Blog Directory CineVerse: February 2014

What's up, doc?

Thursday, February 27, 2014

"Harvey" is an interesting film to dissect 64 years after its original release. Our views on psychiatry, mental illness and alcoholism have certainly changed, which can make this film a bit problematic for modern audiences. Nevertheless, the picture still packs a walloping charm and disarming sensibility made all the more entertaining by James Stewart's resonant performance. Here's what our discussion group learned after examining "Harvey":

WHAT IS DIFFERENT, UNIQUE AND MEMORABLE ABOUT THIS FILM, NOT ONLY IN 2014 BUT FOR 1950, WHEN IT WAS RELEASED?
  • It takes a lighthearted, whimsical look at mental illness and substance abuse without getting too serious.
  • Arguably, prior to this film, mental illness was always treated soberingly in serious dramas and some “social problem” pictures, such as “The Best Years of Our Lives,” “Sunset Boulevard,” “Hangover Square,” “A Double Life,” “Spellbound,” “Gaslight” and “The Snake Pit.”
  • This is, debatably, a fantasy film in that it leaves open the strong possibility that Harvey actually exists via several unexplained phenomenon and visual clues in the movie. It often walks a fine line between fantasy and reality, but deliberately steps over the line into fantasy several times. Unlike a film like “It’s a Wonderful Life,” where you see a tangible angel and heavenly bodies literally talking to one another, this movie relies on the faith and imagination of its viewers, although it’s clear that the filmmakers want you to believe that Harvey exists. Still, either interpretation (Harvey is or isn’t real) is possible. In this way, Harvey is a remote cousin to the psychological horror films of Val Lewton, where the monster or supernatural menace is suggested, but never shown.
  • The movie does not criticize alcoholism/problematic drinking, which is what Dowd suffers from and which may be the culprit behind his “imaginary” friend. One reading of the film is that, by making Dowd such a sympathetic, admirably nonconformist character, but also a drunk, it actually condones drinking as a way of gliding through life with less stress and worries. Some critics marveled how a film with this kind of even unintentional message could have been given the stamp of approval by the Hays Code and censors of the era.
  • You could also make the case that “Harvey” is actually quite contemporary and postmodern in its sensibilities. Critic Jeffrey Kauffman wrote: “Harvey is an unabashedly old fashioned piece of entertainment, but it’s also surprisingly modern in its prescient view of cynicism and conformity” (see http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Harvey-Blu-ray/36383/#Review).

WHAT THEMES ARE PROPOSED IN “HARVEY”?
  • The film forces us to ask the question: Is it better to be “sane” and conform to the norms of a cookie cutter society, or is it better to be a free-thinking, carefree dreamer who lets worries wash over him or her?
  • Put another way, perhaps the adage “ignorance is bliss” can be applied here: In a crazy, unfair, cutthroat world, is it better to live in reality or fantasy?
  • Faith vs. science: Consider how critical the film is of the mental institution and its methods (stripping and bathing patients, giving “cure” serums, the attendant’s rough-and-tough tactics) and how supportive the movie is of those who believe in the rabbit.
  • Kindness, patience and being “pleasant” are more important than being “smart.”
  • The story is a “comedy of errors,” like Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” in that it presents ridiculous situations borne from misunderstandings and mistaken identities as the basis of its humor.

