Monthly Report: July 2021

Standard

By Scott Ross


Moscow on the Hudson (1984) One of Paul Mazurksy’s lesser efforts, but with compensatory charms. Despite a strong narrative core — impromptu Russian defector acclimating himself to his New York exile — and a remarkable star performance by Robin Williams, the movie is repetitive, diffuse and overlong; although only 115 minutes, it might have been far more effective at 90. The picture is, however, capped by a lovely scene in a diner, where the Russian’s bitterness at America not living up to his idealized expectations falls away on the evidence of several other immigrants’ experience. As always with Mazurksy, there is much sharp dialogue, a number of good characterizations, and some fine performances: In addition to Williams, who captures the humor, the sadness and the paranoia of his character, Maria Conchita Alonso contributes a rich performance as his Italian girlfriend; Cleavant Derricks is excellent as a Macy’s security guard who becomes the émigré‘s best friend; Aleksandr Benyaminov is endearing as his nonconformist grandfather; Tiger Haynes is warm and charming as Derricks’ own grandfather; Saveliy Kramarov is unexpectedly funny as the KGB agent who is Williams’ bête noire; and Elya Baskin, who is both manic and surprisingly moving as a would-be defector. (The movie is, in a way, Baskin’s own story.) The rich, warm cinematography is by Donald McAlpine, and David McHugh composed a charming musical score. The occasionally trenchant screenplay is by Mazursky and Leon Capetanos and the Russian sequences were shot at the Bavarian Studios in Munich.



The Miracle Worker (1962) The emotionally overpowering adaptation of William Gibson’s play, beautifully directed by Arthur Penn and marvelously acted, especially by Anne Bancroft and Patty Duke.



The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) Although not David Cornwell’s first novel under the pseudonym John le Carré — he’d done two elevated whodunnits previously, which introduced his great creation George Smiley — The Spy Who Came in from the Cold was the first to catch fire. And while le Carré was far from the first fiction writer to suggest that the world of the international spy was less glamorous than grubby, its appearance in the time of the early James Bond pictures carried the unpleasant but necessary shock of realism, which the inevitable movie version did much to transport into popular art, although it did surprisingly little business. Perhaps word-of-mouth damaged it; it’s as bleak and hopeless a look at deadly Cold War games-playing by both sides as may be imagined. That’s not a criticism, but it’s hardly a selling point for mass response. Nor is Richard Burton’s performance calculated to comfort; as Leamas, the story’s anti-hero, the actor burrows into the role so thoroughly that it’s nearly impossible to separate the spy’s real character from the drunken, embittered persona he projects. The movie is never less than intelligent (the screenplay by Paul Dehn and Guy Trosper wisely follows the novel closely) and Martin Ritt’s direction, like the stark black-and-white cinematography by Oswald Morris, is virtually without flaw. The superb supporting cast includes Oskar Werner as Burton’s German interrogator, Claire Bloom as his British soul-mate, Bernard Lee as the grocer he attacks to get himself arrested, Cyril Cusack as his MI6 “Control,” Michael Hordern as an easily wounded Soviet in-between and, in smaller roles. Sam Wannamaker, George Voskovec and Robert Hardy. Only Peter van Eyck seems out of place, through overuse as a villain too easily spotted as a meanie, but Rupert Davies is the living physical embodiment of George Smiley as le Carré describes him. The only less than truthful note is the set for Burton’s behind-the-Iron Curtain trial, which is too elaborate by half. Sol Kaplan’s musical score is as stark and spare as the movie it accompanies.


Ulzana’s Raid (1972) An exceptionally well-made, often disturbing, remarkably even-handed Cavalry picture written by Alan Sharp, the Scottish iconoclast who also wrote the 1976 Arthur Penn-directed Night Moves, perhaps the greatest under-rated thriller of the 1970s. Although some of the violence is horrifying, especially during the picture’s first third, its impact is oddly mitigated by the saturated, bright rose blood, which to a modern eye looks nothing like the real thing. Sharp was at pains to distinguish his fiction from the historical fact: “The events described in the film are accurate in the sense they have factual equivalents,” he said, “but the final consideration was to present an allegory in whose enlarged features we might perceive the lineaments of our own drama, caricatured, but not falsified. The Ulzana of Ulzana’s Raid is not the Chiricahua Apache of history, whose raid was more protracted and ruthless and daring than the one I had written about. He is the expression of my idea of the Apache as the spirit of the land, the manifestation of its hostility and harshness.” Ulzana’s opposite in the movie is Ke-Ni-Tay, the Indian tracker played with extraordinary grace and gravity by Jorge Luke, who beautifully compliments the aging Army scout embodied by Burt Lancaster at his most engagingly taciturn. Robert Aldrich, whose work as a whole is seldom what one would call subtle, directed with intelligence and even sensitivity, and Frank De Vol composed an exceptional score, anchored to a spritely martial theme that would have warmed John Ford’s heart. Joseph Biroc’s stark, gorgeous images of Arizona, Colorado and Nevada are, alas, marred by some dismayingly shaky camera operation.

As the tyro lieutenant whose Christian ideals are shattered by the torture-murders of various white settlers, the young Bruce Davison reminds you once again, as he has throughout his career, that good looks and irreproachable talent are not always enough to place an actor where he deserves to be on the Hollywood totem-pole.



Yellow Submarine (1968) Although the production schedule was impossible (one year when the average for a cartoon feature was three), the budget extremely limited (as was the animation), the people behind it (George Dunning and Al Brodax) had lately been responsible for the terrible Saturday morning Beatles cartoon series and the boys, interested only in satisfying their three-picture deal with United Artists, couldn’t be bothered even to voice their own characters, the result of the effort was one of the most visually sumptuous and imaginative animated pictures ever made. Its lushness is so fulsome it’s almost overwhelming and it wears its cleverness lightly; its wit is as playful as its design. (Jeremy, the peripatetic “Nowhere Man,” is a sly dig by the screenwriter Lee Minoff at Jonathan Miller, who had directed one of his plays in New York.) I’ve never understood how a movie this visually rapturous, and featuring the songs and images of the most popular rock band in the world, made so little money at the box office in 1968 (less than $1 million at a time when the big hits routinely took in fifty) and that Fantasia was considered a “head” movie and not Yellow Submarine. The rich, glorious designs were the work of Heinz Edelmann, Jon Cramer and Dick Sawyer and the charming script was by Minoff, Brodax, Jack Mendelsohn and, before he discovered that love meant never having to say you’re sorry, Erich Segal.



Blood Work (2002) As long as the movie, directed by and starring Clint Eastwood and written by Brian Helgeland, sticks to its source, it’s a very good police-procedural laced with compassion and a certain sly wit. Alas, about two-thirds of the way in, Helgeland and Eastwood depart from Michael Connelly’s taut, intelligent novel and the whole thing collapses into who-do-you-think-you’re-kidding? absurdity and coincidence. That’s not just a shame, it didn’t help; Blood Work was one of Eastwood’s rare massive flops.



On a Clear Day You Can See Forever (1970) The Alan Jay Lerner-Burton Lane musical, sumptuously designed for the screen and cleverly directed by Vincente Minnelli, with an odd central performance by Barbra Streisand that teeters on the precipice of the obnoxious.


Phil Silvers arrived with ulterior motives but now looks as if Gina Lollobrigida is about to rape him. Photo by RDB/ullstein bild via Getty Images


Buona Sera, Mrs. Campbell (1968) Another relic from my increasingly distant childhood, also (like The Miracle Worker) initially viewed in a television airing, and which photogenically is ugly as hell but which otherwise holds up remarkably well as a certain type of broad but extremely funny period sex-farce. The plot is no more relevant to life, or true to it, than a Basile fairy tale; the characters are sheerest stereotype; most of the narrative arc can be read well in advance of every point; Telly Savalas over-acts appallingly; the color photography is lackluster and doesn’t begin to take advantage of the Italian setting; the camerawork is often shaky; the rear-screen process work is sub-standard even for 1968; too many lines were badly dubbed; and the direction by Melvin Frank would barely pass muster for a contemporary Universal Movie of the Week.” Yet the script, by Frank, the British wit Denis Norden and the “Caesar’s Hour,” “M*A*S*H” and “Dick Van Dyke Show” contributor Sheldon Keller, is often hilarious; Phil Silvers, Shelley Winters and Lee Grant contribute marvelous support; Riz Ortolani composed a delightful musical score with a breezy main theme; and, as “Mrs. Campbell,” Gina Lollobrigida at 40 is both luscious and very, very funny. Silvers in particular has one of his best movie roles: As one of three possible American fathers of Lollobrigida’s grown daughter (the others are Savalas and Peter Lawford) he takes a basic comedy shtick — turning to the camera and reacting with an increasingly flabbergasted mix of puzzlement and disbelief each time a different door is slammed in his face — and makes it riotous three times in a row. The picture is enjoyable because, while it is utter nonsense, it’s done with such good humor, and the performers have so much aplomb and are so likable; whatever the movie’s faults you can easily find yourself wishing the studios still knew how to make genuinely funny comedies even if they weren’t pretty to look at, and with comedians this damned good at making people laugh.

Remarkably, there were no fewer than two Broadway musical versions of this story, neither of whose creators admitted to stealing the plot and characters! The first, the Alan Jay Lerner-Burton Lane Carmelina of 1979, was a fast flop featuring Georgia Brown in the lead and a score woven with strands of gold; if there is, for example, a more spine-tingling expression of middle-aged erotic hopefulness than “One More Walk Around the Garden,” I don’t know it.

The second, Mama Mia!, had songs by ABBA.

Come back, Melvin Frank! All is forgiven!



A Room with a View (1985) The nearly miraculous adaptation by James Ivory, Ismael Merchant and Ruth Prawer Jhabvala of E.M. Forster’s novel.


Bloomer Girl (1956 “Producer’s Showcase” television version) Hard on the heels of the Oklahoma! revolution, E. Y. Harburg concocted a stage musical that, while comic in tone, challenged Oscar Hammerstein by taking in 19th century feminism, slavery, abolition and the Civil War and, in collaboration with Harold Arlen, offered one of the finest of 1940s musical scores. The original 1944 production also pilfered Oklahoma!‘s chief comic, Celeste Holm and, as director and musical stager, its choreographer Agnes de Mille. The 90-minute television version, filmed 12 years later, has a younger heroine in Barbara Cook and, alas, only half the score, the racier material jettisoned for live broadcast. (Although an occasional bawdy reference still sneaks through.) Although Cook is not the comedian Holm was and lacks her dry wit, she possessed one of the most sparkling lyric sopranos ever to be heard on Broadway, in 1956 a few months shy of making history in Leonard Bernstein’s Candide, and she’s charming as Evelina. (Holm could carry a tune, but only so far; Cook’s voice was just this side of the Heavenly Choir.) Keith Andes has the unenviable task of trying to make a slave-owning Southern roué palatable for a mid-20th century audience (admittedly easier in 1956 than now) but his rich baritone compensates; when he and Cook perform “Right as the Rain” together, the moment is, in spite of the primitive technology and a poor Kinescope transfer, thrilling.

Carmen Matthews is a marvelous Dolly Bloomer, warm and wry in equal measure, Paul Ford animates Evelina’s hoop-skirt manufacturing father with his robust, patented comic bluster and Roy Spearman as Andes’ runaway slave Pompey, while not the actor Dooley Wilson, the role’s originator, was, has a far better singing voice and performs a soaring version of “The Eagle and Me” that makes Wilson’s otherwise amiable performance on the Original Cast Album seem anemic. Brock Peters also shows up, as part of the trio singing “I Got a Song,” and de Mille, recreating her Civil War ballet, also brought back her principal dancers from the show: James Mitchell, Emy St. Just and Betty Low. It isn’t necessarily an ideal reading of the show — far too much of its marvelous song score was cut — but it’s a rather good introduction. The musical’s original book by Sig Herzig and Fred Saidy was adapted by Leslie Stevens and the program was briskly and imaginatively directed by Alex Segal.



The Group (1966) This adaptation by its screenwriter/producer Sidney Buchman of Mary McCarthy’s entertaining novel about eight Vassar graduates fails, as might be expected, to capture the characters’ thoughts, which make up much of the book’s content, or the author’s satirical bent. It’s also one of Sidney Lumet’s weaker pictures as a director, the shortcomings of his approach to the material exacerbated by Boris Kaufman’s uncertainty with color.

Text copyright 2021 by Scott Ross

Monthly Report: June 2021

Standard

By Scott Ross

A Stranger Among Us (1992) A surprisingly square crime drama to have been directed by Sidney Lumet, due largely to the interesting but almost wholly schematic script by its elevated-hack screenwriter, one Robert J. Avrech. One grants that placing a hard-nosed, profane, secular female NYPD cop inside an Hasidic household to solve the murder of one of the sect’s young yeshiva scholars provides an opening for examining cultural differences, and with a religious demographic about which most Americans know little or nothing and which is seldom examined in popular culture… although the appearance of the picture in the summer of 1992 may have seemed more than a bit tone-deaf to some, a mere year after the Crown Heights riots placed in national spotlight the Orthodox in Brooklyn, where the movie is also set, although it was shot largely in Queens.

After listening to the self-serving commentary by Avrech on the Kino Lorber Blu-ray, one imagines him in studio pitch meetings exclaiming, “It’s Witness meets The Chosen!” (Although not Fiddler on the Roof, which Avrech despises but which he seems not to know was made into a movie.) Certainly his constant panting references to Hawks and Hitchcock reveal a mind wholly worshipful of Hollywood movie conventions and absolutely compelled to uphold them. Everything trite and by-the-numbers about the picture is due to Avrech, who can’t even stay true to his own central device in defining the young rebbe-to-be played by Eric Thal, his perpetual quoting from the Kabbalah, admitting in his commentary that the construction of the quotations is entirely his own. What’s best in the picture are Lumet’s typically concentrated direction with its focus on human relationships; Andrzej Bartkowiak’s exquisite cinematography which in its interior scenes evokes Rembrandt and in all other respects is wonderfully lit and shot — the opening credits sequence, a long, unbroken helicopter view of the bridges leading into the borough, is breathtaking, in a way I don’t think they’ve ever been filmed before — and the actors’ performances, especially Thal’s and the extraordinary (and extraordinarily beautiful) Mira Sara’s as his devout younger sister. There’s a moment at the end when, saying goodbye to a woman he loves, Thal’s tear-stained face, despite his facial hair, looks like that of a lost little boy, and is terribly moving.

I’ve seldom cared much for Melanie Griffith, whose little-girl voice militates against her occasionally incisive acting, but she’s relatively effective here, as are Lee Richardson as the aged rebbe, Tracy Pollan as the yeshiva student’s betrothed and John Pankow as Griffith’s temporary partner. Burtt Harris, Lumet’s longtime associate and assistant director, delivers an exceptional turn as Griffith’s oblivious ex-cop father and the cast includes Jamey Sheridan, David Margulies and, as an enterprising Mafia shakedown artist, James Gandolfini. Jerry Bock contributed an often lovely if sometimes intrusive musical score; this is a much more score-heavy Lumet picture than normal, and I wonder if the amount of music was imposed on him by the suits at Hollywood Pictures.* The production design (Philip Rosenberg ), art direction (W. Steven Graham) and set decoration (Gary J. Brink) are superb, particularly in the rebbe‘s home, and the costumes by Gary Jones and Ann Roth are small marvels of character design, especially the mouth-watering, deep red, blue and purple dresses for Mira Sara.

I don’t really wish to keep dwelling on the dopiness of Avrech, whose second bible, after the Torah, must surely be Syd Field’s ludicrous book on screenwriting, but one of his more risible pronouncements on the Blu-ray commentary demands a response: “Every great movie is a love story.”

Balls.

*Did Avrech know the composer of the score for the movie he wrote was responsible for the music of that show he hates?


Switch (1991) Blake Edwards’ very funny sex-role fantasy, with a brilliant comedic performance by Ellen Barkin that is one of the few great slapstick turns by a woman in American movies.


Manhattan (1979) Woody Allen’s beautiful if uneven comedy, suffused by Gordon Willis’ incomparable photography and the peerless music of George Gershwin.


The Big Fix (1978) A genial modern private detective picture featuring a very likable lead performance by Richard Dreyfus and an underlying sadness at the loss of national ideals.


The original poster art, before #MeToo rendered the movie’s foolish distributors neuter.

The Death of Stalin (2017) In an interview a couple of decades ago concerning the inevitable movie of her astonishing 1987 novel Beloved Toni Morrison, mentally rolling her eyes at Oprah Winfrey’s philosophy of life and literature, made the heretical statement that a book did not need a movie to complete it; that it was complete on its own! This seems to me perhaps even more true of the so-called graphic novel, in which the visual is as important as the verbal. The artist and the writer have laid out their story in exactly the manner they feel best represents their text, often in striking or witty fashion that enhances the words and the story. Why then, Mr./Ms. Filmmaker, do you think you must “improve” on what Alan Moore and his gifted collaborators have already accomplished in their book? What makes you think you can? (“Oh, but we want to honor the book through our artistically compromised reinterpretation of it…”)

That said, the 2017 cinematic transliteration of Fabien Nury and Thierry Robin’s La Mort de Staline improves upon its source. It’s sharper, wittier and almost infinitely funnier, and the visuals are an enormous improvement on Robin’s rudimentary (and frankly unappealing) artwork. The movie benefits as well from a wonderful cast of actors and comedians, and comedy is very much central to the director and co-writer Armando Iannucci’s approach to the material. All politics is inherently comic, however tragic the eventual outcome, and The Death of Stalin is hilarious. The naked jockeying for position by members of the Central Committee begins while Stalin is still (barely) alive, as Khrushchev (the marvelous Steve Buscemi), Malenkov (the riotously funny Jeffrey Tambor) and Beria (Simon Russell Beale, and terrifying) plot and counter-plot, alternately aided, abetted and confounded by Molotov (Michael Palin), General Zhukov (Jason Isaacs), Mikoyan (Paul Whitehouse), Bulganin (Paul Chahidi) and Stalin’s problematic adult children (Andrea Riseborough and Rupert Friend). It’s like a musical-comedy roundelay, with the cant of dialectical materialism and the lugubrious conference rules of the International taking the place of the dropped needle. The frantic scramble for a seat, however, is the same, and ends with one last, witty, visual joke.

The usual literalist geniuses who can always be counted upon to express the obvious whinged that the brilliant, mad and entertainingly vicious screenplay (Iannucci, David Schneider and Ian Martin) plays fast and loose with history, but so did the graphic novel — or “comic book,” as the credits weirdly have it — and both carry disclaimers warning readers and viewers of that fact. These types are especially upset that when the appalling Beria is cremated his ashes float away on the wind; I’m going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that their high school literature teachers never introduced to them the gentle concepts of symbolism and irony. Everyone else whose cognitive abilities remain intact can take pleasure in the high black comedy, the uniformly splendid performances, Zac Nicholson’s mouth-watering cinematography and the rich and appropriately Shostakovichian musical score by Christopher Willis. Indeed, the only real cavils I entertain about The Death of Stalin have nothing to do with the picture itself: 1) The spineless, craven decision by the distributors to literally erase the indispensable Tambor’s face from the original poster over alleged (meaning: “said without proof”) incidents of sexual harassment and 2) some loose innuendo by Iannucci on a promotional featurette in which he invoked Donald Trump as a reason for making the picture, a statement I’m glad I didn’t hear at the time or I’d likely have hedged my bets and ignored his movie, the best new picture I’ve seen in years. Why is it that “woke” liberals behave as if a) Trump actually was a dictator, somehow comparable to Stalin merely because they hated him — and which his limp presidency proves conclusively he was not; and b) as though even a mentally befogged old career criminal like Joe Biden, merely because he is a Democrat, could never behave like one?


A Hard Day’s Night (1964) With Singin’ in the Rain one of the two most joyous movie musicals ever made.


Finian’s Rainbow (1968) A great stage musical filmed too late, and with warring elements of fantasy unfulfilled and a director determined to bring reality out of studio backlots that ultimately sink the picture.


Sorcerer (1977) William Friedkin and Walon Green’s variation on The Wages of Fear was and remains one of the most striking movies of the 1970s.

