Monthly Archives: May 2020

  • Never Rarely Sometimes Always

    Eliza Hittman (2020)

    Halfway through writer-director Eliza Hittman’s third feature, the seventeen-year-old heroine Autumn (Sidney Flanigan) is interviewed by a counsellor (Kelly Chapman) in the Planned Parenthood clinic in New York where Autumn is about to have an abortion.  The counsellor asks multiple choice questions about past and present sexual partnerships, inviting Autumn to answer with whichever of the four words of Hittman’s title is the most appropriate.

    In the spirit of that MCQ session …

    Q:  Does the film give a clear picture of Autumn’s personality and backstory?

    A:  Never.

    Hittman’s previous film Beach Rats (2017) is somewhat elliptical but nothing like this.  Autumn lives in Northumberland County, Pennsylvania, with her mother (Sharon Van Etten), father (Ryan Eggold) and younger sisters.  (The latter may be half-sisters and their father Autumn’s stepfather but that’s only a guess.)  Though still at school, Autumn works part-time in a local supermarket alongside her cousin Skylar (Talia Ryder), the only family member she tells about her pregnancy.  Skylar, who’s fiddled cash receipts before, uses supermarket takings to finance Autumn’s trip to New York, and accompanies her there.  They spend two nights away from home, during which time there’s little curiosity from parents as to their whereabouts.  There’s even less curiosity from Skylar about who got Autumn pregnant or, if Skylar already knows this, whether Autumn has told him.

    Autumn sings at the high school concert that opens the film – she’s a startling, dissonant contrast to the Elvis impersonator and the trio of clean-cut boys who precede her on stage.  The lyrics of her song, The Exciters’ ‘He’s Got the Power’, announce Autumn’s predicament:  ‘He makes me do things I don’t wanna do/He makes me say things I don’t wanna say …’   The presentation of males in Autumn’s home and school life, though cursory, is enough to cast suspicion on them.  One teenage boy in the concert audience makes others snigger by heckling Autumn’s performance.  In the pizzeria where she goes with her family afterwards, the same boy makes faces at her; she chucks a glass of water over him on her way out.  (No one comments.)  Back at home, her father, when he’s not sexually stimulating the family dog that he then laughingly brands a ‘slut’, gives Autumn unpleasant ‘meaningful’ looks.

    For Ryan Gilbey in the New Statesman, the lack of information is one of the many virtues of Never Rarely Sometimes Always (which I’ll call NRSA for short).  The script, according to Gilbey, ‘fills in the blanks without resorting to anything as prosaic as straightforward exposition’.  Not so:  the script leaves blanks for viewers to fill in, relying on their predispositions to draw an appropriate conclusion.  For this viewer, Hittman’s approach is doubly exasperating:  she pushes gender politics buttons without elucidating character.  Everything we learn about Autumn’s sexual history comes from that clinic interview:  she first had sex at the age of fourteen, has had a total of six partners to date, including two in the last year, and has practised vaginal, oral and anal sex.  The MCQs include ‘Your partner has refused to wear a condom’ and ‘Your partner has threatened or frightened you’.  Though Autumn remains reticent, she gets increasingly upset as she stutters out her one-word answers to these questions.  That’s as far as Hittman goes.  Her approach ensures that her protagonist, while she may be sexually experienced, remains victim intacta.

    Q:  Does Sidney Flanigan’s facial expression change?

    A:  Rarely.

    Autumn is quite a misnomer:  Sidney Flanigan’s frozen pallor has winter written all over it.  Flanigan is a singer-songwriter whose first acting role this is – it’s anyone’s guess as to whether she wears a gloomy mask because she thinks it best conveys Autumn’s lack of agency and helplessness, or because her acting ability is limited, or both.  While Julia Garner is likewise mostly unsmiling in Kitty Green’s The Assistant, Garner at least leaves little doubt that she’s a capable actress.   In spite of these films’ quasi-documentary features, the main character’s message-bearing face in both is strikingly unrealistic, given how much of normal everyday life tends to involve dissimulation of negative thoughts and feelings.  Garner has an advantage in this, of course, because her character is a PA and has to summon a bit of brightness, at least in her voice on the phone to clients.  The excuse for Autumn to look bleak is that she often feels physically lousy, which Flanigan sometimes suggests well.  But since she’s anxious, especially at home, not to invite questions as to what’s the matter, it’s surprising she never puts a false brave face on things.

    In the later stages, Skylar manages to make Autumn’s face crack a couple of times.  Until then, her displays of emotion are limited to the Q&A at Planned Parenthood.  (Autumn barely winces even when she tries to bring about a self-induced miscarriage, repeatedly punching herself in the stomach.)  NRSA also has in common with The Assistant a standout, virtually standalone interview sequence that allows the young actress in the main role her best opportunity to shine but in which her interlocutor is just as memorable.  Here, it’s Kelly Chapman, an actual social worker at a Queens, NY clinic called Choices, whom Eliza Hittman met and talked with in developing the film.

    While they’re in New York, the two girls, because they’re short of funds, spend time with a boy called Jasper (Théodore Pellerin), who chatted up Skylar on the coach journey from Pennsylvania and, in spite of her reluctance, managed to get her phone number.  The three go together to a bowling alley then a karaoke bar, where Autumn sings Gerry and the Pacemakers’ ‘Don’t Let the Sun Catch You Crying’.  This would have more impact if we’d not had her bitterly whingeing number at the start of the film and if the sentiments of ‘Don’t Let the Sun …’ chimed, even a little, with Autumn’s demeanour, which they don’t.  Never mind that (needless to say) sunshine is nowhere to be seen in this film:  the Pennsylvania skies are grey and it’s usually pouring down in New York.

    Q:  Does the film feel like a sermon?

    A:  Always would be pushing it – more often than sometimes wouldn’t be.

    As Autumn arrives at the first of the two NYC Planned Parenthood facilities she visits, a group of Catholics stand in the street outside, chanting Hail Marys in unison.   This is presumably an anti-abortion demonstration:  the people don’t carry placards to make that explicit but their chants are resoundingly pro-life.  A Catholic presence is apt too because there’s a Stations-of-the-Cross flavour to Autumn’s journey from Northumberland County to New York and around the big city.

    When she goes to a local clinic for a pregnancy test, Autumn is struck by the very basic test equipment and asks, in one of her more expansive moments, if it’s the same test you can buy in supermarkets.  The medic in charge (Mia Dillon) says it is.  This clinic will soon be revealed in its true, aggressively anti-abortion colours, and the woman medic as its egregious spirit of place – so even the use of a supermarket test is made to seem underhand (though it made me wonder only why Autumn hadn’t already tested herself).  It’s after finding out online that abortion for under-18s is illegal in Pennsylvania without parental consent that Autumn confides in Skylar and they plan the trip to New York.  Autumn has further tests at the first Planned Parenthood clinic; it emerges from these that the Pennsylvania medic deceived Autumn when she told her she was ten weeks pregnant.  She’s actually eighteen weeks and will therefore need to go next day to another Planned Parenthood facility that’s able to carry out abortions at this relatively advanced stage.

    She reports to the larger clinic where she’s told the abortion will entail a two-stage procedure, carried out on consecutive days.  Although she thought her family’s medical insurance would cover the costs, she now learns that her mother would receive an itemised bill – and Autumn’s priority is to keep her abortion, like her pregnancy, a secret.  From this point on, the film’s emphasis is on how tough it is for her and Skylar, stuck in a place they don’t know and with no money, Autumn having used all their funds as an up-front payment to the clinic.  There’s no denying Eliza Hittman illustrates Autumn’s plight emphatically but she does so at the expense of bringing the teenager to individual life:  she’s on the screen purely to make a point.   I watched NRSA on Amazon Prime Video and turned on the subtitling as a (wise) precaution.  Whenever Julia Holter’s score was playing, the screen indicated just a musical symbol.  This is a better idea than the comically diligent attempts subtitles sometimes make to describe music – ‘eerie’ or ‘suspenseful’ or ‘intense’.  In this case, there would have been no need to ring the adjectival changes.  The score is always miserable.

    The moments when the film doesn’t feel like a sermon are supplied by Kelly Chapman’s persistent, concerned counsellor and in the lighter-hearted interactions between Skylar and Jasper at the bowling alley.  Talia Ryder is more emotionally animated than Sidney Flanigan.  The storyline is always working up the sex-pest side of Jasper and it’s strongly implied that Skylar eventually has to have sex with him in exchange for Jasper’s paying the girls’ bus fare home to Pennsylvania.  Even so, Théodore Pellerin plays Jasper well, giving him a neediness and an awkward humour, as well as a quiet determination to press home his financial advantage.

    Q:  How often do you find yourself agreeing with Armond White reviews?

    A:  Sometimes.

    It’s a worrying trend.  Not only is White’s political standpoint objectionable; he’s also disingenuous.  He complains that Eliza Hittman’s film is the ‘latest example of politicized filmmaking as the Hollywood norm’.  White is exercised not by politicised filmmaking as such but by the fact that its current practitioners tend to be liberals.  (Praising the work of the publicly right-wing Clint Eastwood in his recent review of Richard Jewell, he’s careful to describe Eastwood’s movies as ‘not so much political as they are morally conscious’.)  White nevertheless offers a kind of refuge on Rotten Tomatoes, where, as I write this, 170 of the 172 reviews for NRSA are ‘fresh’.  I largely agree with his analysis of the film (and with that of Dustin Chase, the only other dissenter).  And although White is too determinedly contrarian, he’s railing against a critical and industry-insider consensus whose reactions are hardly less automatic – and which explains, as well as the Rotten Tomatoes profile, the major prizes already awarded to Hittman’s polemic at this year’s Sundance and Berlin festivals.

    White is naturally happy to ignore the powerful evidence that the Hollywood politicising he claims to detest has become more prevalent and crudely problematic since Trump became President.  There are obviously strong grounds for thinking that #MeToo energies and momentum were increased thanks to Trump – a man who evidently enjoys abusing a position of power in relation to women and who suffered no electoral disadvantage (perhaps the reverse) in the light of public exposure of his appetite for sexual harassment.  It’s entirely understandable that filmmaking liberals, like liberals in any other walk of life, feel angry and largely powerless in the face of Trump’s (and others’) rampant right-wing populism.  But using these frustrations to fuel films in a way that, as Armond White accurately puts it, ‘overwhelms storytelling craft and reason’, isn’t the answer – it’s a culturally retrograde step.  We’re already living in a dark time politically.   The last thing we need is creative tunnel vision and evasion, as exemplified by films like The Assistant and Never Rarely Sometimes Always, to send us into artistic reverse too.

    21 May 2020

  • Vivacious Lady

    George Stevens (1938)

    This comedy may not technically qualify as screwball but the romantic pairing – an academic hero in need of a sentimental education and a sparky, more worldly-wise heroine – inevitably brings to mind Bringing Up Baby (released just a few weeks earlier in 1938) and Ball of Fire – and, to a lesser extent, The Lady Eve.  A big difference in Vivacious Lady is how quickly the romance comes to fruition.  Peter Morgan Jr (James Stewart), an associate professor of botany, is in New York to find his playboy cousin Keith (James Ellison) and return him home to Old Sharon, the college town where they live.  Having tracked Keith down to a Manhattan night club, Peter telephones his father with the good news.  He has to shout down the phone to drown out the voice of a club singer performing close at hand.  Peter finishes the call and notices the chanteuse, Francey Brent (Ginger Rogers), who then directs her looks and lyrics towards him.  Francey comes to sit with Peter; they talk for a while before leaving the club together.  It’s a surprise to see James Stewart’s Peter yield to love at first sight before your eyes – surely shaking him out of his staid, donnish habits is the challenge for Ginger Rogers’s Francey that will occupy nearly the whole ninety minutes of Vivacious Lady?  The next surprise eliminates that first one.  Peter and Francey get married the following day.

    All that remains now is for the groom to inform his parents – the overbearing Peter Morgan Sr (Charles Coburn), president of the university where his son is a member of the faculty, and his wife Martha (Beulah Bondi), whose heart condition causes her to take ill whenever her husband raises his voice, which isn’t rarely.  Peter Jr brings Francey back to Old Sharon (a fictional place, possibly inspired by Sharon, New Hampshire?), without anyone there knowing she’s his bride, and without his bride knowing Peter also has a fiancée, Helen (Frances Mercer) – ‘The old man whipped her up – blue blood, a thoroughbred’.  That description of Helen comes from Keith, the only other person in on the happy couple’s secret. He proves a good egg, considering that, when Peter first ran him to earth in the Manhattan club, Keith was in drunken raptures about Francey, assured Peter she was the most beautiful girl he’d ever met, and engineered that first conversation with Francey purely as a joke on his serious-minded cousin.  The stage is set for a New York vs Old Sharon culture clash, for the uproar that’s bound to result from Morgan Sr finding out the truth, and bound to give Mrs Morgan another nasty turn.

    You wonder if Vivacious Lady’s comic basis will be too slender for the humour not to wear thin, but this doesn’t happen.  The long-delayed revelation to the Morgan parents of their son’s marriage, when it finally happens, is amusing twice over.  Peter manages to inform his father just as Morgan Sr is about to deliver a speech designed to seal the deal on a major donation to the university from a rich alumnus (Lloyd Ingraham).  Francey tells Mrs Morgan only because the latter has just assured her, ‘I know all about it’, though she doesn’t.  Speedy matrimony doesn’t pre-empt the setbacks on which romantic comedy depends:  there are as many bumps in the road for Francey and Peter as there would have been if he’d brought her home as a girlfriend.  The screenplay, by P J Wolfson and Ernest Pagano (from a story by I A R Wylie), is well supplied with witty incidents and lively minor characters.  George Stevens’s direction is nimble but never frenetic.

    Stevens’s expertise as a director of 1930s comedy, grounded in his work as cameraman on numerous Laurel and Hardy shorts, makes it all the more striking that he switched so thoroughly to drama later in his career (according to Wikipedia, there are no comic scenes in any of his post-war films after I Remember Mama (1948)).  The 2017 Netflix documentary series Five Came Back, based on Mark Harris’s book, stresses the traumatic legacy of Stevens’s experiences as a film-maker in wartime (as the head of a film unit under Eisenhower, he shot footage of Dachau and other Nazi camps).   Watching Alice Adams or Swingtime or Vivacious Lady, as well as being highly enjoyable, sharpens your awareness of how deeply the tenor of Stevens’s screen material changed.

    In Ball of Fire, Barbara Stanwyck’s Sugarpuss O’Shea, a night club performer and gangster’s moll, may be the outsider in the ivory tower where she takes refuge (from the police who want her for questioning) but she dominates the place. Ginger Rogers’s Francey, for all her feistiness, is more of an underdog newcomer to academia.  As well as being funny (and dancing briefly), Rogers blends toughness – a catfight between Francey and Helen is startlingly vigorous – with a vulnerable awareness of how much she offends the Old Sharon status quo.  The vulnerability doesn’t turn mushy – until the climax of the story, when the mushiness is played for laughs.  Francey returns alone and heartbroken to New York.  She eventually discovers that in the next-door train compartment is Mrs Morgan, who has lost patience with and walked out on her bullying husband, and, like Francey, is weeping bucketsful.  On their very first meeting, on the margins of a college gathering, the two women literally share a cigarette:  Francey offers the one remaining in her case and Mrs Morgan divides it in two.  This is nicely reprised on the New York train, as a clue to Francey of who her neighbour is.  The travelling companions cheer themselves up even before the Peters Jr and Sr board the train to deliver a happy ending for all concerned.

    All except the wronged fiancée, that is.  Frances Mercer has an exceptionally thankless task:  Helen is a snob, a scold and a sneak.  It’s grimly amusing that, despite his vehement opposition to his son’s marriage, Peter’s father never says, ‘What about poor Helen?’  When the latter tells his mother she caught Peter leaving, in the small hours, the hostel for women students where Francey is now holed up, it’s enough for the invalid to rise from her sick bed and head for the hostel to sort things out.  That’s when she accidentally finds out that Francey is her daughter-in-law.  A delighted Mrs Morgan instantly forgets about Helen.  She also confides in Francey that her weak heart is a put-on, though a necessary means to marital survival.

    Charles Coburn is first-rate as Morgan Sr, Beulah Bondi more surprisingly effective as his wife:  Bondi seems to relish, as much as Mrs Morgan does, her zany dance routine with Ginger Rogers and the likeable James Ellison.  Franklin Pangborn is wonderful as the officious but easily scared manager of the no-men-allowed hostel.  Hattie McDaniel has an uncredited appearance as (of course) a maid.  Willie Best is the increasingly perplexed New York train porter who tries his level best, with ham sandwiches and the one cigarette he can lay his hands on, to alleviate the misery of the ladies in adjoining compartments.  Best’s racially self-demeaning routine is a brake on enjoyment of the train episode, which is such fun in other ways.

    Two years after Vivacious Lady, its stars won Best Actor and Actress awards at the same Oscars ceremony in different films (The Philadelphia Story and Kitty Foyle respectively).  They’re a fine comedy partnership; it’s a shame they didn’t work together again.  James Stewart, who was just coming up thirty at the time, looks even younger – it makes sense of the set-up that Ginger Rogers seems a bit older (though she was actually Stewart’s junior by three years).   Stewart is so much more appealing an actor when, as here, his essential rectitude is used light-heartedly.  One of his and Rogers’s best exchanges comes in the hostel.  The fold-down bed in Francey’s room has a mind of its own, smacking down from the wall whenever a door or drawer shuts.  It even has a name of its own – Walter, after the late husband of the hostel maid (Helena Grant) who, his widow explains, had a habit of falling over.   As Peter keeps delaying his departure from the room and Francey hers to New York, they keep hoping the bed will do its stuff.  They even slam doors to encourage it.  Walter refuses and stays firmly in the wall.  This sequence isn’t only funny.  It also functions as an exasperated comment on Hays Code constraints on bedroom scenes, whether those in the bedroom were married or not.

    20 May 2020

Posts navigation