Showing posts with label cinema. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cinema. Show all posts

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Some Like It Hot (1959)



These days we are fortunate for the opportunities to see classic films once again in a movie theater. While the films are projected digitally, it does not take away from the theatrical screening experience. Many classic films are as relevant today as ever. Turner Classic Movies is on pretty much all the time in my home. Their partnership with Fathom Events is a true boon to film lovers.

This week, I screened Some Like It Hot for only the second time ever. And it was my first time seeing the movie on the big screen. What really struck me was the amount of innuendos which were cleverly crammed into the movie. I also realized how much more cellatious Lemmon's character was over that of Curtis. I mean, his character was one randy dude!


To briefly recap, two musician bachelors (Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis) are looking for any opportunity to make money. They discover an opportunity to play with an all female orchestra and decide to dress as women to join them. In the process they become witnesses to a mob hit and remain on the run from some mobsters out to rub them out. During their time performing in Florida (which was actually filmed at the Hotel Coronado in San Diego), both men fall for fellow orchestra member, Sugar (Marilyn Monroe). There are a bunch of rich older bachelors staying at the hotel and one of them falls for Daphne aka Jerry. Jerry then encounters the world of being objectified as a woman as well as it's benefits. Joe works hard to get Sugar, eventually adopting a Cary Grant affect and pretending to be a wealthy oil tycoon. The mob inadvertently catches up to them and hilarity ensues. The (musical?) comedy Some Like It Hot, conjures many images from pop culture with its iconic moments. The most common is Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon dressing as women. Or perhaps Marilyn Monroe singing, "I Wanna Be Loved By You." To me, the most impressive thing about this film from director Billy Wilder is that it basically blew apart what was left of the Hays Code. That list of restrictive, censored topics that for a couple decades were banned from films.


Time has also brought the homosexual themes depicted within the film to the forefront. While I would not say that they were intentionally placed there at the time of production, you can't help but wonder what was going through the mind Jerry's (Lemmon) character. He got so excited when Osgood Fielding III had proposed marriage to her/him. Joe (Curtis) had to remind Jerry that he was actually a man after spending so much time reinforcing to him earlier about being a woman. Was Jerry merely caught up in the role as a woman, or did he actually enjoy the male attention?  Joe goes from being a man pretending to be a woman, only to meet a woman he's interested in and then having to pretend to be an entirely different man to woo her. Crossdressing helped him meet women, but it would not work to close the deal with one. I'm sure there have already been many essays written on this topic. Some of those can be found here. Essentially, the movie hints at homosexuality, studies the male gaze, speaks to female objectification and misogyny, and finally, condemns male insensitivity. Wraps it all into an nice bow.

The whole gangster storyline was good for framing but totally secondary to the story. This element was added by Billy Wilder himself. The original storyline was adapted from a French film called Fanfare For Love from 1936, which followed the story of the men dressing as women but did not feature men on the run as part of the plot.


Fun fact from Wikipeda: Marilyn Monroe worked for 10% of the gross in excess of $4 million, Tony Curtis for 5% of the gross over $2 million and Billy Wilder 17.5% of the first million after break-even and 20% thereafter. The movie made $40 million in it's initial run.

Sunday, March 5, 2017

All About Eve (1950)



There is a list of films that I should have seen by now, but just haven't gotten around to watching. This became glaringly apparent over a decade ago in film school. While my list is shorter, it is certainly still lengthy. One of the films I have been meaning to watch was All About Eve (1950). Luckily, it was this month's film selection for the TCM and Fathom Events collaboration. I couldn't pass up the chance to see this on the big screen.



You've certainly heard the famous line from Ms. Bette Davis, "Buckle up, it's going to be a bumpy night!" The movie is a backstage story revolving around aspiring actress Eve Harrington. Looking shabby, Eve shows up in the dressing room of Broadway mega-star Margo Channing, telling a melancholy life story to Margo and her friends. Margo takes Eve under her wing, and it appears that Eve is a conniver that uses Margo. The story twist was unique for it's time, but it is one that has been replicated multiple times since then. Davis's famous "buckle up" line was an admonishment to the crowd at her party, as well as the audience watching the movie, as we are about to see the story arc unfold. And while, the story twist may be familiar, the theme of the story, which is critical of the world of show business, still holds true today. Be careful what you wish for when it comes to fame, because you might just get exactly what you want.

The film set a record at it's time with a 14 Academy Award nominations and one six. Bette Davis did not win for Best Actress, likely due to the fact that both Davis and co-star Anne Baxter were both in the Best Actress category. I'm not alone in stating that this is by far, Davis's best work. Baxter wasn't bad, but her screen time paled in comparison to Bette Davis and those eyes. Interestingly, in the 1970s, the film was made into a musical called Applause and Anne Baxter eventually took over the Davis role, Margot Channing in the show.  
Tonight was also the debut of Feud, the mini-series about What Ever Happened to Baby Jane and the rivalry between Joan Crawford and Bette Davis. The series has homages to films by both women and even the pilot episode has tributes to All About Eve. Ever since the end of the studio system, we just don't have stars the size of Bette Davis anymore. All About Eve is absolutely a film that anyone who says they love movies, should see. I can't believe I didn't get around to watching this sooner.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

See the Oscar Nominated Shorts Now

This Sunday is the Academy Awards. The Shorts categories are unique because so few people ever actually get to the films. All shorts, live action and animation are available for viewing today On Demand. Below is the trailer.



Shorts®HD is the global home to short film, where short stories come to life in stunning high definition. Shorts®HD obtains only high quality live action, animation, and documentary movies from the world’s most famous film festivals and independent suppliers. Through the acquisition of these films, the channel offers professional short filmmakers an unparalleled commercial medium to develop their careers. ShortsHD™ is available on DIRECTV (Channel 573), and AT&T U-Verse (Channel 1789), US Sonet (Channel 292), CenturyLink prism (1789) and Frontier Communications (Channel 1789).

Saturday, January 7, 2017

A Monster Calls (2017)


As I've aged, I do find myself more open to being moved emotionally by movies. I remember back in the summer of 1982 watching E.T. in a crowded theater. I was 6 and everyone but me seemed to be crying during the scene of E.T. dying. I even had my aunt lean over to tell me that it was ok to cry, which I thought was weird since I didn't have anything moving me to tears, there was a fake alien on screen in a dramatic death scene. Maybe it's because I was only 6, with just 84 months of life experience. I really don't remember being emotional in a moving screening until 1994 watching Schindler's List in a sold out theater just after Christmas. That movie moved me to tears.

Fast forward to last night. Yes there have been many other films to effect me emotionally, but last night hit me hard when my kids and I watched A Monster Calls. The movie is based a popular children's fantasy novel that's become required reading for middle school aged children. I had not heard of the book, but I did see the previews which looked regrettably familiar to the recent Spielberg flop, The BFG. However, these are not the same movie and have next to no similarity to one another other than they are both based on popular books and have very large menacing looking but friendly creatures romping about. Otherwise, these are two different movies.

This story follows a young boy with his dying mother coming to terms with the inevitable reality that life goes on, even when loved ones pass away. Children often don't have the ability to cope with the understanding and emotions involved in losing a loved one, especially a parent. In this story, the troubled boy, known mostly around town for having a sick mother, is visited over several nights by a large tree which comes to life and comes to him to tell three metaphorical stories to explain aspects of life to him. The fourth story must be told by the boy to the tree, where the boy is required to share his nightmare. The boy overcomes bullying, a demanding grandmother, an absent father and losing his mother.

The boy, Conor O'Malley is played by Lewis MacDougall, who has a face for film. Felicity Jones is the mother with the terminal illness. With an inconsistent British accent is Sigourney Weaver. Liam Neeson voices and via motion capture, portrays the giant humanoid yew tree who visits Conor nightly. I brought my 10 and 11 year old children. The younger child was somewhat bored because of the slower pacing of the film but in the end, we discussed the movie and they both walked away with a strong message from it.

Lastly, getting back my mention of feeling emotional, I lost my mother unexpectedly when I was 23 and she was just 44. Any films with mom's dying get to me, this film particularly hit me because the boy's nightmare is losing his mom. My childhood nightmare was my mother dying and it eventually came true, while I was no longer a child, I still could not have been emotionally prepared for what I experienced with her sudden death. There was a very cathartic element in this movie for me, which caused me to weep during the film with large tears rolling down my cheeks. It truly is rare for me to me to experience any emotions anymore, especially as strongly as A Monster Calls caused me to feel last night.


Monday, July 18, 2016

Dark City (1998)


Dark City – Proud to be a Hybrid
(written in 2006)

In Janet Staiger’s article, “Hybrid or Inbred: The Purity Hypothesis and Hollywood Genre History” she argues that Hollywood films have never been “pure” or easily arranged into categories nor are modern films hybrids of genres.  She hesitates to loosely call such films “hybrids” as some film scholars has done because of the suggestion that a hybrid as it’s own genre is invalid.  There is an inherent need for a reliable categorization for films, but Staiger argues that all modern films fit into multiple genres and categories. In her argument, she disagrees that movies such as sci-fi noir are hybrids.  She instead suggests, derogatorily, that the term “inbred” would be a better way to define these films, since they sample prior film conventions to create new ones.  I disagree and believe using the term “hybrid film” is a useful and helpful term in defining contemporary genres.  A recent example of this is found in Alex Proyas’ 1998 film Dark City.  This underrated film is a textbook example of how to successfully meld film noir with science fiction and validates the argument for the continued recognition of genre hybrids.

In an article by Rob Latham, he notes that “postmodernism tends to move toward an implosion of conventionally separate genres, creating multiple hybrids.”  (Latham 229) It is a rare sight in our modern times for completely conventional genre pictures to be produced.  While a discussion of genre study and theory is beyond the scope of this argument, it is worth noting that genre purity has become nothing more than a historical note in film history.  Virtually every movie borrows from earlier films or crosses conventions through two or more genres.  Laura Marks defines hybrid cinema in the following way:

The term "hybrid cinema" also implies a hybrid form, mixing documentary, fiction, personal, and experimental genres, as well as different media. By pushing the limits of any genre, hybrid cinema forces each genre to explain itself, to forgo any transparent relationship to the reality it represents, and to make evident the knowledge claims on which it is based. Hybrid cinema is in a position to do archaeology, to dig up the traces that the dominant culture, and for that matter any fixed cultural identity, would just as soon forget. One cannot simply contemplate a hybrid (or a work of hybrid cinema): one cannot help but be implicated in the power relations upon which it reflects. (Marks 8)

With Marks definition of hybrid cinema, she provides another clear explanation for the purpose of having the term.  This counters Staiger’s argument that hybrid is inaccurate or unnecessary. According to Marks, hybrid cinema allows us to push genres to every possible edge of their individual definition. We are then able to review and rethink the implications of that genre.  It also it takes us back to where we recall fears and concerns of the past that are also applicable to today’s time.  Film noir was very much reflective of the World War II paranoia that permeated society.  By forming a hybrid with science fiction, noir becomes applicable to our current times as we attempt to deal with modernist fears.  Fears such as: where is the world going?  Will it still be here for our children and our children’s children?  Will technology cause a greater sense of alienation between people?  Is the concept of a utopian society nothing more than a fantasy?  These themes are all present in the sci-fi noir hybrid genre.

When we look at the origins of film noir, we find that it is made up of many elements and is a virtual hybrid of concepts in itself.  “Film noir is a mood, a tone, a play of shadows and light and beyond all of these, a visual consideration that in its narrative structures embodies a world view.” (Tuska) Paul Schrader in his groundbreaking essay “notes on film noir,” believes there were four main causes for noir, “World War II and post-war disillusionment, post-war realism, the German influence (meaning the work of German expressionists), and the hard-boiled tradition of gangster films. (Schrader)
This is further supported by Alain Silver and James Ursini where they describe noir as a “group movement” much like Italian Neo-Realism and German Expressionism. (Silver and Ursini)  Classic film noir is considered to have ended in the early 1960s but following that time, there were films that borrowed from noir conventions and combined them with other genres.  This style was given the name of neo-noir. By its name, it harkens back to German Expressionism and Italy’s Neo-realism, two genres which greatly influenced the more popularly known genres which came along after.
In the post-classical Hollywood era, one of the most significant trends in noir crossovers involves science fiction. This post-modern sci-fi noir emergence began with Blade Runner (1982) and grew even larger in the late ‘90s with films like Twelve Monkeys (1995) and Gattaca (1997). Representations of film noir continue into the 21st century with films like Brick (2005) and even The Black Dahlia (2006), a film which seems to be little more than an exercise of the film noir genre. Dark City stands out among all of these films as yet another postmodern variation on the genre of film noir, with science fiction being a framing element to the story.

To critically study genre conventions within Dark City, we must place the film within contemporary culture where “film noir has not only made a comeback as neo-noir pastiche, but in which genre boundaries have become so permeable that noir tropes have infiltrated adjacent popular genres” (Hantke).  Many contemporary films use elements of film noir to heighten their aesthetic.  For Dark City, the noir aspect is almost a character itself within the film.  The term “Dark City” has been used to describe the look of many early gangster/mob films which were later given the label “film noir.”

The title of the films prepares you, if nothing else, for the look of the film that you about to see.
Within film noir and Dark City the city represents the horrors of the modern world.  No one is who they appear to be nor are they who they think they are. In Dark City, this is due to The Strangers switching around everyone’s identity each night.  This is a reflection of our modern times as we come to terms that we are really strangers to one another and that no one really knows anyone, much less themselves.  The control that The Strangers have over the Dark City world brings in the science fiction element.  The mechanical system that powers the Dark City world is portrayed as a big machine that lies deep underground where The Strangers dwell.  The big machine is representative of the corporate world that we live with in these modern times and controls our lives in the real world.  It also harkens to the Orwellian idea of “Big Brother” controlling the world around us.  This element of the film works well within this genre hybrid of science fiction and noir.

Throughout the film, John Murdoch, the protagonist, has reoccurring memories of Shell Beach, a place he thinks that he enjoyed spending the summers during his childhood.  Try as he might, he cannot remember how to get back there.  Eerily, everyone that he asks knows the place but cannot remember where it is either or how to find it.  On his various attempts to find Shell Beach, he hits dead ends.  In this way, the city is called into question.  Questions begin to arise in the audience as to what the city is all about.  This is foreshadowed early in the film as we are shown a circular rat maze with a rat heading deeper into the maze as opposed as heading out of it.   In our modern lives, we often feel as if we are running in circles and hitting dead ends as we make our way through the world, with no way out.  This theme is commonly found in films of noir based hybrids.

Noir commonly also features amnesia storylines where a man awakens to find he is accused of a murder that he does not recall committing.  The amnesia subplot has also become extremely popular in the last decade with successful films like Momento (2001).  This film is no exception.  Dark City begins with Murdoch, waking up in a state of amnesia and finding a dead body in his room with a bloody knife next to him.  He has no recollection of who the woman is or of a murder.  The film continues, true to the genre conventions, as Murdoch then finds himself running from the police who are pursuing him as the murderer.  This concept of amnesia within the noir genre is for an even greater purpose as it forces the audience to experience “a nagging sense that, even in our relatively untraumatized middle-class lives, something is missing and we can’t quite recall what it is.” (Rafferty) The individual identity crisis of Murdoch is symbolic of the worldwide identity questions of: Who am I really?  Why was I created?  What is my purpose?  Variations of these questions are addressed throughout hybrid genres such as sci-fi noir.

The theme also continues to resonate with audiences with a deep rooted fear that the lives we are living are nothing but illusions.  This anxiety which continues to be played out in neo-noir films, like that of Dark City is the fear that lies in the back of our mind that our lives and identities have been created for us, like those of the citizens in the film.  Everything is synthetic and artificially created around us.  This is most often attributed to our political leaders, who frequently “cultivate historical amnesia.” (Rafferty)  Our culture of consumerism, represented by “the city” also encourages amnesia as we are encouraged to believe that the next “big thing” is better and supersedes that which was created before it.  This exemplifies the sense of loss we all experience as modernity robs us from tradition.  Modernity states that everything and everyone is disposable and recyclable.  Like the constantly changing world of Dark City, our world is changed around us whether we approve of it or not.  That which is in the past is gone and future has yet to be created.  Tradition and comforts are uprooted by those that exercise control over us and there is little, if anything, that we can do about it.
Films using noir in recent times have often utilized it to reflect a specific time period in America’s past.  It seems to often portray the postwar 1950s such as in a film like L.A. Confidential (1997).  “The current versions of noir are too self-conscious to transmit the same anxieties of the original noir films. Instead, they trade on an even spookier notion: All emotions are a thing of the past, gone the way of the traditional virtues.” (Sharrett 79) This does play into the characterizations in Dark City, where the Strangers change the memories and identities nightly of the humans in the city. Everyone experiences a form of subconscious amnesia, since they cannot recall that fact that they held a different identity on the prior day.  All emotions between those characters are not truly theirs, since no one is really who they think they are, which is another feature of noir films.   In the film, the noir element is not played so much to set a time period, but more of sense of nostalgia that is played in the background to the over-riding science fiction storyline.

This amnesia also breeds paranoia and confusion which grows within Murdoch’s psyche.  The unknown elements of the city feed the paranoia and terror.  It is presented in the science fiction portion of the hybrid genre by showcasing the lack of knowledge of the world that they characters live in.  Vivian Sobchak points to three things found in science fiction films to deal with the paranoia. There is a look to magic, religion and science.  The magic is sought out to reconcile with unknown powers.  Religion is used to reconcile one’s own existence, while science is used as an empirical way to explain the unexplained.

Murdoch’s character is imparted with the same “magic” power as The Strangers have and is able to use it to defeat them.  This same magic is then used to change the Dark City world into the world that he wants.  The darkness element of noir is eliminated as the sun rises and lights up the city.  Science is portrayed in the film by Dr. Schrader (Kiefer Sutherland) who is a “human” psychiatrist who agreed to help The Strangers in exchange for not having his memory erased every night.  As the film progresses, he uses the science of The Strangers against them by empowering  Murdoch with the ability to defeat them.

Religion is featured in the film within the character of Murdoch who is portrayed as a messianic figure.  Much like that of Luke Skywalker from Star Wars (1977) or Neo in The Matrix (1999), the messianic figure is prominent in science fiction genre films.  Murdoch’s defeating of The Strangers portrays him as the savior of the Dark City citizens and hints at a “happily ever after” conclusion, but it does not wrap up all the loose ends.

Dark City concludes with an ambiguous ending, also common to the noir genre.  Much like reality, we never know how things will eventually turn out.  Murdoch manages to cause the light to shine on the city and bring in large bodies water, the moisture of which, kills off The Strangers. However, we are left with not knowing what becomes of the people there.  It is never even disclosed if the people were originally from Earth or if they were even human.  Murdoch is also able to create Shell Beach, which he had never been able to find in his prior attempts to seek it out.  The event of him creating Shell Beach again brings up the notion that reality is nothing more than what we want it to be.  Nothing is ever solved; the mystery of life, both in the movie and reality continues to draw questions.

While they may not all be historically accurate, the noir conventions of 30s and 40s American iconography portrayed in the film were never meant to be.  Both within the story and for the audience, the iconic noir representations are there to set a mood for the film as a whole.  Some of the noir conventions of the eternal 1940s in Dark City are presented as the cars on the street, the wardrobe of the people and even the appearance of an all-night automat.  The look is very reminiscent of the artwork of Edward Hopper, whose most popular work was created in the 1940s and reflects his vision of that time.  One scene in the film takes place in the automat as Murdock goes in to retrieve a lost wallet.  The harsh lighting contrasted with the darkness outside the automat, like that of Hopper’s painting Nighthawks, portrays the isolated feelings of the characters in the film.  Even when they want to eat, they are forced to get their food from the mechanical device.  Human interaction is at a minimum and even then is usually cold and unfriendly.  The seedy hotel where Murdock lives is watched over by the man at the front desk who is lit by a single lamp hanging over his head.  He reminds Murdock constantly of the rent being due in an unkind tone.  Due to the fact that the thoughts and memories are traded around each night, Murdoch is faced with interacting with different people each day who are sharing the same identity. For example, the front desk man at the hotel where Murdoch lives one day is swapped out with a different person who still knows his name and still demands the rent money.  This constant change of identities represents the impossibility of a utopian society.  No one ever really knows anyone. The Strangers are all very similar to each other in appearance and personality.  They live in a form of utopian society below the Earth, but it a cold, disaffection life they lead.  This further destroys the myth of a perfect utopian world.

The Strangers are representative of the horror genre as they seem to be part vampire, zombie and the living dead.  This is yet another genre hybrid which exists within this film and it cohabitates comfortably with sci-fi noir.  Much like the sci-fi noir hybrid, sci-fi horror is concerned with the same broad thematic territory.  It addresses the terror of the unknown, especially for Murdoch as he learns more about whom The Strangers are and what they want from him.  As the film progresses, we discover that The Strangers are some sort of alien that are using corpses for a body as a means to interact in a world with humans (or whoever the human-like people are, since it is never disclosed if they were abducted from Earth or where they come from).  Aliens are most always symbolic of those that are different from us, whether its race, gender or philosophy.  In the sci-fi horror hybrid forms, they are presented as being terrifying creatures, sometimes, like in the case of Dark City, they take on a human form to make their identity indistinguishable from the humans.  Other examples of aliens in science fiction and horror hybrid films that combine those two genres are Alien (1979), The Thing (1982) and Species (1995).

It is a challenge to find any film that does not combine multiple genre conventions.  Going back to Staiger’s article, she argues that film genre purity has never existed.  That argument is an agreeable one since every film has always utilized various concepts.  Even film noir took gangster films and utilized German Expressionistic aesthetics to create the kind of hybrid film that was later defined as noir.  However, her claims that post-Fordian Hollywood films should not be called hybrids because of the fact that genre purity has never existed is a ridiculous one.  Modern Hollywood films are virtually all hybrid films that combine genre elements to create fresh approaches to film narratives.

 WORKS CITED AND REFERENCED

Dark City. 1998. New Line Cinema. DVD 1999.
Hantke, Steffen. Encapsulated Noir: Hybrid Genres and Social Mobility in Alex Proyas’ Dark City.  6 October 2006.  15 November 2006. From Scope: An Online Journal of Film Studies. http://www.scope.nottingham.ac.uk/article.php?issue=3&id=84

Latham, Rob (2002) Consuming Youth: Vampires, Cyborgs, and the Culture of Consumption. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Marks, Laura U. The Skin of the Film: Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2000. Questia. 13 Dec. 2006 <http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=17841811>.

Rafferty, Terrence (2003-11-02). "The Last Word in Alienation: I Just Don't Remember". nytimes.com. 13 December 2006.

Schrader, Paul (1996) Notes on Film Noir, in Alain Silver and James Ursini (eds.), Film Noir Reader. New York: Limelight Editions, pp. 53-65.

Sharrett, Christopher. "The Endurance of Film Noir." USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education) July 1998: 79. Questia. 13 Dec. 2006 <http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5002291197>.

Silver, Alain, and James Ursini (1996). Film Noir Reader, vol. 1 Pompton Plains, N.J.: Limelight Editions.  pp.

Sobchack, Vivian (2004). ‘Cities on the edge of time: the urban science fiction film’, in Liquid Metal,. ed. S. Redmond, Wallflower Press, London, pp. 78–87.

Staiger, J. (1997). “Hybrid or Inbred: The Purity Hypothesis and Hollywood Genre History." Film Criticism. 22(1): 5-21.

Tuska, Jon. Dark Cinema: American Film Noir in Cultural Perspective. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1984.  p. vii

Monday, July 11, 2016

Blackmail (1929)

Alfred Hitchcock’s Blackmail

       Considered by most to be the first true British talkie, as well as Hitchcock’s first sound film, Blackmail is a historical film in the British cannon of cinema.  My thesis will compare and contrast the silent version of Hitchcock’s original creation to the “new” sound version.   I will examine the film and discuss whether the sound version improved upon the original with the scenes featuring sound as well as its influence on the British cinema and Hitchcock’s career.

Hitchcock began his early film career with Gainsborough Pictures under Michael Balcon.  He learned aspects of the trade including spending some time with German filmmakers in Germany before getting his first attempts at directing in 1925, at the age of 26.  He utilized aspects of what he learned from the German expressionists.   In 1926, he directed The Lodger, a film loosely based on the Jack the Ripper legend.  The film was a hit and in 1927 Hitchcock left Gainsborough for the larger British International Pictures, and his new contract made him the highest paid director in Britain.  Blackmail was his first assignment there which eventually became the first British talkie.  “At the time, many cinephiles thought that 'talkies' would reduce cinema to being only 'pictures of people talking' but Hitchcock's inventive and expressionist use of sound demonstrated that the new technology actually opened a new realm of possibilities.” (14)  
In the late 20’s, the British industry was having a difficult time competing with the more refined cinema being produced in Hollywood.  Film production in Britain dropped from 136 features in 1921 to 37 features in 1926.  This caused the British film industry to analyze their situation and see what they could do to turn their studio system around.  In 1927, a quota system was established which required a certain percentage of the screens to be set aside for domestic films known as the Cinematograph Films Act.  “It introduced a requirement for British cinemas to show a quota of British films, for a duration of 10 years. Initially this was 7.5% for exhibitors, which was raised to 20% in 1935. It was later blamed for the emergence of the 'quota quickies.’ ” (12) 
While the Cinematograph Films Act helped improve attendance and increased production, the arrival of sound film in the late 1920’s further complicated matters.  A report that ran in Variety in 1929 stated that "13 out of 14 first run London houses have American talkers or synchronized pictures." A major problem that the British studios had was that their films often sat on the shelf for about a year before finally being released.  Since the introduction of sound in the late twenties and early thirties involved such a major technological change for both studios and exhibitors, the films that Britain was producing became in danger of becoming obsolete before they were even released to the public.  Even today, most films that the studios shelve appear dated once finally released.   In addition, the expense of converting to sound drove many exhibitors out of business. (9)  1929 was a big year for films.  The first animated sound cartoon was produced, Steamboat Willie and the first feature length film in color was also filmed.  However this was all going on across the Atlantic in the USA.  The British had some catching up to do.
When Blackmail went into production, the film was planned and initially filmed as another British International Pictures silent film.  The movie was produced at Elstree Studios.  It was just two years earlier in 1927 that Warner Brothers produced The Jazz Singer, considered the first sound film feature.  History tells us that sound films were initially thought to be just a passing fad, but this was not the case.  Since the industry’s conversion to sound was gathering so much momentum, management at British International Pictures decided to add some dialogue to make the film a “part-talkie”, which was becoming increasingly common for films at that time.  British International Pictures’ competition, Gaumont, was trailing behind in their conversion to producing sound pictures.  BIP produced twice as many sound films at Gaumont from 1928-1931. (12)  They were able to use this to their advantage to keep Hitchcock on board with them until Hitchcock reconnected with Michael Balcon later 1934 at his new studio Gaumont-British. 
The original source material for Blackmail was a play by Charles Bennett; Tallulah Bankhead, incredibly, played the leading role on the stage.  Bennett assisted Hitchcock in the construction of the film adaptation but did not write any of the dialogue.  The first film he actually wrote for Hitchcock was the original The Man Who Knew Too Much in 1933.  He went on to write several more films with Hitchcock.  Benn Levy actually wrote the dialogue for Blackmail.
With Blackmail, starting in pre-production Hitchcock had been careful in his crafting of the film that with some reshooting and reworking, he was able to produce a version of the film that could actually be released as a “full talkie” which had scenes of dialogue throughout the picture.  What many are not aware of is that the silent version of the film also was released into theaters.  However, this version did not go out until two months after the sound version.  It was exhibited mostly to suburban and rural areas where sound equipment had not yet been installed into theaters.
The silent version of the film is widely known to exist within the archives of the British Film Institute, but has been seen by few.  In the USA, the silent version is not available on VHS or DVD.  A DVD copy of the sound version of Blackmail that includes the silent version was tracked down on Amazon.com – Germany.  It is in PAL format and cannot be played on Region 1 DVD players.  This DVD was obtained in order to screen the silent version for this paper.  It also includes the famous sound check between Hitchcock and Ondra, showing her what her Polish accent sounded like on screen.
Hitchcock cast his film with Anny Ondra, his first blonde leading lady.  She began her film career in 1920 in Czechoslovakian films as a comedian.  John Longden was the leading man.  In 1929, he appeared in one of the first films about the Titanic, Atlantic.  He also went on to star in several more of Hitchcock’s films, including his last British film, The Jamaica Inn.  The role of Mr. Crewe, the artist turned rapist, was played by Cyril Ritchard.  He would go on to be well known for his musical theater performances, especially that of Captain Hook opposite Mary Martin’s Peter Pan.
 Another film, Kitty by Victor Saville was being made with British International Pictures.  It was started several months prior to Hitchcock’s Blackmail.  Kitty was shot and released initially as a silent film in 1929 and then withdrawn only to have its last two reels reshot with sound.  The replacement of a reel with sound was common method for creating some “part talkies” of that time.  In the case of Kitty this ruined the film by taking away from the melodramatic storyline to drawing the audience’s attention to the novelty of the talkie section of the film.  The rest of the film was unchanged except for music which was also synchronized with the silent reels.  The added scenes took away from the fluidity of the film and seemed out of place.  Hitchcock was able to avoid this mistake by making the sound scenes incorporate smoothly with what had already been shot for the silent version. (3)  While there were other films from Britain that began to use partial sound, like Kitty, Blackmail was the first to be considered a “full talkie” and therefore considered the first British talking picture.
It is often assumed that much of the dialogue-free scenes in the sound version of Blackmail were taken straight from the silent version.  Upon watching the two films many of these scenes seem identical.  But as Barr points out in his book, English Hitchcock, it was common in those days for films to shoot two good takes of each scene so that they could provide a negative for a local release of the film as well as one for overseas.  It would appear that Hitchcock may have foreseen the adaptation of his film for sound and actually shot two good takes of each scene.  The similar scenes in both films often bare slight differences between one another when closely compared.  For example, when Alice is sitting along in the restaurant after Frank steps away, she pulls out a small slip of paper telling her when Mr. Crewe plans to meet her there.  In the silent version she looks at her watch to see that its 6:49, while in the sound version the same shot of her watch shows the time being 6:52.  There are other subtle differences throughout the film but are they are virtually undetectable.
“Hitchcock integrated documentary-like presentations of the mechanics of crime, detective, and legal work in many of his films: the best early examples are Blackmail and Murder’.” (7)  The opening of Blackmail features an exercise in this documentative style.  We follow the police as they are sent on a call to track down their criminal.  He is captured and brought to jail where he is interrogated.  Then he is placed in a line up where he is identified by a witness, fingerprinted and then locked up.  While this scene has nothing directly to do with the storyline, it does let us know that we are going to be watching some sort of crime drama as well as illustrating the impersonal power of the police.
Hitchcock is famous for using pretty blondes and putting them in compromising situations.  With Alice, she is apparently unhappy in her current relationship with Frank, decides to spend time on a fling with Mr. Crewe, the artist.  She seems to use the excuse of him getting off work late as a reason to be upset with him.  She agrees to go to dinner at a restaurant that she had already planned on meeting Mr. Crewe at.  Once she sees that he has arrived, she becomes indecisive in her plans with Frank.  This eventually angers Frank enough for him to leave.  He is outside the restaurant as Alice and Mr. Crewe walk out arm in arm.  Hitchcock then begins spinning his web of danger.  Mr. Crewe invites Alice into his apartment so that he can see his art studio.  Alice agrees to be led into his trap.  Once inside he convinces her to try on a skimpy dress and pose for him.  In the sound version, he plays a funny little tune on his piano that is best summed up as creepy.  She comes out in the little dress and playfully poses for him.  She then returns behind the changing panels to take off the skimpy dress, meanwhile Mr. Crewe takes her dress and makes her come out in her underwear.  He then forces her to his bed where he attempts to rape her.  It is there that Alice manages to reach a bread knife to stab him to death with.  A bread knife is not known to be much of a lethal weapon but it is mentioned later that she got him in the jugular vein.  
              After Alice kills Mr. Crewe she goes into shock.  Exhausted, she leaves his apartment in a zombie-like state.  Her conscious immediately begins to affect her as her mind starts to play tricks on her.  She becomes startled as she sees arms that are similar to the arm of dead Mr. Crewe.  The arms are all reminders of the murder she just committed.  As she stumbles along through the city, she sees a sign advertising “Gordon’s White Purity” with a flashing animated neon sign of a martini shaker that she starts to envision as a hand with knife in a stabbing motion.  The arms and the neon sign allow the audience to experience what Alice is feeling at that moment.  
          Hitchcock also uses his first “shock cut” in this sequence when Alice screams at the arm of a beggar the scene cuts to the scream of the landlady discovering Mr. Crewe’s body.  This is yet, another example of Hitchcock’s creative use of the new medium of sound in his movies.
               Hitchcock again finds a strategic new place for sound inside Alice’s bedroom.  After stumbling through the streets she makes it home and crawls into bed.  Within a short time, her mother comes in to wake her up for the day.  One of the first things the mother does is to remove the birdcage cover which prompts the finches to begin chirping away disturbing the silence.  This is the first of many uses of bird noises that Hitchcock will employ throughout his career to coincide with a character in a distressed state.  The bird noises in Blackmail act as an annoyance to Alice.  The birds were notably missing in the original silent version of the film.  Hitchcock letter said, "There have always been occasions when we have needed to show a phantasmagoria of the mind in terms of visual imagery. So we may want to show someone's mental state by letting him listen to some sound--let us say church bells--and making them clang with distorted insistence in his head."
The scene which follows features Alice going downstairs for breakfast.  This is a famous scene in the film that has been addressed by many authors on the topic.  Alice sits with her family for breakfast.  A pest of a neighbor stands there talking about the murder and knife.  The word “knife” itself seems to lunge out at Alice.  This all builds the audience for what comes next when the blackmailer, Tracy, shows up and essentially takes over the house.  The growing tension mounts until the moment when the parlor window shatters, and Tracy flees.  This all represents the sort of 'crucible' situation that Hitchcock would sometimes make the subject of a whole film, such as Rope. (10)  Mogg believes that a misconception about the famous scene on the morning after the artist's killing, in which a gossipy neighbor repeatedly uses the word “knife”, is merely a clever use of sound by Hitchcock.  The repetitive use of the word “knife” appears to jump out at Alice.  Striking the scene may be, but it works for other, deeper reasons.  It draws attention to itself for a purpose, being a study in the psychology of Alice, who has gone all night without sleep.  She walked the streets in a virtual comatose state.  It is in these times that the mind plays tricks.  The silent version is just as effective without the verbal “knife” references.  Alice’s father asks her to cut the bread.  Alice slowly reaches for the knife.  We see the shadow of her hand crawl over it as she slowly grabs it.  The blade of the knife glimmers in the light.  Then someone walks in the door of their store, ringing the bell which startles Alice causing her to drop the knife.  This is followed by a title card of her father saying, “You should really be more careful with knives dear.” The silent version of this scene fares better since the humor of the chatty neighbor is non-existent allowing the tension to build and it provides a much more dramatic moment. 
The sound version of the film carries some of Hitchcock’s signature light moments.  The scene with the neighbor mentioning the knife also has a very comical line which further pushes Alice’s nerves over the edge: “A good, clean honest what over the ‘ead with a brick is one thing.  There’s something British about that.  But knives.  No, knives is not right.”  This is one of a few light moments in the film.  Another is when Mr. Crewe’s landlady describes to the police the blackmailer.  She describes his hair as not blonde nor brunette but “mousey.”  She also mocks the slightly deranged expression on his face.  It is timed perfect as the film builds toward Alice’s impending doom of being discovered.  This is one of the few scenes that are actually improved by having sound.
In addition to being known for being the first sound film, Blackmail also features many of the first Hitchcock trademarks.  While his brief cameo in The Lodger was his first, Blackmail features what was probably his most prominent cameo, as well as longest.  He is seen sitting on the London Underground facing the camera in a way that forces the audience to notice him.  He is pestered by a small boy while attempting to read the newspaper.  He is shown yelling at the parents of the child as if to say “control your child!”  In the sound version, the only noise heard is the loud sound of the train rolling along.  No dialogue is discernable.  Hitchcock also features creative shots of staircases as he does in later films like Vertigo and Psycho. (2)  When Alice and Mr. Crewe first arrive they climb several flights as the camera follows them straight up with a boom shot in a cut-away fashion of the staircase.  This shot, however, is not seen in the sound version of the movie.  Also, there is an overhead shot looking down several flights of stairs within Mr. Crewe’s apartment when Alice makes her escape after his murder.
Another first in this film is the use of a prominent location for the climatic finale of the film.  For Blackmail, Hitchcock chose the British Museum where the blackmailer is chased by Frank.  The blackmailer climbs to the roof and just as he is about to give himself up, he falls through the glass ceiling.  “The British Museum climax was suggested to Hitch by Michael Powell, who was familiar with the Reading Room and its glass dome.” “Hitchcock develops still further his trademark emphasis on subjectivity, an emphasis both technical and thematic.  It had featured in practically every one of his silent films, and by now was capable of yielding profound effects and commentary”. (10)
This final scene in the museum also utilized early special effects.  The rather complicated effects were done in a way known as the “Schüfftan Process.”    It was named for the cinematographer who invented the process while shooting Metropolis.  Schüfftan placed a plate of glass at a forty-five-degree angle between the camera and the miniature buildings. He used the camera's viewfinder to trace an outline of the area into which the actors would later be inserted onto the glass. This outline was transferred onto a mirror and the entire reflective surface that fell outside the outline was removed, leaving transparent glass. When the mirror was placed in the same position as the original plate of glass, the reflective part blocked a portion of the miniature building behind it and also reflected the stage behind the camera. The actors were placed several yards away from the mirror so that when they were reflected in the mirror, they would appear at the right size.  Overall, it achieved a very realistic result. (13)
In his own words, Hitchcock explained how he liked how the standard plot of Blackmail could adapt into a film.  The basic theme is love versus duty.  Both versions of the film open with Frank doing his duty by arresting the criminal.  Once his day ends, he then tends to Alice, his love.  Later, when he realizes that she is implicated in the murder, he becomes torn between love and duty.  The audience immediately can make this connection and is brought into the film. (7) According to Hitchcock, he originally wanted to end the film with Alice being pursued by the police, bringing the young detective's moral conflict ("love versus duty") to a head. This ending, he claims, was turned down by the producers for commercial reasons.  Alice could not be left to her own fate because audiences want a conclusion.   However, the ending as it was made, with its ingenious use of a clown painting to symbolize Alice's lingering feelings of guilt, is if anything darker and more subtly ironic than the ending Hitchcock originally had in mind. (9)  This clown painting is used in both the silent and sound versions of the film and is just as effective in both.  The ending leaves an eerie feeling, since it is not a happy resolution.  Alice and Frank must now spend the rest of the lives with the guilt of her crime.
The title of the film comes from a character within the film named Tracy.  He was the only witness to see Alice go up to Mr. Crewe’s apartment.  Tracy shows up at the home of Alice the morning following the murder to harass Alice and Frank, who by now knows that she was with him last.  Tracy’s character is a minor one, at best.  His plans fall apart when the Mr. Crewe’s landlady picks him out of a mug shot book.  The police believe him to be the murder.  They give chase to him and wind up at the British Museum.  Incidentally, Hitchcock had him heart set on the museum and when he found out he could not shoot there due to the lack of lighting, it was decided to use the special effects instead.  Tracy tries to explain that he is the wrong man when he meets his untimely death by falling through the glass domed ceiling.  He is essentially a red herring to the situation of Frank having to split himself between being a detective investigating a murder and his girl friend being the person who committed that murder.  Only a couple of scenes for the chase sequence were reshot for sound.  Namely the scene of Tracy attempting to explain his innocence just he falls through the ceiling.
Hitchcock’s was known for being a dirty old man which is further supported by a screen test of Anny Ondra, apparently done so that Ondra could hear why her thick Polish accent would not work for the sound version of the film.  In that screen test he interacts with Ondra and asks, “Have you been a good girl?” To which she responds laughing, “Oh no!”  Hitchcock responds, “Oh no?  Have you slept with men?”  She responds that he is making her nervous and moves away from the microphone.  Hitchcock then directs her, “Now come over here, or it won’t come out right – as the girl said to the soldier.” (1)  Hitchcock was never shy about sex or his flirtatious nature with his leading heroines.            
Due to Ondra’s unusable voice, Hitchcock devised an ingenious way to provide her a British voice.  Since post-synchronization had not been devise, Hitchcock had the actress Joan Barry stand just off camera and speak the lines into a microphone while Ondra mouthed the dialogue in sync.  In most scenes, this is virtually undetectable.  Most, without knowing this, would problem never even notice the fact.  Ondra’s performance in the silent version is arguably better than that of the sound film, due most in part to the fact that she relied on her physical acting and facial expressions to convey her character with very little dialogue via the titles.  In the sound version she comes off much more as a whiny, self-centered female.  Without actually hearing her verbalize her expressions, she is much more likable.  The audience can relate more to the silent version who just seems like a simple female who makes one big mistake.  In the sound version she comes across as being much needier for the help of Frank, the man she cheated on to begin with.  Had she stayed faithful to him, she would not have gotten herself into the problematic situation.  Critic Robin Wood points out, “Blackmail introduces the motif of the "guilty woman" that made for some of Hitchcock's most profoundly resonant films: Rebecca, Notorious, Vertigo, Psycho, The Birds and Marnie.  The latter two, both featuring Tippi Hedren, who it seems was born to be “the damsel who caused her own distress.” (15)
             Hitchcock enjoys depicting consequences for the actions of these guilty women.  In Alice’s case, she was forced to defend her virtue in a situation that she brought upon herself to begin with.  Of course, a virtuous woman would never have gone up to the apartment of a man she barely knew.  Hitchcock plays it as if this flirtatious woman gets what’s coming to her.  This scene involving Alice is consistent with sexual scenarios in which Hitchcock enjoyed placing his lovely leading ladies.  Virtually ever movie he made has a scene where a woman is placed into precarious circumstances due to her sexuality and often punished for it.  
          Critically, the Blackmail was well received, due mostly to the fact that the film featured sound.  On June 24, 1929, a reviewer for the Daily Mail said the film was “the best talking film yet – and British.”  A reviewer from Variety noted that the film “silent would be an unusually good film; as it is, it comes near to being a landmark.”  Mind you those all-talkie films were still relatively a new format, especially in Britain.  This would explain such raving reviews.  However, this positive reaction from both critics and moviegoers is what propelled Hitchcock into being a first rate, top notch director in Britain.  It was the first film that the British felt could compete with the quality of films coming from the foreign competition.
          When Hitchcock was later in his years, he looked back on Blackmail with negative criticism.  He felt the dialogue did not flow and that it sounds more like spoken titles than natural speech.  Actors in the early days of talking pictures referred to saying their lines as “speaking their titles.” On the same token, since the film was made in the early days of sound in film, the dialogue scenes are used only when it seems useful.  (5)  Hitchcock could have been a little kinder to himself if he remembered that the use of the apparatus of sound was a new medium that still did not know if it belonged.
          While Blackmail showed that Hitchcock and British International Pictures could produce successful films with sound, it did not being any immediate help to the British film industry.  Their studios still could not afford to pay their actors what the Hollywood studios were playing.  Plus in Britain, movies were still considered entertainment for the working class.  Subsequently, most British actors still preferred working in the theatre, where the upper-class went for their entertainment. (2)  It would be many years before Britain would become the “it” place for cinema.
          Even though the silent version of the film was stronger, once sound was added, Hitchcock was able to add a new dimension to the film and pioneer techniques that he and other film makers would use, even to this day.  While the sound additions did not necessarily improve the film, Blackmail left an indelible mark upon the face of British cinema and changed its future.  The film was a huge success not only for British International Pictures but for the British film industry as a whole.  At last a film was made that could stand up to all those films coming out of America.  The rest of the British studios could comfortable settle into the fact that sound was here to stay.  Additionally, the success of Blackmail propelled Hitchcock into celebrity status as a director that knew how to make a financially successful sound picture.  Even with the few road bumps that he faced immediately following this production, Hitchcock galvanized his career in this film.  The face of British cinema would never be the same after the 30 year old Hitchcock made this contribution.  It was now proven that sound could be utilized in a creative and productive way that brought more to a film than just the novelty of voices talking on the screen.  















