Around the World in 24 Frames 07.31.09: Stroszek

Posted by Len Archibald on 07.31.2009

...We've got a 1080 out here...a truck on fire...We have a man on the lift, we're unable to find the switch to turn off the lift...We can't stop the dancing chicken. If you send us an electrician out here, we'll be standing by. Over.

Man, what a week it's been – I've been in the crazy process of developing scripts, shooting and editing my show: It's hard work and long hours but it's work I love to do, so it's all good. Let's get this BAD BOY (Uh huh, yeah, uh huh, Bad Boy...) on the road!

The Rant

So there's a particular comment from last week that I need to address...

Another great review from Mr Arthouse Archibald. I can't wait to see what you you have next week!
Posted By: The 8th Samurai (Registered)  on July 24, 2009 at 08:48 PM

For those who are unaware, The 8th Samurai is my username when I leave comments around here. I must give a hearty thanks to my wife, who tried her best to surprise me with a nice comment...You really need to get your own screen name.

I've been hopping over to the Wrestling section of 411mania, mainly contributing to their Top 5 (Cheap Plug!) and there is one thing that I need to say to those who take this WAY too seriously – even moreso to the ones who HATE certain wrestlers (like John Cena, Triple H) and feel like if they had "the books" they would do a better job than what they see on television...

Some of you guys are arguing over a S-C-R-I-P-T-E-D form of ENTERTAINMENT. The wrestling BUSINESS (yes, it is a BUSINESS) is again, for the third freaking time – A BUSINESS. And what is the #1 goal of a business, kids?

A: To make money.

So, to anyone who wants to talk about "workrate" or "artistry" or any of that BS, I have 2 points to make:

1) Workrate and so on is all subjective, as no matter what one accomplishes, the end result is PREDETERMINED.

2) The above result is based on who SELLS TICKETS AND MERCHANDISE because, yes, kids – the wrestling BUSINESS is a...what? Oh, yes...A BUSINESS.

Go on, dismiss $$$ for workrate. You run a wrestling BUSINESS and you try to push who YOU think should be your #1 guy and see if that fails and you find someone else who makes you an unprecidented amount of money; no matter how much you may "think" he "sucks", you will PUSH him...

...Unless you like spending $100 to make $1. Or just hate money in general.

No matter the company, WWE, TNA, ROH, NOAH, All-Japan, Shimmer, CHIKARA, etc – these companies exist to make a PROFIT, and based on their business models will do everything in their power to do so. Even ROH puts their main titles on guys who either their fans CHEER or BOO wildly because at the end of the day, they are paying $$$ to see that person win or lose.

You can dismiss this line of reasoning as "markish" – and I will laugh and say "um...so?"; but here is the fact: Example – The WWE is making more profit than they ever had (oh, now here comes the argument of inflation – which is a moot point because that's a case over money that DOES NOT EXIST[ie cannot spend now]) and they are the #1 wrestling BUSINESS in the world. John Cena is the face of that company. He moves the most merchandise. The same people here who argue that he is no reason for their success are the same ones who, when going to a WWE event, will carry a sign that says "CENA SUX" and expend every ounce of their energy to boo him out of the building. You're sheep. That's what THEY WANT YOU TO DO. It ADDS to the "mystique" of his character of a guy who busts his ass every night and DOESN'T CARE if he is cheered or booed. You ADD to that.

No one – not ONE company is even CLOSE to the WWE. They are the only WORLDWIDE touring wresting company on the planet. NOAH doesn't come here. CHIKARA isn't doing events, nor have a large enough fanbase to go to Italy. I haven't heard of ROH doing shows in Iraq EVERY YEAR FOR SIX STRAIGHT YEARS. TNA is JUST now opening doors to expand shows in other countries.

So, continue to hold onto your rose-colored view of what you "feel" pro-wrestling "is", while the rest of us, the ones who take it at face value as a form of ENTERTAINMENT (lest we forget that pro-wrestling got its start as a CARNIVAL ATTRACTION.) You can whine and complain all you want about "who deserves" and "pushes" and "burried" and "the good ol' days" but at the end of the day, the company and the product that is put out is still making HORDES of money WITHOUT your all-knowing smarmy, smarky, ignorant, cynical, ill-informed and ultimately, futile business-sense.

Because, at the end of the day, wrestling is a BUSINESS. I'n sure Vince McMahon, Triple H, John Cena, Chris Jericho, Edge, CM Punk, Rey Misterio and Jeff Hardy are crying that behind the keyboards of some annonymous (and seemingly witty – mostly to self) computer screen-names don't approve of their "interpretation" of pro-wrestling...

...All the way to the bank on top of their bags and bags of money.[/end rant]

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

I love movies. They represent escapism, art, intellect and spirituality. Some are nothing more than popcorn flicks, designed to ease the burden of "real-life" for a couple of hours. Some bring important issues to the forefront that challenges how we perceive our surroundings. The most important thing for me – if one is a serious film goer – is to constantly expand and discover new movies. This includes experiencing stories told outside of North America.

Yes, I know: "I don't like to read while I watch movies". Well, neither do I, but I won't use that to prevent me from finding a great story within the screen. It is important, as human beings to discover other cultures and expand our perceptions of those different from us and how they see the world. There are reasons that Bergman, Kurosawa, Fellini, Ozu and Truffaut are important in the movie world – They are just great at what they do.

I intend to highlight a new film every week that is considered "foreign-language"; now that definition is simple, yet broad and complex. For example, if you need subtitles to understand the events of the plot, I will discuss it. If it is a film from a primarily English-speaking nation, but is *NOT* in English (i.e. Leolo or Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner from Canada), I will discuss. If it is a film from outside the U.S. and it *is* in English, I will not discuss (sorry, Brits & Aussies) – for now. My goal is to shed light on some of these gems, and help quell the insatiable appetites for those who can't live without seeing a new movie. Enjoy!

Stroszek (1977)
Germany
Dir: Werner Herzog
Runtime: 115 min



Werner Herzog. I've mentioned his name once before (in one of 411's Top 5 Columns) but I've stated it again because you will be reading a lot of it from now on. Werner Herzog, along with filmmakers Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Margarethe von Trotta, Volker Schlöndorff, Hans-Jürgen Syberberg and Wim Wenders created a new kind of German movement within the film world. Just as their countrymen F.W. Murnau and Fritz Lang contributed to the visual medium of film through expressionism – diagonal angles and deep shadows - in the early days of cinema, these three - especially Herzog, contributed by way of neo-realism.

For as many great – GREAT films that Herzog accomplished (and I will touch on many of them in future articles), I feel his greatest contribution and achievement to the art of film is his darkly comic and equally as tragic Stroszek. Here is a film that is so…Weird, yet at the same time so easy to relate to. The film's closing image (and I'm not spoiling anything) is of a dancing chicken. Herzog called it a "great metaphor". For what? Everyone has their own ideas – and therein lies the trick, and genius of a filmmaker who strives to create art.


Bruno S., the most underrated film actor of the 1970's.

To tackle the story of Stroszek, one must first tackle the real-life story of its star, Bruno S. See, Bruno S. was the son of a prostitute and terribly abused by his father – so much so that he was deaf at one time. From age 3 he was in a mental institution, which is where he called home until he was 26. He then became a street musician, where Herzog caught wind of him while watching a documentary. Herzog cast him in The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser (aka Every Man for Himself and God Against All), where Herzog was accused of exploiting a man who may or may not be mentally ill. Werner Herzog never believed Bruno S. was mentally unstable or ill – just a simple man who had been shaped by his past into somewhat of oddball with unrefined social skills. Nowadays, we call them "nerds" or "fanboys" (ZING!). After tackling that film, Werner Herzog was inspired to do another with his muse, about a man who decides to flee the pains of poor German existence to the grand riches and easy life of The United States – only to find that it is no easier there. Herzog wrote the script in four days.

Stroszek opens with Bruno Stroszek (Bruno S.) being released from prison. He has a history of acting out when drunk. He is strictly warned to quit his ways, since he is "rehabilitated" and turn his life around or he will wind up back inside prison. Bruno salutes and leaves…Only to walk right into a bar when the opportunity presents itself. From there, he meets with an old acquaintance, Eve (Eva Mattes), a prostitute who is terribly mistreated by her pimps, one who looks uncannily like someone straight out of the prospectors from the California Gold Rush. Bruno offers Eve a chance to stay at his apartment and away from the harsh life. They find her (and Bruno), beat her and humiliate him - in one hell of a strange scene where he is forced to go on his hands and knees, ass up on a piano while one of the thugs play. The elderly little man who tended to Bruno's apartment while he was in prison, Mr. Scheitz (Clemens Scheitz) announces that his nephew in Railroad Flats, Wisconsin has extended an invite for him to move there. This becomes an opportunity for Bruno, who declares that this is how they will all begin their new lives, where they will be rich and comfortable. Eva raises cash through prostitution (her clients are a group of Turkish construction workers), and they all find themselves in the magnificence of a new 40-ft Fleetwood mobile home in Wisconsin.

How they get there (and beyond) is a hell of a ride. Herzog was one of those filmmakers who could create genre-less films, and this is one of them. Stroszek is a comedy, a tragedy, a neo-realistic take on lower-class Germany and lower-class America, an absurd satire, and a deeply philosophical and moving piece of entertainment. It is as spontaneous and episodic as M*A*S*H*, as disturbingly realistic as Pixote and as screwed up as 3 Women or The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie with the quiet poignancy that reminds me of scenes from To Kill a Mockingbird or Magnolia.


Clayton Szalpinski, Clemens Scheitz and Bruno S. in the hometown of Ed Gein.

One such scene is early in the film: Bruno seeks the aid of a doctor after he has lost his job in Berlin. The doctor has no cure for his ills but listens attentively and is sympathetic. He leads Bruno into a ward where premature babies are held and are taken care of. He allows one of them to cling onto the doctor's two big fingers, exclaiming "how tenacious the grip reflex is", even in this small infant. I think what the doctor (and ultimately, Herzog) was trying to convey is that if even the tiniest of life is willing and has the capacity to hold on for dear life, even if it doesn't consciously understand the concept of it, that we adults should 1) not take it for granted and 2) be able to find within ourselves, the capacity for resolve and self-reliance. Bruno's eyes squint, examines, never blinks. The doctor cradles the tiny life in his arms, gently kissing it on the ear until the baby falls asleep. Bruno, through his intense stare, glares right through the moment.


Life is fragile, yet resilient.

Herzog says on the commentary of the DVD for Stroszek that the final sequence is the best he's ever filmed – lofty territory for the man who shot Aguirre: The Wrath of God and Fitzcarraldo. I have already revealed the final image, but will not reveal its last moments, as it is one of the strangest, funniest and saddest moments ever staged and have to be seen to be believed. The only thing I can give you is to ask yourself this question once the movie ends: With Bruno's attitude about life in Germany compared to life in America, how else did he think it was going to end? It is in fact one of film's most inspired moments, where – as a filmmaker – I would not change the final 10 minutes. It is perfect and as true to the characters, tone and story as possible.

One of the things that sets a film like Stroszek apart from others is its eye for realistic detail. Actors *look* like prettier, or at least more presentable representations of what a particular role calls for. If Hollywood wants someone to play a backwoods mechanic from Wisconsin, they may call upon Billy Bob Thorton or even Larry the Cable Guy – they are, what producers and casting directors consider "type". If Werner Herzog wants someone to play a backwoods mechanic from Wisconsin, he finds a backwoods mechanic from Wisconsin – damned if they have no acting experience.

Werner Herzog, with documentarian Errol Morris were originally going to collaborate on a documentary about Ed Gein, who hailed from Railroad Flats. Clayton Szalpinski was a mechanic who repaired Herzog's car while there, and was perfect for the role of Mr. Scheitz's nephew, complete with twang and imperfect features. The film carries a tint and lack of color that looks like documentary footage. And Bruno's performance, incapable of a false note – incapable of lying, gives something that I can only describe as some part of his soul. Bruno S. used to scream off the top of his lungs for an hour or two to get in the mood before a scene.

Stroszek was considered an attack on American society when it was first released, but if you examine the tone, Herzog is far harsher on his own country, while the Americans are treated as more naïve and even nice (there is a tremendous scene in which a bank official attempts to explain to Bruno that if he doesn't make the payments for his trailer the bank will have no choice but to take it away.) This is similar to audience reaction to Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing, where critics believed the film was anti-white, when upon closer examination of the plot shows that Lee was far more critical of the role African-Americans play in society.

Herzog throws every possible trick at us: A talking bird, dancing animals, a musical interlude, a search for a tractor over a frozen tundra with a metal detector, the fastest-talking auctioneer ever, and an impromptu tooth-pulling – with none of it seeming like it is out of place or simply there for shock or manipulative effect. Eva is abused by her pimps in a wretched scene where they dump trash on her head; all the while Bruno and Mr. Scheitz watch. They are powerless to help. The scene lacks polish, and sheen from how Hollywood would handle something like this. No music is played. No dramatic intercuts. It is just there – existing in the moment. This is Herzog's gift and specialty when behind the camera.


They must find all involved in the "conspiracy"...

Werner Herzog was born in Munich in 1942 and is considered as one of the preeminent filmmakers of his, or any generation. In the 1970's, he crafted this, as well as other classics such as Aguirre: The Wrath of God (1972) and a remake of Nosferatu. In the 1980's, his masterpiece, Fitzcarraldo was the talk of the film world – a project that rivaled Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now in terms of scope – and lack of sanity. (A documentary of Fitzcarraldo's production, Burden of Dreams, showcases how Herzog had a 360-ton ship built...Only for it to be dragged up a muddy 40 degree slope in the jungle to show its "realism".) He is as prolific in the new millennium as he was the last, with the films, Grizzly Man (2005), Rescue Dawn (2006) and his documentary, Encounters at the End of the World (2007). He is currently in the middle of post-production for his latest film; a remake of Bad Lieutenant, starring Nicolas Cage and Val Kilmer.

Herzog was a man who loved to emphasize grand images over story – but this was one of the few times where he had images that served the story and brought it to heights that only few films have attained. Stroszek is odd, off-center, entertaining, bleak and wholly artistic without any naked-eye proof of its art. It is brilliant.

So what does the "Dancing Chicken" - considered as one of the great film metaphors mean? It has been interpreted as an attack on American consumerism, fate triumphing over free-will and how America is more impressed with empty entertainment than substance. Roger Ebert thinks it's, "A force we cannot comprehend puts some money in the slot, and we dance until the money runs out." Herzog apparently shot the footage by himself, since the crew hated the dancing chicken so much.

What do I think? I think it's just a dancing chicken. You are born, you live, you die – and the world will continue to dance and cluck.


Cluck, cluck, cluck.

I couldn't find a trailer for Stroszek, so here is its most famous scene:


{Film Passport Stamped}

Coming Attractions: The first in a six-part series of the films of the French New Wave; Henri-Georges Clouzot's thriller that's so shocking, characters may die of fright from the revelation.

Questions or comments? Email me at [e-mail]!!!

Bookmark 411mania.com on your computer!

-or-

Check us out at Twitter!

TWITTER

http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma