Swoon

It feels like a period documentary and the story is the story of Leopold and Loeb - A terrifying portrait of two real life killers who killed without passion or reason just to prove they were above the law. The period details are beautifully drawn but where it lacks is in the actor's faces. They appear rather than participate fully. There is a detachment in their portrayal that kept me at a safe distance and I could admire it with my head but I couldn't connect with my heart. The opposite of what happened to me with 1958's Compulsion - I was riveted by Dean Stockwell. I believed and understood just by looking into his eyes.

This is the third film on the case I've seen and it certainly has merits of its own. There was no grandstand acting here, no over-acting for the Academy Awards or anything like that. I actually found the acting quite adequate unlike some others. It was downplayed, true, but sufficient. Let's remember that these people were not the norm for their time - or for any time. They were bigger than life, or at least they thought they were. The cinematography and staging were wonderful with so many scenes "unbalanced" in their composition. The cutting too was uneasy but uneasy on purpose. The characters were not portrayed as likable and, no, an intolerant society was not set up for blame. There is much going on here - certainly more meets the eye on first viewing.

Two highly intelligent young Jewish men, who are also lovers, attempt to get away with "the perfect murder". This intriguing drama was also filmed as "Rope" (1948) and "Compulsion" (1959). Based on the true story of Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, this version stars Craig Chester (as Mr. Leopold) and Daniel Schlachet (as Mr. Loeb). Of the three features currently available, this is undoubtedly the most "realistic" version of the gruesome crime. Yet, for most, "Swoon" will also be the least entertaining of the three films.

This one focuses on not only the murder, but also the sexual relationship between the principals. With unsavory flourish, "Swoon" comes across as an attempt to move responsibility for the crime from Leopold and Loeb, to an intolerant society, with the former explaining, "I wanted to murder the idea of suffering as my condition; I wanted to surpass the boundaries of intelligence for something more pure." Excuses, excuses.

Director Tom Kalin makes it an outstanding looking production, with Ellen Kuras contributing terrific black-and-white photography. Due to the availability of archival footage and Mr. Kalin's expert editing, the real Leopold and Loeb can be seen. And, due to and Leopold's relatively long life, we have one of the subjects characterized becoming an actor in the film. The real actors, Mr. Chester and Mr. Schlachet, perform superbly.

******* Swoon (2/19/92) Tom Kalin ~ Craig Chester, Daniel Schlachet, Ron Vawter

In this modern version of the infamous Leopold and Loeb murder case of the 1920s, "Swoon" stresses the gay angle, relative to "Compulsion" (1959), a film of the same story, but burdened by the watchful eye of the censors associated with the moralistic Hays Code. Actual court records do in fact indicate that the relationship or bond between these two guys was primarily sexual.

Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb apparently had a masochistic pact. And "Swoon" asks the question: which guy was in control? The answer seems to be that they alternated control. Also, compared to "Compulsion", more attention is given to the actual murder of the teenage boy.

This film is quite stylized. Archival images and lyrical cutaways unrelated to the story are used because they are thematically relevant. Further, some scenes are intended as dreams. And non-period piece elements add textural perspective.

The real Nathan Leopold is shown in historical footage, first as a young man at about the time of the actual killing. He is shown in a sequence with a group of fellow ornithologists. And near the end of the film, he is shown as an older man, having been released from prison.

"Swoon" was shot in B&W. Images are a tad grainy, maybe deliberately so, as part of the film's visual style. Casting and acting are fine. I did not care for the background music. It's too whimsical and kooky sounding, given the subject matter. But the music does contribute to the film's overall flighty, giddy tone, reflected in the lack of emotional involvement of the characters. Further, the killing of the young boy is perfunctory and nonchalant.

The film's peculiar tone and mood I found annoying. Yet, it's probably consistent with the mindset of these two peculiar criminals, two guys, both cerebral and intelligent, completely lacking both in conscience and in a sense of moral principles.

Overall, compared to "Compulsion", "Swoon" is more direct, and perhaps a tad more thematically compelling.

Anti -hollywoodian to a fault ,"swoon" is the most realistic account of the ghastly murder of a child by two brilliant students ,inspired by Nietzsche, convinced that their IQ place them beyond good and evil .It was the first time the story of those monsters had been transferred to the screen as it really was :

-In "rope" (1949) ,the victim was a young man

-in "compulsion" (1959) ,the plot was sweetened by the presence of bland lovers ( Martin Miller and Diane Varsi) and a long Christian plea by lawyer Orson Welles .

Don't get me wrong ;both Hitchcock's and Fleischer's works were great, ahead of their time ,when the Hayes Code was still applying. They are much more palatable than Tom Kalin's 'remake" , in stark black and white , with the unbearably violent murder of the little boy .

The dominant character (John Dahl in "rope" , Bradford Dillman in "compulsion" ) is less obvious ,but the gay relationship is explicit -whereas it was only suggested in the previous versions-

Indeed,so horrendous were the chances taken by Tom Kalin that ,with any lesser talent ,the result could have been disastrous , rejecting his work into the porn gay film ghetto whereas it is genuine art house cinema .

The questioning , perhaps inspired by French Nouvelle Vague cinema vérité (archival footage is shown towards the end),may disconcert the viewer .That such a harrowing screenplay succeeds artistically without falling into the trap of sentiment is due to the director's feeling for sparseness which does not allow any conventional sentimentality ( no compassionate lawyer , both parents hardly appear ) but it inspires its vital despair .

The trial turns so improper in its depiction of the sexual practises that the women are requested to leave the courtroom ; and for the first time , the movie does not end with the trial or the arrestation ,but spans ,in an admirably succint style the criminals' whole life .MM Chester and Schlachet give performances which will make your hair stand on end , both deadpan , ruthless...but a pure love at a time the society was intolerant ,and the awful massacre of the innocent.