Wednesday

Classic Television

In addition to watching '24' and 'Lost', I've been watching a lot of the last seasons of 'Columbo'. I've been a Columbo fans for years and have finally completed my DVD collection of the 1970's films. It's fun to watch the director credits as such notables as Steve Spielberg and Jonathan Demme cut their teeth on the series.

The 1970's mysteries have some nostalgia for me as I used to come home from the cottage and watch McCloud, McMillan and Wife and Columbo with my mom. Nostalgia aside, it's always Columbo that I come back to and I've often wondered why.

On watching the series again, Peter Falk has a major impact on the character of Columbo. Consider the pilot episode where you see a well dressed, somewhat normal Columbo that hardly gives you the hint of the evolution of the character and series. It is in the subsequent episodes and the focus on the quirk and brilliantly manipulative character, you see the dynamics of the series progress.

What truly sets Columbo apart from any television show in memory is the strange and wonderful structure of the stories. First of all, the series of mysteries of Columbo, Mcmillan and Wife and McCloud were all small features, clocking in at two hours including commercials. Columbo set itself apart as it always introduces the antagonist (murderer) first and walked the audience through the crime. Columbo doesn't even show up until at least fifteen to twenty minutes into the program. This means that the audience is starting out with much more information than the hero detective and the focus of the story is on how Columbo will figure out the method of the crime.

On top of the unusual story structure, Columbo also features such terrific guest appearances as Ray Milland, Patrick McGoohan, John Cassevetes, Donald Pleasance, Leslie Neilsen, William Shatner, Dean Stockwell, Robert Vaughn, George Hamilton, Johnny Cash, Leonard Nimoy, Martin Landau, Dick Van Dyke, Janet Leigh and Ricardo Montalban. Very few television shows today gather such significant talent.

One of the pleasant surprises that grew out of the move from VHS to DVD is the release of old television programs. For me, Columbo is one of the treasures of the mystery genre.

As a footnote, I've also revisited the 1980's classic, 'Magnum P.I.'. What is of particular interest in the first season is seeing the series evolve and grow. The memorable Mike Post score and the opening credits don't fully appear until at least seven episodes into the series and the characters are vague and ill defined. Over the first half of the series you can see the wheels turning and the show defining itself. The DVD provides us with the original series before syndicated edits and is a very satisfying look at the evolution of a new series.

Tuesday

Mini Series

Like most of the population, I haven't kept up with my New Years Resolutions. Although I haven't seen too many films this year, Rogers Cable has actually given me a reason to look forward to February and trust me, not a lot of Canadians look forward to February. They've announced the addition of AMC and TMC (Amercian Movie Classics and Turner Movie Classics) and I am excited to see a lot of classic films I've missed and revisit the ones I've already enjoyed.

I've been watching the new seasons of '24' and 'Lost' and was musing at how the mini series has become a series. Thanks to DVD distribution, broadcasters don't have to rely soley on syndication ad revenue, freeing them up to play with traditional television formats. While broadcasters have repeated the series, it is something that needs a commitment from the viewer as the storylines are linear and it is tough to just pick up half way through. I have watched most of 24 on dvd and for the first time (they're on season 6) am watching it broadcasted. As is a common theme on my blog, I do find it amusing that everyone is trying to predict what this means for the 'future' of television as if it were an 'either or' world. I suspect that it will run it's course and eventually people will become bored when the new shows are rip offs of others and we'll see another shift. It seems to me that the pattern often resembles the 'everything old is new again' formula. The mini series has reinvented itself as the maxi series and we are full circle once again.

For now I'll watch '24' and ponder how this sadistic show can be so damn entertaining.

The Clunky Classic

I put on 'It's a Wonderful Life' the other night, a film that I enjoy immensely. It is a clever take on the classic Scrooge story and, unlike many other holiday classics, reaches into the darker parts of life. The theme of broken dreams is an easy concept for most people to gravitate to as life rarely makes a path for us to achieve what we want and often when it does it doesn't necessarily make us any happier. 'It's a Wonderful Life' explores these ideas (and more) with a degree of depth not seen in average Christmas fare.

All this said, it has to be one of the clunkiest classics ever made. The film suffers from an odd story structure and some of the worst editing I've ever seen in a studio picture. In terms of the edits, I'm not sure that I would blame the picture editor. The editor is given the footage that the director and cameraman have captured and it is really the directors job to make sure that the film will cut. It would be a fair assessment to say that it was Capra's technical direction that is responsible for the poor edits. Take these two images for example:



The cut is odd as the change in framing is too subtle making it feel like a small jump cut. The secondary character is starting to walk behind Jimmy Stewart before the cut and is unmoving beside him at the head of the next shot. Normally cutting on action (or a match cut) is one of the nicest and smoothest methods to hide the cut. Here, it highlights the jump cut and is a bit jarring for the audience. Although the audience wouldn't notice the technical aspects of the flaw, they do have a subconscious knowledge of spatial relationships.
Here is another example:



Again, the change in framing is too subtle and in this particular cut Uncle Billy's expression changes from laughingly playful to straight. The continuity of emotion is broken and it highlights the poor visual cut. The film is littered with these kinds of poor edits.

The story structure is quite unusual as well. It starts with a conversation of spirits who inform us that they need to send an angel to help poor George Bailey. They decide to give the angel (and us) some back story as to who George Bailey is and the film starts in flashback. What is odd about this structure is that we end up spending eighty minutes on the back story! By the time we get to the part where George is in trouble, we've practically forgot that there were angels in the story at all. Thus, the second act starts about an hour and a half into the movie. I can't help but wonder how much this story structure affected the poor reviews the film recieved when it first came out. The films revival came from public broadcasters showing the film every year as it had fallen out of copyright and was free for public use. The familiarity that we built with it's odd structure by showing it yearly may have had a good counter effect (just a thought)...

Despite these seemingly major flaws, 'It's a Wonderful Life' is a classic and deserving of its status. Why? The film has such a wonderful energy and drive that it transcends its technical problems. I used to tell my students that story was the most important thing and should always trump whatever lighting or continuity problems you're having. If the poor cut will tell the story better than using a bad take then go with the break in continuity. The audience doesn't go to the movies to see good technical film making, they go to see characters who are having the biggest crisis of their lives. 'It's a Wonderful Life' can be a bit sentimental and melodramatic at times but it also features a character who is selfish and unhappy. He can't see the good that he adds to other peoples lives as he's too self absorbed and bitter that he hasn't been able to chase those unattainable dreams. This is where Capra has done his finest work, creating a film that is exuberant and unashamed of its earnestness.

Monday

The Conformist


As an update to a previous post - 'The Conformist' is finally being released to dvd December 5th (Christmas is early). I previously wrote that it was a glaring omission from the catalogue of great movies. As one of Bernardo Bertolucci's finest films and one of the richest films ever made, 'The Conformist' is one of the most visually stunning films ever photographed as well as a profound character study.

The film takes place in fascist Italy as the protagonist (Marcello) is sent to Paris to assassinate his former professor and enemy of the state. I won't reveal any details of how it unfolds but I will say that what evolves is a fascinating mixture of sex, politics and violence. For me, 'The Conformist' defines the great art house film - intelligent, intriguing, challenging, complex and beautiful. I can't wait to get my copy.

Sunday

Borat!

My stomach is still a bit sore from seeing 'Borat' last night. If you don't know 'Borat', he is one of the personas from 'Da Ali G Show'. Sacha Baron Cohen, the creator of the character of Borat, teamed up with a crack team of comedy writers and director Larry Charles (Seinfeld writer) to film one of the funniest films I've ever seen. Going into the film I'd heard those words uttered - "funniest film ever" - and thought that maybe it was just studio spin. It was hardly an exaggeration. I don't remember ever laughing so hard and for so long. That's the thing about comedies in general. They make you laugh for an act or two and then peter out trying to finish telling the story. It's a symptom of the three act structure. Most comedies use up their best material setting up the story then find that about an hour (or so) in that they have to resolve the 'plot'. This means that the gags and funny business are replaced by an earnest effort to satisfy the story. Some comedies, like 'Bullets Over Broadway', skirt this problem by setting up a funny plot. This way it isn't actually dependent on gags to be funny - the story is funny in and of itself. 'Borat' solves the problem by creating the thinnest plot and refuses to make the comedy dependant on it. The thin plot creates a reason for Borat to travel the American countryside but never demands that he go from A to B in any formal manner.

The result? Brilliant! 'Borat' is one of those rare comedies that fuses toilet humour with sophisticated satire. The gags are intellectual one minute then bawdy the next. Some have found the film extremely offensive and it's easy to see why. 'Borat' amplifies racial and sexual stereotypes but places them in the realm of farce. Borat seeks to find the parts of our society that validate these attitudes thus shining a light on ourselves. We are not cleansed of hatred and bigotry and 'Borat' for all it's hilarity gives us a mirror to hold our society up against. It's smart. It's dirty. It's bawdy and it's hilarious.

As a footnote, 'Borat' was sold out and the audience laughed so hard that subsequent jokes were missed. Like 'Little Miss Sunshine', 'Borat' is another example of how good films bring people out to the movie theatres in droves. And unlike the hundred million dollar flops, 'Borat' makes its fortune and success on talent.

Monday

Two Trips to the Toronto Film Festival


I managed to see 'So Goes the Nation' and 'When the Levee's Broke' last week. Both films were excellent as well as important social and historical documents.

'So Goes the Nation' examined the 2004 Presidential race between George Bush and John Kerry. The focus of the film is both macro and micro as it deals volunteers on the ground in Ohio, which turned out to be a swing state and an important campaign battleground, as well as interviews with the chief strategists from the Bush and Kerry camps. It is the balanced view that gives this documentary it's interesting point of view. Far from Michael Moore and Al Franken, the film tries very hard to be non partisan and show the election from both the Republican and Democratic side. The election was an easy target for a soap box documentary where you could expose the dirty tactics used againt John Kerry but they don't follow the easy target. Instead, you get a unique view into the strategy of the opponents. This deconstruction of the party battle plans doesn't diminish it's human appeal as a lot of time is spent with the volunteers on the ground and their emotional investments in the outcome of the election. It is a wonderful balance of people with political strategy and free of any apparent partisan manipulation. You can't help but marvel at how an election campaign is constructed and won, or in Kerry's case, lost.

'When the Levee's Broke' is Spike Lee's documentary about Hurricane Katrina and the destruction of New Orleans. In a four hour running time, the film is a comprehensive view of the storm and its social and political aftermath. Some might expect the outspoken Lee to have a hayday with this material which undeniably exposes America's flaws in both race and poverty. Yet Spike Lee, like 'So Goes the Nation', doesn't go the easy direction. Instead he focuses his camera on the people and allows the material speak for itself. 'When the Levee's Broke' becomes an important document of the storm and the views of the people who were abandoned by the beauracracy of the government. The issues of race and poverty are apparent in the film but Lee allows it to come to the surface naturally. His main agenda in this film is to humanize the events, to show you how a great city and a unique people are shamefully swept away in the richest and most powerful country in the world. The film is an angry, funny, sad, painful and spirited look at the United States biggest catastrophe. If you watch the news often, you might find that the film doesn't offer much new information but it doesn't matter - it offers empathy and humanity. It shares the horror of being black and poor in America as well as the horror of Katrina itself. It is a humbling documentary and one well worth seeing.

Wednesday

Lady in the Lake


Robert Montgomery's 1947 film noir 'Lady in the Lake' is an interesting film that uses the technique of POV (point of view) to tell the story. Montgomery directed this film as well as starred in the leading role of Philip Marlowe. Based on the Raymond Chandler novel, Marlowe is hired to find a publishers missing wife.

The film is an interesting but ultimately failed experiment in film technique. Orson Welles proposed to do an adaptation of Joseph Conrad's 'Heart of Darkness' when he was first hired to make a film for RKO. Welles had planned to do the film in the point of view of Marlow (odd that it's the same name) but for a variety of reasons Welles abandoned 'Heart of Darkness' for 'Citizen Kane'. It was a smart move for Welles as the technique limits the filmmaker. For this reason 'Lady in the Lake' lumbers along, chained to the point of view of Marlowe and never giving the audience the opportunity to see how Marlowe reacts or feels. For Montgomery the point of view allowed the audience to participate in the film as if they were Marlowe. This fails as we are not Marlowe and although we are carried along by the dialogue and plot we never really participate in the film. Film is a window into the characters lives and just because we share their visual point of view, it doesn't mean that we share in the characters thoughts or feelings.

I have seen this technique used well in the BBC comedy 'Peep Show'. What separates 'Peep Show' from 'Lady in the Lake' is that 'Peep Show' shifts the POV shots between the characters. This allows you to see a character react visually to the events of the story. It gives you the window into their thoughts and feelings. 'Peep Show' takes it a step further by giving the characters internal monologues where we hear their private thoughts.

'Lady in the Lake' was interesting to watch as it highlights the strengths of traditional and classic film technique. Alfred Hitchcock's Rope was a similar exercise in making a film that seemingly employed no cuts. 'Rope' was made to preserve total continuity and look like it was made in a single take. Hitchock reflected on this experiment with Francois Truffaut:

"When I look back, I realize that it was quite nonsensical because I was breaking with my own theories on the importance of cutting and montage for the visual narration of a story...as an experiment Rope may be forgiven, but it was definitely a mistake when I insisted on applying the same techniques to Under Capricorn."

Montgomery's 'Lady in the Lake' can also be forgiven as an experiment in technique. It is no wonder that we don't use the technique as 'Lady in the Lake' highlighted the flaws in using extensive POV for storytelling. 'Rope' was a more successful experiment and remains an entertaining film today. This is probably due to Hitchock's acknowledgement that although there were no cuts in the film, he staged the film in a way that it was 'precut'. Although the film had no physical cuts, he blocked it in such a way that he was still able to follow simple film grammar of establishing shots, medium shots and close ups. He just used a dynamic and moving camera as opposed to cutting.