Le Braissive Denture by Pia Santaklaus

23 Densemble 2008

Saturday 20 December 2008: Cinemateque put on a very fine program ‘THE FILMS OF IVAN MOSJOUKINE’. A truly great superstar of his day, perhaps the reason Mosjoukine keeps fading away is because his name is so difficult for Westerners to remember and to pronounce. Think ‘Charlie Chaplin’…unforgettable!

Anyway, it was a real treat to have film historian and fanatic Barrie Pattison present his immaculately unearthed and researched material. Barrie’s sense of history, purity and purpose put the remarkable and complex Ivan Mosjoukine back into perspective. Barrie’s seemingly encyclopedic knowledge never ceases to amaze me. As always, curator Brett Garten did a beautiful job with the screening of the various bits and pieces and bringing the whole thing together. Thank you Barrie! Thank you Brett!

Monday night, 22 December 2008 saw the follow-up program with a presentation screening of a full-length film starring and directed by Ivan Mosjoukine himself. LE BRAISIER ARDENT (1923). After all these years this film maintains a strong visual impact. It had something for everyone; all in one movie Mosjoukine managed to define himself in guises as diverse as a dashing gentleman, a pious Bishop, a professional psychiatrist, a gothic warlock, a dark vampiric presence (he resembles Bela Lugosi), and of course as a sentimental, foolish, infatuated lover.

The film itself is defined through blocks and flashes of surrealism, nightmarish underworlds, beautiful topography, elegant boudoirs, complex sets and gorgeous cutting-edge designs of the times.

According to expert Barrie Pattison, the original film was run at a slower speed. Tonight, we watched it at a faster pace that purists might find unacceptable and so Barrie wasn't there for this presentation to help with some of the translations required. His absence was an upset. Regardless, the film moved along very nicely and the picture quality of this print was absolutely remarkable considering the age of the film.

Furthermore, the audience was lucky to be treated to a new, live soundtrack, provided by young and upcoming talented pianist Adrian Clement. Only 18 years of age, this usually reserved composer took to the piano with a forthright and comfortable energy. He owned the keyboard like a young Franz Liszt, improvising much of the music and bringing a fresh, youthful bounce to the film. Much of the time the music married flawlessly with the images. Adrian’s ability to confidently play through long stretches was admirable.

At one point he introduced a second ‘voice’ with some eerie, spectral, prerecorded sounds. Together with the piano, it was an awe-inspiring moment. With his relentless strong left hand ‘plonking’ and ‘skipping’ onto the lower keys and his right hand playing emotional changes, Adrian provided the necessary momentum and spaces necessary. His score was at once reminiscent of classic silent-era scores and yet with a modern vitality that helped move the film along. His chords were firm, edgy and risky… At no point did it get boring. My one, minor criticism is that he might do better to pull back and create a more sentimental, open and delicate pieces of music specifically for romantic scenes. This was only evident in the last few minutes of the film.

The story, about a suspicious-jealous husband who hires a psychiatrist to convert his woman’s passion for Paris into a fear of the ‘City of Love’, called for something neo-classical, looming and ‘up’. Adrian provided an appropriate brisk hit.

All in all, a fantastic musical debut for Adrian at the Chauvel and I look forward to hearing him again accompanying the upcoming silent film FANTOMAS.

In closing I must thank curator Brett Garten for his tireless dedication and his ability to bring together so many great complex elements.

Pia Santaklaus

Saturday screenings canned until further notice

That's right folks, from this point on cinematheque will screen only once per week - Mondays at 6:30pm sharp. The 12 noon Saturday screenings are no more (at least for the time-being).

Regrets...

Brett

Blanche - this week at Cinematheque

Cinematheque ends for 2008 with...

Blanche

France/1970/Colour/92mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Walerian Borowczyck.

Set in 13th century France, this dark Arthurian tragedy is centred on Blanche, the beautiful young wife of an ageing baron, who falls prey to the lusts of three men: her stepson, the king, and his page. Borowczyk's initial interest in recreating the period and depicting courtly intrigue is gradually replaced by his characteristic cold, flat formalism - instead of fleshing out his main character, Borowczyk turns Blanche into an automaton. Yet despite its almost inhuman cruelty, the film achieves a kind of tragic catharsis. Based on the novel Mazepa by Juliusz Slowacki. In French w/ English subs.

Read more about Borowczyck here.

Jan-Feb 2009 Program

Click to enlarge.


Enjoy!

Marinecktie by Pia Santaklaus

13 December 2008

Hi Brett, I enjoyed today’s Cinematheque session and offer some thoughts:

The first film was the Italian documentary FUTURISM (1971) which presented an excellent array of Futurist artists, their art and history, in a concise and informative, fast-paced style. It set the tone for the rest of the session.

As I now understand it, Futurism developed and sprouted around the same period as Cubism, preceding and inspiring later movements such as Art Deco, Dada and Surrealism. It more or less began in 1909 when Marinetti published his ‘Futurist Manifesto’ in France. In it he blasted and rebelled against nature, the establishment and everything old, while exulting youth, modernity, technology, speed, innovation and power. Other mostly Italian males agreed with this philosophy and joined the movement. The Futurists also glorified violence describing it as “the world’s only hygiene” and scorned all womankind. In time, Marinetti and other Italian Futurists adopted Fascist leanings becoming supporters of Mussolini which may have something to do with the seeming suppression of the movement since.

In what feels like hypocrisy, I believe it transpired that Marinetti eventually moved to the old city of Rome, became less radical and less combative by marrying, taking an academic position, promoting religious art and even espousing and declaring Jesus as a Futurist. With the death of Marinetti in 1944, Futurism expired.

The second film, BOCCIONI’S BIKE (1981) was a very impressive animation. I imagine it a real labour of love for the maker who with such a simple story managed to convey so many elements of the Futurist ‘movement’. He’s gone the full cycle! (Ha!)

Now I’ll focus on the third film, MARINETTI (1968) which left me with a hazy impression. The director Albie Thoms was there today to introduce the movie he’d made 40 years ago. It must have felt quite surreal for him to watch his own work on the big screen after all this time. I imagine he spent a lot of money restoring his film so that a brand new print might exist. I think it was a worthy exercise so that now he can reach new audiences (like us) from younger generations.

The film title was named in honor of the Italian poet and founder of Futurism, Filippo Marinetti (1876-1944).

MARINETTI (1969, shot in 1968) has with the passing of time become an important document, being one of the few Australian full-length feature films of the late 1960s in the experimental, psychadelic, avante-garde genres. It is an audio-visual ‘trip’ that used now-dated camera techniques and angles, frequent nudity and a complex multi-layered soundtrack to build itself into an ultimately difficult, unreassuring but necessary piece.

Historically, this ‘time capsule’ is fascinating. We see images from a long-gone Sydney Australia. In one scene, on a breakfast table we see a packet of Kellogg’s cereal (Coco Pops) and on the streets outside we see the public transport (Sydney buses), just two of the many images that remind us just how much things have changed and yet stayed the same.

I read somewhere that Albie Thoms once said the film “had no message, no revelation for the world…”; perhaps this film was made for his own personal gratification or as an indulgent portrait. In many ways it looks like a glorified home movie. The title may lead some to imagine this is a tribute to the Italian Futurist Marinetti; it may be, or perhaps it’s merely a springboard for director Thoms to unravel his own agenda, the same way Fellini claimed to resurrect and pay tribute to E.A. POE with TOBY DAMMIT (1968) while all the while only very scant tribute is evident as Fellini’s personal vision indulges his own ends.

MARINETTI opens with an extended, uncomfortable stretch of blackness. Sporadic, instant glimpses and bursts of scratching, flashing light are generated as the eyes stare blankly at the screen for a long while. The ears awaken as we sit in mostly darkness listening to the sound of Albie Thoms’ voice in a recorded conversation about Marinetti.

The flashes of white light become more and more pronounced; green flashes are gradually introduced. Around 10 minutes into the film we see full colour… the world of this community begins in the living room of an inner-city Victorian terrace. At the time (around 1968), those old suburbs and that style of architecture were not as fashionable as they’ve become today, making them a good, cheap, chic choice of housing for artistic communities to inhabit.

At one point in the film we hear mention of T.S. Eliot’s disjointed and prophetic poem ‘The Waste Land’ (1922). Perhaps the unkempt, crude, gritty, dissonant, unelegant persons and real inner city wasteland backdrops parallel and conjure Eliot’s impressions. In another scene you might catch a glimpse of TS Eliot amongst the super-fast edits (micro-seconds) of what appear to be the director’s inspirations which included amongst many others The Beatles and Ezra Pound. (Ezra Pound helped Eliot with ‘The Waste Land’ and in 1925 Eliot dedicated ‘The Waste Land’ to Ezra Pound).

It has been noted Eliot chose the title ‘The Waste land’ as an adjunct to Jessie L. Weston’s book ‘From Ritual to Romance’ (1920) which alludes to the sterile land of the Fisher King in the grail legend. Eliot’s ‘The Waste Land’ includes a section ‘The Burial of the Dead’ which alludes to the Anglican ‘The Book of Common Prayer’. Here the narrator (as ‘Son of man’) includes lines of Old Testament allusions and finds himself in a desert. We recall the Old Testament God telling the prophet Ezekiel Israel will become desolate, broken and cities will lay in waste, while in Ecclesiastes, God warns the Jews to remember their youth, for in old age "fears shall be in the way" and "then shall the dust return to the earth as it was". In both Ezekiel 6:4 and Ecclesiastes 12:5-7, human failure seems pre-destined.

On a happier note, the film soundtrack/sound montage is compounded with a multi-tracked, multi-layered, psychedelic, jazz, avant-garde soundscape that works well with the images and the added voice-over narration. Sound quality was pristine and included in the mesh, snippets of at least 2 Beatles songs: Good Day Sunshine (1966) and With A Little Help From My Friends (1967). Nice touch.

Following the Futurists’ philosophy, Thoms used strong light and movement in this creation. Particularly as it progresses into the second half, the film revealed even greater intensity of light, colour and movement.

Hard to watch, now-dated, cheap n’ cheesy camera techniques and effects such as fisheye lenses, garish colour filters, fast in-out zooming, spinning camerawork, slide and film projections and more, imbue MARINETTI with a 1965-1967 Swinging London aura. (Australia was a little behind in those days). It reminded me of films on Pink Floyd’s 1967 experimental light-sound shows at London’s UFO club.

MARINETTI is unattractive, uncommercial and strewn with lascivious content, perhaps for perv value or an opportunity to shoot some ‘tits 'n’ ass’. Sex keeps selling and I would guestimate that female presence in the film outscreened male by 9:1. Unfortunately, in today’s less ‘radical’ climate, most of the femmes in the film seem to take on a loose, lost, lamentable lustre.

Many shaky images rest over the melancholy male voice-over that recites supposedly profound lyrical insights; this narrator provokes with words like “Come!” and “Enjoy!” as females writhe and pose in sensual scenarios.

Indulgent, pretentious, exploitative and dated, MARINETTI is nevertheless a brilliant document of a collective of relatively youthful men and women (mostly women) in a slightly claustrophobic circle in a time when very few real ‘gods’ (eg Lennon-McCartney) walked the earth, while millions of try-hard followers and wannabes polluted and corrupted their afterglow. With some effort, one might see MARINETTI as a film on the creative process, especially the role women might play as muses for men desperately seeking inspiration in the mostly naked flesh of the ‘goddess’. This Robert Gravesian (White Goddess) ‘play’ is magnified by the overabundance of female sexuality which culminates in the resulting child… a product of the union.

Unfortunately, some of these ‘goddesses’ seemed more like ladies of quashed vitality. Sad-eyed sisters of a suburban wasteland lost on a fast track to desolation row. If their role was some kind of muse for the glory of creativity, their limp parading and luxuriating wasn’t convincing enough. These potentially “beautiful people” are old enough to know better - just how ugly one can appear under the suppressive veil of drink and drugs… The true Goddess’s forte is unblemished perfection and strength.

We move on… MARINETTI shows increasing complexity as it goes along. By the 2nd half, the film revealed itself above the status of an ‘anybody can be a filmaker’ film. One could appreciate it for it’s technical skill. The editing became far more impressive and the use of animation overlay and sections of ‘extra’ footage such as the frantic jazzy nightlife cityscape (a highlight), synchronized motorbike routines, gymnastics displays and more, drew the viewer away from the ‘baccanalian boudoir’ and towards other life aspects.

I’ll go out on a limb and add my own personal interpretation of the film. (It may help others…or not). I imagine this movie as a condensed expression of the complete cycle of humanity’s existence. The film opens with blackness and closes with blackness; a full circle is run that we might return ‘home’. Before mankind, we imagine there was nothing but God! (in darkness). We read in the Bible that “in the beginning was the Word” and so we suddenly get ‘words’ in the blackness (we hear the sound of Albie Thom’s talking words). As “the Word was God” (see: Gospel Of John), we may imagine God as filmmaker- 'a creator'. Remembering Genesis and God saying “Let there be light”, a sudden shift from the blackness; the Word is joined by sudden bursts of white light. Subsequent green light in the film may be seen as the creation of nature. We then have the Garden of Eden (?) (a cosy terrace house) followed by humanity appearing one by one and before you know it we are caught in a cycle of birth…sex sex sex sex sex; flesh on flesh and the undeniable generation of new flesh (birth and the young child) continuing the human dilemma. As we near the end, we may seem to abandon sexuality to some degree to focus more on evolutionary skills, techniques and knowledge (seen in the difficult bike synchs, tricky gymnastics and Futurist scribblings and edits). Finally we ‘return’ to a new light (white screen) before we re-enter the void (black screen) where the Word has changed into music though it seems the prophecies wont be denied. Humanity is doomed to wander wasteland Earth forever.

OK, so this is my own philosophizing and hypothesizing and may have nothing at all to do with this film, but for me it’s enough to wax it worthy of another viewing. I recommend you watch this film and see if you can make your own sense of it.

Brett, Thanks for yet another interesting Cinemateque experience. You make great and interesting choices on a very regular basis. Look forward to the next.

Pia Santaklaus

Short Article on Marinetti by Adrian Clement

Albie Thoms’ 1968 experimental Australian film Marinetti, was screened at the Chauvel Cinema on two dates as part of the excellent Chauvel Cinematheque, curated by Brett Garten, and included two short films, including Futurism, a 1971 historical documentary on the Italian Futurists directed by Guido Guerassio, and Boccioni’s Bike, a 1981 animation directed by Skip Battaglia. Seeing how I suggested this program, I thought it is fitting that I write a short article outlining my thoughts on it, having now seen it.



For starters, I think that it’s important to state that Thoms sees his film Marinetti as a tribute or homage to the Italian Futurist Filippo Tommaso Marinetti (1876-1944), who’s 1908/9 “Futurist Manifesto” kick-started a revolutionary nationalist movement which spanned a wide range of mediums such as painting and sculpture and sound art (Luigi Russolo’s manifesto “The Art of Noises” [1913] and his highly unique and unusual instruments that captured industrial and mechanic sounds are usually what critics point to as the first instance of intentional “noise music”). As the film is a tribute or homage, we can deduce that the film has ties to the Futurist movement in some capacity, whether that be stylistically, structurally, aesthetically and so on.




In twenty minutes, Guerassio seemed to provide a very good overview of the Italian Futurist movement, outlining some of its major artists, historical developments and ideas (including those imbued in Marinetti’s manifesto). It also summed up quite well an idea developed in Futurism which Thoms adopted for Marinetti. In 2003, Thoms stated, in interview with Danni Zuvela for Senses of Cinema, that, in Marinetti, he “adopted the Futurist notion of minimalisation of plot and characterisation”. This gives way to an experience that is largely non-verbal and highly subjective which bypasses verbalised pigeonholing. This was the intention of filmmaker Stanely Kubrick for his brilliant 2001: A Space Odyssey (released in 1968, coincidentally the same year as Thoms’ Marinetti), who in an interview with Playboy Magazine from 1968 argued that verbalising a single message would shackle an audience “to a reality other than their own” and “erect an artificial barrier between conception and appreciation.”



On a stylistic and artistic level, Battaglia’s Boccioni’s Bike was as much a tribute or homage to the painter and sculptor Umberto Boccioni (1882-1916) as Albie Thoms’ film Marinetti was to Marinetti. In his adventurous nine minute animation, Battaglia depicts a cyclist in a style that alludes to the dynamism of form and style quintessential in Futurist painting and sculpture.The image of a bicycle is pivotal as it references an event which influenced Marinetti’s decision to write the “Futurist Manifesto”. In 1908, Marinetti was involved in a small car accident, after trying to avoid two cyclists on a road just outside Milan. Helping himself out of the ditch, Marinetti vowed to “destroy the museums, the libraries, every type of academy”. He wrote that the Futurists “will glorify war - the world's only hygiene - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, beautiful ideas worth dying for, and scorn for woman.”

Above everything thing else I appreciated and enjoyed about Thoms’ Marinetti was its brilliant score. Thoms employed “blank verse voice-over narration as part of a sound montage” which mangled together with experimental and/or psychedelic rock music and a large palette of non-musical sound sources. Contextually, Marinetti was released roughly the same era as “The Gift” by The Velvet Underground from White Light/White Heat (1968), which is considered an experimental track because it combined spoken word with rock music, and likewise the same era as Frank Zappa’s avant-rock compositions, which played with language in a similar way to Thoms (but perhaps not as extreme).

In conclusion, just as Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979) was a translation of Joseph Conrad’s novella Heart of Darkness (1899) from a Belgian-Congo era context to a Vietnam War context, Marinetti is as if Thoms was looking at 1960s Australia quite literally through the lens of a Futurist. Today I spoke with Brett Garten about how the film was received on its second screening. Roughly forty years since the film was first screen it still received the same response, with half of the audience walking out according to Brett. This time around however, most of the people who left were still hanging about outside until it finished to discuss the film, conveying a much higher level of interest in the film that was perhaps non-existent 40 years prior from an Australian audience.

Films of Ivan Mosjoukine - this week at Cinematheque

Two big screenings this week. First up is Saturday the 20th of December, where at 12noon, Australia's most persistent moviegoer, film historian Barrie Pattison will look at the life and work of Ivan Mosjoukine.Mosjoukine was the leading actor of the Russian Tsarist era, when he fled the Bolsheviks and became the most adored romantic idol of the European silent film, with a side trip to Hollywood. Great actor and sometime director, his Rabelaisian life was as extraordinary as his work but all this was forgotten for most of the Twentieth Century. Now a shift of political climate in Russia and the work of the archives has brought Mosjoukine back from deepest limbo.

For the second show, on Monday the 22nd of December at 6:30pm, Barrie Pattison returns to present a rare screening of the Mosjoukine film Le Brasier Ardent (The Fiery Furnace) featuring a new score supervised and performed live by Adrian Clement and a new translation from the French, translated live by Barrie Pattison. The pick of the small number of movies in which Mosjoukine directed himself, the film co-stars Natalie Lissenko and Nicholas Koline. Plot, decor and performance elevate, to the near demented, this mix of Boulevard comedy and surreal fantasy.
From Barrie's press release:

Teenage Ivan used the newly arrived Cinematograph to become the greatest actor in
Tsarist Russia. His triumphs in the movies got him lead roles in the Moscow Theatres and
his collaborations with director Yakov Protazanov (of the science fiction classic Aelita)
produced the greatest film of the pre-revolutionary era, their adaptation of Queen of
Spades, dominated by Mosjoukine’s glowering Herman.

This film lived in only the memory of the few viewers who survived the decades it was
believed lost. Mosjoukine had another claim to fame however. He was the actor who
contributed the close-up to the reel which demonstrated “the Kuleshov effect.”

The famous montage theoretician took a shot of Mosjoukine doing his intense tabla rasa
stare, into which were cut pictures of a plate of soup, a baby and a naked woman. The
response was always “What a great actor! See how he shows hunger, affection and lust.”
This reel, now actually lost, was known to every commentator on film in the world.

When the Bolsheviks nearly shot him, Mosjoukine, along with his then wife Natalie
Lissenko and Protazanov, lit out for Europe, settling in France where, in middle age, he
began his career over again. Gathering with the exiled Russian performers and
technicians in Marseilles, they made a series of increasingly flamboyant costume dramas
and adventures. These turned Mosjoukine into the great European silent screen idol. He
was Valentino and Paul Muni in one package.

His fame reached Germany, where he co-starred with Brigitte Helm, fresh from her
triumph as the 17 year old heroine of Fritz Lang’s epic Metropolis. He filmed with
legends of the French cinema like Charles Vanel and Michel Simon and he was taken to
Hollywood for a movie opposite Mary Philbim, from the Lon Chaney Phantom of the
Opera.

Off screen, his association with the great beauties of the day, notably the famous artist’s
model Kiki de Montmartre, drew as much attention as his acting. He enjoyed a life of
extraordinary hedonism, eating epicure meals with celebrity friends, collecting books and
art and indulging himself in legendary romances.

And suddenly his fabled celebrity came to an abrupt end for the second time. The sound
film revealed his thick Slavonic accent, limiting the parts he could play and alienating
much of his ecstatic fan base.

He would die in poverty and isolation only a few years later. Breaking into the meagre
apartment, where they located the actor’s dead body, investigators found cupboards
crammed with fan mail containing marriage proposals, money and bank drafts. These,
had he opened them, would have let him live in luxury.

Even more disastrous, the extraordinary body of work Mosjoukine had generated, all but
vanished. The Soviet Arts Bureaucrats had no interest in the pre-Communist cinema and
recollection of the European silent film rapidly funnelled down to the work of a few
celebrity directors. Only in the legendary Paris Cinematheque, was it possible to see the
star’s flamboyant output. Their curator was devoted to Mosjoukine. A poster for his
L’Enfant du Carnival dominated the foyer of the Chaillot Palace auditorium and the editor of Breathless donated her time to restoring the surviving copies of Mosjoukine
films for preservation.

However with glasnost, the Russian archive was able to admit that they had squirreled
away examples of the Tsarist film. Movie Historians homed in on the fustian work of
director Evgenyi Bauer and your best chance of seeing Mosjoukine was in Bauer
productions. However, somewhat to official discomfort, audiences singled out the actor’s
work and the Pordenone Italy festival picked up on this and, noting that there had never
been a tribute to Mosjoukine, gathered all his surviving films for a retrospective, which
included the amazing, rediscovered 1923 serial House of Mystery.

Barrie Pattison, Australia’s most determined movie goer, had followed Mosjoukine in
the Paris screenings and glimpses of his work in the obsolete 9.5mm format home movie
library. With the motivated few, he converged on Pordenone, rounding out a lifetime of
enthusiast interest. His presentations at the Chauvel Cinematheque on Saturday
December 20 and Monday December 22 draws on this research and other archival and
collector sources.

The Mozjoukine event is unique in Australia, revealing the work of one of the Cinema’s
most flamboyant, most talented, and most neglected figures.

Futurist Films - this week at Cinematheque

SAT. 13/12 @ !@ NOON & MON. 15/12/08 @6:30PM

FUTURIST FILMS

Director Albie Thoms will introduce this program on Saturday the 13th only.

Futurism Italy/1971/Colour/20mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Guido Guerrasio.

The Italian Futurists were the first artists to celebrate modern technology. This film captures the restless experimental energy of futurism and portrays the work of its major artists: Marinetti, Balla, Boccione, Carra, Russolo, and Severini.

Boccioni’s Bike USA/1981/Colour/9mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Skip Battaglia.

Animated, hand-drawn, lyrical film in the graphic style of the Italian futurists, accompanied by the sounds of a futurist orchestra.

Marinetti Australia/1968/B&W & Colour/80mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Albie Thoms.

A tribute to the Italian futurist poet Marinetti, the film is also a record of the avant-garde art circles in Sydney in the late 1960's. The film's bold structure includes long stretches of black and coloured footage interpersed with extremely rapid flashes of photographed footage, culminating with a statement of the "Hand-Made Film Manifesto" of 1968.

Queen of Titicut by Pia Santaklaus

This week’s Cinematheque experience started off very lightly with 3 SCOPITONE music clips, becoming progressively weirder and darker with the next two pieces QUEEN OF APOLLO (1970) and TITICUT FOLLIES (1967). Overall, a most thought-provoking session!

The three SCOPITONE clips were so cringe-worthy they were brilliant. Tasteless, badly acted, inappropriate; they put a very uncomfortable smile on my face. Completely fascinating! Perhaps the cheesiest choice was the clip for the song ‘Strangers In the Night’ in which a young couple rendezvous and flirt beneath a wide open, bright, sun-shiny sky somewhere in Europe…not a hint of “night” anywhere. I can’t wait for more Scopitones!

Next up, QUEEN OF APOLLO (1970); a short film directed by Richard Leacock. For those who find wedding videos boring and offensive, this film carries a similar aura as it opens with a young lady in preparation for an ‘important’ event. Look carefully and this seemingly innocuous piece may reveal a deeper, more idiosyncratic underscore, perhaps even pagan ritual, metaphor and symbolism.

Unless you move past the preening, brushing, grooming, fussing and self-involved ugliness, you may miss any deeper meaning strewn within. We assume the girl being prepared for the symbolic ‘royal event’ is the ‘Queen Of Apollo’. A young boy is trained to hand her a sceptre and she pats his head. Sceptres of course are ceremonial wands used as royal emblems of monarch authority.

Later, at the actual ceremony inside a hall, the ‘Queen Of Apollo’ promenades around her faithful, waving her gloved hand for them; in a corner stands a large fake tree trunk with a constructed door and door-sign above with ‘MR SANDERS’ written in child-like, (Winnie The Pooh style) scribble; the significance elusive. ‘Sanders’ is an old word for ‘sandalwood’, and also means ‘son of Alexander’, but this doesn’t help us much.

In the background, a scrappy house band plays a sloppy rendition of the 1961 Shirelles hit Baby It’s You (also recorded by The Beatles in 1963). This Burt Bacharach, Luther Dixon and Mack Davis song includes the line “You should hear what they say about you –cheat!” Meanwhile an amassed youthful (?) mob bounce up and down in their bright satin outfits like some psychedelic KKK gathering hidden beneath their conical hats, masks and long shiny robes. Something about the demeanour of the rabbles suggests white supremacists…the young ‘Queen’s’ mother’s own hairstyle looks seriously modelled after Queen Elizabeth’s pompadour.

This doco was filmed in USA (New Orleans, Louisiana) locales that might hint a connection with some KKK, Freemasons or other organization. The Ku Klux Klan was a secret organization originally created in 1865 by 6 Confederate veterans from Tennessee. They derived the name by joining the Greek word for ‘circle’ (kyklos or κυ-κλος) and ‘clan’. The KKK used violence and intimidation to stop blacks voting and to suppress Republican votes. Before the Presidential election of November 1868, over 2,000 people were harmed or killed in Louisiana. After reading pro-Democrat Thomas Dixon’s (1864-1946) Ku Klux Klan trilogy of books ‘The Leopard’s Spots’(1902), ‘The Clansman’ (1905) and ‘The Traitor’ (1907), renowned film pioneer D.W. Griffith glorified the original Klan in his film ‘THE BIRTH OF A NATION’ (1915). Like Dixon, he used iconography inspired by old Scotland and the Historical Romances of Sir Walter Scott’s works. As an example, the international flag of the ‘Scottish Rite of Freemasonry’ is also the flag of the United Nations depicting the world nations surrounded by the laurel of Apollo circling (κυ-κλος) the world. Present-day Ku Klux Klan is no longer a single organization, but many smaller, independent groups across America, which makes it harder for researchers to infiltrate.

Still, QUEEN OF APOLLO may simply be chronicling an exemplary, elegant and chaste exclusive event; perhaps a debutante’s big day; perhaps the ‘APOLLO’ in the film title has to do with something as trivial as the name of the reception lounge, possibly called something like ‘Apollo Theatre’ or ‘Apollo Lounge’… somehow this seems doubtful!

I imagine more likely the ‘APOLLO’ in the film title has to do with the then topical ‘Apollo Space Program’. NASA conducted the Apollo space flights between 1961 and 1975 aiming at human moon landing missions. For those who believe it was accomplished, the greatest moment was on 20th July 1969. It is thought that around one fifth of the world population watched the live transmission of the first Apollo moon landing. The lunar landings of the Apollo program are still seen by some as humanity’s greatest achievement.

The Apollo program was named after Apollo, the Greek god of light. Before the Apollo program, America had the Mercury program (another god) to compete with the Soviets (who were the first to fly man to space -12 April 1961). NASA made space travel believable though others suspect that every Apollo mission was a carefully orchestrated and rehearsed Top Secret mock-up. Some see occult metaphors and symbolism in the Apollo missions. Eg: The Numerological ‘staged’ explosion (death-sacrifice) of ‘Apollo 13’ at 13:13 hrs on 13 April 1970; (13 is seen as the symbolic number of death and rebirth/reincarnation). This event and the filming of QUEEN OF APOLLO happened very close together…

NASA-Masonic conspiracies continue to exist; as reward for “pulling off” the Apollo space mission, C. Fred Kleinknecht (said to have headed the Apollo space project) was later made Sovereign Grand Commander of the Council of the 33rd Degree of the Ancient Scottish Rite of Freemasonry in Washington DC. Others say it wasn’t C. Fred Kleinknecht, but rather his brother Kenneth S. Kleinknecht (also a 33 degree S.R. Mason) who worked at NASA. Note: The most active and exceptional serving Masons receive the prestigious and Honorary 33rd Degree. It is said, the ‘Scottish Rite’ is part of the Masonic family degree system. There are apparently few of the first 3 degrees, then, those who apply and pay for them are conferred with the 4 to 32 degrees, and the 33rd degree is for exceptional service to Freemasonry. Very few receive this recognition which might be seen as somehow ‘elite’.

It is believed that all of the early astronauts were Freemasons. By showing the people of Earth that we can leave our planet and travel to space, it infers that other beings might also travel to Earth. Alien conspiracies still flourish.

For many in awe of astral bodies, the worship of the Sun, Moon and Stars continues. We still call many planets after the old Gods, Eg: Venus, Mars, Neptune, Mercury and Jupiter… Humanity has always noticed patterns in the movement of the Sun, Moon and Stars. The ancient Greeks explained the Sun’s daily journey as the work of Apollo riding a fiery chariot across the heavens. The ancient Egyptians explained the waning of the Moon as a monthly re-enactment of the dismemberment of the god Osiris. When humanity discovered the Earth revolved around the Sun, it destroyed our arrogant notion that the universe centred round man. This painful truth revealed our relative insignificance while affirming The Sun as the most brilliant object in our Solar System (and so Apollo shares in that importance). The Moon which seems to magically affect natural life on Earth as it reflects the light of the Sun (Apollo) is also important…perhaps seen as the Goddess, or Queen, (Queen of Apollo?), her gravitational pull influences the tides and the cycles of life, perhaps even our emotional cycle.

Alternatively, in other mythology, Apollo did have a Queen at one stage…Apollo’s famous affair was with his lover Queen Hecuba. When she had a son (Troilus) to Apollo, an oracle foretold that Troy would not be defeated if Troilus reached age 25, so Troilus was killed by Achilles during the Trojan War. Hecuba (Queen of Apollo?) later went insane when 2 of her other children (Poydorus and Polyxena) died.

If the word ‘Sun’ is substituted for the word ‘Apollo’, the title QUEEN OF SUN (or ‘Sun Queen’) might come into play. Perhaps some connection to ‘Nefertiti’ is in order. She was known as Egypt’s ‘Sun Queen’. Her name means “a beautiful woman has come”. It is believed she was from wealthy, privileged, elite Egyptian royalty. Nefertiti was the wife of pharaoh Amenhotep (perhaps the earliest monotheist). It is thought she helped her husband systematically erase the worship of the supreme Egyptian god AMEN, replacing AMEN with ATEN.

Anyway, some occultists see Apollo as ‘Lucifer’, linked to Mars and the coming of the Antichrist.

One cannot be sure who is on the right track…I still wonder about many possible connections between events, mythologies and this strange 12 minute doco QUEEN OF APOLLO.

The next piece was TITICUT FOLLIES (1967); shot in 1966, this is a harrowing documentary film that reveals a hideous male-dominated world of crime and punishment inside a mental institution. If ever you need proof that humanity is a mess, here it is! It’s enough to make you question how the universe got it so wrong. This film could easily be reclassified as ‘HORROR’. Filled with ugliness in many guises; patients, wardens, doctors, buildings, behaviour…ugly, ugly and so ugly! ‘Moe’, the guy running the show, comes off like a spotlight-starved, show-tune-obsessed dictator; a most forceful, unattractive presence.
If the oppressed patients are flawed, this film reveals serious counter-flaws in the staff as well, who, in turn show most questionable traits. Unhygienic, sick, rude, brutal… perhaps most questionable are the psychiatrists and doctors condemning the poor lost souls…At one point we see the tragic force-feeding of a soon-to-be-dead patient.

