5/24/13

Renoir a Luminous (though flawed) Triad

-->
RENOIR (2102)
Directed by Gilles Bourdes
Fidélité Films, 111minutes, Rated R (extensive nudity), in French with subtitles
* * *

Renoir centers on French impressionist painter Pierre-Auguste Renoir, though the movie is really a triad involving him, his final model, Andrée, and his middle son Jean. The year is 1913, and though Renoir is an acknowledged master and the financially secure master of a villa and a private atelier on the Côte d’Azur, his world is slowly crumbling. His wife has just died, his two eldest sons are fighting the Germans, and he has rheumatoid arthritis that’s so bad that he’s chair-bound and must have his fingers bound by strips of linen to keep them straight enough to draw or paint. Even worse, he is uninspired. His narrowing world consists of spectacular sea views, a house full of female servants (most of them former models), and a mischievous twelve-year-old son, Coco, whom he sired when he was 61. It’s hard to tell who is more bored and cranky, the old man or Coco.

Just as things seemed hopeless, young Andrée shows up at the gates, having heard that Renoir needed a model. She would beome the old man’s final great inspiration, whom would repeatedly paint until his death in 1919. Andrée (Christa Theret) is a head-turner whose luminous flesh makes Renoir think deeply of his own wrecked body; she also attracts considerable attention from Jean, when he returns home to convalesce from a war wound that cost him two inches of bone and left him with a lifelong limp. Thus Andrée becomes the object of desire of all the males of the Renoir household–the painter longing for lost youth, Jean who is besot with a combination of bedazzlement and lust, and Coco whose on-the-cusp of adolescent hormones are stirred. What unfolds is, needless to say, a complicated set of relationships.

The film also develops three subthemes: beauty and horror, decay and rebirth, and pride versus wisdom. Andrée’s stunning body and the tranquility of the French coast stand in marked contrast to the horrors of World War I, as seen in disfigured vets along the roadside and embodied in Jean’s bone-exposed wound. We see decay and rebirth in several forms, most notably in how Renoir’s arthritis-deformed body and the passing of impressionism contrast to the sun-bathed youth of Andrée and Jean, and in Jean’s screening of silent films in the family parlor. (In his postwar life he became one of the greatest movie directors of all time. Andrée became his first wife and starred in several films under the name Catherine Hessling.) We also see the struggle between vain pride and wisdom in scenes in which Renoir tries to convince Jean not to return to war because of its utter stupidity and Jean stubbornly defends camaraderie to his father and the war itself to a rapacious war profiteer. (We see it also in some of Andrée’s tantrums and foolish decisions.)

As befits a film with Renoir at its center, director Bourdes bathes the screen with painterly scenes. One, of a paintbrush being dipped into a jar of clear water, is ten seconds of absolute beauty, even though it’s a heavy-handed bit of Freudian symbolism with the stiff brush representing the virility of youth and the semen-like paint swirls the ebbing of Renoir’s own. There is another of soldiers on R & R floating on the blue waters of the Mediterranean, their arms akimbo, and shot and lighted from below–as if they were already the corpses they were destined to become in the trenches. (And check out a scene in which headstrong Coco blows purple paint pigment over Andrée’s sleeping nude body.)

The cinematography and two of the central performances are the strongest part of the film. Michel Bouquet is sublime as Renoir. He not only looks the part, but is also a master at conveying the pain of Renoir’s infirmities, his barely contained rage that he has to cope with them, and his headstrong determination to work and capture beauty, no matter the physical toll it exacts. Christa Theret is–dare I say it–a work of art. At one point Renoir remarks that that Titian would have given anything to paint her breasts. I can’t think of an artist who wouldn’t! But she also shows emotional range to match her physical attributes, playing Andrée as self confident, arrogant, impulsive, and reckless, but also as vulnerable, sympathetic, and naïve. Less successful is Vincent Rottiers as Jean, who is too buttoned down. Other than actually watching movies, we get little sense of the artistic vision one associates with Jean Renoir, and we see no hint of the sort of critical analysis that led him to make Grand Illusion in 1937, considered one of the greatest antiwar films ever made.

