High and Low (1963)

High and Low (1963)

“You’re a fool to pay, but pay you must.”

Synopsis:
When an unknown criminal (Tsutomu Yamazaki) accidentally kidnaps the son (Masahiko Shimizu) of the chauffeur (Yutaka Sada) working for a wealthy shoe company businessman Kingo Gondo (Toshiro Mifune) — rather than Gondo’s son, as intended — Gondo must decide whether to pay the ransom and risk everything he owns; meanwhile, the local police — led by Inspector Tokura (Tatsuya Nakadai) — do everything they can to identify and then capture the kidnapper.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Akira Kurosawa Films
  • Class Relations
  • Japanese Films
  • Kidnapping
  • Police

Review:
Akira Kurosawa’s 23rd film was this modern-day police procedural centering on complex moral dilemmas and toxic disparities between “high” and “low” status individuals in Japanese society. As the film opens, we see Mifune negotiating unsuccessfully with his business partners on behalf of producing only high-quality women’s shoes:

… and then clarifying with his wife (Kyōko Kagawa) and assistant (Tatsuya Mihashi) that he plans to leverage every bit of his assets in order to buy out the company for creative control. After this set-up, the storyline shifts to the trauma of Shimizu being kidnapped, and the ethical dilemma Mifune is instantly faced with, despite immense relief at his own son being safe.

Thankfully, we’re not left too long with this discomfort, given that …

SPOILER ALERT

… he makes the only morally viable choice (to pay for his chauffeur’s son to be returned), thus leading to an excitingly filmed sequence (shot in real time) taking place on a moving train, where the exchange takes place.

This all occurs within the first third of the story, which then shifts to a search to determine who the kidnapper is — and, during this portion, we see the tremendous efforts put forth by the (unrealistically) highly organized and committed police force of Yokohama, who systematically and effectively follow one lead after another, culminating in successful identification.

The final portion of the film shows what happens as the police home in on Yamazaki — clearly a deeply disturbed individual who thinks nothing of killing innocent people on behalf of his grudge towards those with more assets and possibilities (i.e., Mifune and his ilk).

There are quite a few ways in which this film — loosely based on an Ed McBain novel, and co-scripted by Kurosawa and three others — effectively explores the central theme of “high and low” (the Japanese title more accurately translates to “Heaven and Hell”). Physically, Mifune’s family is targeted specifically because of the highly visible location of his luxurious home:

… which literally stands in stark contrast with the working class, at times seedy environs where Yamazaki lives and works. However, two more dominant explorations of this theme also emerge: first between high-privilege Mifune and his lower-class chauffeur (Sada), as we see the extreme disparities in options available to each of them:

… and second, between Mifune and his lackey-associate (Mihashi), whose loyalties vacillate with the changing tides of fortune, while Mifune simply becomes more entrenched in his understanding that acting morally is of primary importance above all else. Effective use is made of location shooting through Yokohama:

… and, despite its 142 minute running time, the film holds our attention throughout. This remains one of Kurosawa’s most gripping films, and is well worth a look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Toshiro Mifune as Kingo Gondo
  • Highly effective blocking and direction
  • Atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a still-powerful Kurosawa flick. Listed as a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Important Director

Links:

Kanchenjunga (1962)

Kanchenjunga (1962)

“It’s rare for a couple to be equally talented and share interests.”

Synopsis:
While on vacation in the Himalayas, the younger daughter (Alokananda Roy) of an industrialist (Chhabi Biswas) and his wife (Karuna Banerjee) ponders an offer of marriage from a wealthy suitor (Pahadi Sanyal) while engaging in conversation with a poor but intriguing young man from Calcultta (Arun Mukherjee); meanwhile, her older sister (Anubha Gupta) talks with her husband (Anil Chatterjee) about whether to stay in their marriage on behalf of their young daughter.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Class Relations
  • Feminism and Women’s Issues
  • Indian Films
  • Love Triangle

Review:
Satyajit Ray’s ninth feature film (his first in color) was this contemplative, conversation-filled drama about love and marriage, set in the foothills of the Himalayas (specifically the hill station of Darjeeling). The synopsis above covers the basics of what we see and hear from the three couples (or would-be couples) — aging Biswas and Banerjee:

… unhappily married Gupta and Chatterjee:

… and the undecided future-coupling of either Roy and Sanyal:

… or Roy and Mukherjee.

Not much else is available to read about this film, but according to Wikipedia:

In 1962, Ray directed Kanchenjungha. Based on his first original screenplay, it was also his first colour film. It tells the story of an upper-class family spending an afternoon in Darjeeling, a picturesque hill town in West Bengal. They try to arrange the engagement of their youngest daughter to a highly paid engineer educated in London.

Ray had first conceived shooting the film in a large mansion, but later decided to film it in the famous town. He used many shades of light and mist to reflect the tension in the drama. Ray noted that while his script allowed shooting to be possible under any lighting conditions, a commercial film crew in Darjeeling failed to shoot a single scene, as they only wanted to do so in sunshine.

As Ray’s first venture into original screenwriting rather than adapting someone else’s work, it will certainly be of interest to fans of the director — and it remains a thoughtful treatise on gender norms and marital challenges in mid-century India. But it’s not must-see for all film fanatics.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Good use of locale shooting to highlight interpersonal tensions and possibilities

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look if you’re a fan of Ray’s work.

Links:

Reflections on Must-See Films From 1961

Reflections on Must-See Films From 1961

I had so much fun writing my first reflection on a specific year of classic films (1960) that I’m back with another. Now that I’ve finally watched and reviewed Last Year at Marienbad (laborious but must-see) and La Notte (not must-see), it’s time to reflect on all titles from 1961!

“I’ll never get used to anything. Anybody that does, they might as well be dead.”

Here are a few thoughts and highlights:

  • Out of a total of 68 films from 1961, I once again voted Yes (i.e., “must see”) on 32 — nearly the exact same ratio as for 1960. (I wonder if I will see similar patterns as I look back at other years; I’m now motivated to go and check… )
  • Of these 32 must-see titles, 14 (nearly half) are non-American, with 7 British titles, two Spanish (though one of these — Jess Franco’s The Awful Dr. Orloff — was dubbed), two French, one Italian (Divorce, Italian Style), one Japanese (Yojimbo), and one Czech.
  • Speaking of the latter title, Karel Zeman’s The Fabulous Baron von Munchausen remains a truly unique treat — especially for lovers of animated features. As I wrote in my review, “It’s impossible to describe the sheer wealth of visual enjoyment Munchausen has to offer… The narrative basically consists of one bizarre, humanly impossible adventure after the other, and is written with a droll sense of humor.”
  • Disney had a couple of authentic hits that year, including One Hundred and One Dalmatians (featuring one of cinema’s most enduring villainesses, Cruella de Vil):

    … and The Parent Trap, which is flawed (certain narrative elements strain credulity) but well worth a revisit simply for its cult status — and for Hayley Mills x 2.
  • Marilyn Monroe fans won’t want to miss her noteworthy performance in John Huston’s The Misfits, where “it’s literally impossible to keep your eyes off of her, and we instantly understand why all the other characters want to be near her.”
  • Among Spanish director Luis Buñuel’s considerable output, his b&w classic Viridiana (co-starring Fernando Rey and Silvia Pinal) remains an accessible highlight, showcasing “the futility of noble intentions in the face of a thankless and debased humanity.”
  • Another not-to-be-missed title is Stanley Kramer’s Judgment at Nuremberg, which should probably be required viewing for all humans, not just film fanatics; but be forewarned that it’s “a uniquely challenging courtroom drama to sit through” given the complexities of the issues at stake.
  • Speaking of films with challenging topics and/or characters, there were plenty to go around in 1961 — including Robert Rossen’s The Hustler, featuring Paul Newman’s standout performance as “Fast Eddie” Felsen:

    … Sam Fuller’s Underworld U.S.A., a “morally challenging” “long-con revenge tale”:

    … and the original cinematic adaptation (featuring Sidney Poitier) of Lorraine Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun, in which “the toxicity of societal racism comes through loud and clear.”
  • Finally, a few personal favorites from 1961 include Jack Clayton’s highly atmospheric adaptation of Henry James’s “The Turn of the Screw,” retitled The Innocents:

    Victim, which took a bold cinematic step towards addressing legally sanctioned homophobia:

    … and Bryan Forbes’ little-seen Whistle Down the Wind (an excellent choice for Christmas viewing).

