Monday, December 25, 2006

Christmas Films

As a rule I avoid Christmas films, that is films with a Christmas theme. You look forward to a week of wall-to-wall movies on TV and you get all this treacly, sentimental, optimistic, life-affirming, lets-all-love-each-other mush. Family films! But let me not be Scrooge-like. Here's a few that can seduce even me into a tearful desire to embrace humanity, plus one or two antidotes to philanthropy.

Mind you, I'm a sucker for the usual Christmas perennials, like The Great Escape and The Wizard of Oz, and I have my own personal treats, like my Laurel and Hardy compilation or their Way Out West. Or an old Bogart or Cagney. Doesn't The Roaring Twenties end at Chrstmastime? Back to the theme:

Three Godfathers is a greatly under-rated film. It has all the hallmarks of a John ford film - John Wayne, eccentric supports, comedy, amazing location photography, beautifully composed. What some would call sentimentality I call real emotion. In any case, it's Christmas! And why shouldn't there be a allegorically religious Western? This tale of redemption carries its message lightly and is rooted in deep humanity. The more I see it, the more it rises in my estimation.


Gremlins. Bedford Falls is invaded by malevolent cuddly dolls. Great fun, shot through with a dark, nasty streak, and full of little jokes for film buffs. Worth seeing, if only for the cinema full of entranced gremlins watching Snow White and the Seven Dwarf's. I like the one who puts a crisp packet over each ear. As the man said, 'We all dream of being a child again, even the worst of us. Maybe the worst of us most of all.'

A Christmas Carol, the one with Alastair Sim, the only one. Alastair was an actor with a face that could be jovial or unpleasant, with a delivery that could be very - I'm looking for a word here that means humorous with an edge - sardonic, that's it. He's the perfect Scrooge.

Holiday Inn. What more could you want? Bing and Fred. Irving Berlin songs. Bugger the plot.

Meet Me in St Louis. I don't like Judy Garland much. She wasn't pretty and I hated her self-indulgent, self-pitying, prima donna final years, but in her youth she had a certain charm when she sang. Somewhere Over the Rainbow always moves me, as does Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas in this film. Not only that, but it's a perfectly realised piece of turn-of-the-century Americana . . .(yawn).

There are a lot of Christmas films I need to see. I'm told Miracle on 34th Street (1947) is pretty good. The Bishop's Wife, with Cary Grant, is another.

If you need a corrective, how about Die Hard? I don't care what anyone says, I love it. Old Bruce undercuts all the impossible heroics with his little quips and Alan Rickman is the kind of villain that villains should be. British, for a start. All he lacks is a moustache to twirl.

But the greatest anti-Christmas film of all is It's a Wonderful Life. Oh yes it is. It is one of the best films ever made. Direction, acting, photography, editing are all impeccable. This is a dark story, a scream of despair, that ends in suicide. For George Bailey really does kill himself. All that stuff with the angel is a dream, that flashes through his brain as he drowns. There is no angel, only a good man who is ground down not only by the stupidity and the corruption and the small-mindedness of others but also by the crushing of his own dreams. Only the miracle of an angel can remedy this situation, and, as we know, there is no such thing.

I see there was an IMDb poll on this subject.


Sunday, December 24, 2006

A conversation

- Hi, Dad. Wanna drink?
- I'm fine, thanks. Sorry, I forgot to bring your DVD back.
- Get Carter? What did you think? I assume you listened to the commentary.
- Yeah, watched it twice , once with, once without. I got a bit irritated by that cameraman. He seemed to do nothing but moan and go on about all the problems. I hadn't realised that Hendry and Caine didn't get on.
- Mm, Hendry was a drunk. I read he wanted the lead for himself and resented Caine getting it. By the way, did you know that hitman was on the train at the beginning?
- No, I'd never noticed that before someone said it on the commentary. It's a good film, though. A bit like a Jacobean tragedy, everyone dead at the end, no real good guys. Where were the police while all this was going on? I suppose that's the point. A self-contained world for scrotes and arseholes. Did you ever see Stallone's version?
- Crap.
- Exactly. You know, when I watched it I thought, 'Forget Michael Caine. Just watch it as if it were a new film and treat it on its merits.' It hadn't got any. I did the same thing with The Jackal. Same thing. They just can't seem to realise that you've got to tell a story simply and not substitute flash for style. Unless you're Orson Welles, of course. By the way, I saw Red Dragon the other day.
- What, you mean Manhunter?
- No, the new one. Antony Hopkins. A bit odd, seeing him older and fatter when it's supposed to be set years earlier. I can't remember Manhunter very well, but it seemed to have more impact, more style. Mind you, this one had a twist in the tail which took me by surprise. I'd almost turned it off before I realised it wasn't finished. I think Ralph Fiennes was a disappointment, compared with the bloke who played the killer in the other one. He was really weird. They tried for a bit more realism, I think, more motivation.
- I saw Tombstone again the other night. Didn't get to bed till after one. Val Kilmer's great, isn't he?
- 'I'm your huckleberry.'
- It's full of quotes. Ringo's good. Love that bit at the end when he suddenly sees he's got Doc to fight, not Wyatt.
- 'Why, Johnny, looks like someone just walked over your grave. You're no daisy at all.'
- Is it in your top ten Westerns? We all know what number one is.
- The Wild Bunch? It might be The Searchers, you know. Then there's Red River, Yellow Ribbon.
- High Noon, Shane?
- I'm dubious about them. Too self-consciously classic. There's My Darling Clementine.
- I remember that. You sat me down to watch it once. I wanted to go out and play football, but you said, 'No, you've got to watch this.' By the way, wasn't Billy Bob Thornton in Tombstone? Wasn't he that gambler Wyatt beats up at the beginning?
- No, that wasn't Billy Bob. Definitely. I've got a feeling he was in it though. Or was it Wyatt Earp? Have you seen The Alamo yet? Not John Wayne's, the new one. Billy Bob's brilliant as Davy Crockett. I know it got a lot of bad press, but I thought it was pretty good. And what about Oh, Brother Where art Thou? Thoroughly recommended. What are you watching tonight.
- Speed.
- Me too.
- See you. Merry Christmas. When are you going to watch It's a Wonderful Life?
- When there's nobody else at home. You know that I always cry.

Friday, December 22, 2006

The films you're supposed to like

In his article on Howard Hawks in his Biographical Dictionary of the Cinema, David Thomson imagines himself on a sinking ship with the opportunity to save from oblivion the ten best films of all time. He muses on how most critics would react - one Welles, one Hitchcock, one Mizoguchi, one Renoir, etc. He claims that he would choose ten Hawks films, but he does have a few funny ideas. He's not keen on Ford and Capra for a start.

It's a game we all play, choosing the ten best, and can be a lot of fun. Taken seriously, the choice will avoid most of the selection criteria I am returning to here from time to time, and has many other factors to consider - script, acting, direction, camerawork, insight, overall artistry, etc.

But there several films which recur frequently on these 'official' lists and these are the films which we might feel we 'ought' to like. I've been having a look at how 'official', intellectual opinion has changed in Sight and Sound's ten-yearly best films poll of critics (and now film-makers). This is found at http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/topten

As a matter of interest, David Thomson contributed to this poll and, being serious, limited himself to one Hawks, His Girl Friday.

I'll concentrate on critics for the moment, although I've got my reservations about them. For example, critics (at least according to my prejudice) are too concerned with the script and the themes of a film rather than the the craft and the visual. The also have a tendency to be arty and pretentious. And rather too inclined to look for innovation or, conversely, trends and patterns. However.

The link leads to several articles on the polls, but these are my immediate thoughts:

The most consistent appearances in the top ten are Potemkin and La Regle du Jeu, featured every 10 years since 1952.

The most successful is Kane.

There are still two silent films there: Potemkin and Sunrise (Murnau). Greed and Intolerance have slipped.

The most recent is Godfather I and II (cheating her because they've added the votes for the two films together). Otherwise, the most recent would probably be 2001. I suppose it is understandable that we need time to allow the 'greatest' films to emerge from the stew of passing enthusiasm, not to mention rediscovery (this applies to Vertigo, Sunrise and Kane itself).

Surprises: Singin' in the Rain and the Searchers. I suppose I consider myself so resolutely middle-brow that I don't expect to find these serious-minded men and women choosing, a musical and a Western, two of my favourites.

Incidentally there are three Westerns in the top sixty or so, the other two being The Man who Shot Liberty Valance and Rio Bravo. Where the hell is The Wild Bunch? Moreover I can't find any other films by Ford or Hawks in the full list, which is strange. What about The Grapes of Wrath or To Have and Have Not?

Those that have fallen out of favour over the years include Chaplin, who was represented by both City Lights and The Gold Rush in 1952. Also, thank God, there are fewer arty films of the Antonioni, Bergman, Godard variety, but they are still bubbling under.

Japanese cinema is well-represented. Ozu's Tokyo Story is in the top ten and the old favourite Kurosawa is still high with Seven Samurai and Rashomon. Mizoguchi's Ugetsu is still highly regarded.

Time for some nominations (a few from each of these categories and my choice in bold):

Citizen Kane. It's like the Bible and Shakespeare on your desert island. It's the sine qua non of cinema.

Silent cinema: The General, Potemkin, Sunrise. I'd like to add Gance's Napoleon.

Asian: I'll have to stick with Kurosawa, because I haven't seen anything else. Seven Samurai. Perhaps Ray should be here too (not Nick, the other one).

European: obviously La Regle du Jeu. I notice, by the way, that Renoir's other masterpiece, La Grande Illusion is now down at 35. I'd better mention Fellini's 8 1/2, although I haven't seen it, not do I intend to. What kind of director puts his own name in the title of his film? There are a few French films I want to see, which appear on these polls, such as Le Jour se Leve and La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc. Le Salaire de la Peur

Art-house (same as above really): take your pick from any already mentioned, plus Bunuel. As a matter of fact I can't find Bunuel on the latest list. Perhaps people have finally twigged that all that time he was taking the piss. I'll pass on this.

Hollywood (classic): The Searchers, Some Like It Hot, Vertigo, 2001, Singin' in the Rain, My Darling Clementine, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, It's a Wonderful Life.

British: Lawrence of Arabia, The Third Man, and there ought to be a Powell and Pressburger film here. A Matter of Life and Death, possibly, or Black Narcissus.

Recent films: There aren't any in the poll. What, from the last 10 years will make it into the Hall of Fame? A Scorsese or Spielberg? Their best work is already more than 10 years old. Is Clint Eastwood's Letter from Iwo Jima going to put the seal on his incredible career?
My personal top ten of all-time greats:
Citizen Kane, plus

Potemkin
The Wild Bunch
The Searchers
Twelve o'clock High
The Scarlet Empress
Way Out West (Laurel & Hardy)
The General
Schindlers List
The Bride of Frankenstein
It's a Wonderful Life


Sunday, December 17, 2006

Peter Boyle

Peter Boyle has died.

I suppose most people remember his turn as the monster in Young Frankenstein, especially his song-and-dance routine with Puttin' on the Ritz. OK, that was good fun, but for real class acting you have to go back to The Friends of Eddie Coyle, where he played a shady character called Dillon.

Friends, directed by Peter Yates, is based on the novel by former Boston DA, George V Higgins, and incidentally provides Bob Mitchum with one of his finest roles. It's a fine, but forgotten film. I'm not sure it's even available on DVD.

Higgin's novels are unusual in that they are composed almost entirely of dialogue, rather like those of Ivy Compton-Burnett. It's no mean trick to advance the plot of a thriller purely with conversations but Higgins pulls it off in highly readable fashion. The film is also heavy on dialogue and remains thoughtful and downbeat throughout. Nonetheless it is absorbing and for my money one of the best gangster films ever made.

The 'friends' of the title is highly ironic, for no-one is to be trusted, least of all the cops, who conduct a favour-for-favour relationship with the various hoods involved.

Boyle's Dillon is a bartender, with fingers in many criminal pies. One of his 'friends' is Mitchum's small-timer, Eddie, trying to avoid prison and tempted to shop one of his other 'friends' in exchange for leniency. Dillon also is receiving his $50 a week from the cops. He is greasy, slippery, humourless and menacing, with his great bulk and slow, padding walk. He is also totally without scruple, and by the end of the film we find he is probably the most evil of all the dodgy characters involved.

It's a memorable performance, but Boyle's potential as a heavy - he was never going to be a romantic lead -was never realised. A lot of TV work came to him as the years passed and he seems to have retired into the sitcom Everybody Loves Raymond.

Monday, December 11, 2006

Getting sorted

Today I get my desk organised, sort all those bits of paper with notes on them, bring my database of videos and DVDs up to date, renew my library books, send out my Christmas cards and buy my Christmas presents.

I need to review this blog too, because I have got various series on the go and am getting a bit confused.

I've got the adaptation series. Story to screen. I've done why adapt and what is adapted. Next, I plan to do the refining process between the first treatment through the screenplay to the shooting script. After that I shall look at the changes that can occur during filming. And finally, the post -production alterations that might be deemed necessary.

Then I have my list of criteria for lists. Put like that it sounds a bit daft, which it no doubt is. Anyway, coming up are canonical, prejudice, snobbery, familiarity, sentimentality, the herd-like mentality, cultishness, genre, star, iconoclasm, politics, innovation. It's going to keep me busy all year.

I also want to do more reviews. I plan to post comments on IMdb - http://www.imdb.com/
and link them here. I want to do The Wild Bunch, the Searchers, High Noon, and The Getaway. If they all seem too obvious, I also have in mind Hell Drivers, Ride Lonesome, Three Godfathers and Written on the Wind. I have already sumbitted my thoughts on Stan (the TV play) and Twelve o'clock High.

I suppose I should write about films I don't like. Perhaps life is too short. On the other hand something needs to be said against over-praised works like The Graduate, Rio Bravo, Klute, The Italian Job, Ben-Hur, Titanic, Gladiator, If, The Wicker Man, Easy Rider and Star Wars in its entirety. Now there's a good series.

Saturday, December 09, 2006

John Walsh did it, why not me?

I might one day. That is, write an autobiography of my formative years through the films I saw.


He called his Are you talking to me? I shall call mine I wouldn't have it any other way, or maybe It ain't like it used to be (but it'll do). Here's a few notes.

Early childhood

Well, this is back to ole Davy, Davy Crockett, King of the Wild Frontier.

This Disney film was probably the first Western I ever saw. Except, it wasn't a Western. I'm a bit purist about what I call a Western, and this film is ante-bellum, and therefore too early. Civil War films aren't Westerns either, nor are modern-day films like Hud. I reccognise, of course, that Hud draws on the genre and could have been placed a 100 years earlier in time. I don't really approve of comedy Westerns either, and certainly not musicals.

So why do I break my own rule and call it a Western? Simply because it has a hero who has the Westerner's morality. By 'morality' I mean an outlook on life and way of behaving. Crockett, like Shane or Ethan Edwards, is a loner, an individualist, more concerned with doing what he thinks is right than in conforming. Thus, he has a family, and while he does not neglect them, he's rarely there; he loses them anyway. He joins the army, but for his own reasons, and as a scout or hunter, which makes him semi-detached from the organisation. He respects his enemies, the Creeks, and is not racist. As a politician, he is a maverick and behaves quixotically in rebelling against the President, thereby sacrificing his career.

He was always dissatisfied, constantly on the moving, constantly moving towards an unreachable frontier, physically and intellectually.

I do not know what the real Crockett was like, but no matter. The screen character was a role model, and so were the classic Western heroes who followed, flaws and all. I am not saying that I consciously tried to imitate them in some childish, playful way, but that their take on life gradually seeped into my sub-conscious. And I expect there was always something in my character that responded to their dislike of joining, their questioning, their self-reliance.

There is obviously a strong streak of selfishness in this. It is libertarian, but not always liberal. It can be male chauvinist, if not outright misogynist. It is obviously anti-socialist, but sometimes it can be anti-social also.

But films in the fifties were moral. Heroes did 'the right thing', without needing the law or God to tell them what it was. Life was complicated, a series of choices and mistakes, compromises and conflicts.

In the film we did not see Davey die, just as we did not see Butch and Sundance die fifteen years later. The reason for this wasn't just that this was a film aimed at children and that his death might upset us. It was also pointing out the immediate translation of the man into myth. There's no need for a hope of heaven when a life itself can be celebrated forever on earth.

Pre-adolescence

I decided early that the name 'Walt Disney' on a film was a guarantee of entertainment and, being a completist, I probably carried on going to see anything with that hallmark long after I could use my age as an excuse. It's easy to be snobbish about Disney and forget that he produced Treasure Island, 20,000 Leagues under the Sea and The Great Locomotive Chase. I still remember Tonka and The Nine Lives of Elfego Baca, films which I have never had the opportunity to see again in 45 years. So they must have had something.

Girls didn't feature at this stage. Certainly not in real life and in films they merely delayed the action and generally got in the way. But there was the occasional crush. I shiver with shame now to confess that I had a crush on Hayley Mills and once crept furtively into a cinema to see Pollyanna. I didn't like films with children and I certainly didn't like girls but this one I watched. I even ordered the book and read it.

Actually Pollyanna is not a bad film. Disney again. Efficiently made - I guess it was Robert Stevenson - with an excellent cast, including Wyman, Menjou, Moorehead and Malden. But at the time the only attraction was the safely sexless Hayley.

Adolescence

It may have been the sixties, but I certainly wasn't swinging. In fact I'm not sure many people were, apart from the ones who always had, the aristocrats, the entertainers, the celebrities, etc. I spent the years collecting weekly pop charts and collating them into annual league tables, struggling at school and overcoming a stammer. I did that, by the way, by prefixing difficult dentals with a silent vowel - eg '(er)destination'. By the time I was sixteen I was chairman of the debating society, which proves that it worked.

I was missing out on the cinema. It was years later before I caught up with the British kitchen sink films, or later Hitchcock. I did see Lawrence and Zhivago, but I wasn't a fan, let alone a movie buff at this stage.

Girls, however, were a problem, not one helped by the constant enquiries of adults as to whether or not I was 'courting'. It was the usual angst of a shy teenager and I retreated into religion. If I ask myself now why someone who already considered himself an individualist outsider should sacrifice his reason to a set of unprovable doctrines, I can only reply that I was seduced by a need for certainty. I went through a left-wing socialist stage at the same time.

In both cases I was, however, an extremist. That meant I could still feel different and rebellious. My religion was evangelical, which meant I could condemn Catholics as superstitious, Anglicans as woolly, and the rest of the world as doomed sinners. Great fun!

When I deigned to think about women, my taste showed no signs of improving. The only physical fight I ever got into at school was over the relative merits of Cilla Black and Dionne Warwick. Yes, I was Cilla's champion. For Christ's sake!

Then one day, on TV, I saw Kathy Kirby. At that moment I grew up. Soon I was mourning the death of Marilyn Monroe and singing 'Boo, Boo, Bi-doo' with tears in my eyes. I was going to see Hammer films, especially if they starred Ingrid Pitt. I remember Karen Steele in Corman movies. I rediscovered Shirley Anne Field and Shirley Eaton and Honor Blackman as Pussy Galore (in my innocence I didn't get it).

The first girl I ever invited out -to the pictures of course - was nothing like those goddesses, but she was a couple of years older than I, and therefore reasonably well-developed. Zulu was the chosen film, one of my all-time favourites, so much so that I think I could turn the sound down and quote the dialogue from memory. The loneliness of command, the heroism of the soldiers, the war chant of the Zulus, the competitive singing in return of Men of Harlech, image piled upon image as body is piled upon body. Wonderful stuff. I'm glad the bitch stood me up, because it meant I could watch the film uninterrupted by adolescent fumbling

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

The Prestige

Yesterday I got our new TV working. More or less. For some reason my DVDs are all in black and white, but no doubt all will be well. It's a 28 inch wide-screen and, as luck would have it, got it's first real test later when TCM showed Lawrence of Arabia. Now that is a test, and it passed with flying colours. Lawrence is a truly wonderful film. The more often I see it the more I admire the dialogue, the wealth of great actors, the music, the photography and Lean's great vision and, most of all, his control of all the elements.

I once read a criticism of the film, namely that for all its scope and scale, there is little at its centre, that we know Lawrence no better at the end of the film than we do at the beginning.

Isn't that the point?

But my raptures over my new TV were soon put into perspective, because I went to the pictures later. I do this rarely and I always realise afresh that no TV, however big and expensive can compare with the wondrous experience of sitting in the dark trying to take in that huge screen, which can with equal ease show you a raging storm at sea or a single drop of water on a woman's cheek.

If only I could pause the film sometimes and go make a cup of tea.

I went to see The Prestige. Good cast, up-and-coming director, intriguing story, technically brilliant. But half an hour too long, and basically a daft story which could not bear the weight of its treatment. Hollywood would have made it with more dash and pace 50 years ago. Maybe Hitchcock. Cagney and Bogart doing the Bale and whatisname roles.