Let's be JEANNE DIELMAN, 23, QUAI DU COMMERCE, 1080 BRUXELLES!

Lord love you, OP.

If this thread makes it past 12 replies, I will eat my hat.

I’m the bathroom cleanser. I’m used frequently.

I'm the accolades. Per Wiki:

[quote]The film was named the 19th greatest film of the 20th century in a critics' poll conducted by The Village Voice in 2000.[15][16] Rated 35th in the 2012 Sight & Sound "Greatest Films of All Time" critics' poll, and not rated in the top 100 of the 2012 directors' list, in 2022, the film was given the distinction of being voted as Sight & Sound's "greatest film of all time".[17][18] The film ranked number 1 on the critics' poll, and tied for 4th place in the directors' poll.[19] It is the fourth film to top the critics' poll after Bicycle Thieves, Citizen Kane, and Vertigo, and the first directed by a woman to do so.[18]

I'm a film bro. What the fuck is this crap?

Huh?

I'm the atrocious acting of the man who played her son.

Did they just find him off the streets?

I’m the son’s foldout bed.

And good for you, OP. I made a Pulitzer Prize for Fiction thread the other day that quickly died, but I have faith in this one.

[quote] "If this thread makes it past 12 replies, I will eat my hat."

I have no comment, except to sat that I'm just doing my part to get this thread past twelve replies.

The “I Saw What You Did” podcast discussed this on the May 9th episode.

They laugh about how the Film Bro stratosphere [italic]lost its collective mind in a mass meltdown [/italic] when Sight & Sound listed it as the greatest film of all time last year.

I'm in real time -- you've never seen the likes of me before!!

I’m the consultant that Sight and Sound hired for the 2022 poll who vowed to “take the white male canon and set it on fire.” Because of me, Jeanne Dielman is now considered the greatest film ever made.

Pssst… there is no “greatest film ever made.”

It's pretty fucking incredible R12.

I'm the embarrassing technical gaffe an hour and ten minutes in. Maybe Akerman and her editor fell asleep while putting the film together because I don't know how else to explain how that was left in.

16 replies and climbing!

I want to see the hat eating from R1. Is nudity involved?

I'm "News from Home" and I'm not exactly chopped liver, OP!

Je vous en prie.

The Swiss husbear named his cat Delphine after seeing this film.

Armond White at r12 is an embarrassment in blinders. What does he mean when he states:

[quote]this Sight & Sound “broadening” merely stacks the deck against movie classics — Intolerance, Children of Paradise, La Terra Trema, Nashville — that acknowledge our humanity and unite us.

How do Citizen Kane and Vertigo “acknowledge our humanity and unite us”? WHO is being united? How does focusing again and again on a privileged white male experience and viewpoint unite us… except in an old, musty, and dangerous figuration?

It’s something to think about, Mr. White. (And what an apt name!)

On the r9 podcast they discuss the film at the [bold]37:14 [/bold]mark.

The other movie they have on the discussion bill is THE BAD SEED (at the 1:11:12 mark), which should hold interest for many DLers : )

I'm the unmade sequel: Jeanne Dielman 2: Jailhouse Boogaloo!

I read somewhere a comparison between this film and 'Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman'.

I'm the meticulous cleaning. Joan would've been great in this role.

Ackerman and Seyrig sat through the entire bloody film in the salle when it was shown in Cannes. They kept hearing the clack of seats closing as others rose to leave.

Yikes, R21 -- that article is truly terrifying.

CITIZEN KANE "rallies enthusiasm across nations and generations" (just like Donald Trump!).

"Leni Riefenstahl is boycotted without comment" -- Lord have mercy.

For Mr. White, "masterpieces representing shared ethnic experience" include THE COLOR PURPLE and BELOVED, and DELIVERANCE ranks among the "sexual identity masterpieces."

A true nutcase, and one with a lot of nerve calling anyone else out on identity politics and non-artistic agendas.

I’m the homage!

I genuinely feel terrible for having watched The Rock in 'Tooth Fairy' and not yet having watched this.

I’m the bland food that looks desperate for seasoning!

I’m curious about how the film was rehearsed. The character of Jeanne interacts assuredly with so many props (their placement and purposes), so many light switches, etc. This can be hard for actors to do in a relaxed way if they’ve just walked onto a new set.

i wonder if Delphine Seyrig lived there for a week, first. Her movements are so precise for someone who’s in an unfamiliar place.

R1, how did the hat taste? I added more water than I did last week.

[bold]Justice4JeanneDielmanThread

well, that didn’t work.

I'm the incredibly curious flashing blue light Jeanne and her son never seem to notice.

Chantal Akerman is one of those filmmakers everyone pretends is way more wise and introspective than she really was. In truth, she kind of sucked.

Mmmmm, [italic]non.

I'm Delphine Seyrig. If you thought my earlier film LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD was too pulse-pounding for you, try this one.

I'm the clueless bro who tuned into this expecting to see some hot hooker action

[quote]The film’s critical reputation is not a post-#MeToo phenomenon; it has been surging for decades. (So has Akerman’s: her 1976 film “News from Home,” which draws on letters to Akerman from her mother, also made the Sight and Sound list.) In 1976, the critic Louis Marcorelles, writing in Le Monde, deemed “Jeanne Dielman” “the first masterpiece of the feminine in the history of the cinema.” J. Hoberman called it “one of the key artworks of the twentieth century,” “a unique spectacle as well as a strong statement on women’s assigned roles and designated space.” My colleague Richard Brody hailed it as a “tour de force of cinematic modernism,” one that “puts time onscreen as it was never seen before.” The film has explicitly influenced the work of directors including Todd Haynes, Gus Van Sant, and Céline Sciamma, who has said that Akerman is “one of the most important filmmakers in the history of cinema.”

R15 Ok, I'll bite. What was it?

Since there's been alot of negative talk about "film bros" (never heard the term before), who is supposed to identify the most with this film? Why did Sight And Sound call it the greatest film of all time?

[quote]r42 Why did Sight And Sound call it the greatest film of all time?

Because their jury voted for it.

They do a list every decade.

R43 I know that, I was asking what about the film made them consider it the greatest film of all time?

People with intelligence, curiosity and wide ranging taste - the kind of people that don’t immediately reject something because it is different or challenging or not immediately rewarding, those who enjoy something they’ve never experienced or perhaps even imagined before without the reflexive, dismissive “that’s stupid.”

^* that was a response to R42’s first question.

I'm the slightest indication of Jeanne's son's appreciation of his mother's tireless efforts on his behalf. I don't exist.

R45 That's kind of a cop-out answer. Doesn't tell me a thing. I meant who is the audience for the film? It's not "bros" so who? Women? Men who identify with women? Gay men? Intellectuals? Pretentioous cineastes?

*pretentious

[quote]R42 I meant who is the audience for the film?

The viewer.

R45 is the type of trite, bad faith reaction that the critics who took part in this poll not only encouraged, they had to have outright intended. Of course if you don't think an obscure, virtually plotless movie that is 200 minutes long is the greatest film of all time, you’re a philistine, you suck at watching movies, you simply don’t like it because a woman made it, etc. There's an element of trolling to it, and that will be fatal to the poll's reputation. It was once seen as canon; in the last poll, Vertigo unseating Citizen Kane felt like a monumental shift. This, though, feels like contrarianism.

Former New York Times film critic Janet Maslin provided this response to the list on Twitter. As usual she is spot-on. "Looks like a list by dutiful A-seeking film students and Criterion addicts. My God, the world is so much bigger than this."

Maslin's response -- the latter half of it, anyway -- is bewildering to me. Whatever you think of the new poll, its selections very clearly encompass a bigger world than before.

I'm the pair of scissors.

R45 - the answer is not in any way a cop-out. Why do you think you must "identify" with a film to find it enjoyable - or in this case perhaps engrossing and rewarding. Is the "audience" for "The Godfather" comprised solely of disaffected first-generation sons of Italian immigrant criminals? Do you think that was the demographic Coppola was targeting? Do you only watch movies with gay protagonists?

"Jeanne Dielman" is a truly great film, and it is almost nothing like any earlier film that dealt with the same themes - "woman's issues," crime, the emptiness of middle-class life, etc. It is, in many formal and structural ways unlike almost every other film, which is a large part of its artistic achievement.

If films that are outside the current Hollywood mainstream, and perhaps have a challenging structure or message make them only for "Pretentioous cineastes" then that's what you think, and it is your loss. There are plenty of worthwhile films in every genre and from every culture - from highbrow European art cinema to offbeat crime dramas or silent slapstick comedy that don't run at the local multiplex these days, but perhaps you might enjoy some of them.

R54 Beat me to it... the scissors that, as soon as she used them and then put them down on the dresser, clearly "in frame" for us to notice, you knew would be used on humans.

The film, as curious and interesting as it is, is not subtle. Broad. Kabuki.

R55 I majored in film, I run a film club. You just can't speak plainly and answer a couple of simple questions, I guess. I was just asking if the film's audience was any particular demographic, you obviously don't know the answer so you blather on and on.

[quote]r57 I majored in film, I run a film club.

It appears you have answers that satisfy you. Why are you looking for answers here?

I'm the shoes that come out of the kitchen cabinet every morning to get polished.

I'm the player speed control icon located on the lower right corner of The Criterion Channel app letting you know that you can get through this movie in about 45 minutes - or less.

R57 do you honestly believe every film is made with a specific, single, demographic in mind? You seem like you're on the spectrum. Or just trolling.

I guess the simplistic answer you are looking for is the non-filmbro demographic.

Ackerman, the director, committed suicide about 4 years before the film began receiving these modern accolades, leading to the #1 in the Sight & Sound thing. Too bad she couldn't have hung on a couple more years.

It's a watershed film, good and unique, definitely in the top 100 of all time. Not #1. Reminds me (in tone and effect) of Bresson or Last Year at Marienbad/Resnais.

You have to be in the right mood. I found it mesmerizing and have watched it twice. If nothing else it's one of the great performances. The artistic daring of it is amazing and, I think, pays off without being pretentious. That always appeals to me.

R7 - I will seek out your thread! :)

The teacher librarian I work with demanded, last week, that I provide her with a list of all films that were made from Pulitzer prize winners. I went through all of them, chronologically, and researched the ones I wasn’t absolutely sure of, though my list included drama as well as fiction.

I watched the first 5 minutes. Is she a whore, darlins?

R64, that’s fabulous!

I am the fact that while this is a good movie, it is absolutely not even in the Top 500 Films Ever Made. They just needed something foreign by a lez up there, y’know.

However, the fact that GET OUT and PARASITE are on this list is outright appalling.

She is very energy efficient turning the lights off in every room she will be leaving for 30 seconds

Also the foley is Barefoot Contessa levels of ridiculous

I can hear her fucking menstrual cycle start at 1:23:45

You’re a whore, chère.

*

A "true action movie"

It’s really a quite interesting stunt, to do a very long movie which is so involved with trivial tasks. But saying that this is the greatest movie of all time is not unlike suggesting that trans women are exactly the same as cis women. No one, at heart, truly believes it.

No one will be seated after the 10-minute long meatloaf-mixing sequence.

[quote]But saying that this is the greatest movie of all time is not unlike suggesting that trans women are exactly the same as cis women.

Your trolling is duly noted, r72.

Those claiming that “Jeanne Dielman” is the greatest film ever made are making a political statement rather than any honest consideration of its aesthetic merits. It’s not even Chantal Akerman’s best film.

You're quite a mind-reader, R75. Were you this upset when it was #19 on the poll 10 years ago?

I get the concept, but I don't have patience to sit through the entire thing.

We're the light switches. We're rapidly wearing out.

It would make a wonderful musical.

I'm the damned baby. I know something's off with that not-my-mother woman today. I swear she was on the verge of shaking me to death while cooing over me.

[quote]It would make a wonderful musical

I'm available.

Me too!

I'm Chantal Akerman; I'll end the film with a 10-minute static shot of our heroine sitting at her kitchen table doing absolutely nothing, and you WILL love it, plebeians!

I'm the missing coat button. It's all my fucking fault.

R77 It wasn't #19 in the 2012 Sight & Sound Poll. It was #36 (still way too high, IMO) in the 2012 Critics Poll, and didn't even crack the Top 100 in the 2012 Director's Poll.

It's quite clear that the only reason that "Jeanne Dielman" shot up like a meteor in the 2022 Critics Poll (along with some other very good films that had no business being ranked, like "Moonlight" and "Portrait of a Lady On Fire" among others) is that Sight & Sound dramatically expanded their criteria for who could now participate as a critic, doubling the number of voters, adding lots of younger voters and internet (read: social media) critics who tend (again, IMO) to not really have perspective when voting on the entirety of film history. How could any responsible critic worth their salt think that "Portrait of a Lady On Fire" is the 30th greatest film of all time? Higher than "Psycho," "Mirror," "Pather Panchali"? I loved that movie, but that's preposterous. It's myopic, "prisoner of the moment" political bullshit.

But this is what happens when identity politics trumps all other considerations. It's more important to this group of voters that the top film was made by a woman filmmaker, than that the top film was the one with the best argument for aesthetic excellence and impact. If people want to decry (rightfully so) that certain groups of people have been marginalized and often excluded from the filmmaking field, whether women, people of color, gay, or what have you, that's great and necessary. But the way to address that is to ensure equality of opportunity going forward, not to pretend that "Jeanne Dielman" is better than "Citizen Kane" because one was made by a woman about a woman, and the other was made by a white guy.

I'm the ennui.

R86, I know that it's bootless to argue with someone who's already made her/his mind up, but I have to ask -- do you know how the SIGHT AND SOUND poll works? It's not a bunch of people at a meeting deciding something together; it's a bunch of critics submitting lists of their top 10, *unranked*. #1 goes to the film that appears on the most lists, etc.

You insist -- with no actual proof, much less a reasonable hypothesis how it would have happened -- that JEANNE DIELMAN made it to #1 solely for political reasons. You can't even entertain the idea that a lot of people might actually think that it's an amazing movie -- groundbreaking, provocative, influential, etc. Ask Todd Haynes. Ask Gus van Sant. Ask any number of professors who have taught it in film schools *for years*.

To quote the bewildering Janet Maslin tweet someone cited earlier, "My God, the world is so much bigger than this." Yes, Janet -- and the new list shows that far better than the old one did.

R86 I'll buy your assessment of why and how this movie suddenly leaps to #1 - the political/cultural climate infuses critics' judgement. I'd also assert that previous polls also were influenced by social conditions, political/cultural values, trends, assumptions.

There is no "pure" poll that happens outside its zeitgeist.

I appreciate the Sight and Sound polls because they make me aware of films that previously weren’t on my radar. This year I watched Jeanne Dielman, Tokyo Story, and Beau Travail for the first time. All three were outstanding.

R90 Yep, I'd heard about Tokyo Story forever, and finally watched it a couple years ago. First half it was an interesting period piece, well made, and then the ending made it... monumentally good. I think there are great films (around the world) that aren't seen much, but deserve attention and praise. Jeanne Deilman isn't the best film made, but it's good it gets pulled back into the light for bit.

R58 I never saw the film! I asked SIMPLE questions. I wanted to know. To be informed. I don't get why people are circling the wagons and not answering, like it's this big secret that you can know and no one else can know. I wanted to know what about the film made the Sight And Sound voters consider it the greatest of all time. Did not get one single answer that was factual or substantive, as if just asking the question was somehow offensive. Wtf?

I also asked what the audience is for the film, and again, this was greeted as if it was insulting or offensive.

R93 Actually, I (R62) answered - the audience most responsive to this film will be pretentious cineastes. That's NOT a bad thing. If you like the comic book movie environment of 2023, you will not tolerate this film.

If you know and appreciate the films of Stan Brakhage, Kenneth Anger, Warhol, Sally Porter, or even Lars von Trier or Lynch... you'll be interested in this. Or if you have a degree in feminist studies. Or if you are shooting heroin.

I'm the intrusive Oedipal musings of the son about his mother's sex life with his father. Apparently, he can't stomach the idea of Papa "thrusting into" Maman.

R95 Prefiguring the last "john" thrusting relentlessly into Maman and finally Maman thrusting the scissors... well, you get it.

I sort of liked the son resenting his friend who now is interested in thrusting girls when clearly the son wanted the friend to thrust... well you get it.

[quote]You insist -- with no actual proof, much less a reasonable hypothesis how it would have happened

R88 I most definitely put forward a reasonable hypothesis for how it happened. You may not agree with that, but c'est la vie. I'm well aware that "Jeanne Dielman" has been a touchstone of certain segments of post-1968 Marxist-feminist (not using those terms pejoratively mind you) academic film studies. Its academic reputation has never matched up to the product on the screen. Others think it's (in your words) "amazing". I think it displays a remarkable lack of sophistication in technique, which has a direct impact on how aimless and boring it is. YMMV.

I've watched (and indeed own) more of the S&S polled films than probably 99.9% of the general population. I have over 1,000 books in my own personal film library. I've owned and operated multiple video stores in my life. I've received grants to do academic research in the field of film history. So yes, I'm well aware of how the fucking Sight & Sound polls work, for chrissakes.

R97 has stated her boundaries.

You speculated THAT it happened, R97, but you certainly didn't give me any reason to imagine HOW. Your earlier post made it sound as if the critics polled somehow got on the same page to make this happen, when of course they didn't.

If you know how the poll works, then why did you ask "How could any responsible critic worth their salt think that 'Portrait of a Lady On Fire' is the 30th greatest film of all time?" The critics polled each submitted their top 10. You should be asking how any (or enough) of them ranked PORTRAIT as 1 of the 10 greatest films of all time.

I'd also suggest that the more voices you let into a poll, the more wide-ranging those results will tend to be, especially when its topic is as subjective as this one.

R97 is PRESSED.

R100 That happens to me when tendentious ignoramuses conflate "diversity" with "aesthetic merit". They are both virtues, but they aren't the same thing.

R101 Might they not also be related, though? Diversity might be a foundational element that informs a works aesthetic presentation.

Is not To Kill a Mockingbird more aesthetically satisfying because of the emotional power of "social justice" etc.?

I'm the shlocky ending.

Akerman works so hard to rebel against traditional Hollywood filmmaking only to end the film with a cheap climax.

Yes, R103 -- what ending could be schlockier than an unbroken 7-minute take of a bloodstained woman sitting at a table, not moving, in silent thought?

The cheap climax is obviously her stabbing her latest customer.

Yes, R105, but you make it sound like she veers off into slasher territory (when it's not shot that way at all), and in any case it's not the actual ending of the film.

The ending kind of reminded me of Timmy in that gay movie name whatever looking in camera. Tears, blood.... same shit.

O.K., I ain't sittin' through it so...what happens at the finis?

I'm just so confused.

I'm the unexpected orgasm!