Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Nov 26, 2007 17:49:07 GMT
This film is as ambiguous as one of Dylan's songs. It has certainly made me think as much. Here is a post I made on IMDb in response to someone who did not care for the film. It is the closest I have come to putting my thoughts into words on this film:
You mention Ledger's portion as being a waste, but in terms of Dylan, I think this segment does the best at capturing who he was at that family point in his life, despite it being one of the loosest connections among the segments. I'm probably biased because "Blood on the Tracks" is my favorite album, but there are so many moments in Ledger's segment that capture the essence of Dylan and the themes of that album and how his personal life mirrored it.
"All the people we used to know They're an illusion to me now. Some are mathematicians Some are carpenter's wives. Don't know how it all got started, I don't know what they're doin' with their lives."
~ from "Tangled Up in Blue", the opening track of "Blood on the Tracks".
I felt the dinner scene between Ledger and Gainsbourg and their old friends connected close with these lines from the song. You are right, in that Gainsbourg performance is incredible, outdoing Blanchett in her segments. Plus, the recreation of the time period, and the parallels between their relationship and the Vietnam War (another aspect covered in "Blood on the Tracks") was skillfully balanced.
Bale's segments were great for what they were. He is such a skilled actor that I wish Haynes had done more with him, but his segments were great send ups of older rock n' roll documentaries.
Whishaw's portion was an interesting perspective of the inane press conferences that soon took over Dylan's career in the mid-60's.
Blanchett's portions were arguably the most enjoyable. Her performance is fun but also an interesting interpretation. The way Haynes set up of these sections were also well done, inputing a lot of surrealism and some grand black and white cinematography. The part with Blanchett walking in the hotel gardens in London were a great reference to Fellini's "8 1/2", as was the whole segment, more or less. Certainly a different and new way to look at this stage of Dylan's career, depicting the radical changes in style, while channeling radical cinema of the 1960's.
I quite liked Franklin's portions. The songs performed were well done, I love the scene where he plays "When the Ship Comes In" (and I am aware that it was not the actor performing). Considering that the past Dylan presented when he signed with Columbia Records was basically all a lie, this depiction is as good as any.
Gere's segment bothered me when I first saw it, but now thinking about it, it is growing on me. I don't like how a lot of people, music historians and documentary filmmakers in general, seemingly ignore his career after his motor-cycle accident, but really Gere's segment helps establish the mystery about it, evoking images and ideas from several of his later albums, including "Desire" and "Oh Mercy".
So, if you're pissed that Haynes made this film for people who are Dylan fanatics, then you might be right. But I'm glad he kept true to his mystery than make it presentable for everyone to understand. His music was nothing like that, and neither was he.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Nov 26, 2007 19:46:57 GMT
Highly, highly anticipating this. What a great year for US cinema.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Nov 26, 2007 19:57:06 GMT
Highly, highly anticipating this. What a great year for US cinema. Agreed. This is the best in awhile. It seems like, for me, in past (recent) years, studio films have been in my top 10, but there have been quite a few films this year that have been offbeat and experimental. It's been interesting and excellent. For this film to make me even question my rating system and my general thought process in analyzing films, that really says something about this year for cinema.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Nov 26, 2007 20:36:26 GMT
Very interesting; care to elaborate?
Is the best year since 1999 for US film?
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Nov 26, 2007 21:23:45 GMT
Very interesting; care to elaborate? Is the best year since 1999 for US film? I just walked away from it, unable to collect my thoughts. It was like watching a dream, I suppose. But I couldn't think of the film in terms of critiquing it or rating it when I got done watching it. I'm still having trouble. I am more than likely going to view it again this Saturday. I'm bringing a few friends along who are pretty open minded, so I wonder what kind of effect that will have on my perception of it. I need to revisit the films of 1999 in order to make that judgment. I've had a craving lately to rewatch "American Beauty", but I have seen it so many times, I do not think a rewatch will be as rewarding as I am imagining it will be. "Magnolia", "The Insider", and "Being John Malkovich" are the only other films from that year that come to mind quickly that I would view as masterpieces. A great year, no doubt.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Dec 3, 2007 19:10:40 GMT
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
I love the way Haynes sets up the scene where Ledger's Robbie and Gainsbourg's Claire meet in the mirror filled cafe, making their appearance on the screen extremely ambiguous. In fact, Ledger's character is even introduced in the film through his reflection in a hotel mirror. If I had to chose a favorite segment, this would be it.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Dec 21, 2007 19:15:15 GMT
The only thing that disappointed, really, was that for such an all-inclusive (though still very selective) "biography", it ended with one of his most iconic numbers, one which was of course given much coverage in Scorsese's No Direction Home. Something like "Series of Dreams" would have been cool.
A minor detraction from an excellent film, though. In many ways, it's somewhat easier to begin with negative thoughts, to get those out of the way, in order to lend more time to what was great about it. More to come...
|
|
DA
Writer's block
I'm born again...like the Watergaters!
Posts: 104
|
Post by DA on Dec 26, 2007 3:18:37 GMT
I'm still reeling. My goodness though, isn't it surreal to think that the source of this entire "mythology" is still alive and kicking and making records?
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Dec 26, 2007 16:07:18 GMT
I thought several times with an inner smile of what Dylan himself would make of the film. Glad you enjoyed it. I'm seeing it on the 2nd again with a Dylan fan group, then again on the 17th with my film society.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jan 10, 2008 21:58:16 GMT
Though I admired the hell out of this film, I feel there's very little I can say about it, very little I'm 'qualified' to critique. Most of the allusions and symbolism flew right over my head. I found it difficult to connect with emotionally.
Much like Across the Universe, actually. Although this is clearly more intellectual, and much more narratively and aesthetically innovative.
I agree with Kino's (now deleted) comment regarding visual semiotics.
Maybe it's too academic...? But again, I feel I can't say.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jan 10, 2008 22:15:04 GMT
Ben Whishaw was a tad underused. I will say that.
Maybe I should finally get into Dylan, if only to get this film... I do have a bunch of his albums downloaded. They've been sitting on my computer for four years.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 10, 2008 22:26:24 GMT
Maybe I should finally get into Dylan, if only to get this film... I do have a bunch of his albums downloaded. They've been sitting on my computer for four years. #^@&^&(%&*@&&*(^^%**^*^(&^%HRTDEG$W#@@%&^*
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Jan 10, 2008 23:16:44 GMT
Maybe I should finally get into Dylan, if only to get this film... Not to discourage you from listening to his music, but, Omar, bobby, Capo, et al, correct me if I'm wrong, but seems like cultural, biographical and legend/myth context would help more w/ the film than the music itself. (Key word, "more.") Scorsese's doc No Direction Home would definitely help the most besides Dylan biographies/interviews that Haynes pulled material from which I read he did. Haynes nailed down the feeling of the actual Judas scene in Scorsese's doc. A really underrated work by Marty; his best since Goodfellas, I think. Pennebaker's Don't Look Back would be very useful, too. Haynes also quotes shots from that doc. Pennebaker also released a supplemental documentary to DLB in '07; it's called 65 Revisited Other film documents that you might track down, thanks to the linked article below, The Other Side of the Mirror and Eat The Docuement. Read this review that cover references and puts the film into context (cultural, social, etc.). I think you all would love it: Copy and paste the full text link below b/c the "non"-full text article got the pictures covering paragraphs: www.villagevoice.com/film/0747,hoberman,78422,20.html/full
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Jan 12, 2008 15:33:30 GMT
Maybe I should finally get into Dylan, if only to get this film... Dylan alone doesn't interest you? The thing with I'm Not There is it's so difficult to review - let alone recommend - without referencing all of the external events to which the film relates. I've read reviews of the film that are passionate and "in the know", but because of that they are just as impenetrable and alienating as the film itself may be. "Too academic"? Possibly, but it may be useful to approach the film as an extremely good specialist documentary - for all its experimental technique, it plays out like a biography, really, assuming the viewer has some prior interest or knowledge of the subject matter, and then going on to evoke the broad feelings its subject matter might ignite. But this is different; this is a " post-documentary" (my term ). It knowingly comes after the critically renowned documentaries by Pennebaker and Scorsese; much of Haynes's film itself covers the same chronological ground - the early Greenwich Village years and the electric tour in England. It's quite a brave and liberating thing to do, to make a film so entrenched in its own references and yet never wag its finger, to always invite and encourage people to know more. That said, it's not all particular to a certain someone: the film is at once specific and non-specific (though not in harmonious balance - I'll concede it's "easier viewing" the more you know about Dylan). Note, too, the title itself and the fact that Dylan isn't seen or heard or given direct reference until the very end (Haynes admitting that, for all his "academic treatment", his film is as hollow as Dylan is rich?). Half way through I thought to myself that this could really be about any prolific artist who wishes to escape categorisation, in the same way that Last Days could have been about any alienated rock star. Thematically, I'm Not There is primarily concerned with Time and Identity (as indeed much of Dylan's oeuvre is, with many albums directly referencing notions of "time": The Times They Are A-Changin', Time Out of Mind and Modern Times, for example, and a lot of his music explores old American legend and myth and how identity is constructed, maintained and deconstructed in a society obsessed with fame). There's no linear narrative, no cause-and-effect progression, and as it goes on it becomes what people might say is a "trippy movie" - Dylan himself (Blanchett as "Jude Quinn") is on drugs for much of its second half, and you've got to be really patient in order to relate one scene to another. A lot of it's grounded in self-reference and intertextuality too - referencing other works, and not just Dylan's music, but the movies that were being made at the time in which the film is set, such as Fellini's Eight and a Half and Tarkovsky's Mirror. I think Haynes, from what I've seen, is excellent at capturing period cultures. I'd never recommend it for people wanting to get into Dylan - for that try Pennebaker's Dont Look Back (1967) or Scorsese's epic (in length, not in biographical coverage) No Direction Home (2005). Scorsese's in particular borrows footage from Dylan's own follow-up to Pennebaker's documentary, the little-seen, very rare Eat the Document (1972).
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Jan 12, 2008 16:03:00 GMT
Not to discourage you from listening to his music, but, Omar, bobby, Capo, et al, correct me if I'm wrong, but seems like cultural, biographical and legend/myth context would help more w/ the film than the music itself. I'm not sure. Yes and no. (EDIT: Since I've written this post, you're probably right.) I'll start with an example: Does knowing that a looped introduction to "The Man in the Long Black Coat" recurs several times during the Gere segment help one to better grasp the mysterious loner that Gere plays? The song itself, as it appears on the underrated Oh Mercy, is atmospheric and chilling, much like this segment in the film, but I know a lot of people watching it won't pick it up. Question, then: is this any different than an obscure song selection in any other film? (I don't know the answer, and in fact it doesn't really matter either way; the "Man in the Long Black Coat" introduction, regardless of whether or not people recognise it, adds a fittingly atmospheric tone to these scenes.) It's important and useful to note, I think, that the film is not a chronological biography. That might seem obvious, given the non-linear narrative, but my point is that "Man in the Long Black Coat", on Oh Mercy (1989), was released long after the Gere segments "take place". Literally, for instance, the Gere segments are a direct reference to Dylan the recluse ("a town called Riddle") who made The Basement Tapes (1975) with The Band. The important thing here is that all of the segments in the film, like the film itself, have a specific and non-specific presence. "Jude Quinn" ("JUDAS!", not to mention The Mighty Quinn) obviously refers to Dylan as he appeared in Pennebaker's documentary; Woody to his early folk years, Arthur Rimbaud to the Romantic "interrogated" by a media conference that might as well be a HUAC gathering, and so on... All of these have specific windows in Dylan's biographical chronology, but each one also represents an ever-present state of mind. If they didn't, if "the many lives of Bob Dylan" by which the film is inspired had no overlap, if Dylan simply made a name for himself as one thing then retreated and went into the next, there'd be no need for Haynes to chop up the narrative the way he does. No: it's significant that these characters overlap, that the obsessive compulsive shown in Quinn compliments the determination in Woody, which in turn reflects upon the stubbornness in Robby Clarke that compliments the need for fresh ideas and identities in Jack Rollins, and so on... I think these five are binded together by Wishaw as Rimbaud and Gere as Billy, the two most puzzling inclusions (the former for its brevity, the latter for its obscurity), but those two are the most quintessential, present in all of the other personae - the witty prophet who speaks in riddles and quips and obscure allegories, and the mysterious loner constantly escaping his own identity. The same applies to the Establishment against which he is perpetually fighting: the interviewer who suddenly becomes the "Mr. Jones" from "Ballad of a Thin Man" is necessarily and significantly played by the same actor who plays Pat Garrett, the authority against which a reclusive Gere can no longer keep silent (and so he dons a transparent but disfiguring mask in order to speak out...). As the film's about to close, a narrator tells us that it's like having the past, the present and the future all together in the same room. For all the times the Times have indeed a-Changed, there'll always be "artists" who wish to speak out against the Establishment: and neither artists nor what they speak out for (and/or against) really change from one generation to the next.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 2, 2008 20:09:30 GMT
How do you folks like the covers on the movie's soundtrack? Omar?
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Feb 2, 2008 21:07:12 GMT
I think they're great. "Goin' to Acapulco", "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carrol", and "When the Ship Comes In" are my favorite.
|
|
DA
Writer's block
I'm born again...like the Watergaters!
Posts: 104
|
Post by DA on Feb 2, 2008 22:35:51 GMT
I like the soundtrack. "Dark Eyes" is absolutely wicked.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 12, 2008 3:43:13 GMT
Maybe I should finally get into Dylan, if only to get this film... Maybe it's too academic...? I feel the above two quotes compliment each other very much; and, after seeing this film thrice on the big screen now, I must agree. I love it, but the more you know about Dylan the more you'll get out of it. Perhaps that's no different to knowing existentialism and appreciating Stalker (for instance)...? I don't know.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 12, 2008 3:49:07 GMT
I think that's pretty different.
But it's probably not that the film is too academic, it's just very esoteric. I'm sure if Dylan's life or music meant something to me I'd connect emotionally with the film without having to conduct any kind of analysis of it.
I did as it is.
|
|