Hôtel des Acacias

Heh, it was restored as part of a master’s degree?

I bought the second BFI Akerman box a while back, so I thought it was time I started watching it.

This is a (long) short, and the weird thing about it is how normal it is. I was expecting something along the lines of Hôtel Monterey — something experimental and contemplative.

But instead this is just a drama involving the people working at this hôtel (and the guests).

Was this originally made for Belgian TV or something?

Oh!

Hôtel des Acacias (1982) is a 43-minute Belgian film directed by students at the INSAS film school under the supervision of acclaimed director Chantal Akerman and Michèle Blondeel.

So it’s a student thing… so I guess it makes even more sense that it was restored by a student, too.

When I throw the die for movies, I usually go “is this good for what it is?” That is, if I were to die-throw on an “objective” scale, all super-hero movies would get a since I gave a to a bergman movie once, and even the worst Bergman movie is better than the best super-hero movie.

So I don’t do that, because that’d be boring, but then what to do with a student movie? Is this a good student movies as student movies go?

And… I don’t really think so? I’m pretty sure I’ve seen student movies that are much better than this.

It’s not that this is awful. I like the cinematography — plonking the camera somewhere and then getting some interesting angles. Most of the performances are bad, but there are a couple really good ones.

But the main problem is just that it’s not really interesting? It’s so normal, only not well done?

Hôtel des Acacias. Yves Hanchar/Pierre Charles Rochette/François Vanderveken/Isabelle Willems. 1982.

The Boys in the Band

This is a gay classic that I always assumed I’ve seen before… but some months back, I watched To Live and Die in L.A., and was really impressed. It’s directed by William Friedkin, and I realised that I’d seen so few of his movies, so I went on a little shopping spree.

Which, again, made me wonder whether I’d really seen this before. And I really can’t remember seeing it! So now I am!

Darn. This 2K release has been cut down to 16:9. I hate that. (It’s just from 1.85:1 so it’s not that big of a difference, which sort of makes it even a greater insult…)

Hey, nice. That’s where I want to live.

But with fewer cockroaches.

Somehow I thought this was an 80s movie, but it’s from 1970! It’s a classic classic!

Awkward!

No, I have seen this before! Must have been in the 80s sometime…

Harold is very memorable.

It’s very Ibsenian — we’re gonna reveal all the life lies of all the characters, apparently.

Or perhaps more Tennessee Williams. The setup is more artificial — they’re playing a game where they’re phoning their true loves… Very… high emotional stakes.

The 70s was a sweaty decade.

So sweaty!

Yeah, OK, sure — it’s pretty risible, and I can totally understand people who loathe this movie. I think it’s spiffy. But I’m a sucker for this kind of theatre drama.

The Boys in the Band. William Friedkin. 1970.

Here Comes Mr. Jordan

Play it daddy-o.

Oh, it’s one of those movies…

Edward Everett Horton!

Claude Rains!

Some guy!

I think I’ve seen this before, actually… but it must be a long time ago.

Or has this ever been remade under another name?

I guess the guy who plays the main character here is Robert Montgomery? I’ve seen him in other movies before, but he’s not one I’ve, like, noticed… so I don’t know if this is the character he usually does or not: Kinda stupid, kinda goodhearted — you know, a boxer who plays the sax. And he does it well! But it’s not particularly charming, either.

Cary Grant was originally going to do the role, but that didn’t happen. But that would have been awesome.

That’s a more fun shot of him on imdb.

It’s a really sweet movie. Very enjoyable.

Here Comes Mr. Jordan. Alexander Hall. 1941.