1980s, Film Noir, Thriller

Hammett (1982)

.

Director: Wim Wenders
Screenwriters: Dennis O’Flaherty, Ross Thomas

In memoriam: Frederic Forrest 1936-2023

By Roderick Heath

Wim Wenders’ Hammett is a movie hard to define. The Hollywood debut of Wenders, Hammett is a crossroads of cinematic styles and epochs. Revisionist neo-noir. Lush tribute to the moviemaking aesthetics of yore. An arty, meta-laced disassembly of those hallowed things. A musing on personal creativity in immediate relation with the evil in the world. A dizzy romp through hallucinated retro Americana by a freshly transplanted filmmaking imagination, offering his peculiarly European take on a film genre and writing legacy. It’s also one of my absolute favourite films, precisely because it’s such a peculiar and rarefied chimera. The source material was a 1975 novel by Joe Gores, a writer who, like the eponymous Hammett himself, had changed careers from private detective to author. Francis Ford Coppola executive produced the film through his American Zoetrope studio, one of several similar productions, including Coppola’s own One From The Heart (1981) and The Cotton Club (1984), which placed heavy emphasis on highly artificial and stylised productions and a variety of retro-flavoured pop artistry encoded in the product, balancing revisionist impulses with a fetishist delight in honouring bygone modes in movies and other arts and trying to prove the two could coexist. That audiences didn’t agree was made patently manifest when most of those movies were ruinous failures.

In a situation reminiscent of the making of Poltergeist (1982), Hammett was dogged by rumours that Coppola himself had forcibly reshot portions of it. Wenders still strenuously denies that, whilst acknowledging Coppola kept a heavy hand in supervising, and obliged him to reshoot portions of it, moving away from his original, more location-based approach. I believe Wenders, in large part because the film feels more like his than Coppola’s even as it’s moulded according to an artistic faith Coppola was dedicated to at the time. Wenders later reported there was no chance of fashioning a director’s cut of his original conception of Hammett because the footage had been junked. In any event, like some other mistreated, high-style relics of early 1980s screen culture, including Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate (1980) and Michael Mann’s The Keep (1983), it’s what actually remains that grips my attention. Hammett emerged as a witty, haunting, byzantine meditation on the meeting of life and art as well as an entertaining jaunt through a generation of beloved clichés, as viewed through the lens of the writer who serves as the film’s protagonist.

Samuel Dashiell Hammett has climbed slowly from the status of a popular author in a disreputable genre to being considered one of the truly important figures of American writing in the Twentieth century. Hammett’s writing was charged with deceptive artistry, uniting a hard and rigorous realism based in his lived experience as a private detective and the unsentimental, even radical worldview he formed in that time, and a Dickensian sense of human strangeness, pitched somewhere in the grey zone between reportage and funhouse mirror caricature, his stories and novels populated with deftly described types and perfervid grotesques. Hammett only wrote a few dozen short stories and five novels, quitting after publishing The Thin Man in 1934 and only writing a few screenplays afterwards, including the adaptation of his long-time lover Lillian Hellman’s Watch On The Rhine (1942). But, in part thanks to Raymond Chandler’s later proselytising on his behalf, and the success of films based on his work including John Huston’s trendsetting The Maltese Falcon (1941) and the popular series spun off from The Thin Man, Hammett came to be seen as, if not the creator of hardboiled crime fiction, than its first real master, its grizzled, gritty Dante or Chaucer, a man whose influence runs not just through his specific subgenre but the entire realm of realistic procedural thriller fiction as well literary writers. Hammett’s life was truly interesting if also, ultimately, quite tragic, beset as it was by illness, alcoholism, political persecution, and jailing, all leading to his early death in 1961. Hammett’s background as a writer who had really engaged in the specialised, rarefied milieu he wrote about gave his work authority and his artistic persona a rare gloss of mystique.

Wenders, on the other hand, was at the time of making Hammett a hot young director who emerged amidst the cadre of German New Wave filmmaker in the early 1970s. Wenders, born in Düsseldorf in 1945, made his feature filmmaking debut with Summer in the City (1970), and made his reputation with his second, The Goalie’s Anxiety at the Penalty Kick (1971), an adaptation of a novel by the writer Peter Handke, who also wrote the film’s script and became one of Wenders’ regular collaborators. Wenders burnished his reputation with the so-called “road” trilogy of Alice in the Cities (1974), The Wrong Move (1975), and Kings of the Road (1976), all portraits of rootless and alienated people, in between two idiosyncratic and defiantly personalised adaptations of famous American novels, The Scarlet Letter (1973) and The American Friend (1977), the latter an adaptation of Patricia Highsmith’s Ripley’s Game. After that, like his peer Werner Herzog, Wenders started making movies in America but never, entirely went Hollywood, remaining instead somewhat peripatetic and making documentaries alongside his features. Wenders managed to escape the contentious making of Hammett and soon made his two most famous films, Paris, Texas (1984) and Wings of Desire (1987), but those successes wedged him in an uncomfortable place between arthouse eccentric and popular international auteur. This led to a career that has ever since lurched between ambitious but divisive or even ignored labours like Until The End of The World (1991), The End of Violence (1997), The Million Dollar Hotel (2000), and Don’t Come Knocking (2005), as well as the popular and acclaimed documentary Buena Vista Social Club (1999), a film that sprang from Wenders’ passion for music as subject matter.

Wenders was nonetheless at the height of his peculiar talent when he made Hammett, a film made more in the mould of the moody metropolitan textures of The American Friend than the stark, space-besotted eye of Paris, Texas but containing seeds of the same forlorn and blasted romanticism and portrait of people adrift in the American landscape. Hammett’s narrative method, blending fact and fiction and blurring any firm sense of distinction with its quasi-metafictional framework, is one that’s more familiar and popular today than it was in 1982. The script was written by Ross Thomas, who under a pseudonym had written the novel The Procane Chronicle, which also depicted a writer playing at being a private eye and was filmed in 1976 as St. Ives, and former actor Dennis O’Flaherty. The film begins and ends with a portrait of Hammett (Frederic Forrest) banging away with relentless zeal at his typewriter, Wenders imbuing that mundane labour with a sense of the epic as he film up through the keys whilst Hammett bashes them, as the heady world he knits in his mind flows down on the page. Hammett, holed up in his apartment in downtown San Francisco circa 1928 (the year before he would publish his first and perhaps best novel, Red Harvest), is creating one of the stories he’s becoming reputed for. The story is then partly acted out for us in a perfect simulacrum of a 1930s movie set depicting a waterfront locale, the kind where dry ice fog flows over studio tank water, the lights blink and glow like outposts in the subsconsious, and the infrastructure is tangled in a gritty-romantic manner.

Hammett’s recurring, hardnosed private eye character, known to posterity as the Continental Op (Peter Boyle), and his sultry female operative Sue Alabama (Marilu Henner) on a job. Sent to buy back some stolen pearls, the Op has been instructed to send a woman as go-between, and he’s chosen his sometime flame Sue: she loads up a derringer in preparation for danger. The Op hears a shot and dashes to intervene, only to find Sue has shot a man dead. The Op quickly realises however that Sue has actually just eliminated her partner in a con she set up, with the pearls clumsily stashed. Sue begs the Op for a two-hour window to make a getaway before he sets the cops on her, and he promises one, but doesn’t keep that promise, and Sue is quickly arrested. “Sue Alabama and I were almost married back in 25,” the Ops narration reports with the faintest breeze of tragedy wafting across the officially hardboiled tone, “I guess it’s just as well we didn’t.” Hammett’s work is interrupted as he lurches into his toilet for a violent coughing fit, sparked by the case of tuberculosis he’s still recovering from, as well as his penchant for nasty booze and cigarettes, but he eventually curls up his bed, pleased with the wad of inky manuscript in his grasp.

The way the fiction and fact weave about each-other in Hammett helps imbue its slippery, opiated textures. Wenders uses his visual language to suggest something unstable about the images on screen, most apparent in the reuse of actors in roles within and without the enacted story and the occasionally jagged and disjunctive editing. Wenders captures Hammett’s own mind stepping back and forth from his imagination with flash edits of the ideas, like the bags of pearls submerged in harbour water, the driving MacGuffin for a story that’s really about seeing someone you love make an awful choice. And whilst the film resists a twist a la Francois Ozon’s Swimming Pool (2002) or Joe Wright’s Atonement (2007) where some portion of the drama on screen is revealed to all be unfolding within Hammett’s head, the way the two realms remain interwoven extends to the climax of the “real” narrative, which essentially reproduces the end of Hammett’s story with rearranged elements and a different but equally, tragically ironic outcome. Of course, Hammett itself is fiction being conjured for us by the filmmakers, and the film is happy in making the audience conscious of its own falseness.

Hammett awakens to find a man in his room, and quickly recognises James Ryan (Boyle again), his one-time mentor and partner as a private detective and the model for the Op, who’s easily slipped into the apartment and is reading the new story. “Her name wasn’t Sue Alabama,” Ryan notes, “It was Betty Philadelphia. And I did marry her, worse luck.” Ryan is well-dressed and prosperous-looking, and he’s in town pursuing some enquiry he doesn’t explain to Hammett, requesting only that his former protégé be his backup for a foray into Chinatown, and recalls that Hammett owes him one mighty favour since Ryan took a bullet for him back when Hammett was still green. Hammett wearily but willingly comes along for the ride, planning to mail off the story on the way, but before he gets a chance Ryan realises they’re being followed by Winston (David Patrick Kelly), a heavy dressed in black, and try to elude him by descending into a basement brothel. Ryan exchanges bullets with Winston, sparking chaos, and when the confusion dies down Hammett realises Ryan has vanished and his manuscript lost. Ryan fails to show up at the speakeasy they arranged to meet at, sparking Hammett’s odyssey through the streets and social strata of San Francisco in his bid to find what happened to both.

Forrest had caught eyes with his important supporting role in Coppola’s The Conversation (1974), and plaudits for his scene-stealing work in Apocalypse Now (1979), playing the terminally sane but out-of-his-depth nice guy Chef. Coppola, sensing a brand of hangdog American everyman potential in Forrest, tried with One From The Heart and this film to promote him to a leading man, a good idea that nonetheless didn’t take. So enjoyable and convincing is his inhabitation of Hammett however that over a decade later he got to revisit the role in Frank Pierson’s telemovie Citizen Cohn (1993), which briefly depicted the HUAC’s attack dog lawyer Roy Cohn trying and failing to make Hammett play ball with him. With his hair riven with premature grey but his arms still showing muscular strength, Forrest’s Hammett presents a quick-witted, intelligent, furtively romantic and able hero who is nonetheless far from being the kind of titanic tough guy his stories celebrate and the case he’s stumbled into needs. His Hammett grins ruefully as Ryan demands he honour his singular debt, accepting that such debts never get called in at convenient times, and turns momentarily charismatic and playful when he encounters a woman in library (Liz Roberson), whose name he doesn’t remember but perfectly recalls when and where they last met (“Christmas Eve, Nineteen Twenty-Four!), and gives her a congratulatory kiss when she mentions she’s now married.

Ryan, in his idealised remembrance of his old mentor, is that man, and Hammett is dogged by guilty fantasies of Ryan shooting him for taking what he taught him, the accumulated art and lore of a lifetime as a gumshoe, and selling “on the street in a cheap magazine.” Hammett’s retirement from detective work is meanwhile noted to have been partly inspired by his health and partly by political conviction. One of Hammett’s best friends in San Francisco is cab driver Eli (Elisha Cook Jr), who he describes as the “last of the IWW organizers,” (“Oh, that’s just Hammett talkin’,” Eli retorts, “What I am now is sort of an Anarchist with Syndicalist tendencies.”), which segues into Hammett explaining that he quit working for the Pinkerton Agency precisely because he was being forced to do strikebreaking. In the course of rummaging his way through the under, over, and in-between worlds of the city, Hammett begins to encounter sundry characters, who all prove mysteriously connected. He’s forced to keep eluding Winston, who starts tailing him and confronts another follower, the nervous, diminutive Gary Salt (Jack Nance), who claims to be a reporter working on a story about forced underage prostitution in Chinatown, and later hints he and Ryan are in competition for something.

Both men are connected to Crystal Ling (Lydia Lei), a beautiful young woman who once escaped the “cribs” of Chinatown, which are all controlled by top gangster Fong Wei Tau (Michael Chow). Hammett learns Crystal once found refuge with Mission manager Donaldina Cameron (Sylvia Sydney), where she met Salt. She turns up in Hammett’s apartment seeking temporary refuge, and Hammett agrees, only for her to be reported dead soon after. Hammett receives a brief telephone call from Ryan, whose curt, barely coherent instructions lead Hammett to the story of a wealthy city elder, C.F. Callaghan, who recently died, supposedly of suicide. Hammett learns from Doc Fallon (Elmer Kline) that Callaghan was actually, violently murdered, but the crime has been covered up. Winston eventually proves to work for the successful lawyer ‘English’ Eddie Hagedorn (Roy Kinnear), who represents the Callaghan estate and is trying to keep the secret. Hammett falls afoul of Fong when he tries to talk with him. Fong proves to be holding Ryan captive, and also has Hammett’s manuscript.

The tangle of plotting threatens in Hammett at points to become almost as dense and opaque as in The Big Sleep, which Chandler reported he even he didn’t entirely understand, but it does eventually resolve into something like sense. Hammett’s probing chiefly serves to bring him into contact with people who are supposed to be the authentic models for the characters in his tales, an idea made more obvious right at the film’s end when Hammett returns to his typewriter, the people he’s met now transcribed into fictional figures. Hagedorn and Winston, for instance, supposed be the inspirations for Kasper ‘The Fat Man’ Gutman and his gunsel Wilmer in The Maltese Falcon, whilst Ryan himself the closest to an equivalent to the Op, and Hammett’s personal proximity to Sam Spade is noted through the fact he’s known to his friends by his real first name. Hammett’s neighbour, the not-at-all mousey librarian Kit Conger (Henner again), has already become the immediate avatar for the tough dames and femmes fatale in his writing, and she is drawn into the case for real through proximity, sympathy, and fascination. “And for what?” Kit asks Hammett after their adventures land them in bed together, “A glimpse in the cesspool? A roll in the hay?” “A roll in the hay at least,” Hammett jests, before assuring her she did a good and noble thing helping him out when he needed it.

Hammett could be considered as perhaps the last of a cadre of films sparked in the 1970s, when a popular revival particularly of Humphrey Bogart’s oeuvre and the attendant mystique of the 1940s film noir helped inspire a revisionist movement, including Robert Altman’s The Long Goodbye (1973), Roman Polanski’s Chinatown (1974), and Arthur Penn’s Night Moves (1975). Those entries took up the private eye genre as defined by Hammett and Chandler but dragged it into an unsparingly aware and sceptical zeitgeist, applying not just a modern filmmaking style but an updated thematic palette, one where social corruption and sexual aberration could be dealt with without euphemism or censor-pleasing. It also followed send-ups like Robert Moore’s The Cheap Detective (1978), written by Neil Simon and similarly preoccupied by recreating the look and feel of old studio movies. A successful TV miniseries adaptation of Hammett’s The Dain Curse (1978) also made the writer’s work popular again in a more straight-laced mould. Hammett extends the revisionist mode however, by calling attention to things like depicting a direct connection between capitalist might and political influence and police corruption, the more unsparing approach to noting the racism and exploitation apparent in the age in depicting a demimonde littered with underage sex slavery, and elucidating the precise underworld meaning of the word “gunsel,” which Hammett popularised, as a slang description of a homosexual hoodlum.

But Hammett also bends away from that revisionist style in its dense, non-realistic visual textures, with Wenders alternating between carefully dressed real locations and backlot recreations that aim for the oneiric quality found in old B-movies. Indeed, Wenders does his damnedest to turn that dreamlike quality into an entire aesthetic. Much like Herzog attempted with his remake of Nosferatu The Vampyre (1979), a movie Herzog said he made to try and exorcise the film’s grasp on his formative cinematic imagination, Wenders tries to assimilate a bygone movie style not just for the sake of nostalgic pleasures, although for those too, but to weave it into a personal mythos, to tap some elusive aesthetic meaning and accord with the deeper wells of creative impression. This elusive project motivates moments of self-conscious artificiality, as when Wenders films Winston lurking whilst watching Hammett and Ryan descending a staircase, with Kelly rear-projected into the image. This transforms a seemingly functional, plot-developing shot into something more peculiar, even surreal, but it’s the sort of thing that was also once part of the common fabric of Hollywood movies as a shortcut to achieving such functional shots. Hammett’s adventures come to resemble an anatomisation of the hidden, floating world lurking in San Francisco’s walk-down rooms and basements, its art deco skyscrapers and wooden stairwells, where entire little communities riddled with crime, sleaze, and secret potentates persist.

Hammett ultimately weaves an atmosphere that feels closer to the underworld fantasies of Fritz Lang’s The Spiders (1919) and Dr. Mabuse, The Gambler (1922) and the hallucinatory demimondes of Josef von Sternberg than to Huston or Howard Hawks or Anatole Litvak and their hard-edged takes on the private eye mythos. Or perhaps a more upmarket take on Albert Zugsmith’s Confessions of an Opium Eater (1962). One filmmaker who would take up where Wenders left off with this curious mix of styles was Bertrand Tavernier, for his similarly atmospheric and melancholy portrait of artistic outsiders, ‘Round Midnight (1986). Wenders presents his own, peculiar spin on the compulsory scene where the dogged hero is knocked out and doped up by the villains, when he’s taken captive by Fong. Hammett has a feverish dream in which a younger Ryan, working with an amused Crystal, is trying to revive Hammett to get him to help in an operation at the Mexican border. This situation that might be a distorted memory or a product of his authorial imagination, but certainly describes Hammett’s dogging feeling of being a letdown in his former, nobly macho profession. “Why can’t it be giant spiders and pink elephants?” Hammett groans as he instead treated to Ryan’s paternal disappointment as well as Mariachi bands and wind-up laughing Buddha toy rocking. This interlude of the entirely surreal resolves back into reality as Hammett wakes up and finds the door of his cell has been opened by a small girl, who then leads him to where Ryan is being held in a pit with rats. The warren under Fong’s gambling house proves barely less surreal than Hammett’s dreamscape, a pit of vice littered with Chinoiserie bric-a-brac and human traffic.

Wenders’ immediate follow-up, The State of Things (1982), dealt with a director trying to remake an early Roger Corman monster movie, as if offering a sardonic self-portrait of Wenders’ own plunge into a realm where pastiche and honouring are hard to distinguish and the cinematic dragon eats its own tail with voracious glee. Like the angelic hero of Wings of Desire, at least at first, Hammett plays at effective involvement with the world but is ultimately relegated to an observer, an instrument transmitting and transmuting its petty tragedies and perversities into something coherent and meaningful, and helps that world, and him, face themselves in the mirror. The journey of a spindly, life-battered hero through an alienated world where pathos and passion are elusively glimpsed across wastelands and through deceptive portals as portrayed in Paris, Texas is also plainly mooted here, even if the approach to filming is entirely different. Wenders’ ironic, distance-touched love of classic Americana imagery as explored in that film and subsequent efforts like Don’t Come Knocking is also in play, reflecting the exported idea of the country back at it.

Hammett is also, inevitably, crammed with cineaste reference points. Wenders homages Alfred Hitchcock’s The Lodger (1927) by recreating its most famous stylistic flourish, a shot of a man uneasily pacing filmed through the floor made of glass. Wenders employs this in a sequence where Hammett visits a library to track down a newspaper article about Callaghan’s death, and overhears the clacking of Winston’s shoes on the next level, hovering in wait, with the clear floor used to communicate Hammett’s honed awareness as a former detective of what tell-tale signs mean. A slightly more arch but understandable touch is a lampstand in Hammett’s apartment being a facsimile of the Maltese Falcon as seen in Huston’s film. One of the two credited cinematographers on the film was the great Joseph Biroc, who had worked in Hollywood for directors including Sam Fuller and Robert Aldrich over decades (and Wenders would with peerless sarcasm cast Fuller himself as a stand-in for Biroc in The State of Things), utilising his talent for deep-focus compositions in a film that has a rarefied look, the colours given a powdery, faded feel, dominated by blues and greys with flashes of muted yellow and other warms tones. A sense of legacy is also purveyed by the casting, which includes the likes of Cook, Sydney, Royal Dano (as speakeasy barman Cookie), and Fuller (as a pool sharp who advises Hammett on who to bet on in a boxing match) – faces and voices who seem to have the long-faded days of old Hollywood and such classical genre fare chiselled into their beings. At the same time Wenders smartly employs their then-contemporary equivalents in the wily character actor stakes, including Nance from Eraserhead (1977), Kelly from The Warriors (1979), and Fox Harris, who would go on to appear in Repo Man (1984).

R.G. Armstrong and Richard Bradford play Lt. O’Mara and Detective Bradford, a good cop-bad cop pairing Hammett has repeated run-ins with, modelled on Barton Maclean and Ward Bond in Huston’s The Maltese Falcon: Armstrong’s formidable O’Mara, when Hammett mentions that Ryan was seeking Crystal, offers his warning: “If you’re half-smart, you never heard of her. And if your fancy friend with the velvet collar’s half as a smart as you are which would only make him one-quarter smart, he’s never heard of her either.” “Well, that’s a lay-off speech if ever I heard one,” Hammett comments. The script is filled with such angular and amusing riffs on the classic brand of hardboiled dialogue Hammett helped lodge in pop culture. One of my favourites, one that pops into my head whenever some big new infrastructure project is announced, comes when Hammett regards a model for the proposed Golden Gate Bridge set up in the foyer of the city hall, and notes with peerless cynicism, “It’s gonna be the longest suspension bridge in the world – the graft’ll probably set a world record too.” Late in the film a cop asks him to sign a register for a bag filled with a million dollars in payoff money, inspiring Hammett to question, “First day?” His encounter with the rotund, boozy, seedy Doc Fallon sees Hammett bringing up the topic of Callaghan’s death: “What’s on your mind, Hammett?” “Suicide.” “My advice, don’t hestitate.” Wenders also get a jot of humour from the sight of two cops, assigned to show the stag film to their superiors and Hammett, returning to indulgent viewing once they leave.

Kline’s Fallon is an extremely effective riff on the Hammettian grotesque, laughing wheezily from sucking down speakeasy hooch whilst musing on Callaghan’s suicide, and commenting, when Hammett says he though he retired, “I got thirteen kids, Hammett. You don’t ever retire when you got thirteen kids.” Hammett, despite not being able to pay Fallon off as well as Ryan, slips him a bill for the privilege of looking at  the autopsy report and then, noting his photo of his army of children with a grin, adds another bill to the donation. Kelly’s Winston meanwhile has a strangled voice that barely raises above a whisper as he delivers gaudy but ineffectual threats (“Why don’t you get your picture took, creep. Your momma won’t know you when I get through with you!”). A great little moment early in the film sees Hammett easily rumbling the lurking Winston as he pretends to be reading a newspaper whilst getting a shoeshine: “I knew a guy once used to disguise himself as a fire hydrant,” he tells the dim young thug, “Of course he had a small problem with the dogs…There’s a swell doorway across from my place and you can stand there all night long…” He finishes up with a teasing comment that he’s holding the newspaper upside down, which he isn’t, but Winston still needs to check. Cook, still a scene-stealing and energetic talent despite his age and frazzled look, is delightful as the cabbie who plays the crusty but stalwart man-of-the-streets offsider to Hammett, insisting, contrary to San Francisco lore, on calling the city Frisco – “I hack here lady, I call it Frisco,” he tells Kit when she corrects him, reacting in startled fashion, “You’re shittin’ me!”, when Hammett tells him his chauffeuring a million dollars, and showing up when needed in a crisis with a colossal old revolver.

Eventually Hammett delves to the heart of the mystery confronting him: Salt, whom Hammett describes pithily as a “short pornographer,” met Crystal whilst trying to write a news article on the Chinatown cribs, and found her an ideal partner in crime to instead set up a blackmail racket. O’Mara and Bradford show Hammett a stag film the pair shot, with Salt wearing a wolf mask ravaging Crystal’s Little Boo Peep: the film was designed to entice sexually repressed rich men. Several such men had their roll in the hay with Crystal in a fanciful bedroom set up in Salt’s photographic studio whilst, of course, Salt clicking away on a camera behind a two-way mirror. Callaghan was murdered by his wife when she caught him with Crystal, and now she’s trying to keep out of sight long enough for Salt to extract their price from the tycoons, but Ryan has complicated the deal by getting wind of it and cutting himself in. Salt is shot dead by Winston, with Hammett and Kit becoming accidental witnesses and also having stumbled upon the blackmail photos. Hammett scares Winston off by pretending to wield a gun and being rather better at stand-offs, and later visits Hagedorn to tell him what his boyfriend-cum-operative’s been up to. The perturbed Hagedorn shoots Winston dead when he tries to bash Hammett’s head in, and then arranges a meeting between Hammett and the blackmail victims, the upshot of which is Hammett is told Crystal and Ryan insist he be the bagman for the payoff.

The appeal of the private eye flick lay in the way it presented a variation on the Western evolved into the urban world of modernising America, still riven with the same rampant urges of raw power whether expressed with gun or bankroll, but contained and cramped by brick and steel, suggesting a way the same outlaw culture and mythos of masculine self-reliance could persist in that zone, carving a path between the forces of plutocracy and barbarianism. A similar mythos attaches itself to creative artistry itself, given tacit permission in the modern world to tell truth to power and walk a tightrope where it’s possible to both participate in and critique society. Wenders grasps that similarity, with his hero ultimately confronted by both the refusal of life to conform to the tight moral and narrative structure of a story and also the impossibility of both those extra-social postures. Hammett critiques this ideal even as it affects to honour it in the way the storyline ultimately perceives the players in the underworld game as battling a stacked deck against the real centres of power. When Ryan asks Hammett early on who runs San Francisco, the writer answers, “The same people who run every town.” Ryan knows what he means: “The cops, the crooks, and the big rich.” Hammett uses this formulation again later when he’s surrounded by emissaries from all three estates, and he delivers a stinging, memorable rant in warning to Crystal, who believes she can outwit and outrun the scions she blackmails: “You don’t really think they’re gonna let you waltz, do ya? Oh, you might get to Berlin or Constantinople — maybe even Hong Kong, wherever you’re going. But one day you’ll turn the wrong corner and wham! Curtains. No more Crystal!…You’re going up against a powerhouse, angel – the big steam.”

 “The big steam” are nonetheless a circle of dweebs held together by their starched high collars – and one fairly calm fellow Hammett labels as the idle rich – lingering in various degrees of tense and resentful wrath whilst Hammett hands each a photo of them in the favourite sexual scenarios with Crystal, ranging from “The Poor Little Match Girl” to “Daddy’s Little Girl.” Hammett breezes through his confrontation with the big boys and their guard/lap dogs with perfect confidence, only to, once he merges, light himself a cigarette and note his own shaking hand with a chuckle – another nod to a vignette in The Maltese Falcon. Hammett’s first encounter with Crystal herself sees the accomplished young seductress and manipulator turning all her wiles on Hammett to, as she has with others including Salt and Ryan, make him a willing accomplice, putting on an singsong accent later revealed to be fake as she suckles on his fingers and mentioning repeatedly how she was “made to do such terribly wicked things” as a prostitute. Hammett remains sufficiently poised despite powerful attraction to sarcastically repeat her flattery (“Given that I am a kind man, a just man…”).

Other pleasures of Hammett are nonetheless more elusive and move beyond genre pastiche, particularly when it feels keenest to Hammett as just a jobbing writer and lost soul momentarily distracted by excitement. The sight of Hammett returning homewards after long nights swashbuckling through the demimonde, turning his collar up to the breeze as the bleary dawn light falls on the San Francisco skyline, contains the essence of some personal poetry. A marvellous vignette later sees Hammett again coming home, black and blue from the punishment taken at Fong’s, swapping words with a consoling neighbour and then ascending the stairs to his rooms, finding some kids playing hide and seek cowering on the steps, and shrugging noncommittally when the seeker down below asks if they’re up there. The fillip of wearily humane humour here contains nonetheless a devious metaphor for Hammett’s ultimate fate in refusing to play along with the HUAC, refusing to be a snitch even in a game. Another, vital contribution to the film’s overall texture, particularly in such downtime moments, is John Barry’s jazz score. Barry’s music weaves around the movie like blue cigarette smoke, signing it with teasing mystery and sad elegance, touched with that sonorous quality that was Barry’s special forte, befitting a movie that so often feels submerged in still, clear water, which is indeed the visual motif evoked in the opening credits.

The film’s production troubles manifest in some jarring edits here and there, but the only major aspect of the film that doesn’t work entirely for me is Henner, who seems out of synch with the arch dialogue patterns. Whereas Lei is quite marvellous in a relatively small role, but one important to the movie as a whole, as she needs to incarnate Crystal’s allure, potent enough to make fools out of smart and powerful men and run rings around whole systems, and gives Hammett the ultimate temptation when she proposes he come with her on her victory jaunt: “You can be my bodyguard-biographer, my lover, my lapdog,” she proposes, resuming the lilt of her false accent, only for Hammett to tell her the brutal truth as he sees it. Sadly, the film did Lei’s career no more good than Forrest’s. The film ultimately votes its official femme fatale a strong note of sympathy when she and Hammett confront each-other with masks off. Hammett angrily calls her evil for killing the woman who became her substitute in the morgue, to Crystal’s vehement retort: “What is evil? Show it to me. My parents sold me when I was nine for five thousand dollars. I turned my first trick with a Caucasian at eleven. At seventeen I am a millionaire. What will I be when I am twenty-one?” “Dead,” Hammett assures her.

The metatextual edge continues here not just in the way the final confrontation mimics Hammett’s story, which Ryan brandishes after paying to get it back from Fong, but in the way the characters conspire to act out the roles in it, and their responses to it. Ryan wants Hammett to rewrite it to accommodate his gone-bad triumph, whereas Crystal quotes its signal punchline, “He needed one hand for the money, the other for the gun – he wasn’t good enough to handle both,” with approving relish when the moment of truth proves to involve something very like that. Ryan, having made himself partner to Crystal, then tries to rip her off at gunpoint during the handover, but gets plugged full of lead by her with a secreted gun. The triumphant Crystal gets her urgent warning from Hammett, but vows, “I can beat them,” before driving off to her fate. Hammett surveys his dead friend, dropped pages of his story bobbing in the water by the dock, and kicks the rest of the pages in as well, as a final surrender to fate and disavowal of a tale that’s cost too much, ransacked his identity and art too deeply. “It’s not like in one of your stories is it?” Kit questions when Hammett returns to her, “It never is like a story,” Hammett sighs. He pauses for a long look at his reflection upon returning home, before resuming his work, finding a groove now that can bear him on to literary legend, if not actual happiness.

Standard
1980s, Action-Adventure, Australian cinema, Scifi

Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) / Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome (1985)

.

Directors: George Miller / George Miller, George Ogilvie
Screenwriters: Terry Hayes, George Miller, Brian Hannant / Terry Hayes, George Miller

By Roderick Heath

The success of George Miller’s Mad Max (1979) prompted a sequel swift and true, emerging in 1981 under the title of Mad Max 2 in Australia. When it was bought up for distribution in the US by Warner Bros., who saw little appeal in linking it to the previous movie when distributor AIP hadn’t treated so well although it still gained modest cult impact, the film was rechristened as The Road Warrior after a repeated line in the movie’s narration, and this time scored a massive hit. Today it’s become convention to call the film by both titles combined. It’s possible to regard all the films in the Mad Max series as variations on a theme and a character archetype, or, in current parlance, “soft reboots,” rather than firmly sequential narratives, even before Miller was obliged to recast the lead role with Tom Hardy supplanting Mel Gibson for 2015’s extension Mad Max: Fury Road. As such the series stands closer in nature to Sergio Leone’s “Dollars” trilogy or many of the James Bond films than, say, the Star Wars films or most other franchise film series where continuity is regarded as an overriding value. Nonetheless Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior, whilst leaping off into a more extreme and fantastical realm from the first entry, does pay heed to a sense of direct connection. Less original in its world-building than Mad Max proved as a whole despite its magpie borrowings, Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior nonetheless went several steps further towards purifying and reconsecrating the temple of pure action cinema.

The follow-up’s leap in ambition and budget was marked by Miller hiring some major technical talents on the Australian movie scene, including future Oscar winner Dean Semler as cinematographer and multiple nominee Richard Francis-Bruce as editor. Miller, who had received offers to work Hollywood including, supposedly, to direct First Blood (1982), had also dallied with making a rock musical in collaboration with screenwriter Terry Hayes, but with everyone wanting a Mad Max sequel he and Hayes and a third collaborator, Brian Hannant, wrote a script, this time aiming for something more self-consciously elemental and classically heroic whilst extending their theme of social decline and resource shortage to a new extreme. This time the plotline could almost be written on a matchbox, mostly jettisoning the jots of sociological theory and satire that defined the first film in exchange for situational intensity and raw-boned and elemental drama. That drama harks back to classic Western films like Unconquered (1947), Escape From Fort Bravo (1953), Shane (1953), and the genre-adjacent Zulu (1963); John Ford epics like Drums Along The Mohawk (1939), Fort Apache (1948), and The Searchers (1956); and above all Akira Kurosawa’s films. But Miller and company stripped away supernal character analysis and social context found in such forebears, and concentrated on an elemental situation of besiegement and chase, mobility and immobility in perpetual dialogue as the essence of life and death and storytelling.

The film starts with a prologue that explains the background causes on the oncoming social breakdown that Mad Max only hinted at, or which could be taken as a slight situational revision, played out over a blend of documentary footage and scenes from the first film. An old man’s voice (Harold Baigent) recalls in sad and sullen metre how a crisis of fossil fuel supplies, exacerbated by confused reactions from global governments (“They talked, and talked, and talked…”), eventually led to conflict and degradation and eventual apocalypse, a downfall Max ironically weathered through his retreat into “the wasteland.” Meanwhile “only those mobile enough to scavenge, brutal enough to pillage” prospered if they were willing to “go to war over a tank of juice.” Max roars into the film proper still behind the wheel of his V8 Interceptor, as if emerging straight out of the very end of the previous film but plainly with a long time having elapsed – Max now has grey on his temples, a brace around the leg The Toecutter shot him in, and a blue heeler cattle dog as a companion. He’s being chased down by highway corsairs after his petrol, with one of their number, the Mohawk-sporting Wez (Vernon Wells) with his comrade-pet-concubine ‘The Golden Youth’ (Jerry O’Sullivan) sharing his bike, about to provide Max with a special nemesis for the movie.

But Wez is only the lieutenant of the berserkers’ leader, the towering, bulbously bemuscled potentate known as ‘Lord Humungus’ (Kjell Nilsson), who hides a terribly scarred face behind a metallic mask, a flourish that signals him as down-and-dirty drive-in kin of Darth Vader. Max manages to outdrive his pursuers, with two of the berserker vehicles crashing, one hitting the road-straddling carcass of an abandoned semitrailer. Wez screeches impotently from his bike at Max and tugs an arrow accidentally shot into him by one of his own men, whilst Max hastily catches gas pouring out of one of the crashed berserker vehicles. Across the semitrailer someone has scrawled a new psalm – The Vermin Have Inherited The Earth, although the word “Earth” is the one actually written on the prime mover, a first hint this vehicle can be separated, reborn and repurposed as the encapsulation of hope, a fusion of Ark and Juggernaut. As he often did in the first film Miller touches on horror movie imagery as Max is compelled for a moment by the scream of a berserker trapped in his wrecked vehicle, his gnarled hand reaching out but falling limp, and then the gnarled and rotting corpse of the semi’s driver falling from the cab. Max also finds a music box mechanism that tinkles out “Happy Birthday to You,” a touch that recalls an entirely lost world of childlike innocence and Max’s own deep pain – and also one that recalls the leitmotif of the musical watch from Leone’s For A Few Dollars More (1965).

A little farther down the road Max comes upon a parked gyrocopter with a snake upon it, acting as a lethal antitheft device. Max is ambushed by its Captain (Bruce Spence), a gangly, whacky character who, like Max, is a canny survivor, but in his own, sly, effective if less commanding manner. The Captain springs out of the ground where he’s concealed himself and holding at the point of the crossbow he carries – bullets are all but gone by this point, and arrows have become the new weapon of choice. The Captain loses his advantage when Max’s dog springs out of the Interceptor and fells him. To stop Max killing him, the Captain raves about an oil pumping and refining station nearby that’s still operational, and Max takes his captive to check out the station: Max binds up the Captain and sets up an amusingly malicious trap for him as he rigs up his gun so his dog can pull the trigger with a toy in its mouth and tied to the trigger, the Captain sweating with particular anxiously when the dog spots a rabbit out on the wasteland. Soon Max and the Captain take up station on the peak of a hill overlooking the refinery, which proves to be operating just as the Captain said, with the petrol being stored in a petrol tanker that rather conspicuously lacks an engine to pull it. Another wrinkle is that the site is now being besieged by Lord Humungus’s flotilla of vehicles, manned by his small army of marauders, who have entirely given themselves up not just to the remorseless logic of raiding and chasing down what the Captain calls “guzzeline,” but have adopted a purposefully crazed and atavistic mindset (and wardrobe) to match, spurning the civilisation that’s left them high and dry.

By contrast, the assailed community working the refinery, equivalent to the hardy homesteaders and settlers in a classic Western, are clinging on to their remnant identities and aspirations, as they hope to use the fuel they’re stockpiling to make a long non-stop drive to a remnant corner of still-habitable earth in the north. Although not immersive and kinetic as the portions of the movie on either side of it, Miller’s style reaches an apotheosis of a kind in the lengthy vignette of Max and the Captain keeping watch on the refinery and the marauders. Miller finds eerie, quasi-abstract beauty in the vantages on the marauders roaring around the barricaded refinery, dust trails whirling in their wakes, hazy lights shining out as the sun dips and rises. Max and the Captain peer down at the scene, Max with binoculars and Captain with his large, vintage telescope – until Max forcibly swaps them – and absorb the basics of the drama unfolding silent movie-style and glimpsed from a distance. The provided theatre and spectacle entertains the Captain until some of the besieged try to flee the refinery in their own vehicles, only to be chased and down and crash. Wez and some other marauders assault a man and woman dragged from vehicle, pinning the man to an old tyre with crossbow bolts and making him watch whilst the woman is gang-raped and then executed by Wez. Once the marauders chase down the other escapees, Max descends, knocks out a guard left with the skewered man, Nathan (David Downer), and takes him to the refinery on the promise of a load of gas for saving his life.

But Nathan dies as Max delivers him, and Max is chained up and treated disdainfully by the settlers, who are led by the no-nonsense Papagallo (Mike Preston). Also in their ranks are the strident Warrior Woman (Virginia Hey), old-timer Curmudgeon (Syd Heylen), a pretty young woman (Arkie Whiteley), and The Feral Kid (Emil Minty), a bushy-haired enfant sauvage who wields a steel boomerang, has dug tunnels like a rabbit under and beyond the refinery, and delights in the music box when Max plays it for him: Max makes an instant friend when he gifts him the mechanism. The settlers assume, not without justification, that Max is another contemptible brute of the wasteland not worthy of their time or fuel, but his fate is made immediately moot when the marauders return. The Lord Humungus is announced, with an ingenious blend of medieval heraldic function, disc jockey shtick, and fight MC hype, by The Toadie (Max Phipps) as the “Warrior of the Wasteland, the Ayatollah of Rock and Roll-a!” Humungus tries to browbeat the defenders by displaying other captured members of their scouting expedition tied to the front of his battle wagon as grotesque figureheads, whilst promising to spare everyone’s lives if they’ll simply abandon the refinery and the fuel to him. The Feral Kid meanwhile starts hurling his steel boomerang at Wez, but kills the Golden Youth instead, much to Wez’s infuriation, and also slices off the fingers of The Toadie when he foolishly tries to catch the missile. Humungus leaves the settler to make up their minds, and when it becomes apparent the settlers risked sending out the scouts to try and find something to haul their tank of petrol, Max attracts their attention and promises to go and fetch the prime mover in exchange for a share of the gas.

Around the simple, space-and-objective defined forms of the plot, Miller weaves little flourishes redolent of personal lore. At one point the Captain fights with the dog over who will get to eat the snake that’s successfully guarded the gyro from a dead marauder. The Captain’s lamenting for the dear lost days when women wore lingerie contrasts the taste for violence, rapine and enslavement the marauders have given themselves over to. The Curmudgeon shows Max old postcards of the tribe’s intended destination – the Sunshine Coast – with the sales of pitch of it being “paradise – fresh water, nothing but sunshine, nothing to do but breed.” The contrasting mystique of heroes and villains is defined in the most basic way possible: the good guys wear white, the villains black, whilst also incidentally looking like the roller disco versus the S&M club. Whilst Miller sneaks in the virtually compulsory (for the era’s Aussie genre films) sex gag, as a rutting male and female marauder are revealed as their tent is ripped away to their surprise during one action scene, the landscape actually seems post-sexual, even antenatal, the marauders generally indulging homoerotic dominance and submission a way of getting rocks off and also creating a new, purified social order. The marauders include women, but they’re indistinguishable from the men. Although the marauders rape the female settler they catch, they quickly slay her, and save their real jollies for the men they’ve caught: those are crucified and emasculated in a foul ritual invocation by Humungus and henchmen, for the sake of terrorising the other settlers and announcing their own power. Humungus retains a sleek, powerful handgun kept in a lovingly tended case along with his last bullets and a vintage photo, perhaps an heirloom of his ancestors, whilst The Curmudgeon wears a vintage army helmet and uniform, a touch reminiscent of a different kind of post-apocalyptic movie, Richard Lester’s The Bed-Sitting Room (1969), itself perhaps another ancestor in Miller’s head, and other counterculture-era satires.

The settlers contrast the marauders not just in look but in social approach: where the Humungus is a rebirth of the warrior-king and tyrant, the settlers have a leader in Papagallo but still debate their purpose and choices, with fraught argument following the Humungus’s ultimatum as factions debate the merits of obeying him or fighting it out. Max’s intervention, with the promise of bringing back the prime mover, reunites them even as they have no idea if Max will honour his agreement and return, although they hope he’ll return for his car. Max eludes the marauders’ pickets and, on the march to the truck, comes across the Captain, dragging the log Max left him chained to, trying to get back to his gyro. Max, in a variation on the “two kinds of people” gag from The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly (1966), gets the Captain to carry the fuel he’s been lugging, but gifts him freedom once the truck is started, much to the Captain’s glee, declaring them partners. And he does indeed become Max’s invaluable supporter, dropping bombs on marauders and rescuing him when he almost dies during an ill-fated attempt to flee in the Interceptor. The Feral Kid presents Max with a surrogate for the son he lost, but he’s far from being some cute moppet, but rather giving a glimpse of the breed that might grow up in this ruined world – prelapsarian and preverbal, able to defend itself from a young age, at once savage but also curiously innocent, delighted to fits of eager panting when he sees Max waste their mutual foes. He could well be the embodiment of the audience, similarly tickled in the deep roots of the cerebral cortex.

The film’s ultimate revelation, that the Kid is in fact the narrator, recalling these events as an old man through the fog of intervening decades of fading memory and accumulating mythos, gives the drama perfect keynote. Not simply in finally, fully investing Miller’s project of rendering Max a new edition of the primeval hero, the kind of titan spoken about around campfires and multiplexes in tones of awe and aspiring delight, but in suggesting the impact Max still has almost in spite of himself – the survivor Max, the loner, the Road Warrior, is still nonetheless also still the social sentinel and father, inscribing his persona on the inheritors and becoming something much larger than the singular being he is. In this regard Miller built upon not just the figure of the lost quasi-paternal hero of Shane but also the oft-floated notion that Leone’s Westerns had been in essence Homeric tales of demigods at roam transposed to a more recent and specific setting. Miller advances that notion a little further, suggesting how such tales become rooted in societies and their chains of storytelling, their ideals and role-playing, and how these attach to parent figures. The utter weirdness of the world Max contends with, the blighted weirdoes and perverts and maniacs left fighting over the scraps of civilisation, seems to pull in a different direction to that kind of higher-minded theme, but actually helps underline it, particularly as the marauders embrace the bestial, berserker side of human nature, providing this world with the equivalent of the wicked pagan priests and cruel warlords besetting the existence of the hero.

Max amidst the settlers is plainly a man out of his element and opaque in his needs beyond resuming his self-sufficient wandering – the Captain, by contrast, acts on his desires by convincing the young woman to leave with him in the gyrocopter, only for her to demur at the last moment in deciding her loyalty to the tribe can’t be shaken off easily. This in turn opens the door for the Captain to stay with her and the others and inherit the role of leader, as signalled at the end. Papagallo, the leader with selfless ideals and a goal in mind, sets in motion the great quest and shepherds his flock towards a hopeful goal even with the possibility it’s illusory or impossible. He’s a figure from a slightly different age in human development, at once vital and effectual for the settlers but also vulnerable, encumbered, refusing to give himself up to a sharklike existence on the wasteland in the way Max has, which Papagallo sees as a surrender that makes him no different to the marauders. Papagallo is provoked to interrogative frustration by Max when frustrated by his determination to leave, pushing his buttons in turn (“What burned you out, eh? Kill one man to many? See too many people die? Lose some family?”) until Max decks him. Papagallo needs an Achilles like Max – only a man with his berserker edge can run the gauntlet of the marauders, but Max finally learns in gruelling fashion that once plunged into the situation he cannot easily escape, as when he does try to flee in his gassed-up Interceptor, Wez, The Toadie and other chase him down, Wez smashing his windscreen and causing him to fly off the road. Max, bloodied and bedraggled, barely manages to crawl away before The Toadie sets off his booby-trapped fuel tanks, blowing up himself and the wrecked relic. The Captain comes out on his gyro and picks Max up, as Miller communicates Max’s battered body and swooning mind through double exposures, before he’s carried high over the marauders and back to the stockade, a brief anticipation of a flight to heaven before returning to hell on earth.

Despite The Road Warrior’s derivations from international cinema classics, its essential Australianness is nonetheless still undeniable. This is particularly true of the way Miller found a clever way of rhyming one form of resource scarcity that’s perpetually shaped human interaction with the Australian land, the relative paucity of water beyond coastal regions, with another, the reliance on fossil fuel resources to power the metal-wrapped steeds of speed-freak dreaming. That reliance had taken a sharp, severe shock in Australia as elsewhere during the oil embargoes of the 1970s. In many ways author Randolph Stow’s 1962 novel Tourmaline, a symbolic and allusive novel about a dying town on the fringe of the expanding inland desert that turns to a wandering, seemingly blessed diviner to seek out water to save the town but who can only find gold, is as much a precursor to Mad Max as any of its genre film bunkmates. Another ancestor could well be Neville Shute’s On The Beach, filmed in 1959, with its presumption that the characteristic that’s always frustrated Aussies – the nation’s distance from the rest of the world – might be in the case of nuclear war some kind of boon. One could also count as a spiritual forebear David Crosby’s song “Wooden Ships” which proposed a more sedate but not that dissimilar vision of people surviving nuclear war by keeping perpetually on the move in boats.

Miller’s sense of cinematic largesse blended aspects of many of the filmmakers he was paying homage to – Siegel’s deep-focus shots and Leone’s looming visages meet Ford’s vantages over sweeping landscapes and frame-bisecting lines of action, and Kurosawa’s wipes and figure-gripping vistas. The greatness of The Road Warrior lies in how it sets its ideas in motion whilst barely slowing down, as one of those rare movies that manages to transmit its ideas through visuals and action. Even the quieter, reflective moments, snatched by the characters in between the mean business of living and dying, contribute to the film’s overall, headlong narrative thrust, like Max forging his bond with the Kid with the music box mechanism. Brian May, who had scored the first film, returned to provide the sequel with big, booming, self-consciously epic music that once more situated the drama somewhere at the intersection of raw melodrama and pop art retro pastiche, and also nimbly mediating the generic swerves within it from rampaging action to horror movie cues to strains at once grand and plaintive at the very end. The main action set-pieces see Max driving pell-mell through the marauder camp to get the prime mover into the refinery stockade, and then make the climactic breakout as Max charges out with the truck onto a remnant road, the tanker festooned with defenders, whilst the rest of the settlers break away, with their fast-moving roadsters under Papagallo returning to intersect with Max, and the Captain drops bombs from above.

Both of these scenes are intricate in staging and structuring despite the simplicity of the goals, cut and filmed with a maximum of dynamic impact. Like one shot that utilises a camera peering out from within one of the marauder cars as it speeds up and moves to intersect with the prime mover as it barrels by, the sense of lateral motion and spatial immediacy all but physically sweeping the viewer into the imagery’s midst. Miller assembles the roaring action with a precise sense of tactical intent even when the basic purpose is to go real fast and not stop. As Max dashes to the stockade, the marauders try to halt the truck by firing arrows into its tyres, whilst Humungus fires his pistol at the truck’s engine, trying to put it out of commission and nearly succeeding, but Max still manages to get the prime mover into the stockade and the sentinels at the gate annihilate the marauder vehicles luckless to get too close with mounted flamethrowers – a particular advantage they have as long as they stick close to their fuel source. The big chase sees the marauders picking off the defenders riding on the tanker, with Wez shooting the Warrior Woman with arrows whilst another luckless defender sets himself on fire with a Molotov cocktail. The marauders then try to clamber on board, as simply shoving the truck off the road is too risky to its precious load. Meanwhile those marauders stupid enough to occupy the abandoned refinery are consumed as charges set burning eplode and decimate the place.

Miller builds up to the breakout with succinct character grace-notes, like that between Max and Papagallo, as Max despite his injuries announces he wants to drive the truck out, and Papagallo, after a brief display of scepticism, hands over his gun and a satchel of shells for it, before the two men give each-other salutary nods from behind their respective steering wheels just before venturing out. The mechanics who repair the prime mover’s damage also affix a stout bulldozer blade to the front, armouring it against Humungus’s bullets, whilst the marauder lord keeps Wez literally on a leash to deploy to best effect when he sees fit during the chase. The Captain helps clear their path by dropping incendiaries on the blockade, and Max soon finds he has company as the Kid has stowed aboard, but the lad proves invaluable as he’s able to warn Max about attackers and even put his teeth to good use. The presence of the gyrocopter, zooming by high over the ground action, is visually exploited as it passes high over the charging vehicles, a tide of motion running at different speeds, all this steel and rage and flesh charging across the vast plain to ends at once urgent and illusory, the plain itself practically featureless, a cradle of surrealist dreaming. Max makes unique art out of marauders vehicles that get in his way, reducing them to pulverised masses of metal.

The imagery, like Humungus roaring down the road, mask in place and muscles bulging, still retains perfectly iconic punk-poetic force, and little squiggles of vicious, often ironic detail weave curlicues through it all, like Max getting an arrow through the thigh and a biker getting himself crushed under the truck when he tries to stab one of its tires. The two hapless captives on the front of Humungus’s roadster are kept blind through the chase with bags over their heads, only for the bags to be ripped off just in time for them to see they’re going to be crushed against the rear of the tanker. Humungus kills Papagallo with a hurled spear just as the settler commander cries out to Max that they’ve won. This climax is one of the greatest of its kind in cinema, all the more impressive and thrilling for the complete absence of anything but the most basic camera trickery. One indelible moment sees the boundary between art and life collapse, when a stuntman was accidentally hurled head over heels from a car and crashed to earth, breaking many bones but, thankfully, not dying: the stunt became a centrepiece of the sequence. The sequence also bears an interesting resemblance to the desert chase in 1981’s other immortal action film, Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), which also revolved around trying to commandeer a truck at speed, and sports a similar punchline about a character seemingly to be lost under the wheels only to reappear unexpectedly. Only in this case it’s not the hero but Wez, who, bloodied and shrieking, fights Max in a tug-of-war over the Kid, whilst Humungus, briefly knocked off the road, comes flying up only to see the oncoming truck coming over a rise, both vehicles moving too fast to swerve: the tanker crushes Humungus and his vehicle and Wez between them, but swerves and capsizes on the roadside in turn.

The sting in the tail: even Max seems to have been unaware that the mission was a deception, as the truck was loaded not with fuel but sand, the “precious juice” actually carried away in drums in the other settler vehicles, having made their getaway clean and having turned the warlike assumptions of the marauders against them. The Captain, whose gyro is wrecked during the battle, pulls up and gives Max a grin of relief: the smirk the battered, barely-standing Max offers in response has a queasy quality, an undercurrent of bewilderment over his inability to die even amidst such utter carnage and when it’s the only logical thing to do. The Captain takes his place driving the settlers away, whilst the Kid loses sight of Max left behind on the road, now with Papagallo’s roadster as his steed. The famous last shot, as Miller pulls back from Max in recreating the Kid’s last view of Max, silhouetted against the last light of day, nods to the introduction of John Wayne’s Ringo Kid in Stagecoach (1939) but deliberately reverses it, not just in the technical sense in pulling away from the stark figure on the road until lost in shadow, but also the dramatic idea: John Ford presented Ringo as the legendary taking solid human form, whereas Max finally melts back into the great dream. Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior is arguably the greatest film ever made in Australia, although it doesn’t entirely lack some of the problems that have dogged the country’s cinema, like some flimsy performances dotted amidst the supporting cast. And, of course, there’s a vaguely absurd aspect to the plotline as the marauders seem to have all the fuel in the world already to chase down their foes despite the total lack of apparent supply – it might have been apt, and amusing, if Miller had taken a lead from Battle of the Bulge (1965) and seen the villains simply run out of fuel for their pursuit, leaving the landscape littered with their less-than-useless jalopies.

The question of where alternative fuel sources might come from would, at least, inform the plotline of third film, before then being roundly ignored again in Fury Road. This element points to the way the themes and assimilated cultural ideas in the Mad Max films, so hip and timely when the original entries were made, had become rather quaint and retro by the time Miller got around to making his long-delayed fourth instalment. In any event, the third film, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, sees Max having embraced different forms of transportation, crossing the wasteland now on a truck converted into a wagon and pulled by camels. Miller opens with an amazing aerial shot swooping down over a seemingly endless expanse of desert and over Max’s wagon. This shot is actually the viewpoint of another flying pest played by Bruce Spence, this time aviator Jedediah, who wings his way over the wastes in a light aircraft looking for things to steal, and takes off with Max’s wagon after dislodging him from its cockpit and jumping from his plane, whilst his son (Adam Cockburn) keeps flying. Max, who now has long, flowing, salt-and-pepper hair and a permanently dilated eye after his injury in The Road Warrior, keeps following the rough path he was travelling until he comes to an outpost of the new civilisation, Bartertown. This proves a place where the nominal ruler is the female warlord known as Aunty Entity (Tina Turner), aided by collaborators and minions including the trade-running Collector (Frank Thring) and chief enforcer Ironbar Bassey (Gary ‘Angry’ Anderson). But real power in Bartertown is wielded by a diminutive but ingenious man known as Master (Angelo Rossitto), who has built the town’s energy system and fuels it with methane gas obtained from the shit of pigs he farms.

Master, whilst obliged to subsist in his stinking underground abode as he runs his power-making operation, often asserts his clout over Aunty and the rest of the community whenever he senses he’s being encroached upon in retaliations he calls “embargoes” – a nice touch acknowledging Miller’s real-world inspirations – shutting down the city’s energy supply and demanding that Aunty publically acknowledge his authority. Wrongdoers in Bartertown are enslaved and used to propagate the pigs and shovel their leavings: one, Pig Killer (Robert Grubb), was as his name suggests imprisoned specifically for killing one of the swine to feed his family. Aunty, unsurprisingly, wants to wrest back ultimate authority from the short savant, but faces one special problem. Master is only one half of a practically symbiotic being, as the hulking, masked man known as Blaster (Paul Larsson) always carries him around and protects him – the two men together called, of course, MasterBlaster, without Stevie Wonder around to sue them. Getting wind of Max’s desire to get back his camels and belongings, sold by Jedidiah at the Bartertown markets, Aunty Entity makes him an offer after getting her goons to test his mettle: if he’ll pick a fight with MasterBlaster, he and Blaster will be obliged to duke it out in a ritual gladiatorial contest in an cage-like arena, the titular Thunderdome, a place designed to be the only one where violence is permitted and one inviolable rule is kept: “Two men enter, one man leaves.”

Beyond Thunderdome was criticised upon release and after for playing as more Hollywoodised and sentimental and far less gleefully raw and violent than its precursors. And that’s certainly true, to a degree, particularly in the finale which presents a reprise of The Road Warrior’s climax but without the same sadistic vivacity and relish. But it’s also, I feel, a film that demands much greater appreciation, and a vastly more interesting individual film and variation on the Mad Max theme than the subsequent Fury Road. Some of that might be nostalgic connection – it’s the first of the films I saw, as a child when it was indeed the only one of them I could watch. The imagery of the film haunted me, and still find retain enormous power, particularly the coda. Beyond Thunderdome was also a product of shifting expectations and life circumstances for the people making it. The success of the first two films had gained Miller, Gibson, and other crewmembers international attention. Miller had made his Hollywood debut directing easily the best portion of The Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983), whilst Gibson was beginning his quick rise as a major star, having anchored several more Aussie hits before making his American debut with Mrs. Soffel (1984).

Now a serious injection of Hollywood cash and concomitant expectations for blockbuster reach were in play for Beyond Thunderdome, and Miller himself was feeling the first urges towards becoming not just the family filmmaker who would make the later Babe and Happy Feet films, but also one who would invest much of his career – too much, perhaps – playing the mini-mogul akin to George Lucas. By the time shooting started on Beyond Thunderdome Miller was also recovering from the accidental death of his stalwart production partner Byron Kennedy, an event that so rattled Miller he brought in George Ogilvie, with whom he had worked in television, to help direct the film. Ogilvie, whilst nowhere near as well-known as Miller, nonetheless did good work himself, with his 1990 film The Crossing well-regarded particularly and notable for providing the first starring role for Russell Crowe. Despite all such compromises Beyond Thunderdome comes out of the gate swinging, including that epic opening and once the action settles on Bartertown, a superbly-realised setting, grimy, shadowy, filled with the flotsam of the future wastes. Max gives swift, efficient displays of both his sceptical acumen – he resists a water seller’s overtures by waving a Geiger counter at his tank and finds it irradiated – and his dangerous pith when confronted by a guard he pulls his shotgun and glows off the crest on the guard’s helmet, and later bests several of Aunty’s goons including Bassey, whose enmity is earned and stoked.

The Thunderdome battle between Max and Blaster is a grand set-piece that starts with the citizenry of Bartertown clambering up its dome mesh for a view on the battle. Bartertown’s judge and auctioneer Dr. Dealgood (a splendidly arch performance from Edwin Hodgeman) acts as the event’s florid emcee, a touch that harks back to The Toadie in The Road Warrior but with a very different spin: Dr. Dealgood invokes the ritual meaning of the battle with philosophical undertones, and oversees a lottery-like spin of a wheel used to decide tricky matters of justice, like a conflation of high priest and game show host. The two gladiators bound around on suspension rigs at first and trying to grab for weapons dangling on high, the battle involving wielded chainsaws and swords and a huge mallet. Max by this time has discovered Blaster is extremely sensitive to noise, and after several near-fatal delays uses a whistle to paralyse Blaster in pain and swats him with the mallet until Blaster lies sprawled and unhelmeted, only to see that his opponent is a childlike being reminiscent of the long-lost Benno from the first film, and reveals the degree to which Max still retains his old scruples. Master intervenes desperately to save his friend, and Max refuses to kill him, but Aunty slays Blaster with a crossbow and after deciding Max’s fate with the wheel has him placed on a horse – with hands tied, facing backwards, and with a fibreglass head from some long-destroyed carnival attraction placed on his head. He’s sent into exile and likely death in the desert.

Miller’s referential streak is just as marked in Beyond Thunderome as in the earlier movies, with the enlarged budget this time stretching to hiring Maurice Jarré, most famous as the composer for Lawrence of Arabia (1962), to do the score and paying homage throughout to David Lean’s film, as well as The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly again in Max’s desert exile, and the script even smirkingly has Dr. Dealgood call Max “the Man With No Name” when introducing him at the Thunderdome. Miller’s new epic lexicon also nods directly to Ben-Hur (1959), on top of Thring’s presence as one shared by both movies: MasterBlaster is a riff on that film’s crippled Simonides and the large, voiceless man who serves as his minder, and the Thunderdome itself can be seen as a version of the chariot race. More curiously, the script’s later portions – with Terry Hayes and Miller again credited as writers – have been seen as influenced by the 1980 novel Riddley Walker by Russell Hoban. Some common roots might have been in play there, particularly as the second half of the film turns towards Peter Pan and Lord of the Flies as touchstones. It’s also interesting that Beyond Thunderdome is the first of the series to actively invoke nuclear catastrophe as a cause of the collapse rather than simply exhausted resources and environmental stress, situating the third entry squarely in the legion of nuclear war angst dramas that proliferated in the last, fitful decade of the Cold War. There’s a disparity between the way the Mad Max films engage this vision compared to, say, Planet of the Apes (1968) – where that film and other Hollywood apocalypses evoke an American artistic tradition of going back to Thomas Cole, fearing and anticipating the collapse of all works and wondering what the ruins would look like, Beyond Thunderdome is the very Australian counterpart, coming almost with a sigh of relief after being sick of waiting for it, knowing it would come, a sentiment captured by John O’Brien’s classic Aussie poem “Said Hanrahan”, about a fretting farmer expecting every manner of disaster – “We’ll all be rooned!”

Max is rescued from the desert by Savannah Nix (Helen Buday), one of a tribe of children who have grown in a virtually paradisiacal sanctuary lodged in a canyon hidden in the desert – a grotto with water and trees which they’ve maintained a child’s wonderland. The children (whose ranks include future Aussie TV stalwarts Justine Clarke and Rebekah Elmaloglou) shear away Max’s long hair whilst he recovers from his ordeal. Max soon learns they think he’s Captain Walker, a rescuer they’ve been waiting for ever since they were left to fend for themselves in this place now grown to the stature of messiah, who can fly them out on his back to a place they call “Tomorrow-Morrow Land.” Beyond Thunderdome expands throughout on the notes sounded in The Road Warrior regarding storytellers and performers as constructors of social traditions. This is first in Dr. Dealgood’s role as voice of the law and philosophy of Bartertown. Aunty herself is as much a figure who dovetails performance and authority, and Turner’s casting introduces a faintly metatextual aspect, especially as the two songs she contributed to the movie, “The Living” as heard over the opening credits and the big hit “We Don’t Need Another Hero” at the end, serve as thematic extensions and commentaries that in their reproduce the motif of storytellers: Turner’s blazing vocals and the self-consciously epic soundscapes match the filmmaking describe the emotional experience of the characters. The notion becomes more insistent when Max is regaled by the tribe, who range between very small and late teens, with their story. The tribe have mapped out their history in terms of a legend, with paintings on the walls of the cave shelters recording the events of how they were evacuated from the city on a plane which then crashed after nuclear holocaust, and the adult survivors left them behind to seek out help.

Here Beyond Thunderdome makes linkages between primeval rock art and modern visual storytelling, science fiction and mystic atavism. Savannah serves as bard who holds a rectangular shape – a movie or TV frame – to become the portal to view the paintings through. Max is given a Viewmaster and flips through the captured images on the discs, including of some random airline pilot who has been immortalised as Captain Walker and a showgirl from some sexy cabaret who has been anointed as “Mrs Walker!” The kids then lead Max out onto the sand and stand upon the stranded hulk of the crashed 747, as grand and invested with meaning and utterly useless as any pyramid or ziggurat left behind by an ancient culture. There’s some kind of genius in this element of the movie, and it does much to offset the swerve towards a different kind of moviemaking to the series so far when it comes to the lost tribe themselves. Far from being as crudely developed and close to the animal as the Feral Kid in The Road Warrior, the tribe is instead only a little rambunctious, if still interestingly conceived with their skewed language and sense of the world, churning together the lost world of technology with the spiritual. Ethereal broadcasts from beyond, aka radio and TV signals, are referred to as “the sonic,” and some of the kids are utterly enraptured when Max introduces them to the workings of a retrieved gramophone, the disc on it reciting a lesson on how to speak French on vinyl, with the kids obeying the recorded voice’s injunctions to repeat the French phrases like catechisms of entirely obscure yet urgent meaning.

This element of Beyond Thunderdome also extends the theme of Max’s lost family and the appearance of surrogates for it, delivering an excellent pay-off for it as Max for all his hardboiled cynicism is provoked to protective instincts towards the children, even if at first these instincts manifest as domineering aggression. Max tries to convince the tribe they’re much better off where they are, and particularly doesn’t want them to venture near Bartertown. Savannah and some of the tribe, exhausted with waiting and realising that Max’s coming portends only the pointlessness of it, determine to leave the grotto. Max tries to intimidate them by firing off a rifle he finds amidst their possessions: appropriating their personification of Death in their legend, Max declares, “I’m the man who keeps Mr Dead in his pocket!” Still the group leave during the night, and Max, with three more of the tribe, sets out to track them down, coming across them as one child is sucked down into a sand void. During the night, they see distant lights that the kids think might be the elusive promise of Tomorrow-Morrow Land but Max knows is Bartertown. Knowing they can’t survive a retreat into the desert, they elect instead to sneak into the powerhouse complex, where they find Master has been thoroughly humiliated by Aunty and her goons by being stranded in a cage amongst his pigs. Max and the kids make hasty alliance with Master and the other prisoners, and Pig Killer sees a means of escape in Master’s engine, which proves to be an adapted steam engine still mounted on rails and with a carriage connected, and the fast-found tribe crash out of the city upon it.

It’s arguably in the concluding eruption of derring-do that Beyond Thunderdome actually, properly stumbles, as the action that ensues once Max and the kids invade the powerhouse confirms just how much Miller had filed down the teeth on his creation. Conceptually, the final chase only offer slight twists on The Road Warrior’s. Despite Anderson’s vividly pugnacious visage and the memorable look of his character (Bassey sports a Noh-like mask mounted on a stick jutting up from behind his back to make up for his lack of stature), he’s a pretty weak replacement for Wez, never allowed the kind of genuine ferocity and threat his predecessor wielded towards Max. Vignettes of the kids sliding down ramps and making violent but non-lethal havoc with Bassey and Aunty’s other thugs feel, as is often noted, closer in spirit to movies produced by Steven Spielberg’s Amblin company than the earlier series entries. Many critics and fans were justifiably wondering how a series that started off with pansexual rape and familial homicide had now become a kiddie adventure tale. The final chase is slightly distinguished from its precursor not just in terms of the different brand of locomotion taken by the heroes, but also in the object of pursuit, as Aunty and her warriors come roaring after the fleeing train – knowledge rather than a limited resource, as Aunty wants Master’s intellect at her disposal, an interesting twist but one that just doesn’t have the same urgency. The mayhem unleased is a lot less bloody and concussive, with the vignettes that make up sequence less brutally impressive and nowhere near as densely packed. Instead of blasting his foes with his shotgun or crushing them under his wheels, Max is now knocking them around with a frying pan.

And yet it can also be said that if one is going make kiddie adventure, Beyond Thunderdome still does it just about as well as you could ask for. The staging and raw filmmaking values are still superlative, with Semler’s work in particular hitting a zenith in the awesome surveys of Aunty’s squadron of vehicle poised on a rise before plunging over the edge and carving trails across a vast plain: such shots have an old-school widescreen texture infinitely preferable to the obnoxiously graded imagery of Fury Road. Miller’s original concept of a blend of screwball comedy and fast car action comes to a different kind of fruition here, with one of the kids, Scrooloose (Rod Zuanic), commandeering an enemy car and working out how to drive it on the guy like his silent comedy forebears, and the sight of Bassey hanging off the engine’s cowcatcher as it barrels down the rails. The train finally comes a halt at the end of the line which proves to be right next to Jedediah’s cave home, and the pilot and his son are pressganged into saving the escapees in their plane. Trapped between a chasm and the advancing vehicles, Jedediah points out the lack of sufficient runway in either direction, so Max, with a selfless bravado that signals the restoration of his original spirit, rides a truck into the advancing foes to bash a gap large enough for the plane to take off.

Aunty laughingly leaves Max amidst the wreckage with plain admiration for his ballsiness, whilst the plane wings its way through a dust storm as Jedediah fulfils the tribe’s quest to reach Tomorrow-Morrow Land. The coda of Beyond Thunderdome opens up a new landscape and scale for the trilogy even as it dovetails its themes and images, as the children behold the ruins of Sydney, complete with fractured Harbour Bridge and gutted skyscrapers looming over an emptied Port Jackson, the atmosphere flooded with red dust. A depiction, finally, of the total devastation of the old civilisation, but with the embryo of another clinging on raggedly in its bowels. The film concludes with Savannah now resuming her role as the storyteller for a new, larger tribe of all ages, living within one of the deserted skyscrapers, recounting the legend of Max and keeping the ruins lit as beacons for him and all the others lost in the wasteland to find their way home. The very last image is again one of Max alone, this time on foot, carrying a set of spears as he wanders in the setting sun – having concluded his devolution into primal warrior, yes, but also now purified, the hero his old boss wanted finally and properly ensconced in the collective dream.

Standard
1980s, Action-Adventure, German cinema, Historical

Fitzcarraldo (1982)

.

Director / Screenwriter: Werner Herzog

By Roderick Heath

Werner Herzog’s career has been one of the strangest of great living filmmakers, fitting for a director always aware of the absurd element of existence and rapt by collisions of life and art. The young talent of the New German Cinema movement emergent in the late 1960s who caught the eye of critics like Pauline Kael even with his short films. The alien auteur on the international film scene in the 1970s and ‘80s. The incessant documentary maker. The internet age ironic pop culture meme, guerrilla film school guru, professional iconoclast, and latter-day character actor, careers sustained while still turning out unique but often ignored movies. All the same man, all displaying different facets of the same great talent and restless creative zest. Herzog, born Werner Stipetić in Munich to a German father and Austro-Croatian mother in 1942, was a child of a bleak age and a country defined by surreal disparities. His mother fled Munich to a remote Bavarian village when Herzog was only two weeks old, after the house next to theirs was hit by an Allied bomb. Even in their new, remote locale Herzog could see the flicker of burning cities lighting the horizon.

Herzog grew up over the next few years in a household without common utilities like running water or a telephone, in the company of other children who ran wild with their fathers off at war. He didn’t see his first film until a travelling projectionist showed on in the local schoolhouse. Although his father eventually abandoned the family, Herzog adopted his father’s surname because it sounded more impressive, returned to Munich with his mother and siblings, and when father and son were reunited many years later they literally didn’t speak the same language. As a teenager Herzog developed passionate interests, but the idea of becoming a filmmaker soon overtook all else. He stole a 35 mm camera from the Munich Film School, which he later characterised not as a theft but an act of necessity. He also developed a reflexive resistance to authority as manifested by bullying schoolteachers, and worked as a steelworker at night to finance his student film projects. Amidst various, sometimes near-fatal travels, he spent stints living in Manchester, where he followed a girlfriend and first started learning English, and in the United States as a student, the latter experience one he would channel into his notoriously caustic portrait of the immigrant experience, Stroszek (1977). He founded his own production company in the early 1960s, around the time he forged his first short film, Herakles (1962).

After several more shorts, Herzog produced his debut feature, Signs of Life (1968). His follow-up, Even Dwarfs Started Small (1970), gained attention for its evocation of the physically unusual and grotesque in portraying the disabled denizens of an institution taking it over, whilst Fata Morgana (1971), built around footage he took in the Sahara desert recording mirages, established his habit of casually collapsing the distance between poetic and documentary filmmaking. Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972) really put Herzog on the map, however, with is unsettling, perverse, inexorable portrait of the ill-fated Spanish Conquistador who vanishes in the Amazon Jungle after succumbing to ever-deeper delusions of grandeur, a process Herzog identified as the logical end of the imperialist project, in the face of a vast, inimical natural landscape. Herzog’s stylistic vigour, with his lunging, wide-angle lensing on hypermobile and often handheld camerawork, and his blending of the immersive and happenstance method of documentary shooting with a defined artistic viewpoint, left a permanent mark on artistically ambitious filmmakers henceforth, particularly on the likes of Peter Weir and Terrence Malick.

Every Man For Himself And God Against All, aka The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser (1974), Stroszek, and Woyzeck (1979), continued to contemplate oddballs and misfits completely at odds with societies so alien to them they might as well have been parachuted in or otherwise drive them to crazed acts, all approached by the director with a blend of sickly estrangement and woozy compassion. Heart of Glass (1976) offered a bizarre portrait of the rural Germany he had grown up in and its medieval past that ultimately shaded into a fractured parable for the human condition. Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979) allowed Herzog to work through his obsession with F.W. Murnau’s original film and its oneiric imagery, converting its visual and thematic lexicon into his own as he blended high Expressionist style with his own cool blend of the naturalistic and the hallucinatory. When Herzog unearthed a scrap of historical information about the adventures of a Peruvian-Irish rubber baron named Brian Sweeney Fitzcarrald, a typical figure from the age of the “rubber boom” that gripped the Amazon basin from around 1890 to 1920, Herzog was fascinated enough to make his personal take on that story the subject of a film.

This one that would revisit the territory of Aguirre, The Wrath of God, specifically the jungle setting and a new investigation of Herzog’s preoccupation with the impossible effort of being human. He embarked on Fitzcarraldo but found his project metastasising into a test of determination and physical, fiscal, and artistic effort as he shot it on location in the Peruvian Amazon, locked in a hall of mirrors with the very subject of the film, the autobiographical dimensions of which emerged inevitably. Herzog weathered the departure of his first star, Jason Robards, and several supporting players, including Mick Jagger, who was playing a supporting role Herzog decided to excise completely once the singer-turned-actor left to go back on tour with the Rolling Stones. Klaus Kinski, who had worked with Herzog on Aguirre, The Wrath of God and Nosferatu the Vampyre and later became perceived by many as Herzog’s great creative muse, was eventually hired to replace Robards, but his and Herzog’s collaborations, always volatile despite the quality of their work together, became so fractious that Herzog later reported that one local tribal leader proposed killing Kinski for him.

Herzog himself didn’t escape the anger of the locals: one of his film sets was burned down by angry people of the Aguaruna nation, on whose land the movie was being made and who were working on the shoot, after several of their people were injured. Herzog found himself following in the footsteps of filmmakers like Erich von Stroheim, with Greed (1924) and Fritz Lang, with Metropolis (1927), and keeping company with contemporaries like Michael Cimino and Francis Coppola, as a filmmaker walking the tightrope of vision above the chasm of career suicide, as he might has well have been burning money to drive the engine of the steamship that features in the movie. The experience as a whole was recorded by the late Les Blank in his famous documentary Burden of Dreams (1982). Whether all that agony was worth the result is one of those grey zones of artistic effort, but the film itself is its own affirmation: the very crux of Fitzcarraldo as a story is that all human effort is, to some degree or another, a magnificently pointless expression of need, an urge that has no rational explanation, other to tilt against the scale and triviality of the universe. If Aguirre, The Wrath of God was the death dream concomitant to that viewpoint, with its voyage to the conqueror’s oblivion, Fitzacarraldo offers the mythical counterweight, a hymn to raging life and the enigmatic power of human energy.

Central to the film and its hero’s quest is an obsession with Grand Opera as the pure stuff of life, analogue to Herzog’s passion for cinema on the most obvious level but also persisting in weird and fascinating counterpoint to his actual efforts: how much effort humans expend to indulge the habits of the fantasias they weave with their minds in near-obliviousness to the actual world about them, the conviction that life without that extra level of the fantastic, the creative, the dream-enfolding, is without point, without differentiation from the old Hobbesian concept of the life as short, nasty, and brutish. Herzog’s anointed hero is Brian Sweeney Fitzgerald (Kinski), son of an Irish adventurer, his name transliterated to Fitzcarraldo to suit the local lingua and known to the few people close to him as Fitz. As an ultimate personal ambition, Fitz is preoccupied with reproducing the grand conceit achieved to unique and surreal effect by the Brazilian Amazonian city of Manaus, which built a marvellous classical opera house, in his chosen home of Iquitos, a far cruder city further up the mighty river in Peru. So desperate is Fitz to attend a performance being given by Enrico Caruso in Manaus that he and his lover and partisan, the brothel madam Molly (Claudia Cardinale), travel the 1,000 miles for the performance, and manage to talk a doorman into letting them into the already packed opera house. When Caruso points across the crowd as part of his performance, both Fitz and Molly are certain he pointed at him, as if the very spirit of destiny has chosen Fitz out.

On a more immediate and concrete level, Fitz wants to make himself a success in business, not purely for the sake of wealth or social standing, but to achieve his specific obsessions. Having failed to build what he called the Trans-Andean Railway in a bid to open up the Peruvian Amazon, he’s now set up an ice-producing concern utilising a well-known chemical process and which other entrepreneurs, like the immensely rich rubber baron Don Aquilino (José Lewgoy), mock him for, seeing no market in Iquitos for ice. Fitz’s desire for opera is presented not as a bizarre fixation but as a natural urge, as urgent as any need for food or sex, one that fills his thoughts and lends shape to his many, often absurd enterprises, and the dream-world of the opera is the one that stirs him to such follies. Fitz’s frustration climaxes with him regaling the townsfolk of Iquitos as he dangles from the spire of a city church, ringing the bell like a wannabe Quasimodo or some devolved ape of god, screaming, “I want my opera! I want my opera!” People stand far below, gazing up at the priest of art in bewilderment and irritation, whilst some policemen assemble and bash down the locked door of the church to drag him out, a moment Herzog invests with deadpan humour, as if with some participle of his mind is back with the Keystone Kops.

The actual opera performance of Verdi’s Ernani Fitz and Molly behold in rapture is on one level an absurd spectacle, famous names performing in a pasteboard world of delirious romanticism and where the only thing thicker than the artifice is the makeup. The portly Caruso plays the young romantic hero and Sarah Bernhardt, hired because of her fame, must mime her performance to an offstage singer, her wooden leg hidden beneath her costume but already the talk of the town. But it’s also a world that has more reality to Fitz than the one he lives in, in a manner that corresponds to Herzog’s own desire to seek in his cinema a truthfulness beyond mere realism of the kind he found in conventional cinema verite fare, and one dream-world feeds another. In this regard Herzog at once honours and subverts a fairly classical mode of movie based around the gallant visionary who sees far beyond the limits of the immediately practical to envision, well, new limits of the practical, whereas for Fitz, who always dresses in a white suit, the impracticality is the very point. In the course of his scheme he comes close nonetheless to unifying two largely irreconcilable realms, the world-building, world-trampling zeal of the businessman and the soul-nourishing if often just as tunnel-visioned influence of the artist. Fitz’s fixation to a certain extent saves him even from the darker aspects of such compulsion, aspects Herzog would later meditate on with the mountain climber protagonists of Scream of Stone (1991), tormented by their own egos and pain before the gruelling challenge of a great rock spire in Patagonia, and more notoriously the animal lover eventually consumed by his ‘friends’ in Grizzly Man (2006).

Aquilano is the essential contrast to Fitz, a rotund vulgarian nonetheless entirely at his leisure in the palatial rococo interior of the Manaus Opera which he seems to have helped build and run, boasting of how it’s been built on land worth ten times what real estate goes for New York with materials like imported Florentine marble. It’s all an expression of the bristling demand for prestige on the behalf of his rich little town, raised suddenly out of a jungle outpost to become a great global hub of commerce and industry, and all of it flowing out the simplest labour and a natural bounty. Aquilano strikes matches on a bronze figurine decorating the opera house, declares the feeling of losing money when playing cards to be beautiful, and feeds a bundle of thousand dollar notes to a fish being reared in a pool on his estate, noting that his fish only seem to flourish in that taste. The fish, or one of its fellows, is itself later feed in turn to the assembled grandees of Iquitos. This last flourish presents a particularly inspired metaphor for the roundelay of capitalist endeavour, one that cuts out any aspect of adventure or vision of the kind Fitz purveys so relentlessly, the money seemingly wasted cycled back through the literal bellies of the rich. Here Herzog contemplates the relationship of artist and patron with a Dickensian sense of its absurdity, but the dynamic of supporter and supported is laced with contradictions: only the artist and the priest can break money out of the illustrated capitalist cycle of money spent to make more money. But priests failed to bring civilisation to the wild nations of the Pachitea: “Two padres finished up as shrunken heads,” Aquilano tells Fitz.

Despite the differences between them, Aquilano likes Fitz for his energy and enterprise. Fitz also inspires passionate support from Molly, and a flock of children he’s become a father figure to: they camp outside the jail where he’s kept for two days after the church incident, one sawing away incessantly on a fiddle, presenting a spectacle so pathetic it moves the jailer to release Fitz. Fitz lives in a hovel with a pet pig for a companion, and it’s the pig he promises to set up on a red velvet chair every night in his opera house. Meanwhile Molly’s steadfast faith proves most valuable. Her stable of well-trained, well-dressed courtesanas makes them a social fixture in this crude town despite the pretences of the nobs, giving her leverage to wrangle a chance for Fitz to pitch to those nobs for support for his proposed opera house. When Fitz irritates the party by playing them one of his Caruso records, they try to throw him out, resulting in a display of angry pride from him as he gulps down glasses of champagne, dedicating each one to an opera composer, before offering his personal manifesto of defiance. “I will outgut you,” Fitz declares: “I will outnumber you. I will outbillion you. I will outrubber you. I will outperform you. Sir, the reality of your world is nothing more than a rotten caricature of great opera.” Molly promptly marches her girls out like a troop commander. “Only a dreamer can move mountains,” she tells Aquilano when he interview them together in an office of the opera house, and later Fitz steps up to declare that his very object: “I shall move a mountain.”

When Fitz decides on Molly’s advice to follow up on Aquilano’s offer to help him get set up in the rubber trade, seeing it as the only way to make his vision reality, he and Aquilano travel together up the Ucayali, a tributary river branching off the Amazon to the east of Iquitos, where Aquilano shows off both his own, immense holdings and the natural barrier that prevents anyone exploiting the land further on: a violent cataract called the Pongo das Mortes, so rough and fast that no boat can traverse it, let alone one large enough to transport loads of rubber, and no other transport route is feasible. “The Indians call the rapids ‘Chirimagua,’ Aquilano tells Fitz, “The Angry Spirits.” Approaching the cataract gorge, they’re urged to be silent by Aquilano’s native guide: “We must be quiet,” Aqulinao tells Fitz with sceptical humour, “Whoever talks will be swallowed up by the evil spirits of the whirlpool…the bare-asses also said ‘The water has no hair to hold onto.’” Shown a map of the area by Don Aquilino, Fitz notices how another tributary, the Pachitea, runs parallel to the Ucayali on the western side of Iquitos and bends close to it at a point well above the cataract, with only a slim isthmus separating them. Fitz realises, without entirely explaining to anyone for a long time, that if he can transport a boat across the isthmus, he can then use it to bring rubber from his claim across the Ucayali, to then be shipped down the Pachitea. Despite the many immediate and theoretical obstacles such a plan entails, Fitz sets about chasing the scheme with new passion, taking advantage of government policy that seeks to develop unexploited land, but also warned by the notary (William Rose) who arranges the deal he must establish his control of the region “by deed and by proof” within nine months or lose the rights.

The real Fitzcarrald was not nearly as florid and ambitious as Herzog’s poetically intensified equivalent. The boat he transported across land was only 30 tons, and was moved piece by disassembled piece, and he died at the age of 35 when his ship sank underneath him some years into his successful business operation. Fitzcarrald was no romantic figure either, instead typifying the kind of exploitative spirit more commonly associated with the rubber boom, much as Herzog portrays Aquilano and the other barons, wringing forced labour out of the native peoples whilst treating them with contempt. Herzog avoids rhetorical asides in contending with this aspect of the story, allowing it to take care of itself, whilst noting his Fitzcarraldo’s efforts as an odd mix of tentative connections and mutual use. The symbolic menace invested in the Pongo das Mortes by Aquilano proves not just to be a folkloric aside in a story where the cataract is a plot element and a practical foe, but a motif of genuine consequence both in terms of his great need to take on the universe and come out the victor, and in terms of the alliances and understandings – even if no one actually, entirely understands them – he forges along the way. Molly loans him enough money to buy a ship, purchasing one off Aquilano that sits decaying and mudbound on the Amazon shore, but with a little hard work from cheap local labour the vessel, renamed the Molly Aida after the two special women in Fitz’s life, is quickly spruced up and painted white in mimicry of her owner’s sartorial splendour. Fitz takes on a captain, a Dutchman known as “Orinoco Paul” (Paul Hittscher) for his long experience sailing on that rival great river, and a crew, including the boozy, licentious cook Huerequeque (Huerequeque Enrique Bohórquez), and a hulking engineer, Cholo (Miguel Ángel Fuentes).

The fully repaired and manned Molly Aida sets out up the Pachitea, but all aboard soon know that’s when the real trouble will start, as the Pachitea is a wild territory controlled by a nation known as the Jivaros, who killed most of the last expedition of missionaries and mapmakers who ventured up there. On the way to the Pachitea, Fitz stops at the one station he managed to build for his busted railroad because he wants to pull up some of the iron rails for use later. He finds one employee, the Station Master (Grande Othelo), still on duty despite not having been paid or visited for six years, and who’s formed a family whilst remaining on the job. The Master is jubilant to see Fitz, who’s utterly bewildered by the man’s presence, as he thought all the employees had been sent home. This tragicomic vignette this time dovetails the Dickensian with the Kafkaesque, in the image of the tattily officious master, forgotten by the vision that placed him there, lording it over a rusting, rotting outpost of failed industry. The Master becomes panicked when Fitz’s men start ripping up the tracks, worried they’re going to leave the one, rusting, already practically immobile steam engine stranded without even the pretence of its dignity, so Fitz spares him that mortification. Herzog’s camera finds an essential cartouche for his aesthetic in surveying the civilised pretences of the station and its stable of mechanical white elephants, quickly being swallowed up again by the jungle’s relentless and careless encroach.

Once they procure the rails, the Molly Aida and its crew start on for the Mission of Saramariza, where some missionaries are teaching natives, who, they claim, now irritably reject the title of “Indians:” an older missionary tells Fitz, “They said to me, ‘Indians are people who can’t read and who don’t know how to wash their clothes.’ Nonetheless, another, younger priest notes quietly as he recounts their ill-fate encounters with the Jivaros, “We can’t seem to cure them of the idea that our everyday life is only an illusion, behind which lies the reality of dreams.” Fitz immediately states that, with his love of opera, he feels kinship with that viewpoint. This sense of kinship becomes a weapon he wields as he travels up the Pachitea. Fitz hears that the Jivaros have been wandering in the jungle for a couple of centuries, searching for the fulfilment of a prophecy, later clarified as involving a “sacred boat with a white god” who will help them lift a curse blighting the whole land. The Molly Aida’s progress is initially greeted by the din of omnipresent drumming, echoing out of the dense foliage and mists clinging to the surrounding hills, indicating the Jivaros are watching their voyage with a sense of defensive threat. The Molly Aida’s crew present a gallery of vivid grotesques who might as well have stumbled out of a classic Hollywood adventure film as made by John Ford or John Huston, particularly the perma-soused Huerequeque, who brings along his two female assistants/concubines to feel up along the way.

Aquilino obliges Fitz to take Cholo along to act, as the tycoon readily admits, as a spy, to make sure he doesn’t poach on any other planter’s preserve. Cholo is initially hostile and cynical towards Fitz’s efforts, is nonetheless entirely won over to his cause when he realises how inspired Fitz’s idea is. Cholo, a towering incarnation of the physical strength of the native peoples, has nonetheless adopted the hard and expedient attitude of one converted to the methods and philosophies of his colonialist masters, with that degree of extra faith that such converts often wield – Herzog would extend this fascination for such a divided character in Where The Green Ants Dream (1984) – nursing his bundles of dynamite to throw at the hostiles in the jungle and bluntly telling Fitz he wants to take the boat back to his usual employer when the time comes. The rest of the crew snatch up rifles and listen with hair-trigger tension before deserting, leaving only Fitz, the Captain, Huerequeque, and Cholo. Fitz’s answer to the frightening enigma is to start blaring out Verdi from his trusty gramophone, bel canto streaming off into the forest, bewitching the forest peoples with a power that’s neither an offence to their beliefs nor a threat to their lives, but simply a strange and beautiful conjuration of worlds beyond the world. The drumming stops, and the Jivaros begin daring to show themselves on the river in boats. Until, finally, they mass together in canoes and block off retreat down the Pachitea by felling huge trees.

Fitzcarraldo can be described in its way as a companion piece and riposte to Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979), a film owed more than a little to Aguirre, The Wrath of God in the first place. Both films depict a journey upriver and a messianic foreign overlord manipulating local peoples into fulfilling his mission. But where Colonel Kurtz embodied a similar quality to Aguirre, the maniacal will to power wielded in the name of some nominal cause that finally becomes its own, self-consuming logic, embodying a dream of death, Fitz brings music, laced with overtones of connection and invocation for life-bringing that’s all the more powerful for having no actual substance, even if Fitz himself doesn’t entirely comprehend the resonances of his actions until the end. Fitz, learning about the Jivaros’ myths through the translations of Huerequeque, realises how he can place the Jivaros in service of his own ambition, without quite considering that they might do the same thing to him. The apparent leader of the Jivaros agrees to help Fitz in his scheme, which he finally unveils in the most thrilling way possible by having a platform built high in a tree, so he and the remnants of his crew can behold the small corner of the Earth they need to make subject to a manmade miracle.

Herzog’s early films had made a deep impact on the world film scene with his often beautiful yet unease-provoking imagery, his fascination and bewilderment before extreme natural landscapes, and sense of ironic contrast between the efforts of the human and the scale and impudence of the world. Aguirre, The Wrath of God famously opens with shots of the conquistadors and their native servants slogging through the teeming jungle like streams of soldier ants, making their inroads only with extraordinary effort. The blaring heroism of older films portraying social, political, and industrial conquest of the New World like, say, How The West Was Won (1962), was swapped out by Herzog’s acerbic conviction that such subjugation was both horrible and largely illusory, and if not illusory, then distinctly Faustian. At the same time, this was balanced by a conviction, half-appalled, half-admiring, that this was still the human mission, a mission communicated with the parable-like coda of Heart of Glass that reduced the human species to a race clinging to a rocky island, challenging the ocean in a boat. The boat motif, returned to here in the evident form of the Molly Aida, becomes the transfixing central metaphor and visual conceit of the film as Fitz and his helmates begin the arduous ritual of dragging up and over the isthmus between the rivers. Herzog’s viewpoint wielded a sense of the intransigence of modernity and western civilisation as crashing into other peoples as well as the natural, whilst harbouring its own neurotic and insidious forces within, like the accursed strain of vampirism that finally escapes into the world in Nosferatu the Vampyre.

Fitzcarraldo, with its portrait of the Amazon being disrupted by industry and portrait of the antipathetic attitudes of modern capitalism and ancient social and religious concepts, was fit for a time in the early 1980s when environmentalist concerns were becoming mainstream and worries over the Amazon in particular were heightened, and sparked a small clutch of films with similar concerns, including John Boorman’s The Emerald Forest (1984), Roland Joffe’s The Mission (1986), and John McTiernan’s Medicine Man (1991). Herzog’s woozily mesmerised fascination for the dark mark humanity leaves often on the Earth would climax in the documentary Lessons of Darkness (1992), with its awesome contemplations of the environmental havoc wreaks during the Gulf War with burning oil wells dotting the desert landscape. The side of Herzog’s art rooted in the approach of a documentary filmmaker is vital throughout Fitzcarraldo but also infused to the very root with its symbolic and aesthetic dimensions: Herzog’s capacity to film the real as, well, real – palpably, even pungently immediate, from its famous core image of the ship working its way with agonising effort up a slope on down to the backdrop of Iquitos with its plethora of rusting corrugated iron rooftops and the stains of authentic sweat and grime on Fitz’s white suit. Herzog pushed his immersive method of filming he espoused to its absolute limit, virtually forcing himself to live out the mania of his main character. Thomas Mauch’s cinematography, utilising the clear, lush, if slightly inexpressive palette of early 1980s film stock which aids the feeling of immediacy, particularly in the pivotal sequences of the ship-dragging, which collapses the boundary between record of an event and the conjuration of it for a fictional narrative.

Fizcarraldo can in its way be described as a particularly eccentric variation of the Greek myth of Sisyphus, which Albert Camus had also taken as the essential symbol of the existentialist concept of human endeavour, although it can also be argued that Herzog partly dismantles the metaphor in the unseen levels of drama he engages with, the world that his protagonists live in being one where effort isn’t necessarily commensurate with desired result. The film also, despite its setting and contemporary concerns, belongs to a very German artistic tradition. The figuration of the pristine, primal river and its guardians facing disruption by an intruding figure looking to steal the horde of gods reiterates and revises Richard Wagner’s Das Rheingold – Herzog had already used that opera’s famous opening strains in Nosferatu the Vampyre so here makes do with Verdi whilst contrasting the grandiosity of the vocals with the alternations of momentous strenuousness and rudderless pathos Fitz’s story involves – whilst the early scenes of Aquilano explaining his empire to Fitz and presenting his own temptation whilst looking down on a ripe world from a high vantage evokes Goethe’s Mephistopheles seducing his version of Faust. Herzog would go on in Where The Green Ants Dream to pit the atavistic, as embodied by his take on Australian Indigenous people with a similarly boding and taciturn self-sufficiency to the Jivaros, against the technological and the apocalyptic, ending with a similar act of appropriation of a vehicle – in the latter film’s case a warplane – to achieve an act of spiritual rebirth. Scream of Stone portrayed the rock climbers’ efforts as at once a profane, media-age act riven with elements of ego and glory-chasing, and a sublime, almost ritual challenge to primal forces.

Fitz’s labours similarly persist on the two levels of cynical get-rich-quick scheme and expression of overriding need of the soul, and his and the Jivaros’ aims, which seem to be fatefully and tragicomically out of alignment, finally prove to be two different versions of the same thing. Herzog’s inspiration for the image of the ship being pulled over the isthmus was the works of ancient builders of Neolithic monuments, ziggurats and pyramids, who often dragged colossal stones great distances for their seemingly irrational projects, most often inspired by a form of mystic and religious zeal that converted into a permanent physical expression to posterity. This makes Fitz Herzog’s ironic priest-king, and the director as enraptured by the act of human forging colossal, nature-defying works with muscle and a bizarre blend abstract faith and practical commitment as Cecil B. DeMille was on The Ten Commandments (1956) and Andréi Tarkovsky in the bell-making chapter of Andréi Rublev (1969). In spite of the great stylistic and philosophical gap between the two filmmakers, Herzog and DeMille both behold the splendour of human ingenuity and will whilst also suggesting it’s all for nought in the face of immutable forces; like Tarkovsky, Herzog finds the meaning nonetheless in the act of creation itself.

But Fitz’s efforts are also destructive, requiring not just that he suborn the Jivaros to his project, but for a great path to be gouged through the heart of the jungle and the crown of the isthmus’ heights with relentless labour of axe and explosive, even before the real test of the possible can occur. When the Molly Aida starts its ponderous journey up the slope, Fitz tries using some hewn logs as a slipway, after the Captain dismisses the idea of using the rails, but veers about and crushes some of the Jivaros. The locals promptly walk off the job and begin their own act of mourning and reckoning with the forces they feel they’re challenging in this bizarre labour, standing and gazing for days on the flowing river, before briefly vanishing and then returning – all of it entirely enigmatic to Fitz and his fellows, although Fitz understands a gesture from the Jivaros, hovering at the edge of the field of light from the crew’s dinner table lanterns with their hands reaching into the brightness, as one of mysterious but intuitive assurance, even blessing. Fitz exploits the resources of the world he bashes through, utilising trees he knows to be as hard as steel to create a windlass to aid the ship’s progress, but it’s Huerequeque who comes up with the ingeniously simple plan of using the steam winch for the anchor, as powered by the main engine, to simply haul the ship up the slow under its own power.

The entire film winnows down to the singular, awesome, hilarious shot of the Molly Aida moving at a virtual forty-five degree angle up the mountainside, diagonally bisecting the cinema frame, a sight all the more compelling with the knowledge that Herzog took no shortcuts in achieving it, the ultimate expression of his desire to find a point where the authentic and the poetic collide. The task of bringing the ship down on the far side of the Isthmus is comparatively easy, the craft slithering down to the riverbank mud and, after a sick lurch close to capsizing settling into the water, sparks rejoicing. Fitz and crew get blotto as they celebrate with the Jivaros with their woozily rhythmic music, dancing upon the mud. That the native peoples have a deeply ingrained poetic sensibility is noted with sarcasm by Aquilano early in the film when he comments, “They call the rubber tree caoutchou, ‘tree that weeps.’ These bare-asses love flowery language. Gold, they call ‘sweat of the sun.’ Bees, ‘fathers of honey.’” This sensibility again coincides with Fitz’s obsessions, the sense of the physical world and its ethereal counterpoints, whether one conceives of them as purely products of the human mind’s subtleties or incarnate on a spiritual plain, are always in flowing dialogue.

The chief, ironic consequence of this is to bring about the ruination of Fitz’s efforts. During the night, with Fitz, Pete, Cholo, and Huerequeque all asleep on board, the Jivaro leaders cut the Molly Aida’s hawser, allowing the ship to float downstream. This deed, far from being malicious, fulfils their particular object in all this, the part they’ve felt anointed to play in a cosmic drama. This is their gesture to the furious spirits of the Pongo das Morte, a rite they hope will lift the curse on a benighted land, white god and sacred ship riding the waters of chaos. The men aboard the ship only awaken when the Molly Aida starts bashing against the stone walls of the canyon around the Pongo das Morte, too late to get the engine going in time to make headway, and they’re forced to ride out the churning, surging waters and hope the craft hangs together. Whether by miraculous grace or merely good engineering, the ship does survive the ride with a few cracked and stove-in timbers. The few inserts of model work interpolated in this scene do violate the carefully wrought veneer of the undeniably actual, although these are cut in amidst the genuine footage Herzog and a small crew dared to film on the freely drifting ship, Herzog’s gaze applied with a sort of punch-drunk wonder to footage of the ship thumping listlessly against rocky shores with operatic arias surging in disconsolate fashion on the soundtrack.

The quieter irony here is that whilst the Jivaros wreck Fitz’s worldly scheme, they help him fulfil his aims on other levels. They set the seal on a legend that binds them together in a manner Wagner would have delighted in, proving the primacy of the dream-world over the actual. The voyage over land and the pacification of the troubled waters two entwined deeds that perform literal acts of beneficence, exhausting the obsession on Fitz and rendering, or at least proving, the Pongo das Mortes just another run of rapids, and providing an absurd contrast to the reign of greed over the land. Fitz, abashed and tired, nonetheless finds his own way of setting the seal on the story and fulfilling his ambiton at the same time, accepting Aquilano’s offer to buy back the Molly Aida and using the funds to hire a visiting opera troupe to enact their rendition of Verdi’s The Puritans atop the steamer, with Fitz himself playing the proud impresario, cigar in mouth, a red velvet chair for his pig on hand, and Molly awaiting him with a large crowd at the Iquitos dock. Mere success is the purview of business, but where incredibly laborious acts are undone with incredibly simple deeds and total failures are alchemised into grand victories, there lies the continent of the artist.

Standard
1980s, Drama, Political

Secret Honor (1984)

.

Director: Robert Altman
Screenwriters: Donald Freed, Arnold M. Stone

By Marilyn Ferdinand

At this moment in American history, when a former Republican president’s multifarious dirty tricks have been publicly unveiled in a legal indictment to his credulous supporters and rabid detractors alike, there is no more appropriate film to watch than Robert Altman’s chronicle of a former Republican president wallowing in disgrace, Secret Honor.

Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th president of the United States, may not have been the East Coast insider from money our allegedly felonious ex-president is, nor was he as managerially inept and cynically opportunistic in adopting whatever beliefs would make him popular. Nixon was a ruthless, paranoid, relentless hunter and destroyer of perceived communists in the 1950s, but he actively courted the friendship of communist China, becoming the first U.S. president ever to visit the country, in 1972. He was revealed to be a savage bigot who threw around the words “kike,” “spic,” “nigger,” and “wop,” but his best friend, “Bebe” Rebozo, was Cuban. He employed future ultraconservatives Pat Buchanan and Dick Cheney on his administrative staff and nominated staunch conservative William Rehnquist to the Supreme Court, but his policies on the environment, the social safety net, and nuclear arms limitation were quite liberal.

Nixon was the ultimate comeback kid in politics. He rose from several significant political defeats, including the loss of the presidency to John F. Kennedy in 1960, to being elected for a second term as president in 1972 by the widest margin in history. Only two years later, to avoid impeachment proceedings related to his role in the break-in at the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C., he became the only U.S. president to resign the office. At the time Secret Honor was made, Nixon appeared to be buried in shame forever, but he had already started to rehabilitate his image. By the time of his death in 1994, Nixon was admired by many as a wise elder statesman.

The purported last days of Nixon’s presidency seem to be the leaping-off place for Donald Freed and Arnold M. Stone’s screenplay for Secret Honor, based on their play of the same name. Nixon was said to have gone quite mad at the end, talking to paintings of presidents past and raging at his persecutors, real or imagined. Although the film takes place at his New Jersey estate long after Nixon (Philip Baker Hall) has become a private citizen, Nixon’s mental deterioration seems to have progressed to an astonishing degree. Of course, his lunacy may have something to do with the decision he appears to have made to end his life. He sits down at his desk with a Chivas neat, places a revolver in front of him, and fumbles helplessly trying to get his tape recorder to record. An audience who knows of Nixon’s obsession with taping his conversations must certainly find his ineptitude with the machine hilariously ironic. I wondered whether he might shoot it instead of himself.

Eventually, the recorder is made to function, and Nixon launches into a long and harrowing rant about his life in the form of a lawyer presenting a case to a judge. He is the lawyer with his foolish self as the client. His envy of his golden-boy brother Harold, lost to tuberculosis at the age of 17, sets the stage for his escalating list of backstabbers and persecutors, ranging from Dwight Eisenhower, for whom he served as Vice President, to the Kennedys, to some of the players in the Watergate scandal. He muses about his White House counsel, John Dean, who testified against him in the Watergate hearings, saying, “If John Dean hadn’t existed, I would have had to invent him!”

Indeed, this Nixon has invented a lot of things to explain his actions over the course of his life. He claims to have been in league with a so-called Committee of 100, a business cabal that chose him as their man in Washington and backed his career. Their ultimate aim, Nixon says, was to usher in the new nexus of world power, the Pacific Rim countries, which they would do by having Nixon serve a third term as president so that he could continue the Vietnam War.

Nixon constantly rails against the Eastern establishment that treated him like a hick Quaker from the sticks. “The Founding Fathers were nothing more than a bunch of snobby English shits,” he spits. Nixon’s self-pity at the snubs he has received track perfectly with his weepy self-justifications in real life, including his declaration after losing the 1962 race for governor of California (“You don’t have Nixon to kick around anymore. Because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.”) and his infamous 1952 Checkers speech to address questions about whether he was using political donations improperly (“We did get something, a gift, after the election. …It was a little cocker spaniel dog, in a crate … sent all the way from Texas, … and our little girl Tricia … named it Checkers. And you know, the kids … love the dog, and … regardless of what they say about it, we’re gonna keep it.”)

Philip Baker Hall gives what might be the performance of the century as he reprises his stage appearance for Robert Altman’s camera. I have read that because Secret Honor is almost a complete interpolation of the stage play to the screen that Hall’s seeming overacting is, in reality, an exercise in stage acting. I disagree with this assessment. Hall does not seem to be overacting to me. Nixon was a self-aggrandizing, grandstanding man in public and a foul-mouthed, paranoid bigot in private. I can well imagine Nixon in a frenzied stream-of-consciousness about every detail of his life, and I think Hall did a tremendous job of remaining absolutely objective toward his character.

There are moments when we can almost pity Nixon, such as when he opens his mother’s bible and lovingly gazes at the photos and remembrances pressed between its pages. But the scheming, grasping Nixon is always in plain view, Shakespeare’s Richard III in a red smoking jacket. His line about his motivation in life could be a line out of Shakespeare: “Resolve to win—period—because that is the American system. You take either side—it doesn’t even matter which one—and you go on the attack.”

Altman can’t really add much to this stagebound production, but his well-known technique of overlapping dialog seems to come into play here as Hall’s Nixon interrupts himself, jumps about from topic to topic, confusing us and giving us an immediacy to events that, for him, may be long past. Altman also frames the four television monitors and the closed-circuit camera Nixon uses to watch himself to emphasize the claustrophobia and narcissism infecting this man.

I’m old enough to remember many of the events and participants of the Nixon years, and I know enough about the ’50s to recognize the names Alger Hiss, Whittaker Chambers, and the Rosenbergs. I think for people unfamiliar with Nixon’s history, this film will make very little sense, and I fear that this astonishing performance by Hall will be forgotten forever someday.

But a notion Freed and Stone explore that remains of interest is why Nixon kept coming back long after he should have been buried politically. This is what they think: “I would be a winner because I was a loser! That’s right. I dream of failure every night of my life, and that’s my secret. To make it in this rat race you have to dream of failing every day. I mean, that is reality.” I’m not so sure, but the perception of being besieged culturally, economically, and intellectually has certainly kept the 45th president’s loyal minions stapled to his side and supportive through his veritable avalanche of legal entanglements.

Altman closes his film with a final act of defiance. He repeats on a tape loop that fills the TV monitors Nixon yelling “Fuck ’em” while flinging an upper cut into the air. This shock to the system (completely in character for both the 37th and 45th president) represents the last nail in the coffin for Nixon apologists. He doesn’t need or want them—and he doesn’t deserve them.

Standard
1980s, British cinema, Drama, Historical, Sports, Uncategorized

Chariots Of Fire (1981)

.

Director: Hugh Hudson
Screenwriter: Colin Welland

In Memoriam: Hugh Hudson (1936-2023) / Vangelis (1943-2022) / Ben Cross (1947-2020) / Ian Charleson (1949-1990) /  Brad Davis (1949-1991)

By Roderick Heath

Hugh Hudson’s Chariots of Fire can still be called a beloved and iconic work, even as it’s suffered a precipitous decline in stature since its release in 1981. At the time it was an uncontroversial winner of the Best Picture Oscar, marked by many as the official moment of resurgence for British cinema at a moment when the New Hollywood era had been decisively declared dead following Heaven’s Gate (1980). Actor turned screenwriter Colin Welland also gained an Oscar for the script, as did the Greek prog rocker turned electronica composer Vangelis. As if the film’s themes of patriotic toil and achievement were bleeding out into real life, entrepreneurial producer David Puttnam gained the climax to his and others’ efforts to foster that British film renaissance after the long, hard winter of the 1970s. That sentiment was famously summarised by Welland’s declaration upon receiving his Oscar, “The British are coming!”, and David Attenborough’s Gandhi would repeat the feat the following year. For years after its release, tributes, pastiches, and lampoons playing on its opening images of men running set to the shimmering electronic tones of Vangelis’ glorifying theme were all over the place.

With time however Chariots of Fire seems to have fallen away from attention, now often dismissed as the prototypical piece of Oscar bait that unfairly beat out Steven Spielberg’s Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) in the ultimate prestige-versus-pop movie clash, and a flagship of 1980s conservative resurgence in moviegoing taste: Ronald Reagan reportedly loved it. Puttnam would piss off myriad players and onlookers with his brief period running Columbia Pictures a few years later. Hudson’s career would suffer a similarly jarring switchback of fortune. Hudson was one of a cadre of directors fostered by Puttnam, following Alan Parker, Ridley Scott, and Adrian Lyne, who had cut their teeth making TV commercials. Like Parker, Hudson had worked for Scott for a time, with Hudson’s signature talent, as evinced on a famous ad for Fiat showing cars being robotically assembled set to music from Rossini’s The Barber of Seville, being interesting fusions of sound and vision. He had also demonstrated his interest in sporting subjects with his documentary on racing driver Juan Manuel Fangio, Fangio, A life at 300 km/h, and worked as a second unit director on Parker and Puttnam’s breakthrough collaboration Midnight Express (1978). Chariots of Fire was his feature debut, and for a follow-up Hudson made Greystoke – The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes (1984), and Revolution (1985): the latter proved a disaster both commercially and critically. Hudson was pushed to the margins, only returning sporadically for relatively straitlaced and classy fare no-one watched, with Lost Angels (1989), My Life So Far (1999), I Dreamed of Africa (2000), and Altamira (2016), although as his feature career broke down he kept up making much-admired commercials. His recent passing at the age of 86 was barely noted by many cineastes.

Despite the train wreck his once-dazzling career became, I retain admiration and interest in Hudson’s prime, when he seemed the least flashy but also most quietly experimental of the directors Puttnam fostered. Greystoke tried to reiterate the Tarzan tale in a fastidiously realistic manner, drawing on a script that was a long-time passion project for writer Robert Towne. The result was uneven but fascinating and, in its early portions, uniquely vivid. But it was also the first case of one of Hudson’s film being tinkered with, as would happen more destructively on Revolution, a film which certainly didn’t work but was also a product of authentic artistic ambition. In keeping with his fascination with culture clashes and boldness in risking elements of anachronism, Hudson tried to explore the American Revolution in a manner that nodded to both punk and new wave-era pop culture – notably casting singer Annie Lennox as a revolutionary maiden – and art cinema, particularly Mikhail Kalatozov and Miklos Jancso, with his rolling, flowing staging of communal events, whilst engaging seriously with the theme of an angry and vehement underclass emerging from revolt, as embodied by Al Pacino’s lead character. The film gained some reappraisal when Hudson reedited it in 2008.

Indeed, the singular thread connecting Hudson’s films despite their wildly varying reception was an interest in clashes between and within cultures, as experienced and embodied by individuals. Hudson himself came from an officially privileged background, having attended Eton as a lad – he notably filmed the other famous scene of Chariots of Fire, the Great Court Run, on location at his almer mater – but also developing a visceral hatred for the prejudice he often found espoused in such circles. As a consequence Chariots of Fire is far from being straightforward in its attitudes to patriotic endeavour and identity, revolving as it does around two core protagonists who become champions and national heroes but nonetheless do so in highly ironic ways and upholding vehemently different motives that somehow still mark them as perpetual outsiders, if only in their own minds. In the late 1970s Puttnam was explicitly looking for a story reminiscent of A Man For All Seasons (1966) as a study of a hero obeying their conscience, and discovered the story of Eric Liddell, 400m champion at the 1924 Paris Olympics, in an Olympic history book. He commissioned the former actor Welland to write the script, and Welland talked to everyone he could still alive and able to remember the 1924 Olympic Games where Liddell had competed, but he just missed interviewing Liddell’s teammate and rival Harold Abrahams, the 100m champion at the same games, as Abrahams passed in 1978. Welland nonetheless attended his funeral service, inspiring his script’s flashback structure and anchoring a story of the past in the then-present.

Stories about the British upper crust had been officially unfashionable for decades when Chariots of Fire emerged, around the same time as the hugely successful TV adaptation of Evelyn Waugh’s Brideshead Revisited, which similarly worked with serious purpose to convey the flavour and meaning of a bygone era’s mores on their own terms, whilst also noting the birth pains of the more recent epoch. If films like David Lean’s The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) and Joseph Losey’s King and Country (1963) explored the breakdown of the old British character in the face of the Twentieth century’s charnel house, Chariots of Fire evoked it from a safe distance, noting an age when it wasn’t considered absurd to put God before fame or when the idea of patriotic duty as a transcendental virtue was still a lit if flickering flame. Chariots of Fire didn’t just set the scene for other posh British dramas to start proliferating again on movie and TV screens, and lurk as an influence behind other ambitious sports films like Ford v Ferrari (2019), but perhaps also opened a door leading to Harry Potter films, which depended on a similarly elastic push and pull between nostalgic yearning and anxiety and rebellion in the face of haughty tradition.

Chariots of Fire has been described as a rare sports movie that even people who don’t like sports movies like. That could be whilst Chariots of Fire contains all the stuff of a heroic sporting drama, it also avoids the usual – by historical necessity of course, but also but dint of focus and method. The film charts the rivalry, and mutual admiration, of the two standout champions of the British team at the ’24 Olympics, Abrahams and Liddell, who nonetheless are fated not to compete head-to-head, but instead find separate paths towards their eventual reckonings with victory. Eric (Ian Charleson) is a China-born Scottish missionary and Rugby Union player turned runner. Harold (Ben Cross) is the son of a Jewish Lithuanian immigrant turned successful English banker. For both men faith defines them as individuals and in relation to the world about them, but in disparate ways: for Liddell his religion supersedes worldly cares and values, whilst Abrahams is driven by angry resentment. Eric muses with love on the Scottish landscape that is nonetheless new and foreign to him after years of hearing about it from his father, whilst Harold chafes at constantly feeling, despite his ardent sense of loyalty and English identity, like others still consider him an alien. The title of course is comes from William Blake’s beloved poem “Jerusalem,” a relevant choice not just in the dashingly poetic lilt it lends but in evoking the centrality of religious faith to the drama as well as Blake’s anxious questioning of the changes befalling his beloved England, and desire to rebuild it as something finer and cleansed: in much the same way the film notes the enlargement of the idea and ideal of British identity.

The film’s flashback structure nods to Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia (1962) (also relentlessly mimicked by Attenborough on Gandhi, at a time when Lean still couldn’t get a film financed to save his life) as it commences with a funeral service for Harold, with a eulogy given by his former teammate and pal from Cambridge Lord Andrew Lindsay (Nigel Havers), and attended by some other old comrades including Aubrey ‘Monty’ Montague (Nicholas Farrell). Hudson dissolves from the sight of the old, withered men mourning one of their own to the spectacle of them in all the glory of their youth, dashing as a team through the surf at Broadstairs in Kent (although the scene was actually shot at West Sands, next to St Andrews Golf Club, in Scotland), both physical strain and sheer joyful pleasure in pushing their abilities to the limit apparent on their faces. Hudson returns to this vision at the film’s very end, partly in sustaining the motif of fluid time and restoration of glory days, and also with an old ad man’s knowledge he has a killer hook: it’s this vision, with Vangelis’ music over the top, that became an instant pop culture landmark. A brief vignette follows of Harold’s competitive and brattish streak on full display as he becomes frustrated at failing to bowl Liddell out during a game of cricket, staged with amusing bohemian verve within the plush environs of a seaside hotel’s ballroom, as well as Harold’s final ability to laugh at himself for all his concerted passion.

Loose framing narration comes from Monty in writing a letter home as he muses on Abrahams’ customary intensity, and thinks back to their first meeting three years earlier when first coming to Cambridge, setting the scene for stepping back again in time, as several of the future track and field stars meet whilst signing up for clubs during their induction at the university. Harold, a law student, also immediately makes his declaration of intent when he takes on a standing challenge that hasn’t been beaten in 700 years: the Great Court Run, referred to in the movie as the College Dash, sprinting around the courtyard of Trinity College in the time it takes for the school clock to strike noon. He unexpectedly gains a fellow challenger when the dashing young aristocrat Lindsay decides to try too: still, Harold manages to not just beat him but the clock too, making history. Truth be told, Abrahams never even tried to take on the Great Court Run (which was actually first beaten by Lord Burlegh, one of the two real men Lindsay is based on, a few years after this), but it makes a great scene in first evincing Harold’s blistering ability in the context of this capital of an eminent but hidebound establishment he’s clawing his way into, and its description of the essence of a certain British kind of exceptionalism blending schoolboy larkishness and fearsome ability, the spirit of eternal renewal and limit-stretching amidst echoes of hallowed tradition.

Soon Harold tells his fast friend Monty that he’s determined to avenge the many slights and insults turned his way by the British upper class, to “run them off their feet” literally and figuratively. Meanwhile, the more serenely modest and pious, if also hearty and good-humoured Eric is being feted in Scotland for his success as a footballer, and courted by coach Sandy McGrath (Struan Rodger) to turn his hand to running: encouraged to give a show of his speed during a sporting carnival he’s giving out trophies at, Eric demonstrates his astounding talent, complete with his signature move as he zeroes in on the finish line of leaning back with his mouth yawing wide in ecstatic effort. He soon decides to take up Sandy on his offer. On the one occasion Eric and Harold race against each-other in the 100m, at a meet at Stamford Bridge, Eric handily beats Harold, sparking a momentary crisis for Harold who’s built his entire identity around being unbeatable. He gains solace when a professional coach he’s approached, Sam Mussabini (Ian Holm), assures him he can make him a better runner, whereas he thinks Eric has reached his limit as a sprinter and is a better fit for longer runs.

The story of the two runners is presented against the backdrop of a Britain recovering in the aftermath of the Great War, with both men competing unawares to be salves for, as one character puts it, “a guilty national pride.” Harold, first signing into Caius, deals with the patronising Head Porter Rogers (Richard Griffiths) in explaining that he only just missed fighting in the war and comments, “I ceased to be called laddie when I took the King’s commission – is that clear?” Harold’s habitual pugnacity and chip-on-the-shoulder attitude is both a reaction to various manifestations of anti-Semitism and taken by others as a justification for it, particularly the Masters of Caius and Trinity Colleges (Lindsay Anderson and John Gielgud), who observe the courtyard race with languid interest, two old trolls inhabiting the high reaches of this otherwise romantic world of blazers and boaters. They later put Harold on the spot for violating their purely amateur ethos by hiring Mussabini, which they worry will besmirch the honour of the university. “I take the future with me,” Harold ripostes, provoked to tension but also perhaps just a little thrilled to have put the old guard’s noses out of joint, to one Master’s exchange with the other once he’s gone, “There goes your Semite, Hugh.”

The two Master are played with snooty verve by the obviously cast Gielgud and the more mischievously cast, famously antiestablishment director Anderson, maker of what could be described as this film’s antithesis, If… (1968). The inevitable punchline that when informed of Harold’s eventual victory one Master notes to the other with satisfaction, “Just as I expected,” lends a more sardonic hue to the theme of the establishment making room. Some have expressed qualms over what Harold’s bucking of the Masters means over the years, considering that the Harold future claims as his own is the one we’re familiar with today, of professional sportspeople and the invasion of sporting endeavour by overriding commercial concerns and an attendant competitiveness that often manifests in drug cheating. More immediately, it also points to a subtext of Chariots of Fire wound in with its own making. Financing for the film was taken over by immigrant entrepreneur Mohammed Al-Fayed and his son Dodi: Harold’s expressions of a multigenerational intent to carve a path into the heart of the British establishment by immigrant outsiders against all headwinds of prejudice surely caught Al-Fayed’s attention, as it could well have spoken to so many who had come to Britain in the post-Imperial age. This theme also extends to Mussabini, a man with a strong midlands accent who nonetheless is Arab-Italian in heritage, further exacerbating the complicating sense of national identity.

This theme is starkly at odds with the film’s reputation as being a conservative statement, although it could also be said to rhyme to a certain extent with the Thatcher-Reagan era’s mixture of embraced traditionalism and narrowly defined and channelled rule-breaking: the outsiders want to be insiders. The film is also cunning in offsetting its antagonist figures. If the Cambridge Masters represent a hidebound old guard, Lord Lindsay is presented as a gentleman bohemian who could also stand in for the Thatcher era Tory’s ideal self-projection, enjoying the fruits of his privilege, merrily practising his hurdling technique in the grounds of his country house with champagne used an actual training tool, but entirely open-minded and breezily reassuring to all in his circle.

The nominal enemies on the running track are the Americans, the flashy Charlie Paddock (Dennis Christopher) and the muscular, intimidating Jackson Scholz (Brad Davis), who have a rivalry not unlike that of Harold and Eric. Whilst Paddock is a figure ripe for a takedown, Scholz proves a serious person who feels unexpected kinship for Eric, eventually giving him a note that suggests equally serious religious feelings, which Eric then carries into the race. Davis had played the lead in the Puttnam-produced, Parker-directed Midnight Express (1978), the film that established the potency of Puttnam’s production approach if with a safe appeal to the US market; Christopher meanwhile was cast with some wit after his lead role in Peter Yates’ Breaking Away (1979) as another sportsman, albeit this one lean and mean, casually accepting a passionate kiss from a random woman when first setting foot in France. Scholz himself, who actually beat both Liddell and Abrahams in the 200m, was still alive when the film was made, as was Jennie Liddell, both thanked in the end credits.

The film’s deeper theme is the way an athlete – perhaps anybody, really – is obliged to find strength and motive within, in wellsprings distinct from and even perhaps alien to the society they represent, even as they’re expected to share out whatever success and glory they win in collective terms. In both Harold and Eric those wellsprings are apparent, Harold’s driving need to prove himself the best participating in a constant roundelay of pride and shame, versus Eric’s triumphal sense of spirituality expressed through physicality, and whichever compels one as an individual viewer the most perhaps says much about one’s own inner drives. Eric’s awesome talent is illustrated to both Mussabini and Harold’s profound wonder when they watch him in a race at a Scots vs English track meet: a fellow runner shoves Eric at the first turn and he falls down at the trackside, gets back up, chases down the other runners and wins, at the cost of collapsing as a breathless mess at the end. Here in particular Eric’s speed seems the purest expression of something beyond the merely human, a vitality of mind and body springing from a conviction so total as to be reflexive: whereas Harold needs the society he feels at odds with in a peculiar way, Eric is beyond it.

In much less airy terms, Eric’s talent has long been honed in active competition as a footballer, the furore of actual struggle a realm he’s been trained to be indifferent amongst, where Harold for all his bloodymindedness competes as the gentleman amateur, and he needs Mussabini’s keen sense of technique to help him improve. Whilst he never does get to race Eric again after losing to him, leaving a tantalising ambiguity in the air, Harold gains something that lets him take on the rest of the best in the world and win. “Short sprinters run on nerves,” Mussabini tells Harold when assessing his and Eric’s differing capacities, “It’s tailor-made for neurotics.” He and Mussabini develop an almost paternal relationship during the course of their labours, with Mussabini finally crying, “My son!” when Harold triumphs. Harold’s friendship with Monty sees him praising him as a “complete man” even as Monty is hurting after grievous failure, even as Harold despairs that he himself might be too scared to win after a life of being scared to fail.

Welland’s script was rife with historical and dramatic licence, including the actual circumstances of Abrahams’ race(s) against Liddell and of Liddell’s quandary at the Olympics, Jennie’s age and attitude to Liddell’s running, the timing of Abrahams’ meeting of his future wife Sybil, and inventing the character of Lindsay as a concatenation of two real historical figures, one of whom didn’t want to be involved with the film and the other competed at a later Olympics. Montague was actually a student at Oxford, although the narration his letters provides is practically verbatim from his real missives. But Abrahams’ authentic musical talent – and Cross’s – and love of Gilbert and Sullivan in particular, was smartly tapped as one of the running motifs of the film, as songs from the G&S catalogue provide jaunty leitmotifs for Harold and the other Cambridge adventurers. After his self-explaining soliloquy to Monty, Hudson shifts into a spry and witty montage of Harold’s training regimens and running victories, scored to his own singing in the Cambridge G&S Society’s production of H.M.S. Pinafore: his signing the anthemic “He Is An Englishman” is a gesture laced with both spry sarcasm and perfect earnestness given Harold’s mission.

Later Harold is distracted from his pure dedication when he’s dragged by his friends to see a production of The Mikado, where he he’s instantly smitten with Sybil Gordon (Alice Krige), playing the role of Num-Yum, belting out “Three Little Maids From School Are We.” Much to Monty’s heartache given his own long-nursed crush Harold successfully asks her out on a date, in part because Sybil’s younger brother is athletics mad, and the two have immediate chemistry even as Sybil tries awkwardly to reassure Harold as he explains his position as Jewish: “I’m what they call semi-deprived…It means that lead me to water but they won’t let me drink.” A moment of crisis seems to arrive when the special of the restaurant Sybil ordered for them both proves to be pig’s trotters, only for this to set them both laughing. Later, as they’ve become a firm couple, Sybil tries with mixed sympathy, irritation, and frustration to coax Harold through his crisis after losing, a moment where despite the jaggedness of emotion it’s plain that Sybil has become along with Mussabini a person Harold can show his deepest, most inchoate vulnerability to.

Eric and his sister Jennie (Cheryl Campbell) have a similarly fraught and close relationship, both being predestined to take up their father’s work in China. Jennie becomes worried that his new passion for running is drawing him away from his habits of faith and their duty, and Jennie is particularly upset when Eric is late from a training session for a prayer meeting, making anxious appeals that he remember what their ultimate purpose it. As he walks with her up Arthur’s Seat outside Edinburgh, Eric explains patiently but firmly that he’s already committed to becoming a missionary but is also determined to take his running as far as he can, feeling that his talent is god-given, that when he runs he “feels His pleasure,” and so must honour it to the upmost. This attempt to balance faith with passion will of course be strongly tested, foreshadowed early in the film when he chides a boy for playing football on a Sunday, although he also makes sure to play a game with the lad and his family the next morning so he doesn’t think “God’s a spoilsport.” Just as Eric and the rest of the team selected for the ’24 Olympic embark on a Channel ferry for their great venture, he learns from an inquisitive reporter’s questions that the heats for the 100m will be held on a Sunday.

When Eric soon declares he can’t participate in the heats, he’s soon taken before  number of British Olympic Committee bigwigs including Lord Birkenhead (Nigel Davenport), Lord Cadogan (Patrick Magee), the Duke of Sutherland (Peter Egan), and Edward the Prince of Wales (David Yelland), in a scene that becomes, in Eric’s words, a form of inquisition in the pointed test of loyalties. Eric stands up for himself effectively against Cadogan’s stern espousal of patriotic duty above all and Birkenhead and the Prince’s smoother espousals of the same, whilst the Duke has more sympathy, retorting to Cadogan’s comment “In my day it was King first, God after,” with, “Yes, and the war to end wars bitterly proved your point.” Eric’s steadfastness places them all at loggerheads until Lindsay intervenes: having already won a silver medal in the hurdles, he suggests that Eric take his slot in the 400m, to be held on a different day, and the offer ends the impasse. Meanwhile Harold is obliged to install Mussabini in a hotel room a safe distance away from the Olympic stadium lest he taint it with his professionalism (“I’ve seen better-organised riots,” he quips earlier on regarding a different meet).

Holm’s expert supporting performance was invaluable, presenting the worldly professional flipside to all the toffee-caked youth, whilst Cross and Charleson’s effective performances went oddly ignored even in Oscar nominations. Hudson lost the Best Director Oscar to Warren Beatty’s work on Reds (1981), an ironic win given that whilst both directors paid homage to Lean in their elliptical approaches to stories set in the same period if contending with highly divergent social perspectives, and because Beatty’s work was generally much more traditional than Hudson’s. Hudson’s exacting recreation of the period milieu, and equally exacting feel for the classically British virtues and foibles at play in the drama, blends throughout Chariots of Fire with an aggressively modern film aesthetic. This is most obviously keyed to the boldly anachronistic electronic textures of Vangelis’s score (which made so much impact that Peter Weir pinched the idea for his Gallipoli, 1982, as did Michael Mann for The Keep, 1983, whilst Vangelis was immediately hired by Scott for Blade Runner, 1982), but is also apparent in Hudson’s restless camerawork and innovative editing. Not that Hudson was being entirely original. Slow motion, freeze frames, and replays were already an accepted part of the average TV sports broadcast by this point, and films like Grand Prix (1966) and Le Mans (1972) had played with fracturing time in filming sporting contests.

Hudson still went a step further in trying to use it all for dramatic, even poetic emphasis, balancing the relentlessly fleeting nature of sporting competition, in which entire lives and fates can be decided in a few brief seconds of perfect physical expression, clashing with the mind’s capacity to experience it in expanses of dilation and distillation, the surging physical effort of racing glimpsed in contorting slow motion that turns events into arias of motion and character. Harold’s loss to Eric in their one race is a blink-and-miss-it affair where the difference between the two men seems trifling and yet means everything, and Harold’s obsessing over it is illustrated in constant, drawn-out flash-cut returns to it, each moment and gesture turned over with agonising meaning, punctuated by Vangelis’ moody electronic stings. Harold’s climactic race is filmed first in a deadpan shot looking down the track, the race that has obsessed the runners and become the focal point of the drama disposed of in a few seconds, the winner hard to make out because of the angle – the event of such grand drama is also a mere blip in movie time, never mind the history of the world, but then is revisited in glorifying slow motion, becoming a dream of individual will translated into speed.

Other innovative touches are more subtle, including Hudson’s use of steadicam shots not just for flashy effects but subtle unity that emphasises more communal moments, in the induction day scene, as he moves through the crowd with and around Cross, and then with more intense effect when he films the American Olympic team training fiercely for the contest, set to pulsing music from Vangelis. Later Hudson’s clever feel for making sound and vision interact manifests as he turns a scene of Eric giving a sermon on the Sunday into a study in contrasts, Eric’s meditative words spoken over footage of the athletes who are racing in various states of pain and effort, including Monty who suffers falls during a steeplechase, and Harold loses to Scholz in their heat, rendered studies in slightly absurd pathos as their efforts crash to earth in dreamy slow-motion. Hudson also honours more familiar and hallowed flourishes, like a montage of spinning newspapers used to communicate the furore Eric’s refusal to run sets off in a battle of religion versus patriotism.

Hudson’s direction has weathered better than Welland’s script in some regards – as intelligent and well-layered as it is, not all Welland’s dialogue is crisp and convincing, as he uses Sutherland to deliver a brief, annoyingly essayistic note on the dangers of severing Eric’s strength from his motives, or when Scholz, after the American coach (Philip O’Brien) dismisses Eric to one of his American competitors, notes, in clunky cliché, “He’s got something to prove, something personal – something guys like Coach’ll never understand in a million years.” Nonetheless, the essence of Chariots of Fire that drives it well beyond the usual kind of sports drama never goes out of focus, even as the film ratchets up tension in building to Harold and Eric’s climactic races. That we usually expect a certain outcome in following the story of a sportsperson in a movie is factored into the viewing experience, in the way Hudson presents Harold’s victory with that deadpan long shot, cutting briefly to Eric cheering him on before returning to a slow motion shot of Harold lunging through the finish tape in exact obedience to Mussabini’s instruction. The coach himself is forced to wait until he can hear the strains of “God Save the King” until he knows his protégé has won.

The more interesting point, reiterating the essence of the entire film, is how he wins, and how it affects him: reeling after the effort of his lifetime, Harold doubles up as if in mortal pain, again in slow-motion, whilst the race flashes once more in his head, this time with his sheer and perfect focus on display. The music on the soundtrack is plaintive and eerie even as Eric comes over to shake Harold’s hand in a gesture of great meaning. Here Hudson captures something profound about victory even whilst resisting the usual movie language for conveying it: for Harold it is a purgation, an emptying out indeed, of his previous identity. Harold afterwards shirks out of the changing room as Lindsay counsels the worried Monty to leave him along: “Now one of these days Monty, you’re going to win yourself, and it’s pretty difficult to swallow.” Eric’s subsequent win is a more traditional kind of heroic payoff, if still one filmed and conveyed in an unusual manner. Eric’s earlier conversation with Jennie is heard over his run, emphasising the vitality of his words as part and parcel with his deeds. He charges home to victory with his signature wide mouth and back-flung head, watched with knowing joy by Sandy and Jennie, and Harold with blazing intensity. The heroes’ return to England sees some further irony in the way Eric readily accepts adulation with the others whilst Harold quietly waits to slip off the train and meet with Sybil, his private war over at last, and his victory that of simply becoming a fully functional man.

The film offers title notes on the Harold and Eric’s different ends, with Harold living to a ripe old age whilst Eric’s air of being a little too good for the world is confirmed in the report of his death at the end of World War II (he died of a brain tumor whilst in a Japanese POW camp), which suggests a whole other, equally interesting story in itself. “He did it,” the aged Monty notes to Lindsay as they leave the church in a brief return to Harold’s 1978 funeral service, “He ran them off their feet.” Whereupon Hudson returns to the opening vision of the athletes running on the beach, restored again to their youthful glory. This encore is particularly cunning in the way it lingers on the men for a few moments after a performance of the hymn version of “Jerusalem” ends, with only the sound of their feet splashing in foam and went sand, nailing a plaintive sense of the ephemeral and immediately physical before Vangelis’ theme returns. Sure, Chariots of Fire might indeed not be as great as Raiders of the Lost Ark, but it is a movie in the top echelon of its kind, a properly mature spectacle that represents a rare melding of dramatic intelligence and stylistic vigour. Tragic lustre has been imbued upon Chariots of Fire’s meditations on the dimming of golden youth and sadly exulting nostalgia in the time since its release, by the sheer fact that several of its stars died young, with both Charleson and Davis claimed by the AIDS epidemic, and whilst Cross lived to be an august character actor, even he departed too early. Still, they’re always young in this movie.

Standard
1980s, Action-Adventure, Auteurs, War

First Blood (1982) / Rambo: First Blood Part II (1984)

.

Directors: Ted Kotcheff / George Pan Cosmatos
Screenwriters: Michael Kozoll, William Sackheim, Sylvester Stallone / James Cameron, Sylvester Stallone

By Roderick Heath

In the late 1960s David Morrell, working as an English professor at the University of Iowa, became interested in the Vietnam war veterans amongst his students and their often painful accounts of returning to civilian life in the United States. Morrell, an aspiring writer born in Ontario and whose father had died in combat during World War II, began a novel about a veteran who, trapped beyond the fringes of an oblivious or outright hostile society, erupts in a display of nihilistic murder and destruction, turned on the victimising civil authorities of a small Kentucky town. The character was known only by his last name, Rambo, which Morrell took from the breed of apple he was eating at the time, and based him on various real-life figures, including war hero and actor Audie Murphy, whose life was beset by traumatic fallout. Morrell also took inspiration from Geoffrey Household’s famous novel Rogue Male, filmed in 1943 by Fritz Lang as Man Hunt. Morrell published his book, First Blood, in 1972 to some acclaim, and quickly sold the film rights. The proposed adaptation kicked around Hollywood for nearly ten years with heavyweight directors including Richard Brooks, John Frankenheimer, and Sydney Pollack taking an interest. Eventually the project was taken in hand by Mario Kassar and Andrew Vajna, two film distributors itching to try producing.

Kassar and Vajna hired the Canadian filmmaker Ted Kotcheff, whose previous credits included helping the Australian film industry revive with 1971’s Wake In Fright (aka Outback), and a jewel of the similar Canadian revival of the 1970s, The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz (1974). Kotcheff in turn attracted Sylvester Stallone, who was hunting for a viable career alternative to his Rocky films after several coolly received attempts to expand his star persona. Stallone rewrote the best extant script, by William Sackheim and Michael Kozoll, with his canny eye for selling a story to a mass audience causing him to revise the story and make Rambo, now gifted a first name of John, more sympathetic and less heedlessly murderous, essentially refashioning him as an angrier, more damaged and antisocial version of the underdog hero Stallone played in Rocky (1976). First Blood the movie resituated the story to a town called Hope in Washington state, in part because this allowed the film to be filmed more cheaply in Canada. The movie, which still finished up costing some $15 million, became a major hit, cementing Stallone’s place as a major Hollywood star. But Rambo’s place as a byword in popular culture wouldn’t be sealed until a sequel, Rambo: First Blood Part II, was released in 1984.

That film would transform Rambo, conceived as an avatar for the wounded and thwarted products of a bitter zeitgeist, into a figure many took to be the guns-blazing representative of the Reagan era’s renewed militarist swagger and sense of purpose, avenging old defeats and swashbuckling through new wars, driven on by the delight of movie audiences. A third entry, Peter MacDonald’s Rambo III (1989), would become the most expensive film ever produced for a brief reign. As embodied by Stallone, with fast and bulbous physique, penchant for wearing headbands but not shirts, and clutching huge weapons, the character Rambo became eventually birthed a popular caricature, eagerly satirised in movies like UHF (1989) and Hot Shots! Part Deux (1992). Quite the progression from the dark and sombre thriller Morrell wrote, which ended with the character being shot dead by his former Green Berets trainer, Colonel Samuel Trautman. For the adaptation, Kirk Douglas was hired to play Trautman, who was revised from a peripheral, resented figure in Rambo’s life to his former commanding officer, but Douglas dropped out early in filming when he disagreed with revising the story to let Rambo live. He was replaced, in another fortuitous accident, by Richard Crenna.

Douglas might have been artistically right, but Stallone knew his audience. First Blood works carefully to put the viewer entirely on Rambo’s side in its opening reels, as the soldier turned drifter seeking out the home of Delmore Barry, the last surviving other member of his old unit. Rambo soon learns from a neighbour that he’s died of cancer, which she believes was caused by exposure to Agent Orange. The forlorn figure that is Rambo, Medal of Honor winner and relentlessly honed, preternaturally gifted warrior turned ragged drifter, follows a highway into the mountains of Washington until he’s picked up on the fringes of the town of Hope by the Sheriff, Teasle (Brian Dennehy), who lets Rambo know he’s not going to be allowed to linger there, and deposits him on the far side of town. Rambo defiantly turns back towards the town and Teasle promptly arrests him. Rambo is placed in the police station lock-up where Teasle’s deputies, including the swaggering sadist Art Galt (Jack Starrett), beat him, forcibly strip him, and hose him down, experiences that remind Rambo of being tortured in a North Vietnamese POW camp.

Kotcheff makes use of flashbacks to reveal Rambo’s reawakened traumatic memory as he’s brutalised by Galt in a manner reminiscent of the stuttering, near-subliminal technique Sidney Lumet utilised in The Pawnbroker (1964). The likeness of his present situation to his time suffering in captivity is immediately and vividly illustrated and also the similarity of intent behind it, the pleasure of petty tyrants in humiliating and reducing people under their thumb. The sight of the scars that score Rambo’s naked torso, when he’s obliged to strip for a cleaning in the lockup, alarm the younger deputy on the Hope PD, Mitch Rogers (David Caruso), who suggests telling Teasle about it. But the sight only stirs Galt to more delighted viciousness, seeing the evidence of suffering and heroism only as a especially sweet spur to proving his own power. Finally, when the cops try to dry-shave the resisting Rambo, he unleashes his fighting prowess. In short order he decks the cops, flees the station, and steals a motorcycle. He rides the bike as far up a mountain trail as he can get before leaving it behind and fashioning himself rough clothing out of a bearskin rug he finds at a rubbish dump.

When Galt gleefully tries to shoot Rambo from a helicopter, Rambo retaliates by hurling a rock back, striking the chopper’s windscreen and causing Galt to fall to his death. Teasle immediately vows revenge for his old friend, but as he and his men venture deeper in the forest with tracker dogs, they soon find themselves completely thwarted by Rambo’s tactical smarts. He slays the dogs and lures the cops onto his ingenious and brutal traps. Teasle himself is finally ambushed, helpless under Rambo’s knife, only to be spared with the advice, “Let it go, or I’ll give you a war you won’t believe,” before vanishing into the underbrush Of course, Teasle can’t and won’t take that advice. He instead calls in the National Guard, who trap Rambo in a mine shaft he’s made his base, but Rambo, surviving an attempt to kill him with a rocket launcher, crawls through the mine until he breaks out to the surface at another locale. Stealing an National Guard truck and heavy machine gun, he returns to Hope, smashes through a blockade, and begins laying waste to the town with Teasle his ultimate target.

First Blood offered something like an upmarket version of ‘70s grindhouse thrillers that often thrust returned vets into bloody action, or a cheeralong extrapolation of the interior fantasies of Taxi Driver’s (1976) Travis Bickle. Rambo can also be seen as an extension of actor-turned-auteur Tom Laughlin’s hero Billy Jack, star of a series of popular movies in the late 1960s and early ‘70s. Both characters were living lethal weapons who had served in ‘Nam, both part-Native American, both reluctant heroes who eventually cracked when confronted by thugs and redneck cops and start dealing out ass-kickings. Only Billy Jack had been a nominally countercultural hero, having thrown in his lot with young hippies, dropouts, and the oppressed, whilst Rambo doesn’t have that much community, and eventually became popularly associated with a revanchist right wing’s attitude to the peacenik crowd. First Blood is nonetheless entirely about an outsider battling representatives of authority. The cops are generally portrayed as smugly self-righteous, bullying, or weak, more concerned with the illusion of order rather than the reality of it, more obsessed with safeguarding its privilege as power than worried about justice, and in the case of Galt, essentially psychopathic.

Instead of developing more respect and solicitude the more Teasle and his people learn about Rambo, including eventually discovering his status as a war hero, they become all the more angrily determined to bring him down, because he taunts and undercuts their machismo. The essential, just about endlessly reloadable moment of crisis in every Rambo movie, awaited with eagerness by the viewer and built towards with varying levels of skill and intensity by its directors, is the scene where our hero’s blood finally boils over and he begins dealing out pain and calamity to tormentors and tyrants. The countdown to this inevitable eruption in First Blood begins in its earliest moments, as Rambo learns of Delmar’s passing and starts a lonely montage trek along the road to Hope, a place that describes itself via a sign over the road in as the “Gateway to Holidayland.” One powerfully lingering aspect of First Blood is Kotcheff’s use of British Columbian locations, which prove a perfect backdrop to communicate Rambo’s solitude and the pall of crisis that follows him like a raincloud from the bucolic setting that was Delmar’s home into the increasingly blue-soaked and dour atmosphere of the mountain forests.

The use of landscape maps out both essential dramatic venues, as Rambo escapes into the woods where he can turn the tables on the cops, and his mental landscape, leaving behind the last glimmer of hope for a familiar face and a toehold in society as represented by Delmar’s place, exchanged for the mockingly named town of Hope and finally a plunge into the primal landscape beyond where civilisation drops away and the best hunter and killer reclaims his place at the apex of existence. But the landscape also folds in upon Rambo until his empire is reduced to a hole in the ground with a flickering fire and a buzzing radio that announces the names of dead men. When he does break free and brings his wrath back to Hope, he has already lost, because he must again countenance civilisation to do so. Regardless of the specific cultural and political context the character was planted in, Rambo nonetheless became the essential modern movie depiction of a truly ancient cultural figure, the perfect warrior born purely for combat, an Achilles, a Hercules, or a modern day Viking berserker, a likeness that becomes inescapable in the maniacal last third of Rambo: First Blood Part II.

For Stallone, Rambo provided a second reliable and recognisable role as a star, a rare gift in the early days of cinematic franchising. Rambo was a counterpart to his lovably dim, gentle-‘til-roused Rocky Balboa, and the star continued this counterpoint when he revived both characters in the mid-2000s and again in the mid-2010s. Rocky was a hero deeply embedded in a sense of community and identity, pushed along by a hazily optimistic sensibility. Rambo, by contrast, is a perpetually clenched fist, his blazing, tragedy-telegraphing eyes perpetually seeing double in the world, the one that is and the one in his past, locked in a nihilistic place by his hard-won self-knowledge that the one thing he’s indisputably great at it is warfare. He comes equipped with his personal Excalibur, his ever-present hunting knife, with its wickedly curved point and serrated back edge, a weapon found on his person that the cops take to be a sign he’s a violent miscreant. The crucial similarity of Rocky and Rambo was that both had to be provoked to do what they do best, Rocky because of his general passivity, Rambo because of his grim knowledge that the kinds of situations that require his skills are already too nightmarish to contemplate. The role allowed Stallone to show off not just his musculature but his athleticism, always more convincing in that regard than the comparative ponderousness of his eventual rival and displacer in the pneumatic movie hero stakes, Arnold Schwarzenegger. “I’ve always believed the mind is the best weapon,” Rambo comments in the second, and Rambo’s cunning as a strategist is repeatedly emphasised as his real edge over variously arrogant and bullish foes.

Rambo is also inseparable from his enemies, the men who provoke his raging remonstrations. First Blood has the best and most dramatically intense of these, in the form of Teasle, who, in his way, is entirely justified in his attitude to Rambo. The film obliges the audience to identify with Rambo as the sad and simple man just trying and failing to get on with life finally pushed too far, with Teasle’s smiling but quietly assured and dictatorial attitude, followed soon by more bluntly thuggish treatment. Unlike most of his successors in the sequels, however, Teasle’s viewpoint is loaned a faint gleam of validity. The reek of danger and strangeness the sheriff gets from Rambo at first glance, and the sense of focused provocation when the drifter ignores his instructions and turns back towards Hope prove, ultimately, correct. Teasle has his own war medals on display in his office, and refuses to grant Rambo any special sympathy: “You think Rambo’s the only guy who had had a tough time in Vietnam?” Rambo nonetheless represents a revenge fantasy not just for disaffected servicemen, but for every wandering outcast bewildered and provoked by their lot in the American landscape, of which there were once many likenesses in Hollywood cinema. Rambo in his first outing belongs to a continuum linking Chaplin’s Little Tramp, Henry Fonda’s Tom Joad, William Wellman’s Wild Boys and Girls of the road, Raoul Walsh’s angry misfits, and Dennis Hopper’s Easy Riders. In a most specific likeness, Rambo, like Mad Dog Earle in Walsh’s High Sierra (1941), is driven into the mountains in a stand-off with authority, but where in the ironclad days of the studio system and Production Code such a figure had to eventually lose, Rambo was a product of a much more ornery time.

Kotcheff was a film and television jack-of-all-trades, gaining his career start in Canadian TV in the late 1950s before moving to the UK and making his feature film debut with 1962’s Tiara Tahiti, and his well-honed efficiency that made him an ideal figure to travel to Australia and then back to Canada to resuscitate their movie industries. It’s an odd career that encompasses the likes of First Blood, Fun with Dick and Jane (1977) and Weekend at Bernie’s (1989) alongside Wake In Fright, The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, and North Dallas Forty (1979). What’s most interesting in this regard is that First Blood plays as Kotcheff’s thematic sequel to Wake In Fright, depicting as it does an outsider arriving in a boondock town and being driven near-insanity by the behaviour of the locals, whose delight in tormenting and degrading a stranger reflects back out at the larger world a sense of resentment and fringe detachment. Whilst Kotcheff swapped the desolate alienation of an Aussie town on the edge of a desert for the tangled and looming reach of pine-thatched mountains, and the naïve intellectual for the hard and ingenious superwarrior, the palpable sense of danger and entrapment and depiction of regressive bullying has evident likeness.

First Blood has been criticised for abandoning its potential as a believable and down-to-earth kind of action movie by having Rambo perform some incredibly lucky pieces of physical action, like jumping off a cliff and crashing down through the nettled pine branches until he’s deposited relatively unscathed on the ground, and causing Galt’s death with a rock when the cop can’t nail him with a high-powered rifle. Those criticisms are entirely legitimate, although to Kotcheff’s credit he manages to invest them with a veneer of sense in his staging and cutting. Such shows of prowess also accrue into it’s plain that Rambo is a unique individual with levels of physical ability beyond the normal, and a degree of reflexive intelligence in the midst of battle, that gives him a radical edge over the blowhards. These touches also clearly signal that, despite its nominal roots in social issue melodrama reminiscent of the films Wellman and Walsh made once upon a time for Warner Bros., already First Blood is bending Rambo’s trajectory off into the zone of the matinee serial-style adventurer, at a time when Superman and Indiana Jones had recently revived the unbreakable brand of old-school pulp hero in movies, and the 1980s style of action movie was gaining definition.

So when Crenna’s Trautman does turn up, his presence is supposed be that of the wise elder who knows all the secret history denied to civilians like Teasle and perhaps even to Rambo himself, the man who knows what Rambo is capable of (“God didn’t make Rambo. I did.”) and also why he is the way he is, and provides a last bulwark between two factions. But his real function is essentially to act as Rambo’s hype man, promising Teasle, and the audience, what Rambo delivers. This quality manifests most memorably when Trautman, upon hearing Teasle’s declaration that two hundred cops and National Guards are being sent in to handle Rambo, retorts, “You send that many don’t forget one thing – a good supply of body bags.” Like a bard at a campfire telling stories of great heroes of old to thrill and excite the next prospectives, Trautman announces Rambo’s skills and qualities until he’s transformed from a surprisingly good fighter for a shaggy loser to a demigod only limited by his remnant human scruples: “Technically he slipped up,” Trautman says in noting Rambo’s failure to actually kill the men hunting him.

Crenna’s role at Trautman, which immediately became his most famous and recognisable, presented an inversion of his portrayal of the disintegrating commander in The Sand Pebbles (1966): where that film, made in the early days of the American Vietnam experience and presenting a parable critiquing it, disassembled the mythos of noble military machismo, Trautman reconstructs it rhetorically whilst Rambo does so physically. Rambo presents a fantasy vision of an American soldier who learned to fight like a Viet Cong guerrilla, with nods to Native American fighting styles. Rambo’s incredible physical fitness and toughness as well as honed skill gives him an edge over his enemies, able to dodge and weave and hide, seeming to become part of the forest itself, like the title alien of Predator (1987). His campaign against Teasle and the pursuing cops becomes an ironic inversion where Rambo does to his foes what the Vietnamese are often perceived as doing to the Americans in the war. He utilises the landscape and cunning, nasty traps to draw in and disassemble them, using their reactive vengefulness against them. One cop ends up tied to a tree as bait to draw in and unnerve his comrades. Another is impaled at crotch height upon a row of wicked stakes. The cops and National Guard are reduced to firing blind and shows of impotent firepower, as when the National Guardsmen shoot a rocket launcher after Rambo as he hides in the mine shaft.

When Rambo is hiding in that mine, Trautman contacts him on a CB radio taken from one of the cops, awakening Rambo from his sleep with his old service call-sign and a rollcall of his dead comrades, provoking the warrior with the perverse feeling of his dreams and waking life blurring incoherently until he realises the call is real. “There are no friendly civilians,” he tells Trautman with new-found conviction, and claims the cops “drew first blood,” justifying his retaliation, whilst Trautman retorts that “you did some pushing of your own,” and Teasle tries to trace the transmission. Kotcheff contrasts the different environs of the two men, Trautman broadcasting in lamplight as a beacon in an endless night whilst Rambo is curled up in a bole in the earth where the wind echoes hollow and his paltry fire flickers in a sea of dark. A haunting and impressive scene that perfectly evokes the mental and moral drama in play and provides a meditative interlude that’s unusual in an action movie. It also somewhat outclasses the more officially dramatic climactic moment where Stallone does some capital-A acting, as Rambo, on the verge of killing Teasle, is confronted by Trautman and has a breakdown. He recounts semi-coherently his feelings of outrage at being abused by antiwar protestors and how one of his friends died in a terrorist bombing in Saigon and he was reduced to trying to stuff his guts back inside his body, a vignette that tries so hard to be terribly cathartic it borders on camp.

Nonetheless First Blood holds together with admirable grit for the most part, in part because it resists deviating from its basic concerns. It matches the ideal of Rambo’s purposeful intensity with its own, wielding a sense of gamy, gruelling, intensely corporeal vitality that’s all but disappeared from contemporary cinema. Arguably the film’s most thrilling scene depicts Rambo’s journey through the depths of the mine in his attempt to escape with the entrance blocked by the explosion. This involves a phobic odyssey through a space of pressing walls, dripping, sloshing water, and teeming rats, a gritty, visceral, vividly claustrophobic sequence that doesn’t look like it was much fun to shoot. When he does finally reach a shaft leading out, Rambo pauses to catch his breath and offer a solemn, silent moment of gratitude before climbing back out to the world. There he finds everyone thinks he’s dead, everyone except Trautman, who muses on the scene outside the mine and knows well Rambo might still emerge but doesn’t tell Trautman. Soon enough Rambo leaps aboard a National Guard truck, forces its driver to jump out, and commandeers the M60 machine gun in the back. He arrives in Hope, blows up a gas station, and begins knocking out the power to the town’s centre. Teasle takes up station on the police station roof, only to be shot in the legs by Rambo from below, and he crashes through the skylight to the floor a bloody mess.

Before he kill the sheriff, Trautman manages to disarm Rambo and penetrate his glaze of wrath to reveal the desperately haunted and anguished man beneath. Trautman then leads him away to whatever fate the law demands, a softening of the novel’s end that also opened the door for a sequel. That Rambo is reduced to sobbing violently, whilst clinging to Trautman who plays his father and confessor, confirms a peculiar status Stallone managed to stake out in his stardom, able to play inarguably tough men who are nonetheless governed by powerful emotions, and his shows of rage and destruction throughout the film are finally revealed to be, essentially, displacement of his urgent need to grieve for himself and his former comrades. First Blood was released after The Deer Hunter and Coming Home (both 1978) had begun a rehabilitation of Vietnam as a movie subject, but before Platoon (1986) offered what many felt was official catharsis. First Blood and its follow-up were nonetheless the more populist version of the same thing, selling to the audience a new image of the ‘Nam vet as a tormented underdog deserving rehabilitation even if the war, as Trautman puts it, “was a bad time for everybody.” “Somebody wouldn’t let us win,” Rambo howls, a note taken up again at the start of the sequel, where Rambo questions, when asked to return to Vietnam, “Do we get to win this time?” “That’s up to you,” Trautman replies.

Rambo: First Blood Part II cunningly extends this Janus-faced attitude, angry anti-authoritarian outlook and revanchist reactionary passion, by portraying Rambo as next plunged into a situation where the representatives of the American government are corrupt and craven, whilst their enemies are even worse, and only Rambo, Trautman, and others like them retain something like honour. As with its precursor, Stallone applied his own polish to a script this time penned by James Cameron, at the same time he was developing his own The Terminator (1984) and Aliens (1986), and there’s a lot of overlap. Rambo is nearly as remorseless and irresistible as the cyborg in The Terminator once he gets going, and as with Ripley in Aliens he’s portrayed as a sorry survivor who welcomes a chance to go back to a scene of suffering to exorcise his traumatic demons and fully evolve into a hero, despite the connivance of suit-wearing creeps. Rambo: First Blood Part II opens with Trautman approaching Rambo where he’s stuck working in a prison quarry, a setting that cries out for Woody Allen singing “Gonna see Miss Liza!” The Colonel gives Rambo his apologies for failing to keep him out of jail, but then offers a chance for freedom, if he’ll volunteer for an extremely dangerous covert mission, to be airdropped into Vietnamese territory and determine whether rumours American POWs are still being held at a remote jungle base are correct. Rambo and Trautman fly to an black ops base near the border of Thailand with Vietnam, and Rambo is briefed by Roger Murdock (Charles Napier), the commander of the operation.

The unpleasant side of this plot keystone is that Stallone exploited another actual, lingering issue of the Vietnam War, the plight of missing American servicemen who were at the time believed to still be captives, to pump emotive adrenalin into his rah-rah action flick. On the other hand, the film is surprisingly direct and scathing about the US reneging on its peace pledges of reparations to Vietnam, a tussle in which the POWs are theoretical pawns: any diplomatic push to get any POWs back would certainly require paying up. The face of this deceit is Murdock, a man who may or may not have once been a soldier but now has certainly crossed over the dark side of bureaucracy, and will again readily and actively betray him and GIs still in Vietnamese hands for the sake of political equilibrium. Rambo catches him out in a lie over his alleged wartime service, which he tells Trautman about, before assuring his old Colonel, “You’re the only one I trust.” Rambo’s airdrop over the jungle from a Lear jet goes wrong when his copious equipment gets hung up on the plane, a thrilling action sequence that also contains symbolic meaning. Being forced to cut loose all the fancy gear he’s been encumbered with obliges Rambo to get back to basics, and keeps him from recommitting the assumed mistake of past American method.

Once he manages to free himself and successfully lands in the jungle, he encounters his local contact, Co Bao (Julia Nickson), after first sneaking up on her. Co Bao, the daughter of a former South Vietnamese officer, has elected to continue his fight, and she helps Rambo approach the camp by arranging passage with some smugglers who regularly traverse a nearby river. When he penetrates the camp, Rambo discovers a number of G.I. captives being kept in sadistically awful circumstances, and he frees one man POW (Don Collins, I think), who’s been left tied to a post. Rambo and Co Bao take him back to their rendezvous point as Trautman comes to the rescue in a chopper being flown by Murdock’s aides Ericson (Martin Kove) and Banks (Andy Wood), but when he’s told Rambo has a freed prisoner Murdock orders the chopper to return without him. Trautman is held at gunpoint whilst Rambo and the POW are taken by the Vietnamese, with Co Bao escaping as she split away from them. The trussed-up Rambo is immersed in a slop pit filled with leeches and then tortured with electricity by a Red Army envoy, Lt-Col Sergei Podovsky (Steven Berkoff), and his aide Sgt Yushin (Voyo Goric), who, along with a detachment of Soviet commandos, have come to the camp for shady reasons. Podovsky wants Rambo to hand him a propaganda victory by denouncing his government over the radio. But, unfortunately for him and all the other Commies, the countdown to Rambo’s next eruption has already begun.

Rambo has his one and only real encounter with a romantic interest in all his excursions to date, as he and Co Bao fall in love whilst adventuring in the wilds, and the girl convinces Rambo to take her with him back to the US. Of course, she’s necessarily doomed, and is gunned down by soldiers after helping him escape the camp. Rambo takes possession of her jade Buddha necklace and wears it at as a lucky totem and wears it through the rest of this film and on into Rambo III, finally giving it away at the end to a boy Afghan warrior he decides needs it more. Nickson’s performance doesn’t exactly help the credibility factor – she comes across exactly as what she is, a Canadian model trying very hard to look and sound like a halting-English-speaking guerrilla warrior – but Co Bao is nonetheless interesting and rather singular as a true human, romantic connection for Rambo. She has similar talents to him, accomplished with an AK-47 and skilled at war in her own way: she pretends to be one of the prostitutes who visit the camp in an attempt to extricate Rambo from their clutches, and saves his hide repeatedly in the ensuing battle. Co Bao’s presence also helped to dampen, at least to a degree, the otherwise blatantly sectarian world-view exhibited in the film holding the Communist Vietnamese as malignant scum who can be happily dispatched in all manner of creatively violent ways, as opposed to Rambo’s relatively soft touch with the police of Hope.

Even the smugglers prove to be treacherous dogs who sell Rambo and Co Bao out, forcing Rambo to slay them all and blow up a patrol boat with a Russian RPG the pirates keep around for such encounters. Of course, there’s also the Russians to add new ingredients to the vengeful mix, presenting the ultimate spectre of a renascent Domino Theory being driven by the masterminds of the Evil Empire, the real Cold War foe unmasked as puppet master. To a great extent all the historical and political issues raised and depicted here don’t matter – in practice Rambo: First Blood Part II is simply a slightly updated World War II movie, with the Vietnamese cast as proxy as Japanese and the Russians as Germans. Berkoff, who had cleverly walked a line between seriousness and absurdity as an Russian villain in the James Bond film Octopussy a year earlier, returned to play a different variation on the concept here – Podovsky is an ice-cold, iron-souled Cold Warrior who presents Rambo with the perfect incarnation of The Enemy, entirely antipathetic in values and methods but just as assured in his sense of patriotic mission as Rambo himself. Nonetheless Rambo’s truest foe is Murdock, who resembles Teasle as a smug-ugly representative of civilian authority but robbed of Teasle’s better qualities and comparable moral perspective, instead providing the incarnation of everything Rambo perceives as craven, manipulative, deceitful, and disdainful of actual fighting men in country’s official mindset.

Where First Blood had been handled in a relatively muted, textured fashion by Kotcheff, Rambo: First Blood Part II was helmed by George Pan Cosmatos. The Greek-Italian Cosmatos had been born in Florence, and worked his way up through the ranks of European film production including serving as an assistant director and bit player on Zorba The Greek (1964). Cosmatos began his directing career with serious films, like the 1973 wartime film Massacre In Rome, but, starting with the absurd but very entertaining blend of medical thriller and disaster movie The Cassandra Crossing (1977), he reinvented himself as a maker of hard-charging action flicks. After scoring another success with the Alistair MacLean-ish World II actioner Escape From Athena (1979). Cosmatos made the Canadian-produced, New York set Of Unknown Origin (1983), a peculiar blend of satire and monster movie depicting a corporate man battling a gigantic rat at loose in his apartment, before being offered Rambo: First Blood Part II. Later he would work again with Stallone on an even more hyperbolic star vehicle, Cobra (1986), the deep-sea Alien rip-off Leviathan (1989), and the popular Western Tombstone (1993). Cosmatos’ gift for pure, unadulterated, go-for-broke pulp cinema impact is rife in Rambo: First Blood Part II. Most particularly, in the pivotal scene of Rambo being tortured and forced by Podovsky to make his propaganda broadcast.

As so often in Stallone’s films the evocation of masculine physicality and suffering embraces what might be called martyr homoeroticism, not so much to invite a desiring gaze but to offer the perfected icon for the audience’s sadomasochistic identification, a mix of delight and distress in the sight of tormented masculine strength before it explodes in orgasmic carnage. What glee the film taps in the sight of the all-but-naked Stallone, covered in sewage, body infested with leeches, which Podovsky begins to methodically peel away with Rambo’s own knife. Rambo is electrocuted and threatened with having a glowing hot knife shoved into his eyes, until Podovsky realises it’s better to threaten the POW he tried to free. Finally Rambo seems to relent and settles down reluctantly before a radio microphone, calling up the American base over the border, and asking to speak to Murdock. Cosmatos moves through shots here in musical degrees of intensity – close-ups of Berkoff’s face with piercing blue eyes as he maintains ruthless pressure, of Stallone’s muscular arm as he grips the radio, of his sadly limpid gaze as he affects being driven to traitorousness – before delivering the killer blows, as Rambo growls out Murdock’s name, lightning flashing on his face, his grip on the microphone tightening with a click of knuckles. “I’m coming to get you,” he warns Murdock, whose aghast and terrified reaction on the other end is glimpsed in a near-subliminal but indelible cut, before Rambo lashes out, using the microphone as a weapon to wallop his torturers and make his break. He even gives Yushin a dose of his own medicine by thrusting him against his own electrical torture device and turning the dial to 11. Utterly ludicrous, of course, and the sort of action movie vignette that’s provided fodder for lampooners ever since. And also a kind of perfection for this kind of moviemaking, completely unabashed and unashamed in presenting the cinematic equivalent of an adrenalin hit.

Rambo: First Blood Part II can also be regarded as one of the many children of Akira Kurosawa’s Yojimbo (1961) and Sergio Leone’s spaghetti western transcription A Fistful of Dollars (1964), films that pretty much made compulsory a scene depicting the hero’s capture and brutalisation, prefiguring his escape and rebirth as incarnate wrath. Rambo flees with Co Bao’s aid but her death provokes him to halt his flight and ready for apocalyptic battle, picking off Podovsky’s commandos one by one and decimating a unit of Vietnamese soldiers who hunt him through long reeds only to find he’s laid a trap. Rambo’s preparations for battle include strapping on a headband with a tug of pure manliness, and selecting a weapon of choice, explosive head-tipped arrows, the sort of touch that makes eight-year-old boys of all ages delight. During a gunfight with the Vietnamese commander who directed Co Bao’s death, he turns one of these on his foe and blows him to smithereens in one of those moments that breaks down what little barrier there is between violent melodrama and absurdist comedy. Meanwhile Yushin chases him down in a helicopter, only for Rambo to manage to scramble on board, kill Yushin, and commandeer the craft, which he then uses to annihilate the camp’s garrison and rescue the POWs. As they flee they’re chased down by Podovsky in a colossal Sikorsky helicopter gunship, but Rambo manages, by playing possum, to lure Podovsky in and blow him out of the sky with an RPG.

Here, again, Cosmatos’ gleeful lack of moderation or care for anything except the impression of hellfire fury blesses the film with a certain pathological perfection, as in the way he holds off Goldsmith’s pounding martial music until after Rambo screams in the deepest eye of his berserker rage, somehow finding a step beyond the zenith of bloodlust. Indeed, what distinguishes Rambo: First Blood Part II from its many forebears and imitators is precisely the way it enters entirely into the berserker mindset, and indulges it to the nth degree. The peculiar conviction of the Rambo films as a unit is their complete rejection of all modern moral sensibility, turning instead to the primeval conviction that sometimes the only solution is righteous bloodletting, and that once countenanced, after other avenues are exhausted that zone must be committed to, and can indeed be a place of virtually transcendental experience. Rambo has evolved into a holy warrior without a specific religion to espouse beyond aiding the weak against the strong, a note taken up in his three subsequent outings. In the meantime, Rambo: First Blood Part II concludes with Rambo only just manages to fly the damaged and failing chopper to the American base and land it safely. There he socks Ericson, shoots up the surveillance equipment in the American base, and terrorises Murdock, only sparing his life on pain of doing his best to bring home other POWs: “Find them, or I’ll find you.” What’s most notable here is that Rambo is essentially rendered impotent by his one great loyalty, his country, discharging his weapons and rage fruitlessly against inanimate objects.

The most invaluable connecting thread for the early Rambo films beyond Stallone himself was Jerry Goldsmith’s scoring. His theme for First Blood precisely evoked the state of haunted but dignified persistence that was the initial key to Rambo’s character, and became the leitmotif for his wanderings in subsequent movies. The soaring lushness and booming martial intensity of his orchestrations are perhaps what chiefly distinguished the series from its lower-budgeted precursors and imitators (along with peculiarly good technical collaborators, including Jack Cardiff who worked as director of photography on Rambo: First Blood Part II, and who might well have remembered his own Dark of the Sun, 1968, when he signed on). The colossal success of Rambo: First Blood Part II birthed a string of imitations, like the Chuck Norris star vehicle Missing In Action and its sequels, and left a permanent mark on the style and assumptions of Hollywood action films. Predator likely wouldn’t exist without it to riff on. It was made the subject of jest and then validation in Die Hard (1988). On through just about every movie since where an omnicompetent hero decimates hordes of baddies, like John Wick (2014) and Extraction (2020). As for the character himself, Rambo III rounded off his initial trilogy, just managing to scrape over the line as the end of the Cold War loomed and Rambo’s days as a relevant pop culture hero suddenly seemed numbered. The film’s choice of taking up the Soviet war in Afghanistan became a sorely ironic point as the film indicted the conflict as the Russians’ equivalent of Vietnam, more than a decade before the US would go into the country itself (indeed an odd piece of fake lore would be coined on the internet that the film’s postscript title tribute to the “gallant people of Afghanistan” had been altered from an original version dedicated to the Mujahidin).

Rambo III’s first director Russell Mulcahy was fired and British editor Peter MacDonald hired. MacDonald stated his chief desire was to make Rambo a more human, humorous figure, and the film had a strong essential proposition: Rambo, after refusing to join Trautman on a mission in Afghanistan supplying Stinger missiles to the Mujahidin, goes in to rescue him when he’s captured, and the two battle their way out of the country side by side. Rambo III’s then-astronomical budget registers in the demolition of expensive infrastructure, the tactile immediacy and ruggedness of the action, and the lustre of the landscapes. But it’s too much a scrappy retread of its precursor despite trying to shift into buddy movie territory: the film climaxes again in a battle between Rambo and a Russian enemy in a giant helicopter – this time with Rambo pitted against him, hilariously, in a tank – and pithy exchanges over the radio (“Who are you?” “Your worst nightmare!”). Stallone resisted bringing the character back until 2008, well into the renewed warlike moment of the War on Terror. Finally he directed and starred in a film variably called simply Rambo or John Rambo, depending on the market. I didn’t like this entry when it first came out, but on recent revisit found it surprisingly good. Rambo, now living a peaceful life as a snake trapper and riverboat skipper, is called upon by some American Christian medical personnel to ferry them into Myanmar where they plan to administer aid to victims of the ruling military dictatorship’s brutal repression. Rambo, after warning them against going, is convinced by their leader’s open-hearted fiancé Sarah (Julie Benz) to take them. When he later hears they’ve been captured by the truly evil local military commander during a massacre of a village, Rambo elects to accompany a team of mercenaries hired by their pastor to go in and rescue them.

The storyline this time around was almost too straightforward and executes a much slower burn than its precursors, holding off the requisite, purgative explosion of payback until the climax, and lacking a strongly developed antagonist, only sporting a particularly vicious army commander Major Tint (Maung Maung Khin), who likes doing things like feeding the missionaries to pigs and slaughtering entire communities. But Rambo did develop some substantial ideas in its juxtapositions, leaning heavily on echoes of High Noon (1952) and Shane (1953) in mooting tension between Rambo’s weary knowledge of humanity’s dark side and the humane, optimistic ideals of the missionaries, as well as probing the schism between Rambo and the cadre of mercenaries with their different generational and professional attitudes. When the action finally cuts loose in the climax, as Rambo unleashes a heavy machine gun on the Myanmar military, backed up by his newfound pals, with properly maniacal impact. By the film’s end the series circled back to where it nominally started, with Rambo returning to the US, but this time truly going home, to his father’s horse ranch in the Arizona heartland. Stallone has returned to the role once more, for 2019’s Rambo: Last Blood, which saw him battling a Mexican drug cartel. But it was a disappointingly generic coda that felt hurriedly repurposed to vaguely fit Rambo, with our hero acting in ways rather too naive for the character so familiar by this point, at least until the impressively bloodthirsty climax. Old soldiers never die, apparently – their box office takings simply fade away.

Standard
1980s, 1990s, Comedy, Films About Films and Filmmaking

The ’Burbs (1989) / Matinee (1993)

.

Director: Joe Dante
Screenwriters: Dana Olsen / Charles S. Haas

By Roderick Heath

It’s been a long time now since Joe Dante was regarded as much more than the maker of a few fondly remembered movies, and a perennial talking head commenting on even older movies. There was a moment nonetheless when he was counted amongst the ranks of major Hollywood talents who, like James Cameron and John Carpenter, emerged from the exploitation film scene of the 1970s and ‘80s to become a big-league hit-maker. Dante, the son of a professional golfer and born in New Jersey, first had ambitions to being a cartoonist, a slant on visual art that would inflect the rest of his career even as his interests turned towards movies. He gained attention with an artfully edited movie mash-up called The Movie Orgy (1968) and landed a job with Roger Corman. Dante became a member of his burgeoning New World Pictures studio, working in a variety of roles including editing Grand Theft Auto (1978) and making his directorial debut collaborating with Allan Arkush on Hollywood Boulevard (1976), a mischievous movie business satire which stitched footage from a variety of New World projects into a semi-original feature. Dante broke out as a director with 1978’s Piranha, a Jaws (1975) cash-in-cum-send-up that wielded its own peculiar sensibility, including an oil-black sense of humour and merry gore-mongering, and united Dante with then little-known writer and sometime actor John Sayles, who penned the script.

The duo left Corman behind to make The Howling (1980), another funny, more wilfully oddball genre effort that helped Sayles kick off his own, more serious-minded independent film career, and boosted Dante to mainstream attention. Dante found a second vital producing collaborator in Steven Spielberg, who brought Dante aboard to direct an episode of the ill-fated The Twilight Zone – The Movie (1982), and then backed Dante in making the comedy-horror monster movie Gremlins (1984) and the zesty Fantastic Voyage riff Innerspace (1987), with the teen sci-fi adventure Explorers (1985) in between. Dante worked out his rowdy, referential, horny side with the uneven sketch comedy Amazon Women of the Moon (1987) and his more overtly satirical streak resurged with The ’Burbs. Of these only Gremlins was a hit, whilst Explorers, seemingly the perfect expression of the ‘80s youth movie zeitgeist until its wry, deliberately anticlimactic last act, and Innerspace, with its loose energy and brilliantly delivered if slightly overextended comic spectacle, were both bruising failures. Dante revisited old ground with Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990) to get his box office mojo working again. But Dante’s career after this proved awfully patchy: his follow-up Matinee did poorly at the box office, and he’s only made four features since, including the well-reviewed but barely-successful anti-militarist fantasy Small Soldiers (1998) and the failed Looney Tunes: Back In Action (2003), as well as occasional TV episodes.

Dante had evident similarities with generational fellows like Spielberg, Carpenter, George Lucas, and Stephen King, in wielding a particular penchant for remixing the infrastructure of growing up American in the 1950s and ‘60s in terms of a personal fantasy landscape, the kinds of kids who had a dresser crammed with issues of Famous Monsters of Filmland and painted Ray Harryhausen figures. Dante was often characterised as the impish rapscallion producing anarchically satiric desecrations of the same suburban Middle America Spielberg was perceived as enshrining. There was some truth in that, but at the same time it’s awfully reductive of both directors: Dante plainly loved his evocations of humdrum suburbia and the big dreamers it so uneasily houses, just as Spielberg’s visions of the same zones usually saw obsession and threat lurking under the placid surfaces. From today’s vantage it seems rather that Dante’s ultimate nemesis proved to be Tim Burton, who appeared on the scene just as Dante was losing career traction. Burton wielded a similar sensibility – fixation with the same zones of retro Americana and old movies, a mordant approach to lampooning the permanent 1950s lodged in the American collective mind, a fondness for plucky misfits as protagonists – and a more overtly stylised visual approach. Also, over the decades Burton proved willing to compromise in ways Dante never quite was. Dante’s approach was inherently ironic, presenting his seemingly straitlaced protagonists as bland on the surface but covertly perverse and unruly, where Burton signposted his inversions and dissensions in a manner that suited an emerging alt-culture better.

The ‘Burbs was a modestly profitable movie but critically it met a largely indifferent response in 1989. Nonetheless it stands as one of Dante’s most quintessential expressions, and it’s a personal favourite film. Dante worked with a screenplay by writer Dana Olsen, who based it on his own childhood memories and having fun with the many urban legends of everyday whackos whose memories haunted the suburban placidity. The ’Burbs could well be the all-grown-up experience of the three young dreamer-adventurers of Explorers, having settled into monotonous adult life in the same suburbs where once the bushes could be a jungle and the neighbour’s yard an alien planet. The film kicks off with a technically brilliant and visually dazzling flourish as Dante perverts the Universal Pictures spinning planet logo by using it as the start of the longest zoom shot in cinema, descending relentlessly from space and zeroing in on Mayfield Place, a cul-de-sac in a Midwestern suburb. The gag is manifold – as well as outdoing Spielberg’s famous jokes with the Paramount logo in his Indiana Jones films, Dante connects the tiny stage of a suburban street with the vastness of the Earth and the cosmos, at once dwarfed but also forming part of an infinitesimal texture. This commences a film that plays as a companion piece to the famous The Twilight Zone episode “The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street,” in the tingling sense of paranoia amidst the utterly ordinary, and sense of a rascally mastermind toying with paltry, reactive humans all too ready to realise their violent and destructive sides. Except there are no aliens here, only Dante himelf.

Dante has his own “directed by” credit appear as shirtless, vest-wearing, hairy-chest exposing Mark Rumsfield (Bruce Dern) appears, slipping on aviator shades with attitude as heavy rock starts pounding. Tom Hanks, still in his young, gangly, charming everyman phase, plays Ray Peterson, a man on holiday from his job who’s elected to spend that time lounging around the house rather than head off to a vacation spot, in part because he’s trying to escape the programmatic wheel of suburban behaviour. But being home all day proves a taunt to his imagination, a la James Stewart in Rear Window (1954). Ray is draw out of his house in the dead of night when a strange mechanical whirring noise and brilliant light are emitted from the basement of a neighbouring house. The house, which previously belonged to a well-liked couple named the Knapps, has recently been sold to a shadowy family called the Klopeks who never seem to come out by day, taunting the proclivities of the other people on the street. Ray’s other immediate neighbour is phone line worker Art Weingartner (Rick Ducommon), a tubby miscreant who’s likewise been left alone with his wife out of town and nothing to do but snoop. Across the street lives (Bruce Dern), a Vietnam veteran and military hardware freak who ritually raises the Stars and Stripes every morning and lives with his much-younger bombshell wife Bonnie (Wendy Schaal). Teenager Ricky Butler (Corey Feldman) has been left alone by his parents, whilst the elderly Walter Seznick (Gale Gordon) keeps his real front lawn lush and the fake lawn on his head just as lush.

Dante sets all of these characters and their microcosmic lives up in a deftly choreographed sequence as the bike-riding paper boy tosses his wares into yards and the various denizens emerge in the sunshine – the boy hits Ray with the paper he throws him, so Ray reacts by tossing his cup of morning coffee after him. Walter avenges himself by sending his poodle Queenie on guerrilla raids to bite the paper boy, only for Queenie to prefer pooping on Rumsfield’s grass, a gift that spoils Rumsfield’s flag-raising ceremony. Jerry Goldsmith’s playful score makes sport of John Williams’ twinkly scene-setting for Spielberg, even sporting dog barks remixed into the music. Ray’s wife Carol (Carrie Fisher) tries to talk Ray into going away for the week, but he commits to playing the bohemian homebody. Ray’s curiosity nonetheless keeps being lassoed by both the strange behaviour of the Klopeks and his friends’ increasingly tantalised and pushy obsession with it. Dante’s approach to all this is at once indulgent and sardonic, gleefully playing up the weirdness that magnifies under the gaze of the adventure-starved heroes with technically accomplished and wittily fleeting pastiches of various genres of film grammar, whilst also perceiving the ways those heroes become just the sorts of agents of malicious discontent they seek to uncover.

When one of the Klopeks, the youngest, Hans (Courtney Gains) finally emerges in daylight, Ray and Art finally goad each-other into heading over and pay a welcome-neighbour visit. This sequence becomes a masterful unit of humour and quick-fire pastiche and comic staging. Dante touches base with a burlesque of a Sergio Leone gunfight stare-and-shoot -out, diving in for close-ups of the many staring onlookers including the dog Queenie, watching in tense fascination as Ray and Art venture in, whilst Goldsmith quotes Morricone on the soundtrack. The camerawork shifts gear into a faintly gothic style with high angles and perspective distortion to create a menacingly looming effect. Facetious menace turns to farce, as the pair put their feet through weak wood in the porch and dislodge fixtures when striking the doorknocker. The house number 669 turns to 666, and a swarm of bees emerges from a secreted hive, driving the hapless duo to take shelter under Rumsfield’s hose: Rumsfield dashes forth to the rescue only for his lawn hose to snap and send him tumbling, and the scene concludes with men squirming desperately under squirting water. Later in the evening Ray takes his dog for a walk – or rather he takes it out and lets it off the leash to run riot – and finishes up falling into conversation with Art and Ricky: in arguing the Klopeks might be dangerous fiends and also trying to freak Ray out, Art cites local folklore in recounting the story of Chip, a soda jerk who slaughtered his family and went about his life normally for weeks afterwards only for summer heat to stir the stench of corruption. Soon Ray and Art witness Hans driving a car out of the garage simply to remove garbage from the trunk and pound it into the bin, before driving rain starts to fall: Ray then observes three Klopeks feverishly digging in their backyard in the storm.

Art is the devil you know: a boy-man who quietly hates his wife and takes any opportunity to stuff his face when he visits the Petersons, whilst his first appearance in the film sees him sneaking up on crows that flock about the Klopeks’ yard with a shotgun. “Art’s got a gun!” Ray alerts Carol when he sees him trying to shoot one of the birds, as if that very phrase immediately evokes good cause to be afraid. Rumsfield keeps his own vigil, looking down into the street, silhouetted in his window and smoking a cigar. Meanwhile Ricky is so entertained by watching the trio’s expeditions he first invites his girlfriend around for a dose of prototypical reality television (“This is real – this is my neighbourhood!”) and later all of his friends to gawk when the chaos reaches a climax: Ricky even puts on catering (“I called the pizza dude!”) for his free show, and his guests form a ready-made audience for the shenanigans, clapping whichever piece of slapstick inanity provided for their amusement. What is still a relatively innocent preoccupation takes a turn towards the urgently obsessive for Ray, Art, and Rumsfield when Bonnie finds Queenie seemingly alone and bedraggled, and when the neighbours go to Walter’s house they find he’s mysteriously vanished, leaving his signature toupee behind. Not long after, Queenie brings bone for Ray to throw which Art recognises is actually a human femur, convincing them both it’s Walter’s. Carol finally tries to put an end to their snooping and paranoia by arranging for her, Ray, Rumsfield and Bonnie – Art is pointedly not invited – to pay a call on the Klopeks for a nice neighbourly housewarming.

Part of the specific pleasure of Dante’s films lies in his recurring gags and casting choices, and his delight in film buff touches for their own sake. Goldsmith pushes the point even further by including passages very lightly transforming his own iconic scores for Patton (1970) and the Rambo movies for the mockery. Dante contrives to evoke the Bates house of Psycho (1960) in the crumbling grandeur of the Klopek house and the occasional, backlit sight of someone mysteriously watching from high windows. As he so often did, Dante casts perpetual refugee from the Corman factory Dick Miller, who appears with another constant regular in Dante’s films, the inimitable Robert Picardo: the duo play garbage men Vic and Joe, who find themselves the bewildered audience as Art and Rumsfield charge out to stop them compacting the Klopeks’ garbage so they can check it for human remains. “My taxes pay your salary!” Joe tries to talk Vic into attending a meditation group, whilst Miller mutters ruefully after listening to the locals theorising, “I hate cul-de-sacs. There’s only one way out and the people are kinda weird.” Rumsfield fiercely reminds the complaining labourers as he lies upside down in a pile of garbage with shaving foam on his face. When Ray tries to ignore Art’s ravings about the Klopeks being Satanists by sticking his fingers in his ears and mumbling a mantra to drown him out, Art insists he’s already succumbing to the brainwashing influence and twists his words it into a mocking version of a Satanic chant: “I wanna kill. Everyone. Satan is good. Satan is our pal.”

A highlight of the film comes about half-way through as Ray, head ringing with his own imaginings, an occult book Art showed him, and too many horror movies on the TV (Dante inserts clips from The Exorcist, 1973, Race With The Devil, 1974, and The Texas Chain Saw Massacre 2, 1986), has a nightmare where he awakens in the night and finds Carol missing. Venturing out of the bedroom, he’s assailed by a huge chainsaw blade cutting through the wall, and then finds himself tied to a huge barbecue by masked Satanists. Carol dreamily calls to Ray, swathed in white silk, praising him for inviting the neighbours to a barbecue, as the devil worshippers tie him to a giant grill whilst repeating Art’s chant. Ray sees Walter and Queenie together rising from a garbage can, in a joke that feels plucked straight from Dante’s beloved Looney Tunes cartoons, where both dog and master give spooky warning with medieval axes buried in their head. Art appears in the guise of Chip, met by peals of canned laughter and applause like a beloved sitcom character and making cheesy one-liner quips, a flourish that anticipates the more sour media lampooning of Natural Born Killers (1994). Finally Ray awakens from the vortex of nightmare to the no less disorientating sight of Mr Rogers on morning TV singing ‘Won’t You Be My Neighbour?’ Here Dante explicitly identifies Ray’s mind with his own, a whirling centrifuge where comedy and horror lose form, permanently colonised by a post-genre melange of pop culture stances.

Much as Matinee contemplates the nerve-jangled era of the Cuban Missile Crisis, with its clear-and-present-danger sense of imminent extermination, The ’Burbs evokes the fallout of the Reagan era’s homiletic appeal to renewed centrism and stability. That stability Dante sees rather as a kind of balkanization along the lines of suburban fence lines, everyone from the fairly decent young family man to the gun-toting coot and the hard rock-playing teenager segmented in their little worlds in uneasy truce rather than balance, but simultaneously, desperately seeking some cause to rally to, to relieve themselves of the pressure of their ordinariness in a country (any country) that needs mythmaking to cohere. Art’s leap to thinking the Klopeks are Satanists plainly lampoons the Satanic Panic that gripped the reactionary sectors of the 1980s, fuelled by texts like the fake memoir Michelle Remembers and the McMartin school trial, whilst he also evinces a fascination with seemingly ordinary people like Chip who abruptly become lunatics. Eventually, in the film’s climactic, sententious but well-handled speech from Ray, he indicts himself, Art, and Rumsfield as the actual examples of that madness in this story. Dante’s capacity to explore socially satiric themes with an unexpected edge of relevance and insight had been present since his early B-movies and would reach a height in his almost scarily prescient 1996 telemovie The Second Civil War, which took the themes in The ’Burbs to a natural conclusion and came up with a warning for the Trump era.

The urge to childlike anarchic action was one Dante had safely cordoned off in Gremlins in the title critters as the represented all the septic forces lurking under the surface of the idealised small town; in The ’Burbs the citizens degenerate into something like gremlins themselves. Dante is amused as well as alarmed by the immaturity of his protagonists, watching them become infantilised as they indulge their seemingly adult concerns. Art is glad to be out from under his wife’s thumb because it’s plain he regards her more like a parental control figure, and Carol increasingly acts like Ray’s mother rather than wife (casting Fisher as the film’s most mature person was a stroke of genius), resulting in a scene where Art and Rumsfield retreat like dejected boys when Carol won’t let Ray come out and play “until he resembles the man that I married.” For all his man’s man affectations, Rumsfield gleefully directs the other two using a “Red Rover” rhyme over a walkie-talkie. Hanks’ innate likeability is key for presenting a main character who does increasingly unhinged and destructive things. Meanwhile Ray’s actual child son Dave (Cory Danziger) is increasingly mortified by the spectacle of his father’s mischiefs. Ray’s attempts to remain reasonably sane and a restraining influence on Art are repeatedly foiled, as when Art writes an accusatory note to the Klopeks and Ray fears correctly they might assume he did it. Eventually he’s drawn into the mesmerising influence after the discovery of the femur – Dante gleefully mocks melodramatic style as Art and Ray scream in panic upon Art’s certainty the femur belongd to Walter, camera zooming in and out like it’s having a palpitation – and later when he discovers Walter’s wig mysteriously transposed from his house to the Klopeks’.

Carol’s attempts to defuse the escalating situation and make nice with the Klopeks results in a painfully uncomfortable and bitterly funny scene as Ray and Carol and Rumsfield and Bonnie finally encounter the three new neighbours. Hans is a jittery, pale, perverse youth, Uncle Reuben (Brother Theodore) is a fierce and cranky elder who barely controls his simmering anger at Ray, and his brother, Dr Werner Klopek (Henry Gibson) who first appears in a burlesque of horror movie anticipation as he emerges from the cellar, glimpsed in menacing silhouette, wearing surgical gloves smeared with red, only for this to prove paint from his hobby of making art from surgical scenes. The Klopeks (“Is that a Slavic name?” Rumsfield questions, sensing both Reds and corpses under the bed) are a perfect alloy of strange traits, from their midnight excursions and oddly impersonal furnishings (“It came with the frame.”) and general of foreignness, but Werner proves such a pleasantly affable, almost fey host that he seems to finally put relations on common ground. At least until Rumsfield starts in with aggressive questioning and Art, sneaking into the house whilst everyone’s distracted, unleashes the snarling beast chained up in the cellar – a Great Dane – and runs for his life, setting off the Klopeks’ improvised alarm system. Hanks’ comic acting is at a height in this sequence as Ray uneasily accepts the hospitable offer from Hans of his idea of an entertaining munchies – a canned sardine and pretzel – and tries to eat it, and later tries to distract from one of Rumsfield’s obnoxious ploys by suddenly suffering a sneezing fit that quickly becomes a real one.

Newly convinced of the Klopeks’ malfeasance by finding Walter’s toupee in their house, Ray resolves to take advantage of what he knows will be the family’s absence and contrives to get rid of Carol and Dave for the day, before setting out with Art and Rumsfield to invade the Klopek house. Art successfully knocks out the power to the house by shimmying up a power pole and cutting a live wire, an act that results in him getting shocked and falling through a shed roof, emerging singed and smoking, but does succeed in disabling the Klopeks’ alarms. Rumsfield keeps watch from his rooftop with a rife, infrared scope, walkie-talike, and animal crackers. Ray furiously digs holes in the Klopeks’ yard whilst Art lounges about, before they shift their attention to within the house. There they finally seem to identify the source of the strange rumbles and glowing, in the form of a huge, baroque furnace the Klopeks have been restoring. The Klopeks return home only to recognise someone’s broken in and retreat unnoticed to fetch the police, whilst Art and Rumsfield behold the beggaring sight of Walter being returned home by his children, having just been in hospital after a spell of heart trouble. Still digging in the cellar floor for any signs of buried bodies, Ray’s pickaxe hits something metallic, only for this to prove a gas line: Art manages to flee but Ray is still inside when the gas explodes and blows the house to pieces. Thankfully Ray emerges, battered and burned but alive.

The flow of great comic business continues right through The ’Burbs, from Ray plucking Walter’s toupee from where he stashed it in his shorts to Ricky, trying to distract the police brought by the Klopeks, leaping onto their windscreen and trying to pass off his houseguests as riotous invades: “There’s these people and they’re in my parents’ house and…they’re eating all their food!” The aftermath of the explosion brings the world onto the cul-de-sac, including cops who represent the judgement of authority and reality. In a moral-of-the-story vignette, Ray unleashes a berserk harangue at Art and accepts they’ve been acting like crazy people: “We’re the lunatics!” he thunders in between bouts of trying to strangle the still-recalcitrant Art. The peculiarity of The ’Burbs is that it tries to present a nimble, scabrous comedy with the trappings of a big-budget Hollywood movie, with Dante embracing the imaginative exaggeration of his heroes and his own genre movie touchstones, constantly, ironically contrasting the looming, swooning camerawork and amplified weirdness of the Klopeks and their home with the gleaming, idealised neighbourhood around them. Where Burton’s Edward Scissorhands a year later would touch many of the same conceptual bases of The ’Burbs, it allows its nonconformist heroes the stature of myth, where The ‘Burbs refuses to indulge, seeing as everyone, whatever their personal mythos, as victims of the persona they make for themselves as part of the general comedie humaine.

At least until the very end: in a climax reportedly reshot to please test audiences, Ray pledges to help mitigate the damage he’s caused, only to be confronted by Dr Klopek, who reveals a sudden sinister side and confirms that he did indeed murder the Knapps and intends to kill Ray too. Ray manages to fight him off and the sight of the Klopeks’ car boot stuffed with the bones of their victims confirms their villainy. This ending presents an interesting dichotomy when it comes to the difference, and occasional disconnect, between theme and movie language. On the one hand, it seems to spoil the theme of the self-appointed guardians of normality proving to be the true reprobates and seeming to finally justify their paranoia. On the other, given Dante’s blackly comic exaggeration throughout, to simply have the Klopeks prove to be mere, victimised innocents would see a bit of a long bow, and the revelation finally gives the constant come-ons of Dante’s outsized style, at long last, some proper horror movie images to indulge, including Dr Klopek snapping on surgical gloves in a slyly congenial but menacing manner, and the horde of bones. Dante tries to have his cake and eat it in finally seeing everyone as a bit cracked, as Ray wanders home dazedly with Carol whilst Art and Rumsfield smugly ride out the switchback in swerving between the status of villains and heroes. The resulting ambivalence is, ultimately, perhaps more interesting and lasting than any didactic message.

When Dante made Matinee four years later, he purposefully redeployed the core theme of The ’Burbs in introducing a major character, Sandra (Lisa Jakub), who’s the child of beatnik intellectuals and earns the distrust of her fellow students and the wrath of authority when she refuses to play along with her high school’s duck-and-cover drill, instead loudly and desperately insisting it’s all a sham and waste of time in the face of the immediate threat of nuclear annihilation. Here the voice of weirdo dissent is plainly valourised, as Sandra becomes the girlfriend of Gene Loomis (Simon Fenton), the main character, despite him being the nominally straitlaced son of a Navy sailor. Matinee unfolds over the course of a week coinciding with the Cuban Missile Crisis: Gene and his family, who often relocate depending on where his dad is stationed, have recently arrived in Key West, and Gene becomes aware his father isn’t out on manoeuvres as he’s been told, but is on one of the blockade ships. Gene himself harbours his own subversive appetites, his burgeoning delight in B horror and sci-fi films. The ultimate sop to that proclivity falls right in his lap amidst the general unease: independent auteur Lawrence Woolsey (John Goodman), maker of such masterpieces as The Brain Leeches and The Hypnotic Eyes of Doctor Diablo, announces he’s going to be premiering his new atomic monster movie, Mant!, at the Key West Strand, a local movie theatre, to take advantage of the island’s current, flashpoint role in the zeitgeist.

Dante’s sense of personal connection with the meat of Charles S. Haas’s script is easy to discern, as Gene eventually comes under Woolsey’s wing, much as Dante did with Corman, the older shyster-artist schooling the kid in both the flimflam side to his business but also his genuine, peculiar creative ideals in trafficking in safe, cordoned experiences of the dark side as necessarily purgative and cathartic. Woolsey is, nonetheless, more patently based on the legendary William Castle, the former big studio B-movie wiz who went independent and reinvented himself as the downmarket Alfred Hitchcock, making personal appearances in his movies and advertising and employing attention-grabbing gimmicks to hook his audiences. Many of the stunts and tricks Woolsey utilises in promoting Mant! are drawn directly from Castle and Corman’s playbooks, like wiring up seats to deliver mild electric shocks and trundling out dangling skeletons mid-movie, and trying to whip up audience enthusiasm by ironically appealing to their desire to see things possibly forbidden or just amusingly bad. Woolsey has his leading lady and girlfriend Ruth Corday (Cathy O’Donnell; her character’s last name Corday is a nod to Mara Corday, star of Tarantula!, 1955, and The Black Scorpion, 1957) also pose as a nurse selling fake insurance policies to prospective audience members, a nice gimmick that falls flat when Ruth repeatedly shows no professional interest in the actually injured.

Matinee indulges a portrait of teenagers from a “more innocent time,” for whom sneaking a listen to a Lenny Bruce album is the height of sophistication and daring. Gene, because of the family’s constant moving, always faces the problem of making new friends, and he dreads going to the local high school. He also has to take care of his younger brother Dennis (Jesse Lee) a lot of the time, and his tendency to get freaked out by the scary movies Gene loves sometimes forces Gene to run the gauntlet with his fretful mother Anne (Lucinda Jenney). When some boys prefer him to the company of some nerd at lunch he meets Stan (Omri Katz), and they become fast friends. Stan has a fierce crush on school goddess Sherry (Kellie Martin). Stan works up the pluck to ask Sherry out on a date, and she happily accepts, but Stan is soon intimidated by Sherry’s older former boyfriend Harvey Starkweather (James Villemaire), a petty criminal recently released early from a jail stint because he also fancies himself as a Beat poet and impressed a literary figure. Stan connects with Sandra, as another misfit, albeit a local who’s never felt at home, and who refer to her parents by their first names. Meanwhile Woolsey is dealing with his own problems, including an increasingly disgruntled Ruth, who’s annoyed he won’t marry her, and his urgent design to get Mant! a booking in a large theatre chain, to pay off nagging debts like the impending lab bill for the movie, as he’s threatened with a lawsuit: “Boy this business has changed,” Woolsey comments, “They used to settle these things with violence.”

Matinee has a strong resemblance to many other post-American Graffiti (1973) nostalgia piece movies cast a half-humoured, half-anxious eye back to the prelapsarian days before JFK’s assassination. But it belongs in a special niche with something like John Waters’ Hairspray (1988) in exploring a similar blend of candy-coloured retro and sceptical coming-of-age meditations, laced with the director’s simultaneously fulsome and ironic sensibility. Matinee is probably the sweetest and sunniest movie Dante made, despite its depiction of a uniquely fraught moment in history that still transmits unease in cultural memory, and during the slow build towards the kind of comic chaos Dante was so good at it risks getting rather more cute than was his usual wont. Still, Dante captures the surreal segues for the lives of the boys into a world of grown-up threat, as when Gene and Stan go down to the blissful beachfront only to find soldiers and their great dark war machines ranged along it. Dante uses The Tokens’ “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” as a leitmotif, both bang-on as period detail and a musical gesture conveying breezy, dreamy nostalgia and longing. The Angels’ “My Boyfriend’s Back” is used more archly as a theme for Harvey as he lurks in the bushes watching Sherry. Dante constantly illustrated his heroes’ inner worlds and transformative urges through dream sequences used as a vehicle for unfettering both fantasy and fear: Ray’s nightmare in The ’Burbs is one example, whilst the dreams shared by the trio in Explorers is perhaps the quintessential instance, as Dante depicted a shared subliminal space in which the heroes discover designs that open other worlds. Here Dante’s variation on this comes as Gene thinks he hears his father’s return and gets out of bed, only to find his house deserted, and when he opens the front door witnesses the apocalyptic eruption of a mushroom cloud followed by an exterminating wind: only then does Gene awaken, delivered back to much safer waking dreams of mutant man-ants.

Whereas in The ’Burbs the movie pastiche was kneaded into the style of the film, Dante often settled for delivering films within films making wry sport of disreputable wonders, like the episodes in Amazon Women of the Moon that give the movie its title, a hilariously precise recreation of of ‘50s space siren movies, and the send-up of cheap Italian space operas in Explorers. Here Dante pokes good-natured fun at the general run of entertainment for kids in the day, when his mom makes him take Dennis to see a movie called The Shook-Up Shopping Cart. This proves a frighteningly accurate pastiche of the kind of live-action pablum Disney was turning out at the time, with the movie-within-a-movie sporting a very young Naomi Watts as a sunny blonde starlet opposite a double-taking co-star. Later, of course, he gets around to Mant! itself, which resembles less one of Castle’s or Corman’s films of the period and looks more like fellow trash titan Bert I. Gordon trying to make a Jack Arnold film. After getting bored during The Mixed-Up Shopping Cart, Gene and Danney leave, only to encounter a scene outside the theatre: two men, Herb (Miller again) and Bob (Sayles), claiming to be from a morals group called Citizens For Decent Entertainment, are protesting the upcoming Mant! screening. They face opposition with Sandra’s parents Jack (David Clennon) and Rhonda (Lucy Butler), who espouse First Amendment rights, whilst Woolsey himself emerges to argue with the men and pass out free tickets, encouraging people to make up their own minds. Gene susses all this out when he recognises Herb from a still from one of Woolsey’s previous films, and realises Woolsey’s just drumming up publicity from a different flank.

This sequence takes a deft poke at the art of using negative publicity as good publicity, and again later when Bob and Herb try to entice Harvey with their two-faced wiles: “What messages do these movies send to the youth of America? That atomic power is nothing but trouble? That it’s all right for atomic mutations to rip the clothes off of young women?” There’s also a dose of sly metatextual commentary on Dante’s constant casting of Miller in restoring him to his original setting as a B-movie face. When Gene confronts Woolsey about his stunt, Woolsey at first tries to report that “Herb turned against me,” but then drops the pretence in realising Gene’s too smart for that. Instead he explains he hired Herb when he was actually a shake-down guy sent to collect money and Woolsey saw an inexpensive actor instead, whilst Bob is a blacklisted actor. Much of the near-sublime quality of Matinee lies in the way Dante captures two ways of looking at Woolsey, from one angle a fly-by-night exploitation entrepreneur who’s a professional bullshit artist, and from another a hero bringing fun and fright a world of young Genes. Casting Goodman, at the height of his rotund charm and performing vigour, as Woolsey makes him instantly charismatic and likeable, and he readily opens up to Gene in sensing a kindred spirit. Gene and Woolsey’s conversations articulate the credo of a hermetic order of horror movie freaks, as Gene confesses to Woolsey, in a manner just about any cineaste might recognise, that with his rootless childhood he found his friends in the oddball likes of Herb and Vincent Price on screen. Woolsey readily identifies with Gene’s problems, recalling his own trouble fitting in, only to assure him, “Now I get my revenge, I get to scare everyone else – but it’s for their own good.” Woolsey goes on to explain the delight he takes hin making monster movies with philosophical zeal, describing some ancient encounter between a caveman ancestor and a woolly mammoth the man survived and felt the need to record his exhilarating escape for posterity. So he a picture on his cave wall and exaggerating its terrible features: “Bang!,” Woolsey announces as the caveman’s vision is illustrated as a threatening cartoon projected with imagination upon a brick wall, “The first monster movie.”

Woolsey goes on to explain that ebb and flow of fear and release, anxiety and catharsis, is the essence of the movie business and why he loves it so much. Dante stages Woolsey and Gene’s exchanges in a series of flowing, unifying tracking shots as Woolsey leads the lad off the street and into the temple of cinema. That temple is however also a profane space, a place for rowdy kids to stamp feet, roll malt balls down the aisles, and to gawk at anything that might provoke the ghost of a sexual fantasy, which Woolsey also knows well. The Strand’s manager Howard (Picardo) is a panicky fussbudget who has installed a fallout shelter in the theatre basement and keeps a radio on him at all times tuned to a military channel to get an early warning if the bombs start falling. Meanwhile Harvey, whose last name pays an unsubtle nod to the infamous serial killer Charles Starkweather, is present for bad boy angst, threatening Stan in between recitations of his poetry: “Destiny – it’s like a crazy river – where you see different people’s boats that they have going by on it…but tomorrow! Tomorrow’s a knife!” Homage perhaps to Corman’s A Bucket of Blood (1958), which starred Miller. Harvey is both a source of comedy as an utter dope, and also a more immediate menace than the atomic bomb with his unstable and violent streak. He tries to steal Bob’s wallet when he and Herb are going through their spiel, only for them to catch him and reclaim the wallet, making as if they’re going to beat him up but then releasing him. Harvey takes their advice and gets a job, which happens to be for Woolsey, filling out a Mant costume with instructions to operate all of Woolsey’s gimmicks and lurch out to frighten the audience at intervals. Woolsey’s stunts include “Rumble-Rama”, which shakes the theatre, and his now process, “Atom-O-Vision,” for the grand finale.

Mant!, glimpsed in random passages during the screening itself, is a lovely if broad lampoon of ‘50s monster movies, styled much like the send-ups in Amazon Women of the Moon and, with O’Donnell-as-Ruth playing Carole, the wife of an unfortunate man named Bill (Mark McCracken), who’s transforming into a giant ant after being bitten by an ant whilst getting a dental x-ray, and becomes increasingly unhinged. Dante casts classic movie faces William Schallert as the dentist, The Thing From Another World’s (1951) Robert Cornthwaite as the compulsory grimly prognosticating scientist, and Kevin McCarthy as an army general trying to battle the gigantic, mutated Bill, and inserts stock footage borrow from The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms (1951). In recreating the classic style Dante does a good job nailing down the look and sound of such movies, particularly the lighting, usually a touch directors get badly wrong, although the prosthetics for “Mant” and the later giant ant puppet are far too good to be from a real movie of the period. Dante makes sport of the sexism littering many such movies, building to the relished moment when Mant gooses his wife with his slimy claw (a queue for the watching audience to be shocked) as well as breathless sexual melodrama (Schallert’s lecherous dentist drive Bill to a murderous rampage by trying to seduce his wife whilst he’s encaged), whilst Cornthwaite’s scientist insists on repeating everything he says in a dumbed-down fashion: “He’ll continue to metamorphose – or change!”

The Mant! premiere kicks the film’s gentle, ambling tenor to a higher gear as the characters intersect and Woolsey’s machinery collapses the boundaries between life and apocalyptic fantasy, and provides one of Dante’s greatest set-pieces of orchestrated madness. Gene does good pal service when he helps Sherry and Stan make up by spinning a story that carefully omits Harvey’s menacing, suggesting Gene has nascent talents for good fiction. Harvey, catching sight of Stan kissing Sherry in the audience whilst he’s supposed to be menacing the crowd, socks Stan and chases him and Sherry around the theatre. The Rumble-Rama makes Howard think the bombs are falling, so he dashes to the basement to set his shelter to close, only for mix-ups to result in Gene and Sandra being locked inside it. Woolsey, with his can-do attitude and general cynicism (“I’m in the wrong business,” he sighs when Howard tells him the shelter was sold to him as completely impregnable), works to get the shelter door off before the two kids suffocate, only to find when he does dislodge it that the pair inside are kissing. Meanwhile a theatre chain owner Woolsey’s trying to land a deal with, Spector (Jesse White), is utterly delighted, taking the violence for ingenious choreography and part of the overall show. The theatre’s upstairs balcony becomes dangerously overloaded with rowdy kids having the time of their lives, and with the added Rumble-Rama the balcony threatens to collapse, with Dennis on it.

As in The ’Burbs, the chaos unleashed is a by-product of rowdy human energy, the desperate need for thrills and voyaging, and the urge to expiate darker urges, even when articulated via schlock. Only the steady hand of a clever film director can impose some form of order on such bedlam, as Woolsey confirms when he deliberately uses Atom-O-Vision, which deploys a mixture of lighting and 3D colour footage to make it seem as if an atomic bomb has blown out the back of the movie theatre, to frighten the audience into evacuating the theatre and empty out the collapsing balcony. Except Dennis doesn’t escape, requiring Gene to risk life and limb grabbing Dennis off the balcony before it sways and crashes down on the empty theatre floor. Meanwhile Stan tries to intervene as Harvey tries to kidnap Sherry at knifepoint, getting knocked out for his pains, but Harvey’s flight quickly comes to a halt as he crashes his car and is apprehended. All ends happily, with the blockade ending, Woolsey proposing marriage to Ruth as the drive off and assuring the kids that adults are just as clueless as they are, and Gene and Sandra going down to the now soldier-free beach to watch the Navy chopper bringing his dad home arrive. An ending that obeys Woolsey, and Dante’s, dictum that a good movie should end with the lights coming up and a sigh of relief, and an instance of life, if never entirely for good, for once playing along.

Standard
1980s, 2020s, Action-Adventure, War

Top Gun (1986) / Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

.

Directors: Tony Scott / Joseph Kosinski
Screenwriters: Jim Cash, Jack Epps Jr / Ehren Kruger, Christopher McQuarrie, Eric Warren Singer

By Roderick Heath

Here there be spoilers…

The release of Top Gun: Maverick has proven a striking moment in contemporary pop culture. That is, it’s a blockbuster movie release capable of wringing the same reaction out of grown-up audiences usually reserved these days for the 14-year-olds flocking to see the latest comic book movie. Top Gun: Maverick is the belated sequel to the 1986 blockbuster Top Gun, a movie directed by Tony Scott but designed and implemented by its producer team of Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer as a precision-tooled star vehicle for Tom Cruise, who was 24 years old at the time of release. Top Gun’s long-simmering cult following is both a little surprising and not surprising at all. It made Cruise, already a fast-rising young star, a major-league big screen heartthrob and instant generational avatar. Its glitzy, glibly stylish look and hit-churning soundtrack pinioned it to a very specific moment in the cultural survey, a flagship of the 1980s cinema movement where pop movies were closely wound in with pop music, both in terms of their look and in their constant deployments of songs, and their mutual celebration of adolescent fancy. Now Cruise, who turns 60 this year (although Top Gun: Maverick has been delayed a couple of years because of the COVID-19 pandemic), returns to his first real signature role. Apart from the Mission: Impossible series which has proven an archipelago of popularity for him amidst the stormy waters of a late career and current screen culture, Cruise long resisted such backtracking.

Cruise has been a curious product of our love of movie stars right from the early days of his career. At once he was the inheritor of handsome ingénues from the dawn of time, the kind who set teenage girls (and quite a few boys) aquiver in their stomachs and itchy in the pants. But Cruise swiftly evinced far more canniness than most in establishing and protecting his stature. He seemed to emulate the careers of stars like Paul Newman and Jack Nicholson, who could for the most part effortlessly step between popular, image-cementing vehicles and artier, riskier, more challenging fare. Cruise has never quite gained their flexibility and reputation as an actor, because he remained first and foremost a star, but it’s precisely that quality which remained his advantage. Acting cred was always a far-off citadel he could storm when he felt like, but his real business was making movies for the widest possible audience, at a time when many a potential rival was sabotaging themselves by acting as if being called a movie star was an odious travail. Whilst Cruise had emerged playing relatively familiar kinds of young male starring parts – a football player in All The Right Moves (1983), a horny teen out for action in Losin’ It (1983) and Risky Business (1984) – Top Gun saw him emerge from a chrysalis as the perfect emblem of the yuppie era. Ahistorical in persona, white bread in ethnicity but disconnected from any sure sense of social identity, he morphed into a blank slate of Reaganite ambition.

With his carefully honed body, his capped teeth, his notoriously intense work ethic, and his air of self-willed exceptionality able to easily straddle personal ambition and embodiment of a creed, Cruise embodied the yuppie ideal perfectly. Cruise’s remarkable resistance to aging, his aerodynamic features only very slightly thickening and hardening over the years, has only amplified his strangeness, the way he seems to embody that essence of the movie star as something disconnected from normal life processes and inhabiting an exalted realm. After decades of having his character, sanity, even sexuality rifled from afar, the verdict has finally come fully down on the side of Cruise being perhaps the last common avatar of that ideal, and the very qualities that once made Cruise the most normcore and antiseptic of movie stars for all his occasional gestures towards stretching and perverting his image, have now become proofs of his specialness, his gift-from-the-movie-gods electness. Top Gun: Maverick is interesting in this regard but it finally evinces that Cruise is at least vaguely aware of his own mortality, especially when it showcases the ravages of aging inflicted on his Top Gun costar Val Kilmer. Both Top Gun movies are, both literally and metaphorically, about defying gravity, but finally must admit that gravity always wins.

Top Gun was based on a magazine article about the new elite training methods adopted by the US Navy air wing during and after Vietnam to improve dogfighting skills in their fighter pilots. Cruise was cast as Pete Mitchell, whose piloting call-sign is Maverick, a cocky but sublimely talented young fighter pilot. The film’s lengthy opening sees Maverick and his Radar Intercept Officer (RIO), Nick ‘Goose’ Bradshaw (Anthony Edwards), on deployment on an aircraft carrier in the Indian Ocean, off some purposefully vague conflict zone where their squadron of F-14 Tomcats encounter enemy pilots flying the flashy new (and imaginary) MiG-25 fighters. The MiGs outmanoeuvre the American pilots and seriously rattle the flight leader, Cougar (John Stockwell), by successfully targeting him, only for Maverick to expertly reverse the humiliation by flying more cleverly and making sport of the foes. After Cougar elects to quit flying, their CO, ‘Stinger’ (James Tolkan), chews Maverick out for his impudent and insubordinate antics, only to then inform him that with Cougar out he and Goose will take his place in the elite training scheme known as TOPGUN where they’ll be pitted against fellow hotshots, based at Miramar, North Island, near San Diego.

At TOPGUN Maverick encounters his one great rival as a pilot, Tom ‘Iceman’ Kazansky (Kilmer), and makes waves with his risk-taking tendencies, earning Iceman’s haughty assurance that he’s “dangerous,” and tangling with tutor ‘Jester’ (Michael Ironside), and program boss and Vietnam-era ace Mike ‘Viper’ Metcalf (Tom Skerritt), particularly when he violates the “hard floor”, that is the minimum altitude allowed during training, in his relentless chases. He also finds himself involved with another of the program tutors, Charlotte ‘Charlie’ Blackwood (Kelly McGillis), who he first meets in a bar and tries to pick up, only to learn her true identity later. Maverick’s close encounter with the new MiG gives him distinction and makes him a valuable source of information for her. As she gets to know him Charlie learns Maverick is haunted by his father’s fate as a fighter pilot, having vanished during an operation in 1965. During a training exercise where Maverick is playing wingman to Ice but the rival hotshot can’t nail a target, Maverick is caught in Ice’s engine wash, sending his plane careening out of control, and when he and Goose eject Goose hits the canopy and dies. Maverick is cleared of responsibility, but his friend’s death hangs heavily on him, and he considers leaving the Navy. He eventually turns up for graduation, just as he and the rest of the class are called to action back in the conflict zone and are flung into a deadly air battle.

One immediately eye-catching aspect of Top Gun is the burgeoning talent of its moment it ropes in, including Cruise, Kilmer, Meg Ryan (as Goose’s wife Carole), and Edwards, as well as notable also-rans like McGillis, Rick Rossovich, Adrian Pasdar, and John Stockwell, and counterbalanced by experts in surly elder attitude in Skerritt, Ironside, and Tolkan. Composer Harold Faltemeyer, straight off providing one instantly iconic theme for a new Hollywood hero on Beverly Hills Cop (1984), here provided the score and attached to Maverick a canoodling guitar theme that recurs every time Maverick does something cool, almost to the point of self-parody. The film opens with consciously glorifying images of the Naval pilots and their ground crews preparing to take off in shots drenched in a sunrise glow, men and machines made equivalent in their adamantine, architectural function in the buzzing enterprise. Segue into shots of the sky-thrashing pilots cavorting to the strains of the Kenny Loggins-sung, Giorgio Moroder-penned rock song “Highway To The Danger Zone.” Moroder also helped write the soundtrack’s other big product, “Take My Breath Away,” performed by the band Berlin, which captured the year’s Oscar for Original Song, and Scott does use its pulsing, breathy, deathless romantic quality to effect, interpolating it over a sex scene for Cruise and McGillis shot exactly like some high-end aftershave ad, complete with fluttering white curtains in a steely blue room.

As a movie, Top Gun belongs to a venerable subgenre. Films about the rarefied world of daring aviators date back to classic Hollywood flyboy flicks like Ceiling Zero (1936), Only Angels Have Wings (1939), Test Pilot (1940), Dive Bomber (1941), intersect with war movies like Twelve O’Clock High (1949), and continue through the likes of Toward The Unknown (1956), Jet Pilot (1957), and The Right Stuff (1983). The popularity of this kind of movie is obviously rooted in the basic thrill of flying really fast, an inherently spectacular and dramatic business not many people have access to experience for themselves. But it also constantly touches base with an essential dramatic dynamic: such movies depict the hermetic, rivalry-filled, thrill-loving world of pilots assigned to push the limits and the constant wrestle required to balance such necessary roguish will and the needs of the hierarchies they nominally belong to, be they civilian or military. In this regard the flyboy movie is an ideal one for exploring the tension between individualism and group identity, a theme immediately interesting and compelling for a vast bulk of the audience who experience that tension daily. Many older movies were concerned with the wildcard having his burrs shaved down to more cleanly fit in with the group or die in failing to heed the lesson, befitting products of an age when conformity was required by mass mobilisation and imperial emergence.

Top Gun, by contrast, explicitly taps its potential as a metaphor for different fantasies promulgated by a new epoch. Maverick’s nickname encapsulates the idealisation of the main character as someone whose exceptionality and independence are ultimately affirmed as virtues. He embodies the dream of being at once undisputed as an individual whilst fitting into an institution, free but also dedicated, cool and square at the same time. He is the personification of a particular tide-mark in American culture, balancing the individualist ideal, both as manifest in classic American mythos and also post-counterculture anti-authoritarianism, and the new conservatism that insists that yes, that individualism can be achieved, but can and must be suspended when higher duty calls. Maverick as a character, like the film’s depiction of the American military in its moment, is rooted in a haunted sense of generational severing involving the Vietnam War that both bent things out of shape but also informs a new determination to get back on top. Only the nostalgic evocations of the former era’s music is retained – “The Dock of The Bay”, “Great Balls of Fire,” and “You’ve Lost That Loving Feeling” are wielded as shared touchstones, a lingua franca connecting new to old – but washed clean of any former meaning. Like the film about them, the songs have no specific meaning save as rhythmic variations for what the film is expressing about Maverick.

Maverick himself is offered as a vehicle for perceiving military service as a geopolitical equivalent of a football game, cemented by shared signs and gestures, expressions of both team identity and individual triumph. The film’s most famous catchphrase, recited by Maverick and Goose after a gruelling training session and facing down the snootiness of their rivals and bosses, “I feel the need – the need for speed!” is cemented with a high-five, a summation of this fantasising. Maverick and Goose are idealised in the film’s first half as the quintessential pair of wild-and-crazy guys who know how to make a party happen anywhere, with set routines for flirtation and a penchant for sitting at the piano banging on the keys and wailing Jerry Lee Lewis off-key. These moments are a recognisable point of descent for this kind of movie: some of those old flyboy pics I mentioned were directed by Howard Hawks, who was constantly fascinated by the rituals of close-knit groups dealing with specific pressures, and scenes of characters gathered around pianos. And yet the differences are very telling. Top Gun is Hollywood product at its most unrefined, much more the offspring of the desire to sell its star as simultaneously unstoppable and relatable and the producers’ mental check-list of how to ensure that, than it is of any authorial voice. Maverick’s friendship with Goose is positioned purely to impact upon Maverick’s journey. Goose’s death occurs to invest the last act with some emotional weight, and yet its real purpose seems to be to allow Cruise to be photographed in some different emotional registers. Here’s Tom Cruise looking moody. Here’s Tom Cruise still looking great in tighty-whities whilst mourning. Here’s Tom Cruise nobly resolving to lift from the ashes.

Similarly, the rest of the TOPGUN team are barely characterised beyond their postures of general antagonism with Maverick, and their inevitable shift to obeisance before his awesomeness. One of the film’s most famous/infamous vignettes sees Maverick and Goose playing Ice and his RIO Ron ‘Slider’ Kerner (Rossovich) playing a gleefully competitive game of beach volleyball, a moment beloved by many for its unabashed celebration of male physiques attached to charismatic actors. A brief interlude of carefully crafted pizzazz that says nothing about the characters beyond what we already know – they’re young, hot, and macho show-offs – when it might have been crafted to demonstrate the evolving camaraderie and inner natures of the heroes, as another potentially Hawksian moment. All of these are however illustrations of the postures the movie wants the audience to take towards the on-screen elements, and thus exist in a realm closer to advertising than drama, the audience being sold on the need to be/have/watch Maverick. Ice is the only rival graced with solidity, and Kilmer tries to give the character sharp angles of behaviour, particularly when he tries to console Maverick after Goose’s death, as if fighting to pierce a membrane of tension between the two of them. But even he’s essentially a one-dimensional foil, a locker room big-mouth with frosted tips and representative of the onus of establishment judgement. There’s some inherent irony in the casting insofar as Kilmer and Cruise as cast in roles the other might, given their career arcs and general ethos, more reasonably have played.

Top Gun is essentially Star Wars (1977) for jocks, mimicking that film’s essential story arc but removing its mythic element, not just by resituating it in the present day, but by reconfiguring the Luke Skywalker figure – the far-flung dreamer who realises brilliant potential – and substituting a state of already-achieved perfection, a hymn to narcissistic self-appreciation and fuck-I’m-good-just-ask-me posturing. The only quality Maverick needs to learn is humility, which Goose’s death finally instils – he learns to look outside of himself to a voice from beyond. The film plays an interesting game in this regard. The story makes much of Ice’s conviction that Maverick flies dangerously, but when there is a deadly consequence to his flying it’s carefully contrived to not really be his fault, but a by-product of several different forces converging to create a tragedy, of which Maverick and Ice’s competitiveness is only one. Maverick feels responsible because he finally learned he does not have godlike control in the air: he is graced both the gravitas of loss but relieved of the pressure of definite culpability. Maverick’s budding relationship with Charlie is both impaired and given new heat when she criticises one of his risky aerial moves, sparking a show of childishly argumentative behaviour from them both – they careen individually through traffic in their his-and-hers choice of vehicles – that inevitably leads to the sack. I’m sure there are more boring and asinine romances in cinema than that between Maverick and Charlie, but I’m not quite sure where. And yet Scott simply takes that emptiness as an opportunity to unabashedly sell music video-like fantasy, picturing the pair riding around on his Kawasaki and pashing on it in artful magic hour shots, much in the same way that Cruise’s general acting response to his situation is to flash his million-dollar super-cocky grin.

There’s no nice way of saying this – not that I feel any desire to be nice – but Top Gun is not a good film. Certainly from a technical filmmaking viewpoint it’s still mostly impressive, and the sheen of Jeffrey L. Kimball’s photography retains its gorgeous, high-end magazine-shoot gloss. And yet it’s a curiously patchy work that scarcely has a plot, has assemblages in place of characters, and almost dissolves into a succession of shots roughly accumulating into scenes, illustrating a script so shallow it can barely pass muster as a bubblegum wrapper. Nonetheless Top Gun proved a vital pivot and permanent landmark in Tony Scott’s oeuvre, and indeed in recent years the general affection for Tony, following his tragic death in 2012, amongst movie fans who grew up on his big-budget, big-flash movies has begun to rival that being shown for Cruise. The younger brother of Ridley, Scott’s career mimicked his elder sibling’s, graduating from the same art college and moving into advertising at Ridley’s invitation, similarly investing heavily stylised visuals into commercials he directed. After forays into directing television, Scott made his feature filmmaking debut with the 1981 Horror film The Hunger, a movie that bombed at the box office but won some attention for its style, including from Bruckheimer and Simpson, who had begun their rise to eminence in Hollywood by shepherding the successful Flashdance (1983), directed by Adrian Lyne, another flashy Brit talent the duo brought over.

Bruckheimer and Simpson hired Scott for Top Gun, and a lot of the film’s success is certainly owed to his arch use of flourishes like sunset backlighting and delight in gleaming fuselage – both human and aircraft. By contrast with his brother’s woozy ambition and genre-hopping, Scott essentially and happily remained a maker of slick B-movies, investing them with a superficial intensity of look and sound. But I’ve never been able to get on board with the belated Tony Scott cult. Apart from a handful of top-level works like True Romance (1992), Crimson Tide (1995), and Enemy of the State (1998), which were mostly distinguished by relative stylistic restraint, most of Tony’s films represent the glibbest form of chic. The phrase “style over substance” doesn’t quite cut it in summarising Tony’s aesthetic: the substance exists purely to serve the style. Tony’s later movies like Domino (2004) are insufferably gimmicky in their shooting and cutting. The Hunger is the most boring lesbian vampire movie ever made, and whilst it presaged Top Gun in establishing Scott’s comfort with extolling various forms of homoeroticism, it also established his airbrushed approach to such things, wrapping everything in a haute couture glaze. Rather than erotic, it’s a post-sexual world he inhabits, where all things are permitted so long as they have no definable weight and can be made to look really cool. Top Gun does at least move, but there’s a weird jerkiness to its construction, as if the film had a troubled shoot and what we see had to be laboriously patched together (a problem that would become more defined on the production team’s follow-up, Days of Thunder, 1990).

The most effective scenes in the film are its two real character moments, both of which revolve around Maverick’s troubled relationship with his father’s memory. When Maverick tells Charlie about his father’s disappearance, Scott performs a simple, effective tracking shot that slowly moves around Cruise as the actor expertly shifts from laughing nostalgia to musing introspection, a clear signal that Cruise is a performer who knows what he’s doing. Later, Viper takes him for a walk on the beach and explains that he was a part of the mass dogfight that claimed his father’s life, which was hushed up because it “took place on the wrong side of some border,” and assures Maverick his dad really was a hero. This scene certainly gains a lot from Skerritt’s expertise as a grizzled character actor. These flashes of substance are however quickly disposed of. They serve less to tell us that Maverick has psychological issues than to have one of the last impediments to understanding himself as awesome have been removed. The inevitable action climax, in which Maverick is sent out to rescue Ice and others from an ambush by MiGs and saves Ice by shooting down three of the enemy planes, is spectacular stuff in a jumpy sort of way. Where in the training scenes Scott and his filming team do a good job of establishing the relationships of the various aircraft, in the combat the editing turns chaotic. The film’s most truly outstanding element remains the flying, when you can see it properly, which is almost entirely authentic.

Top Gun concludes triumphantly, of course, with Ice and Maverick cemented finally as mutually appreciative if still sardonically rivalrous comrades, and Maverick reuniting with Charlie after she seemed to choose her career over him, whilst Maverick contemplates turning TOPGUN instructor himself. Flashforward to the present day. Top Gun: Maverick has the difficult task of locating any form of seriousness in the inherited material, and its main choice in doing so is to make Goose’s death a cross Maverick has been carrying throughout his 30-plus-year flying career. Maverick is rediscovered working as a test pilot on the Darkstar, a prototype plane that can hopefully go to Mach 10. That’s, like, really fast, yo. When he learns the project is being shut down early by its overseer Rear-Admiral Cain (Ed Harris), Maverick, hoping to save the project and its employees from the scrapheap, takes the plane up and goes for broke, busting Mach 10 before crashing. Maverick earns a customary chewing-out, and it’s made clear he’s never risen above the rank of Captain because of his habits of insubordination, and only has a place in the Navy still thanks to Ice’s protection, as his former rival turned eternal pal is now an Admiral.

Maverick is nonetheless saved once again when, through Ice’s intervention, he’s called to TOPGUN to quickly school a select group of graduates for an extremely dangerous mission: they’re assigned to attack and destroy a clandestine uranium enrichment facility in some other (or the same) unnamed rogue nation, an installation built in a remote and rugged locale and heavily defended to the point that Maverick describes as needing “two miracles” to destroy. Maverick soon has to deal with blasts from the past upon returning to Miramar, most agreeably in the form of Penny Benjamin (Jennifer Connelly), one of his former girlfriends (who is mentioned in a running joke but not glimpsed in the first film) and the daughter of an Admiral who now runs a bar at North Island for pilots. More disturbing is the presence of Goose’s son Lt. Bradley ‘Rooster’ Bradshaw (Miles Teller), who has become a top pilot in spite of Carole’s wish for him not to follow in his father’s footsteps, a wish Maverick hesitantly tried to enforce by failing to recommend him for the Naval Academy when it was in his power. Maverick also chafes under the watchful eye of the Naval Air Forces honcho ‘Cyclone’ Simpson (Jon Hamm), who has no time for Maverick’s loose cannon antics, dammit.

Perhaps taking some heed of how angrily many fans took to the borderline contemptuous use of the classic Star Wars heroes in the new Disney-backed trilogy, and perhaps also thanks to Cruise’s ever-rigorous grip on how to manage his screen image, Top Gun: Maverick resists making sport of its hero’s condition of arrested development. When, in the opening minutes, Maverick is glimpsed sweeping the canvas cover off his old Kawasaki and dashing across the desert to work like he’s still the same flashy kid he was in the original, it’s not to service any humour but for the audience to delight in the way Cruise-as-Maverick still embodies their fantasies – in this case to still act like a 24-year-old when you’re pushing 60. Top Gun: Maverick’s most vital theme nonetheless quickly proves to revolve around fear of obsolescence, as Maverick stares down his last real chance to make a mark in the Navy. Maverick’s opening escapade is very obviously based on The Right Stuff, and director Joseph Kosinski acknowledges the model by casting Harris. Cain is nicknamed “The Drone Ranger” and wants to shut down the Darkstar specifically to channel its funding into his drone warfare projects, an offence to any self-respecting, old-school warrior. Thus, the onus of hierarchical command’s paternalistic authority and sometimes blind verdicts Maverick faced in the first film is here also conflated with the threat of the new, a newness that’s blandly impersonal, technocratic, and, well, just plain unmanly.

Not that piloting is strictly a manly business anymore: Maverick’s trainee squad also includes female pilots Natasha ‘Phoenix’ Trace (Monica Barbaro) and Callie ‘Halo’ Bassett (Kara Wang), as well as the braggart  Jake ‘Hangman’ Seresin (Glen Powell, stealing scenes with his smugly louche alpha act), whose rivalry with Rooster echoes Maverick’s with Ice. Hangman is more of a provocateur and bully than either of them were: Phoenix comments dryly that his call-sign stems from his habit of leaving his comrades “hanging out to dry” in tough situations. There’s even a dorky non-alpha named Bob – just Bob (Lewis Pullman) – who serves as Phoenix’s RIO. Throughout their training Rooster’s resentment of Maverick clashes with Maverick’s fear of sending Rooster off to his death, compounding the Bradshaw family tragedy. Hangman eventually catches wind of Rooster’s spurring loss, which also purposefully echoes Maverick’s in the first film. The film hits many of same basic story beats as the original, even going so far as to have Maverick sent on his way to TOPGUN by a bald character actor, before entering into some deliberate doppelganger moments, building to a strong vignette as Penny notices Maverick staring into the bar with a stricken look whilst Rooster within bangs out “Great Balls of Fire” on the piano for his pals just as his father used to. Arguably this is going a few steps too far in positing Rooster as a chip off the old block, considering he was an infant in the original film, but of course it gives both Maverick and the audience familiar with it a hot dose of instant nostalgic connection.

Top Gun: Maverick keeps in mind lessons from some of the more successful extensions of venerable franchises or “legacequels” of recent years. There are detectable likeness to Rocky Balboa (2006) and Creed (2014), Skyfall (2012) and Spectre (2015), Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008), and Kosinski’s own Tron: Legacy (2011), from which it repeats the idea of positing a generational interchange as, basically, a father-son tale. This is one of the best aspects of Top Gun: Maverick, but also an exasperating one, as the film avoids giving much information about just what kind of relationship Maverick and Rooster had as the young man grew up. Their relationship is also defined in a way that resembles the original film in skipping around the issue of responsibility: Rooster’s anger at Maverick for holding him back is used as a stand-in for the audience’s awareness of Maverick’s role in Goose’s death whilst also dismissing that as a lingering issue. The film also generally still exists to affirm Cruise as the fount of all awesomeness. When the hat is tipped to the original’s volleyball scene as Maverick and his students play football on the beach together, it’s mostly to draw the viewer’s admiration for how good Cruise’s physique is still, rather than celebrate those of any potential replacements, and Kosinski avoids filming with the same soft-core sheen that Scott so readily indulged.

Kosinski is one of the more interesting talents to break into big-budget filmmaking in the past decade or so. He started off as a would-be screenwriter but gained attention working with CGI on advertisements and cutscenes for video games, developing a fine eye, a sleek sense of style and function, but also emerging as a film director with a good feel for actors. He’s more classical and has a finer touch than Scott ever had – he cares that Cruise and Connelly seem to really get along on camera where in the original Cruise and McGillis seemed to be thrown together because of their clashing eye hues and bone structures. But he also lacks the fetishistic clamminess that clung to Scott’s imagery, the quality that, for better or worse, defined Scott as a premiere Dream Factory stylist. Scott’s film also belonged to an era when filmmaking was strongly attuned to physicality, which Scott took to typically hyperbolic lengths by coating just about every actor in sweat to catch all the lighting hues but also give the impression these are guys feeling extremes at all times. Top Gun: Maverick by contrast has no such feel for hothouse climes. Kosinski links his shots together better than Scott, but lacks his pictorial intensity. Kosinski settles for reproducing the opening of Top Gun in his edition, down to the backlit crew and planes and playing “Highway To The Danger Zone” on the soundtrack, as if this isn’t some epic years-later revisiting but maybe the first or second imaginary sequel that might have come down the pipeline in the late ‘80s if Cruise had been so inclined. Perhaps if I was more nostalgic for the first film this would pinion me with Pavlovian sense-memory, but apart from mildly liking the song it doesn’t have that leverage over me. This sort of thing is instantly reassuring to fans but it also signals just how derivative and unimaginative this take is going to be. The film doesn’t even have some of the eccentric qualities Kosinski invested in the generally underrated and trend-setting Tron: Legacy.

Similarly, Top Gun: Maverick also reproduces the original in failing to sketch the members of the pilots beyond a couple of basic traits. Kosinski tried his best to invest a definably Hawksian sensibility in his firefighter drama Only The Brave (2017) through portraying group dynamics in difficult, cut-above jobs: he failed – who wouldn’t? – but it was a nice try. He makes a similar play here, introducing the pilots in the trainee team in a lengthy sequence in Penny’s bar as they josh and jibe, compete and party. This sequence is also clever in the way it remixes Maverick’s meeting with Charlie in the original, with the young pilots mistaking Maverick for just another old fart, only to cringe when he strides out before them at TOPGUN. But despite Kosinski’s best efforts everyone remains locked into their specific, generic functions, barely fleshed out or given characteristics, except for Hangman, whose preordained act of redemptive rescue is both delivered with a dash of humour and again tips its hat to Maverick’s role in the original’s climax. And that’s ultimately both what distinguishes and hampers Top Gun: Maverick. Whilst it’s both much more of a real movie than its predecessor, it’s also a simple, straightforward, unambitious one. That sort of thing can be a relief in today’s blockbuster zone filled with multiverses and cross-promotional tie-ins, and it’s plain by the general, initial reaction it’s proven exactly that for many.

Still, I can’t help but wonder when the mass audience became so undemanding. Despite being a paean to unruly willpower, there’s nothing of the like to the film’s crisply ordered, very familiar plot progression, nor anything daring about its approach to its characters and their stories. Where the original at least made gestures towards complicating its morality and destabilising the aura of its hero before reconfirming it, Top Gun: Maverick only goes through the motions of character conflict. Maverick’s calls this time are far more insubordinate than they were in the first film but the movie assures us they’re the right ones (even in the opening vignette where he destroys a multimillion-dollar aircraft). His skirmishes with Rooster are ultimately straw-dummy headbutting. Maverick’s relationship with Rooster is essentially the same as his with Penny – they knew each-other back when, they’ve been through some stuff, and despite the superficial spurning and sparring they all still like each-other, and we don’t have to go to any effort making them connect. Those connections are just there.

Cruise and Connelly bring a decent level of chemistry to their scenes together, convincingly portraying a couple who have been around the block a few times but still have the fire of their younger selves guttering within. Kosinski works in some amusing flourishes that give some flickers of life: Penny takes Maverick out on her yacht and has to teach him basic seamanship despite him being the career Navy man, and later he has to sneak out of her bedroom to avoid giving the game away too early to Penny’s teenage daughter Amelia (Lyliana Wray), only to drop down directly before her expectant gaze and stern warning, “Don’t break her heart again.” None of this escapes the bonds of a standard-issue C-plot romance, and the scene where Penny consoles Maverick through a crisis of confidence feels like it copy-and-pasted from the script of Rocky Balboa, which also dug up an obscure character from the franchise opener to serve as the fill-in for a previous love interest. The film’s best scenes are calculated in divergent ways. The first comes when Maverick goes to visit Ice, who, like the actor playing him, has been debilitated and left almost voiceless by cancer. Maverick confesses his worries and doubts to his old comrade and defender, who tells him by computer that “it’s time to let go” when it comes to Rooster, and then huskily pronounces, “The Navy needs Maverick – the kid needs Maverick.” It’s virtually impossible not to be moved by this, even given what stick-figures the actors played in the original. Part of the new gravitas comes from time and affection for these two actors who remind us for good or ill that more time has passed since the original than anyone involved would care to remember.

Kilmer’s strength as an actor still glows under the ashes of illness, his bond with Cruise has a genuine feel, and the scene ends with a deft flash of audience-tickling humour when Ice then prods Maverick with the question “Who’s the better pilot, you or me?” and Maverick responds dryly, “This is a nice moment, let’s not ruin it.” Later in the film Ice dies from his illness, leaving Maverick defenceless before the military hierarchy, but he decides to take another risk after Cyclone decides to dump him and try a more conservative approach to the raid when it seems no-one can traverse the twisting terrain in the necessary span of time to avoid detection on the impending bomb run. Maverick takes a plane and puts all his piloting legerdemain on the line to prove it can be done, convincing Cyclone that only he can effectively lead the team into battle. This sequence is certainly on point, exploiting both the sophistication of the aerial photography and flying and the straightforward rah-rah of seeing the old hero get his mojo back and prove the world still bends before the awesomeness of Maverick. The actual bomb run proves almost a little too straightforward, despite the inevitable little foul-ups like failing laser guidance that requires so old-fashioned down-home shooting skill.

Both Top Gun movies are inarguably about celebrating the legend of American military strength. The first film, famously, generated a 500% spike in applications to become pilots. The narrative through-line of both movies, whilst preoccupied with Maverick as, well, a maverick, his arts nonetheless simply make him the apex predator in this kind of warfare. But the movies’ pitch also comes with the curious caveat that it is above all just that, a legend. That military strength is rendered a trope, as inconsequential in its way as the realities of Charlemagne’s empire to the stories of Roland or Dark Age Britain to the Arthurian Knights, or the Bengal Lancers in some 1930s Hollywood-made film extolling British imperialism. The abstraction of the enemy in both films, with their menacing black aircraft and face-covering helmets, underlines this legendary conception, even as it also highlights a worrying aspect of military thinking. The “enemy” becomes an amorphous thing, detached from all geopolitical immediacies, turning politics and war into an eternal duel pivoting from foe to foe. Both movies tap tension in anxiety that American military capability isn’t really that much – the MiGs in the first film and the “fifth generation” enemy fighters in the sequel are both described as being formidable and more sophisticated than the US fighter planes – and it’s the calibre of people flying them is what really counts. In the original Top Gun the enemy starts shooting first, and the American pilots are forced to fight for their lives, placing them not only in an underdog position but also in the right. In Top Gun: Maverick they’re engaged in a covert operation and pre-emptive strike.

The potential repercussions of this, and how the pilots feel about it, could be very interesting, but aren’t investigated at all. “Don’t think, just feel,” Maverick instructs Rooster and the rest of the team, which is supposed to relate purely to the required surrender to pure instinct in the heat of jet-powered flying, but also describes every other aspect of their roles. Ours not to reason why, etc. The similarity of Top Gun: Maverick’s basic plot to a host of older war movies is also hard to miss. The bombing run is closest in nature to Mark Robson’s The Bridges at Toko-Ri (1953), and indeed it’s basically the same film, down to Maverick getting shot down after successfully completing the seemingly impossible mission. Except that where Robson took a risk and kept the downbeat ending of James Michener’s source novel in which both pilot hero and his would-be rescuers were shot dead, Kosinski sets up the same situation but delivers crowd-pleasing stuff. Rooster returns to save Maverick from a helicopter that pursues him across the snowy wasteland, only to be shot down himself, forcing the duo to make their way across country together.

Teller, not an actor I’ve felt much liking for thus far in his career, proves surprisingly effective in his role, as far as it goes. With a scruffy moustache he looks enough like Edwards but with a slightly burlier, overcompensating edge. His interactions with Cruise are however more stated than felt. The last portion of the film sees Maverick and Rooster trekking across the snow-crusted landscape and electing to steal a vintage, surplus F-14 from a hanger bay. As far as fan-pleasing touches go this is again pretty good, setting up a finale that wrings excitement from this twist, as Maverick has to not just outfly but outthink two far more modern and formidable opponents in the ultimate dramatization of his career doldrums. But the situations are robbed of what should be some of their tense and immediate impact by the blankness of the setting and the absence of enemy soldiers. It remains as bland and plastic and straightforward as a mid-2000s video game. Which is a significant lack considering that what distinguishes Top Gun: Maverick up until this point is the remarkable beauty and immediacy of the flying sequences, which mostly eschew special effects enhancement as much as the first film and indeed go a few steps further, utilising the cutting-edge camerawork and lensing to show the audience the cast in the planes, and giving a potent sense of the thrills and dangers of weaving a path up a narrow gorge in a plane going hundreds of miles an hour.

The visual drama and immediacy of the flying and filming throughout have been immediately celebrated by viewers and critics alike, and it feels like it could be an important moment in the history of current big-budget cinema, if anyone cares to learn the lesson. At the very least, Top Gun: Maverick is, quite genuinely, an islet of old-school cinema values: putting good-looking people on screen and having them do interesting, spectacular things – an essentialist approach to making popular cinema going back to Pearl White. For all the advancing sophistication of CGI-era cinema, the human eye retains a capacity to tell what’s real from what’s bogus, as Hollywood has begun using its computers as a catch-all for all its efforts, but Kosinski and his crew and actors provide ample evidence that approach to making movies need not be the whole future. Top Gun: Maverick also manages the rare feat of improving enormously on a facile precursor and using it as a solid template, which might well be because that template in turn is rooted in primeval Hollywood lore, however bastardised. Top Gun: Maverick aims to summarise and provide apotheosis for Cruise as a star, but it does so in a manner that confirms just how much of the star’s ambition has waned, and how much the audience expects of him, taking this mostly bland, efficient, solid programmer as some sort of grand return.

Standard
1980s, Action-Adventure, Horror/Eerie, Scifi

Aliens (1986)

Director / Screenwriter: James Cameron

By Roderick Heath

If Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979) sounded in abstract like a movie unlikely to leave much of a mark on cinematic culture upon release, the sequel seemed if anything even more ill-starred. Alien had been a big hit, but attempts to make a sequel soon became bogged down in changing executive regimes at Twentieth Century Fox, lawsuits, and wrangling over returning star Sigourney Weaver’s salary. Despite having emerged as a potential major star thanks to Alien, Weaver had only had one major success since, with her strong if not essential supporting turn in Ghostbusters (1984). A potential answer to the question as to who would make the film, at least, provided when an employee at Brandywine Films, the production company of the first film’s producers and co-writers Walter Hill and David Giler, was on the lookout for interesting new scripts and found a pair by a young filmmaker named James Cameron. Cameron, a graduate of the film schools of Roger Corman and Italo-exploitation, had submitted a potential sequel for First Blood (1981) and his own original sci-fi work called The Terminator, and was busy trying to forget his first foray as director, Piranha II: The Spawning (1982). Hill and Giler, who had taken a chance with Scott and would continue later to hire interesting new talents for the series like David Fincher, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, and Joss Whedon, fed Cameron a basic idea of thrusting the first film’s heroine Ripley into a situation with some soldiers. Cameron hit the ground running in developing the project, but was considered too green to take on directing duties until he made The Terminator on a low budget with maximum industry and potent results.

Cameron was officially hired to make the Alien sequel, given a large but, even by the standards of the time, hardly enormous budget of $16 million, with his then-girlfriend Gale Ann Hurd, who had produced The Terminator, taken on in the same capacity. Cameron’s osmotic knowledge of sci-fi, which caused problems for The Terminator, also drove his interest in portraying spacefaring soldiers in the mould of writers like Robert Heinlein and A.E. Van Vogt. The sequel was filmed at England’s Pinewood Studios, and the 31-year-old Cameron upon arrival found himself facing a lot of scepticism from the British crew, as The Terminator hadn’t yet opened in the UK. Cameron’s own relentless approach to filmmaking, soon to become notoriously onerous, also ruffled feathers, but the film came in, as studios like so much, on time and budget. Aliens was finally released seven years after the first film, an eternity by pop culture standards, particularly in the 1980s. Nonetheless the film proved an instant smash with audiences, and one that would soon enough prove perpetually influential, to the degree that it doesn’t feel like hyperbole to say that Hollywood’s been trying to make it again and again for the past 35 years and never quite succeeding. All anyone who was young and impressionable thought when they first saw it, most likely on video, was that it was awesome.

Arguing over whether Alien or Aliens is the better film is one of those topics movie lovers enjoy fighting over, but what’s certain is that Cameron managed the very rare trick of emulating a great model in a manner that both suited his own sensibility and logically expanded on the original. Indeed, the significant problem that beset subsequent entries in the series was in the inability of any single entry to pull the same trick. Cameron had the unenviable task of mediating Scott’s stylistic approach, which had invested the first film with much of its unique power, and find something new to offer the audience through bringing his own sensibility to bear. The simple addition of an S to the title was all the promissory needed, as simple a declaration as any possible: where before there had been one alien, and the situation matched it, now there would be many, and Cameron follows through on the expectation to expand upon the world and the nightmares Scott depicted. The opening seems to take up where the first film left off, with Ripley drifting through deep space in the Nostromo’s shuttle, the Narcissus, ageless in cryogenic sleep. The craft is intercepted by a much larger salvage vehicle, with a remote robotic unit cutting through the escape hatch and scanning the shuttle before salvagers enter and find Ripley and the Nostromo’s cat Jones still alive. This prologue is exacting in returning the viewer to the mood and method of Alien, not just in the careful recreation of the shuttle set and the hushed, eerily romantic strains of James Horner’s scoring mimicking Jerry Goldsmith’s work, but in the rueful and world-weary comment by one of the rescuers, “There goes our salvage, guys,” immediately recapitulating that this is a universe inhabited by working stiffs where the profit motive looms large and deep space is hardly an escape route from the mundane, where the possibility of rescuing someone is a secondary concern when rounding up a drifting spacecraft.

Cameron continues to follow Scott’s model at first, artfully building a mood of quiet dread where for a vast chunk of the film little seems to happen, although of course every moment of charged intensity without payoff eventually gains it counterweight in thriller action. Such an approach to storytelling in a blockbuster feels all but impossible today, but it’s part of Aliens’ greatness, testifying to a near-vanished moment when crowd-pleasing on the biggest level could also still involve patient, careful storytelling and directorial conditioning. In the theatrical cut of the film, a full hour passes before any actual alien is seen on screen; well over an hour in the “Special Edition” director’s cut assembled for laserdisc in 1990, which stands now as the essential version. Cameron does break from Scott and follows a lead more reminiscent of Brian De Palma in a fake-out dream sequence early on, in which what seems to be the authentic memory of being told by Burke (Paul Reiser), a representative of the company that owned the Nostromo, that she was rescued after 57 years in cryosleep, in the medical bay of a huge space station orbiting Earth: Ripley’s probably real panic attack becomes a nightmare in which she imagines herself impregnated with one of the alien beings which starts to hatch inside her as it did in her fellow crewmember Kane, until she abruptly awakens, panicked and sweating, in the real medical bay. This dream both illustrates the deeply traumatic impact of Ripley’s experiences and provokes the audience’s presumed memory of the first film’s most infamous scene.

As made particularly clear in the Special Edition, Cameron’s script works initially to undercut any hope Ripley’s homecoming will be as positive as the last frames of Alien suggested. She finds herself jobless, disgraced, doubted, and wracked by traumatic nightmares, without friends or family to recognise her upon return, a relic and an exile torn out of her moment. Even her daughter Amanda, who was a young girl when she left, has since grown old and died, a wizened face gazing out at her still-young mother from a pixelated image, time, fate, and identity all in flux. As Burke comes to give Ripley this news, Ripley seems to be sitting in a garden, delivered into nature to recuperate, only for her to pick up a remote control and switch off the large TV screen feeding the illusion. Cameron’s wry visual joke here about technology and falsified environments feels oddly connected with his own extended act of providing such illusion in the fantasy world of Avatar (2009). Soon Ripley is unable to keep her temper when thrust before a review committee who plainly don’t buy her story about the infiltrating alien and seem more concerned by the destruction of the Nostromo and its cargo, and to an extent one can see their point. Finally Ripley is found to have acted negligently, has her flight officer licence cancelled, and learns to boot from the committee chair Van Leuwen (Paul Maxwell) that the planet where the Nostromo’s crew found the alien spaceship and its deadly cargo, now known as LV-426, has now been colonised and is undergoing terraforming.

Aliens immediately recapitulates the cynicism of Alien towards the company, whose canonical name, Weyland-Yutani (suggesting in very 1980s fashion the future convergence of American and Japanese corporate interests into one all-powerful gestalt), was first revealed in the Special Edition, scapegoating Ripley and reducing her to a menial with a tenuous grip on existence. Burke introduces himself by assuring her that “I’m really an okay guy,” which is a pretty good sign he isn’t: although he does seem at first like a solid advocate for Ripley, he nonetheless uses a practiced line of clichés in the course of trying to manipulate her into helping him when it appears she was right all along. Cameron allows images of the cast of the previous film to appear on the computer feed scrolling behind Ripley during the meeting, a salutary touch. But another of Aliens’ qualities is that it’s well-told enough to be a completely stand-alone entity, as the film carefully lays out Ripley’s survivor guilt and contends with the consequences of a situation in a manner most similar types of movie gloss over whilst also offering enough sense of what happened to make her fear as well as the continuing plot entirely comprehensible. Cameron alternates visions of Ripley awakening in stark, body-twisting terror with moments of glazed stillness as Ripley smokes and stares off into nothingness. One nice, barely noticeable touch sees her mane of wavy hair as sported in the first film still present in early scenes but later shorn away to a more functional do, suitable as Ripley is by this time working a labourer in the space station loading docks.

The Special Edition also sports an early visit to LV-426, allowing a glimpse of the colonist outpost, dubbed Hadleys Hope – the outpost’s place sign has “Have a nice day” scrawled in graffiti over the stencilled lettering. Futuristic all-terrain vehicles trundle by the pre-fab structures, buffeted by wind and dust in this tiny island of human civilisation located amidst roiling volcanic rock forms, located someplace between a Western movie town and the outer precincts of hell. A conversation between two administrators (Mac McDonald and William Armstrong) establishes their jaded and frazzled state of mind in running this pocket of habitation whilst an important plot point is conveyed: some company honcho has sent a message asking for a grid reference far out in the planetary wilds to be checked out, so wildcatter mining couple, the Jordens (Jay Benedict and Holly De Jong), have gone off in search of it. Of course, the Jordens come across the all-too-familiar wrecked horseshoe spaceship. I’ve always found this portion of the director’s cut interesting but ungainly: effectively atmospheric, it gives a glimpse of Hadleys Hope as a functioning zone of labour and community, with convincing touches like the playing children who invade the control area of the otherwise tediously functional outpost, and a glimpse of the Jordens as an example of the kind of people who would choose such an existence – tight-knit, working class, adventurous. But it dispels the highly effective sense of mystery and discovery sustained in the theatrical cut, has noticeably weaker acting, and it goes just a little too far in coincidence in presenting Rebecca ‘Newt’ Jorden (Carrie Henn), later to prove an essential character, as being at the epicentre of the nascent crisis. Newt screams in horror as she beholds the sight of her father with a facehugger gripping his head with remorseless biological purpose whilst her mother urgently sends out a mayday.

An unstated amount of time passes before Burke comes to Ripley’s domicile with a representative of the Colonial Marines, Lt. Gorman (William Hope), and tells her that contact with LV-426 has been cut off, and they want her to come with them as an advisor as a unit of Marines are sent to investigate. Ripley is at first, understandably, determined to not to go, resisting Burke’s arsenal of pop psychology cliché (“Get out there and face this thing – get back on the horse!”) and the offer of protection from the armed forces that Ripley already, plainly half-suspects might be vainglorious. Only another wrenching nightmare and a long, hard look in the mirror convinces Ripley there’s only one way out of labyrinth for her, and that only after calling up Burke and seeking assurance that the plan is to exterminate the aliens. Cut to the Marines’ spaceship, the Sulaco, cutting through deep space: the name, taken from a town in Joseph Conrad’s Nostromo, extends that running gag and the connection with Conrad’s grim contemplation of hearts of darkness and corporate-imperial enterprise. Cameron apes Scott’s creation of mood and tension by recreating the quietly gliding camera movements Scott explored the Nostromo with, now scanning the Sulaco’s interior. James Horner’s scoring, like Goldsmith’s employing horns and woodwinds to illustrate the eerie absence of life, interpolates faint drum taps that match the sight of military hardware dormant. One quality that invests Cameron’s early films with much of their populist muscle is the respect and feel he had, certainly earned in his time working as a truck driver in his early 20s, for working class characters, strongly defined by their little social units and camaraderie. It’s a quality Cameron shared with John Carpenter, his immediate forebear as the hero of neo-B movies, although with Cameron it’s arguable this quality arguably hardened into a kind of shtick by the time of Titanic (1997) and Avatar, and where Carpenter’s sensibility led him to increasingly ironic considerations of genre storytelling, Cameron knew which side his bread was buttered on. Nonetheless this lends weight to Cameron’s glancing portrait of life LV-426 and the attitudes of the grunts of the Colonial Marines, as well to Ripley herself. Weaver herself noted that Aliens is essentially one great metaphor for Ripley overcoming her trauma, albeit in a way that thankfully avoids overtness.

It’s important for Cameron that Ripley, originally portrayed in Alien as an officer who makes a slightly snooty impression on her more plebeian crewmates and irks others with her cautious mentality even as circumstances prove her right, here falls basically to the bottom of society as well as mental health. Burke, whilst assuring her there’s nothing wrong with it, tries to plants hooks in Ripley by commenting on her newly tenuous existence. What he doesn’t know, nor Ripley herself, is that her fall also occasions her rise, with particular consequence in the climax, where her specific skill and talent learnt on the loading docks arms her for the ultimate battle with her personal demon. The detachment of Gorman’s Marines, awakening along with Ripley and Burke from cryosleep, is quickly and deftly sketched individually and as a functioning team, particularly the dominant if not necessarily most genuinely strong personalities, including the motor-mouthed, enthusiastic Hudson (Bill Paxton) and the formidable Vasquez (Jenette Goldstein), as well as the quiet, calm Corporal Hicks (Michael Biehn), and the no-nonsense sergeant Apone (Al Matthews). The Marines are reassuring in their confident certainty of their own toughness and competence, and also their generic familiarity, combining classical war movie archetypes and modern sops: the unit includes women, a touch that illustrates Cameron’s cunning retrofitting of old movie templates for a new audience as well as suiting his own sensibility – Apone, who jams a cigar between his teeth within moments of awakening, is right out of a Sam Fuller. But the most crucial point of emulation is Howard Hawks, as the core team fuses together in to a functioning unit once the authority figures are dead or counted out and prove more effective once reconstituted as a semi-democratic whole. Ripley could be said to play the part of the traditional Hawksian woman, except Cameron inverts the old emphasis: she doesn’t have to adapt to the group, but the group fails because it doesn’t adapt like her. Cameron disposes of any dissonance as Hudson teases Vasquez, as she immediately starts doing chin-ups, with the question, “Have you ever been mistaken for a man?” to her immortal riposte, “No. Have you?”

The soldiers patronise Ripley not as a woman but as a civilian, something she gauges immediately, and she takes a certain wry, challenging delight in showing off when she clambers into a robotic loading suit that resembles an anthropomorphic forklift and casually handles a heavy load, much to Apone and Hicks’ approving amusement. Cameron drops in effective, intelligently accumulating character touches that give depth to the Marines, from Hicks falling asleep during the bumpy descent to the planet, to Vasquez and Drake (Mark Rolston) displaying their deep sense of camaraderie as masters of the big guns, drilling in choreographed movement and sharing their own sense of humour, and shades-wearing, ultra-cool shuttle craft pilot Corporal Ferro (Colette Hiller) spouting surfer lingo as she steers her craft down through the stormy clouds of LV-426. There’s also the android (“I prefer the term artificial person myself”) Bishop (Lance Henriksen), present as a standard member of the team. At one point Gorman gets Hicks and Hudson’s names mixed up, a hint at the speed with which the unit was formed that can also be taken as a wry acknowledgement of the difficulty in telling a bunch of young men with buzz cuts apart and of Gorman’s lack of deep investment in noticing the distinction. Hudson himself has an edge of bratty braggadocio that first vanishes when Drake forces him to give aid to Bishop in his party trick display of speed and precision with a knife, but resurges as he regales Ripley with the splendours of these “ultimate badasses” and their arsenal of cutting-edge technological weaponry. The soldiers and their tag-alongs eat before getting mobilised, and another facet of social tension manifests: the grunts notice Gorman doesn’t eat with them, another early sign he’s not going to prove much of a leader. Ripley, remembering Ash from the Nostromo, reacts with virulent unease when she realises what Bishop is, despite his Isaac Asimov-quoting reassurances.

Later, during a briefing for the unit, Gorman generically describes the creatures Ripley has encountered as a xenomorph – exterior-changer – in some official taxonomical flourish that has become since the general name for the malevolent species. After preparing for deployment, the unit is dropped into LV-426’s atmosphere and upon landing find Hadleys Hope seemingly deserted, with signs like half-eaten meals, in a nice nod towards the mystique of the Mary Celeste, betraying the suddenness of what befell the colonists. The Marines soon turn up signs that prove Ripley’s story, particularly patches of metalwork eaten through by the xenomorphs’ spilt acidic blood, and occupy the command centre which was hastily fortified for a last stand. Whilst exploring the deserted domicile, movement detected on their sensors proves to Newt, now bedraggled and deeply traumatised, but also having managed to survive thanks to her intricate knowledge of the domicile’s air duct system, gathered in her years playing in them. Ripley quickly takes on a motherly role for Newt. The team discover two live specimens of the “facehugger” strain that implants larvae in living hosts, kept in plastic tubes in the centre’s Med Lab, with a surgeon’s notes queasily reporting a patient died having one specimen removed. Finally the Marines, trying to find the missing colonists by looking for their subcutaneous tracking chips, locate them seemingly all congregated together in a space under the gigantic atmospheric plant, a fusion reactor-powered array busily making the planetary atmosphere breathable. But when the Marines venture into the plant, they quickly find signs they’re entering a xenomorph nest, and the one living human they find amongst the many eviscerated victims they find fused to the walls quickly dies as one of the larval aliens explodes from her chest. Within moments the unit is attacked by swarming xenomorphs, quickly reducing their ranks and setting the remnant to flight, and it falls to Ripley’s quick thinking to save them.

One aspect of Aliens, relatively minor on the dramatic scale but important to the deep impression made by its overall look and texture, was Cameron’s strong feel, bordering on fetishism, for both a realistic technological milieu, and for military lingo and tough-hombre attitude. Some of the hardware, like futuristic guns mounted on steadicam harnesses and the robotic loading suit, still remain exotic, but other touches, from the Marines’ helmet-mounted cameras to video phones, have become familiar, and all still seem part of a coherent vision of a future that’s at once hi-tech but also rough-and-ready, everything designed for hard encounters on far-flung rocks. That the Marines would use a “drop ship” to shuttle them to and from the planet rather than land a cumbersome spaceship like the Nostromo on LV-426, provides both a logical-feeling aspect of the mechanics of the enterprise whilst also echoing both World War II landing craft and helicopters in the Vietnam war, and also, eventually, provides an important component of the plot. The drop ship itself disgorges an Armoured Personnel Carrier, which the Marines use as a mobile protective base of operations. The visual sheen of Adrian Biddle’s cinematography, with omnipresent steely blues and greys, suggests that the atmosphere itself has soaked up the cobalt-hued lustre of gunmetal and industrial colossi, and the first sight Ripley and the Marines have of LV-426 is of the enormous atmospheric processor installation, powered by a fusion reactor, looming out of the grimy haze, and Hadleys Hope beyond, blurry and smeared in being seen through cameras.

Cameron’s use of such mediating technology also gives Aliens flashes of estranged menace, as the signs of battle and carnage the Marines find once they penetrate the interior of Hadleys Hope, bearing out Ripley’s accounts, are mediated through grainy, fuzzy camera feeds. The oft-emulated scene of Gorman steadily losing all connection and control as the Marines are attacked and the mission turns to lethal chaos intersperses immediate footage and glimpses conveyed through the way their cameras capture incoherent flashes of action and, in the cases of those grabbed or killed by the xenomorphs, blacks out: the technology, which seems to embrace and unite the humans, instead only testifies to their breakdown and impotence. This sequence, which sees the film finally combust after its long, nerveless build-up, cleverly reproduces a key aspect of Alien in the idea of the responses to the xenomorphs being limited by situation, as the nest is directly underneath the plant’s cooling systems, which means that firing off powerful weapons could critically damage the reactor and result in a nuclear explosion. Given the unexpected signs of sentient intelligence the xenomorphs display, too, this might not be a coincidence. This means the team is left almost defenceless as the aliens pounce, save flame throwers and Hicks’ shotgun (“I like to save this for close encounters.”), although Drake and Vasquez, having contrived not to hand over all their ammo, start blasting away wildly as the attack comes.

Cameron and the design team gave the xenomorphs a slightly different look for the film than the sleek anthropoidal shark look of the original model, kicking off a motif in the series where the creatures adapt to their environment. Here they’re distinctly more demonic with a more veinous-looking exterior, hobgoblins surging out of dark reaches they’ve decorated to suit themselves, an environ festooned with eviscerated corpses in a vision of a Dantean hellscape. They discover one living woman (Barbara Coles) who, as Ripley did in her dream earlier in the film, begs her would-be rescuers to kill her, but they’re too late to stop the larval “chestburster” alien from erupting from her chest. The Marines immediately incinerate it with a flamethrower, but this has the unfortunate effect of stirring the other xenomorphs from their nooks. Gorman, pale and sweating and delirious in his horror, quickly proves incapable of a response, so Ripley leaps into the seat of the APC and charges through the corridors of the processor plant, Horner’s furiously martial scoring booming out in announcing the gear change from cosmic horror to rumble-time action. Ripley’s frantic driving in her compelling sense of mission, APC careening against walls, and Gorman’s attempt to intervene only sees him fought off by Burke and then knocked silly by falling containers. Ripley crashes through a partition and reaches the Marines, but not in time to save Drake, who takes a face full of acid blood when Vasquez blasts a xenomorph about to launch on him. As it tries to force open the APC doors, Hicks jams his shotgun in a xenomorph’s mouth and cries “Eat this!” before blowing its head off – an all-time great cheer-out-loud flourish that deliberately makes mincemeat of one of the most disturbing aspects of the xenomorphs as seen up to this point, their double jaw.

One of Cameron’s most important storytelling inflections that recurs throughout Aliens is evinced here in near-throwaway fashion, as Hick’s heroic action nonetheless results in spraying acid blood burning Hudson’s arm. This motif of rolling crisis where gestures and actions constantly result in unintended consequences drives much of the story in a manner that feels realistically chaotic whilst also forcing it onwards in compulsive motion. Ripley manages to barrel the APC out through the plant door after running over a xenomorph that tries to break through the windscreen to get at her, at the cost of shattering the APC’s transaxle. The Marines call in Ferro and the drop ship to come pick them up, but a xenomorph gets aboard the ship and kills the crew, resulting in the drop ship crashing and colliding with the atmospheric plant, setting in motion exactly the inevitable nuclear meltdown they feared. Later in the film Vasquez and Gorman’s final action of blowing themselves up to avoid being eaten and take a few xenomorphs with them offers a moment of valiant kamikaze grace, but also causes another accident that forces Ripley to even more dangerous and strenuous actions.

Aliens tends not to be thought of as a horror movie, unlike Alien, which more obviously straddles the narrow gap between that genre and sci-fi. And yet it has just as much horrific imagery and atmosphere as its precursor, and indeed goes a few steps further, like showing the results of people getting sprayed with the acidic alien blood, and the imagery of the hive festooned with dead, eviscerated colonists. As well as the obvious Horror cues Alien subsumes – the “haunted castle” space ships, the blasted alien planet, the lurking monster, the presence of Ripley as an early and defining “final girl,” the strongly Lovecraftian tilt of the imagery and ideas – it exemplifies how Horror is a style or genre defined by tension derived from the fallibility of the feebly human before forces beyond their control. By contrast, action as a genre is defined by the dispelling of such forces through exemplars of human resilience and toughness: filmmakers don’t have some big, tough muscleman turn up in The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) or Halloween (1978) to kick the fiend’s ass, precisely because such stories require the heroes to be distinctly more vulnerable than the avatars of evil. Aliens can also count classic horror films like The Birds (1963) and George Romero’s Dead films as precursors in the theme of fighting violent inhuman besiegement.

But of course Aliens is also a war movie and an interstellar western, and the argument between the immobilising dread of horror and the proactive furore of these other genres is part of what makes Aliens endlessly engaging as a grand nexus of various storytelling traditions and inflections. As legendary as the film’s heroic beats have become, they wouldn’t be at all effective if Cameron wasn’t also so committed at walking his characters up to the edge of the truly nightmarish. The disparity can be traced to the divergent urges expressed in the roots of the two genres. Both go back to stories told around tribal campfires in a far-flung past. In such oral traditions, horror is based in the kinds of stories told to keep children close to the circle of light, warning balefully of the gleaming eyes watching from the dark, whereas those other genres are based in the tales told about great warriors and leaders, the defenders of the tribe, the ones strong enough to go out into that dark. Something Aliens does better than just about any other example I can think of is find the interlocutor of the two in the image of a protecting parent.

Cameron’s approach to the war movie, whilst containing character types going back to silent films like The Big Parade (1925), is nonetheless shaped by his own and his original audience’s cultural moment. Aliens presents a strongly nudging subtext for a popular understanding of the Vietnam War: the Marines, confident in their edge of both machismo (even the women) and technological superiority, as they descend into an environment which their foes, who prove far more intelligent and dangerous than expected and motivated by more coherent, communal urges, are all too good at exploiting. Cameron emphasises the motif through both casting – Matthews, in a casting touch anticipatory of R. Lee Ermey in the following year’s Full Metal Jacket, had been a real-life US Marine, and knew the required attitude inside out – and details like the future-but-not drop ships and the subsumed banter and attitude of Vietnam-era American soldiers. Cameron had success writing the post-Vietnam revenge and homecoming fantasy of Rambo: First Blood Part II and to a certain extent Aliens can be read as its distaff variation, with Ripley fulfilling the role of resurgent natural warrior. But Aliens feels closer to the more considered metaphorical meditation Cameron had woven into The Terminator, where Biehn’s Kyle Reese was easily read as a damaged returned veteran.  Aliens came out in the same year as Oliver Stone’s Platoon, and the two films’ similarities include a soldier’s-eye sense of disdain for officer school training grad lieutenants.

Aliens feels its way around all this in portraying Ripley’s reconstruction from PTSD-riddled human cargo to the essential and emblematic action heroine. Ripley’s place in finally and persuasively creating an archetype scarcely seen so unfettered since folkloric figures like Boudica, Kahina, or Jeanne Hachette has been very well covered ever since, but it’s worth noting on some of the things Cameron and Weaver manage to do through her that made her so vital. As noted, Cameron presents a largely gender-egalitarian world, mediating the traditional Hawksian testing of the outsider on the level of civilian versus soldier and grunt versus officer, cutting out any of the usual jockeying and bickering or tendencies towards what is now called “girlboss” politicking. Ripley’s wisdom, as in the first film, is a mere edge of awareness and forthrightness, and what seems to be her chief liability, the crippling horror of her prior experience with the xenomorph, proves to be a great advantage too, able to recover more quickly from the dizzying blows of their attacks and already knowing what kinds of behaviours will save lives and which will get them all killed. A crucial moment comes when she reacts to the horrible death of the cocooned survivor, recreating her own image of herself from her dream as impregnated and doomed, as Ripley grips her own stomach and grimaces in terrible sympathy. As far as catharsis goes, this is about as rough as it gets, but it nonetheless immediately precedes her resurgence as a fighter.

To this Cameron added a faith that Ripley’s specifically feminine qualities were potent virtues rather than discomforting appendages to be denied or ignored in the course of enabling her. Alien suggested maternal instinct in Ripley in her choice to save Jones at the risk of her own life, and to a certain extent Cameron merely elaborates on this streak in reiterating the lengths Ripley will go to to save those she cares about and in subtly reproducing the original film’s basic plot beats. Nonetheless Aliens is much more specific, and particularly in the Special Edition makes it clear that for Ripley such instinct is because being a mother is a significant and immediate part of her identity. This signals why she’s able to form such a quick and intense bond with Newt, and also underlies her instinct to race to the rescue of the Marines. It’s also apparent even in small but consequential gestures as when Ripley orders Newt to leave the APC’s command space when the cameras show the Marines exploring the hive and seeing colonist bodies festooning the walls: as well as the awful spectacle in and of itself, in which Ripley amusingly resembles a dutiful parents warding a child off from something verboten on TV, Ripley also knows well Newt might see her parents and brother amongst them.

Newt herself is in part a nod to the kinds of urchins who attach themselves to soldiers in classic war movies, whilst presenting an ideal surrogate daughter for Ripley in the way too she is an uncommon, alternative kind of survivor: at one point Ripley admonishes the ranting Hudson with a reminder that Newt found ways to subsist for weeks without help or training, so surely the ultimate badasses can take a few lessons. Newt wields a mixture of the authentically childlike – picking up the Marines’ idiom and gestures (“Affirmative!”) with mimicking delight – and an edge of premature awareness and gravitas, in her certainty that the Marines’ firepower “won’t make any difference” against the aliens, and her nudging reminder to Ripley that her doll Casey isn’t cursed with scary dreams unlike herself and Ripley because “she’s just a piece of plastic.” It’s a measure of the depth of Weaver’s performance, and probably the reason why she gained a Best Actress Oscar nomination for the role, a rarity for such a genre movie, in that she’s coherently able to shift between more fearsome postures and gently coaxing maternal interactions with Henn’s Newt, in utterly convincing vignettes like her murmuring ruefully, after dabbing away some dirt on the girl with some cocoa when she’s first discovered, “Now I’ve done it, I’ve accidentally made a clean spot here – now I guess I’ll have to clean the whole thing.” Newt is of course also, like Jones, a plot device, providing a motive for Ripley to not only survive, but to take the kind of risk usually reserved to heroes of classic mythology.

Meanwhile the rest of the humans interact with a deft combination of acting and writing to the point where they’re more precisely drawn than many another film’s lead character, from Paxton’s brilliant slide from posturing wiseass to whiny hysteric before finally going out in a blaze of authentic glory, to Goldstein’s strident Vasquez demanding of the injured Gorman, “Wake up, pendejo, and then I’m gonna kill you!” Henriksen, a familiar enough character actor in movies including Dog Day Afternoon (1975) and Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977), had been the star in Cameron’s Piranha II: The Spawning and his initial proposed casting for the role of the Terminator. Cameron’s fondness for him was justified as playing Bishop finally boosted him to cult acting hero status, in part because he expertly walks a line of studied blandness that sustains the question as to whether Bishop is another cyborg monster like Ash – he has a similar awed regard when studying their anatomy – or a good guy. The answer finally comes when he makes a quip, “I may be synthetic, but I’m not stupid,” when he volunteers for a risky mission only he can likely pull off, and it’s impossible to doubt him henceforth, even when he seems to abandon Ripley and Newt to their fate.

Biehn, hastily brought aboard the movie to play Hicks after James Remar was forced to drop out, finished up playing a similar role to the one he had in The Terminator as an ideal male hero who nonetheless finishes up too battered and scarred to be of much help to the heroine as she faces evil alone. Hicks however isn’t a damaged case like Kyle Reese was, but rather a quiet, intense dark horse who clearly isn’t eager to be the star: “Yeah…yeah,” he murmurs ruefully after Ripley points out he’s now in charge, a marvellous little moment for Biehn. But within moments, after being incidentally belittled by Burke, Hicks readily commits to command and to implementing Ripley’s suggestion of aerial nuclear bombardment of the area – “Only way to be sure” – in a way that suddenly confirms he’s the rare character both smart enough and sufficiently untroubled by ego to know the right idea when he hears it, and so is precisely the leader the crisis needs. The crash of the drop ship foils this plan, and obliges the team to fortify themselves in the command centre, sealing up every conceivable door, pipe, and conduit, planning to wait out the 17 day interval before another rescue mission is sent. But Bishop soon tells them they can’t wait that long: the drop ship’s crash damaged the atmospheric processor and it’s now on a countdown to explosion. Bishop agrees to venture outside to patch into the outpost’s transmitter and remote pilot a second drop ship down from the Sulaco. During the wait, Ripley and Newt find themselves trapped with two freed facehuggers specimens, and are only rescued by the Marines in the nick of time. Ripley knows full well this must have been orchestrated by Burke, who she already knows both ordered the search for the alien ship and wants to take the specimens back to Earth, and saw a good way of getting what he wants whilst silencing Ripley. And, incidentally, everyone else.

The reveal that Burke is a villain isn’t at all surprising, as it was pretty compulsory for a 1980s genre film to have an asshole yuppie. It could be said his presence dials down the Kafkaesque portrait of corporate insidiousness in Alien to something more containable: rather than operating on the company’s behalf Burke’s self-defence suggests it’s his own opportunism driving his actions. Still he’s the avatar of the same forces at work, and Reiser makes the character effective in the way he carefully shades Burke’s purposefully inoffensive façade with his unblinking believe-you-me stare and air of practiced facetiousness, a film of sweat greasing his upper lip as he labours to keep up his bullshit in the face of the Marines’ murderous anger. His execution is only staved off by a sudden power outage, a failure that tells Ripley the xenomorphs are on the move with purpose, much to Hudson’s disbelief (“They’re animals, man!”), but quickly confirmed by the team’s motion detectors. Cameron’s use of the detectors, pulsing with ever-increasing pitch and squirming blurs on their readout screens confirming the horde’s approach, to generate tension is peerless, whilst also returning to the ambiguity of technology as a filter for experience. The relentless march of the monsters towards the command centre remains invisible and illogical as they seem to be right upon the humans but without any sign of them, until the penny drops and Ripley turns her gaze upwards towards the panelled ceiling – the one, forgotten conduit for invasion. The pure essence of the monster movie and everything the mode encompasses comes in the next moment: Hicks is boosted up to lift a panel and turn a torch down the duct, glimpsing the hellish vision of a horde of xenomorphs crawling inexorably closer.

Aliens created a template that young and eager genre filmmakers, and some not-so-young ones, would imitate exhaustively in years to come. The hard, chitinous look imbued upon the tech and environs would be endlessly imitated along with the plot patterns and lines of defiant dialogue. Cameron’s editing of the action scenes is quick almost to the point of being subliminal in places, generally to mask limitations of the special effects but also amplifying the sense of the blindsiding speed with which situations turn on a dime from anxious calm to life-and-death conflict. And yet it’s also still entirely lucid and precise in filming and framing. Cameron’s repeated, forceful use of point-of-view shots goes beyond the fascination with layered media, and provides much of the film surging, immediate energy – barely noticed in the rush of events as when he cuts between Burke’s viewpoint as he shuts the door sealing off himself from Ripley and Newt and theirs as they see the door close, and repeated with more bravura towards the end as Cameron adopts Bishop’s pilot’s-eye-view as he barrels the drop ship through plumes of smoke and fire amidst the jutting steel forms in fleeing the atmospheric processor. The sequence of Ripley and Newt trapped in the Med Lab is particularly great in exploiting what the audience both knows and doesn’t know as well as offering a moment of pure situational thrill-mongering. Cameron reiterates the constant motif in the film and its predecessor involving waking and sleeping and the blurred ground between dream and nightmare, as Ripley, who has fallen asleep with Newt who by habit hides under her bed from the very real monsters, awakens and spies the toppled tubes that contained the facehugger specimens, shifting from an idyllic portrait of her bonding attachment into imminent danger and threat, as well as invoking the basic parental role, as the person whose presence allows a child to sleep untroubled.

Ripley quickly finds they’ve been locked in, and Cameron cuts to a shot of Burke switching off the security camera in the Med Lab unnoticed by the Marines. Hicks has given Ripley one of the pulse rifles after showing her how to use it, but it’s been lifted and left on a table outside. Ripley has to find a way of attracting attention, a problem she solves quickly enough by setting off the fire alarm. Hicks and the other Marines dash to the rescue, but how long it will take them to get there is unknown. Ripley has gained their attention, but has made the situation even more nightmarish as infernal red fire lamps glow, the harsh siren buzzes and robs any advantage of listening for the creatures, and water pours down: will the water slow down the facehuggers, or do they love it? For those who had seen Alien, the facehuggers are known to be swift and akin to an instant death sentence once attached, but just how fast they can move and whether they can be outwitted is still moot. Cameron builds to the sear-itself-into-your-cortex shot of the facehugger scuttling after Ripley with obscene multi-limbed motion before it springs on her, wrapping its tail about her neck, Ripley trying to find off its furiously wriggling form, whilst Newt manages to pin the other one’s tail against the wall as it comes for her. Only then does Cameron cut to the sight of the Marines outside, having arrived in the meantime: their appearance is both logical but also a non-sequitir, a startling break from the suffocating moment of dread. Hicks tells the others to shoot out the plexiglass window before launching himself through it in a moment of fearless bravura, and the Marines earn a moment of heroic effectiveness as Hudson saves Newt whilst Hicks, Gorman, and Vasquez untangle the one on Ripley and toss it into a corner to be blasted to bits.

The final invasion by the xenomorphs likewise exploits the red emergency lighting to signal the change from placidity to hellish urgency, as monstrosities drop from the ceiling and erupt from the floor. Burke momentarily prevents the team’s retreat by locking a door, seemingly hoping the team will be killed so he can meet up with Bishop and escape, only to find himself trapped with one of the monsters. It’s a measure of the craftsmanship brought to bear in the film that this sequence manages to evoke the authentic chaos of such a battle as the jangling monsters spring and surge in the bloody red light, whilst also capturing iconic vignettes for its heroes – Hudson taunting the xenomorphs as he guns them down, Vasquez blasting them with her grenade launcher, with Horner’s most epic strains blasting all the way. Hudson, Vasquez, and Gorman all die in the rear-guard defence. Cameron allows each to go down as the reborn absolute badass they always sought to be, fighting to the last round with all their ferocity and grit brought to bear, Hudson dragged into the abyss still screaming out curses at the monsters, Gorman blowing himself and Vasquez up when he realises they’re trapped and can’t escape.

But it’s also worth noting that their gestures are also self-defeating, dying in part by their own heroic pretences as well as the monsters, as none of them quite has the sense to follow Newt at top speed: the little girl holds the key to their salvation in knowing the way through the air vents to the landing field. In this regard Cameron echoes something of the romantic fatalism of H.G. Clouzot’s The Wages of Fear (1953), and indeed its source novel with its last line describing its ill-fated hero as one killed by his own ferocious determination to live. The way Vasquez wails, “Oh no!” after she’s crippled by some of the xenomorph blood, is a perfect signature for her character, registering both fury at herself and terror in finally being crippled, before the simultaneously stirring and ironic sight of her and Gorman locked together in a moment of perfect fulfilment in the second before Gorman’s grenade goes off, and they vansish in a fireball. Problem is, this götterdamerung for warriors results in a shockwave that makes Newt fall into a vent and plunge to a lower level in the building, demanding Hicks and Ripley pursue her. By the time they reach her she’s been snatched away to the hive by a xenomorph, and Hicks is badly burned by acid blood killing another. Ripley manages to help Hicks reach Bishop as the drop ship arrives, but insists she has to back into the hive to rescue Newt. Cue perhaps the all-time greatest variation on a standard action movie vignette, as Ripley arms herself to the teeth in preparing for the venture whilst Bishop flies her into the atmospheric processor, which is beginning to show signs of destabilising in the face of imminent meltdown.

Everything up until this point has been great, but Aliens kicks to a higher level, reaching the innermost core where those divergent ancient storytelling traditions fork, in this sequence. This is of course in large part to the converging elements of cinema – Weaver’s performing, the shooting and editing, Horner’s big brass-and-drum scoring – but also because of the way everything seen before in the film and its predecessor unites into one, pure spectacle. Much like the following year’s Predator, the climax dispenses with all social-animal preliminaries and gets down to a basic, primal rite, the hero who must venture into the bear’s cave and risk tooth and claw. But with the corollary that Ripley’s motive is not symbolic or general, but a specific, deeply personal expression of maternal urge that overrides every other instinct in the existential manual. The deep-flowing fairy tale motif returns as Ripley uses flares like the breadcrumb trail in Hansel and Gretel, whilst on a more mythic level she combines in herself Theseus and Ariadne heading into the Labyrinth on the hunt for the minotaur, Perseus and Andromeda, St George and the princess. The processor plant, glimpsed as Bishop flies into it, has become a gothic monstrosity, spitting lightning and fire, the most literalised edition of William Blake’s vision of dark satanic mills as the blight of industrialism conceivable. All classical storytelling kneaded into modern psychological theory, and it’s working on that level too, as Ripley has also found the overriding urge that makes all inner demons ineffective. At the same time, Cameron lets the audience see Ripley thinking as well as acting: the weaponry she assembles – taping a flamethrower to a pulse rifle, readying the flares – is, far from heedlessly vainglorious, instead utilising every particle of knowledge she’s gathered about her foes and their home, from their physical traits to their numbers, which by this point if hardly decimated must be greatly thinned, and with the majority of the remaining host left behind in the abandoned command centre. In short, even as Ripley finally becomes an action hero unbound, she’s still very much the character she’s been portrayed as, quick on her mental as well as physical feet. If Cameron had by and large eased back on the protean erotic imagery Scott wielded by way of H.R. Giger’s art in the earlier part of the film, he brings it back with a more sickly, suggestive edge in the sight of Newt swathed in hardened cocooning gel that looks like ejaculate, a xenomorph egg peeling open in rather penile fashion, giving this vignette a coded quality of a wrathful mother coming to save her child from a paedophile.

The symbolism inverts nonetheless as Ripley successfully locates Newt and tears her free only to stumble upon the monstrous queen, a great bony crone with a gross, pendulous egg-sack spitting out monstrous seed. Ripley has found her own interspecies doppelganger – the queen’s squarish jaw even seems to have been deliberately moulded on Weaver’s – as another fiercely protecting mother, but this one diseased, spawning misbegotten devils. The two communicate in gesture, as Ripley gives a spurt of fire from her flamethrower, just enough to make clear to the queen she’ll set fire to her eggs if she lets the xenomorphs lurking in the wings come out, and the queen bids them retreat. The tentative little truce ends when one of the eggs opens: Ripley gives a tilt of her head, grits her teeth, and starts blasting. It’s impossible not to share Ripley’s raw, punishing, near-mindless expression of exterminating rage, and yet as with the Marines earlier, her warlike self-purgation is self-defeating, as she wastes most of her arsenal destroying a hive that will be blown up anyway in a few minutes, making herself very close to a victim of new warrior bravura. Tellingly, Ripley aims all her rage and grenades at the queen’s vestigial egg-sack rather than her exoskeletal body, and after Ripley flees with Newt, the alien queen rips free of the sack and follows, bent on vengeance. Ripley finds Bishop seems to have flown off with the drop ship, seemingly confirming Ripley’s anxiety about Bishop, and in the moment of ultimate confrontation with both parental and childhood fear, Ripley tells Newt, “Close your eyes, baby,” as the alien queen emerges from the shadows of an elevator. Except, of course, Bishop suddenly flies the drop ship into view and scoops up the two humans, before fleeing at top speed, just managing to escape the colossal explosion that consumes Hadleys Hope and everything around it and zooming back into the stars.

Cameron makes a dry nod towards a Spielbergian take on a cinematic fairy-tale motif, as he shifts from the cataclysmic vision of the explosion to the sight of the drop ship zooming up into the stars, Horner’s music now offering gently melodic, resolving sounds at a juncture that for most movies would mark the end of the bad dream. But this being Cameron, of course, he has a trick up his sleeve as he did with the emerging cyborg in The Terminator and with the same basic concept of an inimical form of intelligence simply refusing to observe the niceties of what a human would justifiably call enough, as well as repeating and expanding upon the finale of Alien. Right at what seems to be the hearty final moment of conciliation between Ripley and Bishop, who’s delighted by her praise, the hiss of burning acid and Bishop suddenly contorting in pain announces a last act as the alien queen crawls out of a landing gear bay, having skewered Bishop on its horny tail, before ripping him in half. Being as he is an artificial person Bishop doesn’t expire from such treatment, but the vision of both Hicks and Bishop left too injured to help Ripley not only demands she find a way to battle the monster alone but also carries potent metaphorical aspects – Cameron’s viewpoint of a fatally injured idea of masculinity, exposed in both the classical hero Hicks and the motherly, slightly fey male Bishop, whilst playing nice in that they’re both nobly wounded rather than toxic and imperious like the Terminator, nonetheless demands a new kind femininity evolve to take its place, and with the suggestion that the last act of all wars is ultimately fought by women, those who have to deal with the subtler but more pernicious monsters it unleashes.

Bishop’s sundering is also a bravura moment of visual ruthlessness, a shock twist that resembles Ripley’s discovery of the alien on the Narcissus in the previous film and also a last, needling reminder that the material is still mean stuff. Whilst the alien queen hunts for Newt, who tries to hide under the docking bay floor gratings, Ripley emerges wearing the power loader suit, augmented to a level of power equal to the monster. Okay, altogether now, three…two…one: “Get away from her, you bitch!” An unnecessarily rhetorical flourish, probably, given we’ve already seen the idea illustrated thoroughly, but still one of the most delightful moments in the genre film canon, and the signature for Ripley: this isn’t Ripley the damaged survivor or Ripley the hysterical berserker but the ultimate version, powered up with steel fists, completing the journey in now making clear it’s the monster that should be scared. Later, in Titanic and Avatar, Cameron would more conspicuously re-devote himself to what could be called new-age editions of imagery and themes echoing out High Romantic art and literature of the 1700s and 1800s, where artist-heroes rewrite reality with passion, flee collapsing idols, and bestride pristine wildernesses, a twist that might have seemed odd given his penchant for technology as a device both liberating and frightening.

But it becomes clearer in watching Cameron’s oeuvre that the dark side of technology lies in its potential, indifferently destructive effect on living systems, the appeal of it lies in restoring the kind of heroic agency associated with classical art forms. Thus Ripley repurposes a tool, one associated previously with her humiliation and reconstruction, into a new kind of knightly armour, able to step up to the nastiest demon lurking in Beelzebub’s caverns and sock it in the face. Finally, in the titanic struggle that follows, she manages to dump the creature into an airlock and blast it out into the same void as its predecessor, although not before the queen, with its species’ characteristic will to survive, keeps hanging on to Ripley to the bitter end. Finally Ripley seals up the ship as the bifurcated Bishop clings onto the flailing Newt, who finally, unthinkingly anoints Ripley as “Mommy!” as they’re finally united. Cameron returns to the fairy-tale motif for a final image of mother and daughter delivered back to their dreams, perhaps no better than before, but at least now just dreams.

Standard
1980s, Auteurs, Fantasy, Horror/Eerie, War

The Keep (1983)

Director / Screenwriter: Michael Mann

By Roderick Heath

The Keep’s very first shot, as if tracing the path of a falling angel, describes a seemingly endless downwards pan, descending from grey, storm-ridden sky to jagged pine forests clinging to the flanks of soaring mountains, before finally settling on a convoy of grey-painted Wehrmacht trucks labouring their way up a narrow mountain pass, set to the throbbing, alien textures of Tangerine Dream’s score evoking both the roll of thunder and the chugging of the straining motors and mimicking the narcotising effect on the German soldiers rolling up the road. A cigarette lit in ultra-close-up, a shot of caterpillar tracks churning along the gravelly road, swooning visions of the mist-drapped mountain peaks. Immediately, director Michael Mann, making his second feature after Thief (1981), deposits the viewer within a dreamlike space, offering a classical Horror genre setting and motif in journeying from the mundane world into one of oneiric remove, but wrapped not in traditional genre style cues, but a hard shell of burgeoning 1980s high style cinema. The year, a title card informs us, is 1941, with the Nazi onslaught reaching its climax with armies closing in on Moscow. In this place, the Dinu Pass in the Carpathian Mountains, Captain Klaus Woermann, embodied in rugged, sagging melancholy by Jürgen Prochnow, leads his men into a tiny Romanian hamlet clinging to the jagged walls of the pass’s highest reaches, to occupy and garrison an enigmatic medieval fortification there.

Actually entering the village, penetrating a veil of mist to behold a medieval hamlet, sees Mann shifts to slow motion and the score to spacy, mysterious strains as Woermann surveys this piece of another, older world cut off from the sturm-und-drang of the warlike moment and, seemingly, whole other intervening centuries. And the Keep itself, a featureless trapezoidal block of grey brick, looming over the village and a deep gorge. One of Woermann’s men complains about this unimportant detail when Germany’s soldiers are near to total victory, but Woermann assures him the real fighting is over and Germany is now master of Europe: “Does that enthrall you?” he enquires with theatrical enthusiasm. Woermann’s own ambivalence over fighting in a war that most certainly does not enthral him is something that resolves even as his situation becomes ever more mysterious and terrible. Woermann and his men enter the Keep and begin setting up their garrison. But Woermann notes, however, the building is not a defensive structure, but designed like a prison. The walls are lined with 108 silvery, crucifix-like markings that the Keep’s caretaker, Alexandru (Morgan Sheppard), warns are not to be touched, a taboo he insists upon with deadly seriousness although he doesn’t know why and can’t report any bad events in the Keep save the general refusal of visitors to stay through the night: “Then what drives people out in the middle of a rainy night?” Woermann questions. “Dreams?” the caretaker replies.

Since the time of its release, The Keep could scarcely seem more benighted. Despised by F. Paul Wilson, author of its source novel, it was also soon disowned by Mann, furious at the way Paramount Pictures threw the film away after losing faith in the project. Special effects master Wally Veevers died during production, leaving the planned spectacular finale in uneditable disarray. Finally the film proved a calamitous bomb at the box office and was generally dismissed by critics, although many Horror genre fans and scholars grasped its unique and fascinating aesthetic. Mann’s active role in keeping the film hidden away, refusing to let it be released on DVD for many years, only helped its slow accruing of near-legendary mystique for anyone who could catch it on TV or had access to its early VHS and laserdisc releases. The Keep has evolved into one of my absolute favourite films, and its evident flaws are an indivisible part of its compelling makeup. After success with the telemovie The Jericho Mile (1979), Mann made a terrific debut as a feature filmmaker with Thief, a movie that commenced Mann’s career-long aesthetic preoccupation with trying to blend classical genre cinema with a hypermodern, dramatically distilled approach, trying to place as much of the weight of the storytelling and ambience fall on his rigorously constructed imagery that often nudges a kind of neo-expressionistic minimalism. This approach generally suits his preference for tough, stoic heroes, beings who still have some of the toey instinctiveness of forest animals even in the densest urban jungle.

When, for his second film, Mann chose to make a Horror movie, he took a similarly essentialist approach, trying to make a movie describing the idea of a Horror movie as much as the thing itself. He stripped out almost all of the background lore of Wilson’s novel, trying to convey a sense of dread and lurking menace through careful visualisation and weave a fable of pure menace and mood. Mann shot most of The Keep in Shepperton Studios whilst building the Romanian village and the Keep’s exterior in a Welsh quarry, but Mann’s notorious later habit of causing budget overruns with his exacting shooting style was already emerging. But, again as he would later, Mann’s exacting reach for effect justifies itself. The early shots see him weaving his style in a series of elusive directorial flourishes: that opening shot conveys place and time but relentlessly pushes the eye down a vertical access, giving little sense of the surrounds. A lake surface mirrors back the sky, turning the grand space into a trap. Woermann’s first glimpses of the village are dreamy, punch-drunk, barely liminal. The Keep itself is hardly glimpsed apart from the looming grey gateway, with only two proper wide exterior shots of the structure in the whole film. This approach lets Mann skirt location and special effects shortfalls, of course, but also conditions the viewer to a zone unmoored from any sure sense of geography and spatial stability, just as Woermann beholds a scene out of the Middle Ages, unmoored in time.

The Keep itself presents a cultural, architectural, and military conundrum: the locals who maintain it have no real idea of how old it is, who pays for its upkeep, or what its purpose it ever served. Woermann’s soldierly eye notices that for what seems to be a defensive structure it’s built inside out, with easily scalable exterior walls and the largest, strongest stone blocks inside, more like a prison. Rumours start to grip Woermann’s more avaricious men, including Pvt Lutz (John Vine), that the crosses are made of silver and other treasures might be hidden in the Keep: Lutz tries to break off one of the crosses only to receive watch detail for a week from the irate Woermann. During the night, as Lutz stands bored and lonely watch, one of the crosses begins emitting an eerily bright blue light, and looking closer at it Lutz realises that this cross does indeed seem to be silver. He fetches another man on watch, Otto (Jona Jones), and the two men claw out the granite block the cross is affixed to, revealing a narrow tunnel that Lutz crawls into. Mann’s stylistic oddness continues in this sequence, as he distorts the avaricious franticness of the two soldiers with slow-motion shots of them running to and fro amidst hazily backlit shots, all bound together in strange manner by the use of Tangerine Dream’s theme “Logos” on the soundtrack, imbuing a propulsive mood, if retaining a spacy, alien texture inherent in that classic synthesiser sound, of a unit with Mann’s recurrent passion with intensely rhythmic image-audio match-ups, the flagrant anachronism of the scoring heightening the disorientating texture.

Lutz crawls into the passage and dislodges a block, only to almost fall into a vast, dark space beyond, saved because he had Otto tie a strap to his waist. In one of the greatest shots in all of fantastic cinema, or cinema in general, Mann’s camera retreats a seemingly infinite distance away from the soldier’s dwindling torch into the furthest depths of the abyss, a space which contains mysterious ruins of some ancient structures. Once the long pullback shot finally concludes, a surge of light swoops into the frame and coalesces into ball of light that rises up to meet the faint torchlight. Otto is almost pulled into the tunnel by a sudden, violent jerking, and when he drags his comrade out, finds only a steaming, headless trunk, before being flung away with bone-shattering force as a mysterious power floods out of the shaft and infests the Keep. Mann cuts with headlong force to the antipathetic force stirred to action: Glaeken Trismegestus (Scott Glenn), awakening in a bed somewhere in Greece, eyes glowing and surging energy drawing into his body, stirred by the eruption of the entity in the Keep. Glaeken rises from bed, packs his belongings including a long wooden case, and heads to the docks of Piraeus where he bribes a fishing boat captain to take him to the Romanian coast: Mann films the boat’s voyage into dawn light in a languorously beautiful vignette.

Walking the line between intriguing hints and frustrating vagueness is always a tricky art, and for many Mann went too far with The Keep. But it’s precisely the film’s allusive sense of arcane and ageless struggle, and its near-ethereal, carefully reductive vision of perfect forms of good and evil, that makes it something unique, the hints of cosmic battles and unknowable history at the heart of the story, a vast mythic-emblematic Manichaeism pointedly set against the more immediate and definable evil of Nazism, the heart of darkness nested inside the European übermenschen dream. Paramount might well have hoped the film would prove a Horror movie variant on the supernatural anti-Nazi revenge fantasy of Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981). Most broadly and obviously, the film presents a variation on the classic motif of a haunted castle. Wilson’s novel presented a Lovecraft-tinted rewrite of that founding tome of modern Horror, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, a work that’s retained much of its popularity for the way, published just before the dawn of the 20th century, it charted so many of the oncoming age’s faultlines. Wilson made more literal the connection between Dracula and the paranoid impression of dread power and evil rising in the east of Europe it articulated, by moving the setting to World War II and drawing together crosscurrents of folklore and politics at the moment.

Mann, whilst divesting much of the novel’s superstructure, had his own take on the same idea evidently in mind. In particular, Mann seemed interested in investigating through visual and thematic refrains the link suggested by German film historian Siegfried Krakauer in his book From Caligari to Hitler between the psychic anxieties communicated in the imagery of classic German Expressionist films and the oncoming fascist mentality. The German Expressionist era was replete with contradictions, like future Nazi Paul Wegener’s obsession with the Jewish myth of the Golem that caused him to make two films on the subject, and the Nazi leaders’ worship of the monumental aesthetic laid down by the half-Jewish Fritz Lang. Krakauer’s ideas had their highly dubious aspect, but Mann found how to put them to dynamic use, making The Keep perhaps the closest thing anyone has made to a truly modern take on the Expressionist Horror style, and tethering it to a story that specifically offers meditation on the Nazi mindset and questions of how to resist it. The story purposefully unfolds simultaneous to WWII’s supreme tipping point of the furthest Nazi advance during the invasion of the Soviet Union, and the drama enacted in the Keep is both far more intimate than the war and far larger, a confrontation of primeval forces.

Mann’s casting notably has the Eastern European characters speak with American accents, to emphasise their distinctness from the Germans, who are played by a mix of British, Irish, and German actors. Mann also shifted away from the novel’s use of vampirism, which he found silly: once the entity trapped within the grand cavern is unleashed into the Keep, it begins killing Woermann’s men by absorbing their life essence, leaving charred and withered corpses. The entity, appearing after a time as a writhing pillar of fog around a stem of skeletal parts and blood vessels, builds substance out of its harvested victims. The idea of a monster slowly assembling itself a physical form echoes back to Piers Haggard’s The Blood on Satan’s Claw (1971) and would be used again in Stephen Sommers’ The Mummy (1999). Woermann’s messages of distress soon bring not relocation as he hopes, but an SS Einstaz Kommando detachment under the command of Sturmbahnführer Kaempffer (Gabriel Byrne), which steams into the village, takes a number of hostages, and shoots them before their horrified fellow villagers. Kaempffer promises of more retaliation against them if any more Germans are killed. The irate Woermann, who is ordered by Kaempffer not to interfere, points out that Kaempffer has just killed citizens of an allied state.

Kaempffer nonetheless begins using all his arrogant prowess as a bully and killer to get to the bottom of the mystery, using terror tactics to root out presumed partisans. “Something else is killing us,” Woermann states in riposte: “And if it doesn’t care about the lives of three villagers? If it is like you? Then does your fear work?” When some mysterious words appear carved in a wall of the Keep near another dead soldier, the village priest, Father Mikhail Fonescu (Robert Prosky) recognises that the words are not written in any living language, and suggests the only way Kaempffer might get them translated is to find Theodore Cuza (Ian McKellen), a scholar and expert in Romanian history and linguistics, who grew up in the village and once made a study of the Keep. Problem: Cuza is Jewish, and has recently been rounded up for deportation. Cuza and his daughter Eva (Alberta Watson) are at that moment sitting in a depot with other Jews, Gypsies and sundry undesirables awaiting transportation. Cuza is crippled by a degenerative disease that makes him look far older than he really is, and Eva acts as his carer.

Kaempffer’s command brings them both to the Keep, where the SS commander taunts Cuza with talk of place he was just about to be taken to, a place with two doors out, one of them a chimney: “So you had better find a way to be of use to me in three days.” Cuza recognises the language of the writing on the wall as a language dead for 500 years, and reads, “I will be free,” a message Kaempffer immediately interprets as a rebel declaration. Woermann tries to assure the Cuzas that he might be able to sneak them out of the Keep to a safe hiding place if they can buy enough time by keeping Kaempffer satisfied: “But then again you may not,” Eva comments sceptically. Eva soon attracts the lascivious eye of a couple of the German soldiers, who track her through the Keep after she comes to get food in the mess, and assault her in a dark, lonely corridor. Mann pulls off another of his weird yet potent visual flourishes as he pans down from Eva’s body, suspended between the two would-be rapists, to the leather boot of one soldier, an almost fetishistic contrast of the soft and feminine with the Nazi exemplifcation of macho brutality. As with the appeal to greed that helped set it free, the assault on Eva only stimulates the entity’s appetite as well as its cunning: the entity, now a ball of fire and smoke reminiscent of the one that pursues the hero of Night of the Demon (1957), surges through the Keep’s innards and falls on the soldiers, who disintegrate messily as the entity absorbs them.

Mann lingers on the image of the entity, now with two burning red eye-like orbs attached to a glowing brain stem, peering out of a writhing pillar of mist, carrying Eva with tender-seeming care back to her and her father’s room, a particularly strange distillation of the classic image of the monster and the maiden, whilst the scoring imbues the vision with the overtone of angelic deliverance. The stunned Cuza nonetheless retains his wit and will sufficiently to tell the entity to release his daughter. The entity speaks to Cuza, accusing him of collaborating with the Nazis: Cuza responds vehemently that he’d do anything to stop them, so the entity reaches out and touches him, giving him a shock of energy. When he regains consciousness, Cuza finds that he’s been restored to full health and mobility, and he realises why quickly enough: the entity wants his help to escape the Keep, which still entraps him. When he again encounters the entity, whose name, Molasar (Michael Carter), is only uttered once in the film, the mysterious being refers to the Jews as “my people” and vows to destroy the Nazis if Cuza will help him escape the Keep: Cuza agrees to find a mysterious energy source hidden in the grand cavern, an object Molasar describes as the source of his power and must be removed if he is to leave the Keep’s confines.

Mann’s enigmatic approach to the entity and the supernatural drama emphasises the humans in between ultimate good and evil as enacting gradations. “You believe in Gods, I’ll believe in men,’ Cuza tells Fonescu, and yet both material and emblematic conflicts have to play out to their bitter end. Where Thief had mooted Mann’s fascination for self-enclosed, self-directing protagonists, The Keep introduced his other career-long obsession, one with with doppelgangers, characters sharing similar traits and characters who often find they have surprising kinships, yet are doomed to clash violently because they’ve become, or were born, disciples of opposing creeds. It’s a preoccupation Mann would notably take into Manhunter, which revolves around the hero’s capacity to enter into the mindset of his repulsive quarries, and Heat (1995), where the cop and criminal have more affinity for each-other than anyone else, as well as The Last of the Mohicans (1991), where the heroes and villains are linked but also perfectly distinguished by their responses to loss of home and habitat. Mann would extend his recurrent imagery and implications to the point where he’d shoot Chris Hemsworth in Blackhat (2015) in a way that would make him look strikingly similar to Glenn in this film. In The Keep Mann’s preoccupation is presented in a set of seemingly, generically rigid yet unstable binaries, particularly in its main characters. Woermann and Kaempffer, representing Nazi Germany’s armed forces and yet divided by completely different characters and philosophies. The Jewish atheist Cuza and the Orthodox priest Fonescu, who’s desperate to do anything to keep his learned friend safe, and gives Cuza a crucifix as a gesture of protective feeling: Cuza hands the cross on to Woermann. The mortal, female Eva and the male-seeming, immortal Glaeken. In the course of The Keep, the link between the overt evil of the Nazis, particularly Kaempffer, and the entity as manifestation and overlord of their diseased ideals, is constantly reiterated; Woermann likens the twisted psyches of the Nazis to the illogical forms of the Keep’s architecture, and the entity itself no mere stand-in for their sick fantasies but the secret source of them.

As the film unfolds the affinities evolve and twist: Fonescu, under the influence of the evil in the Keep, degenerates into a ranting fanaticism for his creed like Kaempffer, whilst Cuza’s physical prostration is mimicked by Woermann’s moral impotence. At the same time the shaded oppositions cast Woermann as a pawn of the necessities of patriotism in the same way the entity turns Cuza into his Faustian representative: Cuza’s desire to smash the Nazis is realised but as he flexes his fist in his new strength he unconsciously mimics a fascist salute. Behind each set of mirroring protagonists, the eternal champions of light and dark, converging in the Keep. Glenn’s Glaeken is glimpsed making his way to the Dinu Pass, frightening and intimidating a pair of Romanian border guards at a checkpoint when his eyes again flash with brilliant energy as he warns them not to touch the case he has strapped to his motorcycle, a marvellously eerie vignette. Fittingly for a character intended as the pure incarnation of good, the otherworldly Glaeken is also presented as the ne plus ultra of Mannian hero figures: mostly silent, he dominates purely by corporeal presence and baleful charisma, communicated by a stare that seems to x-ray people even when not radiating supernatural energy. Mann had Glenn base his character’s odd, halting, ritualistic speaking style on the vocalisation of electronic musician Laurie Anderson. Glaeken turns up in the village at last making claim to a room in the inn which has been promised to Eva, after Woermann and Cuza outmanoeuvre Kaempffer in getting her out of the Keep. Glaeken the eternal warrior seems to have been left to wander the earth until needed to exterminate Molasar once and for all, and he quickly seduces Eva.

Mann’s debt to William Friedkin as a source of influence on his style – one that would reverse for To Live and Die In L.A. (1986), much to Mann’s displeasure – is apparent in The Keep through borrowing of Tangerine Dream’s pulsing, estranging sonic textures and a visual preoccupation with machines in motion from Sorcerer (1977), and subsuming that film’s subtler sense of atavistic powers working behind the mask of inanimate yet strangely motivated things. Mann’s style is its own thing, that said, to a radical degree. Mann contrives glimpses of grotesque and perplexing things, like the discovery of a dead soldier under the carved words comes in an obliquely framed glimpse of the man’s head fused into the wall, one staring eye amidst a charred black face, and Eva realising she can’t see Glaeken’s reflection in a mirror in what seems a perfectly intimate moment. The colour palette of Alex Thompson’s brilliant photography is mostly reduced to a sprawl of slate greys and blacks and misty whites, tellingly broken up only by the red of the SS Nazi armbands and the glowing eyes of Molasar. The film is full of disorientating jump cuts and discordant camera angles, work to sever a clear sense of chronology and context, as precise measures of time and place cease to be relevant as if within an explosion of the innermost Id, whilst relating back to classic genre cinema and the sense imbued by works from Lang through to Val Lewton of a world gone mad: indeed the cumulative sense of isolated paranoia closely resembles Isle of the Dead (1945), with which it shares a wartime setting and invocation of imminent doom in an isolated locale that seems to have slipped off the edge of the world’s physical and psychic maps.

Molasar meanwhile poses as a saviour to please and manipulate Cuza, who’s desperate to find a way to halt the Nazi onslaught: the Molasar costume, designed by Enki Bilal, an artist for the storied sci-fi and fantasy comic book Heavy Metal, was designed to be reminiscent of Wegener’s Golem with its dark, lumpen, bulbous, stony form, and Molasar, like the Golem of myth, promises to be a righteous weapon defending the faithful and victimised, only to prove a destructive monster. Molasar needs a man like Cuza to release him because, as Glaeken later mentions when he confronts Cuza, only an uncorrupted soul can even approach the imprisoning talisman. McKellen, who after playing D.H. Lawrence in Priest of Love (1981) was having a brief moment as a major film actor long before his eventual resurgence in the mid-1990s, wields a noticeably plummy American accent, but ultimately gives a galvanic, impressively corporal performance in playing an intellectual hero who nonetheless experiences his world physically in his relationship with his wrecked body and frustrated will, and whose transfiguration from angry cripple to empowered and determined avenger has suggestions of both spiritual and erotic overtones – “He touched my body!” he tells Eva in describing his encounter with Molasar. This echoes again in Glaeken’s seduction of Eva, an act that has the flavour of ritual, the lovers become vessels connecting the immortal and mortal, sacred and earthly, flesh and alien substance, culminating in the couple forming themselves into a cruciform.

Prochnow was undoubtedly handed the part of Woermann because of his similar role as the intelligent and humane U-boat captain fighting for an evil cause in Wolfgang Petersen’s Das Boot (1981), although Woermann’s ultimately quite a different character, and Prochnow gives a subtly apposite performance. Where the captain was endlessly tough and resourceful in defence of his men and his command whilst maintain open cynicism for their cause, Woermann is already bursting at the seams when he arrives at the Keep, haunted by witnessing SS men slaughtering people in Poznan, and by the wish he’d fought in the international brigades in Spain and had taken a stand against Nazism before it consumed his and everyone else’s lives. His punishment for his failures of nerve is to be stricken with ineffectiveness in protecting his men, relieved only by upbraiding the icily revolted Kaempffer, who ultimately diagnoses Woermann in turn with “the debilitating German disease – sentimental talk.” Woermann describes Kaempffer’s version of strength as having become literal in the Keep, a force of evil beyond imagining, the manifestation of all the sick psyches that have been given guns and carte blanche to slaughter. The clashes between Woermann and Kaempffer are unusually potent rhetorical vignettes thanks in part to the intensity of the two performers, inhabiting archetypal roles, the classic liberal and the perfect fascist: Woermann ferocious in his denunciations of evil but lacking the necessary edge to be truly effective, Kaempffer all too willing to do anything to make the Nazi ideal real, and willing to murder anyone who stands in opposition, including, ultimately, Woermann.

Their clash reaches its climax when Kaempffer furiously shoots Woermann in the back, just as Woermann, hearing his men screaming as Molasar assaults them, grabs up Fonescu’s cross, and he dies with it in his bloody hands. Kaempffer, plucking the cross from Woermann’s bloody hands, heads out into Keep’s atrium only to find all the remaining Germans killed, some fused into the walls, others scattered in smouldering chunks across the floor, their war machines twisted and melted, as if Molasar has become some Picasso-like modern artist working in the medium of stone, steel, and flesh to create mangled interpretations of warfare. Kaempffer is confronted by Molasar, causing him to drop to the ground wailing for Jesus to protect him, brandishing the crucifix. Molasar seems momentarily afraid of the icon, which resembles the talisman that holds him in the keep, so Kaempffer gathers up enough of his customary arrogacne to stand and face the thing. “What are you?” he demands. “Where do you come from?” the amused hulk asks: “I am you.” He takes the cross from Kaempffer, crushes it, and casually sucks the life from him with the same pitiless ease with which Kaempffer murdered, the Nazi releasing a bone-chilling shriek as he does. This is a brilliant moment where even the utterly despicable Kaempffer earns a flash of cringe-inducing empathy in the face of such pure, inhuman malevolence.

Mann’s hope to make a parable about fascism might well have been a tad pretentious, but he succeeds within the film’s dream logic as Mann paints in visual textures the symbolic drama he’s describing. Molasar literally feeds off the darker desires in the men who release him, and in turn stirs people to more and more destructive acts. Kaempffer’s total embrace of Nazi ideology and methods makes him the human equivalent of Molasar, aiming to build “the next thousand years of history” on the bones of necessary sacrifice, but Molasar even uses Cuza’s own best qualities against him by posing as a messianic saviour figure simply by appealing to his righteous anger and hunger for revenge. The blackened, shrivelled, charred bodies of the Germans ironically resemble holocaust and atomic bomb victims, the casual victims of the war’s unleashed apocalyptic logic. Mann’s depiction of the Keep’s architecture, a strange space of uncertain angles and spaces above the mammoth, black, atavistic cavern, presents an ingenious visualisation of what Woermann describes as “twisted fantasies” of Nazism, growing out of the Nietzschean abyss, the abyss that looks back and sees right through all civilised and intelligent pretences. In this manner, Mann expands on Kracauer’s key concept of the Expressionist cinema movement as directly expressing the collective neurosis gripping Germany after World War I, which finally malformed into susceptibility to Nazism.

Mann’s concept of the Keep nods then back to the Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari (1919) and Metropolis (1926), films that offered their stylised physical world as discrete emanations of human will and mind, beset by insane and sclerotic sectors. The Keep’s interior recalls the cavernous zones of Paul Leni’s Waxworks (1923), and the windmill in James Whale’s Frankenstein (1931) where the good doctor performed his experiments, with alternation of spaces vast and cramped, soaring and warped, fashioned with rough and inhospitable brickwork. In most classic Expressionist Horror the weird world presented in them was the world nonetheless for the characters who exist in them, except notably in Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari which laid down the template but also revoked it by presenting the key drama as the ravings of a madman. Mann does something similar in the opening moments of The Keep by emphasising Woermann’s act of seeing the village and the Keep, presenting his drama as subliminal, with a sense of passing through a discrete veil between waking and oneiric states, and everything encountered beyond there is operating on an unreal level. Whilst Kracauer’s thesis that Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari expressed a collective wish for a paternal dictator to restore shape to reality remains largely unconvincing, Mann puts it good use, correlating the perverse mental projections of the Expressionist style with the reality-distorting influence of Molasar. At the same time The Keep is also a movie that was, in 1983, a work defining a stylistic moment in moviemaking, which it quite obviously belongs to with its obsessive use of diffused lighting effects and backlit shots, as well as the dreamy slow motion and music: Mann follows Das Boot not just in casting Prochnow but in annexing its blithely anachronistic electronic score.

It’s often hard to exactly pinpoint in a compromised work like The Keep where exactly directorial intention and jarring interference diverge: what is apparently true is that Mann was forced to cut the film down from two hours to just over an hour and half. Eva’s swift seduction by Glaeken is often taken to be one sign of editing, but frankly it seems to me like one of the more purely Mannian elements of the film: near-instantaneous fusion of lost and needy souls is common in his movies, like John Dillinger’s swift claiming of Billie Frechette in Public Enemies (2009). There are however snippets of interaction between Eva and Glaeken in the film’s trailer that certainly suggest their scenes were cut down. The rough transition around the one-hour mark more clearly demonstrates interference. What’s presumably supposed to be the insidious infiltration of the village by Molasar’s influence comes on far too suddenly, particularly Fonescu’s pivot from kindly, good-humoured friend of Cuza to a ranting loony who barks zealous scripture at him. Soon after, in a moment difficult to parse on initial viewings Eva goes to Fonescu for aid only to find he’s sacrificed a dog on the altar of his church and is drinking its blood from a goblet. There was also a scene of Alexandru being murdered by his sons with an axe.

Given Mann’s stylisation, however, the jagged editing and resulting elisions really only reinforce the generally unmoored mood of the tale, the sense of obscene things lurking in the corner of the eye and numinous forces working relentless influence on the merely human. What was lost from the film through cutting, as well as some of the integrity of the last act, was Mann’s attempt to film the idea of evil as a miasmic influence, meant to mimic the fascist sway picking at the stitches of society and stampeding the world towards barbarian ruin. On the other hand, most of that stuff is supernal to the essential drama: Kaempffer and Woermann’s deaths transfer the weight of the story on Cuza and Eva. Moreover, it’s apparent that when faced with cutting the film, Mann often chose to jettison plot sequences to concentrate on moments commanding his bleary and submerged sense of atmosphere – that long shot of the fishing boat sailing into the dawn, for instance, kept instead of a moment taken from the book where Glaeken kills the captain of the boat who tries to doublecross him. Glenn, the top-billed actor, is nonetheless barely in The Keep for most of its first half, and even when he does arrive at the Keep he remains detached, ambiguous: authentic good is as alien as pure evil.

Glaeken seems to wield some sort of psychic power over Eva, brushing a hand over her eyes to make her sleep as they together in bed, a subtler but equally coercive force to the one Molasar wields. Glaeken senses through Magda the nature of her father’s compact with Molasar, and when Cuza takes a chance to leave the Keep with the German guards insensible under Molasar’s influence, Glaeken warns him about Molasar’s true nature and need. Cuza refuses to believe him, and drops hints about his presence to Kaempffer, who immediately sends some of his men to bring him in. When Eva frantically protests the arrest and gets into a tussle with the soldiers, Glaeken, to protect her, begins tossing the soldiers about like nine-pins, only to be machine-gunned: splotches of luminous green blood appear all over his torso and he refuses to die, until he plunges into the ravine and finishing up sprawled on a ledge where the Nazis presume him dead. Molasar’s subsequent slaughter of the remaining Germans clears the way for Cuza to descend into the cavern and locate the talisman, which he then carries back to the surface, whilst Glaeken revives and begins climbing the jagged ravine wall.

Mann offers one of his signature sequences here, a mesmerically constructed climactic running montage set to intensifying music, later exemplified by the likes of the hero’s Iron Butterfly-scored dash to the rescue in Manhunter and the clifftop chase in The Last of the Mohicans. Mann cuts between Glaeken hauling himself up the ravine face, still covered in glowing green blood (a touch notably recycled by Predator, 1986), whilst Cuza retrieves the talisman, which Molasar can’t even look at. Cuza climbs up through the cavern, a vast, eerie space filled with unknowably ancient ruins and signs of mystique-ridden history, all set music sampling operatic choruses and a church bell-like propelling rhythm. Striding down a corridor as he re-enters the Keep, Cuza’s progress is marked by the crosses on the wall glow in reaction to the talisman’s passing. Glaeken, after escaping the ravine, opens the case he carried to the Keep and removes what appears to be a simple metal tube, actually a weapon capable of destroying Molasar. This passage is one of Mann’s greatest units of filmmaking, and reaches its apotheosis as Cuza reaches the atrium, only to meet a dazed Eva, who tries to stop him removing the talisman. Molasar, watching on as the two struggle, commands Cuza to kill her and continue out.

As if in humanistic rewrite of the Abraham and Isaac myth, Cuza turns on the monster and demands of it, “Who are you that I should prove myself by killing my daughter?” before insisting that if the talisman is Molasar’s, he should be able to take it out himself. This marvellous climactic moment closes the loop on the moral drama before the supernatural battle can occur, as Cuza’s faith in men is proven right by his own deed, refuting the famous test of Abraham’s faith whilst sticking up for the nobility of the reasoning person. McKellen’s challenge to the monster, shouting “Take it!” with the ferocity of hero facing down a demon, is every bit as epic as McKellen’s confrontation in the guise of Gandalf with Balrog in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring some seventeen years later. Infuriated, Molasar reduces Cuza to his crippled state again, but before he can kill Cuza and Eva, Glaeken walks in with his cosmic bazooka, fitting the talisman into its muzzle and unleashing energy rays that charge the crosses and drive Molasar back into the Keep. Of all the sequences in The Keep the finale was the most crudely curtailed by Veever’s death, production quagmire, and Mann’s own creative uncertainty. What was intended to be an epic showdown was reduced to a straightforward scene where Glaeken, despite knowing that “when he goes, I go,” as he tells Eva earlier, nonetheless confronts Molasar with the intention of annihilating him.

Mann interpolates flash visions that hint at alien origins for Glaeken, whose physiognomy changes to match Molasar’s (Molasar already resembling Glaeken in turn in his complete form, nudging the refrain of dualistic kinship), and a close-up of his eyes as he wields the energy weapon sees a kind of mesh grid has been exposed on them. When Molasar tries to hit his foe with an energy pulse as Glaeken glances to make sure the Cuzas are safe, Glaeken responds by blasting a hole through Molasar, who returns to a formless state and is sucked back into the cavern. Glaeken, after giving a last, forlorn gesture to Eva, is then sucked in after him, disappearing through the cavern door amidst blinding white light. And yet, once again, apart from the rather jagged edit in the brief combat of the two beings, the climax feels more consistent with the movie as it stands than a more drawn-out fight would have. The proper climax of the story we’ve been told is Cuza’s challenge to Molasar, proving that Molasar cannot ultimately corrupt everyone. Glaeken’s arrival merely delivers the coup-de-grace, although this comes complete with a memorable vision of his weapon gathering power, pulling in energy with a rising whir before unleashing primeval force.

Mann instead, typically, places the weight of the scene’s power and meaning on the intensity of the gestures and visuals, particularly in Glenn’s deliberately stone-faced yet delicately plaintive characterisation as Glaeken finally proves he’s a true white knight, fearlessly eliminating the evil despite knowing it will cost him everything, leaving behind Eva screaming in dismay. A TV reedit of the film, screened a few years after The Keep’s theatrical release, sported a restored coda based on the novel’s ending, in which Eva descends into the cavern and finds Glaeken still alive there, restored to mortal form. This was excised from the theatrical release, an odd move in itself, as presumably movie studios would usually take the more clearly upbeat ending. The movie proper instead concludes on an enigmatic note, as Fonescu and other villagers, now free of the evil influence, rush to help the Cuzas, and Mann offers a final freeze frame of Eva staring back into the Keep, as if hoping, or sensing, Glaeken is still within, still existing in some form. Again, Mann’s choice here prizes evocation over literalism, with the surging, soulful music and the image of Eva capturing an iconic impression, of triumph bought at a cost, and love as strong as death. The Keep is undoubtedly an untidy, misshapen work, but it’s also a uniquely potent and densely packed work of brilliance, and to my mind close to ideal of what a Horror movie should be.

Standard