AuteursHousekeeping

Wim and vigor

By July 20, 2010No Comments

King wenders

A view­ing of a splen­did Region 2 PAL U.K. DVD of Wim Wenders’ splen­did Kings of the Road inspires fur­ther rumin­a­tions on auteurs, auteur­ism, and taking/not tak­ing the bus. (That’s young Wenders above, in an out­take from the shoot­ing of the 1976 fea­ture.) It’s grist for the Foreign Region DVD Report mill, at The Daily Notebook, as always. 

No Comments

  • Chris O. says:

    I know it was a rhet­or­ic­al ques­tion, but did you see this Guardian piece on Lynne Ramsay back in April?
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2010/apr/22/lynne-ramsay

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    @ Chris O: Indeed. People always like to talk about the ways the film world has changed, and my way of being con­trari­an is to point out the ways it’s stayed the same, but for me, one way it really has changed—and maybe it’s got more to do with the film­makers I am excited by more than any­thing else—is the amount of time that goes by between pro­jects for some dir­ect­ors I find extremely vital. Ramsay’s at the top of my list for that, and the Guardian art­icle men­tions some oth­er not­ables. Back in “the day” you’d walk out of a theat­er show­ing a Fassbinder film and there’d be anoth­er one open­ing. Of course, that was Fassbinder. But still—in the mid-’60s Godard made two, three films a year. Buñuel was a steady pro­du­cer. And so on. I sup­pose if I actu­ally liked Joe Swanberg’s work, the early aughts woulda been a great years for me. But I don’t.

  • Chris O. says:

    Thank you. I could­n’t agree more. But is *part* of the prob­lem, though – and maybe this is me being com­pletely cyn­ic­al, and you touched on it men­tion­ing “wealth” (along with fame and age) – that these guys wait around for the fund­ing for their mid to lar­ger pro­jects because they have pool boys and private school tuitions to con­sider? I’m not say­ing they need to mar­tyr them­selves and reach into their own pock­ets to fund their ambi­tions (Clooney/“Good Night and Good Luck” and Duvall/“The Apostle” come to mind), but why not? Coppola, for bet­ter or worse, is doing it. It’s trick­i­er than that, for sure, I real­ize. Maybe this mostly an American prob­lem because some coun­tries have more grants, state fund­ing and what­not that we may not. Of course, the Lynne Ramsay example refu­di­ates (tee hee) that. I don’t know. Doesn’t seem to phaze Soderbergh, Eastwood and Allen, though. They per­petu­ally have some­thing going.
    You’ve touched on some­thing that interests me here. The same goes for music and the stand­ard release mod­el. If you wait four years in between albums (because of giant world tours, etc.)… what if that next album sucks? You’re going to wait anoth­er four to give it anoth­er go? I don’t like all of Jack White’s music, but I respect the eth­ic and the poten­tial in throw­ing some­thing against the wall each year and see­ing what sticks.

  • I think you’re both quite right. I’m eager to see more from a num­ber of film­makers and musi­cians, too. It always increases the expect­a­tion (and almost inev­it­able dis­ap­point­ment) when every work of art becomes, by vir­tue of its delay, an EVENT. I enjoy people like White (and Prince, I’d add) who just keep at it.
    As for the movies, I don’t know the par­tic­u­lars of Lynne Ramsay’s time away from the cam­er­as, but it does seem to me that often the dir­ect­ors with the longest times away from the set – Lisa Cholodenko, say, or Nicole Holofcener, to name two recent examples – are women. Allison Anders used to say that, while it was tough for any­one to make a first film, it was tough­er for women to keep mak­ing them, for a vari­ety of reas­ons. I bet that’s still true.
    I won­der, though, if some of this is also partly due to obsess­ive, American ambi­tion. Like the nov­el­ists who were always chas­ing after THE great American nov­el, while Brits like, say, Graham Greene were just writ­ing, year after year, in every pos­sible form. Or the artist’s determ­in­a­tion to do some­thing of epic sweep, rather than just a simple, sol­id film.
    You men­tion the busy Eastwood, Allen and Soderbergh, Chris, and I’d agree but all of them also have a very strong sense of budget, and Soderbergh (as Glenn, you cer­tainly know), can truly go bare bones what he wants to. It’s the film­makers who still seem to need that big expens­ive can­vas – and huge name casts – who go years between pro­jects. If there are gaps in their filmo­graph­ies, in many ways it’s mostly by choice.
    Plenty of film­makers, espe­cially after a long pro­ject, talk long­ingly about how they just want to grab a video cam­era and a couple of friends and shoot some­thing, fast. But how many do? (Whose work we’d actu­ally want to watch, that is.)

  • bill says:

    I can hardly blame the guy for not fol­low­ing through, giv­en the reas­ons cited in that Guardian art­icle, but I sure would have liked to see a film adapt­a­tion of THE RESTRAINT OF BEASTS.

  • Chris O. says:

    Exactly, Stephen. However, the ques­tion for me more than “But how many do?” is “Why don’t they?” And “If Auteur A can­’t make some­thing with a video cam­era and some friends, should we be call­ing them an “auteur” in the first place? (I don’t have the answers.) I believe in the idea that cre­ativ­ity begets more cre­ativ­ity and exhaustion/boredom breeds more of the same. But the hearts of these film­makers may be in chas­ing Ambitious Project X rather than mak­ing some­thing off-the-cuff just to stay act­ive… and that’s their call. Less fun for us, per­haps. At least, people like Winterbottom (Soderbergh’s UK coun­ter­part, I think) and Werner Herzog aren’t sit­ting on their hands.
    It is inter­est­ing to real­ize this is the longest, say, Peter Weir has gone between films. But will the same be said for Ramin Bahrani (not say­ing much, yet, with three films and a short in five years). If noth­ing else, we have the yearly Pixar offering.

  • And you know, Chris, inter­est­ingly – and com­pletely illo­gic­ally, I admit – I’ve nev­er felt the same way about act­ors. In fact, I liked that – back in the old days – you really had to WAIT for the next great De Niro or Penn performance.
    It’s still true, I guess, of Day-Lewis. But – as ter­rif­ic as both of them are – I won­der if I would­n’t appre­ci­ate P S Hoffman or Edward Norton more if they wer­en’t so ubi­quit­ous some years…

  • lazarus says:

    Back to the main sub­ject, Glenn I appre­ci­ate the con­sid­er­a­tion giv­en to Wenders’ career, and that you were able to see the worth in Land of Plenty, which I feel was unfairly over­looked. Don’t Come Knocking was indeed a pain­ful mess, esp. con­sid­er­ing the people involved, and the Million Dollar Hotel was an inter­est­ing curi­os­ity but does­n’t quite work.
    I recently was able to get ahold of the exten­ded, European cut of Until the End of the World, and I really think it deserves a re-evaluation, espe­cially in light of the recent release of Inception. What Wenders has to say about dream addic­tion and the nat­ur­al world vs. the con­struc­ted one (wheth­er through our sub­con­scious or tech­no­logy) is explored in much more detail in this ver­sion, and I always felt the film’s Chandler-by-way-of-William Gibson aes­thet­ic nev­er got its due.

  • Haice says:

    I do think the whole Coppola/Hammett exper­i­ence changed Wenders— like an astro­naut com­ing through a radi­ation belt—in some weird subtle way.

  • Yann says:

    Im Lauf der Zeit” and “Paris, Texas” are my favour­ite “slow cinema” films (along with “Barry Lyndon” and “La Notte”). Wenders star­ted to loose his touch for me with “Der Himmel ueber Berlin”, which has some beau­ti­ful moments, but is also way too syr­upy and pseudo-philosophical for my lik­ing (“show, don’t tell” – ok, hit me over the head if you want …) – it seems to have gone down­hill from there, but I haven’t really been fol­low­ing his career since.

  • Chris O. says:

    In terms of his 2000s out­put, I thought “The Soul Of A Man,” was the best thing about Scorsese’s “The Blues” series. It’s worth check­ing out.

  • I’d nev­er rule Wenders out, but I won’t rush to see his new­est films without alot of pri­or encour­age­ment, à la BUENA VISTA SOCIAL CLUB. I think his spin-out ulti­mately begins, and quite spec­tac­u­larly, with UNTIL THE END OF SOLVEIG’S SMIRKING – which is to say, it will nev­er end, or so it seems. That said, I’d really like to give it the re-eval laz sug­gests, as there were many great themes lurk­ing amid the clumsy dia­logue and voi­ceovers, none less than the addict­ive dream machine. Which is, essen­tially, an iPad, Wi-Fi-ed to the YouTube of the mind…

  • LondonLee says:

    WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN becomes almost unbear­able near the end, I hope Ramsay’s up to it. Still, rather her than a gazil­lion oth­er dir­ect­ors I could mention.
    Like Bill, I’d love to see a movie of THE RESTRAINT OF BEASTS too. One of the fun­ni­est and oddest nov­els I’ve ever read.

  • lazarus says:

    @ James Keepnews: It’s cer­tainly more of the same thing to an extent, but because those themes are actu­ally giv­en the time and space they need, the movie does­n’t come off as just a skip through cool loc­a­tions with a alt. soundtrack, and wacky clothes and set design.
    That cut is eas­ily found out there in the ether.

  • SeanAx says:

    Thanks to the “Kings of the Road” Region 2 review, I hopped on to Amazon UK and picked it up, along with “Alice in the Cities” and “The State of Things” (and finally upgrad­ing from my very old Pacific Arts VHS tapes). They arrived this morn­ing and I can­’t wait to watch them.