2020s, Action-Adventure, Fantasy, Scifi

Rebel Moon – Chapter One: Chalice Of Blood / Chapter Two: Curse Of Forgiveness (2024)

.

Director / Cinematographer: Zack Snyder
Screenwriters: Shay Hatten, Kurt Johnstad, Zack Snyder

By Roderick Heath

This review applies only to the extended editions of the Rebel Moon diptych, not the shorter versions released under the titles A Child Of Fire and The Scargiver. Here there be spoilers.

A few years ago I noted that we’ve entered a new era where, in the blurring of film and television via streaming and the vestigial idea of the cinematic form remaining there, lesser talents who ought to be sticking to TV are increasingly getting employed to make movies and the real filmmakers are turning to TV. This tendency has only sped up. There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is economics, but also has connections to current cultural expectations – ambitious, vigorous, visually adventurous, risk-taking directors are ironically having an easier time getting money out of streaming services who both want to make a splash and offer plenty of scope for that ambition, whilst cinema is increasingly becoming a realm for the mundanely efficient and reliably vision-free: the idea of cinema as the anodyne space has become the norm, the comfort zone, for the mass audience. Zack Snyder is, whatever else one thinks about him, a filmmaker born to work on the biggest of canvasses. It’s well-known that Snyder has one of the most vociferous-trending-insufferable fan cadres around in our great and glorious internet-fuelled age, and in particular the push to get his Justice League released in its originally intended form was a subject of a bizarrely intense groundswell. The other side of that coin is that the anti-Snyder league is just as insufferable, if not worse. So much of the conversation about Rebel Moon in critical and non-fan circles was utterly contemptuous, enough so that I was put off watching it for a time.

I was even prepared to believe that dismissal to a degree: Snyder’s return to non-franchise filmmaking after a decade misspent on superhero movies with Army of the Dead (2021) was, despite flashes of strong black humour and some wicked ideas, mostly a clumsy and frustrating exercise, stylistically and story-wise. It made me suspect getting streaming money behind him and a lack of oversight might have only freed Snyder’s worst instincts. Also, there’s the plain truth that Snyder’s shortened, supposedly more commercial versions of his movies are consistently inferior and sometimes borderline incoherent compared to his extended cuts, particularly Sucker Punch (2011) and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016): Snyder’s longer versions often reveal genuinely expansive ideas and qualities. His Rebel Moon diptych had an intriguing genesis, reportedly beginning life as a story proposal submitted to Disney-Lucasfilm as an entry in the Star Wars mythopoeia. Once rejected by those overseers, the proposal was retooled into a project better suited to Snyder’s particular bent, and produced by Netflix. When the greatly extended version of Rebel Moon emerged as a two-part edition with chapters titled, respectively, Chalice of Blood and Curse of Forgiveness and which runs, minus credits, some six hours, was finally released, I did finally settle down and take it in. I was rewarded with very likely the best viewing experience of 2024.

Rebel Moon’s basic template is what could be described in an ideal “elevator pitch” – a short and sharp summary to sell a movie to prospective backers and audiences alike – albeit one that might provoke eye-rolling amongst cineastes: it presents itself unabashedly as “Seven Samurai In Space.” Even not counting the way that model has infused itself, both in itself and via John Sturges’s Hollywood remake The Magnificent Seven (1960), into the genetic makeup of modern action cinema, that’s still not even a new spin. Battle Beyond The Stars (1980), the Jimmy T. Murakami-directed, Roger Corman-produced, James Cameron-contributing film has long been emblematic of the original post-Star Wars (1977) run of cheap and cheerful imitators that represented close to a last gasp for the classic B-movie model of cashing in on successful hits, made before the nervous system of the international movie industry realised that the special effects blockbuster had, at that time, found a way to ensure bigger-budget Hollywood movies would always remain at the top of the heap. Snyder, at least, is a filmmaker who has since 300 (2007), his bristling, bloody, entirely stylised take on the Battle of Thermopylae, committed fully to exploring the possibilities of digital-era cinema for filmmaking, both to explore and accentuate new frontiers of style and help keep costs down. In an early scene of Rebel Moon, heroine Kora (Sofia Boutella) is introduced doing farm labour on what appears to be an entirely traditional rural landscape only with a vast, ringed planet hovering in the sky above – Snyder’s camera descends to find her silhouetted against that planet, with the film’s title cards appearing on the way down. The scene is boldly illustration-like, recreating images out of old comic books and off vintage sci-fi paperback covers, not caring if it looks realistic but instead aiming for outsized evocation of genre essence.

Snyder’s reputation as a showman with an unseemly delight in blood and thunder is also borne out to enthrallingly cruel effect in the long pre-title sequence, which opens in medias res amidst the last throes of a defence by the citizens of the planet of King Heron (Yu-Beng Lim) as they’re brought to heel by Atticus Noble (Ed Skrein). Noble is an admiral in the space fleet of a vast and brutal stellar domain called the Imperium, based on a planet called Toa but generally called the Motherworld, assigned to chase down two notorious and troublesome rebel leaders, the siblings Devra (Cleopatra Coleman) and Darrian Bloodaxe (Ray Fisher), and deals out incredible brutality and ruthless punishment to any planet he suspects of sheltering them: it’s Heron’s world turn. He forces Aris (Sky Yang), the son of the king, to beat his father to death in order to save the lives of the rest of the royal family. This extended sequence of torment and terrorism masquerading as virtuous order-keeping goes beyond simply letting us know who the bad guys are: Snyder enters instead into a properly Sadean realm where such spectacles of humiliation, sacrifice, and torture with false hope (Noble quickly retracts his promise to spare the rest of the family after he claims the now theoretically twisted and appropriately malleable Aris) are instead the essence of the Imperium’s philosophy, looking for pretexts to happen, and with Noble its ideal operative.

This extends to the way Noble doesn’t just deploy such elaborate viciousness for its own sake (although he’s certainly a man who enjoys his work), or even to provide the spectacle of freely employed cruelty to terrorise the Imperial populace into loyalty, but also to force the young prince to access the darkest part of himself and brand his soul with the crime. This is how the Imperium’s method and personality reproduce themselves, created damaged, deranged, murderous husks of humanity it can then employ. Noble is also fond of getting his jollies with a tentacled alien when enjoying the privacy of his spaceship cabin, a memorable vision that has its humorous aspect, but is foremost not only a glimpse of a deeply perverse nature but, again, one that makes a spectacle of inhumanity. Noble’s campaign nonetheless faces one great stymie: keeping his crew and soldiers fed, so he sets his sights on Veldt, a moon-planet with scattered populaces, including one village consisting of people who have chosen a purely agrarian, non-technological lifestyle – another philosophical choice that directly contrasts the Imperium’s kind – and also because it helps them stay completely off the Imperial radar. But Noble’s Dreadnought appears in the sky overhead and Noble descends to deliver his already familiar blend of smarmily beaming friendliness, alternated with skull-cracking savagery, because he wants their harvest and also because he knows the village surplus was sold to the rebels.

And so Noble beats to death the village’s avuncular leader, Sindri (Corey Stoll) and his wife is sliced to pieces by soldiers when she dashes forth in grief, whilst the village’s selling agent, who actually did the deal with the rebels, Gunnar (Michael Huisman), is left to pick up the pieces, desperately agreeing to Noble’s demands which will leave them with so little food as to starve. Noble leaves behind a unit of thuggish soldiers, including the theoretically indoctrinated and subordinated Aris, to keep the villagers in line and make sure they keep all their harvest for him to collect in a few weeks’ time. They’re also left with “Jimmy” (body of Dustin Ceithamer, voice of Anthony Hopkins), one a force of android warriors almost impervious to standard weapons, who used to serve the Imperium’s former royal family as their guard of honour, who have since refused to fight since that family was assassinated. The garrison soldiers start harassing and abusing villagers, including the kindly, teenaged water-carrier Sam (Charlotte Maggi), who meanwhile forms a bond with Jimmy. Unfortunately for the garrison and for Noble, there’s something about the village they don’t yet know: living amongst them is Kora, a mysterious, taciturn woman who’s been taken in Hagen (Ingvar Sigurdsson), an older villager who knows she has a dark past and has encouraged her to adopt their lifestyle to expiate it. When the soldiers set their sights on raping Sam and fully intend to extend the same treatment to Kora herself, Kora unleashes astounding, deep-honed warrior skills and slaughters the soldiers, with the unexpected aid of Aris and Jimmy. Facing extermination whatever happens for this show of defiance, the villagers elect to send Kora and Gunnar to find some fighters willing to stand with them when Noble returns.

The Seven Samurai basis of Rebel Moon is a bit of a double-edged katana when it comes to Snyder’s ambitions. The idea of a small, anti-modern agrarian community resisting a supertechnological fascist military seems to defy credulity, although recent history’s given the lie to that plenty of times. And the format has been replayed so often it’s hard to make it feel fresh. But the value is obvious too: the motif of the motley gang of warriors drawn together to defend the weak has a weathered, proven, essentialist power that offers an ideal focal point in the centre of a work of vast conceptual engineering. The world beyond the immediate focus of Rebel Moon is genuinely colossal and decorated with layers of imagination and unexpected detail. As the diptych unfolds, Snyder explores the political context and mythology of his take on the hoary motif of the tyrannical space empire. The assassination of the royal family – King (Cary Elwes), Queen (Rhian Rees), and daughter Princess Issa (Stella Grace Fitzgerald) – is an act that haunts the Imperium, and has been used as the justification for increasingly wrathful crackdowns by the leader who stepped into their place, the former top general Balisarius (Fra Fee). And his acts of repression in turn birth more rebels, like cancer cells eating away at the body. Like Jimmy, Kora, in her previous life when she was known as the celebrated and trusted warrior Arthelais, was close to the royals, serving as detailed guardian to Issa. Issa herself was believed to be the reincarnation of a legendary ancestor of the royal family, capable of miraculous deeds, and since her death has become the object of religious veneration, including by a party of priests who follow Imperium thugs like Noble around and use the harvested teeth of slain enemies to decorate an icon of the princess.

Snyder paints the Veldt community, which seems to have deliberately patterned itself after Viking-era villages, and Kora’s place in it, in a manner that evokes their idyllic, tight-knit communality, whilst also acerbically denying whatever expectations about traditionalist yokels they might suggest. Kora is shown, soon after her introduction, having a fleshy, vigorous bedroom romp with fellow hunky farmer Den (Stuart Martin), and Sindri encourages the villagers to “Fuck for the Gods!”, as if to spell out that even if they seem like a community of Space Amish, they’re no puritans. This also feels like Snyder’s considered tilt at the ever-increasing sexlessness of contemporary big moviemaking, getting down at dirty with Kora in a manner that exalts her carnal needs and prowess and establishes this carnality as, indeed, a kind of holy thing in her universe. Nor does Snyder feel any need to justify it beyond two sexy people having a good time and sowing their wild oats. This evocation of good old lustiness also provides an bold aesthetic counterpoint to the relished sadism of Noble, the different brands of engagement with the flesh pursued by the natural human animal and the perverted fascist presented in perfect contrast (even if one could say the depictions of both are rooted in Snyder’s delight in getting in the audience’s face with things Disney would never let him do). Moreover, this could even be called Snyder’s peculiar take on the same thesis as Pier Paolo Pasolini’s Salo (1975), portraying uninhibited sexuality as a classical virtue contrasting the games of dominance and brutality that define both the Sadean philosophy and the fascist mindset. But Kora’s wild humping also displays her other side, her back a mass of scar tissue.

More incidentally, but still bracingly, Snyder casually rejects the strange weak-kneed quality contemporary Hollywood has with heroines who are unabashedly sexual – Kora’s night with Den is presented as an event that’s the product of mutual lust but has no great consequence beyond that, where Kora’s deeper, evolving relationship is with Gunnar, who is in many respects her opposite in experience and temperament. Left with the guilt and anguish of being indirectly responsible for the calamity that befalls his village, and inexperienced as a fighter, Gunnar is the kind of superficially cunning, actually naïve man who gets people in trouble, and is mocked as a coward. Gunnar nonetheless commits to the mission of trying find defenders alongside Kora, and becomes her comrade, listener, and finally lover. Snyder offers Kora as a contemporary female type in contrast to the pre-modern kind embodied by the late, lamented Issa and by the winsome young Sam. As the diptych unfolds, it’s revealed Kora, in her days as Arthelais, was a creation much like what Noble wanted to achieve with Aris – an orphan of the Imperium’s wars adopted by Balisarius and raised and honed into a nigh-perfect human weapon, unflinchingly loyal not to morals, ideals, societies, or even the throne, but to her most immediate human connection, who happens to be a conniving monster who uses her to help him assassinate the royal family when they start applying the brakes to military expansion.

This version of Kora, in the high military garb of the imperial warriors with short-cropped hair, is a creation of a version of militarism that is, ironically, entirely post-gender, and just about post-everything else except the application of power. Even the death of her chosen lover, a fellow soldier, is part of the Imperium’s project and expectation, of giving its warriors something personal to fight for when other motives break down. The title given to the first part of the extended diptych, Chalice of Blood, proves to be Balisarius’s nickname for Kora as his anointed vessel of wrath and slaughter, but, vitally, even the perfectly engineered tool that is Kora crashes against the frontier of humanity. Snyder shows her gunning down the calmly forgiving Issa, only to be immediately branded by her adoptive father as the scapegoat for his own orchestrated crime, a step of treachery that finally broke his hold over her, but she still couldn’t bring herself to gun him down, cutting a swathe through his guards instead and fleeing, still remembered in Imperium lore as a totemic traitor. After the assassination and Balisarius’s ascent to the throne, the campaign of repression hasn’t just become high policy but enshrined and ritualised as self-perpetuating and self-justifying. Kora, recounting her history, also explores the melange of religion and domination ritual that defines the Imperium, with each of their spaceships containing a power source: colossi that are actually some kind of consciousness-containing form, kept prostrate in a particularly brutal caricature of subjugation, and fed with furnaces that burn up processed organic material, mostly bones and other human remains sourced, Kora theorises, from the Imperium’s slaughtered foes.

This is Snyder’s formidable poetic metaphor for the concept of self-perpetuating fascist dominance, and perhaps the most arresting and intriguing image he has yet conjured. Snyder’s desire to create a kind of cinema that seems built like a megalithic monument, carved stark and cold out of the ribs of some mountain, finally comes to full fruition throughout Rebel Moon. I also realised in watching that, even if the starting point was supposed to be a more adult take on Star Wars, Snyder instead manages to create an aesthetic and a fictional universe looks and feels far, far more like the world Frank Herbert created for his Dune books than Denis Villeneuve’s absurdly overpraised bifurcated adaptation ever achieved. This is found in the mix of superfuturism and atavism, the cyclopean monumentality of the settings, the background stew of religion, quasi-magic, politics, and raw, neo-feudal power politics. The chief difference is that where Herbert’s creation revolved around the eternally fascinating and provocative tension between large systems, particularly the political and the moral, Snyder essentially maintains the Manichaeism of the original Star Wars trilogy, distinguishing his version more by ratcheting up the good-vs-evil schism, as well its obsessive control-versus-revolt dynamic, into more gruellingly visualised and pathologically evoked extremes.

And yet there’s an intriguing approach to the Imperium under all the hyperbolic bloodlust, neither trying to indict it as a monolithically wicked creation nor as a hijacked realm of sweetness and light, but with elements of both encoded into its structure through the eternal dialogue of force and idealism that defines a civilisation. Snyder takes more stylistic cues from the Byzantine Empire than the standard Roman reference points, down to the Orthodox-looking priests with their icons, and from medieval gothic and Victorian-Ruritanian flourishes. The religious exaltation of the two Issas of two different eras bespeaks of the Imperium’s roots in something genuinely miraculous, glimpsed in paintings young Kora is glimpsed gazing at in reverence and identification. Here Snyder reengages with a concept he explored in 300 about the idea of the construction of legend in serving multiple purposes, as both a personal thing – the inspiration we as people take from heroic figures – but also a political thing, feeding into how societies see themselves and what kinds of institutions they tolerate, and how such iconography can be perverted, revised, and restored. This is hinted at through the rebirth of the ancient miracle in the later Issa, whose apparent gift for healing and reviving of the dead, as well as a preternatural wisdom, made her seem to so many as the reinstitution of the Imperium’s essential nature – an embodiment of the extraordinary Kora herself, in a supreme irony, was tasked with gunning down whilst her “father” and his cabal slayed her parents.

The opening scenes of Chalice of Blood establish an epic sweep of focus as Snyder depicts Noble’s forces invading and smashing to rubble Heron’s capital, before zeroing in to acts of incredibly intimate feeling and violence as father encourages son to kill him in order to protect the family, the very notion of masculinity bound in hyperbolically rendered chains of rectitude and responsibility. Snyder delivers a dark joke in that opening too, one that might be taken as a bit of a jab back at Disney-Lucasfilm by making sport of the familiar cute aliens in the Star Wars franchise, as one of Heron’s family pets, a small, green creature, is released from its cage and confronts the Imperium forces chasing the family into its broken palace, and, in a moment of self-sacrifice bidden by the King, unleashes some power within itself that erupts and decimates attacking soldiers. Snyder counterpoints this whilst exploiting the freedom of his medium to evoke the mythic reaches he’s going for in their cruellest and most spectacular dimensions: the images of the Imperium’s priestly creatures stripping off and branding the planet’s priestesses (calling them “pagan witches” to boot) and Noble’s theatre of cruelty evokes some of the most unbridled images found in the traditional takes on the fall of Troy, a sweeping survey of ruthless execution and ritualised, misogynist-tinged humiliation. The king’s swashbuckling ferocity in delaying the Imperium troops, aided by Aris, is a last flourish of idealised warrior culture honour and familial valour before Noble’s hammer, or rather the “femur of a sacred lochnar,” is dropped, and gets an extra twist that drags deep into a pool of dank evil. Once Aris is finished clobbering his father to death and escorted away, the queen notes to Noble that she knows he’s not actually going to let her and the rest of the family live, to Noble’s smug agreement. This long, galvanising opening of course sets in motion the relished countdown to when Kora unleashes her wrath on the garrison soldiers left at the village. The soldiers have supped at the same cup of learned enjoyment of the spectacle of cruelty, but they’re not as good at it: they don’t break down the souls of those they mean to abuse before safely crushing their bodies too.

Kora’s backstory is explored in episodes throughout the entirety of the Rebel Moon diptych, and the emphasis on her experience doesn’t just place her at the heart of this mythos of domination and dissent, but also echoes through the other warriors she and Gunnar collect, all of them defined by the Imperium’s marauding and personal loss. They trek to one of the few larger towns on Veldt hoping to make contact with the rebel agents Gunnar sold to, only to arrive just in time to see him being carted off by imperial troops. They encounter the space pilot and mercenary Kai (Charlie Hunnam) and help him out of a spot of bother in a local tavern. He proposes, by way of recompense, to take them to other fugitives with an axe to grind and keeping their heads down, leading to the traditional set of sequences depicting the various heroes displaying their unique talents and character traits as they’re visited and recruited. Tarak (Staz Nair) is the fallen prince of a planet razed by the Imperium, another man marked with the repute of a cowardice because he didn’t die with his soldiers: now he works as a blacksmith. Nemesis (Doona Bae) is a woman who sacrificed her natural hands for cyborg ones after her own world was destroyed by the Imperium, and fights with two energy-charged swords. Titus (Djimon Hounsou) was once an Imperium General, who refused to commit war crimes and was punished by watching his solider be slaughtered, whereupon he killed his captors and escaped. Now he regularly drinks himself into a stupor between fights as a gladiator.

Snyder renders each of these sequences, nominally familiar as this sort of thing as, as epic vignettes in their own right. Tarak is currently being held in forced labour by a swinish farmer named Hickman (Ray Porter), and demonstrates his prowess to the visiting Kora and Gunnar by showing off his ability to ride with the griffin-like creatures called bennu, an animal his people have gift for bonding with, before leaving the creature to Hickman, knowing well the creature will rip him to shreds. Nemesis, sullen and taciturn, is sought out to confront an ogumo – a creature that appears part human, part arachnid – named Harmada (Jena Malone), who’s being driven to crazed frenzy since humans colonised her home planet, preventing her from hatching out any young ones, so she’s snatched a child for revenge. Nemesis, after trying to make an emotive appeal to the creature and failing, kills her in a fight. Finally, using Gunnar’s rebel contacts, the team head for the planet of Sharaan, run by the sympathetic but line-walking King Levitica (Tony Amendola), where they rendezvous with the Bloodaxes: whilst Devra doesn’t want to commit her rebel band’s dwindling resources to this particular stand, Darrian elects to join, and brings with him a small cadre of warriors, including the stalwart non-binary fighter Milius (Elise Duffy). After Devra departs, the team finds that Kai has actually contrived to gather all these famous dissidents together and sell them to Noble, and the Admiral arrives to take charge of them once Kai has them prisoner, and proposes to gruesomely paralyse them all before shipping them back to the Motherworld.

Hunnam wields his best insolently taunting Irish accent as he’s initially offered as Snyder’s take on Han Solo, the roguish space captain with a charmingly cocky grin, and one who engages in a flirtation with Kora that contrasts Gunnar’s uncertainty as a farmer who’s never been in space and is far out of his comfort zone. The reveal that he’s actually a conniver actually makes sense – the proximity of Kora and Gunnar’s first meeting with him and the apprehension of the agent they came to meet is revealed to be no coincidence. Gunnar’s redemption arc begins when he dashes in to help Nemesis save the child from the raging Harmada, and its apotheosis comes as the catalyst for the fight that climaxes Chalice of Blood, when he tricks Kai by seeming to obey a command to paralyse Kora, only to free her, kill Kai, and unleash a scene of chaos as Noble and his escort are consumed in battle. In the ensuing rampage, Derrian dies during a one-man attempt to bring down one of the Imperium’s hovering gunships. This vignette could well be the ultimate example of Snyder’s capacity to conjure outsized, Olympian heroism, as Derrian sprints up a gantry and leaps atop the gunship, taking blaster hits that burn through his body, globs of blood and glowing plasma energy swimming through the air like the stuff of a sci-fi Jackson Pollock painting. Still Derrian refuses to go down until he’s skewered the pilot of the craft through the cockpit windshield with an appropriated girder as his lance. Snyder moves in for a mighty close-up of the dying Derrian, tears dripping from sightless eyes, his death also the death-spiral of the gunship that crashes into the aerial dock the fight’s unfolding upon: Snyder’s techno-Moby-Dick.

Dodging exploding and disintegrating wreckage, Nobel and Kora both finish up dumped onto a hovering platform to fight an intimate duel that delivers all the bone-crunching, justifiably stoked wrath anyone could ask for as Kora snaps Noble’s arm and impales him with his own sacred femur club, before dropping his mangled, broken body fall into ocean below. Snyder stages this whole sequence with magnificent, lunatic verve, capturing the essence of a particular brand of cyberpunk-tinged space opera in the imagery, Snyder’s cinematography and the special effects awash with a signature visual patina, part sleek, blood-and-fire-daubed technocratic feast and part gritty, smoke-infused arena of primal violence. The only problem is that whilst Snyder caps Chalice of Blood with this rowdy, cheer-along piece of satisfaction, it also kills off Skrein’s Noble who has been, up until this point, the film’s singularly goading representative of the evil Imperium. Not to worry: Noble’s body is rescued by his people and the Imperium’s cadre of priestly doctors revive and repair his mangled body, complete with jaggedly toothless maw, whilst also projecting his consciousness across space to the Motherworld for an interview with the testy Balisarius, who demands Noble, once repaired, follow through on his promise to capture his former daughter. This move that has obvious rhythmic appeal for Snyder, delivering a strong climax to the lengthy introduction before a surprising twist as Noble is revived and restored – a twist that also underlines something interesting in terms of the film’s overall design, taken up again at the very end of the diptych, the idea that whilst defeating a wicked enemy sure does feel cool, that enemy or someone just like them will always be waiting in the wings.

In his ill-fated time as the appointed helmsman of the DC Comics universe for Warner Bros., Snyder consistently provoked and irritated viewers. The popularity of the superhero craze was always attached to a between-the-lines purpose in the post-9/11, War On Terror moment, which was to offer a sense of moral security and personal rectitude in a fractious and random moment of history by tapping childhood avatars of right and nobility. Snyder refused to grant them that kind of easy stature, and instead kept noting how close superheroes are conceptually to figures of myth and religion, but also kept in mind the nature of the hero in the classical sense, a fundamentally unstable fusion of the immortal and human, and how troubling enormous power is in the hands of beings with psyches that can be hurt far more easily than their bodies. This was, depending on one’s viewpoint, either the essential treachery of his efforts or the most interesting. Regardless of the hoopla around it, Snyder’s augmented version of Justice League was a rich, lumpy romp through the world he was trying to build out of the basic stuff of superhero tales, and one that clearly showed Snyder trying to articulate his themes in this regard whilst also letting his storytelling sprawl: it’s the closest anyone came to the general ideal of turning the superhero craze into the authentic stuff of mythopoeia rather than just a vague academic sauce on the same old power fantasy. Where many with 300 felt Snyder seemed too exalting of the Spartans as heroes, considering their Frank Miller-sieved tendencies towards ideals that now seem quite fascistic, like their practising of tribal eugenics and relentless military training, here Snyder essentially inverts the moral equation, but retains a key dichotomy: the forces that forge heroes are barely distinguishable from those that create monsters.

Then again, the aspect of 300 that many missed was that it was a movie told not just from the Spartan point of view but through modes of cultural propaganda, transforming everything that came into its focal range into a battle of noble Spartan perfection against all that was corrupt, depraved, and malformed, from the invading Persians to the Greek oracles and traitors. Rebel Moon is an action-adventure movie as well as a sci-fi epic, and the irony it offers is a fairly common one in this style: the Imperium has, in crafting such incredible organic engines of death and mayhem, has also begotten its most committed and talented enemies. Here, working with his own material, Snyder works from the opposite direction, which is obviously more in his wheelhouse: his heroes in Rebel Moon are all shattered husks of the mortal but this has made them ideal candidates to find apotheosis in a nominally hopeless act of resistance to a seemingly, utterly unstoppable power. Indeed, Snyder strikes this particular note so often, including in a lengthy scene in Curse of Forgiveness in which the warriors narrate how they came to be what they are, that it moves beyond dramatic nicety and rooting interest to become the central preoccupation of the diptych, the sickly fascination with the forces that make people into something both more and less than human. Snyder delivers imagery conveying this concept with woozy visual force, in vignettes of Nemesis literally slicing off her own arms and replacing them with bionic ones that are antiques of ancient warfare to her massacred people, and Titus slaying his captors after being forced to watch his men annihilated, the plumes of hellfire spread from where they were bombarded in the background of the frame matched by the globs of mangled flesh and blood exploding from Titus’s foes.

All of this might be said to be a variation on the famous Nietzsche quote that opened John Milius’s Conan The Barbarian (1982) about that which doesn’t kill us makes us stronger, and Snyder makes the debt fairly obvious by naming one of his heroes Milius (and whilst not given as much depth as the other heroes, Milius is intriguing, and Duffy is eye-catching in the part, particularly in the climax when rampaging through Imperium soldiers with knife and bazooka). The notion of political and military repression being at once a tool for maintaining control but also so often the spur to rebellion and insurgency is articulated with equally obsessive focus. Kora assures Gunnar that Noble will massacre the village no matter if they completely comply with his demands, demands that will incidentally leave them to starve, purely because that’s the only kind of strategy his and the Imperium’s kind can wield. My chief objection to the story here was in terms of the dramatic backdrop: surely the Imperium has resources for supplying its military forces far beyond whatever produce the Veldt town can offer up. Still, the point is made early on this is as much an exercise in ritual terror as it is one of pragmatic need, and that need, whilst Noble proves willing to bend his methods for a while to ensure it’s met, is nonetheless not something the villagers and their defenders can count on forever. Also, the motive of drawing out Kora is also dangled: once he knows she’s connected with the village, Noble knows the best way to draw her out is to attack what she loves. Sindri’s murder by Noble, committed in front of the appalled and staggered villagers, including Gunnar whose slippery if not malicious dealings have brought down such wrath, is painted as a fairly mundane act for Noble, having committed this act at the outset more elaborately with Heron and his family. In one of the illustrative flashbacks to Kora’s own youth, Balisarius the now-dictator is shown performing exactly the same deeds.

Meanwhile Snyder presents the android Jimmy as having an ovular face with many small eye-like lamps, only two of which glow most of the time, but others flickers when he speaks with Sam and glimpses other events around the village: Snyder makes it plain that when all of those lights come, the serious ass-kicking will begin. Jimmy hovers around the edges of the conclaves and confrontations, but intervenes to exterminate a team of alien spies called Hawkshaws who are keeping tabs on Kora and her team for Noble. The notion of making the android the film’s melancholically meditative and poet muser – complete with Hopkins’ Augustinian tones – is an inspired one, as is the way, via the crown of garlands Sam gives him and which he later replaces with one he makes himself with pieces of antler and bone and also a crude cape made of sackcloth, he is transformed from an officially technological phenomenon to a veritable nature deity, incarnating the ancient idealisation of wisdom and decency a natural, elemental thing, something that wells from the state of sentience when it is not denied by the animal part of being. This is equated with Sam’s lucid-eyed, fresh-faced beauty as the embodiment of such essential, natural perfection (I have a feeling Maggi is on a quick path to stardom), and she in turn forms romantic connection with Aris, who has retained his humanity despite all efforts at warping it. Jimmy is introduced treated with the contempt of the soldiers, but they still expect him to save them in the fight, only for Jimmy to make his vote with a blaster that blows the head off a soldier holding Sam as a hostage. Jimmy doesn’t take this as a cue to immediately join the villagers’ cause, however, and he hovers in the pastures, musing on the conflict between his essential “nature” as an artificial intelligence invented to serve noble power instead subordinated to its devolved and evil version. Bae’s Nemesis meanwhile is introduced, in perhaps an effective blend of the Kurosawan mystique with sci-fi strangeness and emotional metaphor, being sought out to take on Harmada, and recognising the maddened creature as just another damaged and malformed by-product like herself and loaded with her own particular angst as a mother literally tortured by her incapacity to birth her young. A recognition that nonetheless can’t stave off the inevitable moment when Nemesis has to slay the scuttling alien.

Snyder might have nabbed his ramping effects, dramatically varying the speed of film during action scenes, from The Matrix (1999), but he’s long since claimed it as his specific dramatic and visual tool. Snyder’s passion for slow motion as device has become a meme-like aspect of his movies, derided by some, but it’s also, undeniably, the essence of his particular cinema, one that tries to capture physicality in many forms at a time when almost everything about contemporary filmmaking seems to repress it. He turns his fight scenes into spectacles where pivots of body become operatic arias that realise the emotions of his characters – something plain enough in Kora’s battle with the garrison soldiers where her righteously murderous rage flashes on her face when Snyder slows the action down before delivering the punch-lines of flashing blasters and slashing blades and spuming blood and tissue. But this only part of the visual texture: later, in the second part, the villagers get down to harvesting their crops with the warriors pressganged into labouring alongside them. Snyder turns this sequence, which would be for many directors a chore to be quickly passed over or ignored entirely, into a unit of deliriously lyrical filmmaking, replete with lingering, loving shots of threshing against low sunlight and water poured over bare bodies. The sequence illustrates Snyder’s idea of a pantheist-pastoral rite of salving passage for the fractured warriors and one that turns the idea behind the farmers’ lifestyle from a spoken ideal into a cinematically enacted one: the idea of working with their hands and enjoying the emotional balm as well as pleasure found in the kind of physical toil that produces bounty is captured, and with the reborn Green Man figure of Jimmy overlooking all.

There’s some timeliness, too, in watching Snyder’s work here in close conjunction with perhaps 2024’s signal, proper cinema release, Francis Ford Coppola’s boondoggle epic Megalopolis: despite vast and obvious differences in design and intent, both films keep alive the ideal of filmed storytelling as a realm of visual fervour and heedless, headlong big thinking that works to hold the audience arrested within an invented world. And, indeed, are both works that harken with unexpected and almost wilfully perverse vigour to the ideals not just of old-school epic filmmaking but even late silent-era cinema. I’ve noted before the qualities in Snyder’s work that recall to me the likes of Fritz Lang and Abel Gance, and this streak is entirely hatched out in Rebel Moon, sprawling across the colossal canvas of his work’s scope if not the cinema screen where it should be, immersing the viewer in this weird bricoleur universe he’s conjured, this swooning, flowing style blending the brutalist and the lyrical, the bloodthirsty and the dreamy. The overall design of Rebel Moon complicates even as it draws towards inevitabilities – another aspect that again recalls the kind of mythology it explores. But in the end, all the external concerns and veils of world-building fall away and the story returns to runic starkness: the small, outmatched band of heroes against the awesome might of the villains.

Boutella has, since catching eyes as the gimlet-eyed, razor-footed assassin in Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015), proven one of the most intriguing talents in current film, something even roles in movies as bad as Alex Kurtzman’s The Mummy (2017) couldn’t entirely ruin. She’s gifted with a balance of qualities that don’t usually come together so ideally for movie stars, vulpine beauty and a physical nimbleness and force that cuts the mustard in playing this kind of role, as well as an ability to seem soulful even when engaged in berserker mayhem, and it’s great to see her in a lead role. She’s backed up with some real stalwarts: Hounsou, for instance, has probably played the same kind of part a half-dozen times too many since Amistad (1997), the fighter who’s stalwart and poignant, and yet he always delivers in them. Skrein first gained attention first on the TV series Game of Thrones, but he’s found his cinematic niche as a particular kind of villain, where his weird and particular kind of S&M-accented New Wave band frontman handsomeness wields ideal vibes. Some enriching touches of world-building also deliver nicely twisted humour, like an alien that speaks using the mouth of some hapless human thrall it’s latched onto, and Noble’s bedroom habits. Not that Snyder’s invention is always consistent, like the very slightly augmented horses the farmers of Veldt use and the samurai flick take on the usual seedy tavern, pointing to one of the real challenges of creating effective space opera realms, where one must needs to keep things based in a convincingly grounded but also fantastically transformed version of the familiar. Rebel Moon also doesn’t entirely escape the fragmented quality his expanded Justice League: the way Jimmy’s experience threads through the film, for instance, feels isolated too much from the main thread of the drama, and in the climax extra ranks of bad guys keep coming out of seeming nowhere. On a more petty detail level, Fee’s fake beard as the older Balisarius amused and aggravated me to equal degrees.

Of course, liking Rebel Moon means liking or at least appreciating Snyder’s style, refined here, or perhaps rather unleashed, to a zenith. The peculiar lensing and patina he experimented with on Army of the Dead , where it seemed wilfully distracting, here resolves into a more complete aesthetic. Even the moments of visceral carnage are touched with a perverse, artisanal romanticism and air of the bygone, and Snyder is plainly trying, like some other filmmakers of the moment, to find ways to overcome the blank, smudgy prettiness of so much digital photography, and gain something vital and expressive from his games with focal plains. Much of the CGI is unconvincing, and not as worked over to be convincing as it would be in a megabudget blockbuster. But I got the feeling that it’s not really supposed to be – ever since 300 Snyder has embraced the idea that movie special effects, no matter how glossy and grandiose they get, are in the end only another tool, part of an aesthetic texture, rather than something that’s supposed to fool the eye. If I balked sometimes at the oceans of CGI blood and bone Snyder insists on decorating every action scene with, it’s not because it provoked squeamishness, but rather crossed the line into the self-consciously theatrical, when all the blasting energy weapons should probably rather be cooking and cauterising flesh. But then again, that theatricality is very obviously the point: this is Snyder’s theatre of sadomasochistic exultation.

The climactic battle is a wild and woozy blast that sees Titus’s well-laid traps and cunning grinding up the Imperium soldiers and outmanoeuvring Noble’s predictable notions of being sneaky, with echoes of both World War I trench warfare, the Spanish Civil War, and Vietnam, as the rebels ambush the attacking soldiers from underground tunnels. In one of Snyder’s more ruthlessly memorable tweaks, he has Noble personally descend into one of the tunnels and cut a swathe through the rebels, hacking and blasting their numbers entirely indifferent to age and gender, clearly in his element as another of the honed Imperium weapons. The rebels use a recovered Imperium gunship, which Jimmy has brought to working order, to add some real firepower to their resistance, and later take advantage of the chaos to use the ship to fly to and board the Dreadnought in posing as wounded. There, Kora turns the warship’s own turret weapons around on the bridge and blows it to smithereens, but doesn’t manage to take out Noble, who demands a more personal touch to his defeat. Snyder might well be gilding the retrofuturist lily more than a little given his futuristic world-blasting spaceships take as much time to aim and fire their weapons as a World War II tank or an actual 1906-model Dreadnought ship, but never mind all that: Snyder delivers one of the more relishable comeuppances for his fascist villains to be found in modern cinema with this flourish.

When Jimmy finally enters the fray and cuts loose on the Imperium soldiers, decimating their ranks armed only with an antler as a weapon, the film’s lyrical and visceral personas, its particular and oddly idealistic take on the polarisation of nature and technology, finally unite. Importantly, too, Snyder keeps dotting the standard action stuff with jolts of strangeness stemming from his careful setting up, particularly when Kora has a vision of the Dreadnought’s tethered colossus power-source, which she means to sabotage, suddenly wrenching itself free of its tethers and announcing support for her actions. And, of course, Noble gets his in an aptly nasty and this time final manner, and Snyder delivers a genuinely and appropriately madcap sense of ferocity and outsized emotive meaning with the spectacle of him and Kora duelling with energy swords within the rapidly disintegrating Dreadnought. Snyder offers a hymn to mutual responsibility in couplehood as Gunnar helps Kora defeat their enemy, but Gunnar’s wounds finally claim his life in a last flourish of tragedy. The last scenes of Rebel Moon make it plain that Snyder means to continue the story, as Titus informs Kora that Issa is still alive in some form and they need to find her to continue the campaign against the Imperium.

Snyder ends the movie on the threatening image of Balisarius taking the news of a defeat in his stride before lording over a parade of his military might – one head of the hydra cut off, but many more remain, and now this kind of bellicose power has been challenged in just the way it likes. Recent events seem to have shown Snyder’s more on the ball than many give credit for. I for one am very eager to see if Snyder goes further and what he does with it: the chief challenge I ask of him is to abandon the crutch of stories like Seven Samurai and get deep into the guts of his invented universe. Because god knows, something current, ambitious genre moviemaking desperately needs is more of what Snyder tries to deliver in Rebel Moon, in its quasi-originality and particularly in comparison to the way, for instance, Villeneuve somehow managed to neuter and suborn the strangeness of Herbert whilst affecting to honour him, and when Star Wars has been bludgeoned into lifeless, focus group-led submission. Rebel Moon isn’t just Snyder’s best work to date but in many ways is the most enfolding work of big-budget cinema I’ve seen since Peter Jackson shelved his Tolkien. Except, of course, that it got nowhere near a cinema.

Standard
1930s, 1950s, Crime/Detective, Horror/Eerie, Thriller

Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) / House of Wax (1953)

.

Directors: Michael Curtiz / Andre de Toth
Screenwriters: Don Mullaly, Carl Erickson / Crane Wilbur

By Roderick Heath

The concept of works fashioned by human hands, things born of our perpetual desire to render our own bodies and faces in our art and imbue it with distinct life might just well break down that sure barrier between the unreal and real, inanimate and living, is one that’s long haunted storytelling. It’s inherent in the myth of Pygmalion, the wish to perfect that which is imperfect through representation, the allure of such creations that can sometimes transfix the artist more than real life. The strangeness and unease in this act can be traced perhaps to very simple nervous and neural phenomena: when we catch a glimpse of something even vaguely human-shaped, we react – perhaps imperceptibly, but still we react. For a tiny portion of time our mind and body gear up to react to another presence, whether in fear, friendship, or desire. Part of our brain processes the human-like as human, and it takes a few precious moments of reason to separate them again. Even as aesthetics and the ideas behind them have evolved and art styles changed, so many of still hold an instinctual awe of a kind for the person who had transcribe a human visage exactly and faithfully into the mediums of paper or clay or stone: that, we still essentially hold, is where artistic talent starts.

The mystique of the wax museum, a popular subject in literature, movies, and comics back when, recalls an art form’s roots in the delights of musty Victoriana, of bygone modes of hype and sensation, a prototypical version of what we now call the “uncanny valley” effect of being confronted with a blurred line between the human and our self-created simulacra. In our age of artificial intelligence and other increasingly destabilising technology, we might even be losing our sure grasp on where all things begin and end. Exhibits like the “Chamber of Horrors” as part of the illustrious Madame Tussaud’s waxworks helped cement the connection in the popular mind between the idea of the wax figure and a particular brand of lurid fascination with the macabre, the threat and promise of a place to go and be thrilled by particularly vivid, three-dimensional depictions of acts of violence and criminality. In effect, a prototype of cinema. The plotline of Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax, two cinematic variations on the same story by Charles Belden, evokes this phenomenon via the mystique of the wax figure, artworks that mimic the human with more superficial realism in their pliable surfaces and solidity than any other.

Well, that’s the idea, anyway. In reality we’ve all had a good, guilty chuckle when we see a picture of a wax replica of a celebrity that didn’t quite come off and scarcely resembles their famous subject, and wonder how the makers got things so badly wrong. The idea of the wax museum has, nonetheless, had a long and storied place in pop culture, long outlasting the time when it was a fairly common and popular form of entertainment. Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax go a step further and contend with a basic and eternally disturbing aspect of art, the constant promise and danger of substituting the imperfect, the unpliable, the rudely self-determined object of fascination that is the human being for the more perfect, the pliable, the biddable – the dead. The eternal, umbilical, erotically charged relationship of beauty and ugliness looms, and the problem of exalting what we find beautiful in the Western art tradition, which for long wrestled with the nicety of separating what the eye finds beautiful about the human form from the carnal. This is an extra ingredient in what makes Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax so intriguing, the fetishistic obsession with the beauty-ugly divide realized through the prism of art, a zone that is, in terms of its own mystique, is able to hold such things in distinct orbits.

Belden was a writer on the make about Hollywood in the 1930s, with work including writing several of the then-popular Charlie Chan movies, but his greatest claim to fame was the unpublished short story “The Wax Works,” which Belden turned into a play titled Mystery of the Wax Museum, and sold to Warner Bros., when the studio was eager to get in on the horror movie craze sparked by Dracula (1931). Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax are films that bespeak fascinating differences between the screen culture of the early 1930s and twenty years later, as well as the disparate sensibilities of Michael Curtiz and Andre de Toth, their respective directors. Both movies served as showcases for technological innovations in moviemaking and viewing that didn’t entirely take. Mystery of the Wax Museum was filmed in the Two-Color Technicolor process, an experimental technique Hollywood had been toying with for several years (having utilised it for a few gaudy minutes of The Phantom of the Opera, 1926, for instance) but proved only a  precursor to the eventual, successful three-colour format. House of Wax remains the most iconic and fitting entry in the initial run of movies shot in 3D, a format that’s had revivals and fads ever since but has never really taken hold as a permanent way of watching movies.

The material of the story is peculiarly suited to such forays of showmanship and hoopla given the plot involves exactly those things, on top of the connection with earlier versions of the same urge linking innovation with art and commerce. Curtiz made two Two-Color Technicolor horror movies: Mystery of the Wax Museum followed his Doctor X (1932). Both films featured Lionel Atwill, whose sleek, smooth speaking voice was made for talkies. Atwill, born in Croydon, London, had been a respected stage actor who made occasional movie appearances before Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum abruptly made him a horror film stalwart and star, although his stature never quite matched the totemic power of major rivals Boris Karloff and Béla Lugosi. Atwill had more luck in retaining his credibility as a character actor than them, however, at least until his career was badly wounded by a scandal involving an orgy he allegedly hosted and subsequent conviction for lying to police. The second time around for Belden’s villain proved the charm in minting a major horror star, as Vincent Price was cast in the Atwill role for House of Wax. Price had appeared in some of horror films and dark melodramas before House of Wax, including the lead in The Invisible Man Returns (1940) and glaring haughtily down from the gothic mansion in Dragonwyck (1946). But it was his appearance in House of Wax that finally turned him immediately from a well-known character actor to a legend specifically associated evermore with horror.

Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax share not just an essential plot, but many sequences, shots, and lines of dialogue. And yet there are also significant differences between the two films that go well beyond slight revision and make them highly distinct. Mystery of the Wax Museum is perhaps less a horror movie that a mystery-thriller with a couple of sidelong swerves into the grotesque, even as the underlying designs of the story are very much in horror territory, designs House of Wax brings it out more completely. The story in both revolves around a talented sculptor and artist – called Ivan Igor (Atwill) in the 1933 film, Henry Jarrod (Price) in the remake – who’s taken up working in wax and brought it to a new exalted level of expressive realism, but refuses to indulge in sensationalism, which means his work is much less famous and profitable than it ought to be. This drives his business partner to burn the museum and all its exhibits down for the insurance, leaving the agonised and intransigent artist to die in the conflagration. Sometime later the artist turns up, apparently crippled by injuries from the fire but now making wax figures with the aid of assistants, and he opens a museum all too eager to deliver macabre exhibits to thrill patrons. Meanwhile a spate of mysterious disappearances, suicides, and murders occurs in the city, with corpses disappearing from the morgue, and eventually a keen-eyed woman with good reason to pay attention notices that several figures in the museum resemble the dead and missing people. Eventually an inquisitive woman discovers the artist is killing these people and using their bodies as his exhibits, moulding them under wax coatings, and that he’s hiding hideous disfigurement of the flesh and mind behind an unblemished mask.

Quite a few well-regarded movies made in the 1930s and ‘40s that later had elaborate remakes became infamously difficult to see and some were even actively suppressed by studios and producers who didn’t want the later productions to have contend with revival screenings for comparison and filched profits.  Mystery of the Wax Museum was unseen for a long time, but wasn’t just shut deep in a vault somewhere, but thought to actually be a lost movie for some time, until a print was unearthed in the late 1960s. Upon revival, Mystery of the Wax Museum , which had like so many lost films built up a legendary aura, proved disappointing for many. The most immediate contrast of Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax is that the former opens with a prologue set in London in 1921 before the bulk of it unfolds in 1933 Manhattan; House of Wax’s timeframe meanwhile is shifted back to the New York at the turn of the Twentieth century. Mystery of the Wax Museum is ironically modernist in its approach to horror; De Toth’s film engages with a brand of jaunty period nostalgia, inflected with a rather anthropological delight in that past and its mores. Curtiz’s Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum diptych might even be said to represent a very small subgenre of horror cinema, Art Deco Horror (a subgenre also inhabited by Edgar G. Ulmer’s The Black Cat, 1934), taking on the challenge of blending a palpably current-day, urban setting, contrasting the highly psychological and stylised brand of horror influenced by German Expressionism, but with elements of that other style nesting within the modern, like a canker. Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum play fascinatingly with imagery where the shiny, new, teeming, busy, mundane contemporary world exists like a shell around things that are more primal, gleaming, chitinous technology cheek-by-jowl with twisted and run-down structures, well-lit and hyper-modern abodes above dank basements and secret passages.

De Toth was, like Curtiz, born in Hungary, and again like him could take on just about any genre and force it to serve his creative bent, even if he was generally more at home in harder-boiled genres. Like so many European talents, de Toth had fled the continent in the late 1930s, finding refuge in England at first, working with another Hungarian émigré, the movie impresario and director Alexander Korda, before moving on to Hollywood. At some point in his career de Toth lost the sight in one eye and after that perpetually wore an eye patch, but he still wielded enough charisma to be married to star Veronica Lake for a time. De Toth had clashes with studios and preferred to avoid getting attached to A-list productions to maintain a level of control and independence. Amongst his striking early movies as a Hollywood director were None Shall Escape (1944), a truly fascinating attempt to encompass the Holocaust before its full extent was known in a movie with a speculative element, unfolding in flashback from the perspective of a then-entirely theoretical post-victory war crimes tribunal. Dark Waters (1944) was a sublimely eerie and atmospheric psychological thriller with Merle Oberon that transferred a Gaslight-esque plot amidst Southern swamps. John Ford encouraged de Toth to get into Westerns, and he made several, as well as the intense streetwise thriller Crime Wave (1954), which carried over House of Wax star Phyllis Kirk. De Toth’s touch often evoked a clammy psychological intensity and a worldview trending dark, even sometimes nihilistic, that sometimes tipped over into the quite maniacal, as in his last complete feature, the ultra-cynical war drama Play Dirty (1968).

House of Wax is, despite being atypical in his career, easily de Toth’s best-known work, and its success is made even more ironic by the fact that de Toth was determined to prove 3D could be an effective expressive tool despite the fact that with one eye blind he couldn’t see the fruits of his own labour, as 3D depends on a quirk of the stereoscopic wiring between eye and brain. Whilst it’s far from necessary to see House of Wax in 3D to enjoy it, viewing it in that format does nonetheless reveal the depth and degree of cleverness and oddball wit de Toth still managed to invest in his direction, the constant use of the frame’s depth and fringes for uses of the 3D effect, some of them relatively obvious – objects being thrown or cast at the camera – others more unexpected, like figures suddenly dashing into the frame from the foreground. De Toth’s more standard aesthetic choices with House of Wax moved away from Curtiz’s ironic balance of stylisation and realism, and instead adopted a tone that’s almost like an old-time carnival – one part lush, witty detail, one part band-and-bunting showmanship.

Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax also reveal the different tenors of their eras, and it could be fairly said that the films taken together testify that zeitgeists do indeed oscillate back from the radical to the conservative, even if the shift is by no means entirely straightforward. The 1933 films contains stuff permitted in early talkie Hollywood but long buried by the time of House of Wax, and nowhere is this more clear than in the characterisations of their respective heroines. In the former film, focus sits squarely on reporter Florence Dempsey (Glenda Farrell), a motor-mouthed, hard-living, on-the-make flapper, a rough draft for Lois Lane and every other go-get-‘em girl reporter character in the canon: Farrell herself parlayed the part into a slightly toned-down variation in the Torchy Blane movies series three years later. Kirk’s Sue Allen in House of Wax is, by contrast, a young woman without a job and many friends in a big city she’s evidently fairly new to, quiet, lacking confidence, broke, and a little desperate. Florence fills in, despite her offbeat, almost antiheroic qualities, as a fairly standard investigator protagonist. She’s never in much danger, and her role in the story skirts participating in the plot motif of the crazed artist-killer seeking his ideal victim-artwork beyond zeroing in on the mystery. The function of damsel in distress is instead filled by Florence’s roommate and pal Charlotte Duncan (Fay Wray), a more decorous lass who wants to marry a young artist for love in contrast to Florence’s merrily pragmatic determination to marry a millionaire.

House of Wax takes up the idea of two contrasting young women living together to weather life in the big city, one woman eagerly mercenary and streetwise and the other more romantic, but reverses the emphasis. The more worldly character, in House of Wax’s case Sue’s roommate, the talkative, playful, decent-hearted gold-digger Cathy Gray (Caroline Jones), is swiftly murdered, and the killer’s eye falls next on Sue. Sue concatenates Florence’s story function as the canny and attentive eye and the object of the villain’s machinations, at once damsel in distress and dogged heroine. In this regard she’s something rather striking in terms of horror movie history, a rough conceptual draft for the Final Girl, an archetype that would when properly defined in later decades, be essentially the same combination. Both films open with long sequences where Igor/Jarrod is discovered by a roving camera at work on a sculpture amidst his creations in his first museum in the blissful solitude of nocturnal labour. He receives a visit from an interested art critic and patron who admires his work and dangles the ultimate prize of not just a sympathetic investor but also genuine critical heralding, but then Igor/Jarrod contends with his frustrated and rapacious business partner, leading to the fire that consumes the museum.

In Mystery of the Wax Museum, the interested patron-critic is named Gallatalin (Claude King), and in House of Wax is called Sidney Wallace (Paul Cavanagh): Wallace plays a more substantial role in the story, as Jarrod contacts him after his reappearance and secures his backing to build his new museum. The disgruntled partner in the 1933 film is Joe Worth (Edwin Maxwell), who’s later revealed to have shifted into outright criminal enterprise by getting into bootlegging back in the States. In the ’53 film, he’s Matthew Burke (Roy Roberts), characterised more as a smug, greedy creep. Both films nonetheless hinge on the spectacle of conflagration the business partner unleashes, noting with deadpan anguish as the villain starts setting fire to the artworks the sculptor has poured his life into, the latter gazing on in dumbstruck uncertainty as a match is struck, flames start to lick, and a life is destroyed, before snapping into desperate, doomed effort to stop his enemy. There’s an unvarnished brutality to the simplicity of the action that reveals an entire paradigm of life, the passion of the artist versus the ruthlessness of the businessman, in both versions. Indeed, it might be the most pointed and metaphorically potent realisation of the theme in cinema.

Both movies linger on the conflagration as a spectacle of queasy violence where, even though the figures melting layer by layer aren’t human or aware, their destruction still carries a bizarre pathos as skin drips away, eyeballs tumble from their sockets, mouths gape and disgorge flame: they are the products of human love and labour, talent and dreaming, and moreover Igor/Jarrod relates to them practically as people, being he converses with mentally and projects his foibles and fantasies onto. Such is the nature of every artist, the story suggests, and a nature that when nurtured is healthy and vital but can become its own, particular kind of madness.  The destruction of art, its sacrifice to money, power, and ignorance, is a crime, moral and financial, and a wound to the psyche of both artist and the world, one that will later be transmuted into morbid ritual of revenge and refashioning. The basic proposition of Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax might even be said to be a thesis on the necessity of the horror genre for creators of a particular bent, a maladaptation demanded by being sensitised to the Sadean instinct underlying so much of the world that hates as much as it wants to love, wants to destroy as much as it wants beautiful things, in a constant dance. Later in House of Wax when Jarrod tells Sidney about his plans to this time create a chamber of horrors, he muses with a blend of knowing and contempt, “I’m going to give the people what they want – sensation, horror shock. Send them out into the streets to tell their friends how wonderful it is to be scared to death.” Meanwhile the artist’s revenge on the destructive businessman is a layered thing — the capitalist has so much power over the artist in the moment, and yet only the artist can grant the kind of immortalisation so many seek, in whatever form they choose, and that form might well be in justifiably cruel and mortifying travesty.

De Toth’s version of the fire scene is the most vivid and strange, in part because it’s a visual concept made for the full colour effect, and the greater contrast De Toth offers between the fury of Jarrod and Burke’s battle, a fight that lays bare the mutual contempt of their polarised breeds, and the whirling of the flames and the passive, pathetic statues slowly liquefying, as well as de Toth and Price placing greater emphasis on Jarrod’s desperate, forlorn witnessing of the destruction, and enacting of that destruction as also his own. Curtiz ends his version of the scene with the aghast Igor standing amidst his burning figures. De Toth builds to a literal climactic eruption as Burke pauses to make sure the destruction is complete by turning on an unlit gas lamp, and the gas explodes seconds after Jarrod scurried for cover under a balcony that collapses. Igor/Jarrod have certain figures in their repertoire that they’re particularly proud of and obsess over – including Joan of Arc and Marie Antoinette, the latter in particular the artist’s perfect embodiment of fetishized, transient beauty. Both figures are, of course, also based on women who died horribly, and so the allure of the created and exalted beauty already has a morbid undertow: what is beautiful will be destroyed violently, and that’s part of its beauty. These two figures become keys to the artist-fiend’s later killings: the Joan of Arc figure is recreated, and the Marie Antoinette must be replaced by Charlotte/Sue. Curtiz delivers a moment of ripe cinematic wit, duly reproduced by de Toth, in which Igor sets sight on Charlotte for the first time, and the modern street clothes she wears are momentarily replaced in the imposed artist vision by the finery of the queen. This moment is twinned with the later unmasking of the artist’s true, ruined face, one sight offering beauty entrapped within the prism of the gaze of the artist, the other ugliness hidden beneath an equally fashioned and affected surface.

The transformation of a person into a work of art is one of those ideas that constantly proves irresistible given that ancient dance of the real and reproduced – to be perfected is also to be destroyed, to be possessed perfectly also lost. Of course, the version of this idea offered in the two films, with corpses simply enclosed in layers of wax with some eye lenses and wigs for extra camouflage, raises a lot of questions, like what happens when the summer gets hot and the corpses under the wax start to smell. But of course, the logic of mania, the dream-logic of realised dark fantasy, is beyond such petty concerns. Mystery of the Wax Museum takes an extraordinarily long team to get to its reveals, with the storyline threading through discursions that vaguely relate to the main plot, including how Worth and his bootlegger crew also deal dope. Igor’s chief assistant in manufacturing the dummies, ‘Professor’ Darcy, aka Sparrow (Arthur Edmund Carewe), is an addict who gets his fixes from Worth in return for doing him favours, and allows Igor in turn to keep tabs on his hated nemesis. Meanwhile the death of a singer, Joan Gale (Monica Bannister), gets her rich playboy boyfriend George Winton (Gavin Gordon) arrested on suspicion he might have been involved in her demise, even as it looks like suicide. Florence, desperate for a story after her editor Jim (Frank McHugh) threatens to fire her unless she gets a story on a slow New Year’s Eve, latches onto Gale’s death and, striking up an uneasy camaraderie with the victimised-feeling Winton his prison cell, vows to get him cleared and find out what’s going on. Meanwhile Charlotte comes to Igor’s attention because she dating his new, young amanuensis Ralph Burton (Allan Vincent), and when palling around the waxworks with her roommate Florence starts getting wind of what’s really going on when she notices the similarity of Igor’s Joan of Arc figure to Gale.

House of Wax clears out just about all of this narrative busy-work, focusing squarely on Sue, who is drawn close to Jarrod like Charlotte to Igor because her artist friend Scott Andrews (Paul Picerni), a talented sculptor, finds work with Jarrod. In Mystery of the Wax Museum Worth’s comeuppance takes place off-screen, where in House of Wax it’s the first order of business once the time frame jumps forward. Burke in de Toth’s film has just settled the insurance claim for the fire after a lot of questions about Jarrod, whose body wasn’t found after the fire, and he’s proclaiming his new wealth to his current girlfriend, the apparently giggly airhead Cathy, who then deftly manoeuvres, to Burke’s discomforted acquiescence, to suggest they get married. When he goes to his office to collect his cash for a trip to Niagara Falls with Cathy, Burke is assaulted by the hideously burned Jarrod and strangled to death, and his death made to look like suicide by dropping him down an elevator shaft with a noose about his neck. Months later, Cathy, revealed to be not nearly as naïve as she acted with Burke but still possessed of a laughing fatalism about life and love, benevolently offers to help her roommate Sue out with her late rent if she can squeeze some money out of her latest beau, and stakes Sue for a meal. Cathy goes out to try and get a job but comes back unsuccessful. With her harridan landlady (Riza Royce) harassing her for rent, Sue ascends to get the money off Cathy, but instead finds her friend dead on her bed and the disfigured fiend lurking in the apartment.

Sue flees, chased by the killer, and after a life-and-death pursuit through the empty streets manages to reach refuge at the house of Scott and his mother (Angela Clarke). Subsequently Sue becomes fixated with Jarrod and his new waxworks, called the House of Wax, also when she sees his Joan of Arc figure and realises it’s a perfect likeness of Cathy. In both films the artist-killer has assistants in on his plot – Sparrow in Mystery of the Wax Museum, whom Igor sardonically calls a great artist providing him with fine wax figures despite his obviously seedy, junkie status; in House of Wax, the alcoholic ex-con Carl Hendricks, alias Leon Averill (Nedrick Young) and deaf-mute Igor (Charles Bronson, billed at this point in his career by his birth name Buchinsky). House of Wax’s Igor stands in for the deaf and gruesome-looking Hugo (Matthew Betz) in the 1933 film, who is  a red herring in that movie, where Bronson’s Igor is a proper villainous aide who helps Jarrod capture Sue and fights Scott, even trying to arrange his decapitation under a guillotine that’s part of the museum exhibits. Naming the secondary heavy Igor after the villain of the earlier film when Jarrod isn’t defined like Mystery of the Wax Museum’s as an emissary of foreign culture was likely intended as the tip of the hat, even if today the idea of an impish villain’s assistant named Igor has become the stuff of genre lore and lampoon: when I watched the movie recently with an audience on the big screen everyone couldn’t help but laugh when his name was spoken.

The younger artist, Ralph/Scott, is presented for contrast, embodying the idea of callow promise and the need to learn, even as he’s possessed of natural virtues, young, good-looking, romantically attached to the woman who is the face of the ideal Marie Antoinette. The relationship of the artists is characterised with intriguing difference in the two movies. Igor is relentlessly critical towards Ralph: “Anatomy!” he groans when he looks at one of Ralph’s sculptures, a clumsy female nude: “Heaven forgive you. You must have studied with the sideshow freaks.” By comparison, Jarrod is supportive and patient with Scott in refining his sculptures, guiding him carefully as Scott makes a clay bust of a man in raging grief, instructing him in how to create the image of the man’s bitterness, with the subtext of course that Jarrod is exploring his own whilst using Scott’s hands, much as he uses bodies of hapless people. The narcissism of the artist is noted in sarcastic metaphor through the assistants, too, as Hugo in the Curtiz film and Igor in de Toth’s both prove to be fine sculptors but only to the extent that they can reproduce their own face. Wray had been carried over from Doctor X, where she played the titular doctor’s menaced daughter. Especially considering this was also the year when she staked her own claim to movie legend by appearing in King Kong, it’s particularly hard to shake the feeling she’s wasted here as the beauty for this particular beast. She is nonetheless used as part of the movie’s driving thematic contrasts, both paired with and contrasting Florence. She’s introduced in the movie delivering a dose of sex appeal, exercising long gams in the apartment she keeps with Florence, and Wray’s particular beauty, at once sensual and doll-like, her unmistakably breathy voice with its curious vocal coach-exacerbated uptown accentuations, are used to offset Farrell’s hard honking wiseacre and much less pure appeal.

The screenwriters of Mystery of the Wax Museum, Don Mullaly and Carl Erickson, both died within a couple of years of working on the movie, in circumstances that don’t sound all that unlike their artist antihero, creatives broken in body and mind by the travails of reality. House of Wax’s script was written by Crane Wilbur, a weathered professional who was a teenager at the time his script is set and so was placing some personal nostalgia into it. Wilber had landed in Hollywood on the back of 1920s theatrical success with his play The Cat And the Canary, filmed multiple times and plainly evoked in the killer’s appearance in black cat and hat, the same as the Cat fiend in his work, and through this version marks the transmission of this archetype of a killer on the loose through the next, oncoming era of horror movies. Wilbur had exactly the right huckster know-how, as well as a knowing since of what would today be called the meta element of the tale as a story musing in the inseparable nature of human life and art and the temptation to take it too far. This bobs up jokily in moments like Jarrod noting Booth’s famous post-assassination gestures as well the wax figure of him as similarly intransigent – “It’s not easy to shut an actor’s mouth.” But this aspect also flows through the drama as a whole. In Mystery of the Wax Museum, when Igor gives his tour of his new exhibition, it still includes many literary and historical scenes as well as macabre flourishes, but some of the exhibits give signs of his mental condition, like a display of a dying and crippled Napoleon. Still this version of the scene is free from the idea Wilbur and de Toth introduced of Jarrod being reborn as a wilful exhibitor of atrocity. Thus for Jarrod it becomes a jolly parade of horrors, starting with a display of a Neanderthal man dragging a mate by the hair: “That’s how your ancestor carried his bride across the threshold,” Jarrod notes with brutal humour, before continuing through displays of torture and murder with gallows wit, including Marat getting stabbed in the bath (“The poor man was dreadfully embarrassed.”) and the dropping guillotine blade severing a wax head, that set the New York ladies fainting.

House of Wax mediates the changed role of its heroine by placing greater emphasis on police investigation, with Detective Lieutenant Tom Brennan (Frank Lovejoy) and his partner Sgt Jim Shane (Dabbs Greer) investigating Cathy’s murder and Sue’s reports about the killer, making a little like a period version of the cops from Dragnet with their taut professionalism and terse interrogation styles. Later, when Sue reports her anxieties about the museum and the Joan of Arc figure to him, Brennan seems to patronise her, but then starts following up on her lead. He and Shane head to the House of Wax and check it out, leading to a great little moment when Greer’s Shane casually asks Averill questions about Jarrod and his work, and his and Averill’s exchange subtly takes on the charged, mutually aware tension of a cop and perp talking, despite Shane maintaining cover (“I’m an engineer on the Ninth Avenue El – it was nice talking to you.”). Later, Shane clicks on where he remembers Averill from, identifying him as a prisoner who got released because he displayed artistic talent by painting of the Last Supper on the cell of his wall. In Mystery of the Wax Museum, although the cops are given much less screen time, the investigative side of the story climaxes when they nab Sparrow and break him down by refusing to give him a fix until he talks, whereupon he breaks down and tells them about Igor’s killings, proclaiming, “The whole place is a morgue!” This scene is replayed in House of Wax although with the drug angle replaced with Brennan provoking Averill’s alcoholism by pouring out booze before him. Of course, both movies feature shared crucial moments and basically the same climax. Once Igor/Jarrod makes a move to claim his Marie Antoinette, she beats at his face in a moment plainly echoing The Phantom of the Opera’s famous unmasking scene, and finds what seems to be the artist’s face is actually a wax mask that shatters and reveals the scorched visage below. The victim, stunned by this horrible discovery, is then clamped to a table down in the laboratory where the artist has built an elaborate system to coat bodies with molten wax, poured from a colossal bubbling vat.

Much of the entertainment value of Mystery of the Wax Museum wells from its particular pre-Production Code energy and louche, Prohibition-and-Depression-era morals. Touches like Florence purloining several bottles of bootleg booze and telling the cops she’s only taking her cut like they will would be entirely verboten just a couple of years later under the Production Code. Florence comes armed with dialogue like enquiring of a cop she knows, “How’s your sex life?”, and her barbed, mutually insulting, covertly flirtatious relationship with editor Jim is replete with magnificently hardboiled quips (“Did you ever hear of such a thing as a death mask?” “I used to be married to one.” “And it came to life and divorced you, I know all about that.”), and Florence doesn’t just seem ahead of her time for 1933 but maybe today too. When she talks to him in his prison cell, Winton gives Florence a sharp harangue about the propensity for the media to play on public prejudices against particular types of people, including his type, and amass every bit of trouble he’s ever been in into a semblance of a portrait of a monster – another touch that feels disconcertingly modern. Trouble is Florence, Winton, and other characters are basically grafted onto a story she barely has anything to do with. The discursions into Worth’s bootlegging and Florence gallivanting around town with the smitten but wimpy Winton never connect in vital fashion with the actual, main story. Lee Tracy’s reporter hero in Doctor X was similarly out of place and screen-hogging, but he was at least also called upon to be the movie’s eccentric kind of romantic hero. Florence and Jim’s confrontations seem highly inspired by Ben Hecht’s The Front Page and in turn creates the blueprint for Howard Hawks’ gender-swapped take on it, His Girl Friday (1940), but barely interact with the rest of the movie: the closest the story comes is when Florence sneaks into the basement of the bootleggers’ headquarters and sees the scarred fiend lurking in the shadows, and races to tell the police she thinks a crate down there contains a body, only to prove to be filled with liquor bottles.

As funny and entertaining as this stuff is, it chokes off any real suspense or moodiness in the story until its climactic scenes. The less cluttered storyline of House of Wax isn’t always used to greater narrative effect, that said, with de Toth offering time-outs from the plot for vignettes that blur the line with depicting and indulging comedy-tinged ballyhoo, even as this reinforces the film’s subtext. These include a paid hype-man (Reggie Rymal) snapping paddleballs to draw a crowd outside the House of Wax and doubling as de Toth’s carnival barker for his own movie, showing off the reaches of 3D effects (at one point, as he affects to playfully tease prospective patrons for the museum, he turns to the audience and affects to see a man with a bag of popcorn, aiming his paddleball at the bag), in scenes that delightfully if goofily break down the barrier between the movie and the art of publicity. An extended sequence of can-can dancers watched by Sue and Scott that constitutes something of a prototypical music video within the film, complete with sexy hype as one of the dancers bends over and shows off her frilly-knickered derriere to the camera. 3D, the wonder of the age, placing the butt right in your face! But the more efficient storyline also lets de Toth stage one of the great horror movie sequences, a superbly-shot and deftly sustained but not overdone suspense sequence, in which Jarrod pursues Sue through the deserted midnight city. The rain-soaked, mist-flocked streets prove a zone of deep, musty blues and greys and enveloping shadows, gritty brickwork and cobbles, bill posters and drains and painted lettering, windows of buildings and shops glow orange with falsely promising hominess. But Sue find she’s entirely alone in this space, a wilderness she has to survive, where a passing cabbie won’t stop and there’s no certainty any random person will open their door to her. In effect, this sequence then illustrates Sue’s forlorn state as a jobless and now almost entirely friendless person in the city, taken to a hyperbolic extreme.

De Toth manages here to take visuals that recall the similarly articulated atmosphere of Val Lewton’s urban horror films but render them more dynamic, whilst alleviating the tension with some well-judged, off-hand humour, like one of the landlady’s gentleman tenants urging her forward before him to investigate Sue’s screams. Meanwhile Sue’s ploys to avoid the killer include taking off her shoes to make less noise (ah, a horror movie character who isn’t an utter moron!) and hovering in a dark alley on the chance her pursuer will go off in the wrong direction. Finally she makes it to the Andrews’ door and starts frantically bashing on it and screaming for help, a moment of agonised revealing as it attracts the killer back again. This scene in particular feels like the direct inspiration for Laurie Strode similarly banging on the door to be let in as Michael Myers strides towards her in Halloween (1978). Sue as a heroine seems a lot less progressive in bent than Florence – just about anyone would – but this partly conceals de Toth’s more careful characterisation of her as an innocent abroad, and the way he engages with another theme that’s become more doggedly common over the years. Sue is distinguished as a heroine by her mix of specific qualities: less adventurous and, one might suspect, more primly virginal than Cathy, and also an outsider, made slightly more aware of her surroundings and the nature of portents as a result – all qualities that would, again, connect her with the Final Girl archetype. Sue’s conviction that she’s not just paranoid and traumatised but that she’s onto something with the imitation of Cathy reflects the female audience’s sense of its own intuitive wisdom, and her travails grow out of an innate refusal to be allayed when she knows something is wrong. When Jarrod comes across her inspecting the Joan of Arc figure closely, she’s appropriately contrite for climbing on his artwork whilst he remains solicitous in his fixated rapture over her; Sue nonetheless keeps her wits about her enough to suggest that Averill, who actually did the moulding of the statue according to Jarrod, was keen-eyed enough to give Joan two pierced ears after photos of Cathy, whereas Sue knows well that the statue, like Cathy, has only one piercing.

Florence might feel grafted unnecessarily onto the story of Mystery of the Wax Museum, but she also services and embodies the divided aesthetic Curtiz goes for. She incarnates the modern, cutting against the whole concept of gothic horror but also finding it lurking underneath the surface of the big bustling city, just as the film contrasts Igor’s artistic ideals and his murderous take on performance art with all the screwball wit and sass of 1933. Mystery of the Wax Museum associates the new world with energy, harsh but good-humoured realism, progress, and cosmopolitan values, and the old world with the decorous, classical, the aesthetic, the bygone and high-falutin’ – the stasis of the dead. One subtext of Curtiz’s film is the vitality of cinema, particularly as practiced in Hollywood, versus the pretty death of other art forms in the cultural inheritance – or at least in the popular understanding of them still switched off from avant garde realms and steeped in decaying Victoriana. Curtiz’s film is, for all its generic hesitancies, is utterly confident in its moment. House of Wax, by contrast, became one of a wave of nostalgic movies that cropped up in the 1950s – one of the first real pop culture nostalgia waves, which mostly looked back to the 1920s and ‘30s, particularly in recalling the grand old days of the classic gangsters and Prohibition, but some cast their mind back a little further to the turn of the century and its scandals.

De Toth’s film obliges itself, partly through its period setting, to move in a different direction to the precursor. House of Wax offers a feedback loop in making a film both about and filled with publicity, alongside considerations of art and commerce and their interaction, finding delight and new energy in the fusion rather than simply polarising them. It’s a film both about and defined by the idea of art as a phenomenon that might separable from its audience when being created but ultimately only achieves substance with us. Not too much of a stretch to see in this de Toth’s manifesto as a director who accepted a career on the margins unafraid of a little hoopla, as well as a metaphor for the film itself, made to sell a new format in viewing, a new way of seeing, of enjoying the spectacle of cinema both for itself and with a new vantage. De Toth’s conveyed nostalgia for an America he didn’t remember is part of the tapestry – the stone-faced polka dancers in the rooftop beer garden, the horse-drawn fire engines and cop wagons, the willowy young fortune hunter getting strapped into her corset like body armour in emulation of a celebrity of the day, the cage elevators and chats about how automobiles are getting fast enough to kill people now. The 1933 film’s use of a waxwork of Voltaire as both a plot point and a source of humour is revised for more immediate historical and parochial resonance (and, indeed, an audience perceived as steadily dumbing down) to John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln assassination; the cultural memory of William Kemmler, the first man to die in the electric chair, is also touched on. There’s some irony in this given Bronson’s appearance, as that actor, once renamed and reborn from oddball supporting actor to major movie star, would grope his way towards that stardom in parts like the similarly reached back into a lurid true-crime version of nostalgia in Machine-Gun Kelly (1958): the mean visage of the past would soon become the new heroism.

The influence of the German Expressionist style on Hollywood filmmaking had been large but not entirely easy. Directors as diverse in temperament and method as John Ford, James Whale, and Rex Ingram specialised in their own takes on the mode: Ingram had evolved a hybrid style of European atmosphere and Hollywood sturdiness for The Magician (1926), an approach Whale took heavy licence from for Frankenstein (1931). Curtiz, who had made his name in European film before shifting to Hollywood, began to evolve a style I’ve called in the past a kind of pop expressionism, malleable to the needs of fast-flowing narrative rather than concerted and monolithically dreamlike, infiltrating rather than shaping the drama. Curtiz’s collaboration with the great production designer Anton Grot was particularly vital in this evolving style, which borrowed aspects of German Expressionism – shadow effects, sets distorted in shapes and sizes, canted camera angles – but also mediating the by rendering the settings more solid, realistic, and minimalist, in manner at once visually striking and dramatically propulsive (and also cheaper to produce), a style he’d perfect by the time of movies like The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938), The Sea Hawk (1941), and Casablanca (1942). Curtiz contrasts the Art Deco curlicues of the canopy outside Igor’s Wax Museum with the studied scenes of ancient and medieval atrocities and yardsticks of historical inheritance harboured within: the museum is a bole containing the remnants of another world, executed in three dimensions and given a semblance of existence again, but entirely illusory.

Curtiz was one of the first filmmakers to truly engage with what colour filmmaking could and should be able to do, and he met the challenge with his deep framings replete with variegated hues and shades in the wax museum and other sinister settings, contrasting the stark clarity and buzzing energy of his newspaper offices and streetscapes through which his camera prowls in elegant tracking shots. Curtiz wouldn’t get to have so much fun with colour again until he made The Egyptian (1954). But the visuals of Mystery of the Wax Museum are muted a little by the early talkie habit of keeping the camera standing off for the most part, even as this sometimes pays off in Curtiz’s flashes of symmetrical and geometric composition, echoing the common interest filmmakers showed around this time of taking inspiration from the games with geometry found modern art. The comparison with de Toth’s in-your-face approach is plain with moments that are reproduced in House of Wax. One of these comes when the mangled killer pretends to be a corpse in the morgue in order to steal the body of a victim, the punchline to a joke about bodies that sit up because of embalming fluid: Curtiz shoots the killer’s rising from an almost deadpan distance where de Toth brings into the looming foreground. Another such shot comes when Curtiz wittily notes Hugo’s mug framed between a row of waxwork heads, but the framing is relatively distant, and the effect is only an incidental gag. When de Toth presents a variation on this, his mobile camera moves with Sue past a rack festooned with the fake heads and then dollies in until the audience realises one of them is Igor, and he’s actively pretending to be an exhibit.

Curtiz’s intriguing experimentation with a particular style for a horror movie betrays however his lack of deep affinity with the genre, which hampers both his Art Deco Horrors, although he’s not only to blame. Both Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum represent uneasy interaction with the kinds of movies Warner Bros. were known for making and popular for. Tod Browning had a similar difficulty when he tried to purvey his horror style for MGM. This might not necessarily be a problem – both Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum are entirely delightful to genre fans if not quite Grade-A classics – but it also inflicts on them a feeling of incompleteness, of movies that don’t quite know what they should be. The energy of House of Wax has its campy, facetious side, but that’s inseparable from its quality: de Toth invests totally in the movie, even if he’s apparently trying something less interesting in terms of genre style than Curtiz. Since Curtiz had deployed the odd, muted, lithograph-like textures of the Two-Color process, not many proper horror movies had been made in colour, and given that for many viewers the mystique of horror at the time was inseparable from the pools of black shadow and grey ambiguity the monochrome screen offered, de Toth’s fearlessness in wrenching the genre into the drenched hues of Technicolor is all the more arresting. This is particularly apparent in the street chase and in the climactic scene where the halls of the museum become a warren of light and dark, highlight and shadow, and the laboratory a place of seething gas flame and bubbling wax.

Given that we’re at least nominally not supposed to know he’s the killer until the “shocking” reveals in last ten minutes, Igor is instead portrayed as a tragic and harmless figure for most of the movie, musing with flickers of anguish and moral exhaustion when regarding the poor art of others compared to what he tried to create. Atwill is quite marvellous in portraying the post-fire Igor, possessed of a lilting, shattered calm when bemoaning that people “without souls” still have their hands and ability whilst he’s been left a broken remnant. It’s a subtler performance than expected, subtler indeed than he became proficient at in providing villainy for movie sin the following decade or so, and provokes the feeling that Hollywood never quite grasped the extent of his range. House of Wax, whilst sustaining the same nominal mystery, plays it more as an open secret, with its version of the artist antihero riven with sardonic-trending-bitter remarks and a savage, newly sadomasochistic sense of what’s delivering to his audience and extracting from them in turn, be it money, jollies, or something more permanent. Atwill’s performance as Igor is several notches more subtle than Price’s Jarrod. Still, it’s entirely plain why Price became a genre legend on the back of playing Jarrod. Price’s capacity for orchestral ham is tailor-made for such a character, able to pivot from pathos to dead-eyed malevolence and all points in between.

Price’s Jarrod offers shows of furtive guilt when he gives away the depth of his quasi-erotic fascination with his figures in the opening scenes and flashes of nerdy enthusiasm that colours into distraught mania as Burke starts burning his figures, before being reborn as an anarchic performance artist, prowling and gliding through the film with shows of arch and malevolent enjoyment, but also possessed of moments of avuncular decency, and his even his darkest mania inflected by a curious idealism that truly believes it can create beauty out of dreadful deed, and freeze all that decays and disappoints into an effigy of perfection. Although he was prized for his plummy voice and air of the effete and aristocratic before he gained horror stature, Price had experience as a swashbuckler and very physical performing earlier in his career, experience that’s important in House of Wax, both in the violent fight in the opening scene (some work by a stunt double notwithstanding) and later when he cunningly offers a visual miscue by portraying the lurking killer who chases Sue as twisted, stalking her with buckled legs and odd gait. Later, when Jarrod is provoked to finally stand up from his wheelchair, he proves not at all distorted but strides after her with long-limbed confidence: both of the ways he’s presented himself in the film are revealed, then, to be acts of a kind, impersonations the two extremes of his shattered psyche.

In both movies the climax comes down to a race against time to save the trussed and helpless victim from the imminent threat of being parboiled and encased in wax. Curtiz delivers a neat twist on the familiar sight of the young romantic hero taking on the villain, especially given Igor’s maiming. Igor proves to be larger and tougher than Ralph, the two men clashing in the spiralling metal staircase descending into the laboratory, and Igor repeatedly bests the determined but outmatched Ralph, so Florence, accompanying Ralph, has to race to fetch the cops. Ralph manages to drag Charlotte out of the way of the pouring wax whilst Igor struggles with the police. In House of Wax, de Toth mixes things up with matching images and brands of suspense reaped from having the hero and heroine both at the mercy of the villains. Scott battles the assistant Igor, whose mute, glowering, muscular form bests the young artist in a fierce brawl and this time proposes to decapitate Scott with the guillotine, a fate he’s only narrowly saved from by Brennan and Shane: the blade falls with a startling crash just seconds after Scott is rescued. De Toth goes in for memorable close-ups of the Sue’s hands and feet – implying she’s naked – as she struggles against the clamps holding her down, her nails digging into the wood of the tray she’s laying on, a particularly visceral touch. In both movies, of course, the villain finishes up falling into his own seething tub of wax, instantly flash-fried. A climax memorably satirised in Carry On Screaming (1966) and remembered for the likes of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) and Young Sherlock Holmes (1986), but also echoing still in something like The Silence of the Lambs (1991) — the trapped woman, the marks of desperately clawing fingernails, the artist-killer trying to perfect flesh and soul with the bodies of other, annoyingly lively humans.

Mystery of the Wax Museum and House of Wax are both excellent, entertaining films made by masters of their craft, and their qualities and faults tend to set at opposite extremes – Mystery of the Wax Museum’s dialogue of eras and types of horror and clever contrast of the cool, sardonic, and hardboiled with a withered, savaged, but longing romanticism sublimated into cruel deeds is as worthy in its way as House of Wax’s headlong showmanship and prototypical genre energy. If I have more fondness for House of Wax, it might be partly because I literally grew up watching it, but also because it knows what it is more, a movie made by a director going for the knockout every time. Even the goofy, leave-‘em-laughing punchline of the movie feels part of its special texture. Mystery of the Wax Museum is the product of a cinematic era, genre, and filmmaker finding their feet. House of Wax marks a divide. It was the first major horror movie released by Hollywood in the 1950s, at a time when the mode had nearly died out and screens were filled with monsters with a science fiction tilt, and de Toth’s work undoubtedly helped stir the revolution of British and Italian genre works within the next few years. It also mediates one version of the genre and another: Henry Jarrod, swathed in black and stalking the city streets, making grisly art of his murderous habits, is the director ancestor of every giallo stalker, slasher fiend, and psycho killer to come.

Standard
1950s, Action-Adventure, Fantasy, Historical, Horror/Eerie, Scifi

The Saga Of The Viking Women (1957) / War Of The Satellites (1958) / The Wasp Woman (1959)

Full on-screen title of The Saga of the Viking Women: The Saga Of The Viking Women And Their Voyage To The Waters Of The Great Sea Serpent

Director: Roger Corman
Screenwriters: Lawrence Louis Goldman / Lawrence Louis Goldman / Leo Gordon

Roger Corman’s early career was inseparable from a particular moment in cinema – both in how movies were made and how they were consumed. Big Hollywood studios were faltering as their stranglehold on production and distribution had been challenged both legally and by television’s encroachment. Still, the new, vast, burgeoning youth audience wanted to go out and watch movies, often in drive-in theatres, where part of the fun was delighting in the ragged glories of the movies made to service their hungers, beyond the purview of parental authority and official tastemakers. When, in particular, the 1950s sci-fi movie boom started to wane as far as the major studios were concerned, Corman inherited a slice of their audience, and it was a sector of viewers that he would move with into the 1960s and ‘70s even as the zeitgeist started mutating with exponential speed. If Corman’s early work like Day The World Ended (1955) and It Conquered The World (1956) represent the popular lore of Corman’s early phase as blocs of low-budget ingenuity with audience-tickling monsters, the other kinds of movies he made nonetheless provided a cross-section of popular movie genres.

The Saga of the Viking Women and Their Voyage to the Waters of the Great Sea Serpent, for instance, stakes out different territory whilst still basically scratching the same itch: a swashbuckling adventure flick with a monster in there somewhere, and a note of sardonic social satire spreading corpuscles through the whole body. The film would be the last of the nine feature films Corman directed in the whirlwind year of 1957. When the audience taste began to shift more decisively towards the arcane, Corman pivoted towards this historical adventure with a dash of fantasy, and managed one of those occasions where he got a little ahead of the curve, beating to movie screens Richard Fleischer’s The Vikings (1958) and Ray Harryhausen’s turn towards mythology for his special effects-driven movies. The Saga of the Viking Women and Their Voyage to the Waters of the Great Sea Serpent – which for the sake of sanity I’ll just refer to as The Saga of the Viking Women henceforth – is also another of Corman’s films where a future-is-history sensibility emerges, at once taking place in a distant past but also, in its way, resembling one of the later post-apocalyptic movies Corman birthed, with its ineffably oddball vision of the past that keeps company with André Bazin’s characterisation of Welles’ Macbeth (1948) as a futuristic fantasia filled with proto-motorcycle warriors and cardboard-crowned space emperors. Corman’s Viking age is a time populated by fairground chimera sea monsters, wool-skin-clad tribal overlords, varsity stars as Norse heroes, divine interventions, and mini-skirted she-warriors.

The verbose full title provides a good-humoured slice of bogus ye-olde-ism, and suffice to say The Saga of the Viking Women isn’t exactly obsessed with anthropological and historical minutiae. Its idea of the Vikings is basically comic book barbarians with the odd reference to Thor tossed in, and indeed portrays them as the relatively civilised stalwarts thrust amidst the fictional Grimolts, who resemble the more typical caricature of Vikings as macho, destructive wildlings. It’s one of Corman’s most absurd works in many ways, certainly one that readily adheres to a less charitable view of his efforts. And yet it’s also one of his little marvels of pacing and dramatic integrity, telling a better story with better characters than movies that have cost a thousand times as much and in just a hair over an hour and infinitely greater resources, and more authentically mythic and surreal than many more official attempts to be such things. The Saga of the Viking Women was also the third of Corman’s collaborations with actress Susan Cabot. Born Harriet Pearl Shapiro in 1927, Cabot had weathered a tough childhood, with her mother suffering severe mental illness, which would also afflict Cabot in later life. Cabot herself spent time in foster care, during which time she suffered abuse, and Cabot married an artist who was a family friend to escape the roundelay of foster homes. Cabot had artistic talent as well, making a living at first as an illustrator before turning to acting and finding a place for herself in the New York theatre world. Cabot’s looks and ability soon attracted Hollywood’s attention, but after a couple of eye-catching early roles, including in The Enforcer (1951) and a handful of Westerns, she quit Hollywood in disillusionment and returned to the stage for a time. She returned to movies with Corman’s Carnival Rock (1957). Despite the film’s nominal status as a quickie cash-in on the rock music craze, it became a fascinating study in desire and pathos depicting an aging fairground impresario who destroys himself out of his passion for Cabot’s character, complete with overtones of Pagliacci and The Blue Angel (1930).

Cabot swiftly became, along with Jonathan Haze and Dick Miller, the emblematic star of Corman’s black-and-white B-movie phase, and an engine of thematic impulse for the director. Cabot’s follow-up role to Carnival Rock saw her playing a disturbed and cruel collegian in Sorority Girl (1957), a cool, collected scientist in War of the Satellites, and the ice-hearted and manipulative puppet-master of Machine-Gun Kelly (1958), before ending not just her collaboration with Corman but her movie career entire with The Wasp Woman. An apt conclusion, too, as a study in the angst of the aging beauty, in a particularly dark vision of Hollywood female stardom. Cabot’s long decline and death in 1986 are the authentic stuff of cineaste tragic legend. But Cabot’s raven-maned, breathy maturity and evident intelligence were rare in her day, and Corman was attentive to the vivid disparities she could present on screen – the dazzling arc of her smile could so easily twist into a leer of sultry malevolence, and vice versa. Cabot for her part was equally bewildered and intrigued by Corman’s mental agility and working method. In The Saga of the Viking Women she’s cast here in variegated, cabalistic contrast to the array of blondes standing in for the eponymous Norse bombshells.

The Viking women in question belong to the obscurely Scandinavian village of Stanjold, nestled on a stretch of shore under all the thrusting white peaks. There are also mountains. Most of the maidens are engaged to male warriors of the village who have gone raiding, but the menfolk have not come home after some two years away. The women cast their votes whether to seek out the men or remain by hurling spears at different targets, a choice all them know is between passive safety and potentially fatal peril. The vote tallies narrowly in favour of the venture thanks to Enger (Cabot), surprising her fellows. Enger, despite being a priestess dedicated to the gods, is known to be intensely jealous of Desir (Abby Dalton), who has the love of Enger’s preferred mate, the hunky Vedric (Brad Jackson), the leader of the Viking men. Also among the intended crew’s number is the imposing Thyra (Betsy Jones-Moreland), who doesn’t have a man of her own and wants to seek one out, and Desir’s younger sister Asmild (June Kenney). The only young man left in their village is Ottar (Haze), who, because of his short, spare build, seems to have been excluded from the warrior ranks. He wants to accompany the women, but Desir insists he doesn’t need to endanger himself too. The women build themselves a longship, which looks rather more like a surf rescue boat bought second-hand from a Malibu lifeguard station, with rudely affixed dragon figurehead and flimsy rudder that breaks off when the women first set sail. This was actually an accident that occurred during filming, and Corman decided to work it in as a detail.

Shortly into the voyage, whilst trying to steer the boat with an oar on night watch, Thyra discovers Ottar hiding under a pile of furs. She keeps his secret long enough so that there’s no chance of the boat heading back to leave him behind. Desir, despite affecting to regard him as a stowaway, is also secretly pleased to have him along. Enger meanwhile tries to kill Desir by dropping the jib on her, but narrowly misses the mark. Later the crew spot floating wreckage, and Desir swims out to check it if might be part of the men’s ship. She barely escapes a shark, and soon after the longship encounters both a churning maelstrom and a monstrous serpent that lives in it, incredible menaces all the Vikings had thought were only legends. The longship is smashed by a lightning bolt, and the crew all wash up on a beach. They’re quickly taken captive by the Grimolts, a savage tribe who nonetheless have gained the trappings of grandeur by using Viking slave labour to build a citadel for them. The Grimolts consider themselves under the divine protection of the sea serpent and entitled to anything washed up by the maelstrom: the Stanjold men are all chained up in a mine near the citadel. At first the king of the Grimolts, Stark (Richard Devon), affects to welcome the women as guests however, seemingly fascinated by their robustness and untamed attitudes, and invites them on a boar hunt. Desir intervenes to save the life of Stark’s son Senya (Jay Sayer), a fey and weedy princeling, from a boar that attacks him, but being saved by a girl upsets Senya much more than being gored, so Desir lets him take credit for the kill.

The gang of buxom Viking lasses seem nominally intended to service a kind of Amazonian fetishism – Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1963) in period garb (and, notably, the later Russ Meyer film basically chases the same storyline of contrasting the Amazons with a brutal patriarch/weak son duo, if with very different emphases that reveal the differences between filmmakers like Cormand and Meyer). Sexploitation was very likely part of the intended appeal of The Saga of the Viking Women, but after offering the sight of his leggy actresses in moderately revealing clothing as sufficiently similar to whatever promise was slapped on the poster, goes for something different. Like Corman’s earlier, chamber-piece noir thriller Swamp Women (1956), Corman offers a situation that seems ripe for racy cheesecake but subverts it in concentrating on the grit and character of his heroes, presenting the crew of women and Ottar as a unit of his ideal protagonists. They’re not improbably warlike or gifted with superhuman abilities, but they are brave, tough, ardent, resourceful, and, mostly, mutually reliant. There’s some dissent, mostly from Enger’s conniving and from Dagda (Lynn Bernay), who thinks the venture is foolhardy and also deduces Enger’s motives in supporting it: “If at the end of the voyage Vedric holds out his arms and his flaxen-haired beauty is not there to enfold in them, perhaps the chief will look elsewhere for comfort.” Corman’s flexible but definite feminism is quickly thrown into contrast by the grimly, cheerlessly macho Grimolts, particularly their cruel king and his weak and tepid son. Senya is dealt the ultimate humiliation when Desir saves his life: “A girl?!” he bleats in horror and disbelief after Desir skewers the boar.

Later, Senya repays the favour nonetheless when, during a feast Stark and the Grimolts throw for their “guests,” he sees Desir secreting away a knife to use on a Grimolt molesting her sister and heads off the imminent crisis by challenging Desir to an arm-wrestling contest. Senya wins the first bout but loses the second, forcing his father to intervene. Asmild takes advantage of her small stature to squeeze out through the barred windows of the room the women are locked in, reaches the mine, and knocks out a guard to get keys to free the men. But as they flee the mine, Stark and Grimolts, alerted by Enger, swoop down on them and quickly imprison them again. The Saga of the Viking Women becomes then another of Corman’s mischievous musings on the nature of toughness and of heroism, his Vikings and Grimolts a historically distanced, play-act lampoon of 1950s American gender anxieties and social constructs. The ironic contrast of Senya flailing in his efforts to live up to being the Grimolt princeling contrasts the Viking women and Ottar proving themselves worthy of their creeds not because they’re big or strong but because they are indomitable. Ottar is perhaps the greatest of Corman’s scrappy little guys, constantly refusing to be dominated, excluded, or put up with anyone’s crap. Senya’s defeat by Desir is forgotten as Ottar bursts into the banquet hall, battling off guards trying to subdue him as he sneaked off during the hunt to try and locate the Stanjold men.

The scene in the Grimolt banquet hall is a feast of Cormanian delights, from the dancer Wilda Taylor, performing Isadora Duncan-meets-Vampira gyrations to Glasser’s frantic scoring before being carried off by a lusty man, to Haze putting on an impressive display of swashbuckling athleticism in a one-take struggle that damn near puts him in a class with Errol Flynn as Ottar fights the Grimolts. He has multiple battles with Stark’s large and powerful henchman Zarko (Mike Forest), the bigger man repeatedly beating Ottar down and leaving him dazed and prostrate, but Ottar keeps resurging, and finally manages to drown his hulking foe in the surf during the breathless climax. After Thyra discovers him on the longship at the outset, Ottar confesses being surprised that she’s willing to cover for him, saying admitting he’s always been a little scared of her as he found her “so forbidding,” to Thyra bemusement. “It’s ridiculous not to have a man along on the voyage,” Ottar says by way of explaining his choice to stow away, to Thyra’s confession, “It’s ridiculous not to have a man.” Corman gives Jones-Moreland a fine little moment as Thyra, at the helm of the ship, leans back and regards the stars with private exaltation in the freedom of the sea and the possible – just a couple of seconds of cinema, and yet it’s the sort of attentive, meditative moment that invests a movie with something tantalising and irreplaceable. Of course, Thyra and Ottar fall in love in the course of the journey, with Ottar fearlessly defending Thyra from Grimolt thuggery (“Keep your filthy hands off her, you big slobbering dog!”). But their bond isn’t realised by either of them until the Grimolts forcibly split up all the couples in the slave mine: “Wait—we’re not,” Ottar cries as they’re dragged apart, before suddenly asking in bewilderment, “Are we, Thyra?” At the end Thyra cries after Ottar kills Zarko and swims out to join the escaping Viking, “You’re the bravest Viking of them all!” And he is, indeed, one of my favourite heroes in cinema.

Ottar is certainly more animated than the other Viking men, who all seem to have been cast from a college gymnasium and given blonde rinses if nature wasn’t forthcoming, but this choice only emphasises the film’s take on the Northmen as star athletes and the women their cheerleader girlfriends. Jackson as Vedric obviously can’t act, but he adopts a speaking style that somehow nails a kind of manly gentleness and aptly, blankly saga-like recitation. Dalton, who Corman featured as a budding starlet in a couple of movies as something very much like the anti-Cabot in terms of her roles and onscreen energy, was an appealing performer, and she’s good as the spunky leader of the enterprise, as is Jones-Moreland. Kenney’s Asmild gets some amusing moments of heroism – slipping through prison bars, something only someone as slightly built as her could get away with, and then clobbering a Grimolt guard over the head with a rock. But it’s Cabot who commands the attention amogst the women, as the darkly boding Enger, contrasting her fair-haired and straightforward comrades with her jealous and clever designs and way with sultry seduction. Desir and Enger are distaff takes on Paul and Tom from It Conquered The World, and Enger more or less follows Tom’s arc from the earlier film as someone who commits evil deeds through following a purely personal logic but returns to the fold and performs heroic self-sacrifice. Thyra and Ottar find Enger creepy, and she proves to be genuinely dangerous to Desir. “They’re only men,” Enger notes sardonically as she and the other Viking women are first taken by the Grimolts, and she proves her talent for manipulation as she sets to work on Stark, promising him sensual delights if she’ll meet her “whim” to see Vedric. She displays a completely different side when she actually gets to Vedric, with a warmth and vulnerability that turns to asp-like coldness of intent when Vedric spurns her, however gently, and she then demands Stark kill him and Desir.

Stark is very happy to oblige, inflicting his own test of love by having the two Vikings burned at the stake, with the promise that the first of them to cry out for their own life to be saved over the other’s will be freed. Desir and Vedric each insist the other save themselves, as the flames lick closer and the other Vikings look on in horror and Stark and the Grimolts gloat in enjoyment. This however drives Enger to pity and provokes her conscience as both Viking and priestess. She accosts Stark and calls for Thor to intervene. On cue, a thunder storm breaks out, the rain dousing the fires and lightning striking Senya’s sword as he reels about in panic, killing him stone dead. As in Day The World Ended, the rainstorm suddenly cleanses the world and heroes and kills the devolved imp. Amidst the unleashed chaos, the Vikings escape. Vedric has a chance to kill Stark but instead insists he and his people only want to leave in peace, and they stalk off towards the shore. Stark performs a funeral rite for his son: his body is cast into a fire pit but only after some useful belongings for the afterlife, including a luckless slave girl, are tossed in first. Stark then leads the hunt to chase down the Vikings before they reach the sea. Enger leads the dogs set after them away by creating a false trail, but finds herself caught in a dead end and is mauled to death by the dogs, to her fellows’ regretful horror. They manage to reach some boats on the surf, and flee. In the wonderfully ridiculous climax, Vedric hurls a sword at the sea serpent as it comes at their boat, and the blade lodges in its brow; the crazed beast instead attacks Stark’s chasing boat, killing the Grimolt king. The Vikings escape the maelstrom and paddle all the way back to Stanjold, somehow.

It’s difficult to capture the perverse delight of The Saga of the Viking Women. Part of the charm lies in the film’s nominal faults, and the feeling that there is less of a veil between audience and movie than usually exists. Not in a documentary sense, but rather the very opposite – in the sense that the film asks the audience to suspend disbelief, in that hallowed phrase, and but not in the usual totally convincing illusion of cinema but in a theatrical conspiracy. As if the movie is saying yes, these actors are marching around some patch of southern California waving swords about, and splashing about in the surf with a hastily renovated whaler – and that’s all we really need if we can set that fine filament of imagination vibrating. That’s all cinema really is at the end of the day, a very fancy version of when you and friends and siblings as children used to raid the prop and costume box in your grandparents’ attic and put on a show, turning the mundane into dreamlike splendours. The Saga of the Viking Women provokes amusement with the literary pretension of its full title, and churns hard and fast through its arsenal of fake legend, bogus ethnography, drunk history, and improvisational aesthetics. At the same time, however, it transcends all that through sheer impudence and total confidence in its self-sufficiency. Perhaps it’s the kind of charm that can only be particularly appreciated when you’ve watched too many quarter-of-a-billion-dollar-costing blockbusters that treat you like an absolute moron, and can’t properly manage the most basic storytelling feats. Whereas The Saga of the Viking Women captures the utterly elemental energy of the fare its title evokes in the starkness of its action – the sight of the lovers facing the fire, Desir’s unwelcome saving of the princeling, Enger calling down the lightning and facing her self-sacrificial death, and Ottar’s battles with Grimolts.

Corman’s oeuvre was always dedicated to the art of doing as much as possible with the least available, and The Saga of the Viking Women succeeds at this in a similar way to The Little Shop of Horrors (1960), which made the joke overt with its skid row flower shop and hand-written signs promising “Lots Plants Cheap.” In that film and its precursor A Bucket of Blood (1959) Corman was making overt fun of his own status as the little guy on the art world totem pole, who finds the weird little monsters he grows have gained an audience but are also insatiably consuming. Corman’s sense of himself as a figure with a tenuous but increasingly solid stake in a business that destroys people very easily, in a town where the creative and intelligent person is often at the mercy of the greedy, gaudy philistine, is a constant subtext. The Saga of the Viking Women, War of the Satellites, and The Wasp Woman are preoccupied with ventures that represent vehement risks for the heroes, and with a sense of jealous propriety regarding the fruits of labour. Corman’s Faustian seekers are figures consumed by their own relentless desires for the illusory promises of whatever grail they chase, are swapped for the more properly heroic questers in movies like The Saga of the Viking Women and War of the Satellites: Corman’s heroic questers enact on a larger level Corman’s little-guys-make-good mythos, whilst The Wasp Woman returns more properly to the Faustian motif.

Corman found his ideal thematic trove in Edgar Allan Poe precisely because Poe’s heroes were so often the depleted remnants of falling orders trying to keep themselves puffed up, those decaying aristocrats in tumbledown mansions with their dead amours decorating the corridors, trying to commune with unseen and baleful forces to win back a measure of lordship – an idea Corman would treat in more earthbound and realistic a manner in The Intruder (1963). The irony Corman mined in the likes of the gangster who still acts and thinks like a gangster in the post-apocalyptic zone of Day The World Ended gave way to the vampiric future emissaries of Not Of This Earth, the roaming rabble-rouser who tries to be cultural soothsayer and captain but is actually a parasitic night feeder in The Intruder, Prince Prospero lording over the pathetic mortals he forgets he still belongs to in The Masque of the Red Death (1964), and indeed the alien sent to keep humanity within the margins who ends up awakening his own human nature in War of the Satellites – all are antagonists defined not just by aggression or sadism but by a deeper, more fundamental attempt to refuse to recognise what they are, and indeed to transcend that state. X – The Man With X-Ray Eyes (1963) defined something of Corman’s perverse pride and gathering frustration with his lot, with its specific take on the Faustian hero a genius fallen from the true faith and comforts of his creed because he sees a little deeper and further, and finds at least a momentary equilibrium as a fairground seer, at home amongst the freaks and scantily-clad dancing girls, but always moving towards a reckoning.

War of the Satellites is one of the purest products of Corman’s blend of raw opportunist gall and adventurous ingenuity, rivalling the heights in that regard of The Little Shop of Horrors and The Terror (1963). When the Soviet Union placed the Sputnik satellite in orbit in late 1957, followed quickly by the American Pioneer launch, special effects artist Jack Rabin suggested to Corman that he should move to capitalise on the headlines. Corman immediately turned to an executive at the production outfit Allied Artists, one of the major players and rivals of Corman’s more usual backers at AIP, and exacted an $80,000 budget with the promise to have a movie in theatres in ninety days. From just about anyone else in Hollywood this might have seemed pure bravado, but Corman could and did pull it off. All of that only provided the roughest précis for Corman’s efforts, working again with Goldman as screenwriter (with Rabin getting a story credit), as War of the Satellites became another of Corman’s stringent science fiction epics, albeit one that, like his Not Of This Earth (1957), avoids overt monster business for something more conceptual, even if there are still some of the customary amusing special effects scenes depicting space launches, which nonetheless revolve around the interesting concept of the film’s version of the titular satellites, really spaceships, being delivered in segments into orbit and then linking together to create the full, proper craft. We also get the United Nations represented with the budgetary expedient of some carefully framed shots of delegates seated at tables and giving addresses.

Like a lot of sci-fi films of its time, War of the Satellites is a work conscious of a world teetering on the brink of great new things, with the frontier of space exploration having finally, officially been breached by Sputnik. Somewhat ironically the becoming of science fact from what had been science fiction kicked off a dissolve into atavism in the youth audience, and soon Corman would be following that logic when he moved on to his gothic horror movies. War of the Satellites also takes a different approach to the same alien replacement/control theme Corman had explored in It Conquered The World following the likes if It Came From Outer Space (1953) and Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). One amusing element of War of the Satellites is the casting of Miller as the film’s stalwart hero, a feat of casting even Miller himself made some jokes about, as his character, Dave Boyer, was supposed to be an intimidating and appropriately romantic hero. Evidently Miller was one of the few good, reliable actors Corman could rope in on such short notice, or perhaps Corman felt he owed Miller a shot at playing a plain old hero role. But his casting also accidentally turned War of the Satellites into another of Corman’s David-vs-Goliath, little-guy-makes-good tales in terms of the foregrounded drama, and harmonising ideally with the larger theme of the plucky humans venturing out into space against the resistance of shadowy galactic overlords who keep trying to foil their efforts.

War of the Satellites proposes that as a United Nations-overseen space venture, the Sigma Project, is finally sending manned probes into space, some mysterious force starts destroying those probes. After the tenth probe is destroyed, the project’s top personnel, director Dr Pol Van Ponder (Devon) and his chief aides, Sybil Carrington (Cabot) and Dave Boyer (Miller), struggle with their dismay but remain committed. UN scientific honchos including Akad (Michael Fox) become more heated in opposing further launches. The world’s most mature pair of teenybopper smoochers (Sayer and Mitzi McCall), parked in a rural lovers’ lane, hear something fall to earth and find a rocket with Latin writing on it. This proves to be a supposed message from the aliens, written in Latin as a formerly common tongue. The aliens explain they destroyed the previous satellites and intend to keep humans caged on their planet because of their violent and warlike tendencies: the aliens have woven an energy field around the Earth to keep it in quarantine, dubbed the Sigma Barrier. Sybil reads the message to the UN General Assembly, and the American delegate whips up a general spirit of resistance to the alien ban. Driving from the launch facility to a vital vote at the UN, Van Ponder’s car is hit by a mysterious beam and crashes off the road, exploding. Van Ponder’s death is reported at the UN but then the great scientist turns up, apparently no worse for wear, to heroic applause from the delegates, and he gains full support for his latest planned mission. But signs of something peculiar and inhuman about this purported Van Ponder begin accumulating, particularly to the attentive Dave.

One of Corman’s recurring trademarks were his credit sequences sporting stylised artwork, and War of the Satellites has one of the most absolutely minimalist imaginable, with simple geometric shapes shifting about a black field, as if mimicking and lampooning the blinks and bleeps of the loft satellites on radar screens and radio frequencies. “It can’t be Sputnik, it’s not listed in the TV Guide,” Sayer’s smoocher whines when he sees a weird light flashing in the sky. His and McCall’s byplay is genuinely funny and seems to be kicking off a cheeky lampoon anticipatory of A Bucket Of Blood and The Little Shop of Horrors. But this actually proves a miscue in a movie that, despite all the forces seemingly stacked against it, plays out otherwise in a taut and serious manner. And, indeed, War of the Satellites stands as something of a precursor of later generations of spacefaring sci-fi, much of executed on a similarly straitened budget: a rough draft for the mind-over-matter achievements of early Doctor Who and, in its later scenes, an atmosphere and setting very redolent of Star Trek, and with a similar preoccupation with the dissolving limits not just of space and time but the body and identity.

Another interesting aspect of War of the Satellites is its concept of future space ventures as United Nations affairs, complete with international oversight, with Akad constantly ranting about how it’s madness to keep on trying to challenge the heavens but still watching on with fretful passion throughout the effort regardless. The Cold War context simmers, of course, encoded into the themes of factional antagonism and rivalry, spheres of influence, wars of rhetoric, spies, lookalikes, and sabotage missions. The fraught UN meetings evoke the tense bloc standoffs of the 1950s, with Dave proving an unexpectedly pithy voice for refusing the aliens’ call to abandon space exploration for the sake of survival, arguing that to cede that kind of power to the aliens is to invite destruction: “Gentlemen, you do not survive by abject surrender,” he comments, and remarks on the aliens’ haughtiness about violating the Sigma Barrier specifically, which suggests they are anxious about this possibility, and the only way to gain any kind of respect and parity with them is to keep going with space exploration. The struggle to stake a claim to the stars therefore moves beyond the political to become an almost theological, Promethean act. More prosaically and amusingly, at one point Van Ponder mentions “Astro-Planetary law,” which of course begs the question of when that was made up and by whom. The false Van Ponder has been placed amongst the human scientists to ensure the next space mission is a proper catastrophe.

This proves mostly a distraction from the film’s more peculiar and witty exploration of the notion of a heroic leader figure who has feet of clay. Van Ponder is, within the narrative, replaced by an alien doppelganger, but this allows Corman to explore the notion of the great scientific savant who’s consumed by a (literally) divided nature. Dave later witnesses from an unseen vantage that Van Ponder has been replaced by an alien that doesn’t merely wear an external resemblance to him but can also divide himself in two, a ghostly image separating from the first body and solidifying into a complete, tangible, separable, but not entirely independent incarnation: this proves connected with Dave’s observation in photos of Van Ponder that he’s taken on a mysterious symmetry in his features. Van Ponder echoes Corman’s own one-man-band captaincy of his little film world, enacting a wish to be able to be literally two places at once to make sure everything gets done right. In the film’s most striking moments, the alien Van Ponder has to perform quick revisions of the physical form he’s wearing to continue his deception of the humans he’s pretending to be. In the first of these, he receives a terribly burned hand unwittingly received whilst chatting with subordinate John Compo (Jerry Barclay), and works feverishly to repair the damage before Compo can fetch a doctor because he knows physical examination will reveal what he is. In the second, faced again with a medical check that Compo has contrived to try and force on him under the guise of checking all the astronauts’ hearts after being launched into space, the alien Van Ponder labours to create and start a heart within himself, finally starting to beat, in a great little scene that fascinatingly literalises the idea of a powerful, formidable, saturnine being growing a heart.

The price the alien pays for this quick bit of flesh engineering is to suddenly also unleash the condition of humanity in his form, falling under the sway of human emotions, including, of course, lust for Sybil. Alien Van Ponder becomes, then, one of Corman’s doomed impresarios, failing in developing the potential for passion but not separating it from egotistical will. The figure doesn’t just resemble the doomed quasi-artist antiheroes of Carnival Rock, A Bucket of Blood, Sorority Girl, The Little Shop of Horrors, X – The Man With X-Ray Eyes, and most of the Poe films, but also the self-made golem of The Intruder (1963), Corman’s one proper discursion into the social realist drama but also perhaps seen better as a present-tense iteration of Corman’s obsession with the theme of people trying to make themselves into something better, something stronger – a theme that reaches its particular crescendo in The Intruder where the abused Black student obtains the world-sweeping martyr-titan strength that is then stripped from William Shatner’s white-suited, rabble-rousing, racist ratbag. War of the Satellites’ variation is more cosmic but also more immediate: the alien Van Ponder comments that “There’s no room for personal feelings on this mission,” supposedly speaking to encourage the great species-wide project of humans conquering space whilst actually trying to suppress this purpose. But personal feelings come with a heartbeat, and this proves a force every bit as destructive as the aliens’ energy barrier the astronauts have to try and bust through to get into outer space.

Cabot’s role in the movie is relatively conventional: Sybil isn’t harbouring any Machiavellian ambitions or tragic villain traits, but is instead the stalwart, level-headed love interest/lust object for the rival males on the space project, and the movie’s final moments deliver the delightful touch of Cabot and Miller’s characters enshrined as a couple, holding hands for a moment of connection between getting back to business. The film really, finally belongs to Devon. Having weathered his cardboard crown and fleecy vest as the barbarian king in The Saga of the Viking Women, here he’s an ideal Corman antihero, presenting at first the image of calm, assured, haughty intelligence leading a visionary endeavour. Once Van Ponder becomes an act by an interloping alien, the difference seems negligible at first even if Van Ponder turns a few degrees colder and more unforgiving: an extraordinary savant of the modern scientific world might indeed seem as alien as any actual extra-terrestrial to the ordinary Joe and Jane of 1958, and the possibility that the new titans of atomic and space age science might actually be acting out some kind of sadomasochistic game of chicken with apocalypse, a feeling increasingly common in the Fantastic cinema of the late ‘50s, starts to percolate. Late in the piece, as the fake Van Ponder’s commands on the satellite, esigned to lead them to ruin, are relayed to the perplexed pilots, one comments, “Ours is but to do and die,” to the other’s retort, “Die! You said it.”

Corman’s visuals muse with incidental irony on the disparate zones of existence the drama and the characters and the filmmakers themselves are inhabiting: the Sigma Project with its towering, sleek rockets being built and the UN halls as concerts of modernity, versus the junk yards Dave ventures into, the kinds of locations Corman was more usually and palpably stuck filming in, littered with wrecked vehicles including Van Ponder’s shattered car, the absurd Earthbound litter of technology echoing the ships flung into space to be made just as broken. The second half of the film shifts to outer space, as the Sigma Project rockets launch and hover in the void. The rockets disgorge the component parts of the “satellite” spacecraft proper in ambitious special effects where in a couple of shots you almost can’t see the strings, the portions snapping together in a very rough draft for later generations of mecha in Japanese manga and anime, and the blankly labyrinthine interior of the “satellite.” Fake Van Ponder kills Compo after using his powers to paralyse him and offering Compo a chance to save his neck by becoming his ally, a chance Compo rejects. Van Ponder declares his death due to escape acceleration, and has his corpse ejected into space soon after following a solemn funeral service, and soon after kills the satellite’s doctor (Eric Sinclair) when, as Dave’s behest, he tries to examine him. Meanwhile Van Ponder explains that the satellite is going to accumulate solar energy to use to ram through the Sigma Barrier at colossal speed, but it’s at precisely this point Van Ponder means to make the ship crack up.

The climactic scenes see Van Ponder splitting up, trying to corner and kill Dave as he defies his false authority, but also to make entreaties to Sybil, who rejects them, obliging him to try and kill her too. But Van Ponder’s new, beating heart makes him physically vulnerable to Dave’s bullets (as in a lot of 1950s sci-fi movies, the idea of using a gun on a spaceship is employed with amusingly casualness), and when one of his bodies dies and fades away, so does the other. The pilots are then able to ram through the Sigma Barrier into deep space as planned, and the frontier of a vast and unknown universe opens up. It’s not that a long leap to note the similarities in the voyaging motif in The Saga of the Viking Women and the spacefaring of War of the Satellites, depicting as they do different ages and radically disparate technology but still the same urge, and with another similar theme, that of know-how and muscles coopted for the interests of others. Devon in both plays the antagonist trying to force the heroes into obedience and effective slavery. The word that feels most apt to describe War of the Satellites is nifty – forced invention snapping in lockstep with its quick, engaging, intelligent storyline and threadbare artistry, a supreme artefact of Corman’s style at its most elemental and waste-free, whilst never giving into mere laziness or leave-the-camera-there expedience. The film also notably sports Corman (who later would gain an unusual sideline as a bit-part and character role player, often in movies made by his many protégés), in one of his relatively few on-screen appearances in his own movies, playing a mission control technician guiding the spaceships through their launch: presumably this choice, as well as mischievously sketching out his own sense of cool, efficient control in auguring these little adventures in no-frills cinema, also helped save on a paycheck. Corman also turns up in The Wasp Woman playing a solicitous doctor.

If War of the Satellites represented a waning gasp for the straight science fiction movie not just in Corman’s oeuvre but in Hollywood genre film itself for the next few years as horror resurged, The Wasp Woman was likely produced to cash in on the success of Kurt Neumann’s The Fly (1958), and also emerged at a moment when genre cinema was toying with fusions of horror and science-fiction elements (Terence Fisher’s The Curse of Frankenstein; Fred F. Sears’ The Werewolf; Paul Landres’ The Vampire, all 1957). This run of movies, which defined a classic transitional moment in Fantastic movie history, all came armed with strongly Faustian themes, as the excitement over the early atomic and space ages in the first part of the decade swiftly curdled. Pointedly, too, they were all movies that started to look for where classic horror movie themes intersected with modern concerns, particularly in terms of tragic heroes afflicted with monstrous traits, traits that were now becoming not supernatural in source but in terms of the impact of modernity on human identity. The Wasp Woman also proved to be Cabot’s last movie, also her best and truest star vehicle. The Wasp Woman had an intriguing genesis, beginning as a story written by Kinta Zertuche, wife of Corman’s regular art director Daniel Haller, and adapted into a screenplay by another of Corman’s regular collaborators, but one who usually worked on the other side of the camera, the actor Leo Gordon.

Corman’s interest in body politics was to prove, if only incidentally in terms of his career and interests, a preoccupation with deep ramifications and echoing rumbles for the future of the horror genre. Even an early inception point for diverting the paranoid mode of 1950s sci-fi, with its alien replacements and disembodied forces of strange influence, towards flickers of body horror. Corman had already dipped a toe in this water with the mutant humans variably agonised and rejoicing in their transformations in Day The World Ended, and War of the Satellites would join The Wasp Woman and Attack of the Crab Monsters (1958) in extending that aspect of Corman’s interests, looking forward to the more fully-fledged versions in X – The Man With X-Ray Eyes and his H.P. Lovecraft adaptation disguised as a Poe adaptation, The Haunted Palace (1963). The latter film would mediate classical Gothic horror, 1920s Weird Fiction, and early signs of the Cronenbergian impulse of perverted flesh and misbegotten human creation. The Wasp Woman, coming between, nods back to the likes of The Wolf Man (1941) in the theme of an ordinary person becoming afflicted by monstrous transformation, whilst engaging with the evolving notion that hubristic science can cause breakdowns in precisely what it’s supposed to be trying safeguard and repair – the integrity of the human being. This is then taken one step further in correlating the affliction and the hubris with the rapidly evolving nature of post-World War II life, in which the business of being a human is to take part in the food chain of consumerism, with the imagery and ideals of advertising and commerce forming a new kind of enclosing theology where to aspire to become the avatar of a lifestyle is to become the anointed, the blessed, the desirable life as both reward for and product of capitalist success.

And this is couched in terms of the specific business of female beauty, with antiheroine Janice Starlin (Cabot) both the cause of and the curse corroding the prosperity of her cosmetics company, Janice Starlin Enterprises. The company exploded in popularity off the back of Starlin herself being the beautiful linchpin of her advertising campaigns and the mystique of her brand when she was a fresh and radiant twenty-something just out of college, but is now falling off a cliff in sales as middle age is starting to cut lines into her forehead and jowls. It becomes plain that unless Janice can find a way to disengage her company from her own image, it’s doomed, but that also means a kind of ritual suicide in terms of the truest form of life – the one found in advertising images. The story’s roots in the imagination of a woman hovering around the edges of the movie industry surely explains both the story’s sympathy for its tormented she-monster and also the alternative narrative viewpoint from Janice’s assistant Mary Dennison (Barboura Morris), who is both unshakeably sympathetic but also suitably sardonic about the mercurial business world she exists within, trying to provide the countering, centring influence on Janice’s willingness to twist flesh and mind to meet the ideals she sells along with her products.

Mary maintains a simmering romantic connection with company executive Bill Lane (Anthony Eisley, billed as Fred Eisley), and the two, along with marketing executive Arthur Cooper (William Roerick), are drawn into a sceptical cabal when Janice becomes increasingly obsessed with a secret project she’s pushing as the salvation of the company’s fortunes, a salvation that walked in the door in the form of seemingly earnest but ambiguous saviour, Dr Eric Zinthrop (Michael Mark). Zinthrop, invited to a meeting by Janice after writing her a letter offering a chance to exploit his new, revolutionary discovery, has been researching the royal jelly of wasps, and claims to have established a way of obtaining incredible rejuvenating properties from enzymes harvested and refined from the jelly. He’s trying to stabilise the formula, and needs a patron. Janice provides Zinthrop with a laboratory and apartment in the company offices, and eventually Zinthrop shows off the startling results of his experiments, as he turns a full-grown cat back into a kitten. Janice insists on being the human guinea pig for his experiments, and Zinthrop gives her a course of injections. But the formula proves to cause truly awful side-effects, which Zinthrop realises when the kitten he rejuvenated suddenly mutates into a grotesque part-wasp chimera. In a stupor of guilt and horror, Zinthrop wanders out of the company building and is hit by a car: hospitalised and concussed, he’s unable to warn the impatient Janice, who’s begun giving herself extra doses of the formula stolen from his laboratory fridge at night. At first the results seem exactly what she wanted, as she’s restored to radiant youth and beauty. But, of course, she also starts developing unusual hungers.

In its driving themes, The Wasp Woman opened up territory popular horror movies would take decades to explore more deeply. The way something like Coralie Fargeat’s The Substance (2024) essentially only reiterates in more hyperbolic and visceral terms what Corman, Gordon, and Zertuche did bears this out. Gordon usually played earth plebs, but his engagement with the world of acting had plainly made a mark on him, as The Wasp Woman can be taken as a meditation on the curse of the changing physiognomy on the actor, just as the story reflects Corman’s anxieties in trying to put steady ground under his feet as Hollywood’s fastest-rising low-rent mogul. The meshed meta preoccupations of many of Corman’s movies in this phase likewise found neat correlation with this meditation on the business of show business and the politics of image-making: much as Corman had done with Carnival Rock and would do again in A Bucket of Blood and The Little Shop of Horrors. The theme of the artist-impresario destroyed by their own yearning to actualise their desires recurs in The Wasp Woman, but with the twist that Janice is her own Pygmalion, and a Narcissus who can’t escape the necessity of her own appearance, and also, more fatefully, doesn’t want to. The script makes a nod to admired genre precursors, as one character makes a quip about Zinthrop being “a regular two-eyed Dr Cyclops.”

Most of The Wasp Woman adheres to Corman’s most stringent production and directorial precepts, barely leaving the confines of the Starlin Enterprises offices in their home skyscraper, except for segues into a tavern where some of the employees go to relax and complain about their boss’s growing perversities, and a few other locales. The offices are a perfect bole of ‘50s décor pretences, complete with sunburst clocks, fake wood panelling, and quasi-abstract doodle in frames on the wall: the kind of environs the TV series Mad Men tried so hard to recreate. Corman later hired Jack Hill to shoot a new beginning for the film two years after the original production, to pad the movie out for TV showings. The new opening depicted Zinthrop getting sacked from his previous job as a research scientist employed by a honey-harvesting company, when his findings are dismissed by a sceptical company auditor Barker (Karl Schanzer) who thinks he’s strayed from the path of what’s good for the corporate bottom line. This opening contrasts the rest of the film in its location filming of Mark placidly tramping about the countryside in protective suit. But it does help flesh out a level of sympathy for Zinthrop as a tragic figure, and also bolsters the movie’s wry take on the nature of corporations financing the experimental labours of creative minds: one businessperson’s bewildering boondoggle is another’s future-seizing moment of Promethean inspiration.

Janice’s offices are an intersection for various levels of social and personal ambition. Eisley, best-known for his lead role in the TV series Hawaiian Eye a few years later and also for unfortunate dabbling in hard right-wing politics, plays Lane, the insufferably smug male executive who nonetheless prides himself on being the most you-can’t-handle-my-raw-charisma-and-candour swinging dick around. Introduced posturing as the one who’ll tell Janice the hard facts about the connection between her waning looks and falling sales, and playing the sceptical voice throughout the rest of the movie, Lane is proven both wrong and right, and rapidly pivots to wanting to prove himself “a loyal member of the team” when Janice starts looking better. Perspective on gender relations circa 1959: Lane’s groan about “Oh, women!” when discussing Janice and Mary’s diverging brands of intransigence is met with Mary’s retort, “Men! Every time you search for an answer, you always come up with ‘women’!” More familiar in the oppositions but delivered with the wryness of reportage, and evoking thematic extension of his skid-row-kid-made-good tales is the way Corman populates the gatekeeping secretarial pool with lush beauties possessed of honking Noo Yawk accents and hard case cunning in flirting with the plebs who make deliveries (including Frank Wolff), tossing up delightful shows of streetwise sass like, “How’d you like to have this phone wrapped around your ear?” and “I’ve got two words for you. Drop dead. Twice!”

Janice’s colleagues fret about Zinthrop’s influence over her, with Cooper discerning the difference between a conman and a quack and worrying Zinthrop is the latter: a conman just wants money, but quacks can kill. Corman gives Zinthrop a large dose of sympathy, however, casting the avuncular Mark in the role and making the scientist more over-enthusiastic for his daring brainwave than maniacal or calculating: part of his and Janice’s affinity, Corman signals, lies in the odd similarity between them as people with vision and ideas who also have to deal with far less imaginative people. The roots of the plot’s seemingly longbow is spelled out as Cooper recalls the attempts by “a bunch of quacks” to halt and reverse aging with monkey gland transplants, which supposedly once had quite a heyday amongst aging Hollywood stars. Corman’s imagery of Janice gazing out from her penthouse perch across the light-studded Manhattan cityscape echoes Sweet Smell of Success (1957), with Janice and J.J. Hunsecker united in their simultaneously vantages of command and states of personal ignominy as titans in the City That Never Sleeps. Although, of course, Janice is both a more literal monster than Hunsecker but also a more sympathetic one, one for whom consuming people is a unwilling fate rather than a personal desire.

Zinthrop’s accident drives events towards crisis as no-one knows what happened to the scientist, and Janice hires an investigator, Les Hellman (Frank Gerstle) to find him, but also enjoys the unimpeded access to Zinthrop’s formula stock. This leads to a moment of perfect triumph for Janice in which she acts out the kind of scenario that would be the theme of her own advertising: rejuvenated by her doses, Janice arrives at the offices for a board meeting, stunning and mesmerising her bombshell secretaries with her recaptured authority as queen bee, and appearing before the mostly male board who gaze on in worshipful bewilderment and suddenly re-enslaved attention. “Our slogan will be ‘Return to Youth with Janice Starlin.’” “It’s a miracle!…It’s like a dream!” she raves to Mary afterwards, her gaiety authentic but also touched with a hint of glaze-eyed mania. Here Corman is toying with the same tendency towards satire on TV commercial language he’d teased in ad-ready grin of the alien-possessed, conformity-pushing, beatifically-smiling, TV commercial-ready wife in It Conquered The World, and which he’d go on to more overtly engage with on The Trip (1967). Corman’s sly pokes at commercialism don’t however wield the usual sense smug superiority of hipster satire, but more a sardonic sense also incorporating a sense of fate constantly courted and dodged, and perhaps not even that: is commercial cinema, particularly the kind Corman was making, that different to advertising? What was it servicing, other than its audience’s secret fantasies and yearnings and illustory selves?

Meanwhile Janice’s attempts to force her body back into obedience to her will’s project resembles the flesh-twisting of the alien imposter in War of the Satellites, albeit with the opposite upshot – where the alien Van Ponder starts his own heart beating and lays himself open to defeat through becoming more human, Janice heads in the opposite direction, retaining a human exterior but becoming something other, an ambush predator in a patient guise. Janice begins turning into human-wasp hybrid at fraught moments, the first arriving when she catches Cooper searching Zinthrop’s laboratory in his nocturnal efforts to find exactly what the scientist has been up to: lurking in the shadows, the transformed Janice launches on Cooper, whose attempts to defend himself are swiftly overcome, and Janice greedily sups the blood pouring from wounds in his neck. The monster mask Cabot sports in her appearances isn’t as goofy as some of the other monstrous manifestations in Corman movies, although it’s not quite good either, with protruding, knobbly eyes, so Corman compensates by cutting around it or using focal tricks to view wasp Janet obliquely until the climax. Meanwhile, when Zinthrop is found in a hospital by her investigators, suffering possibly debilitating brain damage, Janice has him installed in a hastily furnished apartment in the company offices to recuperate. Her motive is less pure humanitarianism than her own desperation over the rapidly depleted supplies of the formula the major and need to get Zinthrop well enough to make more.

The Wasp Woman doesn’t, then, make Janice an entirely sympathetic figure, as the character reveals ruthless streak. This might be the result, to be fair, of the fact that, once she starts taking the formula, she’s not entirely human anymore, and her instincts are taken over by a more sinister set of survival criteria. The film careens to its climax as Mary’s determination to bring in the police to investigate the proliferating disappearances around the offices, stirring the monster in Janice to hatch out, and Mary’s screams finally provoke an authentic, urgent response from Lane, who contends with the excruciating slowness of an elevator as still his quickest route to the rescue, and from Zinthrop, who, his memory finally returning, stumbles after Lane to help. In the final struggle, as Lane tries to stop Janice from killing Mary and himself, Zinthrop grabs a bottle of carbolic acid and hurls it at Janice, scorching her monstrous new face, before collapsing and dying from Janice’s mauling. Lane, finally pushed out of his complacent zone to fight tooth and nail for his and Mary’s lives, completes the coup-de-grace by pushing Janice through the window to plunge to her death, and the last image is of Janice’s mangled, smoking body lying on the street below, the perfect travesty of what she was and wanted to be again. The Wasp Woman’s solid and straightforward telling of a simple, stark story, and matching rigour of style, cordons it off from Cormania like The Saga of the Viking Women and War of the Satellites, as Corman cunningly skirts and minimises most of the problems of low-budget moviemaking and instead achieves a kind of chamber-piece dramatic integrity. The look of the film, courtesy of Floyd Crosby, a former big-time studio cinematographer turned another of Corman’s regular collaborators out in the salving tundra of maverick land, betrays the touch of a potent craftsman slumming: the images have a hard, crisp authority, mostly filmed with the hard, flat lighting that beset low-budget movies of the era, but shading into vaguely noir-ish moments during Janice’s laboratory lurking.

Adventures in Corman Land demand inversed and defiant aesthetic yardsticks, and by those standards The Wasp Woman’s solidity might even be counted as a negative, as its lacks the wild and woolly pleasures of Corman’s most incongruously epic tales and most zanily postmodern deconstructions: it’s not as transcendentally tacky as The Saga of the Viking Women or as delirious and original as some of Corman’s other sci-fi excursions, like Not Of This Earth and Attack of the Crab Monsters. Corman always eschewed any hint of belonging to the hip bohemian culture arriving in Hollywood in his era, and yet he finished up its oddball square godfather as it evolved into the counterculture, and it was only with the likes of The Trip and Gas, Or, How It Was Necessary To Destroy The World In Order To Save It (1970) would revel in a brief moment when being a commercial filmmaker didn’t necessarily mean having to tell a tight, well-ordered, slickly assembled story, but do the exact opposite, to turn it all inside and revel for a moment in the always-lurking psychic symbiosis between skid row cinema and avant garde flux. It’s understandable that Corman, after turning out 49 films in 16 years, abandoned directing in favour of becoming everybody’s favourite low-rent movie mogul, particularly after studio-forced redubbing on Von Richthofen and Brown proved the last straw. But it’s always been regrettable – Von Richthofen and Brown had suggested Corman was willing to flex new stylistic muscle and ambition, and it’s tantalising to imagine where he might have gone if he’d stuck at it – perhaps he would have proven a rival in the 1970s and ‘80s for some of the talents he was later, so constantly given the backhanded compliment of helping get started. Corman of course did return to directing after a long interval with 1990’s Frankenstein Unbound, an interesting but clumsy and misjudged swansong. Instead he seemed happy and lucrative working well into his nineties. Corman’s career was, ironically, the fruit of a moment of tumult and upheaval in cinema, a time when Hollywood seemed exhausted, its blockbusters tired and back-dated, its ideas shop-worn and paltry, its rivals as entertainment for a changing audience powerful and omnivorous. His passing came in a moment of similar upheaval for popular cinema. Corman’s example might well be ticket to weathering that storm too.

Standard
1950s, Action-Adventure, Horror/Eerie, Scifi, Thriller, Uncategorized

Day The World Ended (1955) / It Conquered The World (1956)

.

Director: Roger Corman
Screenwriters: Lou Rusoff / Lou Rusoff, Charles B. Griffith (uncredited)

By Roderick Heath

In memoriam: Roger Corman 1926-2024

I started writing this to give more appreciation to Corman before it was too late; then, mid-writing, it was too late. In any event, this is the first of a two-part look at some of my favourite Corman films of his pre-1960 phase.

The first five years of Roger Corman’s directing career saw him direct twenty-five feature films, a frenzy of creative zeal mixed with mercenary cool practically without comparison for productivity or richness in the history of cinema. In 1960 Corman released two movies that garnered him a sudden upswing in  attention and respect, if not exactly respectability: The Little Shop of Horrors, a movie that was, like most of the films he had made up until then, incredibly cheap and filmed quickly in black-and-white, and House of Usher, a lush colour horror movie made on a comparatively munificent budget. The Little Shop of Horrors played at the Cannes Film Festival, and House of Usher kicked off a series of films adapted from Edgar Allan Poe and H.P. Lovecraft that remain, today, his best-known and most-loved works. It’s comparatively easy to celebrate Corman as a director for his later work – other entries in the Poe-Lovecraft series, also including Pit and the Pendulum (1961), The Haunted Palace (1963), and The Masque of the Red Death (1964), his variably mythic and surreal counterculture exploitation excursions like The Wild Angels (1966), The Trip (1967), and Gas, or, How It Was Necessary to Destroy the World in Order to Save It (1970), and his thematically and directorially ambitious historical films, The St. Valentine’s Day Massacre (1967), Bloody Mama (1970), and Von Richthofen and Brown (1971).

By contrast, the fruits of those first five years have long attracted two entwined but also sharply distinct kinds of appreciation: viewers and critics genuinely fascinated by the particular kind of ingenuity and eccentric verve Corman and his team of regular collaborators exhibited, and those seeking immersion in the pantomime delights of Corman’s tacky monsters, makeshift sets, and other threadbare wonders. Here is where truly advanced Corman studies await. Those films range from strange masterpieces to a couple that are indeed pretty bad, but are all interesting – an array of stark, smart, ideogram-like variations on the essential stuff of genre cinemagoing, often delivered to meet whatever genre vogue there was going on, but shot through with perverse speculative interest, radicalism in theme and humour, and theatre-of-the-mind invention. Corman didn’t just prove you could make a movie about the end of the world on a budget that would hardly cover the catering on a big movie, but, perhaps, could and should only be done that way, with scope and scene reduced to a handful of players clinging on to the edge of the world – subject matter and setting mimicking Corman’s place in the Hollywood scheme of things. In that he proved, at long last, the ablest survivor. Corman successfully defined a version of commercial cinema that could subsist beneath the superstructure of expensive spectacle, a version that would split and veer off into many streams.

Corman’s factory-line approach to turning out movies could well be traced back to the place of his birth, Detroit, and his initial choice to train as an engineer, in trying to follow his father, after the family moved to California. Corman served in the US Navy through the end of World War II before finishing a degree in industrial engineering at Stanford. After a brief attempt to work in a car manufacturing plant, Corman realised this was not his metier. His older brother Gene was already working as an agent in the film world, and Corman decided to follow him. His first display of his defining independent streak and dislike for the big Hollywood studios would emerge when he quit working for Twentieth Century Fox after not getting any credit for coming up with the idea behind Henry King’s The Gunfighter (1950), and became a student again, using the GI Bill to study English at Oxford before returning to Los Angeles and working for a literary agent whilst thrashing out scripts. One he wrote became Highway Dragnet (1954), a movie he also signed on to serve as an associate producer for no pay, purely to get experience. Corman immediately ploughed the money he got for the script and more he borrowed from contacts, adding up to about $12,000, into his first foray as full producer, Monster from the Ocean Floor (1954).

This gambit proved sufficiently successful for Corman to quickly produce another, The Fast and the Furious (1955), which Corman wrote as well and was directed by its star, John Ireland, alongside Edward Sampson. Despite receiving interested offers from well-established players, Corman sold the movie to American Releasing Company, a recently founded by the two entrepreneurial impresarios, James H. Nicholson and Samuel Z. Arkoff, as they offered Corman the chance to immediately make more movies. Corman kicked off his official directing career with his next project, Five Guns West (1955), a modest, mostly conventional, solidly-handled Western: Corman was still not yet thirty years old. Corman’s loyalties as a movie aficionado were perhaps most clearly signalled in his early work by the relatively straight-laced approach he usually took with the Westerns and gangster movies he made, but he began introducing twists, like the warring female antagonists of Gunslinger (1956), and the fascination with criminal psychology as a house of cards introduced in Day The World Ended and developed in Machine-Gun Kelly (1958) through to Bloody Mama. Corman later described The Intruder (1962) as his one stab at a message movie and his only flop, but Corman’s edge of social critique and humanist concern was percolating from the start, like the confrontation with racism often elided in Westerns in Apache Woman (1955). Gunslinger also proved fateful for Corman as it was his first time working with screenwriter Charles B. Griffiths, who would write many of Corman’s films in the next few years.

Some were crime sagas, some teen flicks, others monster movies, a neat cross-section of the era’s popular fare. Still, Corman sometimes found himself starting trends rather than chasing them. The Undead (1957), a truly original and odd melange of horror, science fiction, and fantasy, emerged right at the cusp of a resurgence for horror cinema, whilst the trilogy of burlesques A Bucket of Blood (1959), The Little Shop of Horrors, and The Creature From The Haunted Sea (1961), helped birth the 1960s style of hip, pop art-inflected satirical comedy – particularly the latter, which came well before the likes of Dr. Strangelove, or, How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb (1964) and A Hard Day’s Night (1964) in transposing the aesthetics of stand-up comedy and MAD Magazine to the movie screen. Corman would later become most celebrated for the sheer number of future major Hollywood figures to gain major early career boosts from working with him. More immediately, Corman assembled a cadre of collaborators behind the camera and in front, employed across many movies. Some major if aging stars like Vincent Price, Boris Karloff, Peter Lorre, and Ray Milland would pass through his orbit, and stars on the rise, particularly Jack Nicholson and Charles Bronson, but also including Peter Graves, Lee Van Cleef, Mike ‘Touch’ Connors, and Robert Vaughan. But it was Corman’s corps of regular players whose faces become like old pals, among them Jonathan Haze, Dick Miller, Susan Cabot, Beverly Garland, Allison Hayes, Abby Dalton, Mel Welles, Dorothy Neumann, Barboura Morris, Richard Devon, Richard Garland, Bruno Ve Sota, and Mike Forrest.

One of the peculiar truths Corman stumbled upon, one he’d later explain to one of the young, blow-in talents looking to him for backing, a lad named Martin Scorsese, was that if you hit the right beats for pleasing the market being aimed for in his hemisphere of the filmmaking business, you could basically make any movie you wanted in between. Corman had already proved this often, and some of his best, most peculiar work exists in arguably his least-appreciated, most ephemeral movies-as-product, the ones he made to get in on the rock ‘n’ roll craze: movies like Rock All Night (1957) and Carnival Rock (1957) toss in a couple of numbers by some hit parade acts in scripts that otherwise dabble in postmodern farce and operatic tragedy, explorations of the absurd underside of show business and its players, and its connection with the vast American demimonde, the appetites serviced and personal fantasies given realisation, but built not down from the airy clouds of most Hollywood product, but from the stanchions of the street up. From almost the beginning, too, Corman had experimented with blending genre modes in a way that annexed the postmodern. It’s tempting to call Day The World Ended, Corman’s fourth film as a director, the wellspring of his oeuvre as his first movie in a fantastical genre and the one that really got things moving when it proved extremely profitable, making upwards of $1,000,000 from a budget of $96,000 and a shoot that lasted ten days.

In another sense, however, Day The World Ended stems directly from Five Guns West in focusing on a small, motley band adrift in a hostile landscape. From the Old West to the new: a high mountain abode at the fringes of what was civilisation, suddenly the only recourse for a small group of survivors of nuclear apocalypse. The script was written, as several of his early films would be, by Arkoff’s brother-in-law Lou Rusoff. Nepotism helps keep costs down, but Rusoff was also a sober, canny screenwriter, and he proved the first to invest Corman’s oeuvre with the trait that helped it to stand out, good writing and acting even in the most straitened circumstances. “Our story begins with….THE END!” announces the opening title card; its partner right at the end of the movie is, of course, “THE BEGINNING.” Corman would return to that idea with a more radical angle on Teenage Caveman (1958). “THE END!” is a mushroom cloud boiling up into the atmosphere. Atomic war has broken out, the world’s cities have been pummelled, and radioactive death is spreading across the world. Faux-Biblical scripture booms out over churning clouds. A narrator intones over shots of ruined buildings, “This is TD Day – Total Destruction by Nuclear Weapons…Man has done his best to destroy himself.” A gnarled and filthy figure gropes his way out of surging smoke and steam and stumbles down a slope before collapsing, revealing the stigmata of radiation poisoning blooming on his face. This is the edge of Corman’s little world, the pocket of normality left by the apocalypse, floating on an island of reality, the B-movie rough draft for Solaris (1972).

Corman signals John Huston as a particular touchstone in Day The World Ended, borrowing the coot prospector from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) and from Key Largo (1948) the surly gangster with might-makes-right attitude and his brassy, mistreated moll at his side, as well as the theme of siege and of nerves being ridden like a merry-go-round. Day The World Ended is however more a sci-fi redraft of Frank Capra’s Lost Horizon (1937) – a fantasy of seclusion unfolding in a mountain retreat protected by walls of stone, left delicately untouched by the churning storms without, with a mystic pool of purity at its heart where the maidens swim, and where the disruption in the tenuously balanced Eden comes from those who cannot let go of the world that was. Corman’s fondness for that source was signalled decades later when he acted in a short film directed by his daughter built around its mystique. Day The World Ended is also inflected with a brand of meta-textual play that would recur throughout Corman’s career, in the characters-in-search-of-an-author eccentricity of Rock All Night, The Little Shop of Horrors, and Creature From The Haunted Sea, and hit an apotheosis with Gas, or, How It Was Necessary To Destroy The World In Order To Save It, which would also provide the ultimate self-deconstruction of Day The World Ended’s titular thesis, tales where Corman confronts characters and dramatic modes usually kept apart.

Day The World Ended is still circumspect in that regard but the borrowings and tropes are fed into a supercollider, as Corman gropes towards discovering his compulsive themes and essential business model. The trash auteur who’d studied English at Oxford gives the game away by prominently featuring the Tragedy and Comedy masks on the wall of home that constitutes the bulk of the film’s setting, and even makes their presence the butt of a ruthless visual joke, as he zeroes in on a heroine trying to cheer everyone only to move as she dissolves in tears, the Comedy mask kept sarcastically in the frame. The bedraggled and irradiated survivor is Radek (Paul Dubov); shortly after geologist Rick (Richard Denning) arrives by the same path and finds Radek collapsed and seemingly dying. A little further along the ridge, gangster Tony (Connors) and his burlesque dancer girlfriend Ruby (Adele Jergens) also arrive at the fringe of the poisoned clouds in a car, and look down the slope into the mountain valley where a single, modernist-style house stands. The house belongs to Jim Maddison (Paul Birch), a retired US Navy Commander who chose the locale to live in precisely because he anticipated nuclear war and sought out a local where there was a chance of remaining safe from clouds of radioactive fallout: as well as high and remote, the mountains around the valley are filled with lead, and the house is well-stocked with provisions and fuel.

Maddison lives with daughter Louise (Lori Nelson), who had called her fiancé to retreat to the house with them when it became clear war was going to break out, but he never showed up. At first Maddison wants to fight off the new arrivals because their presence would swiftly exhaust their stockpiles, a stance that seems all the more justified when Tony uses a pistol to shoot off the lock on the front door, but Louise demands her father open the house to them. Rick arrives shortly after, carrying Radek, and Maddison checks Radek with a Geiger counter, finding he’s badly irradiated. Tony’s initial intention to seize control of the situation by brandishing his gun is foiled by Rick, who surprises him with a powerful punch and disarms him. A final survivor arrives, this one descending from the mountains above: Pete (Raymond Hatton), aged gold prospector with a mule he calls Diablo. Pete claims to have just found the gold seam he’s searched for; Pete has big deals going down in his intended destination, the now non-existent San Francisco. Corman’s debriefing of the different eras and ideals of American life, pack mule to car to atom bomb to mutant, but the search for gold goes on. Despite his misgivings, Maddison quickly advises his guests to wash off with bottled water and sets about arranging the house for them. As in a fairy-tale, the clean water is the prize above all.

Science fiction films of the 1950s often dealt in veiled or slightly metaphorical ways with the new reality of the atomic age. Arch Oboler’s Five (1951), a likely immediate influence on Corman and Rusoff, proposed a similar tale of a handful of survivors holed up in a large, modern house after such a war and arguing through what world they would build after, but avoided dealing directly with the realities of nuclear war. Other films had dealt with what-if scenarios about sudden cataclysms disrupting and even ending human civilisation, like Deluge (1933), Le Fin du Monde (1933), and When Worlds Collide (1952). And still more had envisioned the shock of the new and threat of the next through monstrous figurations, as mutant atomic monsters started stalking across movie screens, from Them! (1954) to Godzilla (1954). But Day The World Ended synthesised all those influences and more, and created a new subgenre: the post-apocalyptic drama, and children run as wayward as Planet of the Apes (1968), The Omega Man (1971), Mad Max (1979), and The Matrix (1999), all dealing in different ways with the same basic proposition of a post-nuclear landscape becoming as strange, teeming, brutal, transformation-riddled, and dreamlike as Greek mythology. Its DNA could also be said to inflect the entire realm of American independent film, an idea that barely existed when Corman began, but his template of making virtues out of scarcity and constructing elemental situations became its backbone: Corman, for instance, gifted the basic template to Monte Hellman for his debut The Beast From Haunted Cave (1959), and Hellman passed on the influence through his own cinema. Wim Wenders, whose Paris, Texas (1984) describes an American landscape as alien, arid, and depopulated as Corman’s, paid it puckish tribute in his The State of Things (1983), a film about a wayward attempt to remake Corman’s film.

The tiny cadre of survivors settle down to try and outlast the fallout before they exhaust their supplies. The situation is complicated as Radek, who everyone expects to die, instead clings on to life, but seems to need no food or water. Instead, he goes out of the house at night and devours wildlife that should be inedible, contaminated as all the animals are. One night, about to consume a snared rabbit, Radek sees a strange, gnarled figure looming out of the darkness and shrubbery at the valley fringe, and flees in fear. Meanwhile Tony stews with increasing frustration as he fixates on Louise, spurning Ruby and looking for a chance of gaining the upper hand over everyone. Maddison is worried that seasonal rains might dump radioactive water on the valley, spelling their doom, but for the time being a spring-fed pond provides fresh water and a place to swim. Having a dip there one day with Ruby, Louise experiences the peculiar feeling not just of being watched but of something trying to communicate with her on some inchoate level. Eventually Radek steals away Diablo the donkey and eats him, only for the lurking being to attack and kill him: the being is a mutant, a swiftly evolved response to the new radiation-soaked Earth beyond the valley, but one that still seeks what it can only find there. The distraught Pete, after finding Diablo dead, tries to climb back into the mountains but drops dead from radiation poisoning. Maddison, trying to chase him down, also receives a dangerous dose and barely makes it back to the house. Finally the mutant dares to try and snatch Louise away, whilst Tony takes advantage of Maddison’s prostration to steal his gun and plan Rick’s murder.

The valley and the house are Corman’s Forest of Arden, his Prospero’s Island, realised in a fashion that sustains a tradition to back when Shakespeare’s players only needed to hang up a sign announcing the scene was a forest. The immune Eden encompasses the possibilities of what the world looks like boiled down to a basic dichotomy: communal selflessness versus will to power. That dichotomy, as reports transmit from the mystic mutant zone from beyond the protecting ridge suggests, is solved in favour of raw strength – Corman’s regressing version of the apes-around-the-waterhole scenes of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). The basic object of all effort is Louise, the young, unsullied mother of the future – paging another Corman acolyte, James Cameron, and his The Terminator (1984) – and who will be her mate. The three immediately vying candidates are Rick, Tony, and the mutant; Ruby, despite being only a little bit older than Louise, is nonetheless discounted, hated by Tony as the emblem of what he was forced, in his way of thinking and seeing, to settle for. Maddison is the canny prototype of a survivalist, and also an emblem of paternal authority: the island of refuge is his discovery, his construction, and despite his own misgivings and sense he tolerates his gate-crashers. Maddison is also keeper of forbidden lore: as a Navy captain he witnessed the results of atomic bomb tests, animals deliberately exposed to the fallout. Most died, but a handful mutated rapidly to weather the new climate, gaining new, tough, crusty skin and horns on the head – and in the case of a monkey, a third eye and wicked claws.

This finds its alarming rhyme when another badly irradiated and disfigured man (Jonathan Haze) tumbles into the valley. Rick and Maddison recognise his gnarled skin and changed features as resembling the test animals, and Rick realises that Radek and this man are both stages in a continuum of mutation, of which the ultimate and perfect example is the mutant stalking the valley. The man quickly dies from starvation after reporting the formation of a community of mutants, who are stronger than him and so claim all the food. When Rick tracks Radek and asks up him what he sees when he goes back over the ridge, Radek reports, “There’s wonderful things happening,” but also mentions that he has “an enemy.” As if already tuned into the wavelength of where imagination would drift in the post-World War II era, Corman conceives of the chimera produced by the atomic age as a neo-hobgoblin with the third eye of Buddhist lore and psychic powers. These transmit on levels only Louise can pick up and that only registering on the level of sensation rather than thought, flesh and sex threatening to break and reform in strange, grotesque patterns – anticipating the proto-Cronenbergian warpings of The Haunted Palace, Corman’s great blueprint for modern body horror, in particular. In a cheeky touch, Corman includes himself as Louise’s fiancé in the framed photo she keeps and discards at film’s end, whilst it’s very faintly suggested the mutant might in fact be Louise’s fiancé, radically transformed. Playing the mutant is Paul Blaisdell, a specialist in creating masks, models, and suits, who found himself the go-to man for Corman and other makes of low-budget creature features like Edward L. Cahn throughout the late 1950s.

One of Corman’s recurring, even obsessive themes in his early movies was a fascination with defining the difference between the genuinely tough, brave, hardy, streetwise, what have you, and the merely posturing, the macho, and the maniacal. It’s a question he likely figured a vast number in his audience would respond to: many of Corman’s heroes are literal and figurative little guys who prove braver and more resilient than the hulks and he-men. He’d revisit this in terms comedic (Rock All Night), revisionist of classical myth (The Saga of the Viking Women and Their Voyage to the Waters of the Great Sea Serpent, 1957), and socially conscientious (The Intruder, when the Rick-Tony figuration is inverted and recast as the racist rabblerouser and righteous plebeian hero). The variation is straightforward in Day The World Ended, with the intelligent but still potent Rick contends with Tony, or, as they’re called at different points in the movie, “Mr All-American Hero” and “Mr Heel.” Tony is the embodiment of primeval virtue, for whom civilisation is a perpetual stymie: even in the refuge he’s only held at by Maddison who carries a gun and the key to the storeroom. Rick is at once an ideal hero but also the fallen version of something worthier, pressganged stand-in for Louise’s fiancé whilst mourning his brother, who was “studying for the ministry,” but the world needs a saviour of the flesh, not the spirit. He is, nonetheless, still two-fisted, besting Tony in their two stand-up fights. The seething, acquisitive, self-congratulatory hard-knock student Tony, declares that when he repopulates the Earth with his progeny, “They’ll be tough!” The end of the world and the reduction of the human race to a handful only winnows Tony’s feelings of frustrated strength and need down to the perfect version.

Maddison, realising that survival might just be possible, lobbies for Louise to marry Rick and have children, appointing himself as the equivalent of a ship’s captain with emergency clerical powers. This all seems amusingly prim given the situation portrayed, as too is Louise and Ruby swimming together in swimsuits that wouldn’t get a deacon bothered, but the censor doth sleep no less than the atomic mutant. The dichotomy of the two female archetypes is very different to the men, signalling another quality that would distinguish Corman at the time: his female characters were a cut far above where the vast bulk of Hollywood cinema was, and sometimes still feel radical. Here basic presumptions are still in play: Louise is the “nice” girl, so prudishly dressed it borders on the satiric (like the entirely swathing nightgown she wears in the climax) versus Ruby the sexy dame. And yet Ruby is Corman’s truest figure of empathy, victim of a particular kind of misogyny not ended with the old world but perhaps only, again, rendered to pure form, as she finds herself the inferior candidate for mating and propagation. She gets along best with Pete, who she sneaks pilfered sugar to make moonshine with, watches Louise’s back, and tries to maintain Tony’s last tethers to human decency. Ruby kicks up her heels and amuses her companions by recreating her old burlesque act: “They’d give me the blue spot and then I’d give them the clincher!” she recalls with the glee of someone who’s held the eyes and groins of an audience enthralled, enacting the role of sexual a form of power and exaltation that played to a world vanished but could, in a genuinely revivified world, be powerful and beneficent. Ruby is however doomed by alternations of love and hate for her ratbag boyfriend, enacted in quick and deadly manner when she saves Louise from being raped by Tony and makes a last, desperate appeal to Tony: “What are we fighting for? We’re like a couple of kids!”, only to turn homicidally enraged when Tony spurns her: trying to stab him, Ruby instead ends up with Tony shoving the knife in her own gut, and in a startling vision of misogynist disdain, he drops her corpse over the edge of a cliff with a wiseguy kiss-off that could come right out of Raymond Chandler: “Happy landings, sweetheart.”

Corman’s concise, waste-free technique contends expertly with the limited settings, as when he uses the prostrate Maddison on the couch that bisects his living room as a compositional element to complicate the space and staging, and his steady editing rhythm invisibly breaking up what is in effect a dialogue-driven chamber piece. Later Corman would know that his audience at least partly showed up to see the cheap monsters, but for the moment he makes the mutant’s first appearance a cleverly elusive, even hallucinatory moment, the creature hovering slightly out of focus in the distance, Radek looking on from the foreground. The “wonderful things” hover in the stygian mist all around, at least until the Biblically cleansing rain starts to fall. The mutant’s attempt to abduct Louise is foiled when it proves terrified of the water of the spring, and Louise manages to wriggle free and take refuge in the pool. The rain that starts falling proves to not be irradiated but instead start washes the fallout away. Representing as it does a sudden evolutionary leap to contend with a poisoned world, clean water is ironically toxic to the pathetic mutant, which dies, its corpse smoking in the downpour: Rick and Louise deduce the reason for its death and know this means other mutants won’t survive the rain either. Meanwhile Tony manages to snatch up the pistol Maddison keeps close and immediately plans to gun Rick down when he and Louise return, but he doesn’t know Rick gave Maddison another pistol for extra security, and when he realises there’s no other choice Maddison kills Tony. Maddison finally dies and Louise and Rick finally leave the valley together, with a closing note that might be just a tad excessively optimistic, but certainly fulfils the film’s parable-like form.

By the standards of Corman’s first phase, Day The World Ended is a leisurely affair at 80 minutes long – if he’d made it couple of years later it would likely have been ten to fifteen minutes shorter. It also follows suit with a lot of ‘50s sci-fi cinema in invoking religious overtones, at a time when to sell to a large audience many dabbling in the genre assumed there had to be some kind of parochial moral to what was being portrayed. This was something Corman would quickly dispense with when he realised his young audience, watching from their cars in the drive-ins between make-out sessions, didn’t really want or like. By contrast, when the moral of the story is summarised at the end of Corman’s follow-up monster movie, It Conquered The World, it’s couched entirely in terms of human qualities and potentials, distinguishing their emotional reflexes from the cold, calculating alien whose lack of feeling indicates a species without any feel for, or interest in, communal care. Rusoff wrote the script for It Conquered The World again, although Corman had Griffith give it an uncredited polish, and indeed the writing has the feel of Griffith’s involvement in the headier dialogue and quirkier humour. Again, Corman is doing the utmost with next to nothing, although now the settings stretch to a couple of different houses and interior sets, a world where famous scientists subsist in California bungalows and army bases are safely represented by some wire fencing.

It Conquered The World was the first film released under American Releasing Corporation’s new, more ambitious name of American International Pictures. This time Blaisdell was given few hundred dollars to build the monster that was to be the movie’s main attraction. Corman later, wryly commented that it taught him that movie monster shouldn’t be shorter than the leading lady, and that lady herself, Beverly Garland, reportedly snorted on seeing the creature, “That conquered the world?” The Venusian is indeed pretty blatant in its stiff articulation and rubbery stature, but is also amongst the most memorably designed and iconic of movie monsters, vaguely resembling an ambulating upturned radish with a skirting fringe of scuttling claws, two waving, pincer-capped arms, glow-in-the-dark eyes, and face twisted into a permanent evil leer. It Conquered The World gets in on the run of mid-1950s movies about alien possession and suborning with its theme of an alien invader who starts using creepy little bat-like creatures to fly around and implant control devices in chosen recipients, turning them into slaves.

Another of Corman’s recurring preoccupations emerges here, in the figure of the intelligent and inquisitive being whose private moral schemes lead them in a radically different direction to the society about them, which they consider themselves above or fatefully at odds with. Corman would later take that figure to a conceptual limit in The Masque of the Red Death’s Prince Prospero, who devoted to evil as an ethic, and Bloody Mama’s titular matriarch. Here the equivalent is Lee Van Cleef’s Dr Tom Anderson, a brilliant physicist who has nonetheless alienated himself from authorities with his impassioned antiwar activism and bizarre predictions, including theories about life on other planets being provoked by human emergence into space. Tom is first glimpsed lobbying US Defense Secretary Platt (Marshal Bradford) and General Carpenter (David McMahon) in a desperate effort to get an army-run project trying to launch satellites into space cancelled: “We’re all in a state of high hilarity,” Tom comments sardonically when the honchoes denies he’s been worrying them, “And we’ll all end up in a state of high mortality if you don’t call off this satellite project.”

Meanwhile Anderson’s close friend and former colleague Dr Paul Nelson (Peter Graves) is running the project with his own, more orthodox genius and sense of duty to the fore. His team of scientists and technicians includes Dr Ellen Peters (Karyne Kadler) and Dr Pete Shelton (Griffith), and they’re trying to finally get a satellite into orbit after several failures. “I hear that satellite cost us nine million bucks,” one of the team notes, to another’s quip: “It’d be just great if she sideswiped an airliner.” Tom and Paul and their wives Claire Anderson (Garland) and Joan Nelson (Sally Fraser) have dinner together at the Andersons’ house, where Paul gets the feeling Tom is peculiarly smug about his latest satellite launch. Tom responds by showing Paul a shortwave radio setup in his living room, and lets Paul listen to a peculiar throbbing noise coming in over it, a noise that Tom says is actually the voice of an alien being he’s made contact with, one of a circle of nine, immensely advanced beings living on Venus. What Tom doesn’t tell his friend yet is that he’s been paving the way for the alien to come to Earth: Tom has given the alien information about the personnel of the project base and who exactly it needs to take control of amidst the local population in order to seize all the levers of authority. Tom’s reasons for helping the creature emerge quickly: Tom believes the alien will benignly apply its greater intelligence and will on the human race, finally cure it of warlike impulses and set the species on the path to noble betterment, a world where a man like Tom will finally be hailed as a noble visionary rather than a brilliant crank. The alien’s spacecraft crash-lands after encountering the satellite Paul’s team launched, but the alien survives and takes up residence in a cave system near the project base. The alien sends out a number of small, bat-like flying creatures to track down those selected to be controlled, including Paul and his fellow scientists on the project as well as its military overseer, General Pattick (Russ Bender), and the Sheriff of the nearby town, Shallert (Taggart Casey), as well as Joan and other wives, as Tom has told the alien they must also be controlled. The alien also uses its powers to shut down every machine in the surrounding countryside, save those belonging to Tom and the subjugated: in a miniature remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951), trains, cars, and industrial machines crawl to a halt.

At first glance It Conquered The World seems fairly conventional in its mid-1950s social presumptions, with its pair of dutiful housewife-partners framing the core clash of rebel antihero, a study in and warning about professional intellectual dissenters crossing the line into outright disloyalty through utter conviction they’re doing right, versus the firmly with-the-program hero. Add to this to the way the alien mimics a particular kind of propagandist ideal of what a Communist was supposed to act like – lacking familiar moral standards, acting according to emotionless expedience and absorbing other consciousnesses into its own, blank, gestalt identity. As the film unfolds, however, Corman has great fun revising and toying with those precepts. The alien proves instead a caricature of arch individualism, as Paul realises, acting without any understanding of human empathy as above all the underpinning of a social animal. Paul has to become the anarchic and ruthless guerrilla warrior within his own little backwater. The wives are soon split between the conformity-pushing, in the shape of the controlled Joan, thrusting one of the bat-creatures at her husband with a smile of pleasure straight out of a TV commercial evangelising a miracle cleaning product, and Claire, the seething defender of both home and species, who becomes increasingly determined and irate in provoking her husband’s conscience before marching off with rifle in hand to confront the alien invader. The military hierarchy, in the form of Pattick, is easily controlled, and his watchwords of paranoia readily tweaked to serve the alien’s quarantining needs precisely.

All that’s left of army power capable of intervening is a unit of bewildered GIs tramping about the landscape as if trapped in their own private Beckett play. Here we get the essential Corman double act, of Dick Miller as the stern, rugged, but confused sergeant Neil, and Haze as Ortiz, ethnic comic relief, an obscurely accented, clumsy, but attentive private who notes the “funny-looking bird” that keeps flitting overhead. Cruel satire on the spectacle of repression of civil rights protestors comes when Paul happens upon the controlled sheriff casually gunning down elderly newspaper editor Haskell (Thomas E. Jackson) for his refusal to obey orders. Paul’s sense of logic dictates that anyone possessed by the alien is “my enemy,” and takes this to the still rather shocking limit of shooting Joan after she attempts to plug him into the alien’s soothing mainstream of mindless obedience. Corman’s jocular cynicism extends to the dead-eyed violence that dots the film, from Tom setting Shallert on fire with his blowtorch after he changes sides, to one of the suborned scientists at the rocket range calmly reciting instructions over the radio whilst his colleague throttles Ellen to death, after she is horrified to find the bat-creatures that delivered their control devices in a putrefying stack stashed in a locker: the cool, post-gender landscape of scientific research suddenly becomes the scene of proto-slasher movie stuff. Corman’s images become increasingly charged with evocations of extreme threat but all couched in everyday and domestic settings – Claire beholding her husband dutifully oiling up his rifle to get ready to kill his friend and lurking behind decorative bars that became a cage cutting her off from her husband, and Paul pulling out his pistol to gun down his wife and then clutching her body whilst sobbing.

Whilst dotted with such episodes of surprisingly hard-edged violence and weirdness, It Conquered The World is like Day The World Ended finally propelled by character interaction, with the two scientists duelling with a kind of violence manifest in thought and attitude, violence that never becomes physical between them as Tom in particular tries to maintain the indulgent reasonableness of a man confident he’s about to be proven right. The rest of the action can be seen as mere illustration of the clash of their differing philosophies. Science fiction epic spills over into domestic drama, the two different marriages proving battlegrounds the alien war is fought on. Joan’s possession and Paul’s slaying of her sparks Tom’s appalled bewilderment: “She was still your wife – still Joan! You would have been one with her…”, to Paul’s hard, disgusted retort that she had become his enemy in a war that Tom has foisted on them all. Hard as it to see the roguish Van Cleef with his vulture-like, lunging physique as anyone’s idea of a famous scientist, he does a great job regardless of selling his character’s mix of fanatical fervour and friendly indulgence, as when he assures Paul over the phone that since he’s destroyed his control unit and can’t be possessed for at least a week he might as well come over a drink. But the scotch-sipping palsiness of Tom and Paul doesn’t disguise the sharp angles of their duels of language. “Makes me look back into history for comparison,” Tom comments when Paul notes the alien’s ruthless methods. “Comparison or rationalisation?” Paul retorts. Finally the alien, tired of Paul marauding and upsetting their plans, decides it can’t wait to muzzle him and commands Tom to kill his friend. And Tom seems to shoulder this responsibility in the name of the greater good.

Meanwhile Claire, marvellous played by Garland, personally embodies a paradigm in her moment of his history, trying to live according to the ideal of wifely duty, a duty that demands she incessantly harass her husband over his increasingly dubious life choices, the old job talk transmogrified into a running debate on the ethics of intergalactic treason. As treason unfolds, Claire finds herself made militant and obliged to go out and face the being that is both organ of and puppet master for Tom’s galactic-sized ego. In the process she evolves into a rough draft for Ellen Ripley in her furious, alien-slayer resolve. “Look, I don’t know if you can hear me or not,” she barks over the radio at the alien she now sees as her personal nemesis, “But if you can you listen good – I hate your living guts for what you’ve done to my husband and to my world! I know you for the coward you are and I’m gonna kill you!” The steals the rifle Tom intends to use on Paul and ventures into the caves. There she’s confronted by the creature: “You think you’re gonna make a slave of the world? I’ll see you in hell first!” she snarls as she plugs the sneering creature. But the alien proves invulnerable to both bullets and invective, and Claire dies nastily in its pincers. A sorry end for a character who today would be onto her fourth franchise instalment. Tom and Paul overhear her death through the radio, finally shocking Tom out of all his illusions about the alien’s nature.

Ortiz hears Claire’s screams whilst he’s foraging, as he fetches his comrades. Too late to save Claire, they battle the monster within and outside the cave. Meanwhile Paul visits the rocket range and guns down the possessed there, whilst Tom improvises a weapon with the blowtorch and kills the sheriff to get hold of his working car. Arriving at the cave, Tom is in time to see the soldiers being slaughtered by the alien on the rampage, but he manages to approach the alien which thinks it still his stooge, only for Tom to declare with savage reckoning, “I made you welcome to this Earth – you made it a charnel house!” He plunges the blowtorch into one of the Venusian’s eyes: the alien swipes him in agonised retaliation, and monster and scientist both topple over dead, Tom lying in the alien’s cold embrace. Corman’s laconic direction sharpens here and there with flashes of the inspired, like the sight of the alien’s gleaming eyes in deep shadow as it advances on Claire, and suddenly at the very end he goes for a concluding note of threadbare cinematic poetry, cutting  between the various littered corpses left behind by the drama, as Paul makes account of the meaning of it all: “There can’t be any gift of perfection from outside ourselves,” Paul notes by way of eulogy when he arrives too late: “It has to come from inside – from Man himself.” A fascinating sign-off to a movie from the era, contrasting the usual moral along the lines of “there are some things man is not meant to know,” with Corman’s own, distinct variation: humanity must know itself before it can know anything. And in this idea, Corman had found the key to his career’s preoccupations. That, and making much out of practically nothing.

Standard
1920s, Auteurs, Comedy, Silent

The Circus (1928)

.

Director / Screenwriter / Actor / Producer / Editor: Charles Chaplin

By Roderick Heath

Charles Chaplin the filmmaker and Charlie Chaplin the performer were inseparable concepts from the first few months of his movie career. He became world-famous on the back of short films, at first churned out with insatiable creative zeal for an equally insatiable audience. Of the fifty-two known films he helmed and released between 1914 and 1919, all ran from one to four reels long, with his sense of the cinematic .obviously, constantly growing in ambition and skill. He had, in himself, the ideal star to build his movies around, knowing it was his business on one side of the camera to supply funny business and on the other side to catch it all in the best way possible. The flow of creation abruptly turned off for a time in 1919, and for over a year no new Chaplin film hit movie screens. The reasons for this piled up. Chaplin had formed the new studio United Artists with fellow stars Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford to foster their artistic ambitions, but was still tied to a contract with the studio First National and forced to fulfil it. In the same period Chaplin had his disastrous first marriage, to be a recurring adjunct of his life and career. Chaplin’s growing determination to stretch his talents beyond straightforward comedy had been clearly indicated in the genre and tonal play of A Dog’s Life (1918) and Shoulder Arms (1918), and he next set out to make overtly Dickensian blend of comedy and human drama. The result of this labour of love was The Kid, released early in 1921.

With The Kid Chaplin stretched his cinematic and dramatic reflexes to finally make a feature film. Chaplin had obviously been moving in that direction, but also evidently wrestled with the question of how to annex the realm of long-form narrative without diluting the appeal of his comedy or stumbling into pretentiousness. The Kid drew on his childhood poverty in London and depicted with jagged immediacy the experience of being separated from a parent – in his case, his mentally ill mother, the movie a version of his essential Tramp hero and the young boy he takes under his wing – and at the mercy of a world, where protective authority feels like no protection at all and the leafless street can prove its own kind of garden. Chaplin had matured into a front-rank directing talent: Chaplin effortlessly handled the film’s shifts from knockabout humour to stylisation, realistic reportage, tear-jerking feeling, dreamy reverie and fantasy, and action-thriller stuff in the film’s most famous sequence. That sequence depicted the Tramp having his young ward taken from him by authorities, and his venture across the cityscape to rescue him from the van taking him away. Chaplin had also, in The Kid, recreated the feel of the London of his childhood, evoked and recreated in the shabby areas of an American city.

Chaplin achieved a rare and double-edged feat with his movies, drawing the filmgoing audience around the world into a world most either wanted to forget or didn’t know existed, and making it seem like the most vital place in the universe. Chaplin’s Tramp was always a figure hovering on the edge of things – broke, alone, itinerant, clinging on to existence on the underside of cities and societies. The Tramp was essentially good but never saintly: he could be hard, scruffy, a little dishonest, a man whose sympathy lay in his perpetual pluck, his obvious heartsore solitude, and his constant, improvisatory genius for endurance. Chaplin, after turning out a few more short subjects to fulfil his First National contract, next tried to break out of being a director tied to his own presence and persona with his second feature, A Woman of Paris (1923), which was amongst other things a vehicle for his discovery and regular costar Edna Purviance. Chaplin only appeared in a cameo, as the film was, in part, an attempt to break away from making movies only featuring himself, and accusations that was all he was good at. Despite being recognised now as one of Chaplin’s major works, and drew notices even at the time for how adroitly Chaplin had swapped out his comic detail for emotional and stylistic nuance, the movie proved a bomb. Purviance’s career was abruptly killed stone dead, and Chaplin nursed his wounds whilst indulging a second, even more disastrous marriage with the teenaged Lita Grey, a union on which the fuse burned quickly and detonated as Chaplin was gearing up to make The Circus.

In the meantime, Chaplin rebounded with The Gold Rush (1925), a film he spent a head-spinning $1 million making and 15 months shooting. The Gold Rush proved every bit the successful resurgence Chaplin sought and, although not universally admired at the time, it quickly became regarded as one of his finest films: indeed, it was Chaplin’s personal favourite. Chaplin’s Tramp trying his hand at gold prospecting in the Klondike was the pretext for legendary comic set-pieces including the eating of a shoe and a shack tilting on a cliff’s edge. Chaplin perhaps came closest to an ideal in his method of extracting humour from situations and prospects that seem grim, even horrific on the face of things, and touched with more than a little surrealism and lyrical energy. The Gold Rush is still the ideal movie for introducing an audience to silent cinema. It also felt like a farewell to the mature concept of the Tramp persona as a not-quite-happy, not-quite-going-lucky embodiment of the Everyman who could by virtue of his simplicity turn up in any place and any time – by film’s end the that incarnation of the Tramp got rich and got the girl.

The Circus, on the other hand, looks like the first of a loose trilogy where the Tramp character seen in all three could be taken to be the same person. We get the Tramp in three different locales that speak of changing times and ways of seeing the world, moving from the transient and illusive Victoriana refuge of a circus to a labyrinthine, expressionist, contemporary city of City Lights and on to the hyperbole of the slightly futuristic, inimical industrial world nestled cheek-by-jowl with the same old poverty in Modern Times. Each movie ends with distinct variations on a theme, seeing the Tramp as someone looking for anyone to love in any fashion, but also willing to selflessly fight for and sacrifice on behalf of those he loves, not demanding anything for it, passing through variations of dashed hopes, disillusionment and understanding, and finally gaining someone to walk down the road with. The Circus was made under particularly heavy weather for Chaplin: he was just coming out of an acrimonious break-up with his Grey played out in tabloid headlines, his studio burned down mid-shoot, and, as with The Kid, the personal failure provoked artistic intensity. In one of those little ironies of cinema, Grey suggested Merna Kennedy to Chaplin as his costar for the film (Kennedy went on to have a busy career in the early talkie era, only to cut it short when she married director and choreographer Busby Berkeley in what proved a short union, and died startlingly young of a heart attack, aged 36). Whilst Chaplin would, famously, resist the tide of talkies in his own fashion, a tide already rising when he released The Circus, nonetheless it was also his own, last, proper silent movie.

The Circus was another big hit and gained Chaplin attention at the first Oscar ceremony, where he was given a special award for his overall achievement in making the movie, and also nominations as Best Actor and the soon-defunct award for Best Comedy Director. But The Circus has long hovered with relative unease in critical terms between the outlandish bravura of The Gold Rush and the exactingly fashioned, poetic crescendo of City Lights. Chaplin’s own reticence to talk about it, stemming from the mess that was his life at the time and which he plainly channelled into the movie, didn’t help, although he did, decades later, write a new score for the movie and append a song to the opening. It is, however, a candidate for Chaplin’s richest film, and the pivotal work of his career. His experience and sense of artistic meaning are conceptually summarised and metaphorically encoded throughout The Circus, contemplating a life up until that point spent as an entertainer and creator, and opening the gate to the themes and gestures of his later work. Chaplin’s established artistic reflexes, swerving beyond high slapstick comedy and emotion, here revel in jagged alternations.

The Circus also reveals how much Chaplin had learned about making movies since the days of Shoulder Arms, which was already damn good filmmaking. Chaplin’s contribution to the lexicon of popular film is generally seen not as one of big technical gestures, no revolutionary editing displays or the like, but in terms of a succinct sense of how to connect elements to an overall expressive urge, inviting the viewer into the space, physical and mental, of his protagonist, the staging of comic elements always lively, even madcap, but only ever proving lodestones of what the Chaplin hero is experiencing. It’s hard to ignore the feeling that beneath all the other reasons for Chaplin’s sudden plunge in popularity during and after World War II lay, beyond all his other failings, the feeling that Chaplin was reminding everyone of the past, hanging around like a bad smell when after the war everyone wanted to pretend that world was dead and gone. Whereas Chaplin’s entire career and famous persona were built around the proposition that the worst might indeed happen – but that too can be weathered.

The movie proper opens with a star emblazoned in a white background, which proves within seconds to be the paper target through which bursts a young circus performer, Merna (Kennedy), an acrobat who performs leaps off a horse’s back. Merna provides the idealised feminine element of the circus’ roundelay of dynamic physical performance, specialising in seeming gossamer and agile and lovely in her white costume and tutu, contrasting the lumpen crew of circus clowns who pivot at the centre of the arc her horse describes. Her stepfather is the Ring Master (Allan Garcia), and after she dismounts and bows to the applause of the crowd, he stalks after her, cornering her alone and berating her for missing one of her leaps through the hoop: in what is evidently a common occurrence, the girl, frightened and submissive, pleads that she couldn’t help, but the Ring Master grabs her by the wrist and throws her down through one of the star-stamped hoops. Merna lies prone as the Ring Master tells her she won’t get any food that night, and heads back out to meet the clowns as they come out of the ring: he looks between them with patent disgust, noting, “And you’re supposed to be funny,” before pointing out the half-empty stalls and blaming them for the poor attendance. After he stomps away, the clowns sit in glum wilting whilst the girl sobs where she lies. Chaplin softens the shocking impact of this a tad by billing Merna as only the Ring Master’s stepdaughter, but in the dialogue she only calls him “Father,” and another character refers to her by the same name as the actress playing her.

The star target in the hoop is already established the film’s recurring, deeply ironic emblem, of aspiration in general, and the eternally aimed-for glory as a performer in specific – in this case initially the girl who has to balance on a moving horse and make leaps into the air, something requiring amazing skill even to attempt and the closest thing to a modern equivalent of a Minoan bull jumper, all of life contained in the jump. Within seconds afterwards the girl is being pushed to the ground through one of those stars, and at the end the Tramp screws up a tattered remnant of it and throws it aside. Extraordinary ambivalence for an artist who had climbed to the absolute pinnacle of success in the history of his profession. Merna and her life would be at home in Dickens or D.W. Griffith’s Broken Blossoms (1919). Not only does Chaplin establish the girl as a figure of ready sympathy, but as indeed one he wants the audience to see as more deserving of sympathy than the Tramp, partly to sell the ending. The Ring Master is a bully and thug under his well-maintained performance veneer, but his bad attitude is at least partly informed by the perpetual dance near the edge of ruin that is being an impresario, saddled with performers who just don’t have the edge he thinks required to make the whole enterprise work: the entire circus vibrates on the depressing and cringe-inducing wavelength of desperation.

The one thing this place needs is yet another loser in dire circumstances, so of course a Tramp (Chaplin) is drawn to it like a magnet. The Tramp, as a title card states thing succinctly, is “around the Side Shows, hungry and broke.” He immediately finds himself in danger, as a pickpocket (Steve Murphy) targets onlookers outside a funhouse. When a victim accuses the thief of taking his wallet, the pickpocket swiftly stuffs the wallet into the Tramp’s jacket, planning to get it back later, and so passes a pat-down by a cop called by the victim. The thief trails the Tramp as he searches for any happenstance source of food. The Tramp finds one in the form of a sandwich in the hand of a small child carried on his shoulder by his father. Whilst the father is distractedly talking to another patron, the Tramp makes a play of amusing the child with funny faces as he takes bites from the sandwich. It’s a marker of Chaplin’s confidence of his connection with audience, and also his willingness to test it, that within seconds of first appearing in the film he’s stealing food from a baby, and doing so in a way that highlights Chaplin’s most impish expressivity, the aspect of teasing good-humour, bordering on cuteness, he often invested in the Tramp figure, playing up its calculated side to better note how he’s learned to act in response to sheer need.

The Tramp even slaps a little more sauce from the vendor’s table onto the sandwich, and adds sauce to the act when the father suddenly turns about: the Tramp grabs the tyke’s bib and wipes his lips with it, as if the child has been chomping down merrily. The Tramp’s desperation is his engine of wit and ingenuity, and the source of his humour value to the viewer. This contradiction had been present in the persona almost since his inception, and The Circus meditates on the aberrance of this, as well as the necessity of it. Marcel Carné would borrow and recontextualise the wallet-stealing business for Les Enfants Du Paradis (1945) to introduce his hero Baptiste, who would be at once a tribute to Chaplin and also to Chaplin’s own inspirations, the mimes of French and Italian theatre. The pickpocket tries to recover the stolen wallet from the Tramp’s pocket, only to be grabbed himself by a cop, and the cop hands the Tramp the wallet assuming it was his, even telling him to count the money to make sure it’s all there. The Tramp, after almost giving the wallet over, decides to hold onto this tremendous stroke of luck, but immediately pays the price when the wallet’s actual owner sees him with it and tries to have him arrested, even as the real pickpocket slips the cop’s grasp and flees into the carnival row crowd. The two men converge, both with cops chasing them, running pell-mell down a lane, locked as mirror images, except for the piquant aside of the Tramp, glancing at his doppelganger, briefly lifting his hat in greeting.

The Tramp scurries into the funhouse, where a young couple are amusing themselves on an oscillating bit of floor and an open door leads into a mirror maze, a space where the Tramp finds himself utterly bewildered and lifting his hat to his own reflection. The pickpocket also tries to hide in the funhouse, momentarily falling foul of the treachery of the sliding floor, before attacking the Tramp in the maze, demanding the wallet. The Tramp gives him the slip and escapes outside, but sees one of the cops below, and so pretends to be one of the automatons on the funhouse frontage, pivoting and gesturing. When the pickpocket emerges he moves to strike the Tramp with a blackjack, but stands dead still in following the Tramp’s lead when he too spots the cop, his forced immobility allowing the Tramp to change his automaton act and keep bashing him over the head with his own blackjack. The act is only given away as the pickpocket keels over, and a cop catches the Tramp after he dives back into the mirror maze: for a moment the cop is bewildered about how to get out again. All of The Circus is great but this opening is particularly brilliant, indeed a height of cinema in its way, silent and otherwise, in the way Chaplin builds his jokes and his visuals in careful concert.

The image of Tramp and thief running alongside each-other, locked together by the consequences of actions and motives that are similar but also asymmetrical in fundamental terms, kicks off the game of splintering identity and simulacra, playing off the sudden flux of each man’s status in the world: the Tramp dances on the edge of criminality but tries with all his might to avoid falling over it until tempted beyond endurance and seemingly beneficent fortune. This turns immediately into an absurdist trap, forcing him to take refuge in the organised illusions of the funfair which only contrast and clarify all the unstable surfaces of the real world. The mirror presents the Tramp’s image metastasizing into something inescapable, splintering his sense of self until he finishes up lifting his hat to his own reflection, an image that gets crazier until the Tramp’s last, frantic retreat there as the cop chases him, his darting image suddenly hitting an ecstatic flux that sees the frame churning with a plethora of Chaplins. As well as a great visual joke, this can be seen as a possible dig at Chaplin’s many imitators, both onscreen and off – which inspired him to get the first ever copyright protection for an artist’s appearance and style – and the feeling of the artist’s specific identity suddenly being at the mercy of the world, escaping their own frame and running rampant in the world, diffusing essence. It’s the logical terminus for the idea of falling in love with the camera, and it falling in love with you, as Chaplin first explored in is screen debut, Kid Auto Races At Venice (1914): the complete loss of self, the disintegration into manifold reflected images. But the cop, the authority, can still spot the real one. The game of automatons demands the ability to seem perfectly mechanical and dehumanised, an idea Chaplin would again return to with more thoroughness in the assembly lines of Modern Times. The game of pretending to be automatons sees the Tramp able to deal out a dose of the pickpocket’s own medicine and a touch of revenge besides, but it also has a touch of the grotesque in the Tramp’s indulgence of a mocking laugh disguised as part of the mechanised ritual.

The way Chaplin builds up the momentum of this comic mayhem and pieces it all together into a flux of carefully organised chaos is cinema of a sophistication only a few filmmakers were matching — Griffith, Lang, and the Soviet filmmakers, and none of them, apart from Dziga Vertov sometimes, were funny. Chaplin continues layering his gag sequences in this seemingly random, finally converging style right through the film, culminating in the tightrope walk that is the last comic set-piece. The Tramp manages to give the cop the slip in the mirror maze and flees into the big top. In the ring the proper clowns of the circus are working through a routine on a spinning stage with all their well-honed art, tumbling off the disc, but the audience is bored. In comes the Tramp and pursuing cop and both finish up running on the stage, seeming to get nowhere, until the Tramp manages to outpace the cop just enough to come up and around behind him, before tripping and falling, swatting the cop off the stage in turn, and then also knocking down the Ring Master when he dashes over to see what’s going on. The crowd is absolutely delighted by this spectacle of life that looks like art, and they’re rewarded with a second display of the Tramp’s accidental greatness when he takes refuge in the apparatus of the circus’s resident magician, Professor Bosco (George Davis), who performs, trying to disappear and re-conjure his compulsory leggy assistant (Betty Morrissey) only to get the Tramp in her place. Finally the Tramp flees the tent and encounters the pickpocket, now firmly in the custody of the cop who was pursuing him: the Tramp hands over the wallet in question eagerly and bids adieu to his brief life of crime. “Bring back the Funny Man!” the audience demands, whilst the Tramp settles down and goes to sleep in the back of a cart outside the tent.

The joke extends through the film as the Tramp operates from positions of emotional directness – he’s funny when exhibiting the traits of raw survival and also of the outsider, and when alight with the strange stimulus of love, but take away both and he becomes a damp squib, urged to ever-more-risky escapades to top himself. The distortions and reality-warping effect of the funhouse proves a kind of portal for the Tramp, who passes through into the nominal shelter and refuge of the circus itself, and that proves a place with transformative and highly ironic possibilities for transmuting the Tramp’s errant nature into the stuff of entertainment and earning potential. But it also proves a place rife with its own kind of inequity, brutality, hierarchy, and a queasy mixture of artistry and raw profit motive imperatives: domestic abuse from a brutish parent and angry haranguing of hard-luck clowns. Behind the surface frivolity, heroic discipline and entertainment of the circus lurks real people in states of misery and hard-working. Merna is punished by her father for her failures in performing: “You don’t eat tonight,” he dictates, and extends this ban to all the other people of the circus when they try to slip her some food. Success in show business is the literal difference between eating and not eating a lesson the Tramp knows implicitly and Merna has foisted on her.

After the Ring Master realises the crowd enjoyed the Tramp’s travails, he looks for him and sees him as he’s being unwittingly hauled away in the cart. The Tramp is offered a chance to audition for the clown troupe, and he camps out amidst the circus trailers: having been loaned a bit in advance, the Tramp boils some water in a can on a campfire, and has a piece of bread, and even obtains an egg from a chicken that trots by: the splendour of plenty. Merna, famished, exits her trailer, whilst the Tramp chases the chicken, can’t help taking a bite of his slice of bread. The Tramp returns and seeing this responds exactly like a man used to his life would, grabbing the bread and warding the girl off with a threat of force. As with his temptation with the wallet earlier, this proves his undoing as he trips over his own campfire and knocks over his pot of soup. As the Tramp settles down, and recovers his affectation of calm rectitude, he waves the girl over and splits the piece of bread with her as recognises she’s as hungry as him. Gifted the portion of bread, Merna starts scoffing it down, only for the Tramp to stop her and tells her off, warning her she’ll get hiccups. When he glances away she quickly downs the rest and, as the Tramp warned, gets hiccups, but so does he. As the Tramp tries to get over this attack he learns from Merna that she lives and works in the circus, and is soon privy to a quick display of her lot in life as the Ring Master sees her eating, takes the bread off her, and slaps her in the face before chasing her off.

This whole sequence is just as impressive as the opening, but in a completely different register, madcap comedy and conceptual patterning giving way to precisely mimed and observed characterisation – the reflexive hard case visible under the Tramp’s surface is, like the earlier food-stealing bit, an acknowledge of just what dire straits look like, but go further: Chaplin pushing his stock character into a zone of disconcerting realism, a place the Tramp immediately withdraws from, acknowledging that his civility is a pretence, but a pretence he requires, and so does everyone else. His own flurry of threatened violence is also immediately contrasted with the cold thuggery of Ring Master, the deftness of Chaplin’s portrayal of the Tramp’s attempts to reassert his savoir faire and get Merna to act right and getting her doe-eyed, smiling gluttony instead. The Tramp’s expression of disbelief when he sees Merna’s treatment is immediately followed by a reflexive twitch as the Ring Master turns from him as if afraid he’ll hit him too, but immediately switching to pleasantry as he knows damn well his own chance of regaining a niche in the world depends on this dubious dictator. Nonetheless, covert resistance and mutual aid: the Tramp dashes back long enough to give the egg to the girl.

During his tryout, the Tramp’s efforts to be deliberately funny include waddling and some simple farceur moves, meeting the Ring Master’s loathing. He gets the company clowns to show the Tramp some of their regular acts, including the “William Tell act” where one shoots an arrow through the apple on another’s head – part of the act is to take a bite from the apple before the shot, but the Tramp proposes to substitute a banana instead – and “the barber-shop act,” where the clowns play two rival barbers and a hapless customer that finishes with everyone slathered in soap suds. Here Chaplin nods deliberately not just to the kind of vaudevillian routines and slapstick elements given new life in the short funnies his old boss Mack Sennett specialised in making, but the whole art of the physical comic and the kinds of routines that have a basic structure, and what’s required to make those acts funny with each iteration. Chaplin even manages to get a banana skin in there, but in a totally different fashion to expected. Soon enough the Tramp has repeatedly annoyed the Ring Master, accidentally causing him to drop on his bum when the Tramp settles on his chair, and flailing wildly when trying to perform the barber routine and getting the boss lathered too, and he’s chased out in a fury. But Chaplin’s little master class in comedy staging commenting upon itself isn’t finished yet: as the Tramp heads out, miffed but acquiescent, he annoys a donkey that chases him, and becomes his bete noire around the circus, charging at him whenever it sees him. The Tramp’s obliviousness to humiliation and failure is nonetheless on display in a variation on the kind of scene where a man tries to be charming despite the impossibility of his position with a woman, when he talks to Merna after the failed audition, still with soap smeared in his face, and she helps him restore his façade of natty composure. After she’s called to perform, the Tramp indulges a little lovelorn voyeurism through a hole in the circus tent.

The Tramp’s tryout sees Chaplin reducing his own, familiar act to shtick, an act of overt self-satire that takes a poke at both his own temptations to complacency and caricatures of his style: just about anyone can move like me, Chaplin saying, but it’s how it’s all put together that makes the difference. This feeds into the way Chaplin constructs a story that affects to make slapstick comedy a succession of ridiculous events. The obvious irony in all this is that Chaplin, a man who had poured every inch of himself, physically and mentally, into becoming a great clown, the sure-fire crowd-pleaser playing his signature persona, presents his character as someone who becomes a comedy star through being frantic, clumsy, and utterly hapless, whilst of course actually being rigorously and agonisingly planned and played. Chaplin’s rise to fame was the quintessential American success story: all he needed to get ahead was hard work, moxie, genius, a once-in-a-century opportunity, impossibly gruelling training in theatrical arts, and an aching existential void at heart demanding constant effort and movement. Chaplin’s thesis about the circus being a society in miniature is expanded as the Tramp’s second shot comes when several of the stagehands revolt when they’ve not been paid: the head property man (Stanley J. ‘Tiny’ Sandford), the ideal enforcer for the Ring Master in his size and strength, gets angry and beats up the whole lot of them. The head property man grabs the Tramp, who’s looking in on Merna within the circus tent through a loophole, and asks if he wants a job.

Being pressganged into prop man service puts the Tramp and the prop plates he carries in for a juggler at risk again: the donkey charges him again, knocking him into the lower audience stalls. His attempt to carry out a table loaded with Bosco’s animals for his hat-pull tricks sees him unleashing fur and fowl: the Tramp cannot construct comedy, but he can deconstruct the tricks and mechanics of show business, which the audience finds cripplingly hilarious. The Tramp’s efforts to put the rabbits back in the hat are the ultimate mockery of the Tramp’s keep-up-appearances life ethic, everything conspiring to give the game away, to turn the performance inside out, to make the seemingly unfunny reality of the enterprise the source of humour, and also a contemplation of how the perception of intensity of effort in entertainment is so often the lodestone of its failure. One has to be so good at art that it simply seems to happen. The blown act becomes the new act, Chaplin’s existential confession. The Ring Master finally realises what he has on his hands, and commands that the Tramp be kept on to exploit this unique deconstructive talent for disaster, a joke he cannot be let in on for either the joke’s sake or the Ring Master’s financial advantage. Chaplin’s understanding of Hollywood economics is still true today, in the boss’s certainty that well-fed talent is unproductive and unmanageable. “The circus prospered, but not the property man; and the girl led the same hard life.”

Chaplin had a way with not just investing a comedy routine with a guiding idea but in turning it into a kind of ritualised expostulation of that idea, and it’s the marrow of The Circus, much as it would be with the Tramp getting caught in the moving gears in Modern Times and Adenoid Hynkel playing with the inflatable globe in The Great Dictator. Other comedy sequences throughout The Circus carry the same quality of implication through the chosen motifs and elements – the art of forcing the swallowing a horse pill, being trapped in a cage with a lion, walking a tightrope whilst harassed by monkeys. As if Chaplin has set out very precisely to put across the feeling of being someone obliged to both work and live in the public eye, to make one’s living, even one’s fortune, in labour that demands arts both subtle and forceful, mischievous and bludgeoning, always at risk of getting shredded or battered or broken, where a perspective and a concept can be reported but not editorialised. One also leads to another: the attempt to blow the pill down the horse’s throat sees the Tramp finish up with it lodged in his throat instead – “He blew first!” – and in his panic runs right into the lion’s cage, the door slamming shut and closing him in. The Tramp’s attitude swerves hysterically between posturing bravado and sheer terror: Merna’s arrival seems to promise rescue, only for her to faint at the alarming spectacle. When she wakes up and frees him, the Tramp flees at a gallop and finishes up on a flagpole, but tries again to recover his self-image as he pretends to be stretching his muscles in exercise. Finally an angry slap from the Head Property Man brings up the horse pill: too hard to swallow.

The Tramp’s success gives him a power that notably eludes the striking stagehands, power he immediately applies to secure decent treatment for Merna as well as himself, one he is finally clued into his success. This cues another of Chaplin’s brilliant bits of behaviour, as the Tramp squares off against the Ring Master as he suddenly flexes muscle of a kind, tearing bits of straw in rough approximation of macho gesture and leaning on a bale to indicate his resolve, only for the bale to tip and him fall to the ground. The Ring Master offers fifty dollars a week, then sixty, and finally offers to double that, only for the Tramp to declare, “Nothing less than a hundred!” Master negotiator. Whilst clued in, the Tramp doesn’t lose his ability to make the crowd laugh: the buoyancy of love and empowerment carry him through, but heartbreak proves ruinous. The circus fortune teller, pressed to read Merna’s palm by some of the other young circus women, predicts for her “love and marriage with a dark, handsome man who is near you now.” The Tramp, overhearing this, goes loopy, of course assuming he is the man, and he buys a ring off one of the other clowns (Chaplin regular Harry Bergman) to propose to Merna. But fate is a quick-change artist, and Merna swiftly encounter the new tightrope-walking act, Rex (Harry Crocker), “King of the Air,” and Merna’s heart is instantly lost. “I’m in love!” Merna quickly tells the fortune teller, and again the Tramp overhears. The Tramp’s spirit visibly wilts within his body, but he obeys the call to perform. The show must go on.

And yet the show without passion, without feeling, is meaningless: professionalism is a tool that can get an artist through a trough of such feeling, but not replace it indefinitely. The heartbroken Tramp is no longer capable of being funny, his audiences suddenly silent and bewildered by his performances. He is instead driven to competition, trying his hand at mastering tightrope-walking with a low-slung rope: “New Hopes and New Ambitions.” Rex triply taints the Tramp, both in his skill, a daring, heroic thing compared to the clown. His performing costume is evening wear, aping the kind of high society style the Tramp himself evidently fantasises about wearing but never can, but strips this off mid-act to reveal the outfit of a more traditional circus performer, masculine virility bared. But one night he proves a no-show, and the Ring Master presses the Tramp replacing him as he’s seen him practising. The Tramp talks a carny into strapping a sandbag hoist onto him, allowing him to pretend to be a phenomenally skilled and daring eacrobat. Things go wrong, of course. Some monkeys from the magician’s menagerie, accidentally released by the Tramp before the show, scuttle into the highwires and clamber all over the would-be wirewalker, and the harness comes off, forcing the Tramp to traverse the wire and fight off monkeys all at once, his existence reduced finally to its perfect essence, the ultimate act of fine balance. The ideal act is matched to the ideal audience reaction, the crowd below thrilled and terrified, leaping from their seats in alarm and concern, save one sole man who remains stuffing popcorn in his face even as his eyes remain glued to the spectacle: the movie viewer in microcosm.

The monkeys themselves contribute invaluably to this scene, one impish animal draping itself over Chaplin’s head, biting his nose and slipping its tail in his mouth. Chaplin nonetheless regretted losing footage from the first version of the scene he shot, yet another of the disaster plaguing the production. The scene is however its emblem, and one for the entire experience of the film’s making, and of Chaplin’s philosophy of show business. Chaplin would return to the self-reflexive contemplation of the stage artist’s life in Limelight (1952), if in quite a different key, from the perspective of an aging has-been musing sadly on a waned career. Of course, too much woe-is-me from the superstar who kept marrying teenage girls, and left his last wife Oona an estate worth $100 million, might get more than a bit rich. But The Circus is an artefact imprinted with Chaplin’s mental landscape as a man as much as The Kid was with his childhood, and suggests it was never a happy place, a realm where the ultimate fate could always be to finish up alone and on the skids. But Chaplin his prime could count on an audience, and his art was communing with that audience, converting the private into the public. Except that The Circus portrays the consequences of losing that touch: the Tramp can no longer protect Merna, or himself, when he cannot make the crowd laugh. One of Chaplin’s coups of visual effect, characterisation, and comedy coalesces again in a framing where the Tramp imagines, in the form of a projected alternative self, rising up and knocking out Rex with a few stiff blows, with a backward flick of his foot to kick dust on his felled rival for extra disdain. Here Chaplin illustrates, with a clever split-screen effect, the Tramp’s interior mental landscape when finally provoked to a fine edge not just in humiliation by the world but humiliation in the small salving space available to all humans regardless of social station.

And yet this is an illusion, an almost Buddhist rejection of grasping, desirous love. Instead, the Tramp’s actual, ultimate expression of love it to abandon it and draft Rex into the role, ensuring he and Merna get married.Not that the Tramp surrenders that easily: after seeming despite all the odds of reviving his fortunes by surviving the highwire, an entry into a completely absurdist and hyperbolic zone, the Tramp sees the Ring Master hit Merna again and promptly attacks and flattens him, leaving him with a beautiful shiner as recompense for getting sacked. When the Tramp camps out near the circus that night, Merna comes to him and wants to leave with him, but the Tramp laughs that off and instead tracks down Rex, proposes he propose, and gives him the ring he bought to do it with. The next day he provides a one-man crowd throwing rice for the happy couple as they emerge from a court house, and looks on as the newlyweds approach the Ring Master. The Tramp immediately gets confirmation he’s helped the right man for the job when Rex immediately stands up to the Ring Master when he accosts Merna: “You’re speaking to my wife,” Rex tells the Ring Master fiercely. Merna demands the Tramp be given his place in the troupe back again as part of the peacemaking of morning, and the Ring Master complies with the condition he ride in the last wagon. Merna and Rex instead invite him to ride with them, but the Tramp makes his point when he lifts two fingers with a smile and then three with a shake of the head.

Chaplin’s influence flows on endlessly – in the theme of a selflessly arranged marriage with a hidden cost there’s as much of The Circus in Yasujiro Ozu’s Late Spring (1949) and in the spectacle of bittersweet survival in Federico Fellini’s Nights of Cabiria (1957) as in any comedy. Here Chaplin unifies the meditation on his career and the emotional instincts of his audience. Just about everyone, or everyone who counts, anyway, has been the Tramp to some degree in their life, on both the crucial but also incidental levels of not knowing what the next step is, where the next meal or roof or paycheck is, but also in the things actually lived for. The Tramp’s gestures for Merna and Rex reconfigure his experience with the wallet at the outset. Chaplin could well have ended The Circus easily with the Tramp farewelling the newlyweds with a fatherly, acquiescent twinkle, or take his place in the wagon train as the circus rolls out of its campsite on to a new vista. But Chaplin knew the show was rolling on: sound was coming, his career and life were on shaky ground, and what came next would have been a loaded question for him just as it was for so many who had been gods of the silver screen until the microphone switched on. The relatively limited range of such concerns nonetheless were amplified soon as the Great Depression took hold and suddenly a generation of people found themselves playing the Tramp.

And the Tramp as a character was made for something for more than regulation happy endings – the whole point of the character, indeed, was that he showed people how to weather unhappy endings. We should all wish we could pick ourselves up and get on with life like the Tramp. But here Chaplin manages something that goes beyond stoicism or sadsack pathos. The Tramp stands and watches as the carts trundle off, until he’s left in the centre of the ring left in the ground by the big top amidst settling dust. The parade has literally gone by, leaving only its ghostly impression, and with it the moment of the Tramp’s brief impersonation of a star and aspiring lover. Chaplin shifts in from his stark long shot to a close one, regarding the Tramp as picks up a scrap with the star Merna jumped through on it, registering the look of abyssal regret and pining that passes over the Tramp’s face. Chaplin’s greatness as a mime is apparent, but so is the subtlety of expression, a glimpse of something over the edge of his guise. The Tramp here is the man, the inner self, the one he hides, and he damn well hurts: that Chaplin seems to be wearing less makeup, to be more himself, also registers. And then he mutters a very plain “Oh well,” scrunches up the scrap, stands, and kicks it away with one of his backward foot flips. This was a trick Chaplin had first used on screen in Kid Auto Races At Venice (1914), but with the bit of comic skill now reconfigured as something infinitely more meaningful, blending acceptance and defiance, weariness and willpower, finality and reflexive purpose. The Tramp trots away, resuming his sprightly walk twirling his cane, still impossible, still hopeless and placeless and friendless, and still indomitable. It’s one of the most famous last shots in cinema, and justly so – Chaplin’s most exactingly crafted and calculated, most perfectly iconic vision of his persona. And also Chaplin’s commentary on himself, and any entertainer. The show must go on. Because the show is life.

Standard
1910s, Comedy, Silent, War

Kid Auto Races At Venice (1914) / Shoulder Arms (1918)

.

Kid Auto Races At Venice (aka The Kid Auto Race ; The Pest): Director / Screenwriter / Actor: Henry Lehrman
Shoulder Arms: Director / Screenwriter / Actor / Producer: Charles Chaplin

This essay is presented as part of the Eighth Annual Allan Fish Online Film Festival 2024, a festival founded by Jamie Uhler and hosted by Wonders in the Dark, held to honor the memory of the late cineaste extraordinaire Allan Fish, considering films in the public domain and/or available to view online

By Roderick Heath

Charlie Chaplin. 110 years after he made his debut in the costume of his ‘Tramp’ character, Chaplin is very possibly still the most recognisable and emblematic performer in cinema history. Even those who have never seen his films, and indeed wouldn’t be caught dead watching a silent movie, know on sight the figure with the bowler hat, little moustache, cane, ballooning trousers, and odd ways of ambulating. The mystique of Chaplin feels inextricable from the phenomenon of popular cinema itself. Although movies had existed for twenty years by the time his face first flickered upon a screen, Chaplin became the first bona fide superstar of cinema. Perhaps of history altogether. Before, performers had been limited, however far their names travelled, to whatever locale they were in. Then Chaplin was on screens all over the world, completely uninhibited by place or language but exploring life with image and gesture and motion – precisely why, arguably, only a physical comedian like Chaplin was equipped to truly make the best of what cinema was in his day. Chaplin’s life arc has long been inseparable from his art, and indeed Chaplin owed much of his colossal success precisely to the way he made the overt stylisation of his performance, the archetype he stepped into with his costume, somehow nonetheless suggest a lowered veil between performer and audience, that Chaplin was inviting the viewer into his personal mental universe and that he was also accessing theirs.

And there was truth to this. Chaplin had assimilated his childhood and maturation and turned it into a running blend of high comedy riven with pathos and pain, even horror. Chaplin’s parent, Charles Snr and Hannah, were music hall performers. Charles Snr had Romanichal heritage on his mother’s side. His parents’ marriage, whilst never officially dissolved, was essentially over just a couple of years after his birth in 1889. His mother, whose singing career never took off, also suffered from bouts of mental illness and venereal disease. Their father never provided support, so young Charles and his brother Sydney eventually had to go into a workhouse and later to schools for pauper children. When their mother was finally hospitalised, Charles and Sydney were taken in by their father, but his severe alcoholism was also driving him to an early grave. Chaplin later recounted that his first stage performance came one night in Aldershot when he filled in for his ill mother with a short song and dance act. Forced to support both himself and Hannah, Chaplin pursued performing as the only thing he could do, whilst often sleeping rough around London in the meantime. Chaplin had a steady stream of juvenile parts through his childhood and teenage years, including acting in the play Sherlock Holmes opposite actor William Gillette, who had co-written the play with Arthur Conan Doyle, on several national tours. Chaplin’s skill as a dancer later gained him success in a member of a clog dancing group, but he quit as he felt increasingly attracted to comedy.

Charles and Sydney started working together and formed a comedy routine called Repairs when Charles was 18. Sydney later helped bring his brother into the company run by the legendary theatrical impresario Fred Karno, and Chaplin’s growing talent encouraged Karno to select him for a team of performers he was sending to the United States – a company that also included Stan Laurel. Whilst in the US Chaplin started an act he called “the Inebriate Swell,” an upper-crust souse, and it swiftly became his calling card. During his second American tour in 1913, Chaplin received an invitation from the New York Motion Picture Company, whose Los Angeles-based subsidiary Keystone Films had recently lost a star comedy performer, and gave him a shot at filling the gap. Chaplin watched some Keystone movies and found them a bit slapped-together in comedy terms, but the promise of a steady, $150 dollar-per-week contract was tempting. On a more personal level, so too was the chance to change his lifestyle. Chaplin took the offer, arriving at Keystone’s studio early in 1914 and encountering its legendary chief Mack Sennett, who was surprised and a little aggravated by how young Chaplin was. His first movie was Making A Living, directed by and starring Henry Lehrman, released a month after it was filmed. In the meantime Chaplin was cast in Mabel’s Unusual Predicament, opposite Keystone’s biggest female star Mabel Normand. For this film, Chaplin started assembling a costume to give him a distinct screen persona, in a performing tradition with roots in the commedia dell’arte and its stock characters: Pierrot in a bowler hat.

Chaplin deliberately put together bits of costuming that seemed at odds with each-other, as both packaging for and signals of his body’s unruly capabilities, his discordant impulses and flashes of anarchy held together only by a tattered pretence of dignity. As well as a statement of character, the Tramp proved to perfectly encapsulate a moment in time, poised between the affectations of one era and another, just as Chaplin himself had been forced by life to learn to straddle levels of society and even continental sensibilities. The Tramp’s ideal of a place in a society that constantly rejects him is rooted in the demarcations of Victorian gentlemanliness, and his notion of a poised, forbearing, proudly self-contained man of the world, when he is actually a knot of barely controlled impulses in an assembly of op-shop garments, striving in a time when the nominal ideals of class are giving way to mere strata of power and wealth. He might be someone from a good background who’s fallen calamitously, or he might be someone from the bottom desperately trying to mimic what he takes for the aspiration-worthy. As he evolved, the Tramp gained mannerisms that could point in either direction, an edge of pretention in his maintenance of outlandish pride and savoir faire, his curiously pansexual flirtiness often turned on to disarm, floating on a lode of anarchism held at bay only by a sense that his decorum. His pretences are the only things giving him identity: as long as he has them, he is not yet an actual bum. The Marx Brothers, for instance, can be seen as splitting the Chaplin persona into pieces – the trickster survivor, the dubious traveller, and the chaos-bringing holy fool. Indeed, just about every screen comedian since has drawn on the template Chaplin offered to some degree or another over the intervening decades, but, notably practically no-one has ever come close to successfully mimicking the most essential part of his persona – the part that seemed to be able to become more sympathetic and empathetic the more pathetic he became.

Chaplin’s perspective nonetheless was thoroughly that of someone very familiar with being at the bottom of the heap, particularly in his impudent, sometimes quizzical, sometimes downright contemptuous take on authority, his scepticism towards do-gooders, cops of both the legal and moral variety, and his celebration of that tattered pride, that lurching, ever-moving approach to life, somehow both accepting its chaos and rejecting it at the same time. And his audience, the vast bulk of which shared his perspective and experience, loved him for it, for reporting without the usual kind of mediation from above: there is no hint of noblesse oblige in Chaplin’s reportage from the fringe, save the most ironic kind. In any event, Mabel’s Unusual Predicament came out a few days after Chaplin’s second performance in the guise, The Kid Auto Races At Venice, so that film became, as far as viewers were concerned, his debut. Venice in this case being Venice, California. The film was subtitled “Extract from a letter from Charlie Chaplin to his best girl,” a flourish that began the perpetual burring of actor and role together: the Tramp was Charlie Chaplin, and vice versa, at least until Chaplin finally tried to bust out of the association, and paid the price for it. Chaplin was reteamed with Lehrman for The Kid Auto Races At Venice, and Lehrman is listed as the writer and director, although the degree to which either art is applied is debatable. The subject of the movie is already Chaplin’s irrepressible sense of connection to the movie camera, as both subject of its attention and of his fascination. The joke of the short film is straightforward, and exploits a real, unsimulated event, the Junior Vanderbilt Cup, held in Venice, California. This was a rally for “pushcars” with very small, light motors something like modern go-karts but also resembling soapbox racers, starting like those on a ramp for initial propulsion. The race seems to have been a pretty big deal at the time, judging by the audience that’s turned up – a survey of people in their day out finery, a splendid incidental time capsule of both social mores and the environs of Venice in the day.

Chaplin, as the film would have it, is attending the races whilst a little pickled. “I made tracks for the track,” a title card supposedly drawn from Chaplin’s letter announces. The movie opens with a newsreel or documentary-like conceit of simply filming the race, but with Chaplin standing on the edge of the race course near the finish line, watching with wobbly fascination. A cop nudges him and tells him to get out of the way, so Chaplin trots down the course, nearing the camera and noticing he’s being filmed. He seems to be breaking the fourth wall, only for a later shot to reveal that a newsreel crew is shooting the event. Chaplin, intrigued and dosed with Dutch courage, starts pestering the crew, constantly trying to get in front of the camera. His lurching progress up and down the fringe of the race route sees him constantly nearly hit by the racers charging by – I bet the drivers just loved having some random actor lurching in their path. Chaplin becomes so annoying the director becomes increasingly aggressive in clearing him from the proximity. The director is played by Lehrman himself, who might well have been authentically piqued at being handed this freakish, man-sized mass of physical verve and independent wit by Sennett and told to make a movie happen, expected to keep him on the rails and within the margins of the Keystone house style. Within a few seconds of the film’s start, some of Chaplin’s about-to-be-signature mannerisms are apparent. He tries to pull together the front of his jacket, at once too tight and too long, aware he looks a bit slovenly, and then sets himself, stiffening his legs right up to his buttocks, pushing his torso forward a little, as if wanting to project an air of jaunty, hearty insouciance, and trots out of frame, twirling his cane with feverish energy, like he thinks he might possibly whir it fast enough until he takes off like the first helicopter.

The most telling disparity between the version of the Tramp Chaplin presents in Kid Auto Races At Venice and the more developed persona is the prototype still has one foot unsteadily planted in Chaplin’s drunk act: the Tramp is plainly inebriated, and like many a drunk we’ve all encountered, he becomes fixated on something and can’t leave it alone. Attempts by the director, crew, and cops to move him along only provoke him to further defiance. The costume wasn’t quite complete yet: Chaplin would later go for baggier, freer trousers, where the ones he wears here instead bulge at the front where he’s tied the too-large pants up tightly. The younger Chaplin’s face is slightly heavier, darker and not yet brightened with makeup, his prop moustache a little thicker and bushier. He looks a tad more aggressive and provocative than the Tramp in full flower, and indeed the Tramp proved a little disconcerting to Keystone with his early, slightly fouler edition, which Chaplin would quickly refine into the more familiar, romantic, fool-of-fortune version. Chaplin keeps sticking himself in front of the camera as it surveys the racers lining up to start, the junior drivers with their approximations of manly pith. At another point, the film crew set up further down the road, and Chaplin comes running up in search of them, tripping at some point but recovering and quickly striking a casual pose before the camera, before the director spring out and shoves him away.

Chaplin, seemingly sobering up and becoming more artful in what has now become a duel of a kind with the habitual Tramp pride already at stake, postures with billboard advertisement cool as he flicks ash from his cigar and then tosses the butt over his shoulder to kick away with his flicked-up foot. Chaplin’s nerve and skill are constantly apparent, in the way he so casually plays out his comic conceits whilst dodging speeding vehicles and playing oblivious to the real crowd amused by his antics, sticking to his bit to the end with the dedication of a man who knows life falls to pieces the moment the act stops. The chagrined director at various points shoves him hard out of the way onto the road, and later reaches out and drags him out of the frame, recreating the old vaudevillian joke of the hook reaching out for the unpopular performer. By movie’s end the director has given Chaplin a kick in the pants – a gesture the Tramp would usually be delivering to others later. Chaplin now has licence to jump in close to the camera and gain his revenge by making faces right into the lens, marking the only time the movie shifts from full-body shots to a close-up as Chaplin sneers and twists his nose. A descent into pure, childish antic and defiance, taunting the eye of the device that remains indifferent to him, and through it the world. The End. It feels so perfectly apt that Kid Auto Races At Venice is an overt joke about the whole idea of being in front of a camera and performing for it, blending aspects of documentary and fiction in a manner that feels strangely modern. The oldness of Kid Auto Races At Venice is also its newness: it is simplicity itself. One could easily remake it at any public event with an iPhone. Indeed, just about any TV news broadcast from a public space will pick up its selection of onlookers waving or making faces at the camera.

The obvious joke to make here is that Charlie Chaplin invented photobombing. And whilst probably not true – the day after the camera was invented, surely someone was trying to get their face in the frame – Chaplin is already betraying a fascination with the art of being an artist that would recur throughout his career, and a keen understanding of what the gorgonizing gaze of cinema was doing to him and everyone else. In the age of movies, everyone becomes, in their own minds if not on a screen, a movie actor. This births another, related phenomenon, where the authentic and unwittingly recorded world gains its own kind of mystique, something else Chaplin is tapping in Kid Auto Races At Venice. He is an actor, playing with calculation a character who is lured by the camera, and also a specimen of raw humanity: drunk, dopey, pushy, and vulgar. Chaplin is looking forward to the age of reality television and internet streaming where both instincts are dovetailed, the urge to perform in life and the urge to look at life unmediated by performance oscillating on the scales. Chaplin would keep hold of this idea and return to it for his The Circus (1928), the plot of which hinges on the Tramp’s capacity to make people laugh but only when unaware of it, performance and hapless activity collapsing into one frame. Decades later, Chaplin would close the loop in A King In New York (1957), where the title character becomes the unwitting star of a TV show without his knowledge, becoming a portal of vicarious entertainment through hidden cameras, where the dinner party he’s supposed to be enjoying keeps being interrupted by advertisements delivered by the hostess.

Chaplin on camera in the Tramp guise is a new immigrant in at least three senses. As an Englishman taking his great chance not just on American shores but in the still very new-found land that was Hollywood of 1914, a site of moviemaking for only a couple of years. The rising theatrical star who saw another new world opening up in movies. If he’d hesitated, he might have finished up just another broken-down old vaudevillian, or second banana to other stars when it became plain all his breed needed to get in front of cameras and quick if they wanted to keep make a living. And, finally, the man moving from one comic persona, a drunk wobbling with merry obliviousness through the world, to a man all too aware of being in the world, perpetually at odds with it whilst applying all his art of living to weather it. Here he is improvising comedy in front of a real crowd, turning the mechanics of moviemaking themselves into a joke and a subject of anthropological curiosity, filming the world, immortalising what it sees, spinning the straw of the ordinary into the gold of fame and fortune, but Chaplin-as-Tramp violates the understanding that one must be chosen by the camera, not force one’s self upon it: that’s not how the magic box works. Or, rather, how the industry behind the box works. Chaplin off screen knew damn well he had what the camera needed. Chaplin-as-Tramp himself already wears his anachronism on – and as – his sleeve, his attempt to look spiffy out of date and gone to seed. Here are the people of Venice itself, caught in a moment of jollity just before the start of the greatest and most terrible break in western history, World War I some six months away, wearing styles that would themselves look a little absurdly out of date just a few years later, watching the birth of a youth culture obsessed with speed and cars.

Chaplin tried to give creative input to his vehicles with the new few movies he made, but found them usually ignored and resented. One of his reunions with Normand resulted in a row and Chaplin was nearly sacked, but Chaplin’s first few roles had already earned appreciation and good notices, obliging Sennett to make nice with the new star, and he acceded to Chaplin’s campaign to direct his own movie proviso that Chaplin would pay back $1500 if the movie failed. Chaplin’s directorial debut, the 12-minute-long Caught In the Rain, was released on May 4, 1914 – yes, Chaplin had been in the movie business for all of five months at that point – and it proved a hit. Soon Chaplin was directing a film a week. Towards the year’s end he took a supporting role as a different kind of character, as “Charlie the city slicker,” in the Marie Dressler vehicle Tillie’s Punctured Romance, directed by Sennett himself. This proved a good move, showing Chaplin could win notice and appreciation even in a character role. Money, and the question of Chaplin’s worth, soon became a sticking point: after Sennett refused to meet Chaplin’s price when his contract came to be renewed, the rival company Essanay offered more than he wanted, and Chaplin moved on. At Essanay Chaplin formed a stock company, found a beloved leading lady in the chance discovery of Edna Purviance, and began revising the Tramp character into one more deliberately akin to Pierrot, particularly in the film titled, most fittingly, The Tramp (1915). Throughout 1915 Chaplin started becoming more painstaking in making his movies, and experimented with tempo of comedy, even risking unhappy endings. By year’s end he was also the biggest star in film. In 1916 Chaplin moved to the Mutual Film Corporation and became one of the highest-paid people in the world. In 1917 he was able to finance and build his own movie studio.

Of course, success stories for one exalted hero tend to also be trails littered with many losers, themselves describing narratives of worth and consequence. Chaplin’s clashes with Normand and total eclipse of her was sad given Normand’s place as one of the genuine woman film pioneers and his precursor as a comedy director-star, and his split with Sennett would prove the first of several bad calls with talent and business that would eventually leave Sennett a destitute and forgotten figure. But that was the movie business, a business in the last throes of its wild-west, free-for-all, survival-of-the-fittest-and-quickest days, and Chaplin both drove and benefited from the centrifuge of the moment. Chaplin would also remember their examples in later works like The Circus and Limelight (1952). Chaplin’s tendency to court scandal in his private life was still a work in progress, and the disparity between the character he played on screen and the man he was off not yet an issue. For the time being he was a man enjoying well-earned success and also funnelling much of it back into furthering his creativity. The moment of Chaplin’s success also coincided with World War I ’s outbreak and unfolding, and Chaplin became an emblem of relief from the grimness, even as he began focusing on his own kind of grimness, his Tramp whose problems and travails were at least quotidian. Whilst he did attract criticism from the press for failing to return to England and join the army as war raged, servicemen proved to feel him infinitely better employed lifting their spirits in movies rather than getting his head shot off. To return the appreciation, Chaplin set out to take make a movie about the experience of a soldier.

Specifically, the Tramp as soldier. Within the course of Shoulder Arms Chaplin satirically encompasses all the broad, propagandistic stories about how the war would proceed and compares it with the reality, a reality that basically turns everyone involved into Tramps – putting up with rain, mud, hunger, random torments, vermin, authority figures, and occasional, random attempts by strangers to kill you. Chaplin ploughed colossal effort, money, and time – four whole months – into making the movie that would have seemed bizarre on the Keystone lot three years earlier. It also required no small amount of creative guts, as the idea of making a comedy about the war was one some considered distasteful, and friends warned Chaplin against trying. War in movies was a serious business best left to those making ones about Erich Von Stroheim raping nuns. Shoulder Arms was the second movie Chaplin made at his new, self-named studio. The first was A Dog’s Life (1918), a work that evinced his new, rigorous sense of comic storytelling and shaded effect of character and story, to the point where one critic described as the first total work of art in the realm of moviemaking. Shoulder Arms was in that regard a little bit of a step backward with its loose narrative structure and lack of emotional depth, but was also adventurous in its own – part humour-soaked realism, part fantasy; part paean to the fighting man, part mockery of the entire enterprise.

The idea of Shoulder Arms likely excited Chaplin as a special challenge to his evolving control as a movie artist, weaving the stuff of his humour out of the intricacies and absurdities of life, and identification with his beset heroes. When the film came out, just two months before the Armistice, one quality that delighted soldiers was the way it showed Chaplin had been paying attention to their travails, and turned the everyday bother of service in the trenches into the stuff of his comedy, capturing the practically existential absurdity of it all. Chaplin was rewarded with his biggest commercial success yet. Shoulder Arms would, most obviously, open up territory Chaplin would revisit much later and with a fresh urgency for The Great Dictator (1940), a movie where his conspiratorial empathy for the common man and foot soldier turned into a howl of drowned-out humanist pleading, and his approach to blending serious musings and satirical commentary would come with a political and pacifist spin many felt had become excessively blatant. The early war scenes of The Great Dictator return to the same survey of the Great War battlefield, and the later reels of the 1940 film would repeat the same basic idea of Shoulder Arms, by segueing into a fantasy of displacing the enemy leader and cutting the warmongers off at the ankles. Except that where in Shoulder Arms the fantasy resolves wryly with the Tramp waking from a dream, The Great Dictator shifts instead into pure rhetoric, trying to force the audience to awaken and head things off. Later Chaplin would dig even deeper his attempts to balance a disparity in subject matter and tone with Monsieur Verdoux (1947).

Chaplin’s pride as a filmmaker entirely responsible for his vision proves a cue for a little humour that courts a sense of conspiracy with the audience, as the opening title card, which declares “written and produced by Charles Chaplin”, sees his hand reaching into the frame to write his name, and then eagerly pointing to his own painted image to claim the feat with immodest eagerness, thus managing to indulge and disavow his ego at the same time. The film opens with a line of new US Army recruits being trained in rifle drill: a title card dubs this bunch “The Awkward Squad.” Chaplin’s hero, known as Doughboy but sporting the Tramp’s signature moustache, tries ever so hard to mimic professional soldierly poise but only reveals innate clumsiness as he brings his rifle down in the wrong hand and slams it into the foot of the recruit next to him. Doughboy has all of Chaplin’s flexibility, but this counts against him in his efforts to replicate the pivots and gyrations demanded of him, his lower half acting like an elastic extension that over-rotates and shifts in waddling gait when trying to march. Exhausted, Doughboy dashes into his tent and flops prostrate upon his cot. “Over There,” a title card appears, signalling a shift to the trenches of France, where handmade signs point variously to “Rotten Row” and “Broadway,” and Doughboy strolls mystified along the duck walk as shells land unnoticed in his wake, sending up puffs of smoke and dust.

Doughboy nonetheless seems ahead of the curve in the arts of frontline survival, the trenches for him being only another kind of slum or dosshouse. He knows to watch out for vermin: he has a rat trap hanging from his tunic, ready to snap any unwitting finger, and a cheese grater which he hangs on the wall to scratch fleabites. He’s billeted in a dugout with some other soldiers, including a sergeant (Sydney Chaplin, who also later plays the Kaiser), after having some trouble getting through the doorway with his well-stocked kit. Across the lines, German soldiers are paraded, inspected, and harangued by an officer of exceedingly short stature (Loyal Underwood). Doughboy stands watch as shells land in the trench behind him and then as rain falls, and begins daydreaming – cueing a witty and innovative use of a split-screen effect – of scenes of the life he’s been forced to leave behind. Letters and care packages come for all the soldiers except Doughboy, who gets so jealous he starts reading a letter another soldier has received over his shoulder, Doughboy’s expressions and the soldier’s moving in concert with the letter’s contents until the soldier notices his unwelcome audience and shuffles off. Doughboy is eventually handed a package from home that went briefly astray, and finds he’s been sent by some kindly soul a package of stone-hard crackers and a block of Limburger cheese that’s so smelly he dons his gas mask before trying to chow down on it. Abandoning all hope of a meal, he instead hurls the cheese block across into the German trench, which immediately sends all the Germans fleeing.

Soon after, an attack is ordered on the German trenches. Doughboy’s fear mounts as the moment to go over the top nears, whilst shells crash around the trench and a serious-faced officer counts down the moments to the attack on his wristwatch. Doughboy looks at his identification tag and notices to his alarm that his service number is 13. Still, he tries with all his might to man up, swatting his chest in macho fashion only to cringe at the hurt he causes himself. Striking a heroic, recruiting poster-ready pose, he grabs the ladder to climb up, only for the ladder to tip over and deposit him against the far trench wall. Finally Doughboy does manage to follow his comrades. The twist: next we see Doughboy, he’s escorting all the Germans he’s captured including the tiny officer: asked by one of his own superiors how he did it, he simply replies, “I surrounded them.” Easy to imagine Chaplin’s audience in the day cheering all this with both patriotic glee as their great on-screen avatar of average pluck wins through, as well as awareness of the absurdity in Chaplin’s eliding way of acknowledging that of course he’s awesome at war: he’s the director and star. A point he returns to right at the end with revisionist sting. Chaplin’s instinctive humanism also finds expression when faced with the niceties of wartime side-taking. He literally belittles the enemy, but he also lends their own common-as-muck soldiers some sympathy, portraying the German foot soldiers as ordinary men beset by bullying and peevish authority – they too are just more Tramps. The German rankers laugh in delight as Doughboy gives their tiny officer a cigarette, only to then bend him over his knee and spank him like a child. Chaplin rounds off the scene with an iris shot on the soldiers being marched off whilst one of Doughboy’s comrades laughs uproariously in the background. In the same key, Chaplin was able to get away with some of his most potent expressions of class anger and contempt for the rich and powerful, in the vein that would steadily amass him the deep enmity of right-wingers over the decades, when filtered through the wartime factionalism, including Doughboy striking a match against the Kaiser’s fancy car and handing over one of his festooning medals to excitable rankers.

Chaplin builds his comic set-pieces around the frontline soldier’s travails, particularly in a scene where Doughboy’s dugout is flooded by rainwater. With three men cramming themselves on a top bunk out of the water and another snoozing oblivious whilst immersed, Doughboy has to find someplace to sleep, and appropriates the horn of a phonograph to use as a snorkel. Waking later, he rubs life back into one frigid foot but panics when he doesn’t feel anything in the other, only for this to prove to be another soldier’s. After his heroic capture of the Germans, Doughboy seems to be settling in nicely, eating with one of his pals in the trench and now making utility of the sniper bullets whizzing overhead to open a wine bottle. He takes a brief time-out from his luncheon to do a little sniping of his own, chalking up his hits, until an enemy bullet takes off his helmet and he feels obliged to deduct a point from his tally. Job done, he heads off for a nap. Later, during a call for volunteers, Doughboy steps forth with bravado, only to lose intestinal fortitude when the officer tells him, “You may never return.” Soon Doughboy finds himself behind enemy lines working as a spy. Disguised within a rubber tree costume, he hurriedly snaps into appropriately arboreal stances when German soldiers march by. When one German takes up an axe to chop the “tree” down for firewood, Doughboy has to knock him out surreptitiously, and another two when they come to check. Meanwhile Doughboy’s sergeant pal has been assigned to keep watch on German troop movements, hiding under a bridge and sending out radio messages, but he gets caught. Prisoner and escorts pass by Doughboy in his tree disguise: Doughboy ambushes the escort, allowing both soldiers to flee.

The image of Doughboy in his tree disguise is one of Chaplin’s evergreen (sorry) comic images, and also a nod to the pantomime tradition he was coming out of, with Chaplin’s pale, moustachioed face peering from a hole in the side, arms skewed, and even managing to evoke the Tramp costume with the tree’s flaring trunk-legs, set to mad motion as Doughboy flees the gunning Germans across a field and into the forest. Doughboy finally manages to slip out of costume, leaving it behind like a shed skin to fool his pursuers, and up a drainpipe. He happens upon a war-pummelled farmhouse where the walls have been knocked out by shelling but Doughboy still closes the window and draws the blind to get some sleep on a bed. The owner of the house proves to be a lovely young French farm girl (Purviance) – is there any other kind? – who finds Doughboy sprawled on her bed. Her initial alarm gives way to a look of amused surprise, a ragged Miranda rediscovering hapless, ordinary men in the brave new world of uniformed warriors. She caringly dabs at his scruffy hand, awakening Doughboy, but he of course pretends to still be asleep to let her continue, allowing him to cop a feel as she places his hand on his knee. Doughboy faces a language barrier as he can’t speak French and the girl is afraid for a moment he might be a German, so he has to improvise a sign language to explain he isn’t.

Four years into his directing career, Chaplin’s camera still lingers in the era of makeshift sets and tableaux in Shoulder Arms, his scenes built around key sets – the trench, the soldiers’ dugout, the chateau where the climax unfolds, with the photographic perspective almost all from one, resolute side of the space. But within those structures and strictures Chaplin moves his camera in and out with precision, his technique a well-oiled machine for capturing comic business: not a single gesture is garbled through poor direction or unnecessary editing, and Chaplin understood a key rule of filmed comedy, that the deadpan camera suited it in fundamental ways. The way the frame catches and shapes the action is vital – for instance in the scene of Doughboy reading the letter of the soldier’s shoulder, with its shift towards intimacy, and the feet gag in the flooded dugout. Or, towards the end, when Doughboy in German disguise pretends to rough up the sergeant who’s been captured before an audience of bemused Germans, their regimented ranks contrasting the frantic activity in front. Later Chaplin makes the French girl’s ruined farmhouse into a kind of diagrammatical gag that also makes capital of the flat perspective (and anticipates visual and conceptual variations on the joke in the funhouse of The Circus, and the factory gears of Modern Times, 1936), with Doughboy shutting the window and going to bed despite the missing walls. Chaplin makes use of the fields of space and depth in his frames, like the laughing soldier behind the captured German, and the captive sergeant and his guards.

When Doughboy first arrives at the front line, Chaplin even deploys a long, smooth dolly shot, trudging forth and then back in the squalid warren where explosions go off scarcely noticed just behind the lurching neophyte soldier. Despite the comedic use, here Chaplin happens upon an early version of the “immersive” technique of later war movies, from Lewis Milestone’s tracking shots in No Man’s Land in All Quiet On The Western Front (1930) through to the lunging steadicam shots through the submarine in Wolfgang Peterson’s Das Boot (1981). He segues into a genuinely effective squall of suspense-building as Doughboy waits for his first attack, with Chaplin cutting to the officer, bent over to read his watch, counting down the seconds to the attack, and then showing the ticking hands working, before returning to Doughboy as he quivers in anxiety and explosions go off about him. Despite the ambition evinced by Shoulder Arms in his awareness that he was making movies for a vast, international audience, and his own evolving pretences as a filmmaker, Chaplin still has one foot planted in the Sennett world with its aura of make-do. He’s very obviously just filming around the fringes of Los Angeles and surrounding hills – you can even see a passing car and some oil derricks far off in the background when the Germans are hunting Doughboy in the woods, and those woods themselves are eucalypt groves. The hyperrealism of Stroheim’s own approach to filmmaking on Foolish Wives (1922) was still a few years off.

The last portion of Shoulder Arms sees Doughboy hunted down by the Germans, who at one point bail him up with a machine gun, only for him to turn it about on them and flee. The French girl is arrested as for aiding the enemy and taken to a chateau the Germans are using as a headquarters. Chaplin gets in his lampooning jab at those aforementioned Stroheim vehicles as the girl is captured and presented to a lecherous German officer, with the officer and a bearded soldier both obviously relishing the imminence of her fate worse than death – Chaplin moves in for one of the film’s few close-ups to register the weird leer the soldier gives the girl before going out, driving the nominal sexual threat over into a zone of weird, funny, faintly disturbing hyperbole. The officer isn’t an impressive Teutonic sadist but a weedy bloke with an improbable tweaked moustache. Doughboy arrives to save the girl, having tracked her and entering the room by sliding down the chimney: his heroism is still a bit hapless, burning his backside on a pot boiling in the fireplace, but he quickly passes on the favour by jamming a red-hot poker into the German’s butt before knocking him out and shutting him in a closet. Doughboy locks him in and turns to the girl, shrugging at the simplicity of his victory.

But the ultimate bully soon arrives in the form of the Kaiser with a contingent of staff officers making a tour of the front, forcing Doughboy to dress up in the officer’s uniform and fake his way out of the room, managing to lead he girl out into the yard which is filled with soldiers and also the Kaiser’s motor car. When his sergeant pal is brought in after being captured, he almost gives the game away, so Doughboy pretends to thrash him as a hated enemy. Doughboy, the girl, and the sergeant manage to overcome the Kaiser’s driver and escort, and the girl dresses up as the driver. This cues a delightful little gender-bending joke from Chaplin as Doughboy, trying to improve the girl’s disguise, uses some axle grease to paint a moustache on her, and the girl kisses Doughboy with glee, leaving the marks of the moustache on his cheek. Somehow Purviance looks even cuter, and the joke also gives a sly acknowledgement of the fakeness of Chaplin’s own perpetual in-character moustache. Meanwhile the Kaiser within bawls out one of his aides for drinking wine: “Pay attention to the war!” But the Kaiser is soon taken captive by his fake escort and driven back through the lines, with the sergeant warning the American soldiers that they’re coming by returning to his radio.

Doughboy and the girl arrive to a hero’s welcome and the Kaiser’s capture means the war’s end. Doughboy gets to take the ultimate Chaplin kick at an authority figure’s backside, giving the boot to the Kaiser when his captive abuses him, but a title card makes the merry announcement of “Peace on Earth and good will to all men.” Except that Doughboy awakens from this wonderful dream in the tent where he fell asleep at the start, still back in basic training, with his beloved fellow recruits come to shake him awake and drag him back out to training. Doughboy’s awakening is a moment that seems at first glance like a last, throwaway joke – of course this has all been a dream, an indulgence of the eternal personal need for fantasies of grandeur and special glory before the reality kicks in. Chaplin would return to this motif, if with infinitely greater nuance, at the end of City Lights (1931), which also hinges on dispelled illusions in awakening, of seeing properly, without illusion, an act at once necessary but also painful.

Kid Auto Races At Venice can be viewed on YouTube here

Shoulder Arms can be viewed on YouTube here

Standard
2020s, Action-Adventure, Scifi

Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga (2024)

.

Director: George Miller
Screenwriters: Nick Lathouris, George Miller

By Roderick Heath

Here there be spoilers…

It’s impossible to believe nine years have elapsed since George Miller released Mad Max: Fury Road, his revival of his canonical action series. My own muted, even irritated response to that film contrasted its hyperbolic reception by so many – although the film was only a modest hit, the way it dominated cineaste conversation for a few months back when made it seem like the only film in the universe. In retrospect it’s plain what the film did and didn’t accomplish. It hardly unleashed a wave of gritty, back-to-filmmaking-basics action flicks – the degree to which it represented that itself was absurdly overhyped – but it did inform the narrative strategies and archetypes in many movies, particularly a revival of action feminism as a pop culture grail. People were impressed enough that Miller in his 70s was making a movie that muscular, which makes the release of his follow-up Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga at the sprightly age of 79 even more of a feat. Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga is, actually, a prequel, depicting Fury Road’s heroine in her life before the run for freedom that film depicted. Prequels are always fraught propositions. They constantly dice with substituting alluring mystique for the painfully literal, for spelling out the intriguingly enigmatic as the blindingly obvious, and, moreover, simply trying to wring more money out of franchises where the makers don’t dare do something new.

It’s plain, however, that Furiosa, played by Charlize Theron in Fury Road, compels Miller as a character – the resurgent, vengeful embodiment of the abused feminine so unceremoniously run over back in his debut, his first Mad Max film, all the way back in 1979, thrust with heightened contrast, but also perfectly evolved fitness, into the ultra-macho world Miller fused out of all the spare parts harvested from Australian car culture, spaghetti westerns, samurai movies, and post-apocalyptic science fiction. The Mad Max mythos has since slipped the scene of its birth – jagged punk humour, an air of reportage from a schismatic post-colonial culture in rapid change, and hard verisimilitude in staging were all hallmarks of the original Mad Max trilogy’s approach, but now this property is ensconced in the age of blockbuster ambition, if, at least, still thoroughly implanted in Australian filmmaking culture. Miller even begins the film with a shot of the Australian continent from the perspective of space before diving down through the atmosphere to a location in the continent’s centre, really the first time the series has ever squarely accepted Australia as the series’ setting rather than being merely the blank canvas of its futurism. Despite retaining aspects of continuity from movie to movie in the old trilogy, those movies already seemed to be essentially offering Max as a timeless archetype – the action movie equivalent of Charlie Chaplin’s Tramp – and the timeframes of the two most recent movies seem to be urging even more in that direction. Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga hits many of the expected beats of a narrative about Furiosa, depicting how she was taken from the childhood refuge of the Green Place, how she finished up working for and allied to the despicable warlord Immortan Joe, and even how she lost her left arm.

Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga is however also an extension not just of the Mad Max franchise but of Miller’s career-long preoccupations with storytelling as an endlessly sprawling and interlocking phenomenon, connecting across frontiers of culture and individuals. The film’s quasi-mythic approach to expostulating Furiosa’s life story, framed by the narration of a character in the film, the History Man (George Shevtsov), makes plain that Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga is less in-universe journalism than a string of retellings mediated by time and perspective. This points to the way the film itself is a succession of revisions of Miller’s previous work and motifs. More prosaically, but also more pleasingly, Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga steps back from Miller’s hyped-up strategy on Fury Road: that film’s opening scenes, with their frenetic, music-video-like cutting, is immediately contrasted with Miller’s return to a more elegant, spacious, grandiose style, at least when framing his extended, ferocious action scenes, an approach that contrasts but also helps amplify the other quality Miller brings to bear, of spare, cool essentialism. This is immediately apt for an opening that depicts a child Furiosa (Alyla Browne) and friend Valkyrie (Dylan Adonis) picking pears from a tree in the Green Place, a refuge of forest and water in the otherwise decimated Wasteland zone, where the girls’ families and community are subsisting in apparent happiness and industry.

But the scene is immediately despoiled by a gang of marauders, bikers who have stumbled upon the Green Place, the existence of which has been reported but never nailed down. Furiosa, knowing the bikers shouldn’t be allowed to get away, sneaks down to their parked metal steeds to cut their fuel lines, but is caught and bundled up by the men, who see her existence, as an unblemished and entirely healthy girl contrasting most of the apocalypse survivors beset with “half-life,” as necessary proof of the Green Place’s existence. They flee on their bikes, but Valkyrie alerts Furiosa’s mother Mary Jabassa (Charlee Fraser), who gives chase and turns her formidable skills as a sniper on them, steadily whittling down their number until only two are left. Furiosa’s own ingenuity also frustrates them as she bits through a fuel line and tries to escape, but the last rider, Toe Jam (David Field), manages to get Furiosa to the fringe of the large encampment of a biker horde, just before Furiosa’s conniving gets her captor’s throat torn open. The girl is nonetheless presented to the leader of the horde, the swaggering Dr Dementus (Chris Hemsworth), who tries and fails to extract the Green Place’s location from the expiring Toe Jam. When a sandstorm blows in and smothers the encampment, Mary sneaks down, slays men guarding Furiosa in Dementus’s tent, and steals her away. But on the road back, knowing she can’t outrun the pursuing bikers, Mary tells Furiosa to ride by herself back home whilst she mounts a delaying action. But Furiosa can’t leave her mother, and so becomes the distraught witness to her capture and slow, terrible torture to death in punishment by Dementus and his goon squad.

This long opening portion might well be the best thing Miller has ever done, immediately plunging the viewer into a situation at once specific to the known forms of his established universe and so perfectly elemental it doesn’t require more than the slightest exposition and pretext. We could be on a primal plain, a rival tribe having snatched a child, but for the decaying technology of a collapsed world – the essential proposal of Miller’s Mad Max films encapsulated in a perfect ideogram. The sense of rhythmic propulsion – aided by Tom Holkenborg’s scoring and contoured by Margaret Sixel and Eliot Knapman’s nerveless editing – is matched to precision of detail deployment. We swiftly accrue insight into how a culture has evolved for survival in the Wasteland, and appreciate the canniness of the Green Place breed who, far from having gone soft in their relative life of ease, are capable and infinitely nimble. Mary is able to appropriate discarded vehicles and parts and universal adapting devices (would that actual vehicle repair was so sensible), and relentlessly running down and slaying the kidnappers. The opening also, purposefully echoes the later scenes of the original Mad Max, depicting a parent chasing down bikers who, rather than seeking to exact retribution on a mother and child, have instead split them apart and reap the consequences; the jokey image of the old woman wielding a shotgun in the original has been swapped out for the eagle-eyed young mother taking aim across swathes of arid and alien land to strike down her foes.

It’s too good a start for even the greatest filmmaker to sustain, but Miller tries his damndest. Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga essentially consists of four main set-pieces, each the axle for a phase in Furiosa’s maturation, with mediating episodes to cement the nominal story and flesh out the particular corner of the world noted only in the shallowest terms in Fury Road. Dementus imprisons Furiosa whilst coming to regard her as something like an adopted daughter and drags her along with his travelling caravan of miscreants. He entrusts her care and education to the History Man, an old and wizened figure who has scrawled some of the vital lore he retains not just on his priest-like robes but in tattoos upon his skin. Furiosa, whilst refusing to speak at all whilst in Dementus’s retinue and affecting disdain, takes a leaf from the History Man’s example and tattoos the direction back to the Green Place as marked by stars on her arm. After a period of wandering, the biker horde sees a flare exploding over the wasteland and track it to its source – a member of the berserker cult called War Boys (Sean Millis) with an arrow lodged in his brow, who hopes he’s gone to Valhalla when he sees the horde, and tells them of the existence of the Citadel run by Immortan Joe (Lachy Hulme). Dementus immediately tries to lay siege to the Citadel, but finds the War Boys’ maniacal devotion to their boss and the defences of the place too formidable, and quickly flees.

Dementus remains determined to cut himself in on Joe’s action, and concocts a stratagem to seize one of Joe’s other two fortresses, the oil pumping and refining station known as Gastown. With the city in his control, Dementus confronts Joe to seeking a deal to keep him and his horde fed in exchange for ensuring Gastown’s product keeps flowing. Joe accepts on the proviso of claiming Dementus’s pet physican, the Organic Mechanic (Angus Sampson), and Furiosa herself, who finally speaks to disclaim any relation to Dementus. Joe takes her in as an alluring prospect for a future wife and adds her to his harem, all kept in an abode behind a vault door. Already seeing her physical attributes are tantalising and troublesome, Furiosa concocts a trick: she cuts off her longish red hair and makes it into an improvised wig: when Joe’s large, dumb, pervert son Rictus (Nathan Jones) plucks her out of the vault to get his mesmerised jollies, she’s able to give him the slip and takes refuge amidst the city’s lesser denizens. A few years later, having grown up to look remarkably like Anya Taylor-Joy, Furiosa has disguised herself as a boy and emerges from anonymity when she displays guts and an edge of ruthless smarts when she saves a wrecked vehicle being hoisted into the citadel to scavenge, and lets a luckless worker drop to his death. This gets Furiosa promoted to work as a mechanic. She helps build the War Rig, an armoured petrol tanker designed to run food out to Gastown and bring back fuel. Planning to flee en route with half-baked ideas of revenge on Dementus and running back to the Green Place, Furiosa finds herself forced to aid the truck’s crew, and its valiant driver Praetorian Jack (Tom Burke), in battling off renegades split from Dementus, who try with all their might and suicidal bravura to capture the truck.

Miller’s preoccupation with mythical story structures and chains of storytelling defined the original Mad Max films increasingly, and also bled over into his swerves into children’s entertainment like Happy Feet (2006). The one film he made in between Fury Road and Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga, his adaptation of A.S. Byatt’s Three Thousand Years of Longing (2022), was an uneven and cumulatively exasperating but certainly interesting effort to engage with the urge and act of storytelling itself, as a form of conjuring, connecting past to present and self to group, both disguising and revealing truth. Miller plays mythopoeic bingo throughout Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga, with nods to many a legendary hero’s life beginning with a fateful exile and orphaning, to the likes of Mulan in donning mannish disguise to weather the travails of being young and female in a dangerous, masculine world, and to Arthur as a once and future knight disguised in dogsbody clothes, and, of course, to the Trojan cycle: Dementus’s method for grabbing control of Gastown is a variation on the Trojan Horse, and later, more subtly, a character is executed in a riff on Hector being dragged behind Achilles’ chariot. Miller and coscreenwriter Nick Lathouris also tip their hats to other films. John Milius’s Conan The Barbarian (1982) is Miller’s overall model for depicting a hero’s growth from stolen and mistreated child to full-grown, omnicompetent warrior and incarnation of Nietzschean will through an episodic epic. Miller confirms this debt with a couple of direct salutes, in repeated images of characters crucified on trees, in the History Man’s skin-riddling script, and when Immortan Joe displays his power by getting one of his warboys to fearlessly sacrifice himself from on high, just as Thulsa Doom did. The way the raiders who take Furiosa have cattle skulls affixed to their handlebars provides unexpected homage to Touki-Bouki (1973).

Another homage pulls off the admirable two-birds-one-stone hit in referencing Akira Kurosawa’s Yojimbo (1961) and through it Sergio Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars (1964), as at one point a dog is spotted carrying a human body part in its mouth – not a hand as in Yojimbo but a foot this time. Miller’s own, special imagination is apparent in the touch of the armoured truck having been refashioned into a communal work of art, reminiscent of Achilles’ shield in The Iliad with the story of civilisation etched on its face, here in the flanks of the tanker having been imprinted with bas-relief artworks encompassing the mythos of the Citadel and the War Boys. Where in Fury Road the social structure of the Citadel and its symbolic nature were shallow and elided, Miller is fastidious almost to a fault in describing the interrelationship of the Citadel, Gastown, and the third necessary producing fortress city of the Wasteland, the Bullet Farm, and the crude but effective economy that’s arisen in the interrelationship of the Citadel’s use of water to produce hydroponic foodstuff and organic protein with insect farms and the material churned out by the other fortresses to build Joe’s military power. Miller nods back to both Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) and Happy Feet in his acerbic portrait of social leaders: the People Eater (John Howard), an ally of Joe’s with a fake nose and tattered business suit, is a satire on the idea of a politician as a malignant front for the actual power of Joe and his cult.

The two major factions become then surveys of different kinds of social control and order. Dementus tries to use a blend of charisma and showmanship to command his tribe, blended with bloodcurdling spectacle of punishment for those who get in his way. Joe, hulking but damaged and deformed, is a self-constructed nightmare figure, a steampunk Darth Vader with an army of warriors more effectively and efficiently enthralled by the promise of paradise for dying in battle. Dementus has both real cunning but also a self-defeating aspect, unable to control his people in the same way although he has such quaint rituals as the fate that befell Furiosa’s mother and, later, a forced battle between some failed rebels in the ranks to earn a place on the motorbikes that will be used to quarter their leader. Dementus is a great leader when commanding a roving band but flails in his attempt to seize the reins from Joe in a step-by-step plot, because Joe has already figured out how to best persuade and enthral people: religion. Dementus and his horde seem rather to have built themselves a kind of cargo cult around their motorcycles, understandable, but not as effective. Furiosa herself threads through a path between these camps, refusing to become a tended orchid in Joe’s hothouse – she knows, having seen one of Joe’s wives give birth to stillborn conjoined twins and being hence relegated to a cow to be milked, that such a nominal boon isn’t permanent, even if she was up for being sexually used by malformed creeps. She’s already had a taste of such treatment, in one of Miller’s gleefully grotesque yet peculiarly sensible asides, as the Organic Mechanic sometimes tapped her blood to make blood sausage for Dementus – a relatively subtle but bleakly funny variation on Miller’s recurring motif of people made into livestock in the last realm of Darwinian capitalism. Furiosa has one keepsake of the Green Place she keeps with her always, a peach seed she keeps hidden within her hair, or, at the times she cuts that off, in her mouth.

Indeed, although fairly restrained in terms of visible bloodletting, Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga is Miller’s most gleefully violent and nasty film since The Road Warrior, restoring some of the feral savagery and baroque grotesquery that initially defined the series, from the dying Toe Jam being hung upside down to drain the blood from his throat so he can cough up the Green Place’s location, to Mary being crucified and having terrible things done to her thankfully just out of camera’s direct view, and sundry other acts. The capping image of fiendish poetic justice is also pure nightmare fuel, something the appended montage of footage from the more plainly upbeat Fury Road can’t dispel. The driving notion that this is a world where cruelty is a currency also however leads into Miller’s interesting attempt to weigh up an interesting question. The upshot of the film has a surprising overlap in thematic concern and preoccupation with some other recent movies, including Nick Cassavetes’ God Is A Bullet (2023), in focusing on an abused young woman seeking revenge against a charismatic, cult leader-like man but faced with the impossibility of dealing out any kind of revenge that can properly exact payment for just exactly what it is that’s been taken from her. Hemsworth himself has already established a talent for playing the sort of character he does here, and indeed has arguably done it better, in his pseudo-Charles Manson in Drew Goddard’s Bad Times At El Royale (2018) and, most wittily, as a smarmy new-age techie guru in Joseph Kosinski’s Spiderhead (2022).

The idea is that Dementus sees himself as a kind of ironic father figure to Furiosa, having through his brutality and example essentially reforged her as a higher being, again is a variation on the relationship of Conan and Thulsa in Conan The Barbarian, but with the motif given a screwy, Sadean sitcom-at-world’s-end makeover. Dementus is intended as a villain who is capable of truly awful brutality and ruthlessness and has a clever tactical mind, but also has a loopy, neurotic, even comedic energy that has to flow somewhere because he’s sealed and cauterised off vital parts of his nature: he repeatedly mentions having lost his family during the collapse of civilisation, and the price he’s paid for not only surviving but becoming a wasteland king is the throttling of his civilised self and, with it, an extra dimension of astuteness as well as feeling. Some remnant of it persists: in what seems to be a funny flourish of incidental detail but proves crucial, he has a teddy bear dangling off his back by chains. He gives this to Furiosa, who casts its aside but takes it up again, only for Dementus to snatch it back again in a huff when she tells the truth about him to Joe and accepts Joe’s shelter. Trouble is, something here, both in the writing and in Hemsworth’s performance, doesn’t quite grant access to any sense of the broken man buried far within Dementus’s shell, the one who might have a little tragic gravitas to deepen his villainy. The idea that he might cast Furiosa in the role of progeny even if he doesn’t really feel it is also skirted and skidded over without effect: Dementus doesn’t even learn who the adult Furiosa is until their final confrontation.

The film’s central and most spectacular sequence depicts Praetorian Jack’s effort to drive the War Rig to Gastown, with Furiosa and the rest of the crew fighting tooth and nail against the renegades’ piratical assault. Here Miller deliberately restages the climax of Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) as a self-conscious indulgence of the reboot ethic, and also keeping in mind in how much classical mythology borrowed and remixed idea and motifs. The likeness here is not so much Homer’s The Iliad to The Odyssey but The Iliad to Virgil’s The Aeneid, the quasi-remake that inflates and augments, reshuffles and enlarges. More to the point, Miller has a high old time throwing every nutty new idea at the old concept, with the renegades parasailing behind their pursuing vehicles and a nasty new weapon fixed to the War Rig to see off boarding parties: a pivoting fixture on the back that when switched on swivels with dangling maces to churn anything in range to junk and red foam. During the battle Furiosa has to crawl up the underside of the tanker trailer, handed a vital part to fix the engine by an engineer before he gets crushed under the wheels. Finally, after everyone else has been killed, Furiosa is left alone with Praetorian Jack, and she makes a play to take over the War Rig, holding him at gunpoint. But Jack simply dumps her out of the vehicle and seems to leave her behind, only to return on foot to her, pointing out the flaws in her plan and offering to take her on as his driving partner.

It’s both great and disconcerting to see Burke, the simmering romancer and wastrel of The Souvenir (2019) and other serious-minded recent movies, playing the film’s rather blatant Max Rockatansky stand-in – Jack is costumed just like Max in The Road Warrior as well as basically taking his place, and moreover, I was left with the feeling he did a much better job as replacement Max than Tom Hardy in Fury Road (Miller spares a brief cutaway cameo reproducing the first sighting of Max in Fury Road, with a figure plainly supposed to be Max standing by his Interceptor and looking down from a bluff upon the Citadel – hopefully we’re not meant to presume that he spent the ten or so years standing up there or however long it’s supposed to be between this film and Fury Road). The crucial moment when Jack reappears on the road after Furiosa thinks he’s left her behind sees him advancing with a leisurely stride and an attitude of confidence not laden with arrogance or neurosis – he has an aura of a kind that’s almost a foreign language in current pop culture. Burke’s not as traditionally good-looking an actor as Hemsworth, but he has that actor’s gift of seeming to transform his whole form in a role. You can understand why Furiosa falls for him, although Miller proves a little shy of coming to grips with their affair. Back in Mad Max he wasn’t shy of exploring the easy chemistry of Max and his wife and even spared time for Goose enjoying the performance of a leggy chanteuse. In today’s blockbusters with all their clashing impulses and niceties it’s far harder to portray a proper adult passion than torture, to show bodies being smashed in every conceivable way except for actually, like, smashing.

Still, Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga is a film supercharged with emotional intensity, albeit coded into its imagery. Again, this is perhaps best realised in the opening chase, with the maternal determination and punitive intent of Mary imprinted on her concerted brow and constant, efficient forward movement, and expressed with her lethally accurate bullets, motifs returned to later as Furiosa herself wields a rifle with the same protective and vengeful urge, and sets out to close the circle with her own relentlessly focused chase. The risk is that when everything is dedicated to putting over the awesome, not much stays awesome, but Miller manages some striking antistrophes, as when he notes one of the Gastown elders methodically reproducing John William Waterhouse’s “Hylas and the Nymphs” on the walls of a chamber, the image with its evocation of erotic allure, the mutual mystery of male and female filtered through the divine and mortal, an echo out of the past with a sense of the fragility of both art and humans, so starkly contrasting the world outside. Later the painting is noted scuffed and seedy as it suffers from Dementus’s oblivious keeping: Miller packs must suggestion into these twinned glimpses, his meditation on the state of our art and the carelessness with which its keepers keep it, particularly when it gets in the way of an agenda. Miller is taking his original impulse behind the Mad Max films to a limit here – something close to a silent film in the way the images take the weight of the emotion, and the films express themselves in motion as emotion.

That’s not to say I think Miller is completely successful in that regard: getting back to Jack and Furiosa, and Miller’s self-invited comparison to Conan The Barbarian, it’s notable how well Milius’s montage of Conan and Valeria in the throes of passion that becomes something deeper, infused with that Basil Poledouris score, makes coherent what follows for them, where Miller settles for just having his couple press brows together in a CGI-decorated pullback shot. A niggle, perhaps. Miller’s cinema is arresting throughout, both on a nuts-and-bolts level, the lensing used to give physical forms and actions a looming, thrusting, adamantine presence, and in gestures that blend technique and expression, especially a marvellous time-lapse effect that conveys the passage of days, months, years in Furiosa’s life. This shot offers the sight of her discarded wig, a bowl with her discarded hair glued to it, perched in a branch jutting from the rocky side of the Citadel, the branch managing to grow and reach out for the ever-passing sun in this desolate place, keeping the discarded remnant of Furiosa’s youth with it. Miller recreates stylistic aspects of his early films, most specifically the motif of mayhem being watched from a remote vantage, the action at a tantalising, cinematic distance and the sound muted. Sixel and Knapman’s cutting is much, much cleaner than the frenetic, garbling editing of Fury Road, the staging finding an ideal meeting point for Miller’s fluid lines of motion and the requirements of contemporary cinema with its chain lightning pacing. In this regard in particular Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga feels like a return to form for Miller.

Moreover, Fury Road missed with me was that it seemed to want to ply concepts and messages without having really thought them through: the fleeing females were in search of a promised Eden and yet the film never tried to grapple with their ways of thinking and seeing as they must have been shaped by the world they’re in. Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga on the other hand tries very hard to make its characters and their choices and their little world more coherent, the aesthetic ideal of perpetual motion and expression through sign and deed segmented as a result. Fans of Fury Road’s devil-may-care approach might well find this frustrating to a degree, particularly as Miller quite conspicuously slows down between the big sequences. Personally there were points where I wished he’d done so even more: to quote Mystery Science Theater 3000, I started to lose track of all the crappy vehicles swerving about on dusty roads. Also, in Fury Road I had assumed Furiosa was some kind of nom-de-guerre or honorific doled out by Immortan Joe, but no, it’s just her name, for some reason. I was tickled by the presence of some familiar Aussie faces dotted through the cast, like comedian David Collins, former footballer Ian Roberts, and musician Tim Rogers, as well as Mrs Hemsworth Elsa Pataky under some disfiguring makeup as one of Dementus’s lieutenants – a cadre who have all taken their names from makes of motorcycle.

But Taylor-Joy is the star here, even if the film necessarily keeps her off-screen until the second half, and then her chief job is mostly to be the human emblem and linchpin for bedlam. Taylor-Joy is an elegant contradiction in the current, rising movie star stakes: so far she seems infinitely flexible as a performer, her sinuous physique the pure stuff of magazine spreads but her anime-character eyes imbue a quirky specificity. It’s not a part that asks as much of her as she might give, that said. Part of me wished that Miller would let Furiosa get more feral, more furious, rather than the sternly adamant thing she’s already been defined as. That’s another problem with prequels: they’re doomed to be locked into predefined patterns rather than follow the shifting energies of new moments and choices. Also, the film, so fastidious elsewhere, is silent as to just why Furiosa grows up with Taylor-Joy recreating Theron’s American brogue (amusing given Theron herself is South African) when she’s grown up in places where everyone else speaks fluent Strayan. All that said, however, whilst she doesn’t look all that much like Theron, Taylor-Joy immediately stakes claim to Furiosa as personal property: with long hair dyed red, and later shaved off entirely, and forehead swathed in black, cabalistic makeup in her Praetorian guise that draws out the vulpine, witchy intensity of her one-of-a-kind eyes, Taylor-Joy has a potent allure and gamine physicality ideal for the part, and her gaze has an intensity that bespeaks of a soul melted down to red hot fluid and never again congealed, blazing out of every glance.

Dementus’s schemes to seize control of the whole domain drives him to first capture the Bullet Farm. Jack and Furiosa, having determined to abandon the Citadel and ride off in search of the Green Place after completing a last run to the Bullet Farm, and find the place has been seized by Dementus’s horde, who try their best trap and overwhelm the War Rig: Furiosa brings her own, honed sniping skills to bear and tries to kill Dementus whilst Jack wrathfully barrels the War Rig through the horde and uses the Rig as a battering ram to destroy the old industrial buildings at the Farm’s heart. Here Miller manages to completely articulate the meshed emotions played out in the ferocious action: Furiosa’s care for Jack and singleminded hate of Dementus are both behind her shots, and Jack’s wrath at being underestimated results in factory chimneys swaying and tumbling. He’s forced to abandon the rig and take off with Furiosa in a car they’ve prepared for their flight, but they’re chased down by Dementus. Furiosa is tied up by her damaged arm and forced to watch as Jack isdragged behind a bike for hours on end, steadily tearing him to pieces. When Dementus calls time and the dust settles, he finds Furiosa has gnawn through her arm, leaving hand and wrist in the shackle whilst the rest of her stumbles back to the Citadel.

Miller’s choice of framing his miniature myth of Furiosa takes a peculiar turn here, right when it seems to be gearing up for a grandiose climax. Joe and his squadrons heed Furiosa’s advice about Dementus’s deceptive intentions when he seems to be burning Gastown, and instead head to draw him into battle on the plains between. The History Man’s narration notes sardonically all the wars of human history leading up to this one, which he dubs the “Forty Day Wasteland War,” not quite a fulfilment of Einstein’s dictum about the last war being fought with the weapons of the first, but getting there. This proves the sardonically defined terminus of the Mad Max series’ running theme of the inextricability of violent conflict from human affairs and history, and also an adjunct to the holy mission of revenge Furiosa is committed to. She fashions herself a mechanical arm to utilise and rides out after Joe’s forces have put Dementus to flight. Furiosa even works the arrogance of Rictus and brother Scrotus (Josh Helman) to her own ends as she lets them do the work of appropriating fuel and vehicle parts to repair one of their own cars only to then blithely ride off in it, on the way to tracking down Dementus and the last of his band. Finally she brings Dementus down and confronts him in what might be intended to be Miller’s homage to and variation on the “point of dying” climax of Once Upon A Time In The West (1968).

But Miller tries to avoid merely recreating that kind of scene. What he offers instead proves both gripping and awkward. Miller had three choices here. He could gain some pathos from the presence of some kind of actual familial feeling between Dementus and Furiosa, persisting alongside their very real mutual hatred. Or, he could have that feeling persist in one character but not the other, and gain some moment of conclusive shock and emotion at the realisation. Or, simply have the bad guy get taken down by the heroine. The version Miller tries pits Furiosa’s haughty vengefulness and determination to find a way of extracting satisfaction from a man who blindly extols his own indifference, revenger and villain glancing off each-other, in a manner that reminded me of the crucial mutiny scene in Mutiny on the Bounty (1962) where Marlon Brando’s Fletcher Christian simply cannot quite erase the smug sureness of authority from Trevor Howard’s Captain Bligh even as he’s poking him with a  sword and casting him adrift. One can see the sense of what Miller is aiming for here, but just as apparent is the truth he doesn’t quite pull it off. It feels like a product of a mismatch of attitudes Miller wants to put over: having been so heartily acclaimed for the female emancipation story in Fury Road, he wants to cling to the image of Furiosa as the blankly righteous avenger, but his deeper dramatic instincts want to wring the moment for something else, an exhaustion with the revenge motif in general and questioning what lies beyond it. The idea that Furiosa kills a part of herself to get what she’s after, just as Dementus once did, is certainly in play, but also remains at arm’s length.

The film ends, then, on a bold and challenging note. The History Man recounts what Furiosa told him about Dementus’s fate – that she staked him out in the Citadel garden and planted the Green Place seed under him, the tree growing literally up through his crotch and holding him like some kind of nature deity – a Green Man in exchange for a Green Place, his carcass otherwise kept from death by constant tending. It’s not made clear if and when he died, but the ending suggests he was still persisting when Furiosa leads the wives in escape as depicted in Fury Road. It’s a remarkable image to resolve on, appalling and sick and powerfully poetic – Miller engaging with the strangest motifs of mythology, coming right up to the edge of violating the boundary between the real and surreal that’s been persisting in his fictional universe since the start and bleeding over into something even strange and more primal. It is, at once, a touch that threatens to break Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga, but ultimately, in musing upon it, I realised actually makes it, and kicks it into a new stratum of achievement for Miller. It certainly won’t be his last film, and yet it would make an ideal emblem of his career, perched somewhere in the space between literal and symbolic, horrific and alluring, savage and intimate.  It also confirms that for all the sturm-und-drang, Furiosa – A Mad Max Saga is, ironically, like Three Thousand Years of Longing a classic late movie from a director, cutting edge in style but an expression of an old soul longing for green shoots out of sullied, haggard flesh at the end of a long, exhausting, thrilling ride, an idea he implants in this movie in the strangest, most haunting way he can imagine.

Standard
2010s, Drama, Scifi

Marjorie Prime (2017)

.

Director /  Screenwriter: Michael Almereyda

By Marilyn Ferdinand

The world of speculative fiction has long embraced artificial intelligence. For example, from the 8th-century B.C.E., Homer’s Iliad mentions that Hephaestus, the god of artisans, fashioned maidens from gold to help him in his work. Homer wrote that, “In their hearts there is intelligence, and they have voice and vigor, and from the immortal gods they have learned skills. These bustled about supporting their master.” This invention is clearly an example of the positive aspects of AI. Then there are the negative examples, such as Futura, aka Robot Maria, from the novelist Thea von Harbou’s Metropolis and Fritz Lang’s 1927 film of the same name that was created to destroy the machinery supporting the city.

Now, science has caught up with human imagination. AI programs, which are getting more sophisticated by the day, can review professional literature at breathtaking speed to answer queries and synthesize knowledge that likely will result in medical and engineering breakthroughs. Conversely, AI voices and advanced language skills are already enabling deceptive communications that can adversely affect such things as elections, financial safety, and territorial security.

People who use AI report that they sometimes feel like they are talking to a real person that they themselves have created, one who wants to do nothing more than please them. This is the premise of Michael Almereyda’s thought-provoking film Marjorie Prime. Based on the play by Jordan Harrison, Marjorie Prime takes place in the not-so-distant future in the modernist, Long Island home of Marjorie (Lois Smith, reprising the role she originated on stage), an 80ish woman descending into dementia.

The film opens with Marjorie talking uneasily with Walter (Jon Hamm), a man in his 40s who is sitting rather stiffly on her living room couch. She acts a bit bashful and awkward around him, even as he presses her to eat a spoonful of peanut butter in what appears to be a daily tug of war. After some coaxing, she does as she is asked, and then settles down to talk about her life with her husband, the flesh-and-blood Walter who was 20 years her senior and died several years before the action of the film takes place.

This Walter, Walter Prime, is an AI hologram who was purchased by Marjorie’s son-in-law Jon (Tim Robbins) to help her retain whatever memory she still possesses and coax her to eat and take better care of her health. Tess (Geena Davis), Marjorie’s daughter and Jon’s wife, finds Walter Prime creepy and her mother’s choice of the prime’s age puzzling and disturbing. We muse that this is the handsome man Marjorie married, unmarred by old age and infirmity, but it also seems that the prime is a facsimile of the man with whom Marjorie was most happy and shared the best memories.

At Walter Prime’s urging that she tell him more about himself and their life together so that he can better “help” her, she shares a story about how, early in their marriage, before Walter had become wealthy and influential, they chose a poodle from the city pound that they named Toni. She recalls how Toni loved to run on the beach and would come home with a coat full of sand. She continues the story of how, after Tess had been born and Toni had died, the family went back to the pound. Tess, without any prompting from them, chose a dog that looked just like Toni, and they named her Toni II. Walter Prime takes it all in, saying, “I’ll remember that.”

Barring an electronic meltdown, the memories Walter Prime makes are not subject to the corruption human memory is heir to. Indeed, at one point, the characters discuss the notion that a memory is not even as good as the last time it was called to mind, several generations removed from the actual event that took place.

To emphasize the unreliability of the stories we tell each other and ourselves, Almereyda includes flashbacks to the moments memories discussed in the film were made. For example, Marjorie relates the story of her engagement to Walter. She says they were sitting on a bench in Central Park watching saffron-colored flags waving in the wind, a reference to the art installation “The Gates” erected there by Christo and Jeanne-Claude in 2005. Walter, she says, got down on one knee and proposed. Even in the telling, Marjorie is not completely clear on the details. In flashback, however, we see that the couple were in bed, likely after making love, and Walter pulled out and opened a box containing an engagement ring. They talked obliquely about the challenges of a May-December marriage. The image of “The Gates” Marjorie remembers came from TV news.

Amid the unique experience of a human and an AI forming a relationship, Almereyda tells a somewhat less interesting story about the secrets and schisms that have caused the family great unhappiness through the years, especially Tess. She and Jon have conspired to keep her brother Damian from re-entering Marjorie’s memories, a case of sibling rivalry that has never resolved. In Jon’s private conversations with the AI, he fills Walter Prime in on background details to help it develop into a more robust version of Walter while avoiding landmines with both Marjorie and Tess. Tellingly, Jon is rarely seen without a glass of scotch at hand, suggesting that the prime is not the only one that has been schooled in avoiding landmines.

The atmosphere of repression hangs heavily over the film. Cinematographer Sean Price Williams takes advantage of the misty Long Island air and overcast weather patterns to laden the images with a veil of darkness. One arresting image is of Tess and Jon walking from the beach back to the house, trudging through the moist wind looking gray and grave. Williams also favors darkly lit interiors that suggest that the AI is not the only ghost inhabiting the premises.

All of the performances are effective, especially Smith’s long-honed characterization. However, it was Geena Davis who really grabbed me. She shimmers with brittle anger that is a thin veneer for a depression that goes much deeper than simply resenting her mother for not loving her more. Despite her opposition to Walter Prime, in the second act Tess finds herself talking to a prime of her now-deceased mother. Their conversation is quietly hostile, as Tess tells Marjorie Prime not to smile so much, a devastatingly telling detail. Davis really embodies the desperation of a daughter who perceives a constant undercurrent of displeasure from her mother.

Almereyda continues to play with the possibilities of artificial intelligence as the film progresses in an engaging, if slightly ridiculous manner. The last scene plays like a game of Telephone, but I wouldn’t bet against its chances of coming true in the future. Marjorie Prime isn’t the first shot across the bow from the AI future, but in many ways, it feels the most human.

Standard
1950s, War

Pork Chop Hill (1959)

.

Director: Lewis Milestone
Screenwriter: James Webb

By Roderick Heath

Lewis Milestone was one of the major directors of classic Hollywood cinema, but has never really received his due since as an inventive and interesting talent, one whose career ran over thirty years and was littered with great and superior films. Born Leib Milstein in Chișinău, then in Tsarist Russia but today in Moldova, Milestone came from a wealthy and progressive-minded Jewish family. Sent to Germany to study engineering, he instead fell in love with the theatre, and bought a ticket on a steamship to the United States, arriving at Hoboken aged eighteen. After struggling through odd jobs, Milestone gained his foothold in the New York theatrical world as a photographer, before he enlisted in the US Army in 1917, where he served in the Signal Corps alongside quite a few other soon-to-be-notable filmmakers, including Josef Von Sternberg. Becoming a US citizen after his discharge and changing his name to Milestone, he was brought into the movie world by an independent producer he had met in the Signal Corps, starting as an assistant editor and augmenting his income by moonlighting as a card sharp, before moving on to work under figures like Henry King, Thomas Ince, and Harold Lloyd, labouring in any capacity on the movie lot he could turn his hand to.

Milestone made his directorial debut with Seven Sinners (1925), a comedy that did well enough to make him over the next few years a sought-after director of films in that genre, including his best-regarded silent work, Two Arabian Knights (1927), a pinch of the hugely popular wartime comedy stage play What Price Glory?. Milestone beat out Charlie Chaplin for the first and soon-defunct Best Comedy Director Oscar. Milestone swerved hard to prove his range by making the early gangster film The Racket (1928), and after producing his first Talkie, New York Nights (1929), he was hired by Carl Laemmle to direct a prestige production, an adaptation of Erich Maria Remarque’s merciless but popular antiwar novel All Quiet On the Western Front (1930). Easily Milestone’s most famous work, All Quiet On The Western Front proved a definitive early example of completely successful sound cinema, in part because Milestone elected to film much of it like a silent, complete with dynamic tracking shots, and added sound effects in post-production. He also fought with Laemmle to maintain the novel’s downbeat ending, and the film’s Oscar-garlanded success justified his uncompromising approach.

Milestone’s output through the 1930s was powerhouse, including The Front Page (1931), Rain (1932), Hallelujah, I’m a Bum (1933), The General Died at Dawn (1936), and Of Mice and Men (1939), all displaying his talent and determination not to be pinned down in any genre. But during World War II, Milestone’s career became defined by one particular irony: for all the pacifist passion of his most famous film’s outlook, the skill he’d revealed on All Quiet on the Western Front for directing warfare scenes was called upon now to be applied to movies engaged with motivating audiences for the war effort. Milestone managed the pivot of attitude by bringing a proto-Sam Peckinpah feel for the brutality inherent in both the fascist yoke and resistance to it in Edge of Darkness (1943), The North Star (1943), and The Purple Heart (1944), whilst still etching those films with sigils invested with his old, humanistic touch, and more fully rekindling that attitude for A Walk In The Sun (1945). Like King Vidor and Rouben Mamoulian, other star directors who midwifed the shift from the silent to sound era with their creative potency only to lose critical respect with long and stumbling late careers, Milestone never really fought to escape the studio production treadmill, with an ultimately hindering effect on his late career when contemporaries like John Ford and Alfred Hitchcock were going from strength to strength.

So, after the war, Milestone slogged through some stodgy studio programmers. Still he managed some vital work, including a peculiar take on the film noir style, The Strange Love of Martha Ivers (1946), a low-budget but intelligent and quasi-expressionist take on Les Misérables (1952), and Pork Chop Hill. The Rat Pack comedy heist film Ocean’s 11 (1960), whilst remembered now chiefly as the source for the more popular 2001 remake and its sequels, was at the time dismissed with snark as a low ebb for a director once labelled “the American Eisenstein.” Milestone ended his career even more ignobly as the sole credited director of the 1962 remake of Mutiny on the Bounty, although that legendarily chaotic shoot was begun by Carol Reed and quarrelsome star Marlon Brando also reportedly filmed some of it. Nonetheless the actual film that resulted from all that retained a sobriety and substance that made it feel worthy of having Milestone’s name attached. For its part, Pork Chop Hill, as Milestone’s last war film, was a nod back to his glory days and also an intriguing anticipation of where the war film as a genre was heading.

Pork Chop Hill was also one of the relatively few truly serious war movies to deal with the Korean War, when it was already being referred to as “the Forgotten War,” just a few years after it came to a juddering halt with a technically ongoing ceasefire. For Koreans the war unfolded amidst their homes and scarred their land, minds, and bodies, its impact a constant, haunting memory and imminent reality. For the United Nations-mandated interventionist forces it was a gruelling, vicious, yet weirdly half-hearted and often baffling experience, one that ground to a halt in general stalemate as huge numbers of Chinese volunteers added weight to the North Korean Communist forces, in a moment when the Cold War era was at its hottest. It also saw the onset of a new age of warfare, both technologically and in terms of service experience for soldiers who were mostly conscripted, that had its own peculiar, even disorientating qualities, and which would become all the more difficult to keep controlled in the Vietnam War. In keeping with that sense of neglect and almost hallucinated ambiguity in the collective memory, films about the conflict are thin on the ground compared to World War II or Vietnam.

But the films the war did inspire in Hollywood were interesting and varied, ranging from the measured realism and noble tragedy of Mark Robson’s The Bridges at Toko-Ri (1953), which portrayed the new era of jet warfare, to The Manchurian Candidate (1962), which used the war to hinge a freakishly bizarre evocation of the age’s mental and political landscape upon. Much later, the raucous, satirical lilt of Robert Altman’s MASH (1970) used it more blatantly as a parable for the then-raging Vietnam War. Combat movies also proliferated, including Sam Fuller’s The Steel Helmet (1951) and Fixed Bayonets (1951), Julian Amyes’ A Hill In Korea (1956), Anthony Mann’s Men In War (1957), and Pork Chop Hill. Combat movies as a breed are slightly different from classical war films, which usually tend to be as much interested in the social, historical, and political backdrops to the warfare, and the private lives and home front experiences of the combatants. Combat movies rather are particularly preoccupied with depitcing the world of people immersed in the zone of struggle as a subject compelling in and of itself, and are often driven by a particular realist bent, trying to capture the immediate sensory and psychological states of warriors as well as the bloody, muddy business of fighting, where the urge to survive often becomes the only coherent objective. In contending with a war that proved infuriating and inconclusive in terms of geopolitical struggle, a common theme in most of the Korean War combat films was a sense of almost free-floating, semi-surreal entanglement in a conflict and place the people fighting barely understand or care about. Perhaps the fighters have supernal flickers of a new, post-World War II sense of international responsibility and fellowship, anti-communist ethics, or plain old patriotic service ethos to sustain them, or a more immediate and personal duty to fulfil.

Pork Chop Hill portrays an authentic battle, played out over about a week to the loss of 214 American soldiers and possibly thousands of North Korean and Chinese troops, and ending less than three weeks before the armistice was signed at Panmunjom. After the war’s conclusion, the battle was studied by soldier-turned-historian S.L.A. Marshall and turned into his well-regarded book, Pork Chop Hill: The American Fighting Man in Action, Korea, Spring 1953, and screenwriter James Webb recommended the novel to the production outfit Melville Films, who bought the movie rights from Marshall (to Marshall’s annoyance later when he realised he sold them for a song). Webb wrote a script based on one particular chapter, regarding K or ‘King’ Company, 31st Infantry Regiment, 7th Infantry Division, and their furious fight to hold the eponymous hill, named for its general shape. With Webb writing the script and Sy Bartlett producing, actor Gregory Peck signed on as both star and investor. This gave Peck serious clout over the production, so after Milestone was hired to direct, they clashed fiercely over what kind of movie they were making. Milestone later reported with some bitterness that his conception was ruined by Peck’s desire for a more heroic slant to the story, and dismissed the result as a just another war film.

But, whilst not exactly a return to the outright antiwar sentiment of All Quiet On The Western Front, Pork Chop Hill sees the director argue the point until arriving at a zone of ambivalence, keeping the viewer aware of both the awesome spectacle of human bravery and dedication found in the story, whilst also highlighting with accusatory clarity the failings also on display, honestly portraying the screw-ups and indecision that constantly define the battle, and identifying early on problems that have continued to dog the United States’ existence as a superpower. Pork Chop Hill’s lack of pretension in either direction, straining neither to glorify nor vilify the struggle, is part of what it distinguishes it from a modern perspective: whilst conventional for its moment in some aspects, in others it still feels anticipatory and modern. War is hell, the film says, and hell is a bureaucratic snafu with guns. Pork Chop Hill is also interesting as a reflection on the changing nature not so much of the enemy being fought in the early Cold War era, although that’s certainly in the mix too, but on the Americans fighting, portraying the modern, desegregated US Army with an unstable and evolving sense of just what patriotic service means. The battle for Pork Chop was controversial even as it unfolded, given the hill had no apparent strategic importance, rendering the conflict close to nihilistically futile to many onlookers.

The film on the other hand diagnoses the battle as a particularly intense and vicious arm wrestling match between two inimical political and social blocs, where the very lack of a point is the point, and with the armistice itself in the balance, hostage not to victory but to each side demonstrating determination not to lose. Close to the end of the film, after becoming frustrated with the Red delegates at the armistice talks, an American Admiral (Carl Benton Reid) and a General talk through their opposite’s stonewalling (with a Chinese delegate literally blowing smoke): the General suggests, in dated terms, they need to save face. “I could say let ‘em have their face and let’s get on with the truce – but these aren’t just Orientals, these are Communists,” the Admiral muses, on the way to the above epiphany as to the battle’s meaning. Milestone intended in his original conception of the film to make more of the intercutting between the literal and diplomatic warfare, contrasting such different forms of combat and the way each influences the other, and also the ways they remain entirely distinct and abstract to each-other. But apart from that late scene, portrayal of the negotiations were finally limited to a montage playing out under the opening credits, which is in its own way a clever interpolation that sets the scene for the conflict we’re about to witness as an illustration of Ambrose Bierce’s famous satirical quip that cannons are devices for realigning maps.

Milestone’s opening shot proper is a survey of the American trenches on Pork Chop, currently occupied by Easy Company, with Milestone noting customary GI sarcasm in contending with unglamorous circumstances, having named a dugout the Korea Hilton Hotel, with a sign erected bidding visitors to “Visit the Starlight Roof,” and a coop full of chickens kept with an admonition, “Admire But Don’t Touch.” A Chinese soldier (Viraj Amonsin) employed to make propagandist broadcasts delivers his morning taunts over a loudspeaker system in a customarily insinuating voice, another novel element in a war that, the propagandist notes acutely, has cost the US more lives than its War of Independence and yet everyone back home seems to have forgotten about, and generally affecting a mutual sympathy whilst condemning stubborn leaders dragging the conflict out. Meanwhile a periscope for keeping a safe eye on the enemy swivels about under the blaring loudspeakers, like an anticipation for some future age of warring cyborgs. The actual assault that chases Easy Company off the hill isn’t shown, but later the men assigned to recapture them find signs of a recently vacated life all over the hill, inheritors of a paltry and temporary kingdom.

Lt Joe Clemons (Peck) is the commander of King Company, currently stationed in a reserve position close to Pork Chop and 70 miles from Panmunjom. Clemons receives a call from his immediate superior Colonel Kern (Bob Steele), telling him of Easy Company’s eviction by a sudden, overwhelming Red assault, and ordering him to retake the hill. Clemons is faced with an immediate difficulty in that his weapons platoon – those men who carried the likes of flamethrowers, bazookas, and heavy machine guns – has been detached, and so must make do with three platoons of plain infantry. Clemons is nonetheless assured that another Company, Love, will also be hitting the hill from another side, and they will converge at the top. Surveying a model of the hill displaying the fortifications and general layout of their task, Clemons formulates a basic plan, to lead his 1st Platoon himself with his 2nd Platoon, under his stalwart second-in-command Lt Tsugi ‘Suki’ Ohashi (George Shibata), sweeping up the hill on his left flank, and keeping his 3rd Platoon in reserve, a formulation that can’t really afford any hiccups. King Company are delivered close to Pork Chop by truck in the middle of the night, with an assurance the artillery barrage currently being laid on the hill’s southern slope will be lifted at Clemons’ command.

As King Company start up the hill, they’re initially confident when there’s no immediate fire, only to be taunted by the voice of the propagandist, who knows exactly who and where they are: “You’re coming to visit us in our new home. Care to hear what happened to the previous tenants?” the broadcaster asks, and caps things off by playing a recording of Taps echoing sonorously across the benighted landscape. Soon the defenders let loose on the ascending soldiers, a fusillade made even more murderous when huge searchlights behind the American lines suddenly light up the hill in stark and merciless detail. Clemons gets them shut off as quickly as possible, but it’s still a few minutes of utter hell. Slowly the night gives way to day, and the agonised progress of the attackers up the slope has barely made any ground, forcing Clemons to send out runners in a desperate attempt to make contact with both Suki’s platoon and Love Company, becoming increasingly bitter towards the latter for their bewildering and possibly cowardly absence.

One runner Clemons chooses, the very young Pvt Velie (Robert Blake), manages to reach Suki, who tells the messenger his detachment is just as badly mauled and can’t come to the rescue. Returning to Clemons, Velie encounters a machine gun nest: trying to blow it up with a grenade, Velie misses the toss and instead severely injures himself, but destroys the nest with a second attempt, and staggers as a bloodied mess back to Clemons to deliver the news. Eventually a dozen soldiers from Love Company reach Clemons, led by Lt Marshall (Martin Landau), who tells Clemons the men with him are all that’s left of the Company after being ambushed on the way and that two ranking commanders over him have been killed. As if by way of a cruel cosmic joke, two more of his surviving soldiers are killed by a stray artillery shell even as Marshall explains the bloody business, a sight he witnesses with glaze-eyed horror. Finally, with these paltry reinforcements, King Company manages to reach the Chinese lines and storm the fortifications at the top of the hill.

When the Americans do finally recapture the Korea Hilton, they find to their surprise that some of Easy Company are still holed up within: two of the soldiers confront each-other with unpinned grenades in hand and, recognising each-other as friendlies with gleeful smiles, they turn and urgently hurl away the explosives. The merry reunion ends abruptly when another stray barrage crashes down upon the two meeting squads and wipes many men out. Some of the men are convinced the barrage was friendly fire, requiring some fierce assertion of discipline from the stern Cpl Jurgens (James Edwards), and Clemons’ insistence the fire came from the nearby, enemy-occupied hill dubbed Old Baldy – an assurance that, as Suki acknowledges privately to him later, is entirely untrue. Clemons sends word back to Army Command that he doesn’t have a hope of holding onto it without reinforcements, but finds his reports keep getting muddled in one way or another. A public relations officer (Lew Gallo) turns up to report on a successful action and discovers the truth of their by-the-fingernails position to his deep chagrin, and when another reinforcing company does arrive, they’re soon ordered to pull out again and leave Clemons and ruined band to their plight.

Elements of Pork Chop Hill are certainly generic for a war film of the ‘50s, particularly the jots of comic relief, mostly supplied by the testy Sgt Coleman (Fell) and radio operator Cpl Payne (Cliff Ketchum), who likes telling cornball jokes based on his upbringing around the Texas Panhandle. This sort of thing does nod back to Milestone’s early success with Two Arabian Knights, and thankfully this isn’t as intrusive as, say, Bob Newhart’s contributions to Don Siegel’s otherwise remarkable existential entry in the genre, Hell Is For Heroes (1962). More original and interesting is the way it tries to vary the familiar sprawl of representative characters and types in the ranks and present them as part of a landscape where people flit by, in a manner that feels anticipatory of the likes of Terrence Malick’s The Thin Red Line (1998) and the sense of utterly random fate where people loom in and out of the craziness. To leverage this approach Milestone leans on an array of character actors and emerging stars, including Landau, Edwards, Blake, Rip Torn, Woody Strode, Norman Fell, Harry Dean Stanton, Clarence Williams III, Harry Guardino, George Peppard, and Gavin MacLeod. Their faces, specific enough if not at the time particularly well known for the most part, help impose cohesion on the film’s depiction of the chaotic and hellish zone of nullity Pork Chop’s flanks become during the slog towards the summit.

Pork Chop Hill’s unvarnished critique of an often confused and clumsy US war machine is notable, and one element of the film that feels like a rough but coherent draft for a later era of films, particularly those made and set in the Vietnam era, even if ultimately steers clear of the kind of cynicism towards military authority many of its aesthetic children would purvey. The dedicated rigour of leaders like Clemons and Suki on the ground level and their constantly bitching but mostly committed men is contrasted with the incoherent orders, friendly fire, garbled communications, and overstretched manpower all conspiring to leave them in the lurch. Some of this of course is par for the course in any army in any war, and that’s part of the turmoil of combat Milestone works to explore here. This in turn connects with a more conscientious motivated but even deadlier brand of hesitation and mixed messaging, filtering down through the higher echelons and sourced in general uncertainty as to whether it’s worth throwing more soldiers into a fight nobody’s quite sure is worth it: late in the film one of Clemons’ superiors, Major General Trudeau (Ken Lynch), refuses to commit more men to the fight because he isn’t sure Pork Chop won’t just going to be given away a few days later in the peace talks.

Realism has always been considered the key and indispensible virtue with war movies, particularly today when pyrotechnics and special effects and make-up arts can so readily deliver colourful carnage, but I’ve often held a sneaky conviction the genre was at its best when in the black-and-white photography style of the late 1950s and early ‘60s. Whilst the brazen crimson gush of gore is muted, the dust, heat, and physical exertion registers vividly in the monochrome palette and harsh contrasts of Sam Leavitt’s cinematography. Like many directors with a singular moment of great influence early in their career, Milestone was being chased by other filmmakers at this time: Stanley Kubrick had raided Milestone’s stylistics for his Paths of Glory (1957) on the way to evolving his own, and a few years later David Lean would tip his hat to Milestone’s influence in Doctor Zhivago (1965). Here, Milestone’s familiar visual strategies for depicting warfare are redeployed in a particularly systematic way, especially when battle is first joined on the mountainside. His camera sweeps in alternating directions in lateral tracking shots, first moving slowly and steadily, attentive to the anxious and ready faces of the Americans as they near the barbed wire banks below the trenches. The tracking shots start moving at a swooping pace as the Red soldiers shoot down upon the Americans and the attackers launch themselves at the wire, criss-crossed by shots moving and up and down the slope along with the assault: in this way Milestone invests both a physically manifest sense of action with the camera whilst carefully diagramming the run of action.

Milestone’s roots in the era of Soviet montage-influenced editing also manifests, particularly when, as the struggle up the hill is suddenly illuminated by the unwanted searchlights, he cuts with furiously between shots of a Chinese soldier leaping out of shelter, grenades in hand, as if popping out of a hoary netherworld with demonic vengefulness to rain suffering on the luckless GIs. As the struggle up the hill emerges from night to day, Milestone returns to a mournfully slow movement as the camera tracks down the slope, beholding parched earth littered with dead and mangled bodies. The emphasis is on the battle as a zone constantly punctuated with sudden, annihilating events, through which the character dash, crawl, and die. During an artillery barrage, PFC Forstman (Guardino) and his buddy Cpl Chuck Fedderson (Peppard), assigned to bring up ammunition, dash for shelter in a hole already being occupied by Coleman and Payne, but leave again as Forstman is irritated by Coleman’s territorial attitude. As shells fall again, one hits the foxhole, killing both Coleman and Payne. As he and Forstman dash up the hill, Fedderson is also killed. Forstman doesn’t notive at first, still calling out to him to keep up before realising what’s happened. Forstman’s shock registers as alternating tears and outraged frustration in a tremendous moment for Guardino: “I told ya to hurry up didn’t I – didn’t I?!” he screams at his oblivious pal. Clemons comes upon the sobbing, hysterical Forstman and urges him back to the trenches, before finding the mangled bodies of Coleman and Payne.

Forstman is introduced early in the film, believing he’s due to be rotated back home and initially refusing to go with the deploying Company, until Suki, claiming to be particularly ornery over being denied leave, warns Forstman, “You’re talking to a man in a black mood, and I’m liable to shoot you.” Shibata as Suki is one of the film’s most interesting elements. Born in Utah, Shibata was an authentic soldier, having served as a paratrooper in World War II and later becoming the first Asian-American ever to graduate from West Point, before serving during the actual Korean War as a fighter pilot. His performance has the definite quality, both positive and negative, of bring a non-professional actor – some of his line readings are a bit wooden, and yet he project an easy stoicism and quiet good-humour that plays particularly well off Peck. Shibata’s presence also points to another quality of the film, which considers the increasingly multicultural texture of the American armed forces in the desegregated army, avoiding any sense of rhetoric in contending with this evolving reality but suggesting other dimensions to the unfolding drama, suiting Milestone’s politically progressive bent but also his businesslike dramatic approach. Nisei Suki is joined by many African-American men amongst the ranks, most particularly the carefully contrasted diptych of Jurgens and Pvt Franklin (Woody Strode), two Black men with sharply diverging attitudes to their service. Edwards had appeared in The Steel Helmet before Pork Chop Hill and would later turn up in The Manchurian Candidate, making him something of an emblematic figure in movies for this particular pivot in the history of the US armed forces and an emerging archetype of a strong and patriotic Black soldier, offering firm and clipped authority. During the initial assault on the hill Velie, marching close to Franklin, keeps offering him a helping hand before Franklin angrily drives him away.

Later Clemons sees Franklin and recognises he’s trying to hang back and avoid the fighting, and orders the Private to stick close to him for the rest of the climb, with a promise to make sure he get him court-martialled. Later Clemons passes him to Jurgens’ charge, with Jurgens pointedly not putting up with any shit from the shirker. Franklin still manages to slip away from the combat and threatens to shoot Clemons when stumbles upon him holed up in a shelter. Franklin tries to work up the nerve to shoot Clemons, warning the commander it’s the easiest way to avoid getting tossed in the stockade for ten years: “For what? Because I don’t wanna die for Korea? What do I care about this stinkin’ hill? You oughta see where I live back home – I sure ain’t sure I’d die for that!” Clemons solicitously retorts that a lot of his comrades have had lives just as tough as his, but still do their duty. Franklin on one level is a fairly familiar kind of character in a war movie, the man who doesn’t care much about any grand political or patriotic project and only wants to survive a terrible situation in a philosophical position known as ‘save-ass,’ facing off against a stern commander, but given a suggestive undercurrent by his ethnicity: armed with Strode’s powerful talent for projecting deep and aggrieved unease, Franklin is plainly an avatar for the angry and alienated Black American, lurking in the darkness and thrusting his face into the light with an angry declaration of a right to self-determination but also a plea for some reason to belong. One who is, pointedly invited by Franklin into a larger fellowship – the only price he has to pay for that is risk: “Chances are you’re gonna die like it or not,” Clemons tells him: “So am I whether you shoot me or not. At least we’ve got a chance to do it in pretty good company.”

This exchange feels like an important moment in the history of American cinema at a time when other filmmakers were similarly trying to encompass such concerns, and all the more so for not needing to more baldly state its subtext. Just a couple of years later John Ford would take up the thread by casting Strode in Sergeant Rutledge (1961) as the Black soldier now fully installed in the cultural pantheon of American heroism. Meanwhile, Clemons’ personal friend Lt Walter Russell (Torn), commander of ‘George’ Company, is sent in to augment King Company, but soon ordered to depart again as the High Command is under the impression Clemons is now only mopping up. When the haplessly beaming PR man turns up amidst the general carnage under the same impression and asks the lieutenants where he should go, Clemons and Russell stare in disbelief in the man: “Well Walt, do you have any suggestions where this man should go?”, to Russell’s drawled reply, “I’d better not – I’d hate to live through this just to be court-martialled.” Again, Pork Chop Hill here grazes motifs that would later become standard-issue stuff in war movies in analysing the increasingly cruel contrast between the reality of war and its warriors and the forces of rendering it all smoothly palatable for a nominal public, although the film avoids making the hapless PR man too ignorant. “I guess you must think that I’m a…” he starts to say sheepishly and trails off, and also volunteers to lend his hand to the defence, only for Clemons to tell him instead to take a good look around and communicate what he sees to the superiors.

In the story of the clash over what kind of movie Pork Chop Hill was supposed to be Peck is often cast as the villain trying to make a more conventional movie with a more conventional hero. Which might be true, particularly as Peck’s notion that the battle was less, as Milestone saw it, a pointless exercise and rather a contemporary equivalent in drawing lines in the Cold War sand to historical battles like “Bunker Hill and Gettysburg” emerges, especially at the end when Clemons muses in voiceover that “millions live in freedom today” thanks to the sacrifice on the hill. But his performance is far from one-dimensional: Peck plays Clemons as a fine and stalwart soldier, but also one who becomes increasingly like one giant, clenched fist as he’s forced to preside over the destruction of his command and the sacrifice of his men, his seething frustration plain but also carefully reined in and channelled when he appeals to the PR officer to help him. Finally Russell and his company depart, leaving the tattered remnant of King and Love Companies, all 25 of them or so, to face a big Red attack Clemons expects to fall on them at dusk. They earn, at least, the almost desperate respect of the propaganda commissar: after delivering a warning of the attack over the loudspeakers of a maliciously grinning superior, he makes a personal appeal to the GIs to flee or surrender, before regaling them with a record – a string instrumental version of “Moonlight In Vermont,” making an already inexplicable situation that much more surreal.

Clemons at least plugs into the same subterranean logic as his enemies as, after losing so many men that very sacrifice has supplied its own meaning to the fight, as he tells Suki, “I want to hold this hill – more than I ever wanted anything – stinking little garbage heap.” As night falls, Clemons and his men wait for the hammer to fall, only for Clemons to get a call from Trudeau telling him to hold out as the choice has been made to send a large force to reinforce them, leading to a mad scramble to weather the wait as the Reds attack: the GIs finished up besieged in the Hilton as the attackers turn a flamethrower on the shelter, trying to keep out billowing flames with frantically piled sandbags. Fortunately the cavalry arrives just in time to disperse the attackers. In the morning Clemons trudges down the hill with the other bedraggled survivors of the fight. “Victory is a fragile thing, and history does not linger long in our century,” Clemons’ concluding narration notes, as Milestone notes the survivors trudging their way toward the fog of that history. Much like its characters, Pork Chop Hill is rugged, efficient, lasting, and exemplary. A fitting swansong in a genre for a director who was so uneasy as its master – and also, vitally, a work that lays down tracks for the future of that genre.

Standard
2020s, Crime/Detective, Drama, Historical, Irish cinema, War

The Troubles: A Dublin Story (2022)

.

Director / Screenwriter: Luke Hanlon

By Marilyn Ferdinand

Many moons ago, I took my very first trip to Europe—a exhaustive coach tour of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland that was not really meant for a naïve 22-year-old woman. I was variously sexually harassed, put upon, and regarded with weird suspicion, but the experience led to my enduring fascination with Ireland. Beyond the outsized public relations triumphs that have made the Irish an adored subculture in the United States, my real-world encounter with a tank moving along a parkside road in Dublin pipped me out of my sheltered, suburban shell and made me want to know how the painful, violent story of the Irish people had so transformed into the harmless Irish mythology peddled to me every March 17th.

I read many books and watched many films dealing with the potato famine, the 1916 uprising, and most especially The Troubles, which made the news regularly during that time. In the latter case, the narrative centered on Northern Ireland and the violent battles between those seeking a united Ireland and the occupying British troops and their loyalist Irish supporters. The Republic and diaspora communities usually only showed up in the periphery from time to time, remaining a gray area in my knowledge. Thus, when I heard about first-time feature director Luke Hanlon’s new film, The Troubles: A Dublin Story, I saw an opportunity to learn something that could connect up with my tank sighting all those years ago. 

Hanlon, who grew up in public housing in Dublin’s Northside district, had the idea that became The Troubles: A Dublin Story on his mind for decades. He knew republicans in his neighborhood, ordinary people who took up the cause of a united Ireland for various noble and selfish reasons. Like me, he wondered why the Dublin story had not been told. Pulling together the miniscule sum of €15,000 and stretching it with strategies Hollywood’s Poverty Row directors would have appreciated, Hanlon realized his vision.

Hanlon erases any thoughts of leprechauns and shamrocks by dropping us immediately into the savagery of the conflict. Someone is being held by some “hard men” for interrogation. Things aren’t going well for the interrogators, prompting one of the men to pull out his handgun and disappear to do whatever he feels is necessary to deal with their prisoner. The unfortunate man could be a loyalist infiltrator or a republican who broke some unforgivable rule; we’re sure that whichever he is, he’s not going to get out of the situation alive.

We soon see protests in the streets of Belfast and then a TV broadcast announcing the death of Bobby Sands, the most famous of the republican prisoners in Northern Ireland’s Maze Prison to join the hunger strike designed to force Margaret Thatcher’s government to declare them political prisoners. This emotional moment galvanizes Sean (Ray Malone) and Frank (Adam Redmond) Shannon, brothers born less than a year apart and jokingly called the Shannon twins. They contact Declan (William Delaney), known to be a member of the Provisional IRA, and say they want to join the fight. In due time, they are brought into the IRA and given small assignments to gauge their effectiveness.

Hanlon is careful to depict the world Sean and Frank inhabit. They have been in trouble with the law, but that doesn’t seem to be an uncommon situation in their economically depressed neighborhood. Frank lives in their childhood home and cares for their father (Philip James Russell), who is suffering from dementia and physical disability. Sean, the more wayward and hot-headed of the brothers, marries Marie (Sarah Hayden), a pretty, red-haired colleen, and fathers a couple of children with her. He really seems to care about his kids, but he abuses Marie physically and psychologically.

At long last, the brothers are issued guns and ordered to rob a post office to help fund the cause. Sean slugs the clerk behind the counter, but as luck would have it, a police car stops by during the robbery. Sean looks for a way to escape, using the clerk as hostage to facilitate their getaway, but Frank obeys the orders of his IRA superior on the scene and surrenders. Their two-year prison terms legitimate them with their IRA comrades, that is, until Frank strikes up a romance with a Belfast woman (Sophia Adli) who tends bar at his local.

When governments refuse to heed the wishes of the oppressed and disenfranchised, terrorism seems inevitable, but such freedom fighting provides cover for psychopaths, sociopaths, and opportunistic criminals who have no real understanding of or interest in military discipline. Sean and Frank are assigned to shoot out the knee of one of their more feckless comrades when he is caught selling a small quantity of drugs—ludicrously they ask him if he wants to take his pants down so the bullet won’t pierce them—but then Declan falls in league with a notorious drug dealer who has the money to pay an American businessman who has arms to smuggle into the country. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as the saying goes, but this type of behavior only confirms that principles and loyalties are conveniences, not convictions to such people.

Sean’s vision of the struggle is as a game of Mortal Kombat, an outlet for his aggression that becomes intoxicating and poisonous to his marriage. Frank seems like a true believer, but experience hardens him and the long arm of the Provos reaches far into his personal life and destroys any chance that he will have anything other than the movement to call home. One need only recall the Real IRA, whose members refused to accept the ceasefire in 1998 with the coming of the Good Friday Agreement. The armistice left them at loose ends, with their criminal activities too lucrative to abandon.

Hanlon’s ingenuity in finding the perfect locations and even scrounging up a tank from a former member of the military who instructed him and his cast on how checkpoint operations were conducted lend much to the film’s realism. The script has a very lived-in feeling, with no holds barred. When Marie tells Sean that she hates him, the venom practically spews from the screen. Casting the blond-haired Redmond and the dark-haired Malone as the mismatched brothers was a bit Woodward and Bernstein, but those actors and the rest of the cast are excellent at helping us experience the ordinariness of life in the shadows. The script is well rendered, and the surprise ending puts a point on the unsavory nature of injury and retribution.

Standard