Those looking for historical accuracy will also be disappointed with some of the script’s liberties. Andrée, for example, was not a referral from Renoir’s wife before she died; Henri Matisse, who thought her more Renoir’s ideal model than his, sent her. In part, that’s because she was a tad fleshier than the nubile Theret. She was also just 13 when she first doffed her clothes for Renoir; not surprisingly, no modern director wants to touch that! Film historians will also pick up that certain works were out of their time period. Most non-scholars, though, will find the film’s pacing languorous in places. One could justify this as appropriate for the subject and its locale, though if one is going to take liberties with basic facts, why not telescope time a bit as well? Still, Renoir is well worth the time. We can appreciate his artistic vision, and we can certainly appreciate his fixation on youthful beauty. You may feel like a voyeur for a while, but you’ll get over it!
--Rob Weir


5/22/13

Not One Nickel to the State of Oklahoma

Read my lips: not one nickel to the State of Oklahoma for tornado relief. How can I say such a thing? Two dozen (or more) people died in Moore, the Oklahoma City suburb of 55,000 has been reduced to four square miles of rubble, power lines are down, water is scarce, several hundred people are hospitalized, hundreds more are homeless, private charities are tapped out, and children have died. Doesn’t this make me as heartless as the Tea Party loonies against whom I rail on this blog? Read my statement carefully: Not one nickel to the State of Oklahoma.

If Barack Obama has any political savvy at all–a questionable presumption for a president that increasingly (and aptly) draws more comparisons to Jimmy Carter than FDR–he should continue his current plan of flooding the State with Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) agents, cash, and equipment. But he should not allow so much as a penny to be administrated by Oklahoma itself. It’s time for the chickens to roost in the Tea Party henhouse. (Or is it shithouse?). Both of Oklahoma’s U.S. senators, Tom Inhofe and Tom Coburn, voted against the $60.2 billion aid package for Hurricane Sandy victims. I’ll begrudgingly hand it to Coburn–he’s at least consistent. He’s such a Tea party loser that he has said that every dime of aid to his own state must be balanced by cuts elsewhere in the budget, though it’s probably just a matter of time before he calls for cuts in education and/or poverty programs to get some Sooner cash. Inhofe, though, takes the cake for hypocrisy. He’s telling everyone who will listen–­and we shouldn’t–that his request for tornado aid is “totally different” from the Sandy bill, which he insists was loaded with “pork.” (Guess it takes a pig to know pork!) Slice your bacon however you wish, but the bottom line is that both of Oklahoma’s Tea Party senators said, “Fuck you!” to New Jersey and now at least one of them thinks his state’s needs are more important. No–they’re not, senator; suffering is suffering.

The tornado is a moment of opportunity for President Obama, but to seize it he will need to play politics and ignore the caterwauling from the Right. He should release funds to FEMA and make certain that every dollar spent in Oklahoma is funneled through federal agencies, not state bodies. He should make numerous trips there–photo-ops, if you will. At each stop Obama should emphasize that the federal government is committed to helping Sooners restore their lives. Tell them that he’s personally dedicated to the task, even if it means he must tackle Congress to get it done. Let Inhofe and Coburn explain why Obama has delivered and they could not. The Right will scream, “Obama is still campaigning.” He should follow that with a curt, “I don’t have time to respond such nonsense. I’m trying to help desperate people get back on their feet.”

When Franklin Roosevelt put Harry Hopkins in charge of a jobs program during the Great Depression, he told Hopkins not to ask if the person needing a job was a Democrat, a Republican, or a Socialist. Just put them to work, he told Hopkins, and let them see that the government is on their side. FDR presumed that would make them into Democrats, and he was right; in the 1936 election FDR won every state in the Union except two. It is time for a strong leader to expose one-note tax cutters, deficit evangelists, and Tea Party fanatics as the greedy, clueless, provincial  piggies they really are. It’s the first step to restoring a civic ideal that shows where the pork really lies: among those who place their own wealth, intolerant ideologies, and backyards above what philosopher John Dewey called the “Great Community.” You know it as the United States of America, though the word “united” has been savaged and bloodied as of late. It’s time for it to rise from the canvas and deliver a haymaker to the chins of Inhofe and Coburn.

5/20/13

Marcy Marxer Serves Up Another Winner

MARCY MARXER
Things are Coming My Way
Community Music 206
* * * *

If you’ve got a blues, country, gospel, or old-time song that can be plucked, picked, or strummed on any kind of stringed instrument, Marcy Marxer will play it and make you happy that she did. Her latest collection of present and future standards has three tracks that pay direct tribute to Django Reinhardt and several others that mirror his gypsy soul and loose jazz influences. There is an especially sharp interpretation of Reinhardt’s “Montagne Sainte Geneviève” in which she tosses off swift runs on her Gibson L4 like so much dust from her soles. She gets positively 1920’s Hawaiian in her ukulele-laced cover of “I’ll See You in My Dreams,” goes swamp bluesy on “Kissing In the Dark,” a song first popularized by Memphis Minnie in 1953, gives a folk treatment to the title track, and joins forces with Cathy Fink and Grace Griffith to gives an Andrews Sisters spin to “It’s the Girl” and "Girl Django." Heck, Marxer even gets down to a bongo beat on “Brasil.” The one thing she doesn’t do is get on board with the flavor of the month. Marxer’s albums are generally delicious throwbacks and this one is no exception. So step into the Way Back Machine and enjoy the ride!--Rob Weir

5/17/13

Koby Israelite an Accordion Beast!


KOBY ISRAELITE
Blues from Elsewhere
Asphalt-Tango records 3513
* * * *

Koby Israelite—born in Israel and now based in London--is one part Jimmy Page, one part Bob Dylan, one part Johnny Cash, and one part John Zorn—except he plays the accordion, not a guitar or saxophone. His latest is the aptly named Blues from Elsewhere, and the eponymous track sounds like Sephardic honky tonk. I’m not exaggerating about any of the influences noted above. Check out how he squeezes out the notes atop crunching power chords in “Accordion is the New Guitar,” and then give a listen to his cover of “Subterranean Homesick Blues.” I can doubt even Dylan could imagine the jump jive/power rock instrumental treatment, or Annique’s keening vocals. Israelite is full of such surprises. “Johnny Has No Cash No More” is where Texas two-step meets barrelhouse accordion; “Crayfish Hora” unfolds as if gumbo-crazed Jews were belly-dancing down Bourbon Street; “Take My Brain and Sell it to the Night” is like string band for the Andrews Sisters; “My Way the Right Way” a blend of rock, hand jive, and surf guitar; “Just Clichés” sounds like the soundtrack for an experimental cartoon made in the 1930s; “Kashmir” has the trippy dreaminess of a lost Yes composition; and “East of Nashville” is really east—like Tel Aviv. My first thought was that only Sharon Shannon pushes the accordion to such innovative extremes. Upon further reflection, she’s a piker compared to Koby Israelite.—Rob Weir

5/15/13

Selig Right to Tell Olympics to Take a Walk

Five words I’ve never before written: I agree with Bud Selig. The MLB commissioner has taken a hard line on baseball as an Olympic sport and true fans should applaud his actions. The 2012 Olympics (in London) dropped baseball and softball as Olympic sports, a decision that has spawned a grassroots movement to force the International Olympics Committee to reverse that decision. The kicker is that the same advocates also want professional players to compete. This would entail suspending the MLB season for two weeks in August every four years, a contingency that Selig rejected outright. He’s right. August is when the pennant races really begin to heat up and there is absolutely no reason for the leagues to suspend play for the sake of what is little more than exhibition games that promote corporate advertising and muscular nationalism. I’ll go Selig one better and say that all team sports should be removed from the Olympics. That would give the games a chance to recoup what little is left of the elusive “spirit of the Olympics.”

I mean that. No ice hockey, field hockey, cricket, basketball, or soccer either. But isn’t Olympic ice hockey exciting, you ask? It used to be–back in the days when occasionally a bunch of feisty amateurs could take on the state-sponsored Ruskies and occasionally win. But not now; the National Hockey League is the de facto World Hockey League. Not only do players from 20 nations suit up, more than half of the players now come from outside of Canada and the United States. So stop shutting down the NHL in February for meaningless games between players that already compete. Besides, like soccer (men’s and women’s) there’s already a World Cup. And for heaven’s sake, enough with the farcical “Dream Teams” in basketball! The NBA is also international in makeup, plus it’s boring enough during the season; we don’t need to see it in August, and we surely don’t need to see a bunch of pampered pros beating up on amateurs. This sort of thing is a relic of the Cold War, when (once again) the Russians won gold a few times by defeating US college players. Ancient history.

Dump field hockey, cricket, and other such sports as well; they are only played in a few nations and they also have world championships. If we must keep any team sports at all, let’s return to the rules that say that a person who has signed a professional contract to play (at any level) is ineligible for the Olympics. I’d also love to see an end to the grotesquely expensive and tacky opening ceremonies where nationalism is on display, plus a ban on “medals count” columns. The very idea that a nation “wins” the Olympics makes mockery of the ideals behind the games. We are supposed to marvel over the individual achievements of stellar athletes. Local pride is one thing, but wallowing in the collective national loot gathered by pro athletes in made-for-corporate-sponsors moments is grotesque. Congratulations to Commissioner Selig for not adding baseball to this farce. For once, this Bud’s for you! --Rob Weir

5/13/13

Oli Rockberger Release Lacks Solid Focus

 OLI ROCKBERGER
Old Habits
Oli Road Records 0996

* *

Keyboardist Oli Rockberger has played with such contemporary music heavyweights as Jackie DeShannon, Levon Helm, John Mayer, and Oliver Mtukudzi. He’s also shared the stage with jazz luminaries the likes of Charlie Hunter and Les McCann, and with several hip-hop bands. As a sideman he’s eclectic, but his solo release Old Habits could really use some focus. It’s one of those albums that are so atmospheric that one longs for some grounding terra firma. It falls into no discernible genre, which wouldn’t be a bad thing if Rockberger were slicing some new grooves. Instead, the album feels more like an incompletely realized mélange. It has the cool detachment of smooth jazz, but lacks innovative breakouts or unifying musical themes. There are swells evocative of a rock anthem, but few identifying hooks; frenetic blended instrumentation the likes of a Loreena McKennitt composition, but they seem more like tack-ons than bridges; and quiet moments in which he comes off as a subdued Paul Simon, but without the melodic unity of folk music.  Rockberger’s keyboard work is solid and his vocals more than competent, but this is one of those unfortunate records that dissolve into the background as it’s playing. In short, it lacks “Ah ha!” moments that make it anything more than a backdrop against which life happens.
—Rob Weir   

5/10/13

New Paula Cole Album An Unsuccessful Effort

PAULA COLE
Raven
Paulacole.com
*

I like Paula Cole’s voice, but I’ve got no love for her latest record. It’s an independent, Kickstarter-funded project billed as a return to her Americana roots, but it really shows how far she’s strayed. Take the song “Manitoba.” Is something’s amiss when it sounds more like a West Hollywood studio than a Western Canadian province? Yes, there is.  Cole has a glorious voice that moves across octaves and scales with the ease of a supple ten-year-old ascending and descending a set of monkey bars. But therein lies the problem. Cole sings like the Grammy Award winning pop artist she has been for the past decade. We expect to be blown away by big voices in pop songs. What else is there in compositions that seldom get much more sophisticated than “Oooh, baby, baby, I love you?” By contrast, we listen to folk songs for their narratives, causes, gorgeous melodies, and revelatory emotions. Cole has a powerful voice that she rockets from earthy whispers to Streisand-like crescendos at the bat of an eyelash. Okay, but she wants us to hear the lyrics, she doesn’t articulate well, and any message that might have been there gets lost in a welter of vocal pyrotechnics. Put another way, folk music has produced glorious voices–Joan Baez, Judy Collins, Joni Mitchell, Kate Rusby, Karine Polwart–but there are not diva voices. If Cole’s intention is to turn back the clock a bit, she’d do well to remember that there’s a world of difference between staging a song and interpreting one. If you like big voices, Cole’s theatrics on Raven are impressive; but if you really care about the content, they won’t leave much of an impression.   --Rob Weir