New Year's Resolutions

[osprey_archer]

Happy New Year! (Hopefully it will be a happier year all round than 2017!) The sun is glimmering on the snow outside my window, absolutely beautiful - as long as you don't go out in it; it's -5 degrees right now, which is more than cold enough to kill all aesthetic appreciation.

Nonetheless I am planning to sally forth soon to see Lady Bird, and thus kickstart my New Year's Resolution: watch a movie by a female director every month. Please join me in this quest! I am hoping to recruit others to the cause, possibly even to the point of watching the same movie(s) for at least a few months, because it will give us someone to discuss the movies with and possibly even create a few tiny fandoms + ficlets.

A few movies on my list of possibles!

Jenny's Wedding, directed by Mary Agnes Donoghue, which is supposed to be a good movie about lesbians and also is on Netflix instant, which might make it easier for people to watch.

Girlhood, directed by Celine Sciamma. Also on Netflix Instant! A French movie about a teenage black girl in Paris and her friends and... that's all that I know about it. It looks like it might be fun and/or possibly harrowing?

The Breadwinner, directed by Nora Twomey, which was released in November 2017 but may not have even come to theaters in the US yet? BUT it is by the same production company that gave us Song of the Sea so I'm pretty excited for it and keep checking the listings hopefully.

Novitiate, directed by Maggie Betts, which I wanted to see in theaters SO BADLY and then it was there for like THREE DAYS so I ended up missing it, STILL SO MAD. This one is about nuns and I realize that not everyone wants to watch movies about nuns as much as I do, so I may not try to rope everyone else into this one. Also not sure that Netflix will be getting the DVD in any case.

A Wrinkle in Time, directed by Ava DuVernay. I thought that the father character was waaaay too prominent in the early trailers, but the more recent ones have cut back on him and brought Meg to center stage, AS SHE SHOULD BE, which has made me more optimistic. Also, Mindy Kaling is in this one! Coming out in March, in wide release.

Dance, Girl, Dance, directed by Dorothy Arzner, all the way back in 1940, and I cannot be the only person who is curious to see work by a 1940s woman film director. IIRC she was, for a while, the only female Hollywood film director, until Ida Lupino started directing in the late 40s; I'd like to see some of her work too. I watched her The Trouble with Angels a while ago (another film with NUNS), and it was a lot of fun.

Austenland, directed by Jerusha Hess. I really liked the Sharon Hale book that this movie is based on, but I've waffled about watching the movie because I've heard mixed reviews... but this is clearly the year to watch it! I hope it proves delightful.

My Brilliant Career, directed by Gillian Armstrong. A movie about a nineteenth century woman painter! I love women painters just as much as NUNS.

Also possibly some films by Sofia Coppola? I loved The Beguiled and I've seen Marie Antoinette (I'm still not sure how I feel about Marie Antoinette but it was definitely an experience) and I want to see some more.

Thoughts, ideas, news of other female-directed movies that are coming out this year? Desire to jump on this bandwagon? Please jump on the bandwagon. Think of all the movies we can talk about together!

Comments

[sovay]

IIRC she was, for a while, the only female Hollywood film director, until Ida Lupino started directing in the late 40s

She was the only female film director working in what I'm now learning is called Classical Hollywood. (I can't help it, I expect more sword-and-sandal from a name like that.) There were other, earlier female directors in the silent era, like Lois Weber, but Arzner was the only one to survive the one-two coming of sound and the Production Code.

I watched her The Trouble with Angels a while ago (another film with NUNS), and it was a lot of fun.

I haven't seen that! Did you ever write it up?

(I have not yet seen anything Lupino directed, which is stupid, because she did at least one very famous noir.)

[osprey_archer]

I watched The Trouble with Angels way back in high school, because I was searching out Rosalind Russell movies after I watched His Girl Friday (Rosalind Russell plays the Mother Superior to Hayley Mills' rapscallion schoolgirl), and I wasn't posting on LJ yet then. I remember I enjoyed it - IIRC there are lots of schoolgirl shenanigans, and possibly they get snowed in at some point? - but not a lot of detail about the film.

It was long enough ago that I'd be more than willing to rewatch it, if you wanted us to try to watch it around the same time. Maybe pair it with another Lupino movie? Netflix has The Hitch-HIker on DVD, so I'd vote for that one.

[sovay]

Maybe pair it with another Lupino movie? Netflix has The Hitch-HIker on DVD, so I'd vote for that one.

I will see if I can get hold of The Hitch-Hiker! That sounds like fun, although obviously dependent on my access to the movies in question. (I get most of my DVDs from the local library system.)

[osprey_archer]

Keep me posted! Once you know what you can get a hold of, we'll have to pick a month.

I'm trying to think if there's a month that particularly says noir to me, but there isn't really. February I will probably reserve for female-directed rom-coms, though, because that seems seasonally appropriate for Valentine's Day.

[sovay]

Keep me posted! Once you know what you can get a hold of, we'll have to pick a month.

Will do!

I'm trying to think if there's a month that particularly says noir to me, but there isn't really.

A bunch of the internet celebrates Noirvember, but I do not; I just kind of watch the stuff year-round.

February I will probably reserve for female-directed rom-coms, though, because that seems seasonally appropriate for Valentine's Day.

That makes sense.

Speaking of female directors, are you already watching Kathryn Bigelow? I can recommend Strange Days (1995), which I never seem to have written about, and Near Dark (1987), which I did. Most of her films are not speculative, of course, so those the ones I've seen.

[osprey_archer]

Oh, I like the term Noirvember! Possibly not enough to wait all the way till November to watch Ida Lupino, though. Are there other female-directed noir films? The other films in your post looked like they were scripted or produced by women, but not directed.

I am an enormous baby about gore, which always stops me whenever I consider watching Kathryn Bigelow films. Everyone says her work is great but it would have to be something I really, really want to see to make watching half the movie through my fingers worth it.

[sovay]

Are there other female-directed noir films? The other films in your post looked like they were scripted or produced by women, but not directed.

Lupino's would be the only ones in Hollywood. There were some female-directed noirs in the UK, although I don't believe I've seen any of them, and I know sufficiently little about other countries' noir traditions that I'm not going to rule them out just because I can't think of any examples. [edit] CASE IN POINT: FEMALE-DIRECTED NORWEGIAN NOIR. I had no idea Death Is a Caress (1949) even existed and now I really want to see it.

Everyone says her work is great but it would have to be something I really, really want to see to make watching half the movie through my fingers worth it.

That's fair. Don't start with Strange Days, then. I don't remember it as gory per se, but literally nauseating violence is a plot point.

[osprey_archer]

Aw, man, that looks super hard to get a hold of. I may hold on to Lupino for Noirvember after all, because it doesn't seem likely that I'm going to find a lot of other noir movies with female directors that have a convenient DVD release that either Netflix or my library possesses.

[sovay]

I may hold on to Lupino for Noirvember after all, because it doesn't seem likely that I'm going to find a lot of other noir movies with female directors that have a convenient DVD release that either Netflix or my library possesses.

So I was not able to secure a Lupino-directed noir through my library for ridiculous reasons, but I did manage to secure a Lupino-written (and -acted) noir, and it was totally worth it.

[landofnowhere]

I saw Lady Bird recently and will be curious as to what you make of it?

I've only seen the beginning of Austenland and it was kind of fun, but I hadn't read the book.

[osprey_archer]

I will be posting about Lady Bird! Hopefully before the end of the month, but if not it will be in the January movie round-up.

It's funny, I was actually all set up to hate Lady Bird (both the movie and the character) because she struck me as such a bratty teenager in the preview. But the reviews were amazing and one of my friends personally recommended it so I just had to see it - and although she definitely is bratty at times, there's a lot more to her than that and she really won me over.

[asakiyume]

This seems like a really worthwhile goal! I look forward to your write-ups. I wanted to see Lady Bird but I suspect I've missed my chance.

I'm very frustrated with the trailers to Wrinkle in Time, even the new ones. They seem to feature all sorts of fantastical magical dangers that weren't present in the book--I think we talked about this earlier, but I'm not over it: I resent the Peter Jacksonification of things like the Narnia books and now (so I fear) A Wrinkle in Time. The trailers reminded me of live action version of Disney's Alice in Wonderland--sooooo oooout there. I'll be interested to hear if the do the brief visit to the two-dimensional world.

I like the casting, though! Love the looks of Meg, love the witches.

[osprey_archer]

Lady Bird is worth seeing if you do get the chance! I really waffled about seeing it because the preview rubbed me the wrong way - Lady Bird came across as a bratty teenager in exactly the way that I hate - but the movie totally won me over, not in the sense that she's not bratty, but in that there's a lot more to her than that and when her moments of brattiness are in context - they're still annoying - but in a very human way - in the way that anyone we love may sometimes have moments when they're annoying.

Yeah, we've talked about the Jacksonification of A Wrinkle in Time before, and that's definitely still a thing. Even down to small things like the clothes Mrs Whatsit, Mrs Which, and Mrs Who are wearing: in the book they look like weird bag ladies, whereas in the movie they are bizarre looking but in a glamorous, goddess-like way.

I think it bothers me less than you because I was never super invested in A Wrinkle in Time. But if someone tried to Jacksonify A Ring of Endless Light, say - FLAMES. FLAMES ON THE SIDE OF MY FACE.

I'm also a bit concerned because Charles Wallace doesn't have much of a presence in the trailers, but I'm hoping that's just a misdirect and he'll snap into focus in the actual movie. He's kind of central to the plot!

[sovay]

They seem to feature all sorts of fantastical magical dangers that weren't present in the book--I think we talked about this earlier, but I'm not over it: I resent the Peter Jacksonification of things like the Narnia books and now (so I fear) A Wrinkle in Time.

I am hoping that it is a case of bad trailers for a good movie: I'm taking some cautious hope from the fact that although the trailers seem cut to be as conventional as possible, the look of the film isn't at all. And their Meg has a great face.

[asakiyume]

Meg certainly does have a great face, and I think she'll be good no matter what the story's like. It's just that I don't see how all the magical extras can *not* represent a distracting departure from the original story. Maybe it'll be a good movie anyway (though the gee-whiz aspect of the magical elements rubs me the wrong way), but it seems to me it'll be telling a different story. Again, nothing wrong with that--except that coming out under the title "A Wrinkle in Time" means there probably won't be a chance for a more emotionally and tonally accurate movie to be made of the book. ... But this is all supposition based on the previews; the movie may surprise me!

[silverusagi]

I did NOT like Austenland, lol. But maybe you will!

[osprey_archer]

We'll see! If I don't at least I can get a good cranky review out of it, probably.

[littlerhymes]

This is a great project! I am... terrible at watching things so I won't join (I do really want to see Lady Bird but it's not out here yet) but instead will follow with great interest and also make this suggestion: *shouting at top of lungs* CLEO FROM 5 TO 7 BY AGNES VARDA! ONE OF THE GREATEST MOVIES OF ALL TIME!

I really like Sofia Coppola's Virgin Suicides. I feel meh about Lost in Translation but it's such a cultural talking point that it's prob worth seeing.

Idk about movies coming out this year but would like to also mention that Agnieska Holland's The Secret Garden is a forever delight. Jane Campion's Portrait of a Lady and Bright Star are beautiful and so is Mira Nair's Monsoon Wedding.

I am also sometimes into the work of Julie Taymor (Titus and Across the Universe), Kathryn Bigelow, and Mary Harron (American Psycho is really good). And I really wanna see Sally Potter's Orlando... OK enough.

[sovay]

Jane Campion's Portrait of a Lady and Bright Star are beautiful and so is Mira Nair's Monsoon Wedding.

I have not seen Portrait of a Lady, but I enthusiastically second Bright Star and Monsoon Wedding. I also enjoyed Campion's The Piano.

I am also sometimes into the work of Julie Taymor (Titus and Across the Universe), Kathryn Bigelow, and Mary Harron (American Psycho is really good). And I really wanna see Sally Potter's Orlando... OK enough.

Orlando is wonderful and I adore Titus. As just mentioned upthread, I have only managed to see Bigelow's genre films—the near-future one and the one with the vampires—and therefore, although I like them, have no idea if they are actually representative of her work.

[littlerhymes]

I feel like we have very similar taste in movies. :) I must see Orlando!

I think Bigelow's style has changed a bit since Strange Days and especially since Near Dark, which I think really feels like a product of its time. Hurt Locker (which is greaaat) was a lot tighter and sharper to me? I'd say this is probably as much a function of time as genre, since Point Break also feels very of its age. As a whole I find her career so interesting that she's worked in genres and styles that are almost always limited to male directors.

[sovay]

I must see Orlando!

I hope there are copies readily accessible to you!

Have you seen any other of Sally Potter's films? I have not.

Hurt Locker (which is greaaat) was a lot tighter and sharper to me? I'd say this is probably as much a function of time as genre, since Point Break also feels very of its age.

That makes sense. Strange Days is politically very much of its moment and Near Dark blows its finale up just like an '80's blockbuster. I heard great things about The Hurt Locker.

As a whole I find her career so interesting that she's worked in genres and styles that are almost always limited to male directors.

Agreed. And it's the kind of thing I suspect wouldn't be so unusual if there were more female directors (I can't imagine there aren't other women interested in similar kinds of storytelling, but they don't seem to be getting work if they are), but there aren't, so for now she's an outlier.

[littlerhymes]

Have you seen any other of Sally Potter's films? I have not.

I've only seen The Man Who Cried which looks very gorgeous and has very beautiful people being beautiful at one another, but doesn't hold up narratively imo.

it's the kind of thing I suspect wouldn't be so unusual if there were more female directors (I can't imagine there aren't other women interested in similar kinds of storytelling, but they don't seem to be getting work if they are)

Yes, I agree so hard! It must be a matter of opportunity or lack thereof. It's really good to see directors like Michelle MacLaren and Patty Jenkins getting a chance at big screen superhero/action fare, finally. I hope that's the start of a bigger trend.

[osprey_archer]

I've been meaning to watch a film by Agnes Varda (they had one at the art cinema last fall and I MISSED IT, how silly of me), so perhaps I should make Cleo from 5 to 7 that film!

I'm thinking about devoting February to female-directed romcoms (thematic for Valentine's Day, after all), so that would be a good time for Lost in Translation. And Austenland. Possibly I should finally see Sleepless in Seattle, too? I don't always like Norah Ephron's work, but the movie is so classic that I probably ought to see it.

The Secret Garden is THE BEST and I love it - it's a different experience than the book but in a way where I feel like they complement each other. And anyway the book has that weird Theosophical angle when they're talking about the Magic which I don't think would work very well in a movie; it's strange enough already in the book.

Also Bright Star is gorgeous and it's been long enough since I've seen it that I could probably go for a rewatch. The cinematography is just so achingly beautiful - literally so beautiful that it's almost painful - which really suits a movie about Keats, honestly, in between all his musings on truth & beauty and his early death.

[littlerhymes]

Lost in Translation is so melancholy to me - actually tho it might make a nice palate cleanser in between or after Austenland and Sleepless in Seattle!

I got a real pagan vibe off some of the scenes in Holland's Secret Garden - there's this one scene towards the end in particular where they're all chanting around the fire and calling Colin's father home. It was such an interesting way to nod towards the book but in a really different direction.

[osprey_archer]

Yes, a good palate cleanser may be necessary. I think an entire month of upbeat romcoms might be too much for me.

I remember that scene! It struck me as a good compromise, actually, because it keeps the mystical element that the book has but it also seems like something children might come up with on their own, or crib from a storybook, without the same very distinctive philosophical underpinnings.

Now I want to watch Secret Garden again. You are such an enabler. :p

[littlerhymes]

You are such an enabler. :p

UR WELCOME lol

[sovay]

I got a real pagan vibe off some of the scenes in Holland's Secret Garden - there's this one scene towards the end in particular where they're all chanting around the fire and calling Colin's father home.

That seems to have made me want to see the movie, when nothing else (including the presence of Maggie Smith and John Lynch) ever has. Thank you.

[edit] The book was very important to me as a child. I have seen but retain no particular emotional affinity for the 1949 Hollywood film with Dean Stockwell and Margaret O'Brien and keep meaning to rewatch the 1987 Hallmark TV version because it's the one with the post-WWI frame story and Derek Jacobi. I bounced very badly off the musical.

[littlerhymes]

Hee! It is a very beautifully made & filmed movie, and both Maggie & John Lynch are very wonderful in it, so if nothing else you'll probably enjoy those bits. :)

I loved the book so much too, it's such a touchstone. I haven't seen any of the adaptations you mention, though now I am intrigued by the mention of post-war frame story. Which reminds me that I've read at least one sequel to it that dealt with the war - I think it was Return to the Secret Garden by Susan Moody and I have... mixed feelings about it. But it's a very inspiring book, clearly!

[ladyherenya]

The Austenland film is silly but, I thought, entertainingly so.

I might go and see A Wrinkle in Time - from the trailers, it doesn't really look like what I imagined when I read the book, but it does look like something my siblings would be willing to watch with me.

[osprey_archer]

We've decided to make February Female-Directed Romance Movie month, and we're planning to watch Bright Star (well, rewatch in my case; it's been a few years since I've seen it, though), so I think we'll need something light & silly to cheer us back up afterward. The perfect time for Austenland!

The trailers for A Wrinkle in Time definitely have a more dramatic vibe than the books - there's a lot more imminent peril, for instance. It'll certainly be interesting, at least!