FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE 

With anger and a lot of energy City Of God dives into the world of the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. The world of children gangs. Fernando Meirelles' gangster epic has been compared to Scorsese's "Goodfellas" - every customer who borrows the DVD from us quotes the comparison (well, let's say almost everyone). And everyone is right! City Of God deserves this honor! Scorsese's epic begins with the first-person narrator introducing us and explaining that even as a child he wanted to become a gangster. The children in City Of God on the other hand - it seems - never had a choice. Why is there a world of favelas at all? To isolate the poor from the rest of the city. But then the favelas grew into areas full of life, color, music. And full of dangers. At least that's what I think from the distance of Berlin Kreuzberg. City Of God opens furios. A gang holds a picnic. Then a chicken escapes them. Among those who want to catch the chicken is the first-person narrator, Rocket (Alexandre Rodrigues). And Rocket is already in the line of fire between two gangs! The camera whirls and we see Rocket playing football. In former times, in the suburbs. It has to be, says Rocket, because to understand his story, we have to start all over again. Looking back. Rocket and his friends form their first gang. To commit crimes, some would claim - to survive others. Through these first virtuoso scenes we know; here comes an inventive film! Meirelles loves racing cuts and the use of a handheld camera. That was all new and exciting back then. This also fits to City Of God, because that's how we think we are everywhere at the same time. And everywhere danger can threaten! Gangs always have money and weapons. They commit robberies and deal with cheap drugs. Nevertheless, they are not rich, because in their milieu there is hardly any money. All structures of Rockets Viertel, including family structures, are ultimately subject to the omnipresent poverty. He tells. Only the gangs can give you a certain status, even recognition. But the mortality rate is high and the leaders of the gangs are always young. Life has no value. And then it is taken from you. Once we experience how a victorious leader is killed. Completely senseless. It is clear that he was killed by the STRUCTURE of the crime. It could have been anyone else. Fortunately, City Of God is not only dark, but also very poetic! For example, when Rocket photographs his streets with a (stolen) camera. He asks a photographer to develop his pictures - and is shocked to see how his pictures of an armed robbery end up in the newspaper. Is this really his death sentence? No, he didn't. The gangs are thrilled, feel like little stars! Now they pose for him with guns and girls. In any case there are two cities in City Of God. One for those who work and the other for the stranded. Normally the poorest don't like to tell their stories. But City Of God dares a try. Not that something should be stylized artificially into a myth. The film simply tells what it knows.

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE Possession 

I still haven't gotten used to seeing Zulawski's former "Video Nasty" in full length and to being able to give out Bildstörung in the film art bar Fitzcarraldo as a decorative edition of the great label (the youtube link serves the onlookers to get an impression). You can SEE the film on DVD in full beauty!). I am honestly thrilled! I used to go to the Videodrom because of the movie, but the answer was negative every time. Possession didn't exist on VHS. The reason: Isabelle Adjani's art. The bravest performance ever on celluloid: Adjani at Tempelhof subway station, possessive, hysterical, grandiose! Possession dares to bring us, the audience, into a state of trance. Everything begins with the end of a marriage. Anna (Isabelle Adjani) opens Mark (Sam Neill) that she will leave him. She has to, but doesn't understand exactly why. Anna is disturbed, meets with a secret lover and expresses her newly won freedom through acts of violence. Mark stumbles through the phone and bends himself alone in bed like a fetus. Soon the fight begins. They fight in a street cafe, Anna mutilates herself with an electric kitchen knife. The second surreal act begins with the true nature of Anna's secret rendezvous. In a degenerate apartment in Kreuzberg (by the way in the Sebastianstrasse corner Luckauer in 36. Here the link, as it looks like there today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnleWl52m5s). It is inhabited by a slimy monster hungry for blood and sex, in which Anna finds her new partner, whom she approaches. Mark experiences his most terrible trauma when he has to watch his wife have sex with the worm (Carlo Rambaldi created the creature.) Possession doesn't seem to be a movie where you expect real events as inspiration - and yet that's exactly the case: Zulawski wrote the script after the separation from his first wife (who played the leading role in his early Polish movies). Possession, a film about raging male jealousy, but also about the risk of personal freedom. Zulawski staged his film in 1980 in divided Berlin and makes conspicuous use of wide angles and depth of field. The first shot shows the Berlin Wall, in the background the guards from East Berlin. A memorial of reality full of violence and tensions between East and West (which Zulawski knows only too well since he himself had to leave his homeland Poland). The separation of Anna and Mark is mirrored in the film. Possession is a work of fear and deep sadness. Something thoroughly evil seizes Anna's body (is it diabolical?). This culminates in the scene in the subway station, since Anna gives birth to something that Zulawski doesn't dare to define either. A misunderstanding to misunderstand Zulawski's cinema as mere pyrotechnics. A deep preoccupation with the secrets of the human soul, torn apart by its brutal contradictions - that is his intention. Zulaswki is an extremely romantic director, a passionate explorer of what is torn within us. Possession is supposed to help us overcome this state despite our dark desires. Deep down, Zulawski's work is a film about the search for grace.

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE La Bella Noiseuse 

Frenhofer, the great artist, hasn't painted anything for ten years. He threw everything away while working on his masterpiece, which he wanted to call La Belle Noiseuse. His model: his own wife Elizabeth, the inspiration for the most successful part of Frenhofer's career. At first, according to Elizabeth, Frenhofer painted her because she loved him. Finally, she explains, because he loved her. Then he stopped, fearing that the work would destroy that love. Frenhofer does not see the outside, he depicts the inside of his models. Bones, sinews, the soul. One day three visitors knock on the door of the chateaus where Frenhofer still lives with Elizabeth in seclusion. A collector, a young painter and his friend Marianne. Marianne is distant, unapproachable and of strong will. During dinner together, Frenhofer looks at Marianne - and this look describes their entire relationship. Marianne senses this, she wants to get away from him, because she is aware of the feelings behind Frenhofer's gaze: he will start painting again. Jacques Rivette's film La Belle Noiseuse is the best film I have ever seen about the creation of art! It is also the greatest film about the painful relationship between an artist and his muse. Rivette's film has a running time of over four hours. He also edited a shortened divertimento version - but what for? The great thing about La Belle Noiseuse is that it spends time creating art - and the sprouting, and eventual destruction, of passion. Frenhofer is played by Michel Piccoli, whose eyes can penetrate other actors. With his high forehead he seems intelligent, but we sense; it is a terrible intelligence. Emmanuelle Béart is a perfect beauty with deep eyes, full lips - and impressive willpower. We can understand what Frenhofer sees in Marianne. His wife Elizabeth (Jane Birkin) understands it too. She warns Marianne not to let Frenhofer paint her eyes. The painting could deprive the model of her vitality (We notice a touch of Oscar Wilde in this idea). So much for the plot, but it doesn't bother us as such. The strongest scenes of the film, they concentrate entirely on creating a work of art. In his brick hall, his studio, Frenhofer begins to sketch Marianne. We look over his shoulder (which Rivette allows us to do in very long takes). A physical process, how he obsessively sorts his pencils, brushes and paints. The first strokes, then oil. Frenhofer assigns Marianne a wardrobe; she understands, takes off her coat and will be naked for the next four hours. First we consider Emmanuelle Béart as a woman, then as a model. Slowly we see what Frenhofer means: her innermost being, her essence, her being. He moves her arms and legs like those of a doll. She complains about her legs falling asleep and asks for a cigarette. Frenhofer takes it away from her and bends it back into position. Does it sound boring just to watch a man painting? Not at all! Tension is slowly built up. A fight for the stronger will develops. Marianne is an imposition, a nuisance. Elizabeth translates "noiseuse" as "nutty". Marianne is crazy. This is what Frenhofer wants! She begins to understand and agrees to her determination. Now it is Marianne who drives the work. The day La Belle Noiseuse is finished, we don't get to see it. Marianne describes how she saw something in it, cold and dry - herself. That must be enough for us. At night Elizabeth sneaks into the studio and realizes: she marks the painting with a cross. It marks Frenhofer's death. Now imagine this atmosphere with the sounds Rivette uses in the old castle. We hear the wind in the woods outside and in the old walls, kicks, the slamming of an old door. It's no coincidence that La Belle Noiseuse seems like a haunted movie. Elizabeth mentioned that the old walls are haunted. We hear the scratching of the pencils on the paper (and increasingly loudly). During one scene we see Marianne bent under a cross. At first she cries softly, then she starts to laugh - more and more. The scratching of the pencils, we think we can still hear it, although Frenhofer has put it aside. It is said that the nouvelle vage took place only because of him: Jacques Rivette. He himself was never as famous as his companions. Rivette's films turned out to be too long and complicated for that. But in La Belle Noiseuse I don't see the slightest difficulty! I wish the film to be as long as it is - not a minute less! I sympathized with the struggle in the studio, with the bond that was created. Piccoli embodies exactly Frenhofer's Vorst Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)