Change Your Image
macrane
Reviews
Les rendez-vous d'Anna (1978)
moody, filled with loneliness and despair, but very worthwhile film
Les Rendezvous d'Anna opens with a shot of a train station somewhere in Germany. A woman gets off the train, and she is seen walking slowly to a phone booth, and making a call. The shot is a long one, and the woman is so far in the distance that she can barely be seen at all. This shot establishes the mood of much of the film. I have to admit that, during the first half-hour of this two-hour-plus film, I almost ejected the videocassette and gave up on it. There are many long shots of Anna with her back to the camera, standing and looking out of hotel windows, train windows, at landscapes which are at best industrial. The viewer is tempted to say "OK, I get it; get on with it!" I succumbed to that temptation more than once. If you're willing, though, as I was, to slow down, to settle in to the pace of the film, to stop expecting anything much to happen, there are many rewards for your patience here. Anna is an independent filmmaker; she's on a more-or-less continuous tour of cities to appear at cinemas with her film in an attempt to attract a larger audience. The setting of Chantal Ackerman's film is almost entirely commercial interiors: on trains, in stations, in hotels and hotel rooms. I suspect much of this mirrors Ms. Ackerman's own experience. My first response while watching was to put this film in the same category as 'Last Year at Marienbad,' or 'Hiroshima Mon Amour,' great films, but bleak films. 'Anna' is a bit of a different story, though--the situation is a temporary one; Anna is a creative person out to help sell her work, not simply a symbol for existential angst. Her surroundings are bleak, but she's making sense of it as she can; during the scenes in this film where she interacts with others (two men who don't quite make it as lovers, an older woman, her estranged mother) she comes alive. She listens to people, she talks to them, she's sympathetic; she helps them as much as she can, living in a rootless world. I came away from 'Anna' with a deep sense of involvement with the character; she's still on my mind two days later. Like Anna, I sometimes feel adrift in an alien urban landscape. If you're a lover of European art film, I can recommend this film without reservation.
Born Yesterday (1950)
Junk king comes to Washington, buys a Congressman, and loses the love of his life.
Born Yesterday is an enjoyable film to watch. It's well-written, the acting is very, very good, and the plot comes to a satisfactory conclusion. Broderick Crawford plays Harry Brock, the junk king, in town with his lawyer to buy some legislation. Billy, his girlfriend, played by Judy Holiday, is a diamond in the rough, and he hires a journalist, Paul, played by William Holden, to teach her a few of the things she'll need to know to make a good impression in Washington. Paul and Billy fall in love, and there's trouble brewing for Harry Brock. During the tutoring process,Paul and Billy visit the memorial for Thomas Jefferson, the Smithsonian, Congressional buildings, and the like. He hounds her (gently) into using the dictionary, discovering what words actually mean. He educates her a bit in U.S. political history, with an emphasis on the Bill of Rights (Paul would be aghast at the current attacks on that document). He gets Billy to read some history, particularly Thomas Paine. At one point they're discussing selfishness (Harry Brock, the character played by Broderick Crawford, is selfishness incarnate). Paul makes a speech about how selfishness, if put in practice by our elected officials, leads to fascism. Paul doesn't seem to buy the current dictum that 'greed is good.' Later in the film, Harry Brock's lawyer informs him that he can't just go around Washington buying Congresspeople--nearly all of them are hardworking, honest people who take their legislative positions seriously. The comparison between that situation and the current climate of open corruption in Congress is a stark lesson for us all. This sort of political commentary will not be seen again in American films, at least not the Hollywood sort. The fact that this film was a very popular light comedy makes it all the more remarkable. Apparently Americans in the Fifties took their rights for granted, and expected honesty and forthrightness from their elected officials. Journalists like Paul comprised an honest, truth-seeking profession, not mere corporate embeds playing reporter. I enjoyed the film's story, but I was deeply saddened by the depiction of what this country once was, and what we have lost. It's a worthwhile film. See it, if you get the chance.