Arthouse Mafia


"Money won is twice as sweet as money earned."

Recently watched L'Eclisse, how would the art house gods evaluate it?

Nobody can quite capture a landscape like my dude Antonioni. Nobody.


The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
One of the most funny, random and delightful art movies I've seen! Thanks for highlightning this to me @Mr Minio, enjoyed every second of it!


The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
Arthouse brothers, how would you interpret Tarkovsky's Nostalghia?

I look at it as an allegory to the Noah's Ark story. It's hard not to see fire and water as symbolism, even if Tarkovsky hates that he uses symbols for things...

I was just reading a Tarkovsky article from when he won at Cannes for Nostalgia and talked about Bresson's L'Argent which also won the same prize. Bresson didn't look too appreciative of Tarkovsky also being awarded, but personally I liked Nostalgia way more. Tarkovsky was in the highest praise of Bresson, but I've yet to read anything from Bresson on Tarkovsky.

I didn't try to read too much into Nostalgia, but I found it a wonderful visual spectacle. I also enjoyed the narrative being driven by a single character more than his other films. Films like Stalker and Solaris feel so deeply psycological that it's a kind of supernatural experience. To me his films often feel surreal, but Nostalgia felt more grounded in the real world. I think the reason for that is the narrative focus.

As for the visual spectacle Nostalgia to me felt like a Carnival. The cinematography and visual aesthetic from the sets, props, costumes, and the poetic and intillectual discourse between characters.

Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
Can't really tell you anything about Nostalghia as I watched it only once and it was in 2011 (by the way I'm planning to rewatch all Tarr, Tarkovsky and Angelopoulos - my favourite directors trio - movies in a couple of years, preferably ten years from 2011, celebrating my 10th anniversary of being a movie buff, that would be in 2021), but concerning this part of your post:
but I've yet to read anything from Bresson on Tarkovsky
there is a record of Caveh Zahedi's talk with Bresson, a part of which answers your question:

When I asked him what other filmmakers he liked, he replied that he hated all of contemporary cinema. I was taken aback. He hated everyone? He said yes, but added that he hadn’t seen a film in 20 years. When I expressed incredulity, he admitted that he had in fact seen two films in the last 20 years, films that he had been dragged to by friends who insisted that he had to see the work of this particular director. “Which director?” I asked. He couldn’t remember the director’s name, but he described (with great aversion) both films to me. “You mean Rear Window?” I said. “Rear Window by Alfred Hitchcock? And Rope?” “That’s his name, Hitchcock!” Bresson exclaimed. I was stunned. “You didn’t like Rear Window?” I asked. “I hated it,” he replied. “Everything in it was fake. Nothing was real.” “But it’s an allegory,” I retorted. “Exactly!” he answered triumphantly. “It’s an allegory. I hate allegories.”
So, yes, you will not find any opinion of Bresson on Tarkovsky, because it most probably doesn't exist and Bresson has not seen any Tarkovsky film. Unless since 1980 he watched a couple of them, of course. And most probably hated them.

Talk Bresson, i think his approached was always self centric. I can understand if he not so interested with other auteur works
Bresson was extremely ignorant of cinema. Everything that did not fit his narrow definition of it was automatically pronounced trash. But Tarkovsky, apart from a couple of masters he always championed (Bergman, Bresson, Mizoguchi, Kurosawa, Fellini, Renoir, Parajanov, Iosseliani, Vigo, Rossellini), was extremely critical of many, many films as well. Just read some of his opinions on other movies:

Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Waterloo)
Today I saw Bondarchuk's Waterloo. Poor old Seryozha! It's embarrassing.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on La Luna)
Saw Bertolucci's La luna. Monstrous, cheap, vulgar rubbish.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Red Desert)
The Red Desert is the worst of his films after The Cry [II Grido]. The colour is pretentious, quite unlike Antonioni usually, and the editing is subservient to the idea of colour. It could have been a superb film, tremendously powerful, if only it had been in black-and-white. If The Red Desert had been in black-and-white, Antonioni wouldn't have got high on pictorial aesthetics, he wouldn't have been so concerned with the pictorial side of the film, he wouldn't have shot those beautiful landscapes, or Monica Vitti's red hair against the mists. He would have been concentrating on the action instead of making pretty pictures. In my view the colour has killed the feeling of truth. If you compare The Red Desert with The Night [La Notte] or The Eclipse[L'Eclisse] it's obvious how much less good it is.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Possession)
Saw an unspeakably revolting film called Possession. An American mixture of horror film, satanism, violence, thriller and anything else you like to name. Monstrous. Money, money, money. . . Nothing real, nothing true. No beauty, no truth, no sincerity, nothing. All that matters is to make a profit. . . It's impossible to watch . .. Anything is possible, anything is allowed, provided that 'anything' can be sold.
Last night I had nightmares. I was so frightened I woke up.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Late Autumn)
We watched Ozu's Autumn on television. I don't remember precisely what autumn. Dreadfully boring; rather like a Mendeleyev table.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Hungarian Rhapsody)
Lara and Arayk and I went to the House of Cinema and saw one and a half films by Jancso: Hungarian Rhapsody and Allegro Barbaro. We didn't stay to the end. Monstrous rubbish. Tasteless, pretentious, and portentious; inferior and vulgar. He is some kind of crazed pupil of Paradzhanov, without any kind of talent.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Zombi 2)
Went to the cinema with Franco this evening. We saw Zombie II—science fiction horror film. Ghastly; repulsive trash.
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky (on Tristana)
It's unbelievably vulgar. Just occasionally Bunuel allows himself lapses like that.
These quotes are from "Time Within Time: Diaries 1970-1986", by the way.

Kind of cool to know that Tarkovsky watched Fulci's Zombi 2!!! And that Possession gave Tarkovsky nightmares. It kind of succeeded as a horror film then, right? Anyway, there lays a proof that a great filmmaker can be an ignorant and a terrible cinephile.

Also, yet another quote with Tarkovsky whining about 'money, money, money':

In the evening I watched Cocteau's The Return of Orpheus (on television).
Where have all the great ones gone?
Where are Rossellini, Gocteau, Renoir, Vigo ? The great — who are poor in spirit? Where has poetry gone? Money, money, money and fear. . . Fellini is afraid, Antonioni is afraid . . . The only one who is afraid of nothing is Bresson.

revive the movie of the month
A request worth considering. Maybe in 2018? Would be nice to read some deep insights from a variety of members. Everybody would be eligible to join, not just Arthouse Mafia members. A movie a month would make 12 a year, and then a little summary, and every member ranks the films from best to worst. The downside is that if arthouse flicks are chosen, preferably obscure ones, not too many people would participate.

Well I just came to a sort of realization that I am procrastinating way 2 hard and getting no new film knowledge. Im still a super nooby so I have seen next to nothing so I would love to revive this and get to many films on my watchlist . this is a great little source of directors praising and talking trash to one another

now that's a bing.... bingo for bresson lol xD. i'd read and seen part of his interview and excerpt of his book. simply the guy seems stand with his own principle and ideal. i never realized it was that extreme for years none get any cinema lol, so full of himself

tarkovsky in other way really adore his hero. the asceticism aspect of bresson was something that he keep blabbering about but yeah he nailed it.
"A movie is called upon to provoke a spiritual jolt and not to cultivate idolaters"

i think i'd read somewhere that tarkovsky "stunned" after he watch one of stan brakhage probably in new york. sound like joke but if that kind of avant garde i can see it too blyat for him xD

Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
i think i'd read somewhere that tarkovsky "stunned" after he watch one of stan brakhage probably in new york. sound like joke but if that kind of avant garde i can see it too blyat for him xD
Brakhage was a big fan of Tarkovsky's movies and screened some of his own films for him. Tarkovsky, as expected, hated them all.

Brakhage was a big fan of Tarkovsky's movies and screened some of his own films for him. Tarkovsky, as expected, hated them all.
but i come to believe that stan will definitely happy with that fact xD this is a great little source of directors praising and talking trash to one another
The problem I get when I read those bull sessions are that every director seems to be labeling and defining each other, and that's not how it works in reality or in dream/art. There are no uniform boundaries like that. Also, for all the talk of one guy being bored by the next guy, I found it almost impossible to wade through all of the boring shlt they were talking about. Hot air, most of it.

Just create and don;t worry about the next guy too much, is the thing.