Paul Schrader on Revisiting Transcendental Style in Film | TIFF 2017
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 апр 2017
- Legendary director and screenwriter Paul Schrader revisits the themes of his book Transcendental Style in Film - which articulates a common filmmaking aesthetic shared by directors Robert Bresson, Carl Dreyer, and Yasujiro Ozu - in a keynote lecture, followed by an onstage conversation.
Paul Schrader was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan. His career as a screenwriter and filmmaker spans five decades. His many scripts include Taxi Driver (76), Raging Bull (80), The Last Temptation of Christ (88), and Bringing Out the Dead (99). His features as director include Blue Collar (78), Hardcore (79), American Gigolo (80), Cat People (82), Patty Hearst (88), Light Sleeper (92), Affliction (97), Auto Focus (02), The Walker (07), and The Canyons (13). Dog Eat Dog (16) is his most recent film.
tiff.net 
Кино
9:01 is where he starts talking
Barney Os. thank you
thank you
Thanks. Nearly 10 minutes of crap avoided.
the interviewer's great-- not scared to disagree, has opinions of his own, this feels like a real conversation and not just someone kissing his ass.
Schader is friggin' GOLD!!! I LOVE him! He makes the ineffable accessible! Extremely subtle and precise, his love of and profound knowledge of the cinema elevates everyone around him. I am like number 700.
His book on Transcendental Style is really enlightening and a great source of inspiration.
If Paul Schader had a better respiratory system I could listen to him talk forever
What a great lecture... Thank you for uploading this
Thank you for uploading this, magnificent.
This book was his major contribution to cinema, period.
Better than Taxi Driver?
@@robindro1961 A much bigger contribution than Taxi Driver, yes
Great interview!
That intro TIFF as always occurring with little feathers blessing
Absolutely amazing interviewer
i could not stop thinking about stalker as i listened to this
and A Ghost Story
And I couldn't stop thinking about andrie rubliev
Would like to have heard Schrader’s thoughts about Bergman and Kieslowski’s Dekalog, in particular.
Brilliant.
Tremendous lecture and interview on film outside of the narrative imperitive. Its not that he is the highest authority on these themes but that because of his commercial work, he is able to bring the discussion to wider reknown. It is unfortunate that age or .... has robbed PS of a good speaking voice and presenting skill, nonetheless his charm and intelligence win the day. Thanks TIFF.
This Christian/calvinist-trained man has NEVER been nominated for an Academy Award. Good for him!
First Reformed was though. Took 45 + years tho to get the nom.
had to crank up the volume to 130% to listen to this
Does anyone know where to find a list of the films he discusses? Especially interested in the 132 minute long dumpling film in nine shots. Google has nothing on it.
It’s listed on IMDB as, ‘Oxhide II,’ original title, ‘Niupi er.’ Directed by Jiayin Liu, 2009 and has 132 minute running time. Described as, ‘The director shows herself and her parents making dumplings in their apartment with nine fixed camera positions, with which she revolves around the kitchen table.’
You will learn more about film and/or writing and/or art and/or spirituality by watching his films and listening to his commentary tracks and lectures and interviews than you will in TEN LIFETIMES IN FILM SCHOOL.
Hey, don't steal that. It'll will make a great title.
Unless you're Paul S.
Then I'd be honored!
1:05:56 say it like it is Paul!
41:30 very true
His Man& a Room Films:
Taxi Driver
American Gigolo
Light Sleeper
The Walker
His John Wick films:
Dog Eat Dog............................:)
Kinda disagree about Tarkovsky, who I believe to be the most accomplished director at pulling the viewer into a mystical state. Stalker and Solaris can truly change your consciousness.
Well... Gaspar noe and Malick too
@@federicoalfonsoj.4321 I wholeheartedly agree. Try this one on for size, ermano:
ruclips.net/video/Wz-vegualMg/видео.html
🙏🏽
I disagree with him re: Oz Perkins. He's confusing technique with style. He assumes that because he recognizes 'slow' cinema, it must be an attempt at transcendence, but in fact what Perkins is doing (rather successfully) is building suspense. He's drawing out the tension in his scenes to near the breaking point.
I agree with this 100% you can use these tools for many different reasons.
I think he knows what he is using it for. He just doesn't think it was all that successful. Nonetheless, it is rather presumptuous to say that he doesn't care about horror.
i wonder if paul denino would be in or outside the circle
Sound is too low, specially in the interview.
Wax on, Wax off!
Great talk; the intros were excruciating, though.
56:00
He's still never made a film in transcendental style according to his own definition. First Reformed just as transcendental as Silence is.
Aye, but it's closer to that style than Silence. Much closer. Schrader is too interested in psychological realism to make a purely transcendental film.
John's right... plus Schrader himself stated in the interview that he's not interested in making a film that way
It seems impossible to make a film today that is as "transcendental" (detached from the viewer, at the same time "relatable" but in a deeper way) as Pickpocket by Bresson for example
Yeah, that's what I don't quite get. This seems to be a method of classification other than good/bad. Keeping Tarkovsky out of the circle doesn't mean he likes Tarkovsky any less. So then, does transcendental storytelling actually elevate a film in Schrader's opinion? If not, why go into it in this length.
In general but especially when the guy asked Schrader about possible evidence of Transcendental style or approach in recent TV, I couldn't help but think of Nicholas Winding Refn and Too Old To Die Young. I can't say that it absolutely does or does not fit into the discussion at hand or even tangentially similar, as I'm still in my own process of working out what or how I feel about these rather nuanced though very specific elements and methods. But I'd be interested in hearing Paul Schrader's thoughts on that particularly unique series. It does contain so many common genre traits and assumed conventions of the crime/thriller/drama, BUT then right from the very opening & throughout each episode Refn seems so controlled and frustratingly particular in his pacing, editing, momentum or lack there of in delivering his narrative story. Truly a polarizing and controversial limited series in which those who've seen it seem to either flow with the unique frequency immediately, are fascinated and eventually it's languid trancelike energy brings you in close, or others who just reject it's "acquired taste" aesthetic & pacing as pretentious BS and a colossal waste of time. I'm pretty fascinated with it yet perplexed & honestly not sure how I totally feel on the whole, but I respect and admire the uncompromising nature and absolute dedication towards an unconventional ritual/ceremony underneath a surface of more common genre appeal. Patriot is another one of a kind TV series with a unique tone & approach, also on Amazon Prime.
The sound level is very low, and I had a headache listening let alone taking in the content. I like a lot of Schrader's films including ' American Gigolo ' ' The Canyons ' and ' Light Sleeper. ' As for his three I have reservations and as I am against torture and executions I find it in both Dreyer and slightly less sadistic in Bresson. The old woman plunging to her death in ' Day of Wrath ' is appallingly graphic as if Dreyer enjoyed the scene. He may not have but the scene remains. And why cannot Joan of Arc be left alone for a very long time. It always ends with the burning however discreet, and I know of only one obscure film that shows her ending the film alive. Michele Morgan played her. ' Destinies ' I think was the title. To return to Dreyer- few greater films than ' Gertrud. ' Thank you Schrader for what I did hear. I have to admit I am no purist and define spirituality at anyone's peril!!! Last night I watched Virginia Mayo as a false missionary in Allan Dwan's beautifully filmed ' Pearl of the South Pacific. ' I slept peacefully and grateful that cinema itself is a wide church that embraces all genres.
1:03:15
54:00 I hate when Mom and Dad fight
Paul Muad'Dib Schrader.
Death to all official introductions that last longer than 2 minutes.
eally enjoy his films... the last one that I saw was "First Reformed" with Ethan Hawke but also "Affliction", "Cat People", "American Gigolo" and off course "Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters" that I reviewed on my video blog and if you guys could like to check it out @lfko
eally
i would say true detective is a sort of Transcendental tv
@1:23:35
01:05:00 hahaha
I respect Schrader a lot, but he sounds like he is playing a game of catch up on modern slow cinema. So much has been written about it in the last 10 or so years that I can't see him adding any fresh insights. And he always seems to choose the most milquetoast examples of this style to highlight its greatness like Silent Light and Ida. Good films to be sure, but compared to Satantango and the work of Pedro Costa they are decidedly minor entries.
It's debatable whether Ida is actually an example of that style.
As for Bergman, Schrader could have answered that question more simply: Bergman was a traditional dramatist who drew heavily from literature and theatre, that's why he doesn't fit.
I agree, I was a bit disappointed. Transcendental cinema is a good stylistic category to interpret some kind of films, but some of his considerations about single directors or films seemed somewhat groundless to me. For example I couldn't understand why he thinks that Tarkovsky's films are about himself. I never had that impression, in fact I find them very "universal".
The point isn't that Tarkovsky's movies are ABOUT Tarkovsky, I think. More that Tarkovsky made movies as a spiritual exercise and experience FOR himself, while transcendental style directors care more about guiding the audience toward that exercise and experience.
I think that most great artists do what they do for themselves and, paradoxical as it sounds, that's why they are able to connect with other people, because they reach for the inner core of human experience. Tarkovsky was especially good at that in the realm of sacred. More than guiding the audience, I think transcendental style directors provide the framework for that exercise and experience to happen, with the active and crucial partecipation of the viewer.
I have to respectfully disagree. After all, this is the man who wrote the book on Transcendental Style - and over 4 decades ago at that. It's sort of like saying the Martin Scorsese has nothing to say about gangster films.
@@spb7883 He wrote a book that led to a lot of misunderstanding about the films and directors he was talking about. He deserves credit for writing about Ozu at a time when western critics generally avoided him, but that doesn't make him the 'go to' guy, so to speak.
so much breathing noise. is he going to drop dead on stage?
I was actually surprised that he knows Bresson and Tarkovsky.
He wrote a book about Bresson.
Schrader's book "Transcendental Style In Film" was published in 1972 and has been an important text for anyone seriously interested in film. I'm guessing many young people are unaware of it, which is unfortunate.
Why would you be surprised that he knows some of the most popular art film directors of all time?
i think most people who have an interest in film will eventually hear the names of those two giants of cinema.
This is philosophical crap. Filmmakers AFTER they get the response from the film then claim that it was intentional and take credit for whatever. Do this test. Write it down what we are suppose to feel BEFORE we see the film then see if it matches. That I would give credit for. It's like talking about symbolism.