Thursday, 11 February 2016

Woody Guthrie, Point Break and my favourite film - Reviews #225

A handful of new reviews.



*MINOR SPOILERS*
Remember the Night (Mitchell Leisen, 1940)
- I watched this on the big screen for the first time last night. It’s still the greatest movie I’ve seen: a witty, knockabout Preston Sturges comedy (his last script before becoming a director) that slips gently into an extraordinarily powerful articulation of romantic love: romantic love as both the saviour of and ultimate threat to family, career and existence itself.

Fred MacMurray is an assistant D.A. brought in to win a case against shoplifter Barbara Stanwyck. After forcing her case to be postponed till after the festive season (leaving her in the clink over Christmas), he has an attack of conscience and gets her bailed out, and soon they’re travelling to their home state of Indiana together, as their frosty relationship begins to thaw.

Combining Sturges’ comic smarts and sly sentimentalism with the lushness of director Mitchell Leisen’s visual vision, it’s a heady concoction in which the imagery – a Gothic, lamplit house; shooting through streamers at a New Year barn-dance; silhouettes against Niagara Falls – perfectly complements the action, in which each of the supporting players (Beulah Bondi, Elizabeth Patterson, Sterling Holloway) has one truly great scene with which to comprehensively nail their character, and in which Stanwyck exhibits the most refined strain of that incandescent, beguiling sensitivity that for a short time made her the most important actor on the American screen.

Incredibly, MacMurray matches her every step of the way, the pair generating an intense chemistry of which most screen couples can barely dream – no wonder they were re-teamed for Double Indemnity, many film fans’ contender for the title of Best Noir Ever Made (I’m more of an Out of the Past man, myself).

Every time I watch it, I find something new to make me laugh or cry. Here it was MacMurray’s petulant cry of “Those jurors are gabbing again” (laugh), as he takes an unusual approach to the climactic court case. And then there are all the elements that reward time and again: former lawyer Willard Robertson as a ridiculously OTT defense attorney; Stanwyck and MacMurray’s meeting in the apartment, her very genuine sardonism put to great use; the running gag about her defence of ‘hypnosis’; her heartstopping “You bet”, when he tells her he’s a lucky man to have the family he does, huh; the musical interlude in the parlour; Patterson’s line about her engagement; the moment when it dawns on you that Sturges is preaching on the malleability of human behaviour, one of my pet themes; and the night-time chat between Bondi and Stanwyck – a raw, captivating, unusually mature and effortlessly judged piece of cinema. And then there is the denouement, a Niagara Falls/courtroom one-two that sees Sturges take every duplicitous restriction of the Hays Code and work it in his favour, as only he could.

There’s a black valet who’s a bit thick, a running joke about Sterling Holloway yodelling and an oft-maligned hair bow for Stanwyck, and you’re welcome to sneer, smirk or raise alarm at them all you want, but - for me - everything that happened in cinema up to Remember the Night was just a rehearsal, and nothing that’s happened since has been half as good. (4)

See also: I wrote about my other nine favourite films here.

***



Bound for Glory (Hal Ashby, 1976) - A brilliant – and for the most part brilliantly unconventional – biopic of the legendary protest singer Woody Guthrie, which until its final 30 provides no stock storytelling, no obvious Hollywood moments and no real antagonists aside from the system itself, just the man with his great flaws and virtues, and a succession of episodes within a spellbinding evocation of Depression-era America, in all its grim beauty and despair.

The cinematography by the late, ludicrously great Haskell Wexler is as stunning as any you will ever see – the plains and valleys Guthrie wrote about, the Dust Bowl too – the editing by Ashby (one of the finest in cinema) is predictably astute and inspired, and, asked to carry the piece, Carradine is utterly authentic as Woody, underplaying at almost every turn. Supporting actors turn up for a while, then disappear, as characters will in the life of an itinerant, itchy-footed drifter, and though Randy Quaid’s role is a bit too obvious, ushering in a more schematic denouement than might be welcome, the ensemble does its job well, adding to the film’s hefty cumulative impact.

Slow, meditative and shot through with anger and a painterly poeticism, it’s something like The Grapes of Wrath, filtered through Altman’s Thieves Like Us, and if it doesn’t necessarily bother with the facts, it does get at an important truth about Woody and his work: that he was a man shaped by his times, and by the overtness and extremity of human suffering there, but that his legacy was as someone who spoke truth to power, whose personal failings paled alongside the immensity of his message, and who used the tools he had to make the world a fairer place. (4)

***



Point Break (Kathryn Bigelow, 1991) - This high-octane, New Age actioner is easy to mock but even easier to enjoy, with FBI agent Keanu Reeves going undercover in a group of bank-robbing surfers as he tries to get his man (Patrick Swayze). Arguably in more ways than one – despite an unconvincing subplot featuring an androgynous Lori Petty, it’s quite possibly the gayest film I’ve ever seen, with the Reeves-Swayze interplay making the beach montage in Rocky III look like Battleship Potemkin.

Yes, there’s more cheese than you can shake a cracker at and Reeves’ line-readings are abysmal, but it’s a distinctive, original movie with dialogue that’s just stylised enough not to be embarrassing, an atmosphere of heightened, sunlit Zen homoeroticism, and a succession of adrenalised action scenes from Bigelow that are nothing short of astounding. Our hero’s pursuit of a bank robber dressed as Ronald Reagan at the midway point, shot largely as PoV, is one of the most frenetic, immediate and masterfully-filmed chase sequences I have ever seen. (3)

***


There's quite a bit of this sort of thing.

Burn After Reading (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2008) - A disposable Coens film about adulterous adults and how the missing memoir of CIA analyst John Malkovich (catchphrase: “What the fuck?!”) impacts on their lives, leading to extortion, blackmail and murder. Beginning as a cartoonish black comedy, it balances its stories well and generates some tense moments as it segues into a thriller, but it’s rarely funny and ultimately means nothing – a problem it seeks to alleviate through overt acknowledgement, with little success. It’s ultimately just a spiteful assault on most of its characters (see also: A Serious Man, one of the more troubling films of recent years), though the scene in which Clooney rings his wife and then confronts the mystery man who’s tailing him is – for all its nastiness – an interesting, intelligent and telling vignette.

***

Thanks for reading.

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

Truffaut, Inside Llewyn Davis and the Singing Sweethearts' swansong - Reviews #224

INTRO



Greetings from my desk, as I upload this blog before going to the staff quiz night. Sometimes it's good to turn off the TV and be sociable. Apparently. Yes, hello.

Last night I saw Eileen Atkins doing her Ellen Terry show, which was wonderful, despite my tummy ache.

As well as mining my brain for a piece on the history of Westerns, I'm currently exploring the lesser-known movies of Francois Truffaut, one of my favourite filmmakers. I have seven remaining. The first three were... a little underwhelming.

