I can't really comment on any of the films you mention above, because I haven't seen them, but I would like to share with you my feelings on the MUSIC BOX THEATRE.

I've seen close to 50-100 movies there since I started college back in 2002 and I would agree that it is the absolute best place to see a film with a crowd.

INLAND EMPIRE on opening night, with David Lynch in person had the same vibes you speak of above.

Also, worth mentioning, are the marathons that the MUSIC BOX puts on twice a year. THE MUSIC BOX MASSACRE, 24 hours of horror films, and THE SCI-FI SPECTACULAR. I went to both this year and saw 2001, PLANET OF THE APES, THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN, WAR OF THE WORLDS, RE-ANIMATOR, ISLE OF THE DEAD, THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME, A BUCKET OF BLOOD, and THE BROOD.

All on a large screen, projected ON FILM, with a sold out crowd.

What other theatre can offer experiences like that.....

I wish that I'd run into you at Sundance, Roger. Though I've never met you, like Robert Redford, I'm glad you're back at perhaps my favorite week of the year. I think it's perfectly suited for your blog, and if I'd seen you in town, I would have just briefly let you know how very very much I enjoy this blog and your work. (Although I guess I just did.) Anyway, a few of my notes from the Sundance films I've seen in order that I saw them. Restrepo and Joan Rivers tomorrow, and then 51 weeks to do it all again:

DOUCHEBAG: Fun. Funny. Short. Great soundtrack. Atypical road movie, but classic mumblecore -- good mumblecore.

IT'S A WONDERFUL AFTERLIFE: Gurinder Chara's return to the same London neighborhood that brought us Bend It Like Becham, in a fanciful homage to Frank Capra, Steven King, and much in between. Beautifully shot, but ultimately lacking.

CATFISH: Please tell me that it's all true, because if it is, it's an astounding and astoundingly timely doc about the world in which we find ourselves.

WINTER'S BONE: A near perfect movie. The reason I go to and love movies. Took me to a place I had never been, with two anchor performances (Jennifer Lawrence & Jon Hawkes) that gave it depth and gravity. The very very best of Sundance.

FOUR LIONS: Still thinking about it. Don't know what to think. A farce about terrorists? Brutally funny in places, but is it ok to laugh? Still processing.

Happythankyoumoreplease: I've seen this movie before, haven't I? Late 20 somethings with angst and the need to be loved. Didn't seem like there was much new in it. But why then did I like it so much and why does it stick with me? Extremely well done treatment of familiar themes.

THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT: Brilliant acting. Awesome script. Fresh story. Great movie.

PERFECT HOST: Think Deathtrap meets Silence of the Lambs. Twists, turns, and edge of your seat stuff. Also, plot improbabilities that would probably drive me crazy elsewhere, but excused in the rarified air of Park City.

HESHER: Can't quite figure out what it wants to be, but a movie with layers and indie fav Jon Gordon-Levitt who is very good.

TUCKER AND DALE V. EVIL: Hate horror movies. Maybe that's why I liked this. Hope it finds an audience. It's clever and a bit subversive. Loses steam in the final act.

Just a heads up, the trailer posted here for Blue Valentine is not the Sundance film. Cianfrance's Blue Valentine doesn't have a trailer available yet. There is a short clip on http://www.bluevalentinemovie.com/

Ebert: Substituted with thanks.

I've had a soft spot for Stewart ever since I saw her in Charlie Bartlett and Into the Wild. Then, I saw Adventureland, and I found out why. Good to know she's growing, but I think she's getting too typecast as the troubled young woman.

Also, PSH directing sounds exciting.

Thanks for this post, Roger. Informative as well as exhilarating.

Can't wait until these movies hit the theaters! I will definitely be keeping my eye out for them.

It is interesting, isn't it, how actors and actresses tend to shine when given good material?

(Note: I usually post under "Greg Salvatore," but everywhere else I post under my blog name, so from now on, I will post here as "Literary Dreamer." Just in case people care. :-P)

After watching the 10 minute promo, the only way I'm gonna see "Cane Toads" is if Roger invites me to a free screening and promises to deep fry me up a big batch of Australian cane toad legs at his crib after the flick. And also may the nasty smokeable toad juice be forever damned-I don't care how high it gets you or how many diseases its supposed to cure.

Ebert: Oddly, the movie doesn't mention their culinary properties.

But when in Paris and searching for good frog legs, visit: http://j.mp/ajYbjN

"In short, what I felt in my bones at the Music Box was the experience a working movie critic rarely shares, the sensation of seeing a movie in a room filled with people who are there of their own will, sympathize with movies, and respond genuinely." - Roger

That is indeed a rare sensation. And more's the pity.

I went to the theater's website to learn and where I read about its history and found something unexpected...

"The Theatre Ghost"

Old theaters have ghosts and The Music Box is no exception. “Whitey”, as was his neighborhood nick-name, was the manager of The Music Box from opening night 1929 to November 24, 1977. His wife was the cashier and they raised their family two blocks away from the theater. According to one of Whitey’s daughters and his daughter-in-law, he spent most of his time at the theater. Young people who grew up in the neighborhood tell tales of working for Whitey, being tossed out by Whitey and accidentally-on-purpose skinning their knee to get a free piece of candy from Whitey. Parents speak of the embarrassment of having their child’s instamatic photo in the cashier’s station “rogues gallery” of children not allowed back in the theater for any of a myriad of offenses. On Thanksgiving eve, 1977, Whitey returned to close the theater. He fell asleep on the couch in the lobby and never woke up.

Whitey is a tireless protector of The Music Box Theatre. He helps solve problems and has been known to express his opinion of a bad organist by causing the drapery to drop in both organ chambers simultaneously. He is a positive contributor to the audience’s comfort and enjoyment of his theater. He is sometimes felt to be pacing Aisle 4 (protecting the alley doors where kids used to sneak in). If you see him, be sure to say hello and thank him for his 48 years of care and operation of The Music Box and his continued service to the patrons. He is the Manager Emeritus. - Music Box Theatre

That explains it then. The special vibe in the room. It wasn't just the group assembled.

It was the ghost too. :)

The Music Box & Theaters in Chicago: photos!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/repowers/sets/72157605469767765/

Ebert: Chaz said that wasn't her tugging lightly on my scarf...

an! Those are good photos by repowers.

How is Chicago night in April?

Ebert: During late April, the days are usually pleasant spring temperatures with the fresh leaves on display. The nights will grow chilly, and a light jacket or sweater is a good idea. Urbana is 128 miles south of Chicago, just enough so the leaves are larger and the days a little warmer.

And you're COMING! In fact, all the Far-Flung Correspondents are coming! I'm so honored. You're all on a panel discussion Friday morning.

Oh, and there are sometimes a few April showers: http://j.mp/aWGrSs

Dear Roger,

I'm a lifelong fan who enjoyed watching your earliest shows from Wisconsin.

If you don't mind, I'd like to take a tangent from Sundance to revisit the subject of another film festival you attended, one for which you admit "defeat." I hope, therefore, that this is a subject that will interest you greatly: unlocking the puzzle of Mulholland Drive, which you concluded "cannot be reduced to an explanation." There is very strong evidence to the contrary, most of which I will lay out here as briefly as possible.

Mulholland Drive is ostensibly “about” a man named “Adam” who has made the wrong choice and is thrown out of his “home” (Eden). Several characters step in to guide “Adam” to make the correct choice, including a “godfather” (get it?) and a “Cowboy” who is subtly but unmistakably shown to be Christ Resurrected, the horseman of Revelation 19:21.

Who is it that “Adam” must choose? Camilla Rhodes—whose initials are Chi Rho—☧: Christ. Camilla is introduced to us in the movie after her execution is botched and her missing body is not found in what should be her tomb. After she has gone missing from her execution, “Camilla Rhodes” (Christ) goes to “Havenhurst” (heaven) where she meets its manager “Coco Lenoix,” who is shown to be God (i.e., heaven’s manager) by a variety of rather obvious symbols. Betty Elms/Diane Selwyn represent Judas, complete with a Last Supper scene and the Judas kiss. Is the allegory not obvious enough for you yet? There is much, much more. Every scene of this film is an allegorical representation of Christianity. Many of the characters in Mulholland Drive are different aspects of the triune Christian God: Coco Lenoix, the “godfather” Castigliane brothers, the “Cowboy”, “Camilla Rhodes”/Rita as the incarnate Jesus, the actor Woody Katz, the Jesus-lookalike Ed (also executed for his “history of the world, in numbers”, i.e., the Bible), Mr. Roque, and, most blasphemously, the bum behind Winkies. Humorously, Coco Lenoix’s name comes from the popular French expression à la noix de coco, which means devoid of value (sans valeur)—worthless, a prefigurement of the film’s judgment of God. Once you have this "key", the clues all become immediately obvious: double entendre dialogue, birds of paradise, cowboy hats, apartment numbers, Christian images appearing at key times, t-shirts, and on and on.

Adding all this up, there is a remarkable conclusion that cannot be missed: Mulholland Drive is by far the greatest blasphemy against the Christian God ever to appear in film. Of course, Lynch made use of concealed Christian allegory in Dune with the Christ-like Paul, complete with a scene reminiscent of the Adoration of Paul attended by giant worms. But the entirety of Mulholland Drive is concerned with a concealed allegory of the Christian Gospel with blasphemous implications.

“Adam” catches his wife in bed with a man sporting a serpent tattoo. Lynch uses many symbols to show that Adam’s hilltop garden-like home is, in fact, Eden, and that Adam’s wife is Eve, and that Gene the pool cleaner is the serpent. Adam is thrown out of his home—Eden. His wife calls him a “bastard”—Adam has no father—and says, “damn you Adam!” Later, when a mobster comes looking for him and asks if the house is Adam’s, his wife says, “like hell it is.” Adam drives to “Cooky’s downtown”—hell itself, as we are shown later by a signpost. Just as in Christian theology, “Adam” is thrown out of his home in Eden and condemned to hell, unless Adam makes the right choice. Adam must choose Christ = ☧ = Chi Rho = Camilla Rhodes. When Adam does make this choice, we see that he is returned by a "judge" to his home in paradise in the presence of the triune God.

While banished at “Cooky’s”, Adam is advised to see the Cowboy by his caring assistant Cynthia. Simultaneously, a portrait of the Virgin overlooks Adam as Cynthia speaks. Cynthia is the Virgin Mary, Mother of God. Her jewelry and upraised finger indicate Her saintliness, as in a painting. When Cynthia’s overture to Adam to spend the night at her place is rebuffed, Cynthia says “you don’t know what you’re missing.” Adam, indeed no man, has slept with the Virgin Mary, and hence all men, represented by Adam, are ignorant of this experience, which explains why Cynthia says that Adam–man– doesn’t “know what [he’s] missing.” The blasphemous implication is that Mary is not a virgin by choice, and reminds us of Voltaire’s blasphemy that that God committed the crime of adultery with the Virgin Mary.

Betty Elms/Diane Selwyn simultaneously represent Judas and all unbelievers. Betty Elms arrives onscreen with the declaration “I can’t believe it!”–damning skepticism that seals her fate from the beginning.

Even the acting scene, performed twice, is allegorical of the Christian Gospel. But blackmail is the theme of this dialog, which is, as cited by skeptics and blasphemers such as Voltaire and Paine, the condition of Christianity: choose Christ or burn forever, the ultimate blackmail. Betty practices for a movie audition with Rita/Christ, who plays the role performed later by the actor Woody Katz. During the audition, Woody says “I want to play this one close, Bob. Like it was with that girl, what’s her name, with the black hair. … I was playin’ off ’em. They say, ‘They’ll arrest you’.” Woody is playing his role like the black-haired Rita—Jesus, who was arrested. After Woody summarizes the scene as “Dad’s best friend goes to work,” the action starts:

BETTY: You’re still here?
WOODY: I came back.
BETTY: Nobody wants you here. … My parents are right upstairs! They think you’ve left. …
BETTY: You’re playing a dangerous game here. If you’re trying to blackmail me … it’s not going to work.
WOODY: You know what I want … it’s not that difficult.
BETTY: Get out before I call my dad. He trusts you … you’re his best friend. … This will be the end of everything.
WOODY: What about you? What’ll your dad think about you? …
BETTY: It’s like you said from the beginning … if I tell them what happened, they’ll arrest you and put you in jail. Get out of here before …
Betty and Woody kiss—passionately.
BETTY: I kill you.

And just to drive home the point that Woody represents Jesus Christ, Lynch adds this dialog as Sarah James and Nicki take Betty to Adam’s film, that is predestined to star Camilla:
NICKI: How about that Woody Katz?

SARAH: Oh god! …
SARAH: Now we want to … introduce you to a director who’s a head above the rest.
He’s got a project that you would kill!

Sarah and Nicki are Roman soldiers. In the Bible, the soldiers cast lots for Jesus’ garments at His crucifixion. Sarah is a “casting agent.” She leaves the set with the words “I’m sure you all have a lot to talk about.”

But Mulholland Drive at its most blasphemous is not its outward story of a love affair gone horribly wrong, but its allegorical portrayal of the Gospel account of God’s love for man, represented ultimately by the bum behind Winkie's. In the exchange between Dan and Herb over breakfast at Winkie’s, Dan says he wishes “to get rid of this god-awful feeling,” that we see a short time later is caused by a god-awful man. The entire film is about the source of Dan’s god-awful feeling: an awful God. Dan dies immediately upon seeing this God, causing Herb to exclaim “My God!” The awful man “that’s doing it,” the “bum,” the “beast,” the monster behind Winkie’s, is God. The “bum“ behind Winkie’s is also the wicked witch of the west, as evidenced by their nearly identical appearance, gender, and the numerous Wizard of Oz references used at Winkie’s, especially the broom. Therefore, the Christian God of western civilization is portrayed in a veiled manner as the wicked witch of the west (get it?!).

In the final sequence we see a living Diane die and putrefy in her bed after the Cowboy enters her room and says “Hey pretty girl, time to wake up.” Diane doesn’t wake up and accept God, and her reward is death. That is why the Cowboy looks upon Diane’s rotting corpse impassively, then closes the door—she didn’t heed his directive, so he killed her, just like he will kill all those who reject Him. As indicated by the calla lilies that Adam passes on his way out of Eden, man’s fate is old age, decrepitude, and death. These are the monsters that God releases from His dumpster behind Winkie’s. Diane’s only two options are to wait for these demons to destroy her, or to destroy herself—the Bum’s design is achieved either way.

Take the dinner party at Adam’s. The dinner party is the Last Supper, at which Jesus announces that one of His disciples, one who is eating with Him, will betray Him. The Last Supper is indicated to us by the long table with a white tablecloth, the plain settings and mostly unseen servings, the glasses, and the empty plates with solid dark borders, as represented in paintings of this event. The long, stylized kiss is the Judas Kiss, which is shown to cause a psychological break in Diane and leads to her betrayal and execution of Camilla, just as the same kiss in the Gospels leads to Jesus’ execution. Adam’s mother Coco, Coco Lenoix from the previous dream sequence, is shown in close-up taking a walnut—“noix” means nut in French. Walnuts are known as “a nut fit for the gods” and their Latin name is derived from “Jupiter’s nuts,” another indication that Coco is God.

When the “Cowboy” threatens Adam (making an appearance right after Lynch shows us a raised skull and flickering light, symbolizing "the resurrection and the light"), the Cowboy says cryptically, “Now, you will see me one more time if you do good. You will see me two more times if you do bad.” This prophesy makes no rational sense within the immediate, surrealist narrative, but it makes perfect sense within the concealed Gospel narrative. In Christian theology, a jealous God tells man that he must worship Jesus and have no other gods before Him. If man obeys, he will be rewarded with eternal life in heaven. After He was crucified and rose from the dead, Jesus will return again to earth and take all believers to heaven with him. After that, Revelation 19:11–21 tells us that a “rider on a white horse” will wage war and destroy the remaining unbelievers: “The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh” (Revelation 19:21). The Cowboy is the horse rider of Revelation 19:21. The Cowboy is the Christian God. If Adam chooses correctly, he will see the Cowboy “one more time” when Christ returns, then will be taken to heaven. If Adam does not choose correctly, he will see the Cowboy again, riding on his “white horse,” who will kill him. In the book of Revelation, this rider and His Judgment appear after the seven seals are broken. The seventh seal (Revelation 8:1) is silence in heaven—Silencio.

The love scene between Betty and Rita is another representation of the Judas kiss. After their sexual encounter, Rita takes Betty to “Club Silencio” downtown, emceed by Cooky, i.e., hell, as indicated by the signpost. Consistent with the Apostles’ Creed, Jesus descended into hell after his crucifixion, itself preceded by Judas’s kiss. Betty and Rita watch a satanic magician who tells them that the performances they witness are unreal illusions, and creates a thunderbolt, lightning, and an earthquake, just as in Ingmar Bergman’s film The Seventh Seal. In Revelation 16:17–18, the final, seventh “bowl” judgment is released upon earth—thunder, lightning, and a great earthquake, which, according to Millenialists, prepares the way for Christ’s second coming in Revelation 19:1–16 and the battle of Armageddon in Revelation 19:17–20. Rebekah del Rio then sings the Roy Orbison song “Crying” in Spanish, and, like Mary, sheds tears for Christ. After Camilla is murdered but before Diane kills herself, before, like Judas, she “fell headlong” and “burst asunder” (Acts 1:18), she reminisces despairingly by the cross formed by the frame of the third window beneath the shade, and waits for her coffee. It’s time to wake up. A resurrected Camilla appears standing next to a cross formed in another window, and Diane joyfully proclaims “Camilla, you’ve come back,” until her painful realization a moment later that this is an illusion.

Lynch uses the scene of Ed's execution to show that God responsible for Jesus' execution, a view expressed by skeptics such as Voltaire and Thomas Paine. This scene appears to be inexplicable red herring, but strongly supports the Gospel narrative. The hitman Joe murders Ed, who suggestively shares the same popular appearance as Jesus. Joe gazes happily upwards and says that he “is doing some stuff for this guy.” He wears a Union Jack—a cross—on his chest like a crusader. Therefore, “this guy” on whose behalf Joe acts is the Christian God. Joe is a crusading soldier of God, dispensing God’s justice, such as it is. While laughing at “an accident like that,” God’s crusading hitman asks “who could have foreseen that?” God—that’s who. This reinforces the view that Lynch’s intent is to portray God as a murderous tyrant who contracts man to murder His own Son. The longhaired victim Ed represents Jesus. We find in the 2d part of the film that the hitman is contracted to kill Camilla (Jesus), implying that Ed’s (Jesus’) “funny story” gets Him into “trouble,” just as Joe says. Like the living Jesus, Ed is also simply a man. The hitman takes Ed’s “history of the world in numbers”—the Bible is the history of the world in numbers. Moreover, in the book of Numbers, God commands the Israelites to sacrifice lambs “without blemish” for Him on Passover, just as Joe sacrifices Ed—Christ. Later, Joe asks a prostitute the whereabouts of the movie star Camilla, a strange question unless Camilla is actually Jesus, who consorted with prostitutes.

Mulholland Drive contains many undisguised allusions to great films from the pantheon. It tells story of a failed actress first through her eyes, then ours, and begins and ends—as does its film-on-film predecessor Sunset Boulevard—with the testimony of the victim’s corpse. And as with Jean-Luc Godard’s film-on-film Contempt, the final word is “Silencio.” Lynch adapts many key ingredients from Contempt: a doomed relationship with a beautiful, contemptuous, bewigged and betoweled Camilla/e, her severe head injury in a spectacular and highly stylized automobile accident, the vivid use of red and blue to indicate the director’s purpose, an actress’s pop singing audition, and most important, Contempt’s principal theme of “the fight against the gods.” Significantly for both Contempt and Mulholland Drive, the director Fritz Lang, played as himself, explains through Hölderlin’s poem “The Poet’s Vocation” (poetry-on-poetry) that Man is saved not through God’s presence, but His absence. Invoking a film expressing nearly open scorn for unseen god-like authority, Lynch makes numerous references to The Wizard of Oz, as well as to The Godfather, whose film-on-film sequence demonstrates the punishment for refusing to accept the Godfather’s authority—a corpse in a bed. Like Contempt, Lynch’s theme is about “the fight against the gods,” or rather, the fight against the Christian God.

There’s yet much more that supports Lynch’s concealed Gospel narrative (including "Adam's screenwriter" Wilkin's who lives above Coco—Lynch himself!), but I’ll stop there. Let's just say that, based upon the evidence presented here, I must disagree with your conclusion that,

"I suspect the best way to appreciate 'Mulholland Drive' is simply to experience it as a series of scenes, each one with a power and consistency of its own, that do not 'add up' to a logical plot summary, or cannot be reduced to an explanation"

There is much more to be said, especially about the significance of Lynch's prominent use of the portrait of Beatrice Cenci (who was beheaded for the murder of her father by an iron spike hammered through his head) and Lynch's themes of gruesome and violent head injuries (Eraserhead, Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart, Lost Highway). But Mulholland Drive is most definitely not a disjointed series of scenes. The surrealist filmmaker David Lynch has far surpassed his predecessors Luis Buñuel and all others in making the most blasphemous, anti-Christian film of all time. And the blasphemy is so well concealed that hardly any one caught it. David Lynch is a genius.

I'll leave it for others more to decide how Lynch's accomplishment fits within the history of art and cinema, but from where I sit, Mulholland Drive should be much more widely appreciated than it is, even within the elite world of criticism that has already embraced a fraction of what it knows of this uniquely important film.

I hope that, at the very least, you have been entertained by this deconstruction. Warmest regards.

Ebert: Entertained and impressed, but I'm not sure I could pass a test on it.

Jonah Hill is a good actor.

Sorry for another Jonah Hill comment, but this deleted scene in "Knocked Up" made me realize that he is a valuable supporting actor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0ixmJ2Do6c

I will look for each one of these films - they all sound wonderful.

I'll be headed to the Music Box this week to see a revival of "Odd Man Out." The Music Box is the place that gave me my first education about cinema when I first started down this extreme enthusiast road some 15 years ago. I've come a long way as a blogger, but I still largely see films with audiences, not industry types, before I review them, and I probably always will.

The popular blonde was played by natural blonde Esti Ginzburg, a Sports Illustrated model in her first movie. Zoe Cravitz is not actually blonde.

Ebert: Corrected with thanks.

thanks for your observations roger,

one of the things i have noticed over the past few years is how my memories of films that i saw in a theatre are much stronger than my memories of films that i have seen at home on dvd or vod. going to the theatre is more like an event and all of the associated experiences (the weather, the time of day or night, the audience, what you ate before or after the film, etc.) all remain with you as an association to the film you watched. sad, but this vivid "experience" is usually lacking from films that you watch at home.

best,

sonya

I'm so glad to hear that you liked Jack Goes Boating. I wasn't able to get tickets for it here in Utah. I'm interested to see how Phillip Seymour Hoffman is as a director though.

It seems like a really enjoyable movie though.

I think it shows that the audience is there for something that Hollywood isn't putting out, but how many films at Sundance are styleless, DIY-style mumblefests or Hollywood-style banality? Were there any films at Sundance this year that represented a new and exciting voice of American cinema? I haven't read about any film that sounded like that.

Dear Mr. Ebert,

your writing's pitch-perfect as always, making me feel sorry for not being in this theatre even though it is in Chicago and I live in Germany.

The Runaways. I sure wanna see this one when it's available here in Germany. Whenever that may be. And as for Michael Shannon: well, his Academy Award for Supporting Actor in Revolutionary Road was one of the lesser known victims of The Joker, right? I really enjoyed him in this moive, especially his "I'm glad I'm not gonna be that kid"-speech.

By the way, off-topic question for everybody: am I alone in thinking that with Kate Winslet starring in both Revolutionary Road and The Reader, the right actress won, but in the wrong movie?

And concerning Kristen Stewart: Really? I admit most of what was wrong with the Twilight movies wasn't her fault, but I'm still waiting for proof that there is a good actress hiding in there waiting for the proper breakout role.

That's my 2 cents for now (as you native speakers put it). Keep up the good work, M.H.

Man, Ebert, most of these movies sound highly intriguing. Thanks for the report, General.

Well, I'm happy to see the Duplass brothers back, and more so that they've chosen to work with the terrific Greta Gerwig again, after seeing her in "Baghead" and "House of the Devil."

I, too, am fascinated with the revelation of Kristen Stewart as an actress to watch. I'll admit to not having seen the "Twilight" movies, so I know nothing about her. Should be interesting to see the progression.

Roger,
I was also at Jack Goes Boating screening and I couldn't agree more with your comments about the theatre and the audience. It was an extremely exciting movie experience. I was slightly upset when I read this article to discover you were at the same screening, because I very much want to meet you. Thanks for all the great writing and reviews!
Derick

Dear Mr. Ebert,
As always, your work astounds me! This was a fantastic article! Did you see "Nowhere Boy" this year at Sundance? It is a film about John Lennon's early years growing up and forming The Quarrymen, his pre-Beatles band. It sounds like a great film from the trailer and it was at Sundance this year. I was just wondering if you saw it. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this. You are very kind!
Yours truly,
Bobby

I can NOT believe this...I really can't Mr Ebert! Srsly now? Kristen Stewart ia a great actress? And the Runaways was a good film? really? From a man of your status I didn't expect this, you succumb to Hollywood pressure&say these things about her&her acting, really? I'm dissapointed because you obviously are playing the Hollywood game, too bad, I thought you were better than that!

First off, you really make me miss the Music Box and Chicago. Secondly your excellent and encompassing commentary on these films and actors was great.

During my years in Chicago (1994-2007), we frequented the Music Box almost every week. I took my teenage son there to watch Citizen Kane for the first time. It was the perfect place for watching it. I love their tiny theater too. I live in Hilo, Hawaii now and we have an old refurbished theater called the Palace that plays a hand full of independent and foreign films, mostly only on 2 nights a week. Having your excellent reviews gives me much better perspective on what I want to see since we are somewhat out of the loop here in the middle of the pacific. Mahalo!

Sad to say, down here in Mexico City there's not a single movie house left like the MUSIC BOX as you descirbe it, not a single one. I guess multiplexes are the only way to fill the most seats these days. There was one with the amazing mural in the lobby (closed); another with greek statues inside (an earthquake took care of that one); another two were dedicated exclusively for Disney films and even had Sleeping Beauty's castle as their facades (one was converted into a multiplex, another is now a religious temple); one of my favorites showed only movies from Hollywood's golden era and even changed its programming every couple of days.
Well, at least I can tell newer generations I lived to see places like this.

I don't know if the VOD, YouTube and Selects programs at Sundance 2010 were out of the gate successes, but I love that the fest is throwing its considerable heft at distribution experimentation.

I can't remember ever thinking that Kirsten Stewart wasn't going to be a good actress, even going back to Panic Room. Her breakout role would have been last year's Adventureland. Give her something that isn't stilted and boring, and she'll do fine.

Here's hoping that we get to see these films soon here in the Philippines....

stvs,

You are no doubt correct about, not only "Mulholland Drive", but also other David Lynch movies as having a narrative and not just a series of events because David Lynch has said so himself--he just doesn't want to tell you what it is because it would take away from the magic of it.

Also, in the DVD there's "David Lynch's 10 clues to unlocking this thriller" and here they are:

1 Pay particular attention in the beginning of the film: at least two clues are revealed before the credits.

2 Notices appearances of the red lampshade.

3 Can you hear the titles of the film that Adam Kesher is auditioning actresses for? Is it mentioned again?

4 An accident is a terrible event...notices the location of the accident.

5 Who gives a key, and why?

6 Notice the robe, the ashtray, the coffee cup.

7 What is felt, realized and gathered at the club Silencio?

8 Did talent alone help Camilla?

9 Note the occurrences surrounding the man behind Winkies.

10 Where is Aunt Ruth?

I'm a bit surprised to see that you didn't mention these clues and I'm also a bit curious as to what you think of these clues and their fitting in with your assessment. I'm might have watch it again soon with your metaphor in mind. Do you think these clues line up together with what you said--because I wonder how?

@ Larry wrote:

"IT'S A WONDERFUL AFTERLIFE: Gurinder Chara's return to the same London neighborhood that brought us Bend It Like Beckham, in a fanciful homage to Frank Capra, Steven King, and much in between. Beautifully shot, but ultimately lacking."

I noticed that Roger didn't mention it and consequently assumed as much; ie: that it didn't impress him. However, I also remember his review of "Creation" from the Toronto Film Festival and which I've since seen - and I liked it! And then there's this review from Dark Horizons...

"There are ghosts and romance, music and pure comedy in this Capra-esque charmer. A fresh, wonderfully original and visually gorgeous entertainment that never forgets that it is also deeply human and very smart. The film should prove to be a commercial hit and it is very likely a US deal will be announced imminently.

A comic masterpiece, they really don’t make films like this these days, but thankfully we have Gurinder Chadha to remind us that with the help of a quartet of apparitions, love and curry are in the air." - By Paul Fischer

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/16202/sundance-review-it-s-a-wonderful-afterlife-

And so on one hand there's your reaction to it, and on the other, a glowing review. Meaning folks probably have to weigh the odds of liking/disliking the thing for themselves and then decide. I've already made-up my mind though - I'm going with the ghosts! :)

Smile.

Ebert wrote: "Chaz said that wasn't her tugging lightly on my scarf..."

Were you sitting by aisle 4 near the alley doors? Chuckle! Oooo! I dare you to try and sneak into the Box Theater one night to see what would happen!

Roger wrote: "an! Those are good photos by repowers."

Was that meant to say "and" those were...? Or did you accidentally backspace over a few words? Erasing them? But yeah - those are great shots, eh? What gorgeous old theaters.

As for Whitey the ghost, after reading the story I couldn't help but think what an interesting little movie that would make! About a ghost haunting a theater in Chicago and as a homage to old theaters everywhere still loved by those who attend them.

And I'd like to see Whitey deal with a cell phone going off. :)

Reply to: Larry: WINTER'S BONE: A near perfect movie. The reason I love movies. Took me to a place I had never been, with two anchor performances (Jennifer Lawrence & Jon Hawkes) that gave it depth and gravity. The very very best of Sundance.

For many years, the month of June meant my mother would take down her VHS copy of "Deliverance" and put it in the VCR, hoping to build up my enthusiasm for flying 1,200 miles to attend our family reunion. Now, I can replace it with a DVD of "Winter's Bone." Proof that Natural Selection is trickier than we all thought, and marrying your cousin is...

Reply to: Ebert: The Runaways A somewhat fictionalized version of the 1975-77 teenage girl rock band... packaged as "jailbait rock" by snaky producer Kim Fowley (Michael Shannon). They dressed like hookers and dominatrixes,

Which brings me back to Paris Hilton as role model for an entire generation...

Did I miss your entry on "Winter's Bone"? (Down to the Bone won the award in 2004)

Ebert: Haven't seen it, but I have the DVD and certainly will.

I am SO excited to see Cyrus and am so glad that you loved it. Ive been a huge fan of Tomei since My Cousin Vinny, and I'm glad to see she once again works her magic.

Cannot wait to see Blue Valentine, and who better than Gosling and Williams to portray the intimacies of a relationship. I keep reading really good things about this.

And lastly cannot wait to see Welcome to the Rileys. Not surprised that you and so many other critics are raving about Kristen Stewart, I have never seen the Twilight series, but her work in Into the Wild, Speak, The Cake Eaters, and Adventureland has been so so good. Jodie Foster potential right there

stvs,

Although, there might be those Christian undertones, I think this guy pretty much nails it:

http://www.mulholland-drive.net/analysis/analysis13.htm

Diane is a prostitute who aspires to become an actress, but doesn't get the part she was made for, a tragic story of a fallen actress in the movie, "The Sylvia North Story", but falls in love with Camilla, who does get the part. Camilla pimps her around for parts in movies, gets a lead role, and then breaks up with her for the director. She gets mad and calls a hit on her, which happened, indicated by the blue key. Then she takes some drugs and falls asleep and dreams everything in a different light to cope with it, but ends up being more miserable and commits suicide.

In my last comment on Mulholland Drive, I meant to say that Diane is an aspiring actress turned prostitute from sexual abuse.

Thank you for this post. Living in [Typical Indiana Factory Town], indie movies can be hard to come by here, even down in Indianapolis. We're visiting Chicago for a much needed vacation in a week, and seeing a movie at The Music Box tops our list of things to do.

Thank you for your insight and wit. There's a reason why Jezebel and it's readers love you so damn much!

This may come as a news flash but Ebert has ALWAYS liked Kristen's performances even before that wretched movie Twilight. GO look up his reviews for Into the Wild, Adventureland, Cake Eaters...etc. He hated New Moon an he reviewed it accordingly. HE hated Twi but liked Kristen's acting...simple fact. Get over you insipid hate and don't bash Roger Ebert. The man had integrity and sticks to his guns.

stvs,

Also, in the limo in the movie, the license plate says 2GAY123, which might be an indication of the lesbian relationship.

I take offense to certain commenters who seem to think that liking anything involving Kristen Stewart makes you a player of the Hollywood Game. Whatever happened to thinking for yourself and forming your own opinion?

This year's Sundance was a celebration of just such a thought-- rethinking, re-imagining, and reprogramming your thought process. It was about keeping an open mind about a film, be it a Hollywood Blockbuster or a low-budget indie.

I was at Sundance, and I had the opportunity to see both of the Kristen Stewart films. I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Ebert about the entertainment value of both films. They featured stellar performances and enjoyable storylines.

However, it was "Welcome to the Rileys" that stood out in my mind as a film and a cast worth watching during next year's award season. The three leads boast striking performances that are both touching and thought provoking.

Overall, I agree with most of Mr. Ebert's Sundance reviews. My only difference is that I have long known that Kristen Stewart was a rising actress whose career was worth watching. But of course, it's never too late to catch on.

And while I'm on the bandwagon, stop knocking the Twilight series. The only thing "wrong" with it in the eyes of critics and their minions is that it is the child of a Hollywood machine. So tons of people like it. Good. Hollywood is also in a recession. Be happy that people are out there seeing SOMETHING.

I have said for over a year now, since I first saw Into the Wild and then Adventureland, that Kristen Stewart is perhaps the finest actor I'm aware of under 30 right now. There are few people that can express the internalization of thoughts and emotions, but mostly thoughts, than she.

This is no surprise, as during interviews it's fairly shocking if she is able to find the words to convey what's going on in her mind when confronted with questions, ranging from the outrageously asinine to the thoughtful and poignant. She displays a similar approach in her acting; she's just going to be as honest and authentic as she can in the character she's portraying, and couldn't give two shits if the people watching get what she's going through.

Her ability to cover a range of internal thoughts and feelings is clear in her leading role in the underrated Speak, and continues to improve, Twilight notwithstanding. She seems to go through at least three different emotions in a matter of a couple seconds in the scene in Adventureland, when Jesse Eisenberg essentially attacks her with his lips.

And she's only, what, 19 years old? I'm glad you're starting to talk up her importance, Roger, because the more you do, the more people will realize the developing talent that could become one of the most important and great actors of a young generation.

I always thought everyone was kind of familiar with Kristen Stewart already. For years and years it seemed to me like she kept popping up every time I pulled out some moderate-to-pretty damn good low buzz indie flick from the library. And she's been consistently impressive in all of them. Not to mention she's, you know, attractive. When I found out she was cast in Twilight, I thought "Kristen Stewart's in Twilight? That's weird, that doesn't seem too far up her alley," and I figured everyone thought the same thing. It was bizarre when I found out so many people knew her *from* Twilight.

To understand why it bothers me, imagine that somewhere in the early Noughties before he kept showing up on the Oscar nominee list every year, let's say like right after State and Main, Phillip Seymore Hoffman got cast in a lame but hugely successful blockbuster as a lead character with a dull personality, and when he got back to work getting cast in good movies, you heard people debating whether he can prove a capable actor now that he's taking on more interesting roles in independent films. As if no one had ever heard of PTA. Wouldn't that vex you a little?

That's just how it feels to me. I'm sure I've got an inaccurate perception of a few things, like how long she's been around, but it still bothers the hell out of me when people talk about the strange new territory that the girl from Twilight is dabbling in. She dabbled in Twilight, damn it.

Good to see you fixed the Valentine trailer, youre welcome.

While I agree 100% with everything said here about the Music Box, I must take slight objection with the somewhat snarky comment about the music of the Runaways--"Cherry Bomb" is as close to pop perfection as you can get and even the Carrie Nations themselves would have bowed to it.

Ebert: I'm glad somebody brought up the Carrie Nations.

Ebert, I can't believe you had something good to say about "Twelve". The buzz I've been hearing is that "Twelve" was the worst film at Sundance this year. I guess you disagree. I haven't seen a frame of it, but I've a hard time believing that a movie starring Emma Roberts, 50 Cent and the guy from Gossip Girl can be anything but bad. I hope to be proven wrong, though.

"'David Lynch's 10 clues to unlocking this thriller' … you didn't mention these clues and I'm also a bit curious as to what you think of these clues"

I don't want to threadjack Roger's very interesting post about several excellent new films, so I'll just answer as briefly as I can. Lynch is a genius at conveying multiple, often concealed, allegories all at once. Lynch's "10 clues" pertain to different allegories, some to the surface story of a love affair gone terribly wrong, some to the subjects I discussed above, and some to another concealed allegory that I haven't discussed.

For example, the clue about the title of the film the "Sylvia North Story" is a double entendre. Sylvia North means northern woods and evokes Lynch's common theme of trees taken from growing up in the Pacific Northwest. (INLAND EMPIRE's name is taken in part from the title of Lynch’s father’s Duke University PhD thesis on the Ponderosa Pine.”) Also, corresponding to the alliteration "Chi Rho" of Camilla’s name, the first letters of her film "Sylvia North Story" spell SNS—sins, for which Jesus was executed.

The clue about "the occurrences surrounding the man behind Winkies" is discussed in part above: these clues tie the bum to the Wicked Witch of the West and also to the Christian God. In the book the Wizard of Oz, Winkies are little people living in the West, green pillars appear outside both the entrance to Winkies and the entrance to the Emerald City of Oz, the broom of the wicked witch of the west hangs near the “bum,” a graffito is shown that says “WEST COAST,” and the bum’s facial characteristics are very similar to the wicked witch of the west. So the bum is the wicked witch of the west. But again, the bum is a double entendre. All Lynch's dialogue associates the bum with God, and Lynch even shows us a Christian cross and Virgin Mary graffiti as Herb and Dan walk to see the bum.

In fact, Lynch himself links the bum with God in an interview with Chris Rodley:

Q: Can you say something about the scariest: the horrible, blackened derelict behind Winkies?
A: ... I used to go there [Denny’s on Sunset Boulevard] and have breakfast ... Behind me there were three people and they were talking about God. (Lynch on Lynch, p. 277)

Another double entendre involving the bum's/God's monsters of old age and death: they are also represented as the flying monkeys of the wicked witch of the west! This is Lynch's clue 1, in which we see Diane dance the jitterbug in the opening sequence. In a deleted scene from The Wizard of Oz, the wicked witch of the west sends a jitterbug that bites Dorothy and her party, causing them to dance the jitterbug until her flying monkeys arrive to carry Dorothy and Toto away. Mulholland Drive opens with Diane’s jitterbug contest, and returns to it at the closing, after the bum’s monsters have taken Diane away—God, the wicked witch of the west, caused Diane to dance the jitterbug until His monsters, His flying monkeys, carry Diane away to her death.

And so on. Again, they key is that Lynch, as Roger put it in his review of INLAND EMPIRE, "offers you multiple ways to view it as it uncoils over nearly three hours, encouraging you to see it from all of them at once." So many of these clues refer to double entendres themselves, and are therefore not very valuable as clues. Another concealed allegory I alluded to above is related Lynch's choice of the portrait of Beatrice Cenci. Lost Highway has a veiled reference to the Black Dahlia murder case, so his concealed treatment of another grisly Hollywood murder in the next film he wrote should be no surprise. Remarkably, Lynch also uses details from the grisly murder of Bob Crane throughout Mulholland Drive. Read Robert Graysmith's book The Murder of Bob Crane to see the origin of numerous details that Lynch uses: the "blue key," imagery from the crime scene used throughout Diane Selwyn's room and for Diane herself, and plot details, including the lover/murderer masturbating after the execution. Lynch’s films often feature gruesome head injuries—Eraserhead, Blue Velvet, Wild at Heart (which is also heavy on Wizard of Oz allusions), Lost Highway—and Mulholland Drive is no exception. This is "why" Lynch uses the portrait of Beatrice Cenci, who was beheaded for the murder of her father by an iron spike hammered through his head. This painting was made famous by Percy Bysshe Shelley, who saw it hanging in the Palazzo Colonna in Rome, the site of the Trevi Fountain where Anita Ekberg took her famous swim in Federico Fellini’s La Dolce Vita—no doubt an intentional Lynchian film reference.

I'll stop there, but with the claim that there is much more supporting evidence for these ideas that are available to anyone who watches this film and knows what to look for. A reader mentioned INLAND EMPIRE above. I am certain that at least one concealed allegory can be found in INLAND EMPIRE, but I have no idea what these might be. What are the allegories that Lynch conceals in INLAND EMPIRE? These are waiting to be discovered. As Lynch puts it in his interview with Chris Rodley,

“There are some secrets that, when you learn them, something comes with that learning that is more than the loss of not knowing. Those kind of secrets are different. And I believe in those.”

Philip Hoffman's new thing, Joan Rivers doc, yup for me.

"Runaways," I dunno. Here is a nonfictional account of meeting with truly snaky pop music producer Kim Fowley:

Georgetown D.C., winter 1977. Our electric bluegrass band is invited to a record-launching party for a musically neither-horse-nor-cow group called "Face Dancer." Why? Our schmoozing manager saving us the expense of dinner, prob'ly.

Their producer Kim Fowley in a Tuxedo towers around the room looking nearly 7' tall. Blue eyeshadow. This 1977 John-Waters-style clash of fashion is unimpressive; someone who had absentmindedly neglected to decide which halloween costume he meant to wear. Meet him? Nah, thanks. His hands look long and clammy. Let's eat and get out. Meet the Face Dancer guys? I guess. I dunno. Nah.

What kinda buffet you call this? Recipe from the back of a Rice Chex box. These wild, wild punk parties, real 70s.

The Lord instructs me to undo a "Face Dancer" helium balloon, inhale the helium, and shout "There's a giant on the beach! There's a giant on the beach!"

Soon, a dozen people engage in this same joyful discovery. Kim, from his towering blue-eye-shadow'd latitude, looks nervous about the deflation of all those balloons and the Lilliputian quips. But it's more entertaining than he or anyone else there has been. While this swell gag enlivens the party, we leave, but not because of Kim; it's the baked Rice Chex and pretzel sticks and the brackish cranberry-colored wine in clear plastic cups that has us hoping something's open somewhere.

Don't believe all the wild rock'n'roll stories you hear. There were a few, but they were mostly the foregoing. Kim Fowley didn't like spending money any more than anybody else did. Why do you think they call it "money"?

Anybody know whatever happened to "Face Dancer"? I remember thinking they seemed like responsible boys who would eventually hold down pretty good jobs and take them seriously.

Regarding the Joan Rivers doc: I'm glad to see another movie about angry/outraged post-'50s Vegas-style comedians. John Landis' appreciation of Don Rickles unpacked Mr. Warmth's surreal combination of manic, retro-racist non sequiturs, ersatz rage, and shameless schmaltz. Too bad Rodney Dangerfield left us before he could be profiled. On to Jackie Mason!

Roger, I know exactly what you mean about the feel at these different types of screenings. The one you describe at the Music Box is very akin to what I've felt at some of the screenings held at Austin's SXSW. Particularly at the Alamo Drafthouse, though sometimes at the Paramount Theater as well (depending on the film, the time of day, and the crowd). It's the only festival I've ever really gotten that vibe at.

Reading about your viewing experience of Hoffman's movie was reassuring. I sometimes go into "arty" films (IE films where only fifty percent go because they hope they will see a good movie and the rest go because they are told it is supposed to be a good movie) feeling more like a member of a studio audience, or as Welles once put it, part of the cast.

Is there anything better than going to a movie, expecting a movie, and then forgetting for a couple of hours that you're supposed to assess the movie?

"..the audience seemed to respond as an organic whole.."..Ebert

A beloved film memory and an example of "audience wholism" -isn't there a single probably greek word for it?

Roger, I hear "The Killer Inside Me" "pulled an Antichrist". Any truth to that or blown out or proportion?

And I know your list is alphabetical but there's something hypnotic about a frog that distracts from looking anywhere else, sort of like that "Bad Lieutenant" iguana...

Now for gushing:

Good for Kristen Stewart and her two films. "Twilight" aside (which she chose to become a star, smart career move that will allow her total freedom of script selection but sucks for critics who have to endure the movies, ah well), her role choices are pretty strong and brave. The acting world needs someone with her depths right now. And there are depths, as anybody who has seen "Adventureland" knows she hinted at, without consciously trying...

Ahh, between your blurb and Owen Gleiberman's, I wanna see "Blue Valentine" right now! I've been waiting to see this ever since I heard who the director and actors were...

I think your wondrous experience of seeing Jack Goes Boating at the Music Box may explain why we'll always want to go out and experience a movie in a theater, even if we could see it at home the moment it's released. There's something about the shared experience of seeing a movie with fellow theater goers that is much more magical than viewing a DVD at home could ever be.

I remember going to see Shine with my dad. The movie theater was packed, and when the film had ended and the credits began to roll, nobody moved, for moving would interrupt the emotions we were feeling.

Unfortunately, that sense of sharing something special is diminished when movies are seen at home, no matter how large the screen or how good the sound system. Like going to a crowded church on Christmas Eve, going to a packed movie theater is a spiritual experience that is ill-served stuffed in someone's family room. And don't get me started on movies in planes.

Hi Roger,

did you by any chance catch hold of an Indian film playing in the World Cinema Dramatic Competition -- titled "Peepli Live"?

If you have would like to hear your take on it?

Thanks!

I've been trying to remember the last time I felt the way Roger did inside a theater. The last time I was enveloped like that while watching a movie.

I think it was "Bend it Like Beckham" (2002) at the Fifth Avenue Cinemas outside downtown Vancouver. It was part of the Festival that year and my friend Cheryl and I were surrounded by people who'd made a point of going; Vancouver has a large East-Indian community and we were in the thick of it, this happy, bouncy bunch of people who danced in their seats. :)

And when it was over, everyone was laughing and smiling and humming songs - "Ole, ole, ole ole ole, singing hot, hot, hot.."

I was in a good mood for a month after that.

But before that there was another film, again from the UK only this time, I'd gone to see it by myself.

"Persuasion" (1995) BBC Films. Amanda Root was Anne Elliot and Ciarán Hinds played Captain Frederick Wentworth.

Years earlier, Anne had allowed herself to be swayed by a friend to turn down a seemingly disadvantageous marriage proposal, despite the fact they were both in love. A fact she would come to deeply regret for time would reveal she'd made a mistake and likely destroyed any chance for true happiness; spinsterhood her future.

And then Captain Wentworth returns to England looking to settle down, having made his fortune overseas.

This of course leads to a reunion of sorts, a moment when they meet up again.

He walks into the room and Amanda Root's finger curl round one of the spindles on the back of a chair. A gesture so small no one sees it. But it says so much, it louder than anything else happening in the room. And a very English thing to do of course; emotional repression and all that, but that's why the pay off at the end is good! They had to work for their happiness and when it comes, it's deserved.

And I remember traveling home afterward in a kind of dreamy blissful fog and for having been able to enjoy their triumph vicariously, after rooting for them through the entire film.

I felt the same way about "The Winslow Boy" by David Mamet. Let right be done. I'll always remember that for liking the ring of it so much. So too, the last few lines:

Sir Robert Morton: Oh, you still pursue your feminist activities?

Catherine Winslow: Oh yes.

Sir Robert Morton: Pity. It's a lost cause.

Catherine Winslow: Oh, do you really think so, Sir Robert? How little you know about women. Good-bye. I doubt that we shall meet again.

Sir Robert Morton: Oh, do you really think so, Miss Winslow? How little you know about men.

HAH! :)

Anyhoo, I plan to see "Jack Goes Boating" once it gets released as I saw this clip and that, as much as anything Roger wrote, sealed the deal so to speak. I want to see what happens! I am emotionally invested. Chuckle!

http://www.filmsnmovies.com/video/13497/jack_goes_boating_snow_kiss/

Alot of people in a room to see the same thing for the same reason + the coziness from being out of the cold = the best kind of laughter in the world. I know that feeling, I'm glad you put it in prose.

I moved away from Chicago a couple of years ago, and one of the things I miss the most is the Music Box. As a kid, I remember watching "2001: A Space Oddysey" on PBS, and never quite getting what the big deal was. Then I saw it at the Music Box, and it became pretty clear - same goes for "Patton" and "Touch of Evil". In fact, the last movie I saw before moving was "Raiders of the Lost Ark" at the Music Box. It was the perfect farewell.

Marie says, about my reaction to Wonderful Afterlife: "And so on one hand there's your reaction to it, and on the other, a glowing review. Meaning folks probably have to weigh the odds of liking/disliking the thing for themselves and then decide. I've already made-up my mind though - I'm going with the ghosts! :)"

I guess my notes (which as you note was solely a reaction not a review) were a bit unfair. There is much to celebrate in Wonderful Afterlife. It's certainly fresh and different. If I had seen it in our local artsy/indie/quirky movie moviehouse on a Saturday Night, I surely would have enjoyed it. But holding it up to some of the other things in Park City made it a bit different and my reaction was a relative one. It certainly was very funny in places, particularly early on until the jokes started a bit of repetition. And it was clever. She also uses an amazing color palate, and it's a wonderful movie to look at -- lovingly shot. My cryptic "lacking" comment was simply a result of the fact that with 20 minutes left, there really wasn't much suspense about how it would all be resolved and I found myself thinking I just was ready for it to be wrapped up.

My notes on the last two movies I saw at Sundance:

JOAN RIVERS: Didn't really want to see it. It just fit the schedule. Glad I did. She's a compelling figure, and I can see why the movie won the doc editing award; managed to have narrative coherence and impact despite what must have been thousands of hours of footage.

RESTREPO: Powerful. Jaw dropping in places. I realize how deeply fictional war movies have impacted how I imagined what our troops must be facing in this war. Striking that this real war movie doesn't look like any war movie I've actually seen.

Michael Walker asks: "I think it shows that the audience is there for something that Hollywood isn't putting out, but how many films at Sundance are styleless, DIY-style mumblefests or Hollywood-style banality? Were there any films at Sundance this year that represented a new and exciting voice of American cinema? I haven't read about any film that sounded like that."

Really? First and foremost, you're eliminating a full half of the festival. The festival is and likely always will be about documentaries as much as it is about narrative features. This year's crop of docs is as good as any other years, and to deny the importance of Sundance of elevating the documentary form is to deny its history and continuing importance. Then you're eliminating another quarter of the festival by asking about "American Cinema."

So what's left. Well, there are 16 fims in the U.S. drama competition; a handful in the "spotlight" category (which is brand new this year and is there simply to focus on unappreciated film); a handful in the midnight category, which is largely comprised of low-budget, independent horror or similar types of movies. Then there is the premiere category -- movies with big budgets and hollywood stars or established directors. Finally, there is the "next" category of movies made for under $500k.

So let's take them one at a time. Are the Premiers Hollywood movies? Well, sure. They are movies made largely with the idea of selling to a domestic audience. But they typically have some connection to the festival and have some indie spirit to them. Take Cyrus for example. It is made by Sundance mumblecore heroes, the Duplass bothers, but for more domestic consumption. Anyway, yes, these are premiers.

Now, Next. Yes, these are DIY films. So, how many of these are "mublefests" or "Hollywood banality"? To answer your question, I would say exactly none of this year's crop, although I haven't seen them, but I've heard a lot about them.

How many of the 16 in competition dramas? None that I saw. I wouldn't call any of these avant garde, but by and large these are new, fresh, sometimes unconventional stories (with the exception of happythankyoumoreplease). I would say that at least a dozen represented a "new and exciting voice of American cinema."

There also were dozens of movies at the festival that you could probably put in the "experimental" category, which are not really like things I've seen before, at least as I understand them: Oddsac, Obsedelia, Enter the Void, Pepperminta.

I just think you don't really have a great sense of what the festival is about, or maybe I'm not understanding your question.

Errata: I notice in a prior post I accidentally referred to the great actor Joe Gordon-Levitt as "Jon."

i'm sold on this new Schumacher picture. There's a good filmmaker in there behind all those embarrassing Hollywood pictures.

Thank you Roger, for this article. It's given me a reason to head back to Music Box and watch some great film.

...a room filled with people who are there of their own will, sympathize with movies, and respond genuinely.

Roger's words stuck with me well after I'd finished reading them, and everyone's comments that followed. Then I realized part of the reason why - he was describing this blog, as well. :)

@ Larry wrote:

"My cryptic "lacking" comment was simply a result of the fact that with 20 minutes left, there really wasn't much suspense about how it would all be resolved and I found myself thinking I just was ready for it to be wrapped up."

Oh I see! It's one those.

I felt the same way about "How to Steal a Million" (1966) with Audrey Hepburn and Peter O'Toole. Trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPStHOzjQWU

I'm ready for it to end about 20 minutes before it does. And yet Audrey Hepburn, Peter O'Toole, a $1,000.000 Art heist; there so much to recommend it.

And why I'm more convinced that ever now that the extent to which "It's a Wonderful Afterlife" will entertain, will vary from person to person.

You're either going to enjoy the ride or go "are we there yet?" Chuckle!

You mentioned Joan Rivers...

A little can go a long away with Joan Rivers but to her credit, she's honest. She looks you in the face/i> when she tells you what she thinks and I admire that in people. I'm looking forward to seeing this one, and because it's so honest. Anything else would be too self-serving aka: self-promotion in disguise. And while it's okay to promote a movie about yourself, it needs to be about you, not a commercial "for you".

And I gather "Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work" is a rare example of telling it like it is.

As for "Restrepo" - I'm hoping the focus will be on the price of serving: ie: this is what it's like and consequently, what young men will be asked to process, emotionally & psychologically. There's more to serving than just doing the work physically, eh? I'm hoping they show the seeds of post-traumatic stress disorder, in other words, and because those who make it back alive are going to need "more" than a welcome back home dinner.

Canada's had troops over there for a while and by all accounts, it's kinda sorta like Vietnam.

Long live the old movie palaces. There is nothing like them, especially when the programming attracts an enthusiastic, movie-literate crowd. We're lucky in Sonoma to have the wonderful 1930s Sebastiani Theater on the square. John Lassitar supports it by premiering all Pixar films there. Which surely will earn him brownie points in Heaven.

stvs,

This guy nails it (it seems you didnt' see this the first time I posted it right after my first comment to you)

http://www.mulholland-drive.net/analysis/analysis13.htm

Did you happen to catch ODDSAC? Curious what your thoughts are if you did.

Ebert: All I know about it is, it's not an acronym.

Don't mean to use your blog to be self-serving, but my short film "Goldfish" played at the Music Box as part of Gen Art Chicago. It was my first time in Chicago and I had no idea what I was in for. Man, what a cool theater - and an incredible experience. (and it won the festival)!

Ebert: Readers: Check out his blog.

You do get a lot of twitter replies! I'm sure mine got lost in the masses. I read the lovely letter from Danielle and realized there was a possible mistake. She said you visited her in 1998, which sort of made things a little confusing. You said you visited in 1988. There seems to be a typo.
This was such a beautiful ending to one of favorite journal entries. Thank you for posting that.

Ebert: I'll change that. She was mistaken.

I can't really say much here, but I saw "Scream" in a filled theater and I had to sit on the aisle stairs (at the top row). The opening was great, where Drew Barrymore is on the phone, so I quickly forgot about it and the slight awkwardness. It seemed [the opening] kind of ground breaking at the time, at least to me.

Adding onto my last post, I was a bit of a "Scream" geek, in that I bought the little voice changer thingy and had the posters of the movie in my room.

In response to Keith Carrizosa upthread .... I completely agree. Thanks for the succinct summation of Mulholland Drive - without needing 14 pages on Christian allegory. :) ... No offense. But I always thought it was fairly obvious. Once you watch it a second time - it seems so clear that it's a spurned lover living out wish fulfillment via a dream before she's snapped back to reality. It's brilliantly done - and I love it - but it doesn't need to be more complicated than that.

Goldfish!

Two Girls. One Mission. A lot of Fish.

"Two girls break into their elementary school to save their classroom's goldfish. But everything they know is working against them."

Hurray!

What a great idea for a short! I went to the film's site and watched the trailer and saw the cute little goldfish swimming around and everything! And the girls running with buckets of water and...and... oh hurry up and get a distributor for Canada, already! (Marie starts breathing rapidly into paper bag, etc.)

I also went to Joe Wein's site and saw that he made a commercial for Downey Fabric softer - dude, you did SUPERDAD!

It's about a Dad who puts on a blankie-cape and becomes a super hero! Awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ8CM-89TXc

That aside, I like your sneakers. :)

Love you Roger Ebert but why do you refer to yourself in the third person in this blog post?

