Podcast appearances and mentions of David Bordwell

Chad Freidrichs is a documentarian who has crafted a filmography built with a series of fringe stories that unveil fascinating narratives that exist just outside the periphery of normalcy. His first feature doc, Jandek on Corwood, sees a reclusive folk and blues musician gain a following, all the while he never truly engages with his followers fascination with his work. In 2011, Chad crafted the ethnographic documentary The Pruitt-Igoe Myth, which looks at the urban racism that existed in social housing in St Louis. Then, in 2017, with The Experimental City, Chad explores the rise and fall of societal ideas as witnessed with The Minnesota Experimental City, a grand vision that was never truly realised.Each of these stories have paved the way for his latest film, The Cinema Within, an exploration into the way editing works. Chad explores the language of cinema with Walter Murch, whose book In the Blink of an Eye equally explores the role blinking plays in editing, and also scholar David Bordwell who explores the impact of an edit on our psyche to understand the way it transforms our understanding of cinema. Murch and Bordwell play scene setters for the deeper narrative in The Cinema Within, which sees researcher Sermin Ildirar head to rural Turkey to find a group of people who have never seen a film before, creating the foundation to her research into the role of editing, perspective, and more, on our minds.The Cinema Within is a fascinating look into the impact of editing, and the notion of taking the language of cinema for granted. Like every language, it's one that needs to be learned and built on over time, and Chad's work invites that perspective of cinema. His films are invitations to see the world from a different perspective, and it's that notion that we explore in the following interview, which sees Chad talk about the notion of ideas, while I bring up my personal connection to Jandek on Corwood, a film that I saw back in 2004 at Perth's Revelation Film Festival, and that has stuck in my mind.The Cinema Within is now available to view on DVD, Amazon, Apple TV & Kanopy in America.Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, and Bluesky @thecurbau. We are a completely independent and ad free website that lives on the support of listeners and readers just like you. Visit Patreon.com/thecurbau, where you can support our work from as little as $1 a month. If you are unable to financially support us, then please consider sharing this interview with your podcast loving friends.We'd also love it if you could rate and review us on the podcast player of your choice. Every review helps amplify the interviews and stories from storytellers to a wider audience. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chad Freidrichs is a documentarian who has crafted a filmography built with a series of fringe stories that unveil fascinating narratives that exist just outside the periphery of normalcy. His first feature doc, Jandek on Corwood, sees a reclusive folk and blues musician gain a following, all the while he never truly engages with his followers fascination with his work. In 2011, Chad crafted the ethnographic documentary The Pruitt-Igoe Myth, which looks at the urban racism that existed in social housing in St Louis. Then, in 2017, with The Experimental City, Chad explores the rise and fall of societal ideas as witnessed with The Minnesota Experimental City, a grand vision that was never truly realised.Each of these stories have paved the way for his latest film, The Cinema Within, an exploration into the way editing works. Chad explores the language of cinema with Walter Murch, whose book In the Blink of an Eye equally explores the role blinking plays in editing, and also scholar David Bordwell who explores the impact of an edit on our psyche to understand the way it transforms our understanding of cinema. Murch and Bordwell play scene setters for the deeper narrative in The Cinema Within, which sees researcher Sermin Ildirar head to rural Turkey to find a group of people who have never seen a film before, creating the foundation to her research into the role of editing, perspective, and more, on our minds.The Cinema Within is a fascinating look into the impact of editing, and the notion of taking the language of cinema for granted. Like every language, it's one that needs to be learned and built on over time, and Chad's work invites that perspective of cinema. His films are invitations to see the world from a different perspective, and it's that notion that we explore in the following interview, which sees Chad talk about the notion of ideas, while I bring up my personal connection to Jandek on Corwood, a film that I saw back in 2004 at Perth's Revelation Film Festival, and that has stuck in my mind.The Cinema Within is now available to view on DVD, Amazon, Apple TV & Kanopy in America.Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, and Bluesky @thecurbau. We are a completely independent and ad free website that lives on the support of listeners and readers just like you. Visit Patreon.com/thecurbau, where you can support our work from as little as $1 a month. If you are unable to financially support us, then please consider sharing this interview with your podcast loving friends.We'd also love it if you could rate and review us on the podcast player of your choice. Every review helps amplify the interviews and stories from storytellers to a wider audience. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

PLANET HONG KONG ▼Sabato 28 settembre, dalle 11:00 alle 19:00, saremo in diretta per la nostra prima live streaming sul canale YouTube di  @DoppiaVisione  con "Planet Hong Kong", un'emozionante maratona di 8 ore dedicata alla scoperta e all'esplorazione del Cinema di Hong Kong. L'evento sarà un omaggio a David Bordwell, critico, storico e scrittore cinematografico che ha raccontato Hong Kong come nessun altro in Occidente. Ovviamente non mancheranno sorprese importanti, quindi non mancare!The Killer (1989) di John Woo è uno dei capolavori del regista, considerata una delle opere più influenti nella storia del Cinema hongkonghese (e internazionale), con un impatto rivoluzionario sul genere action, diventando il modello per i film d'azione contemporanei a Hollywood e ad Hong Kong. Quest'anno celebriamo il 35º anniversario della sua uscita, che coincide con l'attesissimo remake diretto ancora una volta da John Woo, girato a Parigi e disponibile in streaming su Peacock. Per l'occasione, abbiamo invitato come nostro primo ospite Ares Guidetti di Murph Magazine, amico e collega a cui abbiamo fatto conoscere il cinema di Hong Kong attraverso la visione dell'originale The Killer, sperando che la nostra discussione vi ispiri a scoprire questo film iconico e il mondo da cui proviene.Con Federico Allocca e Simone CortiRiprese Gianlorenzo Bernabò Di NegroMusica DEMONA alias Andrea Evangelista e Delio GallmannAnimazione sigla Ida CortiLogo design Chiara QuagliarellaPost-produzione audio Matteo FusiCon il sostegno di Associazione La Terza Via, GYBE Studio e SidereusUn grazie a Raffaele Allocca, Elisabetta Marrocco, Riccardo Romano, Andrea Sestu

Description: Jill and Aaron catch up a bit on exciting topics such as David Zaslav, Dune 2, Naked Attraction, and we give a tribute to David Bordwell who is responsible for a lot of people's journeys into cinephilia. We also wrap up Modern Classics by discussing two of the films that resonated the most, Marie… Continue reading CineJourneys – Episode 9 – Modern Classics The post CineJourneys – Episode 9 – Modern Classics first appeared on CineJourneys.

Against the backdrop of the incredibly boring 2000 election, the late, great Philip Seymour Hoffman went on a cross-country journey to see if George W. Bush or Al Gore represented America. The result was THE PARTY'S OVER (2001), aka THE LAST PARTY 2000 — that's right, it's an official sequel to the Robert Downey Jr-hosted documentary. We found many resonances between this fossil from the turn of the millennium and our current moment. PLUS: The Democratic Party primary, the fascist Italian Prime Minister in Canada, and a fond farewell to David Bordwell.Michael and Us is a podcast about political cinema and our crumbling world hosted by Will Sloan and Luke Savage. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week Seamus and Garrett drink the baby Sandworm Gatorade and talk Dune: Part Two! Plus, our thoughts on the new Disney Studios President, Disney+ shows including Andor and Obi-Wan Kenobi come to physical disk, and remembering entertainment and art legends. Episode timecodes: News - 0:40 RIP Richard Lewis - 0:40 RIP David Bordwell - 2:36 New Walt Disney Studios President David Greenbaum - 3:38 Andor, Kenobi, and more get physical releases - 5:09 Dune: Part Two - 6:51 Dune: Part Two spoilers - 20:08 Pop Culture Reference (Bordwell and Thompson)- 44:08 Save The Rec Center (John Wick Chapter 4 & Helldivers 2) - 48:13 Reach the show: Email: popculturereferencepod@gmail.com Twitter: @PCR_Podcast TikTok: @PCR_Podcast Instagram: @PCR_Podcast Facebook: facebook.com/PopCultureReference Music from filmmusic.io "Wallpaper" by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) License: CC BY (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Es ist wieder so weit! Christian, Lucas & Janick diskutieren eure Fragen. Es geht um den Niedergang von Twitter, ob es nochmal eine Nouvelle Vague in Europa geben wird, Lieblingsfilmkritiken, den Tod von David Bordwell, wann Fler endlich sein eigenes Biopic bekommt und vieles mehr! Das ist aber nur der Teaser! Wenn ihr die ganzen zwei Stunden hören wollt, dann unterstützt uns auf https://steadyhq.com/cuts.

Against the backdrop of the incredibly boring 2000 election, the late, great Philip Seymour Hoffman went on a cross-country journey to see if George W. Bush or Al Gore represented America. The result was THE PARTY'S OVER (2001), aka THE LAST PARTY 2000 - that's right, it's an official sequel to the Robert Downey Jr-hosted documentary. We found many resonances between this fossil from the turn of the millennium and our current moment. PLUS: The Democratic Party primary, the fascist Italian Prime Minister in Canada, and a fond farewell to David Bordwell. David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson's official website - https://www.davidbordwell.net/

This week we're discussing directors who have achieved cult status: the ones you can recognise within 24 frames of a film  - the Taratinos,  the Hitchcocks and of course, the Nolans. We come up with rules for achieving cult of director status and question if superstar directors still have power in the era of streaming services.ReferencesA quick guide to auteur theory by Jax Griffin for filminquiry.comPauline Kael's rebuttal to auteur theoryPauline Kael on Taratino and Pulp FictionChristopher Nolan: A Labyrinth of Linkages by David Bordwell and Kristen Thompson - essays looking closely at Nolan's narrative and cinematic style Wally Pfister's cinematography in Inception by Prachurya DasHitchcock's Psycho marketing campaignDramatic Tension in North by Northwest by Junming JiangThe directing and writing style of Greta GerwigFilm Pharmacy recommendationsMiss Congeniality (2000) dir. by Donald Petrie20th Century Women (2016) dir. by Mike MillsJoan Didion: The Center Will Not Hold (2017) dir. by Griffin Dunne-----------If you love what we do, please like, subscribe and leave a review!Produced and edited by Lily AustinMusic and sound by James BrailsfordLogo design by Abby-Jo SheldonFollow usEmail us

This week we get into that particular kind of surrealist madness only French cinema can capture. From the overwrought 60s stylisation of Last Year at Marienbad to modern masterpiece Holy Motors, care of 70s standouts Celine and Julie Go Boating and The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie - if nothing else, we're giving tops marks for the titles.Films referenced:Last Year at Marienbad (1961) dir. by Alain Resnais The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (1972) dir. by Luis BunuelCeline & Julie Go Boating (1974) dir. by Jacques RivetteHoly Motors (2012) dir. by Leos CaraxSources and resources:Film Art: An Introduction by David Bordwell and Kristen Thompson  - the analysis that kickstarted James' love of French Films - comes highly recommendedSacha Vierny (the cinematographer on Last Year at Marienbad)'s obituary by Michael Brooke Pauline Kael's review of Last Year at MarienbadPauline Kael's review of the Discreet Charm of the BourgeoisieThe Triumph of ‘Céline and Julie Go Boating' by Kristen Yoonsoo Kim for thenation.comInterview with Holy Motors director Leos Carax by Eric Kohn for IndieWire-----------If you love what we do, please like, subscribe and leave a review!Produced and edited by Lily AustinMusic and sound by James BrailsfordLogo design by Abby-Jo SheldonFollow usEmail us

From the opening shots of Wong Kar-wai’s DAYS OF BEING WILD (1990), it’s clear that the real world is less important than making its characters – and its audience – feel. Harry calls it “almost Lynchian," using vague timelines and liminal spaces to foreground moment-to-moment emotion rather than adhere to a prescriptive structure. Without a single clear perspective or identity, it’s communicating the essential dependency every person has on the people and world around them. Whether or not we realize it, we all draw strength from that dependency – but some wield it against each other. 1:09:08 - The Aaron Grossman Wong Kari-wai Filmed Apartment Quality Index (AGWKWFAQI) 1:13:02 - Cody’s Noteys (Cheung Chrivia) 1:26:01 - Aaron fucks around, finds out Follow us on Twitter at https://twitter.com/trylovepodcast and email us at trylovepodcast@gmail.com to get in touch! Buy tickets and support the Trylon at https://www.trylon.org/ “Years of being obscure” by David Bordwell: http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2008/06/24/years-of-being-obscure/ Theme: "Raindrops" by Huma-Huma/"No Smoking" PSA by John Waters. Outro music: “Perfidia” by Xavier Cugat, the Mambo King.

Our returning guest this week is David Bordwell, Jacques Ledoux Professor of Film Studies right here at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Professor Bordwell has written about King Hu in his books Poetics of Cinema and Planet Hong Kong, both of which you can find at his website, davidbordwell.net, along with numerous blog posts about King Hu, and a wealth of scholarship covering every corner of cinema. In 2007, he received a special award for excellence in Asian film scholarship from the Hong Kong Film Festival.

How would you feel if one day you woke up and started to shrink? Join Hilary and Holly as they take a closer look at one of the most iconic science fiction films of the 1950s, The Incredible Shrinking Man. They break down the Cold War context, how the atom influenced science fiction at the time, what the film reveals about masculinity and the very ambiguous ending and the different ways to interpret it! Dr Miranda Corcoran also joins us to speak about her experience teaching the text and what it reveals about masculinity during the 1950s. Miranda Corcoran is a lecturer in twenty-first-century literature at University College Cork. Her research interests include Cold-War literature, genre fiction, popular fiction, sci-fi, horror and the gothic. She is currently writing a book titled Witchcraft and Adolescence in American Popular Culture: Teen Witches.Twitter: @middleagedwitch Works Cited:Craig, Rob (2013). It Came from 1957: A Critical Guide to the Year's Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror Films. McFarland. Cunnally, Ruthellen. "Mind over matter: mental evolution and physical devolution in The Incredible shrinking man." Journal of Popular Film and Television 41.1 (2013): 2-9.Haraway, Donna. "“A Cyborg Manifesto”(1985)." Cultural Theory: An Anthology (2010): 454.Hendershot, Cyndy. Darwin and the Atom: Evolution/Devolution Fantasies in The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms, Them!, and The Incredible Shrinking Man. JSTOR.Hendershot, Cyndy. Paranoia, The Bomb, and 1950s Science Fiction Films. Popular Press, 1999.Muller, Jurgen. Movie’s of the 50s. TASCHEN. Bibliothecca Universalis.Thompson, Kristin, and David Bordwell. Film History: An Introduction. 3 rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 2010.Warren, Bill (2009). Keep Watching the Skies!: American Science Fiction Movies of the Fifties, The 21st Century Edition.Music:A Ghost Waltz by Loyalty Freak Music is licensed under a CC0, From the Free Music Archive.Monster Parade by Loyalty Freak Music is licensed under a CC0 1.0 Universal License, From the Free Music Archive.

To officially commence the Milestone month of August, Will Ashton and Andrew McMahon make their long-awaited returns to help break down a unique and unexpected triple feature, the likes of which the podcast world may have never seen before. We begin with an analysis of Barbara Loden’s Wanda, the first film to be written, directed, and led by a female filmmaker. We follow this up with a look back at Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, the iconic feature debut of Tim Burton. Finally, we dive into the work of the great Agnès Varda with an observational look at her acclaimed and influential film Vagabond. SHOW NOTES: 00:03:45 – Wanda 00:37:20 – Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure 00:57:00 – Vagabond 01:20:00 – Recommendations of similar films to seek out NEXT WEEK: Jon Negroni returns yet again to examine Akira Kurosawa’s 1950 masterpiece Rashomon! MUSIC IN THIS EPISODE: Score for Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure composed by Danny Elfman, trailers for Wanda and Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, interview for “Observations on Film Art” with Prof. David Bordwell on Vagabond. CINEMAHOLICS IN THIS EPISODE:Sam Noland,Will Ashton, and Andrew McMahon   Support the show on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cinemaholics See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

To officially commence the Milestone month of August, Will Ashton and Andrew McMahon make their long-awaited returns to help break down a unique and unexpected triple feature, the likes of which the podcast world may have never seen before. We begin with an analysis of Barbara Loden’s Wanda, the first film to be written, directed, and led by a female filmmaker. We follow this up with a look back at Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, the iconic feature debut of Tim Burton. Finally, we dive into the work of the great Agnès Varda with an observational look at her acclaimed and influential film Vagabond. SHOW NOTES: 00:03:45 – Wanda 00:37:20 – Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure 00:57:00 – Vagabond 01:20:00 – Recommendations of similar films to seek out NEXT WEEK: Jon Negroni returns yet again to examine Akira Kurosawa’s 1950 masterpiece Rashomon! MUSIC IN THIS EPISODE: Score for Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure composed by Danny Elfman, trailers for Wanda and Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, interview for “Observations on Film Art” with Prof. David Bordwell on Vagabond. CINEMAHOLICS IN THIS EPISODE:Sam Noland,Will Ashton, and Andrew McMahon   Support the show on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cinemaholics See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this MILESTONE 50th episode (woo-hoo!), I discuss the differences between film critiques and film reviews, and explain why writing about film in general (no matter which approach you prefer) can help you improve your writing skills. ********************************************************************************************************************************************** Email me: marisadellefarfalle@gmail.com Twitter: @marisadee13 Instagram: marisadf13 I'd also really appreciate it if you could take a moment to rate & review this podcast on Apple Podcasts, as it'll help a lot more people find out about this show! ********************************************************************************************************************************************** Helpful links: "Difference Between Critique and Review": https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-critique-and-vs-review/ "The Art of Film Criticism," by Natasha Alvar: https://culturedvultures.com/the-art-of-film-criticism/ "Never the Twain Shall Meet," by David Bordwell: https://www.filmcomment.com/article/never-the-twain-shall-meet/ "The Importance of Film Criticism," by Nathan Rohe: https://www.theodysseyonline.com/the-importance-of-film-criticism "Why Don't Critics Like the Same Films as the Rest of Us?" by Dave Roos: https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/critics-dont-like-same-films-us.htm

Kênia Freitas e Renato Cabral falam sobre os dois primeiros textos traduzidos dentro da nova iniciativa da Abraccine. Na 12ª edição do podcast da Abraccine (Associação Brasileira de Críticos de Cinema), o tema é o lançamento do projeto Abraccine Traduções, iniciativa da associação para incentivar a leitura de textos fundamentais para o exercício da atividade da crítica, através da publicação de artigos inéditos em português, em traduções realizadas por associados e associadas da entidade. O projeto também visa criar um diálogo com a produção acadêmica, e com isso contribuir para a formação de uma nova geração na crítica. Nossos convidados para este podcast são os tradutores dos dois artigos inaugurais do projeto: Kênia Freitas (Multiplot, ES), que traduziu “Reivindicando os Estudos de Filme e Mídia Pretos”, texto dos professores Racquel J. Gates e Michael Boyce Gillespie; e Renato Cabral (Calvero, RS), que traduziu “Quando a mídia se torna gerenciável: Streaming, pesquisa de filmes e o Multiplex Celestial”, texto do professor e teórico David Bordwell. Apresentação: Amanda Aouad (Cine Pipoca Cult, BA) e Renato Silveira (Cinematório, MG). No Podcast Abraccine, críticos de todo o país filiados à entidade se reúnem mensalmente para debater temas relacionados ao exercício da crítica de cinema no Brasil, entre outros assuntos relacionados à sétima arte. Edição: Renato Silveira Trilha sonora: “Tubarão de Bacia”, de Buguinha Dub e Jorge Du Peixe, do filme Febre do Rato, dirigido por Cláudio Assis, vencedor do Festival de Paulínia de 2011. Links de referência: Abraccine Traduções

Welcome to The Tinsel Factory! This week, we’re going through a speed run from the origin of film up to the late 1940’s. (I get way more confident as time goes by)   Recommended Viewing: Library of Congress:  Edison Films: www.youtube.com/watch?v=daKHH7AdN8U&list=PLD28424FAA9414F49  Lumiere Films: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nj0vEO4Q6s  Trip to the Moon (1902): www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNAHcMMOHE8  Great Tain Robbery (1903): www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3jrB5ANUUYn  Birth of a Nation (1915): www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebtiJH3EOHo  The Toll of the Sea (1922): www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNPAB0biktc  The Jazz Singer (1927): Available to rent on major platforms  Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937): Available on Disney+ Singin’ in the Rain (1952): Available on HBOMax  Triumph of the Will (1935): Available to rent on Prime Video WARNING: This is a Nazi propaganda documentary  The Great Dictator (1940): Available on HBOMax  Casablanca (1942): Available on HBOMax  Millions Like Us (1943): www.youtube.com/watch?v=assxbzB7P0Y  The Best Years of Our Lives (1946): Available to rent on iTunes or Prime Video Sources: Wikipedia - of course Birth Movies Death southtree.com https://www.bestmoviesbyfarr.com/articles/movies-from-the-great-depression/2015/06 Encyclopedia Britannica https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRheZ_MUYiY Film History: An Introduction, Second Edition, by Kristin Thompson and David Bordwell https://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/movie-moments/ TCM’s A History of Movies --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/tinselfactorypod/support

As a complement to our earlier podcast with David Bordwell discussing Hill of Freedom and the cinema of Hong Sang-soo, episode 11 of Cinematalk takes a closer look at another superb and semi-autobiographical Hong feature, Woman on the Beach (2006). In Woman on the Beach, a filmmaker travels to a sparsely populated seaside resort town to get some writing done on his next project. While seeking inspiration, he becomes romantically entangled with a pair of women—first his assistant’s companion, then a second woman who reminds him of the first. On the surface, this pair of overlapping love triangles appears to be one of Hong’s most breezily conventional films, but embedded within Woman on the Beach’s straightforward story is a trickier web of narrative rhymes and variations—a kind of Vertigo by way of Eric Rohmer—as its characters attempt to overcome their own preconceptions of one another. Discussing Woman on the Beach on this episode of Cinematalk are Mike King and Zachary Zahos, both programmers for the Cinematheque and Wisconsin Film Festival.

This week, we are delighted to be joined on the podcast by the great film scholar David Bordwell. David Bordwell is the Jacques Ledoux Professor of Film Studies right here at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and is the author of numerous essential texts on cinema, including Planet Hong Kong, Ozu and the Poetics of Cinema, and most recently Reinventing Hollywood: How 1940s Filmmakers Changed Movie Storytelling, to name a just a few. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. You can find him on the world wide web at davidbordwell.net, where many of his books are available for purchase as downloadable pdfs, along with a wealth of supplemental materials, as well as his invaluable blog and where he and Kristin Thompson write about all manner of cinema. Professor Bordwell has been following Hong Sang Soo since his very first film, and our discussion touches on Hong’s filmography as a whole, Hill of Freedom (presented by UW Cinematheque with support from the Center for East Asian Studies) in particular, and Hong’s visit to the 2001 Wisconsin Film Festival right here in Madison. Here’s that conversation.

We're always happy to welcome two outstanding scholars to the Film Comment Podcast, and you've probably already read their criticism or heard them on a DVD or streaming commentary. David Bordwell last joined us to discuss his book Reinventing Hollywood, and of course his books are staples of film studies courses and his regular film blog with Kristin Thompson is a sharp and inquisitive resource. Critic Imogen Sara Smith is our other returning guest, a regular contributor to Film Comment and an all-star contributor at Criterion and elsewhere. Among her beautifully composed and observed essays, she's written about Christian Petzold for us and on the podcast, reflected on the phenomenon of ghosts in cinema. Film Comment Editor-in-Chief Nicolas Rapold welcomed David and Imogen back for a discussion that ranges from fascinating rediscoveries in Japanese cinema to the inflammatory film The Hunt. If you're a longtime Film Comment subscriber, listener, or reader, or are just tuning in now, please consider becoming a member or making a donation to our publisher, Film at Lincoln Center, during these unprecedented times: purchase.filmlinc.org/donate/contribute2

Neste programa, Fernando Machado, Leandro Luz e Marina Oliveira recebem o jornalista, crítico e especialista em cinema e linguagem audiovisual, professor Fábio Rockenbach para debater as obras do cineasta estadunidense Michael Mann, responsável por filmes como "Fogo Contra Fogo", "Colateral" e "Miami Vice". Portanto pegue seu fone de ouvido, prepare o café e nos acompanhe nesta jornada, pois a partir de agora você está em um plano-sequência! Ficha Técnica: Duração: 02h18min. | Pauta: Fernando Machado | Arte da Capa: Marina Oliveira | Edição e Montagem: Fernando Machado | Mixagem de Som e Trilha Sonora: Fernando Machado | Publicação: Fernando Machado ======================================== Caso você queira ouvir os comentários apenas sobre um dos filmes, confira a minutagem em que cada um entra: 00:19:17:16 – Profissão: Ladrão (1981) 00:33:23:01 – Fogo Contra Fogo (1995) 00:56:07:13 – O Informante (1999) 01:15:27:07 – Colateral (2004) 01:34:41:06 – Miami Vice (2006) 01:55:11:19 – Top 3, Considerações Finais, etc ======================================== Dúvidas, sugestões, críticas ou feedbacks podem ser enviados para o e-mail contato@plano-sequencia.com ou através de nossas redes sociais. Estamos no Twitter @planoseqcast, no Instagram @planoseqcast e no Facebook/planosequenciapodcast. Não deixe de avaliar o podcast no iTunes para que possamos ter mais visibilidade dentro da plataforma. Para este episódio contamos com a parceria da Amazon para oferecer descontos exclusivos em produtos relacionados ao cinema de Michael Mann. Links abaixo: A Arte do Cinema: uma Introdução, por David Bordwell e Kristin Thompson Michael Mann: The Pocket Essential Guide (English Edition), por Mark Steensland ======================================== Hiperlinks: Cinema de Michael Mann (Vídeo), por Arthur Tuoto O lirismo das selvas de cimento: o cinema de Michael Mann, por Miguel Forlin A Ética da Noite: “Fogo Contra Fogo” de Michael Mann, por Leandro Costa Para Michael Mann, a ação é consequência e relacionamentos são impossíveis, por Fábio Rockenbach ========================================

This week on The Spectator Film Podcast… Dial M for Murder (1954) 5.17.19 Featuring: Austin, Maxx Commentary begins at 13:17 — Notes — Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Lacan (But Were Afraid to Ask Hitchcock) edited by Slavoj Žižek — Here’s some of the better Lacanian criticism of Hitchcock, of which you can find a lot. I’d recommend this as a decent entry point for this type of scholarship – at least, as decent as you might find with Lacanian psychoanalysis. We relied upon some of the essays in this volume to better characterize the variety of Hitchcockian objects at play in Dial M for Murder and “Hitchcockian suspense.” The two most helpful essays for our conversation today were ‘Hitchcockian Suspense’ by Pascal Bonitzer and ‘Hitchcock’s Objects’ by Mladen Dolar – although we’ll borrow Žižek’s description of the “exchange objects” from the introduction here in the passages below: On Hitchcockian Suspense “Hitchcock’s films therefore work only if a natural order is presupposed. Everything is proceeding normally, according to routines that are ordinary, even humdrum and unthinking, until someone notices that an element in the whole, because of its inexplicable behavior, is a stain. The entire sequence of events unfolds from that point. The most characteristically Hitchcockian staging effects are always organized around such a stain. However, anything whatsoever may function as the stain inducing the gaze – the blood on the dress in Stage Fright; the glass of milk in Suspicion, ‘intensified’ by placing a small bulb inside of it; the black rectangle of the window in Rear Window and, within, that black rectangle, the red tip of the murderer’s cigarette, or, indeed, the plane in North by Northwest, which is at first no more than a speck in the sky” (20; Bonitzer). “Hitchcock’s films are full of decent, ordinary petty-bourgeois people. These are masks. Thus, in The Lady Vanishes, the good Miss Froy, with her tea and meaningless chatter, is really a spy. All the others have something else to hide, a concealed point of abjection, which the perverse element, the visible but barely perceptible stain of crime, will reveal” (21; Bonitzer). On Hitchcockian Objects “But in a series of Hitchcock’s films, we find another type of object which is decidedly not indifferent, not pure absence: what matters here is precisely its presence, the material presence of a fragment of reality – it is a leftover, remnants which cannot be reduced to a network of formal relations proper to the symbolic structure. We can define this object as an object of exchange circulating among subjects, serving as a kind of guarantee, pawn, on their symbolic relationship. It is the role of the key in Notorious and Dial M for Murder, the role of the wedding ring in Shadow of a Doubt and Rear Window, the role of the lighter in Strangers on a Train, and even the role of the child circulating between the two couples, in The Man Who Knew Too Much. It is unique, non-specular – that is, it has no double, it escapes the dual mirror-relation, which is why it plays a crucial role in those very films that are built on a whole series of dual relations, each element having its mirror-counterpart… it is the one which has no counterpart, and that is why it must circulate between the opposite elements, as if in search of its proper place, lost from the very beginning” (6; Žižek) ‘Dial M for Murder: Hitchcock frets not at his narrow room’ by David Bordwell from Observations on Film Art — Observations on Film Art, run by Kristin Thompson and David Bordwell, is without question one of the best, if not the best, film blog on the internet. It’s been active for years and has an incredible archive of articles and essays discussing all sorts of movies. This post on Dial M for Murder from Bordwell is characteristically insightful. Martin Scorsese on Dial M for Murder — The Academy recorded a brief video introduction from Martin Scorsese on Dial M for Murder and it’s pretty cool! Hitchcock by François Truffaut — Essential reading, despite the fact that all of two pages are dedicated to discussing Dial M for Murder. Hitchcock’s Films Revisited by Robin Wood — Robin Wood barely discusses Dial M for Murder in this book, but it remains one of the best books written about Hitchcock’s movies. Check out our Strangers on a Train episode for more resources on Alfred Hitchcock

Sharad Raj- An independent filmmaker and a faculty at film School share his experience of crowdfunding his film- THE JOYOUS NIGHT OF A RIDICULOUS MAN which is an adaptation of shorts stories from Dostoevsky & PremChand. Some of the takeaways from this very insightful talk: 1) Why do you need to crowdfund your film? 2) The strategy of crowdfunding with example #wishberry & #thejoyousnightofaridiculousman #dostervesky#premchand 3) How to approach a casting agency with no money in your pocket? #bling #actors #theatre 4) Film festival strategy n the changing scenario of festival films- is mainstream Bollywood an influence? #berlin #cannes#venice #locarno 5) Is Cinema dead? #youtube #art #discern #editing #Kurosawa #Bresson #Ray #Ghatak #Ozu 6) The books n films to sharpen your seeing skills #David Bordwell n #Jamesmonaco Enjoy the show! Attributes and courtesies: Music- "Hard Boiled" by Kevin MacLeod (https://incompetech.com)Licence: CC BY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ You can follow us and leave us feedback on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter @eplogmedia, For partnerships/queries send you can send us an email at bonjour@eplog.media. DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on all the shows produced and distributed by Ep.Log Media are personal to the host and the guest of the shows respectively and with no intention to harm the sentiments of any individual/organization. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of The Crack-Up series, which explores how 1919 shaped the modern world, film historian David Bordwell discusses two big changes in the American film industry in 1919: the revolt of film stars against the powerful studio system, and Paramount's response, which was to try and control the "product" from creation to point of consumption. He goes on to look at how these creative and commercial tensions still play out today.

In this episode of The Crack-Up series, which explores how 1919 shaped the modern world, film historian David Bordwell discusses two big changes in the American film industry in 1919: the revolt of film stars against the powerful studio system, and Paramount's response, which was to try and control the "product" from creation to point of consumption. He goes on to look at how these creative and commercial tensions still play out today.

In this episode of The Crack-Up series, which explores how 1919 shaped the modern world, film historian David Bordwell discusses two big changes in the American film industry in 1919: the revolt of film stars against the powerful studio system, and Paramount's response, which was to try and control the "product" from creation to point of consumption. He goes on to look at how these creative and commercial tensions still play out today.

Etabliert als die ironische Variante eines Weihnachstsfilms ist John McTiernans Action-Film doch weit mehr, denn er bietet, so sagt unter anderem David Bordwell, die finale Re-Formulierung Hollywoods. Ganz klar: DIE HARD arbeitet mit ziemlich vielen Eindeutigkeiten und der Einheit von Raum, Zeit und Kausalität, nebenbei zeichnet sich die Filmerzählung durch eine herausragend implementierte Redundanz der Kausalitäten aus, bei der jeder Zuschauer direkt mitbekommt, was gerade warum passiert. Eindeutigkeit ist hier Trumpf. Bei all der geschlossenen Form übernimmt McTiernan rein technisch die Errungenschaften des New Hollywoods. Der Film bleibt aber, ganz gegen die Aufrührer der 60er und 70er Jahre in sich erst einmal ideologisch deutlich reaktionär orientiert. Nur eindeutig und einfach lesbar bleibt das nicht bestehen, so stellt er zugleich genügend Angebote, wie man für sich das Gesehene nach eigener politisch-gesellschaftlicher Perspektive einordnen will. Hier sind sie also wieder: die gezielten Widersprüchlichkeiten und das gekonnte Spiel mit einem maximal diversen Publikum, das wir auch aus der klassischen Ära kennen. Und doch ist der Film in seiner Zeit: John McClane kämpft seinen kleinen Kampf um die eigene männliche Identität gegen die globalisierten Achsenmächte, die nun wirtschaftlich den Blue-Collar-Cop in die Ecke drängen, während seine Frau emanzipiert genug ist, um nicht nur auf eigenen Füßen zu stehen, sondern den braven Polizisten auch intellektuell, wie finanziell in die Tasche zu stecken. Das Individuum des virilen Machers ist hier, ganz gegen die 80er Action-Formel, nicht mehr der Experte, der aufräumt, sondern ein Fehler im System des Heists, den der wahre, gebildete Spezialist des Films, sein Gegenspieler Hans Gruber inszeniert. McClane ist ein reagierender, einsamer Mann auf der Suche nach sich selbst und dem Familienglück. Die schlussendliche Interpretation bleibt offen genug gestaltet, dass wir uns dennoch hineingezogen fühlen in einen soghaften Film, der auf seiner Ebene, mit dem was er will, in Sachen Drehbuch und Regie nahe an die Perfektion kommt.

Every film is both a product of its environment, and a rebellion against it. Artists (and audiences) search for something new and fresh, but cannot escape the world as it exists around them. Die Hard is no exception. While Die Hard is often marked as a turning point in American action cinema, we must first look at the state of action cinema as it existed before 1988. What does a “typical” 80s action movie look like? What artistic and societal pressures shaped that mold? And in what ways does Die Hard break it? As we kick off this limited series, let us know what you think! Drop us a line at diehardwithapodcast@gmail.com, or visit our site at www.diehardwithapodcast.com.   Source Links A/V Club, Die Hard humanized (and perfected) the action movie Creative Screenwriting, “There is no such thing as an action movie.” Steven E. de Souza on Screenwriting David Bordwell, It's the 80s, stupid Hollywood Suite, The French Connection and the gritty realism of the 70s IndieWire, 10 Defining 1970s Disaster Movies IndieWire, Cruel Summer: Die Hard (1988) James Kendrick, Hollywood Bloodshed: Violence in 1980s American Cinema Medium, New Hollywood: Why The 70's Were The Greatest Decade In America Cinema New York Times, How the American Action Movie Went Kablooey Oxford Bibliographies, Action Movies Slate, In The Parallax View, Conspiracy Goes All the Way to the Top—and Beyond Vulture, How Die Hard Changed the Action Game   Guests Shannon Hubbell Ed Grabionowski Adam Sternbergh Katie Walsh Scott Wampler   Get In Touch Email Website Twitter Facebook Instagram Patreon   Full Episode Transcript Welcome to the podcast, pal. My name is Simone Chavoor, and thank you for joining me for Die Hard With a Podcast! The show that examines the best American action movie of all time: Die Hard. Thank you to everyone who listened to the first episode of the show! It’s been so fun to get this podcast off the ground. Everyone’s been really awesome and supportive, from the listeners to the experts I’ve been talking to for the show. Starting in this episode, we’ll hear from filmmakers, film critics, and pop culture writers to get their perspectives on Die Hard and what it means as a part of film history. I’m excited to introduce them to you later in the show. If you want to share your thoughts on Die Hard and the things brought up on the podcast, reach out! Email Website Twitter Facebook Instagram I’ve been trying to post lots of additional photos and facts to the social media accounts in particular. My favorite so far was a Dungeons and Dragons character alignment chart I made for Die Hard. McClane is Chaotic Good, Al Powell is Lawful Good… You’ll have to visit the pages to see the rest of who’s who on the chart. And if you like this show, kick me a buck or two on Patreon. Patreon helps to offset the cost of doing this show, not just in pure dollars and cents, but for the sheer amount of time this podcast takes to put together. This is my first solo project, and although I have the wonderful, amazing support of my guests and fans, it still takes a lot of time researching, writing, recording, and editing. Patreon There are some cool bonuses you can get, everything from shout outs on the show, to stickers, ornaments, and the bonus episode – which is TBD, because you get to vote on! So check that out, and pitch in if you can. Shout out to our contributors… Rob T, Jason H, and Saint Even! I hope I’m saying that right. Anyone who’s listened to my other podcast knows that I can’t pronounce half the names I come across. It’s amazing how good you think you are at pronouncing things until you get in front of a mic... Thank you so much! You can also support Die Hard With a Podcast by leaving a review on iTunes. With more starred ratings and written reviews, the show becomes more visible to other potential listeners, so please share the love and let me know what you think! All right. On to our main topic. Every film is both a product of its environment, and a rebellion against it. Artists (and audiences) search for something new and fresh, but cannot escape the world as it exists around them. Die Hard is no exception. While Die Hard is often marked as a turning point in American action cinema, we must first look at the state of action cinema as it existed before 1988. What does a “typical” 80s action movie look like? What artistic and societal pressures shaped that mold? And in what ways does Die Hard break it? But before we talk about 80s films, let’s talk about… 70s films. 70s cinema was a time when shit started to get real. After years of glossy studio pictures, filmmakers wanted to show things as they really were. And with Vietnam, Watergate, the oil crisis, rising crime in cities, and so much more, things were… fucked up. And the movies made then reflected that. They were dark, pessimistic, gritty, bleak. No happy endings to be found here. Midnight Cowboy and Taxi Driver are two of the most 70s-ish depressing-ass movies that I like to point out as an example of this. [CLIP: MIDNIGHT COWBOY - I’M WALKING HERE] With that mood in mind, let’s drill down into some specifics. [INTERVIEW: ED GRABIANOWSKI I’m Ed Grabianowski, and I am a longtime writer; I’ve written for sites like io9 and How Stuff Works and a whole bunch of others, and I also write horror and fantasy fiction. If you go back to the 70s, there weren’t really movies in the 70s that were just like action movies, like that you would just define as action movies, to the extent there were later. You instead got sort of different sub-genres; you had sort of like cops and robbers movies with gunfights and car chases, and then you had like martial arts movies with lots of fist fights and sword fights.] Within this general movement, a few particular genres stand out. There was a lot going on in 70s film as the studios’ creative control was usurped by a new wave of auteur filmmakers. Now of course, there were lots of popular genres in this moment, all important in their own ways, like science fiction, horror, spaghetti Westerns, blaxploitation films, kung-fu movies. You can see some through lines from then, to the 80s, and into Die Hard in particular. But for our discussion today, we’re going to focus on three: disaster movies, paranoid political thrillers, and rogue cops and vigilantes. Let’s start with disaster movies. [INTERVIEW: ED GRABIANOWSKI And then you had the disaster movie subgenre, which was a huge trend for a while, and that was more based on spectacle and the visuals of a disaster happening. And also interestingly tended to be more ensemble casts.] After all, As we discussed in our first episode, Die Hard was directly inspired by one of the best-known disaster movies of the 70s: 1974’s The Towering Inferno. These movies featured people going about their business – attending a party, trying to catch a flight, taking a nice little cruise. Then BAM! A fire starts, a bomb goes off, a tsunami hits. These disasters, some natural, some natural-with-the-help-of-man’s-hubris, and some entirely man-made strike large groups of people, who we quickly learn are totally expendable. We follow these thinly written characters in multiple plot lines as they try to escape, survive, or stop whatever calamity is going on. In the process, the audience gets to experience their peril... which usually includes a bunch of explosions. The Towering Inferno boasts an all-star cast that includes Steve McQueen, Paul Newman, Faye Dunaway, and Fred Astaire. Our main characters are at a dedication ceremony for the new Glass Tower, the now-tallest building in the world. (As an aside, I work quite close to Salesforce Tower in San Francisco, which is currently the tallest building in San Francisco and the second-tallest west of the Mississippi. The fictional Glass Tower in the movie is taller than both of those by 500 feet. And every time I look at it I think about either The Towering Inferno or Nakatomi Tower, and neither of those are things you want to think about on your lunch break.) While at the ceremony, a fire breaks out on the 81st floor, trapping the people above. A group makes it to the roof for an attempted helicopter rescue, but the copter crashes and sets the roof on fire. After many thwarted attempts to escape, Steve McQueen and Paul Newman use plastic explosives to blow up the water tanks on the top of the building, flooding the floors below and putting out the fire. [CLIP: THE TOWERING INFERNO TRAILER] It’s easy to see how novelist Roderick Thorp could see that movie, dream about it, throw in some terrorists, and come up with the seed of Die Hard. As the Watergate scandal unfolded, the paranoid political thriller came to the fore. We’re talking Three Days of the Condor, Parallax View, and obviously All the President’s Men. These are films mostly centered on an individual uncovering a government conspiracy, and trying to either expose it or just escape with their life. But, fitting with the general mood of American cinema at the time, things usually don’t work out too well for the protagonists. Spoiler alert – in these films, usually the big bad government conspiracy gets away with it, leaving the heroes either dead or defeated. The individual, no matter what knowledge they’re armed with, is helpless against the faceless cabal that keeps the populace in line. To put it bluntly, the government is all-powerful and all-knowing, and you, the lone citizen, are fucked if you go against them. [CLIP: ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN TRAILER ] The final 70s genre we’re looking at as a direct influence to Die Hard is the “rogue cop” or “vigilante” movie. The protagonists in these films are also lone individuals, but of a different stripe than what we’ll see later: they’re the anti-heroes. They’re deeply messed up in some way. They’re the cop who doesn’t play by the rules, or the everyman who gets pushed too far by society and turns to violence. Death Wish, Dirty Harry, The French Connection. These movies manifest the existential dread of audiences who feared social upheaval, economic instability, and rising crime in cities. And then they offer the wish fulfillment