A Russian in Hollywood [SHY PEOPLE]

From the Chicago Reader (May 27, 1988). — J.R.

SHY PEOPLE

*** (A must-see)

Directed by Andrei Konchalovsky

Written by Konchalovsky, Gerard Brach, and Marjorie David

With Jill Clayburgh, Barbara Hershey, Martha Plimpton, Merritt Butrick, John Philbin, and Mare Winningham.

I still have a lot of catching up to do with Andrei Konchalovsky. Out of his 11 or so features to date, the last 4 of which were made in the United States, I’ve seen prior to Shy People only 2. The Soviet Asya’s Happiness (1966), a film made with and about Russian peasants, was suppressed for many years because of its supposedly “gloomy” depiction of rural life but surfaced at the San Francisco Film Festival a couple of months ago. The other was Runaway Train (1985), costarring Jon Voight, Eric Roberts, and Rebecca DeMornay and adapted from a script by Akira Kurosawa. But a couple of things are already becoming clear from this limited if striking evidence. One is that he’s a very good (if not great) director regardless of where he’s working. The other is that he currently represents something singular and rather fascinating — a Soviet director who makes commercial American movies that somehow manage to be commercial, American, Soviet, and serious, all at the same time.

Reportedly because of his second marriage to a French translator in Moscow — Konchalovsky has the rare good fortune to be able to live and travel abroad without renouncing his Soviet citizenship, so he can’t be viewed as a melancholy exile like the late Andrei Tarkovsky. Nor can he be regarded as a director who invariably makes films about his homeland. Ironically, the qualities in Runaway Train and Shy People that seem to me most Russian their allegorical, mystical, poetic, pantheistic, and fairy-tale elements — are not especially evident in Asya’s Happiness, a more loosely constructed and neorealist sort of narrative filmed in black and white.

The transcontinental origins of Runaway Train and Shy People need to be considered as well. The former, derived from a script by a Japanese filmmaker, was written by Djordje Milicevic, Paul Zindel, and Edward Bunker. Shy People was conceived by Konchalovsky in Russia ten years ago, while he was making his epic Siberiade, and was subsequently written with Gerard Brach in Paris, with Liv Ullmann and Melina Mercouri as the projected stars and reportedly a remote Greek island as the projected setting.

That Shy People now stars Jill Clayburgh and Barbara Hershey and is set in the Louisiana swamps may seem like a wrenching change, but to all appearances the transposition has been a seamless one; the story seems fully integrated in its present location. A well-to-do, middle-aged divorcee named Diana Sullivan (Clayburgh), living in Manhattan, invites her rebellious teenage daughter Grace (Martha Plimpton) to join her on a trip to the bayous to hunt up some distant relatives. The specific reason for the trip is an article she is researching for Cosmopolitan, part of a series about family trees. (”Roots for honkies” is Grace’s indelicate way of describing the project.) Taken by motorboat to their remote destination — a hillbilly family of five lorded over by the mistrustful widow Ruth (Hershey) — they are dropped off for a two-day visit, and the remainder of the movie deals with the elaborate consequences of this rough encounter, including the profound changes that take place in both families.

Diana quickly discovers that Ruth’s life pivots around two “primitive” myths about her own immediate family: that her dead husband, Joe, is still alive, watching and hearing everything the family does, and that her oldest son Mike (Merritt Butrick), who currently runs a seedy strip joint in the nearby town, is dead (or, more precisely, never lived — Ruth has scratched out every photograph of him). Meanwhile, Diana confronts Grace with a fact that she’s discovered by spying on her daughter in New York — that Grace is currently having an affair with Andre, a 40-year-old former boyfriend of her own who does a lot of drugs.

These discoveries turn out to be only the beginnings of the characters’ rude shocks. Before the visit is over, Grace has introduced some of Ruth’s sons to cocaine, had sex with one of them, and been nearly raped by another; Ruth has confronted her wayward son Mike, shot a man who injured another son, and bought her pregnant daughter-in-law (Mare Winningham) a battery-operated TV (itself a radical and “violent” act, in the movie’s terms, considering the family’s primitive and isolated existence); and Diana has encountered nothing less than the ghost of Joe — to begin a list that is by no means exhaustive.

The plot, as in Runaway Train, can be regarded as extremely schematic, as well as improbable — a veritable lifetime of dramatic events and revelations is compressed into a matter of hours — but not in a way that blunts the overall effectiveness of the material. The acting is uniformly good, and if Hershey’s efforts to achieve the impossible by making us believe in her as a genuine rustic are too plainly visible to succeed, her performance is still an honorable failure at the very least. Clayburgh, by contrast, is flawless (in an admittedly much easier part), and it is good to see her again after such a long absence from the screen — preceded, in the 70s, by what may have been overexposure. (Neither actress, however, approaches the uncommon brilliance of Voight in Runaway Train.)

One of the stronger aspects of the movie’s comparative anthropology is that it isn’t loaded moralistically, and isn’t contrived to score too many obvious points; our impressions of all the characters are gradually altered, but not simply or obviously, and it isn’t a competitive game in which there are winners or losers. The absence of a father in both branches of the family carries a great deal of weight, but no facile parallels are made; indeed, unless I missed something, the fact that Diana is a divorcee rather than a widow comes from the film’s press materials rather than any pointers in the dialogue.

The film opens in New York with an extraordinary aerial shot and extended camera movement that curves and doubles back on itself, moving from a bird’s-eye view of the streets to the balcony of Diana’s apartment. With its densely layered procession of sounds as well as sights — suggesting some of the ambience of Rear Window and the opening shot in The Conversation – this movement defines a complex and mysterious trajectory that becomes as dense and unpredictable as the later Heart of Darkness journey to Ruth’s house in the swamps. Although the film as a whole is framed by the relationship between Diana and Grace, and initially presents the country relatives from Diana and Grace’s “civilized” viewpoints, the story is never reduced to either a simple reversal of values and vantage points or a series of complacent parallels once we get to know the backwoods family better. In the final analysis, all of the characters are viewed objectively, critically, and sympathetically.

One doesn’t want to say too much more about a film that makes and provokes its own discoveries, but it is worth pointing out briefly that, like Runaway Train, Shy People creates some healthy confusion about the usual arbitrary distinctions Americans make between art and entertainment. As luck would have it, I saw both movies with “real” audiences rather than at private press screenings, and there was never a point during either when one felt the unnatural strain and hush that greets most “art movies.” The elements of allegory and poetry in Shy People, which make for a rather theatrical plot construction, lead to none of the self-consciousness that greets films by Ingmar Bergman; the audience was clearly with what Konchalovsky was doing from the beginning, proving in effect that what I’ve been describing as the “Russianness” of this movie, in no way interferes with its fidelity to the home truths found in a Louisiana swamp.

Published on 27 May 1988 in Featured Texts, Featured Texts, by jrosenbaum

No Comments >>

Vampires in Havana

This is almost as much fun as it sounds: a Cuban feature-length animated film (by Juan Padron) that makes fun of horror and gangster movies in a bawdy and caricatural style. Among the heavies who are out to steal Professor von Dracula’s formula, which allows vampires to survive in sunlight, are the European Group of vampires from Dusseldorf and the Vampire Mafia from Chicago. Although the animation style is less than brilliant, there are enough action and high spirits here to make this lively and amusing. With a good Afro-Cuban jazz score by Rembert Egues, featuring Arturo Sandoval’s trumpet (1985). (Facets Multimedia Center, 1517 W. Fullerton, Friday and Saturday, May 20 and 21, 7:00 and 9:00; Sunday, May 22, 5:30 and 7:30; and Monday through Thursday, May 23 through 26, 7:00 and 9:00; 281-4114)

Published on 20 May 1988 in Featured Texts, by jrosenbaum

No Comments >>

The Funeral

This first film of Japanese writer-director and former actor Juzo Itami lacks the freewheeling episodic form and comic exhilaration of his second, Tampopo; but as a sustained social satire, it succeeds more than either that film or his third, A Taxing Woman. Itami’s subject is a family funeral that lasts three days and the elaborate preparations, considerations, and rituals that accompany it–from expenses to the videotape advising both the family and the guests what to say to one another. The results are perhaps a mite overlong, but Itami’s vigorous filmmaking keeps things lively, and Ozu veteran Chishu Ryu is especially welcome in a cameo as the officiating priest. One also gets some early indications of Itami’s handling of food and sex, which reaches full flower in Tampopo. With Nabuko Miyamoto (Itami’s wife) and Tsutomu Yamazaki (1984). (Music Box, Friday through Thursday, May 20 through 26)

Published on 20 May 1988 in Featured Texts, by jrosenbaum

No Comments >>

Return Trip Tango

Although it only runs for half an hour, Angelo Restivo’s cunningly ordered, well-crafted, and locally made adaptation of a Julio Cortazar story makes use of so many free-floating narrative signifiers–including an adept use of sound and music–that it comes across as an outline for a novel. Circling around an ambiguous murder mystery that isn’t so much solved as multiplied and varied like a musical theme, this tantalizing short provides a kind of do-it-yourself fiction kit; what you bring to it is what you get. With Marika Turano, Celia Lipinski, and Mark Dember. (International House, 1414 E. 59th St., Friday, May 20, 8:00 and 10:00, to be shown with Luis Bunuel’s Susana, 753-2274)

Published on 20 May 1988 in Featured Texts, by jrosenbaum

No Comments >>

Reel Life: Richard Pena’s Film Center Testament

From the May 13, 1988 Chicago Reader. The recent news that Richard is departing as director of the New York Film Festival has led me to recall the last time he left an important programming job. — J.R.

The notion of the “testament” — the final work of a major filmmaker — is an important one to film lovers. It can be traced back to the 60s, specifically to the French New Wave and the forging in this country of the concept of the film auteur, a time when these and related phenomena were altering the official canons of movie culture. Starting next Tuesday, May 17, the Film Center of the Art Institute will present a weekly series of testaments to run through the end of June.

A lot of the movies included in “Testaments: Final Films of the Great Directors” were getting their first releases back in those days. And almost invariably, they were dying at the box office and at the hands of most mainstream reviewers, while a team of passionate and informed enthusiasts were singing their praises. Bloody religious wars were waged over these movies; in most cases, they’re still being waged.

Fritz Lang’s The Thousand Eyes of Dr. Mabuse (1960), for example, and John Ford’s Seven Women (1966) are movies that separate the sheep from the goats as far as aficionados of their directors are concerned. Both films premiered mostly in seedy grind houses; most reviewers promptly dismissed or ignored them. Dr. Mabuse, made in West Germany, was released in the United States only in a dubbed version; and because it has never been subsequently subtitled in English, the Film Center will be showing the dubbed version.

With the possible exceptions of Yasujiro Ozu’s An Autumn Afternoon (1962) and Andrei Tarkovsky’s The Sacrifice (1986), all the other selections in this series are as controversial today as they were when they first appeared: D.W. Griffith’s mawkish yet deeply moving The Struggle (1931), Josef von Sternberg’s rigorous avant-garde parable The Saga of Anatahan (1952), Edgar G. Ulmer’s The Cavern (1966), Jerome Hill’s independent Film Portrait (1972), Otto Preminger’s keenly felt The Human Factor (1979), and Sam Peckinpah’s The Osterman Weekend (1983).

Richard Pena, the director of the Film Center and the one who selected these films, believes they represent the essence of these filmmakers’ visions. My own particular favorites in the series — Carl Dreyer’s Gertrud (1964), The Saga of Anatahan, and Max Ophuls’s Lola Montes (1955) — are, for me, three of the most powerful and beautiful films ever made; many of the others are not far behind, and all are eminently worth seeing.

But what is or is not a directorial testament remains a very subjective matter. Pena has said that “it seems difficult to see” the last films of Howard Hawks, Alfred Hitchcock, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, and Jean Renoir as testaments (i.e., summarizing final statements) in the sense that Gertrud and Lola Montes are. Hawks’s Rio Lobo (1970) does seem to me a sour and weak spin-off of his two preceding westerns. But it can be argued that Hitchcock’s Family Plot (1976) is very much a testament in its attitudes toward death, deception, the romantic couple, and the double plot. Fassbinder’s Querelle (1982) has a formal boldness and sexual candor that make it arguably superior to many of his melodramas, and it’s no less reflective of his obsessions. And The Little Theatre of Jean Renoir (1970) can be defended as a summation of Renoir’s stylistic and thematic concerns — especially if one views it as an integrated feature and not as a collection of unrelated sketches.

But this is only to say that each critic, curator, and spectator is entitled to his or her own choice of testaments. Dreyer, as it happens, wound up making Gertrud as his testament only because he was unable to raise the money to make the films he wanted to: Medea or the life of Jesus, projects that he had nurtured over a much longer period. Besides, Dreyer put his whole heart and soul into everything he did.

This potent series might also be regarded as the testament of Pena, who leaves the Film Center and Chicago this spring to become chairman of the New York Film Festival’s selection committee and program director for the Film Society of Lincoln Center, which will open a permanent year-round theater of its own in 1990. For the better part of the 80s, audiences have been treated to the range, intelligence, daring, creativity, and consistency of Pena’s programming. He will be sorely missed — the Art Institute is currently in the process of choosing his successor — and while Pena himself may resist the notion that his “Testaments” series is a farewell gesture to Chicago, this shouldn’t necessarily prevent his audience from regarding it that way. The singularity and sharpness of his 13 selections for this series represent a personal, auteurist approach to film programming (spearheaded by the late Henri Langlois of the Cinematheque Francaise) that is practiced by very few film venues in this country. It is an approach to programming that is at once critical, educational, passionate, partisan, and trailblazing, dedicated less to a notion of what our film culture is than a vision of what it could be.

Dr. Mabuse and Jean Cocteau’s The Testament of Orpheus (1959) will be the first two shown, Tuesday, May 17, starting at 6 PM at the Film Center, Jackson and Columbus Drive. The following Tuesday, May 24, will feature Lola Montes and The Human Factor. For the rest of the schedule or other information, call 443-3733.

Published on 13 May 1988 in Featured Texts, Featured Texts, by jrosenbaum

No Comments >>