10. Sunniviisiline pealkiri

Ma ei saa magada. Diivanil on see lõhn. Põrandal ei saa... Kõik mõtted keerlevad peas. Isegi ei keerle. Aga ma tean, et need on seal OLEMAS. Ja see ei lasegi mul magada. Süda peksleb juba ei tea mitmendat tundi. Kõik väriseb. Justkui oleks minu sees tiksuma hakanud äratuskell, mis kohe-kohe helisema hakkab. Hingan vaid mehaaniliselt, nagu lõõts. Pea on raske ja vajub kogu aeg alla. Peggy Bundy irvitab telekas. Aga ma ei suudagi kellelegi silma vaadata. Ma ei suuda inimese kujugi taluda. Naervaid inimesi ei või enam välja kannatada. Tundub, et nad irvitavad MINU üle. Inimene on roiskuv liha, millest saaks gurmaanidele hea raguu. Lõustad kõdunevad Francis Baconi maalil. Meeste lõhn on vastik. Selles on ülbust, enesekesksust, eluviha. Inimesi toodetakse konveieril nagu Pasolini kiirtoitu. Pean end sundima midagi tegema, kuni väsimusest kokku kukun. Tahan kõndida, kuni enam ei jõua. Tahan uppuda lumme, kuni enam välja ei paista. Tahan külmuda, kuni enam ei tunne. Tahan magada, kuni kõik on meelest läinud. Tahan olla nii, nagu olin kõige alguses. Kaua. Võib-olla igavesti. Olen egoist, teen vaid haiget. Faust ilma Mephistopheleseta. Ei huvitagi enam, et kõik teada saavad. Mis neil sellest? Niikuinii mõtlevad, mida tahavad. Võtsin tablette. Mitu tükki. Lootsin, et need teevad mind haigeks. Aga isegi pea ei käi ringi. Ja vist enam haigemaks ei annagi minna. Sel polegi tähtsust. Mitte millelgi pole tähtsust.

9. Film Statistics (-2008)

For me, the year 2008 could be entitled as "The Great Film Year". Out of the total amount of 168 films of more or less quality I have ever seen, I managed to enrich my experience with 122 fictional and avant-garde films over the last year. Before that, seeing films was just a way of spending time for me. As I was more interested in books back then, my contact with cinema was very rare and the inner quality of these few films was not much of a factor for me. However, in February 2008 I realised that a film could also be seen as a possible piece of art. Henceforth, I have paid very high attention to the inner value of the motion pictures I chose out to watch. In order to have a thorough overview of them, I have created a list of the films I have already seen as well as a list for those I am planning to see in the future. The lists are not complete, for cheap and pointless films produced for the masses are generally not included. They primarily contain only those very often found in the lists of the films considered the greatest ever. However, the lists sketch the baselines of what I like and what not in art, and giving an overview of this is also the main goal of this piece.

1. Films by Country¹

As for the countries producing films, I prefer the pictures that could be put under the term "non-Hollywood". Nonetheless, one cannot deny Hollywood's capability of making deep and powerful films, which is one of the reasons why films produced in the United States are the most frequent in the list of the films I have seen, forming 29,2 % of the total. Out of 49 American films, 31 have been made in Hollywood, which comprises 62,6 % of all American films and 18,5 % of all films. Pictures produced in Europe can most often be found in the list. 109 films are of European origin, which forms 64,9 % of the total. When it comes to European countries producing films, France is with 27 films (16,1 % of the whole) the most prominent, followed by Italy and Germany both with 14 films (8,3 %). Only three Estonian films can be found in the list.² Films made outside the United States and Europe are rather rare in the list, comprising only 6 % of the total. The films of the most exotic origin are "Black Orpheus" (Brazil, 1959) by Marcel Camus and "The Wind Will Carry Us" (Iran, 1999) by Abbas Kiarostami. "Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors" (Soviet Union, 1964) by Sergei Parajanov could also be mentioned due to its detailed portrayal of Ukrainian Hutsul culture.

The countries most frequently found in the list are following:

1. The United States (49 films / 29,2 %);
2. France (27 films / 16,1 %);
3. Italy (14 films / 8,3 %);
4. Germany (14 films / 8,3 %);
5. The United Kingdom (11 films / 6,5 %);
6. Sweden (9 films / 5,4 %);
7. Denmark (9 films / 5,4 %);
8. The Soviet Union / Russia (7 films / 4,2 %);
9. Spain (7 films / 4,2 %);
10. Poland (4 films / 2,4 %).³

Concentrating on films produced in the countries rare or even nonexistent in the list is one of my objectives for 2009. I would like to see more pictures made in other European countries (for example, in Finland, Iceland, Hungary, Belgium, Greece, and Portugal). As I am not much acquainted to the works of many major British film directors (e.g. Powell and Pressburger, David Lean, and Carol Reed), I want to expand my knowledge in British cinema as well. Another goal for me for the beginning year is to see more outstanding oriental films.

2. Films by Year/Decade

My strongest support goes to the films made earlier than yesterday. The oldest film in my list is "The Birth of a Nation" (1915) by D. W. Griffith. As modernism is one of my favourite directions in cinema and culture in general, my favourite decades in the history of filmmaking are the 1920s (particularly German and Soviet cinema of the period) and the 1960s. The 1970s also belong next to these decades, whereas from many films of the 1930s I expected more than I experienced. Nonetheless, newer films comprise the biggest part of the list of the pictures I have seen. Films produced in years 2000-2007 form 31,5 % of the total, followed by films of the 1960s (13,7 %). Therefore, the richest years in film are 2000, 2002, and 2004 (8 films each), followed by 2007 (7 films), and 2001, 2005, and 2006 (6 films each). Paradoxically, in 2008 I did not see any films finalised and first shown in the same year.

The decades from which I have seen the most films:

1. 2000s (53 films / 31,5 %);
2. 1960s (23 films / 13,7 %);
3. 1970s (21 films / 12,5 %);
4. 1990s (21 films / 12,5 %);
5. 1950s (19 films / 11,3 %).⁴

The most fruitful years in the list are following:

• 2000, 2002, 2004 (8 films each);
• 2007 (7 films);
• 2001, 2005, 2006 (6 films each);
• 1959, 1960, 1961, 1972, 1999 (5 films each);
• 1950, 2003, 2007 (4 films each).

3. Films by Director

My favourite film directors are Ingmar Bergman and Andrei Tarkovsky because of their depth and spirituality, visual imagery and style. They are followed by the Italians Federico Fellini for his depiction of the vague distinction between hallucinatory and "real" world as well as his treatment for the collective unconscious, Michelangelo Antonioni for his usage of narrative and cinematography, and Pier Paolo Pasolini for the social message his films include. I also like the pictures by Rainer Werner Fassbinder and the "Three Colours" trilogy by Krzysztof Kieślowski. David Lynch, a strongly European-influenced filmmaker is my favourite director from the United States. His name can be found next to Ingmar Bergman and Alfred Hitchcock, for their works are the most frequent out of all the directors in the list.

The most frequent directors are following:

• I. Bergman, A. Hitchcock, and D. Lynch (6 films);
• L. von Trier (5 films);
• P. Almodóvar, L. Buñuel, F. Fellini, A. Tarkovsky (4 films);
• M. Antonioni, P. P. Pasolini, R. W. Fassbinder, K. Kieślowski (3 films).

The main directors whose films I want to see more are, among many others, Akira Kurosawa, Jean-Luc Godard, Robert Bresson, Stanley Kubrick, Michael Haneke, Woody Allen, and Kim Ki-duk. Unfortunately, there are only a few films by Michelangelo Antonioni, Andrei Tarkovsky and Krzysztof Kieślowski that I have not yet seen, which is why I am procrastinating the pleasure.

4. Films by Rating

I rate every film I have seen to make a difference between good and excellent films. The pictures which I find perfect obtain an A-grade (10 points out of 10) from me. The pieces to which I have given a B-grade (9 points out of 10) are objectively as good as the films in the A-category. The only difference is that the films of the B-category lack of something indescribable that would make them perfect. If I had to characterise the films of the both categories, I would use the same adjectives. Thus, the line between them is extremely vague. The C-category (8 points out of 10) also contains very good films, but those lack a bit of the essence of a great film. When I have to describe a film of the C-category, I would use the expressions "very good" or "surprisingly good", but not "perfect". As the description shows, the whole mechanism of rating is very subjective, and the following results reflect less general reactions of the public than my personal preferences for film.

The complete list of the A-category films:

• The Seventh Seal (I. Bergman, 1957);
• Persona (I. Bergman, 1966);
• Death in Venice (L. Visconti, 1971);
• Solaris (A. A. Tarkovsky, 1972);
• Three Colours: Blue (K. Kieślowski, 1993).

The complete list of the B-category films:

• The Battleship Potemkin (S. M. Eisenstein, 1925);
• Metropolis (F. Lang, 1927);
• Bicycle Thieves (V. de Sica, 1948);
• Wild Strawberries (I. Bergman 1957);
• L'avventura (M. Antonioni, 1960);
• 8 1/2 (F. Fellini, 1963);
• Blowup (M. Antonioni, 1966);
• Teorema (P. P. Pasolini, 1968);
• Satyricon (F. Fellini, 1969);
• Cries and Whispers (I. Bergman, 1972);
• Salò or the 120 Days of Sodom (P. P. Pasolini, 1975);
• Stalker (A. Tarkovski, 1979);
• Berlin Alexanderplatz (R. W. Fassbinder, 1980);
• Blue Velvet (D. Lynch, 1986).⁵

The incomplete list of the C-category films:

• Nanook of the North (R. J. Flaherty, 1922);
• Ikiru (A. Kurosawa, 1952);
• Ordet (C. T. Dreyer, 1955);
• The 400 Blows (F. Truffaut, 1959);
• Breathless (J.-L. Godard, 1960);
• Last Year in Marienbad (A. Resnais, 1961);
• Au hasard Balthazar (R. Bresson, 1966);
• Belle de jour (L. Buñuel, 1967);
• A Clockwork Orange (S. Kubrick, 1971);
• The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant (R. W. Fassbinder, 1972);
• The Mirror (A. A. Tarkovsky, 1975);
• Wings of Desire (W. Wenders, 1987), etc.

It's extremely hard for me to value the likability of newer films in comparison with those made earlier in the 20th century. For example, though I like "The Lives of Others" (2006) by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck very much, it's rather difficult for me to value it amongst classic films. In many newer films there is something specifically characteristic for them that can not be found in most older pieces (a sort of reversed proportionality between intellectual and emotional depth, for example). Therefore, when it comes to rating the films I have seen, I have made a clear distinction: films produced later than in 1994 belong to the separate list of contemporary films.

The best contemporary films in the list are:

1. The Hours (S. Daldry, 2002);
2. Mulholland Dr. (D. Lynch, 2001);
3. Inland Empire (D. Lynch, 2006);
4. The Queen (S. Frears, 2006);
5. The Lives of Others (F. Henckel von Donnersmarck, 2006);
6. Downfall (O. Hirschbiegel, 2004);
7. Talk to Her (P. Almodóvar, 2002);
8. Songs from the Second Floor (R. Andersson, 2000);
9. 3-Iron (Kim Ki-duk, 2004);
10. Dancer in the Dark (L. von Trier, 2000).

There are also several films considered greatest ever by many film scholars which do not belong to my favourites at all. For example, "Citizen Kane" (1941) by Orson Welles was for me, quoting Ingmar Bergman, "a total bore". I support the idea of it being one of the most innovative works in the history of film, yet for me innovativity itself does not turn a bad film into a good one (it's not a bad film, but for me it is not the greatest either). "The Rules of the Game" (1939) by Jean Renoir had the same effect on me. However, I must admit that my dislike could be caused by my tendency to be interested in films of a certain kind, which does not let me see the whole value of the films that are different from my subjective preferences.

By the end of the year 2008, I have seen a large amount of the pictures mandatory in the lists of the film freaks interested in European cinema. There are, however, several exceptions. For example, "L'eclisse" (1962) by Michelangelo Antonioni and "Andrei Rublev" (1966) by Andrei Tarkovsky are still waiting for its turn. My main goal for the film year 2009 is to convert my taste in films into a more distinguished passion.

1 In the list, if the film was produced under the co-operation of several countries, the setting of the film (the language and the location, in particular) determines which one of them has been taken into account for the statistics. For example, there are many films produced in co-operation of France and Italy. Therefore, let's say, the Italian-language film "The Gospel According to St. Matthew" (1964) by Pier Paolo Pasolini acts as an Italian film in the list. If the described method is not possible (for example, the film takes place in Ancient Rome and it has been entirely recorded in Vulgar Latin), the nation of the director has a decisive role. The same goes for the pictures which scenes take place in the countries that do not belong to the circle of producers. Films by Lars von Trier are a good example. Although his "Breaking the Waves" (1996) is an English-language film produced in the co-operation of Denmark, Sweden, France, Netherlands, Norway and Iceland and set in the Scottish Highlands, for the statistics it is still a Danish film. However, Antonioni's "Blowup" (1966), which is an English-language picture produced in the UK, Italy and the USA and set in London, does not act as an Italian film.

2 The list does not include Estonian films produced earlier than in 1991.

3 Although there are an equal number of Italian and German films, Italy is ranking third and Germany forth in the list. It is caused by the fact that one Italian film belongs to the A-category of the list, whereas the best German films are a part of the B-category (see below). The same goes for the rankings of Sweden and Denmark as well as the Soviet Union / Russia and Spain.

4 As there are two films made in the 1970s in the A-category of the list and only one made in the 1990s, the ranking of the 1970s is higher.

5 Although my favourite work by David Lynch is "Twin Peaks" (1990-1991), a show produced for television, it's not included in the list. The same goes for the 1981 British show "Brideshead Revisited". On the other hand, "Berlin Alexanderplatz" (1980) by Rainer Werner Fassbinder can be found in the list, as for me it is essentially an epic film (the final episode of it, in particular) despite it formally being a television series. In the list of the 1000 greatest films by "They Shoot Pictures, Don't They?", a website dedicated to art films, "Berlin Alexanderplatz" has also been included (ranking the 213th position).