The Dark of The Matinee

When coming to a film that is an established classic, it is often with a sense of trepidation. Will time have been kind, will the colossal weight of expectation, familiarity with the oft-quoted dialogue and having inadvertantly seen scenes and camera-moves in modern movies that either ape or are almost frame-by-frame rip-offs (something that took the edge off my very first viewing of Hitchcock’s Psycho) dull the experience? Will it, indeed can it, have the same impact it had on moviegoers seeing it upon release?

Whilst I hold such concerns when first viewing any film with a strong reputation, The Godfather, must have always looked a contender, surely? It has a cast to die for, consisting of such movie luminaries as Brando, Duvall, Keaton, and the then unknown Pacino; it’s directed by one of the great 70’s American directors, Francis Ford Coppola; the screenplay is adapted by Puzo (along with Coppola) from his novel of the same name - an epic tale telling the story of the Corleone family, a Scicilian crime organisation who, along with four other ‘families’ control various business interests in 40’s New York. This must always have been viewed as a sure-fire hit by the studio when filming? There surely could have been little doubt that this film would be a success, not to mention go on to break then box-office records, harvest three oscars from eleven nominations, and to regularly vie with Citizen Kane and Casablanca at the top of various ‘best movies’ lists?

Well, yes actually; As unlikely as it seems in hindsight, Paramount had many concerns both over cast and director, originally wanting to hire Sergio Leone (clearly noted by the studio as a director of ‘epics’) to helm, with Leone turning them down, citing his wish to not ‘glorify’ the Mafia/Italian-American Gangsters. Leone, of course, went on to ‘glorify’ Jewish-American gangsters in his equally-ambitious Once Upon a Time in America so, perhaps, the Italian-born director’s reticence was more due to the source material being too close to home. Once Coppola was hired Paramount continually sought to have him replaced, citing ill-founded concerns over budget and filming difficulties (Coppola actually finished principal photography for The Godfather 6 days under the 83 budgeted - something he was not able to repeat when shooting the testing Apocalypse Now - which shot for a staggering 238 days!).

Paramount also put up fierce arguments against the casting of Brando (they favoured Danny Thomas or Lawrence Olivier to play the Corleone Partriarch) - who’s reputation as a firebrand on-set preceeded him (Coppola paved the way for his hiring by having Paramount agree a reduced fee in lieu of a percentage of the gross) and were equally opposed to hiring the then-unknown Pacino, preferring the star-names of Ryan O’Neal or Robert Redford. Even the talent that auditioned for this movie was astounding; De Niro, Anthony Perkins and Mia Farrow all auditioned.

However, Coppola was able to assuage Paramount’s fears and hire one of the best casts that has ever been assembled in celluloid history, and what a cast; Brando, Pacino, Duvall, Keaton…. Brando, despite his akward reputation, cements his place as the best actor of his generation, by nuancing his performance as Don of the Corleone family with warmth, kindness and a patient maturity - not virtues that had previously been applied to gangsters in prior films. This was something that shone through in Mario Puzo’s novel - the importance of the ‘family’ structure of the Scicillian crime families, and Coppola’s film eschews the gritty, realistic style that would become prevalent in the 70’s, such as that used in Friedkin’s The French Connection and instead has legendary cinematographer Gordon Willis use an orange-ish (oranges also being a motif utilised throughout the Godfather series - watch what happens after any scene in which oranges are present) palette during the Wedding and Scicily based scenes, reverting to a more muted, brown-ish hue for the New York interior scenes, which embues the photography with warmth and grounds the film within it’s 40’s time setting. The score by Nino Rota is one of the most recognisable film scores and adds another voice to help tell the tale, and steeps the film in atmosphere.

Despite Brando’s staggering performance, the generous, though never numbing, running time allows space for characterization and character-development by almost all the principal actors, none more so than Pacino in the first of many virtuoso performances he would deliver in his career as he (and it has to be said De Niro) would go on to near-match Brando in the acting stakes. Pacino is not in his later ’shouty-angry’ mode here, yet he still capitvates as the young Michael Corleone, the WWII hero son (one of four) of Vito Corleone and the one whom Vito had wanted to protect from the ‘family business’, hoping he would go on to become a Senator or attain a similar, legitimate position.

It’s James Caan’s hot-headed Sonny, the eldest son of Vito Corleone, played with Caan’s distinctive inner-anger and sharp delivery, who sets in motion events that will force Michael into hiding, after he takes over running the day-to-day family business following an assassination attempt on the Don, with his vengeful, bullish approach causing big rifts between the rival families - an approach which is at loggerheads to Vito Corleone’s patient, diplomatic handling of the politics and etiquette that keeps the balance between the families.

Puzo’s story, spanning some 10 years from 1945, is of such scale that it would take another article to do it justice, but it certainly must have been a mammoth task to adapt the book to a screenplay, as acknowledged by it’s Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar, and it’s paced just ‘right’, allowing time to tell the story, and it tells it without faltering, padding or losing focus, it really is an astounding achievement. The script never becomes overly-sentimental, but still contains warmth and emotion, the violence rarely feels gratuitous (albeit Coppola did acquiesce to Paramount’s request for more ‘excitement’ by inserting some further violent scenes) and the template of criminal syndicates having morals and boundaries (as demonstrated when the Corleones’ anguish over the neccessity to do away with Sterling Hayden’s Captain McCluskey, who is in the pay of another, rival family) would be taken as de facto and used in numerous movies to follow.

So, did it live up to the hype, the baggage that accompanies a first viewing of a classic, much-loved film? Did it come across as fresh and with as much impact as it would have on it’s release? Well, yes, it did utterly transcend the weight of expectation, leaving me feeling rather silly to have had any such doubts - I found it a rivetting view, feeling fully immersed in the politics and family ties that underpinned these crime syndicates, even sympathising with the Corleones, especially Michael Corleone’s predicament when he finds himself unable to resist the family pull and sense of loyalty and slowly becomes drawn into the family ‘business’ despite his Father having different hopes and ambitions for him.
This is an absolute masterpiece of cinema, and one that fully deserves both it’s reputation and it’s place in the highest echelons of the various AFi, IMDB and Critics lists where it can jostle for that elusive, ‘best film’ slot.

This is one of the lesser regarded 007 adventures, and I’m slightly at a loss to know why. There’s an effective, if convoluted, plot involving a renegade Soviet Union General, treasure smuggling, a circus and an atomic bomb! Louis Jourdan makes a good, if effette, baddie and Steven Berkoff overacts to marvellous effect as a renegade Russian Army General who, tired of seeing the USSR’s enormous advantage in traditional weaponry and troops neutured in treaty talks, wants to end the USSR’s policy of detente, even if it means nuking half of West Berlin to do so.

There is, it has to be said, some cheesyness in the film (”fill her up please”) and despite the fantastic setting of the Summer Palace in India the script uses a lot of lazy stereotypes in this portion of the film - Vijay playing the 007 theme on his snake chanter, the comments about curry etc coming over as a little xenophobic . But there’s a lot to enjoy, the plot and pace rarely sags, there is always a prevailing sense of threat that is built from the first scenes when 008 is ruthlessly knifed in the back by one of the sinister knife-throwing twins from Octopussy’s circus and it builds right until the big top ‘bomb’ scene. There’s a brilliant stand-off between Bond and General Orlov where Berkoff chews scenery and Moore really does exude authority in this - (he may be suave in comparison to Connery’s bit of rough, but he IS Bond), a superb fight on top of the speeding circus train and the car chase/race to defuse a bomb with a brilliant car chase in which Bond nicks a local’s Alfasud and hangs the back end out something lovely whilst being pursued by what seems like half the West Berlin police (I’ve loved that car ever since that scene- “Nein, meine automobile”).

The stunts performed in the end scenes, and indeed throughout the film, are superb and knowing they were performed for real, with real danger inherent in the work (a stuntman sadly lost a leg filming the train-top portion of the film) makes them, to my mind, more involving than their CGI equivalent. If any proof was needed that CGI useage in a Bond movie should be kept to a minimum, the surfing scene in Die Another Day is a great example. This is not a full-on rant against CGI which is merely a tool, but my belief after seeing that 007 nadir convinced me that this series can stand-out by ignoring cgi actors for real stunt work where possible. It appears the 007 producers formed a similar opinion, given the reduced use of CGI in Casino Royale.

This is simply great entertainment and Moore, despite looking his age, delivers perhaps his most forceful 007 performance. Moore, realising the inevitable march of time, was perhaps right to want to make this his swansong and hang up his PPK - only to be coaxed out of retirement by EON for one last film….

I missed this at the cinema, probably because it got a limited release but picked it up on DVD as it sounded intriguing.

Intriguing is probably a good word to describe it. Noir-ish in feel and texture, it features Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Third Rock From The Sun) as a loner who investigates the circumstances surrounding his ex-girlfriend’s disappearance, with help from his Nerdish friend, The Brain. Feeling a little like a The Big Sleep but set on campus, he tracks down clues and infilrates the cliques and crime-rings that operate on and around the periphery of his High School. High School can be an isolating, confusing place for many teenagers, so it is a clever and suitable setting for a detective (which essentially is what this is) story.

The cinematography and subtle soundtrack help add to the Noir feel - there’s some nice use of contrasting light and shadow, and some scenes are deliberately shot from dutched angles to isolate the viewer, and in turn the protagonist, from the bigger picture.

Unfortunately, the unusual slang used by a lot of the characters is difficult to follow and the dialogue is often buried deep in the mix - a complaint I’ve noted from people who saw this at the cinema so it’s not simply that I have a rather crappy centre speaker (not helped by my R2 release not having subtitles and defaulting to the 2.0 soundtrack not the 5.1). I don’t normally have a problem with slang as it’s usually nuanced, in context and delivered in a familiar rhythm that I can pick up and usually from a good idea what the characters are saying - A Clockwork Orange is a great example - Anthony Burgess’ mixture of latin and soviet slang he wrote for the droogs seems to instantly make sense when read or indeed viewed in Kubrick’s searing movie adaptation.

However, part of my befuddledment is probably in as much part due to the effect most noirs have on me -they almost always reveal more of themselves on a second viewing and are more enjoyable as you start spotting clues or red-herrings.

So I can’t say whether I loved this and would put it into the minor classic bracket (technically it’s good enough) or not but it certainly gripped me throughout and should have rewatch value too. Definitely recommended viewing if you are a fan of noir or to enjoy Gordon-Levitt’s excellent portrayal.

At a time when many are debating whether HD-DVD / Bluray will achieve mass-market penetration or whether physical formats’ days are numbered, especially in an age where people routinely choose to download mp3s over their physical, better quality cd equivalent, the studios have invested heavily in this new premium packaging - perhaps in an attempt to add a ‘perceived value’ to DVD releases and these are already becoming very collectable, fetching inflated prices on Ebay for out of stock / deleted releases.

For us of a certain vintage (38 if you must ask) who witnessed the tail end of vinyl, and the fledgling days of home cinema formats like betamax, vhs and laserdisc - all formats which required a certain degree of routine and care to use and store safely, physical formats are entrenched in us - it’s what we are used to; the satisfaction of hearing the plop of a new arrival on the hall floor; opening the package with that oh so important tear strip (I HATE it when they don’t have one!); checking the artwork; opening the case and logging the dvd in profiler. Then the routine of firing up the a/v amp, the plasma and the dvd player, opening the tray, inserting the disc, carefully and waiting for it to load. Bliss! I’m even sad enough to enjoy a decent ‘menu.

So, steel books then: I adore them. They are so tactile, and the studios cannot be lazy in selecting their artwork for the case - it HAS to be clean, crisp and they tend to go for the original poster artwork or a variant thereof. They feel solid and expensive to hold and just, well valuable.

I only have a couple in my collection at present (Sin City Recut & the 4-disc Flags of Our Fathers / Letters from Iwo Jima set) but have Kingdom of Heaven 4-discer on the way along with The Day The Earth Stood Still (a bargain £4.98 at Amazon.co.uk). I also have my eye on a nice copy of Ridley Scott’s latest film American Gangster (a controlled, languid film with excellent performances from Washington & Crowe and a more ’street’ version of Scott’s trademark cinematography).

I’ve just realised whilst writing this that I’ve turned into my Dad - clinging onto, nay extolling the virtues of crusty old formats! My son, on the other hand, puts his discs into a multi-insert disc wallet and stuffs the cases into a cupboard.

So, if I do hang onto my physical formats, shiny steel books and tins - am I going to end up like one of these old curmudgeons who still had a quad tape player in their car well into the 1980’s and rattled on about it’s fidelity and it’s superiority over cassettes to everyone who would listen?

See Ono’s blog here: Downloading teh films for his article which inspired mine.

Noticed the Teaser Poster for the next Bond (no 22) - Quantum of Solace is out. I like it - it’s nice and stark.

To celebrate this small step towards the release of Quantum of Solace in November, I’ve made a wallpaper from the teaser poster, links below should you want it.

The first National Treasure movie came out of nowhere and rather stole the Da Vinci Code’s thunder by weaving a tale of masonic conspiracies into a fun treasure hunt.

This sequel - Book of Secrets, follows a similar template - this time crafting a conspiracy around an American Civil War confederate plot to discover the City of Gold in order to finance their efforts to secure victory. In this treasure hunt, Cage’s character is not only in pursuit of unimaginable treasure but also seeking to clear his Great Grandfather’s name as Thomas Gates has been smeared as a conspirator in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln (Presidents play a big part in this film) by Ed Harris’ antiquities collector whose motives for doing so are not yet clear.

The annoying sidekick Riley returns, not quite so annoying this time round, as do Gate’s girlfriend played by Diane Kruger and Jon Voight as his Dad. As with the rule of sequels - (same + more) - Gate’s Mother comes along for the ride (Helen Mirren) as she is needed both to decode an ancient Incan inscription and as a hostage for Ed Harris who, it seems, wants his hands on the treasure.

It’s the equal of the first film for the most part - the action scenes are much crisper (even the oldies in Voight and Mirren get to do some action stuff!), and the clues mostly make sense - with the involvement of the US President and the final reveal all following the same logic. A sequel is also nicely set-up and, in a refreshing twist - we don’t endure a bloated, pointless ‘2nd’ film which is, in essence, an indulgent set-up for a final film a la The Matrix and Pirates of The Caribbean.

Loses some minor points for some lazy stereotypes when Gate’s hunt for clues takes him to Paris and London (’Gor Blimey’). And, with the cast being bigger this time round, there is not a lot of good lines for the supporting characters who simply are there, at times, to help solve clues and push the plot/hunt along - some scenes do lack a little drama. Oh, and I can’t not mention the hairpiece poor Cage is saddled with - it nearly comes a cropper in a few of the action scenes. Guess Hollywood can accept having older actors and bad guys who are receding / thin haired / bald but not their leading men!

I’m a big kid at heart and love adventure films - particularly treasure hunts so this hit the spot nicely. If you have trouble suspending disbelief and/or hate lack of character development (there is none) this will likely do little for your pallette, however for us ‘big kids’ it’s a lot of fun.

Guess I should say hello. Hello!

I’ve made a few film reviews on my fledgling blog but this seems a friendlier place for someone with a love of celluloid. I like a wide variety of films so I don’t suppose this will be the most cohesive blog, but what the hey!