On hating musicals while making plans to watch Buffy; On The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, which I don’t hate

Last night was a rerun of Buffy: The Musical, Joss Whedon’s annual stunt episode of the show (two seasons ago, there was the silent episode, then the “no background noise” episode. In 2001, it was the “background singer” episode, I guess.) Not a Buffy fan, but with the gushing reviews from last fall still fresh in my conscience, we sat down to watch it. [note: Stephanie Zacharek’s Salon.com review is dripping with the vampire-inspired ecstasy that so scared the Victorians. You want to offer her a cigarette by the last paragraph. In the mean time, here’s a site with enough mp3 files and lyrics links to restage the whole thing at home.]
Anyway, it was pretty interesting, especially for the unexpectedness of it. Favorite lines were self-referential: “Off we go to stop the killer/ I think this line is mostly filler.” And it was pretty game of the whole cast to sing. Makes me wonder, what if Catherine Deneuve hadn’t been dubbed in Jacques Demy’s Umbrellas of Cherbourg? Cherbourg is a bizarre (if you think about it) technicolor classic where garagistes offhandedly sing about fixing the fuel injector on a Mercedes. Thanks go to Agnes Varda, whose tireless efforts to restore and rerelease Cherbourg in 1992 brought the film–and her former husband’s reputation–new life.
[Chicago Reader has a looong, impassioned article from 1996 about Demy and coming to love Cherbourg. Buy Cherbourg here.]
Even though I hate musicals (with the exceptions noted previously), or maybe because I hate musicals, I feel compelled to make one. If only to rationalize writing about Buffy, The new project I’m working on (in addition to the feature-length story incorporating Souvenir) is a musical. I guess I’d better add streaming to the site.

How my film is(not) like a busload of Chinese tourists looking at a famous war memorial

This morning, I did a driveby at the Iwo Jima Memorial (there had been a big formation of Marines there earlier in the day). Whatever Americans know of Iwo Jima today, it’s almost certain they recognize the statue. It was based on a photograph by Life Magazine combat cameraman, Joe Rosenthal [Iwojima.com has good background information.] Within 72 hours, the first 3-dimensional version, sculpted in clay by Felix deWeldon. The monument followed on a wave of popular sentiment.
As I drove by, a busload of Chinese tourists was busy snapping pictures of each other with the monument in the background. Only, they were all at the “head” of the monument, on the “wrong” axis of the sculpture/photograph. At first, I smirked at their cluelessness, but then its source became obvious, and the monument’s utter dependence on the photo alarmed me.
I would bet they had no knowledge of the monument’s (formal) origins. A monument that is inextricably linked to an image will eventually have to serve people who have no shared cultural experience, who haven’t been “trained” through repeated viewing of an image (and through history taught with this image). It ends up serving as a monument to the WWII-era American public’s media-driven remembrance; we are still living in the shadow of that memory.
Iwo Jima is at least one or two generations closer, historical distance-wise, than the WWI memorials in Souvenir November 2001, but the separation of the memorial and the cultural memory is already showing.

On why Rem Koolhaas should wake up every day thanking his mother


Usually, when you get googled for “I went to high school with Ben Affleck” or “
red vines and hidden meaning,” you’re left to wonder who the hell that was, and what’s going on in those folks’ heads? So imagine my thrill when the guy searching for “Rem Koolhaas architecture and Matt Damon” sends a confessional email and includes a link to his weblog, Laughing Boy. Check it out [Mom, this doesn’t include you.] Of course, I still have no idea what’s going on in Laughing Boy’s head, but it’s pretty funny nonetheless.
While on that search query, there’s a great quote in Deborah Solomon’s logically warped and implausibly generousNYTimes Magazine article about the Guggenheim and its wack director Tom Krens. Smarmy casino developer and recovering binge art collector Steve Wynn said of Rem Koolhaas, ”If his name were Sid Schwartz, no one would want him.”

A couple of inspirations for the new project

Spent most of this morning and evening digging around, looking for contextual material for the new project (it’s a feature right now). Here are some source links.
For this, I’ve been really hung up on music videos, actually. Mike Mills (who directed the wonderful, easy-going documentary, Paperboys, which just played at the
Brooklyn Int’l Film Fest in early May) has done some great work.
Also, Gorillaz is a favorite. Brilliant videos, hard to take my eyes off them when they’re on. (Thanks, MTV2 and MuchMusic!)

  • Gorillaz.com is the homeworld of the animated band.
  • Here is an article from Res about the making of Gorillaz vids. Includes an interview with co-creator Jamie Hewlett, a lot of technical information, translation from storyboard to video, etc.
  • Here is an interview with Mike Mills, also from Res.
    The afternoon was taken up with a trip to P.S. 1, which opened its new Playa Urbana/Urban Beach in the courtyard, and a related show of Mexican art. And that’s enough about that.

  • Oh, and over the last

    Oh, and over the last week, a film idea I’d had (and sketched out a couple of weeks ago) is rapidly taking shape. While I’d planned to keep it quiet until I worked it through more clearly, I blurted it out to a veteran producer-turned-major entrepreneur at dinner, then to a couple of very film-minded people, all of whom were very interested. And this morning, I woke up with a few lucid, brilliant flashes (brilliant as in intense, not necessarily as in genius, yet, anyway) about how it could work. So, this week, there’s going to be a concerted effort to develop it. No details online just yet, though. Stay tuned.

    MoMA QNS: I should’ve written

    MoMA QNS: I should’ve written yesterday about the Thursday night opening party for MoMA’s new building in Queens, but I didn’t get around to it. Except for the part where about 1,500 people had to stand in the middle of the street in a tremendous downpour, only to (eventually) be told by the Fire Marshall that there’s no way they’re getting in, it was great. (We led a group of 30-35 people under the elevated train until we reached a Romanian restaurant to sit out the rain. After 10:30, the party was not only great, it actually rocked.)
    Went back again today, the first day it’s open to the public. There were 1.5 hour lines, trailing all the way down a block that probably had never seen such a crowd. Naturally, we walked right in the front door [a rare case of where my sense of entitlement is not wildly misplaced). The two standout features: Michael Maltzan’s work here is really great. Videos projected on the walls; both functional and ornamental ramps (perfect for parties and the ADA), and a very smart experience at the entrance to the galleries. So, of the last $90 million spent on contemporary architecture in NYC, $50 million was spent successfully (MoMA QNS) and $40 million was, well, whatever (Prada SoHo). [here is a little book published by MoMA about the new bldg.]

    The other amazing thing: The literal frenzy of people picking up Felix Gonzalez-Torres posters. This stack sculpture by Gonzalez-Torres from the Walker Art Center collection has a rich, large black&white image of water. As is typical when his work is exhibited, your first encounter is long before you see the actual piece; you notice people walking around with giant posters rolled up and tucked under their arms. (I’d seen this in the pouring rain at the Thursday opening, and it didn’t register at first; if you’re going out for the evening, do you want to carry a giant poster around with you all night?)
    In the gallery with the stack, there was bedlam. Seriously. You’d have thought people stood in line just for the poster. There was frantic activity everywhere as people sought out a wide enough space to roll up their poster. Some people teamed up–as if they were folding sheets together–to roll them up smoothly. The stack itself was in total disarray; people were standing on a stray sheet next to it. By the time we walked through the adjacent galleries and back, the stack was gone; only the wall label and two tape corners on the floor betrayed its presence. And, of course, the hundreds of people walking around with giant posters.
    On the way out, an older woman (sort of an outer borough Sonia Rykiel) with a disheveled roll of several posters was hustling toward the door, while an irritated middle aged woman in a tank top called after her, “Do you have any posters?” Do you have an extra one?” “Do you have more than one?”

    Welcome to the party! This

    Welcome to the party! This week, another weblog launched documenting the conception, birth and life of an independent film. Cyan Pictures is the brainchild of two guys, Joshua Newman (aka “a veritable Doogie Howser”) and Colin Spoelman (aka, a veritable Vinnie Delpino, I guess). As Newman notes on his personal site, self-aggrandizement.com, their’s is the “the web’s first moviemaking weblog.” [of the week, I guess. I added them to the short list.]
    They, too, are starting with a short and a film festival target (Sundance for them, Cannes for Souvenir November 2001). and have just posted the first public version of their script. I wish them all the best. Stay tuned. (via Kottke.org)

    Watching CNBC like it was

    Watching CNBC like it was 1999: Actually, it was nothing like 1999, which is why I’m mentioning it. CNBC had been the VIP room at the analyst’s club for the entire boom of the 1990’s. But in an utterly transfixing burst of reporting, reporter Mike Huckman caught Jack Grubman, a top Salomon analyst of Worldcom, on tape [scroll down for the video] by waiting outside his townhouse yesterday morning. Nothing new about that, right? Except that the video they got was so completely different from anything else I’d seen on CNBC (or from any other reporting on this type of story, for that matter).
    Mr Grubman (who, apparently, is a neighbor) was definitely caught off guard by the reporter and his polite persistence. His answers were unremarkably shocking (“What can I say? I’m not part of the company?” “I’m no different than anyone else on Wall Street.”), especially given his nearly god-like stature in the telecom industry. [Anecdote: When he was earning only $3.5 million in 1997, it was so much that younger analysts at Salomon began pricing things in $3.5m “Grubman units.” He made as much as $25 million/year since then, though, presumably requiring all sorts of G.U. recalculations.]
    But what was most gripping was the man’s palpable sense of loss of control, of a seemingly unprecedented sense of unpreparedness as the world he knew (and so dominated) was collapsing around him personally (and on live TV). In between pleas of privacy, ignorance, and harassment, he still answers questions, cagily and painfully; he clearly wants to be left alone, but also wants to make sense of things. At the end of the clip, Grubman attempts to flee the wrong way up Fifth Avenue, when he abruptly turns and gives one final answer (“So this caught you completely by surprise?” “Yes. Yes.”) He then walks into an empty Fifth Avenue to get away. No waiting car.

    Earlier, I was writing on

    Earlier, I was writing on a new project, which reminded me of the Bohr story, which I posted. Then I found Wall Street on Bravo and kind of got into it for a bit. Then it got on my nerves, because they kept saying, “sure thing” and “easy money.” Even in what may be Oliver Stone‘s only truly good movie, he can’t resist beating the viewer over the head. Went swimming instead. Then came back to an incredible scene in a truly, truly good movie: the hookup scene in Out of Sight.
    I hadn’t really noticed it before, but Steven Soderbergh and Anne Coates wove two intensely related scenes with Jennifer Lopez & George Clooney together: A) their slightly awkward small talk in the hotel bar, and B) their subsequent playful foreplay in Lopez’s room. The sound and dialogue throughout is from the bar, and the overlay of their mutual flirting with its payoff makes their lines doubly charged. Coates uses very brief freeze frames, too, and the combined scene closes on a still of the two actors just about to kiss. The whole scene plays with expectation, anticipation, fulfillment. We know these two stars are gonna hook up, so there’d be little suspense in their flirting. This way, both scenes–and the pacing of the movie–benefit. It’s been almost a month since I’ve had a paean to Soderbergh, and it’s overdue. Coates should get major props, too, though; after all, she won an Oscar for editing Lawrence of Arabia. Here’s an article on Coates from the Editor’s Guild.
    Also found these helpful quotes from a this Guardian interview with Soderbergh:

    “As soon as an actor takes their clothes off in a movie, you’re watching a documentary, not a feature film. I feel like it breaks the spell that you’ve created for the characters, that it’s not Karen taking her clothes off, it’s Jennifer Lopez. In a movie, I sort of check out when people start to slather on each other.” And on Coates: “I had to shut her up. If I had to hear one more David Lean story, I’d belt her.”

    [Buy Wall Street, Out of Sight, or Lawrence of Arabia on DVD.]

    I usually find The Art

    I usually find The Art Newspaper a little too smart for its own good, no doubt an attempt to appease/appeal to its too-smart target readers, who don’t need something as mundane as a newspaper to tell them anything about art, thank you very much. But this article about Documenta 11 (the current sub-theme of this site, apparently) is pretty good, despite its annoying “A is for Africa…Z is for Zero, Ground” conceit.

    There’s something refreshing about a

    There’s something refreshing about a sudden downpour, especially when you’re not trapped in it. Thunderclaps that set off car alarms on your street, Flickers that–save for a surge protector–would fry your laptop. Suddenly bright sunlight (“the devil is kissing his wife”). This is, like, the third or fourth in the last few weeks, though (“The Storm of the Century of the Week”). Can it be a sign of global warming? Yes. Unless you’re a right-wing environmentalist group.

    At first, I thought this

    At first, I thought this guy was a weblog stalker, considering we’d been to several of the same exhibits and openings, but it turns out that the “reading over your shoulder,” “they’re right behind you!”character of Modern Art Notes is a benign sign of how small the DC art world is.

    My favorite astrophysicist and I

    My favorite astrophysicist and I loved this great story from Richard Rhodes’ The Making of the Atomic Bomb, which I found on kottke.org over the weekend:
    Exporting gold from Denmark was “nearly a capital offense” under the Nazi occupation of 1940 on. Entrusted with the gold Nobel prize medals of Max von Laue and James Franck (two German Jewish physicists who had fled first to Copenhagen), George de Hevesy and Niels Bohr dissolved the medals in acid to avoid their confiscation (and any complications that would arise from sheltering Jewish refugees). The resulting solution, known as aqua regia, remained undetected in the Niels Bohr Institute and was delivered to the Swedish Academy in 1950 so that they could be recast. [A search for primary source material turned up this page on the Nobel site, which (unromantically and unfortunately) says the Academy decided to recreate the medals with new gold, not the carefully saved original metal. Still, it’s a great story.]