SHAUN WHITE'S STRAIGHT AIR

. . . is almost unbelievable.

He gets a lot of it, really a lot of it, and when he's at the peak of his ascent he seems to pause for a moment and then decide to come back to the earth.

Great classical ballet dancers give the same impression at the tops of their jumps.  It's an uncanny illusion created by a visible relaxing of the muscles at that moment of apex, very slight, but perceptible.  It seems to suggest absolute calm, absolute unconcern about the landing.  It seems to suspend time along with the rules of gravity.

White does a lot more complex and astonishing things than his straight air move, a required element in the competition which he usually places at the beginning of his run — but his execution of the straight air move is an announcement of sorts, asking us to look not just at what he's doing but at how he's doing it.

It is the statement of a theme, an artist's manifesto.

The finals of the men's halfpipe in Vancouver last night made White's aesthetic ambitions clear.  Going into his second run, the last run of the competition, he had already secured the gold medal.  He could have slid straight down the bottom of the halfpipe to the finish line and collected his prize.  But he chose to outdo his gold-medal-winning first run, and he chose to finish it with his new signature move, which he hadn't yet unveiled in the competition — the double McTwist 1260, a move so complex that it can only be followed clearly in slow motion.


                                                                                                          [Image © 2010 New York Times]

He didn't have enough speed going up the wall to get all the air he needed for this last move, but he decided to use the air he had.  He performed the move with barely enough time to get his board pointed down the side of the wall and his weight over it for his landing.  He hit the snow off-balance but somehow found it again — by force of will, it seemed.

His second, wholly unnecessary run scored higher than the run that had already won him the gold.  It was sublime, Homeric, transcendently beautiful.

ANOTHER NOIR BAR

Now playing on a computer or portable device near you . . . the second movie in the Noir Bars: New York
series from Majestic Micro Movies — extremely short tales of lost
souls in dark bars on dead-end streets.  Have a look:

Noir Bar #2

YouTube
Facebook Fan Page

Watch all the films in the series as they roll out, then order a stiff drink and try to forget them.

[Some explicit language in this one.]

A VERMEER FOR TODAY

What is it about Vermeer?  His virtuosity as a technician is thrilling, of course — but how does he invest his photo-realistic visions with such warmth, such an impression of life?  The painting above revels in specificity, it enters the imagination as a place we've actually visited, but it's more than a record.  As usual, Vermeer plays with frames, spaces opening onto deeper spaces, drawing us in to the scene, and commenting ironically on the act of painting itself, putting frames around life.

The profound beauty of the most ordinary things, the great gift of “the ineluctable modality of the visible”, seem to have inspired him on an almost spiritual level, and the way he communicates this to us is both complex and totally obvious — some kind of mystery hiding in plain sight.

WALKING IN MEMPHIS

Some thoughts by Paul Zahl (of The Zahl File) on Jack Kerouac and his connection to Michael Curtiz's costume epic The Egyptian.  Huh?  Read on:

The 1954 Hollywood movie The Egyptian, a big picture, with Jean Simmons
and Michael Wilding, among many others, is hard to find — all but impossible
to find, in fact, until the days of Internet magic.  (It's available on a Korean DVD.)  It was produced by
Darryl F. Zanuck and directed by Michael Curtiz.  Curtiz had directed
several big pictures, including
Casablanca and Mildred Pierce, not to
mention
The Walking Dead and Mystery of the Wax Museum.

The Egyptian tells the story of a young doctor in Ancient Egypt —
meaning Thebes, Memphis, and Luxor — who is ensnared pitifully by a
temptress known as the “Woman of Babylon”, completely loses his
self-respect, together with everything he owns as well as his post as
Physician to Pharaoh, and finally recreates himself as a 
healer
wandering throughout the Ancient World.  He prospers, only to return home
to lose his true and loyal love, played by Jean Simmons, and to become
caught up in the failed but sublime One God movement of the Pharaoh
Akhenaten.  In a touching scene that works dramatically and
cinematically, Sinuhe, the doctor, is converted to monotheism.  After
all his sad experience of life, Sinuhe seeks monastic solitude in the
desert, a sadder man but much wiser.



The Egyptian is pretty good.  The sets are gorgeous, the camera is
fluid and assured, the acting (with the exception of Gene Tierney, who
is miscast as Pharaoh's sister) confident if a little wooden, and the
matte paintings and miniatures convincing.  Personally, I like the
religion of the film, with Akhenaten's confession of his universal faith
going down well, with pathos, at the end.  Some might say that
The
Egyptian is suffused with '50s-style religion in this country, but that
would be unfair.  The film is so anchored in the pessimistic views —
i.e., life as an exercise in dreamy futility, with loss — of the
author of the original best-selling book, that Akhenaten's “witness” in
the last scene but one, comes off as credible, and for me even
hopeful.  The novel on which
The Egyptian is based, incidentally, was
written in the Finnish language by Mika Waltari.  In the days of our
fathers and mothers, Waltari's novel was an international sensation.

Waltari's father, incidentally, was a Finnish Lutheran pastor.  It was the Finnish Lutherans, of course, who brought us The Flying Saucer Of Love.



Here's the thing:


Jack Kerouac saw The Egyptian in a movie theater when it first came out.

He hated it!

The vehemence of Kerouac's response to this relatively standard
Hollywood production is surprising.  I read his armchair review, which occurs in Some of the Dharma (page
124), three years ago and was impressed by his very negative reaction. 
Here is what he wrote:

WITH 'THE EGYPTIAN' Darryl Zanuck has purveyed a teaching of
viciousness and cruelty.  They present him with a gold cup at banquets for this.  The
author,
Mika Waltari, is also guilty of the same teaching of viciousness and
cruelty.
  You see a scene of a man choking a woman under water.  Both these men
are rich
as a consequence of the world's infatuation with the forbidden murder,
— its
daydreams of maniacal revenge by means of killing and Lust.  Men kill
and women
lust for men.  Men die and women lust for men.  Men, think in solitude;
learn
how to live off your sowings of seed in the ground.  Or work 2 weeks a
year and
live in the hermitage the rest of the year, procuring your basic foods
at markets,
and as your your garden grows work less, till you've learned to live
off  your garden
alone.

QUIETNESS AND REST THE ONLY ESCAPE.

The secret is in the desert.

Now, Ain't that Peculiar!  The Egyptian tells the story of a man
disillusioned by romantic love — in the first half he loses his whole
self, his deepest self, to the wily and nefarious siren of Babylon. 
The Egyptian envisions his then turning aside from the world, and
becoming a kind of medical “gentleman of the road”, a Sal Paradise of
the ancient Mediterranean.  With Kerouacian pessimism, Sinuhe observes
the fruitlessness of human endeavor, and does so over and over again. 
Finally, back home in Thebes — I love writing those words — he
becomes enlightened by Akhenaten, the Sun (One) worshiper, who reveals
to him that God is the whole of Reality, and that Forgiveness, of all
things, is at the core of that Reality.  There is something like
pantheism here, together with absolving Christianity, and the the name
“Jesus Christ” is invoked on the end-title.  How could Kerouac not have
responded positively to this, given his Christo-Buddhism, or
Buddhist-Christianity, or however you want to call his personal
synthesis?



But he didn't like the film.  He focused completely on the Woman of
Babylon sequence, with its subtle, slightly-off-frame drowning of the
Siren — she survives — and the “lust of the eye” and lust of the body
which drives the story at that point.  Biographers of Jack Kerouac
would probably observe in these comments his suspicion of entrapping
women and entrapped men, his frequent equation of greed and lust, and
his persistent failed efforts to choose celibacy on Buddhist grounds
— “Men . . . learn how to live off your sowings of seed
in the ground
[my emphasis].”


I want to guess that Kerouac got stuck on the performance by Bella
Darvi as Nefer, the Woman of Babylon, and did not consider the enduring
Treue of Jean Simmons' character, nor the emphatic world-renunciation
by Sinuhe, which begins and ends
The Egyptian.

What his impassioned observations do tell us, and they read as sober
and non-Benzedrined, is that Kerouac was touchy about violence.  This
is the man who would brawl in bars, mad-drunk, and then write
remorseful exhortations to the whole world to Be Kind.  He was also a
man who loved women, but suspected them, and their “designs”, through
and through, with the exception of Gabrielle, his mother.

Take a look at The Egyptian.  It's a good movie.  Sure, it's too long. 
And to be sure, there's not one word of humor.  But the liturgical
scenes, with their ethereal religious chants praising “Beauty” (I
thought I could hear Lionel Ritchie's “You are so Beautiful”)  — which
work! — and especially the obeisances, including Jean Simmons's, on the
steps of the temple of the One (Sun) God, are sincerely reverent, and
affecting.


You could compare the scene of Pharaoh's archers breaking into the
Temple of Aten with the Roman breach of the Temple in Nicholas Ray's
The King of Kings.  The latter is bloody and sensationalistic (like the “Civil War” cards little boys loved in the '60s, by the same people who
did the “Mars Attacks” cards) — the former, sympathetic and pitiful.

My irony for today is this:

Jack Kerouac should have liked The Egyptian.  The title character, take
away the toga, is the man himself.


Maybe he walked out before the end.  The editor of this blog taught me never to
do that.

AN EXPERIMENT IN NARRATIVE

Matt Barry — a fellow filmmaker and blogger and collaborator on the experiment in question — just posted an insightful piece about Majestic Micro Movies on his site, The Art and Culture Of Movies.  The site is filled with interesting thoughts about movies from every era . . . including a two-part essay with great screen-grabs on the films of Edwin S. Porter.  (You can access Part 1 here and Part 2 here — together they'll give you a nice little overview of the landscape of early film as the era of narrative began.)

That's Matt above in the Noir Bars: New York film from Majestic Micro Movies he starred in, which will be appearing online soon.  It was shot and directed by Jae Song.  I know what you're thinking — it must have taken Jae forever to light that scene, with the baby spot catching Matt's eye and the ominous shadow behind him . . . but no, it was done on the fly with available light in a dark bar and a camera so small that no one knew Jae and Matt were making a movie there.

So cool.

A NOIR BAR

Today is the premiere of the first movie in the Noir Bars: New York series from Majestic Micro Movies — extremely short tales of lost souls in dark bars on dead-end streets.  Have a look at it — a little Valentine from Majestic Micro Movies to you:

Noir Bar #1

YouTube
Vimeo
Facebook
Majestic Micro Movies Home Site

Watch all the films in the series as they roll out, then order a stiff drink and try to forget them.

[With thanks to American Gallery for the Andrew Loomis Ladies Home Journal cover from 1949.]

SURFING THE MICRO WAVE

First there was the French New Wave — an attempt by filmmakers to retake control of cinema from the commercial or state-sponsored studios and get back to basics.

Now there's the American Micro Wave, which is basically the same thing, necessary because the eruption of cinematic invention sparked by the young directors of the New Wave has been smothered once again in corporate standardization and dehumanization.

The Micro Wave is about micro movies.  This is nothing new.  Micro movies dominated the early years of cinema exhibition, and micro movies dominate the Internet.  The question is, can modern micro movies on the Internet get more sophisticated than cute clips from home videos, or pseudo-narratives designed to show off the filmmakers' technical skills, basically just self-generated commercials?

In short, can modern micro movies learn to tell real stories, just as directors of the nickelodeon era learned to tell real stories?



Finally, is this new Micro Wave really a wave?  Too soon to tell, unless you're in the water.  You can't see a wave coming until the sea-swells meet the curve of the seabed running up to the beach, lifting a crest so high that it breaks on the sand.  But you can feel it if you're out swimming in it.

All I can say is, “Come on in — the water's fine!”

[“Mermaid” illustration by D. S. Walker, with thanks as so often to Golden Age Comic Book Stories, where wonders never cease.]

ME AND JERRY

When my car got a flat on a country road in Vermont one chilly night back in 1997 my heart sank.  I'd lent my jack to my brother-in-law three weeks before and had forgotten to get it back.  I hadn't worried about it too much, because I had a new set of tires on the car, but I'd apparently picked up a nail on the road somewhere and now I was facing the consequences.

I saw the lights of a house through the trees and really had no choice but to walk up to it and ask to use a phone.  An older man with gray hair, a long face and large ears opened the door, looking at me suspiciously.  I described my predicament and asked if I could use his phone to call a local garage.

“What do you want from me?” he said.  I figured he was hard of hearing and started my explanation over in a louder voice, but he waved me silent.  “I'm not signing your copy of Catcher In the Rye,” he said, almost vehemently.

“I don't have a copy of Catcher In the Rye,” I said.  “I had a copy in high school but I couldn't get through it so I gave it to my sister.”

“What's your angle?” he said.

I started to explain about my flat tire again but again he waved me silent.  “You didn't like the book?” he asked.  “Not much,” I said.  “Why?” he asked.  “Well, I like David Copperfield a lot, for one thing,” I explained.  “I don't think it's crap.”

“I'm not answering any questions!” he shouted at me.

“Not even 'Can I use your phone?'?” I said.  I realized I was dealing with a total hairpin, but he didn't look violent and it was awfully cold outside.

He showed me to the phone, gave me the number of a guy with a tow truck in Cornish, the nearest town, and hovered over me while I made the call.  I asked him if I could wait inside until the tow truck arrived.  “Yes,” he said, “but no photographs!”

“I don't have a camera,” I assured him, which should have been obvious.  He fixed his gaze on me intently.  “So . . .” he said finally, “you're more into the later books.”  “What later books?” I asked.

He seemed totally bewildered.  “You can't write about this night until after I'm dead!” he said.  “If you do, you will hear from my lawyers!”

“You've got yourself a deal,” I said — and it's a deal I stuck to faithfully.

MAJESTIC FILMMAKING

The first of the Noir Bars: New York series from Majestic Micro Movies will be going online in a few days.  Here's how they were made.  Beginning with a short written monologue, Jae Song cast an actor, worked with him or her on the reading and then recorded the monologue on a small digital device.

In the course of this process, Jae and the actor in a sense created the character, or found one of the many characters lurking in, made possible by, the written text.  What they did was prompted by the script but shaped by the actor's sense of it and Jae's sense of what would work as a voice-over on film.

They then repaired to a bar and began improvising behavior.  Since the camera Jae was using was so small, and since he was shooting with available light and not taking live sound (apart from ambient bar sound), no one really noticed that they were making a movie.  Drinking began.  Jae followed his instincts visually and when he had what he needed, or when his storage card or battery in the camera ran out of space or juice, drinking continued uninterrupted.  The whole shoot rarely lasted more than an hour or two.

Then Jae began the only part of the work he found tedious — editing.  Fortunately his roommate Joe Griffin, a fellow filmmaker who also starred in one of the films, helped out with this.

The films only last a couple of minutes.  The challenge was to create real characters and situate them in real stories.  Only a brief glimpse into the character's narrative could be captured, of course, but the idea was to come up with something beyond a character study, or an anecdote — something that would set the mind to wondering . . . how did this character get into this predicament?  What's going to become of this character?

When you ask questions like that, you are in the realm of a genuine story.

FROM THE ARCHIVES: REPORT FROM THE BEACH, 30 AUGUST 1998

Yesterday at sunset two large Golden Retrievers ran down onto the beach
with their owner and proceeded instantly to two spots in the sand, as
though they were prearranged, and began digging furiously.  They didn’t
stop as long as I watched them.  The holes just got bigger and deeper.
Occasionally the dogs would pause, step back and bark into the holes.
There was nothing in the holes.

This was almost as strange as a couple in their thirties I saw a few
days ago, strolling along the shore.  The man had one arm around his
lady companion — in the other he carried a golf club, a metal driver.



Every now and then he would stop, disengage, address an imaginary golf
ball in the sand and “drive” it into the surf.  Then he would continue
on.


Some fantastic act of defiance — like Cuchulain attacking the breakers
with his broadsword?  A man who cares far too much about his golf swing?


When we know what the dogs were digging for we may know the answers to
these questions, and many others besides.  Mysteries of the beach
revealed . . .

MAJESTIC MICRO MOVIES: TECH SPECS

About six years ago, my friend Jae Song, a filmmaker, told me, in
abject astonishment, that with the new HD cameras just coming on the
market it was possible to fit the camera and lighting package for a
feature film into the back of a station wagon.


Today, he's shooting feature-quality HD video in New York bars with
equipment he can fit into a backpack.




The center of his current package is a Canon 7D still and video camera,
fitted with a Canon 1.0 lens.  That lens, no longer in production and
hard to find, and the sensitivity of the camera itself allow him to
shoot with ambient light (in bars that aren't too dark to start with)
and come up with footage that looks as good as most stuff you see in
Hollywood movies — better, as often as not, because Jae has an
exceptional
eye, artistically speaking.



The camera shoots HD video at 1080 resolution and uses the h264
compression codec — an o. k. codec, as far as Jae is concerned but not
Final Cut Pro friendly.  He suggests transcoding it before editing.




The key to the look Jae gets, however, is a custom gamma contrast curve
that can be downloaded from the Internet for the camera.  Out of the
box, according to Jae, the camera's images are too contrasty, looking
like bad video.  The contrast curve he uses gives more info for
highlights and shadows, and thus more options in ambient lighting
situations and in post.  The downside, for some, is a softer image than
the one Canon thought people would prefer, but with care it simply
gives the footage more of the feel of film.  It works especially well
for Jae in
the bar settings, where the lighting can be harsh at times.




Jae shoots with the lens wide open to 1.0 at all times, at 24 fps,
sometimes varying the ISO and shutter speed slightly according to
conditions.



Jae doesn't manipulate the images in post — what he gets at the
location, trusting his own instincts about the light and the capacities
of the camera, is exactly what he wants.



A series of short films Jae shot with this camera will be appearing
soon on the Internet.  You simply will not believe how good they look.

SOME OF THE MOONRISE

Drunk late at night in 1955, Jack Kerouac watched Frank Borzage's Moonrise on TV, and wrote this poem about it, in his notebook of religious meditations eventually published as Some Of the Dharma:

DUMB POEM CALLED “MOONRISE”


A snake in a pond
Slithers out of harm
Seeking the frond
Of the heavenly farm.

Jeb was your Paw
Forevermore
And this is the law
Of love and gore.

The blood of the bear
Is soaking in the swamp,
Such heavenly air
Overhangs his pomp.

Give yourself up
To the sheriffs of truth,
Fear no hound pup
No karma of tooth  

For your sweet smile
And meditations desperate
Are wine to the senile
And love to degenerate

Face the shroudy kitchen
Of the sea of the night
And make a pretty kitten
Of all this abounding blight

(Written after watching, drunk, Dane Clark on
TV in movie MOONRISE) —
Some cloth has that sin rip
This doesnt



My friend Paul Zahl (of The Zahl File) drew my attention to this.  He writes:

This is Kerouac's little riff on a surprising movie, with its
Prophet of Grace Sheriff and its Recluse of Wisdom Rex Ingram, its
insight about dogs, and its unsensational, unforgettable scene on a
very small ferris wheel.

I think I could preach three sermons arising from stanza four, and another two about the movie's not having “that sin rip”.  I'm not sure they'd be received all that well — but maybe on a park bench some day, as in Moonrise.



Kerouac, watching a late night movie on television and
drunk, manages to capture the theme of the film.  Does “blood”-destiny have to determine the outcome of a life?  Or can other
things, like love (the shaky and vulnerable heroine), a wise man for
father-figure (the Rex Ingram character “Mose”, who knows what's really
up before anyone else does, and who gives his hounds the dignity of
being called “Mr. Dog” and means it) . . .

. . . and a philosopher-sheriff, the
likes of whom I have never seen depicted in a movie — sort of a
small-town “zen-detective” (the phrase is Thornton Wilder's) — who is
able to convey a concrete quality of grace in unsentimental terms.  Can
the “sin rip” (Kerouac's phrase, not the movie's) be mended?  Mended in
believable terms, in a way that could actually happen?



Kerouac takes karma, and a dog's bite and faithfulness,
and the cabin kitchen at the end; and the swamp of the beginning and
middle; and comes up with a . . . kitten.  All while drunk!

VISUAL MICRO FICTION

The first story films were very short — either little gags that could last less than a minute or narratives lasting about ten minutes.  There's a reason for that.  Because movies were a new form, novelties, they fell into story frames that audiences were already familiar with — newspaper cartoons and comic strips, which could be read in less than a minute, and vaudeville skits, which lasted about ten minutes.  These familiar forms helped audiences fit story films into their habitual patterns of consuming entertainment.

In this era, movies and comic strips fed off each other, expanded each other's boundaries.

The first truly sensational American story film, The Great Train Robbery (see the frame grab above), appeared in 1903.  There had been story films before this, or anecdotal films with narrative qualities, but The Great Train Robbery was so popular that it almost singlehandedly created the new market for story films.  In a short time they had replaced gag films and actualities as the preferred cinematic form.

D. W. Griffith made his first ten-minute short in 1908 and at once began expanding the expressive range of the short story film.  In 1909, the first regular comic strip, Mutt & Jeff (above) began appearing in newspapers.  There had been multi-panel strips before this, along with single-panel cartoons that told little stories, but Mutt & Jeff signaled the emerging dominance of the strip.  Just as single-panel cartoon gags had provided a template for early gag films, so the longer story films helped pave the way for the popularity of the multi-panel strip.

In the YouTube era of Internet cinema, we are about where projected movies were before The Great Train Robbery.  The next step will probably be very similar to the next step projected movies took — into the territory of the newspaper cartoon and comic strip and vaudeville skit, all of which can be studied profitably as exercises in micro-fiction.  The idea that Internet cinema can leap from the cute pet or baby video into feature-length narratives is a fantasy.  People will eventually consume feature-length narratives via the Internet, but what happens between now and then will be intensely exciting.  This is when the shape of cinema to come will be determined.

BIJOU DREAM

How do you tell stories in images on the Internet?  Fast!


Is it possible to tell a real story in a micro-fictional format no
longer than a cute baby video?  A filmmaking collective based in
Brooklyn thinks so — and is trying to prove it.




Cinematographer and director Jae Song has been making a series of very
(very) short films shot in bars in New York City, working with unknown
but great young (and not so young) actors.  He's using a tiny Canon 7D
camera,
which shoots stills and HD video, and a rare super-fast Canon 1.0 lens. 
He
uses only available light, and doesn't take live sound (except for ambient bar sound) — the actors tell their stories in voice-overs.  (I've contributed scripts to the project and find myself amazed by what Jae and the actors have done with them.)



The series is called “Noir Bars”, and is part of a larger project called
Majestic Micro Movies, which will eventually include micro musicals and micro Westerns.  The idea in all cases is to create micro-stories, with
fully-imagined fictional characters . .. . brief flashes of narratives
whose larger arcs viewers will have to fill in for themselves.




Not all that different from the first brief story films that caught
audiences' attention back around 1903 — a bit more oblique, perhaps, but serving the same timeless appetite for fables.




Coming soon to your own private nickelodeon — not a tiny storefront
movie theater now but a window on your personal computer or cell phone!
  Parking no problem!