Tema: Domino (Brian De Palma, 2018)

Todavía estoy por ver un bodrio de De Palma. Incluso aquellas películas que son un completo sincristo a nivel narrativo ( The Fury -de la que también reniega a excepción de lo contento que quedó con la BSO de Williams-, Raising Cain), están fotografiadas, musicalizadas, rodadas y montadas con mano maestra, y tienen secuencias para el recuerdo. Audiovisualmente hablando puede que sea el mejor cineasta norteamericano vivo desde Welles, incluso mejor que compañeros de generación como Coppola, Scorsese o Spielberg, claro que como narrador está muy muy MUY por debajo de ellos. Aun así estoy rendido a sus contrapicados, travellings, pantallas partidas y demás. Sus obra es un chorro de imágenes y sonidos maravillosos, aunque como películas en sí mismas la cosa a menudo cojee. Pero, no me importa. En su caso no.

Aqui se pueden leer más declaraciones suyas de lo que fue mal en la producción de la película, pero a diferencia de La Furia o La Hoguera de las Vanidades, que las considera muy malas películas, cree que el resultado final de Domino es muy bueno.

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

Todavía estoy por ver un bodrio de De Palma. Incluso aquellas películas que son un completo sincristo a nivel narrativo ( The Fury -de la que también reniega a excepción de lo contento que quedó con la BSO de Williams-, Raising Cain), están fotografiadas, musicalizadas, rodadas y montadas con mano maestra, y tienen secuencias para el recuerdo. Audiovisualmente hablando puede que sea el mejor cineasta norteamericano vivo desde Welles, incluso mejor que compañeros de generación como Coppola, Scorsese o Spielberg, claro que como narrador está muy muy MUY por debajo de ellos. Aun así estoy rendido a sus contrapicados, travellings, pantallas partidas y demás. Sus obra es un chorro de imágenes y sonidos maravillosos, aunque como películas en sí mismas la cosa a menudo cojee. Pero, no me importa. En su caso no.

Amén a eso.

Échale un ojo al director's cut de Raising Cain, mejora mucho (aunque ya me gustaba el de cines ).


La trilogía de la personalidad múltiple:

Spoiler:

Iniciado por Fincher

Amén a eso.

Échale un ojo al director's cut de Raising Cain, mejora mucho (aunque ya me gustaba el de cines ).


La trilogía de la personalidad múltiple:

Spoiler:

¿Perdón?. ¿Hay un DC?

Iniciado por Branagh/Doyle

¿Perdón?. ¿Hay un DC?

Está incluido en la edición de Shout Factory.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Raisi...1424/#Overview

El tráiler aquí: https://www.lashorasperdidas.com/ind...rian-de-palma/

Iniciado por Brando

Estreno USA el 31 de Mayo
pero no dicen mas, ni quien la lleva, ni si es el montaje final de De Palma, o que

https://twitter.com/ThePlaylist/stat...64472070934530

Los que la estrenan en USA son SABAN FILMS, y hoy han sacado el TRAILER de la peli

y se puede ver aqui

Pues por lo menos parece que vamos a poder asistir a otro festival visual de Alcaine.

Y hay que ver cómo le gusta a de Palma homenajear a Hitchcock.

Saludos

Visualmente ( graves problemas de financiación) pinta un poco pocha, pero por lo que se intuye, ahí está De Palma dándolo todo en la planificación visual, y Alcaine dando otra lección de saber hacer. Ganazas

Tráiler en YouTube

So, this trailer end-credits finally reveal that the editor on DOMINO is none other than Bill Pankow, who collaborated with De Palma on nine projects so far, incl. Carlito's Way, The Untouchables, Femme Fatale & Body Double.


OJO.

Nos queda por oír la música de Donaggio, que para el director siempre compone maravillas.

Se avecina desastre monumental. De Palma en horas bajísimas.

Se que no se debe juzgar a una película por su trailer, pero ....... uffff, que mala pinta tiene.

Iniciado por Screepers

Se avecina desastre monumental. De Palma en horas bajísimas.

En esta estaría hasta justificado, dados los gravísimos problemas que han tenido para terminarla medianamente en condiciones.

"Bears a striking resemblance with Topaz in the sense that both films build thrillers out of contemporary topics (in Hithcock's case, the Cuban Missile Crisis, in De Palma's case, ISIS) whilst using this as a starting point to create a global narrative that addresses each nation's perspective through a different subplot. Perhaps in a longer version we would get a more expanded look at the CIA, etc. but in the 89 minute cut we are presented with something much more fragmented than Topaz (Hichcock's film was certainly far more radically structured, composed in blocks rather than A and B story like we have here). It also recalls Family Plot in the way that De Palma exaggerates his technique, allowing the film to become both formally self-reflexive and aggressively playful.

Of all of De Palma's Hitchcock imitations (I wouldn't say that De Palma *deliberately* pays homage to the two aforementioned films, but for a guy that has made it pretty clear that Hitch molded his view of cinema, it would only make sense that their late films follow similar trajectory), this one certainly feels the most bound to the contemporary world. It comes off as less an extension of old form but rather an extension of the new world: everyone seems to talk about the split-screen scene (the scene where four camera feeds fill the screen is also pretty noteworthy), indeed, the scene feels like a De Palma flourish perfected, but I'd argue that it represents a filmmaker that has moved past his influences to create a singular voice. De Palma is perhaps the only auteur to truly "own" split-screen, in this film he frames it on a laptop screen, with the phone itself streaming live footage—a relatively under utilized technique used to capture an under explored subject. Social media as breading ground for radicals, the digital world through digital lens, etc.

"we are bound by conventions"

The affair subplot initially feels... pointless? But in the second to final scene De Palma links this to the CIA's storyline, and it suddenly becomes clear that the purpose of this subplot was to set-up (or rather, introduce) the film's ideas on US interventionism. What would in any other film be the emotional conclusion of Alex's arc is instead rendered anticlimactic, and thus exposing the hollowness of the CIA's attempt at weaponizing vengeance. Alex says that her action brought her some form of happiness, but from the relatively mute soundtrack during this scene, which up until this point has remained (loudly) expressive, we can surmise that it has not. It is moments like this that I live to see in genre movies, in which narrative conventions are subverted in order to produce a completely different result—denying a sense of completion to instead focus purely on the ideological.

It's easy to sit back and say that the film was taken away from De Palma, etc. but I think that it's important to examine films for what they are rather than lament on what could have been. In its current state, it remains a staggeringly interesting and complex work—in all of its alleged compromises and idiosyncrasies."

89 min version - which I assume is the release cut.



"I used to joke that because of this films production and post troubles, it was going to be De Palma's Mr. Arkadin - but it's kind of true? On a narrative level, Domino doesn't really work - at least the brunt of the plot surrounding the principle Interpol agents. But as a film that evidently once ran over two hours outside of its rough cut, one can quickly surmise that a significant portion of the films excised material revolved around the Interpol characters - in the films latter section, beats revolving around these characters personal lives fall flat, both because we haven't actually spent significant time with them and in one case, because we were never even given the information to begin with! As a result, what must have been the main narrative drive starts to feel like a subplot - the "main" interpol story is afforded as much time as the films own "subplots," one revolving around the CIA, and the other revolving around ISIS. That being said, the film doesn't appear to have been restructured as much as having had literal chunks pulled out of it - which doesn't necessarily diminish the effects of the "final" product, the narrative merely no longer makes sense. Domino: Cornith Version? Well, Ambersons was re-structred and re-shot, and so was most of Stroheim's entire career - I love those films too. Isn't it odd that so often when producers try to cut down a film to make it more commercial, they actually make it less commercial? And if the effects aren't necessarily diminished - frankly I think the stuff revolving the Interpol agents personal lives isn't remotely interesting as the ISIS and CIA subplots - which I wouldn't doubt it was that which attracted De Palma to this project in the first place.

Still - it's a shame, I think a lot of people will hate this movie - maybe justifiably so? And furthermore you can absolutely tell the producers ran out of money: it doesn't look like color correction was even finished, even the sets at times look shoddier than others in the film, the "title card" that seems to have been made in less than a minute, and the poor green-screen is astonishing even for late-style standards. But I found Domino still to be a total blast to watch, not just because of the films three remarkable setpieces, but it shows a sorely missed provocative and politically aware De Palma. The film that remains gives us set-pieces we haven't seen the likes of since Mission Impossible and Snake Eyes, but in its study of media as communications tool feels of a piece with films like Hi,Mom & Redacted. In a way, it also picks up off of that latter film - so much of De Palma is about observing, this one is also about recording.

The narrative is fundamentally broken, but this still feels more of a piece than the similarly re-cut The Black Dahlia - perhaps this is because of how attuned the film is to uses of consumer technology....or frankly, he really had something to say this time, and the most important pieces are still there. It's very admirable - while the rest of his generation disappeared into their own head, De Palma kept his eyes on the world. CIA making deals to work with a terrorist at the expense of less powerful countries to catch bigger fish in ISIS is one thing, but just as important if not moreso is the usage of social media ie Youtube, Facetime, etc to produce propaganda - this is where the film really shines and feels at a piece with De Palma's entire oeuvre, all the way back to his experimental days. Not to say the former isn't interesting - but it's alot to take in on one viewing, and maybe writing about it wouldn't do it that much good - watching CIA & ISIS try to pull one on Interpol is some modern-day palace intrigue that's fun to watch in itself. There's also a slick chase sequence on rooftops that plays out like Vertigo on steroids, and an entirely slow-mo "drone" sequence - what's not to like?

One thing that won't leave my mind though - and I doubt will for some time - is a remarkable split screen sequence, possibly the most affecting one De Palma has ever done. Earlier in the film we see a gun with two phones attached to it, one with the camera pointed in the direction of the potential victim, and the other pointed in the direction of the shooter themselves. Later on we're presented two IPhones on a table side by side, Facetiming to these two phones attached to the gun, as a terrorist attack plays out at a film festival. I'd never seen anything like it, and it shook me to my core. Later on we'll see this footage, and news footage surrounding it uploaded online - not dissimilar to Redacted. But where this diverts from Redacted is that there are no games, no "representations of representations", the channel is quite clear and it's called Youtube. Outside of the other shots this takes (and this movie takes a lot of shots at America without ever setting a foot there) another strand is how the democracy of social platforms like Youtube also allow fundamentalist groups to exploit it as propaganda. I wish we had the full cut, but the film as it is, in my opinion, is much better than it deserved to be in this format. Set-piece or idea, both times my jaw was agape.

And hell, who am I kidding - there are some CLASSIC De Palma moments in here and I gotta stan. Look at the way the opening set-piece is organized, the way it in-effect starts before you've realized you're watching a set-piece, how the gun is left on the table, the tomato crates outside the building, how every object that will play some function in how the sequence plays out is established well before you realize it. That's also why I think the film really had chunks pulled out of it rather than being restructured - sequences like these could only be constructed by one person in the world.

And Pino Donaggio back in the game to boot? Just because the plot doesn't work doesn't mean you're not experiencing pure cinema."

Clip

Vista.

Irregular.

Se salvan las dos modestas set pieces (al inicio y al final) y esa fina línea depalmiana que hay entre la sátira y el poco sentido del ridículo.

A primera oída, Donaggio con ecos de Femme Fatale y algo de North By Northwest, pero no especialmente destacable.


Menos personal que Passion pero algo más entretenida.

La sensación es algo extraña. No es un thriller serio pero De Palma tampoco acaba por desatarse todo lo deseable.

Me ha gustado, mucho más redonda que Passion pero de nuevo descarrila un poco en su segunda hora aunque creonque Passion llegaba a destrozar la película aquí eso no ocurre del todo.

Me encanta ver como autores 'clásicos' como De Palma o Schrader tratan temas actuales.

Merece la pena verla aunque se nota la falta de recursos en ciertas set-pieces

A contracorriente Films, dice que la va a estrenar (en cines) en España

en principio, el 30 de Enero 2020

De Palma siempre es muy pero que muy estimulante. A veces falla, otras acierta. Pero siempre ofrece algo especial...



Con ganas de ver la película.