Filmed in black and white by Frederick Wiseman at an institution in Massachusetts, the inmates and patients are seen to be deprived of comfort, privacy and freedom. Left naked in stark individual cells, they are violated, bullied, ridiculed and shown no dignity.

I recall the artwork of the masters Goya and Bosch who once captured the horror of the ugly human soul pushing outward from the flesh. Many faces seen in Titicut Follies affirm the old masters’ gruesome visions with their foul presence…Paradise truly is lost and freedom is but a dream.
I’m not pointing the finger at any one particular group, though I’m struck by the emotionally challenged, empathy-lacking staff and wardens who have probably been dealing with inmates on a daily basis and are most likely worn down and numb to empathy… all that’s left is an inhuman process of pain. Even in front of the camera they torture the prisoners; one could only imagine what horror they’d inflict off camera.
This film shows the sad leading the sad (though we could also substitute ‘sick’, ‘blind’, ‘mad’ and ‘poor’ for sad). Indeed, this is one of the saddest film experiences ever.

Thanks for such a difficult and thought-provoking Cinemateque experience Brett.

PS: Afterwards, I had a look on the internet and found QUEEN OF APOLLO is included on a long list of PENNEBAKER-HEGEDUS films. I believe Leacock collaborated with D.A.Pennebaker, whereas D.A Pennebaker and Chris Hegedus formed a documentary filmmaking team in the mid 70s where she would co-direct with Pennebaker. Like Richard Leacock (QUEEN OF APOLLO), who’s cinematic style creates a sense of actually ‘being there’, they too have been responsible for many respected and candid pieces. Using unobtrusive handheld cameras, they leave the film subject to determine the result. The Pennebaker-Hegedus team received the D.W.Griffith Award for their documentary THE WAR ROOM (1994).
In 1960, Leacock helped invent sync for cameras and sound recorders which helped sprout the new style of filmmaking taken up by many including D.A.Pennebaker.
Leacock (Born in London 18 July 1921) had spent years as a combat photographer in Burma and China; he also spent over a year as cameraman on Robert Flaherty’s ‘Louisiana Story’ (1948). Later Leacock also worked on Robert Drew’s film PRIMARY (1960), which is an intimate look at the JFK – Hubert Humphrey primary election. Leacock co-shot it and D.A.Pennebaker edited it. When Robert Drew went to work for ABC-TV, Leacock-Pennebaker was born, producing many films including DON’T LOOK BACK (1965).

Warrendale - this week at Cinematheque

Following up from last week's screening of Titicut Follies is another look at institutional life, Warrendale.

Warrendale Canada/1967/B&W/101mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Allan King.

A cinema verite study of the treatment of emotionally disturbed children at the Warrendale Centre in Ontario. The patients have behaviour abnormalities too severe for normal living, but here are given minimal restraint and encouragement to express their feelings however violent their form. Warrendale shared the 1967 Cannes Festival award with Blow-Up.

“This shattering documentary emerges as an engrossing, stark film. Variety
“The depth of emotion may embarrass some audiences, but it is the only way to deal honestly with material of this importance.” Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun Times

Screens with...

The Anatomy of Cindy Fink USA/1965/B&W & Colour/12mins/ 16mm/NFVLS Dir: Patricia Jaffe, Richard Leacock, Paul Leaf.

A cinema verite portrait of a young dancer rehearsing in an artist's studio in Greenwich village.

Le Brasier Ardent - Xmas Show - coming soon to Cinematheque

The Chauvel Cinematheque is pleased to announce a special Xmas screening of Ivan Mosjoukine's 1923 silent film Le Brasier Ardent (The Fiery Furnace) featuring a new score supervised and performed by Adrian Clement and a new translation by Barrie Pattison. Click to enlarge the flyer.

Titicut Follies - this week at Cinematheque

SAT. 29/11 at 12 noon & MON. 1/12 at 6:30pm

Just in time for Xmas, a two week program of feel-bad, cinema verite documentaries kicks off this week with the oft-mentioned but rarely screened classic of the genre...

TITICUT FOLLIES

USA/1967/B&W/84mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Frederick Wiseman.

Filmed in the state hospital for the criminally insane at Bridgewater, Massachusetts, Wiseman's first film had the unique distinction of being banned from public screening by a court order following a change of mind by the state authorities who initially agreed to both the filming and the release of the completed film. The title comes from the annual revue staged by both the inmates and the staff. The basis of the film's structure is the encounter between the employees of the institution and the people they serve.



Screens with...

Queen of Apollo
USA/1970/Colour/12mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Richard Leacock. A cinema verite documentary about a 1970 debutante. Shows the "Queen of Apollo" on her big night - an exclusive New Orleans mardi gras ball.

Reep on Kockin by Pia Santaklaus

19 November 2008

Hey Brett, I really enjoyed last week’s Cinematheque show, Keep on Rockin! I’d seen it on TV as a young child, but it was beautiful to watch it on the big screen and I particularly appreciated how you turned up the sound volume so that the experience washed over the room.

COSMIC RAY (1962 – filmed in 1961) is a daring, sexy and strange B&W short film by American counterculture beatnik artist and filmmaker Bruce Conner (b.1933) featuring Ray Charles’ song WHAT’D I SAY, Conner uses innovative, fast-cut proto-psychedelic visuals which seem vastly incongruent and trippy alongside the somewhat dated Ray Charles hit. Visually ahead of its time, the film screams Sex and Revolution… The sensual sirens, ‘sex-bombs’, look and act like they sprung from the naked liberated later years of the 60s. This is a most beautiful experience for those looking for some 60s style turn-on.

KEEP ON ROCKIN’ is an essential document directed by the now legendary D.A Pennebaker. With the help of at least 8 other camerapersons he covered a lot of ground. The cameras seeped into the atmosphere capturing the intimate minutiae and incidents; especially prevalent amongst the crowds was footage of beautiful, youthful ladies…

Filmed 13 September 1969 and released in 1972, KEEP ON ROCKIN’ (the title named after a comment Janis Joplin made whilst watching an early screening) is basically a documentary of a Rock and Roll Revival Festival which featured many Rock and Roll greats. These artists had been big names over a decade earlier and here they were again to try and show a young crowd how to do 50s RnR properly.

Many other artists such as Gene Vincent, The Doors and John Lennon played at the show but didn’t make it into this particular film, though we did catch a glimpse of Ray Manzarek as part of the cavalcade of transport heading to the venue and John Lennon in a white suit and ginger beard was also spotted exiting a limo.

First up on stage we see Bo Diddley (1928-2008). He played song after pumping song with a broken guitar string while the invasive camera nudged in for some extreme close-ups, so much so that at moments it was literally only centimeters from Bo’s strumming hand, below hip level.
The band was cool. The stage was shaking. Here was a heavy-handed hound that heated the crowd with his ‘hambone’ stomping Rock and Roll blues.

Adding to the mix, the camera was drawn to the entourage which included a beautiful and sexy dark-skinned lady in a provocative mini-dress playing the tambourine and singing. At times the camera went so low that the viewer would virtually get a perve up her skirt.

Next up we saw Jerry Lee Lewis (b. 1935). For the first few songs it was fascinating and out-of-place to see JLL strumming on a Fender Stratocaster guitar when he is so well-known for climbing all over a piano. Showing his versatility, he soon mounts his trusty piano and belts out a good mix of classic songs… Jerry Lee did seem a little subdued on the day, but nevertheless performed great covers of some huge Elvis Presley hits and his own hits including Great Balls Of Fire. His Elvis impersonation was spot on.

Chuck Berry was up next. Arguably the most hard core of the bunch in the film, he treated the crowd to a long medley of his own songs… a kind of innovative live mix. During his rendition of ‘Johnny B Goode’ (1958 –written in 1955), he broke out his trademark one-leg hop march (often mistaken for his other trademark, ‘duck-walk’).

The feigned panic in his eyes as he did the splits was completely hilarious. Years later Eddie Murphy will often put on that exact same expression.

Chuck Berry exuded radiance… this poet shared his early vigorous anthems with this new tarnished generation… He riffed in a style at once sweaty, sweet, sure, sexy and scary. This singular showman in many ways one could imagine him to be Jimi Hendrix’s hip older brother. He wore a vibrant matching pants-and-vest set over a white shirt and shiny patent leather shoes.
One can only imagine how many times Chuck Berry had performed those songs up until then, yet he still seemed excited by them. He provided a raw, restless freshness which imbued the songs with renewed vitality and energy. A truly incredible performer!

Born in 1926, he is a dapper 43 year old man on stage blowing the minds of this crowd of young, (perhaps unworthy) worshippers…The man can still be found playing live shows today, almost 40 years later!

John Lennon once said: “If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it ‘Chuck Berry’”

One could call Chuck a real muse in his own right… He strongly inspired both the Beatles and the Stones; both bands shared a great respect for this talented musician and changed the world...

Finally as night descends, Little Richard (b. 1932) hit the stage. Flamboyant, camping it up in a sparkling tunic that made him look like a human mirror-ball, the deep well from which his energy flowed seemed bottomless. He stood astride his grand piano with a huge cheesy grin; his manic antics and rapport with the audience reveal him to be a somewhat feel-good alien strutting. He teases and taunts the crowd offering them the boots off his feet and even his glittering outfit, eventually leaving him shirtless, dripping in sweat and pulsing pure Rock and Roll.

All that day Canadian flags unfurled amongst the crowded lines of the hordes; some fine, some swine and some divine, particularly the beautiful wide-eyed muses lighting up the many camera lenses.

Ultimately, the camera must return to these great musicians-songwriters. These are not young men, yet they show the much younger crowd a vitality that seems missing in those lives. These old rockers resemble priests or healers injecting old-world spunk into a generally lifeless brood.

With so many cameramen capturing so much, often we lose sight of the great performers as edits focus on images of the crowds and the ambience; a pity to take one’s eye away from the stage, but still a wonderful way to get a fuller picture of the day and the times.

One feels a part of the experience. It’s very immediate.

50’s Rock and Roll never pumped so clearly and loud. It comes a little late, but better late than never. Oh to have had these cameras and sound equipment during the 1950s. Imagine the energy!

To paraphrase Jerry Lee Lewis, these beings are not as young as they used to be, but they’re not as old as some people think. They did this material over a decade earlier, but here, in 1969, their songs colour the air with a kind of youthful kick and naïve primal power. These ‘fathers’ of Rock and Roll, giants in their field, seem like Old Gods of a dangerous core - their inner fire and great commercial sense bring them back to revisit the Earth to shine their glorious magic on the sleeping millions.

Thanks for another top viewing experience.

Pia Santaklaus.

Holy Water Hose Down

Get the story here

Filmmaker Double - this week at cinematheque

SAT. 22/11 at noon & MON. 24/11 @ 6:30 FILMMAKER DOUBLE

Guy Maddin: Waiting for Twilight

Canada/1997/Colour/60mins/ 16mm/NFVLS Dir: Noam Gonick.

This documentary about Canadian film-maker Guy Maddin offers a penetrating account of an obsessive cinephile struggling in isolation to make movies. The film is narrated by passionate Maddin devotee, Tom Waits (joining a fanclub that also includes Martin Scorsese), and features a real-life cast as outlandish as that of one of Maddin's own films.

SCREENS WITH...

Document of the Dead
USA/1978/60mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Roy Frumkes.

An in-depth look at the production and distribution of the 1976 George Romero horror classic Dawn of the Dead. This doco was made as a film school project led by director Frumkes. His intimate access to the production is reflected in the excellent behind the scenes footage and in-depth interviews. There are wonderful interviews with Romero and make-up man/stuntman/actor Tom Savini, as well as John Amplas, Steve Bissette and Gahan Wilson.

The Namesake

Click to enlarge.

Keep on Rockin - this week at Cinematheque

SAT. 15/11 @ 12 noon & Mon. 17/11 @ 6:30

KEEP ON ROCKIN!

USA/1972/Colour/94mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: D.A. Pennebaker.

Filmed at the 1969 Toronto Rock and Roll Revival, this concert film features four legends of rock ‘n’ roll: Bo Didley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry and Little Richard. The compere is Kim Fowley. Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix also feature.

Screens with:

COSMIC RAY

USA/1961/B&W/4mins/16mm/NFVLS Dir: Bruce Conner. A rapid montage of images cut to the music of Ray Charles.

White Dog - this week at Cinematheque

SAT. 8/11 at 12 noon & MON. 10/11 at 6:30pm

WHITE DOG

USA/1981/Colour/84mins/35mm/HP Dir: Sam Fuller.

One of the most famous "unseen" films, White Dog never got a theatrical run in the US even though it had a well-known cast, a legendary director, and a powerful subject - racism. Writer Curtis (L.A Confidential) Hanson and Fuller fashioned an intense yarn about an up-and-coming LA actress (Kristy McNichol), who takes in a German shepherd after she hits it with her car, only to discover that her new pet is a deadly White Dog, trained from birth to hate anyone with black skin. Music by Ennio Morricone.

“White Dog is an unusual, often powerful study of racism in the guise of a man vs animal suspenser.” Variety

TARO, the boy ARTO by Pia Santaklaus

18 October 2008

Hi Brett,

I enjoyed today’s Cinemateque feature TARO, THE DRAGON BOY (1979) and present a few personal thoughts:

I understand this Japanese animation is an adaptation of a famous Japanese folk tale.
However, I cannot pinpoint which particular folk tale or how old that folk tale might be, but noticed this particular retelling owed a great deal to ancient Greek mythology and in particular the myth of Heracles. Until proven otherwise, I imagine this to be the case.

The Homeric heroic archetype on a great odyssey is strongly hinted in Taro, whose tale also includes fantastic personalities, creatures, beasts and challenges.

I believe TARO is based on the strong-man archetype classically found in the Heracles/Hercules story from many centuries BC. Heracles was the greatest and strongest Greek hero, the half-divine son of Zeus/Jupiter to a mortal woman. In TARO, Taro has dealings and ultimately friendship with a Red Demon who becomes the ‘Thunder God’ in the sky, not at all unlike the main traits of Zeus/Jupiter (the sky god of thunder whose symbol was the thunderbolt).

Like Hercules (and later Superman), Taro uses his super strength for good, to help save humanity. He is guided to destroy monsters, rights wrongs and perform various ‘Olympian’ services. Taro too meets an old man (The mentor archetype) who gives him purpose and further strength (equal to 100 men).

Heracles had a twin mortal brother born to his mortal mother. They shared the same mortal mother, though Heracles was also strongly involved with the goddess Hera/Juno. In the Roman telling of the Heracles story, Heracles suckled on a sleeping Goddess’s breast as his real mother was a mere mortal. In a sense, Heracles had two mothers as does Taro whose mother was a mere mortal but also a powerful dragon. Hera sent 2 serpents to kill the baby Heracles as he lay in his cot. The young babe throttled the serpents and thrived.

As a baby, Taro suckled on the milky white eye-balls of his dragon mother who consequently was left blind so that the child might thrive. Perhaps the 2 eyeballs are a variation on the serpent theme though Taro’s mother wanted to keep an eye on him –Ha! Suckling on eyeballs adds a new spin on “Eat with your eyes” or “eye-watering foods”. I understand some cultures still actually eat the eyes of various beasts and birds. Anyway, eyes are organs that detect light. In Roman mythology, Lucina was the goddess of childbirth “she who brings children into the light”.
Furthermore the Greek Goddess Artemis (also known as a goddess of light) is the Goddess of hunting, forests and fertility. While pregnant, Taro’s mother selfishly hunted for fish knowing that it would be beneficial in her state. Fish is widely recognized as a good food source for nutrients promoting good eyesight.

Taro, like Heracles was a champion who performed good deeds on his journeys, making the world a better place and learning about self-sacrifice along the way.

As with Unico, Taro seems to carry some oedipal complex. Taro imagines his mother to look like his pretty young muse friend with a musical pipe in her mouth and when Taro finally meets his dragon-mother, he must grip the horns and she says “mount me”. A later scene finds her in a bare naked state facing her son and embracing him, her full, fleshy breasts pressed in a tender hug. At one point in the movie, Taro is enveloped in snow and dying. He calls out for his Mother in this moment of crisis. Help arrives in the form of a pale horse. The iconography is not unlike that in UNICO (1979) in which the mother is seen as a white unicorn.

In TARO, a glorious flying horse is not unlike the mythical Pegasus. Incidentally, the flying white horse in TARO reminded me of the flying white unicorn in the recent screening of Tezuka’s UNICO (also 1979).

The name Hercules/Heracles itself means ‘Glory of/through Hera’ which suggests a powerful ‘maternal’ or female undercurrent in the hero’s life. Heracles was tormented by Hera as Taro is tormented in his difficult journey to find his dragon mother.

Taro meets a pretty, young girl, who plays the flute; she might be seen as Taro’s muse.
At one point Taro imagines his long-lost mother looks like this girl. She taught him modesty.

Classic Heracles iconography portrays him nude and holding a long club and later donning a lion skin to cover some of his nudity. Taro too is shown in various states of undress, genitals exposed, until he later wears a loin cloth. There may be reasons; Firstly, the boy may be entering a more mature age where innocence is replaced by experience and so for modesty’s sake, he wants to cover his own ‘sex’. Secondly, it may have to do with the concept of a superior man. In the ancient Analects by the Chinese philosopher Confucius we find three things which the superior man guards against. In youth he guards against lust (and so the modesty), then, when he is strong and the physical powers are full of vigor, he guards against quarrelsomeness and when he is old he guards against covetousness.

When Taro kills the fearsome giant ‘Black Demon’, in a sense he kills that part of him that is lustful, quarrelsome and covetous. Like Heracles, the Black Demon carried a long dangerous club.

Heracles made himself a slave and spent some years in the servitude of various persons, one being Queen Omphale of Lydia. Taro too allows this to happen as he dedicates himself to others.

The music in the film is beautiful and very classical in a Japanese sense, however in one part when Taro wanders onto the plantation of an exploitative old lady (“rich old hen”), behind a veneer of classical Japanese instrumentation can be heard the disguised yet clear Western structure of a backwater-swampy 12 bar blues as though Taro’s stay at the old lady’s rural farm was somehow akin to the Delta bluesman Robert Johnson (1911-1938) who stopped at the crossroads to make his rumored deal with the devil. Johnson himself lived on a rural plantation much of his life.

In another scene Taro enters the house of a lusty, busty, possessive woman who frightens him and Taro runs away. This may have allusions to the jealous third wife of Heracles who was instrumental in his death due to an acidic woven shirt she gave him which had destructive properties. The lusty lady in TARO also had a spinning wheel with which to weave a shirt.
In one of Heracles’ Labours he had to clean the filthy Augean horse stables and he cleverly did this task by rerouting two rivers so the filth would be washed out. Taro also is seen diverting various rivers and manipulating dams.

Various task-masters would often refuse to honour agreements made with Heracles and this too is also represented in Taro’s journey. Heracles had to capture the Erymanthian Boar. Wild boars feature in TARO, however Taro captures their hearts in a friendly way. Heracles was a Demi-God due to his strange heritage. He was not the cleverest hero, but certainly the strongest and one of the most courageous, witty and playful. Heracles was also known for his sexual prowess and for completing 12 Labors for King Eurystheus. Taro, like Heracles becomes a cultural hero. In Taro’s case, he gains great recognition by spreading the good grain (rice) to the poorer peoples.

Heracles has been connected with Melqart (Phoenician God) and Shu (Egyptian God) and it is thought that via Greco-Buddhist culture, (which developed between 4th century BCE and 5th century CE), the far east received the Heracles myth. This may be witnessed in various Japanese Buddhist temples in the Nio guardian deities. A consequence of a long chain of cultural interactions begun with Greek forays into India from the time of Alexander The Great, Indo-Greek rule was established for centuries and extended and flourished in the Hellenized empire. It is now believed that Greco-Buddhism influenced the artistic and conceptual development of Buddhism, particularly Mahayana Buddhism before Buddhism was adopted in Central and Northeastern Asia from the 1st century CE and ultimately spreading to China and Japan.

There is debate as to the earliest anthropomorphic images of Buddha; some scholars believe these images were a result of of Greco-Buddhist interaction. Before this innovation, Buddhist art was dominated by symbolic representations which didn’t portray him in human form. The Greeks worshipped human form and were probably the first to represent Buddha this way. The Greeks developed syncretic divinities, fusing together potentially incongruous religious symbols. (eg Sarapis is a God combining both Greek and Egyptian Gods). In India, the Greeks helped combine the Greek God Apollo with traits of Buddha to create a single divinity. In early sculptures, Buddha is represented with unmistakable external characteristics wearing a classic Greco-Roman toga and having curly Mediterranean hair. Gradually, this anthropomorphic representation of Buddha took on more Indian and Asian appearance. Other Buddhist deities were influenced by the Greeks. Heracles (the protector deity of Demetrius I) was the model for the Buddhist protector VAJRAPANI who was later seen as the strong Japanese protector deities NIO (seen at the entries of many Buddhist temples). It has also been suggested that the Japanese wind god FUJIN was inspired by the Greek BOREAS.

Rulers were sometimes deified by the Greeks, particularly in the wake of Alexander The Great’s far-reaching reign. This concept of god-king seems to have been absorbed by early bodhisattvas who had probably also exchanged intelectual and philosophical ideas with the Greeks and who sometimes portrayed Buddha with the face of Apollo. Buddha was elevated to man-god status in purely human form as was done in the West. Buddha’s life-cycle and story shares similarities to the Greek man-gods (eg Heracles) of old.

Anywaves, perhaps too much analysis. Interblending produces the new. Though based on older concepts, Taro is still modern and most enjoyable as a film.

Thanks Brett. Nice choice. Thanks also to the generous Japan Foundation for providing the subtitled print.

Pia Santaklaus

Liquid Sky - this week at cinematheque

SAT. 1/11 @ 12:00 NOON & MON. 3/11 @ 6:30

LIQUID SKY

USA/1982/Colour/112mins/35mm/HP Dir: Slava Tsukerman.

Aliens are after the heroin-like substance produced by the human brain at the point of orgasm. Anne Carlisle, who co-wrote the screenplay, plays a dual role as a lesbian punk model and a male homosexual punk model. A subplot involves Otto von Wernherr, a government scientist investigating the UFO on Carlisle's roof. This offbeat film, directed by a Soviet-born filmmaker, captures New York City in the grip of the New Wave movement of the early 1980s.

“Recasts Weimar Germany - with its attendant androgyny, drugs, and general air of apocalypse - as a New York New Wave nightmare.” Gary Morris, Bright Lights Film Journal

November/December 2008 Program

Click to enlarge.

Aliens from Spaceship Earth - this week at cinematheque

6:30 MON. 27/10 ONLY

ALIENS FROM SPACESHIP EARTH

USA/1977/93mins/Colour/35mm/HP Dir: Don Como.

Using interviews and rare archival footage, this film documents the counterculture’s involvement with the new religious movements of the 1960s and 70s. The film speculates that yogis and gurus may be driven by aliens with a New Age agenda - the evolution of human consciousness. Featured in the film are Sai Baba, Ram Dass, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Father Yod, Elizabeth Clare Prophet, and many other spiritual leaders, as well as starry-eyed testimonials by Cybil Shepard, Martin Landau and Raymond Burr. Folk-rock singer Donovan narrates and provides the soundtrack.

“One of the only films of the era that intelligently and provocatively counteracts the schlock and mass media sensationalism that basically demonized a generation of seekers in the 70s.” Jodi Wille, Process Media

If you enjoyed Shangri-La and Amazing World of Ghosts at past screenings, you'll definitely groove on this far-out 70s schlock-doc.

That's Exploitainment by Pia Santaklaus

I much enjoyed the Cinematheque presentation you made today entitled THAT’S EXPLOITATION. Informative and well curated. You obviously did a lot of research and managed to collect a very interesting bunch of film snippets, sound bites, slides and other quirky and impressive memorabilia. The talk seemed quite extensive and I imagine after the 2 full hours allocated for the presentation you had to cut your talk short. It isn’t surprising, as this is a very big subject and 2 hours can barely do it justice; nevertheless, you managed to fit in a lot of good information, and you did it in a clear and ordered way. I would have loved to have seen and heard all the rest of the program you’d prepared but had to limit.

You credited film historian Eric Shaefer’s book BOLD! DARING! SHOCKING! TRUE! as the major resource for today’s presentation. I aim to see if I can get a copy of that book to find out more for myself.

Permit me to share a few of my own thoughts on the subject of exploitation films:

I imagine that during the 1930s, 40s & 50s the often-present, ever-growing industry of smaller film companies and initiatives who made these non-Hollywood pictures did satisfy a definite gap in the market. One might see the energetic makers of these so-called exploitation films as the rebellious, independent, misunderstood or misrepresented little brothers of the bigger brother we call Hollywood.

Their influence was felt not only by all society, but Hollywood also. Their drive and ability to make quick, profitable films would have been secretly admired by parts of the perhaps less resourceful Hollywood. Their ‘hijacking’ of cinemas, distribution routes, audiences and related structures would have irked the Hollywood machine which would have preferred to own a monopoly over the industry. In all, the so-called exploitation market took some customers and profits away from the Hollywood machine in what I see as a ‘David and Goliath’ struggle; the giant Hollywood could not successfully quash or regulate the effective smaller rebel element.

When one considers that much of history has been written by the ruling powers, one might get some idea as to how the smaller, so-called exploitation industry (that often challenged and ignored the Hollywood path), were labelled with such a derogatory moniker.

To say that the so-called exploitation films are any more exploitative than many Hollywood films through the years is simply wrong.

One cannot assume that an audience is any more exploited by the so-called exploitation films than the audience of bigger budget mainstream Hollywood films. The audience has a choice whether or not to see films from either camp and in fact often demand such entertainments.
One cannot assume that the cast and crew of the so-called exploitation films are more exploited than those of Hollywood films. Clearly the Hollywood machine has a history of chewing up and spitting out (exploiting) many, many directors, actors, actresses, technicians and other employees. The relative term ‘exploitation’ negates itself in this scenario. One cannot single out audiences or makers of either film camp as being any more or less exploited than the other.

If nothing else, the smaller size of the so-called exploitation film crews would ensure smaller overheads and more control, and in this way, they might produce a less exploitative, more guaranteed, truer, clearer, less-compromised individual vision; something many Hollywood heads, being beaten at their own game, may have envied and deeply resented. Almost certainly, parts of Hollywood would have felt exploited by the perhaps piratical element of the so-called exploitation mob.

It is most likely that Hollywood initiatives developed the slanderous phrase of ‘exploitation’ in order to lead a wave of negative energy against their competition, the so-called exploitation groups. This tactic however, does seem hypocritical, as the makers of the so-called exploitation films were in many ways only following in the steps of big brother Hollywood, but on a smaller, cheaper, scale. Both provided product that had an audience, both shepherded their audiences into cinemas and ultimately, at the end of the day, they both tried to make money, some more than others. Hollywood accusingly calling their little prodigal brothers ‘exploiters’ is a lot like the pot calling the kettle black, or the raven chiding blackness. The criticism is unfair as the term might just as easily apply to the accusers.

I would offer that the so-called “exploitation films” deserve a more appropriate relabelling; something more befitting and approachable to market them with. I suggest ‘exploration films’, ‘calculation films’, ‘resolution films’, ‘challenge films’, ‘feeler films’, ‘questy films’, ‘dodge films’, ‘grapple films’ or any other name more suitable for these enduring, influential pieces that have been so wrongly given the negatively suggestive name ‘exploitation’.

Brett, thanks again for the fine effort.

Pia Santaklaus

Maniac Bride Child by Pia Santaklaus

I’d like to offer a few of my thoughts on today’s double at Cinematheque, MANIAC (1934) and CHILD BRIDE (1938).

First MANIAC: With all its flaws, I still enjoyed this relatively slap-dash, generic, low-budget ‘horror’ film. This film experience would have had a lot more impact in its day particularly as psycho-therapy was still in its relative infancy and viewers probably hadn’t been saturated with this sort of horror film. It opened with some beautiful haunting music and some early-scientific theories on mental disease, interestingly distinguishing the mind from the brain, suggesting the mind being the brain’s operator.

One of the main characters, Dr Meirschultz (A Jewish-German name meaning ‘bright overseer’) worked in his lab wearing a white lab-coat, a kind of cliché mad-professor- cum-doctor. His ‘assistant’, Don Maxwell, was a vaudeville actor and impersonator who helped the doctor in a kind of ‘Igor’ capacity, though he looked more presentable than a cliché ‘Igor’. Maxwell would ultimately kill Dr Meirschultz and take over his likeness perfectly. Maxwell had this capacity to become a doppelganger. This doppelganger theme was probably taken from the Edgar Allan Poe story ‘William Wilson’ (1839) in which it features most heavily.

Shades of the Frankenstein story and motifs crept into MANIAC as Maxwell and the Doctor enter a morgue to snatch a dead body with the aim of reanimating it. During the morgue scenes we see short interspersed cuts of footage featuring a cat chasing a mouse (reflecting the real cat and mouse game they were playing), then we later see cat fighting with a cat, and later a dog fighting with a dog. Perhaps this prepares the viewer for the ‘cat fight’ which takes place in a subterranean vault even later in the movie between two real women struggling in their dog-eat-dog world.

So many Edgar Allan Poe references are scattered throughout this film that I would not baulk at suggesting that without the influence of Edgar Allan Poe, this movie could not have been made.
In one scene a woman actually mentions Poe and his story ‘Murder In The Rue Morgue’ (1841) which featured an orangutan. One scene in MANIAC finds a patient accidentally injected with adrenalin and turned into a beastly man resembling an angry wild orangutan or similar primate. In his hyper, ape-like state, the patient picks up a beautiful female and escapes with her in his arms (perhaps shades of KING KONG - 1933) to satisfy his primal urges. Again this ‘orang-utan’ scene references Poe, as Poe had employed the ape as a character in one of his stories.

Another scene in MANIAC, finds Maxwell ‘burying’ the Doctor behind a brick wall which is an obvious tip of the hat to Poe’s short story ‘The Cask Of Amontillado’ (1846).

Poe’s ‘The Tell-Tale Heart’ (1843) is also heavily referenced in MANIAC. In Poe’s story ‘Tell-Tale Heart’, the narrator has an imaginative mind which creates irrational fear that someone’s eye has a vulture-like gleam and imagines the gleam to be evil. In MANIAC, Maxwell sees a satanic gleam in various character’s eyes including Dr Meirschultz, female patients and even a cat that he fears enough to rip out it’s eye and swallow it to avoid the gleam.

On more than one occasion we see superimposed footage of ritualistic, satanic imagery, probably designed to represent the hidden evil that conspires to corrupt Maxwell. The dark side of his mind influences him in the wrong direction. This theme also might have its origins in a Poe story; in this case THE IMP OF THE PERVERSE (1845), the ‘Imp’ of course being a small inner demon that leads decent individuals to do the wrong thing and get in trouble.

On the subject of Poe, he also wrote a story called ‘The System of Dr. Tarr and Prof. Fether’ (published 1856) which dealt in part with the old torturous form of physical punishment that coincidentally featured in today’s second movie CHILD BRIDE (1938) in which the local female teacher closely escapes ‘tar and feathering’ by a vengeful mob of unsavoury men. I imagine the taunting insult “Chicken!” may have originated from this system of victimisation.

CHILD BRIDE starred a young actress Shirley Mill who adequately played the child bride ‘Jennie’. Some of her characteristics, including her demeanour and particularly her voice and the way she enunciated, seemed to very much mimic or respond to the style of the then upcoming popular young actress Shirley Temple.

In CHILD BRIDE we find a dwarf called ‘Angelo’ (angel) with a simpleton buddy called ‘Happy’. I wonder if the name ‘Happy’ was influenced by the animation SNOW WHITE (1937) in which one of the seven dwarves was called ‘Happy’.

I believe there is supposed to be an infamous skinny-dipping scene included in this film. Unless I fell asleep during the session, I did not see such a scene and so did not find the movie ultra-exploitative. The reality of child brides is indeed horrific, but this movie does go some way in exposing such issues. The young bride Jennie is admired and loved by a young boy called Freddie whose age is more appropriate to hers, and the movie ends on a ‘happy’ note with Jennie and Freddie together at last, though I’m not too sure the young, possessive Freddie will grow up to be a suitable enough husband for Jennie as he may have some anger-management issues which he revealed when we saw him intent on gunning down (murder?) the girl-bride’s evil and too-old husband.

A wonderful choice of films Brett. I thank you again, till next week.

Pia Santaklaus.