Showing posts with label Brian DePalma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brian DePalma. Show all posts

Friday, 11 July 2014

Sisters (aka Blood Sisters)




De Palma, Sans Cheese

Sisters (aka Blood Sisters)
1973 USA 
Directed by Brian De Palma
Arrow BluRay Region B/DVD Region 2 Dual Edition

Warning: Spoilers stabbing you 
repeatedly as you bleed out on the floor...

The early part of the 1970s was the last big hurrah for American movies. You had Brian DePalma’s contemporaries, The New Hollywood Mavericks (as I think they were labelled back then) making their important, breakthrough films around this kind of time, give or take a few years. Directors such as Scorcese (Mean Streets), Spielberg (Jaws), Lucas (American Graffiti) and Coppola (The Godfather)... this was a big creative push which ushered in a brief but potent renaissance in American film making with lots of works by these directors having a lasting impact and influence on both American and International film. A legacy which is still being plundered to this day.

DePalma was no exception, of course, making great movies like this and Dressed To Kill, both of which owe a huge debt to Hitchcock’s Psycho and, of course, De Palma’s Obsession (a film which is quite reminiscent of Vertigo in some ways). Sisters is pretty much my favourite Brian De Palma movie. It comes from that great point in his career when he was experimenting with recycling Hitchcock tropes and motifs and then mixing them in with the kind of visual sensibility found in Italian giallo movies of that era.

Sisters tells the story of Dominique and Danielle (one living, one dead and both played by Margot Kidder) and it’s very much like Psycho in the fact that it starts out with a main protagonist, Philip (played by Lisle Wilson) who, like Marion Crane in Hitchcock’s seminal slasher, disappears from the narrative in a very sudden and brutal manner, once he’s been established for a while as the main lead. Philip is introduced, along with Danielle, as an unknowing participant in a TV game show called Peeping Toms. De Palma has always been considered a bit of a voyeuristic director due, I suspect, to the laid back and casual observational style of the kind of camerawork he employs in his movies. Slow, static or sometimes swooping along a track, it takes in everything and doesn’t necessarily stay with any one character for the bulk of his movies and Sisters is certainly no exception. So when we start off with a scene which is a “set up” for a voyeuristic dilemma, followed by the audience in the studio watching that, followed by us, the audience, watching that TV show presenting that footage... we get a whole voyeurism within voyeurism within voyeurism thing in the very first few minutes of this movie... just in case anybody was maybe missing one of De Palma’s key preoccupations at this point.

So let’s talk about blood and death.

The infamous “Birthday Cake” stab scene, where Philip has brought a cake back to Danielle’s apartment for her and her “sister”, who he heard talking through the wall earlier (not realising that Margot Kidder’s character was, without her even knowing it, talking to herself), is both shocking in its sudden opening slash (even if you are savvy enough to be expecting it on your first viewing) and, even by today’s standards, quite shockingly intense in both its brutality and its duration. After Philip is initially stabbed twice in a crossing blow at the top of one of his legs, near the groin, this is followed by a stab through the mouth which takes most of his left cheek out. As Dominique, brought into play in Danielle’s mind from the trauma of her sexual encounter with Philip from the night before,  drops the knife, which is sent spinning... she is clearly suffering from some kind of schizophrenic fit. All the while, Philip is very slowly crawling across the apartment floor towards the knife, expending all his energy on just trying to stay alive and not “bleed out” without a fight. When Dominique/Danielle notices this, though, she flings herself on him and starts stabbing him repeatedly in the back before spinning the knife away again. The twitching Phillip finally dies trying to write help on the window in his own blood... a murder which is witnessed, Rear Window style, by Jennifer Salt playing Grace Collier, the person who will take over the rest of the movie as the lead protagonist.

As we see the end and then aftermath and clean up of the murder from both her point of view and from the viewpoint of Danielle and her ex-husband, Emil, played by William Finley, we are introduced to what is a very early example of De Palma’s split screen technique. Of course, split screen was nothing new, but DePalma does use it a lot in his films to do things like, in this case, totally set up the character of Grace Collier via a feed of her newspaper columns, summing up her stance on life, while also getting the murder clean up out of the way simultaneously. He also uses it to build suspense, such as when Grace and the police narrowly miss Emil in a series of corridors, shown from two angles, as he escapes with the murder weapon and the bloody rags. Even at this early stage of his career, De Palma showed himself to be a master at this kind of thing.

Actually, the use of the split screen technique in this movie is very apt to push the concept of “doubling” and schizophrenia here and De Palma makes full use of this throughout. For instance, in one shot during this sequence, Danielle is looking at herself in a bathroom cabinet mirror on the left hand half of the screen... but the cabinet is made up of two doors and there is a split right down the centre of her face, which is a big visual clue thrown in the face of the audience about what is really going on here... the two characters inhabiting the mind of one body. Also, this means you basically have a split screen (the double doors) within a split screen, which is also visually interesting... this is all good stuff.

The other notable thing about the first murder sequence and, indeed, the whole movie, is Bernard Herrmanns absolute powerhouse scoring. The stab scene has already been visually pre-empted when Philip is getting the writing on the cake iced in a bakery and the angle at which the hands doing the icing makes it look very much like a knife stabbing downwards, as the lady behind the counter oozes the pinky red icing onto the white surface. It’s a phenomenal shot and Herrmann scores this with a child like motif which is reused in the immediate prelude to Margot Kidders stab-frenzy freak out, just before Herrmann segues into full on, in yer face, stab music mixed with weird moog synthesiser sounds, rivalling his earlier, more famous stab music for Hitchcock’s Psycho. I remember musicologist Royal S. Brown noting in an interview once, on a documentary about Herrmann, that the child like melody of the cake theme is replaced with an antagonistic childrens game melody “Nyah nyah nah, nyah nyah!” and this becomes very clear when you think about it. And, of course, this links in perfectly with the tone of the naive and child-like Danielle as compared to the aggressive mindset of the Dominique half of her brain.

There’s a lot going on in this movie and there are some great scenes which all involve the fact that Dominique and Danielle were siamese twins... until something happened and they had to be separated. There’s a very potentially confusing flashback scene which echoes the history of Margot Kidder’s role but it also doubles as a dream sequence for the Grace Collier character, who projects herself into the sequence by being Dominique in the shots. This is because Collier’s mind has, by this point, been rendered easy to manipulate and also provides De Palma with a great sequence, as well as a good conclusion for the camera in that she carries a certain memento of her experiences locked in her brain once the film is concluded. After the flashback/dream sequence plays out, we are then treated to a scene where Emil explains verbally the real history of the characters, in case there’s any confusion with the fact that Daniellle was indeed becoming Dominique at certain parts of the movie. This helps things considerably if you are still wondering how she can’t be two people and how she changed from one set of clothes from another and back again without changing her original “laying on the floor” position during the transition. I’m wondering if Emil’s explanation was either added on after the preview (or at studio insistence) or, maybe if the script originally concluded differently from the version presented in the final cut.

Either way, it doesn’t really matter. The film kind of has three end scenes which give closure and conclusion to Emil, Danielle and Dominique but which also leaves things quite potently inconclusive in terms of both Grace Collier and the private detective she hired, who has “followed the sofa” in which Philip’s body has been stashed. It’s one of De Palma’s better endings, I feel, and Herrmann’s music is a considerable aid to getting the sinister sense of things “not quite at rest” across to the audience by this point.

There’s another story I remember about Herrmann’s score for this film, again from a documentary of some kind, or possibly a biography, and it revolves around his amazing Main Title cue, which is a variation of the stab music which later surfaces in the movie. I think I recall hearing that De Palma had originally asked for a quieter prelude rather than the blood and thunder that Herrmann delivered here. Herrmann said to him something along the lines of... “Hitchcock can get away with nothing really happening in the first half an hour or so because the audience knows something terrible is going to happen. You are not yet as famous as Hitchcock, so they need to know something terrible is going to happen from the opening title music.” That’s not the exact words, I couldn’t find it on the internet... but that’s the gist of it and, for that particular stage of De Palma’s career... I reckon Herrmann was right. The opening titles/stab music in Sisters is one of the most blistering score cues in the history of film music. It’s kinda funny because I use it for the ring tone on my iPhone and my dog always barks when he hears a phone ringing... the upshot of that in terms of watching this excellent new blu-ray version from Arrow was that, every time someone gets stabbed in Sisters, my dog barks at me. Oh well.

There was apparently a remake of this film a few years ago but I can’t bring myself to watch a retread of something which holds such a high place of esteem in my celluloid loving heart. The original Sisters is an absolutely classic example of one of the best American thrillers, before the hack and slash craze had quite got going in the US and, certainly, far more superior to some of the slashers that came after it. If you like this period in American cinema history and you want to see a really entertaining movie with some smart camerawork and some really excellent music, then you probably should add this new dual blu-ray/dvd edition from Arrow to your list. I haven’t watched any of the extras yet but, like the Criterion edition before it, it looks like it’s got some nice stuff on there and it’s not all just recycled from the Criterion DVD, from what I could tell. Definitely have a stab at this one, if you have the inclination.

Wednesday, 17 July 2013

Passion




Passion Demand

Passion
2012 Germany/France
Directed by Brian De Palma

When I first heard about Brian De Palma’s new film Passion, I was positively chomping at the bit to see it. I waited and waited for a cinema release in this country. Then I bought the soundtrack, for reasons I’ll explain later.

Then more waiting and waiting.

A year later... I decided to take the opportunity a friend gave to me of watching the thing because, frankly, I’m still waiting for it to get a release in this country.

Unfortunately... it turns out I’m not in the best of shape to be able to properly review it for you... but I’ll do my best. The problem, you see, is that once I was half way through the opening credits to the movie, I found out the film is a remake of another film from 2010 which I'd not seen, Crime D’Amour (aka Love Crime) and I really don’t like to see remakes of other movies, especially when the source material usually turns out to be way superior these days to the remake.

But, since I’d waited so long to see it, I pressed on and I will do my best to give you a flavour of it, even though I can’t make the comparisons which need to be made.

The film stars Rachel MacAdams as Christine, an advertising executive... and Noomi Rapace (the original version of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) as Isabella, one of her team. Christine likes to be the centre of attention and rule the roost and she takes credit for people’s ideas and uses them as stepping stones for her career, even the victimised Isabella who she wants to also be her lover. She is played, pretty well, as a completely unlikeable bitch by MacAdams and, though I just wanted to punch her throughout the course of the movie, credit to the actress in question for making me feel this way about her. Special praise also for the marvellous Rapace who plays the top/bottom/top/bottom character in this relationship, as various elements in the convoluted plot unfold.. and also to the actress playing Isabella’s personal assistant, Danni, performed by Karoline Herfurth who was so good in the vampire movie We Are The Night (reviewed here).

The convoluted-to-the-point-nobody-cares-anymore plot is, to be honest, very typical of De Palma’s early work, back when he was making vital and brilliant, highly personalised Hitchcock variations like Sisters, Dressed To Kill, Body Double and the like and I can certainly see what attracted him to this material. If anyone is going to get the most out of this kind of subject matter it’s De Palma... I just cant tell you whether he did a better job on it or not because, again, I haven’t seen the original version of the film (yet).

What I can say is that it is very well directed by De Palma, who shows his natural flair for mise en scene (the room to room colour palette changes are great) and gets some good sequences from his actors. The whole ting looks very smooth and, as usual with De Palma, there isn’t complete resolution at the end of the movie. He, once again, delves into dream sequences with some of the characters and by the end of the movie you’re not always sure, at least I wasn’t, where the dividing line between the dream space and reality is and which version you are currently in. For example, when he reintroduces the concept of one of the characters having a twin sister I thought we were immediately going to be pushed back into the same kind of world as his absolute masterpiece Sisters from 1973. Instead we are taken somewhere else as far as that character is concerned... I just wasn’t sure, by the end of the film, where exactly.

This is not a weakness of the movie, though, it is a strength and it will be interesting to see if the original version of the movie makes use of a twin sister within its plot line too.

The very important thing about this film, and the reason why I gobbled up the soundtrack so quickly, is because this film marks the return to collaboration of one of the most enjoyable composer/director partnerships in screen history, with the score to this one being composed by Pino Donnagio and, although not totally what I would expect, it does in very many places capture that old, early 70s neo-giallo style of movie making that DePalma and Donnagio used to be so good at. In terms of the music, if you’re a fan of this composer and director working together, then you should probably take a look at this one so you can hear the score in context.

At the end of the day, the performances, direction, editing and music are all up to scratch here... I just somehow felt underwhelmed by it. I would, however, firmly place it within the realm of De Palma’s other work in this genre and so, if you like stuff like Raising Cain, Femme Fatale and the other movies I mentioned earlier, then you’ll probably want to take a look at this one also... although I feel it’s probably the least compulsive of these particular films. Not a terrible film by any means.... stylishly shot and expertly handled... I just felt a little bit bored by a lot of it and felt that Soderbergh’s Side Effects (reviewed here) tackled a similar area of betrayal and intrigue in a much more effective manner. That being said, however, I wish De Palma would make more films in this mould as I think this is definitely the genre in which he can work his best miracles of movie magic. Hopefully more people will get the opportunity to see this sometime soon.

Sunday, 26 May 2013

Mission Impossible




When You Mission ‘pon A Star

Mission Impossible
1996 USA
Directed by Brian De Palma
DVD Region 2

Warning: This review will self destruct in an 
explosion of spoilers in 5 paragraphs.

I’d never seen any of the modern Mission Impossible films up until very recently, but my father had been going on at me to watch them for years, as he’s a fan of the series. I perhaps sealed my own fate in regards to this particular franchise because I bought him the four films on DVD last year and since he watched them again, the pressure was on me again to follow suit. Well the other night he finally talked me into watching the first one with him... I had certain expectations as to what I was going to be watching but, I can honestly say, this was not the film I thought it would be.

Now I know I used to watch the old TV show with people like Peter Graves, Martin Landau and Leonard Nimoy appearing in it on the old black and white TV set when I was five or six years old... or at any rate, it used to be on in the background. The only things I can remember about it, to be honest, were Lalo Schifrin’s blisteringly famous theme tune and the “this tape will self destruct in x number of seconds” thing at the start of each episode. I wasn’t exactly expecting the movie version to be a good representation of what the TV show was about (although it certainly turned out to be something closer to the style than what I was expecting).

Now I really like Brian De Palma as a director but, I do find his post 70s work a bit hit and miss, to be honest with you. I love his early “Hitchcock” parodies and occasionally he does something in the style of his early work which reminds me of the DePalma I used to love at the time. Some of my favourites being Sisters, Dressed To Kill, Body Double, Raising Kane and Femme Fatale (am seriously looking forward to his new film Passion if it ever gets any kind of release over here in the UK). Even so, though, I wasn’t expecting this movie to be in any way reflective of his earlier work but, in certain sequences in the movie, I was dead wrong about that. I was expecting, from all I’d seen and heard about the film which, admittedly, wasn’t much... a big, modern action movie with long drawn out chase sequences, explosions and more bullets than brains. When, in actual fact, it’s not a bad attempt at being a slow burn thriller with the occasional action sequence used to merely punctuate certain areas of the story.

I wasn’t disappointed by the film but, neither was I as impressed with it as I’d expected to be (I think my dad had really raised my expectations of it to unfair levels of excellence, I have to say). It does, as I say, work well as at thriller and there were some sequences which did remind me of those early DePalma days, especially since you have Danny Elfman on the score and, when he’s not belting out adaptations of Lalo Schifrin’s original theme, some of the scenes did actually remind me of what Bernard Herrmann would have done had Hitchcock been directing this movie... which, of course, does ring true to my perception of the subtle genius of Brian DePalma (I’ve often heard Elfman’s scores compared to the works of Herrmann but I’d never really seen the connection myself, until watching this film).

The positive things about the film for me were the fact that it had a good cast, it wasn't just another episode of “the Tom Cruise show” (although I almost wouldn’t have minded that because I think he’s got enough charisma to keep a piece together) and more of an ensemble job. Jean Reno was especially good but, alas, was underused and not put in a position whereas he could return in a sequel (if you know what I mean). The set pieces such as the hanging down above the computer at Langley and the “helicopter hitched to a high speed train under a tunnel gag” sequence were all okay but certainly didn’t match my idea of what they could have been. The emphasis on this film is definitely one of suspense and good storytelling over action... which is where I come to the negative parts of the movie.

I didn’t know anything about this film but right when Emilio Estevez gets killed off I knew they’d pretty much kill off the whole team during that sequence (or at least appear to). Secondly, when the character played by John Voight (and Peter Graves in the old TV show) is seen being shot, I pretty much knew he was doing it himself and had caused the destruction of the team right there an then which was, I dunno, maybe ten to fifteen minutes into the movie? I knew he’d be turning up again and when his wife escaped unharmed, played by the always delightful but painfully underused Emmanuelle Beart, I figured out she’d be in on it too. So basically, within the first 15 minutes I had the story twists completely figured out and the rest of the film was just waiting for the penny to drop with Tom Cruise and biding my time spotting little known actors like Tony Vogel (who played the 1970s TV version of Dick Barton: Special Agent before lapsing into obscurity again with roles like a few seconds playing German U-Boat Commander in Raiders Of The Lost Ark) turning up as a member of MI5, in a role which must have been less than a minute of screen time, mostly with his head turned away from the camera.

I was a little disappointed at the start of the movie when I thought that Brian DePalma’s shot design and editing were going to be as pedestrian as the original TV show might have been. The first ten minutes or so seemed to be zoom, cut to shot, cut to another shot, cut back to a close up etc. Very uninspired and boring. However, after a little while he did pick up speed again and get back into the kind of sweeping and beautiful mise en scene I would normally peg him for. This included a beautiful shot of Tom Cruise running away from a giant, exploding fish tank which, due to the way his arms and legs fall within the shot,  instantly reminded me of one of the original posters for Alfred Hitchcock’s North By Northwest... I promise I wasn’t deliberately looking for DePalma/Hitchcock moments to highlight here though. Honest, guv!

All in all, I’d say the first Mission Impossible film was a lot better than I was expecting, although really obvious on the story level. Not the action fest I was kind of half dreading, half hoping for, by any means, and certainly not something I would tell people to avoid... although I wouldn’t particularly go out of my way to recommend it either, in all fairness. Looking forward, though, to seeing how the series progressed after this initial movie. The second one is, I understand, directed by iconic action director John Woo... so I suspect it wil be an altogether different kind of mission to the first one. Watch this space...





Mission Impossible at NUTS4R2
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to click on one of the titles below to take you to my review.

Mission Impossible
Mission Impossible 2
Mission Impossible 3
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol 
Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation 
Mission Impossible: Fallout