A Useful Life

What a stinker!

We had quite a low turnout for this week's film, I have three theories why people didn't come:

1.  They didn't want to sit through the AGM, (which turned out to be one of the high points of the evening!)

2.  The film has been shown on Channel 4 and Film Four in the last few weeks. Some people may have seen it and elected not to subject themselves to another 67 minutes of pain.

3.  People had better things to do. Ironing, peeling potatoes and filling in tax returns, for example.

The scene where Jorge is struggling to stay awake and pay attention while the director (Martinez) is pontificating about “erudition” and “film auteurs” was a pretty good depiction of me. Staring into the distance, eyelids drooping.

I do feel there's a certain type of film that the critics always rave about because they recognise the references and it gives them a warm self-congratulatory feeling. I suppose some of the soundtrack bits from old cowboy films were from “Stage Coach” or some other famous old film. Or the way some shot is composed is paying homage to some other film. Well that might suit Philip French and co. but it's not enough for me. Yes, it was a sad story about a man's life which may or may not  have been useful. But, as one of our audience said, it was like watching paint dry. Even the opening credits seemed to go on for ever. I suppose they put them at the beginning because if they'd been at the end nobody would have stayed to watch them. The Rotten Tomatoes web site (see link below) has a critics' rating of 94%, but an audience rating of 50%. That's a telling comparison don't you think?

Some of the music was OK though.  And what a lousy haircut for $200! It looked the same after as it did before! The feedback score was 46% - our lowest for at least two seasons. Even lower than “Meek's Cutoff” (47%), “The Dentist” (62%) and “Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives” (53%).

Thank goodness for “Pigeon: Impossible”

This film, which has won a shed-load of awards, was originally conceived by Lucas Martell as an animation exercise, but it ballooned into a huge development using some cutting-edge animation techniques. All the contributors were volunteers working in their spare time and the project took nearly five years. The majority of the $5-10k budget was used on the music involving 74 musicians from two orchestras. The music was composed specially and took 12 months. There's loads of information on-line and you can watch it again on YouTube.

Your comments:

B	The conceit of a life within films and relating it to the real challenges of life was well constructed and led to an optimistic climax.
B	Strange, but in a nice way!
B	Very odd, quirky little film! Loved the music!
B	Loved the short film. (Pigeon Impossible)
C	Life imitating art? Sad to see that cutting funding to the arts seems to be a universal problem.
C	Bizarre film, couldn't really understand it. Vaguely depressing.
C	Slow to start how films were shown gradually viewers and each become never finally ended. But lives continue! Quite philosophical.
C	Worthy but tortuous
C	Slow moving but held my interest.
D	A for the animation (Pigeon Impossible)
D	I may have gleaned some meaning in this film but overall I found it dull. Sorry!
D	Like sitting in a team meeting!! Liked the pigeon though!
D	Too clever by half. The sort of film that's made for by buffs for buffs but is of little merit for those who just want to be entertained. The animation was brilliant. (Pigeon:Impossible)
D	Loved the short animation. (Pigeon Impossible). But a bit puzzled by the main film. I think I just didn't relate to it at all.
D
D	Set up was rather slow, until last 1/3. Not too sure I grasped it, quite interesting. Loved the short. (Pigeon Impossible)
D	Enjoyed black and white imagery, but I'm glad it was only a short film! Sound was used in an effective way. It fitted in rather well with the AGM. I enjoyed Pigeon Impossible more.
D	Rather slow, textural, thought provoking.
D	I was thrown by the format. It looked a very old-fashioned film – very dated, slow. Which is no bad thing – but I don't think the director pulled that off. It was almost a pastiche of that b+w 'European cinema' look. The music sound track was interesting – tho' I didn't get the references.
E	A slow -moving & slightly bizarre film about a failing Uruguayan independent cinema the poignant effect its closure has on one of its employees.
E
E	Interesting comparison how much more you can do in 6 minutes compared to 60 minutes.
E	Not sure what they were trying to convey. It was slow with very little story. Thought the animated short very amusing.
E	Stunningly boring and devoid of content. I thought at least it will consolidate my Spanish but then it turned out to have virtually no dialogue! Almost as boring as that Japanese film earlier in the season but mercifully shorter. Another £5 down the drain!
E	TEDIOUS BEYOND BELIEF BUT “A” FOR PIGEON:IMPOSSIBLE

On-line:

IMDB user rating 6.5out of 10:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1719497/

Rotten Tomatoes audience rating 50%:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_useful_life_2011/

Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian “A lovely tribute to an old-fashioned arthouse cinema in Uruguay, told with affection and skill” (3 stars) :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/jan/12/a-useful-life-film-review

An elegiac review from someone in Channel4:
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/a-useful-life/episode-guide/series-1/episode-1/

More info about Pigeon:Impossible
http://martellanimation.com/pigeonimpossible