Baisers volés - François Truffaut (1968)

I expected this to be a drama... I was surprised it was a lighthearted comedy! Instead of feeling sorry for his character he makes fun of him, taking the best out of his funny nature.

I was also surprised it was colour, it looks nice. The camera is nice. The editing... has strange things, but I liked it. Maybe the cuts are a little bold but I like it that way (I am really not sure who else notices cuts).

Antoine Doinel is older, he's not the rebel boy any more. He tries to be as normal as everyone else is... though he's a little dodgy. I think Jean-Pierre Léaud does a great job: he's comic without exaggerating, Antoine is a little confused and out of place but it doesn't really matter to him.As I saw the film I couldn't help but think about Truffaut himself, and really he couldn't have found an actor who looked more like him (even the hair!)

Baisers Volés

Antoine et Colette - François Truffaut (1962)

This is a short film, part of a collection called L'amour à vingt ans. One shouldn't expect more from it than what you would of any other short film (somehow I think it's a format not considered entirely seriously). Anyway, I think it works well for all 27 minutes of it - I have a very personal theory that an average short film can be 8-10 minutes and it won't be damaged, only very good short films can last 10-15 minutes and they will keep you engaged for so long... and there are very few excellent short films that can last more than that and still remain interesting and not bore you. You can say in those terms that Antoine et Colette does that.

It's not a big story or very innovative but it's really well narrated. It's also an incredibly modern storytelling, it's the kind of narrative that's still used these days.. it fools you so much that you forget it was actually done fifty years ago. 50! 



Antoine et Colette

The Robber - Benjamin Heisenberg (2010)

The Robber isn't a bad film. But it isn't a great one either. It's a film about someone who runs and robs. You don't know much about him or why he does the things he does. You can infer that he gets a kick out of the adrenaline rush. But that's all. It's a film with a main character that you don't get to know. That's fair enough but it makes a poor film because you don't engage in his story. You don't empathise. You don't even dislike him. There's no emotion involved, just you sitting there wanting to see how the story ends. In my terms, that's not what cinema is about.

The photography is correct, nothing outstanding. To be honest the camera from his point of view doesn't really work too well (at least not for me).

The sound. I don't really understand why in every car there is music. Every single one of them. No matter what the music is or if it's well chosen, that's not a good use of sound. There are quiet moments.. but I think trying to convey feelings mainly through music only is just too easy. Particularly because you still don't know how he feels. 

Der Räuber

La Pivellina - Tizza Covvi / Rainer Frimmel (2009)

Everyone should see this film. Everyone should make this type of films. Human, simple, kind with its characters...  La Pivellina is like a cuddle.

The story is set somewhere in Rome, real people from the suburbs living in a trailer. Circus people who survive as they can. Patti and her red hair is all heart. Adorable. There are no words to describe how amazing that little girl is. The work they've done to make such a young child act is really impressive. She is the film.

Some people like to call it neo-neorealism, I prefer to see it as a fiction with the aesthetics of a documentary. It seems to have been filmed in a documentary way. The camera is a close witness, not an intrusive one, a friendly viewer in the middle of this world. It's like the camera of the Dardenne brothers... only gentle, warm and loving.

The sound is also borrowed from the documentary. Ambiences, the world they are in. Everything is diegetic. What I like the most is that there is no mood music, there's really no need for it.

The narrative is linear. The story and the characters are enough to keep us engaged. No need for any artifice.

I saw this film some time ago and it touched my heart. Months later, it still works. It's still as touching as the first time.

La Pivellina 

Balada triste de trompeta - Álex de la Iglesia (2010)

The title of this film explains what the thing is about: Spain, from the Civil War to the times just before the end of Franco. It takes the title from a very popular song from a very popular singer/actor. I think this film is full of such references that are often missed. But that's what I liked the most about it. You could put them together with Distant Voices... in terms on how well they are true to their own social environment, even without trying.

It is a bold film. It's violent at times, over the top at others.. but again, he fiction characters are fiction... the context is real and that's the scariest thing of all.

Visually it's quite an impressive film. The art department did a great job, everything is very stylish. The sound is okay. Right now I can't remember the dubbing ruining everything, but I might have forgotten.

If dubbing is the tragic flaw of Spanish cinema, certainly actors are its strength. A film that has surreal moments needs to engage with the human side and most actor capture that from their characters. Santiago Segura is in the film for not more than 20 minutes and you would say he stays in it for the rest of the film.

The first scene was my favourite. A circus show is interrupted by the war. A child is left alone on stage while a lion walks in from the darkness. It's such an eerie moment, the atmosphere is so expressive... it's also a metaphor of what's going to happen.

Balada triste de trompeta

Zéro de conduite: Jeunes diables au collège - Jean Vigo (1933)

This is another innovative film, bold, subversive, surreal at times.. fun. Les quatre cents coups older sister (more humourous, less grim...). I need to see more of Vigo.

Zéro de Conduite

Sherlock Jr. - Buster Keaton (1924)

I don't want to forget I've seen this. There's not much to say about Buster Keaton because there's so much to say about him. A truly innovative director, someone ahead of his time, a filmmaker in love with films.

Sherlock Jr. is a simple film yet it has all the best of Keaton: innovation, a creative way of making films, a director/actor/stuntman challenging himself to more.

Sherlock Jr.

No Country for Old Men - Ethan & Joel Coen (2007)

I had see this before but I had do it again to analyse a few things.

This is a poster for Japan, I liked it.

The Coen brothers know how to make genre films. They take thrillers or westerns and make them their own. Not everyone can do that. (Not even Tarantino). This film has elements of the western but it's mainly a thriller. The best thing about it is the pace of the suspense. They are masters of handling information, deciding who knows what is key to this. They also know how to pace things. For this they use sound as their main tool. Technically, the film is impeccable but what's most important is the way the resources are used. It's not that the sound is loud and huge, it's just simple. It's got a lot of silence, moments of anticipations... and then something unexpected might happen. Perfect example of managing saturation and silence.

The actors are well chosen for their role. Nobody is over the top, just simple performances, you'd imagine that carefully led in a simple way. You aren't sure who's the main character because they all seem as important (they are clearly defined in who they are and what they want which never fails to engage the audience.

The film is so well put together that you forget it's an adaptation and not written by the Coens. I think that's what most impressive. No matter how good they can be with adaptations (and remakes) I'm not interested in their version of The Ladykillers.


No Country for Old Men

A Film with Me in It - Ian Fitzgibbon (2008)

This film is advertised as a "black comedy". Surely it's black, but not that funny. I mean it has its moments and ideas but not really... I have to say I laughed in bits but I didn't think it's great. Not too bad, not too great. Average. Perhaps the characters fail again. Too many clichés, perhaps some of the situations are original.

Technically, it's correct. Not outstanding but not badly done. Isn't there are a worse thing for a film than being average in every aspect? At least when you strongly dislike a film you feel a certain way about it.

A Film with Me in It

Whisky Galore - Alexander Mackendrick (1949)

Innocent comedy about alcoholism. That's about it. It's non-pretentious, simple humour. It borders the stereotypes sometimes but it's a nice film for rainy days. Not as good and entertaining as The Ladykillers, but still good fun. Not much to say about the technicalities.

This one doesn't have a remake. Could it be remade? Maybe. Perhaps an update in the photography and the way the characters are presented would be nice (without making it as bad as the new version of True Grit looks).


Whisky Galore

La Ciénaga - Lucrecia Martel (2001)

There are films that everyone talks about, everyone praise and nobody can really express why. This is one of those films. For the same reasons you're scared of watching them. Over ten years after it was released and unanimously acclaimed, I managed to see The Swamp.

First thing was to try and be objective and not hate it just because. And I did. I didn't adored the film, I think it was okay. I tried to understand what it meant at the time. It probably has a different rhythm and structure than most of the films at their time. It's very much a film about the North West of Argentina, rather than capital city based stories. That's the main innovation. It's about a bourgeois family, the relationships between them and with the people around them. But nothing happens. I always talk about engaging characters and empathy. These are empty characters, you just observe them, almost in a voyeuristic way. With pity or maybe despising them a little. You don't feel anything. There's no human drama.  Just everyday life. Even more boring than real life. Naturalism without emotion.

Painting a social environment that you don't normally see in films was a good achievement. But the best thing about La Ciénaga is the use of sound. Argentinian cinema doesn't have a tradition of good use of sound. Moreover, it has a "bad sound" reputation that almost turned into a cliché. Since this film I can see there have been changes and you can see sound is going somewhere and it is important now. My theory is that the most important change was done by emerging directors who were now trained at film school and were more aware that sound was also a narrative element of film (yes, films being audiovisual never gave previous directors a hint before)

What's so innovative about the sound? It also paints the picture. You don't have to make an effort to listen to what the actors are saying. You can feel the atmosphere through sound too (a film like this without the sounds of an approaching storm or the strong presence of nature wouldn't be right). The awkwardness of situations is even more awkward because of the way sound is used. Nothing outstanding or significantly more expensive, just a little bit of extra work and respect for the sound department. At the time this was a huge improvement.

La ciénaga