Dear Readers,
Apologies for turning the queue de grace into the queue de gridlock - lots of life issue stuff happening in the past 3-4 weeks, including a second part time job change with huge practical impact for me and the busiest time of year for my business. My goal will be to have the queue completed this week and I've watched probably half of the remaining movies so that should be doable.
Up first is Brief Encounter (1945)
And the true order of going, or being led by another, to the things of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth and mount upwards for the sake of that other beauty, using these steps only, and from one going on to two, and from two to all fair forms to fair practices, and from fair practices to fair notions, until from fair notions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty, and at last knows what the essence of beauty is.
~Plato, The Symposium
My first crush of puppy love was with a girl named Lulu.
No, that isn't a joke.
She was a ballerina and we were 5 years old at Schultz Kindergarten in Dallas, Texas (Go Panthers!) She had Shirley Temple curls, though a bit darker and moved with a grace that belied the horrible marketing inherent in the notion of "Lulu the ballerina." No, she wasn't blue, or a dancing hippo, or a Jim Henson puppet, she was a cute little girl that I was smitten with (see Charlie Brown and the Little Red Haired Girl for reference.)
Our love was doomed by an ill advised self haircut at 3am, which was perfectly done (except for a few places where I created bald spots by cutting down to the scalp) and the inexplicable subsequent buzz, which for some unknown reason my parents insisted on, followed by me wearing a stocking cap to school in August... followed by a gaggle of 5 year olds stealing my hat of shame and laughingly chasing the bald boy for perhaps the longest 17 minutes of my life.
This movie threw me full blown into the reflection of relationships that happened, those that almost did but didn't quite... and ultimately made me appreciate Karen even more.
Moving past Lulu, I was widowed at 22. I would have to say, that the impact of that event, on the inside of my head, was both very good and very bad all at the same time. I certainly don't think about romantic relationships the same way I did before, and find that the things that I look for and cherish in a relationship are perhaps a bit unusual. Again, that is both good and bad. My inability to escape the existential filter of my own point of view had me understanding, reeling, angry, sympathetic, relieved, apprehensive, hopeful and appreciative of the movement of the film, not necessarily in that order.
My short review of this one would be, find this and watch it. This has to be one of the best movies ever made.
The longer review would start with the How:
One of the many brilliant aspects of this one was the first scene told, then later retold, with the layers of context that let us in on the depth of bittersweet suffering and moments lost through the clutter of everyday life.
This, along with the narration of things Laura can't tell her husband, amidst the knitting and crosswords reflects the simultaneity of consciousness and disconnect that we feel when we consider our perceptions of ourselves, versus our perceptions of everyone else.
It is perfect that so much of this happens in a train station. It is perfect that their trains are going opposite directions. It is perfect that they meet by him removing a bit of dirt from her eye... and that their last moment is stolen by an oblivious busybody whose world is filled with a torrential stream of unimportant details recounted as if they were matters of life and death - but still showing real kindness.
Neither Laura nor Alec were looking for an affair or for love. They were, in some sense, captured on the way to other things... and doesn't that just ring true somehow?
This was beautifully shot, the writing was strong, especially her narration and the repetition of the scene of her homelife with her family, pedantic and ordinary was a lovely contrast to the excitement and concurrent turmoil of her inner life.
The What:
This movie is about the nature of romantic love.
I'm actually reminded of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet here, with Brief Encounter coming at the topic from the other direction. The problem with Shakespeare is that often how he says something is so mesmerizing that we lose sight of what he is saying. So a quick review of the actual plot points of R and J:
- Two 14 year olds fall madly in love and this fills up their world
- They forsake their families and all manner of things in pursuit of this love
- This continues for a few days
- They commit a double suicide over a misunderstanding, because they can't stand to lose that love
Can I just say out loud, that this is NOT an example of what love ought to be? It is a warning, and one that all 14 year olds should pay extremely close attention to. I love that this is taught in Junior High as a matter of course. It is embarrassing that we, for the most part, are too dull to get or honestly talk about the lurking point here with our fine feathered teenage friends.
Shakespeare, on one level, is really simple. When everyone dies at the end, the approach people were taking in the scenes leading up to that dreadful end was bad. What Hamlet was doing... yeah, don't do that. Everybody dies when you do that. Blood everywhere in Shakespeare = bad.
Shakespeare's point here is that the place of love in our lives isn't just the passion that fills up our world in that moment of decision. That sometimes, following that urge blindly, can result in a lot of destruction for ourselves and the people around us.
Brief Encounter joins the Bard is reminding us that, "Caution, downstream impacts to this kind of thing may be larger than they appear."
The reptilian part of my brain wants to say that this movie ends with Laura appreciating her husband and tearfully reconnecting with him because the writer decided to drop back 10 and punt. That she and Alec didn't consummate their affair because a 1945 audience wouldn't stand for it, at least not in a way that implied in any way that this was ok.
The better angels swoop in to slap me off of that intrepretation pretty quickly. This was entirely too well written and executed to be anything other than what it was intended to be. It might theorectically possible for someone to do this accidentally... or do it, then cave to social / societal pressure, but I'm not not willing to put my money on art of this level happening with monkeys and typewriters or with the ending being essentially a cop out. There is more going on here than that.
On one level, they didn't consummate their relationship sexually, because his friend came home early. But that they were willing to, made arrangements for and had greenlit Project Lust has them very much in the "committing adultery in their hearts" bucket.
On another level, it is important, perhaps even critical to the story, that even though the decision was made and opportunity was pursued... it wasn't ultimately fulfilled. This kind of intimacy is simply more than skin rubbing on skin, we all get that even if we don't say it out loud. But the skin on skin step really is important and that it didn't happen in this case matters a great deal.
If the moral point here is that love is more than a connection that goes so deep as to break our hearts when we lose it, this doesn't diminish the poignancy of their situation, or the reality of the loss they experience.
I was making goat noises when we come back to the scene in the train station cafe and we realize that they were hopelessly (literally hopelessly) in love and that Mrs. Chatterblather was ruining their last moment together. Even more bleating as we follow her outside to watch her consider suicide by Express Train. I was literally yelling at her to not do it, even though I knew from the earlier version that she goes back inside.
Buck up with a stiff shot of bourbon indeed.
But love is more than the moment of despair we feel when it is lost, damnably intense though that moment certainly is.
The kindness of Laura's husband when she comes back to him physically and metaphysically, is the true lesson of the film. Brief Encounter isn't saying that the loss Alec and Laura experience is illegitimate or to be ignored. It only says that this loss isn't the whole picture, even though we can sympathize with the idea that it does feel that way when it happens.
We wonder with Laura whether life is worth continuing without the promise that the intensity her love with Alec represents. It is a real question. And fortunately, it has a real answer.
I love my "crossword puzzle" moments with Karen. It turns out that is the thing we miss the most when a long term relationship is lost is companionship. The simple joy of shared experience, the funny moment, the movie and snacks...
and her recognizing the Rachmaninoff in the music, pretty much instantly. That's kind of fun. And the encounter isn't brief, we can enjoy those moments the rest of our lives.
________________________________________________
The Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
 |
| The Bride of Frankenstein |
And thereby make ourselves, as it were, the lords and masters of nature.
~Descartes, Discourse on Method
With the crazed mad scientist moments, I'm reminded that eliminating death has been a goal of medicine and science for quite a while now. Rene' Descartes had this in mind with his invention of modern philosophy and the practical doubt which led us to methodological naturalism and the scientific method. His goal was to take up an approach which would sharpen the process taken by doctors related to the workings of the human body. His hope was that a thoroughly rational approach to physiology and medicine would help us solve the problem of death.
It doesn't sound quite so crazy the way he says it, but there is definite room for a great scream or two here.
The How:
MUA HA HA HA HA ha ha ha ha. HA HA MUA HA HA HA. Ok, I'm better now, just getting my mad scientist into the groove.
I'm sure I saw this as a child, maybe multiple times, but I'm surprised how little of it I remembered. Probably because the scream the Bride gives us was roughly the same noise Lulu made at seeing my bald 5 year old head. The trauma of her hissing at me probably erased most of the plot from active memory.
Electric girl's hair was burned into my brain, along with her screaming the undead Monster version of LET'S JUST BE FRIENDS in a way that just breaks your heart a little. We've all gotten that response from a girl at some point... and if there were a lever in reach... zzzzz zttzzzz tzzzzz.
I was not expecting this to be as campy as it was, very much over the top in moments... but the interesting thing was that the campiness doesn't over do it. It doesn't damage the story, or the acting, or the movement of the film and it isn't just goofball silliness. The truly odd moments help create a surrealistic vision that is both larger than life while messing with our expectations of a more linear narrative.
Dr. Praetorian's presentation of the tiny people in the jars, was just the oddest thing I've seen in a while.
We get a queen, who is aloof, a king who is Henry the VIII snacktastic with a turkey drumstick and amorous air kisses to the queen, a finger wagging bishop, a mermaid, the devil, complete with an evil little mustache and a one song ballerina who prefers Mendelson.
It's like what you get flipping onto Telemundo (if you were completely hammered), and they were all dancing on a stage with a midget and someone in a chicken suit... extremely random. But it serves the purpose of throwing you off the scent for a while, making the chase that much more interesting.
Karloff was amazing. I can't imagine anyone doing what he did without either seeming tritely contrived or monstrous. He brings a real sympathy to the role over and over again, with extremely limited dialogue and movement. Irony firmly in play, the Monster is the least monstrous one of the bunch.
The mad scientist SHE'S ALIVE scenes and electricfest has to be iconic. It makes Tesla look like an amateur, complete with a castle and giant kites on steel cable to attract the delicious lightning. I mean, come on, that's pretty cool.
I also appreciated the nod to Shelley's original work, in the desire of Frankenstein's Monster to have a mate. In the book, Adam talks like an age of enlightment philosopher, is handsome and strong... but still essentially alone. It was the driving work of the plot, and it that sense, this was a truer movie to the text than the original Frankenstein was.
It's a side note, but the castle falling down was pretty spectacular. In terms of special effects, they weren't distracting at all, which is pretty impressive.
The What:
This is a movie about loneliness and fundamental existential angst.
Every major character wants to be whole, and the path to be whole involves the creation of another person who can fill the gap they experience. Consider the following examples swirling around the film:
- Dr. Praetorian's creations are "small" and inadequate, he needs more
- The Monster needs a mate, and the Bride is his best shot
- Dr. Frankenstein has to create the Bride to get Elizabeth back, yes he's bullied into it
- The blind hermit creates a narrative of the Monster from own desire for friendship
It only works for Dr. Frankenstein, perhaps because he was an unwilling participant in the process, so in terms of narrative justice, he gets a pass. Everyone else loses everything.
I was dissatisfied by the "burn it all down" ending, though certainly I can understand the sentiment. I found myself wanting the Bride to see the Monster as the hermit did, as a friend and companion. But she didn't... and the Monster's response was to lash out in despair.
"We belong dead!" Ouch.
I was hoping that they could have another ending, but in this one, it wasn't to be.
On a lighter note, three things I didn't know about the Monster in Frankenstein:
- He likes a good cigar
- Though dribbling a bit, he likes a good stiff drink
- He swam pretty well, somehow I expected him to sink
I need a good haircut. One that does not produce this reaction:
No comments:
Post a Comment