Perhaps the subtitle should be: “Words Needed.”
FLY, a “limited-edition moving image magazine” (according to Netflix, although documentary might have been an easier, more user-friendly and appropriate term), combines music videos, interviews with established as well as up-and-coming artists, photography, and “fashion films” into one, big, 152-minute mess.
Perhaps I’m too, uhm, bourgeoisie to appreciate the novelty and cutting-edge flavor of this work. The DVD opens with a montage of clips from the fashion films and videos included in the disk, set to catchy, almost orchestral-like techno music. The films can be viewed individually in the track entitled “Editorials,” and while a handful does have some visual interest (particularly the one with the male model sporting a purple bullfighter’s uniform — very visually arresting against his pale, taut skin and thick sash of bright red cloth) or a shred of emotional connection (the sultry woman in the cab with the metallic dress and heavy makeup who transforms into a pretty, wide-eyed girl in a charming spring suit by morning), they remind me yet again of why models generally do not make good actors. Sure, they’re pretty to look at, and when they strike a pose on the runway or magazine page, their empty eyes and casual drape allows the viewer to focus on the clothes, the landscape, the generic facial features airbrushed to impossible perfection, without ever wondering about the humanity behind the vacuous expression.
Once they’re mobile and vocal on a moving image, though, more often than not, what ends up happening is that while the bodies and features spring to life and begin taking up more physical space, emotionally they remain as limited as they ever were on the page. Particularly in these films, where the perspective shifts from the clothes to the model herself (or himself, in rare instances), I find so little to draw me into what appears to be interior lives severely lacking in substance. Even with the most compelling, punchy, original music to carry along the narratives, the films have the veneer of a first-time filmmaker desperate to show off his avant-garde roots.
The interviews, on the other hand, can definitely stand alone. Indeed, it would have been much more enjoyable had the filmmakers chosen to focus most of their efforts exclusively on this segment of the DVD. Lengthy “features” with Liam Gillick, Karl Lagerfeld, John Malkovich, Michael Gallagher, and the “multi-ethnic Gypsy punk band” Gogol Bordello provide fascinating glimpses into the work of each artist (although Gallagher is more of an art collector, given his vocation as the purveyor of vintage fashion magazines through his Greenwich Village shop). Gillick muses on modernism vs. modernity, his education and friendships with various artists and how they all influenced his thinking and creativity. Malkovich narrates the story of a cab driver he and fellow actor Julian Sands met while filming The Killing Fields in Thailand, a somber story of murder and mystery visually depicted in a pink-and-white-hued animated short. (You have to see it to believe it. It’s really funny.)
An offscreen journalist interviews Chanel’s Lagerfeld at the New York opening of an exhibit of his gorgeous, Paris-inspired photography. The stunning black-and-white prints demonstrate a keen eye for shadow and light so critical for a great photographer. I love Lagerfeld’s insouciance and cunning, both displayed in wicked form here. Gallagher waxes at length of his passion for magazines and fashion photography, pulling illustrious names out of his factoid-packed head and providing visual punch to his soliloquy with dramatic waves of his thick, borough-bred arms. Gogol Bordello band members scream their stories over the too-loud backbeat of their own music, the cameraman intercutting the short doc with scenes from a live concert where — in the spirit of punk rockers everywhere — frontman Eugene Hutz throws a drum to the audience, then proceeds to climb up on top of it, supported only by the arms of a couple of dozen adoring fans.
Compared to that, the final feature seems quite dull in comparison, which is too bad because it has the makings of a very good full-length film. Photographer and director Malcolm Venville’s “Silent Film,” is a dialogue-free short film inspired by his parents, both of whom are profoundly deaf. The visuals are beautiful, the fifties-era clothing and interiors depicting a clean, orderly life belied by the couple’s marriage of quiet desperation. It’s not an especially brilliant film but is moving nonetheless, with a bit of romance, a bit of tension and a bit of comedy mixed into a silent, bubbling brew.
A selection of various music videos round out the DVD, with tracks from Finn, Plaid, Turzi, Sir Alice, and Manuel Bienvenu among those included. If you’re a fan of “alternative music,” you’ll undoubtedly find something new here. Bienvenu’s French spoken-word piece is especially sad and evocative. (Of course, given that I don’t speak French very well, for all I know the lyrics may just as easily be about a green, kinetic gummy bear.)
Would I watch this again? Er, no. I’m not sure I would have watched it the first time, save for the features. Perhaps I’m just not appreciative enough of post-postmodern art and music to really get this documentary. I read Vogue and Harper’s Bazaar not just for the clothing but for the well-written articles as well. (Seriously!) The fashion shoots intrigue and sometimes repel, but they’re not much more interesting than many of the ads to me. My sculptor friend J., a very introspective artist with a sharp mind and even sharper eye for subtlety of form and figure, could probably glean more insight from Fly than I. My medium of choice lies squarely on the page — printed or blank, it matters not so long as there’s space for the all-important words that make sense of the world. The moving image as captured by the artists who created Fly can indeed be an enthralling space on which to layer one’s unique visions, but in this case, I walk away with only the most superficial memories that will undoubtedly melt into the corners of my mind and eventually disappear.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.



{ 5 comments }
I couldn’t help but think of the liner notes to the remastered version of Who’s Next where they talked about Townsend’s idea for some revolutionary art thing (the aborted Lifehouse project that became this album) but then figured how a bunch of songs and a film could transform anything.
If I ever sign up for Netflix – and everyone tells me I should, even Dubya did! – I might check this out merely to satisfy some morbid curiosity. And probably shut it off within 15 minutes.
wondered, not figured. Yikes, my brain is broken today!
“Me fail English? That’s unpossible!”
Bonjour, Randal! Well, you might actually like Fly. You seem more attuned to cutting-edge art and music than I — especially the music part — and might appreciate the juxtaposition of fashion and music in a way that I can’t seem to beyond Beyonce and Jennifer Lopez.
Netflix is amazing. It’s changed my life. It’s the best thing to happen to me since, well, birth.
Having said that, it’s also a time-sucker. I have about 399 films in my queue, and I add to it almost daily. It’s like you and your music — films are a fascinating medium to me, and I treat Netflix like one big, endless smorgasbord.
Gosh, did you just say that you might actually do something Dubya suggested?
BTW, have you seen the new Rudy ad? I just saw mention of it on Talking Points. “When the world wavered, and history hesitated, Rudy never did.” **Choke gag spit ** Gee, it’s nice to know that 9/11 finally served some useful purpose: to save a rapidly sinking ship known as the SS Giulani. God help us.
Salut,
Marjorie
Cutting edge? I spent last night listening to Black Sabbath for a few hours while I wrote.
Oh, that ad, what a Superhero®! You’re 100% correct in that it’s eliminating that lunatic, now we just need something else to eliminate the rest!
Dear Randal, well, you’re talking to a girl who loves loves loves Hall & Oates. Although, seriously, I really need to stop apologizing for liking those two guys. They’re classics!
One thing’s for sure: this is going to be the most awesome Democratic race in, oh, years and years. Even more so than 1992, I daresay. Finally, a slate of candidates I can get excited about!
And I’m shocked McCain won in SC, not because I don’t like him, but rather because I lived in SC in 2000 and remember the brutal campaign there. Well, actually it wasn’t as bad as everyone says it was but still a pretty notorious time. Columbia can be fairly liberal at times, but rural SC is notoriously conservative, so for McCain to win was an eye-opener.
Salut,
Marjorie
Comments on this entry are closed.