Blue Mountains Film Fest: Day 2 Recap
Day 2 of the Blue Mountains Film Festival started with me waking up to the sight of a whole lot of snow, as seen by the photo I included in yesterday’s recap. Even though I have lived in relatively cold places my whole life (cold as in Australian cold) I had never seen anything like it. After a few hours trudging around looking for some pants to replace the jeans stupidly left in Canberra and an internet cafe, I was more than ready for some relaxing, and some warmth. A pretty cool place to find both was the Cafe Cinema, being run as part of the festival at Cafe 88 in Katoomba.
The Cafe Cinema is a great concept. It is a really nice place to while away a few hours, especially given the fact they sell both coffee and beer, so all bases are covered. Another major advantage is that it gives the opportunities for more shorts to get a screening at the festival and as such it is a vehicle for some local, and more inexperienced filmmakers to get their work seen. As one of the films that showed while I was there was quite long (50 odd minutes) I did not get the chance to see the entire program. Generally speaking the films are of a somewhat lesser standard than those showing in the main program, but definitely interesting and worth a watch. Captured is the story of a war photographer that after a tense start becomes rather melodramatic. It does a have a cool little tic in the shooting style though. The photographer taking a shot causes the action to freeze frame in black and white, a genuine ‘photo’ if you will. The other film I saw was High Ambitions on Abu Dablam. The film chronicles an expedition to summit the titular Himalayan mountain. It was a very apt film given the conditions that were raging outside and the sheer beauty of the Himalayan scenery allows the film to get by. It probably could have been a little shorter, but does finish on a high (literally I guess) as the final push to the summit is the film’s most interesting part.
The night’s short film screening kicked off with what I think was the pick of the music video category over the first two nights. 5 Minutes From Now, a track by hip hop artist King Brown, not only has the best music track, but also a really sharply made clip to go with it. The clip is excellent, a blend of city life and performance footage with really up-tempo editing to match the track. Also some really nice use of black and white as well as split screens which looked amazing without being too distracting. This was one of my favourite films of the night. The first big crowd pleaser of the night was a Boo, a comedy about an elderly couple who get kicks out of scaring each other by pretending to be dead. The film was really well shot and got massive laughs from many in the crowd, though I must admit it was not my favourite comedy of the festival.
Of all the categories thus far, animation is probably the one that has impressed the most. Even those with narratives that are a little unpolished, each and every one of them looks really incredible, with a nice mix of artistic styles. So it was with the Nathan Jones’ effort Outhouse, a tale of two toilet rolls. This was a fun little film, with a cool script and the best animated toilet rolls I’ve seen. Another real crowd pleaser last night was Cockatoo, a film which I also really loved. After impressing last night with her directorial and dual acting role effort Am I Okay, Matilda Brown was again really good onscreen in this Matthew Jenkin directed film. As the film opens, it is a little ambiguous as to whether it is going to take the comedic or dramatic route. Eventually it goes for laughs, but not the cheap kind – I think that this is definitely the best comedic script that the festival has seen over the first two nights. The film nailed the balance between heartfelt and big laughs and as such probably managed to be the biggest success in terms of marrying artistic quality with audience reaction so far.
Last night’s program was quite heavy on comedy actually. The Future, directed by Venetia Taylor, starts from a very cool idea, with one character (who has just accepted a marriage proposal) saying “I wish I could see the future”. And she does, right there and then in the restaurant. The film stays focused on its good premise and managed to be really quite a funny conversational style comedy. When the next film, animation The Deadliest Game fired up, I nerded out more than a little. A combination of animation & live action as well as melding a pastiche of old adventure films with sci-fi – count me in! I was really disappointed then when the film fell really flat. It did look amazing and really original, but the script was not able to back that up. The final film of the night did not have that issue though. I have already said that all the animated films have looked amazing so far, but I struggle to convey just how great The Missing Key looked. In all seriousness, if the next multi million dollar budget Disney flick came out looking like this film, I would be impressed. The old school animation design is really good, and there is a delightful attention to detail as well, with lots of jokes going on in the background. The basically wordless narrative is really well drawn out, and it finishes with a rousing concert sequence as well. Along with Cockatoo, this film was the highlight of the night for me.
That’s day two all wrapped up. Tonight’s day three festivities will see the finalist short film screenings, which promises to be an excellent line-up of flicks, followed by the Yowie awards presentation.
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Trailer for your Weekend: Stoker

I don’t really have any idea what the hell this is. But the bloke in it is Matthew Goode who features in the trailer.
I have to admit that I chucked this trailer on expecting John Cusack in The Raven lighthearted gothic stylings. That was until Nicole Kidman freaked the utter shit out of me in the trailer’s first 20 odd seconds.
After watching the trailer I am not entirely sure what to expect now. But I am intrigued. I am also intrigued by the strong Australian presence too. Kidman, Mia Waskikowska, Jackie Weaver and Matthew Goode who was so incredible in last year’s Burning Man all seem to be pretty major players in this (although I guess the latter is technically British). What do you guys make of this one?
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Blue Mountains Film Fest: Day 1 Recap
Last night saw the first night of screenings at this year’s Blue Mountains Film Festival. The screenings take place at Scenic World in Katoomba, and it is truly an incredible spot. The screen is backed by a drop off into a view of the iconic valleys of the Blue Mountains. The view on the night was made all the better by the flashes of lightning that occasionally illuminated the backdrop behind the films that were screening.
It was against this backdrop that the audience were treated to 12 films, from music videos, to zombie love stories and plenty in between. iMan kicked things off, a slick and rather humourous music video. Though I must admit that I struggle to recall what the song even sounded like, so dominant were the visuals. The first of the short films proper was the excellently titled How Many Doctors Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb, which featured popular Australian television actor Rob Carlton. The film was one of, if not the, audience hit, with abundant laughs ringing out. There is no doubting that there were some funny moments, but the film did veer into the obvious a little for me.
One of my favourite films of the first night was Cocked Up a very short, short animation about a rooster who has a rather too large bucks night and misses his wedding. The film was snappy, delightfully absurd and looked utterly incredible. The computer animation was really unique looking and brought a lot of life to the film. Cocked Up was followed by another of my favourites from the night – A Tale of Obsession, a dark tale with a really excellent script from writer-director Dave Wade. It starts with an awesome opening credits sequence, and continues into a tale of teen lust, love and obsession. This is the really well shot story of “the hottest virgin on campus” – the gun bloke on the footy team, and the young woman who yearns for him. And what a payoff! I definitely did not see that coming.
Length is an interesting issue when watching short films. One thing I noticed during the first night’s films was that the ones I enjoyed the most were those which did not overstay their welcome. An excellent example of this was Jack and Lily. This cool little love story captured that moment where girls go from an annoyance, to something worth investing time in. It was a really nice little tale, and best of all it told it’s story and left it at that. It was really nicely shot and realised that as a short film it had to hit it’s high note and then get out of there. A film which divided opinion on the night was the story of a girl and her teddy bear, entitled Albert and Juliet. Personally I really liked the film, which was based on a great premise. A teenager, living in a broken home, relies on the friendship of her teddy bear to get by, in the face of abuse by her alcoholic mother and peers who bully her. I thought this was an actually quite intense film, which despite overdoing the ‘shakycam’, engaged throughout. It was another film with an excellent ending, this time a rather crushing one.
Am I Okay was directed by Matilda Brown and stars Matilda Brown and Matilda Brown. It is a very interesting comment on contemporary life, with a patient talking to a therapist played by the same actor. The script muses on one’s place in the world, and a woman’s existential crises. The existential crisis that our modern world in many ways necessitates. Really quite ambitious for a short film and a fantastic, sharp script too. The night closed with another crowd pleaser (gasps count as crowd pleasing yeah?) as zombie love took place in Rotting Hill. The film was short and bloody, featuring some quite exceptional special effects. And once you have seen it, you will never see the iconic spaghetti scene from The Fox and the Hound quote the same way again.
Two more nights of short films and a day of features are still to come at this year’s festival so there is plenty to look forward to. Check out the view that greeted me from the window of my hotel room as I awakened this morning. This is what I trudged out in to find an internet cafe to share this update with you guys. I’m off back to the hotel for a warming whiskey.
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Head-On
Director Fatih Akin is a German of Turkish descent, and he examines this melding, blurring and clashing of ethnicities in all of his films. He does it excellently in The Edge of Heaven (2007) and rather blandly in the comedic effort In July (2000). In Head-On (2004) though he examines it through a quite confronting and very personal love story. And it is utterly brilliant, in my mind definitely one of the best films released since the turn of the millennium.
The two main characters Cahit and Sibel meet in a mental institution, both having been admitted following attempted suicides. Cahit is a drunkard, who has never gotten over the death of his beloved wife. The much younger Sibel feels utterly constrained by her traditional Turkish family in the more ‘western’, open society of Germany. She wants to go out and party, drink, take drugs and have lots of sex. All things which are frowned upon by her parents and domineering brother. In Cahit, she sees a way out – and proposes a marriage of convenience. It is from this starting point that Akin crafts a love story like probably no other, in which these two troubled people find some measure of redemption, perhaps not a final one though, in the sharing of their lives. If that sounds twee at all, believe me it is not. It is a rollercoaster ride where emotions are torn and blood is spilt with an intelligent, if perhaps not entirely crowd pleasing, ending. The journey taken by both characters feels real and the manner in which their relationship evolves is similarly satisfying. Cahit, perpetually hungover or drunk at the beginning of the film, is brought back into the world by the spirit of Sibel, though unfortunately the result of this is not always positive. Their relationship is a funny one in many ways and runs an entire gamut – from domestic bliss, to passion, to indifference, to childlike adulation, to jealousy, to tenderness, to lust, to anger. It is all there and none of it feels forced.
Technically, I think that Akin utilises music better than basically any other contemporary director. The film opens with a shot of a Turkish band playing, what I am guessing is, traditional tunes. This band delightfully reappears throughout the film. Akin uses them almost like chapter markers, delineating the film into digestible portions. It is always the same wide shot of the band playing, and the film closes with them taking a bow after their performance. This device is also backed up by the regular soundtrack which is sharp as a tack and enhances everything shown onscreen. The script is a fantastic one, and it is that which allows the film to avoid many of the trappings that the narrative could have allowed. This is dialogue with depth and with cutting intention that tells a story that is crammed full to the brim with emotion.
The film is graphically violent so may be confronting for some people, especially one scene involving wrist cutting and a couple of intense assaults. But none of it is in the least bit gratuitous. It is simply part of the cold world where Cahit and Sibel are desperately trying to find a place to anchor themselves. In comparison with Edge of Heaven, this film is less a broad study of multiculturalism and transnational identity. However the personal tale definitely sheds light on these things, and it is especially notable that neither main character can ground themselves in Germany and eventually return to their Turkish ‘homeland’.
If you haven’t seen Head-On then I strongly urge you to do so. It is a ride that will really pull you in and also make you think. It is not always entirely easy to watch, but then again many of the great films aren’t. But I genuinely believe this is one of the top 10 films made over the past decade and should not be missed.
Verdict: Longneck of Melbourne Bitter
Progress: 60/1001
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
My Favourite… Western
The Western is probably the most enduring and most popular genre in film history. Westerns have literally been made since the very birth of cinema and are still being made and reinterpreted today. So here are three different very different answers to the question, what is your favourite Western.
Tim from Not Now, I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie writes:
The John Wayne starring Stagecoach (1939), directed by the great John Ford, is my favourite of all classic Westerns. It many ways it is an archetypical example of the genre. All of the iconography is present – the semi-desert landscape of Monument Valley, Native Americans, coaches, horses, big hats, guns, sheriffs, gambling, damsels in distress – not to mention the presence of the most iconic Western star in history. But this is B movie iconography elevated to an A level standard.
There are a number of aspects that make this film stand out. Firstly the script. A lot of time clearly went into the screenplay and it shows. This allows the simple story of nine very different people on a fraught coach ride to end up being a whole lot more. Characters which are initially simplistic ciphers, gain depth as the film progresses and believable, complicated relationships are built between them. Ford also throws in some social commentary to boot as part of the main thematic concerns of the film. At the beginning of the film two characters, a prostitute and a drunkard doctor, are run out of town by the puritanical powers that be. Wayne’s character The Ringo Kid though cuts through all of this judgemental bluster accepting them all, especially Clair Trevor’s Dallas on their own terms as fellow travellers. There are also some potshots at big business and it appears that greedy criminal bankers were as big an issue in the late 30s as they are today.
The final standout feature of the film is the fine performance of John Wayne in his breakout role as a big Western star. His raw physical stature is backed up by some serious acting chops. His introductory shot as he waves down the coach, rifle in hand is a fantastic one and from there on in he is really at the core of the whole film. Toward the end of the film is an incredible large scale action set piece as the coach is chased down at full pace by the dreaded Apaches. It is an incredibly shot, actually quite lengthy sequence. It also features one of the most famous stunts ever committed to film. Stuntman Yakima Canutt, playing one of the of course nameless Apaches, falls down in between six horses and between the wheels of the coach rocketing along at full pace. It is quite stunning and more than a little death-defying too.
This is a cracker of a film, unfortunately somewhat hard to come by these days, but if you are a Western fan make the effort to track it down (although it is on Criterion Collection so if you are a major Western fan you can fork out for that). Here’s the fantastic theatrical trailer to whet your appetite in any case.
Tim Hoar is the creator and writer of this here blog you are reading. If you like it, then be sure to like it on Facebook here.
James from Film Blerg writes:
So maybe this is an odd choice, but I’m certainly not the first person to claim that Paul Verhoeven’s Showgirls (1995) is in fact a Western. Saige Walton first planted the seed in my head in a Censorship class at Melbourne University, the arguments of which can be found here. Walton surmises the Western genre and narrative conventions very succinctly: “Nomi travels from east to west, to the frontier city of sin; she mediates conflict, has her showdown with the bad guys and leaves town with order restored… wearing a cowboy hat.”
Nomi Malone (Elizabeth Berkley) arrives in the city of sin with a knife in one hand and steely determination in the other. Quickly landing a job in a mediocre stripclub, Nomi cunningly makes her way to the Stardust Casino, eventually understudying for Cristal Connors (Gina Gershon) after pushing her down the stairs, success rushes to Nomi’s door. The film takes a dramatic turn when Nomi’s close friend Molly is brutally beaten and raped after meeting a rock star idol. Not one for taking crap from anybody, Nomi puts on her bad ass boots and kicks the shit of the rock star abuser.
As Walton mentions, Showgirls sees Nomi in a place of ultimately maintaining order in a hostile and cutthroat frontier land of Las Vegas strippers. Exhibiting many masculine qualities while expertly displaying her physical (and tirelessly sexual skills), Nomi is subject to barroom brawls and catty fist fights of sheer willpower. Meeting her match in Cristal (her antagonist good vs bad opposite), Nomi sizes up the competition and then breaks it down, proving her alpha dog status.
Intently made to provoke audiences with an NC-17, Showgirls was the first major studio film to receive such a rating and still be released on a fairly mainstream level. Despite this, it tanked at the box office. Thanks to the allowances of VHS, Showgirls went onto have a fruitful cult afterlife and is considered by many to be trashtastic.
Showgirls can be best enjoyed with an audience, whether it is in a small group, or a class cult screening on the big screen. Drinking games accompany the film with shots raised when Nomi slaps somebody or when a pelvic thrust manically thrashes around in a pool.
If you’ve seen the film, then you can speak to its trashiness. Whether or not you enjoy the subtle levels of satirical exploitation within each dramatic body thrust or the campy fierceness that Gershon spews out with every line of dialogue is beside the point. It is simply put, an undeniable Western.
James Madden is the Editor of Film Blerg. He is currently undertaking a Master of Arts and Cultural Management at the University of Melbourne and is a Screen Editor of Farrago Magazine. James has contributed to countless student and online publications including Portable, T-Squat and Upstart.
Jon from The Film Brief writes:
There are so many reasons I love Sergio Leone’s The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly (1966). It’s a masterpiece from the first frame of the opening credits, which combines Ennio Morricone’s score (the best film score ever written, to my mind) with a brilliant, blood-spattered vignette that has since gone on to inspire any number of film-makers, perhaps most notably Quentin Tarantino.
It’s a masterpiece from the opening scene, which sets the scene magnificently in the barren, desolate landscapes of the old West (actually filmed at the Cinecittà studio in Rome). Early on in the piece, the story is framed as a battle of wits and brawn – not so much a good vs. evil battle (the man with no name is far too morally enigmatic to represent good) as a document of Darwinian survival of the fittest.
The film is the third and final chapter of the “Man with No Name” trilogy, directed by Italian auteur Sergio Leone. Upon its release, it redefined the Spaghetti Western in a way that its predecessors, A Fistful of Dollars and A Few Dollars More did not. I like the first two films of the trilogy, but The Good, The Bad and the Ugly, despite its still-shabby edges, is that much more crisp, that much more precise in its story-telling.
It is difficult sometimes to look past a film’s status as a genre-definer, and a must-watch for any even semi serious cinema buff. I watched The Good, the Bad and the Ugly for the first time nearly 40 years after it was made. Stratospheric expectations aside, this is an enduring masterpiece for the most basic reasons – a strong script with complex and well-drawn characters, and a master behind the camera who knows just the right way to capture his subject material. You simply must see this movie.
Jon Fisher is the creator and editor of The Film Brief and host of The Film Brief podcast which you can find on iTunes.
The Bergman Files: Prison
“Once he wrote a script about a girl named Birgitta Carolina. She went through the world as if living in a real-life morality play, encountering evil, oddity, degeneracy, poetry, and goodness. And the script ended with her finding salvation. In the final scene she stood singing in the uniform of the Salvation Army.” – Vilgot Sjoman on Bergman’s original script for Prison.
Watching Prison (1949) for the first time, one is immediately struck by the striking imagery that Bergman seeks out – a lone figure walking along windswept hills kicks the film off. He also seeks it out in a more creative manner than the rather straightforward shooting of his first five features. There are zooms, pans, close-ups and much more than we have seen from him previously. There are a number of possible explanations for this. Firstly, the budget of the film was exceedingly tight, so Bergman may be going to more creative lengths to try and make the film look good. Whilst this is part of it, I think the main reason is a heightened ambition on display from the great director. He seems to be challenging both himself and his audience with this film.
This ambition earned some goodwill from me toward Prison, but it only lasted so long. Unfortunately after the exhilaration of the first 15 or so minutes’ ambitious musings, the film becomes overly complicated and pretty underwhelming in general. The film is essentially a film within a film. Or at least I think it is. This device of a film within a film serves to distance the audience from what is occurring onscreen, resulting in scenes that should hold a lot of weight – the birth of new love and the tearing asunder of old – lack an emotional punch. When Bergman begins adding in flashbacks within the film within the film and dreams within the film within the film, things in the film just get altogether too dizzying to follow. I will not spoil the end of the film for those who wish to see it. But I will say that the ending mentioned in Sjoman’s summary above does not come to pass. Bergman was reputedly talked out of his original ending, convinced that it was too sentimental. I think this lack of conviction perhaps shows throughout the film, as it is a genuinely unfocused work.
As great a director as Bergman would go on to become, at this stage of his career he does not seem up to the challenge of handling this storyline. There is just too much going on here. The director in the film looks a lot like Bergman which suggests that the work is at least in part autobiographical. Add to this the scene involving a cinematograph, a favoured childhood toy of Bergman’s, and these suggestions grow even more overt. The storyline is attempting to be quite self aware and self referential in its construction. And the thematic concerns are not integrated as well into the core love story narrative as in a number of his other early works. Mortality, famously one of the director’s core thematic concerns, is much more prominent here but it also just feels a little out of place in many of the sequences. Again Bergman is confronting, here the exploration of abortion in Port of Call (1948) becomes an examination of infanticide. It is telling that whilst this part of the film shocks, as well it should, it does not have the resonance that it should.
This is Bergman’s best looking and most interesting film thus far, but it is also my least favourite them. The start of the film makes you suspect that he is going to deliver something great for the first time in his career. By the end though, you will just be unengaged and unenthused.
Verdict: Schooner of Carlton Draught
‘The Bergman Files’ Leaderboard
- It Rains on our Love (1946)
- Crisis (1946)
- Port of Call (1948)
- Music in Darkness (1948)
- A Ship Bound for India (1947)
- Prison (1949)
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Trailer for your Weekend: The Lone Ranger
There is no doubt that over recent years Johnny Depp has started to wear people down. The piss poor quality of the last two (three?) Pirates of the Caribbean films, and his collaborations with Tim Burton becoming more and more interminable had people a little over little Johnny.
But hopefully we will see a bit of a renaissance for Mr Depp, cause he is definitely a fine actor. The Rum Diary saw a really good performance by Depp as a world weary writer and he tries to continue in fine form with The Lone Ranger, directed by Gore Verbinski. Check out the trailer below and let us know what you think. The start makes it look like a high concept Western and only time will tell how serious they play this one and if Verbinski & Depp can pull this one off.
