ZNAK SAGITE — više od fantastike — edicija, časopis, knjižara...

žižek je dobar za plitke zajebancije. kada treba pročitati nešto jako, duboko i zaista smiješno, uzme se bilo tko od starijih. po mogućnosti Nijemac.

Čim je pomenuo Lakana, mora da je u pravu. 

Za DušMana i sve fanove Maje Miloš!

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/klip-u-roterdamu.html

Za DušMana i sve faniove Maje Miloš i prvi trejler za KLIP!

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/klip-klip.html

Pogledao sam DOWNLOADING NANCY Johana Rencka. Dosta je logično pretpostaviti da je život ljudi koji stupaju u raznovrsne perverzne odnose preko Interneta dosta teskoban i uglavnom nesnosan. Ipak, nema razloga da i film o tome bude takav. Renck je okupio izvanrednu glumačku ekipu koju predvode Maria Bello, Jason Patric i Rufus Sewell i svi oni se ponašaju kao da igraju u nekom filmu koji zbilja ima smisla. Ali DOWNLOADING NANCY privlači pažnju jedino kada zbunjuje time koliko je nejasan.

Otud samo glumački trud ostaje nešto što je vredno pažnje i DOWNLOADING NANCY mnogo više igleda kao neka vrsta očajničkog pokušaja Marie Bello da nađe sebi ozbiljan i izazovan glumački zadatak u savremenom Holivudu nego domet u bilo kom drugom aspektu.

* 1/2 / * * * *

Još od FIGHT CLUBa Fincher je počeo da tone u sve dublju irelevantnost kroz filmove koji su s jedne strane samoživi a s druge potpuno lišeni dramaturgije i bazirani na tome da je Fincher toliki velemajstor da polako treba da se odriče svega što na bilo emotivnom bilo racionalnom nivou veže publiku, i otud se ređaju naslovi od ispraznog FIGHT CLUBa do potpuno dramaturški zalutalog ZODIACa. Ipak THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO je nova pregrada dna za Finchera. U svojoj 49. godini, Fincher ne samo da se pretvorio u visokotehnološkog Šotru, reditelja koji više ne vlada time šta je važno, šta je nevažno, šta je priča filma, koji likovi su nosioci, već bi se slobodno moglo reći da je Šotra u njegovim godinama bio znatno relevatniji. On je tada ipak snimio odličnu seriju PRIČE IZ RADIONICE u kojoj su postojali i priča i likovi, i emocije i određena idejna ravan.

U DRAGON TATTOO nema ničega na suštinskom planu. Ovo je film-slikovnica u najboljoj tradiciji LOTR i sličnih robovanja knjigama, a u ovom slučaju reč je o robovanju knjizi koja niti ima književni kvalitet niti je čitana na način da bi iko poželeo da se u njoj nešto očuva.

DRAGON TATTOO pre svega nema nikakvu dramsku nit. Film je ilustracija jedne istrage i jedne životne priče, a te dve stvari su prilično tano povezane. Film ima glavnog junaka, novinara Blomquista i ima njegovu saradnicu istražiteljku Lisbeth Salander. Ipak, to nije razlog da priča o njegovoj istrazi i njenom životu pre nego što ga je srela nemaju ipak neku snažniju vezu.

Međutim, ako ostavimo po strani taj usiljeni origin story, još je zanimljivije to kolika količina beznačajnih likova bez ikakve funkcije i neuverljivih a i prilično besmislenih događaja dolazi u naš fokus i biva nam prikazano. Fincher opterećuje gledaoca nizom detalja koji kasnije nemaju nikakvu funkciju i sve to, naravno, izgleda kao čista greška, nimalo ne liči na postupak.

Film je realizovan na tehnički solidan način ali un rediteljskom smislu je ravan, bez akcenata, bez potentnih scena, bez pravog dramskog sukoba, sa glumcima koji više galerijski izlažu svoje likove nego što ih zaista igraju sa punim ubeđenjem tako da na kraju sve deluje kao karikatura. Daniel Craig je naročito slabo postavljen jer se njegov lik nimalo ne promeni do kraja priče, a LIsbeth u interpretaciji Rooney Mare prođe nekakvu transformaciju, međutim njeno snalaženje na ekranu je krajnje pretenciozno, odbojno i previše bazirano na spoljnim efektima.

Objašnjenje misterije se u određenoj meri razlikuje od ishoda u romanu i švedskom filmu, s tim što je u šokantno slaboj Zaillianovoj adaptaciji ne samo potpuno uverljivo već i nejasno. Srećom u tom trenutku, gledalac oseti da je na kraju dvoipočasovne agonije pa je samim tim već i potpuno nezainteresovan za ono što je krajnji ishod svega ovoga.

Larssonov roman je bio simpatičan populistički fenomen, a Fincher je uspeo da nam izloži sve slabosti tog romana, ne samo zato što ga je tretirao sa više poštovanja nego što bi trebalo već i zato što je potpunio izgubio nerv da prepozna filmičnost i dramski naboj u materijalu na kome radi.

Englezi i Ameri koji fejkuju švedski akcenat su posebna priča. Fincher očigledno oseća problem zbog toga što junaci govore engleski a Šveđani su i to rešava na najgori mogući način. Kroz akcenat nam stvara utisak da su oni "stranci" - problem je u tome što oni nisu "stranci", oni su Šveđani u Švedskoj i uverljivije je da govore onako kako glumci govore inače nego da se izmotavaju sa "skandinavskim" akcentom.

Fincher se u ovom filmu malo stidi što je tezgaroš, a malo pokušava da od svoje tezge napravi nešto "više", i na tom putu uspeva da potpuno promaši pravljenje pristojnog filma. Švedska ekranizacija je takođe bila slabo gledljiva ali je Danac Niels Arne Oplev barem snimao neku mešavinu TV serije i filma pa tu niko nije ni očekivao ništa naročito. Od Finchera se po defriniciji očekivalo više, ali ruku na srce, odavno je jasno da on više ništa ne može da pruži...

* 1/2 / * * * *

Ode nam Miljan Miljanić, Stari Kadar čiji su uspesi i trofeji zaboravljeni u procesu sunovrata jugoslovenskog fudbala. Zbilja nije uspeo da dovede reprezentaciju u red, ali treba imati na umu da je Miljan između ostalog doneo poslednju Realovu titulu za života najčuvenijeg navijača tog kluba - Generalisimusa Franca, i da je po relevantnosti trofeja koje je osvojio jedan od najznačajnijih trenera u istoriji našeg fudbala.

Pogledao sam RUNDSKOP Michaela R. Roskama, flamansku krimi senzaciju. Roskamov film svakako spada u red prilično neuračunljivih nizozemskih naslova kao što je bio EX-DRUMMER od pre nekoliko godina. U RUNDSKOPu stvari su istovremeno konvencionalnije i radikalnije.

S jedne strane, RUNDSKOP je film koji obiluje originalnim rešenjima. Sama priča o stočarskoj mafiji koja koristi hormone kako bi uzgajala konkurentnu i isplativu stoku ima u sebi dosta svežine i glavni junak koji zbog svoje predistorije mora da uzima ogromne količine hormona usled čega se i sam pretvara u vola je vrlo uspelo rešenje. Isto tako odnos između doušnika i policajaca ima u sebi živost i zanimljivu motivaciju.

S druge strane, Roskama očigledno opseda nizozemska sklonost ka grotesknom i ona je prisutna od predistorije glavnog junaka do celokupne atmosfere provincijske varošice na granici flamanskog i valonskog dela, do samog odnosa prema telima, kako ljudi tako i stoke. Roskam inače dosta potencira tenziju između Flamanaca i Valonaca premda "dobrih" Valonaca ima manje.

Ono što ostaje najspornije jeste tempo filma. Mislim da Roskam forsira jedan sporiji tempo koji uprkos atmosferičnosti nema previše pokrića. Štaviše, mislim da taj sporiji tempo čini jedan već ekstreman i često vrlo mučan film još hermetičnijim a čini mi se da nije bilo potrebe za takvim zahvatom.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam THE DOUBLE Michaela Brandta. Reč je o filmu koji je je verovatno u nekoj fazi trebalo da bude bioskopski ali je na kraju završio kao DTV i rekao bih da je ta odluka doneta u toku produkcije. Film je režirao Michael Brandt, scenarista koji inače radi u duetu sa Derek Haasom. Oni su zajedno pisali ovaj film kao i mnoge blokbastere poput WANTEDa ali očigledno nisu uspeli da se nametnu kao dovoljno velika imena i da njihovu želju za režiranjem isprati neki major studio.

THE DOUBLE je poprilično old school film o dva obaveštajca sa mračnim tajnama koji su primorani da si udruže kako bi pronašli ozloglašenog ubicu iz KGBa koji sada možda radi za FSB a možda se ponaša potpuno nepredvidivo i radi za sebe.

Mentora koji je najveći stručnjak za KGBovca igra Richard Gere a učenika Topher Grace i u načelu to je potentna podela, međuitim, reklo bi se da su Brandt i Haas zbog budžeta dosta reducirali i pojednostavili scenario. S druge strane, saradnik poput Tony Scottovog DPa Jeffrey Kimballa očigledno nije imao puno sredstava za rad i Brandtov film izgleda kao vrhunska DTV simulacija bioskopskog filma ali ne i pravi film koji bi se zaista našao u bioskopima.

Ako imamo u vidu da Brandt nije pokušavao da se nametne sa nečim čega inače nema u bioskopskim filmovima ili da oživi nekumatricu koju su studiji zanemarlili, THE DOUBLE na kraju ostaje kao teško hendikepirani surogat bioskopskog filma i ne može se ubrojati u pozitivne trendove u DTVu.

* * / * * * *

Sa dosta godina zakašnjenja pogledao sam HOLLYWOODLAND Allena Coultera, film o (samo)ubistvu George Reevesa u kome je Ben Affleck započeo svoj kambek. Nažalost, Affleck nije u glavnoj ulozi, on igra Reevesa a glavni junak je imaginarni losanđeleski private dick kog igra Adrien Brody, u vreme kada je posle uspeha sa Polanskim još uvek odavao utisak da bi mogao biti leading man. Ipak, kao što znamo, Brody nije taj kalibar i ako imamo u vidu da je scenario Paul Birnbauma upravo i najmanje zanimljiv u tim fikcionalnim delovima kroz koje nas vodi detektiv, onda HOLLYWOODLAND ne uspeva u onome što mu je osnovni zadatak a to je da nam kroz fikciju kaže istinu o Holivudu i jednom čoveku.

Na kraju filma, mi o Reevesu nismo mnogo pametniji, vidimo da je bio okružen ljudima koji su bili sposobni da mu naude i to je otprilike to.

Ne čudi da su tako živopisne ličnosti kao Toni Lanier koju igra Diane Lane i Eddie Mannix kog igra Bob Hoskins uz Reevesa zapravo glavni oslonac ovog filma. U tom smislu, Coulterovo opredeljenje da se bavi fikcijom a ne suvim biopicom o njihovom odnosu jedino je moglo imati smisla pod uslovom da je bio spreman da izađe sa nekim pravim, definitivnim rešenjem Reevesove misterije. Na kraju, on uprkos toj poštapalici sa fikcijom ostaje neodređen, neopredeljen i u krajnjoj liniji istovremeno lažan i skrupulozan.

Ako tome dodamo da uprkos tome što se dotiče istinitih događaja i prikazuje ih, Coulter mnoge "detektivske" scene postavlja kao poptuni kliše, na ivici omaža starim filmovima i samoparodije, jasno je da nije dobro postavio granicu u odnosu "filma" kao postupka i "filmske industrije" kao teme.

No, sve ove primedbe na stranu, HOLLYWOODLAND nije LA CONFIDENTIAL ali svakako jeste obavezan film za sve one koje zanima istorija Holivuda jer uprkos estetskim nedostacima govori o jednom zanimljivom slučaju, i pokazuje uzore za razne fatalne žene i beskrupulozne muževe koje smo viđali kasnije u noiru a proistekli su iz stvarnosti.

* * 1/2 / * * * *

Pogledao sam BLACK DEATH Christophera Smitha. Moram priznati da mu je ovo, što se mene tiče, do sada najbolji i najzaokruženiji film. U suštini, BLACK DEATH je prilča o raznim neprijatnostima koje su hrišćani i pagani priređivali jedni drugima tokom srednjeg veka. Smith naravno pokušava da iz scenarija Dario Polonija izvuče jednu širu metaforu o tome kako se rivalske organizovane religije bore za dominaciju i kako su mali lokalni kultovi samo amplifikovana verzija velikih crkava i naravno sve to podvlači dopunskom tezom o subjektivinim psihološkim stanjima koja diktiraju ponašanje ljudi koji su glavni tvorci i egzekutori dogme, i rekao bih da ova opšta mesta Smith doživljava kao bitan deo svog iskaza. Srećom, film u osnovi funkcioniše kao ako ne u potpunosti žanrovska a ono bar žanrolika priča i izuzetno je dinamičan uz odličnu upotrebu lokacija.

Glumačka ekipa je takođe izvanredna i Smithu dosta pomaže u suštini B-podela sa A-kvalitetima kakva se može bez većih teškoća skupiti u Engleskoj. U tom smislu, posle izuzetno precenjenih žanrovskih radova, Smith najbolji rezultat pokazuje u filmu koji suštinski na nivou strukture jeste žanrovski, naročito ako imamo u vidu tradiciju WICKER MANa na koju se nadovezuje ali zapravo sam izraz je više okrenut priči i likovima. Reklo bi se da se Smith bolje snalazi u zahtevnijoj nego u kodifikovanijoj i rigidnijoj formi.

BLACK DEATH nije ništa posebno, ali je zato vrlo solidno realizovan primer ničega posebnog, a to je već za svaku pohvalu, naročito ako imamo u vidu Smithov evidentni napredak.

* * * / * * * *

Dir: Frédéric Beigbeder. France. 2012. 98mins

Household-word novelist, columnist, TV host and nightlife fixture Frédéric Beigbeder translates his sharp, dandyish persona and self-deprecating humour to the screen with agreeable flair in Love Lasts Three Years (L'Amour dure trois ans). This breezy, unpretentious comedy chronicles the imbroglios of a young literary critic embittered by divorce who hits the jackpot after writing the cynical title tome under an assumed name.

    Proust and Bourgoin exude effortless chemistry.

Affectionately poking fun at Paris literary life and modern romance in a way that should tickle domestic viewers and devoted francophiles alike, Beigbeder, adapting his own 1997 novel for his directing debut, elicits appealing performances from a cast suited to flippant pronouncements. These range from finely tuned epigrams to barely veiled nods to the intractability of the human condition.

While a few of the spot-on inside jokes won't travel, the overall tone is universal enough to entertain urbanites most anywhere. A trail of successful sneak previews and a spare-but-catchy ad campaign suggest a healthy reception awaits this Jan 18th French release.

Beigbeder, who knows a certain segment of Paris as well as Woody Allen knows a certain segment of New York, fondly lampoons the inherent silliness of the flora and fauna and movers and shakers of the city's intellectual/literary/audiovisual/clubbing spheres while painting a convincing portrait of thwarted mating rituals and heartache.

Clever opening credits deftly portray the idyllic courtship and rosy marriage of Marc Marronnier (Gaspard Proust) and cover girl-pretty Anne (Elisa Sednaoui). But bliss turns to indifference and then hostility and the former lovebirds are in divorce court before the opening reel is half over. Heartbroken Marc asks the judge if he can "appeal" the divorce.

While his divorced parents (Anny Dupery, Bernard Menez) are marginally friendlier than Kirsten Dunst's folks in Melancholia, it's not hard to see why their son might have some unresolved issues in the arena of romance.

After a failed suicide attempt, Marc commits his aphorism-packed vitriol to paper, going from a clean-shaven fellow to a replica of Joaquin Phoenix in I'm Still Here in the process.

The rejection letters he receives from several venerable publishing houses are zingers but an intrepid publisher (Valerie Lemercier) decides to accept the manuscript. Not because she likes much besides the title but because she has a quota of first time authors to fill.

Because Marc is himself a literary critic, the editor knows Marc's colleagues will be merciless, so she counsels him to take a pen name. (Beigbeder cameos in the reverie that leads Marc to his pseudonym.)

When the book hits stores and climbs the bestseller list, Marc has fallen hard for his cousin's wife, Alice (sexy, crazy-like-a-fox flake Louise Bourgoin). She hates lies but he can't quite bring himself to admit that he's the real author of Love Lasts Three Years, paving the way for major problems.

Stand-up comic Proust is very appealing as Beigbeder's stand-in - Beigbeder has admitted that the source novel is more like a diary of his state-of-mind after his own divorce over 15 years ago - while Proust and Bourgoin exude effortless chemistry.

Marronnier has it in for indestructible publishing phenom Marc Levy who, as an extremely good sport, appears as himself. An amusing set piece revolves around a lit awards groupie who rates her pen-pushing conquests in the sack. Iconoclastic rapper JoeyStarr, who made his mark with French audiences in Polisse, is dryly amusing as Marc's polymorphously perverse pal, Jean-Georges.

Beigbeder has fun with the 4th wall - Marc regularly addresses the viewer no matter who else is in the frame - and juggles references from Shakespeare to The Thomas Crown Affair. The film uses key melodies by Michel Legrand with respectful bemusement at what pop culture touchstones can mean in moments of both sorrow and joy.

Vet cinematographer Yves Cape makes locations in Paris and along the Basque coast look good enough to eat whatever the state of mind of each protagonist.

Malo Mas-Mehmetologije

http://www.dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/blog-post.html

Vrlo vešto napravljeno, zbilja.

Reprizirao sam VALKYRIE Bryana Singera. Nažalost, ni na novo gledanje mi se nije popravio utisak.

S jedne strane lepo je da posle RYANa postoji interesovanje da se snimi ozbiljan o Drugom svetskom ratu i činjenica da su se na ovom projektu združili Cruise i Singer pokazuje da mu se prišlo sa maksimalnom ozbiljnošću, međutim, rezultat je toliko slab, površan, tanak u svakom smislu, da ga samo budžet i ugled umešane ekipe čini upotrebljivim.

VALKYRIE je jedna od onih nesvesnih promocija nacizma proistekla iz neobrazovanja autora. Singer ne samo da je impresioniran imaginarijem nacizma sto u ovom filmu ne moze da prikrije, kao ni u APT PUPIL i X-MENu vec podleze onoj sada vec dosta prisutoj iluziji o casnom nacisti koji je superioran oficir, divan otac, hrabar ratnik i jasno mu je da je Hitler budala ali ili sta ce mora da mu sluzi ili mu se opire.

Stoga, meni su ovi iz VALKYRIE isti kao i oni protiv kojih se bore. Da su ustali 1933. imalo bi smisla ali 1943. oni su zapravo zeleli da spasu nemacku drzavu i nemacke kapitaliste pre svega kroz ocuvanje koliko-toliko samostalne drzave i primirje. Dakle, nisu oni bili casniji od Hitlera, cak bih rekao da je Hitler u svom ludilu isao do samog kraja za razliku od njih koji su bili oportunisti.

Rat je produzetak politike i koliko god mi vojsku tretirali kao profesiju i sl. ovi nacisti su itekako znali ciju politiku sprovode drugim sredstvima itd. Sve su to bili generali a kao sto znamo generali kad odu u penziju cesto udju u politiku jer je za dolazak do generalskog cina potrebno proci i `politicku skolu` odnosno postdiplomske studije o politickim aspektima vojnih pitanja i vice versa.

U tom smislu VALKYRIE je zalosno naivan film, narocito u sceni kada Cruise naglasi da ce prvo ukinuti koncentracione logore cim dodju na vlast. To je toliko oportuno da cak i iz ove vizure deluje kao spoj gluposti autora i perfidnosti junaka - Cruiseov lik kao da kaze `obustavimo ono sto ce nam najvise zamerati`. Da ne kazem obustavimo `ono jedino glupo` u Hitlerovom projektu.

Tim pre je Rommelovo ucesce u ovoj prici na neki nacin paradigmaticno jer on je dugo godina, to jest decenijama, profilisan kao `dobri nacista`, vrsni vojni strucnjak, strateg i sl. To je imalo dve dimenzije. Prva dimenzija je pre svega vezana za velicanje protivnika. Dakle, morao se stvoriti utisak da je pobedjen veliki protivnik, a veliki protivnik mora biti ogledalo nasih velikana, dakle divan muz, otac i strucnjak. Rommel se pokazao kao idealan za to - ucestvovao je u atentatu na Hitlera ali kao general nije imao problem da sebi objasni kako se sa vojskom obreo u DALEKOJ AFRICI. Dakle, Rommel nije bio zatecen braneci svoje ognjiste vec preko pola sveta.

Otud kao najmudriji film o ubistvu Hitlera biram potpunu fikciju, jedan od TV nastavaka DIRTY DOZENa u kome su Lee Marvin i ekipa poslati da sprece atentat na Hitlera. To je jedino sto ima smisla i nije cudno da Saveznici nikada nisu priznali nemacki pokret otpora kome BTW VALKYRIE daje omaz na kraju...

Singerov rediteljski postupak je prilično neopredeljen. On svakako u pojedinim scenama stvara tenziju, naročito u onim najjednostavnijim situacijama za postavljanje suspensea kao što je donošenje i aktiviranje bombe. Međutim, u gloalu, tenzije gotovo da nema. Kada se na oko pola filma konačno postavi bomba, ključni aspekt cele akcije a to je puč i preuzimanje vlasti dat je bez ikakve tenzije kroz puko nabrajanje događaja.

