Thank you, Bob and everyone, for your input and all the viewing, reading, and
everything else involved in our process. I’ll be getting in touch with those
whom we need to work with to finalize our choices. As far as “RASHOMON” is
concerned, as I mentioned in an earlier e-mail the question has never been
whether the film is good enough to deserve to be seen. The question is would
people come to see it. It is a title that comes up a lot as an all-time best
dealing with intriguing themes, but there have been numerous opportunities to
see it and there are just so many ways that people can access it from no cost
to owning a Criterion DVD or Blu-Ray for about the same price as two admissions
to our film series.
Joel
From: cinemaexp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cinemaexp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf
Of Bob Stewart
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2018 10:35 AM
To: cinemaexp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cinemaexp] Re: FW: The Last Couple of Spots (with some minor
corrections)
Hello All,
My preferred choices for the 5th slot are Budapest Noir as a first choice and
The Interpreter as a backup choice. My ranking of the choices for the 6th film
in our series would begin with Iceman first, Searching for I Bergman second and
3 Faces third.
The discussion of Rashomon captured my interest enough to actually hunt it down
and watch it at 4am Saturday morning :) A little early for movie watching but I
was up early and had the urge to see it for the first time. I now understand
why this is such an important film and a significant entry in the history of
movie making. From points of structure and style to the masterful story telling
this film is a great work of art. Clearly I recommend a fresh viewing for those
who have seen it and a must if you have never seen it before. I streamed it
from my Filmstruck account which you are all welcome to hack into. I'll happily
give you the logon info. Sadly, Filmstruck is going out of business at the end
of November so if the interest is there act now.
Joel, no fear, on your part, of a Rashomon coup. I'm not on a campaign wreck
your well thought out schedule that is nearing completion. This is just a
gushing film fan sharing a new (to me) discovery. Thanks Abbott for bringing
Rashomon to the surface of the conversation.
Bob
On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 9:46 PM Joel Johnson <joel_johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:joel_johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
I decided to resend this to address a few minor issues in what I wrote as well
as a couple of other things in my earlier e-mail. If you have already responded
to my earlier message, there really isn’t any new information or issues about
making our decisions to consider. In my earlier e-mail I tried to get cute with
the format and indented several paragraphs while addressing the MJFF films.
Before I sent it, it looked just the way I wanted it to. Unfortunately, once it
was sent it had breaks that may have made it difficult to understand. I took
those out. Hopefully, that helps. The other issue I wanted to address was the
attachment. The films that are listed first and in bold print are our first
choice for that slot. I think they should conform to the discussion in our
e-mails over the last week or so. I came up with a second choice contingency
selection unique to each film so that Ken wouldn’t need to come back to us if
the first choice was not available or not available at a workable price. There
is no particular reason to fear that there will be a problem booking any of
those films, but I wanted to let you know why there were second choices that
you may not have expected to see on the list. I decided to separate “HALE
COUNTY” from “ON THE SEVENTH DAY” even though earlier I had both as
possibilities for 2/2-3/19. My reasoning was that they were both from the same
distributor and if there was a problem booking one there might also be problems
booking the other film, too. Anyway, I hope that makes sense to you.
BTW, “HALE COUNTY THIS MORNING, THIS EVENING” has received a Best Documentary
nomination from the Independent Spirit Awards. If we book it, that will be an
extra feather to use in promoting it.
Joel
From: Joel Johnson <joel_johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:joel_johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2018 1:41 PM
To: cinemaexp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cinemaexp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: The Last Couple of Spots
The finish line is in sight, but there are a couple of spots for which we need
to make final decisions. Hopefully, the accompanying list does not have any
major surprises. I would like your input for the final two slots.
After contacting Barbara Merson of the MJFF I did come up with a handful of
films for us to consider including in our series. There seemed to be a mutually
beneficial relationship that developed last year with our opportunity to show
“1945” and a bump in the attendance of last year’s MJFF satellite screenings in
Waterville. Unfortunately, we have not had a lot of opportunity to discuss
those films. Perhaps unfairly, I assumed that the IMDb rating numbers and the
status of being a Foreign-language Oscar submission would make “THE WALDHEIM
WALTZ” and “THE INTERPRETER” our best options from that group of films and that
everyone else on the team would reach the same conclusion.
Bob—citing a comment by Abbott—quite explicitly challenged that thinking. The
revelation that the former UN Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim had a history of
involvement in the Nazi war effort while pursuing high political office in
Austria certainly does serve to remind us of current politics. Do we—and by
extension our potential audience—need or want that reminder? Possibly not—at
least, that seemed to be Bob and Abbott’s thinking. While the film no doubt
offers a lot of granular details about the Nazi-Waldheim connection and the
ensuing controversy when it was exposed, this is not a story with which “the
usual suspects” in our audience would be unfamiliar. Waldheim had been a world
figure and this controversy was covered quite extensively by American news
media during the 1980’s.
We have two films “THE INTERPRETER” (Slovakia) and “THE LAST SUIT” (Argentina)
that are basically road trips. Both have some picaresque qualities to leaven
the tragedy of men revisiting the horror and loss that they experienced as
victims of the Holocaust—“INTERPRETER” having a surviving son looking for
closure on the victimhood of his parents and “THE LAST SUIT” being a
valedictory pilgrimage by an old man to fulfill a promise to someone who helped
him survive the Holocaust. Reviews of both of these films have generally
been favorable, but not without some criticism.
“BUDAPEST NOIR” is a bit different in that it takes place before the war. As
noted there has been criticism of the film for its embrace of the film noir
genre. While last year’s “1945” was set immediately post-war in a
rural village, “BUDAPEST NOIR” takes place in a bustling urban setting with a
seamy underbelly. I read all the critic and user reviews cited on the
IMDb webpage. While there were some issues raised by the critics, there were
almost always nuggets of lavish praise (music, performances, the recreation of
the 1930’s period, etc.) there as well. The user reviews were quite favorable.
The war and the holocaust are certainly foreshadowed, but perhaps not
necessarily the center of the action. I know some of you have mentioned this as
your personal choice, but I’m much more on board with this as perhaps our best
option.
Were you wondering where “KLEZMER” went? I read the four reviews cited on the
film’s IMDb webpage. While there seemed to be a recognition that it represented
an effort to contribute to the Polish reaction to the holocaust, the film
seemed to be found wanting and be disappointing. Barbara Merson in discussing
it with me labeled it as “grim.” It, therefore, seemed like one that we
probably shouldn’t waste much energy considering.
So what film would you like us to present in the fifth slot on 3/2-3/19?
For the final and sixth slot (3/16-17/19) I offer a choice between “ICEMAN,”
the doc “THE SEARCH FOR INGMAR BERGMAN,” and the Jafar Panahi film “3 FACES.”
This e-mail is probably long enough without revisiting everything presented in
prior e-mails. Personally, I like “ICEMAN,” but there are cases to be made for
each of the others. Perhaps ranked choice might be an option here. My choices:
1. “ICEMAN” 2. “SEARCHING FOR INGMAR BERGMAN” 3. “3 FACES”. Anyways, I hope we
can have some clarity on this by the end of the weekend.
Abbott did present a couple of older French films as possibilities in a recent
e-mail. I’m a little bit leery about having more than one older classic film in
our series for reasons I have previously stated. I’m especially leery about
putting something into consideration this late in the process which has not
previously been presented or discussed. Abbott, I hope you will keep these
films in your mind for next year. I (and I hope everyone else) will try to do
that as well.
Joel
