Where do I start with [insert filmmaker here]? - Page 2

Every time I see this thread pop up in New Posts, I expect the next entry to be from Michael Bay telling you exactly where you might start if you want to insert a filmmaker. Lube, probably.

Young Barbara Stanwyck in Ball of Fire is the hottest thing ever.

While I'm thinking about talking people into seeing Persona, here's something I wrote about it in another forum:

This week, I'm alone on a business trip. Celebrating my fleeting freedom of action, last night I permitted myself a rare indulgence: a tumbler of Maker's Mark bourbon, a Cuesta Rey cigar, and Ingmar Bergman's PERSONA. It was a tough decision. The local Cineplex is showing 3:10 TO YUMA and SHOOT ‘EM UP, both of which I’d like to see on the big screen. But I don’t often get the chance to watch a whole Bergman movie uninterrupted, and I couldn’t pass it by.

I chose well. While I’m confident that I’ll enjoy 3:10 TO YUMA and SHOOT ‘EM UP when I get around to seeing them, I’ll be shocked if either movie turns out to be as flat-out entertaining as PERSONA. Yep, an hour and a half of two women alone in a summer house, with one of the women uttering exactly one line of dialogue, makes for riveting, consuming cinema – the kind of cinema that makes you forget what time it is, where you’re sitting, even who you are. Bibi Andersson and Liv Ullman are just that interesting.

PERSONA begins with a series of WTF images that may explore the history of cinema, the deepest churnings of the unconscious, or even the flotsam and jetsam from which we pull together an identity. From another director, I’d dismiss it as so much self-important wankery, but I’ve seen enough of Bergman’s films to trust the guy’s mastery of dramatic narrative. Thus, I was willing to go where it took me, into a mind-state of disequilibrium and expectation. From there, we meet Ullman, a famous actress who, mid-performance, has chosen to give up interaction with the world and, instead, withdraw into herself. Ullman has a fascinating face that, while not exactly beautiful, invites contemplation. What’s happening behind those eyes? How deep is her despair? What does she see that the rest of us don’t? These questions come to consume Andersson, a young nurse assigned to Ullman who agrees with a doctor’s suggestion that she take her patient to the doctor’s beach house for a long recovery (Note: if this is what universal health care looks like, sign me up!).

Once at the beach house, we enjoy a pair of remarkable performances: Andersson all talk and existential longing, and Ullman, all contemplation and, perhaps, wisdom. When a violation of trust collapses the roles and walls between them, PERSONA gives us a brilliant exploration of the nature of identity and the quest for, well, something.

PERSONA is beautiful to watch, another successful collaboration between Bergman and his cinematographer, Sven Nykvist. The combination of light and shadow, image upon image, and simple physical composition makes PERSONA a film that surprises and delights from beginning to end.

It’s a whole different kind of entertainment from the offerings down at the multiplex, but it’s flat-out magnificent. I loved every frame.

Agree with just about everything you said about Persona. I have a hard time making my mind as to whether or not Bergman or Tarkovsky was the better filmmaker. Both legends who will certainly never be forgotten.

But surely Persona's not even an easy jumping off point for films about mental illness, let alone for Bergman's back catalogue.

I think Wild Strawberries is an easier way into Bergman, then probably The Seventh Seal and the more recognisable pictures, Smiles Of A Summer Night before making the journey into darkness with the Faith trilogy and stuff like Persona and Cries & Whispers.

Otherwise it's like telling someone who's never seen a foreign language film to start with Bela Tarr, rather than, say, Renoir or Almodovar. I mean, the ultimate idea behind a thread like this is to [i]keep[/]i people watching these pictures, no?

A personal caveat for trying directors I've never seen anything from before on for size (and there are many directors I've still never seen pictures from that I'm revving up for all the time -- Ivan Passer, Peter Watkins, Ming-liang Tsai, Hsiao-hsien Hou): start at the beginning (or as near to as availability will allow) and roll with it from there. Sometimes -- perhaps always? -- the most rewarding way to appreciate an artist is to watch their chronological development as a creative force, rather than just cherry pick highlights. Or watch one of their films, to see if you like the feel and then go back to where it all began.

That's more or less how I approach it.

Anyone have any advice for someone looking to start watching the films of Jacques Tati, Eric Rohmer and Claude Chabrol?

For Rohmer, I say Pauline at the Beach. It's one of his sexier outings, which should help ingratiate you with his very talky style. Then do My Night at Maud's.

I see where you're coming from, and you make an excellent point. Nevertheless, I stand by the assertion I made above. Persona is a just plain great, entertaining film. You don't need to know anything about Bergman or about mental illness to get lost in Ullman's eyes, or to wonder what Andersson will do or say next. Sure, it's more fun if you know that Bergman was schtupping both of them, but you don't need to know that to enjoy the film.

German/Austrian directors outside of Von Sternberg and Herzog. I know Fassbinder, but besides them are there others that I should be particularly interested in?

I know this request isn't about a certain director or filmmaker but I would like to check out the Hammer Horror films. After looking at the list of all the films the studio put out, I realize I haven't seen a single one and there are a ton of them. What are some good ones, beyond the regular horror icons?

Unfortunately my knowledge of the noble house of Hammer is not what it should be but I am sure anything with Cushing or Lee in the lead is a good place to start.

The only Hammer film I can think of off the top of my head that doesn't feature the 'horror icons' (by which I assume you mean Dracula and Frankenstein et al, not Lee and Cushing) is a fairly late one: And Now the Screaming Starts. Wonderfully nasty.

John Cassavettes.

Perfect choices, I came late to this thread and you took the words from my throat.

Must have been while he was kissing you.

I did gag a bit.

Start with Shadows. If you like that, let me know.

Why can't you tell me now?

It's not that I'm withholding information, those weren't even close to my intentions. Cassavetes just really isn't for everyone, and I wasn't sure if you'd like to see more after you see his most critically lauded. Faces, Husbands, Killing of a Chinese Bookie and A Woman Under the Influence are all recommended.

Start with Faces. Shadows is a primitive effort. Faces is where he got serious about shit. Then try Minnie & Moskowitz. After those two, you'll want to watch anything he ever made.

Shadows, man. Ya begin with motherfuckin' Shadows and nowhere else.

Bah. I've been watching Cassavettes since Stormin' was a year old. Heed me, Ripoli.

Paranoiac, maybe? But if you haven't seen a single one, why skip the big boys? Curse of the Werewolf is kinda different.

Now you're gettin' nasty.

Bump.

Started with Shadows, and while I liked it overall and can appreciate it for the whole "watershed moment in the birth of 'independent' film" accolade that I've seen attached to it here and there, it's pretty badly dated and the stilted acting in parts from Lelia and Tony is painful. I know they were just students, etc., but it doesn't make their parts any less jarring, especially compared to the looser stuff with Ben and his compadres, Hugh and Rupert, etc.

I think I was also expecting Tony's reaction to Lelia's brothers to be a lot more vicious than it was, so when it all went down it seemed sort of anti-climactic. Again, I liked the bits with Ben and the guys just dicking around and talking - it felt more fluid and genuine than the relationship between Lelia and Tony. Going to watch The Killing of a Chinese Bookie a bit later today, and will report back afterward.

I would have started with Faces. Or possibly the more accessible Minnie & Moskowitz. The supporting actors in that one (especially Val Avery in this scene) will knock you out.

Faces is next in my queue! I Netflixed these weeks ago before I found this thread, so I'm kinda going through them in a completely pointless order.

EDIT: Should I even bother with Opening Night, or should I send it back along with Shadows and queue up Minnie & Moskowitz?

They're all worth "bothering with", but I think Opening Night is, like Chinese Bookie, something you work your way toward. Both Opening Night and Chinese Bookie should be watched after A Woman Under the Influence. Bookie and Husbands are his most "impenetrable" films, but still rewarding if you let them be. You can probably skip the Judy Garland retard movie.

Don't know if made your way around to Rohmer, Tati and Chabrol yet. I've seen all of Criterion's treatments of Tati except Trafic, and they're all fantastic films, maybe even equally so. The earliest one, M. Hulot's Holiday, definitely sets the tone of the comedic style consistent in all Tati's films. If you haven't gotten into his stuff yet, you really can't go wrong with M. Hulot's Holiday, Mon Oncle or Playtime. The elaborate whimsy of his work is irresistible.

Haven't seen any Chabrol, but Rohmer is definitely someone to check out if you dig on dialogue-heavy films. All I've seen are his Six Moral Tales, but it's enough to get a feel for his style. The Moral Tales approach evolved appropriately in the 9 years between the first (The Bakery Girl of Monceau, '63) and the last (Love In The Afternoon, '72), though my personal favorite is My Night At Maud's.

Works. Thanks!

I've already seen almost all his films, but I'm curious: Where would any of you start with William Wyler?

I'd say Mrs. Miniver's the perfect point for jumping in and seeing what the guy's all about. It'll give you the perfect idea of his style and help you see why Ben-Hur was such a left-field choice for him to make.

I'd start with his documentary The Memphis Belle and follow it right up with The Best Years of Our Lives.

Dodsworth is amazing too.

I really need to speak up for Red Beard and Ikiru for Kurosawa. Seven Samurai, Rashoman and Yojimbo are all top priority. Other classics like Ran, etc. always seem to overshadow Red Beard and Ikiru but I find these two more accessible than some of the others being mentioned.

Trying to get into foreign cinema in a big way. So...
Wong Kar Wai
Pedro Almodovar
Jean-Luc Godard
Robert Bresson
Andrei Tarkovsky
Roberto Rossellini
Michelangelo Antonioni
Bernando Bertolucci

I can't speak for everything thse guys have done, but here are the titles that started me off:

Wong Kar Wai
Days of Being Wild

Pedro Almodovar
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown

Jean-Luc Godard
Weekend

Andrei Tarkovsky
Solaris

Bernardo Bertolucci
Why not start at the end? The Dreamers.

Almodovar:
Matador
Todo sobre mi madre
Habla con ella
Atame! (Tie me up, tie me down)

For Tarkovsky I always recommend starting with Ivan's Childhood, it's his most accessible feature film, and also one of his best. Very good take on the war film, with some of the Tarkovsky trademarks (beautiful, long takes). Stalker, Andrei Rublev and Solyaris are good from there, and if you can find it, his short (50 min) film The Steamroller and the Violin is very good too. If you're looking for more after that, dive into The Mirror, Nostalghia or The Sacrifice (which he made in Sweden using Bergman's crew, including legendary cineamatographer Sven Nykvist).

Bertolucci I'm not as familar with, but I can say that Novecento, The Last Emperor, The Conformist and Last Tango in Paris are all excellent films.

Antonioni did not make The Conformist, but I would recommend Antonioni's Blowup. It's the only film of his I've (sadly) seen, but it's a masterpiece.

The Long Goodbye
MASH
The Player

For Wong Kar Wai, yeah, Days Of Being Wild is amongst his most straightforward and accessible works. I suppose you should also check out giant hit In The Mood For Love, as that will give you a better idea on whether or not you enjoy the dude's visual tics and fractured storylines.

For Almodovar, Women On The Verge Of A Nervous Breakdown is a great little comedy that gives you a good look at his camp infatuation and visual style. Volver is slightly more serious, but still a good intro.

Godard, start at the begining. He did.

Tarkovsky, I've only seen Solaris, but that sure is worth the viewing. It's long and difficult but I imagine there's no such thing as an easy way into that dude's work.

The only Bresson I've seen is Pickpocket and the only Antonioni Blow Up. Obvious choices both, but also great movies.

Seconding these, ESPECIALLY The Long Goodbye. I have so much love for that movie it's unreal. Gould makes a pretty awesome Marlowe.

Re: Altman - Nashville is magnificent, but it may not be the best film of his to start with.

The Long Goodbye definitley best place to start - MASH feels a bit dated (though still great.)

Tell me about it. This was the first Altman I showed my gf, and she flat out *hated* the part she didn't sleep through. A while after that, I didn't tell her on beforehand The Long Goodbye was by the same director, and she just loved it when we saw that, so we're good for now
I sincerely suggest TLG as a starting point for anyone... not as dated as MASH, good story, great script, and best role Elliot Gould ever played. After that move on to Short Cuts (which was my introduction to Altman) or The Player, then the less known greats like McCabe, 3 Women (another personal favourite), Thieves Like Us or Brewster McCloud. And let me fit in some props for his most reviled work OC & Stiggs. Sorry, you're all wrong- I read the National Lampoon series and still think the movie's infinitely superior.
Weirdly enough, I think Nashville is actually one of the least accessible of his works now. A brilliant movie for sure, but the setting, the movie and the topical allusions don't make it an easy view for unsuspecting audience.

Because I'm 22, I'd recommend Shadows, then Woman Under the Influence (since what 22-year-old can't identify with an ostracized crazy person who listens to her heart?), and then Faces. Then watch all the rest.

Whatever you do, PLEASE watch Mikey and Nicky. It's directed by Elaine May, stars Cassavetes and Peter Falk, and truly captures Cassavetes' acting at his best. Not to mention that the film is a great '70s crime flick, has a powerful plot, and is just all around great. It's also more 'audience friendly' than Cassavetes' directorial work.

When I was in high school and as a college freshmen, I read and re-read Sculpting in Time. Yeah, I wanted to be THAT kind of a filmmaker...

I started with Andrei Rublev, then Solaris, then Mirror. Andrei Rublev is way longer than the others, but Tarkovsky was young, in love with the camera, in love with the possibility of saying everything about life, and the enthusiasm drives each shot. The Bellmaker ending sequence alone is worth the price of admission. Solaris is the most 'mainstream' of his films. Mirror is wilfully impenetrable on a conscious level, but certain shots are striking emotionally. It has one of my all-time favorite openings.

I still haven't seen Stalker, though I've been dying too.

Everyone else has great suggestions (Seventh Seal, Wild Strawberries, Cries and Whispers, Persona,), so I'll just say also watch Scenes from a Marriage. Is it the most human Bergman film? Maybe. The acting, insights into humanity, relationship electricity, etc. are all exquisite.

Whoops! Almost forgot: Fanny and Alexander is his warmest film. Different in tone from the rest of his work, it's therefore essential.

Bela Tarr.

I've seen Werckmeister Harmonies. Impressive photography, didn't love the story. Where do I go from here?