FILMS

Truffaut special:




Anne and Muriel (1971) - Truffaut’s second adaptation of a Henri-Pierre Roché novel is even worse than the mystifyingly lauded Jules et Jim, with the director essentially just reading out the book to provide exposition and motivation, as his cast acts out a succession of short scenes. In the lead, his frequent alter-ego, Jean-Pierre Léaud, is limp and bland as the young Frenchman espousing free love whilst romancing two English girls, the spirited, progressive Anne (Kika Markham) and her sister: taciturn, haunted, ginger Muriel (Stacey Tendeter).

The title characters – and the actresses playing them – are sufficiently distinctive to stick with you after the credits roll, and Néstor Almendros’s cinematography is absolutely gorgeous, but this is no way to adapt a novel, and an object, abject lesson in why filmmakers shouldn’t direct scenes in their second language: Mark Peterson’s line readings as Mr Flint are absolutely atrocious. There’s a reason why he only ever made one other film, and it was called Terror in the Swamp. Philippe Léotard, who was such a disaster in Truffaut's next film (see below), is unexpectedly good here, in a barely written role.

All in all, it just seems an odd project for Truffaut to choose and one upon which he never quite gets a handle. I would advise that you watch Polanski’s not dissimilar Tess, but unfortunately he’s a convicted paedophile who refuses to serve his sentence, so I won’t. (2)



A Gorgeous Girl Like Me (1972) - A sociologist (Andre Dussollier) interviews a criminal (Bernadette Lafont) about her past conquests and falls under the same spell as the other men, in this little-known Truffaut movie, which is brilliantly filmed but sadly wastes its promising premise with a narrative - and performances - that unfortunately recall the Confessions series, that '70s sex-comedy nadir of British cinema.

The caricatured, charmless performances and flashes of flesh are about as arousing as TB and for all the gushing reviews eulogising the film's "jet black comedy", it's simply a one-joke affair, the one joke being that Dussollier sees Lafont as a victim, rather than a calculating nymphomaniac.

But what sounds on paper like the set-up for a dazzling psychodrama or subversive satire doesn't even have the precision of character to work on its own terms. Despite that, the tracking shots, elegant zooms and explicit nods to past works do at least remind you - however fleetingly - of the movies which assured Truffaut's reputation as one of the greatest filmmakers who ever lived, while the "Mr Farrell" sequence and the offbeat final shot call to mind my own very personal relationship with his work. (1.5)



Finally, Sunday! (1983) - Truffaut’s swansong is a gentle (though not particularly funny) comedy-murder mystery, with Jean-Louis Trintignant playing a real estate broker suspected of murder, and Fanny Ardant as the stoic, lovelorn secretary seeking to clear his name (shades of Mark Stevens and Lucille Ball in The Dark Corner).

The movie rarely evokes the Old Hollywood tone for which it strives, but Ardant is charming and truly touching, Nelson Almendros’s monochrome cinematography shimmers and beguiles, and the movie’s rather shapeless, unsatisfying narrative does end up somewhere both philosophically interesting and reasonably tense.

The whimsical final image, shot through with Truffaut's familiar love of children, is just about the perfect sign-off for this giant of cinema, unwitting though it was. (2.5)

***



Inside Llewyn Davis (Joel Coen, 2013) - I have an uneasy relationship with the Coen Bros. I watch most of their films and like many of them, but I also find them frustrating and difficult to love, their movies aloof, smugly self-involved and with a fatal lack of heart, along with a fondness for perverse, self-satisfied twists that take you on the road less travelled to nowhere in particular.

This, though, is my favourite so far.

It took me a while to get around to it (for those reasons I just mentioned), but the lure of the leads and the attraction of the Village milieu that has tantalised me since I was a kid finally got me there. Sometimes its self-conscious oddness (hello John Goodman) and wilful, spiteful unsentimentality (hello a man shitting himself to spoil a potentially moving sequence about dementia) grates, but for the most part this sad, whimsical and purposefully baggy story of missed opportunities and shambling urban alienation is an extraordinarily special piece of work, and one which avoids cliché not because it thinks it’s clever to do so, but because this is how things would be, how the characters would behave.

So Oscar Isaac’s titular folk-singer – shuffling around Greenwich Village in the desperate calm before the coming folk boom – doesn’t visit his young son (because he can’t face it); can’t channel his anger into his music when faced with genuine social ills (whereas Dylan wrote When the Ship Comes In after a receptionist was rude to him at a hotel); and fails his audition for a kingmaker agent through no real fault of his own, certainly no disaster. It simply happens – the try-out doesn’t quite work, perhaps a matter of taste. Nor, indeed, does Llewyn’s dubious novelty record explode in some echo of O Brother Where Art Thou? It doesn’t even come out during the film.

Isaac and Carey Mulligan (as his sometime girlfriend) are both utterly superb – the former better than I have ever seen him – and the music, the cinematography, the explosions of regret and rage are note-perfect. I found the film as a whole unusually and arrestingly affecting. And the cats are wonderful too. Perhaps my relationship with the Coens could yet blossom - this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship. (3.5)

***



I Married an Angel (W. S. Van Dyke, 1942) - On the one hand, it’s nice that this Nelson Eddy and Jeanette MacDonald musical tries something new, but, on the other, it’s an almost complete disaster. The pair made their name as the ‘Singing Sweethearts’ with formulaic but wonderfully, peerlessly escapist period movies like Naughty Marietta, Rose Marie and Maytime, in which their characters fell in love and sang together, while one, the other or both were pursued by villainous forces (including, memorably, Maytime’s John Barrymore). Only one of the six movies they made with that template – a bastardised version of Noel Coward’s Bitter Sweet – failed to work the requisite magic.

This, their last film – and the second to deviate from the tried-and-tested formula, following 1938’s Sweethearts – goes off the deep end with a flamboyantly original storyline that is sadly also completely incoherent, and consists principally of one long, bafflingly misguided dream sequence. Eddy plays a carousing banker oblivious to the unrequited love – and indeed the existence – of his patient, doting secretary (MacDonald). After getting hammered at his fancy dress party, to which she’s come badly dressed as an angel, he falls asleep and dreams of a genuine celestial being (again MacDonald) who comes down to Earth to marry him, only for her innocence to prove their undoing. Sort of. It’s not very well conceived.

Neither performer is at their best here, with Eddy in particular merely going through the motions, devoid of his usual energy and vigour, while the ambitious narrative flits from one half-baked scenario to another, arbitrarily crowbarring in the disparate numbers. Despite said that, there are some minor pleasures: a handful of excellent Rodgers & Hart songs, the imaginative rendering of both the angel’s arrival and the I’ll Tell the Man in the Street number, and MacDonald vamping it up as a fallen angel: in her somewhat naff, slightly embarrassing and dated way, I’ve always found MacDonald weirdly sexy (especially in black and white), so that sequence was particularly… involving.

Sadly none of those compensations come close to rescuing this unworthy swansong for one of cinema’s most charming couples, a film so poorly devised that even Edward Everett Horton isn't good in it. (1.5)

***

Thanks for reading.

Thursday, 4 February 2016

Lillian Gish, Henry V, and Woody Allen in 2015 - Reviews #223

A few reviews. Next time: a journey through the back catalogue of Francois Truffaut.

FILMS



*MINOR SPOILERS*
Irrational Man (Woody Allen, 2015)
- In 1989, Woody Allen created one of his greatest movies, Crimes and Misdemeanours: a bleak, gently blistering drama in which Martin Landau kills his mistress then tries to deal with the guilt of it all. Since then, Allen has made three serious crime movies and, to a greater or lesser degree, they are all terrible. This latest one is perhaps the least terrible of the three (the others are the tone-deaf Match Point and the brain dead Cassandra’s Dream), but it still falls down an elevator shaft after 50 minutes.

Joaquin Phoenix is a brooding cliché of a philosophy professor – dark, sexy, dangerous – who attracts the attention of both an unhappily married lecturer (Parker Posey) and a guileless student (Emma Stone) while toying with the idea of murder. At first you can forgive the film its flaws: lazy exposition, laughable lines and erratic performances (often helpless in the face of the dialogue), because the story is surprisingly involving and watchable, but after a while even that starts to go wrong, and there’s nothing left to cling to.

The movie’s conformity is a problem for me: it purports to wrestle with serious philosophical quandaries (albeit like a low-rent Rope), then goes for the easiest possible way out. And it conforms in its characterisation too. Phoenix’s professor disastrously calls to mind Half Nelson, a film against which almost everything looks unoriginal and somewhat pathetic. In that movie, Gosling’s crack-addicted teacher tries to impress his sister-in-law with his magnetic brand of nihilism and she literally laughs in his face. Here, no-one laughs in Phoenix’s face, they just want to boff him.

In the one interesting choice Allen makes, he has Joaquin’s penis misfiring early on, but when he gets the chance to build on this later, he falls short of pushing the character as far as it will go – they both do – and the results are just unbelievably frustrating. Watch the end of Peter Medak’s The Ruling Class for an example of how you kick your film into another gear, with a seductive, beguiling paragon of evil.

As I have said at least once before, I prefer the ever-underrated In My Father’s Den to the widely-praised You Can Count on Me because the muscular, avenging angel of an anti-hero gets kicked down some stairs and called a prick when he tries to do the right thing, rather than winning out in some pyrrhic but vital way. I prefer Half Nelson to Irrational Man for about 800 reasons, but it starts with Phoenix’s drab if extremely charismatic caricature, and the hypnotic effect his character has on everyone, with his hilariously stupid malt-swigging.

He is also the only actor I’ve ever scene who has scenes stolen from him by his own tummy, Phoenix’s funny little pot belly arriving in the room shortly before him, with a kind of scene-stealing grace that Peter Lorre might have admired. Stone, meanwhile, does her best, and has a handful of truly, unexpectedly impressive moments (considering she’s in a film that simply doesn’t work), but more often than not she is – well – powerless to act, her line readings sounding like something from a 1930s B-movie actress. Or a porn star.

Another problem with the film (and there are many) is Allen’s superficial understanding of philosophy, which both undermines the serious message he is attempting to impart and, more prosaically, means that his brilliant professor is often just spouting rubbish, or paraphrased platitudes. Allen has read the chapter headings in his textbook, it seems, but gone no further epitomised by the frankly embarrassing scene in which Phoenix says the class will consider “Sartre’s classic line, ‘Hell is other people’”, which is as much Sartre as we get. Woody also has no idea how to build a crime narrative, as evidenced by the sequence in which Stone explains that everyone a murder victim knew “couldn’t have done it” – an equivocal shorthand that is frankly insultingly stupid.

I suppose he is 80 now.

At this stage in his career, Allen is desperately in need of a script editor who can tell him: a) You don’t know how teenage girls speak; b) You can’t write working class characters in a contemporary setting; c) You’ve forgotten how to subtly interweave exposition; d) Your plotting is built on contrivance and coincidence, not anything that resembles real life.

In the excellent 2012 documentary detailing his life and work, Allen fascinatingly reveals how he decides which film to do next, emptying a drawer onto his bed and then searching through scraps of paper on which are written one-line summaries of possible projects. He used to dress and augment these frameworks, until the incidental joys were as great as the story they adorned. Now – with the exception of Midnight in Paris and perhaps Blue Jasmine – that isn’t really true: from photography to performance to dialogue to sound, it all feels perfunctory: we simply travel from A to B, his hand revealed well in advance, the minor pleasures few and far between, if they are there at all.

As far as bad dialogue goes; well, it simply doesn’t get any worse than this:
Phoenix: “I’m just… too far gone.”
Stone: “I’m going to be late for my piano lesson.”

And then there are the Allenisms that pepper his work: stock phrases that emerge from the mouth of so many of his characters, no matter how different they are supposed to be. Will he ever again make a film in which someone doesn't say, "This is cra-zy."

The film isn’t funny, either. Not in the way that the first hour of Magic in the Moonlight isn’t funny: this one isn’t even supposed to be. In Crimes and Misdemeanours, among his greatest masterstrokes was to run a hysterically funny narrative in parallel to the main affair, with Allen’s self-righteous documentary maker outfoxed by his insufferable rival (Alan Alda), his character receiving a devastating final sting that threw him and Landau together, and cast the central story into a different light. Here, everything is in the same tone – visual, verbal and philosophical – with no wit or nuance to leaven the po-faced, self-serious quasi-moralising.

These problems are epitomised by a potentially interesting scene near the close, which somehow manages to be taut and tense but also completely embarrassing, with apparently improvised dialogue that has to be heard to be believed, and an action pay-off that’s like a Byker Grove outtake. It’s a fitting climax to an unredeeming, tacky and obvious third act that just about explains itself but is as uninteresting as Allen has ever been. Except for Cassandra’s Dream<, which is the caveat that keeps on giving, and the worst film that Allen will ever make.

In Allen’s hands, it seems that fatalism – predicated on chance – has none of the danger, cynical humour or dark poetry of noir, it’s merely predictable coincidence, playing out in bright colours and dull words. (2)

***



The Scarlet Letter (Victor Sjöström, 1926) - A year before their towering masterwork, The Wind, director Victor Sjöström, writer Frances Marion, and stars Lillian Gish and Lars Hanson made another film – The Scarlet Letter – a flavourful, somewhat fanciful adaptation of the Nathaniel Hawthorne novel. Miss Gish is ideally cast (though perhaps wearing a bit too much make-up, historical accuracy fans) as Hester Prynne, whose illegitimate child outrages Puritan, 18th century New England, visiting tragedy upon her restrictive community. Hanson is her troubled lover, the outwardly respectable Rev Arthur Dimmesdale.

MGM’s films from this period never quite seem to match – say – Fox’s in terms of their scale or authentic set design, and the plotting sometimes comes off as forced or convenient, but Sjostrom's imaginative staging leads to a succession of visually striking passages (he was a great director of shadows and of feet) and the acting grabs your attention and holds it, with Gish’s inventive, intuitive gesturing creating a Hester who’s flirtatious, resolute and also feels intensely, every thought transmitted by the actress’s peerless evocation of the inner life.

Her innocent seduction of Hanson is the sort of scene she so rarely got to play - not that you'd know it from her effortless, uncompromised sensuality - while the sequence in which she reveals the scarlet letter, if plumb in the centre of her comfort zone, is a masterpiece of subtle expression and heart-wracking poignancy. (3.5)

A thousand thanks to Owen for getting hold of this one for me. I’ve been after it for years.

***



Henry V (Laurence Olivier, 1944) - Olivier’s near-mythic adaptation of Henry V is a film of dazzling, bravura moments, but not altogether a great film. Beginning with a brilliant gimmick – a framing device that presents the action before an audience at The Globe in 1600 – it then abandons the conceit at exactly the right time, with a staggering fade that takes us from London to the sky above the ocean, where a swelling British fleet is moving stealthily, hazily towards France. Once they get there, though, we face a world that lurches weirdly from fantastical castles to earthily realistic battlefields, as the narrative mixes Henry’s rousing speeches and introspective ruminations with some of the broadest, most unbearable comedy imaginable (at one point a Welshman wears a leek on his head while ending every sentence with the words, “Look you”), culminating in a wooing scene that seems to go on for ever.

Despite those shortcomings, there are scenes as rich in beauty and emotion as just about anything British cinema produced in the ‘40s, thanks in no small part to the sumptuous Technicolor photography and Olivier’s astounding performance, which – despite the occasional recourse to simply yelling – is full of tenderness, steel and imperious regality, while exhibiting his unique gift for Shakespearean delivery: his understanding so rich, his interpretation so clear, that the dialogue could just as well be in modern slang, were it not for its power, its consequence and its ability to stir anyone with a pulse, an English birth certificate and, ideally, a sword. He also has one hell of a way with a battle sequence: the long take of advancing French cavalry moving from a trot to a murderous gallop is just an astonishingly exciting piece of action cinema.

Olivier adapted two further Shakespeare plays as director and star – Hamlet and Richard III – and while both are better than this celebrated first effort, Henry V still has moments that simply take the breath away. (3)

***



All Through the Night (Vincent Sherman, 1941) - This is the other film in which insular isolationist Humphrey Bogart has a change of heart to battle despicable Nazi Conrad Veidt. But unlike in Casablanca, he’s a gangster who gets in over his head while searching for the killers of his favourite cheesecake supplier.
This weirdly pitched yarn is a curious mixture of heavy-handed propaganda, mannered dialogue and variable suspense: a melange of Hitchcock, Damon Runyon and what we now recognise as ‘WWII Warners’, as the studio warms to the cinematic possibilities of the conflict. It starts oddly and ends badly, but what’s in between is often good fun, with a frankly astonishing cast doing what it can with a peculiar script that promises much but delivers relatively little.

Though he’s given rather too many visual gags for a performer whose talents lay elsewhere, Frank McHugh’s line deliveries are – of course – an utter joy, while Peter Lorre is perfect as the mirthfully malevolent gunman, Pepi, the diminutive, sleepy-eyed legend having turned this type of playful, cigarette-led scene-stealing into nothing short of an artform. (2.5)

***

BOOKS



The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie by Muriel Spark (1965) – This story of a Scottish schoolteacher engaging her charges in twisted adult games is slim, spare and economical, warped, waspish and filled with malevolent, brilliant throwaway jokes, its nastiness masking a poignancy and perception that linger, along with the bitter taste of betrayal. When Spark’s Sandy talks about the virtue of economy, as a way to live and to create art, she may as well be commenting on the book in which she finds herself. (4)



Orson Welles: One Man Band by Simon Callow (2015) – The third volume of Callow’s biography is another stunning achievement: fast-paced, fascinating and immensely readable, the author expertly juggling disparate sources to not only document and explains Welles’s triumphs and disasters, but also to discern the truth behind his endless self-mythologising, coming as close as anyone has to explaining who Welles was, and why he was like that.

Dealing with Welles's life between his estrangement from Hollywood in 1947 and the release of his intensely personal Chimes at Midnight in 1964, it’s often sad, occasionally punch-the-air inspiring and - for the most part - wonderfully written, with Callow a fond but wise and moral adjudicator with a rare insight into the art of acting. And for that, we can forgive him some excessive use of Latin, an occasional recycling of his pet theories and the suggestion that classic ensemble dramas include “Casablanca and Four Weddings and a Funeral".

Sometimes I did wish we could linger longer on the majesties of those things that work - Othello, Touch of Evil, et al - before moving onto the next backstage debacle, but by any standards it's an exceptional work, and for fans it's pretty much essential.

I'm not sure I will ever get over not seeing Welles's stage play of Moby Dick. (3.5)

***

Thanks for reading.

Tuesday, 19 January 2016

Totoro, Les 400 Coups and in the desert with Donald Cammell - Reviews #222

I've had the chance to watch quite a few movies and some TV. I've written you some reviews. Back to the books now: there'll be some of those in the next round-up. Thanks, as ever, for reading.

FILMS



Les quatre cents coups (Francois Truffaut, 1959) - When I was 14, I knackered my knees by doing too much road running (what has this got to do with Truffaut? Don't worry, I'm coming to that), meaning I could no longer spend all my time playing sport. Looking for a new hobby, and energised by the re-release of Star Wars the previous year, I was knocked to the floor by two old movies that I caught in quick succession: On the Waterfront, dominated by Marlon Brando's totemic performance as conflicted informant Terry Malloy, and then Les quatre cents coups, which we watched in a French lesson. I quickly became completely obsessed with the latter, getting the VHS for Christmas in 1999, and spending Millennium Eve watching it, whilst eating some cheese. Back then, it was the film's unease, its portrait of the loss of innocence, its non-conformist central character that bewitched me. Seen as a 31-year-old - again on New Year's Eve (I know how to party) - its 14-year-old protagonist is at times more obviously comic, which only makes the film's sense of heartbreak more acute.

Jean-Pierre Leaud is Antoine Doinel, director Francois Truffaut's 14-year-old alter-ego, caught between a disinterested mother and a weak father, bored by school, too unlucky or preoccupied to make anything of himself, and descending into a life of petty crime. This irresistible but intensely moving portrait of his life utilises Nouvelle Vague tics like jump-cuts and improvisation, but only to subtly enhance the narrative not, as Truffaut's contemporary Jean-Luc Godard would over the next few years, to replace it. Shooting vividly on Parisian locations, Truffaut intersperses Doinel's downward spiral with passages of charming, poetic whimsy: Antoine in a fairground spinning wheel, a Punch-and-Judy show where his growing cynicism is contrasted with the simple pleasure of younger children, and a school P. E. lesson in which the pupils peel away to leave the teacher jogging through town accompanied only by two students.

It's a film that's almost casually iconic: its unforgettable imagery - Antoine peering through the bars of a police van, rolling his polo neck over his mouth, or caught in that astonishing final freeze-frame - all grown from this completely credible character, Leaud (but for a few phony chuckles) inhabiting his role absolutely. Every decision Truffaut makes, like the journey from the active to the passive that Antoine makes upon crashing the adult world, is just perfect, as he punctuates the story with humour (I particularly like the fate of the Michelin Guide, and Doinel's friend Remy talking back to their teacher), further prevents it from passing into Bressonian territory with moments of catharsis, and deals in the kind of confusion, introspection and sense of injustice that dominates the world of the 14-year-old.

Godard seemed to love politics, post-modern gimmickry and himself; Truffaut loved cinema and children, and sentimentalised both without naivety; it's little wonder I prefer the latter. Les quatre cents coups is his first, best and purest: a masterpiece on any terms, and my gateway film to the joys of world cinema, and indeed to cinema as a whole. (4)

***


One of our villains, who is basically a walking (though currently seated) Michael Rooker character.

Harlan County, U.S.A. (Barbara Kopple, 1977) - Documentary maker Barbara Kopple lived with coal miners’ families for a year in order to make this startling, far-reaching film, which uses a desperate localised strike – called by workers seeking union recognition – to examine the way America treats its poor. Alongside vivid footage of a conflict spiralling out of control, she examines corruption and compromise within the union, the duplicity and heartlessness of the coal companies, and the impossible odds stacked against the workers, in the shape of a police force, legislature and judiciary all conspiring to keep them under foot.

Impassioned, committed but also willing to acknowledge the complexities of the situation and the personal shortcomings of some campaigners, it’s ultimately a valuable, inspiring and upsetting film, a hymn to the virtues of authentic unionisation, when America still had such a thing. For an outside observer, it also highlights just how damaging US firearms laws are in a situation like this, making the escalation from placid to dangerous all the steeper – and infinitely more destructive. And Kooper soundtracks the whole thing with a succession of beguiling, soot-choked renditions of bluegrass songs about mining, some done professionally, others sung with an overpowering intensity by minor players in the film. (4)

***



My Neighbor Totoro (Hayao Miyazaki, 1988) - A wonderful, uncategorisable Miyazaki film about young sisters Satsuki and Mei, who move to the country while their mother is in hospital, and deal with growing pains, fear and disappointment - while finding solace in pastoral beauty, one another's friendship and a smiling, furry, 20ft grey-blue troll called Totoro.

The opening is perhaps a little shrill (at least in the Japanese-language version I saw), but it's a sumptuously-animated, emotionally overpowering movie full of charm, magic and humanity, without the superficial need for an antagonist, and with no formula in sight. I'll be seeing it again, and more than once.

Totoro still clutching the umbrella while he leaps over the growing plants. <3 (3.5)

***



*A FEW VERY MINOR SPOILERS*
CINEMA: Brooklyn (John Crowley, 2015)
- This is a really sweet, affecting and mature film that sneaks up on you, with a central performance, a subtly subversive sensibility and a latent, growing power that catch you off guard, compensating for a look and storytelling technique that often stops you forgetting that you’re watching a movie, not observing real life.

Saoirse Ronan is absolutely exceptional as Eilis, who leaves her Irish hometown for a job and a new life in New York, where she begins a romance with Italian-American Tony (Emory Cohen in a sort of Brando-lite performance), an experience that changes her from a callow, homesick stray to a composed, confident young woman, nattily attired in a succession of pastel-shaded dresses. Then tragedy intervenes, trapping her in a conflict between two irreconcilable worlds.

Aside from two sumptuous shots – snow falling on a slow-motion Ronan, dust motes flailing in a sunbeam – the film has the same artificial look as many contemporary British and Irish movies (a problem shared with the largely magnificent Philomena), and some of its comic set pieces and supporting characters are too broad and inauthentic to truly engage. Yet there’s something in the script that is special, richly rewarding, that lifts it out of the ordinary: a realistic romanticism, a desire to engage with the scope of human emotion, and an agreeable allergy to fashioning superficial antagonists. When the film does make one concession on that ground, tossing a blackmailing villainess into the mix, the pay-off is so unexpected, arresting and unusual – yet so rooted in the real – it makes you want to whoop with joy.

The great virtue, though, is Ronan, who always goes for the subtle gesture over the grand one and, playing a character more remarkable for what happens to her than anything she does herself – carved more by events than her own will – keeps us in rapt attention: her evolution a series of small, meaningful moments, epitomised by that stunning moment early on in which she beams with broad but overstated pleasure at her friend’s blossoming love affair, before the look freezes on her face, declines and ebbs away, replaced only by uncertainty. Even when the events around her seem to be happening on a soundstage, in front of a camera, she is utterly genuine: eliciting sympathy, empathy, humour – the centre of everything here that works. It’s an extraordinary performance: the beating heart of a film that isn’t always great, and yet leaves more of a mark than many that are. (3.5)

***



The Lobster (Yorgos Lanthimos, 2015) - Colin Farrell checks into a hotel populated by character actors. If he can find a mate within 45 days, he gets a yacht; if not, he gets turned into an animal (an animal of his choosing, though).

It’s an interesting, sometimes intelligent allegory about love, relationships and the attendant social constructs and personal compromise, which is somewhat undermined by its self-consciously post-modern, deadpan presentation: one of those films that trumpets itself as a true original, and yet travels a stylistic path so well trammelled that it’s almost bare. Even Farrell’s appearance appears modelled after Joaquin Phoenix’s similarly alienated hero in Her.

It’s worth it for the flashes of incisive social comment, the welcome narrative surprises and a few brilliant jokes, but the mass critical circle jerk seems a little much. (3)

***



The Face Behind the Mask (Robert Florey, 1941) - This threadbare effort from Columbia has quite a cult following; I'm not sure why - probably just because of Peter Lorre. He plays a wide-eyed Hungarian immigrant whose face is destroyed in a flophouse fire. Unable to find work, due to his hideously scarred visage, he enters the criminal underworld, only for a succession of clichés and coincidences to prove his undoing.

The incomparable Lorre is very good (if not close to peak form) and there's one unexpected plot development that took a reasonable amount of balls, but otherwise it's a rather dull and drab affair that doesn't bother depicting any of the gang's exciting-sounding crimes (it seems they took that Hays Code edict a little too far) and saddles its cast with an abundance of lousy dialogue. *shrugs* (2)

***



Lucky Night (Norman Taurog, 1939) - I’d only heard negative things about this movie, and yet I’d wanted to see it for years. Why? Completism. It’s the only film starring Myrna Loy that I hadn’t seen (well, aside from Night Flight, if that counts). The arch, wry, stunningly attractive Loy had the most requested profile of the 1930s (source: plastic surgeons), was the favourite movie star of Bonnie and Clyde’s C. W. Moss, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John Dillinger – who broke cover to see her in Manhattan Melodrama, being unfortunately shot for his troubles – and was crowned Queen of Hollywood in 1938, following the biggest poll of its kind ever conducted. She isn’t especially well known today, but from her breakthrough comic role in 1932’s Love Me Tonight, she occupied a unique place in the Hollywood firmament: sexy, playful, a master at manufacturing chemistry with leading men from Gable to Spencer Tracy to her beloved William Powell – and better at flirtatious, knowing badinage, flecked with sentiment, than anyone else in movies.

I was pretty obsessed with her for a while, and her best movies are still knocking around my all-time top 100: the first two Thin Man films, the screwball comedies I Love You Again and Libeled Lady, the underrated disaster epic, The Rains Came, that immense postwar drama, The Best Years of Our Lives, and arguably the apogee of studio excellence: Test Pilot. Though she made a fair amount of dreck (The Squall and the hideous rape apologia, The Barbarian, are the worst offenders), the vast majority of her films are a joy, and almost of them are improved immeasurably by her classy presence. Between The Prizefighter and the Lady in 1933 and Belles on Her Toes in 1952, she made 38 movies – until now, Lucky Night was the only one I hadn’t seen.

Myrna plays an affable but frustrated, unhappy young woman who flees her privileged upbringing in a search for the excitement of romantic love, which she has never felt. In a faintly risible ‘meet cute’, she happens upon fellow broke job-hunter, Robert Taylor, on a park bench. Proving to be his good luck charm, they spend the night winning big at a casino, get a reward for foiling a robbery, and then get hammered, waking up married – at which point they decide to make a go of it, only for their differing viewpoints to tug at the delicate thread of their union. It’s often rather inane, and it really drags towards the end, but for the most part this notorious flop isn’t actually too bad, with a few nice observations about love and life that remain intact 77 years on (I particularly like the way she mutters, "You're very attractive" during a deep discussion, and the way their dynamic shifts between the cerebral and the physical), a handful of reasonable gags and a very nice performance from Loy, looking largely great and sparkling whenever she can, especially during that scene in her father’s office, which she literally steals from behind Robert Taylor’s back, working with almost nothing. (2)

See also: The Impatient Years brought this story (uncredited) into a wartime, home front setting. It isn't very good.

***


A committee designed by a Cammell.

Wild Side: Director's Cut (Donald Cammell, 1995/2000) - When Donald Cammell shot himself in 1996, his final film - Wild Side - was seen as merely a footnote, a direct-to-video erotic thriller that barely anyone had bothered to watch, and which the critics who had regarded as a travesty. Cammell, too, had regarded it as such, as it has been taken out of his hands before he had had the chance to put his usual woozy, kinky, non-linear stamp on it, and tossed onto the home video market (pun intended). Four years later, after a painstaking restoration project led by producer and editor Frank Mazzola, this director's cut finally made its bow, doing the festival circuit before a major cinema release in the UK. It's only ever once appeared on DVD: in a Tartan release in the UK that same year. I managed to find a copy of that long out-of-print disc for a fiver, so I gave it a go.

It's basically not very good. In the Guardian, Peter Bradshaw gave it five stars. Kim Newman in Empire gave it four. I don't share their taste for excess. I find huge performances tiresome and pointless, because anyone can hoot and yell and twitch and shout as Christopher Walken does here. The plot (and I am being kind in suggesting that the film has a plot) concerns a part-time hooker and full-time bank loan manager (Anne Heche) who catches the eye of her latest client (billionaire Walken, looking and acting a lot like Tommy Wiseau), as well as his estranged wife (Joan Chen) and his repulsive chauffeur (Steven Bauer). Across almost two hours, they bicker, flirt, discuss high finance and rape one another, in an almost endlessly repulsive parade of pretentious nastiness.

But amidst that oppressive unpleasantness, and its undisputable ridiculousness, it does have saving graces: Cammell and Mazzola's brilliant editing, Ryuichi Sakamoto's sleazy, neon-lit score, Heche's impressive performance, and the richly sensual love story between her and Chen which, while incomplete and slightly muddled, is also very affecting. Despite those artistic compensations, I won't be watching it again - ever - because a wallow like this simply isn't for me. Cammell's Performance (1970), on the other hand... (1.5)



SHORT: The Argument (Donald Cammell, 1999) - The script and acting are absolutely abysmal, but this unfinished short from Donald Cammell (shot in 1971 but released in 1999) is worth watching for the jawdropping desert cinematography and bravura editing, which create a succession of staggering juxtapositions that essentially define the phrase "acid Western". Editor Frank Mazzola and cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond used some of the effects again - with frankly dizzying results - when he worked on Peter Fonda's majestic, eternally underrated mid-'70s oater, The Hired Hand. (3)

***

TV



Making a Murderer (2015) - What else is there to say? Gripping, immersive, bleak, gruesome, important, harrowing, compulsively watchable and perhaps a little disingenuous, with an astonishing cast of characters. Something like Serial + True Detective + Winter's Bone. If only it weren't all true. (4)



Charlie Brooker's 2015 Wipe (2015) - I'm a big fan, but the last few episodes have felt cobbled-together and uninspired. It had its moments, but the feeling of being variously educated, righteously enraged and weary with laughter by the end seems to have long departed. Please don't stop doing it, just do it better. (2.5)



Sherlock: The Abominable Bride (2016) - I'm still undecided about this one. It was variously delightful, hilarious, self-indulgent, pretentious, confused, fascinating, embarrassing, irritating and exhilarating, and managed to be all of those things at once in the stunningly staged waterfall sequence, which ended with a moment of fitting, knowing and utterly exalting television. Mrs Rick, the world's biggest Sherlock fan, said it "felt like a teaser trailer for the next series", which sounds about right. (2.5)



Behind the Candelabra (Steven Soderbergh, 2013) - The Private Life of Liberace, with Michael Douglas in imperious form as the flamboyantly, secretly gay entertainer, and Matt Damon as his live-in... assistant. Soderbergh's biopic, made for HBO but screened in cinemas over here, is stylistically spot-on and very well-acted by the leads, but doesn't necessarily amount to all that much, largely because it seems to have almost no wider significance. (3)

Wednesday, 30 December 2015

An 11th thing I learned about Peter Lorre

This proved popular on Twitter, so I thought I'd put it up here too. It's Lorre (who fled the Nazis in 1933) winding up Basil Rathbone, for no reason:



You can read my original post about Lorre here. Y'know, if you want.