Text copyright 2021 by Scott Ross

Joy: “A Hard Day’s Night” (1964)

Standard

By Scott Ross

When A Hard Day’s Night was reissued to theaters in 2000, I went with a friend to see it at a local art house and afterward as we stood chatting on the sidewalk I noticed that all the muscles in my face were sore; with a pleasant jolt I realized I had just been smiling continuously for 90 minutes.

Although I had seen the movie numerous times before on television and home video, I don’t think I recognized until that night just how special a picture A Hard Day’s Night really is. Perhaps this is because I was a child of three when it first hit theaters and up to that evening had never experienced it on a big movie screen.* Despite what the pushers of ever-shrinking visual popular culture who wish you to become accustomed to downloading and looking at movies on cell ‘phone screens roughly analogous to the average Post-It Note would have you believe, the size and quality of the medium on and the venue in which you view a motion picture does make a difference, as does seeing it with an audience of people responding to it as you are, whether with laughter, tears or bleats of terror. (Even rapt, silent contemplation of a picture’s charm or beauty, experienced with others, can be communicable.) When people who know movies say, as Roger Ebert did, that the pleasure received from, and the overall greatness of, A Hard Day’s Night are comparable to those of Singin’ in the Rain, they aren’t being hyperbolic, or blinded by Baby-Boom nostalgia. The movie is a rapturous experience — pure , entrancing joy from the opening guitar chord to the final end credit. It’s no wonder I smiled so broadly that night.

Richard Lester “framing” George Harrison

It could have been a disaster. When you think of all the terrible so-called “rock movies” that had been made up to that point — and would be made immediately after — essentially updates of the boring all-star musical revues of the late 1920s and early 1940s, you can well imagine A Hard Day’s Night being every bit as anemic and disposable. Fortunately the Beatles wanted nothing to do with that format, and United Artists didn’t care what sort of picture they made so long as whatever it was came in on time, on budget and produced a marketable soundtrack album. † While it’s certainly possible to create good or even great popular art under confining conditions, it’s when what they do isn’t being taken all that seriously and no one above them is paying strict attention that creative people slip their best work into the marketplace. (Think of the men who made the great Warner Bros. cartoons of the 1940s and ’50s.) Alun Owen, after observing the Beatles’ personalities and the prison-of-success in which they were trapped, wrote a comic, slightly surreal “day-in-the-life” which Richard Lester, himself a bit of a Surrealist, filmed with a friskiness and a willingness to try anything — to be open to the possibilities of the moment — that were (and are) very rare in controlled studio moviemaking and probably only achievable then in an independent production. Borrowing some of the effects embraced by La Nouvelle Vague (jump-cuts, hand-held Arriflex cameras and documentary realism)‡ Lester and his team fashioned a kind of cinematic jeu d’esprit that nips playfully at conventions but seldom draws serious blood.

The movie’s great comic duo: Anna Quayle and John Lennon.

No one of course was sure how the Beatles, whatever their extemporaneous wit with the press and the public, would perform scripted dialogue and movement on film, but they proved remarkable adepts. They were naturals in front of the camera, making it all look both easier than it was and as if they were making up the lines as they went along. In this, as in a number of things, they resemble another quartet of performers: They’re the Marx Bros. for the rock ‘n’ roll generation, antic and cheerfully disdainful of everything the straight world demands of them. That’s one of the reasons, I imagine, that viewers often think the four are ad-libbing, although the people who made the movie aver that Owen wrote most of their characteristically accurate one-liners. (Lester maintains that the structure of the script was his, the dialogue entirely Owen’s.) And while none of the Beatles is remotely like the Marxes, it’s easy to see John Lennon as a Groucho figure, the natural leader and chief cut-up. His scene backstage with Anna Quayle in which they trade elliptical exchanges rivals some of Groucho’s great duologues with Margaret Dumont, and Lennon has an enormously appealing screen persona throughout. Paul didn’t get a specialty sequence as John, George and Ringo did, presumably because he was yoked to Wilfrid Brambell, playing his rambunctious Irish grandfather and Ringo’s largely silent “runaway” scenes may seem like attempts to make him over into Harpo Marx, Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton rolled into one§ (the bit with the camera and the one involving a long coat and mud puddles are especially Keatonian) but the drummer has his own idiosyncratic charm that doesn’t rely on our memories of anybody else. George meanwhile got one of the movie’s best dialogue scenes as the honest innocent in a land of hard-edged hucksters, sweetly popping every pretentious balloon in the tastemaker’s display.

Aside from the Beatles, the engaging cast includes Norman Rossington as their dyspeptic manager, whom no one would confuse with Brian Epstein; the amiable John Junkin as his somewhat off-balance assistant, who moves his lips while reading Son of MAD; young David Janson (billed as “Jaxon”), who looks a bit like a miniature version of Robert Stephens, as the hooky-playing boy Ringo briefly encounters¶; John Vernon, peerlessly stuffy as a train passenger who thinks riding the rails twice a week confers some sort of exalted set of rights on him; the writer Jeremy Lloyd as a nightclub patron whose grinning leaps into the air Ringo copies; Victor Spinetti, hilariously splenetic as the harassed, Angora wearing television director; and Kenneth Haigh, who snobbishly refused a credit for his wonderful performance as the marketing genius George deflates and whose inane jabber (“She’s a trend-setter. It’s her profession.”) is creepily relevant to our own period, in which clueless untested teenagers list theirs as “social media influencer.” Brambell as Grandfather McCarthy is the movie’s sly secret weapon, continually complicating everyone’s lives, encouraging arguments, getting what he can from his reflected glory and generally putting (to paraphrase one of John’s puns) a Spaniard into the works. When he accidentally rises up in an elevator under the stage to interrupt two Wagnerian singers in rehearsal it’s funny enough; when he pops up a second time during the Beatles’ concert it’s unexpected, and riotous. At the time of filming, Brambell was the star of the popular comedy series Steptoe and Son (Americanized later as Sanford and Son) where he was often referred to as a dirty old man, hence the recurring deadpan joke here about his being a clean old man. And although he was scarcely old enough to be Paul’s grandfather, Brambell is the antic antidote to youth-worship, particularly welcome against the scenes of Beatlemania the movie captures and which gave so many parents the whim-whams in 1964.

It’s the depiction of that adolescent phenomenon which so memorably starts the picture, and which came to define the contours of the Beatles’ off-stage existence — in Grandfather McCartney’s apt phrase, “A train and a room, and a car and a room, and a room and a room.” The screenwriter saw something rather desperate in that, and while he did his best to make it more comic than tragic, even in 1964 one can see how their fans’ brainless (and, presumably, erotic) idolatry was eventually going to wear on the four to such an extent they stopped performing in public; of their shambolic Shea Stadium appearance in 1965 they later complained, quite understandably, that they couldn’t hear themselves or each other over the screaming. While kids of the Beatles’ own age also went gaga over Elvis Presley a few years earlier the only previous sustained edition of this teenage mass hysteria I know of is the comparable emergence of Frank Sinatra at the Paramount Theatre 20 years before… although what Heinrich Heine famously called Lisztomania predated that by a century. Some have suggested the war and the disappearance of so many eligible young men from the home front had something to do with it, but as Sinatra’s fans were teenagers, that explanation doesn’t hold much water. It may be true that adolescent anxiety about the war contributed, just as it’s remotely possible that “Beatlemania” may have been triggered by the murder of Jack Kennedy. Still, and even if we grant that some of those bobbysoxers may have been paid by Sinatra’s promoters to scream their heads off, the whole business baffles me, as does the concomitant behavior of the kids in 1964. Erotic compulsion? The simple inherent madness of adolescence? Sex does seem to be the likeliest explanation. But some of the girls in the audience of the movie’s climactic live television concert appear on the verge of complete mental, physical and psychological collapse, not merely screeching but tearfully wailing — sobbing as if their hearts are breaking. Jesus, what were they weeping about?


Readers of these pages will know that while I honor certain favorite filmmakers (usually, with the notable exception of Sidney Lumet, writer/directors) I do not subscribe generally to the whorishly applied Auteur Theory. Still, in an exercise like this one, shot on the cheap in black-and-white (an asset, although it may not have seemed so at the time) and on a foreshortened schedule, a director whose attributes include both nerves and adaptability is probably essential. Lester, who had worked with the Goons on television and directed their crazy-quilt short The Running Jumping & Standing Still Film (both projects anticipating the visual approach taken by Monty Python) was ideal in this respect, although his sense of style never obtrudes on A Hard Day’s Night as it did a couple of years later on A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. Gilbert Taylor’s superb cinematography, often achieved via hand-held camera, is unerring and includes a beautiful panning shot of Paul singing “And I Love Her” with lens flare from an arc light creating a striking halo effect around him. (Naturally the brass at United Artists thought it was a mistake.) And John Jympson’s masterly editing makes each moment feel simultaneously surprising and inevitable; you can’t second-guess any of his choices.

However well A Hard Day’s Night works as a comedy, or even as a kind of fictional semi-documentary, the filmmakers never forget that it was as a band that the Beatles were famous, and the musical respites are among the most radiantly happy ever committed to film. That opening twang on the title song, married to the image of John, George and Ringo running toward the camera pursued by dozens of young people, never fails to make me smile, and it’s so perfectly of a piece you can’t quite believe it wasn’t all planned that way. (It wasn’t; the song was an after-thought.) The train sequence at the start contains some surreal moments, as when the boys are seen outside the compartment window, running beside the locomotive and begging John Vernon for their ball back, and this is extended in the next scene, when they begin playing cards in the baggage compartment and, after “I Should Have Known Better” begins, are suddenly seen with their instruments, singing and playing. You don’t question it, you just accept the parameters of it as the movie Beatles’ reality the same way you accept the topsy-turvy world of the Marx Bros. A number can begin mischievously, as when John attempts to cheer Ringo out of his funk by singing “If I Fell” directly to him or on the soundtrack only, divorced from the boys’ actions, like the exuberant “Can’t Buy Me Love” sequence, which feels in retrospect the apotheosis of the Beatles as, in Ringo’s description, “just four guys who loved each other.”#

Speaking of Ringo, this seems to be as good a place as any to shamefacedly acknowledge how criminally I underrated his musicianship several years ago when I used routinely to refer to the drummer as “the luckiest son of a bitch who ever lived.” Beyond that being a cheap, sneering crack, it wasn’t at all accurate. True, Starr was not the songwriter or the singer John and Paul were but, at least in the beginning of their recording career, his accompaniments were technically miles beyond the merely adequate guitar playing of the other three, and he continued to provide expert and even inspired rhythm until the band broke up in 1970. He was also likable in the extreme, and, like John, a genuine screen presence in a way Paul and George could never hope to be.

In any case, as the writer Mark Lewisohn has noted, with Pete Best at the drums the Beatles would have likely remained merely a popular Liverpool band. With Ringo, they became themselves.


*Weirdly, I do have distinct memories from that time of hearing the Beatles on the radio and, missing the wit of the third-person writing, thinking the song was called “She Loves Me,” not “She Loves You.”

†The movie actually went into profit before it was even released due to advance orders on the soundtrack LP which was UA’s primary concern.

‡Lester himself used a hand-held the camera to shoot the train sequences — the dialogue of which because the camera lacked a sound recorder had to be looped in post-production.

§The silent comedy links in A Hard Day’s Night are made explicit late in the picture, when the boys are chased by the London police; for an American audience (and Lester is an American by birth and upbringing) the sight of a small army of bumbling constables in their helmets running through the urban streets inevitably merges with our images of Mack Sennett’s Keystone Kops. As for my Marx Bros. analogy, Groucho was adamant after seeing the picture that the Beatles in no way resembled himself and his brothers, claiming, absurdly, that they were “real people” — when did you last encounter anyone remotely like Chico or Harpo? His contention that the Beatles, as they come across in A Hard Day’s Night, have little to differentiate one from another, however, has some merit… just not much.

¶Janson/Jaxon is quite good, but clearly too old for the role as written; his character admits to being just under 11 but the young actor is pretty obviously closer to 14.

#Although John, who had a book-related event while the sequence was being shot, disappears at odd moments, reappears and then vanishes again.

Text copyright 2021 by Scott Ross