« Prostitutes who know how to sail | Main | Wellman's women »

March 16, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Noel Murray

I just re-read your previous anti-Swanberg screed and noted that you barely mentioned NIGHTS & WEEKENDS, which to me is where Swanberg made his lead forward. I was in the "can't tell if he's promising or hopelessly slack" camp until N&W, and then I thought he began to show a necessary focus. Haven't seen ALEXANDER yet -- looking forward to it -- but if you revisited N&W (a prospect I'm sure you'd find unappetizing), you might find more of that polish than you remember.


Actors. God love 'em...


Happy to see you are at least willing to at least examine swanbergs new work and high light his strengths. Disappointed in a lot of the petty ramblings of the previous anti-swanberg stuff but anticipate that you feel the same way.
I think it's important to give every artist the freedom to work, and the blogger world is quick to add negative wit and rhetoric, that can be particularly harmful for a subjective audience interested in film.
I mean to say, that it's important for film bloggers like you to support the art of film in general, whether or not a specific film is suitable by ones standards to be held in high regard or not. I think its really generous, considering your previous, forementioned anti-swanberg ramblings, that you took the time to see his film and to talk about it humbly, modestly and with recognition of its strengths.

Glenn Kenny

Noel, the reason I didn't discuss "Nights and Weekends" more is because I was afraid if I let myself go on about it, I would both make myself physically ill, and open myself up to a lawsuit. I don't think the leap is there, frankly. Formally the film is tidier than "Hannah," true, but that's largely because its focus is, let's say, more monochromatic. You know what I mean?

It is interesting to note that in a new interview at Spout,


...Swanberg acknowledges that "Alexander" itself, and its dedication to his wife, constitute a sort of "apology" for "Nights and Weekends." Smart move, slick! Still, it doesn't bode well for your New Year's Resolution bemoaning the fact that you can't make your movies "wilder." But that's life, right?


Watching ALEXANDER tonight, I wish I could agree.

To me, it was his weakest film (although I haven't seen NIGHTS AND WEEKENDS yet). I found the characters to be some of the least interesting in any of his work.

Five minutes in, the film had lost me. Ten minutes in, after that obnoxious and annoying baby imitation scene, I actually got out my portable DVD player and put on the blogger roundtable extra from SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK. That was far more interesting than anything onscreen.

Richard  Porton

Or perhaps the title alludes to Boorman's "Leo the Last" and the recitation of "The Bells" invokes Phil Ochs' song appropriating Poe's poem. After seeing "Alexander", I'm not sure if it really matters. Despite a skein of allusions, the film is a true snore.


For what it's worth, I've finally plunged into the mumblecore scene. My thoughts and ruminations, tangentially on LOL, more broadly on the implications of the movement, are here:


Prada Sunglasses

Thanks for such a detailed review. You've very keen observation for the details that should be there, indeed.

Website Editor

thanks for such a detailed review.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Tip Jar

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad