Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | My Orble | Login

Old Movies - February 2010

This Sporting Life

February 25th 2010 06:07


From the opening scenes of unfettered aggression on the football field it becomes patently clear that this isn't your typical 1960s drama. This Sporting Life is a dense and brutally honest examination of the male character as refracted through the prism of a successful sporting career. Sports movies are, by and large, usually about a facet of the sport in question that bears examining. Here, the sport featured (rugby league), is incidental and microcosm to a wider question of masculinity. The title of the film itself is an elegant and understated joke at the expense of previous modes of filmmaking... director Lindsay Anderson dissects the protagonist's life with an unwavering sense of objectivity, washing away many decades of film conventions in regards to audience sympathy and the previously established unwritten laws of dramatic narrative. Footy player Frank Machin's less-than-perfect life is laid bare without irony or gloss, at the time raising a new bar for realism in English-speaking film, and as a result it remains a timeless and un-dated work of art.


Frank Machin (Richard Harris, in a towering performance) is a complicated man. He had ambitions to make it as a professional football player and seems to court attention, but it's also clear that he derives little joy from from either of these things. He rents a room with a widow, Margaret (Rachel Roberts), and has designs on bringing her out of her sorrow and back to life as his lover, but she is largely unreceptive to his attempts to become the new man of the house. As Frank undergoes extensive dental surgery after a particularly violent collision on the football field (one that leaves his front teeth smashed out), he remembers his induction into the game and the rise to fame and modest fortune that followed. We cast an unjudgemental eye over his sporting life as we're shown all that went into it and all that comes out of it.


Central to this film is an unflinching and uncompromising look at who Frank is and what makes him the way he is. Frank is your typical alpha-male sportsman and every major part of the film (direction, writing, performance) casts him in the full dimensions of a real person - something that cannot be grasped in a few minutes. Instead it takes a whole movie for the audience to get a proper handle on Frank, and even then it's pretty clear that we can only know him as much as we've been shown. I'm not sure I've ever seen so complex and realistic a characterisation on the screen... the insecurities and flaws of a football player aren't really something that tend to get examined in this level of artistic detail. The pride, the brutishness, the alpha male behaviour that makes some men equal parts rivals and comrades, the rise of Frank's ego and cockiness, his own hollow envy, the way he brags about his fame and makes his fellow players uncomfortable, that semi-blank look of animalistic indifference that I've seen on so many men's faces around 1 AM at a leagues club before they snap into a self-destructive fit of violence... it's a sobering and unexpectedly authentic look at working class masculinity and male emotional impotence that pre-figures Raging Bull by nearly 20 years.

This Sporting Life is also so much more than just this. You simply can't talk about this kind of thing in a British setting without involving the class system, and there are many allusions to professional sport operating as an extension of the upper class playing officers-and-soldiers with the working class. It's an uneasy relationship that always threatens to bubble to the surface, and is never more uncomfortably apparent than in the scenes that demonstrate the antagonistic attitude portrayed by the working class towards money and materialism. More than one reference is made to Frank and the other players being performing monkeys, and the scene where Frank takes Margaret to a posh restaurant begats the kind of ugly behaviour made famous by Joe Pesci in Goodfellas ("How am I funny?"), though perhaps it's even more awkward here due to the context being more indentifiable.

You also can't talk seriously about a tough, manly sport like rugby league without acknowledging the latent homoeroticism that it goes hand in hand with. The more obvious examples of this are the naked wrestling in the bathhouse, the character of 'Dad' Johnson (William Hartnell, brilliant as an old closeted welsh homosexual), or the scene where Weaver (one of the club owners) puts his hand on Frank's knee to symbolise their professional partnership. Less obvious, but perhaps more insightful, is the scene where Frank cuts in on a dance purely as a means to get a man to fight with him. This intertwining of male interaction and mutable sexuality isn't exactly at the forefront of the film but - like life - it's there, and it's a fascinating added dimension to an already fascinating film. It's also surprising for something that was made in 1963, and it makes the film seem more modern than most of Hollywood's output in the forty-odd years since.

Richard Harris was deservedly nominated for a Best Actor Academy Award for his portrayal of Frank Machin, though he lost out to Sidney Poitier. Fortunately Harris still managed to make a career for himself off the back of his work here, and it's worth noting that the actor's sense of ego and insecurity amongst his peers often led to difficulties on the set of his more mainstream films for many years afterwards. These character traits no doubt helped make his performance in This Sporting Life such an authentic tour de force... you simply can't fake that kind of toughness. It also takes a brave actor to portray an imperfect and unsympathetic character like Frank so honestly, it's something that a lot of modern famous actors still won't really do. Rachel Roberts is also to be commended for her role as the character of Margaret - a miserly, miserable thing twisted by the tragic death of her husband. She does well not to let the character descend into a two-dimensional caricature of grief gone rotten, and the point where Margaret and Frank begin to, er, 'interact' as 'lovers', could have become a distracting source of controversy had it been handled by a less talented actress.

