magicinaframe-part2

[magicinaframe-part2]

BELLE (1973) Gregoire with the enigmatic young woman.

[magicinaframe-part2]

A Movie Character With A Very Active Imagination

The movie that I have watched most recently is another example of not needing prior information before I watch a movie. This is something that I must share with movie lovers, here, at Tumblr; i.e., a lesson that I've learned over the years. I benefit from not having prior information; i.e., it's not a drawback. I am less likely to being distracted, if or when I have no prior information. Especially if I am in a relaxed state of mind when I watch a movie, I will calmly take in the sight and sound information from the screen. When the movie is over, then I can think about information having to do with the making of the movie, etc.

This lesson, this insight, became important to me in the 1970's, when I went to screenings in Manhattan on behalf of a magazine called Greater Amusements. There were approximately 15 screenings. Most of those 15 movies I had never heard of. I did not look at the promotional material that was given to me by the person representing the distribution company (material that was given to me before I went into the theater, by the way). I looked at said material, after I left the building where the screening room was located; i.e., I glanced through the material when I got to my car or on my way to the subway. There were fewer and fewer opportunities for being distracted and I appreciated the movie that I had just watched as an experience.

What little information did I have about the movie that I watched most recently? I knew the name of the movie, I knew that it was a French language movie from the 1970's, I knew that a character -- a man -- meets an enigmatic woman in the woods. I assumed that the movie that I was going to watch was a drama. The information that I had came from one of the companies with whom I do business.

And I watched the movie...

In the very first scene of the movie BELLE (1973), a character is presented to the audience. His name is Mathieu Gregoire (Jean-Luc Bideau) and he is quoting French poetry; it's a lecture that is taking place in a theater. The poems celebrate the rural beauty of an area in Belgium called Wallonia.

This opening scene establishes that Gregoire is popular and respected. A number of people from the theater audience ask him questions, as he walks from the stage.

Two characters from the theater audience are presented as people who know Mr. Gregoire. One, a woman with blonde hair, says to him "Victor is taking me home," as Gregoire makes his way through the theater's lobby.

Gregoire, a tall, distinguished looking man who appears to be in his 30's, continues walking towards the theater entrance doors and looks in the direction of the street outside. There's a white colored car parked out on the opposite side of the street. He stops and stares; he's thinking about something. It's an odd moment. Time suddenly seems to stop.

The movie's opening credits start up, accompanied by music.

The white colored car is Gregoire's and he drives from the town center into the countryside. It's evening. In the town, there are an adequate number of streetlights, but no streetlights at all, once out of town in the countryside.

Gregoire seems to be lost in thought, as he drives. It's now an unpaved road in the woods. And something happens: an object, indistinct, collides with the right front of the car. Gregoire swerves to the side of the road, stops the car, and gets out to investigate.

With a good-sized flashlight in hand, he carefully inspects an area a number of paces in the unpaved road, behind the car. There are traces of something in the dirt, but nothing really stands out.

This is a beautifully conceived and executed opening to the movie. So much happens on screen that many viewers will feel that they have to find out for themselves how the plot plays out.

Sometime later in the evening, Gregoire is in bed making love to the blonde-haired woman who spoke to him in the theater lobby.

"You seem miles away," she says to him.

He tells her that he thinks he struck an animal while driving in the woods.

The blonde-haired woman is Jeanne, Mathieu's wife. In short order, viewers learn about where Jeanne, Mathieu, and daughter, Marie, live and about Mathieu's usual daily schedule.

The day following the lecture is actually the beginning of a drama that careens into an unfulfilled fantasy.

After going to his office in a museum, Gregoire takes it upon himself to return to the spot on that countryside dirt road in the woods. He has to explore.

There's a German Shepherd dog in the woods trying to get anyone's attention. He takes a shotgun from the trunk of his car and charges after the dog. The forest gives way to an open, marshy area. Then, there's a dilapidated shack in the distance. He explores the shack's interior. Does someone live in the shack? Someone's pair of boots sits near one of the walls of the shack.

Suddenly, the dog starts whimpering outside. He has to investigate. And when he does so, he senses that someone else is nearby. It's a young woman, with long, brownish colored hair, wearing an expensive, theatrical-looking cape.

Already, even before returning to the spot of the collision, Mathieu has been shown to do a lot of imagining while awake, but once Mathieu meets the enigmatic young woman, the plot plays out in a way that does not end well for Mr. Gregoire.

In my humble opinion, Mr. Gregoire should have taken it upon himself to share his experiences with someone and ask for guidance.

BELLE, the title of this 96-minute movie, is Mr. Gregoire's name for the enigmatic, young woman. The movie is not for everyone's taste, but if you -- you who are reading my words -- are interested in my description, track down a copy of this movie. It's available on DVD with English subtitles.

