Hammett (Wenders, 1982)

Hammett (Wim Wenders, 1982)

I mostly wanted to see this film because Wenders’ semi-autobiographical film, The State of Things, is based on the experience he had making this movie. Well, Wim, your experience makes for better film than the actual movie does. Really, this is just a poor man’s film noir with some slightly darker elements mixed in. Author Sam Hammett finds himself mixed up in an attempt to find a missing girl. And, of course, the deeper he gets, the more dirt he discovers. Since this movie was made in the 1980s as opposed to the 1940s, the content is a little more jarring (though barely), and the protagonist isn’t quite as heroic, so it has that going for it. But the setting feels fake and the story is just average, so this is definitely not one of Wenders’ best.  6/10

Essene (Wiseman, 1972)

Essene (Frederick Wiseman, 1972)

This film was rather obviously an influence on one of my favorites, Into Great Silence. Wiseman brings the lives of a group of monks in a Benedictine monastery to film. We see them care for the grounds, discuss theology, pray together, and even council about conflicts in the community. The people featured in this documentary seem genuine in their walks with God. Their actions and words are much more interesting as a result. The film features several short sermons, stories, and prayer circles that are mostly fascinating to witness, even for someone who sees this kind of stuff often.

Towards the end of the film, though, these sermons start to dominate, which brings the film down slightly. This isn’t because what is being said is uninteresting, but more because the following of the monks’ everyday lives is a rarer treat to witness. We see them mow the grass, upkeep their rooms, and we even follow one man to the hardware store where he jokes with the store owner. (This same man is involved in a hilarious interview discussing the use of first names where he interrupts the interview to go after a fly with his flyswatter.) This was a great film and my first experience with a Wiseman film, but I definitely plan to take in more of his stuff.  8.75/10

Into Great Silence (Gröning, 2005)

Into Great Silence (Philip Gröning, 2005)

Into Great Silence was quite the film. When I first saw the trailer for this film, I thought it looked fascinating. Then, I heard it was a near 3-hour film about monks and almost entirely silent. Needless to say, I felt reserved. Even as a spiritual person, I didn’t know if I could find myself captivated for that long with that type of a movie. I was wrong. The near 3-hour run time felt more like an average 2-hour film, even with its slow pace and silence. This film was beautiful in two different ways. First of all, many of the shots were fantastic. Gröning used natural lighting and found ways to capture many darkly lit scenes in ways that were incredible. Also, his edited shot selection was great. The biggest visual downfall were the many grainy shots. I was disappointed with those and found myself wishing the entire film was shot with a clear lens. Regardless, that was not enough keep me from enjoying this film.

The second beautiful aspect of this film was its spirituality. Knowing that these men have willingly chosen this path for their lives and seeing their passion (although in a very relaxed and focused way) unfold on-screen was powerful. It’s a life I know I could never lead, but I have respect for those who can. The film also takes time to focus on the everyday lives of these monks. We see them in their daily chores, and even an afternoon sledding! I can not honestly recommend this movie to everyone. I think it will take a certain kind of film fan to enjoy this movie. Keep in mind that it’s a slow-paced, very quiet film before seeing it. But also note that the visuals and spiritual aspects are well worth watching.  9.25/10

Uprise (Aguilar, 2008)

Uprise (Sandro Aguilar, 2008)

Every now and then I come across a movie that is captivating to me, even though much of what I’m seeing is confusing. As many of you know, I’m not the type of film watcher that needs a heavy plot to make my experience enjoyable. In fact, I’m quite the opposite. But when films start dabbling in the experimental too much, they start to lose me. Uprise has a basic plot that’s relatively easy to follow, but there are so many additional scenes/characters that seem almost thrown in. Though, in this loose style of storytelling, I have no doubt these events make sense to the characters. (Aguilar does a fantastic job of centering this film on the characters, not the audience. This can be a draining experience since we are not actually a part of these characters’ lives, but it’s an interesting experience, nonetheless.)

Where I need no convincing of this film’s excellence is in its cinematography. The low-lit, blue-shaded, intimate cinematography is fantastic. Again, with the cinematography, it’s focused on the characters. We see this story as if a real person was seeing it. At times, things are dark. At times, objects obstruct a clear path to what is happening. At times, not everything is in focus. The film (which I should mention centers around a man visiting his dying father in a hospital) also features some poetic flashbacks to the protagonist’s days as a child. If it had not been for over 30 minutes at the beginning of the film with no human interaction, I probably would have liked this a lot more. It’s still great, and definitely does what the director intended, but not always my cup of tea.  8.25/10

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (Ford, 1962)

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (John Ford, 1962)

Oh, John Ford. You and your many films with so many great qualities, but so many flawed instances. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance falls right into this category. First, and most noticeably, this film falls victim to way too many western stereotypes. The character of Liberty Valance, while portrayed very well by Lee Marvin, is as paper thin as characters come. He’s bad, and that’s about all there is to him. The same could be said about a number of the characters in this film. The most interesting character is Tom Doniphon who is very well-written, but he is portrayed by John Wayne, who gives a very ho-hum performance.

Where the film succeeds the most is in its atmosphere. This is one of the best small-town western settings I’ve ever seen. The set pieces and mise-en-scene are perfect. All the scenes that take place at night are excellent. The dark streets, the bustling saloon and restaurant, and the sounds of an alive town do wonders in placing you right in the thick of things. I really enjoyed being a part of this town. I just wish I would have felt the same about all the characters.  7.5/10