It's Easter, so it's time to revisit Jesus Christ Superstar. Much like "Jaws" seems to come out to theaters around July 4th each year, "Jesus Christ Superstar" surfaces on Easter Holiday and lets us take in the story of Christ's sacrifice and enjoy the hippie rock staging of the whole thing. I have written before about both Carl Anderson and Ted Neely in these roles and there was nothing in today's screening to dissuade me from my belief that they embody the whole spirit of the show.
As you can see above, director Norman Jewison did some creative things in making a film out of s stage musical, The camera angles, still frames, and zoom shots all jazz things up. Choreographer Robert Iscove, goes full tilt with the hippie chanting and arm waving that reflects some of the styles of the day. Although there was a stage musical done from the concept album, most of the staging in the film is original. You can see some of the things I'm talking about in the above clip.
Jewison used locations throughout Israel and the West Bank . The caves, ruins, and deserts are all integrated into the story with visual flare, from overhead shots, camera movement and the occasional insertion of contemporary military equipment as a backdrop. Those scenes sometimes make what is an eternal story feel fresh and relevant to the time.
The musical finale is staged with electricity. Judas dropping from the heavens in his white fringe shirt, and the dancers moving in synchronicity against a night sky in the ancient ruins, looks spectacular.
You can find previous posts on the film here, here, and here. Hope your Easter is one that inspires you the way this movie inspires me.
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Obviously we were going to get to some of the prestige pictures of the year 1975. In addition to "Jaws", "Dog Day Afternoon", which I have talked about on this project, the other Oscar Nominees for Best Picture are "Nashville", "Barry Lyndon" and the ultimate winner "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". Famously "Cuckoo's Nest" won the top five prizes at the awards that year, tying a record with "It Happened One Night" and later repeated by "Silence of the Lambs". This was the fifth nomination for Jack Nicolson and the first time he won. As you watch the film it is evident why this was going to be the outcome. Maybe Ken Kersey thought Nicolson was wrong for McMurphy, but for a cinematic experience he is the perfect fit.
The part of McMurphy is that of a joker in a situation that is grim, an outsider in the ultimate inside game, and the reluctant hero to a group of reluctant fans. He gets to indulge some of his wild mannerisms and facial expressions, but there are also a number of equally quiet and serious moments. The tension between McMurphy, the prisoner faking mental illness and the head nurse, Miss Ratched, is evident in their looks at one another and their voices express a barely suppressed distain. McMurphy of course, is much more open in his aggressive manner of interacting, Louise Fletcher has to hold her emotions back in the passive aggressive pattern that the nurse uses with all of the patients. Her deliberately calm demeanor may be meant to create a safe space for all of the group, but it comes off as condescending at times and she exerts her power with an icy stare rather than a raised voice. This is a film with two fantastic parts and both actors are completely up to the task of bringing them to life.
Maybe this is about the machine and how it grinds everybody down, or maybe it is a film about individuality and the importance of fighting to keep your unique identity. I always think it is about the banality of evil. Miss Ratched seems on the surface to care about her patients, and she probably thinks she is doing right by them, but at every step of the process, her manner sends the signal that they all need to conform and submit to her power. Authoritarians always think they are right and acting in the greater good, regardless of who's necks they have to stand on and what the cost is. She is the embodiment of the Covid Crusaders who wanted everyone to do as they were told, regardless of what the consequences might have been to someone else's life. Ratched acts more aggressively when her power is threatened. What happens to Billy Babbit is a result of her turning the passive control she has exerted over him, into a cudgel, and his betrayal of McMurphy and the self consciousness about being with a woman and the way it will impact his mother are a recipe for disaster, and Nurse Ratched is the one who puts it on the stove to cook.
In an institution filled with troubled souls, you would have a hard time differentiating the patients from the actors. Vincent Schiavelli, Danny DeVito and Christopher Lloyd are three actors early in their careers and their looks were not typical. When you throw in horror icon Michael Berryman in the background, the group seems very much a set of misfits. Sydney Lassick and William Redfield are both very good in parts that have a greater degree of dialogue. Cheswick will make you take pity on a lost soul and everyone will be frustrated with the obtuse Harding, but they are still essential to the group. The other two performances that need to be singled out are key characters in the plot. The "Chief" was played by non-actor Will Sampson. a large man of native American Indian ethnicity, and he makes a great impression in a nearly wordless performance. The moment he does utter a single word, is a transcendent one in the film. Brad Dourif as Billy Babbit makes us root for him and wonder at the world that has produced this sensitive kid that can hardly express himself. Dourif got the nomination that would have gone to the entire supporting cast if the SAG awards Ensemble category had existed in 1975.
Verisimilitude in the film is one of the things that makes the story work. The therapy group sessions are forced, like a true psych experience might be. The patients are all resistant to participating or saying anything that could have a negative consequence. The fact that they shot in a real, active mental institution means that the sets never feel like they are cardboard fronts but caged windows, communal tubs, and a near dormitory existence. The ECT treatment that McMurphy gets looks real and by all accounts represents an accurate portrayal of the procedure. The patients lining up for their medication also seems too real.
The two best sequences in the film are of course the ones that give Jack the biggest opportunities to play to his strengths. When McMurphy breaks out to take the group on the fishing expedition, he plays with all of the other characters and gets a lot out of what is going on. It is a collective moment that he inspires. However, the greatest moment is his improvised calling of a World Series Game that isn't on the TV. Although all of the supporting cast backs him up, it is really his moments and it feels perfect.
I make no secret of my preference for another film this year, but if "Jaws" is not going home with the stupid trophy, I'm glad that this film did.
Whenever you can listen to a live orchestra play a film score, go. When the film is included, question your sanity if you skip it, because these are great experiences. If you are dealing with a John Williams score and the film is "Star Wars" you can just pencil me in and meet me at the door. I love film music and scores. I enjoy classical music although I am not an aficionado. So this was an event that was easy for me to book and look forward to all summer.
The first time I saw Star Wars, at the Chinese theater in Hollywood, on opening day, I was awed by the sound of the film and the music. The score reminded me of the music from the 1930s and 40s. Erich Wolfgang Korngold and Max Steiner were my training ground for what film music should sound like. I was a big fan of Jerry Goldsmith's Patton Score and this horn and string dominated score reminded me of some of the same heroic themes and triumphs of that film.