of being able to buck the rules and do things your way – no matter what the police chief says. [CLIP: DIRTY HARRY] As Ed pointed out earlier, the 70s didn’t have what we consider a blanket “action movie” – as you can see, the genres we just talked about had action in them, but it wasn’t the defining characteristic of the movie. If the word “action” was used to describe a movie in generic terms at all, it was usually paired with the word “adventure” to convey something more fantastic and epic. But moreover, the action in these films was, well… kind of a bummer. Violence and destruction were used to emphasize the more troubling aspects of our society. Even if these scenes were exciting, they were heavy. They were serious. So what tipped these old genres over into a new kind of film at the start of the decade? [INTERVIEW: ED GRABIANOWSKI It just sort of happened. There’s – yes, people – there’s this sort of gestalt like, let’s take elements of all these things and make something that just embodies all of that. And that became the action movie.] Audiences were transforming from Steven and Elyse Keatons into Alex P. Keatons. But in addition to a transition from Carter and the recession to Reagan and a “greed is good” economy, the film industry in particular had new pressures and opportunities that ushered in a new era of filmmaking. David Bordwell, Professor of Film Studies at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, sums it up: “With the new attractiveness of the global market, the demands of home video, and increasingly sophisticated special effects, the 1980s brought the really violent action movie into its own.” Bordwell amusingly closes his exploration of 80s action movies with one, lone sentence: “I save for last the obligatory mention of Die Hard, the Jaws of the 1980s: a perfectly engineered entertainment.” Guess that statement stands on its own... The writer of Die Hard and Commando, Steven De Souza, expands on Bordwell’s point about the global market. He says, “I would argue that the genre of an ‘action movie’ is a completely false creature. There is no such thing as an action movie. All movies have action. ‘Action movie’ is a term that was invented in the ‘80s. I think Commando may have been the first one in 1985. They noticed for the first time that a handful of American movies were making more money overseas than in America. This had never happened before. Commando made 60% of its money overseas and 40% in the US. Action speaks louder than words. You don’t need to read the subtitles to know it was a bad idea to kidnap Arnold Schwarzenegger’s little girl. I disagree with the idea that there is such thing as an action movie, but we are stuck with that term now.” Well, if we’re stuck with that term, let’s go with it. So: what makes an action movie? In the 80s, “physical action and violence [became] the organizing principle, from the plot, to the dialogue, to the casting.” That’s according to academic reference site Oxford Bibliographies. Picture your typical action movie poster. There’s probably some kind of aircraft or ship or ground vehicle, maybe a hot lady kinda small and in the corner there… there’s definitely a bunch of fire… And standing tall in the middle, our hero. And he’s probably holding a gun. The lone hero is one of the defining characteristics of what we think of the stereotypical action movie. But he – and it’s almost always a “he” – is different than our “rogue cop” of the 1970s. The 80s action star was a one-man army, alone more powerful than the hordes of henchman thrown up against him. Our hero might have a sidekick or lead a small team, but in the end they’re either ineffectual and/or expendable – by the end of the film, it’s our protagonist who takes down the bad guy by himself. The action hero inhabits his body, not his mind. His powers come from physical strength (and firepower) instead of cleverness. I mean, when we meet Arnold Schwarzenegger in Commando, we see multiple shots of his biceps before we even see his face. As IndieWire put it, the heroes are “obscenely pumped-up one-man fighting machine[s]... outrageously entertaining comic-book depictions of outsized masculinity.” [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH My name is Adam Sternbergh. I’m a novelist and a contributing editor to New York Magazine and a pop culture journalist. 80s action films, as we think of them now, they’re very excessive, they’re all about a sort of oversized machismo and enormous guns and enormous muscles and enormous explosions. Which was very exhilarating, but I think even by the time Die Hard came out, was starting to feel a little bit tired, and there was a hunger for action film fans – certainly myself, I would have been about seventeen or eighteen, for something a little bit different.] [INTERVIEW: SCOTT WAMPLER My name is Scott Wampler, I’m the news editor at Birth. Movies. Death. I’m also the host of the Trying Times podcast. The first word that’s coming to mind is “sweaty.” When I think of action movies in the 80s I think of, you know, dudes that are super cut up, they look like condoms filled with walnuts, and they’re always glistening with sweat. And usually there’s a dirty tank top involved, or maybe some camo pants.] [INTERVIEW: SHANNON HUBBELL My name is Shannon Hubbell, I’m editor-in-chief of LewtonBus.net. I’d say action films of the 80s – I mean, it’s obviously dominated by Schwarzenegger and Stallone, and so a lot of the larger action films are centered around big, burly, unstoppable killing machines. Just barely human. Other than Terminator, that kinda thing doesn’t yank my chain. But also, you have things like, say, Escape from New York – smaller fare, different types of heroes, anti-heroes, instead of just hulking, machine-gun-spraying douchebags.] Matrix and Dutch, Rambo and Cobra – these guys were far from helpless. Once pulled into a conflict by circumstance, our hero is unstoppable. It’s a reclaiming of agency that had been taken away by faceless forces in the 70s. Our heroes’ incredible power is just that: incredible. I know this might be shocking news to you, but a lot of these 80s action movies are… unrealistic. After all, in Predator, Arnold escapes a thermo-nuclear explosion by just… running away. These guys are superheroes pretending to be regular dudes. Comic book movies weren’t so much a thing yet, although we did have that platonic ideal of a superhero – Superman – appear onscreen in ‘78, ‘81, ‘83, and ‘87. But invulnerability is okay. That’s part of the appeal. We want the heroes that fight for truth, justice, and the American way to be assured of victory. This leads into another characteristic of 80s action: patriotism. Now, of course, not all of our protagonists are American. Arnold definitely does not – er… can not – try to pass for an American, and neither can Jean Claude Van Damme. But most of our protagonists are not only American, but working-class, everymen Americans who are just trying to get by with an honest day’s work. Sometimes that honest day’s work involves special forces missions, but you know what I mean. Adam Sternbergh explains. [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH There was a sort of parallel ascent of the John Rambo paradigm, and Ronald Reagan. And Reagan was quite open about making references to Rambo, and I think Reagan at one point quoted the Dirty Harry line, “Make my day.” And there was a real sense in American culture that post the 1970s, post Jimmy Carter, post this national ennui or whatever people decided had overtaken the country, that America was being proud of being America again, and part of that was watching movies in which American POWs blow entire countries. And in fact the third Rambo movie is just sort of a ridiculous patriotism porn where he goes to Afghanistan and essentially single-handedly defeats the Russian Army in Afghanistan. That kind of action movie, I think if you look at it in a historical, sociological context, it made perfect sense for the national mood.] [CLIP: REAGAN AND RAMBO] In other words, if America was in fact a shining city on a hill, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, and Carl Weathers were there to guard its walls. Finally, the hallmark of an action movie is all the… [GUNSHOTS, EXPLOSIONS] If you’re having a celebration of American masculinity and strength, what else are you gonna do but blow shit up? There was certainly a fetishization of weapons in the preceding decade. Robert Blake’s character Beretta shared his name with that of a gun manufacturer, and Dirty Harry gives a whole soliloquy about his .45 Magnum. But the films that followed had to be bigger. Louder. If the 70s were the decade of the handgun, the 80s were the decade of the automatic weapon. [CLIP: NOW I HAVE A MACHINE GUN, HO HO HO] General explosions were also bigger and better, due to improved special effects technologies. The disaster movie of course had terrific destruction, but the buildings getting blown up were more obviously flimsy sets, if not just miniatures. And to me, the differentiating factor that separates 70s action from 80s action, was that 80s violence and destruction was… celebratory. It was fun. It was generally free of consequence. Our hero can’t die, remember? And the bad guys he’s blowing away are largely faceless cartoon characters, a dime a dozen. It was perfectly okay to sit in a theater and shove popcorn in your mouth while large-scale mayhem unfolded before your eyes. With these definitions in place, let’s go back and tick off the action movie characteristics that Die Hard shares. Lone hero? Check. John McClane is almost totally alone, with only a walkie-talkie as a tether to the outside world. The LAPD and FBI are ostensibly on his side, but they’re certainly not working with him. John must face a whole gang of terrorists by himself to rescue his wife. We’re confident that he’ll achieve his goal, even if things look dicey sometimes. [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH I mean, Die Hard was similar in the sense that it featured a sort of lone, male protagonist who’s battling against the odds, and if faced with a sort of intractable situation where he’s trying to fight his way out using his brains and brawn. An interesting parallel is the movie Commando, which came out just a couple years earlier with Arnold Schwarzenegger, and he basically has 24 or 48 hours save his daughter from these evil military types. And he goes about breaking everyone’s neck and shooting a bunch of people and blowing things up, and spoiler: he saves the daughter at the end. And so in that sense, Die Hard was sort of a very familiar setup. It obviously was kind of ingenious setup because it launched its own mini-genre of movies, which was the “Die Hard in a blankity-blank movie.”] Physical prowess? Mmm, not as much. John McClane isn’t in bad shape, not at all. He’s a cop, he can brawl. But he’s not one of those guys with “gleaming sweat [and] bulging muscles that couldn’t possibly exist without chemical enhancement... A bodybuilder’s fever dream, the sort of thing he might imagine after doing a mountain of blow and watching nothing but early MTV for 48 hours,” as the AV Club puts it. [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH Everything else was moving in that direction, toward more invulnerable, more muscular, more explosive. And then Die Hard came along and said, what if a real, normal guy found himself in this situation? What would he do, and how would he prevail?] Bruce Willis’s embodiment of a wisecracking cop caught in an extraordinary situation was a key factor in John McClane’s believability. [INTERVIEW: SHANNON HUBBELL On paper, just like describing Die Hard to someone, you can totally imagine Schwarzenegger playing that role, or Stallone playing that role. It’s the details and execution that makes it different. You have a character who is fallible, and hurtable and emotionally vulnerable, which is not something that comes across in a paragraph synopsis of Die Hard.] John is a pretty regular guy. He gets tired, he gets hurt. In fact, his physical vulnerability in the original Die Hard is famous. [CLIP: SHOOT THE GLASS] [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH From the very beginning of the movie, when he takes his shoes off at the beginning of the movie, you know, he’s in bare feet, he’s incredibly vulnerable and there’s this real sense that he’s this regular guy, who, there’s no way he’s going to accomplish this. He doesn’t even seem to believe it at the beginning. And it makes it so much more satisfying at the end of the movie when he does; he’s bloodied and he’s broken and his feet are bleeding. And that was just so different from that kind of Rambo, Schwarzenegger paradigm that had been established that had been so successful.] When you watch an action movie, you get the thrill of watching a superman executing a perfect plan. But watching a normal guy making it up as he goes along in Die Hard, you start to wonder – what would I do in this situation? We’ll get more into McClane’s physical and emotional vulnerability in our next episode. Patriotism? Die Hard isn’t an explicitly jingoistic film. There aren’t American flags waving as soldiers fight to defend American values. But we do have John, a white, heterosexual, working-class dude as our hero. See, not only is John representative of the American way of life, he also reflects a tension between classes within America, as well as in relationship to other world powers. Our bad guys are an International House of Terrorists, including what Ellis calls… [CLIP: ELLIS EUROTRASH] [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH I think there’s definitely some quintessential American ideas of class in the movie, and it’s not a mistake that the terrorists are not just Europeans but they’re all wearing turtlenecks and sort of beautiful European clothes and then there is a whole conversation in the elevator between Hans and Mr. Takagi about their suits and their respective tailors. And John McClane’s just a guy with a singlet on, running around like Johnny Lunchbucket. And I think at that particular moment in American history, that was a very resonant idea, again because there was this sense of America’s influence in the world being undermined – in particular by Japan, but just in general. American industry and this sort of notion of the blue-collar American economy was faltering in coming out of the 1970s. There was a sense that that was changing. So McClane is interesting, and I wonder if you made Die Hard now, if he would still be a New York cop, or if they would try to make him even more of a kind of heartland hero.] It’s also worth noting the presence of another foreign “threat” in Die Hard. The Nakatomi Corporation represents a very real American fear in the 80s that the Japanese wouldn’t so much invade as they would conduct a hostile takeover. Richard Brody of The New Yorker explains: “There’s another ethnic anxiety that the movie represents—the film is centered on the Nakatomi Corporation, headed by a Japanese-American man named Joseph Takagi, which is an emblem of the then widely stoked fear that Japanese high-tech businesses were threatening to dominate the American economy.” At the time, the Japanese economy was booming thanks to post-World War II reconstruction and a strong manufacturing industry. Japanese corporations began buying American companies, starting with car factories, steel works, and media companies – industries that are held as quintessentially American. [CLIP: TAKAGI TAPE DECKS] [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH It also has interesting strains of things that were happening in politics at the time, you know, the whole idea of a Japanese corporation that’s come to America and is a powerful corporation, and then the American inevitably has to save them. There’s a little mini-genre of 80s-era films that were sort of about America’s anxiety about Japan’s rising influence in the world. So I think a little bit of that is in Die Hard. You know, this sort of twist of having the terrorists be political terrorists who just turn out to be greedy robbers, was a little bit of a wink at the notion that all the other movies were about politics.] As Adam points out, American fear of this so-called threat can be seen in more than just Die Hard. 1986’s Gung Ho is specifically about a Japanese company buying Michael Keaton’s character’s auto plant. The Back to the Future series (which kicked off in 1985) also has a few telling moments. [CLIP: BACK TO THE FUTURE ALL THE BEST STUFF IS MADE IN JAPAN] [CLIP: BACK TO THE FUTURE II McFLY’S BOSS] In Die Hard, Nakatomi is positioned as not just another Japanese mega-corporation with more money than they know what to do with, but it’s also the company that is threatening to take Holly away from John. Okay, onto our last action movie qualifier: [CLIP: GUNSHOTS, EXPLOSIONS] Welp, I think it’s pretty safe to say that Die Hard has big explosions and over-the-top stunts. Lots of ‘em – and really good ones, too. They’re well choreographed and a pleasure to watch. Plus, they keep their own sense of fun. Having your hero dispatch a bad guy and follow it with a quippy remark is a classic action movie cliche. [CLIP: FEET SMALLER THAN MY SISTER] But the difference is that Bruce Willis has the comedy acting chops to actually pull it off. Look, Arnold’s great at a lot of things, but line delivery ain’t one of ‘em. [CLIP: LET OFF SOME STEAM] In the end, Die Hard is very much in the mold of traditional 80s action movies – and where it breaks that mold, is where it improves upon it. Hollywood’s been trying to recapture that magic ever since. [INTERVIEW: SCOTT WAMPLER I would say that it probably broke a general mold that had a hold on Hollywood for at least a decade. Outside of the work of say, Stallone, Schwarzenegger, who – you know, Schwarzenegger did a lot of sci-fi stuff, and Stallone – Stallone’s always been pretty ‘oo-rah American.’ But I think Hollywood as a whole, it definitely reformed the template, you know? There were shock waves coming off of Die Hard for at least a decade. You can still feel them.] [INTERVIEW: ADAM STERNBERGH I remember sitting in the theater and watching the movie and just being completely blown away by how great it was and how fresh it felt. That is really the thing I wonder if people watching it now can appreciate, is just how it felt like this gust of fresh air, given all the films that had come before. And those action films again, they were all tightly packed in in just like six or seven years in the 80s. It was a very sort of young genre itself. But this kinda came in and it was just a complete reinvention of what an action film could be, and John McClane was a completely different kind of hero, and it was so exhilarating.] The elevated craft of Die Hard, from the airtight script to McTiernan’s direction to De Bont’s cinematography, to the performances of Willis and Rickman, took what could have been an unremarkable summer flick and turned it into a classic. [INTERVIEW: KATIE WALSH My name’s Katie Walsh. I am a film critic for the Tribune News Service and LA Times. You know, you see enough bad action movies, and then you watch Die Hard, and you’re like, “This is so impeccably made.” The cinematography is gorgeous, there’s these amazing camera movements, and the lighting and all of the stuff that’s going on is just so perfect. And then you’re like, “Okay, this is a perfect movie.” I think cinephiles now are saying John McTiernan’s an amazing director, Jan De Bont is an amazing cinematographer, the craft that goes into this movie is impeccable, and it’s a very well-made movie; I think people are recognizing that.] In our next episode, we’ll dig in to arguably the most important contributor to Die Hard’s success: the character of John McClane, and Bruce Willis’s portrayal of him. So get ready, take off your shoes, make some fists with your toes, and join us next time. Thank you to our guests Adam Sternbergh, Scott Wampler, Shannon Hubbell, Ed Grabionowski, and Katie Walsh. Be sure to check the show notes on the website to learn more about them. Thanks again for joining me, and yippee-kai-yay, motherfuckers!  

I talk with Kenny, Lady Cao Feng and Adam about "Yes, Madam!" (AKA "Police Assassins"). It was directed by Corey Yuen and stars Michelle Yeoh and Cynthia Rothrock.  You can watch the David Bordwell lecture mentioned in the show HERE.  Check out Distressor's "Just Breathe", they generously allowed us to use their music in our introduction.

Happy four year anniversary of Flixwise! I hope you'll find that the fundamental things still apply, as time goes by. On this milestone episode, Lady P is joined by an esteemed film scholar and all-around snappy dresser, David Bordwell to discuss none other than Casablanca. They see if it lives up to its reputation as the quintessential Hollywood movie, not just of the 1940s but of all time, and consider if it's worth of its 78th spot on the Sight & Sound List. For a second topic they turn to the subject of David Bordwell's book, Reinventing Hollywood; How 1940s filmmakers changed movie storytelling. Mostly it's just an excuse to talk Joan Crawford. 

We’ve been compiling this episode for about 6 months now and we’ve conducted interviews in New York, Bristol, The Shetland Islands and via Skype. We hope our delve into film criticism is worth the wait. Thank you firstly to our participants, so generous with their time and thoughts. A huge thank you also to our roving reporter Charlotte Crofts for the amazing interview with Tara Judah featured in the episode, and others we couldn’t manage to get in. Thank you finally to our listeners who suggested this episode. The wealth of material we got was overwhelming so look out for all the interviews being uploaded in January while we are on our winter break. That should keep you going in the cold winter months. Participants Tara Judah https://tarajudah.com/ @midnightmovies Sam Fragoso http://talkeasypod.com/ @SamFragoso Simran Hans https://www.theguardian.com/profile/simran-hans @heavier_things Ashley Clark http://www.bfi.org.uk/people/ashley-clark  @_Ash_Clark Violet Lucca https://www.filmcomment.com/author/vlucca/ @unbuttonmyeyes Mark Kermode https://www.theguardian.com/profile/markkermode @KermodeMovie Prof. Linda Ruth Williams https://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/film/staff/lwilliams/ @lindaruth1 Tom Shone http://tomshone.blogspot.co.uk/ @Tom_Shone Roll of Honour All the critics given shout outs across our interviews... Sophie Mayer, Alexandra Heller-Nicholas, Cerise Howard, Emma Westwood, Thomas Caldwell, Josh Nelson, Jack Sargeant, Dana Linssen, Kees Driessen, Rüdiger Suchsland, Adrian Martin, Catherine Grant, Cristina Alvarez Lopez, Kevin B. Lee, Michael Wood, Jonathan Rosenbaum, Robin Wood, Victor Perkins, David Bordwell, Kristin Thompson, Hadley Freeman, Marina Hyde, Ren Zelen, Christina Newland, Molly Haskell, Ashley Clark, James Baldwin, Graham Greene, Cahiers Critics, Bogdanovich & Schrader, Toby Hazlet, Violet Lucca, Doreen St. Felix, Jia Tolentino, Vinson Cunningham, Hilton Als, Wendy Ide, Simran Hans, Guy Lodge, Pauline Kael, Kim Newman, Roger Ebert, Andrew Sarris, Alan Jones, J Hoberman, Anne Billson, Kate Muir, Kay Austin Collins, Ira Madison, Alyssa Wilkinson, Scott Tobias, Keith Phipps, Tasha Robertson, Tim Grierson, Anjelica Jade, Nathan Heller, Jeremy O’Harris, Hunter Harris, Wesley Morris, Nick Pinkerton, Eric Hynes, Badlands Film Collective, AO Scott, Anthony Lane, David Edelstein, Elvis Mitchell, Amy Taubin,  Christian Lorentzen, Senses of Cinema, Four Columns and Reverse Shot. The incidental music for this episode is from Giorgio Gaslini's score for Antonioni's La Notte.

This week, The Film Comment Podcast welcomes back seminal critic David Bordwell to discuss his new book Reinventing Hollywood: How 1940s Filmmakers Changed Movie Storytelling. Instead of approaching the decade through the lens of one genre or auteur, Bordwell thinks about the stylistic hallmarks that distinguished the decade—for example, screenwriting conventions like flashbacks—and how they paved the way for the classical Hollywood form we might take for granted today. Bordwell joins Imogen Sara Smith, frequent FC and Criterion contributor, and Violet Lucca, FC Digital Producer and podcast moderator, for a journey into (and even Out of) the cinematic past.

On a landmark episode of your favorite film analysis podcasts, Arthur and Caleb say good bay the only way they know how; debauchery. That's right, on this week's GoodTrash GenreCast we're taking a look at Scorsese's The Wolf of Wall Street. It's three hours of coke, prostitues and innovative dart games. But, is it one of Scorsese's best? Or, is it guilty of unnecessary excess? Before we find out the answer, we play our game. This week, your hosts rapidly examine Careers that Films Talked Them Out Of. It's fast and it's hot, so keep up. We then move into our round table analysis. Dustin gets things going by bringing up David Bordwell, and examining The Wolf of Wall Street as a melodrama. He presents a strong formalist argument before proceeding with the round table discussion. He brings up the film's critique of capitalism, and Arthur, Caleb, Alex and Dustin all weigh in on the film and its messaging. That's it for this week. So, get your coat, we're about to head to Benihana's. You're more than welcome to join us... The Wolf of Wall Street Timestamps 00:38 - Welcome and Introductions03:36 - Synopsis and Reviews17:46 - Social Media18:35 - The Game - Careers Films Talked You Out Of23:17 - Analysis35:22 - Shelf or Trash/Else or Instead42:25 - Wrap Up

On this special episode of The Projection Booth, Mike spoke with Jeff Joseph and Dennis Bartok about their new book A Thousand Cuts: The Bizarre Underground World of Collectors and Dealers Who Saved the Movies, available via the University of Mississippi Press.September 5, 2016Special Report: A Thousand CutsSpecial Guest: Dennis Bartok, Jeff JosephMike talked with Jeff Joseph and Dennis Barok about their book A Thousand Cuts: The Bizarre Underground World of Collectors and Dealers Who Saved the Movies, now available via the University of Mississippi Press.Links:Buy A Thousand Cuts by Jeff Joseph and Dennis BartokLearn more about CineliciousRead more about film collecting at David Bordwell's website

In his recently published book The Rhapsodes, seminal critic and film historian David Bordwell pays tribute to four groundbreaking film critics who were writing in the 1940s: Otis Ferguson, James Agee, Manny Farber, and Parker Tyler. Through meticulous examinations of their rarely read, multidisciplinary writings and moving biographical accounts, Bordwell paints a vivid portrait of their cultural milieux and makes the case for the uniqueness and importance of their work. Digital Editor Violet Lucca spoke with Bordwell about the genesis of his book and the unparalleled legacy of his “rhapsodes,” in the company of regular FILM COMMENT contributor Nick Pinkerton.

Truffaut remarked there was cinema before Godard and cinema after Godard. The academic discipline of Film Studies could be said to have its own Godard in David Bordwell, the author of some of the most influential books in understanding the history of film style. In this sprawling conversation, David discusses his upbringing that led him to movies and his first steps in helping spearhead the neo-formalist movement of film criticism. He looks back at the formation of poetics, his role in thinking about the conventions that tell us a film story, the role of auteurism as problem-solvers, and how popular film criticism has influenced in his more recent work. They swing through conversations on art history, Jean-Luc Godard, new media, Hong Kong filmmaking, and Robin Wood. Finally, David and Peter discuss Daisy Kenyon, a 1947 Joan Crawford-Dana Andrews-Henry Fonda melodrama from Otto Preminger with so many radical choices in its delivery of narrative one might mistake it for being a subversive text, even if it's all convention. 0:00-2:40 Opening3:27-10:22 Establishing Shots - Texture and Claire Denis11:07-1:27:05 Deep Focus - David Bordwell1:28:10-1:30:37 Mubi Sponsorship1:32:20-1:52:00 Double Exposure - Daisy Kenyon (Otto Preminger)1:52:02-1:56:23 Close

David Bordwell – Film theorist historian and collaborator – 75000 Films (book) FRED meets with film theorist and historian David Bordwell, who collaborated with the Cinemateque Royale de Belgique to make the book 75000 FILMS. This is a book that celebrates the 75 year anniversary of the Cinematek but also [...] The post David Bordwell – 75000 Films (book) #CinemaRitrovato appeared first on Fred Film Radio.

David Bordwell – Film theorist historian and collaborator – 75000 Films (book) FRED meets with film theorist and historian David Bordwell, who collaborated with the Cinemateque Royale de Belgique to make the book 75000 FILMS. This is a book that celebrates the 75 year anniversary of the Cinematek but also [...] The post David Bordwell – 75000 Films (book) #CinemaRitrovato appeared first on Fred Film Radio.

David Bordwell – Film theorist historian and collaborator – 75000 Films (book) FRED meets with film theorist and historian David Bordwell, who collaborated with the Cinemateque Royale de Belgique to make the book 75000 FILMS. This is a book that celebrates the 75 year anniversary of the Cinematek but also [...] The post David Bordwell – 75000 Films (book) #CinemaRitrovato appeared first on Fred Film Radio.

David Bordwell – Film theorist historian and collaborator – 75000 Films (book) FRED meets with film theorist and historian David Bordwell, who collaborated with the Cinemateque Royale de Belgique to make the book 75000 FILMS. This is a book that celebrates the 75 year anniversary of the Cinematek but also [...] The post David Bordwell – 75000 Films (book) #CinemaRitrovato appeared first on Fred Film Radio.

David Bordwell – Film theorist historian and collaborator – 75000 Films (book) FRED meets with film theorist and historian David Bordwell, who collaborated with the Cinemateque Royale de Belgique to make the book 75000 FILMS. This is a book that celebrates the 75 year anniversary of the Cinematek but also [...] The post David Bordwell – 75000 Films (book) #CinemaRitrovato appeared first on Fred Film Radio.

David Bordwell – Film theorist historian and collaborator – 75000 Films (book) FRED meets with film theorist and historian David Bordwell, who collaborated with the Cinemateque Royale de Belgique to make the book 75000 FILMS. This is a book that celebrates the 75 year anniversary of the Cinematek but also [...] The post David Bordwell – 75000 Films (book) #CinemaRitrovato appeared first on Fred Film Radio.