Archive | Film Matters

Austen Auteurs

janeLove & Friendship,” Whit Stillman’s adaptation of Jane Austen’s Lady Susan, is one of the best films of 2016 so far. This is surprising not merely because Lady Susan, an epistolary novel that favors its wicked protagonist at the expense of its subsidiary characters, is easily Austen’s least-beloved book. It is also surprising because so few Austen adaptations live up to their source material. There is Ang Lee’s 1995 “Sense and Sensibility,” which, penned by Emma Thompson, boasts a delightful buoyancy, and Patricia Rozema’s appropriately salty “Mansfield Park” (1999). There is the 1995 BBC miniseries “Pride and Prejudice,” which launched Colin Firth as the dreamiest Darcy on both sides of the Pond. But for every Austen adaptation success story, there’s a film like the unfortunate “Emma” (1996), in which Gwyneth Paltrow simpers over cups of tea for two hours, or, worse, the 2005 production of “Pride and Prejudice,” in which Keira Knightley dimples and bats her lashes as Elizabeth Bennet.

No decent portrayal of Elizabeth Bennet entails dimples.

Yet given the general decline of Western civilization in both the U.K. and the U.S., I believe we need film adaptations of Austen’s work more than ever – films that uphold her wit, etiquette, and ethics. We just need good adaptations that match the right director to the material.

Here are some dream teams sure to deliver more truth than treacle. Continue Reading →

‘Little Men,’ Looming Silences

little menThis week I got to speak about Ira Sach’s wonderful new film “Little Men,” a micro-indie (that doesn’t look like a micro-indie) focusing on the friendship blooming between two thirteen-year-old boys as their parents battle over a Brooklyn retail space. I gave the lecture to the wonderful Long Island cinema club where I sometimes speak and from whom I always learn a lot whenever I do. The group is comprised of cinephiles who are mostly retired and emigrants from Brooklyn themselves. Their perspectives about the entwinement of art and life and how time can change seemingly cut-and-dry issues have made me cry more than once. Suffice it to say, they really grasped this film. Here is the bulk of what I discussed.  Continue Reading →

‘The Little Prince’ Finally Lands

Le-pt-princeIn terms of its impact on cinema, The Little Prince may well have been named The Little Engine That Could. From “The Aviator” to “The Lego Movie” and “The English Patient,” this children’s book about the interplanetary travels of a solitary boy on a solitary asteroid has been influencing films since its release in 1943 – the year before its author, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, disappeared in a fighter plane. Inspired by his crash in the Sahara Desert during an international flight race, the story was always tinged with melancholy about the collateral damage of growing up.

But the writer and aviator may not have anticipated how this collateral damage could extend to the adaptation of his book, which has been butchered in such far-ranging forms as an anime series and a 1974 Hollywood musical. (To be fair, that latter project is at least a fascinating disaster, listing no less than Bob Fosse in its credits.) While a new, computer stop-motion animation adaptation by Mark Osborne (“Kung Fu Panda”) is actually good, even its trajectory has been fraught. Premiering at the 2015 Cannes Festival, it was delayed for U.S. release and dropped by a distributor before finally landing in the happy home of Netflix Studios, which is releasing it on a streaming platform as well as in theaters this month. Something about the purity of this story – of the prince’s clear little voice and features – has seemed to confound Hollywood, which, though itself founded on no shortage of childlike imagination, has a hard time embracing simplicity, let alone sidestepping bombast. But Osbourne and his team have devised a take that’s quite ingenious. Continue Reading →

"All, everything I understand, I understand only because I love."
― Leo Tolstoy