The Imposter

Continuing my string of engrossing documentaries, I saw The Imposter at the Landmark Lumiere in August.

The Imposter; directed by Bart Layton; documentary; English & Spanish with subtitles; (2012) - Official Website

Going into the film, I thought it was fiction and it was a few minutes before I realized it was not a fauxumentary.  The story was improbable enough to be fiction but was based on a true story.

Nicholas Barclay, a 13 year old boy from San Antonio, disappeared in 1994.  Three years later, he re-appeared in Spain.  He told incredible tales of being kidnapped and sexually abused by military personnel.  More incredibly, he spoke English with a French accent and had different colored eyes.  He claimed he was not allowed to speak English while in captivity and developed his accent because he was not used to speaking English.  The military personnel tortured him by injecting chemicals into his eye which changed his eye color.  If it seems to outlandish to be true, it is because it was lie.  Frédéric Bourdin, a French Algerian con artist who specialized in impersonating teenagers, hit the jackpot when he ran across the case of Barclay.  Bourdin convinced the Spanish police, the US State Department, the FBI and Barclay's family that he was Nicholas Barclay.

According to the film, a suspicious private investigator unraveled the case.  Language experts opined that an extended period of not speaking one's native language would not result in speaking it with a foreign accent.  DNA tests proved Bourdin was not Barclay and his fingerprints identified him as being wanted by Interpol for a litany of crimes involving fraud and impersonations.  Bourdin's motivation was a mix of self-preservation, mental diseases and sociopathy.  Bourdin's cooperation with the filmmakers was surprisingly candid at times.

The most fascinating part of the story is why the family accepted Bourdin as Nicholas Barclay given the evidence of his impersonation.  The film posits that Barclay's step-brother killed him and that his mother and sister were aware of or suspected the crime.  Their acceptance of Bourdin as Nicholas is to cover their crime and/or assuage their guilt.  Although a search for the body is conducted, the film ends without it turning up.

The story is so incredulous that it felt like a thriller.  At many points throughout the film, I thought the twists and turns became too much to believe.  I kept wondering if I was watching a true story or was I being Blair Witched?  The FBI looked amateurish and the Barclays looked like PWT.  Bourdin, a professional liar, minimized his culpability and deflected his guilt with his accusations of Barclay's murder.  The circumstantial evidence supports the murder theory but when dealing with a con man like Bourdin, it pays to be skeptical.

At times, The Imposter veered towards Behind the Music territory. There were a several reenactments which I thought generally detracted from the film.  The film had a tabloid feel which was probably deliberate due to the subject matter.  Not in the mood to quibble, I accepted and enjoyed The Imposter on its terms.

The Queen of Versailles

I watched more than my usual share of documentaries in July and August.  I'm not a big fan of documentaries.  I prefer my documentaries to be more of the Victory at Sea variety.  The line between documentary and reality show has become blurred.  I think too many audience members accept the documentarian's work as "fact" when in fact it is frequently "fact filtered through a subjective prism"...as opposed to my blog where I state unassailable facts.  Still, when I view a documentary in the same manner as a narrative, I can be entertained and even enlightened.

The Queen of Versailles played at the 2012 SF International Film Festival and has enjoyed an extended run at the local Landmark Theaters.  I saw it at the Embarcadero Center Cinema.

The Queen of Versailles; directed by Lauren Greenfield; documentary; (2012) - Official Website

The Queen of Versailles was certainly entertaining.  Directed Lauren Greenfield started the project with the goal of following David & Jackie Siegel as they build the largest single family dwelling in the United States.  Outgrowing their 26,000 square foot house near Orlando, the Siegels plan a 90,000 sq. ft. structure to house their belongings, 8 children and household staff.  However, construction is ground to a halt as the Great Recession derails their financing.

Filmed over two years, Queen of Versailles showcases the opulent lifestyle of the Siegels, the stress their marriage faces as their fortunes reverse and unexpectedly draws a parallel to the financial hardships many families find themselves in.  Septuagenarian David Siegel is a time share mogul (Westgate Resorts) who married his trophy wife Jackie, 31 years his junior.  As the film begins, the billionaires are riding high with private jets and Jackie's million dollar shoe & purse collection.  The film implies that Dave is an asshole who hints that he may have committed election improprieties in Florida during the 2000 Presidential race.  Jackie is presented as a vacuous woman who spends her days spending her husband's money.

They start off with grand plans for their new mansion.  The film's title comes from the Palace of Versailles, the design inspiration for the Siegel mansion.  As the economy tanks, the Siegels are forced to halt construction and eventually scale back their lifestyle.  David hunkers down as he seems more interested in making money than spending it.  Jackie however seems to have trouble adjusting to her new circumstances.  We witness the Siegel children as they are forced to fly commercial for the first time in their lives and later go to public school.  We laugh as Jackie asks the rental car agency clerk for the name of her driver thinking it is more akin to a limo service.  Towards the end we see Jackie going downscale as she shops for Xmas gifts at Walmart (she buys multiple shopping carts full of stocking stuffers).  Greenfield skillfully depicts the conspicuous consumption that most of the audience likely expected going into the film.

More interesting for me is the change which occurs in the Siegel's relationship.  Jackie was a Mrs. Florida winner when she met David which gives the impression she lacked intelligence.  Her behavior through most of the flim reinforces that impression.  However, glimpses into her past reveal some surprising history.  Siegel graduated with a computer engineering degree from Rochester Institute of Technology and went on to be hired by IBM.  A few years younger than Jackie and with an engineering degree of my own, I can attest that IBM was a very prestigious company for engineers to be hired in the late 1980s.  Jackie says she left IBM soon after starting because her boss had a computer program which counted down the seconds until he could retire and "really start living his life."  This was too depressing a future for Jackie to contemplate so she left IBM...to get married...to a wife-beater...and model swimsuits...and compete in beauty pageants.  Her career choices is more damning of our society than necessarily Jackie.

As the film progresses, Jackie shows quite a bit of patience for her husband's loutish behavior; more so than her children who begin to resent their father as he verbally mistreats their mother and works longer and longer hours.  Jackie even displays some self-awareness and an understanding that she and her marriage are not being portrayed positively.  After the film was shot, the Siegels complained they were being portrayed inaccurately and that some of the scenes were staged.  I wonder why they allowed themselves to be filmed at all; especially as the economy faltered and their relationship became strained.  As his finances deteriorate, David treats his wife as if she is his ninth child and Jackie clearly recognizes his patronizing behavior. 

The third aspect which I found fascinating is how David Siegel explains his predicament.  He uses some of the same catchphrases as the Occupy Movement.  He paints himself as a victim of easy credit and predatory bankers who won't temporarily extend additional credit which would allow him to ride out his financial storm.  Amazingly, Greenfield was able to invoke some sympathy from me towards the Siegels.

Since the limited release of Queen of Versailles, the Siegels have launched their own media counterattack. I read that the Siegels are about to restart construction on their Versailles.  At the end of the movie, I thought the Siegels would be divorced by now but they are still together.  In the film, David joked (half-joked?) that he was going to trade Jackie in for two 20 year olds.  Jackie may even get a new career out of the film - she claims to have been offered a role on a reality television series.  Ironically, this thoroughly enjoyable documentary confirmed all that I don't like about modern documentaries or perhaps more accurately, all that I don't like about modern society.

Pelotero

An article in yesterday's SF Chronicle prompted me to write about Pelotero.  Although the article was essentially a DVD review and written by film critic G. Allen Johnson, it appeared in the Sporting Green section.

I saw Pelotero (alternate title Ballplayer: Pelotero) in July at the SF Film Society (SFFS) Cinema which no longer exists.  The SF Film Society ended their relationship with New People World after one year.  I don't know what will become of the cinema (aka Viz) although they are listing the North American premiere of Tiger & Bunny - The Beginning on September 29.  The SFFS Hong Kong Cinema series runs September 21 to 23 at the Viz so their relationship is not completely asunder.

Pelotero; documentary; directed by Ross Finkel, Trevor Martin & Jonathan Paley; narrated by John Leguizamo; (2011) - Official Website

Pelotero is a documentary about young baseball prospects in the Dominican Republic.  With a population of under 10 million, the DR produces an oversized 11% of the MLB players.  Among the more well known DR players are Albert Pujols, Vladimir Guerrero, David Ortiz and the Oakland A that never was, Manny Ramirez.

MLB has some unique rules regarding the signing of prospects from the DR.  Rather than a draft, it's more like those movies where homesteaders are lined up in covered wagons, some guy fires a pistol and they all race to stake their claim.  For reasons which were left unexplained, July 2 is the magic date in the DR.  On that day, MLB teams can sign players who are at least 16 years old.  Why July 2 and why 16 years old?  I don't know.  For the populace of a poor country like the DR, signing an MLB contract (with associated signing bonus) is a ticket to prosperity.  To hear Leguizamo tell it, families invest their dreams and hopes into their teenage sons with the goal of them signing with the MLB.

Pelotero follows two such young men - Miguel Angel Sano and Jean Carlos Batista.  Both of the boys have come up through baseball academies which are essentially full-time baseball training facilities where the boys learn their craft in exchange for handing over part of their future signing bonuses.  This seems like a situation ripe for abuse but the film portrays the academy coaches in positive lights.  Both boys refer to their coaches as second fathers.

Whenever there is a lot of money flowing into a poor country, greed (or more charitably, the will to survive) kicks in.  MLB teams were originally attracted to the DR because they could sign players cheaply.  As the signing bonuses have climbed into the 7 digit range, the DR isn't as cheap as it used to be.  On the supply side, kids (and their families) will do just about anything for a million dollar payout.

One curious side effect of 9-11 was that the US State Department became more strict with issuing work visas.  In the years since 9-11, many MLB players from the DR have returned to spring training with earlier birthdates and in some cases, different names.  The kids lie about their age in order to get larger signing bonuses although MLB has instituted a number of rules to guard against it.  It seems awfully risky to bet millions of dollars on a 16 year old boy's ability to continue improving.  It would seem to be safer to sign older players who are more mature and disciplined and farther along in their baseball development.  Regardless, the film makes clear that July 2 is the high water mark in terms of signing bonuses and the longer a player waits to be signed, the smaller his bonus will be.

Both Sano's and Batista's ages are questioned.  In one case, it appears the Pittsburgh Pirates scout in the DR starts a whisper campaign in order to scare away competition and drive down Sano's signing bonus. In Batista's case, it looks as though he and his family lied and forged documents to make him appear younger than he is.  Although his motivation is understandable, I could empathize with the sense of betrayal Batista's coach felt.

Ostensibly about baseball, Pelotero really examines the chasm between rich and poor.  In the pursuit of money, the poor sacrifice their self-respect and the rich sacrifice the poor.  I found Pelotero to be a fascinating film.  It was an "inside baseball" look at baseball with a liberal dose of populist melodrama added for good measure.

Klown

I saw Klown at the Roxie in August.  If memory serves me correctly, Klown played at the 2012 San Francisco Independent Film Festival where I missed it.

Klown starring Frank Hvam & Casper Christensen; directed by Mikkel Nørgaard; Danish with subtitles; (2010) - Official Website

To call Klown a raunchy sex comedy would be an understatement.  In general, I'm not a fan of American sex comedies but for some reason, foreign sex comedies frequently make me laugh.  This is certainly the case with Klown which pushes the limits of good taste and an R rating if it had been submitted to the MPAA.

Most of the characters are named after the actor who plays them which makes me think the cast is part of a comedy or improv troupe.  Also the film's alternate title is Klown - The Movie because it is based on Klown, a Danish television series with the same characters and actors.  I wonder if the TV series is as outrageous as the film.

The most obvious comparison is to The Hangover but Klown kicks it up a couple of notches.  Just recounting the felonies depicted in film would include statutory rape, child sexual assault, child pornography and armed robbery.  The pièce de résistance involves the main character giving a "pearl necklace" to his girlfriend as an apology and demonstration of his love.  However, it is a dark room and case of mistaken identity ...it turns out the woman is his girlfriend's mother and she complains that "some got into my eye."  She is saddled with an eyepatch for the rest of the film.

Frank is an irresponsible man whose girlfriend withholds the fact that she is pregnant because she is unsure if he is "father material."  Frank's best friend is Casper, a married man who wants to take a "Tour de Pussy" with Frank.  His plan is to canoe up a river with Frank as they make their way to a high-end brothel that a mutual friend operates one evening a year.  Along the way, the plan is to have as much sex as they can.  Their respective relationship status only serve as an nuisance; especially for Casper.

Frank's pearl necklace gift falls flat so his only option to prove he has paternal potential is to kidnap Bo, his girlfriend's shy, 13 year old, nephew and take him along on the Tour de Pussy.  From that outlandish premise, all sorts of sexual mishaps occur.  Recounting all of them would not do justice to the film.  Hvam, Christensen and Marcuz Jess Petersen as Bo, show considerable comedic skills playing off each other.  Hvam's Frank is clueless and susceptible to Casper's outrageous suggestions.  Casper has one goal - sex with any available man, woman or child and is willing to drag Frank & Bo to hell and back in his quest.  Petersen is possibly most impressive as Bo who plays straight man and at times, the butt of the jokes.

I thought Klown was hilarious but is definitely not for those who are easily offended.

Why Can't They Successfully Adapt Tennessee Williams on Film?

I've been on a great run of film in the past six weeks.  It's essentially been an uninterrupted string of enjoyment.  Usually, I see several less than enjoyable films but no so in July & August.

The least enjoyable film was Night of the Iguana which I saw at the Castro last week.

Night of the Iguana starring Richard Burton, Ava Gardner, Deborah Kerr & Sue Lyon; directed by John Huston; (1964)

Night of the Iguana was part of the Castro's John Huston series.  I missed all of the films in the series except Iguana.  I had seen almost all of the films in the series before.  The notable exception is Fat City which I have not seen and was not able to attend.

I am too lazy to search but if I have not written about it before, I am always disappointed in films adapted from Tennessee Williams' works.  I am specifically thinking of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, The Rose Tattoo, Suddenly, Last Summer and now Night of the Iguana.  I leave A Streetcar Named Desire off the list because of Brando's ferocious performance.  I will note that Brando first played Stanley Kowalski on Broadway.  In fact, three of the four principal actors from Broadway stage version went to star in the film (Vivien Leigh replaced Jessica Tandy).

Having seen several stage productions of Williams' plays, I can say that Hays Code neutered his films.  Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and A Streetcar Named Desire dealt with the impacts of married men having homosexual relations, Suddenly, Last Summer was a little vague about the age of the "young men" but I interpreted the pivotal character to be a pederast and Night of the Iguana dealt with statutory rape.  All his plays (at least the ones I've seen) put sexuality or some deviation of it as the centerpiece.  I chose the word "deviation" purposely because the Williams' plays treat anything other than a heterosexual couple as deviant - deviating from the societal norm and considered unnatural by the mainstream.  These topics were difficult ones to address in the 1950s and 1960s Hollywood but I always wonder why theater audiences could handle it but concomitant movie audiences could not.

That's a long way to say that I prefer stage productions of Williams' work.  I am surprised that 50 to 60 years after their premieres, the subject matter of the plays is still shocking - rape, cannibalism, women's sexuality and men on the "down low" are still provocative.

In true Williams' fashion, I had a few stiff drinks before Night of the Iguana.  Far from a teetotaler, I'm usually stone-cold sober when I go to the movies.  In this case, I went for drinks after work and several Moscow Mules got the better of me.  I can usually have one with no problem and two will instill a mild sense  of euphoria ("a buzz") but as I reconfirmed last week, 3½ is too much to concentrate on a film; especially one as heavy with dialog as Iguana.

The plot is readily available so I will focus more on the performances.  Burton was adequate as the defrocked priest with a weakness for women and alcohol; that's not much a stretch for the Welsh actor if gossip columns are to be believed.  If Burton's Reverend Shannon is the locus, its the women in his orbit who propel the plot.  They run the gamut - the sexually precocious teenager (Lyon), the sexually avaricious hotel owner (Ava Gardner), the sexually chaste painter (Deborah Kerr) and for good measure, a bitchy lesbian (Grayson Hall in a nice performance).

Of the four, Gardner had the juiciest role.  Iguana was Gardner last hurrah as a fully sexualized leading actress.  Coming off 55 Days at Peking and Seven Days in May, Gardner was still making A picture but Huston must have seen what I saw when watching Gardner on screen.  Unlike Rita Hayworth in The Money Trap (which I saw at Noir City earlier this year), Gardner was still an attractive woman.  Hayworth looked used up and worn out in The Money Trap whereas Gardner's Maxine looks hardened by life (which was probably not much of a stretch for the former Mrs. Frank Sinatra).  Gardner drank and smoke to excess.  She was 40 years old during filming; 16 years after The Killers (1946) which is the earliest film I can remember her in.  I can't say how old Gardner looked in Iguana but it was hard to recognize her if one is familiar with The Killers.  Undoubtedly this resonated with audiences of the day and Houston used the difference to the advantage of the film.  Still, there is an unmistakable sexuality to Gardner's Maxine which only a Hollywood Golden Age movie star like Gardner could have pulled off.

Similarly, Kerr was a far sight different than Karen Holmes in From Here to Eternity but not so different than Anna in The King and I.  What a shoot that must have been in Puerto Vallarta - both Kerr and Gardner having made films (and more) with Burt Lancaster and Gardner so instrumental in getting Sinatra (her then husband) his Academy Award winning role on From Here to Eternity.  Burton was accompanied by Elizabeth Taylor despite both being married to other people at the time.  Houston's ex-wife was Evelyn Keyes who was with Mike Todd until he dumped her for...Elizabeth Taylor.  The set was like a real-life La Ronde.

I thought the plot had several shortcomings but that may have been the effects of alcohol.  After hitting rock bottom, Shannon is literally restrained and ministered to by Kerr's Hannah with "poppy seed tea" and tales of her modest sex life.  It didn't seem too life altering to me but an evening of that combined with Hannah's grandfather's death makes a new man of Shannon.  He is so grateful that he decides to go into partnership with Maxine.  I couldn't help but think how miserable that relationship would be - an alcoholic defrocked priest with a roving eye (and possible statutory rape charge hanging over his head) and a past-her-prime harpy with a taste for young men.  Far from ideal but they wrapped a bow on it and called it a happy ending.

Although I started the post by saying Night of the Iguana was the least enjoyable film I've seen in several weeks, that is more in praise for the films I have yet to chronicle as opposed to an indictment of Iguana.  I'd be interested in seeing a stage production of Iguana as a point of comparison.  As far as Williams' film adaptations go, Iguana is better than most I've seen.  Also, I'll try to lay off the hard stuff before seeing a Williams film again.

2012 San Francisco Silent Film Festival (Part 2 of 2)

I've been so busy at work that I haven't had time to keep this blog updated.  I've seen 40 films since the SF Silent Film Festival (July 12 to 15).

My favorite film of the festival was The Wonderful Lie of Nina Petrovna.  Brigitte Helm of Metropolis is the titular Nina Petrovna, the mistress of a Russian Army colonel.  Reminiscent of the intrigues of Dangerous Liaisons, Petrovna and the Colonel (Warwick Ward) alternately toy with the affections of a young and earnest Lieutenant (Franz Lederer).  What starts as a simple flirtation, spirals out of control as the Lt. appears to experience love for the first time, Petrovna is reborn by the young man's purity of heart and the Colonel seeks revenge.  As the film progresses, Petrovna transforms herself from a wealthy man's mistress into a poor man's true love.  However, the machinations of the Colonel combined with the Lieutenant's desperation result in Petrovna's ruination.  The title could refer to the lie which started the whole affair or the lie Petrovna tells to release the young man from the chains of love.

Although resembling a few von Sternberg and Louise Brooks films, The Wonderful Lie of Nina Petrovna has a certain unique flourish to it which I attribute to Ward's performance as the third lead.  Helm grounds the film in a solid performance.  Comparing Nina Petrovna to the films von Sternberg or Brooks is high praise in my book.  The screening was greatly enhanced by the score by the Mont Alto Motion Picture Orchestra.

Speaking of Brooks, her Pandora's Box was probably the most impressive film of the festival.  If Nina Petrovna is 1A, then Pandora's Box is 1B only because I had high expectations going into the screening.  Once again, Louise Brooks commands the screen.  Was there ever a role in which Louise Brooks did not shine?  Brooks is Lulu, a woman with many male (and one female) admirers and few inhibitions.  Lulu's descent into the demimonde begins when her new husband dies as a result of a botched double suicide.  Convicted of murder, Lulu escapes her prison sentence (with the aid of her son-in-law no less) but not her fate. Lulu and her band of admirers take refuge in a seedy ship/casino where she barely escapes being sold into white slavery.  Ending up in London, Lulu has a climactic encounter with a Jack The Ripper character.

The synopsis is light on details because the highlight of Pandora's Box is Brooks' spellbinding performance.  Unbelievably radiant, Brooks/Lulu uses her charms to lead men to their destruction.  But rather than a femme fatale, Lulu's as much a victim of her own charms as the men she attracts.  Lulu attracts men with such a strong pull of magnetism that they wreak havoc on themselves and Lulu.  Not unaware of the effect she has on men, Lulu is an ambiguous character.  Perhaps not fully deserving of the sympathy she evokes from the audience, Lulu is nonetheless viewed through a prism normally reserved for tragic heroines.

Pandora's Box is also notable for some of the set pieces.  There is a sequence at the theater/circus where the characters navigate an obstacle course of backstage movements which was as impressive a display of blocking as I can recall.  The squalid ship and wretched garret in London were textbook examples of mise-en-scène.

Whereas Nina Petrovna was a pleasant surprise, Pandora's Box met all my lofty expectations.

§§§

A handful of films were quite good but, in my opinion, a step below Nina Petrovna and Pandora's Box.  

It wasn't until a few days before the screening of Docks of New York that I realized I had not previously seen the film.  Having confused Underworld with Docks of New York, it was only until I read the festival program that I realized the plot synopsis did not match my recollection of "Docks of New York."  A quick search of this blog confirmed my suspicion.  So it was that I made hasty plans to see Docks of New York and I'm grateful that I did.

At times, it becomes obvious I've seen too many films.  The plot Docks of New York begins with burly Bill Roberts, a coal stoker (George Bancroft) jumping off the docks to save a soiled dove (Betty Compson) from drowning.  Thwarting a suicide attempt, Roberts quickly wins Mae's (Compson) heart and the two have an intense night which reveals Roberts to be less brutish than first appearance and buoys Mae's spirits.  That premise - man saves woman from suicide and then quickly romances her is almost a trope but I can't quite place the films Docks of New York remind me of...and no, I'm not thinking of Vertigo.

Von Sternberg gives Compson the Full Dietrich - close-ups with soft lighting...all the better to emote with.  However, Compson is no Dietrich and the Dietrichesque character is split between Compson and the more audacious role of Bill's wife (played by the noted Russian actress/celebrity Olga Baclanova).  Yes, Roberts has a wife but the love story is between Roberts and a down-on-her luck whore.  For my tastes, Mae was too much a victim and Baclanova's role was too small to move the needle.

Docks of New York is more a paean to the masculinity of George Bancroft which in the role of Bill Roberts was considerable.  Rough and tough and lacking sentimentality, Roberts (as well as Docks of New York)  forces its way into your heart.  The film is also notable for a few of the sets - the boiler room on the ships and the raucous dive bar on the dock where Roberts holds court.

§§§

Stella Dallas was unabashedly maudlin but undeniably effective.  Overshadowed by the Barbara Stanwyck production (1937), the silent Stella Dallas covers familiar ground.  Stella (Belle Bennett) is the overprotective and gauche mother of Laurel Dallas.  Having married Stephen Dallas (Ronald Coleman) when he was at a vulnerable point in his life, Stella and Stephen separate and ultimately divorce as Stephen's fortunes and self-respect bounce back.  Once he reunites with his childhood love, the pieces are in place for Stella's tragedy.

As Laurel makes her debut in high society, she learns that her mother is ridiculed for her fashion faux pas (her application of make-up was particularly garish) and questionable companions.  Wanting to spare her mother's feelings, Laurel attempts to retreat with her mother to their small hometown.  However, Stella is aware of the embarrassment she causes Laurel and is prepared to make the ultimate maternal sacrifice.

Belle Bennett is more than adequate as the brassy Stella and carries the bulk of the film on her shoulders.  16 year old Lois Moran is impressive as Laurel and provides the crucial counterpoint to Bennett's attention-grabbing performance.  Jean Hersholt also shines as the graceless alcoholic who is the source of several of Stella's problems.  Ronald Coleman isn't quite as effective without "the voice" but certainly doesn't hurt the film.  Douglas Fairbanks Jr. has a small and largely ornamental role as Laurel's handsome boyfriend.

§§§

The Canadian starred Thomas Meighan & Mona Palma as a reluctant married couple.  Although the title refers to Meighan's character, it's Palma as his wife who has the meatier role.  As a sheltered Englishwoman left destitute by her parents' deaths, Nora makes her way to Alberta to live her older brother.  Conflicts with her sister-in-law (Dale Fuller in attention grabbing performance) push Nora into marrying Frank (Meighan) in order to escape her sister-in-law's wrath & ridicule.

The Cameraman is one of Buster Keaton's most famous films so I won't waste time & space on the plot.  I laughed heartily during the screening.

Wings was more enjoyable than the screening with Dennis James' accompaniment at the Stanford earlier this year.  No offense to Mr. James but the Mont Alto Motion Picture Orchestra added some sound effects to the airplane scenes which was surprisingly effective.  Being familiar with the plot, I was able to concentrate more on the original It Girl and boy did she have It!  Unlike Louise Brooks' sensitive and soiled sensuality, Clara Bow was a bundle of energy packaged in effervescent roles.  Playing a more mischievousness and cuckolding role Mantrap, it seems clear that Bow's élan vital was not going to shine through regardless of the role.  Clara Bow was the best thing about Wings and Mantrap; both of which had a lot to admire but space and time prevent me for elaborating.

Little Toys also seemed similar to a film I've seen before.  The gulf of 79 years and different cultures keeps me from fully appreciating the Ruan Lingyu film...or for that matter, Ruan Lingyu herself.  Too overtly melodramatic for my tastes, Little Toys is the final film I found worthwhile...not fully satisfying but still special in that how often are Ruan Lingyu performances screened?

§§§

The Loves of Pharaoh (directed by Ernst Lubitsch)and The Spanish Dancer were bid budget epics which left me mostly bored.  I will say that seeing the European actor Emil Jannings (best known as the professor in Blue Angel) playing an Egyptian pharaoh was a bit of hoot.  Completely missing from The Loves of Pharaoh was the famed "Lubitsch Touch."

The Overcoat is the third adaptation of the Gogol short story which I've seen in the past few years.  My favorite was an ACT production set to music without any spoken dialog.  Although seven years ago, I can still recall it.  My second favorite was a 1952 Italian film from an Italian Neo-realism series at the PFA  in 2010.  This silent version was my least favorite.  Disjointed, replacing the surreality of the  plot with the surreality of the images and not least of which starting more than an hour late, I dozed off but even when awake, I could not engage with the film.

Finally, Erotikon was a comedy I found lacking.  I can't say I actively disliked the film but I didn't laugh much.  If I had it all to do over again, I wish I would have skipped The Overcoat and Erotikon.  The "other" Erotikon was my favorite film on the 2009 SF Silent Film Festival and this year's Erotikon was one my least.

Sight and Sound's Top 10 Greatest Films

While I'm still composing my thoughts about the films of the 2012 San Francisco Silent Film Festival, I wanted to write a little about Sight and Sound's Greatest Film survey.  Published by the British Film Institute (BFI), Sight and Sound conducts a survey of critics, academics, etc. regarding the greatest films.   The survey is conducted every decade (2012, 2002, 1992, etc.).  I won't comment on the films which made the list or their relative ranking or even the films omitted.  Instead, I was amazed at how many of the top 10 films are available for viewing in the near future or have been screened in the recent past.

The Top 10 Greatest Films according to Sight and Sound are:

10.   8½
 9.   The Passion of Joan of Arc
 8.   Man With a Movie Camera
 7.   The Searchers
 6.   2001: A Space Odyssey
 5.   Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans
 4.   The Rules of the Game
 3.   Tokyo Story
 2.   Citizen Kane
 1.   Vertigo

At the Castro Theater alone, you can see four of the top 10 this month!  Citizen Kane screens tonight at 8 PM.  Sunrise plays next Sunday (August 12) at 3:20 PM and 7 PM.  2001 has a two day run on August 26 and 27.  Vertigo plays over the Labor Day Weekend in 70 mm.

The Rules of the Game screens November 27 at the PFA as part of their Grand Illusions series.

I saw The Searchers last summer at the Castro.  I saw Tokyo Story two summers ago at the Viz.  I've seen The Passion of Joan of Arc twice in the past few years, most recently in December 2010 at the Paramount Theater in Oakland.

Man With a Movie Camera was accompanied by the Alloy Orchestra at the 2010 SF Silent Film Festival. I can still remember that memorable performance as the frenetic pace of the music perfectly matched Vertov's quick editing technique.

I seem to recall 8½ playing at the Castro in the last year or so.  If there was a screening at the Castro, I didn't attend it nor a 2009 screening at the PFA.

I've seen all 10 of the films; 6 of them since I started this blog.  I know I've seen Vertigo & Citizen Kane on the big screen prior to starting the blog.  The two films I have not seen on the big screen are 2001 and 8½.  I remember 2001 as one of the first films I watched when my family got a VCR in the 1980s.  I was fascinated by it and have watched it several times since then.  I can't recall when I saw 8½; I suspect it was on television.  

The entire Top 50 film list can be seen here as well as the Top 10 list from a survey of 358 directors including "Woody Allen, Nuri Bilge Ceylan, Quentin Tarantino, the Dardenne brothers, Terence Davies, Guillermo del Toro, Martin Scorsese, Olivier Assayas, Michael Mann, Guy Maddin, Francis Ford Coppola, Mike Leigh, Aki Kaurismäki..."