From 1997, the film is set in the dying days of the old Soviet “empire” in what was then Czechoslovakia. It is about 15 years since I first saw this film and it still brings a smile. Directed by Jan Svĕrák (Dark Blue World, 2001) and staring his brother Zdenek SvĕráK. It was written by Zdenek and Pavel Taussig. Our hero is Louka (Jan SvĕráK, Empties 2007). Louka used to be a cellist with the Czechoslovak Symphony Orchestra but was removed for reasons falling somewhere between deliberate and mistake, this was in the days of bureaucratic decisions being made by the technocrats regardless of the effects. Light-hearted and warm it tackles the events of the time in a manner which might just bring your finger to your eye to wipe away something…nudge nudge. You will laugh.
Being unemployed, our confirmed bachelor, must have an income. He manages this by performing at weddings and funerals. He also supports himself by painting tombstones. In with all of this is his relationship with his on/off girlfriend. Between performances which to say the least, he has no interest in, he talks with his friend the gravedigger. It is here that he learns of a way to make some money fast; marry a Russian bride so she gets her visa out of Russia. Sounds like it could be done, so he agrees.
The arrangements are made and before long, Louka is married to his Russian bride. At this stage we could say they lived happily ever after, but then there would be no film, in fact things go down-hill at an appreciable rate. His Russian bride has her heart elsewhere, namely with her boyfriend I West Germany. Before long she leaves Louka and heads to Germany leaving her son, Kolya behind. Kolya goes to live with his grand-mother for a while but she dies and the authorities decide the child must live with his step-father; Louka
After some resistance, from all side, Louka and Kolya begin to settle down together with room being made in his dingy garret flat. The fact that neither of them speaks the other’s language doesn’t help either. As they progress slowly coming to terms with each other, fate throws another spanner in to the works, Kolya contracts meningitis which requires specific medication for him. This all brings the situation for the two into focus with the authorities. Louka is threatened with prison.
As the world is about to come tumbling down around him, events in the outside world gather pace and the old regime is swept away by the Velvet Revolution. This together with the events in Germany, Kolya’s mother is able to be reunited with him. Things end well for Louka also, he and his girlfriend soon have a new family member to care for.
This is an easy going film, looking at life from the point of view of somebody who despite having things go against him, is determined to get on with things. There are some great moments of simple verbal and situational comedy scattered in here, which make it a cut above the rest. Dig it up, watch it and feel better about life.
There are very few movies which have contributed to the creation of a genre, M is one of these. We see in this movie a nascent Noir setting, we see a dark psychological thriller. Lang’s M (1931) is one of those rare movies which has influenced those coming after it. We see tones of the shadows, the underworld and the police, the fear of society in John Fords, Oscar winning “The Informer” staring Victor McLaglen from 1935.
Once we begin to watch this movie we see the stylisation, indeed do we see shades of F.W. Marnau’s 1922 Nosferatu. The limitation of camera’s and sets in the earlier years certainly helped with the stylisation, we in effect see theatrics on camera, this is not a bad thing. The movie is about contrasts, as we will discuss a little later. From the very start with the children’s games, the shadow on the Police notice etc. this is a movie which is visual, it is the camera more than the script that tells the story. Of course we have to remember, people such as Lang worked their apprenticeships in silent cinema and it shows, positively. Alfred Hitchcock once said you should be able to follow a movie without its dialogue, this is certainly the case here.
Camera play and tome give us power and fear, the camera conveys the mood of the scene, the home ideal, the police offices or even the criminal gangs. We see our villain Hans Beckert is first a shadow, when we see him as a person he is at his weakest, the power is in the shadow, not the light. The camera angles also play into the effects of the cinematography, whether it is the high sweeping shot of the children playing or the shot of Lohmann at his desk in the smoky room with the map to his back (he is a man of power). Just as I mentioned the almost theatrical approach by Marnau in the 20’s I can’t help but wonder if Lang’s use of the shadow and darkness influenced Brava or Argento in their delivery of the Itallian Giallo horror genre. The street scenes such as young Elise Beckmann (Inga Landgut) plays contrast with the scenes of her mother preparing dinner at home. Her playing ball and reading the police notice show the underlying danger, against this her mother goes about her business preparing dinner in the bright, clean and homely apartment. All is not perfect even before she notices her daughter missing, the horror of the murders pays a visit by way of the tension it is causing. The calmness of home is shattered when it becomes clear what has happened, again the contrasts.
Lorre’s Beckert is troubled, he seems to be fighting the evil inside him, a fight he has lost. This film is about the struggle between light and dark, whether it be the dark places within us, the dark shadows of our environment or even the darker aspects of the society we live in. We see the chaleenge of society to police itself and protect itself. As we mentioned M is a first of its kind movie, we see what is to become a psychological thriller, again mirrored in The Informer.
The movie is almost an intrusion into the lives of others. We see the mother innocently preparing dinner in her home safe bright warm and friendly in contrast to the dark shadows and tension of the streets. Frau Beckmann(ellenm Widmann) has an almost silent role except to scream her anguish in the search for her child and indeed the mourning for her. The camera helps the story.
There is fear and despair on the streets. Any man who does not fit in as expected is immediately a suspect, condemmed as the murderer. The Minister orders an immediate arrest. The police deploy the most up to date “scientific” methods to find him. Their efforts begin to have an impact on the ordinary criminals of the city, indeed given this and their own moral outrage, they too begin to look for Beckert. As we see this we also notice the importance of the time, whether it is the need for immediate results or the thieves with their stolen watches, time is ticking, people are dying. As the police work to track him using a mix of “modern” science and old-fashioned policing we see the parallel search by the criminal underworld get under way searching out the evil in their city, an evil far below even their standards, this is an unacceptable evil. The search is organised in grids around the city.
True to form, Lang has Beckert recognised, not by sight but by sound, it is a blind beggar that recognises him from a tune whistled. Another Beggar marks him with an “M” so he can be followed, It is the criminals not the police that eventually find and capture him. He is followed in to an office block as it closes, the criminals take it over as if it were a bank about to be robbed. He is eventually caught. Such is the stylisation of the camerawork that we can see and notice the angular presentation of these scenes inside the symmetrical, ordered office building. He is, as we said, captured and taken to a place where he can be tried by his peers. The police are one step behind but trick “Papa” Lohmann (Otto Wernicke) into revealing where Beckert is to be brought.
When we see Beckert brough to the crowed cellar, he is brought before a tribunal of the city’s criminal class. They are intent in justice at least seeming to be done and even give him a defence lawyer. We see in this scene Beckert’s attempt to plead for his life, he sees himself as much a victim of his illness as the others. There is the semblance of justice, but we all know his life is forfeit. Before he can be finally judged and sentenced by his “peers”, the police, acting on the information they got out of Lohmann, raid the cellar and capture Beckert.
Again the contrast continues; when next we see Beckert he is being brought before a court of Justice. The dark, shadowy rough and curved setting of the cellar is set against the bright, ordered, “square” scene of the court house. Once again the silent-movie pedigree comes through, we never hear the judges speak, the action is purely in the camera-work. The mother’s mourning is all we see, despite him, Beckert, being guilty and for execution her child will not be brought back.
As mentioned, there is a sense of neorealism about this picture, Lang is at pains to show the film through the eyes of ordinary people, not through a “star”. Looking at the film through today’s eyes, we can perhaps understand Beckert’s possible illness, not agree or use it as an excuse for his actions, but we can identify it, the question is, how would his character have been perceived by the audience of the time; his attempts to plea for clemency fall on deaf ears, he must be removed from civil society (whatever that is).
We are perhaps tempted to see this movie through the eyes of history and look for the indicators of the Nazi shadow about to engulf Germany and Europe. We need to remember both Lang and Lorre, fled Nazi Germany. We see society as Lang saw it, made up of powerful and week, good and bad, innocent and guilty, sometimes a mixture of all. We see a struggle between good and bad, both internally and externally within society, both with in groups and between groups or classes. Perhaps this is the type of division which cause the vacuum in Germany at that time, I don’t know. We see what is essentially a filmed stage drama, which has lost none of its appeal and horror over the years.
We all get asked about what our favourite film is. My answer is always, that I don’t have one, movies are like books or chocolates, depending on the time and taste we come across on or two every-so- often which makes us stop and think. I was fortunate enough as a kid/young adult to come across three movies, in some ways similar, in others quite different. Those movies; Casablanca (Curtiz,1942) Roma, Città Aperta (Rossellini, 1945) and “Things to Come” (Cameron Menzies, 1936) all left me wanting to know more. I can remember at different times watching, as a kid, both Things to Come and Roma, I did not know about them before hand, but once I had seen them, they left a mark. As an adult, our paths crossed again and I got to know and appreciate them. These are the movies which first found me and gave me an appreciation of cinematography as an art and medium for an author’s vision.
I was affected by the brutality and shear dystopia of the vision set out by Wells, Korda and Cameron Menzies, it was dark and as a kid, the stuff of nightmares, the bombing of the city initially and then with the sleeping gas by Wings over the World, left me with a chill I can still remember the best part of 30 years later. The poignancy of the air raids stuck with me, perhaps because I was (still am) a child of the cold war, and we grew up with the sword of nuclear conflict hanging over us.
The film opens in an English town/city, at one time it has the magnificent architecture of a capital but also the feel of a small English town, the name of the town is: “Everytown”. This unromantic view for a naming sets the tone for what we have ahead.
It is the Christmas period and our hero John Cabal (Raymond Massey, How the West Was Won, 1962) is talking with two guests, they turn to the subject of possible war. The discussion shows that opinion is divided between the friends . The conversation looks to the future history which may come given the on-going situation, it is even felt by some there that war might be good for society generally, spurring-on technological development. Our host Cabal is a pacifist and does not accept the benefits of war. The theoretical discussion is thrown in to sharp relief when later on Everytown is subjected to what can only be described as a Blitzkrieg attack using planes and tanks reducing the town to rubble.
Looking at these scenes of destruction we might be tempted to guffaw at the special effects and models, but we need to remember this was a ground-breaking vision in 1936, get past the limitations of the period and watch the movie, you will be rewarded for it. We might also not appreciate the forward looking nature of the story itself. We need to remember that the movie is from 1936, the vision from the book even earlier. This movie looks at the world around it and guesses to the future in store, unfortunately it was not too far wrong. The movie is as visual as it is vocal, it is probably the first film, the cinematography of which, left a mark on me. At the time there would have been no other movie which pulled the fears of the time in to such a neat package, giving us a glimpse of what the fears of the time were like. We can contrast it with movies like “The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp” (1943) which although filmed in war time, sought to show how an individual’s respect for another can overcome the evils of war, society was never allowed to descend to total self-destruction, it is a romanticised comedy of sorts. Things to Come makes no attempt to lighten the message, continuously bringing home the horror of the situation.
The war is not a short affair, dragging on for decades through the 50’s and 60’s, it is total war bringing in everybody including pacifist Cabal who we see later in uniform as a pilot. Even here we see the struggle of humanity over the destruction. Massey shoots down an enemy bomber pilot, but then lands to offer him help. The pilot is dying and as they talk a young girl comes across them, the gas and poison of the attacks is also falling around them, the pilot gives the girl his mask, Cabal rescues the girl and takes her back in his aircraft, leaving the pilot his gun, who after reflecting on saving the girl and in all probability killing her family, shoots himself.
As the war progresses into the 1960’s the cause of the conflict has long since been lost to the fug of war and history. Just as we thought things could not get any worse a new evil is visited upon Everytown , biological warfare in the form of a plague which causes the Wandering sickness, we are never told who the enemy was that unleashed this. Over half the surviving population of the world is wiped out. Any semblance of national government is also gone. The war has reversed and destroyed the technological advances made up until the war started.
The scene next brings us to about 1970, Everytown is in the hands of “The Boss” (Ralph Richardson, Doctor Zhivago, 1965), he is every bit the medieval warlord. Firm and vicious, he has controlled the plague by shooting anybody suffering from it. We see he has designs on a nearby group, the Hill People, he wants to take their coal and shale to make fuel for his surviving planes and grow his little empire. He is a despot in the classical sense.
Into this wrecked Everytown flies a modern aircraft far beyond the biplanes of The Boss, piloted by Cabal himself. He tells us of a new civilisation growing in Basra, Iraq. It is made up of surviving “Engineers and Mechanics” who have come together to form a new society, a new world order, based on science, technology and learning. Cabal is taken captive and forced to work on the Boss’s biplanes to service and repair them. He is assigned another to work with him, Gordon (Derrick De Marney), who escapes using the repaired aircraft. He flies to the new society, calling itself “Wings over The World”.
Our next view of Everytown is it being attacked by this new society, this time the gas used is a sleeping gas, when the population reawakens The Boss is dead. As the decades pass we move in to the middle 21st century around 2036. Society has advanced quickly, learning and growing through science and exploration. This has not all been perfect, this quick advancement puts strain on society.
The strains rise to a popular uprising against a planned rocket launch to the Moon. Faced with the danger to the mission the chairman of the ruling council, Oswald Cabal, John’s grandson (and also played by Massey) pulls forward the launch. These people are seen almost as luddites. Addressing the crowds towards the end of the movie he asks “All the universe – or nothingness, which shall it be?”
It is probably hard to underplay the part this movie should play in cinema history, The vision is clear and shocking, no more shocking for the vision itself, even before Poland in 1939 or even the Spanish Civil War which was only gathering pace in 1936 we are shown the destructive nature of Blitzkrieg. We are shown the destruction of society and humanity’s descent to a new Dark Age. Much has been made of the technological advances made by society as a result of WWII. Wells, Cameron Menzies and Korda gave us a new vision which was scarily accurate. We see how eventually a new society is born based on the advances of science, however all is not perfect, order and control seem perfect, but are they? There are few movies which despite being nearly 70 years old can still pack the same punch as they did when first out. The message of Things to Come is as valid now as it was in 1936.
books or chocolates, depending on the time and taste we come across on or two every-so- often which makes us stop and think. I was fortunate enough as a kid/young adult to come across three movies, in some ways similar, in others quite different. Those movies; Casablanca (Curtiz,1942) Roma, Città Aperta (Rossellini, 1945) and “Things to Come” (Cameron Menzies, 1936) all left me wanting to know more. I can remember at different times watching, as a kid, both Things to Come and Roma, I did not know about them before hand, but once I had seen them, they left a mark. As an adult, our paths crossed again and I got to know and appreciate them. These are the movies which first found me and gave me an appreciation of cinematography as an art and medium for an author’s vision.
I was affected by the brutality and shear dystopia of the vision set out by wells, Korda and Cameron Menzies, it was dark and as a kid, the stuff of nightmares, the bombing of the city initially and then with the sleeping gas by Wings over the World, left me with a chill I can still remember the best part of 30 years later. The poignancy of the air raids stuck with me, perhaps because I was (still am) a child of the cold war, and we grew up with the sword of nuclear conflict hanging over us.
The film opens in an English town/city, at one time it has the magnificent architecture of a capital but also the feel of a small English town, the name of the town is: “Everytown”. This unromantic view, naming sets the tone for what we have ahead. It is the Christmas period and our hero John Cabal (Raymond Massey, How the West Was Won, 1962) is talking with two guests, they turn to the subject of possible war. The discussion shows that opinion is divided between the friends . The conversation looks to the future history which may come given the on-going situation, it is even felt by some there that war might be good for society generally, spurring-on technological development. Our host Cabal is a pacifist and does not accept the benefits of war. The theoretical discussion is thrown in to sharp relief when later on Everytown is subjected to what can only be described as a Blitzkrieg attack using planes and tanks reducing the town to rubble.
Looking at these scenes of destruction we might be tempted to guffaw at the special effects and models, but we need to remember this was a ground-breaking vision in 1936, get past the limitations of the period and watch the movie, you will be rewarded for it. We might also not appreciate the forward looking nature of the story itself. We need to remember that the movie is from 1936, the vision from the book even earlier. This movie looks at the world around it and guesses to the future in store, unfortunately it was not too far wrong. The movie is as visual as it is vocal, it is probably the first film, the cinematography of which, left a mark on me. At the time there would have been no other movie which pulled the fears of the time in to such a neat package, giving us a glimpse of what the fears of the time were like. We can contrast it with movies like 2The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp” (1943) which although filmed in war time, sought to show how an individual’s respect for another can overcome the evils of war, society was never allowed to descend to total self-destruction, it is a romanticised comedy of sorts. Things to Come makes no attempt to lighten the message, continuously bringing home the horror of the situation.
The war is not a short affair, dragging on for decades through the 50’s and 60’s, it is total war bringing in everybody including pacifist Cabal in uniform as a pilot. Even here we see the struggle of humanity over the destruction. Massey shoots down an enemy bomber pilot, but then lands to offer him help. The pilot is dying and as they talk a young girl comes across them, the gas and poison of the attacks is also falling around them, the pilot gives the girl his mask, Cabal rescues the girl and takes her back in his aircraft, leaving the pilot his gun, who after reflecting on saving the girl and in all probability killing her family, shoots himself.
As the war progresses into the 1960’s the cause of the conflict has long since been lost to the fug of war and history. Just as we thought things could not get any worse a new evil is visited upon Everytown , biological warfare in the form of a plague which causes the Wandering sickness), we are never told who the enemy was that unleashed this. Over half the surviving population of the world is wiped out. Any semblance of national government is also gone. The war has reversed and destroyed the technological advances made up until the war started.
We all get asked about what is our favourite film. My answer is always, that I don’t have one, movies are like books or chocolates, depending on the time and taste we come across on or two every-so- often which makes us stop and think. I was fortunate enough as a kid/young adult to come across three movies, in some ways similar, in others quite different. Those movies; Casablanca (Curtiz,1942) Roma, Città Aperta (Rossellini, 1945) and “Things to Come” (Cameron Menzies, 1936) all left me wanting to know more. I can remember at different times watching, as a kid, both Things to Come and Roma, I did not know about them before hand, but once I had seen them, they left a mark. As an adult, our paths crossed again and I got to know and appreciate them. These are the movies which first found me and gave me an appreciation of cinematography as an art and medium for an author’s vision.
I was affected by the brutality and shear dystopia of the vision set out by wells, Korda and Cameron Menzies, it was dark and as a kid, the stuff of nightmares, the bombing of the city initially and then with the sleeping gas by Wings over the World, left me with a chill I can still remember the best part of 30 years later. The poignancy of the air raids stuck with me, perhaps because I was (still am) a child of the cold war, and we grew up with the sword of nuclear conflict hanging over us.
The film opens in an English town/city, at one time it has the magnificent architecture of a capital but also the feel of a small English town, the name of the town is: “Everytown”. This unromantic view, naming sets the tone for what we have ahead. It is the Christmas period and our hero John Cabal (Raymond Massey, How the West Was Won, 1962) is talking with two guests, they turn to the subject of possible war. The discussion shows that opinion is divided between the friends . The conversation looks to the future history which may come given the on-going situation, it is even felt by some there that war might be good for society generally, spurring-on technological development. Our host Cabal is a pacifist and does not accept the benefits of war. The theoretical discussion is thrown in to sharp relief when later on Everytown is subjected to what can only be described as a Blitzkrieg attack using planes and tanks reducing the town to rubble.
Looking at these scenes of destruction we might be tempted to guffaw at the special effects and models, but we need to remember this was a ground-breaking vision in 1936, get past the limitations of the period and watch the movie, you will be rewarded for it. We might also not appreciate the forward looking nature of the story itself. We need to remember that the movie is from 1936, the vision from the book even earlier. This movie looks at the world around it and guesses to the future in store, unfortunately it was not too far wrong. The movie is as visual as it is vocal, it is probably the first film, the cinematography of which, left a mark on me. At the time there would have been no other movie which pulled the fears of the time in to such a neat package, giving us a glimpse of what the fears of the time were like. We can contrast it with movies like 2The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp” (1943) which although filmed in war time, sought to show how an individual’s respect for another can overcome the evils of war, society was never allowed to descend to total self-destruction, it is a romanticised comedy of sorts. Things to Come makes no attempt to lighten the message, continuously bringing home the horror of the situation.
The war is not a short affair, dragging on for decades through the 50’s and 60’s, it is total war bringing in everybody including pacifist Cabal in uniform as a pilot. Even here we see the struggle of humanity over the destruction. Massey shoots down an enemy bomber pilot, but then lands to offer him help. The pilot is dying and as they talk a young girl comes across them, the gas and poison of the attacks is also falling around them, the pilot gives the girl his mask, Cabal rescues the girl and takes her back in his aircraft, leaving the pilot his gun, who after reflecting on saving the girl and in all probability killing her family, shoots himself.
As the war progresses into the 1960’s the cause of the conflict has long since been lost to the fug of war and history. Just as we thought things could not get any worse a new evil is visited upon Everytown , biological warfare in the form of a plague which causes the Wandering sickness), we are never told who the enemy was that unleashed this. Over half the surviving population of the world is wiped out. Any semblance of national government is also gone. The war has reversed and destroyed the technological advances made up until the war started.
The scene next brings us to about 1970, Everytown is in the hands of “The Boss” (Ralph Richardson, Doctor Zhivago, 1965), he is every bit the medieval warlord. Firm and vicious, he has controlled the plague by shooting anybody suffering from it. We see he has designs on a nearby group, the Hill People, he want to take their coal and shale to make fuel for his surviving planes and grow his little empire. He is a despot in the classical sense.
Into this new Everytown flies a modern aircraft far beyond the biplanes of The Boss, piloted by Cabal himself. He tells us of a new civilisation growing in Basra, Iraq. It is made up of surviving “Engineers and Mechanics” who have come together to form a new society, a new world order, based on science, technology and learning. Cabal is taken captive and forced to work on the Boss’s biplanes to service and repair them. He is assigned another to work with him, Gordon (Derrick De Marney), who escapes using the repaired aircraft. He flies to the new society, calling itself “Wings over The World”.
Our next view of Everytown is it being attacked by this new society, this time the gas used is a sleeping gas, when the population reawakens The Boss is dead. As the decades pass we move in to the middle 21st century around 2036. Society has advanced quickly, learning and growing through science and exploration. This has not all been perfect, this quick advancement puts strain on society.
The strains rise to a popular uprising against a planned rocket launch to the Moon. Faced with the danger to the mission the chairman of the ruling council, Oswald Cabal, John’s grandson and also played by Massey) pulls forward the launch. These people are seen almost as luddites. Addressing the crowds towards the end of the movie he asks “All the universe – or nothingness, which shall it be?”
It is probably hard to underplay the part this movie should play in cinema history, The vision is clear and shocking, no more shocking for the vision itself, even before Poland in 1939 or even the Spanish Civil War which was only gathering pace in 1936 we are shown the destructive nature of Blitzkrieg. We are shown the destruction of society and humanities descent to a new Dark Age. Much has been made of the technological advances made by society as a result of WWII. Wells, Cameron Menzies and Korda gave us a new vision which was scarily accurate. We see how eventually a new society is born based on the advances of science, however all is not perfect, order and control seem perfect, but are they?
There are few movies which despite being nearly 70 years old can still pack the same punch as they did when first out. The message of Things to Come is as valid now as it was in 1936.
The scene next brings us to about 1970, Everytown is in the hands of “The Boss” (Ralph Richardson, Doctor Zhivago, 1965), he is every bit the medieval warlord. Firm and vicious, he has controlled the plague by shooting anybody suffering from it. We see he has designs on a nearby group, the Hill People, he want to take their coal and shale to make fuel for his surviving planes and grow his little empire. He is a despot in the classical sense.
Into this new Everytown flies a modern aircraft far beyond the biplanes of The Boss, piloted by Cabal himself. He tells us of a new civilisation growing in Basra, Iraq. It is made up of surviving “Engineers and Mechanics” who have come together to form a new society, a new world order, based on science, technology and learning. Cabal is taken captive and forced to work on the Boss’s biplanes to service and repair them. He is assigned another to work with him, Gordon (Derrick De Marney), who escapes using the repaired aircraft. He flies to the new society, calling itself “Wings over The World”.
Our next view of Everytown is it being attacked by this new society, this time the gas used is a sleeping gas, when the population reawakens The Boss is dead. As the decades pass we move in to the middle 21st century around 2036. Society has advanced quickly, learning and growing through science and exploration. This has not all been perfect, this quick advancement puts strain on society.
The strains rise to a popular uprising against a planned rocket launch to the Moon. Faced with the danger to the mission the chairman of the ruling council, Oswald Cabal, John’s grandson and also played by Massey) pulls forward the launch. These people are seen almost as luddites. Addressing the crowds towards the end of the movie he asks “All the universe – or nothingness, which shall it be?”
It is probably hard to underplay the part this movie should play in cinema history, The vision is clear and shocking, no more shocking for the vision itself, even before Poland in 1939 or even the Spanish Civil War which was
only gathering pace in 1936 we are shown the destructive nature of Blitzkrieg. We are shown the destruction of society and humanities descent to a new Dark Age. Much has been made of the technological advances made by society as a result of WWII. Wells, Cameron Menzies and Korda gave us a new vision which was scarily accurate. We see how eventually a new society is born based on the advances of science, however all is not perfect, order and control seem perfect, but are they?
There are few movies which despite being nearly 70 years old can still pack the same punch as they did when first out. The message of Things to Come is as valid now as it was in 1936.
This 1959 Irish War of Independence era movie can, with a certain amount of justification, be described as a forgotten classic. Directed by Michael Anderson (Dam Busters 1955) it touches on a time and a subject matter many film makers until Neil Jordan (Michael Collins, 1996) stayed away from. I came to this film via my father who is a great fan of it and as a result we’ve been looking for a copy for a number of years. Now released on DVD I had to buy a copy and see what all the talk was about. I’m glad I did. The leading and supporting casts are a who’s who of Irish and British acting talent of the time and subsequently. As I mentioned the subject matter was one many stayed away from or used as a support to a more personal story (Ryan’s Daughter David Lean, 1970, which was more of a romance than war film).
Although shot in 1959 it shows little of the experimental film making beginning at that time in France and elsewhere with the early New Wave work or even the earlier Italian Neo-realism. Anderson deploys methods tried and tested in the 1930’s and 1940’s and the movie feels like a product of this period in places, although it also has that more relaxed and expansive feel of its generation. Ryan’s Daughter is only 11 years later and totally different in style. We can also contrast it with Odd Man Out (1947) by Carol Reed (The Third Man, 1949) with an almost Noir feel in places, certainly far more atmospheric and brooding as we watch James Mason the IRA officer on the run in Belfast following a failed robbery. Shake Hands used shadow sparingly and to best effect in the early ambush scene where Paddy Nolan (Ray McAnally, The Mission, Altamirano, 1986) and Kerry O’Shea (Don Murray, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, Breck, 1972) are walking home at night. In many ways one of the more modern scenes in the movie.
The Movie is based on the novel by Rearden Conner, which was adapted by Marian Spitzer (The Dolly Sisters 1945) together with Ivan Goff & Ben Roberts (White Heat, 1949) . We can see novel’s influence in the detail and characterisation such as Lady Fitzhugh (Sybil Thorndike, The Prince and The Showgirl, The Queen Dowager, 1957) being a member of The Movement. This characterisation is perhaps most striking in James Cagney’s character, Sean Lenihan; by day a mild mannered surgeon lecturing to students in Trinity College and by night a respected rebel leader (Commandant). It is in his reaction to the presence of certain women that we see a darker side to his character which later merges with his view of the Treaty being signed, he is ultimately “fighting his own war” . By Contrast Kerry O’Shea does not want to be “in the Movement” and does not want to take life but is forced by circumstance to do both.
I’m tempted to run down the list of supporting actors, it was/is breath-taking. My father ranks this as one of his favourite films, I can see why. You will have noticed I give very little of the plot away – it is young student gets caught up in rebel affairs after death of a friend, he is to be smuggled out of the country and while waiting for his ship with a squad of volunteers events take a number of turns which force all involved to make a series of life changing decisions.
Rating 8/10 It is of its time and dealing with what was then a delicate subject, but is well nuanced and well worth watching.
When commenting on a piece of Shakespeare I’m tempted to grab a volume off the shelf and fill the blog with apt Shakespearian quotes, but I’ll leave that to people better positioned to do so. I have to give credit to Ralph Fiennes, there would be far easier projects to use as a directorial debut than Shakespeare and even other of the bard’s work which would lend itself to a first timer, but he pulled it off.
So what is it about? Essentially it is about a less than popular patrician general who even though is crowned in battle glory is hated by many of the people. This does not particularly bother him as he views the vulgar populous as rabble and to say he has any affection or love for them would be lies. The Rome of this setting is a dystrophic place where the good general is well employed keeping the masses in their place, when not in foreign fields adding to the city’s “glory”.
There is a certain brutality to his moral stance and unique honesty. His mother the family matriarch (played fantastically by Vanessa Redgrave), wife and family friends as well as obsequious fellow patricians and senators propel him to Consulship of the city but some of those tribunes who are not under his spell and realise that it is the people to whom they must turn for power plot his removal and banishment. Dejected and feeling betrayed he goes into exile and, judging by his hair growth, after an Homeric odyssey finds himself in front of his arch enemy, Aufidius, leader of the Volscian forces (played by Gerard Butler), who over the course of his, Coriolanus’, thrice times six battles, has fought him hand to hand five times and been bettered by Coriolanus each time. They join forces and march on Rome. Entreaties by former comrades and his mentor Merenius (played by Brian Cox) come to nothing. Eventually his, mother, wife and son go to him and after much anguish he agrees a peace. The treaty signing reminded me of the counterpart scene in Brannagh’s Henry V (1989). Aufidius, jealous of Coriolanus’ popularity among his Volscian troops renders on to him a death best delivered on the ides of March – sorry I couldn’t resist.
Why does Coriolanus work as a Shakespearian interpretation and as a piece of cinema? Well probably because Fiennes, having played the part over 10 years ago, knew what he was getting into. He also partnered with people who knew what they were doing. He and his co-writer, John Logan, managed to cut back the wording of Shakespeare’s second longest play to a time manageable for modern cinema without losing the value of the play.
Barry Ackroyd’s photography also captures the violent essence and rather smartly allows a movie, shot on a budget to appear far larger than it was. The detail of the settings and props is flawless and use of handheld cameras adds to the starkness of the play. This is not a nice sanitised rendition of one of the bard’s harder works but a full spirited delivery by people who believe in the strength of the work.
The cast is brilliantly picked with performances which I would not have expected from some and typical of others. I generally try to get some Shakespeare each year in Edinburgh as part of the Fringe festival, the interpretations range from fresh to agonising, it will be interesting to see how many people think they can add their vision to this classic next year. The Royal Mile could be an interesting place!
Rating 9/10 – a few extra pounds might have found a use.
Directed by Jean-Pierre Melville, a man described as the god-father of modern French New-wave cinema, the movie without doubt deserves the title of “Classic”. Why so? Watching the movie you see how it has influenced the art of film making since then – and you get completly drawn in to the story being told.
Set in France during World War Two, it tells the story of Philippe Gerbier (played in a brilliently calm and understated way by Lino Ventura), originally an engineer who is now a senior member of the Resistance. We see the resistance as a small group of people who must be weary of their fellow citizens, the people they fight for, in order to avoid capture and death.
One of the most noticeable aspects of the film is the lack of actual physical warfare. Typical of European and indeed French cinema; there is much effort devoted to characterisation and mood. Rather than take away from the end product this very much adds to it. The first acts of the movie show us a careful thinking man capable of sizing up those around him and choosing just who to interact with. The scene at Gestapo headquarters or the activities in Marseilles show us a cool calm thinking man not given to panic.
You could argue that “Shadows” was itself influenced by Roma, Citáa Aperta (Rome Open City, 1944) by Giorgio Summary and there is nothing wrong with that, but it is still stylistically novel in its own right. The camerawork after the escape from the Parisian Gestapo HQ shows him running down empty Parisian streets with the flowing camera shots is now a typical element of new-wave cinema.
Melville is able to show cinematic humour, the camera-work at the train station as he arrives and waits, build up suspense but the single spanning shot that follows him to his seat. Does he disappear behind the passing train?
We see the dual roles of people, quite and quiet ordinary people on the outside and heroes fighting with their lives for what they believe in. But these are not self-important egos, these are people who believe in what they are doing and risk all.
One thing you don’t see a lot of is trooping German soldiers, but you get the danger and suspense. The London scenes in the sub-urban street and the ad-hoc night club during the bombing raid show how a hero in one setting can be like a fish out of water in another. There are many types of bravery.
Melville and Joseph Kessel (who wrote the original novel) were both Resistance members and you can’t but feel they transferred the impact of those experiences to this work.
Rating 9/10
Watch other Melville offerings like Un Flic (The Cop, 1972) or Le Cercle Rouge (The Red Circle, 1970) to see how movies can quietly build to a crescendo.
tomatthemoviesdotcom 