FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Vittorio de Sica - Miracle In Milan 

Vittorio De Sica firmly believed that everyone could play a role: Himself. He worked closely with screenwriter Cesare Zavattini, a member of the Italian Communist Party. Both found inspiration in post-war Italy, a time of poverty and deprivation. The stories were within their grasp, virtually on the street. De Sica, born in 1902, was a good-looking man, a sought-after beau on the big screen. His first directorial works were light comedies, similar to the comedies in which he himself appeared as an actor. Perhaps it was the harsh reality of the Second World War that shattered the optimism necessary for such stories? And so in 1942 he directed The Children Are Watching (DVD5617), which followed shortly after Visconti's Ossessione (DVD7176), which many consider to be the first neo-realist feature film. At least that's what this type of film was called, although there were already films in the silent film era that took a bold and unvarnished look at everyday life. In any case, De Sica shot the film with real people and not actors. An astonishing effect for audiences who were used to Hollywood glamour! I remember a video evening at our local video shop. We were watching Umberto D. (DVD1316) and my friend Anisa had tears in her eyes. She was still crying long after the film had finished. People who don't cry and empathise with Umberto D. - I doubt whether they can empathise at all! Neorealism was a term that could mean many things. It refers to films that are set in the working class and show the poverty of the people. Implicit in them is the message that a better life is possible! They are works of art, not cold and smooth like those from Hollywood. They are works of art that recognise the feeling of confusion. The coincidence that is inherent in everything we experience. Miracle In Milan is in this tradition and yet seems much more cheerful. Who knows, maybe some early American films with their sly, compassionate humour were the inspiration? Whereas de Sica's previous neo-realist works were as hopeless as they were heartbreaking, here we find ourselves almost in a comedy with fantasy elements! Until then, de Sica used human humiliation for tragic material, this time to show the irony of life. In the form of a fairy tale. It is about how we humans live in dreams full of self-deception. A fairy tale that teaches us to be cheerful, to improve our sense of community - and to trust the owners of the land on which we live only until they strike oil...

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Alain Resnais - Last Year In Marienbad 

I can still see it right in front of my eyes as I stood in line at the Schlüter cinema in Schlüter Strasse to watch Alain Resnais' classic. We had to wait in line, in the evening just before ten and it drizzled a bit. Or did I see the same movie last year? It's easy to blaspheme about Last Year At Marienbad. Nevertheless; you watch the film again - it has you back! Does it still exist at all? Students (dressed in black) queuing in the rain in front of the cinema to see Alain Resnais and then discussing the meaning of Last Year At Marienbad for hours? Hoping to find something like truth in art? Alain Resnais has denied his film a higher meaning, but that didn't stop any of his disciples. So when I watch him on DVD today, what awaits me? The higher consecrations of art or something stupid? Is it even more fun to talk about Resnais than to look at him again? Then the first scenes, full of immense beauty. A hypnotic pull, a mysterious puzzle! The plot resembles a secret and the characters don't reveal themselves either. But that's of secondary importance and I never felt the need to guess these puzzles. Who needs a happy ending? Marienbad plays in a chateau with enormous mirrors and paintings. There are endless corridors and magnificent rooms. The guests are elegantly and dearly dressed. "A" (Delphine Seyrig), a beautiful woman. "X" (Giorgio Albertazzi) with the appearance of a movie star who insists that they saw each other last year and agreed to meet again this year in Marienbad. Finally "M" (Sascha Pitoeff) appears. Lover or husband, at least he has power over "A". "M" looks creepy with his deep gaze. He has something of a vampire. "X" tells us the story, while the other protagonists only recite a line of dialogue here and there. In addition, there is the disturbing organ music by Francis Seyrig, which sounds like a requiem. The plan of "A" and "X" was to meet in the sleeping chamber while "M" was playing. But "A" does not remember. She asks "X" to leave her alone. But "X" continues with his memories (or inventions?). He constructs a story for "A" that she doesn't remember. Was there a shooting? A dead man? Was there? No, he corrects himself. It was different after all. We see them in black and white. Dead. Alive. The camera glides, the figures move slowly and solemnly. Last Year At Marienbad claims they met last year (or not), they had an affair (or not), he killed them (or not). Any questions open? I think that's what the '60s were like: the desire to ask questions, while answers to them amount to defeats. Everything about this film is artificial and offers the possibility to observe human behavior with regenerated attention. Could it be that "X" is the "Auteur"? After all, he speaks to us in the second person, as if he speaks to his creatures and shapes their history. Does he create these characters and then let them rule? Anyway, he is extremely involved in the action and desperately tries to convince "A" of his memories. That's why he designs his characters: he can control them. Make them love him. Unfortunately, characters lead a life of their own. And this is exactly the problem. 

