The Saddest Music in the World

Rating:
Summary: Empty ironies signifying nothing
Review: A super-stylish, overly-artful dark, absurdist farce about an embittered, parapeligic Canadian barkeep (Isabella Rosellini) who stages a cynical, showy contest to find the saddest song in the world (and help raise her beer sales while the world weeps 'round its radio sets...) Although I was engaged enough to sit through the whole film, immediately afterwards (and for large chunks of the viewing itself) I felt that I wasted my time watching it. It's painfully derivative of David Lynch's work (which I've never been overly fond of...) along with the same sort of kinetic, surrealistic visual absurdism as movies like "City Of Lost Children" and "Amelie." This is a well-crafted film, in terms of its look, the editing, and the elaborate cinematographic trickery, but the easy irony and lack of true emotional substance ultimately makes it an artsy cinematic puff piece.

Rating:
Summary: A Brilliant and Surrealistic Expression of Melancholy...
Review: Art is a subjective experience with no necessarily functional purpose, but with the intent to create a unique happening as time and place are relative to the creator's approach to the moment of conceptualization of an impression. The impression art has on it's audience is relative to the audience's acquired values, morals, and beliefs, which are based on life long experiences. The obtained knowledge will help skew the audience's appreciation of the art in the direction of like or dislike. This means that the appreciation of the art is completely in the hands of the spectator as knowledge and wisdom function as a guide. One of these art forms is music as it produces a subjective happening as the listener makes their own judgment based on their past experiences and values, which makes it desirable or not.

In the Saddest Music of the World Lady Port-Huntley (Isabella Rossellini) arranges a musical competition, in Winnipeg, Canada, at peak of the Great Depression. The Great Depression, a time when people suffered from starvation, poverty, and homelessness in great numbers throughout many parts of the world, has a special spot in American history. This was a time when United States enforced the law of prohibition, yet alcohol was still easily accessible in illegal clubs and bars where people could drown their sorrows. Misery was plentiful and an income was hard to come by, which made the $25,000 winning reward in the music competition extremely attractive as many had plenty of misery to share. However, the music competition was a front for corporate greed as the winning music was intended to help increase the revenues for alcohol sales, as prohibition was nearing its end.

The story opens with Chester Kent's (Mark McKinney) visit to a blind seer in Winnipeg where he is told to look into his own lost soul and listen to seer's warning. Chester does not take the warning seriously. Instead Chester takes the opportunity to have a sexual encounters with his nymphomaniac mistress and traveling companion Narcissa (Maria de Medeiros) while insulting the seer at the end. This moment sets up Chester's character, which seems to be driven by an enterprising greed and cruelty towards those in his path, while missing the important aspects of life. Chester also has certain levels of talent to create music, but he does not possess the ability to feel the musical experience as he seems to lack the wisdom.

After the brief introduction of Chester the audience is to follow him on his reunion with his former lover and brewery owner Lady Port-Huntley, his father, Fyodor (David Fox), and his long lost Serbian brother, Roderick (Ross McMillan). Chester's reunion brings several flashbacks to the audience where the viewer can witness the tragedy behind the family whose pain is about to be exploited on the stage as they all compete for the $25,000. These flashbacks show how Lady Port-Huntley lost her legs by the alcoholic hands of Fyodor and how Roderick lost his son followed by his wife leaving him. When these people meet again it tears up old scars that never seemed to have healed, which causes further anguish among those involved.

The competition becomes a farce where the true beauty of the musical art is exploited and measured by how much beer the audience gulps down during the competition. In addition, Lady Port-Huntley is the lone judge of the competition, as her choice of a winner is ultimately affected by her past experiences with the competing persons. This means that the competition turns out to be a subjective experience, but not subjective in regards to the music. Chester who knows Lady Port-Huntley pushes the right buttons in order to achieve the goal to win the $25,000. This means that Chester also buys the competition as he cannot generate something completely unique, and he turns the music into a decadent show of visual and auditory experiences, which means that he does not rely on the music.

