19 Maybe 2008
Helle Brett,
I would like to offer some comments on this week’s ‘GRINDHOUSE DOCOS’ program, featuring THE ANIMAL WITHIN (1974) and SHANGRI LA (1977), both made in the USA.
I can’t say I would personally classify either of these two films as pure ‘Grindhouse’.
To me ‘grindhouse’ movies by definition are not good movies; in fact, they need to be bad movies, designed not to be taken seriously, usually ultra-sleazy and violent for the sake of some perverse cheap thrills and fun.
The two movies in this week’s program, in fact take themselves quite seriously, though some might disagree.
I enjoyed both films a great deal, preferring Kevin Duffy’s SHANGRI LA (1977).
THE ANIMAL WITHIN (which I might call a ‘mock doc’), relies heavily on speculative ideas and fabricated staging. In contrast, SHANGRI LA turns out to be a genuine portrait of a time and a place.
SHANGRI LA is a rare and remarkable piece of film history, beautifully paced and capturing real images for posterity. I’m glad it still exists!
Sure, it features some built-in tackiness in places and most definitely exploits the naked form (especially the females), but even that seems to be truthful in representing the innocence and naivety of the dreamers in a specific era at a specific locale. It is of its time; just look at the dated (strange?) male-female relationship dynamics presented!
I believe SHANGRI LA is an important film, not least because I strongly suspect that Blake Edwards may have seen SHANGRI LA and copied it.
The subtle humour in SHANGRI LA would not have been lost to Edwards who filmed Bo Derek in ‘10’ (1979) only shortly after SHANGRI LA was released.
In ‘10’, Derek epitomises female physical perfection and her iconic, slow-motion beach-running sequence is VERY similar in style and execution to the SHANGRI LA sequence Duffy shot on the beaches of GOA . ‘10’ made Bo Derek an overnight sex symbol.
The attractive, curvy, naked, young blonde running towards the camera in ‘slo-mo’ on Goa Beach
SHANGRI LA is a daringly-made film, too overwhelming with foreign wonderment and bemusement to fully absorb in one sitting. I would recommend a second viewing.
SHANGRI LA serves up surprise and interest with bravado, including regular readings-reciting from Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s famous opium-poem KUBLA KHAN, heard scattered throughout the film...both actual lines as well as some rather silly, modern, supplementary improvisations.
A live human birth is shown; I imagine quite confronting if you’re not prepared for it.
A human cremation,
A pig that looks forward to feeding on human excrement/waste from the toilet block, Drug purchasing and drug sharing, tripping experiences,
A real rooster has its head chopped off,
Native Hindu washing their genitalia in the river Ganges ,
Exquisitely carved temples depicting the human sex act in all positions and styles,
Naked, sexy, yoga-practicing hippy ‘chicks’
Real People, real events, real places!
Many scenes filled me with wonderment and disbelief.
SHANGRI LA worked as both information and entertainment!
In comparison, THE ANIMAL WITHIN seemed fraudulent (Even the narrator ‘Robert Ardrey’ was played by an actor) though it too presented some fascinating images and is also a most worthwhile movie experience.
To me, THE ANIMAL WITHIN is a drama feature whereas SHANGRI LA qualifies as real documentary.
Thanks for presenting these films Brett...
Again, great choices!
Pia Santaklaus
