james urbaniak

Possible Films: Short Works by Hal Hartley 1994-2004

/ swampflix / 1 Comment

I was unfortunately out of town or otherwise indisposed when my local arthouse theater recently hosted a showcase of Hal Hartley films. I’m not terribly familiar with the director’s work, but the promotional videos that were cut together for the screenings were very enticing. Unfortunately, the films that were shown have proven difficult to locate elsewhere, even despite the presence of my local, resurrected, independent video store. What they did have readily available was a collection of his shorts, a 2004 DVD release titled Possible Films: Short Works by Hal Hartley 1994-2004, which included eight titles that added up to be a bit of a mixed bag. 

First up is Opera No. 1, described by one online review as the most accessible of the shorts, which has born itself out to be relatively true. It’s a condensation of an operatic story about love and loss starring Parker Posey and James Urbaniak alongside the late Adrienne Shelly, who was a frequent collaborator with Hartley. Shelly and Posey play roller-skating angels among other characters within a narrative that Urbaniak is simultaneously both composing and living (I think). Twelfth Night is alluded to through an apparent gender swap for one of Shelly’s characters (again—I think), but the narrative isn’t really what’s important here so much as the image and, if you’ll forgive me, the vibe. Urbaniak’s placement on a precarious-looking scaffold as he writes out scenes then balls the paper in his fist evokes a sense of what it is to create: to endanger oneself through exposure of your innermost thoughts stage and the frustration that comes when one tries to contort the world into something more beautiful and manageable but failing to capture the same. Posey and Shelly are ethereal as angels, skating about in an empty theatre behind and between rows of empty seats, but the transcendent is also made human in that they also seem to love smoking. 

Opera No. 1 is followed immediately by The Other Also. Apparently, this second short began life as an art gallery installation, and I can neither improve upon nor dispute a contemporary A.V. Club review from Keith Phipps which stated this was “arguably the only place where a single out-of-focus shot of two actresses circling each other in slow motion to the accompaniment of an ambient score and a haltingly repeated Bible passage would be welcome.” It was at this point in my initial viewing that I stopped the DVD and decided to engage with the shorts individually, with some distance between them. 

The third short, the dialogue-free The New Math(s), is a return to something a little more “formful,” a film that is truly experimental in the sense that one feels Hartley trying out different techniques to see if they work. In an abandoned warehouse, two people sit at desks in a makeshift classroom. One, a man whose suspenders and short pants code him as youthful (David Neumann), contemplates an apple, while the other, a woman (Miho Nikaido, Hartley’s wife) works diligently on the math equation set before the two of them. A third character, their apparent teacher (D.J. Mendel) gets on and off of a freight elevator elsewhere in the building. When the woman appears to complete the equation, a non-violent kung-fu style battle seems to break out as each party pursues one another through the empty building, parts of which are likewise etched with other elaborate mathematical equations. The woman pulls a lever, machines elsewhere begin to move, and then their apparent activation seems to no longer be tied to the lever but to the woman herself, with the possible interpretation that the equation somehow delineates or even affects the passage of time. There’s something almost distinctly “public broadcasting” about it, from the grainy film quality to the overuse of the swoop and swoosh noises that come from parodying kung-fu sequences to the very Square One use of math(s) as a narrative device. I feel like I can see Hartley in the editing bay, working out how to convey the starting and stopping of time through the use of heavy machinery footage that may have been free to license, or him pushing the limits of his ability to capture fighting on screen and whether he had a knack for it. As with Opera No. 1, there’s little to say about the narrative or plot, but there is something interesting about the energy and the fun of getting to watch a filmmaker try out some new things. 

The fourth short, entitled NYC 3/94, follows four characters. The first is a man portrayed by Dwight Ewell (most recognizable to me from his long-ago Kevin Smith collaborations, most notably as Hooper the Black, gay comic book writer in Chasing Amy) who finds himself standing at the edge of a roof. The shot cuts away and we find him on the ground, apparently unharmed, where he meets a woman (Lianna Pai) who helps him to his feet. All around them, the sounds of war rage. Elsewhere, another man (Urbaniak again) reads out a jeremiad for the present day, narrating the inevitable collapse that we see taking place on the street. The final character, a man in a suit (Paul Schulze, whom I couldn’t place until I looked him up; he’s Father Intintola from The Sopranos), asks to be let into a place where Ewell and Pai’s characters have taken shelter and apparently dies in the street, but who is later seen escaping with the other two characters. Apparently, the audio was taken from “the war from the former Yugoslavia” (according to the aforementioned Phipps review), and the supposed mundanity of a civilization in collapse is effectively captured via the fact that the short is shot guerrilla style. As our three characters duck and cover from violence that only exists in the audio track and thus is only inferred through the magic of filmmaking in the images, people in the background mill about and go about their daily lives, “oblivious” to the “war” around them. It’s a neat little piece. 

The Sisters of Mercy is the fifth short and consists of seventeen minutes of outtakes between Posey and Sabrina Lloyd (from Sliders!) as they rehearse for Hartley’s short film Iris (not included on the disc), which is set to the song of the same name by The Breeders. It’s interesting from a technical point of view and mostly in conversation with the avante garde music video that for which it is, for all intents and purposes, supplementary material. Iris clocks in at under four minutes long, and Sisters of Mercy works to show how much work actually goes into a much shorter completed piece of art. As an individual piece, there’s little more to say about it, as it feels like an orphaned DVD extra. I did seek out and find Iris on the Criterion streaming collection, though, and it’s pretty good! 

I have to admit that I messed up a little here. Seeing Sisters of Mercy, Iris, and Regarding Soon on the Criterion Channel, I decided not to rush through the remainder of the shorts and instead return the DVD to my local video store, only to discover that the next short, Kimono, was not only not on Criterion, but all but impossible to find online. I would have to rent it all over again, I assumed, until I accidentally misspelled the director’s last name as “Hartly” in one of my Googlings, and discovered the 27-minute short in its entirety … on a porn site. I don’t know that I would call it pornographic, but there should be no mistaking the fact that this is an erotic film. A woman (Nikaido again) is a woman in a wedding dress who is ejected from a New Beetle (this was released in 1999, after all) in a deserted area. She wanders through woods and fields, slowly shedding parts of her wedding dress until she’s down to her lacy undergarments, all the time pursued by two woman that the IMDb page identifies as wood nymphs (Valerie Celis and Yun Shen). Once she’s shed every part of the bridal attire, she redresses herself in a kimono that she finds in a rundown house in the woods. She appears to fall asleep, whereupon a ghost whispers something to her while the observing nymphs cover their ears. Intermittently, poetic phrases float up on screen (ex.: “In this world / love has no color / and who knows how / my body is marked by yours”). They appear in broken lines, and it’s unfortunate that the effect is something like you would see in a contemporary film trailer for a suspense thriller (you know the effect I’m talking about, even if you can’t pinpoint the last time you saw it). It lends the whole experience the effect that it’s an advertisement for something else, and with a runtime of nearly thirty minutes, that’s a negative. On the other hand, this is a beautifully photographed piece, and one which shows that, even before the term “wife guy” was coined, Hartley was pioneering what that meant when it came to making a piece of art about how much he loves his hot wife.

Regarding Regarding Soon, this ten-minute film features Hartley talking about the creation of his stage play Soon, which was inspired by the Branch Davidian massacre and revolves around millennialist end-times Christianity in America. In his review of the DVD, Robert Spuhler noted that Sisters of Mercy was “probably [his] favorite as an actor” because of its insight into the creative process. Regarding Soon turned out to be one of my favorites probably because of my (well documented) interest in American eschatology. The play largely consists of arguments between seven characters about scriptural interpretation and interpolation, and the concept of “creative religiosity,” most notably the way that both religion and art are attempts we mere mortals make at attempting to understand the nature of existence. There doesn’t seem to be a performance of the play online in any format that I can find, but there must have been a publication of the script at some point since it has a presence on GoodReads, and we do get some images of the performance on this DVD, which is nice. I recently saw part of Hartley’s 1989 film The Unbelievable Truth and was struck by the pointedness and efficiency of its dream-like dialogue, how it presaged the kind of quick-witted linguistic playfulness and melodramatic delivery that would go on (sometimes for better, sometimes for worse) to be a characteristic of works like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Gregg Araki’s Nowhere, and Gilmore Girls. It seems like this was the mode for Soon as well, and I hope I get to see a production of it or get the chance to read the script at some point in the future. For something that’s essentially a supplementary text for a larger work, this one held my attention quite well, and it was fascinating to hear Hartley talk about his creative process and confirm some of the things that I had already assumed about him from the previous entries in this anthology. He describes himself as minimalist by nature and how he enjoys working within a “restricted palette,” and I think that came through in all of these in one way or another. 

Ultimately, this collection wasn’t what I expected. Probably a must-view only for Hartley completionists, a few films feel like they are included here just because they had to be stored somewhere in order to be cited in his feature works, or feel like diary entries from production, which has a limited audience. I think that most others would get just as much out of watching the ones that sound interesting to them on the Criterion Channel (or whatever porn site you can find Kimono on).

-Mark “Boomer” Redmond 

Things Heard and Seen (2021)

/ swampflix / 3 Comments

Things Heard and Seen is good, actually. I don’t know if people are simply unprepared for reckoning with the fact that, if you live with ghosts and a gaslighter, the abuser is still the most dangerous thing in your house, or if this is another instance of modern audiences having been infantilized with jump scare horror pablum to the point that slow burns are impenetrable, but don’t believe the backlash. Maybe I should know better by now than to wonder why a film like Things Heard and Seen is treated with so much derision by the general public, resulting in largely negative reviews of both the professional and armchair variety. I suppose that derivativity, like beauty, must be in the eye of the beholder, especially when one of the negative reviews that I read had to stretch all the way back to What Lies Beneath to find something specific to which Heard and Seen could be compared (negatively, and illegitimately I think). There were a few writers I saw who also felt a little bit of a connection to The Shining as well, which is practically unavoidable given its subject matter, but the film also seems to be doing some of that intentionally, given its 1980 setting and its snowy conclusion. Overall, this felt fresh to me in a way that apparently it did not to others.

Successful art restorer Catherine Clare (Amanda Seyfried) lives in Manhattan with her husband George (James Norton) and daughter Fanny. George was once a painter of no small talent and has recently finished his dissertation. At Fanny’s birthday party, the couple share the news with their family and friends that they are moving to upstate New York, where George has secured a teaching position at the fictional liberal arts college Saginaw, near the town of Chosen, also fictional, in the real Hudson Valley. We learn that George was very recently cut off financially by his parents, and that Catherine only became aware of their prior dependency once that funding source dried up. We also learn that Catherine has an eating disorder, as she generally eats a starvation diet and purges after having one bite of Fanny’s cake.

The two get set up in a beautiful, if unmaintained, farm house by real estate agent Mare Laughton (Karen Allen), and the domesticity of this life isolates Catherine pretty quickly. This isolation isn’t helped by the fact that she almost immediately begins to see evidence of a haunting in their new home: she smells phantom, inexplicable gas fumes, occasionally sees lights that seemingly have no origin, and discovers personal items of previous occupants that appear cursed at best, including a ring jammed in a window sash and an ancient Bible belonging to the house’s first owner, a man of the cloth, in which certain names have been scratched out and replaced with only the word “damned.” For his part, George immediately seems to get along with his colleagues, especially Floyd DeBeers (F. Murray Abraham), the department chair who offered George the position based on his glowing letter of recommendation and his thesis on the work of Hudson Valley School founder Thomas Cole. He compliments George for the section of his thesis that pertained to Cole’s religious ideas, which were of the Spiritualist ideas that largely derived from the theological work of Emanuel Swedenborg; George shrugs off this praise, noting that Cole’s Spiritualism was the issue with which he struggled the most in the composition of his dissertation. When they meet, Catherine and DeBeers immediately hit it off, as he likewise notes that there is something in her house that George refuses to see. 

Despite George’s passive controlling of Catherine’s social circle, she still manages to form relationships with a few locals and some of George’s other peers, including the Vayle brothers, college-aged Eddie (Alex Neustaedter) and younger teen Cole (Jack Gore), as well as “adjunct weaving instructor” Justine Sokolov (Rhea Seehorn, who steals the show), George’s colleague and wife of fellow instructor—and marijuana cultivator—Bran (James Urbaniak). Meanwhile, George strikes up a relationship with Willis (Natalia Dyer), an Ivy League student home from school, against her better judgment. When he decides to throw a party for his colleagues, Catherine insists (over George’s pretentious objections) that they also invite their neighbors, and it is from Marie that Catherine learns about the tragic deaths of the last couple who lived in the house, and that not only was George intentionally keeping this information from her, he also kept secret that Eddie and Cole are actually their surviving children. George’s other lies, perhaps a lifetime of them, start to unravel, and so does he, as Catherine learns from the local spiritualists that evil spirits only commune with evil people, and that the spirits she sees in the house are actually there to protect her, and that she should listen to their warnings. 

There’s a lot of art discussion happening, and I’m always interested in that. There’s a little quotation that I like from video essayist and artist Lola Sebastian that I really love and think about all the time, because it articulates something that I could never express so succinctly and with such ineffably quiet brevity. She’s specifically writing about Sufjan Stevens, but her statement has much further reaching and broader implications about the importance of acknowledging the wider human experience outside of the various American pop culture meccas that we see over and over again: “Rich lives [and] big stories happen everywhere, to everyone.” George is a person who fails to see that, even a little bit, because of his obsession with being a person of status. He takes money from his parents to support the family in New York until they can’t help him any longer, and he decides that if he’s going to have to live upstate, he’ll be spending time only with those he deems fit company for a man of his standing, so only his academic colleagues and none of the family’s rural local neighbors. And given that he himself knows that he only has his position fraudulently, we know that he must be performing a constant tightrope act of delusion and self-deception. He’s a truly infuriating character, and that he can be so damned frustrating while attempting to come off as friendly and affable is a testament to a truly great performance by Norton. He effectively captures that ineffable quality of being smug but incredibly fragile, like a balloon that’s constantly threatening to burst. 

This is not a movie that you can watch half-heartedly while also doomscrolling or thinking about your grocery list. It’s decompressed, but that’s the point; it creates a painting before you, giving you enough time to see every detail and every brush stroke, and peopling its landscape with fully realized characters who are as believable as if they were flesh and blood. It requires all of your attention, and if you can give it all of that, you’ll be rewarded. 

-Mark “Boomer” Redmond