Other Dashiell Writings:

Flicks - March
None But the Lonely Heart
The Friends of Eddie Coyle
Kes
Number Seventeen (1932)
Impromptu (1991)

Darkest Before the Dawn:
A Film Snob's Favorites of '09

Flicks - October
The Flowers of St. Francis
The Queen of Spades (1949)
Seventh Heaven (1927)
Hitler: a Film From Germany
Days of Being Wild

Days of Rage
The Baader-Meinhof Complex

Flicks - June
State of the Union (1948)
Such Is Life (2000)
Sátántangó
Rio Bravo
The Long Goodbye (1973)

In the Loop

The Hurt Locker

Flicks - March
Why Change Your Wife?
Quai des Orfèvres
Chloé in the Afternoon
Hearts of Darkness
Journey Into Fear (1943)

Flicks - January 2009
The Great Moment (1944)
Love Affair (1939)
Destiny (1921)
Spring in a Small Town
Born to Kill (1947)

Che

Spare Change?
A Film Snob's Favorites of '08

Flicks - October 2008
The Mirror (1975)
Ministry of Fear
The Eagle (1925)
The Cow (1969)
Performance (1970)

A Christmas Tale

Sicklied O'er
Synecdoche, New York

Love is Not Enough
A Girl Cut in Two

Flicks - July 2008
My Own Private Idaho
Let's Get Lost (1988)
Inauguration of
the Pleasure Dome
Vidas Secas
The Body Snatcher (1945)

Tricky Business
Tell No One
Frozen River (2008)

Homeward Bound
Brick Lane (2007)
My Winnipeg

Flicks - April 2008
Applause (1929)
Daughters of the Dust
The Nun (1966)
When a Woman
Ascends the Stairs
Alibi (1929)

Blood Brothers
Shotgun Stories
My Brother is an Only Child

Paranoid Park

Flicks - December 2007
Robinson Crusoe (1954)
Blind Husbands
Trust (1990)
Ulysses' Gaze
The Parson's Widow

Forsaken
The Orphanage
4 Months, 3 Weeks,
and 2 Days

Knee-Deep in
the Big Maudit

A Film Snob's
Favorites of '07

Blood for Oil
There Will Be Blood

Flicks - September 2007
The Childhood
of Maxim Gorky
Great Expectations (1946)
I Married a Witch
Seven Men From Now
Visages D'Enfant

Wild Man
Into the Wild

Eastern Promises

No End in Sight

The Mind is
a Terrible Thing

Inland Empire

Flicks - June 2007
The War Game (1965)
Big Deal on Madonna Street
The General Died at Dawn
Yolanda and the Thief
Anthology of Surreal Cinema

Nowhere to Run
Black Book (2006)
Mafioso

Flicks - Mar 2007
Julius Caesar (1953)
Man on the Tracks
Miss Julie (1951)
Twelve O'Clock High
Dishonored (1931)

The Big Picture
Zodiac (2007)

Armies of Night
Army of Shadows
The Lives of Others

Flicks - December 2006
The Blue Bird (1918)
Raw Deal (1948)
Eyes Without a Face (1960)
Crane World
Tumbleweeds (1925)

Apocalypso Dreams
A Film Snob's
Favorites of '06

Men & Children
Children of Men
Cave of the Yellow Dog

Flicks October 2006
Quentin Durward (1955)
Méliès the Magician
Wisconsin Death Trip
Early Summer
Le Beau Serge

Lucid Dreaming
The Science of Sleep
Old Joy

Mutual Appreciation
plus: This Film Is
Not Yet Rated

Flicks - August 2006
"G" Men
College (1927)
Sunday Daughters
Thérèse (1986)
Two Seconds

Magic Tricks
Room (2005)
The Illusionist (2006)

Flicks- June 2006
The Seventh Seal
Criss Cross (1949)
Now, Voyager (1942)
White Nights (1957)
Platform (2000)

A Scanner Darkly

Darkness on the
Edge of Town

Twelve and Holding
Lemming

Flicks - April 2006
Under the Sun of Satan
Life is Sweet (1990)
Noah's Ark (1928)
The Miracle Woman
Let's Go With Pancho Villa

Sophie Scholl: the Final Days

The President's Last Bang

Darwin's Nightmare

Flicks - February 2006
Stray Dog (1949)
A Generation
Regeneration (1915)
Viva Villa! (1934)
Hearts and Minds (1974)

Why We Fight

Since Otar Left...
plus: Ballets Russes

Flicks - December 2005
Dames (1934)
Bay of Angels
No Fear, No Die
Foreign Correspondent (1940)
The Citadel (1938)

Signs and Wonders
A Film Snob's Favorites of '05

The Passenger (1975)

The Squid and the Whale
plus Henri Langlois: The Phantom of the Cinematheque

Flicks - October 2005
The More the Merrier (1943)
The Man Who Laughs (1928)
Die Nibelungen (1924)
Salvatore Giuliano
The Cameraman (1928)

The Flicks Archives

 

 

 

LE CERCLE ROUGE
(Jean-Pierre Melville, 1970).

Corey (Alain Delon), a thief just released from prison, encounters an escaped killer named Vogel (Gian-Maria Volonté) by chance, and they team up with an alcoholic ex-cop (Yves Montand) to pull off a major jewel heist.

Melville was obsessed with the image of the cool, almost emotionless criminal—a character type that he returned to repeatedly. In this film the idea is taken almost to the point of parody, with an abundance of long and medium shots and a focus on the wordless coordination of the thieves. The heist sequence is a deliberately abstract version of the robbery in Jules Dassin’s Rififi (1955), a movie Melville regretted not being able to do himself. But despite the stellar cast, and the fine color photography by Henri Decaë, the picture seems somewhat negligible compared to Melville’s earlier efforts in the crime genre, such as Le Doulos or Le Samourai.

The viewer’s interest inevitably shifts to the police inspector chasing the crooks, played with verve by the comic actor André Bourvil. He provides what there is of a philosophical theme—the notion that there is no such thing as an innocent man. This isn't as weighty as it sounds, since the trio at the film’s center is so indistinct in motive and character. Still, it’s a Melville film, and as such displays something of that director’s bracing style.

LE PLAISIR (Max Ophüls, 1952).

After the huge popular success of La Ronde, Ophüls’ adaptation of the famous Arthur Schnitzler play, he turned to his screenwriter Jacques Natanson for another literary effort, this time based on three stories by Guy De Maupassant. As the title indicates, they all deal with pleasure, from the worldly, paradoxical viewpoint of that great author. In point of fact, the film is really one long story sandwiched by two brief ones.

“Le Masque” which opens the film, tells of an old man who goes out dancing every night wearing a mask that portrays a younger face. A doctor brings the man home one night after he collapses during the dance, and we see how, behind the scenes, the old man’s long-suffering wife (Gaby Morlay) accepts her husband’s strange habit as part of her fate. The camera practically whirls with the dancers in the nightclub scene, contrasting with the death-in-life stasis at home.

We then move to the justly famous “Le Maison Tellier,” about a brothel that provides the sole escape for bored provincial husbands in a French town. In a stroke of genius, Ophüls never takes us directly into the brothel, but peers through the windows with slow vertical tracking shots, by which we catch glimpses of the talk and merriment within. Then, on the occasion of her niece’s first communion, the brothel’s madam (Madeleine Renaud) closes her house down for a weekend so that her employees can accompany her to her niece’s country town. Here a simple carpenter, played by Jean Gabin in his only Ophüls film, feels drawn to Rosa (Danielle Darrieux), one of the prostitutes. The excitement of preparation, and the beauty of the church ceremony itself, brings up wistful emotions in the women, who mourn their lost innocence and then return, apparently none the worse, to the world they know. In the church scene, Ophüls creates a beautiful mix of humor and tenderness, and also displays some of his virtuoso camera movement, as we follow a shaft of light up to the church steeple and back down again.

In the final tale, “Le Modele,” Simone Simon plays a young woman who falls in love with the artist (Daniel Gélin) for whom she models. He tires of her clinging ways, and plans to marry a wealthy woman, which drives the poor model to despair. In the end, suffering unites the two more effectively than love ever could.

The two short segments highlight the melancholy aspects of pleasure. In the first case, a man prefers illusion to reality; in the last, regret puts the seal on passion. In both cases, the unfortunate situations of women produce a muted rebellion. The long middle section represents a greater acceptance of life, despite unfulfilled possibilities, and the undertone of sadness is counterbalanced by a gentle humor and tolerance for human foibles. In this, Ophüls and Natanson considerably softened the original Maupassant story. The Darrieux and Gabin characters are not objects of pity—we feel for them even as we smile.

In Le Plaisir, as well as in other great films of his late period, Ophüls seems to have created something new in narrative technique. The editing isn’t used as a means to advance the plot. Events unfold in longer takes that convey more of a feeling of natural time. This new kind of rhythm seems more expansive and yet somewhat hesitant, as if we weren’t exactly sure what will happen next, as in real life. For those used to a classic style, this can take some getting used to. One must settle in and adopt the attitude of the compassionate observer.

THE FAR COUNTRY
(Anthony Mann, 1954).

James Stewart plays a cattleman named Jeff Webster, who travels to the Klondike with his pal Ben (Walter Brennan) to seek a fortune in gold. There he is confronted by a cheerfully dishonest judge (John McIntire) who tries to steal his cattle and cheat all the miners out of their gold claims.

The trek to Alaska has a nice expansive feel to it. Mann has a strong sense of the passage of time, and the location shooting in the Canadian Rockies (the great William Daniels was the d.p.) is gorgeous. Once we arrive in the mining town, with its drab studio sets, the film becomes more pedestrian. The plot is engaging enough to carry us through, but the powerful element here is Stewart, playing a selfish, if laconically charming, character. Jeff is basically out for himself; he’s not interested at all in helping other people. At one point, after some companions ignore warnings of a possible avalanche, he lets them go with a shrug of indifference. Stewart really makes this an element of a believable human being, rather than just a plot device. The tough, going-it-alone aspect of the character is part of what makes him likable. It’s a fascinating performance—Stewart stretching his star persona to portray a difficult, conflicted man—and it sustains the interest of the film, which otherwise is somewhat weak in parts.

There are two love interests. Ruth Roman plays a saloon owner who gets along with Jeff but compromises herself by also allying with the crooked judge. Corinne Calvet plays a spunky French Canadian girl who is in love with Jeff—her childish mannerisms are annoying. The film ends with a shootout that I found to be a disappointment. Nevertheless this is an entertaining western with a lot of nice touches and compelling work from James Stewart.

HIGH AND LOW
(Akira Kurosawa, 1963).

Gondo (Toshirô Mifune), an executive for a major shoe company, has mortgaged all he owns in a bid to wrest control of the business from his incompetent bosses. But on the eve of his impending triumph, an unknown criminal, intending to snatch Gondo’s son, kidnaps his chauffeur’s son instead. Gondo faces financial ruin if he pays the ransom, or devastating shame if he allows his servant’s child to be killed.

The script is based on a crime novel by Ed McBain, but Kurosawa’s treatment is among the most experimental of his career. The film, shot in widescreen black and white, begins inside Gondo’s spacious American-style mansion on a hill overlooking the city of Yokohama. It stays there for over an hour, with long takes and tracking shots moving freely within the rooms, from the opening conversation between Gondo and his co-shareholders, through the receiving of the phone calls from the kidnapper, impassioned discussions with his wife and his trusted secretary, and the arrival of the police followed by debates with them about what to do. This entire first act seems almost like a filmed play, and the viewer may wonder if we will ever break out of the confines of Gondo’s house.

The film’s second act, however, concerns the search for the kidnapper, when a huge police investigation, headed by Chief Detective Tokura (Tatsuya Nakadai), methodically pursues its man. Not interested in the traditional “whodunit” form, Kurosawa reveals the identity of the kidnapper (Tsutomo Yamazaki), a drug-dealing medical student living in squalor within sight of Gondo’s mansion, and this provides a clue to the film’s underlying purpose and structure.

For the “high and low” of the title, which can also be translated as “heaven and hell,” is the contrast between the wealthy and privileged, epitomized by Gondo, and the urban underclass, struggling every day just to survive. The first section in Gondo’s house displays the relative isolation of the rich (and in a sense, their confinement), while the theatrical style highlights the world of personal relationships and dealings made possible by the characters’ social elevation. In the “lower” world of the city, the realm of the kidnapper, everything is fluid and uncertain, and the struggle for survival brings out the more selfish and predatory aspects of the human character. The police are the point of contact between the two worlds—at first I marveled that such a huge team would be assembled to work on one case, but it is soon evident that Gondo’s status as a person of consequence, a public figure who has gained a certain amount of fame and sympathy because of press coverage of the kidnapping, determines the level of time and resources devoted to the manhunt.

The later sections include some fascinatingly lurid glimpses into the underside of Japan’s urban economic boom, including a scene in a seedy nightclub that almost seems like parody today. There’s a wonderful moment in which the kidnapper unknowingly encounters Gondo in the street and asks for a light. If you’re not paying attention, you could miss it, which brings up another unusual feature of this movie. Kurosawa doesn’t use fast editing to accentuate dramatic situations here; everything is paced with an eye to naturalism, to an emphasis on the space within which action occurs rather than the focus on time which is more typically employed in crime or suspense pictures.

Kurosawa was a humanist through and through, so his depiction of class is unsullied by hatred or caricature. Mifune’s character is gruff and often self-centered, but he also follows principles and possesses a good deal of integrity. In the long view, the kidnapper can be seen as a victim of Japan’s caste system, and Kurosawa makes him a fully-rounded character, but neither does he hesitate to show the man’s impotent resentment and corruption, extending even to murder. With our ingrained habits of choosing to identify with a hero, it is only natural to root for Gondo and against the kidnapper, but in the film’s brilliant final scene we are forced to confront a greater reality.

A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
(Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger, 1946).

David Niven plays Peter Carter, an English bomber pilot who wires a distress call to headquarters and reaches a young American woman named June (Kim Hunter). His parachute is torn to bits and his plane is going down. Believing this to be his life’s last human contact, he says a moving farewell to June before jumping out of the plane to what should be certain death. But he wakes up alive on the ground, after which he runs into June and they fall in love. Unfortunately it turns out that heaven made a bureaucratic error, and that he should have died. The heavenly administration sends an angel to bring Peter back, but he refuses, while June tries to help Peter with what she believes are his hallucinations, with the help of her friend, the brilliant doctor Frank Reeves (Roger Livesey).

The story is a kind of Here Comes Mr. Jordan in reverse, but with a less earnest, more tongue-in-cheek attitude to life after death. Here the afterlife is in black-and-white, in serious contrast with the beautiful Jack Cardiff color photography of the sequences on earth, and appears to be a sort of parody of certain idealist notions about a socialist utopia, with everything arranged like an efficient government agency, the newly dead arriving in a receiving station where they give their names to officials to be processed before they enter on their afterlife proper. This is amusing as far as it goes, but eventually the device wears thin, as I believe it’s bound to do in these kinds of stories. I’m not a fan of this sub-genre, and not only because I don’t believe in an afterlife. Even if I suspend my disbelief, which I am more than willing to do, treatments of this theme almost always trivialize the subject through various unexamined assumptions that render the supposed drama of the situation absurd.

There are, however, rewards to be had from a Powell-Pressburger film. The opening sequence, with Niven talking to Hunter on the wireless, is superb. There is a general high-spirited energy to the acting, with the underrated Livesey a standout in that regard. And for the most part, the picture looks gorgeous. But the story takes a turn in its last third or so that makes it fall flat. Without revealing too much, I will say that there occurs in heaven a sort of trial to determine whether Peter gets to stay on earth or not. Raymond Massey turns up as the prosecutor, an American who was killed by the British in the Revolutionary War. Since Peter wants to stay alive because of his love for an American woman, the trial becomes a debate about the merits of England versus the United States. This is very puzzling, unless one knows that the film was produced on the request of the Ministry of Information, to help repair declining Anglo-American relations. Well, perhaps the issue was of some moment to audiences at the time. Judged on its own terms as part of the dramatic structure, it stops the movie dead in its tracks.

In addition, I found all the high-flown talk about the power of love overcoming death and so forth to clash with the film’s otherwise witty and worldly wise tone. In fact the real problem may start earlier in the film, when the script loses interest in the relationship between Peter and June, spiraling off into a lot of cosmic theatrical machinery that is never interesting enough to overcome one’s disbelief in the premise.

Nevertheless, this is not a bad film—not a film that you want to walk out of before seeing the end, not a film that insults you. Powell and Pressburger never made a film like that. It’s a serviceable, polished, often entertaining piece of work. Many people adore it, in fact, but I place it firmly in the lower tier of their accomplishments.


2010 Chris Dashiell
CineScene