criterionforum.org

Ken Loach's films more often than not receive very enthusiastic reviews, but in these same reviews his films have always come across to me as somewhat drab and dogmatic in their insistence on tackling important social issues, so I admit that I have so far always found something else to watch that I imagined would be more uplifting and exciting from a cinematic perspective.

Last night I watched KES on DVD, and it was as I expected a very socially conscious film. It takes place in a mining town in the North of England, and concerns a young boy, who can best be termed as a social misfit. He is an outsider, absent-present of mind, slight of build, given to tall stories and the occasional act of petty larceny, at odds with his bullying brother at home, and bullied by his classmates and teachers at school. He is clearly headed for a career in the penitentiary or the mine shaft.

Then he comes across the nest of a kestrel, and takes one of its young hatchlings home. He raises and trains the bird, and for a little while the bird of prey becomes the very reason for his existence -- the object of all his attention and love.

I suppose that I was not surprised at the authenticity with which Loach rendered the mining community, or the sincerity of his commitment to the boy and the people that surround him. However, I was surprised at how effective and affecting the film was. It was not drab or dogmatic, but rather sweet and sad in all its honesty.

I would be interested in reading what other people have thought of KES and any of Loach's other films. Which would you recommend, and how have they been served on DVD?

Kes is mighty! It is the film (of those that I have seen) in which Loach best succeeds primarily because he does not let the social/political dogma drown the human aspects of the film - which in its own way is 'ironic' because it is a film about a boy who is crushed by his environment..but you know what I mean! If I remember correctly the DVD of Kes is meant to be crap.

Of the others I have seen, I highly recommend 'Sweet Sixteen' and 'My Name is Joe'. These are two top class films but for me don't have that unexplainable magic of Kes. Ladybird Ladybird is also very good but not quite his best work.
Wait for t.v. for: Hidden Agenda, Riff-Raff.

Hope this helps...

Thanks for the recomendations Don Lope!

I have decided to leave it to others to comment on the quality of the DVDs... (I am afraid that I am way too forgiving, when it comes to the quality of the DVDs). The DVD I watched last night was a cheap MGM R2 disc that I picked up at a bulk sale at Border's this winter... It was another instance of just wanting to see the film... It is definitely one that I would upgrade, if it is released in a nicer version.

I love almost all the films by Ken Loach that I've seen. They're not quite like anyone else's work, and I think the common comparisons to John Sayles and Mike Leigh don't shed a lot of light on anything. I would be fascinated to know how Sayles would have made Land and Freedom, for example, but I imagine it would have been quite a bit different. Sayles probably would have focused more on the interlocking relationships among a broad cross-section of people involved on all sides of the conflict. Loach's Land and Freedom centers more on one main character, a communist from the U.K. (contrary to what the title, historically an anarchist rallying banner, might lead one to expect). Many points of view were intentionally underrepresented by Loach -- this is almost inevitable given the subject and the runtime of less than two hours. As with Sayles' Matewan, I found myself wishing the film were much longer. However, what Loach does show us of the conflict is compelling and profound, and the acting and direction combine to form a film that in my opinion far surpasses its often lukewarm reputation, and which should stand throughout the ages, (and should at least come back into print in R1). The R2 from Artificial Eye has a generally excellent transfer and includes a Loach commentary and a BBC making-of documentary.
Carla's Song is another that I think is underappreciated. (Unfortunately, I haven't seen this one on DVD). Part of the reason I liked the film so well is my interest in the terrorist wars in 1980s Central America, but I think it touches very well on far broader themes such as whether to (and how to) escape a conflict in which one's loved ones are still trapped. I don't recall a huge amount of romantic chemistry between the two main characters, but it does link them together and provide a means to explore their divergent backgrounds and potential compatibility in spite of these differences. The performances, and the ways the supporting characters tie together interlocking aspects of the events, are for the most part outstanding.
The same is true, I think, of The Navigators, both as an excellent ensemble film and an astute exploration of workplace politics. Bread and Roses covers some similar ground but is a fairly standard drama which will appeal mainly to those interested in labor issues, and less so more general insights about human interaction. The idea that in Loach's films the politics come before everything else is generally not true at all, but I think one might accurately be able to make that observation about Bread and Roses.
I haven't seen Kes in a long time but I would love to see a R1 release of it. By the way, the price of Hidden Agenda just dropped so it is possible to find this much cheaper at many online retailers. It's a find DVD for the money.
Finally, I'll second the recommendation for Sweet Sixteen. As well as being a superblyl acted drama it has to be, along with The King of Comedy, one of the most strikingly Oedipal films I've ever seen. The DVD is pretty good, especially for Lion's Gate. As with The Navigators I think a gritty appearance was the intended look.

When I wrote the post above, I said that descriptions of Loach's films have generally left me cold in the past. The one exception would actually be LAND AND FREEDOM, which I remember mentally making a note of at the time when it came out, and now you and Don Lope's heartfelt recommendations. Thank you for taking the time to go into some detail on these films.

Loach can err on the side of earnest and schematic, but when he works, it's great stuff.

My favourite film of his, and one of my most harrowing film-viewing experiences, is Family Life - the story of a troubled girl at the mercy of her family and the psychiatric authorities. It features some of the greatest screen acting (at least I hope it's acting) I've ever seen.

Carla's Song went off the rails when the script transferred to Nicaragua. It started off as a classic Loach "grim up North" tale (albeit with some flavour in the form of Carla and her story) and suddenly became a war film. I'm not saying the section set in Nicaragua was bad (I could have done without the anti-US/Contra sermonising though - but this is Loach) I found the switch from Glasgow to be difficult to adjust to and in plot terms, contrived. Robert Carlyle was excellent, though.

King of Kong wrote:I could have done without the anti-US/Contra sermonising though - but this is Loach

I would have been frustrated with the film if it hadn't mentioned the crucial US role in the Nicaragua conflict -- without that one can't understand what happened. And I think it had to be pretty explicit for viewers not already well-informed to grasp it. I don't mean to sound condescending to the average viewer but I've had so many experiences of walking out of a theater and hearing people say, "The thing they said about (insert major world event) was interesting. I had no idea!" This would be especially true for Carla's Song, made in 1996, because people have such short memories.
However, please not that I'm NOT saying that the difficulty in breaking through the walls of ignorance and apathy therefore justify any artistic decision about the tone of the writing. I think Loach understands the importance of subtlety (by conventional criteria of his type and era of dramatic film) and how to be subtle, but he does not confine himself to that. What it boils down to is what is appropriate for the characters and the story. In Carla's Song I thought the writing for the Bradley character was entirely appropriate for a battle-hardened human rights activist and Sandinista ally who is angry over what he is witnessing and angry with himself for his past as a CIA advisor. The urgency of what is going on around him, and what it means to him personally, makes it impossible for him to suffer fools gladly.
To summarize what I'm saying, generally: Although I find many of the themes explored by Loach so pitifully lacking in substantive form in most media that I rejoice when I see someone presenting them as thoughtfully as Loach does in most cases -- I don't want to or need to be preached to or hit over the head with obvious lessons. But I think for an openly political filmmaker, Loach does amazingly little of these things. Maybe he should if he wanted more general audiences to really get his films. This is probably to a great extent why his films aren't more popular and available in good editions.

zedz wrote:My favourite film of his, and one of my most harrowing film-viewing experiences, is Family Life - the story of a troubled girl at the mercy of her family and the psychiatric authorities. It features some of the greatest screen acting (at least I hope it's acting) I've ever seen.

I want to see his television work but have not had the chance. Cathy Come Home was available in the UK (now OOP?). I wonder what the chances are of these surfacing.

how have they been served on DVD?

About half of Loach's twenty-seven features have been released on DVD, with about half of those currently in print in one region or another. The best of these, in terms of presentation on DVD, are the AE edition of Land and Freedom, and the R1 releases of Sweet Sixteen and Bread and Roses. Some of the other Loach releases on DVD have been abysmal, like the Fox Lorber edition (surprise!) of Raining Stones, or seriously compromised by the absence of subtitles, like the comparatively recent R1 version of The Navigators. (Because Loach insists on retaining the integrity of his characters' regional dialects, subtitles are indispensable for even many English-speaking viewers.) There is a French box set that is, reportedly, something of a mixed bag in terms of presentation quality.

Loach's work is highly unfashionable, thematically and stylistically. His films about working class men and women are politically didactic, rendered in a manner most often labeled “realist,â€

seriously compromised by the absence of subtitles....(Because Loach insists on retaining the integrity of his characters' regional dialects, subtitles are indispensable for even many English-speaking viewers.)

I've always been curious about/amused by this...

Don't you find that you get used to the accents after a while?

Well, Don Lope, having gone back and forth to UK (mainly London) on a monthly basis for the past 12 months, and having been further up North (Birmingham, Glasgow) on a couple of occasions, let me just say that PYGMALION takes on new meaning... so many dialects!

I have read this about Ken Loach's films as well... I am not sure if KES is considered difficult, but I think you are right that if you stick with the film and engage, then at some stage your ears adjust. I would almost feel wrong, watching this particular film with subtitles -- the coloquiality of the film begin such an intrinsic element of the whole style of the film. There are words that you miss here and there, but that does not really bother me or obstruct my understanding of the film (I think )... maybe I am more accustomed to this challenge, since English is my second language.

Don't you find that you get used to the accents after a while?

There are words that you miss here and there, but that does not really bother me or obstruct my understanding of the film (I think )...

Some of Loach's films are more easily intelligible than others, but they are set in locales across the UK (excepting Bread and Roses), and many of them feature dialects that are most difficult to track for non-regional natives. I love this element of Loach's practice and am not troubled by availing myself of subtitles to stay in the flow of dialogue, but I'm sure the language issue is one more obstacle to wider distribution of Loach's movies.

Disclaimer: I spent much of my youth hugging concert speakers in Detroit rock clubs, so I need subtitles for many American films as well.

Gregory wrote:I want to see his television work but have not had the chance. Cathy Come Home was available in the UK (now OOP?). I wonder what the chances are of these surfacing.

Cathy Come Home is available at cd-wow:

http://www6.cd-wow.com/detail_results_2 ... code=22862

Thank you, I just ordered it and I hope they'll ship it. I looked for it at three different CD-Wow sites, including in the warehouse, and didn't find it. By pasting the product number from your link over that part of the url of a product on the U.S. site, I found the product there and was able to get it even more cheaply.

By pasting the product number from your link over that part of the url of a product on the U.S. site, I found the product there and was able to get it even more cheaply.

I just did the same, Gregory. To further move the topic off its rails, if you muck around with the product codes surrounding Cathy Come Home's product code, you stumble upon some other BFI discs that don't normally come up in their (increasingly frustrating) search engine.

For example, Whistle and I'll Come to You is 22868, Ossessione is 22866, and Playtime 22864. I'm sure if you fiddle around longer than I did, you can find many more. Now if Miguel will just tell us how he managed to find the Loach disc in the first place...

neuro wrote:Now if Miguel will just tell us how he managed to find the Loach disc in the first place...

I used the cd-wow watch dog monitor at http://www.dvdbargain.net

It was all downhill after Kes, to put it mildly.

Barmy wrote:It was all downhill after Kes, to put it mildly.

Family Life, Looks and Smiles, Riff-Raff, Raining Stones, Ladybird Ladybird, Land and Freedom, My Name Is Joe, Sweet Sixteen....and a Palme d'Or this year...

Most directors would kill to go "downhill" like that!

Gregory wrote:Thank you, I just ordered it and I hope they'll ship it. I looked for it at three different CD-Wow sites, including in the warehouse, and didn't find it. By pasting the product number from your link over that part of the url of a product on the U.S. site, I found the product there and was able to get it even more cheaply.

Ordered it for 10 pounds at cd-wow on Monday and I just got an email that it was shipping today. (amazon.co.uk has it for 30 pounds!)

Gregory wrote:Thank you, I just ordered it and I hope they'll ship it. I looked for it at three different CD-Wow sites, including in the warehouse, and didn't find it. By pasting the product number from your link over that part of the url of a product on the U.S. site, I found the product there and was able to get it even more cheaply.

Ordered "Cathy Come Home" for 10 pounds at cd-wow on Monday and I just got an email that it was shipping today. (amazon.co.uk has it for 30 pounds!)

Wasn't sure where to post this info, but some folks around here might be interested to know that a UK company named Spirit Entertainment will be repackaging most of Loach's previously available films into two boxsets. (Release date is set for 3rd September.)

Amazon link for volume I

Amazon link for volume II

I can't determine yet if these are new masters or merely reissues. Kes certainly deserves something better than the existing R2 disc, but the current specs indicate that the disc for that film in this new set will only contain a trailer. So it doesn't sound good....

Nevertheless, each volume will contain a bonus disc with extra material, and volume I will contain the never-before-released Gamekeeper. Perhaps best of all, those of us who missed out on the BFI disc of Cathy Come Home will find that title in volume II. Looks like my patience paid off! (I would have spent about the same amount as the SRP for volume II just to get that disc from Amazon.UK's marketplace.)

In what one hopes would be a growing trend for filmmakers, legally authorized uploads of some of Ken Loach's films are available for viewing on Youtube. So far, Poor Cow, The Gamekeeper, The Flickering Flame and Cathy Comes Home are up there. There would be more up there if not for the usual copyright hangups. Here's two articles on the idea behind this:
Timesonline
Deadline Hollywood

I recall seeing Kes and Sweet Sixteen on there a few weeks ago, so watch them sooner or later.

A previously withdrawn Ken Loach short film from 1969 is about to get its first public screening (the BBC article linked to has a nice audio piece interviewing Ken Loach and the current Chief Executive of Save The Children):

Will Gompertz wrote:He told me that it was not his original intention to make a film criticising Save the Children, but after researching the organisation he felt compelled to report what he saw. The documentary depicts the charity mostly in poor light and as an old-fashioned, bigoted, snobbish, cruel and manipulative organisation.

It opens with scenes of rundown terraces on the outskirts of Manchester while a narrator tells us that the children who live in the houses are taken-away from time-to-time by Save the Children for a jolly good scrub.

We see and hear from the austere Auntie Lena and disciplinarian Uncle Chris; then employees of Save the Children and into whose care, kids as young as nine were put for a number of weeks. Tales of cold baths, beatings and indoctrination ensues.

We then take off to Nairobi and to a special school run by Save the Children. It is a surreal set-up where vulnerable Kenyan children are plucked from the street and selected for the charity's very traditionally British educational institution where their native tongue is banned and they are taught to read and appreciate PG Wodehouse. It is a bizarre passage.

Maybe naively, given Save the Children helped fund the production, Loach didn't think they'd be a problem with getting his documentary shown. His confidence was predicated on the knowledge that London Weekend Television (now part of ITV) had paid the lion's share (two-thirds) of the budget and had commissioned the film. He felt certain LWT would back him up and screen the programme. He was wrong.

According to Loach an agreement was eventually reached where LWT / Save the Children would not sue him as long as the film was never shown.

Apparently the preference of the joint-funders was to destroy the film but they had consented at the last moment to the BFI (British Film Institute) keeping a copy as long they "threw away the key". The film was duly retained by the BFI, as was the key.

To put it in context Peter Watkins' The War Game, the nuclear war film, only had to wait twenty years for a first public showing. The Save The Children Fund Film is 42 years old this year.

colinr0380 wrote:To put it in context Peter Watkins' The War Game, the nuclear war film, only had to wait twenty years for a first public showing.

Actually, The War Game was widely screened in public from the year of its production (it even won an Oscar in 1966) - it's only the BBC that refused to show it until the mid-1980s.

By contrast, until a few weeks ago the Save the Children Fund Film hadn't been shown to anyone other than Loach, producer Tony Garnett, its postproduction team, the SCF backers and a handful of BFI archivists.

A better comparison might be with Alan Clarke's original version of Scum (1977), which I don't think had any public screenings until 1991 - but even then the gap is nowhere near as big, and of course Clarke remade it in a widely-circulated version in 1979.