The Last Airbender

I approached The Last Airbender with good will and low expectations.  I’d seen and loved the three-season animated series, and I’d heard that the film was terrible.  Nevertheless, I wanted to give it a shot. 

It was fine.

The film errs in trying retell the entire first season of the animated series in an hour and a half, leaving us with a movie that feels more like a highlight reel than a self-contained narrative.  It also takes itself ever so seriously, eschewing comic relief or any sense of joy in favor of portentiousness.  Further, it tries so hard to make us believe in the tormented nature of its villain that the guy comes off as not particularly villainous at all – that’s no fun!

And yet, hey, I like these characters.  I enjoyed seeing their world presented in live action.  I’d have stuck around for the two sequels, had this film made enough money to justify them.  We don’t get enough kid-friendly action movies in the marketplace, and I was willing to enjoy The Last Airbender for trying to fill that niche.

Yes, it didn’t entirely succeed, but I still found it a pleasant way to spend an hour and a half.  Really, you could do worse.

Last Year at Marienbad

How do I get you to see Last Year at Marienbad without telling you anything about it?

This film rewards ignorance.  It doesn’t want you to know its synopsis, or what someone else thought about it, or why you should see it.  It’ll put you in a place where you may feel disoriented, uncomfortable, perhaps not entirely sane.  It’s not doing this because it’s a bad movie.  Alain Resnais does not make bad movies.  It’s doing this because it knows exactly, precisely what it’s about.

It’s stunningly beautiful and demands that you see it on the silver screen, but will abide a small-screen showing if you have no choice.  Its music will haunt you.  Its performances will stay with you.  It will tease you and delight you and make you glad that you watch good films.

And that’s it.  I’m done.  If you’ve seen Last Year at Marienbad, you know what I’m talking about.  If not, queue it up immediately and thank me later.  This film is just that good.

A Woman Is a Woman

One could view A Woman Is a Woman (Une Femme Est Une Femme), Jean-Luc Godard’s second film, as a bold experiment in filmmaking or so much self-important hoo-hah.  I think it’s both.

Here’s the deal:  Godard’s first film, Breathless (written off here), was a huge success, marking him as a major innovator of the French New Wave of filmmaking.  I think the experience empowered Godard and compelled to keep innovating, to keep finding new ways of telling a story.  With A Woman Is a Woman, however, his new way includes silly, distracting tricks and unflattering cinematography of ridiculous people making poor decisions.

What kind of silly, distracting tricks?  Early in the film, the lead character (Anna Karina – more on her later) passes behind a pillar and undergoes an instantaneous costume change, one on which she comments.  Thereafter, we notice every time she passes behind an obstruction, waiting a beat to learn whether she changes again.  It pulls us out of the movie.  Later, Karina and her dumber-than-rocks boyfriend have an argument with a silly gimmick: they aren’t speaking, so they pull books off their shelves and show one another words from the covers to express their feelings.  Give me a break.

What kind of unflattering cinematography?  In his later Vivre Sa Vie (appreciated here), Godard uses black and white film to make star Anna Karina an epic beauty of endless fascination.  Here, his choice of garish color accentuates Karina’s nicotine-stained teeth and makes us recoil every time she smiles.

And what kind of ridiculous people making poor decisions?  I can’t even describe the plot of this film without sounding needlessly condescending, so you’re going to have to discover that for yourself, should you feel so inclined.  Let’s just say that I couldn’t believe that any sane woman would do the things Karina does in this film, and I’m not sure whether Godard expected me to.

So why call this a bold experiment, or even anoint it as hoo-hah, when it seems so obviously a failure?  I think we can do so because Breathless indicated a filmmaker capable of crafting a coherent and well-designed film, and Vivre Sa Vie indicated a filmmaker capable of crafting a masterpiece.  I think Godard was in control of his material, and I think he was feeling sufficiently self-important to try new ways of telling a story and showcasing characters.  Sometimes, experiments fail: A Woman Is a Woman was such a time.

Unstoppable

I can't top Joe Lefors's thoughts on this film.  With his permission, here they are:


I just watched this movie, and it was awesome.
Things that could not stop the train:
*The fat guy from Remember the Titans and other movies where he played a fat guy.
*HUD from Cloverfield.
*A redneck welder with a large pickemup truck.
*Many, many people on walkie-talkies.
*A horse trailer.
*A train full of schoolchildren.
*A device specifically constructed to stop trains that will not stop.
*Rosario Dawson's saucy attitude.
*Helicopters.
*A dude being lowered from helicopters.
*MACHINE GUNS
*Boxcars on the tracks.
*A sharp turn in the tracks.
*Another train attached to the back of the train.
Things that could stop the train:
*DENZEL
*That guy who played Captain Kirk in the GayGay Abram$ Star Trek where the ship was built on land 

Easy A

In Easy A, Emma Stone plays the daughter of Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson.  I was already a Stanley Tucci fan and a Patricia Clarkson fan – I’m now an Emma Stone fan, as well.

Here’s the setup:  Stone plays Olive, a nerdy high school girl who’s embarrassed to admit to her best friend that she stayed home all weekend.  She concocts a story about a first sexual experience with a college boy, and she soon finds herself with a “reputation.”  One thing leads to another, and before she knows it she has a client list of social outcasts for whom she provides stories of imaginary sexual acrobatics in return for things like Bed Bath & Beyond gift cards.  As one can imagine, things spin out of control.

Holding it all together is Ms. Stone, who gives Olive a sweet combination of brains, comic sensibility, and pluck.  Stone, who was fantastic in Superbad and Zombieland, rolls into the A-list here, holding her own with Tucci and Clarkson and lighting up every minute she holds the screen.

Easy A is funny and brisk and thoroughly enjoyable, and much of that is due to Stone’s Charisma.  I understand she’s going to play Gwen Stacy in the new iteration of Spider-Man.  For the first time, I’m interested.

Black Orpheus

What a bold gambit: retell the story of Orpheus and Eurydice, set it in Brazil at Carnival, and infuse it with the rhythms of one of South America’s most vibrant cultures.  And what a payoff.

First, to recap the Myth of Orpheus and Eurydice (Thanks to Edgar and Ingri Parin D’Aulaire’s Myths of the Greeks and Romans.  If you don’t own a copy of this book, there’s something wrong with you.):  Orpheus, the great musician, loves Eurydice so deeply that when she dies, he goes all the way to Hades to bring her back.  The Lord of the Underworld permits her to follow Orpheus to the land of the living, on one condition: if he turns back to look at her, she’ll be lost forever.  Can he resist the temptation and gut out the journey to the surface, knowing that Lord Hades is a master of the doublecross?  Go buy a copy of the book and find out for yourself.

Black Orpheus spends much of its running time setting up the love between Orpheus, a trolley conductor, and Eurydice, a country girl come to Rio to escape a menacing gentlemen she lost in the backcountry.  The couple make an average looking pair, but I challenge any man to look upon Eurydice deep in sleep, her contented face haloed with tousled hair, and not see the great love of his life at the moment he knew he loved her.  Orpheus does.

But the man from the country finds them, finds them both.  He moves like a dancer and wears a death’s head mask and we’re not sure if he’s entirely corporeal.  But we do know that Eurydice’s time draws nigh, Carnival or no, and Orpheus’s quest will soon begin.  When it does, the film detours into a quasi-nightmare world, one of ferrymen and Cerberus and Eurydice, poor Eurydice, begging Orpheus not to look behind him.  It’s captivating and disturbing and unforgettable, and it works on every single level.  Black Orpheus will intrigue you and it will haunt you.  It will make you want to purchase a copy and press it into the hands of your friends. 

See it soon.

Space Battleship Yamato

Listen up, Nerd Nation: Space Battleship Yamato was designed specifically and precisely for you.  It is absolutely, positively, 100% nerd bait: filled with stuff that’ll push your buttons.

Naturally, I loved it.

First, it’s from Toho Studios.  As every nerd worth his GPA knows,  that’s the home of Godzilla and The Seven Samurai, Steamboy and Ikiru.  Second, it owes its production design to the ‘Battlestar Galactica’ reboot, which was the nerd television event of the last decade.  Third, and most importantly, it rips off Star Wars with more style than Lucas did.  This movie has it all: hotshot fighter pilots who must learn the meaning of responsibility, inscrutable aliens out to destroy the planet, and even a beautiful but straight-laced love interest who’s just one kiss away from melting into a soft-focus fantasy woman.

Space Battleship Yamato delivers all of this on a good-enough production budget.  It showcases performers such as The Hidden Blade’s Reiko Takashima, Sukiyaki Western Django’s Toshiyuki Nishida, and 2046’s Takuya Kimura.  And it does it all in a tone that makes it of a piece with any good space adventure movie you can recall.  It’s light, it’s fun, and it knows exactly what it’s about.  It’s nerd bait, sure, but consider me hooked.  

Animal Kingdom

Animal Kingdom is a horrible slog.

