Jane, get your gun

Wow. George's mentioning "Paint Your Wagon" reminded me of some silly westerns like "The Apple Dumpling Gang" and "Blazing Saddles." Then I remembered the title of a comic western on TV all the time that my mom really loved: "Cat Ballou." I couldn't recall any of the plot, just a few vague scenes with Lee Marvin, so I looked it up and — Get out! — look at this description:

"A woman seeking revenge for her murdered father hires a famous gunman, but he's very different from what she expects. (He's a drunk!)"

Sound familiar? Only, this movie preceded "True Grit" by four years (1965) and Jane Fonda is shown on the movie poster WEARING PANTS.

Quantrill's Raid

Did anybody catch that Quantrill's Raid reference between Rooster and LaBoeuf? Rooster would have rode against our Free Staters -- does that color his perspective on race at all? Do Lawrence natives have an opinion on this? Also, Rooster was angry when LaBoeuf claimed women and children were killed, which historically, we've sinced learned they weren't.

More John Wayne?

I watched "Stagecoach" many years ago, but other than that, John Wayne movies were something playing in the background of my pal's house, circa 1985. (Her dad was an FBI agent who was at the Patty Hearst capture. He liked westerns.)

Would anyone like to recommend some more John Wayne movies? Or westerns in general? My Filmaffinity recommendations keep pulling up "Unforgiven," for one thing.

Black marks

Erin pointed out that Rooster wears a black hat. You can't tell by looking at him whether he's a good guy or a bad guy. By movie standards, he seems to be a bad guy. And then you add the black eye patch, and the impression is even stronger. I can see why the filmmakers gave him a physical flaw (and I assume it's in the book), but I sort of wondered why it was a lost eye vs. a big jagged scar on his cheek or a pronounced limp or something. I know eye patches are associated with daring men — pirates and such, and often with villains — but I don't know if that's the notion here.

And it's curious that the bad guy Chaney is so clearly designated as a villain; he literally has a black mark on his face, which, if I remember correctly, was the result of his being incompetent or merely unlucky in some way with a gun — it's a mark of cowardice or weakness — whereas Wayne's physical flaw, his black eye patch, is more like a badge of courage; he's someone who ignored his mom all those times she said doing something fun or dangerous "could put your eye out."

And Mattie's horse, for what it's worth, is named Blackie.

No romance?

I sort of thought that Mattie and LaBoeuf would end up together, especially after the boarding house banter where he threatens to kiss her.

LaBoeuf: A little earlier I gave some thought to stealin' a kiss from you, although you are very young... and you're unattractive to boot. But now I'm of a mind to give you five or six good licks with my belt.
Mattie Ross: Well, one would be as unpleasant as the other.

Their arguments seem like a cliche prelude to a romantic connection, but that never transpires. It makes sense to me that that would be part of the parody — defying our expectations of romance. When LaBoeuf died, I had a sense that it was a way of saying he was weak somehow — maybe he lacked grit — and that he wasn't, in the end, man enough for Mattie. Is that wacky of me? Or maybe putting him in that position would detract from John Wayne's leading man status.

H.W. Gim

What did you think of Gim's role (Chen Lee) in the film? Do you think he was meant to be the stereotypical "Chinaman servant" type in the West? Or is there more there? Rooster obviously enjoyed his company. They shared meals, played cards, etc. When Rooster shot the rat indoors, Chen Lee yelled at him like a wife.

And on the subject of race, what did you make of the "Indian doctor," the benighted soul who has never heard of germs but on whom they still rely for medical attention? (There was some astoundingly racist comment made about him, but I can't remember what it was).

George's pick: Sunset Boulevard

Sorry I've been so absent, everybody. But we went through our Pharmacology unit in less than half the time we were supposed to, and the good news is I have yet to kill anyone I've given meds or injections to.

So instead I will present you with the ultimate in what my old film instructor called the "Dead Man's Story." You may have seen "American Beauty," but this is the one that really set that style of narrative -- the main character and narrator is already dead, and he's gonna tell you why.

Maybe Billy Wilder is best known for his comedies -- "Some Like It Hot," "The Seven-Year Itch," "The Fortune Cookie" or "Sabrina" -- but he started out with dramas, some of them very dark. "Sunset Boulevard" is his masterpiece, with Hollywood during the end of the Golden Age of the studio system as a backdrop.

Music

KC and Erin and I discussed the music during and after watching the film, and I think it was an important aspect of the parody. What do you all think of the music?

They Shoot Horses

From the ones I’ve seen, it was a long standing Western convention that horses didn’t get shot. Many a gunslinger killed a mounted man at more than a hundred yards using a six-shooter. The horses never seemed to be in danger.