I hope you're as disappointed as I am that District 9 beat out Invictus today.

Another well-written, entertaining entry, Mr. Ebert.

I'm going to the Music Box for the first time tomorrow night for a double feature of "Odd Man Out" and "The Third Man", a personal favorite. I can't wait to see that sewer chase sequence, with its echoed footsteps and rushing water, the look on Welles' face as he tries to escape, and only the spotlight at the end of the tunnel lighting up the theatre. Also, those canted angles, high-contrast shadows, the zither music!! Oh, God I can't wait.

As an added bonus there's another Reed film. And I've seen so few--just this film, "Oliver!" and "Fallen Idol," that I'm sure it will be a pleasure.

I'd go tonight, but I gotta see the season premiere of LOST.

Anyway, I'm almost embarrassed to admit: I've never been to the Music Box; though I have wanted to go countless times. Once to see "2001" on the big screen with an appreciative audience, once for "The Earrings of Madame de..." which I hadn't seen at the time but have since enjoyed many times, and several other b&w classic titles on the Great Movies list.

I can't wait! And for those of you who haven't seen "The Third Man" (probably very few people reading this, considering the population of cineastes writing here), you should not miss the chance to see this on the big screen.

@ Keith Carrizosa and anyone else interested in deconstruction, "This guy nails it"

It is easy to find literalist explanations of allegorical art, and, as you point out, there are no shortage of these for Mulholland Drive's surface narrative of a love story gone wrong. When faced with the problem of decoding an allegory, we have the problem of listening to a group of blind men describe an elephant. If you just listen to the blind man who has found the elephant's leg, he will tell you that all clues support his discovery of something round like a pillar, like the author of the linked essay force fitting a literal extrapolation for every single clue in the film.

But what is worse, in my opinion, is critics who plainly see that the artist offers us a puzzle of apparently contradictory pieces that demand a solution, yet retreat to surrealist or psychological mumbo jumbo that the art doesn't mean anything, or could mean anything to anyone. These people would say that the blind men have all found different animals! Nonsense!

I hate, hate, hate, hate lazy criticism like this. Hate it. Hate the insult to the artist that he would waste years of his life to create something that means nothing, and hate the insult to the audience that they would waste any time watching or reflecting on meaningless art.

At least Roger had the integrity to get together with a group of people to attempt to solve Lynch's puzzle, and the honesty to admit defeat when they failed.

Beyond the apparent, simple story of a Hollywood love story gone wrong, we all have before us now a great deal of evidence that David Lynch adapts numerous details from The Murder of Bob Crane, another Hollywood love story gone horribly wrong, to tell his film-on-film story of a Hollywood love story gone horribly wrong. More significantly, we also have a great deal of evidence that Lynch has concealed within every scene of his film an allegorical and blasphemous representation of the Christian Gospel, which for people like Betty Elms who "can't believe it," is truly love story gone horribly wrong.

This is significant not only because it's a compelling explanation of the film's true meaning, but also because it illustrates the sheer artistry required to accomplish the feat of telling multiple stories all at once. Remember the scene in Amadeus where Mozart brags to the Emperor how his Figaro duet turns into a trio, then a quartet, then a “quintet, sextet, septet, octet, and so on!” Mulholland Drive is the same, only with layered, simultaneous allegories. Mulholland Drive is one of the best and most sophisticated films ever created, and hardly anyone appreciates why.

P.S. Roger may appreciate this tidbit, and though I would put this in the speculative category, this at least illustrates the consistency of the Gospel allegory in explaining the otherwise bizarre red herrings in Mulholland Drive.

The final reference to the Castigliane brothers is in the “Last Supper” scene when Rita (who represents Jesus) says in Spanish, off camera, “Yo nunca fui a Casablanca con Luigi!”—I’ve never been to the Whitehouse with Luigi. Luigi Castigliane is Lynch’s Godfather-like character who, blasphemously, represents God. Does Casablanca refer to Casablanca, starring Isabella Rossellini’s mother? Or the Whitehouse, the executive mansion? This line, which does not exist in Lynch’s original 1999 script, appears in the movie released after President George W. Bush declared “I believe God wants me to run for President.” Rita’s statement may be Lynch’s rejoinder to then President Bush: Jesus says he has not been to the Whitehouse with God.

Bobby asks: "Did you happen to catch ODDSAC? Curious what your thoughts are if you did."

To bring this journal entry full circle, ODDSAC will be playing at the Music Box in March. http://oddsac.com/

I didn't see it in Park City, but did attend a panel Q&A with its director, Danny Perez at the filmmaker's lodge. He was an interesting cat -- a bit of a piece of work, but in a good way. Aggressively pessimistic about the times in which we live and the state of the arts -- I'd describe him as sort of glass half full and with a hole in the bottom, mixed in with some anger and angst. But also very passionate about his work and art in general. I'm guessing ODDSAC would be an interesting experience.

Speaking of theatrical experiences, I couldn't hear so much as a breath when Mo'Nique berated Precious from the top of the stairs. It's a cruel extended sequence, and when it ended, you could feel the collective tension from the audience. That's exactly the kind of experience that home viewing will never be able to replicate.

I enjoyed "Welcom to the Rileys" in part-
icular for James Gandolfini performance,
amazing how an actor his size could be
this versatile and devoted to it, he reminds
me of the great J.T. Walsh (R.I.P.)

Oh, wide-screen mama, don't you Cinerama me!
No, wide-screen mama, don't you Cinerama me!

I've given it away from that other thread now, but I bet nobody'll know what I'm talking about.

That song had a different meaning for me than the composer meant, as I was very young, and my experience of what we're reminiscing as old-time-good-old-fancy-theaters was also very different. I was probably under 3 feet tall, so they were gigantic Temples of the Living Mammon.

I was too young to discern whether "Grotto" was the name of the theater in Cleveland or the movie. Whatever it was it was in CINERAMA.

It was my first clue in Ohio that church didn't really mean pfft. MAMMON IS SHOWING IN CINERAMA. CINERAMA IS MAMMON.

MAMMON LIVES. HAIL MAMMON. IN THE BEGINNING MAMMON CREATED CINERAMA. SACRED ELEPHANTS NINE HUNDRED FEET TALL THUNDER MAJESTICALLY ACROSS THE SCREEN. MAMMON IS GOOD. HAIL MAMMON.

Rodge wrote awhile back about how some events in a movie can expand psychically as time and memory wear on. So too my experience of the theaters like the one pictured here in this great essay. In my childhood they would have naturally represented one of the Four Pillars of the Universe, had I been taught such a thing. And so, somewhere in that mammoth psychic memory, Roger represents a priest of the TEMPLE OF CINERAMA.

OOOO-OOOO-OOOOO-CLANG, CLANG, OOOO-OOOO-OOOO,CLANG...

We'll be seeing "Jack Goes Boating" at the local indie theater, which is an outdated mall cineplex at an outdated mall, not very comfortable. Nevertheless, that early childhood impression will also be there among the pinions of my conscious mind... it seems also to be there, watching Netflixes on the laptop...

Dear Roger;

Since Music Box in Chicago is not in my near future and Sundance films are usually watched on my TV I read this post with only mild interest.

But elsewhere on your website I found this:

"Has there ever been a film where the music more perfectly suited the action than in Carol Reed's "The Third Man"? The score was performed on a zither by Anton Karas, who was playing in a Vienna beerhouse one night when Reed heard him. The sound is jaunty but without joy, like whistling in the dark."

Whistling in the dark!

Wow!

Now when are you going to turn your wonderful cast of commentators loose on the Oscar race?

I watched a DVD of the movie "Visioneers" today and I highly recommend it. It star Zach Galifianakis and it's about a corporation that is has pretty much dominated the takeover of the world and within it, people explode if they have an emotion. It's a kind of Orwellian Idiocracy in a thriving modern world.

Here's the opening scene (listen for the lady, in the next room, scream and then explode:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3xhMOXT1Z8

Nothing can replace sitting in a good theater sharing the experience of watching a movie. The shared laughter, groans, tears, mumbles only enhance a good movie. I have employees who watch movies on their computers and I can't even take their opinions seriously on many movies as they didn't really "see" the movie in my opinion.

I have a decent home theater room which I enjoy greatly, but it will never replace the theater going experience for me. It is great to see people who love movies keep places like the Music Box going and people like yourself who are champions of the real movie going experience.

Thanks Roger!

Hi Roger,

Wondering if you saw Alexandre Franchi's "Wild Hunt" this time around...? I've seen the trailer and am crapping myself to see if the movie is as good.

Thanks in advance,
Britt

So Seymour Hoffman is a somewhat decent director as well?
Im no expert in movies or what not, and I usually just come here for the reviews (which are a cracking good read) but seeing Phillip on the cover I had to read this.
For my amateur mind PSH is THE best actor working today. Period.

Completely off topic, except....

Headline from today's USA Today - part of the Super Bowl hype. We know what the gold standard is don't we...

Manning is the NFL's 'Siskel & Ebert

Cheers

RE:Terek Hunaty

J.T Walsh(R.I.P)

That is high praise indeed, sir, describing Gandolfini's performance as reminiscent of J.T. Walsh. Besides all his fine film efforts, his work in Glengarry Glen Ross on the stage was viewed by some as superior even to Kevin Spacey's excellent work in the movie. I once nominated him for inclusion in the prestigious "Stanton/Walsh Rule." If only he had lived long enough to work with the likes of, say, Ray Winstone, Brendan Gleeson, or James Gandolfini. Ah what cinematic bliss doth that conjure up.

stvs,

David Lynch said that every interpretation of his movie is valid.

In that link where I said that guys nails it, I said it because I did notice a lot of those things BEFORE I read it, and there was this clarification there. For instance, with the jitterbug scene at the very beginning, there was the upbeat dance-music, and then suddenly ominous music comes on and it shows the old people fade into the scene. That was one clear clue. Then the prostitution: you couldn't help but wonder why she was there in the story and also why a guy was walking around with a hugh phallic object in the backround.

I'm glad that you made me get a second look at the movie and find out what it's about (did you read ALL the links that I posted; it even does a scene-by-scene analysis) because I believe that understanding increases enjoyment and even knowing the movie's secret doesn't decrease it's enjoyment to me, but I think on the first time you should not know, such as with movies like "Psycho", which also had a deep impact on me because I knew nothing about it when I saw it.

There was always something about David Lynch to me that I really dug. When I was younger I read some of his script to "The Lost Highway" and was very fascinated by it: in particular how he would describe music in his scripts--which in the script described it as a low-droning buzz. Then I bought the soundtrack for the movie, (for some of the bands on there; I didn't see until a few years later) and I heard some of Angelo Badalamenti's music and loved it. Now, 13 years later, I still have that same feeling from years ago about the music and the sound in general in his movies: the performances, for instance. So, there's much to love on the surface of his movies, but the dark psychological aspect, with the aid of the music, atmosphere etc. is really my cup of tea, being a bit of a horror movie fan, because his movies are like good horror movies too!

stvs,

I also think Mulholland Drive is such a kind of classical hollywood movie. That scene where Cookie, the Hispanic hotel manager of the shabby hotel, knocks on the door and tells him somebody is looking for him and and he has such class, it reminds me of old Hollywood movies where they made a point of having ethnic roles being equals (well, the few that did). But now, in Mullholland Drive it seemed to be stealing it and just using it for the movie and not to make that racial point, and saying "Why not make "the ethnic role" really classy?"

I think, just as Roger said Bahrani is a classical filmmaker, I think so is David Lynch.

To Marie Haws:

Marie -- I wanted to make one more comment on your reference to and quote of the Paul Fisher review of It's a Wonderful Afterlife at darkhorizons. Interestingly, Fisher has allegedly been caught red handed plagiarizing several of his recent reviews -- including the Wonderful Afterlife review -- directly from the Sundance media guide. It's rather shocking actually. http://bit.ly/blZfOB

The review has since been taken down by darkhorizons.

I don't think this will affect your enjoyment of the movie. I see from some of your other posts that you were deeply entertained by "Bend It" and are looking forward to Wonderful. I don't think you will be disappointed, nothwithstanding my lukewarm reaction. It's classic Gurinder Chara. I just thought in the interest of the full story, I'd post this errata note about this review and the subsequent revelation, and also because I thought Roger might be mildly interested in this story.

I meant "Roger represents the high priest in the temple of Cinerama."

Mariiiiiiiiiiie? Did you make the connection between "wide screen mama" and "yogurt mama" in my little contest? Is that how you figured it out? You can find out the author by googling that title line, you know...

With all this talk about Mulholland Drive, it makes me wish I had brought it with me to Seattle! It also makes me think that I should have included it on my top ten movies of the decade list. I almost did.

Regardless, my take on the movie was that it was an indictment against the way Hollywood makes films. Think about it: the actress that is cast in the film within the film is not the best actress there; she only gets in because the director is told to cast her...or else.

And then when we go to the "dream sequence" (or whatever it is), Diane's lover is sleeping with the director, which may be how she got the part.

Also, I just thought that visually and emotionally, everything worked in this film, particularly the nightmare sequence (as I like to call it) at the end of the film. Though I've seen it three times, it calls for another viewing, as I haven't seen it in awhile.

Just returned from the Music Box's showing of "The Third Man." What a lovely, simple theater. It is rare that I see a movie and know that I am surrounded by like-minded people who appreciate movies as much as I do.

This was such a memorable experience for me. I can't wait until I return. Maybe I'll see Casablanca on the 14th.

Anyway, I was enraptured from the moment the curtains slowly rose, with that iconic zither music, until that final lingering shot of Alida Valli giving Holly Martins the cold shoulder.

Classic film, fitting theater, and a wonderful time.

Ebert: If you go to my Twitter account, ebertchicago, and hit command-minus or the Windows equivalent, that will reveal the photo beneath, and...

Roger,

Your link to Roger la Grenouille took me back to a wonderful trip to Paris some years ago. I'm wondering, though -- when you were there, did you happen to order the Surprise du Chef for dessert? My wife did, upon vigorous urging by the waiter. Unfortunately, we had failed to notice the Polaroid pictures plastered on the walls, depicting the many others who had enjoyed this unique dish. Not exactly PG-13, if you know what I mean.

Ebert: Recommended for female frogs only.

This is off-topic, but what is up with everyone, now including Ebert, praising The Chaser so much? I regard it as one of the worst films I have ever seen in my entire life, and certainly the worst Korean film. It is an entirely pointless story (spoilers follow) because the woman just ends up escaping by herself, so all that detective work and running around was for nothing. And if that wasn't enough, the killer accidentally finds her by coincidence... sorry, I mean finds her because that's what the script calls for, and not because it makes any narrative or logical sense. Obviously the whole thing is beyond ridiculous and has no legitimate explanation.

The Chaser is objectively a bad film. It is an atrocity. A crime against cinema. It should not be seen by anyone. And I seem to be the only person who realizes this.

Ebert: There is a nihilism to it.

I was Facebooking and browsing around for the "Best Movies of the Decade." Among critics, popular picks are 'Almost Famous' and '25th Hour.' A few include 'Doubt' and 'Capote'. Netflixers seem to be big fans of 'Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.' A strong following for 'Punch Drunk Love' was revealed in your Best of the Decade blog comments. My friend expressed dissatisfaction with my "Best of..." list because it did not include 'Charlie Wilson's War.' Then, of course, there's 'Synecdoche, NY.'

Now, with the release of Jack Goes Boating, is there any greater treasure in the movie industry than Philip Seymour Hoffman?

What about Gaspar Noe's ENTER THE VOID?

As a semi-professional audience member for television shows in Hollywood, Roger is absolutley correct. There are more laughing "types" than you can shake a stick at. The instructive laugh is one of my most important tools.

@Paul Arrand Rodgers
Kristen Stewart was the daughter in Panic Room??!!?
Wow, I totally misjudged her without even having seen the Twilight things. I'm excited to see Welcome to the Riley's now to give her a proper chance.

What do the 3D cane toads do? Does it look like they're jumping off the screen at you?

ebert you dried up, washed out old hack you wouldnt know quality cinema if it kicked you in the nuts

Ebert: Try watching quality cinema sometime. It's not like a kick, more like a gentle caress.

It would spare you the trouble of doing it yourself.

"I could go through my usual vaudeville act about chase scenes and queasy-cams and Idiot Plots, but instead I'd like you to join me in the analysis of something that increasingly annoys me.

Imagine we are watching "From Paris With Love" on a DVD with a stop-action button...

...We don't miss much in the way of continuity, because it's pretty much glued together a frame at a time. We see a dizzying cascade of images, but here's a funny thing: We don't see Travolta completing many extended physical movements, and none involving any danger. The shots of him involve movement, but in bursts of a few frames, inter-cut with similar bursts of action by his attackers. There is no sense of continuous physical movement taking place within a defined space. No overall sense of the choreography." - Roger

And this is why most action movies today SUCK.

They're designed to appeal to increasingly impatient post-adolescent sensibilities. In the past, it was always the story that suffered. Now? Even the action employs shorthand and so you don't have to wait for the next round (aka: dose) of movement. With the end result that all the action has been truncated and condensed into bursts.

I swear, one day you'll be able to buy action in a syringe and just shoot that - as why bother even watching a movie? That's so old school, etc.

"Raiders of the Lost Arc" on the other hand, is one the most perfect action movies I have ever seen. And right up there with it, is James Bond "Casino Royale" with Daniel Craig and because of the opening chase sequence featuring Sébastien Foucan, which uses aspects of parkou or "free running".

You can follow the action beautifully in that sequence - you don't get lost. You're right there with them the whole time. It's brilliant!

Whereas the 2nd Bond film sucked big time. I wanted to shoot the editor and the director. I could barely watch it, it was so badly done. I couldn't follow the action. From the opening sequence, which SUCKED right through to the end when stuff was blowing up.

Note: Daniel Craig is a gifted actor and I've admired his work for years. And he did his best, as did Judi Dench. So no complaints there.

The "Bourne Ultimatum" was a great film, but to the extent "Quantum Solace" tries to emulate it, it fails miserably. Note: I remember reading Roger's review and nodding in agreement throughout.

Anyhoo, curious to hear any news about Bond 3, I Googled it and OH MY GOD... oh dear Lord, please, noooooo!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/film/2804101/New-Bond-film-will-be-in-3D.html

Excuse, I have to go puke now.

Is there a Pakistani man here with his testicles, heart and brains intact? Visit the following link and see if it can shame you into taking some responsibility for the misdeeds of your fellow countrymen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8499578.stm

I apologize as a human being to the women of the world for the existence of such men. They bring shame upon all human beings everywhere.

I repeat, is there a Pakistani man present who will apologize to the persecuted women of his country and try and do something about it other than shrug responsibility and act self important?

Ebert: I very much doubt any Pakistani or Indian readers in this place, and there are a lot of them, do other than deplore the practices described.

If you want them to stand up, why don't you sign your own name?

Another off topic, but on the topic of your review of the Travolta movie...

The use of CGI for so much truly is sickening.

There was a movie by Hugh Jackman called VanHelsing.

In the movie, VanHelsing (or at least CG VanHelsing) executes a stunt of jumping from a horse drawn carriage, from one set of horses to the next to stop the rampaging horses.

This is a stunt that is one of the oldest in hollywood. Heck, Ron Howard did this stunt on an episode of Happy Days.

Why use CG?

To borrow a phrase from the aforementioned TV series, to me, that is when CG "jumped the shark."

RE: Bob Bowman

Roger la Grenouille's frog delicacy

That is TOO funny. I guess that's one dish I don't ever want to know how to prepare. Thanks for sharing the story.

Don't need other people to enjoy a dream; don't need to be in an audience.

Ebert: "I very much doubt any Pakistani or Indian readers in this place, and there are a lot of them, do other than deplore the practices described.

If you want them to stand up, why don't you sign your own name?"

If I may politely point out, there's a considerable difference between looking down your nose at something and actually taking responsibility for the failings of the region in question and taking action to rectify them. It is made clear in the news report that there is no evidence for it, what there is a great deal of evidence for in the region, is flinging acid in the faces of women who don't cover themselves up, rape, beatings and murder. In many instances, women in the region in question cannot even approach the police for fear of persecution from those who are supposed to protect them.

Making some vague statement like - I cannot be held responsible for the actions of others is not a sufficient answer when clearly these actions are preventable through official intervention. We are part of a society, a global human society and are answerable to each other.

Of the two countries you mention, I believe it is the former where women's rights are virtually non-existent.

I do not sign my name because I do not wish to become the standard bearer of a particular cause. I don't think this disqualifies me, or in any manner prohibits me, from trying to point out an injustice and seeking redressal on behalf of any persecuted human being, as someone with knowledge of said persecution, in the capacity I see fit. If you do not wish to publish my comments on such matters, you are obviously under no obligation to do so. That you did not refuse to publish them even though I make some inflamed comments, both heartens me and shames me. If I may say so, the suffering of the women of Pakistan, does not register on any scale of comparison with some hurt I might cause to the ego of some upper middle class Pakistani/otherwise readers. I don't think I'm making any unjustifiable or unqualified statements, if you think I am, I should be greatly obliged if you point them out such that I can set them right, if I haven't already done so.

I got carried away and for this I apologize to you and will apologize to any Pakistani who steps forward and says my comments caused them offense. I will also request that they take some concrete actions to eliminate the intolerable inhumanity their fellow countrywomen are being subjected to on a daily basis. I understand that this is neither a simple nor easy task, small incremental steps however, from all corners of the world, can make a considerable amount of difference, the key I think is awareness.

My thanks for your indulgence.

Ebert: "Gandolfini [in Welcome to the Rileys] ... demonstrates that although he may not be conventionally handsome, when he smiles his face bathes you in the urge to like him."

I've always wanted to see him play Lennie in "Of Mice and Men." Wouldn't it be swell to watch him yearn for them rabbits? He'd break your heart, that's what he would do, George.

"… Twitter account, ebertchicago, and hit command-minus or the Windows equivalent, that will reveal the photo beneath"

Ah, I see that Roger is a teabagger fan.

As I suspect you are fully aware, you will find a principal source of teabagger symbolism in D.W. Grifftith's superb Birth of a Nation a.k.a. “The Clansmen,” which is chock full of racist yet powerful mythology, all culminating in the removal of a black (half-black actually) corrupt political leader.

The entire 2d half of the film is a glorification of terrorism as a political strategy. Griffiths: "The Ku Klux Klan, the organization that saved the South from the anarchy of black rule, but not without the shedding of more blood than at Gettysburg." Violent actions against elected blacks are explained with the text:

The former enemies of North and South are united again in common defence of their Aryan birthright.

It features scenes like this one showing Gus's "just trial" after which he is castrated, hung, and dumped on the steps of the mulatto Lt. Governor Silas "Lynch"'s house ("the answer to the blacks and carpetbaggers").

Birth portrays one huge source of the teabagger's opposition to Obama and calls for violence against the President. The whole film is available online at the internet archive. It's also just a great film to watch.

