June 11, 2005
A few things concerning two of the directors I list (on my bio on this site) as being some of my heroes:
I knew Bjork was doing music for her husband Matthew Barney's new film/installation, Drawing Restraint 9, but apparently she's in it too. These first images from the film - here and here - feature both of them, as well as Barney's other great love: petroleum jelly. They suggest that Barney is continuing the rich visual style he solidified in Cremaster 3, at least in so far as the posed photography goes. The film itself, which has something to do with Japanese Whaling (which I can only imagine/hope Barney deals with symbolically) is scheduled to premiere at an exhibition in Japan this summer (alongside all his previous, less cinematic Drawing Restraint pieces), so I supposed it must be done by now. When that same exhibition comes to the states - well, it would be worth a trip to New York just for that.
Whither, however, De Lamina Lamina and Hoist?
All of this Barney news, by the way, comes from Cremaster Fanatic, which I linked to once before, prior to the New York Times article that revealed that it was, in part, a big joke (something that becomes obvious if one pays attention to the 'fan art'), an art project in itself (sort of like the 'Edited-For-TV' version of Cremaster 5 that garnered attention at galleries). Nonetheless, it is consistently updated with (real) news, and as such it's a valuable resource.
This 1977 Rolling Stone interview with George Lucas is either essential or somewhat worth reading, depending on your point of view; but of particular note are his comments on Apocalypse Now, which he was originally supposed to direct instead of Coppola. He's spoken about it before (or since, I guess I should say), but here he says:
"It was really more of man against machine than anything else. Technology against humanity, and then how humanity won. It was to have been quite a positive film."
The interesting thing about this quote is that it is, almost word-for-word, precisely how he explains, in his commentary tracks for the films, the primitive closing battles of both Phantom Menace and Return Of The Jedi; obviously, he's had these concepts on his mind for a long time. And before one shudders at the thought of Ewok warfare in place of Coppola's Dantean vision, I'd recommend viewing the experimental anti-war film that he made around the same time that he was developing the Apocalypse script with Coppola, and which is available on the THX DVD - it's a very powerful and passionate piece of work, (and was a great inspiration when I made 2nd last year); and technically speaking, it's a 'positive' film, too.
Looking at all of this in context, the political subtexts of Revenge Of The Sith are really nothing new - they're simply more overt.
And as always, it's interesting to consider the possibility of him moving on; that's one of the the things he discusses in this Hollywood Reporter interview from the other day - this time with a few more details, such as budgets and timeframes.
I can't think of another filmmaker who has ever had the luxury of being praised for progressing back to where he once was, at least in the way Lucas has.
(How did the sun come up so quickly?)
Posted by David Lowery at June 11, 2005 5:05 AM
Comments
Concerning Lucas:
"It's about Ben and Luke's father and Vader when they are young Jedi knights. But Vader kills Luke's father, then Ben and Vader have a confrontation, just like they have in Star Wars, and Ben almost kills Vader. As a matter of fact, he falls into a volcanic pit and gets fried and is one destroyed being. That's why he has to wear the suit with a mask, because it's a breathing mask. It's like a walking iron lung. His face is all horrible inside. I was going to shoot a close-up of Vader where you could see the inside of his face, but then we said, no, no, it would destroy the mystique of the whole thing." -- from the 1977 Rolling Stone interview with George Lucas
That's interesting. I need to read more of the older interviews with Lucas. Man, it's like Star Wars fever all over again for me. I don't want to get into yet another prequel discussion necessarily, but man, Episodes I and II certainly didn't get me going like Episode III.
I'll probably analyze this article on my blog later, if time permits.
Also, David, if you're interested in the problem with technology that Lucas seems to be fixated on, read some Martin Heidegger; specifically, The Question Concerning Technology. Here's an excerpt:
"Everywhere we remain unfree and chained to technology, whether we passionately affirm or deny it. But we are delivered over to it in the worst possible way when we regard it as something neutral; for this conception of it, to which today we particularly like to do homage, makes us utterly blind to the essence of technology."
This article seems to summarize his arguement fairly well.
Posted by: Just another anonymous kook at June 11, 2005 12:15 PM
Thanks for that link. Heidegger's use of entymology and linguistics to derive the true root of a concept is especially appealing to me, as is this (as worded by the author of the article):
"It may be art itself that is now called upon by revealing to renew our trust in that which grants new revealings. This role is open to art because it is at once like technology, in that it is a destining revealing, and unlike technology in that it reveals things as beauty and not as standing-reserve."
Posted by: Ghostboy at June 12, 2005 4:23 AM
You really hit the nail on the head, David, concerning Heidegger's method. You might enjoy his other works, especially, Being and Time. I'll get you philosophizing yet! *laughs*
Posted by: Just another anonymous kook at June 12, 2005 6:24 AM