Wow, that’s an efficient introduction!

I have, of course, seen this movie several times before, but now it’s in a 2K restoration from Criterion!

Oh right! This movie ends with three couples marrying?

That’s very convenient for ebooks.

Heh, I remember this scene from when I saw this movie the first time around (as a child, probably). “My, she was yare”.

It turns out that all the problems in the world is because Katharine Hepburn is stubborn and stuff! Whodathought!

This movie isn’t perfect. They could have spent, like, fifteen minutes less on berating Katharine Hepburn, like? But most of the scenes work, and those scenes are just wonderful.

The Philadelphia Story. George Cukor. 1940. ⚅

It’s so Belgian.

Is that Akerman?

Yes, after a false start the other day, this is the first movie proper on the Akerman box set from BFI.

So, this seems to be a series of short tableaux where we see a couple people interact. They’re all lit like this — one or two bright lights placed pretty far off, so much of the screen is #000. Apparently no sound was recorded when filming, but there’s some hyper active foley artists working very hard — every step has a STEP STEP STEP sound, and every door has a creak and a BONK.

So far none of the characters have made a return… but perhaps that’s the movie — just a series of encounters in one night, and no plot?

In any case, this definitely seems like a scaled back production from Akerman’s 70s movies. Did she lose financing?

Does everybody in Belgium have their own code displayed on the houses?

29.M.57 ISO 368.HB.

I really like the way it looks, but unlike other Akerman films, I’m not really hypnotised by this one.

OK, there are storylines of a kind… characters reappear and we can (sort of) follow along some stories.

It’s morning!

I liked this movie. It did fall off a bit towards the end when we spend more time with a handful of the characters — the vagueness of the main part of the movie was quite appealing.

Toute une nuit. Chantal Akerman. 1982. ⚄

Oh, now I remember… I’ve seen this one before. That psycho’s gonna kidnap some poor woman, right?

I think I got this bluray because it was on Hazel Flagg’s list, but I’m not completely sure. I can’t really think of any other reason…

There’s the victim.

What a creep!

I probably saw this on VHS in the early 80s, and while I don’t actually remember anything concrete from the movie, it must have made an impression — I mean, I knew immediately that it was about a kidnapping when I saw that butterfly. On the other hand, that’s not exactly subtle…

I like what he’s done with the place… Did Fritzl see this and go “yes! this is what I’ll do!”

Man, that Terence Stamp is a terrific actor.

I dunno… it’s really well made and well acted — the set design is fantastic — but I’m not altogether all in on this. It’s difficult not to imagine this made by Hitchcock instead: There’s be so much more going on; more tense scrapes; more escape attempts… a less passive kidnappee. It’s hard to believe that somebody would just submit in this way and not try to get an escape plan going.

On the other hand, I don’t think Hitchcock would have managed to make something as creepy as this.

That’s a nice house. Could use more chimneys. MORE CHIMNEY

Anyway, I can’t really say I enjoyed this that much. I guess I kind of respect it? But eh.

The Collector. William Wyler. 1965. ⚃