Kazhes pierakstu burtnīca

It`s amazing to follow how far I`ve sunk. When I first started this factoid I wrote about Umberto Eco and "Abre los ojos". Nowadays I`m only capable of outing my thoughts on a porn movie. A hardcore porn movie to be more specific. How did this happen to me, you may ask. The thing is - I had to watch "Inside Deep Throat" which will be running in cinemas in Latvia quite soon. But who on earth would watch a documentary about a film he hasn`t seen? I certainly wouldn`t. So I decided to download and watch the godmother of all porn movies - "Deep Throat" with Linda Lovelace and Harry Reemes. Story: Linda can`t get an orgasm from sex and a wacky doctor tells her that her clitoris is bizarrely located deep in her throat. So she has to perform deep throat oral sex in order to get pleasure. I don`t suppose that I can really evaluate this film by any criterias - how would I know a good dirty picture from a good one?

Par "Aerosmith" parasti ļaudis izsakās, ka septiņdesmitajos gados viņi bija gandrīz Stounu (vai pat ne gandrīz) kalibra grupa, kas vēlākajās desmitgadēs savu reputāciju ievērojami sabojājusi, sākot intensīvi sadarboties ar "outside songwriters" un darot visu iespējamo, lai paliktu publikas uzmanības lokā, lai tas nozīmētu kaut "I don`t want to miss a thing" stila balāžu izpildīšanu.

Tims Alens, Džons Travolta, Martins Lourenss un Viljams Eič Meisijs (ar Reju Liotu kā galveno otrā plāna personāžu) atklāja mums filmu skatīšanās sezonu Ziņģa un Žeņas miteklī Zolitūdē. Un šī ir tipiska filma, kādu skatīties kompānijā lielākā par diviem cilvēkiem - tomēr uz nekādu mākslinieciskumu nepretendējošas komēdijas ir vispiemērotākās filmas, ko skatīties trokšņainā kompānijā (lai arī jāatzīst, ka vismaz šoreiz trokšņaini bijām tikai Liene un es).

Rainer Fassbinder is the director of this picture and also one of the leading actors. A film must be shot in Spain but for a long time there is no director in sight, after he arrives still nothing is shot for he has problems of his own and so does everybody else on the set. To be honest, I don`t really know what it`s all about. Most of the members of the crew are in some weird pseudo socialist community which means nothing more than sleeping with everyone on the group. The director has a relationship with a dude named Ricky, but also has sex with women. Almost nothing goes on most of the time. The film is by no means entertaining and if it has a message I didn`t see it.

A man travels to the past to make life better than it was before. Sounds silly and familiar? No, in this case it doesn`t. Aston Kusher - Jesse from "Dude, where`s my car?" is good at portraying Evan, the guy with his blackouts. And the plot is also quite amazing. I probably can say that the ending was a bit too happy, but on the other hand - it was just perfect (although Evan ending up locked up in a mental hospital for life would be another good option). Anyway, the fat goth person is really nice. Sometimes there may be some dangerous plot holes around that could happen because of Evan changing his past but they are not too big and everything could be explained in the terms of the logic of the film. A heart felt film it seems to me, no matter what the critics say that decided to call it a flop. After all, who am I to obey the general critical opinion - to believe that `Citizen Kane` is the best film of all times, battling only with `Godfather`?

Now this is a bit complicated. One can certainly feel George Orwell influences in this film but it is somewhat special. Not a comedy though, contrary to the information provided in IMDB. I don`t really know how to rate it or what to think about. It`s good I suppose. The burreacrats are good, so is the ending which I found to be stronger than in Citizen Kane but overall - I don`t know. Perhaps it would be a good idea to watch the film once again. Maybe not, I shall think about it some time.

After a long break I decided to give another chance to Krzystof Kieslovsky`s "Decalogue". This time I chose the part that told us not to commit adultery. It doesn`t mean that I was planning to do just that and to understand why I shouldn`t do it I watched the film. Anyway, there`s Tomek - a young boy who spends most of his free time when not working at the post peeking through a looking glass at Magda - a woman from a neighbouring house. She can`t do much without him noticing, he never misses her making love to Roman. Tomek uses every chance to meet her, but without much success. When he tells her that he has been peeking on her for quite a long time she invites him into her apartment. Magda tries to prove him that it`s not love what he`s feeling towards her, but she fails at that. Tomek cuts his wrists, and now it`s Magda who wants to see him. In the end his final words to her are: "I don`t peep at you any more". And I liked the film, it`s sad just like every part of the Decalogue is (as far as I know) but it`s very powerful in it`s minimalism.

The first dissapointment of the year. For the last few months I have been a fan of Duerenmatt`s work - both his short stories and plays have impressed me quite significantly. But now I found out that he was also capable of rewriting classical stuff (although I have no idea whatsoever what the original Wojcziek was about) and make it sound boring. Not that I said that I find "Faust" by Goethe particulary interesting in its original form for the modern audience. But still I expected this to be more fun. Probably my lack of interest has something to do with the fact that I`m not a great expert of "Faust" and that I`m not an expert at all in everything else classical German literature could offer. I`m pretty sure that in "Urfaust" there are some elements from poems not by Goethe, just as there is something from the older version of the same book. But it`s dull (at least my taste found it to be that way). Wojcziek? I never even got what was the plot here. The lead character seems to be some stupid fool, who has some problems with his wife. And he does a job that doesn`t get paid too well. That`s probably all I can tell. Apart from the fact that from now on I won`t believe that Duerenmatt=very good quality brandname.

It was the reason why I watched "Deep Throat" in the first place. I learned a lot about the most profitable film ever yet I didn`t really learn why it was so popular in 1970s. I learned a lot about the stars of the film yet I didn`t learn what`s the difference between them and other porn stars. Oh, maybe on difference is clear - Linda Lovelace and her technique are unique for sure. The funniest part of the film is Linda`s change of attitude and becoming a feminist - c`mon who`d buy the whole "every time people watch this film they are watching me being raped"? Yeah, sure. I`m not so sure what was the message the makers of this documenatry were trying to pass over? Do they tell you that Gerard Damiano was a revolutionary, a rebel that "Deep Throat" was some sort of an artistic statement? I certainly can`t understand why that should be true. A rebellious porn director? Sure, and when a fellow told in the film that Damiano went for dirty pictures so he could get laid more easily he probably meant it metaphorically? I`m not sure whether I am or am not a morally conservative person but I`m absolutely sure that you usually don`t need group sex to make an artistic statement (unless we`re talking about the band "Circle Jerks" that did have an album titled "Group Sex"). So - how good is the documentary? It`s pretty entertaining but a bit pointless, so that makes the rating of 6.5 (now you know how I rate things).

"Ripping Yarns" ir viens no tiem kino vēstures elementiem, kuru loma manā dzīvē varētu būt lielāka, nekā tā ir vairumam cilvēku, un labi ka tā. Kamēr Džons Klīzs pēc Monty Python eksistences beigām savu solo karjeru pamatīgi iecementēja ar "Fawlty Towers" (ko es - atzīšos - joprojām neesmu noskatījies pilnībā, lai arī vairumu sēriju redzējis neesmu), Maikls Peilins pārī ar Teriju Džonsu izveidoja savu seriālu, kas gan neguva "Fawlty Towers" popularitāti, bet kas kino vēstures annāļos ir iegūlis ar ne mazāk skaistiem burtiem.