criterionforum.org

colinr0380 wrote:And in terms of Hong Kong films I highly recommend A Touch Of Zen, which is one of my sure top ten locks for this decade (as certain of its place as Contempt!)

A Touch of Zen is actually a 1970s film per IMDb.

Oh well, that frees up a spot on my 60s list then

There's a strong possibility that at least half of my top ten for this decade will be Godard films, but none will be Contempt! EDIT: I just compiled a working list and actually only three make it into my top ten, but there's still like eight total on my entire list haha

Considering how, more so than any other decade, the last couple rounds of the 60s List have been Criterion-heavy, this might be helpful: All of the 60s Films released by Criterion

Well, it is good to know that at least someone is voting for Le gai savoir and Un film comme les autres!

A Touch of Zen might not be eligible, but King Hu's Come Drink With Me and Dragon Inn both are. Quite good films though perhaps not quite as great A Touch of Zen, but I'll certainly be including at least one of them on my list.

colinr0380 wrote:Well, it is good to know that at least someone is voting for Le gai savoir and Un film comme les autres!

I know this is a dig, but Le gai savoir is near the bottom of my list as of right now! It surely won't last, but for now :-"

Looking at my list, here's some titles that are fairly safe to make my final cut but which I don't think have been discussed much so far:

the Girls (Mai Zetterling) This was an orphan last round and likely could be again, but I'm surprised it doesn't have more cachet here. Zetterling, herself a former Bergman star, gathers most of his most famous faces and engages them in decidedly un-Bergmanesque political cinema very much in the style of the Nouvelle Vague. A deliciously feminist mash-up of Bergman's love of theater and Godard's love of Brechtian theatrical stylings!

Brigitte et Brigitte (Luc Moullet) Scrappily made and executed, but it has a charming artifice that matches its subjects, and the cinema lover in-jokes are terrific. You can skip the rest of Moullet's work this decade, though.

Love Come Back (Delbert Mann) Easily the best of the Rock Hudson / Doris Day pairings, this sly anti-consumerist satire sets its target on advertising, with an ingenious conceit: an ad company sells the public on a product based solely on its title and then has to scramble to create something that could fit the perimeters it's been sold within! One of the funniest of this decade's sex comedies.

Sex and the Single Girl (Richard Quine) And this is another. Though it's not my favorite entry in the subgenre, it's perhaps still the perfect exemplar of the 60s Sex Comedy, and if you can only see one, it might as well be this! Plus it's the least likely film ever to end with a thirty minute car chase!

Pretty Poison (Noel Black) The less you know going in, the better, but this is the best Chabrol film of the decade, and he had nothing to do with it. Don't make the same mistake I did a couple lists from now and seek out the Black-scripted Porky's cash-in Mischief, though, as it's one of the most repellent and misogynistic films of the eighties (quite a feat!)-- the Kelly Preston sex scene is so offensive that it could be preserved for posterity in a museum to explain horrid sexual attitudes of the era to future generations.

Anyone who was thinking of voting for De Palma's Hi Mom, as I was, should know that Imdb have it as 1970.

MichaelB wrote:

knives wrote:I figure this is a good place for this, but going over Russ Meyer's films today I was left wondering about a major gap for that 'genre' for me in Radley Metzger. Is there a release/ film particularly if it is appropriate for this decade I could use as an entry?

Five out of the six Metzger films I've seen date from the 1970s, but the exception, Camille 2000, is worth a look - it's a surprisingly straight adaptation/update of Dumas' La Dame aux camélias, and if nothing else it's terrifically stylish: designer Enrico Sabbatini more than earned his fee.

Thanks. I'm assuming the extended Blu is the way to go.

domino harvey wrote:Looking at my list, here's some titles that are fairly safe to make my final cut but which I don't think have been discussed much so far:

the Girls (Mai Zetterling) This was an orphan last round and likely could be again, but I'm surprised it doesn't have more cachet here. Zetterling, herself a former Bergman star, gathers most of his most famous faces and engages them in decidedly un-Bergmanesque political cinema very much in the style of the Nouvelle Vague. A deliciously feminist mash-up of Bergman's love of theater and Godard's love of Brechtian theatrical stylings!

I'm sure it won't make my list, but seconded. If you're at all interested in Bergman during this period, this is like an alternative universe version. And if you're not, then here's an incredible troupe of actors enjoying the hell out of themselves.

As for the Godard problem, it's not a problem for me, since I don't rate any of his films highly enough to make the list. The elephant in my room is Oshima, with five dead certs and a couple more bubbling under. In a previous incarnation of the 60s list, I believe I even found a place for the trailer to Death by Hanging.

79 primaveras (Santiago Alvarez, 1969) – Coleccion Santiago Alvarez (Zafra Video), also on He Who Hits First, Hits Twice: The Urgent Cinema of Santiago Alvarez (Other Cinema) – Now that I’ve watched the He Who Hits First collection, I’ve revised my original listing, since some of Alvarez’s films are clearly documentaries. Documentaries made by a master filmmaker with an incredible sense for cutting and cuitting to music, granted, but the avant garde touches in films like Cerro Pelado aren’t sufficient to push them over the edge into experimental cinema. Other films definitely qualify. The incredible Now!, set to Lena Horne’s civil rights anthem, is like a punch in the gut, the direct precursor to that Parallax Corporation training film, but to completely different ends. LBJ is a fantastically complex piece of propaganda.

79 primaveras has a documentary core – it’s a biography of Ho Chi Minh – but it’s elaborated throughout in formally sophisticated ways. Nobody was better at interrogating found footage and stills than Alvarez. Then, in the final few minutes, the film immolates itself in an evocation and embodiment of the Vietnam War that’s absolutely stunning, and as eloquent as Hendrix’s ‘Star Spangled Banner’.

I'm normally averse to posting YouTube links, but if anybody's cinema was designed for widespread, free distribution, it's Alvarez's, so here you go:
79 Primaveras
Now!
LBJ

zedz, I wasn't aware of the Zafra Video collection you mention, but I've just looked it up and see it's a 3-disc set with (among others) English subtitles. How does picture quality compare to the He Who Hits First DVD? Worth an upgrade?

I've only got the He Who Hits First set, but I'd welcome any comment on the quality of the other one.

I suspect that, where the same films appear, they'll be the same battered transfers, but I'd be delighted to hear that they're better.

zedz wrote:As for the Godard problem, it's not a problem for me, since I don't rate any of his films highly enough to make the list.

Jesus, no wonder we almost never see eye-to-eye!

Honestly I find this Godard's weakest decade (Pasolini owns the list for me), but even then he's got many that are some of the greatest ever. Unfortunately that strikes me as true of the whole decade so I'd be shocked if more then two or three make my list. It really strikes me as him spending most of the time trying to figure out who he is which makes for some interesting failures, but they still seem to be failures to me. Though those are better then some of his successes like A Film Like the Others.

zedz wrote:I've only got the He Who Hits First set, but I'd welcome any comment on the quality of the other one.

I suspect that, where the same films appear, they'll be the same battered transfers, but I'd be delighted to hear that they're better.

Ah, OK - I misunderstood your previous post. You're probably right about the transfers, but it would be nice if they were to be made available in better quality.

domino harvey wrote:

zedz wrote:As for the Godard problem, it's not a problem for me, since I don't rate any of his films highly enough to make the list.

Jesus, no wonder we almost never see eye-to-eye!

Oshima is the Godard of the East though, so there's your common ground.

Me, I'm with knives on the side of Pasolini.

domino harvey wrote:

zedz wrote:As for the Godard problem, it's not a problem for me, since I don't rate any of his films highly enough to make the list.

Jesus, no wonder we almost never see eye-to-eye!

I think that's just the tip of the iceberg. I like a lot of Godard's 60s films, but I've never found in his work the intellectual substance others ascribe to him, and there are at least a hundred other films from the decade that I prefer. But it's quite a decade, after all.

Actually, a slight revision there: Vivre sa vie would probably crack a top 100, if I were making one.

Now is definitely going to make my list, it's astonishing.

zedz wrote:I'm normally averse to posting YouTube links, but if anybody's cinema was designed for widespread, free distribution, it's Alvarez's, so here you go:
79 Primaveras
Now!
LBJ

I haven't seen much from the BFI's Flipside series, but Herostratus has certainly caught my attention. Granted, it's probably overlong, and feels at times more like a rough draft of a masterpiece than a full fledged one, but such roughness allows the film's most successful moments to take you off guard and really knock you out cold. There's some good discussion of the film already here but let me just add a few more key search terms to convince everyone to see this: region-free, Nic Roeg, Helen Mirren selling gloves, A Clockwork Orange.

Speaking of Flipside, here's another experimental recommendation:

An Untitled Film (David Gladwell, 1964) – Requiem for a Village (BFI) – This is an incredibly great experimental film, predicated on virtuoso slow motion effects and a superb electronic score by the memorably named Ernest Berk (possibly the most appropriate name ever for an experimental composer!), and its nine minutes fully justified my purchase of Gladwell’s later feature - a cascade of unforgettable images. Pretty definite for inclusion on my list. As a bonus, it boasts an absolutely stunning HD transfer, direct from the original 35mm camera negative (and it shows).

Yes, that one is a stunner!

I showed it to a group of college kids and they practically shit themselves they had never seen anything like it and couldn't conceive how it got made. If that's not the sign of a great film I don't know what is.

Is I Am Curious counted as one or two films? I'm not certain if I will vote for it, but am considering with the answer to this being a major concern.

They're kind of a unique case, which I suppose I could see either way. I think I'm leaning toward calling them eligible as a single film? Is anyone passionate one way or the other?

They're different films-- I'm only voting for Blue