And (apropos of the discussion above of the Gospel allegory in Mulholland Drive) it ends with an explicit depiction of Jesus's return after the whites have established their own just rule on earth.

What a blog subject the teabagger's use of Birth themes would make! (hint hint)

Shoot! So you're telling me that the Musicbox last week is NOT what Sundance Festival is like?!:) I was gonna start buying airline tickets and finding hotels! I LOVED that night and you describe it perfectly. I hope you caught the good vibe I sent...I'm such a fan and it was great to see you out and about.

Bonjour Monsieur Ebert, dans l'amour du cinéma - liberté, égalité, fraternité. Oui?

I agree with your point of view very much, and I am also very envious of you can have so many interesting experiences, we all know, the film is actually a driving in the form of civilization,movies are kinds of records, records of true and false. If it brings civilization , and local development, it is a good movie,just like the experience of ROGER mentioned as it is the reason for the development of Chicago, so well, I believe that with the film's publicity is inseparable. "Jack went boating" is not only a comedy, but its role in the city is a welcome and value.

Now,speaking of Blue Valentine. I think the most important thing between lovers is the trust, and a distance of the regulation, I believe our views will be the same as mine. Although I was just a single Nike Outlet boy.

Hey,I won't talk about the films, and I can only say that these films ROGER you recommend are good, I think I will have the opportunity to go and take a look, and looking forward to your better articles.

Best wishes to you.

I am legitimately excited to see pretty much all these movies ("Cane Toads" being the exception). Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams are both terrific actors,and I look forward to seeing them together in "Blue Valentine." Michelle Williams is also set to star in a romantic comedy with Seth Rogen later this year - a genius pairing if you ask me - written and directed by Sarah Polley.

"Cyrus" also sounds great. You really can't go wrong with a John C. Reilly movie; add to that Jonah Hill (like Keith Carrizosa mentioned, his deleted scenes in "Knocked Up" are honestly some of the funniest things I've ever seen), Catherine Keener, and Marisa Tomei and well - that's even better.

"Jack Goes Boating" also sounds really good; I'm excited to see Hoffman's debut behind the camera. I'm also excited to see "Welcome to the Rileys." I think James Gandolfini's a great actor; his performance in "Where the Wild Things" are was one of the few things about the film that wasn't disappointing. And Kristin Stewart does seem to be a real up and comer, like you mentioned. She has a very natural, unforced screen presence; she was great in "Adventureland."

Aside from that, "Twelve" and "The Runaways" both sound good, but don't quite grab me the way the other titles do.

And the Music Box sounds like a great place to watch a movie. I'd love to go there sometime.

As for Michael Shannon, is he the most unheralded force in acting today, or what?

If you think he's great on screen, you should see him on stage. He's been giving incredible performances in Chicago for years, mostly on the tiny stage at A Red Orchid Theatre. Did you get a chance to see him there this fall in Mistakes Were Made? A (mostly) one-man show, furious with energy and giddiness. A performance that will go down in our town's history (the proud part of it).

Right now, Chicago theatre is experiencing a gigantic wave of creativity and recognition from around the world. Tracy Lett's and Steppenwolf's August: Osage County went to Broadway, won top prizes (along with the Pulitzer) and is in development to become a movie that I promise you will feature one of the largest collections of great performances seen on screen since Short Cuts. Several Chicago-grown productions and talent have moved or are being sought by New York, including the great director David Cromer and his haunting, devastating production of Our Town (which now boasts the longest run in its history). And, of course, Michael Shannon (who has had a nice history on screen, too, before ever being noticed - particularly in Jesus' Son) is a frikkin' Oscar Nominee. Along with plenty more to be proud of...

It's a great time to be an artist in Chicago.

Ebert: I saw him here in "Mistakes Were Made." One of my greatest experiences in a theater.

Here he is at Cannes: http://j.mp/cDfrTX

I can still remember, like it was yesterday, seeing a screening of Gone With the Wind with the American School in London around 1980 as an eighth-grader in an old great London movie house. Not just watching the film, but the entire visceral feeling of the event. Sad for me that my children will likely never have that kind of experience. Of course, with stadium seating they won't have to see films in between heads....

Off-topic, excepting it being Chicago, but I see Roger has tweeted that Mancow has just been fired. He's been in Chicago a long time.

I did some music work for his show back in San Francisco. A Spike Jones style accordion version of "Oo Baby I Love Your Way," I think I remember. He paid me by rigging my win in some contest or other. Cheap fella, wot?

One day he started announcing he was quitting the deejay business and moving back home because his dad was dying of cancer. Can't think of the name of his home town; it's the Garlic Capital of America, though. You'll find the name on many jars of garlic.

He told me that this was a cover story -- the truth was, he'd been hired for half-a-mil a year by some rock station in Chicago. Why he made up that story, I don't know, but he certainly milked it for awhile. He also regaled me with prank phone calls which were... well, my kid's were funnier and he was only 13. I forget what he wanted. Go watch a baseball game or something.

Lots of Bay Area deejays resented Mancow. Billy Jam, who introduced hip-hop to the SF bay airwaves told me that. Not sure why they did. I say good for him. The squeaky wheel gets his palm greased, or however that goes.

Loved your piece on Hoffman's film, I look forward to seeing it. But you truly capture what seeing movies is all about, as a social experience. The one I remember, and will always remember, will be a screening of "La Dolce Vita" my wife and I saw on our honeymoon in Vancouver, B.C. It was a cool summer evening, and the show started around 10 -- a late show, in other words. An old theater, and it was sold out, tickets sold to people who wanted to stay up late and see "La Dolce Vita" on a big screen. We ended up almost in the front row, which initially had me concerned, but it was terrific. And, since that was the first time I'd seen the film when I was approximately the same age as the main character, I finally got it -- REALLY got it. Incredible.

I grew up during the 40s and 50s three blocks from the Music Box and to this day if you name a movie that I saw there, I can remember where I was sitting and who I was with or if I was alone. I can even taste the buttered popcorn: real butter melted in a big tin and poured with a ladle over just popped hot popcorn. The first double bill I saw, with George Libman, was around 1945: it was a re-release of Lost Horizons and She. I'll always remember when Colman first sees Shangri-la across the mountains, and when the She lady turns old at the end. The Music Box was a place of magic and always will be.

Ebert to DiCaprio-10 questions

Mentioning Scorsese's screening several old film noirs during pre-production of "Shutter Island," you ask him what actors from this era he you responded to? " Response:"Certainly Dana Andrews and Jimmy Stewart." Dana Andrews! Who'd had thunk it. Andrews came to mind before Stewart.
Then I remembered the scene in "Laura" where the detective worships at the alter of dead Laura's portrait. And there may have been some Fred Derry in Frank Pierson. But who knows. Are follow up questions allowed? Why Dana Andrews? What role/roles? Why not Mitchum, Douglas, Gene Evans, or Jim from Titicut Follies for that matter. Intriguing interview.

Oh ya, bet you one of those shiny dimes the Sinatra project never sees the light of day.

Interesting choice sir for your overlooked movie of the month.
Like they say two heads are better than one and this one is evident to the contrary,
in this case it's probably the finest to be made by this year's major accomplishers;
Kathryn Bigelow and James Cameron, a powerhouse of a movie and one of the best
later science-fiction movies of the century; next to Dark City and eventually
Minority Report.
I just saw it a couple of weeks ago for the seventh time, before you posted it.
Usually when I like a movie, I keep it on the side for further discovery, research, study,
etc...on my sixth viewing; I took it apart, (when I was a kid I wanted to be an engineer,
I would break apart something electronic that's down; to know it's flaw, then put it back
together from the ground up, just to know how it operates (after Sikes Biko dad
immigrated to Germany and majored in engineering before switching to photography)
now I'm applying this method to my latest passion, film and character) realized this movie is a masterwork of endless creativity, if anyone could find a flaw in this movie then they have something over me. I was glad it wasn't a box office breaker or been nominated for any Oscar's, I rightfully could claim that this was my discovery of an underrated great movie and include it on my list of movies I have seen for at least five times and still want to see more; including:
-Metropolis 26&01, -Citizen Kane, -The Third Man, -King Kong, -Le belle et la Bete,
-The General, -Vertigo, -2001: A Space Odyssey, -The Wild Bunch, -Don't Look Now,
-RAN, -La dolce vita, -Natural Born Killers, -Mulholands Drive,
-Waking Life, -Dark City, -Watchmen, -Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow,
-Minority Report, -Synecdoche, New York, -Chinatown, -Strange Days, -The Exorcist
and The Dark Knight your ultimate mano a mano confrontation, powerhouse movies; movies that are powerful, complex and endlessly inventive.

I was wondering the other day if you've reviewed these titles before, you do indicate in some of your books that you've seen them; yet I couldn't find them on-line.

-David Cronenberg's (The Fly)

-Kathryn Bigelow's (Near Dark)

-David Fincher's (Alien 3)

-James Cameron's (The Abyss & The Terminator)

I like to compare and contrast in my free time.
I know they are nowhere near their later works, but are impressive for starters.

I love Hoffman's work as an actor so am sure I will love this, but really wanted to thank you for the body of your work. I rely on your web site constantly for reviews of movies old and new. I honestly can't find reviews I like as much anywhere; the New Yorker is a close second but its reviews are not archived in a helpful way on line. Your outlook clicks for me, for some reason, and I'm grateful for that...

CANE TOAD REDUX

CAUTION!

POSSIBLY THE MOST HORRIFIC 20 SECONDS YOU WILL EVER WITNESS ON FILM

poetv.com/video.php?vid=59325

I have to reiterate your love of the Music Box. A little over a year ago, when I first moved to Chicago, my then-boyfriend (now-fiance) and I went to see "It's a Wonderful Life," complete with sing-a-long and jeering crowd (at Mr. Potter's expense). The theater is delightful and the crowds are wonderful.

I just discovered your blog and I am so delighted to hear your "voice" again. For years I was joyfully entertained hearing you and your partner banter back and forth.

Today in your blog I read a few words that just jumped out at me. Specifically: "illusory clouds float and stars twinkle" describing the ceiling of the theater (where you viewed the Sundance Film Festival). I want to thank you for vividly bringing back to my recollection the a similar theater (the Whittier Theater in Whittier, CA) where I first saw Breakfast at Tiffany's. In that theater of the 50's and 60's, I too stared at the theater's ceiling and I would be transported into another world.

God bless you.

I enjoy your reviews and your writing in general but how could I email you directly?

It's quite interesting.I will look around for more such post.Thanks for sharing.
http://www.all-star-shoes.net/ all star shoes

“Can We Talk?!” Joan Rivers’ birthday is tomorrow! & that piece of work has a doc coming out this Friday! Joan what’s next, taking over the world? Lol have a great bday!

When you feel hurt and your tears are gonna to drop. Please look up and have a look at the sky once belongs to us. If the sky is still vast,clouds are still clear, you shall not cry because my leave doesn't take away the world that belongs to you.

I love romantic movie.When you head of something you never touch before, do you have an eager to have a try? I think we all have a heart full of inquisitive minds to meet them. We try once, we can know the real thing it is and we will get more. Nice post! Thank you for sharing the meaningful.

Hoffman is a great actor, he show a natural touch in his acting. I love Hoffman's work as an actor. I want to see him in many more movies. I pray that God give him many more power for doing the acting for entertaining us. i really like himCursos de ingles en el extranjero

I love Hoffman's work as an actor. I want to see him in many more movies. Mensajes claro

I saw all his films. Hoffman is a good actor. I hope that will appear in new films but with different acting for entertaining us.

yeah …! thank u ! … to me like all themes