Tag Archives: cinema

Baz Luhrmann’s “Gatsby”: The Colossal Vitality Of His Illusion

Posted on by
12

There must have been moments even that afternoon when Daisy tumbled short of his dreams–not through her own fault but because of the colossal vitality of his illusion. It had gone beyond her, beyond everything. He had thrown himself into it with a creative passion.

- F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby

When I learned months ago that audacious filmmaker Baz Luhrmann was working on a movie based on one of the greatest American novels of all time, F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, I was filled with deeply mixed feelings.

On one hand, I’m a fan of Luhrmann’s. He’s a gutsy, no-holds-barred visionary, willing to push the boundaries, to take risks.

I was a pretty solid Shakespeare traditionalist throughout my time concentrating in the Bard at Rutgers in the late 1980s, preferring stage and film versions of the plays set in the time period originally established by Shakespeare. And yet, Baz Luhrmann’s 1995 William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet changed everything, opened my eyes to the seemingly infinite possibilities available through the art of interpretation.

On the other hand, The Great Gatsby is a deeply special book to me, quite possibly my favorite of all books, a book that was, when I first discovered it in high school, undoubtedly the catalyst for my eventual pursuit of a degree in English.

It was the first book that I ever read cover-to-cover in one sitting, a phenomenon I’d previously thought neither desirable nor possible. I’ll never forget how I was given a copy of the book by a dear Humanities teacher in 12th grade, a man who opened me up to great literature, art, film, and music, whose teaching methods greatly resembled the Robin Williams character in the 1989 film Dead Poets Society, and I was so excited to read this book after his passionate introduction to it in class that as soon as I got home I dug in, refusing dinner when it was offered, turning page after page, basking in the gorgeousness of Fitzgerald’s prose, and, upon completion, I closed the book, embraced it against my heart, amazed by the story I’d just read, and the seed was planted that I would someday be a writer of some kind.

So, how worried am I, despite my fondness for Baz Luhrmann’s work, that this sixth attempt at a Gatsby film (five theatrical, one TV) will trample on a piece of fiction so dear to my heart? Will the movie capture the “colossal vitality” of Luhrmann’s, Fitzgerald’s, and Gatsby’s respective illusions, or will it be a “foul dust”:

No – Gatsby turned out all right at the end; it is what preyed on Gatsby, what foul dust floated in the wake of his dreams…

Well, judging by the first trailer available (see below), I certainly wouldn’t say that it’s an outright abomination, nor would I even go so far as Bryan Hood at ARTINFO.com and say that, “There’s nothing in the clip to promise any substance…”

By all historical accounts, the Roaring Twenties were very much like they are shown in this brief glimpse, and so Lurhmann isn’t really manufacturing anything here. If you disapprove of the focus on the decadence on display, then you’re starting off where character/narrator Nick Carraway ends ups, disillusioned with New York and it’s seeming, “first wild promise of all the mystery and beauty in the world.”

After all:

…[Gatsby's] heart was in a constant, turbulent riot. The most grotesque and fantastic conceits haunted him in his bed at night. A universe of ineffable gaudiness spun itself out in his brain while the clock ticked on the washstand and the moon soaked with wet light his tangled clothes upon the floor. Each night he added to the pattern of his fancies until drowsiness closed down upon some vivid scene with an oblivious embrace. For a while these reveries provided an outlet for his imagination; they were a satisfactory hint of the unreality of reality, a promise that the rock of the world was founded securely on a fairy’s wing.

Visually, you can tell that Lurhmann’s taking enormous pleasure in all of the lush Art Deco detail, and that, it seems to me, is exactly as it should be.

So, put me down in the cautiously optimistic column. I mean, what’s the worst that can happen? The movie could suck big time, but the book will always be the great, virtuosic romantic work that it always has been.

Video Fridays: Dispelling Stereotypes of African Men

Posted on by
5

Today’s Video Fridays installment could easily be a Tweet of the Day installment as well.

Chris Anderson, the TED curator, tweeted a wonderful and badly-needed video produced by African NGO Mama Hope.

Here’s a little something about Mama Hope:

Vision:
At Mama Hope we believe that there are enough resources in the world for every human being to live healthy, happy lives. We envision a world where resources are correctly shared across the globe to provide the tools communities need to thrive.

Through our projects Mama Hope has unlocked the potential of over 76,000 people in Kenya, Tanzania, Ghana and Uganda…and we are just getting started.

Mission:
Mama Hope works in close partnership with local African organizations to connect them with the resources required to transform their own communities.

All our projects are managed for and by partner communities themselves to ensure sustainability. So far, we have achieved our mission by funding the completion of schools, health clinics, children’s centers, clean water systems and food security projects.

The video is particularly noteworthy for how it takes a deadly serious subject and injects humor without diluting the message.

Shame on Hollywood for participating in the perpetuation of negative stereotypes of African men, and thank you to Mama Hope for reminding us all that there are realities beyond the movie screen.

Video Fridays: Woody Allen

Posted on by
8

It’s been nearly two years since I featured one of my favorite filmmakers — Woody Allen — in a Video Fridays installment.

Considering how much Woody has meant to me over the years, this is a regrettable oversight, and I’m happy to make up for it today.

It’s impossible to overstate the impact Woody Allen had on me growing up, specifically considering the arc of his career, from comedy writer to stand-up comic to comic actor/filmmaker to serious film auteur. (I will leave alone the unpleasantness surrounding his marriage to Soon-Yi Previn. Rather, I prefer to see Woody as just as much a flawed, and therefore human, being as anyone else, and I like to consider his career and artistic achievements on their own merits.)

Having been raised a Jew, I’ve always been hyperaware of and sensitive about Jewish stereotypes. To many people, Woody Allen represents a number of those — neurotic, intellectual, non-athletic, whiny, etc. — and yet he did something remarkable in the face of that: he embraced those stereotypes, stepped into the spotlight, and made nearly a movie per year for over 45 years.

Woody made it OK to be smart, initially by being both smart AND funny. But, then he did a very courageous thing. Risking the alienation of his audience, the millions of people who loved him for his comedy, almost over night he switched gears and started to make more complex movies. 1977′s Annie Hall, while still decidedly a comedy, exhibited a significant reduction in sight gags, deeper character development, and dramatic undertones that gave the romance in this romantic comedy much more emotional impact. And the very next year, the comedy was gone entirely in Interiors.

While Allen would go on a few years later to make Stardust Memories, a film that directly addresses his experience of making this transition and how it affected him, he first made Manhattan, which is, in my opinion, a true masterpiece.

It could be said that Manhattan signals Woody having hit his sweet spot. It’s as if Annie Hall and Interiors were thrown into a blender and out came Manhattan, a perfect blend of comedy and drama.

I haven’t even touched on Woody Allen’s genius as a visual artist, a genius he developed in collaboration with a number of great cinematographers over the years. Nor will I have the time to address the gradual decline in consistency in his work over the last half of his career, except to say that his work has probably suffered mostly due to his insistence on making a new movie every single year.

And so I’ll conclude by getting to the point, this week’s Video Fridays clip, one of my favorite scenes from Manhattan, a scene that captures so much of Woody’s sensibilities, as well as the romanticism that has underlied all of his work.

Waste Land: Vik Muniz & The Catadores

Posted on by
6

Last night I had the pleasure, better late than never, to see the 2010 documentary Waste Land, a deeply moving, sometimes hard to watch, yet ultimately inspiring and hopeful account of Brazillian-born artist Vik Muniz‘ three-year project at the world’s largest landfil, Rio de Janeiro’s Jardim Gramacho.

Muniz, who had already become known for using found objects and other unusual materials, such as peanut butter & jelly and chocolate syrup, took these ideas to a whole other level at Jardim Gramacho, fueled by a wonderfully idealistic and altruistic mission, stated at the outset of the film: Now that he has achieved worldwide artistic and material success, it was time to give something back, to create art that changes people’s lives.

The heart of the film is the community of Catadores — workers who pick through the garbage in the dump, gleaning recyclable materials — with whom Muniz forges a real collaboration. After spending time on site, talking to and getting to know some of the Catadores, a handful of them are chosen to be the subjects of portraits by Muniz, with all eventual proceeds from the works to be donated to the subject Catadores and the ACAMJG (the Association of Recycling Pickers of Jardim Gramacho). The working conditions are practically unimaginable, the lives of the Catadores are extremely difficult, but they work hard and are proud that they have chosen to be pickers rather than drug dealers or prostitutes.

Now, when I say that Muniz collaborated with the Catadores, this collaboration went way beyond their becoming subjects for portraits. (The portraits were produced from photos of the subjects that were projected, giant-sized, onto the floor of a warehouse, the images were then filled in using all manner of refuse, and high-resolution photos were taken of the finished pieces. Click on the photos included here and zoom in to see what’s really going on.)

From collecting the materials to be used in the portraits to actually helping assemble the pieces under Muniz’ direction, these people imbued the work with their very lives and experiences.

The most moving scenes of the whole film centered on just how connected the Catadores became with the portraits, all of them brought to tears upon seeing them in their completed state from the scaffolding above. They never dreamed they’d be the subject of something so incredibly beautiful, or that something so beautiful could be born from the ugliness of Jardim Gramacho. Later, one of the subjects, Tiaõ, travels with Vik to London for an auction of his portrait, where it sold for $64,000, and he weeps while telling his mother the news over the phone. Likewise, when Tiaõ and the other subjects are brought to the Museum of Modern Art in São Paulo for the opening of an exhibit of their portraits, they are all similarly moved to tears.

As New York Times film critic Stephen Holden puts it:

It is the first confirmation from the world outside the dump that their lives matter.

Having been born lower middle class in Brazil’s largest city, São Paulo, Muniz describes at one point that many of the Catadore families were from a similar background, but ended up in Jardim Garmacho due to unfortunate circumstances.

As a result, the film has a palpable there-but-for-the-grace-of-God undercurrent.

And so, you might ask whether or not Vik Muniz met his goal of really, meaningfully changing lives.

There’s a key scene in a cozy, modern home where Muniz and his wife are arguing about the long term implications of the project. Muniz mentions that some of the Catadores have asked to keep working for him after the project is over, stating that they don’t want to go back to just being pickers. Additionally, at this point, the decision had not been made as to whether or not to bring Tiaõ to London. Muniz’ wife seems to feel that there is an unintended cruelty to exposing the Catadores to a better life only to return them to the misery of the landfill when the project is over, but Vik says that if he was in their shoes and was offered a chance to have this experience, he’d still want to have the experience even if he knew that it was a taunting and fleeting glimpse.

Ultimately, at the end of the film, we learn that most of the subjects, thanks to the royalties from the portraits, are successful in leaving Jardim Garmacho, and that other monies raised have helped the ACAMJG found a library, medical clinic, day care center, and a skills training center to help the Catadores transition to better jobs.

Really, there’s no question that lives were changed.

There Is Nothing Funny About White Male Privilege

Posted on by
Reply

Poor Newt Gingrich.

It must be hard to live without a sense of humor.

Robert De Niro, on the other hand, recently told one of the funniest jokes I’ve heard in a long time.

Via TPM:

Newt Gingrich is incensed about a joke by actor Robert DeNiro at a fundraiser attended by Michelle Obama for the president’s re-election…

“Callista Gingrich. Karen Santorum. Ann Romney. Now do you really think our country is ready for a white first lady?” DeNiro said. “Too soon, right?”

Sadly, TPM also reports that a spokeswoman for Michelle Obama has told NBC that the joke was inappropriate.

There is NOTHING funny about white male privilege.

Video Fridays: O Brother, Where Art Thou?

Posted on by
4

Referenced in my post from this morning, I was thrilled to find the following awesome scene from the Coen Brothers’ 2000 film, O Brother, Where Art Thou?.

I LOVED this movie a lot for a variety of reasons: the usual Coen Brothers twisted humor, the old-timey soundtrack, and incredible performances all around, especially George Clooney who had never been funnier before and has never been again since.

Don’t get me wrong, he’s a fine actor, but most of the time he just seems to play variations of himself. As Ulysses Everett McGill, however, he mostly put himself aside and thoroughly became a different, goofier, more animated (particularly in terms of facial expressions) actor than I, to that point, had ever thought he could be.

Anyway, here’s the aforementioned gopher scene, with a bonus mass baptism thrown in to boot.

Happy Weekend, everyone!