What to Watch on Criterion Channel Oct. 1 to 15, 2022

So much crap on streaming, what’s a film nerd/nut, cineaste to do?

Ignore the splash screens, read this list!

Leave behind AI-generated suggestions of "more like this" that contain 90% stuff you don’t want to watch.

Definitions:

Film Nerd: You’ll watch Andrei Rublev willingly

Film Nut: No Andrei Rublev.

(I will do a separate post for each streaming service that has anything worthy)

What to Watch on Criterion Channel Oct. 1 to 15, 2022

Film Nerd

France (2021, Bruno Dumont) Really captivating film, such focus on the performances, far more range from Lea Seydoux than you see in a Bond film. Even if you don’t find this an artistic success (def. some debate out there on this film!),

watching mainstream star-focused French cinema (if you haven’t before) is a fascinating comparison to American films. They have a significant star system, with great flare. The general stylistic qualities of French mainstream films is unique and a breath of fresh air. Again, that's only if you don't notice Bruno Dumont's different contribution via his own very personal mise-en-scène. There's more to enjoy if your into the subtleties of presentation and framing of the story.

Cure (1997, Kiyoshi Kurosawa) The mise-en-scène of this one really draws you in. It’s a comfortable blanket, yes, a comfortable creepy horror-ish movie blanket. It's plot is dark and unnerving. There isn’t anything quite like it, with the antagonist’s slacker-murderous vibe unique in cinema, it makes it that much more unnerving. And something underneath that unseats us, as if that which we are not watching is percolating a truly terrifying evil in our lives that we'll never be able to spot. And will they spot it and stop in this film? They might not...

Eyes of Orson Welles (2018, Mark Cousins) Once I got over why this Irish guy is doing a personal 1st person narration (and "Who is this guy?") talking directly to the deceased Orson Welles, I found he actually DOES have good reason to be narrating this and the details learned about Orson were too good to be missed. It definitely starts out a bit weird, it's such an unusual approach, I strongly want to urge you to stick with it, as I learned more details and tidbits about Orson than I had before, and learned more about what makes him tick. If you thought that wasn't possible, this film really does that. (And Mark Cousins is the director of The Story of Film: An Odyssey (2011), I learned. So he's not nobody!)

Dead Man (1995, Jim Jarmusch) You’ll end up spouting poetry or wanting to read a poem (remember those?). If a film can do that, it's hands down the most important film in history! (But see if it does make you do that. Otherwise then it's not.) This is an incredible "poetic cinema" film. Very roughly drawing from the reality of the time its set, but grounded enough in it to spark a solid takeoff point for its poetry. It's really unique in cinema with is mood, pace and tone. Of absolutely all the masterpieces on Criterion Channel, this might be my favorite film on the entire service.

Until the End of the World (1991, Wim Wenders) 4-plus-hour version. Is this music good? Yeah, not bad.
Watch it as a substitute to binging dumb series on other platforms. Is it the greatest film in the world? No. Why is it so long? No idea.

Does it sometimes end a dramatic tension and get boring? Yep, but another one comes up, so it’s pretty good. And it's a huge all-star cast, you got William Hurt, Max von Sydow, Sam Neill, some German actors who's great, it's a great streaming show option, watch a little bit at a time on your lunch breaks.

 

 

  

 

Film Nut

Touch of Evil (1958, Orson Welles) (Film Nerds too for this one.) Watch it before it leaves 10/31/22. Yes, sure, it will pop up somewhere else, of course, but this is one of the meatiest delicacies of Orson Welles you can delve into.

His dedication to this role, while also directing it, indicates a real quest for art inside the studio system, a herculean task. Tangential note, I came away loving Mercedes McCambridge and wanting to know more. And he does that with actors. This is part of his art, the scenes mean something, the actors are given the time and support to truly embody these people and what they mean, and I think that's why the resonate so strongly with the viewer. The mise-en-scène and editing he uses is different from all his others and it intensely involves you in the plot.

You probably already know this? But the studio cut it, and this is the restored version: The restoration team used a mutli-page letter of his complaints Orson wrote to the studio to cut it exactly as he wanted, and you end up with this.

Desert Hearts (1985, Donna Deitch)– I’m personally watching this, I can’t swear how good it is. But I'm enjoying it, I think it's a unique little gem here on Criteiron. It’s not particularly artsy in mise-en-scène or editing style, but it is a very moving drama of both melancholy and romance that really resonate through understated and caring representation. It seems a unique tale for the time period it was released in. (Probably why I didn't hear about it at the time? I really never did.) It may be a true under-the-radar indie that was ahead of its time in subject matter/story respects (probably played successfully in New York, for example). If cinematically it's very straightforward, it makes up for that with the time it takes and the sensitively with which it's told.

Criterion is packed, so I’ll post more for 2^nd half of the month, stay tuned!

What to Watch on HBO Max Oct. 1 - 15

So much crap on streaming, what’s a film nerd/nut, cineaste to do?

Ignore the splash screens, read this list!

Leave behind AI-generated suggestions of "more like this" that contain 90% stuff you don’t want to watch.

Definitions:

Film Nerd: You’ll watch Andrei Rublev willingly

Film Nut: No Andrei Rublev.

(I will do a separate post for each streaming service that has anything worthy, starting here with HBO Max)

HBO Max What to Watch This Week Oct. 1 to 15, 2022

Film Nerd

The Méliès Mystery (2021, Eric Lange) Watch one man age through time:

No, but seriously, he’s a filmmaker, one of the first (almost the first) But he was definitely the first to do many things. This documentary is NEW which is something to be said for this towering figure to Film Nerds, and it has NEW information and, if you already knew a lot, it's got NEW perspective. It definitely reinvigorated my enthusiasm for Méliès, so I highly recommend giving this buried treasure a whirl.

 

Spielberg (2017, Susan Lacy) Run the gamut watching this after the above. Okay I hate Spielberg, there I said it, but even I loved this documentary, because it was him for himself, not trying to be anything else, they covered most of his movies, and they featured the film brat culture he grew up in and gave a really good impression of the historical setting, and the zeitgeist.

But there’s fresh interviews with Scorsese, DiCaprio, others! It’s a focused perspective of viewing an epochal time of transition through perhaps my least favorite lens, but the perspective is really too valuable to miss. And the number of times that his films were thought to be disasters (before they came out) does generate some sympathy to root for this guy. Sharing a fellow filmmaker’s perspective of what goes through his mind on set is really fun. Love him or hate him, you’ll know him better, and honestly that’s worth something.

For Heaven’s Sake (1926, Sam Taylor) As Harold Lloyd silent comedies go, people do not pitch this one to you, and instead are always saying to watch Safety Last (1923), but this one has some even more amazing stunts and very elaborate comedy bits that start from a simple idea and escalate to grand scope. There’s a couple of train stunts I really wasn’t expecting.

While I saw this in a theater out in the wilds of Agoura Hills at a Silent Film Society screening – and yes, Harold Lloyd does play FAR better with an audience of more than 2 people – to me, this did hold up on the small screen with good musical accompaniment. The film quality is also great, so while enjoying the comedy, you get a “you’re right there” feeling of back in time in 1926, esp. interesting as Lloyd always has that cutting-edge (for the time) approach. He seems the most irreverent, so if you want the smartest, winking-est comedy, it tended to be Lloyd, so you get a real sense of the “times” as well.

Film Nut

Last Night in Soho (2021, Edgar Wright) Ah, Edgar Wright what has befallen you. Too witty/edgy with Simon Pegg to be offered a vehicle of equal wit/edge without him. Trying to find your way without him in the modern film universe, but honestly not quite carving out a distinct auteur niche like all those you admire. But much more film-smart and engaging than most mainstream films these days. This one started a bit slow, but it gets cooking eventually. Watched the whole movie, didn’t realize that was Diana Rigg. (That's Simon Pegg below (I mean Terrence Stamp).)

The Batman (2022, Matt Reeves) It’s not that bad! I mean, it’s kind of weird to watch basically a redo of the earlier phase. The push-pull of keeping what they want from Nolan’s while trying to be new is pretty interesting. The dull deadpan acting of Pattinson and Zoë Kravitz pretty much sinks this from a strong recommend,

but honestly there is enough fun and scope and great cinematography that I do recommend. It’s especially refreshing that the film truly takes its time in many scenes. That is really the reason for posting this here, as we really need to fight against the mainstream ADD/ADHD presentation of many films. So even the tiniest sliver of anything that is still trying to be cinema might be worth a look.

Blue Velvet (1986, David Lynch) This is the point at which David Lynch went too dark. And it’s also the “film school” David Lynch movie (the one they show you a lot in film classes.)

It’s hard to say Eraserhead (as stupendously great as it is) is what David Lynch will become. He went Eraserhead --> The Elephant Man --> Dune and then this. So was the “David Lynch” we know really in the cards yet at Eraserhead? Couldn’t you say this is the first David Lynch film?

Stranger Than Paradise (1984, Jim Jarmusch) In the kitchen-sink splash screens we see when we log in, there’s just too much. More than I ever, I want to unplug to the simplest films, the least ADD, and imagine sitting in a theater having plonked down my bucks (paper money) to see this, and start watching and be like, “This is all that happens?”, and eventually not minding.

Ahhh, a breath of fresh air. Truly very little. Deadpan (well it's Jarmusch), and super-minimalist, you wonder how it got made kind of thing. It does have some recognizable faces John Lurie and Richard Edson, just in case you were too uncomfortable.