Tuesday, 29 December 2015

Ten things I learned about Peter Lorre

The latest in a semi-regular series...



Peter Lorre, that strange, strangely beautiful, intensely and minutely expressive actor is one of the most recognisable and most imitated figures in movie history, and the master of the dual-layered characterisation comprising conflicting but complementary parts. But I could never quite get a handle on his life. How was he a star in Germany, then just a bit-part player in America? What was the story behind Der Verlorene, his sole film as director, which took him back to the ruins of his adopted country for barely a year? And why and how did his star fall so low that by the end of his career he was reduced to gag cameos in instantly outdated trash? I wanted to know the answers, so I bought The Lost One – A Life of Peter Lorre, by all accounts the definitive work on his life.

And it is impressive. It’s staggeringly well-researched, featuring more than 300 interviews with the great and good of German and American cinema, delving into the lives of his contemporaries, fleshing out the historical context of the societies in which he lives, and digging out all manner of details from registries, letters and archive newspapers. And yet somehow it never quite gets to the heart of Lorre, leaping about from one aspect of his life to another, never quite joining the dots or reconciling the contradictions in this happy, interested, disinterested, sad, tragic, playful, ruined, unhealthy, trim, stout, deceitful, selfish, generous, lazy, obsessive man, and getting sidetracked by its subplots at the expense of the main attraction.

Its central argument, committedly if rather blinkeredly put, is that the mercurial, pint-sized Austrian acting dynamo was a sleeping giant who never came close to achieving his mammoth potential, through a mixture of human weakness and morphine addiction. It is not a non-stop chucklefest (nor indeed a breezy, page-turner). Biographer Stephen D. Youngkin is almost universally dismissive of Lorre’s screen work, seeing only M, The Maltese Falcon and The Lost One as worthwhile movies*, the rest merely variable Hollywood fodder occasionally enlightened by his slumming presence, but barely meriting a mention. Indeed, the author spends far longer on a minute discussion of his comrade-in-arms Bertolt Brecht’s unhappy time in America than he does on discussing, say, Lorre’s supporting pyrotechnics in mass market successes like My Favourite Brunette – where the actor was like, you know, acting.

It’s a heavy book, in both senses of the word: 453 pages (excluding the copious notes) of big pages with small type, packed to the gills with extraneous information, but also some gems. I thought I’d share those with you here:


1. You know how to whistle, don’t you?
His eerie, tuneless whistling of the Hall of the Mountain King, in his still-stunning second movie, M (Fritz Lang, 1931), was done in post-production, as he’d never learned to whistle, so couldn’t do it on cue. Lang’s sadistic treatment of his star included forcing Lorre to be kicked in the shin with a nailed boot, then re-taking the close-up at least 12 times. But he got what he wanted – Youngkin says that the French version of the film, starring Lorre but apparently not overseen by the director – is a pale imitation of the original, with the actor notably overdoing his part.


Not Crime and Punishment.
2. You’ve got a Freund
Lorre only agreed to feature in the horror film Mad Love (Karl Freund, 1935) if his new studio, Columbia, would also produce an adaptation of Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, starring him as Raskolnikov. Unsurprisingly, Mad Love was a sensation – earning him a reputation as an unparalleled screen menace – while the literary epic was dead on arrival.


3. Elisha Cock, Jr
Censor Joseph Breen objected to Lorre’s depiction of the “pansy” Joel Cairo in the seminal Maltese Falcon (John Huston, 1941) and demanded cuts to scenes in which he cuddled the gunsel, Wilmer (Elisha Cook, Jr), and stroked his face. Cairo’s gardenia-scented calling card and habit of brushing the phallic handle of his umbrella across his lips eluded Breen to form part of an indelible characterisation.


4. The way it crumbles, cookie-wise
Lorre was a key influence on Bertolt Brecht, who studied the performer’s style while formulating his theories about acting. Their last public collaboration was in 1931’s Mann Ist Mann, on the Berlin stage, but they also worked together on several unrealised film projects, including a 1945 story called Lady Macbeth of the Yards. This project, updating Shakespeare to the Chicago stockyards, would have seen steer cutter John Machacek – advised to “be bold” by a fortune cookie – murdering his way to... not a kingdom, but a little market specialising in choice meats. Replete with surrealistic touches, such as a singing witch, a mirror maze and nightmare sequences featuring “a distant rumble growing into thunder, and a cloud of dust… kicked up by the hooves of an oncoming herd of steers”, it had the potential to be a classic film noir. Warner’s story editor kiboshed it at the last.


5. Morley repugnant
Robert Morley, in conversation with the author, said of his Beat the Devil co-star: “I have always thought him an intensely tiresome little chap, with quite the foulest vocabulary I have ever had the misfortune to listen to.”


6. A Royale with cheese
Though Lorre is a standard pub quiz answer, as the first person to play a Bond villain (he was Le Chiffre in a 1956 TV version of Casino Royale), his death scene didn’t go entirely to plan. According to screenwriter Charles Bennett: “Peter expired as the camera sent the show across the nation live. But then, the director failed to push the right button, and instead of this scene jumping to the next, the cameras remained on ‘dead’ Peter. Rightfully concluding that his job was done, he rose and quietly departed to his dressing room, smiling whimsically, to the utter bewilderment of possible thirty million viewers.” He was shot dead, again, in the next scene.


7. A barrel of laughs
The strain of applying his genius to substandard roles did occasionally rile Lorre outwardly. Ellis St. Joseph updated The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse (a great title, I’m sure you’ll agree) for a 1957 episode of the Climax! show (I’m not lying). Fishing for a compliment, he told Lorre: “I’m grateful you accepted it. What did you think?” Lorre admitted he hadn’t read it. “When you are asked to jump into a barrel of shit,” he added, “you don’t ask if it’s feet first or head first.”


8. Hallelujah, it’s a bum
Lorre returned to his adopted country of Germany in 1951 – 20 years after M, and 18 years after fleeing Hitler’s stormtroopers – to direct his first film, Der Verlorene (The Lost One). His unorthodox audition technique included asking Gisela Trowe to wiggle her bum and spending three days creeping out Lotte Rausch, in character. The film created the peerlessly eerie word “Totmacher!” (“death maker!”). In fact, Lorre was no stranger to inventing words, his singular vocabulary comprised of heptalk and neologisms, including the multi-purpose “kreep”, a favourite of the many impressionists to whom he inadvertently gave a living. The film divided critics, who bristled at the morphine-addled director’s confrontational approach to the issue complicity in Nazism, and never found an audience. When Lorre went back to America the following February, he made the coolest packing list of all time: a toothbrush, a razor, a washcloth and a 35mm print of Der Verlorene.


Lorre dancing. One of the best things ever in a movie.
9. Stocking filler
Fans of benign Hollywood anecdotes might like to know that Lorre, Joseph Buloff and Jules Munshin spent two weeks of the Silk Stockings shoot arranging an elaborate practical joke on Rouben Mamoulian – a huge Lorre fan who had rehabilitated many typecast performers from Guy Kibbee to Myrna Loy and Fredric March, and cast the 53-year-old actor in a delightful comic role for this remake of Ninotchka. At a cost of $10,000, approved by studio chief Louis B. Mayer, the trio’s first filmed take of the 'Too Bad (We Can't Go Back to Moscow)' number was a re-written version that began: “When you’re working for Mamoulian, it’s like working for Napoleon.” At the end of the shoot, they presented him with the film, as well as a transcript of the lyrics. Speaking of Napoleon, Lorre's first theatrical ambition was to embody the Little General. The closest he ever got was shooting publicity stills for a 1937 play that fell apart before rehearsal.


10. Ranting and Raven
He improvised most of his dialogue in the 1963 Roger Corman comedy-horror, The Raven, including this memorable opening exchange:
Vincent Price: “Shall I ever hold again that radiant maiden whom the angels call Lenore?”
Lorre: “How the hell should I know? What am I, a fortune teller?”

*though he’s also notably fond of a TV episode called Man of the South, co-starring Steve McQueen

***

Thanks for reading.

Wednesday, 23 December 2015

Review of 2015: Part 3 - Books (and a tiny bit of TV)

I've been trying to read a book a week. Here's how I got on. (My other reviews of the year, concerning movies and live shows are up already.)

Fiction:



For me, this was a year dominated by four writers, but really it was the year of Vonnegut. The year that I found a writer who moved me, made me think, and made me howl with laughter. Who seemed to be writing just for me. And who taught me that the only person you should write like is yourself (I finished my first book this year) and who was responsible for, erm, nine of the 47 books I've read. (I could still make it to 52.)

Of Vonnegut's works, Slaughterhouse Five is the obvious stand-out - the book that drew most memorably on his own experiences, and made his name - but the polemically dazzling God Bless You, Mr Rosewater is a withering critique of capitalism (with a distinctly sentimental side), and in Mother Night he mines race hate for all the black comedy he can find, with dangerously funny results.



My favourite book of the year, though, was Philip Roth's American Pastoral, a masterwork, spun with bravura style, that deals with immigrant identity, the unknowability of everyone, the disappointments of adulthood and the utter chaos of existence, as a legendary high school sports star turned upstanding citizen has his life exploded by an unexpected act of violence. It is his daughter “who transports him out of the longed for American pastoral and into everything that is its antithesis and its enemy, into the fury, the violence, and the desperation of the counter-pastoral — into the indigenous American berserk", as Roth unforgettably characterises it. The Human Stain, by the same author, isn't far behind.



The third author who took up quite a bit of my time this year was John Steinbeck, whose trilogy of books about the Californian labour struggle in the 1930s are absolutely astounding. Everyone knows about the trim, simple Of Mice and Men, and the sprawling, experimental Grapes of Wrath, but prior to those he wrote a book every bit as good: In Dubious Battle: a muddy, hungry, violent chronicle of a strike, a neglected classic apparently too abrasive, gloomy and superficially cynical to have ever found much of an audience.

And then there was Jane Austen, whose escapist but often weighty works allowed me to pass many a contented hour. I've read Pride and Prejudice and have Northanger Abbey left to read - of the others, it was Persuasion that left the greatest impact on me. Written as Austen was ailing (and so facing a severe race against time), it seems like the articulation of her entire worldview, albeit within the boundaries of a conventional romance.


The yawn also rises.

Other highlights of the year were Hilary Mantel's Bring Up the Bodies, Truman Capote's legendary In Cold Blood (which falls somewhere between fiction and non-fiction) and Breakfast at Tiffany's, and Donna Tartt's The Secret History. The worst novel I read was Hemingway's tedious, self-indulgent early work, The Sun Also Rises: a great title and a singular style in search of anything like a story.

Non-Fiction:



I tend to read quite a lot of books about movies (my 48th book, in which I'm currently engrossed, is about Peter Lorre), and this year was no different. Of the biographies, David Stenn's excellent, meticulously-researched Jean Harlow book, Bombshell, was by far the best, though Charles Affron's work on Lillian Gish, and the actress's own memoir - The Movies, Mr. Griffith and Me - are well worth seeking out if you're a fan, as I am (bit of a long shot). The same can't be said of the Warren William and William Haines books I read, since William enjoyed an almost uniquely dull existence, while Haines's move away from Hollywood and into interior decorating really doesn't make for the most thrilling reading.

Far better were Victor S. Navasky's cool, forensic audit of the Hollywood witchhunt, Naming Names, and the non-fiction novel, Tinseltown, which paints an unforgettable portrait of the movie community in the 1920s and may just have solved the murder of top director, William Desmond Taylor.



Besides Gish, the deceased lady I'm most interested in (not romantically) is the tragic British songstress Sandy Denny, and I read two books about her as well. Neither of them were all that great, unlike this blog I wrote about her, which is the most-read thing on here this year. Peter Hitchens bought the Mick Houghton book from me on Amazon, which was odd.

Away from the arts, I enjoyed four books by Jon Ronson, of which his latest - So You've Been Publicly Shamed - was in many ways the most serious and frightening, as well as the most coherent and complete. There were two Ben Macintyre books (Operation Mincemeat was great fun), two about the Mitford sisters, a horrible, compulsively-readable true crime tale (True Story by Michael Finkel), and Bridget Christie's utterly charming concoction, A Book for Her, which discusses feminism, comedy and campaigning. She is wonderful.

***

TV:


Sexy brilliant actor man.

I accidentally moved into a flat without a TV aerial, so everything I saw was on iPlayer or DVD. A Moon for the Misbegotten, a 1975 TV movie based on Eugene O'Neill's play and starring Jason Robards, was head and shoulders above the rest. The BBC's adaptation of Wolf Hall had its flaws, but also the greatest performance of this and perhaps any other year, in Mark Rylance's Thomas Cromwell. By contrast, even the acting powers of Ben Whishaw couldn't save London Spy, which relinquished its curious hold on the audience after three interesting episodes, and fell down the toilet. The Apprentice was great, especially the interview round, but Jack Dee's baffling descent into unfunniness proceeded to sink You're Fired without trace. Meanwhile, Adam Curtis's iPlayer exclusive, Bitter Lake, did something utterly new. And the best sitcom of the modern era, Parks and Recreation, came to a close, with something between a bang and a whimper.

***

Thanks for reading, and for all the comments and support this year. :-)