Each musical performance is represented by countries such as Siam, Serbia, and the United States whereas Chester represents the United States, his father Canada, and his brother Serbia. The national division serves as an analogy to the dysfunction in the family. It also provides some insights to why the family members lack appropriate communication skills, or empathy to hear the pain of others as their pain seems to be overwhelming to themselves. This notion is supported by flashbacks and heavy symbolism such as Roderick carrying his child's heart in a glass jar that is submerged in his tears.

The director, Guy Maddin, produces a genuinely surreal cinematic event that will bring the audience a nostalgic visual experience through the throwback cinematography. The throwback cinematography reminds the viewer of films made during the silent era, and the time when the story supposedly takes place, 1933. The camera has a clear focus in the center of the image while the surrounding area closer to the edge of the frame becomes more dissolved into fussiness. The film is mostly shot in black and white, but it does have moments of color that enhance the emotional experience. Using this technique adds to the visual experience in a way that makes it feel as if it was the 1930s.

The Saddest Music in the World is in the hands of the beholder, and to truly become engrossed by the story it helps to have a good understanding of the art form film. This is because the film utilizes a unique style that brings bizarre comedy and tragedy mixed into one while the script and cast guide the audience into a bleak dream where Maddin conceptualizes his vision of a personal impression. In the end, the impression is left for the audience to ponder as Maddin leaves the viewers a heap of notions and perspectives on what has taken place during the film.

Rating:
Summary: Boxing Helena: The Musical
Review: I "get" Guy Maddin. I thought "Careful" was very clever and entertaining and "Twilight Of The Ice Nymphs" certainly worth a peek on a rainy day. But I refuse to wet myself over Emperor Maddin's newest clothes merely because it's simply "different". It IS possible to be "different" and still be ENTERTAINING at the same time, and I think Maddin has now officially worn out his welcome with the let's-smear-vaseline-on-the-lens-and-use-super-8-cameras-and-Expressionist-set-design-and-make-this-look-like-a-lost-silent-film-from-the-1920's trick with the release of "Saddest Music In The World". The idea of an international musical olympics, where countries compete to compose the Saddest Music In The World is quite brilliant and a great comic set-up (wouldn't the Swedes be shoo-ins?), and would have made a perfect SHORT film subject. After about 30 minutes, Maddin runs out of ideas and then literally precedes to wear the viewer down through sheer repetition of images and set-pieces. Isabella Rosselini is quite watchable, as always (even rolling around on a cart as a double-amputee) but she alone does not have the power to carry this film. Worth a look if you crave the offbeat, but ultimately just chalk this one up as an interesting failure from a genuinely talented director.

Rating:
Summary: Either you get it or you don't
Review: I rented this film on a whim, that is the title and the cover of Isabella Roselini in a bleach blond wig smothered in a world of blue. Why not? I walk through Blockbuster wondering if there is ever anything worth seeing that I haven't already. The vast majority of Hollywood comedies are unfunny to me. What a discovery! I have been watching films for over 45 years and never have seen such a hilarious tongue-in-cheek presentation of a film about sadness. Three of the five most important characters are wallowing in their own self-pity to such extremes I couldn't believe it or stop laughing. German expressionism copycat...whatever dude...get over yourselves. It's set in the depression and it's about sadness. Where would you rather have it based? In Hawaii? The low budget sets were beliveable and the over the top acting was right in tune with the theme. I can't wait to see his earlier pics.

Rating:
Summary: A Unique Film From A Rare Talent
Review: If you know that Isabella Rossellini is married to David Lynch, you will have no problem understanding why she chose to star in this film. Director Guy Maddin tells a bizarre story, filmed through a snowy, distorted lens in black and white, making for a truly surreal vision. The story itself is simply about a Baroness in Canada who recrutes musicians from around the world to promote the worlds "saddest" music for a large sum of money. However, instead of gut wrenching sorrowful music, the audience is treated to a unique collage of `cold' characters seeming to come from the 19th century. The cinematography is fantastic, but the characters don't bring much life to the story. They are all stilted, bland inventions plucked straight from a silent film. At best the film is a study in film cinematography and style. There is love, tragedy and all the elements of true cinema, but it never fully evolves. However, the film is an advanced version of what David Lynch might have done if he chose this story, time and place. This film is for the real film buff who will not be disappointed.

The extra featurettes are truly amazing and spark enough interest in what a filmmaker will do to make his dream come true.


Rating:
Summary: Vile, Vile, Vile.
Review: Isabella Rossilini tries bravely to carry this dog on her back, she with the no legs even. Yeah, see, she lost both her gams back in a car crash where she was servicing her lover, his drunken father comes on the scene and they crash. The car pins one of her pins and the drunken father, who is some kind of lushed up doctor, sees double and saws off the wrong leg with a hacksaw. So then we get to see Rossilini pretending to have no legs. Then we get to see her lover's brother all broken up over the loss of his son. Keeps the son's heart pickled in a jar, he does. Then, during a scene of passion, he kind of drops the jar and it breaks, and the heart of his dead son lies there on the floorboards, with a shard of glass in it no less. A laugh riot? Then there is the "saddest music in the world contest" where various ethnics play sad-type music until a buzzer sounds. Kind of like the Gong Show. Only Chuck Barris is nowhere in sight. Could've used him to gong this dog before it ever got funding from demented financiers. What's the name of the director of this rubbish? Guy Maddin? He lives in a world so morally empty that there is truly no reason he should go on living. He is an empty shell.

Rating:
Summary: Killing one's Father
Review: Picasso once said 'In art, one must kill one's father'.
In that case,Guy Maddin,Canada's heir apparent to David Lynch,
has laid Mr. Lynch to rest.
Actually, to refer to Maddin as 'another Lynch' is a bit of a disservice.
Nothing against Mr. Lynch, it's really the old example of comparing apples to oranges.
Maddin is a much more eclectic, and far more stylized artist.
In fact, his films are ultra stylish.
Of course, this film, as all his films, aren't made for the suburban Hollywood masses who regularly diet on cornbread alone.
But,if you're ready to go a tad further than 'Bridget Jone's Diary' or even past the run of the mill, loud, bing bang boom 'let's make tons of money' hollywood/Michael Mann type fodder, then you will find this refreshingly original and, yes, even artistically challenging.


Rating:
Summary: Strange!
Review: Suffice to say this is one of the best movies ever about a pair of glass legs filled with beer.

Hands down.

Rating:
Summary: The strangest movie in the world
Review: The premise: would-be minstrels gather in Winnipeg in 1933 for the "Port Huntley Lager Saddest Music in the World" contest, intended to bring levity to the "saddest city in the world" at the height of the great depression, and sell a few beers along the way. I think the braintrust behind this film had a few too many Port Huntley lagers when they were coming up with this one. A bizarre movie with a generally incomprehensible plot, made interesting by the 1930s era stylings of the visuals - part silent flic, part surrealism, part Movietone News reel. Goofy, entertaining performances abound, particularly by Rosselini as the legless beer magnate. I can't really say that I liked it, but I was certainly intrigued enough to keep watching.

Rating:
Summary: great eye candy!
Review: These sort of hyper-visual, experimental movies need to be made now and then to show what filmmaking and imagination can achieve in the arts. Of course, a movie like this relies more on visuals and technique than story - though that's not to say there isn't a story here. It's just not the most compelling story. The movie itself could easily have been condensed into something like 45 minutes, maybe even 30, and you'd still walk away with the point they were trying to make. Making it as long as a feature film gives it more "legitimacy," I suppose, so it won't be tucked away in some IFC "short collection." But as well conceived as it is, with superb 20's/30's atmosphere (grainy, black and white, glowing, surreal-faux sets), you simply sit back and feel bored a lot of the time because of the slowness of the story. Visuals can only carry a film so far. Genius filmmaking? Well, that'd debatable. But it's refreshing, and I think essential, that experimental movies like this be made. If the actual story and the characters had been more compelling, I think this would be a "must buy" and one you'd want to see quite a few times. I've watched it once, I'm glad I did, but I doubt I'll ever see it again. Not bad, not great - as a movie. But great eye candy!