I would love to show the movie to people to start a discussion about distraction and imagination. Doesn't distraction often get in the way of imagination, etc.?

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

CRUEL STORY OF YOUTH (1960)

[magicinaframe-part2]

Changing Societies

In my growing up years, the idea that I could watch a produced-in-Japan movie meant that I expected one of two outcomes. I either expected to watch a Samourai movie, with mostly male actors in the cast wearing costumes from previous centuries, or I would watch a movie with one or more monsters smashing and stomping their way through rural and urban settings, interspersed with what my brother referred to as spastic crowd scenes.

From the late 1950s through the 1970s, no New York city television station, as far as I can remember, ever scheduled a produced-in-Japan contemporary drama or comedy movie.

During these years, was I learning anything about what life was like in Japan? That would have been second-hand knowledge.

My second-hand knowledge of things happening in Japan was derived from reading newspapers and magazines or watching television news broadcasts or news specials. Any news story or news special on television that I might watch would probably have to do with the Japanese economy; i.e., the news story or news special would focus on changes or trends in production and manufacturing that, presumably, benefited Japan's society as a whole.

Any news story or news special that I did watch eventually went down a 'forget-it, no-longer-important' chute. I have no memory of any specific news story or news special.

I also don't recall ever meeting someone from Japan, during my years in Boston, Massachusetts -- either on campus or off campus.

So... it's only since the late 1990s, when I purchased a videocassette player/recorder and hooked it up to my television set in my humble abode that I first watched produced-in-Japan contemporary drama or comedy movies. I started out feeling as if I was looking in from the outside.

The name of the very first Japanese movie that I watched on videocassette was THE EEL, by the way.

Some twenty-five years later, do I still feel as if I'm looking in from the outside? No, I don't feel that way or think that way. The main reason why I say that has everything to do with the fact that many of the details of the society presented on screen -- the way it functions, the way that the characters act and behave towards each other -- are similar or identical to the society that I live in, the society in which I grew up.

It's the differences between the two societies that I tend to think about the most, when I now think about Japanese movies in general or specific Japanese movies.

As an example of what I mean, family life in Japan and man - woman relationships are more conservative in Japan, as compared with family life and man - woman relationships in the U.S.

Before I sat down to start working on this piece, here, at Tumblr, I went to You Tube and watched an interview of John Lennon and Yoko Ono by Dick Cavett, shown in a 90-minute time slot, that millions of people in the U.S. watched in September, 1971. There was nothing said in that interview about Yoko Ono's growing up in Japan -- and I was hoping to learn something about her growing up years, when I watched it at You Tube.

The movie that I most recently watched on DVD is a produced-in-Japan contemporary drama that debuted in theaters throughout Japan in 1960. Among other things worth focusing on in said movie, there are countless details that show the way that the Japanese people consciously latch onto trends or products from the U.S.

Again, today, it's the differences between the two societies that I will think about, more than the similarities. The movie in question presents the clash between the two generations -- the generation that fought World War II and the generation that came of age, once the war concluded.

Consider... Because the specifics regarding the circumstances that the Japanese people were dealing with in the 1950s and 1960s depend on an understanding of the historical details following the conclusion of World War II, then the clash between the generations in Japan is understood to be different from the clash between the generations that came into focus in movies, later on the 1960s, here, in the U.S.

The name of the movie that I watched most recently on DVD is CRUEL STORY OF YOUTH.

Once the opening credits are completed, CRUEL STORY OF YOUTH starts up by establishing a dramatic situation that is meant to involve the audience as quickly as possible.

Two young adult females, Makoto (Mako, for short) and Yoko, high school classmates, are moving along an unspecified city street, at night, looking to hitch a ride from drivers seated in their parked cars.

It's either spring or summer, because of the clothes that all of the characters are wearing in this opening scene.

The drivers in the parked cars are middle-age males.

One driver, dressed in a western-style suit, who appears to be in his 30s, agrees to Yoko's request. The two classmates get in together, sitting in the front seat, along with the driver.

Yoko is let out where she lives.

Further down the road, the driver asks Makoto if she wants to stop somewhere to get something to eat. With no hesitation, she agrees.

When the driver parks in front of a hotel, Makoto tells the driver that she did not want to eat at a hotel and asks to get out so she can go home on her own.

The situation rapidly worsens, as the driver assaults Makoto who has to defend herself. She scratches at the driver -- on his face, on his cheek. He moves in, assaulting her, again.

Suddenly, a young man, wearing a student's uniform, appears and fights with the driver who is no match for the young adult male. Within a matter of seconds, he's on the ground, beaten.

The student demands that the driver should go to the Police. Instead, the driver offers money from his wallet -- which the student, who appears to be older than Makoto, contemptuously knocks out of the driver's hand.

The student character is named Kiyoshi Fuji and he and Makoto become two of the main characters in the 96-minute CRUEL STORY OF YOUTH.

Within the first thirty minutes of the movie, Kiyoshi rapes Makoto twice. In the aftermath of the first rape, Makoto asks him why he did it and his response is that he is angry.

Angry at who, Makoto asks.

Angry at everyone, he replies.

CRUEL STORY OF YOUTH's cast features many characters, and what I find memorable about the way that the script is written is that the majority of the characters are equal in importance -- regardless whether they appear in many scenes or in few scenes. Clearly, the intention on the part of writer - director Nagisa Oshima is to analyze what is going on in Japanese society. The result is an unforgettable movie.

Behind the names in the cast, the opening credits of the movie show newspaper headlines -- presumably about crimes involving young people.

Quickly, the viewer learns that the city neighborhood where Kiyoshi lives is the home turf of a crime boss who is never arrested by police, during the movie.

I'm deliberately not going into detail about the course of Kiyoshi and Makoto's relationship.

If any of what I have written sounds interesting, CRUEL STORY OF YOUTH can be viewed on-line at the Internet Archive, with English subtitles, and is also available on DVD, also with English subtitles.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

L'Ingorgo (1979)

[magicinaframe-part2]

All The Problems That Are Not Solved...

On any given day, here, in New York City, I will tune to an all-news radio station to find out the time (I don't wear a watch, there are no clocks in my humble abode, my radio is battery powered, etc.). Most of my time checks occur right before a survey of traffic in the metropolitan New York City area and, depending on my mood, I will listen to the details of the traffic situation; i.e., I will note whether the traffic situation seems better-than-usual or worse-than-usual.

Over the last couple of months, I've noticed that afternoons, here, in New York City, can include situations that involve more than one highway and that the congestion can last several hours.

I bring up the subject, because it's one of the ideas that I've kept thinking about, as a consequence of watching a movie on DVD, a movie that I had never heard of. It's a movie that played in theaters in Italy, starting in January, 1979, and subsequently played in theaters in a number of other European countries. In 1979 and 1980, the movie did not play in theaters in the U.S., but, according to the Internet Movie Database, it did play in theaters sometime much later in 1988.

In this movie, a traffic jam starts up around 11:00 a.m. or 12 noon, on a summer's day, on an unspecified highway in Rome, and extends through the night and into the next morning. And when I say traffic jam, I mean congestion that results in no movement at all; i.e., all of the motor vedhicles stay put; they are idle.

The script of this movie focuses on one stretch of the highway, with the majority of the characters people traveling in cars and trucks. And as you might expect, there are many characters.

As for what happens during the period of time when none of the motor vehicles can move... well, that is what movie lovers, here, at Tumblr, should find out for themselves. For me to say anything more specific would mean that I'm giving the plot away. And I will not give the plot away.

One of the many ideas that I've held onto, having watched this movie from start to finish two times, is whether the traffic situation in Rome has improved since 1979 or not. And more specifically, for the country of Italy: are the higways kept in good shape, managed well? What are the details regarding the answer to this question that I have just asked?

The name of the movie is L'INGORGO which translates into English as TRAFFIC JAM. It's a movie that I recommend to all movie lovers, here, at Tumblr; i.e., to people who I don't know and who, most likely, I will never meet.

This is one of the most satisfying exciting movie experiences I have had in -- easily -- 20 years.

If anything that I have written sounds intriguing, track down a copy of the movie L'INGORGO on DVD, with Engllish subtitles.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

A FEW HOURS OF SUNLIGHT (1971)

[magicinaframe-part2]

Has Anyone Encountered A Sympathetic Movie Character, Recently?

The other morning, I was doing my usual daily start-up routine, in my humble abode. I had a transistor radio tuned to one of New York City's many FM stations as background entertainment and accompaniment. While doing something menial, I heard music for the first time -- a song, sung by a young man whose voice I did not recognize. He repeatedly sang the words "There are too many love songs."

I stopped what I was doing and thought for a moment. The specific words of the song's lyrics were less interesting to me than the way that the young man's voice combined with the instruments that I heard backing him in the recording. But after a few seconds of concentration, I realized that the words of the lyrics connected with an idea that had been on my mind during the previous week or so.

I assumed that the singer (who, perhaps, wrote the lyrics, or collaborated with someone to write the lyrics) had one too many unhappy relationships and was voicing a complaint, a problem, that countless young adults all over the world could relate to.

But, really, weren't those specific words of the song's lyrics an exaggeration? They were an exaggeration to me, as I'm not bothered by multiple love songs playing on a radio station. Should radio stations change their programming decisions and play less love songs every day? No, so far as I was concerned, it's all in the mind of random radio listeners, and when it comes to my mind, my way of thinking, I have no problem if a music radio station plays one love song or fifteen love songs on any given day.

If you -- you who are reading my words -- want to focus on what went wrong with your unhappy love affair, why not find a movie that presents a love affair from start to finish -- preferably a movie that you have never heard of.

One such movie, in fact, was what I recently watched some seven days prior to listening to the song on my transistor radio. What did I know about the movie, before I started watching it? Well, I knew the name of the movie, I knew that the movie was a contemporary drama, I knew the name of an actress who played one of the main characters, I knew when the movie debuted, and I knew the name of the movie's director. I didn't know that a love affair was the sole strand of the plot. I simply focused on what was happening on screen, as I watched my DVD, where I live.

To make the song-on-the-radio and movie-on-DVD comparison more compelling, the movie in question features a song that is sung twice -- once, accompanying the opening credits and the second time, as the movie concludes.

Somehow, I think I'll remember the movie's song and discard the radio station's song down a 'forget it' chute.

The name of the movie in question is A FEW HOURS OF SUNLIGHT (1971) (orig'l title: UN PEU DE SOLEIL DANS L'EAU FROIDE)...

Gilles Lantier (Marc Porel), in his early 20s, lives and works in Paris as a journalist for one of France's best-known newspapers, France-Presse. He has been in a relationship with a fashion model from the U.S. (Barbara Bach), for some time, but the relationship has been stale for a while. Gilles knows that he should end the relationship but can't bring himself to do so. He's all mixed up, he tells his colleague and friend, Jean (Bernard Fresson) in the office. He also confides in a former girlfriend, an older woman. Gilles takes his colleague's advice and travels by train to Limoges, a smaller city south and west of Paris, in a rural part of the country, where his sister lives with her husband.

The new setting is idyllic. His sister and brother-in-law live in a beautiful villa that's adjacent to a stream. Imagine: fresh air, sunlight, fewer distractions than usual. And, yet, Gilles can't shake his negative mood.

Sister and brother-in-law take Gilles to a dinner party in town and introduce him to an extremely good-looking woman, a little older in her 20s, named Nathalie Silvener (Claudine Auger), who is immediately attracted to the handsome journalist.

Eventually, the two characters sleep together at a local hotel. From then on, the plot of the 110-minute A FEW HOURS OF SUNLIGHT details the progress of the love affair and how the relationship concludes (My choice of words is deliberate, here, as I don't give details of a movie's plot away).

As with most drama movie love stories that I've seen over the years, A FEW HOURS OF SUNLIGHT is also a character study, one that I enjoyed watching a great deal.

The one feature of the movie as an experience that I want to remember -- one of the movie's many strengths -- is the way that the two main characters, Nathalie and Gilles, are complemented by all of the supporting characters (There are many supporting characters in the movie, by the way). This is due to a combination of the script which is an adaptation of a novel by Francoise Sagan, the direction of Jacques Deray, and the acting performances of the entire cast. And thanks to the way that the script is written, I easily focused on the two main characters and felt that I was part of the way that the plot played out; i.e., I participated with the movie as the plot played out. That means, also, that I followed every twist, so that, at the movie's conclusion, I could have had a conversation with both characters.

Nathalie and Gilles: they're both sympathetic characters, similar to people who I have met over the years.

If any of what I have written sounds interesting, A FEW HOURS OF SUNLIGHT is available on DVD with English subtitles.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

Carlo and Carla in a scene from THE GARDEN OF DELIGHTS (1967)

[magicinaframe-part2]

The First Thought On My Mind At The Conclusion Of A Movie

I was in my 20s when I started focusing on the very first thought on my mind at the conclusion of a movie. From watching a lot of movies in my growing up years, I discovered -- then, in my 20s -- that the first thought on my mind, when a given movie concluded, meant that I was likely paying attention to everything that happened on screen and, also, that the amount or degree of distraction while watching a given movie did not limit or obstruct my attention at any time, during the movie. The two ideas -- the first thought on my mind and distraction -- were related to each other.

I noticed the very first thought on my mind in movie theaters, but I also tried to make sure that if I was at home or at someone else's house and was watching a movie on television, the possible distractions (phone calls, the sudden appearance of someone who had to talk to me, loud noises, food deliveries, etc.) were kept to a minimum.

I was learning this on my own, paying attention to my thinking and feeling during the time that I was watching a movie.

What was so important about that very first thought on my mind? In my 20s, I had a hunch, an intuition, that it was the start of understanding a given movie as a unique experience -- and it was the result of me paying attention, paying attention as much as I could, to all of the sight and sound information that I took in with my eyes and ears. And so that, in turn, motivated me to continue to make the effort; i.e., to pay attention to all of the sight and sound information on screen.

I'm bringing up this topic, this subject, here, at Tumblr, as a way to consider whether there is something limiting or ineffective about the way movie reviews are written. I'm thinking about the words and phrases that are often used in reviews and about the way that a particular scene or sequence is highlighted in reviews. In the case of highlighting a specific scene or sequence in a movie's review, that scene or sequence quickly becomes more significant, more important than the movie as a whole. Ultimately, I want movie lovers to think about the language they use to communicate with other movie lovers; i.e., the English language.

My pieces that I post, here, are not movie reviews, by the way.

Secondly, I'm bringing up this topic, this subject, because it connects directly with a number of my previous pieces. With a number of movies that I have written about, I said that the particular movie should be better known or thoroughly researched.

In the case of a movie that I have recently watched, the first thought on my mind was, in fact, "This movie should be better known." And then I said to myself "Was it ever distributed to theaters, here, in the U.S.?"

The first thought leads to a second thought, logically.

The name of the movie is IL GIARDINO DELLE DELIZIE, an Italian language movie whose title translates into English as THE GARDEN OF DELIGHTS...

After the opening credits, the movie begins with a series of short, indoor scenes at a reception for a young Italian man and young Italian woman who have just married. The bride and groom are shown in separate shots; they both appear to be in their 20s. The reception guests are only heard; they are partially seen, as they eat food from their plates. The guests' dialog is unusual in that they seem to be wondering whether the marriage will last long.

Immediately after the series of short scenes, the viewer watches a leisurely camera pan of a darkened room. The young man and woman enter the room behind two bus boys carrying luggage. The young man and woman, named Carlo and Carla, have arrived as night falls. This is their hotel suite for the start of their honeymoon.

In keeping with my practice of not saying how the plot of the movie plays out, I will tell movie lovers, here, that, from the reception scenes to the very last scene, the plot of THE GARDEN OF DELIGHTS unfolds over a period of three successive days and ends in a way that deliberately encourages the audience to decide what will take place next -- or what should take place next; i.e., immediately after the last scene is followed by the end credits.

I'm not sharing any of the particulars as to what happens during the three-day time frame. Instead, I will say that, in my humble opinion, THE GARDEN OF DELIGHTS was created and executed as a detailed criticism of a character, a young Italian man, in terms of his relationship with his wife, Carla, and in terms of how he behaves inside and outside the hotel.

The Internet Movie Database informs that THE GARDEN OF DELIGHTS debuted in theaters in Italy in June, 1967, and was not distributed in theaters in the U.S. It has a running time of 95 minutes.

This movie is a combination contemporary drama and character study, with psychological and thriller elements.

Of the two main characters, Carlo and Carla, there is much more information regarding Carlo presented to the audience, as compared with Carla, so it is more likely that adults watching the movie will construct a relationship with the character Carlo. In my humble opinion, that was the intention of director Silvano Agosti and the scriptwriters (one of whom was the director, by the way).

If any of this sounds interesting, THE GARDEN OF DELIGHTS is available on DVD, with English subtitles. I recommend this movie to all movie lovers, here, at Tumblr.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

"What are the young people doing with all of those drugs?"

The title to this piece, here, at Tumblr, quotes an imaginary, random adult family member who is responding to news reports that started proliferating in the second half of the 1960s.

At that time, use of marijuana, amphetamines, LSD, and other drugs became popular among college-age young adults and, then, among high school students throughout the U.S.

"Hey! after school, come meet us behind the bleachers! We'll smoke some weed!"

Try to imagine that you -- you who are reading my words -- are in high school in the early 1970s and one of your classmates invites you to a get-together after school. Why would the invitation be a really good idea -- an idea that you would agree to? And, more particularly, what was it about the idea of getting high on marijuana? Why was getting high on marijuana so much better than being in school, or so much better than being anywhere else?

I'm asking these questions on a weekday in New York City, looking back more than 50 years, attempting to get a handle on why U.S. society in the year 2025 is so messed up.

I grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, in the suburbs of New York City. I remember that in the early 1970s, I started paying attention to the attitudes of adults; i.e., not just my parents, my aunts and uncles, but random adults. What were they thinking about, what were the important subjects on their minds, what were they concerned about?

From my day-to-day experiences, I knew that many parents, teachers, and adults in general whom I encountered were upset about the increasing use of drugs. The above title, in fact, is similar to what I occasionally heard spoken on radio phone-in talk shows, back then.

What information about the effects or impact of using drugs -- the drugs that were becoming popular -- was presented to the public in general, at that time? Do I remember?

There's a logical question for me to ask, as a follow-up. In the late 1960s and extending into the 1970s, were there any documentaries on television focusing on teenage drug use? There probably were, but I forget if I ever watched one. If I did, that was because a school teacher made it an assignment. Then, I would have watched and I would have disregarded any of the information in the documentary. And I would have found something else to do -- like listen to music or read a book or visit a friend.

As far as I was concerned, marijuana was perfectly fine to try -- and I did try smoking marijuana, when I went to school in Boston in 1968.

The context that I'm presenting has everything to do with a little-known and odd movie that has gotten me strolling down memory lane. It's a movie that throws a lot of phrases and ideas at the viewer; for example, youth rebellion. An unseen narrator says that there's teenage rebellion going on around the world. Teenagers and young adults use drugs, as an act of defiance, as an act of rebellion. The movie, then, focuses on one drug, in particular: LSD.

The name of the movie is ACID DELIRIO DEI SENSI (1968) which translates from Italian into English as ACID DELIRIUM OF THE SENSES. I describe it as 'odd,' because it starts out as a documentary, with voice-over narration, and then changes into a series of dramas, connected to each other by an unseen narrator. From the way that the individual dramas can be compared to each other, the intention of the people making the movie is to get teenagers and young adults to stop using the drug.

The intended audience for the movie is parents and adult family members in Italy and in other European countries. I'm sure that teenagers tried to watch the movie in theaters, when it debuted.

As was typical for most produced-in-Italy movies, at that time, the soundtrack of ACID DELIRIO DEI SENSI is dubbed. The series of dramas that play out on screen take place in New York City. So there is a great deal of location shooting, using hand-held cameras -- but there, also, is a good deal of studio shooting that was done in Italy.

Two of the characters from the series of dramas are played by actors who were active in the Italian movie industry -- but were not known, here, in the U.S.

This would make for a fascinating research assignment for me: find any journalism regarding the movie; i.e., reviews, articles, interviews in Italian newspapers and magazines, or on Italian radio and television programs.

The characters in the series of dramas who take LSD are young, college-age, or in their 20s. The actors who play the characters all look close to that age range.

The movie claims that members of organized crime are interested in distributing the drug.

The first drama presents an in-demand fashion model named Shelley who also goes to school at New York University. A number of Shelley's friends throw a party for her. It's her 20th birthday. A cake, laced with LSD, is served, everyone present eats portions of the cake. Shelley eventually leaves the party and wonders down an avenue in mid-town Manhattan at dusk. She approaches an office building and notices a pool and water fountain in front, adjacent to the avenue's sidewalk. She, then, starts taking off her clothing and jumps into the pool.

Within seconds, a police car pulls up in front of the building. Two police officers rush from the car, run into the pool, grab Shelley and take her into the car -- which speeds off, joining and passing traffic on the avenue, with siren blaring.

The scene was staged for the movie. And I have to ask: was there anything written about the making of ACID DELIRIO DEI SENSI, in English, in any newspaper or magazine? What did the adults standing outside the office building think was happening?

The details in the scene are worth noting. That partially-seen police car was not a New York City Police Department precinct cruiser. The two police officers, also, were seen from a distance; was that really NYPD clothing that they were wearing? And what about the cameras shooting the scene? Were they concealed, or did the adults on the street see the cameras and the camera men?

I've watched the movie a number of times and I know that I have passed by that building in midtown Manhattan, with its pool and water fountain, many, many times.

In addition to Shelley, the series of drama scenes present and develop 11 characters, and it's one of those additional characters, named Ursula, who I'm going to remember for quite a long time, since her personality is unlike all other characters that I've encountered in youth-oriented movies from the late 1960s-early 1970s; i.e., characters who use or distribute any of the drugs that were becoming popular.

The unseen narrator -- presumably, the movie's director -- mentions that the birthday cake for Shelley, laced with LSD, was delivered by Ursula who could not attend the party.

Sometime later in the course of the movie (running time: 92 minutes), Ursula invites a young, African American dancer named Nick to her apartment with the intention of seducing and teasing him. The dialog between the two characters in this long scene (presented in 3 sections, with a running time of not quite 5 minutes) is extensive.

Among other things that take place in the scene, Ursula tells Nick that she enjoys using LSD to manipulate another person's thinking and behavior. In fact, in a subsequent scene, she does just that.

This kind of thinking and behavior on the part of a young adult character in a youth-oriented movie, with drugs a key part of the plot, is the opposite of the peace and love mantra that was prevalent throughout the popular culture, in the U.S.

I'd like to think that director Giuseppe Scotese envisioned a trend, before it developed. Two major events in the U.S. occurred, after ACID DELIRIO DEI SENSI debuted in theaters in Italy: the Tate-Labianca killings in Los Angeles, California, in August, 1969, and the Altamont Speedway Free Festival in Alameda County, California, held on December 6, 1969.

Hallucinogens, such as LSD, were very much part of both the killings and the free music festival.

If anything that I have written sounds intriguing, then ACID DELIRIO DEI SENSI is available on DVD, with English subtitles, and can, also, be viewed on-line, also with English subtitles.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

L'ENFER (2005) & Traumatic Events - cont'd...

In January of last year, I wrote and posted a piece, here, that focused on a difficult-to-understand movie called L'ENFER (2005). I could not figure out how a group of characters were connected in some way. These characters were all having a great deal of difficulty getting through the day; they seemed greatly affected or impacted by some difficulty they were experiencing. Did these characters know each other? Were they going to meet each other? Were they related to each other? Was there some explanation that was being withheld? The uncertainty, the lack of explanation, extended for quite a while.

This one aspect of L'ENFER's plot was the key ingredient that kept me interested throughout the movie's 102-minute running time. I call that aspect 'the self-defining problem' of each of the characters. Somehow, each of these characters had to overcome a traumatic incident in each of their pasts.

This new piece, here, at Tumblr, adds to what I already discussed in 'Traumatic Events' from January of last year.

As long as an adult watching L'ENFER can focus on the meaning of the word 'trauma,' then the uncertainty becomes less of a problem.

One character finally gets around to speaking one-on-one to another character in that other character's home (her apartment), about 3/4's of the way in the movie's running time, and some traumatic incidents do come into focus. An adult viewer will, then, construct relationships with -- by my count -- four characters.

Three of the four characters come across as sympathetic. One is unsympathetic.

L'ENFER's final scene comes across as a twist ending and may have been one reason why the movie did not play in theaters in the U.S. and Canada, after its world debut at the Toronto International Film Festival on September 9, 2005.

L'ENFER also includes occasional comedy touches which go well with the overall grim tone of the plot. I like to think of the movie as a shaggy dog joke. It helped me get through the days leading up to the new year.

I don't recommend the movie, but if any of what I have written sounds interesting, L'ENFER is available on DVD with english subtitles.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

A REPORT ON THE PARTY AND GUESTS (1966)

[magicinaframe-part2]

"Do you really need information before you watch a movie?"

A group of seven adults -- four men and three women -- are enjoying each other's company, in a clearing, in the woods, somewhere in Czechoslovakia. They're having a picnic.

The seven are all about the same age -- about 30 years old. They all know each other. Their conversation is relaxed, as they eat cake, pie, and drink from bottles of white wine that've been chilled in a nearby stream.

On this sunny afternoon, their conversation continues, and a perceptive viewer will figure out that the picnic has been planned as the first act before a second get-together that involves more people, hosted by someone they all know, a notable person who grants favors (one of the four men is working on a project that can be completed with the host's o.k.). Evidently, working with Mr. Notable is a sure-fire way to become successful in contemporary Czechoslovakia.

The sound of a group of people in the distance interrupts the picnickers' conversation. It's a group of adults and some children, all in a jubilant mood, a wedding party. They're walking, dancing, and singing; one of this group, a man playing a violin, is accompanying them, as they move out of view.

Some of the group of seven try to get the attention of members of the wedding party, with no luck.

"They're on their way to the second celebration," one of the seven says, so the picnic ends earlier than planned. The women all go to the nearby stream to clean themselves and change into party clothes, and then all seven follow a path in the woods in the same direction that the wedding party took.

But something happens. New people appear, out of nowhere. One man, with a strange expression on his face, walks up to one of the seven and locks his arm around one the seven's arms and leads him to the other six picknickers further down the path in the forest. Other strangers, all males, appear and move menacingly towards the other six. Soon, all seven are forcibly pushed as a group, away from the path, into the woods.

I'm briefly describing the beginning of the movie A REPORT OF THE PARTY AND GUESTS (org'l title: O SLOVNOSTI A HOSTECH - 1966), as a way to get you who are reading my words to think about the question I pose in my title to this piece at Tumblr.

This is a one-of-a-kind movie that holds a viewer's interest firmly for the entirety of its 71-minute running time.

I'm asking movie lovers, here, at Tumblr, to imagine that you're moving from channel to channel on your television set with your remote control device and you happen to bump into a movie -- this movie -- a movie you have never heard of.

"Who are these new people in the forest? Why are they making the picknickers move off?" you might say to yourself.

Well, everything that happens from then, onward, is strange and sort of understandable; i.e., not immediately understandable, but eventually sort of understandable.

At first, the seven have to stand on a gravel path elsewhere in the forest, until two men, from the group of strangers, return, carrying a wooden desk and chair which they set down on the gravel path. The man who sits down at the desk is the first new person in the forest who locked his arm around one of the seven -- the man with the strange expression on his face.

Soon, a second-in-command drags the heel of his shoe to create a circle in the gravel around the seven picknickers.

And then a strange conversation ensues.

"Have these seven picknickers done something wrong? Why have they been brought to this new area?" you might ask yourself.

A new character suddenly appears out of frame, a character who takes over the direction of the plot. And all of the characters, led by this new character, move on foot to a new area in the forest where the remainder of the plot plays out.

A perceptive viewer will figure out that the unusual events on screen and the relationships amongst the characters (and there are many characters) refer to events that have already taken place in Czechoslovakia -- or events in Czechoslovakia that might take place in the future.

And if you stay with this movie to its conclusion, I think you'll then want to find information about the making of this movie, the first reception of the movie in Czechoslovakia, and then what happened to the person who co-wrote the script and directed the movie.

The fact that you look for information after the movie concludes means that you watched it with fewer distractions than usual -- which, in turn, means that you're more likely to remember any and all of the details of the movie as an experience.

If any of this sounds interesting, A REPORT OF THE PARTY AND GUESTS can be watched on-line for free with English subtitles at the Internet Archive and is also available on DVD, also with English subtitles.

I've watched the movie twice on DVD, during a recent weekend, and expect to watch it, again, every couple of years.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]

[magicinaframe-part2]

Imprisonment

The abduction of a child by a stranger, taken to parts unknown... When was the last time that I heard of one in a news broadcast or read of one, in a newspaper? I can't remember. So I have to jar my memory.

I went looking on-line. The news that I finally remembered was first reported in October of 2018. A 13- year- old girl, a teenager, was abducted from her home, in a rural area of Wisconsin, and was in captivity for not quite 3 months. Her abductor shot her parents.

That was six years ago, when the news was first reported.

The fact that I have not heard of any abductions in this country, since then, may be a good sign, in terms of lessening the general tension, but it may also mean that would-be abductors are just waiting for the start of the new year. The new year of 2025 means the start of a new administration in Washington, D.C. And, maybe, with the new year and new administration, there will be a new news story. I hope not.

But what with the unending politically tense situation, here, in the U.S., most adults in this society are only paying attention to a few news stories on any given day, so it follows that most adults -- with justification -- can't recall the last time that they were aware of an abduction of a child with forced imprisonment, somewhere in the U.S.

Hence my title to this piece at Tumblr: one word, a noun, a concept, a state of being. Is it a word that most people enjoy thinking about? I don't think so.

The word is immediately understood by multiple generations of people, starting with middle school-age teenagers, all the way to senior citizens (such as yours, truly). From a writer's point of view, the concept of imprisonment is a starting point for a story that's guaranteed to hold an audience's attention.

But if you who are reading my words know that the movie you're thinking of watching focuses on the abduction and forced imprisonment of a teenager by a stranger, are you going to watch without prejudging?

Going by the odds, a person thinking about watching such a movie will first look for information about the plot. And -- again, going by the odds -- the search for information will take place on-line. In my humble opinion, that's a mistake. Try watching the movie, without looking for information beforehand.

The movie that I'm thinking about on this crisp fall day in New York City is an example of one about which I had just a little information. I knew that it was a foreign language movie, that it was recent, and that one of the main characters was a teenage girl who had been abducted; i.e., past tense, with the implication that she was no longer abducted. That was the little information that I already had.

In the case of this movie, the prior information did not affect the way that I responded to what was taking place on my flatscreen TV. That's because of the way that the script was written and the way that the movie was shot.

The movie that I'm thinking about today does not show the abduction. It does, early on, show the end of the imprisonment by the abductor.

Consider. A teenager who goes through imprisonment and is finally free from her abductor and reunited with her parents would likely, in her mind, go back and forth; i.e., from the present back to moments from her imprisonment, and then back, again, to the present.

That is how the plot of this movie plays out. So it follows that the acting on the part of all of the performers in the cast is natural and believable. And that is what I found out for myself in watching this wonderful movie -- twice, so far.

It's a movie that never played in theaters in the U.S.

The name of the movie is A MOI SEULE which translates into English as 'mine alone.' The people who made the movie gave it an English language title: COMING HOME. Clearly, they wanted the movie to play in theaters in English-speaking countries.

A MOI SEULE debuted at the Berlin International Film Festival in February of 2012. It's not readily available on DVD with English subtitles.

If you can find a streaming service that has the movie with English subtitles, I recommend that you take the time to watch it. You won't feel as if you're wasting your time. Find out for yourself.

-- Drew Simels

[magicinaframe-part2]