Showing posts with label Janet Leigh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Janet Leigh. Show all posts

Friday, August 22, 2008

Repeat Viewing: Touch of Evil (1958, Orson Welles)

TSPDT placing: #22

Directed by: Orson Welles
Written by: Whit Masterson (novel), Orson Welles (screenplay), Paul Monash, Franklin Coen (reshoots)

Orson Welles was undoubtedly one of the finest filmmakers of the twentieth century, and yet the entire span of his career carried with it an air of tragedy. Knowing exactly what he wanted in his films, Welles frequently stood on the toes of studio executives, usually unsuccessfully, and most of his pictures were eventually cut and re-cut into completely different entities. By the end of his career, studios were refusing to fund any of his films, numerous projects were abandoned and Welles' lingering cinematic genius went to waste. With the exception of The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), Touch of Evil (1958) is the director's most famous butchered masterpiece. Furious with the alterations that had been made to his work, Welles wrote a 58-page memo highlighting the changes he would like to see made. It was not until 1998 that a "director's cut" based upon Welles' wishes was edited and released, and this is the version that I have just enjoyed, considered definitive by most Wellsians. Additionally, I was lucky enough to experience the film in the cinema, in a classic double-bill with Carol Reed's The Third Man (1949).

Welcome to Los Robles, a small town on the border of Mexico and the United States. As by-the-book Mexican narcotics cop Mike Vargas (Charlton Heston) explains, "all border towns bring out the worst in a country." Drugs, alcohol and firearms do a steady trade; greed and corruption stretches to the very heights of law enforcement. Police Captain Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles) is the most respected American detective in the region, but he is as corrupt as the criminals whom he puts behind bars daily. Unshaven, obese, obsessed and arrogant, Quinlan boasts no redeeming qualities, a stupid and dangerous hunk of flesh. He is truly a formidable villain, and perhaps one of the finest that I have seen in a film: he's Harry Lime without the likable boyish charisma. However, and herein lies the dilemma, Quinlan is one helluva good detective, and his procedures, however dubious, often get the job done. But is it acceptable to convict even a guilty criminal based on fabricated evidence, or does this make Quinlan the worst criminal of all?















After a home-made bomb tears apart the vehicle of a wealthy American businessman (via an astonishing uninterrupted three-minute crane tracking shot), Detective Vargas offers his aid in solving the crime. He is currently on a honeymoon with his newly-married American wife, Susie (Janet Leigh), but his job appears to be a priority to him, and he is often neglectful of the women he loves. Few are enthusiastic about having a Mexican's help in the case, and Vargas' involvement will later lead Quinlan to cross the line between dishonesty and pure evil. Filmed as a B-movie on a B-movie budget (Welles was paid meager $125,000 for his writing, acting and directorial duties, only to have his film butchered by the producers), Touch of Evil exploits its low-budget roots for maximum shock value, inviting the audience into a highly-exaggerated, unrelentingly-sinister web of deceit, lies, betrayal and murder. Almost every supporting character – from the bulging Quinlan to the sleazy, slimy Mexican drug-lords of the Grandi family – have not a redeeming value to their characters.















Commentaries on Touch of Evil, even the overwhelmingly positive ones, find it obligatory to include a snide remark on Charlton Heston's unsuitability for the role. I had no such qualms. Having seen fewer Heston films than I'd like to admit, and so being unacquainted with his all-American image, I found him quite believable as the Mexican Mike Vargas, his unflinching moral determination often leading him to abandon his damsel-in-distress wife when she most needs him. Orson Welles, his already-wide girth complemented by large amounts of padding and low-angle cinematography, is a genuinely menacing antagonist, especially when one considers a distant past when Quinlan must have been an honest detective. The Police Captain's long-time partner and good friend, Pete Menzies (Joseph Calleia) grovels admiringly at the feet of his superior, a somewhat pathetic devotee – forced to risk everything for the sake of his duty to the law – who ultimately lends an air of dignity to the parade of dark characters.

Charlton Heston wasn't far off the mark when he described Touch of Evil as "the greatest B-movie ever made." The film does, indeed, descend into subject matter of such squalor and revulsion that it seems the work of a filmmaker outside the polished Hollywood studio system. Nevertheless, the film is also the work of a consummate professional, with outstanding camera-work that often employs smoothly-shot long-takes. It's this contrast that I find most interesting about the film: Welles is utilising stylish and classy artistry to capture an environment completely devoid of style or class, a retched and depraved community of low-lives and petty criminals, drugs and sex, murder and corruption. This raw pulpiness, momentarily realised in the open minutes of Aldrich's Kiss Me Deadly (1955), is here brought to its apex. Welles' film, though completely overlooked at the 1959 Academy Awards, has since developed the status of a classic, and is perhaps his most celebrated film after his extraordinary 1941 debut, Citizen Kane. It was also the last film that the director would complete in Hollywood.
8/10

Currently my #2 film of 1958:
1) Vertigo (Alfred Hitchcock)
2) Touch of Evil (Orson Welles)
3) The Fountain of Youth (Orson Welles) (TV)

What others have said:

"Much of Welles' work was autobiographical, and the characters he chose to play (Kane, Macbeth, Othello) were giants destroyed by hubris. Now consider Quinlan, who nurses old hurts and tries to orchestrate this scenario like a director, assigning dialogue and roles. There is a sense in which Quinlan wants final cut in the plot of this movie, and doesn't get it. He's running down after years of indulgence and self-abuse, and his ego leads him into trouble. Is there a resonance between the Welles character here and the man he became?... To some degree, his characters reflected his feelings about himself and his prospects, and Touch of Evil may be as much about Orson Welles as Hank Quinlan. Welles brought great style to his movies, embracing excess in his life and work as the price (and reward) of his freedom."

