Routine Pleasures (Jean-Pierre Gorin, 1986)
At the risk of badly paraphrasing...
Gorin’s film was an interesting proposition. He is following subjects that he has no personal interest in - model train enthusiests - as a means of discovering something about the nature of pleasure in art and work but also an understanding of his place as a French ex-Marxist making a life in California. Much of the latter revolves around the critic and artist Manny Farber, an elusive figure in the film who, despite his absesnce, is probably the most illustrative component of the work. I think that if I was the type to ask questions at Q&As I would probably ask the function of the length of time he allowed the dull train scenes to go on for. The endless information and factual minutae relating to trains becomes suffocating in this film. Why include as much as he did?
Gorin spoke of American archetypes and his upbringing in France in relation to the US. A big concern for both himself and Manny was 1930s Hollywood film. It had something to do with being raised by Trotskyists and getting a sense of labour and work in early American movies. He talked about the workers in these films having a modesty and anonymity that he found touching (!?). He spoke of imperfect films that don’t go rushing to a central point but instead meander, sometimes fail, but nonetheless deliver the most memorable images. He discussed what makes a memorable image. “Godard taught me,” he said, “that a good film puts you to sleep. Then you wake up and it’s the same.”
At this point he spoke of film structure and the importance of not falling into the patterns of Hollywood clichés. He said, “you don’t do like Wim Wenders and just throw some characters on the road, do a classical style road movie with some music by the Kinks in the background, and think you’re doing anything new.”
Gorin’s film was an interesting proposition. He is following subjects that he has no personal interest in - model train enthusiests - as a means of discovering something about the nature of pleasure in art and work but also an understanding of his place as a French ex-Marxist making a life in California. Much of the latter revolves around the critic and artist Manny Farber, an elusive figure in the film who, despite his absesnce, is probably the most illustrative component of the work. I think that if I was the type to ask questions at Q&As I would probably ask the function of the length of time he allowed the dull train scenes to go on for. The endless information and factual minutae relating to trains becomes suffocating in this film. Why include as much as he did?
Gorin spoke of American archetypes and his upbringing in France in relation to the US. A big concern for both himself and Manny was 1930s Hollywood film. It had something to do with being raised by Trotskyists and getting a sense of labour and work in early American movies. He talked about the workers in these films having a modesty and anonymity that he found touching (!?). He spoke of imperfect films that don’t go rushing to a central point but instead meander, sometimes fail, but nonetheless deliver the most memorable images. He discussed what makes a memorable image. “Godard taught me,” he said, “that a good film puts you to sleep. Then you wake up and it’s the same.”
At this point he spoke of film structure and the importance of not falling into the patterns of Hollywood clichés. He said, “you don’t do like Wim Wenders and just throw some characters on the road, do a classical style road movie with some music by the Kinks in the background, and think you’re doing anything new.”