There is one intelligent film that I saw over the weekend that needs to be talked about here. It was released in the mid-90s and it often makes "Most Controversial Movies" lists, and for good reason. The film in question is none other than Kids. All I have to say is "Oh...my....god... I am amazed that this film was released, let alone even made". It was quite shocking to me because I have never seen a much more honest and truer portrayal of teenage life on film...ever. This film doesn't hold any punches back and it goes full-force. This is a generational wake-up call to anyone who has younger siblings or children near the same age group. I wanted to shut this film off, but I found I could not as it had a staying power that I could not ignore. Anyone who has seen this film knows exactly what I'm talking about, and for those of you who don't know about this film, I implore you to go and seek it out.
The movie ends with SPOILER! one kid raping another while getting AIDS. The movie basically portrays teenagers in the worst possible way it can, not realistic.
So in this honest portrayal of teenage life (spoilers) they talk about sex, do drugs, have some sex, beat a guy up, talk about sex more, do some more drugs, then have sex again, and the somebody gets raped.
As a teenager, this seems a little excessive to me. Maybe I'm just a really good kid.
Maybe talking about Kids was a bad move. But there is one film that is almost unparalleled when it comes to cinematography, and that film is none other than Stanley Kubrick's epic period piece Barry Lyndon. That still remains one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen, as the natural lighting and the setting is absolutely breathtaking.
On a total whim, I rented and watched Jean Cocteau's La Belle et la Bête (Beauty and the Beast) not expecting much. I was stunned after it ended and I thought to myself "Wow...they weren't lying when they said it was a masterpiece in the trailer." I encourage anyone who likes fairy-tales or has seen Disney's version, to watch this movie. The Beast may look primitive by today's standards, but it is an absolutely amazing movie that should be watched by anyone who has a shred of respect for movies at all. I will warn you that it is French with English subs, but I'm sure it won't bother most people here on the forums.
I've seen two Lars von Trier movies recently. The first was his latest film, Antichrist. A lot of people have criticized it for being misogynistic in it's depiction of a severely depressed woman trying, and failing, to cope with the loss of her son. The criticism is directed towards the character's belief, as the film progress, that she, and all women, are inherently evil. I see this more as an illustration of how deep into her depression she is by the final act of the film, and clearly Lars wanted to make a film about this subject matter while being as un-misogynistic as possible (he hired a misogyny-consultant for the film, and also includes many scenes of the woman's husband confronting her belief). While watching, I kept thinking to myself that calling this movie misogynistic would be like saying that about Blue Velvet. Both films deal with subject matter relating to women being treated horribly, but in such a way clearly meant to provoke discussion and not at all meant to condone. It's impossible to discuss the film without first bringing up that debate, but what should really be discussed is how skillfully shot and paced this movie is. There is another bit of controversy concerning explicit sexual violence in the final act, which I was unaware of until after seeing the film. Everything before this event, which I will not go into detail about because I think that the scene is more powerful if you don't expect it to go where it does, is incredibly restrained and brooding, dealing with the female lead's painful progression into the depths of her depression and the cold and distant male lead's attempts to help her. Highly recommend, if you're into psychological horror.
The second was Dogville. This was an absolutely brutal film to watch. Not nearly as restrained as Antichrist, it still involves expert pacing and build up to a terrific finale. Lars made this 3-hour piece feel like 90 minutes. Conceptually, it's a lot less surreal than Antichrist, which dealt with nature as a force that corrupts humans. It's about a small town which offers a woman in need of protection a safe haven from the mob. As the film progresses, the townsfolk begin to take advantage of her more and more, showing an increasingly darker side of themselves until the penultimate act, where if you think back to the people you were introduced to in the first scene you can hardly imagine that these characters are the same people, yet the pacing is so precise that you get strung along and totally believe the character development. In it's execution, it's quite a bit more bizarre than Antichrist. It's difficult for me to describe exactly how it's set up, so here are some images:
Within maybe a half hour, you'll completely forget that the events are taking place on an undisguised soundstage, since the acting is so believable. The final act in the film involves an event that you are sort of praying for throughout the second half of the film, and once exactly what you wanted to happen happens, you aren't sure how you feel about what you just saw, whether or not it was the right thing to do. In this way, it is similar to Funny Games, though it does not break the fourth wall, it's more of Lars subtly saying "well, you wanted this, now do you feel like a bad person?" in the same way that Haneke winks at the audience for watching a entertainment based around the torture of a helpless family. Recommended as highly as Antichrist.
Sorry if this sort of rambles, I did not expect it to be as long as it turned out to be.
Comments
The movie basically portrays teenagers in the worst possible way it can, not realistic.
As a teenager, this seems a little excessive to me. Maybe I'm just a really good kid.
The second was Dogville. This was an absolutely brutal film to watch. Not nearly as restrained as Antichrist, it still involves expert pacing and build up to a terrific finale. Lars made this 3-hour piece feel like 90 minutes. Conceptually, it's a lot less surreal than Antichrist, which dealt with nature as a force that corrupts humans. It's about a small town which offers a woman in need of protection a safe haven from the mob. As the film progresses, the townsfolk begin to take advantage of her more and more, showing an increasingly darker side of themselves until the penultimate act, where if you think back to the people you were introduced to in the first scene you can hardly imagine that these characters are the same people, yet the pacing is so precise that you get strung along and totally believe the character development. In it's execution, it's quite a bit more bizarre than Antichrist. It's difficult for me to describe exactly how it's set up, so here are some images:
Within maybe a half hour, you'll completely forget that the events are taking place on an undisguised soundstage, since the acting is so believable. The final act in the film involves an event that you are sort of praying for throughout the second half of the film, and once exactly what you wanted to happen happens, you aren't sure how you feel about what you just saw, whether or not it was the right thing to do. In this way, it is similar to Funny Games, though it does not break the fourth wall, it's more of Lars subtly saying "well, you wanted this, now do you feel like a bad person?" in the same way that Haneke winks at the audience for watching a entertainment based around the torture of a helpless family. Recommended as highly as Antichrist.
Sorry if this sort of rambles, I did not expect it to be as long as it turned out to be.