Η πιο λυπητερή μουσική στον κόσμο

Will Sloan5.0

If you love old movies, have a deep love/hate relationship with Canada, and have had the shit kicked out of you by life - boy, have I got a movie for you!A Richard Roeper thumbs-down classic. Watched the used DVD I bought at Rogers Video in the mid-2000s

spap13.5

when to watch a Guy Maddin film: - when you want to watch an offbeat classic but can’t find any.that’s all. no but honestly, while this wasn’t as good as My Winnipeg, it definitely held its own in a very big way. i lost concentration at around the half way point, but quickly regained it and other than that, there were a few connection issues, particularly with characters, but it was all forgivable just to see the spectacle that this film is.….Sadness is just happiness turned on it’s ass.how the past impacts the present with the past of the Depression causing there to be a turn away from what is normal, a switch from what may be expected, and a flourishing of ideas that are out of the box, allowing imagination to run rife and create and adapt to the times, however you can only imagine what things may be like if the past had not rolled out in such a way. and then, from the end, we see what the world could possibly be if there was a key change in history, if the ideological piercer had tilted in another direction. what would happen to the world? where would they go? perhaps it didn’t matter, perhaps anywhere they ended up would be better then where they began, but it could also turn the other way to dangerous proportions. then, just quickly with this one, there is the loss of identity in the face of socio-economic changes. this loss can cause the mind to wander and to hinge onto perfect moments of the past, moments which had once offered a reprieve, but have now become your entire life, leaving you unable to move past that point. what happens if you are stuck in a time that no longer belongs to you, but to the altered tides of history? what can you do to replenish your humanity other than begin anew? but how can one begin anew in a world so devoid of freedom?how art mimics life, yet how it is manipulated so it’s power can be used for any objective at any moment, even in order to make money where there is none. however, this seems to turn art into a game, in a sense allowing it to lose meaning, as people begin to look at it only as a source of money, only as a way to become ‘rich fast’. perhaps this is where Maddin believes this stereotype of the ‘artist’ comes from as someone who only wishes to become wealthy and, if they don’t, then they will end up living a life solitude and poverty. how placing art within a competition causes it to lose all meaning whatsoever and rather just gives the mind a chance to look at what is subjectively better to them, but despite all this, they seem to lose sight of the actual meaning of it, of the pure effects and the abilities that it has. and then how art is our deepest, our most personal thoughts sprawled for all to see and, not only that, but it is turned to make a profit. it is the fight to the death between personal dignity and the commerciality of our thoughts.Life’s full of surprises… take away those surprises and life’s a pretty dull proposition. the saddening connection to money in a Capitalistic world and a seemingly harsh outlook from Maddin’s Winnipeg on the American economic ‘imperialism’ of the time, with some likely aggrieved sentiment for the ones who ‘began the entire Depression’. this is an idea of consumerism, a hatred towards the way that the world had been dictated by what was owned, by how much money had been given. and then there’s the idea that, with the American mindset, every single thing, every moment, seems to become a transaction of some sort, a chance to sell ones own ideas and oneself to whoever they can, not thinking of the moral implications of anything at all. this then translates into a fear of the truth, which can be expressed best through art, as they do not wish to see all they are responsible for, they do not wish to hear of the lives they have affected. this is a disassociation from accountability and it runs as a thoroughly important thread throughout the film. ….my second Maddin film and was pleasantly surprised by this. i had always heard that My Winnipeg was his most accessible film and that his others were very niched in the way they could be received, but i really enjoyed this. i tend to like the weird, experimental type of film, even one that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, and this fit right into some of these categories. the opening scene with that fortune telling of Mr Kent… if this was my first Maddin film i would’ve likely turned it off there, purely as it is nothing like what you’d expect when turning on a film from 2003, but it was incredible. the way this had placed the entire plot point, acted as a foreshadowing for all that would occur, forewarning an entire ideology, an entire world of the treacherous water in which they walk. it may have seemed like his words meant nothing, but the story had strayed from them on purpose, in order to shock with the ending. i really just love the old style, the way these films from the early twenty-first century look older than films from the plotted time within the twentieth century. it feels like a treat just to watch them as you’re almost seeing a sort of beauty that is often quickly forgotten by Hollywood, one that is replaced by the both menace and wonder of technological advancement. it’s a way into a world that has long gone, emitting historical messages that scarily mean just as much more as they did in the time of which the film is set. the cinematography itself giving this dream like aura to the film, merged with the editing, creates this terrible sickening feeling that can only be felt in Maddin’s film, a sort of nausea where the unknown is terrifying and the visible is horrifying. the quick cuts give this surrealist turn, quickening the mind and thoughts to the point of confusion, but not to the extent of disconnection. it leaves us perfectly involved and invested within the film just to make us want to know more, but always leaving messages beneath the surface for us to read into and search for.i just love surrealism so much. the way it can confuse the individual due to its inexorable exploration of the human mind and thoughts, leaving people interested, leaving them wanting to know more, but not giving them the initial satisfaction of being able to read all with one watch, forcing those who truly care, who truly see the beauty of it, to look deeper and dive within, becoming encompassed by the story, falling into the minds of those characters which we follow. however, this doesn’t mean that it is inaccessible to all, it is merely an art to interest and stimulate those who wish to stay in the outside, while developing and educating those who dig deep within. despite its issues, which i mentioned at the beginning of this post - i really prefer to look at the positives of a film as even the worst films have something to give - i loved this and can’t wait to watch more of Maddin’s films before they leave the criterion channel at the end of the month.

Daisoujou4.0

For Secret Cinema. Thank you, whoever you are.Guy Maddin is a radical filmmaker. To begin with a comparison -- when The Lighthouse was announced to be in black and white, I saw various reactions on the internet. Some people found the decision to be "pretentious," others were just confused at a movie choosing to do that in the year 2019, when color is pretty easy to come by. I imagine many of us using Letterboxd consider this a valid aesthetic choice with its own challenges and benefits, but to some, filmmaking has improved over the years, why go back? On a large scale, I believe this assumption is what Guy Maddin is spending his career challenging. His films are inextricably linked to the early cinema of around the 1920s, using techniques often right out of that era. Acting is generally no longer so melodramatic and theatrical, but Maddin asks, is that necessarily an improvement? We have color, we have much more impressive effects than the obvious videos of crowds used here... but do we need them? I can appreciate a good piece of realism when it suits a film, though as someone who usually wants movies to do something I can't see in real life, I am all about stepping away from techniques that are most natural, when it makes sense.And this film certainly does that! The performances are so excessive in their emotion, with everyone having an absurd tragic backstory. In fact, the whole movie is absurd, and quite funny for it. It revolves around a contest to find the titular saddest music in the world, with representatives from across the globe flying in to Canada, performing with live commentators. This all happens under the watchful eye of Isabella Rossellini as an amputee with beer glass legs. It's gloriously silly. I laughed a lot, but in my usual fashion I can't help reading big themes into everything I watch, so here are a few quick observations: the obvious point at the end is about holding in one's emotions and being callous to others throughout life, though what interests me more is the behavior of the American contestant throughout the film. He spends all of his time in the contest trying to buy others out of it to perform for him. Maybe America is the nice melting pot it claims to be, though I prefer the cynical interpretation that America is quite literally exploiting the sadness of other nations for their own monetary gain.All that said, this is loads of fun. I was laughing throughout; the style is unlike anything you'll ever see outside of Maddin's other films; Maria de Medeiros is lovely (particularly in a musical number with a hockey team); this movie has it all. The person picking for me really nailed it. I can't wait to explore more Guy Maddin; he has never disappointed.