September Blind Spot: Brief Encounter

Do you know a movie that anyone who has seen it praises unconditionally but you still don't hear whole lot of buzz around them otherwise? I mean, we all know movies that we think are under appreciated but this is taking it to the next level. I think my film for this month, Brief Encounter(1945), is one such film. I know lot of people who think world of this film. I should rather say it like this - I have never seen anyone say anything remotely bad about this film. But somehow this film has successfully eluded me thus far. I decided I wasn't going to let it go any further this year and finally put it on this list. And here we are, in the month of September, I have finally seen it!

Brief Encounter is about an affair of two sensible, happily married people with perfect families who wouldn't even think about cheating on their spouses, that is, until they meet each other. Even their meeting is a chance meeting. Laura is a housewife and spends her Wednesdays shopping and Alec is a doctor who spends his subbing for a friend. Their paths cross at a Milford railway station where they catch trains in opposite directions every week. They meet for the first time in waiting room where he helps her get something out of her eye. Over the next couple of weeks their paths cross again on few occasions and two very easily strike up rather innocent friendship at first. However, as they start spending more and more time with each other watching movies and sharing lunches, even they don't realize when it turns into a full blown affair.

It opens with Laura and Alec parting their ways. It is one of those scenes where both Celia Johnson and Trevor Howard say a lot without actually saying much; probably even the best of the lot. Rest of the film plays out inside Laura's head where she imagines she is telling everything about this encounter to her husband. This is a rather interesting tool since it makes us privy to all the information first hand, from Laura's own perspective. It tells us things that we otherwise would only guess like at every step of the way, both Laura and Alec knew what they are doing will have serious repercussions and still kept going with it. In their own words, they decide not to see other a thousand times over the week but still end up together every Wednesday.

Neither Celia Johnson nor Trevor Howard are particularly attractive or traditionally beautiful. But this story is not driven by their physical attraction and it is a very welcome change. We don't get many films like that. What drives this story is their innocuous desire to get out of the ordinary, to do something different from their routine life and once ball gets rolling, no one really knows how to stop it or whether they really want it to stop it. What makes it work is chemistry of Johnson and Howard, compact script and direction. And it is directed by David Lean in his early period of British films. When someone says David Lean, films that I associate this name with are his sprawling epic films like Lawrence of Arabia(1962), Doctor Zhivago(1965) or even A Passage to India(1984)(even though I wasn't the biggest fan of it). It was nice to see him making such a personal film with equal finesse.

However as much as I like it, and I do feel very strange saying this but, I cannot help but feel a little disappointed and this is completely my own fault. When I think back on it, I can only think of good things about this movie but never being really wowed by it. I have seen many people giving this film glowing review. While I sat down to watch this one, even I was expecting to be swept off my feet a la In the Mood for Love(1999). What I forgot was it impressed me so much was because I had no expectations at all from it; I didn't even know it then! Here I already was expecting a masterpiece here and now even a really good film seems like a letdown. I told you, I have no one else but myself to blame.

August Blind Spot: L'enfant

Dardennes Brothers are one of the directors who have garnered quite a reputation for themselves over the years. I became more and more aware of them as I got more into foreign cinema and their films became part of my ever growing watch list. I was under the impression that I have never seen any of their films and hence wanted to include one on this year's Blind spot list to give myself a start. I chose L'enfant(2005) because, with one of their two Palme d'Or, it seems to be their most revered film. I have been meaning to check out more Palme d'Or winners as well. Two birds in one stone, I thought. As it turns out, they directed The Kid with a Bike(2011) which I saw last year. So this wasn't really my first Dardennes film but regardless it was a worthy choice.

Like most other directors, most revered directors anyway, Dardenne brothers have their own style and their own formula and, from what I know, most of their films follow that track. Based on this, my first thought was what makes them so special if they are essentially making the same film again and again? What I can say right now is it’s their ability to tell what looks like same story from outside from different perspective and their ability to make us viewers relate with characters. And I felt it even more in reference to the character of Bruno in this film because saying that he is a despicable character is putting it very mildly. He is just about worst father that ever existed on the surface of this earth.

First of all, Bruno is an extremely irresponsible and deplorable guy from the start. He doesn’t even have a house and he almost scoffs at a notion of having a regular job. He lives either in a shelter or in his shack by the river. Sonia does have a small apartment rented but Bruno even sublets that to someone else when she is in a hospital for her delivery. As for job, Bruno has a 14 year old assistant who helps him do petty crimes like stealing. If you already hate him, I can't really blame you but there is much more to come yet. I haven't even started. Elephant in the room here is Bruno selling their 9 day old son in black market. I don't think this would count as a spoiler because if you one thing about this movie it would be that but even that isn't all.

L’enfant is almost like a checklist for all their trademark elements. Their films usually feature characters struggling to make their ends meet. Here, with no real prospects, Sonia and Bruno pretty much live on her welfare money and his stealing money. They do not use any score. There was none here but to tell you the truth, they didn’t really need it. They tell their stories so well that I really didn’t notice any lack of score until it was brought to my attention half way through. Handheld cameras are prevalent. Leading characters are seen in every scene. You do get either Sonia or Bruno is ‘every’ scene. And I think Bruno, played by Jeremie Renier – one of Dardennes’ regulars, is in every scene except first couple of them where Sonia is looking for him. And, in words of IMDb, they usually end with one character giving a helping hand to another - that's Sonia finally going to meet Bruno in jail. All check.

Bruno doesn't have many redeeming qualities. After he has sold their son, he shamelessly sells his pram as well and there is not even a hint of distress seen in his actions. [SPOILER ALERT] Sonia faints after hearing this news and involves police in this. After seeing that, he somehow manages to get that child back but not because he felt bad for it. It's because Sonia might make authorities pick him up.[SPOILER END] I really wouldn’t mind if someone skinned him and left him hanging to dry. About the only responsible thing he does throughout this film in taking blame for stealing a purse in the end. Otherwise he is an extremely horrible and irresponsible person throughout. 

You usually feel for someone you are rooting for in their bad times. Making you feel for someone you almost hate and want to see punished as hard as humanely possible needs something special and, by the end, L’enfant had done that; Dardenne brothers did that with just one image. As much as I hated Bruno, and as I said earlier I really despised him, note on which they chose to end this film still gave me hope that there might still be some future for Bruno and Sonia together. There still might be some hope for Bruno to account for something. I think it really needed it and they could not have said it better in thousand words.

Since it revolves around Bruno and Sonia and has at least one of them on screen all the time, naturally Renier and Deborah Francois hold key for its success. Personally, I liked Francois more because her character goes through bigger emotional arc with initial elation and hope of new life with arrival of their child to bitter disappointment to eventual makeup after Bruno comes around. However, there would be no denying that Renier is more important to success of this film. It is designed in such a way that you are sympathetic towards Sonia and despise Bruno and I would think it would be difficult to make viewers hate you than to make them sympathize with you.

But real hero of L'enfant is neither Bruno nor Sonia. It's the script written by Dardenne brothers themselves. It is so well written, so well paced that it almost always succeeds in getting exact response it was aiming for from us viewers. I obviously do not have in depth knowledge of their style. So I am going to go to someone I know bit more and someone who I think has one think in common with them - Christopher Nolan. I could be completely wrong about it but I think, like Nolan, their films almost always have some great performances. But what it boils down to is their direction and writing that makes them so great. In hands of lesser directors, these films and even performances couldn't be as good as they are. That makes me real excited to tackle rest of their films!

July Blind Spot: Jalsaghar(The Music Room)

Couple of years ago when I was doing my Masters in US, one of my university friends was kind enough to lend me his copy of Apu trilogy. This was my first and so far only excursion into cinematic world of Satyajit Ray, probably the only Indian director with a worldwide fame and following. Considering how successful that experiment went, (it certainly was a success, so much so that Pather Panchali(1955) sits prettily in my personal ‘Top 100’) it is rather sad that I never saw any of his other films since. So I put one of his films on this year’s blind spot list, since that is what this list is for – to get rid of such blemishes.

Even though it is directed by Satyajit Ray, considering this is a Bengali film, this film also provides me a unique opportunity. Usually films I choose for this list are those which are supposed to have been seen my most people. So I try not to get into plot details and other usual suspects of review. But I would be very surprised if many of those who frequent this place would have seen this movie. So, for a change, I get to frame this post as a traditional review.

Jalsaghar(1958) or The Music Room, as it is known internationally, is a story of Biswambhar Roy, a last of his kind landlord which means he is basically a royalty in areas surrounding vast pieces of lands he owns. It also used to mean that everyone leaving in that area would depend on him for their livelihood but his estate is in dilapidated state. He has inherited lands that are being depleted by river nearby and there is not much he can do about it. So he has the title and even respect of the people that comes with it but no perquisites that usually follow.

But his status in the community means he has to live pompous life his ancestors did, even if it is only to put up a show for others and pinnacle of his ostentation is his music room. His music room is where he would invite some of the best artists - singers, dancers, musicians - to put up a show for him and would invite most important people around to accompany him. Even being a part of this group would mean your entry in landlord's innermost circle and indication of your elevated social status.

Only problem here, however, is Biswambhar Roy's estate is running on fumes and can not really afford all this extravagance. He even has to sell family jewels of Roy family that have been passed on for generations to pay for initiation ceremony of his son but even this doesn't deter him from his flamboyance. His wife tries to open his eyes but there is no other way he can live by and in the end, he succumbs to illusion of his grandeur, leaving his his last two remaining servants helpless witnesses of this event. His manager, who handles all his financial business and other things related to his lands, is solemn, worried where this might lead to while his man servant is almost giddy to see his master back to his old ways months after. [SPOILER]What he doesn't realize is this is candle burning brightest before extinguishing[SPOILER END].

Jalsaghar was Satyajit Ray's only third film; he made it between second and third installment of Apu trilogy. But, even though this was obvious right from Pather Panchali, sensibilities of this film are of a seasoned film maker. Premise of changing times and someone who once prospered in it failing to adapt to these times is not exactly novel. But what makes it work despite being the same old story is Satyajit Ray's handling with a knack of seasoned storyteller. He knows what he is going for, how he wants to get there and he does so right on the money.

He highlights hollowness of Roy's lifestyle from very first frame. His idiosyncratic behaviour to keep up with it and cling on to stupid notions of his false status only make him more miserable and Ray does not flinch from showing this. But he doesn't make him spineless which makes it much more interesting character; someone I genuinely cared for despite being rather vain. He is not without his values, however vain they might be and not without his qualities either, however crazy they might be especially under the given circumstances.

Chhabi Biswas, playing protagonist Biswambhar Roy, makes it even more impressive with great range he puts on display here - from someone who is lordly from head to toe, riding his beautiful horse Moti to a hollow shell of that man we see in the very first scene with no idea of time and date. His ease and command with which he slips into persona of Biswambhar Roy also played major role in making me sympathetic towards him, despite all his glaring faults.

While Roy is seeing the last days of his fading glory, Ray makes this story even more contrasting by adding character of Mohit Ganguly, son of userer leaving nearby, and making him a rising star. Roy constantly feels threatened by him as quite possibly he is looking to replace him. There are quite a few confrontational scenes between the two in film and almost every single one of them would find its place on highlight reel. Ganguly, being a self made man still not used to be a part of dignified society around him, is like a new kid on playing ground; always uncomfortable around Roy. And Roy, possibly because he himself not comfortable with his rise, constantly trying to cross him.

And finally, Indian classical music that is featured so richly in this film. I have to admit one thing though - however deplorable this guy might be, he certainly had a good taste in music. If you have any liking towards this kind of music, three concerts featured in this film alone are more than enough to make Jalsaghar worth a watch. Having artists from all over perform at your doorsteps like this, used to be a kingly habit of the class that Roy is last remnant. And Ray doesn't use them only to as a showcase of classical music but makes them very much integral parts of whole narrative. I feel really happy after getting back on Ray bandwagon with this film but this time I really hope my next stop won't be after another two years.

June Blind Spot: Au revoir, les enfants

For various reasons, World War II has been a topic that fascinates me a lot and it continues to do so to this day, even after reading many books and seeing films covering multiple facets of this monstrous event. WWII was a kind of event that tested everyone it touched to the limit of their existence. I believe the way we respond in the event of great adversity is what really defines us as humans and this event offered many such opportunities. I am usually game for anything that involves WWII but if it is anything as revered as Au revoir, les enfants(1987), it validates my inclusion in Blind spot list.

Though it didn’t go down exactly as we see in the film and almost certainly not with Malle at the center of it, Louis Malle, who directed this film, witnessed events this film is based on first hand. Three Jewish students and one Jewish teacher were captured from Roman Catholic boarding school Malle was attending when he was 11 and sent to concentration camps along with their head master who suffered for harbouring them. His fateful last words while being led away by officers, “Au revoir, les infants! À bientôt!”, make for title of this film.

This is a film about budding friendship between two boys which gets clipped under very sad circumstances. This is story of Julien Quentin and Jean Bonnet in Nazi-occupied France in 1944. Bonnet is a sort of recluse, even more so since he is new to Julien’s Catholic boarding school.  Julien isn’t the most popular guy either but at least he is comfortable with most everyone else. Bonnet goes through the same old routine that I imagine every person trying to break into close-knit group like boarding school can be has to go through. But slowly, he and Julien get closer and become very good friends; only to have to face dire consequences of it.

Maybe I am more like Julien in that way but to me, it wasn’t obvious from the start that Bonnet is a Jew hiding from getting captured. I mean, it was obvious that something was wrong by the way he is introduced but not what exactly. Julien never knows difference between a Jew and a gentile either. If I had not known what this film is about, it really would have been a big surprise for me too to figure it out. What’s more surprising for me is throughout the film, no one actually directly tells us so either. That is until Nazis come knocking on school doors looking for them. It becomes all obvious then!

For first half or so, this movie is about an outsider trying to fit in as best as he can and finding an unlikely friend in someone who never really became an insider despite being part of that world. A Jew in hiding, Nazi occupied France or 1944 have nothing to do with any of that. Two boys form a tenuous relationship at first which only gets stronger and stronger with every experience they share. And then doubt creeps in. Julien finds out Bonnet is not his friend’s real name. He sees him praying one night and that adds to it. I am not sure if he ever puts two and two together, maybe he does based on the way he looks at Bonnet in the restaurant, but once again Malle is content with ambiguity.

Among all this ambiguity, however, there is one moment which is as clear as sunlight. Even though Malle has said that actual events did not transpire exactly like he showed in a film, this is a moment that will haunt you for the rest of your life. When German soldiers get into their class asking for certain Jean Kipplestein, Julien remembers that name to be his friend's and with boyish curiosity tries to steal a glance at him past Nazi officer. Immediate gasp left my lips. That one look of curiosity blows Bonnet's cover and leads him to his eventual death. Like every other emotion that Malle keeps in check, he never makes this film about over bearing guilt of unknowingly sending someone to gallows but that's what hangs over it in the end. 

Malle never goes for over sentimentality. Even in the end when Nazis knock on school door, where he had every chance of being melodramatic, he keeps melodrama in check. I don’t want to take any cheap shot at Spielberg or Schindler’s List(1993) because I love that film and even think it’s better than this one but I do want to mention it if only for stark emotional contrast in the way they handle similar situation and still make it just as devastating. Schindler's List is a relentless, full-on attack on your emotions that turns you into a blabbering mess. You don't even realize the effect Au revoir, les enfants has on you almost till the last moment when those fateful words are uttered. It totally stumped me but only response it got out of me was a "Wow!" and sigh.

Malle himself considers this to be his most important film. It most certainly his most personal and given the subject at hand and, even more importantly, almost autobiographical nature of this incident, there should not be any doubt about that. I haven’t seen most of Malle’s work; in fact only Atlantic City(1980) which I saw only a couple of days before this one. But given the reputation of rest of his work, this might even be his best one and that is not a slight in the slightest.

May Blind Spot: Safety Last

When I got to see Mark Harris’ epic documentary The Story of Film: An Odyssey(2011) last year, like everyone else who has seen it I am sure, it opened a lot of new doors for me. I always knew a lot of areas that I lacked exposure, like silent films for example, but what this doc did brilliantly was gave me starting points to eradicate those anomalies in my film knowledge. I am still working on many of those areas but it is always good to know where to start than just grapple with all the options. One such area was classic comedians and it introduced me to Harold Lloyd, probably the last of classic comedians that I was introduced to. I checked off lot of names from my watch-list over the last year and inclusion of Safety Last(1923) in this year’s blind spot line-up was to get rid of that last dark spot around the corner as well.

It is convenient for us viewers too but it's rather convenient of director to name characters in this film as 'The Boy', 'The Girl' or 'The Pal' and 'The Law'. So 'The Boy' and 'The Girl' are in love with each other and want to get married but he wants to become responsible first. So he leaves his small town, goes to a big city to get a job and make sure he can provide for his girl. After being in the city, 'reality' strikes and he has to share a room with his 'pal' and can only get a job in De Vore Department store as a salesman. Off course, he can not tell this to his girl as this would mean he can not hold his part of bargain. So he lies that he has a great job that pays sumptuously and will be able to get married and bring her to the city pretty soon.

Keeping this illusion alive takes lot of work. And Money. And if they had that, it wouldn't be an illusion. So he has to pawn almost everything they own to buy gifts a manager of his fabricated stature could afford like lavaliere and almost his entire paycheck for a chain to wear it. Though such gifts convince his girl of his well-being, they also convince her mother that a young man should not be left alone in big city with so much money. And 'The Girl' decides to surprise him by visiting. This puts our boy in a rather precarious situation and presents us with a long but well done sequence even though we must have seen similar scene played out many times before. And during this sequence, his real manager declares that he will give $1000 to anyone who will come up with an original idea to promote their store. This culminates into that iconic scene which most of us watch Safety Last for(see picture above).

It is actually a very simple story of boy and girl. Nothing specifically wrong with that especially since it is rather enjoyable. It's just that it is too straight forward and set up in a way that the whole thing is leading towards one big gig at the end. It largely depends for all the laughs on talents and physical humour of Harold Lloyd and his roommate, Bill Strother. Again, nothing specifically wrong with it either since lot of comic films did that in the day and considering how well choreographed and performed that one last, big stunt is, it's also worth it but it's just too old school. 90 year old, to be precise. And we being The Dark Knight(2008) generation and all, might have been a bit too used to a fight or an explosion or to at least whip smart one liners every second of every minute. If you can curb that instinct of yours, you can lean back and certainly enjoy this one. I did!

If you thought that I was making fun of its simplicity, let me remind you again - I enjoyed this film! As for its simplicity, it was a reminder to watch films with their time frames in mind. I am sure many things it does, like that iconic climb of Tower in the end or sequence in which he juggles multiple roles during impromptu visit of his wife-to-be, were rather difficult to film and to stage in 1923. They may not be today with technology so far advanced but that's why you need to keep in mind that it was made in 1923 and it is still quite enjoyable, if not exactly novel. Standing the test of time for almost a century, that in itself is quite notable achievement. I fail to imagine how many of today's films would pass that test in 2100.

The other day, someone shared a quote from Man of Steel(2013). In the middle of General Zod giving a pounding to whole New York and Superman trying to save it from that, he finds time to get Lois Lane somewhere alone and kiss her. Now how he was able to do that in the middle of shitstorm is matter for another post but he IS Superman so... Anyways, I digress. After their kiss Lois i.e. Amy Adams says "You know, they say it's all downhill after the first kiss". I can apply that analogy to all classic comedians and my affairs so far with their films.

In all reality, that makes Chaplin nothing short of Superman. His reply to Lois above is something on the lines of 'I am pretty sure that only counts when you are talking about Human' and Chaplin has proved his super-human abilities with every film. I don't even remember the first time I saw a Chaplin film; I must have been single-digit old. We have had our ups and downs, mostly ups though, but it hasn't hit a rough patch yet and after all these years, there is still something to look forward to i.e. Limelight(1952). Buster Keaton, based on analogy above, turns out to be very human. The first kiss was The General(1926) and it has been by far the best one. I have taken it forward from that and I genuinely enjoy the company but it has certainly been downhill since that first kiss. 

The Marx Brothers, on the other hand, have been extremely unlucky. They haven't gone much further than second date and even that second date was to ensure I didn't brush them off with one false step. There are certain things you just can't do in affairs like these, you know! Jacques Tati, though not contemporary of others in these ranks and it is too soon yet to seal his fate but, is another one that might end up with fate similar to Marx Brothers. Second date I will soon arrange might do the trick for him. I don't know much about Harold Lloyd but based on all these encounters is it wrong if I expect him to be at least Captain Freaking America? I mean he is sort of lame but he is still a super hero. Or... am I having just too many affairs?

April Blind Spot: American Graffiti

Whenever I choose my Blind spot films, I usually have certain thought behind them. Since I had a pretty late start to serious movie watching, there are so many great films I haven’t seen yet. So when I choose, I try to choose films from as many decades, genres, languages as possible while trying to justice to those glaring omissions as well. And obviously, they cater to my own tastes as well though I do try to use this opportunity to broaden them. So when I get to them, even though I don't go too much into details,  I do know few things about them; things that somewhat assure me that there is a good chance of me at least liking these films. I do this so that I would know what I am getting myself into, at least when it comes to blind spots. These spots are too precious for me and I try not to waste them as much as possible.

But sometimes, even after all this whittling, I do get a curve ball that I don’t know how to handle. I am getting into this entire preamble because this month’s selection, American Graffiti(1973), is one such occasion. I have been writing this blog for almost three years now and, however poorly I might be doing it, you would expect I would know how to get myself out of such situation. Don't worry! It isn't as plain and simple as I didn't really care for this movie. With Barry Lyndon(1975) last year, I have tasted those waters but here I was into something deeper. What, you ask? Well, you will know soon enough!

So why did I choose American Graffiti? In all honesty, I knew nothing about it walking in, except for the fact that certain George Lucas directed it. I don’t have any particular affinity towards this man (or you can say that’s my way of saying “I pretty much hate him”). I don’t even have any interest in Star Wars film, original trilogy or abomination of three more films that followed them, which basically made him whatever he is now. Again, that’s my way of saying “I don’t understand why people like them so much” and we can all see what this guy has turned into now. But I added Graffiti to the list because I have seen many people say something on the lines of – I wish he went back to making films like American Graffiti. That’s it! All my defense stands on that single line. Flimsy, eh?

Wait! There is more. Film is about two high school graduates leaving their small town to go to college in some big city. I don’t like these films. Sure, I haven’t seen all of them and sure, there are 1 or 2 I even liked. But mostly, I don’t like high school movies and more they are about last fateful day or nostalgia it brings with it, more I stay want to away from them. Maybe I am not just that kind of guy but I don’t get Dazed and Confused(1991) (See what I did there? and honestly, it should have been called American Graffiti 2 because that’s what it is). I have had enough last days of my own and surprisingly, I have even spent them in a similar way people do in these films but something about them never connects with me when it is put on screen.

You do realise I am leading you up to something, right? because we are almost there! What I am trying to tell you through all this blabbering is against all odds American Graffiti somehow got to me. Don't worry, I ain't head over heels in love with it and I still don't get how anyone just abandons their car and get into someone else's? Sure, it is just a strip but what if they don't drop you back to where your car is? How are you gonna get back to your car? Have you thought about that? and BTW how in hell do these cars start? because I will be damned if I see a single key in whole film. BUT... main point is I still like this film somehow.

I am sure people connect with this movie because of how authentic it feels. I am sure it reminds viewers of their teenage years and how they went about spending those fateful moments. Even though it is very distinctly '60s with its authentic rock-n-roll and suburban look, it is easy for anyone who has been there to get nostalgic about it. I haven't and that's why I usually don't get them. Maybe it is me back in my hometown, back to those hangouts and back with friends that I spent those times with had its effect but the fact that it did lure me in counts more than it would for any other film.

I like that most of the characters are not obnoxious or at least because I like the film and hence don't think they are. I like that they all have their own stories and they all get their own arcs, sometimes crisscrossing through each other to get to one common end. I liked how it got me invested in them, even those I didn't much care about initially. I knew Ron Howard had his career in front of camera before he got behind it but I liked seeing him and young Richard Dreyfuss. I can't believe this is the same guy in Close Encounters of Third Kind(1977). How much can a man age in 4 years? But most of all, I loved Cindy Williams.

By now, film's tumultuous production is as legendary as film is. One of the six films Universal sanctioned after success of Easy Rider(1969) to let young filmmakers make semi-independent films for low budget, this film hit the rocky road from start. With limited budget and time, Lucas often printed first take he would get even if they weren't necessarily according to the script. It all worked for good though as probably spontaneity of those scenes is what made it such a hit. Technical misfortunes were abundant and it is filmed almost exclusively at night but it looks as well-lit as any suburban strip can be. Apparently Universal deemed it unreleasable and shelved for six months and when they released it, it quickly became third highest grosser of the year.

We all know where Lucas went after this but now I understand why people want him to go back to him before Star Wars. Given his track record, this might be a colossal waste as he did go back to his glory days in 1997 and made what I called above an abomination of trilogy. But still, if he can make anything remotely close to this, it can be worth an attempt. How much worse can it be than Star Wars 7?

March Blind Spot: Diabolique

When I selected my movies for this year’s Blind Spot back in December, one movie I got most enthusiastic response about was Diabolique(1955). Even though I was anticipating this one as well; enough to put it on this year's list, I have a small history with this film. I knew next to nothing about it up until last year and for some reason, I always thought of this as some sort of horror film; probably because that title gave me such vibes. I don't remember exactly where but I had it in one of my queues somewhere. Though I have always tried to get more acquainted with it, I am not the biggest fan of horror movies. So I took it off that list without having seen it. I have been regretting that decision for last year, even more so today after having seen it now.

This film comes with a disclaimer at the end - "Don't be Devils. Don't ruin the interest you friend could take in this film. Don't tell them what you saw. Thank You for them!" Now that could be a terrible translation but you get the idea, right? And considering how little I knew about this film a year ago, there could easily be many more like me. So, I intend to take this seriously even though it is now almost 60 year old film. I will try to give away as little as possible but if you haven't seen this film and intend to keep yourself in blind, turn away now and find yourself a copy of this film. Let me assure you, you are missing something worthy!

Michel Delassalle runs a boarding school where he works as a headmaster along with 4 other teachers including his wife and former mistress that everyone knows about; even his wife. But more surprising thing is, they are actually very good friends. Probably because they both have been manhandled by brutish Monsieur Delassalle, in case of his wife - she still is. Delassalle is not just a strict headmaster, he is an outright cruel person. And not just to the students in his school, to his fellow teachers which as I just mentioned include his former estranged lover and especially to his wife, who in reality is providing all the dough to run that place. He himself wouldn't get paid if it wasn't for his wife's money. That doesn't deter him much though as he knows his wife too well. She is submissive, demure and religious; death sentence of a combination for her, blank check for him.

A day before one of the weekends when school is going to be closed for few days due to holidays, Nicole, Delassalle's mistress, plants an idea into Christina's, Delassalle's wife, mind. She intends to get rid of him for their own good. This is only a final resort but by then we have seen enough evidence that this person deserves it more than anyone else. And it will only be poetic justice if it comes at hand of two women he has treated worst. Christina, being what she is, wrestles with that idea. As terrible a person her husband is, because of the kind of upbringing she has had, initially she can not even think of something like this, let alone actually cary it out. But every time she decides to turn away from this, as if on queue, her husband does something to push her towards it; like humiliating her on dinner table in front of everyone. That turns out to be a final straw as Christine leaves with Nicole next morning to her house where they plan their perfect murder and even execute it to almost perfection. But, as you would expect, something goes wrong at the last step and they spend rest of the film cleaning their trail.

As I promised above, I won't give away any more details than this. I have given you about 45 minutes worth content and as intriguing as they may sound, all they actually do is set us up for thrilling 80 minutes that follow. It takes its time to set everything up but that doesn't mean it gets boring, not even for a second. And what follows for rest of it more than makes up for it anyways. Vera Clouzot and Simone Signoret, in their contrasting characters of Christina and Nicole respectively make sure of it. Differences in their personality is what makes dynamics of this partnership even more crooked than it already is based on their relation to Delassalle. Christina seems utterly terrified of her husband and that makes her fickle at every stage of their plan. Nicole, though regularly overpowered by Delassalle; when we see her first, she is wearing sunglasses to hide her black eye given by Michel the night earlier, is much more composed, stern. She has thought out every little detail of their plan earlier and once it's is set in motion, she doesn't even flinch an eye. But when walls start to close up on them, Christina is the one that can handle that pressure more capably than Nicole.

In many ways, it reminded me of another film that has lot of similarities(slow start, elaborate setup of story, building tension, role reversals and those last couple of minutes) and even has similar look and feel to it, The Wages of Fear(1953). Though there are few traditional twists, unlike most other thrillers, there aren't couple of key scenes that drive whole film. On the other hand, its biggest asset is the way it keeps on building tension in every scene. It utilizes every scene it has at its disposal to add on to tension until everything changes in last couple of minutes. This connection I made was completely unprovoked. Imagine my surprise when I realized Clouzot actually directed both.

This is my second year of doing Blind Spots and 15th entry into the series. During its run last year, I have seen likes of Tokyo Story(1953) and The Treasure of the Sierra Madre(1948) which I am quite sure will make their way into my top 100 when I decide to update that list. I would probably be able to say this with much more conviction after little more time has passed but even after watching such revered movies, Diabolique can go down as not only 'one of the best' but probably even 'the' best. I only wish it was as much respected or well-known as the other two. I don't even know how many years will it take - maybe 15 to 20 years, depending on the judge!

February Blind Spot: How Green was My Valley

There are many films, especially those made decades earlier, where their reputation, good or bad but mostly bad, usually precedes their presence in pop culture references than anything that actually concerns film itself. And more often than not, these films are only remembered for all the wrong reasons for no fault of their own. My choice for this month’s blind spot, 1941’s Best Picture Oscar winner How Green was My Valley(1941) – ‘the film that beat Citizen Kane(1941)’ – is one such film. In February, all of us are in the high pitch Oscar fever with ceremony just a few days away. Since last year, I have been trying to get through all the Best Picture winners and hence, I thought it will be a good idea to choose past winner for this month. Last year I did the same thing with The French Connection(1971). I am continuing the trend this year with How Green was My Valley.

This is a story of Morgan family, 1 BIG family, leaving in one small village in South Welsh at the start of 20th century. Like many small villages, most men in village have one business. In this case, it is coal mining. Morgans have six sons and one daughter, Angharad . Their youngest son, Huw, is our narrator and protagonist. Their father and all five sons work in collieries.  Being a small and close-knit community that most villages like this are, Father Morgan is not only the patriarch of Morgan household but also a well respected, authoritative person of the community. Their daughter is the most beautiful face in the valley and their sons are voice of youth, young, dynamic leaders of tomorrow. What we get for two hours is this family, and subsequently everyone around them, going through uncertain phase of their life.

We see them going through workers strike that their father vehemently opposes but has to participate for the sake of whole community. We see them trying to live through consistently dropping wages but increasing risks and in case of Angharad who falls in love with Mr. Gruffydd, their local priest, but has to marry son of mine-owner because he thinks he will not be able to provide for her, we see whole community turn on to them for something she herself strongly opposed. However when it comes to Huw, family has high hopes for him. At least their father does; he has seen what collieries can do to man and very capable, hardworking men like his other sons. He doesn't want his eldest to go down that gutter as well and is visibly upset when Huw decides to follow their family tradition. Mother, on the other hand, seems quite contend with him following their father's or brother's footsteps. "If he could be as good a man as his father or his brothers, I will be fine with it", she says. There are many occasions when she says something like this, very simple and practical, and I love that about her.

I tried not to go into this one with too many preconceptions. In this case, it was slightly easier since only thing almost anyone talks about it is being ‘that’ film. It almost doesn’t exist beyond that but I will admit I wasn’t super excited about it either. And first 15 minutes confirmed my belief. It might be that I am watching too many 2013 movies in the past few months that theatricality of a 1941 film bothered me a bit initially. Not like I have that problem every time I watch a classic and I do watch fair amount of them but it was bit jarring this time around. It also could have been that voice over narration which felt bit too on the nose. I was almost certain then that I will just have to slog through this one. I was going to take this as a sort of dress rehearsal of what I expect majority of my 19 remaining Best Picture winners will be.

But then, something unexpected happened! As I kept going through it, I get more and more into it. That voice over narration disappeared almost completely. It appears here and there till the very end but not to the point of my initial annoyance. I got used to the type of acting and was even able to see beyond it. By the end of it, I was completely into it to the extent that I kept praying for Father to be well in the end from the second alarm blares over that valley. I credit most of this to its screenplay. What I find most interesting in it, apart from turning me around completely on it, is how much it manages to put in it in those two hours. There are almost too many characters for it to handle - 6 sons, their daughter, parents and few other add-ons like Bronwyn, their daughter-in-law, and Mr. Gruffydd, local priest. But it manages to give almost every one of them enough screen time to warrant their existence and at the same time keeping it easy enough to follow.

It is also funny that even though my favourite part of the film was screenplay, it was also the only department I had problem with. I like everyone in their respective roles, I like the direction, I also like how Ford makes it look like. But I really don't have much to say about any of them except it was good. Screenplay is something I have already praised for it's depth but I will go into couple of loose ends here as well. Movie starts with that voiceover narration I've already talked down. In it Huw talks about finally leaving the valley after 50 years. When it ends, he couldn't be more than 15. So what happens over the rest of 35 years that is worse than what we have already seen that makes him leave? I don't get why would Ford put that bit at the start if rest of film has no intention answering it. I don't want dwell too much on it since, as I said, I quite like this film but it was something he could have easily avoided.

So let’s address the elephant in the room – How does it measure up against Citizen Kane, Mecca of films? Let me make two things clear first. One, I have only seen Kane once, about three and half years ago, so the only thing that I remember about it is what’s Rosebud? Absolutely nothing else! So yes, it is highly overdue for a re-watch which brings me to my second point. Based on that first watch, I am not that big fan of it. Hence it never was high on my list of re-watches. My reaction to it was somewhat similar to that of Joey and Rachel’s(That’s a Friends(1994) reference for you. Go, figure!). I might have rendered my opinion useless after that preamble but at this point, I actually do prefer this one over Kane. And if you know your Oscars and your Citizen Kane, you would know that it was always going to be impossible for it to win. If there is anyone to blame here, blame Academy for making that decision; ‘tis the season after all!