Ballerina (2009; d. Bertrand Normand)
I tripped over this documentary on FilmStruck (I love dance documentaries), and it’s really really good. Not only do you get to know a bunch of different dancers, but it’s a portrait of what ballet means to Russia and Russian culture. So steeped in history that even these Tween girls in ballet class understand it, know what it means, want to be a part of it. I learned a lot.
Shampoo (1975; d. Hal Ashby)
I watched it a bunch, preparing for a piece I was writing. Should be out in October. Shampoo is everywhere right now, since Criterion’s announcement. Beautifully, though, I pitched this piece before Criterion announced. Pure coincidence. I had something I wanted to write about it that I had never written about before, here or anywhere else. And then came Criterion’s announcement. So it was perfect timing.
Tully (2018; d. Jason Reitman)
Allison and I watched this. We loved it.
Always Shine (2015; d. Sophia Takal)
Allison and I, in discussing Tully, started to talk about Mackenzie Davis, and I referenced Always Shine, a movie I absolutely LOVED. Allison had never heard of it, so we tracked it down and watched it. It was so much fun. We paused every 10 minutes to discuss every small emotional nuance. It was a blast. See Always Shine, if you haven’t.
Chinatown (1974; d. Roman Polanski)
Been a long time since I’ve seen this one. It’s amazing how the images, the outfits, the mood, the specific shots, stay in the brain. Imprinted.
I Am a Killer, Season 1, episodes 1, 2, 3 (2018)
Tripped over this on Netflix and watched a bunch. This is how I relax. Listening to murderers make excuses for their actions.
Madeline’s Madeline (2018; d. Josephine Decker)
I’m a big fan of Josephine Decker’s work. She’s one of the few filmmakers working right now where I could recognize one of her shots in a blind lineup. It’s very distinctive, how she uses focus, how she frames things, how she uses super shallow depth of field… She seems to not care “how things are done.” (Her cinematographer Ashley Connor deserves much credit too.) I don’t know much about her, although her interests are up there onscreen. She started as an actress, part of the “mumblecore” scene in New York, but she was making experimental shorts all along. Her first two features traveled the festival circuit at the same time – and it somehow felt like, “Wow. These are your first two features? WHO ARE YOU?” First was Butter on the Latch (and so far, it’s my favorite of hers). It takes place at a Balkan folk music camp in California – and the film appears to be a mix of documentary and fiction. The folk music camp is a real thing (I so want to attend), and the two young women who attend – whose friendship seems to be somewhat perilous – are fictional – but the line is not clear. God, I love that film. Thou Wast Mild and Lovely, her followup, was a little more ambitious, going for a kind of rough country poetry. There’s always something disturbing going on in Decker’s stories: identities fluid, the violence of merging, the potential of losing your “self” all together. (Decker knows her Ingmar Bergman). Decker’s next film, Flames, was a collaboration with her boyfriend-and-then-ex-boyfriend. They started out to document their relationship and ended up documenting the demise of the relationship. It’s for sure navel-gazing, but when Decker’s “gaze” is as interesting as it is, you want to watch. Madeline’s Madeline, her first film with relatively big “names” in it (Molly Parker, Miranda July), has been scooping up awards and getting insane buzz on the festival circuit. It’s now out in theatres. I love it, don’t get me wrong, but I think Butter on the Latch – so far – is her best. Much of Madeline’s Madeline takes place during an experimental theatre company’s rehearsals and … as Decker usually does … she uses real people, real New York actors, and you feel like these are people who have been working together, playing together, forever. There isn’t a set script. Things are “found” through the filming. There’s more of a message in Madeline’s Madeline, and it’s extremely “meta” (most of Decker’s stuff is) … I don’t particularly groove to the message part of it. I mean, it’s fine, but I love movies that don’t pressure themselves into imparting some message. Message-less cinema gets a bum rap. Decker is personal though. Whatever she is grappling with will go into her films. So this is where she’s at. Extraordinary performances all around, particularly newcomer Helena Howard, who is just as good as everyone has been saying she is. A teenager. Incredible performance. This is not kitchen sink realism. Decker is OUT there, and this teenager can do it. I would still say, though, if you want to get to know Decker – and I think you should – check out Butter on the Latch and Thou Wast Mild and Lovely. Decker is pretty major. More people should know about her.
The Savages (2007; d. Tamara Jenkins)
Tamara Jenkins has a new film coming out called Private Life, which I was reviewing. So I went back to watch Jenkins’ other films. She makes basically one a decade. Which is a travesty, when you consider all the second-rate male directors who have one project every couple of years. Jenkins is an oddball. Her interests are oddball (and yet so personal, so true). She’s a woman. She does personal stories. Hence: one film a decade. I mean, The Savages got two Oscar nominations, one for Laura Linney and one for Jenkins’ script. And then she doesn’t get another thing financed for over 10 years? Maybe she didn’t want to make anything else, but I DOUBT IT. At any rate, I had forgotten how good this one was. Tamara Jenkins is my kind of filmmaker.
Slums of Beverly Hills (1998; d. Tamara Jenkins)
What a strange and funny movie. It’s almost slight, but it has such a rich sense of place and mood and atmosphere. Marisa Tomei is amazing. Everyone is, though. This is what I mean about Jenkins. She has a very clear sense of what she’s about, what she wants to do. She’s got her own vision, her own rhythms. Her scripts are terrific: everyone talks in their own cadences, you can probably tell who is who just from reading it. Distinct characters. Complex. And, see above, these aren’t “message” films. It’s such a RELIEF. I exaggerate. But still … my friend Mitchell says to me, “My favorite kinds of movies are where interesting people sit around talking.” Cosign, my friend, cosign.
Something New (2006; d. Sanaa Hamri)
I will never ever get sick of this beautiful movie. I pop it in to relax. The last scene makes me cry every time. I get engaged with the characters, even though I’ve seen it 20 times. When people say “Why are there no more good rom-coms?” I always point to this one.
Cold Justice, Season 2, episodes 1 – 6 (2014)
Tripped over this on Netflix, maybe. Got totally sucked in. Yet another crime show. This one about cold cases, where a former prosecutor and a crime scene investigator travel around the country helping local police departments solve cold cases (sometimes they fail). It’s a pretty nitty-gritty show, which is why I like it. Forensics, suspects, DNA evidence, what you need to bring something to trial, and etc. Plus I like the two ladies.
We the Animals (2018; d. Jeremiah Zagar)
I reviewed for Ebert. I thought it was good.
Spotlight (2015; d. Tom McCarthy)
This month has been very rough in re:
1. attacks on the press
2. the Catholic Church.
So I pulled this movie out and watched to keep my strength up. Because in these particular cases – there is only one right side. There are usually grey areas to debate, but not here. So get on the stick or get out of the way of progress. I have no interest in “debating” someone who wants to roll back the Enlightenment. I reviewed Spotlight for Ebert.
Merrily We Go To Hell (1932; d. Dorothy Arzner)
I had forgotten how devastating this movie is. After a discussion about it on Twitter, I decided to watch it again. (I wrote a huge piece about it years ago.) Directed by Dorothy Arzner, the only female director working in Hollywood – i.e. America – in the 1930s. This is nothing to be proud of. It is a disgrace. Arzner’s work is wonderful and her movies were hits. So shame on … everybody.
Cold Justice, Sex Crimes, Season 1
I can’t stop. An offshoot of Cold Justice, this series focuses on sex crime cold cases, which are much harder to 1. solve and 2. prosecute, due to statute of limitations and all the rest. But it’s terrific. What these women do is travel around the country, giving local police departments the resources to process all the backlogged rape kits (which is a travesty in this country – but these things take money.) They actually solve a bunch of these cold cases. This series is more upsetting that Cold Justice: in Cold Justice the victims are dead. In Cold Justice, Sex Crimes, the victims are still alive. I recommend this series!
BlacKkKlansman (2018; d. Spike Lee)
There are sequences as beautiful as anything Spike Lee has ever done, scenes which embed themselves in your mind (the student protest meeting a perfect example). I am glad I saw this one on the big screen. There’s so much to discuss, of course, but I just want to give a shout out to the performances, in particular John David Washington, who carries the film. It’s a very strong performance.
The Way We Were (1973; d. Sydney Pollack)
You know, I’ve seen it a million times. It still gets to me. It plays out like a tragedy. I want to intervene. They’re both so good.
The Bad and the Beautiful (1952; d. Vincente Minnelli)
A brutal “expose” of Hollywood, how it works, its ruthlessness, its cruelty, the selfishness of its people. Lana Turner at her very best. But everyone’s great here.
Blue Iguana (2018; d. Hadi Hajaig)
Kind of dumb. But it has its moments. Mainly Sam Rockwell. This feels like a Sam Rockwell movie circa 1999. I reviewed for Ebert.
Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills (1996; Joe Berlinger, Bruce Sinofsky)
I saw this on its first release and followed it through the years. It shows the “Satanic panic” for what it was: complete and dangerous idiocy. They literally had NO evidence against these kids. NONE. No physical evidence. Nada. Zip. Zero. Someone in the town said, basically, “Damien Echols is really weird, he dresses in black and reads weird books.” And then one of the kids was pressured into a false confession. Which still isn’t understood as a “thing.” How could you confess to something you didn’t do? But then you hear those interrogation tapes, and how he was led into confessing … you see red. This is why Damien Echols was on death row. A travesty. (Oh, and by the way, my first time in Memphis, I booked my hotel across the river in West Memphis, Arkansas – not sure why I did that. Cheaper, I suppose. Turns out, the hotel was right down the street from where the bodies were found. We drove right by it to get back to Memphis.)
Paradise Lost 2: Revelations (2000; d. Joe Berlinger, Bruce Sinofsky)
Even more upsetting and urgent than the first, especially when you realize – without a shadow of a doubt – that whoever really did this basically got away with it. Those poor little boys were also surrounded by a shady cast of characters, any one of whom could have done it, might have wanted to do it.
Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory (2012; d. Joe Berlinger, Bruce Sinofsky)
Alford Plea notwithstanding, the guys are free, as they should have been all along. The film was nearly done when that happened, they had to quickly finish it up so it could make it out to festivals. I was there at the New York Film Festival when it screened, and Jessie Misskelley Jr., Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin were all there. It was a very emotional moment.
Fleabag, Season 1 (2018; created by Phoebe Waller-Bridge)
Oh my God, this is so great. I got a text from a guy I was in love with 20 years ago. He texts me from time to time. Not to be a pest. We went through a decade and almost a half of no contact. Recently, we’ve texted a little bit. We’re older now. We’re “safe.” At any rate, I only mention this because he texted me a couple weeks ago saying, “You have to watch Fleabag on Amazon. It’s funny, heartbreaking and she reminds me of you a little bit.” When I saw Fleabag (and he’s right: it’s fantastic), and I saw what a TRAINWRECK “she” is, I had to laugh. I’m still laughing. But hey, the shoe most definitely fits. This is funny, raw, honest, out there. Only 8 episodes so far, each one half an hour. I highly recommend it.
Supernatural, Season 6, episode 9 “Clap Your Hands If You Believe” (2010; d. John F. Showalter)
It never gets old.
City of Joy (2016; d. Madeleine Gavin)
Just getting released onto Netflix now. A documentary about City of Joy, a refuge center in the Congo for victims of rape. I reviewed for Ebert, it’ll go up this week.
A Very English Scandal, episodes 2, 3 (2018; d. Stephen Frears)
I finally finished it. It’s so good! Hugh Grant … I mean, obviously he’s a huge movie star, I’m not trying to say he’s not, but he’s good in the way movie stars in the Golden Age were good. They didn’t make a huge deal of their acting, their “process.” There’s very little fuss with Hugh Grant and you’ll never hear him bragging about how hard he worked (if anything, you’ll hear the opposite). I have always loved him. But he’s moving into a REALLY interesting phase right now, and he’s already taking chances – with this, with Paddington 2 (which was amazing), and everything else. He’s older now. And he’s going with it. He’s so fantastic in this.
Lincoln (2012; d. Steven Spielberg)
So I’m reading Ron Chernow’s biography of U.S. Grant right now, so that was one reason I wanted to watch it again. But also I wanted to remind myself of what this country went through, what it fought for, for progress – imperfect, yes. Flawed, yes. But what isn’t? Now that the “party of Lincoln” is no more, it was very moving and heartening – in a way – to dig into this history and remember the sacrifices, the tremendous sacrifices of that time, of Lincoln himself, to wrench this nation into some semblance of fairness. Spielberg is a genius at casting, too. Everyone feels so perfectly cast you think there couldn’t have been any alternatives. But of course there were! Spielberg had to choose. Beautiful.
Supernatural “Tall Tales”, Season 2, episode 15 (2007; d. Bradford May)
This is pretty out there stuff for a Season 2 episode. Too many funny moments to count. My recap here.
Supernatural “Houses of the Holy”, Season 2, episode 13 (2007; d. Kim Manners)
It’s so DARK. The way Kim Manners uses the shadows … it’s like he PAINTS the guys’ faces with shadows. Ugh. Looking at each and every frame here is looking at a work of art. And they had the same amount of time to pull it off as they do now, when the show looks so ugly. I know, I know, I should let it go. Watching this is kind of eerie, considering Season 4. The “angels” show up this early. Mary’s bedtime comment to Dean which takes on such enormous significance later. They’re there already. This episode is a glimpse. Oh, and a new person left a couple of comments on old posts – welcome! – criticizing the inaccurate accents in a couple of episodes. I understand the concerns, although I think it’ll be a long haul if you can’t get past it, since accurate regional accents is certainly not a “thing” in Supernatural. But I just want to say: this whole episode takes place in Providence, Rhode Island – my home state, a state I know very well. And Providence in this episode may as well be New York City, circa 1977. People gunned down in the streets. A priest murdered on the steps of a church. The people you meet in the episode: a prostitute, a drunk, a date rapist and a child molester. Like: THAT’S Rhode Island in this episode. So yeah, I don’t take it personally. I think it’s kind of funny actually. My recap here.
Supernatural “Playthings”, Season 2, episode 11 (2007; d. Charles Beeson)
I haven’t dug into Season 2 in a while. There’s so much that’s good here. This episode is a favorite. Recap here. It’s so bizarre. Plus, there’s the gigantic dress on the wall, and the “you’re butch … you overcompensate” comment, with the button on that being Dean’s REACTION. WHAT IS THAT. He’s busted, he knows it, he’s shy, he’s befuddled, he didn’t realize that was what he was putting out – or he thought he hid it well. Amazing that that moment even happened, honestly. Then there’s this gorgeousness:
Before Sunrise (1995; d. Richard Linklater)
I decided to watch the trilogy all in one sitting. I can’t believe I’ve never done it before. Not sure I will ever do it again. It was extremely upsetting and it almost ruined my day. I had to do something else to shake it off. The accomplishment of the trilogy is almost unparalleled. It seems that the “Up” series is really the only equivalent, although that’s documentary, not fiction. From the jump, from Slacker, that opening monologue in the taxi in Slacker, Linklater has been telling us who he is, what matters to him, how his mind works. I am sure there will be more in the “Before” series. Which may very well add to the devastation. I know people of many generations love these movies, but there’s a specific kind of identification for people around my age … because I’m basically the same age as the two characters. What the characters were going through was what I was going through when I walked out of the movie theatre back into my life. So none of it felt nostalgic to me. I wasn’t a woman of 60 when I saw Before Sunrise for the first time. I was that age myself. So it felt like “this is happening in real time, this is my life too.” A Gen-X love story.
Before Sunset (2004; d. Richard Linklater)
I actually went through a day very similar to this with that guy I mentioned above who told me to watch Fleabag. The scene in the car, in particular. In many ways, my script was inspired by this trilogy, by Linklater, by that guy I mentioned. It gave me the courage to be like, “Who the hell says two people talking ISN’T dramatic? Those people have short attention spans so we don’t need to listen to THEM.” This one is the most painful of the trilogy for me. Maybe because – metaphorically speaking – my guy DID go to catch his flight. And there we have it. The End. No trilogy for me.
Before Midnight (2013; d. Richard Linklater)
It’s been a while since I’ve seen this one. I had forgotten the moment in the hotel room when Ethan Hawke goes to pick up the phone and says “Let me alert Sweden …” which is so hostile and hilarious. This is a great movie about feminism too: its pros and cons. Linklater is brave enough to let both sides have their say, to allow the debate to erupt. It’s not that “everyone’s right” or “nobody’s right” – it’s that these things have to be fought out, moment to moment. You can see where she’s coming from, but God I can see where he’s coming from too. My first boyfriend always took everything personally the way she does. So I’d say “I’m going to audition for summer stock” and he’d get all weird because that would take me away from him for a summer. And I’d be like “DUDE. I’M AN ACTRESS. What did you THINK was gonna happen? I’d get a day job and try Moosewood Cookbook recipes with you on the weekend??” He was always trying to trap me. But in his mind, that’s not what he was doing. These movies are great, because at some point you can see yourself in them – and not just women seeing themselves in her, men seeing themselves in him … but ALL of it. It also becomes clear that – wow – not getting on that plane at the end of Before Sunset was … really kind of out there. Yes, he gets to see his son in the summers. But he DID leave his son, the thing he said he would never ever do. And you can SEE the toll that has taken on him, on her, on the whole thing. Their relationship, their real relationship, began with an act of betrayal, and you can’t get away from it. I’m very curious to see what the trio is cooking up for the next installment.
They All Laughed (1982; d. Peter Bogdanovich)
What a magical movie. Doomed at the get-go because poor Dorothy Stratten was murdered a month after they stopped filming. It’s now found its audience, it has its champions (myself included). I wrote about the film here. I was so so proud to be one of those interviewed for the documentary about They All Laughed, called One Day Since Yesterday. (Streaming on Netflix.)
I love these monthly posts! Such a blast to see all the films & series you subscribe to, as well as the ones you don’t! I think it’s amazing that you archive everything you watch. Writing-Nerd-Level: full 10. Love it.
The Before Sunrise/Sunset/Midnight post was interesting as you claim the Linklater conversations, as well as Mr. Fleabag man, inspired your script in this way.
Yes!— Two people talking IS dramatic, can be powerful and moving, as their whole worlds shift from stunning dialogue alone. That’s the subtlety of life. That’s how it works. Reminds me of my all time favorite film, Meet Joe Black (1998), It’s truly strung together by conversation alone. I love this.
Also, I’ll never forget how shook I was in realizing that Ethan Hawke left his son. The ending of Sunset, missing the plane, was so epic… Didn’t even realize the full weight of the action, or inaction, rather, until Before Midnight. I mean… Geez.
Hillary – Writing-nerd-level: full 10 – ha!!
I do this with books I’ve read too although I only post those at year end. My dad was a librarian. I always have a catalog in my mind.
// Also, I’ll never forget how shook I was in realizing that Ethan Hawke left his son. //
I know!!! Me too! and it was really driven home to me in this last viewing, when I watched them all in a row. So I watch Sunset, and see him saying “I don’t want to miss on the small moments with my son” and then we come to Midnight and it opens with him saying goodbye to his son and saying “maybe” they could see each other in a couple of months. OUCH. Linklater structured it so perfectly – really driving home just what this love – the love that audiences have been invested in for 20 years – has wrought in other people’s lives. No WONDER the ex-wife hates them both. I would too. and it was interesting to see how one of the ways the two of them bond in Midnight is in trashing the ex-wife. Or, not “trashing” – but she’s a huge topic of conversation, it’s like she’s the third person in the relationship.
It’s just brutal. Somehow it was clearer than ever in this last viewing – maybe because I’m older now, and pretty cynical about love – I don’t know – the movies are like a snapshot not just of how the characters have changed, but how I have changed. It’s so intense!!
and I am SO curious to see what they will come up with next. There’s nothing set, and they all keep it open-ended (“Maybe there’ll be another one, we don’t know, we’ll only do it if it’s right”) – part of the excitement is that Linklater works on a lot of things totally outisde the spotlight. Nobody even knew he had been filming Boyhood for 12 years. Or, if they knew, they didn’t care. So it wouldn’t surprise me if conversations had been going on among the trio all this while about which way they want to proceed.
It seems to me that the two characters are at an impasse. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Ethan Hawke went back to America. and left his twins behind. The twins he barely mentions, by the way. Did you notice that? He’s so taken up with regret about his son that he’s missing the moment he’s in. This is so true to life – we all do this.
anyway, it’ll be very interesting to see what might come next.
Linklater projects move in Divine Timing. No doubt. And although I’m satisfied with everyone’s beloved trio, I have a feeling it’s not done. I mean, could it ever be DONE? After decades of investing into these characters, Linklater/Hawke/Delpy’s creative gears must always be grinding out ideas on how that universe moves forward. And forward. And forward.
I’d like to see them in the states, doing the American (failed) Dream after Celine is forced to abandon her ambition. I felt that in Midnight, like she was already coming to terms with the fate of it. Which was painful, but endearing. God I love these movies. So special. I want to see Jesse in his element, in America, and Celine so totally out of hers.
Thanks for responding, I think it’s so cool how you communicate back with your fans. I appreciate you & your time!
Hillary – of course! Talking here with people who show up and read is one of the main reasons I keep doing this! I appreciate it so much!
I’m satisfied too with the trilogy – and its ambiguous ending. It does seem that Celine may cave – and I can only imagine this will be bad news for all involved – but so far, each film has up-ended my expectations but who knows. I like your thought about them in America – that would be very interesting!
I still have never re-watched Before Sunset. I kind of don’t think I CAN. Before Sunrise was my coming-of-age fairytale, and I still resent how Before Sunset unravelled it. And yet I am weirdly okay with where Before Midnight went.
I loved your blog post, Natalie, about the trilogy – I think I referenced it somewhere else? In case I didn’t – just want you to know I so appreciated your thoughts, which in many ways echoed mine – but also had some differences, which just speaks to this trilogy’s ability to speak to people in different ways.
and ha – in re: Before Sunset!! It really was an unraveling, wasn’t it.
I related so much to it – more so than the first one – which was more of a wish-fulfillment type thing for me. Although it definitely made me think of Fleabag man (he was quite a bit older than I was, though … so our “thing” wasn’t exactly a youthful discovering-of-self thing like Before Sunrise). I’ve read a couple pieces which felt dismayed that she seemed so unhappy in Before Sunset – and so connected to him that she would have that flip out in the car – but that makes me just think people are kind of mis-reading the film, and mis-reading what Linklater was after. That one night in Vienna created its own kind of devastation in each one – and the things stirred up in her reading his book – like: How DARE you romanticize me and us when it has caused so much pain – how DARE you miss me so much, WHILE you are married with a kid – don’t TELL me about your unhappy sexless marriage – please understand what this does to me – etc. Like I said above, a very similarly fraught conversation went down in my life – and I felt like: oh my God this is too real, too close to home. and the ending – where he clearly was going to stay – just crushed me. For my own reasons. Very complex stuff!!
Watching all three together was like having an anvil dropped on me.
Interestingly enough – watching Midnight this last time – I was so much more struck by what these two had done – by choosing each other, his relationship with his son was sacrificed. Or, not sacrificed – they still see each other – but he betrayed himself by choosing her, he broke many many promises. This isn’t romantic, it’s awful – and you can see the toll it’s taken. It made me really really sad.
I really love thinking about these movies. I’m on a Linklater tear at the moment and I watched Waking Life – have you seen it? It’s up there with my favorite Linklater – and there’s one scene where you see Celine and Jessie lying in bed talking – and Waking Life was made between Before Sunrise and Before Sunset – so it’s like a fantasy, a “what if”, an alternate reality – a dream. Linklater still dreaming about those two characters.
I’m sure you know the backstory about the real woman this trilogy was if not based on then inspired by. I knew the story but I hadn’t realized Before Midnight was dedicated to this woman.
Life imitates art, art imitates life.
Thanks for the great discussion!
funnily enough we watched Lincoln last week! Maybe you mentioned it and it got in my head? I remember feeling like I really wanted to watch something brown. I’ll admit to not loving it, and in part because I found much of the casting so distracting (although there were some wonderful faces amongst the tertiary cast and Strathairn and Pace were perfect) — but even so it was still pretty intense to watch at this point in time. I did love the scene you chose the gif from!
I will never have any chill when it comes to spn s2, Playthings, etc. I will never know rest.
Always love reading these diaries!
Jessie – so weird about the Lincoln dovetail!!
I’m so interested in your thoughts on what was distracting in casting – especially since I called out the casting. I was mainly thinking of Straithern, Jared Harris – who is the spitting image of Grant – even though I would never have thought of that before he was cast – Tommy Lee Jones and Bruce McGill.
also I had forgotten Adam Driver was in it as the telegraph operator!!
and in re: Season 2 – totally. NO CHILL. It’s been a long time since I re-watched – it’s almost like I spent so much time with it for recaps I had to take a break. It’s been so fun to go back. Playthings in particular is so great and weird.
ha, yes! Surprise Adam Driver! Surprise lots of people! I was really interested to read your thoughts too. I think there were just — so many people — in all these little mini stories that weren’t stories so much as collections of moments. Spader, Blake-Nelson and Hawks all hanging out together! Old-Timey Gordon-Levitt! McGill, Pace, Goggins, Holbrook, Costabile, Stuhlbarg, Earl Haley, Harris! Nothing wrong with recognisable faces of course but it was distracting to me as a parade of Hey It’s That Guys as disjointed glimpses of the machinery that pushed the amendment through — I didn’t feel like we ever got to dive deep into that machinery. I also (for the first time in my life) had reservations about DDL — but that had a lot to do with the makeup and editing too. Definitely an ambitious movie and an interesting one to think about these days – I couldn’t possibly deny its particular power regarding decency and law especially for you guys.
TLJ was great! Harris was great — his gravity was so light, if that makes sense? I found him kind of a relief! Speaking of Harris being incredible, is The Terror on your radar? I can’t recommend it enough! Easily one of the best things I’ve seen this year.
hahaha yes, it was a cast of hundreds!
Old-Timey Gordon-Levitt! ha! He seemed pretty contemporary-acting to me – like he still had a cell phone in his pocket. I love him, but he just didn’t seem really of that era.
Wow – The Terror – no, I have not seen it – will check it out!
The Terror – definitely bingeworthy. I loved Harris as King George VI in The Crown series, but in The Terror he just makes my heart ache!
Melanie, so excited you liked and watched The Terror, I feel like not enough people got to know about it! The cumulative effect of those ten episodes was almost overwhelming for me.
Yes, Jessie! Because the doom is established at the outset, I don’t think it is a spoiler to say that it was utterly gripping to watch the tragedy unfold – like Cassandra prophesying with fated futility.
Also, I can’t think of the word which describes the concept whereby the speaking of a thing (or naming in this case) ultimately calls that stated thing into being and draws it to you. (I am really trying to be very serious, but when I write it down it reads exactly like a Tulpa and all I can think is, I bet Sam knows the word I’m looking for…!) Like if they’d just named it ‘Boaty McBoatface’ it might have gone a whole other way.I
Forgive me, please!
Hillary, Sheila and Natalie I have really enjoyed reading and digesting your comments on The Before Series. I too am the age of these characters, (47 at the time of this post comment) and I have probably spent more time thinking about these three films than any others through the course of my life with culture. I think of them in how they are so many ideas. How they are a conversation about love and idealism and reality and fate and heart break and loss and bitterness and dreaming and betrayal and hope… most of all of hope.
I am sure they speak to almost anyone who watches them, regardless of age, but there can be no denying that they are speaking specifically to and from Generation X. Probably the last self-governing childhood, the last to ride their bikes all day, the last to play outside independent of adult supervision, latch key, divorce or divorce adjacent in their peer groups, technology emergent but not dominant. Entertainment expanding with Cable TV but kicked out of the house as often as not on a summer or weekend day. The last middle class (privileged) teenage working population. The last to be left to their own devices. And a very small generation to boot, buffeted by the Baby Boomers idealistic fantasies and memories of their youths and the very real realities of their compromises, their narcissism, their wounds.
In reading your comments I was particularly struck by how different the films impacted each of you from how they impact me. And how much I’m thinking of the perspectives you all brought to my thoughts. How I am influenced by what I identify with in these films, how magic they are in their writing that what I see and feel can be different from what others see and feel. That there is much to take away.
For me, I see them explicitly through the romance of a love that is destined… I do believe Julie Delphy, Richard Linklater and Ethan Hawke believe in the love of Jesse and Celine as fated… but a fate written in the terms of life as it is not as we wish it were. I’ve thought a lot about your discussion of Before Sunrise as at it’s end a betrayal; and it is in very black and white terms. But, when I look at that I see the light side of that, the gray more than the black. The love that was denied but could not be denied. Yes, Jesse does leave his wife, but I think it’s clear that he was on that path regardless of Paris. He was on that path from the minute he married her. There is enough in how he talks about his marriage to glean that his wife feels the same emptiness in what has become more obligation than love. This is hard to be presented with but it is no less real because of that and I’m not sure it’s cynical. He loves Celine in a way that he will never love anyone else, even in Midnight when it is at its most bleak, Jesse is fighting for her.
His son is a casualty of this love, his relationship with his son is a casualty of this love, his absence from his son is a circumstance of this love and I think the first few moments of Midnight really show the cost. It is very real. They do not shy away from this reality. The cost. As a father of two children the opening scene when he is putting his son on the plane is hard to watch, it puts me in a state I hope to never be. I cannot imagine it even with it so plainly presented. It feels like a knife in my chest. The son is growing up and away from him and he is not there. You see the cost.
Jesse has made a choice for his love of Celine. Right or wrong he chose, but choosing does not lessen the carnage. But love of Celine is everything for him.
But, I think things are different for Celine. I think she is the much more complicated and conflicted character of the two. It’s the genius of Julie Delphy to me. Linklater and Hawke are the dreamers in these, you can tell they are the romantics, the fantasists, the movie makers. Jesse is a boy pretty much throughout, a reader and believer of fiction and philosophy. An idealistic believer in love. Watch how he is constantly trying to touch her throughout Sunset and Sunrise, how he reaches for her no matter her emotional state. How he smiles at her and how he talks of the future, even when talking of the past. How he wrote a book and pretends it wasn’t solely so he could find her. His love is a through line, he dreams of her, he sees her on the streets of NYC, he remembers her and never forgot her.
Delphy is the film maker of the series and through her, Celine is the character that is most true, the most real. Celine is not a romantic. She is touched by romance of course and she does love Jesse but at almost every point in every film she is more than just this love. She is a pragmatist who tilts at wind-mills. She has big ambitions for her life, crusades to lead, fights to fight. Her life beyond her love of Jesse seems to be as important, if not more so throughout.
In Sunrise, she remembers Jesse, i.e. ‘Let me sing you a Waltz’ but in more practical ways she has forgotten him, she pretends not to know whether they slept together to protect herself at first, she does not want to give him the specialness of her remembering. It was special but it was a dream and for her dreams of love are taken from you, a little piece of you each time. I don’t think she is as connected to him as he is to her. Her life is bigger than him while for him at his core, she is his life. Even in Midnight when the familiarity of life and the wages of success have worn at him, even when his narcissism over his accomplishments is on full pompous display, he is at the end fighting to hold on to her when pushed by her reality of their marriage. She is asking continually if it is real. Is it real? Would it happen again now?
For him I think that answer is a resounding yes. For her I’m not sure that she is so sure.
I loved the perspective you all had on her melt down in the car in Sunset. It’s a powerful piece of writing and acting. Your breath is shallow and your heart is racing as you watch it. You all wrote of how unfair it was of Jesse to romantize her and this reaction is a reaction to that. I never thought of it this way and frankly I am staggering under the weight of my own romantic notions of that scene. I don’t know that the book caused her pain of him, I think it may have awakened her to things she thought were not for her but I could be wrong. For me that scene is speaking to how hard his idealizing love is for her, not because she is broken in anyway but because she is not sure it’s something she ultimately wants more than the other things she wants. I think Sunset is ultimately mostly about Celine thinking of love as more than she might be able to handle and of Jesse as being the embodiment of this. But, she comes to realize and more importantly she comes to want that she loves him in a way she has never loved another. She learns this about herself in Sunrise I think. As the truly great Stevie Nicks wrote…. ‘lightning strikes, maybe once. Maybe twice.’ Celine’s love for Jesse is the acceptance of the wanting of this..
But, I’ll think a lot more about what you all wrote as I love these films as much as you.
Jack – wow, what a great comment! Thank you so much for taking the time to put this all into words. It’s a great tribute to these films – and I thank you.
Much to think on. I think it really shows how these films strike people on a REALLY personal level. It’s hard for me to see Before Sunset outside of how much it mirrors an almost identical experience in my own life – like, eerily so – (my guy had recorded an entire album with songs about me, and dedicated it to me. He was married. And I was still trying to recover from losing him – and I was the OPPOSITE of “flattered” by how much he still thought of me, or how much he missed me, etc. I was a very sad woman for a very long time – and I also had a full life, and was working on things I enjoyed, and had built a whole new life for myself. But always … always … there was this alternate path. With him. I listened to those songs about me and felt … rage. It seemed that since he was married it was SAFE for him to feel nostalgia for me – whereas I – alone (for what would end up being forever) could not afford to miss him. ANYWAY. You see my point. I don’t feel rage anymore at this poor man – like I said, he texted me to check out a TV show this past month. :) But the similarities – Jessie writing this book, Celine’s reaction … that’s what I see. Jessie says something like “when you didn’t show up, I buried that idea of romance, I put it to bed” – that’s what happened to me. I didn’t set OUT to do this, it just happened. Because love is terrible. I’m not a fan. :)
Anyway, when I first watched Before Sunset, my main feeling was “Oh my GOD how did he KNOW all this …” Total recognition. My experience of Sunset since my first viewing has morphed – In many ways, it’s Sunset – out of the trilogy – where my relationship has transformed the most. Every time I watch it, it seems like a different movie. I am still pissed when he pulls her onto his lap.
Her heart was broken. I feel very strongly about this from my own life: Nostalgia is something I cannot afford. I have to just move on, do the best I can, not look back. Like Celine says in Sunset: “I never recover” from breakups. Neither do I. It’s easier to have casual relationships – like the one she has with the photographer – instead of risking that “never recover” thing. And I’ve heard all the arguments in opposition to my view of things. And that’s fine. But my life experience has led me to this POV, just like others’ life experience has led them to their conclusions.
// Yes, Jesse does leave his wife, but I think it’s clear that he was on that path regardless of Paris. //
I totally agree. They would not have lasted, either way. and it’s not because of Celine, or the memory of her (although you wonder what the wife thought of Jessie’s novel). It just wasn’t a good match. Still, I can see why the ex-wife is in a rage. I think Linklater can too.
// His son is a casualty of this love, his relationship with his son is a casualty of this love, his absence from his son is a circumstance of this love and I think the first few moments of Midnight really show the cost. It is very real. They do not shy away from this reality. The cost. As a father of two children the opening scene when he is putting his son on the plane is hard to watch, it puts me in a state I hope to never be. I cannot imagine it even with it so plainly presented. It feels like a knife in my chest. The son is growing up and away from him and he is not there. You see the cost. //
Beautifully put, and so true. And the weight of this circumstance has formed the relationship. They can’t even have a romantic night away without it encroaching on them. I love how Celine has bonded with the son – and how Jessie feels left out of that (he wants to talk with him on the phone, but she hangs up before he gets a chance). It’s all so human and complex!
// I don’t think she is as connected to him as he is to her. Her life is bigger than him while for him at his core, she is his life. //
Ha! I totally do not agree with this. I think she has protected herself after the devastation of not being able to go meet him. I think she has never found anyone who could “take” her – the way he could. She probably intimidates other men. She’s used to it. But he leaned INTO that part of her, he wasn’t put off by it. She probably doesn’t think about him much because she can’t afford to. When she flips out on him in the car, you can see how much the loss has impacted her – how much his return has ruined her carefully formed equilibrium.
In my experience – and again it’s just my experience – men are far more openly emotional, sentimental, nostalgic. Women are often painted in these terms but I have found the opposite to be true. This is not negative or positive, just my experience. It seems that Linklater really understands this – you can see it in Boyhood too. He doesn’t fall into the trap of romanticizing the male penchant for idealization – he sees the traps in it – and he can see the female side. Or Delpy helps him see the other side in their collaboration. and he’s open to it.
Whatever way we look at it – these two are certainly tied together, and his openness to her, the way he fights for her, the way he fights WITH her about her feminism – it shows his investment. These are extremely toxic topics right now – try writing about feminism on Twitter as a woman and watch the death/rape threats come your way – but these Before movies give those ideas and complexities space to maneuver. It was there even in the first one! It’s PART of the dynamic – and I just love that. People don’t talk like this in other movies. I treasure it so much!!
// As the truly great Stevie Nicks wrote…. ‘lightning strikes, maybe once. Maybe twice.’ Celine’s love for Jesse is the acceptance of the wanting of this.. //
This is also beautifully put – and I think that’s very true.
Much of her conflict appears to be with her ideals of feminism and what it is supposed to provide. Many women feel the same way – it’s a lot of pressure, it really is. It can create unhappiness where there is none, or where it could be more easily managed if “women” weren’t such a topic of conversation – ALWAYS. Like: LEAVE US ALONE. Let us just LIVE. Women get it from all sides, other women, other men.
You see it in the wonderful scene where they all sit outside having dinner in Midnight. There’s the hot couple from Greece – with all the sexual jokes and affection (she, by the way, showed up in Slacker – a teenager – “my cousin from Greece” – I love that. I love Linklater’s commitment to a repertory of people) – and how Celine is “triggered” (for lack of a better word) watching the ease of their relationship. Ease like that seems somehow outside of her capability. I relate to this. I couldn’t be a part of a relationship like that Greek couple if you paid me. Too much has happened, too much disappointment – other good things can happen, but not THAT.
and who knows. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but I’m not holding my breath.
Thanks again for your thought-provoking comment!
// Even in Midnight when the familiarity of life and the wages of success have worn at him, even when his narcissism over his accomplishments is on full pompous display, he is at the end fighting to hold on to her when pushed by her reality of their marriage. She is asking continually if it is real. Is it real? Would it happen again now?
For him I think that answer is a resounding yes. For her I’m not sure that she is so sure. //
Oh, and this is a REALLY good point. I can really see what you are saying.
Fleabag – ha! My autocorrect changed that to ‘cleavage’ – haha! I discovered this show recently when looking into the creator Phoebe Waller-Bridge. You have to wonder how much of that was autobiographical? And, yes, what a hilarious trainwreck. I love that your long ago ex felt comfortable enough to compare you to her! I would take that as a win in a weird sort of way.
I was searching PWB because I was watching ‘Killing Eve’ of which she is also the creator. I have binged a lot of TV this past year which I have really loved – Justified, Deadwood, The Terror, Santa Clarita Diet, Peaky Blinders, various Sci Fi and various mysteries and period dramas, BUT Killing Eve is far and above the best thing I’ve seen on TV in years! The leading characters, Eve (Sandra Oh), Villanelle (Jodie Comer), and Carolyn (Fiona Shaw), are all seriously messed up in their own way. It is terrifying and at the same time so funny. Compare to the typical male dominated international thriller like Bond where they all seem to totally have their sh#t together 24/7. These women feel so real. Even though Fleabag and Killing Eve are very different you can feel PWB’s honesty particularly in the portrayal of women. And in ways that shoe fits me, too – maybe all of us!
‘Clap Your Hands’ #1 always!
Killing Eve better than Justified and Deadwood? That goes into the queue.
I think you’ll like it!
Hi Sheila –
First off thank you so much for taking the time to write so beautifully and actually give consideration to my comments to expand upon your relationships with the films and characters. I have been sitting with your response for the past week trying to sort through what you said, re-reading what you wrote, thinking not only about what you’ve said but of also how much it challenged my thoughts on these films. This is a present tense state of mind for me, as my thoughts seem to go back and forth between agreement, disagreement, questioning my points of view, questioning your points of view and how to settle these thoughts into something coherent and thoughtful… as you did.
Sunset is for me the most perfect film. I love it in ways that are very personal and very visceral. I saw its first showing on a very hot Friday in July at the Angelika. I’d loved Sunrise for years and when people talk about the films of young Gen-X it is for me unequivocal in its importance. Though very few people had seen Sunrise, the fact that they were revisiting these characters was not a surprise to me, (especially after the brief interstitial in Waking Life), I knew Delphy, Hawke and Linklater shared the same relationship to these characters as I did. (Of course my relationship is not actual as is theirs). For Sunset to come along, it was a gift.
To this day, I can put myself on Mercer on that day and feel what I felt coming out of the dark of the Angelika into the heat of the afternoon and the most intense bright sunshine and bluest sky. Only movies and music do that in that way to me… and of course there once was a certain girl, a long time ago, who broke my heart and in doing so altered the way its beat ever since. A beat that is a little less, a little more hollow, as if there is an echo that will never quite quiet. I understand your having to make choices because of a choice that was made that was not yours. //I didn’t set OUT to do this, it just happened.// This is a truth. I found the same in this film. I’m sure there are many who have.
Odi et amo. quare id faciam fortasse requiris.
Nescio, sed fieri sentio et excrucior.
Catullus 85
So, I wanted to write about Celine, from my perspective, from my admittedly male perspective. I don’t know that I can get away from gender, I think it’s an important aspect of how life is experienced. I know that in a perfect world it might not be, but I am imperfect. So, know that I know I am writing from this outlook and I am ok if people don’t see it my way. I do not think it makes me right. Also, know that your writing has made me think quite a bit about what I see in these films and maybe even what I now think of as what I saw in these films. I’ve thought a lot this past week about how you and the other commenters on this thread wrote, or at least about the specifics of what you’ve all wrote of her, all of you most likely have many more thoughts on her, but also lives to lead that do not include sharing every last thought with a guy commenting on your message board. Bear with me.
Celine is a complex character, not a complicated character as I’ve seen her described, (I hate when someone is described as complicated, complicated implies confusion, or self-involvement or narcissism to me. It seems lazy and dismissive). Celine is not confused… she is complex. She is many, many things and every one of those things she understands confidently. Her self. Her experience. Her being. I find her to be a truly complete individual, not perfect but also not bothered by needing to be and I credit Delphy with this.
And yet I have always been heart-broken with how she reacts throughout Sunset. I never saw her as having a broken heart over missing meeting up with Jesse. Yes, she bears the scars and wounds of life and love and what it does to you. But, it always destroys me in little ways that she doesn’t seem to have had much thought of him over the years. I don’t know how quite to express this, I’ve seen it this way for so long. Celine crushes me in Sunset. When she pretends not to know that they slept together, that she is so flippant about the fact that of course neither of them showed up to the train station (her casualness at first causes Hawke to protect his ego and lie about the fact that he did in fact, show up), that she does not honor that night. And even knowing that that look over her shoulder back at him on the stairs going up to the door of her Paris flat is coming, I still spend much of the film thinking of her, what are you doing?
I didn’t know why, or rather maybe I did and it makes me a little uncomfortable as the reasons I feel this may actually be wrapped up in this simple truth as written by you and it’s not in who Celine actually is:
//In my experience – and again it’s just my experience – men are far more openly emotional, sentimental, nostalgic.//
There is a lot here. Especially when it comes to men who are creative, or artistic, or quiet or dreamers. Men who read too many books, watch too many movies and listen to too much music. Jesse is that kind of man, I am probably that kind of man (I think it’s the Irish in me, there is melancholy and romance and doom in that blood). I see his reaching for her through years of longing and desire and want, years of knowing that this is the one. When he pulls her to him I didn’t see the violation, I saw all of those years without her (now I see I wasn’t looking, or rather wasn’t seeing). I just never quite saw why she didn’t see it the same way. Fate, it was right there. But, what you wrote here has made me consider a differing view. (I was speaking of how I don’t see her as connected to him as he is to her)
//Ha! I totally do not agree with this. I think she has protected herself after the devastation of not being able to go meet him. I think she has never found anyone who could “take” her – the way he could. She probably intimidates other men. She’s used to it. But he leaned INTO that part of her, he wasn’t put off by it. She probably doesn’t think about him much because she can’t afford to. When she flips out on him in the car, you can see how much the loss has impacted her – how much his return has ruined her carefully formed equilibrium.//
I’ve seen Celine through this prism I’ve had of her and she is not a Romantic to me because of it and I do hold that against her, despite everything in her that I see as extraordinary. I don’t know if that is wrong but I’m thinking about it a lot more this past week and I’m seeing a different way to view Sunset.
But, I still see them as fated. And I love that.