THE COLLECTOR

1965/Director: William Wyler/ Writers: John Fowles (novel), Stanley Mann (writer)

Cast: Terence Stamp, Samantha Eggar, Mona Washbourne, Maurice Dallimore

The Collector is a film by William Wylers, based on the novel by John Fowles, starring basically only two actors in a almost stage style performance. Terrance Stamp plays butterfly collector Freddie Clegg who is actually rather brilliant but has an incredible inferiority complex. He works as a clerk who is taunted daily by his co-workers until he one day wins a substantial fortune in the British football pool. He uses his money to buy and equip a isolated, rustic old house in the lush British country side. By equip I mean he turns the Gothic looking cellar into a furnished holding cell meant to contain one Miranda Grey ( Sammantha Eggar ) who he has developed an obsession with and is determined to make her fall in love with him. The first step in his bizarre courtship is to chloroform her then kidnap her and haul her back to her cell. She has no idea where she is or what Freddie’s intentions really are and in some ways neither do we, as the viewer is uncertain of how sincere he really is with his promises and comfortings.

The film focuses on the tension and conflicts between educated and born into money Miranda and once working class Freddie who is now wealthy and has a lot of free time on his hands. Both actors deliver excellent performances. The movie came on the heels Hitchcock’s Psycho (and so cannot avoid often undue comparisions) and while technically Psycho is a better made film, The Collector is a more believable study of a broken mind and psychosis. One cannot help but sympathize somehow with Freddie’s plight (and Stamp’s insightful performance adds to our ability to connect with the unhinged young man). We almost hope that Miranda will little by little actually come around to Freddie or that he will honor his word and release her at the time he promises at the beginning of her captivity. Not just for her sake, but for his own because does not seem to be an evil person. None of this is to be and the film ends tragically, but not with Freddie being killed off by his captive, as is the norm for modern captor/captive films, but with the unintentional death of Miranda from exposure to the elements basically.

Some reviews I scanned refer to Freddie as a serial killer, but this is not the case at all. He sincerely seems to mean no harm to Miranda and while he is forceful he is never brutal or sadistic. As the film progresses however and the worlds from which Freddie and Miranda were born into seem to remain distant and unknown to the other Freddie becomes more and more frustrated and Miranda more and more terrified and dependent at the same time. In one scene Freddie tries to understand Miranda’s interest in Picasso and J.D Salinger and angrily destroys the books he bought her. In another Miranda insults Freddie’s prize winning butterfly collection that he shyly reveals to her, hoping to show something of his true self to her.

As I said, the film ends not with the death of the captor but with the slow decline and death of the captive. The last shots of the film show Freddie stalking his next victim, now more experienced and not apt to make the wrong choices as before, such as choosing someone he has nothing in common with. Freddie, while at times likable and almost naïve in nature, in the end has little remorse left for Miranda and concludes she brought it all on herself. One scene is left to the viewer to decide what really may have or may not ahve happen when Freddies lies down in bed wit the again chloraformed Miranda and caresses her hair as the scene fades in typical 1960’s fashion. He promises nothing happened as she was unconscious but why even mention the incident all then.

While the movie is nicely shot and I might say it suffered a little from a lack of a truly claustrophobic atmosphere. It also suffered from a really inadequate soundtrack by the usually capable Maurice Jarre. The soundtrack is nice… but too nice and at times a little corny and seems like more of a soundtrack for the films of the 1950’s. The movie needed a score that was a little more tension creating, rather than, honestly, soothing and inappropriate.

Another great British movie that, like The Servant, uses the action and drama as a vehicle for other messages, here such as British class struggle, the basic problems of loneliness and men and women communicating in general. I am also preparing a post on what I call Miranda style movies, and have about eight films to try and pander. Some may seem a little odd and may stretch the category a little and I will see if I can manage to be convincing or not. I searched for some quotes from the film but could find none really and will see if I can get a script from online and select some of my own, as some of the lines are so unsettling and chilling. A truly creepy film that relies on acting and atmosphere and well written lines. I have never read the book by John Fowles and being in China I may have a hard time locating it unless I can back to Beijing or Shanghai. I would certainly like to read the book after seeing this film again the other night. I cannot recommend a movie like this high enough.

IN A LONELY PLACE

1950/ Director: Nicholas Ray/ Writers:Dorothy B. Hughes (story), Edmund H. North (adaptation)

Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Gloria Grahame, Frank Lovejoy, Carl Benton Reid, Art Smith, Jeff Donnell, Martha Stewart

It has been said that the character of “Dix” Dixon Steele in Nicholas Ray’s In a Lonely Place comes closer to conveying Bogey’s real character than any other of his film roles. Steele is a once successful screen writer who has not had a hit in years and now is cynical and inclined to drink heavily and sulk. His disposition is moody and prone to violence. It is a small wonder that he becomes the main suspect when a young girl is found murdered after she spent her last night alive at his apartment reading a book meant for adaptation. Steele is so burned out and bitter at the shallow movie industry that made him a celebrity he cannot even read the book himself.

Gloria Grahame plays Steele’s neighbor Laurel and she is drawn into his cynical charm easily as they spare back and forth with witty barbs and jabs. As the film develops she becomes more and more aware of Steele’s very dangerous side and soon begins to wonder if he is in fact the killer or not. Steele seems to take delight in giving confusing information to the cops who he sees as unable to solve the matter alone, at one point over dinner with a cop buddy reinacting the way the murder may have taken place with sadist relish.

Obviously Steele is a troubled man with a history of violence and we find out a history woman beating as well. He is soon irrationally jealous and suspicious of Laurel and the tensions gets more severe as she tries to get away secretly. The movie ends with Steele being cleared of the charges but losing Laurel because of his own possessiveness and violence. Originally Ray and screenwriter Andrew Solt had Steele murder Laurel in a rage at the same time he is cleared of the murder he was suspected of originally. Ray saw this as simply too nihilistic and felt marriages and relationships could end on some less solemn note. Interestingly during production Ray and his wife, Gloria Grahame herself, were as privately as possible ending their rocky marriage. Ray often slept on the sofa in the studio office and a contract was written up stipulating what duties, and what duties only, Mrs. Grahame were responsible for while on the set in the presence of her director husband. Who knows if this real life drama had any influence on the hastily improvised ending Ray suddenly felt compelled to add on even after the more tragic ending had been shot and approved.

The film was produced for Bogart’s Santana Productions at a time when the big film studios began to see independent studios as threats to their power. It is a fine performance by Bogart. He is funny, brooding and menacing. Some of the dialog and interchanges seem a little over the top at times but they are all the more engaging for that reason. I tend to like the types of performances given in older films though they seem exaggerated by todays post method acting standards. It is considered a film noir classic though it is hard to really fit into a niche neatly. Didn’t fare too well at the box office but has become a cult classic by virtue of its quality alone. And aren’t those the best kind of movies anyway? Ones that bomb and get no awards when they are released but get all the respect they deserve day in and day out for decades. The film has since justly received all the honors it deserves including one of the highest any film can receive… a haphazard review here on my measly blog.

A SELECTION OF QUOTES FROM A LONELY PLACE. ALL QUOTES FROM IMDB.

Mildred Atkinson: Before I started to go to work at Paul’s, I used to think that actors made up their own lines.
Dixon Steele: When they get to be big stars, they usually do.

Sylvia Nicolai: Well, he’s exciting because he isn’t quite normal.

Brub Nicolai: Maybe us cops could use some of that brand of abnormality. I learned more about this case in five minutes from him than I did from all of our photographs, tire prints and investigations.
Dixon Steele: Nobody can call me the things he did.

Laurel Gray: A blind, knuckle-headed squirrel. That’s REAL bad.

Dixon Steele: There’s no sacrifice too great for a chance at immortality.

Dixon Steele: I was born when she kissed me. I died when she left me. I lived a few weeks while she loved me.
[last lines]

Laurel Gray: [tearfully] I lived a few weeks while you loved me. Goodbye, Dix.
Frances Randolph: Remember how I used to read to you?

Dixon Steele: Uh huh. Since then, I’ve learned to read by myself.
Dixon Steele: Go ahead and get some sleep and we’ll have dinner together tonight.

Laurel Gray: We’ll have dinner tonight. But not together.
Dixon Steele: It was his story against mine, but of course, I told my story better.

Mel Lippmann: What does it matter what I think? I’m the guy who tried to talk Selznick out of doing “Gone with the Wind”!
Actress in Convertible: Dix Steele ! How are you? Don’t you remember me?
Dixon Steele: Sorry, can’t say that I do.
Actress in Convertible: You wrote the last picture I did… at Columbia

Dixon Steele: Oh, I make it a point to never see pictures I write.
[referring to the book Dixon is supposed to adapt into a screenplay]
Mildred Atkinson: Oh I think it’ll make a dreamy picture, Mr. Steele. What I call an epic.
Dixon Steele: And what do you call an epic?
Mildred Atkinson: Well, you know - a picture that’s REAL long and has lots of things going on.

Capt. Lochner: Why didn’t you call for a cab? Isn’t that what a gentleman usually does under the circumstances?
Dixon Steele: Oh I didn’t say I was a gentleman. I said I was tired.

Mildred Atkinson: It must be WONDERFUL to be a writer!
Dixon Steele: [sarcastically] Oh, thrilling!

Capt. Lochner: [Dixon has replied with sarcasm to Lochner's questions] You’re told that the girl you were with last night was found in Benedict Canyon, murdered. Dumped from a moving car. What’s your reaction? Shock? Horror? Sympathy? No - just petulance at being questioned. A couple of feeble jokes. You puzzle me, Mr. Steele.
Dixon Steele: Well, I grant you, the jokes could’ve been better, but I don’t see why the rest should worry you - that is, unless you plan to arrest me on lack of emotion.

Dixon Steele: [noting the geography of their apartments] You know, Ms. Gray, you’re one up on me - you can see into my apartment but I can’t see into yours.
Laurel Gray: I promise you, I won’t take advantage of it.
Dixon Steele: [wryly] I would, if it were the other way around.

Capt. Lochner: Considering that you’ve never met Mr. Steele, you pay quite a bit of attention to him.
Laurel Gray: Hmm-hmm. I have at that.
Capt. Lochner: Do you usually give such attention to your neighbors?
Laurel Gray: No.
Capt. Lochner: Were you interested in Mr. Steele because he’s a celebrity?
Laurel Gray: No, not at all. I noticed him because he looked interesting - I like his face.

Brub Nicolai: You know, I got married.
Dixon Steele: Why?
Brub Nicolai: Oh, I don’t know. I guess she had a couple of bucks to spare.

Dixon Steele: [to Laurel] I’ve been looking for someone a long time… I didn’t know her name or where she lived - I’d never seen her before. A girl was killed, and because of that, I found what I was looking for. Now I know your name, where you live, and how you look.

Laurel Gray: [on a scene in Dix's script] I love the love scene - it’s very good.
Dixon Steele: Well that’s because they’re not always telling each other how much in love they are. A good love scene should be about something else besides love. For instance, this one. Me fixing grapefruit. You sitting over there, dopey, half-asleep. Anyone looking at us could tell we’re in love.

Dixon Steele: Anything you want to make you happy?
Laurel Gray: [whispers into his ear] I wouldn’t want anyone but you.

Dixon Steele: You know, you’re out of your mind - how can anyone like a face like this? Look at it…
[leans in for a kiss]
Laurel Gray: I said I liked it - I didn’t say I wanted to kiss it.

Dixon Steele: You annoy me!
Laurel Gray: If I do, it isn’t intentional.

Capt. Lochner: I didn’t expect you to give me more information… but certain facts contradict your original statement.
Laurel Gray: [flatly] I wish you’d say what you mean.
Capt. Lochner: Yes, let’s do that. On the night of the Atkinson murder, you looked at Dixon Steele and said you didn’t know him.
Laurel Gray: I didn’t.
Capt. Lochner: Since then, you and he have been inseparable.
Laurel Gray: He’s writing a script. I’m doing the typing.
Capt. Lochner: Do you receive a salary for this?
Laurel Gray: No. I’m doing it for love.
Capt. Lochner: [surprised] Are you in love with Mr. Steele?
Laurel Gray: For the record, I am in love with Mr. Steele.
Capt. Lochner: Are you going to be married?
Laurel Gray: [pause] If we do, I’ll send you an invitation - after all, it was you who first introduced us to each other.

Dixon Steele: Oh, I love a picnic. Acres and acres of sand and all of it in your food.
Laurel Gray: Stop griping. Just lie still and inhale.
Dixon Steele: What, sand?
Laurel Gray: No, air - and don’t let it go to your head.

Laurel Gray: [to Capt. Lochner] Yesterday, this would’ve meant so much to us. Now it doesn’t matter… it doesn’t matter at all.

Dixon Steele: You know, when you first walked into the police station, I said to myself, “There she is - the one that’s different. She’s not coy or cute or corny. She’s a good guy - I’m glad she’s on my side. She speaks her mind and she knows what she wants.”
Laurel Gray: Thank you, sir. But let me add: I also know what I don’t want - and I don’t want to be rushed.

-

-

=

=

A - Z LIST OF URANIUM CAFE TOPICS

THE SERVANT

1963/ Director:Joseph Losey/Writers: Robin Maugham (novel)Harold Pinter (screenplay)

Cast: Dirk Bogarde, Sarah Miles, Wendy Craig, James Fox, Patrick Magee, Catherine Lacey, Richard Vernon

I had never really heard about this movie, a collaboration between director Joseph Losey and playwrite/screenwriter Howard Pinter except in passing while reading reviews of other films. I had had the DVD lying around for a couple months and decided I would pop it in one night and was so stunned by the film I felt compelled to do a post on it here at the Cafe though it tends to fall outside what I would normally write about though is one I want to promote. In fact, the film is not easy to critique and really is one that must be seen and allowed to wash over you with its dark waters and sinister shadows. I made a clip from the movie and uploaded it to youtube (see the next post… I must post videos separately from posts heavy laden with text and graphics for technical reasons), as well as uploading the trailer, as there was very little there about this marvelously malevolent story of role reversal, British class struggle moral decay and sexual decadence.

The story is essentially a set piece with almost all of the drama occurring inside a house recently acquired by the independently wealthy and aristocratic playboy Tony, played superbly by James Fox in his first acting role. “Gentleman’s gentleman” Hugh Barrett arrives to meet Tony for an interview. He finds Tony sleeping off some afternoon beers in back area of the empty house. There is a long shot of Barrett staring at Tony asleep that makes more sense as the film develops. It appears to be politeness to not awaken the lazy upper class gentleman, but in fact is Barrett making his calculations. To be ceratin, the opening scene is done so excellently – in particular the edgy b/w cinematography by Douglas Slocombe - and sets the tone of the film which is maintained until the ending. Barrett is played by Dirk Bogarde in what many consider to be his best role. I have not seen him in a film in many, many years and had forgotten about his scene presence. The fact that Barrett is actually evil in a Mephistophelian sense does not become clear immediately, but gradually it becomes evident something is amiss and that the rich and bored Tony has become the target of an evil game played out by the equally bored and hostile Barrett and his ‘sister’ Vera, played coquetteishly to a tee by Sarah Miles.

There seems to be no real motive for the games that Barrett and Vera begin to play on Tony other than the fact that Tony seems to be a suitable target for their ultimately spiteful manipulations. I speculate that perhaps the whole thing, in particular his seduction by Vera - and most likely Barrett himself, though the bisexual innuendo is well hidden between the lines of 1963’s British censors - was to enact some sort of blackmail plot against Tony to keep his secrets from his serious flame Susan, played by TV soap star Wendy Craig (Butterflies) and Tony’s prominent family. But the film never really establishes this and Barrett ultimately only seeks his servant’s pay but in the process turns Tony’s world upside down and while Tony loses nothing in the sense of wealth or property he loses all morally and spiritually, and that alone seems to satisfy Barrett. And in a sad way it seems to satisfy Tony as well.

What is so fantastic about this film is how it really works on a dark psychological level in every aspect, from the acting and cinematography to the sparse but effective score by Sir John Dankworth. While Tony’s character is not without fault and basically unlikable to any working Joe simply because he is so rich and listless – talking of projects in Brazil that never seem to materialize – he seems undeserving of the wreckage he receives by the bitter Barrett. Barrett no doubt sees himself as superior to Tony and resents his servitude. He has no doubt begun to get bitter long before his employment to Tony, who seems to hire Barrett for no other reason than he cannot take care of himself and has the money to spend on a servant and later a maid (Sarah Miles). Wendy Craig’s Susan seems to despise Barrett from the beginning, and at first I found her unfair and snobbish and disliked her character, yet in the end her character seems to be the only one who retains her dignity. I have read some reviews about how she is undone as well by Barrett, but I did see it and the ending shows her winning out over (or at least not not succumbing to) Barrett – where she slaps the crap out of him and he recovers and helps her adjust her coat as she leaves. There are no winners at the end but only people who have been broken down less than others.

Miles is sexy and hot as Vera and we are never really sure what the relationship is between her and Barrett, except that it is not brother and sister. They are lovers for certain and the plot they develop seems much more complicated than is shown and we have to draw our inferences from their looks and nods as nothing is ever really reveled in dialog.

The house and its hallways and objects – such as an oval mirror – become a symbol of Tony’s moral decline, starting off bare and empty, then filled with luxury and then with decadence and squalor. There are so many intriguing scenes that I could go on and on and I really like to keep my reviews/comments a little on the shorter side, and do not like retelling the movie narrative really. I like to read those types of movie sites, but I tend to shy away from doing that, and if I wee going to I would have to admit that this film is beyond my skill to do that. I think I can refer you to the clip I made and posted in the next post and it should describe better than I can the mood and angst ridden energy of the film.

They simply do not make movies like this any more. It’s as dark as a movie can become without being maudlin and gimmicky. Without ever spilling a drop of blood or firing a pistol the movie is as tense and nerve wrecking n experience as you are going to get. I cannot praise this movie enough and encourage you to go out and get this little known but gripping Brit drama about the horror of just being a human being and falling far from the lofty heights into the dark abyss.

A -Z LIST OF URANIUM CAFE POSTS

-

I am a huge enthusiast of film noir style films and especially those of the 40's and 50's. I decided to finally begin this category dedicated to noir films. I have seen plenty and have a decent DVD collection to review. I might add that for me film noir is not limited to tough talking detective films, though those movies represent the core of what film noir is noted for, but can include boxing films such as The Set Up and Requiem for a Heavy Weight, and in a stretch even westerns such as High Noon or Gregory Peck's The Gunfighter. Some newer films such as the excellent Body Heat and L.A. Confidential draw from the film noir tradition but are not really film noir to me for one big reason: they are not in sensational black and white. Color just eleviates the despair and suffering to a tolerable point. The soul is to so dark and stained any longer and you cannot get those great smoke rings against the black background any longer. Lets begin this category with triple doses of the underbelly of life, beginning with pretty boy Tyrone Power's experiment in carny angst:

-

-

Nightmare Alley

-

1947/Director: Edmund Goulding/Screenplay: Jules Furthman , William Lindsay Gresham (novel)

-

Cast: Tyrone Power , Joan Blondell, Coleen Gray, Helen Walker, Taylor Holmes, Mike Mazurki, Ian Keith

-

From what I understand Tyrone Power bought the rights to Lindsay Gresham’s novel for something like $60,000 and wanted it to be a vehicle to shed his romantic lead image and establish him as a legitimate actor. The studios at first felt the material was unfilmable but Powers and prospective director Edmund Goulding were persistent and the movie was filmed. Powers plays a traveling sideshow carnie on the look out for his big break who he finds in the sideshow fortune teller. They team up after her alcoholic husband or boyfriend drinks a bottle of wood grain alcohol and do a mind reading act that soon grows too small for Powers. He is shotgun married to the strongman’s (Mike Mazurki) naïve but sexy daughter played convincingly by pretty Collen Gray.

-

He crosses paths with smart and sultry Joan Blondell who plays the typical film noir femme fatal who is always one step ahead of the desperate and haunted male lead. She plays a high class psychiatrist whose clientele include the social elite that Powers targets for his big scams. The movie plays with moral issues and big questions in the way a good film noir film would, and that is with great photograhy, tough dialog and cool acting. The films never become pompous or overblown because the people suffering from these existential calamities are people on the edge of life, living pay check to pay check who live by their wits and luck and flexible morals.

-

-

-

His transformation into “the geek” is excellent and there are plenty of great lines. There are some problems too that require some added suspension of disbelief, for example, that the so called code Powers and Gray uses to dupe the audiences could be so effective based on how it is used in the film is far fetched. It just could not work but we have to accept that it would work in order for the story to be propelled along. Another problem is that Blondell uses a vinyl record and old style phonograph to record all her therapy sessions when in fact records and phonographs can only be used for playback. Again we must accept this for the plot to work. Sometimes some things like this can ruin a movie for me but in this case it did not.

-

Despite these minor flaws and the fact I usually hate carnival movies (except for La Strada and few others) the movie works well and Powers in fact becomes a legitimate actor and left his pretty boy image behind for the most part. The black and white is marvelous.

-

-

-

-

-

-

Panic in the Streets

-

1950/Director: Elia Kazan/ Screenplay: Edward Anhalt

-

Cast: Richard Widmark, Paul Douglas, Barbara Bel Geddes. Jack Palance, Zero Mostel

-

While this is not one of Elia Kazan’s best films it is nonetheless a good movie and you can see many of his signature touches in some of the scenes, especially in the indoor shots. The opening shots of the poker game are similar to the ones shot for A Streetcar Named Desire, a remarkably great movie only a couple years down the road. Richard Widmark plays a civil service employed doctor working in New Orleans who comes across a case of Pneumonic Plague brought in by an illegal alien on one of many cargo ships. The movie becomes a race against time story as both Widmark and murderous hooligan Jack Palance look for the same man for different reasons; Widmark to stop the highly contagious and air born spread form of plague from killing thousands and Palance to get information on an imaginary fortune in something he feels the dying man is hiding. Zero Mostel is good and sweaty a Palance’s partner in crime with a little more of a conscience.

-

The acting and dialog are pretty good although Widmark is a little over the top at times. He is ready to blow a fuse even when he seems to be getting everything he asks for from the local police chief (Paul Douglas) who puts his career on the line to help. This is okay since this is that Widmark does best. Even better is Palance who hisses and menaces his way from scene to scene and seems lacking in any scruples at all but is street savvy and lethal from the opening scenes where he kills a guy for just wanting to leave a poker game. While far from a flawless movie it is difinently worth a watch or two.

-

-

-

-

-

The Big Knife

-

1955/Director: Robert Aldrich/ Screenplay: Clifford Odets (play), James Poe (screenplay)

-

Cast: Jack Palance, Ida Lupino, Wendell Corey, Jean Hagen, Rod Steiger, Shelley Winters

-

Based on a play this movie takes place on one set for the most part, that of a large living room with a huge wet bar every one mingles around. The talking is fast and tough and the acting is pretty good if not a little over blown in some parts, but I liked the movie alot. Palance plays a burned out actor with no way out from under the thumb of movie boss Rod Steiger because of Palance's stained past. Ida Lupino plays his tormented wife and Shelly Winter's is a lushy starlet whose only role is that of party girl for the movie execs. Everyone is jaded and on edge. The confrontations between Palance and Steiger are terrific. Palance is the A-list actor who has gotten everything he was promised and everything he desired but who suddenly does not want to renew his contract, much to the chagrin and consternation of movie mogul Steiger who is not letting him out of the deal without a battle to the end.

-

There are some great moments int he film. One great scene where Palance imitates a growling crocodile and then a skimpering, slithering lizard that is worth a few replays. I have to admit I like him more as the heavy in a film,as in Panic in the Streets, than as a wishy washy, whiny sentimental actor with budding principles but the movie is fine. I found some of the interaction with his physical trainer a little unintentionally (I assume) homoerotic really and sort of silly. As far as noir style films go it is not what I like the most, but I can recommend it. It is a scathing look at the greed and vanity of Hollywood behind the cameras.

-

-

-

-

A TO Z LIST OF URANIUM CAFE TOPICS

-

PERFORMANCE

-

1970 / Directors: Donald Cammell and Nicolas Roeg / Writer: Donald Cammell

-

Cast: James Fox, Mick Jagger, Anita Pallenberg, Michele Breton, Ann Sidney, John Bindon, Stanley Meadows, Allan Cuthbertson, Anthony Morton, Johnny Shannon

-

-

Amazingly this historic and influential film was not released on DVD until February of this year (2007). It stars James Fox, Mick Jagger and Anita Palenberg. Palenberg also helped with writing some of the film script. Prior to Performance James Fox had played mostly proper English gentlemen of one sort or another. Here he convincingly plays the viscous and violent Chas, an East side London gangster who is the enforcer for boss Harry Flowers. Fox' s performance is chilling and has been cited as influential on the London gangster type that appear in the newer British crime movies by directors like Guy Ritchie. It is too bad Fox did not do more roles like this. In fact he would all but retire from acting after Performance and devote his energy to being an evangelical Christian, only appearing here and there over the years in films, most recently as Varuca Salt' s father in Tim Burton' s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

-

-

The film itself was controversial at the time and Warner Brothers was shocked by what directors Donald Cammell and Nicholas Roeg delivered to them when they were expecting a pop-music movie similar to The Beatles A Hard Day' s Night. The film captured the darker feel of late 60' s period London and there is fairly graphic sex and drug use (some purported to be real). In one scene Anita Palenberg injects what we assume is heroin into her butt cheeks. Even by today' s "flexible" standards the scene is unnerving. There were rumors that Palenberg - who had dated Rolling Stone' s temperamental and star-crossed guitarist Brian Jones and then later became Keith Richards common law wife and mother of their three children - had an affair with Jagger during the filming. Neither have ever confirmed this and Palenberg has sharply denied it.

-

-

While Fox stretched his capable acting abilities and created the evil and yet ladish Chas, Jagger and Palenberg simply play themselves and yet it is a perfect balancing act between Chas' uptight and rigid sensibilities and Taylor and Pherber's "free love" and drug using inclinations. After Chas becomes a target of the mob he works for he goes into hiding while trying to escape the country to America where gangster like him are truly appreciated. He winds up staying in the bizarre and decadent household of reclusive rock star Taylor (played by Jagger) and his girlfriends Pherber (Palenberg) and Lucy (Michele Briton). Taylor does not warm up to Chas, but finally Chas convinces him that he needs a " Bohemian atmosphere " to hole up in for a short while. Chas and Taylor begin to get drawn into each other' s dangerous worlds and a twisted connection is formed. Pherber slips Chas some psychedelic mushrooms and Fox is soon wearing wigs and lipstick and searching his soul while grooving to some far out tunes. Jagger is great as the reclusive and jaded Taylor and performs a really good blues song on guitar in one scene.

-

-

The ending is somewhat odd and confusing but it seemed fitting really in this case. Normally I do not like a strange ending to a movie that leaves too many questions. The look and sound of the film is marvelous and it is supposed to have been the first full length film to employ what is known as the " cut-up technique " , formally used in literature by people like Brion Gysin and William S. Burroughs. It is the method of splicing random scenes together to create an effect of irregular yet seemingly purposeful continuity. It is a common technique in film anymore and you hardly think it is anything special now.

-

-

The film had problems with release and distribution and was widely panned at the time of its release as lurid and exploitive (are those supposed to be bad qualities?), but has since went on to be considered one of the great films of British cinema. Some parts may seem dated, such as the strange synth tracks and experimental photography played at the beginning during a court room scene. Some other parts are ahead of their time even, for example a song sequence that predates MTV in the way it is done. It is tough and hallucinogenic at the same time. A hippie/gangster movie. Not a genre that was explored much. It does not become an " acid trip " movie in any way though some scenes have those elements.

-

-

Also, if you are intersted in some really subperb acting and black and white cinematography check out Fox's excellent performance as Peter Marlowe in one of my all time favorite films, 1965's King Rat with George Segal and Tom Courtenay, about existence in Changi POW camp in Singapore during WWII. There will a post of that remarkable film coming soon.

-

Here is a fine little piece about the film showing the reactions to it in the early days and then how those opinions have changed. The statements are from the cast and crew:

-

http://www.phinnweb.org/roeg/films/performance/articles/neon.html

-