My theory continues to take hits. Jason Aaron does dig sports. But David Aja doesn't. Joshua Dysart doesn't dig sports. But you know what he does dig? Movies. He digs them a lot and has
some fascinating things to share about the movie-going experience.
Who is Joshua Dysart? I first became aware of him via a Hellboy spin-off called BPRD: 1946. It was a creepy limited series, and I enjoyed it, but I didn't really register the writer of the book. Dysart has recently launched a new series, based on the classic character from the DC Universe, "The Unknown Soldier." Dysart's version of the soldier is actually an Ugandan pacifist doctor brought back to Uganda to deal with the human crisis stemming from the decades long civil war in that country, who starts to embrace violence in reaction to the horror he sees. It is only two issues in, but I've been loving it. But don't take my word for it. The AV Club said, after just one issue, "Dysart and Ponticelli don't spare the two-fisted action in trying to tell a story that's both relevant to the real world and viscerally exciting. If they can sustain this energy and impact,Unknown Soldier could be a new Vertigo classic."
I quickly discovered that Dysart isn't into sports, as I mentioned previously. Here's our interview with Joshua Dysart about movies. You will notice that there are a ton of links associated with movies. That's because Dysart sent a YouTube link for just about every movie he mentioned. That's downright gentlemanly, folks. And you should thank him for his effort. Maybe you should buy Unknown Soldier, maybe.
IDYFT: In our quick exchanges pre-interview, you expressed an interest in global cinema. I've encountered plenty of folks who refuse to watch any movie that has subtitles. Do you remember what your first experience with foreign movies was? Was it, like it was for a good number of comic book guys, a college viewing of Akira?
Dysart: Wow, You're really making me think back. It certainly wasn't Akira (which I saw on the big screen in Houston, Tx when I was 17. I'll never forget that). Fact is, I was the only child of a young family. My mother was 20 when she had me and we lived with my Uncle and my two cousins once my dad and my mom parted ways. So I was always exposed to the youth culture of the late 70's. We were also one of the first homes to have a VCR in my neighborhood because my mom dated this liquor salesman for a while and he won some regional contest and we ended up with this mammoth top-loader machine that weighed about 50 pounds. There wasn't even any movie rental stores in my south Texas town of Corpus Christi at the time. So it was a bitch getting flicks to watch. But my cousin Jerry would go to Austin and come home with films by guys like Michelangelo Antonioni and Federico Fellini and Yasujiro Ozu and I would sit there with these young adults, my family, and watch these things. I think a lot of my aesthetic to this day was formed by those artists, regardless of the medium I'm working in. In many ways I think my family destroyed my commercial viability at an early age.
But the first foreign film I ever saw, at least that I can remember, had to have been Jean Cocteau's, "Beauty and the Beast", which is a great film for kids. It's one of the few memories I have of doing something cool with my dad (wow, nothing Freudian about that, is there?) To this day it's one of my top 20 films of all time. I've probably watched it 100 times. Shortly after that I sat and watched Akira Kurosawa's "Roshomon" with my cousins and even though I had to ask a lot of questions, I think it was a turning point in my understanding of narrative. The first foreign film that I went to the theatre to see by myself was Kurosawa's "Ran", I was 14 and we were visiting friends in Austin, so I took a bus on my own to see it. Don't get me wrong, I also loved cheesy 80's action films and everything else. And there is plenty of amazing American cinema. I mean we gave the world John Houston, Sam Peckinpah, John Cassavetes, Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, Stanley Kubrick, Orson Wells, and on and on... all masters who's work I absolutely adore. But I had this thing down in my DNA, this obsession with the larger world and foreign films moved me in a way most American films made after 1982 just couldn't. Foreign films were obsessed with form, and worked hard at their craft. They often lived in quiet moments and passing glances. They just felt like life to me. And life was interesting when I was a kid. I think that's uncommon for a lot of comic book creators, most of the ones I meet consumed huge amounts of escapist entertainment. But escaping was never my core reason for engaging in art... for me it was to learn, learn about the wide, mysterious adult world.
IDYFT: Do you feel like there are established American directors whose reputation will increase with time? I'm thinking of guys who hover between art and commerice, like the Coen Brothers, Sam Raimi, Joe Dante. Clearly, the Coen Brothers get the most critical love, but they often get described as kind of heartless technicians. Is "Raising Arizona" a great American movie? Is "Gremlins"?
Dysart: Well, first off, It's important to say that this is all personal opinion. For instance, time and collective perspective often identify "Gone With The Wind" as a great movie, but really, to me, it's a pile of trash. On the other hand I could watch Cory McAbee's "The American Astronaut" all day long and almost nobody has ever even heard of that flick. So you know, who's to say how films and directors will be received on the whole. I do think that in the long run the Coen Brothers will continue to be celebrated. Technical craft ages better over time than any sort of attempt to emotionally connect with the audience does. Sentiment is reflected by time and culture, but craftsmanship is impressive in all times and to all cultures. Kubrick has often been described as a cold, emotionless technician, but we'll be studying and interacting with his body of work for as long as we engage with cinema in its modern form. So I think the Coen's will be just fine. To a lesser degree Raimi will be fine too, his voice is too unique not to be perceived as valuable. I imagine in 100 years Dante will get glowing praise on the Turner Classic Movie's bump before they show "Innerspace", but I don't see his work actually being studied much. And yes, both "Gremlins" and "Raising Arizona" are great American movies. One is better than the other, but still... they both have something important and genuine about them at their center. They both engage the viewer honestly and and have real creative intentions, to make you laugh and have fun. Anything movie that succeeds at that is a great movie.
IDYFT: How about what's going on in Brazil lately, and Iran over the past 10 years or so? Do you have any concern that as American Culture exports more and more, we'll see more foreign movies that are filmed by foreign directors, about foreign issues, but look more and more like Hollywood Blockbusters? I'm thinking of how often "Mongol" was compared to "Braveheart", for example. Or is that not a problem?
As far as Brazil goes, they've certainly had their moments of participation in the world cinema conversation. Cinema Novo was a huge part of late 50's and early 60's. At that time Brazilian filmmakers were getting a great deal of notice outside of their home country. In 1959 "Black Orpheus" won the Palme d'Or. It's a hell of a movie.As of the mid-90's, political stabilization and funding have really allowed for Brazilian film to thrive and they now consistently play a part on the world cinema stage. In regards to the main gist of your question, I suppose you could argue that "Central Station" or "City of God" suffer from an American mainstream aesthetic, but I don't think that's true. I think their exuberance is characteristically Brazilian actually.
Now Persian cinema is a huge global success. Remember Hollywood, as far as the world goes, is not the only commercially successful player out there. Films from India, Nigeria and Iran bring in serious ticket sales all over the world. But those are commercial successes, and we're more interested in pretentious artsy-fartsy flicks. So how is Iran meeting my particular cinematic itch these days? in 1997 "Taste of Cherry" took the palme d'Or and that is an amazing film. Since then Iranian cinema has been getting a lot of attention. To be honest I've seen very little of it. I need to be exposed to more. But, in keeping with your question, "Taste of Cherry" had an American Jazz score. Did that make it somehow less Persian? I don't think so. I think it wrestled very well with Iran's modernity issues.
IDYFT: It seems a lot of your work in the comics field have been adaptations of works originally created from other media. Do you find yourself watching movies with half an eye on what might be interesting or fun to adapt? Can you separate the creative urge from the ability to just enjoy a movie?
While we're at it, let's throw some other amazing contemporary cats in the mix, directors who keep it quiet. Who don't push the pulp. Who create brilliant comments on their cultures and ours in a steady low-key voice, like Carlos Reygadas, Ming-liang Tsai, Nikita Mikhalkov, the Taviani brothers and Laurent Cantet! There's so much amazing cinema of all stripes to see.
Anyway, thinks for the opportunity to rap about something other than comics and East African Politics! It was fun! I totally procrastinated on my work to do this. People love to talk about shit they love to talk about.
IDYFT: In terms of films, do you find yourself gravitating towards a particular region in the world, and/or a particular moment in time? Or are you all over the map, as it were?
Dysart: Well, sorta. It's probably more accurate to say that certain movements in cinema engage me. And those movements, more often than not, stem from a region. I'm a huge fan of Italian Neo-realism and various off-shoots of it (Satyajit Ray comes to mind), the Japanese New Wave (as well as the Japanese New New Wave), German Expressionism, French New Wave, No Wave Cinema, Punk film, New German cinema, the Surrealist movement, New French Extremity, Dogme 95, Exploitation cinema, Spaghetti Westerns and a lot more that aren't coming to mind right now. Then you have magic moments that were tied not only to place, but
time as well... Russia in the silent era, Northern Europe in the 50's, Italy and the UK in the 60's, The US in the 60's and 70's, Latin America in the 70's and right now, actually. Denmark right now as well. Canada in the 80's and 90's. And I think Japan has consistently produced generation after generation of globally relevant filmmakers without fail. There seems to be a culture of innovation and aesthetics of form in Japan that lends itself to the progression of cinema as well as the artist's conversation at large. So I guess the answer is yeah, I'm all over the map.
IDYFT: How about what's going on in Brazil lately, and Iran over the past 10 years or so? Do you have any concern that as American Culture exports more and more, we'll see more foreign movies that are filmed by foreign directors, about foreign issues, but look more and more like Hollywood Blockbusters? I'm thinking of how often "Mongol" was compared to "Braveheart", for example. Or is that not a problem?
Dysart: Well, Mongol was actually a fine example of modernist mainstream aesthetic fucking up something that could have been fucking amazing if had been handled with a little more dignity. I was very excited to see that flick, caught it on opening weekend. I thought, "yeah, let's see a David Lean style epic!" But it just turned out to be a piece of commercial crap. And yes, it is bothersome to me that sometimes the very aesthetic I'm trying to run away from when I search out foreign cinema is starting to creep into it, but you know what, 95% of everything has always been shit, and will always be shit, but quality cinema, ambitious cinema, will still exist. So I'm not too worried about it. Also, let me say this, all art benefits from cross-pollination. Amazing things can come from cultures mixing up their vision of the world. So, ultimately, I'm not too worried about it. The world will never become one big America. If anything the reverse will most likely happen. America, and it's cinema, will more and more reflect the outside world.
As far as Brazil goes, they've certainly had their moments of participation in the world cinema conversation. Cinema Novo was a huge part of late 50's and early 60's. At that time Brazilian filmmakers were getting a great deal of notice outside of their home country. In 1959 "Black Orpheus" won the Palme d'Or. It's a hell of a movie.As of the mid-90's, political stabilization and funding have really allowed for Brazilian film to thrive and they now consistently play a part on the world cinema stage. In regards to the main gist of your question, I suppose you could argue that "Central Station" or "City of God" suffer from an American mainstream aesthetic, but I don't think that's true. I think their exuberance is characteristically Brazilian actually.
Now Persian cinema is a huge global success. Remember Hollywood, as far as the world goes, is not the only commercially successful player out there. Films from India, Nigeria and Iran bring in serious ticket sales all over the world. But those are commercial successes, and we're more interested in pretentious artsy-fartsy flicks. So how is Iran meeting my particular cinematic itch these days? in 1997 "Taste of Cherry" took the palme d'Or and that is an amazing film. Since then Iranian cinema has been getting a lot of attention. To be honest I've seen very little of it. I need to be exposed to more. But, in keeping with your question, "Taste of Cherry" had an American Jazz score. Did that make it somehow less Persian? I don't think so. I think it wrestled very well with Iran's modernity issues.
IDYFT: It seems a lot of your work in the comics field have been adaptations of works originally created from other media. Do you find yourself watching movies with half an eye on what might be interesting or fun to adapt? Can you separate the creative urge from the ability to just enjoy a movie?
Dysart: Well, no, actually, I don't keep an eye out for what might be fun to adapt. That's actually my mercenary work you're bringing up. I mean, I give it my all and I invest in it artistically, but if I had my druthers it's not what I'd be doing. I think that comics and cinema have more differences than they do similarities and I think that work that struggles to bridge the gap between the two ultimately suffers for it. So while a good movie can inspire me to create, it's not a specific element of an inspiring film that I'm trying to emulate. I'm a bit of a purest in that way. Having said that, I'm about to adapt a screenplay into a graphic novel, so what we feel in our heart and what we do to keep working are two different things, you know? But yeah, I can still enjoy a movie. I do have pretty high standards though. I'm a bit like a junkie who needs a stronger and stronger fix. And it's hard to say what makes a good film. We can talk aesthetics and craft all day long, but in the end it's something intangible. Something unique and true about the piece itself, something about it's intentions that make it an amazing experience to watch or not.
IDYFT: You are currently working on a new updated version of DC's character "The Unknown Soldier". You've located the action to Uganda, which was in the grips of war for the vast majority of the last 20 years. You spent some time in Uganda since the ceasefire began, and you've clearly done a ton of research for "The Unknown Soldier". Have you come across a film (documentary or no) that tells some truth about that conflict particularly well? Right now, Uganda certainly seems like another African nation in turmoil that the Western (particularly American) media didn't cover very well, or barely at all.
Dysart: Honestly, it's criminal the way this war has been neglected by the global media. There aren't a lot of really GOOD films that have emerged from this conflict either. There's a lot of well-meaning ones, informative ones and even some that have succeeded at bringing attention to the war, but actually good, well made films, as I define "well-made"... not many. There is a film called "War Dance", which will emotionally devastate you. I have some minor problems with it, mostly about how it white-washes the Ugandan government's role in the whole thing, but I guarantee you, if you watch it, you will cry. You will hug your children or your lover and cry. You will spend the rest of your week marveling at the life you lead, no matter how mundane it seemed at the time. It's probably the finest piece of art to come out of the conflict that I've seen. Go on, I challenge you to watch this film and not cry.
IDYFT: If possible, can you give a Top 5 Global Cinema rundown? If it makes it easier, it doesn't have to be THE Top 5. It could be just 5 movies you would recommen enthusiastically, and a few sentences on why you enjoyed them.
Dysart: Okay, but here's the deal, I'm not going to give you my all time top 5. I'm a pretentious prick, and the odds of someone sitting down to watch one of my top five and going, "What the fuck is this shit!" is pretty high. Though I adore, with all my heart, Andrei Tarkovsky's "Solaris" I cannot, in good conscious, ask anyone to sit through it. They will hate me. Unless they are my soul mate.
So instead lets do the most engaging cinema, stuff that is important for any global cinema list, but is not arduous to watch unless you suffer from sever ADD (and if you do, the first film on this list is made for you). In no particular order, the first 5 that come to mind are...
Visitor Q (2001): Takashi Miike. When you finish this film you won't be entirely sure of what you've just seen. You will call all of your friends who just happen to be twisted, sick bastards and you will recommend it emphatically to them. You will search out other movies by Miike, and slowly, one flick at a time, "Ichi the Killer", "Audition", "Izo", "Dead or Alive", "The Happiness of the Katakuris", "Gozu" they will eat your soul and you'll never be the same again. "Visitor Q" is the gateway drug to one of the most prolific and creatively audacious cats working in cinema today (he also makes a ton of shit, but that 's what happens when you direct 70 films in 11 years).
Breathless (1960): Jean-Luc Godard (editor note: my fave French New Wave film) This, my friends, is birth of cool. Quentin Tarantino's most obvious and surface influences may come from the grindhouse, exploitation and garbage mouth cinema movements, but early Goddard is the chicken-wire mesh structure onto which all those bits are stuck. And it was his first feature ever. Just remember, next time you're dogging the French... a Frenchman taught us what cool was all about. If you like "Breathless" enough to search out other Goddard work you'll discover a completely uncompromising vision that has spanned decades. He is an intellectual powerhouse, a creative force to compare against any artist in any medium in human history and, possibly, cinema's only true philosopher.
Winter Light (1962): Ingmar Bergman. Bergman is my favorite filmmaker ever. And it was hard to pick a single one by him. But this is about as accessible as Bergman's going to get (some would say his most accessible is "Wild Strawberries", and that might be true, but it's just not dark enough for me). This film is short, it's powerful and it's focused. The scene by the body near the river is probably the best photographed scene in Bergman's entire body of work, and that's really saying something. This is a quiet study of faith, in which the light that gives us hope comes not from God, but from his absence. In the words of Leonard Coen "There is a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in." Once again, if you like this film, Bergman's entire body of work now stretches out before you ready to infect your soul and change your view of the world. Stunning and subdued.
Holy Mountain (1973): Alejandro Jodorowskyi. "Holy fucking shit!" is what they should have called it. This movie is nothing short of a shamanistic cry for meaning in the form of moving pictures. An explosion of mystical energy and universal hope. A blur between what is real and what is not. A comment on civilization, humanity and the horror-show construct we're all a part of. Written and Directed by a man who now writes comics for the French market. I used to put this flick on at parties and turn the sound off, just to have something cool playing. But people would become hypnotized. They'd stopped socializing and just stare at the images. So I had to stop playing it at parties. Must be seen to be believed. [Editor note: I watched the trailer; I'm not entirely sure I believed what I saw. Therefore, seeing it doesn't mean you'll believe it!]
Aguirre The Wrath of God (1972): Werner Herzog. Herzog is one of my favorites, and probably the artist I most relate too as a person. He is a humanist, a lover of humanity, a believer in the good in all of us, and yet... he is drawn to the darkness, obsessed with the urge in us to destroy ourselves and any beauty that surrounds us. This movie amazing. The visual equivalent of deep ambient music. With a core performance by Klaus Kinski that leaves you trembling at the end.
So that's it, only 5!? You're killing me, I could do that all day!
IDYFT: Since they didn't make your top Most Engaging 5, I'll ask you about the following directors and my favorite movies by them--Where do Carol Reed's "The Third Man" (or the much more overlooked "The Fallen Idol") fall into your pantheon of great directors/movies. Reed of course, also was a mercenary at times (Oliver! jumps to mind). And what about Luis Bunuel? Viridiana? Los Olivados?
Dysart: Well, Carol Reed was a phenomenal director. I actually own "The Third Man" on DVD. And though I haven't seen "The Fallen Idol" in years I have fond memories of it. He was a world class director, absolutely. And there's nothing wrong with being a mercenary. Man's got to eat. We can't all be auteurs all of the time. Fact is, this interview is going to, unfortunately, shortchange a lot of really amazing UK directors, like Lindsay Anderson, Lynne Ramsay and the wonderful, wonderful Mike Leigh. There's just too many to talk about! Luis Bunuel is a god. In fact the "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie" would've probably been 6th on the list if you had allowedme more than 5. "Viridiana" is an absolute vision to behold. To be honest I've never seen "The Forgotten Ones". I've read about it. I'd love to see it. (PS: I know no self-respecting foreign film snob would use the English titles as I have been, but I thought it might be easier on any readers who weren't too familiar with the subject matter.)
While we're at it, let's throw some other amazing contemporary cats in the mix, directors who keep it quiet. Who don't push the pulp. Who create brilliant comments on their cultures and ours in a steady low-key voice, like Carlos Reygadas, Ming-liang Tsai, Nikita Mikhalkov, the Taviani brothers and Laurent Cantet! There's so much amazing cinema of all stripes to see.
Anyway, thinks for the opportunity to rap about something other than comics and East African Politics! It was fun! I totally procrastinated on my work to do this. People love to talk about shit they love to talk about.
And just so you understand the full breadth of my foreign film fetish, I leave you with a fight scene from "The Story of Ricky", watch it, love it...
2 comments:
Nice interview BBM.
Yeah, good interview. I added a few films to my "to watch" list.
Ahoy, Netflix!
Post a Comment