Monday Evening Palate Cleanser

It vexes me. I am terribly vexed.

Why, on this mild Monday evening, do the words of Joaquin Phoenix's Commodus echo through my head?

That's a rhetorical question. I know exactly why. That answer's multi-faceted. Part of my vexation stems from encountering, in this here blogosphere, a putative paean to a particularly distinguished work of cinema, which praises the particular work at the expense of practically every other movie the director of that work ever did, trotting out heavyweight quotes the better to swat at...David Denby, who recently had the temerity to cite said director's "refinement." What such score-settling has to do with the work at hand is, naturally, beyond me. But the score-settler seems to believe he's achieved the ambition of that character in Gass' "In The Heart of The Heart of The Country," which I guess is nice for him, not so nice for those turning to him for some wit or perception. And in thinking about all this, I further think, "Dude, you really want to get into it like this?" "It" being the week, after a weekend of examining some of the other discontents readily available in the film-appraisal corner of our world. And I answer, "No, I do not."

So instead, here's a stately and august image from Anthony Mann's strange and fascinating 1964 epic The Fall of the Roman Empire—the same story as Gladiator, sorta, with Christopher Plummer as Commodus—a film that seems to luxuriate in a stately slowness; it's more a film about the contemplation of action than action itself. And the imagery, created by Mann once again in tandem with cinematographer Robert Krasker (they also worked together on El Cid) is always breathtaking.

Here, in the opening scene, Alec Guinness' gloomy Marcus Aurelius congratulates James Mason's Timonedes on correctly predicting the sunrise. He's not joking.

The new disc of the film (from Miriam, which also put out the excellent recent DVD of El Cid) looks incredible thus far; it streets next Tuesday. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to luxuriate in it a bit before the next sunrise.

Comments

[bill]

Err...maybe I'm missing a joke, or not reading something closely enough, but that link you put in "particularly distinguished work of cinema" is to your own review of the "Daisy Kenyon" DVD, in which you have nothing but praise for Otto Preminger's body of work, and don't mention David Denby once.

Me am confused.

[Glenn Kenny]

Sorry to confuse. The link back to one of my own was only meant to indicate the film under discussion, not the writeup I found grievous...which I didn't link to as per my wish to avoid even the appearance of a pissing contest. I couldn't not at least leave a clue, though...

[Dan]

But the blogosphere was BUILT on pissing contests! Drudge Report versus Daily Kos! AICN versus CHUD! Judge us not by the quality of our writing or the purity of our research, but rather by the volume of our bladders!

In all seriousness, good for you for staying above the fray. I'm pretty sure we've read the same article and I was as confused as you were. Not that I necessarily agree with Denby all the time but about halfway through I thought I was reading a parody of a film nerd rant.

[Eric Stanton]

I know the blog entry you're referring to, and I would enjoy reading your thoughts, Mr. Kenny, in the event you happen to change your mind about responding.

I enjoy the author's blog as a rule, but was bemused by the entry. I have an impression the author hasn't seen as many of Preminger's Fox noirs as he implies, or his enthusiasm for "Daisy Kenyon" wouldn't have come upon him as such a visitation of the unexpected.

BTW - to take just one laugh point - "The Best Man" a better movie than "Advise and Consent"? Not in my world, not even close, but to each his own, I suppose....

I have a feeling that the tortuous quality of that entry stems, in part, from the need to reconcile an enthusiasm for "Daisy Kenyon" with the imperative of protecting the notion that godmother Pauline was correct, well, just about all the time. Which can create a problem if you are looking at one of Preminger's best films.

[Glenn Kenny]

Yes, Eric, Dan, you both nailed it, and for those playing at home, here's the link:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/blogs/wolcott/2008/04/here-in-its-ent.html

I've been an oft-slavish Wolcott fan for decades (most of the stuff I wrote for my college paper consisted of bad imitations of him and Lester Bangs), and loved his last book "Media Poodles." But on occasion—as when he affects to be a dance critic, for instance or (as Eric points out) he's compelled to protect a notion received from a beloved source—he can be kind of distastefully transparent. That is all.

[Dan]

Glenn, I totally forgot to include this in my comment, do you have any more info on this "Miriam Collection?" Upcoming releases, who's running the show over there, etc? I know they're tied to the Weinstein Company, and it seems like they've got access to the MGM back catalogue (which is good, because Sony will do precisely NOTHING with it anyway), but the Weinstein Company website doesn't seem to have much on the topic. I like how they're handling their releases and I'd like to know more about them (especially what goodies we can expect).

[Bill C]

Weinstein doesn't have access to the MGM back catalogue, Dan, nor has Sony for almost three years now--Fox is UA's pimp du jour. The Miriam Collection (named for the Weinsteins' mother) consists of Samuel Bronston productions, so we'll probably see KING OF KINGS or 55 DAYS AT PEKING next.

[Dan]

Thanks, Bill, it's been kicked around so much I forget who has it. Considering the behavior of their home video departments, though, can't really blame me for confusing Fox and Sony. :-)

I notice Weinstein is fitting films like "Control" under the Miriam Collection banner as well, at least according to Amazon (which is why I'd like a dedicated website like Criterion's, if they're really serious about this). So far they feel like another Warner Home Video to me (in no way a bad thing). "King of Kings" should be interesting; it'd make a good double feature with the '27 DeMille from Criterion.

[Bill C]

Meant to add that Warner still owns a goodly portion of MGM's library, with Fox controlling anything that didn't slip through Turner's fingers way back when. (Between the two studios, we've actually had some pretty sweet catalogue releases over the last couple of years to rival these splashy Miriam discs.) MGM is currently set up as the theatrical but not DVD distributor of in-house Weinstein product. Meanwile, Sony still has Bond, which is all they really wanted out of that deal anyway. What a Byzantine arrangement!

[Dan]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I love WHV. As far as I'm concerned they're the only major-studio home label that gets it right when it comes to their back catalogue. Fox is slowly improving (their Noir line is a welcome addition), but by and large, they don't seem to realize what a collective gold mine they're sitting on. Look at how long it's taking Paramount to put out "The African Queen!"

[Griff]

KING OF KINGS was a co-production between Bronston and MGM; Warners controls most worldwide rights to the Nicholas Ray film. Miriam will probably bring out Ray's quite interesting PEKING next, followed by CIRCUS WORLD.

[Campaspe]

So if we are discussing Ray, anyone have any notion when we might see "Bigger Than Life" on DVD?

[Glenn Kenny]

Campaspe, there are a couple of very good renderings of "Bigger Than Life" on foreign-region DVD—a no-extras disc on the French label Carlotta, and a BFI edition that's got some sups. DVD Beaver rates them both pretty high. Of course, they're foreign-region discs, hence costly, and you need a player.

The video rights here I think still reside with Fox. Since widescreen and Technicolor don't appear to be prohibitions against being included in the company's "Noir" DVD series (see 1954's "Black Widow"), perhaps the company can put "Life" in their next batch of Noirs...along with "The 13th Letter." Hmm...I should call my contact at Fox now!

[bill]

Since you all seem to know so much about this topic, does anyone around here know if there's any rumblings about a DVD release of Michael Reeves' "The Sorcerers"? I've been wanting to see it for years, but having just watched "Witchfinder General" last night for the first time in years, I'm really starting to get impatient.

[bill]

I wish I could edit posts. In lieu of that, please just pretend I didn't just say "in years" and "for years" in the same sentence. Feel free to recast the sentence however you'd like.

[Bill C]

Yeah, speaking of editing, in my last post "didn't slip" should be, erm, "slipped."

I was hoping for THE SORCERERS when MGM put out the Director's Cut of WITCHFINDER GENERAL last fall. Who knows, maybe if they ramp up their Midnite Movies line again... Like BIGGER THAN LIFE, it is readily available on DVD in other regions, though.

[Glenn Kenny]

This DVD wish list/inquiry thing we've got going is worthy of its own thread. Check out the post above this one...

[cadavra]

Sony has Bond only in the ability to make a new one; the catalog titles went back to MGM/Fox with everything else.

To clear up the confusion: Turner (now Warners) owns virtually all MGM titles up to mid-1986. What we now think of as MGM should really be considered UA, since it's built on the UA library from 1951 forward, as well as the post-1986 MGM titles, plus the AIP/Orion, Korda and Goldwyn libraries, which were purchased subsequently.

[Lucy]

Many of the leading businessmen of Pittsburgh had a serious responsibility thrust upon them at the very threshold of their career.

[Canada Goose Parka]

Art is a lie that tells the truth .