Blog Directory CineVerse

In the mood for a lovely movie

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

CineVerse is on a roll discussing back-to-back top 20 Sight and Sound picks this month. Ranking #5 on that list is Wong Kar-wei’s In the Mood for Love, which debuted in 2000 and has been praised by cinema cognoscenti as perhaps the finest film of the 21st century so far. This romantic drama unfolds against the backdrop of 1960s Hong Kong, presenting Chow and Su (Tony Leung and Maggie Cheung) as nearby neighbors who forge a connection upon suspecting their spouses' infidelity with each other. Despite their burgeoning shared affection, they grapple with societal norms and their own moral compasses, opting to suppress their emotions and deny their passions.

Click here to listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week.


The film's allure lies in its exploration of themes such as yearning, desire, and solitude, as well as Kar-wai's distinctive storytelling methods—including a nonlinear narrative and poetic imagery that infuse the storyline with layers of depth and intricacy. But it’s In the Mood for Love’s captivating visuals, marked by sumptuous cinematography, intricate compositions, and rich palette of colors and light, that particularly resonate. The filmmakers adopt a stylized aesthetic, utilizing slow motion takes, swift fadeouts between scenes, noticeable distances between the lens and the subjects (who are often separated from the viewer by glass or doorways), closeups of clock faces, wafting cigarette smoke, shadowy high-contrast color cinematography, and revealing camera pans. The recurring musical motifs of a pining arrangement for strings and Spanish language numbers sung by Nat King Cole significantly underscore the romantic tension between Chow and Su.

Kar-wai refrains from showing us the faces of the cheating spouses, and he often avoids showing both Su and Chow in the same frame when they converse. Collectively, these choices suggest emotional remoteness and the inability of the couple to connect with each other or their spouses fully. At the same time, the tight framing and compositions often feel voyeuristic.

This has been widely described as a “mood piece” and a film driven more “by feeling than by thought.” We’re given a cliché, shopworn setup of two conveniently accessible people whose spouses are engaged in an illicit affair, but it deviates from our expectations for how they will behave and react to their feelings in light of this knowledge. For many viewers, this can be an exercise in frustration and disappointment; for others, its unpredictability and emphasis on mood, tone, and aesthetics create an enriching emotional experience. New Yorker critic Kyle Chayka wrote: “The film’s impossible sumptuousness is meant to be just that—impossible. Wishing that the two of them ended up together means missing the poetry of the dance.

Interestingly, the story concludes (SPOILERS AHEAD) by jumping ahead a few years. Chow returns to the old apartment and ironically doesn’t realize that Su is behind her old door. A few years later, during the Vietnam War, he embarks on a journey to Cambodia, where he explores the magnificent Angkor Wat Hindu-Buddhist temple; while being watched by a monk, Chow softly utters a secret into a crevice within a wall, sealing it with mud afterward. We can assume this secret is his spoken love and desire for Su.

This could be the most effective film ever made about the emotional and erotic power of displaced desire and repressed romance. Chow and Su’s choice to suppress their amorous feelings creates a potent yearning that feels palpable to the viewer. In a carpe diem modern world where we continually observe screen characters who quickly indulge in taboo trysts, one-night stands, and erotic assignations, how more refreshingly romantic can a delayed, unconsummated romance be?

In the Mood for Love is also a meditation on the repercussions of moral discipline, rejecting a taboo intimacy, and holding onto and letting go of a secret. “We won’t be like them,” we hear our protagonists promise each other, and they stay true to that pledge but consequently suffer by refusing to indulge in their repressed passion. They re-enact and imagine how their spouses met and engaged in their secret affair, and they rehearse future conversations with their betrothed partners: Chow and Su practice how, for instance, Su will inquire about her husband’s affair and reply to his responses.

Asynchronous love is another core theme. We see Su and Chow pass each other on the stairs, pursue each other at times when the other person isn’t there, and come together only to separate several times, implying that they are out of sync and on different paths, yet continually running into each other.

Kar-wei and collaborators muse on the fate versus free will question, too. Criterion Collection essayist Steve Erickson asks: “Have their lives already intermingled before the moves ever take place, before the movie even starts? This is a film where all our initial assumptions circle back on themselves, where the crisscrossing hallways mark the coordinates of destinies already mapped. Is it, in fact, Chow and Su who were fated all along to be lovers, and out of fear and rectitude defy and lose one of the rare chances for happiness that life offers?

Most importantly, In the Mood for Love contemplates how the passing of time and the extent to which we change as we age can shape our memories. Recall the intertitle that reads: “He remembers those vanished years as looking through a dusty window pane. The past was something he could see, but not touch. And everything he sees is blurred and indistinct.” Slant Magazine reviewers Calum Marsh and Jake Cole wrote: “Has there ever been a more apt description of the cinema’s capacity for imperfectly rendering our memory, lost to time, which we are forever desperate to reclaim?...And so what seems conspicuously ‘indistinct’ about In the Mood for Love—the pervasive sense of simplicity that governs the drama, from the convenience of its setup to the vagueness of what proceeds from it—becomes, in retrospect, a sophisticated expression of the fundamentally abstract quality of memory and reflection, not so much a paean to past love as to past love remembered in the present…Perhaps we could say that In the Mood for Love’s real subject, then, is the gulf that divides the past from the present.”

Similar works

  • Lost in Translation
  • Love (2015)
  • Three Colors trilogy
  • Carol
  • Summer Palace
  • The Spectacular Now
  • Hiroshima Mon Amour
  • The Remains of the Day
  • Long Day’s Journey Into Night (2018)
  • Spring in a Small Town

Other films by Wong Kar-wai

  • Chungking Express
  • Days of Being Wild and 2046, which form a trilogy with this movie
  • The Grandmaster
  • Happy Together
  • Fallen Angels

Read more...

Her name is Cleo and she dances on the Seine

Friday, March 22, 2024

Released in 1962, Agnès Varda's Cleo from 5 to 7 has impressively climbed the ranks among the greatest international cinematic works in recent years. Consider that, in a 2019 BBC poll, it was voted the second-best film directed by a woman, and it placed #14 in the Sight and Sound poll of 2022, making it the third-highest-ranking movie by a female director (one of several films helmed by women that are well represented on that list). This was deemed an important French New Wave work and a pioneering film for that time. Critic Molly Haskell called itthe first fully-achieved feature by the woman who would become the premiere female director of her generation.

Corinne Marchand takes center stage as Cléo Victoire, complemented by Antoine Bourseiller, Dorothée Blanck, and Michel Legrand in supporting roles. The narrative orbits around Cléo, a budding singer grappling with the anticipation of a medical diagnosis dictating her fate. Set within the condensed timeframe of two hours, from 5 pm to 7 pm, the film tracks Cléo's meandering journey through Parisian streets, offering a poignant examination of her introspections, fears, and interpersonal connections.

To hear a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week, click here.


What’s particularly memorable and distinctive about this movie is that it occurs in real-time, with a 90-minute runtime that roughly depicts the minute-by-minute experiences of Cleo between 5 and 6:30 p.m. on a single summer afternoon (the summer solstice). Interestingly, the story ends prematurely, not spanning until 7 p.m., which poses questions and theories about why.

