Robert Kane Pappas asks TO AGE OR NOT TO AGE -- but doesn't quite answer

Is that title a play on Hamlet's "To be or not to be"? Or just a question that hangs in the air sporting so many ramifications that easy answers go by the wayside? If the title TO AGE OR NOT TO AGE strikes you (it does me) as a bit clunky, rest assured that the movie is a lot more intelligent, sometimes poetic, even occasionally sweet than its name might suggest. Back in 2003, filmmaker Robert Kane Pappas, gave us the excellent documentary Orwell Rolls in His Grave (the link provides my earlier review on Netflix, writing as "talltale"). Now Mr. Pappas is back, with quite a different kettle of fish.

The filmmaker, shown at right, is interested in the subject of aging -- that's for sure -- but he approaches it from a variety of angles, using talking heads (belonging to scientists, businessmen, friends and acquaintances) and exploring the possibilities in ways that are quiet and thoughtful, rather than angry and coercive.  The intent here seems to be discovery rather than conversion (as with, and rightly so, "Orwell") and so the ideas he's marshaled about aging, its "necessity," and the possibility of putting it off for years (or decades) is intriguing.

As Dr. Thomas Kirkwood notes in the film, "A lot of people think we're biologically programmed to die, but the truth is that we're biologically programmed for survival.  There is no mechanism inside us that turns on to kill us when a certain period of time has elapsed."  No, but people do seem to die, finally and often enough, of "old age" -- old age being something that, along with which, necessary bodily functions cease operation.  Even so, there is now an entire field of research known as anti-aging, and this film introduces us to a number of its practitioners (like Dr. David Sinclair, above).  And when they explain themselves and their approach, they make some sense, too.

Another of these is Dr. Cynthia Kenyon, below, who insists that the anti-aging break-though "ranks with the discovery of DNA...  People would age more slowly, stay younger longer, and remain free of disease for a longer time."  And Aubrey de Grey, Ph.D., at left, who definitely has that "spiritual" look down pat, 

arugues that we'll be able to "get rid of and reverse aging itself  That this can be done no longer seems in doubt.  The only real questions nowadays is For how long?"

As some of the scientists do point out, when this reversal-of-aging begins is rather important.  Wait too long, and you'll stop aging, all right, but you'll stop when you are already too old for it to matter.  The time to begin, evidently, is when you're middle aged and still healthy: pre-50, I should think.  As for the friends that Pappas queries, the results range from "Of course I want to live longer" (the indomitable Madelyn Lynn, above) to the not quite so certain.

In case you haven't noticed by now, this movie is not a "to have a face-lift or not to have a face-lift" cliff-hanger -- though there is one women, pictured with our filmmaker at right, who is concerned with exactly that.  (She gets one, too.)  No: this film's more about yeast and mice, genes and opossums. In the supermarket, where ideas seems to come more freely, notes Pappas, we begin to think about things like the bigger picture, Big Pharma, and the SIRT2 gene.

Eventually it grows rather moving to hear these people and their attitudes: skeptical, amused, wondering.  One scientist becomes a priest and then returns to science via teaching.  And of course our current health care system comes under some scrutiny, as well.  Overall the documentary is more allusive that you will probably first imagine.  And whatever your final estimation of the subject at hand, I think you'll be surprised at the mood -- thoughtful but questioning -- you're left in by the finale.   

To Age or Not to Age opens for your delectation this Friday, July 16, at Manhattan's Village East Cinemas.  You can find other upcoming screenings here.

Pedro González-Rubio's ALAMAR is a watery, elemental, one-of-a-kind delight; Q&A with the filmmaker

Such a pleasant, unusual surprise (in so many ways), ALAMAR (which means "to the sea") is a near-impossible movie not to recommend: an odd combination of documentary and narrative in which the story is "made-up" yet almost everything we see is real, happening in real time and as it would in real life. Plus, the "actors" play their real-life counterparts.  The creator of all this, Pedro González-Rubio, has made only two other movies -- a dark, unreleased documentary called Toro Negro (more about this in the interview below) and The Making of BABEL (yes: one of those "making of" movies about that Brad Pitt film).  With this new work, the filmmaker has delivered a neither-fish-nor-fowl film that manages to both swim and soar.

A couple has recently split in a town near the Mexican coast.  He's a native, she's European.  Before the mother and son leave the country, perhaps for good, the boy, who appears to be somewhere between 6 and 8 years old is taken by his father (with mom's permission) to spend some time in his grandfather's shack on the sea and learn how gramps makes a living and how life is lived quite differently in this unusual environment.  That's it.  The film is 73 minutes long, there's not a wasted moment, yet so much life, love, symbolism, change and possibility is packed into its short running time so beautifully and well that González-Rubio (shown above) has created a sui generis movie.  A wonderfully generous one, too.

The director's style is definitely documentary.  Featuring almost no exposition, the camera tracks moment-to-moment activities so well that we sometimes grow concerned.  The little boy is meandering in waters that contain not just fish but crocodiles, above, and he's often warned to stay out of their way. Likewise, a fabulous white bird, below, whom dad calls "Blanquita," comes into their life and is coaxed, haltingly, into a kind of relationship.

The grandfather, Nestór Marín (below), is a man of few words (whom does he usually have to talk to?) but proves a good, loving teacher to both his son and grandson.  And the father, a remarkably photogenic and exotic-looking man, proves someone the camera clearly loves (the audience will, too). Mom gets short-shrifted, but then, she's not part of this male-bonding trip.

The location itself -- the sea (see the color of that water, below!) and surrounding land with all the flora and fauna -- could not be more beautiful.  When, early on, after the arrival of father and son, some building, painting and refurbishing takes place on the boathouse that will be home for the three, a small window is constructed that opens out onto the sea.  At the moment that tiny portal first swings wide, the word ALAMAR appears in the center of its ocean view, presenting us with, not only the film's title but a gentle reminder that "this is just a movie."  Yet before this moment, and after, for the rest of its running time, this film is so much more.

Alamar, released in the U.S. by Film Movement, opens for a one-week-only run in New York City at Film Forum.  You can find other playdates here (click and scroll down).  Once word gets out about this remarkable movie, I should think there will be many more venues added.

**************

TrustMovies met with Pedro González-Rubio a few months back in the Manhattan offices of the film's U.S. distributor Film Movement. Exceedingly friendly and happy to talk about many different things, the filmmaker proved as delightful an interview as his film is a movie. His answers appear in standard typeface below, while our questions are in boldface.

There’s a scene in the movie where someone mentions “rubio.” Were they taking about the little boy, who looks sort of "blond" at that moment in the movie? Or were they talking about you?

Rubio…? I don’t know…
.
It happens on the boat, I think…

Oh! Yes, Rubia! They are talking about a fish. That is how they name a fish. A Rubia is like a “snapper”.

Ah. Now I get it. So, how many hours of film did you actually shoot for this movie?

About 35 hours.

That’s not that much?  Is it?

Not compared to previous work. I remember that I did one where I shot 200 hours. It was The Making of Babel.

The Brad Pitt movie. You did the “making of” part?

Yes, and it was feature-length: one hour and a half. So there were 200 hours because we had to be on the set every day.

So 35 hours was all you shot on Alamar!  And you dedicated it to your grandfather....

Yes, because my grandfather was a filmmaker.  He even worked here in the States and directed Anthony Perkins. It is not easy to get hold of that film – it is called The Fool Killer.  More than a western. It was sort of a… Midwestern.

Do you remember the young woman who was in it? 

I just remember it about the guy and the boy. This was when Anthony Perkins was really …  it was after he had done Psycho.

He was really on top of his career back then.  What was your grandfather’s name?

Servando González. Gonzales-Rubio is from my father‘s sirname. My grandfather had done his first feature film, Yanco, about an old man who plays the violin, which he passes on to a kid. The townspeople have never heard this sound before, and when they do, they hear it in the night, so they think it is the devil.

This was his first film?

Yes, his first, and it was very difficult for him to get the film out, for people to see it, and he had very few resources. At that time there were very strong syndicates – one for the film making crew -- and the director’s syndicate. Because he did not belong to the director’s syndicate, they did not want him to show this film. They wanted to burn it. It is similar to what happened to the boy in the film.

The Fool Killer was not a big success over here, I think.

No, but my grandfather did not speak English.

Then how did he get to make the film?

His Amercian producer has seen Yanco. He was from New York. He said, "I want this director to do this film."

So things like that happened way back then, too.

Yes! It’s crazy but his producer insisted that he do it, even though he did not speak English. But now his grandson does speak English!

And is making movies -- and very well, too! Where are you actually from?

From Mexico City. But then I did, like, two trips in total to make the film -- to this second biggest coral reef in the world and the biggest one in Mexico. But, you know, this place is in danger of physically disappearing. Because of all the different interests that are present in this area.

(We talk a bit about Margot Benacerraf's Araya with its stunning photography – which González-Rubio has not seen -- and I Am Cuba – which he says has the most stunning photography ever -- from the same director of photography, Sergei Urusevsky, who did The Cranes Are Flying. I have not seen that one, and so we both agree to watch each film.) 

Your leading man is one of the most beautiful, strange, stunning and interesting men I have seen on film. Like a force of nature. Almost otherworldy, at least from a different world that any of us here in the city would have seen.

Yes.

And your film, which almost seems like a documentary, it not at all a doc. But rather a narrative film. It seems to constantly fudge the line between the two. Where did you get the idea for this film?  And does a situation like we see here actually exist wthin a couple – where the two people are SO very different?

Yes, their situation does exist and quite often. In Playa del Campo there is this mix of races.

The racial mix might be a little unusual, but these two people: How did they meet, how did they bond? We don’t see any of that.

They met because she was a tourist there, and then she stayed to live there. This often happens in this area.  She still lives there in Playa del Campo, but they separated and so she lives further down in the south.

Is that where we see her with the boy at the end?

No, we see her in Rome.

Ah… So he may never see his father again. So this is important for the father to pass on his knowledge, like a blueprint for the kid so he will know who he is when he grows up.

There are different levels. With the father it is not like he lives in that location, but he comes there sometimes. So this is voyage for the young man to remember, the kid to learn and the older man, the grandfather, to pass it on. It is like the three generations, three stages of man.

You give us almost no expostion, and you must have done this deliberately, so we must watch and learn as we go along.

Rather than giving any conventional narrative, I wanted this film to be able to be experienced via the sensations. To be more organic and to focus on the characters rather than on a story. But the problems… The problems, the crises are in us, after we walk out of the theater, so for the hour and fifteen minutes, we live with them and learn. In a kind of utopia.

Yes, it is a utopia. Kind of.

I wanted to do something that would transport us back to the senations that we had, the sense of discovery, when we were younger.

And you succeeded in that, I think.  What else have you done before this?

I did a documentary called Toro Negro. It was screened here in NYC at the Two Boots Pioneer Theater.

Yes! Which is not here anymore.

Really?

Yes. It’s gone now. It was such a charming little theater. And I loved that name!

Too bad.  And I also did The Making of Babel – which took two years to complete.  I co-directed both of the other two, but this one is all my direction. So here in this one I also did the editing, as I did in the other ones.

So you did the writing, directing, editing and cinematography?!

Yes – except the underwater cinematography. The crew was just two of us: boom operation and myself and that was it. It was a very organic film, and we did all the activites with the characters. I did the cooking; we were like a family. The location you see in the movie was also our five-star hotrel. And it was our catering facility, too!

What did this whole thing cost?

Very little to film. I could finance it myself. But for post-production, that is whre the cost comes – like any film. To do the color correction, sound design, music and then bring it up to 35mm, We shot it on HDV and then blew it up to 35.

Where did you find the actor who plays the father?

He lives in Touloon which is south of Playa del Carmen, where I live. And he is a bird-watching guy – a self-made ornothologist. That is why, when the bird arrived, he already had the touch. His passion is birds. Even the man’s features – he is like an eagle in a way – his eyes!

Does this guy want to act again, to do another film?

I don't know, but he should!

Did you pay your actors?

Yes. We paid some while we were filming, then something when we finished, but I still have more to pay them.

What festivals have you been to?

The Rotterdam and the Berlinale -- in the Generation Section – which is for children's films.  So this movie seems very universal and with a broad range of audience.

I would not call it just a children's film because it makes such as impression on adults, too. Has it been picked up for release by other countries?

Yes, and this took us by surprise.  All the territories have been sold. And all this happened because of the sale agency that took it on: MK2.

Martin Karmitz?!  That means France picked it up.  

Yes and the UK and Poland and Spain... 

Well, your movie does not compare closely to anything else I can think of.  It fuses documentary style and narrative, and it does this in such a way that it honors both formats.  And it doesn't make you feel queasy, uneasy, about the truthfulness there.  The way that some filmmakers handle their subjects.

They're going in and interfereing and not being respectful.  That was the trouble with my first film, Toro Negro.  it was about a young 21-year-old, alcoholoic bullfight who has no success at all. He comes from the streets and was abandonded at age 11.

Very depressing.

Yes, and it is not like anything that has been seen about bullfighting. 

Is that maybe why it did not get any distribution?

Maybe. This is what happened with Toro Negro, my first film: It was a very harsh documentary. Too harsh.. Not like what you know from the usual bullfighting movie.  No big arena, where the bullfighters are considered like rock stars. This is the real, harsh, ramshackle bullfighting. It takes place in very poor area. And the documentary explored the inner life of the protagonist, with all the domestic violence – and not talking heads but the real thing. For me as a filmmaker, I did not feel any identification with my subject.  So this time I wanted to explore the other side of the coin – love. So Alamar, instead of being about frustration and hatred is about freedom and love. The ying and yang.

How old are you, Pedro?

33.

Oh-- you look so much younger than that! Are you married? Family? 

No.

Is there anything else you’d like to talk about that you have not covered here today?

Oooh, yeah –plenty! Many, many things! But that will be for next time. Actually it is all there in the film. There are even many symbols that are there and that reflect my philosophy.

It’s amazing: You really have packed so much into this 73 minute film.  Oh—I do have a last question: What are you doing next?

I know it is going to be a combination of both universes: the good and the devil, the loving and hating – and then this purifying voyage of self-discovery.

Do you have a title yet?

No, but my leading character is Russian. So he is very intense.

Yes, very intense and troubled, I'll bet. Russia is such a strange country. I've never been there -- but just looking at its history. Constantly being under the thumb of, first the Czars, and then the Commusnists, and now the Captialists.

And the Mafia. It is crazy!

We get the high sign to end the conversation, 

so we thank each other for the time -- 

and for such an interesting interview.

From the Vault: STILETTO -- Vallelonga, Sloan & fine "B" cast serve revenge up hot

Made a few years back and appearing at a couple of minor festivals (I am not dissing Newport Beach and Charleston, mind you, but we are not talking Cannes and Venice here), the rabid, ribald, sex-and-violence filled STILETTO sort of sneaked into town via the straight-to-DVD route.  There are a number of reasons, however, that you might want to catch up with it. Part camp, part dead-serious drama, part exploitation film, part revenge-themed thriller and a thoroughly "B" movie (meant as no condemnation, by the way), this very odd film -- directed by Nick Vallelonga (shown below) and written by Paul Sloan (who also has a major acting role in the ensemble) -- is likely to jolt you big-time, from its very first scene.  From then on, it works about as often as it doesn't, but when it does, it can be riveting.

Why is that beautiful blond  (played by the alluring Stana Katic, who soon becomes a brunnete: see poster above) slicing up mobsters via throat, tummy and heart? Could it be revenge?  Of course, but for what dastardly deed?  You'll find out, but not before several more sleazebags have bitten the dust. That's pretty much the plot.  The fascination of the film lies elsewhere: in its utterly bizarre set of characters and the array of terrific "B" actors corralled to play them. Each actor pulls out all the stops and, in the process, gives us a master class on quick, sharp characterization -- laid in with a shiv or on with a trowel, depending on the how subtle or florid the acting style in question.  (The trowel can occasionally work wonders, by the way.)

I called this a "B" Movie, so let's start with the literal  "B" actors: Berenger, Tom and Biehn, Michael.  These two have changed a lot physically since their glory days, especially Mr. Berenger, shown above (Biehn's below, right), but they've still got that swing. Another "B" is Brooks, Amanda, who plays a Brit-acccented, good-time girl interested only in inflicting pain -- on herself as much as on others (like that guy, below, left).  This is a characterization you will not soon forget.

As is another by that stand-up guy and Henry Jaglom-regular David Proval.  Mr. Proval has only one short scene, but from first-frame, he's in our (and the non-hero's) face, chewing that scenery with relish and aplomb. Moving from the florid to the so-real-it-hurts department, we have Diane Venora, an actress who maybe never has a false moment.  Though one of my favorites, I didn't immediately recognize her in this film (she's the wife of the Greek mob boss played by Berenger), but the few scenes she appears in take on such immediate importance and reality that they wipe the floor with everything else -- including the bloodshed and killing, which is saying something.  The dialog in Ms Verona's scenes seems particularly good, due perhaps to Mr. Sloan's (that's he, below, with the gun) writing ability, Ms Venora's acting or (I'd guess) a combination of the two.

Remember James Russo?  Here he is again (below) and just as alert and igniting as ever. William Forsythe? Check.  Tom Sizemore, Kelly Hu, D.B. Sweeney, Dominique Swain and lots more; they're all here and doing a fine job.  To say that the filmmakers have a tendency toward the overwrought is putting it mildly.  But surely they know this and so are capitalizing on it.  Still, the overwrought goes overboard occasionally, and the ending, in particular, while I liked its style and subtlety, I must say I did not believe (Sloan's character seems to have just saved the Berenger character's life, so why the extended animosity?)  Oh, well.  I suppose that's the least of the problems.

I can't call Stiletto is a good film.  But I can't really call it camp, either, because there are things about it too good for that category.  It's a weird combo, all right, and I will be interested in seeing what else Villalonga and Sloan come up with, together or separately.  Finally, I must thank my good friend and oft-time movie companion Jerry Williams for turning me on to Stiletto.  He recommend it months ago, but after seeing last week's The Girl Who Played With Fire, he remarked how much better a "woman's vengeance" thriller it  was than this second installment of the Millennium trilogy. So at last I moved the movie to the top of my Netflix queue -- the result of which you have yet finished reading.

Straight-to-DVD: Steve Blair's semi-starry, sort-of funny rom-com I DO & I DON'T

You might think that using as the subject of a modern romantic comedy the tribulations associated with an upcoming marriage would have been pretty much  exhausted by now. You'd be right. Yet there is always "room for one more, honey," though the end result might well crash and burn. Marriage is just too juicy a subject for young filmmakers not to tackle, it seems, and so into the fray flies Steve Blair, a Baltimore-born filmmaker (actor, writer, producer), whose first try at both writing and directing is titled I DO & I DON'T.

Mr. Blair, shown at left, is in charge of a company called Bmore Pictures, a nice moniker that doubles as a nickname for Baltimore and an exhortation to "do better."  (Baltimore, in fact, is given the largest credit of anything in the end-credit sequence!)  His work as a writer on I Do & I Don't is adequate, but his directorial skills could use some honing.   He places the camera generally front and center and lets his cast -- a good one -- do its job.  Only once in the movie does the camerawork rise above the prosaic: a very funny angle of the bride-to-be spreading her legs and relaxing in her wedding dress, flanked by her "mentor" and her "dresser."

Blair's story involves a young couple (his second marriage, her first) that the bride's parents insist must obtain pre-marital counseling via "the Church."  Due to the necessity for speed, the pair ends up in the clutches of a nut-case older couple who involve their "wards" in everything from their own problematic marriage (above) to a nudist colony (below).

There is some fun to be had here: some physical comedy that works, and an occasional line that draws a laugh.  And toward the conclusion the filmmaker gets a bit more daring with ideas -- about trust, truth, what a real commitment to marriage might mean.  The movie actually begins with the bride's declaration of "I do.. and I don't," but we don't hear the actual outcome of this until the finale.

Made four years ago, but only now getting distribution (and straight-to-video, at that), Blair's film boasts a better cast than you might expect:  Bryan Callen (above, left: mostly from TV and cable) and Alexie Gilmore (above, right: World's Greatest Dad, Mercy) plays the about-to-be newlyweds, and they're both as good as the script and direction allow, while Jane Lynch (shown below, right, from Glee and other TV) and the fine character actor Matt Servito (shown at left, below) nail the older couple.

A few years previous to the making of this movie, a really brilliant and award-winning Italian film called Casomai (from 2002) explored similar territory, as a young couple prepares for marriage, again with the help of the Church-- but via a very unusual young priest.  Never released here in the States, except at the occasional festival (TrustMovies saw it at the FSLC's Open Roads), the movie was a stunner -- funny, warm, real,

moving and very surprising -- the best film about entering into modern marriage that I have yet seen.  I hope Mr. Blair gets to see Casomai someday.  Meanwhile, his movie makes its DVD debut next Tuesday, July 20, via Phase 4 Films, available for sale or rental.

Photos are from the film itself , 
while those of Mr. Servitto 
and Ms Lynch come via 
Sam Holden Photography. 
Mr. Blair's photo is courtesy of Urbanite.

DVDebut: BROOKLYN'S FINEST -- better than you've heard, but not good enough

Antoine Fuqua is developing quite a name and a repu-
tation. He may be the most commercially successful black filmmaker working today. A journeyman director of the dark and gritty, his movies always promise more than they deliver. Yet, from his first full-length effort, The Replacement Killers, he has shown such promise that each of his films has proven worth seeing, though none truly satisfies -- including his most successful:
Training Day.

Fuqua (shown, right) never writes; he just directs.  This may be a good thing, as he has a penchant for grit and the streets. He chooses projects in which sleaze is everywhere, in every color and class, and trust is rarely to be found.  However, if this director knew more about screenwriting -- plot, set-up, fruition and the like -- his films might be a lot better. It is inevitably the plot mechanics -- too-frequent use of coincidence, unbelievable last-minute heroics -- that bring his movies down.

BROOKLYN'S FINEST begins exceptionally well, with a toss-you-into-the-middle-of-it set-up and some terrific dialog between Vincent D'Onofrio (great, as usual) and Ethan Hawke (above, right).  Much of the dialog in the entire film is first-rate (the writer is Michael C. Martin); I used the Blu-Ray's English subtitles, in fact, so as not to miss any of it. Hawke, too, is excellent, but appears again in the kind of role (playing either side of the coin) he does so often -- Training Day, Assault on Precinct 13, Staten Island, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, and now this one -- that he may soon be relegated to it.  Also on board is Richard Gere (above, left) who is as good as he's been in some time, playing a cop about to retire who has major trouble playing by the rules.

Playing by the rules is something few in this film manage, either because the rules keep changing, aren't there in the first place, or, when they are, seem to be in direct opposition to someone else's guidelines. This is especially true of the characters played by Don Cheadle (above, right) and Wesley Snipes (above, left). The latter is just out of prison and toying with going (semi)straight, while the former is a dirty undercover cop, vying for a promotion yet! Standing in the way of same is a new power broker on the block, played by Ellen Barkin, below. (Women figure but tangentially and remotely in Fuqua films.)

That sharp and funny dialog at the movie's beginning has to do with the concept of right and "righter," wrong and "wronger," as the D'Onofrio character puts it.  And this pretty much provides the theme for the movie itself, which then expands into dirty, dirtier and dirtiest -- with the cops, drug dealers and sex traffickers all vying for pride of place.  But once again, as good as is the set-up, the resolution is crap: full of coincidence (from finding a missing girl to setting up your best friend) and ridiculous, one-man heroics (or, in Hawke's case, one-man sleaze-oics) to save the day. As with all of Fuqua's films, I end up seeing it, being initially impressed and finally disappointed.

Brooklyn's Finest, an ironic title if ever there was one, is out this week on Blu-Ray and DVD for sale or rental.

Birkin & Castellitto in Rivette's AROUND A SMALL MOUNTAIN opens at IFC Center

I'd say Jacques Rivette is lucky to have two stars as charismatic as Jane Birkin and Sergio Castellitto to help ground his new trifle AROUND A SMALL MOUNTAIN (36 vues du Pic Saint Loup). Despite its charming start (a cute-meet that works, opening the movie to its full plot potential) and a few scenes along the way that delight, his film continually threa-
tens and then finally does deflate, like a red balloon that has floated over one too many sharp turrets.

I'm not big on overly expository screenplays, but M. Rivette (shown at right) tends to err in the other direction, giving us a clue or two but refusing to go farther. We (like the character played by Castellitto) know something is wrong with our love interest and leading lady, but due to the refusal of the director and co-writer (with Pascal Bonitzer and Christine Laurent) to fess up (he won't even allow Ms Birkin's character to do so: She consistently refuses to communicate with a guy who clearly cares for her), we viewers remain too much in the dark.

Worse, when we finally do learn a few answers, they are so obvious and soap-opera-like that we can but shrug. Worst all all is how he has used a wonderful actress like Birkin (above, left, with Castellitto) forcing her to babble a long monologue -- one addressed to nobody (she's by herself, you see, in a circus tent) and somehow make it even remotely believable.  No actor should have to do this, but there she is, giving it her all.  The monologue offers clues to character and event that might better have been more artfully filtered throughout the screenplay, rather than foisted upon us in a single, undigestible lump that must have been a tad trying for the actress.  That would have taken some more work, however, and this film, being a "lark," well, there's no need.

TrustMovies admires (you may, too) Rivette's love of and delight in the small, down-on-its-luck circus and its performers that provide the background for the film.  There is charm to be found here, in the alternately silly/funny tricks and acts on display, but considering the amount of time spent in and around this one-ring show, the return-on-investment isn't much.  References and quotes abound, everyone from Shakespeare to Donald Rumsfeld gets his licks in, as does the past, lost love, current attraction and games of control.

The biggest treat, aside from the two stars, may be the gorgeous French mountain country, an example of which is shown at left. Eventually, though, the movie becomes for us viewers much like it has been for Castellitto's character. It's as though we've taken a vacation and spent some odd time with a group of people that appear to invite us in -- only to leave us out.

Less lengthy than any other of this fabled French filmmaker's work that I know (two hours is short for Rivette), the movie's 84-minute running time does help in reaching the conclusion more quickly.  I can't imagine any diehard fans missing the film, though, at this late date in his career (Rivette's 82), it probably will not bring him new converts.

Around a Small Mountain, from The Cinema Guild, opens this Friday, July 9, in New York City exclusively at the IFC Center.  You can find additional playdates, with cities and theaters, here.