Has anyone seen the transcript from a Don Simpson lecture he did in some University many years ago?
There he talks about how he would remake The Bicycle Thief. It basically revolves around a bad ass biker who falls in love with the girlfriend of the leader of a rival biker gang. He steals his girl and his bike and they ride in to the sunset with Kenny Logins blaring through the speakers.
To me something like The Bicycle Thief is a lesson of how a film can be more than the sum of its parts… its that rare quality where it is something whole and indivisible. Films today feel like they are made by committee, a bunch of set-pieces that are put in because they are cool that do not entirely add to the whole of the film. If you look at a lot of the reviews here they pick out parts of films, and for good reason, the film themselves lack cohesion.
What film recently can be said to be perfectly self-contained, that it did not feel like something made piecemeal to satisfy a multitude of interest groups.
I keep coming back to this film, and I suppose it seems like a strange choice to make a case around, but I rewatched Primer again this week, and damn, that film is effortless. Everything is integral, everything works. On a budget of $7000!
Hancock, Indy 4, Iron Man, My Blueberry Nights, Cloverfield, Wall-E, all these films are clunky, forced, piecemeal ventures that occassionaly strive for moments of greatness before being subverted by their own incompletion. Perhaps when you start thinking about your hypothetical audiences too much you lose sight of what is important about the film you are making and … pander.
“What film recently can be said to be perfectly self-contained, that it did not feel like something made piecemeal to satisfy a multitude of interest groups.”
The Happening!
Seriously though, you obviously won’t find artistic satisfaction in Hancock Indy 4, Iron Man, MBN, Cloverfield or Wall-E. All are big production produced to a mass audience, and all of them are directed by directors that are competent when they are at their best.
The Bicycle Thief absolutely rules. I agree with the scholars at copenhagen university when they stress that the importance of neorealism can not be overstated, since it was the first major alternative to the classical hollywood storytelling. And boy is it more intellectually rewarding. Even though there is no denying the charm of John Ford, nor the craftsmanship of Welles in Citizen Kane, or the ingenuity of Griffith, I think the italian neorealism pushed filmmaking into a place where I personally become interested in it as an artform. Along with the expressionism of the 20s Germany, these films are the ones I admire the most. Now, if you were to combine these two directions, and spice it with an unparralleled insight into human existence, society and life, you get something truly worth experiencing. Ingmar Bergman.
In my top ten films of all time, far too easy for me.
Comment by rot — July 4, 2008 @ 7:49 am
The Bicycle Thief. Great film.
Comment by Cinexcellence — July 4, 2008 @ 8:40 am
Has anyone seen the transcript from a Don Simpson lecture he did in some University many years ago?
There he talks about how he would remake The Bicycle Thief. It basically revolves around a bad ass biker who falls in love with the girlfriend of the leader of a rival biker gang. He steals his girl and his bike and they ride in to the sunset with Kenny Logins blaring through the speakers.
Comment by swarez — July 4, 2008 @ 1:10 pm
LADRI!
Comment by Roy P. — July 4, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Oh my I really disliked this film. I know, I know it’s a classic yada yada, but I really didn’t like it. Grr.
Comment by Shannon the Movie Moxie — July 4, 2008 @ 5:30 pm
Haha… if you’re gonna win first post you better give up the goods rot. Nobody’s too cool to talk about the De Sica (nope, not even you).
Comment by Agent Orange — July 4, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
I find this is a film best watched in a quiet place all by yourself. The magic continues to work with THE BICYCLE THIEF. All is well.
Comment by Kurt — July 8, 2008 @ 7:37 am
To me something like The Bicycle Thief is a lesson of how a film can be more than the sum of its parts… its that rare quality where it is something whole and indivisible. Films today feel like they are made by committee, a bunch of set-pieces that are put in because they are cool that do not entirely add to the whole of the film. If you look at a lot of the reviews here they pick out parts of films, and for good reason, the film themselves lack cohesion.
What film recently can be said to be perfectly self-contained, that it did not feel like something made piecemeal to satisfy a multitude of interest groups.
I keep coming back to this film, and I suppose it seems like a strange choice to make a case around, but I rewatched Primer again this week, and damn, that film is effortless. Everything is integral, everything works. On a budget of $7000!
Hancock, Indy 4, Iron Man, My Blueberry Nights, Cloverfield, Wall-E, all these films are clunky, forced, piecemeal ventures that occassionaly strive for moments of greatness before being subverted by their own incompletion. Perhaps when you start thinking about your hypothetical audiences too much you lose sight of what is important about the film you are making and … pander.
Comment by rot — July 8, 2008 @ 7:54 am
oh I would add Wanted into that list as well…
Comment by rot — July 8, 2008 @ 7:56 am
“What film recently can be said to be perfectly self-contained, that it did not feel like something made piecemeal to satisfy a multitude of interest groups.”
The Happening!
Seriously though, you obviously won’t find artistic satisfaction in Hancock Indy 4, Iron Man, MBN, Cloverfield or Wall-E. All are big production produced to a mass audience, and all of them are directed by directors that are competent when they are at their best.
The Bicycle Thief absolutely rules. I agree with the scholars at copenhagen university when they stress that the importance of neorealism can not be overstated, since it was the first major alternative to the classical hollywood storytelling. And boy is it more intellectually rewarding. Even though there is no denying the charm of John Ford, nor the craftsmanship of Welles in Citizen Kane, or the ingenuity of Griffith, I think the italian neorealism pushed filmmaking into a place where I personally become interested in it as an artform. Along with the expressionism of the 20s Germany, these films are the ones I admire the most. Now, if you were to combine these two directions, and spice it with an unparralleled insight into human existence, society and life, you get something truly worth experiencing. Ingmar Bergman.
Comment by Henrik — July 8, 2008 @ 8:18 am
Italian Neo-realism, Henrik have you seen the crowning achievement that is Fellini’s Nights of Cabiria?
Comment by rot — July 8, 2008 @ 8:38 am
No.
Comment by Henrik — July 8, 2008 @ 11:38 am