Friday, March 03, 2006

Altman, now more than ever

Welcome to Robert Altman Blog-a-thon Weekend, in which criticism and commentary sites all over the Internet band together to pay homage to Mr. Altman, who will be given an honorary Oscar March 5. What follows is a running list that hopefully will grow and grow as Friday becomes Saturday becomes Sunday. If you haven't done so already, notify me when you post something related to Altman and I'll include the address and a description here. You can email me at reeling@aol.com or post the URL and summary in the comments section of this thread, and I'll add the information as soon as I can.

For best results, make like the opening credits of "Nashville" and read the following text aloud at high speed, in a booming carnival barker's voice, starting with:

The Altman Oscars! What better way to counter the day-late-dollar-short melancholy that surrounds the director's award from an industry that ignored or misappreciated him for long periods of his durable career? Rather than dwell on "Crash" vs. "Brokeback" and the like, Cinemarati has concocted an alternate universe list of Oscar nominees drawn entirely from Altman's filmography. "I can’t pretend not to have somewhat mixed feelings about this," writes contributor Brian Carr. "Here’s a guy that Hollywood turned its back on throughout the Reagan Eighties, a development which he turned to his advantage by directing a string of smaller-scale films starting with the outstanding 'Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean.' His five nominations for directing over the years are certainly a sign of some appreciation for the man, but is there anything that can overcome the mortification of being defeated by Ron Howard?" The fantasy lineup is a delight, an Altman geek's answer to fantasy football -- a tribute to the filmmaker's floating repertory company and a stealth ranking of all-time great Altman performances, songs, ,zooms, subtle visual gags and gratuitous nudity. (See below for more, more, MORE Altman nudity!) The Altman Best Actor and Actress categories include:

BEST ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE:
Julie Christie, "McCabe & Mrs. Miller"
Shelley Duvall, "Three Women"
Cynthia Nixon, "Tanner on Tanner"
Sissy Spacek, "Three Women"
Susannah York, "Images"

BEST ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE:
Elliot Gould, "The Long Goodbye"
Phillip Baker Hall, "Secret Honor"
Michael Murphy, "Tanner ‘88"
Tim Robbins, "The Player"
Robin Williams, "Popeye"

Let the quibbling begin. What, no Warren Beatty for "McCabe and Mrs. Miller"? No Julianne Moore for supporting actress in "Short Cuts?" And where's Keith Carradine's "I'm Easy" from "Nashville" for best song? Does having won a real-world Oscar disqualify it? Damn you, lists; I reject you, then I seek you out.

"Self-Styled Siren" says that in light of "The Player," Altman's honorary Oscar underlines"...another point about the film colony, namely its sheer cluelessness. Oh sure, they believe they're in on the joke. But do they realize just how dark that joke is? In some of the old Warner Brothers cartoons, Daffy Duck would tear around shrieking, 'I know when I've been insulted!'"

NYC Film Critic takes us through "Nashville" song-by-song. "Like all great movie musicals, the key to understanding Robert Altman's 1975 masterwork 'Nashville' is to pay closer attention to the characters' songs than to their dialogue. That's because the large cast of characters that make up this sprawling epic reveal more about themselves through their music than they ever would in conversation." Jdanspsa Wyksui, an Altman newbie, finds "Nashville" satisfying because it is "...unusually unromanticised...I expected 'Nashville' to be a celebration of the American Dream, and in a way it is, but it is deeply critical of it; from the start it has characters singing about peace, love and understanding, then as soon as the song ends they settle back into their bitter, disagreeable, and troubled persona. Dreams don't crumble in this film so much as they are denied outright. Everybody wants for more - that great reconciliation, that deserved recognition, that wider success - but it's always out of reach. Some realise this and some don't, and it is heartbreaking to watch those in both camps as they either deal with a crushing realisation, or continue to delude themselves." (For a sprawling, original take on Altman's sprawling, original "Nashville," see Ray Sawhill's 25th anniversary Salon appreciation.)

The Great Swifty Speaketh! joins the blog-a-thon, undaunted by the fact that he has seen just one Altman movie, "The Company." He is respectful but not enraptured. "I think it will be rather difficult for me to actually sit through it again, but then, that is pretty much like being dragged off for dinner with people who don't really click with you."

Bill Roundtree revisits Altman's snowy frontier. "'McCabe & Mrs. Miller' is, I flatter myself to think, a uniquely impossible experience to relate to anyone else, even anyone who loves it. That's partly the gift of Altman in general, who's the filmmaking equivalent of Spinoza's God: the creator as noninterventionist. Improvisatory, organic constructions leave too much room for variance to ever pin entirely. But it's specifically true of 'McCabe & Mrs. Miller,' a movie that seeks (calculatedly, to an extent, which makes its success all the more unlikely) to settle in the shadows of a world at the moment of its disappearance." The Listening Ear considers "McCabe" at length, in the context of Jean-Luc Godard's movies and his analysis of movies. Altman's western illustrates "...what Godard called the 'complex' - the ways people try to live together. He tends to do this through discourse - through the ways people talk to one another. Or, usually, fail to talk effectively. Altman’s films are famous for their murky dialogue, the ambient noise that makes it hard to hear, the overlapping conversations interfering with each other, the low recording levels - that is a factor here. But even when they can hear each other, they can't understand each other." At The House Next Door, David Milch, creator of HBO's "Deadwood," discusses "McCabe and Mrs. Miller," a formative influence on his own vision of frontier life.

Wandering the backroads of Altman's filmography, More Than Meets the Mogwai ambles off into the woods, picks through the brambles and digs up a treasure: a short film Altman produced for a 1977 episode of "Saturday Night Live" guest-hosted by Sissy Spacek, who was then starring in Altman's as-yet-unfinished "3 Women," and in "Welcome to L.A.," which was directed by Altman's friend and artistic heir Alan Rudolph, featuring Spacek with Altman regulars Shelley Duvall and Keith Carradine (who make postmodern sort-of-cameos in the "SNL" short). Upping the ante, this essay analyzes Altman's filmmaking, with particular emphasis on editing, to suggest how Altman might have been working through, or perhaps riffing on, conundrums posed by that movie, Rudolph's movie, his own career and cinema in general. "Altman's exercise in montage subtly connects both films in a myriad of ways, with the least common factor being the use of same actors and actresses. There's a similar sensibility in the devotion given to actress Spacek in both Rudolph and Altman's films that makes the interconnectedness seem organic."

Another Altman spelunker is Girish, who revisits Altman's pre-"M*A*S*H" feature, 1969's "That Cold Day in the Park," which stars Sandy Dennis as a woman who spies a young man in a park on a rainy day, chats him up and brings him home. "One thing leads to another, and soon we're in gothic-land." But the movie's true star, Girish writes, is "...the signature audiovisual strategy that Altman puts into place here, fully-formed, for the first time. He uses a potent combination of: (1) fluid, prowling pans, (2) zooms, both in and out, and (3) constant play with in-focus and out-of-focus." (For more on Altman's visual and aural strategies, read Robert T Self's "Robert Altman's Subliminal Reality."

Liverputty examines Altman's nudes. "There are always layers in Altman to undercut any titillation. Altman made an anti-western. He also makes anti-nude scenes." For a more detailed look at one such scene, check out Five Branch Tree's take on Julianne Moore's bottomless showstopper in "Short Cuts." "On one hand, the scene is filled with intense drama...But on the other hand, this is thick with black comedy because, to be blunt, Mrs. Wyman was caught with her pants down."

Like Anna Karina's Sweater raises a toast to Altman's "Health." "Like 'Nashville,' 'Health' is strewn with various interconnected plot threads, though it's far more anarchic here. It's hard to say whether or not this is by design, but it actually works in the film's favor. The political maneuverings and underhanded tactics are mostly presented without any context, but this senselessness makes the film that much more interesting."

Drifting scrutinizes two lesser-known Altmans but cannot quite embrace them. In "O.C. and Stiggs," the director's signature is vivid enough, "but so too is the fact that Altman is working against the grain as far as content goes, looking with that zoom lens of his for something, anything, with which to qualify this comedy about the misadventures of two high school charlatans." "Images" is Altman's "Persona," but 's while it's "...very well made, of course; it's also very deliberate, very reserved, very careful." Whine-Colored Sea contributes an elliptical Altman-related list, including a shout-out to "Images" and "Three Women" which were Lynchian long before Lynch was Lynch. "People get so fixated on Altman's multi-character epics that they forget about these two psychosexual delusions and what-the-hell-just-happened? identity-swapping dramas."

Curious about "A Prairie Home Companion?" You know, for film ran an early review as its inaugural post back in January.



Looking for an offbeat Altman angle, When Canses were Classeled settles on one of the director's most offbeat leading ladies, Shelley Duvall. "As I scanned through DVDs looking for an appropriate screencap or two, I was reminded of just how often, among many other recurring actors, Shelley Duvall appears in Altman's '70s films. And how odd it is that she never again appeared in an Altman film following 'Popeye.' Rumor has it that Altman reacted to Duvall's stint getting systematically dismantled by Stanley Kubrick on the set of 'The Shining' by grunting, I suppose with resignation, 'she's a different actress.' But, for a period, she seemed like Altman's secret favorite."

Culture Snob excavates a long essay on Tim Robbins and Jeff Bridges and extracts a nugget on "The Player" that asks how Altman could make us care so much about the film's revolting protagonist, Robbins' dirtbag studio hotshot Griffin Mill. "He embodies all the terrible traits we've come to hate in execs of any sort: He's a liar; he's self-centered; he looks down on nearly everybody; he cheats on his girlfriend with an exotic beauty named Good Dog's Water (or some such), and he even kills a lowly writer. And worst of all, he gets away with every bit of it. Yet the movie works, not just as Altman's gentle fuck-you to Hollywood, but as both a thriller and a human drama...How did that happen?" The answer is quite simple.

Coffee, coffee...and more coffee... contributes a still life of "Vincent and Theo," which organizes itself around "the irony between van Gogh's failure to sell his artwork while he was alive, and the immense monetary value his artwork has today. By making the film about the artist, Vincent van Gogh, and his art dealer brother, Theo, Altman has tried to say something about the conflict between art as personal expression and its commercial value."

"That Little Round-Headed Boy" shows some love for "Popeye," and explains why, despite being a cartoon adaptation, it's overpoweringly Altmanesque. "There are so many things about 'Popeye' to savor, but I especially appreciate its visual, intellectual whimsy. Watch how Altman introduces a close-up scene of Popeye in bed, then pulls back to show he's rigged a sea salt's hammock above the mattress. Or the framed 'picture' of Popeye's pap, which is nothing but a piece of cardboard with two words: 'Me Pap.' These sight gags have smarts."

If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger... republishes a 2005 Bright Lights Film Journal article on "Secret Honor." "Subtitled 'A Political Fable,' 'Secret Honor' recasts Richard Nixon's political career as the center of a New Left parable; a storybook tale for the barricades about a man helplessly stranded in a moonscape of poisoned idealism, trying to put sense to his own role in its creation, and dwelling within the lightless passages of its unseen realm." For visual accompaniment, Jamie Stuart, a.k.a. MutinyCo, links to a photo gallery commemorating Altman's 2003 appearance at Two Boots Pioneer Theater.

Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule offers a fragmented three-part career survey. (Part 1 is here, Part 2 is here. Part 3 is here.) Strewn throughout the text of the article are Altman-related links to books, movies, appreciations and the like. Among these: an appraisal of "O.C. and Stiggs" at Coffee, coffee and more coffee.

And that's not all: The Wit of the Staircase on "McCabe and Mrs. Miller". Quiet Bubble on "Dr. T and the Women"; The Evening Class recalling a 2003 Robert Altman tribute at the Castro Theater; Edward Copeland on Film's take on "Nashville," plus an anecdote about interviewing Altman.

But wait, there's more: Coincidentally and wonderfully, the Museum of the Moving Image has announced "American Maverick: A Robert Altman Retrospective," a 22 film series that will run April 29-June 8, 2006. Altman will appear at the museum with "Kansas City" and at a preview screening of "A Prairie Home Companion." Screenings will include, "M*A*S*H," "McCabe and Mrs. Miller," "Nashville," "The Long Goodbye," "California Split," "Thieves Like Us," "Tanner '88," "Tanner on Tanner," "The Player," "Short Cuts," "Gosford Park" and, on a double bill with "Kansas City," Altman's jazz documentary "Jazz '34." No schedule is posted yet, but the museum promises to finalize one soon.

And finally, speaking for more people than Mr. Altman could know, The Listening Ear has a confession to make: "Robert Altman made me a movie geek."
______________________________

UPDATE: At Fanzine.com, Benjamin Strong writes about Robert Altman's Oscar acceptance speech: "Last night at the 78th Academy Awards ceremony the Establishment fed a lion and he didn’t bite. Robert Altman graciously accepted his Honorary Oscar, the award slated for aged filmmakers whose industry colleagues have never otherwise recognized their work." And Kevin Killian writes about the Oscar Nosedive.

63 comments:

Filmbrain said...

My contribution to the Altman blogathon, a reivew of Health, can be found here.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Thanks, Filmbrain! I'll post the link. Keep 'em coming, folks. And remember, it doesn't have to be new, it just has to be vaguely Altman-related. Reviews, essays, personal remembrances, ticket stubs, photographs, cartoons, dreams -- send them to the House with URL (or email me at reeling@aol.com) and I'll add them to the hopper.

girish said...

Mark Asch at Bill Roundtree on McCabe & Mrs. Miller.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Got it. Will post shortly. Thanks, Girish.

Anonymous said...

A wonderful project, thanks to all the participants. But I confess some disappointment that this post wasn't entitled "Altman, Now More Than Ever".

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Good call. The change has been made.

Maya said...

I'm just going to pipe in here to thank you in advance, Matt, for moderating what promises to be a welcome Altman overload! What an enterprise....

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Maya: My pleasure. I love the man, what can I say. The purpose of this enterprise is to reclaim Mr. Altman from the industry that has, throughout his career, for appallingly long periods of time, failed to honor and embrace him with a sincerity befitting his contribution to American life. There is no better way to do that, in my opinion, than to ask non-famous, non-connected, non-industry Altman lovers to give of their time and appreciate his movies as all movies should be appreciated: idiosyncratically, personally and independently. Now more than ever.

William said...

To quote a great film spoken by a great filmmaker...

"Old buildings and whores get more respectable with age"

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Absolutely goddamn right.

Maya said...

This blogathon is reminding me that I've seen more Altman films than I thought I had; that forgetfulness being due, no doubt, to the fact that it is only recently that I've come to categorize movies by their helmers and not their leading actors. I forgot "The Player" was one of his. And appreciate Culture Snob's revitalized excerpt from an earlier love ode (don't worry guy, I love 'em too). I couldn't comment at his site so I do so here.

Recently I watched Kirk Douglas in "The Bad and the Beautiful" and realized the tradition of Hollywood producer cad walked onto the studio set with the first platinum blonde bimbo and the first latin lover. They're almost archetypes. We see in them aspects of ourselves and that's why they work. As someone who was always cast as the bad guy in stage plays, I have to admit it's not as easy as you think playing the bad guy. You can cut him from broadcloth a la Snidely Whiplash or you can humanize him through troubled motivations, as Tim Robbins did in "The Player."

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Yeah, I know what you mean. I think it comes back to Altman's unique gaze, which is understanding but not necessarily compassionate. He may not approve of "shitbag producers" like Griffin Mill, or the other miscreants, criminals and swine who've wound their way through his labyrithian "plotless" narratives, but he doesn't deny them their humanity in order to brand them as monsters. Even Robbins' selfish pig cop in "Short Cuts" seems more pitable and gross than evil; ditto Chris Penn's volcanic frustrated husband and Julianne Moore's cheating wife. Altman in some ways strikes me as Stanley Kubrick's shambling old beatnik brother, an omniscient observer of the human organism in all its forms. Altman is God, and in spite of it all, he finds us worthy of attention, and rather charming, all things considered.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

PS, since this of all places is a good venue to discuss it: do any of you agree with the characterization of Altman as a misanthrope? I've heard a lot of very intelligent people level that charge, and I am sure that in the dimness of my youth I probably lodged that accusation myself a time or two. And he can certainly be cutting, cold and even smug.

But I wonder, all in all, is the misanthrope label really valid? If so, how so? And is it in all of his movies, or only in some, or only in the case of certain characters? And if it is true, should it be an obstacle to loving Altman, as opposed to merely respecting him?

Maya said...

They say no entourage is good for an artist, and when that artist's vision leans towards ensemble, can one begrudge him for wanting a little time to himself?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

I fear I didn't express myself clearly enough. I don't mean Altman's personality in the real world, I mean his artistic temperament, or to get all criticky, his gaze. Is it compassionate, somewhat compassionate, not compassionate at all?

I say this because throughout my life I have read negative or mixed reviews of various Altman movies pegging him as a misanthropic artist, somebody who finds people interesting but doesn't really like them. I don't see how that's possible, given the wealth of humanity he puts onscreen, but when something is repeated over and over again over the course of almost 40 years, you start to wonder.

Anonymous said...

My one-sentence defence of Altman against charges of misanthropy is that he expects the worst of us but is always prepared to be surprised by our best. Distrust, but verify; call it his inheritance from the Show-Me State.

Mark Asch said...

I agree with anonymous; I was going to phrase it in terms of Altman caring enough to be disappointed. The ending of Nashville, for instance, restores our innocence to us by taking it away: until we realize how much it stings to be let down, we didn't realize we were expecting anything. (Every cynic is a failed optimist, to make an entirely unoriginal point.)

That Little Round-Headed Boy said...

I don't see Altman making a lot of judgements on screen. But he's creative: Having a prickly temperament is part of the package. You can't be that artistic, that restless, and have the political underpinnings of his best films and not have a clear-eyed view of how the sausages are made in life. But he does find a way to work it into his art, which is the important thing.
By the way, has he ever really discussed frankly his working method, in the sense of why some movies are clearly fussed over and others are just thrown like spaghetti at the wall? I just thought of Welles and the way he walked away from AMBERSONS. Maybe Altman lives for the on-set experience, for the search, and how the actual film comes out matters less?

The Great Swifty said...

My contribution (if it can still be regarded as one) is here

Culture Snob said...

Thanks, Maya, for your comment, and thanks, Matt, for the Blog-a-thon.

As for Matt's question about misanthropy, I'll excavate another Altman bit, part of larger piece on Magnolia:

"Altman is often accused of being misanthropic, but a better term would be clinical. In Short Cuts, Altman documents his characters’ lives largely from the outside, letting them hide behind big-city blankness. Except for a grieving couple, one never gets a sense of the characters’ pain, aside from the petty things that set them off. The audience sees the cop’s affair without understanding why he strays. We watch the pool cleaner’s jealousy at his wife’s phone-sex business, but that alone can’t explain why he snaps. Julianne Moore parades around without skirt or underpants, a physical state meant to show her emotional vulnerability, but it doesn’t succeed precisely because the character is so withdrawn." (The essay, if you care, is here: culturesnob.com/archives/000180.php.)

Lastly, a minor correction: The excerpt Matt cited (thanks!) is from an essay on Tim Robbins and Jeff Bridges. Bob, alas, has never gotten a piece all to himself in my neck of the woods.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Swifty: You're posted.

Culture Snob: You''re corrected.

Mark Asch: I can't help but smile seeing your comment, "Every cynic is a failed optimist," followed immediately by an image of Charlie Brown.

Peet said...

I don't think an actual misanthrope could bring forth such a tireless fascination with people as Altman does with his ensemble pieces and psychological portraits. Altman is in love with human complexity. He finds our negative sides just as compelling as our good ones, because it's all part of the package. He'd be bored to death by simplistic Syd Field characterizations that reveal the screenwriter's intentions within the first few minutes.

The Great Swifty said...

Ah, thanks!

Tom Sutpen said...

I've never cottoned to the view of Altman as a misanthrope. But I do wonder why the epithet got pinned on him in the first place.

If I had to guess, I'd say its a consequence of his taste for moral ambiguity; his overall unwillingness to come to any conclusions about the characters in his films (there's always another dimension to be explored). He's also, through his filming style (regardless of what period in his work we're talking about), constantly making the viewer aware of the environment of a given scene, thereby reapportioning our attention and subtly distancing us from what other directors would place front and center, now and forever.

You see this a lot in the work of Richard Lester, who was also tagged a misanthrope in his day, as well as Altman's (is it really a coincidence that Altman almost directed 'Petulia' before Lester took on the project?).

If Altman has any kind of fundamentally dystopian attitude toward the human race, it's the human race represented in traditional Hollywood storytelling models. His contempt for types, be they archetypes or stereotypes, is bottomless and it led him to essentially twist the head off of just about every genre he could get his hands on once he got the chance (not to underline the similarity too heavily, but this was the hallmark of Lester's filmmaking in the 1970s).

So to put it crudely, Altman is only a misanthrope if you're one of those people who think "The Big Sleep" is some kind of documentary.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

tom sutpen writes :If Altman has any kind of fundamentally dystopian attitude toward the human race, it's the human race represented in traditional Hollywood storytelling models. His contempt for types, be they archetypes or stereotypes, is bottomless and it led him to essentially twist the head off of just about every genre he could get his hands on once he got the chance."

That comes close to explaining my own feelings on this issue, so thanks for that. Perhaps it all comes down to tools, to language. Altman has never felt comfortable within established systems that impose limits on human possibilities and make the "truth" seem easy to grasp when in fact, as Altman knows, the "truth" of anything is often hard to grasp, and certainly impossible to distill without losing nuance. He's all nuance, no summary. There is no such thing as "long story short" with Altman, even in his shortest films. Every character and situation is the tip of the iceberg. There is always more you're not seeing and never will see. This respect for the mysteries of personality is often misread as distinterest, condescension or contempt, when actually it's more generous than almost any filmmaker's, because it says, in essence, "I don't truly know any of you and I never will, so here's a thumbnail sketch."

This, i think, is what frustrates many viewers about Altman. They are accustomed to being told that stories, personalities and the human experience in general can be broken down into neatly digestible bits, swabbed with formula and served up like chicken McNuggets. The sad part is, over the course of Altman's career, mass audiences have become more and more accustomed to the idea that McNuggets are a nourishing meal.

Peter Nellhaus said...

I encountered Altman briefly at the first Denver International Film Festival. The festival organizer was a production assistant on Nashville. I had mentioned that A Wedding seemed similar to Cousin, Cousine. Altman's response was that his film was comparable to Rules of the Game.

One of the couple of times I was quoted as a student film critic was for Brewster McCloud, where I wrote "Mom's apple pie is thrown back in her face."

What is interesting about the posts in general is that they are well split between the better known and lesser known films.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

New links added since last night -- see above. The format of the post keeps shifting and reorienting itself, which seems oddly appropriate considering we're talking about Altman.

dave said...

My post on Altman's Nudes is up on Liverputty.blogspot.com.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Got it, thanks, Dave. Sure to be the most popular link of them all!

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Reading all these essays so close together crystallizes Altman's iconclastic spirit. He never does anything the easy way. He is always pushing against simplicity, against genre, against cliche, against received wisdom, against hand-me-down rules. To some extent, all his movies are jazz movies.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

That said, there are a few movies of his that I just can't sit through again. PRET A PORTER, for one. And HEALTH. It seems as though his working methods either yield gems or paste, with not much gradation in between. I'd like to hear more people weigh in on problematic or unsuccessful Altman movies, movies that just flat-out didn't work for them for one reason or another. I'd do that myself if I wasn't writing something else.

Brian said...

Time willing, I hope to compose an ode to THE COMPANY comparing and contrasting it to Niv Fichman's cinema verite BLUE SNAKE in the near future. And/or finally sit down and watch the pan-and-scan video of COUNTDOWN I bought from a video store that was going out of business last year. But for now, I've got a more general post up at Cinemarati that includes an all-Altman fantasy lineup of Oscar nominees.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Outstanding! I will post shortly.

Brian said...

For me, of the films I've seen, VINCENT AND THEO comes closest to flat-out not working (and even it has a wonderful supporting turn by Johanna Ter Steege). It's just so stultifyingly pretty in a way that his other films aren't. And Tim Roth gives a performance that goes over-the-top not just in moments like in other Altman films, but practically all the time. Perhaps the dissonance between the lovely images and the near-constant shouting and thowing things around the room makes for an interesting juxtaposition for some viewers, but for me it made the film feel somehow flat, predictable and boring.

I think PRET A PORTER is nearly as good as SHORT CUTS (admittedly I don't love the latter as much as many do) and I haven't seen HEALTH yet.

(and, psst...it's Brian Darr, not Carr).

Brian said...

Ah, wonderful dissent on my proposed nominees. At first I had Beatty on a list of six but then I decided to be merciless and chose him to be cut because he was the only one I could bear to see go (without disqualifying Murphy's turn for being in a TV series, which I didn't want to do either). Moore's great in SHORT CUTS but not as great as McDormand for me. Maybe she's better than Emily Watson in GOSFORD PARK but I didn't want to leave that film out in the cold. Obviously there's ludicrously vast riches to choose from, especially in the supporting categories. As for "I'm Easy", I have to admit it's not a favorite tune of mine, even though I love the film dearly.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Of course it's hard to choose, but the most egregious oversight, in my biased opinion, is Beatty, whose foggy depressive-romantic-visionary vibe matches up nicely with the general temperament of Altman's career. If I were going to pick any actor and single performance to stand for Altman's body of work, that would be it.

That Little Round-Headed Boy said...

Matt, fellow Altman fans — I literally just finished watching CALIFORNIA SPLIT (I'm in all-Altman mode all weekend long. Next up: THREE WOMEN) and I'm ashamed of myself for not having seen it in years. I vaguely remember seeing it as a kid on a Movie-of-the-Week, where it left me underwhelmed. Needless to say, it's a freakin' masterpiece. On Brian's list, I'm in agreement on Beatty, but can I get a shout-out for George Segal? He has never done a thing for me, except maybe BLUME IN LOVE, but here he was totally in character, the realistic anchor to Elliott Gould's brilliant verbal flights of fancy. I felt Segal's flop sweat from the opening scene. And Gwen Welles was great, too, by the way (that scene where she says, "Not really...not really" when told Segal's character likes her, is so true, so devastating. That scene alone would put the lie to any notion of Altman being a cold cynic.) By the way, did Brian's site have a Best Sound category? If so, I'd nominate CALIFORNIA SPLIT. That opening scene alone has a rhythmic murmur and purr that's incredible. I hope somebody writes more about this film. Among his greats, it strikes me as underappreciated.

girish said...

Brian, I know you're probably sick of hearing this. :-)
But Beatty's McCabe is close to my heart too.
Though Michael Murphy is the actor I think of first when I think of Altman male performers.

TLRB: I've never seen CALIFORNIA SPLIT.
In fact, would it be shameful to admit all the Altmans I haven't seen?
THIEVES LIKE US, BUFFALO BILL, A WEDDING, QUINTET, HEALTH, JIMMY DEAN, OC/STIGGS, SECRET HONOR, BEYOND THERAPY.

I know, downright bad.

Given That Little Round-Headed Boy's Altman catch-up week, anyone else up for confessing the Altmans they MOST want to see for the first time?
For me, that'd probably be THIEVES LIKE US, CALIFORNIA SPLIT and A WEDDING. I've just read so much about them.
Yours?

dave said...

I recently saw CALIFORNIA SPLIT and loved it. Now it's one of my favorite Altman movies. I have no idea what it says about gambling, but I liked it as a buddy movie. It mostly escapes some things that nag me about Altman, which I'll try to write about later. I also think it's his the best use of multi-track. And I hear that little round-headed boy's shout-out, after this movie I was really missing 70's era George Segal.

girish said...

Brian, I'm pleasantly surprised to hear that you liked PRET-A-PORTER. I saw it when it first came out and was disappointed for two reasons: (1) It followed what I thought were two killer Altmans, THE PLAYER and SHORT CUTS, (2) The doo-doo jokes.
Though they didn't bother me as much in BREWSTER MCCLOUD (which I like quite a bit).

Switching topics, I gotta say: Altman records better DVD commentary tracks than pretty much any other director I've ever heard. He never falls into the trap of recalling technicalities in great, boring detail, but is instead distanced and reflective; he is humble as heck, giving everyone else all the credit, especially actors; and I love how he allows for lots of pauses and dead time, without inundating you with trivialities.
He'd be just about the coolest guy to hang out with.

girish said...

OK, so I'm feeling loquacious tonight.

Here's a crude and half-baked two-cent theory:

1970s Altman: "Opens Out" and undermines the Hollywood classical narrative model of tight continuity and clear apprehension of space (both visual and aural).
1980s: Going in the opposite direction by "Closing In", cutting back on visual/aural ambiguities, and instituting clear and tight theatrical space (like in the play adaptations he filmed).
1990s and beyond: Sort of returning to the large canvases, ensembles and audiovidual strategies of the 70s, along with their stylistic elements...

And so, here's my question: is that related to why his 80s films are the lesser-seen of his output? Just wondering...

dave said...

THIEVES LIKE US has been on my want-to-see list forever. There's a lot of Altman I haven't seen, but THIEVES and KANSAS CITY are at the top because I have an obsessive fascination with period recreation.
Others I want to see: STREAMERS, SECRET HONOR, and COME BACK TO FIVE AND DIME.
I'll watch IMAGES and QUINTET when I have enough heavy drugs.

I think the Altman movie I have enjoyed seeing most in the last several years was THE DELINQUENTS. If I had more time, that would have been my pick to focus on in this Blog-a-thon. This 50's teens-gone-bad flick is way better than it needed to be, and fits into Altman's canon quite nicely. It also has great shoe-string Kansas City locations. Altman would have been 32 when he made it.

girish said...

Dave, Given your interest in period recreation, I think the "once-removed Altman" of Alan Rudolph's The Moderns might be fun.

You know, I almost did an Alan Rudolph post for this blog-a-thon, because I'm a big fan and that wouldn't be out of place at this event. Which reminds me: gotta go resume work on my Altman post.

girish said...

Ah, and I meant to type "audiovisual" strategies above....

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

I am ashamed to say that I have never seen HEALTH all the way through, nor have I seen THE GINGERBREAD MAN. (Any love for that one?) I saw O.C. AND STIGGS when I was a kid and literally had no idea what was going on or what it meant. Junior high is perhaps not the best time for a movie like that; it can scare the hell out of a person.

Girish: I'd go one better on Altman's middle period. Not only is he closing down and becoming more rigorous, more simple, less expansive, frankly more theatrical; he is in many ways returning to his roots in TV. Not just early filmed TV, where he got his start as a director, but live TV in the 50s, which I assume must have been a conceptually formative period for him when he was more a viewer of TV than a participant.

His ABC versions of THE DUMBWAITER and THE CAINE MUTINY COURT-MARTIAL remind me of Playhouse 90-type productions. They weren't broadcast live, but in their inventive use of multiple, often locked-down cameras, they might as well have been time-warped relics from that fabled Golden Age. Those two TV movies might be the tightest, leanest work of his entire career. They're like cots made up by Army privates; you could bounce quarters off of them. Altman has a laser-like focus in every scene, ever moment. No meandering, no woolgathering, no atmosphere for its own sake; in other words, not a whole hell of a lot of the stuff we think of as Altmanesque.

It's really a shame that those two TV projects (how the hell did he even get them made?) have been seen by so few, because for me, they demonstrate, beyond a doubt, that Altman isn't rejecting three-act commercial storytelling because he can't do it. In fact he can do it amazingly well (as THE PLAYER proved again). He is rejecting it because he wants to do things that have not been done.

A personal anecdote by way of explaining what I mean: As an adolescent, I attended the Booker T. Washington School of Performing and Visual Arts in Dallas. I was a visual art student, studying painting, printmaking and metal sculpture, mostly. One day sophomore year, my basic drawing teacher was putting us through a series of exercises where we'd study the principles of a particular school -- Impressionism, for example, or Cubism -- and then try to apply them to real objects or human subjects. During the Cubism section, we were all somewhat annoyed because (being young and dumb, maybe 15 years old, and full of ourselves) we were still laboring under the misimpression that abstract or nonrepresentational art required no technical skill, no planning and no discipline. (The "Hell, my five year old could do that!" response.) it might have been an instictive reaction to being confronted with something we did not understand, but anyway, like I said, we were young.

This teacher, who was really sick of our bullshit, overheard somebody complaining that Picasso was a genius who couldn't draw. She hauled out a gigantic coffee table book of purely representational sketches he did when he was still learning. Then she put them side by side with rough sketches by Rembrandt and Michelangelo. Even though we were young and dumb, we had eyes, and we could see that Picasso, while just a kid, was already on track to equal the draftmanship of some of the great representational artists who ever lived. He embraced Cubism because he was exploring new frontiers, because the old way of doing things did not satisfy him, not because he was incapable or unwilling to buckle down.

Thinking about Altman's ABC movies reminds me of that day.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Even more mind-blowing: his first movies were documentary shorts. So his mastery of the grammar of live TV drama wasn't a case of doing what he'd learned, but rather doing what he'd seen others do, as well or better than most of them had done it.

Brian said...

My problem, of course, isn't that I don't love Beatty's performance, but that the other five I chose are at least as essential, in their own way. In some cases (Gould in THE LONG GOODBYE and Williams in POPEYE) they make a film I'm not wholly sold on crucial anyway. In the case of Hall in SECRET HONOR, he pretty much is the movie. Flay me for this if you will, but I think it's a tribute to MCCABE AND MRS. MILLER that it would survive and still be an excellent film with someone else in the Beatty role (though I hesitate to specualte who). It surely wouldn't be the masterwork it is, but it wouldn't fall to pieces like I suspect even TANNER '88 and THE PLAYER would without their male leads. Of course this is all speculation and game-playing, and (ultimately, for me) procrastinating writing a hopefully more substantial post.

Onto girish's questions: There's lots of key films I've not seen, but topping the list of the ones I'd like to play a local revival house are: THIEVES LIKE US, QUINTET, A WEDDING, BUFFALO BILL & THE INDIANS and BREWSTER MCCLOUD.

And as for PRET-A-PORTER, I just saw it earlier this year, and though I agree the doggie-doo gags are ridiculous, I do appreciate that they help the viewer imagine that the sumptously beautiful people and places might be accompanied by a rather foul smell. And though I can see how the film may have seemed like a failed rehash of SHORT CUTS (only with bigger stars) at the time, I guess the fact that the film it most resembles isn't one of my favorite Altmans (unlike THE PLAYER) works in PRET-A-PORTER's favor.

Matt, I love that Picasso story and totally see how it applies to Altman.

Anonymous said...

Apologies in advance for a longish post. There's just so much to catch up on.

I agree with our host that Tom Sutpen's diagnosis of Altman hating types rather than people is dead on. (And--"His contempt for types, be they archetypes or stereotypes, is bottomless and it led him to essentially twist the head off of just about every genre he could get his hands on once he got the chance"--quite beautifully expressed.)

Matt also requests "I'd like to hear more people weigh in on problematic or unsuccessful Altman movies, movies that just flat-out didn't work for them for one reason or another." Well, I'm one of those inordinately indulgent fans who finds something to love in every Altman film I've seen. (Once, during a round of that filmbuff conversation chestnut "What actor's films would you take on a desert island" I did a runaround on the whole point by selecting Michael Murphy.) But sure, even I have to acknowledge some films I don't plan to visit again unless in the context of reviewing Altman's work as a whole.

That Cold Day in the Park is a sterile exercise to my eyes, especially compared to its descendents Images, 3 Women, and The Room. Modeling himself after such European masters as Polanski and Bergman cuts Altman off from the uniquely American bustle that’s his true stomping ground. Sandy Dennis does a nice, chilly job, but her withdrawn black widow feels like an idea, not a person; the gulf between her and Sissy Spacek’s Pinkie shows how much artistic pretense Altman shed to reach his seemingly affectless art.

Fool for Love is the weirdest misfire of the director’s career for me. He seems a natural for the material, but the film is arch where it needs to be mysterious, smarmy when romanticism should flow. I don’t know Shepard’s work well enough to comment, but could this be one of those cases, like Cronenberg’s M Butterfly and Peckinpah’s Osterman Weekend, where a director’s artistic rigor inadvertently exposes the weaknesses of his source material?

And no, no love for The Gingerbread Man here. The movie’s more than adequate: executing its twists and turns with due tension, teasing some nice beats out of stock characters, even achieving at least one moment of spooky poetry when an old man sits down to die. (Rereading this before submitting I think I’ve stolen the last clause from a contemporary review, but can’t place it. Just wanted to mention it to be fair.) But it’s easily the least Altmanesque Altman has ever been. His past use of thriller tropes always launched off to more artistic realms. Robbins’s telephone call voyeurism of Scacchi works as a noir moment, but the real kicker is the soothing, permafrost blue of her apartment, a deepfreeze cold enough to lure any lizard who’s passions and fears are threatening to boil over; the slow red-herring buildup of Scott Glenn in Nashville turns out to be not mere misdirection but the stuff of tragedy, a guardian angel mistaken for a threat, a should’ve-been savior who’s too far away and seconds too late when the time comes. But Gingerbread Man has nothing of this, just a batch of the same old same old, done rather better than average.

(For the record, I’m quite fond of Quintet, which I know is the standard choice for—cue comic book guy—Worst Altman Ever. It’s so damned wrapped up in its own crazy little world that I can’t help loving it its very intransigency.)

Matt: I also share your fondness for The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial (though that was CBS), as well as the two Pinter adaptations for ABC. (The Gun, eh, not so much.) I’ve long thought it a pretty obvious truism that great artists are, first and foremost, good ones. If a director couldn’t pull off a black-hat white-hat confrontation, a tearful farewell at a train station, a don’t-open-the-door shock, they’re not a great director, period. (Not if they haven’t done so, you understand, just whether they lack the chops to make such setups work.) One of the steady pleasures of Altman’s career is how he’ll bend, invert, or even snap the rules of filmmaking—but he can only play with them so fluidly because he’s got them down cold.

And Dave, I hope you enjoy Kansas City when you get to it. For me, it’s top-flight Altman, one of his very best.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Anonymous--Wow, I forgot to mention THE GUN, which I agree doesn't really work because it's a bit too Early 60s Message Picture in its rhythm. Also, you're right, that was CBS, an more creatively conservative network than ABC when it comes to hiring the occasional iconoclast like David Lynch.

Also, I'm hugely fond of KANSAS CITY because I spent part of my childhood there, and because I was raised in a family of jazz musicians. Those two factors would have probably made me inclined to love the movie even if it hadn't been great, which it is.

That Little Round-Headed Boy said...

Girish, Matt, others — Thanks for admitting it first: I haven't seen every Altman, either. I was planning on my first viewing of 3 WOMEN tonight, but the DVD I got from the library is jinxed. (On the other hand, having a library that carries it on DVD is a good thing.)

I've never seen QUINTET, BEYOND THERAPY, A PERFECT COUPLE, HEALTH, OC AND STIGGS, BUFFALO BILL or the TANNER movies. But I will. This blog-a-thon has been a wonderful tribute and thanks again, Matt. It has inspired me to study Altman more in-depth. Having said that, let me give a little love to THE GINGERBREAD MAN. Maybe it's not quirky, but it's still got his touches. It's a solid Grisham legal thriller elevated a little simply by Altman's participation. (Much the same way that THE RAINMAKER was elevated by Coppola's participation.) I also think KANSAS CITY, DR. T and COOKIE'S FORTUNE are as close to late-Altman imperfectly perfect as you can get.

Let me bring up another point while we're being truthful: It's almost a reflex to bow before THE PLAYER and SHORT CUTS as a return to form and I'm thrilled for him that they were hits, but I have no desire to ever see them again. Both are solid films, but I prefer my Altman a little more offbeat, or even bad. Both of those films already seem dated to me, in a way I can't quite articulate, and I'm not sure it was best for Altman to be working within the system again. I think he works better on the edges. (Yes, I understand that sort of negates my point about the very within-the-system GINGERBREAD MAN, but, hey, I just liked that film better.)

The only Altman movie I could never sit through was VINCENT AND THEO. I don't know why. And the only Altman movie I ever actively hated was PRET-A-PORTER. Oddly enough, my one-degree-of-separation from Altman occurs in connection with that film. I once had the opportunity to meet the screenwriter of the film, and thoroughly enjoyed talking to her. I finally said, 'So, Altman, what was that like?" and, of course, now I can't recall any great anecdotes. (Sorry!) But I never brought up the fact that the movie was a terrible stiff. What the hell, working with Altman is reward enough.

By the way, here's my Oscar dream for tonight: just before they give Altman the honorary gold watch, the cast of NASHVILLE (whoever's left, that is) walks out on stage and stands in a semi-circle behind the Man. And maybe sings "It Don't Worry Me." For all the yammering about this year's "brave" nominated films, none come close to NASHVILLE's impact. Might be a good reminder to Hollywood of what it once was capable of accomplishing.

Anonymous said...

All those damned words and I forgot to answer girish's question about the Altman I most regret never having seen? Well, there's The Delinquents (your post reminds me I've still never caught up with this for some reason, Dave), but my top choice is probably that infamous Bus Stop episode with Fabian. I'm sure it's pretty tame stuff to modern sensibilities, but I'd like a look at Altman's nascent tweaking of genre sensibilities and expectations.

And to change the question by entering the realm of "What-If", the one Altman film I most wish I could have seen is his Ragtime.

Little Round-Headed Boy, I agree that The Gingerbread Man works, and deserves a viewing on entertainment value alone. But when I caught up with it a second time, it proved the only Altman film that offered up nothing more than I'd gotten the first time around.

Of course, Vincent & Theo is another of my favorites, sharp, wise, and iconoclastic as all get-out. Which is only to say that my Altman is not your Altman, nor anyone else's, though each are equally beloved. One of the more charming lessons of this weekend's blogging.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

My own entry is finally up: an interview with "Deadwood" creator David Milch about "McCabe and Mrs. Miller."

That Little Round-Headed Boy said...

Matt, others. Re: my earlier post on how Altman should get his Oscar tonight. I offer up four crackpot scenarios:

Scene 1: The curtain rises. Warren Beatty and Julie Christie walk out together in a haze of opium smoke. Behind them, the Debbie Allen Interpretive Dancers, dressed in frontier hooker wear, begin to slink and slither across a cathouse set. Christie lies down in front of a hash pipe as Beatty carefully pulls out a bowler hat from a hat box, grabs a mic and begins to sing IT'S HARD OUT HERE FOR A PIMP.

Scene 2: The curtain rises. The set is a mock-up of Nashville's Parthenon. A banner reads: TANNER FOR REPLACEMENT PARTY PRESIDENT. Michael Murphy waves to the crowd, and introduces Henry Gibson, Keith Carradine, Lily Tomlin and Ronee Blakely, who belt out "It Don't Worry Me" as images of Bush, the Iraq War, Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay flash across a video screen. Shelley Duvall, in an 'fro wig, wanders aimlessly through the crowd and Jeff Goldblum does magic tricks at the side of the stage.

Scene 3: The curtain rises. It's the inside of Griffin Mill's office in THE PLAYER. Tim Robbins sits behind a giant Hollywood desk, and listens as Ang Lee, George Clooney, Steven Spielberg, Bennett Miller and Paul Haggis "pitch" their nominated Best Picture movies. Mill cuts each off halfway, rejects them all as non-commercial losers and heads out to meet Greta Scaachi and Susan Sarandon at a mud bath.

Scene 4. The curtain rises. Julianne Moore walks out bottomless and proceeds to vaccuum the entire Oscar stage as Jon Stewart stands speechless.

Anybody else got any ideas?

That Little Round-Headed Boy said...

I think I mixed up my Altman movies on that last scenario. Don't remember what Moore was doing in that scene, for obvious reasons. But you get the idea.

Anonymous said...

Little Round-Headed Boy: I think you conflated Moore in Short Cuts with Sissy Spacek in Alan Rudolph's Welcome To L.A. Vacuuming has never been the same.

Scene 5: The Curtain Rises. As a mournful wind howls and snow fills the stage, Altman lumbers about dodging the bullets of representatives from MGM, Paramount, Dreamworks, and Disney. Miraculously he manages to kill his would-be assasins, but his triumph is unseen by the assembled celebrities who rally to put out a fire in the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion.

Campaspe said...

Hi - thanks for organizing this festival. My post on "The Player" is here. I am enjoying this comments thread, but I didn't realize my tagging Altman as misanthropic was going to go against the tide of opinion. I thought it was along the lines of looking at K2 and saying "mighty tall." He's such a hugely enjoyable director, but having an ability to make humanity entertaining doesn't mean you find it admirable. For me, the ultimate Altman character is in McCabe and Mrs. Miller, but it isn't Warren Beatty. It's the big-eyed, coldly psychopathic teen who shoots a harmless cowboy for the sheer undiluted hell of it. What I see ALtman facing in every film is our seemingly limitless capacity for thoughtless, casual cruelty.

girish said...

Matt--Thanks for your responses. Great points about the 50s TV influence and the Cubism parallel. I haven't seen the ABC movies and I plan on doing so.

Once again, congratulations on orchestrating this amazing feat of collective Altman-love.
Just think of the trove that worldwide future Altman googlers will find...

Dennis Cozzalio said...

Matt, everyone: I knew it was gonna be a great party, but really, I had no idea! I regret not being able to get into the mix here earlier than this, and now that I am in it I'm not going to be able to stay long (longer than I should have, as it turns out), but I did want to check in on my most obvious divisions with the conventional wisdom on individual Altman movies.

I generally find the "misanthrope" tag not applicable in any meaningful way to Altman's approach, but even if it was, that wouldn't negate him or diminish him for me as an artist if he had something interesting to say to go along with that attitude and amplified it with his usual stylistic command. That said, I'm definitely in the camp (and it's a very small camp, I suspect) that finds little to value or appreciate about Short Cuts. It's the movie where I find Altman's attitude toward the people he portrays, and the city he supposedly investigates, veering close to poisonous.

And just as a piece of entertainment I found it, upon my most recent viewing last year, to be largely annoying-- there's an awful lot of scenes involving actors yelling presumably cutting things at each other that seem atypically unshaped and left to dangle within the Nashville-like interlocking story structure. In this regard, I find the Tim Robbins-Madeline Stowe storyline and the Frances McvDormand-Peter Gallagher storyline ridiculously miscalculated-- this is the quintessence, I think, of black humor that doesn't work at all-- and the one story that does attempt to grab at our emotions-- the baker tormenting the family whose son has died afterbeing hit by a car-- is fatally undermined by some of the worst performances I ever see in an Altman film (Andie McDowell, Lyle Lovett, Jack Lemmon).

I don't usually like to play the literature card as a finger-wagging comparison when thinking about adaptations, but the way Carver develops this same situation, with such poetry and simplicity and understated agony, shames Altman's rendering of it. In fact, the major problem I have with Short Cuts is how much in the way of cachet the filmmaker has been lent by the estate of Raymnond Carver, and how much everyone is so willing to go on and on about how the two artists' sensibilities meshed so well on the project, when I think that the very opposite is true.

Carver's sense of locale, of introspection, of precise but never too-clever poetry, is at odds with Altman's melting-pot sensibility. And it's a fatal miscalculation to just assume that Carver's stories, so rooted in the rhythms and observations of the Northwest, could simply be transplanted to Los Angeles with so little in the way of a leap of creative reimagination. It's almost like saying that what's really important about Carver was not his literary voice, his longing to connect in abstract and very real ways with his environment, the stillness of his approach, and the way the man put words together, but instead his plots. That's what Short Cuts boils down to for me, and the fact that it is easily Altman's most unpleasant movie on a surface and a subterranean level makes it one that hope never to have to see again.

On the other hand, I love the crazy- quilt, ridiculous party pitch of Pret-a-Porter, even the poop jokes, Girish! (I loved 'em in Brewster McCloud too.) Brian makes an observaton that I hadn't considered about them that I really like, and that is their function as a sophomoric reminder that even beautiful Paris is subject to the whims of nature, and that there might just be a smell that travels along with those whims that could go a step or two toward explaining the city's pungent quality. (Now, there's an element that might transfer to Los Angeles, or any other city, with much more reasonable efficiency than using Carver as a skeleton for a series of bitter seriocomic stylistic riffs and calling it a meeting of artistic minds.)

I'm in love with the cacophony of Altman's films in general, Pret-a-Porter being the most "what-the-fuck" of all of his big party films, and I enjoy the fact that it seems so haphazardly smashed together. And any movie that allows Marcello Mastroianni and, more importantly, Sophia Loren to revisit that striptease from Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow (this time with a twist) has nothing to be ashamed of in my book, regardless of whether it all "works" or not. I'm glad it's out there. Pret-a-Porter is probably my favorite Altman orphan.

I'm afraid that the Buffalo Bill piece I was hoping to do for the Blog-a-Thon is going to have to be tabled for later in the week, as I want to be able to finish part 4 of my Altman retrospective in the afterglow of tonight's Oscar ceremony. (And it seems like I just wrote some of it!) But I would like to thank Matt for being such a gracious and encouraging host and for bringing all this great reading (including the stuff in this comments column) together for us to enjoy. It's been an overwhelming ton of fun!

girish said...

Dennis--Brian and you have convinced me to make a second date, twelve years after my first one, with PRET-A-PORTER!

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Thanks, everyone, for participating. This has been a much, much bigger affair than I could have imagined, and the sheer variety and quality of reponses has been incredible. It's like an Altman reader. My only regret is that I wasn't able to get the Milch piece up in time for it to be read and processed, but it's been a crazy week, so them's the breaks.

Enjoy the Oscars. Check back in tomorrow for some brief comments and what promises to be a lively comments section. I will also let you know whether my Oscar bet with Odie resulted in a free meal or an empty wallet. Good night, and good luck.

Durium said...

I used Robert Altman's film Kansas City as part of my blog ( http://keepswinging.blogspot.com ) 4th of June 2006
or
http://keepswinging.blogspot.com/2006/06/Jazz-on-film:-Kansas-City.html

Enjoy it.

Durium

Anonymous said...

Check out this discussion today about Altman's career for washingtonpost.com by Todd Hitchcock, AFI Silver Film Programmer, here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/11/21/DI2006112100862.html

Oggs Cruz said...

Here's my contribution to the Altman blog-a-thon... Three reviews:

-Long Goodbye, The (Robert Altman, 1973)

-Prairie Home Companion, A (Robert Altman, 2006)

-California Split (Robert Altman, 1974)