In the Shakespearean play, Julius Caesar was warned "to beware the Ides of March". In history as he walked to the Senate, Julius Caesar was told by a seer a second time of his impending doom on the day and yet Caesar marched onwards to his impending doom. In the recently released film THE IDES OF MARCH (George Clooney, Columbia, 2011) no such doom awaits any of it's characters. What does march onwards to it's doom is the metaphorical death of idealism, trampled by the political machinations and maneuvering behind the scenes during a campaign. It is this death, symbolized with the characters of Stephen Meyers (Ryan Gosling) and Mike Morris (George Clooney) that gives the film a sublime message, and for me an unexpected one at that.
The narrative to the film is excellent. It is a fascinating (although I am unaware of the accuracy) look into the machinations of a campaign and this glimpse is afforded us without any specifically overt political messages. This is utterly refreshing as the temptation exists to sub textually infuse the narrative with just such a message. Throughout the film the dialogue is outstanding but the moments without dialogue work just as, if not more effectively. And the character arcs, particularly for Meyers and Morris are full and rich. Both travel the road from idealist to corrupt conformist and the films representation of politics as the ultimate tool of corruption is paramount to giving the narrative such excellence.
Also striking to me is work that George Clooney accomplished as a director combined with the efforts of his cinematographer Phedon Papamichael. There exists a stillness to this work, a quiet subtlety that allows the visuals of the film to carry the work. A good example of this is when Morris succumbs to Meyers pressure and fires Paul (Philip Seymour Hoffman). We don't know what Morris has decided to do leaving the previous scene and Clooney elects to show Paul coming out onto the street and asks him to enter his vehicle. Then, we see only the vehicles, with no dialogue. We know what is being said, we don't have to hear it and this is just beautiful work. As Paul exits the vehicle, his performance tells us all that was said inside the truck.
Achieving this stillness requires good shot composition and also serves to lend weight to the moment. It is a tonal shift for Mike Morris as well as the film as a whole. It is the moment when he is abandoning his principles (although his dalliance with the intern could be seen as the same). Clooney and Papamichael both chose to place the camera in some very interesting places, creating shots that were de-centered and off kilter, adding to the effect that something wasn't right with our narrative or our characters.
And the characters in this film were all cast spectacularly. George Clooney is always good and Evan Rachel Wood is so adult finally. Hoffman and Paul Giamatti are two of the best in the business today but in the end this film belongs to Ryan Gosling. There is a quiet intensity to him, giving you the feeling that he is always ready to explode, that something is about to burst forth, scripted or not. This has been a banner year for Gosling and he is really coming into his own.
George Clooney chose to do a few other things which I love. First, the ending is ambiguous. You want to know what happens to these characters, but Clooney leaves it open for individual interpretation. Does Stephen Meyers crack and turn on Mike Morris? Does the scandal come out on Governor Morris? Leaving it open and ambiguous is great filmmaking. Finally, Clooney keeps the film tightly timed at under two hours, a refreshing change of pace in contemporary Hollywood. I think this film was excellent and is proving Clooney and Gosling to be at the top of their respective games.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
THE PINK PANTHER (Blake Edwards, United Artists, 1964)
Through the magic of new technologies such as DVR's and brilliant stations such as TCM I have the great fortune to be able to see films like THE PINK PANTHER (Blake Edwards, United Artists, 1964). And while this is really cool, for me it can be somewhat problematic in that I will watch it over and again, and soon I have to force myself to delete it off my DVR. I watched this film four times before deleting it and if I hadn't deleted it how many other times I'd have watched, I don't know.
I am also going to begin trying something new for my blog. I've realized that with many of the classic films that I watch, two things strike me. One, many people today haven't seen the film, never heard of the film or just couldn't care any less about the films I love. The other realization is that many of these films have been written about or discussed endlessly. So for films like THE PINK PANTHER, ones I've seen countless times, I'm going to just write less formally, and focus on the things I truly love in that film. Obviously the more I write, the more beloved a film is to me. And maybe my musings will spur others to watch. So what do I love about this film....
Let's start at the beginning. I love the title sequence. Animated, we get two wonderful things. The Pink Panther character which everyone knows and loves and we get the great score from Henry Mancini. Both have become iconic and the music particularly is just contagious. It's been rattling around inside my head for two weeks now, but since I love it so much, not one bit of that matters to me.
Let me not forget Meglio Stasera (It Had To Be Tonight). I love this song. Placed throughout the film, particularly as Sir Charles (David Niven) chases Princess Dala (Claudia Cardinale), it is catchy and romantic at the same time. But what really sends the song over the top is the performance of the song in the middle of the film. Performed by Fran Jeffries, she is sultry and seductive and adds the spice to the number. But watch the film. During this sequence just keep your eyes on Clouseau (Peter Sellers). The man is amazing. You will be dying from laughter as he just destroys it. Him dancing, with a seriousness that just screams comical.
And here is the film and franchise all in one man, Peter Sellers. The franchise has become so universally loved that many don't realize the Clouseau character is not the main character in these films until the later films. It is because Sellers absolutely STEALS every scene he is in.
The bedroom scene. Ridiculous. As Simone (Capucine) struggles valiantly to keep Jacques and his amorous advances at bay, the comedy just flows. Jacques with the blanket, the sleeping pills, the Stradivarius, Simone's cold feet, Jacques with the milk. All of it endless comedy and all done so simply; one set, actors who can act, no special effects and comedy that is pure and funny, no toilet humor or vulgarity. And the filmmakers make use of sound and visual design brilliantly. As Jacques gets the sleeping pills all we hear if the offscreen sound of pills spilling on the floor and then his feet crunching them. Just amazing, and funny as hell!
What about the driving sequence in the town square? How many times has this sequence been emulated, even outright copied? When Sir Charles and George (Robert Wagner) stop in the middle of the square, both in gorilla suits and discuss what to do, look at the older Italian gentleman. Just priceless. And let's not forget the scene right before at the costume party, where Jacques (in full armor, visor down) starts a fireworks show, all the while shouting "Tucker, Tucker"!
Speaking of Sir Charles and George Lytton, what a pair of remarkably cast actors. Sir David Niven and Robert Wagner epitomize early 60's suave and debonair men. Niven has upper crust charm just oozing from his pores and Wagner is Hollywood drop dead handsome. And what of their counterparts Capucine and Claudia Cardinale. Both just beautiful and elegant, the four take us back to a more glamorous era in Hollywood, when stars could be idolized for their onscreen work, not "being just like us".
This brings me to an interesting thought I had while watching the film. This film was released pre sexual revolution and it can easily be seen as a portent of things to come. Capucine kisses three different men in this film yet is a married woman. The Lytton boys think nothing of sexual conquests and Princess Dala is teased by Sir Charles as being "the Virgin Queen", an Elizabethean taunt. Not to mention the portrayal of Clouseau as the only forthright member of working class society, a man constantly frustrated sexually in his advances towards his wife. I'm sure a whole paper can be written on this subject, a fascinating one at that.
This whole film is fascinating to me, one worth watching over and again. While it has more comedy than A SHOT IN THE DARK, overall I'd rate it a little lower for overall quality. Still, a comedy masterpiece, and I thank my parents for having had me watch this many times when I was growing up.
I am also going to begin trying something new for my blog. I've realized that with many of the classic films that I watch, two things strike me. One, many people today haven't seen the film, never heard of the film or just couldn't care any less about the films I love. The other realization is that many of these films have been written about or discussed endlessly. So for films like THE PINK PANTHER, ones I've seen countless times, I'm going to just write less formally, and focus on the things I truly love in that film. Obviously the more I write, the more beloved a film is to me. And maybe my musings will spur others to watch. So what do I love about this film....
Let's start at the beginning. I love the title sequence. Animated, we get two wonderful things. The Pink Panther character which everyone knows and loves and we get the great score from Henry Mancini. Both have become iconic and the music particularly is just contagious. It's been rattling around inside my head for two weeks now, but since I love it so much, not one bit of that matters to me.
Let me not forget Meglio Stasera (It Had To Be Tonight). I love this song. Placed throughout the film, particularly as Sir Charles (David Niven) chases Princess Dala (Claudia Cardinale), it is catchy and romantic at the same time. But what really sends the song over the top is the performance of the song in the middle of the film. Performed by Fran Jeffries, she is sultry and seductive and adds the spice to the number. But watch the film. During this sequence just keep your eyes on Clouseau (Peter Sellers). The man is amazing. You will be dying from laughter as he just destroys it. Him dancing, with a seriousness that just screams comical.
And here is the film and franchise all in one man, Peter Sellers. The franchise has become so universally loved that many don't realize the Clouseau character is not the main character in these films until the later films. It is because Sellers absolutely STEALS every scene he is in.
The bedroom scene. Ridiculous. As Simone (Capucine) struggles valiantly to keep Jacques and his amorous advances at bay, the comedy just flows. Jacques with the blanket, the sleeping pills, the Stradivarius, Simone's cold feet, Jacques with the milk. All of it endless comedy and all done so simply; one set, actors who can act, no special effects and comedy that is pure and funny, no toilet humor or vulgarity. And the filmmakers make use of sound and visual design brilliantly. As Jacques gets the sleeping pills all we hear if the offscreen sound of pills spilling on the floor and then his feet crunching them. Just amazing, and funny as hell!
What about the driving sequence in the town square? How many times has this sequence been emulated, even outright copied? When Sir Charles and George (Robert Wagner) stop in the middle of the square, both in gorilla suits and discuss what to do, look at the older Italian gentleman. Just priceless. And let's not forget the scene right before at the costume party, where Jacques (in full armor, visor down) starts a fireworks show, all the while shouting "Tucker, Tucker"!
Speaking of Sir Charles and George Lytton, what a pair of remarkably cast actors. Sir David Niven and Robert Wagner epitomize early 60's suave and debonair men. Niven has upper crust charm just oozing from his pores and Wagner is Hollywood drop dead handsome. And what of their counterparts Capucine and Claudia Cardinale. Both just beautiful and elegant, the four take us back to a more glamorous era in Hollywood, when stars could be idolized for their onscreen work, not "being just like us".
This brings me to an interesting thought I had while watching the film. This film was released pre sexual revolution and it can easily be seen as a portent of things to come. Capucine kisses three different men in this film yet is a married woman. The Lytton boys think nothing of sexual conquests and Princess Dala is teased by Sir Charles as being "the Virgin Queen", an Elizabethean taunt. Not to mention the portrayal of Clouseau as the only forthright member of working class society, a man constantly frustrated sexually in his advances towards his wife. I'm sure a whole paper can be written on this subject, a fascinating one at that.
This whole film is fascinating to me, one worth watching over and again. While it has more comedy than A SHOT IN THE DARK, overall I'd rate it a little lower for overall quality. Still, a comedy masterpiece, and I thank my parents for having had me watch this many times when I was growing up.
Monday, November 7, 2011
THE NOTEBOOK (Nick Cassavetes, New Line, 2004)
There are times when the entire world seems to be against you, and if this happens to a moment when the world is against you being in love with someone it makes life that much more agonizingly cruel. These same people, at most turns every bit as rational and reasonable as any person, will do things completely against their character. And they will do these things for love. So it is with the love story you have between Allie Hamilton (Rachel McAdams) and Noah Calhoun (Ryan Gosling) in THE NOTEBOOK (Nick Cassavetes, New Line, 2004). Theirs is a simple love story, often similar to a modern day Romeo and Juliet. And with this film you get exactly that. Simple and predictable, nothing earth shattering.
The narrative for the film is rather predictable, from the incessant clues placed within the narrative to overtly placed iconography throughout the films production design (seriously, did they have to make every thing worn by McAdams and Rowlands red to beat into us that they were the same character?) The story follows the basic tenets of the traditional love story. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, love brings them together again (usually against all odds). The problem for me with this film is that this narrative is forced upon us, and we are severely manipulated into feeling. Compare the narrative of this film to the brilliantly refreshing one offered in 500 DAYS OF SUMMER (Marc Webb, Fox Searchlight, 2009). THE NOTEBOOK doesn't even come close in regard to Scott Neustadter and Michael Weber's amazingly updated take on the classic mythology of the genre.
What is amazing in this film is the job put forth by it's cast. Ryan Gosling has so much talent, and plays characters with such unusual mannerisms and intensity that every time he is on the screen he places you on the edge of your seat, prepared for anything. To me, he is what Brad Pitt used to be, back before he became BRAD PITT. With a huge 2011 my hope for Gosling is that he doesn't become too big of a star and lose all the quirkiness and likability which helps to make him so endearing.
His co-star in the film actually manages to steal the film out from under him. Rachel McAdams plays Allie Hamilton with such energy, vitality and just the right amount of uncertainty that it is easy to see her sitting in her dressing room, rehearsing, trying to decide if she wants Noah (Gosling) or Lon (played with oozing charm by James Marsden). Her performance as Allie, particularly as she decides between the two men, is the singular moment where the narrative leaves it's predictable shell.
It was also really great to see two veteran actors giving heartfelt performances, and Gena Rowlands and James Garner really help propel the film. Long a favorite of mine, James Garner offers up a portrayal that seemingly adds to what Gosling accomplishes.
And Rowlands is very good as the dementia stricken older Allie, floating in and out of a reality that no longer exists for her character. Their touching end is a deft touch and honestly a neat little spin on the Romeo and Juliet ending.
Formally the film is done quite well. The set design allows you to float back to a charming south and the directors decision to fill his screen with rich and bold colors throughout give the film added depth and dimension. The score is rather complementary and obviously adds emotional tone and weight.
My problem with this film probably lies in the fact that I waited eight years after it's release to see it. Years of hearing fans talk about it's emotional weight and the film itself becoming a signpost for being the ultimate "chick flick" built it up within my mind before the film has even started. As I watched I steadily prepared myself for something drastically sad to happen, and when that event never materialized there was an obvious disappointment. Also, ultimately the film will be completely forgotten within weeks. There is no iconic scene, no memorable lines or scores. Think of the great love story films over the years. You remember the end to CASABLANCA, the theme from LOVE STORY, even the haunting score and cinematography to BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. This film just falls a little short, for me.
The narrative for the film is rather predictable, from the incessant clues placed within the narrative to overtly placed iconography throughout the films production design (seriously, did they have to make every thing worn by McAdams and Rowlands red to beat into us that they were the same character?) The story follows the basic tenets of the traditional love story. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, love brings them together again (usually against all odds). The problem for me with this film is that this narrative is forced upon us, and we are severely manipulated into feeling. Compare the narrative of this film to the brilliantly refreshing one offered in 500 DAYS OF SUMMER (Marc Webb, Fox Searchlight, 2009). THE NOTEBOOK doesn't even come close in regard to Scott Neustadter and Michael Weber's amazingly updated take on the classic mythology of the genre.
What is amazing in this film is the job put forth by it's cast. Ryan Gosling has so much talent, and plays characters with such unusual mannerisms and intensity that every time he is on the screen he places you on the edge of your seat, prepared for anything. To me, he is what Brad Pitt used to be, back before he became BRAD PITT. With a huge 2011 my hope for Gosling is that he doesn't become too big of a star and lose all the quirkiness and likability which helps to make him so endearing.
His co-star in the film actually manages to steal the film out from under him. Rachel McAdams plays Allie Hamilton with such energy, vitality and just the right amount of uncertainty that it is easy to see her sitting in her dressing room, rehearsing, trying to decide if she wants Noah (Gosling) or Lon (played with oozing charm by James Marsden). Her performance as Allie, particularly as she decides between the two men, is the singular moment where the narrative leaves it's predictable shell.
It was also really great to see two veteran actors giving heartfelt performances, and Gena Rowlands and James Garner really help propel the film. Long a favorite of mine, James Garner offers up a portrayal that seemingly adds to what Gosling accomplishes.
And Rowlands is very good as the dementia stricken older Allie, floating in and out of a reality that no longer exists for her character. Their touching end is a deft touch and honestly a neat little spin on the Romeo and Juliet ending.
Formally the film is done quite well. The set design allows you to float back to a charming south and the directors decision to fill his screen with rich and bold colors throughout give the film added depth and dimension. The score is rather complementary and obviously adds emotional tone and weight.
My problem with this film probably lies in the fact that I waited eight years after it's release to see it. Years of hearing fans talk about it's emotional weight and the film itself becoming a signpost for being the ultimate "chick flick" built it up within my mind before the film has even started. As I watched I steadily prepared myself for something drastically sad to happen, and when that event never materialized there was an obvious disappointment. Also, ultimately the film will be completely forgotten within weeks. There is no iconic scene, no memorable lines or scores. Think of the great love story films over the years. You remember the end to CASABLANCA, the theme from LOVE STORY, even the haunting score and cinematography to BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. This film just falls a little short, for me.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
THE MALTESE FALCON (John Huston, Warner Bros., 1941)
The second half of my glorious film adventure was seeing the classic THE MALTESE FALCON (John Huston, Warner Bros., 1941). Like CASABLANCA before it, there is nothing I can write which tells anyone something new about this great film. So again, I'll just write what comes to mind for me, with no linear order or structured thought.
Humphrey Bogart is great as Sam Spade. In fact he is great period. AFI determined he is the greatest male actor of the twentieth century, and while I personally am a Cary Grant man and would also argue for Jimmy Stewart, the amount of iconic roles Bogie made is incredible. The iconic roles aren't the entire story with Bogie though. He defined a role for American males to admire and emulate, and his standard lasted longer than he did. The role of Sam Spade embodies this. Tough, never flinching, a ladies man when he wants to be, nothing gets to Sam Spade. The only way to stop him is to trick him as Kasper Gutman (Sydney Greenstreet) resorts to in the film. The only issue that doesn't hold up, for me, is this portrayal is rather over the top by today's standards. It's almost TOO much.
I love the cinematography in the film. To me, using natural light and keeping everything realistic in tone and mood is what the best films are about. When this is done correctly it almost feels as if the viewer is right amongst the characters within the narrative, living in the same spaces our heroes and villains are. But the great Arthur Edeson does another thing which I personally love. Taking a page from German Expressionism, he constantly changes the angles and positioning of his camera. He uses extreme angle camera placement as well as canted and oft-centered. Changing things from the norm give photography like this a freshness and vibrancy. I love it!
I have to admit I read this after watching but I love John Huston and the work he did directing this film. Extensively prepared he shot his script and allowed his actors time to do their work. And having seen many of his other works, you know he is truly a master at his craft.
I love true noir films. The darkness and the stark reality get me. The idea of the femme fatale strikes a chord. Honestly guys, who among us hasn't done completely foolish and reckless things for women, particularly those we know to be detrimental to us. DOUBLE INDEMNITY (Billy Wilder, Paramount, 1944) is the ultimate example of this. What Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray) does for Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck) personifies what the femme fatale will do to a man. But noir films are dark and real and to me are a more accurate representation of what life is. And their rise through the forties is the perfect foil to the packaging the studios gave us during that period.
I love Peter Lorre as Coiro. I love the scene where he confronts Spade in his office and sticks a gun in his face not once but twice. I love that Lorre is smarmy and self serving, slick and cowardly. And I love that his face is not what Hollywood ever showed us during that period. He was different and that makes him stand out. And every time I see him, I want him to turn around so I can see if there is a chalk marked "M" on the back of his suit. Let's see who knows what I'm talking about there.
Finally I love that theaters like the New Beverly exist, and that stations such as TCM broadcast classics every day, and that DVR and Netflix exists so that cinephiles like me can get our fix!
Humphrey Bogart is great as Sam Spade. In fact he is great period. AFI determined he is the greatest male actor of the twentieth century, and while I personally am a Cary Grant man and would also argue for Jimmy Stewart, the amount of iconic roles Bogie made is incredible. The iconic roles aren't the entire story with Bogie though. He defined a role for American males to admire and emulate, and his standard lasted longer than he did. The role of Sam Spade embodies this. Tough, never flinching, a ladies man when he wants to be, nothing gets to Sam Spade. The only way to stop him is to trick him as Kasper Gutman (Sydney Greenstreet) resorts to in the film. The only issue that doesn't hold up, for me, is this portrayal is rather over the top by today's standards. It's almost TOO much.
I love the cinematography in the film. To me, using natural light and keeping everything realistic in tone and mood is what the best films are about. When this is done correctly it almost feels as if the viewer is right amongst the characters within the narrative, living in the same spaces our heroes and villains are. But the great Arthur Edeson does another thing which I personally love. Taking a page from German Expressionism, he constantly changes the angles and positioning of his camera. He uses extreme angle camera placement as well as canted and oft-centered. Changing things from the norm give photography like this a freshness and vibrancy. I love it!
I have to admit I read this after watching but I love John Huston and the work he did directing this film. Extensively prepared he shot his script and allowed his actors time to do their work. And having seen many of his other works, you know he is truly a master at his craft.
I love true noir films. The darkness and the stark reality get me. The idea of the femme fatale strikes a chord. Honestly guys, who among us hasn't done completely foolish and reckless things for women, particularly those we know to be detrimental to us. DOUBLE INDEMNITY (Billy Wilder, Paramount, 1944) is the ultimate example of this. What Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray) does for Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck) personifies what the femme fatale will do to a man. But noir films are dark and real and to me are a more accurate representation of what life is. And their rise through the forties is the perfect foil to the packaging the studios gave us during that period.
I love Peter Lorre as Coiro. I love the scene where he confronts Spade in his office and sticks a gun in his face not once but twice. I love that Lorre is smarmy and self serving, slick and cowardly. And I love that his face is not what Hollywood ever showed us during that period. He was different and that makes him stand out. And every time I see him, I want him to turn around so I can see if there is a chalk marked "M" on the back of his suit. Let's see who knows what I'm talking about there.
Finally I love that theaters like the New Beverly exist, and that stations such as TCM broadcast classics every day, and that DVR and Netflix exists so that cinephiles like me can get our fix!
CASABLANCA (Michael Curtiz, Warner Bros., 1942)
There is nothing I can write or say about CASABLANCA (Michael Curtiz, Warner Bros., 1942) that has not been endlessly done before. It is one of the best films ever made, it is critically acclaimed and universally loved. It's stars, story, songs, lines and essence have become iconic in our society and there are very few who haven't seen it. So after seeing it yet again the other day at a wonderful double feature at the New Beverly, I am just gonna write down some of the things I love best about the film.
I love Ingrid Bergman. She defines what a movie star was and should be. Simply beautiful and exceedingly elegant, her role as Ilsa Lund is understated and performed with passion. I defy anyone to watch her and not fall in love with her. The cinematography by Arthur Edeson in this film quite simply accentuates her in every possible way. When I watch this film I often find myself lost when she is on the screen.
I love Humphrey Bogart as Rick. Never a huge fan of Bogie, over the years I have come to appreciate the tremendous work our most popular actor displayed for us. Role after role becomes iconic with him. In CASABLANCA he defines the ideals of the American male during the war years. Full of stoicism and self sacrifice for the greater good, Rick sets a standard for all of us to aspire to.
I love Rick's Americain Cafe. What a remarkable place. As I watched yesterday I was struck by the thought of having a nightclub where dress was required. Dinner jackets and gowns, civility oozing out of every crevice in the establishment. Full of European taste and sensibility. I would be a regular at Rick's.
I love the writing and the dialogue. Watch the film again, maybe for the 10th or 23rd time. Catch things you have never heard before, laugh at lines and realize comedy exists where you hadn't previously realized. These lines have become iconic, known universally. Some are so big they are misquoted more than stated correctly. "Play it once Sam, for old times sake". Play it Sam. Play As Time Goes By".
I love As Time Goes By. The piano, the melody; it takes me to the era, to the time. It takes me to Rick's. It's haunting and romantic and can make you love and feel sad all at the same time.
I love the stellar cast. I love the fact that as a cinephile I know that Claude Rains (Capt. Renault) was also the villain in another personal favorite, NOTORIOUS (Alfred Hitchcock, RKO, 1946). Or that Conrad Veidt (Maj. Strasser) was the sleepwalker Cesare in that classic of German Expressionism, THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI (Robert Weine, Goldwyn, 1919). Or that Peter Lorre (Ugarte) is creepy and fantastic every single time I see him in a film.
I especially love that there are moments in this film, no matter when I see it, that give me chills. The aforementioned scene when Ilsa directs Sam to play As Time Goes By. The entire airport sequence at the end of the film. Or when Viktor Laszlo (Paul Henried) directs the band at Rick's to play La Marseillaise and the entire club sings along (well, except the Nazis).
I will watch CASABLANCA anytime, anywhere. I have seen it at least twenty times and hope to see it another thirty. It is definitely on my short list of top ten films EVER.
I love Ingrid Bergman. She defines what a movie star was and should be. Simply beautiful and exceedingly elegant, her role as Ilsa Lund is understated and performed with passion. I defy anyone to watch her and not fall in love with her. The cinematography by Arthur Edeson in this film quite simply accentuates her in every possible way. When I watch this film I often find myself lost when she is on the screen.
I love Humphrey Bogart as Rick. Never a huge fan of Bogie, over the years I have come to appreciate the tremendous work our most popular actor displayed for us. Role after role becomes iconic with him. In CASABLANCA he defines the ideals of the American male during the war years. Full of stoicism and self sacrifice for the greater good, Rick sets a standard for all of us to aspire to.
I love Rick's Americain Cafe. What a remarkable place. As I watched yesterday I was struck by the thought of having a nightclub where dress was required. Dinner jackets and gowns, civility oozing out of every crevice in the establishment. Full of European taste and sensibility. I would be a regular at Rick's.
I love the writing and the dialogue. Watch the film again, maybe for the 10th or 23rd time. Catch things you have never heard before, laugh at lines and realize comedy exists where you hadn't previously realized. These lines have become iconic, known universally. Some are so big they are misquoted more than stated correctly. "Play it once Sam, for old times sake". Play it Sam. Play As Time Goes By".
I love As Time Goes By. The piano, the melody; it takes me to the era, to the time. It takes me to Rick's. It's haunting and romantic and can make you love and feel sad all at the same time.
I love the stellar cast. I love the fact that as a cinephile I know that Claude Rains (Capt. Renault) was also the villain in another personal favorite, NOTORIOUS (Alfred Hitchcock, RKO, 1946). Or that Conrad Veidt (Maj. Strasser) was the sleepwalker Cesare in that classic of German Expressionism, THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI (Robert Weine, Goldwyn, 1919). Or that Peter Lorre (Ugarte) is creepy and fantastic every single time I see him in a film.
I especially love that there are moments in this film, no matter when I see it, that give me chills. The aforementioned scene when Ilsa directs Sam to play As Time Goes By. The entire airport sequence at the end of the film. Or when Viktor Laszlo (Paul Henried) directs the band at Rick's to play La Marseillaise and the entire club sings along (well, except the Nazis).
I will watch CASABLANCA anytime, anywhere. I have seen it at least twenty times and hope to see it another thirty. It is definitely on my short list of top ten films EVER.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
THE FOOTBALL FACTORY (Nick Love, Momentum, 2004)
I am slightly obsessed with several things which are all rather easily explained. I love the beach, surfing and blondes. Easy to figure that out, I'm from Orange County. I love films and USC which has a lot to do with me attending the film school there. Unexplainably I have an ongoing love of England and particularly Premiership football. So when the film THE FOOTBALL FACTORY (Nick Love, Momentum Pictures, 2004) was recommended to me of course I immediately queued it up. And the film hardly disappoints. The narrative is based off the novel of the same name also by Love and I of course will be reading it shortly. While the film has it's shortcomings, primarily in a confusing narrative and dialogue and an extreme glorification of violence, it is entertaining as hell and raises some very intriguing social issues, particularly for England.
The film is made with a faux documentary style, which lends weight and importance to it's narrative. This style, using news footage and broadcasting, gives the narrative a "loosely based on" feel to it. These headlines are extremely believable, and the film itself could easily be something that any member of the warring factories could be filming as events unfold. The narrative needs this because if you are not a fan of premiership football then you will be extremely confused as to what is taking place and why. Adding to this confusion is the fact that every actor has a heavy British accent and the dialogue is written full of colloquialisms and slang. Also giving the film good local color is the characters within the narrative.
And each one of these characters is superbly portrayed. In fact, the portrayals of many of these characters also adds to the overall film and it's documentary style. Tommy Johnson (Danny Dyer) is remarkable. The protagonist to the film, he epitomizes what appears to be a lost generation of males in contemporary England. He works a dead end job, has no meaningful relationships with women and lives only to party on the weekends and watch football. A good life no doubt, but Tommy is facing the other side of thirty and social conventions implore him to move on.
And to me this is one of the most powerful aspects and messages of the film. The role of social conventions and constructs within our lives. Tommy has no prospects. He is uneducated and a member of a non existent work force. To maintain a lasting relationship with a women would require advances beyond his means. The only thing left for Tommy is to embrace that which he knows; his love of Chelsea football, drugs and casual sexual encounters and a fair amount of violent episodes. These releases come for Tommy as a way of coping. How can he be expected to live out life's social conventions when those particular doors are shut to him and his generation? And how exactly does the role of Tommy play into the ancillary character of England within the film?
England is represented in two manners within this film. There is the role of Tommy and his mates, the lost generation that believes their country has failed them and that what they were promised as children was all lies. The other half of England is the representation of the grandfather. Here is old England, proud and patriotic, yet still ready to move on. It is telling that the two grandfather characters never escape to Australia. The message is clear, there is no escape for these men, regardless of generation.
And for England to be represented as a character in such a manner opens up the ability for the film to show a side of England the world doesn't usually see. Here is a country that is economically struggling. There is, amongst it's youth, a general malaise and ambivalence towards life itself and the social and power constructs of the country. There is also wide spread drug use, creating a country apathetic towards it's situation. Does this sound like any country we might live in? Are we Americans destined towards a similar fate? I am sure that Mr. Love had no intent of his book or film being analyzed as such but the parallels to me are just very striking.
I loved this film, probably a little bit too much due to my English obsession. But anything that can have such an impact with social commentary is definitely a meaningful work, and I highly recommend this film to anyone. And lastly, no one cares about Chelsea football.
The film is made with a faux documentary style, which lends weight and importance to it's narrative. This style, using news footage and broadcasting, gives the narrative a "loosely based on" feel to it. These headlines are extremely believable, and the film itself could easily be something that any member of the warring factories could be filming as events unfold. The narrative needs this because if you are not a fan of premiership football then you will be extremely confused as to what is taking place and why. Adding to this confusion is the fact that every actor has a heavy British accent and the dialogue is written full of colloquialisms and slang. Also giving the film good local color is the characters within the narrative.
And each one of these characters is superbly portrayed. In fact, the portrayals of many of these characters also adds to the overall film and it's documentary style. Tommy Johnson (Danny Dyer) is remarkable. The protagonist to the film, he epitomizes what appears to be a lost generation of males in contemporary England. He works a dead end job, has no meaningful relationships with women and lives only to party on the weekends and watch football. A good life no doubt, but Tommy is facing the other side of thirty and social conventions implore him to move on.
And to me this is one of the most powerful aspects and messages of the film. The role of social conventions and constructs within our lives. Tommy has no prospects. He is uneducated and a member of a non existent work force. To maintain a lasting relationship with a women would require advances beyond his means. The only thing left for Tommy is to embrace that which he knows; his love of Chelsea football, drugs and casual sexual encounters and a fair amount of violent episodes. These releases come for Tommy as a way of coping. How can he be expected to live out life's social conventions when those particular doors are shut to him and his generation? And how exactly does the role of Tommy play into the ancillary character of England within the film?
England is represented in two manners within this film. There is the role of Tommy and his mates, the lost generation that believes their country has failed them and that what they were promised as children was all lies. The other half of England is the representation of the grandfather. Here is old England, proud and patriotic, yet still ready to move on. It is telling that the two grandfather characters never escape to Australia. The message is clear, there is no escape for these men, regardless of generation.
And for England to be represented as a character in such a manner opens up the ability for the film to show a side of England the world doesn't usually see. Here is a country that is economically struggling. There is, amongst it's youth, a general malaise and ambivalence towards life itself and the social and power constructs of the country. There is also wide spread drug use, creating a country apathetic towards it's situation. Does this sound like any country we might live in? Are we Americans destined towards a similar fate? I am sure that Mr. Love had no intent of his book or film being analyzed as such but the parallels to me are just very striking.
I loved this film, probably a little bit too much due to my English obsession. But anything that can have such an impact with social commentary is definitely a meaningful work, and I highly recommend this film to anyone. And lastly, no one cares about Chelsea football.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
COCO BEFORE CHANEL (Anne Fontaine, Warner Bros., 2009)
One of the best things about contemporary film is that with the blossoming of the digital age and the ongoing ubiquity of film, film subjects have become as wide and varied as they ever have been. Viewing a film now gives you insight to subjects never before imagined, and with the explosion of availability of information one can easily learn so much more about the subject of a film. One recent such foray for me was to watch COCO BEFORE CHANEL (Anne Fontaine, Warner Bros., 2009). The Chanel name is ubiquitous in our society, really try to find someone that has never heard the name. So when the film was recommended to me I figured I'd give it a shot. And what I come away from this film with is a portrait of an amazingly strong woman, one that overcame so many obstacles yet persevered. An inspiration no doubt, but in a time with few good role models, one that should be held in much higher regard.
Gabrielle 'Coco' Chanel (Audrey Tautou) had the world against her. Abandoned to an orphanage at an early age, by young adulthood she is scratching out an existence in a world beneath respectable layers of society. It is a world that is not destined for someone of Chanel's social status to succeed in, and the fact she is a woman makes the odds even longer for her. Yet Tautou infuses the role (and character of Chanel) with strength and determination and an unyielding disdain for the excess and frivolity of her time. Often we forget that which our predecessors overcame in order that our lives should be bettered. Woman in general owe a debt to people such as Chanel. At the very least, some knowledge of her is necessary.
It is this knowledge of her world and the portrait the film creates that fascinates me. Chanel's views on marriage, disdainful at best, denied after the loss of her lover Boy Capel (Alessandro Nivola - a great role for him, he has that sly smile DOWN) are eye-opening when compared to many contemporary women and their view to marriage. The changes to social conventions, primarily in the expectations of females is also rather striking. When Chanel wanted to start her business, both Boy and Baron Balsan (Benoit Poelvoorde) offer to finance her, but merely with the intent to amuse her, never thinking once that anything substantial could come of such endeavors. And here is the question that hits me the most as I think about this subject. Have things changed tremendously, or have they really not? Appearances say so, but a deeper examination would definitely change the color of your perception.
This is a fascinating film, filled with beautiful costume design and overall art direction and production design. The performances are really good, with Audrey Tautou just capturing the essence of such a great feminine role model. Please, if you have a daughter, have her watch a film like this, to see what she is capable of not only becoming but capable of OVERcoming.
Gabrielle 'Coco' Chanel (Audrey Tautou) had the world against her. Abandoned to an orphanage at an early age, by young adulthood she is scratching out an existence in a world beneath respectable layers of society. It is a world that is not destined for someone of Chanel's social status to succeed in, and the fact she is a woman makes the odds even longer for her. Yet Tautou infuses the role (and character of Chanel) with strength and determination and an unyielding disdain for the excess and frivolity of her time. Often we forget that which our predecessors overcame in order that our lives should be bettered. Woman in general owe a debt to people such as Chanel. At the very least, some knowledge of her is necessary.
It is this knowledge of her world and the portrait the film creates that fascinates me. Chanel's views on marriage, disdainful at best, denied after the loss of her lover Boy Capel (Alessandro Nivola - a great role for him, he has that sly smile DOWN) are eye-opening when compared to many contemporary women and their view to marriage. The changes to social conventions, primarily in the expectations of females is also rather striking. When Chanel wanted to start her business, both Boy and Baron Balsan (Benoit Poelvoorde) offer to finance her, but merely with the intent to amuse her, never thinking once that anything substantial could come of such endeavors. And here is the question that hits me the most as I think about this subject. Have things changed tremendously, or have they really not? Appearances say so, but a deeper examination would definitely change the color of your perception.
This is a fascinating film, filled with beautiful costume design and overall art direction and production design. The performances are really good, with Audrey Tautou just capturing the essence of such a great feminine role model. Please, if you have a daughter, have her watch a film like this, to see what she is capable of not only becoming but capable of OVERcoming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)