This is only the second Senegalese film to be featured here but it’s an old one, contemporaneous with the French New Wave in fact and so shows its influence. However it’s also distinctly African in its sensibilities which at times can make it difficult to decipher. Confusing as it is sometimes, I’m very pleased that it actually does have a plot and even if I can’t understand everything, I found the parts that I could understand absolutely hilarious and entertaining. At the same time, it offers a very satisfying portrait of what Senegal was like in that era, from the poorest to the very richest echelons of society. Just a fantastic film all around.

We’re no strangers to films that are heavy on symbolism but there’s just too much in this one that we can’t decipher. Victor Erice isn’t a director we’ve seen before and this seems to be pretty much his only film of note. The fact that this is considered one of the masterpieces of Spanish cinema was enough to get it added onto my watch list but even knowing that this was made during a time of heavy censorship in Francoist Spain wasn’t enough to make much sense of it. The individual scenes are mesmerizing and I can see how there is so much intentionality behind them. Yet without the necessary cultural references, I’m reduced to making only the vaguest of guesses as to what it is trying to say and that’s no fun at all.

I keep meaning to go back to Sergio Leone’s films but some of them are very long, making them difficult to fit into a watching schedule. This Western stars Charles Bronson as the protagonist and I believe that this was their only collaboration. It’s certainly a more complex film and the intent seems to be to obfuscate the plot and the exact role of each character. It’s a lavish production that oozes with style and achieves its remarkable length by being not afraid to let the camera linger interminably on every expression of the faces of the characters. It’s nothing special in terms of story or theme, but it does successfully frame the Western genre as a larger than life epic of mythic proportions and that is enough to qualify it as a great cinematic work.

This time we’re going all the way back to the very first feature film by Lars von Trier. I may not enjoy every one of Trier’s films but I can’t deny that they’re each so unique. The concept of a detective who dives so deep into the mind of the serial killer he is hunting that he becomes lost isn’t novel by now and I’m even getting some Max Payne vibes from the main character. The execution and aesthetics are something else however with practically every shot being shocking or just plain weird. Plus it even offers a justification for the world seeming to be the way it is! I wouldn’t read too much into what it means but it is rather satisfying to watch.

Off the top of my head, I can’t think many any coming-of-age film that involves the main character needing to choose between different religions, so that’s enough to make this film interesting to me. Add to that how it boldly confronts issues like menstruation, and it’s no wonder this is a favorite of the critics. Strong as the pitch is, this film kind of flubs it by being too nice and too light-hearted. Margaret’s family is so sweet and so supportive and her problems so easily resolved with minimal fuss that we barely see her struggling with anything. It’s a pleasant film to watch but it feels like it ends too soon without Margaret having to get into any serious confrontations and that’s just not very satisfying.

We’ve watched many films by Akira Kurosawa but none have been quite like this, a lesser known one from very early in the director’s career. It’s about a student movement against the rise of militarism in Japan just before the Second World War, thus providing a relatively rare Japanese perspective of the war. It’s also notable in that it stars Setsuko Hara, who is best known for her collaborations with Yasujirō Ozu. I believe this is the only film in which Kurosawa and Hara worked together and I’m fascinated by how Kurosawa uses the actress in a way Ozu never would. There’s nothing particularly noteworthy in its execution so this isn’t considered to be a great film. But making this film in 1946 must have been an incredibly bold artistic statement and I really have to admire that.

Not long ago, I wrote about how Jafar Panahi’s newer films seem darker than his older ones. Well, I was wrong because I’ve now gone back to watch this and it’s far more depressing. Rather than having a central narrative, this film consists of a series of vignettes about a group of women who are all victims of the Iranian government and society. This is raw and brutal in a way that Panahi’s later aren’t. Even so I detect some amateurishness at this stage of his career, such as the way the camera sometimes focuses on details that are irrelevant.