Two more reviews for ya. These are the not so great ones. Why so? Well...read on! Check back as I come closer to completing my coverage of the festival.
Arakimentari
Review by Jon Waterman
**
This documentary explores the world of Nobuyoshi Araki. He’s one of Japan’s most controversial, most prolific and most talented photographers. His work ranges from the uniquely beautiful to the uniquely perverse (and beautiful). Director Travis Klose follows Araki around for a little while and try to get into the mind of the eccentric genius. To fill in the gaps and get society’s take on him, he interviews critics, models and celebrities.
I wish there would have been more man on the street reactions rather than analysis from famous people. If he’s such a controversial figure, find out first hand from the people why that is. I would have loved to see interviews with his assistants and more of his colleagues. I think Klose is relying on the big names, like Bjork and Beat Takeshi to increase the popularity of the movie and give it name recognition rather than substance. It’s not that they don’t have anything to say, but I feel they were meant as attention getters. There are people out there who could have contributed more interesting things to say. Get people who are closer to him.
We get good insight into how and why he works, but not from the interviews. We get it from listening to Araki himself talk and from him taking photographs. We see how he works with his models and the unusual ways in which he works. He’s very frantic and fascinating to watch.
Klose and his cameraman, Brian Burgoyne, decide not to use a tripod for the majority of the picture – possibly to capture the frantic, fast-paced Araki in action a little easier, while still remaining relatively close to him. Yet, it leads to a more in-your-face technique, which lacks Araki’s sense of professionalism. The camera roams without proper exposure or purpose, and we catch it zooming and focusing way too often. It can be chalked up to poor editing and poor camerawork. Please, get a tripod. And use it.
The movie showcases the finished product more so than the process (which could be seen as a positive or a negative). It’s easy to see why he’s so popular and why he’s so controversial. His photographs range from provocative to forceful to passionate to simplistic to shocking to pornographic. Not all of them are great, but some are absolutely amazing. He truly does have a gift (and over 300 publications attached to his name).
The documentary isn’t the best, but it’s not the worst either. The camera definitely became annoying. The movie lacked a solid structure, but was still able to keep my interest. Araki is an interesting character and very much worthy of being the subject of this doc. I wish it had gone a little more in depth, but hey. DJ Krush’s music is good.
+++++++
November
Review by Jon Waterman
1/2 star
All Yvonne wants is to go to America and visit her pen pal, who has a swimming pool in her back yard. Her parents can’t afford to give that gift to her, because money is tight. On top of that, marital problems are starting to become a problem. Something has to give. Marianne, the mother, breaks much more when she wins the lotto. The surge of money causes more strife than no money and the onset of winter looks like it’ll be awfully cold.
Now I understand that with newfound wealth there could be relationship problems, but the motivations of Marianne make little sense to me. She ends up buying her daughter a swimming pool (in a frigid November month), but for some reason can’t afford the plane ticket to the US. She freaks out about the car that her husband, Paul, buys. This is understandable, because he didn’t consult her, and she was the one who bought the ticket and won the money. Yet, she goes out and purchases plane tickets for herself to go a different foreign country. It’s fine to be conservative to a degree, but she was hypocritical. Her handling of the situation was stupid, frustrating and I wish it wasn’t the main cause of conflict. I didn’t get it.
Another problem I had with it is that the beginning gives away the end. Within the first five, ten minutes you find out that Yvonne freezes to death sleeping inside the empty swimming pool. In a small way, this is good, because then you see how incredibly dumb and pointless the mom’s decisions and “sacrifices” were, and it gives you a hindsight perspective. But, it’s also moronic, because I have no problem telling you what happens at the end, because it’s right there in the beginning. You end up waiting for the end. You find yourself guessing how much time is left in the movie and how many more plot points must occur before reaching the final resolution.
Maybe eventually first-time writer/director Luki Frieden (from Switzerland) will get better at storytelling. He also puts in a “Magnolia” sequence where the cast of characters sings along to a somber song that’s obviously not part of the scene. Not only is it a rip off, but it’s a bad one, because it’s out of nowhere and doesn’t fit the feel or the style of the rest of the picture. The relationships between some of the characters aren’t established well enough. How do they know each other? He also relies on the standard blue tint to insinuate the oncoming winter and emotional gloominess.
I guess I really don’t have much of anything positive to say. The dad looks like Robin Williams, if that means anything. The whole thing is just too trite for me.
Arakimentari
Review by Jon Waterman
**
This documentary explores the world of Nobuyoshi Araki. He’s one of Japan’s most controversial, most prolific and most talented photographers. His work ranges from the uniquely beautiful to the uniquely perverse (and beautiful). Director Travis Klose follows Araki around for a little while and try to get into the mind of the eccentric genius. To fill in the gaps and get society’s take on him, he interviews critics, models and celebrities.
I wish there would have been more man on the street reactions rather than analysis from famous people. If he’s such a controversial figure, find out first hand from the people why that is. I would have loved to see interviews with his assistants and more of his colleagues. I think Klose is relying on the big names, like Bjork and Beat Takeshi to increase the popularity of the movie and give it name recognition rather than substance. It’s not that they don’t have anything to say, but I feel they were meant as attention getters. There are people out there who could have contributed more interesting things to say. Get people who are closer to him.
We get good insight into how and why he works, but not from the interviews. We get it from listening to Araki himself talk and from him taking photographs. We see how he works with his models and the unusual ways in which he works. He’s very frantic and fascinating to watch.
Klose and his cameraman, Brian Burgoyne, decide not to use a tripod for the majority of the picture – possibly to capture the frantic, fast-paced Araki in action a little easier, while still remaining relatively close to him. Yet, it leads to a more in-your-face technique, which lacks Araki’s sense of professionalism. The camera roams without proper exposure or purpose, and we catch it zooming and focusing way too often. It can be chalked up to poor editing and poor camerawork. Please, get a tripod. And use it.
The movie showcases the finished product more so than the process (which could be seen as a positive or a negative). It’s easy to see why he’s so popular and why he’s so controversial. His photographs range from provocative to forceful to passionate to simplistic to shocking to pornographic. Not all of them are great, but some are absolutely amazing. He truly does have a gift (and over 300 publications attached to his name).
The documentary isn’t the best, but it’s not the worst either. The camera definitely became annoying. The movie lacked a solid structure, but was still able to keep my interest. Araki is an interesting character and very much worthy of being the subject of this doc. I wish it had gone a little more in depth, but hey. DJ Krush’s music is good.
+++++++
November
Review by Jon Waterman
1/2 star
All Yvonne wants is to go to America and visit her pen pal, who has a swimming pool in her back yard. Her parents can’t afford to give that gift to her, because money is tight. On top of that, marital problems are starting to become a problem. Something has to give. Marianne, the mother, breaks much more when she wins the lotto. The surge of money causes more strife than no money and the onset of winter looks like it’ll be awfully cold.
Now I understand that with newfound wealth there could be relationship problems, but the motivations of Marianne make little sense to me. She ends up buying her daughter a swimming pool (in a frigid November month), but for some reason can’t afford the plane ticket to the US. She freaks out about the car that her husband, Paul, buys. This is understandable, because he didn’t consult her, and she was the one who bought the ticket and won the money. Yet, she goes out and purchases plane tickets for herself to go a different foreign country. It’s fine to be conservative to a degree, but she was hypocritical. Her handling of the situation was stupid, frustrating and I wish it wasn’t the main cause of conflict. I didn’t get it.
Another problem I had with it is that the beginning gives away the end. Within the first five, ten minutes you find out that Yvonne freezes to death sleeping inside the empty swimming pool. In a small way, this is good, because then you see how incredibly dumb and pointless the mom’s decisions and “sacrifices” were, and it gives you a hindsight perspective. But, it’s also moronic, because I have no problem telling you what happens at the end, because it’s right there in the beginning. You end up waiting for the end. You find yourself guessing how much time is left in the movie and how many more plot points must occur before reaching the final resolution.
Maybe eventually first-time writer/director Luki Frieden (from Switzerland) will get better at storytelling. He also puts in a “Magnolia” sequence where the cast of characters sings along to a somber song that’s obviously not part of the scene. Not only is it a rip off, but it’s a bad one, because it’s out of nowhere and doesn’t fit the feel or the style of the rest of the picture. The relationships between some of the characters aren’t established well enough. How do they know each other? He also relies on the standard blue tint to insinuate the oncoming winter and emotional gloominess.
I guess I really don’t have much of anything positive to say. The dad looks like Robin Williams, if that means anything. The whole thing is just too trite for me.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home