Monthly Archives: September 2018

  • Billy Liar

    John Schlesinger (1963)

    John Schlesinger’s first feature film, A Kind of Loving, appeared in 1962.  Billy Liar, his second, followed a year later.  Both are adaptations of novels with a contemporary northern setting, written by Yorkshiremen who were about thirty at the time of publication.  Both novels became stage plays too – Billy Liar before it was a film, A Kind of Loving after.  The protagonist in each case is a young man oppressed by the constraints of the world he inhabits.  But whereas Stan Barstow’s A Kind of Loving is straight kitchen-sink drama, Keith Waterhouse’s Billy Liar has an important element of fantasy.  Inside his head, Billy Fisher temporarily escapes, from nagging parents and girlfriends and his deadly dull office job with a firm of undertakers, by imagining himself supremo of the make-believe country of Ambrosia.  (On a less visionary level, Billy also makes up stories about his family and love life, hence his sobriquet.)  By the time that Schlesinger made Billy Liar, the characteristic gritty urban landscape of ‘British New Wave’ cinema was already familiar, thanks to films like Jack Clayton’s Room at the Top (1959), Karel Reisz’s Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (1960) and Tony Richardson’s A Taste of Honey (1961), as well as Schlesinger’s own debut feature.  Billy Liar’s mix of social realism and fantasy makes it distinctive within the genre.  In Schlesinger’s hands, the mix is awkward and often unpleasant too.

    Billy Liar, with a screenplay by Keith Waterhouse and Willis Hall, supplies early evidence of what became Schlesinger’s persisting tendencies as a film-maker.  When sympathetic towards characters, he was a skilled and sensitive director of actors.  When he went in for larger social commentary, at least in stories set in or near the present day (Far from the Madding Crowd (1967) is a signal exception), he was shallowly misanthropic.  Midnight Cowboy (1969) is the most flagrant example.  The central relationship between Jon Voight’s Joe Buck and Dustin Hoffman’s Ratso Rizzo is moving and memorable:  Schlesinger gets excellent performances from both his lead actors.  Yet his critique of American values and culture is indiscriminately hostile.  Nearly everyone else, including people just as much on the receiving end of America as Joe and Ratso, is treated with derision  The result is compelling but hardly makes sense.  In Billy Liar, Schlesinger is much more favourably disposed to Billy (Tom Courtenay) and one of his girlfriends, Liz (Julie Christie), than to anyone else.  In long retrospect, this film often looks like a lower-key warm-up for the cynical pyrotechnics of Midnight Cowboy.

    Billy Liar opens with the actual signature music to the long-running radio programme Housewives’ Choice and a cameo from Godfrey Winn, as himself, compering the show on the BBC Light Programme, as Winn often really did in the early post-war decades.  Schlesinger cross-cuts between Winn in the studio and shots of anonymous urban and suburban housing.  When Winn says, ‘The next record was requested by …’ and gives a name and address, the camera records excitement in the requestee’s neighbourhood, as women emerge from their houses to tell each other the news.  The sequence seems to be poking fun at both Winn’s suavely condescending manner and his listeners’ excitement.  It’s inoffensive enough but Schlesinger, once he opens the Fishers’ front door, switches to a harsher tone that’s a sour taste of things to come.  Billy, who’s already late for work, hasn’t yet appeared for breakfast.  His parents (Mona Washbourne and Wilfred Pickles) squabble about whose fault it is he’s still in bed and who should get him out of it.  His grandmother (Ethel Griffies) chips in occasionally.

    Schlesinger cuts to Billy upstairs, recumbent and dreaming Ambrosian daydreams.  When he eventually comes down, his elders’ grumbling continues until he imagines opening fire on them with a machine gun.  This fantasy fusillade recurs several times in the course of the film – it’s a serviceable comic device (and the best part of the imaginary elements, not least because it’s always brief).  What’s striking is that the pitch of his family’s carping doesn’t change, regardless of whether or not Billy is there to hear it.  His exasperation at the barrage of moans and John Schlesinger’s scornful treatment of the moaners are indistinguishable.  In the outside world too, there’s a good supply of people continually going on at Billy – Mr Shadrack (Leonard Rossiter), his martinet boss at the ‘funeral furnishings’ office, and blowsy Rita (Gwendolyn Watts), one of the two girls to whom Billy has (so far) proposed and who are sharing a single engagement ring.  Rita’s polar-opposite number Barbara (Helen Fraser) oppresses him in a different way – soppy-nice and primly respectable, she’s alarmingly eager to settle down to three-piece-suite married life.  Shadrack, Rita and Barbara are all caricatures but there’s no cartoon light-heartedness in them.  The actors are on top of their roles in short order and Schlesinger doesn’t want them to show different sides.  It’s the repetitive playing as much as the persistent complaints that ensures this trio get on the viewer’s nerves as they do Billy’s.

    As Mrs Rothwell, the hero’s mother-in-law and nemesis in A Kind of Loving, Thora Hird was relentless too but her character had dramatic weight.  The supporting roles in Billy Liar don’t but Schlesinger directs the actors in them as if they did.  With at the most three exceptions (see below), the people in Billy’s world aren’t rich or powerful so it’s discomfiting that Schlesinger is intent on ridiculing their concerns and aspirations – and rather puzzling, in view of the film’s social realism aspect.  Here too, Schlesinger hasn’t got A Kind of Loving out of his system.  Like its predecessor, Billy Liar has black-and-white photography by Denys Coop.  The scene-setting at the start includes some quasi-documentary footage, including a wrecking ball demolishing houses.   This shot has the virtue of ambiguity – is the old, obsolete order being swept away or are cultural traditions being destroyed? – but that’s a virtue lacking in Schlesinger’s small-minded demolition job on people.

    The cheesy comedian Danny Boon (Leslie Randall) – Billy has dreams of writing material for him – is an outsider in two ways:  he’s a TV celebrity and on a flying visit to the town to open a new supermarket[1].  The other two relatively affluent figures are the partners in Shadrack and Duxbury, the firm of undertakers.  Next to figure-of-fun Shadrack, Councillor Duxbury (Finlay Currie) is almost complex.  This elderly pillar of the community speaks in a local accent both broad and, to Billy, comically old-fashioned.  Duxbury is aware that Billy imitates him for a laugh and, when he lets Billy know as much, is touching and dignified.  The script and Schlesinger are comparatively generous to a character who’s already being made fun of by another character.  It’s a pity that Finlay Currie’s Scottish vowels coming through the Yorkshire ones makes Duxbury’s voice even more bizarre than was presumably intended.

    The direction is consistently overemphatic.  When Julie Christie’s Liz appears, it’s instantly clear that she’s different from the other girls Billy knows – a glamorous free spirit.  As the camera follows Liz down the street, Schlesinger has to underline the point by having her do little skips, swing her handbag, make faces in shop windows.  The Ambrosia sequences, typically featuring massed ranks of marching extras, are literal-minded and reliably unfunny.  When Billy and Liz talk together at a dance hall and he describes his world of make-believe, Tom Courtenay’s animation is delightful.  It also confirms the tiresome redundancy of the staged, set-piece fantasies.  However, there’s a serious weakness in the climax to Billy Liar – whether it derives from the novel and/or stage play, I don’t know – that can’t be laid at Schlesinger’s door.

    Billy proposes marriage to Liz, who accepts.  He accepts her proposal to leave town immediately:  they agree to catch the midnight train to London.   (Liz, we gather, is already an experienced traveller.)  When he returns home to pack a suitcase, Billy learns that his grandmother, who had a funny turn earlier in the day, is now seriously ill in hospital.  After a row with his father, Billy goes to join his mother’s hospital vigil.  His grandmother dies soon after he arrives but Billy still heads off to the railway station to meet Liz.  It becomes obvious during the few minutes before their train is due to leave that he’s losing his nerve about going to London.  He makes an excuse to get off the train to buy milk from a machine on the station.  He does so in time to get back on board but hesitates long enough to ensure the train leaves without him.  He then pretends to curse having missed it.  Liz looks back at Billy with a rueful smile.  She knew he wouldn’t go through with it:  she’s even put his suitcase out on the platform for him.  It’s understandable that Keith Waterhouse and Willis Hall felt the need for a family crisis to bulk up the finale but the unexpected death of a member of the household is too major.  We seem meant to see Billy’s failure to leave home as final proof that he’s all talk:  his falsehoods including lying to himself that he’d do anything to escape his humdrum life.  But his decision not to walk out on this particular night is not only reasonable but responsible.

    In the opening scene at the Fishers’ home, Billy’s mother laments that the record request she’s sent to Housewives’ Choice seems to be at the bottom of Godfrey Winn’s pile.  She gave the letter to Billy to post:  it emerges that he failed to do so not out of carelessness but because he read it first and was ashamed of his mother’s poor grammar.   When, with some embarrassment, he admits this to her, Mrs Fisher’s hurt registers quietly but unmistakably.  Mona Washbourne is a fine actress:  more than anyone else in the supporting cast, she tries to give her character shadings.  The upside of the misjudged subplot around the grandmother’s death is the clear opportunity it gives Washbourne, in the hospital sequences, to enrich her portrait of Billy’s mother.   As the father who’s grafted his way up to running his own small business and is infuriated by his daydreaming, grammar school-educated son, Wilfred Pickles is relatively one-note (and one volume, which is mostly too loud) – though you always feel, especially in the last showdown with Billy, that he could have done a lot more with more sensitive direction.  In the smaller parts, it may seem surprising that an actor as limited as Rodney Bewes, playing Billy’s pal and work colleague Arthur, does best.  This is, I think, because Schlesinger’s attitude towards Arthur is unusually benign.

    Although it’s easy with hindsight to say that Tom Courtenay and Julie Christie stand out, it’s no less hard to ignore what’s staring you in the face.  Courtenay had followed Albert Finney in playing Billy on stage.  While anyone who loves watching a great screen actor will naturally regret that Finney didn’t do the film, Courtenay’s boyishness and lighter presence make Billy Liar more easily entertaining than it might have been with the more imposing Finney in the role (especially given Schlesinger’s direction).  It’s hard to pin down Tom Courtenay’s particular quality here:  describing him as ‘spiritual’ is OTT, though the French spirituel, with its hints of wit and mischief, is less wide of the mark.   The tangled-web momentum of Billy’s untruths allows Courtenay to show off his versatility and comic invention, and he’s immensely likeable.  Julie Christie hardly compares in terms of acting ability but her radiant warmth and beauty, particularly in the unlovely settings of Billy Liar, are glorious.  It’s hardly surprising she went on to bigger things so fast.  Two years later, she was starring in Doctor Zhivago and winning a Best Actress Oscar for DarlingJohn Schlesinger’s next film.

    1 September 2018

    [1]  The setting of Waterhouse’s novel is the fictional town of Stradhoughton in Yorkshire.  Unless I missed it, there’s no mention of the town’s name in the film, which was shot largely in Bradford.

  • Cold War

    Zimna wojna

    Pawel Pawlikowski (2018)

    Cold War is the story of a love affair that spans fifteen years and a large part of Europe.  It begins in Poland in 1949 and ends there in 1964, when the lovers, Zuzanna ‘Zula’ Lichoń (Joanna Kulig) and Wiktor Warski (Tomasz Kot), decide to commit suicide together.  Pawel Pawlikowski, who wrote the screenplay with (the late) Janusz Glowacki, covers plenty of ground, briskly and elliptically.  Like Pawlikowski’s previous film Ida (2013), an international succès d’estime, this new one is unusually compact (85 minutes), stylishly shot in black and white by Łukasz Żal and, for me, eventually unsatisfying.

    Pawlikowski begins with fragments of folk music – performed by a group of male street singers, an old woman accompanying herself on a pedal accordion, and so on.  Wiktor and his colleague Irena (Agata Kulesza) are on the road in search of material to represent Polish folk culture, for inclusion in the repertoire of Mazurek (Mazurka), a song-and-dance troupe comprising handpicked members of the nation’s rural youth.  Accompanying and supervising the two musicologists is apparatchik Kaczmarek (Borys Szyc), who shows no musical appreciation but knows what the government wants and doesn’t want, in terms of the language in which songs are sung, as well as the performers’ hair colouring:  the authorities prefer blondes.  At the auditions, fair-haired Zula does a duet with another girl.  The latter, as Irena points out, has the purer tone but she lacks the extra something Wiktor immediately perceives in Zula.  Once her companion has been dispatched and she’s auditioning alone, Zula makes clear she’s neither the preferred peasant type nor easily compliant.  She sings ‘Heart’, a ballad she heard in a Russian film that she saw.  When Irena thanks her and tries to cut her off, Zula carries on regardless (‘And the chorus …’).

    Wiktor learns from Irena that Zula served a prison sentence for stabbing her father, and asks what happened.  ‘He mistook me for my mother so I used a knife to show him the difference,’ Zula explains, ‘It’s all right – he’s not dead’.  Wiktor is supposedly old enough to be Zula’s father; the age difference between the actors playing the leads is much smaller.  In the early years of the story, Joanna Kulig is thoroughly convincing as a teenager (though temperamentally distant from them, she looks a cross between the young Hayley Mills and Anne Wiazemsky in Bresson’s Au hasard Balthazar).  It’s amazing that Kulig is actually thirty-six, only five years younger than Tomasz Kot.  The chemistry between them, in combination with Zula’s unusual backstory and behaviour, makes the beginnings of the affair compelling.  Lying on the grass with him beside a lake, Zula tells Wiktor that she loves him, will be with him ‘until the end of the world’ but has also been ‘ratting’ on him to Kaczmarek.  She assures Wiktor she’s not really given anything away but he stalks off angrily, turning back only when he hears a splash.  Zula has jumped into the lake – because, it seems, she felt like it.  She floats, Ophelia-like, on her back, singing her audition solo ‘Heart’.

    Along with the two charismatic main actors, the eclectic collection of music in Cold War is its most distinctive feature.  Under Wiktor’s and Irena’s tutelage, Mazurek give a performance in Warsaw that Kaczmarek acclaims as ‘a real calling card for our culture’.  The troupe’s repertoire soon features hymns to agricultural policy and to Stalin.  (Irena, who isn’t keen on this trend, quickly disappears.)  By now, Wiktor and Zula are lovers and he plans that they defect to the West while Mazurek are in East Berlin in 1952, participating in a Communist youth festival.  The Berlin Wall is nine years in the future but Zula loses her nerve and Wiktor defects alone.  The film picks him up in 1954 in Paris, where he makes a musical living playing piano in a jazz club.  Billie Holiday is on the record player in his apartment.  After joining him in France later in the decade, Zula records a jazz-cum-chanson version of ‘Heart’ (effectively the film’s theme song) and, at a party, dances with crazy abandon to ‘Rock Around the Clock’.  Back in Poland in 1964, she’s a club singer, delivering a faux-Mexican number called ‘Bongo!’ – culturally anomic garbage that’s the antithesis of the traditional Polish folk music that kicked the film off.  Zula performs ‘Bongo!’ wearing a black wig over her once-prized fair hair, though she’s now also the mother of a blonde-haired infant.

    Zula and Wiktor are separated for much of the time – by living in different countries or, once they’ve both returned to Poland, through his temporary imprisonment as a political prisoner – but these aren’t the only obstacles to happiness.  In Paris, they don’t enjoy each other’s company except in bed and are always suspicious about each other’s ex-lovers.  Zula in particular hates Wiktor’s Parisian friend Juliette (Jeanne Balibar), both for her pretentious translation into French of the lyrics of ‘Heart’ and for the fact that Juliette and Wiktor once had a fling.  The film’s European tour includes (as well as an episode in Yugoslavia) an excursion to Rome, where Zula is briefly married to an Italian, whom she leaves to come to Paris.   Her and Wiktor’s other romantic allegiances are always short-lived.  They’re people who can’t live together continuously, thanks to enduring personal tensions as well as geographical circumstances that divide them.  They can’t live without each other either.

    Pawlikowski has said that he based the protagonists (not, one hopes, their suicide pact) on his own parents.  It’s clear that he also intends the relationship, the nomadic narrative and the film’s musical trajectory to reflect a much broader theme – the tug of homeland, the need for roots.  The French version of ‘Heart’ is called ‘Loin de toi’, a phrase that, even if Juliette didn’t intend this, seems to refer to Poland as much to a human love.  Wiktor follows Zula back there, in spite of the risks of doing so.  When Zula visits him in prison, he tells her to be more pragmatic in her choice of men and she follows his advice.  In the last part of Cold War, she is married to Kaczmarek (the father of her child); still well connected in the Communist regime, he pulls strings to get Wiktor out of jail.  Reunited once more, Zula and Wiktor conduct a brief DIY marriage ceremony, on the site of the same ruined church they wandered through early in the film, and prepare to die.  Each swallows a handful of tablets.  The closing line is Zula’s:  she decides they should spend their final moments across the road from where they’re now standing – ‘The view is better from the other side’.  For this couple, Poland is both indispensable and, behind the Iron Curtain, intolerable.

    Joanna Kulig and Tomasz Kot both have one dominant look.  Her sulky ingénue glamour fuses little girl lost and femme fatale.  His keen eyes flash wariness and humour.  (He also has a great, strictly rationed, smile.)  Their magnetism, reinforced by novelty (though Kulig was in Ida in a much smaller role), made the Cold War trailer unusually absorbing but Kulig and Kot don’t have the same impact over the course of the film as a whole.  The characters they’re playing are less substantial than their context.  Though you always sense the presence of two fine actors, they become part of the unarguable style of the piece.  There’s good support from Borys Szyc and Agata Kulesza (who played the key role of the title character’s aunt in Ida.)

    According to Wikipedia, Pawel Pawlikowski was fourteen when he ‘left communist Poland with his mother for London. What he thought was a holiday, turned out to be a permanent exile[1].   If he spent more time with his mother than with his father, this could explain why Zula is the dominant character in the story – right through to its conclusion, when she takes the lead in the marriage ceremony, the doling out of tablets (‘You need more – you’re heavier’) and the choice of final viewpoint.  Because it’s inspired by something Pawlikowski experienced personally, the central relationship may well, for him, be thoroughly and inevitably true.  My difficulty with Cold War was that, as its metaphorical aspect became more salient, I gradually lost belief in the attachment between Zula and Wiktor as individuals.  The doomed love affair seemed more and more a given, a vehicle for the larger political aspect.  In interviews, Pawlikowski is reliably interesting and enjoyable to listen to.  (His acceptance speech at the Oscars, where Ida won for Best Foreign Language Film in 2015, was one of the most engaging of recent years.)   His films look extraordinarily good.  He’s an unusually succinct storyteller.  He deals with themes that are worthwhile, to put it mildly.  I would really like to like his work more than I do.

    31 August 2018

    [1] The phrase ‘permanent exile’ is an overstatement.  Pawlikowski, also according to Wikipedia, moved back to Poland once his two children had grown up.  He now lives in Warsaw, close to his childhood home.  (His first wife died in 2006.  He remarried in 2017.)

Posts navigation