Rebecca (1940)

2008 #10
Alfred Hitchcock | 125 mins | download | PG

This review could be seen to contain some spoilers.

RebeccaI must confess that I don’t think I’ve come to Rebecca under the best circumstances for judging it as a film in its own right. As with last week’s Great Expectations, Rebecca is on my current University module, which means I arrive at it having just read both Daphne du Maurier’s original novel and, the afternoon before viewing, a detailed and very interesting account of the film’s genesis and production from Hitchcock and Selznick: The Rich and Strange Collaboration of Alfred Hitchcock and David O. Selznick in Hollywood (nothing like a snappy title, eh?) by Leonard J. Leff. Such reading conspires to lead me into direct comparisons with the novel (which, as with most adaptations, are ultimately unfavourable due to things having to be cut), as well as a preoccupation with what was going on during production.

But, trying to put such distracting things aside, Rebecca has a great many good points. The cast, for one thing, are perfect. There were serious doubts about Joan Fontaine as the lead, but she is spot-on as the shy, almost childish, Mrs de Winter. Laurence Olivier is equally effective as Maxim, and Judith Anderson’s Mrs Danvers is suitably scary, if significantly younger than I imagined. The production’s technical aspects are also highly admirable: while the early Monte Carlo scenes may be nothing especially exciting, the plot whizzes past and we soon find ourselves at the infamous Manderley, all large halls, fog-filled grounds, dramatic lighting and big camera moves. Especially of note is Maxim’s confession — a long chunk of dialogue in the novel, it would have been all too easy to just use a flashback, but Hitchcock instead employs a camera move across the empty room to suggest the narrated action.

Further comparisons with the novel are inevitable, of course. The film skips nothing of importance, condensing events effectively so that the plot moves at a decent pace. Some events, such as the fancy dress ball and following ship wreck, are even made more dramatic by combining them. Some choices are thoroughly bizarre though: the novel is well known for its first person narrative, something the film attempts to retain by featuring Mrs de Winter in every scene… until the end when, in a deviation from the novel, she remains at Manderley while we follow Maxim and co. to London for some final twists. This does lead to a dramatic reunion upon Maxim’s return to Manderley, but I’m not convinced such a brief moment was worth the modifications.

As expected, viewing in such close proximity to the novel also forces comparisons that aren’t especially warranted — for example, the film loses much of the characterisation of Mrs de Winter by unsurprisingly finding no way to adapt her frequent flights of fancy and imagination. But then, one can always read the novel for those things (and I’d recommend it — get past the famous but dull opening and it often rattles along), and so, judged purely on its own merits, there is a considerable amount to recommend in Rebecca.

5 out of 5

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1939)

2008 #9
Sidney Lanfield | 77 mins | DVD | PG

The Hound of the BaskervillesArguably the definitive screen interpretation of Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson, played by Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce, appear for the very first time here, in what would become the first in a series of 14 pictures starring the pair. (Incidentally, this will be the first in an irregular set of reviews of that series. I have the rather lovely Optimum box set, you see, and so shall slowly work my way through it. Though as I’ve already owned it for several years and only just started watching it (as with so many DVDs), I have no idea how long it will be before I finish.)

I’ll start by laying my cards on the table: The Hound of the Baskervilles is a vastly overrated Holmes tale, and one that has been unduly adapted at least 15 other times (that from a quick search of IMDb). As far as I can tell its popularity is primarily due to the circumstances around its original publication (it was the first Holmes story in nearly a decade, following his death in The Final Problem). Holmes is absent for much of the story, which plods along fairly uneventfully (or, at least, inconsequentially) until a slightly dubious climax involving a centuries-old portrait. Naturally, all of these flaws carry over into any faithful adaptation, and this certainly is one.

One of the novel’s strong points is its occasional Gothic styling, and this is something the film version does very well. Dartmoor looks fantastic, like something Tim Burton would have created were he working in the ’30s. It’s clearly a set, but it’s dramatic and moody and completely effective. After the dull and poorly-designed interior scenes in London, it’s fantastic when the film finally moves down into Devon and things… well, don’t exactly get going, but at least there’s something to look at! As with the novel the plot meanders by, diverted by an escaped convict and an entirely pointless (in this version at least) seance, until that painting-based resolution. All is not lost, however, as a particularly vicious-seeming attack by the hound livens things up considerably.

Rathbone is underused as Holmes, which is a shame as he immediately makes the part his own. Bruce isn’t as bungling and comedic as he would later become, though the signs are already beginning to show. And the infamous final line — “Oh Watson, the needle!” — is actually a huge anticlimax if you haven’t seen it before, an entirely pointless, meaningless and misplaced addition.

I feel like I’ve come down a little harshly on Hound of the Baskervilles, mainly thanks to a general unfavourable opinion of the source material. There are many better Holmes stories, often ignored thanks to the fame of this particular one. The following 13 films may be even less faithful adaptations than this, but I’m looking forward to their fun and frivolity, which will hopefully top Baskervilles. The moor really is fantastic though.

3 out of 5

Dark City (1998)

2008 #2
Alex Proyas | 97 mins | DVD | 15 / R

Reposted today in memory of the great Roger Ebert, this was a film he championed and, as you’ll soon see, I adored.

Dark CityA little while ago I wrote about not falling in love with new films any more. Well, put bluntly, here’s one.

Dark City is probably the most underrated film I’ve ever seen. It is, to my mind, absolutely brilliant. It’s an intelligent and engaging neo-noir thriller with wonderful sci-fi twists. The imagery is fantastic — the film is beautifully designed and shot in a wonderfully stylised and highly effective manner. The sets and effects are breathtaking — not showy like so many blockbusters, but utterly effective and impressive. The script and story are complex (though never too much) and interesting, allowing you to piece together the mystery of just what is going on. To my mind, it’s much more effective than the whole “what is the real world” thing of The Matrix.

Incidentally, on that subject, if you’ve seen all of that particular trilogy you may find some bits of Dark City eerily familiar — to say which would spoil things, but many are so obvious you don’t have to be a film buff to spot them. Either both universes are based on similar philosophical ideas, or the Wachowskis just ripped this off (in case you hadn’t noticed, it predates The Matrix by a year, and many of the most recognisable elements are in the sequels anyway). Considering there hasn’t been a lawsuit (to my knowledge), I’ll guess it’s the former. But Dark City does it all better: there are no rambling, incomprehensible speeches and it doesn’t batter you around the head with philosophical claptrap when all you want is the story to move forward.

The film’s single major flaw is the studio-imposed opening narration, which gives away far too many plot twists — honest to God, if you ever watch this, mute it during the New Line logo and don’t turn the sound back on til the first close-up of Kiefer Sutherland’s fob watch. If you don’t, you’ll find most of the mystery of the plot ruined, as this narration shockingly gives away most of the answers. (There are rumours of a director’s cut, 15 minutes longer and without that narration, slated for release back in 2006. Maybe this year it’ll turn up as a “10th Anniversary Edition”.)

I could witter on for pages about how much I’ve fallen for Dark City. It’s a superb movie, massively underrated, that I hope I haven’t over-hyped for any reader who wants to seek it out. But please, if you do, heed my warning about muting the opening narration — it really is worth it.

5 out of 5

Dark City placed 3rd on my list of The Ten Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2008, which can be read in full here.

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

2007 #127
Paul Greengrass | 110 mins | DVD | 12 / PG-13

The Bourne UltimatumThis final instalment in the action-thriller trilogy was recently announced as Empire magazine’s film of the year, following wide praise on release that dubbed it the best action movie in a long time. Unfortunately, I fear it may’ve become a victim of its own hype.

It’s certainly a good film for many reasons: its appropriately unrelenting momentum, even in dialogue scenes; several stunning action sequences; a mostly decent plot. But it’s also flawed: despite the globe-hopping, complex plot, it feels somehow slight; several villains and plot devices seem tacked on to create an over-arching plan for the trilogy, when Bourne had really dealt with all these matters in the first two.

Ultimately, it simply didn’t feel as entertaining as the first two instalments, though I had an odd sense that I should be liking it more. Perhaps future re-viewings will aid my appreciation.

4 out of 5

Manhattan Murder Mystery (1993)

2007 #124
Woody Allen | 103 mins | DVD | PG / PG

Manhattan Murder MysteryWoody Allen mixes a bit of the thriller into his usual relationship-based comedy/drama style, with effective results. The combination produces an engaging thriller with the usual character-focused drama woven around it, and a decent dash of comedy too. The first half hour or so is a tad slow, but the pace picks up as the story rattles into the second half.

Murder Mystery has been criticised as lightweight — the comedy stops the thriller being too serious, the thriller stops the drama being the focus, and they both prevent the comedy from overpowering — but Allen has dealt with these elements in isolation elsewhere, so it’s refreshing to see him do more than merely repeat himself.

This is an underrated gem in Allen’s relatively vast body of work.

4 out of 5

Wild at Heart (1990)

2007 #116
David Lynch | 120 mins | DVD | 18 / R

Wild at HeartMy experience of David Lynch’s work has so far been limited to Dune, the first short season of Twin Peaks, and Mulholland Drive. Admittedly, a list including the latter two isn’t that bad, but it fails to encompass any of the acclaimed films that made his name.

Wild at Heart doesn’t come much closer: a quick look at IMDb reveals that it only beats Dune and the Twin Peaks movie in user ratings. I think I can see why: it’s filled with mannered performances that can seem cheaper than those in daytime soaps (I presume this is deliberate, but some people just won’t get, or like, it); characters and plot threads that meander off and seem pointless, while others don’t come to anything; plus it lacks the opaqueness that many seem to hold as the key worthy feature of Lynch’s work.

In spite of its many faults I quite liked a lot of it, so my rating falls on the generous side. I still have no idea why there were so many Wizard of Oz references though.

4 out of 5

Bringing Out the Dead (1999)

2007 #114
Martin Scorsese | 116 mins | DVD | 18 / R

Bringing Out the DeadIt’s hard to know what to make of this, because by the end it all seems a little pointless. The storyline, which follows Nicolas Cage’s paramedic across three nights in New York, is a mixture of short episodic medical incidents with longer threads that continue throughout. These connect and fall apart, feeling as episodic as the rest, and most of them don’t really lead anywhere.

Perhaps the best description is that it’s a collection of subplots in search of proper story. There are some decent scenes and good shots, but the film doesn’t seem to have anything to say, and it doesn’t end so much as simply fade to black when it runs out of things to do.

3 out of 5

The Naked City (1948)

2007 #112
Jules Dassin | 92 mins | DVD | PG

The Naked CityPolice procedural film noir, shot entirely on location in New York (unusual at the time).

The story is quite straightforward — girl is murdered, police investigate — but it exists mainly as a structure on which to hang perspectives of the city, its criminals and its law enforcement (though in an infinitely less pretentious way than that sounds). The odd, character-less voice-over narration is more puzzling than any mystery in the plot.

The acting is sometimes stilted and some of the direction is actually a little flat, but there are enough enjoyable elements to cover for it — particularly the chance to see so much footage of a real city at this time.

4 out of 5

Transporter 2 (2005)

2007 #103
Louis Leterrier | 84 mins | DVD | 15 / PG-13

Transporter 2Sequel to 2002’s low-key, disposable-but-fun actioner.

The plot is almost senseless and thoroughly familiar from the likes of Man on Fire or M:i-2, but that doesn’t matter: the action’s the focus, and on that promise it mostly delivers. In spite of the odd bit of CG-aided silliness, or the lack of anything as inspired as the first film’s oil fight, the fights are still a lot of fun; one involving a fire hose is especially well executed. There’s also a good number of amusing moments (both intentional and not, it must be said).

It may not quite reach the first movie’s simple highs, but there’s still enough to like. More films in the series wouldn’t go amiss.

3 out of 5

Almost inevitably, Transporter 3 is on its way in 2008. Personally, I’ll wait for it on DVD, probably in a sale — but I’m somewhat looking forward to that day coming around.

The Black Dahlia (2006)

2007 #94
Brian De Palma | 116 mins | DVD | 15 / R

The Black DahliaNoir-wannabe, adapted from the James Ellroy novel based on a real, unsolved case. That case is far from the focus here: from the start the apparently-central crime is anything but, meaning the biggest let-down is that events barely follow the eponymous story.

It’s one of many problems in a film that tries hard to be a proper noir but fails in almost every respect: performances (most of which wind up flat), corny dialogue, plot, pretty-but-vacant direction, and even voice-over narration. I haven’t read the novel, but apparently it’s a poor adaptation too. What you want is a ’40s-style thriller; what you get is a weak ’40s-set character drama.

2 out of 5