There’s no doubt Mr. Coppola like many other 70’s mavericks suffered to achieve the success and admiration in the 80’s. That said, there’s much to admire in the Coppola ouevre of this decade. In particular Rumble Fish, a difficult film for sure, cold, austere and considerably weirder than the literary treatment of The Outsiders, but astonishing and eye-poppingly brilliant nonethless.
Showing posts with label Francis Coppola. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Francis Coppola. Show all posts
Monday, 8 July 2013
Saturday, 1 January 2011
Apocalypse Now
Starring: Martin Sheen, Marlon Brando, Frederick Forrest, Dennis Hopper, Robert Duvall, Albert Hall Jr.
****
By Alan Bacchus
Gut, determination and a whole lot of ego from Francis Coppola was the engine which not just got Apocalypse Now made but made it great. Coming off the Godfather films, Francis Coppola was at the height of his creativity, the height of his influence and undoubtedly his confidence. When filmmakers find themselves in this type of position it's wonderful to see filmmakers push themselves creatively.
And he couldn't have set goals any higher than Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness. One of those legendary Hollywood properties deemed unfilmable. It's one of cinema's great page to screen translations, injecting the chaotic American involvement in the Vietnam into Conrad's material. The combination the machoness of John Milius's original script, the dense poetry of Michael Herr's voiceover and Coppola's hallucinogenic vision, it's a miraculous combination of the written word and the visual medium.
Coppola famously filmed a million and half feet of film, for months, often straying from the script and re-writing as he went along. Looking at both the Redux and the original theatrical versions, it's interesting to see the creative choices Coppola made in terms of narrative plotting. In the original version continuity is purposely eschewed in favour of a hallucinatory series of set pieces. The USO playmate show is just such a scene. It’s a lengthy sequence, which doesn’t serve the narrative but the absurd and strange nature of the war. In the Redux version, an additional scene with the bunnies meeting Willard is reinstated, but by removing this scene and never referencing the bunnies again, the scene is compartmentalized, complimenting progressive journey, or odyssey undertaken by Willard and his crew.
Same with the character of Kilgore as played by Robert Duvall, who disappears from the story after he says his famous line, 'Some day this war's gonna end'. It's a perfect line to close his character off with. But in the Redux version continuity is reinstated with a couple of additional scenes with Kilgore, showing his discombobulation after having surfboard stolen. It's an interesting scene to watch but takes the macho lustre off his character and for the worse smooths over the punchy editing of the narrative.
As a stand alone sequence the lengthy French plantation scene is terrific. It deserves to be in the Redux version, but admittedly is too long for the theatrical version, in particular it's placement at the end of the second act. It's a shame it found no place in the original version, it's one of the best scenes in the entire film.
The opening dialogue scene, after trippy helicopter ghost/hotel sequence, is still a classic. So perfectly written, performed and directed. I think my favourite part is the silent civilian character played by Jerry Zeismer, who we see reacting to the questioning with a stoic professionalism. His only line in the scene comes at the end, when he dramatic utters Milius’s best line, ‘terminate with extreme prejudice. How awesome is that.
Arguably the most incongruent aspect of the film is Coppola’s kooky electronic score, co-written by Francis and his father Carmine. When we first hear the music it comes after Zeismer's dramatic line, ‘terminate with extreme prejudice’ which sends Willard on his mnission. We then hear the drone of synthesizers which is always jarring to me. It feels out of place and arguably tempers the punch line of that scene. Yet as the film moves along and Coppola delves further into the psychology of war, the score successfully merges with the all other sights and sounds of the picture.
The Blu-Ray special edition, entitled ‘Full Disclosure” features both the theatrical and Redux cuts in addition to Hearts of Darkness and newly produced special feature interviews. The picture quality is stunning, the most eye popping is Vittorio Storaro’s colours which never looked so vibrant and bold. It's also presented in the original uncropped 2:35:1 aspect ratio for the first time.
