Oscar History
Film Bitch History
Welcome

The Film Experience™ was created by Nathaniel R. All material herein is written by our team.

This site is not for profit but for an expression of love for cinema & adjacent artforms. 

Powered by Squarespace
DON'T MISS THIS

Follow TFE on Substackd 

COMMENTS

Oscar Takeaways
12 thoughts from the big night

 

Keep TFE Strong

We're looking for 500... no 390 SubscribersIf you read us daily, please be one.  

I ♥ The Film Experience

THANKS IN ADVANCE

What'cha Looking For?
Subscribe
Monday
Nov092015

AFI Fest: Hitchcock/Truffaut

Hitchcock/Truffaut has a kind of sacred place among film books. Though it's rarely assigned in class, since its original 1966 publication the collected interviews between Alfred Hitchcock and Francois Truffaut have unofficially defined auteurism, the role of the director in Western film, and - most obviously - public opinion about Hitchcock. The immediate result of the publication was to turn public opinion about the Master of Suspense from lowbrow entertainer to underappreciated artist, and to further solidify Francois Truffaut's image as critic-cum-creator, a critical distinction upon which the members of the French New Wave thrived. With a book this prominent in film history, a movie about the book is a lofty goal to say the least. Historian and director Kent Jones uses his movie as an unfocused if zealous love letter to Hitchcock, that ultimately falls short of its goals.

The movie Hitchcock/Truffaut attempts to be many things. On the one hand, it is a historical documentary which explains who Alfred Hitchcock and Francois Truffaut were and why their legendary interviews exhaustively analyzing every single one of Hitch's films was so important to film history. In this endeavor, Jones is primarily aided by the original recordings of the interviews. Unedited and untranslated Hitchcock is even more blunt and humorous than the published book let on. He gives a rather graphic explanation of the famous green-lit scene in Vertigo before suddenly cutting the interview short with a clipped "Off the record!" Jones includes the scenes that Hitchcock and Truffaut discuss, which allows the audience to observe critically with the directors' eyes and compare what Hitchcock says he's doing to the end result. It's a testament to Hitchcock's notorious control that there's little difference between what he describes and what appears onscreen.

This leads to Kent Jones's second goal in Hitchcock/Truffaut: a formal analysis of Alfred Hitchcock. As this was the primary motivation of the original book as well, parts of this can feel redundant. Jones brings in various directors to explain what they love in Hitchcock's films - Richard Linklater talks about time, Wes Anderson talks about precision, David Fincher talks about suspense, Scorsese talks about everything. The more directors Jones brings into the conversation, the more wide-reaching he reveals Hitchcock's influence to be. Directors who at first glance have little stylistically in common react with the same joy to discuss their favorite parts of Hitchcock's films. However, this formal analysis begins to drag, as very little new is discussed beyond what Hitch himself states.

That is the greatest flaw with Kent Jones's film: he doesn't add more to the conversation. Hitchcock/Truffaut was published nearly 50 years ago, but the movie doesn't have anything new to say about either the book or its subject. In trying to be too many things - a history, an analysis, a tribute - Jones's movie wanders aimlessly. 80 minutes spent with Hitchcock is never time wasted, but ultimately I wonder: why make this movie?

Grade: B

Oscar Chances: Low, though the Academy does like insider baseball.

Monday
Nov092015

Star Wars: The Marketing Strikes Back

Manuel here. I have been trying to steer clear of the Star Wars hype machine. I’m an avid fan as you all know so I don’t need to obsess over every extra footage trying to glean what this latest installment will be about. Alas, while catching James Bond: The Winter Soldier ahem, I mean Spectre, I caught that latest trailer after all. And while a trailer, as we all know, is by no means indicative of quality, I have to say I am very much eager to revisit this galaxy far far away. 

Abrams did a great job jump starting Star Trek and while Lucas's characters and stories are quite literally of a different world, the emphasis on practical effects and simple color palette suggest there's a chance this could be something special. And thank god we'll be spared any Jar Jar nonsense (though I will say, this wacko theory about that loathed character is funny, if all too ridiculous).

And so, I had to share these character posters that are making the rounds. I know everyone is already making a lot of the fact that Mark Hamill’s Luke Skywalker continues to be conspicuously (and intentionally, I’m sure) absent from the marketing of the film, but I have to admit that I wanted an Oscar Isaac character poster. If only to see his luscious cartoon pilot locks (what is it with hair and me lately?). And don’t get me started on Lupita; is her character going to be cameo-sized? I'm happy she's getting strong reviews Off-Broadway (enough for her play Eclipsed to already have booked a Broadway run next year) but for all the press she got when she was signed on for the franchise, I'd have expected her to be more prominently featured. [Update: No sooner had I published this that I saw the latest TV ad features her voice!] If she will be unrecognizable under CGI, I hope she gets to play more of a wily Bobba Fett than a tangentially villainous Jabba the Hutt.

And speaking of Jabba, did you hear that all “Slave Leia” merchandise is being pulled from stores? We know Carrie Fisher is not a fan (she reportedly told fellow co-star Daisy Ridley,“You should fight for your outfit. Don’t be a slave like I was.”). It’s a savvy and progressive move on Disney’s part though one which necessarily neglects both what Leia stands for and how the outfit in itself plays out in the film (I mean, she uses her chains to kill her kidnapper!). Yes, the outfit has since been co-opted and exploited, but does that really merit a wilful banishment from our pop culture lexicon?

Monday
Nov092015

Box Office: The Winner Is Bond... James Bond

Amir here, with the weekend’s box office numbers. The fourth Bond turn by the sexy but no longer enthusiastic Daniel Craig predictably ruled the weekend, scoring the franchise’s second highest opening weekend gross of all time. The highest number belongs to Skyfall, of course, and there was never any chance, with cooler reviews and less general excitement, that Spectre was going to break the series’ record. All things considered this is a great success for everyone involved.

Box Office Top 5
new Spectre $73m
new The Peanuts Movie $45m
The Martian $9.3m (cum. $197m)
Goosebumps $6.9m (cum. $66.4)
Bridge of Spies $6m (cum. $60)

The Peanuts Movie came second and, again, the numbers can be considered successful when one considers the younger generation’s emotional distance with these characters. Both Spectre and Peanuts have another week to spend at the top before their competitions arrive in the form of The Hunger Games and The Good Dinosaur.

New Limited Releases
Miss You Already
$570k
Spotlight
$300k
Brooklyn
$181k
Trumbo $77k
Peggy Guggenheim Art Addict $22k
In Jackson Heights $15k
Theeb $7k

On the limited side of the releases, Oscar hopefuls Spotlight, Brooklyn and Trumbo all entered the fray. Spotlight has the weekend’s highest per theatre average, which certainly isn’t too shabby for a film many are already considering the frontrunner. Whether these numbers can translate to success when the film goes wide remains to be seen. Meanwhile, Steve Jobs continues its lacklustre run. Is it just too soon for people to be interested in a biopic about him?

What did you see this weekend?

Sunday
Nov082015

Meet me in Brooklyn

Sunday
Nov082015

Interview: The Star of Philippines' Oscar Submission 'Heneral Luna' on the Subjectivity of History

Jose here. Since its release in the Philippines, historical epic Heneral Luna has been shattering box office record after record, not only managing to break even in almost no time, but also drawing very young audiences, some of whom might have taken advantage of a half-off student discount (take note Hollywood!). The film which chronicles the campaign by General Antonio Luna to combat American invaders in the late 19th century is directed with flair by Jerrold Tarog. Thanks to its commercial and critical success not only did it open Stateside in late October, it was selected by the Philippines as their official Oscar submission.

The star John Arcilla gives a ferocious lead performance as the titular army officer. 
Arcilla is one of the Philippines’ most respected actors, having made a name for himself as a star across television, stage and film. In America, he will be best known for a supporting performance in The Bourne Legacy, and his terrific work in Metro Manila, but as shown in Heneral Luna he can carry an entire epic on his shoulders. Despite the terrible reception that kept interrupting our phone interview, Arcilla also proved to be an incredibly insightful conversationalist, making remarks that made me wish I could sit down and talk history and politics with him for an entire afternoon. We talked about his process when playing historical characters, remembering the subjectivity of history and what an Oscar nomination might bring the film.

full interview after the jump...

Click to read more ...