The Graduate April 13, 2010

The first time I watched ‘The Graduate‘ I was in my first real phase of movie-loving. I think I was going down the AFI 100 Movies list (note: before the 10th anniversary one) and checking off at least a movie a day. I was a teenager.

And ‘The Graduate’ was ranked as the 7th best film of all time. At the time, I thought: Really? Better than ‘Some Like It Hot’ or ‘Psycho’ or (the poorly ranked and yet undeniably fantastic) ‘Fargo’? I like the rankings on the old list better than the 10th Anniversary list, all films considered, but that is a topic for another post.

So the first time I watched ‘The Graduate’ I was underwhelmed because I did not relate much to any of the characters. I was just pleased to have seen another ‘classic’. Now, having watched it again at a new stage in life, it has left a completely different taste in my mouth, despite Ben’s awkwardness and the tonal dichotomy being the same.

Sabrina is a Little Creepy December 12, 2009

If you pinned me in a corner and forced me to pick the best writer/director of all time, I would choose Billy Wilder. Any one of these movies on their own are great films, if not masterpieces: Double Indemnity, The Lost Weekend, Sunset Blvd., Ace in the Hole, Stalag 17, Some Like It Hot, The Apartment, Sabrina…. That’s 8, and he had some other good ones, too. Sure, some great directors have made that many great films, but few have done so many genres. He won 6 Oscars, had 15 other nominations, and took home the Irving G. Thalberg Award in 1988. He had mainstream and critical success and made films that can fit every mood, even today. Why he did so well was because he told straightforward stories. No gimmicks. And, of course, his famous ten commandments. “The first nine are, thou shalt not bore. The tenth is, thou shalt have right of final cut.”

I have nothing but admiration for Mr. Wilder. Now that that is out of the way….

Watching ‘Sabrina‘ again for the fourth or fifth time, instead of Sabrina (Audrey Hepburn) seeming like the cute, hopelessly romantic chauffeur’s daughter, she seemed quite creepy. In the 1950s I’m sure no one thought too much of it, but unlike in ‘The Apartment’ (1960), where Miss Kubelik is a former lover who has problems and tries to kill herself, Sabrina is an obsessive stalker who has problems and tries to kill herself.

In the beginning of the film, during the course of an elaborate party, Sabrina watches David Larrabee from afar — perched on the branch of a tree. When David sneaks out of the party with his usual two champagne glasses and a bottle of bubbly, she greets him, but he brushes her off. David meets with the girl in the indoor tennis court while Sabrina watches through a window. This is quite voyeuristic. Billy Wilder was keen on the sexual humor and, had the sensors at the time allowed it, I’m sure he may have had David and the girl do a little more than sip champagne while Sabrina watched.

And then, as we all know, Sabrina goes to kill herself in the garage. Linus Larrabee ends up saving her, and the next morning she’s off to Paris.

Things escalate when she returns. If David had any common sense, during the next few scenes he would have made a run for it. But as Billy Wilder and his co-writers Samuel Taylor and (the very talented) Ernest Lehman showed us before, David doesn’t use much sense and only thinks about how girls will look once their cocktail dresses are on his floor.

First, she has a new dog and named David. Now, dogs are often named for characters or things we like, but David is not a dog name and it is quite odd to name a pet for someone you’ve been pining over for a few years.

Sabrina and David get back to her house and they chat, they make plans, she still loves him, etc. etc. etc. Sabrina’s reveal here is what David should be worried about: She recites all of his moves (which I mentioned above). “You saw a lot from that tree,” David says to her. She continues on, ignoring that comment. Shouldn’t David be a little concerned that Sabrina is a little too in tune with his methods?

Sabrina’s father seems to be the only one who thinks this whole thing is a problem (not counting Linus and the senior Larrabee). When Sabrina is in Paris and writes home, the rest of the Larrabee house staff is sad that she is still in love with David, but once she returns, they are so happy that she is being accepted they forget how she used to feel. Her father tells Sabrina that David is engaged. “I know,” she says. “He’s not married yet,” she declares. She plans to snatch David away. “I don’t like that. I don’t like the sound of it,” her father says. He believes that Sabrina should find someone respectable and live a humble, happy life. Not to reach for the moon. He tells her that before Paris, and she agrees. But on her return, oh, “The moon is reaching for me.”

It is interesting to see how Sabrina manipulates David, but fortunately for everyone, Linus is working in the background. He makes a play for Sabrina to get her away from the family. But she starts to like him as well (David is confined to bed… because of Linus’ doing). “Dear David. Yes, I did get over that. I’m cure. Now, how to get over the cure?” As she diagnoses, Linus is the cure for her. Funny how it is called a “cure.” Sure, it sounds like a good line, but it also cures her possibly psychotic obsession.

And so she is cured and goes to Paris with Linus. Sabrina finds love, Linus realizes business isn’t everything, and David grows up a bit and does what is best for the family. It is a happy ending, for sure, but Sabrina herself isn’t quite as pleasant as she first appears. With each viewing I begin to imagine her more and more as Glenn Close in ‘Fatal Attraction’… except with a slightly less violent ending. A valid comparison? I think so.

Movies to Study: Psycho August 22, 2009

There are many reasons why Hitchcock’s ‘Psycho‘ is one of the best films ever, but I think one of the real treasures of the film is the performance by Anthony Perkins. He has a very boyish quality that plays perfectly with the relation to his mother, and we have no trouble believing that she is his best friend. But what makes a role great is that when watched repeatedly, things are always taken in new and different ways.

The first time watching the film, one sees him as an innocent victim to a sheltered life and an overbearing mother. He cares about her, cleans up her mess, and really did kind-of like Marion Crane. Then, when you watch it for the second time, it’s much clearer. He is a great liar to strangers, but when we know what’s going on, it seems so obvious. This also works, though, because Norman Bates really is innocent of murder; what he’s guilty of is covering up his mother’s crimes. He clearly doesn’t enjoy having to send Marion’s car into the swamp, but there’s never a question that he wouldn’t.

Norman Bates, so often calm, only trips up once, and that’s when Arbogast comes to question him. He stutters, which is an obvious tell, but Norman still escapes because he subconsciously tosses the onus to his mother–and obviously she’s not going to incriminate anyone. Later, in the third act when Sam and Lila visit to check it out, Norman is back to form, and despite getting caught, plays until the final beat.

The film is also a master of subtlety and coincidence. In the third act, a few times, the Sheriff attempts to explain the situation to Sam and Lila, but they cut him off or he gets sidetracked. Because of this, our curiosity is prolonged until the final scene where we get a secondary school psychology lesson. Questions arise before this point: Did his mother fake her death? Was someone else killed and buried instead of her? What does Norman mean when he says she’s ‘invalid’? Just who the hell is walking around the house in woman’s clothes? And it all makes sense, back to the very beginning, when Norman said he liked to stuff birds. He mentions the chemicals that preserve them, which he used on his mother’s corpse.

One of my favorite lines comes from Norman (who else?): “She just goes a little mad sometimes. We all go a little mad sometimes.” On the first run, we assume he’s just defending his mother. Why should he put her in “some place”? He belittles Marion and makes her feel cruel for even suggesting such a thing, but OH, the sweet power of those words. Norman is literally ‘mad’ in the film, which is a mean twist on its own, but every other character also goes a little ‘mad’. Marion steals $40,000, Arbogast walks in on an old lady who he knows he shouldn’t barge in on (both on legal terms and from Norman’s verbal contributions), and Sam not only becomes stand-offish with Norman, but almost seems to be making the switch from Marion to her sister. Lila appears to be the only rational person in the film, because even though she busts into the house and finds Mrs. Bates, wouldn’t any sister do the same?

One could make the case for Sam as they have for Lila: Wouldn’t any lover do anything to save them? I doubt it, because as we saw in scene one, Sam won’t marry Marion because he’s got alimony. I don’t know about you, but if I cared so much about someone, I would want to marry them no matter how much money I did or didn’t have. But Marion cares about him; that’s why she stole the $40,000.

There have been many essays written on Hitchcock’s direction, and I feel no need to rehash those here. But when his mastery of storytelling came together with this perfect script and these great actors, it made one of the best films of all time.

The Godfather July 27, 2009

Just a quick post because I’m thinking about it….

‘The Godfather‘ has to be the best movie ever made. Period. Only maybe 2-3 other movies can be put into the same category, but I’m pretty sure ‘The Godfather’ is better than them. It’s possibly the most enjoyable experience one can have watching a film.

This seems kind of random, I know. I may post again on its greatness when I watch it in the near future.

Movies to Study: Bringing Up Baby June 9, 2009

I usually try to keep the Movies to Study column about films that are fairly recent. You can go almost anywhere and find essays on why Citizen Kane or The Godfather are perfect films. Tonight I was watching Bringing Up Baby and my sister came into the room. I paused the movie and said, “Do you know who that is?”

“No,” she replied.

“Katherine Hepburn. Do you know who she is?”

“No.”

Then I went forward a couple frames and did the same thing for Cary Grant. Same response. It’s sad how most people in the young generation have no clue who these people are, yet they are icons and have been in more great films than almost any of the actors working today. So in order to champion my cause of pushing older classics, that is why Bringing Up Baby is the newest Movie to Study.

The heart of this film is a romantic comedy, and for a film made in 1938, the material is still fresh. A lot of these jokes and setups are still used in comedies today. There’s some slapstick, some puns, some general turmoil, misunderstandings, crazy characters, cross-dressing, and leopards. All necessary elements for a successful comedy.

‘Anatomy of a Murder’ and the Jimmy Stewart May 3, 2009

I typically balance my Netflix queue with recent movies I missed and older classics which I need to see. I put off watching ‘Anatomy of a Murder‘ for almost half a month (clearly not getting my Netflix money’s worth) because of its runtime of 2:40. Last night I popped it in, and the time went by very quickly. I love when a ~3 hour movie goes by quickly (see: The Godfather, The Departed), and ‘Anatomy of a Murder’ is one of those.

I first became interested in this film when I saw the poster (which is also ranked by Premiere as the best movie poster of all time). So simple, yet so effective. But also, the film stars James Stewart, who is my favorite actor of all time. Since I like lists, here is a quick rundown of some great movies he has been in:

• Vertigo
• Rear Window
• The Philadelphia Story
• Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
• It’s a Wonderful Life
• Anatomy of a Murder

And a handful of others. Plenty of actors have one or two great performances, but actors that deliver great work consistently are rare, especially these days.

But I digress.

‘Anatomy of a Murder’ is a film about a lawyer, who was a former DA, defending a man who committed murder. He murdered a man who raped his wife earlier that night. He is trying to get the man off with a temporary insanity plea. What’s so effective is that through a majority of the story, and possibly even after the film is over, we are unsure of what really happened. Sure, we know that Lt. Manion killed the bartender, but did the bartender actually rape Manion’s wife? Who knows? This film reminded me much of ‘Doubt,’ a great movie, where, even at the end of the rope, only the parties immediately involved know what happened. Often that bugs me, but when done right, it’s perfect.