tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post1156940436196197902..comments2024-03-24T20:15:00.996-04:00Comments on Critic After Dark: Playtime (Jacques Tati, 1967)Noel Verahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05904212081036547668noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-53261941842489402572016-04-18T00:13:54.192-04:002016-04-18T00:13:54.192-04:00That's one way. Another is high.That's one way. Another is high.Noel Verahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05904212081036547668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-28429072398344718282016-04-17T16:11:55.734-04:002016-04-17T16:11:55.734-04:00Best way to watch Tati is wasted.Best way to watch Tati is wasted.Kalkamanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00319744242973241576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-51155244112142618862012-04-12T01:05:36.799-04:002012-04-12T01:05:36.799-04:00Thanks. I think I joined it; if not, please let me...Thanks. I think I joined it; if not, please let me know...Noel Verahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05904212081036547668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-37938748065047751292012-04-09T09:44:46.726-04:002012-04-09T09:44:46.726-04:00Thanks for writing this lovely article. And thanks...Thanks for writing this lovely article. And thanks for loving his works as much as I do.<br />Tati's themes were so universal - an individual at the sideline watching society 'deal' with technology, something called communication, etc. Because that is also in Les Vacances / Mon Oncle and these were a success. But I think it's about the package ànd story: even less (apparantely) is happening in PlayTime compared to the other ones. Classic narrative structures so not followed, and editing replaced by sounds & visuals: hard to find broad audiences liking it...This is the way he wanted to make the movie. So you see, an Academy Award is no key to longlife success.<br /><br />For Hulot and Tati lovers to unite, I created this group on Facebook as an hommage. If you are interested, search for:<br />I'd like to be part of the Mr Hulot universe, even as a cardboard cut out.Ingrid Hoebennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-24042218451576125862008-10-01T20:21:00.000-04:002008-10-01T20:21:00.000-04:00You own or manage your own theater? Ah, life.You own or manage your own theater? Ah, life.Noel Verahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05904212081036547668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-85173057737134313622008-10-01T17:46:00.000-04:002008-10-01T17:46:00.000-04:00Oh, my God !What wonderful words about one of the ...Oh, my God !<BR/>What wonderful words about one of the most wonderful movies ever made. I love those five Tati films (never been able to watch 'Parade') and Play Time most of them all. Play Time was my first encounter with Tati, and the first time it was a disaster. I simply did not understand why first the man in the front raw was laughing, when noone else in the theatre did - a while later someone behind me were almost dying from laughter - and so on. "The funniest film in the world" it said on the poster. Well - to a 16 year young kid, who had not done his homework before meeting Tati, it sure was bad. Next day, the local newspaper claimed, I had never had so much fun in one night, and the reading learned me a bit about why. Of course, I went again a week or so later, after first consulting the library, which only had very little to show me about this not very productive director. Allready this second viewing was much better, and during the three weeks, Play Time was shown, I saw it four times, every time seeing something new. -I was beginning to learn. A year or so later, PT was shown as a reissue in a suburb cinema - and now for the first time here in 70mm. -Now I learned more. <BR/>There was only one 70mm print available in Denmark, and at the time, I got my own cinema - and had it equipped (1974) for 70mm projection, the distribution rights had expired, and the print had been junked !! -A new 70mm print from Play Time never reached Denmark, unfortunately.<BR/>The lot of Tati films have had several reissues in Denmark since then, and I run them all every time, knowing that each time it will be with red numbers in the account books. The Tati fans are not many hereabout. <BR/>To say, as Michael Sceff, that making this film in 70 does not make sense, is not true imho. You must remember, that during the sixties, 70mm presentation was the only way to give the audience the six-track stereophonic sound, that is an ever so big part of this very film. You could have 4 track on a 35mm print, but in a much lesser quality.<BR/>Having done Play Time in the nineties, or today with the possibilities of digital sound, would have been something complete different, and even how much I would love to watch or even run the film in 70, I'm quite content with the latest reissue, offering restored 35mm prints with DTS 6-track digital sound. -In fact, the sound discs are the same, if You run 35 or 70mm Play Time newest generation. The sound is marvellous, and result quite close to the ultimate. Even being a 70mm fanatic, I'am afraid not many in the cinema will think about (or miss) 70mm.<BR/>After reading this blog, I will positively consider running Play Tíme again, before the actual license period expire.<BR/>See You all in the dark, when it really is pure magic: -In the company of M. Hulot !<BR/><BR/>All the best<BR/><BR/>Per Hauberg<BR/>Malling Bio, DenmarkUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12982304060196855427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-63652831700788518712007-07-18T00:56:00.000-04:002007-07-18T00:56:00.000-04:00It's a valid response, Mike, but for my part, I li...It's a valid response, Mike, but for my part, I like follies and expensive failures, especially when they're committed by interesting artists, and when the failures of themselves are interesting. Coppola, for one is interesting enough, but his Apocalypse Now less so (I'm interested in seeing his One From the Heart again, though). I loved Altman's Popeye; I love Scorsese's New York, New York, or Spielberg's 1941.<BR/><BR/>Cahier du cinema had a term for that kind of film--'film maudit' or films that are so far out they weren't appreciated by their audiences at the time. Well, in the case of the abovementioned flms, they still aren't much appreciated, but I like to think the time isn't right yet.<BR/><BR/>And that's the case I suspect with Playtime. I love the gigantism, the 'overblown' look as you put it; part of the humor and pathos of the film is that the human figures look so lost in this world. Those little people among these huge buildings, that isn't right, and that's Tati's point, I submit. <BR/><BR/>And no, I don't think it's meant to be funny in a conventional sense, or even received in a conventional sense; I actually showed it to some kids and they seemed more receptive to what it was trying to do than any adult I know, and that, I think, is because kids don't really have the need for that kind of storytelling ingrained firmly in them. <BR/><BR/>I remember what had been written about Renoir's Rules of the Game, how the audiences booed and walked out of the theaters because it didn't meet their expectations of the time. The characters were too unsympathetic, the shots went on too long, the comedy seemed to make fun of everything, it wasn't the kind of French comedy they were expecting to see. <BR/><BR/>That's the problem with an experimental film, or a film out to break boundaries--the audience may not be ready for something too new. <BR/><BR/>And another thing--did you see Playtime in 35 mm? You said it was years ago, so I'm assuming it's probably on the big screen (either that or on VHS or Betamax). I keep hearing about how it should really be seen in 70 mm--well, that's what I write about.Noel Verahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05904212081036547668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-9943154060342144852007-07-13T13:26:00.000-04:002007-07-13T13:26:00.000-04:00I read your entire review of Playtime and very muc...I read your entire review of Playtime and very much liked the<BR/> comparisons <BR/>>with Kubrick's film. My favorite part of the film, and the only part<BR/> I <BR/>>like really, is the entire restaurant sequence. The M chair imprint on<BR/> all <BR/>>the backs of the women wearing low cut back dresses, the pole that<BR/> causes <BR/>>everyone to crash into it, the smashing of the front door, the fire<BR/> that <BR/>>destroys the place --- all hilarious. But in my view, other<BR/> considerations <BR/>>aside, the movie is a failure because the above-mentioned scenes are<BR/> pretty <BR/>>much all that's funny in a film that's supposed to be a comedy. The <BR/>>inside/outside shots of the skyscraper ground floor, very funny. But<BR/> that's <BR/>>about all. And what about the revolting sequence of drivers picking<BR/> their <BR/>>noses, etc.Not funny. I could go on, but I haven't seen the film for<BR/> so <BR/>>many years I can't really focus on any more specifics More than that,<BR/> <BR/>>something you didn't comment on is the overblown nature of the whole<BR/> thing. <BR/>> Aside from examples like the<BR/>> pie fight in Laurel and Hardy's "Battle of the Century", comedy<BR/> succeeds <BR/>>by being small. Certainly Tati's previous films each played on a very<BR/> <BR/>>small canvas. A weekend at the beach, a stay at an infernal modern<BR/> house, <BR/>>etc. etc. What has always troubled me about this movie is the<BR/> overblown, <BR/>>inflated ego behind itt. The building of Tativille, so costly and so <BR/>>unnecessary. Shooting the film in 70mm, as if it were an epic, makes<BR/> no <BR/>>sense. To me it simply implies ego out of control. And all of it<BR/> could be <BR/>>forgiven if the film were really funny, instead of (very) sporadically<BR/> <BR/>>funny. I don't know too much about the background of the making of<BR/> this <BR/>>film, but I bet it torpedoed his career After this, Playtime, then no<BR/> more. <BR/>> Anyway, that's my take on the film. What do you think. Best wishes<BR/> <BR/>>always, Michael ScheffAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-50937010906346116822007-07-08T23:18:00.000-04:002007-07-08T23:18:00.000-04:00First of all--thanks!Second, I imagine it's simple...First of all--thanks!<BR/><BR/>Second, I imagine it's simplest to write the dialogue, then have Kubrick coach his daughter to recite the lines, then using the most interesting takes. Most common way to direct children.<BR/><BR/>Third, I've always thought 2001 was Kubrick's coming-out film, where he shows his ultimate preference, as I put in <A HREF="http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/noelmoviereviews/message/34" REL="nofollow">this</A> and <A HREF="http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/noelmoviereviews/message/35" REL="nofollow">this article.</A>Noel Verahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05904212081036547668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12690266.post-13714683741100496942007-07-07T14:40:00.000-04:002007-07-07T14:40:00.000-04:00That was a fantastic piece of writing! I haven't s...That was a fantastic piece of writing! I haven't seen Playtime yet but this essay has inspired me to order a copy! <BR/><BR/>I do like 2001 as well though, especially the scene with the daughter on the video phone which seems the most spontaneous, human and natural performance in the film and which always leaves me wondering whether Kubrick gave the girl lines to read or whether he just asked her questions and got her to respond naturally and then wrote Heywood Floyd's dialogue around it (I guess it would be easy to find out if Bush Baby toys were around in the late 60s!)<BR/><BR/>I love Solaris too, and while it was conceived as a more emotion driven riposte to Kubrick's technologically driven film, I think they complement each other beautifully. Even though I agree with your points about the way technology is encroaching onto human presence and may eventually wipe all traces out 2001 captures that sense of wonder and excitement with our creations that can lead to that end.<BR/><BR/>It is a love letter to technology without shying away to its dangers, especially if it is watched in a double bill with Dr Strangelove which feels the exact opposite! (Crazy humans utilising impassive technology compared to 2001's impassive humans confronted by technology that is more emotional than they are!)<BR/><BR/><BR/>It makes me think that the emphasis on the astronaut's breathing is showing the last traces of biological humanity being stripped away, whether it is Poole having his air line cut by HAL or Bowman's breathing disappearing in the final scene as he ages in jumps.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com