Its plot-driving motivator is to learn if Cleo has a terminal illness, but the story is more of a series of loosely linked or unconnected vignettes, as we observe the titular character drift from one encounter or experience to another, from the opening scene with a tarot card reader to a visit with her manager to a café and hat shop to a taxi ride to a sequence in her apartment with her lover and her songwriters to a reunion with her friend Dorothee to a stopover at a movie house to her walking in the park and meeting the soldier Antoine. Despite its lack of plot, the movie explores existential themes such as the fear of death, the essence of identity, and the quest for life's meaning. Cleo's journey in the film encourages viewers to reflect on their own mortality and the importance of human connections.

Perhaps the most fascinating facet of Cleo from 5 to 7 is its sense of spontaneous cinematic energy and aliveness thanks to the unforgettable handheld camera shots capturing Cleo as she walks among the masses in Paris; these unrehearsed and organic shots grace the picture with an authenticity and artless exuberance. We notice that men and women turn their heads and stare at Cleo or the camera, which reinforces how she’s a celebrity and an attractive woman who values her beauty. Film critic Adrian Martin wrote: “Cléo from 5 to 7 seemed to embody the prime obsession of all the young cinema movements of the sixties: to evoke the eternal present, flashing by in a sustained intensity.”

Varda also utilizes nontraditional compositions, jump cuts, editing loops (three similar shots of her descending the staircase), lengthy shots, an opening color sequence that contrasts with the monochrome of the rest of the film, and infusions of contemporary news and politics (the radio report of the Algiers conflict).

Cleo from 5 to 7 reminds us that our destiny is not written. Our heroine is convinced from the start of the narrative, via the tarot reading, that she has terminal cancer, but we learn from her doctor at the conclusion that it is treatable and not fatal. We also notice that the story ends at 6:30, 30 minutes short of the 7 o’clock hour mentioned in the title.

What happens in that last half hour? Maybe she develops a more intimate affection with Antoine and comes further out of her shell, more open to the possibilities of loving someone else besides yourself. Consider that Antoine prefers her real name Florence; perhaps the story ends at 6:30 because in those last 30 minutes offscreen, she has come to accept herself as the more relatable and human Florence and no longer as Cleo, the pop singer with an image to maintain. She's chosen to live life on her own time.

Takeaway #2? Our lives can change quickly for the better if we open our eyes. Cleo from 5 to 7 is about transitioning from inward to outward, from insular to broad-minded, and from fear to joy. Haskell continued: “It is an odyssey that, like so many French films, is about the double delight of watching a beautiful woman against the backdrop of the most beautiful of cities, but it is also a spiritual journey from blindness to awareness, and from self-absorption to the possibility of love…Through an arresting use of Paris as both visual centerpiece and reflection of a woman’s inner journey, Varda paints an enduring portrait of a woman’s evolution from a shallow and superstitious child-woman to a person who can feel and express shock and anguish and finally empathy.”

This film is also concerned with navigating modern life in a complicated world as a woman, and how females, fairly or unfairly, draw negative and positive attention. Cleo from 5 to 7 illustrates how men and women alike can’t help but gaze at, admire, covet, and desire a young and attractive female. Varda doesn’t objectify or unabashedly sexualize Cleo in male gaze fashion, but she deliberately casts an alluring young actress for this role; the handheld camera scenes are particularly revealing, showing numerous men turning their heads and eyeballing Cleo. From a feminist standpoint, the film provides insight into the experiences of women in society, particularly during the 1960s. Through Cleo's character and her interactions with others, messages of female empowerment, objectification, and the limitations imposed by gender norms are evident.

Similar works

  • Other films set in real-time and concerned with temporal matters, including Rope, High Noon, 12 Angry Men, The Set Up, and Russian Ark
  • French New Wave films of this period, such as Breathless, The 400 Blows, Jules and Jim, Vivre Sa Vie Masculin Feminin, and others
  • Murnaugh’s silent Sunrise in how it recreates that film’s streetcar scene

Other films by Agnes Varda

  • Le Bonheur
  • Vagabond
  • Faces Places
  • La Pointe Courte

Read more...

Why The Third Man comes in first for so many

Tuesday, March 19, 2024

Directed by Carol Reed and released in 1949, The Third Man stands as a classic of its time—and for all time—75 years later. The narrative unfolds in post-World War II Vienna, which is divided into zones controlled by the Allied powers. Holly Martins, an American pulp writer portrayed by Joseph Cotten, ventures to Vienna to reunite with his old friend Harry Lime, played unforgettably by Orson Welles. However, he soon learns of Lime's demise in a perplexing accident. Martins's quest for truth plunges him into a labyrinth of deceit, corruption, and intrigue. Joining the cast are Alida Valli as Lime's paramour, Anna Schmidt, and Trevor Howard as Major Calloway, a British military police officer aiding Martins in his inquiry.

To listen to our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted earlier this month, click here. For the latest Cineversary podcast episode, celebrating The Third Man’s 75th anniversary, click here.


How do we love The Third Man, shining as brightly as ever in its diamond anniversary year? Let us count the ways:

  1. There’s a wealth of top-notch talent involved, including screenwriter Graham Greene, co-producers David O. Selznick and Alexander Korda, director Reed, cinematographer Robert Krasker, and the stellar actors already mentioned.
  2. It represents a fascinating multicultural story and features a melting pot of performers: It’s a film primarily made by Brits and mostly populated by European actors in smaller roles but also boasting two acclaimed American thespians.
  3. The fact that it was shot on location in war-ravaged Vienna, and not on a London set or Hollywood soundstage meant to replicate that European city, adds verisimilitude to the look and vibe of the entire picture. The striking Viennese architecture juxtaposed against crumbling edifices, cracked stairs, and glistening cobblestone streets creates an unforgettable visual template.
  4. The expressionistic chiaroscuro lighting design by Krasker, especially in nighttime outdoor scenes, is one of the finest examples of stylistic black-and-white cinematography ever created. The impossibly grandiose shadows he was able to conjure and the monochromatic canvas of high contrast produced remain a visual marvel.
  5. The screenplay by Greene remains one of the greatest narratives of any era, a masterfully constructed and brilliantly paced cinematic story that benefits immensely from wonderful dialogue, keen transitions between scenes, and sudden twists that compel the viewer to pay closer attention as the story progresses. The standout dialogue scene remains Lime’s cuckoo clock speech, delivered superbly by Welles, lines of which he contributed himself, but the entire exchange between him and Holly on the Ferris wheel, which spans a mere 300 seconds, is a masterclass in superlative screenwriting and directing. But the opening voiceover narration, spoken by Reed, also perfectly sets the scene. Recall, too, the back and forth between Holly and Calloway and how the major always maintains this verbal intelligence over Holly with great lines like “You were born to be murdered,” “Death's at the bottom of everything, Martins. Leave death to the professionals,” and, after correcting Holly for calling him Callahan, “Calloway—I’m English not Irish.”
  6. The Third Man boasts perhaps the greatest delayed entrance of an enigmatic character in movie history. The buildup to Lime’s reveal in that dark doorway, which occurs at the 62-minute mark of a 95-minute picture, is the stuff that film legends are made of. “The Third Man presents such a nonstop visual experience that it is easy to miss what a small, seat-of-the-pants picture it essentially was,” wrote Criterion Collection essayist Lucy Sante. “Consider, for example, that Anton Karas, without whose score the movie would be substantially different, was found on location, playing in a restaurant…The Third Man is in fact a brilliant succession of dice throws, a borderline counterintuitive combination of disparate elements that somehow come together as if they had been destined to do so. It is a singular object, a fluke, a well-oiled machine, a time-capsule item, a novelty hit. There has never been another movie quite like it.” This famous delayed appearance, which excites an anticipatory audience with delight once this titular character and prime motivator of the story is shown, may have inspired similar delayed character reveals in later films. Consider Omar Sharif’s Ali in Lawrence of Arabia, Henry Fonda’s villainous Frank in Once Upon a Time in the West, Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka, Robert Shaw as Quint in Jaws, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s belated appearance in Terminator 2, Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs, Michael Keaton in Beetlejuice, Jack Nicholson as Col. Jessep in A Few Good Men, Kevin Spacey’s John Doe in Seven, and Johnny Depp’s Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean.
  7. The zither-ific score by the previously unknown Anton Karas became the third biggest-selling album of the 1950s, proving immensely popular worldwide.
  8. The Third Man may have been a forerunner to more modern spy thrillers, inculcating a morally disconcerting postmodern worldview in motion pictures, and serving as a delicious study in contrasts, according to John Miller with TCM. He wrote: “The Third Man works on many more levels than merely the "entertainment" that Greene termed it to be…it is an early example of a cold-war intrigue that, while not depicting a single spy, can be seen as a prototype for spy thrillers to come. It also works as a study of post-WWII morality with Harry Lime viewing his victims not as human but as far-removed dots that stop moving. It is also a character study featuring a hopeless love triangle… The Third Man rewards repeated viewings because it goes far beyond being a witty and exciting mystery thriller. It flips all expectations on their heads by featuring an attractive embodiment of villainy and ineffective heroism; an enjoyable sense of cynicism and a bleak view of romance; a calming sense of chaos and a nostalgic vision of decadence. And when you meet Harry Lime, prepare yourself for a smiling justification for everyday corporate evil in the post-war modern world.”
  9. It’s difficult to name-drop films that may have been directly influenced by The Third Man; Welles’ Mr. Arkadin and the 1997 Croatian remake Treca Zena spring to mind. But this only emphasizes how unique the picture truly is and how challenging it was in the years following its release to ride its coattails. Interestingly, The Third Man may have been inspired by more films and books than vice versa. Predecessors include M, Morocco, The 39 Steps, Foreign Correspondent, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, The Ministry of Fear, The Stranger, and Les Miserables.
  10. The British Film Institute placed The Third Man number one on its list of the greatest British films of the 20th Century. Additionally, it ranked #2 and #4, respectively, in a Time Out poll and a Total Film survey of the best British films of all time, and in 2005 BBC TV’s Newsnight Review viewers chose it as their fourth favorite movie ever. The American Film Institute named it #57 in its 1998 list of the top American films, while The Third Man earned fifth place in the AFI’s Best Mystery Films list.
This is often categorized as a film noir, yet it’s different from films established in the noir canon. Like other noir works, it utilizes a quite expressive lighting scheme evocative of film noir, featuring high-contrast lighting and exaggerated shadows in a gritty urban environment. It is this lighting style that makes possible arguably the most famous onscreen introduction of a character in motion picture history—the shot when Harry is revealed in the dark doorway. The film also puts us off-kilter with canted (tilted) camera angles utilized for many shots, and the filmmakers utilize wide-angle lens distortions and extreme facial close-ups to further purport this domain of strange, suspicious characters.

But while The Third Man’s milieu is a gritty urban environment endemic to so many classic noirs, the architecturally Old World Vienna in this story is a bombed-out, rubble-ridden cesspool of corruption, moral decay, and surveillance. Los Angeles, New York, or Chicago this is certainly not. Further evidence that this does not share the same DNA as proper noirs is the zither music soundtrack, which can sound jaunty and playful, deviating considerably from the traditional orchestral or jazzy type score prevalent in noir. The zither sounds mockingly shrill at times, as if revealing an undercurrent of pessimism and a tinge of tonal irony. This is quite idiosyncratic as musical accompaniment, with nothing else to truly compare to it.

Many scholars point to Carol Reed—director of several notable works, including Odd Man Out, The Fallen Idol, Our Man in Havana, The Agony and the Ecstasy, and Oliver!—as the irrefutable driving creative force behind The Third Man, and for compelling reasons. Reed chose to film on location in war-battered Vienna, a decision that lends valuable authenticity to the visuals and the entire mise en scene. Consider, too, that he was a fitting choice to helm this movie, as he was in the British Army’s wartime documentary unit. He refused to cast anyone but Welles to portray Harry Lime, which may have been the most consequential decision he made on the production. He resisted pressure from Selznick to imbue more American elements into the production and from Greene to bring Holly and Anna together at the conclusion. We can thank Reed’s vision and persistence for the cynical, unsentimental, and darker tonality that makes The Third Man a more lasting work.

As mentioned, Reed eschewed a conventional symphonic score, multi-instrumental soundtrack, or Viennese waltzes, opting instead to take a chance on Karas, an unknown musician, who impressed the director with his zither playing. This was a major risk: Reed fought with the producers to keep this solo instrumentation in the film and won.

Additionally, Reed wasn’t afraid to have characters speak in German or other non-English languages for long stretches with no subtitles, which perhaps helps us more closely identify with Holly, the American outsider surrogate for the audience. Ponder the wordless montage when Calloway presents proof of Lime’s crimes to Holly as a case study in efficient filmmaking, further proof that Reed had smart narrative and visual instincts. Reed’s choice to let the final shot breathe unbroken also speaks to his cinematic savvy. We, like Holly, are waiting eagerly to see if Anna will embrace him or not; lingering on her face and body language speaks volumes about these two characters and the situation. Proving to quite literally be a hands-on filmmaker, Reed facelessly infused himself in the narrative by filming his hands reaching through the sewer grate and voicing the opening narration.

Mind-stirring theses abound in The Third Man, a morality tale about corruption and hypocrisy. Lime personifies the morally reprehensible black market forces that erupted in postwar Europe and unscrupulously profited from other people’s suffering; and yet Lime’s speech about “would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever?” resonates in that period, which followed the mass killing of millions of people via bombings from Axis and Allied forces. “Lime stands out as one of the screen’s most chilling embodiments of the banality of evil, and a perfect stand-in for the film’s vision of moral breakdown in post-World War II Europe,” Slant Magazine reviewer Matt Noller posited.

One reading of The Third Man is that it espouses anti-American sentiment on the other side of the world following the war: Holly is a symbol of the United States and how our country was perceived in postwar Europe. Consider how foolish, clumsy, and naïve Holly is; he’s a personage of ridicule who is, as Village Voice critic Steve Hoberman stated, “blamed for a murder, followed in the street, hijacked by a cab driver, and repeatedly rebuffed by Anna (who can never remember his name). Such are the burdens of world leadership.” Hoberman added that the script created a political allegory: pro-British, anti-Soviet, and critical of the U.S.A.

Roger Ebert shared somewhat in this interpretation: “The Third Man" reflects the optimism of Americans and the bone-weariness of Europe after the war. It's a story about grownups and children: adults like Calloway, who has seen at first hand the results of Lime's crimes, and children like the trusting Holly, who believes in the simplified good and evil of his Western novels.”

Adding weight to this subtextual argument is Salon critic Andrew O’Hehir, who wrote: “The Third Man is important not just because of its technique but because of its theme: Just because blundering Americans rule the world does not mean they understand it, and American cultural hegemony has transformed the global economy into the plot of a gangster movie. While the corrupt and duplicitous postwar Vienna of “The Third Man” may at first look like an ancient realm of fedoras and overcoats, men in ties and women with ringlets, in moral terms it’s the same world we inhabit today.”

This is a picture dripping with pessimism and cynicism. There is no classic happy love story ending here, only the feeling of postwar disillusionment and weariness, a fractured existence (exemplified by a city divided into four sections), hapless victims and seedy opportunists, fools like Holly who have no place in this space, and confused identities (ponder all the wrong names and mistaken identities: Holly is called Harry, Calloway is called Callahan, Holly mispronounces Dr. Winkel’s name, and Harry is the enigmatic third man).

The Third Man certainly ruminates deeply on betrayal: Lime betrays the confidence and love that Holly had placed in his friend, and Holly betrays Harry by leading the police to him and ultimately shooting him dead. And you can’t avoid the classic love triangle trope: Holly loves Anna, Anna loves Harry, Harry at one time may have loved Anna but loves himself more. However, the irony is that, in this love triangle, despite Holly doing everything the classic romantic lead should do (fall in love with the woman and try to protect her), she rejects him and holds a torch for a villainous racketeer.

Here's an interesting exercise in comparative filmmaking: Contrast The Third Man with Casablanca, released seven years earlier. Note how both feature a love triangle between a profiteer (Rick/Harry), a beautiful woman with an Eastern European heritage and accent (Ilsa/Anna), and a man who believes he’s doing the noble/right thing (Victor/Holly). Both films involve emotionally charged endings where the woman has to decide which man to choose. In each movie, the heroine passes on the expected choice, although Anna doesn’t have any love for Holly as Ilsa does for Rick. According to film reviewer Glenn Erickson: “The Third Man shows how the sentiment and ideals of Casablanca have soured in the postwar situation. In Casablanca, the risks taken by Rick, Elsa, and Renault are in harmony with the larger drama being played out between the Axis and the Allies. This ‘ideological security’ helps all three of them make painful personal decisions based on faith in a moral cause. By contrast, Martins, Anna, and the late Harry Lime drift in a moral limbo where such absolutes no longer exist. The Allies have ‘won’ but Vienna has become a political mire of injustice and conflicting ideologies…The characters of the wartime Casablanca may be confused, but they are ennobled by patriotism and able to make wise decisions. Patriotism is dead in the Viennese ruins of The Third Man. Even the benign characters are too disillusioned to function effectively. Holly waffles and plays at romance like a schoolboy. Anna drifts between bitterness and suicidal despair.”

Ultimately, The Third Man reminds us that the world is complicated—populated by an array of disparate forces, races, languages, and interests. Everybody in this world, as Renoir famously says in The Rules of the Game, has their reasons, including shadowy figures like Harry Lime, emotionally abstruse love interests such as Anna Schmidt, seasoned sleuths like Major Calloway, and the countless ethically compromised inhabitants of postwar Vienna. Trying to navigate this byzantine ethical landscape is difficult enough for the natives and the occupying forces, but it’s exponentially harder for naïve outsiders like Holly Martins who attempt to apply a myopic Americanized mindset to a convoluted state of affairs that requires greater depth perception and nuanced sensibilities, not simplistic or romanticized notions.

Holly is the unmistakable bull in this China shop, making a mess out of multiple situations and leaving an embarrassing trail of mostly regretful decisions in his wake. Calloway urges him to be sensible, but Holly says “I haven’t got a sensible name.” He’s been spurned, disillusioned, admonished, and humiliated by nearly everyone he encounters because he’s failed to grasp the new world order: that pessimism, greed, mistrust, and dehumanizing turpitude are the prevailing currencies of value, and no cowboy on a white hat straight out of a western dime novel is going to rescue or restore anyone.

The Third Man’s greatest gift, then, is that it takes an internationally spiced prestige drama, with a would-be romance recipe that uses ingredients associated with an emotionally epic payoff, and slathers it with classic noir’s bittersweet sauce of cynicism. The result is such a unique blending of different, surprising tastes: a one-of-a-kind layer cake with a delightfully decadent Lime-flavored center that you never expected.

Read more...

Cineversary podcast celebrates diamond anniversary of The Third Man

Thursday, March 14, 2024

David Thomson and Charles Drazin
In Cineversary podcast episode #68, host Erik Martin celebrates the diamond anniversary of Carol Reed’s The Third Man with two outstanding guests: David Thomson, renowned film critic, cinema historian, and author of The Fatal Alliance: A Century of War on Film; and Charles Drazin, film historian and author of In Search of The Third Man. Together, they scour the streets and sewers of Vienna on the trail of Harry Lime and the truths behind this now 75-year-old masterwork.

To listen to this episode, click here or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Audible, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Pocket Casts, PodBean, RadioPublic, and Overcast.

Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at www.cineversary.com and email show comments or suggestions to cineversarypodcast@gmail.com
  
 

Read more...

Dear Zachary: Your movie is transfixing but devastating

Tuesday, March 5, 2024

Nothing can quite prepare you for the emotional rollercoaster ride that director Kurt Kuenne takes you on in his 2008 documentary Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father, a film that asks a lot of its audience. Kuenne recounts the tragic story of Andrew Bagby, a young doctor murdered in 2001 by his ex-girlfriend, Shirley Turner. The filmmaker, who shared a longstanding friendship with Bagby since childhood, undertook the project both as a heartfelt tribute and a means to document Bagby's life for his unborn son, Zachary. Dear Zachary stands out as an expressively charged work, guiding audiences through the highs and lows of Bagby's life, his untimely death, and (SPOILERS AHEAD) the subsequent legal proceedings involving his grieving parents David and Kathleen and the titular grandson they seek custody of (fascinatingly, the film is not so much about Andrew or Zachary as it is about these grandparents). Kuenne lends exceptional authenticity and depth to the narrative, and his emotional investment is palpable throughout the movie.

To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, conducted last week, click here.


Dear Zachary doesn’t even pretend to be objective. This is more of a passionate polemic or video as personal essay than a documentary. Kuenne, who also narrated, shot, edited, scored, and co-produced, has an understandably biased agenda here: To pay proper homage to his late friend, explain to Andrew’s son and survivors why Andrew was so loved and special, and bring needed attention to the injustice behind Andrew’s murder and the legal system that allowed Shirley Turner to kill two innocent human beings—one a defenseless child. In this way, it transcends its role as a true crime doc by serving as a form of advocacy, particularly addressing the shortcomings of the legal system in protecting victims and preventing similar tragedies. We hear Kuenne’s narrator voice get choked up in some scenes, revealing how sincerely invested the artist is emotionally in his subject.

In defense of the documentarian here, he never originally intended this to be released commercially to the public. It was to be a private video given to Zachary and his family and friends. The director donated all profits from the movie to scholarships named after Andrew and Zachary.

What distinguishes Dear Zachary as a doc? Kuenne employs a fairly rapid style of editing, using archival home video snippets, current-day interviews and visitation footage, and photographs to tell this story at a relatively swift pace, often speaking quickly and juxtaposing images speedily. Reviewer Brian Orndorf wrote: “Kuenne’s intense study of the events is impressive, using furious editing and speed reading to pack a hornet’s nest of holdups and procedural steps into the narrative. The effect is chaotic (think “Spun” for editorial comparison), whirling the viewer around, hoping to impart the tumultuous sensations that haunted the Bagbys, leaving “Dear Zachary” undeniably compelling, but also faintly pushy, trying much too hard to unsettle the viewer with visual gimmicks when the stark reality of Turner’s twisted ways and the Bagbys’ fury is more than enough to brand itself on the heart and mind.”

Arguably, Kuenne didn’t need to lace the film with his highly emotive piano score, which can come across as manipulatively maudlin. The images and words are powerful and persuasive enough to wring every emotion possible out of the viewer.

Dear Zachary stresses perseverance through the power of love. David and Kathleen have to put aside their hatred and loathing of Shirley, the murderer of their son, to have visitations with their grandson. They stand as the ultimate role models of grace and dignity under pressure, teaching viewers that love and family bonds are bigger priorities than even justice.

This is also a painful dissertation on the profound unfairness of life. One tragedy as a subject matter is enough to warrant a fascinating documentary, but two awful human catastrophes compound the misery exponentially and utterly unfairly. Just when you think the horrible circumstances the Bagby family has to endure can’t get any worse or more cosmically cruel, it gets much worse.

On a brighter note, Kuenne’s passion project reminds us that dead loved ones live on so long as we cherish and remember them. Dear Zachary pays tribute to Andrew and the young son he never knew, but the candid interviews with relatives and friends of the Bagby family—as well as David and Kathleen’s efforts as political activists to change the flawed legal system around bail and the safety of children in custody—reveal that they will never be forgotten.

Similar works

  • Documentaries that set out following one trajectory but eventually change course and focus as filming progresses, such as The Queen of Versailles, Capturing the Friedmans, Gimme Shelter, and Vernon, Florida
  • The Thin Blue Line
  • My Brother Jordan
  • The Imposter
  • Tell Me Who I Am
  • Making a Murderer

Other docs, shorts, and films by Kurt Kuenne

  • Drive-in Movie Memories
  • Validation
  • Shuffle

Read more...

It's alright ma, I'm only bleeding (through the floor)

Tuesday, February 27, 2024

In 2017, Darren Aronofsky opened a disturbing Pandora’s box he called mother!, a psychological and surreal horror film that delves into the life of a young woman (Jennifer Lawrence), residing with her husband (Javier Bardem) in a rural and secluded mansion. Their peaceful existence takes a tumultuous turn when an enigmatic couple, embodied by Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer, unexpectedly enters their lives. As tensions mount and the intrusive behavior of the visitors escalates, the woman's once-serene life descends into chaos. Complementing the leads are memorable supporting performances from Domhnall Gleeson, Brian Gleeson, and Kristen Wiig.

The movie's provocative and polarizing nature has further contributed to its enduring reputation. While some viewers admire its audaciousness and thematic complexity, others find it polarizing, viewing it as either pretentious or disturbing.

To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, click here.


Aronofsky employs intense visuals to instill a pervasive sense of unease and tension throughout the film. But it’s a hard work to take literally, often employing dream logic and fantastical imagery (like the supernatural visions the poet’s wife sees throughout the house). Instead, it plays better as an allegory or parable for some greater lesson. After all, it’s pretty doubtful the director would subject his audience to (SPOILER ALERT) a literal killing and cannibalistic eating of a newborn baby.

Among the clues that this is a nightmarish cinematic metaphor removed from the real world? Consider how blood can dissolve wood and stone, the wife’s ability to sense a diseased heart hidden in the home upon touching the walls, the ridiculous escalation of intruders, and how the crowd so quickly devolves into brutality and aberrant behavior. Interestingly, the characters are never named. Speaking of characters, the house itself qualifies as one, often exhibiting human traits like that obscured cardiac organ or the bleeding floor as well as the exaggerated sound effects that enhance the domicile’s aliveness. The unnerving sound design, in fact, substitutes for a proper musical score.

The filmmaking choices ramp up the tension and claustrophobic elements of the misc en scene, as noticed by critic Brian Tallerico: “Aronofsky shoots the film with a stunning degree of close-up. We are on top of Lawrence and Bardem for most of the film, which not only amplifies the claustrophobia but allows Aronofsky and Libatique to play with a limited perspective. We stay close on Mother, and can barely tell what’s happening behind her or to the sides. The lack of establishing shots keeps us off the game when it comes to a typical horror experience. We often spend horror films looking for answers—Who's the killer? Who's going to die? Who's going to live? "mother!" changes the genre rules. It thrives on horror of confusion, which is the main currency of the film.” BFI reviewer Nick Pinkerton observed: “Save for two bookending scenes, the narrative is entirely filtered through her eyes; she is very often tracked in moving, choreographed closeups which recall Aronofsky’s treatment of Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler; and more than once the camera’s point-of-view is aligned intimately with her own, as when she looks down in the shower at the swell of her pregnant stomach.

Major themes afoot in mother! include, of course, the abuse and destruction of the planet. The film can serve as an effective allegory for, as Jennifer Lawrence stated, “the rape and torment of Mother Earth… I represent Mother Earth.”

Mankind’s yearning to connect to an often uncaring and absent creator deity is also explored herein, as personified by the unnamed poet, who frequently abandons his wife and leaves her vulnerable.

Additionally, the film plays as a biblical metaphor, representing the Old Testament and New Testament. Lawrence further said: “Javier, whose character is a poet, represents a form of God, a creator; Michelle Pfeiffer is in Eve to Ed Harris’s Adam, there’s Cain and Able, and the setting sometimes resembles the Garden of Eden.” The poet’s wife gives birth to a Christlike messiah, who is literally consumed by the spiritually ravenous throng in a communion-like ritual.

Matt Goldberg, writer with Collider, wrote: “The movie is about the relationship between God, Mother Earth, the environment, and humanity, with Aronofsky coming down on the side of humanity being a plague upon the Earth…When (Ed Harris is) puking in the bathroom, we quickly see an injury right where his rib would be. In the next scene, his wife, representing Eve, shows up. They’re allowed to wander the house but are told specifically not to go into the poet’s office, but they do so anyway and Eve accidentally breaks the fire crystal. They’re then exiled and soon begin having sex elsewhere in the house, thus representing original sin and man’s fall from grace after eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden…The wake then becomes a chaotic party where, after numerous protestations to not sit on an un-braced sink, the sink becomes unmoored from the wall and water pours into the house. Thus we have humanity’s downfall following the slaying of Abel and eventually the flood…the Earth and humanity will die and at best God will simply do everything all over again because he needs to create and desires love from his creations.”

Mother! reminds us, too, of the threat of a patriarchal-dominated society and male ambitions to women and families, who are frequently ignored, neglected, minimized, and abused. Case in point: The poet is a powerful and creative man but he takes his wife and other female partners for granted, demanding their love and adoration without reciprocating it equally. Furthermore, it’s a film about the dangers of religious fanaticism, the cult of personality, entrusting your faith in an imperfect human being or belief system, and social media—with the often rude, imposing, possessive, and outspoken home intruders symbolizing the nameless followers and comment critics who populate social media platforms, chatrooms, and comment fields.

This movie is also a rumination on the unbalanced relationship between a vampiric artist and his exploited muse, or how the artist often sucks dry the vitality of his inspiration. Critics have compared the poet to a kind of Bluebeard figure who cycles through one female muse victim after another. mother! has also been referred to as a “self-criticism” narrative in which the artist (Aronofsky) indicts himself and his self-indulgent creative instincts, illustrating the destructive nature of artistry and creativity. The poet has to “burn down” his inspirations and create a lot of waste to produce a relatively small but beautiful jewel. Ponder that Aronofsky was dating Lawrence at the time of this production.
 

Similar works

  • The Apartment trilogy by Polanski, including Repulsion, Rosemary’s Baby, and The Tenant
  • Allegorical thrillers like The Neon Demon, The House That Jack Built, The Babadook, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, and Don’t Look Up
  • Home invasion horrors like Funny Games and The Invitation
  • Suspiria (2018)
  • Antichrist
  • Possession

Other films by Darren Aronofsky

  • Requiem for a Dream
  • The Wrestler
  • Black Swan
  • Noah
  • The Whale
  • Postcard from Earth

Read more...

Universal thumbs up for It Happened One Night

Tuesday, February 20, 2024


They don’t come much more timeless or beloved than It Happened One Night, directed by Frank Capra, produced by Harry Cohn for Columbia Pictures, and released in 1934—90 years ago this week. The film follows the escapades of Ellie Andrews, a wealthy socialite portrayed by Claudette Colbert, who flees from her domineering father to elope with a fortune-seeking playboy. Along her journey, she encounters Peter Warne, a recently fired newspaper journalist played by Clark Gable. Recognizing Ellie, Peter offers assistance in exchange for an exclusive story, leading to a mismatched duo embarking on a cross-country adventure filled with comedic mishaps and burgeoning affection.

Set against the backdrop of the Great Depression, the film was crafted during a challenging era for Columbia Pictures, a minor studio competing with Hollywood giants like MGM and Paramount. Despite initial reluctance from Capra, who ultimately secured creative control, the production encountered obstacles including budget constraints and artistic disagreements. Nevertheless, It Happened One Night triumphed as both a critical and commercial success. The memorable performances of Colbert and Gable, coupled with their on-screen chemistry and impeccable comedic timing, solidified the film's enduring popularity.

To listen to a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this film, click here. For the latest Cineversary podcast episode celebrating It Happened One Night’s 90th anniversary, click here.


This picture remains evergreen for delving into topics such as class privilege, socioeconomic disparities, and the universal quest for happiness—messages that particularly struck a chord with audiences of this hardscrabble era. Its examination of these themes, presented with both levity and depth, imbued the film with substance and raised it above the rank of frivolous entertainment expected from a romantic comedy for 1934.

Ponder that this is likely the best comedy that Gable and Colbert, individually, have ever starred in and quite possibly their finest performances, as evidenced by the fact that It Happened One Night is the only film each ever won an acting Oscar for. Although it was already his 13th directed film in the sound era, It Happened One Night is also the feature that made the world take notice of Capra, his first in a successful run of crowd-pleasing movies that the filmmaker crafted in the 1930s for Columbia.

Moreover, the film is an important early benchmark in the screwball comedy subgenre. Three-Cornered Moon (1933), also starring Colbert, and Bombshell (1933) with Jean Harlow are often credited as the first screwball comedies, but this is the work that likely helped put screwballs on the map thanks to its superior quality compared to those earlier pictures, its immense popularity at the box-office in 1934, and its enduring legacy. It helped introduce several key characteristics of the screwball comedy, a subgenre known for:
  • Farcical stories and situations—where the film pokes fun at stereotypical characters, such as filthy rich fathers and spoiled rotten daughters (case in point: My Man Godfrey)
  • Themes highlighting the differences between upper and lower socioeconomic classes, with many of the settings taking place among the high society but involving a likable male love interest from the other side of the tracks (see Mr. Deeds Goes to Town)
  • A plot centered on courtship and marriage (The Philadelphia Story) or remarriage (The Awful Truth)
  • Often a strong-willed, determined, and sometimes tomboyish female lead, commonly depicted as stronger and even smarter than her male counterpart (Bringing Up Baby, The Lady Eve)
  • Fast pacing in the humor and repartee, direction, editing, and dialogue delivery (His Girl Friday)
  • Physical humor, including slapstick (Bringing Up Baby), pratfalls (The Lady Eve), and sight gags (To Be Or Not To Be), are often used to elicit major laughs and make dignified characters look ridiculous.
  • Quirky and colorful side characters also populate these stories, as evidenced by Shapely, Danker the singing thief, and the various motel owners in this film.
  • A story involving mistaken identity, misunderstanding, keeping of an important secret, occasionally involving cross-dressing or masquerading (Some Like it Hot and Bringing Up Baby)
  • A classic battle of the sexes between a man and a woman, with the male lead’s masculinity often challenged by a strong female love interest (The Awful Truth)
  • Colorful supporting characters with quirky personalities.
It Happened One Night helped advance several of these elements in the subgenre, such as silly characters, eccentric scenarios, and a comedic battle of the sexes theme. Its seamless fusion of humor and romance, as well as its contrast between the haves and the have-nots, established a blueprint that numerous films would emulate in subsequent years, including My Man Godfrey, Sullivan’s Travels, The Lady Eve, The Palm Beach Story, and many others. Film scholar Molly Haskell remarked: “Films before (It Happened One Night), the romantic comedies, they really hadn’t been silly…here, (the leads) could be silly and also be incredibly romantic.”

This isn’t a wall-to-wall screwball, but certain scenes and situations employ the zaniness and physical chaos endemic of classic screwballs, such as when Peter and Ellie pretend they're married in front of the detectives, when he gives her the “piggyback” ride, and the hitchhiking sequence.

Aside from being a screwball influence, It Happened One Night made history by becoming the inaugural film to secure victories in all five primary categories at the Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Director (Frank Capra), Best Actor (Clark Gable), Best Actress (Claudette Colbert), and Best Adapted Screenplay (Robert Riskin). This marked a significant milestone in Oscar history, establishing the film as a trailblazer in the annals of cinema. Consider that after It Happened One Night, only two other films have won all five of these major awards: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975), and The Silence of the Lambs (1991).

Furthermore, it’s been recognized as among the first Hollywood films to portray a wealthy character undergoing a dramatic reversal of fortune and being romantically involved with an individual from a lower socioeconomic background. This narrative decision allowed the movie to delve into themes of class and privilege in a manner that was innovative for a film set in and released during the Great Depression.

Additionally, It Happened One Night set new standards and expectations for on-screen romantic relationships. The palpable chemistry between Gable and  Colbert elevated the film beyond conventional romantic comedies. Their natural banter and flirtatious exchanges set a precedent for on-screen chemistry that would influence numerous romantic films to come. “It Happened One Night has had an immeasurable effect on the romantic comedy genre, which has paid homage to and spoofed Capra’s picture countless times,” Deep Focus Review essayist Brian Eggert wrote. “Whenever a character uses their sex appeal to stop a passing car, whenever a sheet separates a room, whenever life on the road provides a life-altering experience, whenever a bride changes her mind at the last minute, and whenever two bickering adults fall in love, It Happened One Night is among the influences.”

Capra’s work was groundbreaking for its realistic portrayal of downtrodden settings, which was rare for Hollywood films of that time. Scenes depicting dirty country roads, bus stations, outdoor shows, and a run-down countryside, along with characters eating raw carrots and meager breakfasts, offered a stark contrast to the glamorous escapism typically associated with Hollywood productions.

The movie left a lasting cultural imprint, shaping not just future romcoms and screwballs but also popular characters and trends. Recall that Gable eats a carrot and is called “Doc” by Shapely, the rider on the bus, who is later frightened by the mention of a personality named “Bugs Dooley”: This movie is credited with inspiring animator Friz Freling in the creation of cartoon character Bugs Bunny. Additionally, rumor has it that sales of men’s undershirts tanked after Gable was shown taking off his shirt to reveal a bare chest; the film may have also popularized hitchhiking.

As proof of how beloved this film and its narrative was and is, consider the numerous remakes in its wake: Even Knew Her Apples (1945); You Can’t Run Away From It (1956); and several adaptations made in India between 1956 and 2007. It’s been spoofed and referenced, as well, in movies like Laurel and Hardy’s Way Out West (1937), Mel Brooks’ Spaceballs (1987), and Bandits (2001).

This pre-code film was provocative in its time, too. For instance, the "Walls of Jericho" scenes were considered risqué in 1934 for their suggestion of an unmarried man and woman sleeping in the same room together, for Gable taking off his shirt, and for Cobert wearing a revealing undergarment. In her Criterion Collection essay, Farran Smith Nehme wrote: “What takes this setup from the cute to the ravishing is what happens when the lights are shut off and the full beauty of Joseph Walker’s cinematography takes hold. The rain outside makes the windows sparkle, and the light from them outlines Colbert’s form as she stands there in her slip, trying to calm her nerves. It’s a shot that, at the time, could have revealed more of Colbert’s state of undress, and indeed that’s how Capra had planned it. But Colbert objected, and Capra later said the scene was sexier in the near dark. It Happened One Night made the sexual longing unmistakable, but did it in a way that showed future filmmakers how to stay on the right side of the censors.”

Also, the film includes numerous instances of sexual suggestiveness, such as Colbert showing off her legs and fellow bus rider Shapely’s lines like “When a cold mama gets hot, boy, she sizzles,” and “Shapley’s the name and that’s how I like ’em.” Eggert continued: “Ellie…has a voracious appetite. Literary and early Hollywood symbolism often treated hunger as a shorthand analogy for sexual appetite, and It Happened One Night features no end of references to food and hunger…Coming from the vacuous high society, she finds herself drawn to Peter in all his earthiness—epitomized by his fondness for that most phallic of vegetable roots, the raw carrot. When, out of desperate hunger, Ellie resolves to try a bite, she realizes that raw carrots aren’t so bad, after all.”

Amazingly, we never even see Peter and Ellie kiss, nor does Capra give us a payoff romantic embrace at the conclusion—merely a clever shot of the Wall of Jericho blanket tumbling down, a cinematically potent suggestive image.

Capra's films often explore populist values and depict the struggle of the everyday common man against the machinery of politics, commerce, and corruption. They frequently portray rugged individualism as a myth or fairy tale created to maintain the illusion of democracy, as seen in works like Meet John Doe and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Capra's characters are often conflicted by alternating realities, exemplified by George Bailey's internal struggle in It's a Wonderful Life as he grapples with his desires for personal fulfillment and societal responsibilities. Strong and charismatic female leads are also a hallmark of Capra's films, with actresses like Jean Arthur, Barbara Stanwyck, and Claudette Colbert taking on memorable roles in movies such as Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, Meet John Doe, and It Happened One Night.

Several of Capra’s scenes in the film serve as poignant reminders of the Great Depression setting. For instance, the scene where bus passengers engage in a spontaneous singalong symbolizes a moment of hope and unity amidst adversity, allowing them to momentarily forget their personal struggles and come together as a community. Additionally, the sequence where characters selflessly give their last dollars to a hungry woman and child highlights the widespread economic hardship faced by many during this era. Furthermore, the scene where Ellie impulsively dumps a perfectly good meal on the floor reflects a sense of hubris and extravagance that contrasts starkly with the prevailing economic conditions of the Great Depression. We also observe Peter gesturing friendly waves to drifters riding the rails.

Indeed, class disparities are front and center in It Happened One Night. At the heart of the film lies the juxtaposition between Ellie, an affluent, sheltered heiress, and Peter, a rugged reporter. Their interactions serve as a lens through which the movie delves into societal class distinctions, challenging preconceived notions linked to affluence and privilege. This is also a narrative about the battle between two Kings: King Wesley and Peter, who is nicknamed “King” by his fellow inebriated reporters in the scene when he is introduced. The former is a King whose class, fame, wealth, and privilege make him a fitting suitor to an heiress, while the latter is a king with a lowercase "k" who, despite his lower socioeconomic status, rules Ellie’s heart.

Other themes explored include self-reliance, autonomy, self-discovery, and the importance of thinking for oneself and pursuing one's true passions. Ellie and Peter each pursue independence and freedom in distinct manners. Ellie flees from her domineering father to pursue her marital desires, while Peter, a tenacious and self-reliant journalist, seeks autonomy through his career. Their joint odyssey facilitates a deeper understanding of their individual aspirations and desires. Ellie and Peter both undergo significant personal growth and exploration throughout the narrative. Ellie learns to assert her independence and agency, while Peter cultivates empathy and compassion. Their collaborative journey serves as a catalyst for uncovering pivotal truths about themselves and their intrinsic values.

Recall how Peter lectures Ellie on how to properly dunk a donut, ride piggyback, and hitchhike. This becomes a running gag in which Peter asserts his assumed authority on these subjects until the student becomes the teacher in the hitchhiking sequence, which demonstrates that, like her, he’s learning important lessons in this journey—including the lesson that Ellie isn’t the dizzy dame or helpless brat that he imagines her to be.

This is certainly a “money can’t buy you love” tale. The film espouses that wealth and material possessions are insufficient for securing love or happiness, highlighting the significance of true affection and mutual respect. The movie conveys a message that love can serve as a great equalizer among different classes, suggesting that interpersonal relationships have the potential to transcend socioeconomic barriers. 

However, this message may be diluted when tracing the trajectory of Ellie's character arc, which ultimately challenges the notion of female empowerment and independence. While initially depicted as a strong-willed and intelligent woman resistant to patriarchal control, Ellie's reliance on Peter for protection and eventual acceptance of her father's wishes arguably undermine her agency and autonomy. Moreover, her ignorance regarding financial matters and her inability to fend for herself highlight the constraints imposed on her by societal expectations and gender norms. Thus, while the film may celebrate the spirit of the common man in certain respects, it reinforces traditional gender roles and power dynamics for the time.

Per Slant Magazine critic Chris Cabin: “If the film ultimately idealizes the morals of the middle class in terms of usable intellect and responsibility, the narrative builds off the friction between entitlement and self-reliance, both between the two leads and within Ellie. The filmmakers all but underline this early on when Warne’s colleagues christen him “King,” just like Ellie’s other suitor—one given as a sign of a family’s wealth and heritage, the other gifted by the common man for an act of careless, bemused defiance.”

It Happened One Night has a few greatest gifts it continues to bestow with every rewatch. First is its ability to make us believe in the spontaneity of love and how it can happen unexpectedly. Gift #2 is its reinforcement of the often implausible notion that opposites can attract. And gift #3 is its remarkable power to increasingly care about and root for two characters who often aren’t very likable or relatable—especially 90 years later when the dated gender politics and patriarchal values of this film can uncomfortably stand out.

Read more...

The power of persuasion

Sunday, February 18, 2024

Fair warning: The 2014 film Diplomacy, a French historical drama helmed by director Volker Schlöndorff and adapted from Cyril Gély's play of the same title, is one of those “based loosely on historical events” dramatizations that can infuriate scholars and historians. Nevertheless, even if it fudges the facts, it’s a compelling drama that unfolds against the backdrop of Nazi-occupied Paris in 1944, chronicling the efforts of Swedish diplomat Raoul Nordling, portrayed by André Dussollier, to dissuade General Dietrich von Choltitz—the German military governor of Paris, played by Niels Arestrup—from executing Adolf Hitler's directive to annihilate Paris before the Allies' arrival.

Dussollier and Arestrup deliver arresting performances, infusing their characters with depth and authenticity, while Schlöndorff's direction and the film's cinematography capture the tension and complexities of the narrative, effectively portraying the intricate negotiations and ethical dilemmas faced by the protagonists.

To hear a recording of our CineVerse group discussion of this movie, conducted earlier this month, click here.


What’s interesting about Diplomacy is that it’s an antiwar movie stripped to bare essentials, featuring only two main characters, filmed primarily in a single room, depicting very little actual combat and not featuring any personalities from or scenes involving the other warring side. This is the rare war film less about action than about words. In their essay for Offscreen.com, George Lellis and Hans-Bernhard Moeller wrote: “It is easy to dramatize war, but much harder to dramatize peace. In Diplomatie, Gély and Schlöndorff have pulled off the trick of making anti-war works because they have provided a largely non-violent resolution to the conflict at hand. The superiority of the choice of non-violence over destruction is reinforced by a closing caption that tells us that Choltitz’s wife and children went unharmed, putting to rest Choltitz’s fears that if he disobeyed orders his family would be killed… Diplomacy thus deemphasizes spectacle in favor of talk, drawing one’s attention to the subtleties of dialogue and performance.”

Interestingly, the filmmakers use archival black-and-white footage of, first, the destruction of Warsaw to quickly demonstrate how ruthless and mighty the Nazis are at destroying a city, and second the encroachment of the Allies into Paris and the street combat involving the French resistance, to lend the film a sheen of verisimilitude.

Although the outcome is anticlimactic, considering that we know Paris wasn’t decimated, Schlöndorff and company effectively tighten the knot and create riveting suspense toward the conclusion as we await the general’s decision and observe the fictional close call among the soldiers preparing to detonate the explosives. Nordling and Choltitz go toe-to-toe with intriguing contentions for why the city should be spared or not, with the diplomat increasingly serving as the general’s conscience as the film progresses and penetrating the Nazi commander’s thick armor of resolve and self-imposed ethical immunity. By administering Choltitz’s medicine in time—therefore resisting the urge to let him die—and by responding “I don’t know” when the general asks him what he would do in his place, Nordling earns his trust, respect, and convincible ear.

Indeed, Diplomacy serves as a memorable lesson on empathy, or putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. When Choltitz asks Nordling what he would do in his place, he’s posing the question to the audience, too. While it’s easy to argue logically that saving over a million French lives would outweigh saving your wife and children, the reality is that, if the decision were up to you it might not be so easy to make.

The moral conflict at the heart of the tale is palpable: If you are sworn to obey orders and do what’s best for your soldiers and your country, should you disobey those orders if they come from a leader you no longer trust and from a motive of senseless violence and brutality?

Here, we also have a classic battle of wills. This story pits one man—a neutral diplomat with cunning and persuadable powers—against a grizzled military leader who holds the fate of a major city and future postwar world order in his hands. The stakes are incredibly high, and both men prove that they can cogently rationalize their arguments and weigh the pros and cons of the impending decision. Although the general appears unyielding and determined earlier in the film, we see cracks emerge in his stony façade as well as physical and moral vulnerability.

Diplomacy further posits that the fate of nations and the outcome of major historical events often hinge on the mere choice of one flawed human being. Although this 11th-hour meeting between Choltitz and Nordling is a dramatic fabrication, it demonstrates how the decision one person can make in human history can be incredibly impactful. Director Volker Schlondorff said in an interview: “War places men in extreme situations and brings out the best and worst in humanity. These days a conflict between France and Germany is so unthinkable that I found it interesting to recall the past relationships between our two countries. If, God forbid, Paris had been razed, I doubt that the Franco-German bond would have formed or that Europe would have pulled through.”

This film also shows how words can sometimes be more powerful than weapons, and how healthy human dialogue and well-timed, carefully articulated arguments can defuse even the most volatile of situations. “The movie presents an argument between civilization and barbarism, between the pleasure principle and the death instinct,” wrote New Yorker critic David Denby. “But the filmmakers mostly avoid high-flown rhetoric in favor of the intensely practical give-and-take of negotiation. Schlöndorff…makes a case that diplomacy can solve the most intricately knotted problems.”

Similar works

  • Is Paris Burning
  • The Devil’s General
  • Winterspelt
  • Frost/Nixon
  • Downfall
  • Conspiracy
  • Thirteen Days
  • Shake Hands With the Devil
  • Fail Safe
  • 12 Angry Men
  • Secret Honor
  • Missing
  • Films with narratives restricted by limited locations, like Rope, Rear Window, and Sleuth

Other films by Volker Schlondorff

  • The Tin Drum
  • Death of a Salesman (TV)
  • Enigma (TV)

Read more...

Cineversary podcast sends valentine to It Happened One Night for its 90th birthday

Wednesday, February 14, 2024

Joseph McBride
In Cineversary podcast episode #67, host Erik Martin and guest Joseph McBride, a film professor at San Francisco State University and author of Frankly: Unmasking Frank Capra, send a valentine to It Happened One Night, directed by Frank Capra, which celebrates a 90th birthday this month. Erik and Joseph hitchhike across Hollywood history to examine how this granddaddy of the romcom and screwball comedy remains a classic, its influence on later films, what it reveals about Capra, and much more.

To listen to this episode, click here or click the "play" button on the embedded streaming player below. Or, you can stream, download, or subscribe to Cineversary wherever you get your podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Audible, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Pocket Casts, PodBean, RadioPublic, and Overcast.

Learn more about the Cineversary podcast at www.cineversary.com and email show comments or suggestions to cineversarypodcast@gmail.com.

Read more...

  © Blogger template Cumulus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP