Posts Tagged ‘London’

Sabotage aka The Woman Alone

Sabotage aka The Woman Alone

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

As I said in my review of Secret Agent, I was almost ready to write a very similar review of this to the one I wrote for that. The story begins similarly broad and vague, the characters not refined or focused enough. But though it’s not as joyful as The 39 Steps (though there’s a few humorous touches, like the grumpy woman in the pet store) it makes up for that in being quite wonderfully heavy. I’d quite forgotten that Hitchcock ever was this heavy prior to The Wrong Man (NB. I wrote this before watching Lifeboat again – wow).

The story, simply put, is about terrorism in London and its effects on those who survive. Of course, there’s more to it than that, but I struggle to view this movie in anything but purely emotional terms. The film is most famous for its central scene where a young boy carries a bomb across London on a bus. Hitchcock famously spoke of this scene as being a failure for him, because he allowed the bomb to go off, betraying his usual rules of suspense and surprise. One really wonders what the point of the movie would have been had the bomb not gone off and taken the child with it. For around this central sequence is built a pure, exhausting tragedy the likes of which you simply don’t expect from cinema this early. For a 75 minute movie to have such emotional weight is nothing short of astonishing.



Blackmail [1929]

Blackmail [1929]

Thursday, September 30th, 2010

This is immediately noteworthy not just for being Hitchcock’s first talkie but also the first ever British talkie, though that’s not the only reason for my having such a tidy breakpoint between the last Hitchcock review and this one. I would’ve probably got to this sooner were it not for there being a scene (the “Knife!” scene, no less) from the silent version on the DVD I have (in the Early Hitchcock set). The scene is so equally effective the way Hitchcock did it silently that I simply had to track down a copy of the full silent version before going any further in watching and rewatching his work.

The thing is, Hitchcock didn’t just adopt sound in his pictures willy-nilly, as easy as that might have been for him to do. Abandoning none of his learned knack for the visual, Hitchcock said much over the years of his approach to the sound component of his cinema. If he was going to have sound in his movies, it would have to contribute something and take nothing away. Just as I noted his limited use of title cards in his earlier silent work, using them only when the image didn’t say plenty, he only has his characters speak here when they have something to say.

Often the sound will even say the complete opposite of what we see, further showing how far ahead of the game Hitchcock was in his use of it. The rapist that initiates Anny Ondra’s troubles in the movie sings a perfectly jaunty song as he makes his advances. When the (still shocking now, let alone in the late Twenties) murder occurs, Hitchcock pulls the sound out entirely using silence, not sound, to enhance the suspense. And then there’s that much talked about knife scene when he simply crowns himself the master of sound, as a woman babbles on about her opinion of the murder, but the only discernible word in her dialogue is “knife” to the wild irritation of Ondra.

But as I say, the film works just as well without the sound. The story concerns Ondra’s character who finds herself subject to the blackmail of the title after someone witnesses her leaving the scene of a crime that had her murder a young artist in self-defense after he tried to rape her (this isn’t spoilers, it all happens in the first 20 minutes or so). Through all of this Hitchcock is simply brimming with visual ideas. A cunning early shot has the blackmailer see police enter his home through a tiny shaving mirror in the corner. A man is arrested and there’s a perfect dissolve from his mugshot to his fingerprint. As Ondra goes up to the rapist’s studio, we get a full cutaway view of them ascending the staircase. And as Ondra wanders the streets of London following the fateful scene, there’s all manner of tricks, including one of my faves as a neon sign advertising a cocktail shaker metamorphoses into a stabbing knife. But the best one was new to me on this viewing: an arresting visual where a the shadow of a window frame crosses Ondra’s neck like a noose as she rises, having just written a note of confession, that tells us all we need to know about her character’s genuine remorse. In the silent version of the famous “Knife!” scene, by the way, the jolting break in the scene comes, ironically, from the ringing of the shop’s doorbell. Hitchcock simply cuts to the bell ringing, and I swear you can practically hear it.

This was one of the first Hitchcock movies I saw at a time when I hadn’t seen that many old movies, let alone early talkies. It was an instant fave then and remains so now. It was fascinating to discover that the original silent version worked so well this time, though. Clearly the sound version is the one to watch, but the comparison is a fascinating one I recommend to anyone interested in this kind of thing. With a blonde central heroine and a climax at famous landmark (the British Museum), not to mention the downright dangerous framing of that blonde as a kind of anti-heroine, I feel this one is even more like the “first true Hitchcock” than The Lodger was. In any case, it’s a must see.



The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog

The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog

Friday, September 24th, 2010

Like I said in my review of The Pleasure Garden, this is the one that’s usually referred to (in fact even by the man himself in François Truffaut’s booklength interview) as “the first true Hitchcock” and it’s hard to argue. Dealing with a suspicious new member of a household in the time of Jack the Ripper, it contains just about everything Hitchcock would become known for.

Hitchcock himself is rather dismissive of the most cited visual in this: a scene where the mysterious stranger paces back and forth in his room while below the residents gaze up at the ceiling, which becomes transparent to reveal his footfalls from underneath. My favourite shot comes when the Lodger himself arrives. It’s a hallway arrival to rival that of Father Merrin in The Exorcist over 40 years later, and though I’m certain I’d seen this movie a few times before now, it really put the chills on me this time around.

The visual storytelling here is just stunning. I had none of the trepidation about it being silent that I had coming to The Pleasure Garden. It plays less like a “silent movie” than as a movie that’s just so finely put together that it doesn’t need the dialogue. Even the title cards are sparse (something I noticed as I watched more silent Hitchcock was quite usual for him). And of course, if you do start to drift, there’s always the first instance of the Hitchcock Cameo to look out for (I won’t spoil it for you).

The bulk of what I have to say in this review (because as for the movie itself: it’s about as essential as Hitchcock gets at this early stage… you’ve just got to see it…) concerns the DVDs that are around of it. I’ve become quite obsessive about this Hitchcock marathon and built up a collection of all the movies in the best versions I could get my hands on. The Lodger was one of the few where I seem to have missed out on the “best” DVD release, and that’s in the MGM Premiere collection (which I’ve read has technical issues of its own anyway).

The version I got isn’t bad visually, being the BFI’s restored print included in the UK British Years box set. However, this disc gives you the choice between an old scratchy print (which either runs too fast or has scenes missing) with music, or this beautiful BFI version without. This didn’t hurt so bad until I discovered that none other than Joby Talbot (notable to me for his work with The League of Gentlemen; you might know him from The Divine Comedy) wrote a brand new score for this very print (parts of which can be heard here) which isn’t included for whatever reason. I hope one day there’ll be a release that includes this score (on Blu-ray perhaps!) In the meantime if anybody can direct me to a recording of that score (or any that fit, really), I’d be very grateful indeed.



National Treasure: Book of Secrets

National Treasure: Book of Secrets

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

As with the first movie, this is clearly “Meh-” material: as Mark Kermode put it I think, it passes the time until Indy 4 well enough. But as with the first movie, it must be said that it’s mostly a good “meh-”. It’s bookended by a build-up and finale that are almost identikit copies of their original counterparts (“it’s a little gold man …” anyone?) but it has its moments like a chase down the tiny backstreets of London, a foray into Buckingham Palace, a nice scene around Paris’ Statue of Liberty (which reminded me I really must remember to see that next time I go).

It’s a Bruckheimer movie, so you should expect plausibility to go entirely out of the window, and that it certainly does around the point where Nicolas Cage manages to kidnap a President who seems almost willing to be kidnapped – even that’s a fun sequence, though, I’ve gotta admit. Likewise the stuff with Helen Mirren and Jon Voight as “mom and dad” feel often hideously like pandering to the older audience, but, y’know, it’s Mirren and Voight, it’s hard to complain. If you don’t watch movies often then it’s the last thing you want to waste your time on; otherwise, knock yourself out.



St. Trinian’s

St. Trinian’s

Saturday, April 19th, 2008

As with the original Star is Born and the political thrillers mentioned in my Vantage Point review, it’s been too long since I last saw one of the original St. Trinian’s movies for me to make a fair comparison here other than to mention that I know for sure I was a huge fan of them when I was little. I imagine it was one of my early, “I want to be one of them!” experiences even if I didn’t really know it at the time. When Rupert Everett first started talking about his involvement with the new version (a few years ago now I think), I was pretty excited but that excitement ebbed as Mischa Barton first joined the cast, then the whole Girls Aloud involvement, the way it was marketed, and finally the reviews.

Ultimately I came to the movie expecting it to fail on all levels – the nostalgia of the old movies, a re-imagining or modern updating thereof that actually worked, even the slightly dodgy “perv appeal” a lot of the criticism has been aimed at. To my astonishment, I enjoyed every second of it and I imagine it’s a movie that I will wind up watching far too many times for my own good in the future. It works on all of the levels mentioned above and then some. No, it’s not going to win any awards. But though it mightn’t seem like it sometimes, I do enjoy a little pure entertainment from time to time; and this is the kind of thing that for me fits the bill. It couldn’t have been better.



Jumper

Jumper

Tuesday, March 18th, 2008

I feel luckier than most of those who’ve been disappointed by this one by the fact that my interest in it lay pretty much solely in AnnaSophia Robb’s appearance in it, and I found out how small her role was when I saw the trailer months ago. It’s smaller still than that, in fact … but at least I was prepared. The worrying thing to me about her presence here was how young she looked – like, just how long ago was this thing shot?! ‘cos right now, even around the time Bridge to Terabithia shot, I’m sure she could almost quite easily have played the older, more prominent, Millie. (this article suggests they shot August 2006 … I guess AS is just good at dressing older more recently, lol).

As to the movie – well, it’s as slick as the trailer looked, and I think the key lies in realising the rather dreary thing the movie is saying, and it’s something we’ve all wondered from time to time if we’ve ever thought about having a superpower and which one we’d choose etc; would we really use it to help people like Superman etc? Or would we just keep it to ourselves and peep on people in the shower (ahem)? But while this would seem to be a unique and pertinent, especially at this point in time, subject for a movie, it turns out to be pretty unexciting in the end.

I think the only thing that could maybe have made it better is if they cut out the time lag and cast a younger guy as the hero, keeping AnnaSophia in the Millie part (really, this is not just the AnnaSophia fan in me saying this lol). You can imagine younger teenagers acting this way, even as far as “acting older” like Leonardo DiCaprio in Catch Me If You Can. When it’s Hayden Christensen and Rachel Bilson … it’s just kinda pathetic. Also nobody should ever let Jamie Bell use his regular voice in a movie, ever again. I figured it might’ve worked here in the short clips I’d seen, being as it almost makes sense if he’s never stayed in one place most his life … but basically, the movie’s just not good enough for me to be that considerate over it.

The scene where Christensen finally reveals to Bilson his little quirk is quite the ultimate case in point as to why this movie is so far from realising its potential. He dances around the issue in a stupidly comic way, Samuel Jackson right outside the front door seconds away from killing them both; and when he finally shows her, her acting ability is revealed in all its hopeless glory as she “reacts” to seeing a human being defy the laws of time and space before her very eyes.

Having only seen 3 movies so far from this year (including this), I really thought this would be the one that made it feel like the year had begun. As it is, though the other two (Rambo and Day of the Dead) were no masterpieces either, I’d certainly watch them again much sooner than this one, which told me all I needed to know in one go and left me simply wanting to shout, “Next?”

On the plus side the visuals are good (Egypt in particular – Bucket List losers take note lol) as are the exotic locations. I guess they make up for the criminal underuse of AnnaSophia. But we’re still left with a gaping hole of a movie. That it ends an hour too soon (not that I’d want another hour; but seriously, no ending in movies has ever made me think “That’s it?!” so loudly) is just insult to injury … and that Christensen doesn’t even learn anything by the movie’s close is just … grr, can you just tell that I’d rant about this for days if I had the time? I guess there’ll be a sequel … I mean god, if White Noise got one … I won’t even be rushing to download that … unless it’s AnnaSophia.



Run, Fat Boy, Run

Run, Fat Boy, Run

Tuesday, February 26th, 2008

After Big Nothing – in fact, possibly before that (my initial anticipation for Hot Fuzz wasn’t that huge) – even Simon Pegg couldn’t help this one from looking like yet another of those rushed British comedies I really thought we’d seen the back of years ago. It’s essentially The Full Monty with running and a dash of Rocky; it’s severely overloaded with Britcom stars (the David Walliams “Mr. Man” from Little Britain in Thandie Newton’s bakery is about the most cringeworthy … plenty others come close though), it’s shot in 2.35:1 ratio for no good reason (one of my biggest movie hangups), and the prospective stepfather plot with Hank Azaria is about as thoughtless as that in All I Want for Christmas, right down to the final, “Hang on, he hasn’t actually done anything wrong yet, besides being willing to step in for a single mother, has he? Let’s make him swear at the kid!” moment.

But what can I say, none of these things really detract from the general sense of fun throughout – Dylan Moran being one of the Britcom peeps who never annoys (“Come on up!” LOL might be my favourite final shot of the past year; it’s certainly the funniest) and the final marathon sequence, built around a beautiful image of Pegg “hitting the wall” … my heart just went with it entirely and there were more than a couple of tears in my eyes for him. I just realised looking at the IMDb that David Schwimmer directed it – I’m sure I knew this already but it’d slipped my mind. See, this is what I meant on Gone Baby Gone about a movie exceeding the director’s name. I’d be interested in seeing more from him.



A Good Year

A Good Year

Wednesday, February 13th, 2008

It’s taken me a long time but I’m finally, slowly, recently coming to the realisation that I really just don’t like Ridley Scott in general – that is, that the movies of his that I tend to love … and yes, when I like a Ridley Scott movie, I really like it … they always tend to be the ones that everyone else see as failures for him. Of the hits, only Thelma and Louise stands out for me – I’m still working through the Blade Runner Final Cut set hoping for an epiphany but it’s not looking good – add Hannibal and Matchstick Men and that’s about it for me.

With those last two in mind, particularly Matchstick Men, I actually looked forward to seeing this one, because it seemed to fit the magic mould. I’d much prefer to see Scott applying his technical sheen to a loopy, down to earth story like this than anything he did in Gladiator, American Gangster, and worst of all Kingdom of Heaven. The same goes for Russell Crowe – I don’t give a damn about the accent, I’d much prefer to see him as loose as he is here than his more commercially successful man act … I mean he truly glows in places of this movie, you can feel the France getting to him like it gets to anyone.

In short, I was far from let down. In fact, I barely stopped laughing for the whole movie. It’s barely got a thing to say worth saying, but like Matchstick Men it’s just an undeniably talented director (yeh, don’t get me wrong – I just don’t like most of his movies lol) letting rip on a story completely unworthy of that talent; and to me, the product is far more desirable than any of his more “worthy” feats. You can practically feel the breeze and smell the twilight air in some scenes here, rustic France probably hasn’t looked so inviting since Jean De Florette and Manon des Sources. The soundtrack is random as hell, the girls are beautiful, the wine’s surprisingly, hilariously rotten … what can I say but I’ll be coming back for more of this one for sure.