Not long ago I watched one of the first spaghetti westerns, “A Fistful of Dollars”. There is a scene where one set of bad guys opens fire on a whole Mexican cavalry unit with a Gattling gun. After firing hundreds of bullets, a couple dozen men are dead, but the horses are hardly bothered. Now this could just be because of low budget filmmaking—it is easier to tell an actor to fall off a horse than to train a horse to fall down. But since spaghetti westerns overturn many Hollywood expectations, I take it to be a jab at convention.

In our movie, two horses get shot out from under their riders. First, Ned Pepper’s horse is killed by “La Beef”. Cogburn makes fun of him for shooting the horse and not the man. Second, in the big gun battle at the end, Cogburn is never hit with a bullet, but Ned Pepper shoots his horse out from under him. So instead of the traditional scene with the hero wounded on the ground with the bad guy closing in, we have the hero stuck under his dead horse with the bad guy closing in. Deliberate parody?

Cinematography

This movie featured beautiful scenic backdrops, with snow-capped mountains, winding rivers and dense woods. You may have noticed it bore little resemblance to Oklahoma, and that's because it was filmed in Colorado. As majestic as it is, the scenery seems quite incongruous with all the references to place names in Oklahoma and western Arkansas.

Subtle parody

Not everyone thinks of "True Grit" as a send-up of old Westerns, but I think it's clear that the movie never takes itself too seriously. It was made at a time when the corny white-hat Western was decidedly on the way out, and the movie is awash with sentimentality. As I said, I think Rooster is played as a subtle parody of Wayne's entire career, and I think the romantic, sweeping vistas and the over-the-top music are part of the joke. The final shootout scene is the ultimate nod to the audience, with Wayne riding out to meet the bad guys across a pastel-colored meadow, holding the reins of his horse in his teeth and shooting with both hands.

Kim Darby

Kim Darby is what makes this movie more than just a John Wayne Western. She is what made this movie stand out to me when I was a kid.

I have heard people say Darby was unbearably annoying in this movie and is a terrible actress in general. I personally think she was adorable and charming and perfect as Mattie. She's stubborn, brave, a pain in the ass, savvy and naive at once. As an actress, Darby is more than capable of handling Wayne in each and every scene. Their relationship development is charming to behold.

John Wayne

"True Grit" was not necessarily Wayne's best acting role, but I think it was sort of a turning point for him. Unlike most of Wayne's previous cowboy heroes, Rooster Cogburn is old and fat, wears the wrong color hat, and "likes to pull a cork." It's a recognition that age is catching up with him and he can't be the same hotshot he used to be. He was a Hollywood legend by this point, and the role was sort of a wink at all the Western hero roles he'd played so often and come to personify.

Favorite lines

I mentioned earlier that I love the dialogue in this movie, which I've heard is mostly directly from the short story by Charles Portis. Wayne had great lines in all his films, but this movie stands out. Here are some of my favorite lines:

Rooster Cogburn
• By God. She reminds me of me.
• Drop that switch, La Boeuf. Put it down, I said. You're enjoying it too much.
• DAMN a man that whistles!
• Young fella, if you're looking for trouble, I'll accommodate you. Otherwise, leave it alone.
• Fill your hands, you son-of-a-bitch!
• Damn that Texan! When you need him, he's dead.

Mattie Ross
• My name is Mattie Ross, of Near Dardanelle in Yell County. My family owns property, and I don't know why I'm being treated like this!
• If I smelled as bad as you, I wouldn't live near people.

Ranger La Boeuf
• The French is 'La Bourf.' I say 'La Beef.'

Ned Pepper
• I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!

Tom Chaney
• Everything happens to me, and now I'm shot by a child!

Lesbian Vampires

Remember how kc’s blog started with a discussion of vampires? (Ok, so it was partly at my insistance.) Well nobody has talked about the poor creatures ever since. So this being a film blog and all, I thought I bring this site to your attention. What can’t you find out there somewhere on the internet? I don’t think I can help out in the search for “killer goth garb”, but do you think we could invent a cocktail that she could drink while wearing it?

http://www.sistersofblood.com/?cat=2

The Movie not Chosen

I noticed on Filmaffinity that cl had given a lukewarm rating to “The Sweet Hereafter”. I think almost as highly of that movie as I do of “Exotica”, and I almost chose it for my pick. (But I’m glad now to have done “Exotica” instead.) So Christy, I was wondering if you might have anything to say about your reaction to “The Sweet Hereafter”. You said that you didn’t know until recently that both these films were from the same director? Does knowing that make a difference? Or just more generally, how do you think the two movies compare?

Since “The Sweet Hereafter” wasn’t the club film, perhaps we should note any spoilers in the comments.

Substitutions

I had thought about the idea of some characters using others as substitutions, and then I ran across this observation in an IMDB review. It's an interesting theme for the film.

Exotica focuses on the substitutes used by its central characters. Francis substitutes Christina for his daughter and Tracey for Christina (when she was his daughter's babysitter). Eric substitutes his club DJ job for the career he wanted in radio, he substitutes his voyeurism in the club for his inability to have a lasting relationship. Zoe substitutes for her dead mother and continues to run the club, instead of a husband she has Eric contractually substitute so that she can have a baby. Thomas substitutes his opera liaisons for a real relationship and substitutes an incubator for the eggs he has taken from a nest. Christina substitutes a protective Francis for her uncaring and probably abusive father. Voyeurism substitutes for interaction.

A different kind of murder mystery

NM says in an earlier comment that one of the things she liked about "Exotica" was how, as a "Twin Peaks" fan, she thought it had similarities. I agree that the mood and unexpected plot turns are similar.

But the comment also made me reconsider just how unconventional "Exotica's" story is. "Twin Peaks," as unique as it is, begins with a Hollywood- or audience-friendly tale: It centers around the mystery of a young woman's death. (And the series fell apart once the mystery was solved, even with all the strong supporting storylines.) This is the stuff of most audience-friendly fare: "Without a Trace," "C.S.I.," etc., with pretty women or children as typical victims.

Yet even though the murder of Francis' daughter is the motive/link we're waiting for during much of the movie, it's pretty much glossed over as no more than a senseless and tragic event. The movie's more about the emotionally burdensome aftermath (much like "The Sweet Hereafter"). There isn't even much exploration of why Francis was viewed as a suspect, other than the possibility that he thought Sara wasn't his child. I don't know whether Atom Egoyan had trouble either making or financing his films, but I admire him in retrospect for serving up a story that doesn't pander to traditionally audience-friendly storylines. There's a young girl's murder that isn't romanticized or exploited in any way.

Dialogue and acting

The first two things I notice about a movie are how well the dialogue is written and whether the acting is natural (transparent). Okay, to be honest, I notice nudity first, but I definitely notice dialogue and acting before I notice themes or cinematography or even get the characters straight. And I think the level of dialogue and acting ability varies greatly in movies. Just look at Nicholas Cage movies to see how good and bad it can get.

So, my question is: What was everyone's opinion of those aspects of the film?

Sorry if I'm being coy, but I'd like to hear a few opinions before I offer mine!

The Music

Did you notice the use of music? Of course there is the Leonard Cohen song. But there is also that haunting music with some sort of Indian flute. This theme plays at several important points in the film. And there is the very peaceful music that plays during the scenes in the field. It perhaps takes longer to realize that all those people are looking for a dead girl because the music is so tranquil.

Up next

After all the naked ladies, how about something G-rated?

This was my favorite John Wayne Western as a child. I fell in love with the title, first of all, and the notion of someone having "grit." The plucky adolescent heroine might have had something to do with it, too. And the dialogue, of course.

I know this movie is not universally loved, so I hope I won't be run out of town for this pick.

And I apologize in advance for Glen Campbell.

Miscarriage of love

I thought there was a recurring idea of birth and parenthood in the movie. Thomas is incubating eggs, which get taken from him. Francis and Christina and presumably Tracey were caregivers for Francis' daughter, who gets taken from him. Eric found the daughter's body. Tracey's dad loans his daughter to his now childless friend. Zoe is pregnant with Eric's child, upon whom Eric will presumably have no claim because of the contract. Francis is sort of a father figure to Christina. Zoe inherited the club from her mother, and now she acts the part of a benevolent matriarch to her employees. There are all these parental type, caregiving relationships, and yet everyone seems so uncared for and alone.

Chekhov and the Gun

This film has several species that are common—even weedy—inhabitants of movies, particularly the overgrown lowlands of hack B-movies. We have a strip club; we have a stripper who seems be threatened with violence at one point; we have an intimidating jealous boyfriend who works at the club. We have a guy who is part of an international smuggling ring; we have cop types in the customs agents. And we have a relationship between a middle age man and a teenage girl that is clearly odd. But none of these play out according to the script that we might expect from past movies.

And of course, we have a handgun found in a drawer during a scene made dramatic by both the surrounding visuals and the music. So who will get shot? Does Egoyan also transgress on the most basic Chekhovian expectation?

Quid Pro Quo

Another important theme in the movie is transactions. Some of these are monetary; some are otherwise.

At the start, Thomas is offered ballet tickets in lieu of cab fare. As a consequence he gradually develops a cruising MO where he sells a ticket to a prospective hook-up only to return the man’s money after the performance and thereby create an obligation to continue the evening elsewhere. We also overhear Thomas refusing to pay for a botched remodeling job.

Francis pays his niece to babysit a baby that is not there—a transaction that she eventually refuses. Francis also offers Thomas an exchange where he will falsify the audit Thomas’s records if Thomas will wear a wire into the Exotica for him.

At the club Eric’s job is only partly that of master of ceremonies; perhaps more important is his role as salesman to get clients to buy table dances from the strippers. We learn that Christina’s falling out with Eric is the result of discovering a secret transaction—Eric’s contract to father Zoe’s child. And finally, after Zoe expresses puzzlement that Eric would continue to work in such a painful environment, we get what is perhaps Christina’s most important line, “Zoe, not all of us have the luxury of deciding what to do with our lives. It’s a job; he’s getting paid alright.”

Palette: Gold and white

There is another link between two places based on the palette. The public parts of the Exotica are lit with a cold blue light. But Zoe’s quarters are dressed out in baroque gold and white and are warmly lit. This is closely matched by the interior of Francis’s house when Tracey is there practicing her music. The walls are white and there is a gold horse on the mantel by the picture of Francis’s wife and daughter in a gold frame, a gold music stand, and there is another picture of the daughter in a gold frame on a table. Tracey wears a black dress with a gold pattern—rather dressy for just playing music in an empty house. Later when Christina confronts Zoe in her quarters about the contract with Eric for the baby, Christina is wearing black with gold chevrons.

Linking the club and pet shop with cold colors is easy to understand. But I’m much less clear about what to make of this linked living quarters using warm golds. I am convinced that the choice is intentional. This is furthered by the fact that Tracey plays the Indian flute theme and this theme restarts when we first see Christina in the black and gold clothes.

Palette: Blue and Green

This film could easily be more confusing than Atom Egoyan intends it to be. Luckily he worked with a talented crew to find way to unify the themes. One that I’m impressed with is the cinematography of Paul Sarossy and particularly the palettes used. The interior of the Exotica club features pale yellowy greens—including Eric’s work shirt—that are lit with a cool blue light. These colors and tones are closely matched at Thomas’s pet shop thereby linking the two places. The club is named “Exotica” and strippers are sometimes called exotic dancers, but the differences between the two establishments are clear. Thomas might have strange creatures from anywhere in the world in his tanks—we don’t know; we can’t see. But at the club, we see all too much. With the exception of Christina, the other dancers all seem to get naked. Eric’s repeated pitch that for just five dollars one of these women will introduce us into “the mysteries of her world” is not credible. The clients might find the dances to be arousing, but we can see that there is no mystery on offer. And further, even though these naked ladies feature frequently in shots in the club, I don’t think they are presented to the film viewer in a sexually exciting way. The cold colors are one reason why.

"Everybody Knows..."

Or so says Leonard Cohen in the song that Christina dances to at the Exotica club. But we the viewers don’t know. And the participants on screen don’t know either. As this carefully woven film unfolds, we are given three storylines but no understanding of how they might fit together. Soon we see that some of the characters know things that the others don’t. And we realize that we know things that some of the characters don’t while they must know things we don’t.

I was impressed with this movie on first viewing it, and like it even better now that I have seen it several times. But I think one thing I have lost in knowing the film better is the sense of repeated revelation from the first viewing. I’m looking forward to what those of you who have never seen it before have to say, and maybe I can briefly relive that experience vicariously.

The very structure of the movie is built around this withholding of knowledge and understanding with the three seemingly unconnected storylines, but also with some of the visual devices. Time and again we see characters viewed through one way mirrors. The first line of the film is said by an as yet unseen customs agent: “You have to ask yourself what brought the person to this point?” He says this to another agent who is watching a suspect through a one way mirror—a suspect he will later have a tryst with without revealing himself. Then at the Exotica club, the one way mirrors figure repeatedly as we see three of our characters observing through the glass: Eric, Francis, and finally, Zoe.

The other visual embodiment of this obscurity is just obscurity. One of our storylines is a group of people crossing open fields of tall grass. We quickly realize that they are searching, and the open vistas are of no help to them because what they want to find would be down in the grass. At least one of the participants, Eric, feels that it is probably a futile quest and tells Christina “There are so many places you could hide something in this country.” But the most compelling image of obscurity is the murky green but glowing tanks in Thomas’s pet shop. What lives in there? Francis is disturbed by some strange creature in a tank in the moments before he discovers Thomas’s gun.

New movie Notice

We are starting our second movie today, "Exotica". There will be no further warning of spoilers.