It was another good year for cinema!

Cartouche (1962)

Cartouche (1962)

“They obey me from one end of Paris to the other.”

Synopsis:
In 18th century France, a swashbuckling thief (Jean-Paul Belmondo) travels with his accomplices and his new wife Venus (Claudia Cardinale) to Paris, where they begin robbing from the rich and distributing to the poor — but things get much more complicated when “Cartouche” (Belmondo) falls for a beautiful noblewoman (Odile Versois).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Claudia Cardinale Films
  • French Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Jean-Paul Belmondo Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Royalty and Nobility
  • Thieves and Criminals

Review:
Philippe de Broca — perhaps best known for helming cult favorite King of Hearts (1966) — directed this high-spirited historical adventure flick, described by the New York Times reviewer as offering up “colorful, illustrating legendary footnotes to French history that should keep action fans, romantics and comedy connoisseurs happy even if it confuses the historians.” Indeed, one shouldn’t look for historical accuracy of any kind here — but the production design is appropriately lush, and one feels plopped directly into the era.

A year before starring in Fellini’s 8 1/2 (1963), Cardinale played luscious Venus, a gypsy whose willingness to overlook her partner’s openly roving eye strains credulity yet somehow works anyway; thankfully, her character is given an appropriately satisfying arc.

Belmondo, meanwhile — who seems to have participated in a remarkable number of films during the early 1960s — is able to put his rascally Godardian persona to good use (and did all his own stunts).

While it’s easy to see why he would fall for beautiful Versois:

… it does get complicated keeping our loyalties straight. Regardless, fans of this type of fare will likely not be disappointed (though viewers should be forewarned that there’s a highly distressing, lengthy waterboarding sequence included at one point).

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Jean-Paul Belmondo and Claudia Cardinale as Cartouche and Venus
  • Lovely cinematography and production design

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look if you enjoy this kind of drama and/or Belmondo or Cardinale.

Links:

Derby (1970)

Derby (1970)

“You’ve gotta earn what you make.”

Synopsis:
Aspiring roller derby players in Ohio dream about the big time.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Documentary
  • Sports

Review:
This disappointing documentary about the roller derby scene of the early 1970s offers little hope about the state of humanity. Granted, that shouldn’t necessarily be the prerogative of a sports documentary, which arguably should focus on: 1) what the sport entails, and 2) why people choose it.

In this case, however, while the action is plenty raw — these roller derby athletes play fast, rough, and theatrically — the aspiring athletes interviewed here (along with their wives and girlfriends) are such an uninteresting bunch that it’s hard to care whatsoever about their travails or their outcomes.


The biggest “star” of the show is Roller Derby Hall of Fame inductee Charlie O’Connell, shown here enjoying retirement by his poolside home in California.

Unfortunately, he’s utterly lacking in charisma or meaningful insights. The trailer for a later documentary called This is Roller Derby (2007) — which I haven’t yet seen, but plan to check out — offered me a lot more info in just three minutes.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Occasional snippets of drama on the skating track

Must See?
No; skip this one.

Links:

Red Desert (1964)

Red Desert (1964)

“You wonder what to look at; I wonder how to live. Same thing.”

Synopsis:
The traumatized wife (Monica Vitti) of a petro-chemical industrialist (Carlo Chionetti) begins an affair with a visiting associate (Richard Harris).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Infidelity
  • Italian Films
  • Mental Breakdown
  • Michelangelo Antonioni Films
  • Monica Vitti Films
  • Richard Harris Films

Review:
Michelangelo Antonioni’s fourth and final film made with Monica Vitti was his first in color, and in many ways feels like a fourth addition to their original b&w trilogy — L’Avventura (1960), La Notte (1961), and L’Eclisse (1962) — given that once again, Vitti plays a dissatisfied woman who seems to be aimlessly drifting through life. However, in this case she’s simultaneously recovering from and continuing to experience an ongoing mental breakdown much more overtly than what her previous characters went through.

Indeed, Vitti’s Giuliana is visibly disoriented and deeply distressed. At one point she states, “There’s something terrible about reality, and I don’t know what it is. No one will tell me.” Her performance is believable, and especially challenging to watch knowing that she lived so many of her final years suffering from Alzheimer’s. It’s hard not to sympathize with her sense of disorientation given how stupidly and/or mindlessly so many people around her act, as epitomized in the film’s odd party sequence taking place in a crowded riverside shack.

While it’s a little strange seeing red-headed Harris playing a dubbed Italian:

… it works well enough, and his inherent gravitas is welcomed. Story-wise, however, there is as little here to hold onto as in Antonioni’s earlier films. As Andrew Sarris wrote somewhat impatiently in his review for The Village Voice: “Antonioni’s first color film after eight black-and-white features in 15 years… is more a series of paintings unfurled in time than the kind of dramatic spectacle we have been calling a movie for the past half-century.” Indeed, it’s the visuals here — a combination of natural landscapes:

… and harsh mechanical wastelands:

… that most linger in one’s memory, rather than anything about the narrative or characters themselves.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Monica Vitti as Giuliana
  • Carlo Di Palma’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though most film fanatics will likely be curious to see it as part of Antonioni’s quartet of Vitti films. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Eclisse, L’ / Eclipse, The (1962)

Eclisse, L’ / Eclipse, The (1962)

“All those billions, lost — where do they end up?”

Synopsis:
A young woman (Monica Vitti) who has just broken up with her lover (Francisco Rabal) finds new romance with the earnings-focused stock broker (Alain Delon) of her mother (Lilla Brignone).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Alain Delon Films
  • Italian Films
  • Michelangelo Antonioni Films
  • Monica Vitti Films

Review:
This third entry in Antonioni’s informal “trilogy of alienation” — following L’Avventura (1960) and La Notte (1961) — once again features his muse and lover, Monica Vitti, in a central role; and, similar to the two earlier titles, its storyline — this time taking place in the EUR of Rome — isn’t exactly jam-packed. As DVD Savant writes in his synopsis of the film: “The camera simply observes a series of events in a young woman’s life that show her responses — or more accurately, her difficulty in finding responses — to what seems a random and soul-less existence.”

Indeed. Of course, there is a lot more going on thematically for those interested in digging deeper; as Professor Richard Read notes in his analysis of the film:

“It is widely recognized that Michelangelo Antonioni’s film L’Eclisse is a late Italian Neo-Realist critique of the alienating effects of capitalist reification, mass society, mechanization, dysfunctional gender roles and urban living in Cold War Rome.”

Yep. All that, for sure — though as a straightforward movie-watching experience, the film remains less than compelling. However, Vitti and Delon are a beautiful couple to look at:

… and Gianni Di Venanzo’s cinematography is top-notch. Especially noteworthy are the energetic stock trading scenes, filmed with real brokers as extras to add to the verisimilitude.

Note: If you’d like to geek out on the role of architecture in this film, be sure to watch James Macgillvray’s talk.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine cinematography


Must See?
No, though most film fanatics will probably be curious to check it out.

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

La Notte (1961)

La Notte (1961)

“You two have really worn me out tonight.”

Synopsis:
A novelist (Marcello Mastroianni) and his wife (Jeanne Moreau) spend a challenging evening together, including attending a party where Mastroianni flirts with a beautiful young woman (Monica Vitti) and a playboy (Giorgio Negro) pursues Moreau.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Italian Films
  • Jeanne Moreau Films
  • Marcello Mastroianni Films
  • Marital Problems
  • Michelangelo Antonioni Films
  • Monica Vitti Films

Review:
The second of Michelangelo Antonioni’s so-called “alienation trilogy” — after L’Avventura (1960) and before L’Eclisse (1962) — was this similarly (slowly) paced film showing us a day and a night in the lives of a well-to-do couple whose relationship has clearly reached a point of impasse. After visiting their dying friend (Bernard Wicki) in the hospital:

… Mastroianni is briefly seduced by a disturbed young woman (Maria Pia Luzi) down the hall:

… while nonchalant Moreau wanders the streets of Milan, observing life and landscapes around her.

