Los Angeles Plays Itself

Los Angeles Plays Itself is a video essay by Thom Andersen, finished in 2003, exploring the way Los Angeles has been presented in movies.[2][3] Consisting almost entirely of clips from other films with narration, the film was not initially released commercially as it was only seen in screenings presented by Andersen, occasional presentations at American Cinematheque and copies distributed via filesharing and other person-to-person methods. In 2014, it was announced that the film would finally be released officially by Cinema Guild.[4][5][6] [7] [8]

Los Angeles Plays Itself
Directed byThom Andersen
Written byThom Andersen
StarringEncke King (narrator)
CinematographyDeborah Stratman
Edited bySeung-Hyun Yoo
Release date
  • 2004 (2004)
Running time
169 minutes [1]
CountryUSA
LanguageEnglish

Inspiration

Andersen stated that the film idea occurred to him after a lecture he gave at the California Institute of the Arts, where he talked about his objections to L.A. Confidential, the 1997 Curtis Hanson film adapted from James Ellroy's novel.[9]

Synopsis

In the film, Andersen argues that the influence of Hollywood overshadows Los Angeles and is one of the reasons the city's name is frequently abbreviated.[9] He makes the case that directors have a distaste for modernist architecture, which is regularly used for villains' homes.[9]

Reception

On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 96% based on 45 reviews, with an average rating of 8.2/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "A treat for cinephiles, this documentary is a comprehensive, academic, and enlightening film essay concerning Los Angeles and its depiction in the movies."[10] On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 86 out of 100, based on 19 critics, indicating "universal acclaim".[11]

The film won the National Film Board Award for Best Documentary at the 2003 Vancouver International Film Festival and was voted best documentary of 2004 by the Village Voice Critic's Poll. [12]

gollark: Your idea of "run the thing backward" is quite obvious to anyone who looks at the problem. There have been many people looking at the problem. So if it worked someone would have proved collatz now.
gollark: <@!714406501346967572> 0.4 offense, but if you could easily prove the Collatz conjecture with relatively simple maths someone already would have,
gollark: I assume the 0/1/infinite solution thing is from something something linear algebra.
gollark: Ah. So the matrix maps the values of all the variables to the outputs of each equation, and the same output can be attained in multiple ways sometimes.
gollark: No, I mean how do you use that to get intuition for number of solutions of some equations.

References

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.