Reset Your Preset to 107.1FM!

Starting at noon on Saturday, October 21, CHIRP will be broadcasting on-air at 107.1FM on the north side of the city! Check out our broadcast page to find out about joining the celebration.

Become a Member

Now Playing

Current DJ: Alex

Colleen Green Oh Baby from Oh Baby (Hardly Art) Buy Colleen Green Oh Baby at Reckless Records Buy Colleen Green at iTunes Buy Colleen Green Oh Baby at Amazon Add to Collection

Listen Live

Requests? 773-DJ-SONGS or .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

The CHIRP Blog

Entries categorized as “The Fourth Wall” 26 results

Kevin Fullam writesThe Fourth Wall: The Fall of The Simpsons and the New Criticism

Welcome to The Fourth Wall, CHIRP's weekly e-conversation on cinema. This week's subject is the YouTube video essay The Fall of The Simpsons.

This edition is written by CHIRP Radio volunteers Kevin Fullam and Clarence Ewing.

Clarence:

This time around, Kevin, I’d like to chat about something that’s not a movie or a TV show, but a critique of a TV show. A show that was, in the minds of many in our generation, THE TV show…The Simpsons.

The critique is a YouTube video called “The Fall of The Simpsons: How It Happened.” It’s a half-hour essay by someone named Super Eyepatch Wolf that tries to explain why The Simpsons, now entering its 29th season, has fallen so far from grace in terms of quality.

I think the video makes a lot of sense. The creator and narrator laid out his argument in a sober, systematic fashion. First, he provided a form of proof that the show is, in fact, not as good as it used to be. He then goes into the history of the show’s creative staff and what they did to make this show work, followed by an analysis of what makes something funny, which I found particularly interesting.

Keep Reading…

Share October 13, 2017 http://chrp.at/P0C Share on Facebook Tweet This!

Categorized: The Fourth Wall

Topics: the simpsons

Kevin Fullam writesThe Fourth Wall: The Square

Welcome to The Fourth Wall, CHIRP's weekly e-conversation on cinema. This week's subject is the Australian crime thriller The Square.

This edition is written by CHIRP Radio volunteers Kevin Fullam and Clarence Ewing.

Kevin:

Oh, what a tangled web we weave... -- Sir Walter Scott, Marmion. 

I don't even need to complete the above verse, do I? You know what's coming next. And while we can't be sure of exactly what will befall Raymond Yale, the hapless protagonist of the 2008 Australian thriller The Square, we're quite certain that he's digging himself a deeper and deeper hole in attempting to cover up increasingly egregious sins. 

Ray (David Roberts), a successful construction foreman who's not above squeezing his contractors for payola, is sleepwalking though his marriage. His wife suspects what we know: he's found a paramour in the much-younger Carla (Claire van der Boom), who sees Ray as her ticket to escape from her own husband, the shady, menacing Smithy (Anthony Hayes).

During their hotel trysts, Carla pushes Ray to leave his wife and commit to something permanent. Ray is less than convinced, but when Carla discovers a huge stash of cash brought home one day by Smithy (presumably through nefarious means), she and Ray agree to abscond with the money and start a new life together. The only quandary: how to steal the cash without inviting reprisal from Smithy?

Keep Reading…

Share October 6, 2017 http://chrp.at/OwX Share on Facebook Tweet This!

Categorized: The Fourth Wall

Topics: the suqare

Kevin Fullam writesThe Fourth Wall: BoJack Horseman, Season 4

Welcome to The Fourth Wall, CHIRP's weekly e-conversation on cinema. This week's subject is the Netflix series BoJack Horseman.

This edition is written by CHIRP Radio volunteers Kevin Fullam and Clarence Ewing.

Clarence:

In the series BoJack Horseman, the humans and demi-humans who populate the bustling film and TV industry town of Hollywoo [not a typo] have the usual problems. But, as in our reality, some problems are more profound than others.

The series’ main character (Will Arnett), the washed-up former star of the ‘90s sitcom Horsin’ Around, is a giant pile of vice, self-loathing, and poor decision-making. If a writing teacher out there needs to provide an example of the difference between a "hero" and a "protagonist," they don’t need to look any further than this guy.

BoJack has friends: now-former agent/lover Princess Carolyn (Amy Sedaris), now-former houseboy Todd Chavez (Aaron Paul), industry frenemy Mr. Peanutbutter (Paul F. Tompkins), and biographer Diane Nguyen (Alison Brie), who’s also Mr. Peanutbutter’s wife. But over the series’ first three seasons these people have realized, in their own ways, that the best way to keep BoJack in their lives is to get away from him. Mr. PB and Diane focus on their marriage, Princess Carolyn her career and desire to start a family, and Todd his search for his own place in the world, which still involves crashing on other peoples’ couches.

Keep Reading…

Share September 29, 2017 http://chrp.at/NWi Share on Facebook Tweet This!

Categorized: The Fourth Wall

Topics: bojack horseman

Kevin Fullam writesThe Fourth Wall: The Levelling

Welcome to The Fourth Wall, CHIRP's weekly e-conversation on cinema. This week's subject is the Netflix feature The Levelling.

This edition is written by CHIRP Radio volunteers Kevin Fullam and Clarence Ewing.

Kevin:

You grew up in Nebraska, right, Clarence? I have to imagine that all around, there were glistening fields of crops as far as the eye could see? Admittedly, I've never been to the Cornhusker State, but such is my impression of most everything west of the Chicago suburbs... at least, until you hit the Rockies or so. Even for an urbanite like myself, the landscapes I'm envisioning are rather majestic.

The farm depicted in 2016's The Levelling? Far from majestic. Did we see the sun emerge even once here in the English county of Somerset? The farmhouse sits rotting after a flood, with its former inhabitants evacuated to a nearby trailer home. Cows shuffle dutifully to and fro, through muck and mire. 

Returning to her rundown family farm is veterinary student Clover (Ellie Kendrick). Her brother Harry has just died via a self-inflicted gunshot wound; he had been drinking -- was it suicide, or an accident? No one seems to give a convincing answer either way. Money problems abound, with Clover's father Aubrey (David Troughton) in dire financial straits. Also telling? Clover refers to him by his first name, and shows a decided lack of warmth towards him and her brother James (Jack Holden). As we'll find out, there's good reason.

Keep Reading…

Share September 15, 2017 http://chrp.at/N8W Share on Facebook Tweet This!

Categorized: The Fourth Wall

Topics: the levelling

Kevin Fullam writesThe Fourth Wall: After Love

Welcome to The Fourth Wall, CHIRP's weekly e-conversation on cinema. This week's subject is the French drama After Love

This edition is written by CHIRP Radio volunteers Kevin Fullam and Clarence Ewing.

Clarence:

In Joachim Lafosse’s film After Love, Boris and Marie are a couple separating after 15 years of marriage. They have a big house and a pair of adorable twin daughters. For various reasons, Boris is still living with Marie and the kids in the house that was given to the couple by Marie’s parents. He refuses to leave, she refuses to buy him out, and the audience is witness to the slow-motion crash of a family falling apart.

Strong performances by Cédric Kahn and Bérénice Bejo as two people whose relationship has come to an end are complimented by a beautifully stifling atmosphere from the director and cinematographer Jean-François Hensgens.

Most of the film takes place in the house where the family lives. The former loving couple’s frustration, anger, and resentment are so palpable, they become characters in themselves. The audience is placed at a similar perspective to Boris and Marie’s daughters, friends, and extended family as witnesses to the emotional war between these two people.

I felt like After Love is one of the most apt titles for a film that I’ve seen in a while. But then I saw the film’s original French title, L'Économie du couple (“The Economics of a Couple”), which made even more sense.

The emotional and personal turmoil this couple goes through is fueled by conflicts about money. The major questions boil down to: how much did each person invest in this relationship, and how much is each person owed? I felt like, in this sense, the film can be read not just as a story of personal tragedy but also a comment on a Western capitalist society where money is a valid substitute for self-worth.

Kevin, as you watched Boris and Marie’s story unfold, did you find yourself taking a side? Was one character’s “argument” more valid than the other’s?

Kevin:

I think it's natural to take sides during films of relationship strife, though a well-crafted story such as this one should have the viewer waffling about whom they support. And ultimately, don't we feel sympathy for the kids most of all? They aren't at the age where they can often find words to articulate their thoughts, but the constant discord, from low-grade tension to outright yelling matches, probably takes a larger toll on the girls than their parents. 

Did you ever see Before Midnight? The Before trilogy is near and dear to my heart; spaced nine years apart, the tales are walk-and-talk snapshots of a couple (played by Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke), from their first meeting to their eventual marriage and beyond. And because of the jumps in chronology (which director Richard Linklater also used to great effect in Boyhood), we as viewers wind up mentally extrapolating the preludes... particularly in Midnight, when a number of off-screen frustrations finally boil over in one of the most brutally-authentic arguments I've seen in any film.

In After Love, I found myself doing the same sorts of extrapolations, seeing as how we're essentially picking up the story of the marriage in mid-stream. They'd been together for 15 years. At what point did doubts start to enter Marie's mind? Was there a part of her that was always concerned about their compatibility, given the disparity in wealth and education between her and her husband? Might things have come to a head sooner if they hadn't had children? What was the final straw for her? 

As far as the economics of the relationship, I think the money here -- as in many other breakups -- is used by both sides as a proxy for "winning" or "losing." It's pride. Do the final numbers ultimately matter? If money weren't an issue, the sticking point might've been the custody time instead. Clearly, Boris' lack of wealth didn't matter much during the courtship phase, so what was the real source of discontent? Or perhaps Marie's priorities changed once they had children? My natural inclination was to side with her because she and I seemed to value the same things (she was educated, she was an avid reader, etc.), but on the other hand, who did she think Boris was when she married him? 

There's one other key figure in the film, and that's Marie's mother. Seeing as how it's her (along with her late husband) that is the source of the family's money, you might expect her to be a factor in undermining the marriage? "He's not good enough for you," etc. But she counsels quite the opposite, and thinks her daughter is being unrealistic with her expectations. Passion always fades, she says, adding that it's natural for the relationship between a wife and husband to evolve over time. 

It's a refrain you often hear from older generations: younger folks expect too much from marriage, and thus are inevitably disappointed. And of course, in many societies, even the notion of "marrying for love" isn't seen as a great foundation for a long-term relationship! It's certainly a question with a lot to unpack, but where do you stand regarding the issue of modern-day marriage and expectations? And do you have any favorite films which dissect this topic? 

Clarence:

You are right, Marie's mother manages to say a lot about marriage in a few words. Hers was a very good portrayal of someone who's a bit world-weary but is not an overbearing caricature of cynicism. Overall, I kind of side with Marie's stance on being proactive about resolving the couple's situation, but it's obvious Boris has nowhere to go. His secret meetings with business partners that his daughters secretly witness suggest he's in some physical danger outside the house as well.

It would have been very easy for the filmmakers to make one of these two people out to be the "bad" parent. But a big part of the narrative involves how their love for their children is as plain as their animosity toward each other. The way the story is told, I feel for both of them.

I only know of Before Midnight by reputation, but I've heard great things about it. I think the closest movie I remember to After Love in terms of theme is the Joseph Gordon-Levitt film (500) Days of Summer. That movie didn't involve a marriage, but the two films do take close and ultimately unsentimental looks at what happens when love ends. I think that is a weak spot for American movies in particular. There's an unspoken storytelling requirement that things will work out before the end credits, usually due to the couple somehow rediscovering what made them fall in love in the first place.

I feel like these kinds of rules, both philosophical ("Love conquers all.") and operational (any story involving an attractive female character between 25 and 40 must focus on motherhood in some way) are still a big part of American movies and TV shows, even the so-called "edgy" projects that pop up occasionally like Amy Schumer's Trainwreck or pretty much any Judd Apatow movie.

At least that how it seems to me. In your movie-watching journeys, have you noticed a kind of difference in how U.S. films and films from other countries treat the subjects of love, romance, and domestic bliss?

I've got another, unrelated question. I saw After Love at Facets Cinemateque, one of the oldest independent film houses in Chicago. I used to go to art-house movies a lot years ago, but not so much lately (although I have been recently going to Chicago Film Society screenings). Netflix and TiVo have fundamentally changed how I get most of my content. I must say, though, I got a bit nostalgic sitting in that odd-shaped screening room, watching a relatively obscure movie with a group of like-minded patrons. It's a different feel than the ultra-modern blockbuster theaters, which for all their state of the art technology, feel more like a mall than a place to see art. At this point in my life, "at home" and "art house" are my preferred places to watch movies, with "modern multiplex" a definite third. How do you feel about it?

Kevin:

I'm right there with you as far as venue preferences -- though modern multiplexes would be much more tolerable if they simply trimmed the number of commercials/trailers shown? (You can't even sit in silence before the start times at those places, either, since the commercials are often running well in advance.) The one saving grace with newfangled theaters? Stadium seating. Stadium seating is a glorious thing. 

As far as After Love and relationship films in general, you raised a number of interesting points:

1) One of the biggest differences I notice between American and European films of any genre is the use of music -- specifically, how much less of it is used in the latter. I think Hollywood films tend to hit the viewer over the head as far as using film scores to generate emotion? (Here's where we have madcap antics! Now here's where the strings come in to accentuate this tender moment!) Subtlety often ain't a strength. But particularly in French cinema, I feel that moments of vulnerability are allowed space to breathe? 

2) This might be a contrast between mainstream Hollywood and indie fare as opposed to any American/foreign divide, but let's face it: most films -- hell, most forms of entertainment in general -- want audiences to leave with a positive vibe. So I completely agree with you in that a typical story of this ilk would have the couple/family reconciling and living happily ever after. In fact, it's a bit of shock when this doesn't occur in major American films... like in, say, Ordinary People or American Beauty

This is a broader issue, but I've always been fascinated with the mystery of why we're sometimes drawn to art that makes us feel sad? (Nick Hornby explored this topic a bit re: pop music in High Fidelity, though I'd argue that while the lyrics of many pop songs are full of heartbreak, the melodies generally are much more upbeat.) I view films like After Love as cathartic in a way, in that they help me reach emotional places that I sometimes have a tough time getting to on my own. 

3) Finally, you mentioned (500) Days of Summer -- I had some issues with the film, but there was a scene where the protagonist attends his ex-girlfriend's (Summer) party with dreams of reconciliation, and a split-screen was used to illustrate the differences between his expectations and the reality. Fantastic sequence, and a genius concept. 

Did you see the movie? Want to add to the conversation? Leave a comment below!

 

comments powered by Disqus

Share September 8, 2017 http://chrp.at/OHt Share on Facebook Tweet This!

Categorized: The Fourth Wall

Topics: after love

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. »»