Thursday, May 29, 2008

mumble mumble ego ego

Last night I went to Columbia to see Mister Lonely. Harmony Korine was there to do a Q&A after. Let's roll through the movie first, then the Q&A because both were rather wretched. First, the two people who had seen it before me and both recommended it DID NOT warn me of not one but TWO sexual assaults in the film. Graham and new Edward, its ok I forgive you although you dudes totally know my stance on that. The first one was a forced fingering - Charlie Chaplin on Marilyn Monroe (impersonators), and as he was doing it she was crying and he was saying "If I smell my finger will I smell Michael [Jackson]?" Sounds funny because its Michael Jackson right? Well when you see it, its not funny. Its fucking disturbing and poorly shot. Not that you can ever shoot a sexual assault well. But its focused on Marilyn's face of shame and desperation. Then when he's done he really does smell his fingers, and the idiotic art school audience fucking laughed. Yes because assault is so funny.

The second was an all on rape. Again, Chaplin on Monroe. In the film they are married, and he purposely lets her get super sun burned. Then he starts massaging her burn and decides to grope her breasts in what looked to be painful. He finally becomes totally animalistic and rapes her from behind. The camera? Yes, again, only on her face and her whispering "stop, stop, stop." It was grotesque and gratuitous, which really, is all I expect from Korine. I haven't been able to sit through or complete any of his films because I get so fed up with his obsession with showing sexual assaults.

I understand that rape and assault happen in life, I've had roommates be raped, I've been (minorly, if thats even possible) assaulted, its present. However, I truly believe that you can have a film that has rape and assault in it and NOT show it. If for some reason you absolutely must show it, I don't think you have to only focus on the women's agonized face for the duration of the scene. But all thats for another day.

Anyway, overall I'd say the film was my most favorite of Korine films in that I didn't absolutely hate ever second of it and I was able to finish it. The film has two main story lines. The first is about a Michael Jackson impersonator who goes to live in the French highlands in this castle of impersonators. It was pretty funny/poignant/disturbing all at once. The second was a story of these nuns who learn that they can jump out of planes with no parachutes and live. Werner Herzog is their priest. My favorite scene is from one of these jumps - the first 'jump' when the woman gets sucked out of the plane during a food drop and doesn't realize she may live. The sound cuts out to a droning fuzz, the visuals get skippy, its really well done. In that moment I had to admit that Korine has some talent beyond shock value.

After the film was a director's Q&A. I hate these. Always. It always ends up being a giant circle jerk around the director. Last night the opening question was just some Columbia undergrad art student who said "I'd like to thank you for making the ordinary extraordinary." GAG! Then the inevitable, "how did you get the film funded." Who the fuck cares? At least Korine said, "thats boring who cares, you get money from a buncha places" thank god he didn't explain it. Then more "this film was so inspiring what genre would you classify it as" and lots of questions that ended in periods. Some doof asked him what his views on marriage are and he said "I just work it down there, you know" referring to his dick. Lovely. Then of course the audience eats his shit up. He also said that he found Gummo to be a "series of great moments on film." Arghhh! How can he possibly think that raping a mentally disabled person on film is a great moment??? How much more ego can this ass get? He was so full of himself and so spoiled and so obviously getting high off these idiots who wished he would fill them up if ya know what I mean. In the end it seemed like a giant Korine bukkake, or as Graham said, a korkkake. No thanks.

I really wanted to ask him what his obsession is with sexual assault and why he has to include it in every one of his movies, but I was worried I'd get tomatoes hurled at me. Chicken.

Edward, Jennifer and I all noticed that the crowd seemed to have a sinister undertone in them. It didn't feel like the usual audience I'm around at a film, which only underscored my distaste of Korine even futher, that he'd have all these 'off' fans.

I went home and decided to watch a film to take my mind off my irritation. I got Kissing on the Mouth from netflix that day so I popped it in. Its a nice 76 minutes which filled the time before I had to sleep. This is Joe Swanberg's first film - the dude we saw at the Eustache film Wednesday and who did Hannah takes the stairs which I watched a few months ago. Kissing is part low-fi porn part insane amounts of self-absorbed dialogue, so like any other 'mumblecore' Swanberg film. I was wondering why I watch these. They aren't particularly good from a film standpoint. Its just a dude holding a camera and filming his friends improvising conversations. I decided that I watch them because they keep me company. It's like I'm sitting in the room with these people talking about relationships, sex, jobs, life only I don't have to put any effort into actually opening my mouth and forming words. Its just a bunch of self-interested introspective-to-a-fault 20somethings blabbing on and on and having sex thats probably not in their best interests long-term. Considering thats been me for awhile, minus having any sex (wah), its pretty cathartic to watch others talk about it.

I also find it refreshing to watch films with normal bodies. One of the main girls has nearly the exact same body as mine, pale pasty patches extra flab in some spots, hot in other spots, normal ole mid-20s body. You see her bruises on her body when shes naked, you see buried ancient stretch marks, pock marks, etc. Same with the dudes. They are like the dudes I see. Its nice to watch that. Also its very frank in body hygiene as it relates to sex - it shows in no nonsense terms trimming and shaving pubes in extremely close up detail. How often do you get to see that? I like that its there. Finally, its really weird to watch Swanberg masturbate to completion in the shower having just seen him the day before.

Labels: ,

7 Comments:

At 2:41 PM , Blogger I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! said...

I haven't seem the film, but I'm going to discuss showing sexual assault in films in general. Personally, as someone who is in the majority and has not been assaulted, I typically find focusing on the most painful aspect the most effective. Just as victims of any type of violence are probably more sensitive to cinematic violence, if the goal is to try to explore the pain and emotional baggage that comes with assault, then I think it is warranted.

Of course, if people laughed at it afterwords, that would piss me off too.

And for the record, I will ask just about any question to anyone if you bring me along in the future. "Hey Korine, how come you're so fucked up?"

 
At 2:42 PM , Blogger I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! said...

Forgot to click 'email followup'.

 
At 2:47 PM , Blogger rus-trilla make it rain said...

I agree that the most painful can be the most effective, but I don't think that film makers do it in a 'tactful' or appropriate way. And I don't think the majority of movie goers are processing rape scenes in the way you or I would (eg: let's take a critical look at this and explore xyz). I think most of them see a sex scene to be honest. And that disturbs me. Also it'd be nice if movies with rapes had that listed somewhere, like "trigger warning". A kid who's been kidnapped and tortured will know not to see kidnapper suspense movies so they can avoid triggering past emotions/events. A rape victim has a much harder time deciphering which movies to avoid so they dont have to be triggered since so many films, even the most innocuous, will have some form of sexual assault in them.

 
At 2:47 PM , Blogger rus-trilla make it rain said...

But thats me being the 'feminazi' free speech silencer huh :)

 
At 2:49 PM , Blogger I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! said...

I know this is somewhat ironic, but I bet there are some right-wing crazies who track all the bad stuff in movies. I will look on the internet.

 
At 11:09 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you should give the average movie-goer the benefit of the doubt. (re: how you interpret a sexual assault scene vs. how other people do)
Especially considering that the "average movie-goer" isn't seeing Harmony Korine's films and probably doesn't give a fuck who he is.

Your point is still taken, though.

 
At 9:47 AM , Blogger Yeah, nah. I'm a boss! I'm a businessman! said...

I think he's more tactful than Eli Roth or something. That shit is technically unsexual but potentially more damaging.

Sexual violence is a horribly ugly and tactless facet of our life. I think as a filmmaker you're allowed to capture or express anything you want. Even being tactless can be effective.

And yes, they should be judged based on what the choose to portray and how they portray it. You should have asked him about his handling of assault and sex--both together and separately. He probably wouldn't have had a bullshit, dick-related answer.

You actually probably see Ken Park because the difference between Korine and Clark's ways of dealing with the subject might make you appreciate HK's restraint in Mister Lonely...though every possible warning needs to be administered before that one. Because it's so graphic but also feels so eerily real.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home