Mark Cousins' The History of film: An Odyssey

He does sound like a Bazin disciple - the pleas for realism got really tedious - but the problem is cinema surely is montage and realism and 'looks like our dreams' (as his intro used to say) so he needs to do better.

sorry what i was getting at is that cinema can be everything: montage or realism or a mix, etc.

gave up on this when i realised my irritation with the content was far outweighing any pleasure/insight i was getting. also came round to the idea that the subject is just too big for one person to properly tackle (and the fact that it's one person's 'personal' vision of film implies a unity and coherence that cinema, or any long-established artform, never actually has - ie it's a story of fragments, repetition, changes, diversions, false starts etc etc.) wld rather have seen different ppl tackling different genres/national cinemas and so on.

Yeah, agree, but then again it wouldn't be an auteur's auteur vision. Which I'm not sure TV companies would buy into. Collaboration wd still need an overall 'editor' of the histories into a streamlined style.

Hope there is another attempt at this. Doubt we'll see anything soon, its amazing MC got it off the ground...you can tell there is a bundle of energy there, even if scattered over the screen.

Keep checking this once a month to see what more I've seen:

- Daisies was another discovery.

- Badou Boy's, for its use of sound and rough imagination.

- Started making my way through the Japanese documentaries of the 70s - Minimata et al.

- Battle for Chile

- I am Curious (yellow)

otoh, the more I've watched (and I've watched more than ever these last 3-4 months) the more I see how little directors matter...I know they do, but it feels somehow oppressive to think about auteurs and artists blah. Much better to cover what it ws being said, not by whom, as there was a lot of common ground with the range of topics.

I know what I'm saying is rough and too general. All stuff I'm thinking about at the mo.

Embarking on this tonight--it'll be playing, two episodes at a time, for the next couple of months at the local documentary theatre. Hope I like it enough not to bail.

make sure you've seen all the movies made up until now before you watch because it spoils the fuck outta like most of them

Whenever they excerpt from the ones I haven't seen, I'll close my eyes.

First impressions after two hours: the narration's going to wear me down, and the construction is quite scattershot. Sometimes allusions across time are noted (most of them valid, a couple rather tenuous--Chaplin into Bad Timing struck me as a reach), sometimes not. I'd like to see that Iranian documentary from the early '60s that popped up.

oh is that the house is black yeah i need to see that

That's the one--I was scrolling back, and someone said the same thing upthread. The friend I saw it with tonight says it's only 30 minutes long and available on DVD.

It is on YouTube, if you don't mind watching it that way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WL4w5ceO7w

Being so short, that might work until I can see it properly--thanks.

Parts 3 and 4 tonight. I like the obscure stuff the guy digs up (obscure to me, anyway): the Japanese film influenced by Caligari (A Page of Madness), the Brazilian film from the early '30s (Limite), the films of Ruan Lingyu. And I liked Blood of a Poet into Inception.

Realizing that you can't encompass everything, there are omissions that jar: Ford without Stagecoach, Disney without Fantasia, the '30s episode without Von Sternberg. (He made a brief appearance earlier.) The Hitchcock segment seemed quite scattershot. "Here are seven reasons why Hitchcock's so important"--a couple of times, I wasn't even clear what the reason was.

The two hours go by easily, though. I'm glad I'm not seeing it in three or four sittings.

I watched this when it was broadcast on UK tv this time last year, and the hour-a-week format worked really well for me; I tended to PVR it and probably had a couple of 2hr sessions as well catching during the run, but as you say it just slips by. The mid 20th century episodes were my favourites, esp. the wonderful interview with Kyōko Kagawa.

In honesty, despite the omissions and things one could take issue with, it kind of amazes me that a series like this could get made *at all* these days, so kudos to Cousins for getting funding and making it happen. A fair bit of the location footage seems to be him on solo travels with a camera, but the sometimes ramshackle feel of this was pretty beguiling too. Like a lot of people on this thread it certainly opened my eyes to a mass of films that I've never seen (or even heard of) as well.

Good point. Every time I complain about something, I feel a little petulant; he managed to get a serious 15-hour history-of-film made, and no one's going to see things exactly the same. I've already found out about a number of films I didn't know. (Which doesn't mean I won't have more petulant complaints for the next few Sundays...)

Part 5: A little sketchy on film noir, but he does give Stagecoach its due here. I don't think Capra was mentioned, but you could argue he belongs more to the '30s...except I'm not sure if he was mentioned in that episode, either.

Part 6: Film I most want to see from tonight: Cairo Station, in part for Hind Rostom. I liked the way he ended with The Searchers, Vertigo, Touch of Evil, and Rio Bravo as a group--those four films have always belonged together for me (as different as they are in many ways). The Apu films are among my favourites, but I thought there was a little too much time spent on Ray; Marilyn Monroe was barely mentioned. I partly associate the '50s with Biblical epics--not important, but maybe some acknowledgement of DeMille.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rmPgyCUMW8E/TkFEdGQMnlI/AAAAAAAABgI/wxAKUQIMV8I/s1600/%25D9%2587%25D9%2586%25D8%25AF+%25D8%25B1%25D8%25B3%25D8%25AA%25D9%2585.jpg

Lots of films I've got to see from parts 7 and 8. He's got a knack for choosing the right sequences, and the quality of the clips is fantastic--he'll show stuff I've seen and forgotten, and I'll think, "How did I not think that looked amazing at the time?" High on the to-see list: Trinka's The Hand and Chytilová's Daisies.

Things I puzzled over...I don't think of Tati as being on a plane with Bergman, Bresson, and Fellini (independent of my own feelings about each--just in terms of importance). Substituting Kurosawa or Dreyer for the pre-New Wave '50s would make more sense to me. Not mentioning L'Avventura is bizarre, especially as he often argues that this or that changed film grammar. Something schlump warned about upthread: his habit of excerpting endings. Black Girl, Nostalghia, one or two others--did no one tell him I haven't yet seen these films? The final segment on American film in the '60s was quite arbitrary, but I assume some of that will be smoothed over in the next episode on the '70s.

I can't complain, but sometimes I still do. I'm enjoying this quite a bit.

Catching up on your posts now Clemenza. Wish they put this on TV for a repeat, would watch. Makes me nostalgic for the time some of the initial participants sat down and watched this together.

I loved Davies. One of my 10 - 20 or so discoveries from watching this.

Daisies I mean -- spelling fails again :-(

Back at it after a week off. Once again, whatever carping I do does not mean I'm not enjoying this.

I knew I'd be extra nitpicky about the America-in-the-'70s episode. The following omissions wouldn't bother everyone, but to me they should be there: Hal Ashby, Paul Mazursky, Alan J. Pakula, Michael Ritchie, Bob Rafelson (Five Easy Pieces, at least). (I'm assuming Spielberg and Lucas will be used as bridges to the blockbuster era--a bit unfair to Spielberg, I think.) Starting off with Catch-22, and devoting a good five minutes to it, was perverse. Somewhat surprised there was no mention of Elaine May, Joan Micklin Silver, or Claudia Weill, just because they would have fit into Cousins' goal of an alternate history.

Much more inexplicable: no Nashville or Bonnie and Clyde. When the latter didn't show up in the '60s episode, I thought that made sense--it would lead the '70s episode. But nothing. Those two are non-negotiable.

The film I'd most want to see from episode 10 is that Japanese documentary about the negligent chemical company.

Minamata: The Victims and Their World is really awesome, yes! Opened me up to a few other Japanese documentaries from that time.

Not as much American film in parts 11 and 12, so fewer complaints from me. Lynch and Lee are obvious benchmarks for the '80s; I would have maybe added Jonathan Demme, too. (And still no mention of De Palma.) I didn't think Sayles was a great choice for the turn towards indie films (implied, anyway)--would have gone with Jarmusch and/or Soderbergh instead. I could sense my friend squirming through the France-in-the-'80s segment, but he seemed to get Britain right. We were laughing about Canada turning up in the 12th hour: Cronenberg, skip back 40 years to Norman McLaren, forward to Jesus of Montreal, see you later.

Film I'd most want to see: I guess the B&W Scottish one from the early '70s about the old woman and her grandson (can't remember the name...xyzzzz?).

My Childhood--Wikipedia has a list of all the film clips.

All done. Good stuff from the last three parts:

--a few minutes on the ascension of documentaries starting in the late '90s; didn't expect that
--the segment on Japanese horror
--American coverage in the '90s was pretty good
--the segment on Sokurov

Carping:

--lots on the Coens, no mention of Fargo
--as always, lots of endings revealed
--calling Van Sant's Elephant one of the key films to come out of the '90s, two seconds before the actual date (2003) is flashed on screen
--so much time given to Baz Luhrmann...I've never seen a Luhrmann film; based on what I saw last night, I don't think I'd last five minutes

Anyway, on the whole, well worth the 15 hours.

his voice is kinda making me want to kill myself, along with a lot of his ideas, but i've been just sick enough in the last week (i.e. unable to do anything but stare blankly when i get home at night) that i keep watching.

so is this any good

nah

I don't know about watching a bunch at a time, but once a week (assuming you can get used to his voice and his style), I think it's enjoyable.

So this is on Netflix now, right? What's wrong with his voice? Is he Irish? Is that bad?

He's Irish. He just has a way of speaking.

An Irish way?

Have a listen to a little bit of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yx3HAEq0gJs

Sounds Irish, with requisite voiceover portent.

Did you know that when they broadcast "Planet Earth" in the US, they replaced David Attenborough's narration with Sigourney Weaver's?

It's not that he is Irish. His voice his famously infuriating. But I got over it, for this.

the shot selection and the connections are almost all brilliant, his theorising about art and commerce considerably less so

also, spoilers a-go-go

Did you know that when they broadcast "Planet Earth" in the US, they replaced David Attenborough's narration with Sigourney Weaver's?

And for the subsequent Life, the voiceover script was rewritten for Oprah Winfrey.

"Critics in the nineteen sixties said..." is a big catchphrase in my house as a result of this show

I watched the first two episodes of this last night. Really great stuff. Some of the comparisons he makes are a little odd, but sometimes they seem inspired (his comparison of Ozu to Jeanne Dielman, for example).

Just started this and I know I'm going to love it, especially for the comparisons, which keep things fresh and personal. Have no problem with his voice.

but sometimes they seem inspired (his comparison of Ozu to Jeanne Dielman, for example).

I think its a fairly standard comparison but its worth talking about film in this way on TV...certainly not seen anything like it.

There are plenty of standard comparisons that I am unaware of.

Sure, same here :) Just wanted to say how he brings non-normal film talk on TV.

Ok, his voice is getting a little annoying, the way every sentence lilts upward like a question as he trails off. Still great, though.

Holy Toledo TCM: http://news.turner.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=6436

Turner Classic Movies (TCM), now in its 20th year as a leading authority in classic film, will present the U.S. television premiere of the acclaimed documentary series The Story of Film: An Odyssey this fall. The series, which tells the history of cinema through a worldwide lens, will be the centerpiece of TCM's most ambitious and far-reaching programming event ever. Over the span of 15 weeks, beginning Monday, Sept. 2, TCM will present The Story of Film: An Odyssey curated with a slate of 119 films and dozens of short subjects representing 29 countries across six continents.

Whoa that rules. I wonder which movies they'll show with some of the more esoteric episodes.

Note to self: read rest of article.

Wow, nice one TCM!

Time to get a DVR.

I watched some of the youtube clips of this and am kinda on the fence. altho he did convince me to see some Ozu.