antonioni

I know I'm prone to gushing and over-effusion sometimes on these boards, but really, it was so very, very good.

I put off watching The Passenger for a long time ('cause Zabriskie Hurts) and when I finally saw it a few years ago I was completely blown away -- I need to see it again

I still haven't dared to see Zabriskie Point.

I also can't believe the Malaga scenes at the end of the film - that town is such a horrible tourist pit now. It actually used to look classy (or at least peaceful, in a desolate sort of way).

You can see the camera operator reflected in the french window. The man must be a brute.

(i don't know how much of a difference those extra six or something minutes they put back in really makes, though)

I haven't seen the early stuff in eons.

Forgot to look for this. I did notice the first time Jack says "What the fuck are you doing with me?" (under the tree), it's clearly dubbed as his lips aren't moving, which suggests it was done to make the line resonate in the last hotel scene.

Second time I'd seen The Passenger (first since mid to late '80s); hadn't remembered hardly anything but the famed next-to-last shot ... I do think it stands with Blowup at a minimum; i'll probably work my way backwardish through his oeuvre now. Nicholson's probably never given a more somber and natural performance, even in his '69-75 Arthouse Bogart run (which this capped). I though Maria Schneider was speaking English phonetically, but her movements seem similarly stilted (when she puts her hand on Jack's shoulder, elbow stiff).

My brain was asleep early on -- what was Jack burning in his yard in the flashback, besides tree limbs, if anything?

I thought that was the reflection of the assassain.

I see Ebert upgraded the pan from his original review, so he is getting smarter (in some cases).

Still, I wanna see it again.

Tracer Hand otm. The filmmaker can't expect us to do his work for him PLUS give us the most somnolent raw materials.

i don't think it's a boring film, and i also don't tend to try to remake "boring" into a superlative, a positive quality. certain films may displaced my interest from the sort of things you ususally focus on in films (character psychology/goals, etc.) onto other things (milieu, intricacies of visual and sound design) but that doesn't make them boring, just compelling in different ways from the norm.

ok, well i'm not sure what needs to be filled in as to why he "does what he does." it's pretty clear at the beginning that he's just had it with his assignment, and his life. as for the identity he assumes, if everything was revealed as or during he assumed it, it'd be an incredibly boring movie. most (tho not all) about the dead guy is revealed to the viewer in the same way that nicholson's character receives it, and thus, there's a story (a thriller, even).

the schneider character is a total blank in terms of psychology--she doesn't even have a name, a backstory, anything.

not entirely, she claims she's an architecture student. but it isn't really that important, she's basically the "mysterious female" type as in most thrillers/mysteries.

we can choose to fill in such blanks in many ways (or to interpret the blanks as having some greater metaphysical, political, etc. meaning) but the fact that the blanks are flaunted so obviously perhaps makes such activity seem a bit pointless, as far as a longtime critic is concerned.

there isn't much to "interpret," there's a lot there in the film. i think if antonioni had spelled out things more, it'd be a much weaker movie.