Showing posts with label thomas narcejac. Show all posts
Showing posts with label thomas narcejac. Show all posts

August 07, 2009

Vertigo (1958)

5/5

Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo is a tantalizing masterpiece. The answers to its mysteries ebb and flow beyond your grasp, always so close but always out of reach. It opens itself up to various interpretations, letting you come to your own conclusions without ever affirming or rejecting them. The movie tackles a great many intertwining topics: for me, the most potent one is the need for people to control their own lives, sometimes by controlling others' lives as well. It contorts itself into a tale of obsessive love, of purity and perversion, and of deception and dual identities. It is dark, often morbid, and unsettling, but it is the kind of work you will never forget.

The movie starts in the middle of a cop chase. Leaping from rooftop to rooftop, Scottie Ferguson (Stewart) slips and barely catches a gutter. Perilously hanging on for dear life, he looks down more than five stories and a crippling vertigo paralyzes him. Another policeman reaches down to help, only to fall to his own doom. Scottie's fear of heights is cemented through this traumatic event and he quits the police force. Soon after, he is contacted by an old college buddy who requests his assistance in tailing his wife. He suspects her of being possessed by a ghost and is afraid that the spirit inhabiting his wife, who committed suicide at age 26, will cause her to do the same thing. As he begins following her, Scottie develops an attraction for her that soon turns into an unhealthy fixation. But that is only half the story. After that, it spirals more and more out of control, beyond anything you could have predicted.

Watching Vertigo again, and thinking about it next to Notorious and Psycho, I am struck by Hitchcock's mastery of structure. He seems attracted to scripts with unconventional story arcs and plot progression. Most directors would struggle against invoking boredom with such an uncertain framework. Hitchcock uses it to his advantage to generate suspense, manipulate your expectations, and telegraph events to their breaking points. You have never seen a story told this way, and so you have no idea what might come next. In a horror movie like Psycho, that's the most terrifying fear you can imagine. In Vertigo, that's the strongest, most mesmerizing pull you will ever experience.

The casting of Jimmy Stewart, originally maligned by critics and by Hitchcock himself, turns out to be one of the film's greatest strengths. Stewart is America's hero, the original Tom Hanks, the everyman, the good guy; he is Mr. Smith at Washington and George Bailey with his wonderful life. And here he is deeply disturbed, twisted so far from his off-screen celebrity persona that you feel a torment brewing inside yourself. You want to care for him, you want to believe he is the sweet, kind-hearted soul you know and love, but witnessing his repugnant actions sickens you. No other actor could have pulled off that necessary duality.

The cinematography is, as always, remarkable. The signature track in, zoom out shot reminds us of his technical abilities, but there are many more scenes where his sense of atmosphere defines how he shoots. In the scene at Ernie's where Scottie first sees Madeleine (Novak), the camera moves as if in a dream. The room brightens when she passes by and dims after she leaves. Her platinum hair, pinned up into a spiral, and all-gray suit give her an eerie aura. Hitchcock's use of colors is entrancing; they are inserted into scenes with such presence and purpose that it makes you wonder what they mean. Because it has to mean something, right?

The movie has some flaws. The special effects, both in the opening credits and nightmare sequence, severely date the film. Several key plot points remain unexplained and some of the dialogue rings a little off to our modern ears. (Are people really diagnosed with "acute melancholia, coupled with a guilt complex"?) And for some reason, which may be entirely circumstantial and outside the realm of the film, the movie wasn't as gripping on this viewing as it has been in the past. Still, this is one of Hitchcock's finest movies. I'll now admit that Psycho is my favorite Hitchcock, but I would not have any cause to disagree with someone who placed Vertigo or Notorious in that spot. Vertigo is a masterpiece that would define the entire work of any other director and is essential viewing for anyone interested in cinema as an art form.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052357/

May 03, 2007

Diabolique (1955)

5/5

Diabolique grabs you from the start and never lets you go. It is at once mysterious and intense, but it continues to excite because the underlying reason for the fear shifts throughout the film. The tension in the beginning is a result of the way M. Delassalle abuses his wife and mistress (to the point where they console each other). In the middle it is caused by the imminent murder of M. Delassalle by the two women. And for the last half of the movie, the tension reaches a peak because M. Delassalle's dead body has gone missing.

This movie is perfectly crafted, from theme to execution. Watching this movie is one of those rare treats in cinema where every aspect of filmmaking comes together, and without flaw. The lighting and cinematography work on a thematic level, with ubiquitous bars of lights and shadows, stairways and columns, visually imprisoning Christina, the wife, to reflect how her marriage traps her. The dialogue and acting are expressive, yet subtle. They are meaningful, layered, and nuanced, yet never unnatural. The story is a treasure to unravel; it is clever and funny in more ways than one. You can watch this movie once and think it is amazing, but you can also watch it again and get a completely different picture (still thinking it's amazing).

The story, written by Boileau and Narcejac, felt more contained and thought-out than Vertigo, which they also wrote. That being said, the story gets a bit excessive and ludicrous in the planning of dirty deeds. And there is a force of good and order at the end--perhaps the creators were too unsure of themselves to let the bad guys win, much like Kurosawa in Rashomon? Either way, this movie is required viewing for lovers of Hitchcock. It rivals some of his best and surpasses most of the rest; and it also works really well as a partner piece for Vertigo. And as the original poster tagline says, see it and be amazed by it.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0046911/

April 01, 2007

Eyes Without a Face (1960)

4/5

Eyes Without a Face is unique in the horror genre in that it is surreal and expressionist. It frightens through its environment and the subtly real characterizations of the "villains," not through surprise or the grotesque (although it would have been easy to, given its subject matter). The movie is about a doctor who wants to graft a face onto his daughter, who has been scarred because of a car accident that he is responsible for. That is one of its strongest points--that we understand his motivations and empathize with him. There was one part where I literally jumped back in my chair because of the frank, unexpected nature of someone's actions. The complexity of character that arose from that single action enriched the analytical groundwork of the film. Also, from a directing standpoint, the use of music and of sound overall (especially of footsteps) was brilliant.

That being said, the sound was very often low-quality; you could tell when they overlaid audio tracks because of background static. The production quality overall (such as sets, lighting, camera, etc.), editing, and much of the acting seemed amateurish. However, the idea is what carried this movie through, and it was not hindered by the poor quality of these elements.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0053459/