Venice Film Festival: Two singular visions.

Mark Salisbury reports:

Yesterday I saw two singular, all-encompassing artistic visions back to back. The first was made 25 years, is set in the (now) near future Los Angeles and was directed by an Englishman. The second is set in the Old West, was directed by an Aussie and has yet to be released. They are, with a doubt, the best two films I’ve seen so far at Venice: Blade Runner: The Final Cut, and The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford. Unspooling here prior to a short theatrical run and DVD release in time for Christmas, Blade Runner: The Final Cut isn’t, content wise, that much different from 1993’s Director’s Cut. I looked hard and spotted only a handful of additions: Joanna Cassidy’s face has been CGI’d onto the stuntman/woman who crashes through the shop window after Deckard shots her; the blue sky that Roy Batty released the dove into at the end is now overcast and rainy; a couple of the deaths seemed nastier than I remembered. There are a few more special effects, the backgrounds feel more dense, the colors are richer, Deckard’s eyes didn’t seem to glow as red as they did in the Director’s Cut (and someone told me Sean Young’s voice had been tweaked too) but none of it’s too obvious. Everything’s been integrated seamlessly. This isn’t a Star Wars revision. The film looks better and sounds better than ever before. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen the two previous theatrical cuts but, frankly, it was a joy to see it again on the big screen. As for Jesse James, it is, alongside David Fincher’s Zodiac, the best American film of the year. More on that another time...

Glenn Kenny:
May as well let this cat out of the bag—I saw a not-quite-finished version of Jesse James a couple of months ago and was pretty damn impressed with it. Another critic there deplored the continuing romanticization of the outlaw myth, and I can see that critic's point, but I think it's too late to get too worked up about it now. I anticipate that most others will see this as a less romanticized vision than previous—Brad Pitt's James is a largely unpleasant, to say the least, character. A lot of the early word on the picture tossed around the description "Malickean," but it's not quite that—for one thing, it is a 100-percent narrative film with a very strong—what is it they call it?—through line. It's just a narrative film that takes its time. I'm much looking forward to seeing this in its fully-polished version in Toronto.

Comments

[Sam Adams]

It's beautiful and thoroughly well-acted, but something about TAOJJBYCRF doesn't strike as deeply as it could. Maybe judging it against Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid isn't quite fair, but Dominik is playing in that territory, and he doesn't get to the root of what makes the outlaw myth so seductive and so dangerous. It doesn't help that he outright swipes the one great scene from Sam Fuller's I Shot Jesse James and more or less bungles it thanks to a glaringly out-of-place Nick Cave cameo. That said: Man, Casey Affleck.

[phildickian]

So Dominick steals a scene from Sam Fuller. And your point is? I don't understand this type if criticism anymore. Are you congratulating yourself for noticing the reference? We are almost eight years into the 21rst century; pointing out that someone steals something from someone else is a little pomo, don't you think? Let's move on. Everything is collage. You, Sam Adams, are a collage of everyone you've ever met. I bet you stole the way you hold your glass from someone you saw in a movie. These issues, of who stole what from whom, belong to a time when The Internationa Style was all the rage. Just because you notice a shot from a Sam Fuller movie doesn't mean you're as smart or smarter than Dominick. It just means you guys share a brain, and he's putting his to good use.

[G. Kenny]

I think Sam's point is that Dominick bungles it...just like Sam said. I don't happen to agree, but there you have it.

[Sam Adams]

Phildickian, your issues are showing; I can just picture you being too consumed with pique to hit the keys correctly. To break it down for you, I have no problem with appropriation, but if you're going to steal a scene (idea, hook, whatever), you'd better improve it.

[phildickian]

If you're going to steal a scene (idea, hook, whatever), you'd better improve it.

Says who? Says you? When Kenneth Goldsmith transcribes an entire day's worth of Traffic reports and prints them verbatim, he's not "improving," them, unless you consider the act of transposing them to another medium as an improvement.

And my issues are showing. Yes, they are. Is this meant as an insult? Because it should be. But I'm not quite sure if it comes off like an insult. It actually comes across like an obvious, lazy observation. I mean, I was trying to insult you, and I'm assuming I did, because you had a mental picture of someone, probably yourself, since you don't know what I look like, frothing at the mouth, cheeks flushed, banging away on a keyboard, keys dusty with potato chip flakes.

This mock civility amongst people who post comments is really starting to irritate me. Let 'er rip, boy! Why else do you spend time writing. Don't be afraid. The web is the land of the trolls.