criterionforum.org

Update from Oregon: Albert Maysles was the honoree at the Ashland Independent Film Festival this weekend, and he gave a presentation on his upcoming autobiographical film "Handheld from the Heart." He showed clips from (among others) the Capote, Brando, and Ali films, and specifically mentioned that Meet Marlon Brando will be on DVD at the end of the year (though he did not say from who). He didn't say anything about the other flicks, but he did casually mention Criterion in relation to Grey Gardens, Gimme Shelter, et al. He seems to have a high opinion of them.

I guess that means it's possible that Meet Marlon Brando could be part of an Eclipse set, but consider that if it was paired with the other two short films mentioned in this thread, it would be only a single disc, which is unprecedented for Eclipse.

Anyways, Maysles is way hard of hearing so I didn't bother asking him about Criterion when I got to shake his hand. He was selling his overpriced book, and like a sucker, I bought it. Great guy, great show.

Gropius wrote:

Antoine Doinel wrote:The BFI is in the midst of a complete retrospective of their work.

Yeah, I've looked through the listings for that, and I can't help feeling - from the descriptions alone - that, in thematic terms, Albert Maysles has spent most of his career punching below his weight. The 'direct cinema' aesthetic is one with massive potential, and yet, with the obvious exception of Salesman and a couple of others, most of the subjects of the films are people who already had plenty of attention (The Beatles, Stones, Truman Capote, Christo - even, although it's not mentioned in that retro, Britney Spears).
Of course one could argue that the Maysles camera gets behind the facade, or picks up on the revealing incidental details at pop concerts or press conferences or art installations. But I still feel like they might have made more films about 'everyday' people or situations where cameras don't usually go (one that does sound more in this vein is Lalee's Kin, a 2001 film about poverty in Mississippi).

I've been thinking the same. And with Pennebaker as well. For all their skills, most of the films for which they are recognized are of course celebrities or rock bands that already have followings and that allow them to get financing for the films. Even Grey Gardens I'm sure benefitted greatly from being "the Bouvier cousins." Salesman is the great exception. Don't Look Back and Gimme Shelter might be great films, but would they be known, or have gotten made, if the subjects weren't Dylan and the Stones? And furthermore, is there anything that special about teh filmmaking in either of those? I dare say there are several hundred additional documentary filmmakers who could have pulled off direct cinema films following Dylan and the Stones that would be equally skillful & interesting. I think one main skill that they must have had was in selling themselves as documentary filmmakers to various bands and managers in the early and mid 1960s. of course, there weren't so many people doing it at that time, so I am probably underselling them. (And mind you , I really like all the films under discussion here.)

Adam wrote:Don't Look Back and Gimme Shelter might be great films, but would they be known, or have gotten made, if the subjects weren't Dylan and the Stones? And furthermore, is there anything that special about teh filmmaking in either of those?

I wholeheartedly disagree about Gimme Shelter, which has an amazing frame story format, cross-cutting between the Stones watching a rough cut, the Madison Square Garden concert, and the planning for Altamont, with the last half of the film at Altamont being in stark contrast to everything we've seen before. The ending showing people walking down a hill while Gimme Shelter blares, and the close-up of Mick at the very end, are breathtaking, not to mention that the cinematography is at all times excellent (the cohesion, beauty, and luminosity of the Madison Square concert is especially great, while the Altamont concert has a more journalistic, on-the-fly mode).

I could say similar things about Don't Look Back, which I like a lot less than Gimme Shelter.

Gropius wrote:But I still feel like they might have made more films about 'everyday' people or situations where cameras don't usually go

The Maysles have to their name Yanki No!, The Burks of Georgia, Abortion, Letting Go, and Lalee's Kin. These movies don't get as much play, nor are they available on DVD; add to that list Salesman, the first non-fiction feature, and several films (some never completed) made about regions like Kenya, Cuba, Russia, and Poland.

I also think it's worthwhile to examine the types of artists and celebrities that Maysles has filmed: he's filmed actors, dancers, novelists, boxers, lots of musicians (including conductors and pianists who, however famous, are hardly box office draws), and the Christos.

I don't understand how anyone who's seen a Maysles film can say that it's NOT about regular people: most of Gimme Shelter's Altamont footage focuses on the audience. The Christo films are more about people's reactions than the difficulty in pulling off the projects. And I can't tell what you mean when you say

Adam wrote:Even Grey Gardens I'm sure benefitted greatly from being "the Bouvier cousins."

Do you mean it benefited in publicity? Sure, who cares. Do you mean that this knowledge actually gives the movie aesthetic weight? I'd disagree wholeheartedly, and so would Albert Maysles. I had the chance to interview Mr. Maysles over the telephone before he rolled into town, and he had this comment about Grey Gardens (exact quote):

Albert Maysles wrote:I know that the Beales are related to Jackie and some people have thought, oh, that's the reason that we made the film. No. It was the interest in them as people, these two women.

Not that we NEED that quote based on the final product, which is totally human and more about the effects of lingering wealth than distant celebrity (among many other things).

Another thing that Mr. Maysles told me when I interviewed him was that he has trouble getting financing for his movies. Les Blank said the same thing when he was in town last year. How interesting that in each of these cases, their most famous films are about famous people? These are the ones that get attention, and Al Maysles has to take on work for hire even today to support his private projects, like the upcoming In Transit and a movie about the private conversations of 3 to 6 year olds. It's no wonder that the Maysles filmed celebrities (and made damn good movies about them) because that's where the work was. The fact that they made so many great films about regular people too (that were often edited or altered by the TV networks that paid for them) should be applauded.

Excellent counter-arguments. It behooves me to see the other Maysles films that you list before making such comments. I should program them. He's in LA this week, for book signings and showings of various things with the Beatles, Marlon Brando, and so forth.