The Last Picture Show July 28, 2006
Posted by clydefro in : Classic Films, 1970s , add a comment
Peter Bogdanovich’s film The Last Picture Show
Numerous characters emerge in The Last Picture Show. Its cast is deservedly famous and most people know that they were virtually unknown, save Ben Johnson, at the time of its release. The actor who was unable to break out was the film’s lead, Timothy Bottoms. Bottoms plays Sonny, a normal high school senior with little ambition who probably sees his hometown as the place he’ll someday be buried. The film takes place over one year as Sonny and his high school friends Duane (played by the young Jeff Bridges) and Jacy (Cybill Shepherd in her first acting role) go from losing football games to graduating and trying to move on with their lives. Sonny gets involved with his coach’s wife, Ruth Popper (Cloris Leachman as an original desperate housewife and who deserved every bit of the Oscar she won here), and learns life lessons from “Sam the Lion” (Johnson, who probably won his Oscar for the beautiful monologue he has while rolling cigarettes and fishing with Sonny) . There are many great performances in the film and a lot happens, but there’s not much plot and I mean that in the most flattering way possible.
The beauty of The Last Picture Show is that it just drifts along like the tumbleweeds and dirt we see Billy (played by Timothy Bottoms’ real-life brother Sam) sweeping throughout the film. Each viewing is a little richer than the last because of this. We get to know the characters and their flaws as the film progresses. In the adults we see the teenagers’ futures and, slowly, Sonny sees this as well. Billy’s tragic fate seems to stir up something inside Sonny and he realizes the innocence of youth can’t last. The final scene between Sonny and Ruth offers some hope that he has begun to take responsibility for his actions and, if we pretend the sequel made twenty years later doesn’t exist, the audience is left wondering what will happen to these characters.
The soundtrack consists of era-specific country and western songs, none more memorable than Hank Williams’ “Why Don’t You Love Me” which serves as the first and last song heard. I don’t know if it’s just the catchiness of the song or something more, but I’ve associated that song with the film since I first saw it a decade ago. In a nice touch, each song in the film coincides with a character actually playing the song via radio, record player or jukebox. The black and white cinematography also works well to convey the film’s 1950s setting. Bogdanovich claims Orson Welles suggested he use black and white, not because of the period, but to show the depth the director was looking for in certain scenes. Regardless of the reason, the film is better off without color, poignantly suggesting the lack of hope for most of the film’s characters.
Peter Bogdanovich has become an unintentional allegory of what can happen to a talented director when he makes a few unwise decisions and lets his arrogance stir him in the wrong direction. He made two of the decade’s best films in this and Paper Moon
Collateral July 23, 2006
Posted by clydefro in : Modern Films, 2000s , add a comment
It’s been about two years since Michael Mann’s Collateral
Movies that take place over one night have a special quality about them. Martin Scorsese’s wonderful After Hours immediately springs to mind as an example of this. Using this tempate, Collateral begins with Jamie Foxx’s cab driver character, Max, picking up a young female attorney (played by Jada Pinkett Smith) and taking her to a federal office building. As Max is just about to drive away, he gets his next fare, Vincent, who he will unwillingly spend the rest of the night driving around Los Angeles from one murder to the next. Vincent is, of course, a hitman played by Tom Cruise, the world’s biggest movie star. Except he’s not. He’s actually a gray-haired, non-descript and ruthless killer devoid of any movie star mannerisms or charm. In short, Maverick is nowhere in sight. Cruise is often not given enough credit for his acting ability. Accused of coasting by on his considerable charm, people seem to forget the fine work he’s done in such films as Rain Man and his three Academy Award nominations for Born on the Fourth of July, Jerry Maguire and the significant departure Magnolia. In Collateral, Cruise may have turned in his best performance to date by stripping himself of his movie star qualities and portraying a character who’s ruthless and businesslike to a fault. “This is my job,” Vincent says to Max, and the viewer gets the feeling that Vincent has completely removed any nagging moral questions about what he does for a living in favor of viewing his murders as mere occupational projects required to collect a check.
Despite Cruise’s top billing and considerable star power, Collateral is really about Max, a man who’s been kidding himself into thinking that he’s been driving a cab as a transition into owning his own limousine service for twelve years. Jamie Foxx is impressive in the role, arguably even better than his Oscar-winning performance in Ray the same year. Gone is all evidence of cockiness or confidence that’s been present in most of Foxx’s other roles. While Ray might have been mimickry on the highest level for Foxx, Collateral allowed him to embody a completely different person and show remarkable acting skill. As Max is given the opportunity to snap out of the doldrums of being a cab driver, Foxx is near perfect and completely believable as the transformed hero.
At two hours, Collateral is impressively lean compared to some of Mann’s other work. Not a moment is wasted and the editing is seamless. Even though the characters are sufficiently introduced, there’s no extraneous dips into their private lives. Even Max’s visit to his mother at the hospital becomes an integral part of the plot, leading up to Max impersonating Vincent and his meeting with Felix (Javier Bardem in a great cameo). The lack of unnecessary fat in Collateral is especially evident on multiple viewings where the viewer can let the story move along organically without wondering what’s going to happen next. When I recently watched the film, I noticed that each scene transitions effortlessly and at just the right time. This is no doubt helped by having the action shift locales with each of Vincent’s victims, keeping things as fresh as possible.
Not to discount Cruise and Foxx, but the most important participant in Collateral might be director Michael Mann. As in films like Heat and Manhunter, here Mann elevates what could have been a basic action movie into something much more. No other director in Hollywood today is as talented at putting his own vision into otherwise standard fare as Mann. Whether it’s the memorable use of music in key spots or the brilliant choice to shoot Collateral on digital video to capture Los Angeles at night, Mann frequently makes bold, interesting choices that are, more often than not, highly successful. He is an inspired filmmaker who makes mainstream, big budget movies for wide audiences that often manage to withstand the scrutiny of more discriminating filmgoers as well.
Bad Timing July 19, 2006
Posted by clydefro in : Classic Films, 1980s , add a comment
I try to not write about films that I’ve only seen once and feel like I don’t fully understand their significance. Having said that, I recently watched Nicolas Roeg’s Bad Timing
Garfunkel plays Dr. Alex Linden, a psychoanalyst working as a professor at a Viennese university. Through a dynamic series of edits, Roeg shows the audience how Linden meets and becomes involved with Milena Flaherty, played by Theresa Russell in a brave performance. The film opens with Milena being taken to a hospital via ambulance following a drug overdose. At the hospital, Linden is first questioned by Inspector Netusil (Harvey Keitel foregoing an Austrian accent) who then interrogates him at various points throughout the film on his involvement in Milena’s overdose. Denholm Elliott is along for the ride as well, playing Milena’s Czech husband.
The most striking thing about Bad Timing is its editing. As in other Roeg films, the director alternates between the present and the past and the audience must make sense of the puzzle-like composition. In this particular film, though, the fragmented nature is never severe enough to confuse the attentive viewer to the point of no return. We understand what is happening even though we’re not sure exactly where everything fits just yet. One particularly memorable sequence is when surgeons make an incision in Milena’s neck immediately after we’ve seen Alex and her in one of the film’s many erotically charged scenes.
One can look at Garfunkel’s performance as either appropriately detached given the oddly obsessive nature of the character or as blandly uncharismatic resulting from his lack of acting ability. I’m still undecided, but leaning towards the latter. Watching the film, I had trouble figuring out what Milena was ever attracted to in Linden and Garfunkel’s lack of emotion was a key factor in this. I suppose the effects of timing and coincidence hover over the film enough that the two lovers being such opposites may be an essential element, but the idea that Milena would be drawn to Alex was a distraction for me nevertheless. On the other hand, Garfunkel’s mostly lethargic acting does infuse the climactic scene between his character and the nearly comatose Milena with an additional shock value. The other performances fare better and Russell is particularly quite good, if almost too enthusiastic especially when compared to Garfunkel. If you can get past Keitel being somewhat miscast as a Viennese inspector, his performance is fine as well.
Despite its flaws, however, Bad Timing manages to stick with you and roll around inside your head for a good while. When films are capable of making you think without being overly manipulative, something worthwhile must be present and Roeg was a master of this in his prime. His films are ideal for multiple viewings, when the audience can pay less attention to the plot and instead focus on other interesting aspects such as taking a closer look at the characters. The viewer can peel back the first, superficial layer and look deeper inside the film. One example of this in Bad Timing might be Roeg’s use of paintings by the artist Gustav Klimt. I also found The Who’s “Who Are You” to be an interestingly appropriate choice and somewhat jarring given its unique inclusion. It’s rare to see a film use a single rock song since we usually hear multiple instances of rock music if any at all. The song’s use is timed perfectly as we see Alex watching Milena from afar. The notion of spying or watching that he had lectured on at the university is perhaps revisited through Alex’s actions here.
Overall, Bad Timing is certainly worthwhile viewing but seeing it once may not be enough to fully grasp everything that’s going on. It’s obvious Roeg has a reason behind his choices and has much more talent than fancy camera tricks . What’s less obvious is exactly what his motivations are at times and whether the audience is meant to comprehend them. Regardless, Bad Timing works best not as a thriller or mystery, but as an exploration of the two main characters’ obsessive natures. When viewed as a psychological journey, the film is much more interesting and compelling, which I assume was what the filmmakers intended anyway. Additionally, the Criterion Collection DVD supplements are helpful for digging deeper into the film. The interview with Theresa Russell, in particular, is very informative. I imagine most anyone interested in Roeg’s films would certainly find much to keep them occupied in Bad Timing and the DVD is a great resource for watching, rewatching and learning more about the film.
