For this weeks Q&A I asked for an art theme to celebrate the joint birthday of Vincent Van Gogh and Francisco de Goya on this very day! So we'll start with a few art-focused topics before venturing to rando questions.
TOM: Which film about an artist (in any field of the Arts) that you were not particularly knowledgeable about made you want to see/hear the real work by that artist?
I vastly prefer non-traditional biopics so I'm susceptible to stuff that piques curiosity rather than gives you a greatest hits. So I like bios like Thirty Two Short Films About Glenn Gould (1993). I have some problems with I'm Not There (2007) which is my least favorite Todd Haynes film but I respect the hell out of it conceptually. In terms of movies about painters I definitely became more interested in Francis Bacon after Love is the Devil (1998) and not just because of Daniel Craig in the bathtub! I already cared about Caravaggio before seeing Derek Jarman's Caravaggio but I hope people see that one, too.
BRIAN: If you had to recommend a budding Cinephile a movie based on an artist, a work of art, or has artistic themes what would it be?
Hmmm. A lot of movies about painting aren't very good (Watching someone paint being only a notch more interesting than watching someone write). So let's do "artistic" theme and the answer there is easily Amadeus (1984). It's such a useful movie to reference in ways both commonplace ("too many notes!") and contemplative (what makes the difference between competent journeyman skill and true genius?). One of my other favorite "art" movies is High Art (1998)...
8 more questions after the jump
But my interest in that one is mostly due to the interpersonal complexities and Oscar worthy acting within its riangular affair (Radha Mitchell, Ally Sheedy and Patricia Clarkson)
JONO: Contemporary female artists in need of a biopic?
The important thing to note straightaway is that Hollywood has a very limited perception on what biopics can be. You don't need to necessarily have lived a super dramatic life as long as thematically your life's work can be interesting and the biopic is very focused. I wish, for instance, that Frida (2002) was more focused on one time frame because it's got several strong elements but as a whole movie it doesn't really add up to much.
The right director could make a great Cindy Sherman feature but it would have to be prismatic and identity-politics based like an I'm Not There puzzle. There's Ana Mendieta whose earth-body performances would look great onscreen. She lead an interesting life from a prominent Cuban family to an immigrant to the US and then a mysterious high rise fall to her death which some attribute to suicide, others to a quarrel with her new husband. I think Jenny Saville's obese female nudes, her willingness to pose herself, and her fascination wtih plastic surgery could all make for something interesting and provocativelly charged and feminist for the big screen. I think Tracey Emin is controversial enough in the "but is it art or narcissistic provocation?" kind of way that someone could wring a decent movie out of her rise from "Everyone I Eve Slept With" to "My Bed"
Obviously Yoko Ono but only as long as the film understands her as a lead and doesn't become just another Beatles picture. Diane Arbus is fascinating enough that there's every reason to give her a real biopic rather than a fictional one (Fur). And I remain sad that Michelle Pfeiffer never adamantly pursued her desire to do a Georgia O'Keeffe bio.
CRAVER: Shamefully I have never seen any movie from Japan's golden age. I intend to begin with Kurosawa. Which of his movies do you think I should watch first?
I am not the greatest fan of Rashômon (1950) I have to admit BUT I do think it is absolutely essential viewing since it is referenced so often and has proven so influential to narrative filmmaking. But after you've watched that join us for Throne of Blood (1957) since we're doing it for Hit Me With Your Best Shot!
KEISHA: Who are your favorite Best Actor and Actress winning pairs, either based on merit or for superficial reasons (As I was thinking about this, I realized that had Judy Garland won in 1954, she and daughter Liza Minnelli would have both won Best Actress when Marlon Brando won Best Actor.)