IS HARVEY IRRESPONSIBLE IN ITS DEPICTION OF THE MENTALL ILL AND ALCHOLIC, OR IS THIS A FROTHY, FUN ENTERTAINMENT THAT SHOULDN’T BE TAKEN TOO SERIOUSLY?
  • Like so many films of its era, “Harvey” paints mental illness with a broad, stereotypical brush: in Hollywood’s classic era, the insane are usually showcased as either violent psychopaths  (“Hangover Square”), victims whose cure is true love (“Spellbound”), or harmless, happy-go-lucky crackpots (“King of Hearts”). Additionally, the easy way to deal with characters so afflicted in pictures of this period was to have them committed to a sanitarium or institution.
  • Many very distinct and different psychiatric disorders are often grouped together in films prior to the 1970s and generically labeled. For instance, “hysteria” is often applied to deranged women.
  • One could argue that this film is negligent in its depiction of Dowd: here is a man who is not encouraged to get treatment for his alcoholism, who is looked up to by some as almost a Zen-like genius who not only has the gift of seeing a creature others cannot but who doesn’t feel pressured to face reality like the rest of us are forced to do.
  • Writer Daniel DiMattei espouses this belief, by writing: “…he's incapable of relating to actual people, has no stable relationships (romantic or platonic), and is avoided by most of the townspeople and hardly acknowledge by anyone as he squanders his lonely existence developing an alcohol addiction rather than receiving treatment or help with developing his social skills. But perhaps the most absurd concept about this film is its message that the mentally ill are happier than the sane. For those who don't see why this is a terrible and utterly misguided message, visit your local mental health facility or speak with someone currently living with bi-polar disorder.” (See http://www.examiner.com/review/harvey-1950-a-review). 
  • Then again, this is a commercial work of feel-good entertainment, not a public awareness message, or a cautionary tale, or a history lesson, or a textbook example of accurate psychological diagnosis. The ending alone should give you a clue that this is lighthearted fantasy: consider that the head of the sanitarium walks off arm in arm with the invisible rabbit, believing fully in Harvey’s presence and power and no longer a doubting Thomas. How plausible is that for a conclusion?

DO ANY OTHER FILMS COME TO MIND AFTER VIEWING “HARVEY”?
  • Miracle on 35th Street
  • Being There
  • Donnie Darko
  • Lars and the Real Girl
  • The Beaver

OTHER FILMS DIRECTED BY HENRY KOSTER
  • The Bishop’s Wife
  • No Highway in the Sky
  • The Robe
  • Flower Drum Song

Read more...

Rabbit habit

Sunday, February 23, 2014

James Stewart is known for many memorable roles, from George Bailey to Senator Jefferson Smith to the protagonist in several Hitchcock thrillers. But one of his most beloved characters is Elwood P. Dowd, the lead in “Harvey” (1950; 104 minutes), which CineVerse will spotlight on February 26, directed by Henry Koster, chosen by Tom Nesis.

Read more...

An easy day's night of a movie

Thursday, February 20, 2014

You may not think there's much substance to "A Hard Day's Night," one of the most influential and enduring pop musical movies of all time, but there's more than meets the eye--or the Moptop--in this Fab Four foray. Here's what our group learned and shared about this 50-year-old flick:

HOW WAS THIS FILM INFLUENTIAL AND HOW DID IT BREAK FROM THE CONVENTIONS OF EARLIER POP MUSIC FILMS STARRING ELVIS AND OTHER MUSICIANS?
·       Unlike many previous films by stars like Elvis and Cliff Richard, this film did not employ a formalistic, fictional narrative. A Hard Day’s Night plays more like a documentary or newsreel in which we’re witnessing “you are there” footage that feels unscripted and spontaneous.
·       This documentary style is evidenced by the ample handheld and moving camera work, use of real locations, naturalistic lighting, and footage of the band performing.
·       The lads play themselves, not some characters who have to win a race or defeat the bad guys; there is no contrived plot or artificial rags-to-riches success story here; this film is a zeitgeist moment movie in that it captures the height of Beatlemania and showcases the real four Beatles, with their distinct personalities.
·       Yes, there is a screenplay and scripted lines, but the film is more of a loosely connected series of episodes and unimportant subplots that form a cohesive film documenting the Fab Four’s popularity at this time and place.
·       In its rapid fire editing, unconventional camera angles, handheld camera esthetics, cinema verite style realism, fast and slow motion action sequences, and other elements, it reveals a kinship with the bold experimentalism and playfulness of French New Wave cinema.
·       The movie is credited with giving rise to the wave of British and American spy thrillers that came afterward, as well as the Monkee’s TV program and, of course, MTV style music videos.
·       Previously, many pop musicals followed the tradition of the classical Hollywood musical and its reliance on lip-synched, carefully choreographed performance, wherein many characters “break out into song” as part of the plot or dialogue. Here, however, as essayist Bob Neaverson puts it: “Lester's partial employment of a humorous surrealism (and its resulting disposal of the conventionally ‘realist’ aesthetic) meant that it was no longer necessary, or, for that matter, uniformly desirable, to interpret the central musical numbers via conventionally representational sequences of performers miming to a backing track and pretending to play instruments. A Hard Day’s Night is arguably the first film of its kind to stage central musical numbers which are not tied to performance.”
·       Also, unlike other pop musicals where Elvis or others are depicted as having a female love interest, the Beatles are depicted as “attainable” and “available” to female viewers, which was important to their image and popularity.
·       Several numbers are repeated toward the end, including “Can’t Buy Me Love,” “Should Have Known Better” and the title track; it begs the question, why? The Beatles had many other hits from their catalog they could have chosen instead of these repeats, but maybe they were looking to push these particular songs more from a commercial standpoint.

WHAT ARE SOME THEMES AND MOTIFS PLAYED OUT IN THIS PICTURE?
·       Nonconformists against the establishment: the foursome are scoffed at, ridiculed, dismissed and condescended to by older generations, and the Beatles parlay this disconnect in a cheeky, irreverent rebelliousness that isn’t too threatening to the social order.
·       Mistaken identity and disguises: From Paul’s grandfather posing as a waiter to John donning a fake beard and mustache to George wandering into an ad agency where he’s mistaken for a focus group subject, playacting and identity misunderstandings abound in this playful romp.
·       The search for someone who’s lost: Ringo goes missing, as does Paul’s grandfather, and even the manager loses his band in a repeated pattern of lost-and-found subplots.

DOES THE FILM’S LACK OF A FORMAL, DRIVING PLOT ULTIMATELY HURT A HARD DAY’S NIGHT, OR DO YOU ADMIRE THE LACK OF PLOT?
·       Arguably, the main narrative thread is that John, Paul and George have to find their lost drummer before their live show begins, a plot which is conveyed without much suspense or intrigue.
·       As previously mentioned, the film is filled more with episodic vignettes that combine to form a humorous and entertaining whole of a picture.
·       While A Hard Day’s Night may disappoint as a cohesive, interesting story, it’s likely more satisfying as an impressionistic pastiche documenting this group’s immense charisma, talent and popularity at this period in history; showcasing them as more of their real selves and true personalities is more important to the filmmakers than peddling a ridiculous fictitious yarn.

OTHER FILMS BY RICHARD LESTER
·       A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum
·       The Three Musketeers
·       The Four Musketeers
·       Robin and Marian
·       Superman II

Read more...

Warmer weather--and hotter movies--are coming

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

The March/April 2014 CineVerse schedule is now posted and ready for viewing. Curious to learn what we'll be viewing and discussing over the next few weeks? Check out the new calendar by visiting http://1drv.ms/MdTrGO.

Read more...

Revisit Beatlemania -- 50 years later

Sunday, February 16, 2014

Hard to believe, but it's been 50 years now since the Beatles invaded America. Relive the fun on February 19 when CineVerse celebrates the golden anniversary of "A Hard Day’s Night” (1964; 87 minutes), directed by Richard Lester, chosen by Dan Quenzel; Plus: Stick around for a preview of the January/February CineVerse schedule.

Read more...

Noir lite

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Regarded by some film scholars to be a minor classic worthy of rediscovery, Delmer Daves' "Dark Passage" is the least remembered of the quartet of films featuring Humphrey Bogart and wife Lauren Bacall. Here's what our CineVerse group uncovered after taking off the bandages:

WHAT DID YOU EXPECT COMING INTO THIS MOVIE, AND HOW WERE YOU SURPRISED?
·       Interestingly, for a film featuring Bogart and Bacall, we don’t get to see Bogart’s face for the first third of the film, and Bacall disappears for most of the last third of the movie.
·       Most of the first third of the picture is shot using subjective camera, in which we see the point of view of Bogart’s character, which is an interesting technique used in the film noir “Lady in the Lake” one year earlier and in a handful of films prior.
·       For a film noir, it doesn’t replicate a lot of the same conventions and clichés: the city isn’t necessarily depicted as threatening and oozing evil, and Irene isn’t a classic femme fatale leading men into danger; in fact, her abode is a sanctuary where Parry finds refuge from danger.
·       Also, unlike many films noir, Dark Passage doesn’t end on a pessimistic, dark or cynical note wherein somebody dies or a villain gets his comeuppance; instead, its denouement is like a tacked-on fairy tale ending—the lovers “reunite in an exotic fantasyland, and this tale of murder and deceit ends up happily ever after,” according to critic Glenn Erickson.
·       There are a lot of implausibilities and illogical elements at work in the story, which many critics consider to be a mess; yet, arguably, the film proves captivating and entertaining, primarily due to the talents and star power of its leads and the noirish ambience.

WHAT DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE DECISION TO USE SUBJECTIVE CAMERA AND NOT SHOW BOGART’S FACE FOR A GOOD PORTION OF THE MOVIE. WAS THIS A MISTAKE, OR DOES IT WORK?
·       You could make a case that it’s unnecessary: while it’s true that Parry has his appearance changed, which is an important plot element, you could have either had Bogart wear makeup or cast a different actor and dubbed in Bogart’s voice.
·       Or, as reviewer Mark Van Hook posited: “I would have started the film with Bogart in bandages and explained the plastic surgery development in the film’s first scenes, with Bacall either already a part of the story or somehow introduced later. This would have allowed Bogart to reveal himself earlier in the film instead of more than halfway through it, and it would have allotted more time to the mystery of just who did kill Parry’s wife.”
·       The problem with subjective camera is that characters who are interacting with and speaking to the person whose eyes we’re seeing through have to look and talk directly to the camera, which breaks the fourth wall, feels stilted and awkward, and can result in campy delivery.
·       Subjective camera was used very sparingly after “Lady in the Lake” and “Dark Passage” because it was thought to be too gimmicky and not conducive to the accepted cinematic standards of conventional film grammar, which calls for shot, reverse shot, close-up, reaction shot, over-the-shoulder shot and other traditional shot techniques.

HOW IS THIS PAIRING OF BACALL AND BOGART DIFFERENT FROM THEIR OTHER 3 FILMS TOGETHER?
·       Although Bogart and Bacall only made 4 films together, including “Key Largo,” their most popular couplings were Howard Hawks’ “The Big Sleep” and “To Have and Have Not,” in which their sexual chemistry was powerful and the double entendres and erotically charged flirting was indelibly etched in fans’ minds.
·       Here, the chemistry is still strong and the romance feels real, but their interaction is more calm and comfortable.
·       Film Comment writer Bertrand Tavernier theorizes that “the motherliness of the Bacall character and Bogart’s enforced passivity make for an uncharacteristic type of relationship…gentle tenderness prevails, which probably accounts for Dark Passage’s comparative obscurity.”

OTHER FILMS DIRECTED BY DELMER DAVES
·       Pride of the Marines
·       3:10 to Yuma
·       Broken Arrow
·       The Hanging Tree

Read more...

We had it all...just like Bogey and Bacall

Sunday, February 9, 2014

Maybe it's the sultry smooth voice of Lauren Bacall or perhaps its all the cigarette smoke emanating from

Humphrey Bogart's kisser, but there's somehting magical about the chemistry between these two onscreen and offscreen lovers. See what all the fuss is about for yourself by joining CineVerse on February 12 for “Dark Passage” (1947; 106 minutes), directed by Delmer Daves, chosen by Jeanne Johnson.

Read more...

A cop flick unlike any other

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Last evening, CineVerse took a trip through the wayback machine to 1971, a time when the streets of New York were infested with filth, graffiti and heroin-peddling Frenchmen. Here's a roundup of what our discussion of "The French Connection":

HOW WOULD THIS FILM HAVE BEEN UNIQUE, INNOVATIVE OR CONTROVERSIAL IN 1971?
·       The main character is a vigilante, amoral anti-hero who is a questionable cop; he’s not necessarily motivated by the quest for law, order and justice but by obsession, anger and selfish determination. Popeye Doyle is a bigot, a rogue, a violent intimidator. We root for him because he’s the protagonist of the story and we’re intrigued by his mission to stop these criminals, but his actions are morally troubling.
·       We see the very ugly, dirty, gritty realism of urban decay, New York warts and all circa early 1970s. The landscape is hellish, dark, gray and cold.
·       The film employs a realistic style via handheld cameras, location shooting in New York and France, and a you-are-there verite sensibility that makes us feel as if we’re watching a documentary.
·       The car chase scene tops any one previously filmed, including Bullitt, in terms of action, tension, stunts, realism, and danger. It’s a riveting centerpiece of the film, but arguably given too much significance in the grand scheme of the movie. However, as Roger Ebert said, “in a sense, the whole movie is a chase,” which makes this scene perhaps the pièce de résistance.
·       By contrast, much of the earlier segments of the picture are slowly paced, appropriate given that these men are on tedious stakeout detail. The car chase helps release some of that bottled up tension and accelerate the rhythm and pace.
·       The casting of Gene Hackman is curious for the time, in that he wasn’t yet an established star; this film put him on that trajectory.
·       The ending is decidedly bleak and nihilistic, much like many of the films of this era, including Chinatown, Klute, Midnight Cowboy, A Clockwork Orange, The Godfather, etc.
·       Note that this was the first R-rated film to garner the Best Picture Academy Award.

HOW IS POPEYE DOYLE SUCH AN INTERESTING, ATYPICAL COP HERO, ESPEICLALY FOR A POLICE PROCEDURAL MOVIE LIKE THE FRENCH CONNECTION?
·       He’s not given any backstory, and we’re not shown any flashbacks or given much in terms of explanatory exposition; we do know that his hunches once got a good copy killed, but it’s never explained. We’re never told how he got his “Popeye” nickname.
·       He’s not given any love interest, means by which to relieve his tensions, reward or recognition for his hard work.
·       Today, even antihero characters are allowed a chance at redemption by the end of the film. Popeye is given no redemption, nor are viewers given much to sympathize or understand him.
·       He demonstrates palpable racism and uses the “N” word; in today’s cinema, a white cop would get his comeuppance for this. Popeye doesn’t.
·       This film helped usher in the era of the vigilante, streetwise cop character, made further famous by Dirty Harry, Charles Bronson and 1970s police shows like Baretta, Starsky and Hutch, and others.

WHAT THEMES ARE AT WORK IN THE FRENCH CONNECTION?
·       Doyle is a man of his times: a dirty, ugly, crime-ridden city needs a dirty, ugly copy who’s not afraid to break the law himself.
·       Good doesn’t always triumph over evil, and innocent people often pay the price for the pursuit of justice. Consider that most of the criminals get away without being punished, and that innocent citizens are often put in harm’s way by Doyle and his determination to catch the bad guy.
·       Doubles and doppelgangers are a motif in this movie: For example, consider how Doyle is contrasted with the villains around him, including the French who savor their seven-course meal while Popeye has to eat cold pizza outside, or how Doyle collapses next to the villain he shoots in the back.

OTHER FILMS THAT REMIND YOU OF THE FRENCH CONNECTION
·       Bullitt
·       Dirty Harry, Madigan, and The Line Up (all directed by Don Siegel)
·       Z
·       Serpico
·       The Taking of Pelham 1, 2, 3
·       Taxi Driver and Mean Streets (both directed by Martin Scorsese)

OTHER MOVIES DIRECTED BY WILLIAM FRIEDKIN
·       The Exorcist
·       Sorcerer
·       To Live and Die in L.A.

Read more...

Keep the spinach away from this Popeye

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Yeah, The Fast and the Furious films offer some great car chases. But if you want to see one of the old school textbook examples of how a car chase is don, join CineVerse on February 5 for “The French Connection” (1971; 104 minutes), directed by William Friedkin, chosen by Norm Omiecinski

Read more...

  © Blogger template Cumulus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP