Well movie reward season is on my mind, and I wanted to do another Oscar type blog. But frankly, I don't have much else to say. You can check out what I said here and here. And to the Academy's credit, this year's ceremony was a step further in the right direction. We have an Academy Award ceremony that celebrated more diversity, avoided cringy bull shit, and for the most part gave recognition to quality films. Although, they will never be perfect. Yeah, I noticed you snubbed RRR for Best Picture. That wasn't right. But point is, I don't have anything new to address regarding the Oscars.
So instead, I am going to talk about another film buff circle jerk talking point, the Sight and Sound Top 10.
For the uninitiated, the S&S Top Ten is a poll of movie critics taken every ten years that simply decide which films are the greatest. The intent is that every ten years, the list would reflect the culture and tastes of the film community.
Like the Oscars, Sight and Sound faced its own criticisms that were somewhat similar. The films largely represented white males. And nothing against the film critic, but they don't reflect well to the general tastes of the film community. I'm not saying Harry Potter or some shit should be on there, but I understand how the Sight and Sound poll can feel elitist to some.
It felt extra apparent last year as the latest list had a historical shuffle in the top rankings. For only the second time since the poll's history, the discourse for the top spot wasn't dominated by Citizen Kane or Vertigo, it was this film. A film from my perspective came out of nowhere. A non-American, experimental film, and it's a film directed by a woman and has a female lead. And once the word woman got into the discourse, you know the Internet was jumping on that shit like a noble soldier on a unpinned grenade.
Now like I said, I never heard this film until this poll, so I had no stake in this fight. But, I was curious what made this particular film special. There are plenty of films that both were directed and starred women that could theoretically take the top spot such as Cleo from 5 to 7 and Twilight, so why this film in particular?
To answer the question of whether I am a sexist or a woke snowflake, I have watched Jeanne Dielman to give you my full review. Hold on, let me get my pretentious film critic glasses, they always put me in the mood.
...
Anyway, Jeanne Dielman (23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles) is a 1975 film directed by Chantal Akerman. The film is simply about a widow who resorts to sex work to pay the bills, but the synopsis rarely reflects what you actually watch in the movie. What you mainly see is her slice of life. And unfortunately, she isn't a Kardashian, so her slice of life is purely layman depictions of life from cooking food, doing laundry, to quietly sitting in a chair contemplating what the hell went wrong in her life.
It's interesting that this film is the third contender of "greatest film of all time" as it compares and contrasts nicely to Citizen Kane and Vertigo.
If you watched this film, chances are you are an experienced film buff. And by now, you should know cinematic language operates on a realism spectrum. To use an example, Vertigo may lean on one extreme with its liberal use of colors and surrealism. Citizen Kane falls somewhere in the middle with its journalistic progression mixed with noir stylings.
Jeanne Dielman is the complete opposite of Vertigo in terms of cinematic language. I don't know the MO behind this film, but I like to think they wanted to make the most uncinematic, unentertaining, and unstylish film imaginable. The film received mixed reviews upon release. And frankly, I probably would have disliked the movie if it hadn't already developed this reputation as a masterpiece.
This is the type of arthouse movie that asks a lot of patience from its viewers. But unlike other slow burn movies, say Bridge of Spies for example, you aren't rewarded with mild disappointment but with one of the most compelling pieces of filmmaking I have ever seen.
Rather than talk about the themes, I am more drawn to the question of what makes Jeanne Dielman so gripping despite being, intentionally I might add, immensely boring. What's the magic trick I sometimes ask when confounded by films like this.
I think it really puts you in the mundanity of this character's life. You see practically every minute detail all except her bathroom breaks which is pointedly omitted despite the basic human practice reasonably omitted in every traditional film. That's how mundane this film is. You recognize the omitted parts of her other life that are equally as mundane.
But going away from the vulgar quality that we don't see Jeanne Dielman take a shit, the mundanity also connects with how we as humans experience time and our daily lives. We don't register the time it takes to fold clothes and buy groceries, but this makes you wallow in it. It not only shows how fleeting time is, but it makes you recognize a factor you don't understand until you're older. That that mundanity, that fleeting time, some of it was done and sacrificed in the name of you. Unless you had a very unfortunate life, chances are you have had a mother, grandmother, or aunt that folded your clothes and bought your groceries. All of that was for your benefit.
That's the engrossing nature of Jeanne Dielman, and becomes the center of what you thought was just an artsy film about a lonely widow turned sex worker. In reality, it's not about a sex worker but a woman. A woman who reminded me of my mother. The person who spent hours of her life folding clothes and buying groceries just so I can grow up to review movies on the Internet.
In other words, sorry ma.
I don't think the movie is perfect. Due to the purpose of this film being about a dull slice of life, it's enjoyment is closer to an art piece than a movie. The lack of drama for me lacks the resonance that some of my favorite arthouse movies have like Three Colours: Blue.
So is this film the greatest film of all time? That was the initial question that started this journey. Personally, I would say no. But that's only because my definition of what makes the greatest film of all time is different from Sight and Sound. It's clear the collective voting for this poll have change tact reflecting the sentiments of our society. The critical piece that makes Jeanne Dielman stand out among Citizen Kane and Vertigo is that it does exactly that. Think of it this way, a film about a woman with little agency, stuck in a cycle of monotony, helpless in a power structure that takes her for granted is a tad more relevant than rich guy who needed more hugs and a white guy who can't get over his love boner. For how elitist Sight and Sound comes off. And yeah, choosing Jeanne Dielman isn't actually picking the fan favorite. Picking Jeanne Dielman might have been the most culturally relevant film to choose. Maybe it's a good thing that a film that asks you to be more sympathetic is leading cinema. We could use more of that right now.
Or you could just give Iron Giant the top slot you fucking cowards.
