Daily Archives: Friday, July 17, 2015

  • Casanova (TV)

    John Glenister, Mark Cullingham (1971)

    Casanova, screened weekly on BBC2 in six episodes in late 1971, was Dennis Potter’s first serial drama for television.  The whole thing lasts 325 minutes and watching it at BFI last week, as a feature in the last segment of their Potter retrospective, I had to keep reminding myself it wasn’t meant to be seen either in one sitting or on a cinema screen.  Potter, nevertheless, over the course of his television drama-writing career, made an important contribution to the metamorphosis of the TV play into the TV film and it’s hard not to feel that Casanova is often trying to be cinematic.  Take, for example, the repeated montages of key images from the story, playing in the mind of the title character.  In 1971, it wasn’t that unusual to see this kind of thing from your seat in a picture house but it was an innovation to see it from a chair in your living room.  Some of the ‘filmic’ elements look primitive now.  Casanova combines material shot on location with studio recordings.  At the start of the first episode, a gondola carries representatives of the Venice Tribunal along a canal.  Their late-night destination is Casanova’s apartment, the purpose of their visit to arrest him for atheism, blasphemy, fornication, etc.  The dark canal has a stygian quality; on the soundtrack, the water doesn’t so much lap as slurp; the overall effect is sinister and vaguely disgusting.  But this opening sequence is unusual:  too often there are shots of the city that don’t tell us more than that the BBC did some filming there.  The memory montages tend to be obvious and sometimes lurid – as when the screams of a woman achieving orgasm are juxtaposed with those of a man being publicly flogged to death.   In the final episode, in which the ageing Casanova is working at his memoirs, a draught in the room (aka the cold wind of time) scatters the leaves of paper from the table – a venerable Hollywood cliché.  In spite of this, and though it takes a while to get used to the switches between celluloid and videotape, the studio sections stand up, in technical terms, very well.  The lighting, set decoration, costumes and make-up compare very favourably with, say, the BBC’s I Claudius, which was made five years later.

    I was fifteen coming up sixteen when Casanova was shown in 1971 and I think I saw most, if not all, the episodes.  Its subject and nudity predictably offended Mary Whitehouse and my recollection is that the serial got a lukewarm reception from television critics.  It’s acquired a higher status in retrospect and in the context of the Potter oeuvre as a whole:  W Stephen Gilbert, in Fight and Kick and Bite, his 1996 biography of Potter, judges it ‘a pivotal piece’ and its protagonist ‘unique among [Potter’s] driven characters in not being racked by guilt’.   Potter was first drawn to Giacomo Casanova as the subject of a television drama when book-reviewing for the Times and asked to review the first volume of a new translation of Casanova’s memoirs.  Potter’s psoriatic arthropathy had been getting worse for several years and he clearly sympathised with Casanova’s plight – locked up by the Tribune in ‘the Leads’ (‘i piombi’) of the jail in the Doge’s Palace and not knowing how long he’ll have to stay there.   W Stephen Gilbert notes that Potter, when he began to write Casanova, was ‘more imprisoned than ever by his illness in his Ross-on-Wye fastness’.  Kept under lock and key and, years later, when his health is failing, Casanova finds salvation in reading and writing.  In one episode, his body has developed lesions that require gruesome and painful treatment:  this obviously links to Potter’s condition and anticipates the main character’s illness and treatment in The Singing Detective.

    BFI sensibly included two intervals – the first of twenty minutes after episode two, the second of forty minutes after episode four.  So the whole show ended six hours and five minutes after it began.  It may seem no more than an obvious reaction to such a marathon to say that Potter takes his time telling Casanova’s story.  But I do think the total length of Casanova is out of proportion to its limited plot and themes, even though the piece is chronologically quite complex.  The six episodes include two that alternate between Casanova’s incarceration and his former life, and four that move between the prison cell and his life after prison.   The highlight montages, which accrue new images as the story progresses, are a feature of every episode.  (The success of all kinds of regular television programmes, then and now, depends considerably on repetition.  Casanova may have been a nearly unprecedentedly ambitious television drama but the montages come to seem increasingly like the routines expected by the audience of a weekly TV comedy or variety show.)  In the parts of the story describing Casanova’s post-jail experiences, we soon discover that the ‘impious libertine’ isn’t chastened by his punishment.  He’s all the more committed to sensual pleasure, anxious not to waste a moment of the time that he has left to experience it.  Once the viewer knows this, it increases the pressure on the prison scenes to be compelling per se and, from midway through, these sequences tread water.  ‘I resolve to escape’ becomes close to a mantra in the last episode and a half:  it feels wrong that one’s main interest by this stage is in how Casanova will escape from his physical prison.  Of greater interest is his desire to escape from himself – his appetites – but this is usually asserted in monologue rather than dramatised.

    Women’s bodies – often naked, sometimes sexually abused – became an increasingly controversial element of Dennis Potter’s television drama.  (In response to accusations of misogyny, Potter insisted that his purpose was to expose and deplore misogyny.)  Bare breasts are on display throughout Casanova and particularly well represented in the repeated montages.  It’s not easy, seeing the serial in long retrospect, to keep some of Potter’s later work – Blackeyes, in particular – out of your mind but I think the camera’s gaze on exposed female flesh is defensible here.  This isn’t so much because it’s what you’d expect in the story of a legendary rake but because of the rich complexity of Casanova’s character – a complexity that is thanks partly to Potter’s writing but thanks more to Frank Finlay’s brilliant and fearless performance.   Finlay achieves and sustains a series of remarkable contrasts:  between Casanova’s ardent anticipation of seduction and post-coital cafard; between his arrogance and his self-reproach; between his angry, funny sang-froid in deriding antagonists and the exposed vulnerability of his look when he’s alone in captivity.  He speaks his lines not only with great verve, suppleness and wit but with a vocal musicality that makes him sound Italian, even though he never resorts to aiming for this effect by doing-an-accent.  His voice, in conjunction with his unusual, compelling facial features, creates a convincing exotic.   You’re very conscious of the shape of Finlay’s head, especially his jawline:  his sophisticated, superbly accomplished libertine has a bestial quality and this Casanova, even bewigged and with cologne on his cheeks, gives off a stink of mortality.  Finlay suggests an almost prehistoric skull beneath the skin.  Potter and the directors set their leading man a huge task in the later prison scenes:  he has to work hard to keep them dynamic but you never stop admiring his inventiveness.

    The artistry of Finlay’s Italianate Casanova leaves the other men in the cast looking and sounding emphatically, crudely English.  You’re especially aware of this in the fifth episode, when Casanova travels to England (the people in London are no different from those we’ve encountered in Venice and Grenoble), and in Norman Rossington’s contributions.  His main role is as the Venetian jailer Lorenzo but he’s also Casanova’s English travelling companion on a coach journey to London.  Rossington plays Lorenzo with obvious, unvarying vigour and Cockney vowels:  after a while, the jailer’s daily repetition of phrases and routines starts to work for the actor – you have to acknowledge Rossington’s stamina, anyway.  In the final episode, Graham Crowden is an exception to the anglicising rule but his all-stops-out caricature of a rule-bound German is quickly wearying.  It may be unfair to single out for praise Norman Tyrrell, since he plays an Englishman, but his cameo, as another coach passenger in the English episode, is perfectly judged.  Very few of the young actresses in the roles of Casanova’s conquests went on to better things so it’s important to record how individual and poignant some of them are – particularly Zienia Merton, Brigid Erin Bates, Caroline Dowdeswell and Lyn Yeldham.  (Merton, along with Bates, has kept an acting career going over the decades but it’s hard to ignore the information on IMDB that her next job after Casanova was in The Benny Hill Show.)  In the last part of the last episode, an actress called Gillian Hills is beautifully effective as the German girl who grants Casanova’s carnal deathbed wish, and prays that God remember this as an act of charity on her part.

    Directing duties were split between John Glenister and Mark Cullingham.  (Glenister directed the first, second and fourth episodes and Cullingham the other three.)   They do a decent job although there are times when their attention seems to be so absorbed in mise-en-scène that there’s a loss of dramatic focus.  (For example, episode three begins with a painstaking reconstruction of a commedia dell’arte show but the kerfuffle caused by Casanova in the audience is very sloppily staged.)   It was Dennis Potter, according to John Glenister, who decided on the Vivaldi theme music.  Watching the serial in 1971 was the first time that I’d heard Four Seasons.  I have to admit I’ve continued ever since to think of it as the Casanova music.

    5 July 2015

  • All Is Lost

    J C Chandor (2013)

    All Is Lost is all about Robert Redford.  It has to be:  the film has a cast of one and Redford’s character has neither name nor biographical context.  He’s a yachtsman, sailing his craft, the ‘Virginia Jean’, alone in the Indian Ocean.  The writer-director J C Chandor begins his second feature (the first was Margin Call (2011)) with a voiceover, spoken by Redford, which supplies little information beyond the fact that there are people – presumably the sailor’s family – to whom he wants to send a valedictory message.  (When you first see the man, you notice he wears a strikingly large ring, with a big blue stone at its centre, on his wedding finger.)  Approaching what he thinks is the end of his life, he expresses in this message regret for what he’s failed to do.  After this ‘all is lost’ (the man’s own words) prologue, a legend on the screen reads ‘Eight days earlier’.  The man wakes one morning to find the ‘Virginia Jean’ holed below the water line, following a collision with an errant shipping container.  In spite of swift, resourceful efforts to repair the damage, he’s soon in perilous difficulty as he tries to keep the boat afloat and himself alive.  You naturally want him to succeed in doing so – because he’s a human being/Robert Redford up against it rather than because he’s an individual you’ve decided is worth rooting for.  The sailor might be a serial killer or a Tea Party member; you’ve no idea why he’s on his own in the Sumatran Straits.  The gravity of that opening voiceover immediately suggests that All Is Lost means to be a very serious movie.  The implication that the man won’t outlive it, that an extended flashback will describe eventually unavailing attempts to survive, warns you not to watch those attempts in the way that you watched Tom Hanks marooned on his desert island in Cast Away.

    A central theme of Chandor’s movie is impending death – the character’s situation and Robert Redford’s advancing years naturally call to mind the lines in The Dry Salvages:

    ‘There is the final addition, the failing
    Pride or resentment at failing powers,
    The unattached devotion which might pass for devotionless,
    In a drifting boat with a slow leakage …’

    It’s only when the action moves beyond the point at which his farewell message-in-a-jamjar has been dispatched that you get a sliver of hope that Redford may survive.  (In one of the most expressive moments in the whole film, he makes to throw the jar as far as possible but then drops it limply into the waters.)  Even in the closing stages, Chandor shows Redford, after he’s set his inflatable life raft on fire to try and attract the attention of a distantly passing craft, floating down and away underwater, as if to death.  Finally, he comes to and realises the other vessel is miraculously close.   He rises to the surface; you see a hand reach out and he grasps it before the screen goes dark and the closing credits come up.

    Redford is being praised for the performance of his life and this role is certainly a career-defining one – in the sense that it’s a statement of his fundamental qualities as a movie actor.  He has always seemed happy in his own company on screen, letting the camera get closer to him than any fellow actor but still not too close.  The last moments of All Is Lost are ambiguous – perhaps the man is losing consciousness and merely imagining salvation – but they provide an entirely happy ending for Redford:  taking the life-saving hand is as near as he gets to interacting with another human being.   Redford has had some famous screen partnerships – with Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The Sting, Barbra Streisand in The Way We Were, Dustin Hoffman in All the President’s Men, Meryl Streep in Out of Africa.  Redford doesn’t really connect with any of these co-stars; since the relationships with Newman and Hoffman are absolutely straight and the films in question depend on a combination of star quality and an engaging plot rather than character, this lack of connection doesn’t much matter.  The movies with Streisand and Streep are, I think, more memorable because Redford is just the right actor to play men who are fascinating but infuriatingly inaccessible to the women who love them – and because the actresses, trying to spark Redford as an actor, share something of the plight of the characters they’re playing.  (Redford’s mysterious reserve also holds your interest in The Great Gatsby although you don’t believe in his passion for Mia Farrow’s Daisy.)

    In All Is Lost, there are several reasons for wanting Redford to beat the odds.  He’s always been interesting to watch and you’re grateful to him for that; you also admire what he must have put himself through physically to make this movie.  He reads the opening words very well – his voice supplying what is, for Redford, a surprising depth of feeling and tension.  After this, what he says consists of:  a brief, abortive attempt to communicate an SOS message over the boat’s wireless; a moment of anguished frustration when he yells ‘Fuck!’ (the film’s certificate warns of ‘a single use of strong language’ and it feels like the single such use in Redford’s long career:  it’s an unusual pleasure even to hear him shout); unheard cries of ‘Help!’ in the direction of a Maersk vessel.  (This sequence was briefly disorienting as it was a Maersk ship Tom Hanks was in charge of in Captain Phillips a few screen weeks ago – and I’d watched Cast Away in preparation for seeing All Is Lost.)   There’s no further dialogue.

    Is the rest of what Redford does great acting?   No: much of the movie is virtually documentary description of how the sailor tries to survive – any halfway decent actor could do this.  David Edelstein, in lauding the performance, is right that Redford can convince you in a way few other actors can that he’s thinking – although it seems to me that he brings a magnetic quality to looking intelligent rather than tells you specifically what is going on in a character’s mind.  Edelstein is right too that when the sailor in All Is Lost is running out of options and thought appears to give way to emotion the impact is strong but I think this is simply because the dominance of emotion is so unusual to see in Redford – not because he’s overwhelmingly expressive.  What is remarkable is that Redford is both old to be playing the role at all and in amazing physical shape for a man of his age.  His good looks have survived without any evidence of cosmetic aids and he looks much younger than his seventy-seven years.  He gives J C Chandor – and the audience – the best of both worlds, a combination of everyman vulnerability and movie star immortality.  There’s some very beautiful submarine photography by Peter Zuccarini, especially configurations of fish and the climactic image of the ring of fire that was once the life raft.  Up above the water, Frank G DeMarco captures some equally wondrous cloud formations and sunsets, especially one that, through a slow fade, suggests the ending not just of a day but of a life.

    30 December 2013

Posts navigation