Network (Sidney Lumet, 1976)

"I don't like the way this script of ours has turned out. It's turning into a seedy little drama"

Introduction

David Mamet and Aaron Sorkin surely watched this film hundreds of times before beginning their own careers. Indeed, Sorkin paid his respects to Network upon winning his Academy Award for The Social Network. Writer Paddy Chayefsky is one of only two screenwriters (alongside Woody Allen) to have won a Academy award for three films, as a solo writer. This film remains relevant and it is shockingly critical of television, cinema and media as a whole.

A Voice for the Audience

Howard Beale (Peter Finch) is an anchorman with failing ratings for his TV show. Realising he will be 'let go', he reveals - live on air - that he will kill himself. On TV. Next week. This single act sets in motion events that slowly reveal how sordid and spineless the TV station is - Beales popularity soars as his madness becomes a quasi-circus act as he preaches every night his attitude towards the problems in the world. Audiences lap it up and slowly, this crazed man becomes the most important man on TV. A product of the corruptness the media are happy to continue exploiting - especially as the success of Beale means success for the TV station, satisfying the demands of 'the money'; aka, the stakeholders.

Roger Ebert explains how, interestingly, though central to the story Howard Beale's madness and success is merely a 'macguffin', a story that really gives us a sense of context for the story of Diane Christiansen (Faye Dunaway), the "ratings hungry programming executive who is prepared to do anything for the numbers" as she begins a relationship with Max Schumacher (William Holden) as he realises the old-days are over and the new-class are taking over.

Tell Me About the Media

I would not be the first to wax-lyrical about the 'state of television' and how Network was clearly unaware of Jerry Springer, The X-Factor and Big Brother - you can find that easily enough on the internet. But it is interesting to compare the film to an equally shocking film directed by Spike Lee: Bamboozled.

Both satirical attacks on the media industry, Spike Lee manages to shock us with the depiction of racial stereotypes and the use of African-American images and ideas in the modern media. Though Sidney Lumet doesn't focus on the racial representation in the media, they both build to a climax whereby the outcome of the greed and immorality of the business itself results in a step too far - a TV-show that depicts black-face and obscene stereotypes and a decision to kill the performer live on air. Both films aspire to a realist-edge, Spike Lee using digital handheld cameras and behind-the-scenes sequences in Network add an air of authenticity. Both films don't feel too far from the truth. When we reflect on reality TV - and the moments whereby channels have apologised for the decisions to broadcast a situation (Jade Goody's racist tirade on the UK Big Brother, young Hollie Steel on Britains Got Talent), it can't be long before TV stations are held responsible for their actions. I think we could all easily stand up - ""I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!"

The many, memorable speeches reflect attitudes that remain relevant in 2012 - a core speech details how everything is a part of one system and how dehumanising the world is. The bitter conflict surrounds the way the media needs to represent itself (its about you! its about informing you!) and what its actual objective is (Its about us. And we can only survive with money. From you). When you consider the recent phone scandals leading to the Leveson enquiry and you consider the awful truth behind Jimmy Saville in the UK ... the same conflict is at the center. The balance of morals under the pressure of capitalism - and the need to make money.

Change?

Joshua Klein writes in 1001 Movies to See Before You Die how Network is a "cynical treatise on the moral and ethical decline of television", going further by stating how it is "a damning portrayal of not just the television providers but us, the compulsive television viewers". It is and we are.

The change that Sidney Lumet, Spike Lee and others expect comes from us. We are the viewers and we dictate the creation of these programmes and whether they will continue. I would like to believe that the cynicism many have towards reality TV will continue - the pseudo-reality beginning to rub off and lose its edge. Big Brother changed its channel in the UK due to dwindling numbers - so the end is nigh. Klein also highlights how "sensationalism and tawdriness of TV is exactly what keeps us coming back", and maybe so. But celebrity culture [I hope] is perceived as cheap - and sporting icons in the Olympics celebrated and valued. I can only hope this continues to shape the media - and inspire a generation. Maybe we have stood up - and we're not taking it any more. Indeed, I'm not.

Rocky (John G. Avildsen, 1976)

"Stay in school and use your brain. Be a doctor, be a lawyer, carry a leather briefcase. Forget about sports as a profession. Sports make ya grunt and smell. See, be a thinker, not a stinker."

Introduction

I often read the ideas titled 'How to make your blog better'. They always say "make sure you update on a regular basis", etc. I think of Rachel at Rachels Reel Reviews and her daily focus points, then there is A Life in Equinox with, amongst other regular features, he has 'The Monday Corner' every Monday. I should have something like that put in place but I know I would get behind. One thing I enjoy writing is Art Gallery reviews - but they take up a lot of time and, though they bring up great parallels with cinema, I think the fact that it is modern art, people are probably put off from the outset. I have recently purchased the Rocky Blu-Ray box set. This first film is truly brilliant - and even watching it in the Film Club at my school, many boys thoroughly enjoyed it. But it is more, much more, than a boxing film ...

The Omen (Richard Donner, 1976)

"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast; for it is the number of a man; and his number is 666"

Introduction

I borrowed this from friend Jo who you may notice, often puts his view of films as comments on this very blog, but I raided his collection as soon as he moved to London and amongst the films he had was this. A 'classic' horror film - so they say - that I felt I really should watch so that I know my horror films. Bear in mind this is four years after 'The Exorcist' and three years after Roeg's 'Don't Look Now', so horror films that involve families and demon-children/dead children seem to be a recurring theme in 70's films. But, this seem to warrant many sequels - akin to 'The Exorcist' - and so, the orginal was worth the watch ...

Quick Synopsis

Switched at birth, Damien (Harvey Stephens) is child of Robert (Gregory Peck) and Katherine Thorn (Lee Remick). The Dad, Robert, switched the child as his actual child was a still born. It is 6th June 1966. 6am. The happy family move to England, whereby Robert Thorn is appointed US ambassador to England.

Damien turns five and the family nanny hangs herself in front of everyone and, at the same time, a rottweiler dog barks. Mrs Baylock - a new nanny arrives, and she is clearly a bit weird, while a Priest begins stalking Robert, confronting him on many occassions, warning him about Damien who, he believes, is the anti-christ. Not to mention that Satan himself has decided how Katherines current child, still in her womb, shall not be born.

Not long after telling him this, the priest falls from onto a church spire impaling himself, and, turns out, Katherine is preggers. It's not long before 'Damien' strikes again and he pushes Katherine over a banister. Robert needs to find out more - especially when he sees photographs taken showing ghostly images of the cause-of-death, before the death of the nanny and the priest (E.g. the spire the priest fell onto). That seems unclear, read it again and it should make sense.

The photographer and Robert visit Italy, where Damien was initially adopted and the hospital has since burned down alongside all the birth records. Finding the head priest of the hospital, he is found very ill indeed - having been severely burned giving him only movement in his left hand. But alas, he uses a small piece of charcoal to point them in the direction of Damiens mother. At a graveyard they find that inside one grave is a jackal skeleton - seems he wasn't born of a human and may actually be the antichrist, while in the other grave is the body of Robert and Katherines first child showing that it was not a stillborn but was, in fact, murdered at birth. Cue rottweiler dogs and, luckily, they escape. Robert calls the wife, Katherine, asking her to come to Italy but, before she gets a chance, she is thrown out of the hospital window by Mrs Baylock. Robert is devastated and the photographer and him travel to Israel to find an archaeologist who can stop the antichrist. Bugenhagen, the archaeologist, tells him that there is a way to stop him: by stabbing him with the seven daggers of Meggido. Easy.

Robert can't kill a child though - thats crazy talk - and he throws the daggers to the side. The photographer on the other hand goes to grab them and is suddenyl decapitated by a pane of glass. Robert can kill a child and will. He gets the daggers and returns to England.

He finds Damien and - just in case - he checks his body and finds 666, just as Bugenhagen said, confirming the fact that he is the antichrist. Mrs Baylock trys to kill him but, luckily, he has a knife and kills her - taking Damien to a church. He pulls the first knife and - police break in and shoot him. Robert and Katherine are both dead and have a double funeral.

So Damien has new parents - no other than the President of the US of A. Credits.

What I reckon...

Its all a little messed up to be honest. I watched this a while ago and came away feeling non-plussed. I think the idea of an antichrist is clearly a great idea for a movie, while practically having an actor effective as the antichrist is something different. Probably why the film rests on Gregory Peck's shoulders, and even Damien - the antichrist - needs a nanny to fight off the good guys.

Now, maybe its rooted in some fascinating back-story and history - akin to the history of Dracula and Frankenstein, but I have a funny feeling its not. I mean, 666. Yeah, we get it - the number of the devil. "Born on the the 6th of the 6th of 1966" at 6.06am. Just because you can't do 6.66am. Or maybe you can. he is the antichrist.

As mentioned in the introduction - it wasn't particularly new. Exorcist and Don't Look Now was years before this, so you know it was a product of the new kids-as-evil craze that was sweeping through Hollywood so you have to ask yourself the question - what was so special about this one, because, honestly, I'm not too sure. Its a boy for one - alot of the pre-pubescent girls-who-are-possessed/evil often have some subtext of girls growing up and all that puberty stuff. Exorcist is a prime example, while this is a boy possessed since birth. The horrors are visual also - impaling on a church fence and the dogs, which are adds to the fear factor, but I felt it was all a bit horror-by-numbers and, alas, I am in an awkwards position because I don't know exactly the context it was released within in '76 as I was not born for another four years. maybe there is something about modern day outlook (London) versus traditional, religious outlook (Rome/Vatican). aith was beginning to be less important in society in the seventies, so these little digs at Catholocism might be a product of that - how technology (photography) is, bit-by-bit, making us ignore the real question of faith.

I can't knock the score by Jerry Goldsmith - but it hardly beats The Exorcist now, does it? The little gander I have had of other materials claims that it got more credability because it is played as a Thriller (hmmm...) and that the sequence of the lady hanging herself, happy-as-larry ("this is all for you Damien") is indeed, messed up and can't be really topped by other horrors.

Nevertheless, I have a funny feeling that the franchise this spawned, combined with the notion of a 'Damien/antichrist' tag (To the point that Only Fools and Horses references it) used in pop culture has given us the impression that this film is important to the canon of cinema - or at the very least of horror, when in fact, it just happened to benefit from publicity it didn't ask for.

Taxi Driver (Martin Scorsese, 1976)

"Here is a man who would not take it anymore. A man who stood up against the scum, the c***s, the dogs, the filth, the sh*t. Here is a man who stood up"

Introduction

Amongst the many directors I admire, Martin Scorsese is up there. Having watched 'Taxi Driver' recently (followed by Scorsese's full music video to Michael Jackson's 'Bad' starring Wesley Snipes and written by Richard 'The Wire' Price.) I decided to follow the viewing with a read of Amy Taubin's study, published in the BFI classics series. I still have to finish the book (its very slim so it shan't be long...) so I may add a little to this review if she raises something in the closing chapter that affects my perspective. I first watched the film years ago and so this was only my second viewing but I think the next step is 'Mean Streets' if I want to get an idea of Scorsese's early days. Nevertheless, one thing Taubin mentioned that I think is interesting is how Herrman - the composer - worked on many Hitchcock films and Scorsese, a Hitchcock fan himself, working with Herrman (becoming the final score Herrman wrote before his death) on a very dark film signaled the start of a new era in Hollywood, a Hollywood that ultimately faded away after Hitchcock, Ford and all the other pre-1970's directors. (Also interesting to note is that 1976 was the year Hitchcock himself released 'Family Plot', whereby the score was composed by the up-and-coming, pre-Star Wars, pre-Indiana Jones, John Williams)

What I reckon... (Summary is pretty much within this chunk...)

This is a film that, in my opinion, gets better the more you watch it. So many layers and issues raised about inner-city life, loneliness, faith, passion, desire - even love. What is most interesting about this is the perspective we view it from, and how this perspective cannot be trusted either. Travis Bickle (Robert DeNiro) is a sociopath - he is trusted with peoples lives, but despises these lives he controls. He moves around a city viewing the 'scum' out there on the streets, the 'scum' that he, in effect, is a part of. Not that he knows - he sees himself above all that. He sees himself as some sort of God. Not only does Scorsese show us this part of his life from above (from coffee's and the fantastic long-shot at the end as we pan above the bloodbath Bickle leaves) - as if looking down on everyone and everything, but also Bickle himself, narrating his views and- ultimately - decides to control people's lives himself - telling Iris (Foster) what she should do with her life and then murdering Sport (Kietel) and his brothel buddies at the finale.

Bickle's an insomniac who wanders the streets at night - on foot, in the car - so he feels he might as well 'get paid for it' by being a taxi driver. A profession ideally suited for people who want to people-watch, day in, day out. He goes t the dodgy ends of NYC - an area where most taxi drivers are not so keen to go, but he wants to know about it, he wants to comment on it and bath in the dirty mush of NYC, the muggy foundations of NYC.

Split into three acts - the first act shows Travis attempt to woo Betsy (a campaign worker for Sen. Charles Palantine), after the coffee he seems to be successful and they go to the movies but, unfortunately Travis genre of film was not taken into consideration. Travis likes, and often watches, porn. The angelic 'untouchable' Betsy (Shepherd) has been tainted. To some extent abused and defiled by his conscious decision to take her to a porn movie. The second act is his attempt to change, building his body up and his plans to assassinate Sen. Charles Palantine - but, ultimately fails (this recurring theme of Travis failing at building a relationship with Betsy and failing to assassinate are all small concerns that - bit-by-bit - build up to a crescendo of frustration and anger towards the world from Travis' eyes...) and then, the final act, we are introduced formally to Iris who - akin to Betsy - Travis wants to 'save' from the streets. A destroyed girl he wants to turn into an angel. He needs to save her and he believes that he is some sort of saviour and seems to destroy all the horror surrounding Iris - a bloodbath in the dingy flat, Sport murdered, etc.

Apparently Schrader based the character on him during a bad period in his life (y'think) - that's immense. He was squatting in an ex-girlfriends apartment spending money in porno theatres and had no friends - so alone. But then he read Arthur Bremer's personal diary (Bremer shot George Wallace - a man who aimed at becoming president...) which seemed to have a similar attitude to his own - but, I guess, a lot more twisted and corrupted and - ultimately - mad. Nevertheless, the parallels is what makes this film so personal and relate-able - while also so twisted and sinister also.

While Bernard Herrman's score is very interesting - the depressive two chord and four chord change, the idea of impending doom and the growth of frustration and anger inside Bickle is simply breathtaking - while the saxophone seems to create this beautiful theme that contrasts against the dirty streets and horrible vision of NYC we see.

This film would go great as a double-bill with Fincher's 'Fight Club'. Though 'Fight Club' creates a false persona, 'Taxi Driver' still deals with the dirty, depressive view of a corrupt society that breeds the people that snap into insanity. Which reminds me of 'Falling Down' also. I think De Niro's performance is simply so convincing - you pity him because you know he is in control of the situation. This anti-hero also feels like you might meet him yourself, though it is quite clear that mentally he has problems and is ultimately so self-involved. Never aware of the options available to him - akin to many post-Vietnam soldiers. What do you do after such an event?

Because the whole film cuts so close to the bone, it has the edge of fear and horror. The eyes lingering in the car mirror and the sense throughout the film about what Travis will do - when will he crack? His not-so-subtle racism is also a part of this which is so difficult to watch also. In a world that has become so diverse - whereby, in my opinion, racism has become hidden as opposed to being openly condoned. Travis drives through the streets rarely conversing with people - but we know his thoughts and his attitude to the African-American characters in his head. The real fear and horror is the possible parallels this might have with people in society today - violent, dangerous racist sociopaths who will inevitably crack at some point ...