Tuesday, 8 June 2010
The Conversation
Starring: Gene Hackman, John Cazale, Harrison Ford, Allen Garfield
****
by Alan Bacchus
There have many great San Francisco-set films, if Vertigo is the best, “The Conversation” makes a terrific companion - a paranoia film about a reserved and quiet surveillance man whose conscience is awakened when he finds out the couple he’s spying on may be targeted for murder. It’s a classic 70’s film from arguably the decade’s best director.
Harry Caul (Gene Hackman) is the nation’s top surveillance expert. The film opens on Harry and his team recording a conversation between a man and a woman in the middle of San Francisco’s famous Market Square using a series of long distance microphones. After reviewing the tapes Harry discovers what might be a plot to murder the couple. When Caul visits his employer he refuses to give up the tapes unless he meets his employer face-to-face. Instead he’s brushed off by his assistant, played by a young Harrison Ford. Harry’s conscience won’t allow him to release tapes, instead retreating to his lab to uncover the conspiracy himself.
Harry Caul is one cinema’s classic characters – a loner, with an acute talent, so acute in fact, his life has become a day-by-day intimate obsession with his job. He doesn’t get out much, and when he does it’s spent in the company of other wiretappers who seem bent on comparing dick sizes. A night on the town after a trade show turns into a game between Harry and his east coast competitor Bernie Moran (Allen Garfield) of one-upmanship to prove who’s the better wiretapper. I won’t ruin the payoff, but the scene ends with Harry being humiliated by Moran. Harry’s insecurities run deeper though. An incident from his days in NYC are often brought up which resulted the mob murder of some of the people he was tapping. This guilty conscience awakens with his latest case. The climax of the film contains a great reveal about the case, and the denouement (and specifically the last scene) is sad and somber ending which reveals the current state of Harry’s mind. It’s one of Gene Hackman’s best performances. Usually known for his tough guy roles, Hackman’s Caul is a soft spoken, shy introvert. Despite his towering stature he is meek and insecure.
“The Conversation” was made at a time just as Watergate hit, and so Coppola’s timing was impeccable. He captured the paranoia of big government and the secrets and lies that are covered up by the highest powers. Other films such as “All the President’s”, and “The Parallax View” would tread similar ground. Coppola’s influence was likely Michelangelo Antonioni’s “Blow Up” which tells the story of a photographer who thinks he discovered a murder in one of his photographs.
Sound designer Walter Murch was highly influential in much of Coppola’s work, including his George Lucas collaborations “THX 1138” and “American Graffiti”. The attention to the sound is remarkable and is as important as the cinematography. The film was shot by Bill Butler (Jaws) and may not stand out like Gordon Willis’ or Vittorio Storaro’s work with Coppola, but it’s justly unobtrusive and complements the quiet story.
What’s remarkable about the film is that Coppola shot it in between the two Godfathers. Has there been a greater quality of output from a director in such a short period of time? Please send me some examples if so. Coppola was at the peak of his talents. Watching the film again is a delight, but if you’re watching it for the first time, I’m insanely jealous.
Saturday, 27 September 2008
THE GODFATHER PART III
The Godfather Part III (1990) dir. Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Al Pacino, Andy Garcia, Talia Shire, Joe Mantagna, Sofia Coppola, Diane Keaton.
***1/2
Can we finally show some love to “The Godfather Part III?” Before the trend of reviving old franchises, Francis Coppola decided to make a third part to his legendary Godfather duo. It was 1990, 16 years after 1974’s “The Godfather Part II”. With the enormous pressure of meeting the expectations of the first two films, “Godfather Part III” was a disappointment to almost all fans. Even the seven Oscar nominations it received seemed like a ‘nice try’ pat on the back for Coppola.
Since 1990 “Part III” has been like the Scarlett Letter, or the runt of the family that people don’t recognize. Even I joined in the fray and refused to acknowledge “Part III” as part of the “Godfather” saga. Most of the criticism centred on Coppola’s casting of his daughter Sofia as Michael Corleone’s daughter. Time to debunk this, she’s not that bad – certainly not enough to ruin the film.
This zeitgeist of hate against the film has perpetuated itself much too far. It even made EW’s list of worst sequels of all time – landing in between “Revenge of the Nerds II” and “Legally Blonde: Red, White and Blue”. Come on! So 18 years after Part III, and with a new Blu-Ray edition to marvel at, it’s time to show the respect this film deserves.
Like the two previous films “Part III” opens with a party, this time celebrating a donation of the Corleone family to the Catholic Church. This is a different Michael Corleone than we last saw him. It’s 1979 and the family is mostly legitimate - the casinos have been sold off and the Lake Tahoe estate abandoned. Instead Michael has gone corporate. The party also serves as a reunion of sorts – Kay who left Michael years ago returns with a new husband; and a new face shows up, Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) the illegitimate son of Sonny. Like Sonny, Vincent’s a hothead and desires to work for Michael as his bodyguard to combat a growing feeling of dissention from Michael’s former mafia colleagues. After an assassination attempt Michael agrees to take on Vincent.
Vincent unfortunately falls in love with Michael’s daughter Mary (Sofia Coppola), which both men know makes Vincent vulnerable to his enemies and endangers Mary. As Vincent struggles with his choices, Michael finds himself in a complex web of corporate intrigue which involves an international corporate conglomerate Immobiliare, the Catholic Church and the Mafia. Michael’s forced to bring back those gangland instincts in order to free himself against the plots against his family.
Like the previous two films Coppola remarkably controls the tone of the film. It always starts with Gordon Willis’ cinematography. It’s slightly different colour palette, the sepia look is updated slightly with a more golden tone. It reflects greater wealth and esteem of the Corleone family in this modern age. The stakes and scope of the film is larger than previous films. The Catholic Church, the Pope, large corporate conglomerates show the new era of corruption. The ‘globalization’ of organized crime if you will.
Coppola is careful to continue his solid foundation of character as basis for the conflict. Central to this is Andy Garcia’s character. It’s a marvelous performance (which garnered him an Oscar nomination). When we first meet Vincent as a leather-jacket wearing street thug, he’s overacting like a gangster. It feels out of place, like out a Godfather parody. But of course, this is by design because this is Vincent’s desire – to be part of the Corleone family. After Michael’s son Anthony chooses a life of music over the ‘family business’, however legitimate, we can understand Michael’s attraction to Vincent’s unquestioned loyalty. Over the course of the film, watch how Vincent changes. Under the guidance of Michael his rough edges are smoothed over and he develops the confidence and coolness of a leader.
In the short term, Michael’s politicking and alliance with Vincent works – but he can only evade his past so long. The finale preceded by another wonderful montage assassination sequence, is both a surprise and deeply emotional climax to the full Godfather story. After the dramatic death, Coppola’s flashbacks to the two previous films satisfyingly link the three films and complete the second arc of Michael's character.
“Godfather Part III” was not a necessary addition to the story – neither was Part II though either. So what if Part III doesn’t have the ‘magic’ of the other two parts, it’s better than “The Phantom Menace”. Enjoy.
PS. And again, for the record, Sofia Coppola is not that bad. She’s certainly not great, but Coppola cuts around her performance to get what he needs from her minimal performance.
“The Godfather Part III” is available on DVD and Blu-Ray as part of the new Coppola Restoration edition of the series.
Other Relevant Postings:
THE GODFATHER
Thursday, 25 September 2008
THE GODFATHER
The Godfather (1972) dir. Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, James Caan, Talia Shire, Diane Keaton
****
What more analysis or praise do we need to shower “The Godfather” with? It’s the gold standard for cinema – a perfect film with more than enough layers to survive viewing after viewing after viewing. It never wears out.
The film opens with the now famous wedding scene – which is really four or five sequences in one scene. For the first 25 mins or so the audience is sequestered within the grounds of the Corleone family. Getting married is Connie and his husband Carlo. Connie's father is Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) the elderly Don who mumbles quietly to his minions, but exercises absolute power with absolute confidence. There’s the three sons, Sonny (James Caan) Vito’s broad-shouldered philandering eldest son, Fredo (John Cazale) the drunken n’er-do-well, Tom (Robert Duvall), the adopted brother and family lawyer, and Michael (Al Pacino), the unassuming war-hero returning home.
Who would think that by the end of the Parts I and II, Sonny would be betrayed and indirectly murdered by his brother-in-law, and that Michael would ostracize Tom out of the business of the family and then have own his flesh and blood brother Fredo murdered.
After the crucial wedding scene, we finally see the family in action outside the confines of their estate. It's a highly competitive world of gangsters - five families in New York, currently in a period of peace. But when a wildcard shows up in the name of Virgil Solozzo (Al Lettieri), Don Vito finds himself at odds and at a crossroads for the family.
This is where the contradictory morals of the genre are expertly navigated by Coppola, We know Don Vito is a ruthless negotiator and a killer - the horse's head showed us how the Don reacts to 'bad news' - but he has created his own personal set of morals to abide by. Similar to the western genre, the Corleone family is governed by the gangster 'code of honour' outside traditional authoritarian law. The crucial moment in the film is Vito's decision to maintain the intregrity of his family and not get involved with Solozzo's drug scheme - it's partly a political decision, partly a moral decision - and it ultimately causes the war which changes the direction of the movie and all the characters. When Don Vito is shot and left bedridden Michael steps up to exact revenge against Solozzo and take leadership for the family.
"The Godfather" is a timeless film because with each viewing I seem to catch more depth and layers in the characters. The scene when Michael convinces his brothers that he should be the one to kill Solozzo is the first overt expression of Michael's 'turn to the darkside'. But with this recent umpteenth viewing I saw some the seeds of Michael's fate planted in the audience earlier than that. Watch the scene when Kay calls Michael at the house while Clemenza shows him his meatball pasta recipe. Michael of course avoids telling Kay he loves her. By not saying 'I love you', it's perhaps a silent acknowledgement of the new life he's knows he's about to enter - something which Kay cannot be a part of.
The central theme of the film of course is not exclusively about the mafia - but family. Specifically the corruption of family from the inside out. Coppola’s epic scale and archetypal themes seem to borrow or echo classical or even biblical tales of tragedy. Another layer of depth I discovered with this recent viewing is in the scene when Michael meets Kay again after returning from Sicily. Coppola brilliantly plays the scene while Kay is attending to her school children - a great and subtle visual metaphor for this first heinous act of deception to bring Kay into his world and corrupt her innocence.
By the end of the film, Michael becomes the person he swore he'd never become. But the tragedy of the story is not that Michael has become part of the 'family business', but that he's betrayed the code of honour set and established by his father - which is wonderfully articulated in the fabulous closing shot - 'a man that doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man'.
"The Godfather" is now available on Blu-Ray in new "Restored" edition.
Wednesday, 7 May 2008
YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH
Youth Without Youth (2007) dir. Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Tim Roth, Bruno Ganz, Alexandra Maria Lara, Andre M. Hennicke
**
Francis Coppola's return to cinema was perhaps the most disappointing film of the year 2007. Coppola produced his little art film under the noses of all press, bloggers and cine-spies. And so when it was announced last year he had a film completed, in the can, and that it would be released late in the year, near the other Oscar pictures, the buzz was palpable. It had been 10 years since we'd seen a new Coppola film (since 1997's "The Rainmaker"). We all knew Coppola's best days were behind him, and his film output in the 90's were less than stellar, but there's always a glimmer of hope that some of the old magic that produced a string of film masterpieces in the 70's would be re-sparked.
The story behind the making of the film teased us even more - a self-financed venture, shot in Bulgaria, with a small hands-on crew, the same manner of production Coppola's early films were made. Unfortunately it's a mess of a unrealized ideas and only a tease of the once great filmmaker.
The film tells the long epic story of a Romanian professor Dominic (Tim Roth) who in 1938 at age 70 is struck by lightning and finds himself near death in a hospital bed. After several days hidden under a cloth bandage he emerges 30 years younger. His doctors cannot explain the phenomenon, but somehow Dominic has tapped into a metaphysical fountain of youth which bewilders everybody. He not only has the ability to stay young, but he discovers other magical powers of mind control as well. The story gets circulated around the world, and attracts some unsavoury parties - including the Nazis and American Intelligence agents. Dominic uses his powers to evade his crafty pursurers and go into hiding.
Years later in 1955, the film picks up Dominic living a solemn lonely life in the country. One day he bumps into a doppleganger version of his lost love Laura - except this woman is named Veronica (Alexandra Maria Lara). Veronica has also been struck by lightning and like Dominic exudes weird metaphysical abilities. Veronica can now speak Sankrit and communicate with the dead thousands of years old. Dominic finds himself with the opportunity to finish his life's work in language-study and fall in love with his old flame again.
"Youth Without Youth" is one of those metaphysical experimental films, which suits the art-house sensabilities of a David Lynch or Peter Greenaway more than Mr. Coppola. To his credit Coppola manages to craft a stunningly beautiful film, but he sets such a slow and languid pace, it becomes an utterly tiring exercise to watch all 124 mins in one sitting. The first half is the most intriguing as Dominic learns of his new found abilities, including a dramatic confrontation with the Nazi Gestapo agent. Hell, Matt Damon even shows up, playing someone similar to his CIA character in "The Good Shepherd". The second half leaps from a suspenseful noir, into a period romance genre and peeters out to become virtually nothing.
The ideas get so big the film eventually becomes an unruly uncontainable mess of metaphors, pseudo-science, and anthropological mumbo-jumbo. Though Coppola took the 'keep it simple stupid' approach to the production, he chose to film a film too complex for his return.
Though it currently sits 28% rotten on the Rotten Tomatoes meter, it's not the anamimous critical trouncing you'd expect. The film is not all that bad either. The film possesses a poetic beauty complimentary to its ruminations on the meaning of life. Unfortunately while some may find it's existentialism profound, most others will shut the film off once Tim Roth starts speaking his voiceover in the artificial language invented by his character - seriously, that happens.
"Youth Without Youth" is available on DVD May 13 from Sony Pictures Home Entertainment.
Wednesday, 21 November 2007
HEARTS OF DARKNESS: A FILMMAKER'S APOCALYPSE
Hearts of Darkness (1991) dir. Fax Bahr, George Hickenlooper
Documentary
****
There is no better documentary about the pain and sacrifice of making a film than “Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse”, which is now available on DVD for the first time. The documentary which chronicles the sordid history of the making of “Apocalypse Now” is a film worthy of the greatness of its subject. A remarkable amount of on-location footage, candid audio recordings and modern reflections of the time from the participants make for an all-access pass into the hellish process of making a masterpiece.
At the top we’re privileged with an interesting tidbit of info that the film was first proposed as an American Zoetrope feature for George Lucas to direct. A script had already been written by Zoetrope pal John Milius, and was to be filmed in 16mm during the Vietnam War. That suggestion didn’t fly with the studios, and so Coppola had to wait until he had the clout from “The Godfather” films before taking another shot at it. After the backstory of the development of the project, the documentary is taken over by the footage shot by Coppola’s wife Eleanor who traveled with the crew to the Phillipines location. "Apocalypse Now" turned out to be a cursed production which lasted over a year, survived a hurricane, a near-death heart attack from Martin Sheen, the firing of its lead actor, and the numerous contemptuous antics of Marlon Brando.
Directors Bahr and Hickenlooper effectively use a clever voiceover track from Orson Welles - a similar maverick independent who also tried to film Joseph Conrad’s novel in 1940, before “Citizen Kane”. That project was too daunting for Welles but we have the narration from his Mercury radio program which acts like an ominous ghost haunting Coppola’s film.
Though Eleanor Coppola doesn’t get directorial credit, she should. Her candid audio recordings which were made without Coppola’s knowledge offers us true fly-on-the-wall access to a great artist at work. We get to hear the indecisive ramblings of Coppola near the brink of insanity. He honestly confesses his film will be no good and questions the risk he’s taking in making a ‘pretentious’ film.
There are many profound themes that emerge from the material without manipulation from the filmmakers. The notion of war and filmmaking being linked metaphorically comes true when the Philippine Army takes away Coppola’s helicopters in the middle of shot to fight off some Communist insurgents. Amazing. The film is also about ego and excess. His description of how he wants the set designer and casting director to fill out the French Plantation scene is grossly egotistical. And look at the opening shot of an unflattering Coppola, shirtless, so heavily bearded you can’t see his face, and frantically twitching. He resembles the character of Kurtz himself - out of control, out of touch with reality and without an end-goal vision.
Sometimes great art comes from the insane mind. Coppola was never committed, but he certainly lost years of his life making the film. Indeed “Apocalypse Now” became an unrivaled masterpiece. One thing missing is Coppola’s opinion on the finished film. I suspect he hates it, probably because it brings up these tragic memories which are nightmarish to him but fascinating to us. Enjoy.
Buy it here: Hearts of Darkness - A Filmmaker's Apocalypse
Wednesday, 3 October 2007
BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA
Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) dir. Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Gary Oldman, Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Anthony Hopkins
***1/2
I love “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”. It’s a gothic near-masterpiece, which goes back to Bram Stoker’s original material and builds the film back up directly from his novel. It’s therefore a non-vampire vampire film – a fresh start, unencumbered with genre expectations. Coppola has made the film into a Wagner-esque operatic epic love story spanning continents and centuries.
The opening, wonderfully grand, sets the tone for the film – Polish composer Wojciech Kilar’s dark and brooding chords punctuate an intense pre-credit sequence. Coppola establishes the tragic death of Dracula’s wife, Elizabeta, his renunciation of God and his rebirth as the undead vampyre avenger. We then see the familiar story in turn-of-the-century London as Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) receives his assignment to travel to Transylvania to visit the enigmatic Dracula (Gary Oldman) and close a deal on a series of land purchases in London. When Dracula notices that Harker’s fiancé Mina (Winona Ryder) looks exactly like his long lost wife, he decides to travel to London to find Mina. Harker, imprisoned in Dracula’s castle, is then put through a series of menacing ordeals, in hopes of breaking his mind like his former liaison –Renfield (Tom Waits).
After the lengthy journey Dracula does meet with Mina. The second act becomes a passionate courtship between the two. Mina feels the powerful attraction of the vampire blood-lust and so is drawn to Dracula. Harker does escape from Dracula’s castle and manages to travel back to London. With the help of Professor Abraham Van Helsing (Anthony Hopkins) and his team of vampire fighters Harker faces off against Dracula one last time to save Mina from becoming one of the undead.
“Bram Stoker’s Dracula” has a rare cinematic exuberance which can easily be mistaken as overdramatic or unrealistic. Coppola has purposefully created a ‘stagy’ feel to his interpretation. Unlike Werner Herzog’s Dracula (“Nosferatu”) which was more ‘on location’, Coppola’s world is manufactured and heightened in all meanings of the word. The acting is big, the music is big, the sets and costumes are big. This tone has much in common with John Boorman’s “Excalibur”, another film, which has been ridiculed for its over-dramatics. Watch these two films back-to-back and you’ll find many similarities.
Gary Oldman is fantastic as “Dracula”. Coppola gives him two distinctive looks – his older “Transylvanian” look and his suave modern Londoner look. He woos Mina with his charming modern attire, but I prefer the angry and vengeful Dracula. There’s no black cape, or widow’s peak. Dracula famous outfits were created by Japanese designer Eiko Ishioka and gives us a Kibuke version of Dracula. It works because the audience is immediately taken outside all other versions of the story including both German “Nosferatu” versions.
