MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

The Exiles (1961, ****)


Milestone Films, one of the most important distributors of gone-missing films from international film heritage, including Killer of Sheep and I Am Cuba, releases Kent McKenzie’s The Exiles presented by Charles Burnett and Sherman Alexie, a restoration of an almost-unseen 1961 fiction film in film noir tradition, the story of Native Americans in Los Angeles’ Bunker Hill District as they struggle during the Bureau of Indian Affairs “relocation period.” Glistening with bright light and darkening sorrow, the no-budget Exiles, shot in 1958 on short ends, was indie decades before the slapdash label was applied to many an undernourished project. It’s a narrative based on extensive documentary research that plays out as a day in the life of several native Americans in their twenties who have left the reservation for the big city, and the result is mood and moment, anthropology and melancholy. The sound design is unusually strong, creating a sense of a bustling, vital world now passed, and the general enterprise bears modest comparison to the early work of Cassavetes. It’s also a fugitive capsule of a moment, shaped, heightened, at small remove from its practical locations captured on-screen. It’s an action movie, in the best sense of the phrase. The double-disc edition includes scenes from Bunker Hill in 1956 and “Bunker Hill: A Tale of Urban Renewal”; clips from Thom Andersen’s Los Angeles Plays Itself, commentary by Sherman Alexie and Sean Axmaker; shorts by Mackenzie, and “the first Native American Film,” “White Fawn’s Devotion,” as well as a stills gallery, an episode of the Leonard Lopate Show with Sherman Alexie and Charles Burnett. Text material includes a production history, a 1956 funding proposal, the final script and original publicity material from 1963, along with Mackenzie’s master’s thesis on the making of the film and his last resume. [Ray Pride.] Film website. And a tribute skateboard design.

Comments are closed.

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon