FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE 

Ordell überlegt lange. Die Kamera lässt ihn, hält einfach drauf. "It's Jackie Brown!" Odell hat Recht. Es war Jackie Brown, die die 500.000 Dollars gestohlen hat. Es ist ungewöhnlich, dass ein schwarzer Waffen-Dealer im Film überhaupt die Möglichkeit zum Denken bekommt. Bei Tarantino aber ist so einiges anders. Er hat den gleichnamigen Roman von Elmore Leonard verfilmt, in dem alle Protagonisten klug sind. Eine Frage des Überlebens, der Klügste wird es schaffen. Jackie (Pam Grier) weiss, dass sie unbedarft aussehen muss, um zu überleben. Ordell (Samuel L. Jackson) würde sie sofort umlegen. Sie ist gerissen, so wie jeder andere in Tarantinos Film. Der Kautions-Verwalter (Robert Forster), der AFT-Agent (Michael Keaton) - sie alle wissen, was passiert. Frage nur, ob sie schnell genug sind, an Jackie dran zu bleiben. Mit Jackie Brown bewies Quentin Tarantino nicht nur, dass er mehr war als ein Hype! Sein dritter Film bleibt sein Bester! Nie wieder arrangierte er so perfekte Szenen wie die zwischen dem ständig bekifften Ex-Con (Robert de Niro) und Ordells Geliebter (Bridget Fonda), die über ein Foto in Ordells Bude diskutieren. Nie wieder inszenierte Tarantino derart präzise! Obwohl Koffer-Verwechslungen seit den 60ern beliebt sind, ist es nicht der Plot, der hier überzeugt. Es ist die Struktur des Films. Jackie Brown, 44 Jahre alt, arbeitet für die schlechteste Airline als Stewardesse. Nebenbei schmuggelt sie Geld für Ordell. Dann wird Beaumont (Chris Tucker) gefasst und das AFT (personifiziert durch Michael Keaton) ist ihr auf den Fersen. Man nimmt sie fest. Ordell aber schickt den Kautions-Agenten Max Cherry (Robert Forster), um sie freizukaufen. Hier beginnt die grosse Liebesgeschichte, das Herz des Films. Langsam wächst die Zuneigung zwischen beiden (in einem schlechteren Film hätte eine Sex-Szene alles verdorben). Jackie fürchtet, von Ordell ermordet zu werden. Sie muss ihn zuerst umbringen, doch ist sie keine Killerin. Im Gunde weiss Max, dass Jackie ihn benutzt. Trotzdem sind ihre Gefühle echt. Jackie ist hilflos. Sie kann nicht anders. Wir lernen all diese Charaktere kennen (und in den meisten Thrillers lernen sie sich doch immer nur gegenseitig kennen). Ich denke, die Tatsache, dass Tarantino uns teilhaben lässt an seinen Charakteren, macht den Unterschied aus! Das macht seine Filme zu "Kultfilmen". Tarantinos Stärke sind seine Dialoge und sein Timing. Und natürlich sein Casting! Pam Grier, die Sexbombe des Blaxploitation Kinos der 70er wirkt hier müde und verzweifelt. Noch zieht sie alle Blicke auf sich, doch Jackie kennt das Leben. Robert Forster als Kautions-Agent spielt die Rolle seines Lebens! Ein still arbeitender Profi und ein sensibler, melancholischer Liebhaber. Samuel L. Jackson wirkt noch kälter und gefährlicher als je zuvor und Robert de Niro darf einmal schlicht und ergreifend dumm sein. Mit am besten; die fast unsichtbare Performance von Bridget Fonda, der es nur um das Eine geht: High zu sein. Damals meinten einige, Jackie Brown sei zu lang. Es sind genau diejenigen, die mit schön altmodischen Filmen nicht mehr zurechtkommen. Ich dagegen wünschte, Tarantinos Figuren würden noch viel länger miteinander reden, sich betrügen, leben. 

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE William Friedkin - Cruising 

The film leaves the most important question unanswered (and a bit disappointed): How does the New York cop (Al Pacino) really stand about homosexuality? Does Friedkin lack the courage to answer this question in the film? Or did I miss something? Is he perhaps even involved? Who is in truth the murderer? Cruising doesn't tell us that. Friedkin's film is controversial. He dives into the New York S&M gay scene and is accused of misrepresenting their lives. It almost seems as if the discussion about the film has displaced the open questions Cruising doesn't dare to answer. As a crime thriller Cruising has gotten mightily confused; a chaos! Or is it chaotic because Friedkin simply didn't dare to clearly assign Pacino's character to the S&M scene? How can we understand the last scene when the cop's girlfriend covers his leather gap and the canvas fades black? But at least: Friedkin's film looks outstandingly visualized, holds out a high tension from the very beginning and explores an alien milieu for us. That must be enough.

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE 

Rob Reiner's second film is a small miracle. It's not about "Sure Thing", a willing woman without an inner life, but about how two teenagers fall in love. Everything begins in a classroom: John Cusack as Walter falls in love with his classmate, but behaves so clumsily that she advises him to leave her life better. Thereupon, at the invitation of a friend from L.A., he plans a trip across the country by passenger, because there the girls are supposedly willing and do not ask long. But also his classmate wants to visit L.A., her friend, a future lawyer... A road movie and on the way both argue, gain common experiences, laugh and suffer. Both talk and think like real teenagers, they are shy about sex and yet eager to experience something. But that sex only becomes beautiful in connection with love and respect is the simple and equally revolutionary message of Rob Reiner's film! When they meet in the end, it's the same for us viewers! To discover: The best teen comedy of the 80s!

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE 

A warm promise from the past! A film that forges cohesion, among those who have experienced it, but also unites those who would like to experience it! Mark Reeder came from Manchester to West Berlin in 1979 on a route that did not seem easy: through the German democratic republic. In the island city, the military fetishist and label boss finds his way into the New Wave/Punk scene. He meets Nick Cave, Blixa Bargeld or Gudrun Gut and plays in a Jörg Buttgereit film. Reeder opens his video archive and we experience never seen material: Nena as a street singer or Nick Cave, who shows us his German Gothic collection as well as his Colt. Deadly Doris plays at Potsdamer Platz (which was still Potsdamer Wiese at the time), The True Heino is sued by the "real", Ideal collect money for squatters and Blixa Bargeld explains why he never went to East Berlin. Not all the material is new, but thanks to the charming way shipowners introduce us to West Berlin, we suddenly feel right at home! The documentary becomes a biopic! When shipowners moved to West Berlin on the tracks of German Krautrock, I was six years old. Nevertheless, names like Gudrun Gut still shine in the 90s, so that many things still seem familiar to me. For those who couldn't experience the 90s, B-Movie is also a great service, because the documentary brings to life the myth of an island of the pure avant-garde! Mark Reeder, however, does not act as a braggart who transfigures the past, but rather as an outside insider who seems more like an astonished child. Despite the subtitle Lust & Sound in West Berlin 1979-89, B-Movie doesn't end pessimistically either, but with a view of techno-loving Berlin. But Mark Reeder has to return to Manchester with a Berlin collapse...

FREE ON CINEGEEK.DE 

Chen Kaige plays two films at once: an epic of China's recent history and a drama behind the scenes of the Beijing Opera. At first glance, this may not seem logical: What does the birth of a modern nation have to do with the extinction of a traditional form of theatre? But everything in Farewell My Concubine flows effortlessly into one another. We are overwhelmed; so much so that objectivity doesn't matter any more anyway. In the beginning we see how two orphans are prepared for their theatre careers. Years later they reach their zenith, are famous. Douzi (Leslie Cheung) in the role of concubine as transvestite, Shitou (Zhang Fengyi) as king. A life outside their roles is not granted to either of them. Their relationship survives the Second World War, finally the Cultural Revolution. Although famous, they are politically undemanding. The relationship between the two is not balanced. While Douzi has homosexual feelings, Shitou marries the beautiful Juxian (Li Gong). She is the heroine of the movie and stands by both men. Just as the royal Peking opera survives the red times of communism, when Anachrosnimus is accepted, the relationship grows. Can the two even develop their own personality, detached from the other? But the Cultural Revolution is a time of mutual denunciation. Douzi in particular has to suffer as a result. Finally, Xiaolou denounces him as a homosexual; he in turn denounces his friend's wife as a hooker. Obviously director Chen Kaige has his own experiences with the cultural revolution... Farewell My Concubine won the Cannes Film Festival and was subsequently banned and performed again. Especially the homosexual aspects of the story might have been difficult for the communists. Considering the circumstances under which the film was shot, the calm, the elegance of the work is almost monstrous! It is also wonderful with how much love for detail the Peking Opera is presented! And with what colours! A modern epic that takes us to a strange place in a different time. A modern classic!

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.