Right after
this, I switched over to PBS . . . .
I
said it last year. And the year before that. And the year before that.
And I
will say it again:
I am
not watching the Oscars.
And you
can’t make me.
Why
should I—or anyone outside the movie business—waste three-plus hours of earthly
existence watching a parade of over-dressed, half-talented, face-lifted,
bulked-up, non-entities squeal tears over some gold-plated hat stand while
making lame in-jokes about people we’ll all forget the next day as we suffer through songs that fornicating cats
wouldn’t howl to.
No. I
am not watching the Oscars.
Instead,
on Sunday night, I am going to watch a movie. AND a TV show!
Further,
I’m going to suggest—no, urge—no, DEMAND—that, instead of watching the Oscars,
you at least consider watching one or more of the following movies (plus one TV
show), whether you pipe it in over your computer, or trundle over to your local
DVD rental store. (I have two in my neighborhood.)
Real
movies that will feed you body, mind, and soul in ways that your fruitless wait
for Angelina Jolie’s boobs to pop from her dress will not.
Even
better, none of the four movies (and one television show) discussed below ever won
Oscars. They may have been tossed a nomination or two—like a bone thrown to
a spirited, three-legged dog—but these films were either completely ignored or went
home empty handed, forgotten by the clique of cool popular kids (who, by the
way, all grew up to be pimple-faced, sad-sack
used car salesmen—oh, is my bitterness showing? Sorry!).
Snark
aside, I’m not a bit mad none of the movies won Oscars, and don’t you be either.
They all deserved better fates and met them—to be remembered as good, even
great, movies, loved and admired years after most Oscar winners have been
forgotten. (Come on. When was the last time you actually even considered watching
Oliver? Really!)
The
Oscars say nothing about whether a movie is actually good or great. It’s Hollywood’s
party: If they want to award Silent Hill:
Revelation 3D Best Picture of 2013, I say go for it, Tinseltown! I’ll back you
all the way! To the bitter end!
When I
first saw Orson Welles’s Citizen Kane on a Green
Bay TV station one Sunday afternoon in 1971, I mistook it for an
extraordinarily atmospheric horror film (which in a way it is).
Then,
as I was transfixed, I realized just how bad those network TV series I had been
watching until then were. I didn’t watch another TV series for over 20 years.
Citizen Kane remains the best movie I’ve
ever seen and I’ll say that ‘til I die.
This thinly
veiled biopic of media mogul William Randolph Hearst (the Rupert Murdoch of his
day) is a feast for the senses, from your eyes to your toes, and your mind and
soul, too. Full of dash, invention, and energy, it has not aged a day, not in
its technique, not in its writing, performances and not in its bright dancing spirit.
Kane makes all those ten-best-ever
lists for the simplest of reasons: It belongs there. It earned it. The Sight and Sound ten-best-ever list may
have erred in dropping it to second place behind Hitchcock’s Vertigo, but it still embraces me completely
every time I see it.
The Black Book (Reign of Terror), from 1949, makes history into a perfect subject for a film noir. Set during
the French Revolution (the one with powder-wigged heads rolling off guillotines),
it’s a gory, exciting, eye-popping delight.
Robert
Cummings plays D’Aubigny, a French patriot who dives into a whirlpool of
conspiracy and bloody murder concerning a black book. The black book is full of
names, names of those slated to be sentenced to the guillotine by fiendish dictator
Maximillian (“Don’t Call Me Max!”) Robespierre (brought vivid raging life by Richard
Basehart). This key to Robespierre’s power disappears and it must be found
before it’s too late!
Save a
few plot stumbles, The Black Book is a
feast all the way, one of the trippiest, the most beautifully shot noir of its
era, as visually dazzling as Kane.
Photographed by John Alton and directed by Anthony Mann on a $40,000 budget—peanuts--it
shows what can be accomplished by great talents working from small purses.
Cummings
seems a little miscast, but he’s more than compensated for by the performances
of Basehart, Norman Lloyd, brutish Charles McGraw, and best of all, little-seen
Broadway actor Arnold Moss as the smooth-tongued devil Joseph Fouché, the chameleonic
head of Robespierre’s secret police and, eventually, the Minister of Police for
Napoleon.
Leonard
Maltin calls it right: in Reign of Terror
every shot is a painting, stark compositions of light and shadow through which
weave a thrilling story leading to a wild and wonderful movie. Here, the blood
runs black like the shadows of that terrible event.
“I don’t want
the monster to die!” a friend said.
Most
critics point to 1935’s The Bride of
Frankenstein as the best of the James Whale/Boris Karloff trilogy, but my
heart goes to the first one, released in 1931. In fact, Frankenstein may well be the best film from those early years when
Hollywood was clumsily coming to grip with the emergence of sound, for one of
the strongest impressions left by the film is a lonely, scary quiet.
With
Whale at the helm and Karloff behind the makeup, Frankenstein is stark, bleak, and touching. Its haunting images reflect
the humor, horror, and sadness at its heart and seem to be an influence on
films as diverse as The Seventh Seal and,
most obviously, The Spirit of the Beehive.
The
absence of a music score, I believe, is a strength, giving its fantastic story
an eerie, somber verisimilitude.
Especially
memorable are the opening sequences in the cemetery as Henry Frankenstein
(Colin Clive, also excellent) and Fritz (indelible Dwight Frye) hunt for body
parts and the brain that will bring Henry’s vain dream to dreadful fruition. The
creation sequence is classic and the monster’s first encounter with the sun is
one the most tender, beautiful moments in all film. The final confrontation
between Henry and his Monster at the top of the windmill still brings tears.
“I
don’t want the monster to die!” a friend cried when I showed it to her for the
first time.
As for
Boris Karloff, it is impossible to praise his performance too much. That it has
survived decades of parody and has overwhelmed all other comers, is the highest
compliment I can pay.
Whatever
you think you know about James Whale’s ground-breaking horror classic, when you
see it you’ll realize that you know very little. Frankenstein is a film that needs no monument, no statues, but
itself.
You’ll
have noticed that this list, so far, as shown a distinct prejudice toward black
and white movies made before most of you were born.
Yes, I
am being thoughtless and insensitive to my younger readers. To make it up to
you, I will compromise and actually recommend a movie shot in color from just a
few years ago.
So it
is, I think you should watch Into Great
Silence, a transcendent two-and-half hour documentary about the lives of Carthusian
monks in their faraway home high in the Swiss Alps.
It’s a
movie about people who choose to live quiet lives far apart from the clangorous
grime and jittery bustle of the modern world, in the faith that they are
drawing closer to something larger.
The
most thrill-packed sequence comes when the monks are taken on their annual
afternoon ski-shoe trip on a small hill a short drive away. The men seems so
happy with this small pleasure, it left me smiling for days.
It’s
said that the Divine is best encountered in stillness. This lovely movie proves
it. It also shows how critics who refer to Die
Hard movies as “meditations on masculinity” or whatnot haven’t the
slightest idea what “meditation” means. This movie does.
Now,
for that TV show (because, these days, TV is where the Art can really be found).
Girls, the funky, controversial HBO cable
series, may not be the absolute best of this Golden Age of TV we’re in right
now, but it’s on at the same time as the Oscar telecast, so, when that moment
finally dawns on you—and it will, trust me--that oh-my-God, you really are bored . . .
(Note: In
case you are concerned, I watch Girls under
the strictest supervision, namely my wife’s, who stands ready to rip the remote
from my hand the second I start breathing hard; say, when I start rewinding to
the sex scenes “so I can see how good the acting is.”)
Honestly,
this really is a very good show: sharp, witty, and poignant; well-directed, and
very well acted by its entire cast, including show creator Lena Dunham, who
plays dilettante writer Hannah. (Am I the only one in the world to cop to the
idea that Hannah is no writer at all? Discuss!)
Though this
comedy of rude manners focuses on a narrow slice of the world—wannabe
twenty-something artists in a Brooklyn neighborhood—it resonates, even with a
pair of 50-somethings a continent away. It even creates suspense: after all,
what are these foolish people going to do with their lives? Even this grayhair
recognizes the overwhelming confusion and terror experienced by many characters
from his twenties. (Sorry, high-minded do-gooders: their foolishness is what
makes it a comedy.)
Girls is not as innovative as some
critics think—its roots in Seinfeld, Frasier, and, of course, Sex in the City, show everywhere. (The second Hannah finds her Ricky Ricardo, those
roots will really show.)
Girls is one more sign that feature
movies have lost their power, their edge, and their innovation. Most all the
artistry has moved to television.
What
other excuse do you need for not watching the Oscars?
(re-edited 3/5/13)
Copyright 2012 by Thomas Burchfield
Copyright 2012 by Thomas Burchfield