ATLRetro

By Ray Dafrico
Contributing Writer

THE QUIET ONE (2019); Dir. Oliver Murray; Documentary about Bill Wyman featuring Eric Clapton, Bob Geldof, Andrew Oldham, Glyn Johns; Opens Friday, July 5 at the Landmark’s Midtown Art Cinema; Trailer here.

Upfront, a disclaimer of sorts, I am a huge Rolling Stones fan. As a rock and roll musician myself, I believe them to be archetypal band, from the quintessential, charismatic front man Mick Jagger; the effortlessly cool, eternal Keith Richards; to the diverse, multitalented abilities of Brian Jones, Mick Taylor and Ron Wood. Ultimately however the band was always at its heart a rhythm and blues band, with its foundation in the rhythm section of Charlie Watts and Bill Wyman, the subject of a new documentary THE QUIET ONE.

The film, directed by Oliver Murray, features commentary from Eric Clapton, Bob Geldof, Andrew Oldham, Glyn Johns and others. Wyman was the Stone who never received the attention that some of his bandmates did,  but amongst musicians, he is considered one of the world’s best bass players. Non-musicians and casual fans probably don’t know that much about him as he was content to stand stoic and mysteriously to the side and back of the stage, being the glue, holding down a machine firing on all cylinders. As Wyman himself says in the film: “We could blown any band off a stage.”

The film begins with Wyman recalling his earliest memories. Born as Bill Perks on October 24, 1936, Wyman recalls the bombings during World War II and how deeply this experience affected him. He could remember classmates suddenly not showing up for school after a bombing raid due to the fact that they had been killed.  The film then reveals Wyman’s relationship, or rather lack of one, with his parents. He was alienated from them and felt closest with his grandmother through whom he discovered collecting and documenting things—something that Wyman, along with photography and music, would continue to do extensively for the rest of his life.  He would become the unofficial archivist for The Rolling Stones, and part of this film’s attraction is its unseen footage from Wyman’s own collection. The death of his grandmother when Wyman was still a child devastated him. His father then pulled him out of school and forced him to work as a bet collector in a local pub. Not unlike a Dickens novel, you feel the pain of this childhood.

Bill Wyman in the Studio. Photo credit: Bent Rej Photography. Used with permission.

Tired of living in dangerous working class Penge, England, Wyman, then still named Bill Perks (which he hated), joined the British armed forces in the late 1950s and ended up stationed in Germany where he discovered rock and roll via Armed Forces Radio and records which American GIs had. He also befriended a man named “Gordon Lee Wyman,” who Wyman describes as “quite a character.” Young Bill Perks was impressed enough to change his name legally to Bill Wyman. Soon after, and under the spell of rock ’n’ roll, Wyman modified his first bass by hand and started his first band The Cliftons.

Upon his return to England he went to an audition that a friend had told him about that would lead to Wyman joining the soon-to-be Greatest Rock and Roll Band in the World. At this point, Wyman’s life accelerates at warp speed—constant touring, fame, riots, rebellion, arrests, sex, and, for most of the band, drugs. Wyman never had any interest in the latter. However, he does describe smoking a joint that was laced with animal tranquilizer and said, “ I don’t need this.”

The Rolling Stones on tour in North America. Photo credit: Bob Bonis Archives Inc./Promotone. Used with permission.

The 1960s were a cultural phenomenon, and The Rolling Stones were front and center. Although the Stones were reaching incredible artistic heights at the time, authorities targeted the band as a threat to society. “It was really us vs. them” is how Wyman describes it, and he then goes on to talk about the deterioration and eventual death of bands founder Brian Jones, in 1969.  Despite a momentous concert in London’s Hyde Park and a very successful US tour, the dark times would continue later that year at the free concert at Altamont, California, where a man was stabbed to death directly in front of the stage while they played. Wyman says he doesn’t like to talk about it because it was so horrible.

The 1970s saw the Stones having to flee the U.K for France because they were so far in debt and British taxes were so high. Wyman dreaded leaving and recalls the madness of recording EXILE ON MAIN STREET in the basement of Keith Richard’s villa in Villefranche-sur-mer. What he would discover was he really liked France and struck up friendships with the likes of Marc Chagall and James Baldwin. Wyman would end up keeping a home there to this day. The Stones continued to tour and record throughout the ’70s, but Wyman felt the need to express himself creatively and was the first member of the band to release a solo LP, MONKEY GRIP, in 1974, followed by “STONE ALONE” in 1976. While these records were mostly just side projects for Wyman, he scored a worldwide hit in 1981 with the song “(Si Si) Je Suis un Rock Star.”

Production Still – Bill Wyman working in his archive. Photo credit: Luke Varley. Copyright: The Quiet Ones Ltd./Promotone. Used with Permission.

While he never fell for drugs, sex, however, was Wyman’s vice, and he explains that his loneliness was probably the cause of  it. Hearing  this in context with his childhood, it is easy to imagine how he could feel this way. Combined with the isolation that fame can bring, it is also easy to understand when Wyman states that it was “sometimes very difficult to keep one’s sanity.” He was first married in the late 1950s to Diane Cory, and they had a child, Stephen from the marriage. When the couple divorced, he felt his son should stay with his mother as he was constantly working and touring. He later found that his son was miserable, sick, and not even being fed. He won custody, and Stephen lived with him from then on. Swedish model Astrid Lundstrom was Wyman’s companion throughout most of the 1970s.

The Rolling Stones were never a band without controversy and Wyman would receive his share when he fell in love with and then married 18-year-old Mandy Smith on June 2, 1989. The tabloids had a field day. In the film Wyman, who was 51 at the time, reflects upon what a mistake it was. He would later go on to meet and marry his current wife, Suzanne Accosta in April 1993. Wyman officially left The Rolling Stones in January 1993 after the very successful STEEL WHEELS comeback tour. He says wanted to leave on a high note and felt that was the time. Wyman talks of his life after The Stones playing with his band The Rhythm Kings, and in the film’s conclusion he tells a wonderful story about a meeting with Ray Charles.

A line from the film that struck me was Wyman saying that all of his heroes were “the little guys.” Director Oliver Murray successfully takes us through Wyman’s journey of a somewhat reluctant rock star’s life. THE QUIET ONE is a surprisingly touching film that speaks from the heart and one which I would highly recommend regardless if you are a Rolling Stones fan or not.

Contributing Writer Ray Dafrico is a guitarist, singer/songwriter and founding member of The Nightporters and Kathleen Turner Overdrive.

by Brooke Sonenreich
Contributing Writer

NICO (2018); Dir. Susanna Nicchiarelli; Starring Trine Dyrholm, John Gordon Sinclair, Anamaria Marinca; Opens Friday, Sept. 7 at the Landmark’s Midtown Art Cinema; Trailer here.

“Don’t call me Nico. Call me by my real name: Christa,” says the disheveled, 45-year-old Danish actress, Trine Dyrholm who plays Nico in NICO, 1988.

The film is a biopic of the last two years of the life of Christa Päffgen, better known as Nico from The Velvet Underground. However, the story is an authentic representation of a time long after Nico’s involvement with The Velvet Underground. It’s a look at Christa’s middle-aged debauchery as she tours through Europe with a group of amateur bandmates. In between driving through beautiful roads, the artist participates in interviews that often bore her with questions concerning her being Lou Reed’s femme fatale. She seems annoyed at, if not completely oblivious to, the fact that without The Velvet Underground her solo rock career wouldn’t be as successful as it is. Indeed, it is her spot in 1960s history that makes her important to her fans more than anything else.

She makes a respectable point though when speaking at an Italian press conference: “Well, I only sang three songs with them. The rest of the time I was playing the tambourine in the background. I did the same thing when I was a model; I was there for my image. Look, my life started after the experience with The Velvet Underground.”

The film moves slowly through Christa’s ups and downs on the road, sometimes following her into the bathroom as she brazenly shoots up heroin into her bruised ankle. Still, it moves through these spaces with little judgment.

Trine Durholm in NICO 1988, a Magnolia Pictures release. Photo courtesy of Magnolia Pictures.

Often times director, Susanna Nicchiarelli, oscillates between archived footage from Nico’s time with Andy Warhol’s stylish gang to the late 1980s moments of her on stage at various European venues. In contrast to the archived footage of her youth, the singer now shamelessly indulges in food and alcohol. She celebrates her unkempt look as she confidently states, “I’ve been on the top, I’ve been on the bottom; both places are empty.”

Perhaps the most memorable scene is after the star does heroin in a club restroom. She enters the stage to perform the song “Nature Boy” with the backing of an Italian jazz band. It’s a solemn rendition of the song and it conjures up emotions regarding her estranged, suicidal son Christian Aaron Päffgen, or “Ari.”

The film picks up when Ari joins the tour for quality time with his estranged mother. In a rare moment of desperation, when Christa is doing methadone in a room next door, Ari slits his wrists and winds up in a foreign hospital. Here we voyeuristically experience the downside of the Päffgen family’s drug use. Despite Christa’s seamless ability to perform while on heroin, the drugs have infected her and her son’s lives in ways that become more visible than the bruises on her ankle.

The conclusion is weak compared to the rest of the film, if only because of its lazy reliance on end title cards to inform us of the star’s actual death. Nevertheless, even though the biopic is slow moving, it stands well as an entertaining and thorough look at Christa’s last moments in the limelight.

By Andrew Kemp
Contributing Writer

TICKLED (2016); Dir. David Farrier, Dylan Reeve; Starring David Farrier; Now Playing at Landmark Midtown Art Cinema; Trailer here.

Before we get started, just know that I enjoyed the new documentary TICKLED, and I absolutely recommend you take the time to see it in theaters. Know as little as you can. Don’t google. Watch the trailer only if you must.

If you’re unconvinced and still reading… well, here’s where it gets tricky. Because central to the experience of TICKLED is watching its twists and turns unfold. You won’t even believe how weird this thing gets, and many of the film’s best moments are tuned precisely to the shock and thrill of that escalation. To review it properly risks spoiling it. Spoiling it risks ruining it.

I’ll provide an overview. New Zealand journalist David Farrier (see Kool Kat of the Week interview here) is the kind of guy who trafficks in weirdness. Known in his home country as an entertainment reporter and personality, Farrier is the guy you send in to the field to witness the weird and off-kilter. His territory is the human interest story, the kind of thing that would show up at the tail end of a news broadcast to give you a light laugh and send you on your way. Need a guy to do a sit-down with GWAR? Farrier’s your man. In his quest for the odd, Farrier stumbled upon something he’d never seen before—a competitive endurance tickling league. Videos produced by an entity called Jane O’Brien Media lurked on YouTube, depicting young men in athletic gear tickling one another for sport. Farrier laughed, and sent out an email asking for an interview and a profile.

That’s when all hell breaks loose.

The film chronicles Farrier’s surprise as he becomes the target of seemingly crass, homophobic emails attempting to prevent him from writing his small article. Sensing a larger story, Farrier begins a collaboration with filmmaker Dylan Reeve, a partnership that takes them to some weird corners of the internet, across the Pacific to the United States, and into a web of harassment and hate that spans decades. At one point, the film shows Farrier engaged in an actual car chase.

Let me repeat that. From tickling videos to a car chase on American streets.

This movie is unbelievable.

TICKLED is a slick, well-produced documentation of Farrier’s investigation that takes great pains to provide the context the story needs to avoid feeling like a hit job. Farrier takes time to meet with innocent tickling enthusiasts who demonstrate the innocent, victimless nature of their fetish that contrasts wildly with what’s going on in the YouTube videos, making it clear that this is not an attempt to shame a subculture, but rather a document aimed at defending it. The bad behavior on display in TICKLED is very bad indeed, stretching way beyond the studios where the videos are made and into a world that intersects at poverty and privacy, at benevolence and exploitation.

TICKLED is a living document, to an extent. Legal threats are all over this thing, and the recent LA premiere became a shouting match attended by some of the figures from the film. The story is not yet over. But TICKLED makes a very strong case for who should held accountable, and by bringing the film to the widest possible audience, Farrier and Reeve hope to bring a shadowy organization into the light.

By Andrew Kemp
Contributing Writer

TICKLED, now playing in Atlanta movie theaters, is a whodunit at heart. New Zealand journalist David Farrier had hoped to write a short article about some videos he found online depicting something called Competitive Endurance Tickling. He couldn’t have known that the response to his request for an interview would send him on a multi-year journey to uncover a dark underbelly to this seemingly good-natured sport and, perhaps, a real-life monster.

ATLRetro talked with Farrier about the making of this insane little film, improvisational journalism, fetish culture, and how it felt when he first realized what he was getting into.

Note: the reception on our phone call was patchy, but we worked around it for the most part.

You can read my review of TICKLED here.

ATLRetro: First of all, I really loved the film. I’ve never been so on the edge of my seat watching a conversation outside a coffee shop.

David Farrier: [laughs] I know, I know. And like the world’s [unintelligible] car chase.

Right. I think I even said out loud in my chair when it happened, “we are having a car chase right now.”

DF: [laughs]

It was just very surprising. So, obviously it’s difficult to ask directly about the fallout over the film without spoiling it. For instance, the event that happened at the LA premiere.

Yeah, yeah. On that I’d just say that, you know, it’s been a pretty interesting time. People from, I mean the movie is about Jane O’Brien Media, and it doesn’t paint them in a particularly great light, and at one of our premieres we had some key players from the film turn up. And at the end of this film, during the Q&A, [unintelligible] with more legal action. That’s been going on through the whole process.

When I was done watching the film, I didn’t get the feeling that the story was finished. It felt like some things are just beginning. What’s it been like promoting a finished film when it’s still unfolding day to day?

It’s difficult mainly because that people we want people to see the documentary without knowing too much, and when people see this documentary, when they’re coming out to a screening, that’s out there now, so we have to talk about it. [unintelligible] people to not watch the trailer, not read a review, watch the movie, and get into all that afterwards. The story is very active, as you say, you know. We showed everything in the film that we wanted to show at the time, but since the company is still active, of course, they’re going to push back after the film’s out, so we just have to keep on going.

When you sent that first email off at the very beginning of the film, things quickly went off the rail. I’m curious to know what kind of story you thought you were going to make before that first response. Where were you headed?

Yeah, I mean, I was just looking to generate a one-and-a-half minute story about, you know, here’s this crazy sport about competitive endurance tickling. And I wanted to talk to a competitor and I wanted to talk to the organizer. And get some shots of the event and maybe an interview with the organizer and an interview with the New Zealand competitor. But, you know, that first response that was very aggressive about telling me not to do the story, you know, that changed all that. I didn’t have my nice one-and-a-half minute story, it turned into something completely different.

Right, I get the impression that if you had gotten an answer that was just “no, we’re not interested,” then all of this that has come to light wouldn’t have come to light.

Oh, totally. [unintelligible] I would have forgotten about it and moved on. I was in a quick turnaround situation, so each day I had to turn in a story. So I didn’t have time to investigate, I had to move on to the next thing. Had it been a more measured response, there wouldn’t have been a documentary.

What was the first moment where this started to get too real? Was there ever a moment where you were scared?

There were lots of moments, I mean I was apprehensive when I went to the airport, you know, they sent representatives and I was going to have a meeting. And there was the time I spent in America, approaching people on the street. So approaching them I found nerve-wracking, but [co-director] Dylan and I, we were in this together from the start, you know. We came across this crazy thing. We both got warned early on by this company that we expect legal action to happen, so we were united in that, I suppose. So if we hadn’t had each other, I probably would have run away from the whole thing.

Yeah, you guys seem to have a good working relationship. It seemed that there were moments where each of you had a choice of whether to continue or stop.

There were lots of discussions. It was like that the whole way through. If one of us was coming under threats or attacks, you know, we’d talk to the other person and share what we’re going through. We’d share everything in the process, right? In a practical sense, it was really great having someone else in this with me.

You’ve mentioned in interviews that you don’t have a background necessarily in investigative journalism.

No, no.

When you were doing this investigation, did you sit down and come up with a step by step plan, or were you kind of improvising as you went along?

I mean, the story happened really quickly. We did the Kickstarter campaign so we could start shooting it really quickly, and we did that initial shoot, and then we came back realizing the story was of a scope, was like, bigger. And we had a lot of time to prep and prepare for the second shoot, and I write entertainment, I was in the newsroom among all the hard current affairs reporters, and I always kind of admired what they were doing. [call completely breaks up at this point]

I think you actually broke up a little bit right there.

In the news room, I did, like entertainment, but I was sitting next to some really hardened current affairs reporters, so I absorbed a lot of what their techniques were. But really, it was just a lot of research, a lot of planning, and just being super aware of what could happen, what could not happen in any kind of situation, so I could react accordingly. So really just lots, and lots, and lots of preparation.

I’ve seen the film and I think you do a very good job of avoiding one of the concerns you might have going in, that this was going to turn into “fetish shaming.” I’m curious when you’re developing your approach on the film, was that something you were aware of, did you have to take pains to make sure that didn’t happen?

Oh, yeah, right from the beginning. Right from the beginning, we were super aware that we didn’t want to paint the fetish community with the same brush. It was the idea that, yes, there’s some bad stuff going on, but it’s less about the fetish and more about the harassment going on around it. One of the first people who reached out to us and supported our Kickstarter was Richard Ivey, who was filming in the fetish [community] and his whole career was built around it. And he came on board with the same concerns, like “I hope you’re not going to make a film that paints us,” you know, “in a negative light.” Yeah, it was right from the beginning that we wanted to make it super clear, and make it clear in the movie, you can be into tickling, there’s nothing wrong with that. I mean, that’s great, it should be celebrated, but, you know, the dark world that we stumbled onto was somehow almost separate to the tickling.

Right, in the video of the LA premiere, there was a debate going back and forth between you and one of the people involved about whether the tickling videos are pornographic.

Yeah, that was one of the rather obscure arguments. [laughs]

The idea that they’re just pornography with clothes. I’m just curious about that distinction. Why does that distinction need to get made by them that they aren’t?

That’s a whole other side of it…but that’s not what the film is actually about, and what the problem is. He claims that he doesn’t make fetish content. Now I would argue that Jane O’Brien Media is making, [are] not necessarily pornographic, but certainly, what’s the word? Erotic, and it’s really in the debate about what is erotica versus what is pornography. But, you know, anything can be erotica. If that happens to be young, good-looking, athletic men in sports gear tickling each other, that’s not all that surprising.

I have a question about the decision, and this was probably a conversation in the editing room, but the decision to show the tickling videos unblurred, showing all the faces of the people participating in them unblurred.

Yeah, the understanding was that we [had] many tickling videos, [but] we wanted to not focus on the tickling videos to an excessive degree. Because some of the people in the tickling videos, you know, we had to talk them about it. But all the videos were already online en masse, like they’re already out there. And our film explains why they’re in it. So while they’re online, hour-long tickling videos, the film provides context for why they’re there and how the people got there. I mean, I don’t want to give spoilers, but it kind of contextualized what was going on. The videos that were no longer online and no longer out there, we blurred those ones. Some of these videos were over a decade old and we didn’t want to bring those back for people, and also we didn’t know who was in them, so we thought about that a lot in the editing room.

To me, I find it an interesting dichotomy between the tickling videos as kind of a metaphor for everything else that’s going on. Somebody sitting on top of somebody else, and dominating them. Whether that’s physically happening in a video, or metaphorically happening in everything else.

Completely, oh yeah, definitely.

So the videos themselves are harmless and the [surrounding] behavior is bad, or are these videos themselves exploitative?

No, the videos… the people who were in those videos, if they knew who was behind it and why it was being created, if they knew all of that and kept doing them, that would be fine. What makes it exploitative is that they don’t know—the people that I’ve spoken to—they don’t know what those videos are for. And I think that’s wrong. In a nutshell, there’s nothing wrong with making tickling videos as long as you know who they’re for and where they’re going and what they’re going to be used for, etc. It becomes problematic when you don’t know the answers to those questions.

TICKLED is now playing at Landmark Midtown Art Cinema. Click here for showtimes.

Andrew Kemp is a screenwriter and game designer who started talking about movies in 1984 and got stuck that way. He can be seen around town wherever there are movies, cheap beer and little else.

HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT (2015); Dir. Kent Jones; Starring Alfred Hitchcock, François Truffaut, Martin Scorsese, David Fincher, Wes Anderson and Peter Bogdanovich. Starts Friday, December 11; Landmark Midtown Art Cinema; Tickets and showtimes here; Trailer here.

By Aleck Bennett
Contributing Writer

Landmark Midtown Art Cinema continues to spur discussion of great movies by presenting a great movie about a great book which discusses great movies. That’s a lot of “great,” but it’s hard not to go overboard in the superlatives when you’re talking about Kent Jones’ HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT.

In 1962, one of the founders of the French New Wave of cinema turned to his favorite director, one of the old guard, for a week-long series of conversations undertaken to establish the older filmmaker’s legacy as an artist. The resulting book (published in 1966) was one of the most influential documents ever published about filmmaking: HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT. The book worked as intended, as François Truffaut’s examination of Alfred Hitchcock’s ouvre to that point was possibly the first attempt to present the director’s work as a cohesive body of personal expression instead of a simple series of mindless thrillers.

It’s hard to imagine a time in which Alfred Hitchcock wasn’t taken seriously as a filmmaker. But even such a celebrated figure as Hitch was hardly unassailable during his time. Contemporary critics cited unbelievable plots or seeming lapses in logic in Hitchcock’s movies as detriments. He had, during the 1950s, become something of a comic figure. His gag-filled appearances as the host of ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENTS, as well as the plethora of products (magazines, books, record albums and board games) bearing his name, led to him becoming a beloved pop culture icon, rather than known as a true artist worthy of serious examination.

François Truffaut was no stranger to the serious examination of classic movies, having been one of the leading critics at CAHIERS DU CINÉMA, the celebrated French film magazine. It was there that he coined the “auteur theory”—the idea that some directors utilize the industrial trappings of filmmaking and the collaborative nature of the process the way a writer uses a pen or a typewriter, or the way a painter uses a brush. And, like a writer or painter, that these directors used the medium to explore their own idiosyncratic visions and psyches, and that much of these filmmakers’ projects contain similar themes, images and other elements that form an interconnected body of work. These directors were the true authors (or, in French, auteurs) of their work, rather than the screenwriters or producers behind the films, overriding the raw materials given to them and transforming their movies into personal testaments. It was this theory that fueled many of the magazine’s own critics (Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard and Éric Rohmer among them) to film their own movies, thus launching the French New Wave.

When the book was published, Hitchcock’s reputation was in need of rehabilitation, and Truffaut was riding a wave of acclaim. Truffaut was in a perfect position to draw attention to the solid artistic merit of Hitch’s films, and thankfully had both the writing talent to describe that merit and the intelligence to ask Hitch the right questions. HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT arrived at just the right time, and landed in the hands of a generation of aspiring directors who had grown up loving Hitchcock’s cinema and, like Truffaut, believed it to be worthy of serious consideration. This is where Kent Jones’ loving tribute comes in.

Jones not only offers a look inside the creation of this landmark work of film criticism, utilizing audio recordings of the interviews and never-before-seen photographs from the sessions, but also goes to the directors who have been inspired by this work. Wes Anderson probably best sums up its importance in the lives of the filmmakers involved, describing his copy as having been so frequently used that it has been reduced to a stack of loose papers held together with a rubber band. Also on hand are Martin Scorsese, David Fincher, Olivier Assayas, Richard Linklater, Arnaud Desplechin and many others to express just how this book inspired them to look deeper into Hitchcock’s work and his technique. In discussing VERTIGO, for example, the documentary provides a capsule description of how Truffaut’s book led to Hitchcock’s work being reassessed. At the time of the book’s release, VERTIGO was almost impossible to see, having been a critical and commercial failure. Yet the discussion of the movie between the two directors made it one of the most in-demand titles among aspiring filmmakers, who searched out for rare film prints in order to learn from it. As a result, the film’s reputation grew steadily over the years as it began to be more seriously discussed and analyzed.

Jones weaves HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT together beautifully, using clips from Hitchcock’s movies to illustrate the comments from the documentary’s participants, and winds up being as much a celebration of the director as it is of the book about him. It will make you want to read (or re-read) the book. It will make you want to revisit Hitch’s filmography. And then it will make you want to revisit Hitch’s filmography with a copy of the book at your side. My only argument with the film is that at 80 minutes, it’s far too short for my liking. But, then, as an avowed cinema nerd, I’d gladly spend hours upon hours listening to the world’s top directors discussing this book and the two men responsible for it. For all you normal human beings out there, it’s the perfect length to get you hungry for more. In short, HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT is a delight for anyone even remotely interested in the behind-the-scenes world of movie making.

NAUSICAA OF THE VALLEY OF THE WIND (1984) and MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO (1988); Dir: Hayao Miyazaki; The Studio Ghibli Collection at Landmark Midtown Art Cinema, Fri. Nov. 9 through Thurs. Nov. 15; NAUSICAA plays November 9 at 1:45, 7:00 p.m., and 12:15 a.m.; MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO plays November 11 at 12:15, 5:00, and 9:40 p.m.; showtimes for additional movies here; all films presented in 35mm. NAUSICAA trailer here and MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO trailer here.

By Andrew Kemp
Contributing Writer

Landmark Midtown Art Cinema may not be the center of the known universe, but for film lovers and adventurous families from November 9-15, the theater may certainly feel like it. That’s because the Art Cinema is playing host to an incredibly special event that will see almost the entire Studio Ghibli collection light up the screens, each film proudly offered in an increasingly-elusive 35mm presentation. Some film nuts may just move into the building.

While Ghibli doesn’t have the widespread name recognition in America that, say, Pixar enjoys, Ghibli and co-founder/frequent director Hayao Miyazaki combine to form one of the biggest animation brands in the world, especially in the studio’s home country of Japan where Ghibli’s films routinely break box office records and land major awards. Here in the states, Ghibli films have competed favorably for critical attention with the mighty animation brands of Pixar and Dreamworks, winning the second-ever Best Animated Feature Oscar for SPIRITED AWAY in 2002 and scoring another nomination just a few years later for HOWL’S MOVING CASTLE (2004). In the world of animation, Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli are already considered legends, and they’re currently working at the peak of their talents.

So who is Hayao Miyazaki? An animator and artist, Miyazaki was already a 16-year veteran of the Japanese animation industry when he released his first full-length film, THE CASTLE OF CAGLIOSTRO (1979), based on the long-running LUPIN III manga and anime TV series. Miyazaki followed that success by moving into the world of manga—Japanese comics—where he created his own series about a girl caught between warring territories in a dying post-apocalyptic world. Miyazaki named his series NAUSICAA OF THE VALLEY OF THE WIND and he helmed a feature adaptation in 1984 that garnered enormous critical and commercial success in Japan and convinced Miyazaki and co-founders Isao Takahata and Toshio Suzuki to make the move to their own studio. So, while NAUSICAA is not officially a Studio Ghibli release, all things Ghibli began with that film and it holds a special spot of reverence in the collection.

Likewise, NAUSICAA is one of the crown jewels in the Ghibli film series playing at the Art Cinema because, frankly, it’s so rarely screened. Although widely available on DVD today, the original American release was marred by a lack of respect for the material. NAUSICAA received international distribution before Ghibli had made a name outside of Japan, and local producers didn’t hesitate to make massive cuts and add bad dubs to make the film “palatable” for their audiences. As a result, truly terrible versions of the film still exist out there (including an American hack job called WARRIORS OF THE WIND). Fans can finally see the original cut on 35mm and exactly as Miyazaki intended when NAUSICAA hits the screen on November 9.

Thanks to that highly public Oscar win, SPIRITED AWAY is perhaps Miyazaki’s most well-known film in America, but MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO is arguably his most popular. The third official Studio Ghibli release (and the second directed by Miyazaki), TOTORO is the story of two young girls who move to the country to be closer to their gravely-ill mother. Left largely to their own devices, the girls soon discover that the forest around them is teeming with fantastical creatures who become close companions just as the girls need them the most. Absolutely packed with Miyazaki’s trademark imagination, whimsy, and heart, TOTORO has become something of a signature film for Studio Ghibli, who adopted the film’s primary critter as their studio logo, and for fans who obsess over the film’s compelling fantasy elements (who doesn’t want to ride in a CatBus?) or create their own wild theories as to what it all means. (Don’t click here unless you’re ready for massive spoilers, possible lunacy). Bottom line, it’s hard to go wrong with any Studio Ghibli release, but if you’re only going to make it to one, MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO is a must-see.

The film series runs from November 9-15, and while movie fanatics and toon-heads will be arriving en masse, families looking for wholesome entertainment for their children have plenty to be excited about as well, especially parents of young girls. One of the trademarks of Miyazaki and all of Studio Ghibli is the presence of strong, complex, young female lead characters. In an American marketplace that mostly serves a particular princess archetype to girls, Ghibli is powerful counterprogramming. The sisters at the heart of TOTORO and the stoic leader of NAUSICAA are two great examples, but so are the brave heroes of SPIRITED AWAY, KIKI’S DELIVERY SERVICE (1989), and THE CAT RETURNS (2002). Children seeking action and adventure may take to the war and strong themes of PRINCESS MONONOKE (1997) and younger children will delight in the Ghibli’s PONYO (2008), a sweet-natured take on “The Little Mermaid” story. Just be aware that all films are presented in the original Japanese with English subtitles—many kids will enjoy reading along with the story, and those who can’t will have plenty of visual input to enjoy on the screen, and a lot of engaging questions to ask on the car ride home.

Overall, the Art Cinema’s film series is offering just about every film in Studio Ghibli’s catalog, including the little-seen MY NEIGHBORS THE YAMADAS (1989), a comedy from Takahata that diverges from the usual Studio Ghibli art style into something a bit more experimental. In fact, the only films that the Art Cinema isn’t screening are a few of the most recent Ghibli releases and the hefty post-war drama GRAVE OF THE FIREFLIES (1988), which is an extremely heavy film and is a bit more comfortable standing alone. Still, any established Ghibli fan or curious newcomer has plenty to choose from, and is highly unlikely to go home disappointed.

Andrew Kemp is a screenwriter and game writer who started talking about movies in 1984 and got stuck that way. He writes at www.thehollywoodprojects.com and hosts a bimonthly screening series of classic films at theaters around Atlanta.

Professor Morte puts a choke hold on Jonathan Williams. Photo courtesy of Wrestling with Pop Culture.

When our BFF blog Wrestling with Pop Culture (WPC) decided to throw a one-year anniversary party on Wed. March 28 at The Masquerade, ATLRetro couldn’t help but get excited because Jonathan Williams, the mad mastermind behind our second favorite Atlanta-based pop culture blog, is the absolute personifcation of one Kool Kat. Long before either of us took that leap of faith to pull the trigger on our own projects, we found ourselves hanging together at those media receptions, dinners and openings that us freelance writers call breakfast, lunch, dinner and happy hour – that fine line that   keeps us from being “starving” artists more often than we’d like to admit.

Now we’d support anything Jonathan & WPC did, but we’ve got to admit that he’s put together one helluva birthday party. One of the sweetest, glammest Kool Kats ever, Amber Taylor, is hosting! Death is a Dialogue and Needeep are rocking! Monstrosity Championship Wrestling hosted by our favorite Ghost Host with the Most, Professor Morte of the Silver Scream Spookshow! And it’s the official after-party of the Atlanta Film Festival‘s screening of Platinum Championship Wrestling documentary THE BOOKER! Luchador face and body-painting! Raffle! Chambers of Horror photo booth! Wrestling photographer Jay Taylor!

OK, we’d better shut up now and let Jonathan fill you in about WPC’s secret origins, more about the crazy party action and how it all came together, and what else he’s up to. All of which makes us think we need to get busy planning our own ATLRetro first birthday shindig – now that the bar has been set, stay tuned, kids…

Why did you decide to pull the trigger on Wrestling with Pop Culture?

I’ve been a freelance entertainment journalist for several years and have written for local publications like The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Creative Loafing, as well as national publications such as Gothic Beauty and Pro Wrestling Illustrated. But the most fun I ever has as a writer was when I was interning as a college student for Sideshow magazine. That was a free monthly that Jon Waterhouse did, and it covered all aspects of pop culture, from music and movies to pro wrestling and comic books. While I have had the opportunity to write about some cool stuff since Sideshow folded up its tent, I’ve never found another publication that covers the kookier side of pop culture the way that magazine did.

A couple of years ago, when the economy started to tank and freelance work became more and more scarce, I started thinking about starting my own publication. With online media taking over much of the readership that used to rely on print publications, I thought starting a website would be the cheapest and easiest way to go. I also knew that I wanted to focus on professional wrestling in a way that I had never seen any other publication do. It seems like most mainstream publications usually poke fun at wrestling, and traditional wrestling magazines focus solely on what happens in the wrestling world without exploring wrestling’s connections to other forms of entertainment.

From its earliest days as a carnival sideshow attraction through its territorial days, when wrestling made a name for itself across the country with regional TV shows, to the current WWE-dominated scene that allows wrestlers to cross over into the mainstream as action heroes, musicians and other forms of entertainment, pro wrestling has been embedded in Americana and pop culture for decades. Wrestling with Pop Culture covers all these aspects of wrestling, as well as other forms of entertainment that appeal to people who are as fascinated with luchadores and the pageantry of this form of performance art as they are with B horror movies, rock ‘n’ roll, comic books and other like-minded aspects of pop culture.

Jonathan Williams with Stephanie Anderson from Neon Armour Body Painting. Photo courtesy of Wrestling with Pop Culture.

Who else is involved with Wrestling with Pop Culture?

I’ve had a lot of help getting WPC off the ground. Tessa Horehled from DriveaFasterCar.com really helped me with all the technical aspects of getting a website running. KRK Ryden, the artist best known for his work with Devo, designed the black-and-white version of the logo, which I think illustrates the wacky world I envisioned perfectly. Amber Taylor, who will be the host of my show, has provided continued technical support. And I have a few guest writers, including “The Human Hand Grenade” dany only, who also co-hosts Georgia Wrestling Now, to do movie reviews and things like that. Other than that, a large majority of the interviews and reviews you see on WPC are done by me. I’m also working on a comic strip, which will hopefully debut in the next few months, that will further explore the world Ryden helped create with his image.

It sounds like this party is going to be pretty awesome. How did everything fall into place?

I initially wanted to do something last August that incorporated live wrestling and a few rock bands, and concluded with a viewing of a WWE pay-per-view. That never materialized for various reasons, but as the first anniversary of WPC approached I thought about how I could try to pull off something like that again. I first contacted some potential sponsors and, thankfully, found some good ones early on. Pabst Blue Ribbon has been very supportive; then media outlets Creative Loafing and Scoutmob got involved. Things really started falling into place just a few weeks ago as the Atlanta Film Festival announced its screening of the Platinum Championship Wrestling documentary THE BOOKER on March 28. Since the Masquerade is right down the street from the Midtown Art Cinema, and since PCW runs shows there every month or so, I thought it would be a great venue for an event with wrestling and bands.

Can you tell us more about the bands and wrestling activities?

Death is a Dialogue and Needeep, [two] great bands who are also great at getting their names out there, both agreed to do the show. Although I wanted to take advantage of PCW’s fans being in the area that night, I actually wanted to do something a little different with the wrestling portion of the show. Last October, the Atlanta Zombie Apocalypse set up a wrestling ring in its parking lot to provide entertainment for the people waiting in the long lines to get in. I didn’t get to see either of those shows, but I heard from some of the PCW wrestlers that were involved that the promotion was Monstrosity Championship Wrestling and there were matches that included actual monsters, as well as a match that pitted a Bible-thumping Jesus freak against Satan himself. It turns out Prof. Morte from the Silver Scream SpookShow is somehow involved in this promotion, so I contacted him, and he agreed to do some monster wrestling matches at my event.

Also, Amber Taylor, whose band the Sexual Side Effects is playing another Atlanta Film Festival event at the Goat Farm the following night, where their new video will be premiering, also wanted to be part of the action. So since she’s sort of walking freak show unto herself, I decided to let her be the host of the whole thing. With additional sponsors like Criminal Records, Adrenaline Fitness and Ox’s Wrestling Ring Rentals, I feel like the event covers Atlanta’s pop culture scene in much the same way the website covers various aspects of pop culture. The Atlanta Film Festival has also made this event one of its official after-parties and PCW recently put out a challenge to MCW, so things just get more and more interesting by the day. And the Academy Theatre, where PCW has its matches every Friday night, is selling tickets for only $5 through this Friday. Otherwise, tickets are $8 in advance, $10 at the door or free for AFF pass holders.

And did we hear right that there’s face and body painting, artists, a raffle, something to do with those crazy maniacs from Chambers of Horror?

Other festivities include luchadore-inspired face and body painting from Neon Armour, raffle prizes from Adrenaline Fitness; Chocolate F/X; monster artist Dave Cook; Monster Joe Coffee, who also made the WPC T-shirts; and lots of other new stuff coming in each day. Chambers of Horror is also going to have a photo booth there, and local wrestling photographer Jay Taylor will be snapping pics.

Jonathan Williams of Wrestling with Pop Culture. Photo credit: Neda Abghari.

While Wrestling with Pop Culture is your big baby, what other writing projects are you up to right now?

In addition to keeping WPC from tapping out, I am also the Editor-in-Chief for The Creative Process, which is part of The Creatives Project. I still write a monthly art column for Stomp and Stammer called Sheer Art Attack, and I have weekly music contributions to Creative Loafing. I occasionally contribute to PWI and Drive a Faster Car, and I’m also working on some articles for the Miami New Times about all the WrestleMania festivities that will be taking place down there next week.