Django Film News!

Elliot

scot wrote:

Elliot, who's so enthusiastic about it, in his screenplay proposal adds in the self-hating Hollywood touch - that Django was rejected by idiotic Americans, that his North American tour wasn't a success. Something not backed up by the facts.

Dregni, p. 225:

Django had his share of disappointments during his American visit. The second Carnegie Hall show was a source of embarrassment, and he never got a chance to record commercially in the United States. With his sense of pride, he may have viewed this as a dismissal by the American jazz world.

Elva Ledesma

scot wrote:

the kinds of people who would see something in a Hollywood movie and want to get involved with it because it was "cool", spare us that.

scot wrote:

I believe that the more people who know about Django and his music the better. Elitist attitudes might be why this beautiful music is "fringe" and not mainstream. I'm not suggesting that every person that wants to hear the music and appreciate it could possibly be "involved" as a musician--from what I've read, this is very difficult music to master. My thought is that this music should have as wide an audience as possible--I'm sure that Django loved this music and wanted to share it with the world. I'm sure he would have been in favor of a film and with the widest possible distribution.

--Elva

a

i'm almost certain django would've wanted to be a movie star much more than being a part of a movie that shared gypsy jazz with the world.

scot

Sure, Django had his disappointments while he was here. They were mostly due to his own irresponsibility and misplaced expectations, cultural isolation and old fashioned homesickness. They were certainly not the result of any rejection by Americans - jazz fans and musicians everywhere (including Ellington's band) were crazy about the music he played. Yes, according to Dregni p209, the tour had "great successes and cruel disappointments". But pages 210-219 are devoted to how well-received he was on the tour.

I had many conversations about this with John Bajo (Dregni, p319), who was at the Chicago concert, and he always said he was puzzled by how Delauney wrote up the American tour - as if it was a failure. Bajo said everyone he ever talked to who saw Django was knocked out by him. Django may have suffered at the hands of that crowd whose business is beating up musicians - critics, club owners and record company executives. I don't reckon he was the first musician to experience this and not the last, either. But American jazz fans and musicians loved him - of that, there is no doubt.

Django's music has been easily available in the USA for 50+ years, it's always been pretty popular here. The jazz radio station here in Charlotte plays a fair amount of it. It's music that, if it speaks to you, it speaks loudly and irresistably. But it is met with indifference by many people too - I know, that seems impossible but it is true, and not all of these people are idiots, either. No movie is going to change that, just as it didn't for Charlie Parker after Clint Eastwood's movie about him. Pop culture rules right now, and pop culture is all about ugliness in all things. Django's beautiful and romantic music has no chance with the "celebreality" crowd - the Hollywood crowd. Is that who you want to make a movie about Django?

Elliot

Scot,

I'd be willing to agree with you about all of the above, but I would assume a movie would be about Django's perceptions, not about the people who were appreciative in their time (and a good movie would perhaps present both elements). There were people who were appreciative of Van Gogh as well, they just happened to be people who couldn't afford to buy his art. That doesn't mean a bio wouldn't end with Vinnie alone in a field, revolver in hand. For whatever reason Django felt bitter and disappointed.

Your summation of culture seems a bit narrow to me. Art creates its audience, not the other way around. There is nothing happening musically for people over 30, many of whom are weary of loud distorted electrified guitar music that was more appropriate for an earlier generation and time, and that is a big segment of the buying public. Culture is like one of those sand filled decorative glasses to me - layered, with some things reaching up towards art, others reaching down to kitsch, but they all exist simultaneously. I think Charlotte playing GJ is a good sign. You may say that hip-hop rules the popular culture, but every time I visit New York I'm always surprised at how hard it is to locate rap music on the radio. What disturbs me is the short-sightedness of so many GJ players who want to buy a Stimer and a crappy amp just so they can make sure their music remains fossilized in time, and they can be Junior Djangos. Django was above all a stylist, by which I mean that he took an art rooted in another time, and using the modern form turned it into something fresh and interesting - let us do the same. People want to be involved with what is happening today, and DR will always sound old to them, just like Louis Armstrong's Hot Five who despite all he accomplished remains fairly unlistenable by today's ears. We've got a lot going for us, e.g. the continued interest in Europe, so I say, have a bit of faith - we can all hang together, or all hang separately!

Tom Landman

How so?

Elliot wrote:

... just like Louis Armstrong's Hot Five who despite all he accomplished remains fairly unlistenable by today's ears.

Elliot

Tom Landman wrote:

How so?

Elliot wrote:

... just like Louis Armstrong's Hot Five who despite all he accomplished remains fairly unlistenable by today's ears.

Well, admittedly I'm speaking out of my own personal observation, but along with the sound quality just about everything the Hot Five offers seems to be ploddingly slow.

scot

Elliot

I don't mean to be too cranky here, but you'd think that a biography would be about what actually happened, too - not some postmodern interpretation. Whatever we imagine Django's perceptions were at the time, whatever they actually were, the fact is that he wasn't rejected by idiotic Americans. Django was popular here then just as he is today. That was the part of your original post that I took such exception to, which I still object to.

Now, I don't know anything about art, but whenever some "artiste" presents us with yet another egregious insult to good manners and taste (on nearly a daily basis these days), they or the arts administrator in charge are quick to assure us that they are only giving us what we want. That sounds more to me like the audience for "art" is creating it's own art and artists, not the other way around. Or maybe it's just vulgarity feeding on vulgarity. Wayne's showcard is unfortunately the most likely outcome of a Hollywood movie about Django, though maybe now they could get a cast even uglier than Cruise/Dion - I like Will Ferrell and Paris Hilton (quality name similarity there!) to play the lead roles. Sorry, but I don't like any manifestations of modern pop culture - not television, not movies, not modern pop music, not ostentatious luxury lifestyles and especially not celebrity culture. I am turning into a curmudgeon a bit early and at high speed...

I do agree with you about the need for N American guitarists to find their own voice in this music. Guitarists everywhere, really. Find new tunes to play, new ways to play old tunes, new sounds from your guitar. But I make no apology for my use of the Stimer and a vintage Fender amp. I hate the sound of piezo transducers and I'm not crazy about solid-state amps either. Though in my experience audiences could not care less about this kind of stuff.

Cheers
Scot

Teddy Dupont

scot wrote:

I had many conversations about this with John Bajo (Dregni, p319), who was at the Chicago concert, and he always said he was puzzled by how Delauney wrote up the American tour - as if it was a failure.

I think it was because Django organised that tour totally independently of Delaunay and Delaunay never quite forgave him for that. Consequently, he took a very jaundiced view of the whole escapade and it was undoubtedly the start of the breakdown in their relationship.

The majority of the official reviews and other documentation indicate that audiences and musicians alike really enjoyed Django's playing. However, some very influential critics took a contrary view, no doubt buoyed by their belief that only Americans could play jazz and Django's typically irresponsible attitude to punctuality and general capriciousness. The comments made by Leonard Feather about Django's playing were quite ridiculous and John Hammond had never liked him.

Django's expectations for his visit were ludicrously high and as it became increasingly evident they would not be fulfilled, he became withdrawn, uncooperative and homesick further alienating the people who could have promoted and supported him in the US. I am sure the tour was a failure in Django's eyes but that was inevitable against his unrealistic dreams. I do believe Delaunay was right when he said the fault for the "failure" was primarily with Django himself.

Musically, I think the tour was a major success in that it exposed Django more intimately to the new directions jazz was taking thereby giving him the impetus he needed to move on and produce some fresh and exciting ideas.

However, the fact is that before the American tour, Django's career in popularity and commercial terms was all upwards and after, it was down but that was as much about changes in musical tastes as anything else. With a different approach Django could have changed that downward movement but as always, he did exactly what he wanted to do when he wanted to do it and to hell with the consequences. Fortunately, he continued to play brilliant music throughout his life regardless of such "peripheral" issues.

P.S. I think any Hollywood biopic on Django or anyone else will be complete tosh as they always are.

a

yes, total tosh.