The 1960 Mini-List

[Red Screamer]

Il Bell’Antonio (Mauro Bolognini, 1960) Co-written by Pasolini, this tragicomedy of sexual humiliation plays like a screwball farce slowed to ballad time and transposed to a minor key. The parents of a beautiful, rabidly desired young man arrange for him to marry the daughter of a wealthy judge. He’s decided not to marry but agrees after falling in love with her photograph. They marry but never consummate—her out of ignorance, him seemingly refusing to. Is he gay or asexual? Is he impotent? Is this a revolt against the traditional exchange of property by marriage? Or just another iteration of the ol’ Madonna-whore complex? Every character has a different interpretation of Mastroianni’s refusal, revealing their own sexual insecurities and personal disappointments in the process. And thus one private act threatens to tear through the fabric of their society. If La Dolce Vita’s Rome is a vision of Italy lost in a meaningless religious and sexual free-for-all, the Sicily of Il Bell’Antonio is on the opposite end of the spectrum: an Italy imprisoned by its conservatism and sexual hangups whose religious, legal, and social strictures are so tightly wound together that no one can budge an inch. I don’t know how involved in the production Pasolini really was, but the film makes a good companion to his excellent documentary Comizi d’amore in which he confronts average Italians at random about sexual taboos and notably sends off the film with a harsh critique of the institution of marriage. In particular, Il Bell’Antonio has echoes of that film’s section on the double standards of chastity: fetishized in women, even said to be necessary if they want to marry, chastity becomes a source of shame for men, a breach of masculinity and, in the context of marriage, a punishable offense.

I’m not familiar with Bolognini’s other work, but his direction here shows talent, particularly for nuanced characterization. Though his style is skillfully pared-down and actor-focused, he also comes through with effective visual flourishes for crucial moments in the narrative. On the other hand, he doesn’t always seem to know how to approach the material. The most obvious example of this is when Brasseur exclaims that he doesn’t care if he dies in a brothel, because at least everyone would know he’s virile, and then the film immediately cuts to an in memoriam portrait of him, but tonally Bolognini plays against the goofy irony of this setup-punchline. Generally though I appreciate how he bestows potentially farcical situations with a tender, melancholy weight.

Did anyone else think it’s implied that

SpoilerShow

Mastroianni’s friend is the one who fathered the maid’s child? There’s that seemingly extraneous scene of him harassing her, and then he says something on the phone about wanting to raise the child.

Either way the ending has a complicated poignance, but that reveal would drastically change which interpretation of Mastroianni the film favors.

This might also be a contender for funniest tagline of the year: “It lights up a hush-hush theme of life with beauty and brilliance!”

[Rayon Vert]

Zazie dans le métro (Malle). Last one for me. Honestly I can’t remember the last time I had such a hard time getting through a film. Apart from the excess surrealism, this came across like a comic book (bande dessinée) not only in terms of the characters and visual gags but the camera framings, especially the distortion caused by the frequent use of the wide-angle shots. Unfortunately, for me at least, despite all the inventiveness, it’s just an unrelenting experience of unamusing shrillness that was already hard to take at the 30 minute mark, never mind 92 minutes.

[domino harvey]

[Rayon Vert]

I have no idea of what the board's view of this film is!

[swo17]

We all love it!

[domino harvey]

I personally think it's among the most enthusiastically entertaining films I've ever seen. I'm sorry it didn't work for you, RV

[Rayon Vert]

(insert gif here = feeling like a complete alien. again.)

[therewillbeblus]

I can see both sides- it’s a masterpiece (top twenty of the decade for me) but I wasn’t bowled over on my first watch, and it’s definitely the kind of film that can feel overwhelming- even off putting- if not in the right space. Once I returned in the mood for its unfiltered zaniness, it became an all-timer, and only gets better each watch. Maybe it’s not for you, but thank god for the power of revisits just in case

[domino harvey]

If it makes you feel any better RV, Cahiers hated it! (But then Godard gave Zazie a cameo in Une femme est une femme)

[Rayon Vert]

Well since I own it now, I have an opportunity to give it another shot one day!

Revisiting the early De Palma films set from Arrow recently, for the main 60s list, I strangely liked The Wedding Party quite a bit (and even more so Greetings), which I couldn't stand the first time.

[Rayon Vert]

Nice gif, domino. (And reassuring to hear there were sane people back then.)

I did like the tour of Paris, though, and that joins up with quite a few films of the era.

[Red Screamer]

I watched Zazie recently too and I liked it, but not nearly as much as all that. I agree with RV that you can really feel the strain in Malle’s direction. He’s too uptight for the comic anarchy he’s going for and he doesn’t have a strong sense of rhythm, physicality, or spontaneity. I actually thought the annoying and repetitive elements of the film made it way funnier than it should’ve been but still, Malle’s certainly no Jerry Lewis! While watching Zazie I kept thinking that I would have gone nuts for this movie when I was 10, which reminds me: this must be the kids movie with the most pedophile jokes in it, right?

[domino harvey]

There are obvious appeals in the film for kids watching, but it's not a movie intended for kids (and indeed in some countries it received a restricted, adults-only rating). I'm no Malle booster but his anonymous style means he can shape himself to the needs of a project, and I don't think a film this breathlessly zany could sustain any hand but a stable one to keep it coherent and moving along. It's also trying to transplant and embody the linguistically anarchic ethos of Raymond Queneau's source material (which, despite best efforts, is really untranslatable into English) into a visual medium, which is an ambitious and impressive accomplishment

[yoshimori]

an unrelenting experience of unamusing shrillness ...

Mr Vert is not alone here, of course. Each time I try to watch it, maybe four times in total, I get less far into the thing. There are only so many hammer-blows-to-the-head I can take. My cartoonist friend has similar feelings. And we generally love Queneau.

[swo17]

As a reminder, you all have until next Thursday to request that I add titles to the list of eligible films in the first post. If a film isn't listed there, you won't be able to vote for it

[domino harvey]

Will the 1961 List open on April 1 while the voting for 1960 is occurring?

[swo17]

Yes

[swo17]

Just as a point of clarification, since this is a new thing for everyone: Please don't PM me your lists right now. Among other things, my inbox is full and I can't handle them. We had some discussion about how this would all work starting here but to reiterate:

1. You have until the end of the day March 31 to request that I add a film to the list of eligible titles in the first post. (The only thing that would prevent me from adding a title is if I rule that it belongs to another year.)
2. On April 1 I will both start a 1961 thread and prepare a link that will enable everyone to vote for their top 10-25 films of 1960.
3. At the end of the day April 8 I will close voting through the external link and present results shortly thereafter.

Any questions, let me know

[swo17]

If you're planning to vote in this project and would like to test out the voting form and have a say in how it works, please see here

[domino harvey]

Bandwidth (René Jodoin)
Produced for the Royal Canadian Air Force, members of which are clearly smarter than me, this is a confusing “explanation” of waveforms and their respect bandwidths (I think?) that is nonetheless fun to watch in a confused stupor due to the crisp midcentury modern art style and the dulcet narration. Basically one big



[P]

La corde raide (Jean-Charles Dudrumet)
V e r y thin noir with Annie Giardot cucking husband François Périer and him being such an asshole about it that it becomes impossible to care what happens to either of them. This movie stretches material that would barely sustain an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents into feature length by throwing in a lot of b-roll and extra footage to pad it to 82 minutes. Filled with lots of “pretty” shots that mean nothing and don’t serve the narrative (and this film is too shallow to evaluate on any other level). Every twist in this is fully predictable save the last one, and that’s because it’s of the “Oh, fuck this movie”-variety.

Meurtre en 45 tours (Etienne Périer)
Powerful songwriter Jean Servais is obsessed with the idea that his chanteuse wife Danielle Darrieux is cheating on him with her piano player, probably because she is. He soon gets into a fatal car accident, yet somehow the two lovers find themselves haunted by a series of threatening records from the husband… This movie has more than a few plot similarities with La corde raide, but it’s far, far dumber. Take the scene where a character converses with the husband’s voice on the record in such a way that their interaction could not possibly occur with anything even sort of resembling plausibility (“Walk over to the bookshelf. Look up. Stop. Pick up the book. No, not that book…” etc, ie basically a serious version of the “Audition” sketch from Mr Show). Périer obviously loves American noirs, but thankfully few of those thought as little of their audience as this movie does.

När mörkret faller (Arne Mattsson)
A philandering grocer is offed with an axe right before Christmas Eve in a Swedish murder mystery that on paper sounds like it belongs at the same 1960 Proto-Slasher table as Psycho or Peeping Tom, but this is really much more of a piece with Agatha Christie mysteries than anything resembling slashers or giallos (there’s a strangulation later). I’m sure Arrow will disagree when they invariably release this claptrap because it’s marketable as what it isn’t, though! This movie is quite long and despite the red herrings (one of whom is literally red), it’s pretty obvious from the structure of the narrative who done it, even if the film loooooves ominous closeups of lots of characters reacting in a way that in retrospect indicates nothing whatsoever when all is revealed.

North to Alaska (Henry Hathaway)
Endless Western comedy with sickly-looking prospector John Wayne romancing Capucine’s ostracized prostitute (yes, Wayne is really doing this storyline again) plus defending his claim with buddies Stewart Granger (completely miscast) and Fabian (truuuuuly annoying) against villain Ernie Kovacs. A film this wispy can’t withstand any real bad guys, so I get what it is doing with Kovacs’ genial scammer, but he’s especially ineffectual as the bad guy because I like him way more than any of the “heroes” offered. Also, and this can never be said enough, fistfights are not funny. They are not funny. Fistfights = Not funny. What's not funny? Fistfights. Isfightsfay aren'tay unnyfay. How long does this film run before the first of what will be, and I’m not exaggerating, at least a hundred shots of a character getting punched in their face? If you said four minutes, you are correct!

[Red Screamer]

I'm whittling down my last minute watchlist for the next few days. Can I ask if Kinoshita's The River Fuefuki and Ulmer's Amazing Transparent Man/Beyond the Time Barrier are ineligible or have they just not been nominated yet?

[swo17]

Those are both eligible as 1960 films but no one has requested that they be added to the master list yet

[knives]

Jodoin is fantastic. Probably my favorite of the McLaren disciples although he took me the longest to appreciate. Propagation from this year is also worth checking out.

[Red Screamer]

OK thanks swo.

I’ve watched a lot of recommended films for this list that haven’t made a strong impression on me, but my What Is The Big Deal Award for this round has to go to Black Sunday/La maschera del demonio. It has gnarly, effective cinematography which scratches some Halloween decoration kind of itch, I get that. But it’s hard to consider its visual style truly remarkable when it would look boilerplate and comic booky next to the low-budget lushness and creativity of something like Cat People, which is also a film that integrates style, narrative, theme, and character on a level undreamt of by Black Sunday (though in fairness Bava’s film is pretty upfront about not taking its script very seriously on that level). I’ve recently seen three 1960 horror films that make use of the tropes of haunted family portraits and crypts under the mansion. Between this, House of Usher, and Et mourir de plaisir it’s not at all apparent that Bava builds the strongest mise en scène around these tropes or even has the most fun with them. Other than its nasty violence, I can’t see what would be special enough about Black Sunday to catapult its reputation to the status of horror classic above and beyond its contemporaries.

[Matt]

Though I think it’s pretty great, it is probably more “important” and “influential” than it is “excellent.” So little was expected of it (it was basically a little reward for Bava, who brought a couple of troubled, semi-abandoned studio projects to completion) and yet it made so much out of so little.