I saw Lars Von Trier's 'Nymphomaniac' as two volumes on the 1st and 2nd March 2014 at the Curzon Soho. It works more effectively seen in two parts on consecutive days in a comfortable cinema. Rather amusingly the cinema chose to play music prior to the onset of the two parts of the film. Songs associated with the more extreme aspects of sex and sexual attraction. The only exception to this was the song 'Je T'aime' sung by Jane Birkin and Serge Gainsbourg, which is striking precisely because its erotic and gentle tone is at odds with the contents of this film. As the promotional posters assert, 'Forget about love'.
'Nymphomaniac' is the story of Joe's sexual development from childhood to the point at which she is saved in an alley by a gentleman called Seligman to whom she recounts her life story back at his apartment. She is a self-confessed nymphomaniac and attends a therapy group for the condition at a certain point in the film. Joe is played by three different actresses to represent the different stages of her life. This is not as disruptive as it could have been, owing to two factors, Stacy Martin and Charlotte Gainsbourg look similar to each other and also the film's episodic structure render the characters as archetypes, they develop but their existences are about progressing the story to its inevitable end. The philosophies and ideas that underlie the film are arguably of far more importance than any particular character. Having said that as the central protagonist, the viewer does begin to empathise with Joe.
The plot device of the dialogue between Joe and Seligman in his apartment, provides a coherent structure to the narrative proceedings. Elements in Seligman's room enable Joe to contextualise her experiences, sometimes these are visual objects such as the fly (fishing hook in this context) on the wall that enables Joe to discuss her childhood in relation to fishing. Seligman helps her to analyse her experiences from different angles. The chapter headings creating the restrictions of a book. In life, we are quite often too caught up in our experiences to allow us to punctuate our experiences in this way but when we do, it does allow us to analyse them differently. We witness our own progression and/or decline with a degree of detachment. Joe's desire for sexual experience is actually no more or less pronounced than many of her contemporaries. The 'game' she plays with her friend who promises to provide a bag of chocolate sweets to whomever has sex with the greatest number of men on a train is indicative of the need to experience as much as possible by the onset of adulthood.
The men in the film are universally as interested in sex and its various forms as the women with the exception of Seligman, who almost serves the role of a Eunuch until the end. His final act and fate in the film is horribly inevitable but highlights the importance of viewing the film as a treatise on sexuality, power and gender roles rather than simply a pornographic film designed to arouse the viewer. 'Nymphomaniac' is not a film about sexual gratification. Despite the assertion that the film contains some real sexual acts (these do not take place between any of the main cast as the end credits reveal), it is far more intelligent and thought provoking than many of the Hollywood films that have touched upon the subject of sexual relationships.
However, where the film slightly fails and 'Shame', Steve McQueen's film about male sexual addiction collapses, is in their inability to face up to the possibility of sexual infections inherent within the promiscuous sexual lifestyle. Having said that, Joe does describe how she has lost the majority of her sensitivity in her genital areas and she is subject to bleeding. One of the saddest scenes in the film involves Joe being reunited with her first love, Jerome and making love with him, only to declare she couldn't feel anything. Sex outside of love becomes as meaningful as masturbation.
In its exploration of culture, patterns and power relations, 'Nymphomaniac' is a film that should be seen by anyone who has ever questioned the point of recreational sex outside of relationships and indeed, whether relationships are more enduring when they are platonic. Whether or not, you choose to see the whole film, try to see the scene when Mrs H played by Uma Thurman brings the children to see their Daddy's new lover. In a comparatively short episode, more is said about the repercussions of infidelity than in many psychological journals. It is devastating.
Barry Watt - 11th March 2014.
Afterword.
'Je T'aime... moi non plus' was written by Serge Gainsbourg and remains most well remembered for the version sung by himself and his young lover, Jane Birkin. Originally released on Fontana Records.
'Shame' was directed by Steve McQueen and stars Michael Fassbender as Brandon, a man who suffers from sexual addiction. It was released in 2011. It is worth watching in conjunction with 'Nymphomaniac'.
'Nymphomaniac' was directed by Lars Von Trier and is in all good cinemas now. It is most regularly screened as two separate volumes. Each volume is around two hours. Occasionally, the two volumes are shown consecutively.
BW
Tuesday, 11 March 2014
Saturday, 8 February 2014
'Sensing Spaces: Architecture Reimagined' - Learning to see through walls.
Last Sunday, I visited the Royal Academy of Arts and saw the 'Sensing Spaces: Architecture Reimagined' exhibition. My entry time was 10.30 am and I was amazed upon showing my ticket to be told that I was 'free to take photographs'. Now I don't know if that statement has the same potency with you as it did with me. But essentially, most exhibitions vehemently enforce a strict 'no photography' policy, owing to issues such as copyright protection. Fortunately, I had my camera with me, so I wondered how viewing the exhibition from two perspectives would alter my experience. The photographer inside of me will takes photos of just about anything whereas the more demure exhibition attendee has a more fleeting eye. I can focus on things that interest me for hours but I can walk around an exhibition in a relatively quick time. My appreciation is largely based on individual works and on the essence of an exhibition. If one or two works don't appeal to me, I will accept that they exist and then move on. Essentially, I wonder whether all of life is like this, we acknowledge then accept, incorporate or reject. Our ideas grow from our engagement with the organic and inorganic world.
The exhibition focuses on seven architects and their installations. These installations are playful explorations of architecture and how it engages with the user or explorer. Light, dark and a myriad type of materials are used to engage and I guess, occasionally enrage. There is no fixed path around these installations and with one or two exceptions, you can handle the installations. Indeed, where this exhibition comes into its own is through the tensile nature of a number of these installations. Being able to feel wood beneath the tips of your fingers is like being a child again experiencing a smoothness occasionally marred by a rough patch that reminds you of the source of this bi product. As I seem to have stumbled back to Pezo Von Ellrichshausen's installation in my mind. Let's see what it looks like...
This installation engages jarringly with the existing archway that is used as an entrance and exit into one of the other galleries in the Royal Academy of Arts. It mirrors it, in a distorted manner. It is less perfect but offers a greater degree of tactile stimulation. Rubbing body parts against this rough hewn archway would be more satisfying than the original archway, it dances with esoterically.
If this use of space is highly enticing, the installation by Kengo Kuma is definitely hands off. It is a bizarre mix of bamboo (I believe?) and lighting sources that create a serene yet disconcerting experience.
I wholeheartedly recommend this exhibition if you want to re-experience the sense of childish wonderment you had and somehow had overlooked in the jagged world of adulthood. It's an exhibition, which relies on all of your senses. Each experience will be unique based on personal interests and values. One thing is certain, through shared photographs of this exhibition, it could ironically become one of the most viewed London exhibitions in time. I am glad to help with the promotion of this exhibition, which runs until the 6th April 2014.
Barry Watt - 8th February 2014.
Afterword
'Sensing Spaces: Architecture Reimagined' is at the Royal Academy of Arts in London and runs until the 6th April 2014. Please bring a camera and create your own mini works of art.
BW
The exhibition focuses on seven architects and their installations. These installations are playful explorations of architecture and how it engages with the user or explorer. Light, dark and a myriad type of materials are used to engage and I guess, occasionally enrage. There is no fixed path around these installations and with one or two exceptions, you can handle the installations. Indeed, where this exhibition comes into its own is through the tensile nature of a number of these installations. Being able to feel wood beneath the tips of your fingers is like being a child again experiencing a smoothness occasionally marred by a rough patch that reminds you of the source of this bi product. As I seem to have stumbled back to Pezo Von Ellrichshausen's installation in my mind. Let's see what it looks like...
Amazingly, this bizarre temple like structure could be climbed and you could stand on the roof gazing at the Royal Academy of Arts and the wonderful angels that guard its skylights. Indeed, the work becomes a celebration of the weather. I can imagine how emotionally affective this work would be in all weather conditions. To stand on the roof, staring at the sky as rain drops splatter against glass would be something to behold.
Continuing my journey around the exhibition retrospectively, I stumble upon the archway of Eduardo Souto De Moura.
This installation engages jarringly with the existing archway that is used as an entrance and exit into one of the other galleries in the Royal Academy of Arts. It mirrors it, in a distorted manner. It is less perfect but offers a greater degree of tactile stimulation. Rubbing body parts against this rough hewn archway would be more satisfying than the original archway, it dances with esoterically.
If this use of space is highly enticing, the installation by Kengo Kuma is definitely hands off. It is a bizarre mix of bamboo (I believe?) and lighting sources that create a serene yet disconcerting experience.
Strangely organic, the bamboo weaves in its distorted fashion to the ceiling then back to the floor. The visitor disorientated by a constant need to rediscover his/her footing. Multiple lights like stars punctuating an arterial system.
In contrast, Li Xiaodong's maze like installation also brings to mind, memories of libraries and archives. Silent places of reflection and the accumulation of knowledge.
In the second photo, you clearly see someone's feet. For some reason, one visitor chose to be photographed laying down as though dead or in a state of perpetual slumber and to be photographed. Something about the atmosphere of this space must have overcome him. It also included mirrors and as I have an aversion to my own reflection, I chose to capture it again for prosperity.
The Grafton Architects' installation was somewhat more subdued. Yet no less impressive. The light more striking in its piercing attack upon the darkness.
Light has an almost erotic thrill in the midst of darkness. It represents escape and a space beyond. A change of perspective.
Possibly, the most engaging installation for most visitors to the exhibition would be the one provided by Diébédo Francis Kéré. It is essentially a tunnel that you are invited to penetrate, pierce or adorn with long plastic straws. A truly immersive experience and which will become increasingly more amazing as the exhibition continues.
Something about this work is inspirational to families and may hold the key to the housing problem. If you can encourage people to stick straws into a bizarre tunnel like construct, why not provide the materials for families to build their own properties? Self build housing is the way forward. As a sentimentalist, I enjoyed watching everyone poking and proding away with their plastic straws (well, that's what they looked like!) The children and adults working imaginatively to create their own miniature works of art within the greater whole. For example, please see the intricate hive structure someone created above.
As I left the exhibition, I was left with a positive feeling and once again, I found myself more aware of the architecture surrounding me. I also saw the final installation, which exists just outside the Royal Academy of Arts by Alvaro Siza. Not much to say about this one. It's more of a visual tease for the delights inside, a column evoking future pleasures in the courtyard where I also became overwhelmed by a bizarre work of art in the making in a flower pot of all places.
I wholeheartedly recommend this exhibition if you want to re-experience the sense of childish wonderment you had and somehow had overlooked in the jagged world of adulthood. It's an exhibition, which relies on all of your senses. Each experience will be unique based on personal interests and values. One thing is certain, through shared photographs of this exhibition, it could ironically become one of the most viewed London exhibitions in time. I am glad to help with the promotion of this exhibition, which runs until the 6th April 2014.
Barry Watt - 8th February 2014.
Afterword
'Sensing Spaces: Architecture Reimagined' is at the Royal Academy of Arts in London and runs until the 6th April 2014. Please bring a camera and create your own mini works of art.
BW
Sunday, 26 January 2014
'Inside Llewyn Davis' - The Karmic Circle begins and ends with a Cat.
'Inside Llewyn Davis' is the latest film by the Coen Brothers and is set during the early 60s. It tells the story of a folk singer called Llewyn Davis as he struggles to make it in the Greenwich Village folk scene. It is a film about continuing to endure even when everything is stacked against you and it is more importantly, the best film about cats you will ever see.
The film throws in several references to the establishments that proved so influential in the lives of the many folk singers who dominated the Greenwich Village scene. As such, the Gaslight Café features prominently in the film and indeed, a little known (at that point) singer who is humorously referred to as 'Young Bob' in the end credits is heard in the distance when Llewyn Davis leaves the Café at the beginning of the film and features at the end of the film. The film is structured around this one sequence at the Gaslight Café in 1961, which is a springboard for one of the two performers and effectively, potentially the last stand of the other performer. The Kettle of Fish is also featured. This was another venue where folk performers sang located in the same building as the Gaslight Café.
In many respects, Llewyn Davis' life bears more than a little resemblance to Dylan's early life. Dylan in his early years was known to crash at various friends' apartments, borrowing records and generally not settling down. But if we consider the fact that many of the Greenwich Village venues did not pay a regular wage to their performers and instead, after each set the performers handed around a hat or basket in the hope that the audience would give them enough money to survive, it is not surprising that many singer/songwriters were poor. Another parallel concerns Llewyn Davis' decision to take part as a session musician for an appalling novelty song with a slight protest angle called 'Please Mr Kennedy' requesting that he not be sent into space and to take a one off payment for his work rather than royalties. The difference being that Dylan's session work enabled him to make further contacts even where the financial recuperation was minimal.
In many respects, this film offers a darker view of the folk scene than the stories that are fed into the mainstream culture. Regularly, one is led to believe that the folk scene was all sweetness and light. Handholding and community singing. Beautiful people singing their traditional songs and songs that they had adapted from these songs. This film reveals a world where singer/songwriters are regularly doomed to produce one song, which is subsequently deleted and forgotten. Llewyn Davis is a victim of this situation, one part of a group that disbanded not through internal battles but because his partner had committed suicide. He is stuck with the product of this union, a song called 'If We Had Wings' (adapted to 'If I Had Wings' when he sings this song alone in the Gaslight Café) and is struggling frantically to be accepted as a solo artist that Bud Grossman deems as 'uncommercial' after hearing one of his songs (Bud Grossman is almost Albert Grossman, who later became Dylan's producer). The failures in the folk scene are rarely mentioned unless their failure is linked to drug abuse or decadent acts. Indeed, the sadness that pervades this film stems from that fact. Who remembers you when you are no longer popular?
As an aside about this film, you cannot consider it outside of the context of the cats that cross the path of Llewyn Davis. If ever, there is an animal that symbolises his character, it's a cat. The cat represents his fickle nature and his promiscuity. It also acts as a substitute child for him. The effort he makes to find cats at various points in the film is touching. Also he hits a cat at one point by accident and he leaves the car to find the cat. In the saddest sequence, he witnesses the cat as it leaves the road and crawls into some trees, presumably to recover or to die in peace. He returns to the car.
'Inside Llewyn Davis' is a film about karma, fate, failure and struggling to succeed. Llewyn Davis has an inflated sense of his own self importance highlighted during the scene when he heckles another performer finally aware that he is marking time and doesn't have enough material to truly impact upon the scene. His relationship with Jean played by Carey Mulligan who screams that he should wear 'double condoms' to prevent any other woman from getting pregnant is revealed to have been one of many relationships which has gone wrong. He is not a bad person, just a victim of his own ambitions. He suffers because he makes others suffer. It's a film to see for a view of the 60s which is not tainted by the illusions of 'Flower Power' and the cosy idealism regularly associated with the folk scene. If you have never felt like Llewyn Davis, you have never lived.
Barry Watt - 26th January 2014.
Afterword
'Inside Llewyn Davis' is in all good cinemas now. The Coen Brothers have another hit on their hand.
BW
The film throws in several references to the establishments that proved so influential in the lives of the many folk singers who dominated the Greenwich Village scene. As such, the Gaslight Café features prominently in the film and indeed, a little known (at that point) singer who is humorously referred to as 'Young Bob' in the end credits is heard in the distance when Llewyn Davis leaves the Café at the beginning of the film and features at the end of the film. The film is structured around this one sequence at the Gaslight Café in 1961, which is a springboard for one of the two performers and effectively, potentially the last stand of the other performer. The Kettle of Fish is also featured. This was another venue where folk performers sang located in the same building as the Gaslight Café.
In many respects, Llewyn Davis' life bears more than a little resemblance to Dylan's early life. Dylan in his early years was known to crash at various friends' apartments, borrowing records and generally not settling down. But if we consider the fact that many of the Greenwich Village venues did not pay a regular wage to their performers and instead, after each set the performers handed around a hat or basket in the hope that the audience would give them enough money to survive, it is not surprising that many singer/songwriters were poor. Another parallel concerns Llewyn Davis' decision to take part as a session musician for an appalling novelty song with a slight protest angle called 'Please Mr Kennedy' requesting that he not be sent into space and to take a one off payment for his work rather than royalties. The difference being that Dylan's session work enabled him to make further contacts even where the financial recuperation was minimal.
In many respects, this film offers a darker view of the folk scene than the stories that are fed into the mainstream culture. Regularly, one is led to believe that the folk scene was all sweetness and light. Handholding and community singing. Beautiful people singing their traditional songs and songs that they had adapted from these songs. This film reveals a world where singer/songwriters are regularly doomed to produce one song, which is subsequently deleted and forgotten. Llewyn Davis is a victim of this situation, one part of a group that disbanded not through internal battles but because his partner had committed suicide. He is stuck with the product of this union, a song called 'If We Had Wings' (adapted to 'If I Had Wings' when he sings this song alone in the Gaslight Café) and is struggling frantically to be accepted as a solo artist that Bud Grossman deems as 'uncommercial' after hearing one of his songs (Bud Grossman is almost Albert Grossman, who later became Dylan's producer). The failures in the folk scene are rarely mentioned unless their failure is linked to drug abuse or decadent acts. Indeed, the sadness that pervades this film stems from that fact. Who remembers you when you are no longer popular?
As an aside about this film, you cannot consider it outside of the context of the cats that cross the path of Llewyn Davis. If ever, there is an animal that symbolises his character, it's a cat. The cat represents his fickle nature and his promiscuity. It also acts as a substitute child for him. The effort he makes to find cats at various points in the film is touching. Also he hits a cat at one point by accident and he leaves the car to find the cat. In the saddest sequence, he witnesses the cat as it leaves the road and crawls into some trees, presumably to recover or to die in peace. He returns to the car.
'Inside Llewyn Davis' is a film about karma, fate, failure and struggling to succeed. Llewyn Davis has an inflated sense of his own self importance highlighted during the scene when he heckles another performer finally aware that he is marking time and doesn't have enough material to truly impact upon the scene. His relationship with Jean played by Carey Mulligan who screams that he should wear 'double condoms' to prevent any other woman from getting pregnant is revealed to have been one of many relationships which has gone wrong. He is not a bad person, just a victim of his own ambitions. He suffers because he makes others suffer. It's a film to see for a view of the 60s which is not tainted by the illusions of 'Flower Power' and the cosy idealism regularly associated with the folk scene. If you have never felt like Llewyn Davis, you have never lived.
Barry Watt - 26th January 2014.
Afterword
'Inside Llewyn Davis' is in all good cinemas now. The Coen Brothers have another hit on their hand.
BW
Sunday, 12 January 2014
'12 Years A Slave' - Slavery, Religion and Mr Pitt's 'Knight in Shining Armour'.
Today, I saw '12 Years A Slave' at the Barbican and judging by the emotional state of my fellow audience members at the film's conclusion, few would be going home untainted by the experience. It is a worthy contender for any and all awards that are thrown at it. Yet, one detail should not be overlooked in any evaluation of this film, the role of Brad Pitt. A role I shall look at later as the more I think about it, the more cynical I become in my feelings about this superbly produced treatise of slavery, power relations and their inexplicable connection to the misappropriation of religion.
'12 Years A Slave' is Steve McQueen's first film since the controversial and unsurprisingly successful film about one man's addiction to sex, 'Shame'. 'Shame' was another exquisitely made film, Michael Fassbender as Brandon Sullivan and his insatiable libido continued to resonate with the viewer, long after they went home. My observation at the time the film was released that I found the film very detached and quite objective remains true three years after its release. The film would have been quite different if any of the characters in the film had contracted a sexually transmitted infection but clearly this was not of interest to Steve McQueen, who wrote the film with Abi Morgan. 'Shame' is a film for people who do not need to be emotionally bludgeoned with the moral conceits of some Hollywood screenwriters. Significantly, Steve McQueen did not write the screenplay for '12 Years A Slave', it was written by John Ridley and based upon the 1853 autobiography of Solomon Northup, the central protagonist of this film. As such, the possibility for the same level of detachment from the director is impossible. He provides the means through which an extremely and profoundly emotive story are presented to the viewer. I offer this as an observation, not as a judgement as regardless of the limitations that the director may have found himself under, either financial or narrative based, his authorial vision shines through in certain key scenes.
The most horrific scenes in the film and make no mistake, the film is a collection of atrocities and the most troubling are often the most subtle, are probably the attempted lynching of Solomon and the whipping of Patsey. The attempted lynching of Solomon comes about as a result of the growing animosity of John Tibeats towards Solomon, which culminates in Solomon beating John with a vehemence that is only stopped by the intervention of another plantation worker. Solomon is subsequently hung from a tree, an act which is at odds with the 'rules' surrounding slave ownership. The rope is loosened by another plantation worker who goes to get the plantation owner, William Ford. The rope is around Solomon's throat and the risk of strangulation is still very real. Solomon has to keep moving on tiptoe to prevent asphyxiation for occurring. The director shoots the scene in long shot as other workers on the plantation move near to the hanging man continuing with their daily tasks as he continues moving to save his life. Through a sequence of shots, the viewer is privy to the fact that this atrocious act is being viewed by people around the plantation. The other scene that brings tears to your eyes is the scene in which Edwin Epps is pushed by his wife to whip Patsey, the 'slave' to whom he has been paying particular attention late at night. Edwin Epps passes the whip to Solomon first to perform the act, revealing how conflicted his character is. The whipping is watched by Edwin and his wife and Solomon. The viewer has the added horror of the reaction shots of the whipping as Patsey is screaming. Edwin eventually takes over from Solomon and the subsequent sequence of the cleaning of Patsey's wounds brings tears to the eyes of both Solomon and the viewer.
No consideration of this film should overlook the quality of the acting from almost all of the cast (with one exception). Michael Fassbender as Edwin Epps takes the role of sadist to the next level. His treatment of 'his slaves', the way he punishes those cotton pickers who do not exceed their previous day's quotas through whipping and his repeated sexual abuse of Patsey, shown graphically on one occasion leaves the viewer shattered. If Edwin Epps as a plantation owner depicts all that is fundamentally rotten in human existence, Benedict Cumberbatch as William Ford offers a slightly ineffectual but wholly benevolent plantation owner. The juxtaposition of their characters helps the viewer to understand that the plantation system with its hierarchical structures helped to bring out the best and worst in those considered the 'masters'. Power has a tendency to corrupt but it can also liberate those who aspire to do good. Gender roles are largely subverted. The female characters are fully rounded and developed. Patsey played by Lupita Nyong'o has a strength of character that is never more in evidence than when she pleads with Solomon to end her life. She is no longer prepared to accept the never-ending cycles of abuse she is subjected to. Solomon refuses. Solomon Northrup played by Chiwetel Ejiofor, the subject of this film, cruelly conned and kidnapped before being sold into slavery is an Everyman figure. The focal point for the viewer. He experiences the atrocities in this film, so that we will hopefully never have to experience them again. One of the simplest moments in this film and also the most powerful involves him looking directly at the viewer. His close-up, an image of exhaustion yet hope. He never gives up, although throughout the film, we are privy to moments when he feels like it. Most notably, the masquerade ball scene where he plays the violin and the music becomes slightly discordant as the viewer is reminded that at one point in his previous life, he would have attended such gatherings.
Then Brad Pitt as Samuel Bass saves the day...
I cannot express how frustrated I am that Brad Pitt, who also produced the film, ended up in the role of the labourer whose radical views concerning equality and slavery and growing empathy for Solomon's plight, effectively leads to Solomon being freed from slavery and returned to his family. I cannot decide whether his involvement in the production of the film led to him being offered this role or whether Steve McQueen genuinely felt that he was the right person for the role. I am left with a slightly bad taste in my mouth as a result of the choice. Indeed, one wonders whether the casting choices were as is often the case with the production of certain films, determined by the need for financial backing. There is an argument to suggest that replacing the known actors with new actors may have granted the film a greater relevance, although this could have adversely effected its chances at the forthcoming awards ceremonies and indeed, may have made it difficult to produce the film in the first place.
Whatever my feelings concerning the casting of Mr Pitt, this film is possibly one of the most powerful films I have seen for years. Its exploration of religion and its connection to slavery, both in a negative sense, religious doctrine is used as an excuse for acts of brutality by Edwin Epps and also positively by the 'slaves', as songs with a religious focus give them hope and a reason to continue with their struggles, provides a rich subtext, which will no doubt provide a rich seam of material for future studies. It's a film of horror and superlative acting, almost the perfect film. It deserves to be seen in the cinema.
Barry Watt - 12th January 2014.
Afterword
'12 Years A Slave' is in all good cinemas now.
BW
'12 Years A Slave' is Steve McQueen's first film since the controversial and unsurprisingly successful film about one man's addiction to sex, 'Shame'. 'Shame' was another exquisitely made film, Michael Fassbender as Brandon Sullivan and his insatiable libido continued to resonate with the viewer, long after they went home. My observation at the time the film was released that I found the film very detached and quite objective remains true three years after its release. The film would have been quite different if any of the characters in the film had contracted a sexually transmitted infection but clearly this was not of interest to Steve McQueen, who wrote the film with Abi Morgan. 'Shame' is a film for people who do not need to be emotionally bludgeoned with the moral conceits of some Hollywood screenwriters. Significantly, Steve McQueen did not write the screenplay for '12 Years A Slave', it was written by John Ridley and based upon the 1853 autobiography of Solomon Northup, the central protagonist of this film. As such, the possibility for the same level of detachment from the director is impossible. He provides the means through which an extremely and profoundly emotive story are presented to the viewer. I offer this as an observation, not as a judgement as regardless of the limitations that the director may have found himself under, either financial or narrative based, his authorial vision shines through in certain key scenes.
The most horrific scenes in the film and make no mistake, the film is a collection of atrocities and the most troubling are often the most subtle, are probably the attempted lynching of Solomon and the whipping of Patsey. The attempted lynching of Solomon comes about as a result of the growing animosity of John Tibeats towards Solomon, which culminates in Solomon beating John with a vehemence that is only stopped by the intervention of another plantation worker. Solomon is subsequently hung from a tree, an act which is at odds with the 'rules' surrounding slave ownership. The rope is loosened by another plantation worker who goes to get the plantation owner, William Ford. The rope is around Solomon's throat and the risk of strangulation is still very real. Solomon has to keep moving on tiptoe to prevent asphyxiation for occurring. The director shoots the scene in long shot as other workers on the plantation move near to the hanging man continuing with their daily tasks as he continues moving to save his life. Through a sequence of shots, the viewer is privy to the fact that this atrocious act is being viewed by people around the plantation. The other scene that brings tears to your eyes is the scene in which Edwin Epps is pushed by his wife to whip Patsey, the 'slave' to whom he has been paying particular attention late at night. Edwin Epps passes the whip to Solomon first to perform the act, revealing how conflicted his character is. The whipping is watched by Edwin and his wife and Solomon. The viewer has the added horror of the reaction shots of the whipping as Patsey is screaming. Edwin eventually takes over from Solomon and the subsequent sequence of the cleaning of Patsey's wounds brings tears to the eyes of both Solomon and the viewer.
No consideration of this film should overlook the quality of the acting from almost all of the cast (with one exception). Michael Fassbender as Edwin Epps takes the role of sadist to the next level. His treatment of 'his slaves', the way he punishes those cotton pickers who do not exceed their previous day's quotas through whipping and his repeated sexual abuse of Patsey, shown graphically on one occasion leaves the viewer shattered. If Edwin Epps as a plantation owner depicts all that is fundamentally rotten in human existence, Benedict Cumberbatch as William Ford offers a slightly ineffectual but wholly benevolent plantation owner. The juxtaposition of their characters helps the viewer to understand that the plantation system with its hierarchical structures helped to bring out the best and worst in those considered the 'masters'. Power has a tendency to corrupt but it can also liberate those who aspire to do good. Gender roles are largely subverted. The female characters are fully rounded and developed. Patsey played by Lupita Nyong'o has a strength of character that is never more in evidence than when she pleads with Solomon to end her life. She is no longer prepared to accept the never-ending cycles of abuse she is subjected to. Solomon refuses. Solomon Northrup played by Chiwetel Ejiofor, the subject of this film, cruelly conned and kidnapped before being sold into slavery is an Everyman figure. The focal point for the viewer. He experiences the atrocities in this film, so that we will hopefully never have to experience them again. One of the simplest moments in this film and also the most powerful involves him looking directly at the viewer. His close-up, an image of exhaustion yet hope. He never gives up, although throughout the film, we are privy to moments when he feels like it. Most notably, the masquerade ball scene where he plays the violin and the music becomes slightly discordant as the viewer is reminded that at one point in his previous life, he would have attended such gatherings.
Then Brad Pitt as Samuel Bass saves the day...
I cannot express how frustrated I am that Brad Pitt, who also produced the film, ended up in the role of the labourer whose radical views concerning equality and slavery and growing empathy for Solomon's plight, effectively leads to Solomon being freed from slavery and returned to his family. I cannot decide whether his involvement in the production of the film led to him being offered this role or whether Steve McQueen genuinely felt that he was the right person for the role. I am left with a slightly bad taste in my mouth as a result of the choice. Indeed, one wonders whether the casting choices were as is often the case with the production of certain films, determined by the need for financial backing. There is an argument to suggest that replacing the known actors with new actors may have granted the film a greater relevance, although this could have adversely effected its chances at the forthcoming awards ceremonies and indeed, may have made it difficult to produce the film in the first place.
Whatever my feelings concerning the casting of Mr Pitt, this film is possibly one of the most powerful films I have seen for years. Its exploration of religion and its connection to slavery, both in a negative sense, religious doctrine is used as an excuse for acts of brutality by Edwin Epps and also positively by the 'slaves', as songs with a religious focus give them hope and a reason to continue with their struggles, provides a rich subtext, which will no doubt provide a rich seam of material for future studies. It's a film of horror and superlative acting, almost the perfect film. It deserves to be seen in the cinema.
Barry Watt - 12th January 2014.
Afterword
'12 Years A Slave' is in all good cinemas now.
BW
Sunday, 29 December 2013
The Sex Pistols - Punk, subversion and refusing to turn a blind eye.
Last night, I watched the documentary 'Never Mind The Baubles: Xmas '77 with the Sex Pistols', which was broadcast on BBC4 on Boxing Day. It was directed by Julien Temple who was also responsible for the films 'The Great Rock and Roll Swindle' and 'The Filth and the Fury', both focusing on the rise and disintegration of the Sex Pistols. I could give you a potted biography of the band but if you made it beyond the title to this blog, you already have some idea of the importance of this band. Whether you like or hate them, they still resonate within the UK culture and are one of the more influential bands. The documentary focusing on Christmas Day in 1977 where the band holed up in a Huddersfield nightclub all day, performing a live set and helping to host a party for the children of striking firemen in the afternoon and in the evening, performing a live set for the adults was fascinating and helped to reveal a more sentimental side to the band. Now the live footage in this documentary of the Ivanhoe's gigs and the afternoon party are something else. Seeing John Lydon (Johnny Rotten) cutting up cake for the kids and seeing the kids pogoing to songs such as 'Bodies' (the lyrics slightly changed to make them a little less aggressive. Having said that, the irony of singing a song about abortion to a group of kids cannot be escaped). John Lydon's comment that children understood the music of the Sex Pistols was quite revealing. He is right, the energy of the music is infectious and if you consider the context in which the songs were performed and released, the importance of the band cannot be underestimated.
The 70s were not the best of times for anyone. Strikes were the prevalent feature of day to day like in the United Kingdom. The fireman's strike was one of many long running strikes during a decade that also saw the gravediggers, refuse collectors and miners on strike over pay. The fact that the Punk movement popped up in the mid 70s was in many respects, a release for the pent up frustrations that had been bubbling under the surface. The fact that the movement seeped into fashion, youth culture, music and literature could be seen as a necessary scream against a society and Government that had lost touch with the people it purported to support. The fact that the movement also helped to create a sense of equality between formerly disparate groups should also not be overlooked. The movement was a celebration of difference, diffidence and innovation. Like every thing else, it should not be seen in isolation as the Punk ethic was apparent in the USA, particularly within the music scene. The likes of the Ramones, Blondie and Patti Smith were channelling equally potent energies of apathy and rage. It also surfaced around Europe. Of course, as is the case with many sub-cultural groups, it was absorbed into the mainstream within a comparatively short time frame. The original subversive basis of the movement rendered as meaningful as a stick of chewing gum to be sold. Having said that particularly thanks to the bands that continued to appear throughout the 70s, the bad decisions made by the Government of the time and the effects that they were having on the general populace continued to be highlighted.
Back to the Sex Pistols, I feel that their music is still relevant and I long for the emergence of a new cultural movement to counterbalance the apathy that pervades the UK culture. In an age of 'we can make you famous' TV talent shows, high unemployment rates, no pay rises and a coalition Government that is so out of touch with the voting public and its opinions, surely something has to give? Let's hope it happens soon or else let's make it happen!
Barry Watt - 29th December 2013.
Afterword
'Never Mind The Baubles: Xmas '77 with the Sex Pistols' is available on BBC iPlayer until 2nd January and is well worth a watch.
The Sex Pistols' seminal album, 'Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols' is available from Virgin Records. Upon this gem of an album, you will encounter the aforementioned 'Bodies' and may leave your inhibitions at the door.
BW
The 70s were not the best of times for anyone. Strikes were the prevalent feature of day to day like in the United Kingdom. The fireman's strike was one of many long running strikes during a decade that also saw the gravediggers, refuse collectors and miners on strike over pay. The fact that the Punk movement popped up in the mid 70s was in many respects, a release for the pent up frustrations that had been bubbling under the surface. The fact that the movement seeped into fashion, youth culture, music and literature could be seen as a necessary scream against a society and Government that had lost touch with the people it purported to support. The fact that the movement also helped to create a sense of equality between formerly disparate groups should also not be overlooked. The movement was a celebration of difference, diffidence and innovation. Like every thing else, it should not be seen in isolation as the Punk ethic was apparent in the USA, particularly within the music scene. The likes of the Ramones, Blondie and Patti Smith were channelling equally potent energies of apathy and rage. It also surfaced around Europe. Of course, as is the case with many sub-cultural groups, it was absorbed into the mainstream within a comparatively short time frame. The original subversive basis of the movement rendered as meaningful as a stick of chewing gum to be sold. Having said that particularly thanks to the bands that continued to appear throughout the 70s, the bad decisions made by the Government of the time and the effects that they were having on the general populace continued to be highlighted.
Back to the Sex Pistols, I feel that their music is still relevant and I long for the emergence of a new cultural movement to counterbalance the apathy that pervades the UK culture. In an age of 'we can make you famous' TV talent shows, high unemployment rates, no pay rises and a coalition Government that is so out of touch with the voting public and its opinions, surely something has to give? Let's hope it happens soon or else let's make it happen!
Barry Watt - 29th December 2013.
Afterword
'Never Mind The Baubles: Xmas '77 with the Sex Pistols' is available on BBC iPlayer until 2nd January and is well worth a watch.
The Sex Pistols' seminal album, 'Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols' is available from Virgin Records. Upon this gem of an album, you will encounter the aforementioned 'Bodies' and may leave your inhibitions at the door.
BW
Sunday, 22 December 2013
'American Psycho' - Living for Today, Dying for Tomorrow.
On Friday night, I went to see 'American Psycho' at the Almeida Theatre. I went along with high expectations and left largely satisfied. Patrick Bateman remains one of the truly iconic literary figures. A cultural icon for a generation bereft of meaning and anxious for the reflective details of a polished chrome surface or large glass table to fill in the gaps of living.
I read the novel, 'American Psycho' years ago and since then, I have read the rest of Bret Easton Ellis' work. He has a unique voice. He captures the madness of our age, the 'buy now, pay later' philosophy that permeates the lives of the under 40s. His novels are permeated with characters who can be understood but not liked. In 'American Psycho', the reader is confronted by vapid smiles, possession hungry creatures, anxious for their next expensive meal in the current trendy restaurant, mistaken identities and a unique range of business cards. Patrick Bateman is no better or worse than any of the other twenty something investment bankers who populate the novel. If anything, his response is the most honest to the apathetic accumulators who dance repeatedly to the same old tune who have sex simply to remind themselves that they still live and breathe. Love is a joke to be sold or represented in a three minute single. Attention spans are limited. Lives more profitably abused than celebrated. Dancing around white lines, shooting up to break down the boundaries of diffidence.
The film of 'American Psycho' by Mary Harron felt oddly lacking the first time I saw it in the cinema. A very sanitised adaptation of the novel. The casting of Christian Bale was an inspired choice and despite such over-the-top sequences as Bateman running around with a chainsaw, in retrospect, it still warrants a watch. It captures the essential truth of the novel. The horror is in the lifestyle choices and the fantasies that they engender. I have vague recollections that the ending although slightly different to the end of the novel succeeds in making the point, if it didn't happen, it soon could. 'This is not an exit' is one of the most desultory lines in any cultural product.
Since my exposure to the novel and film of 'American Psycho' and also to Bret Easton Ellis' other works, I have met the author twice at talks/signings at the Southbank Centre in London. During the Q and As after the talks, the author has had to field the usual questions regarding the so-called 'misogyny' in 'American Psycho'. He wisely rebuffs such accusations. In defence of Bret Easton Ellis, his characters are by their nature regularly superficial, unfeeling and driven by base instincts. I have never felt that he treats his female characters any worse than his male ones. They are not gentle, unrealistic, sentimentalists, they are archetypes of a vicious world where tearing apart small businesses in order to allow large companies to flourish and grow is part and parcel of everyday life. Mergers and acquisitions are not coital, they regularly result in destruction. Another thing that I noticed at one of the talks/signings was the entourage that Mr Ellis had. At one point, a slightly highly strung lady squealed rather loudly about how much longer the signing was going to take. Bret Easton Ellis as he has pointed out is part of the culture he seeks to dissect. He lives the life of a wealthy decadent but with one difference, he addresses the problems that this causes him. He does it through his writing.
The musical of 'American Psycho' at the Almeida Theatre is directed by Rupert Goold. It is a revelation. Its success and failings return to one question, do you like Patrick Bateman and if so, do you feel that he can be saved? The novel and film can be interpreted in any number of ways, although the novel certainly does not want you to walk away with a warm sentimental feeling. If the murders have not happened, they soon could and that's the scariest thought of all. The film implies the same. The musical achieves a similar effect but in a way that left me feeling even more empathetic towards Patrick Bateman's character. He marries if only in a dream and his choice of bride will ruin him. Marriage without love will ruin Bateman and the body parts will amass because of this fact. It will be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
One of the strong points of this production of 'American Psycho' is the mise-en-scene. The stark clinical minimalism of an 80s apartment with videos lining the bookcases rather than books and one expensive work of art leaning to one side of the stage being one constantly used set. Bateman's apartment is a metaphor for the fragmentary life he leads. He doesn't need any objects with sentimental connections. He is constantly out at nightclubs, restaurants and at work. Lighting is used expressively to complete the concept created by the sets. At points in the production where Bateman's thoughts become particularly murderous, projections to the side and back of the stage show childish images and more horrific sketched images.
The music is a combination of new songs with an 80s feel, synthesiser heavy and also songs from the same period performed by the cast, 'Don't You Want Me' being particularly impressive. As is the case with many musicals, lyrical or musical motifs repeat throughout this production. The first song called 'Clean' introduces Patrick Bateman, in a similar manner to how Bale appears in the film. Remember the eye mask as Christian Bale as Bateman comes out of the shower explaining his cleaning routine. The whole concept of 'cleanliness' as a complete rebuttal of anything impure or affecting within this musical becomes devastating. Patrick Bateman even has a slightly sympathetic side to his character possibly because he is played by Matt Smith and some of the lyrics of the songs. From my memories of the novel, Patrick Bateman's relationship with his secretary, Jean does not hold the seeds to his salvation that this musical tries to develop. It's curious how musicals need the simplicity of a love story or potential love story to hold the more unsavoury aspects of their narratives together. The Patrick Bateman of this production is therefore ultimately a tragic 'Everyman' figure.
To close, the characters, narrative and style of this musical remain close to the original novel, even where the narrative slightly veers towards the optimistic. It deserves to be more widely seen. A West End transfer should happen in the New Year. It is time for the West End to start to celebrate new productions. 'This is not an exit'.
Barry Watt - 22nd December 2013.
Afterword
'American Psycho' is currently on at the Almeida Theatre but other than Day Seats and Returns, it is sold out until the end of the season.
http://www.almeida.co.uk/event/americanpsycho
The novel of 'American Psycho' by Bret Easton Ellis is a cheery little read for those of us slightly jaded by a diet of superficiality and vacant smiles. It is currently published by Picador. The line 'This is not an exit' is copyrighted to Bret Easton Ellis and appears in 'American Psycho'.
The film of 'American Psycho' by Mary Harron was released in 2000 and is available on DVD. It works up to a point as a film.
'Don't You Want Me' is copyright to the Human League and remains one of the most iconic 80s songs.
BW
I read the novel, 'American Psycho' years ago and since then, I have read the rest of Bret Easton Ellis' work. He has a unique voice. He captures the madness of our age, the 'buy now, pay later' philosophy that permeates the lives of the under 40s. His novels are permeated with characters who can be understood but not liked. In 'American Psycho', the reader is confronted by vapid smiles, possession hungry creatures, anxious for their next expensive meal in the current trendy restaurant, mistaken identities and a unique range of business cards. Patrick Bateman is no better or worse than any of the other twenty something investment bankers who populate the novel. If anything, his response is the most honest to the apathetic accumulators who dance repeatedly to the same old tune who have sex simply to remind themselves that they still live and breathe. Love is a joke to be sold or represented in a three minute single. Attention spans are limited. Lives more profitably abused than celebrated. Dancing around white lines, shooting up to break down the boundaries of diffidence.
The film of 'American Psycho' by Mary Harron felt oddly lacking the first time I saw it in the cinema. A very sanitised adaptation of the novel. The casting of Christian Bale was an inspired choice and despite such over-the-top sequences as Bateman running around with a chainsaw, in retrospect, it still warrants a watch. It captures the essential truth of the novel. The horror is in the lifestyle choices and the fantasies that they engender. I have vague recollections that the ending although slightly different to the end of the novel succeeds in making the point, if it didn't happen, it soon could. 'This is not an exit' is one of the most desultory lines in any cultural product.
Since my exposure to the novel and film of 'American Psycho' and also to Bret Easton Ellis' other works, I have met the author twice at talks/signings at the Southbank Centre in London. During the Q and As after the talks, the author has had to field the usual questions regarding the so-called 'misogyny' in 'American Psycho'. He wisely rebuffs such accusations. In defence of Bret Easton Ellis, his characters are by their nature regularly superficial, unfeeling and driven by base instincts. I have never felt that he treats his female characters any worse than his male ones. They are not gentle, unrealistic, sentimentalists, they are archetypes of a vicious world where tearing apart small businesses in order to allow large companies to flourish and grow is part and parcel of everyday life. Mergers and acquisitions are not coital, they regularly result in destruction. Another thing that I noticed at one of the talks/signings was the entourage that Mr Ellis had. At one point, a slightly highly strung lady squealed rather loudly about how much longer the signing was going to take. Bret Easton Ellis as he has pointed out is part of the culture he seeks to dissect. He lives the life of a wealthy decadent but with one difference, he addresses the problems that this causes him. He does it through his writing.
The musical of 'American Psycho' at the Almeida Theatre is directed by Rupert Goold. It is a revelation. Its success and failings return to one question, do you like Patrick Bateman and if so, do you feel that he can be saved? The novel and film can be interpreted in any number of ways, although the novel certainly does not want you to walk away with a warm sentimental feeling. If the murders have not happened, they soon could and that's the scariest thought of all. The film implies the same. The musical achieves a similar effect but in a way that left me feeling even more empathetic towards Patrick Bateman's character. He marries if only in a dream and his choice of bride will ruin him. Marriage without love will ruin Bateman and the body parts will amass because of this fact. It will be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
One of the strong points of this production of 'American Psycho' is the mise-en-scene. The stark clinical minimalism of an 80s apartment with videos lining the bookcases rather than books and one expensive work of art leaning to one side of the stage being one constantly used set. Bateman's apartment is a metaphor for the fragmentary life he leads. He doesn't need any objects with sentimental connections. He is constantly out at nightclubs, restaurants and at work. Lighting is used expressively to complete the concept created by the sets. At points in the production where Bateman's thoughts become particularly murderous, projections to the side and back of the stage show childish images and more horrific sketched images.
The music is a combination of new songs with an 80s feel, synthesiser heavy and also songs from the same period performed by the cast, 'Don't You Want Me' being particularly impressive. As is the case with many musicals, lyrical or musical motifs repeat throughout this production. The first song called 'Clean' introduces Patrick Bateman, in a similar manner to how Bale appears in the film. Remember the eye mask as Christian Bale as Bateman comes out of the shower explaining his cleaning routine. The whole concept of 'cleanliness' as a complete rebuttal of anything impure or affecting within this musical becomes devastating. Patrick Bateman even has a slightly sympathetic side to his character possibly because he is played by Matt Smith and some of the lyrics of the songs. From my memories of the novel, Patrick Bateman's relationship with his secretary, Jean does not hold the seeds to his salvation that this musical tries to develop. It's curious how musicals need the simplicity of a love story or potential love story to hold the more unsavoury aspects of their narratives together. The Patrick Bateman of this production is therefore ultimately a tragic 'Everyman' figure.
To close, the characters, narrative and style of this musical remain close to the original novel, even where the narrative slightly veers towards the optimistic. It deserves to be more widely seen. A West End transfer should happen in the New Year. It is time for the West End to start to celebrate new productions. 'This is not an exit'.
Barry Watt - 22nd December 2013.
Afterword
'American Psycho' is currently on at the Almeida Theatre but other than Day Seats and Returns, it is sold out until the end of the season.
http://www.almeida.co.uk/event/americanpsycho
The novel of 'American Psycho' by Bret Easton Ellis is a cheery little read for those of us slightly jaded by a diet of superficiality and vacant smiles. It is currently published by Picador. The line 'This is not an exit' is copyrighted to Bret Easton Ellis and appears in 'American Psycho'.
The film of 'American Psycho' by Mary Harron was released in 2000 and is available on DVD. It works up to a point as a film.
'Don't You Want Me' is copyright to the Human League and remains one of the most iconic 80s songs.
BW
Sunday, 1 December 2013
'Saving Mr. Banks' - Just a spoonful of substance helps the reality go down.
I went to see 'Saving Mr. Banks' at the Barbican today and I was emotionally violated by a film that touched every one of my feelings. I enjoyed the sensation at the time, although upon leaving the cinema and discussing a documentary that was on one of the BBC channels last night about P.L. Travers with my Mum (that I missed and will watch later), my view of the film may have slightly changed.
Let's start at the beginning, the film is a fictional account of the relationship between the author of 'Mary Poppins', P.L. Travers and Walt Disney. The relationship was a business based transaction as Walt Disney spent more than twenty years to get P.L. Travers to sell her film rights to the novel of 'Mary Poppins' to him. As a last ditch attempt, he invites her to Los Angeles, where Disney invites Travers to work on the script, design and general feel of the film (in a desperate attempt to get her to sell the rights to him). The film leaps between P.L. Travers' past as a girl and her present situation as an adult seemingly affected by many unresolved issues from her past. Emma Thompson plays the role of P.L. Travers with a subtlety and humanity that may or may not be a fair reflection of the actual author. Tom Hanks plays the role of Walt Disney and the same statement equally applies to him.
I need to express at this point that I enjoyed this film as a fictional work. In fact, it resonates as one of the finest films I have seen this year. It is framed as a narrative incorporating elements from 'Mary Poppins', the image of the wind dial and the alteration of wind direction implying change yet also suggesting that this has all happened before and will continue to happen. The film of 'Mary Poppins' uses the wind dial in the same way. Now where this film goes into another more vital and vibrant symbolic plane is through its usage of everyday objects and colours that help to link Travers' reality as a child with her life as an adult. For example, pears are a particularly important symbol in the film serving as a symbol of both satisfaction and failure. Her father gives a pear to P.L. Travers' mother as a child as a token of love then later in childhood, P.L. Travers is asked by her dying father to get him pears and proceeds to drop them. He is dead by the time she finally gets back from her pear hunting trip. Now true or not, apparently P.L. Travers asked the film makers not to use the colour red in 'Mary Poppins'. This ties in to the fact that P.L. Travers' father was an alcoholic who apparently died of some alcohol related disease (he is coughing up blood). Hence, her aversion to the colour red.
In terms of the characters, one quickly understands why P.L. Travers has issues with anyone tampering with her intellectual property as 'Mary Poppins' is effectively a pure example of catharsis. She used the novel and characters to effectively try to rewrite her past. Mr. Banks is effectively a symbolic representation of her father who she couldn't save. Mrs. Banks stands in for her mother, who ultimately seems to be long suffering (in reality, P.L. Travers' mother committed suicide after the death of her husband) but hard working. Mary Poppins is the positive force for change, the film implies that the figure may have existed in P.L. Travers' life in some form or other (an Aunt?).
Now, allowing for the positives, what happens to the film when you gradually learn that events that are being presented as factual are gradually revealed through other sources to be fictional? There's a great scene where P.L. Travers' mother asks her to look after her sisters and then wanders off to a lake to attempt suicide. She is saved by P.L. Travers who goes into the water after her. Also P.L. Travers as an adult remains a total enigma in many respects. Her character as suggested by this film is entirely informed by her childhood. Her love life is overlooked. Essentially, she is a little girl. Now Walt Disney also remains merely a two dimensional character. The fact that the Disney company were involved in this film may have slightly skewered the focus of this work. He comes across as being a genuinely nice guy, driven, slightly egotistical (he has pre-signed autographs in a cigarette case that he gives to people who ask for his autograph) but somehow, the photos at the end of the film reveal more about Disney than this film can. He deserves a more objective film, which will not be produced by Disney. I like this film up until the point that you step back and ask the question, how much of this is real? In many respects, I throw the same statement at 'Philomena' too. The ultimate divergence from reality apparently occurs at the end of the film when P.L. Travers attends the film premiere in Los Angeles of 'Mary Poppins'. She is shown to be deeply moved by the film in places, on account of its parallels with her own life but in reality, apparently she was crying owing to her belief that Disney had 'produced a film that was all fantasy and no magic'. (Please see my link to the article on 'Mary Poppins' that appeared in 'The Sunday Times' on 27th October 2013 in the Afterword to this blog entry).
My final thought, should you discard the truth and embrace a very entertaining Disney film or feel slightly sordid having seen a confectionery created with the express intention of deceiving to the same extent that it illuminates? The decision is yours... It's not pretending to be a documentary but real people are being distorted. It's a good film and that may be the only truth that matters. Perhaps?
Barry Watt - 1st December 2013.
Afterword
'Saving Mr. Banks' is out in all good U.K. cinemas at the moment. It's a co-production between Walt Disney Pictures, Essential Films and BBC Films.
'Mary Poppins' was written by P.L. Travers and was the first of six books featuring the character. Her adventures can be found in various editions including those produced by Harper Collins.
'Mary Poppins' - The film was released in 1964 and stars Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke. A Walt Disney production. Well worth seeing.
The 'Sunday Times' article is reproduced on the following website. It is copyright to the 'Sunday Times' where it first appeared on 27th October 2013.
http://dancelines.com.au/disney-added-spoonful-saccharine-mary-poppins/
Valerie Lawson's Dancelines is copyright to Valerie Lawson (She owns the website reproducing this article).
BW
Let's start at the beginning, the film is a fictional account of the relationship between the author of 'Mary Poppins', P.L. Travers and Walt Disney. The relationship was a business based transaction as Walt Disney spent more than twenty years to get P.L. Travers to sell her film rights to the novel of 'Mary Poppins' to him. As a last ditch attempt, he invites her to Los Angeles, where Disney invites Travers to work on the script, design and general feel of the film (in a desperate attempt to get her to sell the rights to him). The film leaps between P.L. Travers' past as a girl and her present situation as an adult seemingly affected by many unresolved issues from her past. Emma Thompson plays the role of P.L. Travers with a subtlety and humanity that may or may not be a fair reflection of the actual author. Tom Hanks plays the role of Walt Disney and the same statement equally applies to him.
I need to express at this point that I enjoyed this film as a fictional work. In fact, it resonates as one of the finest films I have seen this year. It is framed as a narrative incorporating elements from 'Mary Poppins', the image of the wind dial and the alteration of wind direction implying change yet also suggesting that this has all happened before and will continue to happen. The film of 'Mary Poppins' uses the wind dial in the same way. Now where this film goes into another more vital and vibrant symbolic plane is through its usage of everyday objects and colours that help to link Travers' reality as a child with her life as an adult. For example, pears are a particularly important symbol in the film serving as a symbol of both satisfaction and failure. Her father gives a pear to P.L. Travers' mother as a child as a token of love then later in childhood, P.L. Travers is asked by her dying father to get him pears and proceeds to drop them. He is dead by the time she finally gets back from her pear hunting trip. Now true or not, apparently P.L. Travers asked the film makers not to use the colour red in 'Mary Poppins'. This ties in to the fact that P.L. Travers' father was an alcoholic who apparently died of some alcohol related disease (he is coughing up blood). Hence, her aversion to the colour red.
In terms of the characters, one quickly understands why P.L. Travers has issues with anyone tampering with her intellectual property as 'Mary Poppins' is effectively a pure example of catharsis. She used the novel and characters to effectively try to rewrite her past. Mr. Banks is effectively a symbolic representation of her father who she couldn't save. Mrs. Banks stands in for her mother, who ultimately seems to be long suffering (in reality, P.L. Travers' mother committed suicide after the death of her husband) but hard working. Mary Poppins is the positive force for change, the film implies that the figure may have existed in P.L. Travers' life in some form or other (an Aunt?).
Now, allowing for the positives, what happens to the film when you gradually learn that events that are being presented as factual are gradually revealed through other sources to be fictional? There's a great scene where P.L. Travers' mother asks her to look after her sisters and then wanders off to a lake to attempt suicide. She is saved by P.L. Travers who goes into the water after her. Also P.L. Travers as an adult remains a total enigma in many respects. Her character as suggested by this film is entirely informed by her childhood. Her love life is overlooked. Essentially, she is a little girl. Now Walt Disney also remains merely a two dimensional character. The fact that the Disney company were involved in this film may have slightly skewered the focus of this work. He comes across as being a genuinely nice guy, driven, slightly egotistical (he has pre-signed autographs in a cigarette case that he gives to people who ask for his autograph) but somehow, the photos at the end of the film reveal more about Disney than this film can. He deserves a more objective film, which will not be produced by Disney. I like this film up until the point that you step back and ask the question, how much of this is real? In many respects, I throw the same statement at 'Philomena' too. The ultimate divergence from reality apparently occurs at the end of the film when P.L. Travers attends the film premiere in Los Angeles of 'Mary Poppins'. She is shown to be deeply moved by the film in places, on account of its parallels with her own life but in reality, apparently she was crying owing to her belief that Disney had 'produced a film that was all fantasy and no magic'. (Please see my link to the article on 'Mary Poppins' that appeared in 'The Sunday Times' on 27th October 2013 in the Afterword to this blog entry).
My final thought, should you discard the truth and embrace a very entertaining Disney film or feel slightly sordid having seen a confectionery created with the express intention of deceiving to the same extent that it illuminates? The decision is yours... It's not pretending to be a documentary but real people are being distorted. It's a good film and that may be the only truth that matters. Perhaps?
Barry Watt - 1st December 2013.
Afterword
'Saving Mr. Banks' is out in all good U.K. cinemas at the moment. It's a co-production between Walt Disney Pictures, Essential Films and BBC Films.
'Mary Poppins' was written by P.L. Travers and was the first of six books featuring the character. Her adventures can be found in various editions including those produced by Harper Collins.
'Mary Poppins' - The film was released in 1964 and stars Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke. A Walt Disney production. Well worth seeing.
The 'Sunday Times' article is reproduced on the following website. It is copyright to the 'Sunday Times' where it first appeared on 27th October 2013.
http://dancelines.com.au/disney-added-spoonful-saccharine-mary-poppins/
Valerie Lawson's Dancelines is copyright to Valerie Lawson (She owns the website reproducing this article).
BW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)