Heaven And Earth Magic (1962)

USA
written and directed by: Harry Smith
comment: 31st July, 2015

I would like to see this film with a live musical score sometime, somewhere. As far as I remember from the history of animated avantgarde cinema, I enjoyed European directors more (and mainly Raoul Servais, and I recommed his "Harpya" the most), but Smith is kind of a different story. When it comes to the runtime, I will gladly give an hour of my time to watch somebody else's out-of-body experience, especially when I compare it to the amounts of time modern convetional film-makers demand the viewer gives them. And also probably because I will never take even so much as an approximate volume of drugs as Harry Smith to see these things firsthand. He is offering a lesson in friskiness against the prevalent sensation that everything about art must be serious and important, as well as extending a middle finger at anybody willing to be offended by such a trifle of a film.

Shadows (1959)

USA
written and directed by: John Cassavetes
starring: Ben Carruthers, Lelia Goldoni, Hugh Hurd
comment: 30th July, 2015

I am left speechless after a long time again. Most of all I got stuck with a feeling of how beautiful Cassavetes makes these beings look, and feel free to imagine anything you want under this description. And/but it is unfinished.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

Australia/USA
directed by: George Miller
written by: George Miller, Nick Lathouris, Brendan McCarthy
starring: Charlize Theron, Tom Hardy, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Zoë Kravitz, Riley Keough, Nicholas Hoult, Hugh Keays-Byrne
seen: 28th July, 2015, comment reworked: 28th August, 2017

At the very beginning thoughts like this crept into my mind: "What the hell is that? Who the hell is that? What the hell is happening?" My brain needed a while to start to grasp what was George Miller's ultimate goal. The first thing that got it was my heart: It was drawn in by passion (intense, driving, or overmastering feeling or conviction; ardent affection; a strong liking or desire for or devotion to some activity, object, or concept not dependant on rationalization) and it made me feel like I could follow Furiosa if necessary. (Charlize Theron makes me so much more happy in a role like this than in those basic "women power" films like North Country). Nobody, not even once during the whole film, uses the fact that Furiosa is female as a way to insult her. And that is so beautiful. I even managed to stay on my exercise bike for 82 minutes while watching Fury Road which is a record-breaking time for me. It is that much captivating.

Only later I began to realize that I'm watching a master class in showing, not telling. The subtle storybuilding nuances, where every opening situation is mirrored in a corresponding closing scene, where the original meaning is shifted and declares an evident character development. Characters, situations and ideologies are shown in medias res, the context can be deduced or imagined. This furious fantasy world works on a similar basis as Tarantino's Kill Bill - After I accept that gangsters and hitmen use katanas and follow honor codes, I don't have to question the logic of the story and everything makes perfect sense. The world of Mad Max work the same: It's crutial to accept that the civilisation reforming in the wasteland comes up with a few rules of its own. Dictator brings a special truck for drummers and a guitarist from hell on his war conquests. The man with unearthly strenght has wits of a small child and wears a necklace made from heads of baby dolls. The face of the most prized wife was scared by her own hand as an act of personal defiance.

Woman in the Dunes (1964)

Suna no onna
Japan
directed by: Hiroshi Teshigahara
written by: Kôbô Abe (screenplay + book)
starring: Eiji Okada, Kyôko Kishida
seen: 26th July, 2015

This is what happens when you're thrown into life. Or maybe after you run a pin through an antlion. (?)

What kept my mind busy a long time after the film was over was an overthought about one sentence the protagonist said (according to the english subtitles): "Men aren't dogs, you can't put them on a leash." In my head I translated that into my native language as "men" = "male humans", but what if he ment "humans", aha?! I did a brief research using an online dictionary and I found that Japanese does not distinguish the words "man" and "human" as both can be called by a single word (otoko), but "men" (hitobito) and "humans" (hito) are differend. But for the love of god I cannot seem to catch which word is the poor fellow using when he says that line.

And moving on: I don't understand him in different ways as well. He has an idea about making a ladder, but why does he never make one? But that's of course me polemizing the human nature, not me holding something against the film itself. Maybe I'm not human? Surely I'm not a man.

Targets (1968)

USA
written and directed by: Peter Bogdanovich
starring: Tim O'Kelly, Boris Karloff, Nancy Hsueh, Peter Bogdanovich
comment: 13th July, 2015

The opening sequence where we're watching an "archive" footage of Boris Karloff in pseudohistoric/horror stage set and the title "TARGETS" in giant letters pops right over it gives me an instant feeling of watching a modern (=innovative + reflective) film. The absence of background music makes a powerful impression and together with the ruthless editing underlines the absolute uncompromisingness of the whole creation.

I am fascinated by the total detachment combined with different levels and dosages of emotion in separate scenes and in the complete film. And maybe exactly the film not bothering itself with commenting or explaining anything is the reason why it remains misunderstood/underappreciated.

If I skip the great finale (which on its own is so eloquent and fairy-tale-like that to this day I don't really grasp how exactly did they make it to work so well and it's been three years since I first saw it) then the film still contains a lot of beautiful sequences of brilliantly assembled details, as for example in the scene when the shooter comes home and wonders alone about the house, looking at the relics of his own "life", as his family members' voices can be heard from outside the camera's range.

There are also some brief moments of naivety or clumsiness present, rising from the lack of experience on the director's part, or how else should I call it, but it doesn't bother me at all in the end because the immense respect for history (both of the world and of the craft) shown by Bogdanovich is more than enough for his adequate redemption.

-"I was astonished to see him here in Baghdad, for I have an appointment with him tonight... in Samarra."