Linda Hunt meets Leslie Chow. Awesome.
Thursday 30 June 2011
Monday 27 June 2011
It's been a while since I've gone back and revisited the whole Star Wars franchise all at once, and with a real critical eye besides a simple thumbs up or down. They are movies that even die hard fans are divided over, though generally consensus' have been formed as to which ones are truly great films and which are slumming in crucial and essential elements. I tend to agree with them for the most part, with one or two exceptions, but overall they provide fun, exhilarating entertainment that easily be enjoyed over and over again. So to begin the journey, I will start reviewing from the very beginning of the saga and work my way through a galaxy far, far away and at last rank them from best to worst.
* I will still be continuing with everything else, including my much delayed Halloween project!
Saturday 11 June 2011
Baby Doll (1956)_____________________
"Strange, sad, and sexy, but only occasionally thoughtful in its organic absurdity....Baker's performance, however, is a quiet triumph."
____________________
--
--
The combination of playwright Tennessee Williams and director Elia Kazan gave 1950's Hollywood something that had rarely been felt or experienced by any kind of public, movie-going or not. A public that had been accustomed to straight-laced conformity and tight moral codes of conduct, one that had been repressed from seeing the world they live in on screen and all of its unpolished ugliness. Baby Doll isn't the first of its kind, for sure, but it carries on a carefully constructed kind of world where eccentricity melds with the hurting humanity of those which make it up. Williams' trademark story elements are all set in place, but where this story takes its twist is rooted in its essential weirdness; though now opened up beyond the confinements of a stage (the film was written directly for the screen) and into a wider cinematic realm of bizzare-ness.
When it's summertime, and hot and sweaty in Tennesse Williams' glorious paradise, you know you're in for a treat, and here we find a child-woman stuck with an old repressed grump of a husband while he rants and raves about it. Simple enough? He wants her, she doesn't want him -- in fact, she's not sure what she wants. And I believe it is this compelling mystery that, for the most part, anchors Baby Doll from the get-go, and holds a stark point of interest throughout. Though there's still this strange sense that floats along with the sexy, erotic air which Williams and his director so charismatically infuse into the film, like a kind of overblown absurdity including adult sized cribs, rocking horses, a game of hide and seek, direct innuendos, and the vivid eccentricities of dialouge and characterization.
On first viewing, the movie seemed too shallow for its own good, all of this "show" and style (which many have shared the same feeling), but seeing it again, I've noticed that it's those trademarks of vibrant huamnity I've mentioned before that ground the absurdity into something plausible and organic. Rarely have I seen such complexities and narrative threads woven directly into a single character, as I have with Baby Doll Meighan. She is the story arc -- it is her growth that turns the narrative, and Carroll Baker does one helluva job handling this complex character with as much simplicity as she does. She tracks Baby Doll's change with a sense of ease, spontaneity, and discovery of intellect, sexual maturity, and integrity. It's one of the most underrated performances given by actress of the time or any time, and it's what makes the character resonate with vast emotional depth.
However, I'm not fully convinced that the movie itself pulls the same kind of emotional weight/narrative hooks in its plot development or surrounding characters. Maybe it's just hitting a blind spot for me, but what Kazan gets right is unbalanced occasionally with everything else because his imagination and ideas are not as fully rounded or satisfying as he maybe thought they were. His use of clarity in his expansivness of visual space is refreshing in context of the world outside, but inside its what's going on inside that feels eventually limited and repressed. For example the one-note roles of Archie Lee, Vacarro, and Aunt Rose only act as mere devices, than humane contributions to the narrative (as Baker's Baby Doll is). It's a big reason why A Streetcar Named Desire is such a gem, with imaginative and completley human characters that are not confined by any poorly shaped notions of writing or direction.
It's sad to see that while, Elia Kazan respects and nurtures the character of Baby Doll and to have her transcend, he leaves the rest of the project eventually flat and muddled with confusion, but the mystery of what Baby Doll desires still hangs, and thanks to Carroll Baker, it feels so much more rich and emotionally satisfying to leave it that way.
Baby Doll: B- / Carroll Baker: A
Friday 10 June 2011
These are the following film reviews/analsysis' that I have completed or will complete and will be updated regularly. Will be organized when more start coming in. Click on link for full/partial review.
* Baby Doll (1956)
* Psycho (1998)
* The Fighter (2010)
* American Graffiti (1973) -- a newly endorsed, polished review is upcoming!
* Baby Doll (1956)
* Psycho (1998)
* The Fighter (2010)
* American Graffiti (1973) -- a newly endorsed, polished review is upcoming!
Thursday 9 June 2011
This new scene takes place a few months after the murder of Judith with Loomis aginst the staff of Smith's Grove, as he begs them to put Michael under maximum secrity. I think this scene helps to flesh out Loomis' personal/emotional involvement in finding and destroying Michael and the twisted psychological connection he has with him.
But the scene also conveys the "dedication" Loomis has to his patient and how he will keep him locked away as tight as possible. It's interesting to see Loomis in a different kind of wardrobe,too -- the jacket and turtleneck and hat -- but they don't use makeup or any wig too make him look any younger even though he is from when we next see him. Maybe to show that he hasn't changed much, as Michael hasn't.
These doctors piss me off -- LISTEN TO THE MAN! Dr. Sam Loomis blooms as tragic a character as any heroine of the series, because rarely does anyone want to actually listen to his "madness" (aka truth) and hell breaks loose because of it.
After he leaves the conferece room, Loomis goes to Michael's cell and finds him siting and waiting. The illusion to "staring at a wall, looking past the wall" and his inhumane patience comes into visual play here and its eerie.
"You fooled them haven't you, Michael? But not me."
This scene also sets up two things; a following additional scene after he makes his escape, and the fact that Loomis knows the game long before Michael really begins to play it. Which makes there pairing as hero/villian more sturdy and interesting.
And the kid knows it too. He only needs to wait now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