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Virgin Mountain 

The Icelandic Dagur Kari has it with adult men still living with their mother. Fusi (Gunnar Jónsson) is again so one, 43 years old and obese. Fusi only talks about the essentials. He's never had a girlfriend. Fusi's hobby are toy soldiers with whom he recreates historical battles. Basically, he has the soul of a child: Innocent, helpful and nice. Still, he's lonely. Fusi has always been the outsider, the "fat one". In another movie such a character with a preference for heavy metal and war games could also be a dangerous guy. But we must not hesitate to take this human mountain to our hearts. Kari now confronts his hero with a love story. Sjöfn is her name, Fusi puts the hurdles to adulthood in the way. She asks him upstairs for tea, but Fusi replies that he would rather drink milk. It's this unaffectedness that makes Virgin Mountain so humorous. Kagur trusts in his calm comedy tone, in his slightly bizarre characters, who receive our affection with ease. Will Fusi are the sad life that is presented to us in so many different shades of grey and brown? Can he have the love he naturally carries in himself? Will he move out?

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Brian de Palma - Blow Out 

Blow Out by Brian De Palma seems strangely familiar and also quite strange. The paranoia thriller was constructed from some events of recent American history, thickened with references from other films and by other filmmakers. Nevertheless: Blow Out is an independent, phanatastic achievement! The title is reminiscent of one of the greatest 60s classics. The story in which a photographer takes a picture of a corpse and finally analyzes his photos for the find. Was there even a dead body on the negative? In Blow Out John Travolta plays the character who is confronted with the same questions. He works for a greasy B-movie production company in Philadelphia. He makes cheap cynical exploitation films - according to De Palma's taste! One night he stands at a bridge in the park. The cry of an owl and similar noises fill the night he records. Suddenly he witnesses a car accident! The car crashes off the bridge, a blowout. Travolta jumps behind, saves a girl (Nancy Allen) and later finds out that the driver of the car was a presidential candidate. Listening to his tape, he thinks he heard a shot just before the accident. Is it a murder? He follows the trail of Nancy Allen, finds out that she was a helper in a blackmail. It's wonderful how the plot now condenses! Apparently De Palma doesn't just have a handful of ideas, he floats in abundance! We meet a series of violent characters like Burke (John Lithgow) as Travolta's character gets deeper and deeper into the swamp of a conspiracy. Something personal is at stake for him: his ability as a sound engineer and his personal pride! "I'm a sound man!" In the best Blow Out scene, he recreates all the events of the night. He follows the tracks of his own recording. De Palma's technique follows that of the greatest thriller specialist of all time. It hitchcocks really powerful! Numerous references like the shower scene are dedicated to the "Master of the Macabre" (De Palma). He gives a whole series of ugly murders in unusual surroundings and a hunt through Philadelphia while Liberty Bell strikes for the big jubilee. Two strategies of "Hitch" are used here: First his patriotically charged images, then the desperate hunt within a human mass that cares for the individual but not further. However, De Palma's film takes all this away and so Blow Out stands alone. The desire for exaggerated violence and nihilism, the sexual insinuations, quite naturally alongside the postmodern quote cinema - all this is Brian De Palma! But you hate or love him. So he unites the cinephiles with the onlookers! Note: As in his best films, De Palma fills the action with three-dimensional plausible, even interesting characters. We like to believe that characters like John Travolta, Nancy Allen or John Lithgow are real. They all have these little quirks, the quirks of life. For me, that's the difference between a good De Palma movie and a big one: The characters! De Palma often uses stencils to throw himself at his beloved surface stimuli. In Blow Out he goes to as much trouble as he does in his greatest works! The protagonists really behave like people in similar situations. They don't just follow the requirements of a plot! But the most beautiful thing: Blow Out is held together by real cinematic intelligence. In scenes like this, where Travolta is following the accident, we are taken on a journey of discovery. We are allowed to find out what he is reconstructing! At last we are more than just passive witnesses of the events - and that really doesn't happen so often in the cinema.

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Yasujiro Ozu - Tokyo Twilight 

 The hat on the wall hook, the whiskey bottle, the steam from Ozu's teapot - all of these symbolise loneliness in Ozu's cinema. Abandonment, transience. And if you look carefully at Tokyo Twilight, the story of a father (Chishū Ryū) and his two grown-up daughters Takako (Setsuko Hara) and Akiko (Ineko Arima) and their long-lost mother, you will realise how courageously such themes as suicide, alcoholism, abortion and abuse resonate here. Ozu's latest black and white film treads dark territory. Who knows, maybe that's why Tokyo Twilight never appears in Ozu's retrospectives? Ozu remains true to his style. His low shots at eye level and the absence of panning shots. He also remains true to his theme, the family. But everything here is much darker. Anyone who reads contemporary reviews will learn of Ozu's greatest failure. Tokyo Twilight is set in winter, whereas Ozu normally favours the other seasons. The film plunges into the shabby milieu of Tokyo. Then Tokyo Twilight crosses a line: one of the two adult daughters becomes pregnant - out of wedlock. Why did she go astray, asks the other sister? We learn that her mother left her when she was young. That's why she became so "wild". The film itself never judges. It always remains reserved, never savours the daughters' grief, but observes calmly. It is empathetic and accepts its characters.

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Kenji Mizoguchi - Ugetsu 

Two brothers, one greedy, the other envious. During a time when the land was devastated by vagabond soldiers, they risk the welfare of their families, risking their lives by pursuing their interests. Kenji Mizoguchi tells her story in this great film - one of the best ever! Although his heroes are rough and uncouth, Ugetsu is a work of elegance and mystery. Even before it becomes clear, we feel that Ugetsu is a work of elegance and mystery: Ugetsu is also a ghost story. Ugetsu is opened by the landscape passing us by, even being rolled up - like a Japanese drawing or a scroll. We see a village. Heavy branches lie on the roofs of the houses so that the wind does not carry the roofs away. We get to know Genjuro (Masayuki Mori), a potter and Tobei (Eitaro Ozawa), a farmer. Shots fired from afar, the army approaches. Genjuro's wife begs him not to ride into town. Not in these times! She asks him to protect her and her son. But with the excitement of a fool, Genjuro insists on the ride. Tobei, just as crazy, insists on accompanying him. Genjuro returns with gold coins. He has captured a factory in the city. His wife, on the other hand, tries to make it clear to him that new clothes could never outweigh her love for him. But Genjuro has only one thing in mind: money, money and even more money. Almost furiously he gets back to work. Tobei meets a great samurai. He would like to ride along, but is chased away as a stupid farmer without armour. Soon the two men decide to go into town again - out of fear for their possessions. This time they want to cross the lake in a boat because it seems safer to them. The scene at the lake, it's the most wonderful one in the whole movie! In front of us a world full of haze and fog. The lonely boatman gives a warning of pirates. Genjuro leaves his wife and child behind at the coast, Tobei accompanies him. In the city Genjuro's work quickly pays off and so he is invited to the castle of the beautiful Lady Wakasa. She is impersonated by Machiko Kyo, one of the greatest Japanese stars ever! Meanwhile Tobei also leaves his family alone. Stupid and clumsy as he is, he kills a samurai and steals a skull. Thanks to this trophy he is honored by the top samurai with a following. The troop's way leads to the house of the Geishas, where Tobei finds out that his wife was raped and abducted by soldiers. She now works as a geisha. Meanwhile Genjuro is spellbound by Lady Wakasa's appearance. Her beauty, which, he says, is unparalleled in the world! Lady Wakasa praises the simplicity and perhaps he should have felt warned because he hears the voice of her dead father. He is whispered to leave his village and marry the beautiful one... Mizoguchi held the theory that a scene should be filmed in a shot. We know this view from great Japanese films of the time with the difference that Mizoguchi's camera never stays. It seems to float, moving through space, which is as beguiling as it is poetic. Morbidly the scenes in Lady Wakasa's castle as a priest sees Genjuro's face. Frightened, he stammers, one would see death in it! Something is there on his skin! They are symbols of an exorcism! Of course Lady Wakasa is a ghost, which we never doubted. Finally we also realize that her castle is in truth a ruin. In Ugetsu, however, there is a second spirit that appears quite unexpectedly. Just at the moment when both men return to their village and hope for forgiveness from their wives for their male blindness... The characters in Ugetsu are down-to-earth. But I would understand it as a comic character. However, the story itself seems to be taken from the old days of Japanese ghost theatre. Unlike western horror movies, Mizoguchi never tries to scare us. It's something else that drives him. Something very kind! At the end we saw a fable, but we also witnessed the ordinary life.