The title sequence of course is legendary as the opening scroll moves up the screen and then the music transitions to the action of the attack by the Empire's cruiser. When Darth Vader appears on the screen we get a villain's cue and the music again clues us in as to who the good guys and the bad guys are. When we get to Tatooine, we start to get the recurring themes that will come up for the rest of the film. Luke is on a heroes journey and there were a some great scenes with his theme. The dual sunset is one of those moments and the discovery of his Aunt and Uncle's burned bodies is another.
Leia has a theme as well and both themes will be used for the subsequent films. Ben Kenobi's sacrificial death also is an iconic music moment and it pushes Like's desire to succeed even further. This is a film, much like "Jaws" that gets half of it's emotional energy from the score. When played by a live orchestra the music is even more stirring. By the time we get to the throne room medal ceremony, we have had a succession of great music highlighting terrific action scenes and character points.
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
Breakout
It's been a month since I posted one of these Throw Back Thursdays films, in that time I have traveled literally from one side of the country to the other. So many logistics have been involved that it has not been reasonable for me to catch up on a film for the purpose of this series. One thing however that I did do while pausing the viewing of films from 1975, was acquire a couple of those films for later use. Today's film would be one of those. I was sure I had a copy of the Charles Bronson/Robert Duvall film in my collection, but when I went to find it, there was no disc or box. I was puzzled because I wrote about this movie back in 2016, but I guess I must have watched it on one of my services. Thankfully Kino Lorber had a nice Blu-Ray with extras. [By the way, while writing this I went to the Kino Lorber site and dropped a bundle]
This is a terrific Bronson film that came out right after "Death Wish" and right before "Hard Times" so it is in the sweet spot of his most productive era. The film was also on the cusp of the new marketing strategy by the film studios of front loading their films into as many locations as possible, simultaneously. This strategy would be revolutionized by the film "Jaws" the very next month after this was released. Get paid now instead of slowly rolling out your film. With heavy advertising the movie did quite well and returned a profit with a couple of weeks.
"Breakout" is based on a real life prison break from Mexico, by a shady character who was accused of murdering his shady partner, but the body was not identifiable and the convicted guy proclaimed his innocence vehemently. For legal reason, the producers never refer to the book that the film is made from and they don't even use the famous "inspired by true events" tag. The Mexican government was not happy that a movie was being based on the real escape, the first to use a helicopter, and the film makers tried to distance themselves from the story because there was also an implication that a relative of the convicted man was framing him to keep an inheritance out of his hands.
Robert Duvall plays the prisoner, and he does most of his acting with a look of stupor on his face. The character is going mad, drinking excessively, and is physically declining so that gives the plot a sense of urgency. Jill Ireland plays his loyal wife who is plotting escapes but not having a great deal of success. She hires Bronson, a plane pilot with some smuggling background to help her get her husband out before he just gives up the ghost. There are some effective scenes when she visits him in prison and she struggles with the unwanted attention from the guards who search her and a lack of desire to have a conjugal visit in the pigsty of a room that she and her husband are given. Ireland was a beautiful woman but sometimes a bit wooden as an actress. Here though, she acquits herself quite well opposite Duvall. Even though her character loves her husband, she does have a rather flirty relationship with the impish pilot played by Bronson. He seems to be doing the job as much for her as for the money, and he develops a big crush on his client.
John Huston, who had just starred in "Chinatown" the previous year, and was getting ready to shoot "The Man Who Would be King", did one day of work on the film as the mysterious grandfather of Duvall's character. It is very murky why he is working against Duvall, it seems to be tied up with something in their business but those exposition scenes were apparently cut and Huston is only on screen for about two and a half minutes in three brief scenes. Randy Quaid plays Bronson's partner and he gets involved in the plot at one point by trying to dress in drag and connect with Duvall in the prison. This was the second of two escape plans that failed before Bronson lights on the helicopter idea.
The prison scenes will remind you of why you never want to go to jail in Mexico, and the corruption starts at the beginning with the murder of the Man that Duvall is supposed to have killed. He does have a companion in the jail who is sympathetic and facilitates the plan, unfortunately, unlike in the real life incident, he does not make it out with his friend and that is the button on the end of all the visual promotion material for the film. To make the actual escape more engaging and exciting, someone has to die and that is going to be the loyal Mexican compadre of Duvall.
One more spectacular moment takes place late in the film when a spy, trying to thwart the escape for Huston's character, ends up in a fight with Bronson on an airstrip after the fugitives have left Mexico. Plotwise it is never clear why the CIA is working with the grandfather, and the fight feels like a last minute addition. However, if you were disappointed in not seeing the Nazi mechanic in the airfield fight in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" , getting dismembered on screen, there is a shot in this film that should make it up to you.
Charles Bronson plays a different kind of character her, much closer to the pre-murder Paul Kersey in his earlier film than the vigilante that Kersey becomes. While not as slyly humorous as his turn in "From Noon till Three", it is still a comic performance and he nails it pretty well. If you have not seen this film, I would recommend it to you, it is a couple of hours well spent with one of the great action stars of a different and earlier generation.
The film world is full of movies based on plays. Nowadays, there are plenty of plays, usually musicals, that are based on films (See Disney, Back to the Future, Almost Famous and The Producers). This is a play based not on a film, but on the behind the scenes moments of the making of a film, the transcendent and incredibly hard to film "Jaws". If you are visiting this site for the first time, take a look around, you will see that "Jaws" is revered above all other films (with maybe one exception) by the author of these pages. It is a film that I know I have seen well over a hundred times. It will then come as no surprise to longtime visitors to KAMAD, that a play about the making of the film would draw my attention. Last weekend, we made a special expedition to NYC for the purpose of seeing this particular work.
"The Shark is Broken" was written by Ian Shaw and Joseph Nixon. Ian Shaw is the son of actor Robert Shaw, who portrayed "Quint" in the film and was notoriously cantankerous on the set in addition to being well lubricated during his time on the film. Robert Shaw was said to have bullied his co-star Richard Dreyfuss mercilessly and that the two even had some physical set-tos. Dreyfuss has always contended that it was a difficult relationship in shooting but that ultimately he had immense respect for Shaw and they were friends. Ian Shaw was inspired in part by a drinking diary his father had kept, and he knew the film is a key part of his father's legacy, so he started writing. I believe there is a great deal of honesty in the play but that it is also an entertainment first rather than a documentary, so obvious license will be taken in telling the story.
While it might seem strange to start my discussion of the play with the stagecraft rather than the story or the acting, it is not a surprise at all. The set is open from the moment we entered the theater. The only other Broadway style productions that I have seen recently were "Hamilton" and "Harry Potter and the Cursed Child 1/2" and as I recall, there is no curtain raised in either of those experiences either. So the set is right there for as long as you are in the theater before the play begins, and it is hard not to start noticing things and feeling right about commenting on them. The physical set is a cutout of the Orca, Quint's ship, which is the setting for the last half of the movie. There are some props in the hull of the ship but for the most part the action takes place in the small cabin around the table that you see in the film. It looks appropriately claustrophobic and intimate for the three actors to operate in.
Most of the passage of time and change in setting is determined by the lighting and by the screen scenes on the large background screen that contains images of the ocean that the film was shot on. The play actually starts when we see the image of a shark fin in the background, and then a cloud of smoke and steam erupts from the location as the image sinks below the surface. It is the first of many laughs that will fill the auditorium for the next hour and a half. The lighting indicates time of day, sometimes the golden hour, and occasionally the choppy seas the actors were enduring. This simple tech solution to the environment probably keeps costs down but it also encourages us to keep our focus on the actors.
Ian Shaw trained as an actor and has appeared in multiple plays, films and television shows, but it is his resemblance to his father that is the most striking feature when the story gets going. Obviously, he did not have to train for that, just a little hairdressing and makeup to fit the part. His voice, while not a perfect echo of his fathers stentorian voice, it is authoritative and familiar to all of the fans of the film. He gets several inflection moments just right, but he does not seem to be merely mimicking the clips of Robert Shaw from the film, it is an acting performance not a replication. The story does start off lightly but it does go to some dark places along the way, so even though the play is largely comic, Shaw adds plenty of drama to some of the passages. He honestly portrays his father as a driven creative alcoholic with a very competitive nature. His nature was not always easy to accept and that is part of the plot as the three actors are trapped in unpleasant conditions with one another for weeks in this confined space.
Robert Shaw was a veteran screen actor when he took the role of Quint. Richard Dreyfuss had worked in films but was just moving up to featured status and he was just of insecurities and anxiety. It was in large part his belief that he had whiffed his performance in "The Adventures of Duddy Kravitz", that lead him to accepting the part of Hooper, the smart aleck college grad who would butt heads with Quint on the shark hunt. In a way, it was the contrasting personalities of the two actors that helped create the dynamic that makes the film such a great character piece. Alex Brightman is the actor who gets to play Dreyfuss in this production, and he knocks it out of the park. His energy and staccato delivery of lines, matches the tone that Dreyfuss had in the film. Brightman has to do a lot of the heavy lifting when it comes to the comedy, because he is the most physically active character in the play, in spite of the sub-plot about him being physically overwhelmed on the shoot. He has all many of the big punch lines to the humorous script and just like Dreyfuss himself, he is not afraid to mug a little for the audience.
The part of peacemaker seems to have fallen to Roy Scheider on the Jaws set, and here actor Colin Donell does a solid job as the voice of reason on the set. His appearance as Chief Brody is visually well cast, and he has the moderate voice range that is characteristic of the actor he is playing, particularly between the two more outlandish characters he plays against. I think it is the lines that he has, that sometimes draw attention to the theatrical nature of his part. He is a part time narrator, part time mediator, and often is the wall between the tension of the other two. As a result, he sometimes feels like he fades into the background and when he does get a chance to shine, it feels a little more obvious that he is now speaking, rather than having a natural transition to his lines. Donell does get to shine in one regard for sure, he strips down to a swimsuit as Scheider to sunbath on the deck and he is chiseled, unlike Dreyfuss/Brightman, and his physique drew a few awes and in-takes of gulped air from appreciative audience members.
Story structure starts the play in the eighth week of shooting on the water, when nerves are beginning to fray, but at least there is a sense of gallows humor about the logistics of what Spielberg was attempting. The characters are killing time by telling stories and making jokes, and in Shaw's case, drinking obsessively. By the tenth week, they are playing made up bar games when no deck of cards is handy, and the talk gets to be more serious, although there is usually some levity to be found. When Dreyfuss tosses Shaw's bottle overboard, the unpleasant physical confrontation brings a whole lot of matters to the surface. The name calling seems a lot less just guys kibbitzing and more in line with real tensions. Everyone tells a little bit of their character's back story and the writing seems a little more self conscious in these moments. It is well known that the Indianapolis Speech was critical but also trouble from the start. Shaw ties to wrestle it into a coherent shape but his intoxicated performance destroys the impact of the scene, and this is the dramatic climax of the three characters on the boat. The audacity of featuring the greatest scene in the movie as a failure is remedied in the coda of the story as Ian Shaw does a credible job of performing as his father when he gets a second chance to do it right. No curtain needs to drop, the lights just go down and the memory of the film, combined with the live performance, provides the chill on the back of the neck that punctuates the whole enterprise.
The screen fills with production shots from the 1974 shoot and the actors take a well deserved bow. The play is entertaining as anything you might hope to see. Sometimes the play is a little obvious in the laughs it goes for, but those laughs still come and a real fan of the movie will enjoy every moment of it. The three actors are superb in their parts and although Shaw is the real focus of the story, Brightman walks away with some of the best moments. I flew 1700 miles, just to see this play. We did do a couple of other things on the trip, like eating at a couple of great spots, but even if we had not, for this fan of the Movie "Jaws", the trip was worth it.
This movie came out before I had started the blog and this is the first time I am getting to write about the film. I said it last night when I posted an update on Facebook, this is the jewel in the crown of Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy. Both "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight Rises" are excellent films, but the middle film is the finest second act in a superhero trilogy you are likely to encounter. We are past the origin story and Batman is a looming presence over Gotham. The crime lords are beginning to chaff under the attention they are getting from the District Attorney, and things seem to be turning around for the city, just as Bruce Wayne wanted. Enter the Joker, a figure of chaos, who at first seems like an enemy and then a potential ally to the underworld kingpins, but looks are deceiving, as we will be reminded on a regular basis.
The opening set piece with the daytime heist of mob money from one of the banks secretly controlled by the criminal elements of the city, is a terrific starting point. The crime is filled with audacity in execution and violent subterfuge by the man who planned it. When the last clown standing takes off his clown mask and reveals the clown make-up he is sporting, we know that we are in the company of a deranged criminal who does not follow any rules or patterns. This will undermine both the criminals and the cops for the rest of the story. This is the performance from the late Heath Ledger that won him a posthumous Academy Award, and it was richly earned. Ledger gives the Joker mannerisms that suggest he is bat shit crazy in every scene, but he also has a voice that commands respect because of the level of intelligence behind it. In the scene at the fund raiser, when he takes notice of Rachel Dawes, he pushes his sweaty hair back behind his ear, with a knife in his hand, like he is primping for a meet cute, while armed and dangerous. When he gets caught and is baiting the officer who is standing watch over him, he manages to smirk in an antagonistic way, in spite of the fact that he is still covered in his trademark make-up. Ledger underplays so many scenes despite being the most flamboyant character in the story.
One of the things that makes this film work well is that Bruce Wayne gets to be part of the plot in addition to being Batman. His love triangle with Rachel, his planning of the extraction of the accountant from Hong Kong, and the series of moments when he seems set to reveal himself, are all more engaged in the story than the billionaire usually gets. When he manages to safe the life of the man who is going to reveal his identity, it is in his best detached and clueless rich guy persona, a part he plays regularly in the film. Christian Bale has to do most of his acting in these scenes since the costume does so much in the Batman moments. One of the jokes that people sometimes make about Nolan's Batman concerns the gravelly voice that the Batman uses to cover who he is. I think too many people believe it is just an attempt to intimidate criminals (which it is) but they ignore that he is also avoiding being identified.
Director Christopher Nolan has put together a great series of action sequences which are mostly justified by the plot, even if logically they can't all come out the way they are supposed to. I have already mentioned the opening heist, but Batman has a heist of his own when extraditing Lau from Hong Kong. The spectacular removal from the building is a moment from a 60s era James Bond film, but played as serious rather than comic. The stunned security men are befuddled at the smashed window and the pane flying into the upcoming day looks just brilliant. Both the Joker and Batman have an action scene that plays out their own plans simultaneously, as Harvey Dent, claiming to be Batman, is transferred across town, there are gun battles, crashes, the end of the Batmobile and the birth of the Batpod, and it climaxes with a tractor trailer cartwheeling front to back on the streets of Gotham.
Harvey Dent, played by Aaron Eckhart, is the White Knight of the city that Batman wants to step aside for, but of course the Joker has a different goal. Certainly Harvey has reason to feel embittered and resentful. The fact that he can be tipped over to the Dark Side has been hinted at a couple of times in the course of the film. I just think that the final Two Face challenge is such a reach that it is the only flaw in the carefully constructed plot. It works, but only barely, and I think you have to see the film several times to be convinced that it is not just a plot contrivance.
The film is filled with actors who do a fine job in their parts. Most of the criminals get short shrift but the cops, many of whom are tainted, get a chance to show off a bit. Eric Roberts is slimy as hell, Morgan Freeman is as cool as you would hope, but the heroic center of the film is Jim Gordon, played by Gary Oldman. Gordon is a cop who tries to play it by the book but knows that the Batman is the linchpin on pushing Gotham back from the brink. His part in the capture of the Joker is a fun twist and his distraught father in the last scenes are demonstrations of Oldman's talents.
The electronic and orchestral score makes a dramatic impact on the film, although the lack of melodies probably keep it from being memorable. Humming along to the strum and dang of the score is not really possible, but the score is effective time after time in evoking emotions and mood. The action scenes have the parts that are most like traditional tunes, and Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard have divvied up the two antagonists to create wholly different personas for them musically. It is a very distinct score from the Tim Burton Batman films and several elements from the first film are repeated here, in completely appropriate ways.
Even though the Joker succeeded at spoiling Harvey Dent as a hero, Batman and Jim Gordon snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by changing the narrative and turning Batman into the dark figure of the story. The combination of Batman's faith in the citizens of Gotham on the ferry, and the sacrifice he makes to become a fugitive, give the story the bump it needs at the end to reach an emotional crescendo. The final narration from Gary Oldman makes the conclusion pay off with goosebumps.
The Paramount Summer Classic Film Series, at the Paramount Theater in Austin Texas, has been one of the great discoveries of my arrival in the area. When I saw the schedule for this summer, I joked with my daughter that I should just get an apartment downtown for the season, since I will be at the theater so often. I will do a more complete wrap up of the Series in a another post, but in commenting on this particular film, it seemed right to take note of a particular fact. Four of my ten favorite films played during the series, Jaws, Lawrence of Arabia, Amadeus, and 2001: A Space Odyssey. Some might find that a sign that my tastes are not particularly daring, I on the other hand, find it proof that these films have merit because they deserved to be included in the series.
"2001: A Space Odyssey" is the first of the films that make up my list of the ten best, for me to see in a theater as a child. This movie came out when I was ten, and I saw it with my family at one of the movie palaces on Hollywood Blvd. It made a big impression on me and it has continued to stimulate my mind, overwhelm my senses and make me deeply grateful for fifty plus years. As I watched it last night on the Big Screen in another old movie palace, I was in awe immediately by the title sequence of the film. It was a combination of shots of the Earth, Moon, and the Sun lining up and the music cue is fantastic. When the title is listed, I was sooo ready to go on this ultimate trip once again.
The Dawn of Man Sequence befuddled people early on but the symbolism is not subtle and when you pay attention, you will understand the jump of a million years of evolution immediately. The space sequences in the second act are all about showing our technical advancement, and repeat the flight, landing pattern three times back to back. I have seen this movie dozens of times but it was not until last night that a new piece of information dawned on me. The two sections of the flight to the moon where the crew and passengers are weightless are impressively created with practical effects, but I had not noted before how the costumes were also part of that effect. The Flight attendants wear uniforms that are a little odd. I'm not talking about their grip shoes, I am referring to their headgear. Suddenly it hit me like a thunderbolt why they wear those turban like get ups.
Ok, so it only took me fifty years to figure it out, but that's because everything Stanley Kubrick did in making this movie was meticulous.
The screening included the Intermission break, which has almost disappeared from modern films, even the ones that probably need a break. "Gandhi" was the most recent film with an intermission scheduled for all it's screenings. "The Hateful Eight" had an intermission built into it's 70mm engagements. This year's "Asteroid City" has an optional intermission that I have not heard of anyone using. The break in 2001 is at a particularly portentous moment and it makes returning to the last part of the movie so much fun.
I flew solo last night because my daughter had a social event planned, but to my major disappointment, she would have skipped the movie anyway. We went to a screening a few years ago in Hollywood, and I'm sad to say, she is not a fan. No matter, I am a fan and I got to enjoy this masterpiece one more time on the big screen. The psychedelic trip into the monolith near the end is not nearly as long as you think it is, and it still dazzles in spite of the fact that the optical technology seems quaint in comparison to some of the modern film techniques.
This film will always have my full endorsement. See it in a theater and be awed.
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
Jaws
This was a hectic day and I didn't get a chance to rewatch a film for the project, so I'm sharing with you some of the material from the past on the greatest film of 1975.
I had two theatrical presentations of Jaws this year, one in May, and the second in July. Of course I have seen the movie at home a couple of times earlier in the year. Frankly, I could watch this movie ten times a year rather than the four or five that have been standaard for me over the last couple of decades. This is the movie that I know I have seen the most and it is also the one I have written about the most.
Back in 2015, on the fortieth Anniversary of the film, I did an extensive set of posts celebrating the four decade long reign of this film as my favorite (At least of the second half of the twentieth century).
Here are some links for you to go back and see from that time frame.
A list of non-shark shark sightings in the film.
Everyone knows the most famous line from the film, here are some other good ones.
We have probably added a dozen to the collection in the last eight years, this was Amanda's Closet in 2015.
The three leads are not the only great characters in the picture.
Ah, now eventually you do plan to have megalodons, in your megalodon movie, right?
For a movie featuring giant sharks, there is an awful lot of tangential story development and action that features big sharks only in the background. At least Spielberg had a reason the shark was not seen much in the opening act of Jaws. Director Ben Wheatley seems to think this is an espionage, action thriller and that the sharks are not really why we are coming to see this movie. The movie starts with a James Bond of the Oceans sequence, then spends a big amount of time playing Armageddon games. Then the movie transitions to Die Hard on the high seas, before turning into Jurassic Park of Thailand. Finally we get to the good stuff, and what do we have? Mega Shark Versus Giant Octopus.
Look, this was always going to be a popcorn picture that we laughed at a little, but still felt like it should be taken seriously. That does not happen. There is nothing you can take seriously in this movie. When we start meeting the new characters, the first one is basically working on his Iron Man suit. The villains you can pick out in a few seconds of screen time and the set up for the climax moment is presented as if the character who will use it did it as an afterthought.
I like Jason Statham films a lot, but there are getting to be too many "Fast and Furious" imitators out there and if he is going to be in all of them, he will be overstaying his welcome. He is great in the action scene opening, and he does a great impression of Ed Harris without the liquified oxygen. When we get to the actual shark battles that come at the end, he looks good enough on a jet ski, but the cars and motorcycles of the other series probably make this feel like a repeat. So many of the shots have a deliberately cartoon feel to them that there is no suspense at all. I understand the presence of sub-titles since the film is partially produced by Chinese interests and will be marketed there, but some of the Chinese style shorthand in storytelling, makes the film even more like a Syfy weekend programmer, in spite of it's budget.
Shortcuts are taken everywhere. How did the most technologically advanced company in the world not know that part of it's resources were being given steroids, so that an even more advanced technology can make the impossible, possible? The cash and resources can't be covered up like a bookkeeping mistake. The usurping of the chain of command is also something that just does not get explained. Maybe Chinese audiences expect that from capitalists, I don't know or understand. The secondary heavy, a bad French sailor, is smart enough to know that a boat engine will draw a meg to a boat when he is warning his troops, but twenty minutes later, he is clueless and we know bad stuff is going to happen to him.
After we have escaped Blofeld's drilling platform, oops, I mean Jing Wu's scientific sea station, we relocate to an area that will give the audience the surrogate thrills they are seeking, but it pays off a lot less interesting than the first fill. Even with Megmouth Cam. To punch it up, other characters have to become action heroes, and against all odds they do. Of course it requires the bad guys to ignore the common threat to everyone on "Fun Island". Yes, it is actually called "Fun Island". It's been five years since the last film, and that interval resulted in the laziest writing you are going to get in this summer's film lineup.
"The Meg" was so much fun, you just assumed that a sequel would have it's moments. No, it doesn't. it's like a beached shark instead of a beached whale. The crowds will stand around it for a little while, but after a few days, the smell will drive them away.
Do you remember when comedies used to come out on a regular basis and they were funny? Somewhere in the last ten years, people seem to have lost their sense of humor. Comedy films got released, ignored and then disappeared, and as a result, there are far fewer of them. Nowadays, the comedy has to be mashed up with horror, action, romance, to get to the big screen. The last straight up comedy that I saw was "Good Boys" from 2019. Don't get me wrong, I love me some "Stuber", or "Sisu", or "Renfield", but they all bring you in on a different vibe. This movie is a throwback to films like "I Love You Man" or "Role Models". The goal is to tickle your funny bone and break your heart, with a little lesson included. The mayhem is of the everyday variety, no hatchets to the head or super heroes.
"No Hard Feelings" aspires to be "The Hangover" or "Bridesmaids" and it almost succeeds. There is enough here however to recommend it, and you will definitely laugh out load at a couple of sequences. Does it get the mix of raunchy, sentimental and outrageousness perfect, no. It is the best thing this side of the Farrelly Brothers you are likely to see this year, and you have star and producer Jennifer Lawrence to thank for that.
As is often the case in a comedy, our protagonist is not an entirely sympathetic character. Maddie Barker is a self centered underachiever, living in the house she inherited from her mother, and struggling to make ends meet in the face of rising property taxes due to the influx of wealthy summer people driving up land values in her Montauk Beach community. Lawrence plays her as a mean girl with a bitter tongue but one who can also sweet talk her way out of some things, but not everything. Maddie drinks too much, is promiscuous, and indifferent to the feelings of some of the people she comes into contact with. The premise of the film is far fetched, but it is supposedly based on a real Craigslist ad. Maddie has lost her car, the main source of her income as an Uber driver. She sees an ad that offers a car in exchange for giving an introverted high school graduate, the "girlfriend" experience. Desperate times call for desperate measures and this early 30s party girl decides to take up the offer to make a man out of a 19 year old college bound innocent.
In spite of the extreme unlikelihood of the premise, the follow through is very entertaining. Andrew Barth Feldman as Percy Becker, has the right geek quality that confirms him as an outsider, but not necessarily a loser. The idea that exposure to, and a sexual relationship with, the older woman might help bring him out of his shell seems conceivable. The humor comes from the awkwardness of the situation, the inevitable subterfuge from passing Maddie off as a woman attracted to Percy and not as an employee of his helicopter parents, and the fact that Maddie defies conventions that Percy has learned to accept or impose on himself.
The boldest scene in the movie involves Maddie convincing Percy to go skinny dipping with her in the ocean, and then having some teenagers bully them by taking their clothes. They have no idea what they are in for. Maddie shamelessly comes out of the water and engages them in a fistfight, completely nude, but fearless. Lawrence does not shy away from the demands of the scene and she plays Maddie exactly they way we would expect of this ballsy woman with a lot to lose if things go wrong. Seth Macfarlane will have a lot to add to his actress shaming song if he ever hosts the Academy Awards again.
Maddie is the butt of a lot of cracks about her age, which at 32 does not seem old to me, but to the college bound kids at the Princeton mixer, it is like she was born in another century...oh wait, she was. The humor in this party scene includes referencing the Gen Z obsession with recoding every little thing, and then using it to create a cancel culture. I about bust a gut when the virtue signaling parents at the party get incensed at a joke they consider inappropriate. The juxtaposition of generations in the scene was way too on the nose for comfort.
Like all real stories, there need to be high points and low points in the relationship between the characters. We can see trouble coming when Percy is more enamored of Maddie than she is comfortable with. He breaks through her hard shell with a sweet musical moment, that she smothers as quickly as she can. Of course there will also be crossed wires, unintended over heard conversations, and personal revelations that make the story more interesting and engaging, even if we see most of it coming. Director and co screen writer Gene Stupnitsky, who also made "good Boys", has all the ingredients of a great comedy, but somewhere in the process, it just does not jell as well as it should. Maybe it's a timing issue or the tone switches need a little more percolating, but it just misses working all of the time.
Don't worry though, it works enough to make it worth a visit. I laughed out loud several times and I did understand the sweetness that underlies the raunchy. Jennifer Lawrence is very good and carries off the funny quite well. Matthew Broderick plays Percy's overprotective and indulgent father, and it seems completely appropriate, since forty years ago, he would have been playing Percy himself. There are amusing side characters with strings of plotline that are not particularly important, but they add to the film to make it more rounded. Frankly, the line about "Jaws" would have been enough for me to recommend the film, even if if fall just short of being great.
Regular visitors to this site will not be surprised at the fact that we had a return visit to "Jaws" on the big screen, just a month after our recent screening. Yes the 47 year old film is widely available for home viewing, yes there is an expense and inconvenience of traveling to a theater thirty miles from home, but those things don't matter. Seeing "Jaws" in a theater is a chance to share the experience with an audience, it is an opportunity to treat the moment as special, and it is one more instance where we can sit in awe of the accomplishment of the film.
The screening was promoted as a "Movie Party" and the audience was provided with some tools to participate, including a shark fin hat that I tried on but took off while watching the movie. The bloody inflatable drink cozy was not needed in the theater but might come in useful in a hot tub. We were encouraged to respond to lines in the movie but the audience was relatively subdued. I did sing along with Quint about those fair Spanish Ladies and with all three of our hunters when they were tired and wanted to go to bed, but I did not hear others doing so. There was one audience member enamoured of the response line when Hooper Identifies the kind of shark the skiff load of fisherman hauled in, he repeated the line "A What? " with a great deal of impressionistic accuracy.
Another example of the advantages of seeing a film with an audience is being able to see the reactions of others to the moments you are reacting to as well. The man sitting next to me jerked involuntarily when Ben Gardner's head appeared in the hole in the hull of his own boat. The audience laughed together at several points and you could also feel the pall that fell over everyone, on -screen and in the audience, when Mrs. Kitner confronts the Chief. At that moment it doesn't just feel like a story, it feels like a tragedy.
I think we also felt a collective sense of community joy when Mayor Vaughn tells Brody and Hooper, "For Christ' sake tomorrow is the 4th of July and we will be open for business". Since we were all sitting in a theater together, the day before the Fourth of July, it just seemed especially relevant to us. Whenever someone asks what a great movie to watch for the Independence Day holiday, this is always the first answer.
When I first saw this movie on it's original release, I have to admit that I did not quite get it. There is a vibe to Wes Anderson's film making style that I was not tuned into. The arch, dry, detached story telling left me less engaged than I thought I should be. I did not dislike the film, I was simply indifferent to it. Flash forward twenty years and I have evolved a bit when it comes to Anderson's style. I have seen more of his films, adjusted to the off kilter approach and I have embraced the absurdity of the production design with enthusiasm.
"The Royal Tenenbaums" is Anderson's most commercially successful film, but it is not my favorite. "Isle of Dogs" the stop motion animated film, was my number one film of it's release year and contains most of the mannerisms that this film has, but it adds more heart to the story, which is where I think "Tenenbaums" shoots for but only partially succeeds at. The film is not meant for us to love the characters, they are all deeply flawed and that is the joke. We do understand them a bit better by the end and we don't wish them ill, but we can also see that they are still problematic human beings. Laughing at Royal's clueless cruelty and self centered behavior was easy, seeing him as a figure of redemption is a little harder but the steps he took seem right in retrospect.
As always there is an impressive cast in a film from Anderson, and the thing that helps me re-evaluate this film more positively is the presence of my favorite actor, Gene Hackman. As the patriarch of the family, Royal is a passively malevolent figure in his children's lives. As the lead character, he is a delightful figure to watch with jaws dropped as he utters the cluelessly cruel comments about his own family. Hackman sells this narcissistic persona flawlessly. His rapid delivery of the lines may finish before we even realize how thoughtless his words are. At this stage in his career, it pleased me to note that I was not put off by those flashbacks where he is made up to look younger. Although the image is imperfect, the acting was spot on.
If I have a reservation about the film, it is that there is a scene that involves the death of an animal. It takes place off screen, and there is some acknowledgement that it is supposed to be in a humorous context. Unlike the same sort of scene in "A Fish Called Wanda", we had a bit of a connection with this dog and that makes the film a little more sensitive for us animal lovers. Maybe this is the reason we got Isle of Dogs", if that's the case than the fiction is worth it.
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
The Drowning Pool
At one point, I was set to buy this on ebay, believing that Strother Martin was in the film for a second Harper Story. It would have been for my companion blog, "The Strother Martin Film Project". When I looked closer at the credits, I realized that Strother does not appear in this film, so I skipped it and never ended up seeing it until this last weekend. In 1975, I could easily have skipped this simply because I had limited resources or availability. Although there were six screens within walking distance of where I lived, not everything played in my town.
This is a fish out of water story following Lew Harper, a private detective from California, who ends up in Louisiana, trying to help out a woman that he'd had an affair with several years earlier. The plot at first involves blackmail, but as things roll along, there is political corruption, bribery, kidnapping, murder and assorted other felonies that become part of the story. This is a sequel of sorts to "Harper" which did feature the same character that Paul Newman is playing and in which Strother did have a part. Since it was directed by Stuart Rosenberg, who had done "Cool Hand Luke" and "Pocket Money" with Newman and Martin in each, that's why I was confused.
Newman is a natural at playing an aw shucks, slightly disheveled, low key private investigator. Harper's persona is not unlike that of Jim Rockford from the TV series, they are both wise guys, eager to talk their way out of trouble rather than fight their way out, but willing to sucker punch someone in the right circumstances. Newman is playing against his real life wife Joanne Woodward, as Iris, his ex-flame. Melanie Griffith is an ingenue in the film, and she is in the middle of a busy year here. In 1975 she was previously in "Smile", and she will appear in "Night Moves" which was released the same month as this. Character actors Richard Jaeckel, Andy Robinson and Paul Koslo also are in the movie, but the most important other character was played by a co-star in the most important film of the year, decade, era and maybe ever.
Murray Hamilton plays the not very well disguised villain of the piece, J.H. Kilbourne, a wealthy oil baron, aching for the land that belongs to the family that Woodward's character Iris is a member of. There is a secondary villain that you can probably figure out but is much better hidden for the eventual reveal at the end of the film. Hamilton is an oily, self centered kook, with a slightly Cajon accent. His performance is very distinctive from his role as the feckless mayor of Amity in "Jaws". Hamilton worked primarily in television but had an important part in "The Graduate" and then his two biggest parts were the films that came out this year.
The movie is a diverting piece of slow burn southern mystery, that will not compel you to rewatch it but also will not irritate you for taking the time to check it off of your list. The sequence referred to in the title is actually pretty effective and it is all done in camera so it looks really good. Not an essential film from the era, but definitely has the vibe of all those other 70s films that you remember so well.
Apparently, I should have chosen 1981 for my Summer Movie Season debate claim from the Lambcast a couple of weeks ago. After all, 1981 had "An American Werewolf in London", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Superman II" and this film, the one that turned Kurt Russell from a Disney kid into an action star. I saw "Escape From New York" in the Summer of 1981 at the El Rey Theater on Main Street in my hometown of Alhambra California. I'd been married for a year and I had summer off between semesters, while my poor wife had to work, so I saw this at a matinee by myself. I had to take her to see it the next week, because I knew she would love it, and sure enough, she fell completely for Kurt Russell.
This was a low budget film that made the most of every dollar they had to spend. John Carpenter was a viable director after his success with "Halloween" and he had made a TV biopic about Elvis with Kurt Russell, so it feels a little inevitable that they would work together in a completely original project. The premise is a simple one, Manhattan has been turned into a maximum security prison, where the convicts are dumped to make out the best they can. In the middle of an international crisis, the President's plane goes down in the area, and someone has to go in and recover him and the McGuffin he in possession of. Former military hero, now convict Snake Plissken, is given the job as a way of gaining his freedom.
Russell does his best Clint Eastwood impression throughout the film, and that makes sense because when Carpenter originally wrote the screenplay years earlier, he had envisioned Eastwood in the part. Snake is an anti-authoritarian, like John Carpenter himself, so the movie is full of middle fingers extended toward the government, convention, and anything else that was pissing off the director at the time. Russell plays Snake as a sullen outsider, who wisely trusts no one and is a lot more of a strategic thinker than he is given credit for. He snarls and growls his way through the plot, remaining cool in the face of every obstacle he ends up against.
The action scenes are not complicated but they are fun. As Snake tries to get away from a swarm of crazies at one point, he uses his weapon to improvise a door through a wall. It's a terrific looking action piece and emblematic of the kinds of creative moments Carpenter brings to the film. I combat sequence in a boxing ring is brutal without getting as gory as it would be if this film were made today. The nihilism evinced by Snake is downright compelling, even if it runs contrary to the world's best interest. He is so indifferent that he even puts off a moment of personal revenge because he is tired. His final FU to the whole affair is completely fitting with the character and the semi-dystopian world that all of the characters are operating in.
Four years ago, we got to see the movie at the TCM Film Festival, with both Carpenter and Russel in attendance.
I'd been a fan of the TV critics Siskel and Ebert since I'd discovered their show on PBS a couple of years before this film came out. While putting this post together I came across their reviews for this film, and if you have a few minutes you can watch it here:
As much as I respected Roger Ebert, I usually found myself on the same side of the equation as Gene Siskel. This may have been the tipping point for me way back in 1981, and lasting until Siskel's death in 1999.
Last night's screening was presented by Austin based film maker Robert Rodriguez. Before the movie screened he did a brief introduction and he surveyed the house on the number of people seeing the movie for the first time, for the first time on the big screen, and who had seen it in theaters in 1981. A couple people up front were given some nice gifts, one of which were some personal sketches done for the film and signed to Rodriguez by production designer Joe Alves (the production designer of Jaws also). He shared a bit about his personal relationship to the movie, and how he came to be acquainted with Carpenter and worked with Kurt Russell on "Grindhouse". He promised a few stories after the film as well.
The most amusing one involved Kurt Russell. Rodriguez was showing off his love of "Escape From New York" to Russell when they were together one time by showing that the wallpaper on his phone was an image of Snake Plissken. Russell responded by getting out his own i-phone, fumbling with it for a minute and then asking Suri "Who am I" , to which Suri replied, "You are Snake Plissken". Kurt laughed and said, I'm the only one in the world who can do that.
I've posted the trailer for Jaws a dozen times before, so I am changing it up a little for this post. Chief Brody is the character in the film with the most important story arc, and the sequence above explains that his instincts are really headed in the right direction. The fact that Mayor Vaughn talks him out of closing the beaches does not make him the bad guy. Martin Brody has a huge about of guilt poured on him when Alex Kitner is killed by the shark, but remember, his kids were on the beach, and he was trying to be cautious in pursuing his responsibilities as Chief of Police for this community. The fact that he gets bull rushed by the Mayor and Selectmen about closing the beaches a second time, shows that he is not the one ultimately responsible, but he shoulders that burden anyway.
His wife Ellen, tells Hooper about Martin's fear of the water and dislike of being on the ocean. It takes an act of courage, fueled by his own guilt, to get Brody onto the Orca and to join the fight to end the shark. Once on the boat, Brody is made a figure of ridicule by both Hooper and Quint. Their jabs are subtle, sometimes condescending, but all of them are attempts to assert dominance in the triumvirate that is on this odyssey. Martin is the realist, who believes they are outmatched when he sees the shark and utters the famous line from the film. Some might see it as cowardice, Quint certainly does, but it turns out he was entirely correct. The good man, who is not blinded by his fear from thirty years earlier, or by the intellectual superiority that Hooper assumes, is the one who had the best advice, and he was ignored because of the other two men's assumptions.
I have seen this film well over a hundred times, and every experience bring satisfaction. Sometimes it is for the inventiveness of the director, sometimes I am awed by an actor's performance, occasionally I marvel at a technical achievement. This time, it is the spine of the script that I was noticing the most. Chief Brody is the glue that holds the film together. He is an average family man faced with extraordinary circumstances. We watch him get out of bed, struggle with mundane issues like feeding the dogs and chastising his kids, before he gets slapped in the face with the remains of Chrissie Watkins. He finds the fortitude to try to do what is right. he defers to authority when it is necessary, and defies authority when it is clear that someone else has to act.
Roy Scheider's Chief is the odd man out on the Orca. Both Quint and Hooper are experienced sailors. Maybe their experiences are different, but they are comfortable on the water. We know Brody is not. Quint is Ahab, chasing the White Whale. Hooper is an academic, determined to prove his superiority to the old fashioned ways of the senior fisherman. Brody just wants to kill the shark, however it can be done. It is his responsibility to take care of the extended family of the Amity Community. He is not trying to prove himself or impress anyone, he just wants to get her done.
I have written about Scheider's performance before. He is excellent in this film, but Dreyfuss gets the funny lines and Shaw has the mic drop moment in the film. Brody is the everyday hero that a family and a town need.
Throwback Thursday on the KAMAD site will be a regular occurrence in the next year. As a motivational project, to make sure I am working on something, even in a week where I don't see a new film in a theater, I am going to post on movies from 1975. Along with 1984, this is one of my favorite years for movies and it is full of bittersweet memories as well. 1975 was my Senior Year in High School and my Freshman Year in College. The greatest film of the last 60 years came out in 1975, as well as dozens of great and not so great cinematic endeavors. Most of the films in this weekly series will have been seen in a theater in 1975, but there are several that I only caught up with later. I hope you all enjoy.
Rollerball
This was one of the films from my original project back in 2010. I was writing about films from the summers of the 1970s, my formative years, and this movie came out the same week that "Jaws" hit the marketplace. In spite of mixed reviews, I suspect it would have been a big hit except that it was overshadowed by the competition. I chose the film this week because it was referenced in a television series I am currently streaming. "Daisy Jones and the Six" is a fictional look at a 70s era band, along the lines of Fleetwood Mac. Two of the band members are obsessed with "Rollerball", actually calling it brilliant, and they are on their way to see it for the eighth time. That fictional enthusiasm was enough for me to go back and watch the film again for Throwback Thursday.
When I went back to my original post, I was happy to see that it expressed my feelings about the film almost exactly as I was experiencing them this week. You should read that post here. The strength of the film is in the design of the game the movie is based on. The combination of roller derby, soccer and football plus the acceptance of violence that goes well beyond that in hockey and rugby, is a great show that will hypnotize the masses. The production design of the film starts off with a bang by showing off the track, the ball, the teams with their motorcycles and some futuristic fonts that seem to be realistic from the perspective of time.
The color schemes of the teams are the only distinguishing element. I guess a logo might imply more choice than the proles are entitled to. The combination of the high tech track and the traditional fugue music sets an ominous tone that we will feel every time the game commences. I thought the teams individual struts on the track as they were entering also sets a martial tone and a sense of inevitable clash.
Houston, the team that Johnathan E (James Caan) plays for, has the simple Houston stride, an in-line synchronized march that is direct, elegant and feels very determined. Other teams seem to have been more artistic, for example the Tokyo team has an arrow wedge that looks fearsome, and as they break out of the formation, they drop down to the center of the rink in a kamikaze style flourish. The film comes to life the most in the three matches that we see. Of course as the rules are being changed to force Johnathan out of the game, the clashes become more elaborate, violent and ultimately deadly.
Obviously, the script and the director were trying to say something about the dangers of corporate control over the world. Unfortunately, there are few places other than the game and Johnathan's personal life, that we see the stilting effect of corporate decision making. There is a sequence where Johnathan attempts to discover how corporate decisions are made. His wife had been taken away from him in what he sees as an arbitrary action. He wants to know why.
The computer system that has replaced all the books, is limited in access and intelligence. There are not really librarians, just clerks who try to direct people but have no ability to find information on their own. It's as if Wikipedia had to be accessed through a human, who did not have any understanding of the information they control access to. Later in the film, Johnathan goes to Geneva, to the main data storage facility. If the director had spent less time at the idyllic party of drug addled executives, there might have been an opportunity to do some interesting exposition with the main computer "Zero". A video of the corporate wars or a quick summary of the current social conditions might have made Johnathan's individualism seem mor meaningful. Instead, there is a mildly amusing Ralph Richardson, playing word games with an A.I. that has a defective memory. It is a lost opportunity to do the thing the film purports to do.
Early on there was a moment that I thought could be contrasted to the world of today in an interesting way. As the corporate anthem is being played before the first game, all the players are lined up obediently standing at attention, but Johnathan is clenching his fist and lightly pounding it against his leg. It is certainly not the act of defiance that kneeling on the sidelines or staying in the locker room for the anthem would have been. It sems the smallest act of individuality that could exist in the corporate world.
Throughout the film, Director Norman Jewison uses classical music to set the mood, in a way that seems to deliberately invite comparison to "Clockwork Orange." The use of some interesting architecture in West Germany (at the time), which is modernistic in the way a futurist might have suggested does the same thing.
As I said earlier, my original post expresses my feelings about this film perfectly, but I hope that the few extra note here made your visit worthwhile.
