Coens, utterly NP and getting moreso.

[John Bailey]

>
>A few thoughts off the top of my head: In the Evil Dead series, yes, it is 
>the
>camera that turns those movies into something special. Also, of course, the
>parody/pastiche aspect which is probably only obvious to those interested 
>in the
>genre. The Evil Dead II changed my aesthetics for ever, and my aesthetics 
>are an
>important part of my life. The camera in film generally corresponds with 
>the
>narrator of a novel, and thus with the language in which a story is told. 
>The
>camera can be, so to speak, full of itself, and it can subordinate itself 
>to to
>tell the story. Nothing wrong with either of that, if it is well done (and
>what's wll done, of course, is wholly subjective). One has to evaluate 
>camera
>work in relation to the story it tells: It may detract from a good plot, it 
>may
>serve a good plot, it may elevate a bad plot into the realms of high art. 
>Which
>is to say that what is exciting in the the Evil Deads would have been 
>completely
>out of place in A Simple Plan (where we consequently find only one example 
>of
>what one might call a Raimi signature shot, to devastating effect). As for
>splatter and drama: I have always thought that the best splatter movies 
>have a
>lot in common with, say, "Titus Andronicus", Jacobean Revenge Drama, and, 
>as far
>as the horror comedy of "Evil Dead II" or "Re-Animator" is concerned,  the
>wonderful parody/pastiche of the genre called The Courier's Tragedy in 
>"COL49".
>It is almost all about sadistic and sexual sensation, it is, in fact,
>exploitation. And, what can I say: Those plays and movies are good, if not
>always clean, fun. But artists do develop their craft, and so, if you don't 
>mind
>the comparison, Shakespeare went on to write Hamlet, and Sam Raimi went on 
>to do
>A Simple Plan...
>

I agree with most of your points wholeheartedly here, and would throw in New 
Zealand's Peter Jackson as the Kit Marlowe to Raimi's Shakespeare. How 
irreverent we are being here. I apologise to anyone offended.

>I have never watched L'Annee Derniere a Marienbad, much to my discontent, 
>but I
>am looking forward to Moulin Rouge, which is in the theatres now in 
>Germany, and
>perhaps Lantana (what's the meaning of that title, by the way?).

Lantana is a species of shrub 'having dense spikes or heads and small 
colorful flowers' which is of some importance to the plot of the film, and 
seems a little *too* close to the title of Magnolia, considering the similar 
narrative structure and themes of both films. Unfortunately (in my opinion) 
Lantana is of the school of filmmaking which traditionally dominated the 
Australian film scene, namely the 'just dump the camera anywhere, roll some 
stock and let the actors say some lines' style. Very bland to look at, but 
extremely rich performances. It almost as if the camera is embarrassed to be 
there.

Moulin Rouge, on the other hand, though flawed, is a visual and auditory 
treat. If you have trouble dealing with song and dance numbers in the Big 
Lebowski, then you may find Moulin Rouge a tough one. Personally I enjoyed 
the vision of a fin-de-siecle Paris featuring mixing in modern songs (dozens 
of tuxedoed cabaret gents bursting into Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit as 
the camera swoops down upon them at a dizzy pace).

>
> > And for more contentiousness...I'm reading The Sot-Weed Factor for the 
>first
> > time, as it had just come up a few too many times on this list and I was
> > starting to feel like I was missing something. Yep, I was. So far, I'd 
>say
> > it's a much better book than M&D on many counts. Which I'm surprised to 
>find
> > myself saying.
>
>Oh, this is because you are oh so wrong...
>
>Best wishes,
>Thomas
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp