A Canterbury Tale

Perhaps this is more significant now than ever, this quaint tale of wartime Canterbury and the ancient pilgrims whose presence is still felt. Some of the symbolism feels a little clunky - does the heroine really have to have travelled to Canterbury previously with her boyfriend 'Geoffrey' (i.e. a Chaucer reference) and why is the Glue Man so fixated on causing havoc in the blackouts? John Sweet's accent and acting has caused some other comments - I found his character jarred a little but somehow by the end, he fitted in. And the ending is curiously touching. The whole film has the usual touches of brilliance you would associate with Powell and Pressburger. Good stuff.

This is a patriotic war film shot at a time of National Emergency, so don't expect any complexity in the characters of the GI, the Sergeant and the Land Girl. All are fine citizens - as of course one would expect that pillar of the community the local magistrate to be...

The plot, such as it is, is bizarre. A small village in Kent is being terrorised by a madman who puts glue in women's hair during the blackout. The GI, the Sergeant and the Land Girl resolve to find the culprit.

All roads lead to Canterbury, where the Cathedral oversees the resolution of the mystery and of the disappointments in the characters' lives, before the soldiers set off on a more dangerous pilgrimage.

In the end, the plot is unbelievable, the character of Culpepper the magistrate unfathomable, the symbolism of the Cathedral laid on with a trowel - yet, why is this such a satisfying film? I think that there is a spirit which shines through this film - an optimism, a determination. The Land Girl has lost her Pilot fiancée, she grieves yet she is not downhearted. The GI loves and misses his homeland but can compare timber preparation techniques with the local blacksmith and find commonality. The English Countryside is ravishing throughout.

This film subtly highlights the values being fought for, the personal values, the village way of life, the spirit exemplified by the history of the Canterbury Pilgrims and of the Cathedral itself. And it is by tapping into the British psyche so deeply that even today it resonates which makes it a great film.

... from writer-producer-directors Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger. A trio of (then) modern day pilgrims meet at a train station in Kent on their way to Canterbury: Alison (Sheila Sim), a young war widow; Peter (Dennis Price) a British army sergeant; and Bob (John Sweet), an American army sergeant on a 3-day furlough. The trio bond when Alison is attacked by the notorious "Glue Man", a mysterious figure who runs about at night dumping glue on unsuspecting ladies' heads. The townsfolk seem content to let the mystery lie, but the trio of newcomers are determined to find the culprit and bring him or her to justice. Meanwhile, they also take time to learn more about their surroundings in the English countryside, thanks to local historian Colpeper (Eric Portman).

This is an odd movie. The goofy-sounding Glue Man mystery is an unusual pretext to keep the characters together, but it works. The true aim of the film seems to be reconnecting a war-battered audience with its history and bucolic country landscapes. There's a bit of the mystical, with discussions of centuries past and the lingering ghosts of ancestors. The film also serves as a bit of American-British co-operation propaganda, in the form of Sweet's amiable Oregonian Bob. Sweet was an actual U. S. G. I. loaned to the film, an unprofessional actor, and it shows, but in a good way. His voice and personality may strike some the wrong way, but I found him charming. Both Sheila Sim and Dennis Price were also unknowns, and they both went on to fame, but Sweet became a school teacher. Recommended.

The major disadvantage when recommending this film to someone is that it's practically impossible to describe! It's easy enough to say what it *isn't*: it's not a detective story and it's certainly not a thriller, despite the fact that it nominally revolves around an unsolved crime. It's not a war-story, despite the fact that it is set immediately before D-Day and the main characters are intimately involved in the war effort. It's not a romance, despite the fact that two of the characters have an unhappy love-story. And it's not the Chaucerian epic one might be led to expect by the title and the opening scene - although by the end, the pilgrimage allusions turn out to be rather more strangely apt then they at first appear.

