Showing posts with label Sidney Lumet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sidney Lumet. Show all posts

Saturday, 8 February 2014

Serpico (Sidney Lumet, 1974)

Al Pacino has been a target for many throughout his career. Serpico begins as full-bearded Frank Serpico (Pacino) is wheeled on a stretcher through bustling corridors, blood over his body, in the same manner as Carlito Brigante in Brian DePalma’s Carlito’s Way. Clearly DePalma owes a debt to Sidney Lumet in this open tribute. It’s an ambiguous start as cop-killin’ ain’t cool on the streets of New York.

But, unlike Brigante’s retiring gangster, Frank Serpico is a cop who’s joined the force with the intention to rid crime from the streets. His morals and idealism lands him in hot water with the New York Police Department as he refuses to join their corrupt, penny-pinching crew. Over time, he builds a ground-breaking court case, dubbed the Knapp Commission. Based on a true story, Serpico is written by Midnight Cowboy’s Waldo Salt and Norman Wexler and based on the biography of the same name, by Peter Maas. Highly critical of the police, Serpico criticises the unethical methods of controlling crime (through well-organised bribery) and the inevitable harassment within the workplace if you choose not to be a part of the underhand deals.

But this is Al Pacino’s film. A clean-shaven cop taking the pledge represents a youthful naivety before Serpico realises the ugly side of policing. His facial-hair dictates his slow spiral into cynicism and distrust before he eventually has a full-grown beard – something we know from the outset is a sign of things to come. Pacino comfortably argues and bellows with friends and politicians; he flirts and playfully jokes with his girlfriends; and his gaze is intense as he fights his corner. Unlike The Panic in Needle Park, Frank Serpico is in complete control of his conduct – and knows what he wants. In one sequence, he scruffily drags a known mobster into a prison-cell. His frustration and anger at the lack of support is why it looks so messy – rather than his own lack of control.

Sidney Lumet, as director, captures him by standing back. There is no voice-over narration or open-discussion about Frank’s feelings. We are observing the brutal truth. The grim streets and alleyways capture the confusion and brashness of the cops. The change in dynamic by turning the end of the story into the beginning is thought-provoking. Policemen state how “six other guys” wanted to shoot Serpico. Is he a villain? By the end, we realise those who are truly at fault. Serpico jumps to action on an attempted-rape call-out at one point, while his colleague scoffs at taking the call. Someone else will get it. But Serpico persists. When we see the vicious, decrepit state of the poor woman and the group surrounding her, expertly shot in low-lighting by Lumet, it only serves to support the change necessary within the organisation – a change Serpico leads.


Not knowing the true story means we can speculate on the outcome. Michael Corleone, served his country but turned to become the leader of “the family”. We wonder whether Serpico will break. Like The Godfather, Pacino is strong and defiant. He will not back down to those his disrespects. But Serpico doesn’t have the muscle of the Corleone. He is a lone man on a mission to change a disease that is hidden and embedded deep in those who serve and protect. A little too long perhaps, Serpico is not a masterpiece. But it does showcase Pacino’s talents as he is in every scene. His likeability is crucial as we see his frustration play out. We side with him and, in that final shot, we know the fight isn’t over.

Friday, 28 December 2012

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.

Large Association of Movie Blogs

Monday, 28 March 2011

A-Z #62: Dog Day Afternoon

You can pick up hundreds of DVD's for a round-pound each - it doesn't matter. Its never about quantity, its about quality. A-Z is my way of going through my collection, from A-Z, and understanding why I own the films ... or you can tell me why I should sell 'em


#62 - Dog Day Afternoon

Why did I buy it?

I am embaressed to say that Dog Day Afternoon I did not know about until the brief mention in Dominic Sena's Swordfish. If I recall correctly, Travolta uses the film as an example as to how it has a great ending. This perked my interest, but following that note, I heard alot more about it - especially having watch The Godfather and becoming keen to watch young Al Pacino in action.

Why do I still own it?
 
Because it truly is a brilliant film. Like The Godfather and The Deer Hunter, the film stars John Cazale in another blistering performance - who knows what he would've made had he continued to make films. We all talk about De Niro and Pacino - but at this point in the seventies, Cazale was one of them. The film is incredible on multiple levels. As pure entertainment it is non-stop, set-in-a-day and [pretty much] set in one location. On the first viewing, though based on a true story, you have no idea where it is going. This leads to the next level - the film shows how Pacino's character is robbing the bank to pay for his male lover's operation to become a woman. Can you believe it? This is an action film with heart and intelligence. The acting is flawless too - Pacino playing the impulsive, but confused robber at the heart of it, whilst Cazale is the Vietnam veteran ... we question whether he will 'lose it'? Nominated for multiple awards - including the Best Picture and Best Director for Sidney Lumet - even winning the statuette for Best Screenplay. This truly is an example of rewwatchable, classic filmmaking.
 
All together now - "Attica! Attica! Attica!"

Large Association of Movie Blogs