The film, set in the lower-middle-class world of a family of Australian bank robbers, tells the story of a 17 year old boy.  The boy finds himself immersed in this world, and he must learn to negotiate it.  The character, played by James Frecheville as a large, awkward kid just a few protein shakes away from hulking, is as dour and confused and scared a protagonist as you’re likely to find in a major crime film.  Oh, and he hides all this dourness, confusion, and fright behind a mask of emotionless indifference.

Listen, if I want to spend an hour and a half with dour, confused, and emotionless adolescents, I’ll volunteer to help out at my local high school.  I’m watching a movie, here: entertain me.

So anyway, Animal Kingdom’s got this kid and he’s frightened and withdrawn and all that.  Not much fun, right?  Well, at least the movie makes up for with a grainy look, an ugly color scheme, and absolutely zero comic relief.  I mean, come on – this thing’s a homework assignment, not a night at the pictures. 

Is Animal Kingdom well played?  Sure.  Does it do all the things it tries to do?  Yes.  Is it a grind?  Absolutely.  Animal Kingdom is the longest, most painful grind at the movies that I’ve experienced in quite some time.  Pass this one by.

127 Hours

127 Hours is fantastic!

If you’d told me that you could make a movie about a guy who gets stuck in a crevice for five days anything other than a tedious, painful slog, you’d have lost me.  But 127 Hours starts with a bang and propels us through an ordeal of thirst and increasing desperation with, dare I say it, verve and aplomb.

Here’s the setup: James Franco plays a fun-loving guy whose idea of a good time is heading out to the desert and biking, running, and climbing on his own.  Clearly, this character hasn’t seen any Werner Herzog documentaries, or he’d know that nature is intrinsically out to get him and he should never venture out without a buddy, a plan, someone who knows where he’s going, some signal flares, and maybe a short-wave radio.  Nevertheless, Franco’s a likeable fellow who appears to mean well, so we forgive.  While running along, he misjudges the stability of a piece of sandstone and falls into a crevice.  The piece of sandstone falls on top of him, pinning his arm to the crevice wall.  He’s alone.  He’s stuck.  He’s screwed.

Here’s the slog part, right?  Not at all.  Director Danny Boyle uses music, creative and exciting camera work, and a smartly crafted screenplay to keep us absolutely riveted on this story.  Franco tries various schemes to free his arm.  He deals with limited mobility and a dwindling water supply.  He hallucinates, he panics, he gets himself back together.  Ultimately, he decides he must cut his arm off to get free, then realizes that he’s dulled his knife by chipping at rock.  Now what?

This is powerful, exciting stuff, held together by Boyle’s virtuoso directing and Franco’s extraordinary performance.  I didn’t think I could spend an hour and a half with a guy pinned by a rock, but 127 Hours not only makes it work, it makes it pop.  127 Hours is phenomenal.

Hereafter

Clint Eastwood’s Hereafter tells three tales separated by time, distance and class, ties them together at the end, and leaves us feeling like we never really got into any of them.

In Tale 1, a beautiful and rich Frenchwoman has a near death experience and embarks on a journey of discovery about what we think we know about the afterlife.  In Tale 2, a boy loses his twin brother in a tragic accident and deals with the disillusionment that comes from seeing a variety of frauds who claim to be able to help him get in touch with his beloved sibling.  In Tale 3, a legitimate psychic tries to run from his gift because it’s virtually impossible to build a life when you spend all your time working with the dead.

Here’s the problem: unlike, say Amores Perros, which juggles its tales in a way that keeps us invested in all of them simultaneously, Hereafter makes us wish the damn thing would settle down with one story and tell it properly.  Just as we get in to a particular character’s life, the film changes focus and we feel frustrated.  Hereafter would have been much better served by telling its three stories one a time, then putting them together in last 15 minutes. 

I like Clint Eastwood.  I like this film’s performers.  I’d have loved to have gotten lost in Hereafter.  But this film errs in its structure, and it doesn’t work as well as it could.  Bummer.

Made in Dagenham

I’d watch Sally Hawkins walk her dog. 

This is not a beautiful or glamorous woman, but I’d have a thousand dinners with her before I’d so much as share a happy meal with Angelina Jolie.  Hawkins has an intelligence and vitality that makes her absolutely fascinating. 

In Made in Dagenham, which tells a true story, Hawkins plays Rita O’Grady.  In 1968, O’Grady led the women of the Dagenham Ford plant on a strike for a revolutionary proposition: equal pay for equal work.  It was something nobody else was even thinking about – most people just accepted that women should make less than men because, well, because that’s the way it had always been.  The film takes O’Grady from just another happy worker to full-fledged labor leader, and it shows how she grew into the role while maintaining her decency and discovering her extraordinary ability to lead.  Working with Albert Passingham (the brilliant Bob Hoskins), she carried her fight all the way to the top levels of British government and won.  She won because she was right, but she also won because she realized she could.

Hawkins endows Rita O’Grady with all the traits of an outstanding leader: drive, vision, empathy, organizational skill, and the ability to make her case.  She’s a pleasure to watch, and she transforms Made in Dagenham from just another earnest biopic to a bright, compelling, and wildly entertaining time at the movies.  I loved Made in Dagenham, and I can’t wait to see what Hawkins does next.

The King's Speech

The King’s Speech is a therapist movie, and such films rely on the skill and charisma of the actors playing the therapist and the patient.  This film has Geoffrey Rush and Colin Firth, as fine a pair of performers as you’re going to find working on the big screen, and they acquit themselves with professionalism and class.

In fact, The King’s Speech reeks of professionalism and class.  It’s like Masterpiece Theater on a big-screen budget.  And that’s fine and all, but I couldn't help feeling that the movie had no soul.  The King’s Speech hits every mark and feels very slick, and it is what it is.  If nothing else, it’ll remind you why you think so highly of Rush and Firth.  That’s ok, but I think that I’ll barely remember this film ten years hence.

Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work

“White.  All this white.  This is what Hell looks like.”   Joan Rivers pages through an empty appointment book.  Comics’ careers run hot and cold, and Joan’s been on a cold streak for some time.  Yes, she still lives in high style.  Yes, she can still fill a casino theater in South Dakota.  And yes, she’s still wickedly funny.  But, says Joan, “A career in the entertainment industry is a career in the rejection industry.”  Joan soldiers on, but the rejections are piling up.

And so goes Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work, a sojourn in the life of a performer who loves her craft and is so good at it that she can’t stop just because bookings are low.  Yes, she needs to earn enough to maintain her lifestyle.  However, there appears to be no Joan Rivers other than the Joan Rivers who’s either writing jokes or reviewing jokes or producing or performing or doing something to keep her in the public eye, to tell her that she’s loved.  She knows she went to far with the surgery and she knows that some consider her a relic.  Yet, George Burns performed well into his nineties.  Joan would consider that a pretty nice life.

Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work pulls us into Joan’s world and gets us to see past the surgery into the heart of a workhorse.  Laugh-out-loud funny, it records failures and successes both, while giving us a retrospective of Rivers’s career as a groundbreaking comic who walked away from her anointed position as Johnny Carson’s successor and who, in some ways, never recovered from that decision.  It’s engaging and fascinating.  It makes me want to see her perform in concert.  It turned me into a fan of Joan Rivers.

Hiatus

Hi there,

I'm in Japan right now, helping out with the relief effort.  As you may expect, the time I can devote to seeing and writing about movies has declined considerably.

I look forward resuming this blog when the situation stabilizes and free time becomes more abundant.  Until then, I invite you to peruse the archives.  You may discover something!

Best,
Alex

Hell Comes to Frogtown

Hell Comes to Frogtown: the title alone tells you whether you’re in or you’re out.  Me?  I’m in.

Rowdy Roddy Piper stars as Sam Hell, the only potent man left in post apocalyptic Ventura County.  Sandahl Bergman is the woman charged with leading him on a raid of Frogtown, where mutant amphibians hold a harem of fertile young women hostage.  If you’re still around, you’re in for an hour and a half of cheesy gags, skimpy costumes, bad acting, and poorly done action.  You also get Rory Calhoun as an old prospector, excellent mutant frog costumes, and a climactic fight on the famed Star Trek Cliffs.  What more could you want from a movie called Hell Comes to Frogtown?

Marty

I like Ernest Borgnine.  This guy looked in a mirror one day and didn’t see a short, fat, ugly-lookin’ dude who’d probably go nowhere in the entertainment industry.  He saw an actor, a guy who could make it, and he took his shot.  His first film credit dates from 1951, 6 years after he helped save the world by serving as a Gunner’s Mate (1^st Class) in WWII, and he’s been working ever since.  Most recently (at age 93), he had a key supporting role in last summer’s RED, the movie about how great Helen Mirren looks in a slinky white dress.  Ernest Borgnine is a hero.

Marty, which won Best Picture for 1955 and for which Borgnine took home a Best Actor award, shows us why the man succeeded, and continues to succeed, in his chosen profession.  The film is the story of a man who learns to stop seeing the world through the eyes of others and start seeing for himself.  It’s standard coming of age material, but Borgnine sells it with sincerity and goodwill.  When Marty agonizes over whether to buy a butcher shop, we want him to succeed.  When Marty rescues a sobbing woman who’s just been ditched at a local ballroom, we wish we could show that kind of class in a tough situation.  When Marty tries to balance the demands of his family, his friends, his profession, and his heart, we know something’s going to drop; and we care a lot about what does and what doesn’t.

This isn’t to say that Marty is perfect.  The film, written by Paddy Chayefsky, can veer into the kind of writerliness that may feel right onstage but that, onscreen, feels stilted.  Further, its ending took me by surprise: the credits rolled just as I was settling in for a third act.  Yes, this may be a movie about Marty’s choices, but I wanted to see the results of those choices, the complications they’d cause, and Marty’s way of resolving them.  I wanted a sharper climax, one that would give me a greater sense of closure. 

Nevertheless, I’ll look back on Marty with fondness.  The film allowed me to spend an hour and a half in the company of a guy who wasn’t the handsomest fellow on the block, who wasn’t the smoothest talker, who wasn’t the center of attention.  It allowed me to spend an hour and a half with the best, most decent guy around.  It allowed me to spend an hour and a half with Ernest Borgnine. 

That’s time well spent.

PS  There’s a whole other storyine here about Betsy Blair, the actress who played Clara, the love interest.  The Black List had effectively ended her career when her husband, Gene Kelly, threatened to make no more films for MGM if she didn’t get the part that would eventually land her a Best Supporting Actress nomination.  Her Wikipedia page, linked here (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0086198/bio), provides some details of a life lived with principle and passion.

Toy Story 3

They made Toy Story 3 for kids, right?

They animated it with pretty colors and they used established characters from the first two Toy Story films, which definitely felt like kid-friendly fare.  They set much of the action in a day care center, and they used a fuzzy purple teddy bear for a villain – how much more kid-friendly could they get?

A lot more.  In fact, I rate Toy Story 3 as the most terrifying kids’ movie since Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (You remember Chitty: the Andrews / Van Dyke Disney romp that featured a child abductor who haunted preadolescents’ dreams for years).  The themes center on loss and betrayal and the slow, mortal march of time.  The day care center becomes a chamber of horrors that will make a generation of children scream in dismay at the prospect of spending time anywhere similar.  The visuals include a creepy baby-doll who looks like something out of a Romero film, a gelatinous octopus that’d make Lovecraft shriek, and a Daliesque animated tortilla with Potato Head features that weaves and lurches in sickening contortions.  Don’t even get me started on the aforementioned villain, an evil good ol’ boy of a bear (brilliantly voiced by Ned Beatty) who represents everything wrong with authority and everything to fear in those who promise to look after you.

Here’s the deal: the first films’ Andy’s all grown up and ready to head off to college, and his toys find themselves in a box dropped off at the local day care.  Things seem lovely at first, but it isn’t long before the true nature of the facility reveals itself.  Can our heroes escape?  With Andy leaving them behind, to what do they have to escape?  Why bother?

We’re talking about some dark stuff.  Combine it with some of the film’s unnerving visuals and scary sequences, and I can’t imagine showing it to anyone under the age of ten.  Hell, just writing about Toy Story 3 creeps me out all over again.  If this is a kids’ movie, I’d hate to see what Pixar can put together for adults.

The Town

Brilliant writer and great guy Les Phillips has allowed me to run his review of The Town.  Enjoy.

===

THE TOWN (2010, directed by Ben Affleck).  Ben Affleck has become a really excellent director of action.  I don't mean asteroids 'n' scary monsters; I mean his presentations of robberies, gunfights and car chases make them new, with special rhythms and angles.  They look and feel like nothing you've seen.  And Ben loves Boston (and Cambridge).  His footage of the city is special too; the camera lingers on the geometry of the downtown skyline, or it pauses for a second to revere the Bunker Hill Monument, or observe something as small and particular as the toll booth on the Tobin Bridge.  Affleck films a robbery and getaway in the North End, one of the oldest neighborhoods in America, and somehow he fits all the energy and violence into its tight old streets and alleys.  Those sequences are both engineering and filmmaking; it's impressive film art.  The director proved with his first film how well he understands poor white Boston; he "gets" the sociology of Charlestown perfectly.  And, of course, he's Ben Affleck, so they let him film at Fenway Park.

THE TOWN has some absolutely wonderful performances.  Rebecca Hall is superb.  She plays a bank manager, one of the random young professionals who've moved into Charlestown's gentrified sector, in the neighborhood but certainly not of it.  She falls in love with a bank robber -- that would be Doug MacRay, played by Ben Affleck. Why would she fall for a criminal from the 'hood?  Hall makes it more than plausible; we see a refined young woman who's also more than a bit lonely, carrying around some incompleteness that's waiting for somebody to come along.  Pete Postlewhaite is a florist who also happens to be the local crime lord, and he is the most menacing, purely evil florist in all of recorded history; he's a quiet, suggestive Irish serpent.  Jeremy Renner is an utterly convincing Boston boyo, vigorous and vulgar.  Blake Lively has the druggy-slutty girl role, and she makes the most out of her minutes on screen; she's brash, wounded and sorrowful.  I haven't even gotten around to Jon Hamm and Chris Cooper, who are just as fine.  This cast is a tremendous embarrassment of riches, and Affleck makes the most of them.

So there are great visual moments, many fine pieces of acting, many fine scenes.  What's missing from THE TOWN?  A screenplay good enough to weave all this humanity into a persuasive narrative, and deep enough to highlight the moral resonance that's only touched on.  There are several little speeches where characters tell their backstories -- how Doug MacRay lost his mother, how his sidekick has always searched for a family.  But all of these speeches are thin, cliche, sentimental.  THE TOWN announces itself as a story about a community where crime is the dominant art and craft, handed down through generations; about mere theft that escalates into a series of murderous rampages; but there's no moral urgency, no gravity.  When all is said and done, this is a story about some bank robbers.  Also missing:  the central performance that could anchor the film.  Doug McRay is Charlestown's representative man; he's got to embody all the pain and conflict of the cursed reluctant criminal, acting out his fate.  Affleck spends much of his screen time reacting, furrowing his brow, speaking the lines; he's not awful, but he never finds the character.  He's occupying space that needs a great performance.  Affleck can be a fine actor, but he doesn't deliver here.

Ah, but Affleck the director!  GONE, BABY, GONE was a pleasant surprise.  THE TOWN is much more than that; this is a director with real vision and imagination, first-rate talent with actors.  THE TOWN is not quite Affleck's breakthrough, but the next film might well be.

Vivre Sa Vie

You know how, in most films, the camera remains unobtrusive?  Sure, it’s your magic eye into the lives of the people whom it observes, but you don’t notice it.  It’s just there.  In Jean-Luc Godard’s Vivre Sa Vie, the camera is practically a character.  It jostles for a better view of the proceedings.  It looks around when it loses interest in the actors.  At one point, it rat-tat-tats across a room when automatic gunfire stitches the background.  Watching Vivre Sa Vie makes us feel not like an omnipresent god sitting in judgment, but like an invisible sprite in the room.  Occasionally, people even look right at us.  People’s eyes wander, after all.  Why not in our direction?

This sprite the camera makes of us has an obsession: Anna Karina, star of the film and one of the most mesmerizing women ever to flicker on a movie screen.  It can stare at her for minutes on end.  It can stare at her profile, at her full face, at the back of her head while she speaks with someone else.  Occasionally, Anna stares at it, and us, and our secret gaze projects on her what we will.

Anna’s character, Nana, is a loathsome human being.  She’s selfish and stupid and, as near as I can tell, makes not a single good decision during the entire film.  We meet her as she’s meeting with her husband.  She looks at a photo of her child, then discards it.  She tells her spouse that there’s no point in her coming back: she’d just cheat again.  She’s bad at her job.  She’s behind on her rent.  She’s finding that beauty will only get her so far, and eventually it gets her on what we’ll politely refer to as a “walking street.”  With any other observer, perhaps with any other actress, we’d soon dismiss Nana.  But our invisible sprite loves her, weeps for her, never ceases in its fascination with her.  It pulls us in, focuses us so completely on her that we, too, begin to border on obsession.

And when the camera finally closes its eyes, unable to take any more, we’re left wrenched and lost and devastated.  In 1987, Wim Wenders made a film called Wings of Desire about the angels who follow us and love us and weep for us.  25 years earlier, Godard embodied that angel with a camera and made Vivre Sa Vie.  This is what it’s like to bear witness.  This is what it’s like to love without condition.  This is what it’s like to gaze with the angels’ gaze.

You must see it.  You must experience Vivre Sa Vie.  You must.