Have You Seen?

email this story
read comments (13)
post a comment

David Thomson, who is usually my favorite film critic-essayist, has written another huge anthology work (somewhat similar to his The New Biographical Dictionary of Film) running 1024 pages called Have You Seen...?: A Personal Introduction to 1000 Films (Knopf). It won't hit the stores until 10.24, but uncorrected proofs have been sent out, and I've been sinking into my copy with pleasure off and on or the last 48 hours or so.

The book is basically about Thomson going back to each and every film and making them seem curiously fresh and vital again. (And therefore necessary to see once more.) Each re-review and re-assessment runs four or five long paragraphs, and are composed with such smooth and clever assurance that you can knock off 25 or 30 in a single sitting and then return the next day, hungry for more. At no point do you have a feeling that he's recycled past writings (even if he has here and there).

Here's a two-paragraph taste of his page 17 take on Aliens:

"Generally speaking, the industrial strategy known as franchising -- of doing sequels until the end of time -- was a disaster in the 1980s and 1990s. But every now and then, something quite wonderful came of the plodding method. If you put Alien and Aliens side by side (and it may be one of the last great double bills in American film), you get not just the thumping and very satisfactory sequence of prolonged combat after great unnerving threat.

"You also get the emergence of the secret love story in these Alien pictures, the way in which no matter what happens in her movie career, Sigourney Weaver is never going to meet a more faithful lover than the creature. Indeed, its only rivals were the gorillas in the mist.

"Ripley comes back from the first film like Sleeping Beauty in her spacecraft. She looks lovely still, but the journey has taken fifty-seven years. She is brought back to Earth's drab reality, but she has nightmares. And then she hears that the planet that [Alien's] Nostromo went to -- it is called LV-426 now -- has a small community of miners on it, a few families. And now, as Ripley comes home and wakes after fifty-seven years, the regular signal from LV-426 cuts out. Is there a clearer way the Alien has of calling to Ripley?"

The only thing missing is at least a glancing acknowledgment of the eight-year tragedy of Aliens director Jim Cameron -- a guy who was good and imaginative and tough enough to make this film, both Terminator movies, The Abyss and Titanic over a brilliant 13 year stretch ('84 to '97) and then....nothing.

Cameron is back on it now, somewhat, but for at least eight years he retreated into a kind of rich-man's sandbox retirement that involved a lot of deep diving, a 3-D documentary, more diving and a lot of kicking back. In short, a complete abdication-renunciation of what he had it in him to do -- a Napoleonic retreat from the task of creating smart and exciting movies that matter.

The navel-doodling that guided Cameron from '98 to '05 (or '06) was, for me, shattering. Where would the world be if other men and women of strength and vision in other fields followed Cameron's example? Think about that.

Ongoing Tragicomedy<< previous | next >>Slammin' Shut

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 22, 2008 at 8:48 AM

comment #1

Edward says ...

We could only have dreamed that Bush would have taken a long break after being Gov. of Texas. Seriously though; I would think that the pressure to succeed after Titanic must have been enormous and to be able to do some adventuresome documentaries had to allow him to recharge the creative batteries. Let's just hope he hasn't lost his touch.

Posted by Edward at June 22, 2008 9:47 AM

comment #2

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Wow, a David Thomson masterwork. I think Thomson is brilliant half the time and nuts half the time in his assessments, but that's what makes him a great read, you're constantly sparring with his off-kilter opinions and refusal to buy into received wisdom. My critical education as a teenager/college student was, first, reading Kael and developing a free-range love for what movies can be and the jazzy way of expressing it, and then Thomson being Professor Kingsley and barking the woolly thinking and lazy opinions back out of me.

Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau at June 22, 2008 9:51 AM

comment #3

George Prager says ...

Keir Dullea at the Brattle Theater in Cambridge:

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/News/63514-Ghost-of-future-past/

Jeez, Brett, you really love yourself, don't you?

Good quote:

Asking the audience if theyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve seen PremingerÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s performance as the ruthless commandant in Billy WilderÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Stalag 17, Dullea opined, Ã¢â‚¬Å“ThatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s him . . . on a good day.Ã¢â‚¬Â

Posted by George Prager at June 22, 2008 10:23 AM

comment #4

sutter kane says ...

I kind of agree with Mgmax on Thomson. I've been over his Biographical Dictionary of Film, and the guy does go out of his way to defend opinions that are anti-mainstream. I enjoy the reading, and agree with him about half the time, but the other half I find him infuriating (his opinion on Bogart's lack of range, for instance... like Thomson's only seen the Marlowe/Spade movies and not Sierra Madre, Caine Mutiny, Key Largo, In A Lonely Place...), which is part of the reason he's so much fun to read.

As for Cameron, I also agree with Edward that trying to top Titanic must have been a daunting task, and I can at least understand why the guy would take his incredible newfound wealth and use it to explore some other passions. But I fear that he has lost his touch- much like Lucas, the guy got handed more money than god, and has no doubt been surrounded by yes men for the last ten years and generally cut off from interacting with real people (and his dialogue was never that good to begin with). I've got high hopes for Avatars, especially from a technological view point, but I'm trying to keep my expectations low.

Posted by sutter kane at June 22, 2008 10:43 AM

comment #5

erniesouchak says ...

Thomson is on par with at least a half-dozen other critics who write well but have some berserk, inexplicable fetishes (Nicole Kidman, anyone?) that can't help throwing their overall judgment into question. Re: Cameron, maybe the guy just wants to work on projects that really inspire him. If I had the choice, I'd do the same thing. Plus, I don't get the sense the world has really been clamoring for another James Cameron film.

Posted by erniesouchak at June 22, 2008 11:03 AM

comment #6

62Lincoln says ...

"I don't get the sense the world has really been clamoring for another James Cameron film."

Was the world clamoring for Titanic prior to its premiere? In response to all the worry over whether Cameron still has "it", I suggest we give him the benefit of the doubt until he has proven otherwise.

Posted by 62Lincoln at June 22, 2008 11:58 AM

comment #7

supertaster says ...

So let me get this straight ... after a string of commercially successful and intellectually honest films, Cameron has been wasting his time with the trivial pursuit of deep sea exploration? You mean the guy would rather selfishly waste time trying to understand and share some of our world's mysteries instead of making movies? What a douche!

Posted by supertaster at June 22, 2008 12:12 PM

comment #8

joncro says ...

That pictures reminds me that the new Godfather remastered DVD set looks incredible......

Posted by joncro at June 22, 2008 12:23 PM

comment #9

Drew says ...

You're absolutely wrong on Cameron, Jeff, and let me explain why.

You know how George Lucas constantly tells us that he's going to get back to experimental filmmaking? And instead, he just pumps out more STAR WARS product and INDY sequels?

Well, Cameron didn't tell us he was going to do it... he just went and did it. He developed brand-new camera systems, he pushed himself on a personal level, and he rediscovered his love of film in the process. The entire time, he's been working towards getting the industry to a place where he could finally make some of the things he's had in his head. And the entire time, he's still been developing material.

Cameron's decade off is going to result in something special. I'd bet on it. And the Lucas comparison is so off-base, man... he's the anti-Lucas. He's the guy who just does it instead of talking about it.

Let's put it this way. Jeff Katzenberg has a vested interest in hating AVATAR, since MONSTERS AND ALIENS is going head-to-head with it, and after seeing some footage from it, he said, "That's the future of filmmaking." Strong words.

Posted by Drew at June 22, 2008 3:58 PM

comment #10

Adonis says ...

Wells,

To say that Cameron has shirked some responsibility to the public at-large, essentially in your eyes by cowardly choosing the easy route in life rather than making full use of his talent and know-how... well, it frankly is self-righteous and ignorant.

James Cameron has invested a lot of time and energy into his passions. A human being owes nothing to anyone other than to take care of those around him and to investigate one's passions.

You constantly chirp on the "talented" and the special that they don't do enough for you... Your judgmental attitude is disappointing. It is a frightfully poor quality to have, to be a sideline player relegated to casting moral judgments upon so many.

Posted by Adonis at June 22, 2008 9:14 PM

comment #11

master002 says ...

You may love to join our chatting this with hot singles at W E A L T H Y C H A T . C O M, where the successful and affluent singles and hot girls and models to hook up for Love, Romance, Flirt and Sexy Dating!

Posted by master002 at June 23, 2008 6:26 AM

comment #12

Markj74 says ...

From what i've read, and heard people say, about Avatar I think Cameron will more than make up for his extended spell away from behind the camera. He says his plan is to blow the audience through the back wall of the theater in the same way that 2001 did the 60s and Star Wars did in the 70s. Cameron is the sci-fi cinema master, and his return will be a grand return. Napoloenic is indeed the word Jeff.

Posted by Markj74 at June 23, 2008 1:39 PM

comment #13