This Sporting Life has been hailed as one of the groundbreaking films that ushered in the British genre of 'kitchen-sink drama'... I'm not really a fan of that phrase as (to me) it seems to denote a banality or routine-ness that's inherent in real life, and I think This Sporting Life is a lot more exciting that that. It's a bleak movie, and it won't be to everyone's taste, but it's a very rewarding experience and it stands out amongst it's contemporaries like a strong ale in a case full of mixed women's drinks.
32
Vote
   


Peeping Tom

February 22nd 2010 07:05


When we first get to know the protagonist of Peeping Tom we've already witnessed him committing a rather disturbing murder, seemingly just for the purpose of filming such a thing. It's a strange way of introducing a film's 'hero', by rights the audience should be ready to hate him, but as Peeping Tom progresses we're consumed by an overriding need to understand this guy and he becomes a kind of sympathetic figure in spite of the horrendous murders. It's quite easy to see why veteran director Michael Powell became a focal point for so much outrage after making this oddly macabre thriller, and it's a movie that's very much ahead of it's time and seems downright anachronistic for something made in the early 60s.

The opening murder scene is highly stylised and almost Hitchcockian, playing out like a silent film complete with vaudiville musical accompaniment, but beyond this establishing sequence Peeping Tom is a one-of-a-kind experience. I guess it feels so unique because it takes what would normally be the villain of the movie and turns him into the protagonist... the plot isn't driven by a manhunt or an investigation of his killings, it's more a series of vignettes where we explore this character, Mark, and what makes him tick.

Mark is a shy, peculiar man dispassionately obsessed with voyeurism due to an unusual and traumatising childhood. He seeks to capture a certain fear of death on film by killing women whilst moving a camera towards their faces. Peeping Tom explores our fascination with voyeurism, exemplified by a scene where Mark shows his young neighbour, Helen, some footage of himself as a child. She's horrified and disturbed by these films, but she also can't stop watching them. This mesmerising pull of what frightens the viewer is a sort of metaphor for the power of film itself, just as Helen feels compelled to watch Mark's videos, we also feel compelled to watch Peeping Tom. It's not surprising that critics at the time became so vocally angry at this movie... it probably affected them on a deeper level than most of them cared to admit, with Mark's quest to capture the face of death an outright microcosm of the history of violence in cinema itself, and why it continues to fascinate us.

Karlheinz Bohm as Mark has a strange presence that goes a long way to explaining the film's cult appeal... he has a prematurely aged look that belies his character's past, and comes across as a blond, handsome version of Peter Lorre. He inhabits the role so completely that he convincingly engages the audience's sympathy without ever losing the wrongness inherent in his character. Peeping Tom's bold dissection of a serial killer's motivations are on par with psychoanalysis in modern film today, clearly demonstrating the cause-and-effect cycle that led to Mark's emotional deficiencies... he tries to film Helen's reactions to his childhood footage just as his own father filmed him, and seems to be suffering from a sense of displacement where he sees his own life from outside himself, making him the ultimate voyeur.

Peeping Tom isn't a particularly gruesome movie by today's standards, but it does remain quite shocking. It also offers an unexpected early peek at the sordid side of life (Mark works on the side as a pornographer, amongst women of dubious moral character). The final scenes are like a kick in a gut, resonating well beyond the film's end because of the level of care and intimacy the director invests in a character who should be absolutely repulsive. Peeping Tom shares a few similarities with Psycho (which was released in the same year) but is actually a lot more interesting and less dated due to it's more complex treatment of a very dark subject matter, and it's worth the time of anyone who was ever a fan of M, Se7en, The Silence of the Lambs or any other decent crime-horror film.
32
Vote
   


Nine

February 18th 2010 10:53


I was initially put off watching Nine because of the subject matter (being based on Fellini's [semi?]autobiographical 8 1/2, which I haven't seen). I was worried that it would leave me unable to properly appreciate the film... I mean, as far as things go, a Fellini film is a pretty obscure source for a big scale, all-star movie musical. For anyone else out there with similar reservations, I'll let you know that this movie is pretty self-contained and prior knowledge isn't really needed. But in place of those reservations I'm going to give you a whole bunch of other reasons not to see this film, highest amongst them being that it's a boring piece of crap.

Daniel Day-Lewis plays Guido Contini, a celebrated Italian director in the midst of heavy writer's block. He's a procrastinating smooth-talker and a playboy artist with a sense of humour. He's also a realist, highly frustrated, very self-assured and a lying, cheating philanderer. Day-Lewis gives another complex, recognisably iconic performance to add to his gallery of rogues, complete with mellifluous Italian accent. His internal battles form the crux of the movie, and his presence alone is the film's only real redeeming feature.

Firstly, the musical sequences all take place in Contini's imagination, and outside the film's narrative. It leaves little room for innovation of interaction and only really serves to highlight the genre's artifice next to other modern films. Each song seems like a film clip from a movie soundtrack, with snippets of the film's highlights sprinkled throughout like a promotional video, and it makes the whole thing feel very superficial. It doesn't really propel the film along. As any film student should know, the songs in a musical move the plot forward, but here the film just grinds to a halt during all the songs. It's like the director was all too aware of how unpopular musicals have become in recent years, and so he came up with this idea of making all the songs into film clips that take place outside of the plot so as not to challenge what modern audiences are willing to accept in a movie. But if a modern audience can't accept a musical where the songs don't take place within the narrative then why even bother making a musical in the first place? If I was a serious fan of musicals (and I'm not) I would feel very cheated by this movie. As it stands, I was just vaguely annoyed and very bored.

There are also some interesting ideas floating around that don't get a decent look-in... there's a slight sense that the movie is challenging the accepted idea of the director as auteur, with Contini's crew bending over backwards to make him look good simply because his name guarantees production and press interest, but this isn't really taken anywhere interesting. Instead the film just meanders along with Contini not really doing anything other than shagging and flirting with a variety of attractive women who get to sing a song each in his imagination. The rest of the cast includes an array of highly accomplished female talent... Penelope Cruz, Nicole Kidman, Marion Cotillard, Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Fergie and Sophia Loren all appear. I'm not sure Cruz's performance is worth the Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination she got, but it's hardly surprising considering she won last year and that the Academy loves backing up their winners with further nominations.

Anyway, I wouldn't really recommend this movie. It's not very good and has very little in the way of excitement, it's only really worth watching for Daniel Day-Lewis but even with that in mind you'll still be bored. Oh, and Fergie's song looks like the video for Madonna's Cherish. In fact, most of the songs look like film clips for Madonna songs in the early 90s.
13
Vote
   


The Hurt Locker

February 14th 2010 07:20


This is my pick for the Best Film Oscar, partially because it (amazingly) has something new to say about war, but mainly because it also happens to an excellent film. It takes the premise of war as a drug (it plainly states this before the movie starts) and really runs with it, with director Kathryn Bigelow crafting a teeth-shatteringly tense action masterpiece that makes all it's points in ways that only a visual storytelling medium like film can make


[ Click here to read more ]
43
Vote
   


The Combination

February 9th 2010 10:24


There was a lot of controversy surrounding this film when it first came out, with some theatres in Sydney's western suburbs even erupting into violence and causing the film to be pulled from some venues. It seems strange that movies like The Combination can encourage violence amongst the very people they seek to educate, it suggests that the probelms in these subcultures are far too ingrained to be fixed by cautionary art, but I think films like this are a good start nonetheless. Part of the issue is the attitude of the average uninvolved Anglo-Australian... most people hear about crimes involving Lebanese youths and the part that seems most relevant to them is the ethnicity of the perpetrator rather than the crime itself. This film goes some way towards addressing this kind of blinkered prejudice and how it feeds the very problems that cause it... it's a vicious cycle and writer/actor George Basha is to be commended for putting it out there in all it's glory, and for suggesting how we might break this cycle


[ Click here to read more ]
36
Vote
   


36
Vote
   


Precious

February 4th 2010 06:40


I actually watched this movie thinking it was a true story, and that the character of Precious was a real person who had actually written a book of her life story and that this was what the film was based on. I wiki'd it right after I watched the film and was surprised (and a little disappointed) to realise it wasn't a true story after all. This probably shouldn't have any real bearing on my opinion of the movie, but I can't help but feel that I cheated myself a little bit, having invested all that emotion into something that isn't real. I guess we do that with movies anyway, and that to certain degrees the best of them become 'real' in the eye of the beholder. Precious feels like it should be real


[ Click here to read more ]
29
Vote
   


And the 2010 Nominees Are...

February 2nd 2010 13:56


Well, the nominees are in


[ Click here to read more ]
57
Vote
   


More Posts
2 Posts
8 Posts
13 Posts
287 Posts dating from May 2006
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:
Moderated by Luke
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]