Posts Tagged ‘documentary’

Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father

February 23, 2009

dearzachary

Filmmaker Kurt Kuenne began this home-movie scrapbook as a memorial tribute to his best friend Andrew Bagby, most likely murdered by an unstable ex-girlfriend. But Kuenne had to shift gears when the suspect fled to her native Canada and announced her pregnancy with Bagby’s son. Little Zachary was born with his grandparents battling the Canadian judiciary to bring his mother to justice and Kuenne just as zealously gathering material for a portrait of the father he’d never know. Then something even more horrible happened, and Dear Zachary had to change course again. The result is understandably jittery, and urgently provocative. With material so raw, the movie’s lack of craftsmanship sometimes works to its own advantage. It’s about as personal as a documentary can get. 

Scott Walker: 30 Century Man

January 24, 2009

scottwalkerphotoblog

If Scott Walker: 30 Century Man doesn’t quite know what to do with its subject, aside from revering him, well, who does?

Director Stephen Kijak, in this points-for-bravery, first-ever Scott Walker documentary, does at least shrewdly begin by invoking Orpheus, the famed poet-musician of Greek myth whose skills were serious enough to persuade Hades to give back his girlfriend. The idea is to make us think “wow” and “yikes” simultaneously.

And that is about what it’s like to witness Walker’s long strange trip from ’60s Britpop trio the Walker Brothers, who were not related or actually named Walker or even British in his case, to avant-garde recluse adored by fellow artistes as disparate as Sting and Radiohead and responsible for increasingly weird and infrequent recordings to which he won’t ever listen upon their completion, probably because even he doesn’t fully understand.

Yes, when Brian Eno says, “These are very, very spaced-out pop songs,” and David Bowie says, “I have no idea what he’s singing about,” the artist being discussed is nothing if not a serious one. Kijak may even figure he doesn’t need to work too hard; as an insidery profile of an ultimate outsider, this is music-doc manna.

Most of Scott Walker: 30 Century Man feels like having just been slipped an unknown LP from an earnestly intelligent fanboy friend who has locked the door and won’t let you leave without listening. For starters, just take the voice — that bewitching, reverb-abetted, somehow confidently tremulous baritone. Somebody in the movie says it’s beautiful and unpleasant at the same time, and that’s an understatement. One minute it’s as trivial sounding as some sci-fi ritual ditty sung by Spock in the original Star Trek; the next it’s, well, still kinda sci-fi, but with enough music-of-the-spheres seriousness to make you think the universe really is singing to you. Or just watch Walker go when he’s in his studio. How demanding life must be within his selective fraternity of random sessioners; how exactingly he gathers, say, the sounds of meat being punched for a piece inspired by the execution of Mussolini.

Just get over the idea that your leg’s being pulled, Spinal Tap-style, with that array of early solo albums: ScottScott 2Scott 3 and, according to the prim narration, “what was regarded as his masterpiece of the period, Scott 4.” Upon this last, incidentally, is inscribed a useful quotation from Camus: “A man’s work is nothing but this slow trek to rediscover through the detours of art those two or three great and simple images in whose presence his heart first opened.”

The engagement to be had here isn’t from parsing Walker’s mysteries, or making a case that he’s the peer of James Joyce or Francis Bacon or whomever. It’s about the pleasure of witnessing one man’s steady, uncompromising approach to his own unique artistic ideal.

Kijak also makes telling use of footage from archival performances, illustrating both Walker’s divergence from American popular music and his own individual consistency. Whether in a rudimentary TV spot from the ’60s or an actual music video from the ’80s, Walker wears the given era’s trappings awkwardly. Not because he’s unattractive; quite the contrary, as several people here attest. Not because he’s a poseur; even more people, including the man himself, will attest to the conviction with which he has shunned public attention. No, he doesn’t fit in because the trappings can’t trap him — or even seem to keep up. Quite clearly Scott Walker has always been ahead of his time.

Nerdcore Rising

November 17, 2008

nerdcorerising

OK, it’s a fair point that conscious hip-hop has become a little bit pious and practically oppressive. And if Talib Kweli wants to call his record A Prisoner of Consciousness, fine; he’s earned it. But even alternatives have alternatives. So here’s one: Instead of conscious hip-hop, where the flow is ever-so-smooth and the vibe is soulful and socially aware, how about self-conscious hip-hop, where the flow is spastic, the vibe computer-savvy and socially awkward?

We are talking here about making rap safe for web-addicted white-boy shut-ins from college towns everywhere. Oh, they are players, all right. Players of Magic: The Gathering and World or Warcraft. We are talking here about nerdcore. 

And we are watching in wonder and listening to the genre’s so-called godfather, the Bay Area-spawned MC Frontalot (né Damian Hess), as he spits the hook in “Braggadocio,” a signature track: “Now it’s time for a little braggadocio/while I swing my arms like Ralph Macchio.” 

It works on several levels.

The occasion for this drolly enlightening experience is comedian/filmmaker Negin Farsad’s documentary Nerdcore Rising, which is worth seeing, if for no other reason than written description being unable to do it justice.

No, Frontalot and his fellow geekstas haven’t exactly reinvented or revolutionized hip-hop–no more than Farsad has transfigured the band-bio documentary. But in each case, they’ve made it theirs. A couple of years ago, Farsad tagged along with the Frontalot crew’s first tentative national tour, in which were addressed such quandaries as why music made mostly on computers in relative isolation should be performed live; how to tie a proper necktie; what to do when the opening act gets fake blood all over your gear; whether nerdcore is viable as anything other than a novelty act or a self-contained sub-subculture; what it means when not everyone’s a fan; and what it means when someone actually is.  

Like, seriously. There’s that sweet girl from Florida who says she’s not a groupie but willingly drives 19 hours to catch a Frontalot show. And there’s a wonderfully tender moment when the musicians sort out their collective feelings about her–first having a little fun at her expense, then catching themselves and feeling ashamed and humbled and appreciative, then realizing she makes them nervous because, well, all girls make them nervous. 

Remember, this is a band whose song titles include “I Hate Your Blog” and “Yellow Lasers,” and whose completely dorktastic pre-show rituals include a group Wookie call. Oh yes they did. As keyboardist Gaby wisely observes, “There’s no real for us to keep. I think that’s important.” 

Farsad understands that the tribulations of adolescent male life plus the creative democratization of web publishing and desktop music studios equals something rather precious. She also gathers lots of pithy commentary to put the phenomenon in perspective. Weird Al Yankovic weighs in with a validation. De La Soul producer Prince Paul risks serious cred shrinkage with a cautious allowance that nerdcore’s fundamental sincerity is in fact the old-school way. “For those guys to do what they do really takes a lot of guts,” he says. But besides being brave, they’re honest, and “to me that’s true hip-hop.” And former Dead Kennedys frontman Jello Biafra cautions, “Be careful with your own stereotype; it could become a prison.” 

True dat. If Frontalot isn’t careful, he could become a prisoner of self-consciousness.

Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story

October 28, 2008

Writer-director Stefan Forbes’ slickly made documentary profile of the late, hate-inducing, intensely Machiavellian Republican strategist (and impish below-the-belt campaign wedge driver, and equal-opportunity destroyer of Mike Dukakis and Bob Dole, and proclaimer of pro wrestling as the only honest sport, and frustratingly not-half-bad blues guitar player) positively brims over with sour-grapes hearsay and character assassination. But you just know he deserved it, right? Yeah, as the missing link, as it were, between Strom Thurmond and Karl Rove, Atwater knew how to make him some enemies. Hopefully viewers in that camp will derive catharsis from seeing again how he got humbled and bloated and crippled and killed by brain cancer. Or maybe not: As journalist Eric Alterman observes, “Isn’t it a shame that he didn’t decide to become a Democrat? Because it would have been just as easy for him. He didn’t really believe in any of those things.”  Wait, so that’s the quality you most want in the good guys? 

Flow: For Love of Water

October 21, 2008

Your tap water might be making you sick. But your bottled water might be making you sicker, while also enabling the environmental rape of the American heartland and unconscionable extortion in the Third World. Yes, water is the new oil, and there is such a thing as the water-industrial complex, and of course it consists of greedy multinational corporate predators. Irena Salina’s free-spilling documentary, courtesy of Beastie Boy Adam Yauch’s movie-production concern, is about as precisely aimed as an unattended fire hose, and as structured as the resulting puddle. But there’s something to be said for the sheer force of full saturation. Flow’s benumbing humanist-alarmist muckraking ploys include historically hazy nostalgia for a bygone era before agriculture became big business and dams destroyed ecosystems and water rights got privatized, without accounting for the ensuing problematic population growth. How depressing to have to think it a mercy that chemical-polluted drinking water might be lowering human sperm counts. 

Soldiers of Conscience

September 25, 2008

This latest documentary from the Berkeley-based producing-directing (and wife-husband) team of Catherine Ryan and Gary Weimberg has a deceptively straightforward premise: “This film is about killing in war,” we learn early on from Peter Coyote’s narration. “And about some U.S. soldiers who have chosen not to.” As its title suggests, Soldiers of Conscience grapples with an apparent moral contradiction. It asks the questions we have presumed that decency forbids, and tests a counter-intuitive hypothesis that the call of military duty need not be dehumanizing by default. This involves chillingly intimate recollections from a handful of conscientious objectors, each rather astonishingly articulate, and from veterans who’ve taken lives without hesitation and will again if so required. It’s a modest, unpretentious film, and probably more affecting for it: Conveying not just the grimly harrowing circumstances of modern combat but also a real sense of the bright, mature and morally serious minds that terrible crucible has forged, Soldiers of Conscience amounts to a timely cross-examination of the human killer instinct.  

Cine Manifest

September 20, 2008

Hey kids, let’s put on a Marxist film collective! That, more or less, was a founding principle of Cine Manifest, the seven-member strong (and sometimes less strong) assembly of San Francisco filmmakers working from 1972 through 1978 to make politically potent movies that regular people could tolerate.

Judy Irola’s breezy personal documentary Cine Manifest, new to DVD this week, brings a fond, proud and wistful recollection of the group’s formation and probably inevitable dissolution. Together they shared credit for two earnestly humane and deservedly acclaimed features, Over-Under, Sideways Down (1977) and Northern Lights (1978), plus several shorter films of zany vitality celebrating each other’s birthdays, a good deal of infighting, and many, many talking-points memoranda.

The gang consisted of Eugene Corr, Peter Gessner, John Hanson, Stephen Lighthill, Rob Nilsson, Steve Wax and Irola–the only woman, whose membership the others had at first denied but reconsidered when she wrote them a note explaining how dumb that was of them.

Later, although the collective’s budgetary constraints compelled Irola to give up her Ms. Magazine subscription, she was able to offer much-needed feedback on the portrayal of women in the lads’ scripts, to point out that somebody had to clean the toilets (“I didn’t join so I could be your maid. Love & kisses, Judy”), and to provide the essential, starkly gorgeous black-and-white cinematography of Northern Lights, a docudrama about Scandinavian immigrant farmers in North Dakota co-written and co-directed by Hanson and Nilsson.

Cine Manifest, the movie, is a touch overlong and lacks external context; it feels like a private (which is not to say exclusive) pet project, perhaps better suited to a featurette than its own full DVD. But it’s an important testimony on behalf of Bay Area artistic ideals, which benefits from the perspective, grace, and good humor of hindsight.

“I think our achievement was not as filmmakers, but it maybe was as a little social experiment,” Gessner says. “It may not have any application to anybody else. I mean, no other film groups tried to follow our example, maybe ’cause they looked at us as a car wreck.”

An equally reflective Nilsson looks back on some of his ideas from the period as “pretentious as hell,” but forgives himself, and his comrades, because “we were all trying.” Nilsson’s subsequent career in particular has made an impressive case for the cooperative approach to filmmaking, most recently with his astonishing 9 @ Night film series, about life in San Francisco’s Tenderloin.

As for Cine Manifest’s brushes with mainstream Hollywood, well, the director of Rebel Without a Cause did once lie strung out in a sleeping bag on their editing room floor. “Oh my god,” Hanson says, “We evicted Nick Ray. Is that our legacy?”

Not entirely.

Proteus

September 16, 2008

If writer-director David Lebrun’s Proteus seems by turns like conventional biographical documentary, cleverly curated museum show, animated lecture in an upper-level college survey course and precision instrument of trance induction, that’s as it should be. The film borrows its name from the Greek sea god famous for assuming an infinite number of forms. Ernst Haeckel, a founding father of ecology, liked that name too, and accordingly coined the term “protists” (later “protozoa”) after discovering and describing thousands of these unicellular creatures. Lebrun’s movie tells–and, importantly, shows–Haeckel’s story. It involves Goethe’s Faust, Coleridge’s Ancient Mariner, and the occasional trippy montage of lovely, grotesque, endlessly shapeshifting microscopic organisms, all set to Yuval Ron’s expansive yet restrained score. The result is a bewitching, cinematically fluent unification of scientific method and creative imagination.

Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired

September 1, 2008

Probably no one would dispute the three most important facts of Roman Polanski’s life. First, in 1943, the concentration-camp incarceration of his father and murder of his pregnant mother by the Nazis–from whom Polanski, then still a boy and essentially on his own, escaped. Second, in 1969, the murder of his pregnant wife Sharon Tate by the Manson family–to whom many journalists wantonly presumed the director, then most recently of Rosemary’s Baby, somehow was connected. Last, in 1977, the “unlawful sex” he pleaded guilty to having with a 13-year-old girl–whose subsequent forgiveness still doesn’t change the corollary fact that Polanski has since been a fugitive from American justice, self-exiled to Paris indefinitely. 

Nor should it be controversial to suggest that these episodes remain inescapably significant to Polanski’s filmmaking, just as his work remains inescapably significant to American movies. So what can any new biographical treatment, be it a detail of the life or a full survey, on film or in prose, possibly hope to add? And what does it say that the two most recent efforts get by quite nicely without even interviewing the man himself?

As if faintly anxious about requiring extra justification, both Marina Zenovich’s recent documentary, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, and Christopher Sandford’s new book, Polanski: a Biography, flash their credentials early and often. As it turns out, Sandford’s formerly sealed court transcripts aren’t any more revelatory than Zenovich’s familiar ones are cinematic. Yet neither of these new journalistic endeavors seems superfluous, and we’re left to decide whether in the final analysis that’s to Polanski’s credit or our shame.

Not so long after the Manson murders made him a pallbearer for American innocence, Polanski found himself officiating the unholy marriage between American jurisprudence and celebrity journalism. Meanwhile he’d managed both to catalyze the visionary, personal filmmaking of 1970s Hollywood and arguably to pilot its irrevocable descent into indulgence. Thus our stance on the man basically comes down to which application of Jack Nicholson we consider more significant to American culture: directing him in Chinatown or borrowing his hot tub to dope and sodomize a minor.

With that in mind, Zenovich wants simply to reiterate that regardless of Polanski’s guilt or guile, his trial was a mockery of justice. That’s thanks especially to absurd encouragement from the testily star-struck judge Laurence Rittenband, for whom the filmmaker proved a formidable goad. Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired has much damning evidence to present against the media circus.

And Polanski: A Biography has more. One scene Sandford describes is so visually concise that it could have been a cartoon in the New Yorker:  “Amidst the commotion,” he writes, “one enterprising young man stationed himself at the front door, selling T-shirts inscribed with the slogans ‘FREE POLANSKI’ and ‘JAIL POLANSKI’.”

In both Zenovich’s film and Sandford’s book, Polanski comes across simultaneously as libertine and fatalist; as outgoing trouper and proud, brilliant creep; and as a major artist superbly matched to the technically sophisticated showmanship inherent to his chosen medium. Both of these accounts, while not approving, necessarily, or even entirely charitable, seem protective of their subject. Which is a little silly; if there’s one thing Roman Polanksi always has been able to do, it’s stand up for himself. This is a man who took it upon himself to clandestinely investigate his wife’s murder, suspecting his own friends enough to gather forensic evidence from them and send it to experts for analysis. This is a man who then got his memorably graphic production of Macbeth bankrolled by Playboy magazine while the actual murderers went to trial. No, we don’t need new biographies to tell us Polanski is chutzpah personified, but of course that’s why he still and always interests us.   

As to a context of his films, Wanted and Desired puts forth a few choice clips, then turns the task of synopsis over to the prim Mormon prosecutor Roger Gunson, whose preparation for the Polanski trial included a retrospective of his work–from which Gunson reasonably adduced a thematic throughline of “corruption meeting innocence over water.” (It’s probably as brilliant an aesthetic summary as anyone prosecuting a hot-tub sex scandal will ever hope to contrive.)

Sandford necessarily allows a broader view: “As well as two satanic-cult pictures, his canon includes psychological thrillers, faithful adaptations of Shakespeare and Dickens, a costume melodrama, matinee swashbuckling, Hitchcockian suspense, Thirties noir, excursions in absurdism and soft porn, sometimes concurrently, and a deranged Dracula spoof in which a Jewish vampire hunter, played by Polanski himself, repeatedly peers through a keyhole at a naked woman who happens to be Sharon Tate.” Not to mention an adaptation of Wladyslaw Szpilman’s 1946 memoir, The Pianist, for which Polanski became the oldest director ever to win an Oscar, in 2003. Arguably it was precisely that film’s Polanskian detachment that inoculated it against Spielbergian mawkishness.

But by then, Sandford writes, Polanski “enjoyed the kind of public opprobrium not seen since the time, thirty-seven years earlier, when John Lennon had remarked that the Beatles were ‘more popular than Jesus.’ A few rather desultory public burnings took place of books and posters of The Pianist, though these put the perpetrators in the morally equivocal position of vandalizing what was in effect a memorial to the Holocaust.”

Such is the peculiar power of Polanski, a survivor so tenacious that he overstepped the American myths of survivorship, and accordingly became, as Sandford puts it, “Hollywood’s ogre–that necessary figure.”

And so, in both Wanted and Desired and in Polanski, any pretext of new hindsight or of adjusting a cultural reputation seems, however innocuously, specious. Maybe it’s enough just to affirm Polanski’s irresistibly analyzable, ultimately inexhaustible mystique. As the director himself likes to say, in his exaggeratedly exotic accent, after what everyone else on set always figures is a final take, “Fandastic, fandastic! We go again.”  

Hats Off

August 21, 2008

Quite reasonably identified as one of “the 50 most beautiful people in New York” three years ago, when she was 90, Mimi Weddell has enjoyed a distinguished (if not famous) career as an actor, a character and a muse. She is someone who knows how to give the camera what it wants, and in Hats Off, Bay Area filmmaker Jyll Johnstone gently wonders how she knows.

Weddell, whose headshot might be in the dictionary under “a class act,” didn’t really get started as a public persona until she was 65, but apparently she’s anything but a dawdler. “Doesn’t time go really fast?” she says of her own drive. “It’s moment by moment by moment and you’ve got to grab it.”

She hustles, all right, sometimes enduring 14-hour days of cattle-call auditions, often all for naught. “I rarely get calls for little old ladies,” says one casting director who has worked with Weddell, “‘cause that’s not what the world is about anymore.”

Which must be why it’s so satisfying to see that, in the tradition of Dan Geller and Dayna Goldfine’s Ballets Russes documentary, Johnstone’s film has a wise, sly way of telling the commercially youth-obsessed entertainment industry to kiss off. A few spots of generically jazzy stock soundtrack music notwithstanding, Hats Off doesn’t patronize its subject or its audience.

Instead, it delights, with judicious selections from the Mimi Weddell highlight reel: out for blood in Dracula’s Last Rites, dozing off at the Nicholson-Streep wedding in Heartburn; stealing brief scenes in Law & Order, just doing it at the gym in a Nike commercial, and more. It must be said that Weddell’s gymnastic skills do impress–not because she’s old, but because she also seems to smoke like a madwoman.

The nutshell meaning of Weddell’s “rise above it” mantra: Try not to stay in bed too much and, as you age, you’ll tend to dwell less on life’s misery. Works for her, most of the time.

“If you don’t dance, for heaven’s sake, you can not aspire; you do not lift up from this earth,” she says. To which her daughter Sarah responds, “Baloney. Yeah, talk to me when you have to pay the phone bill and you can’t figure out how to do it. Talk to the earthbound girl.”

So there’s that, too. What really gets Hats Off past the potential for greeting card platitudes is its kind but clear-eyed appraisal of poignant family dynamics. Witness the telling detachment with which Sarah, who still lives with Mimi as an adult, calls her parents by their first names; or offhandedly tells her mother, “You probably wish you didn’t have children–they must have held you back,” one day while slicing Brussels sprouts; or chides herself with a mocking laugh for spoiling Mimi’s life by being a “complete schlump of a daughter.”

Mimi’s son Tom has a subtly wounded quality, too, and a bond with her that implies as much mutual admiration as mutual disappointment.

Why Weddell’s life warrants a documentary portrait at all, Johnstone sees, is that it’s ultimately a life much fuller and more unruly and therefore more affecting than Weddell’s self-cultivated image lets on.

“She’s a great success,” Sarah says. “She’s lived on her wits and her beauty.” It is and isn’t a compliment. 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.