Isto tako čak ni Cruise koji dominira na ekranu i dobija najviše prostora za igru ne uspeva da izgradi pravi karakter a ostatak glumačke ekipe koja je izvrsna na papiru ne uspeva to da sprovede na ekranu. Bill Nighy doduše uspeva da šmira "ono svoje", i Tom Hollander pravi simpatičnu minijaturu ali Branagh je recimo potpuno neiskorišćen.

VALKYRIE je mogao da bude znatno bolji film, ali to nije ključni problem. Ako ostavimo po strani greške u realizaciji, ovo je film koji po prvi put načinje temu dosta rasprostranjene skepse među nacistima prema Hitleru. Naravno, sam von Stauffenbergov plan je ekranizovan više puta pre ovog filma, ali do sada nije bilo filma ovako visokih ambicija i široke distribucije koji je pokušavao da zađe iza one već uspostavljene slike o nacističkoj Nemačkoj kao monolitnom režimu u kome nije bilo nikakvih trzavica i opozicije.

Umesto toga, Singer nam prikazuje novu vrstu klišea gde se maltene sukobe nacisti idealisti sa nacistima budalama, ali u tom crno-belom pogledu na stvari, on po prvi put posle Hitlerove kinematografije stvara ideal naciste na ekranu, pokazujući da su danas oni u najmanju ruku pretvoreni iz istorijske činjenice u puke filmske miteme.

* * 1/2 / * * * *

Reprizirao sam THE RECKONING Paul McGuigana, ekranizaciju romana Barry Unswortham dobitnika Bookerove nagrade, i na novo gledanje ostavio mi je snažniji utisak nego na prvo. McGuigan je uspeo da napravi izuzetno vešt spoj estetizacije i realizma kad je reč o pristupu četrnaestovekovnoj Engleskoj, sa glumcima koji su sposobni da odigraju ta oba efekta i izuzetnim lokacijama.

Glavni McGuiganovi glumci imaju movie star looks ali ni Paul Bettany ni Tom Hardy ni Gina McKee ne deluju deplasirano kada se smeste uz face koje prolaze kao srednjevekovna sirotinja. Jedini koji u toj podeli štrči u izvesnoj meri je Vincent Cassel koji nedovoljno brani svoj lik glavnog negativca.

McGuigan prevashodno jako vešto vlada ritmom tako da u scenama pozorišne igre koje su integrisane u samui priču i imaju ključnu ulogu on uspeva da udahne izuzetnu energiju naivnim srednjevekovnim moralitetima i na neki način THE RECKONING je izuzetno ubedljivo objašnjenje značaja pozorišta u tadašnjem društvu. U izvesnom smislu, deluje gotovo paradoksalno da je McGuiganov film možda efektniji put za objašnjavanje srednjevekovnog pozorišta od pozorišta samog.

S druge strane, pozorišnici u ovom filmu dele neke od ambicija sa savremenim teatarskim stvaraocima ali McGuigan u Unsworthovom romanu stvara ambijent u kome ta ambicija može da se ostvari u potpunosti. No, upravo u domenu odnosa prema teatru, THE RECKONING dostiže možda i najznačajnije domete na idejnom planu.

Drugi značajan idejni plan je politika koju Unsworth i McGuigan pokazuju kao izuzetno savremenu iako je srednjevekovna - sa zločinom koji se toleriše dok od zločinca ima koristi i okretanjem tih dela protiv kad mu prođe rok trajanja. U tom smislu, THE RECKONING ne nudi tipičan prikaz Srednjeg Veka sa histeričnim strahom od crkve i kuge već je znatno smireniji i nudi likovima više opcija.

Sve do samog kraja THE RECKONING stoji kao vrlo ubedljiv i uzbudljiv film a ni kraj ga ne devalvira previše. Uprkos tome što poslednjih godina impresionira radovima kao što su film PUSH i serija SHERLOCK, McGuigan nikada kasnije nije imao film ovakvog dometa i ambicije. Ipak, ako imamo u vidu da je najbolje radove imao pre odlaska u Holivud, ostaje nada da će sa dobrim radovima nastaviti i sada kada više nije tamo.

* * * 1/2 / * * * *

1990. je izašao TV film THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER prilično ambiciozan film sniman na hrvatskom lokacijama koje spontano evociraju atmosferu nacističke Nemačke, naročito u tom trenutku.

Von Stauffenberga igra Brad Davis, koga znamo iz MIDNIGHT EXPRESSa gde je ostvario jednu od najupečatljivijih uloga u istoriji, a ovde je verovatno najgori glumac u podeli, sa teatralnom i početničkom glumom kakva se ne bi očekivala od glumca u punoj zrelosti. Nažalost, ovo je bila jedna od Davisovih poslednjih uloga pa ne čudi da je pred svoj prerani kraj bio dosta daleko od najbolje forme.

Reditelj Lawrence Schiller je stara televizijska faca i svakako je u rediteljskom smislu imao i uspelijih izdanja od THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER. Međutim, na nivou realizacije, ako se izuzme Davisova skandalozna gluma na svim nivoima, reč je o TV filmu koji stoji relativno pristojno.

Ono što su razlike u odnosu na VALKYRIE pored formalnih a to je da THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER kreće iz flešbeka, i da se na kraju izneti istorijski podaci recimo za generala Fromma razlikuju, i sam prikaz Frommovog stava se razllikuje. Kod Singera je Fromm drugačiji, karikaturalniji nego kod Elkinsa, i dok je kod Elkinsa on donekle tolerantan prema ideji puča on ne traži da bude glavnokomandujući vojske već samo da ne bude sklonjen. To je najkrupnija razlika u iznošenju istorijskih činjenica.

Otsale se razlliku u detaljima, recimo kod Elkinsa je Rommel uključeniji a Goebbels ne stavi cijanid pod jezik već ga spremi u džep za svaki slučaj.

U pogledu "ukidanja logora" i ovde Stauffenberg inisitira na tome ali ipak u drugačijem kontekstu, više pragmatično u smislu da je to stvar "nemačke unutrašnje politike koja iritira Saveznike". Isto tako Elkins uvodi motiv straha aristokratije i old money ekipe od Himmlera i njegovog izrazito antiaristokratskog stava. Očigledno je da deo nemačke elite uprkos famoznom "dogovoru elita" nije simpatisao socijalistički aspekt nacionalsocijalizma ali mu je on odgovarao u periodu planske privrede kao vid represije koji je omogućio izvesne vidove tehnološkog i infrastrukturnog progresa kao i razvoj vojne industrije. Dakle, Elkins načinje pričo o klasnoj raslojenosti u samom vrhu Trećeg Rajha i otud je automatski produbljeniji od Singerovog filma.

Zanimljiva razlika između dva filma je to što Von Stauffebnerg kod Singera ima nerazdvojnog ađutanta kao i u drugim ekranizacijama, i kod Singera je jasna homoerotska dimenzija, naročito kada ađutant primi metak umesto starešine otpozadi na streljanju što je navedeno kao istorijska činjenica a kod Elkinsa je prikazano obično streljanje. Ovde nema ađutanta uopšte, von Haeften se ne pojavljuje ali se zato homoerotizam čuva za Axel von dem Busschea koji je takođe bio umešan i istorijski je potvrđen kao činilac. Axela igra mladi Rupert Graves, i prikazan je kao anđeoski lik što je i logično ako imamo u vidu da je Axel u dva navrata trebalo da ubije Hitlera zahvaljujući svojoj fizičkoj lepoti, naime plan je bio da se detonira na "modnoj reviji" novih zimskih uniformi. U svakom slučaju, von Haeftenovu toplinu zamenjuje Axelov anđeoski lik.

Ironija sudbine je takva da je Axel jedini imao hrabrosti da se samoubije da i se rešio Hitlera a od cele ekipe je on jedini preživeo rat i kasnije posle rata uspeo da se izuzetno afirmiše kao stručnjak i diplomata.

Uprkos razumevanju konflita između katoličke aristokratije i nacističke partije, ipak ni THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER ne prikazuje Clausa Von Stauffenberga kao nacionalistu i tek uzdržanog Hitlerovog simpatizera koji je takođe verovao u pokoravanje i kolonizaciju istočnoevropskih naroda, naročito Poljaka i delio nacionalističke ideale sa nacistima.

Otud je THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER za nijansu politički zreliji od VALKYRIE ali je sa druge strane u svojoj nenamernoj pronacističkoj dimenziji VALKYRIE bliži suštinskoj Von Stauffenbergovoj odanosti pojedinim nacističkim idealima.

Istorija pokazuje dakle da je Von Strauffenberg bio priličan bećar, a anglo-američki filmovi o njemu bave se prevashodno glorifikacijom. Razlog za to možda leži u tome što su ratni filmovi ovog profila u američkoj kinematografiji još uvek preskupi da bi se bavili tako provokativnim likovima ambivalentnih ideoloških gledišta.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19634_5-badass-movie-heroes-who-were-actually-just-really-lucky.html

Ajd što ne zna da glumi, al što je budaletina...

Evo šta Stari Kadar kaže o stanju u sredstvima javnog informisanja.

http://www.politika.rs/rubrike/Pogledi-sa-strane/Ne-treba-svako-bas-sve-da-zna.sr.html

Frederic Beigbeder's film follows the hijinks of a young literary critic who meets his cheeky match at his grandmother's funeral.

Writer-turned-filmmaker Frederic Beigbeder offers up a lively, occasionally hilarious, but ultimately forgettable French rom-com with his aphoristically titled debut, Love Lasts Three Years (L'Amour dure trois ans). Adapted from his own 1997 novel, this tongue-in-cheek tale of amour fou (or amour faux) features flashy direction and a spirited turn by It Girl Louise Bourgoin (A Happy Event), but is also a tad too generic, not to mention overtly misogynistic in ways that could only perhaps fly in Gaul. EuropaCorp release will definitely score points at home (it nearly tied Dragon Tattoo for opening day box office, despite having being released on half the prints), while overseas action for this well-tread genre should be predominantly Francophone.
our editor recommends
Searching for Sugar Man: Sundance Film Review
Wish You Were Here: Sundance Film Review

Intellectual-cum-celebrity Beigbeder is widely known in France for his multiple radio and TV appearances (including a film criticism show he hosts on Canal Plus), as well as for his bestselling novels Windows on the World and 99 francs (which he adapted to the screen for director Jan Kounen). Witty, goofy and publicly irreverent, he's managed to concoct a credible alter ego with his film's would-be hero, Marc Maronnier (Gaspard Proust), a young literary critic whose marriage goes kaput in a rapid-fire and cleverly executed opening sequence.

But things somewhat look up for Marc when he meets his cheeky match, the gorgeous and vivacious Alice (Bourgoin), at his grandmother's funeral. The fact that Alice is living with Marc's cousin (Nicolas Bedos) doesn't seem to pose a problem for either of them – the question is barely evoked – and they eventually begin an affair. The only real hitch is that Marc happens to be the author of an immensely popular book (also called Love Lasts Three Years) published under a pseudonym – a secret he tries to hide from his squeeze, who finds the text to be juvenile and lame.

In that sense she's quite on the money, and the various aphorisms that graze the voiceover and dialogues, when they're not CGI'd onto the screen, run the gamut from cute ("In the 21st century, love is an unanswered SMS") to questionable ("Adultery makes one an adult") to undeniably sexist: When Marc's brutish buddy (Joey Starr) reveals, quite predictably, that he's decided to turn gay, he says it's because he's "sick of being annoyed by bitches." Another scene has the pals providing intellectual commentary on the pubic hair of female passersby, turning them into the snotty Parisian equivalents of construction workers on a lunch break.

Obviously, all the testosterone-fueled gags and chauvinist diatribes are meant to hide the fact that Marc is undeniably in love, and the narrative soon streamlines ahead to a conclusion rehashed from any number of romantic comedies. More intriguing, and definitely funnier, is the troubled relationship Marc has with his publisher (played by a straight-faced Valerie Lemericer), who seems to be the only character in the movie not to take him at his, um, word.

Stand-up comic Proust (who, like Marc, is no descendant of the great French writer) does a good job delivering Beigbeder's snarky dialogues in deadpan fashion. Bourgoin offers up her usual mix of spice and sultriness, though Alice remains an altogether shallow character.

Slickly shot by Bruno Dumont's regular director of photography, Yves Cape, and featuring music and a live performance by New Wave composer Michel Legrand, the production is well-stocked and energetic, if not exactly original. Sets include a number of swanky Paris apartments (including one with an indoor swimming pool), which may partially explain why all these wealthy intellos only have one thing to worry about.

Opens: In France (January 18)
Production companies: The Film, Akn Productions, EuropaCorp, France 2 Cinema, Scope Pictures
Cast: Louise Bourgoin, Gaspard Proust, JoeyStarr, Jonathan Lambert, Frederique Bel, Nicolas Bedos, Elisa Sednaoui
Director: Frederic Beigbeder
Screenwriters: Christophe Turpin, Gilles Verdiani, Frederic Beigbeder, based on his novel L'Amour dure trois ans
Producers: Michael Gentille, Alain Kruger
Director of photography: Yves Cape
Production designer: Christian Marti
Music: martin Rappeneau
Costume designer: Marie-Laure Lasson
Editor: Stan Collet
Sales Agent: EuropaCorp
No rating, 97 minutes

Pogledao sam nemački TV film STAUFFENBERG scenariste i reditelja Jo Baiera u kome Clausa Von Stauffenberga igra Sebastian Koch, jedna od najvećih zvezda nemačkog filma. STAUFFENBERG je bliži istorijskim podacima od THE PLOT TO KILL HITLER ali mu je po strukturi identičan, ponovo priča sve u jednoj velikoj retrospekciji. Kad je reč o prikazivanmju Von Stauffenbergovog lika, ovde su njegove simpatije prema nacizmu nagoveštenije, mada ne u meri u kojoj je on bio sklon da ih nagovesti inače.

Koch je filmska zvezda pa tako i igra Stauffenberga, vrlo glamurozno ali Baier, uprkos solidnom production valueu ipak nije naročito vešt ni kao scenarista ni kao reditelj tako da ovaj film ne nudi ni kvalitet ni uverljivost već deluje prilično naivno u pojedinim deonicama a sam način na koji su pučisti hteli da svrgnu Hitlera čak nije ni jasan što se ipak nije javljalo kao problem u prethodnim filmovima koje sam gledao na ovu temu.

Otud je STAUFFENBERG uprkos tome što načinje temu Stauffenbergovih naklonosti prema nacizmu ipak najslabiji od ovog triptiha na tu temu. Ipak, Stauffenberg se pojavljuje kao lik i tema u još dosta filmova i televizijskih radova, naročito u Nemačkoj.

    Culture
    Books
    Science fiction

Haunted by The Handmaid's Tale

It has been banned in schools, made into a film and an opera, and the title has become a shorthand for repressive regimes against women

       

The Handmaid's Tale, English National Opera
'The book appeared in Canada in the fall of 1985 to baffled and sometimes anxious reviews' ... the English National Opera production of The Handmaid's Tale, 2003. Photograph: Tristram Kenton

Some books haunt the reader. Others haunt the writer. The Handmaid's Tale has done both.

The Handmaid's Tale has not been out of print since it was first published, back in 1985. It has sold millions of copies worldwide and has appeared in a bewildering number of translations and editions. It has become a sort of tag for those writing about shifts towards policies aimed at controlling women, and especially women's bodies and reproductive functions: "Like something out of The Handmaid's Tale" and "Here comes The Handmaid's Tale" have become familiar phrases. It has been expelled from high schools, and has inspired odd website blogs discussing its descriptions of the repression of women as if they were recipes. People – not only women – have sent me photographs of their bodies with phrases from The Handmaid's Tale tattooed on them, "Nolite te bastardes carborundorum" and "Are there any questions?" being the most frequent. The book has had several dramatic incarnations, a film (with screenplay by Harold Pinter and direction by Volker Schlöndorff) and an opera (by Poul Ruders) among them. Revellers dress up as Handmaids on Hallowe'en and also for protest marches – these two uses of its costumes mirroring its doubleness. Is it entertainment or dire political prophecy? Can it be both? I did not anticipate any of this when I was writing the book.

I began this book almost 30 years ago, in the spring of 1984, while living in West Berlin – still encircled, at that time, by the Berlin Wall. The book was not called The Handmaid's Tale at first – it was called Offred – but I note in my journal that its name changed on 3 January 1985, when almost 150 pages had been written.

That's about all I can note, however. In my journal there are the usual writerly whines, such as: "I am working my way back into writing after too long away – I lose my nerve, or think instead of the horrors of publication and what I will be accused of in reviews." There are entries concerning the weather; rain and thunder come in for special mentions. I chronicle the finding of puffballs, always a source of glee; dinner parties, with lists of those who attended and what was cooked; illnesses, my own and those of others; and the deaths of friends. There are books read, speeches given, trips made. There are page counts; I had a habit of writing down the pages completed as a way of urging myself on. But there are no reflections at all about the actual composition or subject matter of the book itself. Perhaps that was because I thought I knew where it was going, and felt no need to interrogate myself.

I recall that I was writing by hand, then transcribing with the aid of a typewriter, then scribbling on the typed pages, then giving these to a professional typist: personal computers were in their infancy in 1985. I see that I left Berlin in June 1984, returned to Canada, wrote through the fall, then spent four months in early 1985 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, where I held an MFA chair. I finished the book there; the first person to read it was a fellow writer, Valerie Martin, who was also there at that time. I recall her saying: "I think you've got something here." She herself remembers more enthusiasm.

From 12 September 1984 to June 1985 all is blank in my journal – there is nothing at all set down, not even a puffball – though by my page-count entries it seems I was writing at white-hot speed. On 10 June there is a cryptic entry: "Finished editing Handmaid's Tale last week." The page proofs had been read by 19 August. The book appeared in Canada in the fall of 1985 to baffled and sometimes anxious reviews – could it happen here? – but there is no journal commentary on these by me. On 16 November I find another writerly whine: "I feel sucked hollow." To which I added: "But functional."

The book came out in the UK in February 1986, and in the United States at the same time. In the UK, which had had its Oliver Cromwell moment some centuries ago and was in no mood to repeat it, the reaction was along the lines of, "Jolly good yarn". In the US, however – and despite a dismissive review in the New York Times by Mary McCarthy – it was more likely to be: "How long have we got?"

Stories about the future always have a "what-if" premise, and The Handmaid's Tale has several. For instance: if you wanted to seize power in the US, abolish liberal democracy and set up a dictatorship, how would you go about it? What would be your cover story? It would not resemble any form of communism or socialism: those would be too unpopular. It might use the name of democracy as an excuse for abolishing liberal democracy: that's not out of the question, though I didn't consider it possible in 1985.

Nations never build apparently radical forms of government on foundations that aren't there already. Thus China replaced a state bureaucracy with a similar state bureaucracy under a different name, the USSR replaced the dreaded imperial secret police with an even more dreaded secret police, and so forth. The deep foundation of the US – so went my thinking – was not the comparatively recent 18th-century Enlightenment structures of the republic, with their talk of equality and their separation of church and state, but the heavy-handed theocracy of 17th-century Puritan New England, with its marked bias against women, which would need only the opportunity of a period of social chaos to reassert itself.

Like any theocracy, this one would select a few passages from the Bible to justify its actions, and it would lean heavily towards the Old Testament, not towards the New. Since ruling classes always make sure they get the best and rarest of desirable goods and services, and as it is one of the axioms of the novel that fertility in the industrialised west has come under threat, the rare and desirable would include fertile women – always on the human wish list, one way or another – and reproductive control. Who shall have babies, who shall claim and raise those babies, who shall be blamed if anything goes wrong with those babies? These are questions with which human beings have busied themselves for a long time.

There would be resistance to such a regime, and an underground, and even an underground railroad. In retrospect, and in view of 21st-century technologies available for spywork and social control, these seem a little too easy. Surely the Gilead command would have moved to eliminate the Quakers, as their 17th-century Puritan forebears had done.

I made a rule for myself: I would not include anything that human beings had not already done in some other place or time, or for which the technology did not already exist. I did not wish to be accused of dark, twisted inventions, or of misrepresenting the human potential for deplorable behaviour. The group-activated hangings, the tearing apart of human beings, the clothing specific to castes and classes, the forced childbearing and the appropriation of the results, the children stolen by regimes and placed for upbringing with high-ranking officials, the forbidding of literacy, the denial of property rights: all had precedents, and many were to be found not in other cultures and religions, but within western society, and within the "Christian" tradition, itself. (I enclose "Christian" in quotation marks, since I believe that much of the church's behaviour and doctrine during its two-millennia-long existence as a social and political organisation would have been abhorrent to the person after whom it is named.)

The Handmaid's Tale has often been called a "feminist dystopia", but that term is not strictly accurate. In a feminist dystopia pure and simple, all of the men would have greater rights than all of the women. It would be two-layered in structure: top layer men, bottom layer women. But Gilead is the usual kind of dictatorship: shaped like a pyramid, with the powerful of both sexes at the apex, the men generally outranking the women at the same level; then descending levels of power and status with men and women in each, all the way down to the bottom, where the unmarried men must serve in the ranks before being awarded an Econowife.

The Handmaids themselves are a pariah caste within the pyramid: treasured for what they may be able to provide – their fertility – but untouchables otherwise. To possess one is, however, a mark of high status, just as many slaves or a large retinue of servants always has been. Since the regime operates under the guise of a strict Puritanism, these women are not considered a harem, intended to provide delight as well as children. They are functional rather than decorative.

Three things that had long been of interest to me came together during the writing of the book. The first was my interest in dystopian literature, an interest that began with my adolescent reading of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, Huxley's Brave New World and Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, and continued through my period of graduate work at Harvard in the early 1960s. (Once you've been intrigued by a literary form, you always have a secret yen to write an example of it yourself.) The second was my study of 17th and 18th-century America, again at Harvard, which was of particular interest to me since many of my own ancestors had lived in those times and in that place. The third was my fascination with dictatorships and how they function, not unusual in a person who was born in 1939, three months after the outbreak of the second world war.

Like the American revolution and the French revolution, like the three major dictatorships of the 20th century – I say "major" because there have been more, Cambodia and Romania among them – and like the New England Puritan regime before it, Gilead has utopian idealism flowing through its veins, coupled with a high-minded principle, its ever-present shadow, sublegal opportunism, and the propensity of the powerful to indulge in behind-the-scenes sensual delights forbidden to everyone else. But such locked-door escapades must remain hidden, for the regime floats as its raison d'être the notion that it is improving the conditions of life, both physical and moral; and like all such regimes, it depends on its true believers.

I was perhaps too optimistic to end the Handmaid's story with an outright failure. Even Nineteen Eighty-Four, that darkest of literary visions, does not end with a boot stamping on a human face for ever, or with a broken Winston Smith feeling a drunken love for Big Brother, but with an essay about the regime written in the past tense and in standard English. Similarly, I allowed my Handmaid a possible escape, via Maine and Canada; and I also permitted an epilogue, from the perspective of which both the Handmaid and the world she lived in have receded into history. When asked whether The Handmaid's Tale is about to "come true", I remind myself that there are two futures in the book, and that if the first one comes true, the second one may do so also.

    Culture
    Television & radio
    Sherlock

Series: Saturday interview
Previous | Index
'There is a clue everybody's missed': Sherlock writer Steven Moffat interviewed

So, Steven Moffat, writer of Sherlock and Doctor Who, what really happened when Holmes plunged to his death last Sunday? We have all, he says, missed one vital clue ...

        reddit this
    Comments (218)

    Stuart Jeffries
        Stuart Jeffries
        guardian.co.uk, Friday 20 January 2012 18.15 GMT
        Article history

Steven Moffat, writer of Sherlock
'So many people theorising about Sherlock's death online – and they missed the clue' ... Steven Moffat, writer of Sherlock. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian

How did Sherlock Holmes survive that death plunge? If, indeed, he did. Perhaps the falling body was Moriarty in a Sherlock mask? Or maybe pathologist Molly supplied a corpse to throw from the roof? Who or what lies in the grave over which Martin Freeman's Dr Watson delivered the lovely soliloquy that made around 7.9 million Britons' stiff upper lips tremble on Sunday night?

Steven Moffat eyes me guardedly from his living room sofa at his home near London's Kew Gardens. Why don't you just tell me how Sherlock survived, then you can go back to your study to write some more Doctor Who? "Christ, no!" says Moffat, grinning. A-ha! So that implies Sherlock has survived. (Not such a brilliant deduction: it's hard to imagine a third series without the hero.)

"There is a clue everybody's missed," he says tantalisingly. "So many people theorising about Sherlock's death online – and they missed it! We've worked out how Sherlock survives, and actually shot part of what really happened. It all makes sense." In this, he argues, he and co-writer Mark Gatiss have gone one better than Doyle. "He cheated outrageously. He has Watson deduce that Holmes fell off a waterfall. But there was no body. And it only means one thing in a detective show when there's no body." That the victim survived. So you set yourself the test of killing off Sherlock, putting his corpse in plain view and then bringing him back from the dead to watch his own funeral? "Yes. We had to have Holmes dying in Watson's arms – and get away with that, which we have." But how? Moffat sips his tea silently.

Sherlock will be back for a third series of three 90-minute episodes, hopefully before the year is out, he says. Only then will we know how Moffat, the 50-year-old Scot who masterminds two of the BBC's most successful franchises (he is co-creator and an executive producer on Sherlock as well as lead writer and executive producer on Doctor Who), brought Holmes back from the dead. "My problem is that the audience is more fiction-literate than ever. In Shakespeare's day, you probably expected to see a play once or twice in your life; today you experience four or five different kinds of fiction every day. So staying ahead of the audience is impossible."

Moffat believes the popularity of the two shows suggests reports of dumb Britain are exaggerated. "They are very clever shows, but they also fetishise cleverness. Cleverness is the superpower. So I get irritated when people say on Twitter: 'It's too complicated. I'm not following it.' Well, you could try putting your phone down and watching it."

But surely he's just writing shows for kids and TV-infantilised adults? How can these be more intellectually demanding than adult dramas? "Honestly? I think we beat them hands down. Anything can be addressed to a child audience – you just have to write it better. The restriction with Doctor Who is that you have to get on with it because it's an adventure story. You can discuss anything. We've had a suicide in it. You just have to do it clearly and honestly and with enough integrity that children will watch it and understand it, and parents will be happy that they do so."

Moffat suspects Sherlock has overwhelmingly the same audience as Doctor Who. "Sherlock is Doctor Who but an hour later in the TV schedules. Not two hours later, one hour."

Doesn't Moffat want to write grown-up stuff for two hours later? "Not really. Writing for adults often means just increasing the swearing – but find an alternative to swearing and you've probably got a better line." He says he did write grown-up stuff – Joking Apart in the 90s and Coupling in the 00s, sitcoms that riffed on his own sexual history. "You could say they were adult. Or maybe they were more childish than what I'm writing now."

Sherlock originated when Moffat and Gatiss, who were working in Cardiff on Doctor Who, discovered a shared fondness for Doyle's detective on train journeys back to London. Their idea was to free Holmes from his heritage-industry prison. He would lose his deerstalker and tweeds, but gain a smartphone and nicotine patches. He wouldn't say: "Elementary, my dear Watson." He would be younger, and technologically cutting-edge – just as Doyle had written him.

"We wanted to bring him out of the faux-Victorian fog and see him for what he is. Sherlock Holmes is really that posh freak from a wealthy family, that scary boffin crime-solver who lives in your town. Then Watson the ex-soldier, invalided out of the war in Afghanistan, coming home a bit bored because he'd rather be back at the front. So solving crimes with a psychopath excites him.

But how did Moffat and Gatiss solve the most vexing mystery, Sherlock's sex life? "There's no indication in the original stories that he was asexual or gay. He actually says he declines the attention of women because he doesn't want the distraction. What does that tell you about him? Straightforward deduction. He wouldn't be living with a man if he thought men were interesting."

Moffat is not saying that Sherlock, like Austin Powers, misplaced his mojo. "It's the choice of a monk, not the choice of an asexual. If he was asexual, there would be no tension in that, no fun in that – it's someone who abstains who's interesting. There's no guarantee that he'll stay that way in the end – maybe he marries Mrs Hudson. I don't know!"

In the latest series' first episode, Holmes was sexually discombobulated by a lesbian dominatrix who strips off in order to arouse Sherlock's sexuality from its dogmatic slumbers. I couldn't find any of this in Doyle's story A Scandal in Bohemia, from which the episode was adapted. Indeed, Moffat and Gatiss's treatment drove one critic, Jane Clare Jones writing in the Guardian, to suggest they had created a misogynistic throwback. In the original story, Irene Adler is an adventuress who outwits Holmes; in Sherlock, as Jones put it: "She's become a high-class dominatrix saved only from certain death by the dramatic intervention of our hero." She added: "While Doyle's original is hardly an exemplar of gender evolution, you've got to worry when a woman comes off worse in 2012 than in 1891."

Moffat, unsurprisingly, doesn't agree. "In the original, Irene Adler's victory over Sherlock Holmes was to move house and run away with her husband. That's not a feminist victory." He says he found Jones's argument "deeply offensive". "Everyone else gets it that Irene wins. When Sherlock turns up to save her at the end it's like Eliza Dolittle coming back to Henry Higgins in My Fair Lady: 'OK, I like you, now let me hack up these terrorists with a big sword.'

"You could only draw conclusions about my personal sexual politics if you proceed from the assumption that I was presenting the characters as the way it is and the way it ought to be. But both are clearly defined as deranged – it's love among the mad. He's a psychopath, so is she. She's prepared to throw him to the dogs until he works out the code, he's prepared to let her nearly get executed. They're not really going to buy a house and a Volvo together. I'm not saying this is how people should date!"

It's not the first time Moffat has been accused of sexism in his writing. He wrote a storyline recently about Doctor Who's mother. "I was called a misogynist because I was reducing women to mothers. 'Reducing women to mothers' – now there is possibly the most anti-women statement I've heard."

Jones also charged that during his stewardship of Doctor Who (he took over as head writer from Russell T Davies in 2008) Moffat plucked women characters "from a box marked 'tired old tropes' (drip/scold/temptress/earth mother to name but a few), and his consequent failure to sketch a compelling central dynamic between the lead and his companion has seriously affected the show's dramatic power."

Moffat balks at this. "River Song? Amy Pond [two leading Doctor Who women characters he created]? Hardly weak women. It's the exact opposite. You could accuse me of having a fetish for powerful, sexy women who like cheating people. That would be fair."

Moffat strives to ignore detractors. "I try not to go online much. They're always gunning for me." When he made Moriarty Irish, he was charged with betraying Doyle. But Moffat and Gatiss feel free to take liberties. When actor and playwright William Gillette wrote the first stage adaptation, he cabled Doyle, "Can I marry Holmes?" Doyle replied "You may marry him, or murder, or do what you like with him." But, Moffat says, they are true to the original's spirit. "Our own fanboyness about Sherlock Holmes means that there are absolute limits to what we do. Ours is an authentic version of Sherlock Holmes."

Moffat was born in Paisley, near Glasgow in 1961. After an MA in English, he became a secondary school English teacher in Greenock. His TV break came in the late 80s, thanks to Harry Secombe. The former Goon visited Thorn Primary School in Johnstone, Renfrewshire, to film his religious show, Highway. Moffat's father, Bill, the school's headmaster, allowed the show's producers to film there on the condition that they read his son's script for a TV series about a school newspaper. This became ITV's Press Gang. During its six-year run, Moffat's first wife left him for another man. He plundered that break-up for his next project, the BBC sitcom Joking Apart, about a sitcom writer and the rise and fall of his relationship. In later sitcoms Chalk (set in a school) and Coupling (which satirised male commitment phobia), he mined his own biography again.

"I write the kind of stuff I'd like to watch," he says. Ever since he fulfilled a childhood dream in 2004 and was hired to write for Doctor Who, that stuff has been, he says, "action, mystery, suspense, adventure – all those things, opposed to a deep analysis of the failures of the human heart that I could never possibly write." Why not? "Who wants to read the angst-ridden ravings of a middle-class successful writer who has had his two dream jobs – writing Doctor Who and Sherlock?"

When Moffat took over from Davies as Doctor Who's head writer, he was in Hollywood, having been contracted to write three Tintin films for Steven Spielberg. He walked out on Spielberg – what a thing to have on his CV! "I felt really guilty. Far from swaggering out of the building saying, 'I don't care about your damn movie', I felt haunted with guilt because I was the villain. I'm glad they used some of my script in the first film. Steven was lovely about it. He could have sued me."

Isn't choosing British TV over Hollywood nuts, career-wise? "Not really. I think TV is pushing ahead. It used to be we make TV on video and they remake it on 35mm. We all now work in high-def, we all have the same cameras. You can get things made the same year you think of it, rather than 12 years later. We can make three Sherlock films in the time it takes Hollywood to have lunch."

Time for one last question. It's the cyclist who knocked Watson over as "Holmes" lay crushed on the pavement who holds the key to the mystery, isn't it? Or Mycroft, Sherlock's estranged brother? Moffat shakes his head with a grin. He's enjoying this. And enjoying more, no doubt, getting away with Sherlock's murder.

Pogledao sam EL MAL AJENO Oskara Santosa, produkciju Alejandra Amenabara iz 2010. godine koja u sebi ima elemente supernatural trilera ali u suštini to ipak nije. EL MAL AJENO je melodrama o lekaru koji u jednom trenutku otkriva sposobnost da isceljuje ljude ali spoj njegove već prisutne rezigniranosti i nekih nusefekata te supermoći uskoro počinju da mu pretvaraju život u pakao.

Oskar Santos uspeva prilično dobro da zaintrigira i payoff je možda presuptilan za moj ukus, mada možda je i bolje da ostane ovako apstraktno nego da se uđe u konkretizaciju bez pokrića u dobroj ideji. Puls filma otud pre svega od intrige a egzekucija uje vrhunska i vrlo glossy.

Sam prikaz bolničkog života mi je bio malo neuverljiv. Naime, Noriegin lik je kao neki lekar opšte prakse koji leči sve vrste bolesti dok ne stekle isceliteljske moći, i svaku od tih bolesti leči sa veštinom specijaliste. Možda je to neka podela rada u španskim bolnicama sa kojom ja nisam upoznat ali to mi je prilično zamsetalo jer mi se čini da je svuda prisutna birokratizovanost zdravstva morala imati neku ulogu u jednom filmu sa ovako specifičnom temom.

EL MAL AJENO nije veliki film ali je vešto realizovan, atmosferičan i zaslužuje pažnju kao jedno sporedno Euro-ostvarenje.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam THE ARTIST Michela Hazanaviciusa. Još od njegovog CLASSE AMERICAINE je bilo jasno da je on sklon eksperimetima na temu klasičnog Holivuda a serija komedija OSS117 je pokazala da njegove sposobnosti daleko prevazilaze ravan DEAD MEN DON'T WEAR PLAID i da je on spreman za znatno veća dela, ponovo oslonjen na izuzetno duhovitu i tehnički superiornu polemiku sa klasicima repertoarskog filma. Međutim, OSS117 su pored statusa megahita po svom profilu bioli filmovi koji nisu shvaćeni ozbiljno. Srećom, prvo je Jean Dujardin počeo da igra u sve avangardnijim i provokativnijim filmovima a onda su on i Hazanavicius zajedno uspeli da se izbore za visokobudžetni film kakav je THE ARTIST.

THE ARTIST je nastao u formi nemog filma. Naravno, kako je reč o nemom filmu snimljenom u savremenim okolnostima, Hazanavicius se poigrava sa tonom međutim, u suštini nikada ne odstupa od forme ortodoksnog nemog filma sa natpisima umesto dijaloga a te natpise koristi vrlo malo, čak mnogo manje nego što su ih koristili autori nemih filmova.

Nemi filmovi se danas mahom konzumiraju kao klasici komedije i ponešto od značajnih autora se masovnije prikazuje u formi inserata, međutim, ljudi koje zanima istorija filma znaju da su autori nemih filmova u njima pričali vrlo kompleksne priče, sa razvijenim karakterima, i da su te priče i po svojoj složenosti i po utisku koje su ostavljale na gledaoca daleko prevazilazile humor Charlie Chaplina i Buster Keatona. Ipak, teško je izbeći poistovećivanje nemog filma sa komedijom, uostalom, i sama odluka da se danas snima nemi film sama po sebi deluje kao vic, pa i THE ARTIST u sebi ima dosta komedije. To ne čudi ako imamo u vidu da je Hazanvicius sklon humoru. Međutim, isto tako, THE ARTIST ima i dosta ozbiljnih karaktera i opipljivih emocija.

Guy Maddin je u svojim filmovima oživeo nemi film kao umetničku formu ali je uspevao da ga artikuliše uglavnom u hermetičnim izdanjima. THE ARTIST je međutim film koji može da komunicira sa najširom publikom, pitanje je samo koliko je najšira publika danas raspoložena za u vrstu rizika, ali ovog šuta to čak nije ni pitanje da li je umetničko delo naišlo na strpljivu publiku ili ne, već je komunikativnost THE ARTISTa nešto što se teško može osporiti.

Nije Hazanavicius prvi reditelj koji je snimio dugometražni nemi film koji ima umetničku vrednost i može da komunicira sa publikom, međutim, sasvim sigurno je jedini koji je u ovom trenutku kada nemi film više nije standard uspeo da snimi tako nešto i po tome je THE ARTIST jedinstveno ostvarenje i predstavlja korak, svakako ne napred, ali iskorak nekuda svakako, ostajući sasvim u okvirima tradicije i psiholoških predispozicija savremene publike.

Kad je reč o stvarima koje se nalaze unutar ove forme, THE ARTIST je priča o filmadžijama u periodu kada je film bio sveprožimajući društveni uticaj i kada su zvezde mnogo više poistovećivane sa likovima. Vrlo je zanimljivo koliko radikalnih promena proisteklih iz uvođenja zvuka možemo locirati u periodu kada su film i autori i publika, mada ne i svi teoretičari (što je vrlo zanimljivo) krajnje naivno doživljavali. I THE ARTIST je u tom smislu pogled u epohu i prenošenje ondašnje atmosfere današnjem gledaocu, u toj meri da je jako teško ne tretirati tadašnje filmske radnike kao filmske likove.

Jedan film koji mi je ne samo zbog Malcolm McDowella prizvao u sećanje jeste i SUNSET Blake Edwardsa čiji je koncept u tome da dve istorijske ličnosti uvede u fikciju bez ikakvih pokušaja da se napravi ikakva postmoderna ili istorijska rekonstrukcija, pošto se filmska industrija i ličnosti tog vremena danas teško mogu percipirati kao išta drugo do filmski likovi, kao što se ličnosti iz antičke istorije, najpre poznaju kroz mitove i epove.

Otud su i filmovi-u-filmu u kojima igra George Valentin ne samo nadgradnja onoga kako je ta vrsta filmova izgledala, već su u slučaju uvodnog filma RUSSIAN AFFAIR i vrlo duhovit komentar na savremenu političku situaciju (nešto na tu temu je snimao Renny Harlin nedavno) a film kao simbol razvoja psiholoških odnosa između likova je samo jedan od detalja koji pokazuje koliki je Hazanavicus majstor.

Ko ima uslove, treba da napravi double-bill SUNSET Blake Edwardsa i THE ARTIST.

* * * * / * * * *

Robot & Frank: Sundance Film Review
12:02 AM PST 1/22/2012 by John DeFore
share

    Comments

0

Robot & Frank
The Bottom Line

Thoroughly charming comedy gives a retired cat burglar an unexpected new partner.
Director:

Jake Schreier
Cast:

Frank Langella, Susan Sarandon, James Marsden, Liv Tyler, Peter Sarsgaard, Jeremy Sisto, Jeremy Strong
Screenwriter:

Christopher D. Ford

PARK CITY — The kind of light-touch comedy Sundancers pray for, Robot & Frank reminds quirk-hardened veterans that an odd premise and big heart don't have to add up to too-precious awards bait. Any distrib who can't sell a crowd-pleaser like this is in the wrong business.
our editor recommends
Arbitrage: Sundance Film Review
Sundance 2012: Ice-T's 'The Art of Rap' Has Head-Bopping Premiere
Sundance 2012: Sundance Institute Issues Statement of Support for Hospitalized Indie Exec
Related Topics
•Sundance Film Festival Re...
•Sundance Film Festival 20...

PHOTOS: Sundance 2012's Hottest Films

Frank Langella plays Frank, a onetime cat burglar whose wife left long ago and whose two grown kids, worried over his increasing memory loss, are tempted to put him in a home. This being "the near future," Frank's son chooses another option: Against the old man's wishes, he buys a walking, talking humanoid robot programmed to improve Frank's physical and mental health. (Peter Sarsgaard lends Robot his voice, eschewing HAL 9000 clichés in favor of believable naturalism.)

Now Frank, a snarky old dude to begin with (and one given to shoplifting decorative soaps from a local shop) has a proper foil. "That cereal is for children," Robot says of a Froot Loops breakfast. "You're for children, idiot," Frank replies.

It's funnier when Langella says it, which is true of most every quip and gesture in the actor's wry, uningratiating performance. Christopher Ford's script helps, giving Frank a sharp-eyed curiosity about his new techno-caretaker and only once or twice ignoring logic for the sake of a plot point.

PHOTOS: The Scene at Sundance 2012

We smell a rumble when, on his regular trip to the library run by sexy spinster Susan Sarandon, Frank is patronized by a rich hipster (Jeremy Strong) who intends to turn the building into an "augmented reality" community center where bound books are just fashion accessories. Before long, Frank has convinced Robot that it would be very, very good for his mental agility to plan a proper heist, with Strong the worthy victim.

First-time director Jake Schreier has fun here, playing the robo-assisted caper against the increasing concern Frank's kids (James Marsden and Liv Tyler) have for his situation. There's baggage aplenty in the ex-con's parenting history, but the film thankfully underplays that melodrama, reserving its most poignant moments for interactions between man and microchip. Apple fanatics may fetishize the iPhone's Siri and Steve Jobs's other user-friendly innovations, but do any of them love their computers enough to risk jail time instead of reformatting a hard drive?

Venue: Sundance Film Festival, Premieres
Production Company: Park Pictures Features
Cast: Frank Langella, Susan Sarandon, James Marsden, Liv Tyler, Peter Sarsgaard, Jeremy Sisto, Jeremy Strong
Director: Jake Schreier
Screenwriter: Christopher D. Ford
Producers: Galt Niederhoffer, Sam Bisbee, Jackie Kelman Bisbee, Lance Acord
Executive producers: Danny Rifkin, Bob Kelman, Tom Valerio, Bill Perry, Jeremy Bailor, Ann Porter, Stefan Sonnenfeld
Director of photography: Matthew J. Lloyd
Production designer: Sharon Lomofsky
Music: Francis and the Lights
Costume designer: Erika Munro
Editor: Jacob Craycroft
Sales: Dina Kuperstock, CAA / Jessica Lacy, ICM
No rating, 88 minutes

Srpstvo najzad prodire u anime!

"There, down in a forlorn valley called Milos, our heroes become enmeshed in a rebellion in which the inhabitants are seeking to get their Holy Land back."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/19/DD3D1MP85D.DTL#ixzz1kBpLXEyT

Pogledao sam film LE PACHA Georges Lautnera, francuski krimić iz 1968. godine po scenariju čuvenog Michel Audiarda čiji je sin Jacques Audiard jedan od značajnijih savremenih francuskih reditelja a Michel je bio jedan od najčuvenijih francuskih scenarista i potpisnik mnogih kultnih ali i globalno prihvaćenih filmova.

LE PACHA je adaptacija romana Jean Labordea i govori o martorom policajcu kog igra Jean Gabin i čije se karakteristike u priličnojmeri iscrpljuju u ovoj podeli koji nemilosrdno i bez mnogo obaziranja na zakon želi da reši slučćaj brutalne pljačke u koju je upleten i zbog koje je ubijen njegov kolega i prijatelj.

Gabinov junak je brutalan policajac koji u svemu tome čak i nema previše šarma ili nekakve dinamike koja je krasila američke prikaze nemilosrdnih policajaca tog doba. Gabin ni ne ne pokušava da bude harizmatičan, njegov junak je namćor i u suštini mizantrop a film se odlikuje brutalnošću međuljudskih odnosa kakva se retko sreće.

Otud ni sam endgame u kome se glavni junak namerno trudi da ne uhapsi već da ubije organizatora pljačke nimalo ne odstupa od već uspostavljene klime u filmu.

Georges Lautner je veteran francuskog krimića i repertoarskog filma uopšte i on je prolazio kroz razne faze u svojoj karijeri, doticao se i sexploitationa i raznih drugih polazišta. U svakom slučaju LE PACHA u sebi objedinjuje mnoge od njegovih opsesija, tako da u filmu deo atmosfere čini muzika Serge Gainsbourga koji se i pojavljuje u filmu igrajući samoga sebe i nastupa kako uživo tako i sa nekoliko pesama na soundtracku. Po prikazu dekadentnog života, LE PACHA dosta podseća na zgroženi prikaz kontrakulture kakav nudi i COOGAN'S BLUFF Don Siegela.

Lautner je reditelj koji je snimao svašta, ponešto od toga je vrdno pažnje a LE PACHA spada među baš te naslove.

* * * / * * * *

Braćo, evo novog Mela! Kreće za Dan žena u Rusiji, očigledno je da Mel i dalje ima uspomenu na tamošnje žene...

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-i-spent-my-summer-vacation-8-marta.html

Pogledao sam SEEKING JUSTICE Rogera Donaldsona, film koji sam dosta očekivao jer je baziran na scenariju koji je svojevremeno bio na Black Listu najboljih nesnimljenih scenarija pod naslovom HUNGRY RABBIT JUMPS. Sad kad je film gotov, rezultat je krajje rutinski triler koji nije uspeo da se izbori za mesto u američkim bioskopima ali je tu i tamo uspeo da bude eksploatisan po svetu. Nic Cage je u ovom filmu otprilike u istoj ravni kao i u TRESPASSu s tim što je TRESPASS ipak slabiji film, sa slabijim scenarijem.

Kad je o scenarijima reč, HUNGRY RABBIT JUMPS je scenario koji je sam po sebi imao veliku reputaciju, a TRESPASS je imao poznatog pisca. Otud, ne može se reći da je Cage birao da snima koješta. Pa ipak, oba ova filma nisu uspela da stignu u bioskope.

Roger Donaldson je oko Cagea okupio respektabilnu ekipu, tu je January Jones a negativca igra Guy Pearce. Sama egzekucija je dosta solidna, kao što bi se i očekivalo od veterana i majstora Donaldsonovog kalibra koga relevantnost još uvek nije napustila, te je čak između svojih mejnstrim rezultata uspevao i da iznenadi sa naslovima kao što je BANK JOB. Međutim, u ovom filmu prvo sam scenario nije previše zanimljiv. Premisa o udruženju koje isteruje pravdu onda kada sistem nije dorastao izazovu je u načelu zanimljiva, međutim kada se pokrene mehanizam cele priče, sve se pretvara u krajnje predvidiv triler koji ne uspeva da bude ni DEATH WISH ni PARALLAX VIEW nego je tako na pola puta između hičkokovskog akcijaša i neke kafkijanske teorije zavere. U principu, danas je čak i u okvirima popcorn filmova kao što je odlični UNKNOWN opšti standard zapleta te vrste ioak na znatno višem nivou.

Donaldson ima nekoliko prilika za rediteljski set-piece i u principu koristi ih, međutim dosta scena su ravne, i na nivou postavke i na planu same egzekucije, SEEKING JUSTICE vrvi od opštih mesta u rasponu od scenarija do lokacija, i to već ako nije zamorno, ono bar svakako ne dopriinosi nekom dobrom utisku. Činjenica da Donaldson i ekipa to sve rade bez grešaka ne pomaže dovoljno.

Teško je shvatiti gde je projekat sa Black List scenarijem, Donaldsonom kao rediteljem i ovakvom glumačkom ekipom zapravo pošao naopako, ali to se očigledno desilo i tu nema dileme. Proketstvo filmova snimanih u post-Katrina Nju Orleansu se nastavlja. Očigledno je 40 posto novca koji se vraćaju producentima privlače raznorazne oportune producente i to utiče na kvalitet filmova a ovaj grad će postati poznat po tome što je u njemu seriju svojih najsopskzurnijih naslova snimio ne samo neuračunljivi Nic Cage već i Bruce Willis.

SEEKING JUSTICE srećom ne pravi peviše grešaka, samo ono što je u njemu priostojno i dobro nije previše zanimljivo. Otud mu i nije mesto u bioskopima.

* * 1/2 / * * * *

Quote from: crippled_avenger on 23-01-2012, 18:37:09
Braćo, evo novog Mela! Kreće za Dan žena u Rusiji, očigledno je da Mel i dalje ima uspomenu na tamošnje žene...

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-i-spent-my-summer-vacation-8-marta.html

me gusta   

Bong Joon Ho snima novi film u martu!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/oscars/9020666/John-Hurt-Your-life-is-your-own-property.html

Jedna manje poznata priča iz istorije jugoslovenskog filma i porno industrije...

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/eros-i-valkire.html

Pogledao sam EL HORA FRIA Elio Quiroge, postapokaliptičnu priču sa suvišnim shyamalanskim preokretom koja zahvaljujući svom niskom budžetu i no nonsense pristupu stvarima donosi jedan osvežavajuće arhaični 80s pristup stvarima.

Quiroga obogaćuje svoj film motivima i simbolima koji zapravo nemaju puno značaja na nivou celine i očigledno je da spoljnim efektima želi da produbi svoju u osnovi zdravu low budget postavku. Ti pokušaji produbljivanja priče su najslabiji deo filma ali zapravo ne smertaju previše.

Priča prati grupu ljudi koji su preživeli apokalitični rat o kome se malo zna i govori se krajnje apstraktno, a među njima je i nekoliko dece koja su im osnovni motiv da se bore za opstanak u pustim tunelima nekadašnjeg tržnog centra kroz koji sporadično lutaju inficirane žrtve biološkog rata.

Quirogin film u sebi ima nešto karakteristika zombi filma iako infiicirane osobe nisu zombiji per se, ali u osnovi je jedna atraktiva žanrovskka melodrama o ljudima dovedenim do granice strpljenja.

Realizacija je efikasna i mišićava a Quiroga sa malim budžetom gradi efektan i atmosferičan ambijent. LA HORA FRIA nije veliki film ali je zato solidan "mali" film koji neke važne stvari neobično dobro radi.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam SULTANES DEL SUR Alejandro Lozana, vrlo pristojan meksičko-špansko-argentinski heist film nastao u produkciji lokalne ispostave Warner Brosa. Upečatljivu i jednu od nosećih uloga igra španski glumac Jordi Molla dok ostatak ekipe čine lokalne zvezde koje nama nisu previše poznate.

SULTANES DEL SUR prati grupu pljačkaša koji posle akcije u Meksiko Sitiju bežeu Argentinu i tamo očekuju da zamene dolare za pezose i nađu spas. Međutim, u varošici kojom vladaju dva krimi bosa oni bivaju opljačkani i obezglavljeni a moraju da pronađu novac kako bi se spasili od naručilaca posla.

SULTANES DEL SUR je koncipiran kao nepretenciozna zabava i reklo bi se da niko nije računao na izvozni potencijal van španskog govornog podučja. Samim tim u filmu nema ni originalnosti niti bilo koje druge svežine  koja bi ga preporučivala u internacionalnim okirima. Lozano međutim vrlo hrabro odlučuje da se lati i pucnjava i potera, stvari za koje su Amerikanci ipak glavni specijalisti, i imajući sve ovo u vidu realizuje ih sasvim podnošljivo.

Iako SULTANES DEL SUR ne može da se meri sa američkim filmovima oive vrste, nesumnjivo je veštiji od većeg dela američkog DTVa na ovu temu i dobrog dela post-tarantinovskog taloga.

Uprkos svemu tome, ovaj film iz 2007. godine je zanimljiv pre svega onima koji su radoznali da vide šta se snima za bioskope u drugim zemljama koje nisu postigle globalnu dominaciju na tom tržištu.

* * 1/2 / * * * *

S. Korean Authorities' Confrontation with DPRK Accused

Pyongyang, January 25 (KCNA) -- The south Korean puppet group of traitors are getting evermore undisguised in their intention to escalate confrontation with the DPRK from the outset of this year.

Traitor Lee Myung Bak in a "special new year policy speech" said that "big change is predicted in the situation on the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia." He made such an impudent remark that "the situation on the peninsula has entered fresh turning-point and window of opportunity is opened."

The black-hearted design of the Lee group of traitors, obsessed with daydream of confrontation between systems, has been further brought to light during the period when the nation mourned over the demise of leader Kim Jong Il.

As soon as an important announcement on his demise was made public the group busied itself convening emergency meetings of the "National Security Council" and "State Council", as if "contingency" had arrived and thinking that a "chance" presented itself to bring about a "system change" in the DPRK.

The military authorities formed emergency teams under the "Ministry of National Defense" and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and put the puppet army on a heightened emergency alert and ordered it to adopt a war posture.

Chongwadae, administrations and offices also went into an emergency standby.

The group set up a committee grouping more than 40 members of "government" bodies including the Intelligence Service and the "Institute for Security and Strategy" with the minister of "Unification" as its chief, while raising a hue and cry over "possibility of chaos in the north" and "contingency." It even drafted an "emergency plan" allegedly to cope with any eventuality.

The group of traitors, which is bereft of elementary ethics, worked hard with bloodshot eyes to hurt the fellow countrymen stricken with grief over the great loss to the nation. Its war hysteria is an unpardonable hideous crime.

The puppet group seeks to maintain its power while trumpeting about "change" but it was south Korea which experienced regime change as a result of several contingencies such as April 19 Popular Uprising.

The people's mind-set has reached a point of explosion as the present Lee Myung Bak regime which emerged a "pragmatic government" pursued pro-U.S. treachery, confrontation with fellow countrymen and unpopular misrule. The political crisis has now reached the extremes in south Korea.Lee group of traitors will have to pay dearly for its racket for confrontation with the DPRK and moves for a war of aggression which added to crimes it had already committed.

Наравно, амерички подрепаши неће успети...

Song 'Kim Jong Il Is Immortal as Sun' Created in Korea

The opening of Man on a Ledge today marks the end of an odd 10-year journey for the movie's writer Pablo Fenjves.

Most edgy thrillers are written by hotshot 20- or 30-somethings, but Fenjves is just starting to hit his stride in Hollywood as a spry 58-year old scribe. His previous claim to fame was being known for his involvement as a key witness in the OJ Simpson murder trial.

"In a weird way, I'm peaking," Fenjves said at the movie's premiere afterparty Monday night, as a security guard kept guests from getting too close to star Sam Worthington and photographers took shots of Elizabeth Banks and rising actress Genesis Rodriguez.

Worthington stars as an ex-cop-turned-escaped convict threatening to jump off a building while a police psychologist (Banks) tries to talk him down, not knowing the threatened suicide is part of an elaborate diamond heist.

Fenjves sold Man on a Ledge almost 10 years ago to MGM, which tried in vain to find a director for the film. Such directors as D.J. Caruso and Paul McGuigan flirted with the project, but executive turnover and a string of box office disappointments plagued MGM.

What saved Ledge was a WGA-required provision in Fenjves' contract that allows the author of a script to reacquire the rights to unproduced original material at the five-year mark; it's not a provision used very often, since most writers don't have the funding to take back their projects, and the time period for reclaiming the material is short.

Fortunately for Fenjves, he had three producers -- Mark Canton, Lorenzo Di Bonaventura and Neal Moritz -- ready to help him buy the script back. Fenjves chose to throw in his lot with Di Bonaventura, who extracted it from MGM and set it up at Paramount Vantage.

The project eventually made its way to Summit, but not yes"> before going through the legal wringer several times. It was the subject of lawsuit involving Bob Yari Productions when John Travolta was attached to star, as well as one involving Gavin Polone, who repped Fenjves in his original deal and later sued Summit claiming his production company was elbowed out.

"I jokingly say that this [movie] is a metaphor for the life of a Hollywood writer," said Fenjves. "You sell something that everybody is excited about, but the next thing you know they have notes, and they are basically slowly pushing you out onto a ledge. And then they hire other people. And then things happen to the script that you are not to happy about."

Even at Summit, the project stalled out a time or two. Chris Gorak was attached to direct it with Worthington to star, but the movie was weeks from taking off when Gorak left to direct the sci-fi invasion movie The Darkest Hour.

The script then went through the development machine. It initially had more of a play-like feel to it, as it centered on two people on a ledge and contained flashbacks; the action-packed third act was a more recent addition. And several other writers worked on it. Despite it all, Fenjves retained sole writing credit.

Fenjves wrote a slew of made-for-TV movies in the 1990s with titles such as When the Dark Man Calls, Bitter Vengeance and The Devil's Child but found himself in the spotlight as a witness for the prosecution in the Simpson murder trial; Fenjves, who lived in Brentwood in the early 90s, was the person who heard a dog wailing at the time of the murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.

Even odder, Fenjves found himself years later ghost-writing Simpson's If I Did It pseudo-memoir. (Fenjves has ghost-written several best-selling memoirs, including those of Janice Dickinson and David Foster.)

But it's on the strength of Ledge that Fenjves is enjoying a third act in a town where most are lucky to get one. Fenjves sold a project named Undertow to Relativity, with Michael De Luca attached to produce, he has Halle Berry attached to a script called Mother, and is working with Win Win and The Visitor producer Mary Jane Skalski on an indie titled The Good Brother.

"I'm 58 years old," he says, "and I don't mind having a movie made now because most guys are still talking about the movie they had made when they were 38."

For him, the secret to success is to simply keep writing.

"There's an old saying that says in Hollywood things come to those who wait. It's wrong. It's good things come to those who write."

Hm, pitanje je samo da li KCNA pravi ovo saopštenje kako bi rutinski podigla radnu temperaturu ili tu ima nešto dublje...

Мислим да је редовно дизање тензије, али ми се допао тон чланка и живописни описи издајника.  Повремено пратим КЦНА, и то паралелно онај сајт на јапанском серверу, као и онај на севернокорејском. Овај други ми је занимљивији, пошто има много клипова с телевизије, видео извештаја, краћих интервјуа с одважни прегаоцима, итд. Обилазиш ли те далеке сајтове? Занимљив је, мада не знам где је хостован, сајт Pyeonghwa Motorsa, фирме која је у већинском власништву Мунове секте:

http://www.pyeonghwamotors.com/eng/

То је једина фирма са страним капиталом која има билборде по Пјонгјангу.

Pratim KCNA, kako da ne, i pamtim živopisne definicije koje nude.

Nikola Tanhofer je jean od mojih omiljenih reditelja, pre svega zbog svog vrlo efikasnog pristupa pripovedanju i izuzetne vizuelne kulture koju je stekao radeći kao direktor fotografije. U SVANUĆU iz 1964. godine sve dobre odlike Tanhofereovog odnosa prema vizuelnosti su i više nego evidentne, on se potvrđuje kao izuzetno vešt i moderan reditelja, međutim, na planu vođenja priče ovaj film je pre svega nejasan a zatim i u ozbiljnoj formalnoj neravnoteži.

SVANUĆE počinje kao potpuno nejasna gotovo pa francuski novotalasovska melodrama a zatim se transformiše u blue collar suspense triler na železnici u najboljoj američkoj tradiciji, ali taj spoj deluje proizvoljno i više kao greška nego kao znak Tanhoferovog nepredvidivog spajanja žanrova.

Tim pre je šteta što je u svakom od tih segmenata ovaj crno-beli film izvanredno realizovan. Time se samo povećava osećaj koliko je na planu vođenja priče i onoga što je ipak osnov vrste filma kojom se bavi Tanhofer pogubio konce.

Otud će SVANUĆE pre svega biti zapamćeno kao jedan vrhunski vizuelni primer jugoslovenskog filma o industrijalizaciji i radnicima koji propušta da ispriča priču i ima bilo kakvu poentu osim najopštijih mesta o radničkoj solidarnosti koja je ipak samo sporedni motiv ako imamo u vidu koje sve teme Tanhofer pokušava da dotakne.

* * / * * * *

"Protiv nas su Hrvati, sudije – i ceo svet"

1996 EP Rukomet Jugoslavija - Hrvatska, poslednji minuti uz legendarni komentar Srdjana Knezevica

Screen Daily je živopisao KLIP Maje Miloš u Roterdamu!

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/klip-vs-screen-daily.html

Još priče o KLIPU

http://cutprintreview.com/reviews/3-12-stars/clip-klip-iffr-review/

Pogledao sam EL CONSUL DE SODOMA Sigfrida Monleona, vrlo zanimljiv biopic poznatog španskog pesnika i političkog aktiviste Jaime Gil de Biedme koji je bio aktivao od pedesetih do kraja osamdesetih kada je umro od Kapošijevog sarkoma izazvanog HIVom u vreme kada je epidemija bila na vrhuncu. Jaime je bio pesnik koji je radio pod velikim uticajem T.S. Elliotta i francuskih pesnika, i u periodu frankizma je žuiveo dosta sloodno baveći se dvema vrlo zabranjenim aktivnostima a to su homoseksualni odnosi i komunizam. Međutim, Jaime je bio sin bogatog duvanskog magnata i priličlno uspešan poslovni čovek unutar očeve imperije tako da su mu frankisti progledali kroz prste uz sporadične packe.

Ako imamo u vidu vreme i režim u kome je živeo, Jaime je bio dosta drzak a Jordi Molla, koji je uprkos saradnjama sa Amenabarom koliko ja znam ipak strejt, u ovom filmu mora da se satire sa nekim raznim muškarcima koji igraju ključne rent-a-bojeve i ljubavnike iz Jaimeovog života. Međutim, isto tako zanimljivo je da je najveću ljubav imao sa ženom gde je ispoljio i svoju drugu stranu, doduše na krajnje neobičan način.

Monleon ne pravi naročito sistematičan biopic međutim uspeva da iznese konzistentno liniju koju je želeo da prikaže, nudi jednu logučnu sliku Jaimeovog života, sa jasnim utiskom čime sa bavio i zaključcima koji iz toga proizilaze. Monleon povremeno naglasi koja je godina ali nema nekih prenaglašenih spoljnih zahvata.

Jordi Molla je izvanredan u glavnoj ulozi isa Monleonom uspeva da dosta ubedljivo prenese Jaimeovu emociju čak i u situacijama sa kojima je dosta teško poistovetiti se.

U finišu, kada već umire od AIDSa, začuju se i Bronski Beat i Pet Shop Boys a posle njih samo i može da dođe pop da opeva.

* * * / * * * *

Evo nešto za Mehmeta, mala kontemplacija o turskim serijama i rasizmu.

http://www.dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2012/01/turske-serije.html

Prelepo.

Naravno, možda je stvar u tome što su u turskim/ latinoameričkim serijama vidljiviji tradicionalni kulturni kodovi (porodčni, verski, običajni itd.) koje vezujemo za nacije i prepoznajemo ih (kao neprijateljske) dok u velebratovima itd. imamo posla sa postnacionalnim/ posttradicijskim kulturnim kodovima koji se vezuju za društva koja slobodu stavljaju iznad nacionalnog ili verskog - dakle liberalna zapadna društva.

U osnovi, ako gledaš na formu, tako je. Ali, kod nas su VELIKI BRAT i FARMA upravo najveća reafirmacija patrijarhalnih vrednosti, svi pokušaji da se tu uvedu gejevi, transvestiti i sl. služili su da bi se te grupacije izvrgle ruglu i od strane učesnika i od strane javnosti. Dakle, kod nas su sami organizatori tih emisija računali na to da će te grupacije služiti za zgražavanje. Uostalom, većina učesnika najviše i pokušava da pridobije simpatije publike tradicionalističkim gestovima kao što su plakanja zbog toga što im nedostaju deca, fizički i verbalni sukobi oo povređne časti ili političkog neslaganja na nacionalnoj osnovi i sl.

Isto važi i za prateće emisije koje idu uz FARMU tipa NAROD PITA gde se postupci učesnika sagledavaju kroz krajnje patrijarhalnu optiku.

To je sve legitimno opažanje ali ne kvari originalnu poentu - VB i ostali slični programi se ne doživljavaju kao holandski (upisati po želji) nacionalni produkt jer njihova osnova - život u nadgledanoj zajednici - nije deo ekskluzivno holandske kulture već nadnacionalne kulture zapada koji govori da je zarad bezbednosti zgodno žrtvovati nešto slobode itd.