cineACTION!

A MAGAZINE OF RADICAL FILM cnmcnsm ameonv

No 5
“@552

alternative cinema

8".‘
‘ feminist
thi rd world
\ 1
underground
exper imental

7- -

I ~»».‘.;..i

also interview w/ arthur penn

:
 CIneActlon|
No. 5. May 1986
Editorial Collective
Andre“ Ilrittnii
Bryan Bruce
Scott Forsyth
.~\nthiin_\ |f\\lfl
Florence .l;ieohowit/
Maureen Judge
Richard Lippe
Susan Mtlfflstl
Contents
Lori Spring
Rnhiii \Viio|.l
From the editors Page I

SCOTT FORSYTH St MAURIil§N _lIlI)(iI‘

Editors for this Issue
Sans Snleil Page 2
Seiiii |'t\I’.\_\'li1
JANINE MARCHESSAULT
Maureen Judge

The Seven Sins of Bette Gordon's l‘urit'I_i' Page 7

til-Sltils“ Stuart Ross K/\\' ARM/\TA(iE
I 4\\t>l‘l K I’-\SI|'-l'I’ Bryan Bnice
Stuart Russ Textual I-Ixeess in Joyce WieI;ini.I‘s IllIIItlIi!|Ii!|_I{ Page I2
KASS H/\NN|N(i
I\'I'| SI I I|Nti I-ixcaliiuir Publications
t'Rir~'lirs'(i Delta Weh Graphics Interview with Arthur Penn Page I5
Oniarin Film I!|.tIiI!4|t'. Picture
.S‘ull.i l'lIll!It.'.\_\‘ Rl(‘II/\Rl) LIPPI: K’ ROBIN \\'()()I)
Plan: Ln/.. Nnli'miaI_ Film Ifuanl uf Canada.
aml the iniliriilual aulhiirx, Pissing on the Cinema of Trzinsgression Page Z7
BRYAN IIRUCI‘
(‘u|i'.~lt nun.’ is published quarterly hy the
(‘ineAetion! collective. Single copy price is
$3.50; double issues $7.00: subscriptions are Notes for the Exploration of Hermosillo Page 32
auiilahle for four issues for $12.00 ROBIN W001)
Iiiitlividualsi and $25.00 (insiitiiiiiins):
abroad. add $2.00. Planting Pictures: discussion of
at Page 39
the lilms of William D. Mac(iilIi\'rziy
Mailing address: PI"|‘l‘R II/\R('()llRT
( 'uie.~I rlimi!
-Ill Alexander SL, Apt. 705
State Machismo: The Oflieial Versions Page 45
Toronto. Ontario
MJY IRS Canada nfthe State of Male/Female Relations
J()Y(‘I' MASON
M;lI!\|\L‘flpl\ (l)p¢d< double-spaeesll Lire \A('|L‘\t|Il\‘\.i.
HR‘) \htIll|tl be ilwtlmpunlrsi h) J \ll|II1p\f\L seIl'- ‘Point of View": (‘orrigan and Britton Page St)
addressed mum enwl-vpc, Iii: .illlIf\ tin tll
AlL'\I(‘|'Il I(‘\ptIl1\li'\till} ii-i ilieii Io“.
‘Books': Jimtp (‘ill Page 53
nit ilptllttltls e\pre\\ed III Il’ldl\l\.i\1;|i articles JR‘ Iltll SCOTT FORSYTH
I1t€t\\L\tI|_\ R‘I\d\II\(‘l| by the cdiliitizil eiilleetiie.

All &l\L‘iL'\ \'0I\lilIIIt'\i iIL‘l’t‘III are \‘lY|'Y)tl§iIl ‘ Mai

I924!» hi (‘mi-.-ti-milil and mu) not he reproduced
Front cover: Sans Snleil (above) and Aerial l'Tt'\\'
wnhiiui |‘\t‘fl'IIl\\ttIIl.

ISSN Ulillv-‘lXI\l\
Second (‘lass Mail Regtsltaiiiin No, 7057
Pnnted llnd hound in ('anatla

This issue was assisted by grants from the

litplorations programme and the Writing
and Publication Section of the Canada
(‘ouneil.
 Isabelle Huppert and Jean-Luc Godard on the set of Godard's Passion.

u“/5
.

~
._'
s
as-_
#1. .’
1
“
-
\l‘

From the editors

from the spectrum ol '...-~
ALL OF THE FILMS DISCUSSED
dilLl'l"ldllVt7 lms,
in this issue are
-_
from lilm
*
Cuba, Canada and Mexico outside dominant
'..
distrtbutton. ln addition, two (ilfL.LlOl’S are introduced
making practices operating outside of mainstream with strong senses of social place and very different
production. No specic political or aesthetic position lm-making strategies.
denes these lms; they may he considered to be A discussion of the Cinema of Transgression takes
experimental, feminist. documentary. structuralist. us underground in New York to question the politics
Marxist, narrative or some combination. behind “shock tactics" in lm.
In each of these lms there is a strong relationship We welcome reader's comments and criticism. ln
between formal structure and politics or vision. lf this issue, we publish a communication from Philip
there is a connecting similarity, perhaps Sans Svlz'iI‘s Corrigan and a response from Andrew Britton;
intense refusal of closure is exemplary. Marker‘s lm. readers may detect a continuation, among other
with its deconstruction of traditional images and subjects, of a discussion on the function of criticism.
narration, leaves its viewers with a sense of both lost Finally. an interview with Arthur Penn ranges over
certainty and the potential of new vision, different past and present Hollywood and dwells on the present
history. limitations of the dominant industry which the other
Variely and Ilamllinring each pursue different. and lm—makers represented here operate oustide of and,
arguably feminist, searches for new relationships to varying degrees. against.
between the image, the narrative and the spectator. Scott Forsyth
Geographic origin, by itself, places lms from Maureen Judge

Spring '86 CineAction! I

 SANS

SOLEIL
n! SSSS ng '86
 ‘ ‘ » <

by Janlng Marchgggaun The events of Mav l9oZ in France (the Solan trial. the _OAS
demonstrations) arc said to have exerted a tremendous inu-
ence over Marker‘s subsequent work and it is probably this
Iizni ivri/in_t_t_t-rm 11/II/li_t'_/ilim|1!m!Itt'rtt'(;rItL q aw/,1 q/‘awn-gr. iiillueiice that informs I.l' ./tilt‘ .\Iui. (Kimbining cinema-verite
uncut‘. In u \\'ll_l'. the Il\'ll \\'0![(/.l' mmniuiii<'a!t* iiilli mcli ollier.
In I7!I(' ii-Ital fIf.\’Il)!_l' i.i’ In I/ll‘ ollicr. An l-I!l[!0.\’.\'ff7f/I'I‘l'.
rI(’IllU!'_l' i.i
l)'P° i"l"l"'l"“'>_"""‘ll““" l“ ll“ “l
"‘°"l* M41}? “ill! -“""~"'"l
*"i1"l!'¢|)' §""'*'i'|l>ll" l'""l1'~'§ "li P1"'l-‘~ ""5 lm l.\'Plll°§ 11 ‘~39-‘lrc
l1_zc1izl.i are hunt out Q/'1hcIit't'1llo I/(‘Fifi/11'!‘ the lIl1lt’t‘i]iht'rabIt'_ to ‘take to the streets‘ in the manner of it Dlillil \"~‘l'"“'-
illunmrit-.tinii.i-1 makviln ii-i'/Ii ilit-irdeliriuni, with I/It'i!r/rf/I. .4 ll is not siirprising that four years later. Jlll hvliirr the
IlllI!!ll'IlI.)'IO/Iflfll\t‘0llIl1I)|I!‘!lIfkt’_/]lIIYlt’([/:/"Illhf!!!‘/ilklblf/lift‘ evcttls of May I968. Marker established the SLON group
I/Il‘l!'7|lIl"(’ it/'IIic projector. llIarIIii'.i'.i pratcrls. l1J_/i't't'rtIr)t-3, (Societe Pour le l.ancenient des Oeuvres Nouvelles)‘ whose
((‘Itri_r /liarkt-r, Sat-ts Soleil) rst project was to produce l.iit'n tlu l'ii-Intuit (f21r_/'nini I'll’!-
iium, N67). Marker invited various lnimakers (including
can Rouch_ noted for his ethnngraphie dpiCli()n§_ tn-ta; William Klein. .loris lvens. .l.L. Godard. Claude Lelouch,
spoke of those rare moments in l'||m when without the Agnes Varda, .-\lain Rcsnais] to eoiiiribiitc an episode that
aid Oi‘ translation. the Spectator suddenly comprehends wotild deal in some way with the situation in Vietnam. The
an unknown dialect. participates in strange ceremonies, has tt restilt is a rich and intaluablc catalogue of different
knowledge of towns and landscapes never before seen,‘ approaches to political filiiiinaking. to ‘making political lms
Rouch‘s remarks highlight the assumption, common to many politically‘ as Godard has ptii it. Marker‘s own approach is
a realist epistemology. that a language ofanittersal signica. inscribed in the \'er_\ idea of the lm. in bringing together
tion. a language transcending all human barrie-rs_ eapahle ht‘ \'ariegati:d points ofview on a political catastrophe in order to
accessing the supratemporal essences of a ctimmnrt totality_ better uiiderstantl it. ln the juxtaposition of different
can be located in and through the agency of lm. Chris approaches. Marker does iioi privilege any one position, but
Marker‘s Suns Stilt-il (Sim I,(',\‘,\', |9tl2)does indeed write from lets each stand in relation to the other. each episode collide
thisagenc_v—"another world“—whose tnaterialeeneeriseon. with the nest. coinmingle. intercept. rcstrticitire in a move-
Stitttted in dislocated legends. shreds of fantasies and dreams_ ment of utytiu/i:tilimi. lt was this idea of equalization that
details from a favorite ft|m_ the banal speetaeles of at-eryday inspired the SLON group to support and help foster a purely
extistcnce in the third world (West Africa) and rst world militant L‘l|1L''l;|—f7vl‘ llic \\l!!'/\'l'!'.\ initl_/in I/l(' imr/rt'r.\'. SLON
(Japan), three children on a road to lee-land in l%5_ All tht-§¢ encouraged the workers to establish their own cinema. to
elements are renderedlhroughthelelters ofa 'wt)|'|dl[;tv¢|It;r' develop sigiiifyiiig practices that would best represent their
in ii bltir of temporal landmarks which at times scent to collective interests. The idea was simple. change history by
resouiid with the familiarity Roiich describes. Yet Sn/i.i Soleil "hit"!-!i"ll ll> “Tll\'l\ Tl" P"‘llYi'"1-l1"\\\-'\i~‘f-ittcl Willi \'i".Vi"l.l
recasts this familiarity as phantasm_ as the one twenty-ttntrth degrees of success as inaiiy of the lms nierely reproduced the
ofa second fro1en in the projeetar_ condemned tn the ashes tit‘ same oppressive structures of representation. the same boiir-
iime, outside time—as impossible memory. geois myths. without changing them.
The complex interaction between memory and history in a The notion of eqtialilzition implies precisely a kind of
concern which Marker has explored and |:X[(;|'ld¢d over many polytheism. the introduction of multiple points of view which
years. Asa member of the Left Bank‘ in the fties, Marker, ittnundate the posttivistic claim and render it ambiguous. lt is
along with his friends Alain Resnais and Agnes Vardti, was in Suiii Sn/vil that this process of equalization entertains the
renowned for his short tloeumentarit-§_|tn essay-§ “-ltich possibility of an entirely new conception of histor_\: it history
explored in various hybrid forms thejuncture between ction not founded oti opposition htit on tIi'/_'/i'reiit'i'. As such. Saris
and reality. I.ellri' ilc Siht‘rit'tl95tl)for example. interrogated Sn/ttil is not an alteriiative lm traditionally elucidated in
the relationship between sound and image. between point oi‘ relation to and tliiisasa reaction against a dominant typology.
view and image construction. By juxtaposing three different Like Mtirkt-r‘s earlier lms il is ll hybrid-—a strange composi-
commentaries (reflecting three disparate world views: the tion of notiveati roman and ethnograhic document. ln this
Communist‘ the Socialist and the Capitalist) over the same way it dees boundaries. it resists categories because it is
series of shots. Marker demonstrated how sounds transform always neiiherone or both together; it can be described onlyas
images, how ideologies manipulate cognition. how three niovenient. as the very process of wriiing—as irritiirt-.
separate narratives can be titted frorn one visual enntt-gt, .S'un.i .\'uIcilfiilly cnibraees Marker‘s concerns for the riddled
ln I11 J¢'!c'r' ( I963) Marker transposed these concerns onto interface between real and imaginary. between ideology and
his own narrative in an attempt to distend and re-shape the representation. between history and memory. Unlike his one
cinematic contours of time and mcmnry_ Matte-tip almost time collaborator Resnais where the interaction between
entirely of still photographs. I11 Jolie relates the pursuit ofan lttt1lL!iI1ilY_\' 1-) Kind real (4') is cumulative. Marker Ite\'et’ col-
elusive childhood memory through past and future; ;t man is lapses the two terms; rather. there is always a social edice
haunted by the image ofa death he witnessed as a child—the operaiingotitsidc the ll'llilgL‘—1|[7!‘t’-Il‘.\‘| from which the image
death is his own. The movement of the lm is tgngqntltgrqd is drawn. This noiioii ofpre-text does not attend some theo-
through a complex montage of ‘memory moments‘ and logical parade of essences and origins hut is highly material.
through the circularity of the science-ction narratit-t-_ ideological. reied; it is a concrete social reality. The image for
It is probably signicant that Marker produced l.cJuli'.'lIui'. Marker is a memory of the pre-test: "Legends are born out of
considered by many to be his most straight-forward documen- the need to decipher the intleciphcrable." The docttmentation
tary_ in the same year, Unlike many of his t;qn1p;|[[iQ[§ on th,_- ofdiffercnt aspects ofesisteiice iliroiigli mechanical reproduc-
Lefi Bank. though equally aware ofthe contradictions ttrtt_ler- tion is born from this same need: to rt-cover what is forever
lying the ‘commiited‘ art work‘ Marker directed his efforts lost. to uncover the secret strticturelsl of the cipher. the pre-
towards nding/formttlating the intersection between the existent scheme oftliiiigs. lii Suii.i".S'riIi-iltliis need is referenced
representation of politics and the piiliiics of representation, through a world traveller, a man of many worlds, Sandor

Spring ‘B6 CineAction! 3

Krasna. whose letters written from farofflands are read on the term is literal for in the Western World it is capital that weaves
soundtrack by the woman who (we suppose) is their recipient. the webs of memory.)
Krasna. for whom only the banalitics ofeveryday life carry $0"-Y Slfil di$¢Y¢dil5 3")’ ""i""Y "a"'3llV° °l hi5l°l'Y by
meaning.isin the process ofmakinga lm (this lm'.'). Before introducing ambiguity into every last hiatus of its construc-
the titles appear. over black leader a woman's voice addresses li0"- The "105! madily di5¢¢l'nib|¢ °r lhic 55. 35 "0l¢d bv.
us directly: that ofthe author—Chris Marker is credited with the concep-
-|-hc m image he mm me “bum was onhrw L.h||dn_n M u tion and theeditingofthe lm;51tndor Krasna is said tobethe
mad ‘O “gland in N65‘ H‘. said ‘hm rm him 5. Wm ‘he "MEL. “r author ol tltc letters; the narrator is acknowledged only for her
happiness and also. that he had tried several lime; to tint; it to
reading wlten logically she is responsible for at least part ofthe
other images. but it neverworlted. He wrote: “l‘II have to put it script. Though the existence of Sandor Krasna is highly
all alone at the beginning ofa lm with a long piece of black improbable. his mysterious absence. his relationship to the
|=ild=t‘- ll "WY d""'l 5“ l\=\PPi"t‘§§ t" ll" imgs‘ "W" 4" MN narrator and to the lilm as well as Chris Markcr's own position
thcy‘ll sec the black.“ in all this. serve to carve at productive uncertainty into the ow
The woman pauses before reading the second sentence as a ofpredominantly documentary images: where is theirpoint of
golden hucd image of three children on a road appears origin? As in 1aJ1'!z‘t'. the lm is premised ina large way on the
momentarily only to disappear into black. ls this the image of complex interplay of temporalities which multiply and erode
happiness? Or. is this a representation conjured up in the any one origin on the continuum. In the absence ofour world
narrator's mind as she reads the letter? Or. is this Chris traveller, a woman reads the letters he has sent to her in order
Marker‘s imaginary construction; are the narrator. Sandor to describe him to us. to de-cipher him. to re-instate his
.
l

presence. Her attempt to do this. however. cngendcrsa rather

. . .
Krasna. the Image of happiness merely contrivances_ ruscs?
‘

This ambiguity is fortied by the insertion only a few frames odd confttsion—wherc does she begin and where docs she end.
latcrofthc image ofair-craft bombers.men and war machines Like the secret of the cipher. she is reected. is part of. i_r
getting ready to take off. The juxtaposition is startling and as exactly what shc deciphers. It becomes increasingly diicult as
with the previous image its origin is uncertain. While this thelm ttnfoltls to separate the narrator'squalications—“he
image of war does in fact prove the diiculty in linking the used to like to. he told me the story. he wrote me"—from
image of happiness with other images. its presence is more Sandor Krasna‘s letters which are all written in the rst per-
than a simple demonstration as it is not called forth by the son. For example. the narrator recalls: “He told me the story
letter. The lm's tension is rooted in thejuxtaposition ofthesc about a dog Hachiko: a dog waited every day...“ The story is
rst two images and in the way the cummcntaryinteracts with accompanied by the image of a statue of a dog in Japan.
but never completely controls them. presumably the dog of the story. The legend is related to us
Sandor Krasna's wish is to have the image of happiness directly by the narrator. or is it Sandor Krasnai’ The compli-
framed in black. standing as representation. taken to its most cated interpolation of voices. like disembodied echoes. fades
extreme point. polished and puried. shielded against any into one impn.s'.tihIt' narralnr_ at once sender and receiver: a
lexicographic intoxication. The difculty of this endeavor is circle.
articulated through the presence ofthe war image: a meaning- Tlte image track adds another impossible temporal dimen-
ful danger. the danger of meaning. ofthe real. ofthe prc-text sion to the lm. For the most part Sandor Krasna's letters
which is always inextricably bound up in the lmic ontology. precede the images or coincide perfectly. The statue ofthe dog.
The imaginary. the memory of happiness is never innocent. for example. corresponds to the story. we therefore assume
Sans Suleil sets itself the task of fullling Sandor Krasna's that it is Krasna‘s image. Logically this is not possiblmbecuuse
deSir8 to set the image free. to strip it of its pre-text and seal it it is the narrator who dictates the order in which she recalls
into its own cognisance. From this process might emerge it Krasna and dierent pans of her narration lie outside the
new system of signication. not at new subjectivity but a realmoftheletters(forexample,the storyofthedogisone he
radical(inevery sense ofthe word) restructuration ofobjectiv- told her and is not part of a letter): they are her memory of
ity. But how to go about this’! How to forge an attack on the him. Logically there are two lms. the one lm that Krasna is
terror embodied in the silver protusions. the phallogocentric describing in his lettcrsand .S'nrt.rSoIz'iIwhich can only be seen
mechanisms ofa war which has been determined in advance. as a kind ofhomage to this rst |m.as its‘ duplication. But as
Maybe the answer is in the darkness—“at least the_v‘|l see the with the voicc(s). the two lms fall into one: they are merged
black"—and perhaps the secret of the cipher is grounded in through the images which work to fntstrate the establishment
the enigmatic absence ofa man named Sandor Krasna: Sans ofany one temporal position. The montage ofimagcs moves
Or/Gold Less. outside the realm of logical linearity and in this way deny the
What if. as Niewsche had insistcd.the ciphcris made up of possibility of their own truth: "My personal problem was
mirrors which in essence reveal nothing, but maintain their more specic: How to lm the ladies of Bissau7...l see her——
chimera through defraction. What if the cipher is precisely She saw me—She knows that l see her—...and at the end the
that absence of quantity that the act of dc-ciphering lls in. If real glance..." The images comply with the description which
this is so then the cipher is sun I1'.r.r and the act of dc-ciphering slides effortlessly back and forth between past and present.
its undoing in the fabrication of entities where nullity before While at rst it seems clear that the images precede the letters.
presided. And if the act of deciphering is simply historicity this is undone for one short instant as a woman from Bissau
exercising its structures over time. then the privilege. the pref- stares directly into the camera. Her glance carries an uninch-
erence.the selection.thc sanction ofone moment overanother ing immediacy which supersedes the commentary. Marker
merely contributes to the construction of oppressive though. is well aware of the sttturing eccts of the eye which
hierarchies—paradoxically false in the way that they afrm a provided the locus for the only movement in 11.10152 where
univocal history. Indeed. the epistemic task of ordering and the harsh atness of a photograph dissolved into ux as a
preserving corresponds to a desire to dominate and control: a woman awoke from sleep. bltttktfd "Om the past. from dream.
“will to power". a will to combat the fearofdarkncss which is from memory into the consciousness of the present: directly
of course the absence of God. lt is not difcult to ttttdcrstand into the camera. The wuman from Bissau crosses the same
how this ‘will‘ operates the elaboration ofhierarchies and the time barriers as she. the habitual recipient of the gaze. stares
careful grooming ofmemory banks to support them. (This last back into its face. Her image or rather the image of her asserts:

4 CIneAction! Spring '86

 Spr|ng'86 C|neAcl|on' 5
4
(not you are here but) ‘I am here. wherever here is. in front of achieves their equalivation as representations. Crosscutting
the camera.‘ between a giralle being shot in Africa and the death in Japan
Howl?‘/¢l' and agam» °"¢= ‘ms ‘mm°d‘“¢)' ‘h"¢=“¢"5 ‘° ‘ah’: ofa bear is not done for the sake ofcomparison but in order to
OW!‘ ‘he “‘"\- I0 ilbliih 3 5?‘ Pmmm °‘ \‘"“°'5‘3"““‘8~ gain insight into the idea of death. lt is perhaps here that we
¢°"‘l'3di°li0" i5 \'¢"""°d"¢°<‘~ M°§‘ °“‘1'= l"\l\8°§ ‘mm W55‘ might come to understand what Rouch called that ‘impossible
Africa and Japan are represented in typical ethtwerahis familiarity‘ achieved only in lm. which he believed stemmed
5‘)"¢—‘h° ¢¢""¢"‘ ‘5 h4"‘"-l h°‘d- ‘h° “"5 3'? m"8h- Thc ‘maghs from the presence of a common humanity. What Sans Saleil is
¢X°\" 4 "ml" ‘=l5¢i"3‘i°"~ ‘MY 1"°‘"“°‘ m°"'=m¢"‘5~ P¢°P‘°» able to access are not the essences ofa common humanity, but
r“““‘5—hh‘m3‘5- imhgcs °“mag*51‘h°Y“"= ““‘°‘c“““‘°“‘h“ the desire for it. the desire that all legends from all cultures
|ll<¢ ‘ht? Woma" ‘mm Bi5$l1- ll"?! Cilfry =1" ‘m""=d‘a°)'- 3"‘ share: the desire to decipher the indecipherable. ln this way
while the images are lmed in the manner ofthe direct cinema. evcry aiiemni is cqaaiiy vaiiii and iikc me Japan‘-ac who wouid
‘hc 5°""d5 ‘"h‘¢‘"' 3°c°mPa"Y ‘hem am ‘°‘ ‘hh m°5‘ Par‘ have a sex shop and a church in the same building. so too do
b§"=\¢l¢d2 “WY ""5 7"‘ 5°""d$ “"mm“‘ d°“’" ‘° ‘hhh mm‘ the many different rituals. different habits. t.lilTerent ways of
imal "hY‘hm‘C ¢°mP°"‘m‘5» 3‘ ‘im°5 5°‘m7id‘"E "X3c“Y- 5“"“h' existing. different ideas stand side by side as part ofa horizon-
s=ly~ with thv im=e=§~=1t Others P"“i"E away from them wm- tal list made Up by Sandor Krasna of “things that make the
pletely. During certain segments the sounds fade into the naan bani ia5i,_.n-- Each of inc“ is ioi-n (mm ii; migiaai
‘>"¢“E|'°""d °“h° C<‘mm@'"‘3l')’- lhcll 5Y"ll1¢‘i¢ q"i‘h‘)' ham)’ pre-text. reinserted and rearranged in a new combination. The
a“d‘h‘h3 ‘hhh 5"‘-‘deh‘Y ‘he?’ Eww ‘°“dh‘~ and °"°""““' ‘hc effect of this exision is to empty each image of its symbolic
‘m3§°9—““3¢““‘h§‘h¢m- ‘°C“‘h8‘hhm ‘h““‘ ‘dhd °‘5‘h‘°°‘ residue—to dismember it. erase it and write it anew. The
phonic simulacra. The pronounced absence of real direct innniaga oi'imag¢§_ 5-aand§_ and commamary ai-C combine‘;
5°‘md “'3"5‘°""‘5 ‘hh "‘5“3‘ ‘°"“"'h5 ‘h‘° "”P“'5°h““‘°“a‘ alternated. re-distributed so that identities are not lost but
condensations which at times even the direct gaze could not incmiy iiansfnrmadl nmnai names; mica aiiiidi-an on a i-Dad
P‘°"‘3°~ become an image of happiness. (As the lm‘s epigraph from
°‘
ll! °l'd¢l' \° 91°59 ll\¢ ¢‘\'¢‘= Of ‘mm P1'°P'"‘)'~ §°m° ‘hh Ash Wednesday reads: “Because l know that time is always
images appear as flashfontvards. In the middle ofa neighbour- iimc and piaca is aiways and may piacei-')
hood ritualin Japanthe imageofa bird from the llede France The éniinim which is -San i¢5s~ iiavnises aii caiegoriea
‘S ch‘ ‘hi “ ‘S mP“‘ “hd him‘? P'"c°P“h‘¢- Thch “h‘Y 3 ‘cw collapses hierarchies. constmcts a space—a lacunary body—
~‘“°"d$ h“""~ ‘hh §P“"““' sch‘ m“h“g'¢5 ah°‘h°‘ m°mhh““'Y where third and rst worlds can co-exist. where an image of
erruption—a man in a boat. Finally. once more the ritual is nanniness and an image of wan bunma iasi inm_imagns_
‘h‘em‘P‘°“- ‘h‘5 ‘hhh hY whh‘ ‘S Pcrhahs ‘he mm: 5‘gh“‘Cah‘ Krasna describes this area as the ‘Zone'. the world created
‘magc °“h* ‘h'°°—“ ‘”h.“° ma" h‘m‘hE 3 h“‘c“ ma" ‘A“"c“h‘ through an image svnthesizer: "My pal Hayao Yamaneko has
in the middle of some ritualistic trance. The three different i-nand inc Soiaiinnfiiihe images nfinc nrascni dnnti Ci.iang¢_
images take on meaningas memory later in the lm when they inen change inn images niiiie na5i_-~ 1-ncimages nmdacnd by
reappear. The circle is complete as the images invade the ritual inc Znnii --ninciaiin incinsaivns in bi; wnai inay arc; images_
briey; the invasion is hardly noticeable until later when it is nni inc nnnabie and cnninani inim Oran aimaay inacccssibia
‘¢i“‘Zed ‘hm ‘he-V P"=d‘c‘°d ‘he ““h_wh“‘ was ‘° c°m"- realitv."Thcse are theimages ofimpossible memory resplend-
“"°a“Y Pa§‘~ ““*“dY ‘h ‘he P35‘ as '°P‘°§¢h““‘°"_- ‘h ‘he “"7 ent with familiar legends. The Zone can accommodate multi-
‘h°§¢ images ¢°"f"§¢ ‘h° °"<‘¢' °‘_ ‘hm€~5- 5° ‘°‘f '5 _M““‘¢"_ ple ctions-—“a legend forevery frame of lm“; it iscapable of
the expert shuffler oftime—referenced by the third image. the embiacing inwmmnnsarabic in,-ms 0|" |ii'a_ -|-ht eclipse Pm.
man witha movie camera who reappears in different postures dnccd ininngn inn Znnc inimdaccs me nossibiiiiy nf many
°"‘Y ‘hm? “mes ‘h‘°“8h°"‘ ‘hc ‘?°“"5° °‘ ‘hh h‘m- Th‘§ “TY suns. the shadows of many wills: a locus where hierarchical
‘magl? h‘§h“Bh‘5 ‘he amh‘€““Y "’h‘ch “hd“§“°‘°5 ‘hh chh“ decrees no longer hold sway. The Zone suggests a new kind of
‘hm? ‘"h° ‘S "°h‘h“ ‘hh Camera’! The ‘l“°5“°h- "5 whh ‘hh objectivity. a new way of understanding representations and
representation. is always circular; it will always require the ni consiraciing mam as a Cnaiienga in inc ossii-ied fabics of
split. The image of someone behind a camera encompasses its ni§iim,_
own impossibility as a representation unable to access its ii
nniv in inc end of inc i-iin.i_ aim, a inng amass‘ inai
in
origin. to invert its own process. This is true ofall inscription. gandni Ki-'a5aa'§ wish can ix §uCceSsru"y gi-amcd; me image
‘hcrh ‘S hhvc‘ ‘my ““'h‘hE hack hh ‘he ‘SP"3‘ °“‘m"-' of three children on a road to lceland in I965. the image of
Sandor Krasna locates the Spiral in his favorite lm. Alfred nanninnss re‘nrns and is H,”/ind imn inc iin_ Hm iiiis nniy
Hitchcock's Vertigo. He sees the Spiral in the lm's graphic wncn inc nn._iem has bccn'd¢siioved_ when inc image has
motif: in Madelaine‘s hair;in one man's insane mt-ntur_t'..in his been dniiniid and aii cnnasnondcnnns mndaicd imnnssibia
°h5¢55“’° hem‘ ‘° ‘i“5“Y F‘ m°m°"Y ‘" °“‘°‘ ‘° “W “"‘h “- Thch Five years after it was lmed. a volcano erupted transforming
it is Krasna himselfwhosifts throughthe locations ofthe lm. inc saniiiiea iandscane inin a memnnv iiagmam ,,im.; ma
huntsthem down like Scottie searching for Madelaine. only to imagi. of happiness (mad in iiuai above iiic ashes of iime_
find them changed or non-existent-—the way Scottie nds
Judy. lt is Krasna who in his turn compares the stills from the Ana men in its turn. the journey entered the Zone; Hayao
lm. moments in memory. with what is to us already another showed me my images already atTected by the moss of Time,
memory. In Sans Soleil temporal diffemces collide in an freed of the lie that had prolonged the existence of those
absence of order which leads to a leveling. a attening out— tmsli 5"-'=t“°“'¢t‘ ‘W "1" 5P‘"l‘»
the ‘Spiral of time‘ ironed into a circle with no clear point of
departure. NQTES
Two worlds are represented in the lm: twa opposite poles of i_ 5,, Pnnfj‘ Nov‘ i955‘
survival which are as different from each other as they are from 2' -i-ii, L,“ Bank was ,;i,. ai,ani_ga,-at can", in pans; annosii, me
ours. Presented separately. these worlds would easily have Righl B;mk_it also reflectcda political position.
served as quintessential images of Otherness: together they 3. .S‘ncit-1y for the Pramtuivn of New Works. For a more detailed
become images ofdifference. By juxtaposing West Africa with discussion ol'SLON see William F. Van Wert. “Chris Marker: The
Japan without searching for possible homologies. Marker SLON "I|m§-"FF/'" Q"I"l"/.t' 32-5PI'"\B I979‘ PP» 3‘h4"<

C Cir\eActlon! Spring '86

 The Seven Sins of
Bette Gortlon’s Variety

by Kay AITTIBQGQG language and the voice. l'ari<'!_v takes its stance sharply con-
trary to a structural avant-garde. paying homage instead to
lm noir and using a complex combination ofclassic suturing
1 poetics. cinema vtirité realism. and the

Betta Gordon
2. The Second Sm:
I I ntil l'urit'!_v ( I983). as Amy Taubin said. Bette Gor-
don was a nice girl (Village Vain’. May W84. 60).
.

Qhe made the lms she thought she was supposed to

K
make. A teacher and ex-spouse of James Benning. she was
inuenced primarily by the lmmakers of the '60s and '70s, illhy Ache!’ hi 1* Yohhg NTW Ytlrk W\’ll"- ll“ ‘-laugh!"
notably Michael Snow, to whose Walking Woman she pays "[11" thuenl -l¢“’l5h l-¢""l|Y< lh lhc la“? 705 $h¢ lell
homage in E\'chan_qcs (I978). Beginning in the middle "vos. heme fur the Puerw Rica" and drug-addict shew of
Gordon made a series of short avant-garde structural lms lh¢ l-Owtlf F813! sills‘. Bllrhlhtl htil’ |l"lhLl lh 1| “W 5" $h°W Oh
which were described in Canicrn Obxcurain the terminology of 1h'~‘ $l‘¢0hd hm" "ii 3 42nd Sh Pm" $h"P< Uhllkc [he |'=m5l'
|h¢ currgm ;n¢nr¢1i¢a| nnhndn,“/_ Gnydnyfg |;n§_ ;m;n;ding oriented nvant>garde_ Aeker saw no possibility of revolution,
to Karyn |(;iy_ mmmptcd tn mggkg yigihlc mi; "mysm-igg nf particularly in New York.and she opted instead forthe acting
cinematic representation" (Camera Obxrura. 5, l9tl0_ lll). “"1 ‘ll 5' Brand d°§P4lll l" Whlh "Ch lihllml ld¢¢1-5 -‘chcd
Amongthe formal strategies which Gordon employed wastlie l"\P°$~*lh|'~'» A5 Ackl" -‘i1.V$i lh'~' dcillh "ll Sh-l Vl'~‘h’U$ in 1979
avant-garde convention ofthe ‘meaningless‘ image: a woman m1"l<¢‘d lh" “"4 "ll [hm P°Yl°d- ¢""~l 5° >h= Wok "P h0d)'-
smnkinga cigarcllc ("diving into 3 pnn|_;| wc|m;|n wn|king_ of buildingas a way to physically alter the conditionsofidentity,
two women smoking a cigarette or diving into a pool. a b“4"'h'~'"h¢ °l_Ph°"‘E’-"-\Ph" Rllbl M“PP|"lh°YP°'~* ravmllc
woman wa|king_ny twn wnmqn ,;x¢n;|nging¢|n|h¢_;_ R;-phnln. models. and began to make her living as an art critic (BBC TV
graphing, time exposures. color treatment. use of negative, interview, I934). She also wrote novels such as T711‘/trlull Life
black leader. long dissolves. and disjunctive sound/image 1!/Tv1lllI»\'¢' !wII!v¢'ll978); The ("hilt/-I-i/H’ I-!'' Q/‘I/It’ Black
relations. as well as a rigorously symmetrical editing pfOCt> TWIIIIIII/H (1973); I DFPHIIII I \\'ll»\' 41 ~_\'"t[lI1nmaniar (I930);
dure are some of the other conventional strategies of N0_re.r H¢'”"- 1"" Efifll /HILL’ l W30); Ditl!t'_\ T7Iirtl Alnlllf U932);
( I976), An AlgoriIlm1(l977l. and £.\'d|angt'.t'( l978)_ Blond and (iulx in Ht'_r.'li Srlmal (1983): (ireal Evperlnliuns
In I950 came £!lt]lI_l‘ Suitcases. a short feature which, as (I983); and the screenplay ll"
l'l"i1'I_\'(l9l‘l3l4
Gordon admits. was inuenced by the British new narrativists /\Ck"‘5 “’l'lll"E5 L'hl".V '~‘°m"l"h11|ll.V Wllh lht? i“’3"l'g3l'd¢
11

and modeled so closely on Yvonne Raincr‘s J0unu'_v.r Fmm in their refusal of narrative or story. their impetus to destroy
Berlin/I971 that at moments it slipped into unintended par- Th°¢1hlh8§. I" d'~'ll"lll°"§ "ii Eh?" WXI5 ilhd
ll'Klh5lll'L'§-* Ylgld
ody (Villagp I-'()[(‘('_ (,())_ Altnuugh 311 nftng lm; (nus far had classic formulations of image and identity. and in their free-
centred on thq fgmnlq i|n;|g¢_ Gm-don guyg that um“ wheeling impruvisatory juxtapositions reminiscent of Bur-
Ifxchanges. her lms were not consciously feminist. Neverthe- |'°"8h5 and K*‘"‘"“¢< H" Wofk Wm 10 hi“/f "INC in CDT"-
less.they wereembracetl bythe feminist lm communityinthe "10" Whh P"l"l'~‘Y§~ h°W°"‘Y- ‘him With Olhff Wl'll¢l'- UR
British-inuenced movementawayfromthe socio|ogicalfem- Pal"l'~"5 Juli“ Schnabcl and Dam-l S3“°- 5h° d¢llEhl5 lh
inist documentary and towards the enshrinement ofthe a\':mt- lilkl"§a"Ylhl"8l"°m "h.V“'h\"'~‘< P"lh°lY "‘h"'\"¢d "135 ¢°“i|B°-
ggrdg as the gm-mgt marginal pngition frnm which wnmcn her practise. she chortles, is actually more like plagiarism, as
could deconstruct classical forms of signication. As Kay put 5'“! P|""'~l¢"§ all klhdll "l_|h'~'""\1YL‘- l"1$- ¢°h"‘Y$¢!ll0h$- and
it. Gordon's lms were concerned with “incompleteness. the her own life (BBC TV. l9ll4)- G!¢'1lIE.\'/It'r|Ii0-\'. for example.
variability ol'women's discourse and her position within lan- h\'8l"5 "Om lhll Dllikch-* "°\'°|- lh5L‘"§ ¥l\|°l*‘§ from K¢3l5
guage and within representation“ [(‘nm¢'m Ob_t'(‘u!a_ 5, l(5)_ (both poems and letters). slides easily from herown life to The
At rst glance. l"ar|'t'l_|'( l9ll3)seems to be a kick in the head 37117,!‘ ll/‘O ilhd 7711’ E_\'1‘ Qflhf 771.’?! til popular schlock novllt
to those feminist t:onccrns.Although.aslshallsuggestbelow_ .S'I:Z\IIt)7'!.Z\'77!I) lwhitih lth‘ §|m$ 11$ “lhill llhhy \'i|E"l- "Y"-l
Gordon does take into account many of the issues which Ulh°l'$-
currently concern feminist lm theory. such as the male gaze. MWJYS lh'"° hill" °mPh41$l§ "h "'5lh52"5$l\‘¢ 5°X"i1lh)’- Tn"!
[hg woman‘; |nnk_ rgmlc ;_t¢5i|-¢_ and me wnmm-gs rcminn tn love she defines as "that violence that's absolutely right.“ She

Spring ‘B6 CineAction! 1

explains hcr work in pornography in political terms, as offer- 4. The Fourth:
ing a clear view of sexual relations, since the slave can always
see more clearly than the masters. Still the woman is identied Pornography
as a masochist. wanting to be weak. wanting to be enslaved.
I/arie!_r continues this theme in the gure ofthe woman who
comes to see herself as the object of male fantasy.
n a period in which the most vocal feminist groups are
mustering their forces against pornography. anti-
ccnsorship feminists take for granted the necessity to
eliminate pornography, and N01 A Lave Story is still one ofthe
most important lms for a grass-roots feminist audience. Var-
iely locates itsclfon 42nd St. and centres on a woman's grow-
ing fascination with pornographic expressions of sexuality.
3. The Third Sin: When a man asks Christine the old question. what's a nicegirl
like you doing in a place i like that, she answers not with an
Sisterhood and analysis of the pornographic destruction of women or of the
economic deprivation of women which forces them to take
Motherhood degradingjohs to survive. Instead she answers blankly, “What
do you mean’! lt‘s a job. l like it there. l enjoy it."
But of course it's not as simple as that.
Christine is a writer who has looked forjobs in publishing,
have attended to these ‘bad girl‘ representations of teaching, and other respectable elds, and ends up selling
Gordon and Acker because in their careers and as persons tickets at Variety. the oldest movie theatre in New York, nowa
they have acted ‘against the grain" of accepted feminist porn house. Scenes of Christine at work include constant
practice. The major tendency amongst women lmmakers reminders ofthe currency of pomography, the woman's body,
(indeed I would say women working in virtually all media] has as the manager calls in the customers with promises ofnaked
been towards feminism. Gordon and Acker also work from women and the kind of sex their wives refuse. Christine
within the space demarcated as l'eminist—Gordon certainly in becomes fascinated with Louie. a man who frequents the
the past and Acker also in her claims to be seeking a woman's theatre. and she follows him on his rounds through the under-
language—butthey have rmly resistedthc majortendencyof world of peep shows, live sex acts, and maa protection
the contemporary North American women's movement, the rackets. This quest becomes the heart of the lm, and as she
trajectory from sisterhood to motherhood. Variclydoes evince slips ever more deeply into the solitary world of her desire, she
a certain sisterhood or sympathy amongst the peripheral becomes increasingly fascinated also with pornographic
women characters in the bar, who commiserate with each representations of women.
other and reach out in concern for Christine, the central Early on in the lm, there are indications of her deepening
character. but Gordon explicitly rejects the notion ofwoman‘s obsession. li. a scene in a diner with her correct leftistjoumal-
power in terms of collective action. as Christine withdraws ist boyfriend, she begins to tell him about herjob in a normal,
from her female friends in her solitary pursuit of her own even casual tone. But on the cut to the reverse angle, Christine
desire. stares offsereen and begins to recite in an almost trance-like
As for motherhood. the topic so influentially addressed in voice, “And then inside on the screen, a woman reaches up
Mulvcy/Wollen‘s Riddle Qflhv Sphinx, that lm's motto could and undoes the ncckstrap of her halter. Half-turning, sh» licks
well be the inscription over the portals of the feminist psy- her lips and rubs her nipple until it's stiff. Fuck me, she says.“
choanalytical paradise: “We live in a society ruled by the Christine turns to look at Mark on these last words, drops
father, in which the place of the mother is suppressed. Moth- back into character, and released from the possessive hold of
erhood, and how to live it. or not to live it. lies at the roots of the pornographic fascination. takes a bit from her hot turkey
the dilemma." The relation to the mother is central to a wealth sandwich.
of feminist concerns, particularly those which spring from the Later, in a scene with Mark in a car eating Chinese food out
discourse ofpsychoanalysisorfromavision ofthe revolution- of cartons, Christine interrupts Mark's story, again as in a
ary possibilities of a lesbian sisterhood. Barbara Hammer's trance: “Other story, story. stories. smooth stories, smooth
lms draw from both these sources, as docs Sally Potter's skin. smooth black slip agaiher skin. She parades in front of
Thriller, and Lizzie Borden‘s Barn in Harm-r offers a militant him. Her red snakeskin heels click across the oor. He licks his
version of the latter. lips. She kneels down in front of him. She slowly lifts up her
Variely. on the other hand, is characterized by a heterosex- slip, showing herself to him. She kneels down on all fours.
ual tunnel vision, and can be seen as resolutely opposing the turning herselfto him. She waits for him.“ When Mark nally
movement on the one hand towards a lesbian nation (the interrupts.asking.“Why arc you telling me this'."',she replies,
‘bad.’ mother-rejecting daughters forging towards freedom “l‘m telling yuu about my life.“ Not only Christine's dis-
from patriarchal constraints) or on the other, “looking toward course, but her very notion of her own subjectivity. has been
explorations of the way the mother has been constructed. and invaded by pornographic fascination.
to attempts to give her the voice she has so long been denied" There are three more scenes involving the pomographic.
(E.Ann Kaplan. WomenamIlh0('im-nm. I984). Variz-!_t'in fact One is a variation on the one just described, where Mark
blowsa rhubarb to the mother. who is given notice literally on continues doggedly playing pinball as Christine recites
Christine‘s message tape, nagging about writing a letter to another story ofa woman having sex rst with a snake. then
“Arthur" (a brother?). Christine replies,not with the prcscrip- with a tiger. and nally with a man. The story lasts for four
tive embrace ofthe lost object, the motheris voice, the longed- minutes—a strikingly long period for a monologue—during
for reminder of the plenitude of the imaginary. but with which the lm cuts back and forth between Mark’s prole and
excuses. lies, and a derisive imitation. Christine's full-face looking off. with no attempt at POV sutur-

I CinaAction! Spring '86

ing.Thissceneisalmostimmediatelyfollowcd bya l2-minute scenes in which Mark appears. it is clear that the straight
scene without i.lialogue—a length even more striking for the heterusesiial relationship cannot contain these transgressive
suppression ofdiscourse—in which Christine tails Louie to the expressions of Christine's transforming sexuality. The correct
Flamingo Hotel in Asbiiry Park, where she steals a porn boyfriend isinatleqiiateto herdesires. Heincreasingly absents
magazine from his overnight case. Here the trajector_\ of the himself from her, lirst wiilidrawiiig his ga7e. then his person;
hermeneutic quest is entwined with the pornographic such he finally disappears fronithe lilmaltogethcr.The othermotif,
that the pornographic representation of women becomes the counterpoiniing and underscoring the inadequacy of hour-

i
virtual object of the female siibject‘s pursuit. a complex and gcoislicterosesiiality in the face ofarticulated female desire.is
surprising reversal of expectations. that these transforniations of Christine's desires have been
occurring systemati-
T|1e following scenes cally in relation to
are the ‘rape fantasy‘ (.‘ltristine‘s pursuit of
and the ‘object of - Louie. the object of
desire‘ scene. This her fascination. lt is
passage of the film is her quest for knowl-
extremely dense, push- edge, for the ‘mascu-
ing inexorably line‘ goal of mastery.
through an escalating which paradoxically
spiral of transgressive transforms her into
representations. each the conventional
more shocking than representation of the
the last, as Christine object of masculine
becomes more and domination.
more caught up in the‘
workings of her
desire. The rape fan-
tasy begins in the
hotel room, as Chris-
tine arranges herself
in a PIn_t'b0_i' position 5. The Mala
on the bed and ga1.es
at pictures in the Gaza and
stolen maga1ine.
Already the porno- Female
graphic representa-
tions are having a Desire
transformative effect.
Cut to Christine in the
Variety ticket booth.
he shadowing/
from which she exits
lo the projection
investigative
s c e n c s a r e
booth, where we see
among the most
the porn movie on the
pleasurable in the
screen replaced by her
film. from many
fantasy of Louie points of view. They
entering the room of are the scenes in
the previous scene. He
which John Lurie‘s
approaches her on the
miisic is at its best. for
bed and begins to one thing. Visually
undress . She watches
also they are thick
him. in this t‘ape/ with the trappings of
seduction scene. porn
film noir: chiaroscuro
cliches abound, end-
highlighting of
ing with ames ick-
emblematic scenes of
ering over the screen. gungsm, mating
Cut to Christine pos-
Sandy McLeod as Christine in Variety.
under sireetlights.
ing in front of her
headlights piercing the
mirror at home now
fully transformed inin the object of d|g§i|'i: of ;_1)n\’¢|]|iQn;_\| blacl-tiiessortlickeriiigdiiiil) acrossthe watcr.camcra smooth-
l_\ tracking llstilfs are l'ollowed,or hand-held
camera stopping
pornographv: she is dressed in ii sexy curs;-t_ garters and
All I l W I ll tti EL" vs irl; iroii barrier of
the empty. echoing subway
stockings,ani.la ‘little-girl‘ hairdo. She poses.caresseslierself, K

licks herlips, opens her mouth, and so on_ in C||’i[]1i[;|[iQn of station. 'lhese scenes are also replete with visual Jokes which
the representations ofwomenthaishe liascometo know from Pit)
I tilt flni mil'r L‘t\T1\tIfl|lt\l1§I Christine silently mouthing
1

Louie's world. “follow that car"; the small-time hood slirtigging his shoulders
These scenes, along with the investigative scenes— and htittoiiing his siiit jacket iii a gesture learned from the
Christine‘s pursuit of Louie— -forin the I'f\l.|_]Uf movement of movies. 'lhesi: sorts ofiisiial ph:a!~l1R‘§ El\'° ‘he mm 3 $¢"-will
the film. They are activated by two principal motifs. ln the surface which agreeably marks it in contrast to the atly lit,

Spring '86 CineAction! O

4
 symmetrically composed, static image of the modernist ‘gynocentric' genres, lm noir and melodrama, as offering
avant-garde. instances in which the operations of the patriarchy are
However. in its deployment ofcinematic strategies. the lm problematized—in the sense that the genres pose problems for
consistently operates in opposition to classical conventions of themselves which they can scarcely contain (Annette Kuhn,
visual pleasure. These tracking scenes rigorously represent “Women's Genres." Screen vol. 25. no. l. l984,20). Christine
Christine's point of view, transgressing the hegemony of the Gledhill. Annette Kuhn. Mary Ann Doaneand Laura Mulvey
dominating male gaze which characterizes lm noiras well as have all written inuentially about melodrama and lm noir
the classic realist cinema. Varit'I_t' systematically excludes the as types of lms in which the contradictions of patriarchal
male gaze throughout the lm. Although clearly the lm is representations of women are most acute (Mary Ann Doane,
about men looking at women. specically looking at pomo— “Giltla: Epistemology as Striptease.“ (‘amt-m Obsmra ll,
graphic representations of women, the image presents no I983. ll).
instance of the male gaze except in tightly restricted circum- Christine Gledhill has noted ve structural features oflm
stances. Mark is initially allowed to look at Christine, but his noir which produce the genre's ambiguous ideological clfccts.
gaze is circumscribed always by the over-the-shoulder shot. These are l) the investigative structure of the narrative, in
allowing the spectator no invisible access, no direct identica- which the hermeneutic code is deected from questions of the
tion. with his point of view. And when Louie looks at Chris- crime to the woman as enigma 2) plot devices of voice-over
tine,she is perceived through a mirror. in which her image isat and ashback which. linked with the investigative structure.
the same time reected. destabilize the male discourse from its control over events and
The ‘lipstick‘shot isagood example: CU Christincapplying truth 3) the proliferation of points of view. allowing for a
lipstick, her image reected in a mirror; a man's torso enters struggle for control of the image and encouraging “the crea-
the frame behind her; she looks at him through the mirror, as tion of heroines whose means of struggle is precisely the
he pulls close enough into frame to be reectedfram the nase manipulation ofthe image which centuries offemale represen-
dmvn in the shot. His eyes, his look. are framed out. and the tations have provided" 4) frequent unstable characterization
foreground of the image emphasizes Christine's look. retum- of the heroine, posing the discontinuous and contradictory
ing his. Throughout the lm. the mirror is used as a frequent stereotypes of women as a problem for the spectator 5) an
device to circumscribethe traditional spectator positi0n.c0n- expressionist visual style and emphasis on sexuality in the
sistently deecting and confounding the spectator‘s gaze at the photographing of the heroine.
woman. or mediating between the male gaze, the camera's Mary Ann Doane usefully expands on this last point: in its
gaze, and that ofthe spectator. reliance on high~contrast lighting and use of shadows, lm
Thus it is Christine's gaze which provides spectator access noir establishes a disturbance of vision as the premise of its
tothc text,eiectingadisplacementofthe cinematic conven- signifying system. The image often conceals more than it
tion of the dominating male gaze, the transgression called for reveals, but the message is clear: unrestrained female sexuality
by feminist theory. As Janice Doane and Devon Leigh is a danger, not only to men but to the system ofsignication.
Hodges write, summarizing a decade of feminist speculation: Doane quotes Montrclay‘s phrase suggesting that woman is
“For nally, an active feminist gaze is itsclfa challenge to the “the ruin ofsignication"(Doane, Camera Obsrura. I I, I983,
tradition that constitutes women as the passive recipients of ll).
the language and l0lS Of Inll" (EM/ilif V. Z. W33. 56). Thus lm noir links the issue ofknowledge and possibility/
Not only does Christine's look control the image, but it is impossibility with issues of femininity and visibility. Woman
her curiosity. her fascination. her desire. which motivates the confounds the relation between the visible and knowable at
lm both structurally and thematically. specically in the the same time that she is made the object ofthe gaze. Janey
scenes in which she pursues the man. ln a narrative which is Place has also noted the progressive possibilities ofthe femme
motivated by the woman‘s curiosityand stnicturedaround the fatale character of lm noir: "The dark woman of lm noir
activation of the women's look. one might expect to nd had something her innocent sister lacked: access to her own
representations of the woman's body which could counter sexuality (and thus to men's) and the power that this access
precisely, as Karyn Kay puts it, the “entrapment ofthe female unlocked" (Janey Place. Women an1IFi/m Nair. I978, 36). The
image in an eroticizedcirculation ofidentication and repres- femme [male ultimately loses her power, but “lt is not their
entation"((‘anu-ra Obsrura, 5, I980, 8 l ). But it is precisely the inevitable demise we remember but rather their strong. dan-
investigative scenes which trigger the pomographic scenes gcrous, and above all, exciting sexuality . . . . We retain the
which always immediately follow. image ofthe erotic. strong, unrepressed (ifdestructive) woman
'lTtus the major conundrum which the lm poses: it is , , _a remarkably potent image of woman" (Place,-$5).

C hristine‘s own desire, her quest for knowledge. for the ‘mas- In this context, Variety appears to be a text-book investiga-
culine‘ goal of mastery. for knowledge won through sexuality tion ofthe possibilities ofturning the genre on its head. l)The
and power won through that knowledge, which gradually investigator is nowa woman and the enigmatic gure is male
brings about the transformation of Christine into exactly the 2) the investigation is conducted in the present. thus eliminat-
object of desire. a pomographic fantasy constntcted for the ing the subjective voice-over ruminations on the past. guilt,
male gaze. etc. 3) the point of view is clearly located in the woman's gaze
4) rather than the dark woman of lm noir. the heroine is
clearly a good girl with a good boyfriend whose character
, . disintegration is systematically revealed as a function of the
6. events and circumstances of her situation S) the conventional
lm noir visual style is relegated to the "outside" world of the
investigation, and the woman‘s own space is marked in con-
trast by an inected, clearly lit and mundane openness. and
t least since I978. with the publication of the BF] untilthe end ofthe lm.the woman resists.in herapparel and
monograph, WantenamlFiImNair. feminist lm theor- demeanor as well as mise-en-scene, any extreme of
ists have attended to the progressive possibilities of the Sextllililtion.

I0 CineAction! Spring '66

 The possibilities of suelt reversals. it would seem. are com- corset scene). Christine moves through another investigation
a
PI“ 1"“! lI)'"i1"‘IC- I"¥'I"di"k! "I" °"I.V IIK‘ ¢°"5""¢li"" “Ii scene. which culminates in the predictable consequences:
alternative representations of women. at the origination of mun mush;-5 her in 3 pom shop. from which she llees. The
female curiosity and desire. but an investigation of cinematic gqgng clmrly nets as rentinder of the woman's vulnerability in
the pornngrapltic world. and perhaps shotild warn her
to
-‘lgnil-"i1\lI*‘" 11$ \\‘L‘"-
abandoit her quest. Third last scene: at home in her apartment.
itow strewn with garbage. ntess. pornographic movie posters
(she sits on one titled B&'_\‘U!lll Sliairiel. and in tears. ("hristine
sits listening to Little Anthony and the lntperials sing "The
' ' Diary": “How I'd like to look. into that little book. the one
7' ' that ltas that lock and key. and know the boy you care for. the
one that's in yottr diary._
The song is explicit in its connection ol sexual desire with a
mastering knowledge: a gooey old soitg. it represents the
moment of Christine's understanding - at last - the natttre of
nl'ariel,t'. however. as I ltave suggested. no alternative her own desire. Front tltose depths, Cltristine acts: she reaches
representation ofwoman has been posited (but rather the' for the phone. ln the penultimate scene. Christine asserts her
l"°\'i"1blIll)' "Ii III" '5“"“"“I“"“l)- and "0 allcmmivc power. claiming lter knowledge and commanding Louie to
female discourse has been found. In fact and this is my final mcu hu‘
Ifmm" lhc ““m“"‘j* mic" ll“? mic" ""ci5':_d °mi_“'|y_ from PM The last shot/scene oftlte Film offers no answers. to be sure.
lilm. The cttn\'entionttl C\1IC§Sl(l| or investigative voice- h Om.“ in_\u.“,_| ‘hum-hL-t“-,;|| mm nnirimagc.slfIpPL‘l.I toils
over so frequently found in lilnt noir which is almost without essentials: the blackness of night encroaching from the edges
°’_‘C‘ip‘i““ I_““|° In“ ‘“'“"“'P‘i““ bcing M”‘I""I Pi"""') hi” hm" of the screen. the latttpligltt glistening on a rainy cobblestone
displaced. in the shadowing scenes. by the woman's unbroken street. and no one is there. The emblematic signifying elements
silence—always underlined by sound eects (echoing foot ' of filnt noir are there, but they are presented literally as an
steps. etc.)and by John Lurie's sensational music. Christine‘s cmp“. space‘
own space is invaded by the voices of others (including a Bc;“.L.cn dcsirk. and gmm-mnion “C, an ,_.mp‘y _\pu¢¢_
verbal molester telliitg a dirty _|UkL‘l via the phone messagr romantic or sinister. sign emptied of predetermined mean-
a
machine.and indeed her voice. in the pornographic recitation ing_ 3| spun. "pcm.,_| up In "ml amply Sign ms“ lhc achieve.
scenes, is performed as if possessed. taken over bv the dis- ntent of l'urieti"s transgressions. The sign. emptied of mean-
course of an intaginary other. In the penultimate scene with ing_ i._ n.d“|L.m' with p‘,»ibi|mL.§_
the phone call to Lottie. her voice finally asserts itsell in an
articulation of her knowledge. but the results of her command-
ing discourse are never shown.
We might come to agree that such reversals are ultimately
V \
futile, as llerntan Rapaport argttes in his elaborate meditation
on Alirit in ll'u/tilt-rlmid as an instance of the activation of
t'=m-'= FILM V I D E O FI LM
. in proiuuincing “you are nothing but a pack ofcards".
. .
<"'
Alice does not necessarily dispel the “laus“ olsignilication
.;_-
ortlie s_\-ntasoftlie pacl:.Stntple shut'llirtg.the throwing of . .,~
cards into the air. does not make the language of cards go 1;.1 .
! 1
' ‘
awa_v;ittustiitittatesanewgame. . ./\llAlicecando.lilte .

any other dreamer. is tIi\l'\lpl or silence the formidable

I1,
chainitl tlre;i!.i sigtiilicatitiii.ot Wonder-land. to disartictt-
late h_\ recogiining that ii represeiitzition ntust he nut in its
Q £1! ,‘
N11? .. __ trr -.
‘L *1‘ .- w ..t - P
|
place. diminished in status vis-a-vis the ego, But todo so is '
‘u * .
.- , '- . '
1!. .
~

already lo practice ltreudian negation. to recognize the .

-. . ; 1 1 _
, >
. J. . ta '-
power ot the decapitating queen by taking decapttation ‘_ - .. ,1 _7 1 ' ..!* »,_
intii one's own hands.h_v throwingor seatteringthe deck or g: —l_'r— “ ' ‘-Ni
gures. .‘l'ou-iitterilietleekis not tivabitlishanyihing
. .
- -- -

a pack.a game. .-but merely toinsiirevtliateter is already

.

and alwavs there.

(Herman Raptiport. "The Disarticiilztted lniage: Gazing {hean-e filrn Opera dance
In \\'ontl':rlatid." Ifrirliiic tol. vi no. 1. l9X2. S9)

specialist booksellers since 1975

8_ 25 bloor st w. tor0nto.canada
maw iaa t4\6) 9221175
Redemption PHONE/MAIL ORDERS/MASTERCARDNISA

. ,

seent to have written myself into a little here. Can the

VIDEO FILM VIDEO
sins of l 'ari'el_i' be redeemed‘? Let its go back again to those
last four scenes for another reading.
From the depths of her capitulation to male fantasy (the \ J
Spring '86 CineAction! II
 ‘ l

Textual Excess
in Joyce Wieland’s
Handtinting
by K888 B8I’\I1|I1g ln l'9t\‘)_ l’, Adainis Sitneynpplietl the term “.~tn|etural lm"
tn \\urk\ h_\ Hnl|i~ Fnimptnn. Miehziel Snn\\ and .l<t_\ee Wie-
Ri'—rI.\in/i—l/iein‘!u/'lim/tilit: hm"/\', 15/'\t*e|1|‘t,' tt'i!/i/I'e\Iien'\, 11/ land (\\h<>nt S|tne_\ l\ cuinfortzihle referring tn Ah "Snow's
en/1'! my mi 1|/4/I<'\!!nwt ti urn ml/umlilim'liun~n turn nnim wile"). ln th|\ nrtiele. he outlines tlte llmr L‘|'lllTZ|L‘ll.‘fl.\llC§ of
nnue llmn u t/Ill/lIt‘I' III t’|1/I!H'u/ Iutmrt" II l\ an tll I ul turvim/. \ll'l|L'lllfi|l lm: xed t'r;nne/e;inier;| pu>itiun; limp-printing;
:\tlt'teti|1e Rieh repltutngr;|pli_\ ull the screen: and the llieker ellect, Mure
rL'CCtlll_\,ll'lClL‘fIl1l1;l\l11t>>l\|\ll;|ll)'hCt'11;l|'1[!llULllUll10hClllI1'lS
The lmx in .It>_\ee \\'iel:|nd l1;l\'L' been L'\!|1\]\[L’l\lL\ plneetl \\hieh ll tn\e»tt_u;ite the ph_\'.~ie;|l prt>pertie.~ tn‘ lm as at lltit
within tim l'nnne\\urlts_ both ul \\l1lClI are un\;itt~l'aietnr_\. innterml. utilizing light. pm_|eet|un_ printing procedures. illu-
Whilethe Ctiimtliaiii [10ptll;lT|‘7|'L'\\ reeepliun has endetittmretl ~ion of innventent etc. and Z] which emph;|>i7e the tensions
In Ilimiliziri/e and enntttin “Our _ln_\'ec" ;i~ one ul (';||i:|tlti\ ;|ntung.~t the plnzstettl ll'l£llL‘flL|l>. perceptual processes. and the
ll’\||_\ClI|CLIllC2ll’lI\l>,lmi||1ll‘ln|t)glC>£|I1LlCHllCI!\|11llil\'Ch1|l’1il— [1lClnfl;ll re.ilitte~ lm has tr;itlitinti;ill_\ represented. Histori- I
uall) upprnpriutetl \\'iel;|ntl‘~ work into the \ll'llL'lllf2l|l\l ur e:iIl_\.critte~l1;|\etreated \\'tel;|ittl‘>\mrk \\tthinthe eontextof ,
moderin.~t etinun. \\'h:tt l twuld like tn ~\lgge.~.l t~ thtit nhile the LlL‘\Clt>pIl'lCl1l ufstrtieturail lm.
isstte~ twllurlti ilk‘ ele;|rl_\ tint exempt ltunt \\'|el;|ntl\ eun~1tl- In the I97‘) edition tvl his hunk l'l\lmmr_\' Film. Sitm‘y'S
enttinn. her |m~ e\ceetl ;m_\ nnnn;n|\e tlL'l|I1ll|n|'|\ nr ;n1_\ re\i~etl eutimlertitmii nl \lHlCHlll lm nn1it.~ the original
attempt I0 eulegnrile them tiemnliitg In pzirtieultir :i\;int- tl|.»eu~~|tm of \\'|el;intl‘s lim. \\'e etniltl mark this as u pru-
gttrde .\elnml:~. \\'hz|t l.\1ll i\\ue tn her lnh 1> nut the deeun- ltIlll1(l2ll'\\CllL'L‘,;ll1&|Ckl11I\\'|C(lgCll1CI'|lUl-Llll‘lffCI'lLIC.Zl!‘Ill"l5CTlp-
struetinn nr negttttun ul‘ FCpfL‘\L'I1lt|lll\l\ hut the pining ufneu ttun nf \\'ie|;md's ewe», signalling her ttnetmlaiintihilily. If
repre~ent;|tion;|l \';ll|lL‘\ilI1L| relzitmm. And to the e\tent th.|t ~lrttctnr;|l lm lh u fnuntlaitiun garment Ili.\lnuned by men,
her wnrk emhndies All] intermgzitinn of Iurmnl ennvennunx ".|n_vee"l&I\ Sllc)‘\\'nu|<llI;l\'e|t)l§U10llll‘!1il|'ll>lWh0¢KC¢'3d$
this intcrrngzitiun l\ ;ll\\'£l_\\ intersected h_\ ill] tthltltng timl its .\lrielure\.
persistent concern \\|th the pnlltieal. M) mvn expenenee of \\'iel;|ntl'.~ twrk. and especially

I2 CineAc!|0n! Spring '86

 7~—- _u—u—uu_

»!Z§4~
,V;,f .3 ’ ,

Ilnmlliiililig H967). involved a similar encounter with this L‘\ltlhll\|'lcs ;i series otipiittern-like sequenees.hiit it should be
"something extra". and III)‘ Y'~‘1l§""> ll" ¢"L‘i\Llil11l Will! ll" tinted that their potential homogeneity is seriously mitigated
wnrk through this lilin are decidedly personal and adniiiiedly h) tlte lr;ignient;ir_\ framing and cutting. Gestures are often
impressionistic. l rst viewed IIim<Iiinliii_e ten years ago and it left iiieomplete, with cuts oeeiirring at illogical points within
has ft.‘Ill2ll!‘lL‘(l hothersome since‘ l have toiintl no siieeess in inoteiiienis. lliese gestural images (dance movement. Halle-
trying to situate it, in spite of the temptations of zitxiilahle |n|.ih ;|rin-tlailiiig, turning over hitthing-cap etc.) are nl'ien
niode|sl't>rtloiiigso, ‘llieertisotitlie prohlentwiisilie i.‘tHt\l;ll1l played till zigziinsi eomplimentairy mnvements in opposing
sense ofthat “soinetliingiitltlitional", the siirpltis. the excess g|i[e'tjlltl|l\_ or by the lateral inversion of LI previous shot,
alltidetl to land avoitled by) otliers_ that extra whieli renders pmtliieing a rh_\thniie alternation of direction within the
the lm. as the French would sit), tlc mi/1. My effort in what i‘r;|m._-_ ,\/Iiimettls of stasis (white women observers at the
follows will he to give some (provisional) .\[7t.'LIlllL"ll) til‘ that's tliincel ser\e as punetiiaition within the rhythmic score.
not lt\tH\X)l’l1t\l'ti|'llC 1| notion] to Wielaiitl‘s eseess/surplus in Not only are the rliytliinie qualities ofthe lilm produced by
Hu/uliinlin_e. with a \‘ie\\' to extending ilie discussion ot' her |]]¢;||1stvl tlepietions ot'uoinen's hodies—hiit there isu “bodi-
work beyond the coii\'eniii\it:il huiintlziries I) “qn;il|t_» to the rh_\ihm itself. I suppose this is something ofa
On the lace oi‘ it, Ilu/it/linIin_e is inatle tip of 1| number of triiisiii. ll\i\\e\er.thettpesotbotlilyresonaneesthatcomprise
fairly simple elements: ll opens \\ith a hrielpan tieross it l'7l'lt.‘l\ the esnerieiiee oftlie tilnt are especially powerful. at least for
W;ill;qt|it.'lt eulsol'ytiiii‘ig black wtinieiidiineingl'ollow,alung me There i~ am zilnimt aiudihle sen-satiun at play here. as
with shuts of women observing the dance; at wonten‘s locker stirring and hasic as Motown R&B,and yet lhisisasilentlilm.
rouin at a swimming pool: head-diinlting in the pool: .sociali7- Rl1_\l|1lt\ i- the tilm's music. il-\ hPL‘L‘L‘h h¢Y°"'~l lhu §il"‘¢c- ll“
ing. laughing,eonversatiun. One image. that ol‘a \\itI'l‘|All1 \\illl 1'l\_\ll""l\' 1'1\\l\'"~"-' "ll ill" “'"l"""'> him)’ 1"“! "W bml)’ "ii ‘he
chin in hand. reappears frequently tliroughout the li|ni—in Li lL‘\l
way, the lornial lynclipin of the piece. Most of ilie shots tire lliis hoil1l_\ \l""|l') l“ "f
ll"-' l’l\)‘ih"‘ ”"'"I'i"'i".E P05“ 11
repeated seteral times. often laterally lliripetl, and miich ot'the ¢l\1tl|k'I1L'\' l" l 41¢-lItl1lI\ P\)'~‘lititiii:il_\'tic theory which denies any
tilitistock has been sporadically tinted with various eolouretl PlL'£l\ll|'L' tir desire outside of Itingtiage. Rather, Hamliiniing is
i dves. Oeeasional sections of leader. scratched tiioiage and itllgltvtl IIWR‘ \\'Ill\ Ills‘ kind 0|‘ ¢U"$l'-l¢f!i0"5 IIPPFIIW" in
lilmstock perfortitions also appear. Kriste\';i's theory of the semiUllC. According to Kristevzi. the
These elements go on to comprise several l\pU;|t1l i'e;i- sentioiie represents 2| prelingtiistie. zttavistic core of energy
ttires that l'd like to examine here. beginning with the rh)ih- llY"\l'"l°<l "1 ill" "¢\‘\1-\li¢- l'K‘fC¢Pltltl|. and tactile experience
mic qiialiiies ofthe lilin. The most obvioiis rltyiltniic eompo- \\'h1\'l\ P"'“'*l'~‘-‘ “'P"'""‘"“l'l\‘"- l"dl"ldu1"l°" and |""B"¢|g°-
nent would he the gestures and hodil) mtiteitteiits of the The ~_\"l"\ "1 ”"'"I!i!lliII,£'- Wilh ll-* Pill-*1\ll""5 and |'hY‘hm5
women depieted—the constant repetition o|' these lltlgcs ieealls this £lll|\l\llL‘ iiioveineitt.

$r>ring'ss CineAction! 13
 W

ln addition.the lm invokesadifferent form ofpleasure by essence of woman. but a textual system where difference is
representinga specic loss—the loss of the imaginary c|ose- conceived as an act of subversion operating through. and
ness to the mother's body. Separation is replayed by the against, conventional syntax, grammar.
loss/disappearance, and reappearance of the images of l‘ve suggested the construction. in Hamilinling, of an inde-
women in the lm as they vanish around comers or move out tertninate space enclosed within a symmetrical border.
of frame. This play on the absence and presence of the Another element l‘d like to consider, which is also "outside"
women's bodies replays and re-evokes the primordial expe- the "body" of the lm, consists of various marks of the
rience of loss and separation from the matcmal body. The apparatus. the plastic material of the lm—l mean the use
lm's insistent articulation of images of eorporeality. the appearance of perforations. scratches, dyes applied to the
movement of the women‘s bodies as they dance. gesture, celluloid. Tl1e perforations made with knitting needles
swim,stands in contrast tothe silence ofthe lm.which refers, (domestic deconstruction perhaps) and usually found on
again,to this prelinguistic space./Xnditis this movement back colored leader. while contributing to the overall rhythmic
through representation, through the linguistic structures “dance"ofthe lm.also act as slits or tearsin the fabric ofthe l
which order our experience according to the measure of a text, intemtpting it, breaking down the possibility of homo-
rationalist (and patriarchal) economy. that foregrounds the genous reading/meaning. The handtinting works in a similar
possibility ofa representation of that which remains invisible manner. The (apparently) random dispersal ofdyes ofdiffer-
and absent—female pleasure and specicity. ent colors, without regard for the integrity of specic shots,
While there is this double movement of the foregrounding places the identity oftheir repetition in question: what we get is
ofthe material substrate and the play with polyvalcnt textual- repetition with a difference, something extra, a surplus.
ity, the image in Wieland‘s work always maintains its own The system of formal articulations of the gaze within the
particular resonance. The images of the women‘s bodies in lm that l sketched earlier. is broken down at one particular
Handrinling. for example. mostly black and poor. raise the juncture: near the middle there appears a brief shot from an
question of how to represent those that have been marginal- earlier Wieland lm, Ca(fu0(/( I967). This shot functions in a
ized and excluded by dominant representations. While the way similar to the perforations, scratches and tints in that it
"materialist" techniques of the lm work against and under- interrupts the continuity of the lm‘s representational plane.
mine the transparency of the image and the possibility of However. it also operates as a kind of signature—What Der-
situating the latter in an immediate relation to a pro-lmic rida has called the “signature effect“—marking both the uni-
‘real‘, the image maintains both a discursive and a referential quc specicity of the artist, and enabling our consideration of
value. all of the extratextual “outsides"/imaginary spaces/unspeak-
To come back to the text. I want to emphasize one more able sites constructed bythe lm as preciselya utopian terrain,
essentially rhythmic element which will lead me to considera- a locus of potentially heterogenous avant-garde practice, a
tion of a second central feature of the lm. namely its con- surplus. multiple—again. too much.
gtructiun nfan imaginary, unrepresented, unspeakable (p§y- Banhes and FOUC3llll, among others, hill/C signalled the
chic?) space. Considered in terms ofits material substrate. the decline in status of authorship. of textual authority. The
lm can be regarded as at series of ickering shapes and colors author whose "death" they acclaim is. of course, the one long
composed of varying densities of emttlsion on celluloid. The revered in Western culture (and certainly still fetishiscd in
use of complimentary shots. and lateral flips produces an manyquarters--not the least ofwhich isavant-gardecinema),
oscillation ofareas ofdense emulsion from side to side within the author as master, as phallic will-to-power over the text.
the frame. Not only does this technique engage the eye move- What l want to suggest here is the possibility ofanotherauthor
ment ofthe viewer, it also sets upu kind ofspatial symmetry in emerging. one conditioned by a principle which is decidedly
a material sense. The alternation of dense emulsion from side not phallic, one which resonates both inside and outside a text
to side within the frame is suggestive ofa sort of symmetrical as a surplus. a signature. an excess. This is the author of a
enclosure, a constructed site similar to that produced by the writing (whether literary. lmic or other) marked by the sense
articulation oflines ofsight in the lm. Ilanthinling rigorously ofa hctcrogenous elsewhere, a feminine (though not necessar-
structures the gaies ofthe women depicted so as to construct a ily female) site of utopian possibility.
space outside the depiction itself. Initially these spaces are
'd"'d'|~ sh t"
II
tc to in t\| ua sequences. s ots o women
speu~'l'~ - d anctng.
'
I
~ >

preparing to swint. etc. are presented/constituted as separate

locales. but c\'entually. through the interruption of the conti-
nuity of specific sequences. this constructed space takes on a
more general character. lt is an elsewhere. an outside of the A MAGAZINE OF RADICAL FII-M CRITICISM 8‘ THEORY
lm. yet its existence/its concept is established on the inside. It
is the space. the site/sight of excess, of contradiction. a no-
place. u-topia. too much. The construction of this unspeaka- _

ble locus/matrix by means of symmetrical enclosure and lat-

eral contiguity of material substrate (emulsion), is similar to
the suture effect—it is bttilt upon the sight lines ofthe women. a e l
v

Perhaps it is necessary at this point to insist that this obser- p g

vation/interpretation is distinct from those attempts by .
(mainly American) feminist art historians to counter uhiqui-
tous phallic imagery with efforts to develop complementary
female imagery. My attempt here is however to trace a textual
activity.a movement. rather than to search for feminine motifs
<

in the form ofradical content; this is theattempt to explain the

text and its activities as a practice of difference. of dilference
inscribed. lt is not the translation of some pre-linguistic

I4 CineAction! Spring '66

 An interview with
Arthur Penn
by Richard Llppe 8- Robin Wood
/-I l rst met and interviewed Arthur Penn in I970, during
the making tit'l.i1iIt'Ii[q Mun; the interview was published in
M1ivit' IN. At that tinte Penn's career seemed to have deve-
loped an irresistible impetus that would secure him a prom-
inent place in the American cinema ofthe next decades: The
(7iui't', Iimiriiv uml ( 'I_i‘rIt'. and .~tIiu".s Rl’.\'IllfItI (the lms
which. with Ni_i,'Ii! .lI0i't*.i', represent the stimmit of his
achievement to date] had t'ollowetl each other in rapid suc-
cession. establishing their director commercially as well as
artistically. ln the lifteen years that have ensued, however,
Penn has heen able to make only four lms, of which only
.Vi_elil .\I<m-.\’ can he judged ti complete artistic success (it
was ti eoinniercial disaster).
This February. Penn wits in Toronto as executive pro-
ducer of I)t'mI of ll 'in1vr, ii Gothic thriller scripted by two
seltool-friends of his son‘s the has since taken over the direc-
lion]. Richard Lippe and l seized the opportunity to invite
him to our apartment for dinner and an interview that
proved to he more like a conversation (we have tried to pre-
serve its inforniiil and relaxed tone). We wanted to discuss
his work since !.i/!It- Big Mun and. especially, the problems
laced bv lilm-makers of ambition, intelligence and integrity
within the contemporary Hollywood situation.

nw; 1 mugh, M. m/k /in», UM“, "H. ‘-,,,“/,,,',,,,_,- Q/‘

,,,,>_c;” then the natural progression is that the executives who are
working in Ho/Iymiml . 77it'n' \t't'H| In lw an IlllIIl_l' pro!i-
. . . Pl" in!" ll'"{§l‘ ¢°"lP""i°> "W *5-‘~°""i1l|)' ¢Q"\Pi|"Y "'|°_"-
kms in gpning ,-,m.n,_,.”»n_c p,”j‘,‘.,_, W, up “mi” A1,“; qf They're business school gradtiates, they're cost-effective and
,m,,m,.,-,,g Q/ml. ,,m;,,,-,,,m/ A,_,,,,,,-U, ,,, ,, ,1-,,v \-my ,,m.,,,V,-,,,'(-,,/ you hegin to have that kind ot thinking. Whatever one may
plals and lm l_i'/mi-. think about the old moguls, there was a certain passion, a
Ap: AbSo|uw|y_“-0|] Nu know if, K-;|||_\~ an ;,nliqu;“cd love for movies. And whether it be (ioldwyn or Warner or
medium in the States because the studios which had existed H'~\"')‘ C"h" "T l-""l> BA M11)" lh\‘l'L' W35 -"°m°lhl"S- how‘
under another environment—ecoiioinic, cultural etc.—had °"\‘|' drcildlilll ll"? "WY h4l\'° l"'°°" l"'~li\'i'~l"i|llY- "*5"? W35 3‘
been signatories to contracts with the unions which are now lhl‘ lwil" "li ll ‘hill l“"""~'* “'"'~‘ lllclr m_"- Am-l 'hi"'5 "oi
proving I0 be onerous. The cost of labor is so otitrageously "U" “ii lh'55'-’ P\'°Pl'5l lhf-'5'-' l'"~'°P|= *3"ul‘-l .l“51 W9“ sel‘
high that ordinary average lilnis are slipping upward into ling CL‘l'L‘lll or alltoniohiles or whatever. And immedtBl¢|)'
the twenty million dollar bracket \'er_\' easily and given that, Y"" 5“"l'-‘ lll\'|'\' Wllh "ll "-l'~'"- lllc" ll?“ |m_P"l5¢ '5 lo Calcg?‘
and given the demise and retirement or the sort of patriar- fill-‘ ll"-‘ 1d'=1l—“'h1ll 1* ll "KN l'l_“"7 “'l"" fl"-l ‘hm <_l°7_“'l"" 5
chal gures who used to run the studios, they've now its market expectations.’ And with that kind of thinking,
become sort of relatively minor possessions; of these con- .\'""'"' ""l""1*"1¢41|l)' ll|l'~‘""E "ml ¢'~'"5*"""E ll“ "M773"!-V
glomerales and multi-national companies. You know, as "dd lm» ill" "'1" ‘hill W" 11" |°\'¢~ W" k"°W "1: P"! lh3l‘|5
cOCa_co|a' Gulfund WL-_\l,_-m_ Rupcn Mummh M Uniwr. not like every other lm or every other automobile we drive
sal. Every studio you can really talk ahoiit is reaIl_\' one of lhill onc_s'ccs_on the street. _And that‘s the nature of ll now,
these sort of relatively minor income-producing units o|' a M‘ lllcrc |> lh“ km‘-l 9' 3 Pmm c'5n*f~"'5h|P~ “'5 "°l ‘he "Bl"
great big multi-national conglomerate. And what the_\' then “'""-l bl" "'5 "N ll"? Wrong \'l"°"fl '-'"h'~'|'- Y9" k"°W ll"°f°'5
do as a result ofthat is instead of being studios with an ego §"""'lhl"tl i"h°“"'" in ll"? Amlw" Ph¢"°m°"°"- C3P"3l'
an ‘heir own‘ ‘hey bemme [hi5 kind U|'mrp,,nn¢ K-mi“»_ and ism has reached the point where there is this a priori censor-

Spring ‘B6 CineAction! II

_?
ship which is in cffect—il's in effect in this peculiar way. other forces; and cenainly the—-I was going to say implicit
which is. if you want to be paid well to make your movie. but it's really explicit—choice of the kind of constant Soviet
you are automatically a participant in this structure. As a enemy as the gure is so dangerous. so dangerous to the
participant in the structure you're as culpable as they are. l thinking-it just terries me.
don't mean to say. to be cxonerating myself as the sort of HW: The desperation of all that seems to go with the whole
pure anist—it's quite the reverse l‘ve been every bit as cul- sense. I think. that capitalism may be entering into some kind
pable as thcy. Personally speaking. I think l'm at the old qfullintate crisis as prophesied by Marx over a hundred years
crossroads where l need now to change my life and to move ago. a series of escalating economic crises which we've cer-
away; the idea of making lm outside oi the U.S. or in the toinly been tltraugh and now this kind of desperate need to be
primitive circumstances in which l originally began is tcrri- reassured in what amounts to o kind of hysterical way or a
bly attractive. fantasy way. the oltemotive to the Rambo-Rocky lms is
RW: We read in Variety that tIterc'.\’ the possibility of your .s'heerfantasy. explicit fantasy. which carries the some kind of
doing a lm in France on Frenclt mont*_i'." reassurance but in a way that we don’! actually have ta admit
AP: Yes, l'm working on that idea at the moment. I was that we believe it.
approached while I was in France by several French pro- AP: But the Rambo and the Rockies are so close to
ducers who suggested that I might want to make a lm in home...and there's something indisputable about the
Europe. But. and this is the unfortunate part. they all sug- numbers that those lms are able to assemble at the box
gested that the lms needed to have American stars. There olee. Those paid admissions are shocking. are shocking.
are no stars. other than American stars. who are world because they're paid for that and they're not paid for a quite
stars. and since it's now a world market. however one wide spectrum of other kinds of lms. And it's also fascinat-
would think about it. that immediately begins to be both ing that the very same actor, Stallone. put him in Rhinestone
attractive and something of an impediment. because very and nobody shows up. In anything but these roles nobody
many of the agents for these lm stars just won't talk to you goes.
in any other terms except "so-and-so gets ve million." RL: Do you think that to a certain extent that kintl of
That's it. and that's an immutable fact. As soon as you have audience response is planted by publicity and media hype.’
one ofthose immutable facts in the beginning. where e\'cry- AP: Well you see it seems to me that that's calling into
body says to the hierarchy. “well, if he-‘s getting his full play the very best of these kind of industrialists who are
money I want my full moncy. etc." and we're in that terrible running the studios now. Give them something like that to
game. do and they do it brilliantly based on selling it before it's
RL: Would it be t'll.\'lt'!‘_/it! ymt to set ttp ttn intlt-pctttlettt pro- cven hit the marketplace, before one foot of it has been
duclion an the strt'n_t.'tlt tg/'_|'uttr name atttl what _t'ott'vc tumed in the camera. They know how to do that. much as
acconiplishetl." they know how to sell automobiles a year ahead or what-
AP: No. there's nothing inherent in that that's particularly ever. you know. they sell all products superbly. when the
advantageous. in fact it‘s a little bit disadvantageous. It's a audience knows what the ingredients are going to be. What
lot easier if you're sort of an unknown. for instance. and set they can't sell is the unknown. the mysterious, the unex-
up and do a little scratch. non-union lm. As the unions pccted. the aberrant. the anomalous. that doesn't sit well.
know about you and know your reputation. they tend to RW: Do you think After Hours caultl have any importance.
come in and say. wait a minute. what about some teamsters. I don't mt-on so much as a lm itsel butfor what it was try-
what about l.A. camerapcople. what about so-and-so. and ing to do? Scorsese scents to have re! out very deliberately to
before you know it you've got a big work force. It's a real prove that it is still possible to ntake a low-burlgetlm on a
dilemma. lt‘s not conned only to the movies. it's conned little sttbject withaut any really big stars. and the /ilm does
to the basic American capitalist structure at this point. in appear to have tlatte rather well comntercially within a certain
which labour has this peculiar position which is that they range. It's been runningfar months up here. Only in one thea-
don‘\ participate in the ownership of it; therefore they get Ire Qfcourse.
these enormously high wages instead of having some kind AP: Yes. exactly. and that's almost a holy action. But
of rooting interest. ln the absence of that kind of participa- when a picture stays in one theatre it doesn't really generate
tory rooting interest it seems to me to be somewhat close to Income. It does all right. it keeps the theatre occupied. I
the heart of the matter. have nothing but admiration for Scorsese for doing it. And
RW: This also set-tn.i' to he ttndcrpinttctl. tltc wltole situation indeed he proved all those points. but unfonunately what
seems to be uttderpinncd by the current ideological climate in thc lm's also proving to the nanciers is that that's not a
an age where there's a nta.r.\’ivt' swing ta the rtgltt and Ilte pro- very productive use of their money. They would say. l could
jects that rla make IYIl1Ill'_|'!'t‘_Q(‘Ilt'I‘(Jll\'|llll‘!J—I’lEl|l wing pro- take my money and put it into stocks or bonds or whatever
jects. reactionary and even crypto;/o.\~ci.\"t_/iIm.r. The whole and have a better income than that lm is generating. I've
Rocky-Rambo syttdrmtte hectttttt-.r more scary‘ as llVII('.\‘ goes even heard this kind of gossip about the movie studios-
on. that the executives of the conglomerates say about movies.
AP: Yes it does. and it's extremely symptomatic of both wc could take that 250 million dollars a year that are allo-
the culture and of the movie "industry" which now begins cated to...production. invest it elsewhere and make a better
to be the appropriate word for it—it is now an industry in retum than we're making on lms. Unfortunately that's
the same way that munitions are an industry. You know all proving to be true. The number of lms that are going to be
my life I've resented that word as being applied to the made by the studios are diminishing at an alarming rate. I
movies. But now I think it's perfect. l think it is industrial— think Coca-Cola says Columbia is not to make more than
it's product-designed. mass-audience designed. and what twelve lms in the next year; Fox is not going to make more
ideology creeps into it unfortunately is of the extreme right than about ve. MGM at the present moment is caught up
or. l‘m not sure whether you characterize it necessarily as in this terrible period of acquisition by Ted Turner. So far
right. it's a kind of desperation today. The Rambo image is the only lm that has a go ahead is this little lm. Dead of
such a desperate image of lonely obsessive power and trying Winter. lt's a very inexpensive lm. done under these pecul-
to rectify wrongs that have been done in the past by some iar circumstances.

I8 ClneAction! Spring '66

 RW: E_i' a £‘0!7t]tl£'IPl_|‘ unlrnotrn director. to set up.” Did it have anything to do ivith Steve Tesirhlr sur-
AP: Exactly. And what's marvelous about Mary Steenbur- rt-ss with Breaking Away?
gen is that she was perceptive enough to see in this some- AP: It had. li had a little to do with that and a little to do
thing wonderful to do. and Roddy Macilowell did that too, with my reputation and it had to do with the last ofa com-
while a number of others just turned it down. Agents. they pany. in this case Filmways. which was sort of breathing its
said—l wouldn't even send it to them. No way. It's a tough last. It didn't have a lot of money so it gambled on two
time. lms. Four Frietnlx and Blowout. Neither was the kind of
RW: You've either toltl tne in the /tart or I've read about a lm I would gamble on tn save it company. But on the
number 0fpt‘0jf(‘LF that you were working on or trying to get other hand they didn't have the bigger sums to go for the
' xet up. a project about xtrip-niining you mentioned at one bigger stars so they thought they could get the best of the
paint. alni rolletl The Last Cowboy was (‘IIlll_l' mentioned reeognizeahle names this way. S0 they did. I regretted
in Variety. antl ditln't _l'lt|I also mt-tttion o mtnerl_i'." deeply that the lm didn’t make money for that company. I
4
AP; Quite possibly I did mention a number of comedies. “PPr°'5l"I°‘-I lhclr I351 B-¢5ll"l‘-
RW: I ii'ontlert'tl what hotl happenetl to all lll!JSl'. ii'h_i' they Rwi NI" lllll BI0W°l1l-
‘lit-In‘; gm Q/filip gmim([' AP: And that had Travolta.
AP2The last ('oti'ba_i' didn't get off the ground because it RI-3 t4Itll it "W5 "lllfll "'0"
1’-\'l"’"-V‘ V1’-
was about the last cowboy. It was about agri-business tak- AP: And °¥‘|'"-'l"lY Tm‘/"II" "I lhi" Poll“ “'35 3 IWEC "ame-
ing over the ranges and the last individualistic spirit. (‘oii- RW; We lt'aIl‘ll¢’(/ Four Friends again the other evening.
bay was based on pieces of material that appeared in the
I
.itiII/intl it a \'l'I'_|‘ .\'l!'tlIlgl'>/flltl. I'm innit-ii-hat unxure what you
New Yorker. factual pieces. Our screenplay followed the lt'l'I’l' tr_i-ittg to ilo in that _/iltn.
same congurations. What's naive about it is that within the AP: l‘ni pretty much unsure myself.
V"? °°mPa"'°5 lI"°m5CI"'$ ‘"1’ ""75" Walling Ii1Cll""5- 0"“ HW: It .i'¢'t'nis itttere.i'ting to me. but afailure overall. It
section of the company will buy the rights in The last (‘mi'- tlvi-.i"ti't .\'t't’Itl very rleurlyfttrusi-erl. I don’! l\'Il0\t‘ ii-hat yoitfeel
bay with that very title. and then comes the screenplay and qlmul it
they say. “But it has a terrible downer ending. It has to have AP; I don't |‘¢¢l that,
a happy ending." And then they say. "'\_Nell why don't
W"
kn“:
7;‘!
RW: Tlierc .i'et'nu" a /irobletti with the central character, pos-
malfe a mfwiz asIcd7;7'-"l”r'“(€”$b(1II)’ I You .ril1l_i- I I/llllh‘. Craig ix alway.r somewhat bland.
Was.i'oti_ who
2)‘: rzgfzg to f 0“ I”-I “_c_a“‘g I In I '5'" itnt"hori.i'ttiutt't'. .4/.i'a. IIl.\'I trltat we're to ntalre of Danilo and
AP :;'-'k;£”[:lg'(‘:'f'-f'1:1_':|1" nsaip‘ what attitmle tht-_/i/tti iratitx HS to tolre totvttrtl him. He seems
. ' '. c ' : e s
. '_-
was with Warner Brothers and I was working with a writer
. . . ~h "h '/\l'
.

2“p.a(|S;ugi.:£.r) m‘ Q, L mm
.'t th't . -

rgzlarnfreggnlhelllg wfgeua RW: 77it'_/iltti .\'l't‘Itt_\' to be itiviting its to have nturh more
‘ - ° "-‘ ° °"'= E“ "*1" W" .-nt tti~'itititmtti t t‘t-i- ll’.
like mg Scrip‘ bl." we lust dol like ‘he ending" and ‘hm
was ?b{caL:‘:I:f;“'(:" ‘lligzwlrfvlzl Pugs‘, H°w can we
‘iiiforming ‘\'t:ilSaI\IfZll it was an era
ildlea
in which it was very difficult to have a conventional hero or
"s ssi
ou - 1 is in. . <.
i:iiv-
»

Ilou (‘OIIIIIIIIGPI trietl to lo olD: ltc S‘ir/t m ha“We mmdmdy gcnum-ely mm! Y9“ gym‘
end”; ‘ ‘ "3 ' ‘ "Pm ' pathy. quitemum
were all whf, strange during the sixties. people
Ap I bu‘ rm h mod m were acting. don't know. odd in a rather marvelous way. I
Ru‘ you Izssjl "gm Mr‘ it 5‘ n 6:‘ still think quite romantically about the sixties but in [I115
irholelm has to rarrr through that ironrlhlii \I|1IflHlI€lt'l't’l_\' wt merildlklné
ows o 4:0.“
cgsm I lhmk wmmzc commg up on
AP:E tl.lthd. ' '
drfl. t e canvas aftert t e sixties an being
'Il e at that
- -

I don,‘ I doI:1_l§|:"?:~wwl:ulI'_ll:f1eHz$f'(“}_””s .
S“ sort ofbcginning turning point of where the country. I
. < - 4 - -

_ ' ' . ‘I m think. is now. And Danilo as an innocent. Iguess that can't
e .
a [cw "I my mend“ Io go mu and mak: 3 sit well hut that was the view of Danilo...
R|_; (‘nu/,/_,-0,, gt.’ ,,,_,;_,¢.,;“., E gmw, Qflwnl,/(. am] haw. ml. RW: The xretie irltere he \t‘(II(‘llt‘S the burning of the Ameri-
/;/mnanred Mdpmdlmvy ,-“depend”,/_..' K,-W-Hg you mt, m,,_ (‘an_/log ti rtrtktng ht-came one .rtttItlenI_i'_reoIt:e: at that point
"0, you wa,m.d7 lioir rotii/tletely tttiairure he IS of ei'er_i'thtng going on because
I AP! It's extremely dileult...for instance I'm talking about l""»" km‘, Qf1"'"'""l ll!‘ '7-
a lm now that would involve four of us. It wouldn't take a §pi_ T" luv" "W """'P°IlllClZ"d I-'E\_"'¢ E" Ill" ¢¢""¢ II“? °I
great deal of money either. but nonetheless the picture "I
I'll" '5 ¢l""5¢ V"! hil_"-I I" d°_b"l "_ was Whiligwc “fefe
would still cost in the vicinity of six or seven million dallais. ‘"“""P"P_E_l° l-lQ- Thi" '5 1° 513/ "1 =1 hlgllly P°I"'°aI "mc-P
1‘ jus‘ d°¢§_ And Once you-[C gnu, that COSL wmmu; our IIOII-4P0IlllCl7tC(I_ tigurc and one whose parents have left their

l
taking our fees. it gets to be very dillicult even though the political scene in Europe and have come here and brought
studios. I think. would be very responsive. It means that all Im“ "Pl" “"5 Am“"'5“" "ac\“""~ and ‘halls why he W35
of the artists have to make the essential sacrice. which I'm '"l'""§""E- "'5 i‘ ‘"3’ bald I39‘-
Wnalnly P"=P3l'¢d I9 d°- I d°"'1 know h°W man)’ ‘Jr "W Id" RL2 Alto lie'.r _i,troii'iti_q up iti the Mlll\\‘€Il, in Indiana, bleak
I°“'5 “'°"Id be P"¢Pa"d- “'5 3 ""15 "isle? I0? K-IIf¢Cl°l'5 I0 17¢ ontl (|lIlI|!Glll' £ll'[lt‘l\'('¢l. (it'ut'gia {Jotli 'I7ieIen) is seemingly
this cavalier about that because we have longer careers. but .ronii- .\'(II’l q/‘t-atoI_i'.i"t lll this st'iitatitin—I'ni not sure what
“I975 kel Illa‘ lefflblc CIQCI‘ llckmg 3“’3)’~ Th¢)"Y° "P "W" (i'eor_i3t'a'.i'fitnt*titin is in the_/ilm. She has oll there pretensions
I" lhal high m°"=Y'e3ml"E Period I737 3 felall‘/cl)’ 5'19" lift" oftlonritig rtntl being ¢'.\'tm0rtlinor_i'. But Georgia never fulfills
ind lI‘|¢il' 38¢m5 ¢¢"3i"I)’ know lh3l- V"Y- Vef)’ I9" ‘Jr ‘hem any ofthix oml _i-et she hai thefunrtion of being some sort of
ha" ¢l'ld"l'¢d mlllih btiyod 1°"Four
)’¢3\'§~
Frimds niyth_/i_qitre_/or Danilo. I'ni not sure how the romance and the
“W5 7'9" ""1"".L’('rl to "mks, 1'11"‘-Y time it talru.r_/or them to (onie together cannertx with the pol-
whatever. Craig’ Warson was barely lrttairn at that time. The itiml (mm-m_\* qml hpir (,1-nr;_riq_/I/; ["10 thi;
only otherfatni/iarfocc to ma lt'.\' Lnir Stnith. Wa.r that eu.i_i' AP: She doesn't really. She's just really quite the opposite.

Spring '86 Cine/\ctlon! I7

|l'\ hard fur mu mm lu recall] our kIl.\Cll\.\II\I1.\. She \\;|.~ HL2 I711’ /ilm I\ nlllurl I"uur I'flL'l1LI\—\\'/III!IIIIIIIII I/H’ ulI|1'r
intended In rcpruwnl lhc \\iIcII_\ rc\:klc~> . chulhcnl purl of In 1| /'rIumI.\." 'I7n-_r u-um In Ivu II/IlIn\I mm-I'\I\ImI.
lhr /\I11L'TI4.'I|I1 \pIl'|I——l\\\ Iimih. nu huumI;|riu~_ nu I|mil to AP: Than \\;|> :1 |n1.snumv:r. I ;|I\\;|_\'~ \\:mlL‘I.I In Call lhc lm
hcr umhmnn. hcr c.\pccl:|lum~u|'l1cr>cIl.1I1;n aurl at m;n- (imrym and m I-'un\pc 1| |~ cnllcd ([1-ur_u1u.
\'cIInu\ pmmnw oi .»\|ncru:::. \\'I1u1I1c| ~\m<:nc;| c\ ur fuII'|lI~ n Rw: 1 ,;”,,;_ R.‘/ /;,-,.mv|. ‘M,/\ ,/H. ,,,,,\-“. M. hm ,/,1‘ 1

i* "Ii" “'73- "‘“Ch "p""' I'.\'l!'uuI'IliImr_\‘ pru\vm1'. U '/ml hm I|uppu1m/ In Iumf’ I'\'r Iwrvr
RW: I mm/\ u [YI'nI1/I'll! n I/IIII I mku n~ryI1IIII- uvlw "1 M,” mm hi,/;”.‘, Hr M-Imi
prmniu‘ /‘mm (l~L'l!!'vL'I'II. Sllv m'm.\ I/IIlIl' I'll/I1'|lIU|I\ uml \1um*-
u'Im/ ‘L'I'IIIlIl_L' Irnm Ihr \mrl. 'IIn- /II'\I !I!m' I.\un 1/ Ihlmm-II AP: II " “ “"1 ‘Mn "I h"'"F II“ """“"'| ‘"1"’ ""4 d"'"I§
Jozli T7n'II'I|_!I1I' IIu\ II\ u /H'I'/lII'!l|1'!' Iml I'm mm nu! .\|u'I' Imu ‘Wu “ml Ihc" "W hcmll f'hIL' 1“ bk‘ K'"\I‘|".\\'\I 1'E3""- Y""
1'/.\v il <"nulIlIn'/1/um/. I Ilunk II‘\ IIu' \\'lI\ Ihv mlu n H'I‘IlIl'Il. hm" “I '““"5 ‘_‘| ‘h"“' I*"“I "1 *'.‘Ph"I ‘“'“"‘““'I“"’“
‘hm
AP! And dircclcd... ‘Imp m ‘$~'”" H ‘”""
RW: Irln/|‘I III!!!/\ m. Irln/1‘! \n' Imu I'I\I'. II.\ \rrIIII'II. II RL: ‘"‘”'I‘ ”"”””'|
mull! hr :lim"lw/. I um /vu::Inl Ilml unv\un<' uuulrl III\'iIz' FIW: Ur Ilurrmm IImI.' I

(imrgiu nn (I .u'mmIIIuIu II‘!II”!/|l'\I‘Hll'IIIH'I'.\1I/II\l'iI|lIII'II A_P: 0"" "I. lh" mm?‘ [hm "“'k"‘ '1“ ]““¥h I‘ H“"'I“'n
M. ,“,,._ I-ord hclng numlnaulud.
A-P: \\'c|I.lI1uru‘\ w|11cll1|11g;|hn\1r hur. thh ;|li\c r:|uin_u aw: '"""I‘ ”‘"”'”'-‘ """' ’~"""I'" In“ MP1" "I" L'gI"*
spirit |I1;|l'.~ \cr\ ;|llr:1cl|\u. I WU“ Om I" (I"“rF'“'
RLZ Hulh IIIIIIKI I mu II \I1r rmnmlnI!m' II Iul 0/ I.I:u .\lIn- AP: Rmll-II‘, M“-‘hr hf‘ I'“'“r""‘I “"“"‘h'"!--
nu/II uml III /mrllrulur Ihv .\'uII| [fun/L'\ Ilrunlm-I III (';|h:|rc|. RW: I J! murw In-'\ m-rvr Iwuvu II//u\\m/ In I/II IlII\'I/III|_L' II'Iu'
Illv kimlul '\mrIII n nu Ill \lur' ulnlmlu. Shv wmmlIlin-rm! Ilml u_uuin u Im-I1, III (u!l!'\I'. InII!II'III\ ulml ruu'ru.m_ri!1,r:.
Inu'unI.\ imilulIn;_' lhul. AP: Thu) \\‘L||lI and mpccl Luke Sk_\\\'uIkcr4 Il'.\ 1| lcrrihlc
AP: 'IIml'.~ wr) mu-. Il‘~ not I i/4| Mlnnclh I \\':|~ using :\> lhmg. Punr _ImIi 'II1cIcn \\Im1.~;| \\umIcrl'uI nclrcss. I think.
lhc imangc. hul S:|I|_\ Buulc.» III Ium u ('Inrm'u_ 1| urczuurc in and nmsl ;mra|cli\c pcmm cnu|dn'1 cu-n work z|n_\'n10rc.
:1

LII’! ;|I|cn \uc|cl_\ \\'hn |||~l dug-~|1‘l \\;|nl In he held III I1} lhu Shc got imn 1| Nuil Snnun pl;|_\ and \hc Ii\'u\ in Now York
limiling :|~pcc|\ of rhul ~oc|L'I) um! /m\l11\ulll u|' lhcrc :|mI nn\\' hccanuw ~hc \\;u1l.~ In he m |I1u:nrc.
burns vcr) hrighlI_\. RL1 H111!‘ Iilnn mu‘ I111/m'I|II|' z’l|u!'u:"II'!'1:I'II Iv_r mII'n.\iI_\' and

Four Friends (1981)

II CineAclion' Spring ‘B6

 excess in confrontational .\'itltatiatt_\'. In Four Friends this would come out. I don‘t know about the balances in that
excess seems almost to produce iron) in certain scene.v._/(tr lm. It was such a damned hard lm to keep hold of. l
instance. the last appearuttce in thelttt qfLot'.\' Smith. trherc probably lost control of it.
she identies hersclfax wife atul Ittotlter, hath of which roles RW: It’: very hard to keep hold offor the vieu-er as it-ell.
she has non‘ abnt/ttl_t' I0.\'t. atttl ttI!t't‘_\‘ that terrible scream. AP: I don't know what it was then that spoke so passion-
Such incidents xeettt abrupt atttl not cottte.\-tttaIi:t*tI in the way ately to the Europeans.
one expects front HoIl_t'\mntl ttarrali\'t'.t. RW: But European: are so often right about American
AP: What we ttndertook there. you see. was a kind of frac- ntovier.
tured narrative. We‘d start the narrative olfand then RL: War Ihl’,/Ill" Ft""'"l'fFitl/I)‘ successful in Europe?
another voice would be heard—another narrative voice AP: Quite—based largely on the fact that it was so criti-
leading you into a sequence. We kept talking about change cally successful. lnformally the critics get together and vote
and discontinuous change. that's the technique of the lm. on the best lm and they picked Georgia.
I And it was really to break the narrative—the expected nar- aw: WP hm" Ill"! TEIEEI II"-I "/5" be?" V".I’ “'9” "TI"-"34 I"
rative form. I don't know ltow to evaluate the attempt but I Ellfvlt IS that true.’
like the idea of doing a dillerent form. I don't know AP: l haven't heard. CBS, for the second time in my life
whether we succeeded or not. There were certainly dillerent illll’ I mildtl it lm for lhem. E0115 Otll OI bllsinttii.
opinions of the lm. It has very strong supporters in (laughter)
Europe. Too many of them regard it as my best lilm. I don't On Little Big Man they went right out of business, and on
think it is by a long shot. I'm always astounded when I hear Target. so there's no one to hear from. It's apparently doing
that. well but I never hear from anybody because there's nobody
RL: You begin with DaniIo'.t ttormtimt. then /tats to that of in charge anymore. Everybody was red right as the iilm
the old woman anti .rtlb.\'eqttt-tttl_t' to the frietttl trlm i.\' the mu rt] came out. They just disbanded the entire lm unit.
the undertaker. RW: What it-ax your involvement in Target.” How did _t'0tt gel
AP: I must say that I lake responsibility for that. I intu that."
imposed that idea on Steve Tesich. I thought that there AP: I got into it because Ijust had the impulse to make a
wasn't enough thrust in Danilo as a central character. for lm. I'd been approached about a lm called Falling in
him to be the narrative vessel in which the story would be I.o\'t'. Ulu Grosbard was working on Target at that time.
contained. Confronting that fact, I thought that we should When I was approached about that lm I thought to
give voice to these other perspectives. myself. ‘I don‘! believe this story one bit. l don't know any-
RW: Ilike that. thing in the world that can help this story.‘ Ulu‘s awfully
AP: I like that too. I t.l<>n‘t know if it was entirely good. and so is Streep—-wonderful—and they couldn't
successful. make it work. And I wouldn't have done any better with it.
RW: I think the [tr(thIt'ttt ix that Dttnilo sittt/7/_\' i.tn't \'cry If anything. I probably would have done less well. But by
interesting. I/‘thefilttt mttltl have been stntctttretl more on that point, my juices v.'c:'-: a!rI-arly going to make a lm. It's
alternative narratives. givittg other cltaractert greater prttnti- like becoming aroused in some way, you know, you get
nence and greater t'qttttliI_t' it tttight have ht-en ll tmtrh xtrttttgt-r ready to go. And there I was in this state when I realized, in
lm. my discussions with them. that we were never going to rec-
AP: I wish there had been a t‘t'ttII_t' radical voice in that oncile our dillerences. I said. for instance, that there was no
lm. way the story could progress if the people were of the same
I
FYW: think the scene in the /iltn which I dislike the !It0_\'l i.\' social order. They are two people living in the suburbs and
the one intercutting the joIl_t'_/ttlk tlttncing with the decadent they are essentially the same person. It's really a story about
party which xectttx to me IIltIh'llt_L' xtlclt alt tth\'itttts point tritlt- someone falling in love with themselves. And they kept say-
out any irony. ing Brie] Encounter. and I said no. Brief Encounter has class
AP: Oh, I hope there's irony. dilference, and there's every dilTerence in the world and why
(laughter) don't we split this and make one of them an urban dweller
FIW: II I('('It|t'tl to ttte tttt itt\'itatiot|_/itr et't'r_t'ttttc to gt: out and somebody else a suburb dweller, but institute dillerence.
and participc re ittjo/l_t‘_litlk tlattcittg. But the folks at the studio couldn't see that.
t

(more laughter) RW: I don't know how it wax set up in therst place but it
AP: Oh god no-—there‘s nothing I hate worst; than (Mk look: like an old-fashioned star vehicle. They say. ‘we've gal
dancing. these two slats under contmct—as would have been the care
HW: But the contrast bettvecn the two .\'eem.t so strong and bark I” dun‘-ml H0’,-I'wa0d—“'e'"' gm '0 make "lm [Wshe
so ;,',,,p/,_ ' them. Let's have them fall in lave. He can be a commuter.
AP: t was talking about kind of bonded culture, which
11 ‘”" "‘ " ‘””"""‘"'
brings over the mores of the old country and stavs in this AP? BI" IIIIII W35 "OI III“ ¢1I$'¢- I3¢¢3I"5I1 I"¢IIII°I SII'¢°P "°I'
terrible, suffocating bond and about the hrokemopen forms D¢NII° W35 "ally I" II )’*¢I- TINY Wa"I=d I° Work I°§°III°I
4
of another kind of culture. Those were mv intentions. 118-"I" nd "I°"8 Cam" IIII5 V¢IlI‘3I¢~ TIWY “"3" ‘III "'Ia"I°‘-I
HL: Throughout thc_/ilm Daniltt vacil/atcs.bet\\'een extremes. III"I- UIII “'35 II E-"III III¢I'Id °I_ II“5II'5 Imd BIIIEI SI‘ UII-I Iel-I
ls Georgia’: function to draw httn out ofthir pattern and Tar;.'l'l WIIWII I1¢"-I5"" W°I'I‘I"E °"- 3"‘! I W35 I"§I I" IIIBI
effect a workable cotttpromisel’ In the beach .rcenc at the end §IiII¥‘ 5° 54"" C°II'=II- who I5 °III' IIIIIIII3I IIE°III- 5III<I 'wcII- I
of the lm she tell: hint that tte.\'l time it it-ill be her turn to lI°II'I I<"°W II YIIII WIIIII I" Ied IIII5 IIII"E' “"4 I“? bI°IIEIII
choose. She prevent: him/mm retreating in/,1 hiy ,,a,,_ Target to me. And I said that I thought it was attractive.
AP: Yes, that closed, su[Tocating_ homeostatic grouping Now I have to say that I was in this over-aroused state, I
RW2 I think one needs Danila getting more involved in (ieur- WIIIIICII II‘ make 3 "I°VI°- And II" IIICI III?" II “'35 “I I¢"B°IY
gm‘: cttlttm», in Europe was cxtrentely tempting. A lot of other thittgs came
AP: Quite possibly. You sec, l guess I was counting on his Imo PI‘IY_III° P°55II>IIII)' "I W°\’kI"S WIIII I'IiICI<m1l" iIl§‘IIII---
love for her, the unspoken part, the good part of Danilo Rwi W1" Ma" Di//0" "/"¢’t"I.l‘ "1-"7

Spring '86 CineAction! I9

 l P" Y‘

AP: No, Hackman wasn't even cast. but I thought Hack- which distinguish my lms from other lms.
man right olf the bat and that was so attractive. So. I RW: Actually I wish you functioned like that more regularly,
haven't got apologies, I took it fully with my eyes wide open because everyone has the right to make two or three lms that
knowing the limitations of it, knowing the kind of lm it are be/ow his best in order to make the greotjilttt. 7hot's the
was. But I thought also there was another pan of it and this way the old Hollywood worked. People kept working. but it
is a question of vanity. I thought, dammit, I'd like to show seems so dtf/icttlt to keep working nowadays.
that I can do this kind of high-kinetic lm, action movies. AP: I would like to go right on now and work on another
‘ They're always talking about action movies——damnit I can lm—my juices are owing and I'm really hot to make
do those, I can do them better than those damn whipper- some lms. but the ones I want to make. Icon’! make.
snappers. People talk about action lms and I think. god. RL: Are you satisfied with Target in ternts oflvhat you
they‘re really pretty awful. So it was one of the things I wanterl to do with it."
really imposed. I mean I wrote that whole sequence on the AP: Yes I was. but ljust wish that I could have put a dis-
bridges in Hamburg. claimer on that saying ‘Don't take this seriously, it's just a
RW: In most action/ilms one sits through the plat scenes in movie.‘
order to get on to the nest action bit. but I think in Target the (laughter)
opposite is tme. Tlte Hackman~Dillon confrontations are the FIW: Since the .ri.\'tie.r directors of your calibre are always
core of the lm. e.\'pectt’zl to make masterpieces which never used to be the
AP: There was certainly a limitation inherent in that movie case. Lang could make hallo rlozen basically little B movies
to that relationship—it couldn't go much beyond ‘Gee Dad. with no big stars. low hmlgets aml it/‘ten quite ttnpromising
you're not the guy that I thought you were.‘ material. with which he often rlitl wnnch'r.r.
RW: Thelm is very much concerned about fan|ilies—thc AP: Yes. and Ford and Hawks. they all made terrible
Ihreefan|ilies—the Ilackman-Hunnicutt-Dillon family. the lms.
lost family ofSchroder, and the CIA. which is an at least two RW: Now t'verylnt that yott or Scor.re.re makes is c.\'/tecterl
occasions referred to as the family. What were you trying to to he a IlIGSll’f[lll'l‘l’.
do with that and what is the relationship between the (‘IA as AP: It's not going to be. and we're all incapacitated by
family and the other two families? that. What happens then is the studios will say ‘don't go
AP: Ironic. in that instance. And ironic also in varying near Penn or Kubrick or Scorsese—_vou‘re going to get
degrees with Schroder. For me, families contain such a var- caught up in one of those arty intellectual lms that's not
iety of ingredients. some very good, some very bad, some going to be a money-maker. And it is a fact of present life. I
very difficult. But I can't take the one about the CIA being don‘t know Stanley Kubrick that well. but he‘s trapped in it
called family too literally. now. He can't make the lms he wants to make. He won‘!
RW: I think possibly a problem I have with the lm is that make the lms they want him to make and he‘s going
the central family. the Hackman-Hunnicutt-Dillon family. is through year after year of being unproductive.
so conventionally conceived. The lm would be really intere.rt- RW2 This zloes seem about the bleakest period in the Holly-
ing if it wentfurther in trying to rethink the family and certain wrmtl cirtenta. There are .rofew_/ilms coming out now that I
structures of the family. howfathers and sans can relate and arltttire.
how they relate to the woman. The lm seems to be another of AP: And even when there are. for instance gifted young
all these restorations of the father movies in which the father people like Robert Zemeckis, the material with which
is re-instatetl as the seat of all authority and the son has to they're engaging seems to me so unwonhy of them. You
learn to respect hint. can't make a good lm out of Bock to the Future...or
AP: That's a perfectly reasonable criticism and one that I Romancing the Stone is a well-made movie about nothing.
can't respond to except to agree with it. Unfortunately, it's They get away with it because they have nothing to live up
not a lm about the family, it was not intended to be about to. Of course, this is no excuse. You go for so many years
the family. It was a schematic lm about how do we get without making any money and you live in this community
into a kind of action sequence where people are bonded in where people make huge amounts of money. By the time I‘d
this particular way, where father and son are bonded into a made three or four lms I hadn't made any money out of
mutuality, but at no point, neither the beginning twelve or them. I was working with people who were getting fonunes
thirteen minutes. in Dallas. with the most conventional and I had not made any money. The only money I ever
American family, was there an attempt to give that descrip made was in the theatre at that point. And by God you get
tion of the family or the politics ofthe family. It was a to the point where. whatever the circumstances. you think
simple-minded lm. “I want a piece ofthe pie or a piece of the apple“ but you‘re
RL: Was there any consideration given to making the Hack- biting into the fruit that eventually gets you trapped.
man character more responsible.’ There is the whole thing RW: I suppose Scorsese comes as close as anyone to a direc-
where Matt Dillon confronts him with "did you kill people."". tor who's gone on doing what ht" really wants to tlo. His work
Hackman is evasive and more-or-less "no I didn't. I was just continues to he so intensely personal and idiosyncratic. Some-
pushing o pencil" and he's taken o the hook rather quickly. how he scents to get away with these incrcrlibly off-heat sub-
RW: He seems to admit that he was responsible for people's jects like Raging Bull and King of Comedy.
deaths. AP: And After Hours. But you know. with enormous dis-
AP: yes_ he do“ W5 no‘ an elegam and thoughmhmugh appointments. Right up to the wire they cancelled The Last
lm. It was designed for quite other purposes on my pan. I T"'"P'"'"’"‘"/ O"'5'- H""lb"=ak'"8!
don‘; know whh" it was a “fa Crisis of my own’ when | FIW: They rl actually gone as for as scouting locations.
wanted to say that I was still alive and functioning. Maybe I AP: Those are killing to the spirit. At that point you're so
'vas also taking as a clue the kind of mindlessness of other committed. I admire Marty a lot. I admire his resilience.
action lms that are popular. in that I made it mindless although I know he‘s paid a big price. There comes a point.
without entering into any of the other considerations. which too. when you think "I‘ve got to .rcore...I want another pic-
are the usual considerations into which I deeply enter and ture like Taxi Driver.“ Because otherwise you feel so immo-

IO CineAction! Spring '86

L
 Target ( 1 985)

bilized because you can‘t get lms made. Ute last two or tItt' n|n.\t rlreutl/ul rmrt-I I 'vt- ever .\trit‘t1_qIt-tl through. Nam‘ qf
three lms were not mega-hits in the Hollywood terms. the _t,'00tI .\rt-1|u.\' Q/‘the /ilm it in II. I ttttttyttuvl ("lint Ea.\’t\vumI
These guys are in there for a very short tenure. They have in the purl at /|i.\ pn-.\"t'nt ttgr.
no memory, no knowledge of lm, no interest really. They AP: But all l kept thinking \\tts, how could this callow
want to know what your last product did at the box oice. l youth have done all of this‘? And the attitude towards
never thought that I would nd myself defending the old women is despicable. The attitude towards u'.\‘ is despicable.
Hollywood system. RW: I'm m'\'t-r .\lI!’t' ulmut that. It'.\ all hntttttl up \t‘lI/I the
HW: What about Dino DeI11ttrentis—hz' .r¢'etn.t’ tu have /ilm'.\" inability to make its miml up ulmut the /taro. It '.\ IIt'\‘t’!‘
aria/ltnl Mirhael ('imitw." ll 'Itir'h it brave after Heaven's (It-ur In nu’ iv/ten ht".\ In-t'n_1,' t'mIur\mI aml wlzett ltv'\ nut by the
Gate, Iilttt at a wlrole. It'\ the nutm-n who are uwtl In mtirlmin him
AP: ll was brave and Cimino came through for him in the rt-puatt-rII_r um! what /Iwy .\u_r i \ ahmltttvlt true.
sense that he did a very responsible job for him...sca|ly FIL: E.\u'pt that the Ariana C/Itl!‘tI(‘It’! _euv.v hark ta him at the
...with Year afthv Dragon. He's got a lot of skill. lt‘s not a vml. n'hi<'h tlm'.\tt'I ntukv atty .u'ti.\1* at all.
lm that I liked. RW: 7714' 1-mIt't|_i,' t.\ tli.\a.\trtm.\ tvith the .\luItIer Rt'.t’t1rr¢'<'tinn
KW: I think it hm about half a tIa:¢-n ab.mIutel_\ .\'Ittnning Snttph0tt_r an the .mumltru<"k.
scenes. AP1 Reall_\' dreadful. And alter that rape...and then when
AP: And it has about halia dn7en absolutely ahlmrrent somebody else rapes her. there comes that terrible ‘ven-
t scenes that I found deeply ullensive. geance is tnine.‘ The fact that he raped her is overlooked.
RW. Well. it .\'ee!tt: .\'t) tatally unable tojiml any mherettt There i.\ a kind of heav_\‘-duty narcissism in Cimino which
attitude mu-anl the lvatling churarter. serves him well on certain occasions and serves him ill on
AP: The giv0n.r of the leading character are so grandiose as others.
to make him impossible. He is the Vietnam hero. the most RW: .-lllqfltit /iIm.\ are vi-r_v l'l!Il/lI.\l'tI. I‘Iit'_r'n- tttutlv with an
decorated cop of the police force... t'\'tmr>nIttntr_vurc ant! an t'.\'|rtmt'tIittur_t' ptmimt hut r0nu'p-
RL: ...amI a Dirty Harry type... tuaII_v .\lI curt/tt.\etI.
AP: ...and he's all of thirty-one or something. How did he AP: What l think proved with this lm is that he can
he
do all that‘? stay within the boundaries of t1;|l'l'illl\'0. In IIt'a\'t'n'.\ (iate
HW: And the casting Q/‘AIit'kt'y Rourke i.i all tvmttg any“-u_v. there was a master_\' demonstrated, but at the t'\'/n'n.\'t' of the
I read the n0v¢'I when I ht-anl Cimitm ivas/ntitt_q it. It n'tt.\ lm. That roller-skating scene was breathtaking—

Spring ‘86 C|neAct|on' 21

 i
breathtaking scene after breathtaking scene but at the so many of in my television days—Horton Foote. Sam Shep-
expense of cenain characters. the narrative. and certainly at ard. Marsha Normand plays—doesn‘t seem appropriate.
the expense of United Artists. There isn't an awful lot to On the other hand. he's much to be admired. Altman is.
celebrate at present in American lm. He's indomitable, he never stops working. he's productive.
RW: Part of the problem is that there isn't an awful lot to What comes to mind is that Pauline Kael once said that the
celebrate in America. antl I think that's why sontebody like three most interesting directors working in American lm.
Cimino has enormous problems. because the impulse behind Altman. Scorsese and Coppola. are all three Catholics. And
his work always seems to be a desire to a[/irnt. It'.r there con- whatever other similiarities she was talking about. there
sistently throughout his work. to a/rm something. in terms of aren't very many of those people who are whole. those are
values and that's what‘: wrong with Year of the Dragon— injured. injuretl careers-deeply injured. T‘here‘s something
he's trying to airm something that can’! be afrntetl any- very wrong. the situation that nips thesc artists in the bud in
mare. a system that's been eltircretlitetl. Antl he should know that way.
l
"M" RW. An actor you should work with is Aitlan Quinn.
RW! Wlrllltl _t'0ll like SW11!’ \t'iItl' HOW-" AP: Yes. he's good. isn't he. l saw Desperately Seeking
AP: Yes I would. thank-you. Susan. and then I saw A Lie of the Mintl. the Sam Shepherd
RL: Arthur. have you eonsirleretl going back to the stage to play, Get; he‘; goQd_ht;‘§ gymputht.-tt¢_ [gndgn strung‘ |
work again.’ really liked him very much.
AP: l'm going. I'm going to do a play. lt‘s a nice play. it's RW; t-'5 q sun uftm/i.Ru,,tbu_
3 l°|'l'ir'¢ P|3Y “"54 ”""Ii"£' C'('Fl\'""1l‘l1I'I- AP: He's certainly just popped into my consciousness.
RW: You coultl have some practice in this apartment. Just God, that‘; th¢ mQ§[ ;|[[fac|iVg young mun Pvt; such in tt
stick around ‘till it gets tiark. long time tit-t the screen,
(laughter) HLZ Dlll you like Desperately Seeking Susan‘?
AP: l think that's true of anywhere...it‘s written by a Pole Ap; | did_ | thought bctwcch th¢ two oft]-tem_Madohha
"/h°'5 3" °mi8Y°» and "'5 abolll P°li§h ¢"\ig1'¢§ i" NW’ Ymk and Ruseanna Arquette—they made one terric character.
who are caught between their cultures. a nostalgia for the But it keeps slipping in style.
culmfc ‘My lc behl"d~ bl" '10‘ 3 "°5l"lEl“ for ‘hf h°"'°|'$ RW: I thought it was quite ll nice little thittg but it eou/cl
of that culture. But it's done in a most inventive. lively. have tlone .ro much mort._
unusual way—a free form. People come out from under the RL; 1 Saw Muucta worker again rm-,,,/_t-_ 1,1” t.-,,,,,1_
Tht»
Md and $13" 5435"“ and ‘hm 8° buck u"d*"' ll" b-l 3""-l t'r/ul tnvrie. I hadn't seen it for a long time.
disappear. AP: lt‘s a movie about which l have pretty mixed feelings.
HW: When‘: it going to open!’ l like what it does. and l like the fact that it's so emotional.
AP: rm g°l"§ "3 "Y ii °"l ml!‘ Wmm" and W5" 205121" There are pans of it that l thoroughly dislike.
11° ll in ll"fall» l 119"‘! know if ‘hi5 i5 ll"! a\'Y°E“"“ 0" 7")’ RW: It'.t' the on/yv/ilm where I .t'tart cryittg before the credits
pan. but l‘m going to try to persuade the producer to go to ht»t;t,',t
B|'°3d“'3Y- Al ‘hi5 m°m°m- my "W" lmP"l5° i5 1° 533% "l¢l'§ RL: I tltittk the .ttrut'tttre is a bit awkwartl. the episorlicneszr
confront the culture. with its ahsettce of theatre. its absence u/‘tltt-_/7/tu ¢it>t-_;-,t'/ qujyt» mu-/.~_
ofdrama. its absence of lms. rather than lake the other AP; whut dttt-_;tt‘t wtu-|t (Or mt; t5 thut wt; haw tht» fttmity
Way °\"~ Whld‘ l5 1" 2° "lT'B"‘-'|d“'i\)’ and W how Y"ll'l| 8°! there being the antagonist. the obstacle. the very conven-
"=¢°B"ll=d- I "link ‘W 5h°"ld 8° Tighl 5" ll
Blnadwily hi“ tinnality of that family. Captain Keller and all that
some wonderful theatre buildings. and we should change the glfugglgtu
landl0t'd'S grip n lhtlmv l Can mlil‘ it P1‘l'$l11l>i\‘¢ 93$? fl" HL: ...ye.t atttl the .-lntlrt-w Prine cltorarter with the ret'er.\'ttl
my P°5lll°"- bl" "'5 BOMB In b" /Ill"-' m""¢)’- l don“ k"°“’ at the etul where he .ttontlt" up to hisfatlter antl tellr hint he
how well l‘m going to be able to convince them but that‘s tt'(t.\' wrong...
what l'd like to do.
RW: As you're so int'olt'erl in theatre, have you ever consi- AP: ...all that. you see. was effective on the stage and l just
dered doing the kintl o/_ lming that Altman's been involved in. didn't have enough sense about cinema at that point to
converting plays into lms? know that it shouldn't be in the movie. that the camera
AP: Certainly Altman is a very good model to use. some- could tell us about that child's impediment in a way that we
one who has always found a way around orthodoxy. I've could never depict on the stage and that would be the elo-
got to do more of what he does. We're beginning to become quent antagonist the lm should rage against. that terrible
quite good friends. visitation on the child. The camera does it. and then to have
RW: And a way ofeseapingjrottt the twenty ntillion dollar people have to talk. when Annie says she wants to take her
budget. down to the summer house and teach her. and Captain
AP: He moved to Paris while l was there making Target. Kdl" $3Y5 “TWO WRRS. MiSS Sllllivnl“
and we saw a good deal of each other. He set up a place RL: 77tat whole "two weeks" business seems so arbitrary.
there with a cutting room in his house. and he brought AP: You see. it was necessary on the stage. l didn't know
Scotty. his right-hand woman. over and in his wonderful enough when we moved it over onto lm to reduce that
way. he really got right to work. He lmed from at Marsha aspect ofit. So that pan of it was theatrical in the bad
Normand play called Laundromat. It's pretty good. it is just sense-
what it is. a one-act play on lm. l don't have that kind of HL: One of the
t'ery nice things about it is that it is such a
enthusiasm for those small pieces. but what l complain non-sentimental/F/I" ¢’\'¢’" ll"7"lZl' '7'-Y -"Kl! ll" ¢"""li"""l/7l"'- I
about in [hg theauc constantly is that | wish to God we had felt that you really were avoiding the pitfalls of senIimentaliz~
a kind of theatre where I could use my kinetic skills. I int: the story. It's extraordinary to_/ind in ajilm of the early
would like to do a sixty person mob scene. l‘d like to do a sixties a character like Anne Bancroft's—a very wonderful.
t
big p|3y with ;t lot of people. stuff that l can do in lm. But powerful woman who is still very human again not comprom-
the idea of going back to the kind of small playlet that l did ised or sentimentalized in any way. Thelilm was projecting

II ClneAction! Spring '86

 —-~
t \ I

E3,

'

The Miracle Worker (1962)

i'er_i- slmng i!YIll_L't‘S qfwiniirii Il\'(‘IlI_\'—_/i\'l' ,i'¢'ur.\' ago in a tray FIW: Purl u/'lIiu [l!UhIl’IY| .\t't'II|.\ In he Ilia! ]I!l)I¢'_\'| IIIIX
lhul \\'t1.\‘ i't'r_i' llFhUf(‘It'riSIi(‘ of lhnl ]7t'!il1tl. imlliiiig \'('f_l' rleur m_/iu~u.\' on ax it Iiml ii-ilh Vie!/iam am!
AP: Oh, totally. Anne came along there as a new kind of l$'uler_|,'uIe. I lliink lllt‘ 4-/ii.-rg_i' IS Ihvrv .i'0int'u'hz'n.' bu! il can’!
gure. a new kind of heroine. both in the theatre in Tii'u_!br .\¢‘('!I| I0 he ninliilizuil. uml lliurif/iire any .\'nr/ qfle/l wing or
Ihc S(‘¢'.\'G\\' and in this play. carving out a new kind of early m<Ii<'ulpri.i'i|imi mi‘: popular, ii ileum’! mu/re In0It¢'_i'. and we're
feminism for herself. She was remarkable. so gifted. Unl'nr- hark It‘/It'll‘ \\'(‘ .i/urlml \\'i|h, irilli Ihe hu.\'im'.s'.\men and the
tunately. the theatre died. just as tilm is gradually dying—it L|l‘t‘lIlI!lltl!ll.\' unil Il|¢' bu.iim'.t:t' ll£'H/.\'.
died out from under her. Just not enough roles to keep her AP: Every culture. at certain times. gh lh¢$¢ kind Of
engaged. iiii/mi'eri'.i'hi-il periods. I mean artistically impoverished, for a
RL: I llinugh Jane Fonilu lt'll.\' m'luaI/_i' quite guilt] in Agnes of \'@"'iL‘i.\' “ii i'L'ii§""§- i “'°“i‘-inii i“~'t!i" ii‘ i‘"°W ii°W 1° '~iiil8'
God. She rrvulml a rah’ Ilia! i\'a.t 4'.\.t1'nIiaII_i'nmi-¢'.Yi.m'n!. ""5'~' iiiih P'~‘Yi"¥i bi-‘t3iiiii*'~‘ iii> iiiici-i Wiiii enigma mi’ m°- i
uncle!-irrillrn. uul ii/'Iu'r lI\\'!l _\'|I’t’I|_I,'I/I qfpre.\'t'iir£'. allhaugh I t-i0"ii i<""\'\' i"")’bU*iY Wii" Wiiiiy i'~‘5P'3¢i5 Rlmaid R=3t§i"1-
zliiIn'! like the !lll)\'il’, I llinuglu il \\‘!l.\' quilt’ aitjlill. But l also don't know anybody who isn't prepared to
AP: Jane Fonda is really a terric actress. as Anne is. ¢i<"““'i"liLl° iiiiii iii-'3 ii" °"t5iEii'iE'- iiEiii'¢~ 5° Wei" 5iiiid="iY
They're really up there. Jane can do some really remarkable talking about “the great communicator," l mean this media
work. though she hasn't always done it. gure. lt‘s very hard for me and my friends to make sense
- HW: Ht’! ran-t-r Iiux been \'('f_\' t:Ii.\'u|i'.r/iu~mr_i' inn: lliv t'igIii- "ii ii- iii> Y"? P\'\'iiiii"- i “'iliCh'¢1i ii ii" "iii" dill’ 0" ii"
iex. Even lhu lhi'ng.t .\’h4",\ lrivil la (l('\'l'I0[l Iii-rxel/I Ii'Ii'4' Nine to 5111"! "ii iitl‘ U"i"" ¢ili"'§§4 /\i1*"iiii@iY b"8iiiiii'iB- in Wiiidi
Five. have been .m t‘(l!7l[7fl|!7li.\'t'll. he was saying things that are absolutely impossible, we
AP: And schematic rather than organic. They‘re not made \\'l>"'l filitl i1W~‘>v W¢'t'L' going i0 hlilttl the budget. We'll
out of passiun_ rather “let's talk ;|bu\|[ ihe working maintain the high military hudgct——it's absolutely blue sky
woman“... time. It's as if he was turning on the entire country with
RL: "bin rm! ii[!l'ml ll!l_\‘hUlI_\'mur/i. " \'(’I'_l' something he was smoking. But there we are. The politically
AP: W¢‘r¢ really ;|| 3 hard rim¢_ |r‘§ not jusr |m5_ astute columnists take exception to it but the people in the
although l think tilms are the strongest and most exact >iFl"~'i 1-i""'i- UP Ll"¢§ ihs‘ Wick "\i"ii=i- and "5 $"m¢b°d¥
1 model nt‘wh;1t's wrong in America right now. l think pointed out. Manhattan is a fascinating place that has thirty
l
yrnlmriy i5 doing good wQ[k_ thousand millionaires and thirty thousand homeless.
l

Spring '86 CirieAction! 23

RL: We \\‘t'!‘l' tal/rin_q about the Rocky and Rambolmx and parnngra/|I|i' rlebatr. .4Itrl_t't't Ihe Right. at the tame lime. i.r
the r¢'.rurgt'Im' 0/‘Rtmiu Lil‘ the nlunxtvr. Thix .\'¢'l’IIl.\' a vt-rt‘ ronsolixlating.
dH!!§l‘!'l)ll.\"L'llI1l£‘ tn be pIa_\'in_t' aml liabudy .i'1'¢'ttt.¢ to want-to AP: lt's consolidating better than we are. The Right is eon-
lake ll .s'¢'riua.\l_r. solidating, they've got a network, they/‘ve got spokesmen.
AP: It's a wonderful way of not looking at your own RW: /1mImnm'|*.
monster inside your own sell‘. lt‘s very good to lay off every- AP: Money was never the power of the Left. It was really a
thing that's wrong with the world onto this alien tribe. force for social change, a sense of injustice. lt wasn't money
RW: The h1|ur_t,'wii.\ nmliu have alu'u_r.\’ I¢'!tt/4't/ In link any that unilied the Left. but it's what gives the Right its pecul-
Idt-wing [|t).Yi!i(I!I with the Sm-iv: UniaIt—t1 hrzzigoyrrtan that iar power. And in this media time, they're able to buy vis- ‘
ntalws it on-11 nwrr luhmi It! arlupt any hf/'1-u'in_r,' position. ibility. But l think we're at a philosophical deeit. lt‘s very
AP: On the other hand. it's very dillicult to have a respon- hard to say feminism is a big enough issue to militate the
sible left. As much as we can excoriate the right, we can Left.
excortate the left. We haven't done a good job of it. those of RW: Bcrausv the dominant itl¢'alag_t' has marle 1'ti[/irient l
us ol that persuasion. We haven't done an eloquent job of aIl0\\'a!u't'x[a! it.
trying to express what we see as a better culture. a better AP: lt's wonderfully resilient.
society. lt‘s damned dil‘lieult_ |t's just damned dillicult. We RW: You make afrtr ntovic-.t" like An Unmarried Woman
have a little pla_\'\\'rigltt and directors‘ unit that we run at the and _t'au't't' rlealt trithfentinisln. you've xaizl. "Oh _\'l’.\‘, that’:
Actor's Studio every Monday—Kazan and l started it and _/Tm’. thr'famiI_r ix great." 77tat'.t"jusI ane tin)‘ ¢'.\‘antpIz'. Yell
we have some very good people in it. Mailer is in it. and think there is a certain amount Q/'r'on.\'a/izlaling going an in
Don DeLillo—a|I of them. it you asked them, would dene ittIeIlc'¢'!uaI rirr'Ie.t'. anyt\'a_\'. t\'hir'It is at Oll‘ pn'ser\'ing Ihingx.
themsel\'e.s as men of the left. including Kazan. very much antlrlr-\'t'Io/1in_q them. !('atlt'/'1)!‘ when .\’0ri¢'tr t\'ant.\' them.
so. and yet you don't see any work from any of us that AP: Well, l wish l really telt that. l don't.
helps to dettne what we mean by that. And that's pretty RW: I think the whale rrmtiitg-together QI the Frcuzlian and
imp0\'|:t'isl1ed. Mar.\1'.\"/ Irazlilianx anrl /'¢'mini.s'm ix \'rr_|' interesting. II’: hap-
HL: The pI'nhIt'!n Imlut \('t,'IH_\ tn he u link Q/'_/2n'u.t'. a kiml 0/' [7(’Ilt'tI in the lax! Ian roars or sn.
r/|Iint¢'rin_t,'. Tak<{!iu' 4-mnt/1/1-.wtinixm. irlticlt ax a nwvmu-ii! AP: Yes. hut there's also, it seems to me. another kind of
ha.t' b¢'mnn' i:tcrt'it.\’i!t_t_'Iyurttamh 4-.\‘]u'¢'ial/4t‘ with the current movement at loot. There was just a piece in the New York

~=§“‘¢'

,~

t.
\

F’,

1
1

The Missouri Breaks (1976)

2‘ CineAction! Spring ‘B6

‘ .2

§§=
6

I K\N: ~

The Missouri Breaks (1976)

Times Maga1ine—~unteth|ng about the Yale eritie~. There‘> AP: And it‘ they really wanted to do they could he running
:1 salon nr something. And the truth is that these peunlv re
a big ntovement alkmt there. and l ean't hegtn to explam
it-—they're called deconstrttctirttmts. But i> seem.~ to me that 1/r'.\']wnI!r'. We've gut genuine psycltntics walking aruttnd. I
at the le\el of eritieimt, and pmbahly at the le\el nf the art ntt-‘em. the deuble hind that’- gtven ht thew pm-r penple—
that inmkv.-> the eritictmt, the is\ne.~ are nut heing dealt "We'll lel _\‘m1 mil 0l' the asylunt if you promise to get your
with. the wcial i\~ue.\ are stntpl)‘ not tlte t;urrene_\ of utlr own ntedicatiun." That means be your own keeper. which is
ttme. I mean even l'ettt|nt>m i> only one part ul the i\stte— what they \\‘eren‘t able to do in the I'|r.\t place. So there the_v
one eat of the pte. are. people whu_ in order to save money. the entire culture
RW2 Ute ulmlv wn|i1Im'\—\!rm"!uruIl\l lmrliliu/t llml hut M“ U“ [“"*" {mm ‘my kind “f h"|P- "-“¢'3Pl ‘hm "WY 5"" B9
Iutl Iu rlurmt\!rm'IIm|nm hu.\ Iver'1mtt' to lllrlfltlll’, tn "ml L1“ lb?” Th"T411l"'~'- I13 l¢l'l'lbll'- /‘"7"’/l’~ And lhl‘
;“,,,m.”-(._ |ncrea.\e and frequency of thal. it's just amazing. it's hard to
walka hluck in New York nnw withuttt seeing sumcune
' '‘ - ' .~leeptng un a grate or tn a dnorwav. There‘> a ktnd ul heart-
RL: then-‘t mt"/1 mt mnrnmu.\ um! tmlt-n1/t_e
.~Intl _eu/1 he/hum lessnc» to our mciety that's rcallytshuclting.
Ihv inIr'lIt'r'luu/ 1'/ilu uml I/tr nnrltl ul Iur_ut'. RL: 77ml t'.\'IfUl!f(Ii!IHfj' /u.\'Iupn.rilion 0/‘e.\'lrt-nu’ trerllllt aml
AP: Oh, tt'\ huge. You pruhuhlt dun‘t >ee |t an much rater ""”"'"" !""‘"/1'--»
here. hut tu walk arnund Manhattan and we the ltnntele». AP! -4-and l'"i1)'hL‘ in lhffk‘ |iL‘> Wm" lm! I0 Rilmh» ll‘
the hungry. It‘> ju>t apalling. I >a\\ a \\ontan pick at earmt )'"l1'|'\' I1"l"E I" 4" nylhlnll "hm" ll W“ *3" ll )'°"|"l‘lr- W"
out nl' the gutter on (\vlt|n\hu\ A\en\te where no\\ the renla bL'¥'""“' WP'~'Y'"1"~*\'|"d 4""! 5uP'~'r'P"“"~'“'d and 5‘-'P‘“"'“rm'3d
for a More are t\\el\'e. t'tt’teen tltumattd du|lar> a ntunth, "mi W" 11° "I" ‘MI’? 1""-l b)’ Y°"T>°l|')/“ll blm" Ill" 5)/Slcm
You kntm. ttmttey i> lItI\MHg un that ~treet_ and here t~ thi> 11Pi"'l- B¥‘¥'¢'l|-R‘ lh" 5)’-‘Mm I5‘ S\‘l"l.1 I" d'~"1‘i"° ¥"u- l "W3"
wunmn picktng a lthy carrot uut at‘ the gutter in tmnt nt‘ a ll"! lltlllf in Rmbo. On v-'h0se behalf he is supposedly
Korean wgetahlc .\Inn:. lt'.\ rt'r_t peettl|ar—~ueiet_\' |> to hard ¢l"i"L‘ ll‘i*- 11"‘ 4‘/~"" "1" ""'~'§ Wh" 4"“ "5P""§ib|\' R" d¢C'¢l\"
m d¢_\t_-|-|ht-_ ing him. an then.-'5 nuhmI_r to be trusted. I saw Rumlm on an
FIL: .-lml Ilm it /1rL'\L’IlIt'rIhr ]I1p"]I'tlllltl.\ t/uutnl—"hu_e airplane and I couldn't he/iut'r it. I literally couldn't helieve
Iurln-\' are t'Iturut~m'\." it: I wa>jt|.\t appalled.

Spring '86 Cir\eAc!ion! 25

RW: I .t'¢'i’_/i'm'r itctv /”!1I.\’ !l()\\‘ lhu/i ever bi;/bro. what to do.“ He wrote the ending that we have. lt's not
AP: Yes. l can imagine. and that must be terrible for you. ntuclt of an ending. hut it‘.s tlte only ending we could work
HW: I ll.l'l’l/ Iv cn_in_i' _r,'nilt_q
I0 llie nmi'|'r'.i" .\'() niudi am! mm‘ out. given what we had.
i'I'.r at hat"! ll rluly, al tvnrsl u puni.\’hnii'nl. RW: ll 'a.t Ihc srri/it lIl‘I|l(II/_l' iiiemii/iIi'li'."
AP: There must he another and hetter way. AP: No. there was an ending ofsorts. hut it just petered
PW: I/tn/tr .\u. out. llte reall_v interesting thing is that the writer. Tum
MAX: M('IIl\‘. Meow! Mc(iuane, had recently made a movie for Elliot Kastner
RW: Toll u.\" uhuul The Missouri Breaks called Ni/ii~l_i'-Tim in I/It’ Shailv. and Kastner. for some rea-
AP: lt was a situation where each of us had read tlte script son that l've ttever understood. had suddenly decided that
attd tiirtted it dotvn. l discovered this later. And Elliot Mc(iiiane could recut it himself. The recutting took place in
Kastner got together with any two of us and he would say England while we were shooting the lilm, so McGuane left
to Brando. “I've got Nicholson and Penn to do this, will _l'lIIl the States and went to England while we were waiting for
do it'.’" When Brando agreed he said. “I've got Brando and the ending. l don't know quite why that happened. l should
Pentt to do this. will you do it‘."' And pretty soon, we were ask Elliot sonte day. l haven't seen him for quite at while.
all locked into it. lt scented so ii/in-al tltat I didn‘t really pay RW: Aiiiirltcr /i/iii Hldllt‘ uruuml I/I1’ .\(lIllt' time, written by
much attention to it, and lo and behold. the deal was ntade. Mr(iiium'. Ranclto Deluxe. /tu.\ ll/!HlI.\'I z'\'m"lli' the .\'anti'
And from that point on, from the making of the deal to .\I!'lll'IllI‘(' at Tlte Missouri Breaks. Riilhur (llI(”_\'. _g|'i'i'ii _\‘U|lI‘
starting the lm. it was six weeks. So what we did was go to iIi'.\('ripliun uftlie iiiakiiig ii/'lIii' /ihii. Missouri Breaks r'mm'.s'
Montana and huild the principal hoiise. and we used a lot ll('!l).\.\' u.\'_/in mun’ .\t'riu|1\.
ol' leftover sets from I.ittIi' Big Mun. which were still stand- (laughter)
ing arottttd. They weren‘t in very good shape so we propped AP: Rmirlm I)<'lu.\'u is more of a piece. hut it‘s more
thent up and then we started to make the ntovie. And a lot frivoloiis.
ofeaelt day was spent llesltittg out scenes. which were RWZ II ilm-.i1i'r Iiiii-i- iII|_\ Q/'1/iv iliililr/iiri_e cli'nicItls Ilia! Mis-
extremely sketclty. That was the best part of the movie. soiiri Breaks 1/l'\‘(’/(I[7.\. ii‘/'i'.\/ii-rli\'<' of irIt<'lIii'r _i'm1 ti'z'n’/‘us!
watching these two giiys improvise and develop scettes. hut I|(l\‘l'II_t,'_/llll or mil.
we always knew that we didn't have an ending. One of the AP: Oh. we were taking it serioiisly. biit we knew we were
cleverest soliitioits was Brando's. He said. "l don't tinder- in a very leak_\ hoat. Terrible tliiitgs were written in the
stand who this character is so l think he sltoitld he some~ press, terrible stories were heiitg led l'ront Montana that
body different every time we see ltint." And l quite agreed Nicholson aitd Brando were at one anotlter's throat and
with hint. l didn't know how to play a regulator either. this that l \\as having a terrible time with them. Absolutely none
dispassionate killer...at least iit S/mm-. they gave him ii cos- of it was true. We had a \er) good time.
tiinte. they gave this terrihle hlaek vengeance motive. llte RL: lliiv HruiiiIu'.i love .\('l’IlL' tvillt I/tt’ Iiur.i'i' in I'll’ .\'<'ri/ii."
tact of the matter is. we had a very good time making the AP: No. lt's ii inarvellotts scene. Brando said. "Give me a
movie. altltottglt we iliil have a sense that we were sinking. horse and ll mttle and let's go. let's try it.“ And all l had to
and then ol'eoiirse_ when we got to the ending. we knew we do was keep the eainera going. l knew there was going to be
were clrnirni'n_e. And that's when l called Rohert Towne and no stopping him once he started. Ten years ago yoii could
said. "Boh. come and help. l'm desperate. I don't ktto\\ slttttil a lilni in that ittattner. You coiildn‘t do that today.

I
CIHGACTIONI
A MAGAZlNE or RADICAL FILM CRITICISM s. THEORY
¢|ne/igrioui--_-=5
*"*W'"i°"*"'=**"~"="'"¢'="""*°"' -»¢'=

Forthcoming Issues:
0 July/Aug—Scorsese: Issues
Cs
of Masculinity
0 Oct/Nov—Stars
SUBSCRIBE NOW!
Four issues: $12.00 (individuals)
$25.00 (institutions)
(Abroad. add $2.00)

Free with new subscriptions!

#1 Neglected Films of the '80s
#2 Women in Contemporary Hollywood
#3/4 Reading the Text
Special double issue
Cinallclioni 705-40 Alexander St Toronto. Ontario. Canada M4Y 1B5
. SN” al/3!./ab/e—$7-00

26 ClneAction! Spring '86

nit unvml‘

5?
QM

WW
A
unnniiin

ml‘
M, X‘
\‘\\\\\\
ya‘
Mi
W

ii

as“ W
\.

H
\
/
l

the cinema of transgression

‘
.
,

///gm
/
‘tr

l
‘_,
/.
snttl“
\\\\\\\\\\\

*‘=‘
($3
/ .

Q»
.
5

./1,
\
I’
';.J " ‘;-As’:

it
@

K
/v
I

by Bryan Bruce

Walking in the East Village on a recent visit to New York

City, I noticed a xeroxed poster for a Super-8 film called They
Eat Scum by Nick Zedd to be screened at the Pyramid Club
later that same evening. I had heard of the Cinema of Trans-
gression, heard its other compelling monikers—Ordeal
Cinema, Cinema of Endurance—was intrigued, and decided
to experience it for myself. It was to be screened at 10; I arrived
at 10:15; they told me it would be more like 1 1. Eventually the

Spnng'B6 Cine/\clion! 27
 Y

audience was in place, the music turned down, and the As part of the strategy of polemicism, Surrealism, Camp,
projectionist/lm-maker busy threading up his work. A few and Punk play on the ambiguity oftheir images and gestures—
images began to make it to the screen, unframed and ickering inconsistency. contradiction, and unpredictability becoming
out of the sprockets. l could make out a man in bondage part of the aesthetic. A notorious example in Punk is the
whose face was being smeared with what looked like excre- appropriation of Nazi imagery in fashion or dress? lf, as in
ment, then a grotesque nuclear family at the breakfast table— Surrealism, the symbol is meant to be taken as a pure confron-
an abusive, nagging transvestite mother arguing with the tational gesture, the political signicance of wearinga swas-
hideous father and snivelling child. l thought to myself that it tika shifts: the gesture has offended as intended and should not
could be an interesting lm, but at that point the projector be read further.‘ Obviously. the purposive ambiguity of this
broke down completely and, without apology. Zedd noisily strategy runs the danger of being misinterpreted. which is
packed up hisequipment, yelling somethingabout a screening precisely part of the elTect intended; Punk continually strives I
later in the week at another altemative space. for the inappropriable. which means nding forms ofexpres-
Out ofcontext, the images that l saw did not offend or dis- sion that are not easily accounted for or diffused. lt would be l
gust me,at least not on anyaesthetic or moral grounds;nordid difcult to come up with a more loaded symbol than the
theobviouslycrude,low-budget,sub-Bqualitytum me offihe swastika, and the initial shock of seeing it incorporated in
lm. Contrarily, l found this seemingly more democratic, less ‘fashion’ is perhaps its central function. To some, however, the
corporate approach to lm-making exciting: a lm forum for reading ofthe sign is indelil>le—these punks are irresponsible,
artists who cannot or choose not to produce art under the fascistic, pro-Nazi. Punks almost encourage such a misread-
conning, depoliticizing auspices ofgovernmental patronage; ing, and refuse to articulate the meaning oftheir stance, partly
a form which anyone with a cheap Super-8 camera and some because people want it explained not so they can engage the
tape could participate in, encouraging, as in the Punk move- reasons for radical and subversive expression, but only in
ment, a more egalitarian, interchangeable relationship orderto render it harmlessby masteringit intellectually. lfone
between artist and audience; an expanded cinema in which art looks at the Punk movement as a whole. and at the subtext of
forms converge in various permutations in spaces not tradi- this willful inarticulation, the gesture has a much different
tionally associated with lm—bars, clubs, galleries. In theory, signicance.
it seemed like the most interesting lm movement to come out . . . .
or New York Since warho|_ Firstly. Nazi artifacts were usually‘ worn by punks in con-
NDW ma‘ I have mn a numb“ or mms ofthe Cimma or ]\lf'lCllOl’l with the fetishized sexual iconography of chains,
» -
Transgression and read The Underground Film Bulletin » l'.l1..l ll.
If“ C‘ .°m U cl“ ‘I 3“ d‘ dh. f '—— '° 1"";
kwwc. ‘Ire ?:me.‘.u."c“°}:'
(UFB) mg “rand .zim pm out by -I-mnsg“_SSion.S ourgeois_norma cy ac on itse .ienti yingt e master
Poncd found" Nick Zgdd aka Orion Zericho I have had m slave relationship, most hideously apparent in Nazism, as the
reverse my inmal emhu5iaS'm to [he point nrcondcmning ‘ht basis of patriarchal culture. lt is diflicult for people to accept
movement outright. l want now to examine the multiple rea- mmelhmg as sccmmgly. '."“““*‘“° and ordmary as thc dress
sons for my dismissal of the movement despite its annexation code as 3 means m 3 Cmlque of cunum espcmauy when ‘he
of certain potentially effective political strategies ofthe Punk majamy dresses elm“ as 3 passive reneclion °f “_gmd°'
movement differentiation, conservatism—or as a purely personal state-
-rhc ciacma or Trans [ssion as a kind of expanded ment. Secondly, adornment with such offensive icons signies
B .
Cinema‘ is more accmmdy -
sensibility man 3 Sly]: of mm‘ a certain dlSl3l1LC
.
from the conventional presentation of per-
and one which like the several sensibilities from which it mm] imagejbrdinga vcryimmcdialc upressiun °ra“cna_
b0rrows—Surrealisn'i, Camp, Punkfeschcws precise dcni- "0n".'_By__w;an:g cha'nSk(_)l:lh‘flr °pli"e;?orls—S:aSnkF5‘
tion and accountability.‘ These sensibilities have in common "U" ix“ an ‘cu ‘_p“n “ “oimsmll y y ' C ml {W
‘Sp
the strategy ofoffending or provoking through gesture, posit- or me" mshvclmm by ‘l‘° domlnanl. 'deo.|ogy‘.and mt dw-
ing a pure polemic that is, at least initially. depleted of a lance re" "°'.“ “ and Fhclr own ldcnmy wuhm “' Th? wink
specic politic. Surrealism, for example, accomplishes this by geslum “Pious ‘hes: 'c.°nS no‘ as “F cmpiy acsllm'c'u"°n
disengaging the symbol from representational meaning, using lag m 59'“ Cum“ fashion "ends wh'c.h U? S‘.”a§“ka pamms
a disturbing or disgusting image not for its symbolic reson- m rabm purely ‘*'F°°"""°'.Y) or as an .'"dm?"°.n Oran “hep
ance, but for its purely offensive or disruptive impact; the °"°°¥°. or pmm‘.m°" °'."‘°" m.°§l°bv'°“s s'gn'c?nce‘bmas
surrealist narrative. with its arbitrary and illogical connee- 3 P°l'“c.a"y “meal pmjfcl wmch demands 3 rcadmg beyond
tions, is not meant to be read for latent signicance, but supercml “.pp.c‘“a"c.cs' . . .

ex P‘ rienced for the state of confusion and disorientation it The amb'g“"y of “mg” . 3"“.. d.c.g?“bed
.
"moduccs another
generates. The‘Camp sensibility, while less intentionally con- gu‘?|"y;har?d ‘he TIE: §en5'P,'¥:cs' ':ele|emc.nwrP|a)." As
frontational. similarly relies on exaggerated and extravagant ma" ‘mug "W5 0 amp.‘ C W O C. p°'.m ' 1,; 5.“,
gesture, and a preoccupation with anice and styliration. dhmlm me 5'm°“S' Camp '5. pkiyful‘ an."'s“'°us'. i Using
Although to its credit it has become increasingly politicized. w"r“Sm5 and Cm.“md'cmry ‘mags’ as m Pu.nk' mvemng
the Punk movement shares this strateS)’ of the P oliticall Y lhemjsm .
. .Surmahsm‘orexaggcra"nglhcm'as'n Camp_a"
.
non-specic, polemical gesture designed to provoke and chal- 3;; "?“"n“c:1 of "}';.|_>|a_yr“ll.mS5‘ F‘!"‘|°‘*" ‘be? pamwlarly l
lenge the existent codes of morality and ethics. Like Surreal- c cm“: me‘ Dd O “mm! mg “um am “'5'
ism and, especially, Camp, Punk plays particularly on the The nal paradox of the three sensibilities, which they,
sexualas the most morally contentious arena by fetishizing the themselves, tend to ignore, is the perhaps by now obvious
gesture (in fashion, for example, through piercing, leatherand point that being apolitical is in itselfa kind of political state-
chains, dog collars and leashes. borrowed from the practice of ment. and that every act, gesture, or image, now matter how
bondage and discipline—this can be construed as a more apparently insignicant, does signify, even if only an empti-
politically articulate than simply confrontational statement if ness. This brings us back to the old Cahier du Cinema conceit
read as a metaphor for dominant sexual practice). Each sensi- that every lm is political, and to the task ofdening precisely
bility, then, relies on extremity and excess, and lays emphasis how 2| lm or lm movement is political.
on experience over analysis of the extreme images it presents, If one were to dene the political nature of the Cinema of
ridiculing any attempt to account for them ideologically. Transgression according to the categories set out by Callie!

IO Cine/\otion! Spring '86

-mi
critics Comolli/Narboni in their
eism". it would fall approximately
in which. “The content is not explicitly
way becomes so through the criticism
-. form" “ Formal. considerations
Cl!1t‘l‘£l/idL0iUgV/(t‘lll-
under ‘category tel‘. tilms
political. but in some
practised
i
‘
t! t 5:‘:
' ' _ _‘;_"
'
H
.-'1"
.v; ,1,-X
, -~ _%F:*;.’§}l~_~“~/l<~-».~I:;e»
.1 [gig
"1",-‘~77 7-‘

.L‘: M
iv

its
on it through
. . < _'l ,,,‘_/5 ["_,?";€il':/b‘-L'\ =_5L.'»f"' Y’;-i $1,
here ll‘lLiU(.iL‘ both the. tilnis :"1.Q, “if /I 4
4 . - _

.,F'7"l"
_. .
themselves—-the super-X format. C" , ,_ .-
‘JR
'#‘~ V_l._>
the cheap. low-budget qual-
ity, the grainy. poorly lit or over-exposed 5], ‘k;§‘~ -t "93"--I-“(Hm
images, dictated
most often by economic necessity—and
which they are presented—tht.
the context within
expanded cinema approach.
1
'
, ,,
_ '
.
,- '7/4’! Hllcuson
" combining lms with live performance.
4"§"~r‘=' "-@-/t E
supplementing them 13' *.-'* -
i with underground publications. etc. s-ilsiéa V

| venue. one which throws into question

ln theory. it isan exciting
the traditional means
?}._ / . l
l of the production of cinema. SPCCliILilii)’, -.
however. the. ‘tr '4 Us
',
ll
Cinema of Transgression. while reacting
established and entrenched avant-garde.
violently against the -,‘_ ,' Ll
_
in '
commercial lm
school dogma. the government-funded \' .<
lm-maker. and the
cloistered academic critic. fails to produce f<_ ;,='.~ .

an articulate voice
in opposition to them. and, instead. l "_
has become itsell monoli
thic.an undifferentiated gestalt ofanarchist w
angst asapolitical
as the worst of the traditional
~\-:.-,
J
avant-garde.
lt is the peculiar quality of the Cinema
appropriate the tendencies of the traditional
condemns, and to become itself highly
of Transgression to
institutions it '" .§/
.3»
its avowed intentions. In his Cinema
appropriable. despite
of Trans ression mani-
I Mnnlv :7 _/ .
2 It t-.

festo, Orion Zericho (Zedd) rails

against every institution:il- \'.
n his >’)t, I K »',€£‘
ized instance ofcinema without “ ‘< °?Zl-
recognizing the allinities of his
movement with them. Part oi the J2’-‘.'*:"_7-§)t_' 1‘3.3§.
'\._-_
problem is his inaccurate at -,
.=-I ,
. .
,4
. -

“ tr’ ~: l:.\‘.Ti~
and misplaced assessment ofthe
avant~garde. He denounces
4 )9 p Vi
~

structuralism ' asa "m 0 num e nt to laziness _.I Q; 4 “Iv, _>’_—;:..IR

‘

s
“‘7
" _»
‘ pe r p etrated
' bv an 3,‘;
“9""'¢"¢h‘3d 3¢~'ld°"1i‘3 5"°bb"Y-" bu! d°t~'$
"01 ilddl'¢§$ ll"-'
~
‘J |
~
‘ ~;|'\ Q;' __0_p§;' '
t\' {.55} ,,»j|/__‘,
~ ~ , ;_ '
obvious problem of structuralists Zedd seems to believe that the only
producing apolitical. pur- objection to the extreme
portedly transcendental or mystical art images produced by the Cinema
legitimized by vinue of of Transgression is the
‘pure' form. Indeed. this same criticism queasy. moralistic one. taking offense
can be levelled at the to the form itself. What
Cinema of Transgression; its repetitive rml/_i' offends is the irresponsible
and purely gesttiral use of these images, the
images of violence and sexual perversity assumption that tlie_v represent.
intrinsically and out of eon»
ls‘th'islti become as meaning-

”
text. 1| politically cogent statement.
es in
- eir so a on as tb epa tt erns an gri
so ." ru i ra is d'd fstctufm As with pornography. the
*
07
. images
' o f sexual l transgression
i
sexual acts should not be condemned
or mere l yexp ict . ui i sin u it e
>

in themselves; btit
l"t iltd
neither. in themselves. do they constitutean

gmi“
effecti\'el_\ radical
stance. lt is the s P ecilic context within
which they are placed
that determines their precise meaning.
Pornography can be
reaction.ir\ or pl’Ugl'L\§l\L one has onl\
to
exploitativtness of certain gay pornography loolt .ii the non-
or personal por-
nography produced outside the limitations
orn indusin
ofthe commercial
p proxiniity ("ineniii ol'Tr:insgressiiin to ll/J/t"l'I/(III
"
.
" "' l’\l
" “' "‘ " ' ""“ ""' "" “"' ' “' "" uh/z pornography is all too apparent
Riglil Sitlc Q/'!lI,i' Brain. starring in Rlthdfd Kern s 7711'
A

’
,_ .. no NI\ 1..-it». the Queen of Transgression
herscll. Lydia Lunch. who
- -

ll i- i l .-» IN i,
appears ad nauseam both in .
l
lms and eachofthelivc UFH's the
")\ ll tA’ti‘\ publishedthus far. The lm is
I
of some interest formally. the black
in - 1- -~~ l.unch's disturbing music reminiscent and white images and
. .., .. - 1---. l ofMa_\-a Deren (iigain.
~ an allinity with the established
~' it avant-garde which the move-
H —
ment spurns]. Hut the effect
I ‘i W-"M of the images, described in the
r i . ..
=
UFB as “the psycho-sexual fantasies
. .
mt ll VI V »
ll girl"'. including Lunch givinglim of ti sexually insane

\
l,iY‘1l
I
A

*' FoetuslofScraping Foetus

Mu '—, . in =~ '- ~ uffthe Wheella blowjob and being
*1" '" W ‘ ~ (ofBlack Flag), isinsepiirable
battered by Henry Rollins
. .. 7.... /'54
""" “- ‘tr ""*- from pornographythat exploits
women.despitetheattemptaitlegitimizationunderthe
rl
. ivy
'
-
‘"‘ -»
> =
.
‘ ~' label or the. strategy
of the. “art lilm .
banner
.3-' “Y """' " of .
breaking taboos.
if '--7 -T!- >'='"= t=“*"» *==*
Misogynisticimagesofwomen
sive towards men which
beingdegraded byandsubmis-
‘*"‘ “ ” ‘
“*" ’ ‘““ “ “" ""“""‘“ saturate virtually all heterosexual
p<>rnogmnh_v ineseapably
’ ‘ "‘ " “ “"‘ "“’ " “ "“ inform the reading of this kind or
.iii.>1ii>.i . ‘
wwrlivulated rtiaterial.Onthcuppusiteextrcme.nthereoniri-
. i
M
.
. .
"‘ ., .
butions by Ltinch. such asa comic
, ,-....~= iM|\Yl.;7' . ., . . ""' " '* " "- strip in UFB N5 in which the
t, ;.,. . female protagonist takes a
.. - >\ . .-. ti .- man's head tip her ass and subse-
quently eats him for dinner.
are typical of the Movement‘s
unconscious fixation on the
stereotypical castrating female

Spring 86 CineAction' 29
 (also apparent in Kern's Mtvtlttttwn Love Suicides and Scott edge. The fanzine format of the UFB is taken directly from
B.‘s Ms! Rites), a common Camp cliché, and revulsion with Punk, the home-made fan magazine fortnat for Punk groups
natural bodily functions. Lunch has done better work for the c0n5i5ting ofinterviews, reviews, pix,comics, and ironic mate-
Movemcnt. such as her music. performance. and text for rial reprinted from other publications, put out by any Punk
Zedd‘s own 17ie Wild World ofLydia Lunch, but with The Right who has something to say and access to a xerox machine. Like
Side nfM_l' Brain, she has unfortunately presented herself as Punk fanzines, the UFB reacts against the New American
the Madonna of the New York avant-gardc.“ Right/Moral Majority. but is as contemptuous of the estab-
The use Of h0m0S¢Xut\l$. trltnvtllilli. and transexuals in lished left. and can be characterized by a certain anarchistic,
the lms of the Cinema of Transgression is equally problc- anti-authoritarian ethos with a vague leftist slant, and a con-
matic. typical of a certain tendency of the avant—gardc tn use centration on the ironies and paradoxes of dominant culture. '°
such extreme characters out of pure formal interest, as in Zedd also borrows the Punk strategy of using pseudonyms to
Camp. or merely to offend or provoke. Taking an example subvert the cult of the pcrsonality.a gesture which is lost, like
from outside the Movement. the uncontextualized transvest- must of his other Punk stances, by his an star posturing and
ites of Ross McLaren's Baby Green, minutely explored East Village egomania.
through close-ups and the slow motion camera, are perhaps As a reaction against an article published in the Village
meant to be disruptive of gender roles. but the emphasis on Vain‘ by C. Carr". which describes the lms of Ela Troyano
form and technique diffuses the radical gesture. Placed in (Bubble Pt-aplc, Tomii of the Dz-proved) as instances of the
isolated subjectivity. these images remain marginal, freakish. Cinema of Transgression. Zedd has produced in UFB U5 a
detached from any social or political reality. The mainstream diatribe against the two women which underlines the worst
easily subsumcs this kind olstrategy as the carnivalesque-—the aspects of his position. Firstly. by refusing to include Troya-
release of a controlled amount of radical energy in order to nt1‘5 lm; as part of the Cinema of Transgression, Zcdd is
ensure the continued existence of the status quo. The Camp attempting to conne and control a historical movement,
treatment of sexual deviance. or its association with violence failing to acknowledge that other lm-makers may be working
and hysteria. evident in Kern's Manhattan Love Suicides or. alongthc same lines owing to similarhistorical and ideological
outside the Movement proper, Mark Rappaport‘s Chain Let- determinants. As I argued initially, the use of the polemical,

i
ters, does little to change dominant attitudes towards gender olTensivc gesture can be traced to such movements as Surreal-

'
transgrcssion.and worse, serves to substantiate cliches used to ism (what is Bunuel's Un Cliien Andalnu if not transgressive
account for and contain these characters.

may 5|
| . m ,
, ,' ’ '_
. I_Iy, ,$,0
" 1-"
| "Mung"; cinema?) or to the specic inuences of New York lm-
makers (the lms of Scott and Beth Bette Gordon, Jim
Jarmusch, Mark Rappaport, etc. anticipate or run parallel to
J \ °‘
‘;‘MY IAlh‘|'-"2'
gun“ '"°"
‘K Futrxsiil
ttzzmsv tustttttl
5
/jf 6 » S‘t . ‘
I-WI SHIGIDES."
\\\ '32:“ti»""“ Mt-Ir!
”"‘" Au _“‘
those of Kem.Zedd. DeLanda,ctal);ifZedd coinedaterrrl for
the movement, it is not therefore his exclusive invention or
, .
property. Secondly, Zedds sexist (and racist) comments
.

6:t§L'r.u an waaq
"' '""“"'
"'5"
t-vw\ wiv
I/ ‘

»
3

\\ *\(l'°'-“" ~
must: :3 ‘-mt
/bur-\II>1\\|RL\-will
-' 7 "-‘"3
c-‘niergi: asclearly in his editorial as their unconscious_inserip-
tton in his and lellow Transgressors lms, sufficiently, l
would venture ' to dismiss the entire Movement
sound: /”{ r
, '4
‘ .
""""‘a,;‘,;"w " . . . '
The Cinema of Transgrcssion, in presenting transgressive
_
.

§,';‘L':,‘t-i'¢t ms
5;-:a$_'_""‘
-,,,-,u,,,/
%‘;#l.‘,,'{‘¢
" ‘ 3:

5
'
gI‘
“ts

.
. i
l
;
t

‘
'

~
t
'\, ll
__¢/'

‘g
sell

-if
1

lib]!
‘t

*g
,
'
he‘
it_'f1\\f:\;'§'-
vtfdnflu-u-M

'
"PI"
‘.5; am
'
'

gt.-I
characters—homosexuals, transvestites, anists, criminals—
whoare self-absorbed and self-destructive,maybegearedtoa
particular audience that recognizes these stereotypes. but
there must be a responsibility attached to creating any image
in a public forum. Scott B.'s Last Rites, for example,‘1, based
;;';“_"}_§'.': ,""u“,‘;”:,q tm an _, ' > -. ‘gg on the Grandma Bareld case. is typical of the Movement's
\J60ON'--" Rh‘ Rm, I-Y-Put’ " "nth t'.'tl_>f;t-I use of characters and events that are in themselves absurd,
H
0
aw only .i|l”"',
IZAYAIE-F A I _
1
.
NIYMIAI fvtl
I 1'I\lT\l
time‘
descriptive of the schizophrenia of American culture. The
t . .
adped trwist of the transéressiisl scxualnatio? ofrthts rgatirial
4 I

nntlv ii-it -ecu u.y.¢. " tint. rrn-. on y ac ievcs, as critic ret arcus says o ce atn a ais
’ ' e '“i-l:t’:'iiar strate B ies, . . a discontinuity that b
Y vinuc of its noise is
Although Zcdd insist; mm ‘hc (‘gncmu of Tfanggfgggio is easily grasped and as easily deected. . ."."'1e lmrintercuts
unique in history and owes nothing to the traditional avant- 1! ¢°l1f¢§5i0l'l3|i1CC°l1m 0“! W°"\?" 0" dcanl '°Wl3"""8°"‘"

garde, the movement is most denitely an East Village phe- crimti difilly I0 ll"! wmef Wllh 3 "’a¢k"\B 5h°l °r ‘he "5
nomenon, and symptomatic of the exhaustion of the New kettle, tea, poison. and nally the dd husbands Whm 5|"
york an scene‘ |n Such an ,;m,m,nm¢m_ in which at-1 ha; fucks at the cnd.Theinteresting idea ofinverting necrophilia,
bccorne unmm,m|,|y prM|eg¢d_ in which thc ,_-xp;tn,eitm_ usually designated as the ultimate instance offemale passivity,
acceleration,and exhaustion ofart form has out-paced radical ht?" ¢mP0W¢F5 ll"? W°m"- bl" °"|Y "1 ll" "ll"
§°"l¢Xl °r
content.theappealto transgression is lost.1he Movementhas Psychosis. augmented by the actor's campily bacl perfor-
produced nothing that has not been done before by Warhol, mance. This extreme and "noisy" gesture becomes, in effect,
P;tu|Mot-ri§ey,oi-Jack Smiih;Zeddevenemulatesthe Warhol indistinguishable from the lVationaI knqitirefs sensational
an Sm, pus".-m'gmh,;|-ing gmupics and aw|ym5(Z¢dd.h¢ad5) treatment of the same material. The nal mantra-like line of
consisting of. according to Zn, “Cute teen-age lm students the film. “in my mind l ltve forever". could be the Cinema of
and alTection-starvedtransvestites. . .noticcable by theirdis- Tfansgrciivn ttlh¢m- Fil'l$ $U¢|1 35 l-Tl RIIIP-R Th? Rlhl/"
tinctivc trademarks of scowling faces and skin tattoed with 5"!!!’ 11/ M)’ Btin. and Manhattan Love Suiride:‘iIldU|8=m|Y
bmism bitemat-k§_ and razor cuts sometimes bearing the emphasize phenomenological perception and pnvilege utter
name Zedd and other obscene slogans"." This kind of pcr- 5"b.l¢9ll"llY l" 5\1¢h 3 W3)’ ma‘ 5"8$°5l5 ‘he M°V§'P°"l'5
sonal, olTensivc gesture is. again, borrowed from the Punk i!PF"h)'3"d ¢"""l“'llhlh°id" °f¢"¢°""$3"¥ T"|P°||"°3|°|'
movement, another inuence that Zedd does not acknowl- social change. lt is. ultimately. empty noise.

30 CineAction! Spring ‘B6

7
4 This account ol the Punk incorporation ol Nazi imagery does not account
loi every instance ol the gesture. but rathert is meant as an attempt at
reading the movement in general tn suppon nl this. punks such as
Johnny Rotten ol the Sex Pistols. when approached by the National
From to support their lasctstic platlorm, ietected the ollei to the extent
ol discontinuing their practice ol wearing swastikas

5 Susan Sontag Notes on Camp" A Susan Sontag Reader, New York.

Vintage Press 1983. p tl6

6 JCGWLUC Comolli and Jean Naiboni "Cinemal Ideology/Criticism“.

Movies and Methods, ed Bill NlCl\Dl5‘ Berkeley Univeisityol Calilomia
Piess.1976 p 26

7 The Urrdeiginund Film Bulletin tr-1, p 48

B Kern's "carrt you take a |oke" deleiise ol the lilni in question is a lurther
instance ol not taking responsibility lot the images he has produced

9 Zal

ll) Two local rloioriloi lanlines Hide and Dr Sriiilh are much more
politically articulate than the average ‘zine. particularly concerning gay
and lentiiiist issues

lt C Cari Noteslioniundetground The Village Voice.Vol XXX.no 50.

Dec 10‘ 1985

‘I2 this lS a lilni that Zedd might not recognize as pail ul ‘his’
AQBII1‘
movement but which obviously comes out ol the same sensibility

13 Greil Marcus "The Cowboy Philosopher" Airloium Vnl XXXIV no 7,

March. 1986. p 91

Zedd flattering himself in UFB F

NOIBS
t lhave used the temi ‘sensibility rather than ‘rnovemenrparily to account
lot Camp Surrealism and Punk can be delined as art movements (the
M
lonnei tn painting and cinema the latter in l'U5lCl and Punk as a
political movement. although rnoventent" perhaps implies an DYQBHIZEY
tron arid direction which these phenomena lack Camp is less a movement
than a particular way ol looking at art. a taste it appropriates art
movements retroactively alter they have been isolated and distanced by
history (Art Deco and classical Hollywood cinema are typical exam-
ples ) The term ‘sensibility’ also evokes. as Sontag phrases it, “the realm
W E ST
ol purely subtecttve prelerences mainly sensual that have not been
brought under the sovereignty ol reason“ (“Notes on Camp". A Susan
Sontag Reader, Vintage Ptess, 1983 p 106) a oeltntton which accom-
modates the emphasis on pure gesture violence. and sexual excess l|'l
Surrealism, Camp, and Punk. and their contempt lor rational analysis

2 A punk would be less likely to use the terirt ‘lashion owing to its
connotation ol bourgeois commodilication non~punks are quick to point
out how much time and apparent pride punks invest in their appearance,
which speaks ol lashion over utilitarian dress The idea ol uniloim
perhaps expresses the attitude more accurately

3. The unlortunate existence ol truly lascist-c neo>Nazi elements within

the Punk movement such as the National Front iii Britain unavoidably
allects the reading ol this kind ol gesture

We carry a wide
variety of film theory.

Spring ‘86 Cine/Kction! 3|

 Notes for the Exploration
of Hermosillo
.<:
-
=;-\,M
, .
‘

;.:.
‘*4,
" I?
_,
—-;’."'»~¢"'~¢¢“a\1
_

~
*-4 ,‘,_;,§..
§1‘%4§,V
1‘<
., ‘
_
5
w;;~~~,€
;;q_[_.
~f Hi¢"~.Z‘
, §
.,
_x

‘yolk r

.,‘ @-

\ '5
:&¢. , F, Ha’ x
- Q- #1

Matinee: the hold-up.

32 Cine/Action! Spring '86

—
 by Rob“-1 w°°d house. Anyone looking to the lms for interest me in a tour ofthe local market.
embodiments of avant-garde practice He told me subsequently that his
discovered Jaime Humberto will look in vain. The relationship to intention had been to make the entire
Herm0sillo—the man and his Hollywood is constant, though at the lmin sequence-shots, each scene lmed
fi|ms—at a recent film feglivl same time ambivalent and idiosyncratic. without a cut (there would have been
organized and generously hosted by the Hermosillo‘s allegiances are to main- about l5). The realization of this was
UniversityofGuadalajara. Hermosillo is stream directors and popular genres; the defeated by the low budget, short
clearly an important gure in ct)ntem- way in which those allegiances are real- shooting-schedule, and the human falli-
porary Mexican cinema, crucially ized is invariably off-centre, personal, bility ofthe two splendid actresses. The
because his lms are often very good,but and highly inventive. formal project was, however, evident
also because of what is happening The lms demonstrate repeatedly a fromthc rst sccne.asequence-shot last-
around him: his creativity appears to thesis that has underlain several articles ing about seven minutes, and, alerted by
have becomeacatalyst for the creativity in cine/QCTION/: that progressive and this. l attempted to count the shots. l
ofothers, and there has formed around radical work can be produced within made the total 43 (some of which are
him a strikingly harmonious and enthu- mainstream cinematic forms, given pro- brief cutaways to close-ups of one or
siastic group, lm-makers and critics. pitiouscircumstances. Such circumstan- other of the actresses. to 'cover‘ a
male and female, straight and gay, ces (economic, social. ideological) today moment when strict temporal continuity
amounting to the kind ofcreative work- barely exist in Hollywood, but they collapsed and the scene couldn't be
shop out ofwhich very interesting things appear to ourish in Mexico (or at least reshot in its entirety); l may have missed
can be expected to develop. The festival in Guadalajara, where Hcnnosillo now one or two cuts because despite my
was built around a Hermosillo retro- makes his lms)—to ourish. that is. incomprehension of the dialogue, the
spective: I was able to see eight of his within and despite material constraints narrative became quite engrossing. The
lms within ve days, an unusual oppor- (sometimes palpably apparent) of adoption ofthe sequence-shot as formal
tunity to begin to come to grips with a budget and shooting-schedule: since principle (there remain perhaps ve
complex and (to me) hitherto unknown I971. Hermosillo has been able to make single-take scenes in the lm, includinga
body of work. l must stress ‘begin.‘ l l2 feature lms. What is most imme- scene in a supermarket of considerable
don't as a rule write about a lm unless l diately striking about the eight l saw is virtuosity)enables Hermosillo to explore
have seen it at least three times(prefera- their combination of unity and variety. systematically all the possibilities of
bly six); in this case l saw the lms only They express a coherent attitude, an movement and reframing within the
once each, and half ofthem were inno- underlyingnucleusofthematicconcems; shot: panning, tracking, zooming; the
cent of subtitles (l have no Spanish). they imply an awareness of political. rangefrom long-shot toclose-up. Yet the
What follows. then. must be regarded as feminist and gay issues without ever camera movements are never fussy or
the most supercial and provisional of beingdirectly‘about‘them;withthe pos- there for their own sake. There is no
overviews, instantly disposable when the sible panial exception ofl.es/lparienciax question of an autonomous formal sys-
lms become accessible outside Mexico Enganan/Deceptive Appearances. they tem of the kind so assiduously sought
(as surely they will). are not ‘thesis' lmsand are neverdidac- after by Noel Burch: the reframings,
tic. At the same time, they encompass a changes of distance, decision as to
he editors of this issue have remarkable range of subjects, genres, whetherone characteror both are in the
assured me that the term ‘alter- tone and formal method. If none is a frame. etc., are always at the service of
native pn|ctices'canbeinterpreted masterpiece, none is without interest. the dramatic development.
loosely. Its strict sense would, l take it, and the best are very good indeed. The characters are a wealthy middle-
refer to attempts to construct cinematic
aged Woman and her Servant; the plot
languagesinoppositiontothcdominant f l begin with (‘onf|'tlt-neias/ concerns the attempts by the former
language(centred on Hollywood). lnthe Can/id:-nres (I982). it is because it (afraid of growing old and losing her
context of world cinema. Hermosillo‘s marks one pole of Hermosillo‘s beauty) to live vicariously through the
work scarcely constitutes an alternative range, being the closest of the eight to latter. whom she seeks to dominate and
practice; it does. toadegree_ in the con- anything that could be termed 'experi- manipulate, the lm moving steadily
text of Mexican cinema. The lms have mental‘ cinema. My grasp of it was at towards the servant's rebellion and
been nanced and produced independ- best partial. The French-subtitled print departure. There are clearcnough echoes
ently, and for the most pan have not we were promised failed to materialize; ofdistinguished literary sources(Strind-
received wide distribution or popular aside from a few extras in the super- berg's ThcStronger,Genet‘s TheMaid.r),
acclaim. The problem here seems prim- market scene, there are only two charac- but also, characteristically, of the melo-
arily that of the Mexican distribution ters.andthelmconsistsentirelyoftheir drama, in which the mistress/servant
system,which offerslittle space for inde- conversations. Invoking the ‘power of relationship has so often played, in var-
pendent products: most of Hermosillo‘s positive thinking.‘ l decided to concen- ious forms, a signicant role (Minnelli's
lmsare readily accessible, and the festi- trate on the lm's formal aspects; though Madame Bovary. 7711- Reckless Moment.
val audience's response was markedly concentration was twice interrupted by Madame dc . . ., Beyond the Forest).
enthusiastic, the most recent lm greeted Hermosillo himself, who, worried that I Hermosillo brings the relationship from
withave minute ovation fromapacked must be bored to distraction, tried to the margin of the lms to the centre,

Spring '86 CineAction! 33

 action and the audience. playing contin-
uously on a tension between distance
and involvement. One of the sequence-
shots. a restaurant scene occurring about
two-thirds of the way through the lm.
\
D
can stand as exemplary. At the outset of
I
€ ' the narrative Bcrenice. motivated by
sexual repression. frustration and desire
in roughly equal measures. determines to
possess the handsome Rodrigo. The res-
taurant scene occurs at the point where
they are at last negotiating a love alTair
(with desire and resistance. in different
forms, on both sides). They arrive in the
entrance and move across the restaurant
in the foreground of the image. the
camera tracking their progress. But the
restaurant is full; they have to go to the
back to wait for a table. The camera.
however. now becomes static. leaving
...(‘ them to move into long-sltot while the
foreground is occupied by a table at
which two young men are nishing their
meal. The soundtrack continues to give
us the dialogue of Berenicc and Rodrigo;
t the young men. though much closer to us
and engaged in continuous conversation.
are inaudible. The expected cut to an
intimate two-shot of the prospective lov-

l
ers is rigorously with-held. They then
move forward to the mid-ground of the
shot to hover conspicuously over the
young men's table. Finally the young
I» men leave; the couple sit down. regaining
the foreground of the image; but the
camera remains static throughout their
lengthy duologue. resolutely resisting the
~: ‘pull' of the standard shot/reverse-shot
Q gure that would ‘suture‘ us into the
action. Throughout the shot Hennosillo
Q plays on the spectators‘ tunconscious7)
,\ '_ ‘i
expectations oi the ways tn which dta-
Hermosillo directing DOUG Herlinda y su Hi/'0. logue sequences are traditionally shot;
the varying distance (determined more
exploring all its possible permutations viously would have remained lixed on by lhe m<W¢m¢nl5 Oflhe vlof than Of
from supportiveness through unhealthy the mistress. now follows the movements lb! d¢lilCh¢d- ilimvil imP=l§§i\'¢ ¢11l'l1¢l'-
wmptictty to own amg0nt§m_1‘h¢|3tm Qt the _<¢mmt_ and by the refusal to cut) offsets the ten-
thereby explores issues of gender. class (‘alt/itlt'm't'.t'carries to its extreme what dency 1° idenlii-|Ci"i°" imP|i¢ii i" ‘he
and age tltrough the examination of a isin fact a constant feature of Hermosil- $\I¢"iil'i0~
single relationship. l think. although lo's work. the fondness for the long take wilh "5 mmmilml I0 1|“? lhmali
both women are Mexican.one might add with multiple refrantings (if the art of ofthe woman's melodrama. its adoption
ntist'-on<.m‘nt-has.underthe inuence of Oi dillwiillivlt techniques. and b0V¢
race: the mistress is blonde and fair-
complesioned_ the servant black-haired T\’-style one shot/one idea shooting. all 1|" in iii l40"d"'155 [QT ‘/"Y “Viking 311d
and dark-skinned: one thinks at times or but died in Hollywood. it is being resur- complex mirror-shots. the lm reminded
the Bette Davis/Donna Drake relation- reeled in Mexico. and without the least "W=1 Bfll deal Of Sirkl Certain other
ship in B¢'_|'()mI the Fort-yr, sense of pretension or self- aspects. particularly the character Of
consciousness). One sees this clearly in B¢l'¢"i¢'='$ 80‘-i'"°lh¢l'-3" °PP|'¢$5i\’¢ and
The integration of narrative and for-
mal system becomes readily apparent la Paxiun .t't'_L'llII Iivrt'nit't'/77|r' Prnxtinn grasping Old Klilliiliiil Wh relentlessly
towards the end of the lilm. The moment armrtling In !1t'r¢~rti¢'t'. an earlier lm and C°nd"¢l§ 1| m°"°Y'i¢"<-“"8 b"5i"955 "9""
when the servant at last begins to assert one ofHermosillo's best ( I976). Here the h¢l' Sikbed. evoke Blmtll. C0mmOn I0
herself against her mistress is marked sequence-slmt is the em-‘ptinn rather Bl1""=|=l"dlh¢ "1°|<>4\'*""=*i§\h'=lh¢"1=
also as the point where. for the rst time than the rule ll was aware of only two vTY=P"=§§iv/Trutfilliv '=\’"Pli"Bi" "0-
really extended examples. i.e. complete |=t1C¢ and d¢$lf\1L‘li0"- “W iii"! i5 3 sig-
in the lm, In-r movements rather than
the mistress‘s determine the movements scenes lslingftve minutes or more).hut "icmll 1\ddili°" ‘O lh= “"1\|°E"¢ 0"
the function of the long take in Hermo- Works associating wumm Wilh FIE. 0"
of the camera: the mistress sits writing.
the maid paces backwards and forwards sillo‘s work becomes clear: the denition which i WW1’! in fl‘/|P4CTl0N~' 31 ii WE‘
behind her, and the came-m_ which pm. ofa very precise relationship between the i"5 Wilh 3 "i8h""i"° °r ‘ha ii" i" which

34 CineAction! $prlng‘86
Bgrgniggie |m§b;md pqyj-|¢d (and whit-|1 giant truck. he helps the _\'otinger ho_\' tn the _\‘UllgL‘l' hoy as his ‘private secre-
perhaps she started). and ends with her -‘l"“ 1l“'1l_\'- itiry.‘ lt is tiroiind this point that sugges-
covering her godniotlier in credii~notes So lar. everytliiiig set-ins see-iire~tir lion-s begin to aicruniulale that the two
and pzirtillin and \\'il|i(ll1[1 away from the tl;in_eerotisotil_\ tothe point permitted h_\ ftitllllillillll tlilnll "‘\'"lb'"’-* "Tl-' |"\'°Y>—
blaring liotise,tinini;ige oftlesperaite and the genre. to titillate its bellire thL- pm. the logical implieatioii that the Holly-
terrihle .sell'-liberation. CtillCL‘l\’C(i resoltition. lhe triick is the" tuiod l"l\ldLi_\'-ll‘|n\'iL' has consistently
l have the impression that .\1uIiIiet' held tip and taken ovei by it gang til l'l‘\It1dill‘s"-1'-‘?*1'T) 1" d\‘")'< /"""""’l' ‘W’
(I976), another of llerniosilltfs best ing‘\\]p|_‘[\_'|][ n\hht_*rs_ \t 11" nu-ti it tr, tipptireiitly not the rst Hermosillo lm
lms. is shot more eonventionally. but I eoneetil the smaller \;in in which tlie\ zihotit ti g:i_\ relationship tind neither is it
may be wrong: it is \'er_\' dil'l'ietilt to hold will escape with the loot alter ti rohher)-: 111*‘ \41>l~ will" l-‘ “rikinll i‘"\’\‘ i-* "W ""31
togetherzillaspects oliti l'i|ni on one \'iew- the tlevelopnient. treated llllllélii) us lack of l'tts_s or self-cotiseiotistiess with
5718- and I h¢¢1l"1¢ W lill-\k‘iI\€lls'L1 h)‘ lhs‘ eotited_\‘. seetits at rst sight siinp|_\ to \\hich the theme is treated: there is no
progress of the l1tllT£lll\‘C that my atteii- i|-|du1gL-l|,gh“>.\-|“nm\iu\_~‘-ht)m|nF_ tlraniatie tnoinent o|' reveltitioii. the fact
tion to formal elements lapsed. lt olTers hidden amongst the fitrtiitttre. knows i‘ §il"P|) il""\\"~'l1 I" s'm1'Ytlt-‘- 1|-\ \""1s'-
notable examples of another frequent ntithiiigat rst o|'\\‘li;it is happening‘ hut thing perleetl) nzitiiral that need surprise
characteristic of llermosillo's tuirk. the the older tititoni;itic;i|l_\ falls iii \\lli\ the I1" ""s'- "WK"-’ h"""‘>'=X\"']")' ""\"~‘Y
abrupt shil‘t.within what tippetirs to hezi rohhers. participating in the rohht-r_\ its heeomes an 'isstie,‘ and the lm sees no
stahlegenerictrtimework_olttineorn;ir- tin accomplice. The rohher) itsell te need to adopt ti pro-gay tor anti-g;i_\'l
rative moventeiii:tileatttretlitithringsto again plti_\ed its eoiiiet.l_\'. hut suddenly -\li"\l‘\'- "Y l" l'""_iL‘fl P">ili\"~‘ ("Y "6111!-
mind certain early lilms of the French iiititltilates iiitti ti scene til'\'iolent death: \i\I-‘l iI1t1lL!'-'* "|' l11l)'"\'-“I fl" ""“'~ ll i~‘
New Waive. but which fl1il)'i\ll\‘Ci|CUt11- the rohhers sire no“ killers. From thttt tretttetl tisjitst part ofthe iiatttral tirdertif
mon source iii Renoir. tinotlier of ller- point. nothing is eletir|_\ prediettihleziiitl. lhi"tl*- -HR‘ l_"\"'“".\ "'|""""‘h'P
mosilltfs fzivorite directors, clinging to our generic e.\peet:itions_ \\L' hL‘l\\'L"~'" l|1L' l\\'" "W" "ml lhv W" b")'>
The lm opens somewhat in the are repe;itcdl_\ cast adrilt. From kids‘ develops iittfillf P1"l¢F"> "ll ,It~'l1|\\\ts_\.
manner of ll Disney-type kids‘ action action movie the liltn shifts into thy cotiimitiiieiitandbetrayal;tlietoneshilts
movie. though without a trace ol'ciite- mtile-hiidd_\ road nio\ie siih-genre ti Iii |"\'"~'4\*|"E1.\' "‘“'""|‘ 11"‘ ""1216. \\‘|1i1v
ncss or sentimentality. Two little boys, 'I7iumlt'i-Imll llllll Iiehi/iiul: tut» tlttlt-rt-nt still retaining elements ol’ L"lll‘l\L'ki}. The
close friends. repeatedly plti_\ tritant but not iieecssaril) iiicomptitihle sctsol s‘|""1l\—1l K"-*4!-*lT\'\|-* 41ll\'"\P| I" mh 1|
from school to zittentl nititinees at the eoiiventitm, begin to inter;tet, ‘Hm L~hj|t1. ehiirch that results in the death of hoth
local mtivie liouse.\\'hich feed their Iong- ren hecoiiie increasingly coinniittetl to men. tlisL'"i§L'd 11> l'"i\‘>l-*—i\ ¥1'PP\‘\| h.\'
ing for excitement; the older siipplies the rohherstitholia\'e.;i|'ter;ill.ptirtiall) lhs‘ '~'"\“"Bi 1|" ¢hi|*|T"'l 1'" “'°|"‘""L'*|
lurid m_\‘lh$ 01' Miw Cit)’. where one resisted the process ti|' socialization home as heroes. and the younger
can relish the daily spectacle of batik wliich the htl_\\i11l\L‘lltil)ClL'\\I“[\|UlCLi]. L'\PfL'-\n'\ |1I\ Coltlitlllig Ctttttllltvl l\I
robberies and bloody corpses in the 'l1iis contniitnieiit trtinscends htllh the Ills‘ I114!" ht! 1\‘\'L‘d h_\ R‘l'\I\it1g!llt PiIl'li¢I-
streets. When he gets ti chance to go there \ iolent tletitli o|'the tlitlicr and the hl’L‘llis- Pills‘ ill ills‘ L's‘|\-‘h"IlIt>I1>-
with his father to deliver fttriiittire in at upotitlie g;|ng;one gang nietiiheratlopts 'l"he lilin that curries the principle oI'

La Pasion segun Berenice: Martha Navarro and Pedro Armendariz Jr.

Spring '86 CineAction! 35

 §"~§“"

Maria de mi Corazon: publicizing the magic act.

lhc shifl of tuttc to tt\ c\trctt1r:—htt\tng itttmv:n\c cullcclttrtt of di.~ctmttuctct] tattnvd tn the cntl \\tth :1 |t:trr:ttt\c logic
upun it its cnttrc \tructuru—i~,\lurmtIt- hlcntk-r.~_ mixcr\ and nthcr gtttlgt-t\. thztt mt-rrttlt-~ thrtthh zthuut ‘rcztl hll-‘
mi ('vru:nn/.1IuI'm "I mt //HIV! (1979), \\'hcn.\hu .~tth~cqttcnt|)'rc;tl|1c~th;tt ht-i.~ p|;n1~|h|ltt_\. 'I1tu clIcCl |~ lo lttrcc tt
Accurdtttg tn llut|t1n\tl|t>. thc ~hil't tn ;tth|cf.~l1c pcr.\t|;tdt'.\httn tu rt-I'urm;|nt| rt-cumitlt-r.|ttutt nl thu l'tr~t h;t|l' and of
tunc \\;t~ II\\PH'C\| h\ :1 hunk cttllctl ‘l:l |u|n ltcr tn hcr |n;tg|cittn'~ ttct. 11tt:_\ the cuttplt-'~'pcrlcct' tt-|:|ttt\|t~htp.;| hwc
Cinu dc llttcltcuckf tn \\htch thc atttthur rutltscutur thctr luv: for catch uthcr and lhttt. rcmtttntngztt thc It-\cl ul plt|_\.nc\'ur
ttrgttu thztt lt|nt1;|ttt<:nl;tl tn ||tlcl\ct>ck'\ tlctt-lnp ;| wcnttttgl) td_\lhc c\i\tcncc; 1| pcttctrtttt-<1 tn ;tn_\ dccp trttxt tvr
work i~ thc wttw utlhc pn-c;|ri<\t|~ttc_~\ uf n:lt|t|utt~htp u|'cqttt|l|t_\ ttnd pcrll-ct ntttl- u|tth:r\t.tntltttg.
cu-r_\'tl1|ttg ttntl thc crttpltun nl the n:|l|t_\. :| catrccr in which tutrlt and pl;t_\ [-"y||1<yr(t\h\lt\\]\]) Hltn'|lCnL*k|;|t1 |_\ I;'I
ttttprt-dtcttthlc .\Iurm cnttch th|~ tn tt.~ hucntttu \|rtt|;tll_\ ~_\nun_\'mutt>. ()nu \cl- (kn-ttzlm tlu lu \'~tnt~ Hm Ilmrl 1|/‘Ila’
ct.-ntml t‘ttu|t\s'ttt.<vt\ \\ htrlttht-xtltult-l'|It1t tlu hztck u\tttl'nrt;thl) tn cn|u_v “hut .\n_'In t 1‘)-Ur tl I1’tvt-uttv rcprcwtttctl thc
hinges. The l'|t'~t hull‘ t~ prctlu|nin;|ntl_\ ;tppt';|r\ tu he tt rclttxcd. .~t>tnc\\h;tt lcltcttuth tncctttttl nl Bttnttcl and Strlt.
light and pl;t_\lttl.;t|tnt>\t \\ht|n~tc:tl. Wu tttctvmt-qttctttiatl.ttmlctnattultttgcnt¢r- th|~ tntght hc wt-n ;t~ the ntccttng of
watch :1 mun. Hector (Huutnr Bttltllhl, tztintncntt It \\t\tt|dhtttI1I1tit'lngi\'c;t\\;t) Bunnvl and llttgltt-t>t~L;_||tm|t;lt t1 |'|'|t1\[
onc of the .\l;tr\ of .\Iultnt'v) pcrform ;t theturn|ng»pt>int(|t‘~ crutttt ptt_\ that thv hc .ttlth-ti that Ht*r|ttu\|]lu'\ I'tlm~ tun:
httrglttry thcn cutttc hutnc tn nd Mttntt lm t:;|nnut hc tlcscrihcd without rc\'cttl— nt-\cr p.tr;t~tttt-;||_ th_|t Itc ~cctIl\ ;||\\tt_\~
(MartaRu_|u.thcscr\;ttttnt('11!)/itIt'I|t‘t‘\). tng thttt it hut t\nc_ \incc—l|n||kc tn 17lt' cutt~c|ntt~ nl hts tttth|cttct'\;|m| t|.\c.\thctn
hist'nrIt1crh»\'t-r_ in ht~ hcd:~ltulcl'th|tt1 Hlrtl\_ tut’ c.\:tmplc—tht'rc |~ ;th:~t»ltttv:|_\ tcr_\ |tltn\)m:r;tttc;tll_\ Herc ht: l:|kc\ tlptt
t'0r:|nnthcrtnt|n,\\lt<\lttt>ttt\wtiltudhur. nothing tn ~ttggc.\t lhztl lhc ltvnv will nttclcttaut'|litcltu\ck\thunt.tttc:tntlst)'-
When ht: tub hutt ~hc gut tn xhu rcpltcx rhttttgcl. Sufi-tcc tt tn \;t_\ that tht: \\|~h- tthscv
||~t|t- ]1|'w_'og'\_'t1p;|ltt\|\\j t't\tn;|nt|L'
that xhc |\ at ntztgtctatn. She in tttrn is tttllntctttt';|ttt;t>yot'thcrsth:tlftttrn~in sttt, ;t~ 1| _\t\ttt1t1 mun tn t|rt\m_u |n~tntc-
ptllctl h_\ the pccttl|tt|'tt|c~ nI'hi~ ;|p;trt- atnt;tttt'rnl'tn|ttt|tt'.\ into thc ntghttnttrcuf mt] l<v||u\\\;||td ~p|t-xntt at _\nttng \\nm.|n
mcnt: no fund tn the lrttlgc. hut an tl1c~t:cu|1d.;| nightmztru rc|cntIv:~sl_\ \t|~- who l':|\c|tt;|tc\ hun; thu mu tltruttghtntl

38 Cine/kctton! Spnng'86
 this part of the film of point-of- gender-roles, the possibility of sexual complete when her son is crippled in an
view/identication techniques; the des- reversal). A plot summary might suggest accident which the lm suggests he may
cent from a world ofsecure daily normal- Myra Breckinrizlge territory. but the lm have willed. The complementary nature
ity into a strange dark underworld is completely devoid of ‘camp.’ Amnr ofthe lms is cemented by the fact that
discovered to exist within it: sustained Libre, although it quite lacks Ri\'ette's the motherin each is played by the same
pursuit and suspense sequences. Here. formal innovativeness. might be retitled actress. Guadalupe del Toro—herself
the object of the man's obsession is a ‘Celine and Julie Go Screwing.' ll con- the mother ofanother promising young
deaf-mute. and the underworld into cems two very sexually active young director, Guillermo del Torn. repres-
. which she leads him (presided over by women (Julia and July, in fact) who try entetl in the festival by a delightful short
her blind fatlier-ligtire) is a mysterious to practice the ‘free love‘ ofthe title and hlaek comedy. Dona Lupe ( I985) .
organization of the mutilated. The lm nd it more complicated than_they bar- The impression Hf ‘ha Guadalajara
develops strong mythic o\'ertones:a var- gained for; there were no subtitles and I group as an extended ,-umi|y_ Wm‘ Hep
tant on Qrpheus and Eurydiee. but also became somewhat bemused. but the mosmo as ‘he mm‘ bcnign and mm_
on Oedipus. with the boy killing the point seems to be not the undesirability oppmssiw of fathom is conrmed by
Father and trying to escape with the but the difculty ofbreaking witha tra- Dam, Huh-,"1a_ in which many of "5
woman. only to discover that in order to ditional sexual ideology. members turn up in bit parts. giving the
keep her he mttst himself accept mutila- lm somethingoftlie relaxed feelingofa
tion and become the father he has killed. family party. lt can perhaps be claimed
There is ti remarkable. unnerving chase as the rst authentic gay comedy within
§“l"'~‘"'1‘-“'ilhll"‘ '¢""P|'~'~"‘l"||§’ ""k'~“~l- n his most recent lm. Dona Hz'r- commercial cinema (it just precedes Mr
P\"'5"'¢d lhmugh 11 '-l\'$'~'"¢d milrk M Iimia i' .i'u Hijn/Dona Herlinrla aml Beautiful Laumln'lIt'): 2| roniulr (as
"lBh| P)! kglesh "lPPl'¢5 Ch5"'lll"E 1-l°“'" her Son ( I984), Hermosillo takes tip opposed to a ‘social problem‘ movie like
‘M “'51”-‘ U" “'h_""l°d _l"_‘“_'d* iB""""l a theme of special signicance in Mexi- Making I.0\'('] centred on a gay relation-
mcc“ T9‘! B"‘“"_""k1ll1'"§l°||"W°db)/1' can culture. the close mother/son rela- ship (instead of on a 'straight' character
H|l¢hFt‘¢k'il" wmcdy/§u>P°"5°
‘/'"'.V tionship. The festival provided an ideal as in Par!/u'r.i") which is neither put down
$C°"°'" “f’h'c_hlh¢ ‘5°l'Pl°"'k#‘ fL‘ff'L!'~' in" companion-piece in the promising (as in Staircase) nor marginali7ed in
Pit"! Whlch '5 "W" £!"<-l\"l")/ '""|l"""*l debut-lm of a young director Arturo favor nfa heterosexualcouple (as in Vic-
by ll" P"|'$""Y*- Villusenor. who has worked on some of Inr. Victoria). Executed with unfailing
One of the most interesting aspects of Hermosillo‘s lms and playsa small role poise and condence, the lm is a
the lm (apart from its commendable in Dona Her/imla: In I-‘r'Iit‘i:IaiI do Ia comedy of bourgeois manners. at once
anti-sexist equalizing ofmaleand female Senora (‘vnxitelo/.S'4'nora (‘on.i"in'lo'.i affectionate and satirical. Dona Her-
nudity, still rare in mainstream cinema) Happiness (I985). The two lms com- linda. a widowed upper-class matriarch,
is the way in which Hermosillo effects a plement each other perfectly. Villa- has two ambitions, (l) that her son
reconciliation between Hitchcockian senor's economical half-hour movie Rodolfoshould be happy and (2)that he
point-of-view editing and his own fond- presenting the darker potentialities of get married and have a baby. The only
ness for the long take. At a number of the relationship in a concentrated study apparent obstacle is that he is in love
moments we are given what is clearly a of unhealthy mutual dependence in with a young male music student. The
shot fromthe young man'sviewpoint:he which the mother‘s happiness is only mother, undaunted, proceeds to nego-
then, however, enters the frame and the
camera eventually turns tn incorporate
him in the action, the looker becoming
the looked-at within a single shot. The
result is a new version of (or variation
on) the characteristic tension between
involvement and distance. Hermosillo
dislikes the lm. regardingit as one ofhis
mistakes. l'm not so sure. Certainly at
the end one is left somewhat at a loss: it is
not clear what it all amounts to, one
experiences a certain emptiness. Yet l
continue to nd it strange and haunting.
About I.e.t A/mri0ncia_i* Enganun/
Di=cep!ii'¢' App:-ararm-.i ( I978) and Amer
Libra/Free L0\'l'( l97tt) l have little at the
moment to say: they were shown
0
towards the end of the festival, l had Q;
reached saturation point and. lazily. -~g__‘__ "
didn't make notes. Both relate clearly
enough to Hermosillo‘s preoccupations.
The former struck me (I may be quite ' ii

wrong) as the coldest and most sche-

matic of the lms. the kind of thing an
’ ‘ i
I

- "11?
anist produces when he feels a need to
tell us more explicitly what his work is all . _ ' ' H >»

.
mm amhiglmyv the musorimss of
about (in this case, various aspects
l
. . . .
of AmorLibre. equalizing male and female nudity.

l Spring '86 CineAction! 37

l
tiate la) the incorporation of the lover With each lm Hermosillo sets himselfa accurate. or has any general validity. the
into the household land into her son's limited objective. a specic narrative motivation behind the desire to make
bedroomland (b)the son's marriage toa problem to be solved or situation to be lms becomes very dubious. ln Guada-
liberated. politicized woman with whom explored, with no pretensions to offer a lajara this love ofcinema seems. again, to
he has a longstanding affectionate rela- grandiose metaphysical statement emanate originally from Hermosillo
tionship. who wants to have his baby but (which often proves illusory anyway) in himself: his own work is saturated in the
also values her independence. Much of the manner ofa Rarhamoii or a Sl'\‘l’Ill/I sense of a mainstream cinematic tradi-
the humorarises from the fact that,while Seal. Though. as l have indicated. I nd tion that includes Hollywood but is by
everyone knows what is going ort. and individual lms excellent. the body of no means restricted toitthiseyes light up
knows that everyone else knows, the work—its range of subject. narrative. at any mention of Renoir, Rossellini,
proprieties mustberigorouslyobserved. tone, gcnre—is more impressive than Riveite. .),atraditiontlie lilmsat once
.

A characteristic moment (with a charac- any ofthe lms considered individually. further and creatively intenogate. Can-
teristically witty use of foreground and As for distribution, I see one obvious adian studentsseem partlyinhibited bya
background within the shot): the young problem that derives not from the lms" particularly sterile and stereotyped con-
men are working out together on an limitations but from their very specic cept of ‘originality‘ that actually makes
excercise-machine in the gardemthey get kind of interest. Despite the efforts of them afraid to explore freely the tradi-
carried away and begin to make passion- much serious lm criticism over the past tion of the art they propose to practice. in
ate love; Dona Herlinda entersthe back- JO years to undermine it, a fairly rigid case they are somehow contaminated by
ground ofthe image in long-shot bearing dichotomy still persists in otir lm cut» it; the predictable result is that, lacking
a tray of refreshments; the men's body ture between ‘art' and 'entert:iinment.' any critical perspective. they are com-
movements shift back to the rhythms of popular and ‘serioiisf a dichotomy that pletely at the mercy ofwhatever happens
exercise; the mother smiles approvingly Hermosillo‘s work implicitly rejects. to be fashionable, from contemporary
as she approaches. The lm moves Excluded from the general release circuit Hollywood sci- through rock videos to
towards a happy ending in which every- by theirforeign languagetnot to mention the latest trends in commercials. The
one is satised. Dona Herlinda has her their frequently disturbing idiosyncra- absent factors—sense of community,
household, her son and her grandchild. sies). the lms conspicuously lack those love of cinema—cannot be made to
the wife goes offto studyin Europe fora signiers of ‘art-icity‘ that art-hotise dis- order: it is doubtful that even the most
year, leaving the baby to be nurtured by tributors (not to mention most revievt- excellent lm school can construct them
the gay couple. No acknowledgement ers) generally require before they will by itself. though obviously it can con-
has been made by anyone that anything promote unknown directors. The tribute. They depend on a whole com-
in the least unusual has talten place. The obvious route for the lms to take is that plex ofsliiftingand only partly denable
lm, receiving its Guadalajara premiere, ofthe festival retrospective. I would add social influences. a fertile soil and a pro-
eompletely captivated a large mixed that the lms seem to me an admirable piiioiis climate.
audience (many had to be turned away model for the kind oflively independent Meanwhile, I sliallenntinue to look to
from the first screening). The presenta- work that ouglil to be possible in (‘aii- Guadalajara with interest. where such a
tion ofthe gay relationship is so totally ada. The question of why we have no climate seems already tn have evolved.
unapologetic that the spectator is really Hermosillo of our own (in tertiis of
left no option but to accept it. mainstream narrative cinema lean think J|m S"-‘uh
The above account seems to demand or "° Cam"-ll" wh" hi" l'""du¢'3d 1|
A
--
Al
Q
—

one further comparison. with La ("age

aux 1:0//‘._._-cgnuinty a ,_-um¢dy_ tenainty
‘5‘""Pi""bl° b"dY ‘ll “""'kl l§ ‘me ‘hill
plrobablycannotbeansweredinteriiisol
either individual talent or econoniies: it
H
"
>,t¢,t-.-
E1
. k_-J
.31’
‘ea’
'3;
centredonagay relationship.and partly ‘,_>.~;

concerned with poking fun at bourgeois 5"m§ “"h'~"'_“ mall" °l ""l‘"""3 '"l""l.1"_ 4' *1‘ " ‘. ttH
mm.a5_ Hm In (age is fa, [mm my idea bles like ‘social climate‘ and the state of ' '_ _\ i lk
ofan niuheniir gay comedy. lts gay cuii- lm °"l""'~'- ‘ ‘\ l Lag; G 4‘,
ple is offeredlolfered up. one might say) This leads me to a few nal words _ ; i ‘, ‘Lil
as comic spectacle forthe straight bour- about the Guadalajara group that has
geois audience. and of course we must developed, rather in the manner of
never see them making love. Hermosil- or nic rowth. around Hermosillo and
lo‘s lm presents its audience with two hifalms.gMostofits memhersare young.
very handsome and attractive young several are still students. and it has close
men who, while they generate comedy ;ttTti;ttitms with the university; it was proper tales press presents
around them. are never presented as ineviiablethat I should come to compare jim smith's latest
funny. pathetic or grotesque in them- it with the Canadian situation. in so far poems 81 prose poems
selves; and they gel to undress and make as I have experienced it. Two features eXp|°|-ing
love within the rst few minutes. struck me particiilarly. First. there is a iohn Wayne
real sense _ol community. ol a creative the american new right
o what claims do l wish to make workshop in which ideas are exchanged. wmiam burroughs
for l*‘l¢l'm0§tll0'$ Wvtlt. and Whit! enthusiasms developed, excitement geii- 29 BIC b H .
isthelikelihood ofour being able erated. Second. these are people who Q a Pom P
only $5.00
I0 58¢ thti lllttt 0tltSid¢ M¢XiC0'-’ one actually love movies. I have often noted
problem i5 that there i5 S0 fill‘ I10 it\¢0I1- as a curious characteristic of many Can- but" T°'°m° b°°k“°res
at
tcstably major. denitive work,or one of adian pt-otltiction §[ut_lt}nl§ that, °' °"‘l" 4""! "W" P'°P=' “"357
8°‘has M" 2
i_.i_i---1-
those ‘revelations‘ on which interna- althou E h thev- want to make films. thev- 789' Sm‘ F’ T°'°m°
_ sot for postage i. handling)
tional reputations are initially based (the appear not to love. or even be very inter-
two are not necessarily the same thing). ested in, the cinema. lfthis perception is

i
38 CineAction! Spring '86
l
.2
t

Planting Pictures:
a discussion of the films
of William D. MacGillivray
by Pgggr Hafgouft to take the footage. select what was most meaningful and. by
re-working tt on an optical printer. discover a structure that
wottld be hotlt a tribttte to l.inda and a satisfactory lm.
inda Joy wasa young woman whose love-olllife shone Throttgh doing so. Mae(iil|i\'ray has produced an excep-
from her like a beacon. With radiant eyes and tional lnt. l.t'ntlu ./o_t' is a masterpiece of minimalist lmmak-
ing. B_\ tttili7ittg only these out-takes front Linda's life. all
l
glistening teeth. the energy of her person animated
every expression that crossed her face. Her beautyand vitality interspersed with slow fades to black. MaeGil|i\'ray has
informed every gesture. l didn't know her personally, hut l devised a heuutifttland ntaleottstrttetion that tellstlte story of
know her now. at least her hands and face, as an image a woman's ght with deatlt. 'lhe ottl_\ additions consist ofa
preserved for us within a lm. few black-&-white free/e frames which appearas Linda moves
Lintla Jny is the latest lm put together by tlte Maritime towards death; and then. o\'t:t hlaek leader. MaeGilli\'ray's
lmmaker. Bill MacGillivray. l say "put together“ because set1siti\'e aeeottnt of his last visit to her in hospital.
Linda Joy is a lm that was begun by Linda herself. As He speaks about ltis intense friendship for her—\'irtually his
co-ordinator of the Atlantic Filmmakers‘ Co-operative in love; and yet lte knows now that there is nothing that lte t:an
Halifax (AFCOOP), she knew ntany lmmakers, including do. 'lhis spoken story--Bill's story-—Iinks Linda's story in a
MacGillivray. Afew yearsago.whilestillayoung woman.she way to lter soetal sttrrottnd and eottnterhalances her visual
developed breast cancer. She refused the ob\'ious as she tried exuberance with his own subdtted speeclt.
to refuse the disease. She refused a masectomy. The lm that The opening image ofl.t'mlu.In_t' isa freere-frame of Linda's
she wanted to make would have documented the battles she smiling face. with her hands thrust before it in the form ofa
fought with the medical profession; and at the time she con- trough. ller hands not only front the sign appropriate for
eeived the film. it would also have documented her triumph a wotnatt httt tltey also register the moment before the clap
over her disease. that will ser\'e as head-sync for the lm.
This project was not to be. Within months of what appeared After her hands snap together to establish the sync. Mai.{ii|-
to be a successful operation in Toronto, removing the lumps li\'ray lets her tell her stories; and after he has told Iu'.\‘ story
but not the breast. the cancer returned in a galloping fnrnt and abottt her death. he brings her back to lite for a moment. We
within six weeks she was dead. see Linda. once again in colour. prottdly displaying thescaron
Prior to this relapse. however. she had visited her friends at her breast which is the mark of her light against mechanical
the Newfoundland Independent Filmmakers‘ Co-operative surgery and the atlirmation of her mm vitality.
(NIFCO) to discuss with them her script about her struggle. Whether or not a full ntaseetomy might have prolonged her
Evidently, they said much the same thingas MacGil|ivray had life. the lm doesn't make clear. ln terms ofthe lm. however.
said: just tell your own story! So one day. she did just that. it doesn't matter. Linda Joy was a woman. ebulliently full of
With Mike Jones on camera. Linda told her story in a series of life. who contracted cancer and who then tool\ a stand against
single takes. Shortly after that, she fell ill and died. what the medical profession automatically proposed for heras
While there was some talk amongst Linda's friends about slte took a stand against her disease. I.imIa Joy is a lm that
using these "interview" takes as pan ofa larger lm. utililing embodies a record ofthat struggle. ln its social referents. it is a
stills from the pastand perhapslming some otherincidents. it doeun'tentary—indeed. rimilua t't‘rilt". ln the authority of its
was Bill MacGillivray who decided not to do this. He wanted construetion—througlt its step-printing,deliberate changes of

$t>ring'as CineActi0n! :19

>
 t
nioud. atitliorit_\ oli r|i_\thm. and through the delicate halanee Within the pages ol‘i"i'm'A('TI()N.'. the lms of Bill MacGil-
itacliie\es henieeiiiiiiage and sound—~itistrans|'ormei.lintoa lnray might not readily be considered political. 11terc is
niiiiiinalisi lictioii lm. Linda Joy is no inore. I.i'IiiIu ./tI_l' nothing in his work that partakesoftlic academic Left. Yet in
.s\l(\l\L's {ls the depiction otia striiggle—a struggle ll|ll\'L'f.\lll- a \er_\ real \\‘a_v. in at wa_\‘ that is essential tn the reginnal
i/ed h_\ the \\a_\ that it has heeii presented. ln its quiet \\a_\. struggles uitliin Canada. his lms urn political. While they
l.iiiiIu ./(ll is a "perfect" lm. don't t the estahlislied models ol' radical political thinking.
his lins enihody the political struggle of the regions against
' the centre and ofthe pcrsonaliled cinematic utterance against
the honiogeni/ed language of tlte cinematic machine: of the
ls it oiil_\ a eoincideiice that l.i1iiIu.!u_i' hears a small st_\listic tno\ic htisiness. as one sa_\'s—a hiisiiiess that generally either
reseiiihlance to the rst lm that Mac(iil|i\ra_\ e\er inade-— h)'—p;isses or co-opts the Canadian reality.
"._i’H.-l..\I. I/<)"_‘/J’ llis diplonia lm for the London School oli l-‘or instance. when Mac(ii|Ii\ra)' returned to Canada alter
liiliuleclitiititictiioii the London International l~'iliiiSc|ioo|]. his training in (ireat Britain. he got lll\‘l)l\‘L'Ll in a regional
"..\‘Il .-l..1I. is ;i simple escreise hotli in the handling of actors t!ltI\'Ct!‘ltII1l that. supported by the Canada Coitncil. resulted in
and iii iiiiii--i'Ii-ii-ne. the founding of a series o|' lm co-operatives across Canatla.
A iuaii enters ;i hatlirooiii. sliowers. dries liimself, trims his Along \\ll|l Lionel Simmons. MacGilli\'ray‘s co-worker and
heard. deodori/es one arin»pit. snit'I's at the other htit lea\'cs it ciiiciiiatograplier. and Gordon Parsons. often Mac(iillivray's
dr_\ , and e\its from the room. Meanwhile. we see in the mar- producer. MacGilli\'ra)' was directly involved in the founding
gins ot the l'rame a \\'oiuan alsncome in. sit on the toilet. have a of/\F('OOPin llalillix, out ofwltieli.alter.-Irii-I I i'i'ir. his‘ next
pee. and e\it troni the room. There is not so nuicli as an lm. lie t'oiinded Pietiire Plant. his own production company.
e\cliange ol' glances between them. and. while the lm does Aerial lllt‘ (I979). a bl)-minute nio_i-4-Ii-rriiiirugc, and Sia-
coutain cuts. there is a strong leeliiig of an extended sequence Ii(IIl.\' ( I984). a lull-scale feature lm,constitutc Mat:Gillivr:ty‘s
sliot \\itliiii this ten-ininiite lm. chiefdramatic work to date. Hc has made other lms—l:.irgely
$11." in _‘t5mm_ |-,];|¢l._&_“|iii¢_ 7.-31!.-|_.\!. alreai_l_\ declares sponsored lms like 7711' .-lu/Imr ii/' 17iv.i'i' ll'uriI.\" (I980). a
sttllte‘ of Mae(iilli\'ra)‘s pre~occiipatioiis. lle is an assured tlthilllllclllilf)tillllltlNC\\‘l't)lll‘ltlli|t1tlWflltl’.ll£ll'U|IdH0fW0d.
s|_\ll.\l as a creator of images: he is at ease in working with inade for the National Film Board; an item called M-iij/iunid-
aciors: and lie is capahle of aeliieiing llli|\ll'l‘Ill|ll et't'ect with Iuml ii! llkir. made for Parks Canada; plus another item for
niiiiiinal nieans. l-'iirtlicrniore—pcr|iaps the limitation ol' his T\‘Ontario on Alistair McLeud—biit it isthruugh Aerial View
earI_\ \\orL—l\lac(iilli\'ray's iinnerse is at tliissiage \er) much and .$'!uliim_i" that. along with the recent miracle of Linda Jay.
centred on the iiiale. his nork can best he introduced.
\\‘liat are the elements that characterize this work. that
‘ make it political and that make it ('anadian‘.’

Mike Jones and Joel Sapp in Stations.

_T-'_I ‘ 1 is

D .

-2;

,6
aw“ I. "

0*
H ==

O0 CineAction' Spring '86

 To begin with. it it regional. To make such 3 §[3[c|ng|1| is arc making. since we see the characters on the screen lming
inevitably to endorse the "realist" dimension of cinema as well 0"“ ""°\h°l’-
as to underline one of the confusions within the Canadian Asif to emphasize this confusion of the lmit: with the real.
political situation. MacGillivray cuts to a l6mm version ofthis Super ll movie; so
Both Aerial View and Stations are rich in landscape. in the that for a moment. the secondary text becomes the primary
sense of a particular region with its unique sense of scale. ln text within the lm. As he cuts back and forth from the lomm
Aerial Vietr. it is the specic space ofHalifax and its ambient version of this home movie (which gives it a sense of the
coves; in Slalions. it is the stretch and breadth of Canada as present tense) to the Super tt version (which conrms it in the
i seen from a train. past). we might notice that the sound of the projector is
If. for a central Canadian. to visit the Maritimes is to visit deliberately audible on the sound-track. while the lm it.-sell‘ is
the past.watching thcsetwo lms might sccm like going back ghostly in its silence. The apparatus of illusion-making is
in time. This continuity with the past is what troubles the foregroundedinthis way.whiletheillusionitsclfkecpschang-
I political surface of MacGi|livray‘s work. It scarcely ts any of ing status within the discourse of the lm.
the currently progressive paradigms. Yet this feeling of Meanwhile. something like at conventional story is being
regional identity—whether from old-fashioned Halifax or told. As they watch the footage. father and son. Sammy asks:
i new-fashioned Edmonlon—is central to the sense that Cana- “Wht‘rt-' is Tom now. Daddy?“ "I don‘: really know." replies
dians have of themselves as Canadians. Furthermore. within Geoff. “Mummy looks happy." says Sammy. "I think she is."
the Canadian struggle for cultural autonomy. arguably it is replies Geoff.
"progressive" to encourage regional voices to be heard. as it is “ls” not "was." As in Lintla Jar. there is in these two lms a
to encourage a knowledge of our past. constant play between what is present and what has passed—
Along with this presence of regional landscapes, however, in fact. a dcstahilimtion of the present in relation to the past.
there is also in both Aerial Vimr and Slarimu‘ the sense ofa Once we have sccn this lm. we could speculate that. in
joumey. ln each ofthese lms thereare actualjourneys which terms of narrative timc—the chronology rcquircd for the
ttrc both psychological and gcographical—a joumey into the story—this scene must occur very near the end. Yet it opens
self which is at the same time an actual joumcy within the the lm—in mt-tlia nu‘. in the classical sense; yet also in a way
specic spaces of Canada. that distances and disrupts the spectator/spectacle relation-
Furthermore. while MacGillivray works within narrative. ship expected within lm. We can respond to the human
there is as yet no privileged sense ofa present tense in his lms. emotions represented in Bill MacGillivray‘s lms. but we have
In LinrlaJo_r. for instance, Linda is "alive" in the last shot after to work on the place of the events within chronological time.
we have heard an account of her death. So too. in Aerial View The lm also opens with a declaration of a triple absence:
and Slaliaris: while the lms both have structually a beginning. missing is Tom—as we shall learn. an important guru gure in
a middle and an end. this structure does not correspond to the Ge-uii‘s life as an architectural student: and missing (we might
narrative time of the lm. It is not just that there are llash- assume from the scene with the two of them) is both Mummy
l
backs or ash-forwardszthc lms‘ narrative strategies cannot and (we must asstime from Sammy's question) Mttmnty'>
beexplainedinthisway. Basically.the lms rcfuseanysenseof happiness. If this lm is ubotll something. it is about an
an unfolding present tense. investigation into thc reason for these absences and into their
Coupled to these strategies of temporal dislocation is a eventual cost.
frequently imposed disjunction between image and sound. After this rst scene (the domestic). we get another less
l
l
MacGi|livray plays with the standard text-book practice of personalsccncttlte professional).This second scene. however.
l over-lap editing—introducing the sound for a new scene while is equally intricately designed.
the present scene is still on the screen; cutting away to a new We sec ovcr<hcad shots of some maps and charls—rcal-
scene while the present sound continues. ln MacGillivray‘s estate charts we might assume. Then an aerial view ufa Nova
hands, however. this practice is so extended that different bits Scotia coastline. ovcr which the title appears. Aerial I 'it'\\‘. On
of narrative information are presented simultaneously on the the sound-track we hear what we might assume is the chopper
screen.This strategy also becomes part ofthe great reticence of sound of a helicopter: except that in the next shttt. we arc
thcsc lms: the lms refuse to emphasize the climactic examining thc coastline from the point-of-view of a motor-
moments within their own drama. Instead. they cut away to boat. Only then might we register that the chopper sounds of
another scene just as these moments are about to occur. the rst shot are really the sounds belonging to the next
Finally—and this is stylistically perhaps the most interest- shot—the sounds of the boat.
ing aspect of MacGillivray's work—therc is in these lms a For this "professional" scene. no faces are visible. Bttt
self-reexive concern with systems of representation. ln Aerial voices are hcard. ln the image. wt: are moving pasta freightcr.
View. there is an 8mm lm within the l6mm format; in Sm- grounded on the rocks some months before. "Someone made
lions. there are recurring television images within the space of at good buck there though.“ one ofthe voices says. And then a
the screen. It is as if MacGillivray wants to critique his own few moments later: "A great place for kids to grnw up.“ We
representational practice. his own use of cinema both to get strong sense in this scene of property being sold.
explore the self and to search for a present by recording the It would be tedious (and unnct:essary)to go through the lm
past. in this dcgrcc of detail. It is enough to say that every scene is
choreographed with the same attention to thc signication
' potential within the very syntax of lmmaking.
This is notjust “il|usionist" practice. giving us the space and
Aerial View opens witha scene ofGeolfand his son Sammy scale of specific locations within Nova Scotia. lt is that-
watching a home movie together. This Super 8 lm shows because it does give us this space and scale; at the same timc.
Geoff. his friend Tom (Mike Jones). and Mary. Geoll‘s wife- with every change ofsccne. it challenges the way that we relate
to-be and Sammy‘s mother. all throwing about a kind of sound to image and present to past.
frisbec together. Thcy are also making a movie of themselves. On a more thematic level: Geoff is a young architect who.
Except that the lm we are watching is not really the lm they perhaps. through the inuence of Tom. has been made more

Sprlng'B6 CineAction! 4|
idealistic than he might have been about the politics ofarchi- If Aerial View favors the idealism of a young malcarchitect,
tecture. about the [|ll!'[lU.\'l’ of architecture. At the opening of it also critiques this idealism. Gcofl‘s determination to be true
the narrative (which is not the opening of the lm). Geoff is to his own principles isolates him from his friends. alicnates
enjoying an assured success in his profession. But lte is not him from his wife. and leaves him alone in the country with the
much interested in this success. He is more interested in local responsibility of looking after Sammy. By refusing the com-
housing. “using local materials and local skills." as he explains mercial world, he is also refusing what many people would call
at one time to a classroom of students. the real world.
ln fact. this classroom scene allows Geoff to present his The critique of Geofl‘s position is most strongly voiced by
ntanifesto—a manifesto that might not he that far removed Mary. his wife. While arguably shc is dramatically disfavored
front the manifesto of Bill MacGillivray. We have to build by the lm—she is constantly smoking. she doesn't like
something that is of some |I.\‘t‘ to people. not just something Geo‘s Newfy friends. she doesn't want to move to the coun-
that will close deals. create cash llow. and allow a lot of rich try. she wants to have more money. and she doesn't seem to
people to make yet more money and which will keep the care a lot about Sammy—it is her voice that articulates the
politics of civic exploitation in place. As Geoff talks about critique which we can infer from other aspects of the lm.
building his own house in tlte country with his own hands. This voice begins during a luncheon meeting with a friend in
about discovering skills within the process of that building the new fashionable Chateau Halifax restaurant that looks
which he never knew he had. about the beautiful view that he over the city. But we can hear it over a number ofscenes in the
has from his window, one young girl cacklcs when he says that lm, again defying any sense ofchronological order. as at one
he doesn't have a television. and one boy. who had been time. the luncheon with her friend becomes a discussion with
reading some kind of merchandising magazine throughout her friends. including Geoff.’ While her character is unsympa-
Geofl‘s discussion. nally asks the determining question: thetically presented in the lm. Mary's voice describes quite
"How much money do you guys make?“ GeotT has no answer. sympathetically the total self-involvement that we see in
Fortunately. at the moment ofthis question, the loud-speaker Geoff.
system asks him to move his car. He accepts this command as Aerial Victr is a simple lm in many ways. It tells a simple
an excuse to leave the classroom. While the image stays on the story. an old-fashioned story. a story of idealism and ofdcfeat.
class. on the embarrassed teacher. we hear the car drive away ln this way it might be related to Linda Joy that tells a similar
from the school. kind of story. Yet in both lms. as in Stations, it is the structure
Because ofits mixture ofthe old and the new. Halifax is rich that universalizes the particular situation. as the panicularities
in architectural signiers. ln At-rial Vii-tr. MacGillivray uses ofthe specic locations give warmth and a sense of reality to
the city as Antonioni used Milan in Ia Nolte or the EUR the whole.
section of Rome in I'i§cIt's.t"e. At a number of key points in the lm. MacGillivray retums
A couple of sequences in this lm are particularly reminis- to the Super 8 footage. as ifin moments ofsclf-reection. as if
cent of Antonioni. There is one moment towards the begin- part ofGeofl‘s awareness of what he has lost. So for the end of
ning of the lm when Geoff and his partner Ross are off to the lilm. he retums to his aerial view.
close some important architectural deal. As they go up in an We see Geoffs panner. Ross. in a four-seater. single-engine
elevator in the Maritime Centre. one of the new bank-based private plane. He is surveying the terrain of the coast.
high-rises that have been erected in the south end of town. obviously looking for sites on which to build. as in the second
through the window in the elevator we can see the spire of St. sequence ofthe lm. ln fact. this might be the second sequence
Matthew‘s Anglican church being dwarfed and then lost as the ofthe lm! Ross would appear to be looking down on Gcofl‘s
elevator rises above it. later. towards the end ofthe lm. after house. But nally. he grows impatient. “Come on.“ he says to
Geoff has retired to the country and has lost both his wife and his pilot. “Let's get outta here. This is costing me money."
his job. Tom comes to visit. accompanied by a hitch-hiker. As the voice of commerce ends the lm—an hour-long
“We met on the road and we're friends for life." says Tom. featurettc—MacGillivray freezes the frame on this nal aerial
with his Newfoundlander‘s friendliness. when they arrive. view ofthe location for his lm. having moved in on the image
A marvellous scene follows—like 7:_l(M.M. was intended to as the sound moved away. Then the credits roll.
be. a sequence shot—in which the hitch-hiker plays the mouth
0
organ and Tom and Geoffdrink a bottle ofScret.ch. talk about
Mary. and share the primordial Newfy knock-knock joke
together. Although a very different lm. Stations is organized in the
lt is the scene that follows. however. which is truly wonhy of same way. There is the same extended overlapping between
Antonioni. We see the three of them wandering about the image and sound and the same refusal to privilege a present
rocky shore together the morning after their evening together. tense. lt’Supcr B footage was part of both the structure and
As so often in the Maritimes. the space is thick with fog. Tom meaning in Aerial View. nagging Geoff about his past and
and Geolfwandcr out onto the deck ofthe marooned freighter about his loss of both Tom and Mary; in Stations. television
that we had seen at the opening of the lm. Then Tom offers monitors play a similar role but in a rather dilTcront way.
his confession. “The older I get.“ says Tom. “the more l While the video images too refer to the past. they also serve to
realize that you gotta tow the line . . . You gotta play your question the value of their own acquisition and the way their
part." Tom has joined the system. Through a friend of his meaning has been changed in the process of their own
father. he has become a civil servant. He has a nine-to—l'|vejob. construction.
pension benets. the lot. He has sold out. The central character in this lm is called Tom Murphy. and
ln close-up now. their faces wet with mist. Tom and Geoff this Tom too is played by Mike Jones. A one-time seminary
exchange silent glances together. Then. for the end of the student. he has espoused a secular life and become a television
scene. MacGillivray cuts away to a long-shot of the two of reporter. very much against the wishes of his father. But the
them on the wreck. each posed at opposite ends of the deck.
facing away from one another. each looking out through the ‘Ihappen to know that the lilm was not conceived in this way.
mist at another section of the sea. Nevertheless this device becomes part of the l|lm's ltnal stntcturc.

42 CineAction! Spring ‘B6

T
real project he wants to undertake for television involves a has re-worked this footage. making it ghostly through step-
personalised documentary that would explore the disorienta- printing. making it unreal—as ifa scarcely-recalled memory.
tion felt by some of his former colleagues at the seminary who However. since the "Tom" in this older footage is recogniIa-
have lost their calling. especially ofhis friend Harry who has bly Mike Jones. this seminary footage bears an eerie. almost
been his friend for many years and who left the seminary at the too-close relationship to the real. As in Aerial l'it'tt‘. this criss-
same time as Tom. Harry‘s disorientation is far greater than crossing between the “actual” and the “f|ctional" contests the
Tom's. Harry has found noaltemate position in life—not even representational practice endemic to lm and the way we tend
a job, certainly not a woman. Tom. on the other hand. seems to validate the ctional with references to the real.
to have fallen into his job. has found a wife and started a In Stations. however. both at the opening and at several
family. points throughout the lm, this “home-movie“ footage serves
Essentially..S'ta!iaItt' is ahmt! disorientation.The people that to underline the loss that can be felt when such communal
we see travelling across the surface of the land by Via Rail are dedication is surrendered; and it serves to remind Tom both of
mostly immigrants. leaving one section of Canada for the greater grief that such a surrender caused for his friend
another—looking for work. looking for meaning. There is a Harry and ofthe alienation from his father that Tom has felt
Québécois who has been working at the lumber-camps of ever since.
British Colttmbia and who wants Tom to ask him why he does Again. in what at rst glance scents an old-fashioned way.
that. There is Brenda from Vancouver who is on her way to Slaliant" is very much about the search fora father. Yet. whilea
Toronto. hoping to nd work. There are also other pas- reconciliation with Tom's real lather is central to the plal of
sengers, some from other countries, who are now travelling the lm. it doesn't have that much to do with the .tI0r_t-ofthe
across the enormous space of Canada. returning to some little lm as the lm unfolds.
place they call their own. The.t1ar_i' ofthe lm seems more to consist ofthe many little
Since the travellers who are searching for work are also anecdotesthatallthe pcoplcinthctrain share witlt Tom as he
searching for meaning. they are in this way like Harry Who. interviews them for this "human interest“ lm that he has
since he left the seminary. has found no reason for doing been asked to make for a commercial station in Vancouver.
anything and who has nothing to believe in. Most of these anecdotes also involve a searching. as l have
The inner mc;1ning|e$§n¢§§ of Tome own 5g¢u[;|[ |if¢ i§ said—a searching for work.asearching fora place that might
brought home to him when ht: receives news that Harry has become home (Of. as in the case of the immigrant travellers,
committed §t|ir;id¢_ 3 guigidig that may haw ban pmcipiimcd that has become home. a searching for the relationship ofself
by Tom's insistent qugglioning or him for his lgkyigion Show to the vast land over which they speed in their via Rail tratn. ln
The scene of Harry‘; death i§ iypii;-it n|‘ih¢ Chi¢y¢mgn[ qf this way, all are concerned with a search for the meaning of
this lm and is indicative oftlte way in which MacGillivray lhclf “V95-
thinks cinema. Some of these characters were scripted into the lm. Some
During the television intentiew with Harry that had were found on the train. Some were a mixture ofboth—pcoplc
occurred earlier in the lm. Harry had tried to explain his who were found butwho were then askedto talk about specific
grief. He no longer felt part ofsomethinggreater than himself, things. Brenda. the young woman with whom Tom attempts
he explained. He was no longer part of a larger whole. “I to haveafling. is particularly touglt in talkingabout.from her
wasn't Father any more. I had to introduce myself as me." point of view. both his pampered past and privileged present.
Losing his vocation was not for hint just like a break-up ofa Bernard, a porter in the train. is a political radical who wants
marriage. “It was like ending a life." as ht: said. to change the world. not just reflect its surfaces for some
Later. while Tom is editing this footage. we might notice “human interest“ television show.
that Harry‘s reference to death has been eliminated from Most contpellingarethecomments made hy Robert Frank.
Tom's assembly while other bits ofinformation we didn't see the well-known American photographer and off-heat lm-
in the interview sequence have been added. "Reality" is being maker who now has a home in Cape Breton. “Stories are
manipulated for the sake ofa good television show. Then the boring." he begins by saying—a comment that might well
phone rings. Tom freezes the video image of Harry‘s dis- relate to MacGillivray's refusal to create strong narratives for
traught face: and we learn that Harry. indeed. has killed his lms. Frank then talks with Tom about catchingtrainsand
himself. missing them. about the elements in life that either make it
The exploitative side of image-making is further emphas- dependable or which allow it to be exciting. But like all the
ized in this lm by an encounter that Tom has with a drunken other characters in this lm. he talks about a sense of home—
man who angrily resents Tom's superior position to all the something which. with all his travelling. Robert Frank has
people he is interviewing. He considers the whole process never had.
patronizing. “The big ones want to look at the littlcones.“ he “So home is when you get on the boat.“ he says to Tom,
t
I
screams out about TV. Yet as Tom manages to placate him
. who has left his “human interest" lm in Halifax and is now
and coaxes him to lct himself be ltlmed. he too declares the on his way to Newfoundland. With the idiomatic skills now of
problems with his father. "l gotta message for my dad." he a true Maritimer. Frank can recognize that Tom is coming
l
says to the camera. "l made a mistake." home "from away."
t Along with all the video footage in Slalians. as in Aerial lf Slaliam is more engaging through its number of little
Viflt‘. Sralialtt also contains some home-movie. l6mm foot- stories than through attydynamic plot. more through its sense
age. This footage shows Tom—more correctly. Mike .lones— of random encounters than through any compulsive narrative
as a young man at the seminary. taking his vows. prostrating thrust. so these stories take place within the space of Canada
himself on the ground as required indication of his humility. but outside of time. The "present tense“ of the lm does not
greeting his father. sharing his pride in his holy life with his fully declare itselfuntil two-thirds ofthe way throughthelm.
family and friends. The scenes that we witness. therefore—both the scenes on the
This footage was actuallv shot by Mike Jones‘ lather and is train and the scenes at Tom's home on the West Coast with
authentic footage of Mike s own term at a seminary in his Holly. his wife. and Mark. his son—have neither a temporal
youth. For Sldlfltl. however. as for Linda Ja_t'. MacGillivray nor a causal relationship to one another as the lm unfolds in

Spring '86 CineAction! 43

~.
 time.Wecani/t'rtliese relationships.ot'course—butq/Ierwe occupied as (jeol'l' was in .-leriiil l'ieii'. Like Mary in this,
have seen the lilni. ln the lms of Bill Mae(iilli\'ray. conven- however. she too <loesn‘t seetii to he too close to their son.
tional narrative is always i.lo\\n-played. What happens ll) the Mark. With the exception of the most recent I.imIu.Iu_i'. Mae-
characters is always lessimportant than what happens hl’Ill'l't‘II Gi|li\ ra_\'s lilins enact the interests o|' a very male-centered
ih,_-m_ worltl.
The end ol‘.S'luIi'iiii.\ int-olves an abrupt change ofstyle. llall
the narrative and temporal dislocations both parallel and ‘
underline the dislocations of the char;ieters—not only the
severe tlisorientalion ot'H;irry and in another way ol'Tom_but llowever. all that might be clianging. M;lC(ill|i\’fZl)' is well
also of all the characters travelling across ('aiiatla in the awareol the neetl to espanil the hori/onsol't|ie world that he
train-—the lm ends securely in the present tense with Tom depicts. Limlii Jul‘ acknowledges this awareness. Antl for his
back in NL'\\lUllI‘l(|lilI'ld. re-united with his family and r¢wn- next lilin that he plaiistoshoot thisautiinin_he has forthe rst
ciled with his father. Aiitl after all the stylistic torinalit_\' and time a \\‘l)I'l'Iilll at the center of his \viirk_
sell'-questioning nature ol'the processolintage production. the I.i/2' (‘Iain-i tells the story (as the script s_\nopsis pills illof
last scenes are more in the style of riiitiliizi-i't’riI¢‘. “an intelligent.stroiig-willed woman who has tintil now. lived
Willi Mike Jones‘ real lather presenton the screen and with a quiet sheltered lite in a small \illage ol‘ rural Nova Scotia."
Mae(iilli\'r'.t_\'s real lather singing a lovely song. this collapse Through a series ol' II‘ll\1|Ll\'CIlllll'L‘\. Mary inoyes from a paint.
into the merely representational is arguably a weakness in the hy—iitinibers hobby lo the recogni/ed acclaim ofan established
liltn. arguably an over-simplilication of the issues that have artist.
he-en raised by ihe lilm. At the same time, in a way that is Rich both iii tletail and iii the tliiersilicatioii ol'cliaracter_

ti
consonant with Mac(iiI|i\'ray‘s cinematic thinking. lhis entl- the script promises a more exlentled palette than Mac(iilliv-
ing does resolve. both in style and in thenie.lhe problein set by ra_\"s previous work. (':isting will be crucial; but those of us
the lilm. who know his work cannot help btit look forwartl to the
With Tom. his father. and his son being photographed by chitllcltgcs of M;ie(iilli\'ra_\"s nest production.
the tower on Signal Hill by Tom's wife. Holly. Sm!imi.\ \'cry \\'ith ii governinent liliii policy that encourages the tnost
nnicli celebrates the iiniticatiiiti of the male dynasty by the L‘X|‘1|\\llilll\‘C o|' lilniic enterprises—sttil'l‘ to be plaeetl between
close of this lilm. ,-\t the same tiine. in the scenes that involve the ails on eoininereial 'l'\'—we eannot help bitt look forward
her. Holly is stronger than Mary iii.-leriul I 'i'eii‘. She isgrantetl to a new lilm lironi the Miiritimes. to a new lilm that deploys
tnore intlepentlenee of spirit. She has her own work. and itl local materials and loeiilskills_ that plants picturesin the mind
sonie key scenes. she conveys a sense of what she ltas had to ofliow we live. \\'e cannot help but look torwairtl to a new lilm
endure in her marriage to 'l'om—a inzin equally as sell‘ pre- by Bill MaeGil|i\'ra_\.

C I N EMA LU M15 RE ,»¢»unu»“.

Situated in the heart of downtown Toronto,
the Cinema Lumiere offers an attractive
alternative for the cineaste.
l
We GTE‘ DFOUG IO DFESEFII the YIHQSI Ill ll'll'8l'
l‘l8YlOl'l3| fl|lTlS BUG the DESI In Canadian DFO
j UH I l

gramming with selections changing biweekly, B()()|\'S

The night owl can eniov the bizarre at the
¢ First editions. out of print & rare books
Lumiere late nights everv Fridav and Satur-
dav. Watch for forthcoming series bv Robin
l Current releases
Wood and Othgr nOfab|e§_ ' Specializing
Broadway &
in the
Hollywood
GOlCl€l’l Age Of

Our cafe menu boasts a varietv of deluxe

v Mail orders -— credit cards
cakes and tortes with fresh, ground coffee
alwavs available. Trv our weeklv specials and ~ Free V; hr. parking at Municipal lot
the delightfully sinful mintloafs. - Open Monday-Saturday 11-6
Pick up CineAction! andother film magazines
at our new bookstand. Here you'll find the 10°/o OFF
latest in contemporarv criticism and the best WHEN YOU PRESENT THIS AD
in cine news.
The cinema Lumlere= 17 YORKVILLE AVENUE
Serving metro TOl'Ol1tO
forthelastzoyears
290 College Street, Toronto 963-9318
..............'
2ND FLOOR I BETWEEN YONGE 8 BAY ' 9286992

i 4‘ CineAction! Spring '86

__ _7____ 41
 State Machismo
The Official Versions of
the State of Malel Female Relations
by Joyce Mason this case, l simply had the idea. I worked with Carlos
lahio...ott the screenplay. as well as Setttin Quinones. at
t Toronto's Festival of Festivals last fall (and at the !'.‘_'|‘f"‘_i‘:I-"vy";:"g "‘:m""' Yv°"“ml“id"p|"“'“‘| d"“'|"p"d“
Montreal Festival which preceded it) the National \\t.nl"f‘n“' -miungThe
about ttlming.
mc Mop‘ “mild thaw" “S we
“mlonly thing that we had sketched
Film B93\'d'5 l¢i""l'¢ dew-smedy 9" Day-‘i Pmw‘-l w out prcttv clearlv—sketched simplv because that too
be one ofthe big press hits ofthe Canadian entries. During the b,_~cum,_- ,_-,'"ich,-,4 {guy by day during [hf Wm}; ,,|" |]|mtng_.

Toronto felivl. lmwever. although the press was ll offelicita- was the love story between the seripiwriter and tlte worker.
tions (and variations on surprise that something commercially which is the other part of the pIot...We always wrote out
viable and "funny" could come out of the NFB) no compari- It-'I1l11li\'L‘ d"1|"t!"'= i""~l Wt-‘ i1|“'=l!> Wvfl‘ ¢h1l"§i"t= ll il Ws
sons were made in these reviews to another humourous lni-— “""i*"d “'"l‘ ll" "¢'°“---w'~' d"-l"" l'"P°>'= "_ \"'"L‘"_lli"-
ltguetip hut rather we worked out the dtitlttguclrom
a mere I2 catalogue pages away—which was also about the
crisis of male identity and culture (machismo) in a changing '_ ‘ '!“".“'f“".“."_l‘“"jl
cussed.
f'f‘"°_"_’g_"“'_"_" “.h'"l' W“ h“,"' ‘l“"
Ihc original scrctnpla) has \t.ry little todo with the
. . . .

5°c'my~ Up '0 u ("nun Pm” ("mm Owl” Puma‘ Cuba‘ nished lni.1hisis notan easv metliodofwork and from
I933} the very start you know )'ut|'rc'going to create a work that
i
Up m a Certain Point. like 90 Days. is a ction feature tilm. trt at convenlinnttl sen\c will never be full) achieved. 'lhat i.\
drawing upon documentary techniques and traditions. Each to it‘s going to he it work with detects and. perhaps,
l

lm was produced by the state lm agencies oftheir respective structural deliciencies here and there. hut. in t:\tIl1ttngc for
counmci Bmh mmmakers (Tomfm Gu(igffcz A];-3 and Gil“ whtii'.’...in exchange for achieving a certain ingenuousness
walk") had access w me means of production for 3 femur‘. and treshiicss that ll gives you to discover something and
l
t length comedy and, on the basis of their previous popular "‘l’“'“ " "‘ ‘l“" '"“"““'"'| ,. h I . ‘I P
successes and for reasons ofthe economic structure of produc- "“r_;,",’Y;”‘:_::] Q 2*“): Igxg
tion in each country/institution. they had this without the ' ' ' ‘ ' '

necessity of presenting a completed shooting script for prior

appmva|_ When I attended a screening ol Up Io a (1-rl_uin Pain! at
Both |mm;|ker$ an; highty wnsdous of rhcjr m|¢ in [hg Lehlman College in the-‘Bronx. one of the proiessors lrom
social dynamic olculture and society. and responsive to their l-11"" /\\'"'~'Fl§'1\ and Ci"|bb§" 5_l"d"3§ ¢XPY¢5§¢‘-l hi5 "m"Z¢'
perceived audiences. Both lms have received positive end0r- mfm ""4 dcllghl ill lh" Y§'l¢ll|°l'l§l"P bfJlW¢¢" 1-l°¢"m¢"l4"'Y/"5"
sements from those audiences. The lms are comedic. Both -\L‘¢"'il1 ilml §"l1'JlUR"~i ll<Ill0"—ll1l‘ l"l"||lB\‘"°° and |'°§P°"'
useirony and satire in approaching issues ofsocialconcern. In §l\'¢"¢§§ "l "W >t~'TlPl- "Cl" )'"\1 l"1"$l"'~' §""“'""¢ §3¥l"S 5"
this article I will look, in the context olithe above points. at the Hull)/“'"°d_ 'w°|l~ ""“l_| "ll" 50"“ ¢‘lu'Pm_¢"l 1" ll“? d°ck> “ml
convcrgences and dilfercnces between these two lms and the -WI" §l"‘°""tl ""4 """l¢/_l-l¢\{¢‘l°P ll“
5"}?! 11* W" 2° "l°"g-'
two cultures and political economies of which they are a part. Tl1¢)"d "¢\"~‘I' E'~‘l “'1l)' Wllh ll! Am! )"=l- "3 *0 l.1""'~l- 5" V"!
90 Days is a sequel to The llIa.reuIim' Ml'.YIiq|lP. When pro- will 1-l0"'~'
duction began, with a budget of $488,000 from the NFB ltwasthc tvuiol making t_heltlm_the system tor producing
programming committee. 90 Days consisted ofa schedule of culturelatttungst all til the lilni‘s content. wltich spoke most
plot developments around which_the non-professional actors lmm°d|¢"¢l)' “f ll"-‘i mil" -*L‘"$'~‘ ‘ll l-:\1|E|-"ill ll|l_ll"="C¢- {Mid
woutd impmvisc diatoglm oddly enough. it was a similar dramatic lilmmaking technique
(for which there is a long tradition at the National Film Board)
Walker and Wilson (David Wilson shares the "Story" which was cited over and again in newspaper reviews as the
credit on the lm) resurrected Sam Giana and Stefan marvelous innovation of 9!) I)a_t'i'. This wonder and interest
i wvdniliwiky "Om ll": "YiB"\"| cl“ ""4 4"“ "P ll fill"! expressed about this aspect of both lms is worth noting. lt is
l
"Bl" ~‘¢_h=d"|“>“'- Pk" d="¢l“P""=""‘ *"“""d “'hl“l‘ ‘MY amazement that a lm can be both pleasurable and not Hol-
“'"ff'ld '"‘P"“"“ "l'i"“g“"' lywood...that somehow the old LA producers adage "Give
. we lwk mt lm ‘ht my “ nalurally “lunwd m Bi" I them wltat they want“ spoken from another location
‘he nudimcc mccivin m. d T
results in
l think using non-actors was the key. You don tgetthat ktml I .

ofgritty. naturalperformances from trained actors. And of g me mg un"xp“"c ' 0 P e"5ur'“ ls

‘

course you i:an‘t get scripted performances out of 1"-ldcd d‘3l|llhl~

non-actors. Tltcse responses. both ofthe Canadian press to 9l)I)a_i-.r and
“We just rode the waves. lfsomething worked, we capi- of the American Press (and this professor) to Up to a Cerlailt
talizcd on it." Point’. were surprising to me. My habit of watching un-
77"‘ (i"Il'l"'- M°""'é"|- 5°Pl» l-V35 Hollywood lm and political-ction-on-a-shoe>string had
perhaps made inc blasé about this particular approach to
while ll" 5"lP\ °l UP '9 ” (“'”""" P99" W35 also d“"'*|“P“'d ction lntmaking. lam nevertheless interested in the nuances
l" Pmducllonr "5 Pk“ is 5elr"'¢"'“l"° “ml aclually r""““’5 ll“: and the relative skill and intelligence which each lmmaker
development ofa script for a lm about machismo. “mt in nmnipulming mesa m;hniquL.§_

Spring ‘B6 CineActior\! 48

 In spite olprtitesttititiit “ti
so|idl_\ plotted
than 9!! I)ll_\'\ hats hiiinhling sell'-tthsorptitiii til‘ the two intile
l1t\I‘l—;|l1l|i_\‘llL‘ll].
slur) thttt qttite nicel_\ keeps the blight o|' ttit l\.\\lL' off tlte letids. lliit the chtir;icter\' ltiektil‘se|t'-knottledgeis nntdiietou
lietiontil |iIIkl>C1IpC,": the sticizil issiie docttntent:ir_\' ttirtted lttclt o|' selti-ctiiiseiotisitess; atntl. from its privileged otitside
lictitin tilin hats Ll long trtidition tit the NFB its at l11L';ln\ of \iew.tlie;ttidieticeni;i)‘iid tltisftiniiy. But .~\le.\;ind Bliie.like
slipping lntntnkers‘ fetittire lilm tispirtitinns through tlte niost oftheir titidicnce. don't rezill)‘ ctire \\"ll' the)'re lonely nr
atpprortil process. And hnth lilnts tire nttide. though oith titih:tpp_\ they jtist \\:int II to chzinge. They desire the tntigicul
\'tir_\'ing degrees of:ieet>rnplishtnent_ from it loctition ofsocitil etent thtit will trtiiisform their li\'es—reordering the universe
responsibility and service. Though iii the case of Alexi. zidded \\itli llieiii tit the ceitter. And the l'tint;is_\' world ofthe cinema
to these is tin ilhllll_\' to engage the intelleettitil ctipticities tintl prm ides this.
pt\|lltC£l| interest of his aittdienee. Btit hoth lilinnittkers llll(L‘ ln l '/1 mu ('urmin I’tii/il. on the titherhtintl,the plot istirmly
seriotisly the aispect olitheir occiiptititins \\hlCll is to entertain. rooted in the pl;tll\lhlL‘. The chtirticters tire pll|CL‘t| in ti social
The key to W!I)ii_r.i' sticcess is tindtitihtedl) iii this tlesire to tintl econoniic context.‘ The prtihlents of nittcliisnio tire ntit
enterttitn tiiitl to pletise tin aiiidience. Milli)‘ retisontihl) pro- tsolttted in at single |octition—he it. lieterosestitil roniaintic
gressive people ili|\L‘ told me thtit they liked this lilnt. 'lhe_\' lintl reltititiiiships. the workplace. the pro|et.iri:it. the intellectuals.
the chtirtieters or the sittitttioii not so mticli liorri|'_\ing ;|.\ ttt;t|-nugt-_ ete, R;tther_ it i, tn“-rtmt-en tint] inte-m;|;|ti_-4
tinitising tl fottnd it simu|tiineotisl_\ ptithetic iniil liorrtl‘_\tng). through till aispects of the cttlttire and eeonom). 'l1ie central
The lili1i's own ptihlieit_\ |ti_\s eltiim on the retiding lllill \\e tire chtirticter is the seriptwriter. Osctir lpltiyed by Osctir Alvarez)
rnetint to ttilte: "A \\ill'tt‘| and tiftlheait etitnedy. this sttir_\ c:in't who in the cottrse ol'video inter\ iews tind resetireh tit the docks
faiiltoentertttin.Richinohserttitioiioftiioderiistieittliiitires.it |"I\lt’\\lt3\ his inl':ittttititin \\ith Lintt (Mirt;i lhtirrtil. 1| single
takes ti good swipe tit todti_\"s htittered tnaile egos." tiiother tind tin tirtictiltite tuirltcr. The two tntiin ntirrtitive
Bttt the nitile ego is more stroked thtiit swiped ill in this plot threttds follow this rontttnce tiiid the detelopinent oft: lilm-
and though the chziraieters tire liir from heroic (or e\en tittrtic- \L‘[1l_ The dt:\‘t.‘|tIp\t.'|Il o|' the script is depicted its ti set of
tire) the) tire [1Ul'll_\'L‘Ll in ti syinptithetic I'l1i|I1t1t.‘t'. .~\s for the stwilll aintl \\\ClilbiC rcltttions...tlie director and writer are
“tihservtitiott of modern socittl mores." otie might wonder tit friends, the writer's wile is to play the role which is httsed on
the ctistotns tind conventions of .»\ng|ophoiie lieterosextttilit)‘ the chtirticter of Linti. the dockworkers disciiss their work ttntl
tit the Montretil NFB. For indeed. ftir from the coii\'eiition:tl their pri\tite lites in from ofvideo crews atnd iii cuiiverstition
btittle-of-tlie-sexes plot sitiizititins. we ;ire offered scentirttis of with the writer tind sometimes the director. tind the writer and
which iitost Ctinzitlittiis hti\e htitl no persoiitil esperiettcei l.in;i (the ttiodel for his inaiin L'i'lllfilC|k‘Tl htt\‘e tin ;iI'|';iir.
lnstetid. in response to the threait ti|' \t't>nien‘s perceived N;trr;iti\e tletelopntents tind cometitioiis ol' the script-
LlL‘t'!\;lIItl.\. we tire own ilV\'il_\’ to ;i "return of the repressed tttthin-the-lilni tire referred to tintl disputed h) the L‘ll£ll'ilL‘lL‘l’§
t'tiiittis_\"' world. ttnd ite lift! given etitlence ofltow people's lives tire slitipetl by
.~\lthotigh tlie_\ tire tinliltely to identify with the iiluuliiint‘. the eiilttirzillypreserihed ctinventioiis which have '~ll;l|JL'dll1Cil‘
tiiidiences mil)‘ recognise ltintl even identify with) the ll\\k- tiittigintttiotis.
\\'Zl|'t|l1L‘S> oftlie cli;irticter's interactions, the nun-intellecttttil. lnterciit between the loters‘ rst enihraice tintl their conver-

46 CineAction' Spring '86

7'-'

sation in a bedroom (Lina stands at the window, Oscar lies in unresolved statements:
bed), is a sequence in which Oscar considers the ending of his
script: a shot of a jet rising heavily and steadily from a ninway. lib??? ‘ “'hv"§"'
and mhwmgawaymm the shyjs osanlh v°|ce_°v:hsays.‘“h That happy ending, he says shaking his head. “l had
ends with a plane aloft. This grouping ofscenes begins with a mixcd “dings “mm “W
close-up ofa bowl ofice, a tape deck and two glasses; as Lina --pmpk who saw mt. m,.|y “THC, ,;,,d_ -oh‘ Hy;,,,g_5mk
5¢00P5iC¢im0lh¢if8l355€§.l|15B3§q"95°|'|8P|3Y57 “ll-lcauld is so wonderful. Don't you dare have things turn out
cut her wings then she'd be mine; but she couldn't y, and badly." And members of the Korean community
l
what l love is the bird." and the scene plays out a romantic and impressed upon us what ti terrihle thing it would be if an
physical tension that is resolved in their embrace and their '="tl=l8'=d W°"\1"\ Wet" back lltsjilli H" lift‘ Wltllld bs
movement together out of the frame. CUT. He considers the ‘““'>“
ending for the lm/has writtenthe ending to this affair. CUT. hm’ d°°'_‘hh T |h‘hf' lhc “'“"°' P'h.'p'_" """h:dhf°
Slanding m ‘he window‘ Lina says: -tr" so w Samiaga" lm so we e t we had to be uinsisitnt wit I at
Oscar. still lying in bed, responds, “lf
I asked you to say?“ “ln 93:‘
lhls \'°°m- Wm‘ my kid?" Them l5 no "75P°n5e~ “l'm sure the lm wouldn't be a hit if it wasn't
What is evident in this sequence, and it is reinforced at other mj,,y;i,|¢;-
points in the lm, is the writer's power to dictate the outcome. "9" Dill‘! ih =\_" ¢K¢¢Pli<"1 I" lh'~' NFB "ll"-"
Just before this. Lina had told Carlos that she doesn't like sad Mammne Ackerman. The Gazmi-_
endings and that she thinks the lm should have a happier Mh""""' Sch" '3/hs
hhdihg ‘hhh his play hhd_shh whmhd ‘he womhh to have her A lm production project described as having begun with a
w°'k hhdh gohd 'hhh' hm Lma '5 ho‘ 'h charge °f lhc schhh list of “social issues“ and a desire to pioneer an alternative to
Hc has church her. wohh "he . dhckyhrhs hhh her homc) and. conventional drama has ended with the desire . ' to p lease.
h.‘ has slrhwh 0:; '.hhmhhh°h hhihzl hi. pas‘ hhd he‘: asp": The NFB is mandated by parliament to interpret Canada to
h°hs' ehwm is raw mhwhh .0‘ '5 hhhhph h.h°h ah Canadians through lm. But it is zi public that is largely
interpretation, while she leamsofhis world only by inference unknown and a mmiomhi ml" is mm anal 80¢ The
. . . J p ' J y y
hhd hhhqhe mkrchcc ahd has hh Pow" ‘O reshape h 'h her regional production studios are in a relatively better position
°‘"_'l‘_t:lh:g" h h . , to interact with and respond to that mandate. But the threa-
_ '5 oes hmfheahl 3‘ S C '5, hm mhml ahd ashhe: °' ‘hm tened position ofthe NFB on a Conservative agenda of budget
Shh '5 p°w"ks5' hm mlheh hehhchles a much mo“ °“'c"m5' cuts and privatisation doesn't leave much room for the blos-
cribed area of power. Her challenges to his presumptions are gaming of regional drama Pmdumionv
“huh, 'h respohse th hls h,SSem°h thhljhe dohkyhhds were Though the rationale ofauthcnticity is offered in relation to
hhwhhhhy macho‘ sh‘ phhhs °“‘ ‘hm: Mach'5m° '5_ Prehy using non-actors in 90 Days. at the bottom line it is less a true
much ‘ht Same ':V"yWhe'e3 hhd' by ‘he way' why 3"" l ‘here c/mire than a reection of scal restraint. Sam Grana (charac-
any women on_the lm crew?“ A_nd later. when he refers to
3" tcr name Alex) and Stephan Wodtislawsky (Blue) are on staff
actress (his wife) playing her in the lm. she points out. at the NFB, as is Daisy de Bellefeuille (who plays Blue's
"°h'cahy' Nm me‘ your Chh'_‘hch"' mother). Furthermore. 90 I)a_i'i" is a sequel to The Masculine
Bu.‘ ‘he pow" lhh‘ she has ‘S dehhhh by her hmhh°h' QM Mysliqiie and the circumstances under which that lm was
hrs‘ hhhgc hr her '5 hs she spchks very rhhicruhy at h hhmh produced seem analagous to the qualities of the lm itself.
'h°°hhg_hb°“' w°'k'hg_a"h shmy °°"h"'°h5' H" specch Employed butwithoutmeaningful work (due to lack offunds)
‘hens hfhh hpplhux whlch '5 'h'°mh whh applause rm ‘he english language lm production stall within the Montreal
play which Carlos has wrIll=n—draWms both B Pmllvl and =1 National Film Board, isolated from the community they are
distinction between their respective roles as ‘voices‘ for a imendedtoservmwim equipmemand mm Stock bmnu place
community and ll'lC‘l'¢l2ll'lOIlSl1lp of that role to their ‘work.' lo go‘ ‘um the Cameras in on lhcmsdvcsn
, wmk hhd pehph: shhhhdeslowhrhlhplay ah 'hh?gral role The issue of machismo was dealt with in Up I0 a Ct-rlain
'h the shhhhhc or ‘he hhh‘ Thr°h5hhm.lhe_hh"h.hv°' head Poinl in terms of social and economic relations. Our perspec-
hhd should" Shh‘? or dockwhrkhrs bung 'hl"v'eh'§d are tive and sympathies shift during the development ofits narra-
°'
'h§°h°d' Th“ prhwde 3 c_°"m"P°"h ‘h' 3" ""h°h'h'"g °f'
the narrative and they situate events in a material and eco-
tive: in the initially appealing, sensitive, if awed, protagonist
we bcgin ‘O recognizt a 5e|Sh_ phimndering Hm who masks
"hm"? coma" The hhh dhhclhl ‘wants '0 make 3 mm about his self-interest in romanticism. Such a scenario would cer-
'hhch'sm°_h s'h,gk ‘Sim’ ‘h h hhglc cohwxh Bu‘ ‘ha scmeh‘ tainly not be specic to Cuba, but it is reasonable to assert that
wrhch lhmhgh .ghmp.Shs °.fh's hwh h'hc.h'sm° hhd through h'5 it is the ideological commitment of the lmmaker to an ongo-
"h°h.°hh| rclhhohshm whh L'hh' hegms lo “sen ‘hm bmh ing struggle for change in his society which draws him to
mhhhhmh hhd ‘he hves °hh° d°ck_W°'k°'s am mmpl“ examine the ideological underpinnings of machismo‘s
to le tinder oneisstie or one bad attitude. As Ennque Feman- appca|_Of which romanticism is cmuinly mm
dez pointed out in hisreview ofthe lm, “Machismo is a social As Enrique Fcmandcz has poimcd mm
evil, not a personal sin.“‘
The dierences and similarities in production approaches legrjvgghlxgl
Wllh regard lo qucslions or chamcleri scrip‘ devclopmml and Eisenisiein and Brecht. Since the cinema can do either just
audience. etc. are I believe reective of the different positions as ,¢adi|y_ Aka chooses lo do b.,;|,_ He is lb, gm“ PM, or
4
°f lmmakers and ‘hell lmmaklng in5m\"l°"5 Wllhl" lhlllf cinema dialcctics. Yci howdi'erent...l'rnm that other mas-
respective countries and societies. let of the self-conscious. tnaterittlist cinema. Jean-Lue
l
[n Nonh American popuh; b¢]i¢f_ indiyidu3| 5g||‘. Godard...Alea...m;ikeslmsin_whii:h lifculwa_\'sihreateris
expression (whether in the form of ‘entertainment’ or of ‘art')
and social responsibility are perceived as contradictory. This is ° ‘°"_“"_'" M“ '
E: spillb*;"_‘_'_‘h.‘ h°"'_'fhh"']“s
hr 'hhh' h 3“ 'hY""_°"j h‘h§"
“"'°5‘“,"__l’“§“'°" '“‘ *‘ PM“ h"
reected in Ackerman's comments regarding the blight of an
. . .
issue on the ctional landscape. and in the lmmaker's own
"ma" h°jh'~§ °.‘h°' ‘h"h h'°"'_°"f""“"
R’ thB ' '
“umg e u""a“:,;;'/ti“, V”/gg
".E' F‘ d.

Spring '86 CineAction! Q7

 ln 9!! l)a_i'.t'. on the other hand. a resolution is offered to what difgct attempt to ugggmmndalc the lmmaker‘; perception of
in the real world could be described as a conict of interest the audience's desire, is in the nal analysis perhaps no more
h¢‘l“'¢¢" ll"? §¢XL‘5~ And ll“? F¢§°l"ll""5 ll°"E"¢ in ¢h¢°k °f ofa romantic cliche than Up la a Certain Point's nal freeze
not) to the cniotioiial/sexual problems of these two hetero- fmmc Ora bin; in |iighi_ |3m_ in Aka‘; mm ihc shaping ohm
§L‘K"i1ll‘3"Ell§l1 M°""*=“l"§="° dfll‘/"*4 ‘tulle 5il"Pl)'ll"°uEh ending is revealed in the dialogue and structure of the lm.
tlte enactment of their respective fantasies. One fantasy is PQ§_§ih|g and ()pp()§ing ending; am pi-Qpoggd by[hg Qhafaclgfg
infantile (Blue). the other adolescent (Alex). of Lina and of Carlos. Whatever the ending. something of its
But perhaps tiiost intcrestingasa cultural point ofcompari- nature has bccn exposed: that it is chosen. decided upon. The
son is that in the depicted fantasies of 91) l)a_i':. the search for ending of the lm is therefore both arbitrary (either would do
satisfactioii is irrevocably enmeshed with conimodication. the job of closing the narrative) and dictated (in the existing
/\lthougli each character attempts to re-liumanise. to emo- inequality of social relations Carlos is dominant).
iionalivc the transactions being made. the culture in which lt is ultimately. in this aspect of their lms and their
they esist is one which encourages isolation and then com- approaches that l nd the core ofa difference in sensibility.
modies the possibility of re-connecting. Blue picks his bride- Alea's intellectual engagement with his subjects. with his
to-be front a catalogue of Korean women looking for North medium. with his social and political context enriches his
American luishands. His protestatioii that "I don't think she is emotional commitment to his characters. He also enjoys the
a tnail ordcrhridc. btit someone that l fell in lovc with through relative security ofthe lCAlC (The Cuban Film lnstitute)—it
the mail over a long period oftime." stands in contradiction to is after all unlikely to be privatised and its government has no
his cinbarassnient that anyone would know that she is coming interest in courting the Hollywood studios into transforming
or why. lt isalso evident in his own culturally prescribed need the streets of Havana into the all American town.
to ignore the economic transactional signicance of marriage ln comparison. the context for feature lm production in
as an institution by ronianticising his relationship to it. Canada is ideologically and critically impovrishcd. economi-
Tlic previous lilin. in which Blue explains his intense need to cally and culturally contradictory and psychologically com-
please women (whether they want to be pleased or not). is plieated (a confusion ofinferiority. impotence, bravado. sub-
enlightcning in this respect: he said. that as he was growing tip limzttiun and service). To produce a feature entertainment lm
his father never lifted a linger to do anything around the within the often threatened and maligned NFB inevitably
house. and how iitiliappy and overworked his mother was: draws eitherattacksor the back-handed compliments 0faber-
and that he decided that he would know how to make a ration. The assumed inferiority, in our American-colonised
woinau liappy-—hy simply being the opposite of his father. culture. regarding state-subsidised work is the rst hurdle of
.~\nd in 9!) I)rrt'\. his new. completely dependent bride-to-be is inferiority which filmmakers must approach. The conception
indeed ‘made to order" for this fantasy of replacing the father that at subject of social relevance makcs boring cinema is the
as provider and lover. delivering the ‘mother' from her less next.Comntercialviability as the ultimate signier ofworth is
desirable situation. Of course when. after his inother‘s visit. another—the longstanding idea that we will only really be
llyaiig-Soak appears in a dress and hairstyle which reminds good when we can make it in the States.
him too closely of iiiom his insensitive dismissal of her plca- lt is this state of cultural colonisation and political confu-
sure in lierappcaraiicc is a classic moment ofaggressive denial sion that may account. in part. for the failure of 90 Da_t's—a
of thc ocdipiil conflict. failure both at the levels ofconception and ofconviction. The
Blue's story is the central one of 9!! l)u,i‘.\'. He wants the ideal context in which work can be produced discourages intellec-
womaii. by which he really nicansa woman that he can create tual engagement. on the one hand. as elitist; and dramatic/
in his own iiiiage. Blue says to Hyang-Sook. while walking character revelation. on the other hand. for reasons of nan-
througli the park. that thc reason he hesitates to marry her is cial restraint (Non-professional performances may be gritty.
that they haven't slept together yet and might not be compnti- as Walker claims; however. they are also restrained and carc-
ble.She responds "But l‘m healthy."(This isihe"compatibil- ful). Starting with a social issue of great importance—an
ity" line. so often referred to as the funniest point in the lm.) upheaval in gender roles and in sexual relations—which effects
What he is saying is that he wants control—wants to retain the every aspect of our lives. Walker. like his actors. has taken few
power to reject if not satised. risks.
lliai it is not a qtlcsllott of desire. passion or love. but of ln 9!! Dl|_|‘S he has neatly narrowed his character focus to
potter and transaction becomes explicit when Hyang-Sook. two men (rather than Ma1t'uIilir' My.i'!ique's four) and wisely
after learning that lic has nitide love to u previous ancee abandonedthe“consciousncss raising"sequencesofMMthat
decides that she nittst make love with him in order to hold a exposed these characters as completely and cloyingly pre-
position ofat least equal privilege (or rights to marriagc)as the conscious. The comic element of 90 Da_t'.t is in the eccentricity
previous tvonian. and he refuses. ofthe individual and the oddity of the situations. The ironic
Ales‘ fantasy. on the other hand. has to do with being the distance is in the degree to which these characters and their
phttlltts itself: being the object of dcsire—ihe sought after. A esperiences deviate from the audience's notions of masculinity
\\t\I\'l1lll approaches liini.inahar. on behalfofanother woman and of romantic pursuit. The audience and the lmmaker
wliotvants his spcrni.Thoughthisisthc logical outcomeofhis laugh not at the character's contradictions (both Alex and
philaindcring ‘cock-siire-' self image. he is baffled by the direct Blue have. in 9!) Da_i'.\". become completely consistent) but at
business-like approach. He attempts to transform it—in his the characters [LY contradictions of socicty‘sIiamix. That they
own iniagination.toromanticiseit: "l think maybe that s0mB- are exaggerations of their society's !eIitIt'nrit's seems less the
thing could develop liere...l know it sounds weird. but you point. The humour of the lilm is dependent largely on the
kno\v...l think she's interested in me..._vou know. why would audience's sense of the silly and the inappropriate.
she approach nit"? Both on its own terms and by comparison Up I0 a Cerlain
ln both lltiiiiisics. what has been commodilied and is being I'"I'"! "l'l's'\’§ it lm \')'l1lCl1 l5 ill ntiti hllmlltvll. tI\'ili0¥ll~ P°l8'
serviced. front differing directions. is the notion of male power l'Iill‘\\- iftmitf i1_"d llngilg-l~4Tl1l5i5 §llf\"ll1\"¢°u5lY 5! "35"" °f
“mi pl,“-m~4\»_ gm-1|'_ man and of his context. His theoretical engagement and politi-
cal commitment are evident in his lms but echoed by his
The happ_\ ending (the weddiiig) in 911 Days. although a words: both through his book. Dialtirlira tlt'I Espermdar and

48 CineAction! Spring '86

 - \..
- l r

l
"\

v--__,, ‘N

Up to a Certain Point—Discussing narrative closure: Her world is raw material for his manipulation.

through §l2llL'IIICl.\’ to tlit: prc>s ‘€\lL‘l'l zis. "I ugrvt‘ with Ilia‘ ulk‘ iii the tttirltlk ititi~i \llL'\,'\‘\\llll |\1tllll\‘.lll\ L'\\lI\l\\llIL‘\l
revolution. l'm not going ttiqticstitin it bcctitise l'm nut intur- lllll'|II\1lk\‘[\,lll||\l\\\tI. "l‘nitt~tiipit-tl it»tii.tLt~~itit-."lit-~.i»~.
csicd in dningthzit. Ntiw, irirliiit tht: FC\'\\l\lllOIlll1Cl'C1I|’€ll1lI1g> "i\i~t In ~l\-t\\ lltlll It ~'1I" W \1<'"\‘ "
that I know can ht: imprutctl. that airc nut right. aiml l'ni "Ru//tiii: ilk‘ l¥\1H'=l\'"}".\<" l'_""*l"\' I *""~"‘\l\'/<
intcrcstcd in revealing thcsc things. But this is criticism mt.-tint "”‘“"' ""“" M“"l' 2"/kg
to improve things‘ not dmtmy iliem."" . .

The p0miml mnum or mu NF“ and mo L_u]mm|/_‘_0cia] lt sci.-i_it> thiit tliu i_i'ni/iluiitiri til p_iiri~iii ctiii ht: ttitiiitl iii :in_\
mnk_xm'~(~unudu is hm,d]),“kL_|),mn0um|“uChu .“_mihi|m_ prntltictitin tiiiit an in lll1_\' fL‘\UllIll<ll'll tlitiiigli l hiipc. iii the
r

t
l Bngagé‘. Htl\\‘L‘\'L‘f. whcthcr at the Nl-‘B or the l('/\l(". 1|pcr~ Ca“ 0! pun: °mcm“"m"'m' mm Mu" M“ r"*'“'
sonal commitment to engiigc with thc \iib'cct ill hand is. for
mc the essential rcquircmcnt in :i l-llilillkf. And Wulkcr. NOTES:
seems to have sloughcd off this ctimmitnit.-iit in ri|\t\Uf of 1 U/JlOiCEt1a!!l PDtIl|l\BSHDdl5lltl1ul0llttcaada BdllSlll€18lDI&VtDlYPCEIVBGR
fantasy and ¢SCilpn', C°"""9"='i' “"135?
All this is not tn h€|_\' than Aleu l\l|_\ dcliu-rctl tti Us thu 2 :ea?e;:;p1‘gg5‘° ‘he MB ml” V Ma"a“"e AC“'"“"‘ 7”” r”"'9”"
l°“g'“"5“"“d._-""l'° l'T"".'"'“"."'"“ ll“ "‘"“"'°'“? "" °‘4""]'“' 3 In contrast is 90 Days we are never min what Alex or Blue no lot R ltvlllg I WEN
"1 m|i"|""5l"P§ lm ll“ 'm""“"“' “uh Scncl Pi" ) '-l|'1l“‘ ‘"1 1| surpiisedwhen reading reviews at ieleieiices to Bliiea< an cllice worker lrealised
romantic vision oH'reet.l0m which, though prtijcctutl tinto thc irieri, that even in the nrevtous Matctilrrie lilysiiqiie there had been nu clear
woman. is at rutit 1| m:i.~culini.~it faiiitaisy. lt may t\l'l'cr tti cnd Itldlll "la! "W59 W9"! bum" Bl Salami 'l|"t Pt-Xlulttt iwvitle with "Q
E

-. _

"“'§p“)n§>'b'h? M J .n‘.“_ ‘d)_n”'ml

.-. 9'~_,
male [l!l.\'_\'l’.S'.\IUIl of wnnicii; but it docs nothing to liiku on the
‘qlldl r“|‘m"m.hlp' Bu‘
-

4
Zxgll: ‘5°:':$""l°co@:“':7rl°'g° gal! ?=‘|°"1;5‘ll'""" 95"""1""?'“$°"'E*'"""~“°"'
ii
“Proper cblll
t IIWISOB YBSDIIICCS
Enrique Ferriandez The VI/lag!‘ VUICC March 19 i985

l
pcrh‘lp_5 bu"‘u§c_ 0! ll“
"c§lhcm '*“n‘""l""f‘nl m d'“|cc“C“] 5 For my comments in this regard l am indebted to Peter Harcuitrt who 5|\2llB(ll1|§
forms "1 Pmducmll l|1m- hlh "W" ¢"nu'1l'~l|@l|""5 and “>1l¢|"~'d insightsregarding nlMHSCU/lllEMyS!IQlIt‘Wlll1llullgllléFB5llVEtllOlFESllV8l‘
bulls"“ art: both appurimt and critically vulncrziblu in his lilms. in 1934 I tuuriu his ideas irtliriiiely more inieiesiiiig tltait the ttiirr itsell arid use
Still the dialectic bctwtecn L'lCt‘li|ll"In'lL‘lll aintl sticiiil rc:~pnn- them "HE B5 8 90"" ll" ¢t>t"Pa"5<1" W'"t "REM Ctrt Pwtlv
sibility rcziclics beyond thc hnrdcns ofctipitzilist d€1UCfilClL'.\ 5 “HaZZ‘"9 ‘he B“'”a“¢'“°Y~" the V'”"£le l/0'" Mm" 25 W55
and their cultural institutions; and Alttil htt.~ nut ittntittgcd to 7 M810 viii X rt0 aritqaai ii you really IDVESOMEOME you love her lm vi‘/ttatvte
. _ . _ . is not lot what you impose oh lier ll IS lust the opposite at at !lldC’lU'lSl
c_5CaPC [M qucglmn “I lh" “l"¢5l ‘"7 p\“"~' '~"“¢rl‘“""‘°m relationship ll|Sp|EClSClyBl8lBllUl\Sll|Dll1Bll§Da§€d0ll3Sill|i!ll0l\l)llIQ(lOlTl
Clll1Cl’Z riot on suliiectroh and 0| participation at the two people at the same level llliink
ls them mom iii (‘uhii l1irl'iIni\tliiitdiiii't p1I\ll ii rc\ti|\i- ma‘ ml 9”“
"5 ""5 “Y l“ '"a"Y"""9‘ '" "‘e"'"‘b“Ca“‘e ““ l ‘AV ll 9"" 90"‘
tiomiry 1'inc. to ii,
l n't cr ill qu u r c\nl ii tmn r\ ct iiilr at LllLll\!l\\
' . B S3 ma
we" beyom"Q me ma"_w°man
me ed 'elal'°"‘
don'tbuther with ptiliticstilull.h\it>impl) r:ntcrt:|in'.‘.~\Icii, U u " am Sac’ cum D mac 0 c""“'E and W357

5D""tU 86 CineAction' 49
 A Criticism
of Dei@"°¢
(for Gertrude Stein)
Born Again,
or: Uncle
by Phlllp Corrlgan i I i p7S
With Andrew Britton's ‘In
Defence of Criticism‘
(rinv»1('TI!)N.' J/4. tssm we
have a familiar cinematic pattern: some
G BIg
Monster (or some lack) is speeitically
constructed in an early framing and the
rest of the mo\'ie works to provide relief/
sustenance. Like such dominant ideo
Inflatable
tropes he supplies a hidden pedagogy,
the comforting and comfortable peda
gogic voice ofauthority that will put ‘us
ri ht. explain (and, of course, forgive)
g
'our‘ mistakes and set us walking prop-'
t

erly again, after drying the tears that his

Machine
"criticism" had actually occasioned.
It is full of those ()h.S'l'!'t'llIIU!I_\‘ tvilhoul
an 0h.rer\'t'r which Paul Valery so effec-
tively criticised all those years ago
(before lilml). Unlike Valery, Andrew by Andrew BHHOI1
(who rarely appears as an I/hye) glis-
sades through the ohjectivist language "I AM HE WHO ACHES WITH
and that easy retreat of any authoritar- AMOROUS LOVE. Wltat do you
ian, the 'one' (e.g. ‘one feels...'l. But, as makc of that‘? I AM HE WHO
the very theoretical. political. and ACHES. First generalization. First
embodying differences which he nds so uncomfortable universalilation.
ttndigestible have shown. behind this WITH AMOROUS LOVE! Oh.
innocuous ‘everyone knows'tand which God! Better a bellyache. A b¢|_
‘one' does he have lI‘l ntind. I wonder?) lyache is at least specic. But the
there is the petty pedagogy of authority ACHE OF AMOROUS LOVE!"
claims and with it. like the onrushing D.H. Lawrence on Whitman.
silencing. comes a host ofselecting prac-
tices. That is to say. Andrew takes (or Uncle Philip is terribly cross with me,
better. male;-.r) a series of imaginary per- and he says he's going to stand me in the
sonae from some easy elements ofa very comer for a very long time.
diffused project and then. chomping "Fascism for me, as for others. begins
loudly, devours the hricks his straw has with a contempt for other people's
made and believes therefore that the happiness".
Walls of this Theoretical Jericho must Well, who'd have thought it'.' A slap on
surely come tumbling down. the wrist from Uncle Philip.
I read his work waiting for a hint, a
suggestion. an implication. a touch of Truth to tell. although Uncle Philip
that sentimental embodiment without always takes care to mention the others,
which any writing today (for me, I give I think what he really means is himself.
away my terms here quite openly)has to “_ ,_ feminism, anti-racism, ami-
be recognised for what it is: a species of imperialism and the celebration ofdiffe-
that fascism which is so extensive. Like rencing. sexualized subjeetivitles . .
Peter Fuller‘ there is the slovenly implied Did you ever‘? What a carry~on! All those
appeal to authority gures (principally big words just to say ME!
those of men and the holy God of aes- Even Gertrude Stein is Uncle Philip,
thetics) and an equally meretricious really. Whenever he gets angry with me

t'nnI'1I mi p. SI mnI'rl on p. 52

50 CineAction! Spring ‘B6

 A oi De’ence The avant-garde is rather various and tht-it own Sense nf their own nmbndt.
IS "01 I" b¢ I1-ll"¢¢l by Y9" °l' by me. ment and consciousness and spirit and
mni'dfmm p. 50 rather what is to be asked of any cultural bging-in-thg-world (rind 5[3t1ing—w|'|¢t'£
selection which can announce. in the practice including that special fonn ¢t;¢_Andt-¢w?_ft-nmthe ptemicethatit-t
calm voice ofany priesthood.th8l 50'"! called writing-criticism which is (if it is ntdi-t to have more people have to
special ‘we‘zireinatime which hedesigns not simply to annotate the holy of the ht-cnntt» n-ton, by [hgif own “ti;
as ‘not a creative period‘: ‘it would be aesthetic and revive authority) the affir- ttnnsfnitntttinn and that of the t¢in;nin_
difculttocome up with evenahandful mation of love and solidarity—it is at titttnees which eonstratn, silence or
(that grab and run masculinist emphasis moral question: in what way does this cxcludc thgm) wt; nnvc tn bngin by dis.
is really quite contagious) of films from social fonn enable.empowcrihe t:elebra- tn;tnt|ing the etttturttl enntrnl booths
thecurreniyear which are even ofminor tion and connectivity of difference in which tittvc for Cttntttt-ins dcnied “PC.
interest‘(p.S).llikedthat_Andrew.‘even that form of ‘making hope practical" nttnec in tttvntit orttte claim that within
ofminorinterest‘anice Oxbridge touch. which l believe to be doing difference tht; §¢lgQ[i\/gtfdilitjn there is rtlsoa set of
gently balanced. like—gosh, there is not differently. Film (along with 2,567 other ttttthtttieed interpretation;-what “the
cven a minor-minor elective to place in cultural forms) is one of the ways in work“ means. This seems. in my dang.
i the tezicherly desire syndrome here. a which feminism. anti-racism, anti- ing_ t-vttsit-enese away from another
l tiny trace to glorify and incorporate to imperialism and the celebration of dif- t)mt;t_ to be where we are nnw_ what is
curriculum. ferencing $BXlIilll§¢¢l §"ll.l¢°ll"lll°5- hall necessary‘? What is possible? Well I for
So I thtwsht ‘whttt is seine tth hm-‘ made tt polyuphony of making s=nse/ one might g0.sentimentally,witha polit-
Well we have ‘a defence ofcriticism'and sensibilities. theories and pleasures, i¢5 nt‘ feeling good.‘ Or is that to be
50 it SBYS. bl-ll Wllal l5 ill"? l° lx ‘l'=l°"' dftrilm and bewmings. through Wlllfll greeted with the snort of derision as the
SlV¢ bl-ll? fol’? 1l83l"§l7 whal l5 ll'l¢ different collectivities are now more ttttthoriged representative of all those
Placllwl “’°l'k Whlcll ll‘ b¢l"8 l’¢l\1§¢d as.iun-tl. The glissade (alas not quite as gufgg in dot-ttinttt-tee [caches for the
3ll¢l- cllllillly lll‘lPl‘ll‘"ll~ wllal l5 lhal enchanting B5 Rvbbf-Gl'lll¢l'5 .2/l~l-l"!!T-\' Critical Bible and pronounces a series of
theoretical defence (as in psychoanalytic nnt its sttttvt-t-Sivti nt working
,,0_i,-,,-ft nnntncmn? Fnscistn int tn¢_tt,t rntothet-§_
'l'¢5i5l3"¢¢') Wlllcll l5 bclllg il"l'l°llllc"-l class racist masculinitylof/\ndrcw‘s bib- begins with a contempt for other peo-
here? Dilferent collectives have lived tingntptiin tbntnotc ntiintm one wtttttd ptc-S happin¢§§_ Littn in t9(,tt we do not
llll'°"Bll ll"? la“ W" °l' llll¢°" (‘ll 50) be ofinterestwereitnotfor(ltitsalmosi have to suddenly make ‘good’, ‘politi-
2 entirely masculine authority (2) its eli- e;tl‘_ oppositional or progressive lms,
W3“ Wllll 3 l3°l'l“l" dl5C°"¢l'll'lB- all
Elllllbdled l°'¢°g"lll°ll- Wlllcll Pl°¢l5°lY sion of the semi-fascism of Perry Ander- but we have to make different films dif~
and theoretically indicates a need to go snntit recent g|i[Z Stow ntnddit-tg ttrtet t-en,nt|y_ 0|h¢[wigp_ tnon the met; and
beyond resistance and resisting tvlt 50 Dad (In the imclt-.r of Iii.»-mriral leiis settle back in our chairs whilst Sir
Sllllillll rt" Ill? bllglll b°)’5 and lllgll man-rialism-—one of the most odious telle us why it‘s good and what it means.
llll)'- l"‘3°ll5¢*lll*lllllll e"il5l°ll5l lo "€f"~l' hooks l have read for many years‘) with
ing. And in that refusing there is a spe- the patriarchal mcssianism of Edward NOTES
¢l3l- fol’ 5° ll“
5Plllll llll'l'l5~ll §P¢¢lal Pm‘ Thompson or the more sturdy. but not ":;'r5:;:9'x7::ma;::,Zmn:'LZ',%::L':”w;"mE:f;';:'G
¢i0“$- 3|"-l )"=$- -*¢"ll"l°"lill- l°""dl"B- 3 less exclusivist. politics of Fred Jameson. izwwtselnbrlmlin wt-at-s me tmt=rii>tm=tuinaii>ttn=~

- C°ll¢¢ll\'l5ll'lS
.
lll, lll-‘ll “gellllc llP°93lYP5¢“ Throu 5 houti the text I waited fora hint.a _
"°"’ “"°"““3" '9”
ant-sartitn Hislotyllmdnn Wzuwileldiritnlstrt
M""“'
"‘“"""""" c“""""'vwast. Inlm
Ofllifmtltlvn-' trace, that in the last fitteen or twenty malroll Phiilirwtrlntlltuz Fall 1905 iitm-.n.ta,t='cP4=o=IIt=
That is to say we tdiffewttly to be years films might have been made. fezjfevjzrtjnsié-;“'_';'1-l--t~';r;;1;; R§“1;;"1g;;”n§
sure,and this is festive!)are Into Textual- ttttdit-nut; t-night have heen ple;|5urably w,,“,,,,,,,,#,i,,,,i,,,, i,,,,,,,, tt,,,,,,,,,9, mt, K 5,,,,,,,,,,
ity, we are timingand spaeingour words. infntntett (its Brecht would have it). dis- :'!;te(lzlC:ntoltt:‘M;w"£izr; vl:I1:i1nl’I;ivuyIyH::1;:'0:£
. ~ , . . iilll iigan I lanolouy

lms‘ .Andrew.‘ are nm m “P1 Kiln‘ §ll55_l°ll mlghl llllvci Pu" ‘_“abl°d- by rmurimiinmnn CtlIMIMelm1979iJ wniiiivesne-aiptmtue-
DOCS lhl "Wt! "I l936 I0 be 5ld- Flll"5 lion Ill I Illirmilla/i 196!) u satntiwtttutsotmswt inlay
'
are C0§\l’lM-l¢d (\'¢!ll1E_l' _lll?l" lecllldlngl
_
feminism, sexual politics, anti-bourgeois
'
and anti~capttalist 4' to
-, ~. politics in rel..ition " - lllrlitllltv/L!ltBmkst982l-¥l1IfItDilIVe)tu1Bl$§IIIt
kwmzmmm A"!“m¢'bqwmw,wm‘mm
l\'3"5 Qla llcld °lP°55ll7lllll¢5-alllmilge‘ different film practices. t P entnttwi ‘Against itteintttcai £ttctim Ban" tum Sum
repenoire: they are visual constructions |n§t¢nd we are offered the return tttthe ‘W Ft-"t hit" vwwntt Sinttii 1964
. _» _ . .. . 2 Pct-vtttari Doittqittyttntitpes Both/lrte5il|l5ll.‘lr\ltzlutttll~
Wllll addcd ll'3l3¢5 Qlll“? 5P¢°Cll- mlllllcal sale male world ot rrilirislri.‘ Well we ti, inwwmm $,,,t,tti,.t;,tit,.,.., ittmttttnim wtmnea
and noise tracks. They are multiple in ttnnw tttnt wot-|d_ difft;rtgntly_ 35 tt _e,_-tie; .1-itttntnnnt it-tifrutcetsl nn :21? ;:]uIIt:; testis) ng't‘»:'-3
:":ut;"|"n §"§(,Wwm,ml$,i,,, 5,3,, Matt,”
t " ' - .
. l U QIWII
their resourcetulness for meaning. YOU
- >

ol differentiating prisons,ullofthem tied

- >

56¢. /\"dl’¢W- Wllal Y°lll' 5lll‘lW P¢°Pl° to disadvantage. until the prisoners. Ctnmt nun tacit (ed) Capitalism Slate rntnnitmwii Mann!
- . ~ ' t - - . itttntinon-otattetiaaot
cunslnicuon olilhg last lhcomucal bllnkmg dgdmsl lhc "gm" “gm: m ‘he ;i lllilltlns Yntvi/l1§2Dl7lLtIIl Chitin iauiciecmipttin
)’¢lll'§ llld°5- ill"-l ll "lllsl have bull Y°lll' vocabulary and the standards of the Etna/lirizittl tau R Willuis Phl4licsaM|eIIuS(LI\WI New
intention because like me. and also as It boss-class and their insistence that CUlll..l- §;'7'95°** ‘W C‘ P °°'"°'" '" ""’" "“""'""" 5°""Y ‘
mllswllne 5“blecl'V"Y~y°“l'vefl'l~'5ll‘e "ll Pmlllllillon allcily llll‘/9 all 4 insaieinttpennruittrinneincoiianntaiewtmtwuwutma
tqfa
enormous “coming out" ofa million dif- inscribed meaning and their equally vio» 2-tlti to-T sayol tn; mum“
' t ' ' ‘ I . Hill! I
lent reduction of all cultural experience
. - -

°,h:::M'w““'|,m'‘:m“m'“m,mit§;w,Ww,ti,m,m,,w
V

ftrenlll Collevllvlifd \'=¢°B"lll°ll§ Wll°

lfl l975lN0tes nlt the sitctttltllly w'w"\I=' Stwwr 1: :32:
Say» and
a . -
ll"!
1"" lat’ ll'°l" P°l"¢ I" llll$
A t
to that nfreading 0/the It'.\'I. No hint here
‘ » t ~ wtynne he mt-ii -rungs it-wwtt sue
imymg‘ we shall d.em oursc]veS' Thm ‘ff ‘he wllh 5'_x'al/dlnercnccd
Pmbl'"'_m5 hiilmydlmrrrrzzulnuiliciwwiisnli switisttiewtiam Vale. msiarnt
I5 WYY llaPP)' making l°l’ ""3 a"d W°"ld literacy. or with textuality as a danceand Altcia 0Slnltu Anteman merry nwv snaoett by New Von: mm
htfe lit!!!" lmP05§lbl¢ W" °ll
- ‘ti ta P intict
-
J play amongst the significations. - ~ . e
F Www mmonnlmwn
rntunnmntsnnrsuaattsus Mhwmsm
Wlllcll l'¢C°Elll5l3d lllal lllclc l5 ll° l'll°l_l"' What is precious to me is that revolu- ;t,,,,,u,n,,,,u,n,,,,,,,t, t;,,,,,mt tmi J n,mt_q,ti,mi.
"18 ‘lll' lllm5 (QT 3")’ Yllll" Clllllllill Pm‘ lion which still denes the two crucial
ductions) rather there are resources there pingt-nssivc questions (httt_ nf¢nttt5,;_ for "N M awn“ ‘ml R DW.B||:m;'f'mm‘“““l; um: .

l°l' l"al""E ""°ill""El"l<

.. Tllal l5~ 1° l" each collectivity differently): What is l:;g.D'NID§t‘I\ Cmss4t>~!t1StLi.trtmn l|eu|Vnitt.ln1i-|iin_N'll:tt\wt
~.
direct. the ai_idience_has come alive in its
a . - > - -i Pmsibte? To dtywnrk
nencssniit? what it - t
“mm “mm 1.
‘gm N Fmwh Iwwm “main”
unaenantwntmiituenuttnmt Vutt.

Wondrous dIlTl'¢¢"18- which might assist in people's coming to An mAnIsica lull isu

Spring ‘B6 CineAction! BI

Q-_ ___
 COLLECTIVISEDRECOGNITIONS!" works of art until they have the good
Happy-making! Isn't that adorable‘! fortune to encounter him. I am cast as
' “RACIST WORKING-CLASS MAS-
CULINITY!“
the villainous Don Almro. On these
occasions. Uncle Philip becomes more
A littlt: less sensitive this. perhaps; hut than usually dyspeptic and fantastical.
any stroke in a just cause, and Uncle and imagines that I wish to shut him up
(unItI_/romfl. 5!) Philip is a blue-eyed little darling, all forever inthc male world ofcriticismand
for Ming n bud boy no nlwnyh uses nun dressed up to meet tlte angels. throw away the key. Naturally.he would
nnn-,¢_ jnsl [0 remind In‘. nun his L.On_ "RACIST WORKING-CLASS MAS- preler to ltghtoutlorthe territory, honk-
winnnntss nns been |.ni§L.._|_ --Fm. G“, CULINITY!" ing on his hom and coming altve tn his
U-ndc Smn-'_ |§n-I ‘hm gnrgwnn-_v rm Two slaps on the wrist. 4l)_()()l) lines. it wondrous dilferenctng. ‘Once. when he
sum sh‘-~d hc graurfuh if she wnn; n|iVe_ detention and a week's loss of privileges was insisting with particular strtdeney
A few yen“ ngo Unntc pnnin bum hnn_ tor working-class men! that it was th_e aim ol my ltfe to prevent
M-|fn gran bin nnisy slenm Engine wnh Plow shall we manage it‘! So many had htm lrom deltntng himself. l was so rash
-~|_m.,_- and 50|idn|-ny~- painted on lnn ltttle buys to be chastised! as to reply that the sooner he dened
Sign |cn|| n hi, L-En n-nn;n;nc_ and 5n|nc_ Peter Fuller. Edward Thompson. Perry himselfthe better. for whether or not he
inn“ he d,-inns n so fnnl than I mink he-5 Anderson . . . even a gentle tap of found the effort worth his whtle tt_would
going m kn] nomnbndy admontshment to hard-working Fred at least get him out of my hatr. My
Jameson, who can still only manage a reward wasacliparound the ear. and the
"\\/()N[)ER()U§ |)]|TFEREN(‘|N(]“ C+. observation that this was exactly the
HONK! |-|()N|(y H()N|(t So many little wrists to be slapped! So kind of caddish remark that was to be
--GENTLE ,\P()(_‘A[_YP§E OF ,\F_ many little cliitdish bottoms to be expected from a Cambridge boy.
FIRMATION!“ ~\'P1l"k@'d!
CHUFF! (‘tippt (‘Htippt OW! OW! PLEASE DON‘T_ UNCLE One day l hope to summon up the nerve
"A MILLION D[FF|jR[{NT]_A[_ PHILIP! tosay to Uncle Philipthat lwouldprefer
cottncrtvtsteo RECOGNl- "LOVE AND SOLIDARITY!" growls it.un the whole. ifhe aid not vrvissl his
TIONS!" Uncle Philip, $PAN|(! SPAN K! fantasies of bondage and liberation
VROOM! vtzoomt vttootvtt SPANK! And Wititl llbtilll the little girls. either Ohm criticism or onto me. and that
~~| AM WHO HE Agptgg w|-[H Uncic pninp-y ifhe is rcallyinterestcd in the “enormous
AMOROUS LOVE!“ At the mention of the little girls Uncle wmiat= aai" at dim-twat mllwivilivs
BANG! BANG! BANG! Philip becomes sensitive again. and has a \\’|li¢|\ ilk‘ ¢"\'i§i""5 in hi5 mm? 0|)/mP!1!"
I always know when Uncle Philip is hav- gentle apocalypse of affirmation. mvd. hm‘ would be W¢|| itdvifd I0 ltildt
ing a gentle apocalypse of allirmation "THE ETERNAL FEMININE LEADS in hi5 §lK‘1"" °"Bl"° for 50"“? ""1" ("Pm
because a funny glint comes into his eye, US ONWARD!" “!_“'i!">P‘"'!- If I 5"" r°\'|l"8 Wail)’ bra‘/¢|
and he starts ltitting me and accusing me The little girls have all been so good that Will dd lhl Wl1i|¢ i £lm- Of C0lI\'S¢- in
ofall sorts ofthings. Once he said that l they cantidy ttptheirdesksandgo home. P\’i"¢lP|¢- h¢!PP.V "14" he i5 hi\PPY- ll l5
wanted to stop him dancing attd playing with a lollipop front Uncle Philip. i"1P°5>ib|¢ fl" ml‘ "1 Wk" lh" d'=B"3'= 0r
amongstthcsignilications. lwasinforit “LADIIB.LOLLlPOl’SANDl.lQUOR— interest in his twrsaaal vitrrivavc that
then. l can tell yott. ICE ALLSORTS ALL AROUND!“ lt¢- Phps. would think appropriate.
Frankly. as far as l'm concerned. he can And a whole box of sweeties for Ger-
dance til he drops. trude Stein [who is actually otherwise
Sometimes Uncle Philip goes into a kind engaged with Alice B. Toklas. and isn't
oftranceinfrontofa ntirror.murmuring disposed to be interested in Uncle Phil-
“Wondrous dillerencing!“ overand over ip's liquorice allsorts).
again. l am always glad when this “THE ETERNAL FEMININE LEADS
happens. as I have a chance to slip out US (AND MORE P/\RTl(‘ULARl.Y. ls a fofufn fol‘ cfltlcal
and go dancing myself. I know that one ME) ONWARD!" ,
day Uncle Philip isgoing to ftnd ottt that Up to heaven in the ego ntachine! t‘6Sp0I‘lS8 IO ISSUCS
I'm a faggot and that l like to dance in WHEEEEE! LOOK AT ME! ~ -
gay discos. This will make him Alrlgflet VROOM! vtzootvtt vttootvtt l'3l5¢d 111 lh pages Of
than evenbecausc he thinks that all men HONK! HONK! HONK! ' '
art: fascists: Whene\'et' he wants to be ct-turn ctturrz CHUFF! CmeAcn0n-’ Readers
abrasive. he accuses you of heing Exit. in apotheosis. Uncle Philip. shak- are invited to direct
masculine. tng the classiest ltttle ass tn Toronto and
Odd really. because he sometimes looks distributing free copies of his bibli- §ubn][Ss]Qns to:
quite masculine himself. especially when ography , l
he's wearing his Gertntde Stein hat. Uncle Philip sings alntost as well as he Cin€ACll0n/
Uncle Philipdances antongthe signiIiea-
tions the way some people dance at
discos.
dances. His party-piece. which he per-
forms with a grandeur befitting Bee-
thoven. is the prisoners‘ chorus from
'
Alexander St-
'
Look at me. what great buns! Fitlclin. though curiously enough he Toronto! Ontarlo
Look at me. what a sensitive soul! seems to be under the impression that it
"GENTLE APOCALYPSE OF AF- is a solo nttmher. Healways says ‘we'. of
FIRMATION !" course. bttt it tends to come ottt sounding
Shake that ass. Uncle Philip! like ‘l‘—a fact which l derive from his
“HAPPY-MAKING DIFFERENTIAL conviction that there is no meaning ‘in‘

BI CineAction! Spring '86

1'

©©)KS cilic lilnis. historic reportage, discussions wiili viewers and

lm-makers. advice on teaching and political work: the
projecteil audience includes lm-niakers. teachers. stit-
dents and activist.s. l.ike the maga/ine. the collection wants
to he partisan. inl'ormati\'e and eniertainiiig wltile address-
Political Criticism, ing serious political and theoretical issttcs. Like all collec-
tions. it gives the reader the particular pleasitre of
Hollywood and hrowsing-skipping from piece to pieee—snapping one's
atteittion from sllb_|t't.‘l to suhject. (Of course. given the
i . . .
Oppositional Film (iodartliait inspiration ol'the title. such jtiinps will doiiht-
less lead tts through disorientation to new connections.)

Tho Now Lolt on tho Now Lolt

A review ol';i collection encourages a certain iinpressioii-
ism. htit the nattire olithe material also demands a political
response, at least iii a eodilied lasliioii. Peter Steven. who
works in iiideperident lm distribution in Toronto. pro-
. HQLLYWQQD POLITICS vides an introdiictiim which strikes the expected tones of
AND COUNTER-CINEMA consensus and congratulation aitd also presents the context
and ltistor_\' of the maga/iiie. Jiniip (‘iii is prottdl_\' sittiated
i it within the American New Left of the oils and 7l)s. “the
Mo\'enient" as Steven ptits it. l stippose this aggrcs.si\‘c|_\
cheery rhetoric is a combative response to media deroga-
tion of those political and cultural rebellions we all
remember as loriiiative oi‘ conlemporar_\ politics. More
of
those iiividiotis
i\h_]L‘Cllt\llili"li_\'. Steven sets up one
tlicltototuies which valorire one term at its ‘i-pposite‘s‘
expense. Under New l.el't we lind the still glowing oils.
owering pluralism. moveinent politics; tinder Old l.el't.
the forgotten Klls. Party Iincortliodox_\ . slid-illhllitlllcti class
polities. Any necessary criticism ol'Stalinism is iitideretit h_v
the righteous sclf-presciitatiiin. At the le\el of political
practice the schema ignores the degree to \vhich those
inlainousl_v ‘spontaneotis‘ movements involied. were
sometimes led hy and even l'\‘\l\’ll_lCti the organi/ations of
the ()ltl l.el‘t—('oinniunists. 'l'rot.sk)ists and the ohiioiis
New/()ltl synthesis of Maoisin. More hi'oadl_v. to invoke
the passing conjuncitire oli the New Left witltotit clear-
sighted criticism ol'its |'aiIitres tifprogrtiiiiiiie and organi7a-
413*" tion isastonisliing naivete. Far from groiiuds loroptimism.
the New Lel't'.s tra_iector_\ was the dissipation oi‘ a mass
hase, the integration o|' its politics into liberalism when
clear class and anti-iitiperialist lines were not drawn. the
reduction ol‘ its networks oi activists and intellectuals.
Media jibes ahoiit the ttirit to ps_vchoiherap_\‘. ‘radical'
lifesl_\'les and jogging are not L'l\lit'L‘i) without truth. We're
in a downturn in radical polities; the sectoral inovcinents
which persist are \'ariousl_\ integrated and isolated with
by Scott Forsyth soitie political and organivational consolidation. Settli-
mental etocations can only coiituse leftists in perceiving
Jiuii/i ('ul: I!!!/I_\ lt'l!IIl/. I’nli'lii:i nnil ('niuiier-(‘iiiuimi the Iiniitatioiis olimovemeni politics. (One ot'tlie articles h_\
edited h_\‘ Peter Steven John lless. is considerably more pereepine on the 6(ls.)
Between the Lines, I985 Fortttiiatel)‘. Jump (‘iii in practice is much hetter than
400 pages: Piil-l,'~!5 this; indeed. the vitalit_\ ol' lelit cultural criticism and lilni
This collection of material from the lelit-wing American production \\'ilttIll it exemplies is one ofthe crucial areas
i Iilm magaline provides a fair picture ol'a decade of politi- of consolidated strength. Steven also notes a consistent
cal criticism, politica|l_\ motivated tilin-making and some elass line in the writing which coniplentents the emphasis
i sense of the ongoing development ofa specialized practice on gender. sextialii_v and ethnicity raised by the move-
L oli lm studies. inents. As well, Junip (‘ill has done important historical
lump ('14! is rightly celebrating more than Ill years as a work in addressing the cttltitral politicsol"_‘llls ('ommunists
itiajor forum for political tilni criticism and a signicant and a good example on the Workers Film and Photo
urganiving tool l'or independent lilm-making in Nortlt l.eagtie is included in the hook.
America. The material compiled includes criticism of spe- On hehall‘ til‘ the magavine. Steven offers some valid

Spring '86 Cine/\ction! 53

 self-criticisms. Some writersare charged withatendency to ltealtliy popttlist ambivalence about 'theory.‘ On the one
reduce art to the social and ideological and a hostility to the ha nd, we are in the midst ofa resurgence of Marxist theory
dominant cinema which ignores the pleasure for a mass in politics, philosophy. economics. sociology and cultural
aitdience and denies atttonomy to the aesthetic. (As a studies. lt isa reason for optimism but.on tlteotlter hand.
loitg-tinie reader l would have liked to sec one of those in a tliflicttlt period for radical politics. such seholarsltip is
‘('ttt_ slash—Aha! sexist/racist ideology!‘ articles one more open to acatlentit: domestication—nowhere more evidently
time.) Predictably he blamesthis on residual Old Leftism. than in the attaitiment by lilm and cultural stttdies of a
We are ttsed to left cultttralcriticism ritualistically dismiss- iticlte amongst tltc ‘discip|ines.' and a certain hierarchical
ing Socialist Realism. bttt Steven's repetitiveness on this l'etishi/ation of theoretical language which attends such
point starts to feel like a concession to the hostile anti- instittttionalivation.(lt's probably worthemphasi7ingthat
coititnttnist culture we live in. (I won't dwell on the ‘logic’ the language of down-to-earth. pragntatic politics is no
wlticlt allows a simultanetius fond remembrance for a dif- guarantor of ‘correctness' either.)
ferentwingol'Stalinism andits manoeuvresinthe Chinese Leaving aside disputes about the lntroduction‘s (the i
(‘ultttral Revolution.) Soviet aesthetics is a bureaucrati- tttagazine‘s'.'] sense of ltistory and theory. readers, when
cally distortetl part ofa tradition of Marxist sociology of they get to the collection. will lind themselves engaged
art which tlates back to Plekhanov in the l9th century. lt is politically atid tlteoretically—as lilnt-makers. teachers.
a tradition frequently charged with social and ideological viewers.
reductionism. but still not without at coherence and power
worth debating. Indeed. all of the lilm movements the
collection celebrates have utilized more naive variants of
sociological criticism and invoked ‘realism' against Holly-
wood in the tlevelopment of ellective ideologies of film
practice. This is not exactly rigorous self-criticism.
Just when l was calming down, Steven turns to what he
calls Marxist aesthetics. He surely intends to be brief. hut
the version of this tradition is sti truncated and idiosyn-
cratic that a response is required. The schema he olTers is -~
quite original; Marxists writing on art divide into the
‘greats' lBrecht, Lukacs and Sartre make it) who are ico-
noclastic and titopian. the Soviet-model critics who are
respectable aiitl the Soviet-model hacks who arc not. Guess
ttliich group ottr New Lefties want to emulate? Steven
wishes aesthetics to mean merely response to specic texts
*'\
and that respotise will either deploy the hase/superstrttc-
titre model ofclassic Marxism or move to diversity. exibil-
ity. etc. This myopic focus can be objected to in detail; for
itistatice. Brecht and Lultacs (and followers like Gold-
matiti) have a complicated relationship to both the Soviet Shmey Te"-|p|e
model and the Marxist sociology l‘ve mentioned above. Or
what abotit Marcttsc. the star of the New Lcft's selective
appropriation of Marxism. who rejects the base/super-
strttclttrc inodel and is still hostile and reductionist to []|'||;Q mun Wm] f"||||u|_.|||]||ywnm|
popular itietliai’ More important. this 'aesthetics' needs to
be placed within Marxism‘s sttstained debate on culture Most radicallilm criticism begins with Hollywood.e\'en
aitd politics. The potential of Marxist cultural criticism is if only negatively. Steven contends that the magazine has
bound tip with varied theoretical debates: the re-dening of grown more sophisticated in its comprehension ofthe mass
ideology atid class consciousness begun by Lenin and Luk- pleasttres of dominant lilm and this small selection seems
;tcs_ re-sitttated by Altlittsser and his followers and oppo- to bear that ottt. (‘harles Eckert on Shirley Temple is
tietits; the attempt to comprehend class hegemony and original in tlteoreticttl approach and exceptionally enter-
cultitrein Gramsci;tlieintriguing.iflargely failed effortsof tainttig in its deployment of promotional material. con-
Reich. Marcttse and Althusser to deepen a radical view of temporary political and economic discottrsc and details of l

sttbjecti\itytn a synthesis with Freudianism. Eventhe more tilnis. [)an Rttbey persttasively tracks the contradictions
locally aeslltetic work such as the delineation of mass witltiti Slur ll'ur.\‘ combination of spectacle. technology
cttltttreandcttltttreindustriesbytlte Frankfurt theortstsor and ideological recttperatioti_ Somewhat startlingly. he
tltc superb debates on Realism and Modernism amongst concludes with ait indictment of big technology from the ’
l.ttkacs. Brecht. Benjamin and Adorno have involved point of view of llmils-l0-gt'O\\’llt, soft-teclinology refor
comprehending the nature of present capitalism and the mism. Wasn't ljttst talking about the New l.elit's political
possibilities oftranslormation. To be more positive. Steven |inipness—how about communes. Dan‘! Chuck Kleinhans
does appreciate the necessity of incorporating Marxist stakes otit an exemplary stance on entertainment and
politics and tlteorv into the left-wing cultural project. working class audiences in it discussion of working class
Perhaps l'm beinga little hard on this Introduction. but lilni heroes, Jane Fetter opens tip musicals for serious
./tulip ( ‘u!'s attention tti serious Marxist issues. is not prom- discussion and then closes tlte case with a particularly dottr
int-nt|_\ in evidence in this collection.‘ This is apparently ‘structuraIist‘ polities which compares itnfavorably to
due to the broad aitdience imagined and to Steven's otlterimportattt work on nttlstcals:

54 CineActlor\! Spring '86

 Tlte brevity of the section does not allow any considera-
tion ofsome key questions for radicals reacting to popular
culturc—what does such analysis mcan for radical lm
practice? Does it lead to formal or ideological prescrip-
tions? How can sophisticated comprehension of media
texts and mass pleasures contribute to mass politics’! Of
course. some questions may seem intractable. short of
seizure of the means of production.

Tho llltmmunts make the llluvlus

The bulk of the collection is devoted to oppositional

cinema. and this seems justiable in promoting awareness
and condence amongt the lm-making constituencies.
and given the considerable literature available on Holly-
wood. As it has throughout the century. oppositional lm
usually means documentary lm for reasons of politics.
°"8“"i“‘i°“the“*1 °°°,"°'_“i°§- . The Other Francisco (Dir: Sergio Giral, Cuba)
Most of material is historical reportage and assess-
ments of the practical diiculties of left lm-making. There
are particularly good over-views of Newsreel and Third The nal section on ‘Radical Third World Cinema‘ is in
World Newsreel. black American lms. and the overall several ways the most impressive. Julianne Burton and
state of independent. documentary work in the United Tom Waugh discuss 25 years of Cuban cinema and the
States.Agood politicallook is takenat UnionMairi.r, which particular contribution of Joris lvens as a committed
also raises issues of the Old Left. The Quebec/Canadian internationalist. These articles make great reading and we
t
lm. A Wives’ Tale. receives particular attention to process. can feel the impressive accomplishments ofa national and
Steven notes the problem that much of the writing simply communist lm culture. despite the effects of colonialism
documents rather than engaging critically or theoretically. and bureaucratic deciencies. Teshome Gabriel looks
but that is a persistent limitation in documentary lm closely and formally at St:mbct‘tL"s .\'aIn,a lm which con-
history.’ fronts the central contradiction ofclztss within the national
The only disappointing section is devoted to ‘Women's liberation of a Third World country.
Counter-Cinema.‘ Since feminist lm criticism and lm- At this point. l‘d read about women‘s. gay. lesbian.
making are so developed and specialized. and since Jump black and national cultures (and I was looking in vain for
Cut has always been in the forefront ofthese developments. proletarian culture) and it struck me that there is a confu-
i it is surprising that the selection is brief, theoretically sion repeated between what is useful in developing an
uneven. and considers no women's lms in detail. oppositional ideology in practice and a lixing of distinct
Ruby Rich provides a good over-view of feminist criti- cultures as a political concept.
cism and lms. but it will appear somewhat cursory and As concepts these need more thotight and argument
dated to most readcrs.Shedoes introduce key lm-makcrs about whether in expressing the politics of at particular
like Ackerman. Rainer and Meszaros. who have continued oppressed grouping they also appeal to 2| kind ofessential-
to be important for feminists. Her ‘naming' of modes of ism about gendt:r,ethnicity, sexttality whicli \‘tt|ttri7cs sec-
women‘s film is engagingly democratic and non- toral experiences and attendant reformism. and which can
prescriptive. although the names smack of preciciusness. lead to dead-end isolation in movement politics. Presuma-
Two debates on ‘positive images‘ and Shirley MacLaine as bly this is the kind of debate Jump ('uI‘s class line can take
star are conceptually banal and politically tepid in relation on. although it is not taken up here. Maybe that Old Left
to any recent writing on identication and appropriation debate on proletarian culture can serve as a model of
ofimagcs and stars. (Presumably such inclusions are duc to considerable rigor and sophistication.
thecditofsarchivalfunction.but l think we canbcspared lt is also worth commenting on what seems to mt: a
them.) Julia Lesage has an arresting analysis of Broken successful strategy of inclttding interviews. exchanges.
Bloxrnms. the kind of revisionism that has been cnicial to advice on leaching and political work. Some of these are
radical lm criticism. That‘s all. Jump (‘ufs record on mundane or obvious(forex;imple,the editors promisingtn
women and lm is much better. be more sensitive on gay issues) but several times valuable
The section on Gay and Lesbian Cinema modestly and insights emerge on production.distribution.and consump-
intelligently lays out some political and conceptual tion of left-wing lms. Julia Lesage‘s powerful concluding
groundwork forexpanding cultural politics commensurate article on Central America sets ottt the tactics of utilizing
‘t with the importance of the gay and lesbian movements. lm in political work and highlights what is likely to
Richard Dyer on gays in lm and Becker. Citron, Lesage remain a crucial arena of imperial confrontation with
and Rich on lesbians and lm offer exhilirating manifesto~ world revolution.
style overviews which entwine personal positionsand stake Some major omissions should be noted: there is very
out a distinctive politics about culture. This section high- little of the magazine's considerable writing on European
lights the need for left self-criticism on gay issues. but also lms and almost nothing on experimental lm, so it seems
points to the importance ofaudience appropriation in any that little attention is paid to controversial debates about
cultural politics. radical modernism. although a second volume is hinted at.

Spring'86 CineAction! BB
 PCrh:\p\ thc ~trungu~t |mpn:s.\iun [mm the hook i\ the
l'cc||ng lhul lcl'l|.~l cultural work i~ dc\\:|np|ng at curtain
imlunltvgltill cnltcrcutcu and nn zullcrmtliw orgztni/ntinn uI'
pruducliml and t|l\l|'lhllliuII- S<1|m.'I1ntc\ lhi.\ ~ucn1\ lu
m\n|\c lnrcgrnumling lhc ctluc.|lmn:|| u\crlhc;|c.sll1c1tc;
mum: tlt~l;|m:clr<m1lhc cu|Icc|i0n'~. hn'gilln|l1g\ \\il|1HH||)-
\\nu;|\ popular pk-;|>urc.~ and IL|L‘u|0gl\‘.\. But lhi> di>_ium:-
liull |~ mu ru;|I|_\ uhwlulc. l'l1im;m-l_\_ rzuliunl culmrnl
pnl|tic~ ]1t>\L'\ lhc rc-.|pprupr|;|l|u|t. |t not t'c-dc|1itin|1.ul’
plcimm. MM p‘,pu];"il\‘
a
256 QUEEN ST. W. TORONTO 598-I447
'H1u cullcclimt duliu-rs \\h;|l lhu muuzt/|nc dv.-||\cr~—;|
wmc 0| dm-r~c dnruclmm in puluicnl urtlivi\n\ and in\;|ln-
zthlc inlkvrmnliun on lhu range ul current nppu\ili1Il1;ll
’
o"e""g Md‘ aelecnon °' popular and
scholarly lllm lournals and crltlcal and technical
lnmnztkutg. ()h\m||~l) I nd \U|llL‘ ltnniuniunx, hul ;|n_\' books °“ mm and "dau-
pul|lic:|l c\pc|'|um‘c \huu|dhulr11\lr:|lin1:;|\ \\cll ;|.\ engag-
lH_L'. and lc\\ hunk\ arc pulnicatl c.\pv:ricm:c~ ;|| ull. Dtwpilc
|l\ n;|1nc~:tl\c Ill lhu lcclmiquc nl n||\cn|t|1ccIiun_ r;tdi\::||
\|\\‘\'l;|ln|\ \\ |l| tluuhlk-\~ ~cn~c;1 cnltcrcncc;mdcu|tnccl|n|1
.nmntg~l lhc pnl1l|c~:|nd pr;|clicc~ rcpn-~c|1ml.;|mI|h;ui>
huth rv;|~\ur||131;u1t|c|t:|llcng|ng.

FOOTNOTES
1 Some very gund matenal Irom Jump Cu! IS another recent cnllechun
In
Mower and Mclhuds. Volume II edited by Btll Ntchuls Berkeley and
L05 Angeles UHIVBIQIIY 0| Cal||om|a Press I985 all f0l'IlIl'l {OI
OPCII _'
2 See Richard Dyer, 'En!e¢tammenl and Uluptzl" |n Heme The Mt/sma!
ednted by Rtck Altman London Fioulledge 5 Kegan Paul. 1981
readers Writers &
3 Fol an allot! In cnuecl lhts ||m|tahun we BM Ntchuls “The Votces 01 Jlmldbh "Hi M
Docnme|\la|y' m Mavnzs and Melhnzlr Volume II, and B||l N|cho|s T .._
!t1r*u/ngyandIhvl/wage Bloommgton lndmna Umvevsnly Pvess 1981 on‘! I )0 ltmlllnns .itrn\\ umnln

‘Paul
the

<> “Y
TH O; FU N t\;J
ARTISTS’ FILM CENTRE
Canada's only centre tor the production,
dlstrlbutlon, exhlbltlon and promotion
of Avam-Garde Illm and related media.
507 King St. E. Toronto, Ontario. M5A 1M3 Canada
Tuesday - Friday. noon-6pm (416) 364-7003
f.
O

58 C|neAct|on! Spr|r\g'86
F
 ..>*

Contributors
KAY .-\RM.~\T.~\(iI" lc;|cl1c~ ("im'1u;|SI\ld1c\:u lhc l'ni\cr~|l_\ ut"lurnnl\\;~hc|~;1c\1r;nurl~>r
Tnr<m\u\ l"c~l|\';|l of|'1'~l|\';|l.~u|1nl 1~ an ;|\\;ml-\\|nniny lm-nmkcr.

|\'.~\S.\"B.-\f\'.\lN(i lcalclu-~l111~lud|c\;n lhrl'nl\c|~|1\ ul \\'c\lcrn()nl;un\. I nmlnn;\ln-|\ chm!

ul Ihu (';n\:|d|;|n I-lIm|nnk\'r~' l)1~lr|hnl|m\ ('cnuu and |\ \\llII|LL' ;| hunk. -l/h'rrmIm- .\'Inm'un'\ III
lhu H'urI\ 1|! ./mu‘ If/u/um!‘

!!RY.~\N BRl‘(‘l:1~;|\\rilcr1|1 lurunln.

S('()‘l'l l~’()RS\'TH |~ an \\nlcr and lcnchcr m Tnrullln.

Pl-IT!-R ll.»\R('()lTRT |~ currcmly pml'c~~<\rnt I-'||m S1ml|u~ at (';|rlclun lH11\u1~1|). ()nu\\;|: |u~
hunk lmlmlc .\'I\ l{11I'u[n'uI1 I)n'n1ur\. .\Iurn'\ uml .\I\Il|uIngIu\. .Inm I'n'l'ru l‘4'!rl1\‘na
Rl('H.4\Rl) l.lPPI-' lcauclu-~l|11ul York l'ni\cr~|1_\'\ .-\1k1n~nn (bllcgc.

J.-\NlNl' l\1.~\R('l*lli$§.~\ULT lcalclxm lm ~l\|d|c~ an R_\cr.~un Pu]_\lcclm1r;|l h1\Ill\llL'. ’|uru|1ln:

\hc |.~ currcm|_\ suiting 1| >cric\ n|' ;|ruclu~ on ;|llvr|mli\c d1~m\11'~u.~ |n (';|n;n|i;|n um-Inn.

.IO\'('l1 MASON |.~ ;| lkcclamcc \\ mcr and udilnr. :1 1}.-m|n1\l .|m| currunll_\ \mrL1ng un 1| lm ~»:r|p|.

ROBIN WOOD lcanclu-.~ lm slu1||c\ an York I'ni\cr.~il_\‘~ |'|lm and \'idcu l)up;|rlnv.11|. and :~
cu-nrdinulur of the .~'\1km.~on (‘ullugu lm ~u|d|v~ pn\gr;||nn\c; hc |~ currunll} \\urk|n_u on am
cxlcndcd vcrsinn of his c;\rl_\’ hunk nu Huc|n:uck_ and planning 1| hon}. nu n;|rr:|u\c lm and
idculug).

/\bo\'e: S41/|.\ Snlvil

‘Y _

gene hackman in arthur penn ’ s ‘target ’