The only word I can find to give a flavour of this story is that it is above all English - as English as Ealing comedy (without the comedy), as Miss Marple (without the murder), as Elizabeth Goudge (without the magic)... and yet again I find myself defining it by what it *isn't*! It's English in a way that is quietly, deeply antithetical to the frenetic posturing of 'Cool Britannia'. It is as English as the haze over the long grass beneath the trees of a summer meadow; as polished brass and a whiff of steam as the express pulls up at a country halt; as church bells drifting in snatches on a lazy breeze, and the taste of blackberries in the sun.

It's almost impossible now to comprehend that the 1940s countryside in which this film is set was *really there*; that it was not the Second World War but its crippling aftermath that industrialised farms, banished the horse-drawn vehicles from the wheelwright's, and exchanged towering hay-wains for silage towers. Britain was determined never to starve again - and so the world that had once differed so little from that of Chaucer's time was swept away beyond recall. When it was made, this film was no more a rustic period piece than 'Passport to Pimlico', a few years later, was an urban social documentary. Subsequent events have preserved both in mute evidence of contemporary communities that are almost unbelievable today.

It is perhaps fair, therefore, to assume that the type of viewer who will watch 'Battlefield Earth' is unlikely to find this film anything other than silly, parochial and ultimately dull! Very little actually happens. The story is on occasion both humorous and poignant, but what we at first assume to be the central plot turns out not to be the point at all. The triple denouement is set up so gently and skilfully that we, too, are taken by miraculous surprise, with the true shape of the film only evident in retrospect.

It is, ultimately, a story about faith, and miracles, and pilgrimages, even in the then-modern world of shopgirls, lumbermen and cinema organists - and if that idea in itself sounds enough to put you off, as I confess it would have done for me before I watched it myself, then I will gladly add that it is a film about beauty, and hope, and unexpected friendship and laughter; and technically very accomplished to boot. The use of black and white is glorious, ranging from the glimmer in the obscurest of shadows to sun-drenched hillside, and the totally unselfconscious reference to Chaucer in the opening sequence is in these days worth the price of admission alone.

If you like gentle films - sweet-natured films - films with a deep affection for their subject - films that make you laugh and cry, but always smile - then I urge you not on any account to miss this one. If, for the moment, you require thrills, spills, forbidden passions and last-minute rescues, then pass it by and let it go on its tranquil way. When you are old and grey and full of sleep, this unassuming classic will still be there, waiting...

Some of the Archers' films have moved and delighted me -- BLACK NARCISSUS, THE RED SHOES. Others have interested me but left me rather cold -- PEEPING TOM, TALES OF HOFFMANN. This one falls right in the middle. The wartime milieu, the surprisingly *dark* nighttime photography, the central characters, the supporting cast of Kentish country folk -- all these engaged me for about the first hour of the movie. But in the second hour, as the "Glue Man" theme became increasingly worn out and the prospect of "miracles" in Canterbury loomed larger, I felt more and more detached from the proceedings. Especially unwelcome was the churchy quality of the denouement. Still, I have no argument with the commenters who have praised the film so highly. So let me turn the denouement of my own commentary into a list of the positive impressions that stayed with me after "The End" appeared so unexpectedly on the screen.

First -- I loved the camaraderie that developed immediately among all the ordinary folks thrown together and forced to work as teammates for the common cause. (If war is good for anything, it must be that.) Second -- I liked the tall skinny American soldier and the difficulties and simple pleasures he found among the Brits -- I've been there, done that, and P&P captured the feeling very nicely. (Note: Bob Johnson's accent is quite authentic for a rural Oregonian, so stop complaining, you funny Commonwealth lot!). Third -- I enjoyed every minute that Sheila Sim was on camera. Finally -- that cut in the prologue, from the hawk to the fighter plane, was excellent indeed. (And yes, I'd bet my piggy bank that Stanley Kubrick got his idea for the bone-to-space station cut in 2001 from this very film.)

But wait, I realize that I do have to register one last complaint. I love black & white movies, so much that whenever I hear twentysomething kids whine that they can only watch movies in color, I am nauseated. And yet -- I wager that any filmmakers who purport to represent the beauty of the Kentish countryside on a summer day will truly achieve their goal only if they film in color. England's green and pleasant land just can't be painted in shades of gray.