“You’re playing with your life.”
“So? You’ve got to play with something.”

I remember seeing the trailer for this, seems like ages ago now, before anyone was really talking about it much at all, and I was really excited despite, I realise even more now having seen it, not really being such a huge fan of Edith Piaf, and not really knowing all that much about her life. And though I’d seen Marion Cotillard in a lot of stuff, like Innocence and more recently A Good Year, she’d never struck me either as a particularly outstanding actress nor, as here, as knock-out beautiful as she is.

It’s a beautiful film that kind of closes in on the sorrow in Piaf’s life, cutting in between her close to death and at two stages of her childhood (played by two absolutely wonderful girls both rightly given more screentime than I expected), with her in her prime scattered in between. At the end, an interviewer asks her about each phase we’ve seen: “What advice would you give a woman/a young girl/a child?” to which her every answer is “Love.” The structure first strikes one as jumpy, but the more I think about it now, the more phenomenally coherent I find it. To someone who knew so little about, basically, “what was she so sad about?”, the delivery of information is perfect.

Marion Cotillard is as perfect as “they” say. I really didn’t expect it, and much as I’ll love it if Julie Christie gets the Oscar, Cotillard’s performance is simply so much more. It’s in the later scenes of Piaf’s life that my heart simply drops out of my chest at how much Cotillard vanishes in the role. The make-up, of course, helps; but it’s a two-way effort of make-up, Cotillard working with it as much as it works with her. It’s truly astonishing.

I was sure I already had a review of this so this might end up a little on the short side. I’m pretty sure I’ve said something about Erzsebet Foldi before, that’s why I thought I’d reviewed it already … ‘cos what I thought I’d written was, how is this movie the only thing she was ever in?! An amazing dancer, beautiful to behold, so natural before the camera, and perfectly cast as Scheider’s loving, precious, brotherless, generous (“underlined 3 times” lol) daughter … yet this is her only film credit, it’s incredible.

Anyway, clearly the reason I watched this this weekend is due to the sad passing of Roy Scheider this past week. Of course, at 76, he had a great innings – certainly better than Bob Fosse, who he basically portrays here – but it still saddened me to hear of it. This movie already had resonance outside of its surface appearance due to just how much Fosse put himself into it. Now – at least, this week, I find it serves as a perfect farewell to Scheider. It struck me during the last scene how it might strike some as a tad tasteless to watch it at such a time, ‘cos I know there are a lot of people who prefer death be confined to grave grief, black suits, hearses and mourning; but I think it’s perfect in its attitude to death … that celebration scene of “Bye Bye Life” countered so slapfaced by the snapback to “the only reality” at the end, the body bag being zipped up.

You can see Scheider’s Gideon so many ways – ego is always mentioned in reviews of the movie; it’s easy to sense he has no self-awareness, doesn’t know what he’s doing or who he’s hurting etc. I think he has total self-awareness; he just doesn’t care. And to me the film’s biggest comment is: why should he, when death is so inevitable? It’s a kind of Fight Club / American Beauty type message, as dangerous as it is profound. I still don’t know what to make of these movies entirely, some days I love them and some days I realise what an ass I am to love them so; I know that when I’m watching they are fun though; that Scheider’s performance is incredible; that the song and dance numbers start brilliant and only get better as the movie goes on; that we’re lucky to even have one movie featuring Erzsebet Foldi; and that anything that can make me get in such a twist reviewing is pretty much always worthy of 5 hearts.

The classic. I think. This is one of those movies I’ve watched so many times both for fun and for study that I can’t help but quote vast chunks of it out loud as it plays. There are just so many things about this movie that, to my surprise every time, lift it far above the quality genre pieces the other installments in the series are.

It’s a perfect screenplay, to start with. Syd Field talked a lot of nonsense (I realised, eventually) about screenwriting and his “paradigm” is broken down with every recent passing week, but one of his books I’d still recommend is “Four Screenplays” which simply broke down four screenplays – this one, Thelma and Louise, Terminator 2, and Dances with Wolves – and showed why his system worked, owing a lot of course to Joseph Campbell, whose thoughts on mythology are overwhelmingly present here too – I think Jodie Foster in particular is fond of talking about the mythical aspects of this movie whenever she’s asked about it.

It’s interesting to me to notice that all those four screenplays, all produced between 91-92, have some seriously powerful women in them – Clarice Starling, Thelma and Louise of course, Sarah Connor, Stands with a Fist – and one of the most stand-out things about Silence is that it was made at a time when doing the whole feminist thing still actually meant something, before people started to see such things with an eye for cynicism and post-modernism.

I like the lightness here too, though, and it’s something I noticed while watching Hannibal is yet another thing I think they got right (in comparison to the very straightlaced Red Dragon and Hannibal Rising) there; “If this door should fall down or – heh-heh – anything else …”, “No … no, you ate yours,” – I think part of the reason I for one really didn’t object to Thomas Harris thinking a romance was spawned here is because of how the sharp minds of Clarice and Hannibal right from the off even resembled one another in the humour department.

It’s really just one of those perfect movies you can’t say much of for or against, being as it’s there in front of you as it is and it couldn’t be any other way. Even though I practically know it by heart, I still love it, could even watch it over again right now just a few days after watching it before. It’s classic Jodie, definitive Hopkins, perfect in genre; basically, more deserving of the Oscars it received than just about anything since. What else is there to say?

Well, finally, I loved this one so much it went over A Clockwork Orange in my 1971 list and thus shot straight to the top of my favourite movies of all time … kinda knew that’d happen sooner or later. Again, there’s little to say that I haven’t said below or that others haven’t said before, but I noticed a couple of cute things this time around worth mentioning, both of them costume related; the way Harold is dressed exactly the same as the psychiatrist in their first meeting, and the way Maude is dressed almost exactly the same as a little girl walking in the same way as her behind her at one of the early funerals … Maude, though, carrying that bright yellow umbrella that makes her look more like the little girl, lol. It’s just an absolutely beautiful movie I could quote or talk about scenes from for hours. “For me, they will always be glorious birds …” – “Most of life’s sorrow comes from people who are this – but allow themselves to be treated like that …” I probably should’ve saved it for Valentine’s Day … though that’s reserved for Hannibal still this year One day I’ll write a much longer review … for now, just consider it an even higher recommendation, if you’ve not seen it yet, than I gave for Beautiful Girls a few weeks ago.

January 5th, 2006:

I’m surprised by how much I said in my first review of this (below). I really can’t think of much to say about it right now, I need to watch it so many more times. I want to know ths movie by heart. Everything about it is perfect. Its offbeat take on life, death, and love is beyond compare. Maude is one of the greatest movie characters ever.

18th October 2004:

Someone recommended this movie to me a while ago and I already knew about it and knew it was a movie I wanted to see, and after that recommendation, I wanted to see it even more. I don’t know why it took me till now to finally see it.

I was barely even in the right frame of mind to watch it, nevertheless it belongs forever in my top 100 movies of all time. It’s only just at 100 after a first viewing but I just know it’s going to rise and rise. These two characters are people I want to hang with forever. Harold and Maude belongs in that group of movies that just tell you to grab life by the balls. It’s almost terrifying in that aspect, Maude is so free-spirited she would make almost anyone on earth feel somewhat lifeless.

And the soundtrack by Cat Stevens … well, it’s awesome, but more than anything makes me want to hear more Cat Stevens. Why is this soundtrack never uttered in the same breath as Simon and Garfunkel’s The Graduate and Aimee Mann’s Magnolia? I see something of Cameron Crowe’s influence coming from this movie too, I wonder if he’s ever mentioned it on a commentary anywhere – I’m going to have to watch Almost Famous again.

Definitely one of the most romantic movies of all time.

Little to add to the first review here but on BAFTA night to single out Sam Riley. I was shocked by his exclusion from most of the awards, let alone the whole movie in other categories, when nominations were first announced; after watching his performance a second time, my mind simply boggles. I honestly think this whole movie belongs up there with the likes of There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men this year, and his performance up with Day Lewis and Depp, not to mention the cinematography … it of course baffles me even more that it’s excluded from so many categories at the BAFTAs, and I hope it wins all that it’s up for.

November 27th, 2007:

I really didn’t know how I’d fare with this one, not really being a huge fan of Joy Division nor really even knowing much of their story or music except for what was touched on by the brilliant 24 hour Party People ... to illustrate how little, I didn’t know anything about Ian Curtis’ epilepsy. And I’ll admit, in light of 24 hour Party People, I did find myself wondering about the need for this movie.

It didn’t take long for me to realise this was one of the best movies of the year, though. I can be pretty picky about movies like this if they don’t feel like they gel as a whole from the start – the ensemble, the design, the authenticity, especially these days when it’s so much more possible, everything has to be right about these movies – and if nothing else, this one is certainly the best “period” movie of the year technical-wise up with Zodiac and American Gangster. This one betters both those by far though with the other less technical stuff – the stuff that makes cinema get inside you. The performances are all perfect, believable – I think it says it all that even Craig Parkinson’s turn as Tony Wilson works following Steve Coogan’s, at the time, seemingly irrepeatable take on the guy.

The soundtrack, of course, is perfect. Mark Kermode has said all that needs to be said about how right the decision to have Sam Riley do his own singing was – the cool thing I think he didn’t mention though is how the band sounds too. Like I said, I’m not a Joy Division fan – I’m one of those people who know the songs but wouldn’t immediately name the artist … at best I’d be, like, “ummm … someone from the Manchester thing?” lol. But in addition to being a portrait of a doomed young artist to rank up there with The Doors, to a lesser extent Last Days, etc, this actually made me for the first time want to listen to the music too. The black and white photography is simply beautiful, it’s the kind of movie where almost every frame is an art print, and it’s far from being all misery like it could’ve been. It’s one of the best British films in ages, and I haven’t done my double bill recommendation thing in ages … even if it’s obvious, I can’t think of a better pair than this and the aforementioned Party People.

It’s a massive credit to this film that I didn’t spend the first half hour itching, “where’s Tatum?!?” lol … sure, there was some of that, but really this is one of the best sports movies I’ve seen even without her. It has such a great, real, consistent feel to it, reminding me of the very few occasions when I was little where there’d be a great outdoor, hot summer day sports event I was in some way involved with that I actually enjoyed.

That’s not to say the screen doesn’t spark alight the moment O’Neal makes an appearance. They really missed a trick not casting Annasophia Robb in this role in the remake, I was instantly reminded of the quirky confidence of Robb in Winn-Dixie, Terabithia etc, (that crinkly nose, O’Neal writes about in her autobiography I’m reading right now how her dad told her every time she smiled she looked like she smelled something funny; what he should’ve added was that though that’s sort of true, it’s an adorable look :)) While I’m on the subject of cuties, it’s worth mentioning Jackie Earle Haley who was surprisingly quite beautiful way back when. Him and O’Neal make quite the onscreen couple without even interacting much at all, lol. I love the costumes on Tatum outside of the uniform too And that front and back shot of her walking away from Matthau in tears is an emotional high I never in a million years expected to find in this movie. It’s one of those scenes that actually means even more when you know something of the actor’s real life backstory – for her to put herself in a scene where a father figure slings beer in her face like that after her upbringing is really something. I know, stuff like that shouldn’t affect one’s judgment of a film … but sometimes, you just can’t help it.

It even made me want to check out the remake again – I think perhaps Richard Linklater was attempting something there I didn’t give him credit for ‘cos I hadn’t seen this yet … like simply showing how child protection^*, health & safety and political correctness laws have poisoned the world so much you just can’t make a movie like this anymore. Which makes this one all the more special.

* Just in case that sounds to anyone like I don’t care about child protection – that’s not what I mean, but if your eyes are open you’ll know what I do mean by the fact that some parts of that thought train have gone way off the tracks.

LOL additional – shows how much I’d given up even looking for this movie in the right places – it is now available on DVD, so apologies for bitching about the rights owners … I still got it cheaper from eBay, that’s what counts lol

Finally got hold of a nice digital copy of this – so stupid of me ditching all my VHS including this all those years ago assuming it’d be easy to find again; I don’t think it’s been on TV yet this millennium, grr, and the eBay auctions have been equally sparse, never coming close to as low a price I finally got it for this week.

This is an even more beautiful movie than I remember – you know exactly how dedicated the film makers are when you see the year – 1952 – coupled with the credit “advice on the tuition of the deaf” on the opening scroll. It’s by far the smartest “old” movie I’ve ever seen, so ahead of its time it even beat the first dramatic adaptation of Helen Keller’s story by 5 years. Just watch the sublimely subtle way the headmistress of the school gestures at Jack Dawkins’ Searle to look at her when he’s speaking during a meeting, and her growing frustration at the others who don’t. It leaves you better than any movie I’ve seen with this heightened awareness of what people with disabilities have to put up with – like, even during the movie I watched after this, I was looking at peoples’ lips and realising how often it’s really impossible to follow what someone is saying without the sounds they’re making. There’s this fantastic visual motif in the movie of people with their backs turned on people – every time you see it it carries some significance, right from the first use of it with the overwhelmingly touching reveal about the headmistress.

But all this intelligence and consideration doesn’t mean the movie isn’t full of heart too. Another visual motif is that of the camera simply tracking in on Mandy’s face, often coupled by the sound fading out, that face often streaming with tears; her confusion is profoundly communicated to us in this way. The movie is so good overall that I’d completely forgotten how adorable Mandy Miller was here, let alone the performance she gives which is so beautiful and real I still find myself checking up online whether she actually was deaf (she wasn’t – you might know her better as the voice singing “Nelly the Elephant” hehe :)) Those frowning, curious eyes staring silently over the wall at the other kids playing, it’s just one of the most moving images I’ve ever seen.

There’s the sharp, almost brassy humour of the best friend of Mandy’s mother, too – again remembering this is the early Fifties (note the solicitor’s scene: “Striking a woman is always a mistake – heaven knows they often ask for it but the courts take a dim view,” lol) – fearlessly putting Searle in his place, “I’ve already told her you’ve got no manners so you’ve no need to demonstrate it, now get on with it and show her around!” lol. In this frank talk and the whole issue of the broken family rearing its head towards the end of the movie, again the movie is just years ahead of anything else I’ve seen from the time.

The acting ensemble is all-round perfect. It’s easy to focus on the child’s performance in a movie like this, but Mandy Miller’s is really just the center of a whirlwind of talent on display here. If the end credits aren’t a little obscured by your tears, you should probably get your ducts checked I’ve seen a ton of the better known Ealing productions but this one remains by far the best in my opinion. Anyone involved with children – parents, teachers, whatever – could really learn a lot from this movie, the deaf thing doesn’t even come into it, if you’ve a child in your life you owe it to yourself and them to seek this one out, and anyone with the power practically has a duty to make it widely available again.

“You’re wrong if you think the joy of life comes principally from human relationships.”

Well, 2007 just keeps getting better and better. As this began my first thought was basically whoops watching it so soon after Forbush ... but while there’s certainly a similarity in this story of man finding himself and humanity in nature, this has plenty more to warrant the extra hour of running time. It ends with less hope than Forbush, but somewhere in the midst of it is an abundance of the stuff.

I’d kind of convinced myself that it would be another of those 2007 movies to have a tremendous central conceit but one that’s simply not backed up enough by the unexpected stuff that surrounds it. It could easily have been exactly what it is but over 2 and a half hours got tired. But, and I don’t know what it is – I’d say Eddie Vedder’s songs, but they’re actually fairly sparse and I’d heard them before; I’d say Emile Hirsch’s performance but it’s really a mix of fresh-faced Leo DiCaprio-ness and emaciated Christian Bale that we’ve seen plenty of before (not to say it’s still not utterly compelling). I think more than likely it’s the whole combination – there simply isn’t a false note here. William Hurt and Marcia Gay Harden are absolutely heartbreaking as the parents; Jena Malone about as perfectly cast as the almost psychically close sister as Maggie Gyllenhaal and Zooey Deschanel were in Donnie Darko and Almost Famous, her voiceover contributing to the constant reassessment of ideas this movie is. This really had me hooked from start to finish. It never stops clarifying and questioning its message. I haven’t read the book so I can only comment on Sean Penn’s screenplay and say his intelligence shines through with none of his occasionally grating self-righteousness. The dialogue is just about constant poetry, particularly in Alex/Chris and his sister’s voiceovers. I definitely picked the right movie to watch on my birthday.