A viewer who nowadays seeks out Alan Pakula’s Comes a Horseman will probably already
be familiar with the director’s core achievement, his 70’s “paranoia trilogy.”
For much of the way, Comes a Horseman
may seem like an archetypally conscious “change of pace” – a slowly-paced
Western, defined by big skies and vanishing plains, with a conniving cattle
baron facing off against a hard-headed up-against-it woman who refuses to give
up her land, eventually joined by a like-minded cowboy. The film’s enjoyable
enough in that mode, but its primary interest lies in the home stretch, as its
thematic links with Pakula’s other works come into focus. It takes place toward the end of WW2, and local interests are already looking ahead to a new
economic era, where the imperative of fueling and feeding the troops will yield
to domestic development, and the energy that powers it will reign supreme. For
all his displays of power (his man-cave of a ranch is the film’s sole imposing
interior), the baron (Jason Robards) is in the pocket of the bank, and
ultimately impotent to stop the exploratory drilling on his property; rather
than capitulate and compromise his sense of himself, he chooses nihilistic,
ultimately crazed, resistance. Although the two protagonists (Jane Fonda and
James Caan, both at their most quiet and recessive) have a climactic moment of
heroism, and a symbolic rebirth in flames, it’s clear they’re only participating in one atypical strand of a revolution that will transform America. Gordon Willis’
cinematography eloquently embodies the duality, painting vistas of a scale and
handsomeness that demand respectful submission, while darkly insinuating the
looming threat from beyond the frame. A few years later, Pakula would cast Fonda at the
centre of a worldwide financial meltdown in Rollover,
a film more predictively and analytically ambitious than Comes a Horseman, and yet, for all its underappreciated near-greatness,
more dated as a result.
Wednesday, October 24, 2018
Wednesday, October 17, 2018
Maine Ocean (Jacques Rozier, 1986)
Jacques
Rozier’s Maine Ocean often has a
rowdy, expansive feel to it, with outsized characterizations and confrontations
(in this sense it’s far removed from his earlier Du cote d’Orouet) – the narrative expands from an initial fracas on
a train between two women (one of them an errant Brazilian samba dancer) and
the fare inspectors, moving on from some of the characters but later returning
to them: it feels like the movie wants to scoop up everyone it touches and to
forge an all-accommodating unity. This leads to its joyous peak on the island
of Yeu, off the Vendee coast, where the characters eventually dissolve their
differences and devote themselves to music making and performance, a creative process
we observe evolving note by note. The movie then flirts for a while with a bizarre resulting notion,
that one of the fare inspectors might be discovered by an American promoter as
the “next Chevalier,” before swerving dramatically and leaving him abandoned by
all the others, devoting its last twenty minutes or so simply to charting his
journey back to the mainland, involving several changes of boats and much
agonizing about the low tide: the stuffy imposer of rules and order finds
himself stripped of almost all context, literally and figuratively searching
for a way back to the shore. By then we may almost have forgotten an odd digression
earlier on, where the other woman, a lawyer, chooses to defend a client by
launching into a disquisition on different modes of language and their social
baggage, which links to how Rozier initially emphasizes the theme of
miscommunication – in the end, the fragmentation reasserts itself in a
different, elemental form. The film’s shifting modes of transport – from land
to air to sea – reflect its remarkable, wildly unpredictable encompassing of everything from
communal goofiness to last-man-in-the-world-tinged solitude.
Thursday, October 11, 2018
Hustle (Robert Aldrich, 1975)

Robert Aldrich’s 1975 film Hustle is a melancholy reading of its era’s confusions, of a time
when restrictive norms and values are loosening, but it’s not yet clear what
they’ll be replaced with. Burt Reynolds’ protagonist, police Phil Gaines,
affects the necessarily hard-bitten manner while persistently musing of escape,
into old movies and songs and expectations and into his memories of the brief
time he spent in Rome; he’s modern enough to sustain a relationship with a
high-class prostitute (Catherine Deneuve, inherently shimmering with resonances
of multiple elsewheres) but not to avoid agonizing about it. The main plot
follows a young woman who turns up dead on a beach: it’s ruled a suicide, but
her agonized father (Ben Johnson) obsesses with piercing and punishing the
hedonistic society she moved in: an impossible task given its connections and
protections and the lack of any direct culpability. The film is heavy with the
contradictions of its period: it’s suffused in casual racism and homophobia and
sexism (the only major female character who isn’t a sex worker, the dead girl’s
quiet, unremarkable mother, is saddled late on with a personal history that the
film holds out as the reason for the daughter’s self-destructive life choices),
and its aspirations to morose complexity often register just as much as
artistic indecision or weariness. Reynolds’ customary reserve inhibits the
sense of his character’s morality, and there’s often a sense that Aldrich was
too overawed by Deneuve to do more than stare at her. In the end the film
swerves into moral tennis: Gaines hits a lob through his duties for the sake of
his own calculation of fairness, and receives a return punishment in short
order in senselessly random manner. These narrative moves don’t really serve
the film’s highest ambitions, but then that’s part of the point, that unless
you’re a fine-suited “somebody,” the short-term demands of the hustle will
always push those ambitions into compromise or surrender.
Thursday, October 4, 2018
Histoires d’Amerique: Food, Family and Philosophy (Chantal Akerman, 1988)

The
title of Chantal Akerman’s Histoires d’Amerique:
Food, Family and Philosophy points at the film’s duality – a promise of conviviality, served up by an outsider. The film isn’t conventionally warm - the
camera serves throughout as a fixed, direct spectator – but Akerman’s humanism
prevents it from morbidity or oppressiveness. For the most part, the film
consists of direct-to-camera English-language testimonies from American Jews:
they’re not identified by name or period, but appear to belong at least
primarily to the 40s and 50s, to lives recently brutalized by relatives lost in
the camps or otherwise separated by exile, and before that by progroms and upheavals:
even when the stories are primarily accounts of happiness and success, they
always incorporate lurking shadow, the impossibility of ever traveling entirely
into the light. Akerman intersperses these with humour of the “the food here is
terrible and such small portions” variety – the often-mournful quality of the
punchlines all the more plaintive for the surrounding figurative darkness. Not
just that: Akerman frames her participants (actors doesn’t seem like the right
word somehow) against urban nightscapes, only yielding to hazy daylight in the
final scenes, as the film starts to play with its own artifice, bringing its
people together and reshuffling their assigned identities. For the most part
though, it's suffused in profound loneliness even as it illustrates the
power of community – it examines memory both in its glory and its burden. One
of the closing testimonies, by a young man preparing to kill himself, is
additionally chilling now for the knowledge of how Akerman ended her own life,
after a last film – No Home Movie – which
while being closely aligned to this one, sheds its elaborations and mannerisms.
It gives Histoires d’Amerique an eerie
quality of premonition, as if to finally confirm its recurring sense of how
events may become hopeless, even if not entirely serious.
Wednesday, October 3, 2018
Moral edges
(originally
published in The Outreach Connection
in May 1999)
The new Nicolas Cage
thriller 8 MM would be a
disappointment, if it wasn’t directed by Joel Schumacher, who always works to
this kind of standard. Cage plays a private detective, hired by a wealthy widow
to investigate the authenticity of an apparent snuff film found among her late
husband’s possessions. The trail leads him deep into the porn subcultures of
L.A. and New York, constituting a wrenching lesson in the extent of the human
dark side, and eventually putting him in severe physical and psychological
danger.
Our lives with porn
I think most of us
would have to concede the fascination of this theme. Even though we might lead
lives apparently untouched by prostitution, drug-dealing, bondage, or any of
the stuff that low-life dreams are made of, the reported magnitude of the
industry ($300 million annually in Canada, according to a recent Globe and Mail article) seems to render
it impossible that we’re not closer to it than we think. If I am not lying through my teeth about always walking by those
stores and avoiding those street corners, then certainly one of the guys in the
next few offices has to be. But movies like 8
MM, figuratively erect with melodramatic frenzy, treat pornography like a
journey into science-fiction, winking with cynical calculation at the hush-hush
hypocrisy. The fact is, the movie has virtually no potential audience except
porn enthusiasts (who, given its box office failure, seem to have decided it’s
no substitute for the real thing).
Is society’s silence
necessary? It’s difficult nowadays to gauge the shape of the moral consensus,
but yeah, it probably is. Many commentators in the States were obviously
unprepared for the extent of public tolerance for Bill Clinton’s after-hours
activities, and Clinton even seems to have come out of it all with a measure of
dignity. People just didn’t seem to deem it that relevant to his job. But what
if the revelations had been of regular Presidential visits to an underground
dungeon, for a cleansing round of chains and whips? The jokes would be even
more plentiful, but wouldn’t a hunger for domination and pain be considered far
more damning to his leadership capability than his weakness for Lewinsky’s more
submissive attentions? It’s a patriarchal society after all.
Dancing with the devil
8 MM clearly means to explore the effect on a relatively normal Everyman of
facing our secrets head-on, the thesis being summed up thus: “Dance with the
devil and the devil don’t change – the devil changes you.” But the film is so
unsubtle, and the story-telling so melodramatic and wedded to easy conflicts,
that one almost expects the climax to reveal Satan himself – hooves and fire
and brimstone and all – hanging out in some sleazy warehouse organizing
threesomes and bondage sessions (which would have been much more fun than the
climax actually provided). It does exactly nothing to illuminate the
small-scale human transactions that make up the industry’s life blood.
How clearly can one
flirt with the devil without giving ground? Do we chip away at our better
selves by renting a video from the back room of the local store? 8 MM implicitly asserts so; a premise
that logically leads to Cage – overwhelmed by the wretchedness of the flesh
peddlers – transforming himself into an avenging angel of destruction, hunting
down the evildoers like the vermin that the movie clearly knows them to be. The
morality of this behaviour – arguably
even more damaging to our social fabric than the odd beaver shot – is not dwelt
upon. That’s Hollywood.
Let’s shift moral
gears. John Boorman’s The General is
a rollicking, larger-than-life caper about Irish master-criminal Martin Cahill,
who robbed his way to semi-Robin Hood status. The movie skims through Cahill’s
formative years, the better to enjoy him at the peak of his rabble-rousing
powers, and basically settles into a series of set-pieces – marked throughout
by nimble handling, lip-smacking characterization, and irresistible earthiness.
Beyond redemption
One of the
highlights is a multi-million dollar heist on a jewelry wholesaler, which we’re
later told pushed the place out of business, and a hundred people into
unemployment. And that, says Cahill, with his usual callous flippancy, will
merely put them in the same boat with him (however much his business boomed, he
was always in line to pick up the weekly dole money). Other than Jon Voight as
his weary police inspector nemesis, there’s never anyone to call him on his
self-serving trample through an already fractured and impoverished society. Most
of the time, the movie takes Cahill’s voice pretty much as its own, and often
seems to exist in a moral vacuum, downplaying contexts and consequences (and
treating the various political factions as no more than competitors in
larceny).
Towards the end, Voight’s character lets the years of frustration get to him and administers Cahill a beating. The subsequent exchange, focusing on Voight’s self-recrimination and Cahill’s goading of him, constitutes a more pointed accusation than anything else in the film. It initially seemed odd to me that an isolated infraction by an officer of the law was treated as gravely as two filmic hours of advanced crime by a confirmed villain. But later I thought Boorman’s apparently neutral treatment of Cahill was actually the ultimate condemnation – an acknowledgment that the man was beyond redemption or persuasion, outside the zone of conscience or rationality in which our ideals and fine-tunings make a difference. It’s possible a second visit to The General would reveal such moral subtleties embedded throughout, and it’s a rare film nowadays that suggests a persuasive case for an early repeat viewing.
Furthermore, it
would probably be just as fresh and entertaining the second time around. In the
past, Boorman’s work has often been ponderous and stuffy, but not here. The
failings of 8 MM would have been much
easier to take if the movie wasn’t so damn serious and self-important. It can’t
even manage the easy stuff – imagine a movie about porn with not a single shot
that you’d like to take a second look at. From a good director, that might have
indicated something interesting going on.
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
9 to 5 (Colin Higgins, 1980)

It’s strange that as I write
this in the late summer of 2018, Colin Higgins’ 9 to 5
remains a relevant enough cultural touchstone that ideas for a sequel are
reportedly being kicked around. Of course, there’s a lasting feel-good rush to its depiction of collective female triumph, and it’s a little surprising (not
really in a good way) how much of the film’s prescription for a productive
office environment – equal pay, flexible work hours, job-sharing, onsite
daycare, visually pleasing workspaces and so forth – would still constitute a
cutting-edge employer. But the film is unnecessarily and counter-productively
rigged, most glaringly by making the oppressive male boss, Hart, not just an
adulterer, hypocrite, stealer of ideas etc. but a downright criminal embezzler;
when he’s ultimately removed, it’s not through the operation of justice or
transparency, but via the eccentric whims of the Board Chair (Sterling Hayden).
It’s grating now that we never get to see one of the three women (Judy, the one
played by Jane Fonda) contribute more to the office than to screw up the Xerox
machine; even more so that the movie should remind us of this in the closing
montage. Still, overall it’s pretty well-paced, and seldom actively grating:
one appreciates the somewhat perverse streak evidenced in their early fantasies
of how they’ll bring Hart down, or the sequence of stealing the wrong dead
body, or the abidingly odd sight of the bondage-fantasy circumstances in which
they keep Hart captive (for weeks). These amount only to a symbolic undermining
though: in the end, the movie can barely chip at the power of corporatization (Fonda
would take another, much underrated, shot at it shortly afterwards, in
Pakula’s Rollover). Perhaps it’s not
so surprising after all that it took over 35 years to gather the energy for a meaningful
second attack…
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
La spiaggia (Alberto Lattuada, 1954)

Alberto Lattuada’s La spiaggia undergoes an interesting
evolution from a blandly conventional study of a challenged woman to something
more structurally unusual and sociologically astute. Anna Maria (Martine Carol)
collects her young daughter from the nuns with whom the girl spent the past year,
with no immediate plan beyond taking her to the seaside, with the hope of a new
start beyond that. She rapidly attracts attention in the small, self-absorbed
vacation community of mostly wives and kids: first for being habitually dressed in
the black of a widow, then from some quarters as an object of desire, then later again for
being a former prostitute. The latter development causes everyone to shun her,
until a local billionaire who’s been observing her from the margins of the film
intervenes with a simple yet powerful gesture of support that redeems her
status and re-establishes her hope of a new beginning. Much of the film is
ineffectually pleasant and scenic, although in retrospect Lattuada may appear
to have been lulling us into complacency, into regarding the casual adultery
(or attempts at such) and entitled venality as being somehow normal or
inevitable. But the final stretch lays all this hypocrisy out in the open,
damning the men as thieves and the women as chattels, all the more interestingly
for its flagrant transparency; the billionaire seems to exult in his ability to
reshape reality, to bend not just behaviour but underlying belief to his
will (the town’s notional leader, its young mayor, having failed in his own
attempt to help Anna Maria, can only look on impotently). Carol’s rather
passionless presence seems for much of the film a relative weakness, but
ultimately supports the film’s division of even well-heeled society into two
essential groups: those who are written upon, and the much, much smaller group
that gets to do the writing (a secondary female character gets at least an
ambiguous foothold in that second group, recklessly living the life she
desires, and then skipping town without paying the bill).
Thursday, September 13, 2018
The Seventh Victim (Mark Robson, 1943)

The Seventh Victim isn’t the most satisfying of Val Lewton’s great
films - the narrative feels overly condensed in some ways and oddly cluttered
in others (injudicious editing may apparently have played a part in this) –
and yet it may leave the most complexly troubled aftertaste of any of them.
There’s nothing supernatural in the film, but it’s suffused with a longing to
transcend and escape – in its most benign form into the kind of playful poetry
that attaches a narrative to a spotlight on the skyline; more darkly, into devil
worship, although the adherence to Satan seems less significant than the unity
of the group itself, and of the meting out of the death penalty to those who
break its rules. Released in 1943, the film doesn’t explicitly reflect on the
war, but it feels gripped throughout by threat, by a danger of being undermined
from within by collaborators with an external enemy, and by persistent
uncertainty about the best form of response. The ending is particularly bleak –
Jacqueline, whose unexplained disappearance drives the early part of the
narrative (her younger sister comes to New York in search of her, rapidly
becoming suffused in Jacqueline’s world to the point of falling in love with
her husband), escapes the pressure from the cult to become the “seventh victim”
of its fatal doctrines and walks out alive, only to succumb on the same night
to her recurring obsession with suicide. This doesn’t quite mark the film as an
exercise in mere futility – other characters follow a more positive arc – but
the film is much more an exercise in capture than in escape; eeriest of all is
the sense that Jacqueline’s action constitutes a sort of triumphant fulfilment
of destiny, insofar as she died on her own gloomy terms, not on anyone else’s.
Thursday, September 6, 2018
Un nomme La Rocca (Jean Becker, 1961)

It’s a bit strange that the title of Jean Becker’s Un nomme
La Rocca takes the form of an assertion of identity, because the character
barely has any coherence at all, beyond what flows from Jean-Paul Belmondo’s
embodiment of him (which is obviously way more than nothing). After an almost
Leone-like prologue, the movie takes La Rocca to Paris, where he effortlessly
muscles in on the gambling and bar scene, shooting one antagonist and pushing
others around like playing cards. That comes to a sudden end after he tangles
with some American deserters and gets sent to jail, not inconvenient anyway as
he’d been musing on how to spring his incarcerated best friend Xavier from
there. The movie spends a while in conventional behind-bars mode, until the two
men volunteer for a land mine clearing team in exchange for reduced sentences,
and events shift into sweaty, stripped-down, existentially-questioning mode,
pushing Xavier in particular to the limits of his tolerance. The final chapter,
a couple of years later, has the men free again, maintaining an apparently
chaste household with Xavier’s sister (La Rocca’s sexual prowess, emphasized
earlier on, is off the film’s agenda by this point) and aiming to buy a farm
property; Xavier taps his old shady connections to get the money, leading to a
final tragedy, and La Rocca barely has any role in this final act other than to
react, lament and ultimately walk away. The movie has a colourful supporting
cast, dotted with portrayals that vividly impact before being summarily swept aside; the opening credits inform us it was shot at the Jean-Pierre Melville
studios, and Becker’s direction sometimes feels Melvillian, although mostly only
to the extent of a style, not a worldview or investigative method. Unless, that
is, in the year after A bout de souffle,
the title somehow means us to reflect on the emptiness of such filmic labels
and narratives even as we succumb to them.
Monday, September 3, 2018
My movie confessions

(originally
published in The Outreach Connection
in May 2000)
I’m very sensitive
to people who talk or generally make a nuisance of themselves in movie
theaters, although I usually just move to another seat rather than confront
them. Earlier this year, I briefly experimented with a tiny flashlight, to
illuminate the notebook in which I sometimes write notes for these columns. I
took great care to sit in isolation and to use the light as minimally as
possible. Even so, someone complained and told me I was being irritating. I was
very ashamed at having become the very thing I deplored. Just as well the movie
(Angela’s Ashes) was no good, because
the shame would have ruined it for me either way. Of course, human nature being
what it is, I still wished I’d told the whiny little nerd to go screw himself.
I’ve largely
daydreamed through most of Jean-Luc Godard’s recent films, despite the very
best intentions. The Cinematheque Ontario program stated of his Nouvelle vague: “A nocturnal sequence in
which a servant moves through the villa lighting lamps is worth more than the
rest of the decade’s commercial cinema put together.” I confess to only having
half-registered that sequence.
(I don’t doubt the
writer’s sincerity, but if he were being exiled to a desert island for a few
years, I truly suspect he’d rather be accompanied by the thousands of hours of
commercial cinema than the two minutes of lamp-lighting).
I went to see the
lamentable Dog Park, solely because I
have a little Labrador puppy and often go to the dog park myself (I’ve
confessed to this before, but I don’t deserve to get off that easily). Judging
by the film’s box-office performance, no other dog owners made this mistake.
He’s a great dog
though. He’s named Pasolini, after Pier Paolo. Sometimes Pasolini and I lie in
front of the TV together and eat peanuts. I watch the movie and he watches the
peanut jar. On average it’s a ratio of three peanuts for me and one for Paso
(which might by the way have been a reasonable value ratio to apply to the
lamp-lighting sequence versus the commercial cinema). Sometimes, when we’re
done with the peanuts, Pasolini brings over his soft-toy cow and shoves it in
my face. It makes a rather loud moo-ing noise. Usually I have to rewind the
movie.
Talking of the
Cinematheque Ontario, they recently showed the consensus choice for best film
of the 90s: Dream of Light, by Victor
Erice. I’d never seen it, and still haven’t, because it played on a Friday
evening and I thought it would be more fun to spend that time of the week
drinking with my wife. I know some people may view this as a sign of hope, if
not redemption, but I know in my moviegoer’s heart that I failed some kind of
test. But sometimes I don’t use that particular heart.
I once reviewed a
film for this newspaper and referred in passing to the occupation of one of the
characters as a building contractor. My wife, who also saw the film, read over
the article before I sent it in and pointed out to me that he was actually a
drug dealer. I haven’t lived a lot.
I have a standard
list of the films I’ve never seen and would most like to, and - happily – it slowly dwindles down over
time. Right now the top ten would probably include Jacques Rivette’s Out One, Carl Dreyer’s Day of Wrath, Andrei Tarkovsky’s Andrei Rublev – assuming they’re not playing
on a Friday evening that is. I also thought the list included Josef von
Sternberg’s Saga of Anatahan, until I
looked back recently at the record of movie viewings I’ve kept since 1982, and
discovered that I’ve in fact seen it – not once, but twice! Admittedly that was
fifteen years ago, but still…how could I have completely forgotten about it? This is but one of the problems of having
a passion with so little tangible residue – sometimes I really envy stamp
collectors. Anyway, I’m eagerly looking forward to my third viewing of Anatahan.
I found the love
scenes between Kim Basinger and Alec Baldwin in the remake of The Getaway oddly arousing. And I think
it must have had something to do with knowing they were really married, which
must have kicked of some little voyeuristic trigger in my head. So you see,
sometimes it pays to know your celebrity trivia. Imagine the thrill if Jack
Nicholson and Lara Flynn Boyle ever make a movie together.
Not long ago, I saw
a film by one of the most acclaimed current directors (on this issue, I’m too
deeply embarrassed to specify further). I found the main character remarkably
inconsistent in his behaviour, and couldn’t really make much sense of it. Only
toward the very end of the film did I realize that there were actually two main
characters, who looked somewhat alike, and that the film consisted of two
intertwined stories. I decided it was best to exempt myself from ever
attempting to comment on that director’s work, and I’ve stuck to it.
I usually take my
used movie tickets and put them in a box, and on a couple of occasions I’ve
made huge poster-sized collages out of them. They’re up in the house. I think
they look terrific, and I even think I could make some kind of aesthetic case
for them. Alternatively, they may be just sad. Maybe that’s why I do what I can
to hang on to my wife.
I can’t believe in
my heart (either of them) that films like The
Godfather and The French Connection
are approaching their thirtieth anniversaries. To me those still look and feel
like contemporary films. I can’t fathom that there’s a generation for which
those films are ancient history. And then I realize that for, say, a
sixteen-year old, Five Easy Pieces
would be- mathematically – as far away in time as was Cecil B DeMille’s The Greatest Show on Earth from my own
birthday. In other words, ancient history. I think I’m really beginning to see
how the years can catch up with someone. Will The Godfather still seem contemporary to me in my eighties, and how
much of a relic will I be then? (I think it will, and I won’t care).
I love movies. I love
Welles and Hawks and Bresson and Antonioni and (for most of the way) Godard.
But that doesn’t mean I have to love Fellini.
(2018 update – very little of this holds true
now in the same way. Most obviously, I’ve seen all of the then-unseen films I
wanted to see, mostly multiple times. Pasolini has long since been replaced by
Ozu (another yellow Labrador). Fellini has grown on me over the years. 70’s
films still feel pretty contemporary to me though, so maybe that one will never
change.)
Thursday, August 30, 2018
The Medusa Touch (Jack Gold, 1978)

Any modern-day remake of Jack Gold’s The Medusa Touch would probably skew much younger in its casting
and energy-level, its plot fleshed out by race-against-time set-pieces. If Gold’s
version works significantly better than seems likely, it’s largely because of
its world-weariness and sense of crusty experience, allowing its melodramatic
contrivances to seem like expressions of shared frustration and common anticipation
of doom. Richard Burton is among the stiffest and intemperate of leading men, so
it works pretty well to cast him as a man driven by those very qualities,
allowed several vituperative rants about societal hypocrisy and the general
mediocrity of people individually and collectively: the premise is that he has
the capacity to destroy at will, from individuals who cross him, to planes that
he pulls from the sky for the hell of it (the retrospective echo of 9/11 is
impossible to shut out), or even beyond that, to tamper with the workings of
manned space probes. Lino Ventura (his presence on the British police force amusingly
attributed to an exchange program with the French) comes in to investigate after
Burton’s Morlar is attacked in his home and left for dead – the film dramatizes
the fruits of his investigation in flashback, interspersed with the growing anxiety
as Morlar clings to life against all odds, his malicious capacities and intents
possibly intact. The extensive use of other establishment actors in small
parts, the alertness to time and place, and the breadth of Morlar’s fury
(encompassing the family, the education system, the law, the church, etc.)
gives the film an unlikely symbolic force, allowing the character to embody
whatever undiagnosed or unaddressed ills are slowly poisoning us. At the risk
of auteur-seeking excess, it’s thus tempting to see the film as a companion piece to
Gold’s sensational The Reckoning,
which dramatizes a very different form of rage-filled triumph over the English establishment.
Thursday, August 23, 2018
Nea (Nelly Kaplan, 1976)

Nelly Kaplan’s Nea
embodies some of the classic ambiguities of female-desire-centric cinema, as seen
(at least insofar as the director comes first among competing inputs and
influences) from a female perspective. The film (also known as A Young
Emmanuelle and variations thereon) conforms to many aspects of the manipulative
template: it undresses its women much more than its men, at intervals that seem
(without having checked) pretty evenly spaced out so as to avoid fidgeting,
focusing on particular on the sexuality of a precocious (and also frequently
naked, in a way that encourages near-clinical examination) 16-year-old
protagonist, Sybille. But it generally feels like an authentic attempt to
excavate the girl’s perspective, frequently placing her in the position of observer
(putting on her big glasses for emphasis) – the other main perspective is that
of her cat, which seems broadly complementary. The plot itself emphasizes her
as principal actor – she works up her fantasies into an anonymously-published
book which becomes a best seller, but when her publisher Axel (Sami Frey, cool
as ever) resists taking their relationship further, she decides to deploy the
perception of her innocence as a weapon against him. The rape fantasy that ends
up becoming true is another often-questionable device which here gets somewhat
repurposed; ultimately, the (rather abrupt) ending certainly reflects Sybille’s
desires and actions more than those of Axel (with the side benefit along the
way of facilitating her mother’s sexual awakening also). None of this compares
with Kaplan’s La fiancée du pirate,
which is much more zestily provocative on its own terms, and more broadly
resonant as a social critique (its knockabout rustic setting seems more productive
than Nea’s standard-issue country mansion, notwithstanding at times that the
interiors, especially Nea’s lair, carry an alluring fairy-tale-like quality),
but the scepter of the earlier film is useful in focusing on Nea’s real, if
inherently debatable strengths.
Thursday, August 16, 2018
Blue Black Permanent (Margaret Tait, 1992)

Blue Black Permanent is the only full-length feature
made by Margaret Tait, when she was already in her 70’s – it’s a work of consistent
beautifully idiosyncratic wisdom, of someone deeply immersed in her environment
and mode of engaging with the world, while in no way resisting the
inevitability of moving on. In some ways, one might see some strenuousness in
its periodic insistence on modernity, a visit to a night club for instance;
certainly it feels like Tait was rather beguiled by recording the present in a
way that would guarantee it becoming dated. This chimes with the film’s unusual
structuring absences – it emphasizes its characters’ identities as poets or
artists or photographers, but is reticent on actually allowing us into their
work, especially to the extent it’s escaped from them to be exhibited or
posthumously consumed. Tait spends as much time on moments that may seem
inconsequential in themselves – a day at the beach, a visit to the shoe store – but only to assert the arbitrariness of memory, how it privileges strange
shards of experience even as it erases major chunks of biographical data. In
this sense, things that are painfully unknowable – preeminently here, even
after decades of self-interrogation, the reasons why one’s mother would suddenly
have drowned – may ultimately find rest, in the contemplation that even
apparently objective truths become reshaped and eroded by the flow of time and
memory (the sea is a major thematic force here, both as glory and threat). But
this isn’t to deny the pleasure of looking back: some of the film’s loveliest
sequences are flashbacks to the mother’s life, not least a trip to the island where
her ailing father now lives alone, temporarily immersing us in the rituals of
making tea and laughing with friends over old stories, and the delight of
receiving a modest but personal gift (homemade honey, its impact as
transcendent here as that of the more traditional arts).
Friday, August 10, 2018
The Mother and the Whore (Jean Eustache, 1973)

Jean Eustache’s The
Mother and the Whore is an astonishing, grueling chronicle of formative
experience, allowing few points of easy clarity (certainly not regarding the straightforward
sexual opposition that one might think to detect in the title) beyond the prospect of future disappointment and deflation. Jean-Pierre Leaud’s Alexandre lives an
emblematic Parisian life of the period, free of most conventional obligations, exercising his whimsical conversational prowess, easily making intellectual and
sexual connections, even while being put up by his tolerant lover Marie
(Bernadette Lafont). For much of its three-and-a-half-hour length, the film has
the quality of pure performance, like watching a tightrope walker; it follows
that a fall of some kind is inevitable. He meets Veronika (Francoise Lebrun),
marked as the relative “whore” by the volume of her past sexual partners and
her straightforwardness in talking about them, but possessed by a certain
severe, almost Gothic quality (chiming against her remark about liking old
vampire movies) that gradually shifts the relationship’s centre of gravity,
draining Alexandre of his glib assumptions, or the ability to fake them,
whichever one it was. The film frequently evokes the events of 1968, and
reaches further back to music and cultural touchpoints before that; Alexandre
reflects on people who used to be in his orbit and dropped out along the way; he probes the world for rituals and signs and rhythms; but for all his
externalized energy, his life is fatally unexamined in the ways that will ultimately matter. When Veronika evokes the
importance of children near the end, to the extent of positing procreation as
the only measure of love and meaningful sex, she’s defining territory he hardly
knows how to enter, and his failure resonates as that of a generation lacking a
clear path forward, and thus constituting easy pickings for the waves of
capitalistic and technological upheaval to come. Eustache’s film is one of the
greatest of its period – at once thrilling and draining, revelatory and tragic.
Thursday, August 9, 2018
The Altman pretender

(originally
published in The Outreach Connection
in May 2001)
Michael
Winterbottom’s new film The Claim, a
Western set in the snow of the 1870’s Sierra Nevadas, is regarded by some as
one of the best films of the year – a premise that’s often been articulated by
reference to Robert Altman’s McCabe &
Mrs. Miller. The two films certainly have a similar setting and general
look, and there’s a broad parallel in some of the characters and themes, but I
think this comparison represents an even greater misappropriation of Altman’s
name than the recent comparisons between Traffic
and Nashville.
Robert Altman
McCabe & Mrs. Miller was completely convincing as an evocation of
time and place, full of fascinating characters and incidents, and dense in
meaning and allusion, The notes I made when I last saw it are barely coherent
to me now (the movie rather overwhelms your faculties), but they’re certainly
gushing – Altman contrasts romantic idealism with entrepreneurial excesses, the
stuff of legend and fable with pragmatism and calculation, the brutally clear
with the mistily mystic. And just as in Nashville,
he engineers a staggering finale, contrasting the death of McCabe with the
effort to save a burning church, suggesting that community and symbolism –
however embryonic – might provide a better basis for endurance than capitalism.
Not that anything about the film is that straightforward.
As Altman films go, The Claim reminded me not of McCabe as much as of Quintet, his weird 1979 science-fiction
thriller in which an icy city of the future is obsessed by a murderous game. Quintet stars Paul Newman, but
resolutely resists the actor’s charisma: the notional dramatic highlights are
wantonly understaged, and the film as a whole is distinctly off-putting,
although not without a modestly persuasive, depressed vision of humanity. In
the end, Newman heads off into the frozen waste, despite being told he’ll
freeze there, and the camera watches him for a long long time as he recedes
into the whiteness, balancing the similarly extended beginning (except that at
the outset he was accompanied by a pregnant lover who’s killed during the
course of the film) and suggesting that the film is primarily about emptiness
and negation.
Victory over the elements
Accurately or not, Quintet looks like one of Altman’s rush
jobs, as though he needed the money, but it seems to me that even this minor
work provides greater satisfaction than Winterbottom’s film (which I take to be
a conscious attempt to make a masterpiece). As The Claim begins, the wagon train brings into the remote town of
Kingdom Come a party of railway surveyors. If they choose to bring the railroad
through town, riches will follow. The town is run as the feudal property of its
Scottish founder, a man who’s already made a fortune from gold, and dreams of
more to come. Years earlier, as a struggling young immigrant, he sold his young
wife and baby to a prospector in exchange for the land claim that would provide
the root of his riches. Now the woman is dying and the child is a young adult,
and they’ve arrived on the same wagon train in search of him.
Based on Thomas
Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge,
the story provides an odd, unpredictable group of character dynamics in a
volatile setting. America is in its infancy here, still discovering itself day
by day, possessed by energy and ambition; Kingdom Come, however, is perpetually
covered in snow, as if in premature hibernation, and every human contact is
like a small victory over the elements. Winterbottom emphasizes the uncertain
and evolving nature of the community here: for example, Milla Jovovich’s
character is both a brothel keeper and as respectable a figure as there is in
town.
I can’t decide
whether or not Jovovich is an interesting actress. She seemed so in Million Dollar Hotel, and her conviction
in the derided Joan of Arc epic The
Messenger was largely persuasive. For now at least, she’s finding parts
which render her stylistic flatness mysterious, even challenging. At best
though, she seems to me to represent a limited avenue of investigation (to
admit a predisposition that may color my opinion here, she doesn’t strike me as
a great beauty either, contrary to reputation). Nastassja Kinski, on the other
hand, has fascinated me for her entire career (and it’s astonishing to realize
we’re talking about more than two decades there). The Claim essentially casts Kinski as the woman of the past and
Jovovich as that of the future, which I think is quite a problem in itself.
Personal tragedy
Neither of these
actresses is a particularly robust personality, and not really is anyone else
in the cast. The characterizations are muted and largely distant – a far cry
from the presence of Beatty and Christie in McCabe.
In Mullan’s case, this seriously undercuts the personal tragedy that’s supposed
to grip the film’s final passages. The intention seems to be to evoke a Lear-like
madness, but instead it’s just one man’s folly.
When The Claim depicts the construction of a
new town, overseen by Jovovich, one remembers Claudia Cardinale’s similar
evolution into a frontier matriarch in Sergio Leone’s Once Upon a Time in the West, which merely provides another
perspective on the limitations of Winterbottom’s film. I sometimes find Leone’s
desire for grandeur to be more than individual scenes can bear, but his film’s
scope and confidence are unmistakable, and the long final camera pan across the
diverse activity of an embryonic new American community is both as striking as
documentary and as thrilling as giddy fantasy. The Claim never makes such an impact. It’s not about anything, except
what it’s about. It tries to construct structures that might generate classic
meanings and allusions, like McCabe,
but seems to end up aimlessly shuffling the cards, like Quintet.
Michael Winterbottom
is a remarkably versatile film director, apparently adopting a different style
and outlook for just about every movie he makes, and that usually works fine
for small-scale British movies. Personally I thought Welcome to Sarajevo was overrated, and I Want You underrated, but these are not issues that are likely to
get too many people’s blood boiling. Even if The Claim were one of the year’s best films, at best I think the
case would come down to a happy accident. Whereas Robert Altman, for all his
love of chaos and sprawling canvases, has never been anything other than
deliberate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



