Sunday, 30 June 2013

The Lady from Shanghai (Orson Welles, 1947)


"Maybe I'll live so long that I'll forget her. Maybe I'll die trying." 

Introduction

Two years after Citizen Kane, the genius Orson Welles married Rita Hayworth. This was her second marriage lasting three years before they separated – but not before a brief rekindling of their romance on the set of The Lady from Shanghai. It didn't last long and they divorced in 1948. In that regard, Hayworth and Welles relationship is an important factor to consider when analysing this strange mess of a film. Detailed by James Steffen and Rob Nixon on Turner Classic Movies, a rough cut of the film was 155 minutes long and was chopped down by editor Viola Lawrence to a mere 87 minutes - David Benedict, introducing the film at the BFI Retrospective, was under no illusion about the distorted and clunky "short" film we were yet to watch. This is not Orson Welles at 100% - indeed, he is barely at 50% - but amongst the awkward accents, cold (but dull) characters and gossip-fuelled production there lies something brutal and beautiful about filmmaking and art - and the mysterious question raised as to whether Art reveals the Artist; whether intentional or not...

Scene Hopping Story

Orson Welles is Michael O'Hara - or "Black Irish" to his fellow shipmates - a seaman who assists on-board a yacht owned by sneaky lawyer Arthur Bannister (Everett Sloane) and his wife Elsa (Rita Hayworth). Elsa falls for Black Irish, but Arthur doesn't intervene highlighting the dangerous game the two are playing - we wonder whether foul-play is at hand. The two lovers slowly realise an opportunity to escape together, but all is not what it seems as friends of the Bannisters become deceitful - whilst even Elsa and O'Hara become distrusting of each other. Can they ever live a life together? Or are they simply not meant to be?

The characterisation is immediately unbalanced, as you try and find your grasp of the narrative out at sea. Orson Welles is putting on an Irish accent as he attempts to woo this upper-class rich woman - a woman who, opposed to the ravishing red-head Rita Hayworth defines, is a short-cut, platinum-blonde. The latter was a choice Welles made without consulting Harry Cohn and consequently added another reason for studios to despise him. The story sporadically jumps from a yacht (owned by Errol Flynn) to a courtroom, before leaping to an empty fairground making you dizzy as you desperately reach for some sort of solid foundation that The Lady from Shanghai simply doesn't have. As if recalling a dream, you question what happened - were we within a Chinese Theatre? Or were we within San Francisco? (We were within both)

The finale is a shoot-out in a room of mirrors and, though the characters look desperately to see what is a mirror and what is not, we realise that the confusing and surrealist edge that is successfully shown here does not reflect the film as a whole - and simply reminds us how confusing the story is. Both holding mirror shoot-out final sequences and Chinese themes, Guy Hamilton's The Man with the Golden Gun clearly realised how effective the finale was by using mirrors and guns within the opening action-sequence too or the maligned 007 adventure. In the repeated-reflections of the mirrored-maze, Welles even nods to The Great Train Robbery as Rita Hayworth shoots to camera.

Controlled Chiaroscuro

Kim Newman writes how The Lady from Shanghai is a "broken mirror of a film, with shards of genius that can never be put together into anything that makes sense", and the mirror truly is shattered into small pieces. Orson Welles frames so many shots in a manner that echoes his incredible film-noir framing in Touch of Evil. A clear use of background and foreground; defined silhouettes of the couple within an aquarium (that has surely inspired every couple-meet-in-aquarium scene ever since); a birds-eye-view shot above the yacht looking down on Hayworth as she sunbathes is geometric in its framing, except for her feminine figure.

But the story itself remains a convoluted confusion. The Irish narration draws our attention to the strange accent Welles is using and, in many instances, voids the entire purpose of narration completely. In the hope that a character explaining the story illuminates elements we're not privy to, instead "Black Irish" seems to ramble on when describing, multiple times, how he won't join the Bannister's on the yacht ... only to be convinced easily enough when he is offered money and Rita Hayworth says she'll "make it worth his while". Why did we even listen to his thoughts in the first instance?

But, there is a reason Woody Allen references The Lady from Shanghai at the end of Manhattan Murder Mystery. A murder within the story and a relationship whereby we are not sure who is playing who. It begs the question between Rita Hayworth and Orson Welles, two stars at the top of their game in 1943 (though Hayworth's Gilda was a couple of years away...), and who may have chosen to be with each other for more financially-motivated purposes. It is a strange beast, but it is unforgettable - and Orson Welles clearly struggling to effectively adapt a novel (Sherwood King's If I Die Before I Wake) is something worth watching unto itself. But this is a Rita Hayworth film - and her refusal to become the cliché vixen that Gilda had sold as her image is fascinating. So calculating and cold, with her wide-eyes become tight and sly, proves how versatile she was. For this, The Lady from Shanghai is a crucial Golden-Age Hollywood viewing necessity.

Originally written for Flickering Myth on 30th June 2013

Friday, 28 June 2013

Despicable Me 2 (Pierre Coffin; Chris Renaud, 2013)

"That's right, baby! Gru's back in the game with cool cars... gadgets... and weapons!"

Introduction

Whether you enjoy Despicable Me or not, it is clear from the outset that this is a heavily manufactured product. Small, silly-voiced creatures for Lemming-like comedic effect; a villain clutz at the centre of a story with imitatable foreign-accent and finally, to top it off, three "leedle" girls - including a wide-eyed cute one that proved you had a heart of stone if you didn't think she was adorable. Despite these animated film cliches, Despicable Me was touching in the depiction of adpoted children teaching a Father how to be a better role model. A role model that, in turn, impacted on the "minions" themselves. Released in 2010, Despicable Me capitalised on the "new" 3D trend and included multiple exciting 3D features including a rollercoaster ride and a playful end-credits sequence as the minions attempted to reach further and further into the audience. Could Despicable Me 2 use 3D in such an interesting way? More key to the original films success, we wonder if Gru (Steve Carrell), now "good", could retain his "superbad - superdad" charm?

A Happy Family?

To re-establish our favourite characters we see how Gru has set up a perfect family home for his girls - they continue to sleep in old nuclear bombs - but Gru has begun to organise parties for them, much to the delight of the parents as women try and set Gru up with single women. But things change dramatically when Lucy (Kristin Wiig) appears and, though a secret agent for AVL (Anti-Villain League), she knows of Gru's past achievements and kidnaps him to assist in catching a new villain. He has created a serum that turns cute bunnies - or cute minions - into crazed, dangerous killing machines. We join Gru and Lucy as they investigate the many quirky characters of a shopping mall (where the serum was last detected...) - and watch as they begin to work out who is the real super villain. Is it the Mexican Restaurant owner? Is it the Asian hair dresser? Who knows...

The real heart of the story though is now on Gru - the three girls are merely accomplices and assistants to his new role as AVL Super Spy - and his growing relationship with Lucy. The minions are in a slightly improved role as the final act reveals the super villain kidnapping the yellow creatures and transforming them into crazed-purple animals. But, personally, I felt the that the family established at the end of Despicable Me was more than successful

Interesting Parrallel

Considering Despicable Me 2 is released the same summer as Monsters University, it is interesting to reflect on the story behind Monsters Inc: Two (assumed fearful) male monsters, we find out, are brilliant parents to an adorable girl. The successful celebration of non-traditional families is clear-cut as both Mike and Sully become ideal parents despite their same gender and incorrect judgement (from us) that they are dangerous. Despciable Me 2 argues that, actually, children need a Mother - and parents need a partner - to successfully create a family. Agnes (Elsie Kate Fisher) pleads with Gru as she questions, in mock-frustration, why he has no partner. Gru awkwardly and uncomfortably manages to join forces with Lucy to give the children what they want - a Mother. Heaven forbid he is a strange, single parent - imagine if he was gay! Not in this sugar-coated, incredibly-popular kid-friendly film. Imagine the children of non-traditional families leaving the cinema - why can't I have two parents?

Furthermore, we notice that, unlike Despicable Me - whereby the foreign-accented character is outed as a loveable rogue - Despicable Me 2 assumes that (outside of the lead characters) foreigners are not to be trusted. Thematically, DM2 rewinds the clocks to a different time.

Spies and Comedy

But the film remains enjoyable and playful to the point that it seems to know all to well what we want from a fun, colourful, funky film. A nostalgic nod to All 4 One's 'I Swear' acknowledges the slightly-too-old-for-kids-film audience that clearly adore the film whilst the duck-and-dodge dynamic of investigative secret spying weaves into the film an energy that harks back to The Incredibles.

Despicable Me 2 hasn't lost the plot and understands a little of what we liked about the original, with one lovely flashback to Gru's childhood - something we all enjoyed in the first film. But if you are hoping that it pulls on the heart strings as much as DM did, unfortunately it fails to deliver. Despicable Me 2 is enjoyable and kids will be as quote-happy as they were the first time round, but it fails to break any ground in telling a story that hasn't been told many times before. As unexpected as it may have been, Despicable Me felt fresh and new opposed to Despicable Me 2 that feels expected and recycled.

Origially written/published for Flickering Myth on 28th June 2013

Sunday, 23 June 2013

Gilda (Charles Vidor, 1946)

"I thought we agreed that women and gambling didn't mix."

Introduction

In The Shawshank Redemption (titled Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption in Stephen King's Different Seasons) there is a moment whereby we see a scene from Gilda. Andy Dufrane (Tim Robbins) attempts to ask Red (Morgan Freeman) to bring him "Rita Hayworth" but before he can ask, Red tells him to wait so that he - and all the prisoners - can fully appreciate her cinematic introduction: "Gilda, are you decent?" [she throws her hair back] "Me? Sure. I'm decent".

The prisoners cheer in what may be one of the most iconic moments in Hollywood history; a moment that truly established her as a star from the trailer alone. But Gilda carries more than mere eye-candy for the viewers, it is also considered the "gayest, straight film" according to  David Benedict (who introduced the film at the BFI) as the love-triangle seems to be more between Gilda's (Rita Hayworth) husband Ballin Mundson (George Macready) and Johnny Farrell (Glenn Ford) ... at last until the final act anyway.

The Dark Alley

Opening on Johnny Farrell rolling the dice and winning a fixed gambling game, we realise that this is a man down on his luck, despite his winnings. Attacked briefly, he is saved by Mundson - carrying a cane with a concealed blade - and the two strike an unlikely friendship. It does beg the question as to why does a high-rolling, Casino-owning Ballin Mundson lurk in the dark alleys and save attractive men? Considering the 1946 time-period, you can leave it to your own imagination as to the subtext raised in these opening moments.

Ballin and Johnny form a partnership, with Johnny as manager of the Casino Ballin owns. After a short holiday, Ballin returns with a new wife: Gilda. Within moments, we realise there is more to her than meets the eye as she has a history that, somehow, involves Johnny. Rather than adhering to a strict generic code, Gilda manages to blend a wide range of filmmaking styles to become unique in its own right. Briefly, Johnny Farrell's immorality and narration firmly root the film in the Film Noir genre, but the romantic edge, musical numbers and comedic touches obscure this simplistic description.

Glenn Ford plays a character who holds unclear motives. Though he had a relationship with Gilda, he is cruel and unkind to her - as if to highlight how she is what has come between himself and Ballin. At one point, Ballin orders Johnny to go home with Gilda - but Johnny refuses, arguing that he should be with Ballin. He reluctantly leaves, but their relationship is clearly hinting at something more than friendship. Johnny Farrell's weak smile, sense of self-loathing and his abusive treatment of Gilda turns him into a character who you find difficult to like - but I think we all know the true challenges he faces and how his actions are all in re-action to his true love of Ballin Mundson, and the conflict of emotions he has towards Gilda.

Eroticism and Class

But Gilda oozes sexuality and the single movement of removing a satin glove, within a dance routine, in a repetitive stroke is considered one of the most erotic scenes in cinema. Her moody, sultry singing of the unforgettable "Put the blame on mame", whether it is front and centre in the middle of a club - or as a late-night private song - still draws you into her animalistic prowess. The strange narrative that twists and turns in a manner that loses a sense of consistency by the end doesn't destroy the performances - and indeed, George Macready plays a villain that wouldn't look out of place in a James Bond movie as he wears a long formal dressing-gown and, akin to Oddjob, a concealed weapon. Even his baldness precedes 007's arch nemesis Ernst Stavro Blofeld.

Like Johnny, we are viewing this world as a visitor. We are introduced and mesmerised by the world Ballin inhabits. They are all despicable characters - Gilda marrying a man for his wealth; Johnny content in his gambling occupation; Ballin as the owner of a Casino that makes money off Nazi's. But we are still drawn to the world and the complex and unlikely relationship between the characters. This explains the love for the film, and why people continue to be drawn to the story. The romantic couple "hate" each other; the villain confesses how he loves his wife - and yet we root for down-and-out Johnny. All these elements ensure Gilda is not forgotton, but I doubt it would remain as unforgettable without the graceful, elegant Rita Hayworth portraying the reckless and wil Gilda, who manages to portray a confident woman - but a woman men love to hate.

Gilda is playing at the BFI this week on June 28th - click here to get tickets!

Originally written/published for Flickering Myth on 23rd June 2013

Saturday, 22 June 2013

Monsters University (Dan Scanlon, 2013)

"I've been waiting for this my whole life! I'm gonna be a scarer!"

Introduction

Despite the critical success of Toy Story 3 - Oscar nominated and widely considered the closing chapter of a flawless trilogy - the release of Cars 2 proved that not everything Pixar touched turns to gold. Monsters Inc. was the fourth film in the Pixar canon and was the first film released in the new Millennium, in 2001. Can a series whereby the original is 12 years old continue? Is Monsters University as profound and poetic as Toy Story 3 or is it as hollow and thematically-stunted as Cars 2? Mike and Sully clearly have something to prove...

Hardwork

Clearly, the Monsters of Monsters Inc. are ideal for a series - loveable, colourful (akin to Cars, ripe for toy-manufacturing...) and set within a world that has comedy fed into its foundations as 'scares' are merely the day-to-day job and us humans are oblivious to this alternate world. How frustrating it was to end this set-up in Monsters Inc. as Mike (Billy Crystal) and Sully (John Goodman) realise that laughter is more powerful than scares - and the fate of Monsters Inc. is changed irreversibly.

Directed by Dan Scanlon, this is his first feature at Pixar after working in the Art Department for Cars and, rightfully, he takes us back in time. Monstropolis still creates energy through scaring and we are shown the academic route necessary to become an elite "scarer" as Mike joins Monsters University and meets Sully for the first time - a world whereby Sully, the son of a historic monster, is laid-back, lazy and selfish. Many things has to change to join the dots between Monsters University and Monsters Inc. including Mike and Sully joining the company, Sully changing his carefree attitude and Mike - who has obsessed and dreamed about working on The Scare Floor since childhood - altering his passion and choosing to be a sidekick to the mighty James P. Sullivan.

But, they connect together well, offering us a story from Mike's perspective primarily. He rallies the troops of the nerdy Oozma Kappa fraternity and completes in the Universities "Scare Games" to prove how scary he truly is... 

Monsters Got Talent

In a range of quirky and vibrant set-pieces, akin to reality TV shows such as The Voice, Mike, Sully and the Oozma Kappa's prove how scary they are. Running through a gauntlet as pink-spikey things swell up the body-parts they touch, silent-library sneaking and a "scare-off" competition as each team member scares robot-kids add pace and fun 'quests' for our characters to complete. They highlight how versatile the universe of these monsters truly is - and so, when we fall into "reality" in the final act the tone shifts and we realise how dark and scary our world is in comparison.

This really is the films strength as Monsters Inc. hints at the idea that many of things we fear are not scary at all while Monsters University clarifies how the true fear may be the world we live in - as Mike and Sully live within a playful world of fantastical games and comedic creatures. This final act, in terms of pace, seems slower and therefore acts more of an extension to the core narrative - but the shift in tone and connection to reality is worthwhile and offers an interesting theme to sneak through.

Monsters University is thoroughly enjoyable and it establishes a set of characters that we want to see more of - but it unfortunately ends with very little scope for a further story (Maybe "Monsters Pre-School"?). Though we have devilishly funny moments (Steve Buscemi's 'Randall' is absolutely hilarious) there seems to be an unclear message to the story we're told. Children will believe Dean Hardscrabble (Helen Mirren's) is the villain of the film - but she's not evil and is merely a strict disciplinarian. Indeed, the true villain is Mike himself as he ignores how unscary he actually is and, through all the games and action, this is where the tension lies. In this theme, and in how it is resolved, it is heart-breaking and troubling to imagine children taking it too seriously.

Pixar's greatest strength was the morals and sentiments that were embedded in the stories - ideas that appealed to adults moreso than children; Wall-E and social-change; Cars and industrialisation; The Incredibles and diversity. Monsters University has no such sentiment, and it is this that is the films greatest loss.

Orignally written/published on Flickering Myth on June 21st 2013

Wednesday, 19 June 2013

100W: Signs

Short reviews for clear and concise verdicts of a broad range of films...


Signs (Dir. M.Night Shyamalan/2002)

Signs
is Independence Day from the perspective of a small family in rural USA. Graeme Hess (Gibson) has a crisis of faith following the death of his wife as aliens invade Planet Earth. Hess and his brother (Phoenix) display the usual awe and wonder that we’ve seen before but the small-town environment draws you into a family that you fall for through a strong young cast (Culkin and Breslin). We run through crunchy, crop fields and look closer at news footage to see purpose in supernatural occurrences as Signs maintains power, but lacks the subtlety of M.Night Shyamalan’s previous films.

Rating: 7/10