All the films from all the editions, including those subsequently removed, presently totalling 1167. An easy way of seeing how…
F for Fake
A documentary about fraud and fakery.
In 1977 when I was living in Orson Welles' garage, he let me watch his personal print of F for Fake. Here is an excerpt from the review I published at the time: img18.imageshack.us/img18/2886/rd1h.jpg
Well. Uh... This was a documentary.
My brain is fucked
Ladies and gentleman, by way of introduction, this is a film about trickery, fraud, about lies.
- Orson Welles
Oh Mr Welles you are a genius. It could very easily have slipped into self-indulgence and it's a work of genius that it doesn't. It's a film that points out the fallibility of so called art appraisers, so many examples are given of professionals incorrectly recognising originals and fakes. We have to question to what degree we should value an original over an exact copy, after all, they both look the same so what's the difference?
For lack of a better description, F for Fake is essentially a film about fraud and fakery. Welles speaks to Elmyr de Hory and recounts…
I started at the top and have been working my way down ever since.
I couldn't understand why people would call this a "film essay" as apposed to a documentary. Now that I've seen it, I clearly understand the distinction, but I'll be damned if I could explain it to anyone. It's less a documentary and more like overhearing a conversation at a party. You have Orson Welles telling you a story, almost as it comes to him, in the most entertaining way he knows how.
The film really does feel like a half hazard conversation that Welles is telling you as he remembers random facts, but it's too expertly put together to REALLY be so random. Sure…
If there is absolutely nothing else to take away from this film but the fact that it is a masterclass in editing, that would be more than enough to walk away with fulfilled. You could actually not pay any mind at all to the words being said, just letting the amalgam of sight and sound wash over you, and it would still be a thrill.
I honestly thought it was fictional for the first twenty minutes or so, until Welles brought up his radio beginnings and Citizen Kane. Then again, maybe it was. I seriously don't know anymore. Did Citizen Kane actually happen, or was it only made with the foresight that it would fit in with the many hoaxes…
F for Fake could be classified as convoluted, complicated or confusing. Yeah, whatever. It's compelling and is confusing for the most part, especially the first hour. Frantic and all over the place and beautifully done in every way. A tangled mess for some, but an enthralling and undeniable masterpiece for others. I am one of those others. Editing is above and beyond what it could have been and is nothing short of extraordinary. A story of the art of fake art and the fakers behind the fake art. "The Act of Faking"? Easily my favorite "documentary". Wonder how it will work on re-watches. You got me, Mr. Welles. You got me good. You and your fantastic voice, that of which rivals Liam Neeson's.
Fake suckas be bluffing.
I just watched this today at 9am in the morning. I will definitely need to take a second look on it.
But I can definitely say there is something very special about it, and I took some important things with me on this first watch.
A tour de force of editing before non linear was even an option. This movie is mind blowing and incredible.
Something special. Incredibly playful and very unique in its presentational style.
Sólo por escuchar a Orson Welles ya merece la pena pero la Operation Mindfuck que se marca entre tanto es de traca.
"a new kind of film." - Orson Welles.
This time around, despite my love for Orson, I did sometimes wonder if in its radically decentered narrative it had, in fact, become somewhat oppressive. I've always told people that this is the 2nd greatest essay film ever made (after, of course, SANS SOLEIL) and definitely one of the most underrated films ever made, and I still feel that way. And yet... its dizzying construction this time around didn't seem as self-consciously designed as other times I've seen it. It reminded me yet again that every screening is a live performance and experience. But to see it on 35mm.... One advantage of it being so underrated is that we are so much more likely to see it on this format…
Need to watch it again.
This review is a fake.
I did not write it, nor did I see the film upon which this review is based.
From this point on, I will tell you only lies.
For a short while, however, I will tell you the truth.
There's a chance I have been lying up until now.
Am I a faker? Or am I faking being a faker?
I'm probably not even a reviewer.
If this is not a review, then what is it?
Is a fake review still a review?
If I wrote it, is it still my review?
But it's a fake. How can it be my review if it's not a review at all?
I guess it's not up to me to decide.
- A Trip to the Moon
- The Great Train Robbery
- The Birth of a Nation
- Les Vampires
- My Neighbor Totoro
- Grave of the Fireflies
- Final Cut - Ladies & Gentlemen
- For All Mankind
Great 60-90 min films (for those days when you just don't have the energy to watch a 3 hour masterpiece)
Doesn't the title of the list explain it well enough? This is a list of 200+ quality "short" films. Easy…
- Citizen Kane
- 2001: A Space Odyssey
- Tokyo Story
- The Rules of the Game