The DVXUser 100 Films Discussion - May 2007

[Erik Olson]

THE FORMAL MONTHLY DISCUSSION OF BENCHMARK FILMS AT DVXUser!

DVXUser has become known and regarded as an online "virtual film school". As with any good film school program, DVXUser should feature our own technical and critical studies courses on filmmaking. Part of that curriculum would include a regular, formal discussion of benchmark films.

The DVXUser 100 Movie Club will assign one film each month from the AFI's renowned 100 Years, 100 Movies list. In ten months, we will cover ten films selected by our members from the field of 100.


How will the films be selected?

On the first of the month, I'll post another batch of ten films from the AFI 100 Years, 100 Movies list. Through midnight on the 5th of each month, DVXUsers can vote on which film we should watch and then discuss at the end of the month or once members have rented and viewed it.

You decide which film you want to nominate. It can be a personal favorite or simply a film you've always wanted to watch, but never got around to. After you vote, maybe post a short plug on why you chose one film over the other nine.

Whatever film ranks highest will be the one we all watch after voting closes on the 5th!


What will be discussed?

Within the confines of the DVXUser rules of engagement (no religion and politics and so forth) we will discuss the film in the context of the world when it was released, writing, performances and techniques.

Subject to regular moderation, it should be an open discussion of what goes into filmmaking now and within the historical context of the film we're examining.

Here is the list for May, 2007. This is an amazing and challenging selection of films. Before PJ was a sparkle in his grandfather's eye, King Kong had a grip on Fay Wray and the American box office.


Gone With the Wind and Stagecoach were lavish, star-studded studio pictures in the finest traditions of Hollywood and who can forget Mr. Lemmon in Billy Wilder's masterpiece, The Apartment? As if it weren't enough, Mr. Lean (my personal hero) graces this list with The Bridge on the River Kwai and then there's the mentionable Platoon and High Noon. Oh, and then there's the matter of that little bird. What a mess.


Everyone should have plenty of time this month as I'm certain that all the SpyFest entries are picture-locked and ready for upload already! Welcome to the discussion!

GONE WITH THE WIND (1939)
THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (1957)
THE MALTESE FALCON (1941)
HIGH NOON (1952)
KING KONG (1933)
AMADEUS (1984)
STAGECOACH (1939)
WUTHERING HEIGHTS (1939)
PLATOON (1986)
THE APARTMENT (1960)

e

 

[Jeremy Ordan]

Platoon... Great choice!

 

[Erik Olson]

I'm going to reserve my vote for tie-breaking. After last month's participation, the last thing we need is a tie between Platoon and Amadeus.

e

 

[krestofre]

I picked High Noon ... and I have no idea why. It just seemed like a good choice and I think could lend itself to a different type of discussion than the previous months.

I'm glad to see this is continuing. After The Godfather discussion I was afriad it would die out.

 

[Erik Olson]

My thinking on The Apartment. A comedy should be fun to examine as everything to this point has been rather serious.

e

 

[krestofre]

A three-way tie? *Faints.*

 

[Jim Brennan]

I still haven't seen Kwai (The purported historical inaccuracies have scared me off thus far), but I always thought High Noon wa a bit overrated, and certainly not the best Cooper role.

I've seen all the others. I guess I'll get Kwai, and see how it fares against the others.

 

[krestofre]

For whatever reason, no local store has High Noon or The Apartment in stock, so I've ordered them. They're not shipping until May 26th, so I may be late on the discussion of those two this month. While I'm waiting I'll try to get to Kwai.

Three-way tie. Sheesh.

 

[Erik Olson]

There has to be a way to kill the tie. I'd like to save my vote for a tie-breaker, but I can't see the poll results until I vote. I love Kwai and The Apartment. I've got both in my NetFlix cue. High Noon is already in the library.

e

 

[krestofre]

I don't mind doing multiple movies. My three year old and two year old make it difficult to get that much focused watching in, but it's all good. If people are going to take the time to vote and affect the focus of these monthly threads then I wish they would also take the time to participate in the discussion. Seven votes for Godfather and one post about it?

Even in a tie situation if people would discuss just the film they voted for that would be an improvement. I'm always going to try to hit every film in the event of a tie, but it's not like that's a requirement. So in that instance I hope that the tie situation isn't frightening people off.

 

[chakamonkey]

I voted for Bridge Over the River Kwai because I had just seen it and the King and I. I was particularly interested in what makes movies "hold up" over the years while others become really dated.

For example, there's a segment in BOTRK where one protagonist has to make it back through the jungle to the POW camp. It felt like it was done in real time. I think the movie-watching public has learned the shortcuts over the years and we don't need to see every step though the jungle to have the monotonous & treacherous journey portrayed. That segment would be edited tightly and the audience would be given cues -- or they'd overlay some popular music if it were
going to take a long time ;-)

But I admit there are alternative explanations for why films are the way they are today. From xbox/PSP/Wii gamers to Xtreme whatever, we may just not be able to sit for slower pacing. The King and I is not an Action/Adventure movie, but I think the pacing held up better by today's standards. I can't speak for High Noon or The Apartment, because I haven't seen them yet.

 

[krestofre]

Wow! Discussion! Thanks chakamonkey. :thumbsup:

Film pacing facinates me. The ability for a director to slow down and be confident enough in the material, the actors, and him/herself to actually let a scene play and not interrupt it with frantic cutting is a skill that is much needed today. Sure there's a place for a Tony Scott film, and that's a fine style for the right material, but it became a fad that has stretched on too long. (For the record I feel the same way about ridiculous handheld work and multiple frames on the screen.)

I was thinking about this very thing a while ago when discussing Superman Returns with some friends (yeah, there's a whole Superman Returns thread, but hear me out). Pretty much everyone I know didn't like the film because they felt it was too boring. Anytime I hear that I immediatly say "Did you like Richard Donner's Superman?" They either reply "No" or "I haven't seen it." Superman Returns was paced like Donner's original. Perhaps more correctly it was paced like a film made before Video Killed the Radio Star came over the air waves and introduced everyone to MTV. As such I loved Superman Returns because I felt Singer has such emotion for Donner's film that he was complimenting it at every turn. It was obviously a conscious choice for Singer because the X-Men films have a much faster pace.

I like how you bring this issue back to the longevity of Kwai and films in general. I don't think that it's related to pacing specifically, but perhaps pacing is just a symptom. With material and performances that are strong enough to endure, maybe it becomes easier to let the camera roll and let the audience be engrossed in a scene instead of cutting to the next big thing.

More to come (from me anyway) as I sit down and watch Kwai again.

 

[chakamonkey]

Well, at least pacing is an angle that can be covered in all 3 films.

The other interesting thing in Kwai is the portrayal of cultural differences; the main juxtaposition being the Japanese with the British. It's so much Hollywood pandering to make the Americans the ones without cultural baggage. I like to be a little more challenged about my assumptions when I invest in one character or another.

To respond to your comments about pacing, I'm not sure an homage to Donner's work is best served by copying the pacing of the original. If the language of film has evolved then it is important to me that you are using the pacing in support of the story. If you want to do a period piece, then I understand why you adopt artistic choices of the period. I didn't see SR, but I'm guessing it was a hybrid of old and new. If a film slows down I want to come to some new understanding, not just be aware that it's a long arduous trek. You can now convey long arduous treks easier than you could 50 years ago. If it slows down and I don't get it, then either I'm just being dense, or the break in tempo took me out of the film for no good reason. Either could be true in my case ;-) If it slows and I develop a new understanding, then Bravo, Old Chap.

Ultimately, I think Kwai is great only in the context of its era. I'm interested to see how High Noon and The Apartment survive by contemporary viewing standards. I saw Lawrence of Arabia recently for the first time. It survives admirably IMO. Now there's a great David Lean film.

And I can't think of Peter O'Toole without saying,
"Damn you! I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star!"

 

[Erik Olson]

Yeah, it's really just an opportunity to watch and comment on the film you want to focus on the most.

If only more then three of us ever participated.



e

 

[Jeremy Ordan]

Was a winner ever picked?

 

[Erik Olson]

Any of the three are open for viewing. We need to formulate a tie-breaker option, where a moderator can cast their own vote near the end of voting. That's an easy way to solve this issue.

e

 

[Jeremy Ordan]

I'm yellow... and the only person who voted for Platoon.

In my opinion, E, this is your gig, you just pick the movie every month. I think that our membership has enough confidence in you to be able to pick a flick and lead the discussion.

Plus, that eliminates the week wasted with the voting and what not.

 

[Erik Olson]

Thanks for that vote of confidence! I felt that a democratic offering would increase participation. The challenge is that we're all so busy with our home, professional and online lives.

Last month, I got caught up in finishing a show and didn't have a chance to weigh-in.

I'd like to try one more month of it as a poll and see how it goes. I think having it as a sticky goes a long way in getting it out there.

e

 

[chakamonkey]

I'd suggest no more than 5 choices for a poll.

 

[Erik Olson]

I'm going to revive this sorry little thread!

This is going to take a day or so for me to build, but I want to go a bit beyond the photography discussion and really get into the performance, direction and production design aspects on Billy Wilder's somewhat spartan and certainly melancholy 1960 film The Apartment.

The Apartment IMDB NETFLIX BLOCKBUSTER AMAZON

The lobby of the Consolidated Life building. The jib operator in me really appreciates the quality of this shot. At first, it seems pretty straight-forward, but it communicates quite a bit. In one deft move, Mr. Wilder introduces us to the characters who occupy the insurance company building and gives us an early glimpse of the tawdry, immoral, nepotistic subculture at its very foundation. In one shot.

Another fully-fledged floor of the Consolidated Life office set. Here, within the swarming mass of humanity is one man. His unremarkable place within the larger societal order is revealed in this shot...

That's our man, C.C. Baxter (Jack Lemmon) - better known through the movie as Mr. Baxter or simply, "Bud".

The Apartment makes suprisingly spare use of the moving camera. There is little if any movement without justification. Watching the film through more than once, I started to deconstruct the visual devices employed by DP Joseph LaShelle.

Fran Kubelik (Shirley MacLaine) considers the phone call she's about to take with her off-again, off-again lover, Jeff Sheldrake (Fred MacMurray), a married man who happens to be C.C. Baxter's boss. She is recovering in Baxter's apartment after overdosing on sleeping pills. She dreads taking the call. There is a very long pause before she finally picks it up, building our own tension as she considers her next move. Half of this largely static shot is composed with Kubelik standing next to the coffee table, only her waist and part of her legs visible during her hesitation. I actually found myself craning to see what was above the frame. Finally, she sits to take the call and the operator relieves us by tilting up to bring her into the action.

For a time, C.C. Baxter has been victim to four mid-level managers who hold his future at Consolidated Life in their hands. In exchange for promised promotion, Baxter has given up any semblance of his personal life so that these "bad apples" may utilize his apartment for their extra-marital affairs.

His desk calendar is filled not with entries relating to company business, but the constantly-changing apartment loan-out schedule. One of the four managers is Joe Dobisch (Ray Walston), who places a call of desperation to Baxter during a moment of opportunity. As it is through the entire picture, the framing is simple, elegant and impeccable.

More later, thanks for looking!

e