"I first saw it when I was 14 and thought it was one of the worst pictures ever--garish, oppressive, and appallingly overacted. Grown up, I'd go with those same adjectives, except now I think it's one of the best. But I'm not going to recant my first response. Part of recognizing that Touch of Evil is a masterpiece means also recognizing that it's often suffocatingly unpleasant, and that Welles is working off his aggression for the vast, trash-movie audience that he hoped to attract. His compositions are teeming, unbalanced, with a center of gravity that lurches left then right."

"Touch of Evil smacks of brilliance but ultimately flounders in it. Taken scene by scene, there is much to be said for this filmization of Whit Masterson's novel, "Badge of Evil." Orson Welles' script contains some hard-hitting dialog; his use of low key lighting is effective, and Russell Metty's photography is fluid and impressive; and Henry Mancini's music is poignant. But Touch of Evil proves it takes more than good scenes to make a good picture... Off his rocker since his wife was murdered years ago, Welles supposedly is deserving of a bit of sympathy. At least, there's a hint of it in dialog, even though it isn't seen in his characterization. Aside from this, he turns in a unique and absorbing performance. Heston keeps his plight the point of major importance, combining a dynamic quality with a touch of Latin personality. Leigh, sexy as all get-out, switches from charm to fright with facility in a capable portrayal."
Variety, 1958
Also recommended from director Orson Welles:

"Macbeth (1948), the first of several Shakespeare adaptations from Orson Welles, is bleak, incredibly bleak. Shot on a restricted budget over just 21 days, the film spends most of its running time swathed in low-lying fog, evoking the haunting desolation and claustrophobia of the unknown Scottish wilderness. In terms of atmosphere, the film is completely brilliant, with Welles having transformed his meagre finances into an asset through his use of constrained sets and mist-obscured surroundings. The director himself, long valued for his incredible on screen presence, bellows his old-style dialogue at the audience, his delivery communicating an inescapable inner torment that leaves you drained and exhausted by the film's end."

"Many early television shows have a tendency to be horrendously stagnant and monotonous, with actors exchanging unconvincing lines amid a shoddy-looking production set with cardboard walls. However, for The Fountain of Youth (1958), Welles borrows from his extensive film-making experience to produce a work that is both refreshing and enjoyable. The eccentric editing techniques – cutting sporadically between still frames, live action and Welles' enigmatic narration – are similar to his later work in F for Fake (1974), and help make the story almost compulsively watchable."

"Vienna (1968) is a completely inconsequential addition to the great director's filmography, a mildly-contemplative reflection on a city of which the filmmaker was fond. That is not to say that I'm not glad to have watched it; after all, inconsequential Orson is better than no Orson at all... Employing a style of montage that effectively foreshadows that beguiling cinematic essay that is F for Fake (1974), Welles' ramble through Vienna can best be described as an affectionate home movie, a diary through which the director can translate a few of his thoughts on the world. His most interesting assertion comes at the beginning of the film, when Welles muses that the Vienna everybody remembers is a version of the city that never existed."

Read More...

Friday, May 16, 2008

Repeat Viewing: Psycho (1960, Alfred Hitchcock)

TSPDT placing: #30
Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock
Written by: Robert Bloch (novel), Joseph Stefano (screenplay)
Starring: Anthony Perkins, Janet Leigh, Vera Miles, John Gavin, Martin Balsam, John McIntire

WARNING: Plot and/or ending details may follow!!!

June, 1960. The movie theatre is quiet; 45 minutes ago, the halls were buzzing with movement and anticipation, but not anymore. Nobody has been allowed into the cinema since the picture began, and the audience is dead quiet. Through the walls of the theatre, one can hear the muffled whirr of running water. Silence. A indistinct shadow is seen approaching through the curtain. Accompanied by the fierce screech of violins, hundreds of voices suddenly utter a deafening chorus of horrified shock and surprise; some patrons collapse into the aisle. Bernard Hermann continues to pound the violin with extraordinary intensity, and a bloody streak carves its path towards the drainpipe. Audience members reel with a frantic mixture of stunned confusion and gripping fear. The Master of Suspense, Alfred Hitchcock, has just painted the most extraordinary masterstroke of his distinguished career. The simple act of taking a shower will never again be the same.

Though he produced many films that could justifiably be considered masterpieces, it is unlikely that Hitchcock ever directed anything more popular and influential than Psycho (1960). The first of only two Hitchcock horror films, it shocked many with its unique narrative structure, and the infamous "shower scene" has become permanently imprinted in the movie-going public's collective memory. Hitchcock allegedly produced the film in order to reclaim his designation as "The Master of Suspense," as he considered Frenchman Henri-Georges Clouzot to have temporarily seized the title with The Wages of Fear (1953) and especially Les Diaboliques (1955). Interestingly, the latter film has a particularly alarming bathtub sequence, and perhaps Psycho was the film through which Hitchcock was able to respond to (and improve upon) the achievements of his chief rival. Gone are the larger-than-life artistic flourishes of Vertigo (1958) and North by Northwest (1959) – this is the Master of Suspense at his leanest and meanest, a film completely stripped of its spectacle and lowered into the unfathomable depths of the disturbed human mind.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Adapted by Joseph Stefano from Robert Bloch's 1959 novel, Psycho opens with the character of Marion Crane (Janet Leigh), a real-estate secretary who impulsively steals $40,000 from her boss and flees in the direction of her California boyfriend. Her cross-country flight ultimately leads her to the Bates Motel, managed by the awkward and mild-mannered Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins), a man who submits loyally to the wishes of his mentally-ill, domineering mother. Meanwhile, Marion's boyfriend Sam Loomis (John Gavin) and sister Lila (Vera Miles) set out in pursuit, their search ending – inevitably – at the Bates motel. The story sporadically shifts from one character to the other; after convincing audiences that Marion Crane is "the wrong man" of so many of his previous pictures, Hitchcock deftly strikes at the heart of their sympathies. In his early film Sabotage (1936), the director had condemned his own decision to murder a character with whom the viewer had been asked to identify, though here he once again dared to break his own rules, and we've never forgotten it.
.
Paramount was so aghast at the story's graphic subject matter, labelling it "too repulsive," that Hitchcock's budget was severely restricted, and the director was forced to finance the film through his own Shamley Productions. These budget limitations proved crucial in developing the unforgettable atmosphere, and were a major factor in his decision to film is black-and-white (which he also did to avoid incurring the wrath of the censors). Though Psycho received a mixed critical response upon its release, its commercial success was extraordinary, and film-goers lined entire city blocks to experience the director's latest. Conversely, fellow British director Michael Powell's thematically-similar Peeping Tom (1960) had been severely trashed by critics and audiences alike just months earlier, and the career of the beloved filmmaker was, for all practical purposes, left in ruins. Furthermore, the success of Psycho triggered the emergence of the "slasher" flick, and subsequent years saw a slew of inferior, gory and imaginatively-titled knock-offs, such as Maniac (1963), Paranoic (1963) and Fanatic (1965).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>
>
>

Though discussions of Psycho rarely stray from the film's more disturbing moments, it's interesting to consider the various crucial scenes of human interaction. Marion's supper with Norman in the parlour room, surrounded by the seemingly-passive but strangely-threatening stuffed birds, is a masterpiece of nervous tension, awkwardness, and the tiny inflections of human speech that communicate more than mere words ever could. Anthony Perkins plays the role of Norman Bates to quirky perfection, and his character {perhaps modelled from Dennis Weaver's jittery hotel night manager in Touch of Evil (1958) – also starring Janet Leigh} is a man who initially demands our pity and understanding. Even after the atrocity in the shower, Hitchcock, as he also did in Frenzy (1972), builds a suspense sequence around a villain's attempts to conceal the traces of his crime. Martin Balsam is rarely mentioned when discussing the film, but his characterisation of detective Milton Arbogast is letter-perfect, his shrewd but amenable tone successfully lulling Norman into a false sense of triumph, and yet the audience knows full well that the experienced investigator sees the transparency of his lies.

Despite the prevalence of cultural spoofs and references, Psycho is a thriller that still holds up exceptionally well, even though most viewers are fully-aware of the first major twist. When I first watched the film several years ago, I was completely ignorant of Mother's true identity, and I gasped aloud at the revelation in the fruit cellar, the swinging lightbulb casting a shifting luminance on the rotting corpse of Norma Bates, as Bernard Herrmann's intense, imaginative and very memorable musical score screeches in the background. Few moments in cinema have succeeded in giving me the same icy chill as the image of Norman in the prison cell, consumed by the mental consciousness of his overbearing mother, and that sinister smile that fades subliminally into the decaying shadow of a human skull. Norman Bates will continue to live on in my nightmares.
10/10

Currently my #1 film of 1960:
1) Psycho (Alfred Hitchcock)
2) The Apartment (Billy Wilder)
3) Peeping Tom (Michael Powell)
4) Inherit the Wind (Stanley Kramer)
5) The Time Machine (George Pal)

Currently my #1 film from director Alfred Hitchcock:
1) Psycho (1960)
2) Strangers On A Train (1951)
3) Vertigo (1958)
4) Rear Window (1954)
5) Rope (1948)
6) Rebecca (1940)
7) North by Northwest (1959)
8) I Confess (1953)
9) The Lady Vanishes (1938)
10) Spellbound (1945)

Read More...