I’ve always
thought it’s a little disingenuous when today’s critics say that they can’t
imagine why Michael Powell’s 1960 film Peeping Tom caused such an uproar when it was first released. Granted, the critical
reaction was excessive (Powell’s career was basically destroyed by it) but it’s
anything but incomprehensible. In the first place, this was easily the most
explicit film (in terms of both sex and violence) to have received mainstream
distribution in Great Britain up to that point, and this aspect of the film is
intensified by the fact that it shows its audience a glimpse of the seamy
underbelly of London that exists cheek by jowl with the ordinary city (the
studio where pornographic photos are taken is both right above and supported by
the local newsagent’s shop, after all). But then there are all the other
aspects of the film that make it both so powerful and so difficult to forget.
For example, Powell goes out of his way to make his protagonist, Mark Lewis, a
sympathetic figure, despite his horrific crimes. He has clearly been
traumatized and victimized by his sadistic scientist father, and the film
reminds us of this fact repeatedly (rather than just mentioning it quickly as a
backstory), right up until the film’s closing words. In this respect, casting
Carl Boehm as Lewis, although he wasn’t Powell’s first choice, turned out to be
a brilliant decision. Not only does Boehm give an amazing performance, but his
accent subtly sets him apart from the other characters, heightening our
impression of how isolated this character is from everyone else around him. And
then there’s the aspect of the film that personally I find most challenging,
interesting, and (not incidentally) still relevant, namely, all the ways in
which the film makes the viewer self-conscious about the act of viewing. In
other words, what we unavoidably share with Mark Lewis is the compulsive desire
to watch, a voyeuristic desire to be entertained by the pain and suffering of
others. Hitchcock touches on this same theme in his portrayal of Norman Bates
in Psycho (also released in 1960) of
course, but Powell’s exploration of this subject is infinitely more complex and
daring. It’s this aspect of Peeping Tom
that contemporaneous reviewers could not forgive Powell for; no one who watches
this film, even today, can remain untouched by the experience of being placed
firmly, even relentlessly, in Mark’s position. But we can still learn as much
from this experience today as the film’s original viewers over 50 years ago.
Every day I read fifty pages of fiction, fifty pages of non-fiction, and I watch a movie. And then I tell you what I think of it all.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Saturday, January 10, 2015
The Time Machine (1960)
To mark the
passing of one of my favorite actors, Rod Taylor, on January 7th, I
went back and watched one of my favorite films when I was a kid, The Time Machine (dir. George Pal, 1960). When I watched it for the first time many years ago,
three scenes in particular seized my imagination. The first comes at the
beginning of the film, when George’s friends are waiting for him to show up for
dinner at his house and then the door bursts open and in he staggers, wounded
and exhausted. Watching that scene again now, I think what appealed to me was
the collision of two worlds and almost of two different film genres: the
adventure film and the domestic Victorian drama. The second scene was when we
first see the Morlocks. It’s easy for me to make fun of them now, especially
bearing in mind that they resemble aggressive Smurfs who have let themselves
go, but they scared the crap out of me when I was a kid, and perhaps my mocking
them now is a way of diasvowing any residual discomfort I feel when I see them!
The third and final scene comes right at the end of the film when Filby breaks
down the door and we realize that George has dragged the time machine back to
its original position and gone back to the future. Again, speaking as a cynical
adult, it’s easy to mock the sentimentality of the ending, but when I was a kid
I loved the romanticism of going back to help the Eloi build their civilization
and I still love speculating about what three books George took back to help
them on their way. In closing, I have to note how much I hate the 2002 film
version of The Time Machine (directed,
funnily enough, by Wells’ great-grandson). The special effects in the 1960
version are awful but the film is redeemed by excellent acting, even in the minor
roles, such as the actors who play George’s friends. Exactly the opposite is
true of the 2002 version: no amount of nifty special effects can compensate for
the awful acting—Jeremy Irons as the ‘uber-Morlock’ is particularly cringeworthy.
Friday, January 9, 2015
Joseph Wambaugh, The Onion Field (1973/2007)
Reading Joseph
Wambaugh’s 1973 book The Onion Field in the era of Ferguson and Black Lives Matter is a strange experience, for
reasons I’ll explain in a moment. First off, though, let’s situate this book
within the context of the true crime genre. Like any book published after the
groundbreaking In Cold Blood,
Wambaugh’s book inevitably shows signs of Truman Capote’s influence, especially
in the opening section, where Wambaugh begins by exploring the background of
each of the book’s main characters while cross-cutting between the detectives
and the robbers until the moment of their fateful and deadly meeting. The
differences between Wambaugh and Capote, however, are what make The Onion Field such a significant book.
Even though In Cold Blood devotes a
lot of attention to the police, it is clear that the murderers are not only
Capote’s main protagonists but also the figures with whom he identifies most
closely. This is not the case with Wambaugh. As a veteran of the LAPD,
Wambaugh’s sympathies are squarely with the police and this book marks an
important shift in true crime’s tendency to portray members of law enforcement
as the main protagonists, and even as victims (this is a tendency that will
developed even further by Ann Rule). Let me be quite clear here: I am not
claiming that Wambaugh misinterprets the facts of the case by turning the
police into victims; after all, one of the detectives is murdered and the
survivor has to endure horrific PTSD for years. My point is that this focus
represents a significant development in the genre, especially as Wambaugh’s
book was originally published a few years after the turbulent 1960’s, when the
police were often seen as victimizers rather than as victims. What makes The Onion Field even more significant
and more nuanced than some might expect, however, is that Wambaugh’s
sympathetic portrayal of humanized and victimized police officers is
accompanied by a stinging critique of the insensitivity, even cruelty, of the
LAPD as an institution. In other words, both criminals and the LAPD brass are
victimizers according to Wambaugh, albeit of different kinds and degrees. This
is where, strangely enough, the context of Ferguson and Black Lives Matter
comes into play. For obvious reasons (and despite the recent murder of police
officers in New York City), many would have difficulty in thinking of the
police as victims today. Instead, they are more often seen as aggressors. This
is why it’s so interesting that part of the LAPD’s response to the events
depicted in the book was to change police policy so that officers would never
surrender their weapons but instead aggressively engage criminals whenever
necessary. As an excerpt from Patrol Bureau Memorandum Number 11 (written by
Inspector John Powers just five days after the detective’s murder) puts it: “Just
as the armed forces protect the nation from external enemies, local police
departments protect their communities from internal criminals every bit as
vicious as our enemies from without. The police are engaged in a hot war. There
are no truces, and there is no hope of an armistice. The enemy abides by no
rules of civilized warfare” (quoted on pages 236-237 of the Kindle edition of The Onion Field). It is impossible to
read those words today and not be reminded of the ongoing debates about the
militarization of the American police. Contemporary events, in other words,
have given The Onion Field a new but
perhaps not entirely unexpected significance.
Thursday, January 8, 2015
Fuminori Nakamura, 'Last Winter, We Parted' (2013)
Let me begin
with an admittedly bizarre comparison: the crime novels of Fuminori Nakamura
are the Goldilocks and the Three Bears of the genre. The Thief (2009, Trans. 2012) is written in a beautifully lean
style that I personally love but that for many readers will leave too much
undeveloped and too many questions unanswered. Evil and the Mask (2010, Trans. 2013), by contrast, I find to be
badly overwritten almost to the point of feeling bloated; it’s filled with
characters pontificating about their nihilistic philosophy of the world and the
dead weight of this speechifying drags the book down. But Last Winter, We Parted (2013, Trans. 2014) is just right. It’s the perfect balance of the leanness of
the first novel and the complexity of the second. It manages to be the most
complex as well as the most compelling of the three. It begins by seeming to
channel The Silence of the Lambs: a
writer is visiting a notorious murderer in prison because he is writing a book
about him. The murderer refuses to cooperate until the journalist reveals some
things about his own life. After this relatively straightforward and even
familiar beginning, the plot rapidly grows increasingly complex. By the time we
reach the end of the novel we can be forgiven for not being completely sure about
who did what to whom and why. In most crime novels, these would be unforgivable
omissions, but Nakamura gets away with it partly because one of his themes is
the universality of guilt and partly because he explores so many other
interesting issues along the way: the gap between imitation and reality, the
representational power of photography (this would be a fascinating novel to
read alongside a viewing of Michael Powell’s notorious 1960 film Peeping Tom),
the nature of human desire, and the relation between crime and revenge, just to
name a few. Add to this a fascinating formal construction that multiplies
narrative voices by reproducing various pieces of evidence under the heading of
‘Archives,’ and Last Winter becomes
one of the most challenging crime novels you’ll read in a long time. One final
note: the other thing one notices when looking at Nakamura’s crime novels in a
group is that the lag time between their original publication in Japanese and
their translation into English is getting shorter. This is evidence not only of
Nakamura’s increasingly impressive reputation, but also of the growing
popularity of international crime fiction in general. Both are good news for
fans of the genre.
Monday, January 5, 2015
Martín Solares, The Black Minutes (2006)
In a 2012 interview,
Paco Ignacio Taibo II, the dean of Mexican crime fiction, explains why he has
not written a novel featuring his famous private eye, Hector Belascoarán Shayne,
since the current drug war began in Mexico: "The narco war has changed
everything in relations between society, crime, insecurity, law and order…These
deep changes in society make you as a writer to rethink the whole thing."
This is an interesting comment to keep in mind when trying to make sense of
Martín Solares’ complex and fascinating 2006 novel, The
Black Minutes, which in some ways can be read as charting a path for
the Mexican crime novel in the era of the narco cartel. The first thing to note
in this regard is that there is no equivalent to a private eye figure in
Solares’ work; instead, the closest we come to having a protagonist is a police
officer who is less corrupt than his colleagues (which is not saying much).
Even with someone as gifted as Taibo, the effectiveness of a principled individual
like Shayne is one of the more speculative, fanciful, some would say
unrealistic, aspects of his work, and Solares seems to have abandoned this
aspect of the genre all together. Instead, Solares focuses on the multiple and
contradictory roles that crime plays in the neoliberal state: at once the focus
of moral panics that apparently drive both policy and action, it is
simultaneously a way for local, state, and national functionaries to enrich
themselves and their associates. Given this context, it should come as no
surprise that although the murders that focus The Black Minutes are technically solved, justice is nowhere to be
found. One of Taibo’s Shayne novels is titled No Happy Ending, and this title would be perfectly appropriate for
Solares’ novel, too. But in another sense, concentrating on the incomplete
resolution of this novel severely undersells its richness. Combining familiar noir elements with dashes of magical
realism, frequent references to a wide range of literary texts, and even a
cameo appearance by Alfred Hitchcock, this is not an easy novel to classify.
And, of course, both it and crime fiction as a whole are all the better for
this fact.
Sunday, January 4, 2015
The House of the Devil (2009)
Ti West is a
very dependable and knowledgeable maker of horror films and The House of the Devil (2009) suggests why. If the
opening credits themselves were not enough of a clue, the early appearance of famous
horror actress Dee Wallace indicates that House
is something of an homage to the classic era of 1970s/1980s slasher and haunted
house movies. It contains a very effective combination of enough of the
formulaic elements of the genre (heightened by the film’s early 80s setting) to
satisfy the most discerning horror buff along with enough variations to ring
the changes. For example, there’s a lovely moment when Samantha, House’s ‘final girl,’ opens the door to
the basement and almost snorts in derision at the thought that she would go
down there (she does not hesitate, however, to explore the rest of the house!).
But perhaps the most distinctive feature of West’s work (we can also see it in The Innkeepers and The Sacrament) is that he’s a master of the ‘slow burn’ horror
film: the pacing of the film, its editing, and the development of the plot are
all developed deliberately and slowly, so much so that many viewers might find
themselves bored. Those who stick around, though, will find The House of the Devil one of the most
loving and effective reworkings of (one of) horror’s golden age(s) in recent
years.
The Man Who Loved His Wife (1966/2013)
Now that
Patricia Highsmith has at last received the recognition she always deserved, it
occurs to me that the next female thriller writer whose greatness needs to be
acknowledged is Vera Caspary. Thanks to the Feminist Press’ indispensable Femmes Fatales series, that process is
well underway. After having brought both Laura
and Bedelia back into print, in 2013
they published Caspary’s lesser-known 1966 novel, The Man Who Loved His Wife (1966) and it’s an absolute gem. The
title is both deeply ironic and neutrally descriptive. Fletcher Strode is
married to the beautiful Elaine, who is nineteen years younger than him. At
first blissfully happy together, after Fletcher has a laryngectomy and loses
his voice, his sense of masculinity becomes so compromised psychologically that
his relationship with Elaine deteriorates and he becomes morbidly suspicious of
her. He starts to keep a diary detailing his suspicions and inevitably, when he
dies under mysterious circumstances, that diary becomes the focus of the police’s
own suspicions about Elaine. Caspary shows a wonderful ability to understand
Fletcher’s psychological torment so that he is both pitiful and aggravating to
the reader. Courageously, after investing so much time and attention in her
lead character, Caspary kills him off in order to devote the final part of the
book to her other characters. This allows us to better understand Elaine’s
situation (Caspary is scrupulous about examining this relationship from both
their perspectives) and to sharpen our dislike of Fletcher’s despicable
daughter and son-in-law, who both have their own reasons for wanting to see
Elaine convicted of murder, and who may even be guilty of the crime themselves.
The fact that so much is left unresolved at the novel’s conclusion shows that
Caspary’s interest is not in guilt and innocence as defined by the legal
process by rather in the everyday cruelties ordinary people can inflict on each
other out of a tangled combination of all-too-understandable motives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)