100 Grand: How now, brown cow?

This blog has recently hit 100,000 pageviews. Woo-hoo! I am extremely proud, since a number that large must include a lot people genuinely interested in my writings and not just googling some images. I've done exactly the kind of blog I would like to read and on my very own terms.  And sometimes, like with the recent Best Finnish Films of All Time post, I've reeived some excellent feedback. I think the blog has developed quite nicely through the years, from insignificant ramblings to some genuine analysis. But I've also been thinking a lot on how to work on it from here on.

The thing is, writing this blog takes a lot. Articles take time. from conception and viewing the films, to writing, to browsing for images, to advertizing in social media. I'm also willing to admit that sometimes the writing has been sub-par whether due to a rush to get something published or for the reason I've been planning a certain article for too long and start to forget the core ideas behind the films the text deals with. I don't write any notes down upon seeing a movie, so my thoughts surrounding a given film always rely solely on my memory.

"Top Gun? Well, if my memory serves me correct, it's a good, totally heterosexual movie."

My most major failing on the blog is the fail to create a forum for discussion, since I don't really receive any comments on the site. This is a major drag, since that does't help me develop my writing nor give me any new viewpoints or ideas. Often times it feels like I'm shouting at empty walls here. Contrast this with the freelance writing I do for the Finnish site Elitisti, where each and every article is carefully read and reread before publishing. And they recieve some comments afterwards, too. That has made me aware of several of my major flaws as a writer and in turn, I feel like I've written some of the best film reviews I've done for that site. It's a fruitful collaboration, with which I've been planning to emphasize more in the future. It also feels nice to write in Finnish for a change.

But then we come to how to develop this site. It appear to me as there are two options: go big or go small. To go big, I would need to start Facebook pages, seperate Twitter accounts, buy a domain, move this thing to be Wordpress-based, and so on. On the other hand, to downsize it there's the chance that starting to invest more on other things lets the quality of this blog slide.

I don't want to completely give up on the blog. I want to come back after years and check out on what I thought of some festival films I saw on any given year. I still have a huge number of ideas for the future. So what I've decided to do is to not pander to the pageviews and downgrade the blog somewhat to resemble a little more of what I started with. I'm going to do more of a film diary type of a blog that gathers some stray thoughts and ideas I've had while watching movies. I will still attempt to do the occasional article and review, but also do more of these editorial-type writings that usually get quite a high number of views (whether because of the images I use or my text is irrelevant).

But since I still have quite a lot on the pipeline for this year, these changes will affect the blog only from the beginning of 2013. The rest of the year will be business as usual. I am also willing to listen to readers' opinions on the matter and what type of blog writings you would like to read, so by all means give me a comment about the matter.

It's a-niiiice! See? Like in the movie! The movie with Borat!

Ugh, I have spoken. Now, I'll give you the top 10 of my most visited articles.

1. Easter Special - Killer Bunnies
2. Les extraterrestres extraordinaire, or: the best aliens
3. WENG WENG!
4. A Tale of Three Americas (Captain Americas, that is)
5. A Tale of Three Punishers
6. It's 2012, Where is Death Racing?
7. Pixar's sequels
8. Sequels to Prometheus
9. War Pigs 
10. The Directors: Sergio Leone

And the top 10 of search keywords leading to the site:

1. watership down
2. aliens
3. captain america shield
4. weng weng
5. michael bay
6. alien 1979
7. punisher skull
8. eddie murphy
9. death race
10. sergio leone

So, thanks to loyal readers for sticking with me, and I hope to see you here in the future. As more than mere numbers. Don't be a stranger!

Best Finnish Films of All Time

The Finnish national broadcasting service YLE recently asked a number of film journalists and bloggers to pick their favorite Finnish films - including yours truly. The results came back today. According to the professionals, the best Finnish film of all time is the 1960 crime/mystery Komisario Palmun erehdys ("Inspector Palmu is mistaken"). The whole list as following (the link takes to each film's IMDb page:

1. Komisario Palmun erehdys (1960, Director: Matti Kassila)
2. Drifting Clouds (Kauas pilvet karkaavat, 1996. D: Aki Kaurismäki)
3. The White Reindeer (Valkoinen peura, 1952. D: Erik Blomberg)
4. The Unknown Soldier (Tuntematon sotilas, 1955. D: Edvin Laine)
5. Eight Deadly Shots (Kahdeksan surmanluotia, 1972. D: MIkko Niskanen)
6. The Man Without a Past (Mies vailla menneisyyttä, 2002. D: Aki Kaurismäki); Frozen Land (Paha maa, 2005. D: Aki Louhimies)
7. The Year of the Hare (Jäniksen vuosi, 1977. D: Risto Jarva)
8. Sensuela (1973, D: Teuvo Tulio)
9. Calamari Union (1985, D: Aki Kaurismäki); The Earth is a Sinful Song (Maa on syntinen laulu, 1973. D: Rauni Mollberg); The Unknown Soldier (Tuntematon sotilas, remake, 1985, D: Rauni Mollberg)

Inspector Palmu inspecting a suspect.

Now, as it is when national heritage is concerned, this list woke some heated discussions. Commenters attacked the "elitist" critics choices, even though reader polls have raised more or less the same films to the top, excluding several popular comedies. Among the critics themselves, the most controversial has been the position of Sensuela in the 9th place. Personally, it's my favorite Finnish film ever made and I'd rather watch that again than just about any of the other fims mentioned in this post. Yet I can't with good conscience compare its unintentional humour, misguided nostalgia and fashion choices or camp humor with some films that are actually well-made. It is an unforgettable film experience all the same, so every critic has had every bit the right to vote for it.

Personally, I think all of the films listed are good, or even great. To truly know Finnish cinema, one should watch each and every one of them (although there's two I've missed, myself. I won't tell you, which). Yet if one would want to list the truly best films Finland has ever made, I personally prefer to pick leftfield choices, films that dared to break norms and did not reach for the wide audience acceptance. Thus Mollberg's version of the Unknown soldier is the only one I picked myself. Here's my list, as well as a few words on why I made each pick. The list is in chronological order.

1. Käpy selän alla (1966, D: Mikko Niskanen)

One of the very few new wave films made in that time period. But Niskanen's film isn't tedious or pretentious, it showcases a group of young people out camping in the wild, who run into relationship problems with each other. It is ponderous and silly at the same time, sexy and awkward, beautifully shot, perfectly acted and very smartly realized. The basic ideas behind the film are grim as the grave:
"If being young is this difficult, however can we survive growing old".

2. Naisenkuvia (1970, D: Jörn Donner)

I wrote about this in the last Finnish cult movies post. Back then I wrote:

"(Jörn Donner) is willing to parody himself, his inflated ego and obsession to beautiful women and sex. Naisenkuvia is not only a razor-sharp, ponderous film, and a good time machine to the turn of the swinging 60's and 70's, but it's also hilarious as all hell."

And:
"The film is a challenge against censorship, for the free expression of everyone, however they might want to express themselves."

3. Crime and Punishment (Rikos ja rangaistus, 1983. D: Aki Kaurismäki)

The obligatory Kaurismäki. There are several of his films I could've picked, but I have a soft spot for this Dostoyevsky adaptation, that transforms the story to then-modern day Helsinki. And it's the best way my home town has been pictured on film before or since. The homely camera shots just lick up the streets and transform the quiet city into a character of its own, not judging, not commenting, just watching our main protagonist.

It is also the first feature-length fictional movie Kaurismäki made, so it's benefits also include allowing the auteur to develop his trademark laconic style, which is used to full effect here. You don't need melodrama, overacting or loads of dialogue to tell a story. Stone-faced, half-silent Finns allow you to adapt the story in your head, just like in a great novel.

4. The Unknown Soldier (Tuntematon sotilas, 1985. D: Rauni Mollberg)

The original 1955 Independence Day classic is too nationalistic for my tastes, and does little more than adapt Väinö Linna's book as it is written. It's not a bad film by any means, but over-emphasized in these sort of lists.

For a truly harrowing experience, Mollberg's remake, a more realistic vision of WWII raging in the Finnish forests, packs a lot more power. Mollberg brilliantly directs a cast of mostly amateurs, teenagers who perfectly encapsulate the futility of war, wasting away a generation before their prime. The book's name also finally gets its due by the horrific final image of dead bodies being loaded into a carriage.  

5. Back to the USSR (Takaisin ryssiin 1992, O: Jari Halonen)

We Finns have had a disturbing history living next to the Soviet Union, and it's politics have influenced us more than we care to admit. It's fall in particular took us off balance. A truly provocative satire by master teaser Halonen perfectly encapsulates the difficulty for any attempt towards Socialism in an agricultural capitalist country. Back in April 2011 I wrote:

"The anarchistic fim has been made with a pittance, but with so much imagination and inventiveness that it turns its downsides to its benefits. Thus the main village is built with shoddy houses that can fall apart in the middle of shenanigans. There's mud and filth everywhere and the society where everyone is bourgeoise can't be seen as any sort of ideal anyway. But communism is hardly a remedy."

Of course, being who I am, those five films weren't enough for me. So I also wrote out five bubbling underers. These were The Diary of A Worker (1967),  The Wedding Waltz (1988), Feast by the Sea (1963), It is written in the stars, Inspector Palmu (1962) and Sensuela, of course.

The list only took fictional films, which torpedoed some of the utmost worthy candidates chances to be crowned the Best Finnish Fim of All Time. I picked five noteworthy documentaries for Twitter. These were Yksinteoin, Reindeerspotting: Escape From Santa Land, Perkele! Images From Finland, The 3 Rooms of Melancholia, and Kovasikajuttu.

Only in recent years have I begun to appreciate the Finnish film legacy more. Our movie history is by no means as impressive as with the Danes or the Swedes, but there certainly is a lot of interesting stuff out there. I find it troublesome that so little of it circulates our TV screenings often, but luckily there are a few festivals and screenings at the National Film Archives that remedy the situation. Rest assured, this listing has taught me a lot of interesting new Finnish films to chack out and I intend to do so by Independence day (December 6th) with another installment of Finnish Cult Movies. Now, I'm off to watch Numbskull Emptybrook.

Yle's news about the matter (in finnish)

A Tribute to the Classic Universal Monsters

A recent (like, a year ago, tops) discussion with some fellow film fans revealed that not everyone thinks that the classic monster films of Universal in the 1930's and 40's are as cracking as I do. Sure, those films are iconic in their imagery and widely recognized as essential building blocks of horror as a genre. But their sometimes slow-moving pace and theatrical acting don't appeal to everybody.

Since we celebrate the studio's 100th anniversary this year and Halloween's a-coming, I'll take a chance to say a few words about why I dig these movies. True, it's mostly due to several brilliant directors such as James Whale and Tod Browning, but there's just something about Universal's horror movies in general which appeals to me.

Bela Lugosi's Dracula is a perfect mix of fascinating sexuality and the underlying threat of that.

True, the films are somewhat old-fashioned. But in that lies also their greatest strength. For the basic thing about Universal's monsters are that they are films about being different and out-of-place. It is easier to sympathize with the monsters, often expressing some pretty human desires and goals, than with their narrow-minded, old-fashioned conservative mindsets. When the crime of being true to oneself and just wanting some love gets the monster destroyed in the end, it's not too far-fetched to see some of these stories as much like Greek tragedies.

A gifted hero grows too ambitious, goes mad and to his downfall, like Claude Rains's Invisible Man.

Of course this was also at the point where movies serialized and every subsequent effort either undid the emotional punch of the first ones, or went to really weird and unexpected places, such as the Frankenstein sequels. But I'd rather take brain-switching antics and Ygor over House of Frankenstein-style ill-advised anthologies.

As mentioned, the sexuality of the monsters is also a strong underlying theme. One of the reasons so many sequels were so boring was that censorship, too much political correctness and understanding made them wishy-washy. The real classics pushed the limit as much as was available to hint during those chastise days. The Bride of Frankenstein even has a fair amount of hinting at the society's handling of homosexuals, which is a radical idea for the time. And it did it with much more grace than any X-Men movie, trying out similar metaphors.

Dr. Pretorius is as camp as they come.

As a child, of course the major draw to these movies was the iconic look of these monsters, replicated, redone and slapped into memorabilia since time immortal. It's hard to imagine Frankenstein's monster that doesn't look like Karloff nowadays (Everyone picks him over Robert DeNiro for a good reason). This look was created by a string of very talented artists (in the case of Frankenstein, make up artist and stunt man Jack Pierce. How's that combo for a balance of the masculine and the feminine?). As a contrast, nobody remembers what the zombies looked on the contemporary, also smart horror film I Walked With A Zombie, for instance.

This bolt-neck however is one of the most iconic characters in the world. Up there with Mickey Mouse and Angry Birds.

If I went into the films to see iconic characters, I stayed for the gothic athmosphere. Lonely castles on hilltops, misty moors, gypsy caravans, mad doctor's lairs. These things basically created your basic horror imagery from scratch, and even though they are clearly studio sets, this creates a sense that something is afoul and a bit wrong in the worlds of these films. a it should. Sadly, the budget for the sets and props also diminished with time and a lot of stuff was recycled from one movie to another. As you may guess, the films that created new things were the ones that stuck to my mind.

Universal's films are frank and theatrical, focusing on the main attraction and building everything around it. Plot-wise, the films adapted some very famous horror novels but cut a lot of corners in their storytelling. While it's sad that a proper adaptation of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein still lets fans await for itself, Universal's loose version is a true corker, and a true classic to boot. At it's core the Universal movies are easy morality stories, with a good, a bad and an ugly character duking it out. Often there are curses, magic or other supernatural forces that prevent or limit the lives of the characters.

Karloff's Mummy only appears like this for one scene. But the horrible magic that brought him back to life is apparent in every scene.

But the ideas are certainly not hard to gasp by even the youngest viewers. Since the scariness of the stories has long since vanished, they even work as a sort of gateway drug to horror enthusiasm, as dozens of gifted filmmakers born since the 1930's can testify. Come for the cuddly creatures, stay for the gothic worlds.

While the main plot was simple, the subtext was heavy and the visions strong. The high-quality workers on the job of these movies gave life to films by even lower-quality directors, such as the original Wolf Man or The Mummy. Sets, lights, make up, costumes, the right mood and character actors salvage a lot. For major studio films, Universal's horror pictures still feel artistic in their dream-like visions told.

Karloff's Frankenstein with some much appreciated me-time.

In the end, Universal cranked out the films maybe a tad too many (one idea can only last so long) and usually the more sequels got made, the worse they got. But the studio did show to be creative with their large back catalogue of iconic characters until at least the turn of the millennium. Say what you will about Hollow Man, but having Paul Verhoeven remake The Invisible Man as an erotic thriller was a ballsy move from the studio. It's sad to see they've lost their touch, churning dreck like Van Helsing and the new Wolf Man nowadays. But still, the old monster movies of Universal should be watched and appreciated by film fans still today.

Oscars 2012

The height of the Awards season is almost upon us, but I'm not really excited about the Oscars this year. While 2011 was a lot better as a movie year than 2010 was, the nominees this year hardly represent the finest cinema had to offer. In fact, I've only seen 5 of the 9 Best Picture nominees, because no matter how hard I try, I can't work up any interest to go see The Help, nor can I be bothered to get up at the crack of noon to go see War Horse at a press screening. And the gala doesn't do much favors by getting old reliable Billy Crystal to host. He used to be great, but I'd want to see something completely different by now. It's not the 90's any more (I'll say!). One should remember that Crystal's 2004 hosting gig wasn't among his finest, either. And the less said about the ceremonies in the last two years, the better (They were boring and awful!). So I'm probably thinking of missing out on the festivities this year. There doesn't seem to be anything on offer now that would be worth it for this European liberal to lose his precious beauty sleep.

But, y'know, talking about Oscars brings page hits (and maybe, just maybe, precious comments), so I guess I can do a small rundown on some of Oscar favorites I have seen, and take a guess on which films will win. I'm not going to put the nominees down, as I am sure that most movie-loving people have already checked them out. As a reminder, they can be seen here. My system is based on smileys.

Signals a film or a person that I think is going to win.

 Signals something I'd thing would be cool to see win, even if unrealistic.

Signals something good the Academy voters promptly ignored when making their ridiculous Oscar picks.

Best Non-English Language Film:
A Separation: Nader & Simin is a shoe-in to win. And would definately be one of the best films to win an award on sunday as well.
Bullhead is criminally underseen, but tough as nails. This would give it a boost and probably make a lot of countries to have a premiere for it.
The Kid With A Bike, Tropa de Elite 2, She Monkeys, Play, Le Havre, The Skin I Live In and a billion others...

Animated Feature Film:
Rango; For the first time in the history of this award, I haven't seen a single one of the films nominated for this award. The smart money seems to be on Gore Verbinski's Rango, which has some of the most unappealing character models I've ever seen. But still should watch it.
A Cat in Paris; It would be cool if some of these European animations would win, though. I'm waiting eagerly to see A Cat in Paris. One of the several Paris-loving films this year.
Adventures of Tintin: the Secret of the Unicorn; It's weird that the Golden Globe-winning Tintin isn't even nominated. The Academy seems to hate motion capture work by principle. Nice going, Andy Serkis-fans. The campaign to get him a supporting actor nom only worked counterwise. But even stranger omission is the wonderful, leisurely and detail-rich Studio Ghibli's Arrietty. Is it even out in the US yet?

Documentary Feature Film:
Pina; I'm guessing that because this is a work by a recognized maestro and about a recognized maestro in a recognized high-brow art, that it will take the gong. Plus, the Academy do like 3D movies now and then.
The Cave of Forgotten Dreams. Also Senna seems to be quite a popular one, too, but I've still to see it.

Best Supporting Actress:
Bérénice Bejo – The Artist; Cute enough to melt the Academy's hearts and to throw in the top of the pile of The Artist's massive sweep.
Melissa McCarthy – Bridesmaids; Would take a big dump on both the sinks of the Conservative portrayal of women in Hollywood movies, and the Oscars as an institution too.
Leila Hatami, A Separation. Let's face it, Simin has quite a little screen time in the film. But that doesn't mean that she doesn't leave an unforgettable impression.

Best Supporting Actor:
Christopher Plummer – Beginners; Haven't seen the film, but it seems a legendary actor is on top of all the voters' picks.
Albert Brooks – Drive

Writing (Adapted):
Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, Jim Rash, The Descendants; The Descendants will be one of the bigger losers of the race, so I think it would be fine to see it have at least a writing award for its trouble. It's the second-best written film nominated.
Bridget O'Connor, Peter Straughan, Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy. It is stunning work, even though it's hard to keep up. Every single scene and even the most insignificant-seeming things turn out to be hugely important. I'm reading the book the film is based on now.
Hossein Amini, Drive; Yasmine Reza, Michael Katims, Roman Polanski, Carnage

Writing (Original): 
Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist

Asghar Farhadi, A Separation

John Michael McDonagh, The Guard

Best Actress:
Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs; Everyone will be putting their money on Meryl Streep for her portrayal of The Great Satan (in a film which I absolutely refuse to watch). That probably should go down well with a Conservative Academy. However, since Streep already has plenty of awards, and Oscars are a place of redeeming past missteps, I think I'll run against the stream. The awards should have a moment of true surprise, and it could be when it's given to the six-time nominee, five-time loser Glenn Close. It's hard to say whether she actually plays her role better, but at least her character actually has a penis and doesn't just act as if she has one. Which is something the Academy voters like.
Rooney Mara, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. No chance in hell, but still would be nice to see.


Kirsten Dunst, Melancholia. She is really robbed. Just because her film's director used the wrong word. Also Jodie Foster and Kate Winslet from Carnage, altough it's impossible to tell which one is the lead.

Best Actor:
Gary Oldman, Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy; One of the only awards I have even the faintest shred of care. It's because I have a huge man-crush for Gary Oldman, one of the very greatest actors living today. Like all real artists, Oldman himself doesn't care that much whether he wins or not. But it still should be the time to honor the great man, and with his knockout underkey performance in Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy, it's as good a time as any. Though George Clooney is pretty damn good in The Descendants as well.
Brendan Gleeson, The Guard; Brad Pitt, The Tree of Life; Ryan Gosling, Drive; Christoph Waltz, Carnage

Best Director:
Michael Hazanavicius, The Artist; I've ran out of things to say. trust me on this.


Alexander Payne, The Descendants 

Nicolas Winding Refn, Drive; Thomas Alfredson, Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy; Lars von Trier, Melancholia; Paddy Considine, Tyrannosaur, Asghar Fargadi, A Separation, Roman Polanski, Carnage

Best Film:
The Artist; If Brett Easton Ellis says so, it must be true. It's heartfelt, old-school and manipulative enough that the Academy will lap it up. But it's no matter. A lot worse films have won in the past.

It would be about equally cool to see Hugo, The Descendants or The Tree of Life win, too. But it's really no matter as it's far from a fair competeition. A lot of the year's very best were omitted from the final list. Just as long as films that are probably sheer calculated award-dreck such as The Help or War Horse doesn't win, I'll be somewhat indifferent.
Drive, Tyrannosaur, Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy, Melancholia, Carnage

So I'd love to hear what you think will win and what was outrageously left out. Just put those angry comments in this comment section or send me feedback. But what do I actually think about those nominated films, actually, you ask? Well, no fear! I'll do another post, less bitter and cynical, I hope, tomorrow.