The Contenders:
Kirk Douglas: The Bad and the Beautiful
Gary Cooper: High Noon (winner)
Alec Guinness: The Lavender Hill Mob
Jose Ferrer: Moulin Rouge
Marlon Brando: Viva Zapata!
Showing posts with label Moulin Rouge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Moulin Rouge. Show all posts
Monday, July 15, 2019
Monday, January 21, 2019
Friday, October 17, 2014
Saturday, July 26, 2014
Gay Paree
Film: Moulin Rouge (1952)
Format: DVD from NetFlix on laptop.
Format: DVD from NetFlix on laptop.
I’ve been public about my dislike of the 2001 film Moulin Rouge!, so I’d be lying if I suggested that I was incredibly excited about seeing the version from 1952. Imagine my relief to discover that the one from a decade or so ago was not in fact a remake of the earlier film. Rather than being a romance that strongly mimicked Titanic, this film is almost a biopic of Henri Toulouse-Lautrec. I won’t be lying when I tell you it felt like I’d dodged a bullet.
Anyway, we open at the eponymous Moulin Rouge, a nightclub/dancehall/disreputable bar in Paris. There’s dancing and singing and a lot of infighting between the dancers, especially La Goulue (Katherine Kath) and Aicha (Muriel Smith). We are also introduced to the club’s chanteuse Jane Avril (Zsa Zsa Gabor) and, of course, Henri Toulouse-Lautrec himself (Jose Ferrer). It’s not until the place closes that we really get a look at him, though. When he stands up, we discover that he is terribly short, like 4’6” short, and that this is primarily from a pair of seriously truncated legs.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Guiche Guiche Ya Ya Weird
Film: Moulin Rouge
Format: DVD from DeKalb Public Library on big ol’ television.
Baz Luhrmann has directed exactly four movies in his interesting career, and two of them are on this list, a pretty good average. His output comes in fits and starts, averaging about one film every five years. Of the four, Australia bombed, two ended up on this list, and the final, Romeo + Juliet could be argued, although I wouldn’t make the argument.
It can certainly be argued that his productions become more and more lavish as time goes on. His first film, Strictly Ballroom is on its own merits, unrestrained, but compared with his later films, is downright sedate. This is especially true when comparing it with Moulin Rouge. This film takes the music and dancing of Ballroom and pairs it with the anachronisms of Romeo into an absinthe-fueled whole that is as much fever dream as it is film.
Frankly, I’m not sure how to react to it.
On the one hand, Moulin Rouge is a period piece, set at the turn of the last century in Paris and the eponymous club made famous by the art of Toulouse-Lautrec (played here by John Leguizamo). And yet, it is also filled with modern music. Rehearsing a play in which our hero Christian (Ewan McGregor) is thrust into the role of a Swiss poet, he suddenly breaks out into “The Sound of Music.” Confronted by the cast of this nascent play and asked if he believes in love, he spits forth a trio of modern song lyrics. Once in the club, we’re treated to a medley of disco and grunge (the entire crowd sings Nirvana lyrics), show tunes and Madonna. It’s difficult for me to put my finger on exactly what or when this is supposed to be.
Since it’s a musical, we’ve got to have a love story, or more precisely, a love triangle. We’ve got Christian, of course. We’ve also got the powerful and wealthy Duke (Richard Roxburgh) who is obsessed with the star of the show at the Moulin Rouge, Satine (Nicole Kidman). The manager of the cabaret show, Harry Zidler (Jim Broadbent, who is always great in everything he touches) wants Satine to convince the Duke to underwrite the show by any means possible. Especially by the means that you’re thinking of. Through a haze of mistaken identity, she assumes Christian is the Duke, attempts to seduce him, and the two end up very much in love.
But, of course, not all is well. The Duke wants her, and will not underwrite the show unless he has her, putting Satine in a difficult position. Does she go for stability or for true love? Happiness or wealth? The penniless writer or the wealthy man of means? Frankly, it’s like a musical version of Titanic without the sinking ship. Or, more precisely, it’s a musical version of Les Enfants du Paradis with only two suitors.
I can certainly understand why people love this movie. It is lavish in a way that few films are. The costumes are astounding, and they won a much-deserved Oscar. The musical numbers are equally over-the-top and grand in a way that the classic musicals of the 30s and 40s could only dream of being. As seems to be the case with Luhrmann when he has free range, it’s all about the spectacle.
And therein lies my issue with this film. It really is all about the spectacle, and less about the story than I am comfortable with. This is a story I know. It could only end in a couple of ways (the comparisons above are a pretty sizable hint, as is Luhrmann’s second film). The characters are no one I haven’t met before in other films—I did, after all, watch Titanic within the week. These characters are only moderately different from those—really, only Satine is different. The Duke is Cal, Christian is Jack. The Moulin Rouge is the ship. The fact that Satine has tuberculosis is the iceberg. And in both films, the band plays on.
It is a spectacle. It is, unquestionably, something you have never seen before in terms of sights and musical numbers and lavish sets and costumes. But if anything in this story surprises you, you’ve never seen a movie before. Based on that, it’s difficult for me to recommend out of hand. But sometimes, a little style over substance isn’t a terrible thing.
Why to watch Moulin Rouge: Lavish numbers and raucous music.
Why not to watch: Insert Character A into Situation B, attach with #2 screws.
Format: DVD from DeKalb Public Library on big ol’ television.
Baz Luhrmann has directed exactly four movies in his interesting career, and two of them are on this list, a pretty good average. His output comes in fits and starts, averaging about one film every five years. Of the four, Australia bombed, two ended up on this list, and the final, Romeo + Juliet could be argued, although I wouldn’t make the argument.It can certainly be argued that his productions become more and more lavish as time goes on. His first film, Strictly Ballroom is on its own merits, unrestrained, but compared with his later films, is downright sedate. This is especially true when comparing it with Moulin Rouge. This film takes the music and dancing of Ballroom and pairs it with the anachronisms of Romeo into an absinthe-fueled whole that is as much fever dream as it is film.
Frankly, I’m not sure how to react to it.
On the one hand, Moulin Rouge is a period piece, set at the turn of the last century in Paris and the eponymous club made famous by the art of Toulouse-Lautrec (played here by John Leguizamo). And yet, it is also filled with modern music. Rehearsing a play in which our hero Christian (Ewan McGregor) is thrust into the role of a Swiss poet, he suddenly breaks out into “The Sound of Music.” Confronted by the cast of this nascent play and asked if he believes in love, he spits forth a trio of modern song lyrics. Once in the club, we’re treated to a medley of disco and grunge (the entire crowd sings Nirvana lyrics), show tunes and Madonna. It’s difficult for me to put my finger on exactly what or when this is supposed to be.
Since it’s a musical, we’ve got to have a love story, or more precisely, a love triangle. We’ve got Christian, of course. We’ve also got the powerful and wealthy Duke (Richard Roxburgh) who is obsessed with the star of the show at the Moulin Rouge, Satine (Nicole Kidman). The manager of the cabaret show, Harry Zidler (Jim Broadbent, who is always great in everything he touches) wants Satine to convince the Duke to underwrite the show by any means possible. Especially by the means that you’re thinking of. Through a haze of mistaken identity, she assumes Christian is the Duke, attempts to seduce him, and the two end up very much in love.
But, of course, not all is well. The Duke wants her, and will not underwrite the show unless he has her, putting Satine in a difficult position. Does she go for stability or for true love? Happiness or wealth? The penniless writer or the wealthy man of means? Frankly, it’s like a musical version of Titanic without the sinking ship. Or, more precisely, it’s a musical version of Les Enfants du Paradis with only two suitors.
I can certainly understand why people love this movie. It is lavish in a way that few films are. The costumes are astounding, and they won a much-deserved Oscar. The musical numbers are equally over-the-top and grand in a way that the classic musicals of the 30s and 40s could only dream of being. As seems to be the case with Luhrmann when he has free range, it’s all about the spectacle.
And therein lies my issue with this film. It really is all about the spectacle, and less about the story than I am comfortable with. This is a story I know. It could only end in a couple of ways (the comparisons above are a pretty sizable hint, as is Luhrmann’s second film). The characters are no one I haven’t met before in other films—I did, after all, watch Titanic within the week. These characters are only moderately different from those—really, only Satine is different. The Duke is Cal, Christian is Jack. The Moulin Rouge is the ship. The fact that Satine has tuberculosis is the iceberg. And in both films, the band plays on.
It is a spectacle. It is, unquestionably, something you have never seen before in terms of sights and musical numbers and lavish sets and costumes. But if anything in this story surprises you, you’ve never seen a movie before. Based on that, it’s difficult for me to recommend out of hand. But sometimes, a little style over substance isn’t a terrible thing.
Why to watch Moulin Rouge: Lavish numbers and raucous music.
Why not to watch: Insert Character A into Situation B, attach with #2 screws.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)