Reviews written by registered user
|4 reviews in total|
Where do people get the idea that movies are supposed to represent some
kind of objective truth? That seems to be Andersen's main bug. He
faults Hollywood for fictionalizing Los Angeles history. He says that
rich white people can't make films about L.A. because they only know
the rich white part of the city, and because they might offend their
rich white friends. It seems in his view that only people who walk the
streets and ride the buses are qualified to depict life in this city,
but the clips he shows from a few "neo-realist" films don't feature the
city very much, except for a long shot of a guy driving past a closed
But all movies (even documentaries and those by poor black filmmakers) are constructs. By their nature (meaning meddling by cinematographers, editors, directors, etc.) they can only present a subjective view of the city. So why not embrace that? Things like "creative geography" are inherent to the art form, so why discount them? Ultimately, Andersen has a bug up his hinder about what he considers to be proper film-making, and it flies in the face of a hundred years of cinema history. And this guy is a professor of film studies!
I'm a big fan of Night of the Living Bread; it's my favorite student
film. It's elegantly streamlined, inventive, and entertaining all the
way though. Loaf, however, goes off in another direction, hitching its
wagon to its "famous" big brother and saving everything for one big
joke at the very end. Taken on its own (and looking at the ratings here
on IMDb), Loaf would seem to be a failure.
Fortunately, most people who have seen Loaf have seen it under very specific conditions: at a horror movie marathon. O'Brien's peculiar oeuvre was a staple at a few of these throughout the 90s -- the Drexel in Columbus, OH, and the Case Western in Cleveland. I have seen these crowds chanting "Loaf! Loaf! Loaf!" in anticipation, and heard their cheers afterward. It's silly fun.
Ultimately, this film was designed as a punchline to another movie -- and in that regard, seen under the right circumstances, it works. Taken on its own, it's a strange creature. So if you should happen to have the opportunity to see Loaf, do yourself a favor and see Night of the Living Bread first. And remember to lighten up!
It is entirely unlikely that any member of the band U2 saw this
production's request to use their song, "One." It was probably handled
by their managers, who have been very hard- headed in the past. The
band Negativland parodied "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For"
and got hit with a great big lawsuit. When magazine Mondo 2000 was
scheduled to do an interview with Dave "the Edge" Evans, the publisher
arranged for Evans to be interviewed by members of Negativland. They
questioned him extensively about the band's use of found sound and
video for their Zoo TV tour, then revealed their true identities. At
that time he stated that U2 had been very uncomfortable with the record
label's lawsuit, and that much of "the legal wrangling took place
without U2's knowledge" --this from the Wikipedia page on Negativland.
Regarding Young@Heart, this is a wonderful documentary.
"Bread" very sharply skewers the conventions of horror movies in general and "Night of the Living Dead" in specific and is constantly inventive. The production values are a little rough at times (it's a student film, after all), but it never loses sight of its goal to entertain. Hey -- George Romero liked it enough to include it on the remastered "Dead" video tape, laserdisc and DVD... that should tell you something.