Whoa! That Liza/Judy what if blows my mind. So having established that we're talking "sets" by year rather than co-stars, I must confess that I'm almost never okay with both of the winners in a given year so my favorite pairs are for other reasons entirely. I love those moments when a pair who wins one year happens to co-star the next like 53/54 Audrey Hepburn & William Holden (Roman Holiday/Stalag 17 to Sabrina). My favorite same film winners are Colbert/Gable in 1934's It Happened One Night, easily one of the greatest romantic comedies ever made. And I really enjoy Kathy Bates / Jeremy Irons in 1990 (Misery/Reversal of Fortune) for its atypical nature; that's the only time (I think) when both winners were villains. And the 1995 wins to Susan Sarandon / Nicolas Cage (Dead Man Walking/Leaving Las Vegas) have always been a curious pleasure because it's the only time in Oscar history where I would have awarded the exact same two films both leading prizes... only in reverse. I was Team Sean Penn/Elisabeth Shue that year.
DAVID: Have you ever seen the 1993 noir film Romeo is Bleeding? I think Lena Olin is deliciously over-the-top in it as the Russian hitwoman tormenting dirty cop Gary Oldman. Are you a fan of Lena Olin?
I can't quite say "Fan" but I do remember her begin great/insane in that movie. She's the only thing I remember about it (I think I hated the movie?) and she's also pretty damn good in some other movies (Unbearable Lightness of Being / Enemies: A Love Story / The Reader).
It's weird that her career never exploded given how consistently vivid she was for a few years. Let's blame her husband Lasse Halström because it's fun to blame him for things. Let's be honest: Chocolat is THE. WORST.
RYAN: Have you ever had a year where you didn't care for any of the Best Picture nominees?
Hmmm. We have to travel back to the days of 5 nominees only. I'm trying to think of a year where none of the Best Pictures made even my top ten list. Generally speaking one of the nominees at least works like gangbusters for me (like Milk in 2008... otherwise that Picture liszzzzz). I think my answer is 1989. Driving Miss Daisy, Born on the 4th of July, Dead Poets Society, Field of Dreams, My Left Foot. That list does nothing for me. 1970 as honorable (dishonorable?) mention: Patton, Airport, Five Easy Pieces, Love Story, M*A*S*H. It's fine, especially the Altman, but none of them are "favorites" per se that I want to return to.
SONJA: What was the very first movie made you REALLY love movies? (thinking back it was The Little Mermaid and Edward Scissorhands for me)
Oooh those movies definitely rekindled mine. It hurts my heart that I can't remember the first movie I ever saw but my mom claims I was always obsessive about them. This will date me but you all know I'm in my 40s (ugh) so whatever. My first vivid movie-related memory is my family driving past Livonia Mall (the movie theater I went to the most as a kid) and seeing a worker removing the tiles spelling Return from Witch Mountain (1978) from the marquee. I was heart broken because nobody knew that the VCR would soon rescue movie fans from never seeing movies again that they loved. But the movie I cite as the one that changed me was The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985) because I suddenly understood that the size of my love for movies was not "normal". I was a Cecile and most people aren't. Their loss, obvs!
JONNY: Given that we've seen a huge revival in film musicals since the turn of the century, including a couple of Sondheim adaptations recently, what do you think of a movie adaptation of Sunday in the Park with George? Do you think that the bifurcated time period structure could work on film?
Sondheim's musicals are so perfect as stage works that it's always difficult to imagine them working correctly onscreen without a genius director (which musicals never get for some reason). Sunday in the Park with Georgeis heaven but I'm not sure it would work onscreen unless you abbreviated the second act. And made it more like an epilogue or a third act after a fairly faithful adaptation of the first act.
Mr W: You can pick one play by Shakespeare that deserves yet another adaptation for the big screen, and you can choose the director and the cast
NOoooooooooo! Moratorium on Shakespeare for 10 years in theater and film. The whole would would benefit from the renewed experimentation of artists all over the world. There are so many other playwrights worth adapting. I mean imagine if for the next ten years we could get even ONE cinematic adaptation each from a handful of other writers instead of the next 12 Shakespeares we're likely to get. Imagine a riff here on there on classics from Williams, Chekhov, Shepard, Kushner, Albee, Brecht, Stoppard, or, well, ANYONE else? It'd be so exciting!