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
Worth Watching September 2012
Worth Watching:
- Bully (2011), Lee Hirsch – An intense and powerful cautionary tale. I don’t have kids, but I think this is a must see. Especially if your kid is an alpha male bullying prick. Or just as importantly, if your kid just does not realise the power of their words. A very well made and put together doco with an important message.
- Community Season 2 (2010), Dan Harmon – As good as, if not better than season 1. There is more comedic depth to the relationships now – the increasing exclusion of Chevy Chase’s Pierce, the continuing love affair of Troy and Abed and the ongoing will they, won’t they between Winger and most of the ladies on the show. A cameo by Betty White and lots of screen time for Ken Jeong’s Chang all add to the fun. As clever and funny as television gets, for me at least.
- Total Recall (2012), Len Wiseman – This is nothing special, but I mainly enjoyed it. I like the two contrasting worlds which were created. The grimness of the colony vs the overlording United Federation of Britain. There were a few very cool nods to the original, the rebooted security screening scene in particular. But like so many other films, it fades badly in the second half. Ok enough, but don’t rush out to catch it.
- The Rum Diary (2011), Bruce Robinson – Captures much of the spirit of Hunter S. Thompson’s book and is able to trim away characters without ruining the narrative. Johnny Depp is very good, not giving us the caricature of himself that he has churned out all too often lately. As a study of a struggling writer, the film is actually more successful than the book. Quite funny at times, but it is disappointing that toward the end it gains a very sentimental edge which is definitely not in the novel. A very weird final 15 minutes doesn’t stop this being a fun film with a distinctive attitude.
- Moonrise Kingdom (2012), Wes Anderson – A very Wes Andersony film from Wes Anderson. The man has shtick and it is very enjoyable here. This is a light story of first love and the battles it faces, driven by very good performances. The young leads make an extremely young love feel real, tangible & a little dangerous, just like the real thing. Ed Norton & Bruce Willis are the pick of the adult performances. The pastiche style does mean that the film is, intentionally I think, a little shallow. Their could be more heart here.
- The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (2012), John Madden – A bunch of pensioners seek to escape the dreariness of old age in Britain by emigrating to India. A stellar cast with Judy Dench, Tom Wilkinson and Bill Nighy being the best out of an incredibly good lot. So much better than I was expecting. A couple of really interesting characters and turns out to be quite a surprising film. I still find Dev Patel an annoying presence, but even he grew on me as this went along. A really enjoyable look at the intersection of two cultures.
- Arriety (2010) Hiromasa Yonebayashi – This Studio Ghibli film looks simply amazing. So much effort and care has gone into the miniature world that the tiny people populate and it is fantastic to see our regular world through totally different eyes. There is a delightfully languid pace in comparison to Western animated films and Arriety is a really cool, adventurous heroine. My only slight criticism is that it does pander to some Disney-esque tastes late in the piece. But overall, an awesome effort.
- Looper (2012) Rian Johnson – A very good film. Joseph Gordon-Levitt playing a younger version of Bruce Willis turns out as awesome as that sounds. The design of the whole thing is brilliant, it is an imaginative juxtaposition of old and new – Kansas farmhouses side by side with hover bikes. Unlike so many time travel flicks, the simple core story is well controlled. Thought the ramifications of it all due make your brain hurt a bit eventually. It also veers a little too much into The Shining territory toward the end, but an utterly brilliant conclusion ensures it ends on a high note.
Not Worth Watching:
- Love (2011), William Eubank – The preview for this came out of nowhere and blew me away. But after an awesome, Civil War set start, it peters out. Much of the narrative concerns a man lost in space with no contact with the outside work for 6 years. Which is apt because that’s how interminable this film is. Nothing happens. Some will try to convince you that it is making points about connection, isolation and the cyclical nature of history. But no one of this is there, cause nothing happens.
- Riders of Destiny (1933), Robert N. Bradbury – This is a real B Western. Mainly just cause the acting in it is truly abysmal. Already a little of Wayne’s aura is shining through, but very little else is worth remembering. Although the plot involving water rights is somewhat amusing given the current political debate here in Australia about exactly the same thing. There is a memorable chase scene involving a horse drawn water tanker too. But the concerning disregard for animal welfare of the horses in the film and the fact it is just so wooden throughout make this one you can do without. Although if not, here it is:
If you only have time to watch one Bully
Avoid at all costs Love
Like what you read? Then please like Not Now I’m Drinking a Beer and Watching a Movie on facebook here.
The Film Brief Podcast
Posting Jonathan Fisher’s entry into The Bergman Files earlier tonight made me realise that some of my newer readers may not be aware of the existence of The Film Brief podcast. So this is just a snappy little post to encourage you to check it out. The podcast is Jon’s baby which I am the regular co-host of. The format is always evolving, but currently consists of a review of a current cinematic release and something a little older. As well as the odd news tidbit and preview of upcoming releases.
Head over to iTunes and access the podcast here. Recent episodes focus on Looper and Moonrise Kingdom. I would also suggest you check out the episode where we discuss The Dark Knight Rises in which I masterfully parry all of Jon’s criticisms of the film with one sentence: “He’s Batman dude”. Check it out guys, and I would love to hear any comments or suggestions you have on the podcast.
To sweeten the deal, I will even throw in this adorable video of a Panda sneezing.
The Bergman Files Guest Post: Port of Call
Here is the fifth installment of The Bergman Files, this review courtesy of fellow critic Jonathon Fisher. Jon is the creator and editor of The Film Brief and host of The Film Brief podcast which you can find on iTunes. Thanks to Jon for the review, and be sure to check out his website and podcast (which he kindly lets me co-host).
“The only bit of Port of Call which I wrote–and which is bad anyway and clashes with the rest of the film–is the hero’s experiences when he gets drunk with a whore. It’s really a miserable piece of work, thoroughly stylized and semi-literary, utterly out of tune with the rest of the film.” – Ingmar Bergman in Bergman on Bergman
Bergman denigrates Port of Call (1948),or at least, his influence on the film, in the above quote and his attitude towards the film typifies its place within his canon. This was the fifth film by the great Swedish director, and it lacks the confidence and grace of his later works. On its own terms, though, Port of Call is an interesting watch, a fine drama that hints at the great career that was to follow.
The film begins with a tragic scene – an attractive young woman in a summer dress flings herself into the icy waters that surround an industrial Swedish port town. She is rescued, and carted off in a car, amid a ‘nothing to see here’ vibe from the townsfolk. This early scene hints at one (of several) distinctly Bergman themes that Port of Call touches upon – mental health, its fragility, and the indifference with which Swedish society wilfully regards it.
This young woman is Berit (Nine-Christine Jönsson), who we learn is plagued by any number of personal issues that would drive anyone insane, including a tense relationship with her immediate family, whom she feels abandoned her as a child. After her suicide attempt, she meets Gösta, a young sailor who has returned to land after a prolonged period of working at sea. They gradually fall in love, and Gösta struggles to come to terms with Berit’s history as she reveals her tortured past to him, piece by piece.
Port of Call is certainly identifiable as a work by Bergman. The psychologically tortured female protagonist, a male character who has difficulty dealing with the past, the edgy portrayal of sexuality and the struggles of working-class Swedes are all themes that the iconic director would return to, again and again, in his storied career. In this film, we get the sense that he is maturing. The characters are not as intricate, or portrayed as sympathetically, as in many of his other works. It suggests the talent that Bergman possessed at such a young age that even in a film that demonstrates his developing sense of character, that Port of Call still contains several scenes of elegance and beauty; the scene in which we meet Berit’s mother, for instance, or the final scene in which the lovers discuss their future.
It is telling that Bergman is reductive of his influence on Port of Call. Bergman was a notorious navel gazer when it came to his own work (which most film fans would agree was a good thing), and was brutally honest about his work. In this instance, it is as clear to him as it would be clear to audiences familiar with his body of work that in 1948, when Port of Call was made, he was a work in progress, both as a film-maker and as a man. His later career saw far more incisive investigations of mental health, sexuality, issues of faith and existential malaise, than this one. Port of Call is no classic Bergman masterpiece, but it tells us something of his development as a film-maker, and as such should be prized by any serious movie enthusiast.
Rating: Stubby of Reschs.
Tim says: I agree pretty much completely with Jon on this one. This is another minor early Bergman film, but the themes are coming through more and more strongly. Worth checking out for a Bergman buff.
‘The Bergman Files’ Leaderboard
- It Rains on our Love (1946)
- Crisis (1946)
- Port of Call (1948)
- Music in Darkness (1948)
- A Ship Bound for India (1947)






