Scenes I Love: Jim James Sings Goin’ To Acapulco in I’m Not There

Posted on September 15, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

When I’m Not There was first released in 2007, most critics gave most of their praise and attention to Cate Blanchett’s performance as one of the film’s six different representations of Bob Dylan. In fact, Blanchett was even nominated for Best Supporting Actress for grabbing her crotch and wearing a painfully fake mustache. When I first saw I’m Not There, I thought that Blanchett’s performance was overrated. Having recently rewatched it on DVD, I’ve changed my opinion slightly. I now think that her performance as “Jude Quinn” is probably the worst performance she’s ever given. Once you get over the fact that Cate Blanchett’s playing a man, the quicker it becomes obvious that she’s not a very convincing man.

In fact, on subsequent viewings, I’ve come to realize that the only part of the film that really works for me is the final section. This is the section where an aging Bob Dylan is played by (of all people) Richard Gere. This is the section where Gere is known as Billy the Kid and he ends up wandering through a surrealistic frontier town while searching for his dog. The town is full of people who look like they escape from an especially grim Fellini film and Bruce Greenwood pops up as Pat Garrett. When I first saw I’m Not There, this final sequence seemed drawn out and rather silly. However, on subsequent viewings, I’ve come to appreciate the fact that, with this end sequence, director Todd Haynes is at least finally being honest about being pretentious.

Another point in this sequence’s favor is that it features a haunting performance of Dylan’s Goin’ To Acapulco by Jim James and Calexico. The contrast between the heartfelt delivery of the song, the intellectual pretensions of the entire film, and the inherent Hollywood slickness of Richard Gere all add up to create a scene that I truly love.

Lisa Marie Goes Down On Mildred Pierce (dir. by Michael Curtiz)

Posted on April 4, 2011 by Lisa Marie Bowman

A quick note: By titling this post “Lisa Marie Goes Down On Mildred Pierce” I have now not only proven that there’s no dare I will not accept but I’ve also won a small but useful sum of cash. Never let them tell you that blogging doesn’t pay off.

Like a lot of people, I was looking forward to HBO’s remake of Mildred Pierce, featuring Kate Winslet in the role made famous by Joan Crawford. And I hate to say it but, as hard as I’ve tried, I simply can not get into this remake. Maybe it’s because the remake’s director, Todd Haynes, has apparently decided to use five hours to tell the exact same story that the original film told in less than two. All I know is that the HBO version has, so far, been slow, ponderous, and ultimately a rather dull affair.

As I attempted to stay awake through the remake, I found myself wondering how the original 1945 film compared to the remake. Fortunately, I just happened to have the original on DVD. As well, by watching the original Mildred Pierce, I could continue my current mission to see every single film ever nominated for best picture. (Joan Crawford won the Oscar for Best Actress for her performance as Mildred but the film itself lost Best Picture to Billy Wilder’s The Lost Weekend.)

Mildred Pierce opens with the murder of sleazy playboy Monty Beragon (Zachary Scott). Monty’s wife, Mildred (Joan Crawford), responds to the murder by attempting to frame her ex-business partner, the equally sleazy Wally Fay (Jack Carson). However, the police arrest Mildred’s 1st husband, the well-meaning but really, really dull Bert (Bruce Bennett). This leads to Mildred going to the police in an attempt to clear Bert’s name. As the police interrogate Mildred, she tells them (and the film uses flashbacks to show us) how she went from being a dissatisfied housewife to a succesful businesswoman to finally becoming Monty’s wife. Through it all, Mildred is motivated by the need to take care of and spoil her manipulative daughter Veda (Ann Blyth).

Seen now, Mildred Pierce is an artifact of different time but, as a secret history nerd, I happen to love studying artifacts. Like many of the films of the late 40s, Mildred Pierce‘s melodramatic plot serves as a reflection of a culture that, in the wake of World War II, was no longer as smugly complacent about how the world worked. As I watched Mildred Pierce, the thing I immediately noticed was just how much the film seemed to be suspended between pre-War and post-War culture. It’s the type of film that goes out of it’s way to acknowledge Mildred’s role as a “new woman” but, at the same time, still finds time to include numerous “comedic” scenes of various men leering at Mildred’s ankles.

(Actually, I guess they were supposed to be staring at her legs but, since this was the 40s, this could only be represented by an occasional flash of ankle. Personally, my ankles are okay but I like my legs better.)

Mildred Pierce is often cited as being a forerunner to feminist cinema and I have to admit I have some issues with that. Yes, the film does acknowledge that a woman can be tough and that a woman can be a succesful businesswoman. However, the film’s message ultimately seems to be that mothers who work will ultimately raise daughters who will become burlesque dancers and potential killers. Mildred Pierce doesn’t so much celebrate female independence as much as it fears it. If only Mildred had remained married to boring and predictable Bert than Veda would never have ended up as a murder suspect.

The question of ideology aside, the original Mildred Pierce remains an entertaining example of old school melodrama. Director Michael Curtiz was one of those “craftsmen” who, in the 30s and 40s, seemed to direct hundreds of films without ever really establishing any sort of unique style of their own. Instead, they simply used whichever style that would be most efficient towards dramatizing the script. For Mildred Pierce, Curtiz imitated the style of a B-movie film noir. It’s a good approach for this story even if Curtiz doesn’t seem to understand the shadows of noir quite as well as his contemporaries Billy Wilder or Robert Siodmak.

Of course, Mildred Pierce is best known as the film that won Joan Crawford an Oscar. I haven’t seen many of Crawford’s films (though I have seen Faye Dunaway playing her in Mommie Dearest) and I’ve got an unapologetic girlcrush on Kate Winslet but I honestly have to say that I prefer Crawford’s version of Mildred to Winslet’s. Because, as much as I idolize Kate Winslet, she doesn’t seem to so much be playing Mildred Pierce as much as she’s observing her. Crawford, meanwhile, sank her perfectly manicured nails into the role and pretty much refused to let go until she got her Oscar. Crawford plays Mildred as a woman so obsessed with survival that she seems to be perfectly willing to destroy the rest of the world if that’s what it takes. To be honest, it’s really not a great acting job but it certainly is fun to watch. Technically, Winslet gives the better performance but Crawford is a lot more entertaining.

(That said, I still love Kate and I actually would probably fall at her feet and say, “Thank you,” if I ever met her in real life because she’s really one of my heroes. Physically, I developed early and I had to deal, at way too early an age, with a combination of a physical maturity and emotional immaturity. By the time I was 13, I was so totally overwhelmed by the insecurity and uncertainty but then I read an interview with Kate Winslet in which she said, “I like having tits and an ass.” And that, to be honest, was the first time I had ever come across anyone saying that it was okay to like your body. So, anyway, the point of all that is that I love Kate Winslet.)

Crawford pretty much dominates the entire film but a few of the other performers do manage to make an impression. As Mildred’s ex-husband, Bruce Bennett is pretty boring but the other men in Mildred’s life are well-played by Jack Carson and Zachary Scott. Scott especially was well-cast as the type of guy that we always says we’re done with just to end up hooking up with them whenever we’re at our weakest. As Veda, Anne Blyth gives such a driven and intense performance that you actually believe that she could be the daughter of Mildred Pierce.

In the end, Mildred Pierce isn’t really a great film but it is a lot of fun and that’s a definite improvement on the current remake.

10 Films I Must See Before I Die

Posted on April 24, 2010 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I love movies. I love watching movies, reading about movies, and talking about movies. Perhaps most of all, I love the hunt. I love discovering movies or finding movies that had previously, for me, only existed in reviews or as a collection of screen captures. To me, there is no greater experience the watching a movie for the first time. (Even if, as often happens, that first time turns out to be the only time.) Listed below are ten movies that I have yet to see but desperately hope to at some point in my life.

1) Giallo a Venzia (1979) — This is supposedly one of the most graphically depraved Italian horror films ever made. If that’s not a recommendation, I don’t know what is. Actually, I haven’t heard a single good thing about this movie but it has still become something of a Holy Grail in my quest to see as much Italian horror as possible. This is largely because the movie is nearly impossible to find. When it was first released, it was banned in the UK as part of the so-called “video nasties” scare. (Trust the English to not only ban a movie but to come up with an annoying name for doing so in the process.) This led to it never really getting much of a release in the English-speaking world and, now years later, it’s only available on bootleg DVDs. As such, I imagine that if I ever do see it, it’ll be because I made a deal in a back alley with some bald guy who speaks with a Russian accent. Much as with drug prohibition, the fact that its “forbidden” has made this movie rather attractive.

The few people who have seen this always mention that towards the end of the movie, Mariangela Giordano’s legs are graphically sawed off. This makes sense as Giordano was always meeting grotesque ends in Italian horror movies. In Patrick Lives Again, she is impaled (through her vagina no less) by a fireplace poker while in Burial Ground, she makes the mistake of breast feeding her zombie son. In many ways, Giordano was like a female Giovanni Lombardo Radice. However, its odd to consider that while the sight of Giordano’s legs getting sawed off was enough to get the film banned, the sight of poker being graphically driven into her crotch was apparently totally acceptable. Censorship is a strange thing, no?

One last reason I want to see this movie — its filmed in Venice. When I was in Italy, I fell in love with Venice. (I also fell in love with a tour guide named Luigi but that’s another story.)

2) An uncut version of Nightmares in a Damaged Brain (1981) — This is another banned Italian movie. When Nightmares was originally released, Tom Savini was credited as being behind the special effects. Savini, however, has long claimed to have had little to nothing to do with the movie. As Savini, to his credit, has never been embarrassed to claim ownership for his effects (regardless of the movie they appear in), I’m inclined to believe him.

In many ways, Nightmares reminds me of a film that Savini actually did work on, Maniac. Not so much as far as the plot is concerned but just in the same bleak worldview and almost palpable sleaze that seems to ooze from every scene. The version that is most widely available on DVD (and the one that I own) appears to be the cut version that was eventually okayed for release in the UK and even cut, this is a film that remains oddly compelling in just how much its willing to immerse itself in sleaze. The uncut version remains elusive but someday, I will find it.

3) The Day The Clown Cried (1972) — You knew this one was coming, didn’t you? I think everyone wants to see Jerry Lewis’s never released Holocaust comedy. Supposedly, Lewis keeps the movie in a locked vault which I just find to be oddly hilarious. My hope is that, if nothing else, some enterprising filmmaker will make a movie about a crack team of thieves who break into Jerry Lewis’s estate just to steal the only copy of The Day The Clown Cried and sell it to the people at Anchor Bay. Jerry could play himself. I also think this film will see the light of day sooner or later. At some point, either Jerry Lewis or his estate is going to need the money.

4) The Other Side of the Wind — Orson Welles apparently spent the last few decades of his life making this movie. At the time of his death, the movie was reportedly 95% film but only 40% edited. Apparently, because of a whole lot of complicated legal things, the movie has spent the last 30 years under lock and key in Iran. Even if somebody could rescue it, the remaining footage still needs a strong hand to put it together. While I’m sure that many directors would be happy to volunteer to provide that hand, the two names most frequently mentioned — Peter Bogdonavich and Henry Jaglom — do not fill me with confidence. I’d rather see the final film put together by Jess Franco, who was assistant director on Chimes at Midnight.

5) The Fantastic Four (1994) — This is not the dull movie that came out in 2005. This apparently an even duller version of the same film that was made 11 years earlier for legal reasons. Apparently, Roger Corman would have lost the movie rights to the comic book if he didn’t start production on a film by a certain date. So, this film was made on the cheap and then promptly shelved. My main desire to see it comes from the same morbid desire that makes me look at crime scene photos. How bad can it be?

6) Le Cinque Giornate (1973) — This Italian film is apparently many things. It’s a comedy. It’s a historical epic. It’s a satire of then contemporary Italian politics. And most of all, it’s also apparently the only non-horror film directed by Dario Argento. This was Argento’s fourth film, coming after his celebrated animal trilogy and it was apparently an attempt, on Argento’s part, to break away from the giallo genre that he has since come to symbolize. Though the film apparently did well enough in Italy, it failed to establish Argento as a director of comedy and that’s probably for the best as Argento’s fifth film would be the classic Deep Red. Still, it’s hard not to play the “What If?” game, especially when it involves an iconic a figure as Dario Argento. It’s also interesting to compare Argento’s attempts to go from horror to comedy with the career of Lucio Fulci, who went from comedy to horror.

7) Cocksucker Blues (1972) — Robert Frank’s documentary of the Rolling Stone touring America was officially unreleased because of its title. While that title certainly played a role, it also appears that the film was unreleased because of just how much hedonism Frank managed to capture backstage. The Stones apparently went to the court to block the film’s release. Somehow, this resulted in a ruling that the movie can only be shown if Robert Frank is physically present. Mr. Frank, if you’re alive and reading this, you have an open invitation to come down to Texas and stay with me anytime you want. Seriously.

8 ) The Profit (2001) — The Profit is a satiric film about a cult. The film’s cult is known as The Church of Scientific Spiritualism and is led by a recluse named L. Conrad Powers. Sound familiar? The film’s release was (and continues to be) prevented by a lawsuit brought by the Church of Scientology. Say what you will about the Vatican, at least you can attack them in a movie without having to worry about getting sued or blown up.

9) Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story (1987) — Probably one of the most famous film that most of us will never see, Superstar tells the story of Karen Carpenter through the use of Barbie dolls. Director Todd Haynes supposedly failed to get the rights to the music he used in the film and, obviously enough, nobody in the Carpenter camp was all the eager to give him permission.

9) Can Hieronymous Merkin Ever Forget Mercy Humppe And Find True Happiness (1969) — God, don’t you hate that title? And, honestly, are you surprised that a film with that title is apparently history’s 1st X-rated musical? Anyway, this is a movie I’ve come across in various film reference books where it’s either described as a masterpiece or (more often) one of the worst movies ever made. Myself, I love musicals and if the musical numbers are mixed in with explicit sex — well, why not? But that title — that title just gives me a bad feeling. Another thing that gives me a bad feeling is that the movie was apparently the brainchild of Anthony Newley. I don’t know much about Mr. Newley but what I do know seems to indicate that he personified everything that most people hate about musicals. The film is apparently autobiographical and its about a really talented composer who treats the women in his life terribly but has a lot of reasons (or excuses) that we learn about in elaborate flashbacks and — wait, I’ve seen this movie. Oh wait, that was Nine. Anyway, Merkin was a huge flop and it has never been released on any type of video format. Yet, it has not been forgotten which can only mean that it must have really traumatized the critics who saw it. In other words, this is another one of my “how-bad-can-it-be” crime scene movies.

10) The uncut, original, 9-hour version of Erich Von Stroheim’s Greed (1924) — A girl can dream, can’t she?