The special effects are perhaps the most talked about aspects of the film. Coppola, with his son Roman and effects legend Michael Lantieri, uses classical film techniques to create the unique effects – optical matting, reverse shooting, lighting transitions. But everything looks fantastic and completely modern. I only wish more filmmakers would go old-school and give us a break from CGI (note: Darren Aronofsky also created all his effects optically and organically for “The Fountain”). One of Coppola’s trademarks is his wonderful dissolves and transitions. Harker’s first traveling sequence is the first of many complex transition sequences that breath life into tired old establishing, time-condensing montages.
Despite the praise, the film is not quite a masterpiece. The second act – the love story with Mina and Dracula – starts to lag at the midway point, but thanks to Anthony Hopkins the picture is saved. Hopkins delivers a wonderful scene-chewing performance as Van Helsing. The appearance of he and his vampire posse injects fresh new life into the second act.
This non-musical opera-version of Dracula is a classic. In fact, over the next few years he’ll return to this style of gothic reinvention by remaking “Frankenstein” with Kenneth Branagh and “Sleepy Hollow” with Tim Burton. But his “Dracula” remains the best of the bunch, and clearly his best film of the 1990’s. Enjoy.
Here’s an old trailer from 1992:
Wednesday, 25 July 2007
THE RAINMAKER
The Rainmaker (1997) dir. Francis Ford Coppola
Starring: Matt Damon, Danny De Vito, Jon Voight, Claire Danes, Mickey Rourke
***
In 1997 Francis Coppola surprised us all with an adaptation of a John Grisham novel – one of the pulpier novelists of the 1990’s that produced a series of safe but saccharine courtroom thrillers. “The Rainmaker” is as enjoyable yet disposable as most of the Grisham adaptation. Though it doesn’t hit the high bar of “The Firm” in terms of suspense or tension, it does best the Schumacher films - “A Time to Kill” or “The Client” and is one of the better Grisham adaptations.
Rudy Baylor (Matt Damon) is a recent grad from a humble state college. With no prospects for employment he takes the only job he can get, chasing ambulances for a slimy lawyer/loan shark/bail bondsman-type Bruiser Stone played to perfection by Mickey Rourke. Rudy’s ‘mentor’ is Deck Shiflet (Danny De Vito) a paralegal who’s failed the bar five times. Though Deck doesn’t have the official license to practice law his street smarts allow him to weasel into situations and gain information needed to conduct business and make money.
When Bruiser's practice comes under investigation Baylor and Shiflet split to form their own firm. Their only case is something Rudy stumbled upon while in school – the case of Donny Ray Black, a 22 year old kid suffering from Leukemia whose frequent insurance claims for treatment keep getting denied. Baylor and Shiflet become the David vs. the Goliath insurance company super lawyers headed by shyster Leo F. Drummand (Jon Voight).
The best moments in the film are in the opening act where Baylor is thrust into the sketchy world of guerilla lawyering and ambulance-chasing. The relationship of Baylor with Shiflet and Stone could have produced an interesting dynamic. Stone could have been a younger version of Baylor, Shiflet who got caught up in the scheming nature of the job lost all his passion for the job could have seen another version of himself in Baylor. The introduction of Baylor’s fish out of water into this environment could have produced more interesting character arcs for both Shiflet and Stone. Unfortunately Stone is taken out of the picture early and Shiflet ceases to become a character of his own and is virtually forgotten in terms of character development and change. This opportunityt is sorely missed.
Everything is focused on Baylor. His love interest, Kelly, played by Claire Danes, adds a bit too much drama onto his already stacked and stressful business plate. It’s hard to imagine nearly fighting to the death an angry boyfriend at night and coming to work the next day with the responsibility of trying the case for a grieving mother of a cancer victim. In fact, it’s completely irresponsible of Baylor to jeopardize the case for the acts he performs on behalf of Kelly.
The majority of the film is courtroom drama, and it suffers from all the same trappings of that genre. It’s very difficult to make the courtroom cinema-worthy even for considering the track record of Mr. Coppola.
From a craft point of view the film looks good without being overpowered in terms of cinematography. He smartly employs John Toll to shoot it instead of someone like Vittorio Storaro (who probably wouldn’t even take the job). I was pleased to see Coppola's trademark overlapping dissolves at the opening of the film. But I was disappointed by Elmer Bernstein’s score, a composer I’m very fond of, but this time he delivers something sounding like 70’s episodic television. And Michael Herr, who wrote the narration for “Apocalypse Now” and “Full Metal Jacket”, writes some functional and sometimes interesting voiceover.
I can only wonder what motivated Coppola to invest his time in this film. With his successful wine business keeping his cash flow positive and a cinematic legacy already written in stone it would appear Coppola could pick and choose his films. Maybe he was scarred from his wounds on the disastrous film “Jack” released the year before and needed to sharpen his skills again with some traditional material. Though "The Rainmaker" betters most of the other Grisham films, with Coppola his bar is always raised slightly higher and as a result it doesn’t quite hit it.
Buy it here: John Grisham's The Rainmaker (Special Collector's Edition)
Thursday, 19 July 2007
THE CONVERSATION
The Conversation (1974) dir. Francis Coppola
Starring: Gene Hackman, John Cazale
****
Yesterday I wrote about “Vertigo”, today’s I’ll write about another famous San Francisco film – “The Conversation” - a paranoia film about a reserved and quiet surveillance man whose conscience is awakened when he finds out the couple he’s spying on may be targeted for murder. It’s a classic 70’s film from arguably the decade’s best director.
Harry Caul (Gene Hackman) is the nation’s top surveillance expert. The film opens on Harry and his team recording a conversation between a man and a woman in the middle of San Francisco’s famous “Market Square” using a series of long distance microphones. After reviewing the tapes Harry discovers what might be a plot to murder the couple. When Caul visits his employer he refuses to give up the tapes unless he meets his employer face-to-face. Instead he’s brushed off by his assistant, played by a young Harrison Ford. Harry’s conscience won’t allow him to release tapes. Instead he retreats to his lab to uncover the conspiracy himself.
Harry Caul is one cinema’s classic characters – a loner, with an acute talent, so acute in fact, his life has become a day-by-day intimate obsession with his job. He doesn’t get out much, and when he does it’s spent in the company of other wiretappers who seem bent on comparing dick sizes. A night on the town after a trade show turns into a game between Harry and his east coast competitor Bernie Moran (Allen Garfield) of one-upmanship to prove who’s the better wiretapper. I won’t ruin the payoff, but the scene ends with Harry being humiliated by Moran. Harry’s insecurities run deeper though. An incident from his days in NYC are often brought up which resulted the mob murder of some of the people he was tapping. This guilty conscience awakens with his latest case. The climax of the film contains a great reveal about the case, and the denouement (and specifically the last scene) is sad and somber ending which reveals the current state of Harry’s mind. It’s one of Gene Hackman’s best performances. Usually known for his tough guy roles, Hackman’s Caul is a soft spoken, shy introvert. Despite his towering stature he is meek and insecure.
“The Conversation” was made at a time just as Watergate hit, and so Coppola’s timing was impeccable. He captured the paranoia of big government and the secrets and lies that are covered up by the highest powers. Other films such as “All the President’s”, and “The Parallax View” would tread similar ground. Coppola’s influence was likely Michelangelo Antonioni’s “Blow Up” which tells the story of a photographer who thinks he discovered a murder in one of his photographs.
Sound designer Walter Murch was highly influential in much of Coppola’s work, including “THX 1138” and “American Graffiti”. The attention to the sound is remarkable and is as important as the cinematography. The film was shot by Bill Butler and doesn’t stand out like Gordon Willis’ or Vittorio Storaro’s work with Coppola, but it’s justly unobtrusive and complements the quiet story.
What’s remarkable about the film is that Coppola shot it in between the two Godfathers. Has there been a greater quality of output from a director in such a short period of time? Please send me some examples if so. Coppola was at the peak of his talents. Watching the film again is a delight, but if you’re watching it for the first time, I’m insanely jealous.
Buy it here: The Conversation
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)