Latest news with #MickLaSalle
San Francisco Chronicle
19-05-2025
- Entertainment
- San Francisco Chronicle
Gene Hackman often played the tough guy in movies. Here's what I thought of him offscreen
Dear Mick LaSalle: I once met Gene Hackman at a boxing match and spoke with him. Nice man. Did you ever meet him? Robert Freud Bastin, Petaluma Dear Robert Freud Bastin: I never really met Gene Hackman, but I was at a press conference where he was getting interviewed, and I was close to him and saw how he spoke to people and carried himself. He did not strike me as a nice man, not at all. He didn't strike me as a wicked man, either, but as someone prickly and difficult. Someone who'd be very hard to deal with in an adversarial situation, and someone who, knowing that, wouldn't hesitate to create adversarial situations. He seemed like the kind of guy that might cut his kids out of his will. Hello Mick: More and more we are seeing movies and series using a technique for filming scenes so dark you cannot see what's happening, nor see the characters in the scene. My most recent example is 'Bosch: Legacy.' Why don't the directors want us to see what's happening? Lucia MacLean, Ben Lomond Hello Lucia: OK, if this happened once, twice or even three times, I'd say that you're responding reasonably to a stylistic trend of dubious worth. But if you're saying this is happening more often than that, it's probably your TV. Seriously. Turn up the brightness and turn down the contrast, and that might solve the problem. And even if the problem really does turn out to be a cinematographic trend, the higher brightness and lower contrast should help. Dear Mick LaSalle: Your response to the query about whether you'd be leery of watching something today that you enjoyed immensely when young — and you replied that nothing has changed, why wouldn't I still love it? — deserved a bit more consideration. I do think a film we loved at the age of 28 might just not appeal any longer. Kathy Hartzell, New York City Dear Kathy Hartzell: True. Except I didn't say what you said I said. I said that the movie stays the same but our perceptions change, and we shouldn't fear that — with the implication being that we're getting smarter and more perceptive as we get older. Of course, I'm assuming that this hypothetical person's perceptions have deepened and that they haven't become an old crank. But I think that's a reasonable assumption, because if they were an old crank, they wouldn't be worried about holding on to their big emotional movie experiences. They would have crossed over into the get-off-my-lawn stage of life. Dear Mr. LaSalle: With all due respect, when it comes to great film composers you are only looking at the present but not the past. I realize we all have our personal favorites, but choosing Rachel Portman over some of the giants of the 20th century movie industry mother taught me not to use that kind of language. John Oertel, Redding Dear Mr. Oertel: I was looking at the present and not the past because I was writing about my favorite living film composers. But apart from that, here's the thing I don't understand. If someone says, 'These are my favorites,' the proper response is, 'Oh, really, and these are my favorites.' It's not to say, 'You have the wrong favorites' and then congratulate yourself for not cursing at them. We're talking about art, and our response to art is subjective. We can dress up and justify our responses with intelligent and even persuasive observations, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. On the other hand, if you tell me your favorite president is Andrew Johnson, then we can have a discussion, because that's an insane choice, for reasons that can be argued beyond someone saying, 'I enjoy this more than that.'
San Francisco Chronicle
12-05-2025
- Entertainment
- San Francisco Chronicle
Which Bay Area theaters have the best projection and sound?
Dear Mick LaSalle: Which theaters have the best projection and sound? Teresa Concepcion, Emeryville Dear Teresa Concepcion: Well, in one sense of the word 'best,' I'd say the Roxie Theater, the Stanford Theatre, the Rafael Film Center and the theater inside the Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive have the best projection, because they project the best movies. But in the sense that I think you mean it, the best sound and picture is at the private Dolby Theatre on Market Street. As for what's available to the public, I have no love for the Metreon, but its IMAX theater is very good. Dear Mr. LaSalle: I was surprised to learn from your article that apparently lots of people spread out a movie over several nights. I thought I was one of the few lazybones who did that. Michael Biehl, San Francisco Dear Mr. Biehl: Everybody does it, but it doesn't mean they should. True, 95 times out of 100, it doesn't matter, because most movies are unremarkable. But with great and near-great movies, watching them over several nights on a small screen – that is, watching them in the wrong way – can bland out the experience and make real greatness seem merely good. Cinema is an art form that assumes and needs a captive audience. Movies are made with the assumption that you're small and the screen is huge, and that you're staying in your seat, that the volume is turned up, and that you can't rewind anything, so you have to pay attention. Even with all those conditions in place, movies face a hard climb, because they're trying to make you believe in an imaginary world and care about the people in it. But strip away those conditions, and their task becomes even more difficult. The sad part of this is that some of the best films are subtle and most are in need of being met halfway. I mean, you can half-watch 'The Avengers' and get the idea. But a quiet masterpiece like 'Before Sunrise' requires that you actually watch, listen and take it in. Otherwise, it might seem like endless, pointless conversation. And no, checking your phone to read about the movie as it's playing doesn't count as watching the movie. Still, we all do it, probably for the same reason that there's a certain resistance to being hypnotized, and in the same way that it requires an act of will to take a nap in the middle of the day, even if you're sleepy. There's an inertia that must be overcome in order to let go of the state we're in, even when we want to or need to. Dear Mick: I just watched 'The Vanishing' (1988) and found the ending very disturbing. The kind of movie that stays with you but not in a good way. Have you watched any really creepy movies that you wished you had not watched? Joyce Harvis, Stockton Hi Joyce: Yes. I have one, and it's the same as yours – 'The Vanishing.' It's a seriously unsettling film, and while I can't say that I wish I never saw it, I can confirm that the movie's disturbing quality doesn't go away, ever. I saw 'The Vanishing' when it was released in the United States in 1989, and a few months ago I made the mistake of thinking of the movie's ending right before bed, and I couldn't sleep. Talk about a lasting impact. Here was this movie keeping me up some 35 years after I saw it. I won't reveal the nature of the ending here, because there may be hearty souls out there willing to risk it. Consider this a combination recommendation/warning. Also, readers should note that we're talking about the original 1988 'The Vanishing' from the Netherlands, and not the idiotic American remake from 1993.
San Francisco Chronicle
05-05-2025
- Entertainment
- San Francisco Chronicle
8 films that feed the soul
Dear Mick LaSalle: Are there any recent films that feed the soul? Alan Takeda, San Francisco Dear Alan Takeda: By 'feed the soul,' I'll assume you mean movies that leave you feeling expanded, enlightened and maybe changed for the better. Even most great movies don't do that, so these are films in a special category. Such films are always rare, but they never quite disappear no matter what's going on, because they tend to be personal works that exist outside of trends and tap into something timeless in the human experience. Here are eight from the last decade: 'Julieta,' 'Truman,' 'Goodbye Christopher Robin,' 'The Quiet Girl,' 'Petite Maman,' 'Nyad,' 'My Old Ass' and 'Daddio.' This is an eclectic list representing Spain, Britain, Ireland, France and the United States. On the flipside, there are movies that devour the soul. In our time, these are sci-fi movies, post-apocalyptic movies and superhero movies that routinely depict American cities being trashed. They leave you feeling discombobulated and agitated, states that might pass for excitement but it's not real excitement. It's more like giddy, unfeeling dread. Hi Mick: What movie wasn't nominated for the recent Oscars that should have been nominated? Anne Spencer, San Francisco Hi Anne: Nicolas Cage should have been nominated for ' Dream Scenario ' (2023), a funny social satire in which Cage, playing an under-appreciated scholar, starts showing up in people's dreams. It's a skillful comic-dramatic performance of a kind that invariably gets ignored, probably because Cage's Academy colleagues can't categorize it. Perhaps they need to undervalue it, because they know they can't do it themselves. Dear Mick LaSalle: Thrilled that you mentioned "The Letter' with Bette Davis. Lots of people might see this film now, since you cite it. Yay! Davis is marvelous, of course. Lucy Johns, San Francisco Hi Lucy Johns: Uh-oh. You're so enthusiastic that I hesitate to break the news, but I wasn't referring to the Bette Davis 'The Letter' from 1940. I was referring to the Jeanne Eagels 'The Letter' from 1929. That's the talkie from the 1920s that I've watched the most often. But don't be disappointed; think of this as a blessing in disguise: There's another version of this story that's even better than the one you know, which I agree is very good. Eagels gives one of the most fascinating performances I've ever seen in this film — she looks like she's having a nervous breakdown live, on camera. And maybe she was. She was a heroin addict and died seven months after the movie's release. Dear Mick: When I was a medical resident at UCSF, I would attend musical performances with Chronicle music critic, Heuwell Tircuit. I suspect you must have known Turk, as he was called by his friends. I miss him and his wit. Robert L. Owen, San Francisco Dear Robert: I'm sure there was a good side to Heuwell Tircuit (1931-2010), and I'm glad you got to see it. I knew him only as the rather snooty colleague that embarrassed our department in 1987 by panning a performance by the San Francisco Ballet that he hadn't even seen! The one good part of the story is that after he was fired, the Chronicle made one of its best hires — Joshua Kosman — to replace him. A real case of the Italian proverb, 'When God closes the door, he opens up a window.' It's reassuring to have your testimony that at least Heuwell attended some of the performances he reviewed. But even more, I appreciate the chance to tell you how critics feel about this sort of behavior. We don't think of it as a guy getting away with something. We look at it as a breach of faith with the public and a betrayal of the artform.
