Cul-de-sac (Roman Polanski, 1966)

Roman Polanski remains a fascinating filmmaker to this day. Alongside Andrej Wajda and Jerzy Skolimowski, Polanski came to the fore in the late 1950’s in Poland. The BFI in London are screening all of Polanski’s films during January and February 2013 and through January, essays on separate films will be released on Flickering Myth in the hope that you too can join us in reflecting on Polanski’s diverse and ever-expanding career. Film essays will include Knife in the Water, Cul-de-sac, Repulsion, Chinatown and The Tenant.

Introduction

Knife in the Water set the standard for Polanski. For his directorial debut, it was nominated for Foreign Picture at the Oscars, losing out to Fellini’s 8 ½. If you lose out to a film considered one of the greatest of all-time, you can go home proud. Suffice to say, Polanski was sought after, eventually turning to England to create Repulsion and Cul-de-sac. A troubled production – Donald Pleasance turned up in a Lincoln to the blustery, small village, whilst Francoise Dorleac joined production with a small dog named Jarderane. Hardly small-scale, it remained true to Polanski's roots - claustrophobic; a small three-way cast; use of deep-focus, etc. "Cul-de-sac was decidedly a Roman Polanski film. Its obsessional tone, its fascination with the mechanics of power and humiliation" (Polanski: The Filmmaker as Voyeur by Barbara Learning) On set, Polanski became demanding and brutal – not least because he had clearly based the film on his relationship with Basia Kwiatkowska, which ended four years prior. Though associated with many hallmarks of his films - this film particularly had a deeply personal edge.

The Castle on a Hill

The story is set-up as two criminals are fleeing the scene of a crime. Akin to Reservoir Dogs, we don’t see or know about the heist or robbery – but for whatever reason, they wind up on Lindisfarne. Albie (Jack MacGowran) has been shot, and can barely move; Richard (Lionel Stander) has been shot in his arm, so he seeks help and finds recently-married couple George (Donald Pleasance) and Teresa (Francoise Dorleac), who live within an old castle on the island. Teresa is unfaithful – our first sighting of her is topless with a neighbour’s son; George is weak and clearly cannot control his considerably younger wife – who we assume has married him for money.

In a direct parallel with The Ghost (titled The Ghost Writer on its US release), the family are isolated; cut off from the outside world as the phone line is disconnected. The marshy landscape and surrounding water combined with an upper-class elitism of the married couple, again connect with the Pierce Brosnan/Ewan McGregor thriller.

Power Games

Unlike The Ghost, though both films have an interest in the role of a powerful female, Cul-de-sac has a clear comedic edge – mocking the childish weakness of Donald Pleasance against the “Lan-dan gangster” of Lionel Stander, who carries a certain Alan-Sugar-like charm.

The sexual-politics are established early on – from the reveal of Teresa’s infidelities through to the awkward manner that George is introduced, standing as a child carrying a kite. In this opening sequence, we witness the dynamic through the eyes of Richard – or ‘Dickie’ as he comes to be known - as he checks out the building before making his intentions known; again, Polanski places us in the place of the voyeur. But it seems ‘Dickie’ is not seduced by Teresa either – Dickie represents the stronger, dominant male opposed to George who, through the humiliating requests Teresa asks of him, is reduced to a bumbling outcast. Teresa almost becomes an accomplice to Dickie as she assists in digging the grave of Albie after he dies from his wounds – and consequently mocks George, laughing and drinking with Dickie. Hardly an example of the supportive wife. In a similar manner to Repulsion, though a key female-role, Teresa is never supported in her frustration of George. Though we laugh at his fear, her lack of support and ridicule of him ensures that she is never seen in a positive light either.

Why, come on in!

If the tone is unclear from the outset, when a family unexpectedly visits the castle, the humour is suddenly heightened. From the married-man who is flirting outrageously with Teresa through to a change in role as Dickie, to remain in the castle until his “boss” finds him, takes on the ‘Gardener/Butler’ job to keep up appearances. Guns are fired; stained-glass windows are broken. Though tense, we all stifle a chuckle when George fails to even hang his own picture back on the wall after a brief discussion of his artistry.

When researching Knife in the Water, it was clear that his exploration into social-issues was a rare theme he tackled in his debut, but I do believe that Cul-de-sac manages to touch upon some basic assumptions between the elitist, ignorant upper-class against the rough, hyper-masculine working class. Dickie manages to mock George tremendously to Teresa’s amusement and, only in the final moments does George manage to re-affirm himself and protect his wife. Of course, it’s too late then, and the guilt, shame and anger at his own initial inaction combined with the self-destructing nature of his flawed attempt at protection (destroying the only way of escape; giving Dickie an opportunity to use the tommy-gun) leads to only further upset. Knife in the Water ended somewhat ambiguously as characters continued their life with no clear change – whilst Cul-de-sac finishes as George, akin to Gollum in The Hobbit, perches atop of the rock, crying out about his own fate. He has lost the love he adored - not through the actions of others – but through his own inaction.

You need only look to the end of Chinatown to see a striking parallel – as Nicholson looks to his love, and sadness overwhelms him. They have lost their love – and they blame themselves. Though Nicholson's 'Gettes' is not alone, George is - and as the credits role on the top of George's misery it would be wrong to let him wallow in his own sadness. We want to comfort him a little and tell him: Forget it George, its Lindisfarne.

Originally written for/published on Flickering Myth on 15 January 2013

The Tenant (Roman Polanski, 1976)

"I am not Simone Choule!"

Introduction

The key to unlocking the 'Apartment' trilogy is knowing that the three films work hand in hand. Themes intertwine and connect; ideas weave between each film and complement each other. My visit to the BFI recently informed me of the psychological element to the series - a Freudian analysis dictated that The Tenant explored themes of repressed homosexuality within the lead character or Trelkovsky. The film is not an easy watch, and reading before or after a viewing will thoroughly inform you and ensure that the subtleties and themes expressed come to the fore - because otherwise it will play out as a strange story about a cross-dressing tenant losing their mind. Indeed, there is much more to The Tenant.

The Last 'Apartment' Film

As the closing act to the 'Apartment' trilogy, it is worth reflecting on the three films including Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby and The Tenant. All portray lead character who, we see their slow descent into a type of madness. The apartments in each film portray an enclosed space that becomes a place that limits their outlook - forcing the characters to become more introspective and lose their grasp on reality as they obsess and reflect on their own insecurities. Repulsion portrays Carol, the virgin who fears men and the sexual-attitudes; Rosemary's Baby portrays Rosemary, the hip New Yorker who fears that the baby growing inside her has a more sinister-side she is yet to witness; The Tenant portrays Trelkovsky, the Polish tenant who fears the apartment he lives within as the neighbours complain and moans about the slightest noise he makes.

In Repulsion, the neighbours are only seen fleetingly as they indirectly witness Carol within the house until the finale and they all witness her self-destruction. In Rosemary's Baby and The Tenant the neighbours become a larger role as in the former the neighbours are the Satanists who are too kind and too supportive of the unborn child whilst the latter shows every neighbour as a menace, each complaining about Trelkovsky's noises and reminding how much of an inconvenience he is. Polanski clearly intends the films to be symbolic - and this is most apparent in The Tenant as on the surface the story is too strange to be taken literally. Repulsion could be simplified to depict a woman slowly losing her mind and Rosemary's Baby could be simplified to depict a woman giving birth to Satan. The Tenant is more difficult - a man finding it difficult to blend in? A man who is secretly obsessed with transvestism? A man who slowly begins to believe he is someone else? This is a film that, as the Egyptian hieroglyphs clearly demonstrate, is meant to be symbolic. The question therefore is what is attempting to symbolise?

Family Problems

My own theory on the trilogy is rooted in the importance and influential nature of family. What defines hereditary illness and the impact of abuse within the family unit. Polanski has never been keen to use his own upbringing as an excuse to define the pessimism in his films, but the parrallels between The Pianist and The Tenant are more than mere coincidence. A "persecuted man locked inside an apartment, obliged to keep silent out of mortal terror from the neighbours, living or dying on the basis of whom he chooses to trust" writes Maximilian Le Cain in his essay Into the Mouth of Madness: The Tenant. He writes of a further parrallel as both characters use a window as a means to potentially kill themselves.

With this in mind, key photographs of family members are used throughout the trilogy - and in Rosemary's Baby, the film itself is about the beginning of a family unit. The single family photograph that depicts the detached-gaze of Carole is used throughout the film and noted in the final shot, hinting at an abusive family that may have influenced her actions in adulthood. In The Tenant, we see Trelkovsky set up his family portraits as one of the first actions when he moves into his flat - and, when staying with Stella, it is her family pictures that strike a chord as Trelkovsky physically rips the images in half, throwing the pictures across her flat and destroying her apartment. His own insecurities and lack of confidence may be rooted in his own upbringing - and his destruction of Stella's family album may tease an envious attitude that Trelkovsky desires. Even the couple who live alongside Rosemary in Rosemary's Baby and the older couple who own the apartment Trelkovsky lives within almost take on a parental role. Akin to parents scolding their child for minor misdemenours, Mr Zy seems to believe it is his role to dictate what Trelkovsky can and cannot do - it would not be unexpected if Mr Zy told Trelkovsky off witht he final words "when you have your own house, you can make as much noise as you want". The scream that Choule lets out, (clearly homaged in The Usual Suspects as the lone survivor shouts "Keyser Soze!") could represent the ongoing frustration of those born into a family that corrupts and changes you - you can choose your friends, but you can't choose your family.

The three films together all explore the influence your upbringing has. The abusive Father in Repulsion; the corrupted and destructive marriage the baby has been born into in Rosemary's Baby and the relentless expectations forced upon Trelkovsky all explain the multitude of issues that adults often hold. And yet, as we know little of the families within each film - or in the case of Rosemary's Baby, we only see the outcome of the family unit at the end - there is an unspoken element. Despite the influence of the family... it is also the one element of our lives that we all feel uncomfortable discussing.

Sexuality

Mary Wild explained in her discussion Projections at the BFI that the undercurrent to The Tenant is Trelkovsky's repressed sexuality. That the film portrays him uncomfortable with women throughout - the only character he is close to, and is comfortable touching is a male character. Trelkovsky represses his sexuality and it manifests itself in the character of Simone Chule instead - a feminine woman with long hair, make-up and a sexy dress. Though I can appreciate Wild's interpretation, I am wary to make a clear judgement on the filmmakers attitude to this.

It seems like a naive assumption that transvestism and homosexuality is inextricably linked. In addition to this, any interpretation that Trelkovsky is going mad seems to associate insanity with homosexuality too. In both cases, whether this interpretation is true, it seems simple at best and insulting at worst. Even the poster hints at such 'deviant' acts as horrific: "something altogether new, altogether chilling". Personally, there is moment whereby Trelkovsky kisses Stella and, this moment, seems to indicate at heterosexual attitude - and his behaviour following this moment does seem to temper his transformation into Simone Chule. Having said that, the character Georges Badar does seem strangely out of place - and the few words this character states all have a strange tone. There is clearly something extra between Trelkovsky and Badar - but I'm not convinced that Trelkovsky is reciprocating any feelings towards Badaer. Could it be that Badar simply seems attracted to Trelkovsky as he has an emotional attachment to Simone Chule, the spirit that resides within Trelkovsky?

Symbolic

The Tenant is not an easy-watch - and I would not recommend this as a first viewing. It truly is the final part of a three-film series so it is essential to watch Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby, if only for the conversations afterwards that accentuate the multiple layers within the films. The Tenant clearly has multiple layers and they are not easy to grasp - especially on a first viewing. But this is clearly the point Polanski is making - that cinema is so much more than a passing-of-time. Cinema is deeply personal, and the links with The Pianist, give the indication that the entire concept of the 'Apartment' trilogy has connections to much more personal elements of Polanski's life than he lets on. The casting of himself in the lead role is also key - as it begs the question of how much of Trelkovsky is there in Polanski? Maybe the confines of Hollywood, represented by the apartment, and the pressures placed upon him in America has fed into his work - The Tenant was made two years after Chinatown and it was his final film before the fateful event that would ensure he never worked in America again. Maybe that was exactly what he wanted.

Projections: A Psychoanalysis of Polanski's Apartment Trilogy @BFI

In London we are privileged to have a broad range of activities that involve cinema. This particular treat at the British Film Institute is one example of something that would be difficult to access anywhere else in Britain outside of Universities.

Mary Wild, situated within the new BFI Reuben Library, led a talk and consequent discussion on Roman Polanski's 'Apartment' trilogy, comprised of Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby and The Tenant. My own recent viewing of Repulsion was fresh in my mind, whilst Rosemary's Baby has stayed in my mind ever since I watched the film a couple of years ago. The Tenant, on the other hand, I have yet to see and I am keen to watch it (and analyse it here on Flickering Myth) when I visit the BFI on January 30th.

Mary Wild begun her discussion explaining the Freudian psychoanalytical interpretation she was due to apply to each of Polanski's films - focusing on the key, lead characters in each; Carol in Repulsion, Rosemary in Rosemary's Baby and finally Trelkovsky in The Tenant. Each character analysed in this manner, reveals that they each hold underlying, subconscious urges and desires that are repressed and therefore manifest themselves in a different manner.

Wild managed to deconstruct all three films in the hour-and-a-half lecture and then drew parallels between all three films. It truly was a fascinating insight into each film - and will surely ensure that I perceive cinema, and crucially character-based films, in a different light in the future. In Rosemary's Baby, Wild highlighted how core the character of Guy truly is. Rather than merely a story of a difficult pregnancy, Wild managed to highlight how the pregnancy represented the growing awareness that Rosemary's married life is a sham - and that Guy was anything but a good husband. The dream-sequence in the film is a fascinating example of the Freud-connection, as it portrays Rosemary - often named 'Roe'/Row - on board an expensive yacht before she walks down, away from her life and into the bowels of her mind... revealing ritualistic and satanic acts.

This was only one element of one film that Mary Wild aptly explained - and it will change my own reading of the film in future. The night ended as she then analysed briefly the connection between Black Swan and the trilogy - specifically Repulsion. In my research for the Repulsion analysis I noted how Darren Aronovsky was inspired by Polanski - but I never knew how much. The recurring themes and almost shot-by-shot imitations show that these films were crucial in the making of Black Swan. In addition to this, Wild pointed out how important a scream mid-film combined with a finale that verges on performance is crucial in the Freudian reading as these moments portray the initial loss-of-mind and the eventual reveal, publicly, to others of the psychological trauma.

The beauty of cinema is within the multiple layers that reside within a film. To deconstruct characters and narrative so that you can reflect and consider how it applies to yourself and everyday life is what lifts cinema from mere entertainment. The BFI manage to present a way to "get inside the head" of Polanski and truly understand a series that you take away and consider, next, how this may reflect on society itself. The viscous cycle of child-abuse; the discrimination of homosexuality; the constraints of a false-marriage. These are real issues - and Polanski manages to delve deeper than merely highlighting the issue. He manages to show how destructive these attitudes truly are.

Chinatown (Roman Polanski, 1974)

"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown..."

Introduction

Since Cul-de-sac, many things had changed for Polanski. After one-year and half of marriage to Sharon Tate, in 1969, she was murdered - while pregnant - by the Charles Manson 'family'. Chinatown was released in 1974 - only five years after the tragic event. It was the final film Polanski would direct in America before the subsequent sexual-abuse in 1977. This is a film that portrays his state of mind at the time - capturing a fleeting moment in his career whereby he was surely a victim to the grotesque tragedies of the world.

Crucially, 'Chinatown' refers to an area where Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson) worked when he was an LA cop. It is a place, in his past, which he wants to forget. He can't forget it - the world so "alien to the main patterns of the city that it seems part of another, ineffable geography". Dana Polan writes how "to enter Chinatown is to leave the space of bearable rationality and personal security". We can only imagine how Polanski's happiness with Tate was shattered by murderers who broke into his personal home to destroy his life. Though a script by Robert Towne, there is something deeply relevant about this film in Polanski's career at this specific moment in time...

Don't Forget The Past - It Makes You Who You Are

Those who have yet to see the film should be aware that Jake Gittes is a private investigator; often hired to take pictures of unfaithful spouses. Mrs Mulwray hires him to snoop on her husband, only for Gittes to find that Mrs Mulwray was not who she claimed to be - and the real Mrs Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) seems to harbour her own secrets about her husband. Gittes investigates and begins to uncover a deeper, corrupted political angle whereby the cities water supply is becoming redirected to an area that Noah Cross (John Huston) intends to turn into property. It is a film that you can enter knowing nothing, because we only find information out as Gittes does - and, as a screenplay, it is one of the best (featuring in Syd Fields Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting as an example of perfect script-writing).

Polan explains in his essay Chinatown: Politics as Perspective, Perspective as Politics how there are two 'strands' of detective stories. One whereby the plot will drive the story forward, and the events of the past are detected without damaging the events in the present. The other strand explains how the past directly affects the present - "the past reaches out and engulf the detective, to entangle him in its spell". The latter is what Chinatown adheres to. Capitalism and authority are already established at the beginning of the film - Gittes is simply unaware of how corrupt and against "the man" these two features in his society truly are. It appears that his old colleague Liet. Escobar (Perry Lopez) represents authority; Noah Cross (John Huston) represents capitalism. Both are against him - and the film ends on a completely pessimistic note.

The very nature of identity is also explored as, from the very start, the question of who Mrs Mulwray is confuses you as to who people are. To support this, Gittes investigation leads to his own face becoming physically changed, as Polanski himself plays the role of "Man with a Knife" sent to threaten Gittes. Events and actions change who you are - Polanski's past affects who he is as a filmmaker; victims of abuse are changed completely. Scars remain and, when you realise - as Gittes does - how sordid, corrupt and selfish humans can be, your entire outlook changes. Its not just Chinatown that is corrupt - it's society itself.

Ironically, Polanski manages to shoot the film in a manner that verges on perfection. In high-definition too, at the BFI, the picture is sharp and bright. The intense heat of California bearing down on the characters - you can actually see each bead of sweat on their brow. How interesting that, considering the deeply cynical story explored, it is framed in a picturesque world that is Hollywood through-and-through.

Polanski-isms

Despite how much larger in scale it is, and the clear urban setting, this film still is in keeping to the Polanski tradition in many ways. In the same manner as Cul-de-sac, Knife in the Water and even The Ghost Writer, it is a 3-way story. You have Jake and his agency who are at odds with those in authority and power (Noah Cross and Liet Escobar), whilst Evelyn Mulwray has her own different angle to the situation present a three-way triangle as characters are often at odds with each other.

Furthermore, water remains at the core of the story as it is the foundations of the corrupt property purchases by Noah Cross. It is through the control of a natural, god-given right, that Gittes manages to see how even something everyone should have access to, has been controlled. Repulsion uses water almost as a coffin for the lone "good guy" in the film; Cul-de-sac has the entire castle surround by water whilst Knife in the Water is set on a boat at sea. Again, Polanski uses this element to reflect the unpredictability of nature - almost to highlight how we, are ultimately animals seeking power and dominance over others. Further to this - he says there is no God. We are all left to stew in our own filth - which we see come to the fore in the final act.

The Definitive Anti-Happy Ending

In many professions, the maxim to always "bring a solution; not a problem" is often stressed. In theory, this should ensure we continue to grow, adjust and improve - and not wallow in a place of self-pity by dwelling on the past. But there is a problem with this, as then we can ignore the flaws and mistakes of the past for the sake of moving forward - doomed to make the same mistakes. Chinatown ends as Jake has failed to protect Evelyn and fails to protect her daughter. By the final act, we know who Katherine (Belinda Palmer) is - and the true horror underneath the surface is evident. But Gittes cannot control the outcome - Noah shielding and "protecting" his daughter/granddaughter from the deceased Evelyn. Gittes is told to "forget about it", as if that is the best solution ... but we know, that this is a deeply rooted problem in LA, spreading much further than Chinatown and out into the orange groves and coast of the area.

Writing about Repulsion, and an interpretation that explores the abuse and incest within the film, this is revisited here as this is the outcome of the relationship between Evelyn and Noah. And, akin to Repulsion, it is the father-daughter relationship that irreversibly affects Evelyn. Clearly Polanski shows his anger about the abuse of families - but I think there is a very telling moment in the film when Evelyn reveals the abuse. Evelyn explains what happened to her to Jake, and he asks "he raped you...?" to which she responds by shaking her head in dismissal. This implies that she, in some respect, feels responsible for the situation. We would be very unhappy about a film that in anyway implies that a victim of child-abuse is somehow responsible - because, simply through their age alone, they are not. Gittes does not attempt to clarify the situation - arguing that she should not feel responsible - instead accepting what had happened to be the case. But these past mistakes we need to learn from - not ignore. Many of these attitudes towards sexism, capitalism, abuse-of-authority and society as a whole remain relevant. Polanski was in a dark place at the time - cynically telling us to forget about it all. We need to not forget and ensure that we reflect on these aspects of society to stop it from repeating itself.

This may be the true tragedy of the film as it hints at the sexism of the time-period - and only three years later, Polanski himself was arrested for the sexual assault of a 13 year-old girl.

Repulsion (Roman Polanski, 1965)

Roman Polanski remains a fascinating filmmaker to this day. Alongside Andrej Wajda and Jerzy Skolimowski, Polanski came to the fore in the late 1950’s in Poland. The BFI in London are screening all of Polanski’s films during January and February 2013 and through January, essays on separate films will be released on Flickering Myth in the hope that you too can join us in reflecting on Polanski’s diverse and ever-expanding career. Film essays will include Knife in the Water, Cul-de-sac, Repulsion, Chinatown and The Tenant.

Introduction

As an interesting starting-point, it is worth noting that Night of the Living Dead filmmaker George A. Romero insists that Repulsion is the best Horror film of all-time. To support his claim, critic Bosley Crowther claimed it is an “absolute knockout” whilst other filmmakers, namely Darren Aronovsky, cites Repulsion as an influence (and it is clear in Black Swan how it has influenced Aronovsky).  The first of Polanski’s ‘Apartment’ trilogy (preceding Rosemary’s Baby and The Tenant), it ensured Polanski would be taken more seriously across continents as Repulsion was his first English-language feature, and the fact that it made a “healthy box-office” secured financing for his next film, Cul-de-sac.

Repulsion tracks the slow, mounting madness in Carol (Catherine Deneuve), a single beautician who shares a flat with her sister Helen (Yvonne Furneaux). From the outset, she is clearly an outcast – often staring into space, losing track of her surroundings and becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the advances of Colin (John Fraser) and the confident sexuality of her sisters married-lover Michael (Ian Hendry). Sister Helen and Michael decide to go on holiday to Italy, leaving Carol on her own – whereby her madness begins to take over her life. She is haunted by the prescence of a man in the flat – nightmares whereby he rapes her in bed. Hands stretch out from walls and Carol acts out irrationally, murdering men who attempt to seduce her.

Fear of Women

True to a recent article in Sight and Sound by Philip Horne, within the flat, Carol creates an environment that becomes grotesque – a rabbit is left to rot; a razorblade lingers in the background of scenes until the inevitable, shocking use of it. Repulsion doesn’t have the same social-conscience of Knife in the Water (Indeed, there is very little evidence to support such an interpretation) but the role of Carol, our scared-of-sex lead role is open to consideration. From male filmmakers, are they claiming that women who would turn down their advances are crazy? Are women who refrain from sex (Carol is mocked in the pub amongst Colin’s friends as a virgin) clearly missing a few cogs? Having said that, other than Colin, virtually all the other male characters are crude, sexist and sex-obsessed. The women who work alongside Carol additionally attest to the horrid attitudes of men. With this in mind, do we assume that Colin represents the rare occurrence of a man who is good – or is his singularity in the film an example of how unlikely a character truly is.

Carol’s madness is not seen as a mental-defect throughout the film - though Helen’s lover Michael does recommend medical help for her. This is a passing comment – and not the core of the film. Her increasing madness results in her attack on both the “good guy” Colin and the lecherous landlord (Patrick Wymark). Andrew Martin, in notes handed to viewers of the film at the BFI, writes that “Polanski asserts that the film is not… study of a sexual pathology, but is about … signs that someone among us is in crisis”. It is difficult, up unto that point, to agree with such a safe-interpretation. Doesn’t the unfaithful Husband Michael “save” her, almost heroically, as he carries her out in his arms? The only “good guy” is killed; aren’t we to assume he is foolish in pursuing such a “frigid” woman?  Everything argues that a fear of sex becomes a problem unto itself … until the final shot.

The Final Shot

Polanski, it seems, views this film as an example of someone in crisis. It begs the question – why is Carol in crisis? What has happened to establish such a repulsion of men? The final shot shows us the family portrait. Carol, as a child, is in the centre – looking to the right, in a manner similar to her detached-gaze that she has held throughout the film (from the first shot). Follow her gaze and we land on her Father, slightly in shadow. Her mother is almost completely obscured by shadow, but it is clear she is there. The large portrait – a portrait we have seen throughout the film – includes many other family members, but in the final shot, these three members of the family are the only people who are not completely covered in shadow. Polanski seems to hint that Carol was a victim of abuse; her disgust and repulsion of men, firmly rooted in her upbringing. Her Mother, may have been aware, but she did not help or stop the situation. Her detached-gaze shows that, even at a young age something was wrong. The image from the outset of a happy family; her sister with her head gently resting on her Mother’s lap, full of smiles has no such resentment.

The use of the eye; of a razorblade; of flies buzzing around a corpse of an animal, all point towards surrealism. The cracking walls and over-grown potatoes show a mind disintegrating throughout the film – but the roots are before the film. Surrealist elements equally hint at something more than what is on screen. Interestingly, after watching Chinatown, the outcome of events is similar and, in another parallel, the ants that lay on the floor in Ida Sessions kitchen in Chinatown precede an outcome that explores Father-daughter child-abuse. Repulsion truly is a milestone in Polanski’s career – and as only the second film in his canon, you cannot help but be astonished at how confident he is in exploring such multi-layered events within such a small space and context. Polanski had truly arrived.

Knife in the Water (Roman Polanski, 1962)

Roman Polanski remains a fascinating filmmaker to this day. Alongside Andrej Wajda and Jerzy Skolimowski, Polanski came to the fore in the late 1950’s in Poland. The BFI in London are screening all of Polanski’s films during January and February 2013 and through January, essays on separate films will be released on Flickering Myth in the hope that you too can join in reflecting on Polanski’s diverse and ever-expanding career. Film essays will include Knife in the Water, Cul-de-sac, Repulsion, Chinatown and The Tenant.

 

Introduction

Polanski, though famed for his flee of America following his own admission of guilt for sexual-assault on a minor, has been a victim himself of the cruelties of the world. A child of parents who were victims of the holocaust (his Mother killed in Auschwitz) he “saw six women shot dead and watched Poles defecate on German soldiers at the end of the war” (The Story of Film, Mark Cousins). Due to this, he was often displaced as a child and grew up intending to be an actor (appearing in Wajda’s Lotna and Pokolenie) before turning to filmmaking in 1962 for Knife in the Water.

Watching the film in 2012, you cannot help but find parallels within his work and Knife in the Water is no exception – set on a boat (Part of the “water trilogy” alongside Cul-de-sac and What?), it is claustrophobic and personal as we join a married couple on a boat trip. Suffice to say, this is disrupted as a lone student hitchhiker joins them.

Brains over Brawn

Bookending the story, Polanski shows us the couple – Andrzej (Leon Niemczyk) and Krystyna (Jolanta Umecka – voiced by Anna Ciepielewska) in a car driving down a country road. The opening is telling as we can barely see through the windscreen due to the reflections on the surface – whereas at the end of the film, we are within the car; clearly seeing the couple without obstruction. This is a film whereby we will learn something about people and, crucially, society – a rare subject matter of Polanski, and generally attributed to co-writer Skolimowski. We observe the higher-earning husband dictating power over his wife – and then attempting to control the young student (Zygmunt Malanowicz – voiced by Polanski himself). It is not unexpected that Polanski toys with us – and creates conflict in the attempts by the characters to change this status. By the time we reach the end of the film, and see our married couple without obstruction, we still don’t see change in their lifestyle due to the events depicted. We are aware of social-injustices; but we do not act on them. The fact that the student is nameless clarifies how little he registers to those above him in status.

Despite this ambiguous ending, akin to Cul-de-sac, the set-up of a stranger changing the dynamic of the couple is a way to force everyone to consider who they truly are.  The two male-roles are characterised clearly – Andrzej is the ‘brains’, whilst the student is the ‘brawn’ – or so the judge, Krystyna believes. Even the title of the film itself serves as a metaphor as the student carries a knife – something that Andzrej claims is useless on a boat. When within the ‘world’ of Andzrej (the world of affluence; of boats and sailing, etc) – those who are skilled at trades of the hand (Construction; Factory workers; Plumbers, etc) are not valued (and believed to be unnecessary?). Andzrej is skipper – and he deems the student and Krystyna unworthy of power (to operate the boat). Indeed, he believes he is the one to lead us forward – even naming his boat after his wife clarifying his ownership of both the boat and his wife.

Life of P(olansk)i

The recent release of Life of Pi has some interesting technical parallels as both films are set within such a small space, they both portray shots and use framing to accentuate and vary the way we view scenes. Life of Pi, obviously explores the idea of deep-focus further to capitalise on the 3D – in comparison, Polanski explores the use of deep-focus magnificently, clearly owing a debt to Citizen Kane and the “triadic framing”, famously used in the snow-sequence (John Orr, The Cinema of Roman Polanski: Dark Spaces of the World).

When you deconstruct the auteur-influences (such as Orson Welles) Polanski has had, you realise how faithful he has kept to his own traditions throughout his career. The expressionistic context – blustery winds of Knife in the Water and The Ghost are decades apart, but manage to add to a sense of unease in the same manner. Indeed, the boat setting alone is tense (water remaining a feature in the vast majority of Polanski’s films) as we know the danger lurks all around them. Akin to the student, we are voyeurs ourselves too as we see Krystyna undress behind the men – and we notice the student catches a glance; he is aroused by another man’s wife. This adds further tension without drawing attention to the fact. The playful one-upmanship as the two male characters play with the knife – you know someone will get hurt. The New-Wave Jazz score and calmness of black-and-white cinematography seems to soften any danger, but visually we know danger lurks - it surrounds them all.

Directorial Debut

As a debut, Polanski manages to map out many of the tropes that will become trademarks to his style. On reflection, the very definition of auteur is established here in Polanski’s work. The sexual-tension as the lone female character wanders around in a bikini and dressing gown will spill into his films. The aforementioned use of water and subtle creaking sound-effects all appear in a different manner throughout his career. The small-scale and non-subjective perspective in Knife in the Water, connects this film with his most recent Carnage. Interestingly, though Polanski often has small-scale films, the vast majority of his films are subjective; focussed on single characters for the majority of the film. As his only Polish-language film, this is set apart from the rest – but knowing what was to come, it is a fascinating insight into a man who was simply an artist at this point in his career – and not the victim or offender of a heinous crime.

The Film Locker #12: Roman Polanski and 'Chinatown'

And so, 12-episodes down and we have completed our run. We finish with Polanski a director I have always admired primarily through our choice film Chinatown. So, in preparation for the episode, I watched Rosemary's Baby, The Pianist and The Ninth Gate. And still, there are many, many more films he has made. He is a controversial choice too with his tragic upbringing leading to tragedy in his personal life. Both Ryan and I are keen to hear opinions and, after this first run, any opinions and advice is warmly welcomed. You can comment on my blog or of Ryan's new baby at www.matinee.ca or email us at filmlocker(at)hotmail(dot)com. 

And, as usual, it is already on itunes and can be found easily on podomatic - so, please do try and write reviews and support us if you can! We have the ol' RSS feed and 2.0 RSS and, if you link in different ways, we also have it on Google and Yahoo

The Simon and Jo Film Show: 25/04/2010

This week we begin at the Tate Modern Art Gallery, near Blackfriars. The film of the week is ‘The Ghost’ or ‘The Ghost Writer’ in America. The usual banter on the Top 5 London Box-Office and obviously lots of news on the delayed Bond franchise and ongoing and continuous release of Avatar and, the plonker that is, Sam Worthington.

The second chunk is an Art-related/Brosnan-related caper that is, effectively, a guilty pleasure.

For Bournes Brain Baffler:
4 - Fletch from Blog Cabins - 3/10

4 - Simon from Screen Insight – 3/10

3 - Jo from Screen Insight– 5/10
3 - Rachel from Rachels Reel Reviews – 5/10
2 - Mad Hatter from The Dark of the Matinee – 6/10
1 - Emlyn – 8/10

[If you have your own results, do email me them or comment on the appropriate post and I’ll put your link up… of course, anyone could lie but the assumption is, you don’t.]

All music is by Alexandre Desplat from ‘The Ghost’ soundtrack.