Bibliography

1. Spoto, Donald. The Art of Alfred Hitchcock, New York: Anchor Books, 1992.

2. Spoto, Donald. The Dark Side of Genius, New York: Plexus, 1994. p. 136.

3. Barr, Charles. English Hitchcock, Scotland: Cameron & Hollis, 1999. p. 81-82

4. Condon, Paul and Sangster, Jim.  Hitchcock, Virgin, 1999.

5. Taylor, John Russell. Hitch, New York: Berkeley Publishing Corporation, 1980. p. 87.

6. Auiler, Dan. Hitchcock’s Notebooks: An Authorized and Illustrated Look Inside the Creative Mind of Alfred Hitchcock, New York: Harper Paperbacks, 2001.

7. Gottlieb, Sidney.  Early Hitchcock: The German Influence, Hitchcock Annual [1999-2000] p. 100-130.

8. Barr, Charles. BLACKMAIL: SILENT AND SOUND. Sight and Sound 52:2 [Spring 1983] p. 122.

9. Steffan, James.  “Blackmail.”  October 2005. http://www.turnerclassicmovies.com/ThisMonth/Article/0,,103555%7C103556%7C18625,00.html.

10. Mogg, Ken. “McGuffin.”  30 November 2004. 3 December 2005. http://www.labyrinth.net.au/%7Emuffin/mcgilligan2_c.html.

11. Telotte, J. P. “The Sounds of BLACKMAIL: Hitchcock and Sound Aesthetic - Critical Essay.” Journal of Popular Film and Television,  Winter, 2001. 

12. Murphy, Robert (ed.). The British Cinema Book (2nd edition), BFI Publishing, 2001 pg 30-31

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Buffalo '66 (1998)

I went with my buddy Dave to see this film when it came out. I think I had seen a trailer for it somewhere and it looked intriguing. Mostly, Christina Ricci was the appeal for me. We really had no idea what to expect. I walked out of the theater after the movie and had a new top 5 movie on my list. The film is darkly comedic, with Gallo channeling Ozu, Welles and Capra, yes Frank Capra!

Billy Brown is released from prison after taking the fall for a petty crime he didn't commit. He was forced to take the fall in exchange for defaulting on his payment for a bet he made with a bookie on a Buffalo Bill's game. As we follow him through his day after being released from jail, the audience is given some insight into his background from his ineffectual mother, his love of bowling to his obsession over a woman that was barely aware of his existence. Forced into his day of adventures is Christina Ricci, who is essentially kidnapped by Billy and falls into Stockholm Syndrome. The plot builds as Billy plans to get his revenge on Scott Wood, the QB responsible for losing the football game that cost Billy the $10,000 and landed him in jail. Roger Ebert hated The Brown Bunny, Vincent Gallo's follow up to his 1998 masterpiece, Buffalo '66. But what did Ebert have to say about this film? He actually gave it 3 stars! The movie is not for everyone but has so many redeeming qualities it's impossible to not find something to love. What other film has Ben Gazzara, Anjelica Huston, Rosanna Arquette, Jan-Michael Vincent AND Mickey Rourke?!


And now my original 2006 essay on the film:

Buffalo ‘66, the Art Film

Vincent Gallo’s 1998 feature length debut, Buffalo ‘66 is considered by many to be an indie classic.  An indie film is described by wikipedia.com as a film that is produced and distributed without major studio financing.  These indie or independent films are typically categorized as art films.  This essay will address the ways in which scenes of Buffalo ‘66 reflect the definition of an art film by the film theorist David Bordwell.
In Bordwell’s article, “The Cinema as a Mod of Film Practice,” he states that the art film defines itself explicitly against the classical narrative mode of cause and effect linkage of events.  Instead, art films typically feature a looser linkage and a deeper study into what motivates that loosening of cause and effect events. (Braudy 776)  This idea is prevalent throughout Buffalo ‘66 as we join Billy Brown just as he is released from prison and follow him through the next 10 hours or so of his life. 
A specific example from the film that supports Bordwell’s idea would be when Billy finally ends up at the dance studio where he tries to use their bathroom to relieve himself after trying unsuccessfully for the first 10 minutes of the film to find somewhere to go, while in the hallway, he borrows a quarter from Layla to use the phone, who is on her way to the bathroom.  We then overhear his conversation with his mother explaining that he just flew in for one day with his wife, who his parents have never met.  She insists on Billy bringing his new wife to the house to meet them.  He reluctantly agrees which results in him deciding to kidnap Layla as she comes back out of the restroom.  This is not the typical cause and effect sequence that a regular narrative driven film would have.  First, we are not sure what his true intentions are with Layla.  Is he going to rape her, rob her and steal her car or what?  After all, Billy was just released from prison and we do not know what he was in there for.  There are several minutes of uneasiness as we see and hear Billy treat Layla in a violent way.  This includes lines like Billy telling Layla if she doesn’t do what he says he’ll take a bite of her cheek and shit her out.  Up to that point we are led to believe that his intentions are of something unpleasant.  It’s not until they arrive at his parent’s house that Billy explains to Layla that he just plans on using her as his wife to impress his parents.  This form of character interaction is right at home in an art film but would not fit into the regular Hollywood narrative style.
Another example is when Billy and Layla arrive at his parent’s home.  The audience would expect the parents to be happy to finally see their new daughter-in-law and son who has been away.  This concept is immediately thrown out the window when Billy’s father, Jimmy, answers the door and immediately yells to his wife that her “son” is here.  She welcomes him and Layla in.  The next scene shows all four people sitting around a square table in silence.  With the lack of sound and body language, we can see that the situation is uncomfortable.  This goes against the traditional narrative notion where we would have expected a family excited to see Billy and his new bride.
Bordwell states that the art cinema motivates its narratives by two principles: realism and authorial expressivity.  Realism is presented in real locations, complex psychological characteristics, real problems and often sexual situations. (Braudy 776)  In Buffalo ‘66, realism is almost always constant.  The settings all appear to be the real thing.  Much like the neo-realistic films of the past, this movie is shot on location in Buffalo, New York.  There is virtually no hint of any studio artifice in the film.
Bordwell notes the difference between art film characters and mainstream cinema.  While in Hollywood films, the protagonist shoots directly for the target; in art films, the protagonist often lacks a goal and slides passively from one situation to another.  (Braudy 776)  This can be found in this film as the character of Billy begins the movie with no real direction.  His first goal seems to be reuniting with his parents which has disastrous results.  Billy then moves toward the goal of murdering Scott Wood, the football player who made him lose $10,000 on a bet.  There is no traditional Hollywood storyline following Billy, the protagonist, on the usual story arch.  Billy does exhibit his problems interacting with his parents.  When Billy and Layla arrive at his parent’s home for dinner, he has a breakdown on the porch before ringing the doorbell.  We witness the flood of negative emotion that seems to envelope him after returning home.  This also ties into Bordwell’s concept of the hero in art films typically being supersensitive individuals who are on the edge of a breakdown.  There is a reoccurring realization of the anguish of ordinary living.  This is further illustrated by several flashbacks that Billy has to his childhood.  One flashback recalls when Billy ate chocolate and learned that he was allergic which resulted in his face turning red and swelling.  The other flashback is when Billy’s father Jimmy kills his puppy Bingo in front of him after the puppy peed in the house for the last time.  These flashbacks illustrate the inner turmoil of our protagonist.
In art films, Bordwell also notes that violations of classical conceptions of space and time are justified by the complex characters found in the films.  These films often have plot manipulations of the story order.  Bazin, the man considered the first major critic of art cinema also acknowledged the loose, accidental narrative structure of art films and praised it. (Braudy 418)  In Buffalo ‘66, we see an example of the classical conception of time when in the middle of the film, at the start of the second act, we are taken back in time and shown why Billy was placed in jail.  Unlike the earlier mentioned flashbacks, which were also shot in 16mm as opposed to the 35mm of the rest of the film, the prison scene is shot in 35mm.  During this section of film we learn that he made his bad bet on Buffalo Bills winning the Super Bowl.  A bet which he loses and as a result is forced by his bookie to admit to a crime he didn’t commit.  It is due to all of this that Billy creates such contempt for Scott Wood, the player who lost the Super Bowl.  Following this scene we are abruptly placed back into the present.  Since this flashback is essential to the storyline, the audience is quick to forgive its disruptive nature as we delve deeper into Billy’s world.  Also, the childhood flashbacks are shot in a home-movie style giving the audience the idea that these are Billy’s memories which may not be completely reliable.  The prison flashback is played to appear much more factual since it was filmed like the rest of this film.
            As mentioned earlier, Bordwell also notes the authorial expressivity found in art cinema.  He states that art films are the work of expressive individuals.  These films often made by individuals who include autobiographical content to their movies.  This was true of Fellini, Truffaut and in this case, Vincent Gallo. (Braudy 777)  The movie commonly referred to as a semi-autobiographical movie.  Gallo himself denounces the idea that film was even remotely autobiographical other the parents in the film being similar to his own.  He is afraid that people will think he really did not really create the script and merely played himself in the film.  Gallo insists that he really did write the screenplay and those performances in the movie were acted.  The film was not intended to be some re-enacted documentary of his life. 
Following right in line with Bordwell’s beliefs, Buffalo ‘66 is able takes advantage of its freedom that Hollywood films do not.  For example, in a sequence taking place around a dinner table of a Hollywood film, the camera would either be fixed at the end of the table with people sitting around the table facing the camera and/or the director would present many close ups of peoples faces as they engage in conversation.  This film turns that notion on its head.  Billy, Layla and his parents each sit on a side of the square dinner table.  As the conversation ensues, the camera takes the place of each person at the table so that no more than three characters are ever seen at a time while they are sitting.  By filming the sequence in this way, the audience is an active participant at the dinner table of this dysfunctional family.  This clearly violates the classical conception of the camera objectively filming the sequence and it works brilliantly.  It has been said that this scene was Gallo’s homage to Yasujiro Ozu, the Japanese filmmaker who is known for his static visual style.
In art films, Bordwell states that authorial commentary is showcased by any breakdown of the motivation of cinematic space and time by cause-effect logic. (Braudy 778) These can be portrayed by things such as enigmas or the puzzle of deciphering just who is telling the story, why the story is being told or what is is being told in the film.  This is not something typically found in classic Hollywood cinema. 
Gallo provides his authorial commentary with a sort of flash forward.  We follow Billy as he leaves Layla in the motel and heads for the strip club that Scott Wood owns with the intent to kill him.  Billy makes one last phone call to his only friend Goon to give him the combination to his bowling locker and says goodbye.  We then follow him in the club which plays in slow motion.  He then finds Scott Wood and shoots him in the forehead and then turns the gun on himself.  This scene is played in a series of frozen shots referred to as “bullet time,” “whereby the passage of time is displayed as extremely slow or frozen moments in order to allow a viewer to observe imperceptibly fast events.” (“bullet-time”) We then cut to Billy’s parents at his graveside, with his mother listening to the latest Buffalo Bills football game on a portable radio and his father sitting next to her, complaining about the cold weather.  The two quickly get up and leave, seemingly unfazed over the death of their son.  Suddenly, we see that this was Billy’s imagined version of the scenario.  He decides against killing Scott Wood and then walks out of the club and goes back to Layla in the motel.  This sequence functions perfectly to stress Gallo’s authorial presence over the film.  He makes us believe we are seeing the fate of the character when it is changed on us to the reality of the situation.  In addition, we are allowed to share in Billy’s imagined consequences of his actions.
One thing that Bordwell does not address in his theory but seems to be ever present in art films of today is the use of lesser known music that was not created new for the film.  In Buffalo ‘66, Gallo chose to use several songs by the band Yes.  The music of Yes uses symphonic and other classical structures blended with rock.  Their music is instrumentally driven which allows for a surreal soundtrack during the imagined strip club murder/suicide scenario of Billy.  Directors like Quentin Tarantino have been quite successful in assembling music that spans the decades and genres to use for his soundtracks, Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are great examples of this.  It has become a common staple of many art films.
Bordwell’s ideas of art film are best culminated in this statement, “…we are to watch less for the tale than the telling, that life lacks the neatness of art and this art knows it.” (Braudy 780)  In Buffalo ‘66, Bordwell’s vision of the art film is firmly upheld through the storytelling style of Vincent Gallo.  Bordwell makes the case for the place of the art film in the cinematic canon.  This film again proves the value of art cinema which provides possibilities for movies that do not exist in classic Hollywood cinema.


Bibliography

Braudy, Leo and Marshall Cohen. Film Theory and Criticism, sixth edition. Oxford UP, 2004.

Buffalo ‘66. Dir. Vincent Gallo. Perf. Vincent Gallo and Christina Ricci. 1998. DVD. Lions Gate Films, 1999.

“bullet-time.” Wikipedia. 3 March 2006. 3 March 2006

 “Independent Film.” Wikipedia. 6 March 2006. 11 March 2006

Kaufman, Anthony. “writing.” November 2001. 11 March 2006