Le Tourbillon

La ronde - dir. Max Ophüls - 1950 - France

Yikes. All excitement I had for Criterion's recent release of Max Ophüls' La ronde came to a screeching hault within the first five minutes. Having seen Roger Vadim's 1964 remake prior, I hadn't expected the Barbarella director to almost mirror Ophüls' film, or perhaps more accurately Arthur Schnitzler's play. So when things played out nearly identically, I think I'd done myself a disservice by seeing Jane Fonda/Anna Karina version before this one. But that wouldn't be as self-punishing as if I hadn't realized what Vadim did right that Ophüls' didn't. Yikes indeed.

La ronde, thus, becomes hindered by the presence of Anton Walbrook as the "Raconteur," the guide through the film's circular structure, grimacing slyly through the sequences and addressing the audience in delicate mannerisms and the occasional lousy song. I found my skin crawling up my arms every time he winked-and-nudged onscreen, conjuring up more of the theatrical apparatus than the cinematic realm. For what purpose does he serve the film? His entire character is thankfully wiped clear of Vadim's version, allowing for the action to flow in more of a sweeping action, keeping the action swift... and if Vadim succeeded over Ophüls in any way, it would have to be here. And "here" is crucial.

I feel a tad reluctant to admit that the fascinating structural examination of bedfellows worked better in Dean Howell's liberty-taking Nine Lives, from 2004. It uses the same approach, following one character through their "romantic" coupling and then following that person's partner as they move to the next person. Nine Lives uses the format in most devestating manners, achieving everything that it should from the lay-out, crafting a haunting, mysterious glimpse into these nine lives. Of course, I'll take Richard Linklater's brilliant Slacker over all three, but it's strange that a little-seen queer film from four years ago proved a better exploration than the works of two respected French auteurs. Yikes.

Um, ha ha

Sorry, Michael Haneke, but I’ve officially decided to resist the English-language Funny Games. I was reprehensive when I first heard that he planned the English version to be a shot-for-shot remake, but now that word is out that it wasn’t indeed a rumor, I simply wonder why. Funny Games isn’t the sort of film one looks forward to revisiting time and time again; in fact, I’ve only seen it three times because I felt particularly sadistic in forcing friends to watch it with me. Haneke himself said that Funny Games was always sort of a film about America more than it was about Austria, so the decision to remake it himself should have been a no-brainer.

With the prospect of a shot-for-shot remake, the only qualifying measure would have been to onslaught its unassuming audience into utter peril (as the Austrian version did to those who’ve already seen it). Promote the hell out of it, throw it onto three thousand screens and piss off the people you’re so adamantly pointing your finger at. However, such isn’t the case. In Saint Louis, Funny Games is opening on a single screen at the Landmark theatre… so what’s the fucking point? Most people who attend said theatre have probably at least heard of the original Funny Games, after The Piano Teacher and Caché did solid business in the arthouse community. So are fans of Saw really going to drive across town just to see this? The answer is no. This is particularly disheartening because media frenzy would have been the only acceptable reason why Haneke would take a film he made ten years ago and adapt it solely in the English language.

The one review I read of the film was probably the most condemning of Haneke’s motives. Michael Koresky of IndieWire states, "What's worse, the entire project suffers from the gall Haneke shows in not only remaking his own film for the 'edification' of a wider audience, but in trusting his own original vision so fundamentally and without question that he has chosen not to append or alter it in any significant way." There are plenty of other denunciations of Haneke’s motives which you can find through GreenCine from the poor film critics who have “professional obligations to endure it,” as J Hoberman states in his review, especially since the most astute of which would have already seen the original.

Where should one go from here? Haneke was on a streak of brilliance from Funny Games on, even if Time of the Wolf and Code Unknown weren’t as widely popular as Caché or The Piano Teacher. Should we let him have his so-called fun with the remake and hope he continues on to better things? I hope this is the case, as Haneke seems to be on the shit list of every single person who’s had to “endure” this film once again. I guess if we all gave Gus Van Sant another shot...

Also on the horizon...

Image Entertainment will release Douglas Buck's remake of Brian De Palma's Sisters. Buck previously directed the horror anthology Family Portraits, which is kind of a mixed bag of gore and human relations. The remake stars Chloë Sevigny, Stephen Rea, and Lou Doillon (daughter of Jacques Doillon and Jane Birkin) in the Margot Kidder role (I think). I'll likely indulge my curiosity, but this could be really fucking awful. Available on 11 March 2008.

Some days you just shouldn't open your e-mails

Dark Horizons is reporting that a studio called First Sun has acquired rights to remake Dario Argento's Suspiria, with talks of David Gordon Green, director of George Washington and All the Real Girls, and Scott Heim, author of Mysterious Skin, to adapt it. I really don't know what to say about this.

In other bizarre news, check here to see what Michael Haneke has planned for once he finishes the Funny Games remake.

Not funny...

Read this if you want to be let down immensely. Sorry.

Whatta Jackass.

Ron Howard, a man who may have only made one decent film in his entire career and a director responsible for such shitfests as The Da Vinci Code, Far and Away, and How the Grinch Stole Christmas, is reportedly interested in remaking Michael Haneke's Caché, which would make for the second Haneke remake in the works (Haneke himself is currently directing an English-language Funny Games with Naomi Watts and Tim Roth). In the article I read he really wants to up the suspense and consequences of the film, which sounds positively nauseating. The Razzies website described The Da Vinci Code as a thriller that thrilled no one but its financiers, so we know what Howard can do with suspense. Let's hope this falls off the radar, as Tom Cruise's remake of the Pang brothers' The Eye has not (Jessica Alba, groan, is set to star). Didn't anyone see the extreme failures of Pulse and The Grudge 2, two other Hollywood remakes? Forget Caché, Howard, and work on that Arrested Development film, for fuck's sake.