That night, the couple head first to a nightclub, where they watch an erotic dance:

… and then to a party, which takes up the entire second half of the film.


Mastroianni is attracted to the daughter (Vitti) of the party host (Vincenzo Corbella):

… while Moreau allows herself to be distracted by a man (Giorgio Negro) who’s shown interest in her.

As with most other Antonioni films of the period, that just about sums up the narrative. While it’s beautifully shot, this one is only must-see for fans of his work.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Gianni Di Venanzo’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look.

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Last Year at Marienbad (1961)

Last Year at Marienbad (1961)

“You know you are ready to leave.”

Synopsis:
At a baroque European hotel, a tall skinny man (Sacha Pitoëff) challenges inhabitants to the game of Nim while an elegant man (Giorgio Albertazzi) continuously insists to a woman (Delphine Seyrig) — perhaps Pitoëff’s spouse — that they had an affair the prior year.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Alain Resnais Films
  • Delphine Seyrig Films
  • French Films

Review:
Alain Resnais’s follow-up to Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959) was this collaboration with writer Alain Robbe-Grillet, resulting in one of the most unusual, provocative, and inscrutable entries in the French New Wave. None of the characters have names, and there is no storyline to speak of other than Albertazzi’s repetitive pursuit (gaslighting?) of luminous Seyrig across various spaces in and around the unnamed hotel.

We have no idea — and (SPOILER) never learn — what’s actually going on here. Albertazzi tells Seyrig things like: “You were waiting for me.” “No,” she replies, “why should I be?” His response: “I’ve waited a long time for you.” Later he says: “You’re running away again.” She replies: “What do you mean? I don’t understand a word.” He responds: “If it were a dream, why should you be afraid?” “Tell me,” she says.

And on and on. Later he adds: “You asked me not to see you. But of course we met, the day after or the next, or the day after that. Perhaps it was by accident. I insisted on your leaving with me. You said it was impossible, of course. But now, you know it’s the only thing left for you to do.” And so we hear, relentlessly, why he believes they were once together and should be again.


Does Seyrig want to believe this is true? It’s not clear — and perhaps not relevant, given that this is Albertazzi’s dream (or reality, or intention), and Seyrig simply plays a key role-of-desire, with Pitoëff showing up every now and then as a not-so-menacing third wheel presence.

To that end, there are two repetitive games going on throughout the film: Pitoëff’s matches with various players (he always wins):

… and Albertazzi’s insistent pursuit of Seyrig. Does he get her in the end? I will leave that to you to find out, since it’s the sole narrative hook of the entire venture.

Watch for a subtle image of Hitchcock on the right during an early sequence; I had to go back to look for it once I learned it was there.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Elegant costumes and production design

  • Sacha Vierny’s cinematography

Must See?
Yes, for its historical relevance. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Tanya’s Island (1980)

Tanya’s Island (1980)

“How much did you miss me? Sometimes I wonder if you need me at all.”

Synopsis:
When a model (Vanity) and her partner (Richard Sargent) end up on an island with a gorilla (Don McLeod), an unusual love triangle ensues.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cross Cultural Romance
  • Deserted Island
  • Love Triangle
  • Primates

Review:
It’s unfortunate that Alfred Sole — director of the horror cult classic Alice, Sweet Alice (1977) — followed up with this nearly unwatchable dreck. Rather than engaging in any attempt at analysis, I’ll simply cite from Graeme Clark’s review for Spinning Image:

This strange item of exoticism was written by its producer Pierre Brousseau and for the male viewers it poses that age old problem. You’re artistic, sensitive but manly, and entirely self-sufficient – so why is your girlfriend interested in a gorilla?

That is the question, indeed. Viewers at the time were likely intrigued and/or excited to see Vanity — best known as lead singer of Nasty 6, which performed Prince’s “Nasty Girl” — in a leading role featuring plenty of nudity:

… and Rick Baker designed the gorilla suit, for what that’s worth.

But the storyline (such as it is — I’ll leave all surprises to you) is sorely lacking.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:
Really, not much.

Must See?
Nope; skip this one.

Links: