least 12 of them at one screening only in LA – meaning only about 200 people, mostly nice people, but older, retired, not really aware of what the outside world think – and that nearly all the films have not been released in the US, so there is no critical or popular feedback.
The nominations for best picture would look far more ridiculous than they do now.
But that is what the system is like.
Smaller countries like it far more than big ones do.
They have been making small steps to improve, but it isn’t working.
Has anyone in France or Europe seen Departures? For all I know it could be a good film.
Dave K wrote: No one I’ve spoken to has any idea what will happen to the New Yorker library, though it seems likely that someone will snatch it up — IFC, maybe? — in the bankruptcy settlements. The sad part is that this means one less company even marginally interested in “difficult” foreign titles, like “Woman on the Beach” and “Still Life.” Not good.”
Not to mention that the films New Yorker has by Nagisa Oshima will continue to linger in home video purgatory.
Tom: of course, technically they are not divided. But no foreign language film ever got a major Oscar, or even a minor one (except best foreign). They are eligible, but it just never happens. The Best Film awards to foreign films have always been to English-language (British) productions.
But you do make it clear how absurd the system is — except that it probably makes perfect sense in the minds of the Academy top people, who think in a classically American ethnocentric fashion.
In my opinion, there shouldn’t be a foreign film section at all. Since all foreign films are — theoretically — eligible for any award, why the special section, whose existence actually underscores the hypocrisy of that so-called eligibility?
I completely agree with Jean-Pierre about the whole idiotic foreign/American divide. “Classically American ethnocentric” is right. We’ve gone down the absurdity of the history of the Best Picture Oscars on this site before, but it’s always astonishing that such narrow criteriae could be sold as “universal.”
Michael, I have to look at New Yorker’s catalogue but I’m not sure how much Oshima they still hold. They let the rights to quite a few titles lapse over the years. It seems that the titles they do own will probably go up for auction. I’m sure that IFC will get a few, that Criterion will get a few others, maybe Kino and Zeitgiest and a few other companies will pick up some titles. A sad business. At this point, all previously known models of distribution are up for re-consideration. Talk about a business in flux…
I think Barry makes up for any “noxious homophobia” (if it’s him who is reaping it in Vanishing Point, I haven’t seen the movie so I don’t know) in The Limey as Terry Valentine’s security consultant. That movie is full of great husband and wife scenes between those two. One that comes to mind is when he’s eating all the nuts at the house in Big Sur and Terry scolds him.
There have been 3 foreign language performances that have won, and several writing awards as well. Best picture, never, and of course, they have been terribly negligent in reaching out.
But having a separate category does hurt – just like having an animated feature category has kept several of those films from being nominated.
And foreign films have won best picture – apart from quite a few British, Last Emperor (which is mostly an Italian production) have won, and The Pianist (French) very nearly did.
,
Foreign language will be tougher, but for better or worse, Slumdog Million, which is 1/3 Hindi, has gone a bit further as both a foreign and foreign language film – though that of course is not what you mean.
In the meantime, Taken is going to be a $120 million film in the US – the biggest French film ever? Perhaps…
There are two reasons the system for FL film continues:
1) The Academy uses it as an outreach to its parallel organizations in other countries
2) The committee – which is self-selected, you just have to see at least 12 of the submitted films at their screenings – is full of members who do this year after year and are devoted to it, and their would be a major reaction if they were cut out of their social time every fall and early winter.
http://www.indiewire.com/article/end_of_the_road_for_new_yorker_films_legendary_distributor_of_difficult_cin/
I have mixed feelings about this news. New Yorker Films issued low-quality DVDs, often ports from UK or other sources. Virtually all of their videotapes were a little hard to watch, possibly from all the Macrovision copy protection. They issued at least a couple of films “squished” on videotape. They did not always take good care of their film prints, either. When I was helping program a “Not on Video” series, I remember finding out that the single print NYF owned of “La Chinoise” was missing a reel, and they weren’t about to replace it. This was in the late 1990s, when that film was very hard to see in the U.S. I saw their print of Rossellini’s “Socrates” in 1993 and, just to make a comparison, it was even redder than that old print then circulating of “Contempt.” I compared two NYF catalogues from the 1970s to a then-current one in the 1990s, and numerous titles had dropped out: like Kent Jones said, maybe they let the rights lapse.
It is sad that a company which disseminated the likes of Godard, Oshima and Akerman is gone. But new ownership of the titles might be in the best interests of the films. Michael W., since Criterion has announced DVD releases of “In the Realm of the Senses” and “Empire of Passion,” maybe some of the titles once owned by NYF such as “Night and Fog in Japan,” “Ceremonies,” and The Man Who Left His Will on Film” will get bought and packaged into an Eclipse release. But I don’t know if NYF kept them till the end. An Oshima retrospective is touring North America this year.
Tom Brueggemann: Thanks for the info. It’s interesting that voters were resistant to “The Class”, yet warmed to “Waltz with Bashir”. I mean, I didn’t expect either film to be their collective cup of tea, but I figured it woulda been the other way around? Anyway, I too would like to see “Departures” before joining in the chorus of those who are calling this year’s foreign film race another debacle. (Though, I must say, I can’t imagine the film being better than “Tokyo Sonata” or “Still Walking”, two movies that Japan could have chosen as entries.) In any event, 2008 was a vast improvement on 2007, when pretty much every eligible foreign title of note was overlooked. This year, they even included Nuri Bilge Ceylan’s “Three Monkeys” on the longlist. They’re improving!
Personally, I don’t think I’d like to see the foreign category disappear altogether. Of course, it’s pretty silly that it even exists, and ideally, it’d nice to have Best Picture nominees like “Grand Illusion” and “Cries and Whispers” every year. But they do occasionally draw attention to very worthy titles that wouldn’t have a prayer in the main categories (like Austria’s superlative “Revanche”, a nominee this year). They just need a structural overhaul and better taste.
Where is Junko when we need her?
I believe Departures won the Kinema Jumpo poll as best film of the year – as I recall, it is sort of the NY Film Critics equivalent in Japan, has been around as long as the Oscars, and is not totally middle-brow or compromised, if not exactly cutting edge.
The foreign language rules are ridiculous, but I agree with Scott: if you lose the category altogether, say goodbye to any foreign-language presence at the Oscars outside of acting nominations. (Interestingly, the short categories–animation and live action–are known for being much more diverse, with maybe only one or two American nominations per year).
I also don’t see a big difference between the Academy’s snubbing of foreign-language fare and their snubbing of any film not released by a major studio, or subsidiary of said major studio. Or anything, you know, really very adventurous at all.
The whole thing’s just a big, hopeless headache–it’s an industry show, and it’ll be defended as that to the death. Not really worth the anguish.
Now the four-month period of Oscar coverage, when the globe is bullied into serious discussions about THE READER and SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE–that’s worth complaining about. Some blogger somewhere should call a massive “time-out.”
Tom wrote: “Where is Junko when we need her?”
We always need Junko.
I actually think foreign language films shouldn’t be eligible for “best picture” and instead the category should simply be renamed “best English language film”, since this would more honestly reflect the realities and elevate the “best foreign language film” category a bit, while allowing the academy to go on as usual.
What I find really problematic, though, is the fact that it is very hard to get a nomination, let alone win, in categories such as cinematography, editing, score etc. unless one has been working on a US/UK production.
I wonder: what possible difference would it make if anything changed above or below the surface of the Academy Awards, of all things? Expecting the industry – that’s “industry,” as opposed to art form – to salute itself in a manner that would be more responsive to actual rather than perceived excellence in filmmaking is like wishing for different parents.
There were three beautiful moments on the show – the acknowledgements of Manny Farber and Leonard Rosenman in the montage of people who’d passed away in 2008; Jerry Lewis holding himself together valiantly and delivering a short and pointed thank you; and Fincher’s close-up during the Best Director build-up, when he rolled his eyes as if to say, “Hurry up and give Danny Boyle his trophy so I can get the fuck out of here.”
Dave, I was wondering if you could go into a little more detail on Friedkin’s revamping of THE FRENCH CONNECTION. It was always an extremely drab-looking movie. His visual scheme sounds exciting. If Wong Kar-wai can do it, why not Friedkin?
While I nod in agreement re the “Classically American ethnocentric” awards – it is amusing that only one American is among the last 8 acting award winners. Perhaps this Oscars had the most non-American award winners ever? (haven’t checked but I suppose its possible)
Kent Jones wrote: “If Wong Kar-wai can do it, why not Friedkin?”
I believe John Badham has done it twice with DRACULA. I have the laserdisc version where he drained a lot of the color out, and from what I understand about the latest DVD of the film, Badham once again had a go at the color scheme of the film.
The Oscars began as a way for the American film industry to promote and honor itself, so it’s not surprising that it mostly remains thus. The award-giving bodies of most other countries do the same, no? “Titanic” didn’t sweep the Cesars, Genies or Kinema Junpo awards, as far as I know. If a foreign language film makes a bit of a splash in the American marketplace or critical community, it has a shot at nominations. Since in the former instance it’s a pretty rare phenomenon, I suspect the Best Foreign Language Film category is retained so that international achievements have at least one place, however inadequate, to get a little acknowledgment from the behemoth known as the U.S. film industry.
It helps to remember that the Academy is a U.S. based organization of film professionals, and it’s a clique of sorts. It’s hard to get them to vote outside their own — in the same way that your high school didn’t vote for a rival school’s students to be Homecoming King and Queen (remember the old adage: Hollywood is high school with money?).
Pan’s Labyrinth (a Mexican/Spanish film) won several of the craft awards just a couple years ago.
Film is becoming increasingly hybrid. Slumdog Millionaire – the most foreign film ever to win best picture – likely will be replicated by more foreign directed, foreign made films, majority in English, but with substantial subtitles (Babel, not a winner, but serious contender, is another example). Whether an actual totally foreign language film wins is unlikely, if not impossible.
Scratch Kinema Junpo from my example above — as Tom mentioned upthread, it’s probably a critics’ poll, not a Japanese film industry awards org.
I wonder: what possible difference would it make if anything changed above or below the surface of the Academy Awards, of all things?
I think most cinephiles, myself included, take the Oscars with a large grain of salt, but to those working in the industry a nomination or a win can mean a lot in regard to exposure, salaries and funding.
So if for instance more foreign language films were nominated in any of the categories, they would automatically get more exposure due to the fact that 1 billion people or whatever watch the awards on TV. And those involved would probably have an easier time getting jobs or funding for their next project.
Judging by a quick scan of the nominees, it seems that there has been a trend in the past decade towards a more global outlook, so that’s a good sign.
The Oscars began as a way for the American film industry to promote and honor itself, so it’s not surprising that it mostly remains thus. The award-giving bodies of most other countries do the same, no? “Titanic” didn’t sweep the Cesars, Genies or Kinema Junpo awards, as far as I know.
The awards you mention are all exclusively for films from the host country, so I think it’s not quite fair to compare them to the Oscars which are open to all countries and have a much more universal relevance.
Curiously, about 2/3s of the people winning Oscars this year were not Americans. Obviously the all Brit & Indian crew of Slumdog added to this, but it was not limited to them.
7 of the 8 acting winners in the last 2 years were not American.
Something like 30 of the last 35 cinematography winners have not been American or American-born (this is the craft category most dominated by foreigners).
You can’t say that about other national awards – the American industry is taking in the rest of the world as much as it ever has.
Talking about the foreign influence on american cinema, has anyone noticed the strong impact f Pontecorvo’s handheld style of “Battle of Algiers” on both French Connection 1 and 2 ? In the case of FC2, the way Frankenheimer shows Marseilles is reminiscent of Pontecorvo’s vision of the “casbah” in Algiers. By the way, why did Fox forget to release French Connection 3 on Blu Ray as well ? By the way, I call “Seven Ups” French Connection 3… I am sure that Philip D’Antoni never directed “Seven Ups” and that we wil know the identity behind the man who directed that very good film. Any ideas by the way ?
No idea. Does D’Antoni have any connection to “The French Connection II”? – always thought he did but don’t see him as a producer. Given that “The Seven-Ups” predates FC II maybe you should rename it “The (Real) French Connection II”.
Yann: Yes, Oscar is open to all countries, but never in its history has it purported to truly consider the best international work on an even playing field with domestic product. Stray films or their directors, writers, technicians and actors have gotten in, of course. But even the Best Foreign Language Film category restricts each nation to only one title, pretty much ensuring that it can’t contain a fair sampling of the world’s best.
I guess all I really mean to suggest is that the Oscar nominations are never going to look like they were chosen by the staff of Film Comment. The Academy is a diverse group of artists, craftsmen, execs, etc., and I doubt that many of them would even consider themselves to be cinephiles (given many of their choices, you many now say, “Duh!”).
JBryant wrote: “the Oscar nominations are never going to look like they were chosen by the staff of Film Comment”
The American Oscars and FILM COMMENT collude on only one thing: the suppression of Brian De Palma! (Sorry, Kent, I couldn’t resist that one!)
Aside from the tremendous chase sequence, I found THE SEVEN UPS pretty boring when I re-watched it last year for consideration in a car crash/car chase series at Eastman House. In the end, I wound up just showing the chase scene before FRENCH CONNECTION.
Nicolas, what makes you think D’Antoni didn’t direct it? It seems to me to be a movie by a guy who wasn’t interested in much but car chases; sort of a recycled, lite version of FRENCH CONNECTION.
I don’t have any ideas myself, but I’d certainly nominate Bill Hickman (who drives the car Roy Scheider is chasing) as the auteur of at least that sequence.
“Slumdog Millionaire – the most foreign film ever to win best picture”
And a British movie about Indian poverty, at that.
Gee, they offered to turn over the awards selection to us at Film Comment, but we thought it was beneath us and impolitely refused.
Why, I wonder, does it always seem like the fix is in with the Oscars? One never really has the sense of “a diverse group of artists, craftsmen, execs, etc.” but of a yearly approximation of what a few representatives of the industry think the public thinks that the industry should consider its worthiest projects. If that sounds convoluted, that’s because it feels convoluted to me – as if it’s about 8 or 9 degrees removed from what it’s sold as, i.e. a democratic selection by a diverse group of (non-cinephilic) artists and artisans.
Kent -
What the public thinks does enter into the equation, but as one factor, not necessarily the deciding factor. What critics think also (sometimes more) factors in.
Some films win on their own. In my 9 years out here, I have never seen anything like the instantaneously proclamation of Slummdog at the likely Oscar winner when the screeners arrived for Academy members in late November, reinforcing the huge buzz that came from pre-released DGA, SAG, WGA and other screenings. It seemed anyone who hadn’t seen it did right away, and the immediate consensus was that it was the one for this year.
At that point, it was in limited release; Fox SL was not overhyping it. One of the keys to winning is making members think they “discovered” a movie.
Having said that, Fox SL’s game plan of rolling the film out so that it may the top 10 in the weeks of the final voting helped assure everyone that they weren’t too far removed from the public.
This is totally anecdotal, but every member of the Acad I know (mostly execs/at-large members) said they voted for Letters of Iwo Jima two years ago (with most voting for Scorsese as director), but also with the caveat that it would never win best picture because American audiences had not responded in large numbers.
Box office has far less to do with all the other awards. Best picture is judged differently.
There is a link between “French Connection II” and “The Seven-Ups — the late, great screenwriter Alexander Jacobs (who died in 1979).
When I interviewed Frankenheimer some years ago, he confirmed Alex’s significant involvement in “French Connection II” (re-writing Robert & Laurie Dillon, who share the screenplay credit).
At the same time, much of the dialogue in the finished film (particularly the scene between Gene Hackman and Bernard Fresson, when Popeye Doyle is in withdrawal from heroin) was improvised off of Alex’s main draft (which I had the opportunity to read).
My information is that Alex was the principal writer on “The Seven-Ups” (credit shared with Albert Ruben, from Sonny Grosso’s story).
Alex also co-wrote John Boorman’s first two American films, “Point Blank” and “Hell In The Pacific.”
Last but far from least, he was an extraordinarily selfless but never coddling supporter of and mentor to numerous other writers — an extreme rarity in the Hollywood shark tank, and one more reason, along with the aforementioned credits and others, why he should not be forgotten.
A long-ago interview he did with Stephen Farber for “Film Quarterly” provides ample confirmation of his penetrating intelligence and lively filmic imagination, which are so sadly missed.
Of course the Academy’s treatment of foreign language films hasn’t been all bad – if it wasn’t for the Oscar nom; what are the chances TCM runs “The Burmese Harp” in prime time (like they are right now as part of a 31 days of Oscar slate).
Another aspect of the Oscars that occurred to me: I’m always reading interviews with directors in which they admit they’re too busy to keep up much with current films. I assume this is a problem among the busy professionals in all branches of the Academy when it comes time to mark their ballots. Yes, there are free guild screenings, DVD screeners and holiday downtime to help play catch-up, but I’m guessing a fair percentage of working Academy members vote without having seen many of the nominees (you also hear stories about them passing the responsibility to family members or employees). I think I read that the Foreign Language Film category may have been decided by as few as 200 voters, since you have to have seen all five nominees to participate. This stipulation favors the retired and unemployed.
Kent: Not to condone anything, but I’d almost bet money that Academy voters mostly vote their true preferences. I just think their collective notion of worthiness is truly that middlebrow. I’m probably naive, but since the ballot is anonymous, why not just vote your preference?
Then there’s the whole issue of how the voting is structured and weighted to favor films that aren’t terribly divisive, but I won’t get into that.
regarding Salman Rushdie (as discussed supra), he wrote an absolutely wonderful piece for American Film back in 1985, on Terry Gilliam’s BRAZIL– I think it was commissioned by Peter Biskind, and I’m not sure if it’s ever been anthologized or reprinted, but it made nearly as lasting an impression as the film.
Nicolas, I’ve heard Friedkin acknowledge “Z” as an influence on “French Connection” but not Pontecorvo. Maybe he was influenced by Pontecorvo’s influence on Costa-Gavras. I’ve met Phil D’Antoni and he’s a very colorful guy, an ex-boxer who would fit in perfectly with the cops he made films about. By the way, that’s also Bill Hickman behind the wheel in “Bullitt,”
D’Antoni’s first film as a producer and one that seems more personal to him than it does to its credited director, Peter Yates.
Adrian, maybe Brian De Palma seems suppressed in Australia, but in North America, Pauline Kael’s favorite director can hardly be called unappreciated.
“Boyle’s film is fulfilling a weird, Zeitgeist role for current moviegoers” This is interesting. However, but Weltanschauung. which strikes a less ephemeral role, might be more like it, for what could be more 21st Century for Americans and the Global bourgeoisie (haute or petty) than a Mumbai-slum Horatio Alger romance.
Dave, the more pressing question is: what does Salman Rushdie think of Brian De Palma, and will they ever find a way to work together?
I have fond memories of MOVIN’ ON, the TV series about truckers with Claude Akins and Frank Converse produced by D’Antoni for NBC in the 70s (later re-named IN TANDEM). But NS, is THE SEVEN-UPS really a good movie? I remember it being on the turgid side, apart from the signature image of the top of the car being sheared off when it crashed into a trailer truck.
Alex, I fully agree with your assessment of SLUMDOG’s popularity. I will add that along with W, it’s the first movie I’ve ever seen that made me feel like I was watching YouTube.
Jaime Wolf: There’s an interesting interview of Terry Gilliam by Salman Rushdie that was printed in The Believer:
http://www.believermag.com/issues/200303/?read=interview_gilliam
Apparently, Mr. Rushdie is a big cinephile. I remember David Cronenberg once interviewed the author when he was in hiding. Anyway, Sir Salman is going to have to put his money where his mouth is, since he’s currently co-adaptating his own celebrated 1981 novel, “Midnight’s Children”, for the screen with Indian-Canadian filmmaker Deepa Mehta.
Anyway, I talked with a couple people who have seen “Departures”, and none had terribly nice things to say about the film. Regardless, I think it opens in the US in May, so we’ll all have a chance to see for ourselves.
Regarding Rushdie and cinephilia, one good example of it is his book SHALIMAR THE CLOWN, a thriller about an assassination of a diplomat who is a Malraux-esque intellectual Frenchman settled in the US. His name is…Max Ophuls. John Updike in his review noted that there was practically no resemblance between any biography of the actual Ophuls and the fictional guy but Rushdie liked the name(and presumably his movies) and kept it.
I agree with him about the Danny Boyle film. Though I don’t know what he sees in THE DARK KNIGHT(an overrated unacknowledged remake of THE BIG HEAT with Aaron Eckhart in the Gloria Grahame role). Still, it’s nice that it was a small film with subtitles that won for a change and maybe those non-professional kids would be helped now(all things being equal of course as it was not in the case of Jackie Coogan).
Pity he misunderstood the ending of AI. But then the myth of Kubrick as intellectual artist and Spielberg as popular showman and being opposed to each other would need time to die out.
Acknowledging the great car chases in the D’Antoni films (“Bullit”, “The French Connection” and “The Seven-Ups”) – is there a significant car chase in “The French Connection II”? I’ve seen most every Frankenheimer film; but not that one. The reason I ask is that car nut Frankenheimer would have been the perfect director for such a scene. Feel his “Ronin” may have the best car chase in any film I’ve seen. And the races in “Grand Prix” are pretty impressive as well (though not much else in the film is).