国际电影导演词典（英文版）：2-1

I nternational D ictionary of F ilms and F ilmmakers- 2 DIRECTORS FOURTH EDITION EDITORS TOM PENDERGAST SARA PENDERGAST I nternational D ictionary of F ilms and F ilmmakers-2 DIRECTORS I nternational D ictionary of F ilms and F ilmmakers Volume 1 FILMS Volume 2 DIRECTORS Volume 3 ACTORS and ACTRESSES Volume 4 WRITERS and PRODUCTION ARTISTS Tom Pendergast, Sara Pendergast, Editors Michael J. Tyrkus, Project Coordinator Michelle Banks, Erin Bealmear, Laura Standley Berger, Joann Cerrito, Jim Craddock, Steve Cusack, Nicolet V. Elert, Miranda H. Ferrara, Kristin Hart, Melissa Hill, Laura S. Kryhoski, Margaret Mazurkiewicz, Carol Schwartz, and Christine Tomassini, St. James Press Staff Peter M. Gareffa, Managing Editor Maria Franklin, Permissions Manager Debra J. Freitas, Permissions Assistant Mary Grimes, Leitha Etheridge-Sims, Image Catalogers Mary Beth Trimper, Composition Manager Dorothy Maki, Manufacturing Manager Rhonda Williams, Senior Buyer Cynthia Baldwin, Product Design Manager Michael Logusz, Graphic Artist Randy Bassett, Image Database Supervisor Robert Duncan, Imaging Specialists Pamela A. Reed, Imaging Coordinator Dean Dauphinais, Senior Editor, Imaging and Multimedia Content While every effort has been made to ensure the reliability of the information presented in this publication, St. James Press does not guarantee the accuracy of the data contained herein. St. James Press accepts no payment for listing; and inclusion of any organization, agency, institution, publication, service, or individual does not imply endorsement of the editors or publisher. Errors brought to the attention of the publisher and veri?ed to the satisfaction of the publisher will be corrected in future editions. This publication is a creative work fully protected by all applicable copyright laws, as well as by misappropriation, trade secret, unfair competition, and other applicable laws. The authors and editors of this work have added value to the underlying factual material herein through one or more of the following: unique and original selection, coordination, expression, arrangement, and classi?cation of the information. All rights to this publication will be vigorously defended. Copyright ? 2000 St. James Press 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 All rights reserved including the right of reproduction in whole or in part in any form. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data International dictionary of ?lms and ?lmmakers / editors, Tom Pendergast, Sara Pendergast.—4th ed. p. cm. Contents: 1. Films — 2. Directors — 3. Actors and actresses — 4. Writers and production artists. ISBN 1-55862-449-X (set) — ISBN 1-55862-450-3 (v. 1) — ISBN 1-55862-477-5 (v. 2) — ISBN 1-55862-452-X (v. 3) — ISBN 1-55862-453-8 (v. 4) 1. Motion pictures—Plots, themes, etc. 2. Motion picture producers and directors—Biography— Dictionaries. 3. Motion picture actors and actresses—Biography—Dictionaries. 4. Screenwriters— Biography—Dictionaries. I. Pendergast, Tom. II. Pendergast, Sara. PN1997.8.I58 2000 791.43’03—dc2100-064024 CIP Cover photograph—David Cronenberg courtesy the Kobal Collection Printed in the United States of America St. James Press is an imprint of Gale Group Gale Group and Design is a trademark used herein under license 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 CONTENTS EDITORS’ NOTE vii BOARD OF ADVISERS ix CONTRIBUTORS xi LIST OF ENTRANTS xiii DIRECTORS 1 PICTURE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1111 NOTES ON ADVISERS AND CONTRIBUTORS 1115 NATIONALITY INDEX 1127 FILM TITLE INDEX 1133 vii EDITORS’ NOTE This is a revised edition of the 2nd volume of the International Dictionary of Films and Filmmakers, which also includes Volume 1, Films, Volume 3, Actors and Actresses, and Volume 4, Writers and Production Artists. The book comprises more than 483 entries, consisting of a brief biography, a complete ?lmography, a selected bibliography of works by and about the entrant, and a critical essay written by a specialist in the ?eld. There are 66 entrants new to this edition. Most of the entries from the previous edition have been retained here; all entries have updated ?lmographies and bibliographies; and many entries have updated critical essays. Since ?lm is primarily a visual medium, the majority of entries are illustrated, either by a portrait or by a representative still from the entrant’s body of work. The selection of entrants is once again based on the recommendations of the advisory board. It was not thought necessary to propose strict criteria for selection: the book is intended to represent the wide range of interests within North American, British, and West European ?lm scholarship and criticism. The eclecticism in both the list of entrants and the critical stances of the different writers emphasizes the multifarious notions of the cinema, and indeed of the various entrants’ role within it. On the vexing question of authorship in the cinema, it is to be hoped that this volume is properly seen in the context of a series which also focuses on the contribution to the cinema or actors and actresses (Volume 3), along with screenwriters, cinematographers, editors, animators, composers, and other production artists (Volume 4), as well as the individual ?lms themselves (Volume 1). Thanks are due to the following: Nicolet V. Elert and Michael J. Tyrkus at St. James Press, for their efforts in preparing this collection for publication; Michael Najjar, for his tireless efforts in researching the entries; our advisers, for their wisdom and broad knowledge of international cinema; and our contributors, for their gracious participation. We have necessarily built upon the work of the editors who have preceded us, and we thank them for the strong foundation they created. A Note on the Entries Non-English language ?lm titles are given in the original language or a transliteration of it, unless they are better known internationally by their English title. Alternate release titles in the original language(s) are found within parentheses, followed by release titles in English (American then British if there is a difference) and translations. The date of a ?lm is understood to refer to its year of release unless stated otherwise. In the list of ?lms in each entry, information within parentheses following each ?lm modi?es, if necessary, then adds to the subject’s principal function(s). The most common abbreviations used are: an animator assoc associate asst assistant chor choreographer d director ed editor exec executive mus music ph cinematographer or director of photography pr producer prod des production designer ro role sc scenarist or scriptwriter The abbreviation ‘‘co-’’ preceding a function indicates collaboration with one or more persons. Other abbreviations that may be used to clarify the nature of an individual ?lm are ‘‘doc’’—documentary; ‘‘anim’’—animation; and ‘‘ep’’—episode. A name in parentheses following a ?lm title is that of the director. A ?lm title in boldface type indicates that complete coverage of that ?lm may be found in the International Dictionary of Films and Filmmakers, Volume 1: Films. ix BOARD OF ADVISERS Dudley Andrew Jeanine Basinger Ronald Bergan Lewis Cole Gary Crowdus Robert von Dassanowsky Jack C. Ellis Susan Felleman Ben Gibson Douglas Gomery Rajko Grlic Robyn Karney Philip Kemp Susan K. Larsen Audrey T. McCluskey Ib Monty Gary Morris Dan Nissen Julian Petley Christopher Pickard Dana B. Polan Paul Shields Frank P. Tomasulo Leonardo Garcia Tsao Aruna Vasudevan xi CONTRIBUTORS Charles Affron Mirella Jona Affron Dudley Andrew Roy Armes José Arroyo Erik Barnouw Jeanine Basinger John Baxter Birgit Beumers Audie Bock DeWitt Bodeen David Bordwell Ronald Bowers Stephen E. Bowles Stephen Brophy Geoff Brown Robert Burgoyne Julianne Burton Fred Camper Ross Care Michel Ciment Elizabeth Cline Cynthia Close Tom Conley Samantha Cook Kevin J. Costa R. F. Cousins Tony D’Arpino Gertraud Steiner Daviau Pamala S. Deane Charles Derry Wheeler Winston Dixon Susan Doll Robert Dunbar Raymond Durgnat Rob Edelman Robert Edmonds Jack C. Ellis Gretchen Elsner-Sommer Patricia Erens Mark W. Estrin Quentin Falk Greg Faller Rodney Farnsworth Howard Feinstein Susan Felleman Leslie Felperin Lilie Ferrari Theresa FitzGerald Manuel Dos Santos Fonseca Alexa Foreman Saul Frampton Frances Gateward Tina Gianoulis Jill Gillespie Verina Glaessner Douglas Gomery Justin Gustainis Patricia King Hanson Stephen L. Hanson Ann Harris Louise Heck-Rabi Ellie Higgins Kevin Hillstrom Kyoko Hirano Judy Hoffman Deborah H. Holdstein Guo-Juin Hong Robert Horton Vivian Huang Stuart M. Kaminsky Joel Kanoff Robyn Karney Dave Kehr Philip Kemp Satti Khanna Tammy Kinsey Katherine Singer Kovács Audrey E. Kupferberg Joseph Lanza Samuel Lelievre James L. Limbacher Richard Lippe Kimball Lockhart Janet E. Lorenz Glenn Lovell Ed Lowry G. C. Macnab Elaine Mancini Roger Manvell Gina Marchetti Gerald Mast John McCarty Vacláv Merhaut Russell Merritt Lloyd Michaels Joseph Milicia Norman Miller Ib Monty James Morrison John Mraz William T. Murphy Ray Narducy Dennis Nastav Kim Newman Bill Nichols Dan Nissen Clea H. Notar Linda J. Obalil Daniel O’Brien John O’Kane Liam O’Leary Vladimír Opela Dayna Oscherwitz R. Barton Palmer Robert J. Pardi Richard Pe?a Julian Petley Duncan J. Petrie Fran?oise Pfaff Gene D. Phillips Zuzana Mirjam Pick Dana B. Polan Richard Porton Victoria Price Lauren Rabinovitz Maria Racheva Herbert Reynolds Chris Routledge E. Rubinstein Marie Saeli Curtis Schade Lillian Schiff Steven Schneider H. Wayne Schuth Michael Selig David Shipman Ulrike Sieglohr Charles L. P. Silet Scott Simmon P. Adams Sitney Josef Skvorecky Anthony Slide Edward S. Small Eric Smoodin Cecile Starr Bob Sullivan Karel Tabery Richard Taylor J. P. Telotte John C. Tibbetts Doug Tomlinson Andrew Tudor Bla?ena Urgo?íková Ravi Vasudevan Dorothee Verdaasdonk Ginette Vincendeau Mark Walker James M. Welsh Dennis West M. B. White Colin Williams Bill Wine Rob Winning Jessica Wolff Robin Wood xiii LIST OF ENTRANTS Percy Adlon Chantal Akerman Robert Aldrich Woody Allen Pedro Almodóvar Robert Altman Santiago Alvarez Lindsay Anderson Theodoros Angelopoulos Kenneth Anger Michelangelo Antonioni Michael Apted Gregg Araki Denys Arcand Gillian Armstrong Dorothy Arzner Timothy Asch Hal Ashby Alexandre Astruc Richard Attenborough Bille August Claude Autant-Lara Lloyd Bacon John Badham Bruce Baillie Juan Antonio Bardem Boris Barnet Paul Bartel Evgeni Bauer Mario Bava Jacques Becker Jean-Jacques Beineix Marco Bellocchio Maria Luisa Bemberg Shyam Benegal Robert Benton Bruce Beresford Ingmar Bergman Busby Berkeley Claude Berri Bernardo Bertolucci Luc Besson Kathryn Bigelow Fernando Birri Bertrand Blier August Blom Budd Boetticher Peter Bogdanovich John Boorman Lizzie Borden Frank Borzage Roy and John Boulting Stan Brakhage Kenneth Branagh Catherine Breillat Robert Bresson Albert Brooks Mel Brooks Tod Browning Luis Bu?uel Charles Burnett Tim Burton Michael Cacoyannis James Cameron Jane Campion Frank Capra Léos Carax Marcel Carné John Carpenter John Cassavetes Renato Castellani Alberto Cavalcanti Claude Chabrol Youssef Chahine Charles Chaplin Chen Kaige Benjamin Christensen Věra Chytilová Michael Cimino Souleymane Cissé René Clair Shirley Clarke Jack Clayton René Clement Henri-Georges Clouzot Jean Cocteau Joel Coen Martha Coolidge Francis Ford Coppola Roger Corman Constantin Costa-Gavras Wes Craven Charles Crichton John Cromwell David Cronenberg George Cukor Michael Curtiz Joe Dante Jules Dassin Delmer Daves Emile De Antonio Basil Dearden Philippe de Broca Fernando De Fuentes Jean Delannoy Cecil B. De Mille Jonathan Demme Jacques Demy Brian De Palma Maya Deren Vittorio de Sica Carlos Diegues Edward Dmytryk Stanley Donen Mark Donskoi Doris Dorrie Alexander Dovzhenko Carl Theodor Dreyer Germaine Dulac E.A. Dupont Marguerite Duras Julien Duvivier Allan Dwan Clint Eastwood Atom Egoyan Sergei Eisenstein Jean Epstein Jean Eustache Zoltán Fábri Rainer Werner Fassbinder Sa? Faye Paul Fej?s Federico Fellini Emilio Fernández Abel Ferrara Louis Feuillade Jacques Feyder David Fincher Robert Flaherty Victor Fleming Robert Florey John Ford Milos Forman Willi Forst Bill Forsyth Bob Fosse John Frankenheimer Sidney Franklin Stephen Frears Martin Fri? Fridrik Thor Fridriksson William Friedkin Samuel Fuller István Gaál Abel Gance Luis García Berlanga Sergei Gerasimov Haile Gerima Pietro Germi Terry Gilliam Jean-Luc Godard Sara Gómez Claude Goretta Heinosuke Gosho Edmund Goulding Peter Greenaway Jean Grémillon John Grierson D. W. Grif?th Ruy Guerra Yilmaz Güney Tomás Gutiérrez Alea Alice Guy Patricio Guzmán Bert Haanstra Lasse Hallstrom LIST OF ENTRANTS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION xiv Susumi Hani Hal Hartley Howard Hawks Todd Haynes Josef Hei?tz Astrid and Bjarne Henning-Jensen Cecil Hepworth Werner Herzog Walter Hill Alfred Hitchcock Holger-Madsen Agnieszka Holland Tobe Hooper Hou Hsiao-Hsien Ron Howard John Huston Kon Ichikawa Tadashi Imai Shohei Imamura Rex Ingram Otar Ioseliani Juzo Itami Joris Ivens James Ivory Peter Jackson Miklós Jancsó Derek Jarman Jim Jarmusch Humphrey Jennings Norman Jewison Jaromil Jire? Roland Joffé Neil Jordan Jean-Marie Gaston Kaboré Karel Kachyňa Ján Kadár Nelly Kaplan Raj Kapoor Lawrence Kasdan Philip Kaufman Aki Kaurismaki Helmut K?utner Jerzy Kawalerowicz Elia Kazan Buster Keaton Abbas Kiarostami Krzysztof Kie?lowski King Hu Keisuke Kinoshita Teinosuke Kinugasa Alexander Kluge Masaki Kobayashi Barbara Kopple Alexander Korda Zoltan Korda Grigori Kozintsev Stanley Kramer Stanley Kubrick Lev Kuleshov Akira Kurosawa Diane Kurys Emir Kusturica Gregory La Cava John Landis Fritz Lang Claude Lanzmann Alberto Lattuada Frank Launder and Sidney Gilliat Richard Leacock David Lean Patrice Leconte Paul Leduc Ang Lee Spike Lee Jean-Pierre Lefebvre Mike Leigh Claude Lelouch Paul Leni Sergio Leone Mervyn Leroy Richard Lester Barry Levinson Albert Lewin Jerry Lewis Marcel L’Herbier Richard Linklater Miguel Littin Ken Loach Pare Lorentz Joseph Losey Ernst Lubitsch George Lucas Sidney Lumet Louis Lumière David Lynch Alexander MacKendrick Du?an Makavejev Mohsen Makhmalbaf Terrence Malick Louis Malle Nils Malmros Djibril Diop Mambety Rouben Mamoulian Joseph L. Mankiewicz Anthony Mann Michael Mann Chris Marker Gregory Markopoulos John Kennedy Marshall Albert and David Paul Maysles Leo McCarey Mehboob Khan Jonas Mekas Jean-Pierre Melville Jirí Menzel Márta Mészáros Russ Meyer Oscar Micheaux Nikita Mikhalkov Lewis Milestone Claude Miller George Miller Vincente Minnelli Kenji Mizoguchi Nanni Moretti Errol Morris Paul Morrissey Robert Mulligan F. W. Murnau Mira Nair Gregory Nava Jan Nemec Fred Niblo Mike Nichols Manoel de Oliveira Ermanno Olmi Max Ophüls Nagisa Oshima Idrissa Ouedraogo Yasujiro Ozu G. W. Pabst Marcel Pagnol Alan J. Pakula Euzhan Palcy Sergei Paradzhanov Alan Parker Gordon Parks Pier Paolo Pasolini Giovanni Pastrone Sam Peckinpah Arthur Penn Nelson Pereira dos Santos Wolfgang Petersen Elio Petri Dadasaheb Phalke Maurice Pialat Lupu Pick Roman Polanski Sydney Pollack Abraham Polonsky Gillo Pontecorvo Edwin S. Porter Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger Otto Preminger Yakov Protazanov Vsevolod Pudovkin Bob Rafelson Sam Raimi Yvonne Rainer Man Ray Nicholas Ray Satyajit Ray Carol Reed Rob Reiner Karel Reisz Jean Renoir Alain Resnais Tony Richardson Leni Riefenstahl Marlon Riggs Arturo Ripstein Martin Ritt Jacques Rivette Glauber Rocha Nicolas Roeg Alexander Rogozhkin LIST OF ENTRANTSDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION xv Eric Rohmer George A. Romero J?rgen Roos Francesco Rosi Roberto Rossellini Robert Rossen Paul Rotha Jean Rouch Alan Rudolph Raúl Ruiz Walter Ruttmann Helma Sanders-Brahms Mark Sandrich Jorge Sanjinés Carlos Saura Claude Sautet John Sayles Franklin J. Schaffner Fred Schepisi John Schlesinger Volker Schl?ndorff Ernest B. Schoedsack Paul Schrader Werner Schroeter Joel Schumacher Ettore Scola Martin Scorsese Ridley Scott Susan Seidelman Ousmane Sembene Mrinal Sen Mack Sennett Coline Serreau Larisa Shepitko Jim Sheridan Kaneto Shindo Masahiro Shinoda Don Siegel Joan Micklin Silver John Singleton Robert Siodmak Douglas Sirk Alf Sj?berg Victor Sj?str?m Jerzy Skolimowski Kevin Smith Steven Soderbergh Fernando E. Solanas and Octavio Getino Humberto Solas Todd Solondz Penelope Spheeris Steven Spielberg John M. Stahl Wolfgang Staudte George Stevens Mauritz Stiller Whit Stillman Oliver Stone Henri Storck Jean-Marie Straub and Danièle Huillet Preston Sturges Hans-Jurgen Syberberg Istvan Szabó Alain Tanner Quentin Tarantino Andrei Tarkovsky Frank Tashlin Jacques Tati Bertrand Tavernier Paolo and Vittorio Taviani Andre Téchiné Tian Zhuangzhuang Leopoldo Torre Nilsson Jacques Tourneur Maurice Tourneur Jan Troell Fran?ois Truffaut Edgar Ulmer Roger Vadim Gus Van Sant Stan Vanderbeek Jaco Van Dormael Agnès Varda Paul Verhoeven Dziga Vertov King Vidor Jean Vigo Luchino Visconti Josef von Sternberg Erich von Stroheim Lars von Trier Margarethe von Trotta Andrzej Wajda Raoul Walsh Vincent Ward Andy Warhol John Waters Lois Weber Peter Weir Ji?i Weiss Orson Welles William Wellman Wim Wenders Lina Wertmuller James Whale Robert Wiene Billy Wilder Robert Wise Frederick Wiseman John Woo Edward D. Wood, Jr. William Wyler Xie Jin Edward Yang Kozabura Yoshimura Krzysztof Zanussi Franco Zef?relli Robert Zemeckis Mai Zetterling Zhang Yimou Fred Zinnemann 1 A ADLON, Percy Nationality: German. Born: Munich, 1 June 1935; great-grandson of founder of the famed Hotel Adlon, Berlin. Education: Studied art history, literature, and theater, with a degree in acting, in Munich. Family: Married Eleonore, a frequent collaborator on his films; son: Felix, film writer-director. Career: Created documentaries for Bayerischer Rundfunk (Bavarian Broadcasting), 1970–1984; directed his first feature film, Céleste, 1981. Awards: Bavarian Film Award (Germany) for Best Director, for Fünf letzte Tage, 1983; Berlin Film Critics Ernst Lubitsch Award for Best Comedy, 1987, Bavarian Film Award for Best Screenplay, 1988, and Césars (France) for Best European Film and Best Foreign Film, 1989, all for Out of Rosenheim; Bavarian Film Award for Best Director, for Salmonberries, 1992; Brussels International Festival of Fantasy Films (Belgium) Silver Raven for Younger and Younger, 1994. Films as Director: 1978 Der Vormund und sein Dichter (The Guardian and the Poet) (for TV) 1979 Herr Kischott (for TV) 1980 Celeste (+ sc) 1981 Fünf letzte Tage (Five Last Days) (+ sc) 1982 Die Schaukel (The Swing) (+ sc) 1983 Zuckerbaby (Sugarbaby) (+sc) 1984 Herschel und die Musik der Sterne (Herschel and the Music of the Stars) (for TV) (+ sc) 1987 Out of Rosenheim (Bagdad Café) (+ co-sc, pr) 1988 Rosalie Goes Shopping (+ sc, pr) 1989 Salmonberries (+ sc) 1988 Younger and Younger (+ co-sc, co-pr) 1989 In der glanzvollen Welt des Hotel Adlon (The Glamorous World of the Adlon Hotel; Hotel Adlon) (for TV) (+ sc) 1999 Die Strausskiste (Forever Flirt) (+ sc) Other Films: 1997 Eat Your Heart Out (Felix Adlon) (pr) Publications By ADLON: articles— ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Percy Adlon,’’ interview in American Film (Los Angeles), May 1988. Stone, Judy, ‘‘Percy Adlon,’’ interview in Eye on the World: Conver- sations with International Filmmakers, Los Angeles, 1997. On ADLON: articles— Walker, B., ‘‘Percy Adlon,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July- August 1988. Boujut, M. ‘‘The Film Career of Percy Adlon,’’ in Avant-scène du Cinema, November-December 1988. On ADLON: films— Die Schonheit im Normalen finden: Die inneren Bilder des Percy Adlon, Bavarian Television, 1993. *** Roughly a decade older than his more renowned compatriots in the German New Cinema, Percy Adlon began making feature films more than a decade after the remarkable early works of Werner Herzog, Wim Wenders, and Rainer Werner Fassbinder. If ultimately he has created a body of work more conventional than those of his younger contemporaries, he has still achieved a handful of works which remain important and distinctive, particularly for their mixture of cool detachment and genuine compassion for lonely eccentrics. Following a long career in Bavarian television, largely in docu- mentary work, Adlon received immediate international notice with Céleste, his first feature. Based upon a memoir by Marcel Proust’s maidservant, the film patiently records the title character’s daily activities, or more frequently her stasis, as she sits waiting for Monsieur to ring for his daily coffee—or for help if seized by an asthma attack. The film is a kind of study in restraint—not only Céleste’s but the filmmaker’s, as he seeks visual and emotional variety within a restricted environment. Most of the drama is set in Proust’s apartment, but there are occasionally montages (handsomely composed shots, empty of people) of elegant apartment facades in Paris, or the writer’s vacation beach in Normandy, or bleak, wintry vistas in Céleste’s native village. Occasionally Céleste (Eva Mattes) addresses the camera directly; at other times her flashback-memories of a livelier, party-going Proust (Jurgen Arndt) weave in and out of the more somber present time of the narrative. Fragmented bursts of Franck’s String Quartet punctuate silences otherwise broken only by a clock ticking or an occasional cough from the master’s cork-lined bedroom; the music unexpectedly becomes live when a string quartet performs (still in fragments of music) privately for Proust and Céleste. Obsession is a common-enough preoccupation of modernist film, but Adlon often explores devotion—not without ironic perspective or quirky humor, but never with the derision of more cynical filmmakers. Céleste, for example, is devoted but not remotely doglike or patheti- cally spinsterish. She appears to have a satisfactory relationship with her husband, Proust’s manservant; and she is not obsequious, as Adlon establishes in an early flashback when, as a new servant, she ADLON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 2 Percy Adlon (left) with Jack Palance. refuses to use the third person (as in ‘‘Will Monsieur be having his coffee now?’’), though she also cannot accept his invitation to call him Marcel. Her visible grief over his death, which concludes the film, raises the question that much of the film has seemed to ask: Is the word ‘‘friendship’’ appropriate for this relationship? Less well known outside Germany but no less accomplished than Céleste is Five Last Days, which with quiet power presents just what the title alludes to: the five last days in the life of a young freedom fighter, beginning with her arrest for spreading anti-Nazi propaganda and ending with her being taken off to be hanged. The setting, again a restricted one, is Gestapo headquarters in Munich: its front office, interrogation rooms and, especially, Sophie’s bedroom in a cavernous basement area. No torture or even especially callous behavior is shown, but the menace of the place is palpable—groaning basement sounds, sinister empty spaces, barking guard dogs. Again Adlon uses a striking variety of shots within confined areas but this is not a dry, academic exercise in camera placement. Rather, the film, like Céleste, is centered upon a growing friendship, here between Sophie and her older roommate Else, a long-term prisoner. The nuances of the performances, and once again an austerity in film style matching the emotional restraint of the women, make this film among Adlon’s finest achievements. A touching lengthy scene in which the two women and a couple of male inmates are allowed by the guard to have a party in their room with some smuggled treats is superbly executed. Sugarbaby, which increased Adlon’s fame abroad, is filled with the sort of droll eccentricity for which he became known in America, as well as introducing his discovery, Marianne Sagebrecht, in a lead- ing role. This film too is highly stylized, but far from austere, with its extravagant lighting scheme—neon pinks and blues, occasional slashes of gold or ghastly greens—and long takes in which the camera meanders a bit away from the actors, to the left and right in ever-wider drifts without ever quite leaving them. The tale leans toward the fantastic: a depressed, overweight funeral-parlor worker, 38, in an instant falls in love with a handsome young U-Bahn driver, 25, spies on him, seduces him with candy bars while his wife is out of town, and has night after night of fantastic sex with him until the wife beats her up on a disco floor. The film’s last shot, with Marianne (as the character is named) on a subway platform proffering a candy bar to an unknown figure, or to no one, is in itself highly stylized, an abstrac- tion of her plight. A major part of Sugarbaby’s success is its ability to present Marianne’s dogged pursuit of the subway driver with alternating AKERMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 3 amused detachment (e.g., their motorcycle ride) and serious compas- sion (a take of over nine minutes in which Marianne tells her lover about her earlier life of suffering and grief) without ever seeming to condescend. Another part is Sagebrecht’s understated performance, memorable even in small details like her first saying ‘‘Zuckerbaby’’ to herself in a hushed voice, as if it were a revelation. At only one point does the comedy cross over into John Waters-style campy melodrama (rather than, say, Fassbinderish degradation), when the wife viciously attacks Marianne on the dance floor and leaves her writhing in misery, while no one makes a move to stop the violence. (A couple of Adlon’s later films have strikingly Watersesque mo- ments: the loony family acting hyper-normal at the dinner table and around the TV in Rosalie Goes Shopping, and the cartoonish lady with whom the older Mr. Younger has noisy sex in Younger and Younger.) Sugarbaby’s success led to Adlon’s making a film in the United States, premiered in Germany as Out of Rosenheim and released in the States, somewhat shortened, the next year as Bagdad Café. It is certainly Adlon’s only film to be turned into an American TV series, though without his participation. The trajectory of the plot is a bit predictable—two exceedingly dissimilar individuals become both friends and business partners—but films about women’s friendships were relatively rare in 1988, and the pair were vividly impersonated by Marianne Sagebrecht, as an ever mildly astonished echt-Bavarian (stranded in the Mohave Desert with little to her name other than a feathered hat and her husband’s lederhosen), and CCH Pounder, as a constantly exasperated and short-tempered African American owner of the cafe where Jasmin seeks shelter, then employment. Some of the supporting characters may be a little calculatedly oddball, but Jack Palance’s Rudy, a cowboyish ex-Hollywood scenic painter who senses Jasmin’s inner beauty and celebrates in oils her outward zaftigheit, is a memorable figure; the role revivified the actor’s career. Yellow filters give the film a markedly different color scheme than Sugarbaby’s, but some camera setups of near-expressionistic styliza- tion recall the previous film. More impressively original are Adlon’s camera movements to connect the spookily empty desert spaces with the oddly cozy cafe, as in one lengthy tracking shot with assorted characters drifting on and offscreen across the dusty parking lot, and several shots following the boomerang thrown by a young vagabond, always taking us back to the cafe. The director also makes repeated use of Bob Telson’s haunting soundtrack song, ‘‘I’ll Be Calling You.’’ Adlon’s second American film, Rosalie Goes Shopping, in which a German immigrant wife (Sagebrecht again) develops petty credit fraud into major capitalist enterprise, has its supporters, but the comic characters are rather one-note (particularly in comparison to the leads in Bagdad Café), and the confessional scenes with Rosalie’s appalled priest (Judge Rheinhold) are rather too predictable. Subtler and more lingering in the imagination is Salmonberries, the last of Adlon’s trilogy of films about German women making a life for themselves in the United States. Friendship is once again the theme, but the couple is even unlikelier, and certainly less comical, than the pair in Bagdad Café: an East German woman (Rosel Zech) whose husband was slain as they attempted to cross the border to the West and who is now living an embittered life as an Alaskan librarian; and a half-Inuit orphan (the singer k.d. lang, who also contributes to the soundtrack) searching for the secret of her birth. Again Adlon secures a memorable performance from a non-professional, here lang as the shy but fierce-tempered orphan for whom the librarian is at first only a tool for researching her strange name (Kotzebue) and origin, but later, on a trip to Berlin, the object of a hopeless sexual attraction. Adlon makes excellent use of another extreme environment—the snowy wastes of the Alaskan tundra—and has at least one scene of unforgettable beauty, when we see the librarian’s bedroom, a shrine glowingly lit not by stained glass but by row upon row of jars of her berry jam against the windows. Memorable in an altogether different way is the Berlin hotel sequence in which the librarian tries to explain to Kotzebue why she cannot have a love affair with her: we see fragments of a night-to-dawn session, each a separate shot with its own striking camera placement, separated by fades to black. The cleverly titled Younger and Younger returns to the cartoonishness of Rosalie in its tale of a philandering storage facility manager who becomes haunted by the ghost of his neglected wife. It does boast an extravagant performance by Donald Sutherland as the elder Younger—and a remarkable makeup job on Lolita Davidovich, who starts out as a middle-aged frump but as a ghost becomes younger and more luscious in every scene. But there is less of a truly distinctive visual scheme than in any of the earlier features, and some of the minor characters are rather palely conceived. Following the film’s commercial failure and the limited distribu- tion of Salmonberries, Adlon seems to have retired, except for a short feature that was clearly a personal project, involving as it does his actual family and American movies. Combining documentary foot- age with staged scenes, In der glanzvollen Welt des Hotel Adlon is a biography of his uncle Louis Adlon (played by Percy’s son Felix), who grew up in the family hotel but lived in Hollywood in the 1920s, had affairs with stars of the day (e.g., Pola Negri, played by Céleste’s Eva Mattes), and returned to Berlin only after World War II, as a Hearst correspondent, to reminisce among the ruins of the hotel. While Adlon may have other projects at hand, the film serves presently as a moving capstone to the career of someone who seems to have found his calling only in middle age and whose work took him to an oddly German-inflected America before leading back home. —Joseph Milicia AKERMAN, Chantal Nationality: Belgian. Born: Brussels, June 1950. Education: INSAS film school, Brussels, 1967–68; studied at Université Internationale du Théatre, Paris, 1968–69. Career: Saute ma vie entered in Oberhausen festival, 1971; lived in New York, 1972; returned to France, 1973. Films as Director: 1968 Saute ma vie 1971 L’Enfant aimé 1972 Hotel Monterey; La Chambre 1973 Le 15/18 (co-d); Hanging out Yonkers (unfinished) 1974 Je tu il elle AKERMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 4 Chantal Akerman 1975 Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles 1977 News from Home 1978 Les Rendez-vous d’Anna 1980 Dis-moi 1982 Toute une nuit (All Night Long) 1983 Les Années 80 (The Golden Eighties) (co-sc); Un Jour pina a demandé 1984 L’Homme à la valise; J’ai faim, j’ai froid (episode in Paris vu par . . . 20 ans après); Family Business; New York, New York Bis 1987 Seven Women, Seven Sins (co-d) 1988 Un jour Pina m’a demande 1989 Histoires d’Amérique: Food, Family, and Philosophy/Ameri- can Stories 1991 Nuit et jour 1992 Contre l’oubli 1993 D’est (+ sc); Moving In (Le Déménagement) 1994 Portrait of a Young Girl at the End of the 1960s in Brussels (+ sc) 1996 Chantal Akerman by Chantal Akerman; Un divan à New York (A Couch in New York) (+ sc) 1999 Sud (South) (+ sc) 2000 La Captive (The Captive) (+ sc) Films as Producer: 1998 Fifty Fifty (sup pr, sup dir) Publications By AKERMAN: books— Les Rendez-vous d’Anna, Paris, 1978. Bordering on Fiction: Chantal Akerman’s D’Est, New York, 1995. By AKERMAN: articles— Interview with C. Alemann and H. Hurst, in Frauen und Film (Berlin), March 1976. Interview with Danièle Dubroux, and others, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July 1977. Interview with P. Carcassone and L. Cugny, in Cinématographe (Paris), November 1978. Interview in Stills (London), December 1984/January 1985. Interview in Inter/View (New York), February 1985. Interview in Cinéma (Paris), 25 June 1986. Interview in Nouvel Observateur (Paris), 28 September 1989. Interview in Filmihullu, no. 4, 1991. Interview in EPD Film (Frankfurt/Main), July 1992. Interview in Séquences (Haute-Ville), July-August 1997. On AKERMAN: book— Margulies, Ivone, Nothing Happens: Chantal Akerman’s Hyperrealist Everyday, Duke University Press, 1996. On AKERMAN: articles— Bertolina, G., ‘‘Chantal Akerman: il cinema puro,’’ in Filmcritica (Rome), March 1976. Creveling, C., ‘‘Women Working,’’ in Camera Obscura (Berkeley), Fall 1976. Mairesse, E., ‘‘A propos des films de Chantal Akerman: Un temps atmosphere,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1977. Bergstrom, Janet, in Camera Obscura (Berkeley), Fall 1978. Martin, Angela, ‘‘Chantal Akerman’s Films,’’ in Feminist Review, no. 3, 1979. Seni, N., in Frauen und Film (Berlin), September 1979. Perlmutter, Ruth, ‘‘Visible Narrative, Visible Woman,’’ in Millenium (New York), Spring 1980. Delavaud, G., ‘‘Les chemins de Chantal Akerman,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1981. Philippon, A., ‘‘Fragments bruxellois/Nuit torride,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1982. Dossier on Akerman, in Versus (Nijmegen), no. 1, 1985. Barrowclough, S., ‘‘Chantal Akerman: Adventures in perception,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), April 1984. Squire, C., ‘‘Toute une heure,’’ in Screen (London), November/ December 1984. Castiel, E., in 24 Images (Montreal), nos. 34/35, 1987. Paskin, Sylvia, ‘‘Waiting for the Next Shot,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), March 1990. Bahg, P. von, ‘‘Keskusteluvourossa: Chantal Akerman,’’ in Filmihullu, no. 4, 1991. Williams, B., ‘‘Splintered Perspectives: Counterpoint and Subjectiv- ity in the Modernist Film Narrative,’’ in Film Criticism, no. 2, 1991. Roberti, B., ‘‘Tradire l’immagine,’’ Filmcritica, September/Octo- ber 1991. ALDRICHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 5 Klerk, N. de, ‘‘Chantal Akerman,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), June/ July 1992. McRobbie, A., ‘‘Passionate Uncertainty,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), September 1992. Chang, Chris, ‘‘Ruined,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/ December 1993. Boquet, Stéphane, ‘‘Ce qui revient et ce qui arrive,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1995. Preziosi, Adelina, and Michele Gottardi,‘‘Corpi di cinema/Esordienti alla carica/Il silenzio invisible,’’ in Segnocinema (Vicenza), Sep- tember-October 1997. *** At the age of fifteen Chantal Akerman saw Godard’s Pierrot le fou and realized that filmmaking could be experimental and personal. She dropped in and out of film school and has since created short and feature films for viewers who appreciate the opportunity her works provide to think about sounds and images. Her films are often shot in real time, and in space that is part of the characters’ identity. During a self-administered apprenticeship in New York (1972–73) shooting short films on very low budgets, Akerman notes that she learned much from the work of innovators Michael Snow and Stan Brakhage. She was encouraged to explore organic techniques for her personal subject matter. In her deliberately paced films there are long takes, scenes shot with stationary camera, and a play of light in relation to subjects and their space. (In Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles, as Jeanne rides up or down in the elevator, diagonals of light from each floor cut across her face in a regular rhythm.) Her films feature vistas down long corridors, acting with characters’ backs to the camera, and scenes concluded with several seconds of darkness. In Akerman films there are hotels and journeys, little conversation. Windows are opened and sounds let in, doors opened and closed; we hear a doorbell, a radio, voices on the telephone answering machine, footsteps, city noises. Each frame is carefully composed, each gesture the precise result of Akerman’s directions. A frequent collaborator is her sensitive cameraperson, Babette Mangolte, who has worked with Akerman on such works as Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles, News from Home, and Toute une nuit. Mangolte has also worked with avant guardists Yvonne Rainer, Marcel Hanoun, and Michael Snow. Plotting is minimal or non-existent in Akerman films. Old welfare clients come and go amid the impressive architecture of a once splendid hotel on New York’s Upper West Side in Hotel Monterey. New York City plays its busy, noisy self for the camera as Akerman’s voice on the sound track reads concerned letters from her mother in Belgium in News from Home. A young filmmaker travels to Germany to appear at a screening of her latest film, meets people who distress her, and her mother who delights her, and returns home in Les Rendez- vous d’Anna. Jeanne Dielman, super-efficient housewife, earns money as a prostitute to support herself and her son. Her routine breaks down by chance, and she murders one of her customers. The films (some of which are semi-autobiographical) are not dramatic in the conventional sense, nor are they glamorized or eroticized; the excitement is inside the characters. In a film which Akerman has called a love letter to her mother, Jeanne Dielman is seen facing the steady camera as members of a cooking class might see her, and she prepares a meatloaf—in real time. Later she gives herself a thorough scrubbing in the bathtub; only her head and the motion of her arms are visible. Her straightening and arranging and smoothing are seen as a child would see and remember them. In Toute une nuit Akerman displays her precision and control as she stages the separate, audience-involving adventures of a huge cast of all ages that wanders out into Brussels byways on a hot, stormy night. In this film, reminiscent of Wim Wenders and his wanderers and Marguerite Duras’s inventive sound tracks, choreography, and sense of place, Akerman continues to explore her medium using no conventional plot, few spoken words, many sounds, people who leave the frame to a lingering camera, and appealing images. A little girl asks a man to dance with her, and he does. The filmmaker’s feeling for the child and the child’s independence can’t be mistaken. Akerman’s Moving In, meanwhile, centers on a monologue deliv- ered by a man who has just moved into a modern apartment. A film of ‘‘memory and loss,’’ according to Film Comment, he has left behind ‘‘a melancholy space of relations, relations dominated by his former neighbors, a trio of female ‘social science students.’’’ —Lillian Schiff ALDRICH, Robert Nationality: American. Born: Cranston, Rhode Island, 9 August 1918. Education: Moses Brown School, Providence, and University of Virginia, graduated (law and economics) 1941. Family: Married Harriet Foster, 1941 (divorced 1965); children: Adell, William, Alida, and Kelly; married fashion model Sibylle Siegfried, 1966. Robert Aldrich ALDRICH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 6 Career: Worked for RKO studios, 1941–1944; under contract to Enterprise studios, 1945–1948; TV director, from 1952; founded ‘‘Associates and Aldrich Company,’’ 1955; signed contract for Columbia Pictures, then fired after refusing to ‘‘soften’’ script of The Garment Jungle; after five–year period working abroad, returned to Hollywood, 1962; after The Dirty Dozen, established Aldrich Stu- dios, 1967, but forced to sell, 1973; elected president of the Directors Guild, 1975; ‘‘Aldrich Company’’ reorganised, 1976. Awards: Sil- ver Prize, Venice Festival, for The Big Knife, 1955; Silver Bear Award for Best Direction, Berlin Festival, for Autumn Leaves, 1956; Italian Critics Award, Venice Festival, for Attack!, 1956. Died: In Los Angeles, of kidney failure, 5 December 1983. Films as Director: 1953 The Big Leaguer 1954 World for Ransom (+ co-pr); Apache; Vera Cruz 1955 Kiss Me Deadly (+ pr); The Big Knife (+ pr) 1956 Autumn Leaves; Attack! (+ pr) 1957 The Garment Jungle (un-credited) 1959 The Angry Hills; Ten Seconds to Hell (+ co-sc) 1961 The Last Sunset 1962 Sodoma e Gomorra (Sodom and Gomorrah); Whatever Hap- pened to Baby Jane? (+ pr) 1963 Four for Texas (+ co-pr, co-sc) 1964 Hush . . . Hush, Sweet Charlotte (+ pr) 1966 Flight of the Phoenix (+ pr) 1967 The Dirty Dozen 1968 The Legend of Lylah Clare (+ pr); The Killing of Sister George (+ pr) 1969 Too Late the Hero (+ pr, co-sc) 1971 The Grissom Gang (+ pr) 1972 Ulzana’s Raid 1973 Emperor of the North (The Emperor of the North Pole) 1974 The Longest Yard (The Mean Machine) 1975 Hustle (+ co-pr) 1977 Twilight’s Last Gleaming; The Choirboys 1979 The Frisco Kid 1981 All the Marbles (California Dolls) Other Films: 1945 The Southerner (Renoir) (1st asst-d) 1946 The Story of G.I. Joe (Wellman) (1st asst-d); Pardon My Past (Fenton) (1st asst-d); The Strange Love of Martha Ivers (Milestone) (1st asst-d) 1947 The Private Affairs of Bel Ami (Lewin) (1st asst-d); Body and Soul (Rossen) (1st asst-d) 1948 Arch of Triumph (Milestone) (1st asst-d); So This Is New York (Fleischer) (1st asst-d); No Minor Vices (Milestone) (1st asst-d) 1949 Force of Evil (Polonsky) (1st asst-d); The Red Pony (Mile- stone) (1st asst-d); A Kiss for Corliss (Wallace) (1st asst-d) 1950 The White Tower (Tetzlaff) (1st asst-d); Teresa (Zinnemann) (pre-production work) 1951 The Prowler (Losey) (1st asst-d); M (Losey) (1st asst-d); Of Men and Music (Reis) (1st asst-d); New Mexico (Reis) (1st asst-d) 1952 Abbott and Costello Meet Captain Kidd (Lamont) (1st asst-d); Limelight (Chaplin) (1st asst-d); The Trio: Rubinstein, Heifetz and Piatigorsky (Million Dollar Trio) (Dassin) (1st asst-d); The Steel Trap (Stone) (pr supervision) 1957 The Ride Back (pr) 1969 Whatever Happened to Aunt Alice? (pr) Publications By ALDRICH: articles— Interview with George Fenin, in Film Culture (New York), July/ August 1956. Interviews with Fran?ois Truffaut, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1956 and April 1958. ‘‘High Price of Independence,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1958. ‘‘Learning from My Mistakes,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1960. ‘‘Hollywood . . . Still an Empty Tomb,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), May/June 1963. ‘‘What Ever Happened to American Movies?,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1963/64. Interview with Joel Greenburg, in Sight and Sound (London), Win- ter 1968/69. ‘‘Why I Bought My Own Studio,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), January/ February 1969. ‘‘Impressions of Russia,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), July/August 1971. ‘‘Dialogue,’’ with Bernardo Bertolucci, in Action (Los Angeles), March/April 1974. ‘‘Up to Date with Robert Aldrich,’’ interview with Harry Ringel, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1974. ‘‘Aldrich Interview,’’ with Pierre Sauvage, in Movie (London), Winter 1976/77. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Robert Aldrich,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), November 1978. On ALDRICH: books— Micha, Rene, Robert Aldrich, Brussels, 1957. Higham, Charles, The Celluloid Muse: Hollywood Directors Speak, London, 1969. Silver, Alain, and Elizabeth Ward, Robert Aldrich: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1979. Salizzato, Claver, Robert Aldrich, Florence, 1983. Piton, Jean-Pierre, Robert Aldrich, Paris, 1985. Arnold, Edwin T., and Eugene L. Miller, The Films and Career of Robert Aldrich, Knoxville, Tennessee, 1986. Maheo, Michel, Robert Aldrich, Paris, 1987. Silver, Alain, and James Ursini, What Ever Happened to Robert Aldrich? New York, 1995. On ALDRICH: articles— Rivette, Jacques, ‘‘On Revolution,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 54, 1955. Jarvie, Ian, ‘‘Hysteria and Authoritarianism in the Films of Robert Aldrich,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1961. ALDRICHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 7 Cameron, Ian, and Mark Shivas, ‘‘Interview and Filmography,’’ in Movie (London), April 1963. Bitsch, Charles, and Bertrand Tavernier, ‘‘La Fonction de Producer,’’ and Claude Chabrol, ‘‘Directed By:,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December/January 1964/65. Silke, James, editor, ‘‘Robert Aldrich,’’ in Dialogue on Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), no. 2, 1972. Silver, Alain, ‘‘Mr. Film Noir Stays at the Table,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Spring 1972. Beaupre, Lee, ‘‘Bob Aldrich: Candid Maverick,’’ in Variety (New York), 27 June 1973. Ringel, Harry, ‘‘Robert Aldrich: The Director as Phoenix,’’ in Take One (Montreal), September 1974. Silver, Alain, ‘‘Kiss Me Deadly: Evidence of a Style,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1975. Combs, Richard, ‘‘Worlds Apart: Aldrich since The Dirty Dozen,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1976. Duval, B., ‘‘Aldrich le rebelle,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), May 1976. Legrand, Gerard, ‘‘Robert Aldrich et l’incompletude du nihilism,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1976. Gazano, R., and M. Cusso, ‘‘L’Homme d’Aldrich,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), June 1980. McCarthy, T., obituary of Aldrich in Variety (New York), 7 Decem- ber 1983. Salizzato, Claver, ‘‘Robert Aldrich’’ (special issue), Castoro Cinema (Firenze), no. 106, 1983. ‘‘Aldrich Section’’ of Cinéma (Paris), February 1984. ‘‘Robert Aldrich,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1985, and March 1988. Lang, Robert, ‘‘Looking for the ‘Great Whatzit’: Kiss Me Deadly and Film Noir,’’ in Cinema Journal (Champaign, Illinois), Spring 1988. Stefancic, M. Jr., ‘‘Robert Aldrich,’’ in Ekran (Ljubljana, Slovenia), vol. 14, no. 5–6, 1989. Lyons, D., ‘‘Dances with Aldrich,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 27, March-April 1991. Jopkiewicz, T., ‘‘Malownicz Apokalipsa,’’ Iluzjon, July-Decem- ber 1991. Charbol, D. ‘‘B. A., ou une dialectique de la survie,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1994. Danel, Isabelle, ‘‘Le sale gosse d’Hollywood,’’ in Télérama (Paris), November 9, 1994. Grant, J., ‘‘Bob le copieux,’’ in Cinémathèque (Paris), Autumn 1994. Ranger, J.-F., ‘‘La dernière lueur d’Aldrich,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1995. Kahn, Olivier, and others, ‘‘Hommage à Robert Aldrich,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 415, September 1995. *** Despite a commercially respectable career both within the studio system and as an independent producer-director, Robert Aldrich remains an ill-appreciated, if not entirely bothersome presence for most American critics. Andrew Sarris did praise Aldrich in 1968 as ‘‘one of the most strikingly personal directors of the past two decades’’; yet, for the most part, it has remained to the French and the English to attempt to unravel the defiant quirkiness of Aldrich’s career. Only the otherworldly Kiss Me Deadly, which Paul Schrader unequivocably dubbed ‘‘the masterpiece of film noir,’’ has received anything like the attention it deserves on this side of the Atlantic; yet the film is quite indicative of the bitter ironies, bizarre stylistics, and scathing nihilism characteristic of most of Aldrich’s work. In bringing Mickey Spillane’s neo-fascist hero Mike Hammer to the screen, Kiss Me Deadly plays havoc with the conventions of the hardboiled detective, turning the existential avenger into a narcissistic materialist who exploits those around him for the benefit of his plush lifestyle. In an outrageous alteration of the novel’s plot, Hammer becomes a modern neanderthal whose individualism is revealed as insanity when it causes him to botch a case involving a box of pure nuclear energy and thus the fate of the world. The result is a final shot of a mushroom cloud rising from a California beachhouse, consuming both Hammer and the bad guys. Only at this extreme and this distance in time has Aldrich’s acute sense of irony impressed itself upon a liberal critical establishment whose repugnance to the surfaces of his films has usually served as an excuse for ignoring their savage, multi-layered critiques of Hollywood genres and American ideology. The extremity of Aldrich’s reinterpretations of the Western in Ulzana’s Raid, of the war movie in Attack!, of the cop film in The Choirboys, and of the women’s melodrama in Autumn Leaves betrays a cynicism so bitter that it could only arise from a liberal sensibility utterly disillusioned by an age in which morality has become a cruel joke. In fact, the shattering of illusions is central to Aldrich’s work, and it is a powerfully self-destructive process, given the sweetness of the illusions and the anger of his iconoclasm. In Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, a gothic horror film whose terms are explicitly the hideous realities hidden beneath the sugar-coating of the entertain- ment industry, Aldrich virtually defines the genre of camp, offering derisive laughter as the only alternative to an unbearably absurd cosmos. This sense of black comedy (which Aldrich shares with, and developed at the same time as, Hollywood contemporary Stanley Kubrick) has frequently been responsible for the volatile relationship his films have had with popular audiences. Given the context of a life- and-death prison football game in The Longest Yard, Aldrich was able to enlist the audience in the hero’s bitter laughter in the face of a triumphant totalitarian authority. But when he adopted the same black humor toward the scandalous chicanery of the marginally psychotic cops in The Choirboys, he angered almost everybody, not the least of whom was the novel’s author, Joseph Wambaugh. Turned in an introspective direction, Aldrich’s acid sensibility resulted in an intensely discomforting, stylistically alienated version of Clifford Odets’s Hollywood-hating The Big Knife and the madly ambitious The Legend of Lylah Clare, an 8–1/2 cum Vertigo far too complex by any Hollywood standard. When turned outward toward the world at large, that same sensibility was responsible for a down- beat, disheartening masterpiece like the much-maligned Hustle, a film that succeeds better than almost any other in summing up the moral displacement and emotional anguish of the whole decade of the 1970s. At his most skillful, Aldrich could juggle ideologically volatile issues so well that his most popular film, The Dirty Dozen, made during the politically turbulent period of the Vietnam War, played equally well to hawks and doves. Its story of death row prisoners exploited by the military bureaucracy into participation in a suicide raid, where they are to attack a chateau, slaughtering both German officers and civilians, seemed explicitly antiwar in its equation of heroism and criminality and its critique of the body-count mentality ALLEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 8 of a morally corrupt system. Yet, The Dirty Dozen still managed to emerge as a gung-ho war movie in the best Hollywood tradition. The multiple contradictions of the film’s stance are nowhere clearer than in its climactic scene, where Aldrich has black athlete Jim Brown re- create one of his famous touchdown runs in order to set off an underground holocaust explicitly parallelled to Auschwitz. In a far less popular film, the revisionist western Ulzana’s Raid, Aldrich does confront the horrors of Vietnam with a nearly intolerable accuracy via the properly bloody metaphor of a cavalry company using West Point tactics to fight a band of Apache guerilla warriors. The film relentlessly refuses to diminish the brutality of the red man; even as it demonstrates the poverty of the white man’s Christian idealism. The result is perhaps the first western ever to cast America’s doctrine of Manifest Destiny in explicitly colonial terms. More than any other mainstream director, Aldrich insisted on presenting the radical contradictions of American ideology. If we adopt a stance not nearly as cynical as his own in most of his films, we might observe that his capacity to do so has frequently resulted in sizable profits. Yet it is also important to remember that, while Stanley Kubrick (whose 1950s films bear striking stylistic and thematic similarities to those of Aldrich) found it necessary to retreat to England, reducing his output to two or three films a decade, Aldrich chose to fight it out in Hollywood, where his capacity for money- making allowed him the space to vent his own personal anger at the compromises we all must make. —Ed Lowry ALLEN, Woody Nationality: American. Born: Allen Stewart Konigsberg in Brook- lyn, New York, 1 December 1935. Education: Attended Midwood High School, Brooklyn; New York University, 1953; City College (now City College of the City University of New York), 1953. Family: Married 1) Harlene Rosen, 1954 (divorced); 2) Louise Lasser, 1966 (divorced); 3) Soon-Yi Previn, 1997; one daughter, Bechet Dumaine; also maintained a thirteen-year relationship with actress Mia Farrow, 1979–92; one son, Satchel, and two adopted children, one son, Moses, and one daughter, Dylan). Career: Began writing jokes for columnists and television celebrities while still in high school; joined staff of National Broadcasting Company, 1952, writing for such television comedy stars as Sid Caesar, Herb Shriner, Buddy Hackett, Art Carney, Carol Channing, and Jack Paar; also wrote for The Tonight Show and The Garry Moore Show; began performing as stand-up comedian on television and in nightclubs, 1961; hired by producer Charles Feldman to write What’s New, Pussycat?, 1964; production of his play Don’t Drink the Water opened on Broadway, 1966; wrote and starred in Broadway run of Play It Again, Sam, 1969–70 (filmed 1972); began collaboration with writer Marshall Brickman, 1976; wrote play The Floating Light Bulb, produced at Lincoln Center, New York, 1981. Awards: Sylvania Award, 1957, for script of The Sid Caesar Show; Academy Awards (Oscars) from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for Best Director and Best Original Screenplay (co-recipient), New York Film Critics Circle Award, and National Society of Film Critics Award, all 1977, all for Annie Hall; Britis Academy Award and New York Film Critics Award, 1979, for Manhattan; Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay, New York Film Critics Award, and Los Angeles Film Critics Award, all 1986, all for Hannah and Her Sisters. Agent: Rollins and Joffe, 130 W. 57th Street, New York, NY 10009, U.S.A. Address: 930 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10021, U.S.A. Films as Director, Scriptwriter, and Actor: 1969 Take the Money and Run 1971 Bananas (co-sc) 1972 Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex but Were Afraid to Ask 1973 Sleeper 1975 Love and Death 1977 Annie Hall (co-sc) 1978 Interiors (d, sc only) 1979 Manhattan (co-sc) 1980 Stardust Memories 1982 A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy 1983 Zelig 1984 Broadway Danny Rose 1985 The Purple Rose of Cairo (d, sc only) 1986 Hannah and Her Sisters 1987 Radio Days (role as narrator) 1988 September (d, sc only); Another Woman (d, sc only) 1989 Crimes and Misdemeanors; ‘‘Oedipus Wrecks’’ episode in New York Stories 1990 Alice (d, sc only) 1992 Shadows and Fog; Husbands and Wives 1993 Manhattan Murder Mystery 1994 Bullets over Broadway (d, co-sc only); Don’t Drink the Water (for TV) 1995 Mighty Aphrodite 1996 Everyone Says I Love You 1997 Deconstructing Harry 1998 Celebrity 1999 Sweet and Lowdown 2000 Small Time Crooks Other Films: 1965 What’s New, Pussycat? (sc, role) 1966 What’s up, Tiger Lily? (co-sc, assoc pr, role as host/narrator); Don’t Drink the Water (play basis) 1967 Casino Royale (Huston and others) (role) 1972 Play It Again, Sam (Ross) (sc, role) 1976 The Front (Ritt) (role) 1987 King Lear (Godard) (role) 1991 Scenes from a Mall (Mazursky) (role) 1997 Liv Ullmann scener fra et liv (Hambro) (narrator); Cannesyles 400 coups (Nadeau—for TV) (as himself); Just Shoot Me (for TV) (role) ALLENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 9 Woody Allen on the set of Radio Days 1998 Waiting for Woody (as himself); The Imposters (role); Antz (Darnell, Guterman) (role); Wild Man Blues (Kopple) (as himself) 2000 Picking up the Pieces (Arau) (role); Company Man (Askin, McGrath) (role); Ljuset h?ller mig s?llskap (Light Keeps Me Company) (Nykvist) (role) Publications By ALLEN: books— Don’t Drink the Water (play), 1967. Play It Again, Sam (play), 1969. Getting Even, New York, 1971. Death: A Comedy in One Act and God: A Comedy in One Act (plays), 1975. Without Feathers, New York, 1975. Side Effects, New York, 1980. The Floating Lightbulb (play), New York, 1982. Four Films of Woody Allen (Annie Hall, Interiors, Manhattan, Stardust Memories), New York, 1982. Hannah and Her Sisters, New York, 1987. Three Films of Woody Allen (Zelig, Broadway Danny Rose, The Purple Rose of Cairo), New York, 1987. The Complete Prose of Woody Allen (contains Getting Even, Without Feathers, and Side Effects), New York, 1992. The Illustrated Woody Allen Reader, edited by Linda Sunshine, New York, 1993. Woody Allen on Woody Allen: In Conversation with Stig Bjorkman, London, 1994. By ALLEN: articles— ‘‘Woody Allen Interview,’’ with Robert Mundy and Stephen Mamber, in Cinema (Beverly Hills), Winter 1972/73. ‘‘The Art of Comedy: Woody Allen and Sleeper,’’ interview with J. Trotsky, in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), Summer 1974. ‘‘A Conversation with the Real Woody Allen (or Someone Just like Him),’’ with K. Kelley, in Rolling Stone (New York), 1 July 1976. ALLEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 10 ‘‘Woody Allen Is Feeling Better,’’ interview with B. Drew, in American Film (Washington, D.C.), May 1977. ‘‘Comedy Directors: Interviews with Woody Allen,’’ with M. Karman, in Millimeter (New York), October 1977. ‘‘Scenes from a Mind,’’ interview with I. Halberstadt, in Take One (Montreal), November 1978. ‘‘Vous avez dit Woody?,’’ interview with Robert Benayoun, in Positif (Paris), May 1984. ‘‘The Kobal Tapes: Woody Allen,’’ interview with John Kobal, in Films and Filming (London), December 1985. ‘‘Fears of a Clown,’’ an interview with Tom Shales, and ‘‘Killing Joke,’’ an interview with Roger Ebert, in Time Out (London), 1 November 1989. Interview with Silvio Bizio, in Empire (London), August 1990. ‘‘The Heart Wants What It Wants,’’ an interview with Walter Isaacson, in Time, 31 August 1992. ‘‘Unhappily Ever After,’’ an interview with J. Adler and others, in Newsweek, 31 August 1992. Interview with S. Bjorkman, in Cahiers du Cinema (Paris), vol. 87, 1992. Interview with A. DeCurtis, in Rolling Stone, 16 September 1993. ‘‘Rationality and the Fear of Death,’’ in The Metaphysics of Death, edited by John Martin Fischer, 1993. Interview with Studs Terkel, in Four Decades with Studs Terkel, audiocassette collection of interviews with various figures (rec- orded between 1955 and 1989), HighBridge Company, 1993. ‘‘Woody Allen in Exile’’ (also cited as ‘‘‘So, You’re the Great Woody Allen?’ A Man on the Street Asked Him’’), an interview with Bill Zehme, in Esquire (New York), October 1994. ‘‘Biting the Bullets,’’ interview with Geoff Andrew, in Time Out (London), 5 April 1995. ‘‘Play It Again, Man,’’ interview with Linton Chiswick, in Time Out (London), 13 March 1996. ‘‘Bullets over Broadway Danny Rose of Cairo: The Continuous Career of Woody Allen,’’ an interview with Tomm Carroll, in DGA (Los Angeles), May-June 1996. Interview with Olivier De Bruyn, in Positif (Paris), February 1999. By ALLEN: television interviews— Interview with Morley Safer, broadcast on the 60 Minutes television program, Columbia Broadcasting System, 13 December 1987. Interview with Steve Croft, broadcast on the 60 Minutes television program, Columbia Broadcasting System, 22 November 1992. Interview with Melvyn Bragg, broadcast on The South Bank Show, London, 16 January 1994. ‘‘Woody!,’’ an interview with Bob Costas, broadcast in two segments on the Dateline NBC television program, National Broadcasting Company, 29 and 30 November 1994. On ALLEN: books— Lax, Eric, On Being Funny: Woody Allen and Comedy, New York, 1975. Yacowar, Maurice, Loser Take All: The Comic Art of Woody Allen, Oxford, 1979; expanded edition, 1991. Jacobs, Diane, . . . But We Need the Eggs: The Magic of Woody Allen, New York, 1982. Brode, Douglas, Woody Allen: His Films and Career, London, 1985. Benayoun, Robert, Woody Allen: Beyond Words, London, 1987; as The Films of Woody Allen, New York, 1987. Bendazzi, Giannalberto, The Films of Woody Allen, Florence, 1987. de Navacelle, Thierry, Woody Allen on Location, London, 1987. Pogel, Nancy, Woody Allen, Boston 1987. Sinyard, Neil, The Films of Woody Allen, London, 1987. Altman, Mark A., Woody Allen Encyclopedia: Almost Everything You Wanted to Know about the Woodster but Were Afraid to Ask, Pioneer Books, 1990. McCann, Graham, Woody Allen: New Yorker, New York, 1990. Hirsch, Foster, Love, Sex, Death, and the Meaning of Life: The Films of Woody Allen, revised and updated, Limelight, 1991. Lax, Eric, Woody Allen: A Biography, London, 1991. Weimann, Frank, Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Woody Allen, New York, 1991. Wernblad, Annette, Brooklyn Is Not Expanding: Woody Allen’s Comic Universe, Rutherford, New Jersey, 1992. Carroll, Tim, Woody and His Women, London, 1993. Girgus, Sam B., The Films of Woody Allen, Cambridge, 1993. Groteke, Kristi, Woody and Mia: The Nanny’s Tale, London, 1994. Spignesi, Stephen, The Woody Allen Companion, London, 1994. Blake, Richard A., Woody Allen: Profane and Sacred, Lanham, 1995. Hamill, Brian, Woody Allen at Work: The Photographs of Brian Hamill, New York, 1995. Lee, Sander H., Woody Allen’s Angst: Philosophical Commentaries on His Serious Films, Jefferson, 1996. Curry, Renee R., ed. Perspectives on Woody Allen, New York, 1996. Fox, Julian, Woody: Movies from Manhattan, New York, 1997. Nichols, Mary P., Reconstructing Woody: Art, Love, and Life in the Films of Woody Allen, Lanham, Maryland, 1998. Baxter, John, Woody Allen: A Biography, New York, 1999. Meade, Marion, The Unruly Life of Woody Allen: A Biography, Boston, 2000. On ALLEN: articles— ‘‘Woody, Woody Everywhere,’’ in Time (New York), 14 April 1967. ‘‘Woody Allen Issue,’’ of Cinema (Beverly Hills), Winter 1972/73. Wasserman, Harry, ‘‘Woody Allen: Stumbling through the Looking Glass,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison), Winter 1972/73. Maltin, Leonard, ‘‘Take Woody Allen—Please!,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1974. Remond, A., ‘‘Annie Hall,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 December 1977. Yacowar, Maurice, ‘‘Forms of Coherence in the Woody Allen Comedies,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), no. 2, 1979. Canby, Vincent, ‘‘Film View: Notes on Woody Allen and American Comedy,’’ in New York Times, 13 May 1979. Dempsey, M., ‘‘The Autobiography of Woody Allen,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1979. Teitelbaum, D., ‘‘Producing Woody: An Interview with Charles H. Joffe,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), April/May 1980. Combs, Richard, ‘‘Chameleon Days: Reflections on Non-Being,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), November 1983. Lahr, John, in Automatic Vaudeville: Essays on Star Turns, New York, 1984. Liebman, R.L., ‘‘Rabbis or Rakes, Schlemiels or Supermen? Jewish Identity in Charles Chaplin, Jerry Lewis and Woody Allen,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), July 1984. Caryn James, ‘‘Auteur! Auteur! The Creative Mind of Woody Allen,’’ in New York Times Magazine, 19 January 1986. ALLENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 11 ‘‘Woody Allen Section,’’ of Film Comment (New York), May- June 1986. Combs, Richard, ‘‘A Trajectory Built for Two,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), July 1986. Morris, Christopher, ‘‘Woody Allen’s Comic Irony,’’ in Literature/ Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 15, no. 3, 1987. Yacowar, Maurice, ‘‘Beyond Parody: Woody Allen in the Eighties,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Winter 1987. Dunne, Michael, ‘‘Stardust Memories, The Purple Rose of Cairo, and the Tradition of Metafiction,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylvania), Fall 1987. Preussner, Arnold W., ‘‘Woody Allen’s The Purple Rose of Cairo and the Genres of Comedy,’’ and Paul Salmon and Helen Bragg, ‘‘Woody Allen’s Economy of Means: An Introduction to Hannah and Her Sisters,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Mary- land), vol. 16, no. 1, 1988. ‘‘Woody Allen,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Downing, Crystal, ‘‘Broadway Roses: Woody Allen’s Romantic Inheritance,’’ and Ronald D. LeBlanc, ‘‘Love and Death and Food: Woody Allen’s Comic Use of Gastronomy,’’ in Literature/ Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 17, no. 1, 1989. Girlanda, E., and A. Tella, ‘‘Allen: Manhattan Transfer,’’ in Castoto Cinema, July/August 1990. Comuzio, E., ‘‘Alice,’’ in Cinema Forum, vol. 31, 1991. Green, D., ‘‘The Comedian’s Dilemma: Woody Allen’s ‘Serious’ Comedy,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 2, 1991. Tutt, R., ‘‘Truth, Beauty, and Travesty: Woody Allen’s Well-wrought Run,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 2, 1991. Welsh, J., ‘‘Allen Stewart Konigsberg Becomes Woody Allen: A Comic Transformation,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 2, 1991. Quart, L., ‘‘Woody Allen’s New York,’’ in Cineaste, vol. 19, no. 2, 1992. Mitchell, Sean, ‘‘The Clown Who Would Be Chekhov,’’ in The Guardian (U.K.), 23 March 1992. Rockwell, John, ‘‘Woody Allen: France’s Monsieur Right,’’ in New York Times, 5 April 1992. Corliss, Richard, ‘‘Scenes from a Breakup,’’ in Time, 31 August 1992. Cagle, Jess, ‘‘Love and Fog,’’ in Entertainment Weekly, 18 Septem- ber 1992. Hoban, Phoebe, ‘‘Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Woody and Mia but Were Afraid to Ask,’’ in New York, 21 September 1992. Johnstone, Iain, ‘‘Moving Pictures Drawn from Life,’’ in The Sunday Times (London), 25 October 1992. Romney, J. ‘‘Husbands and Wives,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), November 1992. Perez-Pena, R., ‘‘Woody Allen Tells of Affair as Custody Battle Begins,’’ in New York Times, 20 March 1993. Marks, P., ‘‘Allen Loses to Farrow in Bitter Custody Battle,’’ in New York Times, 8 June 1993. Baumgarten, Murray, ‘‘Film and the Flattening of American Jewish Fiction: Bernard Malamud, Woody Allen, and Spike Lee in the City,’’ in Contemporary Literature, Fall 1993. Desser, David, ‘‘Woody Allen: The Schlemiel as Modern Philoso- pher,’’ in American-Jewish Filmmakers: Traditions and Trends, University of Illinois Press, 1993. Troncale, J. C., ‘‘Illusion and Reality in Woody Allen’s Double Film of The Purple Rose of Cairo,’’ in Proceedings of the Conference on Film and American Culture, edited by Joel Schwartz, College of William and Mary, 1994. Romney, Jonathan, ‘‘Shelter from the Storm,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), February 1994. Davis, Robert, ‘‘A Stand-up Guy Sits Down: Woody Allen’s Prose,’’ in Short Story, Fall 1994. McGrath, Douglas, ‘‘If You Knew Woody like I Knew Woody,’’ in New York, 17 October 1994. Deleyto, Celestino, ‘‘The Narrator and the Narrative: The Evolution of Woody Allen’s Films,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville), Winter 1994–1995. Lahr, John, ‘‘The Imperfectionist,’’ in New Yorker, 9 December 1996. Romney, Jonathan, ‘‘Scuzzballs like Us,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), April 1998. On ALLEN: film— Woody Allen: An American Comedy (Harold Mantell), 1978. *** Woody Allen’s roots in American popular culture are broad, laced with a variety of European literary and cinematic influences, some of them (Ingmar Bergman and Dostoevsky, for example) paid explicit homage within his films, others more subtly woven into the fabric of his work from a wide range of earlier comic traditions. Allen’s genuinely original voice in the cinema recalls writer-directors like Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, and Preston Sturges, who dissect their portions of the American landscape primarily through comedy. In his creative virtuosity Allen also resembles Orson Welles, whose visual and verbal wit, though contained in seemingly non-comic genres, in fact exposes the American character to satirical scrutiny. Allen’s landscape, though, is particular, being that of Manhattan, its generally middle-class inhabitants and their culture and neuroses, of which he is the cinema’s great chronicler, much as Martin Scorsese is that of New York City’s underbelly. More often than not, Allen has appeared in his own films, resembling the great silent-screen clowns who created, then devel- oped, an ongoing screen presence. However, Allen’s film persona depends upon heard dialogue and especially thrives as an updated, urbanely hip, explicitly Jewish amalgam of personality traits and delivery methods associated with comic artists who reached their pinnacle in radio and film in the 1930s and 1940s. The key figures Allen plays in his own films puncture the dangerous absurdities of their universe and guard themselves against them by maintaining a cynical, even misogynistic, verbal offense in the manner of Groucho Marx and W. C. Fields, alternated with incessant displays of self- deprecation akin to the cowardly, unhandsome persona established by Bob Hope in, for example, his Road series. Allen’s early films emerge logically from the sharp, pointedly exaggerated jokes and sketches he first wrote for others, then later delivered himself as a stand-up comic in clubs and on television. As with the early films of Buster Keaton, most of Allen’s early works depend on explicit parody of recognizable genres. Even the films of his pre-Annie Hall period, which do not formally rely upon a particu- lar genre, incorporate references to various films and directors as commentary on the specific targets of social, political, or literary satire: political turbulence of the 1960s via television news coverage in Bananas; the pursuit by intellectuals of large religious and philo- sophical questions via the methods of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky in Love and Death; American sexual repression via the self-discovery ALLEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 12 guarantees offered by sex manuals in Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex. All these issues reappear in Allen’s later, increasingly mature work, repeatedly revealing the anomaly of com- edy that is cerebral in nature, dependent even in its occasional sophomoric moments upon an educated audience that responds to his brand of self-reflexive, literary, political, and sexual humor. But Allen distrusts and satirizes formal education and institutionalized discourse which, in his films, lead repeatedly to humorless intellec- tual preening. ‘‘Those who can’t do, teach, and those who can’t teach, teach gym,’’ declares Alvy Singer in Annie Hall. No character in that film is treated with greater disdain than the Columbia professor who smugly pontificates on Fellini while standing in line waiting to see The Sorrow and the Pity. Allen inflicts swift, cinematically appropri- ate justice. In Manhattan, Yale, a university professor of English, bears the brunt of Allen’s moral condemnation as a self-rationalizing cheat who is far ‘‘too easy’’ on himself. In Annie Hall, his Oscar-winning breakthrough film, Allen the writer (with Marshall Brickman) recapitulates and expands on his emerging topics but removes them from the highly exaggerated apparatus of his earlier parodies. Alvy Singer (Allen) and Annie Hall (Diane Keaton in her most important of several roles for Allen) enact an urban-neurotic variation on the mismatched lovers of screwball comedy, set against a realistic New York City mise-en-scène but slanted away from farce and toward character analysis. Annie Hall makes indelible the Woody Allen onscreen persona—a figure somehow involved in show business or the arts and obsessive about women, his parents, his childhood, his values, his terror of illness and death; perpetually and hilariously taking the mental temperature of himself and everyone around him. Part whiner, part nebbish, part hypochondriac, this figure is also brilliantly astute and consciously funny, miraculously irresistible to women—for a while— particularly (as in Annie Hall and Manhattan) when he can serve as their teacher. This developing figure in Allen’s work is both comic victim and witty victimizer, a moral voice in an amoral age who repeatedly discovers that the only true gods in a godless universe are cultural and artistic—movies, music, art, architecture—a perception pleasurably reinforced visually and aurally throughout his best films. With rare exceptions—Hannah is a notable one—this figure at the film’s fadeout appears destined to remain alone, enabling him, by implication, to continue functioning as a sardonically detached ob- server of human imperfection, including his own. In Annie Hall, this characterization, despite its suffusion in angst, remains purely comic but Allen becomes progressively darker—and harder on himself—as variants of this figure emerge in the later films. Comedy, even comedy that aims for the laughter of recognition based on credibility of character and situation, rests heavily on exaggeration. In Zelig, the tallest of Woody Allen’s cinematic tall tales, the central figure is a human chameleon who satisfies his overwhelming desire for conformity by physically transforming himself into the people he meets. Zelig’s bizarre behavior is made visually believable by stunning shots that appear to place the charac- ter of Leonard Zelig (Allen) alongside famous historical figures within actual newsreel footage of the 1920s and 1930s. Shot in Panavision and velvety black-and-white, and featuring a Gershwin score dominated by ‘‘Rhapsody in Blue,’’ Manhattan reiterates key concerns of Annie Hall but enlarges the circle of participants in a sexual la ronde that increases Allen’s ambivalence toward the moral terrain occupied by his characters—especially by Ike Davis (Allen), a forty-two-year-old man justifying a relationship with a seventeen-year-old girl (Mariel Hemingway). By film’s end she has become an eighteen-year-old woman who has outgrown him, just as Annie Hall outgrew Alvy Singer. The film (like Hannah and Her Sisters later) is, above all, a celebration of New York City, which Ike, like Allen, ‘‘idolize[s] all out of proportion.’’ In the Pirandellian The Purple Rose of Cairo, the fourth Allen film to star Mia Farrow, a character in a black-and-white film-within-the- film leaps literally out of the frame into the heroine’s local movie theatre. Here film itself—in this case the movies of the 1930s—both distorts reality by setting dangerously high expectations, and makes it more bearable by permitting Cecilia, Allen’s heroine, to escape from her dismal Depression existence. Like Manhattan before it, and Hannah and Her Sisters and Radio Days after it,The Purple Rose of Cairo examines the healing power of popular art. Arguably Allen’s finest film to date, Hannah and Her Sisters shifts his own figure further away from the center of the story than he had ever been before, treating himself as one of nine prominent characters in the action. Allen’s screenplay weaves an ingenious tapestry around three sisters, their parents, assorted mates, lovers, and friends (including Allen as Hannah’s ex-husband Mickey Sachs). A Chekhovian exploration of the upper-middle-class world of a group of New Yorkers a decade after Annie Hall, Hannah is deliberately episodic in structure, its sequences separated by Brechtian title cards that suggest the thematic elements of each succeeding segment. Yet it is an extraordinarily seamless film, unified by the family at its center; three Thanksgiving dinner scenes at key intervals; an exquisite color celebration of an idyllic New York City; and music by Cole Porter, Rodgers and Hart, and Puccini (among others) that italicizes the genuinely romantic nature of the film’s tone. The most optimistic of Allen’s major films, Hannah restores its inhabitants to a world of pure comedy, their futures epitomized by the fate of Mickey Sachs. For once, the Allen figure is a man who will live happily ever after, a man formerly sterile, now apparently fertile, as is comedy’s magical way. Arguably his most morally provocative and ambiguous film, Crimes and Misdemeanors further marginalizes—and significantly darkens—the figure Woody Allen invites audiences to confuse with his offscreen self. The self-reflexive plight of filmmaker Cliff Stern (Allen) alternates with the central dilemma confronted by ophthal- mologist Judah Rosenthal (Martin Landau), a medical pillar of society who bears primary, if indirect, responsibility for the murder of his mistress (Anjelica Huston). Religious and philosophical issues present in Allen’s films since Love and Death achieve a new and serious resonance, particularly through the additional presence of a faith-retaining rabbi gradually (in one of numerous Oedipal refer- ences in Allen’s work) losing his sight, and a Holocaust survivor- philosopher who preaches the gospel of endurance—then commits suicide by (as his note prosaically puts it) ‘‘going out the window.’’ In its pessimism, diametrically opposed to the joyous Hannah and Her Sisters, Crimes and Misdemeanors posits a universe utterly and disturbingly devoid of poetic justice or moral certainty. The picture’s genuinely comic sequences, usually involving Cliff and Alan Alda as his fatuous producer brother-in-law (‘‘Comedy is tragedy plus time!’’) do not contradict the fact that it is Allen’s most somber major film, a comedy-melodrama that in its final sequence crosses the brink to the level of domestic tragedy. Here, the Allen figure is not only alone, as he has been in the past, but alone and in despair. In entirely contrasting visual ways, Alice and Shadows and Fog exhibit immedi- ately recognizable Allen concerns in highly original fashion. A glossy, airy, gently satiric modern fairy tale, Alice implicitly functions as Allen’s most open love letter to Mia Farrow. Her idealized title character searches for meaning in a yuppified New York City. ALLENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 13 Eventually, she finds it by leaving her husband, meeting Mother Theresa, and, especially, by discovering that her two children offer her the only genuine vehicle for romance in this romantic comedy manqué. The film’s final shot displays a glowing Alice joyfully pushing them on playground swings as two former women friends, in voice-over dialogue, bemoan her self-selected maidless and nannyless condition, one which the film clearly intends us to embrace. In Shadows and Fog, Allen employs a specific cinematic genre more directly than at any time since the 1970s. His homage to German Expressionism, Shadows and Fog is shot in black and white in a manner deliberately reminiscent of the films of Pabst, Lang, and Murnau. That visual style and the placement at the film’s center of a distinctly Kafkaesque hero (played by Allen) combine to make Shadows and Fog Allen’s most overtly ‘‘European’’ and wryly metaphysical film since Interiors fourteen years earlier. Not surpris- ingly, Shadows and Fog was greeted by critics much more favorably in Europe than in the United States, but left audiences on both continents less than satisfied. As Chekhov’s forgiving spirit energizes the comic tone of Hannah and Her Sisters, so the playwright August Strindberg’s hostility controls the dark marital terrain of Husbands and Wives. Strindbergian gender battles frequently appear in earlier Allen films, but they are more typically rescued back from the precipice by comedy. Allen’s partial attempt to attribute comic closure to Husbands and Wives pleases but inadequately convinces. While the film (which might have been more accurately titled Husbands, Wives, and Lovers) is often extremely funny, its portrait of two deteriorating marriages is as corrosive as anything in the Allen canon. Husbands and Wives contains other elements long present in Allen’s films: multiple story- lines, a deliberately episodic structure covering a period of about a year, and the involvement of a central character, Gabe Roth (played by Allen), with a woman (Juliette Lewis) young enough to be his daughter. Unlike Ike Davis’s relationship with Tracy in Manhattan, however, this one is consummated—and concluded—with only a kiss. Despite the presence of familiar material, Husbands and Wives shows Allen continuing to break new ground, particularly in the film’s technical virtuosity. The frequent use of a hand-held camera reinforces the neurotic, darting, unpredictable behavior of key charac- ters. Moving beyond his use of title cards to provide Brechtian distancing in Hannah and Her Sisters, Allen here employs a docu- mentary technique to punctuate the main action of the film. The central characters and a minor one (the ex-husband of Judy Roth, the woman played by Mia Farrow) are individually interviewed by an off- screen male voice, which appears to function simultaneously as documentary recorder of their woeful tales and as therapist to their psyches. These sequences are inserted periodically throughout the film, as the interviewees speak directly to the camera—and therefore to us, thus forcing the audience to participate in the filmmaker- interviewer’s role as therapist. Husbands and Wives deserves a place alongside Hannah and Her Sisters and Crimes and Misdemeanors as representing Allen’s most textured and mature work to date. But the film’s visual and thematic pleasures have been obscured by audience desire to see in Husbands and Wives the spectacle of art imitating life with a vengeance; and, in fact, Husbands and Wives does contain uncanny links to the Allen- Farrow breakup even though the film was completed before their relationship came to a dramatic and controversial end, attended by a blaze of publicity that further alienated those audiences not addicted to Allen and narrowed his already selective audience base in the United States. The type of ethical dilemma which occupies such a central place in the Allen canon (and which usually finds its most articulate definition in the mouths of characters played by Allen himself) appeared to have tumbled out of an Allen movie and onto worldwide front pages. (‘‘Life doesn’t imitate art; it imitates bad television,’’ says Allen’s Gabe Roth in Husbands and Wives.) In 1992, shortly before the release of Husbands and Wives, Allen’s romantic relationship with Soon-Yi Previn, Mia Farrow’s twenty-one-year-old adopted daugh- ter, was discovered by her mother, who made the fact public. Furious and ugly charges and countercharges ensued, resulting in Allen’s loss of custody of his three children a year later, while the legal wrangling continued unabated for some considerable time. It is not too fanciful to suggest that Allen’s personal crisis accounted for what, on the one hand, has appeared to be a search for new directions—imaginative, even experimental—and on the other hand, a loss of focus and a diminished coherency of goal and vision. Nonetheless, in the eight-year period following the release of Husbands and Wives, Allen, undaunted by personal tragedy and adverse publicity, continued to work steadily, but the collected films of this period are less easy to pigeon-hole or analyze and have mostly been something of a disappointment to fans and a puzzlement to several critics. He reverted firmly to his distinctive comic universe with Don’t Drink the Water, adapted from his early Broadway play and first shown in America on network television; Manhattan Murder Mystery, a comedy-mystery in the manner of The Thin Man films and the Mr. and Mrs. North radio and television series, with Diane Keaton (replacing Mia Farrow, who was originally scheduled to play Allen’s wife) and Alan Alda; the breathtakingly cruel and brilliantly funny Bullets over Broadway, set in the 1920s/1930s and satirizing the marriage of theater and the underworld that was a staple of so many late 1920s and early 1930s films. At the center is a playwright (John Cusack) grappling with his first Broadway production and becoming involved with a flamboyantly fey actress (Dianne Wiest). The charac- ter could be considered as an emblem for a younger Allen, but the film as a whole is richly comical and sad in its behind-the-scenes portrait of Broadway life and work, as well as awesome in its sense of period and its gentle parody of theatrical and underworld stereotypes. Mighty Aphrodite again tempts audiences to see elements of Allen’s life reflected in the central plot issue of child adoption, but, with its parodies of Greek tragedy and its broadly satiric array of characters, the film rarely strays from its identification as genuine Allen comedy. These 1990s films reveal yet again why so many actors want to work with Allen: Dianne Wiest won her second supporting actress Oscar for her role in an Allen film for Bullets over Broadway (her first was for Hannah); and Mira Sorvino won the same award for Mighty Aphrodite the following year. But, while Allen’s primary response to the tarnish on his personal reputation has been to keep making films, it might be suggested that he now needs to pause for thought and regain some perspective as to the motive force behind them. The four since Mighty Aphrodite have evidenced the lack of sure-footedness referred to above. His evident desire to spot and utilize talented actors, known and unknown, coincides with a rash of screenplays so heavily peopled as to blur the central characters, leaving audiences with far less to engage with than hitherto. The least successful, and perhaps most seriously troubled internally, of the last four of the 1990s is Deconstructing Harry, relentlessly and unattractively self-referential, and looking for its humor in fantasy and fantastical situations which have a certain farcical crudity in contrast to Allen’s usually penetrating verbal wit. Celebrity, miscasting Kenneth Branagh in the central role that Allen ALMODóVAR DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 14 would once have played, is not without its pleasures, but fails to cohere; Sweet and Lowdown, visiting the territory of Allen’s other great love—jazz—is ambitious, entertaining, and boasts a wonderful performance from Sean Penn. If it is neither quite interesting nor quite funny enough, it is nonetheless endlessly inventive, and as good a jazz film as any in evoking the ethos of its subject. Arguably the clearest success of the four, its virtues criminally misunderstood by all but the cognoscenti, is Everyone Says I Love You, in which a now wispily aging Woody co-stars himself with the ravishing Julia Roberts, pushing the boundaries of his earlier collected oeuvre that invited us to accept his seemingly unlikely appeal for women, and almost self- parodying the nebbish aspects of his screen persona. The film, unusually, broadens Allen’s physical landscape, setting the core of the Allen-Roberts romance in Venice (a city that features signifi- cantly in Barbara Kopple’s documentary following Woody and his band—and his wife Soon-Yi—on a European tour) and climaxing in Paris. Too long, structurally undisciplined, and a bit of a rag-bag it may be, but Everyone Says I Love You is a blissful homage to the Hollywood musical, knowing and affectionate. Allen has always denied that his film persona is related to his own, although it is often justifiably difficult for us to believe that. ‘‘Is it over? Can I go now?’’ asks Gabe Roth of the off-screen interviewer in the final shot of Husbands and Wives. Divorced from his wife, Gabe is now alone, but he chooses to be. Gabe may not be happy—rarely is any character played by Woody Allen ever actually happy—but, unlike Clifford Stern at the end of Crimes and Misdemeanors, Gabe is decidedly not in despair. Neither, hopefully, is Woody Allen. It is clear that the fertile imagination, while perhaps floundering to find a new form, is intact, and the comic spirit still present. To the question ‘‘Whither now?’’ must come the answer ‘‘Who knows?’’ But what- ever path he treads in the future, Woody Allen has proved one of the few auteurs of the American cinema worthy of the over-used term, and it may well be that his great masterwork is yet to spring from the autumn of his years. —Mark W. Estrin, updated by Robyn Karney ALMODóVAR, Pedro Nationality: Spanish. Born: Calzada de Clatrava, La Mancha, Spain, 1951 (some sources say 1947). Career: Moved to Madrid and worked for National Telephone Company, 1967; wrote comic strips and articles for underground magazines; joined independent theatre group Los Goliardos and started making Super-8 films with them, 1974; first feature, Pepi, released 1980; also a rock musician, has written music for his own films. Awards: Glauber Rocha Award for Best Director, Rio Film Festival, and Los Angeles Film Critics Association ‘‘New Generation’’ Award, 1987, for Law of Desire; National Society of Film Critics Award, special citation for original- ity, 1988; Venice International Film Festival best screenplay award, National Board of Review of Motion Pictures best foreign film, New York Film Critics Circle best foreign film, and Felix Award for best young film, all 1988, and Academy Award nomination for best foreign film, Orson Welles Award for best foreign-language film, both 1989, all for Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown. Agent: El Deseo SA, 117 Velázquez, Madrid, Spain. Pedro Almodóvar Films as Director: 1974 Dos putas, o, Historia de amor que termina en boda (Two Whores, or, A Love Story that Ends in Marriage) (Super-8); La caida de Sodoma (The Fall of Sodom) (Super-8) 1975 Homenaje (Homage) (Super-8) 1976 La estrella (The Stars) (Super-8) 1977 Sexo va: Sexo vienne (Sex Comes and Goes) (Super-8); Complementos (shorts) 1978 Folle, folle, folleme, Tim (Fuck Me, Fuck Me, Fuck Me, Tim) (Super-8, full-length); Salome (16mm) 1980 Pepi, Luci, Bom y otras chicas de montón (Pepi, Luci, Bom and Lots of Other Girls) (+ sc) 1982 Laberinto de pasiones (Labyrinth of Passions) (+ sc, + pr, role) 1983 Entre tinieblas (Into the Dark; The Sisters of Darkness) (+ sc, song) 1984 Qué me hecho yo para merecer esto? (What Have I Done to Deserve This?) (+ sc) 1986 Matador (+ sc); La ley del deseo (Law of Desire) (+ sc, score, song) 1988 Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios (Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown) (+ sc, + pr) 1990 Atame! (Tie Me up, Tie Me Down!) (+ sc) 1991 Tacomes lejanos (High Heels) (+ sc, song) 1993 Kika (+ sc) 1995 Le flor de mi secreto (The Flower of My Secret) (+ sc) 1997 Carne trémula (Live Flesh) (+ sc, role as himself) 1999 Todo sobre mi madre (All about My Mother) (+ sc) ALMODóVARDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 15 Films as Producer: 1993 Acción mutante (Mutant Action) 1996 Mi nombre es sombra (assoc pr) Publications By ALMODóVAR: books— El sueno de la razon (short stories), Madrid, 1980. Fuego en las entranas (Fire Deep Inside) (novel), Madrid, 1982. Patty Diphusa y otros textos (Patty Diphusa and Other Writings), Barcelona, 1991. Almodóvar on Almodóvar, London, 1995. The Flower of My Secret, London, 1997. By ALMODóVAR: articles— Interview in Contracampo (Madrid), September 1981. Interview with J. C. Rentero, in Casablanca (Madrid), May 1984. ‘‘Pleasure and the New Spanish Mentality,’’ an interview with Marsha Kinder, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1987. Interview in Time Out (London), 2 November 1988. Interview in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1988. Interview in Films and Filming (London), June 1989. Interview in Inter/View (New York), January 1990. Interview in City Limits (London), 5 July 1990. Interview with J. Schnabel, in Interview (New York), January 1992. ‘‘Perche il melodrama,’’ an interview with E. Imparato, in Cineforum (Bergamo, Italy), April 1992. Interview with F. Strauss, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1992. Regular column (as ‘‘Patty Diphusa’’) in La Luna (Madrid). Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1997. ‘‘The Pain in Spain,’’ in Time Out (London), 10 May 1995. Interview with Peter Paphides, in Time Out (London), 28 June 1995. On ALMODóVAR: books— Bouza Vidal, Nuria, El cine de Pedro Almodóvar (The Films of Pedro Almodóvar), Madrid, 1988. Boquerini, Pedro Almodóvar, Madrid, 1989. Smith, Paul Julian, Desire Unlimited: The Cinema of Pedro Almodóvar, London, 1994. Vernon, Kathleen M., and Barbara Morris, Post-Franco, Postmodern: The Films of Pedro Almodóvar, Westport, Connecticut, 1995. On ALMODóVAR: articles— Sanchez Valdès, J., ‘‘Pedro Almodóvar: Laberinto de pasiones,’’ in Casablanca (Madrid), April 1982. Paranagua, P. A., ‘‘Pedro Almodóvar. En deuxième vitesse,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1986. Fernandez, Enrique, ‘‘The Lawyer of Desire,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 7 April 1987. Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Fall 1987. Kael, Pauline, ‘‘Red on Red,’’ in New Yorker, 16 May 1988. ‘‘Spain’s Pedro Almodóvar on the Verge of Global Fame,’’ in Variety (New York), 24 August 1988. Kael, Pauline, ‘‘Unreal,’’ in New Yorker, 14 November 1988. Filmbiography, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), January 1989. Films in Review (New York), January 1989. Corliss, Richard, ‘‘Almodóvar à la Mode,’’ in Time (New York), 30 January 1989. Arroyo, J., ‘‘Pedro Almodóvar: Law and Desire,’’ in Descant, vol. 20, no. 1–2, 1989. Cadalso, I., ‘‘Pedro Almodóvar: A Spanish Perspective,’’ in Cineaste, vol. 18, no. 1, 1990. O’Toole, L., ‘‘Almodóvar in Bondage,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), vol. 59, no. 4, 1990. Bennett, Annie, ‘‘Tour de Farce,’’ in 20/20 (London), January 1990. ‘‘Pedro Almodóvar,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), July 1990. Kinder, M., ‘‘High Heels,’’ in Film Quarterly, vol. 45, no. 3, 1992. Levy, S., ‘‘King of Spain,’’ in American Film, January/Febru- ary 1992. Moore, L., ‘‘New Role for Almodóvar,’’ in Variety (New York), 28 September 1992. Strauss, F., ‘‘The Almodóvar Picture Show,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1993. Williams, Bruce, ‘‘Slippery When Wet: En-sexualized Transgression in the Films of Pedro Almodóvar,’’ in Post Script (Commerce), Summer 1995. Smith, P.J., ‘‘Almodóvar and the Tin Can,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), February 1996. Toubiana, S., ‘‘Masculin, feminin,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1997. *** Pedro Almodóvar is more than the most successful Spanish film export since Carlos Saura. At home, the production of Almodóvar’s films, their premiers, and the works themselves are surrounded by scandal, and the Spanish popular press examines what the director eats, the qualities he looks for in a lover, and his weight fluctuations in a fashion normally reserved for movie stars and European royalty. Abroad, the films have surprised those with set notions of what Spanish camera is or should be; Almodóvar’s uncompromising incorporation of elements specific to a gay culture into mainstream forms with wide crossover appeal has been held up as a model for other gay directors to emulate. The films and Almodóvar’s creation of a carefully cultivated persona in the press have meshed into ‘‘Almodóvar,’’ a singular trademark. ‘‘Almodóvar’’ makes the man and the movies interchangeable even as it overshadows both. The term now embodies, and waves the flag for, the ‘‘New Spain’’ as it would like to see itself: democratic, permissive, prosperous, interna- tional, irreverent, and totally different from what it was in the Franco years. Almodóvar’s career can be usefully divided into three stages: a marginal underground period in the 1970s, during which he person- ally funded and controlled every aspect of the shoestring-budgeted, generally short films, and which culminated in Pepi, Luci, Bom y otras chicas de montón, his feature film debut; the early to mid- 1980s, during which he was still writing and directing his increasingly costly though still low-budget films, but for other producers and with varying degrees of state subsidization; and, from The Law of Desire in 1986, a period in which he reverted to producing his own films, which now benefitted from substantial budgets (by Spanish standards), top technicians, and maximum state subsidies. Though critical reaction to his work has varied, each of his films has enjoyed increasing financial ALTMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 16 success until Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, which became 1989’s highest-grossing foreign film in North America and the most successful Spanish film ever in Spain. Almodóvar’s oeuvre makes a good argument for the auteur theory. One can trace to his first films themes and strategies that he would explore in different forms, with varying degrees of success but with increasing technical expertise, throughout the rest of his career. Almodóvar’s films posit the absolute autonomy of the individual. From Pepi to Tie Me up! Tie Me Down! the central characters in his films (mostly women) either act as if there are no social restrictions, or are conscious of the price of transgression but willing to pay it if such actions lead to, or contain, pleasure. In Almodóvar’s films, the various paths to pleasure lead to a destination and fulfillment (Matador), a dead end and disappoint- ment (Dark Hideout, Women on the Verge), or an endlessly winding path and continuous displacement (The Law of Desire), but never resignation. To explore these varied roads Almodóvar has over the years accumulated a rep company of actors (including Antonio Banderas, who graduated to Hollywoood stardom). When in an Almodóvar film, no matter how absurd the situation their characters might find themselves in, all the actors are directed to a style that relies on understatement and has often been called ‘‘naturalist’’ or ‘‘realist.’’ For example, when in The Law of Desire Tina tells her brother that ‘‘she’’ had previously been a ‘‘he’’ and had run off to Morocco to have a love affair with their father, Carmen Maura acts it in a style considerably subtler than that used by, for example, June Allyson to tell us she really shouldn’t have broken that date with Peter Lawford. This style of acting is partly what enables Almodóvar’s often outrageous characters to be so emotionally compelling. Almodóvar borrows indiscriminately from film history. A case in point is What Have I Done to Deserve This? which contains direct reference to, or echoes of, neo-realism, the caper film, Carrie, Bu?uel, Wilder, Warhol, and Waters. Moreover, by his second period, beginning with Dark Hideout, it became clear that Almodóvar’s preferred mode of cinema was the melodramatic. It is a mode that cuts across genre, equally capable of conveying the tragic and the comic, eminently emotional, adept at arousing intense audience identifica- tion, and capable of communicating complex psychological proc- esses no matter what the character’s gender or sexual orientation. Almodóvar’s signature, and a unique contribution to the movies, is the synthesis of the melodramatic mode with a clash of quotations. This combination allows Almodóvar both a quasi-classical Holly- wood narrative structure (which facilitates audience identification) and a very self-conscious narration (which normally produces an alienation effect). This results in dialectical moments in which the absurd can be imbued with emotional resonance (the mother selling her son to the dentist in What Have I Done); the emotional can be checked with cheek without disrupting identification (superimposing a character’s crying eyes with the wheels of a car in The Law); and camp can be imbued with depth without losing its wit (the transfer- ence of emotions that occurs when we see Pepa dubbing Joan Crawford’s dialogue from Johnny Guitar in Women on the Verge). At his best (What Have I Done to Deserve This?, The Law of Desire, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown), Almodóvar drills a heart into the postmodern and fills it with an operatic range of feeling. Although Almodóvar’s movies have garnered increasingly heady praise in the 1990s, one senses the critical establishment is con- sciously trying to legitimize him in their eyes. Why is it that when a comedy expert grows more ‘‘serious,’’ he is, perforce, taken more seriously? Fortunately, Almodóvar’s mature works remain vibrant, unpretentious melodramas (unlike Woody Allen, whose art films seem like Xerox copies of the masters he slavishly imitates). Although Almodóvar has been chastised for trying to have his soap opera and send it up, too, he accomplished just that impossibility with earlier works like Law of Desire. As arrestingly sentimental as All about My Mother is, and as disturbingly mournful as Live Flesh is, they lack the kick of less-acclaimed works like High Heels, an unabashed glimpse into the soul of Lana Turner. Whereas Almodóvar once passionately embraced the Hollywoodness of Douglas Sirk’s women pictures, his most recent movies merely buss those stylized conventions on the cheek. Why is there such a frenzy to commend the new-improved maverick, simply because he now uses humor only as a diversionary tactic, instead of an integral part of his canon? Despite reservations about the shift in his approach, one admires Almodóvar’s unabated insight into role-playing, his debunking of machismo, his celebration of tackiness, and his unsurpassed skill with actresses. If something joyful seems missing from latter-day Almodóvar, something has also been gained in his collaboration with actress Marisa Paredes, a gravely beautiful dynamo, whom the director uses to suggest the melancholy behind emotional extravagance. If films like The Flower of My Secret are high-wire acts between pathos and humor, then Paredes helps him keep his balance. Even if one reminisces about Almodóvar’s team- work with efervescent comediennes like Carmen Maura and Victoria Abril, one is relieved that he hasn’t become the Spanish John Waters, a filmmaker whose rebelliousness now seems quaint. Exploring his gay sensibility, Almodóvar appeals to straight audiences, who share his appetite for the resurrection and re-invigoration of old movie cliches. In overlooked works like Kika, characters literally die for love, and this slick director understands that classic escapism has undying appeal for a reason. The genius of Almodóvar lies in succumbing to the absurdity of Hollywood romanticism, while recog- nizing it as an impossible ideal. After enduring bloodless Oscar- winners and critically correct masterpieces, the audience rushes to Almodóvar’s movies because they act like a tonic. —José Arroyo, updated by Robert J. Pardi ALTMAN, Robert Nationality: American. Born: Kansas City, Missouri, 20 February 1925. Education: Attended University of Missouri, Columbia (three years). Military Service: Bomber pilot, U.S. Air Force, 1943–47. Family: Married La Vonne Elmer, 1946, one daughter; married Lotus Corelli, 1954, divorced 1957, two sons; married Kathryn Reed, two sons. Career: Directed industrial films for Calvin Company, Kansas City, 1947; wrote, produced, and directed first feature, The Delin- quents, 1955; TV director, 1957–63; co-founder of TV production company, 1963; founder, Lion’s Gate production company (named after his own 8-track sound system), 1970, Westwood Editorial Services, 1974, and Sandcastle 5 Productions; made Tanner ‘88 for TV during American presidential campaign, 1988; directed McTeague for Chicago Lyric Opera. Awards: Palme d’Or, Cannes Festival, and Academy Award nominations for Best Film and Best Director for M*A*S*H, 1970; New York Film Critics’ Circle Award, D.W. Griffith Award (National Board of Review), and National Society of Film Critics Award, all for Best Director, for Nashville, 1975; Golden ALTMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 17 Robert Altman Bear, Berlin Festival, for Buffalo Bill and the Indians, 1976; Acad- emy Award nomination for Best Director, New York Film Critics Circle Award for Best Film and Best Director, for The Player, 1992; Academy Award nomination for Best Director, for Short Cuts. Agent: Johnny Planco, William Morris Agency, 1325 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10019. Address: Sandcastle 5 Produc- tions, 502 Park Avenue, Suite 15G, New York, NY 10022–1108. Films as Director: 1954 The Builders (medium length publicity film) 1955 The Delinquents (+ pr, sc) 1957 The James Dean Story (co-d, + co-pr, co-ed) 1964 The Party (short); Nightmare in Chicago (Once upon a Sav- age Night) (for TV) 1965 Pot au Feu (short); The Katherine Reed Story (short) 1967 Countdown (moon-landing sequence uncred by William Conrad) 1969 That Cold Day in the Park 1970 M*A*S*H; Brewster McCloud (+ pr) 1971 McCabe and Mrs. Miller (+ co-sc) 1972 Images (+ pr, sc) 1973 The Long Goodbye 1974 Thieves like Us (+ co-sc); California Split (+ co-pr) 1975 Nashville (+ co-pr, co-songwriter: ‘‘The Day I Looked Jesus in the Eye’’) 1976 Buffalo Bill and the Indians, or Sitting Bull’s History Lesson (+ pr, co-sc) 1977 Three Women (+pr, sc) 1978 A Wedding (+ pr, co-sc) 1979 Quintet (+ pr, co-sc); A Perfect Couple (+ pr, co-sc) 1979 Health (+ pr, sc) 1980 Popeye 1981 The Easter Egg Hunt 1982 Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean; Two by South (‘‘Rattlesnake in a Cooler’’ and ‘‘Precious Blood’’) (for TV) (+pr) 1983 Streamers (+ pr); O.C. and Stiggs (+ pr) (released 1987) 1984 Secret Honor (Secret Honor: The Political Testament of Richard M. Nixon; Secret Honor: A Political Myth) (+ pr) 1985 The Laundromat (for TV) ALTMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 18 1986 Fool for Love 1987 ‘‘Les Boreades’’ in Aria; Beyond Therapy (+ co-sc); The Room (for TV); The Dumb Waiter (for TV) 1988 Tanner ‘88; The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial (+ pr) 1990 Vincent and Theo 1992 The Player 1993 Short Cuts (+ sc) 1994 The Real McTeague (for TV, opera) 1995 Ready to Wear (Pret a Porter) (+ sc) 1996 Jazz—34 (+ pr); Kansas City (+ sc, pr) 1997 Gun (series for TV) (+ pr) 1998 The Gingerbread Man (+ sc, ro as Al Hayes) 1999 Cookie’s Fortune (+ pr); Another City, Not My Own 2000 Dr. T and the Women (+ pr) Other Films: 1948 Bodyguard (co-story) 1951 Corn’s-a-Poppin’ (co-sc) 1976 Welcome to L.A. (Rudolph) (pr) 1977 The Late Show (Benton) (pr) 1978 Remember My Name (Rudolph) (pr) 1979 Rich Kids (Young) (pr) 1993 Luck, Trust & Ketchup: Robert Altman in Carver County (Dorr, Kaplan) (doc) 1997 Afterglow (Rudolph) (pr); Frank Capra’s American Dream (Bowser—for TV) (as himself) 1998 Liv 1999 Trixie; Hitchcock: Shadow of a Genius (Haimes—for TV) (as himself) Publications By ALTMAN: book— Buffalo Bill and the Indians, or Sitting Bull’s History Lesson, with Alan Rudolph, New York, 1976. Short Cuts: The Screenplay, Santa Barbara, CA, 1993. Robert Altman’s Pret a Porter, New York, 1994. Robert Altman, Interviews: Interviews (Conversations with Filmmakers), with David Sterritt, University Press of Missis- sippi, 2000. By ALTMAN: articles— Interview with S. Rosenthal, in Focus on Film (London), Spring 1972. Interview with Russell Auwerter, in Directors in Action, edited by Bob Thomas, New York, 1973. Interview with Michel Ciment and Bertrand Tavernier, in Positif (Paris), February 1973. ‘‘Robert Altman Speaking,’’ interview with J. Dawson, in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1974. ‘‘An Altman Sampler,’’ interview with B.J. Demby, in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), October 1974. Robert Altman Seminar, in Dialogue on Film (Beverly Hills), Febru- ary 1975. ‘‘The Artist and the Multitude Are Natural Enemies,’’ interview with F.A. Macklin, in Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Winter 1976/77. Interview with Jean-André Fieschi, in Cinématographe (Paris), June 1977. Interview with Jonathan Rosenbaum and Charles Michener, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1978. Interview and article by J.-P. Le Pavec and others, in Cinéma (Paris), November 1978. ‘‘Jumping off the Cliff,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), Decem- ber 1978. Interview with Michel Ciment and M. Henry, in Positif (Paris), March 1979. ‘‘Robert Altman: Backgammon and Spinach,’’ interview with Tom Milne and Richard Combs, in Sight and Sound (London), Sum- mer 1981. ‘‘Peripheral Vision,’’ interview with A. Stuart, in Films (London), July 1981. Interview with Leo Braudy and Robert Phillip Kolker, in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Fall 1981 and Winter 1982. ‘‘‘A Foolish Optimist’: Interview with Robert Altman,’’ by H. Kloman, Lloyd Michaels, and Virginia Wright Wexman, in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylvania), Spring 1983. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), June 1984. Stills (London), November 1984. Interview with Richard Combs, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), January 1985. ‘‘On the Road with Robert Altman,’’ an interview with Nick Roddick, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), September 1986. Interview with Steven Aronson, in Architectural Digest, March 1990. ‘‘Mrs. Miller’s Tale,’’ an interview with Sheila Johnston, in the Independent (London), 6 April 1990. ‘‘How the Western Was Lost,’’ an interview with Derek Malcolm, in the Guardian (London), 11 April 1990. Interview with Richard Combs in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), July 1990. ‘‘Robert Altman: The Rolling Stone Interview,’’ interview with David Breskin, in Rolling Stone, 16 April 1992. Interview with Graham Fuller, in Interview, May 1992. Interview with Jean-Pierre Coursodon and M. Henry, ‘‘Hollywood n’est qu’une metaphore,’’ in Positif, June 1992. ‘‘Death and Hollywood,’’ interview with P. Keogh, in Sight and Sound (London), June 1992. Interview with Janice M. Richolson and others, ‘‘The Player,’’ in Cineaste (Paris), no. 2/3, 1992. Interview with David Breskin, InnerViews: Filmmakers in Conversa- tion, Boston: Faber and Faber, 1992. ‘‘Reimagining Raymond Carver on Film: A Talk with Robert Altman and Tess Gallagher,’’ interview with R. Stewart, in New York Times, 12 September 1993. Interview with Thomas Bourguignon and others, in Positif (Paris), January 1994. Interview with Philippe Rouyer and Michael Henry, in Positif (Paris), May 1996. ‘‘Reigning Blows,’’ interview with Brian Case, in Time Out (Lon- don), 20 November 1996. ‘‘The Sweet Hell of Success,’’ interview with P. Beskind, in Pre- miere (Boulder), October 1997. On ALTMAN: film— ‘‘Robert Altman,’’ for South Bank Show, London Weekend Televi- sion, April 1990. ALTMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 19 On ALTMAN: books— Hardin, Nancy, editor, On Making a Movie: Brewster McCloud, New York, 1971. Feineman, Neil, Persistence of Vision: The Films of Robert Altman, New York, 1976. Tewkesbury, Joan, Nashville, New York, 1976. Kass, Judith M., Robert Altman: American Innovator, New York, 1978. Terry, Bridget, The Popeye Story, New York, 1980. Kolker, Robert Phillip, A Cinema of Loneliness: Penn, Kubrick, Coppola, Scorsese, Altman, Oxford, 1980, revised edition, 1988. Bourget, Jean-Loup, Robert Altman, Paris, 1981. Karp, Alan, The Films of Robert Altman, Metuchen, New Jer- sey, 1981. Fink, Guido, I film Di Robert Altman, Rome, 1982. Kagan, Norman, American Skeptic: Robert Altman’s Genre-Com- mentary Films, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1982. Micciche, Lino, L’incubo americano: Il cinema di Robert Altman, Venice, 1984. Wexman, Virginia Wright, and Gretchen Bisplinghoff, Robert Altman: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1984. Plecki, Gerard, Robert Altman, Boston, 1985. Weis, Elisabeth, and John Belton, editors, Film Sound: Theory and Practice, New York, 1985. Wood, Robin, Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan, New York, 1986. McGilligan, Patrick, Robert Altman: Jumping off the Cliff—A Biog- raphy, New York, 1988. Keyssar, Helene, Robert Altman’s America, New York, 1991. Bourget, Jean-Loup, Robert Altman, Paris, 1994. O’Brien, Daniel, Robert Altman: Hollywood Survivor, New York, 1995. On ALTMAN: articles— Cutts, John, ‘‘MASH, McCloud, and McCabe,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November 1971. Dawson, J., ‘‘Altman’s Images,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1972. Engle, Gary, ‘‘McCabe and Mrs. Miller: Robert Altman’s Anti- Western,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green, Ohio), Fall 1972. Baker, C.A., ‘‘The Theme of Structure in the Films of Robert Altman,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green), Sum- mer 1973. Brackett, Leigh, ‘‘From The Big Sleep to the The Long Goodbye and More or Less How We Got There,’’ in Take One (Montreal), January 1974. Stewart, Garrett, ‘‘The Long Goodbye from Chinatown,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1974/75. Rosenbaum, Jonathan, ‘‘Improvisations and Interactions in Altmanville,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1975. Oliver, Bill, ‘‘The Long Goodbye and Chinatown: Debunking the Private Eye Tradition,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), Summer 1975. ‘‘Altman Issue’’ of Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Fall 1975. Wood, Robin, ‘‘Smart-ass and Cutie-pie: Notes toward an Evaluation of Altman,’’ in Movie, Fall 1975. Benayoun, Robert, ‘‘Altman, U.S.A.,’’ in Positif (Paris), Decem- ber 1975. Byrne, Connie, and William O. Lopez, ‘‘Nashville (An Interview Documentary),’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1975/76. Self, Robert, ‘‘Invention and Death: The Commodities of Media in Robert Altman’s Nashville,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowl- ing Green, Ohio), no. 5, 1976. Levine, R., ‘‘R. Altman & Co.,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1977. Canby, Vincent, ‘‘Film View: Altman—A Daring Filmmaker Fal- ters,’’ in The New York Times, 18 February 1979. ‘‘Playing the Game, or Robert Altman and the Indians,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1979. Bonnet, J.-C., and others, ‘‘Dossier: Robert Altman,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), January 1980. Yacowar, Maurice, ‘‘Actors as Conventions in the Films of Robert Altman,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston), Fall 1980. Eyman, S., ‘‘Against Altman,’’ in Focus on Film (London), Octo- ber 1980. Altman, D., ‘‘Building Sand Castles,’’ in Cinema Papers (Mel- bourne), July/August 1981. Self, Robert, ‘‘The Art Cinema and Robert Altman,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), no. 19, 1982. Durgnat, Raymond, ‘‘Popeye Pops Up,’’ in Films (London), April and May 1982. Self, Robert, ‘‘The Perfect Couple: ‘Two Are Halves of One,’ in the Films of Robert Altman,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Georgia), vol. 5, no. 4, 1983. Edgerton, G., ‘‘Capra and Altman: Mythmaker and Mythologist,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), January 1983. Jaehne, K., and P. Audferheide, ‘‘Secret Honor,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 14, no. 2, 1985. Farber, Stephen, ‘‘Five Horsemen after the Apocalypse,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1985. Self, Robert, ‘‘Robert Altman and the Theory of Authorship,’’ in Cinema Journal (Champaign, Illinois), Fall 1985. ‘‘Altman Section’’ of Positif (Paris), January 1986. White, A., ‘‘Play Time,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January- February 1986. Self, Robert, and Leland Poague, ‘‘Dialogue,’’ in Cinema Journal (Champaign, Illinois), Spring 1986. Combs, Richard, ‘‘A Trajectory Built for Two,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), July 1986. ‘‘Robert Altman,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Wolcott, James, ‘‘Jack Tanner, for Real,’’ in Vanity Fair, July 1988. Film Comment (New York), September/October 1989. ‘‘Altman at Calvin,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 2, 1990. McGilligan, Patrick, ‘‘Altman in Kansas City,’’ in Sight and Sound (New York), no. 2, 1990. Combs, R., ‘‘The World Is a Bad Painting,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin, July 1990. Giddins, Gary, ‘‘Altman’s Back,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 6 November 1990. Fisher, W., ‘‘Vincent and Theo and Bob,’’ in Millimeter, Septem- ber 1990. Sanjek, David, ‘‘The Case for Robert Altman,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, no. 1, 1991. Walker, Beverly, ‘‘Altman ‘91’’ in Film Comment, January/Febru- ary 1991. Andersen, Kurt, ‘‘A Player Once Again,’’ in Time, April 20, 1992. Ansen, David, and others, ‘‘Hollywood Is Talking: The Player,’’ in Newsweek, 2 March 1992. Kasindorf, Jeanine, ‘‘Home Movies,’’ in New York, 16 March 1992. ALTMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 20 Kroll, Jack, ‘‘Robert Altman Gives Something Back,’’ in Esquire, May 1992. Myers, E., ‘‘Mining McTeague’s Gold,’’ in New York Times, 25 October 1992. Pond, Steve, ‘‘Flushing the Locusts,’’ in Premiere, May 1992. Schiff, Stephen, ‘‘Auteur! Auteur!’’ in Vanity Fair, April 1992. Smith, Gavin, and Richard T. Jameson, ‘‘The Movie You Saw Is the Movie We’re Going to Make,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1992. Rico, Diana, ‘‘S*M*A*S*H,’’ in Gentleman’s Quarterly, May 1992. Wilmington, Michael, ‘‘Robert Altman and The Player—Laughing and Killing: Death and Hollywood,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), June 1992. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Rerunning for President,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 14 July 1992. Weinraub, B., ‘‘Robert Altman, Very Much a Player Again,’’ in New York Times, 29 July 1993. Henry, B., Gavin Smith, and F. Anthony Macklin, ‘‘Back/Roads to Short Cuts: Faultlines of a Daydream Nation,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1993. Sugg, Richard, ‘‘The Role of the Writer in The Player,’’ in Literature/ Film Quarterly, no. 1, 1994. Murphy, Kathleen, ‘‘A Lion’s Gate: The Cinema according to Robert Altman,’’ in Film Comment (New York), 1994. Romney, Jonathan, ‘‘In the Time of Earthquakes,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), March 1994. Wollen, Peter, ‘‘Strike a Pose,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), March 1995. Yaffe, D.M., ‘‘He Am What He Am,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 20 August 1996. Wyatt, Justin, ‘‘Economic Constraints/Economic Opportunities: Robert Altman as Auteur,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Austin), Fall 1996. Golden, Mike, ‘‘A Robert Altman Film?’’ in Creative Screenwriting (Washington), Fall 1997. Combs, R., ‘‘Kansas City,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/ April 1997. *** The American 1970s may have been dominated by a ‘‘New Wave’’ of younger, auteurist-inspired filmmakers including George Lucas, Peter Bogdanovich, Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, and Francis Ford Coppola, all contemporaries as well as sometime colleagues. It is, however, an outsider to this group, the older Robert Altman—perhaps that decade’s most consistent chronicler of human behavior—who could be characterized as the artistic rebel most committed to an unswerving personal vision. If the generation of whiz kids tends to admire the American cinema as well as its structures of production, Altman tends to regard the American cinema critically and to view the production establishment more as an adversary to be cunningly exploited on the way to an almost European ambiguity. Although Altman has worked consistently within American gen- res, his work can instructively be seen as anti-genre: McCabe and Mrs. Miller is a kind of anti-western, exposing the myth of the heroic westerner (as described by Robert Warshow and executed by John Wayne and John Ford) and replacing it with an almost Marxist view of the Westerner as financier, spreading capitalism and corruption with opportunism and good cheer. The Long Goodbye sets itself in opposition to certain aspects of the hard-boiled detective genre, as Elliott Gould’s Philip Marlowe reflects a moral stance decidedly more ambiguous than that of Raymond Chandler’s conventional lonely moralist. Similarly, Countdown can be seen in relationship to the science-fiction film; Thieves like Us (based on They Live by Night) in relationship to the bandit-gangster film; That Cold Day in the Park in relationship to the psychological horror film inaugurated by Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho; and California Split in relationship to that generic phenomenon so common to the 1970s, the ‘‘buddy film.’’ Even Nashville, Altman’s complex bicentennial musical released in 1975, can be seen in relationship to a generic tradition with roots in Grand Hotel and branches in Earthquake, for it is a kind of disaster film about the American dream. Aside from his generic preoccupations, Altman seems especially interested in people. His films characteristically contain perceptive observations, telling exchanges, and moments of crystal clear revela- tion of human folly. Altman’s comments are made most persuasively in relationship to a grand social organization: that of the upper classes and nouveaux riches in A Wedding; health faddists and, metaphori- cally, the American political process, in Health; and so forth. Cer- tainly, Altman’s films offer a continuous critique of American society: people are constantly using and exploiting others, though often with the tacit permission of those being exploited. One thinks of the country-western singers’ exploitation by the politician’s P.R. man in Nashville, for instance, or the spinster in That Cold Day in the Park. Violence is often the climax of an Altman film—almost as if the tensions among the characters must ultimately explode. Notable examples include the fiery deaths and subsequent ‘‘surprise ending’’ in A Wedding, or the climactic assassination in Nashville. Another recurring interest for Altman in his preoccupation with the psycho- pathology of women: one thinks of the subtly encroaching madness of Sandy Dennis’s sexually repressed spinster in That Cold Day in the Park, an underrated, early Altman film; the disturbing instability of Ronee Blakley in Nashville; the relationships among the unbalanced subjects of Three Women, based on one of Altman’s own dreams; and the real/surreal visions of Susannah York in the virtual horror film, Images. Because almost all of Altman’s characters tend to be hypo- critical, psychotic, weak, or morally flawed in some way, with very few coming to a happy end, Altman has often been attacked for a kind of trendy cynicism. The director’s cynicism, however, seems a result of his genuine attempt to avoid the conventional myth-making of the American cinema. Altman imbues as many of his characters as possible with that sloppy imperfection associated with human beings as they are, with life as it is lived. Performers enjoy working with Altman in part because he pro- vides them with the freedom to develop their characters and often alter the script through improvisation and collaboration. Like Bergman, Altman has worked often with a stock company of performers who appear in one role after another, among them Elliott Gould, Sally Kellerman, Rene Auberjonois, Keith Carradine, Shelley Duvall, Michael Murphy, Bert Remsen, and Henry Gibson. Altman’s distinctive style transforms whatever subject he ap- proaches. He often takes advantage of widescreen compositions in which the frame is filled with a number of subjects and details that compete for the spectator’s attention. Working with cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond, he has achieved films that are visually distin- guished and tend toward the atmospheric. Especially notable are the use of the zoom lens in the smoky cinematography of McCabe and Mrs. Miller; the reds, whites, and blues of Nashville; the constantly mobile camera, specially mounted, of The Long Goodbye, which so effortlessly reflects the hazy moral center of the world the film presents; and the pastel prettiness of A Wedding, particularly the first ALTMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 21 appearance of that icon of the American cinema, Lillian Gish, whose subsequent filmic death propels the narrative. Altman’s use of multi-track sound is also incredibly complex: sounds are layered upon one another, often emanating from different speakers in such a way that the audience member must also decide what to listen for. Indeed, watching and listening to an Altman film inevitably requires an active participant: events unroll with a Bazinian ambiguity. Altman’s Korean War comedy M*A*S*H was the direc- tor’s first public success with this kind of soundtrack. One of his more extreme uses of this technique can be found in McCabe and Mrs. Miller, generally thought to be among the director’s finest achievements. Nashville, Altman’s most universally acclaimed work, provides a panoramic view of the American experience and society as it follows the interrelated experiences of twenty-four characters in the country-western music capital. In its almost three-hour length, Nash- ville accumulates a power of the whole even greater than the vivid individual parts which themselves resonate in the memory: the incredibly controlled debut performance of Lily Tomlin and the sensitive performances of at least a dozen others; the lesson on sexual politics Altman delivers when he photographs several women listen- ing to a song by Keith Carradine; the vulnerability of Ronee Blakley, who suffers a painful breakdown in front of her surprisingly fickle fans; the expressions on the faces of the men who watch Gwen Welles’s painfully humiliating striptease; and the final cathartic song of Barbara Harris, as Altman suddenly reveals the conventional ‘‘Star is Born’’ myth in his apparent anti-musical, like a magician stunning us with an unexpected trick. Overall, Altman’s career itself has been rather weird. His output since M*A*S*H has been prodigious indeed, especially in light of the fact that a great number of his films have been financial and/or critical failures. In fact, several of his films, among them A Perfect Couple and Quintet (with Paul Newman) barely got a national release; and Health (which starred Glenda Jackson, Carol Burnett, James Garner, and Lauren Bacall) languished on the shelf for years before achieving even a limited release in New York City. The most amazing thing about Altman’s Popeye, which was relatively successful with critics and the public (though not the blockbuster that Hollywood had counted on), was that Altman managed to secure the assignment at all. The film that emerged was one of the most cynical and ultimately disturbing of children’s films, in line with Altman’s consistent vision of human beings and social organization. Altman’s career in the 1980s veered sharply away from main- stream film, dominated instead by a number of film adaptations of theatre pieces, including Come Back to the Five & Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean; Streamers; The Laundromat; Secret Honor; Beyond Therapy; and Fool for Love. Although many of these works are fascinating and contain incredibly modulated performances and surprisingly evocative cinematography (particularly Jimmy Dean), these films have not been particularly influential or financially successful. But they allowed Altman to continue to make notable films in a Spielberg-dominated era that was otherwise largely hostile to his provocative filmmaking. Vincent and Theo, one of the few Altman films in this period that did not start out as a play, received much positive notice. Altman’s decision to preface his film with documentary footage of a present- day auction in which millions of dollars are offered for a single Van Gogh painting was particularly stunning in a Brechtian way. He then begins his narrative story of Van Gogh’s lifetime financial failure, trying to remain true to his painter’s vision. Certainly, it is the parallels between Van Gogh and Altman which incite the director’s interest. Tanner ‘88, a mock documentary about the 1988 American presidential campaign which many critics consider among Altman’s master works, was even more amazing. It was a cult hit which marked Altman’s return to the kind of satire with which he had already excelled. Unfortunately, its distribution on cable TV prevented this work from reaching a wide audience. The most stunning development in Altman’s career is the total critical and financial comeback he made with 1992’s The Player, a film that appeared long after most Hollywood executives had written him off. The most insightful and scathing satire about Holly- wood and filmmaking today, The Player hilariously skewered one target after another (the pitch, the Hollywood restaurant, the Holly- wood party, the dispensable writer), in the process winning the New York Film Critics Circle awards for Best Film and Best Director. Contributing to the film’s popular success were the dozens of stars who took cameos as themselves in order to support Altman, whom they have always admired. The success of The Player allowed Robert Altman to go forward with his most ambitious project since Nashville. Another panoramic narrative featuring dozens of characters, a rich soundtrack, striking cinematography, and sensitive performances, this film is set in contemporary Los Angeles and based on short stories by Raymond Carver. The result, Short Cuts, is one of those rare contemporary American films which truly examines American values (or what passes for them) and dissects life as it is being lived today. The film is memorable from its opening images of helicopters sweeping over Los Angeles to spray for the Medfly infestation to its closing images of urban violence and earthquake; from its depiction of Angelenos struggling to connect with each other through phone sex and illicit liaisons to its presentation of bitterness, silence, and missed rap- prochement as the standard American condition. Central to Short Cuts is the ubiquitousness of violence in American life, particularly against women, and the thesis that men’s passive insensitivity often masks a profound hatred of women and a propensity for aggression. No act of violence in Short Cuts results in punishment, just in more apathy. A trader in ironies and social criticism, Altman emphasizes all the ways we deceive each other; and hardly any of the relationships presented—between parents and children, between husbands and wives—are marked by open, honest, useful exchanges; indeed, the jazz theme ‘‘I Don’t Know You,’’ which is sung by one character as her daughter is about to commit suicide, works as the film’s most prescient theme. Notable, too, is how another character describes her own paintings as being ‘‘about seeing, and the responsibility that comes with that.’’ From that message, Altman cuts to a group of men who’ve found the body of a raped woman, but choose to ignore it, lest it interrupt their fishing weekend. As a reaction against an eighties culture that championed special effects and mindless entertainment (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Conan, etc.), Altman’s admonition to see the world and take responsibility emerges as the courageous stand of a visionary artist still viable and surprising. Like Nashville, Short Cuts is a key Altman film which will undoubtedly come to be regarded as a masterpiece of the American cinema. In fact, both films can be seen as providing the inspirational blueprint for many other filmmakers—particularly Paul Thomas Anderson (whose controver- sial 1999 Magnolia uses several cast members borrowed from the Altman films) and Todd Solondz (whose disturbing 1998 Happiness uses a similar interlocking narrative within a mode of ironic social criticism). ALVAREZ DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 22 In 1994 Altman took on the fashion industry in Ready to Wear (Prêt-à-Porter). Critics and the public were less kind in their regard for this panoramic satire, but the film was nevertheless witty and controlled, more subtle and light-hearted than had been anticipated. The film’s finale—whereby a group of models parade nude—marked the witty and appropriate conclusion of Altman’s satire on the political/ideological implications of fashion and its capacity to de- mean our values. Unfortunately, three recent Altman films seems less impressive, if focused on the indigenous local color of their respective regional portraits. Kansas City, in 1996, presents a murky canvas of gangsterism, ‘‘dope’’ addiction, and black jazz in the early thirties Kansas City. The Gingerbread Man, in 1998, reportedly written by Altman pseudonymously, is a thriller about a lawyer involved with a troubled young woman. In contrast to the sharp visual and aural clarity of Hitchcock’s thrillers, The Gingerbread Man is suffused with such stunningly atmospheric cinematography and overlapping sound (indeed, it virtually never stops raining in the film), that we feel like we are eavesdropping on real people, rather than watching a narrative work its way to a fairly predictable (if effective) conclu- sion. And finally, the 1999 Cookie’s Fortune, set in Holly Springs, Mississippi, is a rather charming evocation of the genuine quirkiness of small-town life, using some of the typical Altman structures from Nashville, but within a much smaller framework. As a postscript on Altman, one should add that he, more than any other director, should never be counted out as an important force in American film culture. If Altman’s work is sometimes uneven, the fact that he continues to work on projects which are political, ideological, and personal—refusing to compromise his own artistic vision—is a sign that he remains, even in his late seventies, the United States’ single most ambitious auteur. His future agenda is ambitious, including a film of Another City, Not My Own, the strange Dominick Dunne novel based on Dunne’s experiences as a journalist covering the sensational murder trial in Los Angeles of O. J. Simpson. Although Altman might seem to be the perfect director, in a culminat- ing masterpiece, to deal with the human circus of venality and opportunism which was the Simpson trial, Altman’s peripatetic popularity with Hollywood backers suggests that this project is by no means a sure thing, no matter how eagerly anticipated the results. —Charles Derry ALVAREZ, Santiago Nationality: Cuban. Born: Havana, 1919. Education: University of Havana; Columbia University, New York. Career: After revolution, served as vice president of newly formed Instituto Cubano del Arte e Industria Cinematograficas (ICAIC), 1959; director of the Latin American ICAIC newsreel, from 1960. Died: 20 May, 1998, in Havana, Cuba, of parkinson’s disease. Films as Director: 1960 Un a?o de libertad (co-d) 1961 Escambray; Muerte al invasor (co-d) 1962 Forjadores de la paz; Cumplimos; Crisis en el Caribe 1963 Ciclon; El Barbaro del Ritmo; Fidel en la URSS 1964 Via libre a la zafra del ‘64; Primeros Juegos Deportivos Militares 1965 Solidaridad Cuba y Vietnam; Cuba dos de enero; Pedales sobra Cuba; Now; Segunda Declaracion de la Habana; La escalada del chantaje 1966 Abril de Giron; Cerro Pelado; A?o Siete; Ocho a?os de Revolucion 1967 La guerra olvidados (Laos, the Forgotten War); Hasta la victoria siempre (Till Victory Always); Golpeando en la selva; Hanoi, martes 13 1968 Amarrando el Cordon; L.B.J. 1969 Despegue a la 18.00; 79 Primaveras (79 Springtimes of Ho Chi Minh) 1970 Once por cero; Piedra sobre piedra; El sue?o del Pongo; Yanapanacuna 1971 Quemando tradiciones; Como, por qué y para qué asesina a un general?; La estampida; El pájaro del faro 1972 De America soy hijo . . . y a ella me debo 1973 Y el cielo fue tomado por asalto; El tigre salto y mato . . . pero morira . . . morira (The Tiger Leaped and Killed, But He Will Die, He Will Die) 1974 60 Minutos con el primer mundial de boxeo amateur; Rescate; Los cuatro puentes 1975 Abril de Vietnam en el a?o del gato; El primer delegado 1976 El Tiempo es el viento; El sol no se puede tapar con un dedo; Luanda ya no es de San Pablo; Morir por la patria es vivir; Maputo; Meridiano Novo; Los Dragones de Ha-Long 1977 Mi Hermano Fidel; El Octubre de todos 1978 Sobre el problema fronterizo entre Kampuchea y Vietnam; . . . y la noche se hizo arcoiris 1979 El Gran salto al vacio; Tengo fe en ti; La cumbre que nos une; El desafio 1980 Celia, imagen del pueblo; Marcha del pueblo combatiente; El mayo de las tres banderas; Un Amazonus de pueblo embravecido; Lo que el viento se llevó; La guerra necessaria 1981 La importancia universal del hueco; Tiempo libre a la roca; Comenzo a retumbar el Momtombo; 26 es también 19; Mazazo macizo; Contrapunto 1982 Nova sinfonia; A galope sobre la historia; Operación abril del Caribe 1983 Los refugiados de la Cueva del Muertro (+ sc); Biografía de un carnaval; Las campanas tambien pueden doblar ma?ana 1984 Gracias Santiago; Dos rostros y una sola imagen; El so?ador del Kremlin; Por primera vez elecciones libres 1985 Taller de la vida; La soledad de los dioses; Reencuentro 1986 Las antípodas de la victoria; Aires de renovación en el meridiano 37; Memorias de un reencuentro 1987 Brascuba 1997 Concierto por la vida; Concierto mayor Publications By ALVAREZ: book— Santiago Alvarez: Cronista del tercer mundo, edited by Edmundo Aray, Caracas, 1983. ALVAREZDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 23 By ALVAREZ: articles— ‘‘Santiago Alvarez habla de su cine,’’ in Hablemos de Cine (Lima), July/August 1970. Interview in Cineaste (New York), vol. 6, no. 4, 1975. ‘‘El Periodismo cinematografico,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 94, 1979. ‘‘Cinema and Revolution: Talking with Santiago Alvarez,’’ in Issues: A Monthly Review of International Affairs (London), May 1980. Interview with M. Pereira, in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 104, 1983. Interview with C. Galiano and R. Chavez, in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 107, 1984. ‘‘Now,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 110, 1984. ‘‘Hablar de estas fotos: Conversación con Santiago Alvarez,’’ in Revolución y Cultura (Havana), November 1986. ‘‘Entretien avec Santiago Alvarez,’’ interview with Marcel Jean, in 24 Images (Montreal), November-December 1989. On ALVAREZ: books— Nelson, L., Cuba: The Measure of a Revolution, Minneapolis, 1972. Myerson, Michael, Memories of Underdevelopment: The Revolution- ary Films of Cuba, New York, 1973. Chanan, Michael, editor, Santiago Alvarez, London, 1982. Waugh, Thomas, editor, ‘‘Show Us Life’’: Toward a History and Aesthetics of the Committed Documentary, Metuchen, New Jer- sey, 1984. Chanan, Michael, The Cuban Image: Cinema and Cultural Politics in Cuba, London, 1985. On ALVAREZ: articles— Sutherland, Elizabeth, ‘‘Cinema of Revolution—90 Miles from Home,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1961/62. Douglas, M.E., ‘‘The Cuban Cinema,’’ in Take One (Montreal), July/ August 1968. Adler, Renata, in New York Times, 10, 11, and 12 February 1969. Engel, Andi, ‘‘Solidarity and Violence,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Autumn 1969. Rubenstein, Lenny, ‘‘79 Springtimes of Ho Chi Minh,’’ in Cineaste (New York), Winter 1970/71. Sauvage, P., ‘‘Cine Cubano,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Spring 1972. Chávez, R., ‘‘El internaciolalismo en el obra de Santiago Alvarez,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), March 1978. Burton, Julianne, ‘‘Introduction to Revolutionary Cuban Cinema,’’ in Jump Cut (Chicago), December 1978. Hood, Stuart, ‘‘Murder on the Way: Santiago Alvarez Season at NFT,’’ in New Statesman (London), April 1980. Piedra, M., ‘‘Un hombre mas joven 30 anos despues,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), vol. 125, 1989. Mraz, John, ‘‘Santiago Alvarez: From Dramatic Form to Direct Cinema,’’ in Documentary Strategies: Society/Ideology/History in Latin American Documentary, 1950–1985, Pittsburgh, 1990. Labaki, A., ‘‘Santiago Alvarez, l’urgence cinema,’’ in Bref (Paris), no. 31, Winter 1996/97. *** Predominantly associated with the educational or the exotic in the United States, the documentary film occupies a very different place in the cinema of revolutionary Cuba. Between 90 and 95 percent of the films produced under the revolution have been documentaries, and the man most responsible for the international stature of Cuban documentary cinema is Santiago Alvarez. As the director of the weekly ‘‘Latin American Newsreel’’ produced by the Cuban Film Institute (ICAIC), Alvarez directed an enormous number of newsreels as well as many other short and feature-length documentaries. Never having formally studied cinema, he became a filmmaker by ‘‘handling millions of feet of film.’’ Alvarez felt himself to be a journalist, but believed that cinematic journalism should have a permanence beyond simple reportage. To achieve such transcendency, Alvarez’s newsreels are typically monothematic and integrated, with the result that they appear more like individual documentary films than the sort of generalized news reporting normally associated with newsreels. The dominant characteristic of Alvarez’s style is the extraordinar- ily rhythmic blend of visual and audio forms. Alvarez utilized everything at hand to convey his message: live and historical docu- mentary footage, still photos, bits from TV programs and fiction films, animation, and an incredible range of audio accompaniment. Believing that ‘‘50 percent of the value of a film is in the soundtrack,’’ Alvarez mixed rock, classical, and tropical music, sound effects, participant narration—even silence—into the furious pace of his visual images. For Alvarez, cinema had its own language, different from that of television or of radio, and the essence of this language is montage. Alvarez’s documentaries focus on both national and international themes. For example, Ciclon is an early newsreel on the effects of hurricane Flora in Cuba. Although it lacks the elaborate visual montage for which Alvarez later became famous, the film shows great skill in the use of sound. There is no verbal narration, and the track is limited to the source sound of trucks and helicopters, and the organ music which eerily punctuates the scenes of caring for the wounded and burying the dead. Now, a short dealing with racism in the United States and edited to the rhythm of Lena Horne’s song, shows the master at his best in working with still photographs. Particularly effective is a sequence in which Alvarez cuts between the chained hands of arrested blacks and the linked hands of protestors to suggest a dynamic of collective struggle in which people are seen not only as products of their circumstances, but as historical actors capable of changing their circumstances. Here, Alvarez fuses ideology and art by making graphic the third of Marx’s ‘‘Theses on Feuerbach.’’ Alvarez’s tribute to Che Guevara, Hasta la victoria siempre, deals with much the same concept. He begins with a series of beautifully shot stills of poverty in the Altiplano. Then, following footage of Che speaking in the Sierra Maestra of Cuba, he dissolves a still of Che into a still of a Gulf Oil Company camp in Bolivia. Through this technique he links the earlier struggle in Cuba with the later guerrilla war in the Andes. One of the finest examples of Alvarez’s work is 79 Springtimes, a beautifully controlled montage on Ho Chi Minh’s life and death. He opens the short by ironically mixing elapsed-time photography of flowers opening with slow-motion footage of bombs falling from United States planes. He goes on to cut between scenes of United States atrocities in Vietnam and protest marches in the U.S., visually ANDERSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 24 depicting the position that the real enemy is not the people of the U.S., but the ruling class and its mercenaries. In the final sequence, Alvarez uses what seems to be every available visual effect—torn and burned strips of film, film frames, bits of paper—to create an incredible animated montage. The soundtrack underscores the visual dynamic with music and poems by Ho Chi Minh and Jose Martí. Even since his death in 1998, Alvarez continues to be thought of as one of the foremost documentary filmmakers in Latin America, although some consider his earlier short films to be superior to the later and longer works. This may result from the fact that in the earlier films the line between heroes (Che, Ho Chi Minh) and villains (U.S. imperialism and racism) was more clearly drawn, while his later works reflected the international compromises with the Soviet Union and reformist Latin American governments that have been required of the Cuban revolution. Nonetheless, Alvarez persisted in his indefati- gable quest for an ‘‘audacious and constantly renewed optic.’’ —John Mraz ANDERSON, Lindsay Nationality: British. Born: Lindsay Gordon Anderson in Bangalore, South India, 17 April 1923. Education: Attended Cheltenham Col- lege and Wadham College, Oxford. Military Service: Member of Army Intelligence Corps during World War II. Career: Editor, Sequence magazine, 1947–52; helped organize first Free Cinema program, National Film Theatre, 1956; directed first feature, This Sporting Life, 1963; associate artistic director, Royal Court Theatre, 1971–75; also directed TV plays and commercials. Awards: Oscar for Best Short Subject, for Thursday’s Children, 1955; Palme d’Or, Cannes Festival, for If... , 1969. Died: 30 August 1994, of a heart attack while vacationing in the Dordogne region of France. Films as Director: 1948 Meet the Pioneers (+ sc, co-ed, narration) 1949 Idlers That Work (+ sc, narration) 1952 Three Installations (+ sc, narration); Trunk Conveyor (+ sc, narration); Wakefield Express (+ sc) 1953 Thursday’s Children (co-d, + co-sc); O Dreamland (+ sc) 1955 Green and Pleasant Land (+ sc); Henry (+ sc, role); The Children Upstairs (+ sc); A Hundred Thousand Children (+ sc); ￡20 a Ton (+ sc); Energy First (+ sc); Foot and Mouth (+ sc, narration) 1957 Every Day except Christmas (+ sc) 1963 This Sporting Life 1967 The White Bus; Raz, dwa, trzy (The Singing Lesson) (+ sc) 1969 If... (+ pr) 1972 O Lucky Man! (+ co-pr) 1974 In Celebration 1982 Britannia Hospital 1985 Wish You Were There (Foreign Skies) 1986 The Whales of August 1988 Glory! Glory! 1993 Is That All There Is? (+ sc, role) Other Films: 1949 Out of Season (Brendon) (narrator) 1952 The Pleasure Garden (Broughton) (pr, role) 1956 Together (Mazzetti) (supervising ed) 1958 March to Aldermaston (supervising ed) 1960 Let My People Go (Krish) (sponsor) 1962 The Story of Private Pooley (Alsen) (English-language ver- sion of Der Schwur des Soldaten Pooley) (narrator) 1965 The Threatening Sky (Ivens) (English-language version of Le Ciel, la terre) (narrator) 1966 Mucednici Iásky (Martyrs of Love) (Nemec) (role) 1967 About ‘‘The White Bus’’ (Fletcher) (role as himself) 1968 Abel Gance—The Charm of Dynamite (Brownlow) (for TV) (narrator); Inadmissable Evidence (Page) (role) 1969 The Parachute (Page) (for TV) (role) 1970 Hetty King—Performer (Robinson) (narrator) 1971 A Mirror from India (Sarabhai) (narrator) 1981 Chariots of Fire (Hudson) (role as schoolmaster) 1991 Prisoner of Honor (for TV) (role as war minister) 1992 Blame It on the Bellboy (role as Mr. Marshall) 1994 Lucky Man (role as himself) Publications By ANDERSON: books— Making a Film: The Story of ‘‘Secret People,’’ London, 1952. If. . . : A Film by Lindsay Anderson, with David Sherwin, New York, 1969. O Lucky Man!, with David Sherwin, New York, 1973. By ANDERSON: articles— ‘‘Angles of Approach,’’ in Sequence (London), Winter 1947. ‘‘The Need for Competence,’’ in Sequence (London), Spring 1948. ‘‘What Goes On,’’ in Sequence (London), Summer 1948. ‘‘Creative Elements,’’ in Sequence (London), Autumn 1948. ‘‘British Cinema: The Descending Spiral,’’ in Sequence (London), Spring 1949. ‘‘The Film Front,’’ in Sequence (London), Summer 1949. ‘‘Films of Alfred Hitchcock,’’ in Sequence (London), Autumn 1949. ‘‘Notes at Cannes,’’ in Sequence (London), New Year issue 1950. ‘‘The Director’s Cinema?,’’ in Sequence (London), Autumn 1950. ‘‘Retrospective Review: Wagonmaster and Two Flags West,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), December 1950. ‘‘Goldwyn at Claridges,’’ in Sequence (London), New Year is- sue 1951. ‘‘John Ford,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1951. ‘‘Minnelli, Kelly and An American in Paris,’’ in Sequence (London), New Year issue 1952. ANDERSONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 25 Lindsay Anderson ‘‘As the Critics Like It: Some Personal Choices,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), October/December 1952. ‘‘Only Connect: Some Aspects of the Work of Humphrey Jennings,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), April/June 1953; reprinted in The Documentary Tradition, edited by Lewis Jacobs, New York, 1974. ‘‘Encounter with Prévert,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), July/ September 1953. ‘‘French Critical Writing,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), October/ December 1954. ‘‘Stand Up! Stand Up!,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1956. ‘‘Notes from Sherwood,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1956. ‘‘Ten Feet Tall,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1957. ‘‘The Critical Issue: A Discussion between Paul Rotha, Basil Wright, Lindsay Anderson, Penelope Houston,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1957. ‘‘Two Inches off the Ground,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1957. ‘‘Get out and Push!,’’ in Declaration, edited by Tom Maschler, London, 1958. ‘‘Sport, Life, and Art,’’ in Films and Filming (London), Febru- ary 1963. ‘‘An Interview with Lindsay Anderson,’’ with Peter Cowie, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1964. ‘‘The Film Maker and the Audience,’’ in Film Makers on Film Making, edited by Harry Geduld, Bloomington, Indiana, 1967. Interview, in Documentary Explorations: 15 Interviews with Film- makers, by G. Roy Levin, New York, 1971. ‘‘Stripping the Veils Away,’’ an interview with David Robinson, in the Times (London), 21 April 1973. ‘‘From Theater to Film . . . Lindsay Anderson,’’ an interview with M. Carducci, in Millimeter (New York), January 1975. ‘‘Revolution Is the Opium of the Intellectuals,’’ an interview with E. Rampell, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 12, no. 4, 1983. ‘‘Lindsay Anderson, Unfashionable Humanist, in Conversation,’’ an interview with Gerald Pratley, in Cinema Canada (Montreal), June 1985. Interview in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), October 1987. Interview with John Russell Taylor, in Films and Filming (London), March 1988. Interview with S. Stewart and L. Friedman, in Film Criticism, vol. 16, no. 1, 1991/92. ANDERSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 26 On ANDERSON: books— Manvell, Roger, New Cinema in Britain, New York, 1969. Sussex, Elizabeth, Lindsay Anderson, New York, 1969. Barsam, Richard, Nonfiction Film, New York, 1973. Silet, Charles L. P., Lindsay Anderson: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1979. Graham, Allison, Lindsay Anderson, Boston, 1981. Hedling, Erik, Lindsay Anderson och filmens estetik, Lund, Swe- den, 1992. Sherwin, David, Going Mad in Hollywood: And Life with Lindsay Anderson, London, 1996. Lambert, Gavin, Mainly about Lindsay Anderson, New York, 2000. On ANDERSON: articles— Berger, John, ‘‘Look at Britain!,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1957. Milne, Tom, ‘‘This Sporting Life,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1962. Robinson, David, ‘‘Anderson Shooting If... ,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1968. Gladwell, David, ‘‘Editing Anderson’s If... ,’’ in Screen (London), January/February 1969. Lovell, Alan, and Jim Hillier, ‘‘Free Cinema,’’ in Studies in Docu- mentary, New York, 1972. Lovell, Alan, ‘‘The Unknown Cinema of Britain,’’ in Cinema Jour- nal (Evanston), Spring 1972. Wilson, D., ‘‘O Lucky Man!,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Sum- mer 1973. Taylor, John, ‘‘Lindsay Anderson,’’ in Directors and Directions, London, 1975. Lovell, Alan, ‘‘Brecht in Britain—Lindsay Anderson,’’ in Screen (London), Winter 1975. Durgnat, Raymond, ‘‘Britannia Waives the Rules,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1976. Lefèvre, Raymond, ‘‘Lindsay Anderson, ou la fidelité au Free Cin- ema,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), October 1982. Schickel, Richard, ‘‘Ford Galaxy,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1984. Houston, Penelope, ‘‘Parker, Attenborough, Anderson,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1986. McCarthy, Todd, ‘‘Lindsay Anderson,’’ in Variety, 5 September 1994. Kenny, Glenn, ‘‘The Magnificient Anderson,’’ in Entertainment Weekly, 16 September 1994. Cox, Jay, ‘‘Lindsay Anderson, 1923–1994: In Celebration,’’ in Film Comment, November/December 1994. *** In a 1958 essay titled ‘‘Get out and Push,’’ Lindsay Anderson expressed his approach to working in the cinema. The way Anderson, the individual, approached working in the cinema paralleled the world view he put forth in feature films: the individual must examine the basis of the system within which he finds himself, ‘‘the motives that sustain it and the interests that it serves.’’ It is the responsibility of the individual to actively seek a new self-definition beyond the confines of the established system; the individual cannot look for change to come from or through any outside authority—political, social, or spiritual. This theme is consistently present in Anderson’s feature films. In This Sporting Life, Anderson approaches the repression of a traditionally structured society through the personal, subjective story of Frank Machin and Margaret Hammond. The setting of This Sporting Life, an industrial northern city, is an environment divided into economic classes, a division which serves to emphasize the central problem of the film—the division within Frank Machin. Machin finds himself limited to the realm of the physical, and constantly attempts to connect with others on an emotional level. Despite his attempts, he is only seen in terms of his physical qualities; he is valued only when he is participating in the physical act of playing rugby. Frank Machin is aware of his limitations but does not know how to change; he lacks direction. He tries to make others responsible for his happiness: Margaret Hammond, the rugby team, and even the elites of society who populate the world of Mr. and Mrs. Weaver, owners of the rugby team. Machin constantly attempts to break into the estab- lished system, seemingly unaware that it is this same system which controls and restrains him. Mick Travis, the protagonist of Anderson’s second feature film, If... , struggles instead to break out of the established system. Mick takes on the responsibility of action, and although his revolution is not complete, he does not remain trapped like Frank. The environment in If... , the English public school system, is a metaphor for the ‘‘separation of intellect from imagination,’’ according to Elizabeth Sussex. The environment of College House does not allow for the creative development of the individual. It encourages separation and fragmentation of the self. Film technique in If... also serves to reveal the narrative theme of the division of the self. The chapter headings physically divide the film into rigidly ordered sections, reflecting the separation of intellect and imagination encouraged by the nature of the tradition of College House. These chapter headings, along with the alternation between black and white and color film, function as distancing devices, making the viewer more aware of the medium. A narrative technique Anderson used to illustrate the process that leads to Mick’s eventual break from the system is the establishment of verbal language as an essential part of the structure of College House. When Mick expresses his disdain for College House through words, they are simply absorbed by the system. There is no change in Mick’s situation until he initiates action by bayoneting the college chaplain. After this point, Mick no longer recites revolutionary rhetoric; in fact, he rarely speaks. He is no longer existing within the structure of College House. Totally free of the system, Mick launches into the destruction of the established order. Mick is no longer acted upon but is the creator of action; in this respect, he triumphs where Frank Machin fails. In O Lucky Man!, the thematic sequel to If... , the medium of film itself becomes one of the narrative themes, and self-reflexive film techniques serve to reveal not only the narrative theme of self- definition, but also the process of filmmaking. The titles used in O Lucky Man! announce the different sections of the film but do not impose order; on the contrary, their abrupt appearance and brevity tend to interrupt the order of the narrative. It is as if the medium of film itself breaks through to remind the viewer of its existence. Indeed the medium, specifically the energy the medium generates, is one of the themes of O Lucky Man! The process of creation in the medium far exceeds anything Mick accomplishes in the narrative until the two meet in the final sequence. ANGELOPOULOSDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 27 Mick Travis, the character, confronts Lindsay Anderson, the director, at an audition for the film O Lucky Man! Mick obediently projects the different emotions Anderson demands of him until he is asked to smile. It is at this point that Mick finally takes action and rejects a direct order: ‘‘What is there to smile about?’’ he asks. Mick is looking outside himself for motivation, as he has done throughout the film, before he will take action. Anderson, exasperated, strikes Mick with a script. After receiving the blow, Mick is able to smile. He soon finds that he is one of the actors in the film; he too is capable of creating action. Britannia Hospital, the final work in the series begun by If... , presents a much darker vision than Anderson’s previous films. As in If... , the physical environment of the film—the hospital—is a meta- phor for a static, repressive system. Unlike If... , this film contains little hope for change or progress, not for the individual and certainly not within the system itself. Mick Travis appears in this film as an investigative reporter who has achieved success by selling ‘‘some- thing the people want,’’ a reference to his former position in O Lucky Man! and a description of his motives as a news reporter. He is attempting to expose the questionable experiments of Britannia Hospital staff member Dr. Millar, the same unethical researcher from O Lucky Man! Although Mick puts up a fight, the system finally overwhelms him in this film. Glory! Glory!, a Home Box Office production, is somewhat of a synthesis of Anderson’s previous work in both theme and technique. The institution that stands as metaphor in this case is one peculiar to the United States, a television evangelism empire—The Church of the Companions of Christ. Like the school in If... , this institution has a verbal language essential to its structure, the use of which sanctions just about any action. Throughout the film people have ‘‘revelations’’ or ‘‘visions’’ in which God makes key decisions for them, removing all personal responsibility. Any action is justifiable—deception, fraud, blackmail—as long as it is done in ‘‘a holy cause’’ or ‘‘for the church.’’ The film techniques Anderson uses in Glory! Glory! are related to his earlier works. The medium is present throughout the narrative in the form of chapter headings and blackouts between chapters. Music is important to the narrative, as it is in O Lucky Man!, but in the later film it is integrated into the narrative structure rather than used as a distancing device. The theme of personal responsibility for self-definition is clearly seen in the character of Ruth. She struggles throughout the film with the idea of who she wants to be and with the identities others want to impose on her. She reaches a key point in her personal progression when she admits that she has always needed some kind of crutch— sex, drugs, God. Not long after realizing that she has been looking outside herself for an identity, Ruth reveals that she finally under- stands God. In essence, she has created her own god, her own mythology. Ruth remains within the system, but for the first time actually believes in what she is ‘‘selling’’ because she has defined for herself the ‘‘authority’’ and the basis for the system. Anderson’s other features, In Celebration and The Whales of August, contain more subjective narratives but still explore the theme of the individual’s responsibility for self-definition. In his last film, Is That All There Is?, an autobiographical documentary made for the BBC, Anderson presents himself as such an individual: an indepen- dent artist who actively sought a self-definition beyond the confines of the established system. —Marie Saeli ANGELOPOULOS, Theodoros Nationality: Greek. Born: Athens, 27 April 1935; surname also spelled Anghelopoulos. Education: Studied in Athens, 1953–59, Sorbonne, Paris, 1961–64, and at IDHEC, Paris, 1962–63. Military Service: 1959–60. Career: Film critic for left-wing journal Dimoktatiki Allaghi until its suppression in 1967 coup; worked as lawyer until 1969; began association with cinematographer Giorgios Arvanitis on Reconstruction, 1970; taught at Stavrakou Film School in 1970s. Awards: Georges Sadoul Award, 1971; FIPRESCI Award, 1973, for Days of ‘36; FIPRESCI Grand Prix, Golden Age Award, B.F.I. Best Film, Interfilm Award, for The Travelling Players; Golden Hugo Award, for The Hunters; Golden Lion Award, Venice, 1980; Cannes Film Festival Palme d’Or, for Eternity and a Day, 1998; Chevalier des Arts et des Lettres. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1968 Ekpombi (The Broadcast; L’Emission) 1970 Anaparastassi (Reconstruction; Reconstitution) (+ ro) 1972 Mères tou 36 (Days of ‘36; Jours de 36) 1975 O Thiasos (The Travelling Players; Le Voyage des comédiens) 1977 I Kynighi (The Hunters) (+ co-pr) 1980 O Megalexandros (Alexander the Great) (+ pr) 1982 Athens (doc) 1984 Taxidi sta Kithira (Voyage to Cythera) 1986 O Melissokomos (The Beekeeper) Theodoros Angelopoulos ANGELOPOULOS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 28 1988 Topio stia Omichli (Landscape in the Mist) 1991 The Suspended Step of the Stork (+pr) 1995 Ulysses’ Gaze (+pr); episode in Lumière et Compagnie (Lumière and Company) 1998 Mia Aiwniothta kai Mia Mera (Eternity and a Day) (+pr, +sc) Other Films: 1968 Kieron (role) Publications By ANGELOPOULOS: articles— ‘‘Mes films sont des appels à la discussion . . . ,’’ interview with N. Ghali, in Cinéma (Paris), September/October 1975. ‘‘Le Voyage des comédiens,’’ interview with J.-P. Brossard and others, in Image et Son (Paris), November 1975. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), June 1977. Interview with D. Rabourdin, in Cinéma (Paris), August/Septem- ber 1977. ‘‘Les Chasseurs,’’ interview with O. Barrot and M. Demopoulos, in Ecran (Paris), November 1977. ‘‘Animating Dead Space and Dead Time,’’ interview and article with T. Mitchell, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1980–81. Interviews with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), February 1985, May 1987, and May 1991. Interview with G. Merat, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), Novem- ber 1988. Interview with H. Petrakis, in Positif (Paris), December 1991. Interview with E. Castiel, in Sequences, January 1992. ‘‘National Culture and Individual Vision,’’ interview with A. Horton and D. Georgakas, in Cineaste, vol. 19, no. 2/3, 1992. Interview with C. Siniscalchi, in Rivista del Cinematografo, March 1993. Interview with A. Faber, in Filmvilag, vol. 36, no. 1, 1993. On ANGELOPOULOS: books— Schuster, Mel, The Contemporary Greek Cinema, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1979. Orati, Daniela, Thodoros Anghelopoulos, Venice, 1982. Estève, Michel, Theo Angelopoulos, Paris, 1985. Ciment, Michel, and Hélène Tiarchent, Theo Angelopoulos, Paris, 1989. Kolovos, Nikos, Theo Angelopoulos, Athens, 1990. O’Grady, Gerald, editor, Theo Angelopoulos (MOMA Exhibition Catalogue), New York, 1990. Horton, Andrew, The Films of Theo Angelopoulos: A Cinema of Contemplation. Princeton, New Jersey, 1997. Horton, Andrew, editor, The Last Modernist: The Films of Theo Angelopoulos. Westport, Connecticut, 1997. On ANGELOPOULOS: articles— Cineforum (Bergamo), September 1975. Positif (Paris), October 1975. Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), December 1975. Giacci, V., in Cineforum (Bergamo), September 1976. Horton, Andrew, ‘‘Theodoros Angelopoulos and the New Greek Cinema,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylvania), Fall 1981. Dossier on Angelopoulos, in Cinéma (Paris), November 1982. ‘‘Angelopoulos Section’’ of Revue du Cinéma/Image et Son (Paris), January 1985. Amengual, Barthélémy, ‘‘Une esthetique ‘théatrale’ de la realité: sur Theo Angelopoulos,’’ in Positif (Paris), February 1985. ‘‘Angelopoulos Issue’’ of Revue Belge du Cinéma (Brussels), Spring 1985. Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1988 and Autumn 1989. Brown, Georgia, in Village Voice (New York), 20 February 1990. Holden, S., ‘‘A Search for a Fictive Father,’’ in New York Times, 14 September 1990. Rollet, S., ‘‘Theo Angelopoulos ou le cinema comme theatre du temps,’’ in Positif (Paris), December 1991. ‘‘Der Fundamentalismus kennt nur Grenzen,’’ in Filmbulletin, vol. 33, no. 5/6, 1991. Bolzoni, F., ‘‘Contro l’effimero,’’ in Rivista del Cinematografo, March 1993. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Two Films on Strife in Balkans Win Top Prizes at Cannes,’’ in New York Times, 29 May 1995. Stevens, Julie, ‘‘Ulysses’ Gaze,’’ in Empire (London), March 1996. Rosenbaum, Jonathan, ‘‘Ulysses’ Gaze,’’ in Chicago Reader (Chi- cago), 18 October 1996. Portuges, Catherine, ‘‘Ulysses’ Gaze,’’ in American Historical Review (Washington, D.C.), vol. 101, no. 4, October 1996. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Ulysses’ Gaze,’’ in New York Times, 17 Janu- ary 1997. *** Theodoros Angelopoulos’s considerable achievements in cinema during the 1970s and 1980s have made him not only the most important Greek filmmaker to date, but one of the truly creative and original artists of his time. In 1970 he convinced producer George Papalios to finance his first film, Anaparastassi. The story follows the pattern of a crime tale à la James Cain. A Greek peasant is killed by his wife and her lover on his return from Germany, where he had gone to find work. A judge tries to reconstruct the circumstances of the murder, but finds himself unable to communicate with the accused, who belong to a totally different culture. To shoot this Pirandellian story of misunderstanding, Angelopoulos adopted an austere style featuring long camera movements that show a bleak and desolate Greek landscape far removed from the tourist leaflets. Reminiscent of Visconti’s Ossessione, this is a film noir that opens the way to more daring aesthetic ventures. Angelopoulos’s trilogy of Days of 36, The Travelling Players, and The Hunters can be seen as an exploration of contemporary Greek history. If his style shows some influences—particularly Jancsó’s one reel-one take methodology and Antonioni’s slow, meditative mood— Angelopoulos has nevertheless created an authentic epic cinema akin to Brecht’s theatre in which aesthetic emotion is counterbalanced by a reflexive approach that questions the surfaces of reality. The audience is not allowed to identify with a central character, nor to follow a dramatic development, nor given a reassuring morality. The director boldly goes from the present to the past within the same shot, and in The Hunters broadens his investigation by including the ANGERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 29 fantasies of his characters. The sweep of a movie like Travelling Players, which includes songs and dances, is breathtaking. Its tale of an actors group circulating through Greece from 1939 to 1952 performing a pastoral play is transformed into a four-hour earth odyssey. Angelopoulos’s masterpiece was preceded by the haunting Days of ‘36. This political thriller about a murder in a prison proved a prelude to events of national importance. It is the director’s most radical use of off-screen space and off-screen sound, of the dialectic between the seen and the unseen. With its closed doors, whispering voices in corridors, and silhouettes running to and fro, it evokes the mystery that surrounds the exercise of power. Angelopoulos’s fifth film, Alexander the Great, breaks new ground: it deals with myth and develops the exploration of the popular unconscious already present in Travelling Players and The Hunters. At the turn of the twentieth century, a bandit is seen as the reincarna- tion of the Macedonian king. He kidnaps some English residents in Greece and leads them to the mountains. The kidnapper tries to blackmail the British government but ends up killing his hostages. Angelopoulos opposes several groups: the foreigners, the outlaws, some Italian anarchists who have taken refuge in Greece, and village people who try to establish a utopian community. The director’s indictment of hero-worship and his portrayal of diverse forms of political failure reveal a growing pessimism in his works. But his style is as masterful as ever, reaching a kind of austere grandeur reminis- cent of Byzantine mosaics. Few have blended political investigation with a search for new forms of expression with such satisfying results. Ulysses’ Gaze is exclusively preoccupied with the problems of historical reconstruction and personal remembrance. The film, co-scripted by the legendary European screenwriter Tonino Guerra, carries out a nostalgic reconstruction of peaceful and colorful ethnic cohabitation at the Balkan crossroads between Orient and Occident. The narrative of the film breaks away from the linear not only time- wise, but also spatially, providing an ultimately subjective account of a personal experience of history and regionality. In Ulysses’ Gaze, Angelopoulus created the prefect cinematic language that allowed him to talk of an individual experience of history as superseding time and space. The remarkable use of elabo- rately manipulated long shots enables the narrative to include com- plex and magnificent subtleties. The mostly hand-held camera of cameraman Yorgos Arvanitis moves very slowly and is often posi- tioned in such a way that it reveals actions taking place in different semantic layers of the screen space. The events lose their objectivity and are constructed through the gaze of the onlooking protagonist. Older historical interpretations intersect with the perceived signifi- cance of newer ones. In 1995, Angelopoulos was one of forty international directors asked to participate in Lumière and Company, a celebration of one hundred years of filmmaking with the camera invented by the Lumière brothers. For this novelty film, each director was asked to create a film in three takes, a maximum of fifty two seconds in length. Though the film was largely forgettable, the inclusion of Angelopoulos among the forty representative filmmakers clearly shows his status in international film. His 1998 film, Eternity and a Day, marked a departure in tone from much of his earlier work. Less harsh and more accessible than his earlier films, Eternity and a Day is the story of an old and ill Greek writer who finds meaning in the last days of his life by helping a homeless Albanian child. A poetic film with dense and haunting imagery, it juxtaposes youth and age, national identity and language, patriotism and ethnic hatred to create an intensely human look at the meaning of life and its unlikely sources. —Michel Ciment, updated by Tina Gianoulis ANGER, Kenneth Nationality: American. Born: Santa Monica, California, 1930. Ca- reer: Played changeling in Max Reinhardt’s film A Midsummer Night’s Dream, 1934; studied tap-dancing in class including Shirley Temple, 1935; completed first film, 1941; after moving to Europe, first edition of Hollywood Babylon published in France, 1959; re- turned to U.S., 1962; following destruction of his film Lucifer Rising, placed an ad in Variety ‘‘In Memoriam Kenneth Anger 1947–1967,’’ and returned to Europe, 1967; completed second version of Lucifer Rising, 1974 (released 1980). Address: c/o American Federation of Arts Film Program, 41 E. 65th St., New York, NY 10021, U.S.A. Films (Conception, Direction, Photography, and Editing): 1941 Who Has Been Rocking My Dream Boat 1941/42 Tinsel Tree 1942 Prisoner of Mars 1943 The Nest 1944 Escape Episode Kenneth Anger ANGER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 30 1945 Drastic Demise 1946 Escape Episode (sound version) 1947 Fireworks* (+ role as The Dreamer) 1948 Puce Women (unfinished) 1949 Puce Moment*; The Love That Whirls (unfinished) 1950 La Lune des Lapins* (Rabbit’s Moon) (conception, d, and ed only, + prod. design) 1951/52 Maldoror (unfinished) 1953 Eaux d’artifice* (+ costume design); Le Jeune Homme et la mort 1954 Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome* (+ role as Hecate) 1955 Thelema Abbey (conception, d, and ed only) 1962/63 Scorpio Rising* 1965 Kustom Kar Kommandos* 1969 Invocation of My Demon Brother* 1971 Rabbit’s Moon 1974 Lucifer Rising* 1980 Lucifer Rising* (second version) (+ role as Magus) 1989 Mouse Heaven Note: * indicates films contained and distributed in Anger’s definitive portfolio ‘‘The Magick Lantern Cycle.’’ Other Films: 1985 He Stands in a Desert Counting the Seconds of His Life (role as himself) 1992 Hollywood Babylon (for TV) (advisor) 1993 Jonas in the Desert (role as himself) 1998 Busby Berkeley: Going through the Roof (for TV) (role as himself); Donald Cammell: The Ultimate Performance (role as himself) Publications By ANGER: books— Hollywood Babylon, Phoenix, Arizona, 1965; reprinted San Fran- cisco, 1975. Magick Lantern Cycle: A Special Presentation in Celebration of the Equinox Spring 1966, New York, 1966. Hollywood Babylon II, New York, 1984. By ANGER: articles— Interview in Spider Magazine, v. 1, no. 13, 1965. Interview in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1966. Article in Filmmakers on Filmmaking, edited by Harry Geduld, Bloomington, Indiana, 1967. Interview with Bruce Martin and Joe Medjuck, in Take One (Montr- eal), August 1967. Interview with Lenny Lipton, in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), November 1967. Correspondence between Kenneth Anger and Paul Johnston, in Film Culture (New York), nos. 70–71, 1983. Interview with J. English, in On Film (Los Angeles), Summer 1983. Interview in City Limits (London), 7 February 1986. Interview with Alkarim Jivani, in Time Out (London), 27 Febru- ary 1991. Interview with Kate Haug, in Wide Angle (Baltimore), October 1996. On ANGER: books— Battcock, Gregory, editor, The New American Cinema, New York, 1967. Youngblood, Gene, Expanded Cinema, New York, 1970. Sitney, P. Adams, Visionary Film, New York, 1974. Hanhardt, John, and others, A History of the American Avant-Garde Cinema, New York, 1976 Haller, Robert A., Kenneth Anger, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1980. Burchfield, John, Kenneth Anger: The Shape of His Achievements, New York, n.d. O’Pray, Michael, and Jayne Pilling, Into the Pleasure Dome: The Films of Kenneth Anger, London, 1990. On ANGER: articles— ‘‘Filmography of Kenneth Anger,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 31, 1963/64. Kelman, Kenneth, ‘‘Thanatos in Chrome,’’ and P. Adams Sitney, ‘‘Imagism in Four Avant-Garde Films,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Winter 1963/64. Micha, Rene, ‘‘Le Nouveau Cinéma,’’ in Les Temps modernes (Paris), no. 214, 1964. Kelman, Kenneth, ‘‘Appendix to Thanatos in Chrome,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1964. Alexander, Thomas, ‘‘San Francisco’s Hipster Cinema,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 44, 1967. Cornwall, Regina, ‘‘On Kenneth Anger,’’ in December (New York), no. 1, 1968. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘Lucifer: A Kenneth Anger Kompendium,’’ in Cinema (Cambridge), October 1969. Sitney, P. Adams, ‘‘The Avant-Garde: Kenneth Anger and George Landow,’’ in Afterimage (Rochester, New York), no. 2, 1970. Mekas, Jonas, Richard Whitehall, and P. Adams Sitney, ‘‘Three Notes on Invocation of My Demon Brother,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Winter/Spring 1970. Magny, Joel, ‘‘Collectif jeune cinéma: 3e nuit blanche,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), April 1972. ‘‘Anger at Work,’’ in Cinema Rising, April 1972. Rowe, C., ‘‘Illuminating Lucifer,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1974. Saslow, James, ‘‘Kenneth Anger: Holding a Magick Lantern up to the Future,’’ in Advocate, 23 July 1981. Hardy, Robin, ‘‘Kenneth Anger: Master in Hell,’’ and Michael Wade, ‘‘Kenneth Anger: Personal Traditions and Satanic Pride,’’ in Body Politic, April 1982. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Sympathy for the Devil,’’ in American Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), March 1981. Wees, W. C., ‘‘Before Lucifer: Preternatural Light in the Films of Kenneth Anger,’’ in Cine-Tracts (Montreal), Summer-Fall 1982. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘The Elusive Lucifer,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), September 1982. ‘‘Kenneth Anger,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. ANTONIONIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 31 Cosgrove, S., ‘‘The Art of Scandal,’’ in New Statesman & Society, 28 September 1990. Cagle, Robert L., ‘‘Auto-eroticism: Narcissism, Fetishism, and Con- sumer Culture,’’ in Cinema Journal(Austin), Summer 1994. Joyard, Olivier, ‘‘Kenneth Anger, le ma?tre de cérémonie,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1997. Stevenson, Jack, ‘‘De laatste der onafhankelijken,’’ in Skrien (Am- sterdam), December-January 1998–1999. *** One of the key figures of the postwar American avant-garde, Kenneth Anger represents a fiercely original talent, relatively free of the independent circles and movements which his own work managed to anticipate in almost every case. Creator of an oeuvre and a persona defined by their dialectical relationship to dominant representational, ideological, industrial, sexual, and aesthetic practices, Anger embod- ies the ‘‘radical otherness’’ of the avant-garde filmmaker, casting himself not only outside the mainstream, but as its negative image. While other experimentalists were exploring ‘‘ways of seeing’’ through cinematic abstraction, Anger remained committed to a search for meanings, even as his films pursued a variety of aesthetic paths. Anger’s meanings emerge from his subversive reworkings of sources already charged with significance: the iconography of American popular culture (movie stars, comic strips, car clubs); the conven- tional rhetoric of narrative forms (from the commedia dell’arte to the lyrics of rock songs); the imagery of classic cinema (Cocteau, Eisenstein, DeMille); and the symbolism of various mythologies (Egyptian, Greek, astrological, alchemical), centered by the cosmol- ogy of master ‘‘magickian’’ Aleister Crowley. Anger gained international prominence and notoriety at the age of seventeen with his film Fireworks, in which he appeared as the protagonist of a homoerotic fantasy in the oneiric tradition of Cocteau and Maya Deren, shot through with the romantic sadism of the American film noir. Three years later, he made Rabbit’s Moon, a delicately humorous, Méliès-like fantasy involving a Pierrot charac- ter and a magic lantern, shot in Cocteau’s own studio in Paris. Another three years found Anger in Italy, where he choreographed an elabo- rately baroque game of hide-and-seek through Tivoli’s water gardens in Eaux d’artifice. Focusing at intervals on the visual patterns of water flowing from the fountains, this film experiments with the textures of an abstract filmic image a full two years before Brakhage’s Wonder Ring. Yet, characteristically, the multiple superimpositions of Anger’s colorful mass/masquerade Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome have less to do with abstraction than with an effort to achieve a magical condensation of mythological imagery. Scorpio Rising, however, remains Anger’s most influential and original work. A tour-de-force collage of pop imagery, it is a paean to the American motorcyclist, a revelation of the violent, homoerotic undercurrent of American culture, and a celebration of the forces of chaos in the universe. Anger spent most of the mid- to late-1960s on two abortive projects. His Kustom Kar Kommandos was cut short by the death of the young man playing its protagonist, although one sensual se- quence, involving the dusting of a custom hot rod with a powder puff, has survived. Far more ambitious, however, was a master opus titled Lucifer Rising, a project cut tragically short when, at a 1967 San Francisco screening of the work-in-progress, the single print of the film was stolen by one of the film’s actors, Manson cultist Bobby Beausoleil, and was supposedly buried somewhere in Death Valley, never to be recovered. This event was followed by Anger’s self- imposed retirement, interrupted in 1969 by the appearance of an eleven-minute structural black mass constructed largely of Lucifer’s outtakes, backed by a maddeningly monotonous soundtrack by Mick Jagger, and titled Invocation of My Demon Brother. By 1974, however, Anger had completed another version of Lucifer Rising, a dense meditative work shot mostly in Egypt, imbued with Crowleian mysticism and most memorable for the thoroughly uncanny image of a pinkish flying saucer hovering above the pyramids. The far more complete version finally released by Anger in 1980 marks a quantum leap in terms of Lucifer Rising’s complexity, and remains the chef- d’oeuvre of Anger’s career. —Ed Lowry ANTONIONI, Michelangelo Nationality: Italian. Born: Ferrara, Italy, 29 September 1912. Fam- ily: Married 1) Letizia Balboni, 1942; 2) Enrica Antonioni, 1986. Education: Studied at University of Bologna, 1931–35, and at Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografica, Rome, 1940–41. Career: Journal- ist and bank teller, 1935–39; moved to Rome, 1939; film critic for Cinema (Rome) and others, 1940–49; assistant director on I due Foscari (Fulchignoni), 1942; wrote screenplays for Rossellini, Fellini, and others, 1942–52; directed first film, Gente del Po, 1943 (released 1947). Awards: Special Jury Prize, Cannes Festival, for L’avventura, 1960, and L’eclisse, 1962; FIPRESCI Award from Venice Festival, for Il deserto Rosso, 1964; Best Director Award, National Society of Film Critics, for Blow-Up, 1966; Palme d’Or, Cannes Festival, for Blow-Up, 1967; Academy Award for Lifetime Achievement in Film, 1995. Address: Via Vicenzo Tiberio 18, Rome, Italy. Films as Director: 1950 Cronaca di un amore (Story of a Love Affair) (+ co-sc) 1952 I Vinti (I nostri figli; The Vanquished) (+ co-sc) 1953 La signora senza camelie (Camille without Camelias) (+ co-sc); ‘‘Tentato suicidio’’ episode of L’Amore in città (+ sc) 1955 Le amiche (The Girlfriends) (+ co-sc) 1957 Il grido (The Outcry) (+ co-sc) 1959 L’avventura (+ co-sc) 1960 La notte (The Night) (+ co-sc) 1962 L’eclisse (The Eclipse) (+ co-sc) 1964 Deserto rosso (Red Desert) (+ co-sc) 1965 ‘‘Prefizione’’ episode of Tre Volti (+ sc) 1966 Blow-Up (+ co-sc) 1970 Zabriskie Point (+ co-sc) 1972 Chung Kuo (La cina) (+ sc) 1975 Professione: Reporter (The Passenger) (+ co-sc) 1979 Il mistero di Oberwald (The Oberwald Mystery) (+ sc) 1982 Identificazione di una donna (+ sc) 1989 Kumbha Mela; Roma ‘90 1992 Noto—Mandorli—Vulcano—Stromboli—Carnevale 1995 Beyond the Clouds (+ sc, ed) 2000 Destinazione Verna (+ co-sc, pr) ANTONIONI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 32 Short Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1947 Gente del Po 1948 N.U. (Nettezza urbana); Roma—Montevideo; Oltre l’oblio 1949 L’amorosa menzogna; Bomarzo; Superstizione; Ragazze in bianco 1950 Sette canne e un vestito; La villa dei mostri; La funivia del Faloria; Uomini in piú Other Films: 1984 Chambre 666 (role as himself) 1995 Making a Film for Me Is Living (role as himself) 1998 Liv (pr) Publications By ANTONIONI: books— La Nuit: La Notte, with Tonino Guerra and E. Flaiano, Paris, 1961. L’eclisse, with Tonino Guerra and E. Bartolini, Capelli, 1962. Screenplays by Michelangelo Antonioni, New York, 1963. Michelangelo Antonioni, Rome, 1964. Blow-Up, with Tonino Guerra, Turin, 1968; New York, 1971. L’Avventura, with E. Bartolini, New York, 1969; New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1989. Il Primo Antonioni (screenplays or working scripts for early Antonioni documentaries and films), edited by Carlo di Carlo, Bologna, 1973. Il mistero di Oberwald, Turin, 1980. That Bowling Alley on the Tiber: Tales of a Director, Oxford, 1986. By ANTONIONI: articles— ‘‘Brevario del cinema,’’ in Cinema (Rome), nos. 11, 16, 20, 37, 41, 1949. ‘‘Le allegre ragazze del ‘24,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Turin), 1956. ‘‘There Must Be a Reason for Every Film,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1959. Interview with M. Manceaux and Richard Roud, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1960/61. Interview with André Labarthe, in New York Film Bulletin, no. 8, 1961. ‘‘Reflections on a Film Career,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 22–23, 1961. ‘‘Eroticism—The Disease of Our Age,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January 1961. ‘‘La malattia dei sentimenti,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), February- March 1961. ‘‘Making a Film Is My Way of Life,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1962. ‘‘The Event and the Image,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Win- ter 1963/64. ‘‘What Directors Are Saying,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), September/ October 1969. ‘‘Conversazione con Michelangelo Antonioni,’’ in Filmcritica (Rome), March 1975. ‘‘Antonioni after China: Art versus Science,’’ interview with Gideon Bachmann, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1975. ‘‘Antonioni Speaks . . . and Listens,’’ interview with R. Epstein, in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1975. ‘‘Antonioni and the Two-Headed Monster,’’ interview with J. F. Lane, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1979/80. Antonioni, Michelangelo, ‘‘Il ‘big bang’ della nascita di un film,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), December 1981. Interview with Gideon Bachman, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1983. Interview with F. Tomasulo, in On Film (Los Angeles), Fall 1984. ‘‘Michelangelo critico cinematografico (1935–1949),’’ edited by Aldo Tassone, in Bianco e Nero (Rome), July-September 1985. ‘‘Quel big-bang con cui esplose lo spazio,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), January/February 1987. ‘‘Entretien avec Michelangelo Antonioni,’’ in Camera/Stylo (Paris), December 1989. On ANTONIONI: books— Carpi, Fabio, Michelangelo Antonioni, Parma, 1958. Cowie, Peter, Antonioni, Bergman, Resnais, New York, 1963. Leprohon, Pierre, Michelangelo Antonioni: An Introduction, New York, 1963. Taylor, John Russell, Cinema Eye, Cinema Ear, New York, 1964. Strick, Philip, Antonioni, London, 1965. Sarris, Andrew, Interviews with Film Directors, New York, 1967. Cameron, Ian, and Robin Wood, Antonioni, New York, 1969. Huss, Roy, editor, Focus on ‘‘Blow-Up,’’ Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1971. Samuels, Charles Thomas, Encountering Directors, New York, 1972. Rifkin, Ned, Antonioni’s Visual Language, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1982. Barthes, Roland, and others, Michelangelo Antonioni, Munich, 1984. Biarese, Cesare, and Aldo Tassone, I film di Michelangelo Antonioni, Rome, 1985. Chatman, Seymour, Antonioni; or, The Surface of the World, Berke- ley, 1985. Dervin, Daniel, Through a Freudian Lens Deeply: A Psychoanalysis of Cinema, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1985. Mancini, Michele, and Giuseppe Perrella, Michelangelo: Architec- ture in Vision, Rome, 1986. Perry, Ted, and René Prieto, Michelangelo Antonioni: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1986. Tinazzi, Giorgio di, Michelangelo Antonioni, Firenze, 1989. Cuccu, Lorenzo, Antonioni: il discorso dello sguardo: da Blow-Up a Identificazione di una donna, Pisa, 1990. Giaume, Jo??lle Mayet, Michelangelo Antonioni: le fil intéérieur, Crisnée, Belgium, 1990. Ranieri, Nicola, Amor vacui: il cinema di Michelangelo Antonioni, Chieti, 1990. Rohdie, Sam, Antonioni, London, 1990. Michelangelo Antonioni, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Margarethe von Trotta, Zurich, 1991. Prédal, René, Michelangelo Antonioni, ou, La vigilance du désir, Paris, 1991. Kock, Bernhard, Michelangelo Antonionis Bilderwelt: eine ph?nomenologische Studie, München, 1994. Arrowsmith, William, Antonioni: The Poet of Images, New York, 1995. Cuccu, Lorenzo, Antonioni: il discorso dello sguardo e altri saggi, Pisa, 1997. ANTONIONIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 33 Brunette, Peter, The Films of Michelangelo Antonioni, Cambridge, 1998. Scemama-Heard, Céline, Antonioni: le désert figuré, Paris, 1998. On ANTONIONI articles— Bollero, Marcello, ‘‘Il documentario: Michelangelo Antonioni,’’ in Sequenze (Italy), December 1949. Cavallaro, Giambattista, ‘‘Michelangelo Antonioni, simbolo di una generazione,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), September 1957. Renzi, Renzo, ‘‘Cronache del l’angoscia in Michelangelo Antonioni,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Turin), May/June 1959. Roud, Richard, ‘‘Michelangelo Antonioni: Five Films,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1960/61. Kauffmann, Stanley, ‘‘Arrival of an Artist,’’ in the New Republic (New York), 10 April 1961. Pepper, C. F., ‘‘Rebirth in Italy: Three Great Movie Directors,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 10 July 1961. Special Issue of Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1962. ‘‘Antonioni issue’’ of Seventh Art (New York), Spring 1963. Barthelme, Donald, ‘‘L’lapse,’’ in the New Yorker, 2 March 1963. Gerard, L. N., ‘‘Antonioni,’’ in Films in Review (New York), April 1963. ‘‘Michelangelo Antonioni: l’homme et l’objet,’’ in Etudes Cinématographiques (Paris), no. 36–37, 1964. Houston, Penelope, ‘‘Keeping up with the Antonionis,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1964. Garis, R., ‘‘Watching Antonioni,’’ in Commentary (New York), April 1967. Kinder, Marsha, ‘‘Antonioni in Transit,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Summer 1967. Simon, J., and others, ‘‘Antonioni: What’s the Point,’’ in Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Spring 1970. Gow, Gordon, ‘‘Antonioni Men,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1970. Hernacki, T., ‘‘Michelangelo Antonioni and the Imagery of Disinte- gration,’’ in Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Fall 1970. Lane, J. F., ‘‘Antonioni Discovers China,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1973. Strick, Philip, ‘‘Antonioni Report,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1973/74. Renzi, Renzo, ‘‘Antonioni nelle vesti del drago bianco,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Turin), May/June 1974. Bachmann, Gideon, ‘‘Antonioni Down Under,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 4, 1976. Burke, F., ‘‘The Natural Enmity of Words and Moving Images: Language, La notte, and the Death of the Light,’’ in Literature/ Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), no. 1, 1979. Barthes, Roland, ‘‘Lettre à Antonioni,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1980. Special Issue of Camera/Stylo (Paris), November 1982. ‘‘Antonioni Section’’ of Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1982. ‘‘Antonioni Section’’ of Positif (Paris), January 1983. Ranvaud, Don, ‘‘Chronicle of a Career: Michelangelo Antonioni in Context,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), March 1983. Aristarco, G., ‘‘Notes on Michelangelo Antonioni,’’ and A. Graham, ‘‘The Phantom Self,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylva- nia), Fall 1984. Casetti, Francesco, ‘‘Antonioni and Hitchcock: Two Strategies of Narrative Investment,’’ SubStance (Madison, Wisconsin), vol. 15, no. 3, 1986. ‘‘Michelangelo Antonioni,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Lev, Peter, ‘‘Blow-Up, Swinging London, and the Film Generation,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 17, no. 2, 1989. Jousse, Thierry, and others, ‘‘Antonini, l’homme invisible,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1992. Walker, Beverly, ‘‘Michelangelo and the Leviathan,’’ in Film Com- ment (New York), September-October 1992. Moore, K.Z., ‘‘Eclipsing the Commonplace: The Logic of Alienation in Antonioni’s Cinema,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Sum- mer 1995. Nowell-Smith, Geoffrey, ‘‘Antonioni,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), December 1995. Hattendorf, Manfred, ‘‘Der Rest ist Nebel,’’ in Film-dienst (Co- logne), 30 January 1996. Chatman, Seymour, ‘‘Antonioni in 1980,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berke- ley), Fall 1997. Schliesser, John, ‘‘Antonioni’s Heideggerian Swerve,’’ in Literature/ Film Quarterly (Salisbury), October 1998. *** Michelangelo Antonioni’s cinema is one of non-identification and displacement. In almost all of his films shots can be found whose striking emphasis on visual structure works in opposition to the spectator’s desire to identify, as in classical Hollywood cinema, with either a protagonist’s existential situation or with anything like a seamless narrative continuity—the ‘‘impression of reality’’ so often evoked in conjunction with the effect of fiction films on the spectator. Since his first feature, Cronaca di un amore, Antonioni’s intro- duction of utterly autonomous, graphically stunning shots into the film’s narrative flow has gradually expanded to the point where, in Professione: Reporter, but even more emphatically in Il mistero di Oberwald and Identificazione di una donna, the unsettling effect of these discrete moments in the narrative continuity of the earlier work has taken over entirely. If these graphically autonomous shots of Antonioni’s films of the fifties and sixties functioned as striking ‘‘figures’’ which unsettled the ‘‘ground’’ of narrative continuity, his latest films undo altogether this opposition between form and content, technique and substance, in order to spread the strangeness of the previously isolated figure across the entirety of the film which will thus emphatically establish itself as a ‘‘text.’’ That which might at first seem to mark a simple inversion of this opposition—where narrative substance would take a back seat to formal technique—instead works to question, in a broad manner, the ways in which films establish themselves as fictions. Antonioni’s cinema strains the traditional conventions defining fiction films to the breaking point where, beginning at least as early as Professione: Reporter, those aspects always presumed to define what is ‘‘given’’ or ‘‘specific’’ or ‘‘proper’’ to film (which are commonly grouped together under the general heading of ‘‘technique’’) find themselves explicitly incorporated into the overall fabric of the film’s narration; technique finds itself drawn into that which it supposedly presents neutrally, namely, the film’s fictional universe. One might name this strategy the fictionalization of technique. Such a strategy, however, is anything but self-reflexive, nor does it bear upon the thematics of Antonioni’s films. In even those films APTED DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 34 where the protagonist has something to do with producing images, narratives, or other works of art (the filmmaker of La signora senza camelie, the architect of L’avventura, the novelist of La notte, the photographer of Blow-Up, the television reporter of Professione: Reporter, the poet of Il mistero di Oberwald, and the film director of Identificazione di una donna), their professions remain important only on the level of the film’s drama, never in terms of its technique. It is as though the image of the artist were trapped in a world where self- reflection is impossible. Indeed, one common strand linking the thematics of all of Antonioni’s films—the impossibility for men to communicate with women—might be seen to illustrate, on the level of drama, the kind of communicational impasse to be found on the level of ‘‘technique’’ in his cinema. Though his films are far from ‘‘experimental’’ in the sense of the work of Hollis Frampton, Michael Snow, or Andy Warhol, Antonioni’s fictional narratives always feel flattened or, to borrow a term from Roland Barthes, they seem curiously mat, as if the spectator’s ability to gain immediate access to the fiction were being impeded by something. Antonioni’s films, then, are not simply ‘‘about’’ the cinema, but rather, in attempting to make films which always side-step the commonplace or the conventional (modes responsible for spectatorial identification and the ‘‘impression of reality’’), they call into question what is taken to be a ‘‘language’’ of cinema by constructing a kind of textual idiolect which defies comparison with any other film, even Antonioni’s other films. This may at least in part account for the formidable strangeness and difficulty of Antonioni’s work, not just for general audiences but for mainstream critics as well. One con- stantly has the impression that the complexity of his films requires years in the cellar of critical speculation before it is ready to be understood; a film that is initially described as sour and flat ends up ten years later, as in the case of L’avventura, being proclaimed one of the ten best films of all time (‘‘International Critics Poll,’’ Sight and Sound). To judge from the reception in the United States of his most recent work, it appears that we are still at least ten years behind Antonioni. As Antonioni has himself stressed repeatedly, the dramatic or the narrative aspect of his films—telling a story in the manner of literary narrative—comes to be of less and less importance; frequently, this is manifested by an absurd and complete absence of dramatic plausibil- ity (Zabriskie Point, Professione: Reporter, Il mistero di Oberwald). The nonverbal logic of what remain narrative films depends, Antonioni says, upon neither a conceptual nor emotional organization: ‘‘Some people believe I make films with my head; a few others think they come from the heart; for my part, I feel as though I make them with my stomach.’’ —Kimball Lockhart APTED, Michael Nationality: British. Born: Aylesbury, England, 10 February 1941; son of Ronald William and Frances Amelia (Thomas) Apted. Educa- tion: Downing College, Cambridge University, B.A., 1961. Family: Married Joan, 9 July 1966; children: Paul, James. Career: Researcher, director, and producer for Granada television, London, 1960s; direc- tor, Strawberry Fields, National Theatre, London, 1978; executive producer, Crossroads (C. C. Riders) TV series, ABC, 1992. Awards: TV Critics Award, for best play, for Another Sunday and Sweet F.A., 1972; TV Critics Award, for best play, SFTA award for best director, both for Kisses at Fifty, 1974; International Emmy, for The Collec- tion, 1976; British Academy Award, for 28 Up, 1984. Address: Osiris Films, 300 South Lorimar, Building 137, Burbank, CA 91505, U.S.A. Agent: Mike Marcus, Creative Artists Agency, 9830 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1968 Number 10 (for TV); Your Name’s Not God, It’s Edgar (for TV); Big Breadwinner Hog (for TV) 1969 In a Cottage Hospital (for TV) 1970 Don’t Touch Him, He Might Resent It (for TV); Slattery’s Mounted Foot (for TV); The Day They Buried Cleaver (for TV) 1971 Big Soft Nellie (for TV); The Mosedale Horseshoe (for TV); One Thousand Pounds for Rosebud (for TV) 1972 Another Sunday and Sweet F.A. (for TV); Joy (for TV); Said the Preacher (for TV); The Style of the Countess (for TV); The Reporters (for TV); Buggins’ Ermine (for TV) 1973 Triple Echo (Soldier in Skirts); High Kampf (for TV); Jack Point (for TV) 1974 Stardust; Kisses at Fifty (for TV); Poor Girl (for TV); A Great Day for Bonzo (Childhood) (for TV) 1975 Wednesday Love (for TV) 1976 The Squeeze; 21 (for TV); The Collection (for TV) 1977 Stronger than the Sun (for TV) 1978 Agatha 1980 Coal Miner’s Daughter 1981 Continental Divide 1983 Kipperbang (P’Tang Yang, Kipperbang); Gorky Park 1984 28 Up (for TV) (+ pr); First Run Features; First Born; The River Rat (+ exec pr) 1985 Bring on the Night 1986 Critical Condition 1988 Gorillas in the Mist 1989 The Long Way Home (for TV) 1991 Class Action; 35 Up (for TV) (+ pr, sc) 1992 Thunderheart; Incident at Oglala 1994 Blink; Nell; Moving the Mountain 1996 Extreme Measures 1997 Inspirations (+ pr) 1998 Always Outnumbered (for TV); 42: Forty Two Up (+ pr) 1999 Me & Isaac Newton; The World Is Not Enough; Nathan Dixon (for TV) 2000 Enigma Other Films: 1985 Spies like Us (role as Ace Tomato agent) 1990 Criminal Justice (co-exec pr) (for TV) 1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula (co-exec pr); Intruders: They Are among Us (mini, for TV) (exec pr); Murder without Motive: The Edmund Perry Story (Best Intentions: The Education and Killing of Edmund Perry) (co-exec pr) (mini, for TV); Age 7 in America (7 up in America) (for TV) (pr) APTEDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 35 Michael Apted 1993 Strapped (for TV) (exec pr) 1994 A Personal History if British Cinema by Stephen Frears (for TV) (role as himself) 1998 14 Up in America (for TV) (exec pr) 1999 The James Bond Story (role as himself) Publications By APTED: articles— With Alan Parker, ‘‘One on One. Michael Apted and Alan Parker,’’ in American Film (Marion, Ohio), vol. 15, no. 12, September 1990. Interview with F. Arnold, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), vol. 9, no. 9, September 1992. ‘‘Michael Apted and the Documentary Heartbeat,’’ interview with Vincent DeVeau, in DGA (Los Angeles), vol. 19, no. 6, Decem- ber-January 1994–1995. Chaudhuri, Anita, ‘‘Mother Nurture,’’ in Time Out (London), no. 1280, 1 March 1995. On APTED: articles— Roddick, N., ‘‘Michael Apted: Van dondon naar Hollywood, van televisie naar bioscoop,’’ in Skoop, vol. 22, no. 1, February 1986. Maude, C., ‘‘True to Life,’’ in Time Out (London), no. 1088, 26 June 1991. Pede, R., ‘‘Gorillas in the Mist, Apted uit di mouw,’’ in Film and Televisie (Brussels), no. 389, October 1989. Interview, September, 1991. *** Classic Hollywood, with its contract personnel and assembly-line approach to film production, no doubt encouraged directors to be craftsmen rather than artists. Certainly, studio workers with no pretensions to what would later be called auteurship could be counted on to do a competent, occasionally inspired job with scripts and performers of many different types. This cadre of professionals on which all five majors depended regularly turned out films that would make back their negative costs and perhaps turn a small profit at the APTED DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 36 box office. Since American film production became largely indepen- dent with the demise of the studio system in the 1960s, not many directors have been satisfied with this traditional hack role, despite the benefits it could bring. For flexibility and steady diligence are qualities that are useful in sustaining a career in an era of more limited feature production. Michael Apted is an instructive case in point of how well such a strategy can work. Apted came to Hollywood in 1979 after a pro- lific, mildly celebrated stint as a director of features and documenta- ries for British Granada Television. Like some actors eager for steady employment (Michael Caine and Gene Hackman come to mind), Apted, since leaving Britain, has signed on to a variety of projects in order to practice his craft regularly. In part, his career is defined by his generally satisfactory, occasionally excellent handling of mainstream fiction film projects. Apted, however, is not just a very competent hack. He has remained faithful to an artistic vision as well, which was nurtured by his television work. In fact, his ordinary commercial projects have made it possible for him to continue working as a documentarist. Apted’s debut effort for Hollywood was an unusual project, Agatha, a mystery about that most enigmatic of mystery writers, Agatha Christie. Saddled with a full-of-holes plot by writers Kathleen Tynan and Arthur Hopcraft, Apted proved unable to make much sense of this women’s picture story (the famed novelist disappears, only to experience an exciting, brief fling with an American newspa- perman). However, he did a commendable job with coaching layered performances from the two leads, the unexpected combination of Dustin Hoffman and Vanessa Redgrave. Predictably, Apted was at his most competent with the detailed recreation of 1920s Britain, espe- cially the lush interiors of luxury hotels. Interestingly, several other of Apted’s Hollywood films are stud- ies in enigmatic, powerful women. Gorillas in the Mist traces the conversion of biologist Dian Fossey into an African conservationist who goes back to nature to study the primates with whom she becomes obsessed. Once again, Apted does a fine job merging Hollywood fakery (i.e., men in gorilla suits, studio sets) with the real thing (much of the film was made, in grueling fashion, on scene in Rwanda). Apted is sensitive to the twists and turns of this ultimately tragic story, including Fossey’s suicidal opposition to the natives in general and poachers in particular, who are trying to kill ‘‘her’’ gorillas. Like these two others films, Coal Miner’s Daughter is part woman’s picture, part biographical picture, for the main character is here again a ‘‘real’’ person, country singer Loretta Lynn. More than is the case in either Agatha or Gorillas, however, Loretta Lynn’s story is melodramatized in the customary TV docudrama style. Her rise to stardom is fueled by the assistance of a mentor, the unselfish singer Patsy Cline, and the relentless, self-serving promo- tion of a no-good husband, appropriately named Doolittle. Yet Lynn’s success, adroitly evoked by Sissy Spacek’s endearing performance and excellent singing, goes beyond the power of others to instruct and direct. Even Doolittle’s alcoholism and her own depression cannot derail her career, though the film seems cautionary in its depiction of the problems success creates for her personal and family life. Nell likewise focuses on an unusual woman, a girl who has grown up in savage isolation in the woodland home where her mother’s death has stranded her. Discovered by a physician and a psychologist, Nell is first a ‘‘case,’’ only later to be seen by the scientifically oriented professionals as a human being with her own needs and rights, including the opportunity to keep herself distant from civilization. This Rousseauean point is made with perhaps more sophistication in Truffaut’s quite similar The Wild Child, but Apted’s treatment is, if predictably heartwarming, effective nonetheless. Much the same could be said about Firstborn, which probes the effects on her children of a recently divorced woman’s rebound relationship with a charming sociopath. Both these films, in the manner of docudrama, are short on coherent plot, even as they focus on suitably affecting moments of emotional crisis. Given the enduring popularity of the form in the 1980s and 1990s, it is hardly surprising that Apted has tried his hand at thrillers as well as the contemporary woman’s picture. Gorky Park, Extreme Meas- ures, and Blink collectively demonstrate that he has little talent in either managing a narrative of generically predictable twists and turns or sustaining suspense and interest from beginning to end. In all three of these films, Apted seems uncertain whether to treat the story seriously (which would have been a smart choice with the intricate web of intrigue Martin Cruz Smith weaves in the novel version of Gorky Park) or, in the Hitchcockian manner, use it as a disposable McGuffin and concentrate on the sophisticated management of spectator emotions. In contrast, Apted’s several treatments of male and female man- ners, slick updatings of the classic screwball comedy, have been more generally successful. Continental Divide features a hard-bitten jour- nalist who is both ‘‘greened’’ and charmed by his encounter with a reclusive ornithologist high in the Rockies. As his pride is humbled, her prejudice gives way to admiration and affection. Married at the end, they decide, however, to live apart and pursue their separate careers. Here Apted makes the most of Lawrence Kasdan’s somewhat prosaic and unimaginative script. Class Action, with its courtroom opposition of old left-wing father and modern corporate daughter, recalls several Spencer Tracy-Katharine Hepburn pairings of the 1940s and offers an entertaining dramatization of contemporary mores. Critical Condition is a Richard Pryor vehicle that, despite some interesting comment on the dubious distinction between sane and crazy behavior, proves generally unfunny. More interesting from the point of view of cinema history perhaps is Apted’s continuing work as a documentarist. In 1963, he was part of a huge sociological project undertaken by Granada Television, the interviewing of a cross-section of British seven-year olds with a view toward demonstrating the effects of social class on the directions their lives would assume. Updatings were undertaken by Granada at the fourteen and twenty-one year point, while Apted has assumed direc- tion of the commercially released segments done at ages twenty-eight and thirty-five for the group. In those two films, 28 Up and 35 Up, Apted acts as the interviewer, showing no little talent for asking the questions that, with wit and perspicacity, often go directly to the heart of the matter. The traditional left-wing politics of the project (which was con- ceived to demonstrate that in the middle of the ‘‘swinging London’’ era that class still mattered in the ‘‘new’’ Britain) are very much Apted’s own, as his two other principal documentary films show. Conceived and financed by Robert Redford, Incident at Oglala examines the controversial case of Leonard Peltier, a Sioux activist convicted of murdering two FBI agents at the Oglala Reservation. The film is a tendentious, quite convincing marshaling of evidence that Peltier was framed for the crime by the FBI and thus improperly imprisoned. Thunderheart, a fiction film project conceived and produced by Robert De Niro, yet another marquee supporter of the movement for Native American justice, was likewise directed by Apted, with special permission from the tribe, on the same reserva- tion. The plot is thin, a predictable thriller with a man of divided ARAKIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 37 loyalty (an FBI agent of Indian blood) at its center; here the main interest lies in Apted’s expert evocation of a way of life fallen on disastrously hard times. Much the same praise may be accorded Apted’s second most impressive documentarian project Moving the Mountain, a meticulously detailed account of the student democracy movement in China that culminated in the Tian An Men square massacre in 1989. Bring on the Night shows that Apted can deal effectively with lighter material as well, in this case rock star Sting’s attempt to create a band with jazz musicians after the demise of The Police. —R. Barton Palmer ARAKI, Gregg Nationality: American. Education: Attended college in Santa Bar- bara, California. Career: Made first feature film, Three Bewildered People in the Night, for $5,000 in 1987. Address: Lives in Los Angeles. Films as Director: 1987 Three Bewildered People in the Night 1989 Long Weekend (o’ Despair) 1992 The Living End (+ ed, sc, cine) 1993 Totally F***ed Up (+ ed, sc, pr, cine) Gregg Araki 1995 The Doom Generation (+ed, sc, pr) 1997 Nowhere (+ed, sc, pr) 1999 Splendor (+ed, sc, pr) Publications By ARAKI: articles— ‘‘Absorbing Alternative,’’ an interview with Chris Chang, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1994. ‘‘The (Not So) Totally F***ked up Gregg Araki,’’ in Suspect Culture (Toronto), Fall 1994. ‘‘Young, Beautiful, and F***ed,’’ an interview with Matthew L. Severson, in Bright Lights (Cincinnati), vol. 15, 1995. Interview with Bérénice Reynaud, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1995. On ARAKI: articles— Ansen, David, ‘‘The Living End,’’ in Newsweek, 31 August 1992. Ehrenstein, David, ‘‘Gay Film’s Bad Boy,’’ in Advocate, 8 Septem- ber 1992. Minkowitz, Donna, ‘‘A Milieu of Misogyny,’’ in Advocate, 3 No- vember 1992. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Totally F***ed Up,’’ in New York Times, 14 Octo- ber 1993. Yutani, Kimberly, ‘‘Gregg Araki and the Queer New Wave,’’ in Amerasia Journal, Winter 1994. Corliss, Richard, ‘‘The Doom Generation,’’ in Time, 6 Novem- ber 1995. Moran, James M., ‘‘Gregg Araki: Guerrilla Film-maker for a Queer Generation,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1996. Kuznecov, S., ‘‘Tri cveta pokolenija sudnogo djja,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), January 1997. *** Of the heterogeneous group of young gay filmmakers currently lumped together under the term ‘‘New Queer Cinema,’’ Gregg Araki is arguably the most challenging and audacious. The very titles of the three films that have received a limited theatrical release and secured him a reputation (The Living End, Totally F***ed Up, The Doom Generation) suggest the impulses that drive his work: anger, despera- tion, a sense of imminent apocalypse, a passionate and reckless romanticism. A possible motto for his work might be the famous line ‘‘Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.’’ The films have been labeled ‘‘nihilistic.’’ To anyone truly alive to the realities of contemporary life (not only gay life), they might equally be found inspirational. Nihilism means a belief in nothing; it should never be confused with pessimism. Araki’s passionate commitment to his characters (‘‘totally f***ed up’’ as their lives may be) is anything but nihilistic. Araki’s aesthetic allegiances are clear already in The Living End: its subtitle, ‘‘An Irresponsible Movie,’’ refers (if somewhat esoteri- cally) to Hawks’s Bringing up Baby, but the most obvious influence is Godard—the early, anarchic Godard of Breathless, who also lost no opportunity (as both critic and filmmaker) to express his commitment ARCAND DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 38 to the more subversive of the Hollywood genres. The film also introduces the themes (‘‘radical’’ in every sense of the word) that propel Araki’s work: gay life in the age of AIDS, human life at the end of western civilization. The question, What can one still find to live for in a world in which there really is ‘‘nothing left to lose’’?, generates the extraordinary fury, intensity, and desperate humor of this film and its successors. Just as The Living End can be seen as a loose remake of (or gay variant on) Breathless, so Totally F***ed Up (the asterisks are Araki’s, not imposed by censorship) relates structurally to Masculin, Féminin. But Araki’s characters are no longer ‘‘the children of Marx and Coca-Cola’’: they inhabit the desolate landscape of America in the 1990s, where Marx is not available, consumerism has over- whelmed the culture, concepts no longer apply, and the only fragile hope lies in the precarious and elusive possibility of an ever-more- vulnerable human contact. The Doom Generation (subtitled ‘‘A Heterosexual Movie,’’ it could only have been made by a gay director) is Araki’s most fully achieved statement to date. Because he does not make overt political statements, one should not assume that his films have no political meaning. Apocalypse is expressed in The Doom Generation not only in the running gag of every storekeeper charging $6.66, or in the ‘‘Welcome to Hell’’ of the opening. It is there in the fleeting landscapes through which the characters pass: the clouds of smoke, the graveyard of wrecked cars—the destructiveness and detritus of Capitalism. Araki himself has drawn a comparison (favorable, and quite rightly) between his film and Kids. Larry Clark’s kids are mainly treated as passive objects for his gaze, the gaze expressing simultaneous desire and repugnance. Araki identifies with his kids up to the hilt, without ever glamorizing or idealizing them. He knows and they know that they are living near the endpoint of the decline of western civilization, that they have no viable future and nowhere to go (his next film is titled Nowhere), but he loves them, believes in their impulses, and allows them authentically to find each other, while Clark’s kids just meanly manipulate. Araki himself has insisted that the film is not nihilistic. Nihilism is what Capitalism has brought us to, and a stand against it is becoming increasingly problematic, but Araki (the true rebel, unlike, say, Lynch and Tarantino, whose alleged ‘‘audacities’’ merely reinforce contem- porary alienation) is exempt from it. The Doom Generation actually achieves, immediately before the climactic bloodbath, the realization of a utopian sexuality: the three characters, having progressively cast off all the bourgeois constraints and inhibitions (including, impor- tantly, squeamishness about bodily functions), have by the end of the film not only all fallen in love with each other but are able to accept the fact, without jealousy or possessiveness. The essentially obsolete patriarchal notion that fidelity can or should be judged in terms of sex finally disintegrates. The culminating bloodbath (the most terrifying I have ever seen, perhaps deriving from, but outdoing, the murder at the end of Looking for Mr. Goodbar), whatever the narrative motivation, seems precipi- tated by the image of the three having sex together, two males, one female, each loving the other two: the image of the not-to-be- tolerated. The bloodbath itself juxtaposes two images of ‘‘America.’’ As a prelude to the castration and murder of Jordan/James Duval (one of the sweetest and most touching characters in modern cinema), the gang of healthy all-American boys displays the American flag and plays ‘‘Stars and Stripes Forever’’ on a ghetto-blaster; these are presented as mere empty signifiers, long ago drained of all substance, relics of an always dubious patriotism that has lost whatever meaning it once had, reduced to a pretext for malicious violence, the mindless crushing out of any sign of new life, of the possible future toward which the film has moved. Against this is set Araki’s America, exemplified in the essential purity of his three transgressive charac- ters: Xavier Red, Jordan White, Amy Blue—a possible future the past is committed to stamping out, an America that might have been. The Doom Generation was clearly a hard act to follow, its ending marking a terrible finality. Araki’s work since has been, so far, perhaps inevitably, disappointing. Nowhere is precisely where his next film takes us: extremely complicated beside the pared-down directness of the previous films, relentlessly inventive in its multi- character plot and its elaborate set design and color-schemes, the impression it leaves is of emptiness, as if all the passion and rage of the early films had been spent, leaving only a kind of decorative doodling. The Doom Generation created its own world, but that world existed in relation to the actualities of contemporary so-called civili- zation; the world of Nowhere is determinedly hermetic, all outside reality excluded. Splendor marks a return to the three-character film, but, despite its amiable actors and its efforts to be disarming, it is ultimately even more discouraging. Explicitly based on classic screw- ball comedy (remaking Design for Living but drawing more widely on screwball conventions, such as the heroine rescued at the altar from the ‘‘wrong’’ marriage), its relation to its sources is essentially parasitic. Where The Living End and The Doom Generation used Bringing up Baby creatively, as a source of inspiration, Splendor merely reuses conventions that have lost their force. But most artists go through relatively arid stretches; the early works have lost none of their resonance with time, and their achievement gives one faith in Araki’s capacity for renewal. —Robin Wood ARCAND, Denys Nationality: Canadian. Born: Deschambault, Quebec, 25 June 1941. Education: University of Montreal, M.A., 1963. Career: National Film Board of Canada, St. Laurent, Quebec, documentary filmmaker, beginning 1963; director of television miniseries Empire, Inc., 1982; creator of television commercials. Awards: FIPRESCI (International Federation of Cinematographic Press) Prize from Cannes Interna- tional Film Festival, 1986, for Le Declin de l’empire americain; special jury prize from Cannes International Film Festival, and Ecumenical Prize from the World Council on Churches, both 1989, for Jesus de Montreal. Films as Director: 1962 Seul ou avec d’autres 1964 Champlain (+ sc); Samuel de Champlain: Québec 1603 (+ sc) 1965 La Route de l’Ouest (+ sc) 1966 Volleyball (+ ed) 1972 Québec: Duplessis et après. . . (Québec: Duplessis and After. . . ) (+ ed, ph); La Maudite galette (Dirty Money) (ro as Detective) 1973 Réjeanne Padovani (+ sc, ed) 1974 Gina (+ ed) ARCANDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 39 1976 On est au coton (Cotton Mill, Treadmill ) 1982 Le Confort et l’indifférence (Comfort and Indifference, Québec et aprés) 1984 Le Crime d’Ovide Plouffe (The Crime of Ovide Plouffe, Murder in the Family) (+ sc) 1985 Murder in the Family (mini—for TV) 1986 Le Déclin de l’empire américain (The Decline of the Ameri- can Empire) (+ sc) 1989 Jésus de Montréal (Jesus of Montreal) (+ sc) 1991 Montréal vu par. . . (Montreal Sextet) (+ ro) 1993 Love & Human Remains (Amour et restes humains) 1996 Joyeux Calvaire (Poverty and Other Delights) 2000 Stardom (15 Moments) (+sc) Other Films: 1967 Entre la mer et l’eau douce 1987 Un zoo la nuit (Night Zoo) (ro as Man at peep-show) 1992 La Vie fant?me (Phantom Life) (dialogue advisor); Léolo (ro as Director) 1993 Les Amoureuses (scenographical advisor) 1999 Dogma (special thanks) Publications By ARCAND: articles— ‘‘Two Canadian Directors,’’ interview with E. Kissin, in Films in Review (New York), vol. 37, no. 12, December 1986. Interview with A. Masson and M. Ciment, in Positif (Paris), no. 312, February 1987. ‘‘Le déclin de l’empire américaine. Entretien avec Denys Arcand,’’ interview with F. Chevassu and Y. Alion, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), no. 4242, February 1987. ‘‘Conversation autour d’un plaisir solitaire,’’ interview with P. Jutras, in Copie Zéro (Montréal), no. 34–35, December-March, 1987–88. ‘‘Entretien: Points de vue et filmographie,’’ in Copie Zéro (Montréal), no. 34–35, December-March, 1987–88. ‘‘Jésus de Montréal. Actors, Magicians and the Little Apocalypse,’’ interview with A. Barker, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), vol. 57, no. 672, January 1990. ‘‘Friheten att vaga,’’ interview with M. Berthelius, in Chaplin (Stock- holm), vol. 31, no. 4, 1989. Interview with L. Bonneville, in Séquences (Montréal), no. 140, June 1989. ‘‘Denys Arcand: prophète en son pays,’’ interview with S. Garel, in Cinéma (Paris), no. 465, March 1990. ‘‘Le point de vu des cinéastes, Denys Arcand,’’ in 24 Images (Montréal), no. 47, January-February 1990. ‘‘Of Warm and Sunny Tragedies,’’ interview with Robert Sklar, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 18, no. 1, 1990. On ARCAND: books— Hofsess, John, Inner Views: Ten Canadian Filmmakers, New York, 1975. On ARCAND: articles— Sklar, Robert, ‘‘Decline of the American Empire,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 15, no. 2, 1986. DeGryse, M. ‘‘Arcand on la vie d’artiste,’’ in Copie Zéro (Montréal), no. 34–35, December-March 1987–88. Paquet, A., ‘‘Du comportement du cinéaste,’’ in Copie Zéro (Montréal), no. 34–35, December-March 1987–88. Harkness, John, ‘‘The Improbable Rise of Denys Arcand,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1989. 24 Images (Montréal), special section, no. 44–45, Fall 1989. Clarke, Jeremy, ‘‘Spiritual Solution,’’ in What’s on in London, 17 January 1990. Harkness, John, ‘‘Sex and Sensibility: The Films of Denys Arcand,’’ in National Film Theatre programme, March 1994. Castiel, é. ‘‘Denys Arcand: le comfort sans indifférence,’’ in Séquences (London), no. 171, April 1994. McSorley, T., ‘‘Between Desire and Design,’’ in Take One (Tor- onto), no. 4, Winter 1994. Johnston, Trevor, ‘‘Love and Death,’’ in Time Out (London), 20 July 1994. Alioff, Maurie, in Take One (Toronto), vol. 5, no. 12, Summer 1996. Seguin, Denis,’’Executive Suite: Denys Arcand,’’ in Screen Interna- tional, 11 April 1997. *** The career of the Québécois filmmaker Denys Arcand presents a bewildering roller-coaster in which periods of national and even world-wide acclaim have given way to stretches of near-total obscur- ity. Hailed in the early 1990s as ‘‘Godfather of the New Canadian Cinema’’ and fêted at Cannes as one of the leading contemporary filmmakers, since 1993 Arcand has been able to complete only two films, one of them a small-scale project for TV. This fallow period echoes another around 1980 when, despite having made a string of hard-hitting documentaries and three exceptional feature films, he was considered washed up and found himself reduced to directing episodes of mini-series for CBC television. Arcand would be the first to admit that these setbacks stem, to a large degree, from his own reluctance to compromise. Provocative and politically aware, he sees film as a means of challenging society and its comfortable assumptions, and can rarely bring himself to follow box-office fashion. ‘‘You have to believe in the material,’’ he told an interviewer in 1997. ‘‘You wouldn’t believe how many scripts with Martians are floating around out there. I could never look at Star Wars; I’m sure it’s well made, but I could never relate to the material.’’ And even when he finds material he can relate to, Arcand is inclined to go his own way without regard to the consequences. A documentary he made for the National Film Board of Canada in 1970 so outraged the NFB that they suppressed it, only giving it a grudging release six years later. Documentary took up the first decade of Arcand’s directing career. Having graduated (with a degree in history), he joined the National Film Board to make a series of shorts on Canadian culture and history. ‘‘They were small films,’’ he deprecatingly remarked, ‘‘and no one wanted to make them.’’ Arcand used these half-dozen shorts to hone his technique and develop his ideas. At the same time he contrived to slip elements of his pessimistic humour and scepti- cism even into such anodyne subjects as Volleyball and Parcs ARMSTRONG DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 40 atlantiques (Atlantic Parks)—often making tellingly subversive points through astute use of editing. Open confrontation erupted over Arcand’s first feature-length film, On est au coton (We’re Fed Up), an exposé of the wretched working conditions in Quebec’s textile industry. It succeeded in antagonising both the extreme left (who thought the propaganda should have been more outspoken) and the employers. The NFB accused Arcand of lacking objectivity and the film, which became a cause celebre, was suppressed until 1976. ‘‘The Film Board,’’ observed Arcand, ‘‘makes thousands of films to say that all goes well in Canada.... So I think it is just normal that there should now and then be a film which says that everything is rotten and that we live in a country that is corrupt from top to bottom.’’ He made two more full- length documentaries for the NFB, both dealing with Québécois politics. ‘‘Arcand’s great theme is betrayal,’’ commented John Harkness, ‘‘and his documentaries deal with that theme most explicitly.’’ Meanwhile Arcand had turned to feature films to pursue his disenchanted vision of Quebec society—and, by implication, of Western society in general. La maudite galette (The Damned Dough) was rather too obviously indebted to Godard, but with its two successors Arcand hit his stride. Réjeanne Padovani and Gina both make shrewd use of a thriller framework to explore political themes, and Gina adds in an element of sexual politics that anticipates his later work—as does its often teasing tone. Though consistently operating from a left-wing standpoint, Arcand mistrusts any form of dogmatism and enjoys upsetting audience expectations. ‘‘A good film is always pulling the rug out from under people’s beliefs and prejudices,’’ he once remarked. The films attracted international notice—the French critic Jean Rochereau compared Arcand to Juvenal and Voltaire—but were too unsettling to gain popular success. For several years Arcand found his career hampered by official suspicion and changes in the system of Canadian government funding. He bounced back, quite unexpect- edly, with his first international hit, Le déclin de l’empire américain (The Decline of the American Empire), a sardonic comedy about sex. Not a sex comedy; the eroticism is all in the talk. While preparing a lakeside dinner, four male academics discuss sex; at the gym their female counterparts do likewise. Finally they all meet for dinner where the conversation, and the revelations, continue. With nods towards Rohmer and late Bu?uel, the overall effect is at once funny and bleak: a witty, perceptive study of an alienated society in terminal decline. The film won the Critics’ Prize at Cannes, and was nominated for an Oscar. Arcand gained his second Oscar nomination for Jésus de Montréal, a fable of passionate irony about an actor cast as Christ in the city’s annual Passion Play who finds the role is taking over his life. Envisaging the film as ‘‘not a very commercial proposition’’ and likely to offend the religious as well as the secular establishment, Arcand was amazed when it became his greatest box-office hit, gaining an award from the World Council of Churches. ‘‘Woe unto you when all men praise you,’’ he mused wryly. Now rated ‘‘one of the most important of contemporary direc- tors,’’ Arcand went on to make his first English-language film. Love and Human Remains, a comedy about sexuality and murder, was adapted from a play by Canadian playwright Brad Fraser. Intended as the director’s mainstream breakthrough, it flopped disastrously. Since then he has completed two films. Joyeux calvaire (Poverty and Other Delights), made for TV, is an amiable, undemanding chronicle of homeless people in downtown Montréal. Stardom, a pseudo-docu- mentary on the rise and fall of a young supermodel, returns to Arcand’s earlier satricial mode, but despite some shrewd jabs at the media it lacks real punch or personal insight. More ambitious pro- jects, such as a long-cherished film about euthanasia, have so far failed to find backing. But given Arcand’s resilience and remarkable come-back record, it would be unwise to write him off just yet. —Philip Kemp ARMSTRONG, Gillian Nationality: Australian. Born: Melbourne, 18 December 1950. Education: Swinburne College, studied filmmaking at Melbourne and Australian Film and Television School, Sydney. Family: Mar- ried, one daughter. Career: Worked as production assistant, editor, art director, and assistant designer, and directed several short films, 1970s; directed her first feature, My Brilliant Career, 1979; directed her first American film, Mrs. Soffel, 1984; returned to Australia to direct High Tide, 1987; has since made films both in Australia and the United States; also director of documentaries and commercials. Awards: Best Short Fiction Film Sydney International Film Festival, Gillian Armstrong ARMSTRONGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 41 for The Singer and the Dancer, 1976; British Critics’ Award and Best Film and Best Director, Australian Film Institute Awards, for My Brilliant Career, 1979; Women in Film Award, 1995. Agent: Judy Scott-Fox, William Morris Agency, 151 El Camino Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90212. Films as Director: 1970 Old Man and Dog (short) 1971 Roof Needs Mowing (short) 1973 Gretel; Satdee Night; One Hundred a Day (shorts) 1975 Smokes and Lollies (doc) 1976 The Singer and the Dancer (+ pr, sc) 1979 My Brilliant Career 1980 Fourteen’s Good, Eighteen’s Better (doc) (+ pr); Touch Wood (doc) 1982 Starstruck 1983 Having a Go (doc) 1984 Mrs. Soffel 1986 Hard to Handle: Bob Dylan with Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers 1987 High Tide 1988 Bingo, Bridesmaids, and Braces (+ pr) 1991 Fires Within 1992 The Last Days of Chez Nous 1994 Little Women 1996 Not Fourteen Again ( + sc) 1997 Oscar and Lucinda Publications By ARMSTRONG: articles— Interviews in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), January 1974, March- April 1979, October 1992. Films in Review (New York), June-July 1983. Interview in Encore (Manly, New South Wales), 31 January 1985. ‘‘Gillian Armstrong Returns to Eden,’’ an interview with A. Grieve, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), May 1987. Interview in Encore (Manly, New South Wales), 29 September 1988. ‘‘Homeward Bound,’’ an interview with Mark Mordue, in Sight and Sound (London),Autumn 1989. ‘‘The Last Days of Chez Nous,’’ an interview with Rolando Caputo, in Cinema Papers (Fitzroy), October 1992. ‘‘Lib berate,’’ an interview with Colette Maude, in Time Out (Lon- don), 17 February 1993. ‘‘Little Women,’’ an interview with Margaret Smith and Emma Coller, in Cinema Papers (Fitzroy), March 1994. ‘‘What Are You Girls Going to Do?,’’ an interview, in Sight and Sound (London), April 1995. ‘‘The Brilliant Career of Gillian Armstrong,’’ an interview with Mary Hardesty, in DGA (Los Angeles), September-October 1995. ‘‘Little Women,’’ an interview with Mary Colbert, in Filmnews, April 1995. On ARMSTRONG: books— Tulloch, John, Australian Cinema: Industry, Narrative, and Mean- ing, Sydney and London, 1982. McFarlane, Brian, Words and Images: Australian Novels into Films, Richmond, Victoria, 1983. Mathews, Sue, 35mm Dreams: Conversations with Five Australian Directors, Ringwood, Victoria, 1984. Hall, Sandra, Critical Business: The New Australian Cinema in Review, Adelaide, 1985. Moran, Albert, and Tom O’Regan, editors, An Australian Film Reader, Sydney, 1985. McFarlane, Brian, Australian Cinema 1970–85, London, 1987. Collins, Felicity, The Films of Gillian Armstrong, St. Kilda, Victoria, Australia, 1999. On ARMSTRONG: articles— ‘‘Profile,’’ in Time Out (London), 24 January 1980. Rickey, C., ‘‘Where the Girls Are,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), January-February 1985. Enker, D., ‘‘Coming in from the Cold,’’ in Cinema Papers (Mel- bourne), July 1985. Grieve, A., ‘‘Gillian Armstrong Returns to Eden,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), May 1987. Forsberg, M., ‘‘Partnership Swells High Tide,’’ in The New York Times, 6 March 1988. Harker, P., ‘‘Gillian Armstrong and Three Times Three,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), November, 1988. Graham, N., ‘‘Directors’ Pet Projects,’’ in Premiere (New York), December 1988. Mordue, Mark, ‘‘Homeward Bound: A Profile of Gillian Arm- strong,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1989. Urban, A.L. ‘‘The Last Days of Chez Nous,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), May 1991. Haskell, Molly, ‘‘Wildflowers,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1993. Dargis, M., ‘‘Her Brilliant Career,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 2 March 1993. Dougherty, M., ‘‘Look Homeward, Aussie,’’ in Premiere (Boulder), May 1993. Stratton, David, ‘‘Gillian Armstrong,’’ in International Film Guide (London, Hollywood), 1996. Swebster, Andy, ‘‘Filmography: Gillian Armstrong,’’ in Premiere (New York), November 1997. Douadi, Monia, ‘‘Portraits de femmes,’’ in Positif (Paris), April 1999. *** While women directors in film industries around the world are still seen as anomalous (if mainstream) or marginalized as avant garde, the Antipodes have been home to an impressive cadre of female filmmakers who negotiate and transcend such notions. Before the promising debuts of Ann Turner (Celia) and Jane Campion (Sweetie), Gillian Armstrong blazed a trail with My Brilliant Career, launching a bril- liant career of her own as an international director. Like Turner and Campion, Armstrong makes films that resist easy categorization as either ‘‘women’s films’’ or Australian ones. Her films mix and intermingle genres in ways that undermine and illuminate afresh, if not openly subvert, filmic conventions—as much as the films of her ARMSTRONG DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 42 male compatriots, like Peter Weir, Bruce Beresford, or Paul Cox. Formally, however, the pleasures of her films are traditional ones, such as sensitive and delicate cinematography, fluid editing, an evocative feel for setting and costume, and most importantly, a com- mitment to solid character development and acting. All in all, her work reminds one of the best of classical Hollywood cinema, and the question of whether her aim is parody or homage is often left pleasingly ambiguous. Although Armstrong has often spoken in interviews about her discomfort at being confined to the category of woman filmmaker of women’s films, and has articulated her desire to reach an audience of both genders and all nationalities, her work continually addresses sexual politics and family tensions. Escape from and struggle with traditional sex roles and the pitfalls and triumphs therein are themes frequently addressed in her films—from One Hundred a Day, her final-year project at the Australian Film and Television School, through My Brilliant Career, her first feature, to High Tide and Oscar and Lucinda. Even one of her earliest films at Swinburne College, the short Roof Needs Mowing, obliquely tackled this theme, using a typi- cal student filmmaker’s pastiche of advertising and surrealism. Like most maturing filmmakers with an eye on wider distribution, Arm- strong dropped the ‘‘sur’’ from surrealism in her later work, so that by One Hundred a Day—an adaptation of an Alan Marshall story about a shoe-factory employee getting a back-street abortion in the 1930s— she developed a more naturalistic handling of material, while her use of soundtrack and fast editing remained highly stylized and effective. Made on a tiny budget and heavily subsidized by the Australian Film Commission, the award-winning The Singer and the Dancer was a precocious study of the toll men take on women’s lives that marked the onset of Armstrong’s mature style. On the strength of this and One Hundred a Day, producer Margaret Fink offered Armstrong the direction of My Brilliant Career. Daunted at first by the scale of the project and a lack of confidence in her own abilities, she accepted because she ‘‘thought it could be bungled by a lot of men.’’ While The Singer and the Dancer had been chastised by feminist critics for its downbeat ending, in which the heroine returns to her philandering lover after a half-hearted escape attempt, My Brilliant Career was widely celebrated for its feminist fairy-tale story as well as its employment of women crew members. Adapted from Miles Franklin’s semi-autobiographical novel, My Brilliant Career, with its turn-of-the-20th-century setting in the Australian outback, works like Jane Eyre in reverse (she does not marry him), while retaining the romantic allure of such a story and all the glossy production values of a period setting that Australian cinema had been known for up until then. Distinguished by an astonishing central performance by the then-unknown Judy Davis (fresh from playing Juliet to Mel Gibson’s Romeo on the drama-school stage), the film managed to present a positive model of feminine independence without belying the time in which it was set. Like Armstrong’s later Mrs. Soffel, My Brilliant Career potently evokes smothered sensuality and conveys sexual tension by small, telling details, as in the boating scene. Sadly, few of Armstrong’s later films have been awarded com- mensurate critical praise or been as widely successful, possibly because of her refusal to conform to expectations and churn out more upbeat costume dramas. Her next feature, Starstruck, although it too features a spunky, ambitious heroine, was a rock musical set in the present and displaying a veritable rattle bag of influences—including Judy Garland-Mickey Rooney ‘‘lets-put-on-a-show’’ films, Richard Lester editing techniques, new wave pop videos, and even Sternberg’s Blond Venus, when the heroine sheds her kangaroo suit to sing her ‘‘torch song’’ à la Marlene Dietrich. Despite a witty script and fine bit characters, the music is somewhat monotonous, and the film was only mildly successful. Armstrong’s first film to be financed and filmed in America was Mrs. Soffel. Based on a true story and set at the turn of the century, it delineated the tragic story of the eponymous warden’s wife who falls in love with a convict, helps him escape, and finally runs off with him. The bleak, monochrome cinematography is powerfully atmospheric but was not to all reviewers’ tastes, especially in America. For Armstrong, the restricted palette was quite deliberate, so that the penultimate images of blood on snow would be all the more striking and effective. A sadly underrated film, it features some unexpectedly fine performances from Diane Keaton in the title role, Mel Gibson as her paramour (a fair impersonation of young Henry Fonda), and the young Matthew Modine as his kid brother. At its best, it recalls, if not McCabe and Mrs. Miller, then at least Bonnie and Clyde. High Tide returns to Australia for its setting in a coastal caravan park, and comes up trumps as an unabashedly sentimental weepie, and none the worse for it. It features three generations of women: Lilli (Judy Davis again), backup singer to an Elvis impersonator and drifter; Ally (Claudia Karvan), the pubescent daughter she left behind; and mother-in-law Bet (Jan Adele), who vies with Lilli for Ally’s affections. In terms of camera work, it is one of Armstrong’s most restless films, utilizing nervous zip pans, fast tracking, and boomshots, and then resting for quiet, intense close-ups on surfboards, legs being shaved, and shower nozzles, all highly motivated by the characters’ perspectives. Like Mrs. Soffel, High Tide uses colors symbolically to contrast the gentle tones of the seaside’s natural landscape with the garish buildings of the town called Eden. Armstrong wears her feminist credentials lightly, never on her sleeve. Nevertheless, her early fiction films can be seen as charting over the years the trajectory of the women’s movement: My Brilliant Career celebrated women’s independence, as Sybylla rejects the roles of wife and mother; Mrs. Soffel reopens negotiations with men (with tragic results); and, finally, High Tide returns to the rejected motherhood role, with all its attendant joys and anxieties. Fires Within, Armstrong’s first 1990s release, is a well-meaning but insipid tale of a Cuban political prisoner and his encounter with his family in Miami. A fiasco, Armstrong lost control of the project during post-production. The filmmaker bounced back strongly, how- ever, with two impressive films centering on the relationships be- tween female siblings. The Last Days of Chez Nous, which Armstrong directed back in Australia, is a thoughtful, well-acted drama focusing on the emotional plight of a pair of sisters. One (Lisa Harrow) is a bossy, fortysomething writer, and the other (Kerry Fox) has just emerged from an unhappy love affair. The scenario centers on events that take place after the latter becomes romantically involved with the former’s husband (Bruno Ganz). The film’s major strength is the depth and richness of its female characters. Its theme, consistent with Armstrong’s best previous work, is the utter necessity of women’s self-sufficiency. Little Women, based on Louisa May Alcott’s venerable 1868 novel of four devoted sisters coming of age in Concord, Massachu- setts, during the Civil War, was Armstrong’s first successful Ameri- can-made film. It may be linked to My Brilliant Career as a story of feminine independence set in a previous era. Alcott’s book had been filmed a number of times before: a silent version, made in 1918; most enjoyably by George Cukor, with Katharine Hepburn, in 1933; far less successfully, with a young Elizabeth Taylor (among others), in 1949; and in a made-for-TV movie in 1978. Armstrong’s version is ARZNERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 43 every bit as fine as the Cukor-Hepburn classic. Her cast is just about perfect, with Wynona Ryder deservedly earning an Academy Award nomination as the headstrong Jo March. Ryder is ably supported by Trini Alvarado, Claire Danes, Samantha Mathis, and Kirsten Dunst, and Susan Sarandon offers her usual solid performance as Marmee, the March girls’ mother. If the film has one fault, it is the contempo- rary-sounding feminist rhetoric that Marmee spouts: the dialogue is completely out of sync with the spirit and reality of the times. But this is just a quibble. This new Little Women is a fine film, at once literate and extremely enjoyable. In her next film, Oscar and Lucinda, Armstrong contrasts a strong feminist heroine and a hero who is ‘‘sensitive’’ to the point of being effeminate. The film is a Victorian-era romantic adventure, and the title characters are shy, guilt-ridden Oscar Hopkins (Ralph Fiennes) and intensely strong-willed Lucinda Leplastrier (Cate Blanchett). The two are soul mates who share an obsession with gambling, and their natures do not allow them to assume the accepted, traditional male and female societal roles. The first section of the film charts the parallel stories of Oscar and Lucinda, and how they evolve as individuals. Lucinda is oblivious to what others think of her as she expresses herself—and she even boldly dresses in pants. Oscar, meanwhile, suffers a traumatic childhood and remains estranged from his father. Approximately 40 minutes into the story the characters meet, and quickly discover that they are kindred spirits. Lucinda’s sense of independence does impact positively on Oscar, but not enough to allow him to free himself from his mental shackles. A childhood shock has made Oscar fearful of water, and his religious upbringing forces him to equate pleasure with sin. So it is not without irony that he is fated to drown while trapped inside a church that has been made of glass; the structure is set on a raft that had been floating down a river. Armstrong fills Oscar and Lucinda with a strong sense of the opposing forces that prevent the characters from adding to the foundation of their relationship. Guilt, fear, and the constraints of religion are what imprison Oscar; they are contrasted to the spirit, individuality, and freedom that personify Lucinda. By depicting Oscar as incorrigibly ineffectual, Armstrong’s purpose is neither to lampoon masculinity nor to cram the film with one-dimensional feminist ire. Instead, she lucidly points out how a male-female relationship is hollow (if not altogether doomed) if both participants fail to connect on equal terms. The twist of the story is that, here, the male is submissive while the female is aggressive. —Leslie Felperin, updated by Rob Edelman ARZNER, Dorothy Nationality: American. Born: San Francisco, 3 January 1900. Edu- cation: Studied medicine at University of Southern California. Mili- tary Service: Ambulance driver in World War I, 1917–18. Career: Typist for William C. De Mille, at Famous Players-Lasky (Para- mount), 1919; editor for ‘‘Realart,’’ a subsidiary of Paramount, 1922; wrote and edited Old Ironsides (Cruze), 1925; directed Paramount’s first sound film, Wild Party, 1929; retired from directing, 1943. Awards: Honored at First International Festival of Women’s Films, New York, 1972, and by Director’s Guild of America, 1975. Died: 1 October 1979. Dorothy Arzner Films as Director: 1927 Fashions for Women; Get Your Man; 10 Modern Commandments 1928 Manhattan Cocktail 1929 The Wild Party 1930 Sarah and Son; ‘‘The Gallows Song—Nichavo’’ sequence in Paramount on Parade; Anybody’s Woman; Behind the Makeup (co-d); Charming Sinners (co-d, uncredited) 1931 Honor among Lovers; Working Girls 1932 Merrily We Go to Hell 1933 Christopher Strong 1934 Nana (Lady of the Boulevard) 1936 Craig’s Wife 1937 The Bride Wore Red; The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (co-d, uncredited) 1940 Dance, Girl, Dance 1943 First Comes Courage Other Films: 1922 Blood and Sand (ed) 1923 The Covered Wagon (ed) ARZNER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 44 1924 Inez from Hollywood (ed, sc); The Bread of the Border (sc); The No-Gun Man (sc) 1925 Red Kimono (sc); When Husbands Flirt (sc) 1926 Old Ironsides (ed, sc) Publications By ARZNER: article— Interview with Gerald Peary, in Cinema (Beverly Hills), no. 34, 1974. On ARZNER: books— Brownlow, Kevin, The Parade’s Gone By, New York, 1968. Johnston, Claire, Notes on Women’s Cinema, London, 1973. Pratt, George, Spellbound in Darkness: A History of Silent Film, Greenwich, Connecticut, 1973. Rosen, Marjorie, Popcorn Venus: Women, Movies, and the American Dream, New York, 1973. Haskell, Molly, From Reverence to Rape: The Treatment of Women in the Movies, New York, 1974. Smith, Sharon, Women Who Make Movies, New York, 1975. Johnston, Claire, editor, The Work of Dorothy Arzner: Toward a Feminist Cinema, London, 1975. Slide, Anthony, Early Women Directors, South Brunswick, New Jersey, 1977. Heck-Rabi, Louise, Women Filmmakers: A Critical Reception, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1984. Penley, Constance, editor, Feminism and Film Theory, London, 1988. Mayne, Judith, Directed by Dorothy Arzner, Bloomington, 1994. On ARZNER: articles— ‘‘Hollywood Notes,’’ in Close-Up (London), April 1928. Cruikshank, H., ‘‘Sketch,’’ in Motion Picture Classic (Brooklyn), September 1929. Potamkin, H. A., ‘‘The Woman as Film Director,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), January 1932. St. John, Adela Rogers, ‘‘Get Me Dorothy Arzner,’’ in Silver Screen (New York), December 1933. ‘‘They Stand out from the Crowd,’’ in Literary Digest (New York), 3 November 1934. Feldman, J. and H., ‘‘Women Directors,’’ in Films in Review (New York), November 1950. Pyros, J., ‘‘Notes on Women Directors,’’ in Take One (Montreal), November/December 1970. Henshaw, Richard, ‘‘Women Directors,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November 1972. Parker, F., ‘‘Approaching the Art of Arzner,’’ in Action (Los Ange- les), July/August 1973. Slide, Anthony, ‘‘Forgotten Early Women Directors,’’ in Films in Review, March 1974. Castle, W., ‘‘Tribute to Dorothy Arzner,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), March/April 1975. Kaplan, E. Ann, ‘‘Aspects of British Feminist Film Theory,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), no. 12–13, 1976. Johnston, Claire, in Jump Cut (Berkeley), 30 December 1976. Bergstrom, J., ‘‘Rereading the Work of Claire Johnston,’’ in Camera Obscura (Berkeley), Summer 1979. Obituary, in New York Times, 12 October 1979. Houston, Beverle, ‘‘Missing in Action: Notes on Dorothy Arzner,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Georgia), vol. 6, no. 3, 1984. Forster, A., ‘‘Dance, Girl, Dance,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), Septem- ber-October 1984. Chell, S. L., ‘‘Dorothy Arzner’s Dance Girl, Dance,’’ in Cineaction (Toronto), no. 24–25, Summer-Fall 1991. Gaines, J., ‘‘Dorothy Arzner’s Trousers,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), July 1992. Doty, A., ‘‘Whose Text Is It Anyway?: Queer Cultures, Queer Auteurs, and Queer Auteurship,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film and Video (Langhorne, PA), vol. 15, November 1993. Mayne, J., ‘‘Dorothy Arzner, les femmes et la politique des auteurs,’’ in Cinémaction (Conde-sur-Noireau), March 1993. *** Dorothy Arzner’s career as a commercial Hollywood director covered little more than a decade, but she had prepared for it by extensive editing and script writing work. Ill health forced her to abandon a career that might eventually have led to the recognition she deserved from her contemporaries. One of only a handful of women operating within the structure of Hollywood’s post-silent boom, Arzner has been the subject of feminist critical attention, with film retrospectives of her work both in the United States and United Kingdom in the 1970s, when her work was ‘‘rediscovered.’’ Most feminists would recognize that the mere re-insertion of women into a dominant version of film history is a dubious activity, even while asserting that women’s contributions to cinema have been excluded from most historical accounts. Recognition of the work of a ‘‘popular’’ director like Arzner and an evaluation of her contribu- tion to Hollywood cinema must be set against an awareness of her place in the dominant patriarchal ideology of classic Hollywood cinema. Arzner’s work is particularly interesting in that it was produced within the Hollywood system with all its inherent constraints (time, budget, traditional content requirements of particular gen- res, etc.). While Arzner directed ‘‘women’s pictures’’—classic Hollywood fare—she differed from other directors of the genre in that, in place of a narrative seen simply from a female point of view, she actually succeeded in challenging the orthodoxy of Hollywood from within, offering perspectives that questioned the dominant order. The films often depict women seeking independence through career—a burlesque queen and an aspiring ballerina (Dance, Girl, Dance), a world champion aviatrix (Christopher Strong). Alterna- tively, the escape route can be through exit from accepted female positions in the hierarchy—a rich daughter ‘‘escaping’’ into marriage with a poverty-stricken drunk (Merrily We Go to Hell). Even excess can be a way of asserting independence, as with the obsessive housekeeper rejecting family relationships in favor of a passion for domesticity and the home (Craig’s Wife). The films frequently play with notions of female stereotyping (most notably in Dance, Girl, Dance, with its two central female types of Nice Girl and Vamp). Arzner’s ‘‘nice girls’’ are likely to have desires which conflict with male desires, while narrative require- ments will demand that they still please the male. While these tensions are not always resolved, Arzner’s strategies in underlining these opposing desires are almost gleeful at times. In addition, Arzner’s films offer contradictions which disturb the spectator’s accepted relationship with what is on screen—most ASCHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 45 notably in Dance, Girl, Dance, when dancer Judy O’Brien turns on her Burlesque (male) audience and berates them for their voyeurism. This scene has been the focus for much debate about the role of the spectator in relation to the woman as spectacle (notably in the work of Laura Mulvey). Although the conventions of plot and development are present in Arzner’s films, Claire Johnston sees these elements as subverted by a ‘‘women’s discourse’’: the films may offer us the kinds of narrative closure we expect from the classic Hollywood text—the ‘‘happy’’ or the ‘‘tragic’’ ending—but Arzner’s insistence on this female dis- course gives the films an exciting and unsettling quality. In Arzner’s work, she argues, it is the male universe which invites scrutiny and which is ‘‘rendered strange.’’ Dorothy Arzner’s position inside the studio system has made her a unique subject for debate. As the women’s movement set about reassessing the role of women in history, so feminist film theorists began not only to re-examine the role of women as a creative force in cinema, but also to consider the implications behind the notion of women as spectacle. The work of Dorothy Arzner has proved a rich area for investigation into both these questions. —Lilie Ferrari ASCH, Timothy Nationality: American. Born: Southampton, New York, 16 July 1932. Education: Attended California School of Fine Arts; appren- ticed with still photographers Minor White, Edward Weston, and Ansel Adams, 1950–51; Columbia University, B.S. in Anthropology and Film, 1959; attended Boston University; Harvard, M.A. in Anthropology, 1964. Military Service: U.S. Army; traveling re- porter in Japan, 1953–54. Family: Married Patsy Asch; four child- ren. Career: Freelance photojournalist, 1954–59; film editor and cinematographer, Film Study Center, Harvard University, 1959–62; director of ethnographic studies, Educational Services, Inc. 1965–66; co-founder, Documentary Educational Resources, 1967; film expedi- tions in collaboration with anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon to document the Yanomamo Indians of the Venezuelan rainforest, 1969–76; research associate in human genetics, University of Michi- gan, 1968–70; lecturer in visual and environmental studies, Harvard University, 1970–71; film editor, American Anthropologist, 1970–76; adjunct professor of film, Brandeis University, 1973–74; research fellow in ethnographic film, Harvard University, 1973–79; research cinematographer, National Anthropological Film Center, Smithso- nian Institution, 1975; lecturer, University Film Center, Hampshire College, 1975; film expeditions to document spiritual and ritual life in Indonesia, 1978–1992. Awards: Blue Ribbon (First Prize), American Film Festival (New York), CINE Golden Eagle, Grand Prize of Golden Bucranium (Padua, Italy), First Prize, Flaherty Award, First Prize, Festival Dei Popoli (Florence, Italy), Exceptional Merit Award, International Festival of Short Films (Philadelphia), and Grand Prize, International Folklore Festival, all for The Feast, 1969; CINE Golden Eagle, Red Ribbon (Second Prize) American Film Festival, Diploma of Merit, International Scientific Film Festival (Rio de Janeiro), all for Yanomamo: A Multidisciplinary Study, 1971; Red Ribbon (Second Prize), American Film Festival, Diploma of Honor International Scientific Film Association (Philadelphia), Special Merit Award, Athens International Film Festival, all for The Ax Fight, 1975; Red Ribbon (Second Prize), American Film Festival, CINE Golden Eagle, Bronze Medal, Film Council of Columbus; all for A Man Called ‘‘Bee,’’ 1975; Grand Prix Bilan du Film Ethnographique (Paris), for A Celebration of Origins, 1993. Agent: Documentary Educational Resources, 101 Morse Street, Watertown, Massachusetts 02472, USA. Died: In California after a long battle with cancer, 3 Octo- ber 1994. Films as Director and Cinematographer: 1963 Dodoth Morning 1969 The Feast 1971 Yanomamo: A Multidisciplinary Study 1974 Ocamo Is My Town; Arrow Game; Weeding the Garden; A Father Washes His Children; Firewood; A Man and His Wife Make a Hammock; Children’s Magical Death; Magi- cal Death; Climbing the Peach Palm; New Tribes Mission; Yanomamo (for Japanese TV) 1975 The Ax Fight; A Man Called ‘‘Bee’’; Moonblood; Tapir Distribution; Tug of War; Bride Service; The Yanomamo Myth of Naro as Told by Kaobawa; The Yanomamo Myth of Naro as Told by Dedeheiwa 1976 Jaguar: A Yanomamo Twin-Cycle Myth 1978 The Sons of Haji Omar 1979 A Balinese Trance Seance 1980 Jero on Jero: A Balinese Trance Seance Observed 1983 Jero Tapakan: Stories from the Life of a Balinese Healer; The Medium Is the Masseuse: A Balinese Massage; The Water of Words 1988 Spear and Sword 1990 Releasing the Spirits 1992 A Celebration of Origins Publications By ASCH: book— With Linda Connor and Patsy Asch, Jero Tapakan, Balinese Healer: An Ethnographic Film Monograph, Cambridge and New York, 1985. By ASCH: articles— ‘‘Ethnographic Filming and the Yanomamo Indians,’’ in Sight Lines, 1972. With John Marshall, ‘‘Ethnographic Film: Structure and Function,’’ in Annual Review of Anthropology, 1973. ‘‘Using Film in Teaching Anthropology: One Pedagogical Approach,’’ in Visual Anthropology, 1975. ‘‘Making a Film Record of the Yanomamo Indians of Southern Venezuela,’’ in Perspectives on Film, 1979 . ‘‘Collaboration in Ethnographic Filming,’’ in Canberra Anthropolo- gist, 1982. ‘‘Images That Represent Ideas: Use of Films on the !Kung to Teach Anthropology,’’ in The Past and The Future of !Kung Ethnogra- phy: Critical Reflections and Symbolic Perspectives, Ham- burg, 1987. ASHBY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 46 ‘‘Collaboration in Ethnographic Filmmaking: A Personal View,’’ in Anthropological Filmmaking, edited by Jack Rollwagen, New York, 1988. With Patsy Asch, ‘‘Film in Anthropological Research,’’ in Cinematographic Theory and New Dimensions In Ethnographic Film, Osaka, Japan, 1988. On ASCH: book— Harper, Douglas, Cape Breton 1952: The Photographic Vision of Timothy Asch, California, 1994. On ASCH: articles— ‘‘Ethnography and Ethnographic Film: From Flaherty to Asch and After,’’ in American Anthropologist, 1995. *** Still photography was Timothy Asch’s first love. He began photographing with David Sapir when he was a teenager at the Putney School, in Vermont, between 1947 and 1951. He went on to study photography at the California School of Fine Arts, where he appren- ticed with Ansel Adams, Minor White, and Edward Weston. In 1952 he did seven months of photographic field work on Cape Breton Island, Canada. These powerful black and white photographs re- mained unpublished until after his death. He continued his career as a photographer for Stars and Stripes while in the U.S. Army stationed in Japan. In 1959 he completed undergraduate studies in anthropology while working as an assistant to Margaret Mead. It was this connec- tion to Mead that influenced Asch to take up film in the service of anthropology. His career took a turn in this direction, in spite of the fact that he continued to exhibit his still photographs from the 1950s to the 1980s. From 1959 to 1962 he utilized his talents as a film editor and worked at the Peabody Museum at Harvard University, where he met John Marshall and Robert Gardner. In 1961 he worked for the author Elizabeth Marshall Thomas in Karamoja, Uganda, among the Dodoth. His photographs from that time were published in Warrior Herdsman (1965) and he completed his first film from this material, Dodoth Morning (1963). Asch saw film as a powerful tool to educate; he was one of the earliest proponents of educational reform and encouraged the use of film in the classroom. From 1966–68 he worked with Jonathan Kozol to develop a media-based curriculum for the public school system in Massachusetts. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s he was in demand by many universities, including Harvard, Brandeis and New York Uni- versity, as a lecturer on filmmaking and anthropology. From 1968 to 1975 Asch traveled deep into the rainforest of South America with anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon to live with, work with, and film the Yanomamo Indians. Shooting 16mm film in the jungles of Venezuela with native peoples who had a taste for intertribal warfare was not an easy task. From this experience Asch directed and produced his first important film, The Feast. Another film from this series, The Ax Fight, stands as a crucial work in the genre. In its understanding of the power of the vignette in film and in its concern for the truth and the accuracy of its representation of a society, it echoes the concerns and methods of Robert Flaherty in Nanook of the North. The Ax Fight, while simultaneously embodying the legacy of Flaherty, also prefigures the more self-conscious and experimental modes of ethnographic filmmaking to come. Asch’s collaboration with Chagnon resulted in thirty-nine films on the Yanomamo which were distributed worldwide through television and international film festivals, and received numerous awards. Timothy Asch did his finest work as a collaborator. After produc- ing the Yanomamo series he worked from 1979 to 1994 with Patsy Asch, Linda Connor, James Fox, and Douglas Lewis on a group of eight films about the people and culture of Indonesia. His intense engagement with the spirit medium and healer Jero Tapakan resulted in a fascinating experiment in cross-cultural filmmaking. His last film, A Celebration of Origins, was perhaps his most complex and difficult work. It received greater recognition internationally than in the United States. During the 1980s Asch was a pivotal figure on the international ethnographic filmmaking scene, building the foundation for the establishment of visual anthropology and ethnographic film pro- grams in China, Europe, and Africa. In 1991 he was the keynote speaker at the International Visual Anthropology and Sociology Conference, Eyes Across the Water, held at the University of Amster- dam. In 1982 he became the director of the Center for Visual Anthropology at the University of Southern California, a post he held until his untimely death in 1994. —Cynthia Close ASHBY, Hal Nationality: American. Born: Ogden, Utah, 1932. Education: At- tended Utah State University. Career: Mimeographer in Universal script department, Los Angeles, 1950–51; worked at Republic stu- dios, becoming assistant editor, 1950s; became full editor, 1963; directed first feature, The Landlord, 1970. Awards: Oscar for Best Editing, for In the Heat of the Night, 1967. Died: In Los Angeles, 27 December 1988. Films as Director: 1970 The Landlord 1971 Harold and Maude 1973 The Last Detail 1975 Shampoo 1976 Bound for Glory 1978 Coming Home 1979 Being There (+ ed) 1981 Second Hand Hearts (+ ed) 1982 Lookin’ to Get Out (+ co-ed); Let’s Spend the Night Together 1983 Time Is on Our Side (+ ed) 1984 The Slugger’s Wife 1985 Eight Million Ways to Die Other Films: 1958 The Big Country (Wyler) (asst ed); The Diary of Anne Frank (Stevens) (asst ed) 1961 The Young Doctors (Karlson) (asst ed) 1962 The Children’s Hour (The Loudest Whisper) (Wyler) (asst ed) ASHBYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 47 Hal Ashby 1964 The Best Man (Schaffner) (asst ed) 1965 The Greatest Story Ever Told (Stevens) (asst ed); The Loved One (co-ed); The Cincinnati Kid (Jewison) (ed); The Rus- sians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming (Jewison) (ed) 1967 In the Heat of the Night (Jewison) (ed) 1968 The Thomas Crown Affair (Jewison) (assoc pr, supervising ed) 1969 Gaily, Gaily (Jewison) (assoc pr) Publications By ASHBY: articles— ‘‘Breaking out of the Cutting Room,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), September/October 1970. Interview with L. Salvato and D. Schaefer, in Millimeter (New York), October 1976. ‘‘David Carradine and Hal Ashby on Bound for Glory,’’ interview with C. Amata, in Focus on Film (London), no. 27, 1977. ‘‘Positive Thinking: Hal Ashby,’’ interview with R. Appelbaum, in Films and Filming (London), July 1978. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Hal Ashby,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), May 1980. On ASHBY: book— Tuska, Jon, editor, Close-Up: The Contemporary Director, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1981. On ASHBY: articles— J?ergensen, U., ‘‘Hal Ashby—en auteur?’’ in Kosmorama (Copenha- gen), September 1974. Harmetz, A., ‘‘Gambling on a Film about the Great Depression,’’ in New York Times, 5 December 1976. Jacobs, Diane, ‘‘Hal Ashby,’’ in Hollywood Renaissance (New York), 1977. Pollock, Dale, ‘‘Whatever Happened to Hal Ashby?’’ in Los Angeles Times, 17 October 1982. ‘‘Hal Ashby,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Obituary in Ciné Revue (Paris), 5 January 1989. Obituary in Screen International (London), 7 January 1989. Pflaum, H. G., Obituary, in EPD Film (Frankfurt/Main), vol. 6, February 1989. Smoodin, E. ‘‘Art/work: Capitalism and Creativity in the Hollywood Musical,’’ in New Orleans Review, vol. 16, no. 1, 1989. Salvagnini, Rudy, ‘‘Hal Ashby’’ (special issue), Castoro Cinema (Firenze), no. 154, July-August 1991. *** Hal Ashby had a reputation for showing a light touch as a director; he stated that he preferred to let the actors develop their characters. During the filming of Coming Home, for example, he threw out a script when actor Jon Voight envisioned one of the major characters differently than the screenwriter. The people in his films generally face choices in situations that reflect major social concerns. In The Landlord characters have to make decisions involving the issue of race; in Shampoo they must decide which side they are on in a complex political and sexual skirmish set in the turbulent summer of 1968; and in Coming Home, the effects of the Vietnam War force characters involved directly with the war as well as those at home to deal with unexpected changes in their lives. The solutions to decisions faced by Ashby’s characters are never facile. In Harold and Maude, Harold gains some degree of maturity but loses the love of his life, Maude; the military police of The Last Detail give a prisoner a way to face life, but also deliver him to prison; while George in Shampoo realizes how empty his life is and appears to want to change it, but at the same time he has lost what chances he had for happiness. Ashby’s experience as an editor is evident; he employed a wide variety of editing effects in his films. His use of both dissolves and rapid cutting to show the passage of time in The Last Detail serves as an example of his background. His predilection for varying editing techniques could explain in part an aspect of his filmmaking that Ashby himself admitted: he did not rely on a distinctive style, but rather attempted to adapt his style to the type and subject of each film. Though he has been called a ‘‘maverick director,’’ Ashby’s career garnered him a good deal of respect from the critics, and his films did well at the box office. Shampoo, Coming Home, and Being There represent his major financial successes, while the reputation of Harold and Maude was made in a slightly different manner. After an initial panning and a short general release, the film caught on in the Midwest, running in several theaters for over a year. The film has since become a cult favorite and has received positive critical response. —Ray Narducy ASTRUC DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 48 ASTRUC, Alexandre Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 13 July 1923. Education: Saint- Germain-en-Laye, and at Polytechnique. Family: Married Elyette Helies, 1983. Career: Literary and film critic, since 1945; published novel Les Vacances, 1945; assistant to Marcel Achard and Marc Allegret, 1946–47; made two short films, 1948–49; began series of six feature-length films with Mauvaises rencontres, 1955; TV re- porter for Radio Luxembourg, 1969–72. Awards: Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur; Officier de l’Ordre du Mérite; Officier des Arts et des Lettres. Address: 168 rue de Grenelle, 75007 Paris, France. Films as Director: 1948 Aller et retour (Aller-retour) (+ sc) 1949 Ulysse ou Les Mauvaises rencontres (+ sc) 1953 Le Rideau cramoisi (The Crimson Curtain) (+ sc) 1955 Les Mauvaises rencontres (+ co-sc) 1958 Une Vie (End of Desire) (+ co-sc) 1960 La Proie pour l’ombre (+ co-sc) 1962 L’Education sentimentale (+ sc) 1963 Le Puits et le pendule (The Pit and the Pendulum) (for TV) (+ sc) 1965 Evariste Galois (+ sc) 1966 La Longue Marche (+ co-sc) 1968 Flammes sur l’Adriatique (+ co-sc) 1976 Sartre par lui-même (co-d) 1980 Arsène Lupin joue et perd (mini for TV) 1981 La Chute de la maison Usher (mini for TV) Other Films: 1948 Jean de la Lune (Achard) (co-sc) 1949 La P . . . respecteuse (Pagliero) (co-sc); La Valse de Paris (Achard) (role) 1950 L’Affaire Manet (Aurel) (commentary) 1954 Le Vicomte de Bragelonne (Cerchio) (co-sc) 1964 Bassae (Pollet) (sc) 1974 La Jeune Fille assassinee (role as Publisher) 1993 Francois Truffaut: Stolen Portraits (role as himself) Publications By ASTRUC: books— Les Vacances, 1945. La Tête la première, Ciel de Cendres, 1975. Le Serpent Jaune, 1976. Sartre, Paris, 1977. Quand la chouette s’envole, 1978. Le Permissionnaire, 1982. Le Roman de Descartes, 1989. De la caméra au stylo, 1992. L’autre versant de la colline, Paris, 1993. By ASTRUC: articles— ‘‘Le Feu et la glace,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1952; as ‘‘Fire and Ice,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma in English (New York), January 1966. Interview in Film Fran?ais (Paris), 6 March 1987. ‘‘‘L’aurore’ sur un drap,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1991. ‘‘Une vie, du film au roman: ‘Ma’ lecture. Entretien avec Alexandre Astruc,’’ in CinémAction TV (Courbevoie), April 1993. On ASTRUC: articles— Eisner, Lotte, ‘‘Venice Film Festival,’’ in Film Culture (New York), vol. 2, no. 1, 1956. Weber, Eugene, ‘‘An Escapist Realism,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berke- ley), Winter 1959. ‘‘Sur une émission de télévision,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February/March 1974. Beylie, Claude, ‘‘Quatre de la forfanterie,’’ in Ecran (Paris), Octo- ber 1975. ‘‘Alexandre Astruc,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Moullet, L., ‘‘Splendeurs et vanites du lyrisme,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1992. *** Alexandre Astruc was the embodiment of the revolutionary hopes of a renewed cinema after the war. True, Clément, Bresson, and Melville were already making films in a new way, but making them in the age-old industry. Astruc represented a new, arrogant sensibility. He had grown up on the ideas of Sartre and was one of the youthful literati surrounding the philosopher in the St. Germain-des-Prés cafes. There he talked of a new French culture being born, one that demanded new representations in fiction and film. His personal aspirations were great and grew even greater when his novel Les Vacances was published by the prestigious N.R.F., almost winning an important prize. While writing essays on art and culture for Combat and L’Ecran fran?ais he became convinced that the cinema must replace the novel. But first the cinema must become more like the novel. In his crucial essay ‘‘Le Caméra stylo,’’ written the same year as Sartre’s ‘‘Situation of the Writer in 1948,’’ he called for an end to institutional cinema and for a new style that would be both personal and malleable. He wanted cinema to be able to treat diverse ideas and a range of expressions. He, like Sartre, wanted to become ethical. This was the first loud clarion cry of the New Wave and it provoked attention in its own day. Astruc found himself linked with Bazin, Cocteau, Marker, and Tacchella against the Stalinists at L’Ecran fran?ais, led by Louis Daquin. Banding together to form ‘‘Objectif 48,’’ these men created a new atmosphere for cinema, attracting the young Truffaut and Godard to their screenings. Everyone looked to Astruc to begin turning out short films, but his 16mm efforts ran aground. Soon he began writing scripts for accept- able standard directors like Marc Allégret. Finally in 1952 he was able ATTENBOROUGHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 49 to make Le Rideau cramoisi in his own way. It was a remarkable way: this nineteenth-century mystery tale was reduced to a set of unforget- table images and a soundtrack that contained no dialogue whatsoever. Pushing the voice-over discoveries of Bresson and Melville to the limit, Astruc’s narrational device places the film somewhere between dream and memory. This coincides perfectly with the haunting night photography and Anouk Aimée’s inscrutably romantic performance. There followed more adaptations, not because Astruc had joined the industry’s penchant for such quality material, but because he always believed in the overriding import of style, seeing plots as pretexts only. The color photography in Une Vie, for example, explores the painterly concerns of the impressionists. But since the plot comes from a Maupassant tale written in the same era, the result is unpretentious. In his older age Astruc has renounced this obsession with style. The themes that possess him now, crises in marriage and love, can actually be seen in all his earlier work as well. Now he can explore these issues in television, the medium that seems perfectly suited to his early ideas. Only now his ideas have changed and so has his following. Alexandre Astruc must always be mentioned in any chronicle of modern French cinema, but his career can only be thought of as disappointing. —Dudley Andrew ATTENBOROUGH, Richard Nationality: British. Born: Richard Samuel Attenborough, Cam- bridge, England, 29 August 1923; full title, Lord Attenborough, Baron of Richmond upon Thames (from 1993). Education: Wyggeston Grammar School for Boys, Leicester, England; Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts (RADA) on Leverhulme Scholarship, until 1941. Military Service: Royal Airforce; served in RAF Film Unit, 1944–46. Family: Married Sheila Sim (actress), 1945, son: Michael, daughters: Jane and Charlotte; younger brother is David Attenborough, British TV executive and naturalist. Career: Film acting debut in In Which We Serve, 1942; co-starred with wife Sheila Sim in original stage production of The Mousetrap, 1952; chairman, 1956–88, and presi- dent, from 1988, Actor’s Charitable Trust; debut as film producer, 1961; chairman of Combined Theatrical Charities Appeals Council, 1964–88; member of Cinematograph Films Council (UK), 1967–73; directorial film debut, Oh! What a Lovely War, 1969; director of Chelsea Football Club (London), 1969–82; chairman of RADA from 1971; chairman of Capital Radio (UK), 1972–92; chairman of Duke of York’s Theatre (London, UK), 1979–92; chairman of Goldcrest Films and Television Ltd., 1982–87; president of The Gandhi Foun- dation, from 1983; member of Committee of Inquiry into the Arts and Disabled People (UK government post), 1983–85; fellow, from 1983, and vice president, 1971–94, BAFTA; president of Brighton Festival (UK), from 1984; president of British Film Year, 1984–86; member of British Screen Advisory Council, from 1987; Goodwill Ambassa- dor for UNICEF from 1987; member of European Script Fund, from 1988; head of Channel Four Television (UK), 1987–92; fellow of BFI, from 1992; fellow of FKC, from 1993. Awards: Zulueta Prize for Best Actor, San Sebastián International Film Festival (Spain), for The League of Gentlemen (shared with Jack Hawkins, Bryan Forbes, Roger Livesey, Nigel Patrick), 1960; British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) Award for Best British Actor, for Guns at Batasi, 1965; San Sebastián International Film Festival Prize for Best Actor, for Séance on a Wet Afternoon, 1964; Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actor, for The Sand Pebbles, 1967; received CBE, 1967; Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actor, for Doctor Dolittle, 1968; knighted, 1976; Oscars for Best Director and Best Picture, BAFTA Film Awards for Best Direction and Best Film, and Directors’ Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Motion Pictures (with David Tomblin, assistant director), all for Gandhi, 1983; Evening Standard Film Award for 40 Years’ Service to British Cinema, 1983; Berlin International Film Festival Peace Film Award Honourable Mention, for Cry Freedom, 1988; BAFTA Alexander Korda Award for Best British Film, for Shadowlands, 1994. Address: Old Friars, Richmond Green, Surrey, TW9 1NQ, UK. Films as Director: 1969 Oh! What a Lovely War (+ co-pr) 1972 Young Winston 1977 A Bridge Too Far (with Sidney Hayers) 1978 Magic 1982 Gandhi (+ pr) 1985 A Chorus Line 1987 Cry Freedom (+ pr) 1992 Chaplin (+ co-pr) 1993 Shadowlands (+ pr) 1997 In Love and War (+ pr) 1999 Grey Owl (+ pr) Films as Actor: 1942 In Which We Serve (Coward) (as Young Sailor who leaves post) 1943 Schweik’s New Adventures (Lamac) (as Railway worker) 1944 The Hundred Pound Window (Hurst) (as Tommy Draper) 1946 School for Secrets (Secret Flight) (Ustinov) (as Jack Arnold); Journey Together (Boulting) (as David Wilton); A Matter of Life and Death (Stairway to Heaven) (Powell and Pressburger) (as Young Dead Flyer) 1947 Dancing with Crime (Carstairs) (as Ted Peters); Brighton Rock (Young Scarface) (Boulting) (as Pinkie Brown); The Man Within (Smugglers) (Knowles) (as Francis Andrews) 1948 London Belongs to Me (Dulcimer Street) (Gilliat) (as Percy Boon); The Guinea Pig (The Outsider) (Boulting) (as Jack Read) 1949 Boys in Brown (Tully) (as Jackie Knowles); The Lost People (Knowles) (as Jan) 1950 Morning Departure (Operation Disaster) (Baker) (as Stoker Snipe) 1951 The Magic Box (Boulting) (as Jack Carter); Hell Is Sold Out (Anderson) (as Pierre Bonnet); Eight O’Clock Walk (Com- fort) (as Tom Manning) ATTENBOROUGH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 50 Richard Attenborough 1952 The Gift Horse (Glory at Sea) (Bennett) (as Dripper Daniels); Father’s Doing Fine (Cass) (as Dougall) 1955 The Ship That Died of Shame (Dearden) (as George Hoskins) 1956 The Baby and the Battleship (Lewis) (as Knocker White); Private’s Progress (Boulting) (as Pvt. Percival Henry Cox) 1957 The Scamp (Strange Affection) (Rilla) (as Stephen Leigh); Brothers in Law (Boulting) (as Henry Marshall) 1958 Sea of Sand (Desert Patrol) (Green) (as Brody); The Man Upstairs (Chaffey) (as Peter Watson, the Man); Dunkirk (Norman) (as John Holden) 1959 League of Gentlemen (Dearden) (as Edward Lexy); Jet Storm (Killing Urge) (Endfield) (as Ernest Tilley); I’m All Right Jack (Boulting) (as Sidney de Vere Cox); Danger Within (Breakout) (Chaffey) (as Captain Bunter Phillips); SOS Pacific (Green) (as Whitey) 1960 The Angry Silence (Green) (as Tom Curtis) (+ pr) 1961 All Night Long (Dearden) (as Rod Hamilton) 1962 Dock Brief (Trial and Error) (Hill) (as Foreman of the Jury/ Fowle/Judge/Member of the Public); Only Two Can Play (Gilliat) (as Probert) 1963 The Great Escape (Sturges) (as Bartlett) 1964 The Third Secret (Crichton) (as Alfred Price-Gorham); Séance on a Wet Afternoon (Forbes) (as Bill Savage) (+ pr); Guns at Batasi (Guillermin) (as Sergeant Major Lauderdale) 1965 The Flight of the Phoenix (Aldrich) (as Lew Moran) 1966 The Sand Pebbles (Wise) (as Frenchy Burgoyne) 1967 Doctor Dolittle (Fleischer) (as Albert Blossom) 1968 The Bliss of Mrs. Blossom (McGrath) (as Robert Blossom); Only When I Larf (Dearden) (as Silas); The Magic Chris- tian (McGrath) (as Oxford Coach) 1969 The Last Grenade (Flemyng) (as General Charles Whiteley) 1970 David Copperfield (Mann—for TV) (as Mr. Tungay); A Severed Head (Clement) (as Palmer Anderson) 1971 Loot (Narrizano) (as Truscott); Ten Rillington Place (Fleischer) (as John Reginald Christie) 1972 Conduct Unbecoming (Anderson) (as Lionel Roach) 1974 And Then There Were None (Clair) (as Arthur Cannon) 1975 Brannigan (Hickox) (as Commander Swann); Rosebud (Preminger) (as Edward Sloat) 1977 Shatranj Ke Khiladi (The Chess Players) (Ray) (as Gen- eral Outram) 1979 The Human Factor (Preminger) (as Colonel John Daintry) ATTENBOROUGHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 51 1993 Jurassic Park (Spielberg) (as John Hammond) 1994 Miracle on 34th Street (Mayfield) (as Kriss Kringle) 1996 E=mc2 (Wavelength) (Fry) (as The Visitor); Hamlet (William Shakespeare’s Hamlet) (Branagh) (as English Ambassador) 1997 The Lost World: Jurassic Park (Spielberg) (as John Hammond) 1998 Elizabeth (Elizabeth: The Virgin Queen) (Kapur) (as Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley) 2000 Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (2000) (as Jacob) Publications By ATTENBOROUGH: books— In Search of Gandhi, London, 1982. Richard Attenborough’s Chorus Line, London, 1986. Cry Freedom: A Pictorial Record, London, 1987. On ATTENBOROUGH: books— Castell, David, Richard Attenborough: A Pictorial Film Biography, New York, 1984. Woods, Donald, Filming with Attenborough, New York, 1987. Robinson, David, Richard Attenborough, London, 1992. Dougan, Andy, The Actors’ Director: Richard Attenborough behind the Camera, with an introduction by Steven Spielberg, Edin- burgh, 1994. On ATTENBOROUGH: articles— Robinson, Stephen, ‘‘The Liberal Friendship That Wasn’t,’’ in Spec- tator (London), 19 September 1987. Sampson Anthony, ‘‘Attenborough’s Biko: The Political Implica- tions of Cry Freedom,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1987–1988. Dyer, Richard, ‘‘Feeling English,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), March 1994. Sharma, Shaija, ‘‘Citizens of Empire: Revisionist History and the Social Imaginary in Gandhi,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Austin, Texas), Spring 1995. Arnett, Robert, ‘‘Gandhi: A Screenplay Review,’’ in Creative Screenwriting (Washington, D.C.), vol. 3, no. 4, 1996. Maland, Charles, ‘‘How Much Chaplin Appears in Chaplin? A Look at Attenborough’s Screen Biography,’’ in Literature Film Quar- terly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 25, no. 1, 1997. *** Richard Attenborough’s successful film career as an actor had been established for twenty-seven years when he directed his first feature. Oh! What a Lovely War was an adaptation of Joan Littlewood’s London stage show about the First World War and the waste of life caused by incompetent and careless strategists. With a script by spy thriller writer Len Deighton, the film shows hints of Attenborough’s future strengths as a director. In particular, the closing shot, in which the camera tracks backwards over a war cemetery, anticipates similar large-scale landscapes and crowd scenes in films such as Gandhi and Cry Freedom. Even the more intimate, and rather disappointing, Shadowlands contains some hallmark Attenborough footage as a small car winds its way through the English countryside. After completing his training at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts in London, Attenborough began his film career in 1942, playing the role of a frightened young sailor in Noel Coward’s acclaimed war film, In Which We Serve. It was a part he would reprise in many British war films during the 1940s and 1950s: as a young actor during World War II, Attenborough made a name for himself representing the ordinary serviceman, struggling to do his duty in the face of overwhelming world events. It was only by taking on character roles such as Pinkie Brown in the 1947 adaptation of Graham Greene’s novel, Brighton Rock, that Attenborough managed to avoid becoming type-cast. Yet the impact of those early roles in war films was to be felt in his work as a director: the underlying theme of his best-known film, Gandhi, is of an ordinary man caught up in major historical events yet rising to the challenge with honour, dignity, and self- sacrifice. Attenborough has claimed that it was always his ambition to make a film of the life of Mahatma Gandhi, and in 1982 Gandhi became his most successful effort as director to date. The film, which won a total of eight Oscars, runs to over three hours and gives a linear biographi- cal account of the founder of modern India. The pace tends to be rather slow, but the Oscar-winning performance of Ben Kingsley in the title role is fascinating to watch, and the film successfully captures a sense both of the vastness of India and the difficulty of the struggle. The overall strength of the film as an uplifting story of courage and sacrifice makes it possible to overlook its simplistic historical vision. Chaplin was an attempt to repeat the epic life of a little man, but proved similarly questionable as an accurate biopic, and lacks emo- tional depth. Later films, such as Shadowlands, In Love and War, and Grey Owl are not of the same order as Gandhi, which managed to be both epic and touching. Attenborough has gained a reputation as a director of long films with epic themes, and his style tends to be technically, rather than emotionally, impressive. His third film as director, the war action film A Bridge Too Far, is a case in point: its all-star cast and ambitious scale tend to detract from the human tragedy of its subject matter, the allied defeat at Arnhem in 1944. A later film, Cry Freedom, has similar limitations. The story of journalist Donald Woods and his investigation of the death of Steve Biko in police custody in South Africa is a gripping thriller, but the film has been criticized for romanticizing the relationship between Woods and Biko. In the end its political impact is reduced by a rather detached mood, and moralizing tone. When Attenborough has attempted smaller-scale dramas, as in Shadowlands, the effect of such detachment is an awkwardness that goes beyond the psychological difficulties of the main characters. Telling the story of the love affair between writer and Oxford Don C.S. Lewis and the American poet Joy Davidson, who later turns out to be terminally ill, the film was named to Time magazine’s top ten list in 1993. But the success of Shadowlands perhaps reflects the strength of the performances of Anthony Hopkins and Debra Winger in an otherwise sentimental film. Distinguished actors and young stars alike continue to be attracted to Attenborough’s film projects, and he continues to appear in films as diverse as Steven Spielberg’s Jurassic Park series and Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet. Although he has become better known as a direc- tor since the 1970s, it was his success as a character actor and as an important British star in the 1950s and 1960s that enabled him to co-produce and direct his first feature. Having come late to directing, AUGUST DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 52 Richard Attenborough, who received a life peerage and was made Lord Attenborough in 1993, has become one of the most important influences in British cinema. The fact that he has continued success- fully to direct, produce and act in films since the late 1960s marks him out as a true all-rounder. —Chris Routledge AUGUST, Bille Nationality: Danish. Born: Copenhagen, 9 November 1948. Educa- tion: Studied advertising photography; earned diploma as a director of photography from Danish Film School, 1971. Family: Married Pernilla Ostergren, star of Den Goda Viljan, 1991. Career: Selected by filmmaker Jorn Donner as cinematographer on Homeward in the Night, 1976; directed his first feature, Honningmane, 1978; also directed dramas for Danish television, as well as episode of The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles for American television. Awards: Outstanding Film of the Year, London Festival, for Zappa, 1983; Special Jury Prize, Young Peoples’ Cinema Festival at Lyon, and Best Danish Film Award, for Tro, hab og kaerlighed, 1984; Culture Award, Danish Trades Union Congress, 1984; Oscar, Best Foreign Film, and Palme d’or, Cannes Festival, for Pelle erobreren, 1987; Palme d’or, Cannes Festival, for Den goda viljan, 1992. Agent: Tom Chasin, The Chasin-Becsey Agency, 190 N. Canon Drive., Suite 201, Beverly Hills, CA 90210–5319, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1978 Honningmane (Honeymoon in My Life) (+ sc); Kim G. 1983 Zappa (+ co-sc) 1984 Tro, hab og kaerlighed (Twist and Shout) (+ co-sc); Busters verden (The World of Buster) (for television) 1987 Pelle erobreren (Pelle the Conqueror) (+ co-sc) 1992 Den goda viljan (The Best Intentions) 1994 House of the Spirits (+ sc) 1996 Jerusalem (+ sc) 1997 Smilla’s Sense of Snow 1998 Les Misérables Films as Cinematographer: 1977 Hem?t i Natten (Homeward in the Night) (Lindstrom); Miesta ei voi raiskata (Men Can’t Be Raped) (Donner) 1980 Karleken (Love) (Kallifatides) 1982 The Grass Is Singing (Raeburn) Publications By AUGUST: articles— Interview in Cinema (Paris), April/May 1986. Interview with Y. Alion, in La Revue du Cinema (Paris), Novem- ber 1988. Interview in Positif (Paris), November 1988. ‘‘Film: Bille’s Feast,’’ an interview with J. Jensen, in Village Voice (New York), 7 June 1988. ‘‘Cold Comfort,’’ an interview with Colette Maude, in Time Out (London), 1 July 1992. ‘‘August Harvest,’’ an interview with R. Neff, in Film Journal, March 1997. On AUGUST: articles— Brovik, I., article in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 30, 1988. Flamm, Matthew, article in New York Post, 30 December 1988. Lohr, Steve, ‘‘For Bergman, a New Twist on an Old Love,’’ in New York Times, 6 September 1989. ‘‘Bille August to Helm Script by Bergman,’’ in Variety (New York), 13 September 1989. Bjorkman, Stig, article in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 33, 1991/1992. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Swedish Film Takes Top Honor at Cannes,’’ in New York Times, 19 May 1992. Alderman, Bruce, ‘‘Intentions Bests Cannes Field,’’ in Variety (New York), 25 May 1992. Gritten, David, article in Los Angeles Times, 12 July 1992. Jones, Andy, article in Newsday (Melville, New York), 16 July 1992. Camhi, Leslie, ‘‘He Said, She Said,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 28 July 1992. Moerk, Christian, ‘‘Reluctant August Shuns Hollywood,’’ in Variety (New York), 3 August 1992. Cowie, Peter, ‘‘Directors of the Year,’’ International Film Guide (London, Hollywood), 1994. Landrot, Marine, ‘‘Une jeunesse d’enfer,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 2 August 1995. *** Since the retirement of Ingmar Bergman from film directing in the mid-1980s, Bille August has become Scandinavia’s premiere interna- tional filmmaker. August’s debut feature, In My Life, the story of a seemingly bright and optimistic middle-class Copenhagen couple and how their hopes steadily disintegrate, heralded the appearance of an important young talent. His follow-up features, Zappa and Twist and Shout, are keenly observed tales of teen angst in the 1960s. For international audiences, they served as reminders that adolescent dilemmas and concerns cut across cultures and language barriers. August’s next project was The World of Buster, an amusing made-for-TV kiddie film which ulti- mately is a minor credit on his filmography. In Zappa and Twist and Shout, August examines the distinction between characters from separate social classes. This also is the case in the feature he made after The World of Buster. This work, the career-defining Pelle the Conqueror, is a wonderful, universal film about desire and disappointment, dignity and dreams. Along with Gabriel Axel’s Babette’s Feast, it was the first Scandinavian film since the heyday of Bergman to earn a high international profile. Set at the turn of the twentieth century, it is the story of Lasse (Max von Sydow), a humble old widower who has emigrated with his son Pelle from poverty-stricken Sweden to the relative prosperity of Denmark. Lasse and Pelle are in search of a better life. Instead, they find themselves practically indentured servants on the aptly named Stone Farm, a harsh and dreary estate owned by a penny-pinching philanderer and his frustrated, faded beauty of a wife. AUGUSTDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 53 Billie August Pelle the Conqueror is a subtle film, the kind in which the characters’ quick glances reveal volumes about what they are think- ing and feeling but never, ever could articulate. Its multi-faceted narrative presents a landscape of villains and victims, a world in which any hint of true love is stifled, and an environment in which the well-heeled but repressed upper classes use and abuse their power by brutalizing the lower classes. As the seasons turn and the plot unfolds, Pelle begins to transcend the mysteries and fears of childhood. It becomes clear to the boy that if he is ever to get beyond the stifling existence of Stone Farm, he will have to part with his loving, well-meaning, but weak father and set forth into the world. Indeed, the force that holds the film together is the relationship between Pelle and Lasse. There is a poignant, life- sustaining bond between the boy, whose experiences here clearly will shape the course of his future, and his father. August never overplays the story’s melodramatics. His direction is sure-handed as he weaves the tale, allowing the viewer to come to know Lasse, Pelle, and the other characters. As much as anything else, Pelle the Conqueror is a film about physical presences, such as the great ship that brings Lasse and Pelle to their new land, the rural landscape of Stone Farm, and the everyday details of farm labor. The images, stunningly captured by cinematographer Jorgen Persson, are as beautiful as they are loaded with drama and emotion. Unlike dozens of filmmakers from across the world who have impressed with films not nearly as striking as Pelle the Conqueror, August has refused to go Hollywood. Instead, he has staunchly criticized films whose prime aesthetic motivations are car crashes and special effects, and has chosen to remain in his homeland and direct films which are motivated more by character and plot development. Upon the success of Pelle the Conqueror, August was the logical choice to be selected by Bergman to direct the latter’s autobiographi- cal script, The Best Intentions, a follow-up to Fanny and Alexander. The Best Intentions is the story of the courtship and marriage of Bergman’s parents; the end result is a film of which the master could be proud. The third film in the trilogy, Sunday’s Children, was directed by Bergman’s son, Daniel. After Pelle the Conqueror, August had attempted to film The House of the Spirits, based on Isabel Allende’s best-selling novel, but could not obtain adequate funding. He eventually got the film made on an estimated $27-million budget. The film was his first major foray into international filmmaking, but it also proved to be his first major failure. The House of the Spirits charts forty-five momentous years in AUTANT-LARA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 54 the lives of the South American Trueba family. August directed a notable cast that included Meryl Streep, Jeremy Irons, Glenn Close, Winona Ryder, Vanessa Redgrave, Armin Mueller-Stahl, and Antonio Banderas. Unfortunately, the result was wholly unsuccessful, with many of the actors miscast and seeming out of place in the setting. —Rob Edelman AUTANT-LARA, Claude Nationality: French. Born: Luzarches (Seine-et-Oize), 5 August 1903. Education: Lycée Janson-de-Sailly, Paris, at Ecole nationale supérieure des arts décoratifs, at Ecole des Beaux Arts, and at Mill Hill School, London. Family: Married Ghislain Auboin (deceased). Career: Art director on L’Herbier’s Le Carnaval des vérités, 1925; made several avant-garde films, and worked as assistant to René Clair, 1923–25; made French versions of American films in Holly- wood, 1930–32; returned to France and directed first feature, 1933; president of Syndicat des techniciens du cinéma, 1948–55; president of Fédération nationale du spectacle, 1957–63. Awards: Grand prix du Cinema fran?ais, 1954; Prix Europa, Rome, 1974; Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur; Commandeur des Arts et des Lettres. Address: 66 rue Lepic, 75018 Paris, France. Films as Director: 1923 Faits divers 1926 Construire un feu; Vittel 1930 Buster se marie (d of French version of American film Parlor, Bedroom, and Bath [Sedgwick]) 1931 Le Plumbier amoureux (d of French version of American film The Passionate Plumber [Sedgwick]); Le Fils du Rajah (d of French version of American film Son of India [Feyder]); La Pente (d of French version of American film); Pur Sang (d of French version of American film) 1932 L’Athlète incomplet (d of French version of American film); Le Gendarme est sans pitié; Un Client sérieux; Monsieur le Duc; La Peur des coups; Invite Monsieur à d?ner 1933 Ciboulette (+ co-sc, co-costume des) 1936 My Partner Mr. Davis (The Mysterious Mr. Davis) (+ co-sc, pr) 1937 L’Affaire du courrier de Lyon (The Courier of Lyon) (co-d) 1938 Le Ruisseau (co-d) 1939 Fric-Frac (co-d) 1942 Le Mariage de Chiffon; Lettres d’amour 1943 Douce (Love Story) 1944 Sylvie et le fant?me (Sylvie and the Phantom) 1947 Le Diable au corps (Devil in the Flesh) 1949 Occupe-toi d’Amélie (Oh Amelia!) 1951 L’Auberge rouge (The Red Inn) (+ co-sc) 1952 ‘‘L’Orgueil’’ (‘‘Pride’’) episode of Les 7 Péchés capitaux (The Seven Deadly Sins) (+ co-sc) 1953 Le Bon Dieu sans confession (+ co-sc); Le Blé en herbe (The Game of Love) (+ co-sc) 1954 Le Rouge et le noir 1956 Marguerite de la nuit; La Traversée de Paris (Four Bags Full) 1958 En Cas de malheur (Love Is My Profession); Le Joueur 1959 La Jument verte (The Green Mare) (+ pr) 1960 Les Régates de San Francisco; Le Bois des amants 1961 Tu ne tueras point (Non uccidere; Thou Shalt Not Kill) (+ co-pr); Le Comte de Monte Cristo (The Story of the Count of Monte Cristo) 1962 Vive Henri IV . . . Vive l’amour! 1963 Le Meurtrier (Enough Rope) 1964 Le Magot de Joséfa (+ co-sc); ‘‘La Fourmi’’ episode of Humour noir 1965 Le Journal d’une femme en blanc (A Woman in White) 1966 Le Nouveau Journal d’une femme en blanc (Une Femme en blanc se révolte) 1967 ‘‘Aujourd’hui’’ (‘‘Paris Today’’) episode of Le Plus Vieux Métier du monde (The Oldest Profession); Le Franciscain de Bourges 1969 Les Patates (+ co-sc) 1971 Le Rouge et le blanc 1973 Lucien Leuwen (for TV) 1977 Gloria (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1919 Le Carnaval des vérités (L’Herbier) (art d, costume des); L’Ex-voto (L’Herbier) (art d, costume des) 1920 L’Homme du large (L’Herbier) (art d, costume des) 1921 Villa Destin (L’Herbier) (art d, costume des); Eldorado (L’Herbier) (co-art d, costume des) 1922 Don Juan et Faust (L’Herbier) (art d, costume des) 1923 L’Inhumaine (L’Herbier) (co-art d, costume des); Le Marchand de plaisir (Catelain) (co-art d, costume des) 1926 Nana (Renoir) (co-art d, co-costume des, ro as Fauchery) 1946 Le Diable au coeur (L’Herbier) (art d, costume des) 1968 Flash 29 (ro as himself) 1987 Buster Keaton: A Hard Act to Follow (for TV) (ro as himself) Publications By AUTANT-LARA: books— La Rage dans le couer: Chronique cinématographique du 20ème siècle, Paris, 1984. Hollywood Cake-walk (1930–1932): Chronique cinématographique du 20ème siècle, Paris, 1985. By AUTANT-LARA: articles— ‘‘Styles du cinéma fran?ais,’’ in La Livre d’or du Cinéma Fran?ais 1947–48, edited by René Jeanne and Charles Ford, Paris, 1948. Numerous polemical articles on the state of French cinema and studios, and attacking government policies, in La Technicien du Film (Paris), Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), and other French periodicals, early to mid-1950s. ‘‘La Traversée de Paris est un film insolité,’’ interview with Martine Monod, in Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 4 October 1956. ‘‘Les Etrennes du cinéma fran?aises,’’ in Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 3 January 1957. ‘‘Attention, notre métier n’est pas un métier d’hurluberlus,’’ in La Technicien du Film (Paris), May 1958. AUTANT-LARADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 55 Claude Autant-Lara (left) on the set of En Cas de malheur ‘‘La Parole est à Claude Autant-Lara,’’ interview with Marcel Oms, in Cahiers de la Cinématheque (Paris), Summer 1973. Interview with J. C. Bonnet and others, in Cinématographe (Paris), April 1978. ‘‘Lausanne (Autant-Lara),’’ in Positif (Paris), December 1981. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Summer 1983. Interview in Film Fran?ais (Paris), 6 March 1987. On AUTANT-LARA: books— Buache, Freddy, Claude Autant-Lara, Lausanne, 1982. L’Institut Lumière présente Claude Autant-Lara en 33 films, Lyons, 1983. On AUTANT-LARA: articles— de la Roche, Catherine, ‘‘The Fighter,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January 1955. Durgnat, Raymond, ‘‘The Rebel with Kid Gloves,’’ in Films and Filming (London), October and November 1960. Biofilmography in Film Dope (London), no. 2, 1973. Special issue of Cahiers de la Cinématheque (Paris), Spring 1973. ‘‘L’Auberge rouge Dossier,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1982. Carbonnier, A., and Joel Magny, in Cinéma (Paris), September 1982. ‘‘Claude Autant-Lara,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Joffre, Laurent, ‘‘La tache brune: De l’affaire du Carmel aux propos d’Autant-Lara,’’ in Nouvel Observateur (Paris), 14 September 1989. Bergan, Ronald, ‘‘Out of Sight, out of Mind,’’ in Guardian (London), 28 September 1989. Chardère, Bernard, ‘‘Autant-Lara le premier,’’ in Jeune Cinèma (Paris), January-February 1997. *** Claude Autant-Lara is best known for his post-World War II films in the French ‘‘tradition of quality.’’ His earliest work in the industry was more closely related to the avant-garde movements of the 1920s than to the mainstream commercial cinema with which he was later identified. He began as a set designer in the 1920s, serving as art director for several of Marcel L’Herbier’s films, including L’Inhumaine, and for Jean Renoir’s Nana; he also assisted René Clair on a number of his early shorts. After directing several films, he worked on an early AUTANT-LARA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 56 wide-screen experiment, Construire un feu, using the Hypergonar system designed by Henri Chretien. On the basis of his work in this format, he was brought to Hollywood and ended up directing French- language versions of American films for several years. He returned to France and directed his first feature of note, Ciboulette, in 1933. During the war Autant-Lara exercised greater control in his choice of projects and started working with scenarists Jean Aurenche and Pierre Bost, who would continue to be among his most consistent collaborators. He also started assembling a basic crew that worked with him through the 1960s: composer René Cloerec, designer Max Douy, editor Madeleine Gug, and cameraman Jacques Natteau. Autant-Lara rapidly established his reputation as a studio director in the tradition of quality. For many, the names Aurenche, Bost, and Autant-Lara are synonymous with this movement. Their films are characterized by an emphasis on scripting and dialogue, a high proportion of literary adaptations, a solemn ‘‘academic’’ visual style, and general theatricality (due largely to the emphasis on dialogue and its careful delivery to create a cinematic world determined by psychological realism). They frequently attack or ridicule social groups and institutions. Autant-Lara’s first major postwar film, Le Diable au corps, was adapted from a novel by Raymond Radiguet. Set during World War I, it tells the story of an adolescent’s affair with a young married woman whose husband is away at war. While the film was considered scandalous by many for its valorization of adultery and tacit condem- nation of war, it was also seen to express the cynical mood of postwar youth. Autant-Lara’s films seem to revel in irreverent depictions of established authority and institutions. L’Auberge rouge is a black comedy involving murderous innkeepers, a group of insipid travellers (representing a cross-section of classes), and a monk trapped by the vows of confession. Throughout the 1950s Autant-Lara was extremely active. His successes of the period include Le Rouge et le noir, adapted from Stendhal; La Traversée de Paris, a comedy about black-market trading in occupied France; and En cas de malheur, a melodrama involving a middle-aged lawyer, his young client, and her student lover. At the same time Autant-Lara was an active spokesman for the French film industry. As head of several film trade unions and other groups promoting French film, he criticized (often harshly) the Centre National du cinéma fran?aise (CNC) for its inadequate support of the industry; the American film industry for its stultifying presence in the French market; and government censorship policies for limiting freedom of expression. Autant-Lara’s prominence was effectively eclipsed with the emer- gence of the French New Wave, although he continued directing films. In the 1950s he, along with Aurenche and Bost, had been subject to frequent critical attacks, most notably by Fran?ois Truffaut. In the wake of the success of the new generation of directors, Autant- Lara’s work is often seen as no more than the ‘‘stale’’ French cinema of the 1950s which was successfully displaced by the more vital films of the New Wave. Yet in spite of, indeed owing to, their ‘‘armchair’’ criticism of authority, bleak representation of human nature, and slow-paced academic style, they possess a peculiarly appealing, insolent sensibility. —M. B. White 57 B BACON, Lloyd Nationality: American. Born: San Jose, California, 16 January 1890. Education: Attended California public schools and Santa Clara College. Military service: Served in photo department, U.S. Navy, 1917. Family: Married Margaret Balach. Career: Member of David Belasco’s Los Angeles stock company, 1911; stage actor in Lloyd Hamilton comedies, 1913; worked in Chaplin comedies, 1916; actor at Mutual, 1918, and at Triangle, 1919; director for Mack Sennett and Lloyd Hamilton, 1921; moved to Warner Bros. and directed first feature, Broken Hearts of Hollywood, 1926; moved to 20th Century- Fox, 1944; finished career with two films at Universal and two at RKO, 1953–54. Died: In Burbank, California, 15 November 1955. Films as Director: 1926 Broken Hearts of Hollywood; Private Izzy Murphy 1927 Finger Prints; White Flannels; The Heart of Maryland; A Sailor’s Sweetheart; Brass Knuckles 1928 Pay as You Enter; The Lion and the Mouse; Women They Talk About; The Singing Fool 1929 Stark Mad; No Defense; Honky Tonk; Say It with Songs; So Long Letty 1930 The Other Tomorrow; She Couldn’t Say No; A Notorious Affair; Moby Dick; The Office Wife 1931 Sit Tight; Kept Husbands; Fifty Million Frenchmen; Gold Dust Gertie; Honor of the Family 1932 Manhattan Parade; Fireman Save My Child; Alias the Doc- tor; The Famous Ferguson Case; Miss Pinkerton; Crooner; You Said a Mouthful 1933 42nd Street; Picture Snatcher; Mary Stevens M.D.; Footlight Parade; Son of a Sailor 1934 Wonder Bar; A Very Honorable Guy; He Was Her Man; Here Comes the Navy; Six-Day Bike Rider 1935 Devil Dogs of the Air; In Caliente; Broadway Gondolier; The Irish in Us; Frisco Kid 1936 Sons o’ Guns; Cain and Mabel; Gold Diggers of 1937 1937 Marked Woman; Ever since Eve; San Quentin; Submar- ine D-1 1938 A Slight Case of Murder; Cowboy from Brooklyn; Rocket Busters; Boy Meets Girl 1939 Wings of the Navy; The Oklahoma Kid; Indianapolis Speed- way; Espionage Agent 1940 A Child Is Born; Invisible Stripes; Three Cheers for the Irish; Brother Orchid; Knute Rockne—All American 1941 Honeymoon for Three; Footsteps in the Dark; Affectionately Yours; Navy Blues 1942 Larceny, Inc.; Wings for the Eagle; Silver Queen 1943 Action in the North Atlantic 1944 Sunday Dinner for a Soldier 1945 Captain Eddie 1946 Home Sweet Homicide; Wake Up and Dream 1947 I Wonder Who’s Kissing Her Now 1948 You Were Meant for Me; Give My Regards to Broadway; Don’t Trust Your Husband (An Innocent Affair) 1949 Mother Is a Freshman; It Happens Every Spring; Miss Grant Takes Richmond 1950 Kill the Umpire; The Good Humor Man; The Fuller Brush Girl 1951 Call Me Mister; The Frogmen; Golden Girl 1953 The I Don’t Care Girl; The Great Sioux Uprising; Walking My Baby Back Home 1954 The French Line; She Couldn’t Say No Other Films: 1915 The Champion (Chaplin) (role); In the Park (Chaplin) (role); The Jitney Elopement (Chaplin) (role); The Bank (Chaplin) (role); The Tramp (Chaplin) (role) 1916 The Floorwalker (Chaplin) (role); The Vagabond (Chaplin) (role); Behind the Screen (Chaplin) (role); The Rink (Chap- lin) (role); The Fireman (Chaplin) (role) 1919/20 Roles for Mutual and Triangle studios Publications On BACON: books— Meyer, William, Warner Brothers Directors, New York, 1978. Fuments, Rocco, editor, 42nd Street, Madison, Wisconsin, 1980. Feuer, Jane, The Hollywood Musical, London, 1982. Roddick, Nick, A New Deal in Entertainment: Warner Brothers in the 1930s, London, 1983. Altman, Rick, The American Film Musical, Bloomington, Indiana, and London, 1989. On BACON: articles— ‘‘Lloyd Bacon . . . Warner Brothers’ Ace,’’ in Cue (New York), 6 April 1935. Parsons, Louella, ‘‘Cosmopolitan’s Citation for the Best Direction of the Month,’’ in Cosmopolitan (New York), May 1949. Calanquin, L. V., ‘‘Best of the B’s: Sons of Guns,’’ in Classic Images (Muscatine), no. 136, October 1986. Haralovich, M. B., ‘‘The Proletarian Woman’s Film of the 1930s: Contending with Censorship and Entertainment,’’ in Screen (Ox- ford), vol 31, no. 2, 1990. *** BACON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 58 Lloyd Bacon (left) with Jane Russell. Lloyd Bacon is probably best known for his director’s credit on such classic Warner Bros. films as 42nd Street, Footlight Parade, Knute Rockne—All American, and Action in the North Atlantic. Still, other film personalities are better remembered for these films: chore- ographer Busby Berkeley for the musicals, and actors Pat O’Brien, Ronald Reagan, and Humphrey Bogart for the 1940s films. Today Bacon is lost in the literature about Warner Bros. In his day, however, Lloyd Bacon was recognized as a consum- mate Hollywood professional. One cannot help standing in some awe of Bacon’s directorial output in the era from the coming of sound to the Second World War. During those fourteen years he directed an average of five films per annum for Warner Bros. (seven were released in 1932 alone.) Bacon’s 42nd Street and Wonder Bar were among the industry’s top-grossing films of the decade. For a time Bacon was considered to be the top musicals specialist at Warner Bros. The corporation paid him accordingly, some $200,000 per year, making him one of its highest paid contract directors of the 1930s. Bacon’s status declined during the 1940s. His craftsmanship remained solid, for he knew the classical Hollywood system of production as well as anyone on the Warner lot. But Bacon never seemed to find his special niche. Instead, he skipped from one genre to another. He seemed to evolve into the Warner Bros. handyman director. His greatest success during this period came with war films. For example, Wings of the Navy had a million dollar budget and helped kick off the studio’s string of successful World War II films. Bacon’s best-remembered film of the 1940s is probably Action in the North Atlantic, a tribute to the U.S. Merchant Marine. This movie was Bacon’s last film at Warner Bros. In 1944 Bacon moved to Twentieth Century-Fox to work for his former boss, Darryl F. Zanuck. There he re-established himself in musicals as well as films of comedy and family romance, but still seemed unable to locate a long-term specialty. He finished at Fox with an early 1950s series of Lucille Ball comedies, and ended his directorial career in somewhat ignominious fashion, helping Howard Hughes create a 3-D Jane Russell spectacle, The French Line. Bacon’s most significant contribution to film history probably came during his early days at Warner Bros. as that studio pioneered new sound technology in the late 1920s. Bacon presided over several significant transitional films, none more important than The Singing Fool. Although The Jazz Singer usually gets credit as the first (and most important) transitional talkie, The Singing Fool should receive far more credit because for more than a decade, this film stood as the BADHAMDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 59 highest grossing feature in Hollywood annals. As its director, Bacon was honored by the trade publication Film Daily as one of the top ten directors of the 1928–29 season. As a consequence of his involvement on this and other films, Bacon established his reputation as a director who helped thrust Hollywood into an era of movies with sound. —Douglas Gomery BADHAM, John Nationality: American. Born: Luton, Bedfordshire, England, 25 August, 1939; son of English actress Mary Hewitt; moved to U.S., 1945; grew up in Alabama, stepson of U.S. Army colonel. Educa- tion: Attended Indian Springs School, Alabama; B.A. in philosophy, Yale University, 1961; M.A., Yale School of Drama, 1963. Military Service: U.S. Army, 1963–64. Family: Married Bonnie Sue Hughes, 28 December 1967 (divorced 1979), daughter: Kelly MacDonald; married Jan Speck, 1983 (divorced 1990); married Olivia Laughlin, 1992. Career: Worked in various jobs for Hollywood studios, including mailroom assistant at Universal; assistant director to Steven Spielberg on Night Gallery (TV series), 1969; associate producer at Universal Studios, 1969–70; solo film directing debut, 1971; worked exclusively in TV as director until 1976; most successful period was as maker of action films and thrillers in the 1980s; guest lecturer at Yale University, UCLA, University of Southern California, Amherst College; Chairman of Yale Drama Alumni Fund. Awards: Southern California Motion Picture Council Award for The Gun, 1974; Grand Prize, Ninth International Science Fiction Festival of Paris, Best Horror Film Award, and George Pal Memorial Award, Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror Films, all for Dracula, 1979. Agent: Adams, Ray & Rosenberg, 9200 Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles 90069, USA. Films as Director: 1971 The Impatient Heart (for TV) 1974 Isn’t It Shocking? (for TV); The Law (for TV); The Gun (for TV); Reflections of Murder (for TV); The Godchild (for TV) 1976 The Bingo Long Travelling All-Stars and Motor Kings; The Keegans (for TV) 1977 Saturday Night Fever 1979 Dracula 1981 Whose Life Is It Anyway? 1983 Blue Thunder; War Games 1985 American Flyers 1986 Short Circuit 1987 Stakeout (+ pr) 1990 Bird on a Wire 1991 The Hard Way 1993 Point of No Return (The Assassin); Another Stakeout (The Lookout, Stakeout 2) (+ pr) 1994 Drop Zone (+ pr) 1995 Nick of Time (+ pr) 1997 Incognito John Badham 1998 Floating Away 1999 The Jack Bull (for TV) Films as Producer: 1989 Disorganised Crime 1992 From Time to Time (Timekeeper, Le Visionarium) 1993 Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story 1994 Relentless: Mind of a Killer (for TV) 1996 Rebound: The Legend of Earl ‘The Goat’ Manigault (Re- bound) (for TV) Publications On BADHAM: articles— Brown, Jeffrey A. ‘‘Gender and the Action Heroine: Hardbodies and the Point of No Return,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), Spring 1996. Quinlan, David, ‘‘John Badham,’’ in Quinlan’s Film Directors, London, 1999. Vincendeau, Ginette, ‘‘Highjacked,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), July 1993. Wood, Robin, ‘‘Burying the Undead: The Use and Obsolescence of Count Dracula,’’ in Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature (Winnipeg, Manitoba), Winter-Spring, 1983. BAILLIE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 60 On BADHAM: films— John Badham: The Director’s Director, 1982. *** Best known as the director of Saturday Night Fever, and a raft of flawed but popular thrillers, English-born director John Badham began his career working in television on series such as Night Gallery (1969), Nichols (1971) and Police Story (1973). He also made several TV movies of variable quality in the early 1970s before going on to establish the characteristic glossy style of his 1980s film output. Badham is notable for the number of different types of films he has made, from dance drama in Saturday Night Fever through romantic horror in Dracula, techno-paranoia in War Games, and sub- Hitchcockian thrillers such as Bird on a Wire. Badham is a workman- like director, skilled in the mechanics of movie making and with a reputation for making reliable, if sometimes predictable, entertainment. The disco dance movie Saturday Night Fever accelerated the career of actor John Travolta, and also marked the beginning of Badham’s own most successful spell as a director. The dramatic pace of the film, helped along by some sharp editing and Travolta’s presence, have made Saturday Night Fever a cult movie: Travolta’s dance scene in Quentin Tarantino’s celebrated Pulp Fiction (1994) pays homage to the earlier film. Yet despite its cult status Saturday Night Fever is at times a rather sluggish film, rescued only by Travolta’s performance and some extraordinary dance sequences. It has been released in several versions over the years, some of which are quite heavily censored. After the success of Saturday Night Fever, Dracula became Badham’s stylish contribution to the vampire film canon. An expen- sive production, heavy with visual effects and flamboyant theatricality, Dracula gives an indication of Badham’s status in Hollywood at the end of the 1970s, and is one of his most watchable films. His period of greatest success, however, came during the 1980s, when films like Blue Thunder and War Games appealed to Cold War worries about placing too much faith in technology. Blue Thunder is a lavish action movie featuring a plot about the commissioning of a high-tech police helicopter. More interesting is War Games, which was Oscar nominated for screenplay and cinematography. An early treatment of the dangerous possibilities for online terrorism, War Games tells the story of a teenage hacker who manages to connect his home computer into the Pentagon’s system, pretending to be the Soviet military about to embark on nuclear war. At a time of great tension between the West and the Soviet Union, the film was a reminder that deadly conflicts often begin with a misunderstanding. Playing on the mystique and suspicion that still surrounded computers at the time, War Games is overburdened by the need to make the machines look as complicated and sinister as possible. It could be argued that the elements of adventure and suspense in the film contradict the message that hacking poses a serious threat. Nevertheless, both Blue Thunder and War Games were immensely successful at the box office. Short Circuit again demonstrated Badham’s ability to switch between genres, this time with the enjoyable comic story of a mal- functioning robot on the loose. It was quickly followed by the light- hearted but over-long police thriller, Stakeout. After these successes, Badham’s career took a downturn in the late 1980s from which it has never really recovered. Bird on a Wire is an amusing but ultimately unbelievable star vehicle for Mel Gibson and Goldie Hawn, while another comedy thriller, The Hard Way, tells the story of an actor who teams up with a real-life New York cop in order to research a film role. Badham’s later films can mostly be described as journeyman work, epitomized by Point of No Return (The Assassin), a remake of Luc Besson’s La Femme Nikita. Besson’s film is a gritty, violent movie about a convicted killer given the chance to avoid the death penalty if she agrees to work as an assassin for the state. While the Badham film sticks fairly closely to the plot of the original, it takes a sanitized, altogether softer approach. There seems little reason for Point of No Return ever to have been made, other than the American audience’s dislike of subtitling and Hollywood’s worries about the extreme levels of violence in the French original. Having begun his career in television, Badham has returned at the end of the 1990s to making TV movies. While in filmmaking terms many of his films are uneven and unsatisfactory, in the 1980s he made some of the most popular movies of the decade. He has also been involved in the development of computer generated special effects. Ironically, having established a reputation as a director of predictable star vehicles, he will probably be best remembered as the director of Saturday Night Fever, a film which helped make a star of John Travolta. —Chris Routledge BAILLIE, Bruce Nationality: American. Born: Aberdeen, South Dakota, 24 Septem- ber 1931. Education: University of Minnesota, B.A., 1955; attended University of California at Berkeley, 1956–58; attended London School of Film Technique, 1959. Military Service: Served in the U.S. Navy during Korean War, 1951–53. Career: Worked under Will Hindle for ‘‘PM West,’’ CBS, and for Marvin Becker Films, San Francisco, and began first film, On Sundays, 1960; founded Canyon Cinema Film Cooperative, San Francisco, 1960; taught film at Rice University, Houston, 1969–70, Bard College, New York, 1974–77, and Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington, 1981–82; founder, with Bonnie Jones, Olympia Zen-Kai, 1982; touring lecturer, 1963—. Awards: Rockefeller Foundation fellowship, 1966; Creative Arts Award for Filmmaking, Brandeis University, 1971; honorary M.F.A., San Francisco Art Institute, 1971; National Endowment for the Arts fellowship, 1971, 1981; CAPS, NY, 1981; Maya Deren Award, Vermont Institute, 1981, American Film Institute, 1991; San Fran- cisco International Film Festival Golden Gate Award; Ann Arbor Grand Prize; Moholy Nagy Award; Guggenheim fellowship; Ameri- can Film Institute fellowship. Address: 669 W. Kodiak Ave., Camano Island, WA 98292, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1960/61 On Sundays 1961 David Lynn’s Sculpture (unfinished); Mr Hayashi; The Gymnasts 1962 Friend Fleeing (unfinished); Everyman; News No. 3; Have You Thought of Talking to the Director?; Here I Am 1962/63 A Hurrah for Soldiers 1963 To Parsifal 1964 Mass for the Dakota Sioux; The Brookfield Recreation Center BARDEMDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 61 1964/65 Quixote (revised 1967) 1965 Yellow Horse 1966 Tung; Castro Street; All My Life; Still Life; Termination; Port Chicago Vigil; Show Leader 1967 Valentin de las Sierras 1970 Quick Billy 1971-present Roslyn Romance (multi-part film) 1978 Roslyn Romance (Is It Really True?): Intro. I and II 1981-present The Cardinal’s Visit (final section of Roslyn Romance) 1987-present Dr. Bish Remedies II 1990 The P-38 Pilot; The Bus Driver’s Tale; Dr. Bish Remedies I 1995 Commute; Kindergarten Publications By BAILLIE: articles— Frequent poems and letters, in Canyon Cinema News (San Francisco) ‘‘Letters: San Francisco Film Scene,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1963. Interview with Richard Whitehall, in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1969. Interview in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1971. ‘‘Bruce Baillie,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Spring 1971. ‘‘Dr. Bish,’’ in Downtown Review, Fall/Winter 1979/80, Spring 1980, Fall 1980. Interview with Scott MacDonald, in Wide Angle (Baltimore), July- October 1992. On BAILLIE: books— Hanhardt, John, and others, A History of the American Avant-Garde Cinema, New York, 1976. Callenbach, Ernest, Bruce Baillie, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1979. MacDonald, Scott, A Critical Cinema, Vol. 2, Berkeley, Califor- nia, 1992. On BAILLIE: articles— Callenbach, Ernest, ‘‘Bruce Baillie,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1964. Polt, Harriet, ‘‘The Films of Bruce Baillie,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1964. Kent, Thomas, ‘‘San Francisco’s Hipster Cinema,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1967. ‘‘Baillie Issue’’ of Harbinger (Houston), July 1967. ‘‘Baillie Section’’ of Film Culture (New York), no. 67–69, 1979. Nygren, Scott, ‘‘Quick Billy’’ (Ph.D. thesis) (Buffalo, New York), 1982. Connor, Kathleen, ‘‘Brigid Rose and Dr. Bish: A Celtic Journey’’ (M.F.A. thesis) (British Columbia), 1988. Cinematograph (San Francisco), vol. 5, 1993. Connor, Kathleen, ‘‘Quick Billy and W.B. Yeats’ The Wanderings of Oisin’’ (Ph.D. thesis) (Athens, Ohio), 1994. *** The career of Bruce Baillie has two central aspects, which are also features of the whole American avant-garde film movement. First, his films are generally intensely poetic, lyrical evocations of persons and places in which the subject matter is transformed by the subjective methods used to photograph it. Second, many of his films display a strong social awareness, describing attitudes critical towards, and alienated from, mainstream American society. In many cases, Baillie fuses these concerns within single films. Stylistically, Baillie’s films are characterized by images of haunt- ing, evanescent beauty. An object will appear with spectacular clarity, only to dissolve away an instant later. Light itself often becomes a subject, shining across the frame or reflected from objects, suggest- ing a level of poetry in the subject matter that lies beyond easy interpretation. Baillie combines images with other images, and im- ages with sound, in dense, collage-like structures. Thus, many of his films cut frequently between scenes, or superimpose objects on each other. One is constantly aware of a restlessness, an instability, which seems to result from his images’ appearance and flow. It is significant, too, that many of Baillie’s films contain, or are structured as, journeys. The effect of Baillie’s films is to make the viewer feel that any moment of the viewing, any single image he is looking at is a mere illusion that will soon vanish. The sensuousness of the light and colors only heighten one’s awareness of their unreality. It is as if there is a void, a nothingness, that lies behind all things. It is not irrelevant in this regard that Baillie has evidenced strong interest, over the years, in Eastern religious thought. Some degree of social comment is present in most of Baillie’s films, but in widely varying degrees. Mr. Hayashi places the poetic and the social in a very precise balance. The imagery consists of evocative, sun-drenched images forming a short, haiku-like portrait of a man. On the soundtrack, we hear the man speak of his life, and his difficulty in finding work. Mass and Quixote indict American society as overly aggressive, toward its citizens, toward Native Americans, and toward nature; as impersonal and dehumanizing; as lacking physical or moral roots. For Quixote, Baillie uses an extremely dense, collage-like form, in which images and fragments of images are intercut with and superimposed on others, with a similarly complex soundtrack. At times, the film’s multiple themes seem to blur into each other, as if the filmmaker is acknowledging that he is as ‘‘lost’’ as the society he is depicting. Castro Street, Tung, and Valentin de las Sierras are, by contrast, apparently simpler portraits of people and places. By keeping his camera very close to things, Baillie renders their details ever more stunning, while his collage editing and soundtrack again create an instability leading to ‘‘nothingness.’’ Castro Street, which depicts an industrialized area, is extraordinary for its combination of diverse photographic representations—black and white, color, positive and negative—in editing and superimposition. Quick Billy contains the- matic and stylistic elements of most of Baillie’s previous films; its motifs include autobiography, ‘‘portrait’’-like representation of peo- ple and events, and an underlying theme, made explicit in the film’s final section, of Western man’s aggressiveness toward his surroundings. —Fred Camper BARDEM, Juan Antonio Nationality: Spanish. Born: Juan Antonio Bardem-Munoz in Madrid, 2 July 1922. Education: Instituto de Investigaciones Cinematograficas, 1947–48. Career: Worked for Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, BARDEM DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 62 assigned to Cinema section, 1946; wrote for film periodicals, and on scripts with Luis Berlanga, from 1947; began film magazine Objectivo, 1953 (banned by government, 1955); arrested for political reasons, 1956 and later; produced through Uninci company, 1958–61; head of Spanish directors’ guild, 1970’s; directed Bulgarian/USSR/East Ger- man production of The Warning, 1981. Films as Director: 1949 Paseo sobre una guerra antigua (co-d, co-sc) (silent short incorporated by Luis Escobar into feature La honradez de la cerradura) 1950 Barajas, aeropuerto internacional (short) (+ sc) 1951 Esa pareja feliz (That Happy Pair) (co-d, co-sc) 1954 Cómicos (Comedians) (+ sc); Felices Pascuas (+ co-sc) 1955 Muerte de un ciclista (Death of a Cyclist; Age of Infidelity) (+ sc) 1956 Calle Mayor (Grand Rue; The Lovemaker) (+ sc) 1957 La muerte de Pio Baroja (unreleased) (+ sc); La venganza (The Vengeance) (+ sc) 1959 Sonatas (+ pr, sc) 1960 A las cinco de la tarde (+ pr, co-sc) 1962 Los inocentes (+ co-sc) 1963 Nunca pasa nada (+ co-sc) 1965 Los pianos mécanicos (Les Pianos méchaniques; The Unin- hibited) (+ sc) 1969 El ultimo dia de la guerra (The Last Day of the War) (+ co-sc) 1971 Varietes (+ sc) 1973 Four versions of The Mysterious Island: 1. La isla misteriosa (for Spanish and Latin American distribution), 2. L’isola misteriosa e il Capitano Nemo (for Italian distribution, incorporates material directed by Henri Colpi), 3. L’ile mystérieuse and The Mysterious Island (French, English and international version, co-d with Colpi), 4. six-hour TV version for international distribution; La corrupción de Chris Miller (The Corruption of Chris Miller) (+ role); Behind the Shutters 1976 El podor del deseo; Foul Play 1977 The Dog; El puente 1979 7 Dias de enero (Seven Days in January) (+ sc) 1982 The Warning 1987 Lorca, la Muerte de un Poeta (+ sc) 1993 El Joven Picasso (Young Picasso: 1881–1906) (TV) 1998 Resultado final (+sc) Other Films: 1952 Bienvenido, Mr. Marshall! (Welcome, Mr. Marshall!) (Berlanga) (co-sc) 1953 Novio a la vista (Berlanga) (co-sc) 1954 El torero (Wheeler) (Spanish version of Chateaux en Espagne) (co-dialogue) 1955 Playa prohibida (El esconocido) (Soler) (sc) 1956 El amór de Don Juan (Don Juan) (Berry) (co-sc); Carte a Sara (Manzanos and Bercovici) (sc) 1958 L’uomo dai calzoni corti (Tal vez ma?ana) (Pellegrini) (pr) 1961 Viridiana (Bu?uel) (pr) 1978 El Diputado (Eloy de la Iglesia) (role) 1986 Adiós peque?a (Uribe) (role) 1995 Noctámbulos (Campón) (ro as Old Bum) Publications By BARDEM: articles— ‘‘Spanish Highway,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1957. Film Makers on Filmmaking, edited by Harry Geduld, Bloomington, Indiana, 1967. ‘‘Cara a cara . . . Bardem-Berlanga,’’ in Cinema 2002 (Madrid), July/ August 1980. Interview with P. Farinas, in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 103, 1983. ‘‘Puedo considerarme propiamente un realista,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), 1988. Interview with Wolfgang Martin Hamdorf, in Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), 1994. On BARDEM: books— Oms, Marcel, J.A. Bardem, Lyons (Premier Plan no. 21). Scwartz, Ronald, Spanish Film Directors: 21 Profiles, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1986. Hopewell, John, Out of the Past: Spanish Cinema after Franco, London, 1987. Higginbotham, Virginia, Spanish Film under Franco, Austin, Texas, 1988. On BARDEM: articles— ‘‘The Arrest,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1956. Aranda, J.F., ‘‘Bardem: Une Méthode de travail,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no. 33, 1959. Durand, Philippe, ‘‘Juan Antonio Bardem, homme d’Espagne,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), October 1959. Carril, M. Martinex, ‘‘Despues de 27 a?os, Bardem se revitaliza,’’ in Cinemateca Revista (Andes), July 1980. Biofilmography, in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Perpignan), Win- ter 1984. Guarner, J.L., ‘‘Bunuel ja perilliset,’’ in Filmihullu (Helsinki), no. 8, 1989. *** A pioneer figure in Spanish film, Juan Antonio Bardem is also one of Spain’s most consistently political filmmakers. In his early movies Esa pareja feliz and Bienvenido Mr. Marshall, co-directed with Luis Garcia Berlanga, he broke with prevailing Francoist film traditions that emphasized militarism, folklore, literary adaptations and cos- tume dramas. Bardem and Berlanga chose instead to present scenes of contemporary Spanish life and used humor to describe and criticize aspects of Spanish society. With Bienvenido Mr. Marshall the two directors were recognized as leading filmmakers and, along with others of their generation, they set out to revitalize the Spanish film industry and to rescue Spanish films from mediocrity. At a meeting held in Salamanca in 1955, they drafted a statement of principles in which Bardem wrote: ‘‘After 60 years, Spanish cinema is politically futile, socially false, intellectually worthless, aesthetically valueless and industrially paralytic.’’ Bardem went on to note that Spanish BARNETDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 63 cinema ‘‘had turned its back on reality . . . (and was) totally removed from Spanish realistic traditions [as found] in paintings and novels.’’ Bardem and other filmmakers who attended the meeting at Salamanca also deplored the lack of general film culture in Spain, noting that it was not possible to see 95% of movies made abroad. Bardem felt that it was important for Spaniards to keep abreast of worldwide trends in filmmaking and especially to become familiar with Italian neo-realism. This was the single most important influence in the development of his own cinematic style. Both in his movies and in his writings he remained faithful to the tenets of neo-realism. In order to foster a film culture in Spain, Bardem founded Objetivo, a cinema journal that was eventually banned by the government. During its brief existence, Objetivo nevertheless became a rallying point for Spanish cineastes, raised the level of film criticism in Spain and informed readers about prohibited films. Several years later, in yet another effort to ensure the autonomy and integrity of Spanish film, Bardem joined with Berlanga, Carlos Saura, and other directors and founded a production company, UNINCI, which operated until 1962, when it was closed down for co-producing Luis Bu?uel’s Viridiana. Because of these endeavors as well as his political outspo- kenness, Bardem was arrested seven times during the Franco years. He nevertheless persisted in his efforts to make political films in Spain. In spite of his lack of favor at home, he won many prizes at film festivals around the world and directed co-productions in Italy, France, Argentina, and Bulgaria. Bardem is most closely associated with films that chronicle the negative effects of Francoism on the psyche of Spaniards of different classes, regions and social milieus. In several films he dramatizes the alienation fostered by Francoism by focusing on a single individual who often bears Bardem’s own given name—Juan. This Spanish everyman feels frustrated and stifled in a closed society. He attempts to find outlets through hobbies, intrigues, and even through radio contests, but all means prove unsatisfactory. In the course of his efforts, Juan is led to reevaluate himself and the world around him in order to find new options. The films depict the choices that each Juan makes, becoming increasingly critical of individuals who act self- ishly, cowardly, or who refuse to take a stand. These general themes continue in the movies Bardem has made since the death of Franco. —Katherine Singer Kovács BARNET, Boris Nationality: Russian. Born: Moscow, 1902, grandson of an English settler. Education: Studied at School of Art and Architecture, Mos- cow. Military Service: Joined Red Army, 1919, later PT instructor for Army. Career: Professional boxer; joined Lev Kuleshov’s ‘‘Ec- centric Workshop,’’ 1924; directed first film, 1926. Awards: Retrospectives at La Rochelle Festival, 1982, and Locarno Festival, 1985. Died: By suicide, 8 January 1965. Films as Director: 1926 Miss Mend (serial) (co-d, co-sc, role) 1927 Devushka s korobkoi (The Girl with the Hat Box); Moskva v oktyabre (Moscow in October) (+ role) 1928 Dom na Trubnoi (House on Trubnaya) 1929 Zhivye dela (Living Things) (short) (+ co-sc) 1930 Proizvodstvo muzykal’nykh instrumentov (The Manufacture of Musical Instruments) (short) 1931 Ledolom (The Thaw) 1933 Okraina (Outskirts; Patriots) (+ co-sc) 1935 U samogo sinego morya (By the Deep Blue Sea) 1939 Noch’ v sentyabre (One September Night) (+ role) 1940 Staryi nayezdnik (The Old Jockey) (released 1959) 1941 ‘‘Muzhestvo’’ (‘‘Courage’’) episode of Boyevoy kinosbornik no. 3 (Fighting Film Album no. 3) 1942 ‘‘Bestsennaya golova’’ (‘‘A Priceless Head’’) episode of Boyevoy kinosbornik no. 10 (Fighting Film Album no. 10) 1943 Novgorodtsy (Men of Novgorod) (not released) 1945 Odnazhdy noch’yu (Once One Night) (+ role) 1947 Podvig razvedchika (The Exploits of an Intelligence Agent) (+ role) 1948 Stranitsy zhizni (Pages from a Life) (co-d) 1950 Schedroe leto (A Bounteous Summer) 1952 Kontsert masterov ukrainskogo iskusstva (Masters of Ukrain- ian Art in Concert) (+ sc) 1955 Lyana (+ co-sc) 1957 Poet (The Poet); Borets i kloun (The Wrestler and the Clown) (co-d) 1959 Annushka 1961 Alyonka 1963 Polustanok (The Whistle-Stop) (+ co-sc) Films as Actor Only: 1924 Neobychainiye priklucheniya Mistera Vesta v stranye Bolshevikov (The Adventures of Mr. West in the Land of the Bolsheviks) (Kuleshov) 1925 Shakhmatnaya goryachka (Chess fever) (Pudovkin) (short); Na vernom sledu (On the Right Track) (A. Dmitriyev) 1926 Protsess o trekh millionakh (The Three Millions Trial) (Protazanov) 1928 Potomok Chingis-khana (The Heir to Genghis Khan; Storm over Asia) (Pudovkin) 1929 Zhivoi trup (The Living Corpse) (Otsep) 1936 Lyubov’ i nenavist’ (Love and Hate) (A. Endelstein) 1946 Sinegoriya (The Blue Mountains) (Garin and Lokshina) Publications On BARNET: books— Kushnirov, M., Zhizn’ i fil’my Boris Barneta [The Life and Films of Boris Barnet], Moscow, 1977. Albera, F., and R. Cosandey, editors, Boris Barnet: Ecrits, Docu- ments, Etudes, Filmographie, Locarno, 1985. On BARNET: articles— Obituary in Kino (Warsaw), no. 2, 1965. Obituary in Cinéma (Paris), no. 96, 1965. BARTEL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 64 ‘‘Boris Barnet,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Fall 1965. Kuzmina, ‘‘A Tribute to Boris Barnet,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1968. ‘‘Boris Barnet,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1973. Gillett, John, in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), July 1980. Gillett, John, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1980. Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1982. Revue du Cinéma (Paris), October 1983. Jeune Cinéma (Paris), November 1984. Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1985. Eisenschitz, B., ‘‘A Fickle Man, or Portrait of Boris Barnet as a Soviet Director,’’ in Inside the Film Factory: New Approaches to Rus- sian and Soviet Cinema, edited by Richard Taylor and Ian Chris- tie, London and New York, 1991. Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 6, June 1993. Filmkultura (Budapest), vol. 31, no. 11, November 1995. *** Boris Barnet’s career as a director has been much underrated in the West, yet it spanned almost forty years of Soviet filmmaking. After a brief period as a PT instructor in the Red Army and then as a professional boxer, he joined Kuleshov’s workshop as an actor and handyman. In 1924 Barnet played the part of Cowboy Jeddy, a gro- tesque caricature of an American, in Kuleshov’s eccentric comedy The Extraordinary Adventures of Mr. West in the Land of the Bolsheviks. He frequently appeared later in his own films, often in cameo roles. Like Kuleshov, Barnet went to work for the Mezhrabpom-Rus studio, where experimentation was combined with the production of films that were commercially successful. Barnet collaborated with Fyodor Otsep on the serial thriller Miss Mend and then made his first two feature films, The Girl with the Hatbox and The House on Trubnaya. Both films involved actors from the Kuleshov workshop and both were light-hearted comedies, satirising the excesses of the New Economic Policy and the social and economic tensions associ- ated with it. The first centred on a lost lottery ticket and the second on the arrival of a country girl in Moscow, but Barnet managed very gently to broaden their frame of reference. His deft touch on these two films marked him out by the end of the 1920s as a director of originality and distinction. The advent of sound seems to have caused Barnet fewer problems than it did other directors: he made two sound shorts about musical instruments in 1930, neither of which has been preserved. His first sound feature film, Okraina, was produced in 1933. This was a re- markably powerful, and in some ways almost Chekhovian, portrayal of life in a provincial Russian town during the First World War and the start of the Revolution. The lives of the characters are almost imperceptibly intertwined with the historical events unfolding far away. The relationship between individuals and events was, however, portrayed in too subtle a fashion for many of Barnet’s contemporaries and, like so many other Soviet filmmakers of the time, he was attacked for ideological obscurantism. Hence it was that Barnet later remarked that he was not merely a ‘‘film director’’ but a ‘‘Soviet film director.’’ The reception for Barnet’s next film, By the Deep Blue Sea, was even more hostile. On one level the film was a light-hearted love intrigue set on a collective farm on the banks of the Caspian Sea. On another level, however, it can be read as an allegorical tale of the eternal struggle between dream and reality, with the collective farm itself as a latter-day utopia, emphasised by the somewhat ironic title—a dangerous comparison in 1936 in the Soviet Union. Given the atmosphere of the time, it is perhaps not altogether surprising that Barnet’s next film, One September Night, was devoted to a more conventional account of the birth of the Stakhanovite movement. In this film the secret police were portrayed as heroes, defending the Soviet Union against sabotage. But The Old Jockey, made the year after, fell afoul of the authorities and was not released until 1959. The Second World War dominated Barnet’s output for the next few years and his efforts were rewarded with the Stalin Prize in 1948. He returned to his true métier, comedy, in 1950, with his first colour film, A Bounteous Summer, made in the Ukraine. Another film, Lyana, was made in Moldavia five years later. Barnet’s last com- pleted film, The Whistle-Stop, was also a comedy, but other films that he made during the last decade of his life are more properly characterised as dramas. But to say that is to underestimate Barnet, because his films cannot be easily pigeon-holed. Barnet’s career in Soviet cinema spanned four decades. He belonged to the generation of lesser known filmmakers who in fact constituted the backbone of that cinema, while taking a back seat in the theoretical polemics that attracted international curiosity and focused attention on the avant garde. His films displayed a mastery of visual technique and a disciplined economy of style. He was a main- stream director but a subversive artist, whose work, tinged with warmth, humour, and humanity, constantly attracted Soviet audi- ences. He took his own life in 1965. —Richard Taylor BARTEL, Paul Nationality: American. Born: Brooklyn, New York, 6 August 1938. Education: Montclair High School, New Jersey; UCLA; Centre Sperimentale di Cinematografia, Rome. Career: 1969—wrote and directed first film, a short titled The Secret Cinema; 1972—directed first full-length film, Private Parts; 1975—directed first big-budget film, Death Race 2000; 1982—directed, co-wrote, and co-starred in black comedy cult hit Eating Raoul; 1989—wrote, directed and appeared in Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills, another black comedy and his greatest commercial success. Died: 13 May 2000. Films as Director: 1969 The Secret Cinema (+pr, sc) 1972 Private Parts 1975 Death Race 2000 1976 Cannonball (+sc) 1982 Eating Raoul (+sc) 1984 Not for Publication (+sc) 1985 Lust in the Dust BARTELDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 65 Paul Bartel 1986 The Longshot 1989 Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills (+sc) 1993 Shelf Life Films as Actor: 1970 Hi, Mom! (Blue Manhattan; Confessions of a Peeping Tom; Son of Greetings) (DePalma) (as Uncle Tom Wood) 1976 Hollywood Boulevard (Arkush and Dante) (as Eich Von Leppe); Cannonball (+d); Eat My Dust (Griffith) 1977 Grand Theft Auto (Howard) (as Groom); Mr. Billion (Kaplan) 1978 Piranha (Dante) (as Dumont) 1979 Rock ‘n’ Roll High School (Arkush) (as Mr. McGee) 1981 Heartbeeps (Arkush) (as Party Guest) 1982 Trick or Treats (Graver) (as Wino); Eating Raoul (+d) (as Paul Bland); White Dog (Fuller) (as Cameraman) 1983 Flip Out (Get Crazy) (Arkush) (as Docter Carver); Heart like a Wheel (Kaplan) (as Chef Paul) 1984 Frankenweenie (Burton) (as Mr. Walsh); Not for Publication (Bartel) (as TV Director) 1985 National Lampoon’s European Vacation (Heckerling) (as Mr. Froeger); Into the Night (Landis) (as Doorman); Ses- ame Street Presents ‘‘Follow That Bird’’ (Kwapis) (as Grouch Cook) 1986 Chopping Mall (Killbots) (Wynorski) (as Paul Bland); Killer Party (Fruet) (as Professor Zito) 1987 Amazon Women on the Moon (Cheeseburger Film Sandwich) (Dante and Gottlieb) (as Doctor); Munchies (Hirsch) (as Doctor Crowder) 1988 Caddyshack II (Arkush) (as Jamieson); Mortuary Academy (Schroeder) (as Paul Truscott); Out of the Dark (Schroeder) (as Hotel Clerk); Shakedown (Glickenhaus) (as Night Court Judge) 1989 Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills (Bartel) (as Docter Mo Van De Kamp) 1990 Dan Turner, Hollywood Detective (Conner and Lewis— for TV) (as Larry Badger); Gremlins 2: The New Batch (Dante) (as Theatre Manager); Far out Man (Chong) (as Weebee Cool) 1991 The Pope Must Die (The Pope Must Diet) (Richardson) (as Monsignor Fitchie) BARTEL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 66 1992 Desire and Hell at Sunset Motel (Castle) (as The Manager); Liquid Dreams (Manos) (as Angel); The Living End (Araki) (Twister Master); Our Hollywood Education (Beltrami) 1993 Acting on Impulse (Eyes of a Stranger; Roses Are Dead; Secret Lies; Secret Lives) (Irvin) (as Bruno); Posse (Van Peebles) (as Mayor Bigwood); Shelf Life (Bartel) (as Vari- ous Apparitions); Grief (Glatzer) (as Attorney) 1994 Twin Sitters (The Babysitters) (Paragon) (as Linguini-Cov- ered Man) 1995 The Usual Suspects (Singer) (as Smuggler); The Jerky Boys (Melkonian) (as Host); Bucket of Blood (Dark Secrets; The Death Artist; Roger Corman Presents Bucket of Blood) (McDonald—for TV) (as Older Man); Love and Happiness (Alan) (as Sully the Short-Order Cook); Naomi & Wynonna: Love Can Build a Bridge (Love Can Build a Bridge)(Roth— for TV) (as Ralph Emery); Not like Us (Payne) (as Morti- cian); Red Ribbon Blues (Winkler) (as Fred the Pharma- cist); The Wacky Adventures of Dr. Boris and Nurse Shirley (Leder) (as Doctor Boris) 1996 Basquiat (Schnabel) (as Henry Geldzahler); Escape from L.A. (John Carpenter’s Escape from L.A.) (Carpenter) (as Con- gressman); Joe’s Apartment (Payson) (as NEA Scout); Prey of the Jaguar (DeCoteau) (as Toymaker); Skeletons (DeCoteau) (as Mayor Dunbar) 1997 Lewis & Clark & George (McCall) (as Cop); Inheritance (Louisa May Alcott’s The Inheritance) (Roth—for TV) 1998 Billy’s Hollywood Screen Kiss (O’Haver) (as Rex Webster) 1999 Hard Time: The Premonition (Cass—for TV) (as Proprietor); Zoo (King) (as Dr. Rail St. Cloud) 2000 Dinner and a Movie (as Lou Semelhack); Dreamers (Kors) (as Larry); Hamlet (Almereyda) Publications By BARTEL: articles— ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Paul Bartel, Interview,’’ in American Film, April, 1985. ‘‘The Secret Cinema—A Screenplay by Paul Bartel,’’ in Scenario: The Magazine of Screenwriting Art (New York), Winter, 1998/99. On BARTEL: articles— Jacobs, Diane, ‘‘Bartel’s Parables,’’ in The Washington Post, 4 Janu- ary 1983. Goldstein, Patrick, ‘‘Paul Bartel Sticks It to the Idle Rich,’’ in The Los Angeles Times, 25 September, 1988. *** Paul Bartel has acted in over sixty films, but he is best known for two, for which he was also writer and director: Eating Raoul (1982) and Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills (1989). These two black comedies amused, titillated, and shocked audiences by finding humor in such diverse subjects as cannibalism, kinky sex, serial murder, class resentment, and homosexuality. The young Paul Bartel would have seemed an unlikely candidate for such scandalous and subversive filmmaking. Raised in a conven- tional middle-class New Jersey family, Bartel knew from an early age that he wanted to make movies. After high school, he enrolled in UCLA’s prestigious film school. Upon graduating, he was awarded a Fulbright grant to study at the Center for Experimental Film in Rome. Bartel’s first directing work was on two low-budget shorts: Naughty Nurse and The Secret Cinema. These films came to the attention of MGM studio head James Aubrey, who bankrolled Bartel’s next project, a bizarre sex comedy originally called Blood Relations. However, the studio marketed the film unwisely, changed the name to Private Parts (a more risque title that many ‘‘family newspapers’’ would not even print, which hindered advertising) and abandoned it soon thereafter. But Bartel’s work nonetheless brought him to the attention of Roger Corman, who specialized in producing low-budget action and horror films. Corman gave Bartel a job as Second Unit Director for the 1974 film Big Bad Momma, and was sufficiently impressed with the younger man’s work so as to offer him the director’s chair on Death Race 2000. However, professional disagreements between the two men marked both the filming and the post-production process. The final cut was a financial success, but at the cost of Corman and Bartel’s working relationship. Paul Bartel’s first success on his own terms came with Eating Raoul (1982), which he directed, co-wrote (with Richard Blackburn), and starred in. The female lead was Mary Woronov, who has done most of her screen work in independent films, notably several directed by Andy Warhol. In Eating Raoul, Bartel and Woronov portray Paul and Mary Bland, a financially strapped married couple. They have never consummated their marriage, because both view sex as ‘‘dirty,’’ and they are contemptuous of their neighbors, all of whom seem to be lust-crazed California ‘‘swingers.’’ The Blands hit on the notion of murdering as many of these ‘‘perverts’’ as they can, and taking their money. Later, they take on a partner named Raoul, whose restaurant offers the perfect means of disposing of all of those bodies, thus giving a whole new meaning to the phrase ‘‘mystery meat.’’ Bartel’s next major directing assignment was on Lust in the Dust (1985), starring former 1950s heartthrob Tab Hunter and transvestite actor Divine, the latter known for outrageous portrayals in several John Waters films. The film was a send-up of the ‘‘Spaghetti Westerns’’ that had been popular during the 1960s, but it was not a financial success. In 1989, Paul Bartel went to work on the film that has proved his greatest commercial success to date. Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills was surely helped at the box office by the star power of Jacqueline Bisset, who played wealthy sitcom actress Claire Lipkin. Her neighbor and best friend, Lisabeth Hepburn-Saurian, was played by Mary Wornov. The two women become the subject of a wager between their respective housemen: the first one who beds his employer wins—and the stakes of the wager involve more than money. Bartel wrote, directed, and played a supporting role in this black comedy. Before his death in 2000, Paul Bartel worked mostly as an actor. He appeared in more than sixty films, including made-for-TV movies. With occasional exceptions like his role in Eating Raoul, Bartel mostly played character parts in supporting roles. Clearly his first love was directing, and he viewed much of his acting work as a way to raise funds for his next stint behind the camera. —Justin Gustainis BAUERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 67 BAUER, Evgeni Nationality: Russian. Born: Evgeni Frantsevich Bauer, 1865. Edu- cation: The Moscow College of Painting, Sculpture, and Architec- ture. Family: Son of a zither player; married Lina Anvharova, a dancer and later actress in his films. Career: Worked as a magazine caricaturist, newspaper satirist, theatre impresario, and set designer; started directing films in 1913, working for Pathé, Drankov, and Taldykin; joined Khanzhonkov’s company, becoming one of the main shareholders, late 1913. Died: Of pneumonia, 9 June 1917. Films as Director: 1913 Sumerki Zhenskoi Dushi (The Twilight of a Woman’s Soul) (+ art dir) 1914 Ditya Bol’shogo Goroda (Child of the Big City; Devushka s Ulitsy; The Girl from the Street) (+ art dir); Ee Geroiski Podvig (Her Heroic Feat); Lyulya Bek; Slava Nam— Smert’ Vagram (Glory to Us, Death to the Enemy); Tol’ko Raz v Godu (Only Once a Year; Doroga v ad; The Road to Hell); Kholodnye Dushi (Cold Showers; Frigid Souls) 1915 Grezy (Daydreams; Obmanutye Mechty; Deceived Dreams); Deti Veka (Children of the Age); Zhemchuzhnoe Ozherel’e (The Pearl Necklace); Leon Drey (Pokoritel’ Zhenskikh Serdets; The Lady-Killer) (+ art dir); Pervaya Lyubov’ (First Love); Schast’e Vechnoi Nochi (The Happiness of Eternal Night); Tysyacha Vtoraya Khitrost (The Thousand and Second Ruse); Yuri Nagornyi (Obol’stitel; The Seducer) 1916 Zhizn’ za Zhizn’ (A Life for a Life; Za Kazhduyu slezu po Kable Krovi; A Tear for Every Drop of Blood; Sestry- Sopernitsy; The Rival Sisters) (+ sc); Nelly Raintseva; PriklyuchenieLiny v Sochi (Lina’s Adventure in Sochi) 1917 Umirayushchii Lebed’ (The Dying Swan); Za Schast’em (For Luck); Korol’ Parizha (The King of Paris) (+ co-sc); Lina Pod Ekspertizoi ili Buinyi Pokoinik (Lina Under Examina- tion; The Turbulent Corpse); Nabat (The Alarm) (+ sc); Revolyutsioner (The Revolutionary) Note: These are the only films that remain from the 82 with which he has been credited. Publications On BAUER: book— Tsivian, Yuri, and others, Silent Witnesses: Russian Films 1908–1919, (in English and Italian), London and Pordenone, 1989. On BAUER: articles— Revue Internationale d’Histoire du Cinéma (Paris), no. 1, 1975. Crespi, A., ‘‘Evgenij Bauer: lo sfarzo e il vuoto,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), vol. 29, November 1989. Robinson, David, ‘‘Evgeni Bauer and the Cinema of Nikolai II,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1989–90. Bagh, P. von, ‘‘Jevgeni Bauer,’’ in Filmihullu (Helsinki), no. 2, 1990. Midding, G., ‘‘Die Technik dient dem Schauspieler, nicht umgekehrt!’’ in Filmbulletin (Winterthur, Switzerland), vol. 33, no. 3, 1991. Raucy, C., ‘‘Jacques Becker: La presence irreductible,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 373, March 1992. Giavarini, L., ‘‘Becker, cineaste de la liberte,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 454, April 1992. Taboulay, C., ‘‘Boulot-boulot, menuise-menuise,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 454, April 1992. Hansen, M., ‘‘Deadly Scenarios: Narrative Perspective and Sexual Politics in Pre-Revolutionary Russian Film,’’ in Cinefocus (Bloom- ington, Indiana), vol. 12, no. 2, 1992. Tsivian, Yuri, ‘‘Cutting and Framing in Bauer’s and Kulechov’s Films,’’ Kintop (Basel), no. 1, 1992. Casiraghi, U., ‘‘La scoptera di Evgenji Bauer: melodrammi d’amore e di morte,’’ in Quaderni di Cinema (Firenze), vol. 12, January- March 1993. Gaines, J. ‘‘Revolutionary Theory/Prerevolutionary Melodrama,’’ Discourse (Detroit), vol. 17, no. 3, Spring 1995. Zorkaja, N. ‘‘‘Svetopis’: Evenija Bauera,’’ Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 10, October 1997. *** When, in 1989, the Russians released a hoard of movies of the Czarist era, few of which had been seen in the West, we discovered a new ‘‘great’’ director. Evgeni Bauer was found to tower over all his contemporaries, including Victor Sj?str?m; for while Bauer’s films could be as emotionally complex as those of Sj?str?m, he was a marvel at something which did not motivate the Swedish master— the mechanics of cinema. Bauer understood the language of the cinema better than any of his contemporaries, and in that silent era, he exploited silence as no one else did until Keaton. The Hollywood of Keaton’s time, ten years later, was still only groping toward some of Bauer’s techniques—the traveling or roving camera, the sudden or unexpected close-up, the zoom-in (if used in a primitive way), angle- shots from above, the masked screen, the use of movement and editing (e.g., in a frenzied dance) to build to a climax, the split screen, vivid composition. Visually then, his films are exciting, and further- more he uses locations tellingly to enhance his dramatic material, as we may expect from a former art director. These elements, when added to natural playing and generally above-average stories—which invariably include a biting, if implicit, commentary on bourgeois society—make up a body of work unparalleled in early cinema. And who else at this time could take his narrative from A to D, without plodding through B and C? Bauer entered the cinema as set designer for Drankov, but when in that capacity he moved over to Khanzhonov, he was given an entirely free hand, directing as well for him—and Bauer’s first film as such, Twilight of a Woman’s Soul (1913), still survives. Like most Russian filmmakers of this period, Bauer gave audiences the doom and gloom they craved, often with a last-reel suicide—but he did it with a sophistication matched only by Yakov Protazanov. For instance, in Child of the Big City a working-girl is wooed by a rich man attracted to women outside his own class; after marriage he bores her and she seduces a valet before deciding to use her husband’s friends to become a courtesan, because she does not wish to give up a life of luxury. He, ruined, seeks her out, only to find her no less contemptu- ous than she was when their marriage ended. In Silent Witnesses the title characters are the servants of Mos- cow’s sybaritic high society, but they have an independent life of their own, caring and principled. When one young maid has a mind to the advantages of being a rich man’s lady and, after a half-hearted refusal, BAVA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 68 acquiesces, she finds her position too insecure to protest against his continuing infidelities. In all of Bauer’s films drunken parties and sexual license are the prerogatives of the rich, who are also vindictive, cruel, and without moral values—but they are also dangerously attractive. In Children of the Age a loving young wife allows an aged roué to seduce her and remains with him even after he has reduced her husband to penury by having him sacked. Her options are open, and furthermore she remains sympathetic, though the peasant audiences of Czarist Russia might well have thought that this brutally unequal society ought to be destroyed forthwith. It would be an overstatement to describe Bauer as subversive, but the society he depicts is wholly unadmirable, mortally sick. There is abnormal psychology—perhaps specifically of the Rus- sian variety—at the heart of both Daydreams and After Death. In the first a man becomes a recluse after his wife’s death, only to become obsessed by an actress who resembles her; and she, while perhaps still loving him, fatally mocks his passion for his dead wife. In the second a man, inconsolable after the death of his mother, drives to suicide the actress who has aspired to be the new woman in his life, then kills himself after reading her diaries to discover her motives. Happiness of Eternal Night marks a firm return to Bauer’s central theme, the rottenness of society, but the plot is a silly thing about a wealthy blind girl who marries a rake, persuaded by his brother who, because of his love for her, had trained to be an eye-surgeon in order to cure her. Because Bauer was his leading director, Khanzonkov offered him a choice of subjects when he decided to make a super-production to rival Yermoliev’s Queen of Spades. Bauer chose a now-forgotten French novel, which emerged as A Life for a Life, a complex melange of high-society gambols, infidelity, and debts. Since all the characters are well-off and one of them, a wealthy widow, does an exemplary job in running a factory, the film (unlike any of Bauer’s others still extant) lacks any immediate revolutionary portents. Yuri Nagorni was de- signed to tell its story without inter-titles, thus pushing us willy-nilly into an incomprehensible plot about an adulterous wife who makes a play for a libidinous opera-singer, the eponymous Yuri: she leaves him at the end of the first half to die in a fire, but the second part, in flashback, contains all that we need to know. Bauer was fascinated by the underside of life, the past and dreams, and both feature in a return to the subject of death, in The Dying Swan, in which an artist fantasizes about a ballerina as she expires. To Happiness holds to this theme as a widow encourages her longtime admirer to court her adolescent daughter, whose fatal illness is halted when she conceives a passion for him. This was Bauer’s last com- pleted film, and the dialectic is less ‘‘true’’ than the first of his movies, but he atones for the deficiencies of the plot by setting it lovingly in the shimmering Crimean sun, with distant vistas of the sea. It also shows, rarely for its time, two mature people genuinely in love with each other. Bauer died in the Crimea, after sustaining an accident while scouting locations for his next film, The King of Paris (1917), completed after the February revolution by Olga Rakhmanova, who had acted in several of his pictures. The inter-titles have not survived, so the plot is not easy to follow, but it is only clear, in this tale of intrigue and blackmail, that the two leading characters are homosex- ual. The sequence in which the older man takes home a young stranger, having impulsively paid his gambling debts, is quite extraor- dinary, as the two of them look guiltily about them. Bauer’s films, with their predatory, managing women and their weak, hedonistic men, suggest a homosexual sensitivity, but he is too modern in outlook to be categorized. With Sj?str?m, he is the only director of the teens of the twentieth century whose work can still be watched with satisfaction and enjoyment. Sj?str?m’s studies of rural life in the last century are valuable, but Bauer’s portraits of Czarist Russia in its last days are even more so, because he was actually there. We have to wait for Lamprecht’s Berlin and Ozu’s Tokyo before we have any other filmed record of a contemporary society; and Ozu is far less pungent, perhaps because, unlike Bauer and Lamprecht, he did not see that as his aim. Bauer made over eighty films, of which only-one third have survived. Sj?str?m made forty-five films in Sweden, of which only thirteen were known to be extant—but two turned up in the 1980s. May we dare hope that there are still some Bauers to come to light? —David Shipman BAVA, Mario Nationality: Italian. Born: San Remo, Italy, 31 July 1914; son of cinematographer Eugenio Bava. Family: Son: director Lamberto Bava. Career: Trained as a painter. Died: Of a heart attack in Rome, 25 April 1980. Films as Director: 1946 L’Orecchio (doc) (+ ph) 1947 Santa notte (doc) (+ ph); Legenda Sinfonica (+ ph); Anfiteatro Flavio (short) (+ ph) 1949 Variazioni sinfoniche (doc) (+ ph) 1956 I Vampiri (The Devil’s Commandment; Lust of the Vampire; The Vampires) (uncredited; completed film + ph) 1959 Caltiki—il mostro immortale (Caltiki, the Immortal Monster) (uncredited; completed film + ph); La Battaglia di Maratona (Giant of Marathon) (uncredited; completed film + ph) 1960 La Maschera del demonio (Mask of the Demon; Black Sunday (+ sc, ph); Esther and the King (+ ph) 1961 L’Ultimo dei Vikinghi (The Last of the Vikings) (uncredited); Le Meraviglie di Aladino (The Wonders of Aladdin); Gli Invasori (Erik the Conqueror) (+ sc, ph); Ercole al centro della terra (Hercules in the Haunted World; Hercules at the Center of the Earth) (+ sc, ph) 1963 I Tre volti della paura (Black Sabbath; Black Christmas) (+ sc); La Ragazza che sapeva troppo (The Evil Eye; The Girl Who Knew Too Much) (+ sc, ph); La Frusta e il corpo (The Whip and the Body; What!) 1964 La Strada per Fort Alamo (The Road to Fort Alamo; Arizona Bill); Sei donne per l’assassino (Blood and Black Lace) (+ sc) 1965 Terrore nello spazio (Planet of the Vampires) (+ sc); I Coltelli del vendicatore (Bladestorm; Knives of the Avenger) (+ sc) 1966 Spie vengono dal semifreddo (Dr. Goldfoot and the Girl Bombs); Savage Gringo; Operazione paura (Kill, Baby. . . Kill!) (+ sc) 1968 Diabolik (Danger: Diabolik) (+ sc, ph) 1969 Rosso segno della follia (Hatchet for the Honeymoon) (+ sc, ph) 1970 Roy Colt e Winchester Jack (Roy Colt and Winchester Jack); Cinque bambole per la luna d’agosto (Island of Terror) (+ ed) BAVADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 69 1971 Reazione a catena (A Bay of Blood; Last House on the Left, Part II; New House on the Left; Twitch of the Death Nerve) (+ sc, ph) 1972 Quante volte. . . quella notte (Four Times That Night); Gli Orrori del castello di Norimberga (Baron Blood) 1974 Cani arrabbiati (Rabid Dogs) (unreleased, + ph); La Casa dell’esorcismo (The House of Exorcism; Lisa and the Devil) (+ sc) 1977 Schock (Shock) 1978 La Venere di Ille (Venus of Ille) (for TV) Films as Cinematographer: 1939 Il Tacchino prepotente (Rossellini) (short) 1943 Uomini e cieli (De Robertis); Sant’Elena piccola isola (Simoni); L’Avventura di Annabella (Menardi) 1946 L’Elisir d’amore (This Wine of Love) (Costa) 1947 Pagliacci (Love of a Clown—Pagliacci) (Costa) 1948 Natale al campo 119 (Christmas at Camp 119) (Francisci); Follie per l’opera (Mad about the Opera) (Costa) 1949 Antonio di Padova (Anthony of Padua) (Francisci); Quel bandito sono io (The Taming of Dorothy) (Soldati) 1950 E arrivato il cavaliere! (Monicelli and Steno); Vita da cani (A Dog’s Life) (Monicelli and Steno); Miss Italia (Miss Italy) (Coletti) 1951 Guardie e ladri (Cops and Robbers) (Monicelli and Steno); Amor non ho. . . pero. . . pero (Bianchi) 1952 Perdonami (Costa); Papa diventa mamma (Fabrizi) 1953 Villa Borghese (Franciolini); Il Viale della speranza (Risi); Gli Eroi della Domenica (Camerini); Cose da pazzi (Pabst); Balocchi e profumi (Bernadi and Montillo); Il Baciodell’Au- rora (Parolini) 1954 Terza liceo (Emmer); Hanno rubato un tram (Bonnard and Fabrizi); Le Avventure di Giacomo Casanova (Sins of Casanova) (Steno) 1955 La Donna piu bella del mondo (Beautiful but Dangerous) (Leonard); Buonanotte. . . avvocato! (Bianchi) 1956 Mio figlio Nerone (Nero’s Big Weekend) (Steno); Citta di notte (City at Night) (Trieste) 1957 Le fatiche di Ercole (Hercules; Labors of Hercules) (Francisci) 1958 La Morte viene dallo spazio (The Day the Sky Exploded) (Heusch) 1959 Ercole e la regina di Lidia (Hercules Unchained) (Francisci) (+ asst d; uncredited); Agi Murad il diavolo bianco (The White Warrior) (Freda) (+ asst d; uncredited) Other Films: 1960 Seddok, l’erede di Satana (Atom Age Vampire) (Majano) (pr) 1980 Inferno (Argento) (d underwater sequence; uncredited) Publications On BAVA: books— Leutrat, Jean-Louis, Mario Bava, Liege, 1994. Pezzotta, Alberto, Mario Bava, Rome, 1995. On BAVA: articles— Lucas, Tim, ‘‘Mario Bava: A Short Biography,’’ in Images: A Jour- nal of Film and Popular Culture, no. 5, http://www.images journal.com/issue05/infocus/bavabio.htm. Silver, Alain, and James Ursini, ‘‘Mario Bava: The Illusion of Reality,’’ in Horror Film Reader, New York, 2000. *** The day after Germany declared war on France and Russia in response to the assassination of Austria’s archduke, Francis Ferdinand— July 31, 1914—Mario Bava was born in San Remo, Italy. His father, Eugenio Bava, was a sculptor turned accomplished cinematographer in the early days of the Italian silent film industry (in 1912, he photographed the epic Quo Vadis; a year later, he assisted Segundo de Chomon on Cabria, a film whose special effects are legendary). For several years Mario worked as his father’s helper, subtitling films for export and animating title sequences for Italian features, until the 1930s, when he began to assist some of Italy’s finest cinematographers. Mario was trained as a painter, and his artistic background encour- aged in him a strong belief in the importance of visual composition in filmmaking. This led to a fast-growing reputation as a special effects wizard, one with a knack for developing new ways of using optical trickery. In 1939, Mario advanced to the level of director of photogra- phy, and besides a series of shorts which he directed in the 1940s, he remained a cinematographer until 1960. Included among the directors for whom Bava photographed films in the early part of his career are Jacques Tourneur, Raoul Walsh, G.W. Pabst, Roberto Rossellini, Paolo Heusch, and Robert Z. Leonard. Furthermore, as Tim Lucas notes, ‘‘his stylized lensing was critical in developing the screen personas of such international stars as Gina Lollobrigida and Steve Reeves.’’ While working with Riccardo Freda on I vampiri (The Vampires) in 1956—the first Italian horror film of the sound era—the director left the project early on after an argument with his producers. Bava stepped in and finished directing half of the twelve-day schedule in a mere two days. This would not be the last time he performed such a crucial task: in 1957, Bava directed some of Pietro Francisci’s La fatiche di Ercole (Hercules), and in 1959, he was credited with ‘‘saving’’ Jacques Tourneur’s Giant of Marathon. Legend has it that Freda then tricked Bava by hiring his friend to photograph Caltiki il mostro immortale (Caltiki, the Immortal Monster, 1959) and once again stepped down as director after just two days. Lionello Santo, the film’s producer, was so impressed with Bava’s efforts that he invited him to select any film he wanted for his official directorial debut, when he was already forty-six years of age. Bava couldn’t have made a better choice, basing La maschera del demonia (Black Sunday, 1960) on the Nikolai Gogol story, Vij. Black Sunday, starring Barbara Steele in dual roles as a vampire sorceress and her virginal descendant, is widely acknowledged as the last great black and white Gothic horror film. However, ‘‘Bava’s tactic,’’ according to Alain Silver and James Ursini, ‘‘was a reliance on fresh rendering or novel manipulation of traditional images.’’ The film was an international success overnight, and the British actress Steele became an instant sensation. Although Black Sunday was shot in black and white, Bava’s subsequent reputation was in large built on his extraordinary and highly symbolic use of color. In the words of Jeff Dove, ‘‘the projects BECKER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 70 which followed [La maschera del demonia] began to develop stun- ning photography, making great use of lighting, set design, and camera positioning to compliment mise-en-scenes bathed in deep primaries.’’ Ercole al centro della terra (Hercules at the Center of the Earth, 1961) shows off Bava’s adeptness with Technicolor, and in films such as Sei donne per l’assassino (Blood and Black Lace, 1963) and Terrore nello spazio (Planet of the Vampires, 1965), his sets and compositions approach the look of artworks. The one exception to Bava’s astounding use of color is his 1962 Hitchcock spoof La ragazza che sappeva troppo (The Girl Who Knew Too Much/Evil Eye), a black and white murder mystery that is widely acknowledged as the first of the giallos— peculiarly Italian horror-thrillers named for the yellow pages of the cheap novels upon which they were based. Silver and Ursini argue quite persuasively that ‘‘the unusal and disquieting visuals of Bava’s films seem rooted in a conception of life as an uncomfortable union of illusion and reality. The dramatic conflict for his characters lies in confronting the dilemma of distin- guishing between the two perceptions.’’ Many of his films—including Black Sunday, Gli Invasoir (Erik the Conqueror, 1961), and Operazione Paura (Kill, Baby, Kill, 1966)—make use the doppelg?nger theme in order to engender confusion and uncanniness. This last film, about villagers who are compelled to commit suicide by the ghost of a young girl, was an admitted influence on works by Fellini, Martin Scorcese, and David Lynch. Other of Bava’s films rely on idiosyn- cratic camera techniques, such as snap zooms, over-rotated pans, and unconventional point-of-view shots, as a way of conveying the emotional states of characters. The extreme violence and downbeat endings of much of Bava’s output in the 1960s eventually resulted in the dissolution of his contract with American International Pictures, which had been suc- cessfully distributing his films in English-speaking countries. After not working for two years, Bava returned with a vengeance in 1968— Diabolik (Danger: Diabolik), produced by Dino DeLaurentiis, was a comic book adapation that proved enormously popular in Europe. Three years later, Bava would break new ground once again with L’ecologia del delitto (A Bay of Blood, 1971), a gory slasher film that preceded Halloween and Friday the 13th in America by nearly a decade. The last three films directed by Bava all met with misfortune of one sort or another. Lise e il diavolo (Lisa and the Devil, 1973) is justly proclaimed by Lucas ‘‘an extraordinary combination of horror film, art film and personal testament.’’ Unfortunately, this creepy tale of necrophilia, evil, and murder starring Elke Sommer and Telly Savalas proved unsalable at Cannes in 1973. Cani arrabbiati (Rabid Dogs), a pet project of Bava’s that he had wanted to make for years, was neither completed nor released in the director’s lifetime. After producer Roberto Loyola declared bankruptcy, Rabid Dogs was impounded for twenty years, only to be acquired and finished by co-star Lea Lander. In 1996, Lander premiered the film in Brussels under the title Semaforo rosso (Red Traffic Light), to great critical acclaim. Bava’s final feature, Schock (Shock, 1977), was scripted by his son Lamberto. But Lamberto had to take over at various times during production, as his father feigned illness in order to provide him with directorial experience. On April 25, 1980, just days after receiving a clean bill of health, Mario Bava died of a heart attack. Never given nearly as much credit for his many accomplishments as he deserved during his lifetime, this director of masterpieces in many different genres, who worked with low budgets under extremely stressful conditions, is only now beginning to elicit the praise and attention he so richly merits. —Steven Schneider BECKER, Jacques Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 15 September 1906. Educa- tion: Lycée Condorcet, and Schola Cantorum, Paris. Family: Mar- ried actress Fran?oise Fabian, a son, Jean, and daughter. Career: Became assistant to Jean Renoir, 1932; made first short film, Le Commissaire..., 1935; German prisoner of war, 1941–42; directed first feature, Le Dernier Atout, 1942; son and assistant Jean Becker completed Le Trou following his death. Died: 1960. Films as Director: 1935 Le Commissaire est bon enfant, le gendarme est sans pitie (co-d, co-sc with Pierre Prevert); Tête de turc (Une Tête qui rapporte) (+ co-sc) 1938 short documentary on Communist Party Congress at Arles 1939 L’Or du Cristobal (co-d, uncredited) 1942 Le Dernier Atout (+ co-pr, co-sc) 1943 Goupi Mains rouges (It Happened at the Inn) (+ co-sc) 1945 Falbalas (Paris Frills) (+ co-sc) 1947 Antoine et Antoinette (+ co-sc) Jacques Becker (right) with Jean Gabin BECKERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 71 1949 Rendez-vous de Juillet (+ co-sc) 1951 édouard et Caroline (+ co-sc) 1952 Casque d’Or (+ co-sc) 1953 Rue de l’Estrapade 1954 Touchez pas au Grisbi (Grisbi) (+ co-sc); Ali Baba et les quarante voleurs (Ali Baba) (+ co-sc) 1956 Les Aventures d’Arsène Lupin (The Adventures of Arsène Lupin) (+ co-sc) 1957 Montparnasse 19 (Modigliani of Montparnasse) (+ co-sc) 1960 Le Trou (The Night Watch; The Hole) (+ co-d, co-sc) Other Films: 1929 Le Bled (Renoir) (role); Le Rendez-vous de Cannes (Petrossian—documentary) (appearance) 1932 Boudu sauvé des eaux (Renoir) (asst, role); La Nuit du carrefour (Renoir) (asst) 1933 Chotard & Compagnie (Renoir) (asst) 1934 Madame Bovary (uncredited, asst) 1935 Le Crime de Monsieur Lange (Renoir) (asst); Toni (Re- noir) (asst) 1936 Les Bas-Fonds (Renoir) (asst, role); Une Partie de campagne (Renoir) (asst, role); La Vie est à nous (Renoir) (asst, role) 1938 La Grande Illusion (Renoir) (asst, role); La Marseillaise (Renoir) (asst); La Bête humaine (Renoir) (asst) 1939 Le Règle du jeu (Renoir) (asst); L’Héritier des Montdésir (Valentin) (asst) Publications On BECKER: books— Armes, Roy, French Cinema since 1946: Vol. I—The Great Tradi- tion, New York, 1970. Beylie, Claude, Jacques Becker: études, textes et scénarios inédits, entretiens, témoignages, florilège critique, filmographie, Locarno, 1991. Vey, Jean-Louis, Jacques Becker, ou, La Fausse évidence, Lyon, 1995. On BECKER: articles— De la Roche, Catherine, ‘‘The Stylist,’’ in Films and Filming (Lon- don), March 1955. Lisbona, Joseph, ‘‘Microscope Director,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1956. Baxter, Brian, ‘‘Jacques Becker and Montparnasse 19,’’ in Film (London), September/October 1958. ‘‘Becker,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1960. Guillermo, Gilberto Perez, ‘‘Jacques Becker: Two Films,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1969. Lederlé, J. L., ‘‘Un Couple sans histoire,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), May 1977. Aubert, F., ‘‘Fran?oise Fabian parle de Becker,’’ and Rene Predal, ‘‘Jacques Becker,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), 11 December 1985. Chevrie, Marc, ‘‘Un Pur Cinéaste,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1985. Vignaux, Valérie, ‘‘Hors-la-loi et société criminelle dans les films de Jacques Becker,’’ Positif (Paris), no. 419, January 1996. On BECKER: film— Viallet, Pierre, and Marcel L’Herbier, Portraits filmés . . . Jacques Becker, 1954. *** Next to Jean Grémillon, Jacques Becker is surely the most neglected of France’s great directors. Known in France for Goupi Mains rouges and Antoine et Antoinette, his only film to reach an international critical audience was Casque d’Or. But from 1942 to 1959 Becker fashioned thirteen films, none of which could be called a failure and each of which merits respect and attention. Tied to Jean Renoir through a youthful friendship (their families were both close to the Cézannes), Becker began assisting Renoir in 1932. For eight years he helped put together some of the greatest films ever made, allowing the generous genius of Renoir to roam, uncon- cerned over the details he had already prearranged. Becker gave Renoir the kind of grounding and order which kept his films from flying into thin air. His fastidiousness and precision made him the perfect assistant. Many of his friends, however, doubted that such a sensibility could ever command the energy needed to finish a film. Nevertheless, film direction was Becker’s ambition from the beginning of his career. It was he who developed the idea for Le Crime de M. Lang, and when the producer insisted that Renoir take over, it cost them their friendship for a time. Soon Becker was directing a cheap anarchist subject, Le Commissaire est bon enfant, with the Octobre groupe company of actors. He wasn’t to be held back. Like so many others, Becker was given his chance with the Occupation. A producer handed Becker the reins of a detective comedy, Le Dernier Atout, which he brought in under budget and to a good box office response. This opened his career, permitting him to film the unforgettable Goupi. Georges Sadoul claims that after the war an American firm bought up the film and had it destroyed so that it wouldn’t compete with American products as Open City had done. Whether this is true or not, the film remains impressive in the clarity of its partly cynical, partly mysterious tone. In addition, the work shows Becker to be a brilliant director of actors. The sureness of touch in each of Becker’s films derives from a precision some link to craftsmanship; but Becker was striving for far more than competence, veneer, or ‘‘quality.’’ He was first and always interested in rhythm. A musician, he was obsessed with jazz and ragtime. No other standard director spent so much time collaborating with his editor, Marguerite Renoir. Goupi is only the first of a host of Becker films whose subjects are difficult to define. Becker seems to have gone out of his way to set himself problems. Many of his films are about groups of characters, most notably his final work, Le Trou. Others feature widely diverse settings: Antoine et Antoinette captures the working class quarters of Paris; Rendez-vous de Juillet must be the first film anywhere to explicitly bring out the youth culture of postwar Europe; Falbalas evokes the world of high fashion as only someone raised in such a world could know it; and, of course, Casque d’Or makes the turn-of- the-century Parisian underworld come to life with a kind of grim romanticism. Becker stated that his fastidious attention to milieu was the only way he could approach his characters. Bazin goes further, claiming that only through the exactitude of social particularity could the universality of his characters and their situations come to life. For Bazin, Edouard et Caroline is, if not his greatest film, at least his most BEINEIX DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 72 revealing one. This brilliant farce in the style of Marivaux is virtually plotless. Becker was able, via the minuteness of his découpage and the sympathy he had for his actors, to build a serious moral comedy from literally nothing. Edouard et Caroline, along with Le Trou, shows him working at his best, working without plots and without the luxury of breadth. Both films take place in prison cells, Le Trou in an actual prison, Edouard et Caroline in the dingy apartment they share and the more menacing jail of her uncle’s mansion. Becker has been called ‘‘the mechanic’’ of cinema, for he took a delight in its workings and he went about his own job with such order and method. This separates him further from such ‘‘quality’’ directors as Autant-Lara, Cayatte, and Delannoy, whose themes may seem grander. Becker was interested in what the cinema could do just as he was interested in what men and women do. Never searching for the extraordinary, he would go to endless lengths to bring out not some abstract rhythm in the lives of people (as René Clair did) but the true style and rhythm of their sensibilities. In 1956 Max Ophuls bequeathed to Becker his project on the life of Modigliani. While the resultant film, Montparnasse 19, is one of his least successful, its style is illustrative. Within weeks after Becker assumed control of the project, both the scriptwriter (Henri Jeanson) and the set designer (Annenkov) left in outrage, for Becker refused to let them show off with words and drapery. His was always a reduced idea of cinema, even when, as in Falbalas, his subject was fashion. Nor did he ever choose name actors, except perhaps Gérard Philipe as Modigliani. He had a sureness of taste, backed up by scrupulous reflection. Becker viewed filmmaking as an endless series of choices, each of which could founder the project. Truffaut once claimed that Becker had his own pace of living; he would linger over meals, but race his car. He would spend hours of film over minor incidents in the lives of his characters, while whipping through the core of the intrigue that brought those charac- ters together. Perhaps this is why Le Trou is a fitting finale to his career. For here the intrigue is given in advance and in a sense is without interest: five men struggling to escape from jail. For two and a half hours we observe the minutiae of their efforts and the silent camaraderie that develops among them. This is, for Becker, the state of life on earth: despite the ingenuity we bring to our struggle for freedom, we are doomed to failure; but in the effort we come upon another value, greater even than liberty, an awareness that our struggle is shared and of the friendship and respect that shared effort confers. If Casque d’Or is destined to remain his most popular and most acclaimed film (it was his personal favorite), it will not betray these sentiments, for the character of Manda gives up not only liberty, but also life with Marie-Casque d’Or, in order to be true to his friend. The stunning scene at the guillotine which ends that film evokes a set of emotions as contradictory as life itself. Jacques Becker was uniquely able to express such contradictions. —Dudley Andrew BEINEIX, Jean-Jacques Nationality: French. Born: Paris, France, 8 October, 1946. Educa- tion: Studied medicine. Career: Gave up medical studies in 1970 to work as assistant director; after Diva, worked as director of TV Jean-Jacques Beineix commercials; defended European filmmakers at the GATT negotia- tions, 1993. Awards: César Award for Best New Director of a Fea- ture Film for Diva (1982); Seattle International Film Festival Golden Space Needle Award for Best Director for 37°2 le Matin (1986) and IP5: L’?le aux pachydermes (1992). Address: c/o French Film Office, 745 Fifth Avenue, New York, USA. Films as Director: 1981 Diva (+ sc) 1983 La Lune dans le caniveau (The Moon in the Gutter) (+ sc) 1986 37°2 le matin (37.2 Degrees in the Morning; Betty Blue) (+ sc, pr) 1989 Roselyne et les lions (+sc) 1992 IP5: L’?le aux pachydermes (IP5: The Island of Pachyderms) (+ sc, pr) 1994 Otaku (+ pr) 2000 Mortel Tranfert (+ sc) Films as Assistant Director: 1971 Le Bateau sur l’herbe (The Boat on the Grass) 1972 The Day the Clown Cried (unreleased); Une journée bien remplie (Full Day’s Work); La Course du lièvre à travers les champs (And Hope to Die) BELLOCCHIODIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 73 1973 Par le sang des autres (By the Blood of Others); Défense de savoir (Forbidden to Know) 1975 Le male du siècle (Male of the Century); Course à l’échalote (Wild Goose Chase) 1976 L’Aile ou la cuisse 1977 L’Animal (The Animal; Stuntwoman) 1979 French Postcards Other Films: 1997 Cannes. . . les 400 coups (role as himself) Publications: By BEINEIX: articles— Interview with Michael Church, ‘‘Hip-hop along the Road to Para- dise,’’ in The Observer Review (London), 14 November 1993. On BEINEIX: books— Parent, Denis, Jean-Jacques Beineix: Version Originale, Paris, 1989. Forbes, Jill, The Cinema in France after the New Wave, Lon- don, 1992. Austin, Guy, Contemporary French Cinema: An Introduction, Man- chester, 1996. On BEINEIX: articles- Gans, Christophe, ‘‘Diva, dix ans aprés. . . ,’’ in L’Avant Scéne Cinéma, no. 407, 1991. Russell, David, ‘‘Two or Three Things We Know about Beineix,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1989/90. *** After a long apprenticeship as assistant to directors as diverse as Jerry Lewis, on the unreleased The Day the Clown Cried, and Claude Berri on Le male du siècle, Jean-Jacques Beineix emerged as a direc- tor in his own right with the intelligent thriller, Diva. Beineix’s talents also extend to screenwriting and producing, and in the 1980s, along with directors Luc Besson and Leos Carax, he helped establish a category of French films sometimes known as ‘‘Cinema du Look.’’ Defined by its slogan ‘‘the image is the message,’’ the Cinema du Look consists of films in which appearances are more important than reality, and in which style is more important than plot or content. Sometimes considered to be the inaugural film of this new style, Beineix’s first solo project is one of the most influential French films of the 1980s. Diva self-consciously addresses what have become known as postmodern themes: it is full of images of reflective glass buildings, and its plot centres on the relative value of recorded music and information. The diva of the film’s title is an American opera star who refuses to be recorded but finds that this only increases the value of bootleg recordings of her performances. It is when one of these bootleg tapes is confused with a tape that incriminates a politician that the plot takes off. As Jill Forbes points out, however, the central figure of the drama is not the diva herself, but the mail courier who makes the bootleg recording. The film’s point, argues Forbes, is that the circulation of information is more important than production. The glossy style of the ‘‘Cinema du Look’’ transferred easily to TV advertising, and Beineix became involved in making commer- cials after the success of Diva. Like TV commercials, which he has claimed ‘‘capture youth,’’ his films tend to employ intense colours and lighting effects, as well as stylized or strange locations. It is thought, for example, that most of the 7.5 million Franc budget for Diva went on sound and vision rather than high-profile actors. His next film, La Lune dans le caniveau, is, if anything, still more a triumph of style over substance than Diva. It tells the story of a stevedore who searches the docks for his sister’s rapist, and raises more questions than it answers. La Lune dans le caniveau is far less convincing than the director’s debut, and confirmed, for French critics at least, that Beineix had been polluted as a filmmaker by his contact with the advertising industry. More successful is 37°2 le matin, which tells the story of a doomed love affair between a disturbed young woman, Betty (Beatrice Dalle), and an aspiring writer. Their turbulent relationship makes for a bleak film, but it is attractively directed and photographed and has achieved cult status and some notoriety for the explicit sex scene with which it begins. Perhaps as a result of Beineix’s involvement in advertising, 37°2 le matin is structured in short set pieces that are separate episodes in themselves. As if to emphasise this connection, one such scene from 37°2 le matin, where Betty angrily throws her lover’s possessions over the balcony of their house, has been remade and used in Europe to advertise a small Japanese car. Despite his influence on the direction of French cinema since the 1980s, Beineix’s later films have failed to live up to the early promise of Diva and 37°2 le matin. Unlike his contemporary, Luc Besson, Beineix could be said to have stuck closely to the spirit of ‘‘Cinema du Look,’’ but he seems also to have gone on ignoring its limitations. His most recent feature film, IP5: L’?le aux pachyderms, is a pensive, good-looking road movie, but in the end it will be remembered for the way its male lead, Yves Montand, died from a heart-attack on the last day of filming, just as his character does in the film. The controversy centered on the way Beineix had made the ageing star spend the whole day immersed in a freezing lake, but the French public was also scandalized that so iconic an actor should end his days working on a Beineix project. Beineix works hard to protect his privacy, and few details of his life outside filmmaking are available. In a sense this parallels the aims of ‘‘Cinema du Look’’: Beineix allows his images to speak for themselves. Some insight into his working methods may be gleaned from Denis Parent’s Jean-Jacques Beineix: Version Originale, avail- able only in French, which is the journalist’s diary of the making of Rosalyne et les Lions. —Chris Routledge BELLOCCHIO, Marco Nationality: Italian. Born: Piacenza, 9 November 1939. Education: Educated in Milan, at Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografica, Rome, and at Slade School of Fine Arts, London (on scholarship), 1959–63. Career: Directed first feature, I pugni in tasca, 1965; joined cooperative dedicated to militant cinema, 1968; co-directed 5- part series for TV, La macchina cinema, 1977–78. BELLOCCHIO DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 74 Films as Director: 1965 I pugni in tasca (Fists in the Pocket) (+ sc) 1967 La Cina è vicina (China Is Near) (+ co-sc) 1969 ‘‘Discutiamo discutiamo’’ episode of Amore e rabbia (Vangelo ‘70) (+ co-sc, role) 1971 Nel nome del padre (In the Name of the Father) (+ sc) 1972 Sbatti il mostro in prima pagina (Strike the Monster on Page One) (co-d uncredited, co-sc) 1974 Nessuno o tutti—Matti da slegare (co-d, co-sc) 1976 Marcia trionfale (+ co-sc) 1977 Il gabbiano (+ co-sc) 1979 Salto nel vuoto (+ sc) 1980 Leap into the Void (+ sc) 1981 Vacanze in Valtrebbia 1982 Gli occhi, la bocca (The Eyes, the Mouth) 1983 Enrico IV (Henry IV) 1986 Devil in the Flesh 1987 La visionè del sabba (The Visions of Sabbath) 1988 La sorciere 1991 La condanna (+sc) 1994 Sogno della Farfalla 1995 Sogni infranti (Broken Dreams) 1997 Il Principe di Homburg (The Prince of Homburg) (+sc) 1999 La Balia (The Nanny) (+sc) Other films: 1958 La colpa e la pena, Abbasso lo zio (as student at Centro Sperimentale); Ginepro fatto uomo (diploma film at Centro Sperimentale) 1966 Francesco d’Assisi 1975 Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma ( Pier Paolo Pasolini) (ro as The President) Publications By BELLOCCHIO: books— La Cina è vicina, Bologna, 1967; as China Is Near, New York, 1969. I pugni in tasca, Milan, 1967. By BELLOCCHIO: articles— Interview in Film Society Review (New York), January 1972. ‘‘La Place de la politique,’’ an interview with G. Fofi, in Positif (Paris), April 1972. Interview with N. Zalaffi, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1973. ‘‘Marco Bellocchio on Victory March,’’ interview with R. Schar, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), September/October 1976. ‘‘Marco Bellocchio—l’alibi du grand public n’est qu’une justifica- tion hypocrite,’’ interview with D. Rabourdin, in Cinéma (Paris), March 1977. Interview with Dan Yakir, in Film Comment (New York), March- April 1983. Interview with J.C. Bonnet, in Cinématographe (Paris), June 1986. Interview in Filmcritica (Florence), April-May 1988. Interview in 24 Images (Montreal), Winter 1988–89. Interview in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1989. Interview in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), May-June 1991. On BELLOCCHIO: books— Wlaschin, Ken, Italian Cinema since the War, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1971. Leprohon, Pierre, The Italian Cinema, New York, 1972. Tassone, Aldo, Le Cinema italien parle, Paris, 1982. Michalczyk, John J., The Italian Political Filmmakers, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1986. On BELLOCCHIO: articles— Tessier, Max, ‘‘Au nom du père et de la politique,’’ in Ecran (Paris), February 1973. Comuzio, E., ‘‘Marco Bellocchio au miroir de Tchekhov,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), April/May 1979. Croyden, Margaret, ‘‘A Fresh Cinematic Voice from Italy,’’ in New York Times, 11 December 1983. Martin, Marcel, ‘‘Les yeux, la bouche’’ in Revue du Cinéma/Image et Son (Paris), November 1984, + filmo. Stefanutto-Rosa, S., ‘‘Il diavola nel subconscio dello psicoanalista selvaggio,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), March-April 1986. Kennedy, Harlan, ‘‘Second Birth,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1994. Segnocinema (Vicenza), July-August 1994. *** One of the healthiest aspects of the ever-more impressive cine- matic output of the 1960s was the greater respect accorded to different, even opposing, approaches to political filmmaking. Thus, a Godard or a Straub could comfortably accept being called a political filmmaker while their work analyzed the process of creating meaning in cinema. One of Italy’s most gifted directors to have emerged since the war, Marco Bellocchio chose to delve into his own roots and scrutinize those primary agents of socialization—the classroom, the church, and, most crucially for him, the family. Besides serving to reproduce selected values and ideas about the world, these structures are depicted by Bellocchio to be perfect, if microcosmic, reflections of society at large. Bellocchio’s films are black comedies centered around the threat of impending chaos. Typically, Bellocchio’s protagonists are outsid- ers who, after learning the rules by which social structures remain intact, set about circumventing or ignoring them. Through their actions they expose the fragility of the social order by exposing the fragility of all presumed truths. The judge in Leap into the Void, for example, devises a bizarre plot to have his sister killed in order to avoid suffering the embarrassment of sending her to a mental institution. The nuclear family, as an incarnation of the social order, repre- sents a system of clearly understood, if unexpressed, power relation- ships within a fixed hierarchy. These power relationships are ex- pressed in familial terms: Bellocchio’s women, for example, are usually defined as mothers or sisters. Even the radical political beliefs that some of his characters profess must be judged with regard to their application in the family sphere: shocked to discover that his sister is no longer a virgin, Vittorio in China Is Near admits, ‘‘You can be a Marxist-Leninist but still insist that your sister doesn’t screw around.’’ BEMBERGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 75 Along with his countryman Bernardo Bertolucci, Bellocchio is a primary example of the first European generation of film-school- educated directors. Often, these directors—perhaps under the influ- ence of la politique des auteurs—tended to exhibit an extreme self- conciousness in their films. While watching a Bellocchio film, one is struck at how little or nothing is left open to interpretation—every- thing seems achingly precise and intentional. Yet what saves his films from seeming airless or hopelessly ‘‘arty’’ is that they’re often outrageously funny. The havoc his characters wreak on all those around them is ironically counterpointed to the controlled precision of the direction. There is a kind of mordant delight in discovering just how far Bellocchio’s characters will go in carrying out their eerie intrigues. The sense of shrewd critical intelligence orchestrating comic pandemonium into lucid political analyses is one of the most pleasurable aspects of his cinema. —Richard Pe?a BEMBERG, Maria Luisa Nationality: Argentinian. Born: Buenos Aires, 1925. Family: Di- vorced, four children. Career: Established Argentina’s Teatro del Globo theater company, 1950s; wrote her first screenplay, Cronica de una Senora (Chronicle of a Woman), 1971; moved to New York and attended the Strasberg Institute, late 1970s; returned to Argentina and directed her first feature, Momentos, 1981. Died: 7 May 1995. Maria Luisa Bemberg Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1981 Momentos (Moments) 1982 Se?ora de Nadie (Nobody’s Woman) 1984 Camila 1987 Miss Mary 1990 Yo, la peor de todas (I, the Worst of Them All) 1993 De eso no se habla (I Don’t Want to Talk about It) (co-sc) Films as Scriptwriter Only: 1971 Cronica de una Se?ora (Chronicle of a Woman) 1972 El Mundo de la Mujer (short) 1975 Triangulo de Cuatro (Ayala) 1978 Juguetes (short) 1997 El Impostor (The Imposter) (Maci) Publications By BEMBERG: articles— ‘‘Maria Luisa Bemberg: El rescate de la mujer en el cine Argentino,’’ an interview with J.C. Huayhuaca and others, in Hablemos de Cine (Lima), March 1984. Interview with K. Jaehne and G. Crowdus, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 14, no. 3, 1986. Interview with Sheila Whitaker, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), October 1987. Interview in Cine Cubano (Havana), 1991. Interview with Z.M. Pick, in Journal of Film and Video (Atlanta), Fall-Winter 1992–1993. Interview with B. Olson, in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 36, 1994. ‘‘Accents and umlauts,’’ in Films in Review (New York), September- October 1994. On BEMBERG: book— King, John, and Nissa Torrents, The Garden of Forking Paths: Argentine Cinema, London, 1988. On BEMBERG: articles— Maeckley, Monika, ‘‘Machismo Takes a Knock,’’ in Guardian (London), 10 December 1982. Rich, B. Ruby, ‘‘After the Revolutions: The Second Coming of Latin American Cinema,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 10 Febru- ary 1987. Jackson, L. and Jaehne, K., ‘‘Eavesdropping in Female Voices,’’ in Cineaste (New York), no. 1/2, 1987–1988. Noh, D., ‘‘Bemberg’s Late-blooming Career Thrives with Mastroianni Starrer,’’ in Film Journal, September 1994. Obituary in Film-dienst (Cologne), 23 May 1995. Obituary in Classic Images (Muscatine), July 1995. Obituary in Time, 22 May 1995. Obituary in Village Voice, 30 May 1995. Obituary in Angles (Milwaukee), vol. 3, no. 1, 1996. *** BENEGAL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 76 Maria Luisa Bemberg entered the filmmaking world only after leading an ‘‘asphyxiating and uneventful’’ life (her own words). Born into one of the wealthiest families in Buenos Aires, she entered the film industry at age forty-six after her children had grown and she had obtained a divorce. Despite her belated entry into the profession, Bemberg became one of the most subversive and popular Argentinian directors of the twentieth century. In addition, she has been acclaimed in Europe and the States. Bemberg’s first (semi-autobiographical) screenplay, Cronica de una Se?ora, gained acclaim as a contemporary domestic drama, focusing on a regressive political system as it affected the female protagonist. Wishing to exert more control over her screenplays, but with no formal training, she spent three months as an actress at the Lee Strasberg Institute in New York and returned to Argentina to direct. In 1982 she caused a stir with Senora de Nadie, which featured a friend- ship between a gay man and a separated woman, challenging in one swoop the sacred notions of marriage, family, and the Church. Released on the day that Argentina invaded the Malvinas (Falklands), the film’s impact was overshadowed somewhat by political events, but the crumbling state of the military regime (which had exerted so much censorship and control over the country’s film industry that by the late 1970s only twelve films were being produced per year) ultimately helped the film succeed. Hugely popular with female audiences, it made a powerful and overtly feminist intervention into a culture crippled by its own repression and machismo. After the overthrow of the military regime, and the humiliation of defeat in the Falklands War, Bemberg still saw much to come to terms with and much to struggle against in her national identity. She felt that her role as a filmmaker, and as a woman in a fiercely patriarchal society, was to explore political oppression as a backdrop and context for intense personal conflict. Her films dwell anxiously on Argen- tina’s troubled past, and suggest that only by coming to terms with it can the nation—and the individual—put it to rest. In 1984 Bemberg directed Camila, the first Argentinian film ever to break into the American market. Recipient of an Oscar nomination for best foreign language film, it is all the more remarkable in that many other directors who wanted to film this true story of illicit love between a priest and a young woman in 1847 had previously been prevented from doing so by the government. By casting the Priest as a beautiful object of desire and Camila (historically portrayed as the innocent victim) as the temptress, Bemberg created a passionate melodrama in which she consciously moved away from her earlier, hard-bitten domestic dramas into a more emotional, lyrical sphere. The historical basis of Camila offers a mythical arena in which to explore her very real contemporary political concerns. Miss Mary continues to focus on these concerns, exploring Eng- lish influence over the Argentinian upper class through the crucial figure of the nanny in the years before World War II. Politics and history are expressed through family structures, sexuality, and human behaviour. Female characters, even the repressed and unsympathetic nanny (played by Julie Christie), are portrayed with understanding— although Miss Mary is a reactionary agent of oppression, the film works to explore why she is so—in an attempt to study the forces that could create both she and the sick family for which she works. Bemberg’s strong sense of the melancholy is an integral part of her work, causing an uneasy tension in all her films: while all her works indict the reactionary political system, they are also impregnated with a tragic sensibility that presents events as somehow out of the protagonists’ control. The bleak endings (in which transgressors are punished and traditional structures remain apparently intact) of Bemberg’s films might seem pessimistic. But the very expression of transgression in the films—along with the tentative exploration of the disruptions that inevitably threaten an apparently monolithic system— by an individual who could so easily be a victim of that system (female, bourgeois, divorced), is not merely laudable, but remarkable. Camila and Miss Mary remain exceptional films, the former a passionate and profound examination of a doomed romance and the latter a sumptuous, evocative account of a repressed woman. If both films are not overtly autobiographical, they do deal in very personal ways with Bemberg’s own identity as a woman existing in a male- dominated society. A third, most impressive, feature from Bemberg is I, The Worst of Them All, set in Mexico during the seventeenth century. Her heroine is a nun possessed of a deep thirst for knowledge who becomes a writer. She also is destined to becomes the antagonist of her country’s misogynist archbishop. Bemberg followed that up with what would be her final directoral effort, I Don’t Want to Talk about It, a fitfully interesting drama about two women—one a dwarf and the other her physically appealing but obnoxiously controlling mother—who become involved with an aging but still-suave bachelor (impeccably played by Marcello Mastroianni). The unfortunate aspect of Bemberg’s career is that it began so late in her life, thus robbing her of time to write and direct other films. Still, before her death in 1995 she was able to transcend the repressive political forces at work in her country and the constraints placed upon her because of her sex. Moreover, her films show her ability to discerningly philosophize about these aspects of existence in her country. —Samantha Cook, updated by Rob Edelman BENEGAL, Shyam Nationality: Indian. Born: Alwal, near Hyderabad, 14 December 1934. Education: Osmania University. Career: Advertising copy- writer and director (over 620 advertising shorts) for Lintas Agency, Bombay, 1960–66; received Bhabha fellowship and worked in U.S.; returned to India and became independent producer, 1970; directed first feature in Hindi, Ankur, 1974; director of the Indian National Film Development Corporation, 1980s; made TV mini-series The Discovery of India, 1989. Films as Director: 1967 A Child of the Streets (doc short) 1968 Close to Nature (doc short); Indian Youth—An Exploration (doc short); Sinhasta or The Path to Immortality (doc short) 1969 Poovanam (The Flower Path) (doc short) 1970 Horoscope for a Child (doc short) 1971 Pulsating Giant (doc short); Steel: A Whole New Way of Life (doc short); Raga and the Emotions (doc short) 1972 Tala and Rhythm (doc short); The Shruti and Graces of Indian Music (doc short); The Raag Yaman Kalyan (doc short); Notes on a Green Revolution (doc short); Power to the People (doc short); Foundations of Progress (doc short) 1974 Ankur (The Seedling) (+ sc) 1974/5 Learning Modules for Rural Children (doc) BENEGALDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 77 1975 Nishant (Night’s End); Charandas Chor (Charandas the Thief) 1975 A Quiet Revolution (doc) 1976 Manthan (The Churning); Tomorrow Begins Today; Indus- trial Research (short); Epilepsy (short) 1977 Bhumika (The Role) (+ co-sc); Kondura/Anugrahan (Telugu version) (The Boon) (+ co-sc); New Horizons in Steel (doc) Junoon (The Obsession) 1980 Hari Hondal Bargadar (Share Cropper) (+ sc) 1981 Kalyug (The Machine Age) 1982 Arohan (Ascending Scale) 1983 Mandi (The Market Place) 1985 Jawaharlal Nehru (doc); Satyajit Ray (doc); Trikaal (Past, Present, and Future) (+sc) 1986 Susman (The Essence) (+ p) 1993 Suraj Ka Satvan Ghoda 1994 Mammo 1995 Apprenticeship of a Mahatma 2000 Zubeidaa Publications By BENEGAL: book— The Churning, with Vijay Tendulkar, Calcutta, 1984. By BENEGAL: articles— Interview with Behroze Gandhy, in Framework (Norwich), no. 12, 1980. Interview with F. El Guedj, in Cinématographe (Paris), September- October 1983. Interview in Screen International (London), 13 December 1986. On BENEGAL: books— da Cunha, Uma, editor, Film India: The New Generation 1960–1980, New Delhi, 1981. Willemen, Paul, and Behroze Gandhy, Indian Cinema, London, 1982. Pfleiderer, Beatrix, and Lothar Lutze, The Hindi Film: Agent and Re- Agent of Cultural Change, New Delhi, 1985. Ramachandran, T.M., 70 Years of Indian Cinema (1913–1983), Bombay, 1985. Armes, Roy, Third-World Filmmaking and the West, Berkeley, 1987. On BENEGAL: articles— ‘‘Shyam Benegal,’’ article and interview in Cinéma (Paris), Septem- ber/October 1975. Dharker, Anil, ‘‘Shyam Benegal,’’ in International Film Guide 1979, London, 1978. Posthumus, P., and T. Custers, ‘‘Film in India: interview— achtergrondon—Shyam Benegal,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), Win- ter 1980/81. Tesson, C., ‘‘La Route des Indes,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1983. Gillett, John, ‘‘Style and Passion: The Films of Shyam Benegal,’’ in National Film Theatre Programme (London), May 1988. Saran, S., ‘‘The Question of Influences,’’ in Cinema in India, no. 12, 1991. Denis, F., ‘‘Of Truth and Invention,’’ in Cinema in India, no. 9, 1992. Niogret, Hubert, and Fran?oise Audé, ‘‘Shyam Benegal: Bhumika,’’ in Positif (Paris), October 1992. Sen, M., ‘‘The Wonder Years,’’ in In India, vol. 4, no. 3, 1993. Cossio, C., ‘‘Il settimo cavallo del sole nel cinema indiano,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), July-October 1995. *** The career of Shyam Benegal, which began with his first feature in 1974, has some similarity in terms of both approach and tenacity to that of Satyajit Ray twenty years earlier. Among shared aspects one may note a background in the film society movement, a strong western influence, commercial work in an advertising agency, and direction of children’s film (in Benegal’s case the feature length Charandas the Thief, made in 1975 for the Children’s Film Society). But Benegal was forty by the time he made his first feature and had already directed a large number of sponsored documentaries and commercials. Moreover, virtually all of his films have been in Hindi, the language of the commercial ‘‘all-India’’ movie, not in a regional dialect. Benegal’s personal style is already apparent and fully formed in the loose trilogy of studies of rural oppression made between 1974 and 1976: The Seedling, Night’s End, and The Churning, the last financed collectively—at two rupees apiece—by the farmers of Gujarat state. In each case the interaction of the rural populace and often well-meaning outsiders ends disastrously, but the note of revolt is very muted. Though Benegal’s social commitment is unquestion- able, he does not offer any clear way out for his characters. In The Seedling, the seduction and abandoning of a servant girl is followed by the savage beating of her deaf-mute husband, but the only answer is the stone thrown at the landlord’s house by a small boy in the film’s final sequence. This is the ‘‘seedling,’’ but Benegal offers no indica- tion as to how it can be nurtured. In Night’s End, a schoolmaster’s efforts lead to violence when his wife is kidnapped by a landlord’s family who are accustomed to exploiting and brutalizing peasants at will. But the final peasant revolt stirred up by the middle class hero gets totally and blindly out of hand, and one knows that it will be put down—no doubt savagely—by the authorities and that passivity will resume. The Churning is more optimistic, but even here the advocates of change are eventually defeated, though their efforts may some day bear fruit. Typical of Benegal’s approach is the way in which women—so often a personification of new values in third world films—are depicted as passive suffering figures. Benegal’s style is always solidly realistic, with stress on a carefully worked out narra- tive line and well-drawn characters. The pace is generally slow and measured but enlivened by excellent observation and fine choice of significant detail. In the late 1970s, Benegal retained this somewhat austere style with a total professionalism but without ever slipping into the extravagance or melodrama of the conventional Hindi film. The Role, one of his richest films, tells of a more dynamic woman, a film star who tries desperately to live her own life but is cruelly exploited by men throughout her life. The film, essentially a problem picture of a kind familiar in the West, has a muted, open ending and is enlivened by vigorously recreated extracts from the films in which the actress is purported to star. Subsequently, Benegal continued the widening of BENTON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 78 his chosen area of subject matter. The Boon, a film shot in two language versions and known as Kondura in Hindi and Anugrahan in Telegu, is a study of the tragic effect of a young man’s belief that he has been granted supernatural powers. The Obsession is a tale of interracial love set at the time of the Indian Mutiny, and The Machine Age is a story of bitter rivalry between industrialists—an archetypal conflict based on an ancient Hindi epic. But Ascending Scale, which depicts a peasant family destroyed as it is pitted against the reaction- ary forces of rural India, shows Benegal’s fidelity to the themes with which he had begun his career. Working aside from the dominant Hindi traditions, the director offers a striking example of integrity and commitment to an unrelenting vision. —Roy Armes BENTON, Robert Nationality: American. Born: Robert Douglas Benton in Waxahachie, Texas, 29 September 1932. Education: University of Texas, and at Columbia University, New York City. Military Service: Served in U.S. Army, 1954–56. Family: Married Sally Rendigs, 1964, one son. Career: Art Director of Esquire magazine, New York, 1957–61 (consulting editor, 1962—); began screenwriting partnership with David Newman, on Bonnie and Clyde, 1967; directed first feature, Bad Company, 1972. Awards: National Society of Film Critics Award, New York Film Critics Award, Writers Guild of America Award and Oscar nomination, Best Screenplay, for Bonnie and Clyde, 1967; Oscar nomination, Best Screenplay, for The Late Show, 1977; Oscars and Los Angeles Film Critics Association Awards for Best Screenplay and Best Director, Golden Globe Award for Best Screenplay, Writers Guild of America Award and Best Director, National Society of Film Critics and Directors Guild of America, for Kramer vs Kramer, 1979; Oscar for Best Screenplay, for Places in the Heart, 1984; Oscar nomination for Best Screenplay, for Nobody’s Fool, 1994. Address: c/o Sam Cohn, International Creative Manage- ment, 40 W. 57th Street, New York, NY 10019, U.S.A. Films as Director and Co-Scriptwriter: 1972 Bad Company 1977 The Late Show (sc) 1979 Kramer vs. Kramer 1982 Still of the Night (+sc) 1984 Places in the Heart (The Texas Project) 1987 Nadine (+sc) 1991 Billy Bathgate 1994 Nobody’s Fool (+sc) 1998 Twilight (+sc) Films as Scriptwriter Only (with David Newman except as indicated): 1967 Bonnie and Clyde (Penn) 1970 There Was a Crooked Man (J. Mankiewicz) 1972 What’s up Doc? (Bogdanovich) (co-sc with Newman and Buck Henry) 1978 Superman (Donner) (co-sc with David Newman, Mario Puzo, and Leslie Newman) Other Films: 1988 The House on Carroll Street (Yates) (co-exec pr) 1994 A Great Day in Harlem (Bach) (ro as himself) Publications By BENTON: books— The in and out Book, with Harvey Schmidt, New York, 1959. Little Brother, No More, New York, 1960. The Worry Book, with Harvey Schmidt, New York, 1962. Extremism: A Non-Book, with David Newman, New York, 1964. Don’t Ever Wish for a Seven-Foot Bear, with Sally Rendigs, New York, 1972. By BENTON: articles— Interviews in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1973, Janu- ary/February 1977, and July/August 1978. Interview in American Film (Washington, D.C.), July/August 1979. Interview in Image et Son (Paris), April 1980. Interview with Leslie Bennetts, in New York Times, 7 October 1984. Interview in Time Out (London), 28 February 1985. Interview with Sheila Johnston, in Stills (London), March 1985. Interview with P. Calum and A. Skytte in Kosmorama (Copenhagen), May 1985. Interview with P. Freeman, in American Screenwriter, vol. 4, no. 4, 1987. Interview with L. Vincenzi in Millimeter (Cleveland), August 1987. Interview with Andrew Sarris, in Film Comment (New York), Janu- ary-February 1995. Interview with Brian Case, in Time Out (London), 8 January 1992. Interview with Geoff Andrew, in Time Out (London), 22 March 1995. On BENTON: articles— ‘‘Robert Benton,’’ in Film Dope (London), August 1973. Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1973. Millimeter (New York), October 1976. Collins, G., ‘‘Robert Benton Goes Back to Texas for a Little Fun,’’ in New York Times, 2 August 1987. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘A Low-Rent Romance,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 11 August 1987. Almendros, Nestor, ‘‘Benton, Texas,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), September 1987. Talty, S., ‘‘Inside Billy Bathgate,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), July 1991. BENTONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 79 Robert Benton Weinraub, Bernard, ‘‘With Kevin’s Gate and Billygate, Filmdom’s Love of Gossip Blooms,’’ in New York Times, 17 September 1991. James, Caryn, ‘‘Film View: A Hole in the Heart of Billy Bathgate,’’ in New York Times, 3 November 1991. Krohn, B., ‘‘Histoires de gangsters, historie d’Amerique,’’ in Cahiers du Cinema (Paris), February 1992. Campbell, V., and Margulies, E., ‘‘Shrink to Fit,’’ in Movieline (Los Angeles), October 1992. Lally, K., ‘‘Benton Returns with a Tale of Small Town Redemp- tion,’’in Film Journal (New York), January-February 1995. *** There were many ways to make it as a bigtime Hollywood director in the 1970s. Robert Benton’s experience provides a common mode: a successful screenwriter turned director. Benton teamed with another aspiring author, David Newman, to pen the script of Arthur Penn’s wildly successful, highly influential Bonnie and Clyde (1967), a film that showed Hollywood how to meld comedy, melodrama, and social commentary. The story of how Benton and Newman came to write Bonnie and Clyde is the stuff of Hollywood legend. In 1964 they were working for Esquire magazine, developing the magazine’s annual college issue. As they were crafting the magazine’s infamous Dubi- ous Achievement Awards, they became caught up with the art cinema of Ingmar Bergman, Federico Fellini, and Akira Kurosawa. They decided to attempt an American version of Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless through the story of two desperados of the 1930s, Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow. Benton and Newman wrote a seventy-page treatment in which they tried to make their film feel like an Hitchcock thriller, but with the comic violent tone of Fran?ois Truffaut’s Shoot the Piano Player. First they sent the ‘‘Bonnie and Clyde’’ script to Truffaut, who passed on it, as did Jean-Luc Godard. Warren Beatty rescued the project, agreed to produce it, and Arthur Penn became the director. Here were the first members of the film generation of the 1960s making what in some ways came to represent the most influential film of the decade, for it captured the restlessness of an age as well as the era’s ethical ambiguity. Bonnie and Clyde at once demonstrated that Hollywood films could successfully incorporate the stylistic flourishes of the French New Wave into Classic Hollywood genre material. The Bonnie and Clyde script won numerous awards, and the duo went on to co-script There Was a Crooked Man (1970), What’s up BERESFORD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 80 Doc? (1972), and Superman (1978). The last two proved Benton and Newman were able to make movies that made money. What’s up Doc? finished in the top ten earners for 1971; Superman generated more than 100 million dollars worldwide. But Benton aspired to be his own director, and he worked single-mindedly at that goal during the 1970s. Success came with Kramer vs. Kramer (1979), Benton’s third directorial effort. Based on his screenplay, Kramer vs. Kramer won the Oscar for Best Picture, Best Actor (Dustin Hoffman), Best Screenplay, Best Director, and Best Supporting Actress (Meryl Streep), a sweep rarely accomplished in Hollywood history. More importantly for Benton’s future, Kramer vs. Kramer finished atop the domestic box-office rankings for the year. Robert Benton had reached his goal; he was as hot a property as there was in Hollywood as the 1980s opened. But thereafter Benton’s filmmaking successes were limited. He did reach another peak in 1984 with Places in the Heart. The film, which featured Benton’s award-winning screenplay, was one man’s affectionate look at life in his hometown of Waxahachie, Texas, during the hard days of the Great Depression. On the other hand, Benton’s Nadine (1987) was also set in Texas, but this comedy failed to capture either the fancy of the critics or the public. As Benton moved into the 1990s, many saw him as the principal case of the power of the screenwriter as auteur. Perhaps this is so, but continuing success at the top—a Hollywood prerequisite if one wants to control one’s movies—seemed to have sucked the life from Benton’s story-telling ability. Some speculated that Benton, who had crafted fine stories of outsiders from Bonnie Parker to the aging detective of The Late Show, had difficulty functioning as a member of the Hollywood establishment. Benton’s most recent films have been set in the environs of upstate New York. Billy Bathgate, based on the E.L. Doctorow novel about a young man’s involvement with mobster Dutch Schultz, has much going for it, beginning with a talented cast (headed by Dustin Hoffman and Nicole Kidman) and superlative production design. But the shoot was troubled, resulting in acrimony between Benton and Hoffman and a curiously emotionless and eminently forgettable film, despite the presence of the always watchable Hoffman (cast as Schultz—a character altogether different from his Ted Kramer character). Nobody’s Fool, based on a novel by Richard Russo, is far more successful. The characters are less flamboyant than those found in Billy Bathgate; as an evocation of time and place, and a portrait of small-town American life, the film is closer in spirit to Places in the Heart. Paul Newman is nothing short of superb as Donald ‘‘Sully’’ Sullivan, an aging, out-of-work construction worker. Long-estranged from his family, the film follows events when he is forced to deal with his son and grandson. Also central to the story are Sullivan’s relationships with various townsfolk, including his landlady (Jessica Tandy), who once was his eighth-grade teacher, his sometime em- ployer (Bruce Willis), and the latter’s neglected wife (Melanie Griffith). Nobody’s Fool works best as a film of moods and feelings; ultimately, it is a knowing, entertaining blend of poignancy and humor. As in his earlier films, Benton draws fine performances from his cast. While one would expect exceptional acting from Newman and Tandy, the filmmaker elicits solid work from Griffith and Willis, who rarely have been better on screen. —Douglas Gomery, updated by Rob Edelman BERESFORD, Bruce Nationality: Australian. Born: 1940. Education: Sydney Univer- sity. Family: Married 1) Rhoisin Patricia Harrison; 2) Virginia Patricia Mary Dugan, 1985; has three children. Career: Worked in advertising and for ABC TV, late 1950s; moved to London, 1961, and taught at girl’s school, Willesden; film editor, East Nigerian Film Unit, 1964–66; head of British Film Institute Production Board, 1966–70: produced eighty-six films, notably short documentaries; moved to Australia, 1971; directed first feature, The Adventures of Barry MacKenzie, 1972; moved to United States, 1981. Awards: Best Director, Australian Film Awards, for Don’s Party, 1976, and Breaker Morant, 1980; Best Director, American Film Institute Awards, for Don’s Party, 1977; Best Director, Canadian Film Awards, for Black Robe, 1991. Agent: William Morris Agency, Beverly Hills, CA. Films as Director: 1972 The Adventures of Barry MacKenzie (+ sc) 1974 Barry MacKenzie Holds His Own (+ co-sc, pr) 1975 Don’s Party 1977 The Getting of Wisdom 1978 Money Movers (+ sc) 1980 Breaker Morant (+ sc) 1981 The Club 1982 Puberty Blues 1983 Tender Mercies Bruce Beresford BERESFORDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 81 1985 King David; Fringe Dwellers (+ sc) 1986 Crimes of the Heart 1987 Aria (directed one episode) 1989 Driving Miss Daisy 1990 Her Alibi 1991 Mister Johnson (+ co-sc) 1992 Black Robe 1993 Rich in Love 1994 A Good Man in Africa; A Silent Fall 1996 Last Dance 1997 Paradise Road (co-sc) 1999 Double Jeopardy; Sydney: A Story of a City Other Films: 1967 You’re Human like the Rest of Them (pr) 1994 Curse of the Starving Class (exec pr, sc) Publications By BERESFORD: articles— ‘‘An Aussie in Hollywood,’’ an interview with G. Crowdus and U. Gupta, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 12, no. 4, 1983. Interview in Screen International (London), 21 May 1983. ‘‘The Paramount King David,’’ an interview with Brent Lewis, in Films (London), December 1984/January 1985. ‘‘Tender Crimes,’’ an interview with Margy Rochlin, in American Film (Washington, D.C.), January/February 1987. Interview with Film a Doba (Prague), Autumn 1994. Interview with S.B. Katz, in Written By (Los Angeles), June 1997. On BERESFORD: books— Reade, Eric, History and Heartburn: The Saga of Australian Film, 1896–1978, Sydney, 1979. Stratton, David, The Last New Wave: The Australian Film Reader, Sydney, 1980. Tulloch, John, Australian Cinema: Industry, Narrative, and Mean- ing, Sydney and London, 1982. White, David, Australian Movies to the World: The International Success of Australian Films since 1970, Sydney, 1984. Bruce Beresford: An Annotated Bibliography, Melbourne, 1985. Hall, Sandra, Critical Business: The New Australian Cinema in Review, Adelaide, 1985. Moran, Albert, and Tom O’Regan, editors, An Australian Film Reader, Sydney, 1985. Radcliff-Umstead, Douglas, ed., National Traditions in Motion Pic- tures, Kent, Ohio, 1985. Lewis, Glen, Australian Movies and the American Dream, New York, 1987. McFarlane, Brian, Australian Cinema 1970–85, London, 1987. Bennett, Bruce, ed., A Sense of Exile, Nedlands, Australia, 1988. Dermony, Susan, and Elizabeth Jacka, The Screening of Australia: Anatomy of a National Cinema, Vol. II, Sydney, 1988. Bertrand, Ira, ed., Cinema of Australia: A Documentary History, New South Wales, 1989. Radcliff-Umstead, Douglas, ed., Motion Pictures and Society, Kent, Ohio, 1990. Rattigan, Neil, Images of Australia: 100 Films of the New Australian Cinema, Dallas, 1991. McFarlane, Brian, and Geoff Mayer, New Australian Cinema: Sources and Parallels in American and British Film, Cambridge, Eng- land, 1992. Radcliff-Umstead, Douglas, ed., Varieties of Filmic Expression, Kent, Ohio, 1992. Murray, Scott, Australian Cinema, St. Leonards, Australia, 1994. On BERESFORD: articles— Connelly, Keith, ‘‘The Films of Bruce Beresford,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), August/September 1980. Robinson, David, ‘‘Bruce Beresford’s New Australian Cinema,’’ in the Times (London), 23 October 1980. Heung, Marina, ‘‘Breaker Morant and the Melodramatic Treatment of History,’’ in Film Criticism, Winter 1984. Quartermain, Peter, ‘‘Two Australian Films: Images and Contexts for The Term of His Natural Life (1927) and Don’s Party,’’ in Commonwealth Essays and Studies (Dijon, France), Spring 1984. Lewis, Brent, ‘‘A Deft Talent,’’ in Films (London), February 1985. ‘‘Bruce Beresford Is Home,’’ in Encore (Manly, New South Wales), 7 November 1985. Bryant, Hallman B., ‘‘Breaker Morant in Fact, Fiction, and Film,’’ Literature/Film Quarterly, 1987. Rochlin, Margy, ‘‘Tender Crimes,’’ American Film, January/Febru- ary 1987. Davidson, Jim, ‘‘Locating Crocodile Dundee,’’ Meanjin (Victoria, Australia), March 1987. Pym, John, ‘‘Mister Johnson,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1990. Vann, Helene, and Jane Caputi, ‘‘Driving Miss Daisy: A New Song of the South,’’ Journal of Popular Film and Television, Summer 1990. Freebury, Jane, ‘‘Black Robe: Ideological Cloak and Dagger?’’ in Australian Canadian Studies (Wollongong, Australia), 1992. Mortimer, Lorraine, ‘‘The Soldier, the Shearer and the Mad Man: Horizons of Community in Some Australian Films,’’ Literature/ Film Quarterly, 1993. Groves, D., ‘‘Oz Helmers Graduate from Hollywood High,’’ in Variety (New York), 7–13 October, 1996. *** Bruce Beresford’s career has been described as both interesting and uneven. Since his debut as a maker of feature films in 1972 with the broad comedy The Adventures of Barry MacKenzie, Beresford has made a wide variety of movies. But there is unity in this variety. If his Australian films, such as The Getting of Wisdom and Breaker Morant, seem more hard-edged and political than Tender Mercies, Crimes of the Heart, or Driving Miss Daisy, his latest American films neverthe- less carry a social comment, if conveyed ever so quietly. Beresford showed an interest in making films from an early age but moved to England when he saw little chance of being able to direct in Australia. After holding a number of jobs abroad, including a stint working for the British Film Institute, he returned home when government subsidies offered the possibilities for an expanded local production schedule. His first film, The Adventures of Barry Mac- Kenzie, was deliberately commercial and pitched at a popular level BERESFORD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 82 since he felt that Australian films needed to prove their marketability at that time. The success of this film and his next ‘‘ocker’’ epic, Barry MacKenzie Holds His Own, gave him the leverage within the industry to be able to explore a different kind of work. The more serious social comment of Don’s Party, a film set against the failure of the Labor Party in the national elections of 1969, offered a clear-eyed look at Australian society of the 1960s and pursued in a more serious way the contradictions in the Australian character. Don’s Party is a small movie based on David Williamson’s play, and it was filmed largely within the confines of a subur- ban house. Its intense probing of character and the film’s at-times claustrophobic atmosphere surfaced in the director’s later, better- known films. Beresford next turned to a project he had wanted to do for some time, The Getting of Wisdom, based on the autobiographical novel by H. H. Richardson. The story traces the adventures of a young woman who arrives from the outback to receive a proper education at a city girl’s school. The film is a period piece but provides a devastating look at the overly genteel pretensions of class-bound, nineteenth- century Australian society. Not yet secure in its own identity, the film noted that the society still copied the Victorian social arrangements of the motherland. A stunningly beautiful film, The Getting of Wisdom established Beresford as a maker of serious and thoughtful films in the European art film tradition. After shooting a caper film, The Money Movers, Beresford made Breaker Morant, which returned to Australia’s past and explored the country’s colonial relationship with Great Britain against the back- ground of the Boer War. The film confirmed Beresford’s interna- tional reputation and opened the way for him to make films outside the rather limited resources of the Australian cinema. Breaker Morant contains a savage look at British attitudes towards its former colony and examines the exploitation and condescension such attitudes produce. Although the film’s leading character was played by an Englishman, the movie was also a showcase for Australian act- ing talent. With The Club and Puberty Blues, Beresford returned to contem- porary Australia. The Club, adapted from another of Bruce Williamson’s plays, is a satire on the inner workings of an Australian football club, including its financial woes, moral tensions, and labor disputes. Puberty Blues deals with a pair of would-be ‘‘surfer-girls’’ growing up along the southern beachside suburbs of Sydney. The film deftly explores the macho world of Australian surfers while offering up an unflattering picture of how young women in this world are exploited and abused. In part because of his growing international reputation, Beresford moved to the United States to direct his next film, Tender Mercies, from a Horton Foote script about a down and out country singer who finds love and solace with a small town Texan widow and her son. At first glance the story seems an unusual subject for Beresford to film, but Tender Mercies contains much of the same social commentary and the visual beauty of his earlier films. The acting is notable, as is the evocation of locale, which is not unlike the arid spaces of the Australian outback. It is a quiet, small film, the kind of movie Beresford was used to making, and it set the pattern for the other successful American films that followed. Only when venturing into the mega-epic with King David did the Beresford touch falter. Returning to Australia, Beresford made The Fringe Dwellers, a movie about a family of aborigines and their attempts to integrate themselves into white Australian society. Their failure to do so causes a split between the generations and a dissolution of the family itself. Long a touchy subject in Australia, Beresford handled the integration issue with sensitivity, tracing the sad divisions between the races. King David came next. Although fraught with high expectations, the film was a critical and box-office disaster. He recouped whatever damage the fiasco might have done to his career by turning to Crimes of the Heart, an adaptation of Beth Henley’s play about three eccentric sisters who have come together as a result of a family crisis. Once again, the director captured the ambience of small-town South- ern society with gentleness and affection. The three sisters, all played by major Hollywood stars who worked remarkably well together under Beresford’s direction, come off as a loving but eccentric by- product of regional gentility and repression. Underlying the film is a steady and unblinking look at the place of women in this traditional society. It is noteworthy that Beresford’s next film rated a large spread in the financial section of the New York Times. Driving Miss Daisy cleaned up at the box-office as well as at the Oscars, and made Beresford’s name a known quantity among general film audiences around the world. A quiet film about the relationship between a black man and his elderly Jewish female employer in the South, the work features tour de force acting performances from both of the principal stars, Morgan Freeman and Jessica Tandy. For the most part the film does not deal with racial or social problems, but prejudice hovers around the edges of the world of the film and subtly affects its tone. It is another of Beresford’s small films, a work of intense concentration that focuses on a microcosm of the modern world and which, in its unfolding, explores broad human as well as social issues. Beresford’s films of the 1990s have met with mixed critical and financial success. Mister Johnson, based on a Joyce Cary novel, follows the adventures of an English engineer in West Africa during the 1920s. The engineer, who has been hired to build a road through the native bush, is accompanied by Mr. Johnson, his wily local assistant. Like many of his other films, it is a tragic story about the clash between societies in a colonial setting. Black Robe is a larger- scale historical film set in the Canadian wilderness. In 1734 a French Jesuit priest accompanies a tribe of Algonquins to his mission among the Hurons. The priest’s spirituality is challenged by the hardships he faces in the wilderness and with the North American Indians. It is a grim film with bleak, scenic locations that create a thoughtful and stark background for its message of cultural friction. The same creative team that filmed Driving Miss Daisy reunited to film Josephine Humphreys’ novel about a Southern family whose conventional lives are disrupted when the mother unexpectedly, and without explanation, leaves her husband and children. Rich in Love deals with the various members of the family but focuses on the coming-of-age of the youngest daughter, who has taken over the mother’s duties. Both the acting and the screen adaptation were critically praised. In A Good Man in Africa, starring Sean Connery, the director returned to Africa, where the locals and the British were still at odds. The film was rather badly reviewed and several of the critics found the portrayal of both sides stereotypical and dated. Silent Fall is a suspense film about a psychiatrist who solves a double murder witnessed by the victims’ nine-year-old son. It was released right on the heels of A Good Man in Africa and might have helped to save Beresford’s current reputation, but it was so infrequently and so negatively reviewed that it only multiplied his troubles. Although in many ways Bruce Beresford has become a Holly- wood director, one who likes large filming budgets and the options that such budgets afford, his films remain really quite consistent. BERGMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 83 Preferring ensemble acting to star vehicles, smaller films to epics (even though Breaker Morant was favorably compared to a David Lean epic by the critics, the film is still basically an intimate courtroom drama) and always infusing his films with an insistent social critique, especially on the question of racism, Beresford has fashioned a remarkably consistent career for all of its seeming diversity. —Charles L. P. Silet BERGMAN, Ingmar Nationality: Swedish. Born: Ernst Ingmar Bergman in Uppsala, Sweden, 14 July 1918. Education: Palmgrens School, Stockholm, and Stockholm University, 1938–40. Family: Married 1) Else Fisher, 1943 (divorced 1945), one daughter; 2) Ellen Lundstr?m, 1945 (divorced 1950), two sons, two daughters; 3) Gun Grut, 1951, one son; 4) K?bi Laretei, 1959 (separated 1965), one son; 5) Ingrid von Rosen, 1971 (died 1995). Also one daughter by actress Liv Ullmann. Career: Joined Svensk Filmindustri as scriptwriter, 1943; director of Helsingborg City Theatre, 1944; directed first film, Kris, 1946; began association with producer Lorens Marmstedt, and with Gothenburg Civic Theatre, 1946; began association with cinematographer Gunnar Fischer, 1948; director, Municipal Theatre, Malmo, 1952–58; began associations with Bibi Andersson and Max von Sydow, 1955; began association with cinematographer Sven Nykvist, 1959; became artis- tic advisor at Svensk Filmindustri, 1961; head of Royal Dramatic Theatre, Stockholm, 1963–66; settled on island of Faro, 1966; estab- lished Cinematograph production company, 1968; moved to Munich, following arrest on alleged tax offences and subsequent breakdown, 1976; formed Personafilm production company, 1977; director at Munich Residenzteater, 1977–82; returned to Sweden, 1978; an- nounced retirement from filmmaking, following Fanny and Alexan- der, 1982; directed These Blessed Two for Swedish television, 1985; concentrated on directing for the theater, 1985; Film Society of Lincoln Center presented a retrospective of almost all of Bergman’s films as director, 1995; Brooklyn Academy of Music honored Bergman with a four-month-long Bergman Festival, 1995; The Museum of Television & Radio honored Bergman with a retrospective titled ‘‘Ingmar Bergman In Close-Up: The Television Work,’’ 1995. Awards: Golden Bear, Berlin Festival, for Wild Strawberries, 1958; Gold Plaque, Swedish Film Academy, 1958; Oscars for Best Foreign Language Film, The Virgin Spring (1961), Through a Glass Darkly (1962), and Fanny and Alexander (1983); Oscar nominations, Best Director, for Cries and Whispers (1973), Face to Face (1976), and Fanny and Alexander (1983); Oscar nominations, Best Screenplay, for Wild Strawberries (1958), Through a Glass Darkly (1962), Cries and Whispers (1973), Face to Face (1976), and Fanny and Alexander (1983); co-winner of International Critics Prize, Venice Film Festi- val, for Fanny and Alexander; Erasmus Prize (shared with Charles Chaplin), Netherlands, 1965; Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award, 1970; Order of the Yugoslav Flag, 1971; Luigi Pirandello Interna- tional Theatre Prize, 1971; honorary doctorate of philosophy, Stock- holm University, 1975; Gold Medal of Swedish Academy, 1977; European Film Award, 1988; Le Prix Sonning, 1989; Praemium Imperiale Prize, 1991. Films as Director: 1946 Kris (Crisis) (+ sc); Det regnar p? v?r k?rlek (It Rains on Our Love; The Man with an Umbrella) (+ co-sc) 1947 Skepp till Indialand (A Ship Bound for India; The Land of Desire) (+ sc) 1948 Musik i m?rker (Music in Darkness; Night Is My Future); Hamnstad (Port of Call) (+ co-sc) 1949 F?ngelse (Prison; The Devil’s Wanton) (+ sc); T?rst (Thirst; Three Strange Loves) 1950 Till gl?dje (To Joy) (+ sc); S?nt h?nder inte h?r (High Tension; This Doesn’t Happen Here) 1951 Sommarlek (Summer Interlude; Illicit Interlude) (+ co-sc) 1952 Kvinnors v?ntan (Secrets of Women; Waiting Women) (+ sc) 1953 Sommaren med Monika (Monika; Summer with Monika) (+ co-sc); Gycklarnas afton (The Naked Night; Sawdust and Tinsel) (+ sc) 1954 En lektion i k?rlek (A Lesson in Love) (+ sc) 1955 Kvinnodr?m (Dreams; Journey into Autumn) (+ sc); Sommarnattens leende (Smiles of a Summer Night) (+ sc) 1957 Det sjunde inseglet (The Seventh Seal) (+ sc); Smultronst?llet (Wild Strawberries) (+ sc) 1958 N?ra livet (Brink of Life; So Close to Life) (+ co-sc); Ansiktet (The Magician; The Face) (+ sc) 1960 Jungfruk?llen (The Virgin Spring); Dj?vulens ?ga (The Devil’s Eye) (+ sc) 1961 S?som i en spegel (Through a Glass Darkly) (+ sc) 1963 Nattvardsg?sterna (Winter Light) (+ sc); Tystnaden (The Silence) (+ sc) 1964 F?r att inte tala om alla dessa kvinnor (All These Women; Now about These Women) (+ co-sc under pseudonym ‘‘Buntel Eriksson’’) 1966 Persona (+ sc) 1967 ‘‘Daniel’’ episode of Stimulantia (+ sc, ph) 1968 Vargtimmen (Hour of the Wolf) (+ sc); Skammen (Shame; The Shame) (+ sc) 1969 Riten (The Ritual; The Rite) (+ sc); En passion (The Passion of Anna; A Passion) (+ sc); F?r?-dokument (The F?r? Docu- ment) (+ sc) 1971 Ber?ringen (The Touch) (+ sc) 1973 Viskningar och rop (Cries and Whispers) (+ sc); Scener ur ett ?ktenskap (Scenes from a Marriage) (+ sc, + narration, voice of the photographer) in six episodes: ‘‘Oskuld och panik (Innocence and Panic)’’; ‘‘Kunsten att sopa unter mattan (The Art of Papering over Cracks)’’; ‘‘Paula’’; ‘‘T?redalen (The Vale of Tears)’’; ‘‘Analfabeterna (The Illiterates)’’; ‘‘Mitt i natten i ett m?rkt hus n?gonstans i v?rlden (In the Middle of the Night in a Dark House Somewhere in the World)’’ (shown theatrically in short- ened version of 168 minutes) 1977 Das Schlangenei (The Serpent’s Egg; Ormens ?gg) (+ sc) 1978 Herbstsonate (Autumn Sonata; H?stsonaten) (+ sc) 1979 F?r?-dokument 1979 (F?r? 1979) (+ sc, narration) 1980 Aus dem Leben der Marionetten (From the Life of the Mario- nettes) (+ sc) 1982 Fanny och Alexander (Fanny and Alexander) (+ sc) 1983 Efter Repetitioner (After the Rehearsal) (+ sc) 1985 Karin’s Face (short) BERGMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 84 Ingmar Bergman 1991 Den Goda viljan (The Best Intentions) (mini for TV) 1992 Markisinnan de Sade (for TV) (+sc) 1995 Sista skriket (The Last Gasp) (for TV) (+sc) 1997 Larmar och g?r sig till (In the Presence of a Clown) (for TV) (+sc, ro as Mental Patient); Bergmans r?st (The Voice of Bergman (Bergdahl) (doc) Other Films: 1944 Hets (Torment; Frenzy) (Sj?berg) (sc) 1947 Kvinna utan ansikte (Woman without a Face) (Molander) (sc) 1948 Eva (Molander) (co-sc) 1950 Medan staden sover (While the City Sleeps) (Kjellgren) (synopsis) 1951 Fr?nskild (Divorced) (Molander) (sc) 1956 Sista paret ut (Last Couple Out) (Sj?berg) (sc) 1961 Lustg?rden (The Pleasure Garden) (Kjellin) (co-sc under pseudonym ‘‘Buntel Eriksson’’) 1974 Kallelsen (The Vocation) (Nykvist) (pr) 1975 Trollfl?jten (The Magic Flute) (for TV) (+ sc) 1976 Ansikte mot ansikte (Face to Face) (+ co-pr, sc) (for TV, originally broadcast in serial form); Paradistorg (Summer Paradise) (Lindblom) (pr) 1977 A Look at Liv (Kaplan) (role as interviewee) 1986 Dokument: Fanny och Alexander (Carlsson) (subject) 1992 Den Goda Viljan (The Best Intentions) (sc); Sondagsbarn (Sunday’s Children) (sc) 1996 Enskilda samtal (Private Confessions) (series for TV) (sc) 2000 Trol?sa (Faithless) (sc) Publications By BERGMAN: books— Four Screenplays of Ingmar Bergman, New York, 1960. The Virgin Spring, New York, 1960. A Film Trilogy (Through a Glass Darkly, Winter Light, and The Silence), New York, 1967. Persona and Shame, New York, 1972. BERGMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 85 Bergman on Bergman, edited by Stig Bj?rkman and others, New York, 1973. Scenes from a Marriage, New York, 1974. Face to Face, New York, 1976. Four Stories by Ingmar Bergman, New York, 1977. The Serpent’s Egg, New York, 1978. Autumn Sonata, New York, 1979. From the Life of the Marionettes, New York, 1980. Fanny and Alexander, New York, 1982; London, 1989. Talking with Ingmar Bergman, edited by G. William Jones, Dallas, Texas, 1983. The Marriage Scenarios: Scenes from a Marriage; Face to Face; Autumn Sonata, New York, 1983. The Seventh Seal, New York, 1984. Laterna Magica, Stockholm, 1987; as The Magic Lantern: An Auto- biography, London, 1988. Bilder, Stockholm, 1988; published as Images: My Life in Film, New York, 1993. Den goda viljan, Stockholm, 1991; published as The Best Intentions, New York, 1993. Sondagsbarn, Stockholm, 1993; published as Sunday’s Children, New York, 1994. Ingmar Bergman: An Artist’s Journey on Stage, Screen, in Print, edited by Roger W. Oliver, Arcade Publishers, 1995. Private Confessions: A Novel, translated by Joan Tate, Arcade Publishers, 1997. By BERGMAN: articles— ‘‘Self-Analysis of a Film-Maker,’’ in Films and Filming (London), September 1956. ‘‘Dreams and Shadows,’’ in Films and Filming (London), Octo- ber 1956. Interview with Jean Béranger, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Octo- ber 1958. ‘‘Each Film Is My Last,’’ in Films and Filming (London), July 1959. ‘‘Bergman on Victor Sj?strom,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1960. ‘‘The Snakeskin,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), August 1965. ‘‘Schizophrenic Interview with a Nervous Film Director,’’ by ‘Ernest Riffe’ (pseudonym), in Film in Sweden (Stockholm), no. 3, 1968, and in Take One (Montreal), January/February 1969. ‘‘Moment of Agony,’’ interview with Lars-Olof L?thwall, in Films and Filming (London), February 1969. ‘‘Conversations avec Ingmar Bergman,’’ with Jan Aghed, in Positif (Paris), November 1970. Interview with William Wolf, in New York, 27 October 1980. ‘‘The Making of Fanny and Alexander,’’ interview in Films and Filming (London), February 1983. Interview with Peter Cowie, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), April 1983. ‘‘Goodbye to All That: Ingmar Bergman’s Farewell to Film,’’ an interview with F. van der Linden and B.J. Bertina, in Cinema Canada (Montreal), February 1984. ‘‘Kak suzdavalas,’’ Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 30, no. 2/3, 1988. Interview with S. Bjorkman and O. Assayas, in Cahiers du Cinema (Paris), October 1990. Interview with Jan Aghed and Jannike ?hlund, in Positif (Paris), May 1998. On BERGMAN: books— Béranger, Jean, Ingmar Bergman et ses films, Paris, 1959. Donner, J?rn, The Personal Vision of Ingmar Bergman, Blooming- ton, Indiana, 1964. Maisetti, Massimo, La Crisi spiritulai dell’uomo moderno nei film di Ingmar Bergman, Varese, 1964. Nelson, David, Ingmar Bergman: The Search for God, Boston, 1964. Steene, Birgitta, Ingmar Bergman, New York, 1968. Gibson, Arthur, The Silence of God: Creative Response to the Films of Ingmar Bergman, New York, 1969. Wood, Robin, Ingmar Bergman, New York, 1969. Sj?gren, Henrik, Regi: Ingmar Bergman, Stockholm, 1970. Young, Vernon, Cinema Borealis: Ingmar Bergman and the Swedish Ethos, New York, 1971. Simon, John, Ingmar Bergman Directs, New York, 1972. Kaminsky, Stuart, editor, Ingmar Bergman: Essays in Criticism, New York, 1975. Bergom-Larsson, Maria, Ingmar Bergman and Society, San Diego, 1978. Kawin, Bruce, Mindscreen: Bergman, Godard, and the First-Person Film, Princeton, 1978. Sj?man, Vilgot, L. 136. Diary with Ingmar Bergman, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1978. Manvell, Roger, Ingmar Bergman: An Appreciation, New York, 1980. Mosley, Philip, Ingmar Bergman: The Cinema as Mistress, Bos- ton, 1981. Petric, Vlada, editor, Film and Dreams: An Approach to Ingmar Bergman, South Salem, New York, 1981. Cowie, Peter, Ingmar Bergman: A Critical Biography, New York, 1982. Livingston, Paisley, Ingmar Bergman and the Ritual of Art, Ithaca, New York, 1982. Marker, Lise-Lone, Ingmar Bergman: Four Decades in the Theater, New York, 1982. Steene, Birgitta, A Reference Guide to Ingmar Bergman, Boston, 1982. Lefèvre, Raymond, Ingmar Bergman, Paris, 1983. Dervin, Daniel, Through a Freudian Lens Deeply: A Psychoanalysis of Cinema, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1985. Gado, Frank, The Passion of Ingmar Bergman, Durham, North Carolina, 1986. Ketcham, Charles B., The Influence of Existentialism on Ingmar Bergman: An Analysis of the Theological Ideas Shaping a Filmmaker’s Art, Lewiston, New York, 1986. Steene, Birgitta, Ingmar Bergman: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1987. Lauder, Robert E., God, Death, Art, and Love: The Philosophical Vision of Ingmar Bergman, Mahwah, New Jersey, 1989. Marty, Joseph, Ingmar Bergman, une poetique du desir, Paris, 1991. Cowie, Peter, Ingmar Bergman: A Critical Biography, New York, 1992. Marker, Lise-Lone, Ingmar Bergman: A Life in the Theater, New York, 1992. Bragg, Melvin, The Seventh Seal, London, 1993. Cohen, Hubert I., Ingmar Bergman: The Art of Confession, Bos- ton, 1993. Gibson, Arthur, The Rite of Redemption in the Films of Ingmar Bergman, Lewiston, Maine, 1993. Tornqvist, Egil, Filmdiktaren Ingmar Bergman, Stockholm, 1993. BERGMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 86 Long, Robert Emmet, Ingmar Bergman: Film and Stage, New York, 1994. Tornqvist, Egil, Between Stage and Screen: Ingmar Bergman Directs (Film Culture in Transition), Amsterdam University Press, 1996. Johns Blackwell, Marilyn, Gender and Representation in the Films of Ingmar Bergman (Studies in Scandinavian Literature and Cul- ture), Camden House, 1997. Vermilye, Jerry, Ingmar Bergman: His Films and Career, Birch Lane Press, 1998. Gervais, Marc, and Liv Ullmann, Ingmar Bergman: Magician and Prophet, McGill Queens University Press, 1999. On BERGMAN: articles— Ulrichsen, Erik, ‘‘Ingmar Bergman and the Devil,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1958. Godard, Jean-Luc, ‘‘Bergmanorama,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July 1958. Archer, Eugene, ‘‘The Rack of Life,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1959. Alpert, Hollis, ‘‘Bergman as Writer,’’ in Saturday Review (New York), 27 August 1960. Alpert, Hollis, ‘‘Style Is the Director,’’ in Saturday Review (New York), 23 December 1961. Nykvist, Sven, ‘‘Photographing the Films of Ingmar Bergman,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), October 1962. Persson, G?ran, ‘‘Bergmans trilogi,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), no. 40, 1964. Fleisher, Frederic, ‘‘Ants in a Snakeskin,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1965. Lefèvre, Raymond, ‘‘Ingmar Bergman,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), March 1969. ‘‘Director of the Year,’’ International Film Guide (London, New York), 1973. Sammern-Frankenegg, Fritz, ‘‘Learning ‘A Few Words in the For- eign Language’: Ingmar Bergman’s ‘Secret Message’ in the Imagery of Hand and Face,’’ in Scandinavian Studies, Sum- mer 1977. Sorel, Edith, ‘‘Ingmar Bergman: I Confect Dreams and Anguish,’’ in New York Times, 22 January 1978. Kinder, Marsha, ‘‘From the Life of the Marionettes to The Devil’s Wanton,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1981. Lundell, T., and A. Mulac, ‘‘Husbands and Wives in Bergman Films: A Close Analysis Based on Empirical Data,’’ in Journal of University Film Association (Carbondale, Illinois), Winter 1981. Nave, B., and H. Welsh, ‘‘Retour de Bergman: Au ciné-club et au stage de Boulouris,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), April-May 1982. Cowie, Peter, ‘‘Bergman at Home,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1982. Corliss, Richard, and W. Wolf, ‘‘God, Sex, and Ingmar Bergman,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May-June 1983. McLean, T., ‘‘Knocking on Heaven’s door,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), June 1983. Boyd, D., ‘‘Persona and the Cinema of Representation,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Winter 1983–84. Tornqvist, E., ‘‘August StrindBERGman Ingmar,’’ in Skrien (Am- sterdam), Winter 1983–84. Koskinen, M., ‘‘The Typically Swedish in Ingmar Bergman,’’ in 25th Anniversary issue of Chaplin (Stockholm), 1984. Ingemanson, B., ‘‘The Screenplays of Ingmar Bergman: Personifica- tion and Olfactory Detail,’’ and J.F. Maxfield, ‘‘Bergman’s Shame: A Dream of Punishment,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salis- bury, Maryland), January 1984. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Sven Nykvist,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), March 1984. ‘‘Ingmar Bergman Section’’ of Positif (Paris), March 1985. Barr, Alan P., ‘‘The Unraveling of Character in Bergman’s Per- sona,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 15, no. 2, 1987. O’Connor, John J., ‘‘Museum Tribute to Ingmar Bergman,’’ in New York Times, 18 February 1987. Chaplin (Stockholm), no. 30, vol 2/3, 1988. American Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1988. Corliss, Richard, ‘‘The Glass Eye,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November-December 1988. Tobin, Yann, article in Positif (Paris), December 1988. Lohr, S., ‘‘For Bergman, a New Twist on an Old Love,’’ in New York Times, 6 September 1989. ‘‘Bille August to Helm Script by Bergman,’’ in Variety (New York), 13 September 1989. Nystedt, H., article in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 32, no. 1, 1990. Oliver, Roger W., ‘‘Bergman’s Trilogy: Tradition and Innovation,’’ in Performing Arts Journal (New York), January 1992. Bonneville, L. ‘‘Les meilleures intentions. Par Ingmar Bergman,’’ in Sequences, January 1993. Kauffmann, Stanley, ‘‘The Abduction from the Theater: Mozart Opera on Film,’’ in Yale Review (New Haven), January 1993. Lahr, John, ‘‘Ingmar’s Woman,’’ in New Yorker (New York), 17 May 1993. James, C. ‘‘Scenes from a Chilly Marriage,’’ in New York Times, May 23, 1993. ‘‘New York Institutions Honor Ingmar Bergman,’’ in New York Times, 13 December 1994. Riding, Alan, ‘‘Face to Face with a Life of Creation: At 76, the Eminent Director Ingmar Bergman Seems Even to Have His Demons under Control,’’ in New York Times, 30 April 1995. Murphy, Kathleen, ‘‘A Clean, Well-lighted Place: Ingmar Bergman’s Dollhouse,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May-June 1995. James, Caryn, ‘‘Sweden’s Poet of Film and Stagecraft,’’ in New York Times, 5 May 1995 Jefferson, Margo, ‘‘Bergman Conquers, Not Once but Twice,’’ in New York Times, 18 June 1995. Bird, M., ‘‘Secret Arithmetic of the Soul: Music as a Spiritual Metaphor in the Cinema of Ingmar Bergman,’’ in Kinema (Water- loo), Spring 1996. Koskinen, M., ‘‘‘Everything Represents, Nothing Is,’: Some Rela- tions between Ingmar Bergman’s Films and Theatre Produc- tions,’’ in Canadian Journal of Film Studies (Ottawa), vol. 6, no. 1, 1997. Thompson, R., ‘‘Bergman’s Women,’’ in Moviemaker (Pasadena), May/June/July 1997. Amiel, Vincent, ‘‘Du monde et de soi-même, l’éternel spectateur,’’ in Positif (Paris), May 1998. Wickbom, Kaj, ‘‘Den unge Ingmar Bergman,’’ in Filmrutan (Sundsvall), 1998. BERGMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 87 On BERGMAN: films— Greenblatt, Nat, producer, The Directors, 1963 (appearance). Donner, J?rn, director, Tre scener med Ingmar Bergman (Three Scenes with Ingmar Bergman) (for Finnish TV), 1975. Donner, J?rn, director, The Bergman File, 1978. *** Ingmar Bergman’s unique international status as a filmmaker would seem assured on many grounds. His reputation can be traced to such diverse factors as his prolific output of largely notable work (40 features from 1946–82); the profoundly personal nature of his best films since the 1950s; the innovative nature of his technique com- bined with its essential simplicity, even when employing surrealistic and dream-like treatments (as, for example, in Wild Strawberries and Persona); his creative sensitivity in relation to his players; and his extraordinary capacity to evoke distinguished acting from his regular interpreters, notably Gunnar Bj?rnstrand, Max von Sydow, Bibi Andersson, Ingrid Thulin, and Liv Ullmann. After an initial period of derivative, melodramatic filmmaking largely concerned with bitter man-woman relationships (‘‘I just grabbed helplessly at any form that might save me, because I hadn’t any of my own,’’ he confesses in Bergman on Bergman), Bergman reached an initial maturity of style in Summer Interlude and Summer with Monika, romantic studies of adolescent love and subsequent disillusionment. In The Naked Night he used a derelict travelling circus—its proprietor paired with a faithless young mistress and its clown with a faithless middle-aged wife—as a symbol of human suffering through misplaced love and to portray the ultimate loneli- ness of the human condition, a theme common to much of his work. Not that Bergman’s films are all gloom and disillusionment. He has a recurrent, if veiled, sense of humour. His comedies, such as A Lesson in Love and Smiles of a Summer Night, are ironically effective (‘‘You’re a gynecologist who knows nothing about women,’’ says a man’s mistress in A Lesson in Love), and even in Wild Strawberries the aged professor’s relations with his housekeeper offer comic relief. Bergman’s later comedies, the Shavian The Devil’s Eye and Now About All These Women, are both sharp and fantastic. ‘‘To me, religious problems are continuously alive . . . not . . . on the emotional level, but on an intellectual one,’’ wrote Bergman at the time of Wild Strawberries. The Seventh Seal, The Virgin Spring, Through a Glass Darkly, Winter Light, and The Silence lead progres- sively to the rejection of religious belief, leaving only the conviction that human life is haunted by ‘‘a virulent, active evil.’’ The crusading knight of The Seventh Seal who cannot face death once his faith is lost survives only to witness the cruelty of religious persecution. In Bergman’s view, faith belongs to the simple-minded and innocent. The Virgin Spring exposes the violence of vengeance in a period of primitive Christianity. Bergman no longer likes these films, considering them ‘‘bogus’’; nevertheless, they are excellently made in his highly professional style. Disillusionment with Lutheran denial of love is deep in Winter Light. ‘‘In Winter Light I swept my house clean,’’ Bergman has said. Other Bergman films reflect his views on religion as well: the mad girl in Through a Glass Darkly perceives God as a spider, while the ailing sister in The Silence faces death with a loneliness that passes all understanding as a result of the frigid silence of God in the face of her sufferings. In The Face, however, Bergman takes sardonic delight in letting the rationalistic miracle-man suspect in the end that his bogus miracles are in fact genuine. With Wild Strawberries, Bergman turned increasingly to psycho- logical dilemmas and ethical issues in human and social relations once religion has proved a failure. Above all else, the films suggest, love, understanding, and common humanity seem lacking. The aged medical professor in Wild Strawberries comes through a succession of dreams to realize the truth about his cold and loveless nature. In Persona, the most psychologically puzzling, controversial, yet sig- nificant of all Bergman’s films—with its Brechtian alienation tech- nique and surreal treatment of dual personality—the self-imposed silence of the actress stems from her failure to love her husband and son, though she responds with horror to the self-destructive violence of the world around her. This latter theme is carried still further in The Shame, in which an egocentric musician attempts non-involvement in his country’s war only to collapse into irrational acts of violence himself through sheer panic. The Shame and Hour of the Wolf are concerned with artists who are too self-centered to care about the larger issues of the society in which they live. ‘‘It wasn’t until A Passion that I really got to grips with the man- woman relationship,’’ says Bergman. A Passion deals with ‘‘the dark, destructive forces’’ in human nature which sexual urges can inspire. Bergman’s later films reflect, he claims, his ‘‘ceaseless fascination with the whole race of women,’’ adding that ‘‘the film . . . should communicate psychic states.’’ The love and understanding needed by women is too often denied them, suggests Bergman. Witness the case of the various women about to give birth in Brink of Life and the fearful, haunted, loveless family relationships in Cries and Whispers. The latter, with The Shame and The Serpent’s Egg, is surely among the most terrifying of Bergman’s films, though photographed in exquisite color by Sven Nykvist, his principal cinematographer. Man-woman relationships are successively and uncompromis- ingly examined in a series of Bergman films. The Touch shows a married woman driven out of her emotional depth in an extra- marital affair; Face to Face, one of Bergman’s most moving films, concerns the nervous breakdown of a cold-natured woman analyst and the hallucinations she suffers; and a film made as a series for television (but reissued more effectively in a shortened, re-edited form for the cinema, Scenes from a Marriage) concerns the troubled, long-term love of a professional couple who are divorced but unable to endure separation. Supreme performances were given by Bibi Andersson in Persona and The Touch, and by Liv Ullmann in Cries and Whispers, Scenes from a Marriage and Face to Face. Bergman’s later films, made in Sweden or during his period of self-imposed exile, are more miscellaneous. The Magic Flute is one of the best, most delightful of opera-films. The Serpent’s Egg is a savage study in the sadistic origins of Nazism, while Autumn Sonata explores the case of a mother who cannot love. Bergman declared his filmmaking at an end with his brilliant, German-made misanthropic study of a fatal marriage, From the Life of the Marionettes, and the semi-autobio- graphical television series Fanny and Alexander. Swedish-produced, the latter work was released in a re-edited version for the cinema. Set in 1907, Fanny and Alexander is the gentle, poetic story of two years in the lives of characters who are meant to be Bergman’s maternal grandparents. After Fanny and Alexander, Bergman directed After the Rehearsal, a small-scale drama which reflected his growing preoccupation with BERKELEY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 88 working in the theater. It features three characters: an aging, womanizing stage director mounting a version of Strindberg’s The Dream Play; the attractive, determined young actress who is his leading lady; and his former lover, once a great star but now an alcoholic has-been, who accepts a humiliating bit role in the production. After the Rehearsal was not Bergman’s cinematic swan song. He went on to author two scripts which are autobiographical outgrowths of Fanny and Alexander. The Best Intentions, directed by Bille August, is a compassionate chronicle of ten years in the tempestuous courtship and early marriage of Bergman’s parents. His father starts out as an impoverished theology student who is unyielding in his views. His mother is spirited but pampered, the product of an upper- class upbringing. The film also is of note for the casting of Max von Sydow as the filmmaker’s maternal grandfather. The actor’s presence is most fitting, given the roots of the scenario and his working relationship with Bergman, which dates back to the 1950s. The Best Intentions was followed by Sunday’s Children, directed by Bergman’s son Daniel. The film is a deeply personal story of a ten- year-old boy named Pu, who is supposed to represent the young Ingmar Bergman. Pu is growing up in the Swedish countryside during the 1920s. The scenario focuses on his relationship to his minister father and other family members; also depicted is the adult Pu’s unsettling connection to his elderly dad. —Roger Manvell, updated by Rob Edelman BERKELEY, Busby Nationality: American. Born: Busby Berkeley William Enos in Los Angeles, 29 November 1895. Education: Mohegan Military Acad- emy, Peekshill, New York, 1907–14. Military Service: Organized marching drills and touring stage shows for U.S. and French armies, and served as aerial observer in U.S. Air Corps, 1917–19. Family: Married six times. Career: Actor, stage manager, and choreographer, 1919–27; director of A Night in Venice on Broadway, 1928; director of dance numbers in Whoopee for Samuel Goldwyn, 1930; worked for Warner Bros., 1933–39; hired as dance advisor and director by MGM, 1939; returned to Warner Bros., 1943; released from Warner Bros. contract, returned to Broadway, 1944; directed last film, Take Me out to the Ball Game, 1949. Died: 14 March 1976. Films as Director: 1933 She Had to Say Yes (co-d, ch) 1935 Gold Diggers of 1935 (+ ch); Bright Lights (+ ch); I Live for Love (+ ch) 1936 Stage Struck (+ ch) 1937 The Go-Getter (+ ch); Hollywood Hotel (+ ch) 1938 Men Are Such Fools (+ ch); Garden of the Moon (+ ch); Comet Over Broadway (+ ch) 1939 They Made Me a Criminal (+ ch); Babes in Arms (+ ch); Fast and Furious (+ ch) 1940 Strike up the Band (+ ch); Forty Little Mothers (+ ch) 1941 Blonde Inspiration (+ ch); Babes on Broadway (+ ch) 1942 For Me and My Gal (+ ch) 1943 The Gang’s All Here (+ ch) Busby Berkeley 1946 Cinderella Jones (+ ch) 1949 Take Me out to the Ball Game (+ ch) Other Films: 1930 Whoopee (ch) 1931 Palmy Days (ch); Flying High (ch) 1932 Night World (ch); Bird of Paradise (ch); The Kid from Spain (ch) 1933 42nd Street (ch); Gold Diggers of 1933 (ch); Footlight Parade (ch); Roman Scandals (ch) 1934 Wonder Bar (ch); Fashions of 1934 (ch); Dames (ch) 1935 Go into Your Dance (ch); In Caliente (ch); Stars over Broad- way (ch) 1937 Gold Diggers of 1937 (ch); The Singing Marine (ch); Varsity Show (ch) 1938 Gold Diggers in Paris (ch) 1939 Broadway Serenade (ch) 1941 Ziegfield Girl (ch); Lady Be Good (ch); Born to Sing (ch) 1943 Girl Crazy (ch) 1950 Two Weeks with Love (ch) 1951 Call Me Mister (ch); Two Tickets to Broadway (ch) 1952 Million Dollar Mermaid (ch) 1953 Small Town Girl (ch); Easy to Love (ch) 1954 Rose Marie (ch) 1962 Jumbo (ch) 1970 The Phynx (role in cameo appearance) BERKELEYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 89 Publications By BERKELEY: book— The Busby Berkeley Book, with Tony Thomas and Jim Terry, New York, 1973. By BERKELEY: articles— Interview with John Gruen, in Close-Up (New York), 1968. Interview with P. Brion and R. Gilson, in Contracampo (Madrid), September 1981. On BERKELEY: books— Dunn, Bob, The Making of ‘‘No, No, Nanette,’’ New York, 1972. Pike, Bob, and Dave Martin, The Genius of Busby Berkeley, Reseda, California, 1973. Meyer, William, Warner Brothers Directors, New York, 1978. Hirschhorn, Clive, The Warner Bros. Story, New York, 1979. Delamater, Jerome, Dance in the Hollywood Musical, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1981. Feuer, Jane, The Hollywood Musical, London, 1982. Morsiani, Alberto, Il Grande Busby: Il Cinema di Busby Berkeley, Modena, 1983. Roddick, Nick, A New Deal in Entertainment: Warner Brothers in the 1930s, London, 1983. Altman, Rick, The American Film Musical, Bloomington, Indiana, and London, 1989. Rubin, Martin, Showstoppers: Busby Berkeley and the Tradition of Spectacle, New York, 1993. On BERKELEY: articles— Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Likable but Elusive,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Comolli, Jean-Louis, ‘‘Dancing Images,’’ and Patrick Brion and René Gilson, ‘‘A Style of Spectacle,’’ in Cahiers du Cinema in English (New York), no. 2, 1966. Jenkinson, Philip, ‘‘The Great Busby,’’ in Film (London), Spring 1966. Thomas, John, ‘‘The Machineries of Joy,’’ in Film Society Review (New York), February 1967. Bevis, D.L., ‘‘A Berkeley Evening,’’ in Films in Review (New York), June/July 1967. Roman, R.C., ‘‘Busby Berkeley,’’ in Dance (New York), Febru- ary 1968. Sidney, George, ‘‘The Three Ages of the Musical,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1968. ‘‘What Directors are Saying,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), May/June 1970. Gorton, D., ‘‘Busby and Ruby,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 3 Au- gust 1970. Knight, Arthur, ‘‘Busby Berkeley,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), May/ June 1974. Roth, M., ‘‘Some Warners Musicals and the Spirit of the New Deal,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison), Winter 1977. Tessier, Max, ‘‘Busby Berkeley 1895–1976,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 April 1978. Delamater, Jerome, ‘‘Busby Berkeley: an American Surrealist,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 1, no. 1, 1979. Telotte, J.P., ‘‘A Gold Digger Aesthetic: The Depression Musical and its Audience,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Fall 1981. Durgnat, Raymond, ‘‘Busby Berkeley: Filmed Theatre and Pure Theatre,’’ in Films (London), January 1982. Franck, S., ‘‘Busby Berkeley’s Dames,’’ in Andere Sinema (Antwerp), no. 102, March-April 1991. ‘‘A Full Dance Card,’’ in New York Times, 7 July 1991. Van Gelder, L., ‘‘At the Movies,’’ in New York Times, 12 July 1991. Cohn, E., ‘‘Berkeley in the Nineties,’’ in Village Voice (New York), vol. 36, 16 July 1991. Fischer, L., and G. Vincendeau, ‘‘L’image de la femme comme image: la politique optique de Dames et autres numeros musicaux de Busby Berkeley,’’ in Cinémaction (Conde-sur-Noireau), no. 67, 1993. Komlodi, F., ‘‘Tancolj, Hollywood!’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), vol. 36, no. 7, 1993. Seville, J., ‘‘The Laser’s Edge: Hear the Beat of the Dancing Feet,’’ in Classic Images (Muscatine), no. 213, March 1993. *** No American film director explored the possibilities of the mobile camera more fully or ingeniously than Busby Berkeley. He was the Méliès of the musical, the corollary of Vertov in the exploration of the possibilities of cinematic movement. His influence has since been felt in a wide array of filmmaking sectors, from movie musicals to television commercials. Certain aspects of Berkeley’s personal history are obvious in their importance to a discussion of his cinematic work, most specifically his World War I service and his work in the theatre. Born to a theatrical family, Berkeley learned early of the demands of the theatrical profession: when his father died, his mother refused to take the night off, instilling in Busby the work ethic of ‘‘the show must go on.’’ Throughout most of his career, Gertrude Berkeley and her ethic reigned, no wife successfully displacing her as spiritual guide and confidante until after her death in 1948. Even then, Berkeley drove himself at the expense of his many marriages. Berkeley’s World War I service was significant for the images he created in his musical sequences. He designed parade drills for both the French and U.S. armies, and his later service as an aerial observer with the Air Corps formed the basis of an aesthetic which incorpo- rated images of order and symmetry often seen from the peculiar vantage of an overhead position. In addition, that training developed his approach to economical direction. Berkeley often used storyboarding to effect his editing-in-the-camera approach, and provided instruction to chorus girls on a blackboard, which he used to illustrate the formations they were to achieve. Returning from war, Berkeley found work as a stage actor. His first role was directed by John Cromwell, with Gertrude serving as his dramatic coach. He soon graduated to direction and choreography, and in 1929 he became the first man on Broadway to direct a musical for which he also staged the dance numbers, setting a precedent for such talents as Jerome Robbins, Gower Champion, Bob Fosse, and Tommy Tune. When Samuel Goldwyn invited him to Hollywood in 1930 as a dance director, however, that Broadway division of labor remained in effect. Berkeley had to wait until Gold Diggers of 1935 before being allowed to do both jobs on the same film. From 1933 through 1939 Berkeley worked for Warner Bros., where he created a series of dance numbers which individually and collectively represent much of the best Hollywood product of the BERRI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 90 period. An examination of his work in this period in relation to the Production Code and the developing conventions of the musical genre illustrates his unique contribution to cinema. Boy/girl romance and the success story were standard narrative ingredients of 1930s musicals, and Berkeley’s work contributed significantly to the formulation of these conventions. Where he was unique was in his visualization of the onstage as opposed to the backstage segments of these dramas. Relying on his war service, he began to fashion onstage spectacles which had been impossible to perform on the Broadway stage. In his films he was able to explode any notion of the limitations of a proscenium and the relationship of the theatre spectator to it: the fixed perspective of that audience was abandoned for one which lacked defined spatial or temporal coordi- nates. His camera was regularly mounted on a crane (or on the monorail he invented) and swooped over and around or toward and away from performers in a style of choreography for camera which was more elaborate than that mapped out for the dancers. Amusingly, he generally reversed this procedure in his direction of non-musical scenes; he typically made the backstage dramas appear confined within a stage space and bound to the traditions of theatrical staging and dialogue. As Berkeley created the illusion of theatre in his musical numbers, so too he created the illusion of dance. Having never studied dance, he rarely relied on trained dancers. Instead, he preferred to create movement through cinematic rather than choreographic means. Occa- sionally, when he included sophisticated dance routines, such as in the Lullaby of Broadway number from Gold Diggers of 1935, he high- lighted the dancers’ virtuosity in a series of shots which preserved the integrity of their movement without infringing on the stylistic nu- ances of his camerawork. The virtuosity of Berkeley’s camera movement remains important not only for a discussion of aesthetics, but also for understanding the meaning he brought to the depiction of sexual fantasy and spectacle in a period of Hollywood history when the Production Code Adminis- tration was keeping close watch over screen morality. Throughout the 1930s, Berkeley’s camera caressed as if involved in foreplay, pene- trated space as if seeking sexual gratification, and soared in an approximation of sexual ecstasy. Whether tracking through the legs of a line of chorus girls in 42nd Street, swooping over an undulating vagina-shaped construction of pianos in Gold Diggers of 1935, or caressing gigantic bananas manipulated by scantily clad chorines in The Gang’s All Here, his sexual innuendos were titillating in both their obviousness and seeming naiveté. Berkeley’s ability to inject such visual excitement meant that he was often called upon to rescue a troubled picture by adding one or more extravagantly staged musical numbers. After leaving Warner Bros. in 1939, Berkeley returned to MGM where, although generally less innovative, his work set precedents for the genre: he directed the first Judy Garland/Mickey Rooney musical, the first Garland/Gene Kelly film, and with his last effort as a director, introduced the team of Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen. Undoubtedly the master director of American musicals in the first decade of sound film and a huge influence on many of the musical talents of succeed- ing decades, Berkeley worked only occasionally through the 1950s, staging musical numbers for various studios. The last of these was the 1962 MGM film Jumbo. With the nostalgia craze of the late 1960s, Berkeley’s aesthetic was resurrected. In 1971 he triumphantly re- turned to the Broadway stage, where he directed a revival of the 1920s hit No, No, Nanette, starring his leading lady of the 1930s, Ruby Keeler, herself in retirement for thirty years. That moment was surely the fulfillment of all the success stories he had directed over his long career. —Doug Tomlinson BERRI, Claude Nationality: French. Born: Claude Berel Langmann in Paris, 1 July 1934. Family: Married Anne-Marie Rassam, 1967 (divorced); two sons: Julien and Thomas; brother of writer/editor/production designer Arlette Langmann. Career: Dropped out of school and worked with his parents as a furrier, 1949; began his career as an actor, appearing in roles on stage and screen, early 1950s; formed Renn Productions, his own production company, 1963; formed AMLF-Paris, a distribution company, early 1970s; became founding president of the French Union of Producers-Directors. Awards: Best Live Action Short Subject Academy Award, for Le Poulet, 1965; Berlin International Film Festival C.I.D.A.L.C. Ghandi Award, Berlin International Film Festival Interfilm Award, for Le Vieil homme et l’enfant, 1967; Best Adapted Screenplay British Academy Award, Best Film British Academy Award, for Jean de Florette, 1986. Address: Renn Produc- tions, 10 rue Lincoln, 75008 Paris, France. Films as Director: 1963 Le Poulet (The Chicken) (short) (+ pr, sc, ro); Les Baisers (Kisses) (episode) 1964 La Chance et l’amour (Luck and Love) (episode) 1967 Le Vieil homme et l’enfant (The Two of Us, Claude, The Old Man and the Boy) (+ co-sc) 1969 Mazel Tov ou le mariage (Marry Me! Marry Me!) (+ pr, sc, ro) 1970 Le Pistonne (The Man with Connections); Le Cinema du papa (Papa’s Movies) (+ ro) 1973 Le Sex Shop (+ sc, ro) 1975 Le Male du siecle (Male of the Century) (+ ro) 1976 La Premiere fois (The First Time) (+ sc) 1977 Un moment d’egarement (In a Wild Moment, One Wild Moment, A Summer Affair) 1979 A nous deux (An Adventure for Two) 1980 Je vous aime (I Love You All) (+ sc) 1981 Le Maitre d’ecole (The School Master) 1983 Tchao, pantin! (+ sc) 1986 Jean de Florette (+ co-sc); Manon des sources (Manon of the Spring) (+ sc) 1990 Uranus (+ co-sc) 1993 Germinal (+ pr, co-sc) 1997 Lucie Aubrac (+ sc) 1999 La Debandade (+ co-sc, ro) Other Films: 1953 Le Bon Dieu sans confession (Autant-Lara) (ro) 1954 Le Ble en herbe (Autant-Lara) (ro) 1955 Jeune homme a l’inauguration (French Cancan, Only the French Can) (Renoir) (ro) BERRIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 91 1959 J’irai cracher sur vos tombes (I Spit on Your Grave) (Gast) (ro) 1960 Les Bonnes femmes (The Girls) (Chabrol) (ro); La Verite (The Truth) (Clouzot) (ro) 1961 La Bride sur le cou (Only for Love, Please Not Now!) (Aurel, Trop, Vadim) (ro); Janine (Pialat—for TV) (sc) 1962 Les Sept peches capitaux (The Seven Capital Sins, The Seven Deadly Sins) (de Broca, Chabrol, Demy, Dhomme, Godard, Molinaro, Vadim) (ro) 1964 Behold a Pale Horse (Zinnemann) (ro) 1966 La Ligne de demarcation (Line of Demarcation) (Chabrol) (ro) 1970 L’Enfance nue (Me, Naked Childhood) (Pialat) (co-pr) 1979 Tess (Polanski) (co-pr) 1980 Inspecteur la Bavure (Zidi) (pr) 1982 Deux heures moins le quart avant Jesus-Christ (Yanne) (co-pr) 1983 L’Africain (The African) (de Broca) (pr); Banzai (Zidi) (pr); L’Homme blesse (Chereau) (ro) 1985 Les Enrages (Glenn) (co-pr) 1987 Hotel de France (Chereau) (pr); Sous le soleil de Satan (Under the Sun of Satan) (Pialat) (ro) 1988 L’Ours (The Bear) (Annaud) (pr); Trois places pour le 26 (Demy) (pr); A gauche en sortant de l’ascenseur (The Door on the Left as You Leave the Elevator) (Molinaro) (exec pr) 1989 La Petite voleuse (The Little Thief) (Miller) (co-pr); Valmont (Forman) (exec pr) 1990 Stan the Flasher (Gainsbourg) (ro) 1991 L’Amant (The Lover) (Annaud) (co-pr) 1994 La Reine Margot (Queen Margot) (Chereau) (pr); La Separa- tion (The Separation) (Vincent) (pr); La Machine (The Machine) (Dupeyron) (ro) 1995 Gazon Maudit (French Twist) (Balasko) (exec pr); Les Trois freres (Bourdon, Campan) (co-pr, ro) 1996 Der Unhold (The Ogre) (Schlondorff) (co-exec pr); Billard a l’etage (Marboeuf—for TV) (exec pr) 1997 Didier (Chabat) (pr); Arlette (Zidi) (pr); Le Pari (Bourdon, Campan) (pr) 1998 Mookie (Palud) (assoc pr); Un grand cri d’amour (Balasko) (ro) 1999 Asterix et Obelix contre Cesar (Asterix and Obelix Take on Caesar) (Zidi) (pr); Mauvaise passe (The Escort, The Wrong Blonde) (Blanc) (pr) Publications By BERRI: books— Le Vieil homme et l’enfant, Paris, 1967. Marry Me! Marry Me!, New York, 1969 Le Pistonne, Paris, 1970. By BERRI: articles— ‘‘Claude Berri, of AMLF, to U.S. for Film Sales Talks,’’ interview with Gene Moskowitz, in Variety (New York), 8 March 1978. ‘‘French Filmmaker Claude Berri Now Involved in All Phases of Industry,’’ interview with John Cocchi, in Box Office (New York), 24 April 1978. ‘‘Je vous aime,’’ interview, in Film en Televisie (Brussels), March 1981. Berri, Claude, ‘‘L’ami difinitif,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1984. Berri, Claude, ‘‘Un souvenir de Tchecosiovaquie,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1985. ‘‘Claude Berri,’’ interview with V. Ostria, in Cinematographe (Paris), July/August 1986. Interview with P. Merigeau, in Revue du Cinema (Paris), Septem- ber 1986. ‘‘France’s Pagnol and Pagnol’s France Bask Again in Nostalgic Warmth,’’ interview with R. Bernstein, in New York Times, 7 December 1986. ‘‘France’s Savory Tale of Fate,’’ interview with R. Bernstein, in New York Times, 21 June 1987. ‘‘Claude Berri,’’ interview with M. Buruiana, in Séquences (Quebec), June 1991. ‘‘Vous n’en avez pas marre, Claude Berri?,’’ interview with Alain Kruger, Eric Libiot, in Premiere (Paris), March 1997. On BERRI: articles— ‘‘Directing Not Enough for Berri, Who Produces, Co-Prods. & Acts,’’ in Variety (New York), 2 October 1974. Delvaud, G., ‘‘Claude Berri ou l’art de ne pas bouger,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1980. Cornand, A., ‘‘Le martre d’ecole,’’ in Revue du Cinema (Paris), December 1981. Bergala, A. and others, ‘‘La Porte etroite,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1985. ‘‘Berri Taps Rich Pagnol Lode, Rolls $9,500,000 Twin Projects,’’ in Variety (New York), 1 May 1985. Gonzales, J.G., ‘‘Claude Berri: un director que finalmente encuentra su estilo,’’ in Images (Puerto Rico), no. 2, 1987. Jorholt, E., ‘‘Kampen om vandet,’’ in Kosmorama (Copenhagen), Winter 1987. ‘‘It’s the Berris Behind Those Two Pagnol Smashes,’’ in Variety, 18 February 1987. Chase, D., ‘‘Close-Ups: Profiles of Production People,’’ in Millime- ter (Cleveland, Ohio), July 1987. Buckley, M., ‘‘Claude Berri,’’ in Films in Review (New York), January 1988. Current Biography (New York), 1989. Solman, G., ‘‘Claude Berri,’’ in Millimeter (Cleveland, Ohio), Janu- ary 1990. Zimmer, J., ‘‘Uranus,’’ in Revue du Cinema (Paris), January 1991. Riding, A., ‘‘A Fable of Guilt and Innocence from ‘Le Big Boss’,’’ in New York Times, 18 August 1991. Granger, R., ‘‘Berri’s Uranus from Prestige, Probes Post-War French guilt,’’ in Film Journal (New York), October/November 1991. Haden-Guest, A., ‘‘Paris Clout,’’ in Vanity Fair (New York), Janu- ary 1992. Morice, P., ‘‘L’Europe a la question,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1992. Williams, M., ‘‘Berri Looks to Mine Gold with Germinal,’’ in Variety (New York), 4 October 1993. Bonneville, S., ‘‘Claude Berri’s Germinal,’’ in Séquences (Quebec), November/December 1993. Slodowski, J., ‘‘Germinal,’’ in Filmowy Serwis Prasowy (Kracow), no. 4, 1994. Bear, Liza, ‘‘Berri Brings Savoir-faire to Producing Game,’’ in Film Journal (New York), April 1994. *** BERTOLUCCI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 92 Claude Berri started out in the early 1950s as an actor, and for several years appeared in roles on stage and screen. When he realized that stardom would elude him, be turned to writing and directing; however, he remained in front of the camera in many of his earliest films as director-screenwriter. The most representative include Le Vieil homme et l’enfant (The Two of Us), Le Cinema du papa (Papa’s Movies), Mazel Tov ou le mariage (Marry Me! Marry Me!), Le Sex Shop, and Le Male du siecle (Male of the Century). Le Vieil homme et l’enfant, Berri’s debut feature, is set during World War II and chronicles the evolving relationship between a grumpy old anti- Semite and a young Jewish boy. It is a warm-hearted, humanistic allegory, seasoned with an ethnic flavor that reflects Berri’s Polish- Romanian Jewish background and, even more specifically, his own experiences when his parents went into hiding during the Occupation and placed him with a non-Jewish family. In his subsequent films, the relationships and themes Berri ex- plored were more adult in nature: love and marriage (in Mazel Tov ou le mariage); the male preoccupation with sex and pornography (Le Sex Shop); marital jealousy (Le Male du siecle); and connections between parents and offspring (Le Cinema du papa). In each, Berri casts himself as the male lead; that they are at least partially autobiographical is evidenced by the fact that all of Berri’s characters are named ‘‘Claude.’’ Berri’s parents both were employed in the Paris fur district, and in Mazel Tov ou le mariage his character even is a furrier’s son. The manner in which the ‘‘Claude’’ character perme- ates Berri’s early work parallels Truffaut’s use of Antoine Doinel as a cinematic alter ego. Nonetheless, Berri’s early-career films are fashioned as mainstream entertainments, and so even the best of them do not rate with the works of Truffaut, Godard, Chabrol, or other icons of the French New Wave. Indeed, Berri has admitted that at this stage of his career his primary aim was to amuse, rather than create art. After a career slump in the late 1970s, Berri came back strong in the following decade with three very different films: Je vous aime (I Love You All), an exploration of romantic connections from a woman’s viewpoint; Le Maitre d’ecole (The School Master), the story of a devoted schoolteacher; and Tchao, pantin!, a tale of revenge centering on a lonely anti-hero and his response to the murder of a young friend. Then he reached a career summit with Jean de Florette and a sequel, Manon des sources (Manon of the Spring), adapted from Marcel Pagnol’s two-volume novel, The Water of the Hills, which deservedly became major art house hits in the United States. Both are rich and rewarding examples of old-fashioned, back- to-basics storytelling, with colorful, larger-than-life characterizations and fluid, cohesive narratives. Jean de Florette and Manon des sources are linked to Le Vieil homme et l’enfant as films that tell simple, human stories. In this regard, they are links both to Berri’s cinematic roots and the films he scripted and directed in the 1990s. Jean de Florette is the story of Jean Cadoret, a hunchback who inherits some farmland in Pagnol’s beloved Provence. Jean arrives with his wife and young daughter in tow, and elicits a passion for toiling the earth. His dream is to live peacefully, and eat the vegeta- bles he harvests. Unfortunately, a wily, powerful old landowner named Cesar Soubeyran covets Jean’s property for its hidden re- source: a stream. The naive, affable Jean is unaware that this source of water exists on his land; meanwhile, Cesar and his cretinous nephew Ugolin plot to drive him out of the district by concocting a series of deceptions. The films ends with Jean dead and his little daughter Manon accidentally discovering the deceit. This serves as a segue into Manon des sources, with Manon having grown into a beautiful shepherdess who is like a force of nature. Yet she also is awaiting the right moment to avenge her father. Jean de Florette and Manon des sources lyrically capture the ebb and flow of life while reflecting on living and dying, the passage of time, and survival. Both mirror the nature of pettiness and greed, and how they may cause unnecessary, irrevocable pain; they spotlight the simple reality that one person’s fortune may be another’s catastrophe. If Jean de Florette details the anguish of an innocent man who savors life and meets an early end because of his neighbors’ avarice, Manon des sources chronicles how those villains are not allowed peace. Despite the ambitious themes explored by Berri in his subsequent films, Jean de Florette and Manon des sources remain the bellwethers of his career. Uranus, Berri’s first release of the 1990s, is a contemplative chronicle of the interaction between the citizens, among them col- laborators, resistance members, and those in between, in a small French town at the end of World War II. Here, Berri returns to the approximate time period of Le Vieil homme et l’enfant. He does the same while focusing on individual heroism in Lucie Aubrac, the based-on-fact account of husband-and-wife members of the French Resistance. While all three films succeed as vivid depictions of life in France during the war, Uranus and Lucie Aubrac offer Berri’s take on the manner in which individual Frenchmen and women responded to the chaos of the time. Finally, Germinal, based on the Emile Zola novel, is epic in scope, a sobering, carefully detailed expose of the exploitation of French coal miners in the late 19th century. The film is linked to Jean de Florette and Manon des sources as a humanistic exploration of the manner in which individuals are manipulated by greater forces of evil. In the early 1960s, Berri established his own production company; a decade later, he was involved in the formation of a distribution company. Over the years he has produced, co-produced, and distrib- uted scores of films. He has been equally involved in the backing of commercial and non-commercial properties, and such classics as Eric Rohmer’s Ma Nuit chez Maud (My Night at Maud’s) and Jacques Rivette’s Celine et Julie vont en bateau (Celine and Julie Go Boating). Most often, he has worked over and over with the same filmmakers, including Maurice Pialat, Claude Zidi, Patrice Chereau, and Josiane Balasko. —Rob Edelman BERTOLUCCI, Bernardo Nationality: Italian. Born: Parma, Italy, 16 March 1940. Education: Attended University of Rome, 1960–62. Family: Married 1) Clare Peptoe, 1978; 2) Adriana Asti. Career: Assistant director on Accattone (Pasolini), 1961; directed first feature, La commare secca, 1962; joined Italian Communist Party (PCI), late 1960s. Awards: Special Award, Cannes Festival, for Prima della revoluzione, 1964; Best Director Award, National Society of Film Critics, for Il conformista, 1971; Oscars for Best Director and Best Screenplay, and Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Feature Film Achievement, for The Last Emperor, 1987. Address: via della Lungara 3, Rome 00165, Italy. BERTOLUCCIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 93 Bernardo Bertolucci Films as Director: 1962 La commare secca (The Grim Reaper) (+ sc) 1964 Prima della rivoluzione (Before the Revolution) (+ co-sc) 1965/66 La vie del Petrolio (+ sc); Il canale (+ sc) 1966/67 Ballata de un milliardo (+ co-sc) 1967 ‘‘Il fico infruttuoso’’ episode of Amore e rabbia (Vangelo ‘70; Love and Anger) (+ sc) 1968 Partner (+ co-sc) 1969 La strategia del ragno (The Spider’s Stratagem) (+ co-sc) 1970 Il conformista (The Conformist) (+ sc) 1971 La saluta e malato o I poveri muorioro prima (La Sante est malade ou Les Pauvres meurent les premiers) (+ sc); L’inchiesa (+ co-sc) 1972 Last Tango in Paris (Le Dernier Tango à Paris; Ultimo tango a Parigi) (+ co-sc) 1976 1900 (Novecento) (presented in two parts in Italy: Novecento atto I and Novecento atto II) (+ co-sc) 1979 La luna (+ co-sc) 1981 La tragedia di un uomo ridicolo (La Tragedie d’un homme ridicule; The Tragedy of a Ridiculous Man) (+ sc) 1987 The Last Emperor (+co-sc) 1990 The Sheltering Sky (+co-sc) 1994 Little Buddha 1996 Stealing Beauty (+co-sc) 1998 Besieged (+co-sc) 1999 Paradiso e inferno Other Films: 1961 Accattone (Pasolini) (asst-d) 1967 C’era una volta il West (Once upon a Time in the West) (Leone) (co-sc) 1975 Bertolucci secondo il cinema (The Cinema according to Bertolucci (Amelio, Giuseppe Bertolucci) (ro as himself) 1981 Wie de Waarheid Zegt Moet Dood (Whoever Says the Truth Shall Die) (Bregstein) (as himself) 1992 Golem, l’esprit de l’exil (Golem, the Spirit of the Exile) (Gitai) (ro as Master of the Courtyard) 1993 Jean Renoir (Thompson) (doc) (ro as himself); De Domeinen Ditvoorst (The Ditvoorst Domains) (Hoffman) 1994 La Vera vita di Antonio (The True Life of Antonio H.) (Monteleone) (ro as himself) 1999 Kurosawa: The Last Emperor (Cox) (ro as himself) Publications By BERTOLUCCI: books— In cerca del mistero, Milan, 1962. Bertolucci by Bertolucci, interviewed by Don Ranvaud and Enzo Ungari, London, 1987. Bernardo Bertolucci: Interviews, edited by Fabien S. Gerard, T. Jefferson Kline, and Bruce Sklarew, Jackson, Mississippi, 2000. By BERTOLUCCI: articles— Interview with Jacques Bontemps and Louis Marcorelles, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1965. ‘‘A Conversation with Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ with John Bragin, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1966. ‘‘Versus Godard,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1967; also in Cahiers du Cinéma in English (New York), May 1967. ‘‘Prima della rivoluzione,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), June 1968. ‘‘Bertolucci on The Conformist,’’ with Marilyn Goldin, in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1971. Interview with Amos Vogel, in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1971. ‘‘A Conversation with Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ by Joan Mellen, in Cinéaste (New York), vol. 5, no.4, 1973. ‘‘Every Sexual Relationship Is Condemned: Interview,’’ with Gideon Bachmann, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1973. ‘‘Dialogue: Bertolucci and Aldrich,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), March/ April 1974. ‘‘Dialogue on Film,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), April 1974. ‘‘Films Are Animal Events,’’ interview with Gideon Bachmann, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Autumn 1975. ‘‘Propos de Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ interview with Guy Braucourt, in Ecran (Paris), October 1976. Interview with D. Buckley and others, in Cineaste (New York), Winter 1976/77. Interview with D. O’Grady, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), July 1977. ‘‘History Lessons,’’ interview with D. Young, in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1977. BERTOLUCCI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 94 Interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), June 1978. ‘‘Bertolucci on La Luna,’’ an interview with Richard Roud, in Sight and Sound (London), no.4, 1979. ‘‘Bernardo Bertolucci on Luna,’’ an interview with M. Sclauzero, in Interview (New York), October 1979. Interview with Michel Ciment and Gerard Legrand, in Positif (Paris), November 1979. ‘‘Luna and the Critics,’’ interview with G. Crowdus and D. Georgakas, in Cineaste (New York), Winter 1979/80. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ in American Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), January/February 1980. Interview with M. Magill, in Films in Review (New York), April 1982. Interview with G. Graziani, in Filmcritica (Florence), February/ March 1983. ‘‘After the Revolution? A Conversation with Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ by D. Lavin, in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), January 1984. Interview about Pasolini, in Cinema e Cinema (Rome), May/Au- gust 1985. Interview with A. Philippon and S. Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1987. Article in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1987. Interview in Films in Review (New York), March 1988. ‘‘Radical Sheik,’’ an interview with Harlan Kennedy, in American Film (Washington D.C.) December, 1990. ‘‘Love and Sand,’’ an interview with R. Gerber, in Interview, January 1991. ‘‘Bernardo Bertolucci: Intravenous Cinema,’’ an interview with Chris Wagstaff, in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 4, no. 4, 1994. ‘‘Beauté volée,’’ an interview with Gérard Legrand and Christian Viviani, in Positif (Paris), June 1996. Interview with Bram Crols and Marcel Meeus, in Film en Televisie (Brussels), July 1996. ‘‘Liv and Let Love,’’ an interview with Geoff Andrew, in Time Out (London), 7 August 1996. Bertolucci, Bernardo, ‘‘Bernardo Bertolucci’s Guilty Pleasures,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1996. On BERTOLUCCI: books— Leprohon, Pierre, Le Cinéma italien, Paris, 1966. Gelmis, Joseph, The Film Director as Superstar, Garden City, New York, 1970. Mellen, Joan, Women and Sexuality in the New Film, New York, 1973. Casetti, F., Bertolucci, Florence, 1975. Ungari, Enzo, Bertolucci, Milan, 1982. Kolker, Robert Phillip, Bernardo Bertolucci, London, 1985. Kline, T. Jefferson, Bertolucci’s Dream Loom: A Psychoanalytical Study of the Cinema, Amherst, Massachusetts, 1987. Negri, Livio, and Fabien S. Gerard, eds., The Sheltering Sky: A Film by Bernardo Bertolucci Based on the Novel by Paul Bowles, London, 1990. Burgoyne, Robert, Bertolucci’s 1900: A Narrative and Historical Analysis, Detroit, 1991. Loshitzky, Yosefa, The Radical Faces of Godard and Bertolucci, Detroit, 1995. Sklarew, Bruce H., Bonnie S. Kaufman, Ellen Handler Spitz, and Diane Borden, editors, Bertolucci’s The Last Emperor: Multiple Takes, Detroit, 1998. On BERTOLUCCI: articles— Kael, Pauline, ‘‘Starburst by a Gifted Twenty-Two-Year-Old,’’ in Life (New York), 13 August 1965. Beck, Julian, ‘‘Tourner avec Bertolucci,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1967. Tailleur, Roger, ‘‘Les Vacances rouges,’’ in Positif (Paris), May 1968. Purdon, N., ‘‘Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ in Cinema (London), no. 8, 1971. Kreitzman, R., ‘‘Bernardo Bertolucci, an Italian Young Master,’’ in Film (London), Spring 1971. Roud, Richard, ‘‘Fathers and Sons,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1971. ‘‘Le Dernier Tango à Paris,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), February 1973. Kinder, Marsha, and Beverle Houston, ‘‘Bertolucci and the Dance of Danger,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1973. Lopez, D., ‘‘The Father Figure in The Conformist and in Last Tango in Paris,’’ in Film Heritage (New York), Summer 1976. Aitken, W., ‘‘Bertolucci’s Gay Images,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), November 1977. Schwartzman, P., ‘‘Embarrass Me More!,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1979. Horton, A., ‘‘History as Myth and Myth as History in Bertolucci’s 1900,’’ in Film and History (Newark, New Jersey), February 1980. ‘‘La Luna Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 Novem- ber 1980. Magny, Joel, ‘‘Biofilmographie commentée de Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), October 1981. Gentry, R., ‘‘Bertolucci Directs Tragedy of a Ridiculous Man,’’ in Millimeter (New York), December 1981. Ranvaud, Don, ‘‘After the Revolution,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), October 1986. ‘‘Last Emperor Section’’ of Cinéma (Paris), 25 November 1987. Article in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1989. Burgoyne, Robert, ‘‘The Somatization of History in Bertolucci’s 1900,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1986. Burgoyne, Robert, ‘‘Temporality as Historical Argument in Bertolucci’s 1900,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin), vol. 28, no. 3, 1989. Burgoyne, Robert, ‘‘The Last Emperor: The Stages of History,’’ in SubStance (Madison, Wisconsin) no. 59, 1989. Bundtzen, L. K., ‘‘Bertolucci’s Erotic Politics and the Auteur Theory: From Last Tango in Paris to The Last Emperor,” in Western Humanities Review, vol. 44, no. 2, 1990. Loshitzky, Yosefa, ‘‘‘Memory of My Own Memory’: Processes of Private and Collective Remembering in Bertolucci’s The Spider’s Stratagem and The Conformist,” in History and Memory, vol. 3, no. 2, 1991. Thomson, David, ‘‘Gone Away,’’ in Film Comment, May/June 1991. Loshitzky, Yosefa, and Raya Meyouhas, ‘‘‘Ecstacy of Difference’: Bertolucci’s The Last Emperor,” in Cinema Journal Austin), vol. 31, no. 2, 1992. McAuliff, Jody, ‘‘The Church of the Desert: Reflections on The Sheltering Sky,” in South Atlantic Quarterly, vol. 91, no. 2, 1992. Loshitzky, Yosefa, ‘‘The Tourist/Traveler Gaze: Bertolucci and Bowles’ The Sheltering Sky,” in East-West Film Journal (Hono- lulu), vol. 7, no. 2, 1993. Buck, Joan Juliet, ‘‘The Last Romantic,’’ in Vogue, March 1994. Robert Horton, ‘‘Nonconformist: Bernardo Bertolucci’s Little Buddha,” in Film Comment, July/August 1994. BERTOLUCCIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 95 Socci, S., ‘‘Bernardo Bertolucci,’’ in Castoro Cinema, November/ December 1995. Scorsese, Martin, ‘‘Ma cinéphilie,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1996. Epstein, Jan, ‘‘Is Cinema Dead?’’ in Cinema Papers (Fitzroy), August 1997. *** At the age of twenty-one, Bernardo Bertolucci established himself as a major artist in two distinct art forms, winning a prestigious award in poetry and receiving high critical acclaim for his initial film, La commare secca. This combination of talents is evident in all of his films, which have a lyric but exceptionally concrete style. His father, Attilio Bertolucci, was famous in his own right as a critic, professor, and poet, and in 1961 introduced Bernardo to Pier Paolo Pasolini, an esteemed literary figure. This friendship led both writers, ironically, away from poetry and into the cinema. Serving as the assistant director on Pasolini’s inaugural film, Accattone, Bertolucci was very quickly entrusted with the full direction of Pasolini’s next project, La commare secca, based on a story by the writer. La commare secca is an auspicious debut; as both screenwriter and director, Bertolucci found at once the high visual style and narrative complexity which distinguish his later films. The sex murder of a prostitute is its central narrative event; as the probable witnesses and suspects are brought in for questioning, a series of lives are unraveled, with each sad story winding toward the city park where the murder occurred. Formally, the film is an ambitious amalgam of a film noir atmosphere and narrative style with a neorealist concentration on behavioral detail and realistic settings. In Before the Revolution, Bertolucci first presents the theme which will become foremost in his work: the conflict between freedom and conformity. Fabrizio, the leading character, is obliged to decide between radical political commitment and an alluring marriage into the bourgeoisie. In this reworking of Stendhal’s The Charterhouse of Parma, Bertolucci expressly delineates the connection between poli- tics and sexuality. The film also establishes the Freudian theme of the totemic father, which will recur throughout Bertolucci’s work, here emblematized in the figure of Fabrizio’s communist mentor, whom Fabrizio must renounce as a precondition to his entry into moneyed society. Bertolucci diverged from the style of his first two critically successful films with The Partner, a complex, experimental work based on Dostoevski’s The Double. Heavily influenced by the films of Godard and the events of May 1968, it eschews narrative exposi- tion, developing instead a critique of literary consumerism, academic pacifism, and the student left, through a series of polemical debates between a bookish student and his radical double. For the most part The Partner is an anomalous film, which conveys very little of the heightened lyricism of his major works. With The Spider’s Stratagem, originally made for television in 1969, and The Conformist, Bertolucci combines an experimental narrative technique with lavish visual design, achieving in The Conformist an unprecedented commercial and critical triumph. Sexu- ality is here explicitly posited as the motor of political allegiance, as Marcello, the lead character in The Conformist, becomes a Fascist in order to suppress his growing recognition of his homosexuality. The character performs an outlandishly deviant act—killing his former professor, now a member of the Resistance, in order to declare his own conventionality and membership in the Fascist order. Conform- ity and rebellion are thus folded together, not only in the psyche of Marcello, but in the culture as a whole, as Bertolucci examines the interpenetrating structures, the twin pathologies, of family and poli- tics. Bertolucci here unveils the full range of stylistic features—the elaborate tracking shots, the opulent color photography (realized by the virtuoso cinematographer Vittorio Storara), the odd, surrealistic visual incongruities—that give his work such a distinctive surface. It is here, also, that Bertolucci connects most directly with the general evolution of the postwar Italian cinema. Beginning with Visconti, and continuing with Antonioni and Bellocchio, an increasing emphasis is placed on the psychology of transgression, a motif which links politics and the libido. The inner life of the alienated protagonist becomes the lens displaying the spectrum of social forces, as the politics of the state are viewed in the mimetic behavior of disturbed individuals. Last Tango in Paris depicts the last week in the life of Paul, played by Marlon Brando, as a man who is both geographically and spiritu- ally in exile. His orbit crosses that of ‘‘the girl,’’ played by Maria Schneider. The raw sexual encounters that ensue serve as a kind of purgation for the Brando character, who retaliates against the hypoc- risy of cultural institutions such as family, church, and state through the medium of Jeanne’s body. Sex is used as a weapon and symbolic cure, apparatus of social constraints. The outsized human passion Bertolucci depicts, chiefly through the threatening figure of Marlon Brando, seems to literalize the filmmaker’s comment that ‘‘films are animal events.’’ In addition to the players, the music by Gatto Barbieri and the cinematography of Vittorio Storaro contribute to the febrile intensity of the work. The world acclaim brought by Last Tango assured Bertolucci of the financial resources to complete the long-planned Marxian epic, 1900. Setting the film in the rural areas of Parma, a few miles from his childhood home, Bertolucci set out to compose a paean to a way of life that was passing—the ‘‘culture of the land’’ of the peasant farmers, seen as a native and pure form of communism. The film depicts the cruel historical awakening of the farmers of the region, part of an entire class that has been regularly brutalized, first by aristocratic landowners, and then by the Fascist regime. Bertolucci localizes this conflict in the twin destinies of two characters born on the same day in 1900—Olmo, who becomes a peasant leader, and Alfredo, the scion of the feudal estate in which the film takes place. The controversial work was released in a six-hour form in Europe, and shortened to three hours for American release. Bertolucci had complete control of the cutting of the film, and considers the shorter version a more finished work. The epic sweep remains, as do the contradictions—for the film amalgamates the most divergent ele- ments: a Marxian epic, it is furnished with an international star cast; a portrait of the indigenous peasantry, its principle language is English. Intentionally fashioned for wide commercial appeal, it nonetheless broaches untried subject matter. The film keeps these elements in suspension, never dissolving these differences into an ideological portrait of life ‘‘after the revolution.’’ The film’s ending seems instead to return to the customary balance and tension between historical forces and class interests. In Luna, Bertolucci turns to a much more intimate subject: the relation between mother and son. The work has a diminutive scale but a passionate focus, a quality crystallized in the opera scenes in which the mother, Caterina, performs. The reconciliation of mother, son, and father occurs during a rehearsal in which the mother reveals, through song, the identity of father and son. This cathartic and bravura BERTOLUCCI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 96 scene plays in high relief the characteristic patterns of Bertolucci’s cinema, in which the family drama is played against the backdrop of a ritualized art form, opera in this case, dance in Last Tango, and theater (the Macbeth scene in Before the Revolution). With Tragedy of a Ridiculous Man, Bertolucci continues his inquiry into the relations between politics and family life, here framing the ambivalent bond between father and son with the correlative conflict between capitalism and political terror. Bertolucci returned to the wide canvas of the historical film with The Last Emperor in 1987. Frustrated by his inability to acquire financing for a film of the Dashiell Hammett story Red Harvest, and unhappy with the state of filmmaking in Italy, the director turned to the autobiography of Pu Yi, China’s last emperor, and had the privilege not only of filming in China but also of filming in the Forbidden City in Beijing, the first time such access had been allowed. The story of Pu Yi illustrates a striking change in the political focus of Bertolucci’s filmmaking. The relationship between individ- ual psychology and the political and historical forces that mold it remains, as before, the central subject of the film, linking it to works such as Before the Revolution, The Conformist, and 1900. But the resolution of the film seems to take place outside the political and historical context. The transformation of Pu Yi, in Bertolucci’s words, from ‘‘a dragon to a butterfly,’’ occurs only in the context of individual friendship. In depicting the rise and fall of imperialism, republicanism, and fascism, and ending the film with a portrayal of the harsh excesses of the Cultural Revolution, Bertolucci depicts a sequence of destructive political ‘‘solutions’’ that somehow clear the way for the journey of the main character from ‘‘darkness to light.’’ Following The Last Emperor, Bertolucci continued his explora- tion of non-Western cultures with The Sheltering Sky and Little Buddha, opening his work to existential and philosophical themes that would almost seem to defy dramatic expression. In The Shelter- ing Sky, Bertolucci fashions a disturbing portrait of a consciousness in search of its own annihilation. Drawn from the Paul Bowles novel of the same title, the film, in its first half, focuses on the pathos of a couple who adore each other but cannot be happy, on the difficulty of romantic love. The work centers on the willful isolation and self- loathing of the character Porter, who has traveled to Morocco in 1947 with his wife Kit and a friend, Tunner, in order to escape the bitter sense of his own emptiness and artistic impotence. Like the character Paul in Last Tango in Paris, Porter is a dangerous and mesmerizing character whose self-absorption creates a kind of vortex which draws others down with him. As the two main characters, Port and Kit, push deeper into the Sahara, the physical hardships they encounter seem more and more like rites of purgation, as if only the heat and dirt of the desert could wear down the various masks and poses that they continually display to each other. Port dies a horrifying death from typhus, revealing the depths of his love for Kit only as the curtain descends. Kit, cast adrift deep in Morocco, hitches up with a caravan of Tuareg nomads and allows the remains of her Western identity to dissolve; she becomes the lover of the leader of the caravan, her Western clothes are buried in the desert, and she enters his harem disguised as a boy, dressed in the indigo robes, turban, and sword of a Tuareg tribesman. In a sense, Kit becomes possessed by Porter’s spirit, his taste for uncharted experience, without, however, assuming his arrogance or corrosive unhappiness. Kit’s story, which Bertoucci poetically links with the phases of the moon and nocturnal shades of blue, becomes dream-like, a carnal utopia of full and expressive passion in which she submerges her identity and becomes whole, albeit temporarily. The Sheltering Sky has much in common with Bertolucci’s earlier films, particularly Last Tango in Paris; as Bertolucci says in an interview, ‘‘Isn’t the empty flat of Last Tango a kind of desert and isn’t the desert an empty flat?’’ By filming in North Africa, however, Bertolucci allows the landscape to provide a kind of silent commen- tary on the doomed protagonists, whose profound unhappiness is made more piercing by the almost cosmic scale of the environment. The film abounds in visual ideas, finding in the mountain overlooks, wind-blown expanses, and fly-infested outposts a kind of encompass- ing dimension comparable to the role played by history in other Bertolucci films. Here, cinematographer Vittorio Storaro composes scenes around the division of color temperatures associated with the two main characters, red and blue, in ways that accentuate their irreconcilability. Exceptional acting by John Malkovich and Debra Winger gives The Sheltering Sky a sense of emotional truth that stays with the spectator, like the tattoos on fingers and feet that Kit receives in the deepest Sahara. Little Buddha, released in 1994, completes what Bertolucci has called his Eastern trilogy. Although it shares the exoticism and the chromatic richness of The Last Emperor and The Sheltering Sky, Little Buddha is a sharp departure from its predecessors. It is, Bertolucci has said, a story without dramatic conflicts, a story in which the dualism and division that animates his other films is resolved into a kind of harmonious unity. Weaving together the ancient tale of Siddartha and his quest for enlightenment with a contemporary story of an eight-year-old American boy who may be the reincarnation of a famous Buddhist master, the film aims for a simplicity of tone and address that could be understood and appreciated by children: indeed, Bertolucci has called Little Buddha a film for children, arguing that when it comes to Buddhism, everyone in the Western world is a child. Little Buddha features a striking visual style, marked by height- ened color abstraction. Vittorio Storaro, Bertolucci’s cinematographer for all his films except one, has said in an interview that Little Buddha represents the culmination of his exploration into light, and that it may be a film that is ‘‘impossible to go beyond.’’ The painterly style of Little Buddha is keyed not only to the contrast between the blue tonality of Seattle and the red and gold of the Siddartha story, but also to the four elements and the movement of the celestial spheres. When Siddartha achieves enlightenment under the banyan tree after staving off temptation and fear, harmony and balance are signified by the simultaneous appearance of the sun and the moon in the sky, and by the balanced color temperature of the sequence. In his career-long work with Bertolucci, Storaro has progressed from an exploration of light and shadow, to an exploration of the contrast of colors within light, to an exploration of the harmony within the spectrum. The fascinating sequences of Siddartha’s journey to enlighten- ment have a distinctly magical, storybook quality, a tone that is achieved partly by filming these scenes in 65 millimeter. The preci- sion and detail that sets these sequences apart gives them the quality of an illuminated manuscript, or of a dazzling storybook of hand- colored pages. Also important here is the acting of Keanu Reeves, who embodies the part of a beautiful youth determined to find the true value of life. The slightly unformed, open innocence of Reeves’ Siddartha is perfectly attuned to the enchanted vision of this benevo- lent film, which discovers in a tale of reincarnation a kind of BESSONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 97 dispensation from the drama of political and sexual conflict that had defined Bertolucci’s filmmaking to this point. Stealing Beauty, the story of a young girl’s sexual awakening, is a small-scale, intimate film that marks a departure from the spectacu- lar, exotic subject matter of the ‘‘oriental trilogy’’ of The Last Emperor, The Sheltering Sky, and Little Buddha. Returning to Italy to make a film there for the first time in more than ten years, Bertolucci set aside the elaborate cinematography and the opulent design for which he had become famous in favor of a more subdued and unstudied style. A story of a young American girl (played by Liv Tyler) who returns to the villa in Tuscany, still populated by artists and bohemians, where her mother had once lived and reigned as the beautiful muse and poet of the group, Stealing Beauty gradually unfolds as the story of the girl’s search for her unknown father, a quest that coincides with her first experience of sexual love. Bertolucci has said that he felt he needed to approach Italy with new eyes, with the eyes of a foreigner, after all the changes that the country had gone through after the 1980s, and that he had in effect ‘‘reincarnated himself as a young 19 year old American girl’’ in this film. Here, the director composes a light, Mozart-like variation on themes he has considered in highly dramatic terms before: the search for the father, the passing of one generation and the advent of another, the dangerous power of erotic attraction. Although Stealing Beauty possesses sobering elements, such as the imminent death of the playwright played by Jeremy Irons, the brooding restlessness of the sculptor played by Donal McCann, and the intermittent madness of the character played by the 85-year-old Jean Marais—perhaps best known for his role in Jean Cocteau’s Beauty and the Beast—the overall effect of this subtle, observant film is that of a movie, as Bertolucci says, that ‘‘weighs only a few grams.’’ The title of the film, the director says, comes from the idea that the artist is always ‘‘stealing beauty,’’ using the beauty of the world for his or her subject matter, drawing from it for inspiration. By setting the film in Tuscany, in a landscape that has inspired painters from Giotto onwards, Bertolucci Bertolucci offers a here a quiet meditation on art and life. In his next film, Beseiged, Bertolucci continues this style of oblique, subtle filmmaking whose greatest power is in its observation of the unpredictability of human behavior. Set again in Italy, this time in Rome, Beseiged is the story of a young African woman (played by Thandie Newton), who has fled to Rome after her husband has been arrested by the military dictatorship in her country. While pursuing her studies toward a medical degree, she works as the live-in housekeeper for a reclusive English pianist (played by David Thewlis). He immediately falls in love with her, which he declares in a series of awkward, tentative, and ultimately assertive gestures that infuriate her. Finally, she tells him that if he really loves her he will try to get her husband out of jail. Surprisingly, he takes her at her word, and begins selling the objects in his apartment to raise money. He also begins incorporating African styles and musical ideas in his composi- tions. As the apartment becomes more and more bare, she mentions that there is not much left to dust, never suspecting the reasons for his selling most of his material possessions. She also begins to be increasingly fond of him, as he becomes more and more certain, assured, and mysterious. Finally, after giving a last concert in his apartment to his friends and colleagues (who consist only of his young music students), he sells his grand piano and wins her husband’s release. Beseiged proceeds with very little dialogue — Bertolucci says that he had in mind a line from Cocteau: ‘‘There is no love, there are only proofs of love’’—a line which he had used in Stealing Beauty and which he saw as a leitmotif for this film: ‘‘it’s easy to say ‘I love you,’ it’s more difficult to give proof, proofs of love. Besieged is about that.’’ He also says an idea that grew naturally out of the film was that the only way of being truly happy is making happy the people you love. Thus Kinsky, the pianist, finds joy in giving up everything, including his beloved piano—without Shandurai, the African woman, ever knowing his reason for doing so. In several ways, Besieged presents the reverse side of the coin of Last Tango in Paris, also a film about a man and a woman in a bare apartment. In Last Tango, Bertolucci set out to show, as he said at the time, that ‘‘every sexual relationship is condemned.’’ In Besieged, the love between Kinsky and Shandurai develops along the opposite arc, from possessive desire to relinquishment, or, as the director says, toward the ‘‘total annihilation of selfishness.’’ The absence of dialogue in the film, in which emotions and messages are communicated through gesture, music, and movement, recalls the cinema of Rene Clair, who in films like Under the Roofs of Paris would have dialogue fade out and music carry the conversation. Bertolucci has also said that the absence of dialogue in the film came partially from his thinking about where the cinema was going, and how much the cinema should incorporate new technologies. He decided that in Besieged he would go back to the origins, to the silent cinema before 1927, when feelings were communicated uniquely through images and music. Made originally for Italian television, Besieged gave Bertolucci a chance to rediscover a kind of spontaneity in filmmaking, a feeling he had lost because of the size and scope of his productions of the last fifteen years. Here, he was able to create twenty or thirty shots in a day’s shooting, to mix handheld, steadicam, and tracking shots together, and not to worry overly much about light and shadow. ‘‘It was like going back to the ‘60’s, to the old times when there wasn’t so much pressure. . . to go back to that feeling was extraordinary . . . incredibly stimulating.’’ —Robert Burgoyne BESSON, Luc Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 18 March 1959. Family: Married actress-model Milla Jovovich, 1997; divorced 1999. Has a daughter with actress Anne Parillaud. Career: Spent his childhood travelling with his parents, who were scuba diving instructors; wrote the first drafts of his films Le Grand bleu and The Fifth Element while still in his teens, mid-1970s; first came to Hollywood, 1977; worked as an assistant on films in Hollywood and Paris, as well as first assistant director for several advertising films, late 1970s-early 1980s; directed first feature, Le Dernier Combat, 1983; formed his own production company, Les Films du Loups, which eventually became Les Films du Dauphins; directed a Loreal commercial featuring his wife, Milla Jovovich,1997. Awards: Brussels International Festival of Fantasy Film Critics Prize, Fantasporto Audience Jury Award-Special Men- tion, Best Director, and Best Film, for Le Dernier Combat, 1983; Italian National Syndicate of Film Journalists Silver Ribbon-Best Director-Foreign Film, for La Femme Nikita, 1990; Alexander Korda Award for Best British Film, for Nil by Mouth, 1997; Best Director Cesar Award, for The Fifth Element, 1997. Address: 33 rue Marbeauf, 75008 Paris, France. BESSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 98 Luc Besson Films as Director: 1983 L’Avant dernier(short) (+ pr) 1983 Le Dernier Combat (+ pr, sc) 1985 Subway (+ pr, sc) 1987 Kamikaze (co-d with Didier Grousset, + pr) 1988 Le Grand bleu (The Big Blue) (+ sc, lyrics, camera op, submarine crew) 1990 La Femme Nikita (Nikita) (+ sc, song) 1991 Atlantis (+ ph, ed) 1995 The Professional (Leont) (+ sc) 1997 The Fifth Element (+ co-sc) 1999 The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1985 Le Grand Carnaval (Arcady) (2nd unit d) 1986 Taxi Boy (Page) (tech advisor) 1993 Point of No Return (Badham) (based on La Femme Nikita sc) 1997 Nil by Mouth (Oldman) (pr) 1998 Taxi (Pirès) (sc, pr) 2000 Taxi 2 (Krawczyk) (sc, pr); The Dancer (Garson) (pr) Publications By BESSON: articles— ‘‘Besson Meets Spielberg,’’ interview with Jacques-Andre Bondy and Alan Kruger, in Premiere (Paris), November 1996. ‘‘Cool Hand Luc,’’ interview with Alan Kruger and Glenn Kenny, in Premiere (London), vol. 5, 1997. ‘‘Astral Grandeur/Fantastic Voyage,’’ interview with Andrew O. Thompson, in American Cinematographer (Hollywood), May 1997. ‘‘Tall Storeys,’’ interview with Nigel Floyd, in Time Out (London), 4 June 1997. ‘‘Luc Besson: Writer/director,’’ interview in Reel West (Bernaby, British Columbia), August-September 1997. Interview with Robert W. Welkos, in Los Angeles Times, 11 Novem- ber 1999. BESSONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 99 On BESSON: book— Hayward, Susan, Luc Besson, New York, 1998. On BESSON: articles— Chevallier, J., ‘‘Le Denier Combat,’’ in Revue du Cinema (France). ‘‘L’Age du Capitaine,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1985. Ferguson, K. ‘‘Tarzan Goes Underground,’’ in Photoplay, Septem- ber 1985. Bodtker, H., ‘‘Splatter—‘videovold’ i naerbilber,’’ in Film & Kino (Oslo), no. 3, 1985. Chion, M., ‘‘Silka Kot Riba v Zvocnem Akvariju,’’ in Ekran (Yugo- slavia), no. 3/4, 1988. Tangen, J. ‘‘‘Det Store Bia’: en dyp Film fra Besson?,’’ in Z Filmtidsskrift (Oslo), no. 27, 1989. Bassan, R., ‘‘Trois Neobaroques Francais,’’ in Revue du Cinema (France), May 1989. Strauss, F. ‘‘La Planete Besson,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 409, 1988. Caron, A., ‘‘Pour quelques Besson de plus!,’’ in Sequences (Montr- eal), September 1990. Kelleher, E., ‘‘French Box Office Hit Nikita Bows Stateside via Goldwyn,’’ in Film Journal (New York), March 1991. Murray, S., ‘‘European Notes,’’ in Cinema Papers (Victoria, Aus- tralia), August 1990. Graye, J., and J. Noel, ‘‘Nikita,’’ in Grand Angle (Mariembourg, Belgium), April 1990. Lubelski, T., ‘‘Besson,’’ in Kino (Warsaw), August 1991. Ostria, V., ‘‘Besson Manque d’Air,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1991. Jousse, T., ‘‘L’Ecran Aquarium,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1991. Lefebvre, P., ‘‘Atalantis,’’ in Grand Angle (Mariembourg, Belgium), September/October 1991. James, C., ‘‘Film View: Word from Nikita: Hold the Subtitles,’’ in New York Times, May 5, 1991. Pezzotta, A., ‘‘Atlantis,’’ in Segnocinema (Vicenza, Italy), May/ June 1992. Alexander, Max, ‘‘A Gaul in Hollywood,’’ in Variety (New York), 10 October 1994. Slaby, Petr, ‘‘Neobarokní intermezzo,’’ in Film a Doba (Prague), Spring-Summer 1996. Kenny, Glenn, ‘‘Braving the ‘Element’,’’ in Premiere (New York), May 1997. Elley, Derek, ‘‘Pop Pic Auteur,’’ in Variety (New York), 23–29 June 1997. ‘‘Luc Besson,’’ in Film Journal (New York), July 1997. Williamson, K., ‘‘Imbessonism,’’ in Box Office (Chicago), July 1997. Chang, Chris, ‘‘Escape from New York,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1997. Cosulich, O., ‘‘Quando il futuro diventa cult,’’ in Revista del Cinematografo (Rome), October 1997. Martani, M., ‘‘Nouvelles images,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo, Italy), October 1997. *** Most noted for their stunning visuals, Luc Besson’s films often invite scrutiny of the blurred line between the artistic and the commercial. Making his directorial debut with Le Dernier Combat, Besson’s beautifully executed black-and-white cinematography earned him a chance to make his first major feature, Subway, a film described by Michael Wilmington as ‘‘Steven Spielberg gone existentialist.’’ Shot mostly at Beverly Center Cineplex, Subway creates an under- ground world of the Paris Metro, both eerie in its fluorescent darkness and charming in the interweaving of fast-paced editing and charis- matic characters. A seemingly complex narrative of three separate strands is treated with a simplemindedness that makes it almost comic-book-like. It is at its best a skillful show of light and shadows, and at worst a flashy skeleton of a film that befits its inhabitants. The Big Blue, Besson’s third film, was a tremendous box office hit at home but a failure internationally. A breathtakingly filmed story about the lifetime friendship and rivalry between Jacques and Enzo, two free-divers, and their relationship with an American journalist (played by Rosanna Arquette), The Big Blue entangles too many elements at once to make sense. Jacques’ mysterious bond with the ocean, as emphasized time and again by his ties with dolphins—it is no coincidence that Besson’s production company in France is called Les Films du Dolphin—never goes beyond a pretentious justification for the showy underwater photography. The American journalist Joanna’s fascination with Jacques, on the other hand, also never once sparks any romantic fulfillment. It is Jacques’ peculiar friend, Enzo (played by Jean Reno, who later stars in The Professional), who anchors the film with his stocky rotundness and almost laughable yet respectable stubbornness. Produced by the Samuel Goldwyn Company, La Femme Nikita returns to cityscapes and paints a bizarre picture of a female hitperson, working for the French equivalent of the CIA. Ultra-violence adorned with a triangular romance and spy-thriller suspense, Nikita seems to be the most interesting of Besson’s films; or, at least, its complexity stems neither from the semi-hallucinatory ambiance in Subway nor the pretentious mythicism in The Big Blue, but rather from an uncanny interest and concern that develop in the viewer about Nikita. The character, proclaims Stanley Kauffmann, is ‘‘so interesting a wanderer between stages of moral consciousness that violence becomes one of the film’s essentials.’’ A genuine interest in her psychology provides the emotional depth that was lacking in Besson’s previous works. In The Professional, Besson continues his psychological study of marginalized, on-the-edge individuals: this time, a hitman, Leon, played by Jean Reno. Leon is the ‘‘Cleaner,’’ New York’s top hitman. He is never emotional; or better yet, as a professional, he never allows himself to be emotional. Through some inopportune circumstances he meets the twelve-year-old Mathilda (played convincingly by Natalie Portman). In her attempt to be trained as a hitperson in order to avenge her parents’ murder, the process of Mathilda’s makeover is in fact a vehicle for exploring the relationship between this odd couple. Walking the thin line between the innocent affection of a man and a child bonding (as in Paper Moon) and a portrayal of a potentially pedophilic liaison, Besson’s incisive direction turns the film from a cliched story into an almost lyrical character study. The last of Besson’s 1990s features, The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc, is a muddled reworking of the Joan of Arc story, with the title character lacking any sort of psychology and becoming little more than an adolescent action heroine. The Messenger was preceded by the visually dazzling but otherwise annoyingly uneven The Fifth BIGELOW DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 100 Element. If this futuristic epic, most of which is set in the mid-23rd- century, seemed to be little more than a comic book come-to-life, that is understandable; Besson wrote the first draft of its script when he was sixteen years old. His scenario features two primary male characters, one a reluctant hero and the other an over-the-top villain, and a female who is an adolescent male fantasy figure: a near-nude, orange-haired nymphet. Unfortunately, the storyline in which they are involved is incoherent—but the film, produced on a $90-million budget, is worth seeing for its truly inventive production design. One certainly would welcome the maturing of a director like Luc Besson, whose natural knack for cinematographic beauty has occa- sionally been enriched with some psychological depth. Going beyond the flashiness, Besson has shown a high potential for artistry, one that goes into the visuality of the imagistic world and actually strives for meanings. But questions still remain: what is it that we seek in cinema (a medium that is first and foremost visual) other than the visuals? —Guo-Juin Hong, updated by Rob Edelman BIGELOW, Kathryn Nationality: American. Born: San Francisco, 1953. Education: Studied art, San Francisco Art Institute, graduated 1972; studied film at Whitney Museum, New York, 1972; studied film under Milos Forman, Columbia Graduate Film School, graduated 1979. Family: Married James Cameron (director), 1989 (divorced 1991). Career: Worked with radical New York-based British art collective, Art and Language; photographed by Robert Mapplethorpe; directed short graduation film, The Set-Up, 1978; lectured in film at California Institute of the Arts, 1983; co-direct of TV miniseries, Wild Palms, 1993. Agent: Creative Artists Agency, 9830 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1978 The Set-Up 1983 The Loveless (Breakdown) (with Monty Montgomery, + sc) 1987 Near Dark (+ sc) 1990 Blue Steel (+ sc) 1991 Point Break (+ sc [uncredited]) 1993 Wild Palms (for TV) (with others); ‘‘Fallen Heroes: Part 1,’’ ‘‘Fallen Heroes: Part 2,’’ and ‘‘Lines of Fire,’’ episodes of Homicide: Life on the Street (for TV) 1995 Strange Days 2000 The Weight of Water Other Films: 1983 Born in Flames (Borden) (ed) 1994 American Cinema (for TV) (ro as herself) 1996 Undertow (Red) (sc) Publications By BIGELOW: articles— ‘‘Dark by Design,’’ interview with Victoria Hamburg and Firooz Zahedi, in Interview (New York), August 1989. Interview with Elvis Mitchell, in Interview (New York), March 1990. ‘‘James Cameron and Kathryn Bigelow,’’ interview in American Film (Hollywood), July 1991. Interview with Ana Maria Bahiana, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), January 1992. ‘‘Momentum and Design,’’ interview with Gavin Smith, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1995. ‘‘Big Bad Bigelow,’’ interview with Graham Fuller, in Interview (New York), November 1995. ‘‘Reality Bytes,’’ interview with Andrew Hultkrans, in Artforum (New York), November 1995. ‘‘Vicarious Thrills,’’ interview with Sheila Johnston, in Index on Censorship (London), November/December 1995. ‘‘Hppy New Millennium,’’interview with Roald Rynning, in Film Review (London), April 1996. ‘‘No Retreat, No Surrender,’’interview with Ian Nathan, in Empire (London), April 1996. On BIGELOW: books— Hillier, Jim, The New Hollywood, London, 1993. Foster, Gwendolyn Audrey, Women Film Directors: An International Bio-Critical Dictionary, Westport, Connecticut, 1995. On BIGELOW: articles— Travers, Peter, ‘‘Women on the Verge: Four Women Attempt to Infiltrate a Male Stronghold: The Director’s Chair,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 21 September 1989. Taubin, Amy, ‘‘Genre Bender,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 22 November 1989. Hoban, Phoebe, ‘‘Happiness Is a Warm Gun,’’ in Premiere (New York), April 1990. Cook, Pam, ‘‘Walk on the Wild Side,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), November 1990. James, Nick, ‘‘From Style to Steel,’’ in City Limits (London), 29 November 1990. Powell, Anna, ‘‘Blood on the Borders—Near Dark and Blue Steel,’’ in Screen (London), Summer 1994. Murphy, Kathleen, ‘‘Black Arts,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1995. Charity, Tom, ‘‘Extra Sensory Projection,’’ in Time Out (London), 25 October 1995. Francke, Lizzie, ‘‘Virtual Fears,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), December 1995. Raphael, Amy, ‘‘American Bigelow,’’ in New Musical Express (London), 2 March 1996. Keane, Colleen, ‘‘Director as ‘Adrenaline Junkie,’’’ in Metro (Mel- bourne), 1997. *** BIGELOWDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 101 Kathryn Bigelow Almost single-handed, Kathryn Bigelow has lastingly scotched the assumption that the terms ‘‘woman director’’ and ‘‘action movie’’ are somehow incompatible. So far, no other female director has shown herself so adept at handling the intricate ballets of stylised violence that constitute the modern Hollywood action genre. But it may not be a coincidence that Bigelow’s career, which until the mid- 1990s was riding high, got stopped in its tracks by one ambitious picture that proved a commercial flop. Most male action directors can get away with a single box-office dud, or even two; but it seems that a woman who trespasses on such classically all-male territory can’t expect the same latitude. Not that Bigelow has ever been content to produce routine roller- coaster exercises; she translates the conventions of the genre, bending and blending them into fertile new mutations. Her first feature, The Loveless (co-directed with Monty Montgomery), put a dreamy Sirkian spin on the standard biker movie. Near Dark is a vampire western; Blue Steel laces a cop drama with horror film devices; Point Break crosses a surfing movie with a heist thriller. For Strange Days Bigelow mixed an even richer cocktail: sci-fi plus love story plus political satire plus murder mystery. Her films, though vigorously paced and tinged with ironic humour, are shot through with a dark romanticism; and by delving deeper into formal, psychological, and thematic patterns than mainstream Hollywood generally cares to, they lift their material some way towards the condition of arthouse fare. Though Bigelow avowedly aims at a mass audience, the moral and aesthetic complexity of her films has kept her a slightly marginal figure in the industry. This status may be reflected in her choice of protagonists: for her, as three decades earlier for Arthur Penn, ‘‘a society has its mirror in its outcasts.’’ The black-leather bikers of The Loveless, the nomadic vampire clan of Near Dark, the surfing bank- robbers of Point Break, all defined by their opposition to conventional mores, represent an alternative darkside structure, respectable soci- ety’s hidden needs and appetites made manifest. A local citizen, gazing fascinated at the bikers’ remote otherness, fantasises about ‘‘be[ing] them for a day or two’’; while Bodhi, leader of the surfboard criminals, even claims their heist exploits are meant to inspire the downtrodden masses. ‘‘We show them that the human spirit is still alive!’’ he exults. Bigelow’s artistic training—prior to becoming a film-maker, she was active as a conceptual artist, a member of the Art and Language group in the ultra-politicised New York art scene—shows in the stylised and highly textured look of her films. Her images are tactile, often sensual to the point of fetishism: in the opening shot of Blue Steel, light caresses the contours of a handgun in extreme close-up, transforming it into an abstract study of curves and shadows. This close-grained visual intensity becomes another means of subverting and reappropriating generic material, turning it to her own ends, while her dark, nihilistic plots serve as prelude to soft-edged, sentimental BIRRI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 102 denouements where love conquers all. Not least of the contradictions that fuel her work is that, while not shying away from graphic incidents of violence against women—the rape scene in Strange Days caused widespread shock—her films often feature women as the strongest, most focused characters, acting as mentors and protectors to the self-doubting males. In her early films Bigelow played these various tensions off against each other, deftly maintaining a balance between mainstream and ‘‘serious’’ audience appeal. With Strange Days the strategy came unstuck. She herself describes the film as ‘‘the ultimate Rorschach,’’ an artefact lending itself to as many interpretations as it has viewers. Drawing its inspiration from an eclectic multiplicity of sources— Hawks, Hitchcock, and Ridley Scott, cyberpunk fiction, and Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom—the film torments and probes us, forcing us to question not only what we’re seeing but our own motives in wanting to watch it. In creating such an intricate, demanding collage, inviting simulta- neous engagement on any number of levels, Bigelow may have outpaced her public. Many reviewers raved over Strange Days (though there were dissenting voices), but the film stalled badly at the box-office, failing to recoup its substantial budget. Since then her career has suffered: Ohio, a projected film about the 1970 Kent State shootings, came to nothing, and her long-cherished Joan of Arc movie, Company of Angels, foundered over a dispute with Luc Besson. Bigelow wanted Clare Danes as Joan; Besson, the film’s executive producer, insisted on casting his then partner Milla Jovovich. When Besson withdrew his backing in order to direct his own film, Bigelow’s financing vanished. It’s a deplorable loss. Few directors could have been better placed to give us a fresh take on the woman who, in all history, most famously trespassed on male territory. It remains to be seen if Bigelow’s The Weight of Water, a maritime murder thriller and her first feature in five years, restores the status of one of the most original and stimulating of current American film-makers. —Philip Kemp BIRRI, Fernando Nationality: Argentinian. Born: In Santa Fe, 13 March 1925. Edu- cation: Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Santa Fe, Argentina, 1942–47, and at Centro Sperimentale de Cinematografia, Rome, 1950–52. Career: Assistant to Vittorio De Sica on Il tetto, 1954; returned to Argentina to found Instituto de Cinematografia, later La Escuela Documental de Santa Fe, 1956; left Argentina for political reasons, 1963; moved to Italy, 1964; attended 1st International Festival of the New Latin American Cinema, Havana, 1979; taught at Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, 1980, and at Film School of Universidad de Los Andes, Merida, Venezuela, 1980–83. Director of International School of Cinema and TV of San Antonio de Los Banos, 1983— . Awards: Grand Prize, SODRE Festival, Montevideo, for Tire Die, 1960; Golden Lion, Venice Festival, for Los Inundados, 1962; honored at Festivals in Benalmadena, Spain, 1979, and Pesaro, Italy, 1981. Films as Director: 1951 Selinunte (short); Alfabeto notturno (short) 1952 Immagini Populari Siciliane Sacre; Immagini Populari Siciliane Profane 1959 La primera fundacion de Buenos Aires (animation) 1960 Tire die (Toss Me a Dime) (co-sc, co-d, co-ph); Buenos dias, Buenos Aires (short) 1961 Los inundados (Flooded Out) 1962 Che, Buenos Aires (comprising two previous films); La pampa gringa (doc) 1966 Castagnino, diario romano (short) 1979 Org (co-d) 1983 Rafael Alberti, un retrato del poeta por Fernando Birri 1984 Rte.: Nicaragua (carta al mundo) (short film) 1985 Mi hijo, el Chei: Un retrato de familia de Don Ernesto Guevara 1988 Un senor muy viejo con unas alas enormes (+ a, sc) 1998 Enredando sombras Other Films: 1955 Gli sbanditi (Maselli) (role) 1982 La Rose des vents (P. Guzman) (role) 1994 Plumitas calientes (Gonzalo De Galiana) (ro as El Angel) Publications By BIRRI: book— La Escuela Documental de Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina, 1964. By BIRRI: articles— ‘‘Cine y subdesarrollo,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), May/July 1967. ‘‘Revolución en la revolución del nuevo cine latinoamericano,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), August/December 1968. ‘‘Fernando Birri y las raices del huevo cine latinoamericano,’’ an interview with Francisco Lombardi, in Hablemos de Cine (Lima), March 1984. ‘‘For a Nationalist, Realist, Critical, and Popular Cinema,’’ in Screen (London), May-August 1985. ‘‘Ein Letzter Dominostein,’’ an interview with M. Vosz, in Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), March 1991. ‘‘?den ich rede weiter von Utopien!’’ an interview with Wolfgang Martin Hamdorf, in Film Und Fernsehen (Berlin), vol. 12, 1994. On BIRRI: books— Mahieu, Jose Agustin, Breve historia del cine argentino, Buenos Aires, 1966. Micciche, Lino, editor, Fernando Birri e la Escuela Documental de Santa Fe, Pesaro, Italy, 1981. Burton, Julianne, The New Latin American Cinema: An Annotated Bibliography of Sources in English, Spanish, and Portuguese, New York, 1983. BLIERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 103 Burton, Julianne, editor, Cinema and Social Change in Latin Amer- ica: Conversations with Filmmakers, Austin, Texas, 1986. King, John, and Nissa Torrents, The Garden of Forking Paths: Argentine Cinema, London, 1986. On BIRRI: articles— Pussi, Dolly, ‘‘Breve historia del documental en la Argentina,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), October 1973. Burton, Julianne, ‘‘The Camera as Gun: Two Decades of Film Culture and Resistance in Latin America,’’ in Latin American Perspectives, Austin, Texas, 1978. ‘‘Fernando Birri Section’’ of Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 100, 1981. Mahieu, A., ‘‘Revision critica del cine argentino,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 107, 1984. Martinez Carril, M., ‘‘Fernando Birri, un mito, una obra,’’ in Cinemateca Revista (Montevideo), February 1986. Araya, G.H., ‘‘Auskunfte uber Fernando Birri,’’ in Beitr?ge zur Film und Fernsehwissenschaft, vol. 28, 1987. Brang, H., ‘‘Welt der Wunder und der Trauer,’’ in Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), March 1989. Schulze, B., ‘‘Wonderland,’’ in Medium (Frankfurt), vol. 21, no. 3, 1991. Feinstein, Howard, ‘‘Entangling Shadows: One Hundred Years of Cinema in Latin America and the Caribbean (Enredando Sombras),’’ in Variety (New York), 11 May 1998. *** Fernando Birri is a key figure in the history of the New Latin American Cinema because he was more interested in creating filmmakers than in creating films; because he offered a sustained and systematic counter-example to existing industrial modes of filmmaking and to the ideological assumptions that limited both the process and the product; because he developed a concrete theoretical-practical approach and founded the first school of documentary filmmaking in Latin America in order to teach that methodology; and, finally, because his students fanned out across the continent putting his ideas into practice. Born in the provincial capital of Santa Fe, Birri was a poet and puppeteer before turning to the cinema in search of a broad popular audience. Unable to break into the tightly controlled national film industry, Birri travelled to Italy to study at Rome’s Centro Sperimentale de Cinematografia during the early 1950s, when the neo-realist movement was still at its height. Profoundly influenced by the ideology, aesthetics, and methodology of this first anti-industrial, anti-Hollywood model for a national cinema, Birri returned to Argen- tina in 1956 hoping to found a national film school. Rejecting the closed commercialism of the Buenos Aires-based film industry, one of the three largest in Latin America at the time, Birri returned to Santa Fe. Birri recalls: ‘‘Fresh from Europe, what I had in mind was a film school modeled on the Centro Sperimentale, a fictional film school which would train actors, directors, cinematographers, set designers, etc. But when I confronted the actual conditions in Argentina and in Santa Fe, I realized that my plan was premature. What was needed was something else: a school which would not only provide appren- ticeship in filmmaking, but also in sociology, and even in Argentine history, geography and politics, because the most essential quest is the quest for national identity, in order to recover and rediscover what had been alienated, distorted and destroyed by centuries of cultural penetration. This search for a national identity is what led me to pose the problem in strictly documentary terms, because I believe that the first step for any national cinema is to document its own reality.’’ La Escuela Documental de Santa Fe grew out of the Instituto de Cinematografia, which was in turn an outgrowth of a 4-day seminar on filmmaking led by Birri. Birri’s goal was to lay the foundations for a regional film industry that would be ‘‘national, realist, and popu- lar’’: national by addressing the most pressing problems of national life; realist (documentary) in approach in contrast to the highly artificial style and milieux of the ‘‘official’’ film industry; popular by focusing on and appealling to the less privileged classes. In keeping with his determination to integrate theory and practice, Birri empha- sized process over product, viewing each film project as the opportu- nity for practical apprenticeship on the part of the largest possible number of students. He was the first of the Latin American filmmakers to posit technical imperfection as a positive attribute, preferring un sentido imperfecto a una perfeccion sin sentido (an imperfect/sincere meaning to a meaningless perfection). Birri’s best-known films are the 33-minute documentary Tire die (Toss Me a Dime) and Los inundados (Flooded Out), a picaresque feature in the neorealist style about the adventures of a squatter family displaced by seasonal floods. Both played to huge and enthusiastic audiences at their local premieres but could not achieve broad national exhibition even after winning important prizes in interna- tional festivals. An inhospitable political climate compelled Birri to leave Argen- tina in 1963. Subsequent months in S?o Paulo catalyzed an important documentary movement there, but Birri himself returned to Italy and relative obscurity until the late 1970s. His presence at the First International Festival of the New Latin American Cinema in Havana in 1979 signaled renewed activity and recognition. Since then, Birri has taught at Mexico’s national university and at the University of Los Andes in Venezuela. The Benalmadena and Pesaro Festivals (Spain, 1979, and Italy, 1981) organized special programs honoring his work. —Julianne Burton BLIER, Bertrand Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 14 March 1939. Career: Assistant director on films of Lautner, Christian-Jaque, Delannoy, and others, 1960–63; directed first feature, Hitler? Connais pas!, 1963. Awards: Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film, for Preparez vos mouchoirs, 1978; Cesar for the screenplay of Buffet froid, 1979; Special Jury Prize, Cannes Film Festival, for Trop belle pour toi (Too Beautiful for You), 1989. Films as Director: 1963 Hitler? Connais pas! (+ sc) 1966 La Grimace (+ sc) 1967 Si j’etais un espion (Breakdown; If I Were a Spy) (+ co-sc) BLIER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 104 1973 Les Valseuses (Going Places) (+ sc) 1975 Calmos (Femmes Fatales) (+ co-sc) 1977 Preparez vos mouchoirs (Get out Your Handkerchiefs) (+ sc) 1979 Buffet froid (+ sc) 1981 Beau-père (+ sc) 1982 La Femme de mon pote (My Best Friend’s Girl) (+ co-sc) 1984 Notre Histoire (Our Story) (+ sc) 1986 Tenue de soirée (Menage) (+sc) 1989 Trop belle pour toi (Too Beautiful for You) (+sc) 1991 Merci la vie (Thanks, Life) (+ sc, pr) 1993 Un deux trois soleil (One Two Three Sun) (+ sc) 1996 Mon homme (My Man) (+ sc) 2000 Les Acteurs (Actors) (+ sc) Other Films: 1970 Laisse aller, c’est une valse (Lautner) (sc) 1992 Patrick Dewaere (role as himself) Publications By BLIER: books— Les Valseuses, Paris, 1972. Beau-père, Paris, 1980. By BLIER: articles— ‘‘Les Valseuses de Bertrand Blier: le nuvité du cinéma fran?ais,’’ interview with R. Gay, in Cinéma Québec (Montreal), vol. 3, no. 8, 1974. Interview with B. Villien and P. Carcassonne, in Cinématographe (Paris), January 1980. ‘‘Beau-père: Entretien avec Bertrand Blier,’’ with C. de Béchade and H. Descrues, in Image et Son (Paris), September 1981. ‘‘A la recherche de l’histoire,’’ an interview with Marc Chevrie and D. Dubroux, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1985. Interview with Sheila Johnston, in Stills (London), May 1985. Interview with P. Le Guay, in Cinématographe (Paris), May 1986. ‘‘Manhandler,’’ interview with Dan Yakir, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1986. Interview with Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1988. Interview in La Revue du Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1988. Interview in Première (Paris), May 1989. Interview with Serge Toubiana and T. Jousse, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1989. Interview with F. Aude and J.P. Jeancolas, in Positif (Paris), June 1989. Interview in Time Out (London), 14 February 1990. Interview with Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1991. ‘‘Boule blanche,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1991 (supplement). ‘‘Yves: Un deux trois soleil: I Want to Go Home/ ‘Pointer ce qui va mal,’’’ an interview with Philippe Ortoli and Yves Alion, in Mensuel du Cinéma, September 1993. On BLIER: articles— Buckley, T., ‘‘The Truth about Making a Movie in Singapore,’’ in New York Times, 2 February 1979. Alion, Yves, ‘‘Buffet froid Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 March 1980. ‘‘Blier Section,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1981. Rickey, C., ‘‘Lolita Fran?aise,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1981. Toubiana, Serge, and Pierre Bonitzer, ‘‘Le cauchemar d’Antoine. Les mots et les choses,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1986. Blier Section of Revue du Cinéma (Paris), June 1986. Chutnow, P., ‘‘Blier Puts a Fresh Wrinkle in the Old Triangle,’’ in New York Times, 17 September 1989. Toubiana, S., ‘‘Entretien avec Bertrand Blier,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1991. Jousse, T., article in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1991. Moullet, L., ‘‘Le neo-irrealisme francais,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1994. Courtade, Maria and Kha, Sylvie, ‘‘Rires et délits,’’ in Positif (Paris), November 1995. Rood, Jurri?n, ‘‘Een lang neus tegen de werkelijkheid,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), December-January 1996–1997. *** Bertrand Blier directs erotic buddy movies featuring men who are exasperated by the opposite sex, who perceive of themselves as macho but are incapable of satisfying the women in their lives. In actuality, his heroes are terrified of feminism, of the ‘‘new woman’’ who demands her right to experience and enjoy orgasm. But Blier’s females are in no way villainesses. They are just elusive—and so alienated that they can only find fulfillment from oddballs or young boys. Going Places (Les Valseuses, which in French is slang for testicles), based on Blier’s best-selling novel, was a box office smash in France. Gérard Depardieu and Patrick Dewaere both achieved stardom as a couple of outsiders, adult juvenile delinquents, whose sexual and sadistic adventures are chronicled as they travel across France. They are both unable to bring to orgasm a young beautician (played by Miou-Miou) they pick up and take on as a sexual partner. They then attempt to please an older woman (Jeanne Moreau), who has just spent ten years in prison. After a night together, she commits suicide by shooting herself in the vagina. Eventually, Miou-Miou is sexually satisfied by a crazy, physically unattractive ex-con. In Femmes Fatales middle-aged Jean-Pierre Marielle and Jean Rochefort, one a gynaecologist and the other a pimp, decide to abandon wives and mistresses for the countryside, but end up pursued by an army of women intent on enslaving them as studs. Again, men cannot escape women’s sexual demands: here, the latter come after the former with tanks and guns. And in Get out Your Handkerchiefs, driving instructor Depardieu is so anxious to please bored, depressed wife Carol Laure that he finds her a lover. Both the husband and the stranger, a playground instructor (Dewaere), feel that she will be happy if she can only have a child. She in her own way does this, finding a substitute for them in a precocious young boy barely into his teens. Handkerchiefs is a prelude of sorts to Beau-Père, which features only one male lead (as does the later Trop belle pour toi, in which Depardieu is at the centre of a love triangle). Here, a struggling BLOMDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 105 pianist, played by Dewaere, is seduced by the refreshingly self- confident 14-year-old daughter of his recently deceased lover. The teenager’s feelings are deep and pure, while the ‘‘adult’’ is immature, too self-conscious and self-absorbed to accept her. In Blier’s films, men do not understand women. ‘‘Maybe one day I’ll do Camille,’’ the filmmaker says. ‘‘But I won’t do An Unmarried Woman, because I don’t feel I have the right to do it. I don’t know what goes on in a woman’s head. I believe I know what certain men think, but not women.’’ As a result, the sexual barriers between the sexes seem irrevocable in Blier’s movies. His men are more at ease talking among themselves about women than with actually being with wives or lovers; their relationships with each other are for them more meaningful than their contacts with the opposite sex. There are alternatives to women, such as turning to homosexual relationships (the characters in Going Places sleep with each other when they are lonely or celibate). Another Blier film, Buffet froid, is also about male bonding: Depardieu, as a psychopathic killer, becomes involved with a mass murderer (Jean Carmet) and a homicidal cop (the director’s father, the distinguished character actor Bernard Blier). However, Buffet froid is mostly a study of alienation in urban society, and the acceptance of random, irrational violence. It is thematically more closely related to Jules Feiffer’s Little Murders than Going Places or Get out Your Handkerchiefs. Quality-wise, Blier’s most recent films have added little luster to his career. However, the film maker seems to have tired of making films about men. Beginning with Trop belle pour toi (Too Beautiful for You), the most accessible of his latter-career works, his primary characters have been women. Trop belle pour toi does feature a clever take on extramarital relationships. Blier regular Gerard Depardieu plays a car dealer whose wife is beautiful and intelligent; nonetheless, he cheats on her with his otherwise ordinary, chubby temporary receptionist. Despite this intriguing premise and recogni- tion with a Cannes Film Festival Special Jury Prize, the film lacks the spark and outrageousness of his earlier work. The director’s other features include Merci la vie (Thanks, Life), a feminist take on Going Places that sparked controversy upon its opening in France. It is a road movie which chronicles the sexual exploits of two young women, one sluttish and the other naive. Un deux trois soliel (One Two Three Sun) focuses on the plight of a young girl, growing up in a public housing project in Marseilles, who adores her alcoholic father and is mortified by her mother’s affectations. Bertrand Blier best explains what he attempts to communicate in his films: ‘‘The relations between men and women are constantly evolving and it’s interesting to show people leading the lifestyle of tomorrow.’’ —Rob Edelman BLOM, August Nationality: Danish. Born: 26 December 1869. Family: Married 1) Agnete von Prangen, 1908; 2) Johanne Fritz-Petersen. Career: Actor at Folketeatret, Copenhagen, from 1893; actor at Nordisk Films Kompagni, 1908; director for Nordisk Films Kompagni, 1910–24; manager of Copenhagen cinema, 1934–47. Died: 10 January 1947. Films as Director: 1910 Livets Storme (Storms of Life); Robinson Crusoe; Den hvide Slavehandel I (The White Slave); Spinonen fra Tokio (The Red Light); Den skaebnesvangre Opfindelse (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde); Jagten paa Gentlemanr?veren; Singaree; Hamlet; Sp?gelset i Gravkaelderen (The Ghost of the Variety); Den d? des Halsbaand (The Necklace of the Dead) 1911 Den hvide Slavehandel II (In the Hands of Impostors); Den farlige Alder (The Price of Beauty); Ved Faengslets Port (Temptations of a Great City); Vildledt Elskov (The Bank Book); Potifars Hustru (The Victim of a Character); Politimesteren (Convicts No. 10 and No. 13); Den blaa Natviol (The Daughter of the Fortune Teller); Damernes Blad (The Ladies’ Journal); Balletdanserinden (The Ballet Dancer); Jernbanens Datter (The Daughter of the Rail- way); Den naadige Fr?ken (Lady Mary’s Love); En Lektion (Aviatikeren og Journalistens Hustru; The Aviator and the Journalist’s Wife); Ekspeditricen (Ungdom og Letsind; In the Prime of Life); Desdemona; En Opfinders Skaebne (The Aeroplane Inventor); Fader og S?n (Onkel og Nev?; A Poisonous Love); D?dsdr?mmen (A Dream of Death); Min f?rste Monocle (Herr Storms f?rste Monocle; His First Monocle); Fru Potifar (Den skaebnesvangre L?gn; A Fatal Lie); Kaerlighedens Styrke (The Power of Love); Mormonens Offer (The Victims of the Mormon); Haevnet (Det b?des der for; Vengeance); Det m?rke Punkt (Mamie Rose; Annie Bell); Eventyr paa Fodrejsen (Den udbrudte Slave; The Two Convicts); Ungdommens Ret (The Right of Youth); Tropisk Kaerlighed (Love in the Tropics); Vampyrdanserinden (The Vampire Dancer); Det gamle K?bmandshus (Midsommer; Midsummer-Time); D?dens Brud Gadeoriginalen (A Bride of Death) 1912 Brillantstjernen (For Her Sister’s Sake); Guvern?rens Datter (The Governor’s Daughter); Kaerlighed g?r blind (Love Is Blind); Dyrek?bt Venskab (Dearly Purchased Friend- ship); Den sorte Kansler (The Black Chancellor); Hjertets Guld (Et Hjerte af Guld; Faithful unto Death); Direkt?rens Datter (Caught in His Own Trap); Det f?rste Honorar (Hans f?rste Honorar; His First Patient); Elskovs Magt (G?gleren; Man’s Great Adversary); Historien om en Moder (En Moders Kaerlighed; The Life of a Mother); De tre Kammerater (The Three Comrades); Operabranden (Bedstemoders Vuggevise) The Song Which Grandmother Sang; Den f?rste Kaerlighed (Her First Love Affair); Hjerternes Kamp (A High Stake); Hans vanskeligste Rolle (His Most Difficult Part); Den tredie Magt (The Secret Treaty); Fodselsdagsgaven (Gaven; The Birthday Gift); En Hofintrige (A Court Intrigue); Den sande Kaerlighed (Flugten gennem Skyerne; The Fugitives); Hvem var Forbryderen? (Samvittighedsnag; At the Eleventh Hour); Alt paa ét Kort (Guldm?nten; Gold from the Gutter) 1913 Pressens Magt (Et Bankrun; A Harvest of Tears); Trol?s (G?glerblod, Artists); H?jt Spil (Et forfejlet Spring; A Dash for Liberty); Naar Fruen gaar paa Eventyr (Pompadourtasken; The Lost Bag); Bristet Lykke (A Para- dise Lost); Fem Kopier (Five Copies); Atlantis; En farlig Forbryder (Knivstikkeren; A Modern Jack the Ripper); Af Elskovs Naade (Acquitted); Elskovsleg (Love’s Devotee); BOETTICHER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 106 Vasens Hemmelighed (Den kinesiske Vase; The Chinese Vase) 1914 S?nnen (Her Son); Den store Middag (The Guestless Dinner Party); Tugthusfange No. 97 (En Gaest fra en anden Verden; The Outcast’s Return); Faedrenes Synd (Nemesis); Aegteskab og Pigesjov (Mr. King paa Eventyr; A Surprise Packet); Aeventyrersken (Exiled); En ensom Kvinde (Hvem er han?; The Doctor’s Legacy); Revolutionsbryllup (A Revolution Marriage); Et Laereaar (The Reformation); Den lille Chauff?r (The Little Chauffeur); Den st?rste Kaerlighed (En Moders Kaerlighed; ‘‘Escaped the Law, But . . . ’’); Pro Patria; Kaerligheds-Vaeddemaalet (The Wager) 1915 Du skal elske din Naeste (For de Andre; The Samaritan); Giftpilen (The Poisonous Arrow); Hjertestorme; Kaerligheds Laengsel (Den Pukkelryggede; The Cripple Girl); Lotteriseddel No. 22152 (Den blinde Skaebne; Blind Fate); Rovedderkoppen (Den r?de Enke); Syndens Datter (Den, der sejrer; Nobody’s Daughter); Syndig Kaerlighed (Eremitten; The Hermit); Truet Lykke (Et Skud i M?rket; The Evil Genius); Verdens Undergang (Flammesvaerdet; The Flaming Sword); For sit Lands Aere (Hendes Aere; For His Country’s Honor) 1916 Den mystiske Selskabsdame (The Mysterious Companion); Gillekop 1918 Grevindens Aere (Kniplinger; Lace); Maharadjaens Yndlingshustru II (The Favorite Wife of the Maharaja II; A Daughter of Brahma); Via Crucis 1919 Prometheus I-II (Bonds of Hate) 1920 Hans gode Genius (Mod Stjernerne; His Guardian Angel); Praesten i Vejlby (The Vicar of Vejlby; The Land of Fate) 1924 Det store Hjerte (Lights from Circus Life; Side Lights of the Sawdust Ring); Den store Magt 1925 Hendes Naade; Dragonen Other Films: 1909 Droske 519 (Cab No. 519) (role); En Kvinde af Folket (A Woman of the People) (role): Dr. Nicola I (Den skjulte Skat) (role); Dr. Nicola (Hvorledes Dr. Nicola erhvervede den kinesiske Stok; How Dr. Nicola Procured the Chinese Cane) (role); Barnet (A Child’s Love) (role); Madame Sans Gène (role); Faderen (A Father’s Grief) (role); Museumsmysteriet (The Mystery of the Museum) (role); Dr. Nicola III (Dr. Nicola in Tibet) (role); Et Budskab til Napoleon paa Elba (A Message to Napoleon) (role); Revolutionsbryllup (A Wedding during the French Revolu- tion) (role) 1910 S?lvdaasen med Juvelerne (The Jewel Case) (role); Tyven (A Society Sinner) (role); To Tjenestepiger (The Rival Ser- vants) (role); Kean (role); Medbejlerens Haevn (Caught in His Own Net) (role); Forraederen (A Traitor to His Coun- try) (role) *** When August Blom came to Nordisk Films Kompagni in 1909 it was the major film production company in Denmark, having been founded in 1906 by Ole Olsen. Nordisk dominated the so-called ‘‘belle époque’’ (from 1910 to 1914) in Danish filmmaking, and August Blom was the leading force in this period. In 1911 Blom became head of production at Nordisk, maintaining his position as a director at the same time. In charge of scripts and actors, Blom launched the career of Valdemar Psilander, who showed a natural talent for understated and realistic film acting. The actor became an immensely popular star in Denmark and Europe until his premature death in 1917. In 1911 Blom directed sixteen of Psilander’s seven- teen films. In 1910 Blom made Ved Faengslets Port (released 1911) which, with Urban Gad’s Afgrunden, introduced the erotic melodrama, a genre refined by Blom in the following years. Ved Faengslets Port is typical of the kind of films which made Nordisk famous all over the world. The story is about a young aristocrat who is in the grip of a moneylender and at the same time loves the moneylender’s daugh- ter. Although Blom tried to introduce contemporary themes in his films, the stories were always the weak part of his and most other Danish films in this period. The compensation for the banal magazine stories was found in the way Blom told these stories. His films are often about contrasts, social and sexual. The films are passionate and reveal the many faces of love with great imagination. As a former actor Blom put great weight on acting, and he had a fine feeling for the direction of actresses. His portraits of women are quite often subtle and daring. Blom put immense care into the making of his films. The sets were used in a dramatic way, playing an important role in the story as a means of characterizing the people. His narrative technique made use of cross-cutting and, assisted by his favourite cameraman, Johan Ankerstjerne, he was an innovator in lighting. One of his stylistic devices, used to great and surprising effect, was the use of mirrors as a means of expanding the dramatic content of a scene. Blom must be considered as one of the important pioneers in the early silent film. It was quite natural that Blom was commissioned to direct the greatest and most ambitious film of the period, a film which introduced a literary era in the Danish film. This was Atlantis, based on Gerhart Hauptmann’s novel of 1912. This ambitious attempt to transpose a modern novel with a complicated plot and interesting characters to film benefited from the director’s steady hand. Blom’s direction of the film is astonishingly mature, confident, and imagina- tive, and in many ways Atlantis is ahead of its time. Johan Ankerstjerne’s camerawork, for instance, points forward to the expressionist-in- spired German films. Another fine film by Blom was Verdens Undergang. Blom made seventy-eight of his approximately one hundred films in the years 1910–14, but he was a company man, and he stayed with Nordisk in the years of decline. He left filming in 1924. During the golden age of the Danish cinema, however, Blom was the great stylist, a gifted and civilized director. —Ib Monty BOETTICHER, Budd Nationality: American. Born: Oscar Boetticher Jr., in Chicago, 29 July 1916. Education: Ohio State University. Family: Married 1) Karen Steele; 2) Emily Erskine Cook, 1946 (divorced 1959); 3) Debra Paget, 1960 (divorced 1961); 4) Mary Chelde, 1971. Career: Football star at Ohio State, early 1930s; after recuperating from football injury in Mexico, became professional matador, 1940; BOETTICHERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 107 technical advisor on Mamoulian’s Blood and Sand, 1940; messenger boy at Hal Roach studios, 1941–1943; assistant to William Seiter, George Stevens, and Charles Vidor, 1943–44; military service, made propaganda films, 1946–47; made cycle of Westerns for Ranown production company, 1956–60; left Hollywood to make documentary on matador Carlos Arruza, 1960; after many setbacks, returned to Hollywood, 1967. Films as Director: (as Oscar Boetticher) 1944 One Mysterious Night; The Missing Juror; Youth on Trial 1945 A Guy, a Gal and a Pal; Escape on the Fog 1946 The Fleet That Came to Stay (and other propaganda films) 1948 Assigned to Danger; Behind Locked Doors 1949 Black Midnight; Wolf Hunters 1950 Killer Shark (as Budd Boetticher) 1951 The Bullfighter and the Lady (+ co-story); The Sword of D’Artagnan; The Cimarron Kid 1952 Bronco Buster; Red Ball Express; Horizons West 1953 City beneath the Sea; Seminole; The Man from the Alamo; Wings of the Hawk; East of Sumatra 1955 The Magnificent Matador (+ story); The Killer Is Loose 1956 Seven Men from Now 1957 The Tall T; Decision at Sundown 1958 Buchanan Rides Alone 1959 Ride Lonesome (+ pr); Westbound 1960 Comanche Station; The Rise and Fall of Legs Diamond 1971 Arruza (+ pr, co-sc; production completed 1968); A Time for Dying (+ sc; production completed 1969) 1985 My Kingdom for. . . (+ sc) Other Films: 1970 Two Mules for Sister Sara (Siegel) (sc) 1988 Tequila Sunrise (Towne) (ro as Judge Nizetitch) 1996 Los A?os Arruza (Maille) (role) 1997 Big Guns Talk: The Story of the Westerns (Morris—for TV) (as interviewee) Publications By BOETTICHER: book— When in Disgrace, New York, 1971. By BOETTICHER: articles— Interview with Bertrand Tavernier, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July 1964. Interviews with Michel Ciment and others, in Positif (Paris), Novem- ber 1969. Interview, in The Director’s Event by Eric Sherman and Martin Rubin, New York, 1970. Interview with O. Assayas and B. Krohn, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1982. ‘‘The Bullfighter and the Director,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1985. ‘‘A la rencontre de Budd Boetticher,’’ an interview with B. Tavernier, in Positif (Paris), July-August 1991. ‘‘Rencontre avec Budd Boetticher,’’ an interview with C. Anger, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1996. ‘‘Budd Boetticher: le dermier des géants,’’ an interview with Gérard Camy and Roland Hélié, in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), May-June 1998. Interview with Jean-Loup Bourget and Christian Viviani, in Positif (Paris), July-August 1998. On BOETTICHER: books— Kitses, Jim, Horizons West, Bloomington, Indiana, 1969. Kitses, Jim, editor, Budd Boetticher: The Western, London, 1969. Buscombe, Ed, editor, BFI Companion to the Western, London, 1988. Budd Boetticher, Madrid (La Filmoteca Espanola), n.d. On BOETTICHER: articles— ‘‘The Director and the Public: a Symposium,’’ in Film Culture (New York), March/April 1955. ‘‘Un Western exemplaire,’’ in Qu’est-ce que le cinéma by André Bazin, Paris, 1961. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Esoterica,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Schmidt, Eckhart, ‘‘B.B. wie Budd Boetticher,’’ in Film (Germany), October/November 1964. Russell, Lee, ‘‘Budd Boetticher,’’ in New Left Review, July/Au- gust 1965. Coonradt, P., ‘‘Boetticher Returns,’’ in Cinema (Los Angeles), December 1968. Wicking, Christopher, ‘‘Budd Boetticher,’’ in Screen (London), July/ October 1969. Sequin, Louis, ‘‘Deu Westerns d’Oscar ‘Budd’ Boetticher,’’ in Positif (Paris), November 1969. Schrader, Paul, ‘‘Budd Boetticher: A Case Study in Criticism,’’ in Cinema (Los Angeles), Fall 1970. Millar, Gavin, ‘‘Boetticher’s Westerns,’’ in Listener (London), 6 Oc- tober 1983. Hollywood Reporter, 2 July 1984. Krohn, B., ‘‘Le retour de Budd Boetticher,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1987. Krohn, B., ‘‘Nouvelles de Budd Boetticher,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1991. Arnez, Nicholas, ‘‘Westerns (part two),’’ in Films in Review (New York), January-February 1995. *** Budd Boetticher will be remembered as a director of Westerns, although his bullfight films have their fervent admirers, as does his Scarface-variant, The Rise and Fall of Legs Diamond. Since Boetticher’s Westerns are so variable in quality, it is tempting to overcredit Burt Kennedy, the scriptwriter for all of the finest. But Kennedy’s own efforts as director (Return of the Seven, Hannie Caulder, The War Wagon, etc.) are tediously paced dramas or failed BOGDANOVICH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 108 comedies. Clearly the Boetticher/Kennedy team clicked to make Westerns significantly superior to what either could create on their own. Indeed, The Tall T, Seven Men from Now, and (on a slightly lower level) Ride Lonesome look now like the finest work in the genre during the 1950s, less pretentious and more tightly controlled than even those of Anthony Mann or John Ford. Jim Kitses’s still-essential Horizons West rightly locates Boetticher’s significant Westerns in the ‘‘Ranown’’ cycle (a production company name taken from producer Harry Joe Brown and his partner Randolph Scott). But the non-Kennedy entries in the cycle have, despite Scott’s key presence, only passing interest. One might have attributed the black comedy in the series to Kennedy without the burlesque Bu- chanan Rides Alone, which wanders into an episodic narrative opposite to the taut, unified action of the others; Decision at Sundown is notable only for its remarkably bitter finale and a morally pointless showdown, as if it were a cynic’s answer to High Noon. The Tall T’s narrative is typical of the best Boetticher/Kennedy: it moves from a humanizing comedy so rare in the genre into a harsh and convincing savagery. Boetticher’s villains are relentlessly cruel, yet morally shaded. In The Tall T, he toys with the redeemable qualities of Richard Boone, while deftly characterizing the other two (Henry Silva asks, ‘‘I’ve never shot me a woman, have I Frank?’’). Equally memorable are Lee Marvin (in Seven Men from Now) and Lee Van Cleef (Ride Lonesome). Randolph Scott is the third essential collaborator in the cycle. He is generally presented by Boetticher as a loner not by principle or habit but by an obscure terror in his past (often a wife murdered). Thus, he’s not an asexual cowpoke so much as one who, temporarily at least, is beyond fears and yearnings. There’s a Pinteresque sexual confrontation in Seven Men from Now among Scott, a pioneer couple, and an insinuating Lee Marvin when the four are confined in a wagon. And, indeed, the typical Boetticher landscape—smooth, rounded, and yet impassible boulders—match Scott’s deceptively complex charac- ter as much as the majestic Monument Valley towers match Wayne in Ford’s Westerns, or the harsh cliffs match James Stewart in Mann’s. Clearly the Westerns of the sixties and seventies owe more to Boetticher than Ford. Even such very minor works as Horizons West, The Wings of the Hawk, and The Man from the Alamo have the tensions of Spaghetti Westerns (without the iciness), as well as the Peckinpah fantasy of American expertise combining with Mexican peasant vitality. If Peckinpah and Leone are the masters of the post- ‘‘classic’’ Western, then it’s worth noting how The Wings of the Hawk anticipates The Wild Bunch, and how Once upon a Time in the West opens like Seven Men from Now and closes like Ride Lonesome. Boetticher’s films are the final great achievement of the traditional Western, before the explosion of the genre. —Scott Simmon BOGDANOVICH, Peter Nationality: American. Born: Kingston, New York, 30 July 1939. Education: Collegiate School, New York; studied acting at Stella Adler’s Theatre Studio. Family: Married 1) Polly Platt, 1962 (di- vorced 1970), two daughters; 2) Cybill Shepherd; 3) Louise Stratten (Hoogstraten), 1988, sister of murdered former lover Dorothy Stratten. Career: Actor in American and New York Shakespeare Festivals, 1956–58; first play as producer, The Big Knife, off-Broadway, 1959; film critic for Esquire, New York Times, and Cahiers du Cinéma, among others, from 1961; moved to Hollywood, 1964; 2nd unit director on The Wild Angels (Corman), 1966; directed first film, Targets (produced by Corman), 1968; Paramount formed and fi- nanced The Directors Company, independent unit partnership of Bogdanovich, Francis Ford Coppola, and William Friedkin, 1973; formed Copa de Oro production company, 1975; owner, Crescent Moon Productions, Inc., from 1986. Awards: New York Film Critics Award and British Academy Award for Best Screenplay, for The Last Picture Show, 1971; Writer’s Guild of America Award for Best Screenplay, for What’s up, Doc?, 1972; Critics Prize, Venice Festi- val, for Saint Jack, 1979. Address: c/o William Peiffer, 2040 Avenue of the Stars, Century City, CA 90067, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1967 Targets (+ co-sc, pr, ed, role as Sammy Michaels) 1971 Directed by John Ford (+ sc); The Last Picture Show (+ co-sc) 1972 What’s up, Doc? (+ pr, co-sc) 1973 Paper Moon (+ pr) 1974 Daisy Miller (+ pr) 1975 At Long Last Love (+ pr, sc, co-songwriter: ‘‘Poor Young Millionaire’’) 1976 Nickelodeon (+ co-sc) 1979 Saint Jack (+ co-sc, role as Eddie Schuman) 1983 They All Laughed (+ sc) 1984 Mask 1987 Illegally Yours 1990 Texasville 1992 Noises Off (+ exec pr) 1993 The Thing Called Love; Fallen Angels (series for TV) 1996 To Sir with Love 2 (for TV) 1997 Rescuers: Stories of Courage: Two Women (for TV); The Price of Heaven (for TV) 1998 Naked City: A Killer Christmas (for TV) 1999 A Saintly Switch (for TV) Other Films: 1966 The Wild Angels (Corman) (co-sc, 2nd unit d, all uncredited, + bit role, voice); Voyage to the Planet of the Prehistoric Women (Gill-Women of Venus) (from Russian science- fiction film by Pavel Klushantsev, Planeta Burg [Cosmo- nauts on Venus; Storm Clouds of Venus], dubbed and re- edited for American Int’l Pictures) (supervising ed, d of add’l scenes under pseudonym Derek Thomas and/or Peter Stewart) 1967 The Trip (Corman) (role) 1969 Lion’s Love (Varda) (guest star role) 1970 The Other Side of the Wind (Welles, unreleased) (role as Higgam) 1973 F for Fake (Welles) (voice-over) 1975 Diaries, Notes & Sketches volume 1, reels 1–6: Lost Lost Lost (Jonas Mekas) (appearance in reel 3); The Gentleman Tramp (Patterson) (‘‘special thanks’’ credit for supervising scenes shot at Charles Chaplin’s home in Switzerland) BOGDANOVICHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 109 Peter Bogdanovich 1978 Opening Night (Cassavetes) (guest star role) 1996 Who Is Henry Jaglom? (Rubin, Workman—doc) 1996 The Battle over Citizen Kane (Epstein, Lennon—doc); Ben Johnson: Third Cowboy on the Right (Thurman) (as himself) 1997 Mr. Jealousy (Baumbach) (ro as Dr. Poke); Highball (Baumbach); Bella Mafia (Greene—mini for TV) 1998 54 (Christopher) (ro as Elaine’s Patron) 1999 The Shoe Store (Proto) (as himself); Hitchcock: Shadow of a Genius (Haimes—for TV) (as himself); Coming Soon (Burson); Claire Makes It Big (Workman) (ro as Arturo Mulligan) 2000 Rated X (Estevez) (ro as Film Professor); The Independent (Kessler) (ro as himself) Publications By BOGDANOVICH: books— The Cinema of Orson Welles, New York, 1961. The Cinema of Howard Hawks, New York, 1962. The Cinema of Alfred Hitchcock, New York, 1963. Fritz Lang in America, New York, 1967; revised edition, 1981. John Ford, Berkeley, California, 1968; revised edition, 1978. Alan Dwan: The Last Pioneer, New York, 1971; revised edition, 1981. Pieces of Time, New York, 1973; revised, as Pieces of Time: Peter Bogdanovich on the Movies 1961–85, New York, 1985. The Killing of the Unicorn: Dorothy Stratten (1960–1980), New York, 1984. This Is Orson Welles, New York, 1992. Who the Devil Made It: Conversations with Legendary Film Direc- tors, Ballantine, 1998. Peter Bogdanovich’s Movie of the Week: 52 Classic Films for One Full Year, Ballantine, 1999. The Best American Movie Writing 1999, edited by Peter Bogdanovich and Jason Shinder, Griffin Trade Paperback, 1999. By BOGDANOVICH: articles— ‘‘Bogie in Excelsis,’’ in Esquire (New York), September 1964. ‘‘Go-Go and Hurry: It’s Later than You Think,’’ in Esquire (New York), February 1965. BOGDANOVICH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 110 ‘‘Th’ Respawnsibility of Bein’ J . . . Jimmy Stewart. Gosh!,’’ in Esquire (New York), July 1966. ‘‘Godard in Hollywood,’’ in Take One (Montreal), June 1968. ‘‘Targets,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1969/70. ‘‘Inter/View with Peter Bogdanovich,’’ with G. O’Brien and R. Feiden, in Inter/View (New York), March 1972. ‘‘Without a Dinosaur,’’ interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), June 1972. ‘‘Peter Bogdanovich on Paper Moon,’’ interview with D. Lyons and others, in Interview (New York), July 1973. ‘‘Cybill and Peter,’’ interview with Andy Warhol and others, in Inter/ View (New York), June 1974. ‘‘Polly Platt: Sets the Style,’’ interview with M. McAndrew, in Cinema (Beverly Hills), no. 35, 1976. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in American Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), December/January 1978/79. Interview with O. Assayas and B. Krohn, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1982. Interview with Thomas J. Harris, in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salis- bury, Maryland), vol. 16, no. 4, 1988. Interview with P. Kremski, in Filmbulletin (Winterthur), vol. 37, no. 1, 1995. On BOGDANOVICH: books— Sherman, Eric, and Martin Rubin, The Director’s Event, New York, 1970. Giacci, V., Bogdanovich, Florence, 1975. Tuska, Jon, editor, Close-Up: The Contemporary Director, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1981. Harris, Thomas J., Bogdanovich’s Picture Shows, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1990. Yule, Andrew, Picture Shows: The Life and Films of Peter Bogdanovich, New York, 1992. On BOGDANOVICH: articles— Houston, Penelope, ‘‘Hitchcockery,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1968. Patterson, R., ‘‘Directed by John Ford: Producing a Compilation Documentary,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), November 1971. Rainer, P., ‘‘Bogged Down: A Twitch in the Auteur Niche,’’ in Film Critic (New York), September/October 1972. Kasindorf, Martin, ‘‘Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), July/August 1973. Starr, Cecile, ‘‘Peter Bogdanovich Remembered and Assessed,’’ in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), Septem- ber 1973. Dawson, Jan, ‘‘The Continental Divide,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Winter 1973/74. Fieschi, J., ‘‘Dossier Hollywood ‘79: Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), March 1979. Buckley, T., ‘‘How Bogdanovich Learned to Think Small Again,’’ in New York Times, 20 April 1979. Le Fanu, Mark, ‘‘Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in Films and Filming (Lon- don), August 1984. de Waal, F., ‘‘In Memoriam Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in Skoop (Amster- dam), May 1985. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in American Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), June 1986. Harrison, B. G., ‘‘Peter Bogdanovich Comes Back from the Dead,’’ in Esquire, August 1990. ‘‘Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in CinemAction! (Toronto), January 1992. Schwager, J., ‘‘The Trick of It,’’ in Boxoffice (Chicago), Janu- ary 1992. McKibbins, A., ‘‘Bogdanovich Looks at the Past through the Pres- ent,’’ in Filmnews, vol. 22, no. 3, 1992. White, A., ‘‘Directed by Peter Bogdanovich,’’ in Film Comment, March/April 1993. Gariazzo, G., ‘‘Bogdanovich inedito,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), September 1994. Birman, B., ‘‘Interpreting Henry James: Bogdanovich’s Daisy Miller,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), October 1994. Atkinson, A., ‘‘Armed (with Camera) & Dangerous,’’ in Movieline (Escondido), August 1995. *** Of all trades ancillary to the cinema, few offer worse preparation for a directing career than criticism. Bogdanovich’s background as Hollywood historian and profiler of its legendary figures inevitably invited comparisons between his movies and those of directors like Ford, Hawks, and Dwan, whom he had deified. That he should have occasionally created films which deserve such comparison argues for his skill and resilience. He first attracted attention with Targets, a flashy exercise with an ailing Karloff playing straight man to Bogdanovich’s film-buff director and a psychotic sniper menacing the audience at a drive-in cinema. The documentary Directed by John Ford likewise exploited Hollywood history, but with uncertain scholarship and even less certain taste. Yet in his first major fiction feature, based on Larry McMurtry’s rural nocturne The Last Picture Show, Bogdanovich created a precise and moving chronicle of small-town values eroded by selfishness and disloyalty. He also showed a flair for casting in his choice of underrated veterans and fresh newcomers. Ben Johnson, Cloris Leachman, and Ellen Burstyn earned new respect, while Timothy Bottoms, Jeff Bridges, and Cybill Shepherd received boosts to nascent careers—though Shepherd, via her relationship with the director, was to prove a troublesome protegée. What’s up, Doc? and Paper Moon are among the shapeliest comedies of the 1970s, trading on nostalgia but undercutting it with sly character-playing and dead-pan wit. Ryan and Tatum O’Neal achieve a stylish ensemble performance in the latter as 1930s con- man and unwanted orphan auxiliary; in the former, O’Neal makes a creditable attempt at playing Cary Grant to Barbra Streisand’s Hepburn, backed up by a typically rich character cast—notably Austin Pendleton, Kenneth Mars, and the ululating Madeline Kahn. Daisy Miller, a period vehicle for Shepherd more redolent of Henry King than Henry James, inaugurated Bogdanovich’s decline. An attempt at a 1930s Cole Porter musical, At Long Last Love likewise flopped, as did Nickelodeon, an unexpectedly leaden tribute to pioneer moviemaking. He returned to form with a low-budget adaptation of Paul Theroux’s Saint Jack, dignified by Ben Gazzara’s performance as the ironic man of honor coping with Occidental venality and Asian corruption. And the Manhattan comedy They All BOORMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 111 Laughed, though widely disliked, showed a truer synthesis of screw- ball humour and sentimentality than other equivalent films, and marked a return by Bogdanovich to the spirit of the classical directors he admires. Bogdanovich worked little in the 1980s, apparently traumatised by the murder of his lover Dorothy Stratten shortly after her acting debut in They All Laughed. At decade’s end, in a twin return to his roots that offered some hope for his future, he married Stratten’s sister and directed Texasville, a Last Picture Show sequel with many of the original cast. Texasville, like most sequels, fails because what made the original interesting and valuable cannot be repeated. Like Bogdanovich himself, then at the beginning of his career, the characters in The Last Picture Show were embarked, with tragi-comic results, on the painful journey into adulthood; the loss of childhood certainties was mirrored by the film’s detailed mise-en-scène, a small Texas town that loses its heart and soul when a benevolent patriarch dies suddenly. Grown up, they are no longer connected by the irresistible force of adolescence, and Bogdanovich’s film—though based on novelist Larry McMurtry’s often poignant continuation—wanders in search of a plot, boring the spectator with childish antics meant to signify the onset of a collective life crisis. The story goes on, but without much interest or direction. Much the same might be said of his career in the 1990s, which has continued but not prospered. The Thing Called Love tries to recapture Bogdanovich’s earlier success with coming-of-age stories (not only The Last Picture Show but also Paper Moon). However, this overly predictable and slow-moving saga of young adults trying to make it big in the highly competitive world of country music deservedly failed to find much of an audience. Noises Off, based on Michael Frayn’s hugely successful play, has moments that recall Bogdanovich’s earlier success with fast-paced farce (the delightful What’s up, Doc?), but lacks a firm sense of directorial control; a fine cast—including Michael Caine and Carol Burnett—never becomes an effective ensemble, and the film’s only virtues derive from Frayn’s play, whose commercial productions are far superior to this screen version. —John Baxter, updated by R. Barton Palmer BOORMAN, John Nationality: British. Born: Shepperton, Middlesex, 18 January 1933. Education: Salesian College. Military Service: Sergeant in British Army, 1951–53. Family: Married Christel Kruse, 1957, one son (actor Charley Boorman), three daughters. Career: Film critic for BBC Radio and for Manchester Guardian, 1950–54; film editor, Independent Television News, 1955–58; head of documentaries, BBC Television, 1960–64; directed first feature, Catch Us If You Can, 1965; moved to United States to make Point Blank, 1967; chairor, National Film Studios of Ireland, 1975–85; governor, British Film institute, from 1985; founder and co-editor of Projections, published annually in London since 1992. Awards: Best Director Award, Cannes Festival, for Leo the Last, 1970; Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et Lettres, 1985; New York Film Critics Circle Awards for Best Director and Best Screenplay, for Hope and Glory, 1987; Cannes Film Festival Best Director, London Critics Circle ALFS Award for British Director of the Year and Lifetime Achievement Award, Ft. Lauderdale (USA) International Film Festival Jury Award, Evening Standard British Film Award, and Boston Society of Films Critics Best Director Award, all for The General, 1998. Agent: Edgar Gross, International Business Management, 1801 Century Park E., Suite 1132, Los Angeles, CA 90067, U.S.A. Address: The Glebe, Annamoe, County Wicklow, Ireland. Films as Director: 1965 Catch Us If You Can (Having a Wild Weekend) 1967 Point Blank 1968 Hell in the Pacific 1970 Leo the Last (+ sc) 1972 Deliverance (+ pr) 1973 Zardoz (+ sc, pr) 1977 Exorcist II: The Heretic (+ pr) 1981 Excalibur (+ pr, co-sc) 1985 The Emerald Forest (+ pr) 1987 Hope and Glory (+ pr, sc) 1990 Where the Heart Is (+ sc, pr) 1991 I Dreamt I Woke Up (+ role) 1995 Two Nudes Bathing (+ sc, pr); Beyond Rangoon (+ pr); Lumière et compagnie (Lumière and Company) (contribu- tor of short piece) 1998 The General (I Once Had a Life) (pr, sc) Other Films: 1976 Target of an Assassin (The Long Shot) (role) 1982 Dream One (pr) Publications By BOORMAN: books— Zardoz, London, 1983. Money into Light: The Emerald Forest: A Diary, London, 1985. Hope and Glory, London, 1987. The General, London, 1998. By BOORMAN: articles— ‘‘Playboy in a Monastery,’’ interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), February 1972. ‘‘Conversation with John Boorman,’’ with L. Strawn, in Action (Los Angeles), November/December 1972. ‘‘Zardoz,’’ interview with Philip Strick, in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Spring 1974. Interviews with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), March 1974 and February 1978. BOORMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 112 ‘‘Director John Boorman Talks about His Work,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), March 1975. Interview with J.-P. Le Pavec and D. Rabourdin, in Cinéma (Paris), March 1978. ‘‘The Sorcerer: John Boorman Interviewed,’’ by D. Yakir, in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1981. ‘‘The Technology of Style,’’ interview with J. Verniere, in Filmmakers Monthly (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), June 1981. ‘‘The World of King Arthur according to John Boorman,’’ an interview with H. Kennedy, in American Film (Washington, D.C.), March 1981. ‘‘Jungle John,’’ an interview with G. Fuller, in Stills (London), November 1985. ‘‘John Boorman en quête de mythologie,’’ an interview with C. Blanchet, in Cinéma (Paris), 19 February 1986. ‘‘Christopher Isherwood: Stranger in Paradise,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1986. Interview in Positif (Paris), November 1987. ‘‘Worshipping at the Shrine: Los Angeles in the Season of the Oscars,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1988. ‘‘Gardening and Parking,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1988. ‘‘Bohemian Rhapsody,’’ an interview with Brian Case, in Time Out (London), 1 August 1990. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), no. 355, 1990. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), no. 411, 1995. Interview with Gavin Smith, in Film Comment (New York), vol. 31, no. 4, 1995. Interview with Isabelle Danel, Fran?ois Gorin, and Marie-élisabeth, in Télérama (Paris), 24 May 1997. ‘‘Return to Zero: The General,’’ an interview with Philip Kemp and Xan Brooks, in Sight and Sound (London), June 1998. Interview with Alain Masson and Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), December 1998. On BOORMAN: books— Piccardi, Adriano, John Boorman, Florence, 1982. Holdstock, Robert, John Boorman’s ‘‘The Emerald Forest,” New York, 1985. Ciment, Michel, John Boorman, Paris, 1985; London, 1986. On BOORMAN: articles— Farber, Stephen, ‘‘The Writer in American Films,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1968. Brown, John, ‘‘Islands of the Mind,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1969/70. McGillivray, D., ‘‘John Boorman,’’ in Focus on Film (London), Autumn 1972. Dempsy, M., ‘‘Deliverance/Boorman: Dickey in the Woods,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), Spring 1973. Legrand, Gérard, ‘‘Hommage à Boorman,’’ in Positif (Paris), March 1974. Stair, Bill, ‘‘En travaillant avec Boorman,’’ in Positif (Paris), March 1974. McCarthy, T., ‘‘The Exorcism of The Heretic,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1977. ‘‘Exorcist II Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 Febru- ary 1978. Sineux, M., ‘‘Un Héraut de notre temps,’’ in Positif (Paris), Octo- ber 1981. ‘‘John Boorman Section’’ of Positif (Paris), July-August 1985. Comiskey, R., ‘‘Man, Myth, and Magic,’’ in Cinema Papers (Mel- bourne), November 1985. Camy, G., ‘‘John Boorman, l’enchanteur moraliste,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), November-December 1985. ‘‘John Boorman Section’’ of Positif (Paris), November 1987. Stanbrook, A., ‘‘Is God in Show Business Too?’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 4, 1990. Williams, L. R., ‘‘Blood Brothers,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 9, 1994. Thompson, David, ‘‘Follow the Money,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1995. Thompson, David, ‘‘As I Lay Dying,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), June 1998. *** ‘‘Film making is the process of turning money into light and then back into money again.’’ John Boorman’s neat epigram will probably haunt him for the rest of his filmmaking days, not simply because it is so tidy a formulation, but because the tensions it articulates have played such a prominent part in his own career. Boorman has always been much concerned with the look of his films. In both Deliverance and Point Blank (shot, incidentally, in exquisite ‘scope) he went to unusual lengths to control color tones; Zardoz and Exorcist II: The Heretic are remarkable for their pictorial inventiveness; the images of the Irish countryside in Excalibur and of the Brazilian rain forest in The Emerald Forest are carefully imbued with a luminous, almost magical quality; and the extraordinary street of housing built for Hope and Glory (one of the largest sets con- structed in Britain since the heyday of the studio system) speaks volumes for Boorman’s commitment to a cinema of distinctively visual qualities. Boorman has certainly proven himself able to turn money into light. Turning it back into money, however, has not always proved so easy, and the commercial weakness of Zardoz and the near total box- office disaster of Exorcist II were no help to him in trying to develop his ambitious projects of the 1980s. After all, an Irish-based adapta- tion of Malory’s Morte d’Arthur (Excalibur), a ‘‘green’’ allegory scheduled for location filming in South America (Emerald Forest), and an autobiographical evocation of his wartime childhood (Hope and Glory) are hardly the most obviously marketable ideas, even from a thoroughly bankable director. Yet sell them he did, and if The Emerald Forest doesn’t come off as well as either Excalibur or Hope and Glory, two out of three is no mean record for an independent- minded filmmaker with a taste for startling visuals and unusual stories. Boorman’s is a high-risk approach. When it goes wrong, it goes wrong with a vengeance, and both Exorcist II and The Emerald Forest sacrifice narrative conviction in the cause of pictorial splendor and some risible metaphysics. But when his approach goes right, the results are sufficient to justify his reputation as one of the most courageous and imaginative filmmakers still working in the commer- cial mainstream. BORDENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 113 At its best (in Point Blank, Deliverance, Excalibur, Hope and Glory, and The General) Boorman’s cinema is rich and subtle, his fascination with images matched by taut story-telling and a nice sense of the opacity of people’s motives, his characters constantly made aware of the complex and unanticipated consequences of their actions. In many of his films, strong-willed individualists find them- selves embroiled in a clash between established order and disorder, a context within which they appear as representative figures caught up in near mythical confrontations. In Hell in the Pacific, for instance, Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune play two enemy soldiers stranded on an island. As they continue to conduct the war their roles become emblematic, and they play out the tensions between conditioned aggression and common humanity. In Point Blank, perhaps Boorman’s most elegantly realized film, the force for disorder is Walker (Lee Marvin), a man obsessed by what he considers to be his just desserts. Double-crossed in a robbery, he wants only his share of the spoils, a goal he pursues step by step up the hierarchy of a criminal syndicate. The film leaves us little choice but to identify with Walker who is, like Sean Connery in Zardoz, an absolute individualist, a man who cannot be restrained by the hierar- chical order on which he impinges so forcefully. Yet Point Blank somehow transcends the conventional morality of assertive individualism. Walker is ruthless and violent, certainly, but it is his symbolic force to which we respond. The movie creates a paradox in which this unlovely figure comes to represent a more human spirit than that embodied in the syndicate’s bureaucratic order. As ever, Boorman provides no easy solutions. After much death and violence it emerges that Walker, too, has been manipulated. Sharing his perspective as we do, we are left with a pervasive sense of impotence in the face of larger impersonal forces. Deliverance, too, shows us order and certainty revealed as precari- ous fabrications. It concerns four men on a canoe trip through the wilderness who are forced to recognize that their ideas about morality and their belief in the social niceties are ineffectual constructs in the face of adverse and unintelligible circumstances. After killing a man who had buggered one of their party at gunpoint, they find that the action leads them down a path of lies and death. ‘‘There’s no end to it,’’ one character observes, close to despair. Excalibur, perhaps inevitably given its source in Arthurian myth, tells of the imposition of order onto chaos and of the terrible price to be paid when that order is not firmly based. Human frailty destroys Camelot when Arthur finds Guinevere and Lancelot asleep together in the forest; in another of Boorman’s inspired cinematic images, Arthur plunges the sword Excalibur into the ground between them. The despairing Guinevere is left curled naked around the sword while the land falls into pestilence and war. In these three films Boorman ensures that we appreciate how difficult it is to make judgments of good and evil, how tangled the threads of motivation can be, a concern which also informs his later expeditions into apparently more ‘‘political’’ topics in Beyond Rangoon and The General. But he does so not only as a pessimistic observer of human failings; he also has hope. There is a lovely scene in Hope and Glory, his most romantic of films, when young Bill (Boorman himself, for the film is autobiographical) has the ‘‘googly’’ explained to him by his father. When he realises what it involves (bowling a cricket ball so that it turns one way but with a bowling action which suggests that it will turn in the opposite direction) he is both horrified and fascinated. ‘‘That’s like telling fibs,’’ he says, a child’s term for lying which is as accurate to the period as it is precise in its childish evocation of acceptable untruth. In Bill’s (and Boorman’s) world, people are forever telling fibs; like the googly, things are not always what they seem. But, also like the googly, that complexity can be a matter as much for celebration as for concern. —Andrew Tudor BORDEN, Lizzie Nationality: American. Born: Detroit, 3 February 1958. Education: B.F.A., Wellesley College. Career: 1973–75—after college gradua- tion, wrote art criticism for several journals before deciding on a career in film; 1988—directed Monsters television series. Address: c/o Weissman and Wolff, 9665 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1983 Born in Flames (+ pr) 1986 Working Girls (+ pr, sc) 1991 Love Crimes (+pr) Lizzie Borden BORDEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 114 1992 Inside Out 1994 ‘‘Let’s Talk about Sex’’ segment of Erotique (+sc) 1996 ‘‘Bad Girl’’ episode of Alex Mack (for TV) Publications By BORDEN: articles— ‘‘Lizzie Borden: Artist and Art Critic,’’ interview with Ariel Bock, Marion Cajori, and Kathleen Mooney, in Interviews with Women in the Arts (New York), Part 1, 1974. ‘‘An Interview with Filmmaker Lizzie Borden,’’ interview with Anne Friedberg, in Women and Performance (New York), 1984. ‘‘Labor Relations,’’ interview with Lynne Jackson, in Cineaste (New York), 1987. ‘‘Interview with Lizzie Borden,’’ interview with Scott MacDonald, in Feminist Studies (New York), Summer, 1989. On BORDEN: books— Todd, Janet, Women and Film, New York, 1988. MacDonald, Scott, A Critical Cinema 2: Interviews with Independent Filmmakers, Berkeley, California, 1992. Cole, Janis, and Holly Dale, Calling the Shots: Profiles of Women Filmmakers, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 1993. On BORDEN: articles— Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Born in Flames: Radical Feminist Ideas,’’ in New York Times, 10 November 1983. Hall, Carla, ‘‘Shadows & Art at the Fringe: Lizzie Borden and Her Unconventional Working Girls,’’ in Washington Post, 22 March 1987. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Trying to Set a Trap for a Serial Rapist,’’ in New York Times, 26 January 1992. Thomas, Kevin, ‘‘Erotique: Sexy Tales from Three Female Filmmakers,’’ in Los Angeles Times, 20 January 1995. *** While growing up in Detroit, Linda Elizabeth Borden got used to being called ‘‘Lizzie’’ by her friends, in reference to the alleged ax- murderer of nineteenth-century Massachusetts. When, as a young adult, she decided on a career in film, Borden concluded that adopting the infamous nickname would help her to be noticed. She need not have worried—Lizzie Borden’s efforts as a screenwriter, producer, and director have brought her considerable attention, and no small amount of acclaim. Borden’s first film was Born in Flames, which was, literally, years in the making. For a novice filmmaker like Borden, raising money posed a serious problem, and her best efforts resulted in her film being made on a shoestring budget of only $30,000. Born in Flames was finally finished in 1983, with Borden serving as director, producer, and screenwriter—although the script was revised in collaboration with the actors (nonprofessionals all) who appeared in the film. Born in Flames takes place in the near future, ten years after a socialist revolution has swept America. But what was promised to be a utopia of gender equality and inclusion has started to revert to the old formula of male supremacy. In response, groups of women come together to resist the new brand of oppression. Although the women learn to work together, the film does not homogenize them by ignoring differences in race, class, or sexual orientation. The rebel women do not achieve unity by sublimating their differences, but by acknowledging them and forging cooperation in the heat of their own passions. Born in Flames became an immediate feminist classic, although not all feminists appreciated the implicit criticisms (such as elitism and insensitivity) that Borden levels at the women’s move- ment through her film. Three years later saw the release of Working Girls, Borden’s unsentimental look at prostitution. Shot in pseudo-documentary style, the film follows one group of ‘‘working girls’’ as they put in a long (18 hours) shift at the Midtown Manhattan condo that serves as a bordello. One might expect a feminist’s film about prostitution to be a strident denunciation of the ‘‘profession’’ and the exploitative patriarchy that evokes it, but Borden’s message is more complex. While working on the script, she spent considerable time with members of COYOTE (Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics), an organiza- tion of current and former prostitutes who lobby on behalf of the oldest profession and its practitioners. These contacts influenced Borden’s perspective in a major way. Borden does not glamorize prostitution—her film is not remotely like Pretty Woman—but neither is it a feminist jeremiad. The title that Borden chose is revealing. Working Girls portrays prostitution as a job—often tedious, sometimes depressing, occasionally interesting or funny. The main character, Molly, has a degree from Yale and is a lesbian in her private life. The other ‘‘girls’’ in the film also fail to conform to Hollywood stereotypes. Lizzie Borden’s next film, Love Crimes, was both her most ‘‘mainstream,’’ and, for many critics, her least successful. Miramax Films gave Borden a bigger budget (about $7 million) than she had ever worked with before, but also took away much of Borden’s control over the final product. The studio even cut out the ending that Borden shot, and substituted its own. The plot of Love Crimes concerns a female assistant district attorney (played by Sean Young) who goes after a male photographer who pressures unsuspecting young women into posing for sexually explicit photos, then uses the pictures as leverage to extort sexual favors. After her sister falls victim to this ploy, Young’s character goes under cover to trap this rapist, but finds herself responding sexually to the man’s personality. The film raises interesting questions about pornography, voyeurism, and sexual dominance/submission, but ultimately answers none of them. In the end, the film proved too ‘‘kinky’’ for mainstream audiences, but too conventional for Borden’s usual fans. Her next project after Love Crimes was ‘‘Let’s Talk about Sex,’’ a segment of the 1994 anthology film Erotique, which finds a female phone-sex operator developing a fascination for her most regular customer; she eventually decides to extend the relationship beyond the telephone. More recently, Borden has directed television episodes for such pay-TV venues as Showtime and the Playboy Channel. —Justin Gustainis BORZAGEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 115 BORZAGE, Frank Nationality: American. Born: Salt Lake City, Utah, 23 April 1893. Family: Married 1) Rena Rogers (divorced 1945); 2) Edna Marie Stillwell, 1945 (divorced 1949); 3) Juanita Borzage. Career: Joined theatrical touring company as prop boy, 1906; moved to California, 1912; actor in many Ince Westerns and Mutual Comedies, 1913–15; began directing for Universal, 1916; signed to MGM, 1935–42; joined Republic Pictures as producer-director, 1945. Awards: Oscars for Best Director, for Seventh Heaven, 1927/28, and Bad Girls, 1931/ 32. Died: Of cancer in Los Angeles, 19 June 1962. Films as Director: 1916 That Gal of Burke’s (+ role); Mammy’s Rose (co-d, role); Life’s Harmony (co-d, role); The Silken Spider (+ role); The Code of Honor (+ role); Nell Dale’s Men Folks (+ role); The Forgotten Prayer (+ role); The Courtin’ of Calliope Clew (+ role); Nugget Jim’s Pardner (+ role); The Demon of Fear (+ role); Land o’ Lizards (Silent Shelby) (+ role); Immedi- ate Lee (Hair Trigger Casey) (+ role); Enchantment (+ sc, role); The Pride and the Man (+ sc, role); Dollars of Dross (+ sc) 1917 Wee Lady Betty (co-d, role); Flying Colors; Until They Get Me 1918 The Atom (+ role); The Gun Woman (+ role); Shoes That Danced; Innocent’s Progress; An Honest Man; Society for Frank Borzage Sale; Who Is to Blame?; The Ghost Flower; The Curse of Iku (+ role) 1919 Toton; Prudence of Broadway; Whom the Gods Destroy; Ashes of Desire 1920 Humoresque 1921 The Duke of Chimney Butte; Get-Rich-Quick Wallingford 1922 Back Pay; Billy Jim; The Good Provider; Hair Trigger Casey (re-ed version); Silent Shelby (reissue of Land o’Lizards); The Valley of Silent Men; The Pride of Palomar 1923 The Nth Commandment; Children of the Dust; Age of Desire 1924 Secrets 1925 The Lady; Daddy’s Gone A-Hunting; Lazybones; Wages for Wives; The Circle 1926 The First Year; The Dixie Merchant; Early to Wed; Marriage License? 1927 Seventh Heaven 1928 Street Angel 1929 The River; Lucky Star; They Had to See Paris 1930 Son o’ My Heart; Liliom 1931 Doctors’ Wives; Young as You Feel; Bad Girl 1932 After Tomorrow; Young America; A Farewell to Arms 1933 Secrets (remake of 1924 film); Man’s Castle 1934 No Greater Glory; Little Man What Now? (+ pr); Flirtation Walk (+ pr) 1935 Living on Velvet; Stranded; Shipmates Forever 1936 Desire; Hearts Divided 1937 Green Light; History Is Made at Night; Big City 1938 Mannequin; Three Comrades; The Shining Hour 1939 Disputed Passage (+ co-pr) 1940 Strange Cargo; The Mortal Storm (+ co-pr) 1941 Flight Command; Smilin’ Through 1942 The Vanishing Virginian; Seven Sweethearts 1943 Stage Door Canteen; His Butler’s Sister (+ co-pr) 1944 Till We Meet Again (+ pr) 1945 The Spanish Main 1946 I’ve Always Loved You (+ pr); Magnificent Doll 1947 That’s My Man (+ pr) 1948 Moonrise 1958 China Doll (+ pr) 1959 The Big Fisherman Publications By BORZAGE: articles— Article in Motion Picture Directing: The Facts and Theories of the Newest Art, by Peter Milne, New York, 1922. Interview with V. Tully, in Vanity Fair (New York), February 1927. ‘‘What’s Wrong with the Movies?,’’ in Motion Picture (New York), September 1933. On BORZAGE: books— Kyrou, Ado, Amour, éroticisme et cinéma, Paris, 1957. Belton, John, The Hollywood Professionals Vol.3, New York, 1974. BOULTING DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 116 Lamster, Frederick, Souls Made Great through Love and Adversity: The Film Work of Frank Borzage, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1981. Belton, John, Cinema Stylists, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1983. Dumont, Hervé, Frank Borzage: Sarastro à Hollywood, Paris, 1993. On BORZAGE: articles— Agel, Henri, ‘‘Frank Borzage,’’ in New York Film Bulletin, no. 12–14, 1961. Obituary in New York Times, 20 June 1962. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Second Line,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Belton, John, ‘‘Souls Made Great by Love and Adversity: Frank Borzage,’’ in Monogram (London), no. 4, 1972. Beylie, Claude, ‘‘Sur cinq films de Frank Borzage,’’ in Ecran (Paris), September 1976. Camper, Fred, ‘‘Disputed Passage,’’ in Cinema (London), v. 9, no. 10. Toulet, E., and Michel Ciment, ‘‘Avignon 1986: Panoramique du cinéma 1915–1920. Ford et Borzage,’’ in Positif (Paris), Septem- ber 1987. Bourget, J.-L., ‘‘L’or et l’amour,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 344, Octo- ber 1989. Hommel, M., ‘‘De ziel van Hollywood,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), no. 180, October-November 1991. Griffithiana (Gemona), no. 46, December 1992. Gunning, T., ‘‘Essays in Mad Love,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 3, January 1993. Tobin, Y. and others, ‘‘Frank Borzage,’’ in Positif (Paris), special section, no. 386, April 1993. Katchmer, G., ‘‘Remembering the Great Silents,’’ in Classic Images (Muscatine), no. 220, October 1993. Landrot, Marine, ‘‘Le septième art au septième ciel,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 24 November 1993. Jones, Kent, ‘‘The Sanctum Sanctorum of Love,’’ Film Comment (Denville, New Jersey), vol. 33, no. 5, September-October 1997. *** Frank Borzage had a rare gift of taking characters, even those who were children of violence, and fashioning a treatment of them abundant with lyrical romanticism and tenderness, even a spirituality that reformed them and their story. Borzage arrived in Hollywood in 1913, and Thomas H. Ince gave him his first small roles as a film actor, gradually promoting him to lead roles and providing him with his first opportunities to direct. He usually played the romantic lead in Westerns and romantic melodra- mas with such Triangle players as Sessue Hayakawa (The Typhoon and Wrath of the Gods, both 1914) and Olive Thomas (Toton, 1919). The first really important feature he directed was Humoresque, written by Frances Marion from a Fannie Hurst story. It had all the elements which were later to stamp a picture as a Borzage film— hope, love, and faith in oneself and others in a world that was poverty- stricken and could be cruel. It won Photoplay Magazine’s award as Best Picture of the year. Borzage insisted that ‘‘real art is simple, but simplicity requires the greatest art,’’ adding that ‘‘naturalness is the primary requisite of good acting. I like my players to perform as though there were no camera on the set.’’ Borzage did exceedingly well at Paramount’s Cosmopolitan and at First National, where he directed two Norma Talmadge favorites, Secrets and The Lady. He then moved over to Fox, where, with the 1927 release of Seventh Heaven, he established himself as one of the best in the business. He directed two others with Janet Gaynor and Charles Farrell, Street Angel and Lucky Star. His The River of 1928, starring Farrell, is a virtual cinematic poem. In 1929 Borzage directed his first all-talking feature, They Had to See Paris, which starred Will Rogers, Fox’s number one box-office star. The year 1933 was probably Borzage’s finest as a director, for he made three films which still rate as superb examples of the romantic cinema: A Farewell to Arms, from the Hemingway novel, with Gary Cooper and Helen Hayes; Mary Pickford’s final and very best film, a re-make of the silent-era Secrets, which had originally starred Norma Talmadge; and Man’s Castle, with Spencer Tracy and Loretta Young, a very moving romance. There was a lasting tenderness about Borzage’s treatment of a love story, and during the days of the Depression and the rise of Fascism, his pictures were ennobling melodramas about the power of love to create a heaven on earth. Penelope Gilliatt has remarked that Borzage ‘‘had a tenderness rare in melodrama and absolute pitch about period. He understood adversity.’’ Outside of Griffith, there has never been another director in the business who could so effectively triumph over sentimentality, using true sentiment with an honest touch. Borzage made four films with Margaret Sullavan that clearly indicated that she was the quintessential heroine for Borzage films: Little Man, What Now?, a study of love in the midst of deprivation and the growing terror in Germany; Three Comrades, in which Sullavan played an ill-fated tubercular wife; The Shining Hour, which featured her as a self-sacrificing woman; and The Mortal Storm, a moving film of the imminent battle with the Nazi forces. Borzage also directed three other films during this time of stress that were extraordinary departures for him: Desire, a sleek romance in the Lubitsch tradition, starring Marlene Dietrich and Gary Cooper; Mannequin, co-starring Joan Crawford with Spencer Tracy, one of their best; and a drama that combined romance with effective disaster, History Is Made at Night, with Jean Arthur and Charles Boyer as lovers trapped in a Titanic-like explosion of violence. While in the case of Desire Ernst Lubitsch was producer, the picture features touches that are just as indicative of Borzage as they are of Lubitsch, for both were masters of cinematic subtlety. In the post-war period, it began to be clear that Borzage’s career was on the wane. His best picture during this era was Moonrise. —DeWitt Bodeen BOULTING, Roy and John Nationality: British. Born: Twins, in Bray, Berkshire, 21 November 1913. Education: McGill University, Toronto. Career: John entered film industry as office boy, worked as salesman, publicity writer, and editor, mid-1930s; introduced by John, Roy began as assistant direc- tor; they founded Charter Films, 1937; John served in Film Unit of BOULTINGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 117 John (left) and Ray Boulting on the set of Heavens Above! Royal Air Force, Roy in British Army Film Unit, 1940–45; obtained leave at same time to make Thunder Rock, 1942; began series of comedies with Seagulls over Sorrento, 1954; both joined board of British Lion Film Corp. Died: John died in Sunningdale, Berkshire, 17 June 1985. Films with Roy as Director, John as Producer (though functions overlap): 1938 The Landlady; Ripe Earth; Seeing Stars; Consider Your Verdict 1939 Trunk Crime 1940 Inquest; Pastor Hall 1941 Dawn Guard 1942 Thunder Rock; They Serve Abroad 1943 Desert Victory 1944 Tunisian Victory (co-d) 1945 Burma Victory; Journey Together (John as d, Roy pr) 1947 Fame Is the Spur; Brighton Rock (Young Scarface) (John d and Roy pr) 1948 The Guinea Pig (The Outsider) (+ co-sc) 1950 Seven Days to Noon (John d and Roy pr) 1951 Singlehanded (Sailor of the King); High Treason (+ co-sc); The Magic Box (John d and Roy pr) 1954 Seagulls over Sorrento (Crest of the Wave) (Roy and John co-d and co-pr, sc) 1955 Josephine and Men 1956 Run for the Sun (+ co-sc); Private’s Progress (John d and Roy pr, co-sc) 1957 Brothers in Law (+ co-sc); Happy Is the Bride (+ co-sc); Lucky Jim (John d and Roy pr) 1959 Carlton-Browne of the F.O. (Man in a Cocked Hat) (co-d, co-sc); I’m All Right Jack (John d and Roy pr, co-sc) 1960 A French Mistress (+ co-sc); Suspect (The Risk) (Roy and John co-d and co-pr) 1963 Heavens Above! (John d and Roy pr, co-sc) 1965 Rotten to the Core (John d and Roy pr) 1966 The Family Way (+ co-adaptation) 1968 Twisted Nerve (+ co-sc) 1970 There’s a Girl in My Soup 1974 Soft Beds and Hard Battles (Undercovers Hero) (+ co-sc) BOULTING DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 118 1979 The Number 1979 The Last Word 1985 The Moving Finger (Roy as d) (for TV); Brothers-in-Law (Roy and John co-d) Publications By the BOULTINGS: articles— ‘‘Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered,’’ in Kine Weekly (London), 9 November 1950. ‘‘What Makes the British Laugh?,’’ an interview with John, in Films and Filming (London), February 1959. Interviews with John in Today’s Cinema (London), 21 April and 5 December 1969. ‘‘Who Dictates the Price of a Film,’’ by John in Today’s Cinema (London), 1 December 1970. ‘‘Getting It Together,’’ by Roy, in Films and Filming (London), February 1974. Interview with Roy in Photoplay Film Monthly (London), March 1974. ‘‘Flour Power,’’ by both in The Month in Yorkshire, March 1981. Letter signed by both in the Times (London), 10 April 1981. On the BOULTINGS: books— Durgnat, Raymond, A Mirror for England, London, 1970. Hill, John, Sex, Class, and Realism: British Cinema 1956–63, Lon- don, 1986. Murphy, Robert, Realism and Tinsel, London, 1989. On the BOULTINGS: articles— Watts, S., ‘‘The Boulting Twins,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1960. Sheed, W., ‘‘Pitfalls of Pratfalls: Boulting Brothers Comedies,’’ in Commonweal (New York), 5 July 1963. Film and TV Technician (London), March 1964. Lewin, David, ‘‘Why the Boultings Can Be Bastards,’’ in Today’s Cinema (London), 24 November 1970. Norman, Barry, ‘‘The Boultings: Fun at 60’’ in the Times (London), 26 January 1974. ‘‘The Boulting Brothers,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1974. Millar, Gavin, in Listener (London), 17 March 1983. ‘‘John Boulting,’’ in St. James Press Annual Obituary 1985, Lon- don, 1985. McCarthy, T., obituary of John Boulting, in Variety (New York), 26 June 1985. Tribute to John in Screen International (London), 29 June 1985. ‘‘A Celebration for the Life of John Boulting,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), September/October 1985. TV Times (London), 16 November 1985. *** The Boultings’ auteurial films (interspersed by potboilers, usually comic) outline a ‘‘pilgrim’s progress,’’ or regress, from a moral earnestness and puritan conscience to a sort of hilarious gloom about the State of England. Their first feature, Pastor Hall, was inspired by Martin Niemoller, the Nazi-defying German clergyman, via a play by ex-Expressionist Ernst Toller. With commentary by Eleanor Roose- velt added, it created a furor in isolationist America. Thunder Rock, adapted Robert Ardrey’s pro-interventionist dream-play, is still re- markable for its didactic strategies—more persuasive than Brecht’s— and its self-reflexivity à la Pirandello. After these calls to conscience came their war documentaries. Desert Victory, a compilation of newsreel footage and its famous ‘‘gunflash montage’’ of British artillery bombarding by night, won 10,000 bookings in U.S. theatres; its realism redirected U.S. propaganda strategies. Tunisian Victory was delayed by U.S. services’ haggling over duly proportionate representation and by Churchill’s wish to sit beside the moviola deciding the exact re-editing of its last shots. The Boultings’ next phase reflects the hopes, strains, and glooms of Austerity and the ‘‘Welfare Revolution.’’ Fame Is the Spur, an adaptation of Howard Spring’s best-seller, was inspired by Ramsay MacDonald’s evolution from Socialist firebrand to the Labour Party’s ‘‘Colonel Blimp.’’ The Guinea Pig depicted a working-class scholar- ship boy’s tribulations in an upper-crust school. The Boultings then switched their moral target from left-idealism becoming sluggish to left-idealism becoming fanatical. In Seven Days to Noon an atomic scientist vows to destroy London unless Britain unilaterally disarms. In High Treason a motley array of ultra-leftists sabotage British power-stations prior to invasion ‘‘from the East.’’ Conversely, the noble hero of Pastor Hall finds his ‘‘antithesis’’—The Boy—in Brighton Rock, from Grahame Greene’s gangster novel. The Boy is petty, vile and doomed less through social environment than through natural evil and/or spiritual deprivation. Vis-a-vis atomic scientist and gangster alike, the Boultings’ spokespersons for ordinary human- ity are blowsy aging blondes, no better than they ought to be, as if to emblemise lowered expectations of human nature. The Magic Box, a tribute to British film pioneer Friese-Greene, was the British film industry’s ‘‘official’’ contribution to the Festival of Britain, and, like Single-Handed, a (dullish) tribute to old-fash- ioned British pluck. The mid-1950s’ deepening anxieties about declining efficiency and social morality provoked the Boultings to satirical comedies; their sarcasms began where Ealing’s left off. Typically, an earnest innocent (often Ian Carmichael) struggles against general moral grubbiness before giving up and joining it. The humour oscillates between tolerant and fraught, puritan and populist, realistic and farcical. Private’s Progress targeted the army, Brothers- in-Law the law, and Carleton-Brown of the F.O the government. Lucky Jim (targeting Oxbridge) is a stodgy version of the Kingsley Amis novel, but I’m All Right Jack (industrial relations) is arguably the crucial movie about post-war Britain, Peter Sellers infusing with warmth and pathos a bloody-minded shop-steward. Heaven’s Above (about the Anglican Church), from an idea by the Socialist-turned- Anglican Malcolm Muggeridge, intriguingly mixes Carry On buf- foonery with Evelyn Waugh-type satire. The Boultings’ bouts of Carry On-type ribaldry aren’t moral cop- out, but a deliberate moral position, an affectionate enjoyment of humanity despite its moral mediocrity and without the guilt of stereotypical puritanism. This mellowness keys their last serious films. In The Family Way, a working-class newlywed’s various troubles make him temporarily impotent; and his trusting father never realises that his best friend was the boy’s real father. The Twisted Nerve, about a mongoloid’s brother given to homicide, offended the mental health lobby, but sought to brood seriously on human nature, irreducible evil, and the everyday. The overt discussion of moral fibre, choice, and consequence in Thunder Rock is the key to the Boultings’ films. Contemplating the characters from outside, they ask BRAKHAGEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 119 moral questions rather than giving psychological data from the inside; and they stress the erosion of idealism, by puzzlement, weariness, or its paradoxical conflicts with decency. Brighton Rock focuses less on Pinky’s mind, or the criminal milieu, than on the moral tropisms of the more hesitant characters. Such emphasis on ‘‘moral intuition’’ is central to the British character, and the Boultings’ steady popularity evinces a profound, not a glib, affinity with audiences. The switch from very earnest to very satirical forms is another facet of their moralism. Wherever possible, the Boultings operated as a semi-independent unit, often called Charter Films. On becoming Directors of British Lion in 1963, they were crucial in its renaissance, albeit embroiled in the controversial decisions preceding its dissolution. —Raymond Durgnat BRAKHAGE, Stan Nationality: American. Born: Kansas City, Missouri, 14 January 1933. Education: Dartmouth College, 1951; attended Institute of Fine Arts, San Francisco, 1953. Family: Married 1) Jane Collum, 1957 (divorced, 1987), five children; 2) Marilyn Jull, 1989, one child. Career: Performed as boy soprano on live radio and recordings, 1937–46; dropped out of college, ran small theatre in Central City, Colorado, began making films, 1952; studies with Edgar Varese, New York, 1954; shot film for Joseph Cornell, 1955; worked for Raymond Rohauer in Los Angeles, 1956; made TV commercials and industrial films, 1956–64; moved to Denver, 1957; began lecturing on film, from 1960; completed major works The Art of Vision and Dog Star Man, 1964; lectured in film history and aesthetics, Colorado Univer- sity, 1969; taught at School of the Art Institute, Chicago, from 1970; began working in super-8mm, 1976; teacher at Colorado, from 1981. Awards: James Ryan Morris Award, 1979; Telluride Film Festival Medallion, 1981; Maya Deren Award for Independent Film and Video Artists, 1986; MacDowell Medal, 1989. Agent: Film-Makers’ Cooperative, 175 Lexington Ave., New York, NY 10016, U.S.A. Address: c/o Film Studies, Hunter 102, Campus Box 316, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1952 Interim 1953 Unglassed Windows Cast a Terrible Reflection; The Boy and the Sea 1954 Desistfilm; The Extraordinary Child; The Way to Shadow Garden 1955 In Between; Reflections on Black; The Wonder Ring (with Joseph Cornell); ‘‘Tower House’’ (photographed for Joseph Cornell under working titles ‘‘Bolts of Melody’’ and ‘‘Por- trait of Julie,’’ finally became Cornell’s Centuries of June); Untitled Film of Geoffrey Holder’s Wedding (collaboration with Larry Jordan) 1956 Zone Moment; Flesh of Morning; Nightcats 1957 Daybreak and Whiteye; Loving; Martin Missil Quarterly Reports (commercial work) 1958 Anticipation of the Night; ‘‘Opening’’ for G.E. Television Theatre (commercial work) 1959 Wedlock House: An Intercourse; Window Water Baby Mov- ing; Cat’s Cradle; Sirius Remembered; Untitled Film on Pittsburgh (commercial work) 1960 The Dead 1961 Thigh Line Lyre Triangular; Films by Stan Brakhage: An Avant-Garde Home Movie; The Colorado Legend and the Ballad of the Colorado Ute (commercial work) 1962 Blue Moses; Silent Sound Sense Stars Subotnick and Sender; Mr. Tomkins Inside Himself (commercial work) 1963/5 Film on Mt. Rushmore, photographed for Charles Nauman’s Part II film on Korczak Ziolkowski; film on Chief Sit- ting Bull 1963 Oh Life—A Woe Story—The A Test News; ‘‘Meat Jewel’’ (incorporated into Dog Star Man: Part II); Mothlight 1964 Dog Star Man (in prelude and four parts dated as follows: Prelude, 1962; Part I, 1963; Part II, 1964; Part III, 1964; Part IV, 1964) 1965 The Art of Vision (derived from Dog Star Man); Three Films (includes Blue White; Blood’s Tone; Vein); Fire of Waters; Pasht; Two: Creeley/McClure (also incorporated in Fifteen Song Traits); Black Vision 1968 Lovemaking; The Horseman, The Woman and The Moth 1969 Songs (dated as follows: Songs 1 to 8, 1964; Songs 9 to 14, 1965; 15 Song Traits, 1965; Songs 16 to 22, 1965; 23rd Psalm Branch: Part I, 1966, and Part II and Coda, 1967; Songs 24 and 25, 1967; Song 26, 1968; My Mountain Song 27, 1968; Song 27 (Part II) Rivers, 1969; Songs 28 and 29, 1969; American 30’s Song, 1969; Window Suite of Child- ren’s Songs, 1969) 1970 Scenes from under Childhood (dated as follows: Section No. 1, 1967; Section No. 2, 1969; Section No. 3, 1969; Section No. 4, 1970); The Weir-Falcon Saga; The Machine of Eden; The Animals of Eden and After 1971 The Pittsburgh Documents (Eyes; Deus Ex; The Act of Seeing with One’s Own Eyes; Foxfire Childwatch; Angels’ Door; Western History; The Trip to Door; The Peaceable Kingdom 1972 Eye Myth (begun in 1968 as sketch for The Horseman, The Woman and The Moth) (16mm version); Sexual Medita- tions (titled and dated as follows: Sexual Meditation No. 1: Motel, 1970; Sexual Meditation: Room with View, 1971; Sexual Meditation: Faun’s Room Yale, 1972; Sexual Medi- tation: Office Suite, 1972; Sexual Meditation: Open Field, 1972; Sexual Meditation: Hotel, 1972); The Process; The Riddle of Lumen; The Shores of Phos: A Fable; The Presence; The Wold Shadow 1973 Gift; Sincerity; The Women 1974 Skein; Aquarien; Hymn to Her; Star Garden; Flight; Domin- ion; he was born, he suffered, he died; Clancy; The Text of Light; The Stars Are Beautiful; Sol 1975 Sincerity II; Short Films: 1975 (divided into Parts I-X) 1976 Gadflies; Sketches; Airs; Window; Trio; Desert; Rembrandt, Etc. and Jane; Short Films: 1976; Tragoedia; Highs; The Dream, NYC, The Return, The Flower; Absence 1977 Soldiers and Other Cosmic Objects; The Governor; The Domain of the Moment 1978 Sincerity III; Nightmare Series; Duplicity; Duplicity II; Purity and After; Centre; Bird; Thot Fal’n; Burial Path; Sluice 1979 Creation 1980 Sincerity IV; Sincerity V; Duplicity III; Salome; Other; Made Manifest; Aftermath; Murder Psalm BRAKHAGE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 120 1981 Eye Myth (original 35mm version); Roman Numeral Series (dated and titled as follows: I and II, 1979; III, IV, V, VI, VII, 1980; VIII and IX, 1981); Nodes; RR; The Garden of Earthly Delights; Hell Spit Flexion 1982 Arabics (dated and titled as follows: 1, 2 and 3, 1980; 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0 + 10, 11, 12, 13, 1981; 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 1982); Unconscious London Strata 1984 Egyptian Series; Tortured Dust 1986 Jane; Caswallan Trilogy (The Aerodyne; Dance Shadows by Danielle Helander; Fireloop); The Loop; Nightmusic; Confession 1987 FaustFilm: An Opera; Loud Visual Noises; The Dante Quar- tet; Kindering 1988 Faust’s Other: An Idyll; Faust 3: Candida Albacore; Matins; I . . . Dreaming; Marilyn’s Window; Rage Net 1989 Faust 4; Visions in Meditation No. 1; Babylon Series 1990 Babylon Series No. 2; City Streaming; The Thatch of Night; Glaze of Cathexis; Visions in Meditation No. 2; Passage Through: A Ritual; Vision of the Fire Tree 1991 Delicacies of Molten Horror Synapse; Christ Mass Sex Dance; Agnus Dei Kinder Synapse; A Child’s Garden and the Serious Sea 1992 Crack Gloss Eulogy; Interpolations I-V; For Marilyn; Boul- der Blues and Pearls and 1993 Blossom Gift Favor; Autumnal; The Harrowing; Tryst Haunt; Three Homerics; Stellar; Study in Color and Black and White; Ephemeral Solidity 1994 Elementary Phrases (in collaboration with Phil Solomon); Black Ice; First Hymn to the Night-Novalis; Naughts; Chartres Series; Paranoia Corridor; In Consideration of Pompeii; The Mammals of Victoria; I Take These Truths; We Hold These 1994/95 Trilogy (comprises I Take These Truths; We Hold These; both 1994, and I....; 1995) 1995 Cannot Exist; Cannot Not Exist; Earthen Aerie; Spring Cycle; I.... 1998 . . . Reel Fine Note: Beginning 1978, many films first issued in 8mm or Super-8mm reissued in 16mm. Other Films: 1969 Nuptiae (Broughton) (ph) 1996 Cannibal! The Musical (ro as George Noon’s Father) 1998 Brakhage (as himself) 1999 Keepers of the Frame (as himself) Publications By BRAKHAGE: books— Metaphors on Vision, New York, 1963. A Motion Picture Giving and Taking Book, West Newbury, Massa- chusetts, 1971. The Brakhage Lectures, Chicago, 1972. Stan Brakhage, Ed Emshwiller, edited by Rochelle Reed, Washing- ton, D.C., 1973. Seen, San Francisco, 1975. Film Biographies, Berkeley, California, 1977. Brakhage Scrapbook: Collected Writings 1964–1980, edited by Rob- ert A. Haller, New York, 1982. I . . . Sleeping (Being a Dream Journal and Parenthetical Explica- tion), New York, 1989. Film at Wit’s End—Eight Avant-Garde Filmmakers, New York, 1989. Composite Nature: A Conversation with Stan Brakhage, with Philip Taafe, Blumarts, 1998. By BRAKHAGE: articles— ‘‘The Silent Sound Sense,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Sum- mer 1960. ‘‘Province-and-Providential Letters,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1962. ‘‘Excerpts from Letters,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1962. ‘‘Sound and Cinema’’ (exchange of letters with James Tenney and Gregory Markopoulos), in Film Culture (New York), no. 29, 1963. ‘‘Metaphors on Vision,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 30, 1963. Interview with P. Adams Sitney, in Film Culture (New York), Fall 1963. ‘‘Letter to Gregory Markopoulos,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Winter 1963/64. ‘‘Letter from Brakhage: On Splicing,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Winter 1964/65. ‘‘Letter to Yves Kovacs,’’ in Yale Literary Magazine (New Haven), March 1965. ‘‘Stan Brakhage Letters,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1966. ‘‘A Moving Picture Giving and Taking Book,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1966. ‘‘On Dance and Film,’’ in Dance Perspectives, Summer 1967. ‘‘Letter to Jonas Mekas, September 1967,’’ in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), December 1967. ‘‘Transcription of Some Remarks. . . ,’’ in Take One (Montreal), September/October 1970. ‘‘In Defense of the Amateur Filmmaker,’’ in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), Summer 1971. ‘‘Stan and Jane Brakhage Talking,’’ with Hollis Frampton, in Artforum (New York), January 1973. ‘‘On Filming Light,’’ with Forrest Williams, in The Structurist (Saskatoon), no. 13/14, 1973–74. Various writings, in Film Culture (New York), nos. 67–69, 1979. ‘‘The Swiftly Perceived Blur,’’ in Rolling Stock (Boulder, Colorado), Summer 1980. ‘‘Stan Brakhage’s Last Interview,’’ by Marilynne Mason, in North- ern Lights: Studies in Creativity, edited by Stanley Scott, Presque Isle, Maine, 1983. ‘‘Brakhage at the Ninth Telluride,’’ in Rolling Stock, no. 4, 1983. ‘‘Brakhage Pans Telluride Gold,’’ in Rolling Stock, no. 6, 1983. ‘‘Telluride Zinc,’’ in Rolling Stock, no. 8, 1984. ‘‘Telluride Takes,’’ in Rolling Stock, no. 11, 1986. ‘‘Brakhage Observes Telluride the Thirteenth,’’ in Rolling Stock, no. 12, 1986. ‘‘Stan Brakhage at the Millennium, November 4, 1977,’’ in Millen- nium Film Journal, Fall/Winter 1986/87. ‘‘James Tenney,’’ in Perspectives on New Music, vol. 25, 1987. BRAKHAGEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 121 ‘‘Some Words on the North,’’ in American Book Review, May/ June 1988. ‘‘Time . . . on dit,’’ series of seventeen articles in Musicworks: The Canadian Journal of Sound Exploration, vols. 45, 47–50, 52–63, Winter 1990-Fall 1995. ‘‘Stan Brakhage Reviews the Fifteenth Telluride Film Festival,’’ in Rolling Stock (Boulder, Colorado), Winter 1989. ‘‘Gertrude Stein: Meditative Literature and Film,’’ in Millennium Film Journal, Summer 1991. ‘‘Screen Test,’’ an interview with Jerry White, in Emergency House, Spring 1992. ‘‘Manifesto,’’ in Cinematheque, Spring 1993. ‘‘All That Is Is Light: Brakhage at Sixty,’’ an interview with Suranjan Ganguly, in Sight and Sound (London), October 1993. ‘‘Stan Brakhage—The Sixtieth Birthday Interview,’’ by Suranjan Ganguly, in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1994. ‘‘Stan Brakhage on Marie Menken,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1994. ‘‘Letter to Amos Vogel from Stan Brakhage,’’ in Wide Angle (Balti- more), vol. 19, no. 2, 1997. On BRAKHAGE: books— Clark, Dan, Brakhage, New York, 1966. Richie, Donald, Stan Brakhage—A Retrospective, New York, 1970. Mekas, Jonas, Movie Journal, The Rise of a New American Cinema, 1959–1971, New York, 1972. Camper, Fred, Stan Brakhage, Los Angeles, 1976. Hanhardt, John, and others, A History of the American Avant-Garde Cinema, New York, 1976. Nesthus, Marie, Stan Brakhage, Minneapolis/St. Paul, 1979. Sitney, P. Adams, Visionary Film, New York, 1979. Camper, Fred, By Brakhage: Three Decades of Personal Cinema (catalogue), New York, 1981. Barrett, Gerald R., and Wendy Brabner, Stan Brakhage: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1983. McBride, Joseph, editor, Filmmakers on Filmmakers 2, Los Ange- les, 1983. Keller, Marjorie, The Untutored Eye: Childhood in the Films of Cocteau, Cornell and Brakhage, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1986. Elder, R. Bruce, The Body in Film, Toronto, Ontario, 1989. James, David, E., Allegories of Cinema: American Film in the Sixties, Princeton, New Jersey, 1989. Mellencamp, Patricia, Indiscretions: Avant-Garde Film Video and Feminism, Bloomington, Indiana, 1990. Sitney, P. Adams, Modernist Montage: The Obscurity of Vision in Cinema and Literature, New York, 1990. Wees, William, Light Moving in Time: Studies in the Visual Aesthet- ics of Avant-Garde Film, Berkeley, 1992. MacDonald, Scott, Film: Motion Studies, London, 1993. Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson, Film Art: An Introduction, New York, 1993. Peterson, James, Dreams of Chaos, Visions of Order: Understanding the American Avant-Garde Cinema, Detroit, 1994. Elder, R. Bruce, The Films of Stan Brakhage in the American Tradition of Ezra Pound, Gertrude Stein & Charles Olsen, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1999. On BRAKHAGE: articles— Tyler, Parker, ‘‘Stan Brakhage,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 18, 1958. ‘‘Brakhage Issue’’ of Filmwise, no. 1, 1961. Callenbach, Ernest, ‘‘Films of Stan Brakhage,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1961. Sitney, P. Adams, ‘‘Anticipation of the Night and Prelude,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 26, 1962. Brakhage, Jane, ‘‘The Birth Film,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Winter 1963/64. Hill, Jerome, ‘‘Brakhage and Rilke,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 37, 1965. Hill, Jerome, and Guy Davenport, ‘‘Two Essays on Brakhage and His Songs,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1966. Kroll, K. ‘‘Up from the Underground,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 13 February 1967. Camper, Fred, ‘‘The Art of Vision, a Film by Stan Brakhage,’’ and ‘‘23rd Psalm Branch (Song XXIII), a Film by Stan Brakhage,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Autumn 1967. Camper, Fred, ‘‘My Mtn. Song 27,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1969. Creeley, Robert, ‘‘Mehr Light. . . ,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1969. Sitney, P. Adams, ‘‘Avant Garde Film,’’ in Afterimage (Rochester), Autumn 1970. Hill, Jerome, ‘‘Brakhage’s Eyes,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1971. Camper, Fred, ‘‘Sexual Meditation No.1: Motel, a Film by Stan Brakhage,’’ and P. Adams Sitney, ‘‘The Idea of Morphology,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1972. ‘‘Brakhage Issue’’ of Artforum (New York), January 1973. Levoff, Daniel, ‘‘Brakhage’s The Act of Seeing with One’s Own Eyes,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1973. Barr, William, ‘‘Brakhage: Artistic Development in Two Childbirth Films,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1976. Kelman, Ken, ‘‘Animal Cinema,’’ in Film Culture (New York), nos. 63–64, 1977. Nesthus, Marie, ‘‘The Influence of Olivier Messiaen on the Visual Art of Stan Brakhage in Scenes from under Childhood, Part I,’’ in Film Culture (New York), nos. 63–64, 1977. Sitney, P. Adams, ‘‘Autobiography in Avant-Garde Film,’’ in Millenium (New York), Winter 1977/78. Cohen, Phoebe, ‘‘Brakhage’s Sincerity III,’’ in Millenium Film Journal (New York), nos. 4–5, 1979. Jenkins, Bruce, and Noel Carroll, ‘‘Text of Light,’’ in Film Culture (New York), nos. 67–69, 1979. Sharrett, Christopher, ‘‘Brakhage’s Dreamscape,’’ in Millenium Film Journal (New York), Spring 1980. Cohen, Phoebe, ‘‘Brakhage’s I, II, III,’’ in Millenium Film Journal (New York), nos. 7–9, 1980/81. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Duplicitously Ours: Brakhage in New York,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 8 April 1981. James, D., ‘‘The Filmmaker as Romantic Poet: Brakhage and Olson,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Spring 1982. Sharrett, Christopher, ‘‘Brakhage’s Scrapbook,’’ in Millenium (New York), Fall/Winter 1984/85. ‘‘Brakhage Sections’’ of Monthly Film Bulletin (London), February and March 1986. BRAKHAGE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 122 Sharrett, Christopher, ‘‘Brakhage’s dreamscape,’’ in Millenium (New York), Spring 1986. Wees, William C., ‘‘Words and Images in Stan Brakhage’s 23rd Psalm Branch,’’ in Cinema Journal (Champaigne, Illinois), Win- ter 1988. Camper, Fred, ‘‘Stan Brakhage’s New Vision,’’ in Chicago Reader, 27 January 1989. Dargis, M., ‘‘The Old Garde Advances,’’ in Village Voice, 12 March 1991. Grimes, W., ‘‘A Film Maker in the Avant Garde for Forty Years,’’ in New York Times, 6 February 1993. Hoberman, J., ‘‘A Blast from the Past: Stan Brakhage’s A Child’s Garden and the Serious Sea,’’ in The Village Voice, 9 Febru- ary 1993. Camper, Fred, ‘‘A Musical Way of Seeing,’’ in Chicago Reader, 16 April 1993. Arthur, Paul, ‘‘Qualities of Light: Stan Brakhage and the Continuing Pursuit of Vision,’’ in Film Comment, September/October 1995. Annett, William, ‘‘Fire on the Mountain,’’ in Independent Film and Video Monthly, July 1995. Elder, Bruce, ‘‘On Brakhage,’’ in Stan Brakhage: A Retrospective 1977–1995, Museum of Modern Art, New York, 1995. *** Stan Brakhage was the last and youngest of the great generation of American avant-garde filmmakers who came to cinema during and soon after the Second World War. Between 1952 and 1995 he has made approximately 250 films, some shorter than a minute long and one more than four hours. Naturally, in this immense oeuvre the short films predominate; the majority fall between ten and forty minutes. Until 1964 he completed one or two films a year; the four of 1959 were an exception and signals of a major breakthrough in his art; since then the norm has been closer to five annually. Even Andy Warhol’s astonishing fecundity dwarfs in comparison when we consider that his work was largely finished when he photographed a film—for he never edited and rarely even had to assemble or order reels—and that his most intense productivity was limited to a five-year period (1963–1968). The sheer enormity of Brakhage’s filmography encourages some sort of division into periods to facilitate discussion. The first six years—from Interim (1952) to Anticipation of the Night (1958), his first major work—can be considered Brakhage’s apprenticeship to his art. These initial works were predominately psychodramas: often fantasies of suicide motored by sexual frustration and adolescent despair. He employed a version of the bodily camera movement Marie Menken perfected before he ever knew her work; but it was a commission from Joseph Cornell to film New York’s Third Avenue E1 before it was torn down that inspired his recognition of the rhythmic and structural potential of vehicular motion (The Wonder Ring, 1955). His marriage to Jane Collom at the end of 1957 coincided with a surge of invention and increased authority from the four films of 1959 (Wedlock House: An Intercourse, Window Water Baby Moving, Cat’s Cradle, and Sirius Remembered)—in which he explored the possibilities of the cinematic crisis-lyric, which he had largely in- vented himself—to Dog Star Man (1961–64) and its four-and-one- half-hour exfoliation, The Art of Vision (1965). He abandoned what he had called ‘‘drama,’’ a complex term that included the use of actors and staged fantasies, to concentrate on sights he encountered in his routine daily life. Eros and death (but no longer suicide) continued to be his central themes, along with a new preoccupation with childbirth— he filmed the arrival of the three children Jane bore during that period. Animal life (and death) too became the focus of several films, inspired by Jane, a passionate naturalist. During this time of fervor and enthusiasm he completed and published his most important theoretical volume, Metaphors on Vision (1964). Brakhage, the most Emersonian of American filmmakers, strug- gled to make a virtue of his self-trust and of his dire economic poverty in the next phase of his career (1964–1970). When the theft of his 16mm equipment, from a car in New York City, curtailed the flood of highly original short lyrical films in 1964, he turned to inexpensive 8mm filmmaking and a series of thirty Songs (1964–69), until his elaborate editing and printing drove him yet again into serious debt. One solution to these costs was painting on film: The Horseman, the Woman, and the Moth (1968). By the end of the 1960s his severe poverty was slightly eased by minuscule production grants and exhausting lecture tours. To the abiding subjects of birth, sex, death, and animals he added a vigorous exploration of cinematic portraiture and an increasing attention to landscapes. He was living with his wife and now five children in a very small cabin, purchased by his in-laws, high in the Colorado Rockies, when he initiated a large-scale autobi- ography in 16mm, of which the four-part Scenes from under Child- hood and the three-part The Weir-Falcon Saga were completed by 1970. His project, tentatively called The Book of the Film, was to have been, he half-humorously predicted, a twenty-four-hour-long film. Initially he conceived the autobiography as generalized and emblem- atic: his observations of his young children would provide the visual materials for an allegory of the growth of his mind, as well as stimulate his buried memories. In the first half of the 1970s oppositional pressures drove his work in two apparently opposite directions: his films became more reflec- tive and subtle on the one hand, and more anxious to make contact with the world. Similarly, in his writings he attempted to reimagine the lives and reevaluate the achievements of the great filmmakers of the past, justifying his liberal elaboration of facts with the analogy of Gertrude Stein’s biographical fantasias. With the help of the Carnegie Institute in Pittsburgh he made three films he thought of as ‘‘docu- mentaries,’’ very personal views of a day in a police patrol car, another in a hospital operating theatre, and the most startling, a day at the morgue (eves, deux ex, The Act of Seeing with One’s Own Eyes, 1971). A series of Sexual Meditations (1970–72) pictured his erotic fantasies when he slept in motels on lecture tours; in making these too he had indirect institutional help: students in the colleges he visited willingly served a nude models. During the same years he made his first personal autobiography: Sincerity (reel one, 1973) uses child- hood photographs, the environs of Dartmouth College (which he attended for a semester before quitting to make films), and filmed snippets of the making of his first film. He also created a number of ‘‘tone poems’’ which embodied his emerging theory of ‘‘moving visual thinking,’’ the cinematic mimesis of elusive cognitive acts. The harsh irony of this period, from 1970 to 1974, culminating in the completion of his long abstract film, The Text of Light—wholly composed of luscious splays of light passing through a crystal ashtray, it was the paradigm of his inward turn at the time—was that institutional support transformed but did not alleviate substantially his marginal economy. He was asked by the Art Institute of Chicago to give courses every spring semester: they paid his travel expenses and a rather high salary for the eight trips—every other week—he BRANAGHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 123 made from Colorado. But it added up to less than a poorly paid full- time teaching position. A sputtering trickle of grants and the distribu- tion of his films through the filmmakers cooperatives in New York and San Francisco helped sustain his impressive productivity only with dramatically increasing debts to film laboratories. The autobiographical series Sincerity I-V (1973–1980) and Du- plicity I-III (1978–1980) dominate his work of the late 1970s. Brakhage had insisted on the aesthetic purity and visual intensifica- tion of silence since 1956, experimenting with sound tracks merely four times until a change of stance in the late 1980s. In an extreme and problematic extension of his confidence in the truth of vision, by making The Governor (1977), an hour-long silent scrutiny of Colo- rado Governor Richard Lamm at work and at home, he tried to apply the experience of his Pittsburgh films to ‘‘a study of light and power’’ as an optical examination of politics, personally observed. Most of his energetic output of films in the 1980s refracted the prolonged crisis culminating in the end of the marriage in which he had been so invested as an artist and polemicist. The key documents representing aspects of that agony would be Tortured Dust (1984), a four-part film of sexual tensions surrounding life at home with his two teenage sons; Confession (1986), depicting a love affair near the end of his marriage (1987); and the Faust series (1987–1989), four autonomous sound films reinterpreting the legend that obsessed Brakhage throughout his career. He had begun the 1980s with two related series of silent ‘‘abstract’’ films—modulations of color and light without identifiable imagery—The Roman Numeral Series (1979–1981), nine films ‘‘which explore the possibilities of making equivalents of ‘moving visual thinking,’ that pre-language, pre- ‘picture’ realm of the mind which provides the physical grounds for image making (imagination), thus the very substance of the birth of imagery’’; and The Arabic Numeral Series (1980–1982), nineteen ‘‘abstract’’ films ‘‘formed by the intrinsic grammar of the most inner (perhaps pre-natal) structure of thought itself.’’ The most recent phase of Brakhage’s filmmaking spans from 1989, the year he married Marilyn Jull and published Film at Wit’s End, until 1995. In this 1989 book, his most lucid and coherent since Metaphors on Vision, Brakhage offered his analysis of the sensibili- ties of eight of his contemporaries in the avant-garde cinema. The filmmaker’s often repeated tendency to elaborate on an isolated experiment or an idea from an earlier moment of his career, producing much later an extended series of films, makes demarcation of periods frustratingly unclear. Such is the unexpected production of eleven films with sound tracks out of the total of thirty films he made between 1987 and 1992. Although seven of his first twelve films (1952–1957) had sound tracks, only four (Blue Moses [1962], Fire of Waters [1965], Scenes from under Childhood: Section No. 1 [1967], and The Stars Are Beautiful [1974]) of the some 200 films of the intervening years were not silent. Similarly, painting on film has been one of Brakhage’s privileged strategies since 1961, but it did not assume a dominant place in his filmography until the 1980s. Not only does he call upon earlier options from his filmmaking for further exploration, but he measures and questions his development and its modes of consistency by returning to previously fecund themes, locations, and image associations. So the periods tentatively outlined here are traced within a palimpsest of filmic revisions. —P. Adams Sitney BRANAGH, Kenneth Nationality: British. Born: Belfast, Northern Ireland, 10 December 1960; family moved to Reading, England, 1969. Education: Meadway Comprehensive School, Reading; Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, London, graduated 1982. Family: Married actress Emma Thompson, 1989 (divorced, 1996). Career: Actor on the West End stage and on television, beginning 1982; early stage successes included Another Country, 1982, and Francis (as St. Francis of Assisi), 1984, both plays written by Julian Mitchell; joined the Royal Shakespeare Company, 1983, and at twenty-three became the youngest actor ever to play the title role in Shakespeare’s Henry V; also appeared in the RSC’s Hamlet (as Laertes) and Love’s Labour’s Lost (as the King of Navarre), playing the three roles in repertory in Stratford and London, 1984–85; wrote and directed play Tell Me Honestly, 1985; left RSC to produce and direct Romeo and Juliet, 1986 (in which he also starred); with actor David Parfitt, created the Renaissance Theatre Company, 1987; Renaissance productions in which Branagh played a prominent role included: Public Enemy (also written by Branagh); Twelfth Night (directed by Branagh; also televised), 1987; Hamlet (as Hamlet, directed by Derek Jacobi); As You Like It (as Touchstone, directed by Geraldine McEwan); Much Ado about Nothing (as Benedick, directed by Judi Dench), 1988; John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger (as Jimmy Kenneth Branagh BRANAGH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 124 Porter, also televised); King Lear (as Edgar, also directed); A Mid- summer Night’s Dream (as Peter Quince, also directed), 1989; Uncle Vanya (co-directed); and Coriolanus (title role), 1992. Returned to the Royal Shakespeare Company to star in Hamlet in London and Stratford, 1992–93; television work includes roles in The Boy in the Bush, the Billy Trilogy, adaptations of Virginia Woolf’s To the Lighthouse, Ibsen’s Ghosts, and O’Neill’s Strange Interlude, For- tunes of War (mini-series), The Lady’s Not for Burning and Shadow of a Gunman, 1982–1995; also narrated television documentary series, Cinema Europe: The Other Hollywood, 1995; acted in first film, High Season, 1987; formed film production company, Renaissance Films PLC, October 1988; directed first film, Henry V, 1989; acted in star- studded Renaissance Theatre Company radio broadcasts (available on CD and cassette) commissioned by the BBC to commemorate Shakespeare’s birthday, 1992–94; other radio work includes Diaries of Samuel Pepys and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Awards: Bancroft Gold Medal, Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, 1982; Most Promising Newcomer Award, Society of West End Theatres, 1982, for Another Country; Best New Director from New York Film Critics Circle, Evening Standard Best Film of the Year, Best Film and Technical Achievement Award from British Film Institute, Best Director Award from British Academy of Film and Television Artists (BAFTA), and Best Director Award from National Board of Review, all 1989–90, all for Henry V; Honorary D. Lit., Queen’s University, Belfast, 1990; ‘‘Golden Quill’’ Award from America’s Shakespeare Guild, 2000. Agent: Rick Nicita, Creative Artists Agency, 9830 Wilshire Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Address: Shepperton Studios, Studio Road, Shepperton, Middlesex, TW17 OQD England. Films as Director and Actor: 1989 Henry V (+ title role, adapt) 1991 Dead Again (+ro as Mike Church/Roman Strauss) 1992 Peter’s Friends (+ ro as Andrew Benson, pr); Swan Song (d only) 1993 Much Ado about Nothing (+ ro as Benedick, adapt, co-pr) 1994 Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (+ ro as Dr. Frankenstein, co-pr) 1995 In the Bleak Midwinter (A Midwinter’s Tale) (d only, + sc) 1996 Hamlet (+ title role, adapt) 1999 The Betty Schimmel Story 2000 Love’s Labour’s Lost (+ro as Berowne, adapt) Other Films: 1987 High Season (ro); A Month in the Country (ro) 1993 Swing Kids (ro) 1994 Gielgud: Scenes from Nine Decades (doc for British TV) (narrator) 1995 Othello (ro, pr); Anne Frank Remembered (narrator); Cinema Europe: The Other Hollywood (doc series for British TV) (narrator) 1996 Looking for Richard (Pacino) (as himself) 1998 Cold War (series for TV) (as Narrator); The Gingerbread Man (Altman) (ro as Richard ‘‘Rick’’ Magruder); The Proposi- tion (ro as Father Michael McKinnon); Celebrity (Allen) (ro as Lee Simon); The Theory of Flight (ro as Richard); The Dance of Shiva (ro as Colonel Evans) 1999 Wild Wild West (ro as Dr. Arliss Loveless) 2000 How to Kill Your Neighbor’s Dog (ro as Peter McGowan); The Road to El Dorado (voice of Miguel) Publications By BRANAGH: books— Public Enemy (play), 1988. Beginning (autobiography), Norton, 1989. Henry V (screen adaptation with introduction), Chatto & Windus, 1989. Much Ado about Nothing (screen adaptation, introduction, and notes on the making of the film), Norton, 1993. The Making of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, 1994. In the Bleak Midwinter (screenplay with introduction), Nick Hern Books, 1995. By BRANAGH: articles and interviews— ‘‘Formidable Force,’’ an interview with Michael Billington, in Inter- view, October 1989. Interview with Joan Lunden, broadcast on Good Morning, America, American Broadcasting Company, 23 August 1991 (program number 1355). ‘‘Hamlet Takes to the Air,’’ an interview with Heather Neill, in Times Educational Supplement, 24 April 1992. Interview with Charles Gibson, broadcast on Good Morning, Amer- ica, American Broadcasting Company, 21 December 1992 (pro- gram number 1701). ‘‘Once More, onto the Screen,’’ an interview with Peter Barnes, in Los Angeles Times, 2 May 1993. ‘‘Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson Discuss Collaboration Much Ado about Nothing,’’ an interview broadcast on Showbiz Today, CNN, 11 May 1993 (program number 293). Interview with Iain Johnstone, in Times (London), 15 August 1993. ‘‘Branagh Talks about Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein,’’ an interview with Charlie Rose, broadcast on the Public Broadcasting System, 26 October 1994 (program number 1234). ‘‘It’s a Monster!,’’ an interview with Graham Fuller, in Interview, November 1994. ‘‘Branagh Discusses His Life and Career,’’ an interview with Charlie Rose, broadcast on the Public Broadcasting System, 30 December 1994 (program number 1281). Interview with John Naughton, in Premiere (U.K. edition), Decem- ber 1995. ‘‘Branagh’s ‘Bracing’ Encounter with the Bard,’’ in Variety (Brewster), 16–22 December 1996. ‘‘Hamlets forspill,’’ an interview with J. Ova, in Film & Kino (Oslo), 1996. ‘‘Idol Chatter,’’ an interview with A. Weisel, in Premiere (Boulder), December 1996. ‘‘My Friends Say I Need a Psychiatrist,’’ an interview with Andrew Duncan, in Time Out (London), 15 February 1997. ‘‘Kenneth Branagh: With Utter Clarity,’’ an interview with Paul Meier, in TDR (Cambridge, MA), Summer 1997. BRANAGHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 125 On BRANAGH: books— Shuttleworth, Ian, Ken & Em: A Biography of Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson, St. Martin’s, 1995. Drexler, Peter, and Lawrence Gunter, Negotiations with Hal: Multi- Media Perceptions of Henry the Fifth, Braunschweig, Ger- many, 1995. Hatchuel, Sarah, A Companion to the Shakespearean Films of Ken- neth Branagh, Winnipeg, 1999. Weiss, Tanja, Shakespeare on the Screen: Kenneth Branagh’s Adap- tations of Henry V, Much Ado about Nothing, and Hamlet, Frankfurt and New York, 1999. On BRANAGH: articles— Whitebrook, Peter, ‘‘Branagh’s Bugbear,’’ in Plays and Players, March 1985. Renton, Alex, ‘‘Renaissance Man,’’ in Plays and Players, July 1987. Forbes, Jill, review of Henry V, in Sight and Sound, Autumn 1989. Nightingale, Benedict, ‘‘Henry V Returns as a Monarch for This Era,’’ in New York Times, 5 November 1989. Champlin, Charles, ‘‘The Wellesian Success of Citizen Branagh,’’ in Los Angeles Times, 9 November 1989. Fuller, Graham, ‘‘Journals: Two Kings—Kenneth,’’ in Film Com- ment, November/December 1989. Kliman, Bernice, ‘‘Branagh’s Henry V: Allusion and Illusion,’’ in Shakespeare on Film Newsletter, December 1989. Willson, Robert F., Jr., ‘‘Henry V: Branagh’s and Olivier’s Cho- ruses,’’ in Shakespeare on Film Newsletter, April 1990. Breight, Curtis, ‘‘Branagh and the Prince, or a ‘Royal Fellowship of Death,’’’ in Critical Quarterly, Winter 1991. Donaldson, Peter, ‘‘Taking on Shakespeare: Kenneth Branagh’s Henry V,’’ in Shakespeare Quarterly, Spring 1991. Willson, Robert F., Jr., ‘‘War and Reflection on War: The Olivier and Branagh Films of Henry V,’’ in Shakespeare Bulletin, Sum- mer 1991. Weber, Bruce, ‘‘From Shakespeare to Hollywood,’’ in New York Times, 18 August 1991. Booe, Martin, ‘‘Ken Again,’’ in Premiere, September 1991. Rafferty, Terrence, ‘‘Showoffs,’’ in New Yorker, 9 September 1991. Feeney, F. X., ‘‘Vaulting Ambition,’’ in American Film, September/ October 1991. Deats, Sara Munson, ‘‘Rabbits and Ducks: Olivier, Branagh, and Henry V,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 4, 1992. Pursell, Michael, ‘‘Playing the Game: Branagh’s Henry V,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 4, 1992. Tatspaugh, Patricia, ‘‘Theatrical Influences on Kenneth Branagh’s Film: Henry V,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 4, 1992. Smith, Dinitia, ‘‘Much Ado about Branagh,’’ in New York, 24 May 1993. Barton, Anne, ‘‘Shakespeare in the Sun,’’ in New York Review of Books, 27 May 1993. Sharman, Leslie F., review of Much Ado about Nothing, in Sight and Sound (London), September 1993. Light, Allison, ‘‘The Importance of Being Ordinary,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), September 1993. Ryan, Richard, ‘‘Much Ado about Branagh,’’ in Commentary, Octo- ber 1993. Lane, Robert, ‘‘When Blood Is Their Argument: Class, Character, and Historymaking in Shakespeare’s and Branagh’s Henry V,’’ in ELH, Spring 1994. Landy, Marcia, and Lucy Fisher, ‘‘Dead Again or Alive Again: Postmodern or Postmortem?,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin), Sum- mer 1994. Shaw, William P., ‘‘Textual Ambiguities and Cinematic Certainties in Henry V,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 2, 1994. Parker, Daniel, Mark Kermode, and Pat Kirkham, ‘‘Making Frankenstein and the Monster,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), November 1994. Thomson, David, ‘‘Really a Part of Me,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1995. Gritten, David, ‘‘Kenneth Branagh on the Rebound,’’ in Los Angeles Times, 3 June 1995. Lavoie, A., ‘‘Les Shakespeare se ramassent a la pellea’’ in Cine- Bulles (Montreal), vol. 16, no. 1, 1997. Lundeen, Kathleen, ‘‘Pumping up the Word with Cinematic Supple- ments,’’ in Film Criticism (Edinboro, PA), Fall 1999. *** It is impossible to consider Kenneth Branagh’s meteoric rise as a film director and actor without taking into account the career in the British theatre which shaped it—and to which Branagh still periodi- cally returns. Classically trained at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art in London, where he was awarded the prestigious Bancroft Gold Medal as outstanding student of the year, Branagh completed his course of study in 1982, then moved rapidly into a series of attention- getting roles on the West End and on television. His early association with Shakespeare’s plays began with an invitation to join the Royal Shakespeare Company at the age of twenty-three, and he became the youngest actor ever to perform the title role in an RSC production of Henry V. Important parts in other Shakespeare productions in that 1984–85 season contributed to Branagh’s emergence as a stage director soon thereafter. He left the RSC to direct an independent production of Romeo and Juliet (in which he also starred) and, primarily, to form (with actor David Parfitt) his own production group, which became a reality in 1987 as the Renaissance Theatre Company. Renaissance acquired a high profile in rapid time, with Branagh and other major British actors directing a variety of productions in which they also appeared, in London and on national and international tours. Hamlet (with Branagh in the title role, directed by Derek Jacobi)—which, like Henry V, would become a play with which Branagh would be permanently linked—and Twelfth Night (directed by Branagh and later remounted for television) were among Renaissance’s most successful late-1980s productions. The company’s success enabled Branagh to make his first film, now financed through the production company he called Renaissance Films PLC. Most actors who turn to film directing do so in mid-career, ordinarily after they have obtained considerable experience in front of the camera. Even Laurence Olivier, whose professional path Branagh’s career so frequently appears to emulate, did not direct his first film until he was in his late thirties, and by then, after twenty-two screen appearances, he was a major star. In 1989, when Branagh directed his first film at the age of twenty-nine, his scant movie experience included just two feature films. By that time, however, he had achieved remarkable success as an actor, director, and producer on the British stage and in a variety of important television roles. And, as it BRANAGH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 126 happened, he had already written several plays of his own, one of them (Tell Me Honestly) produced by the RSC, another (Public Enemy) produced to launch the first Renaissance season. In this unusual, multitalented respect, Branagh’s formative years most re- semble the early career of Orson Welles—who made Citizen Kane, his first film, when he was twenty-six, after establishing a formidable theatre and radio presence in the late 1930s. Welles had the Mercury Theatre as his special training ground; Branagh had the Renaissance. It is surely no accident, however, that the first film Branagh directed (and adapted and starred in) was the same first film which Laurence Olivier directed (and adapted and starred in): Henry V, the final history play in Shakespeare’s tetralogy on kingship, which begins with Richard II and also includes King Henry IV, Parts One and Two. The comparisons and contrasts between the two films are genuinely striking, reflective of the periods in which they were made and of the imposing talents of the men who made them. Olivier, responding to Winston Churchill’s plea for a film to rally Britain in the final days of World War II, creates a ringingly, unambiguously heroic Henry for the ages, an idealized monarch who leads England to victory against France with commanding force tempered by humanity. Olivier’s Henry V ensures that English history is represented as comedy. The excision of lines spoken by the Chorus in the play’s final scene makes the romantic pairing of Henry and Katherine appear deceptively permanent, thereby assuring the war- time spectator of a stable English future in fact contradicted by Shakespeare’s text and by English history. This interpretation is visually reinforced: Olivier’s Henry V is artfully shot to highlight a deliberate sense of artificial cinema space; a Disneyesque mise-en- scene, with its heightened technicolored landscapes, illustrates a fairy- tale universe in which battles are won with little serious injury. Olivier’s and Branagh’s versions of Henry V have virtually identical running times (136 and 138 minutes, respectively). Like Olivier’s version, Branagh’s attempts to create a reflexive illusion of theatre itself in the film’s opening section, though Branagh alters and reduces Olivier’s reconstruction of Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre to insinuations of a movie sound stage. Like Olivier’s version, Branagh’s includes explicit references to Henry’s earlier relationship with Falstaff in the two Henry IV plays. And, like Olivier’s actors, Branagh’s dazzling cast (many of them associated with Renaissance) includes some of the finest Shakespearean verse speakers available. In virtually every other respect, Branagh’s film diverges from Olivier’s. His Henry V represents history as tragedy. Significant passages omitted by Olivier, because they reflect flaws in Henry’s character or guilt at his father’s usurpation of the crown from Richard II, are restored by Branagh. Although he properly retains the heroic elements required by such set speeches as the Saint Crispian’s Day call to arms, his portrayal of the king emphasizes the dark and complex elements within Henry’s character. Unlike Olivier’s version, Branagh’s film includes the conspiracy against Henry. This portion of the film is dimly lit, heavily shadowed. Henry behaves in Machiavel- lian fashion and appears unsympathetic in his own conspiratorial behavior. In text restored to the Harfleur sequence, Henry looks and sounds downright pathological. War scenes feature death marches; soldiers die in mud and muck. Quick cuts, slow-motion photography, extended tracking shots, and unusual framing perspectives are em- ployed to heighten the inescapable anti-war ideology vital to Branagh’s approach. A few more liberties are taken with the text than in Olivier’s version, including the placement of the king at the hanging of Bardolph. The inclusion of liturgical music in Patrick Doyle’s wonderfully evocative score contributes movingly to the film’s power. Most notable of all, perhaps, Branagh restores the lines Olivier cut from the Chorus’s speech which conclude the play on such a dark note. Henry V may, indeed, have created the world’s ‘‘best garden,’’ but the peaceful idyll he achieved was short-lived once his infant son inherited the throne: ‘‘Henry the Sixth, in infant bands crowned King/ Of France and England, did this King succeed,/Whose state so many had the managing/That they lost France, and made his England bleed.’’ By any measure, Branagh’s Henry V is a stunning film. That it succeeded so powerfully in duplicating, perhaps surpassing, Olivier’s achievement is all the more striking in the context of its director’s youthful audacity. Branagh’s other Shakespeare films include the superb Much Ado about Nothing, Hamlet, and Othello (with Branagh cast as a vividly slimy Iago), which Branagh unfortunately did not direct. Othello is visually tame, the Shakespeare text excessively cut. But Much Ado about Nothing proved that Branagh’s success with Henry V was no fluke. Co-starring Emma Thompson as Beatrice opposite Branagh’s Benedick, Much Ado certified his nimble ap- proach in making Shakespeare accessible and entertaining, while preserving much of the original poetry and literacy. Branagh’s screen adaptations of Much Ado and Hamlet also confirm what had become strikingly evident in his leadership of the Renaissance Theatre Com- pany: He is a keenly savvy—some might say cynically savvy— marketer of his projects. By casting such actors as Keanu Reeves, Denzel Washington, and Robert Sean Leonard alongside Branagh, Thompson, and other British actors in Much Ado, and by casting Robin Williams, Jack Lemmon, Gerard Depardieu, and Billy Crystal alongside Branagh, Derek Jacobi, John Gielgud, and Julie Christie in Hamlet, Branagh strengthens his films’ potential international mar- kets, particularly in the United States. Such patterns of casting do not always work, but they do help to attract financing and have influenced recent attempts by others to adapt Shakespeare to the screen. Although the text of Much Ado about Nothing has been severely pruned by Branagh, like his Henry V, it emerges on screen as a highly intelligent, clearly told story. Filmed on location in Tuscany, Much Ado is visually enchanting, as vibrantly bright and sensually warm as Henry V is consciously dark and (until the wooing scene) cold. Like so much of his film work, Branagh’s reading of Much Ado derives a great deal from his performance (also opposite Emma Thompson) in Renaissance’s stage production of the play, directed by Judi Dench in 1988. Branagh has written of the potentially filmic images that haunted him during performances of that production in his introduc- tion to the published screenplay: ‘‘One night during Balthasar’s song ‘Sigh No More, Ladies,’ the title sequence of this film played over and over in my mind; heat, haze and dust, grapes and horseflesh, and a nod to The Magnificent Seven. The men’s sexy arrival, the atmosphere of rural Messina, the vigour and sensuality of the women, possessed me in the weeks, months, and years that followed.’’ ‘‘Emotional volatility,’’ Branagh writes in this essay, was the key to the Beatrice-Benedick relationship. But, most especially—in Much Ado as in virtually all Renaissance stage and screen productions—the rehearsal process depended on a genuine desire to eliminate ‘‘artifi- cial Shakespeare voices’’ in favor of acting ‘‘naturalness’’ which would retain the poetry while conveying the ‘‘realistic, conversa- tional tone’’ present in much of the play’s original dialogue. The witty battle of the sexes, so often the essence of comedy, is splendidly articulated here in the Branagh-Thompson dueling lovers. Like Henry V, Much Ado proves in both visual and aural terms that, even when BREILLATDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 127 Branagh cuts Shakespeare’s text perhaps more than he should, he knows exactly how and why he is doing it. Among Branagh’s non-Shakespearean films, Dead Again de- serves special mention. A film in which Branagh and Emma Thomp- son both play dual roles, it reveals Branagh’s knowledge of other films, filmmakers, and genres—and his considerable versatility as both actor and director. Dead Again employs numerous conventions of film noir, including the periodic insertion of a 1940s plot-line, shot in black and white, into the film’s main story, which is photographed in color. Numerous references to specific films (including Citizen Kane, Psycho, Vertigo, and noir detective pictures) periodically appear. (Dead Again even makes droll reference to one of its featured actor’s early television successes: Derek Jacobi’s I, Claudius series.) The film’s detective hero, Mike Church, displays Branagh in James Cagney mode. The screenplay and performances are extremely witty, by turns frightening the spectator into total identification or saturating him with over-the-top red herrings that become self-reflexively and genuinely funny. Robin Williams’s uncredited appearance as a psy- chiatrist is among the film’s cleverest surprises. Peter’s Friends and In the Bleak Midwinter are modest entertain- ments, partially autobiographical, it would appear, particularly In the Bleak Midwinter (released in the United States as A Midwinter’s Tale). Here, Branagh affectionately satirizes a group of actors at- tempting to mount a production of Hamlet, and the film appeals especially to admirers of British theatre. It should be noted, particu- larly in audience anticipation of Branagh’s Hamlet movie, that he returned to the RSC to play the title role in a magnificent, sold-out production of that play (directed by Adrian Noble) during the 1992–93 season. In numerous ways, Hamlet is likely to be the Shakespeare play with which Branagh (who also directed the all-star BBC radio version) remains most closely identified. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is as ‘‘big’’ a Branagh film as Peter’s Friends and In the Bleak Midwinter are small ones. Produced by Francis Ford Coppola and costing forty-four million dollars, the film stars Branagh (who also directed) as Victor Frankenstein and Robert De Niro as the tormented creature. It contains numerous imaginative pleasures, but its overblown representation of an implicitly overblown story brought general critical wrath upon Branagh’s head at the time of its release. It has became a rare example of a Branagh film that (to date) is a commercial failure. In January, 2000, Branagh was awarded the Golden Quill by the Shakespeare Guild, an American society devoted to fostering appre- ciation of the Bard in the United States. The award preceded by three months the American premiere of Branagh’s film Much Ado about Nothing—a work taking what might be considered substantial liber- ties with the Shakespearean text. Branaugh, who starred, directed, and wrote the screenplay, set the story in the 1930s and made it a musical comedy, complete with period songs by Irving Berlin and Cole Porter. American critics tended to praise the film for its freshness and mixture of cinematic styles; British reviewers were, on the whole, consider- ably less generous. The careers of Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson, as fre- quent co-stars and a prominent acting couple, have attracted consider- able publicity, especially since their marriage in 1989 and separation in 1995. (Their relationship has invited frequent comparison to the one between Laurence Olivier and Vivien Leigh, who eventually divorced.) Each has always made films without the other; and Thompson has won Oscars for Best Actress in Howards End and for Best Screenplay Adaptation for Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility. Nevertheless, some of the most magical moments in Branagh’s films feature the two of them together (Henry V, Peter’s Friends, Dead Again, Much Ado about Nothing). —Mark W. Estrin, updated by Justin Gustainis BREILLAT, Catherine Nationality: French. Born: Bressuire, France, 13 July 1948. Educa- tion: Graduated high school at age 16; went to Paris to study Oriental languages, but dropped out to begin writing novels. Career: Wrote her first novel, L’Homme facile, at age eighteen, 1966; had supporting role in Bertolucci’s Last Tango in Paris, 1972; made directorial debut with une vrai jeune fille, 1976; her third feature, 36 fillette, became her first to be released in the United States, 1989; retrospective of her work presented at the Rotterdam Film Festival, in conjunction with the world premiere of Romance, with other retrospectives held at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, Anthology Film Archives in New York, and Art Institute of Chicago, 1999. Address: c/o French Film Office, 745 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10151. Films as Director/Screenwriter: 1976 Une vrai jeune fille (A True Young Woman) 1979 Tapage nocturne (Night Noises) 1988 36 fillette (Virgin) (co-sc) 1990 Sale comme un ange (Dirty Lake an Angel) 1995 A propos de Nice, la suite (d of segment, ‘‘Aux Nicois qui mal y pensant’’) 1996 Parfait amour! (Perfect Love) 1999 Romance Other Films: 1972 Last Tango in Paris (Bertolucci) (ro) 1975 Catherine et Cie (Catherine & Company) (Boisrond) (co-sc) 1977 Bilitis (Hamilton) (co-sc); Dracula pere et fils (Dracula and Son) (Molinaro) (ro) 1982 Gli Occhi, la bocca (The Eyes, the Mouth) (Bellocchio) (asst ed) 1984 E la nave va (And the Ship Sails On) (Fellini) (co-sc) 1985 Police (Pialat) (co-sc) 1987 Milan noir (Black Milan) (Chammah) (co-sc) 1988 Zanzibar (Pascal) (co-sc) 1990 Le Diable au corps (Vergez—for TV) (co-sc); Aventure de Catherine C. (Beuchot) (co-sc) 1992 La Thune (Money) (Galland) (co-sc) 1994 Couples et amants (Lvoff) (co-sc) 2000 Selon Mathieu (co-sc) Publications By BREILLAT: books— L’Homme facile (The Easy Man, A Man for the Asking), Paris, 1968. Le Silence apres. . . , Paris, 1971. BREILLAT DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 128 Les Vetements de la mer, Paris, 1971. Le Soupirail, Paris, 1974 Tapage nocturne, Paris, 1979. Police, Paris, 1985 36 fillette, Paris, 1988. ‘‘One Day I Saw ‘Baby Doll’,’’ in John Boorman and Walter Donohue, editors, Film-makers and Film-making, London and Boston, 1995. By BREILLAT: articles— ‘‘Circle Releasing’s ‘36 fillette’ Is Breillat’s U.S. Breakthrough,’’ interview with Doris Toumarkine, in Film Journal (New York), February-March 1989. ‘‘Un vrai jeune fille,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1991. Interview with T. Jousse and F. Strauss, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1991. ‘‘Un jour j’ai vu ‘Baby Doll’,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1994. ‘‘Boudu sauve des eaux,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July/ August 1994. ‘‘L’eternelle histoire de las seduction,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1996. ‘‘A Woman’s Vision of Shame and Desire: An Interview with Catherine Breillat,’’ interview with Robert Sklar, in Cineaste (New York), no. 1, 1999. ‘‘Sex, Love, and ‘Romance,’’’ interview with Dana Thomas, in Newsweek (New York), 26 April 1999 On BREILLAT: articles— Cros, J.L., ‘‘Catherine Breillat tourne ‘Tapage nocturne’,’’ in Revue du Cinema (Paris), April 1979. Maillet, D., ‘‘Catherine Breillat tourne ‘Tapage nocturne’,’’ in Cinematographe (Paris), April 1979. ‘‘20 questions aux cineastes,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1981. Baecque, A. de, and S. Braunschweig, ‘‘Des Journees sans tapage,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1985. Insdorf, Annette, ‘‘(Trente-six) 36 fillette’ Eyes the Teen-Age Tempt- ress,’’ in New York Times, 1 January 1989. Vincendreu, G., ‘‘The Closer You Get. . . ,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), February 1989. Katsahnias, I., ‘‘Catherine Breillat tourne ‘Sale comme un ange’,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1991. Lenne, G., ‘‘Sale comme un ange,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), July/ August 1991. Sineux, M., ‘‘Catherine Breillat: la silence et les emotions,’’ in Positif (Paris), July/August 1991. Sineux, M., ‘‘Ja raconte l’ame et la chair des gens,’’ in Positif (Paris), July/August 1991. Palmiere, Michel, ‘‘Le cinema a-t-il un sexe?,’’ in Elle (Paris), 17 May 1999. Spencer, L., ‘‘Film: What’s Love Got to Do with It?,’’ in Independent (London), 13 August 1999. Bear, Liza, ‘‘Catherine Breillat’s Romance,’’ in Bomb (New York), Fall 1999. Murphy, Kathleen, ‘‘A Matter of Skin. . . ,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September-October 1999. Taubin, Amy, ‘‘Laws of Desire,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 8–14 September 1999. Ansen, David, ‘‘A Handful of Tangos in Paris,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 13 September 1999. Darke, Chris, ‘‘Film: Yes, But Isn’t It Pornography?,’’ in Indepen- dent (London), 19 September 1999. Kirkland, Bruce, ‘‘Punching up the Sex? Romance, Fight Club Don’t Push the Envelope So Much as Rip It Wide Open,’’ in Toronto Sun, 16 October 1999. *** It is not so much her subject matter that makes novelist/actress- turned-director/screenwriter Catherine Breillat so provocative and controversial. Rather, it is the manner in which she depicts that subject matter, the choices she makes as a filmmaker as she portrays her characters and their sexual longings. None of the liaisons in Breillat’s films are ‘‘traditional,’’ because of the age differences between the characters or their stations in life. Their unions are injurious and obsessive, with Breillat not holding back in any way as she explores the manner in which duplicity, contrition, and rejection kindle sexual yearning. Her primary focus most often is on her female characters and their carnal appetites. In this regard, Breillat has spent her directorial career re-making the same film (albeit with heroines ranging in age from adolescence through early middle-age). With boring regularity, Hollywood has churned out films focusing on teen-agers and their rampaging hormones. Yet Breillat’s 36 fillette is a different, and decidedly more adult, take on this theme. Breillat tells the story of Lili, a restless, alienated fourteen-year-old who attracts the attention of several men—and, in particular, a middle- aged playboy—while on vacation with her family. As the story unfolds, the question arises: Will she or won’t she lose her virginity? What sets 36 fillette apart from other teen coming-of-age films is the way in which Breillat presents her lead character. Lili’s sexual curiosity does not lead her to boys her own age; instead, she is involved with males who might be her father. The focus of the story is on her, and not her potential sexual partners; she is depicted as being just as much of a sexual predator as any male. Despite her age and lack of sexual experience, Lili is no tentative, blushing innocent. Neither is she a sexual victim. She is instead an indecisive young woman whose fully developed body mirrors her craving for sexual initiation. As Breillat explores the social and sexual realities of the character, the men with whom she deals serve as mere props; they exist solely as a means for Lili to explore the power of her emerging sexuality. And the sexuality Breillat portrays is explicit; her character’s tender age is no excuse for the filmmaker to cut away from actress Delphine Zentout’s voluptuous body during the film’s sex scenes. 36 fillette— and, for that matter, all of Breillat’s films—may not be in the same artistic league as the all-time-best cinematic chronicles of sexuality and desire, adolescent or otherwise. What sets them apart are the choices the filmmaker makes for her lead characters, and the candid manner in which she portrays their sexuality. Breillat began her career as a novelist, and was a published author while still in her teens; because of its salty language, her first book, L’Homme facile, was the subject of controversy in her native France. She started out in cinema as an actress—fittingly, she had a role in Bertolucci’s Last Tango in Paris—and then co-scripted such inconse- quential sexploitation films as Michel Boisrond’s Catherine et Cie and David Hamilton’s Bilitis. Despite its trite handing, Catherine et BRESSONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 129 Cie does offer up a tale of female sexual empowerment as it chronicles the attempt of a prostitute to incorporate herself. Then Breillat’s writing credits grew in stature: Fellini’s E la nave va (And the Ship Sails On) and Maurice Pialat’s Police. The latter deals with characteristic Breillat material as it charts the plight of a racist, sexist police detective who is drawn to a sensual, streetwise young woman involved in a drug smuggling case. Breillat’s directorial debut, One vrai jeune fille, spotlights a young teen’s fixation on her burgeoning sexuality. However, Breillat really came into her own as a cinematic talent with 36 fillette, which allegedly is autobiographical (and also is based on one of her novels). In her subsequent films, she has not shied away from graphic sexual depictions. Sale comme un ange, her follow-up to 36 fillette, chroni- cles the relationship between the wife of a young cop and her husband’s partner, a self-hating, fifty-year-old police inspector. The sex scenes between the two are as fiercely candid as those in 36 fillette. Parfait amour! is the story of a middle-class divorcee in her late thirties and her disastrous affair with a self-involved man who not only is unsettled but is a decade her junior. In Parfait amour! Breillat also pushes the sexual envelope; the film includes a scene in which a hairbrush is utilized as a sexual apparatus. Along with 36 fillette, Breillat’s highest-profile feature to date is Romance. Here, she explores the erotic desires of Marie, a twenty- something schoolteacher whose boyfriend refuses to have sexual relations with her; summarily, Marie sets out on a sexual odyssey in which she experiments with several different partners. Romance may not be the first mainstream film to feature oral sex, or a woman undergoing a gynecological examination. However, such sequences usually are discreetly filmed; the physical activity is suggested, rather than shown in detail. Yet in Romance, Breillat’s staging and camera placement allow the audience an unencumbered view of Caroline Ducey, the actress playing Marie, performing fellatio on Sagamore Stevenin, the actor playing her boyfriend. During the exam sequence, Marie is shown spread-eagled and in full view. And the male nudity in Romance is more than just full-frontal; Breillat shows the erect member of one of Marie’s sex partners (played by porn star Rocco Siffredi). So why is Romance not an exploitation film? The fact that it has been made by a woman filmmaker is an inadequate explanation. After all, a woman is just as capable as a man of directing a film that exists solely to titillate the viewer with hardcore sex scenes. Romance is not pornographic because of the context in which its scenes are presented. Marie is, like Lili in 36 fillette, a sexual being. She is sexually empowered. In a more dated, traditional film depicting relations between men and women—the classics of this type might feature Doris Day and Rock Hudson—the male is the aggressor while the female is sexually withholding, heroically grasping onto her virginity until her wedding night. Yet in Romance, Marie is sexually experi- enced; she relishes her eroticism, and is anguished by her boyfriend’s ambivalence. Breillat illustrates her character’s desires by allowing the camera to reveal all during the sex scenes; she depicts Marie’s womanhood by her shot selection in the doctors’ exam sequence. By making these choices, Breillat presents images that might be disturb- ing to some, and might not be for all tastes, but that nevertheless feature an honesty and forthrightness that is not so much shocking as liberating. —Rob Edelman BRESSON, Robert Nationality: French. Born: Bromont-Lamothe (Puy-de-Dome), France, 25 September 1907. Education: Lycée Lakanal à Sceaux, Paris. Family: Married 1) Leidia van der Zee, 1926 (deceased); 2) Myline van der Mersch. Career: Attempted career as painter, to 1933; directed first film, Affaires publiques, 1934; German prisoner of war, 1940–41; directed first major film, Les Anges du péché, 1943; elected President d’honneur de la Societé des realisateurs de films, 1968. Awards: International Prize, Venice Film Festival, for Journal d’un curé campagne, 1951; Best Director Award, Cannes Festival, for Un Condamné a mort s’est échappé, 1957; Special Jury Prize, Cannes Festival, for Procès de Jeanne d’Arc, 1962; Ours d’Argent, Berlin, for Le Diable probablement, 1977; Grand Prix national des Arts et des Lettres (Cinéma), France, 1978; Grand Prize, Cannes Festival, for L’Argent, 1984; National Order of Merit, Commandeur of Arts and Letters of the Légion d’honneur; Lion d’Or, Venice, 1989; Felix Européen, Berlin, 1993. Died: 18 December 1999, in Paris, France, of natural causes. Films as Director: 1934 Affaires publiques (+ sc) 1943 Les Anges du péché (Angels of the Streets) (+ sc) 1945 Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne (The Ladies of the Bois de Boulogne) (+ sc) Robert Bresson BRESSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 130 1950 Journal d’un curé de campagne (Diary of a Country Priest) (+ sc) 1956 Un Condamné a mort s’est échappé (Le Vent souffle où il veut; A Condemned Man Escapes) (+ sc) 1959 Pickpocket (+ sc) 1962 Procès de Jeanne d’Arc (The Trial of Joan of Arc) (+ sc) 1966 Au hasard Balthazar (Balthazar) (+ sc) 1967 Mouchette (+ sc) 1969 Une Femme douce (+ sc) 1971 Quatre Nuits d’un rêveur (Four Nights of a Dreamer) (+ sc) 1974 Lancelot du Luc (Le Graal; Lancelot of the Lake) (+ sc) 1977 Le Diable probablement (+ sc) 1983 L’Argent (+ sc) Other Films: 1933 C’était un musicien (Zelnick and Gleize) (dialogue) 1936 Les Jumeaux de Brighton (Heymann) (co-sc); Courrier Sud (Billon) (co-adaptation) Publications By BRESSON: book— Notes sur le cinématographe, Paris, 1975; as Notes on the Cinematography, New York, 1977, and London, 1978. By BRESSON: articles— ‘‘Bresson on Location: Interview,’’ with Jean Douchet, in Sequence (London), no. 13, 1951. Interview with Ian Cameron, in Movie (London), February 1963. Interview with Jean-Luc Godard and M. Delahaye, in Cahiers du Cinéma in English (New York), February 1967. ‘‘Four Nights of a Dreamer,’’ interview with Carlos Clarens, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1971/72. ‘‘Quatre Nuits d’un rêveur,’’ interview with Claude Beylie, in Ecran (Paris), April 1972. ‘‘Lancelot du Lac,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), Febru- ary 1975. Interview, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1976/77. Interview with J. Fieschi, in Cinématographe (Paris), July/August 1977. ‘‘Robert Bresson, Possibly,’’ interview with Paul Schrader, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1977. ‘‘The Poetry of Precision,’’ interview with Michel Ciment, in Ameri- can Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1983. ‘‘Bresson et lumiere,’’ interview with David Thompson, in Time Out (London), 2 September 1987. Ciment, M., ‘‘Je ne cherche pas une description mais une vision des choses,’’ an interview with M. Ciment, in Positif (Paris), Decem- ber 1996. On BRESSON: books— Sarris, Andrew, editor, The Film, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1968. The Films of Robert Bresson, by five reviewers, New York, 1969. Armes, Roy, French Cinema since 1946, Vol. 1, New York, 1970. Cameron, Ian, The Films of Robert Bresson, London, 1970. Bazin, André, and others, La Politique des auteurs: Entretiens avec Jean Renoir etc, Paris, 1972; revised edition, 1989. Schrader, Paul, Transcendental Style on Film: Ozu, Bresson, Dreyer, Los Angeles, 1972. Sloan, Jane, Robert Bresson: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1983. Esteve, Michel, La Passion du cinématographe, Paris, 1985. Hanlon, Lindley, Fragments: Bresson’s Film Style, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1986. Semolve Robert Bresson, Flemmarion, 1993. Quandt, James, Robert Bresson, Indiana University Press, 1999. On BRESSON: articles— Lambert, Gavin, ‘‘Notes on Robert Bresson,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1953. Monod, Roland, ‘‘Working with Bresson,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1957. Gow, Gordon, ‘‘The Quest for Realism,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1957. Baxter, Brian, ‘‘Robert Bresson,’’ in Film (London), September/ October 1958. Roud, Richard, ‘‘The Early Work of Robert Bresson,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 20, 1959. Ford, Charles, ‘‘Robert Bresson,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1959. Green, Marjorie, ‘‘Robert Bresson,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1960. Roud, Richard, ‘‘French Outsider with the Inside Look,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1960. Sontag, Susan, ‘‘Spiritual Style in the Films of Robert Bresson,’’ in Seventh Art (New York), Summer 1964. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Robert Bresson,’’ in Interviews with Film Direc- tors, New York, 1967. Skoller, S. Donald, ‘‘Praxis as a Cinematic Principle in the Films of Robert Bresson,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Fall 1969. Rhode, Eric, ‘‘Dostoevsky and Bresson,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Spring 1970. Zeman, Marvin, ‘‘The Suicide of Robert Bresson,’’ in Cinema (Los Angeles), Spring 1971. Prokosch, M., ‘‘Bresson’s Stylistics Revisited,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), vol. 15, no. 1, 1972. Samuels, Charles, ‘‘Robert Bresson,’’ in Encountering Directors, New York, 1972. Polhemus, H.M., ‘‘Matter and Spirit in the Films of Robert Bresson,’’ in Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Spring 1974. Westerbeck, Jr., Colin, ‘‘Robert Bresson’s Austere Vision,’’ in Artforum (New York), November 1976. Nogueira, R., ‘‘Burel and Bresson,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1976/77. Dempsey, M., ‘‘Despair Abounding: The Recent Films of Robert Bresson,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Fall 1980. Hourigan, J., ‘‘On Two Deaths and Three Births: The Cinematography of Robert Bresson,’’ in Stills (London), Autumn 1981. Latille Dactec, M., ‘‘Bresson, Dostoievski,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), December 1981. BROOKSDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 131 Dossier on Robert Bresson, in Cinéma (Paris), June 1983. Bergala, Alain, and others, ‘‘L’Argent de Robert Bresson,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June-July 1983. ‘‘Bresson Issue,’’ of Camera/Stylo (Paris), January 1985. Affron, Mirella Jona, ‘‘Bresson and Pascal: Rhetorical Affinities,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (New York), Spring 1985. Milne, Tom, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1987. Adair, ‘‘Lost and Found: Beby Re-inaugurates,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1987. Baxter, Brian, ‘‘Robert Bresson,’’ in Films and Filming (London), September 1987. Loiselle, Marie-Claude, ‘‘Poétique du montage,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), Summer 1995. Holland, Agnieszka, ‘‘The Escape of Bresson,’’ in DGA (Los Ange- les), May-June 1997. Nagel, Josef, ‘‘Der selige Hauch der Unendlichkeit,’’ in Film-dienst (Cologne), 24 November 1992. Douin, Jean-Luc, ‘‘Le cinématographiste,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 9 February 1994. Bleeckere, Sylvain De, ‘‘Bressons beelden,’’ in Film en Televisie (Brussels), October 1996. Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 7, 1997. On BRESSON: films— Weyergans, Francois, Robert Bresson, 1965. Kotulla, Theodor, Zum Beispiel Bresson, 1967. *** Robert Bresson began and quickly gave up a career as a painter, turning to cinema in 1934. The short film he made that year, Affaires publiques, has not yet been shown. His next work, Les Anges du péché, was his first feature film, followed by Les Dames du Bois du Boulogne and Journal d’un curé de campagne, which firmly estab- lished his reputation as one of the world’s most rigorous and demand- ing filmmakers. In the next fifteen years he made only four films: Un Condamné à mort s’est échappé, Pickpocket, Procès de Jeanne d’Arc, and Au hasard Balthazar, each a work of masterful originality and unlike the others. From then until his death in 1999, he made films with more frequency and somewhat less intensity. In 1975 Gallimard published his gnomic Notes sur le cinématographe. As a whole Bresson’s oeuvre constitutes a crucial investigation of the nature of cinematic narration. All three films of the 1950s are variations on the notion of a written diary transposed to a voice-over commentary on the visualized action. More indirectly, Procès de Jeanne d’Arc proposes yet another variant through the medium of the written transcript of the trial; Une Femme douce is told through the voice of the husband as he keeps a vigil for his suicidal wife; and in Quatre nuits d’un rêveur both of the principal characters narrate their previous histories to each other. In all of these instances Bresson allows the tension between the continuity of written and spoken language and the fragmentation of shots in a film to become an important thematic concern. His narrators tell themselves (and us) stories in order to find meaning in what has happened to them. The elusiveness of that meaning is reflected in the elliptical style of Bresson’s editing. For the most part, Bresson employed only amateur actors. He avoided histrionics and seldom permitted his ‘‘models’’ (as he called them, drawing a metaphor from painting) to give a traditional performance. The emotional tensions of the films derive from the elaborate interchange of glances, subtle camera movements, offscreen sounds, carefully placed bits of baroque and classical music, and rhythmical editing. The Bressonian hero is often defined by what he or she sees. We come to understand the sexual tensions of Ambricourt from a few shots seen from the country priest’s perspective; the fierce desire to escape helps the condemned man to see the most ordinary objects as tools for his purpose; the risk the pickpocket initially takes to prove his moral superiority to himself leads him to see thefts where we might only notice people jostling one another: the film initiates its viewers into his privileged perspective. Only at the end does he realize that this obsessive mode of seeing has blinded him to a love which he ecstatically embraces. Conversely, Mouchette kills herself suddenly when she sees the death of a hare (with which she identified herself); the heroine of Une Femme douce kills herself because she can see no value in things, while her pawnbroker husband sees nothing but the monetary worth of everything he handles. The most elaborate form this concentration on seeing takes in Bresson’s cinema is the structure of Au hasard Balthazar, where the range of human vices is seen through the eyes of a donkey as he passes through a series of owners. The intricate shot-countershot of Bresson’s films reinforces his emphasis on seeing, as does his careful use of camera movement. Often he reframes within a shot to bring together two different objects of attention. The cumulative effect of this meticulous and often obsessive concentration on details is the sense of a transcendent and fateful presence guiding the actions of characters who come to see only at the end, if at all, the pattern and goal of their lives. Only in Un Condamné, Pickpocket, and Quatre Nuits does the protagonist survive the end of the film. A dominant theme of his cinema is dying with grace. In Mouchette, Une Femme douce, and Le Diable probablement the protagonists commit suicide. In Les Anges and L’Argent they give themselves up as murderers. Clearly Bresson, who was the most prominent of Catholic filmmakers, does not reflect the Church’s condemnation of suicide. Death, as he represented it, comes as the acceptance of one’s fate. The three suicides emphasize the enigma of human will; they seem insufficiently motivated, but are pure acts of accepting death. —P. Adams Sitney BROOKS, Albert Nationality: American. Born: Albert Einstein, 22 July 1947, Beverly Hills, California; son of Harry (a radio comedian; professional name, Parkyakarkus) and Thelma (a singer; maiden name, Leeds) Einstein; brother of Bob Einstein (a comedy writer under his own name and a comedy performer under the name Super Dave Osborne). Educa- tion: Attended Carnegie Institute of Technology (now Carnegie- Mellon University), 1966–67. Family: Married Kimberly Shlain, 1997; two children. Career: Sportswriter for KMPC-Radio in Los Angeles, CA, 1962–63; wrote for Turn On ABC TV show, 1968; BROOKS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 132 Albert Brooks appeared on The Steve Allen Show, 1968; appeared on Dean Martin Presents the Golddiggers (variety show), 1969; voice of Mickey Barnes and Kip, Hot Wheels (animated), TV show, 1969–71; ap- peared as Rudy Mandel on The Odd Couple, 1970; wrote and directed short films for Saturday Night Live, NBC, 1975–76; wrote ‘‘Wall Street Blues’’ theme song for The Associates TV show, 1979; voice of several guest characters on The Simpsons TV show, 1989; appeared on several TV specials. Awards: National Society of Film Critics Award, best screenplay, for Lost in America, 1985; Funniest Support- ing Male in a Motion Picture Award, American Comedy Awards, for Broadcast News, 1988. Address: c/o Gelfand & Rennert, 1880 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA 90067, U.S.A. Agent: Interna- tional Creative Management, 8942 Wilshire Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90211, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1979 Real Life (ro as Himself) (+ sc) 1981 Modern Romance (ro as Robert Cole) (+ sc) 1985 Lost in America (ro as David Howard) (+ sc) 1991 Defending Your Life (ro as Daniel Miller) (+ sc) 1996 Mother (ro as John Henderson) (+ sc) 1999 The Muse (ro as Steven Phillips) (+ sc) Other Films: 1976 Taxi Driver (Scorsese) (ro as Tom) 1980 Private Benjamin (Zieff) (ro as Yale Goodman) 1983 Twilight Zone: The Movie (Dante, Landis, Miller, Spielberg) (ro as Driver) 1984 Unfaithfully Yours (Zieff) (ro as Norman Robbins) 1987 Broadcast News (James L. Brooks) (ro as Aaron Altman) 1994 I’ll Do Anything (James L. Brooks) (ro as Burke Adler); The Scout (Ritchie) (sc) 1997 Critical Care (Lumet) (ro as Dr. Butz) 1998 Doctor Dolittle (Thomas) (ro as voice of Tiger); Out of Sight (Soderbergh) (ro as Richard Ripley) 2000 My First Mister (Lahti) (ro) BROOKSDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 133 Publications By BROOKS: articles— ‘‘Real Afterlife,’’ interview with R. DiMatteo, in Film Comment (Denville, New Jersey), vol. 27, no. 2, March-April 1991. ‘‘Spewing Genius: Albert Brooks,’’ interview with Jonathan Cutler, in Fade In (Beverly Hills), vol. 2 no. 4, 1996. ‘‘Playboy Interview: Albert Brooks,’’ with Bill Zehme, in Playboy (Chicago), August 1999. By BROOKS: albums— Comedy Minus One, ABC, 1973. A Star Is Bought, Electra-Asylum, 1975. On BROOKS: articles— Weber, Bruce, ‘‘Reflections on Himself,’’ in New York Times Maga- zine, 17 March 1991. Zehme, Bill, ‘‘Albert Brooks,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 18 April 1991. Guilliatt, R., ‘‘Angel Delight,’’ in Time Out (London), no. 1088, 26 June 1991. Rose, Alison, ‘‘It’s Albert,’’ in New Yorker, 14 February 1994. *** Albert Brooks has been called ‘‘the West Coast Woody Allen.’’ While Brooks does write, direct, and star in comedies set in California instead of New York, his films tend to reflect a more consistent tone of baby boomer self-involved angst than do Allen’s films, and are probably more revealing of the director himself and more universal. Brooks is a true comedian’s comedian (David Letterman has said, ‘‘He’s above all of us’’), he has a cult following, and in 1997 Entertainment Weekly listed him as the fifth funniest human alive (after Robin Williams, Jerry Seinfeld, Roseanne, and Jim Carrey). Born Albert Einstein, Albert changed his name to Brooks when he decided to go into standup comedy, and made numerous appearances on nationally televised variety shows. Asked to contribute an article to Esquire, in 1971 he concocted a six-page illustrated catalogue for an institution called Albert Brooks’ Famous School for Comedians. In 1973 he turned this article into his first film, a short that ran on the PBS series Great American Dream Machine. When Lorne Michaels asked him to host a new series called Saturday Night Live, he declined, but he did agree to make six short films for the show, an experience he later described as being ‘‘like enrolling in the most amazing filmmaking course.’’ Although he subsequently acted in other people’s films (notably Broadcast News, for which he received an Academy Award nomination, and Taxi Driver), his reputation is largely built on the six feature-length films he co-wrote, directed and starred in between 1979 and 1999. In Real Life (1979), a parody of the PBS documentary An American Family, Brooks plays a megalomaniacal director who assures the Yeager family of Phoenix that his camera crew will not disrupt their lives, then proceeds to totally demolish both family and home. Charles Grodin is hilarious as Warren Yeager, a father and veterinarian who commits major medical malpractice on camera, and Frances Lee McCain is touching as Jeannette Yeager, the bored housewife who thinks she’s falling in love with Brooks. Modern Romance (1981) begins with Brooks breaking up with his girlfriend, Mary (Kathryn Harrold), and he then spends the rest of the film alternatively trying to win her back and driving her away. No other film has better captured a certain kind of obsessive behavior which, according to Brooks, is not driven by love but by sex (‘‘A man in his twenties doesn’t drive around a woman’s house 400 times and act like a fool just to have a conversation with her’’). Brooks said perhaps his greatest thrill in the film business was when director Stanley Kubrick called him to say, ‘‘This is the movie I’ve always wanted to make’’—Kubrick’s final film being his own jealousy movie, Eyes Wide Shut (1999). In Lost in America, when self-centered yuppie David Howard (Brooks) is passed over for a promotion, he quits his job and convinces his wife Linda (Julie Hagerty) to do likewise so they can at last fulfill their dream of seeing America like the free spirits of Easy Rider—except instead of motorcycles they do it in a huge Winnebago with a six-figure nest egg to fall back on. In no time, Linda has gambled away their entire nest egg in a Las Vegas casino, and David tries to convince the pit boss (Gary Marshall) that it would be good for business if the casino gave the money back. Brooks has said, ‘‘I always loved the idea of making a life-long decision and finding out four days later that it was wrong.’’ The film exposes the secret life of many middle-class Americans by letting its central characters realize their dreams of liberation, then watching them scurry back to the comfortable and familiar when their dreams go awry. The main problem with each of Brooks’ first three features was their weak endings; they just sort of petered out. But his fourth and subsequent films have all managed to have splendid third acts. In Defending Your Life, ‘‘the first true story of what happens after you die,’’ Brooks plays Daniel Miller, an advertising executive who dies in a ridiculous auto accident and awakens in Judgment City, a way station where a trial determines who is returned to earth and who goes on to the next level. His trial does not go well—flashbacks reveal he lived his life much too timidly—and while waiting to learn his fate he meets and falls for Julia (Meryl Streep). The ending finds Daniel inspired by love and able to overcome his fears. Defending Your Life is a carpe diem movie that is neither preachy nor maudlin; an afterlife movie with no wings or halos. According to Brooks, this vision of the afterlife is the only one that made sense to him—this or dirt, but he ‘‘couldn’t get financing [for] two hours of dirt.’’ Brooks’ most successful film, Mother, demonstrates that no one can push your buttons like your mother because she’s the one who installed them. After his second divorce, John Henderson (Brooks) becomes convinced that his problems with women stem from unre- solved issues with his mother (Debbie Reynolds), so as an experiment he moves back in with her. The film is filled with insights both great and small, and is perhaps the best film ever made analyzing a mother- son relationship. The Muse was less successful because it was less universal, more ‘‘inside Hollywood,’’ than his previous film. But its observations into Hollywood’s veneration of youth and having an ‘‘edge’’ are right on target. Sharon Stone plays the title character with true comedic flair, and such Hollywood heavyweights as James Cameron and Martin Scorcese have cameos. What makes Brooks a true artist is his desire to reveal life as it’s lived today and thereby strike a universal chord. Brooks has said, ‘‘What I like best is when movies capture life.... If the result of something I do is that someone feels 10 percent less crazy because BROOKS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 134 they see someone else is thinking what they’re thinking, then I pro- vide a service.’’ —Bob Sullivan BROOKS, Mel Nationality: American. Born: Melvin Kaminsky in Brooklyn, New York, 28 June 1926. Education: Attended Virginia Military Institute, 1944. Family: Married 1) Florence Baum (divorced), two sons, one daughter; 2) actress Anne Bancroft, one son. Military Service: Combat engineer, U.S. Army, 1944–46. Career: Jazz drummer, stand-up comedian, and social director at Grossinger’s resort; writer for Sid Caesar’s ‘‘Your Show of Shows,’’ 1954–57; conceived, wrote, and narrated cartoon short The Critic, 1963; co-creator (with Buck Henry) of Get Smart TV show, 1965; directed first feature, The Producers, 1968; founder, Brooksfilms, 1981. Awards: Academy Award for Best Short Subject, for The Critic, 1964; Academy Award for Best Story and Screenplay, and Writers Guild Award for Best Written Screenplay, for The Producers, 1968; Academy Award nomination, Best Song, for Blazing Saddles, 1974; Academy Award nomination, Best Screenplay, for Young Frankenstein, 1975; Ameri- can Comedy Awards Lifetime Achievement Award, 1987. Address: Brooksfilms, Ltd., Culver Studios, 9336 W. Washington Blvd., Culver City, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1963 The Critic (cartoon) (+ sc, narration) 1968 The Producers (+ sc, voice) 1970 The Twelve Chairs (+ co-sc, role) 1974 Blazing Saddles (+ co-sc, mus, role); Young Frankenstein (+ co-sc) 1976 Silent Movie (+ co-sc, role) 1977 High Anxiety (+ pr, co-sc, mus, role) 1981 The History of the World, Part I (+ pr, co-sc, mus, role) 1983 To Be or Not to Be (+ pr, co-sc, role) 1987 Spaceballs (+ pr, co-sc, role) 1991 Life Stinks! (+ co-sc, role) 1993 Robin Hood: Men in Tights (+ co-sc, role) 1995 Dracula: Dead and Loving It (co-sc, role, pr) Films as Executive Producer: 1980 The Elephant Man (Lynch) 1985 The Doctor and the Devils (Francis) 1986 The Fly (Cronenberg); Solarbabies (Johnson) 1987 84 Charing Cross Road (Jones) 1992 The Vagrant (Walas) Other Films: 1979 The Muppet Movie (Frawley) (role) 1991 Look Who’s Talking, Too! (Heckerling) (voice, role) 1994 Il silenzio dei prosciutti (The Silence of the Hams) (Greggio) (role); The Little Rascals (Spheeris) (role) 1997 I Am Your Child (for TV) (as himself) 1998 The Prince of Egypt (Chapman, Hickner) (role) 1999 Svitati (Greggio) (co-sc, ro) Publications By BROOKS: books— Silent Movie, New York, 1976. The History of the World, Part I, New York, 1981. The 2,000 Year Old Man in the Year 2000, The Book: Including How to Not Die and Other Good Tips, with Carl Reiner, HarperPerennial Library, 1998. By BROOKS: articles— ‘‘Confessions of an Auteur,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), November/ December 1971. Interview with James Atlas, in Film Comment (New York), March/ April 1975. ‘‘Fond Salutes and Naked Hate,’’ interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), July 1975. Interview with A. Remond, in Ecran (Paris), November 1976. ‘‘Comedy Directors: Interview with Mel Brooks,’’ with R. Rivlin, in Millimeter (New York), October and December 1977. Interview with Alan Yentob, in Listener (London), 8 October 1981. Interview in Time Out (London), 16 February 1984. Interview in Screen International, 3 March 1984. Interview in Hollywood Reporter, 27 October 1986. ‘‘The Playboy Interview,’’ interview with L. Stegel in Playboy (Chicago), January 1989. ‘‘Mel Brooks: Of Woody, the Great Caesar, Flop Sweat and Cigar Smoke,’’ People Weekly (New York), Summer 1989 (special issue). On BROOKS: books— Adler, Bill, and Jeffrey Fineman, Mel Brooks: The Irreverent Funnyman, Chicago, 1976. Bendazzi, G., Mel Brooks: l’ultima follia di Hollywood, Milan, 1977. Holtzman, William, Seesaw: A Dual Biography of Anne Bancroft and Mel Brooks, New York, 1979. Allen, Steve, Funny People, New York, 1981. Yacowar, Maurice, Method in Madness: The Comic Art of Mel Brooks, New York, 1981. Smurthwaite, Nick, and Paul Gelder, Mel Brooks and the Spoof Movie, London, 1982. Squire, Jason, E., The Movie Business Book, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1983. On BROOKS: articles— ‘‘Two Thousand Year Old Man,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 4 Octo- ber 1965. Diehl, D., ‘‘Mel Brooks,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), January/Febru- ary 1975. BROOKSDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 135 Mel Brooks Lees, G., ‘‘The Mel Brooks Memos,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), October 1977. Carcassonne, P., ‘‘Dossier: Hollywood 79: Mel Brooks,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), March 1979. Karoubi, N., ‘‘Mel Brooks Follies,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), Febru- ary 1982. ‘‘Mel Brooks,’’ in Dictionary of Literary Biography, Vol. 26: Ameri- can Screenwriters, Detroit, 1984. Erens, Patricia, ‘‘You Could Die Laughing: Jewish Humor and Film,’’ in East-West Film Journal (Honolulu), no. 1, 1987. Carter, E.G., ‘‘The Cosmos according to Mel Brooks,’’ in Vogue (New York), June 1987. Dougherty, M., ‘‘May the Farce Be with Him: Spaceballs Rockets Mel Brooks Back into the Lunatic Orbit,’’ in People Weekly (New York), 20 July 1987. Frank, A., ‘‘Mel’s Crazy Movie World,’’ in Photoplay Movies & Video (London), January 1988. Goldstein, T., ‘‘A History of Mel Brooks: Part I,’’ in Video (New York), March 1988. Stauth, C., ‘‘Mel and Me,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), April 1990. Radio Times, 4 April 1992. Segnocinema (Vicenza), March-April 1994. Greene, R., ‘‘Funny You Should Ask,’’ in Boxoffice (Chicago), December 1995. *** Mel Brooks’s central concern (with High Anxiety and To Be or Not to Be as possible exceptions) is the pragmatic, absurd union of two males, starting with the more experienced member trying to take advantage of the other, and ending in a strong friendship and paternal relationship. The dominant member of the duo, confident but ill- fated, is Zero Mostel in The Producers, Frank Langella in The Twelve Chairs, and Gene Wilder in Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein. The second member of the duo, usually physically weak and openly neurotic, represents the victim who wins, who learns from his experience and finds friendship to sustain him. These ‘‘Jewish weakling’’ characters include Wilder in The Producers, Ron Moody, and Cleavon Little. Though this character, as in the case of Little, need not literally be Jewish, he displays the stereotypical characteristics. Women in Brooks’s films are grotesque figures, sex objects ridiculed and rejected. They are either very old or sexually gross and BROWNING DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 136 simple. The love of a friend is obviously worth more than such an object. The secondary male characters, befitting the intentional infan- tilism of the films, are men-babies given to crying easily. They are set up as examples of what the weak protagonist might become without the paternal care of his reluctant friend. In particular, Brooks sees people who hide behind costumes—cowboy suits, Nazi uniforms, clerical garb, homosexual affectations—as silly children to be made fun of. The plots of Brooks’s films deal with the experienced and inexpe- rienced men searching for a way to triumph in society. They seek a generic solution or are pushed into one. Yet there is no escape into generic fantasy in the Brooks films, since the films take place totally within the fantasy. There is no regard, as in Woody Allen’s films, for the pathetic nature of the protagonist in reality. In fact, the Brooks films reverse the Allen films’ endings as the protagonists move into a comic fantasy of friendship. (A further contrast with Allen is in the nature of the jokes and gags. Allen’s humor is basically adult embarrassment; Brooks’s is infantile taboo-breaking.) In The Producers the partners try to manipulate show business and wind up in jail, planning another scheme because they enjoy it. In The Twelve Chairs they try to cheat the government; at the end Langella and Moody continue working together though they no longer have the quest for the chairs in common. In Blazing Saddles Little and Wilder try to take a town; it ends with the actors supposedly playing themselves, getting into a studio car and going off together as pals into the sunset. In these films it is two men alone against a corrupt and childish society. Though their schemes fall apart—or are literally exploded as in The Producers and The Twelve Chairs—they still have each other. Young Frankenstein departs from the pattern with each of the partners, monster and doctor, sexually committed to women. While the basic pattern of male buddies continued when Brooks began to act in his own films, he also winds up with the woman when he is the hero star (High Anxiety, Silent Movie, The History of the World, To Be or Not to Be). It is interesting that Brooks always tries to distance himself from the homosexual implications of his central theme by including scenes in which overtly homosexual characters are ridiculed. It is particularly striking that these characters are, in The Producers, Blazing Saddles, and The Twelve Chairs, stage or film directors. Brooks’s late-career films have been collectively disappointing. Upon its release, Spaceballs already was embarrassingly dated. It is meant to be a spoof of Star Wars, yet it came to movie screens a decade after the sci-fi epic. Comic timing used to be Brooks’s strong point, yet the story has no momentum and the film’s funniest line— ‘‘May the Schwartz be with you’’—is repeated so often that the joke quickly becomes stale. The bad-taste scenes in Brooks’s earlier films, most memorably Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein, used to be considered provocative. Now that young filmmakers and television writers have stretched comedy to the extreme limits, Brooks has lost his ability to astound and appall the audience. His most recent feature, Robin Hood: Men in Tights, a parody of Errol Flynn-style swashbuckling adventures, is sorely lacking in laughs. The sole exception: Dom DeLuise’s hilarious (but all too brief) Godfather spoof. Life Stinks! is the most serious of all of Brooks’s films. Rather than being a string of quick gags, it offers a slower-paced, more conven- tional narrative. As with To Be or Not to Be (which is set in Poland at the beginning of World War II), he treats a sobering theme in a comic manner as he comments on the plight of the homeless. But while To Be or Not to Be is as deeply moving as it is funny, Life Stinks! stinks. It is episodic and all too often flat, with its satire much too broad and all too rarely funny. —Stuart M. Kaminsky, updated by Audrey E. Kupferberg BROWNING, Tod Nationality: American. Born: Charles Albert Browning in Louis- ville, Kentucky, 12 July 1880. Education: Attended school in Churc- hill Downs. Family: Married Alice Houghton (actress Alice Wilson), 1918. Career: Ran away from home to join a carnival, 1898; worked carnival circuit, then Vaudeville and Burlesque shows; joined Biograph film studio as comedic actor, 1913; directed first film, The Lucky Transfer, 1915; joined Universal Studios, began association with Lon Chaney, 1919; signed by MGM, 1925. Awards: Honorary Life Membership, Directors Guild of America. Died: 6 October 1962. Films as Director: 1915 The Lucky Transfer; The Slave Girl; The Highbinders; The Living Death; The Burned Hand; The Woman from War- ren’s; Little Marie; The Story of a Story; The Spell of the Poppy; The Electric Alarm 1916 Puppets; Everybody’s Doing It; The Deadly Glass of Beer (The Fatal Glass of Beer) 1917 Jim Bludso (co-d, co-sc); Peggy, The Will o’ th’ Wisp; The Jury of Fate; A Love Sublime (co-d); Hands Up! (co-d) 1918 The Eyes of Mystery; The Legion of Death; Revenge; Which Woman; The Deciding Kiss; The Brazen Beauty; Set Free (+ sc) 1919 The Wicked Darling; The Exquisite Thief; The Unpainted Woman; A Petal on the Current; Bonnie, Bonnie Lassie (+ sc) 1920 The Virgin of Stamboul (+ sc) 1921 Outside the Law (+ co-sc); No Woman Knows (+ co-sc) 1922 The Wise Kid; Under Two Flags (+ co-sc); Man under Cover 1923 Drifting (+ co-sc); White Tiger (+ co-sc); Day of Faith 1924 The Dangerous Flirt; Silk Stocking Girl (Silk Stocking Sal) 1925 The Unholy Three (+ co-sc); The Mystic (+ co-sc); Dollar Down 1926 The Black Bird (+ co-sc); The Road to Mandalay (+ co-sc) 1927 London After Midnight (+ co-sc); The Show; The Unknown (+ co-sc) 1928 The Big City (+ co-sc); West of Zanzibar 1929 Where East Is East (+ co-sc); The Thirteenth Chair 1930 Outside the Law (+ co-sc) 1931 Dracula (+ co-sc); The Iron Man 1932 Freaks 1933 Fast Workers 1935 Mark of the Vampire (+ sc) 1936 The Devil-Doll (+ co-sc) 1939 Miracles for Sale BROWNINGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 137 Tod Browning (seated, front) Other Films: 1913 Scenting a Terrible Crime (role); A Fallen Hero (role) 1914 A Race for a Bride (role); The Man in the Couch (role); An Exciting Courtship (role); The Last Drink of Whiskey (role); Hubby to the Rescue (role); The Deceivers (role); The White Slave Catchers (role); Wrong All Around (role); Leave It to Smiley (role); The Wild Girl (role); Ethel’s Teacher (role); A Physical Culture Romance (role); The Mascot (role); Foiled Again (role); The Million Dollar Bride (role); Dizzy Joe’s Career (role); Casey’s Vendetta (role); Out Again— In Again (role); A Corner in Hats (role); The Housebreak- ers (role); The Record Breakers (role) 1914/15 Mr. Hadley in ‘‘Bill’’ series through no. 17; Ethel Gets Consent (role) 1915 The Queen of the Band (Myers) (story); Cupid and the Pest (role); Music Hath Its Charms (role); A Costly Ex- change (role) 1916 Sunshine Dad (Dillon) (co-story); The Mystery of the Leaping Fish (Emerson) (story); Atta Boy’s Last Race (Seligmann) (sc); Intolerance (Griffith) (role, asst d for crowd scenes) 1919 The Pointing Finger (Kull) (supervisor) 1921 Society Secrets (McCarey) (supervisor) 1928 Old Age Handicap (Mattison) (story under pseudonym Tod Underwood) 1946 Inside Job (Yarborough) (story) Publications By BROWNING: articles— ‘‘A Maker of Mystery,’’ interview with Joan Dickey, in Motion Picture Classic (Brooklyn), March 1928. On BROWNING: book— Skal, David J., and Elias Savada, Dark Carnival: The Secret World of Tod Browning, Hollywood’s Master of the Macabre, New York, 1995. BU?UEL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 138 On BROWNING: articles— Geltzer, George, ‘‘Tod Browning,’’ in Films in Review (New York), October 1953. Romer, Jean-Claude, ‘‘Tod Browning,’’ in Bizarre (Paris), no. 3, 1962. Obituary in New York Times, 10 October 1962. Guy, Rory, ‘‘The Browning Version,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), June/July 1963. Savada, Eli, ‘‘Tod Browning,’’ in Photon (New York), no. 23, 1973. Rosenthal, Stuart, ‘‘Tod Browning,’’ in The Hollywood Profession- als (London), vol. 4, 1975. ‘‘Freaks Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), July/Septem- ber 1975. Garsault, A., ‘‘Tod Browning: à la recherche de la réalité,’’ in Positif (Paris), July/August 1978. Hoberman, James, ‘‘Tod Browning’s Side Show,’’ in the Village Voice (New York), 17 September 1979. Loffreda, P., in Cineforum (Bergamo), vol. 31, April 1991. Mank, G. W., ‘‘Mark of the Vampire—When MGM Challenged Universal . . . and Lost,’’ in Midnight Marquee (Baltimore), no. 44, Summer 1992. Douin, J.-L., ‘‘L’horreur est humaine,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 9 June 1993. Skal, David J., and Elias Savada, ‘‘One of Us,’’ Filmfax (Evanston, Illinois), no. 53, November-December 1995. Wood, Bret, ‘‘Hollywood’s Sequined Lie: The Gutter Roses of Tod Browning,’’ Video Watch Dog (Cincinnati), no. 32, 1996. *** Although his namesake was the poet Robert Browning, Tod Browning became recognized as a major Hollywood cult director whose work bore some resemblance to the sensibilities of a much different writer: Edgar Allen Poe. However, unlike Poe, Tod Brown- ing was, by all accounts, a quiet and gentle man who could nonethe- less rise to sarcasm and sardonic remarks when necessary to bring out the best from his players or to ward off interference from the front office. Browning came to Hollywood as an actor after working circus and vaudeville circuits. Browning tapped into this background in supply- ing elements of many of his films, notably The Unholy Three, The Show, and Freaks. He worked in the film industry as an actor until D.W. Griffith (for whom Browning had worked on Intolerance as both a performer and assistant director) gave him the chance to direct at the Fine Arts Company. Browning directed a few films for Metro, but came to fame at Universal with a series of features starring Priscilla Dean. Although The Virgin of Stamboul was admired by critics, it was his next film, Outside the Law, which has more historical significance, marking the first time that Browning directed Lon Chaney. (Browning remade the feature as a talkie.) These Universal productions were little more than pretentious romantic melodramas, but they paved the way for a series of classic MGM horror films starring Lon Chaney, from The Unholy Three in 1925 through Where East Is East in 1929. These films were notable for the range of Chaney’s performances—a little old lady, a cripple, an armless circus performer, a gangster, and so on—and for display- ing Browning’s penchant for the macabre. All were stylish produc- tions, well directed, but all left the viewer with a sense of disappoint- ment, of unfulfilled climaxes. Aside from directing, Tod Browning also wrote most of his films. He once explained that the plots of these works were secondary to the characterizations, a viewpoint that perhaps explains the dismal, unexciting endings to many of his features. Tod Browning made an easy transition to sound films, although surprisingly he did not direct the 1930 remake of The Unholy Three. Instead, he directed the atmospheric Dracula, a skillful blend of comedy and horror that made a legend of the actor Bela Lugosi. A year later, Browning directed another classic horror talkie, Freaks, a realistic and at times offensive melodrama about the physically deformed members of a circus troupe. The film includes the marriage of midget Harry Earles to a trapeze artiste (Olga Baclanova). Browning ended his career with The Mark of the Vampire, a remake of the Chaney feature London after Midnight; The Devil Doll, in which Lionel Barrymore appears as an old lady, a similar disguise to that adopted by Chaney in The Unholy Three; and Miracles for Sale, a mystery drama involving professional magicians. Tod Browning will, of course, be best remembered for his horror films, but it should also be recalled that during the first half of his directorial career he stuck almost exclusively to romantic melodramas. —Anthony Slide BU?UEL, Luis Nationality: Spanish. Born: Calanda, province of Teruel, Spain, 22 February 1900. Education: Jesuit schools in Zaragosa, 1906–15, Residencia de Estudiantes, Madrid, 1917–20, and University of Luis Bu?uel BU?UELDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 139 Madrid, graduated 1924. Family: Married Jeanne Rucar, 1933, two sons. Career: Assistant to Jean Epstein in Paris, 1925; joined Surrealist group, and directed first film, Un Chien andalou, 1929; worked for Paramount in Paris, 1933; executive producer for Filmofono, Madrid, 1935; served Republican government in Spain, 1936–39; worked at Museum of Modern Art, New York, 1939–42; produced Spanish versions of Warners films, Hollywood, 1944; moved to Mexico, 1946; returned to Spain to make Viridiana, 1961 (film suppressed). Awards: Best Director Award and International Critics Prize, Cannes Festival, for Los olvidados, 1951; Gold Medal, Cannes Festival, for Nazarin, 1959, and Viridiana, 1961; Golden Lion, Venice Festival, for Belle de jour, 1967. Died: In Mexico City, 29 July 1983. Films as Director: 1929 Un Chien andalou (Andalusian Dog) (+ pr, co-sc, ed, role as Man with razor) 1930 L’Age d’or (+ co-sc, ed, mu) 1932 Las Hurdes—Tierra sin pan (Land without Bread) (+ sc, ed) 1935 Don Quintin el amargao (Marquina) (co-d uncredited, + pr, co-sc); La hija de Juan Simón (Sáenz de Heredia) (co-d uncredited, + pr, co-sc) 1936 Centinela alerta! (Grémillon) (co-d uncredited, + pr, co-sc) 1940 El Vaticano de Pio XII (The History of the Vatican) (short, special issue of March of Time series) 1947 Gran Casino (Tampico) 1949 El gran calavera 1950 Los olvidados (The Forgotten; The Young and the Damned) (+ co-sc); Susana (Demonio y carne) (+ co-sc) 1951 La hija del enga?o (Don Quintín el amargao); Cuando los hijos nos juzgan (Una mujer sin amor); Subida al cielo (+ sc) 1952 El Bruto (+ co-sc); Las aventuras de Robinson Crusoe (Ad- ventures of Robinson Crusoe) (+ co-sc); El (+ co-sc) 1953 Abismos de pasión (Cumbres borrascoses) (+ co-sc); La ilusión viaja en tranvía (+ co-sc) 1954 El rio y la muerte (+ co-sc) 1955 Ensayo de un crimen (La Vida Criminal de Archibaldo de La Cruz; The Criminal Life of Archibaldo de la Cruz) (+ co-sc); Cela s’appelle l’Aurore (+ co-sc) 1956 La Mort en ce jardin (La muerte en este jardin) (+ co-sc) 1958 Nazarín (+ co-sc) 1959 La Fièvre monte à El Pao (Los Ambiciosos) (+ co-sc) 1960 The Young One (La Joven; La Jeune Fille) (+ co-sc) 1961 Viridiana (+ co-sc, story) 1962 El ángel exterminador (The Exterminating Angel) (+ co-sc, story) 1963 Le Journal d’une femme de chambre (+ co-sc) 1965 Simon del desierto (+ co-sc) 1966 Belle de jour (+ co-sc) 1969 La Voie lactée (The Milky Way; La via lattea) (+ co-sc, mu) 1970 Tristana (+ co-sc) 1972 Le Charme discret de la bourgeoisie (The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie) (+ co-sc) 1974 Le Fant?me de la liberté (The Phantom of Liberty) (+ sc, sound effects) 1977 Cet obscur objet du desir (That Obsure Object of Desire) (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1926 Mauprat (Epstein) (asst d, role as monk) 1927 La Sirène des tropiques (Etiévant and Nalpas) (asst d) 1928 La Chute de la maison Usher (Epstein) (asst d) 1936 Quién me quiere a mi? (Sáenz de Heredia) (pr, co-sc, ed) 1937 Espagne 1937/Espa?a leal en armas! (compilation, ed) 1940 Triumph of Will (supervising ed, commentary, edited compi- lation of Riefenstahl’s Triumph des Willens and Hans Bertram’s Feuertaufe) 1950 Si usted no puede, yo sí (Soler) (co-story) 1964 Llanto por un bandido (Lament for a Bandit) (Saura) (role as the executioner; tech advisor on arms and munitions); En este pueblo no hay ladrones (Isaac) (role) 1972 Le Moine (Kyrou) (co-sc) 1973 La Chute d’un corps (Polac) (role) Publications By BU?UEL: books— Viridiana, Paris, 1962; Mexico City, 1963. El ángel exterminador, Barcelona, 1964. L’Age d’or and Une Chien andalou, London, 1968. Three Screenplays: Viridiana, The Exterminating Angel, Simon of the Desert, New York, 1969. Belle de Jour, London, 1971. Tristana, London, 1971. The Exterminating Angel/Nazarín/Los Olvidados, London, 1972. My Last Breath, New York, 1983. By BU?UEL: articles— Interview with Jacques Doniol-Valcroze and André Bazin, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1954. Interview with Daniel Aubry and Jean Lacor, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley, California), Winter 1958. ‘‘Poésie et cinéma,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), June 1959. ‘‘Luis Bu?uel—A Statement,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Sum- mer 1960. ‘‘The Cinema: An Instrument of Poetry,’’ in New York Film Bulletin, February 1961. Interview with Kenji Kanesaka, in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1962. ‘‘Illisible, fils de fl?te: synopsis d’un scénario non réalisé,’’ with Jean Larrea, in Positif (Paris), March 1963. ‘‘Luis Bu?uel: voix off,’’ an interview with Manuel Michel, in Cinéma (Paris), March 1965. ‘‘Bu?uel contre son mythe,’’ an interview with Manuel Michel, in Cinéma (Paris), April 1966. ‘‘Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Interviews with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, New York, 1967. Interview with J. Cobos and G. S. de Erice, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1967. ‘‘Bu?uel Scenes,’’ an interview with Carlos Fuentes, in Movietone News (Seattle), February 1975. ‘‘Aragón, Madrid, Paris . . . Entrevista con Luis Bu?uel,’’ with J. de la Colina and T. Pérez, in Contracampo (Madrid), October/ November 1980. BU?UEL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 140 Interview with Aldo Tassone, in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 24, no. 3, 1982. ‘‘Dali intervista Bu?uel,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), December 1983. ‘‘Dnevnaia krasavitsa,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 6, 1992. On BU?UEL: books— Kyrou, Ado, Luis Bu?uel, Paris, 1962. Estève, Michel, editor, Luis Bu?uel, Paris, 1962/63. Durgnat, Raymond, Luis Bu?uel, Berkeley, California, 1968. Luis Bu?uel: Biografia Critica, Madrid, 1969. Buache, Freddy, Luis Bu?uel, Lausanne, 1970; published as The Cinema of Luis Bu?uel, London, 1973. Matthews, J.H., Surrealism and Film, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1971. Alcalá, Manuel, Bu?uel (Cine e ideologia), Madrid, 1973. Aranda, José Francisco, Luis Bu?uel: A Critical Biography, New York, 1975 Cesarman, Fernando, El ojo de Bu?uel, Barcelona, 1976. Drouzy, M., Luis Bu?uel, architecte du rêve, Paris, 1978. Mellen, Joan, editor, The World of Luis Bu?uel, New York, 1978. Cameron, Ian, Luis Bu?uel, Berkeley, California, 1979. Higginbotham, Virginia, Luis Bu?uel, Boston, 1979. Bazin, André, The Cinema of Cruelty: From Bu?uel to Hitchcock, New York, 1982. Cesarman, Fernando, L’Oeil de Bu?uel, Paris, 1982. Edwards, Gwynne, The Discreet Art of Luis Bu?uel: A Reading of His Films, London, 1982. Rees, Margaret A., Luis Bu?uel: A Symposium, Leeds, 1983. Lefèvre, Raymond, Luis Bu?uel, Paris, 1984. Vidal, Agustin Sanchez, Luis Bu?uel: Obra Cinematografica, Madrid, 1984. Aub, Max, Conversaciones con Bu?uel: Seguidas de 45 Entrevistas con Familiares, Amigos y Colaboradores del Cineasta Aragones, Madrid, 1985. Bertelli, Pino, Bu?uel: L’Arma dello Scandalo: L’Anarchia nel Cinema di Luis Bu?uel, Turin, 1985. Oms, Marcel, Luis Bu?uel, Paris, 1985. De la Colina, José, and Tomas Perez Turrent, Luis Bu?uel: Prohibido Asomarse al Interior, Mexico, 1986. Sandro, Paul, Diversions of Pleasure: Luis Bu?uel and the Crises of Desire, Columbus, Ohio, 1987. Monegal, Antonio, Luis Bu?uel: De la literatura al cine; una poética del objeto, Barcelona, 1993. Fuentes, Víctor, Bu?uel en México: iluminaciones sobre una pantalla pobre, Aragon, 1993. Pérez Bastías, Luis, Las dos caras de Luis Bu?uel, Barcelona, 1994. Evans, Peter William, The Films of Luis Bu?uel: Subjectivity and Desire, Oxford and New York, 1995. El Ojo: Bu?uel, México y el surrealismo, Mexico, 1996. On BU?UEL: articles— Demeure, Jacques, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel: poète de la cruaute,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 10, 1954. Richardson, Tony, ‘‘The Films of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), January/March 1954. Robles, Emmanuel, ‘‘A Mexico avec Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1956. Riera, Emilio, ‘‘The Eternal Rebellion of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1960. Bazin, André, ‘‘Los Olvidados,’’ in Qu’est ce que le cinéma (Paris) vol. 3, 1961. Aranda, José Francisco, ‘‘Surrealist and Spanish Giant,’’ in Films and Filming (London), October 1961. Aranda, José Francisco, ‘‘Back from the Wilderness,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November 1961. ‘‘Bu?uel Issue’’ of Positif (Paris), November 1961. Prouse, Derek, ‘‘Interviewing Bu?uel,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Summer 1962. Almendros, Nestor, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel: Cinéaste hispanique,’’ in Objectif (Paris), July 1963. Lovell, Alan, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Anarchist Cinema, London, 1964. Hammond, Robert, ‘‘Luis Alcoriza and the Films of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Autumn 1965. Milne, Tom, ‘‘The Mexican Bu?uel,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1965/66. Kanesaka, Kenji, ‘‘A Visit to Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1966. Harcourt, Peter, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel: Spaniard and Surrealist,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1967. Torres, Augusto, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel/Glauber Rocha: échos d’une conver- sation,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), February 1968. ‘‘Bu?uel Issue’’ of Jeune Cinéma (Paris), April 1969. Pechter, William, ‘‘Bu?uel,’’ in 24 Times a Second, New York, 1971. ‘‘Bu?uel Issue’’ of Image et Son (Paris), May 1971. ‘‘Bu?uel Issue’’ of Cine Cubano, no. 78/80, 1973. Lyon, E.H., ‘‘Luis Bu?uel: The Process of Dissociation in Three Films,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Fall 1973. Fuentes, Carlos, ‘‘Spain, Catholicism, Surrealism, and Anarchism: The Discreet Charm of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in New York Times Maga- zine, 11 March 1973. Murray, S., ‘‘Erotic Moments in the Films of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), July 1974. ‘‘Le Fant?me de la liberté Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), October 1974. George, G.L., ‘‘The Discreet Charm of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), November/December 1974. Mortimore, R., ‘‘Bu?uel, Sáenz de Heredia, and Filmófono,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1975. Conrad, Randall, ‘‘The Minister of the Interior Is on the Telephone: The Early Films of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Cineaste (New York), no. 7, 1976. Conrad, Randall, ‘‘A Magnificent and Dangerous Weapon: The Politics of Luis Bu?uel’s Later Films,’’ in Cineaste (New York), no. 8, 1976. Cattini, Alberto, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel’’ (special issue), Castoro Cinema (Firenze), no. 59, 1978. Yutkevich, S., ‘‘Ein Realist—streng und mitleidlos,’’ in Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), February 1980. Gazier, M., and others, ‘‘Bunuel ou L’Auberge Espagnole,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), special section, Summer-Autumn 1980. Wood, M., ‘‘The Discreet Charm of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), September 1982. Perez, G., ‘‘The Thread of the Disconcerting,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1982–83. Rubinstein, E., ‘‘Visit to a Familiar Planet: Bu?uel among the Hurdanos,’’ in Cinema Journal (Chicago), Summer 1983. BU?UELDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 141 McCarthy, T., obituary in Variety (New York), 3 August 1983. Millar, Gavin, ‘‘Bu?uel—the Careful Entomologist,’’ in Listener (London), 11 August 1983. Mayersberg, P., ‘‘The Happy Ending of Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1983. ‘‘Bu?uel Section’’ of Cinématographe (Paris), September-Octo- ber 1983. Yakir, Dan, and others, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel, 1900–1983,’’ in Film Com- ment (New York), September-October 1983. ‘‘Bu?uel Section’’ of Positif (Paris), October 1983. Greenbaum, R., obituary in Films in Review (New York), Octo- ber 1983. ‘‘Bu?uel Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), November 1983. ‘‘Bu?uel Issue,’’ of Bianco e Nero (Rome), July-September 1984. Oms, M., ‘‘Memorial pour Don Luis,’’ Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Perpignan, France), special section, vol. 38–39, Winter 1984. ‘‘Luis Bu?uel,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1985. Carrière, Jean-Claude, ‘‘Les aventures du sujet,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1985. ‘‘Cet objet obscur de desir Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), November 1985. Poplein, Michael, ‘‘Wuthering Heights and Its ‘Spirit’,’’ in Litera- ture/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 15, no. 2, 1987. Taves, B., ‘‘Whose Hand? Correcting a Bu?uel Myth,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1987. Comuzio, C. ‘‘Le radici di Bunuel nelle sue poesie,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), vol. 29, November 1989. Durgnat, R., ‘‘Theory of Theory—and Bunuel the Joker,’’in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), vol. 44, no. 1, 1990. Hommel, M., ‘‘Bunuel in Mexico,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), no. 172, June-July 1990. Oms, M., ‘‘Don Luis le Mexican,’’ in Cinémaction (Conde-sur- Noireau), no. 56, July 1990. Aub, M., ‘‘Portret w ruchu,’’ in Kino (Warsaw), vol. 25, Decem- ber 1991. Borau, J. L., ‘‘A Woman without a Piano, a Book without a Mark,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film and Video (Langhorne, PA), vol. 13, no. 4, 1991. Koski, M., and others, ‘‘Bunuelia etsimassa,’’ in Filmihullu (Helsinki), special section, vol. 1, 1991. Gorelik, M., ‘‘Shkatulka Luisa Buniuelia,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Mos- cow), no. 6, 1992. Amiel, V., ‘‘Entretien avec Jean-Claude Carriere,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 392, October 1993. Aranda, J. F., ‘‘Luis Bunuel ecrivain,’’ in Revue Belge du Cinéma (Brussels), no. 33–34-35, 1993. Daney, S., ‘‘Luis Bunuel,’’ in EPD Film (Frankfurt/Main), vol. 10, August 1993. Isaac, A., ‘‘Gabriel Figueroa habla sobre Luis Bunuel,’’ in Dicine (Mexico City), no. 50, March 1993. Jousse, T., ‘‘Bunuel face a ce qui se de robe,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 464, February 1993. Malaguti, C., ‘‘Bunuel messicano: la lente rovesciata dell’entomologo,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), vol. 33, May 1993. Perez Turrent, T., and J. de la Colina, ‘‘Entretiens avec Luis Bunuel,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 464, February 1993. Irwin, Gayle, ‘‘Luis Bu?uel’s Explicador: Film, Story, and Narrative Space,’’ Canadian Journal of Film Studies (Ottawa), vol. 4, no. 1, Spring 1995. On BU?UEL: films— Bazin, Jeanine, and André Labarthe, Cinéastes de notre temps, for television, 1967. Labarthe, André, Luis Bu?uel, with interview with Georges Sadoul, Paris, 1967. *** For all the critical attention (and furious critical controversy) his work occasioned over half a century, Luis Bu?uel resisted our best taxonomical efforts. To begin with, while no artist of this century strikes one as more quintessentially Spanish than Bu?uel, how can one apply the term ‘‘Spanish filmmaker’’ to a man whose oeuvre is far more nearly identified with France and Mexico than with the land of his birth? By the same token, can one speak of any film as ‘‘typical’’ of the man who made both L’Age d’or and Nazarín, both Los olvidados and Belle de jour, both Land without Bread and Le Charme discret de la bourgeoisie? Nonetheless, from Un Chien andalou to Cet obscur objet du désir, a Bu?uel film is always (albeit, as in many of the Mexican pieces of the 1940s and 1950s, only sporadically), a Bu?uel film. Perhaps the easiest way to deal with Bu?uel’s career is to suggest that certain avatars of Luis Bu?uel may be identified at different (if sometimes slightly overlapping) historical periods. The first Luis Bu?uel is the surrealist: the man who slit eyeballs (Un Chien andalou), the man to whom blasphemy was less a matter of specific utterances and gestures than a controlling style out of which might emerge new modes of feeling and of expression (L’Age d’or), the man who documentarized the unimaginable (Land Without Bread) and finally, the man who demonstrated more clearly than any other that surrealist perspectives demanded cinematographic realism. The sec- ond Luis Bu?uel (and the saddest, and much the least identifiable, now as then) is the all-but-anonymous journeyman film professional: the collaborator, often unbilled and almost always unremarked, on Spanish films which to this day remain unknown to any but the most dogged researchers; the archivist and adapter and functionary in New York and Hollywood; the long-term absentee from the world’s attention. The third is the Mexican director, the man who achieved a few works that at the time attracted varying degrees of notice outside the sphere of Latin American commercial distribution (Los olvidados, él, Archibaldo de la Cruz, Robinson Crusoe) but also of others that at the time attracted no notice at all. The fourth is the Luis Bu?uel who gradually made his way back to Europe by way of a few French films made in alternation with films in Mexico; and who then, with Viridiana, returned to appall, and so to reclaim, his native land; and who thenceforth, and no matter where or under what conditions he operated, persuasively reasserted himself as a figure of unmistakable moment in world cinema. The last Luis Bu?uel, following his emergence in the mid-1960s, was the past master, at once awesome and beloved, as serene in his command of his medium as he was cheerfully intrepid in his pursuit of whatever of value might be mined from the depths of the previously unexplored. Each of the Bu?uels of the preceding catalogue, except for the obscure and essentially uncreative second one, is manifest, or at least implicit, in the others. Even in his Mexican work, which included some otherwise less than exalted assignments (and Bu?uel himself, unlike certain of his more indiscriminate adulators, was perfectly willing to acknowledge that much of his Mexican work was shoddy or aborted or simply dull), the scion of surrealism showed his hand. BURNETT DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 142 There are several astonishing dream sequences, of course: the vision of slabs of raw meat hanging from the racks of a Mexico City streetcar (La ilusión viaja en tranvía), the incongruous verticality of the skeletal skyscrapers rising from the Mexico City slums (Los olvidados), and the necrophiliac ragings at the end of the Bu?uel version of Wuthering Heights (Abismos de pasión). At the same time, it was in his Mexican studio movies, with their often absurdly brief shooting schedules, that Bu?uel developed the unobtrusive but sovereign sway over narrative continuity and visual construction that so exhilarates admirers of such later works as Le Journal d’une femme de chambre or Cet obscur objet du désir. (According to Francisco Aranda, Alfred Hitchcock in 1972 called Bu?uel ‘‘the best director in the world.’’) Similarly, one may recognize in Tristana that same merciless anatomy of a specific social milieu, and in The Exterminating Angel that same theme of inexplicable entrapment, that one first encoun- tered in Land Without Bread. In El rio y la muerte a man, all of him save his head imprisoned in an iron lung, submits to a round of face- slapping. We recognize in the image (and in the gasp of laughter it provokes) something of the merciless attack on our pieties of Bu?uel’s early surrealist works and something of the more offhand wicked humor of, say, Le Charme discret. When such a recognition is reached, we know that the variety of styles and accents in which Bu?uel addressed us over the years is almost irrelevant. The political and social (or anti-social) canons of early surrealism could not contain him, nor could the foolish melodramatic conventions of some of his Mexican films stifle his humor, nor could the elegant actors and luxurious color cinematography of some of the later French films finally seduce him. Against all odds, his vision sufficed to transcend any and all stylistic diversions. ‘‘Vision,’’ perhaps the most exhausted word in the critical vo- cabulary, struggles back to life when applied to Bu?uel and his camera. In the consistent clarity of its perception, in its refusal to distinguish between something called ‘‘reality’’ and something called ‘‘hallucination,’’ Bu?uel’s camera always acts in the service of a fundamental surrealist principle, one of the few principles of any kind that Bu?uel was never tempted to call into question. Whether focused on the tragic earthly destiny of an inept would-be saint (Nazarín) or on the bizarre obsessions of an inept would-be sinner (the uncle in Viridiana, among a good many others), Bu?uel’s camera is the instrument of the most rigorous denotation, invoking nothing beyond that which it so plainly and patiently registers. The uncertain- ties and ambivalences we may feel as we watch a Bu?uel film arise not from the camera’s capacity to mediate but from the camera’s capacity to record: our responses are inherent in the subjects Bu?uel selects, in those extremes of human experiences that we recognize as his special domain. —E. Rubinstein BURNETT, Charles Nationality: American. Born: Vicksburg, Mississippi, 1944. Educa- tion: Studied electronics at Los Angeles Community College, and theater, film, writing, arts, and languages at the University of South- ern California, Los Angeles. Career: Directed first feature film, Charles Burnett Killer of Sheep, 1977. Awards: Guggenheim Foundation fellowship, 1981; Critics Prize, Berlin Festival, and First Prize, U.S. Festival, 1981, for Killer of Sheep; National Endowment for the Arts grant, MacArthur Foundation fellowship, and Rockefeller Foundation fel- lowship, 1988; Best Director and Best Screenplay, Independent Spirit Awards, Independent Feature Project/West, Best Film, Los Angeles Film Critics Association, and Best Film, National Society of Film Critics, 1990, for To Sleep with Anger. Agent: William Morris Agency, Los Angeles. Films as Director: 1969 Several Friends (short) 1973 The House (short) 1977 Killer of Sheep (+ sc, pr, ph, ed) 1983 My Brother’s Wedding (+ sc, pr, ph) 1989 Guests of Hotel Astoria (+ ph) 1990 To Sleep with Anger (+ sc) 1994 The Glass Shield (+ sc) 1995 When It Rains (short) 1996 Nightjohn (for TV) 1998 The Wedding (mini for TV); Dr. Endesha Ida Mae Holland (doc/short) 1999 Selma, Lord, Selma (for TV); The Annihilation of Fish; Olivia’s Story 2000 Finding Buck McHenry BURNETTDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 143 Other Films: 1983 Bless Their Little Hearts (Woodbury) (sc, ph) 1985 The Crocodile Conspiracy (ph) 1987 I Fresh (sc) Publications By BURNETT: articles— ‘‘Charles Burnett,’’ interview by S. Sharp in Black Film Review (Washington, D.C.), no. 1, 1990. ‘‘Entretien avec Charles Burnett,’’ interview by M. Cientat and M. Ciment in Positif (Paris), November 1990. ‘‘They’ve Gotta Have Us,’’ interview by K. G. Bates in New York Times, 14 July 1991. Burnett, Charles, and Charles Lane, ‘‘Charles Burnett and Charles Lane,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), August 1991. Burnett, Charles, ‘‘Breaking & Entering,’’ in Filmmaker (Los Ange- les), vol. 3, no. 1, 1994. ‘‘Simple Pain,’’ an interview with M. Arvin, in Film International (Tehran), vol. 3, no. 2, 1995. Burnett, Charles & Lippy, Tod, ‘‘To Sleep with Anger: Writing and Directing To Sleep with Anger,’’ in Scenario (Rockville), Spring 1996. On BURNETT: articles— Reynaud, B., ‘‘Charles Burnett,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1990. Kennedy, L., ‘‘The Black Familiar,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 16 October 1990. Amiel, V., ‘‘To Sleep, to Dream,’’ in Positif (Paris), November 1990. ‘‘In from the Wilderness,’’ in Time (New York), 17 June 1991. Krohn, B., ‘‘Flics Story,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma, December 1993. Makarah, O.F., ‘‘Director: ‘The Glass Shield’,’’ in The Independent Film & Video Monthly (New York), October 1994. White, Armond, ‘‘Sticking to the Soul,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January-February 1997. Thompson, Cliff, ‘‘The Devil Beats His Wife: Small Moments and Big Statements in the Films of Charles Burnett,’’ in Cineaste (New York), December 1997. *** Prior to the release of To Sleep with Anger in 1990, Charles Burnett had for two decades been writing and directing low-budget, little-known, but critically praised films that examined life and relationships among contemporary African Americans. Killer of Sheep, his first feature, is a searing depiction of ghetto life; My Brother’s Wedding knowingly examines the relationship between two siblings on vastly different life tracks; Bless Their Little Hearts (directed by Billy Woodbury, but scripted and photographed by Burnett) is a poignant portrait of a black family. But how many had even heard of these films, let alone seen them? Thanks to the emergence in the 1980s of the prolific Spike Lee as a potent box office (as well as critical) force, however, a generation of African-American moviemakers have had their films not only produced but more widely distributed. Such was the case with To Sleep with Anger, released theatrically by the Samuel Goldwyn Company. The film, like Burnett’s earlier work, is an evocative, character-driven drama about relationships between family members and the fabric of domestic life among contemporary African Americans. It is the story of Harry Mention (Danny Glover), a meddlesome trickster who arrives in Los Angeles at the doorstep of his old friend Gideon (Paul Butler). The film details the manner in which Harry abuses the hospitality of Gideon, and his effect on Gideon’s family. First there is the older generation: Gideon and his wife Suzie (Mary Alice), who cling to the traditions of their Deep South roots. Gideon has attempted to pass on his folklore, and his sense of values, to his two sons. One, Junior (Carl Lumbly), accepts this. But the other, Babe Brother (Richard Brooks), is on the economic fast track—and in conflict with his family. While set within an African-American milieu, To Sleep with Anger transcends the ethnic identities of its characters; it also deals in a generic way with the cultural differences between parents and children, the manner in which individuals learn (or don’t learn) from experience, and the need to push aside those who only know how to cause violence and strife. As such, it becomes a film that deals with universal issues. The Glass Shield is a departure for Burnett in that his scenario is not set within an African-American universe. Instead, he places his characters in a hostile white world. The Glass Shield is a thinking person’s cop film. Burnett’s hero is a young black officer fresh out of the police academy, JJ Johnson (Michael Boatman), who becomes the first African American assigned to a corruption-laden, all-white sheriff’s station in Los Angeles. Johnson is treated roughly by the station’s commanding officer and some of the veteran cops. Superfi- cially, it seems as if he is being dealt with in such a manner solely because he is an inexperienced rookie, in need of toughening and educating to the ways of the streets. But the racial lines clearly are drawn when one of his senior officers tells him, ‘‘You’re one of us. You’re not a brother.’’ Johnson, who always has wanted to be a cop, desires only to do well and fit in. And so he stands by idly as black citizens are casually stopped and harassed by his fellow officers. Even more telling, with distressing regularity, blacks seem to have died under mysterious circumstances while in custody within the confines of the precinct. As the film progresses, Burnett creates the feeling that a bomb is about to explode. And it does, when Johnson becomes involved in the arrest of a black man, framed on a murder charge, and readily agrees to lie in court to protect a fellow officer. Burnett’s ultimate point is that in contemporary America it is impossible for a black man to cast aside his racial identity as he seeks his own personal destiny. First and foremost, he is an African American, existing within a society in which all of the power is in the hands of a white male elite. But African Americans are not the sole powerless entity in The Glass Shield. Johnson befriends his station’s first female officer (Lori Petty), who must deal with sexism within the confines of her precinct house as much as on the streets. Together, this pair becomes united in a struggle against a white male-dominated system in which everyday corruption and hypocrisy are the rule. Burnett’s themes—African-American identity within the family unit and, subsequently, African-American identity within the com- munity at large—are provocative and meaningful. It seems certain that he will never direct a film that is anything short of insightful in its content. —Rob Edelman BURTON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 144 BURTON, Tim Nationality: American. Born: Burbank, California, 1958. Educa- tion: Studied animation at California Institute of Arts, B.A., 1981. Family: Married Lena Gieseke, February 1989 (divorced). Career: Cartoonist since grade school in Burbank; animator, Walt Disney Studios, Hollywood, California, 1981–85; director and producer of feature films, 1985—. Awards: Chicago Film Festival Award, for Vincent, 1982; ShoWest Award, for Director of the Year, 1990; Emmy Award (with others) for outstanding animated program, for Beetlejuice, 1990. Agent: Creative Artists Agency, 9830 Wilshire Blvd., Beverly Hills, California, 90212. Films as Director: 1982 Vincent (animated short); Frankenweenie (live-action short) 1985 Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure 1988 Beetlejuice 1989 Batman 1990 Edward Scissorhands (+ co-sc, pr) 1992 Batman Returns (+ co-pr) 1994 Ed Wood (+ co-pr) 1995 Mars Attacks! (+ co-pr, co-sc) 1999 Sleepy Hollow Other Films: 1992 Singles (role) 1993 Tim Burton’s The Nightmare before Christmas (co-sc, co-pr, des) 1994 Cabin Boy (co-pr); A Century of Cinema (Caroline Thomas) (as himself) 1995 Batman Forever (exec pr) Publications By BURTON: books— The Nightmare before Christmas (for children), New York, 1993. My Art and Films, New York, 1993. With Mark Salisbury, Burton on Burton, New York, 1995. Burton (for children), New York, 2000. By BURTON: articles— Interviews, in Los Angeles Times, 12 August 1990; 7 December 1990; 12 March 1992; 14 June 1992. Interview, in Washington Post, 16 December 1990. ‘‘Slice of Life,’’ an interview with Brian Case, in Time Out (London), 19 June 1991. ‘‘Introduction,’’ in Matthew Rolston, Big Pictures, Boston, 1991. Interviews, in Chicago Tribune, 14 June 1992; 28 June 1992. Interview, in Vogue, July 1992. ‘‘Punching Holes in Reality,’’ an interview with Gavin Smith, in Film Comment, November/December 1994. ‘‘Space Probe,’’ an interview with Nigel Floyd, in Time Out (Lon- don), 19 February 1997. Interview with Christian Viviani and Michael Henry, in Positif (Paris), March 1997. Bondy, J.A., ‘‘Intervju,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol 30. no. 2, 1997. Article in Andrew Kevin Walker, The Art of Sleepy Hollow, New York, 2000(?). On BURTON: book— Hanke, Ken, Tim Burton: An Unauthorized Biography of the Filmmaker, Los Angeles, 1999. On BURTON: articles— Corliss, Richard, ‘‘A Sweet and Scary Treat: The Nightmare before Christmas,’’ in Time, 11 October 1993. Thompson, Caroline, ‘‘On Tim Burton,’’ in New Yorker, 21 March 1994. Maio, Kathi, ‘‘Sick Puppy Auteur?,’’ in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, May 1994. Krohn, Bill, ‘‘Tim Burton, de Disney à Ed Wood,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1994. Positif (Paris), June 1995. Jean, Marcel, ‘‘Les effets d’une épidémie,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), December-January 1995–1996. Jean, Marcel, ‘‘Carnet de notes sur le corps martien,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), Spring 1997. Knuutila, P., ‘‘Tim Burton,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 39, no. 2, 1997. *** Although in the last resort I find his work more distinctive than distinguished, Tim Burton compels interest and attention by the way in which he has established within the Hollywood mainstream a cin- ema that is, to say the least, highly eccentric, idiosyncratic, and personal. Burton’s cinema is centered firmly on the figure of what I shall call (for want of a better term, and knowing that this one is now ‘‘politically incorrect’’) the freak. I define this as a person existing quite outside the bounds of the conventional notion of normality, usually (but not exclusively, as I include Burton’s Ed Wood in this) because of some extreme physical peculiarity. Every one of the films, without exception, is built around at least one freak. One must then subdivide them into two categories: the ‘‘positive’’ freaks, who at least mean well, and the ‘‘negative’’ freaks, who are openly malig- nant. In the former category, in order of appearance: Pee-Wee Herman (Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure), Edward Scissorhands, Catwoman (Batman Returns), Jack (The Nightmare before Christmas), Ed Wood; in the latter, the Joker (Batman) and the Penguin (Batman Returns). Beetlejuice (or ‘‘Betelgeuse’’) belongs ambiguously to both catego- ries, though predominantly to the latter; to which one might also add, without stretching things too far, Riddler and Two-Face from Batman Forever—watered-down Burton, produced by him but written and directed by others, still owing a great deal to his influence. If one leaves aside Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure and The Nightmare before Christmas (which Burton conceived and produced but did not direct), this gives us an alternative but exactly parallel division: three films BURTONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 145 Tim Burton with Michael Keaton, two with Johnny Depp (who might well have played Jack in The Nightmare before Christmas had Burton opted to make it as a live-action film). Of the malignant freaks, Danny de Vito’s Penguin is at once the most grotesque (to the verge of unwatchability) and the only one with an excuse for his malignancy: unlike the others he was born a freak, cast out and presumed to die by his parents, surviving by chance. The Joker and (if one permits the inclusion) Two-Face are physical freaks because of disfigurement, but this has merely intensified a malig- nancy already there. They are colorful and vivid, but not especially interesting: they merely embody a somewhat simplistic notion of evil, the worked-up energy of the over-the-top performances a means of concealing the essential emptiness at the conceptual level. The benign freaks are more interesting. They are invariably associated with creativity: Pee-Wee, Edward Scissorhands, and Ed Wood are all artists, of a kind every bit as idiosyncratic as their creator’s. This is set, obviously, against the determined destructive- ness of the malignant freaks, who include in this respect Beetlejuice: the film’s sympathetic characters (notably Winona Ryder) may find him necessary at times, but his dominant characteristic is a delight in destruction for its own sake. What gives the positive freaks (espe- cially those played by Johnny Depp) an extra dimension is their extreme fragileness and vulnerability (the negative freaks always regard themselves, however misguidedly, as invincible). Credit must be given to Burton’s originality and inventiveness: he is an authentic artist in the sense that he is so clearly personally involved in and committed to his peculiar vision and its realization in film. What equally demands to be questioned is the degree of real intelligence underlying these qualities. The inventiveness is all on the surface, in the art direction, makeup, special effects. The conceptual level of the films does not bear very close scrutiny. The problem is there already, and in a magnified form, in Beetlejuice: the prolifera- tion of invention is too grotesque and ugly to be funny, too wild, arbitrary, and unselfcritical to reward any serious analysis. The two Batman movies are distinguished by the remarkably dark vision (in a film one might expect to be ‘‘family entertainment’’) of contempo- rary urban/industrial civilization. But Michael Keaton’s Batman, while unusually and mercifully restrained, fails to make any strong impression, and one is thrown back on the freaks who, with one notable exception, quickly outstay their welcome. The exception is Michelle Pfeiffer’s Catwoman (in Batman Returns), and that is due primarily to one of the great screen presences of our time. Burton’s overall project (in his work as a whole) seems to be to set his freaks (both positive and negative) against ‘‘normality’’ in order to show that normality, today, is every bit as weird: a laudable enough project, most evident in Edward Scissorhands. But the depiction of normality in that film (here, small-town suburbia) amounts to no more than amiable, simple-minded parody (despite the charm of Dianne Wiest’s BURTON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 146 Avon Lady, but her role dwindles as the film proceeds). For all the grotesquerie of his monsters, Burton’s cinema is ultimately too soft- centered, lacking in rigor and real thinking. Ed Wood, however, may be taken as evidence that Burton is beginning to transcend the limitations of his previous work: it is far and away his most satisfying film to date. Here is surely one of cinema’s most touching celebra- tions of the sheer joy of creativity with the irony, of course, that it is manifested in an ‘‘artist’’ of no talent whatever. Johnny Depp, in what is surely, with Pfeiffer’s Catwoman, one of the two most complex and fully realized incarnations in Burton’s work, magically conveys his character’s absolute belief in the value of his own creations and his own personal joy and excitement in creating them, never realizing that they will indeed go down in film history as topping everyone’s list of the worst films ever made. Yet his Ed Wood never strikes us as merely stupid: simply as a man completely caught up in his own delight in creative activity—always longing for recognition, but never self-serving or mercenary. This self-delusion, at once marvel- ous and pathetic, goes hand in hand with his growing compassion for and commitment to the decrepit and drug-addicted Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau, in a performance that, for once, fully deserved its Oscar), and his equally delusory conviction that Lugosi is still a great star. Burton’s two recent films, Mars Attacks! and Sleepy Hollow, neatly illustrate, respectively, his weaknesses and strengths. Mars Attacks!, a parody both of Independence Day and the science fiction invasion cycle of the 1950s, opens promisingly, apparently initiating a mordant satire on contemporary American civilization, the Mar- tians’ approach to Earth, and the possibility that they represent a more advanced and enlightened culture producing a cross-section of possi- ble reactions from a wide range of cultural positions, presented as variously vacuous, irrelevant, or self-serving. From the point where the Martians turn out to be, after all, stereotypically malevolent, within any redeeming features whatever, all that is lost: the film has nowhere to go, and disintegrates into a series of obvious gags ranging from the gratuitously ugly and grotesque (the fates of Pierce Brosnan and Sarah Jessica Parker) to the merely childish. Sleepy Hollow is built around the talent and persona of Johnny Depp, star of the two most distinguished of Burton’s previous films (which can scarcely be coincidental). Once again, the collaboration with Depp brings out all Burton’s finest qualities, an aesthetic and emotional sensibility totally absent from the majority of his work. The film’s horrors are grotesque but never offered as funny, becoming a perfect foil for Depp’s essential gentleness, elegance, and underly- ing strength. The art direction shows Burton and his designer at their finest, creating effects that are at once frightening, beautiful, and authentically strange. It seems clear that Tim Burton needs Johnny Depp more than Johnny Depp needs Tim Burton. —Robin Wood 147 C CACOYANNIS, Michael Nationality: Greek. Born: Limassol, Cyprus, 11 June 1927. Educa- tion: Greek Gymnasium; Gray’s Inn Law School, London, called to the Bar, 1948; Central School of Speech and Drama, London; Stage Directing course, Old Vic School, London. Career: Radio Producer for BBC and actor in London, early 1950s; returned to Greece and directed first film, Windfall in Athens, 1953; later directed stage productions in London and on Broadway. Lives in Greece. Awards: Grand Jury Prize, Cannes Film Festival, 1962, for Electra. Films as Director: 1953 Windfall in Athens 1955 Stella (+ sc) 1957 A Girl in Black (+ sc) 1958 The Final Lie (A Matter of Dignity) (+ sc) 1959 Our Last Spring Michael Cacoyannis (center) on the set of Electra 1960 The Wastrel (+ sc) 1962 Electra (+ sc) 1964 Zorba the Greek (+ sc, ed) 1967 The Day the Fish Came Out (+ sc) 1971 The Trojan Women (Women of Troy) (+ sc, ed) 1975 Atilla 74 (doc) (+ ed) 1977 Iphigenia (+ sc, ed) 1987 Sweet Country (+ sc, ed) 1991 Up, down, and Sideways (+ sc, ed) 1999 Varya (+ sc, pr) Publications By CACOYANNIS: articles— Interview with Pierre Billard, in Cinéma (Paris), February 1957. Interview in Films and Filming (London), January 1960. Films and Filming (London), June 1963. Interview in Screen International (London), 13 May 1978. Interview with James Potts, in Educational Broadcasting Interna- tional, September 1978. Interview with M. McDonald, in Bucknell Review, Spring 1991. Interview with Lindsay Amos, in Cinema Papers (Fitzroy), June 1998. On CACOYANNIS: book— Schuster, Mel, The Contemporary Greek Cinema, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1979. On CACOYANNIS: articles— Stanbrook, Alan, ‘‘Rebel with a Cause,’’ in Film (London), no. 24, 1960. Bianco e Nero (Rome), December 1963. ‘‘Michael Cacoyannis,’’ in Film Dope (London), November 1974. ‘‘Michael Cacoyannis,’’ in International Film Guide 1976, edited by Peter Cowie, London, 1976. National Film Theatre Booklet (London), April 1978. Rivista del Cinematografo, May 1981. *** A man between two worlds—this is how the life and work of Michael Cacoyannis could be characterized. The first world is one which draws on classical drama, his background in the modern theatre, and modern European cinema. The second world incorpo- rates a mixture of the cultural knowledge acquired during his training in England with an inborn sense of the Greek tradition. This is the background from which Cacoyannis creates an original cinematographic depiction of contemporary life. CAMERON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 148 At the beginning of his career, Cacoyannis’s inspiration came from the film classics as much as from his theatrical background; for his debut, Kyriakatiko ksypnéma, it is René Clair who appears to be his spiritual tutor. Cacoyannis’s creative path then led from comedy to drama, to an analysis of the fragile nature of human relations. His stories, of Stella the singer, of the ‘‘girl in black’’ on the island of Hydros, or the story of the lost hopes of a broken family, are attempts to interpret contemporary Greek reality in a very raw way. The films capture the archaic rigidity of social relations and the feelings of loneliness. The random tragic moments in which city intellectuals as well as ordinary village people find themselves are milestones along their path to happiness. City streets, forgotten villages on lonely islands, and scorched foothills provide a suitably poignant backdrop for the fates of Cacoyannis’s characters. It is said—with good reason—that early Cacoyannis films carry the spiritual heritage of Italian neo-realism. These efforts culminated, through directly drawing upon litera- ture, in the creation of a full-blooded renaissance figure, Alexis Zorba in Zorba the Greek—a portait of a man who lives (and loves) life to the full. The friendship of this ‘‘Man of Nature’’ with a young writer as shown in a confrontation of dramatically realistic (but also poetic) scenes, is the victory of the human spirit over convention. Also here in ‘‘sotto voce’’ is the pathos of sights and thoughts, a ghost-like echo of ancient Greek tragedy. This element of contemporary drama is expanded to incorporate classic Greek traditions. Using locations in Greece under a blazing sun, Cacoyannis reworks not only the story of Elektra, but from mythology picks the story of the Trojans in The Trojan Women, while in the grand scenery of olive groves he sets Euripides talking about the Princess in Iphigenia. Cacoyannis does all this in order to address, for a contemporary audience, the eternal question of crime and punishment, to show that evil among people ultimately produces only more evil. For him the ancient myths encapsulate eternal conflicts of the human soul. Thus is Michael Cacoyannis a poet of the modern Greek cinema. —Vacláv Merhaut CAMERON, James Nationality: American. Born: James Francis Cameron in Kapuskasing, Ontario, Canada, 26 August, 1954; moved to the United States in 1971. Education: Graduated in physics at California State Univer- sity, Fullerton. Family: Married 1) Sharon Williams, 1974 (divorced 1985); 2) Gale Anne Hurd, 1985 (divorced 1989); 3) Kathryn Bigelow, 1989 (divorced 1991); 4) Linda Hamilton, 1997 (separated); one daughter with Hamilton: Josephine Archer, born 1993. Career: Financed early screenwriting with truckdriving; first professional film job as special effects man and art director for Roger Corman, 1980; set up production company, Lightstorm Entertainment, 1990; co-founder and CEO of visual effects company Digital Domain, 1993; True Lies first film to cost over $100 million, 1994; Titanic first film to cost over $200 million, 1997. Awards: Razzie Award (USA) for Worst Screenplay, for Rambo: First Blood Part II (shared with Sylvester Stallone and Kevin Jarre), 1986; ShoWest (USA) Producer of the Year, 1995; Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Director, Directors’ Guild of America Award for Outstanding Direc- torial Achievement in Motion Pictures for Titanic (shared with James Cameron others), Golden Globe for Best Director-Motion Picture, Golden Satellite Awards for Best Director of Motion Picture, Best Motion Picture-Drama (shared with John Landau), and Best Motion Picture Film Editing (shared with Richard A. Harris and Conrad Buff), American Cinema Editors Eddie Award for Best Edited Feature Film (shared with Buff and Harris), and Academy Awards for Best Director, Best Film Editing (shared with Buff and Harris), and Best Picture (shared with Landau), all for Titanic, 1998; Academy of Science Fiction, Horror and Fantasy Films Preident’s Award, 1998; Golden Eddie Filmmaker of the Year Award, 2000. Address: Lightstorm Entertainment, 919 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Mon- ica, California 90401–2704, USA. Films as Director: 1981 Pirhana II: The Spawning (Pirhana II: Flying Killers, The Spawning) 1984 The Terminator (+ co-sc) 1986 Aliens (+ co-sc) 1989 The Abyss (+ sc) 1991 Terminator 2: Judgment Day (T2) (+ co-sc, pr) 1994 True Lies (+ sc, co-pr) 1996 T2 3-D: Battle across Time (Terminator 2: 3) (+ co-sc) 1997 Titanic (+ sc, co-pr, co-ed, ro as extra) Other Films 1980 Battle beyond the Stars (co-ph) 1981 Escape from New York (co-ph) 1984 Rambo: First Blood Part II (co-sc) 1991 Point Break (exec pr) CAMERONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 149 1999 The Muse (ro as himself) 2000 Dark Angel (for TV) (sc) Publications By CAMERON: books— With William Wisher, Terminator 2: Judgment Day: The Book of the Film, an Illustrated Screenplay, New York, 1991. Titanic, New York, 1997. By CAMERON: articles— Interview with R. Yates, ‘‘Ship Happens. Jim’ll Fix It,’’ in Observer Review (London), 11 January, 1998. Interview with Garth Pearce, in Total Film (London), February 1998. Interview with Anne Thompson, in Premiere (New York), Febru- ary 1999. On CAMERON: books— Heard, Christopher, Dreaming Aloud: The Life and Films of James Cameron, Toronto, 1997. Parisi, Paula, ‘‘Titanic’’ and the Making of James Cameron: The Inside Story of the Three-Year Adventure that Rewrote Motion Picture History, New York, 1998. Shapiro, Marc, James Cameron: An Unauthorized Biography, Los Angeles, 2000. On CAMERON: articles— Ebert, Roger, review of Aliens, in Chicago Sun-Times (Chicago), 18 July 1986. Chase, Donald, ‘‘On the Set of Terminator 2: Reinventing a Science- Fiction Classic for the Nineties,’’ in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 12 July 1991. Kilday, Gregg, ‘‘Brave New World,’’ in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 20 August 1991. Jancovich, Mark, ‘‘Modernity and Subjectivity in The Terminator: The Machine as Monster in Contemporary American Culture,’’ in The Velvet Light Trap (Austin, Texas), Fall 1992. Thompson, Anne, ‘‘Five True Lies about James Cameron,’’ in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 29 July 1994. Richardson, John H., ‘‘Iron Jim,’’ in Premiere (New York), August 1994. Arroyo, Jose, ‘‘Cameron and the Comic,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), September 1994. Burr, Ty, ‘‘Cameron Focus,’’ in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 13 July 1995. Larson, Doran, ‘‘Machine as Messiah: Cyborgs, Morphs and the American Body Politic,’’ in Cinema Journal (Urbana), Sum- mer 1997. Parisi, Paula, ‘‘Man Overboard!’’ in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 7 November 1997. Masters, Kim, ‘‘Trying to Stay Afloat,’’ in Time (New York), 8 December 1997. Arroyo, Jose, ‘‘Massive Attack,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), February 1998. Hughes, David, ‘‘Magnificent Obsession (Dispatches from the Set of Titanic),’’ in Premiere (New York), December 1998. *** In his acceptance speech at the Golden Globe awards in 1998, James Cameron asked whether the success of Titanic proved once and for all that size matters. Everything about the film was big. At over $200 million, its budget was the biggest in movie history; an entire new studio had to be constructed for the production, including a huge water tank to hold a ninety-percent sized replica of the original ship. In fact, Cameron’s remark could have applied to any one of his films since the mid-1980s. Titanic, which he once called his ‘‘190 million- dollar chick flick,’’ was merely the biggest of a series of films that have earned the director a reputation for taking on groundbreaking and ambitious projects. Known in Hollywood as ‘‘Iron Jim,’’ it has been said that working on one of Cameron’s projects is like waging a military campaign. Cameron can now demand the highest standards from his cast and crew, but it was as a special effects expert for Roger Corman, providing additional direction on Battle beyond the Stars (1980), that Cameron made his first professional steps as a filmmaker. His first solo work as a director, Pirhana II, from which he was fired before completion, did not suggest the beginnings of a glittering career. Its clunky special effects and ludicrous storyline about pirhana fish that learn to fly are closer to B-movie horrors from the 1950s than the director’s polished later output. It was not until 1984, and The Terminator, that Cameron had his first major success. With Arnold Schwarzenegger as the T800, a cyborg back from the future, The Terminator cost only $6.4 million, about the same as six minutes’ footage from Titanic. The Terminator became something of a surprise hit, rescuing Schwarzenegger from a career of bodybuild- ing films and Conan sequels, and launching Cameron into the big league. It brought thoughtful science fiction to a wide audience, addressing concerns about nuclear war and the revolution in comput- ing and robotics that was taking hold in the early 1980s. Widely recognized as a science-fiction classic, The Terminator confirmed Cameron’s abilities as a director and led to him being hired to make the high-profile sequel to Ridley Scott’s Alien. With Sigourney Weaver reprising her role as Ripley, Aliens sees her awakened from hibernation fifty-seven years after her first ordeal and returning to the mysterious planet from which she escaped in the earlier film. Although the plot is rather derivative, the special effects are impressive and the action relentless. One critic, Roger Ebert, advised viewers not to eat before going to see it, but declared it ‘‘a superb example of filmmaking craft.’’ Aliens, and later films like The Abyss and Terminator 2, all contain strong female characters, and Cameron is often noted for creating positive roles for women, but in reality his feminist creden- tials are far from certain. Writing in Entertainment Weekly, Ty Burr even goes as far as to suggest that the presence of strong female characters is thanks to Cameron’s collaborators, Gale Ann Hurd and Linda Hamilton, and notes the misogynistic language in True Lies, which is all Cameron’s own work. Special effects and slick direction redeem the otherwise disap- pointing The Abyss, which opened in 1989 to less than enthusiastic reviews. Set on a drilling rig on the seabed, the film is slower paced than Aliens and contains few sympathetic characters. It is a landmark CAMPION DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 150 film, however, because of the way computerized images are inte- grated with live action. Cameron has been a pioneer of computer generated effects, and in the early 1990s co-founded the IBM-backed digital effects company, Digital Domain, in order to develop the technology further. After the lessons learned on The Abyss, Computer Generated Images (CGI) were used still more effectively in his next film, Terminator 2. Like the column of water in The Abyss, the ‘‘liquid metal’’ T-1000 can change into any shape. But Terminator 2 set new standards for the integration of digital images and live action by applying the ‘‘morphing’’ technique to a live actor. Even apart from the stunning effects, Terminator 2 is a better film than the original, combining humor, real human drama, and large-scale set pieces in what is probably Cameron’s most balanced work. Cameron’s third Schwarzenegger vehicle, True Lies, is a comedy about a spy whose wife doesn’t know what he really does for a living. Like Terminator 2, it is also heavy with CGI, but whereas Terminator 2 put the special effects on display, in True Lies, Cameron aimed to make the action as realistic as possible, concealing computerized shots from the audience. In one stunt, for example, a truck was supposed to leap off the end of a broken bridge and land in the water. When it unexpectedly made it to the other side, Cameron had it removed digitally from the bridge and made to plunge into the sea. Impressive for its technical accomplishments, True Lies is rather bloated and too long for its flimsy plot. Because of the enormous financial success of his films, Cameron is one of the most influential figures in filmmaking, while his production company, Lightstorm Entertainment, allows him almost total autonomy in choosing film projects. Titanic is Cameron’s most ambitious project to date, and its earnings take the gross box office income of his films to over $1 billion. But although the film was successful at the box office and at the awards, it has been criticized for the weakness of the romantic plot at its center, and for its failures as a human drama. In a Cameron film, however, none of this really matters: the director’s real strengths lie in his technical brilliance and his willingness to take risks. After Titanic, it is difficult to imagine filmmaking on a grander scale. Yet as Cameron himself explains, in the era of digital movie making, ‘‘There are no limits to what you can do. Only money.’’ —Chris Routledge CAMPION, Jane Nationality: New Zealander. Born: Wellington, 30 April 1954. Education: Victoria University, Wellington, B.A. in structural arts; Chelsea School of Arts, London, diploma in fine arts (completed at Sydney College of the Arts); Australian Film and Television School, diploma in direction. Family: Parents are opera/theater director Richard Campion and actress/writer Edith Campion; sister is director/ screenwriter Anna Campion; married television producer/director Colin Englert. Career: Became interested in filmmaking and began making short films, late 1970s; short film, Tissues, led to her acceptance into the Australian Film and Television School, 1981; took job with Australia’s Women’s Film Unit, 1984; directed an episode of the television drama Dancing Daze, 1986; short films Peel, Passionless Moments, and Girls Own Story released theatrically in Jane Campion the United States, 1989–90. Awards: Melbourne Film Festival Diploma of Merit, Palme d’Or Best Short Film Cannes Film Festival, for Peel, 1983–86; Melbourne Film Festival Unique Artist Merit, Best Experimental Film Australian Film Institute Award, Most Popu- lar Short Film Sydney Film Festival, for Passionless Moments, 1984–85; Rouben Mamoulian Award Best Overall Short Film/Unique Artist Merit Melbourne Film Festival, Best Direction Australian Film Institute Award, Best Screenplay Australian Film Institute Award, First Prize Cinestud Amsterdam Film Festival, for Girls Own Story, 1984–85; X. L. Elders Award Melbourne Film Festival, Best Short Fiction Melbourne Film Festival, for After Hours, 1985; Chicago International Film Festival Golden Plaque, Best Direcor Australian Film Institute Award, Best TV Film Australian Film Institute Award, for 2 Friends, 1987; Georges Sadoul Prize Australian Critics Award, Best Foreign Film Australian Critics Award, Best Film Australian Critics Award, Best Director Australian Critics Award, Los Angeles Film Critics Association New Generation Award, Best Foreign Film Independent Spirit Award, for Sweetie, 1989–90; Venice Film Festi- val Grand Special Jury Prize, Venice Film Festival O.C.I.C. Award, Toronto International Film Festival Critics Award, Best Foreign Film Independent Spirit Award, for An Angel at My Table, 1990; Best Screenplay Academy Award, Cannes Film Festival Golden Palm, Best Foreign Film Cesar Award, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen Writers Guild of America Award, Best Foreign Film Independent Spirit Award, Best Director Australian Film Institute Award, Best Screenplay Australian Film Institute Award, Best Direc- tor, and Screenplay, New York Film Critics Circle, Best Screenplay New York Film Critics Circle, Best Director Los Angeles Film Critics Association, Best Screenplay Los Angeles Film Critics Association, Best Screenplay National Society of Film Critics, Australian Film Critics Best Director, Australian Film Critics Best Screenplay, Guild of Regional Film Writers Best Director Award, Best Screenplay Chicago Film Critics, Robert Festival Best Foreign Film, Bodil Festival Best European Film, for The Piano, 1993. Address: Hilary CAMPIONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 151 Linstead & Associates, Level 18, Plaza II, 500 Oxford Street, Bondi Junction, NSW 2022, Australia. Films as Director: 1982 Peel (short) (+ sc, ed) 1984 Mishaps of Seduction and Conquest (video short) (+ sc); Passionless Moments (short) (co-d, + co-sc, co-pr, ph); Girls Own Story (short) (+ sc); After Hours (short) (+ sc) 1985 2 Friends (for Australian TV) (+ co-pr) 1989 Sweetie (+ co-sc, story, casting dir) 1990 An Angel at My Table (for Australian TV; edited version released theatrically) 1993 The Piano (+ sc) 1996 Portrait of a Lady 1999 Holy Smoke (+ sc) 2001 In the Cut (+ sc) Other Films: 1989 The Audition (Anna Campion) (ro) 1999 Soft Fruit (Andreef) (exec pr) Publications By CAMPION: books— Sweetie, the Screenplay, with Gerard Lee, St. Lucia, Queensland, 1991. The Piano, New York, 1993. The Piano: The Novel, with Kate Pullinger, New York, 1994. Holy Smoke, with Anna Campion, New York, 1999. Wexman, Virginia Wright, editor, Jane Campion: Interviews, Jack- son, Mississippi, 1999. By CAMPION: articles— Interview with Carla Hall, in Washington Post, 4 March 1990. Interview with Donna Yuzwalk, in Guardian (London), 2 May 1990. Interview with Maitland McDonagh, in New York Times, 19 May 1991. Interview with Elizabeth Drucker, in American Film (Los Angeles), July 1991. Interview with Katharine Dieckmann, in Interview (New York), January 1992. ‘‘Jane Campion’s Lunatic Women,’’ interview with Mary Cantwell, in New York Times Magazine, 19 September 1993. ‘‘Piano Lessons,’’ interview with I. Pryor, in Onfilm (Auckland), October 1993. ‘‘Merchant of the Ivories,’’ interview with Anne Thompson, in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 19 November 1993. Interview with Christian Viviani and Catherine Axelrad, in Positif (Paris), December 1996. ‘‘Jane Campion: Intervju med en dam,’’ interview with Lena Jordebo, in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 39, 1997. ‘‘Portrait of the Director,’’ interview with Kennedy Fraser, in Vogue (New York), January 1997. ‘‘The Lady Vanquishes: Call Me Madam,’’ interview with Geoff Andrew, in Time Out (London), 12 February 1997. ‘‘Jane Campion’s Passage to India,’’ interview with Kathleen Mur- phy, in Film Comment (New York), January/February 2000. On CAMPION: books— Margolis, Harriet Elaine, editor, Jane Campion’s The Piano, New York, 2000 On CAMPION: articles— Quart, Barbara, ‘‘The Short Films of Jane Campion,’’ in Cineaste (New York), no. 1, 1992. Ansen, David, and Charles Fleming, ‘‘Passion for Piano,’’ in News- week (New York), 31 May 1993. Travers, Peter, ‘‘Sex and The Piano,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 9 December 1993. Current Biography (New York), 1994. Article, in New York Times, 10 March 1994. Kirchmann, Kay, ‘‘Silence and Physicality,’’ in Ballet International (Germany), August/September 1994. Landrot, Marine, ‘‘Les désaxées,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 3 May 1995. Gordon, Suzy, ‘‘‘I Clipped Your Wing, That’s All’: Auto-Erotism and the Female Spectator in The Piano Debate,’’ in Screen (Oxford), Summer 1996. Murphy, Kathleen, ‘‘Jane Campion’s Shining Moment: Portrait of a Director,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/Decem- ber 1996. Feinstein, Howard, ‘‘Heroine Chic,’’ in Vanity Fair (New York), December 1996. Genry, R., ‘‘Painterly Touches,’’ in American Cinematographer (Orange Drive), January 1997. Chumo, Peter N., II, ‘‘Keys to the Imagination: Jane Campion’s The Piano,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), July 1997. *** Whatever their quality, all of Jane Campion’s feature films have remained consistent in theme. They depict the lives of girls and women who are in one way or another separate from the mainstream, because of physical appearance (if not outright physical disability) or personality quirk, and she spotlights the manner in which they relate to and function within their respective societies. Campion began directing features after making several highly acclaimed, award-winning short films which were extensively screened on the international film festival circuit. Her first two features are similar in that they focus on the relationships between two young women, and how they are affected by the adults who control their world. Her debut, 2 Friends, was made for Australian television in 1985 and did not have its American theatrical premiere until 1996. It depictions the connection between a pair of adolescents, focusing on the changes in their friendship and how they are influenced by adult authority figures. The narrative is told in reverse time: at the outset, the girls are a bit older, and their developing personalities have separated them; as the film continues, they become younger and closer. Sweetie, Campion’s initial theatrical feature, is a pitch-black comedy about a young woman who is overweight, overemotional, CAPRA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 152 and even downright crazy, with the scenario charting the manner in which she relates to her parents and her skinny, shy, easily manipu- lated sister. The film was controversial in that critics and viewers either raved about it or were turned off by its quirky sensibility. While not without inspired moments, both Sweetie and 2 Friends lack the assurance of Campion’s subsequent work. The filmmaker’s unequivocal breakthrough as a world-class talent came in 1990 with An Angel at My Table. The theatrical version of the film is 158 minutes long and is taken from a three-part mini-series made for New Zealand television. An Angel at My Table did not benefit from the media hype surrounding The Piano, Campion’s 1993 international art house hit, but it is equally as fine a film. It is an uncommonly literate portrait of Janet Frame, a plump, repressed child who was destined to become one of New Zealand’s most renowned writers. Prior to her fame, however, she was falsely diagnosed as a schizophrenic, passed eight years in a mental hospital, and received over 200 electric shock treatments. Campion evocatively depicts the different stages of Frame’s life; the filmmaker elicits a dynamic performance from Kerry Fox as the adult Janet and, in visual terms, she perfectly captures the essence of the writer’s inner being. At the same time, Campion bitingly satirizes the manner in which society patronizes those who sincerely dedicate their lives to the creation of art. She depicts pseudo-artists who would not know a poem from a Harlequin Romance, and publishers who think that for Frame to truly be a success she must have a best-seller and ride around in a Rolls Royce. If An Angel at My Table spotlights the evolution of a woman as an intellectual being, Campion’s next work, The Piano, depicts a woman’s development on a sexual and erotic level. The Piano, like The Crying Game before it and Pulp Fiction later on, became the cinematic cause celebre of its year. It is a deceptively simple story, beautifully told, of Ada (Holly Hunter, in an Academy Award-winning performance), a Scottish widow and mute who arrives with her nine-year-old daughter (Anna Paquin, who also won an Oscar) in remote New Zealand during the 1850s. Ada is to be the bride in an arranged marriage with a stern, hesitant farmer (Sam Neill). But she becomes sexually and romantically involved with Baines (Harvey Keitel), her illiterate, vulnerable neighbor to whom she gives piano lessons: an arrangement described by Campion as an ‘‘erotic pact.’’ Campion succeeds in creating a story about the development of love, from the initial eroticism between the two characters to some- thing deeper and more romantic. Ada has a symbolic relationship with the piano, which is both her refuge and way of self-expression. The Piano is an intensely haunting tale of exploding passion and deep, raw emotion, and it put its maker at the forefront of contemporary, world- class cinema. Unfortunately, Campion’s follow-up features have not been as cinematically successful as The Piano and An Angel at My Table. The Portrait of a Lady, a static adaptation of the Henry James novel, opens in 1872 and tells the story of orphaned American expatriate Isabel Archer (Nicole Kidman), a young woman with vague feminist inclinations. Isabel pronounces that she values her independence and probably never will marry, yet she inexplicably falls for and weds the boorish, self-centered Gilbert Osmond (John Malkovich). The Por- trait of a Lady is one of the more disappointing films of its year. Sheer dullness is what does it in. The film is worth seeing only for the deservedly lauded, icy-cool performance of Barbara Hershey as Madame Merle, Osmond’s mistress. Campion’s next feature, Holy Smoke, may be linked to The Piano for the underlying eroticism that bonds its two key characters. But here is where all comparisons end. Holy Smoke is the story of Ruth Barron (Kate Winslet), another free-spirited Campion heroine: a young woman who has come of age in an Australian suburb and chosen to reject Western materialism by running off to India and joining a religious cult. Her free will is compromised first by her manipu- lative, male-dominated family, and then by macho American deprogrammer P.J. Waters (Harvey Keitel), the ‘‘cult-exiter’’ hired to toy with her mind and return her to her family in spirit as well as body. Ruth is an intelligent woman, strongly committed to her new faith; her embracing the cult is her way of rejecting the vapidity of contempo- rary society. She may be directly contrasted to her sister-in-law, who dyes her hair, wears clothes that appear to be made out of plastic, and fantasizes about movie stars while making love to her husband. Yet the core of the story spotlights the battle of wills and physical, sexual, and psychological grappling between Ruth and Waters, resulting in an exploration of clashing cultures and the nature of sexual desire and fantasy. Granted, Holy Smoke is a serious-minded film. But dramatically speaking, it is shrill and obvious. The members of Ruth’s family are cliches, superficially trite characters who view with suspicion any- thing they do not understand. As they float through their lives as pop culture consumers, mindlessly watching television and munching on junk food, they are painted in the broadest of strokes. The same may be said for the P.J. Waters character. As a professional who is supposed to be tops at his trade, he too-easily is out-finessed by Ruth. In his one-dimensional narcissism—he wears cool ‘‘shades’’ indoors, and exudes vanity while combing his hair and spraying his mouth with breath enhancer—Waters is an obvious target for ridicule. Given Campion’s cinematic mission, however, it is obligatory that she present Waters as a hypocrite. While he harangues cults for controlling their members, he is just as guilty of manipulating his clients; he is a deprogrammer precisely because he has nothing substantial in which to believe. When he sleeps with Ruth—a professionally irresponsible action—Waters is depicted as being just another guy who wants to get laid. Yet when Ruth cracks his shell, and he ends up garbed in a dress and lipstick, crawling on the ground and begging her to marry him, the profundity of the moment is obliterated by unintentional laughter. —Rob Edelman CAPRA, Frank Nationality: American. Born: Bisaquino, Sicily, 18 May 1897; emigrated with family to Los Angeles, 1903. Education: Manual Arts High School, Los Angeles; studied chemical engineering at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, graduated 1918. Fam- ily: Married 1) Helen Howell, 1924 (divorced 1938); 2) Lucille Reyburn, 1932, two sons, one daughter, Ballistics teacher, U.S. Army, 1918–19. Career: Lab assistant for Walter Bell, 1922–23; prop man, editor for Bob Eddy, writer for Hal Roach and Mack Sennett, 1923–25; hired by Columbia Pictures, 1928; began to work with Robert Riskin, 1931; elected President of Academy, 1935; elected President of Screen Directors’ Guild, 1938; formed Frank Capra Productions with writer Robert Riskin, 1939; Major in Signal Corps, 1942–45; formed Liberty Films with Sam Briskin, William CAPRADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 153 Frank Capra Wyler, and George Stevens, 1945 (sold to Paramount, 1948). Awards: Oscar for Best Director, for It Happened One Night, 1934, for Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, 1936, and You Can’t Take It With You, 1938; Distinguished Service Medal, U.S. Armed Forces, 1945; D.W. Grif- fith Award, Directors Guild of America, 1958; honorary doctorates, Temple University, Philadelphia, 1971, and Carthage College, Wis- consin, 1972; American Film Institute Life Achievement Award, 1982. Died: 3 September 1991, in La Quinta, California. Films as Director: 1922 Fultah Fisher’s Boarding House 1926 The Strong Man (+ co-sc) 1927 Long Pants; For the Love of Mike 1928 That Certain Thing; So This Is Love; The Matinee Idol; The Way of the Strong; Say It with Sables (+ co-story); Submar- ine; The Power of the Press; The Swim Princess; The Burglar (Smith’s Burglar) 1929 The Younger Generation; The Donovan Affair; Flight (+ dialogue) 1930 Ladies of Leisure; Rain or Shine 1931 Dirigible; The Miracle Woman; Platinum Blonde 1932 Forbidden (+ sc); American Madness 1933 The Bitter Tea of General Yen (+ pr); Lady for a Day 1934 It Happened One Night; Broadway Bill 1936 Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (+ pr) 1937 Lost Horizon (+ pr) 1938 You Can’t Take It with You (+ pr) 1939 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (+ pr) 1941 Meet John Doe (+ pr) 1942 Why We Fight (Part 1): Prelude to War (+ pr) 1943 Why We Fight (Part 2): The Nazis Strike (co-d, pr); Why We Fight (Part 3): Divide and Conquer (co-d, pr) 1944 Why We Fight (Part 6): The Battle of China (co-d, pr); Tunisian Victory (co-d, pr); Arsenic and Old Lace (+ pr) (filmed in 1942) 1945 Know Your Enemy: Japan (co-d, pr); Two Down, One to Go (+ pr) 1946 It’s a Wonderful Life (+ pr, co-sc) 1948 State of the Union (+ pr) 1950 Riding High (+ pr) 1951 Here Comes the Groom (+ pr) 1956 Our Mr. Sun (+ pr, sc) (Bell System Science Series Numbers 1 to 4) 1957 Hemo the Magnificent (+ pr, sc); The Strange Case of the Cosmic Rays (+ pr, co-sc) 1958 The Unchained Goddess (+ pr, co-sc) 1959 A Hole in the Head (+ pr) 1961 Pocketful of Miracles (+ pr) Other Films: 1924 (as co-sc with Arthur Ripley on films featuring Harry Longdon): Picking Peaches; Smile Please; Shanghaied Lovers; Flick- ering Youth; The Cat’s Meow; His New Mama; The First Hundred Years; The Luck o’ the Foolish; The Hansom Cabman; All Night Long; Feet of Mud 1925 (as co-sc with Arthur Ripley on films featuring Harry Langdon): The Sea Squawk; Boobs in the Woods; His Marriage Wow; Plain Clothes; Remember When?; Horace Greeley Jr.; The White Wing’s Bride; Lucky Stars; There He Goes; Saturday Afternoon 1926 (as co-sc with Arthur Ripley on films featuring Harry Langdon): Fiddlesticks; The Soldier Man; Tramp, Tramp, Tramp 1943 Why We Fight (Part 4): The Battle of Britain (pr) 1944 The Negro Soldier (pr); Why We Fight (Part 5): The Battle of Russia (pr); Know Your Ally: Britain (pr) 1945 Why We Fight (Part 7): War Comes to America (pr); Know Your Enemy: Germany (pr) 1950 Westward the Women (story) 1973 Frank Capra (Schickel) (as himself) 1980 Hollywood (Brownlow, Gill—doc) (as himself) 1982 The 10th American Film Institute Life Achievement Award: A Salute to Frank Capra 1984 George Stevens: A Filmmaker’s Journey (as himself) Publications By CAPRA: books— The Name above the Title, New York, 1971. It’s a Wonderful Life, with Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, New York, 1986. CAPRA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 154 By CAPRA: articles— ‘‘The Gag Man,’’ in Breaking into Movies, edited by Charles Jones, New York, 1927. ‘‘Sacred Cows to the Slaughter,’’ in Stage (New York), 13 July 1936. ‘‘We Should All Be Actors,’’ in Silver Screen (New York), Septem- ber 1946. ‘‘Do I Make You Laugh?,’’ in Films and Filming (London), Septem- ber 1962. ‘‘Capra Today,’’ with James Childs, in Film Comment (New York), vol.8, no.4, 1972. ‘‘Mr. Capra Goes to College,’’ with Arthur Bressan and Michael Moran, in Interview (New York), June 1972. ‘‘Why We (Should Not) Fight,’’ interview with G. Bailey, in Take One (Montreal), September 1975. ‘‘‘Trends Change Because Trends Stink’—An Outspoken Talk with Legendary Producer/Director Frank Capra,’’ with Nancy Ander- son, in Photoplay (New York), November 1975. Interview with J. Mariani, in Focus on Film (London), no.27, 1977. ‘‘Dialogue on Film,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), Octo- ber 1978. Interview with H.A. Hargreave, in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salis- bury, Maryland), vol. 9, no. 3, 1981. On CAPRA: books— Griffith, Richard, Frank Capra, London, 1951. Silke, James, Frank Capra: One Man—One Film, Washington, D.C., 1971. Bergman, Andrew, We’re in the Money: Depression America and Its Films, New York, 1972. Willis, Donald, The Films of Frank Capra, Metuchen, New Jer- sey, 1974. Glatzer, Richard, and John Raeburn, editors, Frank Capra: The Man and His Films, Ann Arbor, 1975. Poague, Leland, The Cinema of Frank Capra: An Approach to Film Comedy, South Brunswick, New Jersey, 1975. Bohn, Thomas, An Historical and Descriptive Analysis of the ‘Why We Fight’ Series, New York, 1977. Maland, Charles, American Visions: The Films of Chaplin, Ford, Capra and Welles, 1936–1941, New York, 1977. Scherle, Victor, and William Levy, The Films of Frank Capra, Secaucus, New Jersey, 1977. Bohnenkamp, Dennis, and Sam Grogg, editors, Frank Capra Study Guide, Washington, D.C., 1979. Maland, Charles, Frank Capra, Boston, 1980. Giannetti, Louis, Masters of the American Cinema, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1981. Zagarrio, Vito, Frank Capra, Florence 1985. Carney, Raymond, American Vision: The Films of Frank Capra, Cambridge, 1986. Lazere, Donald, editor, American Media and Mass Culture: Left Perspectives, Berkeley, 1987. Wolfe, Charles, Frank Capra: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1987. McBride, Joseph, Frank Capra: The Catastrophe of Success, New York, 1992. On CAPRA: articles— ‘‘How Frank Capra Makes a Hit Picture,’’ in Life (New York), 19 September 1938. Hellman, Geoffrey, ‘‘Thinker in Hollywood,’’ in New Yorker, 5 Feb- ruary 1940. Ferguson, Otis, ‘‘Democracy at the Box Office,’’ in New Republic (New York), 24 March 1941. Salemson, Harold, ‘‘Mr. Capra’s Short Cuts to Utopia,’’ in Penguin Film Review no.7, London, 1948. Deming, Barbara, ‘‘Non-Heroic Heroes,’’ in Films in Review (New York), April 1951. ‘‘Capra Issue’’ of Positif (Paris), December 1971. Richards, Jeffrey, ‘‘Frank Capra: The Classic Populist,’’ in Visions of Yesterday, London, 1973. Nelson, J., ‘‘Mr. Smith Goes to Washington: Capra, Populism, and Comic-Strip Art,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green, Ohio), Summer 1974. Badder, D.J., ‘‘Frank Capra,’’ in Film Dope (London), November 1974 and October 1975. ‘‘Capra Issue’’ of Film Comment (New York), vol.8, no.4, 1972. Sklar, Robert, ‘‘The Making of Cultural Myths: Walt Disney and Frank Capra,’’ in Movie-made America, New York, 1975. ‘‘Lost and Found: The Films of Frank Capra,’’ in Film (London), June 1975. Rose, B., ‘‘It’s a Wonderful Life: The Stand of the Capra Hero,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green, Ohio), vol.6, no.2, 1977. Quart, Leonard, ‘‘Frank Capra and the Popular Front,’’ in Cineaste (New York), Summer 1977. Gehring, Wes, ‘‘McCarey vs. Capra: A Guide to American Film Comedy of the ‘30s,’’ in Journal of Popular Film and Television (Bowling Green, Ohio), vol.7, no.1, 1978. Dickstein, M., ‘‘It’s a Wonderful Life, But. . . ,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), May 1980. Jameson, R.T., ‘‘Stanwyck and Capra,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1981. ‘‘Capra Issue’’ of Film Criticism (Edinboro, Pennsylvania), Win- ter 1981. Basinger, Jeanine, ‘‘America’s Love Affair with Frank Capra,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), March 1982. Edgerton, G., ‘‘Capra and Altman: Mythmaker and Mythologist,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), January 1983. Dossier on Capra, in Positif (Paris), July-August 1987. American Film (Washington, D.C.), December 1987. Gottlieb, Sidney, ‘‘From Heroine to Brat: Frank Capra’s Adaptation of ‘‘Night Bus’’ (It Happened One Night),’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 16, no. 2, 1988. Baker, R., ‘‘Capra Beats the Game,’’ in New York Times, 10 Septem- ber 1991. Obituary, in Newsweek, 16 September 1991. Obituary, in Time, 16 September 1991. Obituary, in Film Monthly (Berkhamstead), November 1991. Everschor, Franz, ‘‘Mr. Perot geht nicht nach Washington,’’ in Film- dienst (Cologne), 4 August 1992. Smoodin, Eric, ‘‘‘Compulsory’ Viewing for Every Citizen: Mr. Smith and the Rhetoric of Reception,’’ in Cinema Journal (Aus- tin), Winter 1996. CARAXDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 155 Fallows, Randall, ‘‘George Bailey in the Vital Center: Postwar Liberal Politics and It’s a Wonderful Life,’’ in Joural of Popular Film & Television (Washington, D.C.), Summer 1997. Santaolalla, Isabel C., ‘‘East Is East and West Is West? Otherness in Capra’s The Bitter Tea of General Yen,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), January 1998. *** The critical stock of Frank Capra has fluctuated perhaps more wildly than that of any other major director. During his peak years, the 1930s, he was adored by the press, by the industry and, of course, by audiences. In 1934 It Happened One Night won nearly all the Oscars, and through the rest of the decade a film of Frank Capra was either the winner or the strong contender for that honor. Long before the formulation of the auteur theory, the Capra signature on a film was recognized. But after World War II his career went into serious decline. His first post-war film, It’s a Wonderful Life, was not received with the enthusiasm he thought it deserved (although it has gone on to become one of his most-revered films). Of his last five films, two are remakes of material he treated in the thirties. Many contemporary critics are repelled by what they deem indigestible ‘‘Capracorn’’ and have even less tolerance for an ideology character- ized as dangerously simplistic in its populism, its patriotism, its celebration of all-American values. Indeed, many of Capra’s most famous films can be read as excessively sentimental and politically naive. These readings, how- ever, tend to neglect the bases for Capra’s success—his skill as a director of actors, the complexity of his staging configurations, his narrative economy and energy, and most of all, his understanding of the importance of the spoken word in sound film. Capra captured the American voice in cinematic space. The words often serve the cause of apple pie, mom, the little man and other greeting card clichés (indeed, the hero of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town writes verse for greeting cards). But often in the sound of the voice we hear uncertainties about those very clichés. Capra’s career began in the pre-talkie era, when he directed silent comic Harry Langdon in two successful films. His action films of the early thirties are not characteristic of his later work, yet already, in the films he made with Barbara Stanwyck, his individual gift can be discerned. The narrative pretext of The Miracle Woman is the urgency of Stanwyck’s voice, its ability to move an audience, to persuade listeners of its sincerity. Capra exploited the raw energy of Stanwyck in this and other roles, where her qualities of fervor and near- hysterical conviction are just as essential to her persona as her hard- as-nails implacability would be in the forties. Stanwyck’s voice is theatricalized, spatialized in her revivalist circus-tent in The Miracle Woman and on the hero’s suicide tower in Meet John Doe, where her feverish pleadings are the only possible tenor for the film’s unre- solved ambiguities about society and the individual. John Doe is portrayed by Gary Cooper, another American voice with particular resonance in the films of Capra. A star who seems to have invented the ‘‘strong, silent’’ type, Cooper first plays Mr. Deeds, whose platitudinous doggerel comes from a simple, do-gooder heart, but who enacts a crisis of communication in his long silence at the film’s climax, a sanity hearing. When Mr. Deeds finally speaks it is a sign that the community (if not sanity) is restored—the usual resolution of a Capra film. As John Doe, Cooper is given words to voice by reporter Stanwyck, and he delivers them with such convic- tion that the whole nation listens. The vocal/dramatic center of the film is located in a rain-drenched ball park filled with John Doe’s ‘‘people.’’ The hero’s effort to speak the truth, to reveal his own imposture and expose the fascistic intentions of his sponsor, is stymied when the lines of communication are literally cut between microphone and loudspeaker. The Capra narrative so often hinges on the protagonist’s ability to speak and be heard, on the drama of sound and audition. The bank run in American Madness is initiated by a montage of telephone voices and images, of mouths spreading a rumor. The panic is quelled by the speech of the bank president (Walter Huston), a situation repeated in more modest physical surroundings in It’s a Wonderful Life. The most extended speech in the films of Capra occurs in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. The whole film is a test of the hero’s voice, and it culminates in a filibuster, a speech that, by definition, cannot be interrupted. The climax of State of the Union involves a different kind of audience and audition. There, the hero confesses his political dishonesty and his love for his wife on television. The visual contexts, both simple and complex, never detract from the sound of Capra’s films. They enhance it. The director’s most elaborately designed film, The Bitter Tea of General Yen (recalling the style of Josef von Sternberg in its chiaroscuro lighting and its exoticism) expresses the opposition of cultural values in its visual elements, to be sure, but also in the voices of Stanwyck and Nils Asther, a Swedish actor who impersonates a Chinese war lord. Less unusual but not less significant harmonies are sounded in It Happened One Night, where a society girl (Claudette Colbert) learns ‘‘real’’ American speech from a fast-talking reporter (Clark Gable). The love scenes in Mr. Deeds are for Gary Cooper and Jean Arthur, another quintessential Capra heroine, whose vocal personality is at least as memorable as her physical one. In James Stewart Capra finds his most disquieting voice, ranging in Mr. Smith from ingenuousness to hysterical desperation and in It’s a Wonderful Life to an even higher pitch of hysteria when the hero loses his identity. The sounds and sights of Capra’s films bear the authority of a director whose autobiography is called The Name above the Title. With that authority comes an unsettling belief in authorial power, the power dramatized in his major films, the persuasiveness exercised in political and social contexts. That persuasion reflects back on the director’s own power to engage the viewer in his fiction, to call upon a degree of belief in the fiction—even when we reject the meaning of the fable. —Charles Affron CARAX, Léos Nationality: French. Born: Alexandre Oscar Dupont in Suresnes, France, 22 November 1960. Education: Left school and moved to Paris at age sixteen; watched films at the Cinématheque and audited a university film course. Career: Contributed several reviews to Cahiers du Cinéma; attempted but did not complete a short film, 1978; first feature, Boy Meets Girl, 1984; took a long hiatus from filmmaking after the expensive failure of Les Amants du Pont-Neuf and his breakup with leading lady Juliette Binoche. Awards: Prix CARAX DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 156 Léos Carax Delluc for Boy Meets Girl, 1984; Alfred Bauer Prize (Berlin) for Mauvais Sang, 1987. Films as Director: 1978 La Fille revée (short, unfinished + sc) 1980 Strangulation Blues (short + sc) 1984 Boy Meets Girl (+ sc) 1986 Mauvais Sang (Bad Blood/The Night Is Young) (+ sc) 1991 Les Amants du Pont-Neuf (The Lovers on the Bridge) (+ sc) 1997 Sans Titre (short) 1999 Pola X (+ sc) Other Films: 1987 King Lear (Godard) (ro) 1988 Les Ministères de L’Art (Garrel) (ro) 1997 A Casa (The House) (Bartas) (ro) Publications: By CARAX: articles— ‘‘Léos Carax,’’ interview with David Thompson, Sight and Sound (London), September 1992. On CARAX: articles— Forbes, Jill, ‘‘Omegaville,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1987. Thompson, David, ‘‘Léos Carax,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), September 1992. Horton, Robert, ‘‘New Bridges,’’in Film Comment (New York), November-December 1992. Vincendeau, Ginette, ‘‘Juliette Binoche: From Gamine to Femme Fatale,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), September 1993. Rosenbaum, Jonathan, ‘‘The Problem with Poetry: Léos Carax,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May-June 1994. Lopate, Phillip, ‘‘Festivals: New York,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November-December 1999. *** His name is entirely made up—for nothing as prosaic as ‘‘Alexan- dre Dupont,’’ the birth name of Léos Carax, could possibly contain the delirium of his sensibility. Léos Carax is, however, an anagram that includes his original name, Alex, mixed together with Oscar. This may be the only Oscar Carax ever wins, since his deeply personal style is probably too purely poetic, too elliptical for Academy Award consideration. But the merging of his real identity with the symbol of movie illusion is a clue to appreciating this singular director, arguably the most talented French filmmaker of his generation. Carax was born in 1960, to a French father and American mother, and began writing sporadic contributions to Cahiers du Cinéma while a teenager. He also worked on short films, including Strangulation Blues (1980), before directing his first feature, Boy Meets Girl, in 1984. A spare, black-and-white picture, Boy Meets Girl announced the arrival of a distinct, if not quite developed, talent. In this monochrome ode to Paris at night, a drifter (Denis Lavant) keeps track of his own wanderings, while an actress (Mireille Perrier) escapes to the boulevards to avoid a lover. The title, so suggestive of the most conventional of all plot lines, is ironic in a variety of ways, not least because the boy doesn’t meet the girl for a very long time. On its own terms an evocative paean to Paris, Boy Meets Girl is also an attempt to re-create the French New Wave—in an even more self- conscious light than the New Wave itself. Boy Meets Girl brought its young director some status in Europe, even if he was irrelevantly lumped together with two young compatri- ots, Jean-Jacques Beineix and Luc Besson. It also established Carax’s working relationship with three important partners: producer Alain Dahan, who died after the completion of Les Amants du Pont-Neuf; cinematographer Jean-Yves Escoffier, who would shoot the direc- tor’s subsequent two features; and Denis Lavant. A strange leading man by any measure, Lavant’s troll-like face, gymnast’s physicality, and near-autistic acting style embodied the Carax alter ego; he plays characters named Alex in the loose trilogy that begins with Boy Meets Girl. Capable of self-contained watchfulness and sudden eruptions of violence, Lavant’s presence is obviously key to Carax’s Baudelairean conception of a movie hero. Their next film was Mauvais Sang (Bad Blood/The Night Is Young), in 1987. Although its plot about a mysterious blood-borne virus touches on the specter of AIDS, Mauvais Sang is really another excursion into romantic (and movie) love. Carax’s real-life compan- ion at the time, future Oscar-winner Juliette Binoche, is also the star of the film, deliberately molded by her director-lover to resemble Jean- Luc Godard’s wife-muse-star of the 1960s, Anna Karina. CARNéDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 157 Although susceptible, like all of Carax’s films, to a certain murkiness, Mauvais Sang bursts with sheer filmmaking ecstasy. A sequence of Denis Lavant running/dancing/exploding down city streets, as the camera tracks breathlessly alongside him and David Bowie sings ‘‘Modern Love’’ on the soundtrack, is pure exhilaration, and evidence of Carax’s talent for the set-piece. At this time, Carax acted in a couple of films, including Godard’s bizarre doodle on King Lear (1987). He also prepared his greatest film and greatest folly, Les Amants du Pont-Neuf (The Lovers on the Bridge, 1990), again starring Lavant and Binoche. Most of the film is set on the oldest bridge in Paris, the Pont-Neuf, closed for restoration during the French Revolution bicentennial. A scruffy street performer (Lavant) lives on the bridge, with an older mentor. They are soon joined by an artist (Binoche) who is going blind—a postmodern echo of Chaplin’s City Lights, one of the film’s varied inspirations. Though Carax may allude to his cinematic forbears—L’Atalante being one touchstone—Les Amants is, gloriously and astonishingly, unlike any other film. It begins with a grueling sequence, apparently shot in a police drunk tank with real street people, that promises a documentary-like approach. But the film quickly enters the realm of gutter-level fable, including a Bastille Day sequence that depicts the lovers gamboling across the Pont-Neuf as fireworks streak across the bridge and music blares from a dozen different sources—later fol- lowed by an eye-popping water-skiing stunt down the Seine. The actors themselves appear to be in danger at various moments in the movie. Les Amants was plagued by serious production problems, with stop-and-start shooting from summer 1988 to spring 1990. An injury to Denis Lavant, cost overruns, and the expensive re-creation of the Pont-Neuf in southern France all contributed to the lengthy process. It received a chilly box-office reception in France, and for years failed to secure an American distributor (finally finding an arthouse release in 1999, after its existence had become semi-legendary). Carax, according to his own cryptic description, went ‘‘to hell’’ during the 1990s, returning with Pola X in time for the Cannes Festival of 1999. Pola X is a contemporary adaptation of Melville’s Pierre, or The Ambiguities (the title is whimsical shorthand: Pola for the French title of the novel, Pierre, ou les ambiguities, X for the tenth draft of Carax’s script). The saga of a privileged young writer (Guillaume Depardieu) who leaves his golden existence for the squalor of bohemia (and the bed of his long-lost sister), Pola X pleased few critics, even as it raised eyebrows for its explicit sex scene; in Film Comment, Phillip Lopate declared that the film ‘‘never comes alive, never is believable for a second.’’ Some of the criticism missed the picture’s deadpan humor—like the original novel, it is partly a parody of a certain kind of melodrama—but Carax did seem to be in a holding pattern of sorts. However, his ability to create rich and dizzy images, and to explore the far reaches of l’amour fou, remains excitingly intact. —Robert Horton CARNé, Marcel Nationality: French. Born: Batignolles, Paris, 18 August 1909. Career: Worked as insurance clerk, mid-1920s; assistant to camera- man Georges Périnal on Les Nouveaux Messieurs, 1928; worked as film critic, and made short film, 1929; assistant to René Clair on Sous les toits de Paris, 1930; editor-in-chief, Hebdo-Films journal, and Marcel Carné member, ‘‘October’’ group, early 1930s; assistant to Jacques Feyder, 1933–35; directed first feature, Jenny, 1936. Awards: Special Men- tion, Venice Festival, for Quai des brumes, 1938. Died: 31 October 1996, in Clamart, France. Films as Director: 1929 Nogent, Eldorado du dimanche 1936 Jenny 1937 Dr?le de drame (Bizarre Bizarre) 1938 Quai des brumes (Port of Shadows); Hotel du Nord 1939 Le Jour se lève (Daybreak); école communale (abandoned due to war) 1942 Les Visiteurs du soir (The Devil’s Envoys) 1945 Les Enfants du paradis (Children of Paradise) 1946 Les Portes de la nuit (Gates of the Night) 1947 La Fleur de l’age (not completed) 1949 La Marie du port (+ co-sc) 1951 Juliette ou la Clé des songes (+ co-sc) 1953 Thérèse Raquin (The Adulteress) (+ co-sc) 1954 L’Air de Paris (+ co-sc) 1956 Le Pays d’où je viens (+ co-sc) 1958 Les Tricheurs (The Cheaters) CARNé DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 158 1960 Terrain vague (+ co-sc) 1962 Du mouron pour les petits oiseaux (+ co-sc) 1965 Trois Chambres à Manhattan (+ co-sc) 1967 Les Jeunes Loups (The Young Wolves) 1971 Les Assassins de l’ordre (+ co-sc) 1974 La Merveilleuse Visite (+ co-sc) 1976 La Bible (feature doc for TV and theatrical release) Publications By CARNé: book— Les Enfants du Paradis, with Jacques Prevert, London, 1988. By CARNé: articles— Interview, with F. Cuel and others, in Cinématographe (Paris), May 1978. ‘‘Comment est ne Le Quai des brumes,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 October 1979. ‘‘Marcel Carné sous la coupole,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 July 1980. Interview in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), October 1988. Interview in Film Comment (New York), November-December 1991. On CARNé: books— Béranger, Jean-Louis, Marcel Carné, Paris, 1945. Landrey, Bernard, Marcel Carné, sa vie, ses films, Paris. Quéval, Jean, Marcel Carné, Paris, 1952. Prévert, Jacques, Children of Paradise, New York, 1968. Armes, Roy, French Film since 1946: The Great Tradition, New York, 1970. Prévert, Jacques, Le Jour se lève, New York, 1970. Perez, Michel, Les films de Carné, Paris, 1986. Turk, Edward Baron, Child of Paradise: Marcel Carné and the Golden Age of Cinema, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1989. On CARNé: articles— Manvell, Roger, ‘‘Marcel Carné,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1946. Lodge, J.F., ‘‘The Cinema of Marcel Carné,’’ in Sequence (London), December 1946. Lambert, Gavin, ‘‘Marcel Carné,’’ in Sequence (London), Spring 1948. Michel, J., ‘‘Carné ou la Clé des songes,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no.12, 1956. Sadoul, Georges, ‘‘Les Films de Marcel Carné, expression de notre époque,’’ in Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 1 March 1956. Stanbrook, Alan, ‘‘The Carné Bubble,’’ in Film (London), Novem- ber/December 1959. ‘‘Carné Issue’’ of Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Perpignan), Win- ter 1972. Turk, Edward Baron, ‘‘The Birth of Children of Paradise,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), July/August 1979. ‘‘Le Quai des brumes Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 October 1979. Gillett, John, ‘‘Salute to a French Master,’’ in Radio Times (London), 2 March 1985. Virmaux, A., and O. Virmaux, ‘‘La malediction: Le film inachève de Carné et Prevert,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), October 1986. Thoraval, Yves, ‘‘Marcel Carné: Un Parisian à Toulouse,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), 14 January 1987. Kolker, Robert Phillip, ‘‘Carné’s Les Portes de la nuit and the Sleep of French Cinema,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Fall 1987. Charity, Tom, ‘‘Heaven Sent,’’ in Time Out (London), 18 August 1993. Obituary, in Sequences (Haute-Ville), November/December 1996. Obituary, in Film en Televisie (Brussels), December 1996. Palm, Stina, ‘‘En stillbild ur Marcel Carnés ‘Pradisets barn,’’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 38, 1996–1997. Bates, Robin, ‘‘Audiences on the Verge of a Fascist Breakdown: Male Anxieties and Late 1930s French Film,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin), Spring 1997. *** At a time when film schools were non-existent and training in filmmaking was acquired through assistantship, no one could have been better prepared for a brilliant career than Marcel Carné. He worked as assistant to René Clair on the first important French sound film, Sous les toits de Paris, and to Jacques Feyder on the latter’s three great films of 1934–35. Though he had also made a successful personal documentary, Nogent, Eldorado du dimanche, and a number of publicity shorts, it was only thanks to the support of Feyder and his wife, the actress Fran?oise Rosay, that Carné was able to make his debut as a feature filmmaker with Jenny in 1936. If this was a routine melodrama, Carné was able in the next three years to establish himself as one of Europe’s leading film directors. During the period up to the outbreak of war in 1939 Carné established what was to be a ten-year collaboration with the poet and screenwriter Jacques Prévert, and gradually built up a team of collaborators—including the designer Alexandre Trauner and com- poser Maurice Jaubert—which was unsurpassed at this period. In quick succession Carné made the comedy Drole de drame, which owes more to Prévert’s taste for systematic absurdity and surreal gags than to the director’s professionalism, and a trio of fatalistic romantic melodramas, Quai des brumes, Hotel du nord and Le Jour se lève. These are perfect examples of the mode of French filmmaking that had been established by Jacques Feyder: a concern with visual style and a studio-created realism, a reliance on detailed scripts with structure and dialogue separately elaborated, and a foregrounding of star performers to whom all elements of decor and photography are subordinate. Though the forces shaping a character’s destiny may be outside his or her control, the story focuses on social behavior and the script offers set-piece scenes and confrontations and witty or trench- ant dialogue that enables the stars to display their particular talents to the full. The various advocates of either Prévert or Carné have sought to make exclusive claims as to which brought poetry to the nebulous and ill-defined ‘‘poetic realism’’ that these films are said to exemplify. In retrospect, however, these arguments seem over-personalized, since the pair seem remarkably well-matched. The actual differences seem less in artistic approach than in attitude to production. From the first, Carné, heir to a particular mode of quality filmmaking, was concerned with an industry, a technique, a career. Prévert, by contrast, though he is a perfect example of the archetypal 1930s screenwriter, able to create striking star roles and write dazzling and memorable dialogue, is not limited to this role and has a quite separate identity as surrealist, humorist and poet. CARPENTERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 159 The pair share a certain fantastic conception of realism, with film seen as a studio construct in which fidelity to life is balanced by attention to a certain poetic atmosphere. Carné’s coldly formal command of technique is matched by Prévert’s sense of the logic of a tightly woven narrative. If it is Prévert’s imagination that allows him to conceive both the amour fou that unites the lovers and the grotesque villains who threaten it, it is Carné’s masterly direction of actors that turns Jean Gabin and Michèle Morgan into the 1930s ideal couple and draws such memorable performances from Michel Simon, Jules Berry and Arletty. The collaboration of Prévert and Carné was sustained during the very different circumstances of the German Occupation, when they together made two films that rank among the most significant of the period. Since films in the mode of 1930s poetic realism were now banned, it is hardly surprising that Carné and Prévert should have found the need to adopt a radically new style. Remaining within the concept of the studio-made film, but leaving behind the contemporary urban gloom of Le Jour se lève, they opted for a style of elaborate and theatrical period spectacle. The medieval fable of Les Visiteurs du soir was an enormous contemporary success but it has not worn well. Working with very limited resources the filmmakers—assisted clan- destinely by Trauner and the composer Joseph Kosma—succeeded in making an obvious prestige film, a work in which Frenchmen could take pride at a dark moment of history. But despite the presence of such players as Arletty and Jules Berry, the overall effect is ponderous and stilted. Carné’s masterpiece is Les Enfants du paradis, shot during the war years but released only after the Liberation. Running for over three hours and comprising two parts, each of which is of full feature length, Les Enfants du paradis is one of the most ambitious films ever undertaken in France. Set in the twin worlds of theatre and crime in nineteenth century Paris, this all-star film is both a theatrical spectacle in its own right and a reflection on the nature of spectacle. The script is one of Prévert’s richest, abounding in wit and aphorism, and Carné’s handling of individual actors and crowd scenes is masterly. The sustained vitality and dynamism of the work as it moves seemingly effortlessly from farce to tragedy, from delicate love scenes to outrageous buffoonery, is exemplary, and its impact is undimmed by the years. Marcel Carné was still only thirty-six and at the height of his fame when the war ended. Younger than most of those who now came to the fore, he had already made masterly films in two quite different contexts and it seemed inevitable that he would continue to be a dominant force in French cinema despite the changed circumstances of the postwar era. But in fact the first post-war Carné-Prévert film, Les Portes de la nuit, was an expensive flop. When a subsequent film, La Fleur de l’age, was abandoned shortly after production had begun, one of the most fruitful partnerships in French cinema came to an end. Carné directed a dozen more films, from La Marie du port in 1950 to La Merveilleuse Visite in 1973, but he was no longer a major force in French filmmaking. Marcel Carné was an unfashionable figure long before his direct- ing career came to an end. Scorned by a new generation of filmmakers, Carné grew more and more out of touch with contemporary develop- ments, despite an eagerness to explore new subjects and use young performers. His failure is a measure of the gulf that separates 1950s and 1960s conceptions of cinema from the studio era of the war and immediate prewar years. He was, however, the epitome of this French studio style, its unquestioned master, even if—unlike Renoir—he was unable to transcend its limitations. While future critics are unlikely to find much to salvage from the latter part of his career, films like Drole de drame and Quai des brumes, Le Jour se lève and Les Enfants du paradis, remain rich and complex monuments to a decade of filmmaking that will reward fresh and unbiased critical attention. —Roy Armes CARPENTER, John Nationality: American. Born: Carthage, New York, 16 January 1948. Education: Studied filmmaking at University of Southern California, graduated 1972. Family: Married 1) actress Adrienne Barbeau, 1979 (divorced 1984); 2) Sandy King, 1990. Career: Made first feature, Dark Star, 1974. Awards: Best Short Subject Academy Award, for The Resurrection of Bronco Billy, 1970. Films as Director: 1970 The Resurrection of Bronco Billy (short) (+ ed, mus) 1974 Dark Star (+ pr, co-sc) 1977 Assault on Precinct 13 (+ sc, mus) 1978 Someone’s Watching Me! (+ sc); Halloween (+ co-sc) 1979 Elvis (for TV) 1980 The Fog (+ sc, mus) 1981 Escape from New York (+ co-sc, co-pr) 1982 The Thing John Carpenter CARPENTER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 160 1983 Christine 1984 Starman 1986 Big Trouble in Little China 1987 Prince of Darkness; Armed and Dangerous 1988 They Live (+ co-mus) 1991 Memoirs of an Invisible Man 1995 In the Mouth of Madness (+ co-sc); Village of the Damned (+ co-sc, role) 1996 Escape from L.A. (+ co-sc, co-mus) 1998 Vampires (+ mus) 2001 Ghosts of Mars (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1962–70 (short films, as director): Revenge of the Colossal Beasts; Gorgon versus Godzilla; Terror from Space; Sorcerer from Outer Space; Warrior and the Demon; Gorgon, the Space Monster 1978 The Eyes of Laura Mars (Kershner) (sc) 1981 Halloween II (Rosenthal) (pr, co-sc) 1983 Halloween III: Season of the Witch (Wallace) (mus) 1984 The Philadelphia Experiment (Raffill) (sc) 1986 Black Moon Rising (Cokliss) (co-sc) 1988 Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Meyers (Little) (mus) 1989 Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Meyers (Othenin- Girard) (mus) 1990 El Diablo (Markle—for TV) (co-sc) 1991 Blood River (Damski—for TV) (co-sc) 1993 Body Bags (role) 1994 The Silence of the Hams (Greggio) (role) 1995 After Sunset: The Life & Times of the Drive-in Theater (Bokenkamp) (as himself) 1998 Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later (mus) 1999 Silent Predators (Nosseck—for TV) (co-sc); Meltdown (de Jong—for TV) (story) Publications By CARPENTER: articles— ‘‘The Man in the Cyrogenic Freezer,’’ an interview with Tom Milne and Richard Combs, in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1978. ‘‘Trick and Treat,’’ an interview with T. McCarthy, in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1980. ‘‘New Fright Master: John Carpenter,’’ an interview with J. Wells, in Films in Review (New York), April 1980. Interview in Starburst (London), nos. 36 and 37, 1981. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1982. Interview in Films (London), May 1985. Interview in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), Septem- ber 1988. ‘‘Cheap Thrills and Dark Glasses,’’ an interview with Sheila Johnston, in The Independent (London), 22 June 1989. Interview with Philippe Rouyer, in Positif (Paris), March 1995. ‘‘Damned Again!’’ an interview with Robert Sokol and Sean Farrell, in Scarlet Street (Glen Rock), Fall 1995. ‘‘Fires-floods-riots-earthquakes John Carpenter!’’ an interview with Ted Elrick, in DGA (Los Angeles), July-August 1996. ‘‘Boom Towns,’’ an interview with David Eimer, in Time Out (London), 11 September 1996. Carpenter, John, ‘‘The Carpenter Debate III,’’ in Written By (Los Angeles), November 1996. On CARPENTER: books— Meyers, Richard, For One Week Only: The World of Exploitation Films, Piscataway, New Jersey, 1983. McCarty, John, Splatter Movies: Breaking the Last Taboo of the Screen, New York, 1984. Newman, Kim, Nightmare Movies: A Critical History of the Horror Movie from 1968, London, 1988. McCarty, John, Movie Psychos and Madmen, Secaucus, New Jer- sey, 1993. McCarty, John, The Fearmakers, New York, 1994. Muir, John Kenneth, The Films of John Carpenter, McFarland & Company, 2000. Cumbow, Robert C., Order in the Universe: The Films of John Carpenter, Metuchen, New Jersey, 2000. On CARPENTER: articles— Appelbaum, R., ‘‘From Cult Homage to Creative Control,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1979. Scanlon, P., ‘‘The Fog: A Spook Ride on Film,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 28 June 1979. Stevenson, James, ‘‘Profiles: People Start Running,’’ in New Yorker, 28 January 1980. Ross, P., ‘‘John Carpenter: Les rhythmes de l’angoisse,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), February 1984. ‘‘John Carpenter,’’ in Casablanca (Madrid), November 1984. Nillson, T., and S. Biodrowski, ‘‘The Return of John Carpenter,’’ in Cinefantastique (Forest Park), vol. 22, no. 3, 1991. Biodrowski, S., ‘‘Memoirs of an Invisible Man,’’ in Cinefantastique (Forest Park), vol. 22, no. 4, 1992. Liberti, F., ‘‘John Carpenter,’’ in Film Threat (Beverly Hills), Febru- ary 1995. Liberti, F., ‘‘John Carpenter,’’ in Castoro Cinema (Milan), March/ April 1997. *** While his career has been neither as erratic as Wes Craven’s nor as disaster-littered as that of Tobe Hooper, John Carpenter currently stands as an out-of-time B specialist. His later directorial output has not exactly failed to live up to the promise of his earliest films, but nor has it been able to match their perfect achievements. Carpenter’s first three movies are marvelously economical, deftly exciting, genuinely distinctive, and slyly amusing, and cover a wide range of generic bases. Dark Star, which he made as a student in collaboration with Dan O’Bannon, is one of the miracles of the 1970s, an intelligent and approachable science-fiction film made in the wake of 2001 but fresh and lively, with a satiric bite carried over from the written sf of the 1950s—its surfing punchline is an apt borrowing from Ray Bradbury—and a near-absurdist sense of humour. Its storyline concerns the crew of the spaceship Dark Star and its plunge into isolation-fueled insanity as their twenty-year mission to demolish useless planets with sentient bombs drags on and on. It is a film that repays many repeat viewings. Assault on Precinct 13, an urban CARPENTERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 161 Western rooted in Rio Bravo and Night of the Living Dead, is at once a lean, generic, action machine (its plot centers around a nightmarish street gang as it besieges and lays waste to an isolated police station) and a witty transposition of the certainties of a Hawksian ensemble piece into the racially and sexually tense 1970s. In these films, Carpenter demonstrated that suspense and humour could be com- bined. He also showed that he was a skilled handler of unfamiliar actors, concentrating unusually on nuances of character in forms where spectacle and effects often take precedence. Finally, he estab- lished himself as a talented composer of driving, minimalist, synthe- sizer-oriented musical themes. Halloween is every bit as good as the first few films, but seems less fresh because it has been so influential. Itself a psycho suspense horror movie in the vein of The Spiral Staircase or Black Christmas (and Carpenter’s lady-stalking 1978 TV movie Someone’s Watching Me), Halloween single-handedly revived the drive-in horror movie in the late 1970s, inspiring such nasty pieces of work as Friday the 13th and literally hundreds of blatant imitations. It also inspired a series of sequels, including the intriguing Nigel Kneale-scripted box office failure Halloween III: Season of the Witch, the Carpenter-produced Halloween II, and a couple of Halloween films with which he was not involved in any capacity, except for their re-use of parts of his scores for the original film and its sequel, particularly the title theme. The original Halloween, which featured Jamie Lee Curtis pursued by an unkillable, masked madman and Donald Pleasence as a hammy shrink on the killer’s trail, establishes its own world of horror, as enclosed and unreal as the Transylvanian backlots of the Universal or Hammer series. Carpenter utilizes a mythic American small town teenage milieu, where Halloween is a magical evocation of terror and delight, and where babysitting, trick-or-treating, and blind-dating hold possibilities of joy and/or terror. With its absolute mastery of the hand-through-the-window shock moment, cunning use of the Panavision shape, and a shivery theme tune, Halloween is a slender but masterly confection, and it should not be blamed for the flood- gates it opened when it became an unexpected box office bonanza (in fact, one of the most successful independent films in history). Before Halloween took off at the box office, however, Carpenter returned to TV to helm a biopic of Elvis Presley for Dick Clark productions. The telefilm marked the beginning of Carpenter’s long association with Kurt Russell, a former Disney child star then trying to break away from his image and land more serious (read adult) roles. Russell was one of many actors who tested for the high profile part, but he got it, and turned in a bravura (at times even uncanny) performance as the legendary King of Rock ‘n Roll in what many critics still consider to be Carpenter’s best film away from the horror/SF genre. Although there are pleasures to be found in most of his subsequent works, Carpenter has never quite recaptured the confidence and streamlined form of the early pictures. The Fog, a maritime ghost story, and Escape from New York, a science–fiction action picture, are enjoyable, entertaining movies that straggle through illogical plots, but nevertheless find performers—particularly Carpenter’s then-wife Adrienne Barbeau, but also regulars Kurt Russell, Donald Pleasence, Tom Atkins, Nancy Loomis, and Chuck Cyphers—doing nice little things with characters, and individual suspense sequences in these films at times override the general messiness of the stories. The same feel can be found in films made by others from scripts he wrote in this period, such as Stewart Raffill’s The Philadelphia Experiment and Harley Cokliss’s Black Moon Rising, not to mention the 1990 TV Western El Diabolo. Stepping up into the studio big leagues, Carpen- ter was then given a chance to remake Hawks’s and Nyby’s The Thing from Another World (1950). He came through with The Thing, a controversially downbeat but genuinely effective movie in which an Arctic base is undermined by the presence of a shape-changing alien. The film is buoyed by the edgy, paranoid performances of a well- chosen cast of flabby, unreliable types and frequently punctuated by incredible bursts of special effects activity. The Thing handles its set- pieces—severed heads sprouting spiderlegs, a stomach opening up into a toothy mouth, a dog exploding into tentacular gloopiness— remarkably well, but Carpenter is also in control of the funny, tense, questioning passages in between. Like so many of his later films, though, he seems unable to bring it to a satisfying conclusion. It was the commercial failure of The Thing, which having arrived on Earth just as the box office was embracing E.T., a film that rendered evil aliens temporarily unfashionable, appears to have sufficiently disconcerted Carpenter to force him into a succession of blighted big studio movies. Christine is the regulation Stephen King adaptation, loud and watchable but essentially empty and ordinary. Starman is an uncomfortable and impersonal hybrid of It Happened One Night and The Man Who Fell to Earth. Finally, Big Trouble in Little China is a wacky kung fu-monster-comedy-musical-action- adventure-horror-fantasy that features Kurt Russell’s funniest Car- penter hero role and some weird and wayward sequences, but it never quite catches the magic of the Hong Kong films upon which it is obviously based. Subsequently, Carpenter deserted the big studios and handled a pair of smaller projects in an attempt to get back to the basics of his best work. The first of these, Prince of Darkness, is a labyrinthine and diffuse horror movie with a nuclear physics subplot, while They Live is a funny and pointed update of Invasion of the Body Snatchers in which the aliens have invaded earth to exploit it economically. These two films display traces of Carpenter’s old flair, even if they both open a great deal better than they close; They Live, in particular, is as interesting and offbeat a movie as The Fog or Escape from New York. But neither film arrested the general drift of Carpenter’s career. By this time, while he had not yet settled into the rut that Tobe Hooper has dug for himself, he had also not achieved the generic apotheosis of a George Romero or a David Cronenberg, either. In the early 1990s, Carpenter harkened back to another of his favorite films of yesteryear, James Whale’s The Invisible Man. Carpenter’s variation on the theme, Memoirs of an Invisible Man, was based on a novel by H. F. Saint. The film presented huge challenges for Carpenter and his FX team in terms of making star Chevy Chase’s escapades in invisibility absolutely convincing. Fanciful, funny, and a technical knockout, Memoirs of an Invisible Man was nonetheless not the kind of film that his fans wanted to see from cinema’s ‘‘titan of trick or treat.’’ Carpenter’s fans wanted Carpenter to return to his traditional landscape of chills and thrills. He did so with a vengeance, creating what many of his fans consider to be the most terrifying film he’d made since the halcyon days of Halloween and The Thing: the Lovecraftian In the Mouth of Madness. Determined to stay the course in the cinema of fear and fright, Carpenter turned again to remaking another classic of his youth, Village of the Damned, originally a 1960 shocker about menacing, otherworldly children, but the results were disjointed and anemic. Escape from L.A. teamed him again with Kurt Russell in a splashier, bigger-budgeted sequel to and rehash of their successful Escape from New York, which did little for the reputations or coffers of either man. With Vampires, Carpenter’s name appeared resoundingly above the title. Boasting a superb premise—the Vatican has created a Special Forces team (led by James Woods) to track CASSAVETES DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 162 down and destroy the King of the Vampires and his unholy minions — the film surrendered itself completely to the gore and sleaze that had become endemic to the horror genre by this point. And the opportunity to produce a genre classic was unfortunately missed. John Carpenter once called his movie Halloween the film equiva- lent of a haunted house exhibit at an old country fair. The scares are carefully calculated, coming at you at just the right moments between lulls to ensure a thrilling ride. Without apology, he notes that the film sums up the escapist entertainment that his movies are all about. After all, he says, it is the kind of entertainment he enjoys most himself. —Kim Newman, updated by John McCarty CASSAVETES, John Nationality: American. Born: New York City, 9 December 1929. Education: Mohawk College, Colgate University, and New York Academy of Dramatic Arts, graduated 1950. Family: Married actress Gena Rowlands, 1958, two sons, one daughter. Career: Title charac- ter in TV series Johnny Staccato, 1959–60; directed first film, Shadows, 1960; hired by Paramount, then by Stanley Kramer, 1961; worked as independent filmmaker, from 1964. Awards: Critics Award, Venice Festival, for Shadows, 1960; Best Screenplay, National Society of Film Critics, and five awards from Venice Festival, for Faces, 1968; Golden Lion, Venice Festival, for Gloria, 1980; Golden Bear, Berlin Festival, for Love Streams, 1984; Los Angeles Film John Cassavetes Critics Career Achievement Award, 1986. Died: Of cirrhosis of the liver, in Los Angeles, 3 February 1989. Films as Director: 1960 Shadows (+ sc) 1961 Too Late Blues (+ sc, pr) 1962 A Child Is Waiting 1968 Faces (+ sc) 1970 Husbands (+ sc, role as Gus) 1971 Minnie and Moskowitz (+ sc, role as Husband) 1974 A Woman under the Influence (+ sc) 1976 The Killing of a Chinese Bookie (+ sc) 1977/78 Opening Night (+ sc) 1980 Gloria 1984 Love Streams 1986 Big Trouble Other Films: 1951 Fourteen Hours (Hathaway) (role as extra) 1953 Taxi (Ratoff) (role) 1955 The Night Holds Terror (Stone) (role) 1956 Crime in the Streets (Siegel) (role) 1957 Edge of the City (Ritt) (role) 1958 Saddle the Wind (Parrish) (role); Virgin Island (P. Jack- son) (role) 1962 The Webster Boy (Chaffey) (role) 1964 The Killers (Siegel) (role as Johnny North) 1967 The Dirty Dozen (Aldrich) (role as Victor Franko); Devil’s Angels (Haller) (role) 1968 Rosemary’s Baby (Polanski) (role as Rosemary’s husband); Gli Intoccabili (Machine Gun McCain) (Montaldo) (role) 1969 Roma coma Chicago (Bandits in Rome) (De Martino) (role); If It’s Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium (M. Stuart) (cameo role) 1976 Two-Minute Warning (Pearce) (role); Mikey and Nicky (May) (role) 1978 The Fury (De Palma) (role) 1982 The Tempest (Mazursky) (role) Publications By CASSAVETES: books— Faces, New York, 1970. John Cassavetes, Peter Falk, edited by Bruce Henstell, Washington, D.C., 1972. By CASSAVETES: articles— ‘‘What’s Wrong with Hollywood,’’ in Film Culture (New York), April 1959. ‘‘ . . . and the Pursuit of Happiness,’’ in Films and Filming (London), February 1961. ‘‘Incoming Tide: Interview,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), no. 1, 1962. ‘‘Faces: Interview,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), Spring 1968. CASSAVETESDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 163 ‘‘Masks and Faces: Interview,’’ with David Austen, in Films and Filming (London), September 1968. ‘‘The Faces of the Husbands,’’ in New Yorker, 15 March 1969. Interview with Jonas Mekas, in Village Voice (New York), 23 December 1971. Interview with L. Gross, in Millimeter (New York), April 1975. ‘‘Shadows Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 Decem- ber 1977. ‘‘Cassavetes on Cassavetes,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), June 1978. ‘‘Le Bal des vauriens. Entretien avec John Cassavetes,’’ with Y. Lardeau and L. Marcorelles, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1978. ‘‘Crucial Culture,’’ interview with R. Appelbaum, in Films (London), January 1981. ‘‘Retracting the Stream of Love,’’ an interview with Richard Combs, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), April 1984. Interview with Brian Case, in Stills (London), June-July 1984. Interview in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1988. On CASSAVETES: books— Loeb, Anthony, editor, Filmmakers in Conversation, Chicago, 1982. Alexander, Georg, and others, John Cassavetes, Munich, 1983. Carney, Raymond, American Dreaming: The Films of John Cassavetes and the American Experience, Berkeley, 1985. Gavron, Laurence, and Denis Lenoir, John Cassavetes, Paris, 1986. Carney, Raymond, The Films of John Cassavetes: Pragmatism, Modernism, and the Movies, Cambridge and New York, 1994. Amiel, Vincent, Le corps au cinéma: Keaton, Bresson, Cassavetes, Paris, 1998. On CASSAVETES: articles— Taylor, John Russell, ‘‘Cassavetes in London,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1960. Mekas, Jonas, ‘‘Cassavetes, the Improvisation,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1962. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Oddities and One-Shots,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Guerin, A., ‘‘After Faces, a Film to Keep the Man-Child Alive,’’ in Life (New York), 9 May 1969. ‘‘Robert Aldrich on John Cassavetes,’’ in Dialogue on Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), no. 2, 1972. Benoit, C., and A. Tournes, ‘‘Femmes et maris dans l’oeuvre de Cassavetes,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), September/October 1976. Simsolo, Noel, ‘‘Notes sur le cinéma de John Cassavetes,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1978. Courant, G., and J. Farren, ‘‘John Cassavetes,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), October 1979. Stevenson, J., ‘‘John Cassavetes: Film’s Bad Boy,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), January/February 1980. Landy, M., and S. Shostack, ‘‘The Cinema of John Cassavetes,’’ in Ciné-Tracts (Montreal), Winter 1980. Prades, J., ‘‘La méthode de Cassavetes,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), April 1982. ‘‘John Cassavetes Section’’ in Positif (Paris), January 1985. Doorn, F. van, ‘‘Wonderkind en eeuwige angry young man,’’ in Skoop, vol. 25, February 1989. Obituary in Variety (New York), 8 February 1989. Obituary in Time Out (London), 15 February 1989. Brent, Lewis, ‘‘Cassavetes Recalled,’’ Films and Filming, no. 414, April 1989. Carney, R., ‘‘Complex Characters,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 25, May-June 1989. Katzman, L., ‘‘Moment by Moment,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 25, May-June 1989. Seesslen, G., ‘‘Liebesstroeme, Todesbilder,’’ in EPD Film (Frank- furt/Main), vol. 6, June 1989. Roy, A., ‘‘Flots de vie, flots de cinema,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), no. 43, Summer 1989. Mongin, O., ‘‘Courants d’amour et de haine,’’ in Esprit, no. 7, July- August 1990. Viera, M., ‘‘The Work of John Cassavetes: Script, Performance Style, and Improvisation,’’ in Journal of Film and Video (Atlanta), vol. 42, no. 3, Fall 1990. Sayles, J., ‘‘Maverick Movie Makers Inspire Their Successors,’’ in New York Times, 12 May 1991. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Cassavetes and Leigh: Poets of the Ordinary,’’ in Premiere (Boulder), vol. 5, October 1991. Ciment, M., and others, ‘‘John Cassavetes,’’ in Positif (Paris), special section, vol. 377, June 1992. Gelmis, J., ‘‘Aussi longtemps que nous restons fous,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 377, June 1992. Bendetto, L., ‘‘Forging an Original Response: A Review of Cassavetes Criticism in English,’’ in Post Script (Commerce, Texas), vol. 11, no. 2, 1992. Carney, R., ‘‘A Polemical Introduction: The Road Not Taken,’’ in Post Script (Commerce, Texas), vol. 11, no. 2, 1992. Viera, M., ‘‘Cassavetes’ Working Methods: Interviews with Al Ruban and Seymour Cassel,’’ in Post Script (Commerce, Texas), vol. 11, no. 2, 1992. Zucker, C., ‘‘The Illusion of the Ordinary: John Cassavetes and the Transgressive Impulse in Performance and Style,’’ in Post Script (Commerce, Texas), vol. 11, no. 2, 1992. Landrot, M., ‘‘L’enfant terrible,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 1 Septem- ber 1993. Cassavetes, J., ‘‘Peut-etre n’y a-t-il pas vraiment d’Amerique, peut- etre seulement Frank Capra,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 392, Octo- ber 1993. Norman, B., in Radio Times (London), 2 October 1993. Carels, E., ‘‘Love, Love, Love . . . ,’’ in Andere Sinema (Antwerp), no. 118, November-December 1993. Levich, J., ‘‘John Cassavetes: An American Maverick,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 20, 1993. Scorsese, Martin, ‘‘Ida Lupino, John Cassavetes, Glauber Rocha: Trois portraits en forme d’hommage,’’ Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 500, March 1996. Chéné, Marie, and others, ‘‘John Cassavetes,’’ Positif (Paris), no. 431, January 1997. *** As perhaps the most influential of the independently produced feature films of its era (1958–1967), Shadows came to be seen as a virtual breakthrough for American alternative cinema. The film and its fledgling writer-director had put a group of young, independent filmmakers on the movie map, together with their more intellectual, less technically polished, decidedly less commercial, low-budget alternatives to Hollywood features. CASTELLANI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 164 Begun as an improvisational exercise in the method-acting work- shop that actor John Cassavetes was teaching, and partly financed by his earnings from the Johnny Staccato television series, Shadows was a loosely plotted, heavily improvised work of cinema verité immedi- acy that explored human relationships and racial identity against the background of the beat atmosphere of the late 1950s, given coherence by the jazz score of Charles Mingus. The origins and style of Shadows were to characterize John Cassavetes’s work throughout his directorial career, once he got the studio-financed production bug out of his system—and his system out of theirs. The five prizes garnered by Shadows, including the prestigious Critics Award at the 1960 Venice Film Festival, led to Cassavetes’s unhappy and resentful experience directing two studio-molded pro- ductions (Too Late Blues, A Child Is Waiting), both of which failed critically and commercially. Thereafter, he returned to independent filmmaking, although he continued to act in mainstream movies such as The Dirty Dozen, Rosemary’s Baby, and Two Minute Warning. He continued directing feature films, however, in his characteristic, controversial style. That style centers around a freedom afforded his actors to share in the creative process. Cassavetes’s scripts serve as sketchy blueprints for the performers’ introspective explorations and emotional embel- lishments. Consequently, camera movements, at the command of the actors’ intuitive behavior, are of necessity spontaneous. The amalgam of improvisational acting, hand-held camera work, grainy stock, loose editing, and threadbare plot give his films a texture of recreated rather than heightened reality, often imbuing them with a feeling of astonishing psychodramatic intensity as characters con- front each other and lay bare their souls. Detractors, however, see Cassavetes as too dedicated to the performers’ art and too trusting of the actor’s self-discipline. They charge that the result is too often a mild form of aesthetic anarchy. At worst Cassavetes’s films are admittedly formless and self- indulgent. Scenes are stretched excruciatingly far beyond their cli- mactic moments, lines are delivered falteringly, dialogue is repeti- tious. But, paradoxically, these same blemishes seem to make possi- ble the several lucid, provocative, and moving moments of transcendent human revelation that a Cassavetes film almost inevitably delivers. As his career progressed, Cassavetes changed his thematic con- cerns, upgraded his technical production values, and, not surprisingly, attracted a wider audience—but without overhauling his actor-as- auteur approach. Faces represented Cassavetes’s return to his favored semi-docu- mentary style, complete with the seemingly obligatory excesses and gaffes. But the film also contained moments of truth and exemplary acting. Not only did this highly charged drama about the disintegra- tion of a middle-class marriage in affluent Southern California find favor with the critical and filmmaking communities, it broke through as one of the first independent films to find a sizable audience among the general moviegoing public. In Husbands, Cassavetes continued his exploration of marital manners, morals, and sexual identity by focusing on a trio of middle- class husbands—played by Cassavetes, Ben Gazzara, and Peter Falk—who confront their own mortality when a friend dies. Director Cassavetes’s doubled-edged trademark—brilliant moments of in- tense acting amid the banal debris of over-indulgence—had never been in bolder relief. Minnie and Moskowitz was Cassavetes’s demonstration of a lighter touch, an amusing and touching interlude prior to his most ambitious and commercially successful film. The film starred Gena Rowlands (Cassavetes’s wife) and Seymour Cassel as a pair of dissimilar but similarly lonely people ensnared in a manic romance. Cassavetes again examined miscommunication in Minnie and Moskowitz, but in a much more playful vein. A Woman under the Influence was by far Cassavetes’s most polished, accessible, gripping, and technically proficient film. For this effort, Cassavetes departed from his accustomed style of working by writing a fully detailed script during pre-production. Starring Gena Rowlands in a magnificent performance as a lower-middle class housewife coming apart at the seams, and the reliable Peter Falk as the hardhat husband who is ill-equipped to deal with his wife’s mental breakdown, Woman offered a more palatable balance of Cassavetes’s strengths and weaknesses. The over-long scenes and overindulgent acting jags are there, but in lesser doses, while the privileged moments and bursts of virtuoso screen acting seem more abundant than usual. Financed by Falk and Cassavetes, the film’s crew and cast (including many family members) worked on deferred salaries. Promoted via a tour undertaken by the nucleus of the virtual repertory company (Cassavetes, Rowland, Falk) and booked without a major distributor, Woman collected generally ecstatic reviews, Academy Award nominations for Cassavetes and Rowlands, and impressive box office returns. Cassavetes’s next two films (The Killing of a Chinese Bookie, Opening Night) feature a return to his earlier structure (or lack thereof)—inaccessible, interminable, and insufferable for all but diehard buffs. However, Gloria, which showcased Rowlands as a former gangster’s moll, while uneven in tone and erratic in pace, represented a concession by Cassavetes to filmgoers seeking height- ened cinematic energy and narrative momentum. ‘‘People who are making films today are too concerned with mechanics—technical things instead of feeling,’’ Cassavetes told an interviewer in 1980. ‘‘Execution is about eight percent to me. The technical quality of a film doesn’t have much to do with whether it’s a good film.’’ —Bill Wine CASTELLANI, Renato Nationality: Italian. Born: Finale Ligure (Savona), 4 September 1913. Education: Educated in Argentina to 1925, then in Geneva; studied architecture in Milan. Career: Journalist, then scriptwriter for Camerini, Genina, Soldati, and Blasetti in 1930s; assistant to Blasetti, 1940; directed first film, Un Colpo di pistola, 1941. Awards: Best Film, Venice Festival, for Sotto il sole di Roma, 1948; Best Film, Cannes Festival, for Due Soldi di speranza, 1952; Golden Lion, Venice Festival, for Giulietta e Romeo, 1954. Died: 28 Decem- ber 1985. Films as Director: 1941 Un Colpo di pistola (+ co-sc) 1942 Zaza (+ sc) CASTELLANIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 165 Renato Castellani 1943 La Donna del Montagna (+ sc) 1946 Mio Figlio Professore (Professor My Son) (+ co-sc) 1948 Sotto il sole di Roma (Under the Sun of Rome) (+ sc) 1949 E’primavera (It’s Forever Springtime) (+ co-sc) 1952 Due Soldi di speranza (Two Cents Worth of Hope) (+ sc) 1954 Giulietta e Romeo (Romeo and Juliet) (+ sc) 1957 I sogni nel cassetto (+ sc) 1959 Nella città l’inferno (And the Wild, Wild Women) (+ co-sc) 1961 Il Brigante (+ sc) 1962 Mare Matto (+ co-sc) 1964 ‘‘La Vedova’’ episode of Tre notti di amore (Three Nights of Love) (+ co-sc): ‘‘Una Donna d’Afari’’ episode of Controsesso (+ co-sc) 1967 Questi fantasmi (Ghosts Italian Style) (+ co-sc) 1969 Una breve stagione (+ co-sc) 1972 Leonardo da Vinci (condensed from five-part TV series) (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1938 L’oròlogio a Cucu (Mastrocinque) (co-sc); Batticuore (Camerini) (co-sc); Castelli in aria (Camerini) (co-sc) 1939 Grandi magazzini (Camerini) (co-sc, asst d); Il documento (Camerini) (co-sc); Un’avventura di Salvator Rosa (Blasetti) (co-sc, asst d); Due milioni per un sorriso (Borghesio and Soldati) (co-sc) 1940 Centomila dollari (Camerini) (asst d); Una romantica avventura (Camerini) (co-sc); La corona di ferro (Blasetti) (co-sc, asst d) 1941 La cena della beffe (Blasetti) (co-sc) 1942 Malombra (Soldati) (co-sc) 1944 Quartieri alti (Soldati) (co-sc) 1945 Malia (Amato) (co-sc); Notte di tempesta (Franciolini) (sc) 1958 Resurrezione (Auferstehung) (Hansen) (co-sc) 1962 Venere imperiale (Delannoy) (idea only—begun by Castellani in 1958, discontinued due to dispute with producers and star Gina Lollobrigida) 1964 Matrimonio all’italiana (de Sica) (co-sc) Publications By CASTELLANI: article— ‘‘Putting Gloss on Prison,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1959. On CASTELLANI: books— Armes, Roy, Patterns of Realism: A Study of Italian Neo-Realist Cinema, New York, 1971. Leprohon, Pierre, The Italian Cinema, New York, 1972. Atti del Convegno della X mostra internazionale del nuovo cinema, Venice, 1975. Verdone, Mario, Cinema neo-realista da Rossellini a Pasolini, Palermo, 1977. Gili, Jean A., Le Cinéma italien II, Paris, 1982. Trasatti, Sergio, Renato Castellani, Florence, 1984. On CASTELLANI: articles— Frosali, S., ‘‘Renato Castellani: Regista ‘inattuale’?’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), January-March 1984. Obituary in Variety (New York), 1 January 1986. Pintus, Pietro, ‘‘Renato Castellani viaggiatore instancabile,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), April-June 1986. *** Poggioli, Lattuada, Chiarini, Soldati—the ‘‘calligraphers’’—were the directors, novelists, and critics with which Castellani was associ- ated at the beginning of his film career (1940–1948). The ‘‘calligra- phers’’ were interested in form above all, strongly attached to the narrative tradition of the nineteenth century, committed to an essen- tially bourgeois cinema, refined, cultivated, intellectual. Their aes- thetic was articulated in theory and in practice, and resistant, even antithetical, to the demands of the new realism voiced by De Santis and others in Cinema, and by Visconti in Ossessione. Un colpo di pistola, Zaza (a comedy in the French manner set during the ‘‘belle époque’’), and La donna della montagna are films of escape. Through them Castellani managed his own flight: from the reality of the present, to be sure, but also from fascist propaganda and fascist censorship. The opposition between ‘‘calligraphy’’ and neorealism CAVALCANTI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 166 must be treated cautiously, as Roy Armes points out in Patterns of Realism. Not only did the two tendencies share a number of tempta- tions (to historicism, for example), but individual artists, Castellani among them, passed with apparent ease from one to the other. A ‘‘Calligrapher’’ as late as 1946, Castellani joined the neo-realists with Sotto il sole di Roma, announcing his new allegiance in the very first frame with this intertitle: ‘‘This film was inspired by events that actually took place. It was performed by non-professional actors, and shot entirely in Rome, in the neighborhoods depicted in the film.’’ While the presence of Alberto Sordi undermined the claim of a non- professional cast, his performance as a shoe salesman (recalling, in comic mode, the shoes of Paisà and Shoe Shine), the music of Nino Rota, the theme of black marketeering, the Roman locales and dialect, and the coverage of events of early summer 1943 to the end of summer of 1944 (from the invasion of Sicily to the liberation of Rome) cast the film firmly in the honored mold of Rossellini and De Sica. The chronology of Sotto il sole di Roma is that of Paisà; it is the story of the coming of age of a group of adolescent boys, matured by destruction and death. At its conclusion, unlike the children of Open City, Bicycle Thief, and Shoe Shine, they face the future with confidence—in themselves and in the society of which they are a part. Two films followed in the wake of Sotto il sole di Roma to shape a trilogy on youth and young love: E primavera and Two Cents Worth of Hope. To their scripts are linked the names of Suso Cecchi d’Amico, Cesare Zavattini, and Titina de Filippo, names in turn allied with Visconti, De Sica, and the master family of Italian comedy. Shot on location from one end of the peninsula to the other, the burning questions of the day—the mezzogiorno, unemployment, Communist vs. Christian Democrat—addressed in the films are cloaked in humor and, more importantly, an optimism that, as Leprohon notes in The Italian Cinema, official Italy found reassuring. Threatened by the bleak view of Italy exported by the post-war Italian cinema, the government reacted by passing the Andreotti Law (1948) in the same year Castellani launched what came to be known as ‘‘rosy neorealism.’’ The trilogy was followed by Giulietta e Romeo. This story of young love thwarted by parents and convention had already found expression in the contemporary working class settings of the three previous films, and was drawn from two Renaissance versions: Shakespeare’s and Luigi Da Porto’s. Professional and non-profes- sional actors, including a Juliet chosen from an avalanche of re- sponses to a talent search conducted in the neorealist style, combined to create a tension of text and performance that elicited considerable critical controversy. Once again, Castellani had adapted neorealism to his own uses. This time it was a literary neorealism, redefined to suit his inspiration, and dependent as always on the rejection of mimicry and doctrine. —Mirella Jona Affron CAVALCANTI, Alberto Nationality: Brazilian. Born: Alberto de Almeida Cavalcanti in Rio de Janeiro, 6 February 1897. Education: Attended law school, Brazil, and Geneva Fine Art School, Switzerland. Career: Art director in Paris, early 1920s; directed first film, Rien que les heures, 1926; directed French language versions of American films for Paramount, Joinsville, 1929–30; joined General Post Office (GPO) Film Unit, London, 1937 (head of unit, 1937); joined Ealing Studios as feature director, 1940; head of production, Vera Cruz group, Brazil, and co-founder, Brazilian Film Institute, 1949–50; settled in Europe, 1955; director, British and French television, 1950s to 1968; film teacher, UCLA, 1963–65. Awards: American States Medal for Superior Artistic Achievement, 1972. Died: In Paris, 23 August 1982. Films as Director: 1925 Le Train sans yeux (+ sc, ed) 1926 Rien que les heures (Only the Hours) (+ pr, sc, ed) 1927 Yvette (+ sc, ed); En rade (Sea Fever) (+ co-sc, ed); La P’tite Lilie (+ sc, ed supervisor) 1928 La Jalousie du barbouillé (+ sc, ed, art d); Le Capitaine Fracasse (+ co-sc, ed) 1929 Le Petit Chaperon rouge (+ sc, ed, art d); Vous verrez la semaine prochaine (+ sc, ed); A michemin du ciel (French language version of George Abbott’s Half-Way to Heaven) 1930 Toute sa vie (French language version of Dorothy Arzner’s Sarah and Son); A can?ao do ber?o (Portuguese version of Dorothy Arzner’s Sarah and Son); Les Vacances du diable (French language version of Edmund Goulding’s The Devil’s Holiday); Dans une ?le perdue (French language version of William Wellman’s Dangerous Paradise) 1932 En lisant le journal; Le Jour du frotteur (+ sc, ed); Revue Montmartroise (+ sc); Nous ne ferons jamais de cinéma; Le Truc du brésilien; Le Mari gar?on (Le Gar?on divorcé) 1933 Plaisirs défendus; Tour de chant (+ sc); Coralie et Cie (+ sc) 1934 Pett and Pott (+ sound supervisor, bit role); New Rates 1935 Coalface (+ sound supervisor) 1936 Message from Geneva 1937 We Live in Two Worlds (+ pr); The Line to Tschierva Hut (+ pr); Who Writes to Switzerland (+ pr) 1938 Four Barriers (+ pr); The Chiltern Country (+ pr) 1939 Alice in Switzerland (+ pr); Midsummer Day’s Work (+ pr, sc) 1940 La Cause commune (+ pr) (made in Britain for showing in France); Factory Front (+ pr) (British version of preceding film); Yellow Caesar (The Heel of Italy) (+ pr) 1941 Young Veteran (+ pr); Mastery of the Sea (+ pr) 1942 Went the Day Well? (48 Hours) 1943 Watertight (Ship Safety) 1944 Champagne Charlie; Trois Chansons de la résistance (Trois Chants pour la France) 1945 ‘‘The Ventriloquist’s Dummy’’ episode of Dead of Night 1947 The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby; They Made Me a Fugitive (I Became a Criminal) 1948 The First Gentleman (Affairs of a Rogue) 1949 For Them That Trespass 1952 Simao o caolho (Simon the One-Eyed) (+ pr) 1953 O canto do mar (The Song of the Sea) (+ pr, co-sc) (remake of En rade) 1954 Mulher de verdade (A Real Woman) (+ pr) 1955 Herr Puntila und sein Knecht Matti (+ co-sc) CAVALCANTIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 167 Alberto Cavalcanti (left) with John Mervyn 1956 Die Windrose (d prologue only, collective film co-supervised with Joris Ivens) 1958 La Prima notte (Les Noces vénitiennes) 1960 The Monster of Highgate Ponds 1967 Thus Spake Theodor Herzl (The Story of Israel) (+ sc) Other Films: 1923 L’Inhumaine (L’Herbier) (co-art d) 1924 L’Inondation (Delluc) (art d); La Galerie des monstres (Catelain) (asst d, art d); Feu Mathias Pascal (L’Herbier) (art d) 1926 The Little People (Pearson) (art d) 1931 Au pays du scalp (de Wavrin) (ed) 1934 Windmill in Barbados (Wright) (sound supervisor); Granton Trawler (Anstey) (sound supervisor); Song of Ceylon (Wright) (sound supervisor) 1935 Book Bargain (McLaren) (pr); Big Money (Watt) (pr) 1936 Rainbow Dance (Lye) (pr); Night Mail (Wright and Watt) (pr, sound supervisor); Calendar of the Year (Spice) (pr) 1937 The Saving of Bill Blewitt (Watt) (pr); Roadways (Coldstream and Legg) (pr) 1938 North or Northwest (Lye) (pr); North Sea (Watt) (pr, sound supervisor); Distress Call (Watt) (pr) (shortened silent version of preceding title); Many a Pickle (McLaren) (pr); Happy in the Morning (Jackson) (pr) 1939 The City (Elton) (pr); Men in Danger (Jackson) (pr); Spare Time (Jennings) (pr); Health of a Nation (Health for the Nation, Forty Million People) (Monck) (pr); Speaking from America (Jennings) (pr); Spring Offensive (An Unrecorded Victory) (Jennings) (pr); The First Days (Watt, Jennings, and Jackson) (pr) 1940 Men of the Lightship (Macdonald) (pr); Squadron 992 (Watt) (pr); Sea Fort (Dalrymple) (pr); Salvage with a Smile (Brunel) (pr) 1941 Guests of Honour (Pitt) (pr); The Big Blockade (Frend) (assoc pr); Merchant Seamen (Merchant Convoy) (Holmes) (pr); The Foreman Went to France (Somewhere in France) (Frend) (assoc pr); Find, Fix and Strike (Bennett) (pr) 1942 Greek Testament (The Shrine of Victory) (Hasse) (pr) 1944 The Halfway House (Dearden) (assoc pr) CAVALCANTI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 168 1950 Caicara (Loafer) (Celi) (pr, supervisor) 1951 Terra sempere terra (Land Is Forever Land) (Payne) (pr); Painel (Panel) (Barreto) (pr); Santuario (Sanctuary) (Barreto) (pr) 1952 Volta redonda (Round Trip) (Waterhouse) (pr); Film and Reality (selection and compilation) 1969 Lettres de Stalingrad (Katz) (role) Publications By CAVALCANTI: book— Film and Reality, London, 1942; as Film e realidade, Rio de Janeiro, 1952. By CAVALCANTI: articles— ‘‘Sound in Films,’’ in Film (London), November 1939. ‘‘Cavalcanti in Brazil,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), April/June 1953. Interview with J. Hillier and others, in Screen (London), Sum- mer 1972. Cavalcanti, Alberto, in Filme Cultura (Rio de Janeiro), January- April 1984. On CAVALCANTI: books— Klaue, Wolfgang, and others, Cavalcanti, Berlin, 1952. Hardy, Forsyth, editor, Grierson on Documentary, revised edition, London, 1966. Lovell, Alan, and Jim Hillier, Studies in Documentary, New York, 1972. Barsam, Richard, The Non-Fiction Film, New York, 1973. Rotha, Paul, Documentary Diary, London, 1973. Sussex, Elizabeth, The Rise and Fall of British Documentary: The Story of the Film Movement Founded by John Grierson, Berke- ley, 1975. Pellizzari, Lorenzo, and Claudio M. Valentinetti, Albert Cavalcanti, Locarno, 1988. Ellis, Jack C., The Documentary Idea, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1989. On CAVALCANTI: articles— De La Roche, Catherine, ‘‘Cavalcanti in Brazil,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), January/March 1955. Monegal, Emir Rodriguez, ‘‘Alberto Cavalcanti,’’ in Quarterly of Film, Radio, and Television (Berkeley), Summer 1955. Minish, Geoffrey, ‘‘Cavalcanti in Paris,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Summer 1970. Taylor, J.R., ‘‘Surrealist Admen,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1971. Beylie, Claude, and others, ‘‘Alberto Cavalcanti,’’ in Ecran (Paris), November 1974. Sussex, E., ‘‘Cavalcanti in England,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), August 1975. Zapiola, G., ‘‘Medio siglo de cine en la obra del eurobrasile?o Alberto Cavalcanti,’’ in Cinemateca Revista (Montevideo), Sep- tember 1982. Courcier, J., obituary in Cinéma (Paris), October 1982. Obituary in Films and Filming (London), November 1982. Pilard, P., ‘‘Cavalcanti à Londres. Quinze ans de cinéma brittanique,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), November 1983. Casandey, R., ‘‘Alberto Cavalcanti,’’ in Plateau (Brussels), vol. 10, no. 2, 1989. *** Alberto Cavalcanti was multi-national to a remarkable extent. Brazilian by birth, he worked in French commercial and avant-garde cinema of the 1920s, in British documentaries of the 1930s, and in British features of the 1940s. He also returned briefly to Brazil in an effort to revitalize its production, then lived in Paris during his last years, although he visited and made films elsewhere. In the long view, however, Cavalcanti may be most closely associated with British film, especially with British documentary. Even Cavalcanti’s early years in France led to that subsequent connection. Following work as a set designer, most notably for Marcel L’Herbier, he made the seminal Rien que les heures in 1926. Though part of the avant-garde experimentation of the 1920s, Rien inaugurated the ‘‘city symphonies,’’ one of the lines picked up by John Grierson as he was molding the British documentary of the 1930s. (The other lines came from the work of Flaherty, and of the Soviets, notably Vertov, Eisenstein, and Turin.) Before being invited by Grierson to join the General Post Office Film Unit, Cavalcanti had experience in the early sound films produced by the French studios. As he became involved in British documentary he distinguished himself, especially through his work with sound in relation to image. Granton Trawler, The Song of Ceylon, Coal Face, Night Mail, and North Sea offer evidence of his contributions. It might be argued that these films contain more sophisticated multi-layered sound and edited images—what Eisenstein called vertical montage—than that evident in narrative fiction films of the time. Cavalcanti’s personal creativity became the basis for teach- ing other, younger members of the documentary group. Harry Watt, Basil Wright, and others have attested to Cavalcanti’s significance as a teacher of conception and technique. Though Grierson always acknowledged Cavalcanti’s importance to the artistry of British documentary, there developed a split between the Grierson faction (dedicated to making films to bring about social change) and the Cavalcanti faction (more concerned with ways in which realist film technique and style could be brought to the larger audiences of the theatres). In fact, an anthology surveying the documentary film, The Film and Reality, co-produced by Cavalcanti and Ernest Lindgren in 1942, created a furor behind the scenes when it was released. It presented essentially an aesthetic history of documen- tary (Cavalcanti selected the excerpts), ending with coverage of CHABROLDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 169 feature fiction films embodying some of the characteristics of docu- mentary. The Grierson group was reputedly outraged that no attention was paid to what they viewed as the dominant purpose of British documentary, which was a sort of citizenship education—communi- cation by the government to the citizenry. For his part, Cavalcanti said late in life that he always thought he and Grierson were up to the same thing essentially—that of course he had a social sense, as surely as did Grierson. The real trouble was that he had not received adequate screen credits for the work he had done for the GPO Film Unit during Grierson’s regime. (Grierson favored the idea of anonymous collective rather than individual auteurs.) When Cavalcanti returned to entertainment filmmaking early in the war he was missed by the documentary bunch. At the same time it must be said that Cavalcanti (like Watt, who followed him shortly) brought with him a documentary influence to Ealing Studios that extended into the wartime fiction film. The impact of his experiences in the documentary world can be seen, for example, in The Foreman Went to France, which he produced, and in Went the Day Well?, which he directed. On the other hand, Cavalcanti’s finest achievement as fictional producer/director may well be Dead of Night, a mingling of fantasy and actuality. The surrealistic elements of the film recalled the French avant-garde. In summary it can be said that Cavalcanti seemed always to be the artist, personal creator and, especially, consummate technician. He applied himself to the basic modes of film art—narrative fiction, avant-garde, and documentary—in a full range of capacities—set designer, sound recordist, producer, and director. A charming jour- neyman artist with a cosmopolitan and tasteful flair, he taught and influenced a lot of other filmmakers and was responsible for note- worthy innovation and experimentation in many of the films with which he was associated. —Jack C. Ellis CHABROL, Claude Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 24 June 1930. Education: Univer- sity of Paris, Ecole Libre des Sciences Politiques. Family: Married 1) Agnes Goute, 1952 (divorced), two sons; 2) actress Stéphane Audran, 1964 (divorced), one son; 3) Aurore Pajot. Career: Film critic for Arts and for Cahiers du Cinéma, Paris, 1953–57 (under own name and as ‘‘Charles Eitel’’ and ‘‘Jean-Yves Goute’’); Head of production company AJYM, 1956–61; directed first film, Le Beau Serge, 1958; director, Macbeth, Théatre Recamier, Paris, 1967; director, French TV, 1970s. Awards: Golden Bear, Berlin Festival, for Les Cousins, 1959; D. W. Griffith Award, National Board of Review, and New York Film Critics Circle Award for Best Foreign Film, for Story of Women, 1989; Metro Media Award, Toronto International Film Festival, 1995, and Los Angeles Film Critics Association Award for Best Foreign Language Film, National Soci- ety of Film Critics Award for Best Foreign Language Film, both 1996, for La cérémonie; Golden Seashell and Silver Seashell, San Sebastián International Film Festival, for Rien ne va plus, 1997. Agent: c/o VMA, 40 rue Francois 1er, 75008 Paris, France. Address: 15 Quai Conti, 75006 Paris, France. Films as Director: 1958 Le Beau Serge (Bitter Reunion) (+ pr, sc, bit role) 1959 Les Cousins (The Cousins) (+ pr, sc); A double tour (Web of Passion; Leda) (+ bit role) 1960 Les Bonnes Femmes (+ adapt, bit role) 1961 Les Godelureaux (+ co-adapt, bit role); ‘‘L’Avarice’’ episode of Les Sept Péchés capitaux (The Seven Deadly Sins) (+ bit role) 1962 L’?il du malin (The Third Lover) (+ sc); Ophélia (+ co-sc) 1963 Landru (Bluebeard) (+ co-sc) 1964 ‘‘L’Homme qui vendit la tour Eiffel’’ episode of Les Plus Belles Escroqueries du monde (The Beautiful Swindlers); Le Tigre aime la chair fra?che (The Tiger Likes Fresh Blood); La Chance et l’amour (Tavernier, Schlumberger, Bitsch, and Berry) (d linking sequences only) 1965 ‘‘La Muette’’ episode of Paris vu par . . . (Six in Paris) (+ sc, role); Marie-Chantal contre le Docteur Kha (+ co-sc, bit role); Le Tigre se parfume à la dynamite (An Orchid for the Tiger) (+ bit role) 1966 La Ligne de démarcation (Line of Demarcation) (+ co-sc) 1967 Le Scandale (The Champagne Murders); La Route de Corinthe (Who’s Got the Black Box?; The Road to Corinth) (+ role) 1968 Les Biches (The Does; The Girlfriends; Bad Girls) (+ co-sc, role) 1969 La Femme infidèle (Unfaithful Wife) (+ co-sc): Que la bête meure (This Man Must Die; Killer!) 1970 Le Boucher (+ sc); La Rupture (Le Jour des parques; The Breakup) (+ sc, bit role) 1971 Juste avant la nuit (Just before Nightfall) (+ sc) 1972 La Décade prodigieuse (Ten Days’ Wonder) (+ co-sc); Docteur Popaul (High Heels) (+ co-song); De Grey—Le Banc de Desolation (for TV) 1973 Les Noces rouges (Wedding in Blood) (+ sc) 1974 Nada (The NADA Gang); Histoires insolites (series of 4 TV films) 1975 Une Partie de plaisir (A Piece of Pleasure; Pleasure Party); Les Innocents aux mains sales (Dirty Hands; Innocents with Dirty Hands) (+ sc); Les Magiciens (Initiation à la mort; Profezia di un delitto) 1976 Folies bourgeoises (The Twist) (+ co-sc) 1977 Alice ou La Dernière Fugue (Alice or the Last Escapade) (+ sc) 1978 Blood Relatives (Les Liens de sang) (+ co-sc); Violette Nozière (Violette) 1980 Le Cheval d’Orgueil (The Horse of Pride; The Proud Ones) 1982 Les Fant?mes du chapelier (The Hatmaker) 1983 Le Sang des autres (The Blood of Others) 1984 Poulet au vinaigre (Coq au Vin) (+ co-sc) 1985 Inspecteur Lavardin (+co-sc) 1986 Masques (+ co-sc) 1987 Le cri du hibou (The Cry of the Owl) 1989 Une Affaire des femmes (Story of Women) (+ sc) 1990 Jours tranquilles a Clichy (Quiet Days in Clichy) (+ sc); Docteur M (Club Extinction) (+sc) 1991 Madame Bovary (+ sc) 1993 Bette (+sc); L’oeil de Vichy (The Eye of the Vichy) (doc) 1994 L’enfer (Hell) CHABROL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 170 Claude Chabrol 1995 Le ceremonie (The Ceremony); A Judgment in Stone (+ sc) 1997 Rien ne va plus (The Swindle) (+ sc) 1999 Au coeur du mensonge (The Color of Lies) (+ co-sc) 2000 Merci pour le chocolat (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1956 Le Coup de berger (Rivette) (co-sc, uncred co-mu, role) 1959 A bout de souffle (Godard) (tech adv); Les Jeux de l’amour (de Broca) (role) 1960 Paris nour appartient (Rivette) (role); Saint-Tropez blues (Moussy) (role); Les Distractions (Dupont) (role) 1961 Ples v dezju (Dance in the Rain) (Hladnik) (supervisor); Les Menteurs (Greville) (role) 1964 Les Durs à cuire (Pinoteau) (role) 1965 Brigitte et Brigitte (Moullet) (role) 1966 Happening (Bokanowski) (tech adv); Zoe bonne (Deval) (role) 1968 La Femme ecarlate (Valere) (role) 1969 Et crac! (Douchet) (role); Version latine (Detre) (role); Le Travail (Detre) (role) 1970 Sortie de secours (Kahane) (role) 1971 Eglantine (Brialy) (tech adv); Aussi loin que l’amour (Rossif) (role) 1972 Piège à pucelles (Leroi) (tech adv); Un Meurtre est un meurtre (Périer) (role) 1973 Le Flipping (Volatron) (role as interviewee) 1987 Sale destin! (Sylvain Madigan) (role) 1992 Sam Suffit (role as Mr. Denis) 1993 Jean Renoir (Thompson); Fran?ois Truffaut: Portraits volés (Fran?ois Truffaut: Stolen Portraits 1997 Cannesples 400 coups (Nadeau—for TV) (as himself) Publications By CHABROL: books— Hitchcock, with Eric Rohmer, Paris, 1957. La Femme Infidele, Paris, 1969. Les Noces rouges, Paris, 1973. Et pourtant, je tourne. . . , Paris, 1976. L’adieu aux dieux (novel), Paris, 1980. Autour d’Emma: Madame Bovary, un film de Claude Chabrol, Paris, 1991. CHABROLDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 171 By CHABROL: articles— Regular contributor to Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), under pseudonyms ‘‘Charles Eitel’’ and ‘‘Jean-Yves Goute,’’ 1950s. ‘‘Tout ce qu’il faut savoir pour mettre en scène s’apprend en quatre heures,’’ an interview with Fran?ois Truffaut, in Arts (Paris), 19 February 1958. ‘‘Vers un néo-romanticisme au cinéma,’’ in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), March 1959. ‘‘Big Subjects, Little Subjects,’’ in Movie (London), June 1962. Interview with Gilles Jacob, in Cinéma (Paris), September/Octo- ber 1966. ‘‘Claude Chabrol,’’ in Interviews with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, New York, 1967. Articles anthologized in The New Wave, edited by Peter Graham, New York, 1968. ‘‘La Femme Infidèle,’’ and ‘‘La Muette,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 42, 1969. Interview with Michel Ciment and others, in Positif (Paris), April 1970. Interview with Noah James, in Take One (Montreal), September/ October 1970. Interview with Rui Nogueira, in Sight and Sound (London), Win- ter 1970/71. Interview with M. Rosier and D. Serceau, in Cinéma (Paris), Septem- ber/October 1973. Interviews with G. Braucourt, in Ecran (Paris), May 1975 and February 1977. ‘‘Chabrol’s Game of Mirrors,’’ an interview with D. Overbey, in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1977. ‘‘The Magical Mystery World of Claude Chabrol,’’ an interview with Dan Yakir, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), no. 3, 1979. ‘‘I Fell in Love with Violette Nozière,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), April 1979. Interview with D. Simmons, in Film Directions (Belfast), vol. 5, no. 18, 1983. Conversation with Georges Simenon, in Filmkritik (Munich), Febru- ary 1983. Interview with Jill Forbes, in Stills (London), June/July 1984. ‘‘Jeu de massacre: Attention les yeux,’’ an interview with Pierre Bonitzer and others, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1986. ‘‘Chabrol by Chance,’’ an interview with Claudio Lazzaro, in World Press Review, October 1988. ‘‘Entretiens avec Claude Chabrol,’’ an interview in Cahiers du Cinéma, December 1989. ‘‘Conversazione con Claude Chabrol,’’ an interview with P. Vernaglione, in Filmcritica, March 1989. ‘‘Entretien avec Claude Chabrol,’’ an interview with T. Jousse and others, in Cahiers du Cinéma, November 1990. ‘‘Histoires de fuites,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma, May 1991. ‘‘Entretien avec Claude Chabrol,’’ an interview with T. Jousse and S. Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma, March 1992. ‘‘La Grande Manipulation,’’ an interview with Pierre Murat and Isabelle Danel, in Télérama (Paris), 10 March 1993. ‘‘Hell’s Angel,’’ an interview with Tom Charity, in Time Out (London), 19 October 1994. ‘‘Oskuld, mord och en kopp te,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 38, no.4, 1996. ‘‘Chabrol’s ‘Ceremonie’,’’ in Film Journal (New York), January/ February 1997. On CHABROL: books— Armes, Roy, French Cinema since 1946: Vol.2—The Personal Style, New York, 1966. Wood, Robin, and Michael Walker, Claude Chabrol, London, 1970. Braucourt, Guy, Claude Chabrol, Paris, 1971. Monaco, James, The New Wave, New York, 1976. Moscariello, Angelo, Chabrol, Firenze, 1976. Grongaard, Peter, Chabrols Filmkunst, Kobenhavn, 1977. Magny, Joel, Claude Chabrol, Paris, 1987. Derry, Charles, The Suspense Thriller: Films in the Shadow of Alfred Hitchcock, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1988. Blanchet, Christian, Claude Chabrol, Paris, 1989. Austin, Guy, Claude Chabrol, Autoportrait, Manchester, 1999. On CHABROL: articles— ‘‘New Wave’’ issue of Cinéma (Paris), February 1960. ‘‘Chabrol Issue’’ of Movie (London), June 1963. Gow, Gordon, ‘‘The Films of Claude Chabrol,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1967. Baxter, Brian, ‘‘Claude Chabrol,’’ in Film (London), Spring 1969. ‘‘Chabrol Issue’’ of L’Avant-scène du Cinéma (Paris), May 1969. Wood, Robin, ‘‘Chabrol and Truffaut,’’ in Movie (London), Win- ter 1969/70. Allen, Don, ‘‘Claude Chabrol,’’ in Screen (London), February 1970. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Chabrol’s Schizophrenic Spider,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1970. Haskell, Molly, ‘‘The Films of Chabrol—A Priest among Clowns,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 12 November 1970. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Songs of Innocence,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1970/71. Bucher, F., and Peter Cowie, ‘‘Welles and Chabrol,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1971. ‘‘Chabrol Issue’’ of Filmcritica (Rome), April/May 1972. Cornand, A., ‘‘Les Noces rouges, Chabrol et la censure,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), April 1973. Appel, A. Jr., ‘‘The Eyehole of Knowledge,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1973. ‘‘Chabrol Issue’’ of Image et Son (Paris), December 1973. Dawson, Jan, ‘‘The Continental Divide,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Winter 1973/74. Le Fanu, Mark, ‘‘The Cinema of Irony: Chabrol, Truffaut in the 1970s,’’ in Monogram (London), no. 5, 1974. Walker, M., ‘‘Claude Chabrol into the ‘70s,’’ in Movie (London), Spring 1975. Fassbinder, Rainer Werner, ‘‘Insects in a Glass Case: Random Thoughts on Claude Chabrol,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no.4, 1976. Harcourt, P., ‘‘Middle Chabrol,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1976. Poague, Leland, ‘‘The Great God Orson: Chabrol’s ‘10 Days’ Won- der,’’ in Film Criticism (Edinboro, Pennsylvania), no. 3, 1979. Jenkins, Steve, ‘‘And the Chabrol We Haven’t Seen. . . ,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), July 1982. Dossier on Chabrol, in Cinématographe (Paris), September 1982. CHABROL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 172 Bergan, Ronald, ‘‘Directors of the Decade—Claude Chabrol,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1983. ‘‘Chabrol Section’’ of Revue du Cinéma (Paris), May 1985. Monthly Film Bulletin (London), August 1987. Auld, Deborah, ‘‘I, Claude,’’ in Village Voice, 8 August 1989. Haberman, C., ‘‘Chabrol Films a Henry Miller Tale,’’ in New York Times, 9 August 1989. Pally, Marcia, ‘‘Women’s Business,’’ in Film Comment, September/ October 1989. Bohlen, C., ‘‘Chabrol Offers a Cool-eyed Look at a Stormy Issue,’’ in New York Times, 15 October 1989. Fisher, William, ‘‘Occupational Hazards,’’ in Harper’s Bazaar, November 1989. Borde, R., ‘‘Claude Chabrol,’’ in La Revue de la Cinematheque, December/January 1989/90. Gristwood, Sarah, ‘‘Mabuse Returns: Chabrol Pays His Respects,’’ in Sight and Sound, Spring 1990. Mayne, Richard, ‘‘Still Waving, Not Drowning,’’ in Sight and Sound, Summer 1990. Riding, A., ‘‘Flaubert Does Hollywood—Again,’’ in New York Times, 13 January 1991. Chase, Donald, ‘‘A Day in the Country,’’ in Film Comment, Novem- ber/December 1991. Vaucher, Andrea R., ‘‘Madame Bovary, C’est Moi!’’ in American Film, September/October 1991. Roth, Michael, ‘‘L’oeil de Vichy,’’ in American Historical Review, October 1994. Frodon, Jean-Michel, ‘‘Chabrol’s Class Act,’’ in London Guardian Weekly, 17 September 1995. Diana, M., ‘‘Una commedia borghese,’’ in Segnocinema (Vicenza), July-August 1996. Feinstein, H., ‘‘Killer Instincts,’’ in Village Voice, 24 December 1996. Kibar, O., ‘‘En seremoniell obduksjon,’’ in Film and Kino (Oslo), no. 3, 1996. Signorelli, A., ‘‘A Firenze la ‘sorpresa’ Chabrol,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), January/February 1996. On CHABROL: film— Yentob, Alan, Getting Away with Murder, or The Childhood of Claude Chabrol, for BBC-TV, London, 1978. *** If Jean-Luc Godard appeals to critics because of his extreme interest in politics and film theory, if Fran?ois Truffaut appeals to the popular audience because of his humanism and sentimentality, it is Claude Chabrol—film critic, filmmaker, philosopher—whose work consistently offers the opportunity for the most balanced appeal. His partisans find especially notable the subtle tone of Chabrol’s cinema: his films are apparently cold and objective portraits of profoundly psychological situations; and yet that coldness never approaches the kind of fashionable cynicism, say, of a Stanley Kubrick, but suggests, rather, something closer to the viewpoint of a god who, with compas- sion but without sentiment, observes the follies of his creations. Chabrol’s work can perhaps best be seen as a cross between the unassuming and popular genre film and the pretentious and elitist art film: Chabrol’s films tend to be thrillers with an incredibly self- conscious, self-assured style—that is, pretentious melodrama, aware of its importance. For some, however, the hybrid character of Chabrol’s work is itself a problem: indeed, just as elitist critics sometimes find Chabrol’s subject matter beneath them, so too do popular audiences sometimes find Chabrol’s style and incredibly slow pace alienating. Chabrol’s films are filled with allusions and references to myth (as in La rupture, which begins with an epigraph from Racine’s Phaedra: ‘‘What an utter darkness suddenly surrounds me!’’). The narratives of his films are developed through a sensuousness of decor, a gradual accumulation of psychological insight, an absolute mastery of camera movement, and the inclusion of objects and images—beautiful and evocative, like the river in Le boucher or the lighthouse in Dirty Hands—which are imbued with symbolic intensity. Like Balzac, whom he admires, Chabrol attempts, within a popular form, to present a portrait of his society in microcosm. Chabrol began his career as a critic for Cahiers du Cinéma. With Eric Rohmer, he wrote a groundbreaking book-length study of Alfred Hitchcock, and with his friends (Truffaut, Godard, Rohmer, Jacques Rivette, and others) he attempted to turn topsy-turvy the entire cinematic value system. That their theories of authorship remain today a basic (albeit modified and continuously examined) premise certainly indicates the success of their endeavor. Before long, Chabrol found himself functioning as financial consultant and producer for a variety of films inaugurating the directorial careers of his fellow critics who, like himself, were no longer content merely to theorize. Chabrol’s career can perhaps be divided into five semi-discrete periods: 1) the early personal films, beginning with Le beau Serge in 1958 and continuing through Landru in 1962; 2) the commercial assignments, beginning with The Tiger Likes Fresh Blood in 1964 and continuing through The Road to Corinth in 1967; 3) the mature cycle of masterpieces, beginning with Les biches in 1968 and continuing through Wedding in Blood in 1973, almost all starring his wife Stéphane Audran, and produced by André Génovès; 4) the more diverse (and uneven) accumulations of films from 1974 to the mid- 1980s which have tended neither to garner automatic international release nor to feature Audran in a central role; and 5) the more recent films of higher quality, if sometimes uneven still, produced in the 1980s and 1990s by Marin Karmitz’s company MK2 and including a new set of regular collaborators. If Hitchcock’s Shadow of a Doubt, as analyzed by Chabrol and Rohmer, is constructed upon an exchange of guilt, Chabrol’s first film, Le beau Serge, modeled after it, is constructed upon an exchange of redemption. Chabrol followed Le beau Serge, in which a city- dweller visits a country friend, with Les cousins, in which a country- dweller visits a city friend. Most notably, Les cousins offers Chabrol’s first ‘‘Charles’’ and ‘‘Paul,’’ the names Chabrol would continue to use throughout much of his career—Charles to represent the more serious bourgeois man, Paul the more hedonistic id-figure. A double tour, Chabrol’s first color film, is especially notable for its striking cinematography, its complex narrative structure, and the exuberance of its flamboyant style; it represents Chabrol’s first studied attempt to examine and criticize the moral values of the bourgeoisie as well as to dissect the sociopsychological causes of the violence which inevita- bly erupts as the social and family structures prove inadequate. Perhaps the most wholly successful film of this period is the infre- quently screened L’?il du malin, which presents the most typical Chabrol situation: a triangle consisting of a bourgeois married couple— Hélène and her stolid husband—and the outsider whose involvement with the couple ultimately leads to violence and tragedy. Here can be CHABROLDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 173 found Chabrol’s first ‘‘Hélène,’’ the recurring beautiful and slightly aloof woman, generally played by Stéphane Audran. When these and other personal films failed to ignite the box office, despite often positive critical responses, Chabrol embarked on a se- ries of primarily commercial assignments (such as Marie-Chantal contre le Docteur Kha), during which his career went into a consider- able critical eclipse. Today, however, even these fairly inconsequen- tial films seem to reflect a fetching style and some typically quirky Chabrolian concerns. Chabrol’s breakthrough occurred in 1968 with the release of Les biches, an elegant thriller in which an outsider, Paul, disrupts the lesbian relationship between two women. All of Chabrol’s films in this period are slow psychological thrillers which tend basically to represent variations upon the same theme: an outsider affecting a central relationship until violence results. In La femme infidèle, one of Chabrol’s most self-assured films, the marriage of Hélène and Charles is disrupted when Charles kills Hélène’s lover. In the Jansenist Que la bête meure, Charles tracks down the unremittingly evil hit- and-run killer of his young son, and while doing so disrupts the relationship between the killer, Paul, and his sister-in-law Hélène. In Le boucher, the butcher Popaul, who is perhaps a homicidal killer, attempts a relationship with a cool and frigid schoolteacher, Hélène, who has displaced her sexual energies onto her teaching of her young pupils, particularly onto one who is conspicuously given the name Charles. In the extravagantly expressive La rupture, the outsider Paul attempts a plot against Hélène in order to secure a better divorce settlement, desired by the rich parents of her husband Charles, who has turned to drug addiction to escape his repressive bourgeois existence. In Juste avant la nuit, it is Charles who has taken a lover, and Charles’s wife Hélène who must ultimately resort to an act of calculated violence in order to keep the bourgeois surface intact. In the detective variation Ten Days’ Wonder, the relationship between Charles and Hélène is disrupted by the intervention of a character named Théo (Theos, representing God), whose false image must be unmasked by the outsider Paul. And in Wedding in Blood, based on factual material, it is the wife and her lover who team together to plot against her husband. Jean Renoir said that all great directors make the same film over and over; perhaps no one has taken this dictum as seriously as Chabrol; indeed, all these films represent a kind of formal geometry as Charles, Hélène, and Paul play out their fated roles in a universe strongly influenced by Fritz Lang, the structures of their bourgeois existence unable to contain their previously repressed passions. Noteworthy too is the consistency of collaboration on these films: usually with Stéphane Audran, Michel Bouquet, and Jean Yanne as performers; Jean Rabier as cinematographer; Paul Gégauff as co-scriptwriter; André Génovès as producer; Guy Littaye as art director; Pierre Jansen as composer; Jacques Gaillard as editor; Guy Chichignoud on sound. In the late 1970s and 1980s, Chabrol has increasingly explored different kinds of financing, making television films as well as international co-productions. Some of these interesting films seem quite unusual from what he has attempted before, perhaps the most surprising being Le cheval d’orgueil, an ethnographic drama chroni- cling the simplicity and terrible harshness of peasant life in Brittany prior to World War I with a straightforwardness and lack of sentimen- tality which is often riveting. Indeed, the film seems so different from much of Chabrol’s work that it forces a kind of re-evaluation of his career, making him seem less an emulator of Hitchcock and more an emulator of Balzac, attempting to create his own Comédie humaine in a panoramic account of the society about him. Meanwhile, without his regular collaborators, most notably Stéphane Audran, Chabrol has had to establish a new ‘‘team’’—now including his son, Matthieu Chabrol, as composer replacing the superior Pierre Jansen. Although the series of films directed for producer Marin Karmitz seems laudable and superior to Chabrol’s non-Karmitz films of the 1980s and 1990s, with three exceptions they do not match the unity or quality of Chabrol’s earlier masterpieces. One of the exceptions is Une affaire des femmes, starring Isabelle Huppert (who had previously starred in Violette Nozière). The story of an abortionist who ends up the last female guillotined in France (by the Vichy government), Une affaire des femmes, unlike the majority of Chabrol’s recent films, received international distribution as well as a variety of awards and critical recognition. Chabrol’s achievement here is extraordinary: offering a complex three-dimensional portrait of a woman who is not really very likeable, Une affaire des femmes turns out, by its end, to be the most fair, progressive, passionate film ever made about abortion, dissecting the sexual politics of the ‘‘crime’’ without ever resorting to polemics; and Chabrol’s unswerving gaze becomes the regard of an all-knowing God. Madame Bovary, again with Huppert, is perhaps one notch below in quality: but is it surprising that Chabrol turns Madame Bovary into one of his tragic bourgeois love triangles, only this time with the protagonist named Emma, rather than Hélène? Also impressive—and perhaps Chabrol’s last masterpiece—is the 1995 film La cérémonie, again with Huppert. Released several years after the fall of the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites, La cérémonie (which was based on the thriller A Judgement in Stone written by Ruth Rendell) was character- ized by its director as ‘‘the last Marxist film’’ and presents a polite, likable, stylish, bourgeois French family who is ultimately dispatched by the help. That those who are supposed to provide service should instead gradually institute chaos and revolution within a well-ap- pointed home redolent of privilege and maners, creates an atmosphere of slowly sustaining tension and violent inevitability; that ‘‘la cérémonie’’ is also the French term for the ritual of the guillotine makes Chabrol’s sly ideological point all the clearer. Notably, La cérémonie was moderately successful in the United States (unusual for Chabrol), winning significant box office as well as the best foreign film citation from the National Society of Film Critics. The success of Une affaire des femmes, Madame Bovary, and La cérémonie, as well as the earlier Violette Nozière (all four starring Isabelle Huppert), may indicate that Chabrol’s films—cold as an inherent result of the director’s personality and formal interests—may absolutely require an extraordinary, expressive female presence in order to contribute a human, empathic dimension—else they seem slow, tedious exer- cises. Clearly, Stéphane Audran’s contributions to Chabrol’s earlier masterpieces—both as fellow artist and muse—may have been seri- ously underestimated. More typical of Chabrol’s recent career are films like Les Fant?mes du Chapelier, Poulet au vinaigre, Inspecteur Lavardin, Masques, Le cri du hibou, and Rien ne va plus, which, though worthy of note, by no means measure up to Chabrol’s greatest and therefore disappoint. What becomes indisputably clear is that Chabrol is one of the most uneven great directors; and without a producer like André Génovès CHAHINE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 174 and forceful, talented collaborators on Chabrol’s wavelength, Chabrol can sometimes make bad or very odd movies. The 1976 Folies bourgeoises, for instance, is all but unwatchable, and while Docteur M and Betty may have interesting concepts, one is a dreary re- interpretation of Fritz Lang, and the other a lifeless adaptation of a Simenon novel, containing a wooden performance by Marie Trintignant. L’enfer (directed in 1994) is certainly better, if still minor—a smoldering tale of growing jealousy based on the unproduced script of a master director with a somewhat kindred soul, Henri- Georges Clouzot. Nevertheless, the true cinephile loves Chabrol despite his failures—because in the midst of his overprodigious output, he can change gears and make a fascinating documentary, such as his 1993 L’?il de Vichy (which compiles French film propaganda in service of the Nazi cause), or can surprise everyone with a major, narrative film of startling ideas and unity, such as his 1995 La cérémonie, suddenly again at the very top of his form, a New Wave exemplar for filmmakers everywhere. One hopes for at least one more definitive Claude Chabrol masterpiece. —Charles Derry CHAHINE, Youssef Nationality: Egyptian. Born: Alexandria, 25 January 1926; name also spelled ‘‘Shahin.’’ Education: Victoria College, and Alexandria University; studied acting at Pasadena Playhouse, California, 1946–48. Youssef Chahine Career: Returned to Egypt, worked with Italian documentarist Gianni Vernuccio, 1948; introduced to film production by Alvisi Orfanelli, ‘‘pioneer of the Egyptian cinema,’’ directed first film, Baba Amine, 1950; introduced actor Omar Sharif, in Sera’a fil Wadi, 1953; voluntary exile in Libya, 1965–67. Awards: Special Jury Prize, Berlin Festival, for Alexandria . . . Why?, 1979; Special Jury Prize, Berlin Festival, for An Egyptian Story, 1982; Lifetime Achievement Award, Cannes Film Festival, 1997. Films as Director: 1950 Baba Amine (Father Amine) 1951 Ibn el Nil (The Nile’s Son); El Muharraj el Kabir (The Great Clown) 1952 Sayidet el Kitar (The Lady in the Train); Nessa bala Rejal (Women without Men) 1953 Sera’a fil Wadi (Struggle in the Valley) 1954 Shaitan el Sahara (Devil of the Desert) 1955 Sera’a fil Mina (Struggle on the Pier) 1956 Inta Habibi (You Are My Love) 1957 Wadaat Hobak (Farewell to Your Love) 1958 Bab el Hadid (Iron Gate; Cairo Station; Gare centrale) (+ role as Kennawi); Gamila Bohraid (Djamila) 1959 Hub illal Abad (Forever Yours) 1960 Bayn Ideak (Between Your Hands) 1961 Nedaa el Ochak (Lover’s Call); Rajol fi Hayati (A Man in My Life) 1963 El Naser Salah el Dine (Saladin) 1964 Fajr Yum Jadid (Dawn of a New Day) 1965 Baya el Khawatim (The Ring Seller) 1966 Rimal min Zahab (Sand of Gold) 1968 El Nas wal Nil (People and the Nile) 1969 El Ard (The Land) 1970 Al Ekhtiar (The Choice) 1973 Al Asfour (The Sparrow) 1976 Awdat al Ibn al Dal (Return of the Prodigal Son) 1978 Iskindria . . . Leh? (Alexandria . . . Why?) (+ sc) 1982 Hadota Misreya (An Egyptian Story; La Memoire) (+ sc) 1984 Al Wedaa ya Bonaparte (Adieu Bonaparte) 1986 Sarikat Sayfeya (+ ph) 1990 Iskindiriah Kaman Oue Kaman (Alexandria Again and For- ever) (+ sc) 1991 Cairo as Told by Youssef Chahine 1994 The Emigrant (+ sc) 1995 Lumière et compagnie (Lumière and Company) 1997 al-Massir (Destiny) (+ co-sc) 1999 L’Autre (El Akhar) (+ co-sc) Publications By CHAHINE: articles— Interview with C. M. Cluny, in Cinéma (Paris), September/Octo- ber 1973. ‘‘Entretien avec Youssef Chahine (Le moineau),’’ by G. Gauthier, in Image et Son (Paris), December 1974. CHAHINEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 175 ‘‘Youssef Chahine: Aller aussi loin qu’un peut,’’ interview with N. Ghali, in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), December 1974/January 1975. ‘‘Youssef Chahine: La memoire,’’ an interview with Marcel Martin, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), July/August 1983. ‘‘La verité de personnages,’’ an interview with C. Tesson, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1985. Interview in Cinématographe (Paris), December 1986. ‘‘Serge le Vaillant,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July/August 1992. Interview with Vincent Vatrican, Thierry Jousse and Stéphane Bou- quet, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1995. On CHAHINE: books— Richter, Erika, Realistischer Film in Agypten, Berlin, 1974. Armes, Roy, Third World Filmmaking and the West, Berkeley, 1987. On CHAHINE: articles— Arnaud, C., ‘‘Youssef Chahine,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), Janu- ary 1978. Tournes, A., ‘‘Chahine, le nationalisme demystifie: Alexandrie pourquoi?,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), no. 3, 1979. Armes, Roy, ‘‘Youssef Chahine and Egyptian Cinema,’’ in Frame- work (Norwich), Spring 1981. Joseph, I., and C. Jages, ‘‘Le Cinéma, l’Egypte et l’histoire,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1982. Nave, B., A. Tournes, and M. Martin, ‘‘Un film bilan: La memoire de Chahine,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), April 1983. Toubiana, Serge, ‘‘Chahine a la conque te de Bonaparte,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1984. Dossier on Chahine, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), December 1984. Chaillet, Jean-Paul, ‘‘Soleil d’Egypte,’’ in Première (Paris), May 1985. Kieffer, A., ‘‘Youssef Chahine: Un homme de dialogue,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), July/August 1985. Tesson, C., ‘‘La Descente du Nil,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July/August 1986. Guerin, N., ‘‘Youssef Chahine,’’ in Cinema 90, June 1990. Amarger, M., “Youssef Chahine,” in Ecrans d’Afrique,(Milan) vol. 3, no. 9/10, 1994. Warg, P., “Filmmaker in Court Over Pic’s Prophets,” in Variety, 14/ 20 November 1994. Kehr, D., “The Waters of Alexandria,” in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1996. *** Youssef Chahine is one of the most forceful and complex of Egyptian filmmakers whose progress over the forty years or so since his debut at the age of twenty-four offers remarkable insight into the evolution of Egyptian society. A series of sharply critical social studies—of which The Sparrow in 1975 is undoubtedly the most successful—was interrupted by a heart attack while the director was still in his early fifties. This led him to question his own personal stance and development in a manner unique in Arab cinema, and the result was the splendidly fluent autobiography Alexandria . . . Why? in 1978, which was followed four years later by a second installment titled An Egyptian Story, shot in a style best characterized as an amalgam of Fellini and Bob Fosse’s All That Jazz. As such references indicate, Chahine is an eclectic filmmaker whose cosmopolitan attitudes can be traced back to his origins. He was born in Alexandria in 1926 of middle-class parents. His father, a supporter of the nationalist Wafd party, was a scrupulous but financially unsuccessful lawyer, and Chahine was brought up as a Christian, educated first at religious school and then at the prestigious Victoria College, where the language of tuition was English. After a year at Alexandria University he persuaded his parents to allow him to study drama for two years at Pasadena Playhouse, near Los Angeles, and on his return to Egypt he plunged into the film industry, then enjoying a period of boom in the last years of King Farouk’s reign. Alexandria . . . Why? presents a vividly drawn picture of this vanished world: Alexandria in 1942, awaiting the arrival of Rommel’s troops, who, it is hoped, will finally drive out the British. The film is peopled with English soldiers and Egyptian patriots, aristocrats, and struggling bourgeoises, the enthusiastic young and their disillusioned or corrupt elders. Chahine mocks the excesses of the nationalists (his terrorist patriots are mostly caricatures), leaves condemnation of Zionism to Jews, and tells love stories that cross the neatly drawn barriers separating Muslim and Jew, Egyptian aristocrat and English Tommy. The revelation of Chahine’s own background and a few of his personal obsessions (as with the crucified Christ) seems to have released fresh creative powers in the director. His technique of intercutting the action with scenes from Hollywood musicals and newsreel footage from the Imperial War Museum in London is as successful as it is audacious, and the transitions of mood are bril- liantly handled. Chahine is a key figure in Third World cinema. Unlike some of the other major filmmakers who also emerged in the 1950s—such as Satyajit Ray or Lester James Peries—he has not turned his back on commercial cinema. He has always shown a keen desire to reach a wide audience, and Alexandria . . . Why?, though personal, is by no means an inaccessible or difficult work. Chahine’s strength as a filmmaker lies indeed in his ability to combine mainstream produc- tion techniques with a very individual style and approach. Though intensely patriotic, he has shown a readiness to criticize government policies with which he does not agree, such as those of the late President Sadat. It is ironic therefore that the appearance of Alexan- dria . . . Why? should have coincided with the Camp David agree- ments between Egypt and Israel. As a result, Chahine’s very personal statement of his belief in a tolerant society came to be widely criticized in the Arab world as an opportunistic political statement and a justification of Sadat’s policies. His underlying commitment to the making of an Egyptian identity, history, and memory is evident in his more recent works as well. The 1984 Adieu Bonaparte, a Franco-Egyptian co-production, portrays an East-West encounter through an Egyptian family during Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt. Chahine’s continuous efforts to reconstruct and forge an Egyptian-ness, ‘‘to be nothing but Egyptian,’’ can be most clearly seen in the ways in which he strives to retell this history from a strictly Egyptian perspective and none other. Chahine’s endeavor may not be unique among the whole array of Third World filmmakers who act and/or react against the West. However, given his own involvement and interests in the Western arts and influences, which not too many non-Western filmmakers could in fact claim to be devoid of, it is his inventiveness in forms and consistency in content that make Chahine an important filmmaker in Egypt in particular and in the non-Western filmmaking world in general. —Roy Armes, updated by Guo-Juin Hong CHAPLIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 176 CHAPLIN, (Sir) Charles (Charlie) Nationality: British. Born: Charles Spencer Chaplin in London, 16 April 1889. Family: Married 1) Mildred Harris, 1918 (divorced 1920); 2) Lita Grey, 1924 (divorced 1927), two sons; 3) Paulette Goddard, 1936 (divorced 1941); 4) Oona O’Neill, 1943, eight child- ren. Career: Music-Hall Performer in London and provincial thea- tres, from 1898; engaged by Fred Karno troupe, 1907; toured United States with Karno, 1910 and 1912; signed to Keystone and moved to Hollywood, 1913; after acting in eleven Keystone comedies, began directing (thirty-five films for Keystone), 1914; signed with Essanay (fourteen films), 1915; signed with Mutual (eleven films), 1916; signed with First National (nine films), 1917; joint-founder, with Griffith, Pickford, and Fairbanks, of United Artists, 1919; left United States to visit London, reentry permit rescinded en route, 1952; moved to Vevey, on Lake Geneva, Switzerland, 1953. Awards: Best Actor, New York Film Critics, for The Great Dictator, 1940 (award refused); Honorary Oscar, ‘‘for the incalculable effect he has had in making motion pictures the art form of the country,’’ 1971; Medallion Award, Writers Guild of America, 1971; Oscar for Best Original Dramatic Score (shared) for Limelight, 1972; Knighted, 1975. Died: In Vevey, 25 December 1977. Films as Director, Actor and Scriptwriter: 1914 Caught in a Cabaret (Jazz Waiter; Faking with Society) (co-d, co-sc); Caught in the Rain (Who Got Stung?; At It Again); A Busy Day (Lady Charlie; Militant Suffragette); The Fatal Mallet (The Pile Driver; The Rival Suitors; Hit Him Again) (co-d, co-sc); Her Friend the Bandit (Mabel’s Flirtation; A Thief Catcher) (co-d, co-sc); Mabel’s Busy Day (Charlie and the Sausages; Love and Lunch; Hot Dogs) (co-d, co-sc); Mabel’s Married Life (When You’re Married; The Squarehead) (co-d, co-sc); Laughing Gas (Tuning His Ivories; The Dentist); The Property Man (Getting His Goat; The Roustabout; Vamping Venus); The Face on the Bar- Room Floor (The Ham Artist); Recreation (Spring Fever); The Masquerader (Putting One Over; The Female Imper- sonator); His New Profession (The Good-for-Nothing; Help- ing Himself); The Rounders (Two of a Kind; Oh, What a Night!); The New Janitor (The Porter; The Blundering Boob); Those Love Pangs (The Rival Mashers; Busted Hearts); Dough and Dynamite (The Doughnut Designer; The Cook); Gentlemen of Nerve (Some Nerve; Charlie at the Races); His Musical Career (The Piano Movers; Musi- cal Tramps); His Trysting Place (Family Home); Getting Acquainted (A Fair Exchange; Hullo Everybody); His Prehistoric Past (A Dream; King Charlie; The Caveman) 1915 (for Essanay): His New Job; A Night Out (Champagne Char- lie); The Champion (Battling Charlie); In the Park (Charlie on the Spree); A Jitney Elopement (Married in Haste); The Tramp (Charlie the Hobo); By the Sea (Charlie’s Day Out); Work (The Paper Hanger; The Plumber); A Woman (The Perfect Lady); The Bank; Shanghaied (Charlie the Sailor; Charlie on the Ocean); A Night in the Show 1916 (for Essanay): Carmen (Charlie Chaplin’s Burlesque on Carmen); Police! (Charlie the Burglar); (for Mutual): The Floorwalker (The Store); The Fireman; The Vagabond; One A.M.; The Count; The Pawnshop; Behind the Screen; The Rink 1917 (for Mutual): Easy Street; The Cure; The Immigrant; The Adventurer 1918 (for First National): A Dog’s Life; (for Liberty Loan Commit- tee): The Bond; Triple Trouble (compiled from 1915 foot- age plus additional non-Chaplin film by Essanay after he left); (for First National): Shoulder Arms 1919 (for First National): Sunnyside; A Day’s Pleasure 1921 The Kid; (+ pr); The Idle Class (+ pr) 1922 Pay Day (+ pr); Nice and Friendly (+ pr) (made privately and unreleased) 1923 The Pilgrim (+ pr); A Woman of Paris (+ pr) 1925 The Gold Rush (+ pr, narration, mus for sound reissue) 1926 A Woman of the Sea (The Sea Gull) (von Sternberg) (unre- leased) (pr, d additional scenes) 1927 The Circus (+ pr, mus, song for sound reissue) 1931 City Lights (+ pr, mus) 1936 Modern Times (+ pr, mus) 1940 The Great Dictator (+ pr, mus) 1947 Monsieur Verdoux (+ pr, mus) 1952 Limelight (+ pr, mus, co-choreographer) 1957 A King in New York (+ pr, mus) 1959 The Chaplin Revue (+ pr, mus) (comprising A Dog’s Life, Shoulder Arms, and The Pilgrim, with commentary and music) 1967 A Countess from Hong Kong (+ mus) Other Films: 1914 Making a Living (A Busted Johnny; Troubles; Doing His Best) (Lehrman) (role as reporter); Kid Auto Races at Venice (The Kid Auto Race) (Lehrman) (role as Charlie); Mabel’s Strange Predicament (Hotel Mixup) (Lehrman and Sennett) (role as Charlie); Between Showers (The Flirts; Charlie and the Umbrella; In Wrong) (Lehrman) (role as Charlie); A Film Johnnie (Movie Nut; Million Dollar Job; Charlie at the Studio) (Sennett) (role as Charlie); Tango Tangles (Charlie’s Recreation; Music Hall) (Sennett) (role as Char- lie); His Favorite Pastime (The Bonehead; His Reckless Fling) (Nichols) (role as Charlie); Cruel, Cruel Love (Sennett) (role as Charlie); The Star Boarder (The Hash-House Hero) (Sennett) (role as Charlie); Mabel at the Wheel (His Dare- devil Queen; Hot Finish) (Normand and Sennett) (role as Charlie); Twenty Minutes of Love (He Loved Her So; Cops and Watches) (Sennett) (role as Charlie, + sc); The Knock Out (Counted Out; The Pugilist) (Arbuckle) (role as Char- lie); Tillie’s Punctured Romance (Tillie’s Nightmare; For the Love of Tillie; Marie’s Millions) (Sennett) (role as Charlie); His Regeneration (Anderson) (guest appearance) 1921 The Nut (Reed) (guest appearance) 1923 Souls for Sale (Hughes) (guest appearance) 1928 Show People (King Vidor) (guest appearance) CHAPLINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 177 Charlie Chaplin Publications By CHAPLIN: books— Charlie Chaplin’s Own Story, Indianapolis, 1916. My Trip Abroad, New York, 1922. My Autobiography, London, 1964. My Life in Pictures, London, 1974. By CHAPLIN: articles— Interview with Margaret Hinxman, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1957. Interview with Richard Merryman, in Life (New York), 10 March 1967. ‘‘Charles Chaplin parle,’’ interviews excerpted by C. Gauteur, in Image et Son (Paris), November 1972. ‘‘Chaplin est mort, vive Charlot!,’’ interview with Philippe Soupault, text by Chaplin from 1921, and round-table discussion, in Ecran (Paris), March 1978. ‘‘The INS interview with Chaplin,’’ edited by Charles J. Maland, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 14, no. 4, 1986. On CHAPLIN: books— Delluc, Louis, Charlot, Paris, 1921. Tyler, Parker, Chaplin, Last of the Clowns, New York, 1947. Huff, Theodore, Charlie Chaplin, New York, 1951. Bessy, Maurice, and Robert Florey, Monsieur Chaplin ou le rire dans la nuit, Paris, 1952. Payne, Robert, The Great God Pan: A Biography of the Tramp Played by Charlie Chaplin, New York, 1952. Sadoul, Georges, Vie de Charlot, Paris, 1952; published as Vie de Charlot: Charles Spencer Chaplin, ses films et son temps, Paris, 1978. Mitry, Jean, Charlot et la ‘‘fabulation’’ chaplinesque, Paris, 1957. McDonald, Gerald, and others, The Films of Charlie Chaplin, Secaucus, New Jersey, 1965. Martin, Marcel, Charlie Chaplin, Paris, 1966; 3rd edition, Paris, 1983. Brownlow, Kevin, The Parade’s Gone By, London, 1968. McCaffrey, Donald, Four Great Comedians: Chaplin, Lloyd, Keaton, Langdon, London, 1968. Quigly, Isabel, Charlie Chaplin: Early Comedies, London, 1968. Leprohon, Pierre, Charles Chaplin, Paris, 1970. CHAPLIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 178 McCaffrey, Donald, editor, Focus on Chaplin, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1971. Mitry, Jean, Tout Chaplin: Tous les films, par le texte, par le gag et par l’image, Paris, 1972. Mast, Gerald, The Comic Mind, New York, 1973. Manvell, Roger, Chaplin, Boston, 1974. Lyons, T.J., Charles Chaplin—A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1977. Sobel, Raoul, and David Francis, Chaplin, Genesis of a Clown, London, 1977. McCabe, John, Charlie Chaplin, New York, 1978. Nysenholc, Adolphe, L’Age d’or du comique: sémiologie de Charlot, Brussels, 1979. Eisenstein, Sergei, Film Essays and a Lecture, edited by Jay Leyda, Princeton, New Jersey, 1982. Gehring, Wes D., Charlie Chaplin: A Bio-Bibliography, Westport, Connecticut, 1983. Robinson, David, Chaplin: The Mirror of Opinion, London, 1983. Kamin, Dan, Charlie Chaplin’s One-Man Show, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1984. Smith, Julian, Chaplin, Boston, 1984. Geduld, Harry M., Charlie Chaplin’s Own Story, Bloomington, Indiana, 1985. Robinson, David, Chaplin: His Life and Art, London, 1985. Geduld, Harry M., Chapliniana 1: The Keystone Films, Bloomington, Indiana, 1987. Mitry, Jean, Tout Chaplin: L’Oeuvre complète presentée par le texte et par l’image, Paris, 1987. Saint-Martin, Catherine, Charlot/Chaplin; ou, La Conscience du mythe, Paris, 1987. Epstein, Jerry, Remembering Charlie: The Story of a Friendship, London, 1988. Schickel, Richard, Schickel on Film: Encounters—Critical and Personal—with Movie Immortals, New York, 1989. Silver, Charles, Charlie Chaplin: An Appreciation, New York, 1989. Maland, Charles J., Chaplin and American Culture: The Evolution of a Star, 1990. Karney, Robyn, and Robin Cross, The Life and Times of Charlie Chaplin, London, 1992. MacCann, Richard Dyer, editor, The Silent Comedians (vol. 4 of American Movies: The First Thirty Years), Metuchen, New Jer- sey, 1993. Hale, Georgia, Charlie Chaplin: Intimate Close-Ups, edited by Heather Kierman, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1995. Milton, Joyce, Tramp: The Life of Charlie Chaplin, New York, 1996. Mitchell, Glenn, The Chaplin Encyclopedia, London, 1997. Flom, Eric L., Chaplin in the Sound Era: An Analysis of the Seven Talkies, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1997. On CHAPLIN: articles— Churchill, Winston, ‘‘Everybody’s Language,’’ in Collier’s (New York), 26 October 1935. Eisenstein, Sergei, ‘‘Charlie the Kid,’’ and ‘‘Charlie the Grown Up,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring and Summer 1946. Huff, Theodore, ‘‘Chaplin as Composer,’’ in Films in Review (New York), September 1950. Hickey, Terry, ‘‘Accusations against Charles Chaplin for Political and Moral Offenses,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Win- ter 1969. Lyons, T.J., ‘‘Roland H. Totheroh Interviewed: Chaplin Films,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1972. ‘‘Chaplin Issue’’ of Film Comment (New York), September/Octo- ber 1972. ‘‘Chaplin Issue’’ of Positif (Paris), July/August 1973. Cott, J., ‘‘The Limits of Silent Film Comedy,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), Spring 1975. Adorno, Theodor, ‘‘Quel giorno che Chaplin mi fece l’imitazione,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), July-August 1976. ‘‘Chaplin Issue’’ of Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), March 1978. Corliss, Richard, ‘‘Chaplin,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/ April 1978. ‘‘Pour saluter Charlot,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 May 1978. ‘‘Chaplin Issue’’ of University Film Association Journal (Houston), no.1, 1979. Sato, Tadao, ‘‘The Comedy of Ozu and Chaplin—a Study in Con- trast,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), no.2, 1979. ‘‘Dossier: Charles Chaplin et l’opinion publique,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), January 1981. Ingrao, P., ‘‘Chaplin: The Antagonism of the Comic Hero,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Fall 1981. Everson, William K., ‘‘Rediscovery: ‘New’ Chaplin Films,’’ in Films in Review (New York), November 1981. Manning, H., and T.J. Lyons, ‘‘Charlie Chaplin’s Early Life: Fact and Fiction,’’ in Historical Journal of Film, Radio, and Television (Abingdon, Oxon), March 1983. Balio, Tino, ‘‘Charles Chaplin, homme d’affaires: Un artiste associé,’’ in Filméchange (Paris), Spring 1983. Millar, Gavin, ‘‘The Unknown Chaplin,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Spring 1983. Classic Images (Muscatine, Iowa), nos. 98–106, August 1983- April 1984. Slide, Anthony, ‘‘The American Press and Public vs. Charles Spencer Chaplin,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 13, no. 4, 1984. Maland, Charles J., ‘‘The Millionaire Tramp,’’ in Post Script (Jack- sonville, Florida), Spring-Summer 1984. Jaffe, I.S., ‘‘Chaplin’s Labor of Performance: The Circus and Lime- light,’’ and R.L. Liebman, ‘‘Rabbis or Rakes, Schlemiels or Supermen? Jewish Identity in Charles Chaplin, Jerry Lewis and Woody Allen,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Mary- land), July 1984. ‘‘Chaplin Section’’ of American Film (Washington, D.C.), Septem- ber 1984. Naremore, J., ‘‘Film and the Performance Frame,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Winter 1984–85. Maland, Charles J., ‘‘A Documentary Note on Charlie Chaplin’s Politics,’’ in Historical Journal of Film, Radio, and Television (Abingdon, Oxon), vol. 5, no.2, 1985. Heurtebise, ‘‘On First Looking into Chaplin’s Humor,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1985. Davis, D. William, ‘‘A Tale of Two Movies: Charlie Chaplin, United Artists, and the Red Scare,’’ in Cinema Journal (Champaigne, Illinois), Fall 1987. Florey, Robert, with Brian Naves, ‘‘Charlie Dearest,’’ in Film Com- ment (New York), March-April 1988. Kuriyama, Constance Brown, ‘‘Chaplin’s Impure Comedy: The Art of Survival,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Spring 1992. CHAPLINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 179 Nightingale, B., ‘‘The Melancholy That Forged a Comic Genius,’’ in New York Times, 22 March 1992. Bloom, Claire, ‘‘Charles the Great,’’ in Vogue, December 1992. Ivor, Davis, ‘‘Chaplin,’’ in Los Angeles Magazine, December 1992. Combs, Richard, ‘‘Little Man, What Now?’’ in Film Comment (New York), August 1993. Lieberman, E.A., ‘‘Charlie the Trickster,’’ Journal of film and Video (Atlanta, Georgia), vol. 46, no. 3, 1994. Siegel, Scott, and Barbara Siegel, ‘‘Charlie Chaplin,’’ in American Film Comedy, New York, 1994. Woal, M., and L.K. Woal, ‘‘Chaplin and the Comedy of Melo- drama,’’ Journal of Film and Video (Atlanta, Georgia), vol. 46, no. 3, 1994. Frumkes, Roy, ‘‘Chaplin on Laser Disc,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1994. Maland, C., ‘‘How Much Chaplin Appears in Chaplin?,’’ Literature/ Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 25, no. 1, 1995. Codelli, Lorenzo, editor, ‘‘Forgotten Laughter: A Symposium on American Silent Comedy,’’ in The Journal of Film History: Griffithiana (Italy/United States), May 1995. Thomajan, D. ‘‘Charlie Chaplin Never Called Me Pig,’’ Film Com- ment (New York), no. 32, November/December 1996. Weisman, S.M. ‘‘Charlie Chaplin’s Film Heroines,’’ Film History (London), vol. 8, no. 4, 1996. Lemaster, David J. ‘‘The Pathos of the Unconscious: Charlie Chaplin and Dreams,’’ Journal of Popular Film and Television (Washing- ton D.C.), vol. 25, no. 3, Fall 1997. On CHAPLIN: films— Carlson, Wallace, Introducing Charlie Chaplin, 1915. Abramson, Hans, ‘‘Uppt?ckten (Discovery)’’ episode of Stimulantia, Sweden, 1967. Becker, Vernon, The Funniest Man in the World, 1967. Hurwitz, Harry, Chaplinesque, My Life and Hard Times, for TV, 1967 (also released as The Eternal Tramp). *** Charles Chaplin was the first and the greatest international star of the American silent comic cinema. He was also the twentieth cen- tury’s first media ‘‘superstar,’’ the first artistic creator and popular- ized creature of our global culture. His face, onscreen antics, and offscreen scandals were disseminated around the globe by new media which knew no geographical or linguistic boundaries. But more than this, Chaplin was the first acknowledged artistic genius of the cinema, recognized as such by a young and influential generation of writers and artists whose number included George Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells, Bertolt Brecht, Pablo Picasso, James Joyce, Samuel Beckett, and the surrealist painters and poets of both Paris and Berlin. Chaplin may be the one cinema artist who might truly be called a seminal figure of the century—if only because of his influence on virtually every other recognized seminal figure of the century. Chaplin was born in London into a theatrical family; his mother and father alternated between periods of separation and union, activities onstage and difficulties offstage (his father was an alco- holic, his mother fell victim to insanity). The young Chaplin spent his early life on the London streets and in a London workhouse, but by the age of eight he was earning his living on the stage. Chaplin’s career, like that of Buster Keaton and Stan Laurel, indicates that gifted physical comedians often develop their talents as children (as do concert pianists and ballet dancers) or never really develop them at all. By the time he was twenty years old, Chaplin had become the star attraction of the Fred Karno Pantomime Troupe, an internationally acclaimed English music-hall act, and it was on his second tour of America that a representative of the Keystone comedy film company (either Mack Sennett, comedienne Mabel Normand, or co-owner Charles Bauman) saw Chaplin. In 1913 he was offered a job at Keystone. Chaplin went to work at the Keystone lot in Burbank, California, in January of 1914. To some extent, the story of Chaplin’s popular success and artistic evolution is evident from even a cursory examination of the sheer volume of Chaplin’s works (and the com- pensation he received). In 1914 at Keystone, Chaplin appeared in thirty-five one- and two-reel films (as well as the six-reeler Tillie’s Punctured Romance), about half of which he directed himself, for the yearly salary of $7,800. The following year, Chaplin made fourteen one- and two-reel films for the Essanay Film Company—all of which he wrote and directed himself—for a salary of $67,000. In 1916–17, Chaplin wrote, directed and starred in twelve two-reel films for the Mutual Film company, and then signed a million-dollar contract with First National Corporation to write, direct, produce, and star in twelve more two-reel films. The contract allowed him to build his own studio, which he alone used until 1952 (it is now the studio for A&M Records), but his developing artistic consciousness kept him from completing the contract until 1923 with nine films of lengths ranging from two to six reels. Finally, in 1919, Chaplin became one of the founders of United Artists (along with Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, and D.W. Griffith), through which Chaplin released eight feature films, made between 1923 and 1952, after which he sold his interest in the company. In his early one- and two-reel films Chaplin evolved the comic tools and means that would lead to his future success. His character of the Tramp, the ‘‘little fellow,’’ a figure invariably garbed with derby, cane, floppy shoes, baggy pants, and tight jacket, debuted in his second Keystone film, Kid Auto Races at Venice. Because the tramp was a little guy, he made an easy target for the larger and tougher characters who loomed over him, but his quick thinking, agile body, and surprising ingenuity in converting ordinary objects into extraordi- nary physical allies helped him more than hold his own in a big, mean world. Although he was capable of lechery (The Masquerader, Dough and Dynamite) he could also selflessly aid the innocent woman under attack (The New Janitor, The Tramp, The Bank). Although he deserved her affection as a reward, he was frequently rejected for his social or sexual inadequacies (The Tramp, The Bank, The Vagabond, The Adventurer). Many of his early films combined his dexterous games with physical objects with deliberate attempts at emotional pathos (The Tramp, The Vagabond, The Pawnshop) or with social commentary on the corruption of the police, the brutality of the slums, or the selfishness of the rich (Police, Easy Street, The Adventurer). Prior to Chaplin, no one had demonstrated that physical comedy could be simultaneously hilariously funny, emotionally passionate, and pointedly intellectual. While his cinema technique tended to be invisible—emphasizing the actor and his actions—he gradually evolved a principle of cinema based on framing: finding the exact way to frame a shot to reveal its motion and meaning completely, thus avoiding disturbing cuts. Chaplin’s later films evolved and featured increasingly compli- cated or ironic situations in which to explore the Tramp’s character CHEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 180 and the moral paradoxes of his existence. His friend and ally is a mongrel dog in A Dog’s Life; he becomes a doughboy in Shoulder Arms; acquires a child in The Kid; becomes a preacher in The Pilgrim; and explores the decadent Parisian high life in A Woman of Paris, a comedy-melodrama of subtle visual techniques in which the Tramp does not appear. Chaplin’s four feature films between 1925 and 1936 might be called his ‘‘marriage group,’’ in which he explores the circumstances by which the tramp might acquire a sexual-romantic mate. In The Gold Rush the Tramp succeeds in winning the dance-hall gal who previously rejected him, because she now appreciates his kindness and his new-found wealth. The happy ending is as improb- able as the Tramp’s sudden riches—perhaps a comment that kindness helps but money gets the girl. But in The Circus, Charlie turns his beloved over to the romantic high-wire daredevil Rex; the girl rejects him not because of Charlie’s kindness or poverty but because he cannot fulfill the woman’s image of male sexual attractiveness. City Lights builds upon this problem as it rises to a final question, deliberately and poignantly left unanswered: can the blind flower seller, whose vision has been restored by Charlie’s kindness, love him for his kindness alone since her vision now reveals him to look so painfully different from the rich and handsome man she imagined and expected? And in Modern Times, Charlie successfully finds a mate, a social outcast and child of nature like himself; unfortunately, their marriage can find no sanctification or existence within contemporary industrial society. So the two of them take to the road together, walking away from society toward who knows where—the Tramp’s final departure from the Chaplin world. Although both City Lights and Modern Times used orchestral music and cleverly comic sound effects (especially Modern Times), Chaplin’s final three American films were talking films—The Great Dictator, in which Chaplin burlesques Hitler and Nazism, Monsieur Verdoux, in which Chaplin portrays a dapper mass murderer, and Limelight, Chaplin’s nostalgic farewell to the silent art of pantomime which nurtured him. In this film, in which Buster Keaton also plays a major role, Chaplin bids farewell not only to a dead movie tradition—silent comedy—but to a two-hundred-year tradition of physical comedy on both stage and screen, the tradition out of which both Keaton and Chaplin came, which would produce no clowns of the future. Chaplin’s later years were scarred by personal and political difficulties produced by his many marriages and divorces, his sup- posed sexual philanderings, his difficulties with the Internal Revenue Service, his outspoken defence of liberal political causes, and his refusal to become an American citizen. Although he was never called to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee, Chaplin’s films were picketed and boycotted by right-wing activist groups. When Chaplin left for a trip abroad in 1952, the State Department summarily revoked his automatic re-entry permit. Chap- lin sent his young wife Oona O’Neill, daughter of the playwright Eugene O’Neill, back to America to settle their business affairs. Chaplin established his family in Switzerland and conveyed his outrage against his former country by not returning to America for twenty years and by refusing to let any of his films circulate in America for two decades. In 1957 he made a very uneven, often embarrassing satire of American democracy, A King in New York. This film, like A Countess from Hong Kong, made ten years later, was a commercial and artistic disappointment, perhaps in part because Chaplin was cut off from the familiar studio, the experienced produc- tion team, and the painstakingly slow production methods he had been using for over three decades. In 1971 he enjoyed a triumphant return to Hollywood to accept an honorary Academy Award for a lifetime of cinematic achievement. —Gerald Mast CHEN Kaige Nationality: Chinese. Born: Beijing, 12 August 1952; son of film director Chen Huai’ai. Education: Sent to work on a rubber planta- tion in Yunnan province to ‘‘learn from the people,’’ as part of the Cultural Revolution, 1967; attended the Beijing Film Academy. Military Service: Served in Army. Career: Worked in film process- ing lab, Beijing, 1975–78, then studied at Beijing Film Academy, 1978–82; assigned to Beijing Film Studio, assistant to Huang Jianzhong; transferred (with Zhang Yimou and He Qun) to Guangxi Film Studios, and directed first feature, Huang Tudi’, 1984. Awards: Berlin Film Festival Best Film and Locarno International Film Festival Silver Leopard, for Yellow Earth, 1984; Istanbul Interna- tional Film Festival Golden Tulip, for Life on a String, 1991; Best Film (not in the English language) British Academy Award, Cannes Film Festival Golden Palm (tied with The Piano), and FIPRESCI Award, for Farewell My Concubine, 1993; Cannes Film Festival Technical Grand Prize, for The Emperor and the Assassin, 1999. Films as Director: 1984 Huang tu di (Yellow Earth) (+ co-sc); Qiang xing qi fei (Forced Take-Off) (for TV) 1985 Da yue bing (The Big Parade) (released in 1987) 1987 Hai zi wang (King of the Children) 1991 Bian zou bian chang (Life on a String) (+ sc, song lyrics) 1993 Ba wang bie ji (Farewell My Concubine) 1996 Feng yue (Temptress Moon) (+ co-story) 1999 Jing ke ci qin wang (The Assassin, The Emperor and the Assassin) (+ co-sc, exec pr, ro as Lu Buwei) 2001 Killing Me Softly Other Films: 1987 The Last Emperor (Bertolucci) (ro as Captain of Impe- rial Guard) 1996 Yang + Yin: Gender in Chinese Cinema (Kwan) (doc) (ro as Interviewee) Publications By CHEN: articles— Interview with Tony Rayns, in Time Out (London), 6 August 1986. Interview in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1988. Interview in Films and Filming (London), August 1988. Interview with Don Ranvaud, in Guardian (London), 11 August 1988. CHENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 181 Interview in Time Out (London), 17 August 1988. Interview with Jonathan Mirsky, in New Statesman and Society (London), 19 August 1988. Interview in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), September 1988. ‘‘La representation d’un reve,’’ an interview with Hubert Noigret in Positif, March 1992. Interview in Positif, November 1993. ‘‘La longue marche,’’ an interview with Laurent Tirard and Christophe d’Yvoire, in Studio Magazine (France), no. 80, 1993. ‘‘It’s All About Trust,’’ interview with Tony Rayns, in Cinema Papers (Victoria, Australia), August 1996. Interview with A. Pastor, in Filmcritica (Rome), September 1996. ‘‘Shanghai Charade,’’ an interview with Andrew O. Thompson, in American Cinematographer (Orange Drive), April 1997. ‘‘Concubines and Temptresses,’’ interview with K. Lally, in Film Journal (New York), May 1997. ‘‘Die Kunst ist wie der Wind und das Wasser,’’ an interview with Stefan Kramer, in EPD Film (Frankfurt/Main), June 1997. Interview with A. Lu., in Film Comment (New York), September/ October 1997. On CHEN: books— Berry, Chris, editor, Perspectives on Chinese Cinema, New York, 1985. Quiquemelle, Marie-Claire, and Jean-Loup Passek, Le Cinema chinois, Paris, 1985. Armes, Roy, Third–World Filmmaking and the West, Berkeley, 1987. Clark, Paul, Chinese Cinema: Culture and Politics since 1949, Cambridge, 1987. Semsel, George Stephen, editor, Chinese Film: The State of the Art in the Chinese Republic, New York, 1987. Berry, Chris, editor, Perspectives on Chinese Cinema, London, 1991. On CHEN: articles— Hitchcock, Peter, ‘‘The Question of the Relationship of the Intellec- tual to the State in post-Mao China and the Position of Women,’’ in The Aesthetics of Alienation, or China’s Fifth Generation, Cultural Studies, January 1992. Richard, Fréderic, ‘‘L’amour, les mirages et l’histoire: Va vie sur un fil,’’ Positif, March 1992. Koch, Ulrike, ‘‘Le seul qui puisse voir: La vie sur un fil,’’ in Positif, March 1992. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘Nights at the Opera,’’ in Sight and Sound, Decem- ber 1992. Noigret, Hubert, ‘‘Dossier sur Farewell My Concubine,’’ in Positif, November 1993. Zha Jianying, ‘‘Chen Kaige and the Shadows of the Revolution,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), February 1994. Chen, Pauline, ‘‘History Lessons,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1994. Kwok Wah Lau, Jenny, ‘‘Farewell My Concubine: History, Melo- drama, and Ideology in Contemporary Pan-Chinese Cinema,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1995. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘Motion and Emotion,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), March 1996. Xu, Ben, ‘‘Farewell My Concubine and Its Nativist Critics,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film and Video (Reading), September 1997. *** Chen Kaige is, with Zhang Yimou, the leading voice among the Fifth Generation of Chinese filmmakers, the first group of students to have graduated following the reopening of the Beijing Film Academy in 1978 after the depredations of the Cultural Revolution. As both a participant in (as a Red Guard he denounced his own father) and a victim of the Cultural Revolution (his secondary education was curtailed and, like the protagonist of King of the Children, he was sent to the country to ‘‘learn from the peasants’’), Chen is particularly well-placed to voice concerns about history and identity. The majority of his films constitute an intelligent and powerfully felt meditation on recent Chinese history, within which, for him, the Cultural Revolution remains a defining moment. ‘‘It made,’’ he has said, ‘‘cultural hooligans of us.’’ He has a reputation within China as a philosophical director, and his style is indeed marked by a laconic handling of narrative and a classical reticence. This is largely decep- tive: underneath is an unyielding anger and unflinching integrity. Chen in interviews has stressed the complementary nature of his first three films. Yellow Earth examines the relationship of ‘‘man and the land,’’ The Big Parade looks at ‘‘the individual and the group,’’ and King of the Children considers ‘‘man and culture.’’ Yellow Earth seems to adopt the structure of the folk ballads that provide a focus for its narrative, with its long held shots and almost lapidary editing. The Big Parade alternates static parade ground shots with the chaos of barrack room life, while the third film mobilises a more rhetorical style of poetic realism. Together the films act as a triple rebuttal of any heroic reading of Maoism and the revolution, precisely by taking up subjects much used in propagandist art—the arrival of the People’s Liberation Army in a village, the training of new recruits, the fate of the teacher sent to the country—and by refuting their simplifications and obfuscations, shot for shot, with quite trenchant deliberation. Attention in Yellow Earth is focused not on the Communist Army whose soldier arrives at the village collecting songs, but on the barren plateau from which the peasantry attempts to wring a meager exist- ence. In the process the account of Yenan which sees it as the birthplace of Communism is marginalized. King of the Children banishes the bright-eyed pupils and spotless classrooms of propa- ganda in favour of a run-down schoolroom, graffitied and in disrepair, from which the social fabric seems to have fallen away. Likewise The Big Parade banishes heroics and exemplary characters in favour of a clear-eyed look at the cost of moulding the individual into the collective. In Chen’s films what is unsaid is as important as that which is said; indeed the act of silence becomes a potent force. The voiceless appear everywhere—the almost mute brother in Yellow Earth, the girl’s unspoken fears for her marriage (‘‘voiced’’ in song), the mute cowherd in King of the Children. In Yellow Earth the girl’s voice is silenced by the force of nature as she drowns singing an anthem about the Communist Party. It is almost better, Chen implies, not to speak at all, than—as he suggests in King of the Children—to copy, to repeat, to ‘‘shout to make it right.’’ Life on a String, a leisurely allegory whose protagonists are an elderly blind musician and his young acolyte, has as tangible a sense of physical terrain as Yellow Earth. It also has an icy twist. Dedicatedly following his own master’s instructions all his life, the old man finds himself, in the end, to have been duped. The film, fitting no fashion- able niche, was largely ignored. With Farewell My Concubine Chen seems, superficially, to have taken a leaf from his rival Zhang Yimou’s book. The film has lavish studio sets and costumes and features Zhang’s favourite performer, Gong Li. Funded by Hong CHRISTENSEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 182 Kong actress Hsu Feng’s Tomson Films and based on a melodramatic novel by Lilian Lee, the film traces the relationship between a young boy, sold by his prostitute mother into the brutal regime of the Peking Opera School in 1920s China, and an older, tougher boy. Deiyi is destined to play female roles, and before he is accepted he undergoes a symbolic castration. The title is taken from the title of the opera in which they make their names—set during the last days of the reign of King Chu. The film follows their fortunes up to 1977, the end of the Cultural Revolution, and closes on a note of betrayal and sacrifice. Scrupulously performed, finely filmed, the subject allows its director scope to investigate the tortuous intersection of performance, identity, self, gender, and history. Farewell My Concubine is one of a number of Chen’s films that depict the indoctrination and degradation of children by those who should be loving and responsible. Such also is the case in Temptress Moon, which tells the story of a brother and sister who are introduced to opium by their father. The film may be set during the pre- communist 1920s, yet it clearly is allegorical in that the father’s irresponsibility symbolizes a present-day political machine that has so often callously abused its citizenry. The Emperor and the Assassin is set even farther back in Chinese history—the third century B.C.— yet it too tells a story with contemporary reverberations. It is the based-on-fact account of Ying Zheng, a manipulative, increasingly ruthless ruler who is intent on taking over the country’s other kingdoms, and becoming the initial Chinese emperor. Ying Zheng might be viewed as the counterpart of Mao. Furthermore, his story, as presented here, could be a camouflaged allegory mirroring the failure of the Cultural Revolution. Unsurprisingly Chen’s films have met with varying degrees of disapproval from the official regime. Yellow Earth was criticised in an anti-elitist policy. The Big Parade had its final sequence cut and ends with sounds of the eponymous parade in Tianenmen Square over an empty shot. Life on a String and Temptress Moon were banned. Farewell My Concubine was shown, withdrawn, then shown again. The Emperor and the Assassin initially was rejected by the censors; roughly 30 minutes of footage reportedly were excised to make it more ‘‘regime friendly.’’ To young filmmakers in China Chen’s work, and that of other Fifth Generation directors, can seem academic or irrelevant. To the rest of us, the care with which Chen Kaige observes his protagonists’ struggles for integrity amid lethally shift- ing political tides makes for a perennially relevant body of work. —Verina Glaessner, updated by Rob Edelman CHRISTENSEN, Benjamin Nationality: Danish. Born: Viborg, Denmark, 28 September 1879. Education: Educated in medicine; entered dramatic school of the Royal Theatre, Copenhagen, 1901. Family: Married 1) Ellen Arctander in 1904; 2) Sigrid Stahl in 1922; 3) Kamma Winther in 1927. Career: Actor in Aarhus Theatre (Jutland), then Folkteatret, Copenhagen, to 1907; left stage, became agent for French champagne firm Lanson, 1907; began as film actor, 1912; directed first film, 1913; went to Germany, worked for Erich Pommer, 1923; worked in United States, 1926–34; returned to Denmark and, in 1939, went to work for Nordisk Films Kompagni; left film production, 1942, and became manager of a movie theater. Died: 2 April 1959. Films as Director: 1913 Det hemmelighedsfulde X (The Mysterious X) (+ role) 1915 Haevnens Nat (Blind Justice) (+ role) 1922 H?xan (Witchcraft through the Ages) (+ sc, role as Devil and doctor) 1923 Seine Frau, die Unbekannte (His Mysterious Adventure) 1924 Die Frau mit dem schlechten Ruf (The Woman Who Did) (not completed) 1926 The Devil’s Circus 1927 Mockery 1928 Hawk’s Nest; The Haunted House; House of Horror 1929 Seven Footprints to Satan 1939 Skilsmissens Brní 1940 Barnet 1941 Gaa med mig hjem 1942 Damen med de lyse handsker Other Films: 1912 Skaebnebaeltet (role) 1913 Gidslet (role); Scenens Brní (role); Store Klaus og Lille Klaus (role); Rumaensk Blod or Sstreneí Corrodi (role); Vingeskudt (role) 1924 Michael (role) Publications By CHRISTENSEN: book— Hollywood Skaebner (short stories), 1945. On CHRISTENSEN: book— Ernst, John, Benjamin Christensen, Copenhagen, 1967. On CHRISTENSEN: articles— Gillett, John, ‘‘The Mysterious X,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1966. Higham, Charles, ‘‘Christensen Continued,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1966. Tessier, Max, ‘‘La Sorcellerie à travers les ages,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no. 130, 1968. Routt, W.D., ‘‘Buried Directors,’’ in Focus on Film (London), Spring 1972. *** Benjamin Christensen’s first film was one of the most amazing directorial debuts in the history of film. Det hemmelighedsfulde X is a spy melodrama about a lieutenant accused of betraying his country, but who is saved at the last minute. If the story is conventional, the handling of it shows a natural instinct for film that is way ahead of its CHRISTENSENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 183 Benjamin Christensen (left) directs Lon Chaney time. Told in often very imaginatively composed pictures, the film is completely free from literary clichés in its narrative style. Throughout the length of the work, Christensen demonstrates an ability to transform the psychology of his characters into physical action. The camerawork (by Emil Dinesen) is full of significant contrasts, while the cutting is dynamic and gives the film a marvelous drive. The film was received with admiration; everybody was stunned by its remark- able visual style, and Christensen was immediately recognized as the individualist and the experimenter of the Danish film of his day. His next film, Haevnens Nat, was a social melodrama, burdened by a pathetic story, but also distinguished by an inventive camera style. Christensen played lead roles in both these films. Benjamin Christensen provoked his contemporaries and set him- self in opposition to the filmmaking practices of his time. He had a strong belief in himself and worked consciously with film as a new art form. He considered the director as the author of the film and stated that ‘‘like any other artist he should reveal his own individual- ity in his own work.’’ Thus Christensen can be regarded as one of the first auteurs of the cinema. Carl Dreyer characterized Christensen as ‘‘a man who knew exactly what he wanted and who pursued his goal with uncompromising stubbornness.’’ Christensen’s main work is H?xan, an ambitious and unique film and a pioneering achievement in both the documentary and the fiction film. In this film Christensen combined his rationalistic ideas with his passionate temperament. Christensen was always an isolated director in the Danish film world, and after H?xan he left Denmark. He made an insignificant film in Germany and was seen in Dreyer’s Michael as the master. He got an offer from Hollywood and made six films there. He used his talent for the strange and peculiar Seven Footprints to Satan, a witty horror comedy. Christensen returned to Denmark in the 1930s and in 1939 he was hired by Nordisk Films Kompagni. Again Christensen showed himself to be a controversial filmmaker. Determined to break the trivial pattern of Danish cinema at that time, he made three films which dealt with topical problems arising from conflicts between generations. One film depicted children from divorce-ridden homes, another was about abortion. Christensen’s last film was a spy thriller set against an international setting. It was a total failure, and Christensen left film production. For the rest of his life he lived in splendid isolation as manager of a small and insignificant cinema in the suburbs of Copenhagen. —Ib Monty CHYTILOVá DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 184 CHYTILOVá, Věra Nationality: Czech. Born: Ostrava, 2 February 1929. Education: Studied architecture at Charles University; Film Academy (FAMU), Prague, 1957–62. Family: Married cinematographer Jaroslav Ku?era. Career: Assistant director on 3 Men Missing (Ztracenci), 1956; directed first film, Strop, 1962; forbidden to direct or work for foreign producers, 1969–76. Address: c/o Barrandov Studios, Prague, Czechoslovakia. Films as Director: 1962 Strop (The Ceiling) (+ sc); Pytel blech (A Bag of Fleas) (+ sc) 1963 O ně?em jiném (Something Different; Something Else; An- other Way of Life) (+ sc) 1965 ‘‘Automat Svět’’ (The World Cafe) segment of Perli?ky na dně (Pearls of the Deep) (+ co-sc) 1966 Sedmikrásky (Daisies) (+ co-sc) 1969 Ovoce strom rajskych jíme (The Fruit of Paradise; The Fruit of the Trees of Paradise) (+ co-sc) 1977 The Apple Game (+ sc) 1979 Panelstory (Prefab Story) (+ co-sc) 1980 Kalamita (Calamity) (+ co-sc) 1981 Chytilova versus Forman 1983 Faunovo prilis pozdni odpoledne (The Very Late Afternoon of a Faun) 1985 Praha, neklidne srace Europy (Prague, the Restless Heart of Europe) (short) 1986 Vlci bouda (Wolf’s Hole) 1987 Sasek a kralovna (The Jester and the Queen); Kopytem Sem, Kopytem Tam (Tainted Horseplay) (+ sc) 1991 Mi Prazane me Rozùmeji (My Praguers Understand Me) 1990 T.G.M.—Osvoboditel (Tomas G. Masaryk—The Liberator) (+ sc) 1992 Dedictví aneb Kurvahosigutntag (The Legacy) 1993 Kam Parenky; The Inheritance of Fuckoffguysgoodbye (+ sc) 1998 Pasti, pasti, pasticky (Trap, Trap, Little Trap) (+ co-sc) 1986 Vzlety a pády Other Films: 1958 Konec jasnovidce (End of a Clairvoyant) (role as girl in bikini) 1991 Face of Hope (sc) Publications By CHYTILOVá: articles— ‘‘Neznám opravdovy ?in, ktery by nebyl riskantní’’ [I Don’t Know Any Action That Would Not Be Risky], an interview with Galina Kopaněvová, in Film a doba (Prague), no. 1, 1963. ‘‘Re?ijní explikace k filmu O ně?em jiném’’ [The Director’s Com- ments on Something Different], in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 1, 1964. ‘‘Sedmikrásky: re?ijní explikace’’ [Daisies: The Directress Com- ments], in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 4, 1966. Interview in New York Times, 12 March 1978. ‘‘A Film Should Be a Little Flashlight,’’ interview with H. Polt, in Take One (Montreal), November 1978. Interview with H. Heberle and others, in Frauen & Film (Berlin), December 1978. Interview with B. Eriksson-Vodakova, in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 27, no. 6, 1985. Interview with Kate?ina Po?ová, in Film a Doba (Prague), June 1989. Interview with Marie-élisabeth Rouchy, in Télérama (Paris), 16 February 1994. On CHYTILOVá: books— Bo?ek, Jaroslav, Modern Czechoslovak Film 1945–1965, Prague, 1965. Janou?ek, Jiri, 3 ?, Prague, 1965. Skvorecky, Josef, All the Bright Young Men and Women, Tor- onto, 1971. Dewey, Langdon, Outline of Czechoslovakian Cinema, London, 1971. Liehm, Antonin, Closely Watched Films, White Plains, New York, 1974. Liehm, Mira, and Antonin Liehm, The Most Important Art: East European Film after 1945, Berkeley, 1977. Habova, Milada, and Jitka Vysekalova, editors, Czechoslovak Cin- ema, Prague, 1982. Hames, Peter, The Czechoslovak New Wave, Berkeley, 1985. On CHYTILOVá: articles— Bo?ek, Jaroslav, ‘‘Podobenství Věry Chytilové’’ [The Parable of Věra Chytilová], in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 11, 1966. Hames, P., ‘‘The Return of Vera Chytilova,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 3, 1979. Martinek, Karel, ‘‘Filmovy svět Véry Chytilové’’ [The Film World of Věra Chytilová], in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 3, 1982. Z na, Miroslav, and Vladimir Solecky, in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 5, 1982. Benoit, O., ‘‘Dans la grisaille tcheque: Vera Chytilova,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), May 1984. Waller, E., in Skrien (Amsterdam), September-October 1984. Manceau, Jean-Louis, ‘‘Vera Chytilova a Creteil,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), 18 March 1987. Quart, B., ‘‘Three Central European Women Directors Revisited,’’ in Cineaste, vol. 19, no. 4, 1993. Elley, Derek, ‘‘Dedictví aneb Kurvahosigutntag (The Inheritance or Fuckoffguysgoodbye),’’ in Variety (New York), 22 February 1993. Kristensson, Martin, ‘‘Nihilismens tv? ansikten. Tusensk?norna,’’ in Filmrutan (Sundsvall), vol. 37, no. 4, 1994. Bla?ejovsky, Jaromír, ‘‘Sedmikrásky,’’ in Iluminace (Prague), vol. 9, no. 1(25), 1997. *** So far the only important woman director of the Czech cinema is Věra Chytilová, its most innovative and probably most controversial personality. She is the only contemporary Czech filmmaker to work in the Eisensteinian tradition. She combines didacticism with often daring experimentation, based in essence on montage. Disregarding CHYTILOVáDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 185 Věra Chytilová chronology and illustrative realism, she stresses the symbolic nature of images as well as visual and conceptual shock. Influenced to some extent also by cinema verité, particularly by its female representa- tives, and militantly feminist in her attitudes, she nevertheless made excellent use of the art of her husband, the cameraman Jaroslav Ku?era, in her boldest venture to date, Daisies. This film, Chytilová’s best known, is a dazzling display of montage, tinting, visual deforma- tion, film trickery, color processing, etc.—a multifaceted tour de force which, among other things, is also a tribute to the classics of the cinema, from the Lumière Brothers to Chaplin and Abel Gance. It contains shots, scenes, and sequences that utilize the most characteris- tic techniques and motives of the masters. Daisies is Chytilová at her most formalist. In her later films, there is a noticeable shift towards realism. However, all the principles mentioned above still dominate the more narrative approach, and a combination of unusual camera angles, shots, etc., together with a bitterly sarcastic vision, lead to hardly less provocative shock effects. The didactical content of these highly sophisticated and subtly formalist works of filmic art, as in Eisenstein, is naive and crude: young women should prefer ‘‘useful’’ vocations to ‘‘useless’’ ones (The Ceiling); extremes of being active and being inactive both result in frustration (Something Different); irresponsibility and recklessness lead to a bad end (Daisies); a sexual relationship is something serious, not just irresponsible amusement (The Apple Game); people should help each other (Panel Story, The Calamity). Given the fact that Chytilová has worked mostly under the conditions of an enforced and harshly repressive establishment, a natural explanation of this seem- ing incongruity offers itself: the ‘‘moral messages’’ of her films are simply libations that enable her, and her friends among the critics, to defend the unashamedly formalist films and the harshly satirical presentation of social reality they contain. This is corroborated by Chytilová’s many clashes with the political authorities in Czechoslo- vakia: from an interpellation in the Parliament calling for a ban of Daisies because so much food—‘‘the fruit of the work of our toiling farmers’’—is destroyed in the film, to her being fired from the Barrandov studios after the Soviet invasion in 1968, and on to her open letter to President Husák printed in Western newspapers. In each instance she won her case by a combination of publicly stated kosher ideological arguments, stressing the alleged ‘‘messages’’ of her works, and of backstage manipulation, not excluding the use of her considerable feminine charm. Consequently, she is the only one from among the new wave of directors from the 1960s who, for a long time, CIMINO DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 186 had been able to continue making films in Czechoslovakia without compromising her aesthetic creed and her vision of society, as so many others had to do in order to remain in business (including Jaromil Jire?, Hynek Bo?an, Jaroslav Papou?ek, and to some extent Ji?í Menzel). Panel Story and Calamity earned her hateful attacks from estab- lishment critics and intrigues from her second-rate colleagues, who are thriving on the absence of competition from such exiled or banned directors as Milo? Forman, Ivan Passer, Jan Němec, Evald Schorm, and Vojtěch Jasny. The two films were practically withdrawn from circulation and can be occasionally seen only in suburban theatres. The only critical film periodical, Film a doba, published, in 1982, a series of three articles which, in veiled terms and using what playwright Václav Havel calls ‘‘dialectical metaphysics’’ (‘‘on the one hand it is bad, but on the other hand it is also good’’), defended the director and her right to remain herself. In her integrity, artistic boldness, and originality, and in her ability to survive the most destructive social and political catastrophes, Chytilová was a unique phenomenon in post-invasion Czech cinema. Unfortunately, during the last years of Communist rule in Czechoslovakia, she seems to have lost something of her touch, and her latest films—such as The Very Late Afternoon of a Faun or The Jester and the Queen—are clearly not on the level of Daisies or Panel Story. Since the ‘‘velvet revolution’’ she has maintained her independence as idiosyncratically as ever. Refusing to take up any comfortably accommodating posi- tion, she has been accused of nostalgia for the Communist years. This would be to misrepresent her position. A fierce campaigner for a state subsidy for the Czech film industry, she cannot but lament the extent to which the implementation of the ideology of the ‘‘free market’’ has been allowed to accomplish what the Soviet regime never quite could—the extinguishing of Czech film culture. She has made a number of documentary films for television as well as a 1992 comedy about the deleterious effects of sudden wealth, which was publicly well received but met with critical opprobrium. She has so far failed to find funding for a long-cherished project, Face of Hope, about the nineteenth-century humanist writer Bozena Nemcova. The continuing relevance of Daisies, and its depiction of philistinism in several registers, is surely the strongest argument in support of Chytilová’s position. It is a film that shines with the sheer craftsmanship Czech cinema achieved in those years. —Josef Skvorecky, updated by Verina Glaessner CIMINO, Michael Nationality: American. Born: New York, 1940. Education: Yale University, M.F.A. in painting, 1963. Career: Moved to New York, 1963; studied acting and ballet, directed documentaries, industrial films, and TV commercials, 1963–71; moved to Hollywood, worked as scriptwriter, 1971; directed first film, Thunderbolt and Lightfoot, 1974. Awards: Oscar for Best Director, and Best Director Award, Directors Guild, for The Deer Hunter, 1979. Films as Director: 1974 Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (+ sc) 1978 The Deer Hunter (+ co-sc, co-pr) 1980 Heaven’s Gate (+ sc) 1985 Year of the Dragon (co-sc) 1987 The Sicilian (+ co-pr) 1988 Santa Anna Winds 1990 Desperate Hours (+ pr) 1996 The Sunchaser (+ pr) 1999 The Dreaming Place Other Films: 1972 Silent Running (Trumbull) (co-sc) 1973 Magnum Force (Post) (co-sc) Publications By CIMINO: articles— ‘‘Stalking the Deer Hunter: An Interview with Michael Cimino,’’ with M. Carducci, in Millimeter (New York), March 1978. Interview with Herb Lightman, in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), November 1980. Interview with B. Krohn, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1982. Interview with Jean Narboni, and others, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1985. ‘‘L’année du dragon: un film ambigu,’’ an interview with G. Camy and C. Vivian, in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), December 1985-Janu- ary 1986. Interview with Iannis Katsahnias, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 401, November 1987. ’’Frame and Fortune,’’ an interview with Brian Case, in Time Out (London), 27 February 1991. Interview with John Pym, in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 60, no. 1, Winter 1990–1991. Interview with Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1996. Interview with M. Ciment and L. Vachaud, in Positif (Paris), July/ August 1996. ’’Michael Cimino: On Working with Maurice Jarre,’’ in Soundtrack (Mechelen), vol. 15, no. 60, December 1996. On CIMINO: books— Bach, Steven, The Final Cut: Dream and Disaster in the Making of ‘‘Heaven’s Gate,” New York, 1985. Bliss, Michael, Martin Scorsese and Michael Cimino, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1985. Wood, Robin, Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan, New York, 1986. Adair, Gilbert, Hollywood’s Vietnam, London, 1989. On CIMINO: articles— Valley, J., ‘‘Michael Cimino’s Battle to Make a Great Movie,’’ in Esquire (New York), 2 January 1979. Harmetz, A., ‘‘Oscar-winning Deer Hunter Is under Attack as Racist Film,’’ in New York Times, 26 April 1979. ‘‘Heaven’s Gate Issue’’ of American Cinematographer (Los Ange- les), November 1980. CIMINODIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 187 Michael Cimino ‘‘Deer Hunter Section’’ of Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), January 1983. Greene, N., ‘‘Coppola, Cimino: The Operatics of History,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Winter 1984–85. Films and Filming (London), February 1988. Pym, J., ‘‘Michael Cimino,’’ in Sight and Sound, vol. 60, no. 1, 1990/91. Burke, F., ‘‘Reading Michael Cimino’s The Deer Hunter: Interpreta- tion as Melting Pot,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), vol. 20, no. 3, 1992. Nery, Robert, ‘‘How to Have Your Cake and Eat It Too,’’ in Filmnews, vol. 22, no. 11, December-January 1992–1993. McCarthy, Todd, ‘‘Cimino’s Sunchaser: When Worlds Collide,’’ in Variety (New York), 27 May 1996. Crespi, Alberto, and Federico Nazzaro, in Cineforum (Bergamo), November 1996. *** Erratic as his achievement has been, Michael Cimino is, with Martin Scorsese, one of the two most important filmmakers to have emerged in the Hollywood cinema of the 1970s. His reputation must rest, so far, essentially on two enormously ambitious and controver- sial films, The Deer Hunter and Heaven’s Gate, and his stature will only receive due recognition when the latter is re-released (in its ‘‘original,’’ three-and-one-half-hour version) and revalued. One can confidently prophesy that it will come as a major revelation. In one respect, Scorsese and Cimino appear opposites of each other. Scorsese (prior, at least, to The Last Temptation of Christ) characteristically starts from a small, precise, concrete subject and radically explores it until it reveals strains, tensions, and contradic- tions central to our culture; Cimino begins with a vague and grandiose ‘‘vision’’ and proceeds to map in its salient features and attempts to render it concrete by developing its detail. That Scorsese’s method is by far the more conducive to assured artistic success is obvious, and Cimino has yet to produce work as secure in its aim and tone as Raging Bull or King of Comedy. We may start with Heaven’s Gate and its critical reception: the peak of Cimino’s achievement to date (it remains, for me, the greatest Hollywood film of the past fifteen years), it was almost universally savaged by the American press. The pervasive complaint was that Cimino ‘‘can’t tell a story,’’ despite the fact that he had already managed to do so very successfully, as the CIMINO DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 188 screenwriter of Silent Running and the director of Thunderbolt and Lightfoot; that he might wish to attempt something rather different was not considered as a possibility. Much critical and theoretical work has now been done attacking the overwhelming dominance in Hollywood cinema of the rules of classical narrative, centred on individual psychology and scene-by-scene causality: the dominance, to adopt Barthesian terminology, of the proairetic and hermeneutic codes. These form the basis of the kind of cinema to which Holly- wood has so long accustomed us, but there is no reason why custom should be institutionalized as an unchallengeable and absolute system of construction, permitting no divergence. The structure of Heaven’s Gate is quite other, the best analogy being with architecture. Each scene or segment can be viewed as a building block enacting (though not in any obviously didactic or explicit way) a ‘‘history lesson’’ in the Brechtian sense of the term. Within obvious limits (the film does have a discernible narrative, with a beginning, middle, and end in that order), these blocks relate to each other freely across the entire film, rather than forming a causal a, b, c . . . progression; they gradually add up to a complex structure of thematic interrelatedness. It is significant that when Cimino, after the disastrous North American premières, himself edited a two-and-one- half-hour version for general release, he produced not just a shorter version but a different film: not only does he use perceptibly different takes of certain shots, but whole narrative segments are transposed to different parts of the film, and one brief incident is included which he cut from the original version. This also explains why the film, in whatever version, always appears unfinished: the addition, removal, or transposition of the ‘‘blocks’’ could be an interminable process, the structure (freed from the strictures of narrative causality) being logically incompletable (there was once, according to Steven Bach, a five-and-one-half-hour version). It is also significant that one of the film’s finest set-pieces, the magnificent roller-skating sequence, has no narrative necessity whatever, neither developing character nor furthering the plot, though it is crucial to the film’s ‘‘grand design.’’ There are no precedents in Hollywood cinema for this type of formal strategy; to find them, one must go further afield, to the Kurosawa of High and Low and Ikiru, or to the Pasolini of Medea. Another initial critical objection was to the film’s ‘‘Marxist content.’’ By denying the viewer the traditional narrative pleasures of causality and close identification, Cimino transfers attention from individuals to movements, and the film’s overall movement is toward the destruction of a genuinely multi-cultural, non-sexist, and poten- tially socialist America by the capitalist greed for wealth and power. In view of this, it is ironic that The Deer Hunter has been widely perceived as a right-wing movie. In fact, the two films are generally consistent. More intuitive than theoretical, more emotional than rational, Cimino does not have a completely consistent ideological position which the films dramatize: they seem, on the contrary, often ideologically incoherent, insufficiently thought (particularly the case with Year of the Dragon, which disintegrates under the strain of its own internal contradictions). Though less formally radical than Heaven’s Gate, The Deer Hunter is also characterized by great architectural strength. It is composed of five ‘‘blocks,’’ two set in Vietnam alternating with three set in Clairton, Pennsylvania; in both sets, each block is substantially shorter than its predecessor, enacting on the formal level the theme of ‘‘dwindling’’ on which the action of the film is constructed. The controversial ending, in which the survivors sing ‘‘God Bless America,’’ is neither affirmative (i.e., right wing) nor ironic (i.e., leftist): the singing is characterized by an extreme tentativeness, a failure of confidence in both an available ‘‘America’’ that might be blessed or a God to bless it. As in Heaven’s Gate (and the point relates back interestingly to the work of John Ford and the whole complex American tradition for which it speaks), the ‘‘America’’ that might be affirmed, represented by social outsiders (in Cimino’s case immigrant ethnic groups), is felt to be irredeemably lost, overwhelmed by the Nixonite/Reaganite America of corporate capitalism. Cimino’s career since Heaven’s Gate has been as disappointing as Scorsese’s since King of Comedy. There is perhaps a common cause: the sheer difficulty of setting up intelligent, personal, original, or challenging work in the era of endless mindless sequels and ‘‘pack- ages,’’ in a Hollywood dominated by precisely the kind of capitalist concern that Heaven’s Gate assaults, more concerned with ‘‘busi- ness’’ than with cinema. In Cimino’s case there is a more specific cause: the general distrust generated by the now almost proverbial financial catastrophe of Heaven’s Gate. For all that, Year of the Dragon and The Sicilian, though neither can be counted an artistic success, seem far more interesting than The Color of Money or The Last Temptation of Christ. The former contains scenes of stunning brilliance and virtuosity, but is centrally flawed by its inability to construct a coherent attitude toward its protagonist (Mickey Rourke). The film’s three most sympathetic characters—his young Chinese assistant, his wife, his mistress—are all given speeches denouncing him; he is indirectly responsible for the deaths of the first two and the gang-rape of the third. Yet Cimino also clearly wishes to affirm the character, an impulse culminating in a conclusion which even Mahler cannot save. The Sicilian, like Heaven’s Gate, is an epic that pre- cludes identification: with the possible exception of Giuliano’s fiancée (a relatively minor and somewhat stereotypical role), every position dramatized in the film (including that of the hero) is shown to be severely compromised and untenable. Unlike Heaven’s Gate, how- ever, the detail of the film only intermittently comes alive, and then only in the supporting roles (Joss Ackland, John Turturro). Cimino seems seriously hampered by the doubtless mandatory fidelity to Mario Puzo’s elephantine and cliché-ridden novel, and by the casting of Christopher Lambert, who totally lacks the charisma that alone would make Giuliano plausible. More importantly, perhaps, Cimino has shown himself in all his previous films intensely concerned with ‘‘America’’ (the ideological image more than the appalling reality), and relates rather distantly to a foreign environment. Desperate Hours, a remake of William Wyler’s 1955 thriller, was a surprisingly modest project for one of Hollywood’s great overreachers, but one that offered the potential of grappling with American values at their core. Desperate Hours must be accounted partially unsatisfac- tory, however, and its commercial failure, with that of The Sicilian, has made Cimino’s future in Hollywood increasingly problematic. It is, however, an enormously more interesting and challenging film than the original version. Wyler’s film was ‘‘safe’’ in every way: his usual thoroughly sound, if thoroughly uninspired, direction, and an eminently respectable and sensible bourgeois entertainment. Cimino’s film is neither safe nor sensible. It is characterized by an all-pervasive nervous tension, a relentless edginess expressed by all the characters and communicated strongly to the audience. The value and stability of bourgeois family life (a ‘‘given’’ in Wyler) are no longer guaranteed; the parents are separated, and can scarcely address a sentence to each other without an eruption; the children are disturbed and potentially rebellious. The corollary of this is that the gang who take over the household are no longer automatically invalidated: dangerous and vicious (with Mickey Rourke’s leader prone to psychotic explosions at the slightest provocation), they nonetheless embody the justifiable CISSéDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 189 revolt of the underprivileged in a society riddled with class tensions. Like Rourke’s character, the film is jagged, unpredictable, incom- plete. Character motivations are often unclear (Lindsay Krouse’s role suffered from severe cuts), opaque, and eccentric, yet all the charac- ters have vivid life, a spontaneity of action and reaction, beside which the conventional figures of Wyler’s film seem pallid. As usual, Cimino’s crime (in terms of commercial success) is to deny the audience any feeling of comfort, stability, or satisfaction; that is also what makes his films so fascinating. There is no other filmmaker of whom my own view is quite so completely at odds with the generally accepted one. Heaven’s Gate, above all, stands up magnificently to the test of time and repeated viewings; I have used it in film classes every year, and students greet it invariably as a revelation. Yet ‘‘accepted opinion,’’ once estab- lished, is notoriously difficult to erode. —Robin Wood CISSé, Souleymane Nationality: Malian. Born: Bamako, 21 April 1940; lived in Dakar during his adolescence until the Senegalese-Mali Federation broke up in 1960, at which point he moved back to Mali. Education: Obtained a three-month grant to study in the Soviet Union, 1961; received a scholarship to study film direction at the VGIK (State Institute of Cinema), Moscow, 1963–1969; made three short films as a student, L’homme et les idoles (1965), Sources d’inspiration (1966), and Souleymane Cissé L’aspirant (1968) Career: Film director for SCINFOMA (Service Cinématographique du Ministère de l’Information du Mali), Mali, 1969–1972; with his direction of Cinq jours d’une vie (1972) he decided to work on his own projects; established the NFa Cissé, an annual award for artistic creation in Mali. 1991. Awards: Bronze prize, Carthage Film Festival (Tunisia), for Cinq jours d’une vie, 1972; Bronze prize, Carthage Film Festival, for Den Muso, 1974; Grand prize, Fespaco (Burkina Faso), Grand prize, Nantes Festival (France), Silver prize, Carthage Film Festival, for Baara, 1977; Gold prize, Carthage Film Festival, Grand prize, Fespaco (Burkina Faso), A Certain Regard section, Cannes Festival (France), for Finyé, 1982; Chevalier du Mérite National and Jury prize, Cannes Film Festival (France), for Yeelen, 1987; Gold medal, Congress of the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers, for entire works, 1996. Address: Sisé Filimu/Les Films Cissé, BP 1236, Bamako, Mali. Films as Director: 1972 Cinq jours d’une vie (+ sc, d, ph) 1975 Den Muso (The Girl) (+ sc) 1977 Baara (The Work) (+ sc) 1982 Finyé (The Wind) (+ sc) 1987 Yeelen (The Light) (+ sc) 1995 Waati (The Time) (+ sc) Other Films: 1970–71 Degal à Dialloube (doc); Fête du Sanke (doc) 1973 Dixième anniversaire de l’O.U.A. (doc) 1978 Chanteurs traditionnels des ?les Seychelles (doc) Publications By CISSé: articles— ‘‘Vers un cinéma malien?,’’ interview with G. Hennebelle, in Afrique- Asie (Paris), 14 May 1973. ‘‘Refléter la trame du quotidien,’’ in Le Monde Diplomatique (Paris), September 1978. ‘‘La chronique de Souleymane Cissé,’’ in Libération (Paris), 15–16 May 1982. ‘‘Je suis à la recherche d’une voie personnelle et mon identité,’’ interview with D.A.A. Sow and C. Hamalla, in Podium (Bamako), 30 June 1982. ‘‘L’énergie éolienne de Cissé,’’ interview with M. Cressole, in Libération (Paris), 20 April 1983. ‘‘La conscience et l’espoir,’’ interview with H. Guibert, in Le Monde (Paris), 21 April 1983. ‘‘Souleymane Cissé, v’la l’bon vent,’’ interview with P. Barrat, in Les Nouvelles Littéraires (Paris), April-May 1983. ‘‘Bourrasques au Mali,’’ interview with C. Ruelle, in Magazine Littéraire (Paris), May 1983. ‘‘Rencontre avec Cissé,’’ in Calao (Abidjan), May-June 1983. ‘‘Je crée en marchant,’’ interview with D. Heymann, in Le Monde (Paris), 29–30 November 1987. CISSé DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 190 ‘‘L’Afrique dans la lumière,’’ interview with C. Tesson, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1987. ‘‘Entretien avec Souleymane Cissé,’’ interview with J. Binet and K. Touré, in Positif (Paris), December 1987. ‘‘Souleymane Cissé, cinéaste malien,’’ interview with J-F. Senga, in Présence Africaine (Paris), Winter 1987. ‘‘L’Afrique dans la lumière,’’ interview with C. Tesson, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1987. ‘‘Vers les sources de la lumière,’’ interview with P. Elhelm and C. Waldmann, in Cinergie (Paris), August 1988. ‘‘Le cinéma africain est mal parti,’’ interview with J-J. Louarn, in Faim et Développement (Paris), March 1990. ‘‘Le Chant de Soma,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1991. ‘‘Entretien avec Cissé,’’ interview with J-M. Lalanne and F. Strauss, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1995. ‘‘Souleymane Cissé, l’Africain pluriel,’’ interview with D. Heymann, in Le Monde (Paris), 8 June 1995. ‘‘We Make Films. . . but We Do Not Exist,’’ interview with H. Goutier, in The Courier (Brussels), November-December 1996. On CISSé: books— Vieyra, Paulin S., Le cinéma africain, des origines à 1973, Paris, 1975. Guy, Hennebelle, editor, Cinéma d’Afrique Noire, in Cinémaction, Paris, 1979. Bachy, Victor, Le cinéma au Mali, Brussels, 1983. C.E.S.C.A., editor, Camera Nigra, Le Discours du cinéma africain, Brussels, 1984. Haffner, Pierre, Le Cinéma et l’imaginaire en Afrique noire, unpub- lished Ph.D. dissertation, Paris, 1986. Armes, Roy, Third World Filmmaking and the West, Berkeley, 1987. Boughedir, Ferid, editor, Les cinémas noirs d’Afrique, in Cinémaction, Brussels, 1982. Haffner, Pierre, Kino in Schwarzafrica, in Revue du CICIM, Munich, 1989. Larouche, Michel, editor, Films d’Afrique, Montreal, 1991. Armes, Roy, and Lizbeth Malkmus, Arab and African Filmmaking, London, 1991. Diawara, Manthia, African Cinema, Bloomington, 1992. Ukadike, Frank N., Black African Cinema, Berkeley, 1994. Fepaci, editor, Africa and the Centenary of Cinema, Paris, 1995. Ukadike, Frank N., editor, New Discourses of African Cinema, Iowa City, 1995. Bakari, Imruh, and Mbye Cham, editors, African Experiences of Cinema, London, 1996. Gutberlet, Marie-Hélène, and Hans-Peter Metzler, editors, Afrikanisches Kino, Bad Honnef, 1997. Lelievre, Samuel, Le cinéma paradoxal de Souleymane Cissé, unpub- lished Ph.D. dissertation, Strasbourg, 1999. On CISSé: articles— Tesson, Charles, ‘‘Le cinéma dans sa diversité,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1982. Bassan, Raphael, ‘‘Le vent de l’esprit souffle sur le Mali,’’ in Afrique- Asie (Paris), 31 January 1983. Benabdessadok, Cherifa, ‘‘Baara,’’ in Afrique-Asie (Paris), 3 De- cember 1984. Waintrop, Edouard, ‘‘Souleymane Cissé, les années-lumière,’’ in Libération (Paris), 6 March 1987. Daney, Serge, ‘‘Cissé très bien, qu’on se le dise,’’ in Libération (Paris), 9–10 May 1987. Heymann, Danielle, ‘‘Dans la lumière de Yeelen,’’ in Le Monde (Paris), 29–30 November 1987. Binet, Jacques, ‘‘Oedipus Negro,’’ in Positif (Paris), December 1987. De Baecque, Antoine, ‘‘Cela s’appelle l’aurore,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1987. Villetard, Xavier, ‘‘Toute la lumière,’’ in Libération (Paris), 2 De- cember 1987. Ma?ga, Mahmoud-Alpha, ‘‘Question d’accent,’’ in Africa Interna- tional (Paris), October 1990. Gili, Jean A., ‘‘Waati, le continent retrouvé,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1995. Lalanne, Jean-Marc, ‘‘Terre et mère,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1995. Ahounou, Brice, ‘‘Le temps de Nandi,’’ in Unir Cinema (Paris), July 1995. Haffner, Pierre, ‘‘Ni modèle, ni école, ni tradition,’’ in La Pensée (Paris), April-June, 1996. On CISSé film— Panh, Rithy, Souleymane Cissé (videocassette), 1991 *** Souleymane Cissé was the most recognized African filmmaker of the twentieth century. A participant in a general movement toward social realism in African cinema, Cissé was the first African to win a major prize at the Cannes Film Festival. While the success of both Finyé and Yeelen at the Cannes Film Festival garnered Cissé acclaim and increased attention for African cinema, Cissé has spent his career filming African subjects. Such concentration requires a special devo- tion because Africa is prone to economic and social precariousness. But after studying in Moscow, Cissé returned to his home land to perfect his craft. In doing so he has contributed significantly to the development of social realism in African cinema. Cissé used his creative skills to tell stories of everyday Africans. While working at the SCINFOMA he made more than thirty news- reels and documentary films that examined different African socie- ties. His projects carefully depicted the cultural heritage and typical lives of Malian and other African people. Using the very limited technical means provided by the government for which he was still working at that time, Cissé created Cinq jours d’une vie, a short movie relating the disappointments of an unemployed young man from Mali in 1972. Cissé’s realistic style garnered Cinq jours d’une vie consider- able attention at the Carthage Festival. Buoyed by the success of the film, Cissé formed his own company, Les Films Cissé, to produce his own films without government support. Den Muso is both Cissé’s first feature movie and the first film in Bambara language in African cinema. This movie deals with the suicide of Ténin, a deaf-mute urban Muslim young woman who is rejected by her family when she bears the child of one of her father’s employees. Though the story sadly relates the story of Ténin it also comments on the value of social classes in modern society. Highlight- ing the moral conflicts of adhering to traditional values in contempo- rary society, Cissé accounts for the condition of the modern Malian woman. The first great African movie dealing with the proletarian class, Baara is the most Marxist of Cissé’s movies, both in its liberal form CLAIRDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 191 and its topics. The film grapples with the greed and corruption of the business elite and highlights the emerging social awareness of work- ers and women. In the film, Balla Traoré, a young engineer newly graduated in Europe, decries the economic exploitation in the textile factory he supervises and the corruption of his manager who will eventually have him murdered. Finyé is one of the finest and densest movies made on the African continent. Centered around a love affair between two university students with very different backgrounds one father is a traditional chief and the other is a military governor the film tackles the friction between tradition and modernity in African society. In the film, the students join a mass protest against the falsification of exam results and are later supported by the chief who renounces his powers and allies himself with the youth. Meanwhile the military governor, whose authoritarianism bears some similarities to Moussa Traoré’s politics when he ruled Mali from 1968 to 1991, remains firm in his defense of the government. In the end, Cissé succeeds in illustrating the power of mass protests against the government. Although not the equal of his later film, Yeelen, Finyé offers a complex reflection on African culture and politics. Yet the complexity of the film is portrayed with a lightness and efficient simplicity that has come to typify Cissé’s work. With a certain virtuosity Cissé combines scenes of everyday life with dreamlike sequences or magic rituals. Despite the seemingly effortless simplicity conveyed in his films, Cissé works diligently to achieve these results. He aspires to technical perfection and wants his movies to reach the same esthetic level as foreign cinema. To create his films, Cissé must rely heavily on western help and other non-African technicians. And, unlike other filmmakers who consider a movie as primarily a political tool, Cissé has cultural and esthetic visions for his movies. Paramount to Cissé’s work is his use of feminine themes to highlight the feminine condition and to evoke the symbolic sense of femininity in Africa. Cissé has often given feminine themes a central role in his films. In his first feature film Den Muso, one can interpret Tenin’s dumbness as a way to show Malian women’s submissiveness to patriarchal values. In his later film Waati, the character Nandi illustrates the role of African women in general. All of Cissé’s films use these feminine themes as a metaphor for life in Africa. Working within these feminine themes, Cissé also brings histori- cal perspective to his films. Each film provides a complex web of historically inspired stories, situations, settings, and speech. A full understanding of Cissé’s films requires careful attention to his efforts to place his films in historical context. In Finyé, for example, Cissé juxtaposes the film’s fictional youth protest with footage from a real protest in Mali in the early 1980s. Unfortunately censorship concerns forced Cissé to only touch on the issues surrounding the ensuing fall of Traoré’s regime in Mali. Nevertheless, the force of his Cissé’s film highlighted the power of popular protests and, during the events of 1991, Finyé has been remembered for its political significance. For all his efforts, his self-proclaimed masterpiece, Yeelen, won him international acclaim. Undoubtedly one of the most famous African movies, Yeelen relates the cultural heritage of the Bambara and other Mande-speaking peoples of West Africa. Like Finyé, the film reflects on the tensions between tradition and modernity in a generational conflict; the Chief of the Komo secret society tries to murder his son who is accused of having disclosed some important secrets. In Yeelen, Cissé strays from the social realism typical of his previous movies and adapts a style that is influenced by the Bambara culture—the language of which predominates in the whole western Africa—and its cosmology and concepts of time and space. For some, the film brought to the screen aspects of their culture or experience never before seen. The film shows a complete ceremony of the Komo secret society, which many Malians are familiar with but few have seen. Indeed the cultural content of the film is incredibly rich. While based on the Bambara culture, the Peul and Dogon cultures are also highlighted. In the end, Yeelen goes beyond the theories about a cultural unity in Africa to provide an argument for the preservation of distinct African cultures. In addition to its cultural complexity, Yeelen focuses on the political complexity in an African nation by perfectly representing the Pan-African aspirations of African filmmakers. In the early 1990s, Cissé crossed the Malian border to film Waati, a film about apartheid. In Waati, Southern Africa is described as submitting to apartheid whereas Western Africa is almost depicted as an idyllic place. Waati can be considered as the first genuine Pan- African creation at a time when Pan-Africanism was still a theoretical discourse promoted by the Pan-African Federation of Filmmakers (FEPACI). While offering a rather predictable description of apart- heid, Waati reveals the artistic limits of the topic. Images of the arbitrary violence under apartheid permeate the film. Despite the limited artistic success of the film, the African vision on the barbarism of apartheid was not ineffective. One of the first scenes has obvious cathartic and emotional virtues: on a beach prohibited to Black people, Nandi, the heroine, sees her father and little brother slaugh- tered by an Afrikaner rider. Using her supernatural powers, Nandi succeeds in killing the rider. All the members of the audience, whether they are African or Westerner, can identify with her gesture as the ultimate defense against evil. Misunderstandings about his work have been increasing since the release of Waati. Some have severely criticized Cissé as the director of an agonizing Pan-Africanism, while others favor his approach. These contradictory receptions may illustrate the intrinsic paradox of Cissé’s work: his aspirations toward technical and esthetic quality as well as his desire to concentrate on African cultures. While critics and scholars usually consider speech as the main element in African cinema, Cissé emphasizes the visual aspects of his movies. Con- cerned with pictures and camera movement, his portrayal of everyday life and religious rituals—especially since Finyé—dramatizes the political nature of the activities. Cissé’s work seems to be increas- ingly focused on a reflection of cultures to the detriment of a realistic description of Malian or African societies. But in addition to bringing various cultures to the screen, Cissé’s contribution to African cinema is based on the development of a style that superposes traditional and modern elements, creating an art that is neither traditionalist nor modernist but rather within post-modernity. —Samuel Lelievre CLAIR, René Nationality: French. Born: René Chomette in Paris, 11 November 1898. Education: Lycée Montaigne, and Lycée Louis-le-Grand, Paris, 1913–17. Military Service: Served in Ambulance Corps, 1917. Family: Married Bronya Perlmutter, 1926, one son. Career: Retired to Dominican monastery, 1918; began acting at Gaumont studios, 1920; as René Clair, became film editor of Le Théatre et comoedia illustré, Paris, 1922; directed first film, Paris qui dort, CLAIR DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 192 René Clair 1923; directed for Alexander Korda in Britain, 1935–38; immigrated to United States and signed to Universal, 1940; returned to Paris, 1946. Awards: Honorary doctorate, Cambridge University, 1956; elected to Academie Fran?aise, 1960; Doctor Honoris Causa, Royal College of Arts, London, 1967; Commander of the Legion of Honour; Commander of Arts and Letters; Commander of the Italian Order of Merit. Died: In Neuilly, France, 15 March 1981. Films as Director: 1923 Paris qui dort (+ sc, ed) 1924 Entr’acte; Le Fant?me du Moulin Rouge (+ sc) 1925 Le Voyage imaginaire (+ sc) 1926 La Proie du vent (+ sc) 1927 Un Chapeau de paille d’Italie (+ sc) 1928 La Tour (+ sc); Les Deux Timides (+ sc) 1930 Sous les toits de Paris (+ sc) 1931 Le Million (+ sc); A Nous la liberté (+ sc) 1932 Quatorze Juillet (+ sc) 1934 Le Dernier Milliardaire (+ sc) 1935 The Ghost Goes West (+ co-sc) 1937 Break the News (+ co-sc) 1939 Air pur (+ sc) (uncompleted) 1940 The Flame of New Orleans (+ co-sc) 1942 Sketch featuring Ida Lupino in Forever and a Day (Lloyd) (+ sc); I Married a Witch (+ co-sc, pr) 1943 It Happened Tomorrow (+ co-sc) 1945 And Then There Were None (+ co-sc, pr) 1947 Le Silence est d’or (+ pr, sc) 1949 La Beauté du diable (+ co-sc, pr) 1952 Les Belles-de-nuit (+ sc, pr) 1955 Les Grandes Manoeuvres (+ co-sc, pr) 1957 Porte des Lilas (+ co-sc, pr) 1960 ‘‘Le Mariage’’ episode of La Fran?aise et l’amour (+ sc) 1961 Tout l’or du monde (+ co-sc, pr) 1962 ‘‘Les Deux Pigeons’’ episode of Les Quatres vérités (+ sc) 1965 Les Fêtes galantes (+ pr, sc) Other Films: 1920 Le Lys de la Vie (Fuller) (role); Les Deux Gamines (Feuillade— serial) (role) 1921 Le Sens de la mort (Protozanoff) (role); L’Orpheline (Feuillade) (role); Parisette (Feuillade—serial) (role) 1922 Parisette (Feuillade) (role) 1930 Prix de beauté (Miss Europe) (Genina) (sc contribution) 1939 Un Village dans Paris (co-pr) 1959 La Grande époque (French version of Robert Youngson’s The Golden Age of Comedy) (narrator) Publications By CLAIR: books— De fil en aiguille, Paris, 1951. La Princesse de Chine, Paris, 1951. Réflexion faite, Paris, 1951. Reflections on the Cinema, London, 1953. Comédies et commentaires, Paris, 1959. Tout l’or du monde, Paris, 1962. ‘‘à nous la liberté’’ and ‘‘Entr’acte,” New York, 1970. Four Screenplays, New York, 1970. Cinema Yesterday and Today, New York, 1972. Jeux d’hasard, Paris, 1976. By CLAIR: articles— ‘‘A Conversation with René Clair,’’ with Bernard Causton, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1933. ‘‘It Happened Tomorrow,’’ with Dudley Nichols, in Theatre Arts (New York), June 1944. ‘‘Television and Cinema,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Janu- ary 1951. ‘‘René Clair in Moscow,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Win- ter 1955/56. ‘‘Nothing Is More Artificial than Neo-realism,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1957. ‘‘Picabia, Satie et la première d’Entr’acte,’’ in L’Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), November 1968. ‘‘René Clair in Hollywood,’’ an interview with R.C. Dale, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley, California), Winter 1970/71. CLAIRDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 193 Interview in Encountering Directors by Charles Samuels, New York, 1972. ‘‘A Conversation with René Clair,’’ with John Baxter and John Gillett, in Focus on Film (London), Winter 1972. ‘‘René Clair,’’ interviews with Patrick McGilligan and Debra Weiner, in Take One (Montreal), January/February 1973 and May 1974. ‘‘René Clair at 80,’’ an interview with G. Mason, in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 10, no. 2, 1982. Interview in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), March 1988. On CLAIR: books— Viazzi, G., René Clair, Milan, 1946. Bourgeois, J., René Clair, Geneva, 1949. Charensol, Georges, and Roger Régent, Un Ma?tre du cinéma: René Clair, Paris, 1952. Charensol, George, René Clair et Les Belles de nuit, Paris, 1953. De La Roche, Catherine, René Clair, an Index, London, 1958. Mitry, Jean, René Clair, Paris, 1960. Amengual, Barthélemy, René Clair, Paris, 1969. Barrot, Olivier, René Clair; ou, Le Temps mesuré, Renens, 1985. Greene, Naomi, René Clair: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1985. Dale, R.C., The Films of René Clair, 2 vols, Metuchen, New Jer- sey, 1986. On CLAIR: articles— Potamkin, Harry, ‘‘René Clair and Film Humor,’’ in Hound and Horn (New York), October/December 1932. Jacobs, Louis, ‘‘The Films of René Clair,’’ in New Theatre (New York), February 1936. Lambert, Gavin, ‘‘The Films of René Clair,’’ in Sequence (London), no. 6, 1949. ‘‘Clair Issue’’ of Bianco e Nero (Rome), August/September 1951. Gauteur, Claude, ‘‘René Clair, hélas. . . !’’ in Image et Son (Paris), June 1963. Beylie, Claude, ‘‘Entr’acte, le film sans ma?tre,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), February 1969. Fraenkel, Helene, ‘‘It Happened Tomorrow,’’ in Films in Review (New York), August/September 1974. Fischer, Lucy, ‘‘René Clair, Le Million, and the Coming of Sound,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Spring 1977. Carroll, Noel, ‘‘Entr’acte, Paris and Dada,’’ in Millenium Film Journal (New York), Winter 1977/78. Grignaffini, Giovanna, ‘‘René Clair’’ (special issue), Castoro Cin- ema (Firenze), no. 69, 1979. Haustrate, Gaston, ‘‘René Clair: était-il un grand cinéaste?,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), April 1981. Adair, Gilbert, ‘‘Utopia Ltd., the Cinema of René Clair,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1981. ‘‘Sous les toits de Paris Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 February 1982. Oms, M., and J. Baldizzone, ‘‘Entretien avec Rene Clair,’’ in in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 35–36, Autumn 1982. Kramer, S.P., ‘‘René Clair: Situation and Sensibility in A nous la liberté,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), April 1984. Vittorini, E., ‘‘Nella poetica di Clair una lezione di linguaggio,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), March-April 1986. Faulkner, Christopher, ‘‘René Clair, Marcel Pagnol, and the Social Dimension of Speech,’’ Filmfax (Evanston, Illinois), no. 36, December-January 1992–93. Renard, P., ‘‘Louis Delluc, Rene Clair,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 383, January 1993. Herpe, N., ‘‘Rene Clair,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 384, February 1993. Cremonini, G., ‘‘Aweune domani di Rene Clair,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), vol. 33, May 1993. Trémois, C.-M., ‘‘La belle époque de Rene Clair,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 8 September 1993. Alion, Yves, ‘‘Rene Clair,’’ in Mensuel du Cinema (Paris), no. 10, October 1993. On CLAIR: film— Knapp, Hubert, and Igor Barrère, Le Rouge est mis (documentary on making of Les Belles de nuit), 1952. *** During the 1930s, when the French cinema reigned intellectually preeminent, René Clair ranked with Renoir and Carné as one of its greatest directors—perhaps the most archetypally French of them all. His reputation has since fallen (as has Carné’s), and comparison with Renoir may suggest why. Clair’s work, though witty, stylish, charm- ing, and technically accomplished, seems to lack a dimension when compared with the work of Renoir; there is a certain oversimplifica- tion, a fastidious turning away from the messier, more complex aspects of life. (Throughout nearly the whole of his career, Clair rejected location shooting, preferring the controllable artifice of the studio.) Critics have alleged that his films are superficial and emo- tionally detached. Yet, at their best, Clair’s films have much of the quality of champagne—given so much sparkle and exhilaration, it would seem churlish to demand nourishment as well. At the outset of his career, Clair directed one of the classic documents of surrealist cinema, Entr’acte, and this grounding in surrealism underlies much of his comedy work. The surrealists’ love of sight gags (Magritte’s cloud-baguettes, Duchamp’s urinal) and mocking contempt for bourgeois respectability can be detected in the satiric farce of Un Chapeau de paille d’Italie, Clair’s masterpiece of the silent era. Dream imagery, another surrealist preoccupation, recurs constantly throughout his career, from Le Voyage imaginaire to Les Belles-de-nuit, often transmuted into fantasy—touchingly poetic at its best, though in weaker moments declining into fey whimsicality. The key films in Clair’s early career, and those which made him internationally famous, were his first four sound pictures: Sous les toits de Paris, Le Million, A Nous la liberté, and Quatorze Juillet. Initially sceptical of the value of sound—‘‘an unnatural creation’’— he rapidly changed his opinion when he recognized the creative, non- realistic possibilities which the soundtrack offered. Sound effects, music, even dialogue could be used imaginatively to counterpoint and comment on the image, or to suggest a new perspective on the action. Words and pictures, Clair showed, need not, and in fact should not, be tied together in a manner that clumsily duplicates information. Dialogue need not always be audible; and even in a sound picture, silence could claim a validity of its own. CLARKE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 194 In these four films, Clair created a wholly individual cinematic world, a distinctive blend of fantasy, romance, social satire, and operetta. Song and dance are introduced into the action with no pretence at literal realism, characters are drawn largely from stock, and the elaborate sets are explored with an effortless fluidity of camera movement which would be impossible in real locations. These qualities, together with the pioneering use of sound and Clair’s knack for effective pacing and brilliant visual gags, resulted in films of exceptional appeal, full of charm, gaiety, and an ironic wit which at times—notably in the satire on mechanised greed in A Nous la liberté—darkened towards an underlying pessimism. As always, Clair wrote his own scripts, working closely on all four films with designer Lazare Meerson and cinematographer Georges Périnal. Of the four, Le Million most effectively integrated its various elements, and is generally rated Clair’s finest film. But all were successful, especially outside France, and highly influential: both Chaplin (Modern Times) and the Marx Brothers (A Night at the Opera) borrowed from them. In some quarters, though, Clair was criticized for lack of social relevance. Ill-advisedly, he attempted to respond to such criticisms; Le Dernier Milliardaire proved a resounding flop. This led to Clair’s long exile. For thirteen years he made no films in France other than the abortive Air pur, and his six English-language pictures—two in Britain, four in America—have an uneasy feel about them, the fantasy strained and unconvincing. By the time Clair finally returned to France in 1946, both he and the world had changed. The films that Clair made after World War II rarely recapture the lighthearted gaiety of his early work. In its place, the best of them display a new-found maturity and emotional depth, while preserving the characteristic elegance and wit of his previous films. The prevail- ing mood is an autumnal melancholy that at times, as in the elegiac close of Les Grandes Manoeuvres, comes near to tragedy. Characters are no longer the stock puppets of the pre-war satires, but rounded individuals, capable of feeling and suffering. More serious subjects are confronted, their edges only slightly softened by their context: Porte des Lilas ends with a murder, La Beauté du diable with a vision of the atomic holocaust. Nearest in mood to the earlier films is the erotic fantasy of Les Belles-de-nuit, but even this is darkly under- scored with intimations of suicide. In the late 1950s Clair came under attack from the writers of Cahiers du Cinéma, Fran?ois Truffaut in particular, who regarded him as the embodiment of the ‘‘Old Guard,’’ the ossified cinéma de papa against which they were in revolt. To what he saw as Clair’s emotionless, studio-bound artifice, Truffaut proposed an alternative, more ‘‘truly French’’ cinematic tradition, the lyrical freedom of Renoir and Jean Vigo. Clair’s reputation never fully recovered from these onslaughts, nor from the lukewarm reception which met his last two films, Tout l’or du monde and Les Fêtes galantes. Although Clair no longer commands a place among the very first rank of directors, he remains undoubtedly one of the most original and distinctive stylists of the cinema. His explorations of sound, movement, and narrative technique, liberating at the time, still appear fresh and inventive. For all his limitations, which he readily acknowledged—‘‘a director’s intelligence,’’ he once wrote, ‘‘can be judged partly by his renuncia- tions’’—Clair succeeded in creating a uniquely personal vision of the world, which in his best films still retains the power to exhilarate and delight. —Philip Kemp CLARKE, Shirley Nationality: American. Born: Shirley Brimberg in New York City, 1925. Education: Stephens College, John Hopkins University, Ben- nington College, and University of North Carolina. Family: Married lithographer Burt Clarke, one daughter. Career: Dancer with Martha Graham and Doris Humphrey, also chairwoman, National Dance Foundation, 1946–53; made first film, A Dance in the Sun, 1954; co-founder, with Jonas Mekas, Filmmakers Cooperative, 1962; worked with Public Broadcast Lab, late 1960s (fired 1969); Professor of Film and Video at U.C.L.A, 1975–85. Died: 23 September 1997, in Boston, Massachusetts, following a stroke. Films as Director: 1954 A Dance in the Sun (+ pr, ph, ed, co-choreo); In Paris Parks (+ pr, ph, ed, co-choreo) 1955 Bullfight (+ pr, co-ph, ed, co-choreo) 1957 A Moment in Love (+ pr, co-ph, ed, co-choreo) 1958 The Skyscraper (pr, co-d only); Brussels ‘‘Loops’’ (12 film loops made for Brussels Exposition, destroyed) (+ pr, co-ph, ed) 1959 Bridges-Go-Round (+ pr, co-ph, ed) 1960 A Scary Time (+ co-sc, ph) 1961 The Connection (+ co-pr, ed) 1963 The Cool World (+ co-sc, ed); Robert Frost: A Lover’s Quarrel with the World (co-d) 1967 Portrait of Jason (+ pr, ed, voice); Man in Polar Regions (11- screen film for Expo ‘67) 1978 Trans; One Two Three; Mysterium; Initiation (all video) 1981 Savage/Love (video) 1982 Tongues (video/theatre collaboration with Sam Shepard) 1985 Ornette, Made in America Shirley Clarke CLARKEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 195 Other Films: 1959 Opening in Moscow (Pennebaker) (co-ed) 1969 Lion’s Love (Varda) (role as herself) Publications By CLARKE: articles— ‘‘The Expensive Art,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1960. ‘‘The Cool World,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1963. Interview with Harriet Polt, in Film Comment (New York), no. 2, 1964. Interview with Axel Madsen, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1964. Interview with James Blue, in Objectif (Paris), February/March 1965. Interview with Gretchen Berg, in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1967. ‘‘A Statement on Dance and Film,’’ in Dance Perspectives (New York), Summer 1967. ‘‘A Conversation—Shirley Clarke and Storm DeHirsch,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Autumn 1967 and October 1968. ‘‘Entretiens—Le Depart pour Mars,’’ an interview with Michel Delahaye, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1968. ‘‘Shirley Clarke: Image and Ideas,’’ an interview with S. Rice, in Take One (Montreal), February 1972. ‘‘What Directors Are Saying,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), March/ April 1975. On CLARKE: books— Hanhardt, John, and others, editors, A History of the American Avant- Garde Cinema, New York, 1976. Kowalski, Rosemary A.R., A Vision of One’s Own: Four Women Film Directors, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1980. Heck-Rabi, Louise, Women Filmmakers: A Critical Reception, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1984. Acker, Ally, Reel Women: Pioneers of the Cinema, 1896 to the Present, New York, 1991. Rabinovitz, Lauren, Points of Resistance: Women, Power and Poli- tics in the New York Avant-Garde Cinema, 1943–1971, Urbana, Illinois, 1991. On CLARKE: articles— Breitrose, Henry, ‘‘Films of Shirley Clarke,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1960. Archer, Eugene, ‘‘Woman Director Makes the Scene,’’ in New York Times Magazine, 26 August 1962. Pyros, J., ‘‘Notes on Woman Directors,’’ in Take One (Montreal), November/December 1970. Mekas, Jonas, in Village Voice (New York), 20 May 1971. Cooper, K., ‘‘Shirley Clarke,’’ in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), June 1972. Bebb, Bruce, ‘‘The Many Media of Shirley Clarke,’’ in Journal of University Film Association (Carbondale, Illinois), Spring 1982. American Film (Washington, D.C.), June 1982. Grant, Barry Keith, ‘‘When Worlds Collide: The Cool World,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), vol. 28, no. 3, July 1990. Morice, Jacques and Nevers, Camille, ‘‘Disco, bachot et autres épisodes de jeunesse,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 478, April 1994. De Bruyn, Olivier, ‘‘Belfort 1993. Hommage à Shirley Clarke,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 406, December 1994. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 10 November 1997. Obituary, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 518, November 1997. Obituary, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), vol. 14, no. 12, December 1997. Obituary, in Positif (Paris), no. 444, February 1998. Obituary, in Sight and Sound (London), March 1998. *** Shirley Clarke was a leader and major filmmaker in the New York film community in the 1950s and 1960s. Her films, which exemplify the artistic directions of the independent movement, are classic examples of the best work of American independent filmmaking. Clarke began her professional career as a dancer. She participated in the late 1940s in the avant-garde dance community centered around New York City’s Young Men’s-Young Women’s Hebrew Associa- tion’s (YM-YWHA) performance stage and Hanya Holm’s classes for young choreographers. In 1953, Clarke adapted dancer-choreog- rapher Daniel Nagrin’s Dance in the Sun to film. In her first dance film, Clarke relied on editing concepts to choreograph a new cine- matic space and rhythm. She then applied her cinematic choreogra- phy to a non-dance subject in In Paris Parks, and further explored the cinematic possibilities for formal choreography in her dance films, Bullfight and A Moment in Love. During this time period, Clarke studied filmmaking with Hans Richter at City College of New York and participated in informal filmmaking classes with director and cinematographer Peter Glushanok. In 1955, she became an active member of Independent Filmmakers of America (IFA), a short-lived New York organization that tried to improve promotion and distribu- tion for independent films. Through the IFA, Clarke became part of the Greenwich Village artistic circle that included avant-garde filmmakers Maya Deren, Stan Brakhage, and Jonas Mekas. It also introduced her to the importance of an economic structure for the growth of avant-garde film, a cause she championed throughout the 1960s. Clarke worked with filmmakers Willard Van Dyke, Donn Alan Pennebaker, Ricky Leacock, and Wheaton Galentine on a series of film loops on American life for the United States Pavilion at the 1958 World’s Fair in Brussels. With the leftover footage of New York City bridges, she then made her experimental film masterpiece, Bridges-Go-Round, utilizing editing strategies, camera choreogra- phy, and color tints to turn naturalistic objects into a poem of dancing abstract elements. It is one of the best and most widely seen examples of a cinematic Abstract Expressionism in the 1950s. Clarke made the documentary film Skyscraper in 1958 with Van Dyke, Pennebaker, Leacock, and Galentine, followed by A Scary Time (1960), a film commissioned by the United Nations Interna- tional Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF). Clarke also began work on a public television film on Robert Frost, A Lover’s Quarrel with the World, but due to artistic disagreements and other commit- ments she left the project before the film’s completion while retaining a credit as co-director. Influenced by the developing cinema-verité style in documentary films of Leacock and Pennebaker, Clarke adapted cinema verité to two feature-length dramatic films, The Connection and The Cool CLAYTON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 196 World. The Connection was a landmark for the emergence of a New York independent feature film movement. It heralded a new style that employed a greater cinematic realism and addressed relevant social issues in black-and-white low budget films. It was also important because Clarke made the film the first test case in the courts in a successful fight to abolish New York State’s censorship rules. Her next feature film, The Cool World, was the first movie to dramatize a story on black street gangs without relying upon Hollywood-style moralizing, and it was the first commercial film to be shot on location in Harlem. In 1967, Clarke directed a 90-minute cinema verité interview with a black homosexual. Portrait of Jason is an insightful exploration of one person’s character while it simultaneously ad- dresses the range and limitations of cinema verité style. Although Clarke’s features had only moderate commercial runs and nominal success in the United States, they have won film festival awards and critical praise in Europe, making Clarke one of the most highly regarded American independent filmmakers among European film audiences. In the 1960s, Clarke also worked for the advancement of the New York independent film movement. She was one of the 24 filmmakers and producers who wrote and signed the 1961 manifesto, ‘‘Statement for a New American Cinema,’’ which called for an economic, artistic, and political alternative to Hollywood moviemaking. With Jonas Mekas in 1962, she co-founded Film-Makers Coopera- tive, a non-profit distribution company for independent films. Later, Clarke, Mekas and filmmaker Louis Brigante co-founded Film-Makers Distribution Center, a company for distributing inde- pendent features to commercial movie theatres. Throughout the 1960s, Clarke lectured on independent film in universities and museums in the United States and Europe, and in 1969 she turned to video as her major medium in which to work. —Lauren Rabinovitz CLAYTON, Jack Nationality: British. Born: Brighton, Sussex, 1 March 1921. Fam- ily: Married 1) actress Christine Norden; 2) Kathleen Kath; 3) Haya Haraneet. Career: Trained as racing ice skater. Third assistant director, assistant director, then editor, London Films, 1935–40; served in Royal Air Force Film Unit, finally Commanding Officer, 1940–46; associate producer, Romulus Films, 1950s; directed first feature, Room at the Top, 1958. Awards: Special Prize, Venice Festival, for The Bespoke Overcoat, 1956; Best Director Award, British Academy, for Room at the Top, 1959. Died: 26 February 1995, in Slough, Berkshire, England. Films as Director: 1944 Naples Is a Battlefield (+ sc, co-ph—uncredited) 1955 The Bespoke Overcoat (+ pr) 1958 Room at the Top 1961 The Innocents (+ pr) 1964 The Pumpkin Eater 1967 Our Mother’s House 1974 The Great Gatsby 1983 Something Wicked This Way Comes Jack Clayton 1988 The Lonely Passion of Judith Hearne 1992 Memento Mori (for TV) (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1948 Bond Street (Parry) (2nd unit d); An Ideal Husband (A. Korda) (pr mgr); The Queen of Spades (Dickinson) (assoc pr) 1951 Flesh and Blood (Kimmins) (assoc pr) 1952 Moulin Rouge (Huston) (assoc pr) 1953 Beat the Devil (Huston) (assoc pr) 1954 The Good Die Young (Gilbert) (assoc pr) 1955 I Am a Camera (Cornelius) (assoc pr) 1956 Sailor Beware! (Panic in the Parlor) (Parry) (pr); Dry Rot (Elvey) (pr); Three Men in a Boat (Annakin) (pr) 1957 The Story of Esther Costello (Miller) (assoc pr, 2nd unit d) 1958 The Whole Truth (Guillermin) (pr) Publications By CLAYTON: articles— ‘‘Challenge from Short Story Films,’’ in Films and Filming (Lon- don), February 1956. ‘‘The Way Things Are,’’ an interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), April 1974. CLAYTONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 197 ‘‘I’m Proud of That Film,’’ an interview with M. Rosen, in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1974. ‘‘Feats of Clayton,’’ an interview with Nick Roddick, in Stills (London), November-December 1983. Interview in American Film (Washington, D.C.), December 1987. ’’Jack Clayton Back on Track: The Lonely Passion of Judith Hearne,’’ in Films and Filming (London), no. 410, November-December 1988. Interview in Film en Televisie (Brussels), no. 394, March 1990. ’’Beware the Eyes. Martin Stephens,’’ an interview with Jessie Lilley, in Scarlet Street (Glen Rock), no. 20, Fall 1995. On CLAYTON: book— Craston, George M. A., Jack Clayton: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1981. On CLAYTON: articles— Cowie, Peter, ‘‘Clayton’s Progress,’’ in Motion (London), Spring 1962. McVay, Douglas, ‘‘The House That Jack Built,’’ in Films and Filming (London), October 1967. Houston, Penelope, ‘‘West Egg at Pinewood,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1973. Gregory, C. T., ‘‘There’ll Always Be Room at the Top for Nothing but the Best,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green, Ohio), Winter 1973. Houston, Penelope, ‘‘Gatsby,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1974. ‘‘Gatsby le magnìfique,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), Janu- ary 1975. Rebello, Stephen, ‘‘Jack Clayton’s The Innocents,’’ in Cinefantastique (Oak Park, Illinois), June-July 1983. Sinyard, Neil, ‘‘Directors of the Decade: Jack Clayton,’’ in Films and Filming (London), September 1983. Saada, Nicolas, ‘‘Amnésies,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Novem- ber 1988. Lefévre, Raymond, ‘‘Jack Clayton. Made in England,’’ in Revue du Cinéma, no. 448, April 1989. Sinyard, Neil, ‘‘Jack Clayton,’’ in Cinema Papers (Fitzroy), no. 78, March 1990. McIlroy, Brian, ‘‘Tackling Aloneness: Jack Clayton’s The Lonely Passions of Judith Hearne,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salis- bury), vol. 21, no. 1, January 1993. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 6 March 1995. Obituary, in Film-Dienst (Cologne), 14 March 1995. Loban, Lelia, ‘‘The Haunting and The Innocents,’’ in Scarlet Street (Glen Rock), no. 20, Fall 1995. Obituary, in Psychotronic Video (Narrowsburg), no. 20, 1995. Chase, Donald, ‘‘Romancing the Stones. Jack Clayton’s The Inno- cents,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 34, no. 1, January- February 1998. *** Though nearly forty before directing his first feature, Clayton had a solid professional grounding as associate producer. His credits, though few, have been mostly major productions. Though he dis- claims consciously auteurial choices, his films evince a heavily recognisable temperament. True, his approach is national-generational, insofar as his heavy, faintly expressionistic, blocking-in of a basic mood perpetuates the lyrical emphasis conspicuous in such ‘‘quality’’ films of the 1940s as Brief Encounter, Odd Man Out, and Dead of Night. His penchant for themes of melancholy, frustration, obsession, hallucination, and hauntings are also amply evident. Clayton attracted much critical praise, and an Academy Award, with The Bespoke Overcoat, a ‘‘long short’’ brought in for $5,000; writer Wolf Mankowitz adapted Gogol’s tale of a haunted tailor to London’s East End. Clayton’s first feature was Room at the Top, from John Braine’s novel. Laurence Harvey played the ambitious young Northerner who sacrifices his true love, played by Simone Signoret, to a cynical career-move, impregnating an industrialist’s innocent daughter. Its sexual frankness (as the first ‘‘quality’’ film to carry the new X certificate) and its class-consciousness (its use of brand-names being as snobbery-conscious as James Bond’s—though lower-class) elicited powerful audience self-recognition. It marked a major break- through for British cinema, opening it to other ‘‘angry young men’’ with their ‘‘kitchen-sink realism’’ and social indignation (though politically more disparate than legend has it). Clayton kept his distance from such trends, turning down both Saturday Night and Sunday Morning and The L-shaped Room, to select a very ‘‘literary,’’ Victorian, ghost story, The Innocents, from Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw. Deborah Kerr played the children’s governess who sees ghosts by sunlight while battling to save her charges from possession by the souls of two evil, and very sexual, servants. Is the lonely governess imagining everything, or projecting her own evil? The Pumpkin-Eater adapted Penelope Mortimer’s novel about a mother of eight (Anne Bancroft) whose new husband, a film scriptwriter, bullies her into having a hysterectomy. In Our Mother’s House, a family of children conceal their mother’s death from the authorities to continue living as a family—until their scapegrace father (Dirk Bogarde) returns and takes over, introducing, not so much ‘‘reality,’’ as his, disreputable, reality. The three films are all but a trilogy, brooding with ‘‘haunted realism’’ over the psychic chaos between parental—especially mother—figures and children caught in half-knowledge of sexuality, death, and individuality. Atmospheres sluggish or turbulent, strained or cavernous, envelope women or child-women enmeshed in tangles of family closeness and loneliness. If The Innocents arraigns Victo- rian fears of childhood sexuality, it acknowledges also the evil in children. The Pumpkin Eater balances assumptions of ‘‘excessive’’ maternal instinct being a neurotic defence by raising the question of whether modern superficiality is brutally intolerant of maternal desire. Our Mother’s House concerns a ‘‘lost tribe’’ of children, caught between the modern, ‘‘small-family’’ world, infantile over- severity (with dangers of a Lord of the Flies situation) and adult dissipation (with Dirk Bogarde somewhat reminiscent of The Ser- vant). Its echoes of other films may do it injustice. Several years and aborted projects later came The Great Gatsby, an ultra-lavish version of Scott Fitzgerald’s tale of the lost love of a bootlegger turned socialite. It’s a 1920s yuppie story, but its glitzy surfaces and characters even wispier than their originals acquire an icy, sarcophagal air. Almost as expensive, Something Wicked This Way Comes, from Ray Bradbury, about an eerie carnival touring lonely prairie towns to snare unsatisfied souls, evokes children’s storybook illustrations, but proved a heavy commercial failure. The Lonely Passion of Judith Hearne reverted to more intimate and lacerating material—Brian Moore’s novel of a genteel but alcoholic spinster (Maggie Smith) courted by an opportunist (Bob Hoskins) for the money he mistakenly thinks she has. CLéMENT DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 198 Clayton’s ‘‘family trilogy’’ achieves a strange osmosis of 1940s ‘‘lyrical realism’’ and a more ‘‘calligraphic’’ sensitivity, of strong material and complicated interactions between profoundly different people. The resultant tensions between a central subjectivity and ‘‘the others,’’ emphasise the dark, confused, painful gaps between minds. If the films border on the ‘‘absurdist’’ experience (Pinter adapted the Mortimer), they retain the richness of ‘‘traditional’’ themes and forms. Critics (and collaborators) keenly discussed shifts between Mortimer’s first person narration and the camera as third person, and the relegation of Fitzgerald’s narrator to onlooker status. Even in the lesser films, ‘‘shifting emphases’’ (between gloss and core in Gatsby, space and emotion in Wicked) repay re-seeing, and Clayton’s combi- nations of fine literary material with a troubling temperament make powerful testimony to their time and to abiding human problems. —Raymond Durgnat CLéMENT, René Nationality: French. Born: Bordeaux, 18 March 1913. Education: Educated in architecture at Ecole des Beaux-Arts. Career: Made animated film, Cesar chez les Gaulois, while a student, early 1930s; directed first live-action film, Soigne ton gauche (with Jacques Tati), 1936; made documentaries in Arabia and North Africa, 1936–39; technical consultant on Cocteau’s La Belle et la bête, 1946. Awards: Best Director Award, Cannes festival, for La Bataille du rail, 1946, and Au-dela des grilles, 1949; Academy Awards, Best Foreign Film, René Clément for Au delà des grilles (1949) and Jeux interdits (1951). Died: 17 March 1996. Films as Director: 1936 Soigne ton gauche (short) 1937 L’Arabie interdite (short) 1938 La Grande Chartreuse (short) 1939 La Bièvre, fille perdue (short) 1940 Le Triage (short) 1942 Ceux du rail (short) 1943 La Grande Pastorale (short) 1944 Chefs de demain (short) 1945 La Bataille du rail (Battle of the Rails) (+ sc) 1946 Le Père tranquille (Mr. Orchid) 1947 Les Maudits (The Damned) (+ co-adapt) 1948 Au-delà des grilles Le Mura di Malapaga (The Walls of Malapaga) 1950 Le Chateau de verre (+ co-sc) 1951 Les Jeux interdits (Forbidden Games) (+ co-sc) 1954 Monsieur Ripois (Knave of Hearts); Lovers, Happy Lovers (+ co-sc) 1956 Gervais 1958 Barrage contre le Pacifique (La Diga sul Pacifico); This Angry Age; The Sea Wall (+ co-sc) 1959 Plein soleil (Purple Noon; Lust for Evil (+ co-sc) 1961 Che gioia vivere (Quelle joie de vivre) (+ co-sc) 1962 Le Jour et l’heure (The Day and the Hour) (+ co-sc) 1964 Les Félins (Joy House); The Love Cage (+ co-sc) 1966 Paris br?le-t-il? (Is Paris Burning?) 1969 Le Passager de la pluie (Rider on the Rain) 1971 La Maison sous les arbres (The Deadly Trap) 1972 La Course du lièvre à travers les champs (And Hope to Die) 1975 Jeune fille libre le soir (L.A. Babysitter) (+ co-sc) Publications By CLéMENT: articles— Interview with Francis Koval, in Sight and Sound (London), June 1950. ‘‘On Being a Creator,’’ in Films and Filming (London), Octo- ber 1960. On CLéMENT: books— Siclier, Jacques, René Clément, Brussels, 1956. Farwagi, André, René Clément, Paris, 1967. Armes, Roy, French Cinema since 1946: Vol.1—The Great Tradi- tion, New York, 1970. On CLEMENT: articles— Queval, Jean, in L’écran Fran?ais (Paris), 16 October 1946. Régent, Roger, in L’écran Fran?ais (Paris), 14 October 1947. Eisner, Lotte, ‘‘Style of René Clément,’’ in Film Culture (New York), nos. 12 and no. 13, 1957. Riffaud, Madeleine, in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 14 November 1957. Gilson, René, in Cinéma (Paris), no. 44, 1960. CLOUZOTDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 199 Mardore, Michel, in Cinéma (Paris), no. 62, 1962. Bellour, Raymond, in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 11 June 1964. McVay, Douglas, ‘‘The Darker Side of Life,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1966. ‘‘Plein soleil Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 Febru- ary 1981. Dossier on La bataille du rail, in Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1982. Oliva, L., ‘‘René Clement kdysi—a potom,’’ in Film a Doba (Prague), November 1983. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 25/31 March 1996. Lyons, Donald, ‘‘Purple Noons and Quiet Evenings,’’ in Film Com- ment (New York), vol. 22, no. 3, May-June 1996. Bikacsy, G., ‘‘René Clément halalara,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), vol. 39, no. 5, 1996. Obituary, in Film en Televisie + Video (Brussels), no. 462, May 1996. Obituary, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), May 1996. Herpe, N., ‘‘René Clément,’’ in Positif (Paris), May 1996. Obituary, in Classic Images (Muscatine), May 1996. Obituary, in Séquences (Haute-Ville), no. 184, May/June 1996. Ghiyati, Karim, ‘‘Le petit Parisien à la campagne,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 469, February 1998. Austin, Guy, ‘‘Gangsters in Wonderland: René Clément’s And Hope to Die as a Reading of Lewis Carroll’s Alice stories,’’ in Litera- ture/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), vol. 26, no. 4, October 1998. *** René Clément was the most promising filmmaker to emerge in France at the end of World War II. He became the most technically adroit and interesting of the makers of ‘‘quality’’ films during the 1950s, only to see his career begin to disappoint the critics. In the years of the New Wave it was Clément, above all, who tied the older generation to the younger, especially through a film like Purple Noon. In a more recent phase he was associated with grand-scale dramas (Is Paris Burning?) and with small, personal, lyric films (Rider on the Rain). Clément began his career auspiciously, helping Cocteau with Beauty and the Beast and directing France’s only great resistance film, La Bataille du rail. These films showed the world his wide range. The first is a classic of fantasy while the second exhibits what can only be termed a ‘‘neo-realist’’ style. Because La Bataille du rail was shot on location with non-actors, and because its episodic story was drawn from the chronicle of everyday life, Clément, at the end of the war, was championed as France’s answer to the powerful Italian school of the liberation. For a time Clément seemed anxious to live up to this reputation. He associated himself with the progressive journal L’Ecran francais and sought other realist topics for his films. In Les Maudits he observed the plight of a group of Germans and refugees aboard a submarine. Evidently he was more concerned with the technical problems of filming in small spaces than with the moral dimensions of his plot, and this film was not a great success. But with The Walls of Malapaga Clément recovered his audience. This film, which won the Academy Award for best foreign film, was in fact a Franco-Italian co-production and brought together on the screen the most popular star of each country: Jean Gabin and Isa Miranda. The plot and style returned Clément to the poetic-realist films of pre-war France and continued to exhibit that tension of realism and abstraction that characterized all his work. Unquestionably he was, along with Claude Autant-Lara, the most important figure in the French film industry during the 1950s. His Forbidden Games remains a classic today and is notable both for the ingenuous performances of his child actors against a natural location and for the moral incisiveness of its witty plot and dialogue, scripted by the team of Aurenche and Bost. Doubtless because he had begun working with these writers, Truffaut condemned Clément in his notorious 1954 essay, ‘‘A Certain Tendency in French Cinema,’’ but Bazin, commenting on this essay, found Truffaut to have been too harsh in Clément’s case. Indeed Bazin lobbied to have the Cannes Film Festival award its Golden Palm to Clément’s next feature, Monsieur Ripois. Starring Gérard Philipe, this film makes extensive use of subjective camera and voice over. Shot on location in London, it is clearly an experimental project. But Clément’s experiments are always limited. Technical prob- lems continue to interest him, but he has never relinquished his belief that a film must be well-crafted in the traditional sense of that term. This is what must always distinguish him from the New Wave filmmakers with whom he otherwise has something in common. His all-knowing pessimism, and his literary good taste, finally put him in the camp of the ‘‘quality’’ directors. Clément, then, must be thought of as consummately French. His technical mastery sits well with his advanced political and moral ideas. He is cultured and trained. He makes excellent films both on a grand scale and on a smaller, more personal one. But finally there is something impersonal about even these small films, for, before representing himself, René Clément represents the institution of filmmaking in France. He is a good representative, perhaps the best it had after the war right up through the New Wave. —Dudley Andrew CLOUZOT, Henri-Georges Nationality: French. Born: Niort, 20 November 1907. Education: Ecole Navale, Brest. Family: Married Vera Amado Gibson, 1950 (died 1960). Career: As reporter for Paris-Midi, offered job in film industry while interviewing Adolphe Osso, 1930; assistant to Car- mine Gallone, Anatole Litvak, and others, 1930–34; contracted pleurisy, confined to sanatoriums, 1934–38; reentered film industry as writer, 1938; directed first film, L’Assassin habite au 21, 1942. Awards: Best Director, Venice Festival, for Quai des Orfèvres, 1947; Grand Prix, Cannes Festival, for Le Salaire de la peur, 1953; Prix Louis Delluc, for Les Diaboliques, 1955; Jury Prize, Cannes Festival, for Le Mystère Picasso, 1956; Oscar for Best Foreign Film, for La Vérité, 1960. Died: 12 January 1977. Films as Director: 1931 La Terreur des Batignolles (short) 1942 L’Assassin habite au vingt-et-un (+ co-sc) 1943 Le Corbeau (+ co-sc) 1947 Quai des Orfèvres (+ co-sc) 1948 Manon (+ co-sc) 1949 ‘‘Le Retour de Jean’’ in Retour à la vie (+ co-sc); Miquette et sa mère (+ co-sc) 1952 Le Salaire de la peur (+ sc) 1954 Les Diaboliques (+ co-sc) CLOUZOT DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 200 Henri-Georges Clouzot (right) 1955 Les Espions (+ co-sc) 1956 Le Mystère Picasso 1960 La Vérité (+ sc) 1968 La Prisonnière (+ sc) Other Films: 1931 Ma Cousine de Varsovie (Gallone) (co-sc); Un Soir de Rafle (Gallone) (adaptation); Je serai seule après minuit (de Baroncelli) (co-sc): Le Chanteur inconnu (Tourjansky) (co-adapt) 1932 Le Roi des palaces (Gallone) (co-sc); Le Dernier Choc (de Baroncelli) (co-sc); La Chanson d’une nuit (French lan- guage version of Anatole Litvak’s Das Lied einer Nacht) (co-adapt, dialogue); Faut-il les marier? (French version of Carl Lamac’s Die grausame Freundin, co-d with Pierre Billon) (adapt, dialogue) 1933 Caprice de princesse (French version of Karl Hartl’s Ihre Durchlacht, die Verk?uferin) (adapt, assoc d, ed, sc); Chateau de rêve (French version of Geza von Bolvary’s Das Schloss im Süden) (sc, adapt, assoc d, ed); Tout pour l’amour (French version of Joe May’s Ein Lied für dich) (sc, adapt, co-dialogue, lyrics, assoc d) 1934 Itto d’Afrique (Benoit-Lévy) (lyrics) 1938 Le Révolté (Mathot) (co-sc, lyrics, dialogue) 1939 Le Duel (Fresnay) (co-sc, lyrics, dialogue); Le Monde tremblera (La Révolté des vivants) (Pottier) (co-sc, lyrics, dialogue) 1941 Le Dernier des six (Lacombe) (lyrics, dialogue); Les Inconnus dans la maison (Decoin) (co-adapt, lyrics, dialogue) 1955 Si tous les gars du monde . . . (Christian-Jaque) (co-adapt) Publications By CLOUZOT: books— Le Corbeau, with Louis Chavance, Paris, 1948. Retour à la vie, with others, Paris, 1949. Le Cheval des dieux, Paris, 1951. By CLOUZOT: articles— ‘‘Le Salaire de la peur,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 17, 1962. ‘‘Quai des Orfèvres,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 29, 1963. ‘‘Voix off: Clouzot,’’ interview with Claire Clouzot, in Cinéma (Paris), May 1965. ‘‘An Interview with Henri-Georges Clouzot,’’ with Paul Schrader, in Cinema (Beverly Hills), no. 4, 1969. ‘‘Haberezhnaia luvelirov,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 2, 1993. On CLOUZOT: books— Chalais, Fran?ois, H.-G. Clouzot, Paris, 1950. Lacassin, Francis, and others, Le Procès Clouzot, Paris, 1964. Pilard, Philippe, H.-G. Clouzot, Paris, 1969. Armes, Roy, French Cinema since 1946: Vol.1—The Great Tradi- tion, New York, 1970. On CLOUZOT: articles— Tennant, Sylvia, ‘‘Henri-Georges Clouzot,’’ in Film (London), March/ April 1956. Bianchi, Pietro, ‘‘Henri-Georges Clouzot,’’ in Yale French Studies (New Haven, Connecticut), Summer 1956. Marilen, Jacques, ‘‘Dangers et vertus de l’orfèverie,’’ in Positif (Paris), November 1956. Berger, John, ‘‘Clouzot as Delilah,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1958. Sety, Gerard, ‘‘Clouzot: He Plans Everything from Script to Screen,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1958. Fontaine, A., ‘‘Clouzot sort de sa légende,’’ in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), July 1960. Beylie, Claude, obituary in Ecran (Paris), February 1977. Lacourbe, R., ‘‘Henri-Georges Clouzot, 1907–1977,’’ in Avant- Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 April 1977. Yakir, Dan, ‘‘Clouzot: The Wages of Film,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1981. Listener (London), 15 October 1987. Ciné Revue (Paris), 29 October 1987. Zimmer, J., ‘‘Henri-Georges Clouzot,’’ in Revue de la Cinémathèque (Montreal), no. 474, September 1991. Jeancolas, J.-P., ‘‘Clouzot en 1991,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 374, April 1992. *** COCTEAUDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 201 In a country like France where good taste is so admired, Henri- Georges Clouzot has been a shocking director. A film critic during the age of surrealism, Clouzot was always eager to assault his audience with his style and concerns. Like so many others, Clouzot found his chance to move from scriptwriting to directing during the Occupation, a time when there was a paucity of directors in France. His first effort, L’Assassin habite au 21, was a safe film. Its script followed two similar films he had written which had been well received by audiences. These witty police dramas were exercises in style and cleverness, befitting the epoch. Le Corbeau, made the next year, was in contrast a shattering film, unquestionably hitting hard at the society of the war years. Retaining all the conventions of the thriller, Clouzot systematically exposed the physical and psychological grotesqueries of every char- acter in the film. A grim picture of small-town mores, Le Corbeau was condemned by the Nazis and French patriots alike. When the war ended Clouzot found himself barred from the industry for two years by the ‘‘purification committee,’’ an industry- appointed watchdog group that self-righteously judged complicity with the Germans. Clouzot’s crime was to have made films for a German-financed company, though he was officially arraigned on charges of having maligned the French character and having demoral- ized the country during its dark hours. But even at this time many critics claimed that Le Corbeau was the only authentically engaged film made during the entire Occupation. When he did resume his career, Clouzot’s grim view of life had not improved. Both Quai des Orfèvres and his 1948 adaptation of Manon emulated American film noir with their lowlife settings. Both are extremely well acted, but ultimately small works. Clouzot’s fame in the United States came in the mid-1950s when The Wages of Fear and Diabolique gave him a reputation as a French Hitchcock, interested in the mechanics of suspense. In France, however, these films, especially Diabolique, were seen as only well- made studio products. His 1960 La Vérité, starring Brigitte Bardot, was designed to win him favor in the youth culture of the time, which was obsessed by New Wave life and movies. While the film outgrossed its New Wave competition, its cloyingly paternalistic style showed how far Clouzot was from the spontaneity of the New Wave. The cafe scenes in the film are insincere, and the inevitable indictment of society rings false. All of Clouzot’s films, even up to the 1968 La Prisonnière, were financial successes, but in the end he ceased being the instrumental force in the film industry he had been twenty years earlier. —Dudley Andrew COCTEAU, Jean Nationality: French. Born: Maisons-Lafitte, near Paris, 5 July 1889. Education: Lycée Condorcet and Fenelon, Paris. Career: Actor, playwright, poet, librettist, novelist, painter, and graphic artist in 1920s and throughout career. Directed first film, Le Sang d’un poète, 1930; became manager of boxer Al Brown, 1937; remained in Paris during the Occupation, 1940. Awards: Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur, 1949; member, Academie Royale de Belgique, 1955; member, Academie Fran?aise, 1955; honorary doctorate, Oxford University, 1956. Died: In Milly-la-Foret, France, 11 October 1963. Films as Director: 1925 Jean Cocteau fait du cinéma (+ sc) (neg lost?) 1930 Le Sang d’un poète (originally La Vie d’un poète) (+ ed, sc, voice-over) 1946 La Belle et la bête (+ sc) 1947 L’Aigle à deux têtes (+ sc) 1948 Les Parent terribles (+ sc, voice-over) 1950 Orphée (+ sc); Coriolan (+ sc, role); a 1914 ‘‘dramatic scene’’ by Cocteau included in Ce siècle a cinquante ans (Tual) (+ sc) 1952 La Villa Santo-Sospir (+ sc) 1960 Le Testament d’Orphée (Ne me demandez pas pourquoi) (+ sc, role as le poète) Other Films: 1940 La Comedie du bonheur (L’Herbier) (co-sc) 1942 Le Baron fant?me (de Poligny) (sc, role as Le Baron) 1943 L’Eternel Retour (Delannoy) (sc); La Malibran (Guitry) (narration + role as Alfred de Musset) 1945 Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne (Bresson) (co-sc) 1946 L’Amitie noire (Villiers and Krull) (role and narration) 1947 Ruy Blas (Billon) (sc) 1948 La Voix humaine (Rossellini, from Cocteau’s play); Les Noces de sable (Zvoboda) (sc, voice-over); La Légende de Sainte Ursule (Emmer) (role and narration) 1949 Tennis (Martin) (role + narration) 1950 Les Enfants terribles (Melville) (sc); Colette (Bellon) (role + narration); Venise et ses amants (Emmer and Gras) (role + narration) 1951 Desordre (Baratier) (role + narration) 1952 La Couronne noire (Saslavski) (co-sc); 8 x 8 (Richter) (role + narration) 1953 Le Rouge est mis (Barrère and Knapp) (role + narration) 1956 A l’aube d’un monde (Lucot) (role + narration); Pantomimes (Lucot) (role + narration) 1957 Le Bel indifferent (Demy, from Cocteau’s play) 1958 Django Reinhardt (Paviot) (role + narration); Le Musée Grevin (Demy and Masson) (role + narration) 1959 Charlotte et son Jules (Godard, from same play as Demy 1957 film) 1961 La Princesse de Cleves (Delannoy) (co-sc) 1963 Anna la bonne (Jutra, from song by Cocteau) 1965 Thomas l’imposteur (Franju) (co-sc) 1970 La Voix humaine (Delouche, from Poulenc and Cocteau opera) Publications By COCTEAU: books— L’Aigle à deux têtes, Paris, 1946. Diary of a Film [La Belle et la bête], New York, 1950. Cocteau on the Film, New York, 1954. Jean Cocteau par lui-même, edited by André Fraigneau, Paris, 1957. COCTEAU DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 202 Jean Cocteau Le Sang d’un poète, with drawings, Monaco, 1957. Le Testament d’Orphée (filmscript), Paris, 1961. The Eagle with Two Heads, London, 1962. The Journals of Jean Cocteau, edited by Wallace Fowlie, Blooming- ton, Indiana, 1964. The Difficulty of Being, London, 1966. Two Screenplays [The Blood of a Poet and The Testament of Orpheus], New York, 1968. Beauty and the Beast, edited by Robert Hammond, New York, 1970. Professional Secrets: An Autobiography of Jean Cocteau, edited by Robert Phelps, New York, 1970. Cocteau on the Film, New York, 1972. Jean Cocteau: Three Screenplays [The Eternal Return, Beauty and the Beast, and Orpheus], New York, 1972. Le Testament d’Orphée; Le Sang d’un poète, Monaco, 1983. Past Tense, Volume 1: Diaries, London, 1987. Souvenir portraits: Paris in the Belle Epoque, translated by Jesse Browner, London, 1990. Erotica: Drawings, London, 1991. Correspondance: Jacques-Emile Blanche, Jean Cocteau, Paris, 1993. Les parents terribles, translated by Simon Callow, London, 1994. By COCTEAU: articles— Interview with Francis Koval, in Sight and Sound (London), August 1950. ‘‘Conversation,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), July/September 1952. ‘‘Cocteau,’’ in Film (London), March 1955. Interview in Film Makers on Filmmaking, edited by Harry Geduld, Bloomington, Indiana, 1967. ‘‘Four Letters by Jean Cocteau to Leni Riefenstahl,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1973. ‘‘Aphorismes cinématographiques,’’ and ‘‘Cocteau face a La Belle et la bête,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), July/September 1973. ‘‘Encuento con Chaplin,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 126, 1989. On COCTEAU: books— Crosland, Margaret, Jean Cocteau, London, 1955. Dauven, Jean, Jean Cocteau chez les Sirènes, Paris, 1956. Pillaudin, Roger, Jean Cocteau tourne son dernier film, Paris, 1960. Fraigneau, André, Cocteau, New York, 1961. COCTEAUDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 203 Fowlie, Wallace, Jean Cocteau: The History of a Poet’s Age, Bloom- ington, Indiana, 1968. Lannes, Roger, Jean Cocteau, Paris, 1968. Sprigge, Elizabeth, and Jean-Jacques Kihm, Jean Cocteau: The Man and the Mirror, New York, 1968. Gilson, René, Cocteau, New York, 1969. Armes, Roy, French Cinema since 1946: Vol. 1—The Great Tradi- tion, New York, 1970. Steegmuller, Francis, Cocteau, Boston, 1970. Evans, Arthur, Jean Cocteau and His Films of Orphic Identity, Philadelphia, 1977. Anderson, Alexandra, and Carol Saltus, editors, Jean Cocteau and the French Scene, New York, 1984. de Miomandre, Philippe, Moi, Jean Cocteau, Paris, 1985. Keller, Marjorie, The Untutored Eye: Childhood in the Films of Cocteau, Cornell and Brakhage, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1986. Peters, Arthur King, Jean Cocteau and His World: An Illustrated Biography, London, 1987. Knapp, Bettina L., Jean Cocteau, Boston, 1989. Mourgue, Gérard, Cocteau, Paris, 1990. Marais, Jean, L’inconcevable Jean Cocteau, Monaco, 1993. Soleil, Christian, Jean Cocteau: Le Bonheur Fabriqué, Le Chambon- Fuegerolles, France, 1993. Tsakiridou, Cornelia A., editor, Reviewing Orpheus: Essays on the Cinema and Art of Jean Cocteau, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, 1997. On COCTEAU: articles— Lambert, Gavin, ‘‘Cocteau and Orpheus,’’ in Sequence (London), Autumn 1950. Oxenhandler, Neal, ‘‘On Cocteau,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1964. Durgnat, Raymond, ‘‘Images of the Mind—Part 13: Time and Timelessness,’’ in Films and Filming (London), July 1969. Amberg, G., ‘‘The Testament of Jean Cocteau,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Winter 1971/72. ‘‘Cocteau Issue’’ of Image et Son (Paris), June/July 1972. ‘‘Cocteau Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), July/Septem- ber 1973. Renaud, T., ‘‘Retrospective: Jean Cocteau. Un cineaste? Peut-etre. Un auteur? Certainement.,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), December 1973. Gow, Gordon, ‘‘Astonishments: Magic Film from Jean Cocteau,’’ and ‘‘The Mirrors of Life,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January and February 1978. ‘‘Cocteau Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 May 1983. ‘‘Cocteau Supplement,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), May 1983. Milani, R., ‘‘Cocteau dell’immaginario,’’ in Filmcritica (Florence), June 1984. Combs, Richard, ‘‘Dream work,’’ in Listener (London), 29 May 1986. Spiess, E., ‘‘Ein schillernder Paradiesvogel verirrt sich in eine Ruinenlandschaft. Eine Betrachtung zu Jean Cocteau,’’ in Filmfaust (Frankfurt/Main), vol. 13, July-September 1989. Prudenzi, A., ‘‘Cocteau poeta dell’illusione,’’ in Immagine (Rome), no. 13, Winter 1989–1990. Gauteur, C., ‘‘Cocteau contre Cocteau,’’ in Revue de la Cinémathèque (Montreal), no. 464, October 1990. ‘‘France’s anti-Cartesian,’’ in The Economist (London), 9 May 1992. Perry, Joseph, ‘‘L’enfant Terrible: The ‘Cinematographic’ Poetry of Jean Cocteau,’’ Filmfax (Evanston, Illinois), no. 36, December- January, 1992–93. Beylot, P., ‘‘Premières images,’’ in Focales, 1993. Vajdovich, G., ‘‘Uralom az id? felett,’’ in Filmkultura (Budapest), vol. 30, December 1994. *** Jean Cocteau’s contribution to cinema is as eclectic as one would expect from a man who fulfilled on occasion the roles of poet and novelist, dramatist and graphic artist, and dabbled in such diverse media as ballet and sculpture. In addition to his directorial efforts, Cocteau also wrote scripts and dialogue, made acting appearances, and realized amateur films. His work in other media has inspired adaptations by a number of filmmakers ranging from Rossellini to Franju and Demy, and he himself published several collections of eclectic and stimulating thoughts on the film medium. Though Cocteau took his first real steps as a filmmaker at the very beginning of the sound era, his period of greatest involvement was in the 1940s, when he contributed to the scripts of a half-dozen films, at times dominating his director (as in L’Eternel Retour), at other times submitting to the discipline of contributing to another’s vision (as in his dialogue for Bresson’s Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne). In addition, he directed his own adaptations of such diverse works as the fairy tale La Belle et la bête, his own period melodrama L’Aigle à deux têtes, and his intense domestic drama, Les Parents terribles. But Cocteau’s essential work in cinema is contained in just three wholly original films in which he explores his personal myth of the poet as Orpheus: Le Sang d’un poète, Orphée, and Le Testament d’Orphée. Though made over a period of thirty years, these three works have a remarkable unity of inspiration. They are works of fascination in a double sense. They convey Cocteau’s fascination with poetry and his own creative processes, and at the same time display his openness to all the ways of fascinating an audience, utilizing stars and trickery, found material and sheer fantasy. The tone is characterized by a unique mixture of reality and dream, and his definition of Le Sang d’un pòete as ‘‘a realistic documentary of unreal events’’ is a suitable description of all his finest work. Crucial to the lasting quality of Cocteau’s work, which at times seems so light and fragile, is the combination of artistic seriousness and persistent, but unemphatic, self-mockery. For this reason his enclosed universe, with its curiously idyllic preoccupation with death, is never oppressive or constricting; instead, it allows the spectator a freedom rare in mainstream cinema of the 1930s and 1940s. In technical terms Cocteau displays a similar ability to cope with the contributions of totally professional collaborators, while still retain- ing a disarming air of ingenuousness, which has sometimes been wrongly characterized as amateurism. Reviled by the Surrealists as a literary poseur in the 1920s and 1930s and distrusted as an amateur in the 1940s, Cocteau nonetheless produced films of lasting quality. In retrospect he is to be admired for the freedom with which he expressed a wholly personal vision and for his indifference to the given rules of a certain period of French ‘‘quality’’ filmmaking. He was one of the few French filmmakers of the past to whom the directors of the New Wave could turn for inspiration, and it is totally fitting that Cocteau’s farewell to cinema, Le Testament d’Orphée, should have been produced by one of the most talented of these newcomers, Fran?ois Truffaut. —Roy Armes COEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 204 COEN, Joel Nationality: American. Born: Minneapolis, 1955. Education: Attended Simon’s Rock College, Massachusetts, and New York University. Family: Married actress Frances McDormand, 1984. Career: Worked as an assistant film editor on Fear No Evil and Evil Dead; collaborated on screenplays with brother Ethan Coen (b. 1958); with Ethan produced first film, Blood Simple, 1984. Awards: Grand Jury Prize, U.S. Film Festival, for Blood Simple, 1984; Best Director Award, Cannes Film Festival, for Barton Fink, 1991. Ad- dress: c/o UTA, 9560 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 500, Beverly Hills, California 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director and Co-scriptwriter: (All co-written and produced by brother, Ethan Coen) 1984 Blood Simple 1987 Raising Arizona 1990 Miller’s Crossing 1991 Barton Fink 1994 The Hudsucker Proxy 1996 Fargo 1998 The Big Lebowski 2000 To the White Sea Publications By COEN: articles— ‘‘Bloodlines,’’ an interview with Hal Hinson, in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1985. ‘‘Too Weird for Words,’’ an interview with Geoff Andrew, in Time Out (London), 5 February 1992. Interview, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), July 1994. Interview, in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 38, no. 5(266), 1996. ‘‘Back to Basics,’’ an interview with P. Zimmerman, in Film Threat (Beverly Hills), April 1996. ‘‘Hell Freezes Over,’’ an interview with Lizzie Francke, in Sight and Sound (London), May 1996. ‘‘Pros and Coens,’’ an interview with Geoff Andrew, in Time Out (London), 15 May 1996. Interview, in Positif (Paris), May 1998. On COEN: books— Korte, Peter, and Georg Seesslen, Joel and Ethan Coen, Boston, 1995. Preston Robertson, William, and others, The Big Lebowski: The Making of a Coen Brothers Film, New York, 1998. Woods, Paul, editor, Blood Siblings: The Cinema of Joel and Ethan Coen, London, 1999. Bergan, Ronald, Coen Brothers, New York, 2000. Mottram, James, Coen Brothers, New York, 2000. On COEN: articles— Ansen, D., ‘‘The Coens: Partners in Crime,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 21 January 1985. Breitbart, E., ‘‘Leaving the Seventies Behind: Four Independents Find Happiness Making Movies in the Manner of Hollywood,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), May 1985. Edelstein, D., ‘‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), April 1987. Handelman, D., ‘‘The Brothers from Another Planet,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 21 May 1987. Seidenberg, Robert, ‘‘Miller’s Crossing: John Turturro Meets the Coen Brothers,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), March 1990. Valot, J., ‘‘Joel Coen,’’ in Revue du Cinèma (Paris), May 1990. Sharkey, Betsy, ‘‘Movies of Their Very Own,’’ in New York Times Magazine, July 8, 1990. Richardson, J. H., ‘‘The Joel and Ethan Coen Story,’’ in Premiere, October 1990. Robertson, William Preston, ‘‘What’s the Goopus?,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), August 1991. Horowitz, M., ‘‘Coen Brothers A-Z: The Big Two-headed Picture,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1991. Ferguson, K., ‘‘From Two Directions,’’ in Film Monthly, Febru- ary 1992. Giavarini, J., ‘‘Joel et Ethan Coen,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1992. Clark, John, ‘‘Strange Bedfellows,’’ in Premiere, April 1994. Robertson, William Preston, ‘‘The Coen Brothers Made Easy,’’ in Playboy, April 1994. Friend, Tad, ‘‘Inside the Coen Heads,’’ in Vogue, April 1994. Lally, K., ‘‘Up North with the Coen Brothers,’’ in Film Journal (New York), February 1996. Burdeau, Emmanuel, and Nicolas Saada, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1996. *** Although Joel Coen had worked as an assistant film editor on commercial projects and had made valuable contacts within the industry (particularly director Sam Raimi), he and brother Ethan decided to produce their first feature film independently, raising $750,000 to shoot their jointly written script for Blood Simple, a neo- noir thriller with a Dashiell Hammett title and a script full of homages to Jim Thompson. Though Joel received screen credit for direction and Ethan for the script, this distinction is somewhat artificial both here and in their subsequent productions. Joel and Ethan co-write their scripts and meticulously prepare storyboards in a collaborative effort unusual for the American cinema (the closest analogy perhaps comes from abroad with the British team of Powell and Pressburger). Blood Simple was hardly the first film the brothers Coen made together. Addicted to TV and movies at an early age, they spent a good deal of their childhood writing films and then shooting them on a Super-8 camera. Movie brats in the Spielberg tradition, Ethan and Joel desired commercial success but were determined to retain control over what they produced. Hence their initial decision to make an independent film rather than continue working in an industry where Joel was already beginning to be established. COENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 205 Joel Coen directing Barton Fink A hit with many on the art film/independent circuit but also a commercial success in art house and cable release, Blood Simple was the perfect choice to achieve this aim. Here was a film that succeeded because of its individual, even quirky vision. Using the film noir conventions popular with American audiences for half a century, the Coens offer a clear narrative, solidly two-dimensional characters, and the requisite amount of riveting violent spectacle (including one scene that pictures a dying man buried alive and another featuring close-ups of a white-gloved hand suddenly impaled by a knife). Blood Simple, however, is by no means an ordinary thriller. The plot turns expertly and unexpectedly on a number of dramatic ironies (no character knows what the spectator does, and even the spectator is sometimes taken by surprise). Unlike hardboiled narrative à la Raymond Chandler, the narrative delights in its Aristo- telian neatness, in its depiction of experiences that make perfect sense, climaxing in a poetic justice that the main character and narrator, a venal private detective, finds humorous even as it destroys him. Thematically, the Coens offer a compelling analysis of mauvaise foi in the Sartrean vein as they develop characters doomed by bad intentions or a failure to trust and communicate (an existentialist theme that results perhaps from the fact that Ethan majored in philosophy at Princeton). Blood Simple’s most notable feature, how- ever, is an expressive stylization of both sound and image that creates an experiential correlative for the viewer of the characters’ confusion and disorientation. These effects are achieved by a Wellesian reper- toire of tricks (wide-angle lenses, tracking set-ups, unusual framings, an artfully selected score of popular music, etc.). The film noir genre naturalizes this stylization to some degree, but Blood Simple exudes a riotous self-consciousness, a delight in the creation of an exciting cinema that offers moments of pure visceral or visual pleasure. Though some critics thought Blood Simple a kind of pointless film-school exercise, audiences were impressed—as were the major studios who competed for releasing rights to the brothers’ next project. The Coens’ subsequent five films have all been made with substantial commercial backing; but these films continue to be independent in the sense that none fits into the routine categories of contemporary Hollywood production. In fact, the art cinema tradition of the seventies has been kept alive by the Coens and the few other mavericks (e.g., Quentin Tarantino) who have emerged to prominence. The least successful of these films—Miller’s Crossing—is the most traditional. A ‘‘realistic’’ drama (though the scenes of violence are highly stylized) with a well-developed plot line, this saga of COOLIDGE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 206 Prohibition-era mobsters, like Scorsese’s Goodfellas (released the year before), aims to debunk the romantic tradition of the gangster film most tellingly exemplified by The Godfather (1972). The central character, a ‘‘good guy’’ high up in the organization, confusingly seems more a victim of his poor circumstances than a force to be reckoned with. The plot is otherwise dependent upon unbelievable characters and unlikely twists and turns. Some elements of parody are present, but are not well integrated into the film’s structure, indicating that the Coens were uncertain about how to proceed, whether to make a gangster film or send up the conventions of the genre. The other films share a different representational regime, a magi- cal realism that does not demand verisimilitude or logical closure, but has the virtue—for the Coens—of permitting more stylization, more moments of pure cinema. Raising Arizona and The Hudsucker Proxy offer postmodern versions of the traditional Hollywood madcap comedy; in both films, a series of zany adventures climax in romantic happiness for the male and female leads. Raising Arizona concerns the ultimately unsuccessful attempt of a zany and childless couple to kidnap a baby; The Hudsucker Proxy sends up, in mock Capra-corn style, the triumph of the virtuous, if obtuse, hero over the evil system that attempts to use him for its own purposes. Barton Fink, in contrast, is a darker story, heavily indebted to German Expressionism (an influence to be noted as well in the elaborately artificial sets and unnaturalistic acting of The Hudsucker Proxy). The film’s main character is a thirties stereotype, a left-wing Jewish playwright committed to representing the miseries of what he calls ‘‘the common man.’’ Hired away from Broadway by a Hollywood studio, he embarks unwittingly on a penitential journey that lays bare the forces of the id both in the apparently common man he meets (a salesman who is actually a serial killer) and in himself (abandoning his writing responsibility, he finds himself at film’s end at the beach with the beautiful woman whose picture he first saw in a calendar). All three of these films abound in bravura stylizations. A man dives out a skyscraper window and the camera traces the stages of his fall (Hudsucker); a baby’s meanderings across the floor are captured by a camera literally at floor level (an elaborate mirror shot in Arizona); wallpaper peels off a hotel room wall revealing something warm and gooey like human flesh underneath (Barton Fink); exagger- ated sounds—a mosquito’s flight, a noisy bed, a whirling fan— perfectly express the main character’s self-absorption and anxiety (Barton Fink again). With Fargo, their 1996 release, the Coen brothers return to the crime drama. Set primarily in Minnesota, the film follows an immensely likable and very pregnant sheriff (played by Frances McDormand, Joel Coen’s wife) as she pursues a couple of dimwitted and cold-blooded kidnappers. A macabre thriller veined with moments of comedy, Fargo features the Coen brothers’ trade- mark cinematic flair (though the landscape mutes this somewhat) and intelligent narrative focus. The Coens appear to have abandoned for good the stylized realism and Aristotelian narrative that made Blood Simple such a success. But in an era that has witnessed the commercial success of cartoonish anti- naturalism (Dick Tracy, the Batman films), their concern with strik- ing visual and aural effects may provide the basis for a long career, though difficult films like Barton Fink, despite critical acclaim, will never gain a wide audience. —R. Barton Palmer COOLIDGE, Martha Nationality: American. Born: New Haven, Connecticut, 17 August 1946. Education: Studied animation at the Rhode Island School of Design; studied filmmaking at New York University’s School of Film and Television, where she earned an MFA; also studied film at the School of Visual Arts and Columbia University. Career: Acted with Blackfriars, a Cheshire, Connecticut, acting company, 1960s; began making short films while studying at the Rhode Island School of Design, worked behind the camera on commercials and documentary shorts, and produced a children’s program for Canadian television, mid-to-late 1960s; directed first documentary, David: Off and On, 1972; directed an episode of the TV series Winners, 1978; hired by Francis Coppola’s Zoetrope Studio to develop the film Photoplay, which never was produced, 1978; directed first feature, City Girl, which was not released for two years, 1982; directed episodes of the TV series The Twilight Zone, 1985–1987; directed episodes of the TV series Sledge Hammer, 1986. Awards: Best Director Independent Spirit Award, for Rambling Rose, 1991; Women in Film Crystal Award, 1992; Directors Guild of America Robert B. Aldrich Achieve- ment Award, 1998. Address: 2129 Coldwater Canyon, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1972 David: Off and On (doc) (+ pr, ed) 1974 More than a School (doc) (+ ed); Old-Fashioned Woman (doc) (+ pr, ed) 1975 Not a Pretty Picture (doc) (+ sc, pr, co-ed) 1976 Employment Discrimination: The Troubleshooters (doc) 1978 Bimbo (doc) (+ pr, ed) 1980 Strawberries and Gold (for TV) 1983 Valley Girl (Bad Boyz, Rebel Dreams) 1984 City Girl (+ pr) (completed in 1982); Joy of Sex 1985 Real Genius 1988 Plain Clothes (for TV); Roughhouse 1989 Trenchcoat in Paradise (for TV) 1990 The Friendly; Rope Dancing 1991 Bare Essentials (for TV); Rambling Rose 1992 Crazy in Love (for TV) 1993 Lost in Yonkers 1994 Angie 1995 Three Wishes 1997 Out to Sea 1999 Introducing Dorothy Dandridge (for TV) 2000 If These Walls Could Talk 2 (co-d) (for TV) Other Films: 1971 Passing Quietly Through (pr, ed) 1979 The London Connection (The Omega Connection) (Clouse) co-story) 1989 That’s Adequate (Hurwitz) (ro as Herself) 1993 In Search of Oz (for TV) (doc) (ro as Interviewee) 1994 Beverly Hills Cop III (Landis) (ro as Security Woman) 2000 Rip Girls (Chopra) (exec-pr) COOLIDGEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 207 Martha Coolidge Publications By COOLIDGE: articles— Interview with Chris Chase, in New York Times, 6 May 1983. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Martha Coolidge,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), June 1984. Interview with Claire-France Perez, in L.A. Woman (Los Angeles), August 1985. ‘‘Close Up,’’ interview with Debby Birns, in American Premiere (Beverly Hills), September 1985. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: Martha Coolidge,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), December 1988. ‘‘Off Screen: Martha Coolidge Gets an ‘A’,’’ interview with Renee Shafransky, in Village Voice (New York), 13 August 1995. On COOLIDGE: articles— Schwann, S., ‘‘Close-Ups: Martha Coolidge,’’ in Millimeter (New York), September 1983. Roddick, Nick, ‘‘Martha’s Bag Full of Roles,’’ in Stills (London), June/July 1984. Attanasio, Paul, ‘‘The Road to Hollywood—Director Martha Coo- lidge’s Long Trek to Real Genius,’’ in Washington Post, 7 Au- gust 1985. Klapper, Zina, ‘‘Movie Directors: Four Women Who Get to Call the Shots in Hollywood,’’ in Ms. (New York), November 1985. Cook, P., ‘‘Not a Political Picture—Martha Coolidge,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), December 1986. Bernstein, Sharon, ‘‘Women and Hollywood—It’s Still a Lousy Relationship, But Is There Hope for the Future?,’’ in Los Angeles Times, 11 November 1990. Zeitlin, M., ‘‘Martha, I Says,’’ in DGA News (Los Angeles), no. 2, 1994. Chira, Susan, ‘‘Unwed Mothers: The Scarlet Letter Returns in Pink,’’ in New York Times, 23 January 1994. Sigesmund, B. J., ‘‘Feature Filmmaker,’’ in Independent Film and Video Monthly (New York), June 1994. *** Martha Coolidge began her career as one of the high-profile women filmmakers whose initial credits parallel the rise of post- 1960s feminism. Through the 1970s she worked exclusively within the independent sector, directing a series of savvy feminist/humanist documentaries that explore political and social issues. Perhaps her COPPOLA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 208 best-known film from the period is Not a Pretty Picture, an uncom- promising, autobiographical portrait of a woman filmmaker directing a narrative re-staging of her own rape. In 1983, Coolidge ‘‘went Hollywood’’ and directed Valley Girl, a mainstream comedy as well as her first fiction feature to earn theatrical distribution. (The independently-produced City Girl was made a year earlier, but released a year later.) On one level, it is a mark of social progress that, in the intervening years, Coolidge has been able to forge a mainstream commercial career; had she been a genera- tion older, her gender would have excluded her from entering the ranks of studio directors. Yet conversely, after perusing her filmography, one might dismiss her as a careerist who sold out her artistic independence, with her early credits merely serving as her Tinseltown calling card. For after all, Coolidge is no Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, John Sayles, or Spike Lee: independent-minded filmmakers who, throughout their careers, have cannily used the system as a means to produce their own distinctive projects. It would be unjust to imply, however, that all filmmakers working within the confines of Hollywood are sell-outs. So with regard to Coolidge, more meaningful questions arise: Has she become merely a cookie cutter commercial director, content to bask in the spotlight as a Hollywood player? Or has she been able to successfully operate within the commercial constraints of the industry, directing films that are viable at the box office—and, thus, insuring that she will continue working—while maintaining a semblance of the intelligence, com- mitment, and political sensibility that characterize her early films? What can be said for Coolidge is that quite a few of her main- stream features are non-exploitive, and spotlight the trials of female characters. Yet despite their noble intentions, too many have been commercial throwaways or failed efforts. Valley Girl, a teen comedy, may be admired for transcending the limitations of its genre, and Real Genius may be lauded for its depiction of college students who are not all-consumed by sex. Yet both are disposable, forgettable satires. Lost in Yonkers, based on a Neil Simon play and Coolidge’s highest- pedigreed film, is a slightly-better-than-average adaptation. Three Wishes is a slow-moving 1950s reminiscence, while Joy of Sex is an insipid farce about a high school virgin and how she reacts when she thinks she is dying. Introducing Dorothy Dandridge, produced for television, is a by-the-numbers biography of the tragic African- American actress. Despite its star power—it features Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau—Out to Sea is a dopey comedy. Easily the apex of Coolidge’s Hollywood career is Angie, charting the plight of the independent-minded title character, a working-class Brooklynite who is being pressured to marry and, instead, decides to have a baby out of wedlock. Unsurprisingly, Coolidge’s very best features—those that offer genuine insight along with entertainment value—are independent productions. Given her cinematic origins, City Girl is a logical starting point for her narrative career: a penetrating (albeit little-seen) portrait of an ambitious young photographer and her assorted, unsat- isfactory involvements with men. By far, Coolidge’s very best film is Rambling Rose. Based on an autobiographical novel by Calder Willingham, Rambling Rose offers a compassionate portrait of the title character, a troubled, orphaned 19-year-old. Rose is a vulnerable young woman who confuses sex with affection, and the scenario records the impact she has on the family with whom she comes to live—and, in particular, on a sensitive young teen-aged boy. Angie and Rambling Rose aside, one hopes that the banal Out to Sea and the disappointing Introducing Dorothy Dandridge, her final two credits of the 1990s, do not represent the creative maturation of Martha Coolidge. —Rob Edelman COPPOLA, Francis Ford Nationality: American. Born: Detroit, Michigan, 7 April 1939. Education: Hofstra University, B.A., 1959; University of California, Los Angeles, M.F.A. in cinema, 1967. Family: Married Eleanor Neil, 1963; children: Sophia, Giancarlo (died, 1987), Roman. Career: Worked in various capacities for Roger Corman at American Interna- tional, 1962–64; director for Seven Arts, 1964–68; founder, Ameri- can Zoetrope production organization, San Francisco, 1969; director for American Conservatory Theatre and San Francisco Opera Com- pany, 1971–72; founder, with Peter Bogdanovich and William Friedkin, Directors Company, 1972; publisher, City magazine, 1975–76; opened Zoetrope Studios, San Francisco, 1980. Awards: Oscar for Best Screenplay (with Edmund H. North), for Patton, 1970; Oscar for Best Screenplay (with Mario Puzo), and Best Director Award, Directors Guild of America, for The Godfather, 1973; Palme d’or, Cannes Festival, for The Conversation, 1974; Oscars for Best Director and Best Screenplay (with Puzo) for The Godfather II, 1975; Palme d’or and FIPRESCI Prize, Cannes Festival, 1979, for Apocalypse Now, 1979. Address: Zoetrope Studios, 916 Kearny Street, San Francisco, CA 94133, U.S.A. Francis Ford Coppola COPPOLADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 209 Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1962 The Playgirls and the Bellboy (co-d, co-sc); Tonight for Sure (+ pr); 1963 The Terror (Lady of the Shadows) (co-d, + assoc pr); Dementia 13 (The Haunted and the Hunted) (co-sc) 1966 You’re a Big Boy Now 1968 Finian’s Rainbow (d only) 1969 The Rain People 1972 The Godfather (co-sc) 1974 The Conversation (+ pr); The Godfather, Part II (co-sc, + co-pr) 1979 Apocalypse Now (co-sc, + pr, role, co-mus) 1982 One from the Heart (co-sc, + pr) 1983 The Outsiders (+ pr); Rumble Fish (co-sc, + pr) 1984 The Cotton Club (co-sc) 1986 Peggy Sue Got Married (+ pr) 1987 Gardens of Stone (+ pr) 1988 Tucker: The Man and His Dream (+ pr) 1989 episode in New York Stories 1991 The Godfather, Part III 1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula (+ co-pr) 1996 Jack (+ co-pr) 1997 The Rainmaker (co-sc) Other Films: 1962 The Premature Burial (Corman) (asst-d); Tower of London (dialogue d); The Magic Voyage of Sinbad (adaptor) 1963 The Young Racers (Corman) (sound, 2nd unit ph—uncredited); Battle beyond the Sun (Corman) (sc) 1966 This Property Is Condemned (Pollack) (co-sc); Is Paris Burn- ing? (Paris br?le-t-il?) (Clément) (co-sc) 1967 Reflections in a Golden Eye (Huston) (sc) 1970 Patton (Schaffner) (co-sc) 1971 THX 1138 (Lucas) (exec pr) 1973 American Graffiti (Lucas) (exec pr) 1974 The Great Gatsby (Clayton) (sc) 1979 The Black Stallion (Ballard) (exec pr) 1982 Hammett (Wenders) (exec pr); The Escape Artist (Deschanel) (exec pr) 1983 The Black Stallion Returns (Dalva) (exec pr) 1985 Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters (Schrader) (exec pr) 1987 Tough Guys Don’t Dance (Mailer) (exec pr) 1992 Wind (exec pr) 1993 The Secret Garden (exec pr) 1994 Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (co-pr) 1995 My Family, Mi Familia (exec pr); Haunted (exec pr); Don Juan DeMarco (pr) 1996 Dark Angel (exec pr) 1997 The Odyssey (series for TV) (exec pr); Buddy (exec pr) 1998 Lanai-Loa (pr); Outrage (exec pr); Moby Dick (for TV) (exec pr); First Wave (series for TV) (exec pr) 1999 The Florentine (pr); The Virgin Suicides (pr); The Third Miracle (exec pr); Goosed (exec pr); Sleepy Hollow (exec pr) Publications By COPPOLA: book— The Cotton Club, with William Kennedy, New York, 1986. By COPPOLA: articles— ‘‘The Youth of Francis Ford Coppola,’’ an interview with R. Koszarski, in Films in Review (New York), November 1968. ‘‘The Dangerous Age,’’ an interview with John Cutts, in Films and Filming (London), May 1969. ‘‘The Making of The Conversation,’’ an interview with Brian De Palma, in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), May 1974. Interview with Marjorie Rosen, in Film Comment (New York), August 1974. ‘‘Journey up the River,’’ an interview with Greil Marcus, in Rolling Stone (New York), 1 November 1979. Interview with O. Assayas, and others, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1982. Coppola, Francis Ford, ‘‘Je me considere comme un compositeur de films,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), April 1983. ‘‘Ten Years of a Dreamer,’’ interview with Gideon Bachmann, in Stills (London), September-October 1983. ‘‘Idols of the King,’’ an interview with D. Thomson and L. Gray, in Film Comment (New York), September-October 1983. Interview in American Film (Washington, D. C.), June 1988. ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola: Promises to Keep,’’ an interview with Robert Lindsey, in New York Times Magazine, 24 July 1988. Interview with Ric Gentry, in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Spring-Summer 1987 and Fall 1988. Interview in Time Out (London), 2 November 1988. ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola,’’ an interview with L. Vincenzi, in Millime- ter, November 1990. ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola,’’ an interview with David Briskin, in Rolling Stone (New York), 7 February 1991. ‘‘Lear et l’opera: entretien avec Francis Ford Coppola,’’ an interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif, April 1991. ‘‘A Conversation with Coppola,’’ with P. Parisi, in American Cinema- tographer, August 1991. ‘‘Dracula Doesn’t Scare Coppola,’’ an interview with Janet Maslin, in New York Times, 15 November 1992. ‘‘His Bloody Valentine,’’ an interview with M. Dargis, in Village Voice (New York), 24 November 1992. Interview with P. Biskind, in Premiere (Boulder), September 1996. On COPPOLA: books— Johnson, Robert, Francis Ford Coppola, Boston, 1977. Coppola, Eleanor, Notes: On Apocalypse Now, New York, 1979. Pye, Michael, and Lynda Myles, The Movie Brats: How the Film Generation Took over Hollywood, New York, 1979. Chaillet, Jean-Paul, and Elizabeth Vincent, Francis Ford Coppola, Paris, 1984, New York, 1984. Zuker, Joel S., Francis Ford Coppola: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1984. Frundt, Bodo, and others, Francis Ford Coppola, Munich, 1985. Chown, Jeffrey, Hollywood Auteur: Francis Coppola, New York, 1988. COPPOLA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 210 Cowie, Peter, Coppola: A Biography, London, 1989, revised edition, New York, 1994. Goodwin, Michael, and Namoi Wise, On the Edge: The Life and Times of Francis Coppola, New York, 1989. Biskind, Peter, The Godfather Companion, New York, 1990. Lewis, Jon, Whom God Wishes to Destroy. . . : Francis Coppola and the New Hollywood, Durham, North Carolina, 1995. Bergan, Ronald, Francis Ford Coppola: Close up the Making of His Movies, New York, 1999. Schumacher, Michael, Francis Ford Coppola: A Filmmaker’s Life, New York, 1999. On COPPOLA: articles— Taylor, John Russell, ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1968/69. McGillivray, D., ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola,’’ in Focus on Film (Lon- don), Autumn 1972. Pearce, Christopher, ‘‘San Francisco’s Own American Zoetrope,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), October 1972. Braudy, Susan, ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola: A Profile,’’ in Atlantic Monthly (Boston), August 1976. Bock, Audie, ‘‘Zoetrope and Apocalypse Now,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), September 1979. McGilligan, Patrick, ‘‘Coppola on the Beat,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1981. Bygrave, M., and J. Goodman, ‘‘Meet Me in Las Vegas,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1981. Myles, Lynda, ‘‘The Zoetrope Saga,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1982. Benayoun, Robert, and others, ‘‘Le chat et la pendule,’’ in Positif (Paris), April 1984. Krohn, B., ‘‘Coppola des studios Zoetrope aux studios Astorias,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1984. Greene, N., ‘‘Coppola, Cimino: The Operatics of History,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Winter 1984/85. ‘‘Coppola Section,’’ in Positif (Paris), February 1985. ‘‘The Backdrop Is Only an Inch Away,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), June 1985. Turnquist, K., ‘‘Grape Expectations,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), November 1985. Braudy, Leo, ‘‘The Sacraments of Genre: Coppola, De Palma, Scorsese,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Spring 1986. Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Spring-Summer 1987. Kolker, Robert, ‘‘Francis Coppola,’’ in A Cinema of Loneliness: Penn, Kubrick, Coppola, Scorsese, New York, 1988. Phillips, Gene, ‘‘Francis Coppola,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March 1989. Lourdeaux, Lee, ‘‘Francis Ford Coppola,’’ in Italian and Irish Filmmakers in America: Ford, Capra, Coppola, Scorsese, Phila- delphia, 1990. Bookbinder, Robert, ‘‘The Godfather, The Godfather, Part II,’’ in The Films of the Seventies, New York, 1990. Grant, Edmond, ‘‘Godfather III,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March-April 1991. Bawer, Bruce, ‘‘Peggy Sue Got Married,’’ in The Screenplay’s the Thing, Hamden, Connecticut, 1992. Cahir, Linda, ‘‘Narratological Parallels in Conrad’s Heart of Dark- ness and Coppola’s Apocalypse Now,’’ in Literature/Film Quar- terly (Salisbury, Maryland), Summer 1992. Greiff, Louis, ‘‘Conrad’s Ethics and Margins of Apocalypse Now,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), Summer 1992. Ehrenstein, David, ‘‘One from the Art: Dracula,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January-February 1993. Norman, Barry, ‘‘The Godfather, The Godfather, Part II,’’ in The 100 Best Films of the Century, New York, 1993. Kael, Pauline, ‘‘The Godfather, The Godfather, Part II,’’ in For Keeps, New York, 1994. Whalen, Tom, ‘‘Romancing Film: Images of Dracula,’’ in Litera- ture/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), Spring 1995. Fitzgerald, Frances, ‘‘Apocalypse Now,’’ in Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies, edited by Mark Carnes, New York, 1995. Phillips, Gene, ‘‘Darkness at Noon: Apocalypse Now,’’ in Conrad and Cinema: The Art of Adaptation, New York, 1995. Isaacs, Neil D., ‘‘Bathgate in the Time of Coppola: a Reverie,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), vol. 24, no. 1, January 1996. Scorsese, Martin, ‘‘Notre génération,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 500, March 1996. Librach, Ronald S., ‘‘A Nice Little Irony: Life Lessons,’’ in Litera- ture/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), vol. 24, no. 2, April 1996. 24 Images (Montreal), no. 81, Spring 1996. Rosenqvist, Janne, ‘‘Idiodysseia,’’ in Filmihullu (Helsinki), no. 4, 1996. Greene, R., ‘‘The Big Picture,’’ in Boxoffice (Chicago), October 1997. Lambert, S., ‘‘Trial Run,’’ in Boxoffice (Chicago), October 1997. Welsch, Tricia, ‘‘Killing Them with Tap Shoes. Violent Perform- ances in The Cotton Club,’’ in Journal of Popular Film and Television (Washington, D.C.), vol. 25, no. 4, Winter 1998. Olsen, Mark, ‘‘Grishamovies,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1998. On COPPOLA: film— Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse (TV special), 1991. *** Francis Ford Coppola became the first major American film director to emerge from a university degree program in filmmaking. He received his Master of Cinema degree from UCLA in 1968, after submitting his first film of consequence, You’re a Big Boy Now (1967), a free-wheeling comedy about a young man on the brink of manhood, to the university as his master’s thesis. The Rain People (1969), based on an original scenario of his own, followed in due course. The plot of this tragic drama concerns a depressed housewife who impulsively decides to walk out on her family one rainy morning to make a cross-country trek in her station wagon, in the hope of getting some perspective on her life. For the first time Coppola’s overriding theme, which centers on the impor- tance of the role of a family spirit in people’s lives, is clearly delineated in one of his films. Coppola’s preoccupation with the importance of family in modern society is brought into relief in his Godfather films, which depict an American family over a period of more than seventy years. Indeed, the thing that most attracted him to the project in the first place was the fact that the best-selling book on which the films are based is really the story of a family. It is about ‘‘this father and his sons,’’ he says, CORMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 211 ‘‘and questions of power and succession.’’ In essence, The Godfather (1972) offers a chilling depiction of the way in which young Michael Corleone’s loyalty to his flesh-and-blood family gradually turns into an allegiance to the larger Mafia family to which they in turn belong—a devotion that in the end renders him a cruel and ruthless mass murderer. With this film Coppola definitely hit his stride as a filmmaker, and the picture was an enormous critical and popular success. The Godfather II (1974) treats events that happened before and after the action covered in the first film. The second Godfather movie not only chronicles Michael’s subsequent career as head of the ‘‘family business,’’ but also presents, in flashback, the early life of his father in Sicily, as well as his rise to power in the Mafia in New York City’s Little Italy. The Godfather II, like The Godfather, was a suc- cess both with the critics and the public, and Coppola won Oscars for directing the film, co-authoring the screenplay, and co-producing the best picture of the year. In 1990 he made his third Godfather film. This trilogy of movies, taken together, represents one of the supreme achievements of the cinematic art. In contrast to epic films like the Godfather series, The Outsiders was conceived on a smaller scale; it revolves around a gang of underprivileged teenage boys growing up in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in the 1960s. The Outsiders was a box-office hit, as was Peggy Sue Got Married, a remarkable fantasy. The title character is a woman approaching middle age who passes out at a high-school reunion and wakes up back in high school in 1960. But she brings with her on her trip down memory lane a forty-two-year-old mind, and hence views things from a more mature perspective than she possessed the first time around. Coppola has made two films about the Vietnam War. Apocalypse Now, the first major motion picture about the war, is a king-sized epic shot on location in the Philippines; and it contains some of the most extraordinary combat footage ever filmed. But there are no such stunning battle sequences in its companion film, Gardens of Stone, since it takes place state-side, and is concerned with the homefront during the same period. His next subject was a biographical film about Preston Tucker, a maverick automobile designer, titled Tucker: The Man and His Dream. Coppola contends that Tucker developed plans for a car that was way ahead of its time in terms of engineering; yet the auto industry at large stubbornly resisted his ideas. Unfortunately, Coppola comments, creative people do not always get a chance to exercise their creativity. Coppola demonstrated once more that he had mastered his craft in making Bram Stoker’s Dracula. In it he created a more faithful rendering of the Stoker novel than had been the case with previous film versions of the celebrated horror tale, and the film turned out to be a huge critical and popular success. Francis Coppola is one creative person who has continued to exercise his considerable talent through- out his career. Admittedly, he has had his occasional failure, such as the off-center teen movie Rumble Fish (1983). But the majority of the films he has directed over the years have demonstrated that he is one of the most gifted directors to come across the Hollywood horizon since Stanley Kubrick. Coppola himself observes that he looks upon the movies he has directed in the past as providing him with the sort of experience that will help him to make better films in the future. So the only thing for a filmmaker to do, he concludes, is to just keep going. —Gene D. Phillips CORMAN, Roger Nationality: American. Born: Roger William Corman in Detroit, Michigan, 5 April 1926. Education: Attended Beverly Hills High School; Stanford University, California, engineering degree; Oxford University, one term, 1950. Military Service: Served in United States Navy during World War II. Family: Married Julie Halloran, 1969, one daughter, two sons. Career: Messenger boy, Twentieth Century-Fox, then television stagehand and literary agent, Holly- wood, early 1950s; scriptwriter and producer, then director and producer, mainly for American International Pictures (AIP), from 1953; directed first film, Guns West, 1954; founder and director of production and distribution company New World Pictures, 1970–83; founded production company New Horizons Pictures, 1983, and distribution company Concorde, 1985; set up Brentwood TV com- pany, 1990. Address: c/o New Horizons Production Company, 11600 San Vicente Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90049, U.S.A. Films as Producer and Director: 1954 Guns West 1955 Apache Woman; Day the World Ended 1956 The Oklahoma Woman; It Conquered the World; Gunslinger; Swamp Woman; The Undead 1957 She-Gods of Shark Reef (Shark Reef); Naked Paradise; Not of This Earth; Rock All Night; Attack of the Crab Monsters; Carnival Rock; Teenage Doll; Sorority Girl (The Bad One); Roger Corman CORMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 212 The Saga of the Viking Women and Their Voyage to the Waters of the Great Sea Serpent (Viking Women and the Sea Serpent; Viking Women) 1958 War of the Satellites (+ role); Machine Gun Kelly; Teenage Caveman (Out of the Darkness); I, Mobster (The Mobster); Last Woman on Earth (+ role) 1959 The Wasp Woman (+ role); A Bucket of Blood 1960 Ski Troop Attack (+ role); The Fall of the House of Usher (House of Usher); The Little Shop of Horrors (+ role); Creature from the Haunted Sea (+ role); Atlas 1961 Pit and the Pendulum; The Intruder (I Hate Your Guts) 1962 The Premature Burial; Tales of Terror; Tower of London 1963 The Raven; The Young Racers (+ role); The Haunted Palace; The Terror; X (The Man with the X-Ray Eyes) 1964 The Secret Invasion; The Masque of the Red Death; The Tomb of Ligeia 1966 The Wild Angels 1967 The St. Valentine’s Day Massacre 1969 What’s In It for Harry (for TV) 1970 Gass-s-s-s, or It Became Necessary to Destroy the World in Order to Save It 1971 Von Richthofen and Brown (The Red Baron) 1989 Frankenstein Unbound Films as Producer or Executive Producer: 1954 Highway Dragnet (Juran) (+ co-sc); Monster from the Ocean Floor (Ordung); The Fast and the Furious (Ireland and Sampson) 1955 Beast with 1,000,000 Eyes (Kramarsky) 1958 Stake out on Dope Street (Kershner); The Cry Baby (Addiss); Monster from Galaxy 27 (Kowalski); Hot Car Girl (Kowalski); Night of the Blood Beast (Kowalski); The Brain Eaters (Ve Sota); Paratroop Command (Witney); The Wild Ride (Berman) 1959 Tank Commando (Tank Commandos) (Topper); Crime and Punishment U.S.A. (Sanders); High School Big Shot (The Young Sinners) (Rapp); Attack of the Giant Leeches (De- mons of the Swamp) (Kowalski); Beast from a Haunted Cave (Hellman); T-Bird Gang (The Pay-Off) (Harbinger); Battle of Blood Island (Rapp) 1961 Night Tide (Harrington); The Mermaids of Tiburon (Aquasex) (Lamb) 1962 The Magic Voyage of Sinbad (Posco) (re-edited version of Ptuschko’s 1952 film Sadko); Battle beyond the Sun (Colchart) (re-edited version of Kozyr and Karyukov’s 1960 film Nebo zovet/The Heavens Call) 1963 Dementia (The Haunted and the Hunted) (Coppola) 1965 The Girls on the Beach (Witney); Sky Party (Rafkin); Beach Ball (Weinrib); The Shooting (Hellman); Ride in the Whirl- wind (Hellman); Blood Bath (Hill and Rothman) 1966 Queen of Blood (Harrington) 1967 Targets (Bogdanovich); Devil’s Angels (Haller) 1969 The Dunwich Horror (Haller); Naked Angels (Clark); Pit Stop (Hill); Paddy (Haller) 1970 Student Nurses (Rothman); Angels Die Hard! (Compton) 1971 Angels Hard as They Come (Viola); Women in Cages (de Leon); Private Duty Nurses (Armitage); The Big Doll House (Hill); The Velvet Vampire (Rothman) 1972 The Final Comedown (Williams); Boxcar Bertha (Scorsese); The Big Bird Cage (Hill); The Unholy Rollers (Zimmerman); Night Call Nurses (Kaplan); Fly Me (Santiago); The Young Nurses (Kimbro); The Hot Box (Viola); Night of the Cobra Woman (Meyer) 1973 I Escaped from Devil’s Island (Meyer); The Arena (Carver); The Student Teachers (Kaplan); Tender Loving Care (Naughty Nurses) (Edmonds) 1974 Cheap (Swenson); Candy Stripe Nurses (Holleb); Cockfighter (Born to Kill) (Hellman); Big Bad Mama (Carver); Caged Heat (Demme); TNT Jackson (Santiago); Street Girls (Miller); The Woman Hunt (Romero) 1975 Capone (Carver); Death Race 2000 (Bartel); Crazy Mama (Demme); Summer School Teachers (Peeters); Dark Town Strutters (Witney); Cover Girl Models (Santiago) 1976 Hollywood Boulevard (Arkush and Dante); Fighting Mad (Demme); Cannonball (Carquake) (Bartel); Jackson County Jail (Miller); Nashville Girl (New Girl in Town) (Trikonis); Moving Violation (Dubin); God Told Me To (Demon) (Cohen); Dynamite Women (The Great Texas Dynamite Chase) (Pressman); Eat My Dust! (Wilson) 1977 Black Oak Conspiracy (Kelljan); Grand Theft Auto (Howard); I Never Promised You a Rose Garden (Page); Thunder and Lightning (Allen); Andy Warhol’s Bad (Johnson); Moon- shine County Express (Trikonis); Dirty Duck (Swenson); Maniac (Assault on Paradise) (Compton); A Hero Ain’t Nothin’ but a Sandwich (Nelson) 1978 Deathsport (Suso and Arkush); Piranha (Dante); Avalanche (Allen); Outside Chance (Miller); The Bees (Zacharias) 1979 Rock ‘n’ Roll High School (Arkush); Saint Jack (Bogdanovich) 1980 Battle beyond the Stars (Colchart) 1981 Smokey Bites the Dust (Griffith); Galaxy of Terror (Clark) 1982 Forbidden World (Holzman) 1983 Star Child (Cohne); Space Raiders (Howard Cohen); Subur- bia (Spheeris); Warrior and the Sorceress (Broderick) 1984 Love Letters (Jones); Deathstalker (John Watson) 1985 Barbarian Queen (Oliveira); Streetwalkin’ (Freeman) 1986 Cocaine Wars (Oliveira), Big Bad Mama II (Wynorski) 1987 Munchies (Hirsch); Stripped to Kill (Ruben); The Lawless Land (Hess); Amazons (Sessa); Slumber Party Massa- cre (Amy Jones); Hour of the Assassin (Llosa); Sweet Revenge (Sobel) 1988 The Drifter (Brand); Daddy’s Boys (Minion); Half Life (Ruben); Saturday the 14th Strikes Back (Howard Cohen); Nightfall (Mayersberg); Dangerous Love (Ollstein); Watchers (Hess) 1989 Two to Tango (Oliveira); Crime Zone (Llosa); Stripped to Kill (Shea Ruben); Dance of the Damned (Shea Ruben); The Terror Within (Notz); Time Trackers (Howard Cohen); Bloodfist (Winkless); Masque of the Red Death (Brand); Wizards of the Lost Kingdom II (Griffith); Heroes Stand Alone (Griffiths); Transylvania Twist (Wynorski) 1990 Overexposed (Brand); Streets (Shea Ruben); Morella (Wynorski); Cry in the Wild (Griffiths); Back to Back (Kincade); Primary Target (Henderson); Watchers II (Notz); Silk 2 (Santiago); Full Fathom Five (Franklin); Bloodfist II (Blumenthal) 1991 Terror Within II (Stevens); Hollywood Boulevard (Dante and Arkush); Rock ‘n’ Roll High School Forever (Feldman); Futurekick (Klaus) CORMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 213 1992 Play Murder for Me (Oliveira); Eye of the Eagle 3 (Santiago); In the Heat of Passion (Flender); Deathstalker 4 (Hill); Bloodfist 3 (Sassone); Immortal Sins (Hachuel); Berlin Conspiracy (Winkless); Field of Fire (Santiago); Dance with Death (Moore); Ultra Violet (Griffiths); Bodywaves (Pesce); Blackbelt (C.P. Moore); Sorority House Massacre 2 (Wynorski); Munchie (Wynorski); Body Chemistry 2 (Simon); Assassination Game (Winfrey); Final Embrace (Sassone); Homicidal Impulse (Tausik); Bloodfist 4 (Ziller) 1993 Firehawk (Santiago); To Sleep with a Vampire (Friedman); Stepmonster (Stanford); Dracula Rising (Gallo); Carnosaur (Simon); 800 Leagues down the Amazon (Llosa); Live by the Fist (Santiago); Dragonfire (Jacobson) 1994 Cheyenne Warrior (Griffiths); Unborn 2 (Jacobson); Watch- ers 3 (Stanford); In the Heat of Passion II (Cyran); Reflec- tions in the Dark (Purdy) 1995 Carnosaur 2 (Morneau); Spy Within (Railsback); Crazysitter (McDonald); Dillinger and Capone (Purdy); Twisted Love (Lottimer) (exec pr); One Night Stand (Shire) (exec pr) 1996 Vampirella (Wynorski) (exec pr); The Unspeakable (McCain) (exec pr); Subliminal Seduction (Stevens) (exec pr); Rum- ble in the Streets (McCormick) (exec pr); Last Exit to Earth (Shea) (exec pr); Ladykiller (Winkless); Humanoids from the Deep (Yonis—for TV) (exec pr); House of the Damned (Levy) (exec pr); Death Game (Cheveldave—for TV); Bloodfist VIII: Trained to Kill (Jacobson) (exec pr); Black Scorpion II: Aftershock (Winfrey) (exec pr); Black Rose of Harlem (Gallo) (exec pr); Bio-Tech Warrior (McCormick) (exec pr); Alien Avengers (Spiro) (exec pr); Carnosaur 3: Primal Species (Winfrey) 1997 Urban Justice (Payne) (exec pr); Stripteaser II (Ernest) (exec pr); Starquest II (Gallo) (exec pr); Shadow Dancer (M.P. Girard) (exec pr); The Sea Wolf (McDonald) (exec pr); Overdrive (Spiro) (exec pr); Macon County Jail (Muspratt) (exec pr); Haunted Sea (Golden) (exec pr); Future Fear (Baumander) (exec pr); Falling Fire (D’Or) (exec pr); Eruption (Gibby) (exec pr); Don’t Sleep Alone (Andrew) (exec pr); Detonator (Clancy) (exec pr); Criminal Affairs (Cullinane) (exec pr); Club Vampire (Ruben) (exec pr); Circuit Breaker (Muspratt) (exec pr); Born Bad (Yonis) (exec pr); Black Thunder (Jacobson); Alien Avengers II (Payne) (exec pr); Spacejacked (Cullinane) (exec pr) 1998 Stray Bullet (Wood) (exec pr); Running Woman (Samuels); Watchers Reborn (Buechler); A Very Unlucky Lepre- chaun (Kelly) 1999 The Protector (McCormick); The Phantom Eye (Gibby— mini for TV) (+ role as Dr. Gorman); The Haunting of Hell House (Marcus); Shepherd 2000 The Doorway; The Suicide Club Other Films: 1967 A Time for Killing (The Long Ride Home) (Karlson) (uncredited co-d); Wild Racers (Haller) (uncredited 2nd unit d) 1969 De Sade (Enfield) (uncredited co-d) 1974 The Godfather, Part II (Coppola) (role) 1980 The Howling (Dante) (role) 1983 Der Stand der Dinge (The State of Things) (Wenders) (role) 1984 Swing Shift (Demme) (role) 1991 Silence of the Lambs (Demme) (role as FBI Director Hayden Burke) 1993 Philadelphia (Demme) (role as Mr. Laird) 1995 Apollo 13 (Howard) (role as Congressman) 1997 The Second Civil War (Dante) (role as Sandy Collins) 2000 Scream 3 (Craven) (role as Studio Executive) Publications By CORMAN: book— How I Made a Hundred Movies in Hollywood and Never Lost a Dime, with Jim Jerome, New York, 1990. By CORMAN: articles— Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1963. Midi-Minuit Fantastique (Paris), no. 10–11, 1965. Image et Son (Paris), March 1967. ‘‘A Letter from Roger Corman,’’ in Take One (Montreal), July- August 1968. Interview in The Film Director as Superstar, by Joseph Gelmis, New York, 1970. Interview with Joe Medjuck, in Take One (Montreal), July-Au- gust 1970. Interview with Philip Strick, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1970. Interview with Charles Goldman, in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1971. Séquences (Montreal), October 1974. Millimeter (New York), December 1975. Interview with Bill Davidson, in New York Times Magazine, 28 December 1975. Interview in Journal of Popular Film (Washington, D.C.), vol. 5, no. 3–4, 1976. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1979. Interviews in Ecran Fantastique (Paris), no. 18, 1981, and May 1984. Interview in Films and Filming (London), November 1984. Interview with Robin Wood and Richard Lippe, in Movie (London), Winter 1986. Interview in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1988. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 463, January 1993. Interview with Mark A. Miller, in Filmfax (Evanston), July-Au- gust 1995. Interview with Edward L. Mitchell, in Filmfax (Evanston), May- June 1996. On CORMAN: books— Willemen, Paul, David Pirie, David Will, and Lynda Myles, Roger Corman: The Millenic Vision, Edinburgh, 1970. McCarthy, Todd, and Charles Flynn, editors, King of the Bs, New York, 1975. Turroni, Guiseppe, Roger Corman, Florence, 1976. di Franco, J. Philip, The Movie World of Roger Corman, New York, 1979. Hillier, Jim, and Aaron Lipstadt, Roger Corman’s New World, London, 1981. CORMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 214 Naha, Ed, The Films of Roger Corman, New York, 1982. Bourgoin, Stéphane, Roger Corman, Paris, 1983. McGee, Mark Thomas, The Story of American International Pictures, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1984. Morris, Gary, Roger Corman, Boston, 1985. Ottoson, Robert, American International Pictures, New York and London, 1985. McGee, Mark Thomas, Roger Corman: The Best of the Cheap Acts, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1988. Ray, Fred Olen, The New Poverty Row, Jefferson, North Caro- lina, 1991. Frank, Alan, The Films of Roger Corman: ‘Shooting My Way out of Trouble’, New York, 1998. Gray, Beverly, Roger Corman, Los Angeles, 2000. Silver, Alain and James Ursini, Roger Corman: Metaphysics on a Shoestring, Los Angeles, 2000. On CORMAN: articles— Monthly Film Bulletin (London), vol. 31, 1964. Positif (Paris), March 1964. Dyer, Peter John, ‘‘Z Films’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1964. Midi-Minuit Fantastique (Paris), no. 1, 1965. Film (London), no. 43, 1965. French, Philip, ‘‘Incitement against Violence’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1967–68. Wallace, Eric in Screen Education (London), July-August 1968. Jeune Cinéma (Paris), February 1969. Action (Los Angeles), July-August 1969. Montage (London), April 1970. Diehl, Digby, in Show (New York), May 1970. Ecran Fantastique (Paris), December 1970. Koszarski, Richard, in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1971. Ciné Revue (Paris), 5 February 1976. National Film Theatre booklets (London), December 1976 and January 1977. Avant-Scène (Paris), 15 May 1980. National Film Theatre booklet (London), February 1981. Chute, David, in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1982. ‘‘Corman Issue’’ of Cinema Nuovo (Turin), January-February 1984. Goldstein, Patrick, in American Film (Washington, D.C.) January- February 1985. Newman, Kim, ‘‘The Roger Corman Alumni Association,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), November and December 1985. Strick, Philip, ‘‘The Return of Roger Corman,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1986. Hillier, Jim, and Aaron Lipstadt, ‘‘The Economics of Independence: Roger Corman and New World Pictures 1970–80,’’ in Movie (London), Winter 1986. Hollywood Reporter, 26 March 1987. Exline, P., ‘‘King of the B’s,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), September 1987. Dixon, W., article in Postscript (Commerce, Texas), Fall 1988. Bourgoin, S., and F. Guerif, article in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), September 1989. Garsault, A., article in Positif (France), February 1990. Solman, G., ‘‘Roger Corman,’’ in Millimeter, May 1990. Peary, Gerald, ‘‘Roger Corman: They Call Him Cheap, Quick, and ‘America’s Greatest Independent Filmmaker,’’’ in American Film, June 1990. Combs, R., article in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1990/91. Pede, R., and D. DuFour, article in Film en Televisie (Bruxelles, Belgium), May-June 1991. Bohlin, L., and L. Holmstrom, article in Filmrutan (Sweden), 1992. Liberti, F., ‘‘Il cinema di Roger Corman,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), January-February 1993. Prudente, Rosaria, in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), January-February 1993. Soria, G., ‘‘Comix,’’ in Film Threat (Beverly Hills), February 1996. Biodrowski, S., ‘‘Roger Corman,’’ in Cinefantastique (Forest Park), vol. 27:36, no. 8, 1996. Bacal, S., ‘‘Horror Camp Fire Burns,’’ in Variety (New York), 4/10 March 1996. Marsilius, Hans J?rg, in Film-Dienst (Cologne), 9 April 1996. Alford, H., ‘‘The Merchant of Venice,’’ in Vanity Fair (New York), April 1996. Atkinson, M., ‘‘Corman’s Children,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 10 September 1996. Klady, L. ‘‘Corman Feted by L.A. Crix,’’ in Variety (New York), 28 October/3 November 1996. Scapperotti, D., ‘‘Roger Corman Presents,’’ in Cinefantastique (For- est Park), vol 27, no. 7, 1996. Oosterom, Chris and René Wolf, in Skrien (Amsterdam), February- March 1997. On CORMAN: film— The Roger Corman Special (for TV), 1995. *** Grand master and patron saint of the American exploitation film, Roger Corman has forged a reputation for creative filmmaking on means so minimal as to seem absurd. He began his career in the mid- 1950s producing and directing Westerns, gangster movies, mytho- logical ‘‘spectacles,’’ teen pictures, and sci-fi/horror films distin- guished largely by their five-digit budgets and shooting schedules as short as three days. By the early 1960s his business savvy and understanding of the developing ‘‘youth’’ market had made him the most valuable commodity at American International Pictures, and his shrewd innovations in production and distribution contributed sub- stantially to that company’s pre-eminence in the exploitation market. Backhandedly dubbed by critics ‘‘the King of Schlock’’ and ‘‘the Orson Welles of Z-Pictures,’’ Corman has become a symbol of the creativity available to those willing to accept the economic limita- tions of working outside the mainstream. As a producer, he was able to provide decisive career breaks for a number of actors (Jack Nicholson, Ellen Burstyn, Robert De Niro, Cindy Williams), screenwriters (Robert Towne), and directors (Francis Ford Coppola, Peter Bogdanovich, Martin Scorsese, Jonathan Demme) who were to rise toward the upper echelons of the New Hollywood. Meanwhile, Corman insisted on maintaining his own kingdom on the fringes. When AIP’s growing budgets and pretenses began to tighten studio COSTA-GAVRASDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 215 control over individual projects, Corman left and, in 1970, established his own studio, New World Pictures, which quickly usurped AIP’s place in the exploitation field. Corman did not direct at New World, but instead exerted a decisive influence as producer, cultivating the drive-in/inner-city audience by developing specialized sub-genres (women’s prison pictures; soft-core nurse/teacher films; hard-core action and horror movies) and a strict formula, requiring given amounts of violence, nudity, humor, and social commentary. The social element not only reflected Corman’s own attitudes (a self- characterized ‘‘liberal to radical’’ politically, he independently fi- nanced his anti-racist The Intruder when no studio would put up the money), but also an understanding of the politically disfranchised groups which comprised the New World audience. At the same time, Corman used the company to provide some of the first intelligent American marketing of foreign ‘‘art films,’’ accruing respectable successes with Bergman’s Cries and Whispers, Fellini’s Amarcord, Truffaut’s Adele H., and Kurosawa’s Dersu Uzala. Yet it would not be quite fair to dismiss Corman, as Andrew Sarris did in 1968, as a producer ‘‘miscast’’ as a director. Admittedly, at that time Corman’s most accomplished, complex, and disturbing film, Bloody Mama, was still to be made. But Corman had hit his artistic stride in the early 1960s with a series of seven flamboyantly artificial color horror films, loosely based on Poe and ranging in tone from slightly tongue-in- cheek to openly parodic. The cycle peaked with Masque of the Red Death, which made ingenious use of imagery borrowed from Bergman’s Seventh Seal, to the disbelief of American critics and the delight of the Europeans, who have always seemed willing to take Corman fairly seriously. Indeed, even in the 1950s Corman had learned to make artistic virtue of low-budget tawdriness, which contributed greatly to the existential bleakness of such tortured morality plays as Teenage Doll and Sorority Girl, and to the essential minimalism of the definitive black comedies Bucket of Blood and Little Shop of Horrors. Yet, even if one is unwilling to recognize the philosophical despair of the moralist struggling against nihilism which underlies the straight- faced lunacy of It Conquered the World, the visionary metaphysics of X (The Man with the X-Ray Eyes), and even the Urbiker picture of the 1960s, The Wild Angels, Corman’s audacious independence has at least earned him the right to symbolize the myriad contradictions between artistic ambition and fiscal responsibility which seem inher- ent to commercial filmmaking. Circumstances caused Corman to put his directorial career in the deep freeze in 1971. A rare foray into TV with What’s in It for Harry (1969) had resulted in a film rejected as too violent by ABC, which released the film theatrically without a Corman credit. Studio interfer- ence with his youth movement paean, Gas-s-s-s (1970), eased his break with long-term home-base AIP, but he fared even worse when United Artists slashed his pet World War I drama, Von Richthofen and Brown (1971), into unrecognizability. It was critical savagery of the latter that drove him to assume mogul status full-time by forming New World Pictures, where he served as mentor to Ron Howard, Jonathan Kaplan, John Sayles, and Joe Dante, among others. After selling New World Pictures in 1983 and then suing the purchasers for reneging on a distribution agreement, Corman returned to the pre-sold production whirl with a new outfit, Concorde/New Horizons. Although Corman is still a vital, hands-on moviemaker and a godsend to untried auteurs, his current product is indistinguishable from other direct-to-video fodder. In addition to expanding into family escapism and sexploitation noirs, Corman has been remaking his AIP classics for Showtime, along with some cable-TV originals like Runaway Daughters and Suspect Device, but none of these Cormanized revamps and remakes demonstrates the verve of the compact originals. Cleverly conceived and infused with an undertow of nostalgic tristesse, Corman’s directorial comeback, Frankenstein Unbound, is truly a monster movie for the backward-glancing 1990s. Responsible for precipitating an apocalypse in the future through his unchecked experimentations, a scientist travels back to the nineteenth century, where he tries to bridle Victor Frankenstein’s excesses as a mea culpa for his own God-complex. A cinematic Victor Frankenstein, Corman goes on robbing genre graveyards to bring new life to exploitation filmmaking. While Corman is irreplaceable as a studio chief, his Frankenstein Unbound is idiosyncratic enough to raise hopes for an occasional slumming into personal expression. An unselfish artist with a healthy respect for profits, Corman genuinely gets gratification out of his hired guns’ success stories, and this shining example of vicarious creativity may be the only producer in Hollywood history who could be considered a father figure. As a cinematic icon, Corman’s cameo appearances in his protegee’s blockbusters like Godfather: Part Two, Philadelphia, and Apollo 13 reveal a soft-spoken, mysterious man with immense powers of focus; he looks like the archetypical American loner who simply gets the job done. —Ed Lowry, updated by Robert J. Pardi COSTA-GAVRAS, Constantin Nationality: French. Born: Konstantinos Gavras in Athens, Greece, on February 13, 1933 (naturalized French citizen, 1956). Edu- cation: The Sorbonne, Paris, and Institut des Hautes Etudes Cinématographiques. Family: Married Michèle Ray, 1968, one son, one daughter. Career: Ballet dancer in Greece, then moved to Paris, 1952; assistant to Yves Allegret, René Clair, René Clément, Henri Verneuil, and Jacques Demy, 1958–65; became naturalized French citizen, 1956; directed first film, Compartiment tueurs, 1966; became president of the Cinematheque Francais, 1982. Awards: Moscow Film Festival Prize for Un Homme de trop; Best Director, New York Film Critics Award, and Jury Prize, Cannes Festival, for Z, 1970; Oscar nominations for Best Director and Best Screenplay, for Z, 1970; Louis Delluc Prize for State of Siege, 1973; Best Director Award, Cannes Festival, for Special Section, 1975; Palme d’or, Cannes Festival, 1982, and Oscar for Best Screenplay (with Donald Stewart), for Missing, 1983; ACLUF Award for Betrayed, 1988. Agent: John Ptak, William Morris Agency, 151 El Camino Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1966 Compartiment tueurs (The Sleeping Car Murders) 1968 Un Homme de trop (Shock Troops) COSTA-GAVRAS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 216 Constantin Costa-Gavras 1969 Z (co-sc) 1970 L’Aveu (The Confession) 1973 Etat de siège (State of Siege) (co-sc) 1975 Section speciale (Special Section) (co-sc) 1979 Clair de femme (Womanlight) 1982 Missing (co-sc) 1983 Hanna K (co-sc, + pr) 1985 Family Business 1988 Summer Lightning (Sundown); Betrayed (d only) 1990 Music Box (d only) 1993 La Petite Apocalypse (The Minor Apocalypse) (co-sc) 1995 Les kankobals, episode in A propos de Nice, la suite; Lumière et compagnie 1997 Mad City Other Films: 1977 La Vie devant soi (Madame Rosa) (Mizrahi) (role as Ramon) 1985 Spies like Us (Landis) (role as Tadzhik); Thé au harem d’Archimede (Tea in the Harem) (sc) 1996 The Stupids (Landis) (role as Gas Station Guy) 1998 Enredando sombras (as himself) Publications By COSTA-GAVRAS: articles— ‘‘Costa-Gavras Talks,’’ an interview with Dan Georgakas and Gary Crowdus, in Take One (Montreal), July/August 1969. Interview with David Austen, in Films and Filming (London), June 1970. ‘‘A Film Is like a Match: You Can Make a Big Fire or Nothing at All,’’ an interview with H. Kalishman and Gary Crowdus, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 6, no. 1, 1973. ‘‘Constantin Costa-Gavras: An American Film Institute Seminar on His Work,’’ 1977. Interview with F. Guerif and S. Levy-Klein, in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Perpignan), Spring/Summer 1978. Interview with John Pilger, in Time Out (London), 8 December 1983. COSTA-GAVRASDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 217 ‘‘There’s Always a Point of View,’’ an interview with Dan Georgakas, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 16, no. 4, 1988. Interview in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1988. ‘‘Direct Action,’’ an interview with Andrew Kopkind, in Interview (New York), September 1988. ‘‘Constantin Costa-Gavras: Politics at the Box Office,’’ an interview with Claudia Dreifus, in The Progressive, September 1988. Interview in La Revue du Cinéma (Paris), November 1988. ‘‘Keeping Alive the Memory of the Holocaust,’’ an interview with Gary Crowdus, in Cineaste (New York), February 1990. ‘‘Black and White Movies,’’ an interview with Sheila Johnston, in Independent (London), 31 May 1990. Interview with Claude-Marie Trémois, in Télérama (Paris), 10 Febru- ary 1993. ‘‘Fini les émigrés,’’ an interview with Freddy Sartor, in Film en Televisie + Video (Brussels), no. 432, May 1993. ‘‘La vie des hommes,’’ an interview with Jackie Viruega, in Avant- Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 474, July 1998. On COSTA-GAVRAS: books— Solinas, Franco, State of Siege, (includes articles), New York, 1973. Michalczyk, John J., Costa-Gavras: The Political Fiction Film, Philadelphia, 1984. On COSTA-GAVRAS: articles— Sauvaget, D., and others, ‘‘A propos de Costa-Gavras,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), December 1977. Crowdus, G., and L. Rubenstein, ‘‘The Missing Dossier,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 12, no. 1, 1982. Wood, M., ‘‘In Search of the Missing,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), March 1982. Yakir, Dan, ‘‘Missing in Action,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1982. Camy, G., ‘‘Costa-Gavras: Pour un certain cinéma politique,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), November 1983. Johnston, Sheila, ‘‘Costa-Gavras,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1984. Clark, T., ‘‘Cinematheque Broadens Its Horizons,’’ in Variety (New York), 1 October 1986. ‘‘Colleagues Attack Costa-Gavras for Pic Archive Stand,’’ in Variety (New York), 4 February 1987. ‘‘Four Who’ve Made It,’’ in Variety (New York), 25 October 1989. Dargis, M., ‘‘Crimes of the Heart,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 17 April 1990. Crawley, T., ‘‘A Hellene in Gaul and a U.S. Favorite,’’ in Variety (New York), 2 May 1990. Lubelski, T., ‘‘Trzy dni Costy-Gavrasa,’’ in Kino (Warsaw), Decem- ber 1993. ‘‘Costa-Gavras Strikes a Match,’’ in New Yorker (New York), 19 June 1995. ‘‘L’aveu,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 474, July 1998. *** The films of Constantin Costa-Gavras are exciting, enthralling, superior examples of dramatic moviemaking, but the filmmaker is far from being solely concerned with keeping the viewer in suspense. A Greek exile when he made Z, set in the country of his birth, Costa- Gavras is most interested in the motivations and misuses of power: politically, he may be best described as an anti-fascist, a humanist. As such, his films are as overtly political as any above-ground, interna- tionally popular and respected filmmaker in history. Costa-Gavras’s scenarios are often based on actual events in which citizens are deprived of human rights and expose the hypocri- sies of governments to both the left and right of center. In Z, Greek pacifist leader Yves Montand is killed by a speeding truck, a death ruled accidental by the police. Journalist Jean-Louis Trintignant’s investigation leads to a right-wing reign of terror against witnesses and friends of the deceased, and to revelations of a government scandal. The Confession is the story of a Communist bureaucrat (Montand) who is unjustifiably tortured and coerced into giving false testimony against other guiltless comrades. State of Siege is based on the political kidnapping of a United States official in Latin America (Montand); the revolutionaries slowly discover the discreetly hidden function of this ‘‘special advisor’’—to train native police in the intricacies of torture. In Special Section, a quartet of young French- men are tried and condemned by an opportunistic Vichy government for the killing of a German naval officer in occupied Paris. In Missing, an idealistic young American writer (John Shea) is arrested, tortured, and killed in a fascist takeover of a Latin American country. His father, salt-of-the-earth businessman Jack Lemmon, first feels it’s all a simple misunderstanding. After he realizes that he has been manipu- lated and lied to by the American embassy, he applies enough pressure and embarrasses enough people so that he can finally bring home the body of his son. Despite these sobering, decidedly non- commercial storylines, Costa-Gavras has received popular as well as critical success, particularly with Z and Missing, because the filmmaker does not bore his audience by structuring his films in a manner that will appeal only to intellectuals. Instead, he casts popular actors with significant box office appeal. Apart from a collective message—that fascism and corruption may occur in any society anywhere in the world—Costa-Gavras’s films also work as mysteries and thrillers. He has realized that he must first entertain in order to bring his point of view to a wider, more diversified audience, as well as exist and even thrive within the boundaries of motion picture economics in the Western world. As Pauline Kael so aptly noted, Z is ‘‘something very unusual in European films—a political film with a purpose and, at the same time, a thoroughly commercial film.’’ Costa-Gavras, however, is not without controversy: State of Siege caused a furor when it was cancelled for political reasons from the opening program of the American Film Institute theater in Washington. Not all of Costa-Gavras’s features are ‘‘political’’: The Sleeping Car Murders is a well-made, atmospheric murder mystery, while Clair de femme is the dreary tale of a widower and a woman scarred by the death of her young daughter. Both of these films star Yves Montand. But while Costa-Gavras’s most characteristic works do indeed condemn governments that control other governments or suppress human rights, his concerns as a filmmaker have perhaps shifted towards the more personal. The two features made with scriptwriter Joe Eszterhaus, Betrayed and Music Box, focused on the relationship between the central female character and a man (a lover in Betrayed, a father in Music Box) who is subsequently revealed as a fascist. On further review, both Betrayed and Music Box prove to be deeply flawed films. Both are set in America, and spotlight quintessentially American characters: an all-American farmer and an CRAVEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 218 up-by-the-bootstraps immigrant. Yet both reveal deeply prejudicial, preconceived notions about the essence of the American character. Betrayed covers a difficult, explosive topic: Racism and white supremacy in mainstream America. Gary Simmons (Tom Berenger) is a Vietnam war hero and widowed farmer who, outwardly at least, is a likable, salt-of-the-earth American. His mother is the type whose apple pies win blue ribbons at county fairs. His two kids, a boy and a girl, are fine, well-behaved youngsters. On the Fourth of July, this family joins with its neighbors for an afternoon of picnicking and an evening of fireworks. Yet underneath this picture-perfect view of Main Street lies something warped and sinister. Through changing times and eco- nomic realities beyond their understanding and control, Gary and those like him have been losing their farms and their way of life. This powerlessness has been translated into a violent, horrific extremism. Gary—and, it is implied, thousands of others like him—has become a clandestine terrorist. He spouts the gospel that ‘‘the Jews are running the country.’’ He claims that blacks are not human, but rather ‘‘mud people.’’ In a sequence that is among the most jarring of any movie of the late 1980s, he and his cronies hunt down and kill a black man strictly for sport. Most disturbing of all, Gary’s sweet, cuddly daughter repeats what she’s learned from her father. On to the scene comes a government investigator (Debra Winger), posing as an itinerant farm laborer. Before she is certain of his true nature, she finds herself becoming involved with him sexually and romantically. Betrayed is ultimately an outsider’s view of the American heartland and the Vietnam veteran. While Gary and his ilk objectify blacks, Jews, Asians, and gays, Costa-Gavras and screenwriter Joe Eszterhaus are equally as guilty of objectifying white midwesterners. The film would lead you to believe that every last American farmer is a closet cross-burner. And Gary Simmons, a psycho in sheep’s clothing, is yet one more superficial celluloid Vietnam veteran. In Music Box, Armin Mueller-Stahl takes on the Berenger role: a Hungarian-immigrant father accused of horrible war crimes and thus faces deportation. Jessica Lange plays his devoted attorney daughter who defends him in a high-profile trial. Of course, the sweet old man eventually is shown to be guilty as charged. The generaliza- tion here is that all working-class immigrants hold equally sinister views, and equally clandestine pasts. Costa-Gavras’ most recent film, La Petite Apocalypse (The Minor Apocalypse), is a decidedly minor affair, a satire of 1960s radicals, capitalist greed, the demise of communism, and an overzealous media. It premiered in New York in 1995 not on a theatrical run, but as the opening film in the Sixth Annual Human Rights Watch Interna- tional Film Festival. —Rob Edelman CRAVEN, Wes Nationality: American. Born: Wesley Earl Craven in Cleveland, Ohio, 2 August 1939. Education: Wheaton College, B.A.; John Hopkins University, M.A. Family: Married, one son, one daughter. Career: College humanities professor, left to work as a messenger in Wes Craven a film production house, New York City; assistant editor for Sean Cunningham, from 1970; directed first feature, Last House on the Left, 1972, for $90,000 (it made $20 million); also TV director, from 1985. Awards: Best Director Award, Madrid Festival, 1988. Agent: International Creative Management, 8899 Beverly Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90048, U.S.A. Address: c/o Alive Films, 8271 Melrose Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90046, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1973 Last House on the Left (+ ed) 1977 The Hills Have Eyes (+ sc, ed) 1978 Stranger in Our House (Summer of Fear) (+ sc) 1981 Deadly Blessing (+ co-sc) 1982 Swamp Thing (+ sc) 1983 The Hills Have Eyes, Part II (+ co-sc) 1984 A Nightmare on Elm Street (+ sc) ; Invitation to Hell (+ co-sc) 1985 Chiller (+ co-sc) 1986 Deadly Friend (+ co-sc) 1988 Serpent and the Rainbow (+ sc) 1989 Shocker (+ sc) 1990 Night Visions (for TV) (+ co-sc, exec pr) 1991 The People under the Stairs (+ co-sc, exec pr) 1994 Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (+ co-sc, pr, role as himself) 1995 Vampire in Brooklyn (+ co-sc) 1996 Scream (+ exec pr) CRAVENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 219 1997 Scream 2 (+ exec pr) 1999 Music of the Heart 2000 Scream 3 (+ exec pr) Other Films: 1971 Together (Sensual Paradise) (Cunningham) (asst-pr); You’ve Got to Walk It like You Talk It or You’ll Lose That Beat (Cunningham) (co-ed) 1972 It Happened in Hollywood (Cunningham) (ed) 1986 A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (co-sc, exec pr) 1987 Flowers in the Attic (co-sc) 1990 Bloodfist II (advisor) 1992 Nightmare Cafe (TV series) (creator, exec pr, sc of pilot) 1995 The Fear (role as Dr. Arnold); Wes Craven Presents Mind Ripper: Live in Horror, Die in Fear (for TV) (exec pr) 1997 Wishmaster (Kurtzman) (pr) 1998 Don’t Look Down (Shaw—for TV) (pr); Carnival of Souls (Grossman) (exec pr) 2000 Dracula 2000 (Lussier) (pr) Publications By CRAVEN: book— Fountain Society, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1999. By CRAVEN: articles— Interview with T. Williams, in Journal of Popular Film (Washington, D.C.), Fall 1980. Interviews in Ecran Fantastique (Paris), no. 24, 1982, and March 1985. Interview in Starburst (London), April 1982. Interview with Paul Taylor, in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), August 1982. ‘‘Fairy Tales for the Apocalypse,’’ an interview with C. Sharrett, in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 13, no. 3, 1985. Interview with E. Caron-Lowins, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), April 1985. Interview in Cinefantastique (Oak Park, Illinois), July 1985. Interview in Time Out (London), 29 August 1985. Interviews in Hollywood Reporter, 5 February and 26 August 1988. Interview with A. Martin, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), Novem- ber 1988. ‘‘Entretien avec Wes Craven,’’ with T. Jousse and N. Saada, in Cahiers du Cinéma, January 1993. Hardesty, Mary, ‘‘Wes Craven’s Recurring Nightmare’’ (interview), in DGA (Los Angeles), vol. 19, no. 5, October-November 1994. Grünberg, Serge, ‘‘Entretien avec Wes Craven/La mort des mario- nettes,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 491, May 1995. Williamson, Kevin, and Tod Lippy, ‘‘Scream / Writing Scream / Directing Scream’’ (script and interview), in Scenario (Rockville, Maryland), vol. 3, no. 1, Spring 1997. On CRAVEN: books— Meyers, Richard, For One Week Only: The World of Exploitation Films, Piscataway, New Jersey, 1983. McCarty, John, Splatter Movies: Breaking the Last Taboo of the Screen, New York, 1984. Newman, Kim, Nightmare Movies: A Critical History of the Horror Film from 1968, London, 1988. McCarty, John, The Modern Horror Film, Secaucus, New Jer- sey, 1990. McCarty, John, Movie Psychos and Madmen, Secaucus, New Jer- sey, 1993. McCarty, John, The Fearmakers, New York, 1994. Muir, Kenneth John, Wes Craven: The Art of Horror, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1998. Robb, Brian J., Screams and Nightmares: The Films of Wes Craven, New York, 1999. On CRAVEN: articles— ‘‘Wes Craven,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), May 1981. Starburst (London), April and July 1985, and April 1986. National Film Theatre Booklet (London), June 1988. Time Out (London), 1 June 1988. Mancini, Marc, ‘‘Professor Gore,’’ in Film Comment, September- October 1989. Biodrowski, S., ‘‘Wes Craven: Alive and Shocking,’’ in Cinefantastique, vol. 22, no. 2, 1991. Biodrowski, S., ‘‘Director Wes Craven on the Politics of Horror,’’ in Cinefantastique, vol. 22, no. 5, 1992. *** Of all the horror specialists who came to prominence during the 1970s, Wes Craven has had the least settled career. While Tobe Hooper and John Carpenter have had major creative slumps, George Romero and Larry Cohen have carved out their own areas of independent endeavour, and David Cronenberg and Brian De Palma have, with various levels of success, graduated to major studio projects, Craven has been bouncing between successes (The Hills Have Eyes, A Nightmare on Elm Street) and failures (Swamp Thing, Deadly Friend) with a manic energy, forced occasionally to take work on television to keep going. While his best work exhibits a canny grasp of genre and a disturbing understanding of the place of violence within society, and Elm Street—after a long and difficult gestation period—emerged as one of the most influential horror movies of the 1980s, his worst films literally flounder in the wake of his successes, frequently (as in The Hills Have Eyes, Part 2 and Shocker) resorting to self-plagiarism to tie together blatantly misconceived projects, suggesting a desperate intellect which too often tries to find a short cut. Craven’s first movie, Last House on the Left, a hard-gore remake of Bergman’s The Virgin Spring, was an ultra-low-budget sleeper that hit the drive-ins well before The Texas Chain-Saw Massacre and served to drag the genre away from the then-tired mists of Hammer- style gothic towards the more fruitful modern fields of gritty psycho- sis and social unrest. As with the early films of Romero, Hooper, and Cohen, the focus of Last House is on the destructive potential of the family, as a group of homicidal maniacs torture a pair of innocent girls CRAVEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 220 and are themselves slaughtered by the martyr heroine’s ‘‘normal’’ parents. Filmed with a raw style and a sense of fascinated revulsion, Last House—still banned in the United Kingdom—is one of the strongest of horror pictures, and remains so tough that most audiences cannot take it, either when the maniacs are disembowelling their victims or the parents are fighting back. The Hills Have Eyes is a more expansive, more fantastically horrid re-run of the first movie, stirring in some black humour and a DC Comics-style set of inbred mutants as it replays the wagon train Western scenario out in the desert, where a vacationing family of normals clash with their degenerate mirror image. Although it tackles the same thematic territory as Last House, The Hills Have Eyes is a more approachable work and shows off Craven’s special skills with simple action, even daring to turn the heroes’ dog into a modern movie hero who relates to Rin-Tin-Tin much as Dirty Harry relates to George Dixon. Despite these two powerful pictures, which at once demonstrated Craven’s competence as a director and his flair for the intriguingly horrific, he then fell into a career hole of botched projects, including TV work and an interesting attempt to film David Morell’s First Blood. Deadly Blessing, a hodge-podge of psychotic and demonology themes, is alarmingly inconsistent, featuring some of the best and the worst of Craven as it deals with a series of murders in a cleverly evoked Hittite community. Swamp Thing, an adaption of the DC comic, is a misconceived and childish superhero picture dragged under by ridiculous monster suits and an underdeveloped screenplay, although it has one memorably unchildish scene when Adrienne Barbeau takes a nude swim in the swamp. After this, it is easy to see how Craven could resort to making The Hills Have Eyes, Part 2, which contains an inordinate amount of flashback footage from the first film simply because the budget ran out before the movie was actually completed. Although Deadly Friend and Shocker are more expensively bad, the misconceived Hills 2 stands as Craven’s worst film to date with its use of flashbacks upon flashbacks to the original film (so as to cut costs by re-using old footage?); even the recurring character of the dog gets to have a flashback! However, Craven then turned his career round, dashing off the unexceptional but acceptable Invitation to Hell and Chiller and several pretty good Twilight Zone segments—including ‘‘Shatterday,’’ a Harlan Ellison story with Bruce Willis, and the disorienting ‘‘Word Play’’—before finally getting the green light on A Nightmare on Elm Street. Last House and Deadly Blessing had experimented with surreal, disorienting dream sequences—a bit of nightmare dentistry, and a spider-falling-into-mouth shock—but Elm Street is built around such moments, and features a dreamstalking bogeyman, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), who somehow became a cult hero through the course of four sequels—only one of which, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Part 3: Dream Warriors, did Craven have anything to do with, as a writer—and a TV series. The first Elm Street is a seamless stalk- and-scare horror movie that fully deserved its success for its clever reassembly of the elements of teenage horror established by Carpen- ter with Halloween and Stephen King in Carrie and Christine. However, it is a less rigorous, less satisfying movie than Craven’s best early films, reducing their ambiguous culture clash to a simple conflict between an innocent heroine (Heather Langenkamp) and an unredeemable monster villain. Part of the disturbing quality of Last House and Hills comes from their occasionally sympathetic ap- proaches to their villains, and in the way the heroes’ violent revenge is seen to degrade them to the level of the monsters; Langenkamp’s guerilla-style assault on Freddy, meanwhile, is simply a cheerable demonstration of American resourcefulness. Leaving the Elm Street sequels, which had been set up by a fairly annoying last-minute logical lapse at the end of the first film, to other hands, Craven departed the independent sector for a pair of big studio projects—the execrable Deadly Friend, a cute-robot-cum-teen-zom- bie movie adapted from Diana Henstell’s novel Friend, and The Serpent and the Rainbow, an interesting and seductive voodoo picture adapted from Wade Davis’s nonfiction novel. Both films carry over the dream theme from Elm Street, in the first case to beef up a badly sagging storyline, and in the second as part of a bizarre and affecting cultural travelogue that develops the old Craven’s fascination with magical and monstrous societies as opposed to individuals. However, following that experience, Craven returned to the independents, like John Carpenter before him, and produced another carbon copy of his own most successful work in Shocker, a failed attempt to come up with another franchise series that is nothing but an identikit of A Nightmare on Elm Street with more ideas than it can handle and severe lapses of script, characterisation, and tone to pull it down between its undeniably brilliant sequences (a grand guignol electro- cution, a final chase through ‘‘television land’’). Craven’s entire career has been like Shocker, with moments of startling inspiration and genre craftsmanship let down by hurried scripts and just plain wrong decisions. Craven bounced back from the erratic Shocker with The People under the Stairs. The film fuses the time-honored ‘‘wicked step- mother’’ concept with Craven’s familiar predilections for home-style booby-traps and nightmare sequences. The house itself is one big booby-trap, wired with explosives and rigged with electronic doors of solid steel. It is also one big, bad Nightmare on Elm Street dream- scape, seemingly designed by the same deranged architect responsi- ble for the labyrinthine yet claustrophobic cabin in Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead. Craven returned to Elm Street with the film-within-a-film Wes Craven’s New Nightmare. The film brought back Freddy Krueger as well as some of the cast members of the original Elm Street as themselves, now victims of the horror series, which is mysteriously being acted out in ‘‘real life.’’ Craven appears as himself in the film. Cynics viewed the film as a run-for-cover effort on Craven’s part to renew the Freddy Krueger franchise following the lukewarm recep- tion of People under the Stairs. Others viewed it as the ultimate Craven statement on dream psychology. It confused many, scared few, and was not a box-office winner. Craven then abandoned horror cinema’s most famous street for equally tried and true genre territory with Vampire in Brooklyn. A mixture of comedy and splatter, it marked another attempt by former superstar Eddie Murphy to jump- start his fading career—which he [Murphy] eventually did with his remake of The Nutty Professor. Craven’s persistent attempts to find another successful franchise finally hit paydirt with Scream, a throwback to the teenagers-in- jeopardy slasher genre of Friday the 13th and, of course, A Nightmare on Elm Street. Kevin Williamson’s script, with its solid ear for Generation X slang, cast many knowing winks at past slasher films, particularly Elm Street, in its story of a masked killer on the loose in suburbia. It spawned two blockbuster sequels, Scream 2 and Scream 3, which Craven cleverly turned into films-within-the-film a là his Wes Craven’s A New Nightmare, albeit this time successfully. In between Scream 2 and Scream 3, Craven also made the anomalous Music of the Heart, the true story of an indefatigable New York City music teacher played by Meryl Streep. He also found time to pen his first novel, Fountain Society, a conspiracy tale with futuristic elements. —Kim Newman, updated by John McCarty CRICHTONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 221 CRICHTON, Charles Nationality: British. Born: Wallasey, England, 6 August 1910. Education: Oundle School and Oxford University. Career: Began as cutter for London Film Productions, 1931; editor on major Korda productions, 1935–40; joined Ealing Studios, 1940; directed first film, For Those in Peril, 1944; TV director, from 1960s. Died: 14 September 1999, in South Kensington, London. Films as Director: 1944 For Those in Peril 1945 Painted Boats (The Girl on the Canal); ‘‘The Golfing Story’’ episode of Dead of Night 1946 Hue and Cry 1948 Against the Wind; Another Shore 1949 ‘‘The Orchestra Conductor’’ episode of Train of Events 1950 Dance Hall 1951 The Lavender Hill Mob; Hunted (The Stranger in Between) 1952 The Titfield Thunderbolt 1953 The Love Lottery 1954 The Divided Heart 1956 The Man in the Sky (Decision against Time) 1958 Law and Disorder; Floods of Fear (+ sc) 1959 The Battle of the Sexes 1960 The Boy Who Stole a Million (+ co-sc) Charles Crichton 1964 The Third Secret 1965 He Who Rides a Tiger 1968 Tomorrow’s Island (+ sc) 1988 A Fish Called Wanda, (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1932 Men of Tomorrow (Sagan) (asst ed) 1933 Cash (For Love or Money) (Z. Korda) (asst ed); The Private Life of Henry VIII (A. Korda) (asst ed); The Girl from Maxim’s (A. Korda) (asst ed) 1935 Sanders of the River (Z. Korda) (ed); Things to Come (Menzies) (co-assoc ed) 1937 Elephant Boy (Flaherty and Z. Korda) (ed); Twenty-one Days (The First and the Last; Twenty-one Days Together) (Dean) (ed) 1938 Prison without Bars (Hurst) (ed) 1940 Old Bill and Son (Dalrymple) (ed); The Thief of Bagdad (Berger, Powell, Whelan) (ed); Yellow Caesar (The Heel of Italy) (Cavalcanti) (ed) 1941 The Big Blockade (Frend) (co-ed); Guests of Honour (Pitt) (ed); Young Veteran (Cavalcanti) (ed); Find, Fix, and Strike (Bennett) (ed, assoc pr) 1942 Nine Men (Watt) (ed, assoc pr); Greek Testament (The Shrine of Victory) (Hasse) (assoc pr) Publications By CRICHTON: book— A Fish Called Wanda, with John Cleese, London, 1988. By CRICHTON: article— Interview in Directing Motion Pictures, edited by Terence Marner, New York, 1972. Interview in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1988. Interview in Positif (Paris), February 1989. Interview in American Film, January-February 1989. On CRICHTON: books— Balcon, Michael, A Lifetime of Films, London, 1969. Barr, Charles, Ealing Studios, London, 1977. Perry, George, Forever Ealing, London, 1981. On CRICHTON: articles— Tynan, Kenneth, ‘‘Ealing: The Studio in Suburbia,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November and December 1955. Barr, Charles, ‘‘Projecting Britain and the British Character: Ealing Studios,’’ in Screen (London), Summer 1974. Green, Ian, ‘‘Ealing: In the Comedy Frame,’’ in British Cinema History, edited by James Curran and Vincent Porter, London, 1983. CROMWELL DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 222 Barr, Charles, ‘‘Charles Crichton,’’ in Edinburgh Film Festival Booklet, 1988. Falk, Quentin, ‘‘Wanda: Cleese, Crichton, and Man-Management,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1988. Listener (London), 13 October 1988. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 20 September 1999. *** The demise of Ealing Studios seemed to cast a blight on the careers of those who worked there. Within ten years of the final Ealing release virtually all the studio’s leading directors—Mackendrick, Hamer, Harry Watt, Charles Frend—had shot their last film; only Basil Dearden was still active. And until the late 1980s the career of Charles Crichton appeared to have followed the same dispiriting pattern. His triumphant comeback at the age of seventy-eight, with the huge international success of A Fish Called Wanda, was as heartening as it was wholly unexpected. Wanda kicks off with a jewel heist sequence notable for the wit and precision of its editing. Like several of his Ealing colleagues, Crichton started out in the cutting room, working for Korda on Things to Come and The Thief of Bagdad, and was said to be one of the finest editors in the British film industry. (Among his uncredited achieve- ments is the rescue of Mackendrick’s Whisky Galore, which he recut after it had been botched by its original editor.) A sense of pace and timing, the skilled editor’s stock-in-trade, distinguishes all his best work. Comedy has always been seen as Crichton’s forte. His reputa- tion, prior to Wanda, rested on the three comedies he directed at Ealing to scripts by T. E. B. Clarke: Hue and Cry, The Lavender Hill Mob, and The Titfield Thunderbolt. If all three seem to belong more to the writer’s oeuvre than to the director’s, this may be because Crichton has always been dependent in his comedies on the quality of the script. The Lavender Hill Mob, perhaps the archetypal comedy of the Ealing mainstream, gains enormously from Crichton’s supple comic timing; but given stodgy material, as in The Love Lottery or Another Shore, his lightness of touch deserts him. Even Titfield, with Clarke writing some way below his best, feels sluggish and under- directed beside its two predecessors. Though the serious side of Crichton’s output, the dramas and thrillers, has attracted little attention, he often seems here less at the mercy of his script, able to make something personal even of flawed material. His one non-comedy with Clarke, the Resistance drama Against the Wind, has a downbeat realism and a refusal of easy heroics that recalls Thorold Dickinson’s Next of Kin (and probably ensured its failure at the post-war box-office). Hunted, a killer-on-the- run thriller, builds up a complex tension as well as offering Dirk Bogarde a rare intelligent role amid the dross of his early career. Crichton’s cool, unemphatic handling of the central conflict in The Divided Heart deftly avoids emotional overkill—though nothing, perhaps, could have prevented the film’s final slide into sententiousness. After Ealing, projects attuned to his talents became increasingly rare. Given the darker aspects of his work, black comedy was clearly well within his range, and The Battle of the Sexes, with Peter Sellers as the Scots clerk trying to bump off efficiency expert Constance Cummings, would have been ideal—were it not for a script that junked the quiet implacability of the original (Thurber’s caustic tour- de-force The Catbird Seat) for cautious whimsy and a vapid happy ending. After a couple of interestingly off-beat thrillers—The Third Secret and He Who Rides a Tiger—both marred by clumsy writing and uncertainty of tone, Crichton cut his losses and retreated into television. From there, directing corporate videos must have seemed like a further downhill step. But the company involved was John Cleese’s Video Arts, and it was Cleese’s enthusiastic backing—and his status as a bankable star—that enabled Crichton, after more than twenty years, to return to the cinema. A Fish Called Wanda, with its four ill-assorted crooks, its central portrait of respectability under- mined by larcenous urges, and its running theme of internecine treachery, crosses The Lavender Hill Mob with The Ladykillers—and adds a degree of sex and violence that would certainly have alarmed Michael Balcon. But had Ealing comedy survived Balcon’s death and lived on into the late 1980s, Wanda is most likely what it would have looked like—and its bite and vitality only inspire regret for the films left unmade during Crichton’s years in the wilderness. —Philip Kemp CROMWELL, John Nationality: American. Born: Elwood Dager in Toledo, Ohio, 23 December 1887. Education: Howe High School, Howe, Indiana, 1901–05. Military Service: 1917–18. Family: Married 1) Alice Indahl; 2) Marie Goff; 3) Kay Johnson; 4) Ruth Nelson; one son. Career: Actor on Broadway, from 1910; theatre director for William Brady, from 1913; actor and stage director, New York Repertory Theatre, 1915–1919; stage actor-producer to 1928; hired by Para- mount as dialogue director, 1928; directed first film, Close Harmony, John Cromwell CROMWELLDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 223 1929; hired by RKO, 1933; President, Screen Actors’ Guild, 1944–45; returned to Broadway, 1951, and to repertory theatre, 1960s. Died: In Santa Barbara, California, 26 September 1979. Films as Director: 1929 Close Harmony (co-d); The Dance of Life (co-d with Suther- land, role as doorkeeper); The Mighty (+ role as Mr. Jamieson) 1930 The Street of Chance (+ role as Imbrie); The Texan; Seven Days’ Leave (Medals); For the Defense; Tom Sawyer 1931 Scandal Sheet; Unfaithful; Vice Squad; Rich Man’s Folly 1932 The World and the Flesh 1933 Sneepings; The Silver Cord 1934 Of Human Bondage; The Fountain; Jalna; I Dream Too Much 1936 Little Lord Fauntleroy; To Mary with Love; Banjo on My Knee 1937 The Prisoner of Zenda 1938 Algiers 1939 Made for Each Other; In Name Only 1940 Abe Lincoln in Illinois (Spirit of the People) (+ role as John Brown); Victory 1941 So Ends Our Night 1942 Son of Fury 1944 Since You Went Away 1945 The Enchanted Cottage 1946 Anna and the King of Siam 1947 Dead Reckoning; Night Song 1950 Caged 1951 The Company She Keeps; The Racket 1958 The Goddess 1959 The Scavengers 1960 De Sista Stegen (A Matter of Morals) Other Films: 1929 The Dummy (R. Milton) (role as Walter Babbing) 1957 Top Secret Affair (Their Secret Affair) (Potter) (role as Gen- eral Grimshaw) 1977 Three Women (Altman) (role) 1978 A Wedding (Altman) (role as cardinal) Publications By CROMWELL: articles— Interview with D. Lyons, in Interview (New York), February 1972. Interview with Leonard Maltin, in Action (Los Angeles), May/ June 1973. On CROMWELL: articles— ‘‘The Goddess,’’ in Films in Review (New York), May 1958. Rotha, Paul, in Films and Filming (London), August 1958. Prouse, Derek, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1958. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Likable but Elusive,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Cutts, John, ‘‘The Finest Zenda of Them All,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), Spring 1968. Frey, R., ‘‘John Cromwell,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1972. Canham, Kingsley, ‘‘John Cromwell: Memories of Love, Elegance, and Style,’’ in The Hollywood Professionals (London) vol. 5, 1976. Bleys, J.P., ‘‘John Cromwell ou la mélodie du mélodrame,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Perpignan), no. 28, 1979. ‘‘Cromwell Section,’’ in Positif (Paris), March 1979. Obituary in New York Times, 28 September 1979. Obituary in Cinéma (Paris), March 1980. *** John Cromwell, a fine New York actor, had a distinguished list of credits when he was hired by Paramount in 1928. Talking films were a new medium then, and Cromwell was eminently qualified to direct dialogue. He started in collaboration with Edward Sutherland on Close Harmony and The Dance of Life (from the play Broadway). Paramount then promoted him to solo status on such films as The Street of Chance, with William Powell, and The Texan and Seven Days’ Leave, both with Gary Cooper. Once established as an ace director, he went over to the new RKO studios, where in 1933 he directed such movies as The Silver Cord (from Sidney Howard’s play), starring Irene Dunne with Joel McCrea; and the adaptation of Maugham’s novel Of Human Bondage, with Leslie Howard and Bette Davis. He met David O. Selznick at this time, and subsequently directed such Selznick films as Little Lord Fauntleroy, The Prisoner of Zenda, Made for Each Other, and Since You Went Away. Meanwhile, Cromwell continued as director of other RKO successes, including In Name Only, with Cary Grant, Carole Lombard, and Kay Francis; and Robert Sherwood’s Abe Lincoln in Illinois, starring Raymond Massey. He also directed Hedy Lamarr’s American film debut with Charles Boyer in Algiers; Victory, from the Joseph Conrad novel; and So Ends Our Night, a remarkably tense melodrama of World War Two, with Fredric March, Margaret Sullavan, Glenn Ford, Frances Dee, and Erich von Stroheim. In 1944 Harriet Parsons at RKO signed Cromwell to direct The Enchanted Cottage, a sensitive drama of a plain girl (Dorothy McGuire) and a scarred, crippled war veteran (Robert Young) who begin to see one another as straight and beautiful through the power of love. By this time, Cromwell was a thorough craftsman. He believed in full rehearsals with camera before any shooting took place. ‘‘For every day of full rehearsal you give me,’’ he was fond of saying, ‘‘I’ll knock off a day on the shooting schedule.’’ At RKO they gave him three days for rehearsal, and he obligingly came in three days early. The Enchanted Cottage was a tricky assignment; the love story was so sensitive that it could easily slip into sentimentality, but it never did. He treated it realistically, an approach that, as he said, is ‘‘the only way to treat a fantasy. It always works.’’ Cromwell then directed Irene Dunne and Rex Harrison in Anna and the King of Siam, a film of great pictorial beauty. His best subsequent efforts were a woman’s prison story, Caged, and The Goddess, a realistic story about a film star. Cromwell was falsely accused by Howard Hughes of being a communist during the McCar- thy era. ‘‘I was never anything that suggested a Red,’’ he said, ‘‘and CRONENBERG DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 224 there never was the slightest evidence with which to accuse me of being one.’’ He was blacklisted, however, and the assignments ceased coming his way. He simply returned to the theatre as an actor, and was brilliant as Henry Fonda’s father in the stage play of John Marquand’s Point of No Return. —DeWitt Bodeen CRONENBERG, David Nationality: Canadian. Born: Toronto, 15 March 1943. Education: University of Toronto, B.A., 1967. Career: After making two short films, made first feature, Stereo, 1969; travelled to France, directed filler material for Canadian TV, 1971. Address: David Cronenberg Productions, 217 Avenue Road, Toronto M5R 2J3, Canada. Agent: William Morris Agency, 151 El Camino Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1966 Transfer (short) (sc, ph, ed) 1967 From the Drain (short) (sc, ph, ed) 1969 Stereo (pr, sc, ph, ed + role as Dr. Luther Stringfellow) 1970 Crimes of the Future (pr, sc, ph + role as Antoine Rouge) David Cronenberg 1975 Shivers (They Came from Within; The Parasite Murders; Frissons) (sc) 1976 Rabid (Rage) (sc) 1978 Fast Company; The Brood 1979 Scanners (sc) 1982 Videodrome (sc) 1983 The Dead Zone 1986 The Fly (co-sc, + role as gynecologist) 1988 Dead Ringers (Twins) (co-sc, + pr) 1991 Naked Lunch (sc) 1992–93 M. Butterfly 1996 Crash (sc + role as Auto Wreck Salesman) 1999 eXistenZ (sc) Other Films: 1985 Into the Night (Landis) (as Group Supervisor) 1990 Nightbreed (Barker) (as Decker) 1992 Blue (McKellar) (role) 1994 Trial by Jury (Gould) (as Director); Boozecan (Campbell) (role); Henry & Verlin (Ledbetter) (as Doc Fisher) 1995 To Die For (Van Sant) (as Man at Lake); Blood and Donuts (Dale) (as Stephen) 1996 Moonshine Highway (Armstrong—for TV) (as Clem Clay- ton); The Stupids (Landis) (as Postal Supervisor); Extreme Measures (Apted) (as Hospital Lawyer) 1997 The Grace of God (L’Ecuyer) (role) 1998 Last Night (McKellar) (as Duncan) 1999 Resurrection (Mulcahy) (as Priest); David Cronenberg, I Have to Make the World Be Flesh (as himself) 2000 Dead by Monday (Truninger) (role) 2001 Jason X: Friday the 13th Part 10 (Isaac) (role as Dr. Wimmer) Publications By CRONENBERG: books— Cronenberg on Cronenberg, with Chris Rodley, London, 1997. Crash, New York, 1997. Existenz: A Graphic Novel, Toronto, 1999. By CRONENBERG: articles— Interview in Ecran Fantastique (Paris), no. 2, 1977. Interview in Time Out (London), 6 January 1978. Interview in Cinema Canada (Montreal), September/October 1978. Interview in Starburst (London), nos. 36/37, 1981. Interview in Films (London), June 1981. Interviews in Ecran Fantastique (Paris), June and November 1983. Interview with S. Ayscough, in Cinema Canada (Montreal), Decem- ber 1983. Interview in Starburst (London), May 1984. Interview with C. Tesson and T. Cazals, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1987. Interview with Brent Lewis, in Films and Filming (London), Febru- ary 1987. Interview in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1988. Interview in American Film (Washington, D.C.), October 1988. CRONENBERGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 225 Interview in Cinefex (Riverside, California), November 1988. Interview with Derek Malcolm, in the Guardian (London), 29 Decem- ber 1989. Interview in Film and Televisie, no. 419, April 1992. Interview in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 4, no. 12, Decem- ber 1994. Interview in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 6, no. 6, June 1996. Interview in Take One (Toronto), no. 13, Fall 1996. Interview in Time Out (London), no. 1368, 6 November 1996. Interview in Film Comment (New York), vol. 33, no. 2, March- April 1997. Interview in American Cinematographer (Hollywood), vol. 78, no. 4, April 1997. On CRONENBERG: books— McCarty, John, Splatter Movies: Breaking the Last Taboo, New York, 1981. Handling, Piers, editor, The Shape of Rage: The Films of David Cronenberg, Toronto, 1983. Drew, Wayne, editor, David Cronenberg, London, 1984. Newman, Kim, Nightmare Movies: A Critical History of the Horror Film from 1968, London, 1988. Morris, Peter, David Cronenberg: A Delicate Balance, Toronto, 1994. Grant, Michael, editor, The Modern Fantastic: The Films of David Cronenberg, Westport, Connecticut, 2000. On CRONENBERG: articles— Film Comment (New York), March/April 1980. ‘‘Cronenberg Section’’ of Cinema Canada (Montreal), March 1981. ‘‘Cronenberg Section’’ of Cinefantastique (Oak Park, Illinois), Spring 1981. Sutton, M., ‘‘Schlock! Horror! The Films of David Cronenberg,’’ in Films and Filming (London), October 1982. Harkness, J., ‘‘The Word, the Flesh, and the Films of David Cronenberg,’’ in Cinema Canada (Montreal), June 1983. Sharrett, C., ‘‘Myth and Ritual in the Post-Industrial Landscape: The Films of David Cronenberg,’’ in Persistence of Vision (Maspeth, New York), Summer 1986. Edelstein, R., ‘‘Lord of the Fly,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 19 August 1986. Lucas, Tim, in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), Septem- ber 1986. ‘‘The Fly Issue’’ of Starburst (London), January 1987. ‘‘The Fly Issue’’ of Ecran Fantastique (Paris), January 1987. Newman, Kim, ‘‘King in a Small Field,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), February 1987. Time Out (London), 11 February 1987. Revue du Cinéma (Paris), May 1987. Morris, Peter, ‘‘Up from the Underground,’’ in Take One (Toronto), no. 6, Fall 1994. Beard, William, ‘‘Cronenberg, Flyness, and the Other-Self,’’ in Cinémas (Montreal), vol. 4, no. 2, Winter 1994. ‘‘Special Section,’’ in Mensuel du Cinéma (Nice), no. 16, April 1994. Testa, Bart, ‘‘Technology’s Body: Cronenberg, Genre, and the Cana- dian Ethos,’’ in Post Script (Commerce, Texas), vol. 15, no. 1, Fall 1995. Lucas, Tim, ‘‘Ideadrome: David Cronenberg from Shivers to Dead Ringers,’’ in Video Watchdog (Cincinnati), no. 36, 1996. ‘‘David Cronenberg’’ (special issue), in Post Script (Commerce, Texas), vol. 15, no. 2, Winter-Spring 1996. Cowan, Noah, and Angela Baldassare, ‘‘Canadian Science Fiction Comes of Age,’’ in Take One (Toronto), vol. 4, no. 11, Spring 1996. Grünberg, Serge, ‘‘Crash: eros + massacre,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 504, July-August 1996. Sanjek, David, ‘‘Dr. Hobbe’s Parasites: Victims, Victimization, and Gender in David Cronenberg’s Shivers,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), vol. 36, no. 1, Fall 1996. Daviau, Allen, Fred Elmes, and Stephen Pizzello, ‘‘Auto Erotic / Driver’s Side,’’ in American Cinematographer (Hollywood), vol. 78, no. 4, April 1997. Suner, Asuman, ‘‘Postmodern Double Cross: Reading David Cronenberg’s M. Butterfly as a Horror Story,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), vol. 36, no. 359, Winter 1998. *** David Cronenberg’s breakthrough movie, Shivers, carries over the Burroughsian mind-and-body-bending themes of his underground pictures—Stereo and Crimes of the Future—but also benefits from the influence of Romero’s Night of the Living Dead and Siegel’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers in its horror movie imagery, relentless pacing, and general vision of a society falling apart. Thus the film locates Cronenberg at the centre of the thriving 1970s horror move- ment that produced such figures as Romero, Larry Cohen, John Carpenter, Wes Craven, and Tobe Hooper. While a mad scientist’s creation—a horde of creeping phallic-looking parasites—infects peo- ple with a combination of venereal disease and aphrodisiac, a chilly, luxurious, modernist skyscraper apartment building becomes a Boschian nightmare of blood and carnality. An undisciplined film, Shivers gains from its scattershot approach. Cronenberg has since proved himself capable of more control but, in a movie about the encroach- ment of chaos upon order, it is appropriate that the narrative itself should break down. While strong enough in its mix of sex and violence to give fuel to critics who view Cronenberg as a reactionary moralist, it is clear that his approach is ambiguous, and that he is as concerned with the anomie of the normality disrupted as he is with the nature of the outbreak. The orgiastic solution of the blood parasites may be too extreme, but the soulless routine they replace suggests the straight world deserves to be eaten away from within. His follow-up movies, Rabid, The Brood, and Scanners, develop the themes of Shivers—although his odd-man-out film, the drag- racing drama Fast Company, comes from this period also—and gradually struggle away from impersonal nihilism. Rabid is a plague story, with Marilyn Chambers quite affecting as the Typhoid Mary, while The Brood is an intense family melodrama about child abuse triggered by Nola (Samantha Eggar), a mad mother who can manifest her anger as murderous malformed children, and Scanners concerns itself with the feuds of a race of telepaths who co-exist with humanity and are unsure whether to conquer or save the world. With its exploding heads and car chases, Scanners is a progression away from the venereal apocalypse of the earlier films and is almost an upbeat movie after the icy down-ness of The Brood. Scanners has the typical early Cronenberg construction: it crams in more ideas than it can possibly deal with and tears through its overly complex plot so quickly that the holes only become apparent when it is all over. The CRONENBERG DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 226 unrelenting action of Shivers and Rabid show a society tearing itself apart; and, given the breakup of Nola’s family, the incestuous cruelty of The Brood is inevitable; but Scanners follows a purposeful conflict between opposing, highly motivated sides, out of which a new world will emerge. If The Brood finds a balance between mind and body, Scanners finally achieves a hard-won harmony. Crimes of the Future, Shivers, Rabid, and The Brood all end with the persistent disease threatening to spread. In Scanners, for the first time in a David Cronenberg film, the good guys win. Cronenberg closed this phase of his career with Videodrome, which summed up his work to date. Structurally reminiscent of Shivers, the film follows Max Renn (James Woods), a cable TV hustler whose justification for his channel’s output of ‘‘softcore pornography and hardcore violence’’ is ‘‘better on television than in the streets.’’ Renn is trying to track down a pirate station that is transmitting Videodrome, ‘‘a show that’s just torture and murder. No plot. No characters. Very realistic,’’ because he thinks ‘‘it’s the coming thing.’’ Underneath the stimulating images of sex and vio- lence is a signal which causes a tumor in Renn’s brain that makes him subject to hallucinations which increasingly take over the flow of the film, completely fracturing reality with disturbing developments of Cronenberg’s by-now familiar bodily evolutions. A television set pulses with life and Renn buries his head in its mammary screen as he kisses the image of his fantasy lover (Deborah Harry). A vaginal slot grows from a rash on his stomach and the villains plunge living videocassettes into it which program him as an assassin. His hand and gun grow together to create a sickening biomechanical synthesis. Once Renn has been exposed to Videodrome, the film cannot hope to sustain its storyline, and, as Paul Taylor wrote in Monthly Film Bulletin, ‘‘becomes most akin to sitting before a TV screen while someone else switches channels at random.’’ After traveling so far into his own personal—and uncommercial— nightmare, Cronenberg felt the need to ease off by tackling an uncomplicated project. The Dead Zone, a bland but efficient adapta- tion of Stephen King’s novel, is one of the few films he has directed without having been involved in writing the screenplay. Having proved that he could work in the mainstream, Cronenberg turned to more personal projects that still somehow pass as commercial cin- ema, keeping up a miraculous balancing act that has put him, in a career sense, on a much more solid footing than Romero, Hooper, Cohen, Carpenter, or Craven, all of whom he has outstripped. The Fly, a major studio remake of the 1958 monster movie, is despite its budget and lavish special effects a quintessentially Cronenbergian movie, pruning away the expected melodrama to concentrate on a single relationship, between Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum), a gawky scientist whose teleportation device has set in motion a metamorpho- sis that turns him into an insect, and his horrified but compassionate lover (Geena Davis). The Fly is an even more concentrated, intimate movie than The Brood, with only three main characters and one major setting. Like Rabid Rose and Max Renn, Brundle remains himself as he changes, tossing away nervous remarks about his collection of dropped-off body parts, giving an amusingly disgusting TV-chef- style demonstration of the flylike manner in which the new creature eats a doughnut, humming, ‘‘I know an old lady who swallowed a fly,’’ and treating his mutation as a voyage of discovery. Based on a true-life National Enquirer headline (‘‘Twin Docs Found Dead in Posh Pad’’), Dead Ringers follows the lives of Beverly and Elliot Mantle (Jeremy Irons), identical twins who de- velop a precocious interest in the problems of sex and the female anatomy and grow up to be a world-beating team of gynecologists. Their intense relationship, when unbalanced by the presence of a third party (Genevieve Bujold), eventually leads to their destruction. The film takes fear of surgery about as far as it can go when Beverly, increasingly infuriated that women’s bodies do not conform to his textbooks, brings in a Giger-ish surrealist metalworker to create a set of ‘‘Gynecological Instruments for Operating on Mutant Women.’’ In the theatre, Beverly is kitted up in scarlet robes more suited to a mass and horrifyingly blunders through a supposedly simple operation, wielding these bizarre and distorted implements. The home stretch is profoundly depressing, and yet deeply moving, as the twins come to resemble each other more and more in their degradation. The calculating Elliot follows Beverly into drug addiction on the theory that only if the Mantle brothers really become identical can the two inadequate personalities separate from each other and get back to some kind of functioning normality. Too often genre publications sneer at filmmakers who achieve success with horror but then claim they want to move on, but notions of genre are inherently limiting, and Cronenberg is entirely justified in leaving behind the warmed-over science-fiction elements of his earlier films and concentrating on a more intellectual, character-based mode. For the first time, he is able to present the inhuman condition without recourse (one slightly too blatant dream sequence apart, as in The Fly) to slimy special effects, borrowings from earlier horror films, and the trappings of conven- tional melodrama. This is not the work of someone trying for the commecial high ground, and it certainly is not by any stretch of the imagination a mainstream movie. Dead Ringers is not a horror film. It is a David Cronenberg film, and entering the 1990s, that put it at the cutting edge of the nightmare cinema. Cronenberg used his commercial clout to bring to the screen William S. Burroughs’ novel Naked Lunch, a book that had long preoccupied him. It proved a challenge because the book is almost ‘‘unfilmable’’ (‘‘It would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and be banned in every country on earth,’’ Cronenberg has noted), so, rather than adapt the book in the traditional sense, he opted to make a film about what it was like to be William S. Burroughs. Where Dead Ringers had largely eschewed the fantastic while retaining the horrific, Naked Lunch grows from the fantastic, relegating the horrific to a minor position, in order to become a dissection of the act of creativity itself, which Cronenberg presents in the film as subversive, cathartic, and sexual act to the artist. Whereas Cronenberg had presented art as a viable outlet for release in Scanners, in Naked Lunch he seems to be saying that such a release can also lead to an inescapable trap for the artist, as well. Peter Weller’s Burroughs would like to be a ‘‘normal’’ person, but can’t. He has no choice in the matter—a viewpoint many critics interpreted as self-justification on Cronenberg’s part for the nightmare images he puts on the screen. With Naked Lunch, Cronenberg came full-circle, arriving back where he started—with an original, unsettling, dangerous, and sub- versive ‘‘art film’’ reminiscent of his earliest work. These qualities made him a seemingly natural choice to direct the film version of David Henry Hwang’s bizarre, gender- and identity-bending Broad- way hit M. Butterfly, about a French diplomat’s (Jeremy Lyons) love affair with a Chinese opera diva whom he never realizes is a man (and spy to boot). Remarkably, the film turned out to be rather subdued and orthodox—most unCronenberg-like. He turned that around with his next film, however, the very Cronenberg-like Crash. A lover of cars in his youth (perhaps this is what the anomalous Fast Company derived from), Cronenberg had long been fascinated by J.G. Ballard’s CUKORDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 227 controversial science-fiction novel Crash, the story of a group of people turned on by revisiting the sites of, and even recreating, famous car wrecks such as the one that killed teen idol James Dean. The novel is disturbingly perverse, and, like Naked Lunch, ‘‘unfilmable,’’ except that Cronenberg went ahead and filmed it anyway. As the characters keep raising the bar on their twisted hobby in order to increase their kicks and feel more alive, they start having sex with each other using their accident wounds as orifices—bizarre and horrific behavior from which Cronenberg does not avert his camera’s eye. As a result, the film was slapped with the dreaded NC- 17 rating until Cronenberg agreed to make some cuts to get it an ‘‘R.’’ The NC-17 version was eventually released on video. Either version, though, is a powerful viewing experience—albeit an unwholesome and unpleasant viewing experience that makes one question, ‘‘Why am I watching this?’’ This is undoubtedly the kind of audience response Cronenberg was striving for (as he has throughout his career), and sought to elicit as well with his next film, eXistenZ, another twisted allegory about the sexual and others extremes people feel the need to go to keep feeling alive in today’s Virtual Real- ity world. —Kim Newman, updated by John McCarty CUKOR, George Nationality: American. Born: New York, 7 July 1899. Education: DeWitt Clinton High School, New York. Military Service: Served in U.S. armed forces; directed film for the Signal Corps., 1943. Career: Stage manager on Broadway, 1919–24; manager, stock company in Rochester, New York, and director, New York City, 1924–26; stage director, New York, 1926–29; co-director for Paramount in Holly- wood, 1929–32; joined RKO, began association with Katharine Hepburn, 1932; began association with writers Ruth Gordon and Garson Kanin, 1947. Awards: Oscar for Best Director, and Directors Guild of America Award, for My Fair Lady, 1964; Honorary doctor- ates, University of Southern California, 1968, and Loyola University, Chicago, 1976; D.W. Griffith Award, Directors Guild of America, 1981; Golden Lion, Venice Festival, 1982. Died: 24 January 1983. Films as Director: 1930 Grumpy (co-d); The Virtuous Sin (co-d); The Royal Family of Broadway (co-d) 1931 Tarnished Lady; Girls about Town 1932 What Price Hollywood?; A Bill of Divorcement; Rockabye; One Hour with You (co-d with Lubitsch, uncredited, + dia- logue director); The Animal Kingdom (co-d, uncredited) 1933 Our Betters; Dinner at Eight; Little Women; David Copperfield (The Personal History, Adventures, Experience, and Obser- vations of David Copperfield, the Younger); No More Ladies (co-d, uncredited) 1936 Sylvia Scarlett; Romeo and Juliet 1937 Camille 1938 Holiday 1939 Zaza; The Women; Gone with the Wind (co-d, uncredited) George Cukor 1940 Susan and God; The Philadelphia Story 1941 A Woman’s Face; Two-Faced Woman 1942 Her Cardboard Lover 1943 Keeper of the Flame 1944 Gaslight; Winged Victory 1945 I’ll Be Seeing You (co-d, uncredited) 1947 A Double Life; Desire Me (co-d, uncredited) 1949 Edward My Son; Adam’s Rib 1950 A Life of Her Own; Born Yesterday 1951 The Model and the Marriage Broker 1952 The Marrying Kind; Pat and Mike 1953 The Actress 1954 It Should Happen to You; A Star Is Born 1956 Bhowani Junction 1957 Les Girls; Wild Is the Wind 1958 Hot Spell (co-d, uncredited) 1960 Heller in Pink Tights; Let’s Make Love; Song without End (co-d, uncredited) 1962 The Chapman Report 1964 My Fair Lady 1969 Justine 1972 Travels with My Aunt 1975 Love among the Ruins (for TV) 1976 The Bluebird CUKOR DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 228 1979 The Corn Is Green (for TV) 1981 Rich and Famous Other Films: 1929 River of Romance (Wallace) (dialogue d) 1930 All Quiet on the Western Front (Milestone) (dialogue d) Publications By CUKOR: articles— Interview with Eric Rohmer and Jean Domarchi, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1961. ‘‘Conversation with George Cukor,’’ with John Gillett and David Robinson, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1964. Interview with Richard Overstreet, in Interviews with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, New York, 1969. Interview, in The Celluloid Muse, by Charles Higham and Joel Greenberg, New York, 1972. Interview with Gene Phillips, in Film Comment (New York), Spring 1972. ‘‘Cukor and Cukor,’’ with J. Calendo, in Interview (New York), December 1973. ‘‘The Director,’’ in Hollywood Directors: 1914–40, edited by Rich- ard Koszarski, New York, 1976. ‘‘Surviving,’’ an interview with John Taylor, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1977. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: George Cukor,’’ edited by James Powers, in American Film (Washington, D.C.,), February 1978. ‘‘Carry on, Cukor,’’ with J. McBride and T. McCarthy, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1981. Interview with Gene D. Phillips, in Films and Filming (London), January 1982. Interview with J.P. Le Pavec and D. Rabourdin, in Cinéma (Paris), March 1982. ‘‘Gazovyi svet,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 5, 1993. On CUKOR: books— Langlois, Henri, and others, Hommage a George Cukor, Paris, 1963. Domarchi, Jean, George Cukor, Paris, 1965. Carey, Gary, Cukor and Company: The Films of George Cukor and His Collaborators, New York, 1971. Lambert, Gavin, On Cukor, New York, 1972. Clarens, Carlos, George Cukor, London, 1976. Phillips, Gene D., George Cukor, Boston, 1982. Bernadoni, James, George Cukor: A Critical Study and Filmography, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1985. Haver, Ronald, A Star Is Born: The Making of the 1954 Movie and Its 1983 Restoration, London, 1989. McGilligan, Patrik, George Cukor, a Double Life: A Biography of the Gentleman Director, New York, 1991. Levy, Emanuel, George Cukor, Master of Elegance: Hollywood’s Legendary Director and His Stars, New York, 1994. On CUKOR: articles— Houston, Penelope, ‘‘Cukor and the Kanins,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1955. Tozzi, Romano, ‘‘George Cukor: His Success Directing Women Has Obscured His Other Directorial Virtues,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1958. Reid, John, ‘‘So He Became a Lady’s Man,’’ in Films and Filming (London), August 1960. ‘‘Retrospective Cukor’’ issue of Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Febru- ary 1964. Buscombe, Ed, ‘‘On Cukor,’’ in Screen (London), Autumn 1973. Grisolia, M., ‘‘George Cukor, ou comment le desir vient aux femmes,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), February 1974. McBride, J., ‘‘George Cukor: The Blue Bird,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), November/December 1975. Friedman, A., ‘‘George Cukor: A Tribute,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), no. 35, 1976. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Cukor,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/ April 1978. Estrin, Allen, ‘‘George Cukor,’’ in The Hollywood Professionals, London and New York, 1980. Bodeen, De Witt, ‘‘George Cukor,’’ in Films in Review (New York), November 1981. Flint, Peter, obituary in New York Times, 26 January 1983. Obituary, Hollywood Reporter, 26 and 28 January 1983. Kanin, Garson, ‘‘George Cukor’s Loving Marriage to the Movies,’’ in New York Times, 30 January 1983. ‘‘Cukor Section’’ of Casablanca (Madrid), March 1983. Magny, Joel, ‘‘George Cukor: Un homme qui s’affiche,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), March 1983. Taylor, John Russell, ‘‘Remembering George Cukor,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1983. Clarens, Carlos, ‘‘The Cukor Touch,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1983. Ward, L.E., ‘‘The Films of George Cukor,’’ in Classic Images (Muscatine, Iowa), December 1986. Berg, A. S., ‘‘George Cukor: Sparkling Director of Holiday, The Philadelphia Story, and My Fair Lady,’’ in Architectural Digest (Los Angeles), vol. 47, April 1990. Mirza, C., ‘‘The Collective Spirit of Revolt: An Historical Reading of Holiday,’’ in Wide Angle (Baltimore), vol. 12, July 1990. Lippe, Richard, ‘‘Authorship and Cukor: A Reappraisal,’’ in Cineaction (Toronto), no. 21, Summer-Fall 1990. Calanquin, L., ‘‘Saga of George Cukor,’’ in Classic Images (Muscatine), no. 192, June 1991. Cincotti, J. A., ‘‘I Thought It Was Going to Kill Me,’’ in New York Times, 15 December 1991. Lippe, Richard, ‘‘Greta Garbo: The Star Image: A Corrective Read- ing,’’ in Cineaction (Toronto), no. 26–27, Winter 1992. Petertic, A., ‘‘George Cukor,’’ in Ekran (Ljubljana, Slovenia), vol. 17, no. 3, 1992. Doty, A., ‘‘Whose Text Is It Anyway?: Queer Cultures, Queer Auteurs, and Queer Authorship,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film and Video (Langhorne, PA), vol. 15, November 1993. *** CURTIZDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 229 George Cukor’s films range from classics like Greta Garbo’s Camille, to Adam’s Rib with Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn, to the Judy Garland musical A Star Is Born. Throughout the years he managed to ‘‘weather the changes in public taste and the pressures of the Hollywood studio system without compromising his style, his taste, or his ethical standards,’’ as his honorary degree from Loyola University of Chicago is inscribed. Indeed, Cukor informed each of the stories he brought to the screen with his affectionately critical view of humanity. In film after film he sought to prod the mass audience to reconsider their cherished illusions in order to gain fresh insights into the problems that confront everyone. ‘‘When a director has provided tasteful entertainment of a high order consistently,’’ noted Andrew Sarris, ‘‘it is clear that he is much more than a mere entertainer, he is a genuine artist.’’ Although most of Cukor’s films are adaptations of preexisting novels and plays, he has always chosen material that has been consistent with his view of reality. Most often he has explored the conflict between illusion and reality in peoples’ lives. The chief characters in his films are frequently actors and actresses, for they, more than anyone, run the risk of allowing the world of illusion with which they are constantly involved to become their reality. This theme is obvious in many of Cukor’s best films and appears in some of his earliest work, including The Royal Family of Broadway, which he co-directed. In it he portrays a family of troupers, based on the Barrymores, who are wedded to their world of fantasy in a way that makes a shambles of their private lives. The attempt of individuals to reconcile their cherished dreams with the sober realities of life continues in films as superficially different as Dinner at Eight, The Philadelphia Story, and A Double Life. Ronald Colman earned an Academy Award in the last as an actor who becomes so identified with the parts he plays that, while enacting Othello, he develops a murderous streak of jealousy which eventually destroys him. While it is true that Cukor was often drawn to stories about show people, his films also suggest that everyone leads a double life that moves between illusion and reality, and that everyone must seek to sort out fantasy from fact if they are to cope realistically with their problems—something Cukor’s characters frequently fail to do. Les Girls is the most explicit of all Cukor’s films in treating this theme. Here the same events are told from four different points of view at a libel trial, each version differing markedly from the others. Because Cukor allows each narrator ‘‘equal time,’’ he is sympathetic to the way each of them has subconsciously revised their common experi- ences in a manner that enables him or her to live with the past in the present. As Sarris remarks, Cukor does not imply that people neces- sarily are liars, but rather that they tell the truth in their own fashion. Though Cukor must have harbored some degree of affection and sympathy for the world of romantic illusion—for there is always a hint of regret in his films when actuality inevitably asserts itself in the life of one of his dreamers—his movies nonetheless remain firmly rooted in, and committed to, the workaday world of reality. Directing his last film, Rich and Famous, merited Cukor the distinction of being one of the oldest filmmakers ever to direct a major motion picture. His work on that film likewise marked him as a man who had enjoyed the longest continuous career of any director in film or television. Some of the satisfaction which he derived from his long career was grounded in the fact that few directors have commanded such a large portion of the mass audience. ‘‘His movies,’’ Richard Schickel has noted, ‘‘can be appreciated—no, liked—at one level or another by just about everyone.’’ For his part, Cukor once reflected that ‘‘I look upon every picture that I make as the first one I’ve ever done—and the last. I love each film I have directed, and I try to make each one as good as I possibly can. Mind you, making movies is no bed of roses. Every day isn’t Christmas. It’s been a hard life, but also a joyous one.’’ —Gene D. Phillips CURTIZ, Michael Nationality: Hungarian. Born: Born Mihály Kertész in Budapest, 24 December 1888. Also known as Michael Courtice. Education: Markoszy University and Royal Academy of Theatre and Art, Buda- pest. Military Service: Served in Hungarian infantry, 1914–15. Family: Married 1) actress Lucy Dorraine, 1915 (divorced 1923); 2) Bess Meredyth. Career: Stage actor, 1906–12; directed first Hungarian feature film, Az utolsó bohém, 1912; studied filmmaking at Nordisk Studios in Denmark, 1912–14; managing director, Ph?nix Studios, Hungary, 1917; left Hungary, worked in Swedish, French, and German film industries, 1918; director for Sascha Films, Austria, 1919; signed by Jack Warner, directed first Hollywood film, The 3rd Michael Curtiz CURTIZ DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 230 Degree, 1926. Awards: Oscar for Best Director for Casablanca, 1943. Died: 11 April 1962. Films as Director: (as Mihály Kertész) 1912 Az utolsó bohém (The Last Bohemian); Ma es holnap (Today and Tomorrow) (+ role) 1913 Rablélek (Captive Soul); Hazasodik az uram (My Husband Lies) 1914 A hercegn? Pongyolaban (Princess Pongyola); Az éjszaka rabjai (Slaves of the Night) (+ role); A K?lcs?nkért csecsem?k (Borrowed Babies); Bánk bán; A tolonc (The Vagrant); Aranyáso (The Golden Shovel) 1915 Akit ketten szeretnek (Loved By Two) (+ role) 1916 Az ezust kecske (The Silver Goat) (+ co-sc); A medikus (The Apothecary); Doktor ur (The Doctor); Farkas (The Wolf); A fekete szivarvany (The Black Rainbow); Makkhetes (Seven of Clubs); Karthauzi (The Carthusian); A Magyar f?ld ereje (The Strength of the Hungarian Soil) 1917 Arendás zsidó (John, the Tenant); Az ezredes (The Colonel); A f?ld embere (The Man of the Soil); Halálcseng? (The Death Bell); A kuruzslo (The Charlatan); A Szentjóbi erd? titka (The Secret of St. Job Forest); A senki fia (Nobody’s Son); Tavasz a télben (Spring in Wintertime); Zoárd Mester (Master Zoard); Tatárjárás (Invasion); A béke ut ja (The Road to Peace); A v?r?s Sámson (The Red Samson); Az utolsó hajnal (The Last Dawn); Egy krajcár t?rténete (The Story of a Penny) 1918 Kilencvenkilenc (99); Judás; Lulu; Az ?rd?g (The Devil); A napraforgós h?lgy (The Lady with Sunflowers); Alraune (co-d); Vig ?zvegy (The Merry Widow) (+ sc); Varázskering? (Magic Waltz); Lu, a kokott (Lu, the Cocotte); A Wellingtoni rejtély (The Wellington Mystery); Szamárb?r (The Donkey Skin); A csunya fiu (The Ugly Boy); A skorpió (The Scorpion) 1919 J?n az ?csem (John the Younger Brother); Liliom (unfinished) (in Austria, as Michael Kertesz) 1919 Die Dame mit dem schwarzen Handschuh (The Lady with the Black Glove) 1920 Der Stern von Damaskus; Die Dame mit den Sonnenblum (+ sc); Herzogin Satanella; Boccaccio (+ pr); Die Gottesgeisel 1921 Cherchez la femme; Dorothys Bekenntnis (Frau Dorothys Bekenntnis); Wege des Schreckens (Labyrinth des Grauens); Miss Tutti Frutti 1922 Sodom und Gomorrah (Die Legende von Sünde und Strafe) (+ co-sc) 1923 Sodom und Gomorrah: Part II. Die Strafe (Die Legende von Sünde und Strafe) (+ co-sc); Samson und Dalila (co-d); Der Lawine (Avalanche); Der junge Medardus; Namenlos (Der Scharlatan; Der falsche Arzt) 1924 Ein Spiel ums Leben; Harun al Raschid; Die Slavenk?nigin (Moon of Israel) 1925 Celimene, Poupee de Montmartre (Das Spielzeug von Paris; Red Heels) 1926 Der goldene Schmetterling (The Road to Happiness); Fiaker Nr. 13 (Einsp?nner Nr. 13) (tm) (in United States, as Michael Curtiz) 1926 The Third Degree 1927 A Million Bid; Good Time Charley; A Desired Woman 1928 Tenderloin 1929 Noah’s Ark; The Glad Rag Doll; Madonna of Avenue A; Hearts in Exile; The Gamblers 1930 Mammy; Under a Texas Moon; The Matrimonial Bed (A Matrimonial Problem); Bright Lights; A Soldier’s Play- thing (A Soldier’s Pay); River’s End 1931 D?mon des Meeres (German language version of Lloyd Bacon’s Moby Dick); God’s Gift to Women (Too Many Women); The Mad Genius 1932 The Woman from Monte Carlo; Alias the Doctor; The Strange Love of Molly Louvain; Doctor X; Cabin in the Cotton 1933 Twenty Thousand Years in Sing Sing; The Mystery of the Wax Museum; The Keyhole; Private Detective 62; Goodbye Again; The Kennel Murder Case; Female 1934 Mandalay; British Agent; Jimmy the Gent; The Key 1935 Black Fury; The Case of the Curious Bride; Front Page Woman; Little Big Shot; Captain Blood 1936 The Walking Dead; Stolen Holiday; Charge of the Light Brigade 1937 Kid Galahad; Mountain Justice; The Perfect Specimen 1938 Gold is Where You Find It; The Adventures of Robin Hood (co-d); Four Daughters; Four’s a Crowd; Angels with Dirty Faces 1939 Dodge City; Sons of Liberty; The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex; Four Wives; Daughters Courageous 1940 Virginia City; The Sea Hawk; Santa Fe Trail 1941 The Sea Wolf; Dive Bomber 1942 Captains of the Clouds; Yankee Doodle Dandy; Casablanca 1943 Mission to Moscow; This Is the Army 1944 Passage to Marseille; Janie 1945 Roughly Speaking; Mildred Pierce 1946 Night and Day 1947 Life with Father; The Unsuspected 1948 Romance on the High Seas (It’s Magic) 1949 My Dream Is Yours (+ pr); Flamingo Road (+ exec pr); The Lady Takes a Sailor 1950 Young Man with a Horn (Young Man of Music); Bright Leaf; Breaking Point 1951 Jim Thorpe—All American (Man of Bronze); Force of Arms 1952 I’ll See You in My Dreams; The Story of Will Rogers 1953 The Jazz Singer; Trouble along the Way 1954 The Boy from Oklahoma; The Egyptian; White Christmas 1955 We’re No Angels 1956 The Scarlet Hour (+ pr); The Vagabond King; The Best Things in Life Are Free 1957 The Helen Morgan Story (Both Ends of the Candle) 1958 The Proud Rebel; King Creole 1959 The Hangman; The Man in the Net CURTIZDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 231 1960 The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; A Breath of Scandal (Olympia) 1961 Francis of Assisi 1962 The Comancheros Other Films: 1913 Atlantis (Blom) (asst d, role) Publications By CURTIZ: article— ‘‘Talent Shortage Is Causing Two-Year Production Delay,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1956. On CURTIZ: books— Martin, Pete, Hollywood without Makeup, New York, 1948. Anobile, Richard, editor, Michael Curtiz’s ‘‘Casablanca,” New York, 1975. Rosenzweig, Sidney, ‘‘Casablanca’’ and Other Major Films of Michael Curtiz, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1982. Kinnard, Roy, and R.J. Vitone, The American Films of Michael Curtiz, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1986. Mayne, Judith, Private Novels, Public Films, Athens, Georgia, 1988. Robertson, James C., The Casablanca Man: The Cinema of Michael Curtiz, New York, 1993. On CURTIZ: articles— Martin, Pete, ‘‘Hollywood’s Champion Language Assassin,’’ in Saturday Evening Post (New York), 2 August 1947. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Likable but Elusive,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Dienstfrey, Harris, ‘‘Hitch Your Genre to a Star,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Fall 1964. Callenbach, Ernest, ‘‘Comparative Anatomy of Folk-Myth Films: Robin Hood and Antonio das Mortes,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berke- ley), Winter 1969/70. Nolan, Jack Edmund, ‘‘Michael Curtiz,’’ in Films in Review (New York), no. 9, 1970. Behlmer, R., and A. Pinto, ‘‘Letters,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1971. Davis, John, ‘‘Captain Blood,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), June 1971. Davis, John, ‘‘The Unsuspected,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), Summer 1972. Davis, John, ‘‘The Tragedy of Mildred Pierce,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), Fall 1972. Canham, Kingsley, ‘‘Michael Curtiz,’’ in The Hollywood Profession- als, Vol. 1, London, 1973. Shadoian, J., ‘‘Michael Curtiz’ Twenty Thousand Years in Sing Sing,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green, Ohio), Spring 1973. Davis, John, ‘‘When Will They Ever Learn?,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), Autumn 1975. Berard, V.R., and P. Canniere, ‘‘Michael Curtiz: Ma?tre du baroque,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), February 1982. Werner, G., ‘‘Fran Lidingon till Casablanca?’’ in Chaplin (Stock- holm), vol. 26, no. 2, 1984. Viviani, C., ‘‘Les emigres allemands dans le film noir americain entre 1944 et 1954,’’ in Cinémaction (Conde-sur-Noireau), no. 56, July 1990. Minutolo, S., ‘‘Casablanca,’’ in Quaderni di Cinema (Firenze), October-December 1990. Vernet, M., ‘‘Michael Curtiz,’’ in Ekran (Ljubljana, Slovenia), vol. 16, no. 6–7, 1991. Sayre, N., ‘‘Curtiz: A Man for All Genres. . . ,’’ in New York Times, 29 November 1992. Schnelle, J., ‘‘All Right My Hearties, Follow Me,’’ in Film-Dienst (K?ln), vol. 46, 19 January 1993. Bruyn, O. de, and F. Richard, ‘‘Michael Curtiz au festival de La Rochelle: L’homme pressé,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 384, Febru- ary 1993. Lyons, Donald, ‘‘Iron Mike,’’ Film Comment (Denville, New Jer- sey), vol. 32, no. 2, March-April 1996. *** The films of Michael Curtiz have come to symbolize Warner Brothers Studios of the 1930s and 1940s. Curtiz directed many favorites from that era, including Captain Blood, The Charge of the Light Brigade, The Sea Hawk, Yankee Doodle Dandy, Twenty Thou- sand Years in Sing Sing, and Mildred Pierce. He helped guide Bette Davis as her popularity rose in the 1930s, and helped establish Errol Flynn as the symbol of the swashbuckling hero. James Cagney (Yankee Doodle Dandy) and Joan Crawford (Mildred Pierce) both won Oscars under Curtiz’s direction. His long career and directorial strengths benefitted from the constant work available in the studios of the 1930s and 1940s. Most observers, however, note a precipitous decline in the quality of Curtiz’s films after World War II. Surely Curtiz’s most famous creation for today’s audience is Casablanca, the only film for which he received an Oscar for Best Director. This cult favorite now has achieved a life of its own and established Bogart and Bergman as modern folk heroes. Conversely, director Curtiz has been lost in the shuffle with the passage of time. The anti-auteurist argument seems to be that this particular film represents a happy ‘‘accident’’ of the studio system, and that its enduring popularity should not be credited to its director. What is lost in this analysis is the fact that Casablanca was a major hit of 1943 (finishing among the top grossing films of the year), won three Academy Awards (Best Picture, Director, and Screenplay), and earned Curtiz several awards as the year’s best director. Critics of the day recognized Curtiz’s input. Certainly today we should give proper credit to the director of a film that was popular upon release, continues to be popular today, and has influenced countless other works. Curtiz has been difficult for film historians to deal with because of the length and breadth of his career. Usually overlooked is the time he spent in Europe; Curtiz did not begin with Warner Brothers until he came to the United States at the age of thirty-eight. His career began in Hungary, where he participated in the beginning of the Hungarian film industry, usually receiving credit for directing that country’s first feature film. Curtiz remained active until the outbreak of the First World War. After the war he moved to Vienna where he directed several important films, including the epic Sodom and Gomorrah. Scholars know little CURTIZ DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 232 else about this part of Curtiz’s career, however. Accounts of other activities lead only to contradictions; no wholly reliable list of credits exists. Sadly, historians have written off the first two decades of Curtiz’s career. We know a great deal of the work of other emigrés, such as Fritz Lang and F.W. Murnau, but virtually nothing of Curtiz. Not unexpectedly there exist several versions of why and how Warner Brothers contacted Curtiz and brought him to the United States. Regardless, from 1926 Curtiz became intertwined with all the innovations of the Warner Brothers studio. In the mid-1920s he was thrust into Warner attempts to innovate sound. His Tenderloin and Noah’s Ark were two-part talkies that achieved considerable popular- ity and garnered millions in box-office revenues. In a key transitional year, 1930, Curtiz directed no less than six Warner Brothers talkies. In that same year Warner Brothers tried to introduce color, but with none of the success associated with the studio’s efforts with sound. Curtiz’s Mammy, one of Jolson’s follow-ups to The Jazz Singer and The Singing Fool, had color sequences. In 1933 he directed the well- regarded, all-color horror film, The Mystery of the Wax Museum. Curtiz’s record during the transition to sound elevated him to the top echelon of contract directors at Warner Brothers. Unlike others, Curtiz seemed not to utilize this success to push for greater freedom and independence. Instead, he seemed content to take what was assigned, executing his work in a classic style. He produced crisp flowing narratives, seeking efficiency of method. He was a conserva- tive director, adapting, borrowing, and ultimately utilizing all the dominant codes of the Hollywood system. Stylistic innovations were left to others. Today critics praise the film noir look of Mildred Pierce, but this film was never thought of as one of the forerunners of that style when it was initially released. After Mildred Pierce, Curtiz moved on to Night and Day, the fictionalized life of Cole Porter starring Cary Grant, and Life with Father, a nostalgic, light family romance starring William Powell and Irene Dunne. Both of these latter features took in a great deal of money and earned considerable critical praise, once again demonstrating how well Curtiz could operate when called upon by his employer. If there is a way to get a handle on the enormous output of Curtiz’s career, it is through genre analysis. In the early 1930s Curtiz stuck to formula melodramas. His limited participation in Warner Brothers’s social realism cycles came with films like Black Fury, which looked at strikebreaking. Curtiz seemed to hit his stride with Warner Broth- ers’s Errol Flynn pirate cycle of the late 1930s. Captain Blood and The Sea Hawk stand as lasting symbols of Hollywood’s ability to capture the sweep of romantic adventure. Warner Brothers also sent director Curtiz and star Flynn to the Old West in Dodge City and Virginia City. In the early 1940s the Warner studio returned to the musical, establishing its niche with the biographical film. Curtiz participated, directing Yankee Doodle Dandy (which depicted George M. Cohan’s life), This Is the Army (Irving Berlin), and the aforemen- tioned Night and Day (Cole Porter). Yankee Doodle Dandy demon- strated how well this European emigré had taken to the United States. Curtiz would continue to deal with Americana in his films during the 1940s. For example, he touched deep American ideological strains with Casablanca, while Mildred Pierce examined the dark side of the American family. Feminist critics have noted how the portrait of a strong woman in the latter film mirrors the freedom women achieved during World War II—a freedom withdrawn after the war when the men returned home. The family in Mildred Pierce is constructed in an odd, bitter way, contrasting with Curtiz’s affection- ate portrait in Life with Father. Genre analysis is helpful, but in the end it still tells us too little of what we want to know about this important director. As critics and historians continue to go through his films and utilize the records now available at the University of Wisconsin, University of Southern California, and Princeton, more insights will come to light about Curtiz’s participation in the Holly- wood studio system. In the meantime, Curtiz’s films will live on for the fans with continual re-screenings of Casablanca, Mildred Pierce, and The Adventures of Robin Hood. —Douglas Gomery 233 D DANTE, Joe Nationality: American. Born: Morristown, New Jersey, 28 Novem- ber 1946. Family: Single. Education: Graduated from Philadelphia College of Art (now Philadelphia Colleges of the Arts), 1968. Career: Contributing editor for Castle of Frankenstein, form 1962; managing editor of Film Bulletin, 1968–1974; trailer editor for Roger Corman’s New World Pictures, 1974–1976; co-director and co-editor of his first feature, Hollywood Boulevard, 1976; director of Police Squad, The Twilight Zone, and Amazing Stories TV series, from 1983; Gremlins a major commercial success for director Dante and pro- ducer Steven Spielberg, 1984; creative consultant for Eerie, Indiana TV series, 1991; director and executive producer for Warlord: The Battle for the Galaxy (The Osiris Chronicles) TV series, 1998. Awards: Saturn Award, Best Editing, for Piranha, shared with Mark Goldblatt, 1979; Silver Raven Award, for Matinee, 1993; Locarno International Film Festival, Leopard of Honor Award, 1998. Agent: David Gersh, The Gersh Agency, 222 N. Canon Drive, Suite 202, Beverly Hills, CA 90210, U.S.A. Joe Dante on the set of Small Soldiers Films as Director: 1976 Hollywood Boulevard (+ ed) 1978 Piranha (+ ed) 1979 Rock’n’Roll High School (uncredited) 1980 The Howling (+ ed) 1983 Third segment of The Twilight Zone: The Movie 1984 Gremlins 1985 ‘‘The Shadow Man’’ episode of The Twilight Zone TV series; ‘‘Boo’’ and ‘‘The Greibble’’ episodes of Amazing Stories TV series; Explorers 1987 Innerspace; Amazon Women on the Moon (co-d; segments: ‘‘Hairlooming,’’ ‘‘Bullshit or Not,’’ ‘‘Critic’s Corner,’’ ‘‘Roast Your Loved One,’’ ‘‘Reckless Youth’’) 1989 The ‘Burbs 1990 Gremlins II: The New Batch (+ ro as Grandpa Fred) 1993 Matinee 1994 Runaway Daughters (for TV) 1995 ‘‘Lightening’’ episode (‘‘Picture Windows: Language of the Heart’’) of Picture Windows (TV mini series) 1997 The Second Civil Was (for TV) 1998 Small Soldiers Films as Actor: 1976 Cannonball 1985 The Fantasy Film Worlds of George Pal 1991 Oscar (as face on the cutting room floor) 1992 The Magical World of Chuck Jones (as interviewee); Flying Saucers over Hollywood: The Plan 9 Companion (The Ed Wood Story: The Plan 9 Companion); Sleepwalkers (as lab assistant) 1994 A Century of Cinema (as himself); Il Silenzio dei prosciutti (Silence of the Hams) (as dying man); Beverly Hills Cop III (as jailer) 1997 Flesh and Blood (as himself) Other Films: 1972 Fly Me (dialogue director) 1973 The Arena (Naked Warriors and La Rivolta delle Gladiatrici) (ed) 1977 Grand Theft Auto (ed) 1995 Mr. Stitch TV (special thanks) 1996 The Phantom (exec pr) DANTE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 234 Publications By DANTE: articles— Crisafulli, Chuck, ‘‘A Fan Turned Pro . . . A Guy Named Joe’’ (interview), in Filmfax (Evanston, Illinois), no. 38, April-May 1993. On DANTE: articles— Cardon, André, ‘‘Joe Dante a la dent longue!’’ in Séquences (Québec), no. 126, October 1986. Bassan Raphael, and Frédéric Benudis, ‘‘Panic sur Florida Beach: conte philosophique dantesque / Joe Dante: l’ange noir de Spielberg,’’ in Mensuel du Cinéma (Nice), no. 8, July-August 1993. Barbano, N., ‘‘Jeg savner film!’’ in Kosmorama (Copenhagen), vol. 42, no. 216, Summer 1996. *** Multi-talented director Joe Dante is a bit like one of the juvenile heroes of one of his best films, Explorers, tinkering about with various cinematic bits and pieces and the found parts of miscellaneous cultural artifacts to assemble unique vehicles which sometimes take flight to new and astounding fantasy worlds. It’s no wonder personali- ties similarly steeped in America’s cinematic and pop cultural past (such as Roger Corman and Steven Spielberg) were among the first to recognize Dante’s unique attributes. Like certain other writers on film who eventually became filmmakers themselves (Truffaut, Goddard, Peter Bogdanovich) Dante also be- gan his career as a periodical editor and critic of the genre films he loved. But in 1974 Dante began editing films as well, and his active career in filmmaking commenced with a job developing trailers for Roger Corman’s New World Pictures (with Jon Davison and Allan Arkush). At New World the trio was given the daunting challenge of generating audience anticipation for an assortment of Corman re- leases, among them a steady stream of no-budget Filipino imports. Dante’s first effort (done with Davison, who would later produce Dante’s first two legitimate features) was The Movie Orgy, a seven- hour pastiche of 1950s B movies. This was followed in 1976 by his first commercial feature, Hollywood Boulevard, a collaboration with Allan Arkush in which Corman let the two aspiring filmmakers toss together a satire of low-budget filmmaking on . . . an extremely low budget. Dante would further pursue his love of B movies in 1987 with Amazon Women on the Moon, and in 1993 with Matinee. Dante’s two feature films that followed Hollywood Boulevard launched his career as a legitimate master of genre film in his own right. Piranha, co-written by novelist/director John Sayles, was originally conceived as a Jaws parody. However, the screenplay’s inherent humanity elevates it above the typical slasher films popular in the post- Halloween 1980s. Aside from its imaginative technique, Piranha is effective because Dante and Sayles develop characters about which the audiences cares. The same held true for The Howling, a film which also manifested Dante’s fondness for self-reflexive, life/media blur- ring situations in a tale of a television reporter who eventually becomes involved in a werewolf cult in an Esalen-like California retreat. The involving screenplay was also rife with references to Little Red Riding Hood, Big Bad Wolf cartoons, famous directors of werewolf films, and Allan Ginsberg’s ‘‘Howl’’. The Howling ushered in a peak decade for Dante and the 1980s saw the release of his most distinctive feature films. Gremlins, produced by Steven Spielberg, proved a box-office blockbuster, and the apex of Dante’s commercial clout. The tale centered on Mogwai, an adorably cuddly creature who morphs into a tribe of grotesque and gleefully malicious reptilian creatures that wage an assault on an idyllic Frank Capra-esque small town. Gremlins introduced a level of graphic violence that was new to Dante’s work, and for which the film received some severe critical reviews. In two of the film’s most celebrated technical sequences one of the creatures is pureed in a blender, another self-destructs in a microwave oven. One review dubbed the film ‘‘Dante’s Inferno.’’ Dante had first worked for Spielberg on the third segment of 1983’s Twilight Zone: The Movie, and comments that Spielberg chose him for Gremlins because Pira- nha was Spielberg’s ‘‘favorite rip-off of Jaws.’’ Dante followed Gremlins with some of his most unique and appealing work. Explorers in 1985 was a kind of ‘‘Boy’s Own Story’’ of three preteen buddies who construct a working space craft from the carriage of a 1950s amusement park ride, the Tilt-a-Whirl. Trans- ported into outer space the trio encounter a race of grotesque yet appealing Muppet-like aliens whose knowledge (and paranoiac ap- prehension) of the human race stems from their having tuned in to a steady stream of old movies, television, and media beamed up from earth. A charming amalgam of Peter Pan and Tom Swift, of childhood wonder and disillusionment, the sentiment is kept in check by a sharp gloss of media satire. Dante’s enduring love of B movies peaked most overtly in a collaborative funny valentine to low-budget science-fiction films and mass media foibles, 1987’s Amazon Women on the Moon. This most unique and self-reflexive of American movie satires is a hodge- podge of comic skits held together by on-going episodes from a mangled print of a 1950s sci-fi film being screened on late-night television. (When viewed on TV the effect is truly disorienting!) Co- directed by Carl Gottlieb, Peter Horton, John Landis, and Robert K. Weiss, Dante helmed several of the film’s best sequences. These include the substantial ‘‘Critic’s Corner/Roast Your Loved One’’ episode in which a nondescript middle-class male expires of a heart attack while watching a mysterious television critique of his mundane life (which is given an emphatic ‘‘two thumbs down’’ by two merciless critics). His demise is followed by a funeral in the guise of a celebrity roast MC’ed by his wife, and featuring real-life comedians such as Steve Allan and Rip Taylor. The film is capped by Dante’s brilliant post-credit parody of old sex/VD education films, ‘‘Reckless Youth,’’ with Carrie Fisher and Paul Bartel. Two rather disappointing films—a comedy, The ‘Burbs, and the technically interesting Fantastic Voyage parody, Innerspace—spawned a sequel to Dante’s major commercial success, Gremlins II: The New Batch, in 1990. But the director was back in peak form in 1993 with Matinee, an affectionate homage to B-movie mogul William Castle. Like Explorers, Matinee tempers its unexpectedly poignant evocation of a young boy’s experience of the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 with an affectionately satirical portrait of a low-budget film producer come to town to promote his cheap creature feature, Mant! (‘‘Half-Man, Half-Ant!’’) Dante focused on television work for the rest of the 1990s, but did direct one other feature, Small Soldiers, in 1998. Soldiers is a well- meaning but rather mean-spirited allegory that deals with children’s action toys which turn violently aggressive when implanted with faulty military microchips by a greedy defense industry conglomer- ate. Somewhat obscured by the violent techno wizardry is a plea for pacifism and tolerance, and a critique of profiteering big business. But, as Variety pointed out, ‘‘Despite good intentions, Small Soldiers DASSINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 235 is a muddle of violence and sermonizing that doesn’t achieve its intended comic edge. When the lethal toys go into action any ‘message’ evaporates, and all one can do is marvel at the technology— and be dumbstruck by the onscreen carnage.’’ Still, in his finest work Dante was genuinely (and knowledgeably) retro long before everything from music to Volkswagens seemed to become trendily so in the 1990s. He innately possesses a mindset which has translated into a body of films which draw on a plethora of influences from America’s cinematic and cultural past with a unique blend of poignancy and satire. At his best there’s no one like him, and even misfired Dante is more interesting than most other genre work done in the Hollywood mainstream in the last decades of history’s most complex, commercial, and culturally bewildering century. —Ross Care DASSIN, Jules Nationality: American. Born: Middletown, Connecticut, 12 Decem- ber 1911. Education: Morris High School, the Bronx, New York. Family: Married 1) Beatrice Launer, 1933 (divorced 1962), one son, two daughters; 2) actress Melina Mercouri, 1966. Career: Member of Artef Players (Jewish socialist theatre collective), 1936; directed first Broadway production, Medicine Show, 1939; contracted to RKO (moved to MGM after eight months), Hollywood, 1940; left MGM and worked with producer Mark Hellinger, 1946; named by Edward Dmytryk and Frank Tuttle in HUAC testimony as member of Holly- wood ‘‘Communist faction,’’ 1951; subpoenaed by HUAC, 1952; moved to Europe, 1953. Awards: Best Director Award (shared), Cannes Festival, for Rififi, 1955. Address: 25 Anagnostopoulou St., Athens, Greece. Films as Director: 1941 The Tell-Tale Heart (short) 1942 Nazi Agent; The Affairs of Martha (Once upon a Thursday); Reunion (Reunion in France; Mademoiselle France) 1943 Young Ideas 1944 The Canterville Ghost 1946 A Letter for Evie; Two Smart People 1947 Brute Force 1948 The Naked City 1949 Thieves’ Highway 1950 Night and the City 1955 Du Rififi chez les hommes (Rififi) (+ co-sc, role as jewel thief under pseudonym Perlo Vita) 1958 Celui qui doit mourir (He Who Must Die) (+ co-sc) 1959 La legge (La Loi) (released in U.S. 1960 as Where the Hot Winds Blow) (+ sc) 1960 Pote tin kyriaki (Never on Sunday) (+ pr, sc, role) 1962 Phaedra (+ pr, co-sc) 1964 Topkapi (+ pr) 1966 10:30 p.m. Summer (+ co-pr, sc, bit role) 1967 Survival 67 (+ co-pr, appearance) (documentary) 1968 Uptight! (+ pr, co-sc) 1971 La Promesse de l’aube (Promise at Dawn) (+ pr, sc, role as Ivan Mozhukhin under pseudonym Perlo Vita) 1974 The Rehearsal (+ sc) 1978 A Dream of Passion (+ pr, sc) 1980 Circle of Two (released in USA 1982) Publications By DASSIN: articles— Interview with Claude Chabrol and Fran?ois Truffaut, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April and May 1955. Interview with Cynthia Grenier, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1957/58. Interview with George Bluestone, in Film Culture (New York), February 1958. ‘‘I See Dassin Make the Law,’’ interview with John Lane, in Films and Filming (London), September 1958. ‘‘Style and Instinct,’’ interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), February and March 1970. ‘‘‘A Dream of Passion’: An Interview with Jules Dassin,’’ with D. Georgakas and P. Anastasopoulos, in Cinéaste (New York), Fall 1978. On DASSIN: books— Ferrero, Adelio, Jules Dassin, Parma, 1961. McArthur, Colin, Underworld USA, London, 1972. Schuster, Mel, The Contemporary Greek Cinema, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1979. Arnold, Frank, and Michael Esser, Hommage fur Melina Mercouri und Jules Dassin, Berlin, 1984. Siclier, Fabrien, and Jacques Levy, Jules Dassin, Paris, 1986. On DASSIN: articles— Alpert, Hollis, ‘‘Greek Passion,’’ in Saturday Review (New York), 20 December 1958. Hammel, F., ‘‘A Director’s Return,’’ in Cue (New York), 10 March 1962. ‘‘Jules Dassin,’’ in Film Dope (London), April 1976. Horton, A., ‘‘Jules Dassin: A Multi-national Filmmaker Consid- ered,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylvania), Spring 1984. Kozloff, S.R., ‘‘Humanizing the Voice of God: Narration in The Naked City,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin), vol. 23, no. 4, Sum- mer 1984. Film a Doba (Prague), February 1987. Cieutat, Michel, ‘‘Trois exilés du maccarthyisme en Europe: Berry, Losey, Dassin,’’ in Cinémaction (Courbevoie), July 1990. Sight and Sound (London), October 1993. Lewis, Kevin, ‘‘Love and Noir with Jules Dassin,’’ in DGA Magazine (Los Angeles), April-May 1995. Hanisch, Michael, ‘‘Fremder in Hollywood,’’ in Film-Dienst (Co- logne), 17 December 1996. *** DASSIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 236 Jules Dassin Between the mid-1940s and the late 1950s, Jules Dassin directed some of the better realistic, hard-bitten, fast-paced crime dramas produced in America, before his blacklisting and subsequent move to Europe. However, while he has made some very impressive films, his career as a whole is lacking in artistic cohesion. Dassin’s films are occasionally innovative: The Naked City is one of the first police dramas shot on location, on the streets of New York; Rififi is a forerunner of detailed jewelry heist dramas, highlighted by a thirty-five-minute sequence chronicling the break-in, shot without a word of dialogue or note of music; Never on Sunday, starring his wife Melina Mercouri as a happy hooker, made the actress an international star, won her an Academy Award nomination, and popularized in America the Greek bouzouki music. The Naked City and Rififi are particularly exciting, as well as trend-setting, while Brute Force remains a striking, naturalistic prison drama, with Burt Lancaster in one of his most memorable early performances and Hume Cronyn wonderfully despicable as a Hitlerish guard captain. Thieves’ Highway, also shot on location, is a vivid drama of truck driver Richard Conte taking on racketeer Lee J. Cobb. Topkapi is a Rififi remake, with a delightful touch of comedy. Many of Dassin’s later films, such as Brute Force and Thieves’ Highway, attempt to observe human nature: they focus on the individual fighting his own demons while trying to survive within a chaotic society. For example, in A Dream of Passion, an updating of Sophocles’ Medea, an American woman is jailed in Greece for the murder of her three children; Up Tight, the filmmaker’s first Ameri- can-made release after the McCarthy hysteria, is a remake of The Informer set in a black ghetto. Unfortunately, they are all generally flawed: with the exception of Never on Sunday and Topkapi, his collaborations with Melina Mercouri (from He Who Must Die to A Dream of Passion) are disappointing, while Up Tight pales beside the original. Circle of Two, with teenager Tatum O’Neal baring her breasts for aging Richard Burton, had a limited release. Dassin’s early triumphs have been obscured by his more recent fiascos, and as a result his critical reputation is now irrevocably tarnished. The villain in his career is the blacklist, which tragically clipped his wings just as he was starting to fly. Indeed, he could not find work in Europe for five years, as producers felt American distributors would automatically ban any film with his signature. When Rififi opened, critics wrote about Dassin as if he were European. The New York Herald Tribune reported in 1961, ‘‘At one ceremony, when the award to Rififi was announced, (Dassin) was called to the dais, and DAVESDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 237 a French flag was raised above him. ‘It should have been a moment of triumph but I feel awful. They were honoring my work and I’m an American. It should have been the American flag raised in honor.’’’ The blacklist thus denied Jules Dassin his roots. In 1958, it was announced that he was planning to adapt James T. Farrell’s Studs Lonigan, a project that was eventually shelved. It is one more tragedy of the blacklist that Dassin was not allowed to follow up Brute Force, The Naked City, and Thieves’ Highway with Studs Lonigan. —Rob Edelman DAVES, Delmer Nationality: American. Born: San Francisco, 24 July 1904. Educa- tion: Studied civil engineering; received law degree from Stanford University. Family: Married actress Mary Lou Lender. Career: Lived for several months in Arizona desert among Hopi and Navajo, renounced law career, and joined Pasadena Playhouse, 1925; joined James Cruze production company as property boy, 1927; scriptwriter at Warner Bros., also actor, from 1929; directed first film, Destination Tokyo, 1944; formed Diamond-D productions, 1950s. Died: Septem- ber 1977. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1944 Destination Tokyo; The Very Thought of You; Hollywood Canteen 1945 Pride of the Marines (Forever in Love, Body and Soul) 1947 The Red House; Dark Passage 1948 To the Victor (d only) 1949 A Kiss in the Dark; Task Force 1950 Broken Arrow (d only) 1951 Bird of Paradise 1952 Return of the Texan (d only) 1953 Treasure of the Golden Condor; Never Let Me Go (d only) 1954 Demetrius and the Gladiators (d only); Drum Beat 1956 Jubal; The Last Wagon 1957 3:10 to Yuma (d only) 1958 Cowboy (d only); Kings Go Forth (d only); The Badlanders (d only) 1959 The Hanging Tree (d only); A Summer Place (+ pr) 1961 Parrish (+ pr); Susan Slade (+ pr) 1962 Rome Adventure (Lovers Must Learn) (+ pr) 1963 Spencer’s Mountain (+ pr) 1964 Youngblood Hawke (+ pr) 1965 The Battle of the Villa Fiorita (+ pr) Other Films: 1915 Christmas Memories (Leonard) (role) 1925 Zander the Great (Hill) (role) Delmer Daves 1928 The Night Flyer (Lang) (role, prop man); Three Sinners (Lee) (role); The Red Mark (Cruze) (role, prop man); Excess Baggage (Cruze) (role, prop man) 1929 So This Is College (Wood) (co-sc, role); A Man’s Man (Cruze) (bit role, prop man); The Duke Steps Out (Cruze) (role, tech adv) 1930 The Bishop Murder Case (Grinde and Burton) (role); Good News (Grinde and McGregor) 1931 Shipmates (Pollard) (co-adapt, co-dialogue, role, sc) 1932 Divorce in the Family (Riesner) (sc, role) 1933 Clear All Wires (Hill) (continuity) 1934 No More Women (Rogell) (co-sc, co-story); Dames (Enright) (sc); Flirtation Walk (Borzage) (sc) 1935 Stranded (Borzage) (co-sc); Page Miss Glory (LeRoy) (co-sc); Shipmates Forever (Borzage) (sc) 1936 The Petrified Forest (Mayo) (co-sc) 1937 The Go Getter (Berkeley) (sc); Slim (Enright) (co-sc, uncredited); The Singing Marine (Enright) (sc); She Mar- ried an Artist (Gering) (co-sc) 1938 Professor Beware (Nugent) (sc) 1939 Love Affair (McCarey) (co-sc); Thousand Dollars a Touch- down (Hogan) (sc) 1940 The Farmer’s Daughter (Hogan) (story, sc); Safari (Edward Griffith) (sc); Young America Flies (Eason) (short) (sc) 1941 The Night of January 16th (Clemens) (co-sc); Unexpected Uncle (Godfrey) (co-sc) 1942 You Were Never Lovelier (Seiter) (co-sc) 1943 Stage Door Canteen (Borzage) (sc) de ANTONIO DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 238 1955 White Feather (Webb) (co-sc) 1957 An Affair to Remember (McCarey) (co-sc) (remake of Love Affair 1939) 1972 Seventy-five Years of Cinema Museum (Hershon and Guerra) (appearance) Publications By DAVES: article— Interview with Christopher Wicking, in Screen (London), July/ October 1969. On DAVES: book— Pigenet, M., Delmer Daves, IDHEC, Paris, 1960. On DAVES: articles— Whitehall, Richard, ‘‘On the 3:10 to Yuma—Delmer Daves,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April and May 1963. Wallington, Mike, ‘‘Auteur and Genre: The Westerns of Delmer Daves,’’ in Cinema (Cambridge), October 1969. ‘‘Screenwriters Symposium,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Win- ter 1970/71. ‘‘Daves Issue’’ of Filmkritik (Munich), January 1975. Rabourdin, D., ‘‘Delmer Daves ou le secreat perdu,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), October 1977. Cebe, G., obituary in Ecran (Paris), October 1977. Passek, J.L., obituary in Cinéma (Paris), November 1977. Ledieu, Christian, ‘‘Delmer Daves ou la raison du c?ur,’’ in Etudes Cinématographiques (Paris), n.d. On DAVES: film— Wilkinson, Hazel, director, The Critic and ‘‘3:10 to Yuma,’’ Great Britain, 1961. *** Delmer Daves is perhaps best remembered for the highly success- ful youth-oriented movies that he made for Warner Brothers in the late 1950s and early 1960s. A Summer Place, the definitive teenage love film, was the most financially successful of these. Yet it is unfair to relegate Daves to the realm of glossy soap opera directors. When analyzed as a whole, the body of his work reveals some fine moments. Pride of the Marines, Broken Arrow, and 3:10 to Yuma are all very different films, yet each is regarded by film historians as a classic. After an early career in films as an actor, Daves turned to screenwriting in the early 1930s and worked, often in collaboration with others, on a variety of films, the most prominent of which were The Petrified Forest and Love Affair. When he began directing he continued to write the screenplays for his own films. His directorial debut was Destination Tokyo. While it was not a great film, this first effort was at least a cut above the glut of wartime propaganda movies being made at the time. It was also noteworthy as the only film which Cary Grant ever made without a romantic element (or even any women in the plot). Another war film, Pride of the Marines, was one of Hollywood’s first attempts to dramatize the plight of the returning servicemen. On a par with such other celebrated movies as Bright Victory and The Men, Pride of the Marines simply showed the anxieties and frustra- tions of war veterans who were wounded both physically and psychologically by their experiences. The film was powerful, yet did not resort to over-dramatization. It also dealt, albeit briefly, with the sociological issue of minority soldiers who would return home to a nation perhaps unaware of the value of their contributions to their country. Some of Daves’s most significant movies were westerns that were sympathetic to Native Americans and did not glamorize traditional western themes. Broken Arrow is often cited as the first film to portray Indians without stereotyping them, even if most of the actors were white. 3:10 to Yuma was one of the earliest ‘‘anti-hero’’ westerns and is regarded as a classic both in the United States and Europe. Cowboy was another atypical western. Although ostensibly a comic western, Cowboy had an underlying anti-macho theme ahead of its time. In the beginning of the film the main characters, played by Glenn Ford and Jack Lemmon, are opposites: Ford a traditional ‘‘he-man’’ cowboy, and Lemmon a tenderfoot. By the end of the film both characters become aware of the opposite sides of their own natures. At least a decade before the theme became popular, Cowboy showed that men’s hard and soft sides could co-exist and could make entertaining subject matter for a motion picture. Daves’s final film, The Battle of Villa Fiorita, is regarded by most critics as a run-of-the-mill soap opera, yet even this project shows his ability to build a film around an important social theme before it became popular. In this story, which, like Cowboy, begins as a com- edy and gradually becomes a drama, Daves’s characters are faced by problems which are now visible issues of social concern: divorce, remarriage (or in this case cohabitation), and the rearing of stepchil- dren. In this film, like A Summer Place and his other well known ‘‘soap operas,’’ Daves’s writing and direction make the work much better than its subject matter would suggest. Like his contemporary Douglas Sirk, whose films have been criticized in terms similar to those directed at Daves, his films are actually richer than general critical opinion would seem to indicate. —Patricia King Hanson de ANTONIO, Emile Nationality: American. Born: Scranton, Pennsylvania, 1920. Edu- cation: Harvard, and Columbia University, New York. Military Service: Served in World War II. Career: Teacher of philosophy, longshoreman, and editor, 1940s and 1950s; formed G-String produc- tions, 1958; began making compilation documentaries with Point of Order, 1963. Died: December 1989. de ANTONIODIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 239 Emile de Antonio (right) with Martin Sheen Films as Director: 1963 Point of Order (+ co-pr) 1965 That’s Where the Action Is (for television) (+ pr) 1966 Rush to Judgment (+ co-pr) 1968 In the Year of the Pig (+ pr) 1969 America Is Hard to See (+ co-pr) 1971 Millhouse: A White House Comedy (Millhouse: A White Comedy) (+ pr) 1972 Painters Painting (+ pr) 1976 Underground (co-d, pr) 1983 In the King of Prussia 1989 Mr. Hoover and I Other Films: 1961 Sunday (Drasin) (pr) 1965 Drunk (Warhol) (role) Publications By de ANTONIO: articles— Interview with Jonas Mekas, in Village Voice (New York), 13 November 1969. ‘‘Radical Scavenging: An Interview with Emile de Antonio,’’ with Bernard Weiner, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1971. Interview with G. O’Brien, in Inter/View (New York), February 1972. ‘‘Rencontre avec Emile de Antonio,’’ with L. Marcorelles, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1976. ‘‘Filmer de que ne montre pas l’histoire ‘officielle’,’’ an interview with M. Euvrard, in Cinéma Quebec (Montreal), vol. 5, no. 19, 1977. Interview with A. Rosenthal, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1978. Interview in Cineaste (New York), vol. 12, no. 2, 1982. ‘‘History Is the Theme of All My Films,’’ an interview with Gary Crowdus and Dan Georgakas, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 12, no. 2, 1982. ‘‘De Antonio and the Plowshares Eight,’’ an interview with D. Segal, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1982. de ANTONIO DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 240 ‘‘Emile de Antonio Interviews Himself,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Fall 1982. ‘‘My Brush with Painting,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), March 1984. ‘‘Quotations from Chairman ‘Dee’: Decodifying de Antonio,’’ in Cinema Canada (Montreal), July-August 1984. On de ANTONIO: articles— Bazelon, David, ‘‘Background of Point of Order,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Winter 1964. Westerbeck, Colin, Jr., ‘‘Some Out-Takes from Radical Film Mak- ing: Emile de Antonio,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Sum- mer 1970. Hess, J., ‘‘Political Filmmaking: Feds Harass Film Crew,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), September 1975. Linfield, Susan, ‘‘De Antonio’s Day in Court,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 8 February 1983. Obituary in Variety (New York), 27 December 1989. Ruth, W., ‘‘Emile de Antonio, 1919–15.12.1989,’’ in EPD Film (Frankfurt), vol. 71, no. 2, February 1990. Tuchman, M., ‘‘Freedom of Information,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 26, no. 4, July-August 1990. Wintonick, P., ‘‘Appelez-moi ‘D,’’’ in Revue Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 7, August-September 1990. *** A communist with impeccable Ivy League credentials, Emile de Antonio came to filmmaking relatively late in his career. Leaving Harvard in the 1930s, he first flexed his muscles as a longshoreman on Baltimore docks. After World War II, he returned to academia, attending graduate school at Columbia University, and then teaching for a time at William and Mary College, Virginia. The late 1950s found him in New York, engaged in get-rich-quick schemes. (With a friend, he set up ‘‘Sailor’s Surplus,’’ a mail order business.) More significantly, he became acquainted with several notable personalities in the New York art world. He went drinking with Rauschenberg and Jasper Johns and organized ‘‘galas’’ for the minimalist composer John Cage and the dancer Merce Cunningham. As far as his future filmmaking was concerned, this period was crucial: he was encountering the wealthy liberal arts patrons whose backing would later be so important to him. De Antonio was a member of ‘‘The Group,’’ a ‘‘free open organization of American cinema’’ set up in the summer of 1961 with the avowed aim of rejecting censorship and exploding the ‘‘myth of budget.’’ The organization was comprised of such luminaries of the New York avant garde film scene as Jonas Mekas and Shirley Clarke. However, it was as a film producer/distributor, not as a filmmaker, that de Antonio was associated with this organization. In 1958 he had formed G–String Productions to distribute the celebrated under- ground classic, Pull My Daisy. In the early 1960s, de Antonio was given access to 188 hours worth of kinetoscopes of the McCarthy hearings. He managed to raise $75,000 from his friend Eliot Pratt, the Standard Oil heir, and set to work editing. It took him more than two years, and he went broke in the process, but in 1964 de Antonio emerged with his first documentary, Point of Order. Paul Newman offered to do a narration. De Antonio turned him down. He had already evolved his film philosophy, and it held no place for narrators: ‘‘the narrator on TV becomes a super figure who has to explain to you what you’ve seen, or what you haven’t been allowed to see. It’s not the same as the jackboot of the nazis, but it is a kind of fascism of the mind.’’ In a sense, de Antonio was the great precursor of scratch video and sampling. He described his own method as ‘‘radical scavenging’’: what it entailed was expropriating footage from the television net- works and editing the footage together to make a scathing critique of some aspect of American society. De Antonio devoted his energy to looking for the parapraxes, the out-takes, those never-broadcast moments that had been consigned to the deepest vaults of the network archives. The 1960s proved to be a good period for him. Although Point of Order was slammed by the New York Times, it was successful with students, who were beginning to be politicized by the Vietnam War. Pressed as to why he did not shoot his own footage, de Antonio asked critics what chance an independent filmmaker had against the all- powerful television stations, ‘‘the ruling class of America,’’ as he described them. An independent filmmaker would not have been allowed to get near Kennedy on that fateful day in Dallas. Kennedy’s assassination, indeed, was the subject of de Antonio’s second film, Rush to Judgment. Sponsored in the United Kingdom by Woodfall Films, Tony Richardson’s production company, this project did not endear him to the establishment. Although officially shunned, he was privately helped by ‘‘insiders’’ who gave him access to sensitive material. Nonetheless, the networks had an annoying tend- ency of destroying the most valuable, and most incriminating, footage. His Vietnam film, In the Year of the Pig, was again eccentrically financed. Mrs. Orville Schell, a wealthy New York socialite, gave dinner parties at which the production money was raised, and she is credited as the film’s executive producer. De Antonio managed to find an interview with U.S. General George Patton in which Patton described the young Americans in Vietnam as ‘‘a bloody good bunch of killers.’’ De Antonio’s 1976 effort was Underground. He managed to track down and interview the infamous Weather Underground for this project, a fact that exasperated the authorities, who hadn’t been able to get near the group. The FBI therefore tried to subpoena the film and crew. Not long before his death, Emile de Antonio discovered that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI had been keeping files on him for nearly thirty years. Appalled by American ‘‘secret society,’’ he could not help but be amused at the same time. There was something pathetic and comic about this sinister man, Hoover, and his pet organization. De Antonio, in Mr. Hoover and I, took great pleasure in reporting FBI minutiae: the way that Hoover made all his employees wear felt hats; his admiration for the Jewish star of the television series about the FBI despite his own notorious anti-Semitism; Hoover’s insistence that his driver never take a left turn because of a previous car accident suffered by the FBI chief after such a turn. All of these tales appealed to de Antonio’s sense of irony. ‘‘I am as much Dada as I am a Marxist,’’ he said in an interview he conducted with himself for Film Quarterly. A strange mixture of Thomas Paine and Huckleberry Finn, Emile de Antonio was a devout patriot, who defined his role as ‘‘artist’’ in constructively negative terms. As far as he was concerned, art was necessarily adversary, and he was determinedly critical and anarchistic. He saw such a stance as his duty. —G.C. Macnab DEARDENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 241 DEARDEN, Basil Nationality: British. Born: Basil Dear in Westcliffe-on-Sea, Eng- land, 1 January 1911. Family: Married actress Melissa Stribling, 1947, two sons (including scriptwriter James). Career: Actor in repertory, toured United States with Ben Greet Company, late 1920s; general stage manager for Basil Dean (changed name to avoid confusion), 1931–36; production manager, associate producer and scriptwriter at Ealing studios, 1936–40; co-directed several Will Hay comedies, 1941–43; directed first film, The Bells Go Down, 1943; worked with producer Michael Relph, 1949–71 (TV director, 1960s). Awards: British Film Academy Awards, with Michael Relph, for The Blue Lamp, 1950, and Sapphire, 1960. Died: In auto accident, 23 March 1971. Films as Director: 1941 The Black Sheep of Whitehall (co-d) 1942 The Goose Steps Out (co-d) 1943 The Bells Go Down; My Learned Friend (co-d) 1944 The Halfway House; They Came to a City 1945 ‘‘The Hearse Driver’’ episode and linking story of Dead of Night 1946 The Captive Heart 1947 Frieda 1948 Saraband for Dead Lovers (Saraband) 1949 ‘‘The Actor’’ and ‘‘The Prisoner of War’’ episodes of Train of Events (+ co-sc, Michael Relph producer); The Blue Lamp 1950 Cage of Gold; Pool of London 1951 I Believe in You (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph, co-sc) 1952 The Gentle Gunman (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph) 1953 The Square Ring (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph) 1954 The Rainbow Jacket (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph); Out of the Clouds (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph) 1955 The Ship That Died of Shame (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph, co-sc); Who Done It? (co-d + co-pr with Michael Relph) 1957 The Smallest Show on Earth 1958 Violent Playground 1959 Sapphire; The League of Gentlemen 1960 Man in the Moon; The Secret Partner 1961 Victim; All Night Long (co-d, co-pr with Relph) 1962 Life for Ruth (Walk in the Shadow) 1963 The Mind Benders; A Place to Go 1964 Woman of Straw; Masquerade 1966 Khartoum 1968 Only When I Larf; The Assassination Bureau 1970 The Man Who Haunted Himself (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1938 It’s in the Air (Kimmins) (asst d); Penny Paradise (Reed) (asst d); This Man Is News (MacDonald) (co-sc) 1939 Come on, George! (Kimmins) (asst d) 1940 Let George Do It (Varnel) (co-sc); Spare a Copper (Carstairs) (assoc pr) 1941 Young Veteran (Cavalcanti) (asst d) 1941 Turned out Nice Again (Varnel) (assoc pr) 1956 The Green Man (Day) (supervisor, uncredited) 1957 Davy (Relph) (pr) 1958 Rockets Galore (Mad Little Island) (Relph) (pr) 1959 Desert Mice (Relph) (pr) Publications On DEARDEN: books— Balcon, Michael, A Lifetime of Films, London, 1969. Barr, Charles, Ealing Studios, London, 1977. Perry, George, Forever Ealing, London, 1981. Hill, John, Sex, Class, and Realism: British Cinema 1956–63, Lon- don, 1986. O’Sullivan, Tim, Paul Wells, and Alan Burton, editors, Liberal Directions: Basil Dearden and Postwar British Film Culture, London, 1997. On DEARDEN: articles— Tynan, Kenneth, ‘‘Ealing: The Studio in Suburbia,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November and December 1955. ‘‘Dearden and Relph: Two on a Tandem,’’ in Films and Filming (London), July 1966. Barr, Charles, ‘‘Projecting Britain and the British Character: Ealing Studios,’’ in Screen (London), Summer 1974. Ellis, John, ‘‘Made in Ealing,’’ in Screen (London), Spring 1975. *** Basil Dearden is, par excellence, the journeyman-director of British cinema, standing in much the same relation to Ealing (the studio for which he directed the greater part of his output) as, say, Michael Curtiz did to Warner Brothers. More than any other director, Dearden personified the spirit of Ealing films: concerned, conscien- tious, socially aware, but hampered by a certain innately British caution. Dearden was the complete professional, unfailingly compe- tent and meticulous; his films were never less than thoroughly well- constructed, and he enjoyed a reputation in the industry for total reliability, invariably bringing in assignments on schedule and un- der budget. Such careful craftsmanship, though, should not be equated with dullness. Dearden’s films may often have been safe, but they were rarely dull (despite the allegations of some critics). His work shows a natural flair for pace and effective action: narrative lines are clear and uncluttered, and although in many ways they have dated, his films remain eminently watchable and entertaining. In the moral climate of the time, too, Dearden’s choice of subjects showed considerable boldness. Dearden tackled such edgy topics as race (Sapphire), homosexuality (Victim), sectarian bigotry (Life for Ruth), and post- war anti-German prejudice (Frieda), always arguing for tolerance and understanding. It was perhaps inevitable, given his background and the ethos of the studio, that these ‘‘social problem’’ movies tended towards overly reasonable solutions. ‘‘Dearden’s films,’’ Charles Barr has pointed out in his definitive study Ealing Studios, ‘‘insistently generalize their moral lessons.’’ For most of his directing career Dearden worked closely with Michael Relph, who produced nearly all his films, collaborated with de BROCA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 242 Basil Dearden him on the scripts, and occasionally co-directed; after the demise of Ealing, the two men formed their own production company. Their joint output covered a wide variety of genres, including costume drama (Saraband for Dead Lovers) and comedy (The Smallest Show on Earth), as well as large-scale epic (Khartoum). Dearden’s flair for action was effectively exploited in the classic ‘‘heist’’ movie, The League of Gentlemen, and in The Blue Lamp, a seminal police drama and one of the first Ealing films shot almost entirely on location. Early in his career, Dearden also evinced a weakness for slightly stagey allegories in films such as Halfway House and They Came to a City, in which groups of disparate individuals are brought to a change of heart through supernatural intervention. There can also be detected in Dearden’s films, perhaps slightly unexpectedly, a muted but poetic vision of an idealized community— seen most clearly in his first film with Relph, The Captive Heart, a sympathetic study of prisoners-of-war. ‘‘The community,’’ Charles Barr has noted, ‘‘is presented as part of a wider society involving all of us—and encompassing England.’’ In his strengths and in his weaknesses—the restraint verging on inhibition, the competent ver- satility tending towards lack of directorial character—Dearden was in many ways an archetypally ‘‘British’’ director. Anyone wishing to understand the success and limitations of post-war British cinema, and indeed of post-war British society, could do far worse than study the films of Basil Dearden. —Theresa FitzGerald de BROCA, Philippe Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 15 March 1933. Family: Married 1) Michele Heurtaux, 1961 (divorced); 2) Valerie Rojan, 1987; has adopted Nepal-born son. Education: Studied at Ecole Nationale de Photographie et de Cinematographie, Paris. Career: Worked as a newsreel cameraman in Algeria, while completing military service, early 1950s; began making documentary shorts, 1954; worked as an assistant director to Claude Chabrol on Le beau serge and Les cousins (The Cousins), and on Francois Truffaut’s Les Quatre Cents Coups (The 400 Blows), 1958–59; made feature debut with Les Jeux de l’amour (The Love Game), 1960; formed Fildebroc, his production company, 1965. Awards: Silver Bear (Special Prize), Best Comedy, de BROCADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 243 Phillipe de Broca for Les Jeux de l’amour, 1960. Address: Artmedia, 10 Avenue Georges V, 75008 Paris, France. Films as Director and Co-Screenwriter/Screenwriter: 1954 Salon nautique (doc) (short) (d only, + ph) 1955 Operation Gas-Oil (doc) (short) (d only, + ph); Sous un autre soleil (doc) (short) (d only, + ph) 1960 Les Jeux de l’amour (The Love Game); Le Farceur (The Joker) 1961 L’Amant de cinq jours (The 5 Day Lovers) 1962 ‘‘La Gourmandise’’ (‘‘Gluttony’’), episode in Les Sept Peches capitaux (The 7 Deadly Sins) (d only); Cartouche (+ ro); ‘‘La Vedette’’ episode in Les Veinards 1963 L’Homme de Rio (That Man from Rio) 1964 Un Monsieur de compagnie (Male Companion) (+ co-adapt) 1965 Les Tribulations d’un chinois en Chine (Up to His Ears) 1966 Le Roi de coeur (King of Hearts) (d only, + pr) 1967 ‘‘Mademoiselle Mimi’’ episode in Le Plus Vieux Metier du Monde (The Oldest Profession) (d only); 1968 Le Diable par la queue (The Devil by the Tail) 1969 Les Caprices de Marie (Give Her the Moon) 1971 La Poudre d’escampette (Touch and Go) 1972 Chere Louise 1973 Le Magnifique (Comment detruire la reputation du plus celebre agent secret du monde, How to Destroy the Reputa- tion of the Greatest Secret Agent) (d only, + ro) 1975 L’Incorrigible 1977 Julie Pot de Colle (d only); Tendre Poulet (Dear Inspector, Dear Detective) 1978 Le Cavaleur (Practice Makes Perfect) 1980 On a vole la cuisse de Jupiter (Jupiter’s Thigh); Psy (d only) 1983 L’Africain (The African) 1984 Louisiana (Louisiane) (for TV) (d only) 1986 La Gitane (The Gypsy) 1988 Chouans! 1990 Les 1001 nuits (Scheherazade) 1991 Les Cles du paradis (The Keys to Paradise) 1993 Regarde-moi quand je te quitte (for TV) 1995 Le Jardin des plantes (The Greenhouse) (for TV) 1996 Le Veilleur de nuit (for TV) (d only) de BROCA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 244 1997 Le Bossu (On Guard); Les Hommes et les femmes sont faits pour vivre heureux. . . mais pas ensemble (for TV) (d only) 2000 Amazone Other Films: 1957 Tous peuvent me tuer (Decoin) (asst d); Charmants gar- cons (Decoin) (2nd asst d); La Cargaison blanche (Lacombe) (asst d) 1958 Ramuntcho (Schoendoerffer) (asst d); Le beau serge (Chabrol) (asst d, ro) 1959 Les Quatre Cents Coups (The 400 Blows) (Truffaut) (asst d); Les cousins (The Cousins) (Chabrol) (asst d); A bout de souffle (Breathless) (Godard) (ro) 1964 Les Pieds-Nickeles (Chambon) (ro) 1967 Ne jouez pas avec les Martiens (Lanoe) (co-sc, pr); O Salto (Le Saut, Le Voyage du silence) (Chalonge) (pr) 1970 Le Cinema de papa (Berri) (ro) 1996 Belmondo, le magnifique (Chammings—for TV) (doc) (as Himself) Publications By de BROCA: articles— ‘‘What Directors Are Saying,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), March/ April 1975. ‘‘Philippe de Broca,’’ interview in Cine Revue (Brussels), 4 Decem- ber 1975. ‘‘Dites-moi: Philippe de Broca,’’ interview with T. DeCock, in Amis du Film et de la Television (Brussels), January 1978. ‘‘La gitane,’’ interview with J. Lhassa, in Grand Angle (Mariembourg, Belgium), March 1985. On de BROCA: articles— Baker, B., ‘‘Philippe De Broca,’’ in Film Dope (Herfordshire, Eng- land), July 1974. Bosseno, C., ‘‘On a vole la cuisse de Jupiter,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), March 1980. Buckley, T., ‘‘At the Movies,’’ in New York Times, 11 July 1980. Burke-Block, C., ‘‘Philippe de Broca on ‘Perfect’ release,’’ in Film Journal (New York), August 1980. Curran, T., ‘‘Director’s Series: Philippe de Broca,’’ in Films in Review (New York), November 1980. Duval, B., ‘‘Philippe de Broca,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), March 1983. ‘‘Les Vedettes de la semaine,’’ in Cine-Tele-Revue (Brussels), 10 March 1988. Quenin, F., ‘‘Philippe de Broca l’homme pratique,’’ in Cinema 88 (Paris), 23–29 March 1988. ‘‘Philippe de Broca,’’ in Cinemaction (Conde-sur-Noireau, France), January 1992. *** Philippe de Broca has worked consistently since the 1960s, directing films for theatrical release and television. Yet when one thinks of de Broca, one thinks not of his recent titles but of his earliest and most successful films: sincere, playfully impudent comic spoofs made with dexterity and vigor, which stress illusion over reality. In these early films, which he also co-scripted, de Broca’s charac- ters are nonconformists who celebrate life and the joy of personal liberation. Structurally the films are highly visual, more concerned with communicating by images than by any specifics in the scenario. And these images often are picturesque. De Broca acknowledges his desire to give pleasure to the esthetic sense and, as such, he is a popular artist. While these early films are neither as evocative as those of Fran?ois Truffaut (with whom de Broca worked as an assistant director on The 400 Blows) nor as cinematic as those of Claude Chabrol (with whom de Broca worked as an assistant director on Le beau serge and Les cousins), they exude style and wit. While they might be fanciful in content, their essence is emotionally genuine. De Broca’s films are non-tragic, and feature humorous treatments of characters and their situations. One of his favorite themes is the relationship between the sexes, explored in his earliest films—Les Jeux de l’amour, Le Farceur, and L’Amant de cinq jours—each with Jean-Pierre Cassel playing a lighthearted lover. This character ap- pears 20 years older in Le Cavaleur, featuring Jean Rochefort as a bored, self-centered womanizer. De Broca’s most popular early- career films, however, star Jean-Paul Belmondo: Cartouche, a flavor- ful comedy-swashbuckler chronicling the exploits of kind-hearted criminals in 18th-century Paris; and L’Homme de Rio, a charming James Bond spoof about a soldier on leave who is led to a stunningly photographed Brazil on a chase for treasure. His most renowned effort is Le Roi de coeur, set during the final days of World War I in a town that has been abandoned by all except the residents of an insane asylum. Thematically speaking, Le Roi de coeur is a perfect film for its time. Released just as the anti-Vietnam war movement was gaining momentum, it is a pungent satire that lampoons the very nature of war and conflict. Not surprisingly, Le Roi de coeur fast became a cult favorite among college students. It ran for six-and-a-half years alone at a Cambridge, Massachusetts, moviehouse. Le Roi de coeur is de Broca’s idea of an anti-war film. Typically, he does not focus on the calamity of a youthful hero who is robbed of his life (as in All Quiet on the Western Front), or soldiers needlessly and maddeningly put to death by a military bureaucracy (as in Paths of Glory and Breaker Morant), or the bloody slaughter of his protagonists. Deaths and tragedies in a de Broca film usually are obscured by humorous, feel- good situations. In Le Roi de coeur he gently, satirically celebrates individual freedom. His inmates appear saner than the warring society that has labeled them mad. De Broca is more concerned with good than evil. He began his career as a newsreel cameraman in Algeria and made several docu- mentary shorts, but switched to narrative filmmaking because he ‘‘decided the real world was just too ugly.’’ At his best, de Broca deals with possibilities—for peace, beauty, hope, love. Nevertheless, the work in his first half-decade as a feature filmmaker generally is more satisfying than his efforts of the past three decades. Among de Broca’s higher-profile post-1960s films are Le Cavaleur and Tendre Poulet (Dear Inspector and Dear Detective), a romantic comedy about a female cop who rekindles a romance with an old lover while sniffing out a killer. The latter was so popular that it spawned an DE FUENTESDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 245 American made-for-TV movie and an inferior de Broca-directed sequel, On a vole la cuisse de Jupiter (Jupiter’s Thigh). By the 1990s, de Broca mostly was directing for French television. A typical credit was Le Jardin des plantes (The Greenhouse), a chronicle of the warm and protective relationship between a little girl and her grandfather in the waning days of World War II. Le Jardin des plantes is a thematic throwback to Le Roi de coeur in that it may be interpreted as a statement about the folly of war. It also reflects on the less-than- honorable behavior of some Frenchmen and women under the Ger- man occupation. Yet despite its somber setting, Le Jardin des plantes is consistent with de Broca’s cinematic view in that it primarily is a candy-coated entertainment that exudes a sentimentality for a time and place that in reality was brutal and dangerous. By far de Broca’s highest-profile late-career theatrical feature is Le Bossu (On Guard), which may be linked to Cartouche as a swash- buckler/ripped-bodice period piece. Le Bossu is set in the France of Louis XIV and charts the derring-do resulting from a faithful swords- man’s rescue of an infant princess from the grasp of her sinister relations. While entertaining and acclaimed—it won nine César Award nominations—Le Bossu is nothing more than a slick, by-the- numbers commercial vehicle. In the end, de Broca’s best films were those made in the 1960s. —Rob Edelman DE FUENTES, Fernando Nationality: Mexican. Born: Veracruz, 13 December 1894. Career: Film editor and assistant director, 1920s; first Mexican offered opportunity to direct by Compa?ia Nacional Productora de Peliculas, 1932; producer and director for newly formed Grovas production company, 1942; co-founder, Diana Films, 1945. Died: 4 July 1958. Films as Director: 1932 El anonimo 1933 El prisionero trece; La calandria; El tigre de Yautepec; El compadre Mendoza 1934 El fantasma del convento; Cruz diablo 1935 Vámonos con Pancho Villa; La familia Dressel 1936 Las mujeres mandan; Allá en el rancho grande 1937 Bajo el cielo de Mexico; La Zandunga 1938 La casa del ogro 1939 Papacito lindo 1940 Allá en el tropico; El jefe maximo; Creo en Dios 1941 La gallina clueca 1942 Asi se quiere en Jalisco 1943 Do?a Barbara; La mujer sin alma 1944 El rey se divierte 1945 Hasta que perdio Jalisco; La selva de fuego 1946 La devoradora 1948 Jalisco canta en Sevilla 1949 Hipolito el de Santa 1950 Por la puerta falsa; Crimen y castigo 1952 Los hijos de Maria Morales; Cancion de cuna 1953 Tres citas con el destino Publications On DE FUENTES: books— Riera, Emilio Garcia, Historia documental del cine mexicano, vols. 1–6, Mexico City, 1969–74. Blanco, Jorge Ayala, La aventura del cine mexicano, Mexico City, 1979. Mora, Carl, Mexican Cinema: Reflections of a Society, 1896–1980, Berkeley, 1982. Riera, Emilio Garcia, Fernando de Fuentes, Mexico City, 1984. De los Reyes, Aurelio, Medio siglo de cine mexicano (1894–1958), Mexico City, 1987. On DE FUENTES: articles— De la Vega, Eduardo, ‘‘Fernando de Fuentes: La mirada critica sobre la Revolucion Mexicana,’’ in Filmoteca (Mexico City), no. 1, 1979. Paranagua, P.A., ‘‘Cannes 82: Homanaje a dos maestros del cine latinoamericano,’’ in Contracampo (Madrid), August-Septem- ber 1982. *** The first Mexican cineaste of note, Fernando De Fuentes is still considered the director whose interpretations of the Mexican revolu- tion and whose contributions to typical Mexican genres have not been surpassed. Early sound film production in Mexico was dominated by foreigners: Russians who accompanied Eisenstein in the making of Que Viva México, Spaniards who passed through Hollywood, Cubans, and U.S. citizens who somehow ended up there. De Fuentes was one of the first Mexicans to be given a chance to direct sound films in his country. After several false starts with ‘‘grey and theatrical melodra- mas,’’ De Fuentes indicated first in Prisionero trece that his métier was the ‘‘revolutionary tragedy.’’ During 1910–17, Mexico passed through a cataclysmic social revolution the cultural expression of which resounded principally in the extraordinary murals of Diego Rivera, David Siquieros, and José Orozco. Fiction films did not examine this watershed event seriously until 1933 when De Fuentes made El compadre Mendoza. Far from the epic monumentality of revolutionary transformation painted on the walls by Rivera or Siquieros, El compadre Mendoza recreates the revolution from a per- spective similar to Orozco’s vision of individual tragedies and pri- vate pain. Rosalio Mendoza is the owner of a large hacienda which is constantly threatened by the conflict’s warring factions. In order to appease them, Mendoza pretends to support whichever group is currently visiting him—something he accomplishes by wining and DE FUENTES DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 246 Fernando De Fuentes dining his guests in a room conspicuously decorated with a portrait of the appropriate leader. Eventually, Mendoza and General Nieto (a follower of Emiliano Zapata’s agrarian revolt) become close friends. Mendoza names his son after Nieto and asks him to be the compadre (godfather). But after Mendoza is ruined economically, he betrays Nieto in order to flee to Mexico City. The emphasis on fraternal bloodletting, the corruption of ideals, and disillusion in the aftermath of the revolution is powerfully conveyed in both El compadre Mendoza and Vámonos con Pancho Villa. They remain even today the best cinematic treatments of the Mexican revolution. De Fuentes’s work in traditional Mexican genres is also important. Allá en el Rancho Grande is the progenitor of the charro genre. The Mexican singing cowboy received his cinematic introduction to Mexico and the rest of Latin America in this immensely popular film. The attraction of such nostalgia for a never-existent Arcadia can be seen in the fact that in the year following the release of Rancho Grande, more than half of the Mexican films produced were similar pastoral fantasies, and these have continued to be a staple of Mexi- can cinema. The charro genre’s domination of Mexican cinema is almost matched by films about the Mexican mother. De Fuentes directed perhaps the most palatable of such works, La gallina clueca. This film starred Sara García, the character actress who is the national paradigm of the sainted, long-suffering, self-sacrificing mother. In De Fuentes’s hands the overworked Oedipal melodrama is denied its usual histrion- ics and becomes an interesting work as well as the definitive film of this sub-genre. His better films demonstrate De Fuentes’s strong narrative style, noted for its consistency and humor. They do not seem particularly dated, and De Fuentes utilizes visual techniques such as the rack focus or the dissolve particularly effectively and unobtrusively. He also makes telling use of overlay montages, à la Eisenstein or Vertov, to convey moods or concepts. In regard to singing—one of the banes of Mexican cinema—De Fuentes has been uneven. For example, in his two films on the revolution, restraint is shown and songs function well in relation to the story line. Unfortunately, Allá en el Rancho Grande and its various sequels are characteristically glutted with songs. De Fuentes’s career as a director went from the sublime to the ridiculous. In one year he plummeted from the heights of Vámonos con Pancho Villa to the depths of Allá en el Rancho Grande. The enormous commercial success of the latter film throughout Latin America sealed De Fuentes’s fate. It was popular because De Fuentes DELANNOYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 247 is a talented director; but the commercial rewards for those talents came at a high price. After Vámonos con Pancho Villa, De Fuentes settled into the repetition of mediocre and conventional formula films. —John Mraz DELANNOY, Jean Nationality: French. Born: Noisy-le-Sec, 8 August 1908. Educa- tion: Lille University; Paris University. Career: Began as film actor while at University (sister is actress Henriette Delannoy), late 1920s; in Service Cinématographique des Armées, then chief editor, Para- mount Studios, Joinville, 1930–32; feature director, from 1935; became President of Institut des Hautes Etudes Cinématographiques (IDHEC), Paris, 1975. Awards: Best Film, Cannes festival, for La Symphonie Pastorale, 1946; International Prize, Venice Festival, for Dieu a besoin des hommes, 1950. Films as Director and Co-Scriptwriter or Co-Adaptor: 1933 Franches lippées (short) 1934 Une Vocation irrésistible (short); L’école des detectives (short) 1935 Paris-Deauville 1936 La Moule (medium-length) 1937 Ne tuez pas Dolly! (medium-length) 1938 La Vénus de l’or 1939 Macao, l’enfer du jeu; Le Diamánt noir 1941 Fièvres 1942 L’Assassin a peur la nuit; Pontcarral, Colonel d’Empire 1943 Macao, l’enfer du jeu (partially re-shot version with Pierre Renoir in role played by Erich von Stroheim, who was forbidden by German authorities; original version of Macao re-released after war); L’éternel Retour (The Eternal Return) 1944 Le Bossu 1945 La Part de l’ombre (Blind Desire) 1946 La Symphonie pastorale 1947 Les Jeux sont faits (The Chips Are Down) 1948 Aux yeux du souvenir (Souvenir) 1949 Le Secret de Mayerling 1950 Dieu a besoin des hommes (God Needs Men) 1951 Le Gar?on sauvage (Savage Triangle) 1952 La Minute de vérité (L’ora della veritá; The Moment of Truth) (+ co-sc); ‘‘Jeanne (Joan of Arc)’’ episode of Destinées (Daughters of Destiny) 1953 La Route Napoléon; ‘‘Le Lit de la Pompadour’’ episode of Secrets d’alcove 1954 Obsession 1955 Chiens perdus sans collier; Marie-Antoinette 1956 Notre-Dame de Paris (The Hunchback of Notre Dame) 1957 Maigret tend un piège (Inspector Maigret) 1958 Guinguette; Maigret et l’affaire Saint-Fiacre 1959 Le Baron de l’Ecluse 1960 ‘‘L’Adolescence’’ episode of La Fran?aise et l’amour (Love and the Frenchwoman); La Princesse de Clèves 1962 Le Rendez-vous; Venere imperiale (Vénus impériale) 1964 Les Amitiés particulières (This Special Friendship); Le Majordome 1965 ‘‘Le Berceau’’ and ‘‘La Répétition’’ episodes of Le Lit à deux places (The Double Bed); Les Sultans 1967 Le Soleil des voyous (Action Man) 1969 La Peau de Torpedo 1972 Pas folle la guêpe (+ sc) 1988 Bernadette (+ sc) 1990 La passion de Bernadette 1995 Marie de Nazareth (+ sc) Other Films (partial list): 1926 Miss Helyett (Monca and Keroul) (role) 1927 Casanova (Volkoff) (role) 1929 La Grande Passion (Hugon) (role) 1932 La Belle Marinière (Lachman) (ed); Une étoile dispara?t (Villers) (ed); Le Fils improvisé (Guissart) (ed) 1933 Le Père prématuré (Guissart) (ed); Les Aventures du roi Pausole (Granowsky) (ed) 1934 Le Roi des Champs-Elysées (Nosseck) (ed) 1935 Michel Strogoff (de Baroncelli and Eichberg) (ed); Tovaritch (Deval) (co-ed) 1936 Club de femmes (Deval) (tech adv, co-ed); Nitchevo (de Baroncelli) (ed) 1937 Tamara la complaisante (Gandera) (tech adv, co-sc uncredited); Feu! (de Baroncelli) (ed) 1938 Le Paradis de Satan (Gandera) (tech adv) Publications By DELANNOY: book— Bernadette: Photographies des films Bernadette et La passion de Bernadette, with text by Jacques Douyau, Paris, 1992. By DELANNOY: article— ‘‘Le Réalisateur,’’ in Le Cinéma par ceux qui le font, Paris, 1949. On DELANNOY: book— Guiget, Claude, Emmanuel Papillon, and Jacques Pinturault, Jean Delannoy: Filmographie, props, temoignanes, Aulnay-sur- Bois, 1985. On DELANNOY: articles— ‘‘Jean Delannoy,’’ in Film Dope (London), September 1976. Tribute to Delannoy in Film Francais (Paris), 21 February 1986. Quenin, F., ‘‘Les ainés se déchainent,’’ in Cinéma 72 (Paris), 17 February 1988. DE MILLE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 248 On DELANNOY: film— Knapp, Hubert, and Igor Barrère, Echos de plateau (on making of La Minute de vérité), 1952. *** Critics have not been kind to Jean Delannoy, but the public certainly has, for nearly all his films were solid box-office hits. But Delannoy, both by personal pretension and by the subject matter of his major films, demanded more serious attention. Just as André Cayatte is France’s director of social problem films, so Delannoy may be considered its moral philosopher. La Symphonie pastorale and God Needs Man, made just after the war, brought him this reputation and remain his best-known work, along with Les Jeux sont faits made in collaboration with Sartre. But more than a score of films surround this core, few of which measure up to the ambition and values for which they stand. Delannoy flirted with the cinema in the 1920s while working at a bank. Godard would later recall these beginnings in his caricature of Delannoy ‘‘going into the Billancourt studios briefcase in hand; you would have sworn he was going into an insurance office.’’ His initial training as an editor provided him with a sense of dramatic economy that may be the reason for his popular success and critical failure. His calculated distance, even coolness, alienated many critics, most notably the passionate New Wave cinephiles at Cahiers du Cinéma. No one would have paid Delannoy any attention had he not turned away from competent studio dramas to stronger material. Pontcarral was his first remarkable effort, bringing him fame as a man of conviction when this Napoleonic adventure tale was interpreted as a direct call to resistance against the Nazi occupation forces. He was then chosen to help Jean Cocteau bring to the screen L’éternel Retour. Whether, as some suspect, Cocteau pushed Delannoy far beyond his usually cautious methods, or because the legendary tragedy of this Tristan and Isolde update was perfect material for the frigidity of his style, the film was a striking success, haunting in its bizarre imagery and in the mysterious implications of its plot and dialogue. Just after the war came the films La Symphonie pastorale and Dieu a besoin des hommes, already mentioned as central to Delannoy as an auteur. Evidently, Gide, Sartre, and Queffelec inspired him to render great moral and philosophical issues in a dramatically rigorous way. Today these films seem overly cautious and pretty, even prettified. But in their day they garnered worldwide respect, the first winning the Grand Prize at Cannes in 1946 and the last the Grand Prize at Venice in 1950. The cinematic ingenuity they display, particularly in the use of geography as a moral arena (a snowy alpine village, a destitute seacoast village), and in the taut editing, gives some, though not sufficient, justification for the staginess of the weighty dialogue. Delannoy became, perhaps, the director most maligned by Cahiers du Cinéma because of the battle he fought with Bresson over rights to Diary of a Country Priest (which Bresson won) and La Princesse de Clèves (which Delannoy won). Accusations of his non-authenticity were borne out in the many hack productions he directed in the 1950s, including a super-production of Notre-Dame de Paris. While none of these films is without some merit, the 1960 Princesse de Clèves being full of tasteful production values, his style more and more represented the most deprecated face of the ‘‘cinema of quality.’’ —Dudley Andrew DE MILLE, Cecil B. Nationality: American. Born: Cecil Blount De Mille in Ashfield, Massachusetts, 12 August 1881. Education: Pennsylvania Military Academy, Chester, 1896–98; American Academy of Dramatic Arts, New York, 1898–1900. Family: Married Constance Adams, 16 August 1902, two sons, two daughters. Career: Actor, playwright, stage producer, and associate with mother in De Mille Play Co. (theatrical agency), to 1913; co-founder, then director-general, of Jesse L. Lasky Feature Play Co., 1913 (which became Paramount Pictures Corp. after merger, 1918); directed first film, The Squaw Man, 1914; founder, Mercury Aviation Co., 1919; established De Mille Pictures Corp., 1924; joined MGM as producer-director, 1928; co-founder, Screen Directors Guild, 1931; independent producer for Paramount, 1932; producer, Lux Radio Theater of the Air, 1936–45. Awards: Outstanding Service Award, War Agencies of the Govern- ment of the U.S.; Special Oscar ‘‘for 37 years of brilliant showman- ship,’’ 1949; Irving Thalberg Award, Academy, 1952; Milestone Award, Screen Producers’ Guild, 1956; Chevalier de Légion d’honneur, Cecil B. De Mille DE MILLEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 249 France; Honorary doctorate, University of Southern California. Died: 21 January 1959. Films as Director: 1914 The Squaw Man (The White Man) (co-d, sc, bit role); The Call of the North (+ sc, introductory appearance); The Virginian (+ sc, co-ed); What’s His Name (+ sc, ed): The Man from Home (+ sc, ed); Rose of the Rancho (+ sc, ed): Brewster’s Millions (co-d, uncredited, sc); The Master Mind (co-d, uncredited, sc); The Man on the Box (co-d, uncredited, sc); The Only Son (co-d, uncredited, sc); The Ghost Breaker (co-d, uncredited, co-sc) 1915 The Girl of the Golden West (+ sc, ed); The Warrens of Virginia (+ sc, ed); The Unafraid (+ sc, ed); The Captive (+ co-sc, ed); The Wild Goose Chase (+ co-sc, ed); The Arab (+ co-sc, ed); Chimmie Fadden (+ co-sc, ed): Kindling (+ sc, ed); Carmen (+ sc, ed); Chimmie Fadden out West (+ co-sc, ed); The Cheat (+ sc, ed); The Golden Chance (+ co-sc, ed); The Goose Girl (co-d with Thompson, uncredited, co-sc) 1916 Temptation (+ co-story, ed); The Trail of the Lonesome Pine (+ sc, ed); The Heart of Nora Flynn (+ ed); Maria Rosa (+ ed); The Dream Girl (+ ed) 1917 Joan the Woman (+ ed); A Romance of the Redwoods (+ co-sc, ed); The Little American (+ co-sc, ed); The Woman God Forgot (+ ed); The Devil Stone (+ ed); Nan of Music Mountain (co-d with Melford, uncredited); Lost and Won 1918 The Whispering Chorus (+ ed); Old Wives for New (+ ed); We Can’t Have Everything (+ co-ed); Till I Come Back to You; The Squaw Man 1919 Don’t Change Your Husband; For Better, for Worse; Male and Female (The Admirable Crichton) 1920 Why Change Your Wife?; Something to Think About 1921 Forbidden Fruit (+ pr); The Affairs of Anatol (A Prodigal Knight); Fool’s Paradise 1922 Saturday Night; Manslaughter; Don’t Tell Everything (co-d with Wood, uncredited) (incorporates two reel unused The Affairs of Anatol footage) 1923 Adam’s Rib; The Ten Commandments 1924 Triumph (+ pr); Feet of Clay 1925 The Golden Bed; The Road to Yesterday 1926 The Volga Boatman 1927 The King of Kings 1929 The Godless Girl; Dynamite (+ pr) 1930 Madame Satan (+ pr) 1931 The Squaw Man (+ pr) 1932 The Sign of the Cross (+ pr) (re-released 1944 with add’l footage) 1933 This Day and Age (+ pr) 1934 Four Frightened People (+ pr); Cleopatra (+ pr) 1935 The Crusades (+ pr) 1937 The Plainsman (+ pr) 1938 The Buccaneer (+ pr) 1939 Union Pacific (+ pr) 1940 North West Mounted Police (+ pr, prologue narration) 1942 Reap the Wild Wind (+ pr, prologue narration) 1944 The Story of Dr. Wassell (+ pr) 1947 Unconquered (+ pr) 1949 Samson and Delilah (+ pr, prologue narration) 1952 The Greatest Show on Earth (+ pr, narration, introductory appearance) 1956 The Ten Commandments (+ pr, prologue narration) Other Films: 1914 Ready Money (Apfel) (co-sc); The Circus Man (Apfel) (co-sc); Cameo Kirby (Apfel) (co-sc) 1915 The Country Boy (Thompson) (co-sc); A Gentleman of Lei- sure (Melford) (sc); The Governor’s Lady (Melford) (co-sc); Snobs (Apfel) (co-sc) 1916 The Love Mask (Reicher) (co-sc) 1917 Betty to the Rescue (Reicher) (co-sc, supervisor) 1923 Hollywood (Cruze) (guest appearance) 1930 Free and Easy (Sedgwick) (guest appearance) 1935 The Hollywood You Never See (short) (seen directing Cleopatra); Hollywood Extra Girl (Moulton) (seen direct- ing The Crusades) 1942 Star Spangled Rhythm (Marshall) (guest appearance) 1947 Variety Girl (Marshall) (guest appearance); Jens Mansson i Amerika (Jens Mansson in America) (Janzon) (guest appearance); Aid to the Nation (short) (appearance) 1950 Sunset Boulevard (Wilder) (role as himself) 1952 Son of Paleface (Tashlin) (guest appearance) 1956 The Buster Keaton Story (Sheldon) (guest appearance) 1957 The Heart of Show Business (Staub) (narrator) 1958 The Buccaneer (pr, supervisor, introductory appearance) Publications By DE MILLE: book— The Autobiography of Cecil B. De Mille, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1959. By DE MILLE: articles— ‘‘After Seventy Pictures,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March 1956. ‘‘De Mille Answers His Critics,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1958. By DE MILLE: plays— The Royal Mounted (1899) The Return of Peter Grimm, with David Belasco On DE MILLE: books— De Mille, William, Hollywood Saga, New York, 1939. De Mille, Agnes, Dance to the Piper, New York, 1951. Crowther, Bosley, The Lion’s Share, New York, 1957. Koury, Phil, Yes, Mr. De Mille, New York, 1959. Wagenknecht, Edward, The Movies in the Age of Innocence, Okla- homa, 1962. Mourlet, Michel, Cecil B. De Mille, Paris, 1968. Ringgold, Gene, and De Witt Bodeen, The Films of Cecil B. De Mille, New York, 1969. DE MILLE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 250 Essoe, Gabe, and Raymond Lee, De Mille: The Man and His Pictures, New York, 1970. Higham, Charles, Cecil B. De Mille, New York, 1973. Higashi, Sumiko, Cecil B. De Mille: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1985. Norman, Barry, The Film Greats, London, 1985. Edwards, Anne, The De Milles: An American Family, New York, 1988. Higashi, Sumiko, Cecil be De Mille and American Culture: The Silent Era, Berkeley, California, 1994. On DE MILLE: articles— Lardner, Ring Jr., ‘‘The Sign of the Boss,’’ in Screen Writer, November 1945. Feldman, Joseph and Harry, ‘‘Cecil B. De Mille’s Virtues,’’ in Films in Review (New York), December 1950. Harcourt-Smith, Simon, ‘‘The Siegfried of Sex,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), February 1951. Johnson, Albert, ‘‘The Tenth Muse in San Francisco,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), January/March 1955. Baker, Peter, ‘‘Showman for the Millions,’’ in Films and Filming (London), October 1956. Card, James, ‘‘The Greatest Showman on Earth,’’ in Image (Roches- ter, New York), November 1956. Arthur, Art, ‘‘C.B. De Mille’s Human Side,’’ in Films in Review (New York), April 1967. ‘‘De Mille Issue’’ of Présence du Cinéma (Paris), Autumn 1967. Ford, Charles, ‘‘Cecil B. De Mille,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, vol. 3, Paris, 1968. Bodeen, Dewitt, ‘‘Cecil B. De Mille,’’ in Films in Review (New York), August/September 1981. Mandell, P.R., ‘‘Parting the Red Sea (and Other Miracles),’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), April 1983. D’Arc, J.V., ‘‘So Let It Be Written . . . ,’’ in Literature/Film Quar- terly (Salisbury, Maryland), January 1986. Doniol-Valcroze, J., ‘‘Samson, Cecil, and Delilah,’’ in Wide Angle (Baltimore), vol. 6, no. 4, October 1989. Pratt, G. C., ‘‘Forty-Five Years of Picture Making: An Interview with Cecil B. De Mille,’’ in Film History (London), vol. 3, no. 2, 1989. Higashi, S. ‘‘Cecil B. De Mille and the Lasky Company: Legitimating Feature Film as Art,’’ in Film History (London), vol 4., no. 3, 1990. Christie, I., ‘‘Grand Illusions,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 1, no. 8, December 1991. Moullet, L., ‘‘Les jardins secrets de C.B.,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1991. Eyman, Scott, ‘‘The Best Years of Their Lives,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1992. Jacobs, L., ‘‘Belasco, De Mille, and the Development of Lasky Lighting,’’ in Film History (London), no. 4, December 1993. Palmer, A.W., ‘‘Cecil B. De Mille Writes America’s History for the 1939 World’s Fair,’’ in Film History (London), vol. 5, no. 1, 1993. *** For much of his forty-year career, the public and the critics associated Cecil B. De Mille with a single kind of film, the epic. He certainly made a great many of them: The Sign of the Cross, The Crusades, King of Kings, two versions of The Ten Commandments, The Greatest Show on Earth, and others. As a result, De Mille became a symbol of Hollywood during its ‘‘Golden Age.’’ He represented that which was larger than life, often too elaborate, but always entertaining. By having such a strong public personality, however, De Mille came to be neglected as a director, even though many of his films—not just the epics—stand out as extraordinary. Although he made films until 1956, De Mille’s masterpiece may well have come in 1915 with The Cheat. Even this early in his career, we can locate some of the motifs that turn up again and again in De Mille’s work: a faltering upper-class marriage, the allure and exoti- cism of the Far East, and sexual attraction equated with hypnotic control. He also made a major aesthetic advancement in the use of editing in The Cheat that soon became a part of the repertoire of most filmmakers. For the cinema’s first twenty years, editing was based primarily on following action. During a chase, when actors exited screen right, the next shot had them entering screen left; or, a director might cut from a person being chased to those characters doing the chasing. In either case, the logic of the action controls the editing, which in turn gives us a sense of the physical space of a scene. But in The Cheat, De Mille used his editing to create a sense of psychological space. Richard Hardy, a wealthy businessman, confronts his wife with her extrava- gant bills, but Mrs. Hardy can think only of her lover, Haka, who is equally obsessed with her. De Mille provides a shot/counter-shot here, but the scene does not cut from Mr. Hardy to his wife, even though the logic of the action and the dialogue seems to indicate that it should. Instead, the shots alternate between Mrs. Hardy and Haka, even though the two lovers are miles apart. This sort of editing, which follows thoughts rather than actions, may seem routine today, but in 1915 it was a major development in the method of constructing a sequence. As a visual stylist, however, De Mille became known more for his wit than for his editing innovations. At the beginning of The Affairs of Anatol, for instance, our first view of the title character, Anatol DeWitt Spencer, is of his feet. He taps them nervously while he waits for his wife to make breakfast. Our first view of Mrs. Spencer is also of her feet—a maid gives them a pedicure. In just seconds, and with only two shots, De Mille lets us know that this couple is in trouble. Mrs. Spencer’s toenails must dry before Anatol can eat. Also from these opening shots, the viewers realize that they have been placed firmly within the realm of romantic comedy. Such closeups have no place within a melodrama. One normally does not think of De Mille in terms of pairs of shots. Instead, one thinks on a large scale, and remembers the crowd scenes (the lions–versus–Christians extravaganza in The Sign of the Cross), the huge upper-crust social functions (the charity gala in The Cheat), the orgiastic parties (one of which takes place in a dirigible in Dynamite), and the bathrooms that De Mille turns into colossal marble shrines. De Mille began directing in the grand style quite early in his career. In 1915, with opera star Geraldine Farrar in the lead role, he made one of the best film versions of Carmen, and two years later, again with Farrar, he directed Joan the Woman. Again and again, De Mille would refer to history as a foundation to support the believabil- ity of his stories, as if his most obvious excesses could be justified if they were at least remotely based on real-life incidents. A quick look at his filmography shows many films based on historical events (often so far back in the past that accuracy hardly becomes an issue): The Sign of the Cross, The Crusades, Union Pacific, Northwest Mounted Police, and others. When history was inconvenient, De Mille made use of a literary text to give his films a high gloss of acceptability and DEMMEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 251 veracity. In the opening credits of The Affairs of Anatol, for instance, De Mille stresses that the story derives from the play by Schnitzler. In both his silent and sound films, De Mille mixes Victorian morality with sizable doses of sex and violence. The intertitles of Why Change Your Wife?, for example, rail against divorce as strongly as any nineteenth–century marital tract, but the rest of the film deals openly with sexual obsession, and shows two women in actual physical combat over one man. Similarly, all of De Mille’s religious epics extol the Christian virtues while at the same time reveling in scenes depicting all of the deadly sins. Though it is tension between extremes that makes De Mille’s films so intriguing, critics have often made this aspect of his work seem laughable. Even today De Mille rarely receives the serious recognition and study that he deserves. —Eric Smoodin DEMME, Jonathan Nationality: American. Born: Baldwin, New York, 1944. Educa- tion: University of Miami. Military Service: U.S. Air Force, 1966. Family: Married director Evelyn Purcell. Career: Publicity writer for United Artists, Avco Embassy, and Pathe Contemporary Films, early 1960s; writer on Film Daily, 1968–69; worked in London, 1969; unit publicist, then writer for Roger Corman, 1970; directed first film, Caged Heat, 1974; also director of TV films, commercials, and music videos for recording artists Chrissie Hynde, New Order, Suzanne Vega, and others. Awards: Best Picture and Best Director Academy Awards, for The Silence of the Lambs, 1991. Films as Director: 1974 Caged Heat (+ sc) 1975 Crazy Mama 1976 Fighting Mad (+ sc) 1977 Citizen’s Band (Handle with Care) 1979 Last Embrace 1980 Melvin and Howard 1983 Swing Shift (co-d) 1984 Stop Making Sense (doc) 1986 Something Wild (+ co-pr) 1987 Swimming to Cambodia 1988 Married to the Mob; Famous All over Town 1991 The Silence of the Lambs; Cousin Bobby (doc) 1993 Philadelphia (+ co-pr) 1994 The Complex Sessions 1997 Subway Stories: Tales from the Underground (exec pr) 1998 Storefront Hitchcock; Beloved (pr) Other Films: 1970 Sudden Terror (Eyewitness) (Irwin Allen) (music coordinator) 1972 Angels Hard as They Come (Viola) (pr, co-sc); The Hot Box (Viola) (pr, co-sc) 1973 Black Mama, White Mama (Romero) (co-story) 1985 Into the Night (Landis) (role) 1990 Miami Blues (pr) 1993 Household Saints (Savoca) (exec pr); Amos and Andrew (exec pr) 1995 Devil in a Blue Dress (exec pr) 1996 Mandela (pr) 1998 Shadrach (exec pr) 1999 Janis (exec pr) 2000 Maangamizi: The Ancient One (exec pr) Publications By DEMME: articles— ‘‘Demme Monde,’’ an interview with Carlos Clarens, in Film Com- ment (New York), September/October 1980. Interview with Michael Stragow, in American Film (Washington, D.C.), January-February 1984. Interview in Time Out (London), 1 July 1987. Interview with Quentin Curtis in Independent (London), 15 June 1989. ‘‘Identity Check,’’ an interview with Gavin Smith in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1991. ‘‘Jonathan Demme: Heavy Estrogen,’’ an interview with Gary Indi- ana in Interview (New York), February 1991. ‘‘Demme’s monde,’’ an interview with Amy Taubin in Village Voice (New York), 19 February 1991. Interview with A. DeCurtis in Rolling Stone (New York), 24 March 1994. On DEMME: book— Winfrey, Oprah and Regan, Ken, Journey to Beloved, with Jonathan Demme, New York, 1998. Bliss, Michael, What Goes around Comes Around: The Films of Jonathan Demme, with Christina Banks, Carbondale, 1996. On DEMME: articles— Goodwin, Michael, ‘‘Velvet Vampires and Hot Mamas: Why Exploi- tation Films Get to Us,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 7 July 1975. Kehr, Dave, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1977. Baumgarten, Marjorie, and others, ‘‘Caged Heat,’’ in Cinema Texas Program Notes (Austin), Spring 1978. Maslin, Janet, in New York Times, 13 May 1979. Black, Louis, ‘‘Crazy Mama,’’ in Cinema Texas Program Notes (Austin), Spring 1978. Kaplan, James, ‘‘Jonathan Demme’s Offbeat America,’’ in New York Times Magazine, 27 March 1988. Schruers, Fred, ‘‘Jonathan Demme: A Study in Character,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 19 May 1988. Farber, J., ‘‘Something Wild,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 2 No- vember 1989. DeCourcey Hinds, M., ‘‘Retelling a Psychopathic Killer’s Tale Is No Joke,’’ in New York Times, 25 March 1990. Miller, M., ‘‘An Unlikely Director for the G-Men,’’ in Newsweek (New York), 9 April 1990. Vineberg, S., ‘‘Swing Shift: A Tale of Hollywood,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 60, no. 1, 1990–1991. Gramfors, R., article in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 33, no. 3, 1991. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘How to Film a Gory Story with Restraint,’’ in New York Times, 19 February 1991. DEMME DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 252 Jonathan Demme (left) directing The Silence of the Lambs Ehrenstein, David, ‘‘Of Lambs and Slaughter: Director Jonathan Demme Responds to Charges of Homophobia,’’ in Advocate, 12 March 1991. Taubin, Amy, ‘‘Still Burning,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 9 June 1992. Gleick, E., ‘‘Only Lambs Are Silent,’’ in People Weekly (New York), 22 June 1992. Andrew, Geoff, and Floyd, Nigel, ‘‘No Hanky Panky/The Philadel- phia Story/ Straight Acting,’’ in Time Out (London), 23 Febru- ary 1994. Cunningham, M., ‘‘Breaking the Silence,’’ in Vogue (New York), January 1994. Green, J., ‘‘The Philadelphia Experiment,’’ in Premiere (New York), January 1994. Tally, Ted, ‘‘Ted Tally, on Jonathan Demme,’’ in New Yorker, 21 March 1994. ‘‘Jonathan Demme’s Moving Pictures,’’ in New Yorker, 31 Octo- ber 1994. Reichman, R., ‘‘I Second That Emotion,’’ in Creative Screenwriting (Washington, D.C.), Spring 1995. Norman, Barry, in Radio Times (London), 27 January 1996. Cremonini, Giorgio, in Cineforum (Bergamo), March 1996. Van Fuqua, Joy, ‘‘‘Can You Feel It, Joe?’: Male Melodrama and the Family Man,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Austin), no. 38, Fall 1996. McCormick, Neil, ‘‘Storefront Hitchcock,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), January 1999. *** Jonathan Demme has proven himself to be one of the more acute observers of the inner life of America during the course of a directo- rial career that began in the early 1970s, though he began as just another protégé of the Roger Corman apprentice school of filmmaking. Demme’s concern with character—focused particularly through the observation of telling eccentricities—is perhaps his trademark, com- bined with a vitality and willingness to use the frameworks of various genres to their fullest extent. A film such as Something Wild, for example, combines a tale of character and relationship development in an exhilarating movie which successfully mixes classic screwball comedy (you could imagine Hepburn and Tracy in the leads) with a very real menace in the closing stages that extends earlier comic confusion into the deadlier paranoia of the thriller. DEMYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 253 Perhaps inspired by the ‘‘anything goes’’ aura of his Corman days, Demme has never been afraid to experiment with mood and subject matter in his films: Hitchcockian suspense in The Last Embrace, the possibilities of monologue in Swimming to Cambodia, romantic comedy in Swing Shift, horror in The Silence of the Lambs, and gangster conventions in Married to the Mob. Even his earliest films— Caged Heat and Fighting Mad (which he also wrote)—showed Demme exploiting the possibilities offered by the sex-and-violence format (rampaging girl-gangs in the first, rampaging rednecks in the second) for original and highly distinctive exploration of subjects and style. Caged Heat also gave early signs of Demme’s concern with those struggling to take control of their lives—particularly, but not exclu- sively, women. This examination of self-determination has remained a theme throughout his work, from the women prisoners of Caged Heat and the munitions worker (Goldie Hawn) in Swing Shift to the central characters in Something Wild (Melanie Griffith) and Married to the Mob (Michelle Pfeiffer), and contributed to his reputation as a feminist filmmaker. Their struggle to establish themselves against patriarchal attitudes epitomizes, for Demme, the struggles of the underdog, which he has called ‘‘heroic.’’ This real concern for his characters is clear in the (usually affectionate) intensity with which they—and their lives—are portrayed, and Demme recently described his films as ‘‘a little old-fashioned, at the same time as we try to make them modern.’’ Demme is concerned with entertaining a mass audience, and it is probably unwise to consider the low-key mood of the earlier critical- ly-adored films Citizen’s Band (a black comedy that explores lack of communication through a small town’s obsession with CB-radio) and Melvin and Howard (an offbeat comedy based on a true story of a working-class man who gave a lift to a hobo Howard Hughes in the Nevada desert) as being necessarily closest to his own heart. Both films, however good they may be, were also conscious reactions to the over-the-top nature of earlier Corman-inspired work. Misjudgment of Demme’s concerns is nothing new for the filmmaker. His much-noted focus on the everyday kitsch of Ameri- cana, for example, is driven more by an understanding of its impor- tance as a yardstick by which America consumer society measures itself (‘‘it’s our kind of fetishism’’) than with being a desire to be ‘‘hip.’’ For Demme, observing kitsch is simply a form of realism in a country where the bizarre is often real. Though much concerned with achieving an honest view of charac- ter, Demme is not uncaring about stylish direction. A sequence such as the series of out-takes used for the final credits of Married to the Mob is one mark of a freewheeling approach to filmmaking that has roots in the knowing wit of the French New Wave (Demme cites Truffaut as an early influence), while his pared-down vision of a Talking Heads concert in Stop Making Sense is a distinctive, classy example of the rock film which pointedly eschews the tacky visual trappings too often associated with the genre. Ultimately, though, his concern is with character rather than style—content over form. Demme is concerned more with exploring humanity than with proving himself an auteur for film critics. His own description of Married to the Mob offers an excellent insight into what he has sought in his work. ‘‘It was intelligent fun, it didn’t patronise the characters or the audience, it was good-hearted. Those are tough commodities to come by.’’ Since his late 1980s work, Demme has gone on to make two of the higher-profile films of the 1990s. The Silence of the Lambs, based on the Thomas Harris bestseller, was a film about a young FBI trainee (Jodie Foster) who locks horns with Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins), a psycho- pathic, cannibalistic murderer. The film, which featured fine perform- ances and excellent direction, earned Oscars for Best Picture, Direc- tor, Actor, Actress and Adapted Screenplay—quite a haul for what is essentially a big-budget splatter film. In quite a change of pace, Demme next directed Philadelphia, a film that stars Tom Hanks as Andrew Beckett, an AIDS-afflicted lawyer who fights the system after being fired from a prestigious Philadelphia law firm. Upon the film’s release, gay activists complained—sometimes bitterly—that the film soft-pedals its subject. However, Philadelphia was not produced for those who already are highly politicized and need no introduction to the reality of AIDS. The film was made for the masses who do not live in urban gay enclaves, and who have never met—or think they have never met—a homosexual, let alone a person with AIDS. As a drama, Philadelphia is not without flaws. The members of Beckett’s family are unfailingly supportive and understanding, a much-too-simplistic ideal in a world in which many gays and lesbians are shunned by their relatives. It also is difficult to accept the subtle changes that occur within Joe Miller (Denzel Washington), the homophobic lawyer who takes Beckett’s case. But Philadelphia does succeed in showing that homosexuals are human beings, people who deserve to be treated fairly and civilly. It enjoyed a mainstream success with audiences who normally might be turned off by a more radical, politically loaded (let alone sexually frank) film about gays or AIDS. —Norman Miller, updated by Rob Edelman DEMY, Jacques Nationality: French. Born: Pontchateau (Loire-Atlantique), 5 June 1931. Education: Ecole des Beaux-Arts, Nantes; Ecole Technique de Photographie et de Cinématographiques, Paris. Family: Married director Agnes Varda, 1962; children: Mathieu and Rosalie. Career: Assistant to animator Paul Grimault, 1952; assistant to Georges Rouquier, 1954; made first short film, Le Sabotier du Val de Loire, began association with editor Anne-Marie Cotret, 1955; directed first feature, Lola, 1961. Died: 27 October, 1990, of a brain hemorrhage resulting from leukemia. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1956 Le Sabotier du Val de Loire 1957 Le Bel Indifférent 1958 Le Musée Grévin 1959 La Mère et l’infant (co-d); Ars 1961 Lola 1962 ‘‘La Luxure’’ (Lust) episode of Les Sept Péchés capitaux (Seven Deadly Sins) 1963 La Baie des Anges (Bay of the Angels) 1964 Les Parapluies de Cherbourg (The Umbrellas of Cherbourg) 1967 Les Demoiselles de Rochefort (The Young Girls of Rochefort) 1969 The Model Shop (+ pr) 1971 Peau d’ane (Donkey Skin) 1972 The Pied Piper of Hamelin (The Pied Piper) 1973 L’évènement le plus important depuis que l’homme a marché sur la lune (A Slightly Pregnant Man) DEMY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 254 Jacques Demy 1978 Lady Oscar 1982 Une Chambre en ville (A Room in Town) 1985 Parking 1988 Trois Places pour le 26 (Three Places for the 26th) Other Films: 1954 Lourdes et ses miracles (Rouquier) (asst d) 1955 Arthur Honegger (Rouquier) (asst d) 1956 S.O.S. Noronha (Rouquier) (asst d) 1959 Les Quatre Cents Coups (Truffaut) (role as policeman) 1960 Paris nous appartient (Rivette) (role as guest at party) 1991 Jacquot de Nantes (role as himself) Publications By DEMY: articles— ‘‘I Prefer the Sun to the Rain,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Spring 1965. Interview with Marsha Kinder, in Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Spring 1967. ‘‘Frenchman in Hollywood,’’ an interview with Philip Scheuer, in Action (Los Angeles), November/December 1968. ‘‘Lola in Los Angeles,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1970. ‘‘Cinéastes et musiciens,’’ in Ecran (Paris), September 1975. Interview and biofilmography, in Film Dope (London), Septem- ber 1976. Interview with G. Haustrate, in Cinéma (Paris), July/August 1981. Interview with Serge Daney, Jean Narboni, and Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1982. On DEMY: book— Berthome, Pierre, Jacques Demy: Les Racines du reve, Nantes, 1982. On DEMY: articles— Roud, Richard, ‘‘Rondo Galant,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1964. Billard, Ginette, ‘‘Jacques Demy and His Other World,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1964. ‘‘Director of the Year,’’ International Film Guide (London, New York), 1966. Strick, Philip, ‘‘Demy Calls the Tune,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1971. Petrie, G., ‘‘Jacques Demy,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Win- ter 1971/72. ‘‘Journals: Gilbert Adair from Paris,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1979. ‘‘Demy Issue’’ of Cinéma (Paris), July/August 1981. Dossier on Jacques Demy, in Cinématographe (Paris), October 1982. Haustrate, Gaston, ‘‘Grand prix national du cinéma à Jacques Demy et Jean-Luc Godard,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), February 1983. Biofilmography in Première (Paris), November 1988. Obituary, in New York Times, October 30, 1990. Obituary, in Variety (New York), November 5, 1990. Toubiana, S., ‘‘Jacques Demy ou le bel entetement,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma, December 1990. Hogue, P., ‘‘Playing for Keeps,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July/ August 1991. Hoberman, J. ‘‘The Art of Daydreaming,’’ in Première (Paris), June 1993. Johnson, William, ‘‘More Demy: In Praise of The Young Girls of Rochefort,’’ Film Comment (Denville, New Jersey), vol. 32, no. 5, September-October 1996. On DEMY: films— Delvaux, André, Derrière l’écran, 1966. Varda, Agnes, Jacquot de Nantes (appearance), 1991. Varda, Agnes, Des demoiselles ont en 25 ans (The Young Girls Turn 25), 1993. Varda, Agnes, The World of Jacques Demy, 1995. *** Jacques Demy’s first feature film, Lola, is among the early distinguished products of the New Wave and is dedicated to Max Ophüls. These two facts in conjunction define its particular character. It proved to be the first in a series of loosely interlinked films (the intertextuality is rather more than a charming gimmick, relating as it does to certain thematic preoccupations already established in Lola itself); arguably, it remains the richest and most satisfying work so far in Demy’s erratic, frustrating, but also somewhat underrated career. DE PALMADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 255 The name and character of Lola (Anouk Aimée) herself can be traced to two previous celebrated female protagonists: the Lola Montès of Max Ophüls’s film of that name, and the Lola-Lola (Marlene Dietrich) of von Sternberg’s The Blue Angel, to which Demy pays homage in a number performed by Aimée in a top hat. The explicit philosophy of Lola Montès (‘‘For me, life is movement’’) is enacted in Demy’s film by the constant comings and goings, arrivals and departures, and intricate intercrossings of the characters. Ophüls’s work has often been linked to concepts of fate; at the same time the auteurs of the early New Wave were preoccupied with establishing Freedom—as a metaphysical principle, to be enacted in their profes- sional methodology. The tension between fate and freedom is there throughout Demy’s work. Lola’s credit sequence alternates the improvisatory freedom of jazz with the slow movement of Beetho- ven’s 7th Symphony. The latter musical work is explicitly associated with destiny in the form of the huge white American car that brings back Michel, Lola’s lover and father of her child, who, like his predecessors in innumerable folk songs, has left her for seven years to make his fortune. No film is more intricately and obsessively pat- terned, with all the characters interlinked: the middle-aged woman used to be Lola (or someone like her), her teenage daughter may become Lola (or someone like her). Yet neither resembles Lola as she is in the film: everyone is different, yet everyone is interchangeable. Two subsequent Demy films relate closely to Lola. In Les Parapluies de Cherbourg, Roland, Lola’s rejected lover, recounts his brief liaison with Lola to the visual accompaniment of a flashback to the arcade that was one of their meeting-places. In addition, Lola herself reappears in The Model Shop. Two other films are bound in to the series as well. Les Demoiselles de Rochefort is linked by means of a certain cheating on the part of Demy—Lola has been found murdered and dismembered in a laundry basket, but the corpse is a different Lola. Especially poignant, as the series continues, is the treatment of the abrupt, unpredictable, seemingly fortuitous happy ending. At the end of Lola, Lola drives off with Michel and their child (as Roland of Parapluies, discarded and embittered, departs on his diamond-smuggling trip to South Africa). At the conclusion of Le Baie des Anges—a film that, at the time, revealed no connection with Lola—Jackie (Jeanne Moreau), a compulsive gambler, manages to leave the casino to follow her lover before she knows the result of her bet: two happy endings which are exhilarating precisely because they are so arbitrary. Then, several films later, in Model Shop, Lola recounts how her great love Michel abandoned her to run off with a compulsive gambler called Jackie. Thus both happy endings are reversed in a single blow. It is not so much that Demy doesn’t believe in happy endings: he simply doesn’t believe in permanent ones (as ‘‘life is movement’’). The ambivalent, bittersweet ‘‘feel’’ of Demy is perhaps best summed up in the end of Les Parapluies de Cherbourg, where the lovers, now both married to others, accidentally meet, implicitly acknowledge their love, and return with acceptance to the relationships to which they are committed. Outside the Lola series, Demy’s touch has been uncertain. His two fairy-tale films, Peau d’ane and The Pied Piper, unfortunately tend to confirm the common judgment that he is more a decorator than a creator. But he should not be discounted. A Room in Town, a return to the Lola mode if not to the Lola characters, was favorably received. Demy’s final two credits, Parking and Three Places for the 26th, are musicals which disap- pointed in that they were unable to capture the spark of his earlier work. Agnes Varda, his wife of almost three decades, then directed a film about Demy titled Jacquot de Nantes, which was released a year after his death. The film is a poignant, straight-from-the-heart record of the measure of a man’s life, with Varda shifting between interviews with Demy (tenderly shot in extreme close-up), sequences from his films, and a narrative which details the youth of Demy in Nantes during the 1940s and relates how he cultivated a love of the movies. The film works best, however, as a beautiful and poignantly composed love letter. Its essence is summed up in one of its opening shots: the camera pans the content of a watercolor, focusing first on a nude woman, then on a nude man, and finally on their interlock- ing hands. Jacquot de Nantes is obviously a very personal film. But it was not meant to be a tribute; rather, it was conceived and filmed when Demy was still alive. ‘‘Jacques would speak about his childhood, which he loved,’’ Varda explained at a New York Film Festival press confer- ence. ‘‘His memories were very vivid. I told him, ‘Why don’t you write about them?’ So he did, and he let me read the pages. The more he wrote the more he remembered—even the names of the children who sat next to him in school. Most children do not know what they want to do when they grow up. But Jacques did, from the time he was 12. He had an incredible will. So I said, ‘This [material] would make a good film.’ I wrote the script, and I tried to capture the spirit of Jacques and his family, and the way people spoke and acted in [the 1940s]. We shot the film in the exact [locations] in which he grew up. I also filmed an interview with him. It’s just Jacques speaking about his childhood. It’s not a documentary about Jacques Demy. It’s just him saying, ‘Yes, this is true. This is my life.’ ‘‘He saw most of the final [version]. When Jacques ‘went away,’ I had to finish the film. It was difficult, but that’s the only thing I know. I think the film makes Jacques very alive.’’ Demy was the subject of two follow-ups to Jacquot de Nantes, also directed by Varda: The Young Girls Turn 25, a sentimental reminiscence of the filming of The Young Girls of Rochefort and The World of Jacques Demy, an intensely intimate documentary-biogra- phy which includes clips from his films and interviews with those who worked with and respected him. —Robin Wood, updated by Rob Edelman DE PALMA, Brian Nationality: American. Born: Newark, New Jersey, 11 September 1940. Education: Attended Columbia University, New York, and Sarah Lawrence College (writing fellowship), 1963–64. Family: Married 1) actress Nancy Allen, 1979 (divorced, 1984); 2) producer Gale Anne Hurd (divorced); 3) Darnell De Palma, 1995 (divorced, 1997); one child. Career: Directed first feature, Murder a la Mod, 1967; also film teacher and instructor. Awards: Rosenthal Founda- tion award for Woton’s Wake, 1963; Silver Bear Award, Berlin Festival, for Greetings, 1969. Films as Director: 1961 Icarus (short); 660214, the Story of an IBM Card (short) 1963 Woton’s Wake (short) 1964 Jennifer (short) 1965 Bridge That Gap (short) 1966 Show Me a Strong Town and I’ll Show You a Strong Bank (short); The Responsive Eye (doc) DE PALMA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 256 Brian De Palma 1967 Murder a la Mod (+ sc, ed) 1968 Greetings (+ co-sc, ed) 1969 The Wedding Party (+ pr, ed, co-sc; release delayed from 1966) 1970 Dionysus in ‘69 (co-d, co-ph, co-ed; completed 1968); Hi, Mom! (+ co-sc) 1972 Get to Know Your Rabbit 1973 Sisters (Blood Sisters) (+ co-sc) 1974 Phantom of the Paradise (+ sc) 1976 Obsession (+ co-sc); Carrie 1978 The Fury 1979 Home Movies 1980 Dressed to Kill (+ sc) 1981 Blow Out (+ sc) 1983 Scarface 1984 Body Double (+ pr, sc) 1986 Wise Guys 1987 The Untouchables 1989 Casualties of War 1990 The Bonfire of the Vanities (+ pr, role as Prison Guard) 1992 Raising Cain (+ sc) 1993 Carlito’s Way 1996 Mission: Impossible 1998 Snake Eyes (+ co-sc, pr) 2000 Mission to Mars; Mr. Hughes Publications By DE PALMA: articles— Interview in The Film Director as Superstar, by Joseph Gelmis, Garden City, New York, 1970. Interview with E. Margulies, in Action (Los Angeles), September/ October 1974. ‘‘Phantoms and Fantasies,’’ an interview with A. Stuart, in Films and Filming (London), December 1976. ‘‘Things That Go Bump in the Night,’’ an interview with S. Swires, in Films in Review (New York), August/September 1978. Interview with Serge Daney and Jonathan Rosenbaum, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1982. ‘‘Double Trouble,’’ an interview with Marcia Pally, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1984. DE PALMADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 257 ‘‘Brian De Palma’s Guilty Pleasures,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1987. ‘‘Brian De Palma,’’ an interview with Robert Plunket, in Interview (New York), August 1992. Interview with Isabelle Huppert, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 477, March 1994. Interview with Laurent Vachaud and Pierre Berthomieu, in Positif (Paris), no. 455, January 1999. On DE PALMA: books— Nepoti, Roberto, Brian De Palma, Florence, 1982. Bliss, Michael, Brian De Palma, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1983. Dworkin, Susan, Double De Palma: A Film Study with Brian De Palma, New York, 1984, revised edition, 1990. Wood, Robin, Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan, New York, 1986. Bouzereau, Laurent, The De Palma Cut: The Films of America’s Most Controversial Director, New York, 1988. MacKinnon, Kenneth, Misogyny in the Movies: The De Palma Question, New York, 1990. Salamon, Julie, The Devil’s Candy: The Bonfire of the Vanities Goes to Hollywood, Boston, 1991. On DE PALMA: articles— Rubinstein, R., ‘‘The Making of Sisters,’’ in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), September 1973. Henry, M., ‘‘L’Oeil du malin (à propos de Brian de Palma),’’ in Positif (Paris), May 1977. Brown, R. S., ‘‘Considering de Palma,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), July/August 1977. Matusa, P., ‘‘Corruption and Catastrophe: De Palma’s Carrie,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1977. Garel, A., ‘‘Brian de Palma,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), Decem- ber 1977. Byron, Stuart, ‘‘Rules of the Game,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 5 November 1979. Jameson, R.T., ‘‘Style vs. ‘Style’,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1980. Button, S., ‘‘Visceral Poetry,’’ in Films (London), November 1982. Eisen, K., ‘‘The Young Misogynists of American Cinema,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 8, no. 1, 1983. Brown, G. A., ‘‘Obsession,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), December 1983. Rafferty, T., ‘‘De Palma’s American Dreams,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1984. Fisher, W., ‘‘Re: Writing: Film History: From Hitchcock to De Palma,’’ in Persistence of Vision (Maspeth, New York), Sum- mer 1984. Denby, David, and others, ‘‘Pornography: Love or Death?’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1984. Braudy, Leo, ‘‘The Sacraments of Genre: Coppola, De Palma, Scorsese,’’ in Film Quarterly (Los Angeles), Spring 1986. Hugo, Chris, ‘‘Three Films of Brian De Palma,’’ in Movie (London), Winter 1989. White, Armond, ‘‘Brian De Palma, Political Filmmaker,’’ Film Comment (New York), May/June 1991. Muse, Eben J., ‘‘The Land of Nam: Romance and Persecution in Brian De Palma’s Casualties of War,’’ in Literature/Film Quar- terly, vol. 20, no. 3, 1992. Spear, Bruce, ‘‘Political Morality and Historical Understanding in Casualties of War,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 3, 1992. Barry, Norman, in Radio Times (London), 5 November 1994. Barry, Norman, in Radio Times (London), 10 June 1995 Ingersoll, Earl G. ‘‘The Constitution of Masculinity in Brian De Palma’s Film Casualties of War,’’ in Journal of Men’s Studies, August 1995. Uffelen, René van, ‘‘Realisme even buiten spel. Het Topshot,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), October-Noevenber 1995. Scorsese, Martin, ‘‘Notre génération,’’ March 1996 Hampton, Howard, ‘‘Rerun for Your Life: TV’s Search and Destroy Mission,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July-August 1996. Vaz, Mark Cotta, ‘‘Cruising the Digital Backlot,’’ in Cinefex (River- side), September 1996. Krohn, Bill, ‘‘Tornadoes, martiens et ordinateurs,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1996. Carlson, Jerry W., ‘‘Down the Streets of Time: Puerto Rico and New York City in the Films Q&A and Carlito’s Way,’’ in Post Script (Commerce), vol. 16, no. 1, Fall 1996. Magid, Ron, ‘‘Making Mission Impossible,’’ in American Cinemtographer (Hollywood), December 1996. Librach, Ronald S., ‘‘Sex, Lies, and Audiotape: Politics and Heuristics in Dressed to Kill and Blow Out,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), July 1998. Eisenreich, Pierre, ‘‘Y a-t-il une vie après le stéréotype?’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 456, February 1999. *** The conventional dismissal of Brian De Palma—that he is a mere ‘‘Hitchcock imitator’’—though certainly unjust, provides a useful starting point, the relation being far more complex than such a de- scription suggests. It seems more appropriate to talk of symbiosis than of imitation: if De Palma borrows Hitchcock’s plot-structures, the impulse is rooted in an authentic identification with the Hitchcock thematic that results in (at De Palma’s admittedly infrequent best) valid variations that have their own indisputable originality. Sisters and Dressed to Kill are modeled on Psycho; Obsession and Body Double on Vertigo; Body Double also borrows from Rear Window, as does Blow Out. The debt is of course enormous, but—at least in the cases of Sisters, Obsession, and Blow Out, De Palma’s three most satisfying films to date—the power and coherence of the films testifies to the genuineness of the creativity. Central to the work of both directors are the tensions and contra- dictions arising out of the way in which gender has been traditionally constructed in a male-dominated culture. According to Freud, the human infant, while biologically male or female, is not innately ‘‘masculine’’ or ‘‘feminine’’: in order to construct the socially correct man and woman of patriarchy, the little girl’s masculinity and the little boy’s femininity must be repressed. This repression tends to be particularly rigorous and particularly damaging in the male, where it is compounded by the pervasive association of ‘‘femininity’’ with castration (on both the literal and symbolic levels). The significance of De Palma’s best work (and, more powerfully and consistently, that of Hitchcock before him) lies in its eloquent evidence of what happens when the repression is partially unsuccessful. The misogyny of which both directors have been accused, expressing itself in the films’ often extreme outbursts of violence against women (both physical and psychological), must be read as the result of their equally DEREN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 258 extreme identification with the ‘‘feminine’’ and the inevitable dread that such an identification brings with it. Sisters is concerned single-mindedly with castration: the symbolic castration of the woman within patriarchy, the answering literal castration that is the form of her revenge. The basis concept of female Siamese twins, one active and aggressive, one passive and submis- sive, is a brilliant inspiration, the action of the entire film arising out of the attempts by men to destroy the active aspect in order to construct the ‘‘feminine’’ woman who will accept her subordination. The aggressive sister Dominique (dead, but still alive as Danielle’s unconscious) is paralleled by Grace Collier (Jennifer Salt), the assertive young reporter who usurps the accoutrements of ‘‘masculin- ity’’ and eventually assumes Dominique’s place in the extraordinary climactic hallucination sequence in which the woman’s castration is horrifyingly reasserted. Sisters, although weakened by De Palma’s inability to take Grace seriously enough or give the character the substance the allegory demands, remains his closest to a completely satisfying film: the monstrousness of woman’s oppression under patriarchy and its appalling consequences for both sexes have never been rendered more vividly. Blow Out rivals it in coherence and surpasses it in sensitivity: one would describe it as De Palma’s masterpiece were it not for one unpardonable and unfortunately extended lapse—the entirely gratuitous sequence depicting the mur- der of the prostitute in the railway station, which one can account for only in terms of a fear that the film was not ‘‘spicy’’ enough for the box office (it failed anyway). It can stand as a fitting counterpart to Sisters, a rigorous dissection of the egoism fostered in the male by the culture’s obsession with ‘‘masculinity.’’ It is clear that Travolta’s obsession with establishing the reality of his perceptions has little to do with an impersonal concern for truth and everything to do with his need to establish and assert the symbolic phallus at whatever cost— the cost involving, crucially, the manipulation and exploitation of a woman, eventually precipitating her death. Since Body Double—a tawdry ragbag of a film that might be seen as De Palma’s gift to his detractors—De Palma seems to have abandoned the Hitchcock con- nection, and it is not yet clear that he has found a strong thematic with which to replace it. The Untouchables seems a work of empty efficiency; it is perhaps significant that one remains uncertain whether to take the patriarchal idyll of Elliott Ness’s domestic life straight or as parody. Casualties of War is more interesting, though severely undermined by the casting of the two leads: one grasps the kind of contrast De Palma had in mind, but it is not successfully realized in that between Sean Penn’s shameless mugging and Michael J. Fox’s intractable blandness. Like most Hollywood movies on Vietnam, the film suffers from the inability to see Asians in terms other than an undifferentiated ‘‘otherness’’: it is symptomatic that the two Viet- namese girls, past and present, are played by the same actress. His return to the film of political protest (and specifically to the Vietnam War) brings De Palma’s career to date full circle: his early work in an independent avant-garde (Greetings, Hi, Mom!) is too often over- looked. But nothing in Casualties of War, for all the strenuousness of its desire to disturb, achieves the genuinely disorienting force of the remarkable ‘‘Be Black, Baby’’ sections of Hi, Mom!. Following Casualties of War—a film to which he had a deep personal commit- ment, whatever its success or failure as a comment upon the Vietnam War, violence against women, or the power of traumatic memory— De Palma seemed intent upon remaking his own public image by choosing an unusual property for him, the social satire The Bonfire of the Vanities. He did put a personal stamp upon the material, most notably (and paradoxically) by paying tribute to the Orson Welles of Touch of Evil, opening the film with an extremely long and intricate tracking shot and using distorting wide-angle lenses almost con- stantly (though less imaginatively than Welles). Unfortunately the visual flair did nothing to compensate for some disastrous miscastings and craven attempts to soften the book’s scathing cynicism, or for the unfocused script in general and De Palma’s own inability to do satiric comedy without obnoxious overemphasis. Raising Cain, a return to more comfortable territory—the lurid pop-Freudian thriller, the genre through which De Palma had achieved greatest fame and critical admiration—puzzled those who claimed he was merely repeating himself. But for connoisseurs it was intentionally a delicious self- parody—or at least a virtuoso filmmaker’s display of his special talents—most flagrantly in a spectacularly choreographed steadicam shot in which a psychiatrist spouting endless exposition is always on the verge of walking out of the frame, and in the delirious slow- motion climax. Carlito’s Way again harked back to earlier De Palma successes, this time to crime drama, with an emotional intensity somewhere between the hallucinatory Scarface and the more coolly impersonal The Untouchables. If the film ultimately could not rise beyond the conventional trajectory of its plot—ex-hood trying to go straight is drawn back into crime by his old buddy, despite the outreach of a saintly woman—it at least boasted a brilliant impersonation of a crooked lawyer by Sean Penn and some splendid De Palma set pieces, like the chase through Grand Central Terminal. The film reminds us that De Palma is unsurpassed among film directors in portraying furies: not the collective surges of violence rendered by a Sam Peckinpah, but the private demons unleashed within or witnessed by (the same thing on dream level) ‘‘ordinary’’ people as well as crime kings and raving lunatics. De Palma’s cinematic flourishes have often been called ‘‘operatic,’’ but perhaps the better analogy is with the Lisztian keyboard virtuoso, someone who can tap profound emotional depths one moment but skitters over the surface at other times; who frequently improvises upon others’ themes but is always unmistakably himself, for better or worse. —Robin Wood, updated by Joseph Milicia DEREN, Maya Nationality: Russian/American. Born: Kiev, 1917, became U.S. citizen. Education: League of Nations School, Geneva, Switzerland; studied journalism at University of Syracuse, New York; New York University, B.A.; Smith College, M.A. Family: Married (second time) Alexander Hackenschmied (Hammid), 1942 (divorced); later married Teijo Ito. Career: Family immigrated to America, 1922; made first film Meshes of the Afternoon, 1943; travelled to Haiti, 1946; secretary for Creative Film Foundation, 1960. Awards: Guggenheim fellowship for work in creative film, 1946. Died: Of a cerebral hemorrhage in Queens, New York, 13 October 1961. Films as Director: 1943 Meshes of the Afternoon (with Alexander Hammid) (+ role); The Witches’ Cradle (unfinished) 1944 At Land (+ role) DERENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 259 1945 A Study in Choreography for Camera; The Private Life of a Cat (home movie, with Hammid) 1946 Ritual in Transfigured Time (+ role) 1948 Meditation on Violence 1959 The Very Eye of Night Publications By DEREN: books— An Anagram of Ideas on Art, Form, and the Film, New York, 1946. The Divine Horseman: The Living Gods of Haiti, New York, 1953. Divine Horsemen: Voodoo Gods of Haiti, New York, 1970. By DEREN: articles— ‘‘Choreography of Camera,’’ in Dance (New York), October 1943. ‘‘Cinema As an Art Form,’’ in Introduction to the Art of the Movies, edited by Lewis Jacobs, New York, 1960. ‘‘Cinematography: The Creative Use of Reality,’’ in Daedalus: The Visual Arts Today, 1960. ‘‘Movie Journal,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 25 August 1960. ‘‘A Statement of Principles,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Sum- mer 1961. ‘‘Movie Journal,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 1 June 1961. ‘‘A Lecture . . . ,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1963. ‘‘Notes, Essays, Letters,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Winter 1965. ‘‘A Statement on Dance and Film,’’ in Dance Perspectives, no. 30, 1967. ‘‘Tempo and Tension,’’ in The Movies As Medium, edited by Lewis Jacobs, New York, 1970. On DEREN: books— Hanhardt, John, and others, A History of the American Avant-Garde Cinema, New York, 1976. Sitney, P. Adams, Visionary Film, 2d edition, New York, 1979. Clark, Veve A., Millicent Hodson, and Catrina Neimans, The Legend of Maya Deren: A Documentary Biography and Collected Works: Vol. 1, Pt. 1, Signatures (1917–1942), New York, 1984. Heck-Rabi, Louise, Women Filmmakers: A Critical Reception, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1984. Rabinovitz, Lauren, Points of Resistance: Women, Power, Politics in the New York Avant-Garde Cinema, 1943–71, Urbana, Illi- nois, 1991. Sudre, Alain-Alcide, Dialogues théoriques avec Maya Deren: du cinéma expérimental au film ethnographique, Paris, 1996. Sullivan, Moira, An Anagram of the Ideas of Filmmaker Maya Deren: Creative Work in Motion Pictures, Stockholm, 1997. On DEREN: articles— Farber, Manny, ‘‘Maya Deren’s Films,’’ in New Republic (New York), 28 October 1946. ‘‘Deren Issue’’ of Filmwise, no. 2, 1961. Obituary in New York Times, 14 October 1961. Tallmer, Jerry, ‘‘For Maya Deren,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 19 October 1961. Arnheim, Rudolf, ‘‘To Maya Deren,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 24, 1962. Sitney, P. Adams, ‘‘The Idea of Morphology,’’ in Film Culture (New York), nos. 53, 54, and 55, 1971. Cornwell, Regina, ‘‘Maya Deren and Germaine Dulac: Activists of the Avant Garde,’’ in Film Library Quarterly (New York), Winter 1971/72. Bronstein, M., and S. Grossmann, ‘‘Zu Maya Derens Filmarbeit,’’ in Frauen und Film (Berlin), December 1976. Camera Obscura Collective, The, ‘‘Excerpts from an Interview with ‘The Legend of Maya Deren’ Project,’’ in Camera Obscura (Berkeley, California), Summer 1979. Mayer, T., ‘‘The Legend of Maya Deren: Champion of American Independent Film,’’ in Film News (New York), September/Octo- ber 1979. ‘‘Kamera Arbeit: Der schopferische umgang mit der realitat,’’ in Frauen und Film (Berlin), October 1984. ‘‘Maya Deren Issue,’’ of Film Culture (New York), 72–75, 1985. Millsapps, J.L., ‘‘Maya Deren, Imagist,’’ in Literature/Film Quar- terly (Salisbury, Maryland), January 1986. Monthly Film Bulletin (London), June–July 1988. Homiak, J. P., ‘‘The Anthropological Visualization of Haiti: Reflec- tions on the Films of Melville Herskovits and Maya Deren,’’ in CVA Review, Spring 1990. Smetek, J. R., ‘‘Continuum or Break?: Divine Horseman and the Films of Maya Deren,’’ in New Orleans Review, vol. 17, no. 4, 1990. Mosca, U., ‘‘Maya Deren, o dell’etica della forma,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), vol. 32, no. 314, May 1992. Larue, J., ‘‘Trois portraits de femmes,’’ in Séquences (Quebec), no. 166, September-October 1993. Pramaggiore, Maria, ‘‘Performance and Persona in the U.S. Avant- Garde: The Case of Maya Deren,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), vol. 36, no. 2, Winter 1997. *** Maya Deren was the best-known independent, experimental filmmaker in the United States during and after World War II. She developed two types of short, subjective films: the psychodrama and the ciné-dance film. She initiated a national non-theatrical network to show her six independently made works, which have been referred to as visual lyric poems, or dream-like trance films. She also lectured and wrote extensively on film as an art form. Her films remain as provocative as ever, her contributions to cinematic art indisputable. Intending to write a book on dance, Deren toured with Katherine Dunham’s dance group as a secretary. Dunham introduced Deren to Alexander Hammid, and the following year the couple made Meshes of the Afternoon. Considered a milestone in the chronology of independent film in the United States, it is famous for its four-stride sequence (from beach to grass to mud to pavement to rug). Deren acted the role of a girl driven to suicide. Continuous action is maintained while time-space unities are severed, establishing a trance- like mood by the use of slow motion, swish-pan camera movements, and well executed point-of-view shots. In her next film, At Land, a woman (Deren) runs along a beach and becomes involved in a chess game. P. Adams Sitney refers to this work as a ‘‘pure American trance film.’’ The telescoping of time occurs as each scene blends with the next in unbroken sequence, a result of pre-planned editing. At Land is also studded with camera shots of astounding virtuosity. DE SICA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 260 Other films include Deren’s first ciné-dance film, the three-minute A Study in Choreography for Camera. Filmed in slow motion, a male ballet dancer, partnered by the camera, moves through a variety of locales. Continuity of camera movement is maintained as the dancer’s foot changes location. Space is compressed while time is expanded. According to Sitney, the film’s importance resides in two fresh observations: space and time in film are created space and time, and the camera’s optimal use is as a dancer itself. Ritual in Transfigured Time, another dance-on-film, portrays psycho-dramatic ritual by use of freeze frames, repeated shots, shifting character identities, body movements, and locales. Meditation on Violence explores Woo (or Wu) Tang boxing with the camera as sparring partner, panning and zooming to simulate human response. The Very Eye of Night em- ployed Metropolitan Ballet School members to create a celestial ciné- ballet of night. Shown in its negative state, Deren’s handheld camera captured white figures on a total black background. Over the course of her four dance-films Deren evolved a viable form of ciné-choreogra- phy that was adapted and adjusted to later commercial feature films. In cases such as West Side Story, this was done with great skill and merit. Deren traced the evolution of her six films in ‘‘A letter to James Card,’’ dated April 19, 1955. Meshes was her ‘‘point of departure’’ and ‘‘almost expressionist’’; At Land depicted dormant energies in mutable nature; and Choreography distilled the essence of this natural changing. In Ritual she defined the processes of changing, while Meditation extends the study of metamorphosis. In The Very Eye she expressed her love of life and its living. ‘‘Each film was built as a chamber and became a corridor, like a chain reaction.’’ In 1946 Deren published An Anagram of Ideas on Art, Form, and the Film, a monograph declaring two major statements: the rejection of symbolism in film, and strong support for independent film after an analysis of industrial and independent filmmaking activities in the United States. Although Meshes remains the most widely seen film of its type, with several of its effects unsurpassed by filmmakers, Deren had been forgotten until recently. Her reputation now enjoys a well-deserved renaissance, for as Rudolf Arnheim eulogized, Deren was one of film’s ‘‘most delicate magicians.’’ —Louise Heck-Rabi DE SICA, Vittorio Nationality: Italian/French (became French citizen in order to marry second wife, 1968. Born: Sora (near Rome), 7 July 1902. Education: Institut Superieur de Commerce, Rome, and University of Rome. Family: Married 1) Giuditta Rissone (divorced 1968); 2) Maria Mercader, 1968, two sons. Career: Actor in Tatiana Pavlova’s Stage Company, 1923; formed own stage company with actress-wife, late 1920s; leading film actor, from 1931; directed first film, Rose scarlette, 1940. Died: In Paris, 13 November 1974. Films as Director: 1940 Rose scarlatte (co-d, role as The Engineer) 1941 Maddelena zero in condotta (+ dialogue, role as Carlo Hart- man); Teresa Venerdi (+ co-sc, role) Vittorio De Sica 1942 Un garibaldino al convento (+ co-sc, role as Nino Bixio) 1943 I bambini ci guardano (+ co-sc) 1946 La porta del cielo (+ co-sc, completed 1944); Sciuscia (Shoe- shine) (+ co-sc) 1948 Ladri di biciclette (The Bicycle Thief) (+ pr, co-sc) 1950 Miracolo a Milano (Miracle in Milan) (+ co-sc) 1952 Umberto D (+ pr, co-sc) 1953 Stazione Termini (Indiscretion of an American Wife; Indiscre- tion) (+ co-pr) 1954 L’oro di Napoli (Gold of Naples) (+ co-sc, role) 1956 Il tetto (The Roof) (+ pr) 1960 La ciociara (Two Women) 1961 Il giudizio universale (+ role) 1962 ‘‘La Riffa (The Raffle)’’ episode of Boccacio ‘70; I sequestrati di Altona (The Condemned of Altona) 1963 Il boom; Ieri, oggi, domani (Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow) 1964 Matrimonio all’italiana (Marriage, Italian Style) 1965 Un Monde nouveau (Un Monde jeune; Un mondo nuovo; A Young World) 1966 Caccia alla volpe (After the Fox) (+ guest role); ‘‘Un sera come le altre (A Night like Any Other)’’ episode of Le streghe (The Witches) 1967 Woman Times Seven (Sept fois femmes) 1968 Amanti (A Place for Lovers) (+ co-sc) DE SICADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 261 1970 I girasoli (Sunflower); Il giardino dei Finzi Contini (The Garden of the Finzi-Continis); ‘‘Il leone’’ episode of Le coppie (Les Couples) 1972 Lo chiameremo Andrea 1973 Una breve vacanza (A Brief Vacation) 1974 Il viaggio (The Journey; The Voyage) Other Films: 1918 Il processo Clémenceau (L’Affaire Clemenceau) (Bencivenga) (role) 1926 La bellezza del mondo (Almirante) (role) 1928 La compagnia dei matti (La compagnie des fous) (Almirante) (role) 1932 La vecchia signora (Palermi) (role); La segretaria per tutti (Palermi) (role); Due cuori felici (Negroni) (role); Gli uomini che mascalzoni! (Camerini) (role) 1933 Un cattivo soggetto (Bragaglia) (role); Il signore desidera? (Righelli) (role); La canzone del sole (German version: Das Lied der Sonne) (Neufeld) (role as The Secretary); Lisetta (Boese) (role) 1934 Tempo massimo (Mattoli) (role) 1935 Darò un millione (Camerini) (role as The Millionaire); Amo te sola (Mattòli) (role) 1936 Lohengrin (Malasomma) (role); Ma non è una cosa seria! (Camerini) (role); Non ti conosco più (Malasomma) (role); L’uomo che sorride (Mattoli) (role) 1937 Hanno rapito un uomo (Righelli) (role); Il signor Max (Camerini) (role); Questi ragazzi (Mattoli) (role) 1938 Napoli d’altri tempi (Palermi) (role); L’orologio a cucù (Mastrocinque) (role); Partire (Palermi) (role); Ai vostri ordini, signora! (Mattòli) (role); La mazurka di papà (Biancoli) (role); Le due madri (Palermi) (role); Castelli in aria (German version: Ins blaue Leben, 1939) (Genina) (role) 1939 Grandi magazzini (Camerini) (role); Finisce sempre cosí (Susini) (role); Napoli che non muore (Palermi) (role) 1940 La peccatrice (Palermi) (role); Pazza di giola (Bragaglia) (role); Manon Lescaut (Gallone) (role) 1941 L’avventuriera del piano di sopra (Matarazzo) (role) 1942 Se io fossi onesto! (Bragaglia) (role, co-sc); La guardia del corpo (Bragaglia) (role, co-sc) 1943 I nostri sogni (Cottafavi) (role, co-sc); Non sono superstizioso, ma... ! (Bragaglia) (role, co-sc); L’ippocampo (Rosmino) (role, co-sc); Diece minuti di vita (Longanesi) (unfinished; another version made 1944 with different cast) (role); Nessuno torna indietro (Blasetti) (role) 1945 Lo sbaglio di essere vivo (Bragagalia) (role); Il mondo vuole cosi (Bianchi) (role) 1946 Roma città libera (co-sc); Il marito povero (Amara) (co-sc); Abbasso la ricchezza! (Righelli) (role, co-sc) 1947 Sperduti nel buio (Mastrocinque) (role as Nanzio, co-sc); Natale al campo 119 (Francisci) (supervisor, role as The Noble Neopolitan) 1948 Lo sconosciuto di San Marino (Waszinsky) (role as The Proprietor); Cuore (Coletti) (co-sc, role as The Landlord) 1950 Domani è troppo tardi (Moguy) (role as Professor Landi) 1951 Cameriera bella presenza offresi (Pastina) (role as The Actor); ‘‘Il processo di Frine’’ episode of Altri tempi (Blasetti) (role as the Barrister); Gli uomini non guardano il cielo (Scarpelli) (role) 1952 Buongiorno elefante! (Sabú principle ladro) (Franciolini) (co-sc, role as Garetti); ‘‘Scena all’aperto’’ (role as Count) and ‘‘Don Corradino’’ (role as Don Corradino) episodes of Tempi nostri (Blasetti) 1953 Madame De . . . (Ophuls) (role as Fabrizio Donati); Pane, amore e fantasia (Comencini) (role as Marshal Carotenuto); ‘‘Pendolin’’ episode of Cento anni d’amore (De Felice) (role); ‘‘Incidente a Villa Borghese’’ episode of Villa Borghese (Franciolini) (role); Il matrimonio (Petrucci) (role); ‘‘Il fine dicitore’’ episode of Gran varietà (Paolella) (role); ‘‘Le Divorce (Il divorzio)’’ episode of Secrets d’alc?ve (Il letto) (Franciolini) (role) 1954 Vergine moderna (Pagliero) (role as The Banker); L’Allegro Squadrone (Moffa) (role as The General); Pane, amore e gelosia (Comencini) (role); Peccato che sia una canaglia (Blasetti) (role as Mr. Stroppiani) 1955 Il segno di Venere (Risi) (role as Alessio Spano, the Poet); Gli ultimi cinque minuti (The Last Five Minutes) (Amato) (role as Carlo); La bella mugnaia (Camerini) (role as The Governor); Pane, amore e . . . (Risi) (role as Carotenuto); Racconti romani (Franciolini) (role); Il bigamo (Emmer) (role as The Barrister) 1956 Mio figlio Nerone (Nero’s Weekend) (Steno) (role as Sénèquel); Tempo di villegiatura (Racioppi) (role as The Celebrity); The Monte Carlo Story (Montecarlo) (Taylor) (role as Count Dino Giocondo Della Fiaba); I giorni più belli (I nostri anni più belli, Gli anni più belli) (Mattòli) (role as The Banker); Noi siamo le colonne (D’Amico) (role as Celimontani) 1957 Padri e figli (Monicelli) (role as the tailor Corallo); I colpevoli (Vasile) (role as the barrister Vasari); Souvenir d’Italie (It Happened in Rome) (Pietrangeli) (role as The Count); La donna che venne del mare (De Robertis) (role as Bordigin); Vacanze a Ischia (Camerini) (role as Occhipinti); I conte Max (Bianchi) (role as Count Max Orsini Baraldo); Amore e chiacchiere (Blasetti) (role as Bonelli); Il medico e lo stregone (Monicelli) (role as Locoratolo); Totò, Vittorio e la dottoressa (Mastrocinque) (role as the sick nobleman); Casino de Paris (Hunebelle) (role as Alexandre Gordy) 1958 A Farewell to Arms (Vidor) (role as Count Alessandro Rinaldi); Domenica è sempre domenica (Mastrocinque) (role as Mr. Guastaldi); Ballerina e buon Dio (Leonviola) (roles as the policeman, the taxi driver, and the costume porter); Kanonenserenade (Pezzo, capopezzo e capitano) (Staudte) (role as Count Ernesto De Rossi); Anna di Brooklyn (Denham and Lastricati) (supervisor, co-music, role as Don Luigino); La ragazza di Piazza S. Pietro (Costa) (role as Armando Conforti); Gli zitelloni (Bianchi) (role as Professor Landi); Pane, amore e Andulasia (Setò) (role as Carotenuto); La prima notte (Cavalcanti) (role as Alfredo) 1959 Nel blu dipinto di blu (Volare) (Tellini) (role as Spartaco); Il nemico di mia moglie (Puccini) (role as The Husband); Vacanze d’inverno (Mastrocinque) (role as Manrizie); Il moralista (Bianchi) (role as The President); Il Generale Della Rovere (Rossellini) (role as Giovanni Bertone); Il mondo dei miracoli (Capuano) (role as Pietro Giordani); Uomini e nobiluomini (Bianchi) (role as Marquis Nicolas Peccoli); Ferdinando I, re di Napoli (Franciolini) (role as DE SICA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 262 Ceccano); Gastone (Bonnard) (role as The Prince); Les trois etc . . . du colonel (Le tre eccetera del colonello) (Boissol) (role as Colonel Belalcazar) 1960 Il vigile (Zampa) (role as The Trustee); Le pillole di Ercole (Salce) (role as Colonel Pietro Cuocolo); Austerlitz (Gance) (role as Pope Pius VII); The Angel Wore Red (La sposa bella) (Johnson) (role as General Clave); The Millionairess (Asquith) (role as Joe); It Started in Naples (Shavelson) (role as Mario Vitale); Gli incensurati (Giaculli) (role as comic actor); Un amore a Roma (Risi) (role) 1961 Gli attendenti (Bianchi) (role as Colonel Bitossi); I due marescialli (Corbucci) (role as Antonio Cotone); Le meraviglie di Aladino (The Wonders of Aladdin) (Bava and Levin) (role as The Genie); L’onorata società (Pazzaglia) (role as The Chef); La Fayette (La Fayette, una spada per due bandiere) (Dréville) (role as Bancroft) 1962 Vive Henry IV, vive l’amour (Autant-Lara) (role as Don Pedro) 1965 The Amorous Adventures of Moll Flanders (T. Young) (role as The Count) 1966 Io, io, io . . . e gli altri (Blasetti) (role as Count Trepossi) 1967 Gli altri, gli altri e noi (Arena) (role as man on pension); Un italiano in America (Sordi) (role as Giuseppe’s Father); The Biggest Bundle of Them All (Annakin) (role as Cesare Celli); Caroline Cherie (de la Patelliere) (role as Count de Bièvres) 1968 The Shoes of the Fisherman (Les Souliers de Saint-Pierre) (M. Anderson) (role as Cardinal Rinaldi) 1969 If It’s Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium (M. Stuart) (role as The Shoemaker); Una su tredici (12 + 1) (Gessner and Lucignani) (role as Di Seta) 1970 Cose di Cosa Nostra (Steno) (role as The Lawyer); L’Odeur des fauves (Balducci) (role as Milord) 1971 Trastevere (Tozzi) (role as Enrico Formichi); Io non vedo, tu non parli, lui non sente (Camerini) (role as Count at the Casino) 1972 Pinocchio (Comencini) (for TV) (role as The Judge); Snow Job (The Ski Raiders) (Englund) (role as Dolphi); Ettore lo fusto (Castellari) (role as Giove); Siamo tutti in libertà provvisoria (Scarpelli) (role) 1973 Storia de fratelli e de cortelli (Amendola) (role as The Marshal); Il delitto Matteotti (Vancini) (role as Mauro del Giudice) 1974 Andy Warhol’s Dracula (Dracula cerca sangue di vergine e . . . morì di sete!!, Blood for Dracula) (Morrissey) (role as Marquis di Fiori); C’eravamo tanto amati (Scola) (role as himself); Vittorio De Sica, il Regista, l’attore, l’uomo (Gragadze) (role) Publications By DE SICA: books— Umberto D., with Cesare Zavattini, Rome, 1954. The Bicycle Thief, with Cesare Zavattini, New York, 1968. Miracle in Milan, with Cesare Zavattini and others, New York, 1968. By DE SICA: articles— Interview with F. Koval, in Sight and Sound (London), April 1950. ‘‘The Most Wonderful Years of My Life,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1955. ‘‘Money, the Public, and Umberto D,’’ in Films and Filming (Lon- don), January 1956. ‘‘Illiberal Censorship,’’ in Film (London), January/February 1956. ‘‘Hollywood Shocked Me,’’ in Films and Filming (London), Febru- ary 1956. ‘‘I Must Act to Pay My Debts,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1956. ‘‘British Humor? It’s the Same in Italy,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1959. ‘‘What’s Right with Hollywood,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November 1963. Interview in Encountering Directors, edited by Charles Thomas Samuels, New York, 1972. Interview with D. Lyons, in Interview (New York), February 1972. ‘‘Le Jardin des Finzi-Contini,’’ interview with G. Braucourt, in Ecran (Paris), February 1972. On DE SICA: books— Ferrara, Giuseppe, Il nuovo cinema italiano, Florence, 1957. Agel, Henri, Vittorio De Sica, second edition, Paris, 1964. Leprohon, Pierre, Vittorio De Sica, Paris, 1966. Bazin, André, Qu’est-ce que le cinéma, second edition, Paris, 1975. Caldiron, Orio, Vittorio De Sica, Rome, 1975. Mercader, Maria, La mia vita con Vittorio De Sica, Milan, Italy, 1978. Anthologie du cinéma, vol. 10, Paris, 1979. Darreta, John, Vittorio De Sica: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1983. Bolzoni, Francesco, Quando De Sica era Mister Brown, Turin, 1984. Governi, Giancarlo, with Anna Maria Bianchi, Vittorio De Sica: Parlami d’amore Mariù, Rome, 1993. On DE SICA: articles— Jacobson, H.L., ‘‘De Sica’s Bicycle Thieves and Italian Humanism,’’ in Hollywood Quarterly, Fall 1949. Hawkins, R.F., ‘‘De Sica Dissected,’’ in Films in Review (New York), May 1951. Lambert, Gavin, ‘‘The Case of De Sica,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), June 1951. Sargeant, W., ‘‘Bread, Love, and Neo-Realism,’’ in New Yorker, 29 June and 6 July 1957. Rhode, Eric, ‘‘Why Neo-Realism Failed,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1960/61. Lane, J.F., ‘‘A Case of Artistic Inflation,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1963. McVay, D., ‘‘Poet of Poverty,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November 1964. Comuzio, E., ‘‘De Sica o della doppia costante: il sorriso e il tarlo segreto,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), January 1975. Bachmann, Gideon, ‘‘Vittorio de Sica: Always a True Window,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1975. ‘‘De Sica Issue’’ of Bianco e Nero (Rome), Fall 1975. Passalacqua, J., ‘‘Vittorio De Sica,’’ in Films in Review (New York), April 1978. DE SICADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 263 ‘‘Vittorio de Sica Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 October 1978. Carcassonne, P., ‘‘Dossier: le neo-realisme: De Sica ‘le menteur,’’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), January 1979. Shipman, David, ‘‘Directors of the Decade: Forties,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1983. ‘‘Vittorio De Sica,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), February 1985. On DE SICA: films— De Reisner, Bika, Meet De Sica. Dragadze, Peter, Vittorio De Sica: Il regista, l’attore, l’uomo (for TV), 1974. *** The films of Vittorio De Sica are among the most enduring of the Italian post-war period. His career suggests an openness to form and a versatility uncommon among Italian directors. De Sica began acting on stage as a teenager and played his first film role in 1918. In the 1920s his handsome features and talent made him something of a matinee idol, and from the mid-1930s he appeared in a number of films by Mario Camerini, including Gliuomini che mascalzoni!, Darò un milione, and Grandi magazzine. During his lifetime, De Sica acted in over one hundred films in Italy and abroad, using this means to finance his own directorial efforts. He specialized in breezy comic heroes, men of great self- assurance or confidence men (as in Rossellini’s Generale della Rovere). The influence of his tenure as actor cannot be overestimated in his directorial work, where the expressivity of the actor in carefully written roles was one of his foremost technical implements. In this vein De Sica has continually mentioned the influence on his work of Charlie Chaplin. The tensive continuity between tragic and comic, the deployment of a detailed yet poetic gestural language, and a humanist philosophy without recourse to the politically radical are all elements of De Sica’s work that are paralleled in the silent star’s films. De Sica’s directorial debuts, Rose scarlatte and Maddalena, zero in condotta, were both attempts to bring theater pieces to the screen with suitable roles for himself. In 1943, with I bambini ci guardano, De Sica teamed with Cesare Zavattini, who was to become his major collaborator for the next three decades. Together they began to demonstrate elements of the post-war realist aesthetic which, more than any other director except Visconti and Rossellini, De Sica helped shape and determine. Despite the overt melodrama of the misogynistic story (a young mother destroys her family by deserting them), the filmmaker refused to narrow the perspective through an overwrought Hollywoodian mise-en-scène, preferring instead a refreshing simplic- ity of composition and a subdued editing style. Much of the film’s original flavor can be traced to the clear, subjective mediation of a child, as promised in the title. De Sica’s intense feeling for children’s sensibilities led him to imagine how children viewed the failing adult reconstruction of society after the war. Sciuscia, a realistic look at the street and prison life of poor, abandoned children, was the result. It is the story of how the lasting friendship of two homeless boys, who make their living shining shoes for the American G.I.’s, is betrayed by their contact with adults. At the end of the film one boy inadvertently causes the other’s death. Although Zavattini insists that his creative role was minimal in this instance, the presence of his poetic imagination is evident in the figure of a beautiful white horse. This horse serves to cement the boys’ mutual bond and their hope for a future. Though a miserable failure in Italy, Sciuscia marked De Sica’s entry into international prominence; the film won a special Oscar in 1947. For the balance of the neorealist period De Sica fought an uphill battle to finance his films through friends and acting salaries. Ladri di biciclette anchors searching social documentation in metaphor and a non-traditional but highly structured narrative. Workman Ricci’s desperate search for his bicycle is an odyssey that enables us to witness a varied collection of characters and situations among the poor and working class of Rome. Each episode propels the narrative toward a sublimely Chaplinesque but insufficiently socially critical ending in which Ricci is defeated in his search and therefore in his attempts to provide for his family. Reduced to thievery himself, he takes his son’s hand and disappears into the crowd. Like De Sica’s other neorealist films, Ladri di biciclette gives the impression of technical nonchalance only to the indiscriminate eye, for De Sica planned his work with attention to minute details of characterization, mise-en-scène, and camera technique. During this period he preferred the non-professional actor for his or her ability to accept direction without the mediation of learned acting technique. The story of Toto the Good in Miracolo a Milano remains one of the outstanding stylistic contradictions of the neorealist period (there are many), yet one which sheds an enormous amount of light on the intentions and future of the De Sica-Zavattini team. The cinematography and setting, markedly neorealist in this fable about the struggle to found a shanty town for the homeless, is undercut at every moment with unabashed clowning both in performance and in cinematic technique. Moreover, the film moves toward a problematic fairy tale ending in which the poor, no longer able to defend their happy, make- shift village from the voracious appetite of capitalist entrepreneurs, take to the skies on magic broomsticks. (The film has more special effects than anyone would ever associate with neorealism; could De Sica have left his mark on Steven Spielberg?) Still, Zavattini, who had wanted to make the film for a number of years, and De Sica defend it as the natural burlesque transformation of themes evident in their earlier work together. By this time De Sica’s films were the subject of a good deal of controversy in Italy, and generally the lines were drawn between Catholic and Communist critics. The latter had an especially acute fear (one which surfaced again with Fellini’s La Strada) that the hard- won traits of neorealism had begun to backslide into those of the so- called ‘‘calligraphic’’ films of the Fascist era. These were based on an ahistorical, formal concern for aesthetic, compositional qualities and the nuances of clever storytelling. However, it was their next film, Umberto D, that comes closest to realizing Zavattini’s ideas on the absolute responsibility of the camera eye to observe life as it is lived without the traditional compromises of entertaining narratives. The sequence of the film in which the maid wakes up and makes the morning coffee has been praised many times for its day-in-the-life directness and simplicity. Il Tetto, about a curious attempt to erect a small house on municipal property, is generally recognized as the last neorealist film of this original period. Continually wooed by Hollywood, De Sica finally acquiesced to make Stazione termini in 1953, produced by Selznick and filmed in Rome with Jennifer Jones and Montgomery Clift. Unfortunately, neorealist representation formed only an insignificant background to this typically American star vehicle. A similar style is employed in La ciociara, which was created from a Moravia story about the relation- ship of a mother and daughter uprooted by the war. De Sica attempted to reconstruct reality in the studio during the making of this work, DIEGUES DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 264 making use of a somewhat unsuccessful stylized lighting technique. But as usual, he obtains excellent performances in an engaging dramatic vehicle (Sophia Loren won an Oscar). The filmmakers returned to comedic vehicles in 1954 in L’oro di Napoli. Human comedy emerges from the rich diversity and liveli- ness of Neapolitan life. Though still within the confines of realism, the film foreshadows the director’s entrance into the popular Italian market for sexual satire and farce. The exactitude with which he sculpts his characters and his reluctance to reduce the scenario to a mere bunch of gags demonstrates his intention to fuse comedy and drama, putting De Sica at the top of his class in this respect—among Risi, Comencini, and Monicelli. Often with Zavattini but also with Eduardo De Filippo, Tonino Guerra, and even Neil Simon (After the Fox), De Sica turned out about eight such films for the lucrative international market between 1961 and 1968, the best of which are: Il giudizio universale, which featured an all-star cast of international comedians; Ieri, oggi, domani and Matrimonio all’Italiana, both with Loren and Mastroianni; and Sette volte donna. Il giardino dei Finzi Contini, based on a Bassani novel about the incarceration of Italian Jews during the war, shows a strong Viscontian influence in its lavish setting and thematics (the film deals with the dissolution of the bourgeois family). Una breve vacanza, an examination of a woman who has managed to break out of the confines of an oppressive marriage during a sanitorium stay, reinstitutes the tensive relationship between comedy and tragedy of the earlier films. De Sica’s last film, Il viaggio, is from a Pirandello novel. —Joel Kanoff DIEGUES, Carlos Nationality: Brazilian. Born: Maceio, state of Alagoas, 19 May 1940. Education: Studied law, Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro. Family: Married entertainer Nara Leao. Career: Organizer of Metro- politan Union of students, also film critic and poet, early 1960s; directed first feature, Ganga Zumba, 1964; immigrated to France following Brazilian military takeover, late 1960s; directed Séjour for French TV, 1970; returned to Brazil, mid-1970s. Films as Director: 1960 Fuga (short) (co-d) 1961 Domingo (short) 1962 ‘‘Escola de samba, alegria de viver’’ episode of Cinco vêzes Favela 1964 Ganga Zumba (+ co-adapt) 1965 A 8a. Bienal de S?o Paulo (short) 1966 A grande cidade (The Big City) (+ co-sc) 1967 Oito universitários (short) 1969 Os herdeiros (The Inheritors; The Heirs) 1972 Quando a Carnaval chegar (When Carnival Comes) 1973 Joanna Francesa (Jeanne la fran?aise) (+ sc) 1976 Xica da Silva (Xica) 1977 Chuvas de verao (Summer Showers; A Summer Rain) (+ sc) 1978 Os filhos do medo (Les Enfants de la peur) (TV doc) 1980 Bye Bye Brasil (+ sc) 1984 Quilombo 1987 Un tren para las estrellas 1990 Dias melhores virao (+ sc, pr) 1994 Rio’s Love Songs (+ sc) 1996 Tieta do Agreste (Tieta of Agreste) (+ co-sc, co-pr) 1999 Orfeu (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1965 O Circo (Jabor) (ed) 1967 Terra em transe (Land in Trance) (Rocha) (assoc pr) 1968 Capitu (Saraceni) (assoc pr) 1980 Prova de Fogo (Altberg) (assoc pr) 1988 Dede Mamata (pr) Publications By DIEGUES: book— Palmares: Mito e romance da utopia brasileira, with Everardo Rocha, Rio de Janeiro, 1991. By DIEGUES: articles— ‘‘Diegues fala de Moreau e Joanna,’’ interview, in Filme Cultura (Rio de Janeiro), January/February 1973. ‘‘Carlos Diegues: ‘cette chose trés simple, aimer le peuple,’’’ an interview with J. Delmas, in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), July/Au- gust 1978. Interview with Federico De Cardenas, in Los a?os de la conmoción, by Isaac León Frías, Mexico City, 1979. ‘‘The Mind of Cinema Novo,’’ an interview with D. Yakir, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1980. ‘‘Le Cinéma nuovo dix ans aprés,’’ an interview with G. Haustrate and D. Rabourdin, in Cinéma (Paris), November 1980. ‘‘Adieu, cinema novo,’’ an interview with P. A. Paranagua, in Positif (Paris), May 1981. Interview with J. C. Rodrigues, in Filme Cultura (Rio de Janeiro), August/October 1982. Interview with C. Espinosa Dominguez, in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 104, 1983. Interview with André Tournès, in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), July/Au- gust 1984. ‘‘Cine: Arte del presente,’’ ‘‘Sobre el cinema novo,’’ and ‘‘Diez a?os de cine nacional,’’ in Hojas de cine: Testimonios y Documentos del Nuevo Cine Latinoamericano 1, Mexico City, 1986. ‘‘Choosing between Legend and History,’’ an interview with Coco Fusco, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 15, no. 1, 1986. ‘‘Schizophrenes Land,’’ an interview with R. Braun, in Film und Fernsehen, vol. 18, no. 6, 1990. Diegues, Carlos, ‘‘Le dieu noir et le diable blond et le cinéma novo,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1994. On DIEGUES: books— Johnson, Randal, Cinema Novo x5: Masters of Contemporary Brazil- ian Film, Austin, Texas, 1984. Burton, Julianne, editor, Cinema and Social Change in Latin Amer- ica: Conversations with Filmmakers, Austin, Texas, 1986. DIEGUESDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 265 Johnson, Randal, and Robert Stam, editors, Brazilian Cinema, Aus- tin, Texas, 1988. Xavier, Ismail, Allegories of Underdevelopment: Aesthetics and Politics in Modern Brazilian Cinema, Minneapolis, 1997. On DIEGUES: articles— Prédal, R., ‘‘Bio-filmographie: Carlos Diegues,’’ in Etudes Cinématographiques (Paris), no. 93–96, 1972. Johnson, Randal, ‘‘Xica de Silva: Sex, Politics, and Culture,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), May 1980. Trujillo, Marisol, ‘‘Tormento y pasión en Los herederos de Carlos Diegues,’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 100, 1981. Yakir, Dan, ‘‘Braziliant,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May/ June 1984. Dossier on Carlos Diegues, in Revue du Cinema (Paris), Novem- ber 1984. Osiel, Mark, ‘‘Bye Bye Boredom: Brazilian Cinema Comes of Age,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol 15, no. 1, 1986. Mosier, John, ‘‘Subway to the Stars,’’ in Americas, January/Febru- ary 1988. Welch, Cliff, ‘‘Quilombo,’’ in American Historical Review, Octo- ber 1992. Breschand, Jean, ‘‘Lyon fête ses Lumière,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1995. *** One of the founders of Cinema Novo—the movement that trans- formed film in Brazil and was a pivotal influence in the New Latin American Cinema—Carlos Diegues is probably the most historically minded of its adherents. Like the other directors of Cinema Novo, Diegues is concerned with making films which are ‘‘culturally Brazilian, and impregnated with national and Latin American prob- lems’’; and his entrance into the national reality was, as with many other members of this group, through documentary films that put him in direct contact with social problems. Diegues also shares the interest in popular culture that is characteristic of Cinema Novo, although he tends to emphasize the contribution of black culture, which ‘‘gave us originality. It’s the element that has completely modified Brazil, which otherwise would be a mere cultural colony of Portugal and Spain.’’ Perhaps that which most differentiates Diegues from his Cinema Novo colleagues is his historical orientation. On the one hand, this can be seen in his insistent return to historical themes. But on the other hand, Diegues’s conception of history is complex: he feels that the most important element in cinema is its adecuación (fitness) to the time in which it is made. To the degree that a film speaks to the problems and possibilities of the epoch in which it appears, it allows for the sort of ‘‘political cinema’’ Diegues prefers, a cinema with which the audience can interact. It is this perspective that Diegues brings to his perception of his films as corresponding to particular historical contexts. His first works, Samba School and Ganga Zumba, are products of what Diegues describes as a ‘‘fantastic, euphoric period’’ in which emerged new Brazilian cinema, music, and theater. Samba School was typical of the early works of Cinema Novo, focusing on the popular culture of the slums through an analysis of the alienation represented by the schools of samba. Diegues made the film on a barebones budget and worked at practically all the production tasks, including appearing as an actor. Ganga Zumba was Diegues’s first feature. A reconstruction of the Palmares Republic of runaway slaves in Brazil during the seventeenth century, it corresponded to the search for identity in which many Brazilian artists were then engaged. It also represented the first Cinema Novo film to value Afro-Brazilian culture, as well as the beginning of Diegues’s interest in bringing black history to the screen: ‘‘I tried to make a black film, not a film about blacks,’’ he stated. The military coup of 1964, and its increasingly repressive legisla- tion during the 1960s, changed the cultural scene profoundly. In film, an ‘‘aesthetic of silence’’ reigned, and Diegues perceives this as his ‘‘sick period,’’ during which he made The Heirs and Joanna Francesa as expressions of the depressing tableau presented by the ‘‘Dante- esque levels’’ military terrorism reached. The Heirs is a historical work on the period 1930–1964, which allegorically evokes the role of Getulio Vargas (a populist president-dictator who oscillated between fascism and socialism) by following the trajectory of a bourgeois family. Diegues says that his main intention was to ‘‘project a precise image of this strange, violent and sentimental, baroque and surrealist, sincere and subtle country called Brazil, whose passion torments me more than anything else in life.’’ In Joanna Francesa, Diegues returned again to analyze the Revolution of 1930, this time in a film he considers a ‘‘lament’’ on the death of a culture and a civilization, which reflected the dolorous days through which Brazil was passing. The liberalization of military rule led to what Diegues has de- scribed as the third phase of Cinema Novo, which he characterizes as ‘‘the aesthetic of life.’’ Within this category, he places the two reconstructions, Xica da Silva and Quilombo, which continue the black history of colonial Brazil he began with Ganga Zumba, as well as the popular Bye Bye Brazil. Both Xica da Silva and Quilombo are more mythic than historic, for Diegues believes that ‘‘history is always written by the winners,’’ and therefore a real history of blacks is either impossible or depressing. Thus, he focuses on the character of Francisca (Xica), a black slave whom a wealthy Portuguese freed and took as his lover. Little real information exists on this eighteenth- century woman because all mention of her was exorcised by the townspeople, but her love of freedom is an important myth of Brazilian popular culture. Quilombo was made just two or three years before Brazil was liberated from military rule, and that context allowed Diegues to utilize the story of the runaway slave republic as a metaphor for the building of a utopia. With even less information available about quilombos than existed on Xica, Diegues allowed himself free rein; the result, as he intended, says more about the future than about the past. Xica da Silva was immensely popular in Brazil, but the film which has achieved the most international recognition is Bye Bye Brazil. In this exuberant film ‘‘dedicated to Brazilians in the twenty- first century,’’ Diegues returns to Cinema Novo’s insistent concern with popular culture and concludes that the way in which culture is assimilated and re-elaborated is more important than its origin or alleged ‘‘purity.’’ This is perhaps one of the more useful lessons Diegues has to teach his fellow filmmakers of Cinema Novo. —John Mraz DMYTRYK DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 266 DMYTRYK, Edward Nationality: American. Born: Grand Forks, British Columbia, Can- ada, 4 September 1908, became U.S. citizen, 1939. Education: California Institute of Technology, 1926–27. Family: Married sec- ond wife, actress Jean Porter, 1948, one son. Career: Messenger and handy boy at Famous Players-Lasky, 1923, subsequently cutter, then editor; directed first film, The Hawk, 1935; directed series of films for Columbia, 1940–42, and for RKO, 1942–47; subpoenaed to appear before House Un-American Activities Committee as one of ‘‘Holly- wood Ten,’’ 1947; moved to England, 1948; forced to return to U.S., fined and given six-month jail sentence for contempt of Congress, 1950; appeared as friendly witness before HUAC, and hired by producer Stanley Kramer, 1951; moved to England, 1971; taught at University of Texas, Austin, 1978; professor of filmmaking at Uni- versity of Southern California, from 1981. Died: 1 July 1999, in Encino, California, of heart and kidney failure. Films as Director: 1935 The Hawk 1939 Television Spy; Emergency Squad; Million-Dollar Legs (co-d with Grinde, uncredited) 1940 Golden Gloves; Mystery Sea Raider; Her First Romance 1941 The Devil Commands; Under Age; Sweetheart of the Campus (Broadway Ahead); The Blonde from Singapore (Hot Pearls); Edward Dmytryk (right) and Montgomery Clift on the set of Raintree County Secrets of the Lone Wolf (Secrets); Confessions of Boston Blackie (Confessions) 1942 Counter-Espionage; Seven Miles from Alcatraz 1943 Hitler’s Children; The Falcon Strikes Back; Captive Wild Woman; Behind the Rising Sun; Tender Comrade 1944 Farewell, My Lovely (Murder My Sweet) 1945 Back to Bataan; Cornered 1946 Till the End of Time 1947 Crossfire; So Well Remembered 1949 Obsession (The Hidden Room); Gives Us This Day (Salt to the Devil) 1952 Mutiny; The Sniper; Eight Iron Men 1953 The Juggler; Three Lives (short) 1954 The Caine Mutiny; Broken Lance; The End of the Affair 1955 Soldier of Fortune; The Left Hand of God; Bing Presents Oreste (short) 1956 The Mountain (+ pr) 1957 Raintree County 1958 The Young Lions 1959 Warlock (+ pr); The Blue Angel 1962 The Reluctant Saint (+ pr); Walk on the Wild Side 1963 The Carpetbaggers 1964 Where Love Has Gone; Mirage 1966 Alvarez Kelly 1968 Lo sbarco di Anzio (Anzio; The Battle for Anzio); Shalako 1972 Barbe-Bleue (Bluebeard) (+ co-sc) 1975 The ‘‘Human’’ Factor 1976 He Is My Brother Other Films: 1930 Only Saps Work (Gardner and Knopf) (ed); The Royal Family of Broadway (Cukor and Gardner) (ed) 1932 Million-Dollar Legs (Cline) (ed) 1934 Belle of the Nineties (McCarey) (co-ed, uncredited); College Rhythm (Taurog) (co-ed) 1935 Ruggles of Red Gap (McCarey) (ed) 1936 Too Many Parents (McGowan) (ed); Three Cheers for Love (Ray McCarey) (ed); Three Married Men (Buzzell) (ed); Easy to Take (Tryon) (ed) 1937 Murder Goes to College (Riesner) (ed); Turn off the Moon (Seiler) (ed); Double or Nothing (Reed) (ed); Hold ‘em Navy (That Navy Spirit) (Neumann) (ed) 1938 Bulldog Drummond’s Peril (Hogan) (ed); Prison Farm (Louis King) (ed) 1939 Zaza (Cukor) (ed); Love Affair (McCarey) (co-ed); Some Like It Hot (Archainbaud) (ed) 1950 The Hollywood Ten (Berry) (co-sc, appearance) 1968 Hamlet (Wirth) (dubbing d) 1976 Hollywood on Trial (Helpern) (role as interviewee) Publications By DMYTRYK: books— It’s a Hell of a Life but Not a Bad Living, New York, 1978. On Screen Directing, London, 1984. DONENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 267 On Screen Acting, Boston, 1984. On Film Editing: An Introduction to the Art of Film Construction, Stoneham, 1984. On Screen Writing, Stoneham, 1985. On Filmmaking, Boston, 1986. Cinema: Concept and Practice, Boston, 1988. Odd Man Out: A Memoir of the Hollywood Ten, Carbondale, 1995. By DMYTRYK: articles— ‘‘Reply to R. English,’’ in Nation (New York), 26 May 1951. ‘‘The Director-Cameraman Relationship,’’ interview with Herb Lightman, in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), May 1968. ‘‘The Director and the Editor,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), March/ April 1969. ‘‘Dmytryk on Film,’’ in Journal of University Film Association (Carbondale, Illinois), Spring 1982. ‘‘A Very Narrow Path: The Politics of Edward Dmytryk,’’ an interview with L.D. Friedman, in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salis- bury, Maryland), October 1984. ‘‘Edward Dmytryk Remembers,’’ an interview with J. Bawden, in Films in Review (New York), December 1985. ‘‘The Director & the Bobbysoxer,’’ an interview with Michael Ankerich, in Classic Images (Muscatine), August 1994. On DMYTRYK: articles— English, R., ‘‘What Makes a Hollywood Communist?,’’ in the Saturday Evening Post (Philadelphia), 19 May 1951. Tozzi, Romano, ‘‘Edward Dmytryk,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1962. ‘‘The Cinema of Edward Dmytryk,’’ in Films Illustrated (London), October 1971. ‘‘Edward Dmytryk,’’ in Film Dope (London), June 1977. McClure, L., ‘‘Edward Dmytryk: The Director as Professor,’’ in Filmmakers Monthly (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), January 1979. Buchsbaum, Jonathan, ‘‘Tame Wolves and Phony Claims: Paranoia and Film Noir,’’ in Persistence of Vision (Maspeth), Summer 1986. Telotte, J.P., ‘‘Effacement and Subjectivity: Murder My Sweet’s Problematic Vision,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), vol. 15, no. 4, 1987. Serceau, Michel, ‘‘L’ange bleu ou le remake impossible,’’ in Cinémaction (Courbevoie), October 1989. Fox, D., ‘‘CROSSFIRE and HUAC: Surviving the Slings and Arrows of the Committee,’’ in Film History (London), vol. 3, no. 1, 1989. Piazzo, Philippe, ‘‘Le mauvais camarade,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 14 June 1995. Norman, Barry, in Radio Times (London), 14 October 1995. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 12 July 1999. *** Edward Dmytryk rose through the Hollywood ranks, beginning as a projectionist in the 1920s, working as an editor through most of the 1930s, and directing low-budget films during the first half of the 1940s before making his first A-budget film, Tender Comrade, in 1943. He continued to make notable films like Crossfire and Fare- well, My Lovely before being subpoenaed to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. Dmytryk subsequently became one of the Hollywood Ten and, after completing his jail sentence, the only member of the Ten to become a friendly witness and name names. After doing one film for the King brothers, Mutiny, in 1952, Stanley Kramer hired him to direct four features culminating with The Caine Mutiny. He continued to direct films regularly through the 1950s and 1960s and later taught at U.S.C. in Los Angeles. In many of his films Dmytryk displays much the same sensibility informing the work of Frank Capra: a faith in ordinary people, a belief in the virtues of working together, a deep reverence for traditional American ideals and heroes, and a strongly utopian bent that tends to see evil as a localized aberration capable of correction. Characters often see the light (Hitler’s Children, or Salt to the Devil), find themselves transformed by the example or expectations of others (The Left Hand of God or The Juggler), or reveal a tender, committed side that is not immediately apparent (Soldier of Fortune or Broken Lance). Utopianism, then, instead of becoming a positive affirmation of values, becomes more an implicit trust in goodness that sometimes defuses dramatic conflict by rendering evil ineffective or by side- stepping intense confrontations or issues. By affirming the nobility of true love despite adversity, Walk on the Wild Side, for example, presents a more Pollyannaish view of down-and-out Depression life in New Orleans than the Nelson Algren novel on which it is based. Dmytryk directs with an essentially serious tone that minimizes comedy and seldom romanticizes the agrarian or non-urban ethos so dear to Capra. He also tends to work with more interiorized states of personal feeling that run counter to Capra’s tendency to play conflicts out in public among a diverse, somewhat stereotyped range of characters. But, like Capra, Dmytryk dwells on the issue of faith—the need for it and the tests to which it is subjected. Salt to the Devil, Tender Comrade, Soldier of Fortune, Raintree County, The Juggler, Broken Lance, The Left Hand of God, The Caine Mutiny, Hitler’s Children—these and other films involve tests of faith and commit- ment for their central characters. The characters strive to find and affirm a sense of personal dignity, whatever the odds, and usually do so within a private setting that uses the broader social context as a dramatic backdrop, even in Hitler’s Children or The Young Lions, two films dealing with Nazism. Some have argued that Dmytryk’s work simply deteriorated after his testimony before HUAC; it may also be that recurring themes bridge this period and offer intriguing parallels between the political climate, Dmytryk’s personal view of life, and his overall film accomplishments. —Bill Nichols DONEN, Stanley Nationality: American. Born: Columbia, South Carolina, 13 April 1924. Education: Studied dance at Town Theater, Columbia, then University of South Carolina, until 1940. Family: Married actress Yvette Mimieux, 1972. Career: Broadway debut in Pal Joey, 1940; choreographer for MGM musicals, Hollywood, 1943–49; co-directed DONEN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 268 Stanley Donen with Ingrid Bergman on the set of Indiscreet (with Gene Kelly) first film, On the Town, 1949. Awards: Academy Award for Lifetime Achievement, 1998. Films as Director: 1949 On the Town (co-d, co-chor) 1951 Royal Wedding (Wedding Bells) 1952 Singin’ in the Rain (co-d, co-chor); Love Is Better than Ever (The Light Fantastic); Fearless Fagan 1953 Give a Girl a Break (+ co-chor) 1954 Seven Brides for Seven Brothers; Deep in My Heart (+ co-chor) 1955 It’s Always Fair Weather (co-d, co-chor) 1957 Funny Face; The Pajama Game (co-d, co-pr); Kiss Them For Me 1958 Indiscreet (+ pr); Damn Yankees (What Lola Wants) (co-d, co-pr) 1960 Once More with Feeling (+ pr); Surprise Package (+ pr); The Grass Is Greener (+ pr) 1963 Charade (+ pr) 1966 Arabesque (+ pr) 1967 Two for the Road (+ pr); Bedazzled (+ pr) 1969 Staircase (+ pr) 1974 The Little Prince (+ pr) 1975 Lucky Lady (+ pr) 1978 Movie Movie (+ pr) 1980 Saturn 3 (+ pr) 1984 Blame It on Rio 1985 Moonlighting (series for TV) 1999 Love Letters (for TV) Films as Choreographer or Co-Choreographer: 1943 Best Foot Forward (Buzzell) 1944 Hey Rookie (Barton); Jam Session (Barton); Kansas City Kitty (Lord); Cover Girl (Vidor) 1945 Anchors Aweigh (Sidney) 1946 Holiday in Mexico (Sidney); No Leave, No Love (Martin) 1947 This Time for Keeps (Thorpe); Living in a Big Way (La Cava); Killer McCoy (Rowland) DONENDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 269 1948 A Date with Judy (Thorpe); The Big City (Taurog); The Kissing Bandit (Benedek) 1949 Take Me out to the Ball Game (Berkeley) (+ co-sc) Publications By DONEN: articles— ‘‘Giving Life an Up-Beat,’’ in Films and Filming (London), July 1958. ‘‘What to Do with Star Quality,’’ in Films and Filming (London), August 1960. Interview with Bertrand Tavernier and Gilbert Palas, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1963. ‘‘Talking in the Sun,’’ an interview with Colo and Bertrand Tavernier, in Positif (Paris), December 1969. Interview with S. Harvey, in Film Comment (New York), July/ August 1973. Interview with Peter von Bagh, in Filmihullu (Helsinki), no. 4, 1994. ’’La mise en scène, c’est intangible!’’ in Positif (Paris), July-Au- gust 1997. On DONEN: books— Comden, Betty, and Adolph Green, Singin’ in the Rain (script) New York, 1972. Charness, Casey, Hollywood Cine-Dance: A Description of the Interrelationship of Camerawork and Choreography in the Films of Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1978. Casper, Joseph Andrew, Stanley Donen (Filmmakers, No 5), Lanham, 1983. Casper, Joseph Andrew, Stanley Donen, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1985. Altman, Rick, The American Film Musical, Bloomington, Indi- ana, 1989. Silverman, Stephen M., Dancing on the Ceiling: Stanley Donen and His Movies, with Audrey Hepburn, New York, 1996. On DONEN: articles— Knight, Arthur, ‘‘From Dance to Film Director,’’ in Dance (New York), August 1954. Johnson, Albert, ‘‘The Tenth Muse in San Francisco,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1956. Knight, Arthur, ‘‘Dance in the Movies,’’ in Dance (New York), October 1958. ‘‘Musical Comedy Issue’’ of Cinéma (Paris), August/September 1959. McVay, Douglas, ‘‘Moanin’ for Donen,’’ in New York Film Bulletin, no.9, 1961. Luft, Herbert, ‘‘Donen at Work,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1961. ‘‘Stanley Donen,’’ in Film Dope (London), June 1977. Telotte, J.P., ‘‘Ideology and the Kelly-Donen Musicals,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylvania), Spring 1984. Sloman, Tony, ‘‘Feet First: Kelly and Donen,’’ in National Film Theater Booklet, London, May 1990. Karban, Thomas, ‘‘Linien, die die Bewegung verschieben,’’ in Film- Dienst (Cologne), 4 August 1992. McVay, Doug, ‘‘Applause, Applause,’’ in Bright Lights (Cincinnati), no. 14, 1995. Silverman, Stephen M., ‘‘Billy Wilder and Stanley Donen,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March-April 1996. *** Stanley Donen is most frequently remembered for his work as a musical director/choreographer at MGM under the Arthur Freed Unit, a production team that Donen claims existed only in Arthur Freed’s head (Movie, Spring 1977). With Gene Kelly, he co-directed three of the musical genre’s best films: On the Town, Singin’ in the Rain, and It’s Always Fair Weather. Kelly was, in a sense, responsible for giving Donen his start in Hollywood; their first collaboration being the doppelganger dance in Cover Girl. Donen followed a path typical of that time, from Broadway dancer to Hollywood dancer and choreographer to director. As solo director, he won recognition for Royal Wedding (his first effort), Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Funny Face, The Pajama Game and Damn Yankees. Andrew Sarris believes that Donen always seems to function best as a hyphenated director or a genial catalyst; that any personal style he may possess is usually submerged under that of the performer (Kelly, Astaire, Fosse) or choreographer (Michael Kidd, Eugene Loring, Bob Fosse) and hence is difficult to assess. This view may simply reflect that period of studio production (mid-1940s to late 1950s), when there was a con- stant melding of creative personnel. As Jerome Delamater explains: ‘‘Performers, choreographers, and directors worked together and in many instances one cannot discern the auteur, as it were, or—more accurately—there seem to be several auteurs.’’ Donen credits Astaire for his inspiration and it comes as no surprise that he feels his musical work is an extension of the Astaire/Rogers format (which itself is derived from the films of Clair and Lubitsch). This format is not logically grounded in reality, but functions more or less in the realm of pure emotion. Such a world of spontaneous singing and dancing can most accurately be presented in visual terms through forms of surrealism. Donen’s oeuvre demonstrates a reaction against the presentation of musical numbers on the stage, choreographing them instead on the streets of everyday life. It is this combination of a visual reality and a performing unreality (a performing reality is some type of stage that is clearly delineated from normal, day–to–day activity) that creates the tension inherent in surrealism. Donen geared the integrated musical towards the unreal; our functional perception of the real world does not include singing and dancing as a means of normal interpersonal communication. As he said in an interview with Jim Hillier, ‘‘A musical . . . is anything but real.’’ Musicals possess their own peculiar internal reality, not directly connected to everyday life. Leo Braudy points out that Donen’s musical films explore communities and the reaction/interaction of the people that dwell within. Even though Donen left the musical genre after Damn Yankees (returning to it in 1973), he continued to explore the situation of the individual in a social community, and the absurd, occasionally surrealistic experiences that we all face, in such deft comedies as Bedazzled, Two for the Road, and Charade (the last in homage to Hitchcock). —Greg Faller DONSKOI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 270 DONSKOI, Mark Nationality: Russian. Born: Mark Semyonovich Donskoi in Odessa, 6 March 1901. Education: Studied medicine and music, then law at University of Simferopol, to 1925; State Film School, under Eisenstein, 1926. Military Service: Served in Red Army during civil war, 1919–21. Family: Married scriptwriter Irina Sprink, 1936, two sons. Career: Worked in Ukrainian police force, early 1920s; after film school, joined Belgoskino studios, Leningrad, and directed first film, Zhizn, 1927; directed first sound film for Vostokkino, 1934; began at Soyuzdietfilm (Children’s Film Studios), Moscow, 1940; worked at Kiev Studios, 1942–45; returned to Soyuzdietfilm (renamed Maxim Gorky Studios), 1946; assigned to Kiev Studios, 1949; returned to Gorky Studios, Moscow, late 1950s. Awards: Stalin Prize, 1941, 1946, 1948; Order of Lenin, 1944, 1971; Silver Seal, Locarno Festival, 1960; People’s Artist of the Soviet Union, 1966; Hero of Socialist Labor, 1971. Died: 24 March 1981. Films as Director: 1927 Zhizn (Life) (co-d, co-sc); V bolshom gorode (In the Big City) (co-d, co-sc) 1928 Tsena cheloveka (The Price of Man; Man’s Value; The Lesson) (co-d) 1929 Pizhon (The Fop) 1930 Chuzoi bereg (The Other Shore); Ogon (Fire) 1934 Pesnya o shchastye (Song about Happiness) (co-d) 1938 Detstvo Gorkovo (Childhood of Gorky; The Childhood of Maxim Gorki) (+ co-sc) 1939 Vlyudyakh (Among People; My Apprenticeship; Out in the World) (+ co-sc) 1940 Moi universiteti (My Universities) (+ co-sc) 1941 Romantiki (Children of the Soviet Arctic) (+ co-sc) 1942 Kak zakalyalas stal (How the Steel Was Tempered; Heroes Are Made) (+ sc); ‘‘Mayak (Beacon, The Signal Tower)’’ (d only), ‘‘Kvartal (Block 14)’’ (+ spvr), ‘‘Sinie skali (Blue Crags)’’ (+ spvr) segments of Boevi kinosbornik (Fighting Film Album) no. 9 1944 Raduga (The Rainbow) (+ co-sc) 1945 Nepokorenniye (Semya tarassa; Unvanquished; Unconquered) (+ co-sc) 1947 Selskaya uchitelnitsa (Varvara; An Emotional Education; Rural Institute; A Village School-Teacher) 1949 Alitet ukhodit v gory (Zakoni Bolshoi zemli; Alitet Leaves for the Hills) (+ co-sc) (film banned, partially destroyed) 1950 Sportivnaya slava (Nachi chempiony; Sporting Fame; Our Champions) (short) 1956 Mat (Mother) (+ co-sc) 1957 Dorogoi tsenoi (At Great Cost; The Horse That Cried) 1959 Foma Gordeyev (+ co-sc) 1962 Zdravstvuitye deti (Hello Children) (+ co-sc) 1966 Serdtse materi (A Mother’s Heart) 1967 Vernost materi (A Mother’s Loyalty) 1972 Chaliapin 1973 Nadezhda Other Films: 1926 Prostitutka (The Prostitute) (Frelikh) (role as passerby) 1927 Yevo prevosoditelstvo (His Excellency) (Roshal) (ed) 1935 Nevidimi chelovek (The Invisible Man) (Whale) (spvr of dubbing and reediting) 1940 Brat geroya (Brother of a Hero) (Vasilchikov) (art d) Publications By DONSKOI: articles— ‘‘Ceux qui savent parler aux dieux . . . ,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), Novem- ber 1959. ‘‘Mon Idéal c’est un humanisme combattant,’’ in Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 19 December 1963. Interview with Robert Grelier, in Cinéma (Paris), December 1967. ‘‘My—propagandisty partii,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), Novem- ber 1972. ‘‘Tret’e izmerenie,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), December 1974. On DONSKOI: books— Leyda, Jay, Kino: A History of the Russian and Soviet Film, Lon- don, 1960. Cervoni, Albert, Marc Donskoi, Paris, 1966. Liehm, Mira and Antonin, The Most Important Art: Eastern Euro- pean Film after 1945, Berkeley, California, 1977. On DONSKOI: articles— de la Roche, Catherine, ‘‘Mark Donskoi,’’ in Sequence (London), Autumn 1948. Fox, Charles, ‘‘The Gorki Trilogy—The Poetry of Cinema,’’ in Film (London), February 1955. Marcorelles, Louis, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 93, 1959. Haudiquet, Philippe, ‘‘Mark Donskoi,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), November 1964. Gillett, John, ‘‘Mark Donskoi,’’ in Focus on Film (London), March/ April 1970. ‘‘Director of the Year,’’ in International Film Guide, London, 1971. ‘‘Mark Donskoi,’’ in Film Dope (London), June 1977. Fadeeva, Y., ‘‘Mark Donskoi: Irrepressible Youth,’’ in Soviet Film (Moscow), no. 3, 1979. ‘‘Mark Donskoi,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 Febru- ary 1979. Zak, M., and others, ‘‘V kontekste istorii,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Mos- cow), March 1981. Cluny, C.M., ‘‘Hommage: Marc Donskoi,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), May 1981. Pokrovskii, V., and others, ‘‘Tiazhko, tovarishchi!,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 5, 1990. *** Mark Donskoi may not be as familiar to Western audiences as Eisenstein, Pudovkin, or Dovzhenko; his films are in no way as D?RRIEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 271 readily recalled as Battleship Potemkin, Mother, or Earth. Like other Soviet filmmakers, he propagandizes about the glories of the Bolshe- vik Revolution and highlights the life of Lenin. But Donskoi’s great and unique contribution to Russian cinema is his adaption to the screen of Maxim Gorki’s autobiographical trilogy: The Childhood of Gorki, My Apprenticeship, and My Universities, all based on the early life of the famed writer and shot during the late 1930s. (Years later, Donskoi adapted two other Gorki works, Mother—the same story filmed by Pudovkin in 1926—and Foma Gordeyev.) In the trilogy, Donskoi chronicles the life of Gorki from childhood on, focusing on the experiences which alter his view of the world. At their best, these films are original and pleasing: the first presents a comprehensive and richly detailed view of rural life in Russia during the 1870s. While delineating the dreams of nineteenth-century Rus- sian youth, Donskoi lovingly recreates the era. The characters are presented in terms of their conventional ambitions and relationships within the family structure. They are not revolutionaries, but rather farmers and other provincials with plump bodies and commonplace faces. The result is a very special sense of familiarity, of fidelity to a time and place. Of course, villains in Gorki’s childhood are not innately evil, but products of a repressive czarist society. They are thus compassionately viewed. Donskoi pictures the Russian country- side with imagination, and sometimes even with grandeur. Donskoi’s later noteworthy works include How the Steel Was Tempered, one of the first Russian films to deal with World War II. While based on a Civil War story, the filmmaker includes only the sequences pertaining to Ukrainian resistance to German invaders in 1918, paralleling that situation to the Nazi invasion. The story also recalls the Gorki trilogy in its presentation of a boy who is changed by his encounter with life’s challenges. The Rainbow, an appropriately angry drama shot at the height of World War II, details the struggles of life in a German-occupied village. Donskoi’s message in this film is that despite Nazi brutality, including the shooting of small boys, the spirit of the Soviet people will endure. This film is particularly inspirational; its approach may even have influenced Italian neorealism. The Unvanquished, about occupied Kiev, is a kind of sequel to The Rainbow. It graphically depicts the slaughter of Jews at Babi Yar. The careers of few Russian filmmakers have outlasted that of Donskoi, who in his youth had fought in the Civil War and been imprisoned by the White Russians. His films span fifty years, though his Gorki trilogy alone would have assured him of a niche in cinema history. —Rob Edelman D?RRIE, Doris Nationality: German. Born: Hanover, West Germany, 26 May 1955. Family: Married to cinematographer Helge Weindler. Education: Studied theater at the University of the Pacific in Stockton, Califor- nia; philosophy, psychology, and semantics at the New School for Social Research in New York; and film and television at the Hochschule für Film und Fernsehen in Munich, where she received a diploma in directing. Career: Wrote film criticism for Süddeutsche Zeitung, 1976–86; directed documentaries for German television, 1979–86; directed her first feature, Straight through the Heart, 1983. Awards: Max Ophuls Award nomination and Max Ophuls Audience Award, for Mitten ins herz (Straight through the Heart), 1983; Bavarian Film Award, Best Screenplay, for Bin ich sch?n? (Am I Beautiful?), 1998. Address: Tengstrasse 16, 8000 Munich 40, Germany. Agent: ICM, 40 West 57th Street, New York, NY 10019. Films as Director and Screenwriter/Co-Screenwriter: 1976 Ob’s stürmt oder schneit (Come Rain or Shine) (co-d) 1977 Ene, mene, mink (short) 1978 Der erste walzer (The First Waltz) (short); H?ttest was gescheites gelernt (for TV); Alt werden in der Fremde 1979 Paula aus Portugal 1980 Von romantik keine spur (No Trace of Romanticism) (for TV); Katharina Eiselt 1981 Dazwischen (In Between) (co-d) 1983 Mitten ins herz (Straight through the Heart) 1985 Im innern des wals (In the Belly of the Whale) 1986 M?nner . . . (Men . . . ); Paradies (Paradise) 1987 Ich und er (Me and Him) 1989 Geld (Money); Love in Germany 1991 Happy Birthday Türke! (Happy Birthday!) 1993 What Can It Be 1994 Keiner Liebt Mich (Nobody Loves Me) 1998 Bin ich schün? (Am I Beautiful?) 2000 Erleuchtung garantiert (Enlightenment Guaranteed) Other: 1977 Der hauptdarsteller (Hauff) (ro) 1984 King Kongs Faust (Stadler) (ro) 1987 Wann—wenn nicht jetzt? (Juncker—for TV) (sc) Publications By D?RRIE: books— Was wollen sie von mir?: und 15 andere Geschichten, Zurich, 1987; published as What Do You Want from Me?: And Fifteen Other Stories, translated by John E. Woods, New York, 1991. Liebe, Schmerz und das ganze verdammte Zung: vier Geschichten, Zurich, 1989; published as Love, Pain, and the Whole Damn Thing: Four Stories, New York, 1989. Der Mann menier Tr?ume: Erz?hlung, Zurich, 1991. Für immer und ewig: enie Art Reigen, Zurich, 1991. With Volker Wach, Love in Germany: Deutsche Paare im Gespr?ch mit Doris D?rrie, Zurich, 1992. Bin ich schoen: Erzahlungen, Zurich, 1994. Samsara: Erz?hlungen, Zurich, 1996. Lotte Will Prinzessin Sein, Ravensburg, 1998; published as Lottie’s Princess Dress, New York, 1999. Look at Me (text accompanying photographs by Philip Keel), Zurich and New York, 1999. D?RRIE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 272 Doris D?rrie with Jack Sholder By D?RRIE: articles— ‘‘Interview with Doris D?rrie,’’ interview with Scott Bradfield, in Elle (New York), June 1991. Interview in Short Story (Cedar Falls, Iowa/Brownsville, Texas), Fall 1994. On D?RRIE: articles— Pally, Marcia, ‘‘Open D?rrie,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1986. Diehl, S., ‘‘Doris D?rrie: The Women behind Men. . . ,’’ in World Press Review, October 1986. Root, Jane, ‘‘In the Belly of the Whale and Sharing Flats with Men: Doris D?rrie Discusses Her Researches with Jane Root,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), November 1986. Haskell, Molly, ‘‘Doris D?rrie: More Realist than Feminist,’’ in Vogue (New York), December 1986. Glass, Erlis, ‘‘Der Mann meiner Traume,’’ in World Literature Today, vol. 67, no. 1, Winter 1993. Angier, Carole, ‘‘Monitoring Conformity: The Career of Doris D?rrie,’’ essay in Women and Film: A Sight and Sound Reader, edited by Pam Cook, Philip Dodd, Philadelphia, 1993. Joyner, Will, ‘‘A Wake-up Call for the Germans,’’ in New York Times, 29 October 1995. *** Doris D?rrie’s most consistent cinematic themes are sexual poli- tics and the chasms existing between men and women. In her films, it almost is as if the opposite sexes have evolved from different species. Women are looking for emotional honesty and sexual pleasure in relationships, and attempt to connect with men in what are fated to be hapless, luckless searches for everlasting love. Men, on the other hand, are emotionally unavailable. They are obsessed with the power of their sex organs, yet become sexually unresponsive once they are married (or, for that matter, regularly sharing the same bed with the woman they have so ardently pursued). D?rrie’s heroines may be unable to break through to the men in their midst, but they are not perfect either. They might be flaky or self-absorbed, and this adds resonance to her work. Furthermore, D?rrie’s films are consistently DOVZHENKODIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 273 offbeat. Her characters in the best of them, while existing in real worlds and facing genuine emotional dilemmas, respond to situations in altogether humorous, original, and unusual ways. Men . . . , D?rrie’s biggest hit to date, is a razor-sharp feminist satire. It is a farcical portrait of the manner in which a pompous middle-class married man responds upon learning that he is being cheated on by his sexually ignored wife. By having this affair, she has struck a blow for independence after years of devotion to a womanizing husband. An outlandish scenario unfolds, involving the cuckold befriending his wife’s lover and transforming him into a clone of himself, knowing full well that his wife summarily will become bored. Men . . . is an astute portrayal of the casual attitudes many men have toward women and the manner in which men view each other, all filtered through the sensibilities of a woman writer/director. Unfortunately, D?rrie has been unable to repeat the international box office success and win the critical raves achieved by Men.... Me and Him, her follow-up to Men . . . was a major let-down: a stupefyingly unfunny parody—based, no less, on a novel by Alberto Moravia— about an architect whose penis begins offering him guidance on how to live his life. In In the Belly of the Whale and Paradise, D?rrie repeats the plot structure of Men . . . : a third party comes to play a key role in a less-than-sound two-person, opposite-sex familial relation- ship. The cornerstone of In the Belly of the Whale is the sadomasochistic connection between a fifteen-year-old girl and her policeman father. The girl runs away in search of her mother (who also was physically abused by her father), and becomes involved with a young man who previously had conflicted with the father. Paradise is the story of a married couple who are more concerned with their hobbies and professions than with each other; furthermore, the husband is disinter- ested in satisfying the wife sexually. The third party here is the wife’s former schoolmate. Men . . . , however, is far from D?rrie’s lone artistic success. Straight through the Heart, her debut feature (completed after work- ing for German television and making shorts and documentaries), is a sharply observed exploration of the relationship between a pair of lonely neurotics: a 20-year-old woman seeking her identity and a reclusive middle-aged dentist. While the latter is willing to pay the former to move in with him, he offers her no companionship; he is interested solely in a lively female presence in his life. She becomes psychologically connected to him, but is unsuccessful in her attempt to make him love her. In Happy Birthday, Turke!, an entertaining noirish detective film (as well as D?rrie’s one major thematic departure), the filmmaker touches on the issue of ethnic identity. It is the story of a Turkish-born private eye who was raised by German parents and speaks only German; as a result, he is mistrusted by the Turkish community and subjected to ethnic slurs by Germans. He is hired by a Turkish woman to locate her missing husband, and becomes immersed in a scenario involving murder, prostitution, and police corruption. Nobody Loves Me is a quirky chronicle of the trials of a lonely, death-obsessed airport security officer who is about to turn 30 and senses that life is passing her by. She declares she does not need a man, but still is desperate to find one. Her gay next-door neighbor (who is a psychic, as well as her kindred spirit) declares that she momentarily will meet the love of her life. Could he be the new manager of their apartment building, whose primary interests are seducing attractive young blondes and the compensation to be gained by redoing the building into an extravagant living space? In the end, D?rrie’s heroine is left only with the companionship of her neighbor. One of the points of Nobody Loves Me is that, within the framework of heterosexual relations, it nearly is impossible for a man and a woman to be friends. In fact, the only male who can express compassion and remain loyal to a woman is a gay male; the emotional honesty that exists between the heroine and her neighbor is able to flourish because of the absence of sexual expectation. In the films from the first decade of D?rrie’s career, the heterosex- ual men do not change. But the women evolve. The heroines in Straight through the Heart and Nobody Loves Me each may be unsuccessful in their quests for love. In the former, the result is tragedy, while in the latter the heroine undergoes a transformation, becoming less self-indulgent and more independent. This is her triumph, and it is one that reflects the evolution of D?rrie’s view of the plight and fate of women. D?rrie’s most recent film, Am I Beautiful?, is as incisive as Nobody Loves Me, while offering a more expansive view of human- ity. Its story is reminiscent of Robert Altman’s Short Cuts in that it spotlights encounters between strangers who collectively are kind, or cruel, or manipulative, and who come together, clash, and drift apart. They include a young woman who is hitchhiking and playing at being deaf because she wishes to change her destiny; an elderly man who was married for 40 years and whose wife died three days earlier; a woman who obsessively tries on wedding dresses, in preparation for her own nuptials (which may or may not ever happen); and a woman who meets the man with whom she was in love three decades before. He, in turn, does not remember her, because he has just had a stroke. All the characters seemingly are unrelated, but the film takes on a surreal quality as their connections, however tenuous, eventually emerge: they are in the same family, or share the same profession, or have the same life experience. More to the point, however, they are lonely, and have unfulfilled needs and desires. They are depicted as wanting to be married, or getting married, or at mid-marriage (where they often are bored and unhappy, and involved in affairs), or recently widowed. Am I Beautiful? is a mature film, a philosophical film. As she herself ages, D?rrie seems to be increasingly aware of the passage of time, and the fleetingness of life. One of her points in Am I Beautiful? is that you may not know what your future will be, and for this reason it takes courage to live—and to love. —Rob Edelman DOVZHENKO, Alexander Nationality: Ukrainian. Born: Sosnytsia, Chernigov province of Ukraine, 12 September 1894. Education: Hlukhiv Teachers’ Insti- tute, 1911–14; Kiev University, 1917–18; Academy of Fine Arts, Kiev, 1919. Military Service: 1919–20. Family: Married 1) Barbara Krylova, 1920 (divorced 1926); 2) Julia Solntseva, 1927. Career: Teacher, 1914–19; chargé d’affaires, Ukrainian embassy, Warsaw, 1921; attached to Ukrainian embassy, Berlin; studied painting with Erich Heckel, 1922; returned to Kiev, expelled from Communist Party, became cartoonist, 1923; co-founder, VAPLITE (Free Acad- emy of Proletarian Literature), 1925; joined Odessa Film Studios, directed first film, Vasya-reformator, 1926; moved to Kiev Film Studios, 1928; Solntseva began as his assistant, 1929; lectured at State Cinema Institute (VGIK), Moscow, 1932; assigned to Mosfilm by DOVZHENKO DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 274 Alexander Dovzhenko Stalin, 1933; artistic supervisor, Kiev Studio, 1940; front-line corre- spondent for Red Army and Izvestia in the Ukraine, 1942–43; de- nounced as ‘‘bourgeois nationalist,’’ transferred to Mosfilm, 1944; theatre director, 1945–47; settled in Kakhiva, 1952. Julia Solntseva directed five films based on Dovzhenko’s writings, 1958–69. Awards: Lenin Prize, 1935; Honored Art Worker of the Ukrainian SSR, 1939; 1st Degree Stalin Prize for Shchors, 1941; Order of the Red Flag, 1943; Order of the Red Labor Flag, 1955. Died: In Moscow, 26 November 1956. Films as Director: 1926 Vasya-reformator (Vasya the Reformer) (co-d, sc); Yahidka kokhannya (Love’s Berry; Yagodko lyubvi) (+ sc) 1927 Teka dypkuryera (The Diplomatic Pouch; Sumka dipkuryera) (+ revised sc, role) 1928 Zvenyhora (Zvenigora) (+ revised sc) 1929 Arsenal (+ sc) 1930 Zemlya (Earth) (+ sc) 1932 Ivan (+ sc) 1935 Aerograd (Air City; Frontier) (+ sc) 1939 Shchors (co-d, co-sc) 1940 Osvobozhdenie (Liberation) (co-d, ed, sc) 1945 Pobeda na pravoberezhnoi Ukraine i izgnanie Nemetskikh zakhvatchikov za predeli Ukrainskikh Sovetskikh zemel (Victory in Right-Bank Ukraine and the Expulsion of the Germans from the Boundaries of the Ukrainian Soviet Earth) (co-d, commentary) 1948 Michurin (co-d, pr, sc) Other Films: 1940 Bukovyna-Zemlya Ukrayinska (Bucovina-Ukrainian Land) (Solntseva) (artistic spvr) 1941 Bohdan Khmelnytsky (Savchenko) (artistic spvr) 1942 Alexander Parkhomenko (Lukov) (artistic spvr) 1943 Bytva za nashu Radyansku Ukrayinu (The Battle for Our Soviet Ukraine) (Solntseva and Avdiyenko) (artistic spvr, narration) 1946 Strana rodnaya (Native Land; Our Country) (co-ed uncredited, narration) (films directed by Julia Solntseva, prepared or written by Dovzhenko or based on his writings): 1958 Poema o more (Poem of an Inland Sea) 1961 Povest plamennykh let (Story of the Turbulent Years; The Flaming Years; Chronicle of Flaming Years) 1965 Zacharovannaya Desna (The Enchanted Desna) 1968 Nezabivaemoe (The Unforgettable; Ukraine in Flames) 1969 Zolotye vorota (The Golden Gates) Publications By DOVZHENKO: books— Izbrannoie, Moscow, 1957. Tvori v triokh tomakh, Kiev, 1960. Sobranie sotchinenyi (4 toma), izdatelstvo, Moscow, 1969. Polum’iane zhyttia: spogadi pro Oleksandr a Dovzhenka, compiled by J. Solntseva, Kiev, 1973. By DOVZHENKO: articles— Interview with Georges Sadoul, in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 1956. ‘‘Avtobiographia,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 5, 1958. ‘‘Iz zapisnykh knijek,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 1963. Dovzhenko, Alexander, ‘‘Pis’ma raznyh let,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), April 1984. ‘‘Listy Aleksandra Dowzenki do zony,’’ (Letters to Julia Solntseva 1942–52), in Kino (Warsaw), May 1985. On DOVZHENKO: books— Yourenev, R., Alexander Dovzhenko, Moscow, 1958. Schnitzer, Luda, Dovjenko, Paris, 1966. Mariamov, Alexandr, Dovjenko, Moscow, 1968. Oms, Marcel, Alexandre Dovjenko, Lyons, 1968. Amengual, Barthélemy, Alexandre Dovjenko, Paris, 1970. DOVZHENKODIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 275 Carynnyk, Marco, editor, Alexander Dovzhenko: The Poet as Filmmaker, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1973. Marshall, Herbert, Masters of the Soviet Cinema: Crippled Creative Biographies, London, 1983. Kepley, Vance, In the Service of the State: The Cinema of Alexander Dovzhenko, Madison, Wisconsin, 1986. Nebesio, Bohdan Y., Alexander Dovzhenko: A Guide to Published Sources, Edmonton, 1995 On DOVZHENKO: articles— ‘‘Dovzhenko at Sixty,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1955. Obituary in New York Times, 27 November 1956. Montagu, Ivor, ‘‘Dovzhenko—Poet of Life Eternal,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1957. ‘‘Dovzhenko Issue’’ of Film (Venice), August 1957. Shibuk, Charles, ‘‘The Films of Alexander Dovzhenko,’’ in New York Film Bulletin, nos. 11–14, 1961. Robinson, David, ‘‘Dovzhenko,’’ in The Silent Picture (London), Autumn 1970. Carynnyk, Marco, ‘‘The Dovzhenko Papers,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1971. ‘‘Dovzhenko Issue’’ of Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), September 1974. Biofilmography in Film Dope (London), January 1978. Trimbach, S., ‘‘Tvorchestvo A.P. Dovzhenko i narodnaia kul’tura,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 10, 1979. Kepley, Vance, Jr., ‘‘Strike Him in the Eye: Aerograd and the Stalinist Terror,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Win- ter 1983. Bondarchuk, Sergei, ‘‘Alexander Dovzhenko,’’ in Soviet Film (Mos- cow), January 1984. ‘‘Dovzhenko Sections,’’ of Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), September and October 1984. Bernard, J., ‘‘Odzak dia a mysleni Alexandra Petrovice Dovzenka,’’ in Film a Doba (Prague), September and October 1984. Pisarevsky, D., ‘‘Radiant Talent,’’ in Soviet Film (Moscow), Septem- ber 1984. Navailh, F., ‘‘Dovjenko: ‘L’or pur et la verite’,’’ in Cinema (Paris), January 1985. Amiel, Vincent, ‘‘Hommage a Dovjenko,’’ in Positif (Paris), Septem- ber 1986. Véronneau, P., ‘‘Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1889–1968,’’ in Revue de la Cinémathèque (Montreal), no. 2, August-September 1989. Dovzhenko, A., ‘‘Drevnik. 1945, 1953, 1954,’’ in Isskustvo Kino (Moscow), no. 9, September 1989. Filmcritica (Italy), vol. 41, no. 407, July 1990. ‘‘Nikolaj ??ors?legenda I real’nost,’’ in Isskustvo Kino (Moscow), no. 9, September 1990. On DOVZHENKO: film— Hyrhorovych, Yevheniya (Evgeni Grigorovich), Alexander Dovzhenko, 1964. *** Unlike many other Soviet filmmakers, whose works are boldly and aggressively didactic, Alexander Dovzhenko’s cinematic output is personal and fervently private. His films are clearly political, yet at the same time he was the first Russian director whose art is so emotional, so vividly his own. His best films, Arsenal, Earth, and Ivan, are all no less than poetry on celluloid. Their emotional and poetic expression, almost melancholy simplicity, and celebration of life ultimately obliterate any external event in their scenarios. His images—most specifically, farmers, animals, and crops drenched in sunlight—are penetratingly, delicately real. With Eisenstein and Pudovkin, Dovzhenko is one of the great inventors and masters of the Russian cinema. As evidenced by his very early credits, Dovzhenko might have become a journeyman director and scenarist, an adequate technician at best: Vasya the Reformer, his first script, is a forgettable comedy about an overly curious boy; The Diplomatic Pouch is a silly tale of secret agents and murder. But in Zvenigora, his fourth film, he includes scenes of life in rural Russia for the first time. This complex and confusing film proved to be the forerunner of Arsenal, Earth, and Ivan, a trio of classics released within four years of each other, all of which honor the lives and struggles of peasants. In Arsenal, set in the Ukraine in a period between the final year of World War I and the repression of a workers’ rebellion in Kiev, Dovzhenko does not bombard the viewer with harsh, unrealistically visionary images. Despite the subject matter, the film is as lyrical as it is piercing and pointed; the filmmaker manages to transcend the time and place of his story. While he was not the first Soviet director to unite pieces of film with unrelated content to communicate a feeling, his Arsenal is the first feature in which the totality of its content rises to the height of pure poetry. In fact, according to John Howard Lawson, ‘‘no film artist has ever surpassed Dovzhenko in establish- ing an intimate human connection between images that have no plot relationship.’’ The storyline of Earth, Dovzhenko’s next—and greatest—film, is deceptively simple: a peasant leader is killed by a landowner after the farmers in a small Ukrainian village band together and obtain a tractor. But these events serve as the framework for what is a tremendously moving panorama of rustic life and the almost tranquil admission of life’s greatest inevitability: death. Without doubt, Earth is one of the cinema’s few authentic masterpieces. Finally, Ivan is an abundantly eloquent examination of man’s connection to nature. Also set in the Ukraine, the film chronicles the story of an illiterate peasant boy whose political consciousness is raised during the building of the Dnieper River dam. This is Dovzhenko’s initial sound film: he effectively utilizes his soundtrack to help convey a fascinating combination of contrasting states of mind. None of Dovzhenko’s subsequent films approach the greatness of Arsenal, Earth, and Ivan. Stalin suggested that he direct Shchors, which he shot with his wife, Julia Solntseva. Filmed over a three-year period under the ever-watchful eye of Stalin and his deputies, the scenario details the revolutionary activity of a Ukrainian intellectual, Nikolai Shchors. The result, while unmistakably a Dovzhenko film, still suffers from rhetorical excess when compared to his earlier work. Eventually, Dovzhenko headed the film studio at Kiev, wrote stories, and made documentaries. His final credit, Michurin, about the life of a famed horticulturist, was based on a play he wrote during World War II. After Muchurin, the filmmaker spent several years putting together a trilogy set in the Ukraine, chronicling the develop- ment of a village from 1930 on. He was sent to commence shooting when he died, and Solntseva completed the projects. It is unfortunate that Dovzhenko never got to direct these last features. He was back on familiar ground: perhaps he might have been DREYER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 276 able to recapture the beauty and poetry of his earlier work. Still, Arsenal, Ivan, and especially Earth are more than ample accomplish- ments for any filmmaker’s lifetime. —Rob Edelman DREYER, Carl Theodor Nationality: Danish. Born: Copenhagen, 3 February 1889. Family: Married Ebba Larsen, 1911, two sons. Career: Journalist in Copen- hagen, 1909–13; after writing scripts for Scandinavisk-Russiske Handelshus, joined Nordisk Films Kompagni, 1913; directed first film, Praesidenten, 1919; moved to Berlin, worked for Primusfilm, 1921; joined Ufa, 1924; returned to Copenhagen, 1925; hired by Société Generale de Films, Paris, 1926; left film industry, returned to journalism in Denmark, 1932; returned to filmmaking with documen- tary Good Mothers, 1942; awarded managership of a film theatre by Danish government, 1952; worked on film project on the life of Jesus, 1964–68. Awards: Golden Lion Award, Venice Festival, for Ordet, 1955. Died: In Copenhagen, 20 March 1968. Films as Director: 1919 Praesidenten (The President) (+ sc, co-art d) 1920 Pr?st?nkan (The Parson’s Widow; The Witch Woman; The Fourth Marriage of Dame Margaret) (+ sc) Carl Dreyer 1921 Blade af Satans Bog (Leaves from Satan’s Book) (+ co-sc, co-art d) (shot in 1919) 1922 Die Gezeichneten (The Stigmatized One; Love One Another) (+ sc); Der Var Engang (Once upon a Time) (+ co-sc, ed) 1924 Michael (+ co-sc) 1925 Du Skal Aere Din Hustru (Thou Shalt Honor Thy Wife; The Master of the House) (+ co-sc, art d) 1926 Glomdalsbruden (The Bride of Glomdal) (+ sc, art d) 1928 La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc (+ co-sc) 1932 Vampyr (The Dream of David Gray) (+ co-sc, pr) 1942 Mdrehjaelpen? (Good Mothers) 1943 Vredens Dag (Day of Wrath) (+ co-sc) 1945 Tv? Manniskor (Two People) (+ co-sc, ed) 1946 Vandet Pa L?ndet (Water from the Land) (never finished) (+ sc) 1947 Landsbykirken (The Danish Village Church) (+ co-sc); Kampen Mod Kraeften (The Struggle against Cancer) (+ co-sc) 1948 De Naaede Faergen (They Caught the Ferry) (+ sc) 1949 Thorvaldsen (+ co-sc) 1950 Storstrmsbroen? (The Bridge of Storstrm?) (+ sc) 1954 Et Slot I Et Slot (Castle within a Castle) (+ sc) 1955 Ordet (The Word) (+ sc) 1964 Gertrud (+ sc) Other Films: 1912 Bryggerens Datter (The Brewer’s Daughter) (Ottesen) (co-sc) 1913 Balloneksplosionen (The Balloon Explosion) (sc); Krigs- korrespondenten (The War Correspondent) (Glückstadt) (sc); Hans og Grethe (Hans and Grethe) (sc); Elskovs Opfindsomhed (Inventive Love) (Wolder) (sc); Chatollets Hemmelighed, eller Det gamle chatol (The Secret of the Writing Desk; The Old Writing Desk) (Davidsen) (sc) 1914 Ned Med Vabnene (Lay down Your Arms) (Holger-Madsen) (sc) 1915 Juvelerernes Skr?k, eller Skelethaanden, eller Skelethaandens sidste bedrift (The Jeweller’s Terror; The Skeleton’s Hand; The Last Adventure of the Skeleton’s Hand) (Christian) (sc) 1916 Penge (Money) (Mantzius) (sc); Den Hvide Dj?vel, eller Dj?velens Protege (The White Devil; The Devil’s Protegé) (Holger-Madsen) (sc); Den Skonne Evelyn (Evelyn the Beautiful) (Sandberg) (sc); Rovedderkoppen, eller Den rde? Enke (The Robber Spider; The White Widow) (Blom) (sc); En Forbryders Liv og Levned, eller En Forbryders Memoirer (The Life and Times of a Criminal; The Memoirs of a Criminal) (Christian) (sc); Guldets Gift, eller Lerhjertet (The Poison of Gold; The Clay Heart) (Holger-Madsen) (sc); Pavillonens Hemmelighed (The Secret of the Pavilion) (Mantzius) (sc) 1917 Den Mystiske Selskabsdame, eller Legationens Gidsel (The Mysterious Lady’s Companion; The Hostage of the Embassy) (Blom) (sc); Hans Rigtige Kone (His Real Wife) (Holger- Madsen) (sc); Fange Nr. 113 (Prisoner No. 113) (Holger- Madsen) (sc); Hotel Paradis (Hotel Paradiso) (Dinesen) (sc) 1918 Lydia (Holger-Madsen) (sc); Glaedens Dag, eller Miskendt (Day of Joy; Neglected) (Christian) (sc) 1919 Gillekop (Blom) (sc); Grevindens Aere (The Countess’ Honor) (Blom) (sc) 1947 De Gamle (The Seventh Age) (sc) 1949 Radioens Barndom (ed) DREYERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 277 1950 Shakespeare og Kronborg (Hamlet’s Castle) (Roos) (sc) 1954 R?nnes og Nex?s Genopbygning (The Rebuilding of Ronne and Nex?) (sc) Publications By DREYER: books— Om filmen, Copenhagen, 1959. Five Film af Carl Th. Dreyer, edited by Ole Storm, Copenha- gen, 1964. Jesus fra Nazaret. Et filmmanuskript, Copenhagen, 1968; as Jesus, New York, 1972. Four Screenplays, New York, 1970. Oeuvres cinématographiques 1926–1934, edited by Maurice Drouzy and Charles Tesson, Paris, 1983. By DREYER: articles— ‘‘Lunch with Carl Dreyer,’’ with Ragna Jackson, in Penguin Film Review (London), August 1947. Interview with John Winge, in Sight and Sound (London), Janu- ary 1950. ‘‘Visit with Carl Th. Dreyer,’’ with James Card, in Image (Rochester, New York), December 1953. ‘‘Rencontre avec Carl Dreyer,’’ with Lotte Eisner, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1955. ‘‘Thoughts on My Craft,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 3, 1955/56. Interview with Herbert Luft, in Films and Filming (London), no. 9, 1961. ‘‘Dreyer Mosaik,’’ in Kosmorama (Copenhagen), December 1963. ‘‘Carl Dreyer nous dit: ‘Le principal intérêt d’un homme: les autres hommes,’’’ an interview with Georges Sadoul, in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 24 December 1964. Interview with Michel Delahaye, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 170, 1965. Interview with B?rge Trolle, in Film Culture (New York), Sum- mer 1966. ‘‘My Way of Working Is in Relation to the Future: A Conversation with Carl Dreyer,’’ with Carl Lerner, in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1966. ‘‘Carl Dreyer: Utter Bore or Total Genius?’’ with Denis Duperley, in Films and Filming (London), February 1968. Interview with Michel Delahaye, in Interview with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, New York, 1969. ‘‘Metaphysic of Ordet,’’ in The Film Culture Reader, edited by P. Adams Sitney, New York, 1970. On DREYER: books— Neergaard, Ebbe, Carl Theodor Dreyer: A Film Director’s Work, London, 1950. Trolle, B?rge, The Art of Carl Dreyer: An Analysis, Copenha- gen, 1955. Sémolué, Jean, Dreyer, Paris, 1962. Bowser, Eileen, The Films of Carl Dreyer, New York, 1964. Monty, Ib, Portrait of Carl Th. Dreyer, Copenhagen, 1965. Dyssegaard, Soren, editor, Carl Th. Dreyer, Danish Film Director, Copenhagen, 1968. Milne, Tom, The Cinema of Carl Dreyer, New York, 1971. Ernst, Helge, Dreyer: Carl Th. Dreyer—en dansk filmskaber, Copen- hagen, 1972. Schrader, Paul, Transcendental Style in Film: Ozu, Bresson, Dreyer, Los Angeles, 1972. Bordwell, David, Dreyer, London, 1973. Skoller, Donald, editor, Dreyer in Double Reflection, New York, 1973. Nash, Mark, editor, Dreyer, London, 1977. Bordwell, David, The Films of Carl-Theodor Dreyer, Berkeley, California, 1981. Drouzy, M., Carl Th. Dreyer, né Nilsson, Paris, 1982. Carney, Raymond, Speaking the Language of Desire: The Films of Carl Dreyer, Cambridge, 1989. Aumont, Jacques, Vampyr de Carl Th. Dreyer, Crisnée, Belgium, 1993. Bassotto, Camillo, Carl Th. Dreyer: La passion de Jeanne d’Arc, Venice, 1996. Drum, Jean, and Dale D. Drum, My Only Great Passion: The Life and Films of Carl Th. Dreyer, Lanham, Maryland, 2000. On DREYER: articles— ‘‘Dreyer Issue’’ of Ecran Fran?ais (Paris), 11 November 1947. Rowland, Richard, ‘‘Carl Dreyer’s World,’’ in Hollywood Quarterly, no. 1, 1950. Duca, Lo, ‘‘Trilogie mystique de Dreyer,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1952. Rehben, Ernst, ‘‘Carl Dreyer, poète tragique du cinéma,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 8, 1953. Trolle, Brge?, ‘‘The World of Carl Dreyer,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1955/56. Luft, Herbert, ‘‘Carl Dreyer—A Master of His Craft,’’ in Quarterly of Film, Radio and Television (Berkeley), no. 2, 1956. Eisner, Lotte, ‘‘Réalisme et irréel chez Dreyer,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1956. Luft, Herbert, ‘‘Dreyer,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1961. Cowie, Peter, ‘‘Dreyer at Seventy-Five,’’ in Films and Filming (London), no. 6, 1964. Kelman, Ken, ‘‘Dreyer,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 35, 1964/65. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Darkness and Light,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 4, 1965. Téchiné, André, ‘‘L’Archaisme nordique de Dreyer,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 170, 1965. Bond, Kirk, ‘‘The World of Carl Dreyer,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berke- ley), Fall 1965. ‘‘Dreyer Issue’’ of Kosmorama (Copenhagen), June 1968. ‘‘Dreyer Issue’’ of Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1968. Amette, Jacques-Pierre, ‘‘Carl Th. Dreyer,’’ in Dossiers du cinéma: Cinéastes I, Paris, 1971. Bordwell, David, ‘‘Passion, Death, and Testament: Carl Dreyer’s Jesus Film,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Summer 1972. Wood, Robin, ‘‘Carl Dreyer,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/ April 1974. Vaughan, Dai, ‘‘Carl Dreyer and the Theme of Choice,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1974. Petric, Vlada, ‘‘Dreyer’s Concept of Abstraction,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1975. De Benedictus, M., ‘‘Dreyer: La regola del pendolo,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), January-February 1979. Schepelern, P., in Kosmorama (Copenhagen), December 1982. Devilliers, M., ‘‘Dreyer, la chair et l’ombre,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), November 1983. DREYER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 278 Lardeau, Yves, and C. Tesson, ‘‘Dreyer en images,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1983. ‘‘Gertrud Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), December 1984. ‘‘La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc Section,’’ of Skrien (Amsterdam), November-December 1985. Rosenbaum, Jonathan, ‘‘Gertrud: The Desire for the Image,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1985–86. ‘‘Passion de Jeanne d’Arc Issue,’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), January-February 1988. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Carl Dreyer,’’ in Radio Times (London), 25 Febru- ary 1989. ‘‘Special Issue,’’ Kosmorama (Denmark), vol. 35, no. 187, Spring 1989. Véronneau, P., ‘‘C.T. Dreyer, 1889–1968,’’ in Revue de la Cinémathèque (Montreal), no. 2, August-September 1989. Donovan, F., ‘‘La magie Dreyer,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no. 461, November 1989. Filmcritica (Italy), vol. 41, no. 107, July 1990. Drouzy, M., ‘‘Les années noires de Dreyer,’’ in Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 4, Autumn 1993. *** Carl Theodor Dreyer is the greatest filmmaker in the Danish cinema, where he was always a solitary personality. But he is also among the few international directors who turned films into an art and made them a new means of expression for the artistic genius. Of Dreyer’s feature films, seven were produced in Denmark, three in Germany, two in France, two in Sweden, and one in Norway. If one tries to understand the special nature of Dreyer’s art, one can delve into his early life to find the roots of his never-failing contempt for pretentions and his hatred of bourgeois respectability, as well as his preoccupation with suffering and martyrdom. In his biography of Dreyer, M. Drouzy revealed the fate of Dreyer’s biological mother, who died in the most cruel way following an attempted abortion. Dreyer, who was adopted by a Copenhagen family, learned about the circumstances of her death when he was eighteen years old, and Drouzy’s psychoanalytical study finds the victimized woman in all of Dreyer’s films. But of what value is the biographical approach to the understanding of a great artist? The work of an artist need not be the illumination of his private life. This may afford some explanation when we are inquiring into the fundamental point of departure for an artist, but Dreyer’s personality is expressed very clearly and graphi- cally in his films. We can therefore well admire the consistency which has always characterized his outlook on life. Like many great artists, Dreyer is characterized by the relatively few themes that he constantly played upon. One of the keynotes in Dreyer’s work is suffering, and his world is filled with martyrs. Yet suffering and martyrdom are surely not the fundamentals. They are merely manifestations, the results of something else. Suffering and martyrdom are the consequences of wickedness, and it is malice and its influence upon people that his films are concerned about. As early in his career as the 1921 film, Leaves from Satan’s Book, Dreyer tackled this theme of the power of evil over the human mind. He returned to examine this theme again and again. If the popular verdict is that Dreyer’s films are heavy and gloomy, naturally the idea is suggested by the subjects which he handled. Dreyer never tried to make us believe that life is a bed of roses. There is much suffering, wickedness, death, and torment in his films, but they often conclude in an optimistic conviction in the victory of spirit over matter. With death comes deliverance. It is beyond the reach of malice. In his delineation of suffering man, devoid of any hope before the arrival of death, Dreyer was never philosophically abstract. Though his films were often enacted on a supersensible plane, and are concerned with religious problems, his method as an artist was one of psychological realism, and his object was always the individual. Dreyer’s masterly depiction of milieu has always been greatly ad- mired; his keen perception of the characteristic detail is simply dazzling. But this authenticity in settings has never been a means towards a meticulous naturalism. He always sought to transcend naturalism so as to reach a kind of purified, or classically simplified, realism. Though Dreyer occupied himself with the processes of the soul, he always preserved an impartiality when portraying them. One might say that he maintained a high degree of objectivity in his description of the subjective. This can be sensed in his films as a kind of presentation rather than forceful advocacy. Dreyer himself, when describing his method in La Passion de Jeanne d’Arc, once employed the expression ‘‘realized mysticism.’’ The phrase indicates quite precisely his endeavours to render understandable things that are difficult to comprehend, to make the irrational appear intelligible. The meaning behind life lies in just this recognition of the necessity to suffer in order to arrive at deliverance. The characters nearly always suffered defeat in the outward world because Dreyer considered defeat or victory in the human world to be of no significance. For him the triumph of the soul over life was what was most important. There are those who wish to demonstrate a line of development in Dreyer’s production, but there is no development in the customary sense. Dreyer’s world seemed established at an early period of his life, and his films merely changed in their way of viewing the world. There was a complete congruity between his ideas and his style, and it was typical of him to have said: ‘‘The soul is revealed in the style, which is the artist’s expression of the way he regards his material.’’ For Dreyer the image was always the important thing, so important that there is some justification in describing him as first and foremost the great artist of the silent film. On the other hand, his last great films were concerned with the effort to create a harmony between image and sound, and to that end he was constantly experimenting. Dreyer’s pictorial style has been characterized by his extensive and careful employment of the close-up. His films are filled with faces. In this way he was able to let his characters unfold themselves, for he was chiefly interested in the expressions that appear as the result of spiritual conflicts. Emphasis has often been given to the slow lingering rhythm in Dreyer’s films. It is obvious that this dilatoriness springs from the wish to endow the action with a stamp of monumen- tality, though it could lead dangerously close to empty solemnity, to the formalistic. Dreyer quickly realized the inadequacy of the montage technique, which had been regarded as the foundation of film for so many years. His films became more and more based on long uncut sequences. By the end of his career his calm, elaborating style was quite in conform- ity with the newer trends in the cinema. —Ib Monty DULACDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 279 DULAC, Germaine Nationality: French. Born: Charlotte Elisabeth Germaine Saisset- Schneider in Amiens, 17 November 1882. Family: Married Marie- Louis Albert Dulac, 1905 (divorced 1920). Career: Writer and editor for feminist journal La Francaise, 1909–13; offered position as camerawoman on Caligula by actress friend Stacia de Napierkowska, 1914; formed production company with husband and scenarist Irène Hillel-Erlanger; directed first film, Les Soeurs enemies, 1915; trav- elled to United States to observe production techniques, 1921; general secretary of Ciné-Club de France, from 1922; directed newsreels for Gaumont, 1930s. Died: In Paris, July 1942. Films as Director: 1915 Les Soeurs enemies 1916 Geo le mysterieux; Venus Victrix; Dans l’ouragan de la vie 1917 Ames de fous (+ sc) 1918 Le Bonheur des autres 1919 La Fête espagnole; La Cigarette (+ co-sc) 1920 Malencontre; La Belle Dame sans merci 1921 La Mort du soleil 1922 Werther (incomplete) 1923 La Souriante Madame Beudet (The Smiling Madame Beudet); Gossette 1924 Le Diable dans la ville 1925 Ame d’artiste (+ co-sc); La Folie des vaillants 1926 Antoinette Sabrier 1927 La Coquille et le clergyman (The Seashell and the Clergy- man); L’Invitation au voyage; Le Cinéma au service de l’histoire 1928 La Princesse Mandane; Disque 927; Thèmes et variations; Germination d’un haricot 1929 Etude cinégraphique sur une arabesque Other Films: 1928 Mon Paris (Guyot) (supervision) 1932 Le Picador (Jacquelux) (supervision) Publications By DULAC: articles— ‘‘Un Article? Mais que faut-il prouver?’’ in Le Film (Paris), 16 October 1919. ‘‘Aux amis du cinéma,’’ address in Cinémagazine (Paris), 19 Decem- ber 1924. ‘‘L’Art des nuances spirituelles,’’ in Cinéa-Ciné pour tous (Paris), January 1925. ‘‘Du sentiment à la ligne,’’ in Schémas, no. 1, 1927. ‘‘Les Esthètiques, les entraves, la cinégraphie intégrale,’’ in L’Art cinématographique, Paris, 1927. ‘‘Sur le cinéma visuel,’’ in Le Rouge et le noir (Paris), July 1928. ‘‘Jouer avec les bruits,’’ in Cinéa-Ciné pour tous (Paris), 15 August 1929. ‘‘Das Wesen des Films: Die visuelle idee,’’ and ‘‘Das Kino der Avantgarde,’’ in Frauen und Film (Berlin), October 1984. On DULAC: books— Heck-Rabi, Louise, Women Filmmakers: A Critical Reception, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1984. Flitterman-Lewis, Sandy, To Desire Differently: Feminism and the French Cinema, Urbana, Illinois, 1990. On DULAC: articles— Ford, Charles, biography in Anthologie du cinéma (Paris), no. 31, January 1968. Cornwell, Regina, ‘‘Maya Deren and Germaine Dulac: Activists of the Avant-Garde,’’ in Film Library Quarterly (New York), Win- ter 1971/72. Van Wert, W., ‘‘Germaine Dulac: First Feminist Filmmaker,’’ in Women and Film (Santa Monica, California), vol. 1, nos. 5–6, 1974. Dozoretz, Wendy, ‘‘Dulac versus Artaud,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 3, no. 1, 1979. Dozoretz, W., ‘‘Madame Beudet’s Smile: Feminine or Feminist?’’ in Film Reader, vol. 5, 1982. Dozoretz, Wendy, and Sandy Flitterman, in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 5, no. 3, 1983. Flitterman, Sandy, ‘‘Theorizing the Feminine: Women as the Figure of Desire in The Seashell and the Clergyman,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 6., no. 3, 1984. Serra, R., ‘‘La prima scrittura femminile del cinema,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Bari), August-October 1984. Tol, I., ‘‘Films van Germaine Dulac,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), Winter 1985–86. Magny, J., ‘‘1896–1930. Premiers écrits: Canudo, Delluc, Epstein, Dulac,’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), no. 60, July 1991. Borde, R., and P. Guibbert, ‘‘Le cinéma au service de l’histoire (1935): un film retrouve de Germaine Dulac,’’ in Archives (Perpignan), no. 44–45, November-December 1991. *** Before becoming a film director, Germaine Dulac had studied music, was interested in photography, and had written for two feminist journals—all of which played a role in her development as a filmmaker. There were three phases to her filmmaking career: in commercial production, in the avant-garde, and in newsreels. In addition, filmmaking was only one phase of her film career; she also was prominent as a theorist and promoter of the avant-garde film, and as an organizer of the French film unions and the ciné-club move- ment. The French historian Charles Ford wrote in Femmes Cinéastes that Dulac was the ‘‘heart’’ of the avant-garde in France, that without her there would have been no avant-garde. Her role in French film history has been compared to that of Maya Deren in the United States three decades later. DUPONT DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 280 Dulac learned the rudiments of filmmaking by assisting a friend who was making a film in 1914. The following year she made her first film, Les Soeurs enemies, which was distributed by Pathé. It was the ideal time for a woman to enter commercial production, since many men had been called into the army. After directing several other conventional story films, Dulac became more and more drawn to the avant-garde cinema, which she defined in 1927 as ‘‘lines, surfaces, volumes, evolving directly without contrivance, in the logic of their forms, stripped of representational meaning, the better to aspire to abstraction and give more space to feelings and dreams—INTEGRAL CINEMA.’’ It is generally reported that Dulac was introduced to the French film avant-garde movement through her friendship with Louis Delluc; but Ester Carla de Miro claims that it was in fact through Dulac that he became involved in film. Delluc wrote that Dulac’s first film was worth ‘‘more than a dozen of each of her colleagues.... But the cinema is full of people . . . who cannot forgive her for being an educated woman . . . or for being a woman at all.’’ Dulac’s best known and most impressive film (of the few that have been seen outside France) is The Smiling Madame Beudet, based on a play by Andre Obey. It depicts the life and dreams of a small-town housewife married to a coarse, if not repulsive, businessman. The film created a sensation in its day. Dulac succeeded with what was, at the time, signal originality in expressing by pictorial means the atmos- phere and implications of this study of domestic conflict. Showings of The Seashell and the Clergyman, based on an original screenplay by Antonin Artaud, have generally been accom- panied by program notes indicating Artaud’s outrage at Dulac’s ‘‘feminized’’ direction. Yet as P. Adams Sitney points out in his introduction to The Avant-Garde Film, Artaud praised the actors and thanked Dulac for her interest in his script in an essay titled ‘‘Cinema et l’abstraction.’’ (Wendy Dozoretz has pointed out that the protest aimed against Dulac at the film’s Paris opening in 1928 was based on a misunderstanding; at least one protester, Georges Sadoul, later said he had thought he was protesting against Artaud.) At the other end of the cinema spectrum, Dulac began to use time- lapse cinematography to reveal the magical effects of tiny plants emerging from the soil with leaf after leaf unfolding and stretching to the sun. ‘‘Here comes Germaine Dulac and her lima bean,’’ became a popular joke among film-club devotees, a joke that did not exclude admiration. The last decade of Dulac’s life was spent directing newsreels for Gaumont. She died in 1942, during the German occupation. Charles Ford, who has collected her articles, indicates that she expressed ideas in ‘‘clear and accessible language’’ which others often set forth ‘‘in hermetic formulas.’’ One American writer, Stuart Liebman, sums up the opposing view: ‘‘Despite their undeniable importance for the film culture of the 1920s, the backward-looking character of Dulac’s film theory, constituted by her nostalgia for the aesthetic discourse of the past, both defines and delimits our interest in her theoretical contribu- tions today.’’ The final assessment of Germaine Dulac’s life and work as filmmaker and theorist may depend on the arrival of a well- documented biography, and greater access to all her writings (some short pieces are now available in English translations) and all her existing films. —Cecile Starr DUPONT, E.A. Nationality: German. Born: Ewald André Dupont in Seitz, Saxony, 25 December 1891. Education: University of Berlin. Career: Film critic for BZ am Mittag, Berlin, from 1911; story editor for Richard Oswald, 1916; directed first feature, Das Geheimnis des Amerika- Docks, 1917; director in Hollywood, 1926; signed for British-Interna- tional Pictures, London, 1928; returned to Berlin, 1931; director for Universal, Hollywood, 1933–36; signed to Paramount, 1936–37; signed for Warner Brothers, 1938; dismissed from Hell’s Kitchen, began editing Hollywood Tribune, 1939; formed talent agency, 1941; returned to directing, 1951. Died: Of cancer in Los Angeles, 12 December 1956. Films as Director: 1917 Das Geheimnis des Amerika-Docks (The Secret of the Amer- ica Dock) (+ sc) 1918 Es Werde Licht (Let There Be Light) part 2 (co-d, co-sc); Europa-Postlagernd (Post Office Europe) (+ sc); Mitternacht (+ sc); Der Schatten (Der lebender Schatten) (+ sc); Der Teufel (+ sc); Die Japanerin (+ sc) 1919 Grand Hotel Babylon (+ sc); Die Apachen (Paris Under- world) (+ sc); Das Derby (+ sc); Die Würger der Welt (+ sc); Die Maske (+ sc); Die Spione (+ sc) 1920 Der Mord ohne T?ter (Murder without Cause) (+ co-sc); Die weisse Pfau (The White Peacock) (+ co-sc); Herztrumpt (+ sc); Whitechapel (+ sc) 1921 Der Geier-Wally (Ein Roman aus den Bergen; Geierwally; The Woman Who Killed a Vulture) (+ sc) 1922 Kinder der Finsternis (Children of Darkness) part 1—Der Mann aus Neapel (The Man from Naples) (+ co-sc); Kinder der Finsternis part 2—K?mpfende Welten (Worlds in Strug- gle) (+ co-sc); Sie und die Drei (She and the Three) (+ sc) 1923 Die grüne Manuela (The Green Manuela); Das alte Gesetz (Baruch; The Ancient Law) 1925 Der Demütige und die S?ngerin (The Humble Man and the Singer; La Meurtrière) (+ co-sc); Variété (Variety; Vaude- ville; Varietes) (+ co-sc) 1927 Love Me and the World Is Mine (Implacable Destiny) (+ co-sc) 1928 Moulin-Rouge (+ sc, pr); Piccadilly (sound version released 1929) (+ pr) 1929 Atlantic (+ pr); Atlantik (German version) (+ pr, co-sc) 1930 Atlantis (French version) (co-d, pr); Cape Forlorn (The Love Storm) (+ pr, co-sc); Menschen im K?fig (German version) (+ pr); Le Cap perdu (French version) (+ pr); Two Worlds (+ pr, co-story); Zwei Welten (German version) (+ pr); Les Deux Mondes (French version) (+ pr) 1931 Salto Mortale (The Circus of Sin) 1932 Peter Voss, der Millionendieb (Peter Voss, Who Stole Mil- lions) (+ co-sc) 1933 Der L?ufer von Marathon (The Marathon Runner) (in United States): 1933 Ladies Must Love 1935 The Bishop Misbehaves (The Bishop’s Misadventures) DUPONTDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 281 1936 A Son Comes Home; Forgotten Faces 1937 A Night of Mystery (The Greene Murder Case); On Such a Night; Love on Toast 1939 Hell’s Kitchen (co-d with Seiler, uncredited) 1951 The Scarf (The Dungeon) (+ sc) 1953 Problem Girls; The Neanderthal Man; The Steel Lady (Secret of the Sahara; The Treasure of Kalifa) 1954 Return to Treasure Island (Bandit Island of Karabei); Miss Robin Crusoe (co-d, uncredited) Other Films: 1917 Rennfieber (Horse Race Fever) (Oswald) (sc); Der Onyxkopf (May) (sc); Sturmflut (Zeyn) (sc); Die sterbende Perlen (Meinert) (sc); Die Faust des Riesen parts 1 and 2 (Biebrach) (sc) 1918 Ferdinand Lassalle (Meinert) (sc); Der Saratoga-Koffer (Meinert) (sc); Die Buchhalterin (von Woringen) (co-sc); Nur um tausend Dollars (Meinert) (sc) 1927 Madame Pompadour (Wilcox) (sc) 1956 Magic Fire (Dieterle) (sc) Publications By DUPONT: articles— Varieté, with Leo Birinski, in Antologia di Bianco e nero, Rome, 1943. Interview with Ezra Goodman, in Daily News (Los Angeles), 10 April 1950. On DUPONT: books— Kracauer, Siegfried, From Caligari to Hitler, Princeton, 1947. Eisner, Lotte, The Haunted Screen, Berkeley, 1968. Luft, Herbert, E.A. Dupont, Anthologie du Cinéma, Paris, n.d. On DUPONT: articles— Weinberg, Herman, in Take One (Montreal), January/February 1970. Luft, Herbert, ‘‘E.A. Dupont 1891–1956,’’ in Films in Review (New York), June/July 1977. Pinto, A., letter in Films in Review (New York), October 1977. ‘‘E.A. Dupont,’’ in Film Dope (London), January 1978. ‘‘E.A. Dupont—Der Augenmensch,’’ in Film und Fernsehen (East Berlin), no. 11, 1983. Brandlmeier, T., ‘‘Portr?t: Ewald André Dupont,’’ in EPD Film (Frankfurt), vol. 9, no. 2, February 1992. *** Some directors are able to maintain a steady flow of talent in all their work. Others, like E.A. Dupont, are remembered for one outstanding moment in their career. Variété, or Vaudeville as it is also known, was one of the most exciting films to come from Germany in the 1920s. Dupont made many other good films, but his career as a whole is a rather tragic one. This was partly due to personal deficiencies and partly due to circumstances over which he had no control. Some European directors flourished in Hollywood; Dupont was not one of them. Dupont had been a film critic and a film scriptwriter before becoming Richard Oswald’s story editor and contributing to Oswald’s sensational sex film Es werde Licht. In 1917 he began to direct thrillers like Das Geheimnis des America Docks and Europa Postlagernd. Recognition came with Die Geierwally in 1921. This Henny Porten film was distinguished by the settings of Paul Leni and the camerawork of Karl Freund. It also popularized William Dieterle. Dupont had previously launched the careers of Paul Richter and Bernhardt Goetzke, later featured in the films of Fritz Lang. Freund also photographed Dupont’s next film, Kinder der Finsternis, a film of two parts that featured striking sets by Leni. 1923 was a bumper year for Dupont. His Die grüne Manuela, about a young dancer who falls in love with a smuggler whose brother gives his life to ensure their happiness, won international apprecia- tion. His next film, Das alte Gesetz, garnered a similar response. It told the story of a young Jew’s flight from his orthodox home to seek fame in the Austrian theater. In the depiction of Jewish rituals and the life of the Austrian court and theatre, the film had a rich authenticity. Dupont worked outside the then-current German expressionist style, being more human and realistic in his approach to filmmaking. This was evident in his tour de force Variété, a tale of jealousy and death amongst trapeze artists. Its powerful realism, visual fluidity, and daring techniques, coupled with the superb performances of Jannings, Lya de Putti, and Warwick Ward, made it stand out in a year rich with achievement. The virtuoso camerawork of Karl Freund contributed not merely to the spatial and temporal aspects of the film but in the revelation of motive and thought. The uninhibited sensual- ity depicted by the film led to censorship problems in many countries. Inevitably, Dupont went to Hollywood, where he directed a not entirely successful Love Me and the World Is Mine for Universal. In 1928 he made two stylish films in England: Moulin Rouge, which exploited the sensual charms of Olga Tschechowa, and Piccadilly, with Gilda Gray and Anna May Wong (Charles Laughton made his film debut in a small role). With the coming of sound, Atlantic, made in German and English, proved a considerable version of the Titanic story. But the two British sound films that followed suffered from weak acting that belied the striking sets. With Salto Mortale, made in Germany in 1931 and featuring Anna Sten and Adolph Wohlbruch, Dupont returned to the scene of his earlier Variété. Two more films were made in Germany before he found himself a Jewish refugee in Hollywood. Here his career was uneven. Factory-produced B pictures gave him no scope for his talents. Dupont was dismissed for slapping a Dead End Kid who was mocking his foreign accent. This humiliating experience played havoc with his morose and withdrawn personality. He became a film publicist, a talent agent, and wrote some scripts. He returned in 1951 to direct The Scarf, a film of some merit for United Artists. Dupont also dabbled in television. He wrote the script for a film on Richard Wagner that was directed by his former protege William Dieterle in 1956. In December of the same year he died of cancer in Los Angeles. DURAS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 282 A sad case. Sad too to see the name of his great photographer Karl Freund on the credits of I Love Lucy. —Liam O’Leary DURAS, Marguerite Nationality: French. Born: Marguerite Donnadieu in Giadinh, French Indo-China, 1914. Education: Educated in mathematics, law and political science at the Sorbonne, Paris. Career: Published first novel, Les Impudents, 1943; subsequently novelist, journalist and playwright; directed first film, La Musica, 1966. Awards: Prix Goncourt for novel L’Amant, 1984, Ritz Paris Hemingway, Paris, 1986. Died: 3 March 1996, in Paris, France. Films as Director: 1966 La Musica (co-d, sc) 1969 Détruire, dit-elle (Destroy She Said) (+ sc) 1971 Jaune le soleil (+ pr, co-ed, sc, from her novel Abahn, Sabana, David) 1972 Nathalie Granger (+ sc, music) 1974 La Femme du Ganges (+ sc) 1975 India Song (+ sc, voice) 1976 Des journées entières dans les arbres (Days in the Trees) (+ sc); Son Nom de Venises dans Calcutta desert (+ sc) 1977 Baxter, Vera Baxter (+ sc); Le Camion (+ sc, role) 1978 Le Navire Night (+ sc) 1978/79 Aurelia Steiner (4-film series): Cesarée (1978) (+ sc); Les Mains négatives (1978) (+ sc); Aurelia Steiner—Melbourne (1979) (+ sc); Aurelia Steiner—Vancouver (1979) (+ sc) Marguerite Duras 1981 Agatha et les lectures illimitées (Agatha) (+ sc) 1985 Les Enfants (The Children) Other Films: 1959 Hiroshima mon amour (Resnais) (sc) 1960 Moderato Cantabile (Brook) (sc, co-adapt from her novel) 1961 Une Aussi longue absence (The Long Absence) (Colpi) (co-sc from her novel) 1964 Nuit noire, Calcutta (Karmitz) (short) (sc) 1965 ‘‘Les rideaux blancs’’ (Franju) episode of Der Augenblick des Friedens (Un Instant de la paix) (for W.German TV) (sc) 1966 10:30 P.M. Summer (Dassin) (co-sc uncredited, from her novel) (Dix heures et demie du soir en été); La Voleuse (Chapot) (sc, dialogue) 1991 L’Amant (The Lover) (co-sc) Publications By DURAS: screenplays— Hiroshima mon amour, Paris, 1959. Moderato Cantabile, with Gérard Jarlot and Peter Brook, 1960. Une Aussi longue absence, with Gérard Jarlot, Paris, 1961. 10:30 P.M. Summer, with Jules Dassin, Paris, 1966. La Musica, Paris, 1966. Detruire, dit-elle, Paris, 1969; as Destroy, She Said, New York, 1970. Les rideaux blancs, Paris, 1966. Jaune le soleil, Paris, 1971 Nathalie Granger, suivi de La Femme du Gange, Paris, 1973. India Song—texte—theatre—film, Paris, 1975; as India Song, New York, 1976. Des journées entières dans les arbres, Paris, 1976. Son Nom de Venises dans Calcutta desert, Paris, 1976. Le Camion, Paris, 1977. Le Navire Night, Césarée, Les Mains négatives, Aurelia Steiner, Paris, 1979. Vera Baxter; ou, Les Plages de l’Atlantique, Paris, 1980. Agatha, Paris, 1981. Les Enfants, Paris, 1985. By DURAS: fiction— Les Impudents, Paris, 1943. La Vie tranquille, Paris, 1944. Un Barrage contre le Pacifique, Paris, 1950; as The Sea Wall, New York, 1952; as A Sea of Troubles, London, 1953. Le Marin de Gibraltar, Paris, 1952; as The Sailor from Gibraltar, London and New York, 1966. Les Petits Chevaux de Tarquinia, Paris, 1953; as The Little Horses of Tarquinia, London, 1960. Des journées entières dans les arbres, Paris, 1954; as Whole Days in the Trees, New York, 1981. Le Square, Paris, 1955. DURASDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 283 Moderato Cantabile, Paris, 1958, and New York, 1987. Dix heures et demi du soir en été, Paris, 1960; as Ten-Thirty on a Summer Night, London, 1962. L’Après-midi de Monsieur Andesmas, Paris, 1962; as The Afternoon of Monsieur Andesmas, London, 1964. Le Ravissement de Lol V. Stein, Paris, 1964; as The Ravishing of Lol V. Stein, New York, 1967; as The Rapture of Lol V. Stein, London, 1967. Le Vice-consul, Paris, 1966; as The Vice-Consul, London, 1968, New York, 1987. L’Amante anglaise, Paris, 1967, New York, 1968. Abahn, Sabana, David, Paris, 1970. L’Amour, Paris, 1971. Ah! Ernesto, with Bernard Bonhomme, Paris, 1971. La Maladie de la mort, Paris, 1983; as The Malady of Death, New York, 1986. L’Amant, Paris, 1984; as The Lover, New York, 1985; translated by Barbara Bray, New York, 1998. Hiroshima Mon Amor, translated by Richard Seaver, New York, 1987. Les Yeux bleus cheveux noirs, Paris, 1987; as Blue Eyes, Black Hair, London and New York, 1988. Emily L., Paris, 1987, New York, 1989. By DURAS: plays— Théatre 1 (includes Les Eaux et forets, Le Square, La Musica), Paris, 1965. Théatre 2 (includes Susanna Andler; Yes, peut-étre; Le Shaga; Des journées entières dans les arbres; Un Homme est venu me voir), Paris, 1968. L’Homme assis dans le couloir, Paris, 1980. L’Homme Atlantique, Paris, 1982. Savannah Bay, Paris, 1982. The Square, Edinburgh, 1986. Yes, peut-etre, Edinburgh, 1986. By DURAS: other books— Les Parleuses, with Xaviere Gauthier, Paris, 1974. étude sur l’oeuvre littéraire, théatrale, et cinématographique, with Jacques Lacan and Maurice Blanchot, Paris, 1976. Territoires du féminin, with Marcelle Marini, Paris, 1977. Les Lieux de Duras, with Michelle Porte, Paris, 1978. L’été 80, Paris, 1980. Outside: Papiers d’un jour, Paris, 1981, Boston 1986. The War: A Memoir, New York, 1986. The Physical Side, London, 1990. By DURAS: articles— ‘‘Conversation with Marguerite Duras,’’ with Richard Roud, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1959/60. ‘‘Marguerite Duras en toute liberté,’’ interview with F. Dufour, in Cinéma (Paris), April 1972. ‘‘Du livre au film,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), April 1974. ‘‘India Song, a Chant of Love and Death,’’ interview with F. Dawson, in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1975. ‘‘India Song and Marguerite Duras,’’ interview with Carlos Clarens, in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1975/76. Interview with J.-C. Bonnet and J. Fieschi, in Cinématographe (Paris), November 1977. ‘‘Les Yeux verts,’’ special issue written and edited by Duras, of Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1980. Interview with D. Fasoli, in Filmcritica (Florence), June 1981. Interview with A. Grunert, in Filmfaust (Frankfurt), February- March 1982. ‘‘The Places of Marguerite Duras,’’ an interview with M. Porte, in Enclitic (Minneapolis), Spring 1983. Interview with P. Bonitzer, C. Tesson, and Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1985. Interview with Jean-Luc Godard, in Cinéma (Paris), 30 Decem- ber 1987. Interview with Colette Mazabrard, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1989. ‘‘Jacquot filme Duras,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1993. On DURAS: books— Bernheim, N.-L., Marguerite Duras tourne un film, Paris, 1976. Ropars-Wuilleumier, Marie-Claire, La Texte divisé, Paris, 1981. Trastulli, Daniela, Dalla parola all imagine: Viaggio nel cinema di Marguerite Duras, Geneva, 1982. Borgomano, Madeleine, L’Ecriture filmique de Marguerite Duras, Paris, 1985. Brossard, Jean-Pierre, editor, Marguerite Duras: Cinéaste, écrivain, La Chaux-de-Fonde, 1985. Guers-Villate, Yvonne, Continuité/discontinuité de l’oeuvre Durassienne, Brussels, 1985. Fernandes, Marie-Pierre, Travailler avec Duras: La musica deuxième, Paris, 1986. Selous, Trista, The Other Woman: Feminism and Femininity in the Work of Marguerite Duras, New Haven, Connecticut, 1988. On DURAS: articles— Gollub, Judith, ‘‘French Writers Turned Film Makers,’’ in Film Heritage (New York), Winter 1968/69. ‘‘Reflections in a Broken Glass,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1975. Lakeland, M.J., ‘‘Marguerite Duras in 1977,’’ in Camera Obscura (Berkeley), Fall 1977. Van Wert, W.F., ‘‘The Cinema of Marguerite Duras: Sound and Voice in a Closed Room,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1979. Seni, N., ‘‘Wahrnehungsformen von Zeit und Raum am Beispiel der Filme von Marguerite Duras und Chantal Akerman,’’ in Frauen und Film (Berlin), September 1979. ‘‘Marguerite Duras à l’action,’’ in Positif (Paris), July/August 1980. Andermatt, V., ‘‘Big Mach (on the Truck),’’ in Enclitic (Minneapo- lis), Spring 1980. Lyon, E., ‘‘Marguerite Duras: Bibliography/Filmography,’’ in Cam- era Obscura (Berkeley), Fall 1980. Murphy, C.J., ‘‘The Role of Desire in the Films of Marguerite Duras,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (New York), Win- ter 1982. DUVIVIER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 284 Fedwik, P., ‘‘Marguerite Duras: Feminine Field of Nostalgia,’’ in Enclitic (Minneapolis), Fall 1982. Sarrut, B., ‘‘Marguerite Duras: Barrages against the Pacific,’’ in On Film (Los Angeles), Summer 1983. Murphy, C.J., ‘‘New Narrative Regions: The Role of Desire in the Films and Novels of Marguerite Duras,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), April 1984. Le Masson, H., ‘‘La voix tatouee,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1985. McWilliams, D., ‘‘Aesthetic Tripling: Marguerite Duras’s Le navire Night,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), Janu- ary 1986. Cottent-Hage, M., ‘‘Le camion de Marguerite Duras, ou comment assurer la libre circulation,’’ in Post Script (Commerce), vol. 7, no. 1, Fall 1987. Williams, Bruce, ‘‘Splintered Perspectives: Counterpoint and Sub- jectivity in the Modernist Film Narrative,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville), vol. 15, no. 2, Winter 1991. Grange, M.F., ‘‘Corps filmique entre lisible et visible chez Marguerite Duras,’’ in Cinémas (Montreal), vol. 3, no. 1, Autumn 1992. Vajdovich, G., ‘‘Antiregény és anitfilm,’’ in Filmkultura (Budapest), April 1995. Johnston, Trevor, ‘‘French Lessons,’’ in Time Out (London), 18 October 1995. DuPont, J., ‘‘The Enduring Duras,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 9 April 1996. Obituary, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), April 1996. Obituary, in Kino (Sofia), no. 2, 1996. Obituary, in Classic Images (Muscatine), May 1996. Obituary, in Skrien (Amsterdam), June-July 1996. Roy, André, ‘‘Marguerite Duras, moderne,’’ in 24 Images (Montr- eal), no. 82, Summer 1996. Everett, Wendy, ‘‘Director as Composer: Marguerite Duras and the Musical Analogy,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), April 1998. *** As a writer, Marguerite Duras’s work is identified, along with that of such authors as Alain Robbe-Grillet and Jean Cayrol, with the tradition of the New Novel. Duras began working in film as a screenwriter, with an original script for Alain Resnais’s first feature, Hiroshima mon amour. She subsequently wrote a number of film adaptations from her novels. She directed her first film, La Musica, in 1966. If Hiroshima mon amour remains her best-known work in cinema, her later films have won widespread praise for the profound challenge they offer to conventional dramatic narrative. The nature of narrative and the potential contained in a single text are major concerns of Duras’s films. Many of her works have appeared in several forms, as novels, plays, and films. This not only involves adaptations of a particular work, but also extends to cross- referential networks that run through her texts. The film Woman of the Ganges combines elements from three novels—The Ravishing of Lol V. Stein, The Vice-Consul, and L’Amour. India Song was initially written as a play, taking characters from The Vice-Consul and elaborating on the structure of external voices developed in Woman of the Ganges. India Song was made as a film in 1975, and its verbal track was used to generate a second film, Son Nom de Venises dans Calcutta desert. This process of transformation suggests that all works are ‘‘in progress,’’ inherently subject to being reconstructed. This is partly because Duras’s works are more concerned with the quality or intensity of experience than with events per se. The films present narrative rather than a linear, unambiguous sequence of events. In Le Camion, two characters, played by Gerard Depardieu and Duras, sit in a room as the woman describes a movie about a woman who hitches a ride with a truck driver and talks with him for an hour and twenty minutes. This conversation is intercut with scenes of a truck driving around Paris, and stopping for a female hitchhiker (with Depardieu as the driver, and Duras as the hitchhiker). Thus, the verbal description of a potential film is juxtaposed by images of what that film might be. An emphasis on the soundtrack is also a crucial aspect of Duras’s films; her verbal texts are lyrical and are as important as the images. In India Song, sound and image function contrapuntally, and the audi- ence must actively assess the relation between them, reading across the body of the film, noting continuities and disjunctions. The verbal text often refers in past tense to events and characters on screen, as the viewer is challenged to figure out the chronology of events described and depicted—which name on the soundtrack corresponds to which actor, whether the voices belong to on- or off-screen characters, and so forth. In this way the audience participates in the search for a story, constructing possible narratives. As minimal as they are, Duras’s narratives are partially derived from melodrama, focusing on relations between men and women, the nature or structure of desire, and colonialism and imperialism in both literal and metaphoric terms. In pursuing these issues through non- conventional narrative forms, and shifting the burden of discovering meaning to the audience, Duras’s films provide an alternative to conventional ways of watching movies. Her work is seen as exempli- fying a feminine writing practice that challenges the patriarchal domination of classical narrative cinema. In an interview, Duras said, ‘‘I think the future belongs to women. Men have been completely dethroned. Their rhetoric is stale, used up. We must move on to the rhetoric of women, one that is anchored in the organism, in the body.’’ It is this new rhetoric, a new way of communicating, that Duras strives for in her films. —M.B. White DUVIVIER, Julien Nationality: French. Born: Lille, 8 October 1896. Education: Lille University; studied acting in Paris. Career: Worked in André Antoine’s Théatre Libre, then assistant to Antoine as filmmaker, 1916; directed first film, Haceldama ou Le Prix du Sang, 1919; joined ‘‘Film d’Art’’ of Marcel Vandal and Charles Delac, 1925; made The Great Waltz for MGM, Hollywood, 1938; moved to United States, 1940; returned to France, 1945. Died: In auto accident, 26 October 1967. Films as Director: 1919 Haceldama ou Le Prix du Sang (+ sc) 1920 La Réincarnation de Serge Renaudier (negative destroyed by fire before film shown) (+ sc) DUVIVIERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 285 Julien Duvuvier (left) on the set of Anna Karenina 1922 Les Roquevillard (+ sc); L’Ouragan sur la montagne (+ sc); Der unheimliche Gast (Le Logis de l’horreur) (+ sc) 1923 Le Reflet de Claude Mercoeur (+ sc) 1924 Credo ou La Tragédie de Lourdes (+ sc); Coeurs farouches (+ sc); La Machine à refaire la vie (re-released with sound, 1933) (co-d, sc); L’Oeuvre immortelle (+ sc) 1925 L’Abbé Constantin (+ sc); Poil de carotte (+ co-sc) 1926 L’Agonie de Jerusalem (+ sc); L’Homme à l’Hispano 1927 Le Mariage de Mademoiselle Beulemans (+ sc); Le Mystère de la Tour Eiffel (+ sc) 1928 Le Tourbillon de Paris 1929 La Divine croisière (+ sc); Maman Colibri (+ co-sc); La Vie miraculeuse de Thérèse Martin (+ sc); Au bonheur des dames (+ co-sc) (Sound films): 1930 David Golder (+ sc) 1931 Les Cinq Gentlemen maudits (+ sc); Allo Berlin? Ici Paris! (Hallo! Hallo! Hier spricht Berlin) (+ sc); Die funf verfluchten Gentlemen (German version) (+ sc) 1932 Poil de carotte (remake) (+ sc); La Tête d’un homme (+ co-sc) 1933 Le Petit Roi (+ sc); Le Paquebot ‘Tenacity’ (+ co-sc) 1934 Maria Chapdelaine (+ sc) 1935 Golgotha (+ sc, adapt); La Bandera (+ co-sc) 1936 L’Homme du jour (+ co-sc); Golem (Le Golem) (+ co-sc); La Belle équipe (+ co-sc) 1937 Pépé-le-Moko (+ co-sc); Un Carnet de bal (+ sc) 1938 The Great Waltz (Toute la ville danse) (+ sc); La Fin du jour (+ co-sc): Marie Antoinette (Van Dyke, d uncredited, sc) 1939 La Charrette Fant?me (+ sc) 1940 Untel père et fils (+ co-sc) 1941 Lydia (+ sc, co-story) 1942 Tales of Manhattan (+ co-sc) 1943 Flesh and Fantasy (+ co-pr) 1944 The Imposter (+ sc) 1946 Panique (+ co-sc) 1948 Anna Karenina (+ co-sc) 1949 Au royaume des cieux (+ sc, pr) 1950 Black Jack (+ co-sc, pr); Sous le ciel de Paris (+ co-sc) 1951 Le Petit Monde de Don Camillo (Il piccolo mondo di Don Camillo) (+ co-sc) DUVIVIER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 286 1952 La Fête à Henriette (+ co-sc) 1953 Le Retour de Don Camillo (Il ritorno di Don Camillo) (+ co-sc) 1954 L’Affaire Maurizius (+ sc) 1955 Marianne de ma jeunesse (+ sc) 1956 Voice le temps des assassins (+ co-sc) 1957 L’Homme à l’imperméable (+ co-sc); Pot Bouille (+ co-sc) 1958 La Femme et le pantin (+ sc, co-adapt) 1959 Marie Octobre (+ co-sc) 1960 Das kunstseidene M?dchen (La Grande Vie) (+ co-sc); Boule- vard (+ co-sc) 1962 La Chambre ardente (+ co-sc); Le Diable et les dix commandements (+ co-sc) 1963 Chair de poule (+ co-sc) 1967 Diaboliquement v?tre (+ sc, co-adapt) Other Films: 1918 Les Travailleurs de la mer (Antoine) (asst d) 1920 L’Agonie des aigles (Bernard-Deschamps) (adaptation); La Terre (Antoine) (asst d) 1921 Crépuscule d’épouvante (Etiévant) (sc) 1922 L’Arlésienne (Antoine) (asst d) 1924 La Nuit de la revanche (Etiévant) (story) 1946 Collège swing (Amours, délices et orgues) (Berthomieu) (co-sc) Publications By DUVIVIER: articles— ‘‘Un Réalisateur compare deux méthodes,’’ interview with Pierre Leprohon, in Cinémonde (Paris), 6 May 1946. ‘‘De la création à la mise en scène,’’ in Cinémonde (Paris), Christ- mas 1946. ‘‘Julien Duvivier: ‘Pourquoi j’ai trahi Zola,’’’ interview with Yvonne Baby, in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 31 October 1957. Reminiscences in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 February 1977. On DUVIVIER: books— Chirat, Raymond, Julien Duvivier, Lyon, 1968. Leprohon, Pierre, ‘‘Julien Duvivier,’’ in Anthologie du cinéma, vol. 4, Paris, 1969. On DUVIVIER: articles— Aubriant, Michel, ‘‘Julien Duvivier,’’ in Cinémonde (Paris), 28 November 1952. ‘‘Débat sur Duvivier,’’ in Arts (Paris), 18 April 1956. Epstein, Marie, ‘‘Comment ils travaillent? Julien Duvivier,’’ in Technique Cinématographique (Paris), December 1958. Marcabru, P., ‘‘Les Fran?ais à Hollywood,’’ in Arts (Paris), 8 Febru- ary 1961. Obituary in New York Times, 30 October 1967. Renoir, Jean, ‘‘Duvivier, le professionel,’’ in Le Figaro Littéraire (Paris), 6 November 1967. Amengual, Barthélemy, ‘‘Défense de Duvivier,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Perpignan), Spring 1975. ‘‘Pépé le Moko Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 June 1981. Simsolo, Noel, ‘‘A propos de Julien Duvivier,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), November 1981. ‘‘Special Mac Orlan; La Bandera, Julian Duvivier,’’ in L’Avant- Scène du Cinéma (Paris), April 1982. Douin, Jean-Luc, ‘‘Duvivier, la mauvaise reputation,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 25 January 1986. Pernod, P., ‘‘Carrousels et noeuds coulants (sur Julien Duvivier),’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 359, January 1991. Masson, Alain, and others, ‘‘Julien Duvivier,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 429, November 1996. Borger, Lenny, ‘‘Genius Is Just a Word,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 8, no. 9, September 1998. On DUVIVIER: film— Viallaet, Pierre, and Marcel l’Herbier, Portraits filmées . . . Julien Duvivier (for television), 1953. *** No one speaks of Julien Duvivier without apologizing. So many of his fifty-odd films are embarrassing to watch that it is hard to believe he was ever in charge of his career in the way we like to imagine Renoir or Clair were in charge of theirs. But Duvivier had neither the luxury nor the contacts to direct his career. He began and remained a yeoman in the industry. A director at the Théatre Antoine in the teens, he began his film career in 1922 and made over a score of silent films, mainly melodramas. From the first he separated himself from the experiments in narration and visual style that characterized much of that period. Duvivier’s reputation as a reputable, efficient director jumped in the sound era when he made a string of small but successful films (David Golder, Les Cinq Gentilhommes maudits, Allo Berlin? Ici Paris!, Poil de carotte, La Tête d’un homme). Evidently his flair for the melodramatic and his ability to control powerful actors put him far ahead of the average French director trying to cope with the problems of sound. But in this era, as always, Duvivier discriminated little among the subjects he filmed. This aspect was most evident in 1935. First came Golgotha, a throwback to the religious films he made in the silent era, and now completely outmoded. Duvivier struggles to energize the static tableaux the film settles into. He moves his camera wildly, but seldom reaches for a key closeup or for an authentic exchange among his actors. It is all picture postcards, or rather holy cards, set off to Jacques Ibert’s operatic score. This solemn, even bombastic, film could not be farther from the swiftness and authentic feeling of the romantic Foreign Legion film La Bandera made the same year. Where Golgotha is an official presentation of French cinema, La Bandera seems more intimate, more in the spirit of the times. Its success was only the first of a set of astounding films that include La Belle équipe, Pépé-le-Moko, Un DWANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 287 Carnet de bal, and Le Fin du jour. It is tempting to surmise that cultural history and Julien Duvivier came for once into perfect coincidence in this age of poetic realism. Like Michael Curtiz and Casablanca, Duvivier’s style and the actors who played out the roles of his dramas spoke for a whole generation. In France it was a better generation, vaguely hopeful with the popular front, but expecting the end of day. Duvivier’s contribution to these films extends beyond the direc- tion of actors. Every film contains at least one scene of remarkable expressiveness, like the death of Regis in Pépé-Le-Moko, gunned down by his own victim with the jukebox blaring. Duvivier’s sureness of pace in this era brought him a Hollywood contract even before the Nazi invasion forced him to leave France. Without the strong person- ality of Renoir or Clair, and with far more experience in genre pictures, Duvivier fit in rather well with American film production methods. He deplored the lack of personal control or even personal contribution in the industry, but he acquitted himself well until the Liberation. Hoping to return to the glory years of poetic realism, Duvivier’s first postwar project in France replicated the essence of its style. Panique featured sparse sets, an atmosphere that dominated a reduced but significant murder drama, and the evocative work of Michel Simon and Vivian Romance in an offbeat policier from Simenon. But the country had changed. The film failed, and Duvivier began what would become a lifelong search for the missing formula. With varying degrees of box office success he turned out contemporary and historical comedies and melodramas; the only one which put him in the spotlight was Don Camillo with Fernandel. Believing far more in experience, planning, and hard work than in spontaneity and genius, Duvivier never relaxed. Every film taught him something and, by rights, he should have ended a better director than ever. But he will be remembered for those five years in the late 1930s, a period when every choice he made in the realms of script and direction was in tune with the romantically pessimistic sensibility of the country. —Dudley Andrew DWAN, Allan Nationality: American. Born: Joseph Aloysius Dwan in Toronto, Canada, 3 April 1885; family moved to United States, 1893. Educa- tion: North Division High School, Chicago; Notre Dame University, Indiana, degree in electrical engineering, 1907. Family: Married 1) Pauline Bush, 1915 (divorced 1920); 2) Marie Shelton, early 1920s (died 1954). Career: As illuminating engineer work on mercury vapor arc light led to association with Essanay film company, 1909; wrote stories while supervising lighting; American Film Company (‘‘Flying A’’) formed by Essanay staff, Dwan joined as chief scenario editor, 1910; signed to Universal Pictures, 1913; signed with Famous Players Company, New York, 1914; joined Triangle Company under supervision of D.W. Griffith, 1915; worked in England, 1932–34; trained camera units for U.S. Armed Services photographic division, 1943; contracted to Republic Pictures, 1945–54. Died: In Woodland Hills, California, 21 December 1981. Films as Director (incomplete list; Dwan estimated 1,850 films): 1911 Branding a Bad Man and A Western Dreamer (split reel) (+ pr, sc); A Daughter of Liberty and A Trouper’s Heart (split reel) (+ pr, sc); Rattlesnakes and Gunpowder and The Ranch Tenor (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Sheepman’s Daugh- ter (+ pr, sc); The Sagebrush Phrenologist and The Elopements on Double L Ranch (split reel) (+ pr, sc); $5,000 Reward—Dead or Alive (+ pr, sc); The Witch of the Range (+ pr, sc); The Cowboy’s Ruse and Law and Order on Bar L Ranch (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Yiddisher Cowboy and The Bronco Buster’s Bride (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Hermit’s Gold (+ pr, sc); The Actress and the Cowboys and The Sky Pilot’s Intemperance (split reel) (+ pr, sc); A Western Waif (+ pr, sc); The Call of the Open Range (+ pr, sc); The School Ma’am of Snake and The Ranch Chicken (split reel) (+ pr, sc); Cupid in Chaps (+ pr, sc); The Outlaw’s Trail (+ pr, sc); The Ranchman’s Nerve (+ pr, sc); When East Comes West (+ pr, sc); The Cowboy’s Deliverance (+ pr, sc); The Cattle Thief’s Brand (+ pr, sc); The Parting Trails (+ pr, sc); The Cattle Rustler’s End (+ pr, sc); Cattle, Gold, and Oil (+ pr, sc); The Ranch Girl (+ pr, sc); The Poisoned Flume (+ pr, sc); The Brand of Fear (+ pr, sc): The Blotted Brand (+ pr, sc); Auntie and the Cowboys (+ pr, sc); The Western Doctor’s Peril (+ pr, sc); The Smuggler and the Girl (+ pr, sc); The Cowboy and the Artist (+ pr, sc); Three Million Dollars (+ pr, sc); The Stage Robbers of San Juan (+ pr, sc); The Mother of the Ranch (+ pr, sc); The Gunman (+ pr, sc); The Claim Jumpers (+ pr, sc); The Circular Fence (+ pr, sc); The Rustler Sheriff (+ pr, sc); The Love of the West (+ pr, sc); The Trained Nurse at Bar Z (+ pr, sc); The Miner’s Wife (+ pr, sc); The Land Thieves (+ pr, sc); The Cowboy and the Outlaw (+ pr, sc); Three Daughters of the West and Caves of La Jolla (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Lonely Range (+ pr, sc); The Horse Thief’s Bigamy (+ pr, sc): The Trail of the Eucalyptus (+ pr, sc); The Stronger Man (+ pr, sc); The Water War (+ pr, sc); The Three Shell Game (+ pr, sc); The Mexican (+ pr, sc); The Eastern Cowboy (+ pr, sc); The Way of the West (+ pr, sc); The Test (+ pr, sc); The Master of the Vineyard (+ pr, sc); Sloppy Bill of the Rollicking R (+ pr, sc); The Sheriff’s Sisters (+ pr, sc); The Angel of Paradise Ranch (+ pr, sc); The Smoke of the 45 (+ pr, sc); The Man Hunt (+ pr, sc); Santa Catalina, Magic Isle of the Pacific (+ pr, sc); The Last Notch (+ pr, sc); The Gold Lust (+ pr, sc); The Duel of the Candles (+ pr, sc); Bonita of El Cajon (+ pr, sc); The Lawful Holdup (+ pr, sc); Battleships (+ pr, sc); Dams and Water- ways (+ pr, sc) 1912 A Midwinter Trip to Los Angeles (+ pr, sc); The Misadven- tures of a Claim Agent and Bronco Busting for Flying A Pictures (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Winning of La Mesa (+ pr, sc); The Locket (+ pr, sc); The Relentless Outlaw (+ pr, sc); Justice of the Sage (+ pr, sc); Objections Overruled (+ pr, sc); The Mormon (+ pr, sc); Love and Lemons (+ pr, sc); The Best Policy (+ pr, sc); The Real Estate Fraud (+ pr, sc); The Grubstake Mortgage (+ pr, sc); Where Broadway Meets the Mountains (+ pr, sc); An Innocent Grafter (+ pr, sc); Society and Chaps (+ pr, sc); The Leap Year Cowboy (+ pr, sc); The Land Baron of San Tee (+ pr sc): An Assisted Elopement (+ pr, sc); From the DWAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 288 Allan Dwan (left) with Gloria Swanson Four Hundred to the Herd (+ pr, sc); The Broken Ties (+ pr, sc): After School (+ pr, sc); A Bad Investment (+ pr, sc); The Full Value (+ pr, sc); The Tramp’s Gratitude (+ pr, sc); Fidelity (+ pr, sc); Winter Sports and Pastimes of Coronado Beach (+ pr, sc); The Maid and the Man (+ pr, sc); The Cowboy Socialist (+ pr, sc); Checkmate and The Ranchman’s Marathon (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Coward (+ pr, sc); The Distant Relative (+ pr, sc); The Ranch Detective (+ pr, sc); Driftwood (+ pr, sc); The Eastern Girl (+ pr, sc); The Pensioners (+ pr, sc); The End of the Feud (+ pr, sc); The Wedding Dress (+ pr, sc); Mystical Maid of Jamasha Pass (+ pr, sc); The Other Wise Man (+ pr, sc); The Haters (+ pr, sc); The Thread of Life (+ pr, sc); The Wandering Gypsy (+ pr, sc); The Reward of Valor (+ pr, sc); The Brand (+ pr, sc); The Green–eyed Monster (+ pr, sc); Cupid through Padlocks (+ pr, sc); For the Good of Her Men (+ pr, sc); The Simple Love (+ pr, sc); The Weaker Brother and Fifty–Mile Auto Contest (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Wordless Message (+ pr, sc); The Evil Inheritance (+ pr, sc); The Marauders (+ pr, sc); The Girl Back Home (+ pr, sc); Under False Pretences (+ pr, sc); Where There’s a Heart (+ pr, sc); The Vanishing Race (+ pr, sc); The Fatal Mirror and Point Loma, Old Town (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Tell-Tale Shells (+ pr, sc); Indian Jealousy and San Diego (split reel) (+ pr, sc); The Canyon Dweller (+ pr, sc); It Pays to Wait (+ pr, sc); A Life for a Kiss (+ pr, sc); The Meddlers (+ pr, sc); The Girl and the Gun (+ pr, sc); The Battleground (+ pr, sc); The Bad Man and the Ranger (+ pr, sc); The Outlaw Colony (+ pr, sc); The Land of Death (+ pr, sc); The Bandit of Point Loma (+ pr, sc); The Jealous Rage (+ pr, sc); The Will of James Waldron (+ pr, sc); The House That Jack Built (+ pr, sc); Curtiss’s School of Aviation (+ pr, sc); The Stepmother (+ pr, sc); The Odd Job Man (+ pr, sc); The Liar (+ pr, sc); The Greaser and the Weakling (+ pr, sc); The Stranger at Coyote (+ pr, sc); The Dawn of Passion (+ pr, sc); The Vengeance That Failed (+ pr, sc); The Fear (+ pr, sc); The Foreclosure (+ pr, sc); White Treachery (+ pr, sc); Their Hero Son (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne’s Ward (+ pr, sc); Father’s Favorite (+ pr, sc); Jack of Diamonds (+ pr, sc); The Reformation of Sierra Smith (+ pr, sc); The Promise (+ pr, sc); The New Cowpuncher (+ pr, sc); The Best Man Wins (+ pr, sc); The Wooers of Mountain Kate (+ pr, sc); DWANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 289 One, Two, Three (+ pr, sc); The Wanderer (+ pr, sc); Maiden and Men (+ pr, sc); God’s Unfortunate (+ pr, sc); Man’s Calling (+ pr, sc); The Intrusion at Lompoc (+ pr, sc); The Thief’s Wife (+ pr, sc); The Would-be Heir (+ pr, sc); Jack’s Word (+ pr, sc); Her Own Country (+ pr, sc); Pals (+ pr, sc); The Animal Within (+ pr, sc); The Law of God (+ pr, sc); Nell of the Pampas (+ pr, sc); The Daughters of Senor Lopez (+ pr, sc); The Power of Love (+ pr, sc); The Recognition (+ pr, sc); Blackened Hills (+ pr, sc); The Loneliness of Neglect (+ pr, sc); Paid in Full (+ pr, sc); Ranch Life on the Range (+ pr, sc); The Man from the East (+ pr, sc); The Horse Thief (+ pr, sc); The Good Love and the Bad (+ pr, sc) 1913 The Fraud That Failed (+ pr, sc); Another Man’s Wife (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne’s Inheritance (+ pr, sc); Their Master- piece (+ pr, sc); His Old-Fashioned Mother (+ pr, sc); Where Destiny Guides (+ pr, sc); The Silver-plated Gun (+ pr, sc); A Rose of Old Mexico (+ pr, sc); Building the Great Los Angeles Aqueduct (+ pr, sc); Women Left Alone (+ pr, sc); Andrew Jackson (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne’s Vanity (+ pr, sc); The Fugitive (+ pr, sc); The Romance (+ pr, sc); The Finer Things (+ pr, sc); Love Is Blind (+ pr, sc); Then the Light Fades (+ pr, sc); High and Low (+ pr, sc); The Greater Love (+ pr, sc); The Jocular Winds (+ pr, sc); The Transgression of Manuel (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne, Detective (+ pr, sc); The Orphan’s Mine (+ pr, sc); When a Woman Won’t (+ pr, sc); An Eastern Flower (+ pr, sc); Cupid Never Ages (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne’s Beauty (+ pr, sc); The Renegade’s Heart (+ pr, sc); Matches (+ pr, sc); The Mute Witness (+ pr, sc); Cupid Throws a Brick (+ pr, sc); Woman’s Honor (+ pr, sc); Suspended Sentence (+ pr, sc); In Another’s Nest (+ pr, sc); The Ways of Fate (+ pr, sc); Boobs and Bricks (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne’s Trust (+ pr, sc); Oil on Troubled Waters (+ pr, sc); The Road to Ruin (+ pr, sc); The Brothers (+ pr, sc); Human Kindness (+ pr, sc); Youth and Jealousy (+ pr, sc); Angel of the Canyons (+ pr, sc); The Great Harmony (+ pr, sc); Her Innocent Marriage (+ pr, sc); Calamity Anne Parcel Post (+ pr, sc); The Ashes of Three (+ pr, sc); On the Border (+ pr, sc); Her Big Story (+ pr, sc); When Luck Changes (+ pr, sc); The Wishing Seat (+ pr, sc); Hearts and Horses (+ pr, sc); The Reward of Courage (+ pr, sc); The Soul of a Thief (+ pr, sc); The Marine Law (+ pr, sc); The Road to Success (+ pr, sc); The Spirit of the Flag; The Call to Arms (+ sc); Women and War; The Power Flash of Death (+ sc); The Picket Guard; Mental Suicide; Man’s Duty; The Ani- mal (+ sc); The Wall of Money; The Echo of a Song; Criminals; The Restless Spirit (+ sc); Jewels of a Sacrifice; Back to Life; Red Margaret, Moonshiner; Bloodhounds of the North; He Called Her In (+ sc); The Menace (+ sc); The Chase; The Battle of Wills 1914 The Lie; The Honor of the Mounted; Remember Mary Magdalene (+ sc); Discord and Harmony; The Menace to Carlotta; The Embezzler (+ sc); The Lamb, the Woman, the Wolf (+ sc); The End of the Feud; Tragedy of Whispering Creek; The Unlawful Trade; The Forbidden Room; The Hopes of Blind Alley; The Great Universal Mystery; Richelieu (+ sc); Wildflower; The Country Chairman (+ sc); The Small–Town Girl; The Straight Road; The Conspiracy; The Unwelcome Mrs. Hatch; The Man on the Case 1915 The Dancing Girl; David Harum; The Love Route; The Commanding Officer; May Blossom; The Pretty Sister of Jose; A Girl of Yesterday; The Foundling; Jordan Is a Hard Road (+ sc) 1916 Betty of Greystone; The Habit of Happiness (Laugh and the World Laughs) (+ sc); The Good Bad Man (Passing Through); An Innocent Magdalene; The Half-Breed; Man- hattan Madness; Fifty-Fifty (+ sc) 1917 Panthea (+ sc); The Fighting Odds; A Modern Musketeer (+ sc) 1918 Mr. Fix-It (+ sc); Bound in Morocco (+ sc); He Comes up Smiling 1919 Cheating Cheaters; Getting Mary Married; The Dark Star; Soldiers of Fortune 1920 The Luck of the Irish; The Forbidden Thing (+ pr, co-sc) 1921 A Perfect Crime (+ pr, sc); A Broken Doll (+ pr, sc); The Scoffer (+ pr); The Sin of Martha Queed (+ pr, sc); In the Heart of a Fool (+ pr) 1922 The Hidden Woman (+ pr); Superstition (+ pr); Robin Hood 1923 The Glimpses of the Moon (+ pr); Lawful Larceny (+ pr); Zaza (+ pr); Big Brother (+ pr) 1924 A Society Scandal (+ pr); Manhandled (+ pr); Her Love Story (+ pr); Wages of Virtue; Argentine Love (+ pr) 1925 Night Life in New York (+ pr); Coast of Folly (+ pr); Stage Struck (+ pr) 1926 Sea Horses (+ pr); Padlocked (+ pr); Tin Gods (+ pr); Summer Bachelors (+ pr) 1927 The Music Master (+ pr); West Point (+ pr); The Joy Girl (+ pr); East Side, West Side (+ sc); French Dressing (+ pr) 1928 The Big Noise (+ pr) 1929 The Iron Mask; Tide of Empire; The Far Call; Frozen Justice; South Sea Rose 1930 What a Widow! (+ pr); Man to Man 1931 Chances; Wicked 1932 While Paris Sleeps 1933 Her First Affaire; Counsel’s Opinion 1934 The Morning After (I Spy); Hollywood Party (uncredited) 1935 Black Sheep (+ sc); Navy Wife 1936 Song and Dance Man; Human Cargo; High Tension; 15 Maiden Lane 1937 Woman-Wise; That I May Live; One Mile from Heaven; Heidi 1938 Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm; Josette; Suez 1939 The Three Musketeers; The Gorilla; Frontier Marshal 1940 Sailor’s Lady; Young People; Trail of the Vigilantes 1941 Look Who’s Laughing (+ pr); Rise and Shine 1942 Friendly Enemies; Here We Go Again (+ pr) 1943 Around the World (+ pr) 1944 Up in Mabel’s Room; Abroad with Two Yanks 1945 Brewster’s Millions; Getting Gertie’s Garter 1946 Rendezvous with Annie (+ co-pr) 1947 Calendar Girl (+ co-pr); Northwest Outpost (+ co-pr); Driftwood 1948 The Inside Story (+ pr); Angel in Exile 1949 Sands of Iwo Jima 1950 Surrender (+ co-pr) 1951 Belle le Grand; The Wild Blue Yonder 1952 I Dream of Jeannie (with the Light Brown Hair); Montana Belle 1953 Woman They Almost Lynched; Sweethearts on Parade (+ co-pr) 1954 Flight Nurse; Silver Lode; Passion; Cattle Queen of Montana DWAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 290 1955 It’s Always Sunday (for Screen Director’s Playhouse televi- sion series); Escape to Burma; Pearl of the South Pacific; Tennessee’s Partner 1956 Slightly Scarlet; Hold Back the Night 1957 The River’s Edge; The Restless Breed 1958 Enchanted Island 1961 Most Dangerous Man Alive Publications By DWAN: articles— Interview with F.T. Pope, in Photoplay (New York), September 1923. ‘‘Must Actors Have Temperament?’’ in Motion Picture (New York), February 1926. ‘‘As It Was,’’ in Making Films (New York), June 1971. ‘‘What Directors Are Saying,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), August 1971. ‘‘Angel in Exile: Alan Dwan,’’ interview with G. Morris and H. Mandelbaum, in Bright Lights (Los Angeles), no. 4, 1979. On DWAN: books— Brownlow, Kevin, The Parade’s Gone By, London and New York, 1968. Bogdanovich, Peter, Allan Dwan, the Last Pioneer, New York, 1971. On DWAN: articles— Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Esoterica,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Smith, J.M., ‘‘Allan Dwan,’’ in Brighton Film Review, February 1970. Schickel, Richard, ‘‘Good Days, Good Years,’’ in Harper’s (New York), October 1970. ‘‘Six Pioneers,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), November/December 1972. Dorr, J.H., ‘‘Allan Dwan: Master of the American Folk Art of Filmmaking,’’ in Take One (Montreal), September 1973. Dorr, J., ‘‘The Griffith Tradition,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1974. Biette, J.C., ‘‘Allan Dwan, ou le cinéma nature,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1982. McGillivray, D., obituary, in Films and Filming (London), March 1982. Fornara, B., ‘‘Allan Dwan,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo), May 1991. *** Allan Dwan was a pioneer among pioneers. He, along with men like D.W. Griffith and Cecil B. DeMille, enjoyed careers that spanned the birth and the growth of the American motion picture industry. Active in the industry for over fifty years, Dwan participated in creating at least eight hundred films—his own estimate was 1,850. Most of these were one- to four-reel silents, of which some two-thirds are lost, and for that reason his career remains one which has never been properly assessed. The artistic disparity of his seventy-odd sound films fail to adequately represent this technically innovative, unpretentious, avid storyteller, and his career will surely undergo considerable re-evaluation as the study of film history progresses. It was the scientific aspect of motion pictures that first attracted Dwan to the medium, and in 1909 he joined Essanay as a lighting man. He then joined the American Flying A Company as a writer, but soon found himself directing short films, mostly Westerns. He moved next to Universal, then to Famous Players, where in 1915 he intro- duced the dolly shot for David Harum and directed Mary Pickford in The Foundling. That same year Dwan joined Fine Arts-Triangle, where his films were supervised by D.W. Griffith. He directed many of Griffith’s top stars, including Dorothy Gish in Betty of Greystone and her sister Lillian in An Innocent Magdalene. He once stated how impressed he was with the ‘‘economy of gesture’’ of Griffith’s players. He credits Griffith with developing his clean, spare visual style, while Griffith frequently sought out Dwan for his technical knowledge. One such request resulted in Dwan’s improvising an elevator on a moving track to film the massive sets of Intolerance. Dwan also established his association with Douglas Fairbanks at Fine Arts-Triangle. This professional relationship resulted in collabo- ration on eleven films, including The Half-Breed, A Modern Musket- eer, Bound in Morocco, and the celebrated Robin Hood, described by Robert Sherwood as ‘‘the high-water mark of film production’’ and ‘‘the farthest step that the silent drama has ever taken along the high road to art.’’ In 1923 Dwan directed his favorite film, Big Brother, which was about underprivileged boys, and then embarked on the first of eight buoyant comedies starring Gloria Swanson, the best of which were Zaza and Manhandled. With the arrival of sound, Dwan signed a long-term contract with Fox (1930–41), where he was unfortunately relegated to their B unit except for occasional reprieves—Shirley Temple’s Heidi and Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm, and Suez, much admired for its typhoon sequence. He then signed with producer Edward Small, for whom he directed a delightful quartet of farces— Up in Mabel’s Room, Getting Gertie’s Garter, Abroad with Two Yanks, and Brewster’s Millions. He then unwisely signed an exclu- sive deal with Republic Pictures where, except for Sands of Iwo Jima, his creativity was constricted by studio head Herbert Yates. Moving to RKO, he persevered despite the many obstacles of 1950s filmmaking, churning out entertaining action films. Dwan loved moviemaking and was described as the ‘‘last of the journeyman filmmakers’’ by Richard Roud. Of his self-imposed retirement in 1958, Dwan explained: ‘‘It was no longer a question of ‘Let’s get a bunch of people together and make a picture.’ It’s just a business that I stood as long as I could and I got out of it when I couldn’t stand it any more.’’ —Ronald Bowers 291 E EASTWOOD, Clint Nationality: American. Born: 31 May 1930 in San Francisco, California. Education: Oakland Technical High School; Los Ange- les City College, 1953–54. Military Service: Drafted into the U.S. Army, 1950. Family: Married Maggie Johnson, 1953 (divorced, 1980); one son, one daughter. Career: Under contract with Univer- sal, 1954–55; sporadic work in film, late 1950s; played Rowdy Yates in TV series Rawhide, 1959–65; went to Europe to make three highly successful westerns with Sergio Leone, 1965; returned to U.S., 1967; formed Malpaso production company and directed first film, Play Misty for Me, 1971; first effort as producer, Firefox, 1982; Mayor of Carmel, California, 1986–88. Awards: Chevaliers des Lettres, France, 1985; Academy Awards, Best Director and Best Picture, for Unforgiven, 1992; Fellowship of the British Film Institute, 1993; American Film Institute Life Achievement Award, 1996; Honorary Cesar Award, 1998. Address: Malpaso Productions, 4000 Warner Boulevard, Bur- bank, California 91522, USA. Films as Director: 1971 Play Misty for Me (+ role) 1972 High Plains Drifter (+ role) 1973 Breezy 1975 The Eiger Sanction (+ role) 1976 The Outlaw Josey Wales (+ role) 1977 The Gauntlet (+ role) 1980 Bronco Billy (+ role, song composer) 1982 Firefox (+ role, pr); Honkytonk Man (+ role, pr) 1983 Sudden Impact (+ role, pr) 1985 Pale Rider (+ role, pr) 1986 Heartbreak Ridge (+ role, pr, song composer) 1987 Bird (+ pr) 1990 The Rookie (+ role); White Hunter, Black Heart (+ role, pr) 1992 Unforgiven (+ role, pr, music) 1993 A Perfect World (+ role, pr) 1995 The Bridges of Madison County (+ role, pr) 1997 Absolute Power (+ role, pr); Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil (+pr) 1999 True Crime (+ role, pr) 2000 Space Cowboys (+ role, pr) Other Films: 1955 Francis in the Navy (role); Lady Godiva (role); Revenge of the Creature (role); Tarantula (role) 1956 The First Travelling Saleslady (role); Never Say Goodbye (role); Star in the Dust (role) 1957 Escapade in Japan (role) 1958 Ambush at Cimarron Pass (role); Lefayette Escradille (role) 1964 A Fistful of Dollars (role) 1965 For a Few Dollars More (role) 1966 Il Buono, il brutto, il cattivo (The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (Leone) (role); Le Streghe (role) 1967 Hang ‘em High (role) 1968 Coogan’s Bluff (role) 1969 Paint Your Wagon (role); Where Eagles Dare (role) 1970 Kelly’s Heroes (role); Two Mules for Sister Sara (role) 1971 The Beguiled (role); Dirty Harry (role) 1972 Joe Kidd (role) 1973 Magnum Force (role) 1974 Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (role) 1976 The Enforcer (role) 1978 Every Which Way but Loose (role) 1979 Escape from Alcatraz (role) 1980 Any Which Way You Can (role, song composer) 1984 City Heat (role); Tightrope (role, pr) 1988 The Dead Pool (role, pr); Thelonius Monk: Straight No Chaser (exec pr) 1989 The Pink Cadillac (role) 1993 In the Line of Fire (role) 1996 Wild Bill: Hollywood Maverick (doc) (role) Publications By EASTWOOD: book— Clint Eastwood: Interviews, edited by Kathie Coblentz, Jackson, 1999. By EASTWOOD: articles— Interview with David Thomson in Film Comment, September/Octo- ber 1984. Interview with C. Tesson and O. Assayas in Cahiers du Cinéma, February 1985. Interview with Michel Ciment and Hubert Niograt in Positif, July/ August 1988. Interview with Nat Hentoff in American Film, September 1988. Interview with Allan Hunter in Films and Filming, November/ December 1988. Interview with R. Gentry in Film Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 3, 1989. Interview with Michel Ciment in Positif, no. 351, 1990. Interview with M. Henry in Positif, no. 380, 1992. Interview with David Breskin, in Rolling Stone (New York), 17 September 1992. Interview in Reel West, October/November 1992. Interview with David Wild, in Rolling Stone (New York), 24 August 1995. EASTWOOD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 292 Clint Eastwood Interview with Ric Gentry, in American Cinematographer (Holly- wood), February 1997. Interview with M. Henry, in Positif (Paris), no. 445, 1998. Interview with M. Henry, in Positif (Paris), no. 459, 1999. On EASTWOOD: books— Kaminsky, Stuart, Clint Eastwood, New York, 1974. Agan, Patrick, Clint Eastwood: The Man behind the Myth, New York, 1975. Downing, David, and Gary Herman, Clint Eastwood, All-American Anti-Hero: A Critical Appraisal of the World’s Top Box Office Star and His Films, London, 1977. Ferrari, Philippe, Clint Eastwood, Paris, 1980. Johnstone, Iain, The Man with No Name: Clint Eastwood, London, 1981; revised edition 1988. Zmijewsky, Boris, and Lee Pfeiffer, The Films of Clint Eastwood, Secaucas, NJ, 1982; revised editions, 1988 and 1993. Cole, Gerald, and Peter Williams, Clint Eastwood, London, 1983. Guerif, Francois, Clint Eastwood, Paris, 1983. Rider, Jeffrey, Clint Eastwood, New York, 1987. Lagarde, Helene, Clint Eastwood, Paris, 1988. Weinberger, Michele, Clint Eastwood, Paris, 1989. Frayling, Christopher, Clint Eastwood, London, 1992. Thompson, Douglas, Clint Eastwood: Riding High, Chicago, 1992. Smith, Paul, Clint Eastwood: A Cultural Production, Minneapo- lis, 1993. Bingham, Dennis, Acting Male: Masculinities in the Films of James Stewart, Jack Nicholson, and Clint Eastwood, New Brunswick, NJ, 1994. Gallafent, Edward, Clint Eastwood: Filmmaker and Star, New York, 1994. Ortoli, Philippe, Clint Eastwood: la figure du guerrier, Paris, 1994. Schickel, Richard, Clint Eastwood: A Biography, New York, 1997. On EASTWOOD: articles— Patterson, E., ‘‘Every Which Way but Lucid: The Critique of Author- ity in Clint Eastwood’s Police Films,’’ in Journal of Popular Film, Fall 1982. ‘‘Clint Eastwood section’’ of Positif, January 1985. Kehr, Dave, ‘‘A Fistful of Eastwood,’’ in American Film, March 1985. EASTWOODDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 293 Chevrie, M., and D. J. Wiener, ‘‘Le dernier des cow-boys,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma, March 1987. Holmlund, C., ‘‘Sexuality and Power in Male Doppelganger Cinema: The Case of Clint Eastwood and Tightrope,’’ in Cinema Journal, vol. 26, no. 1, 1986. Bingham, D., ‘‘Men with No Names: Clint Eastwood, the Stranger Persona, Identification, and the Impenetrable Gaze,’’ in Journal of Film and Video, vol. 42, no. 4, 1990. Combs, Richard, ‘‘Shadowing the Hero,’’ in Sight and Sound, October 1992. Tibbetts, J. C., ‘‘Clint Eastwood and the Machinery of Violence,’’ in Literature-Film Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 1, 1993. Biskind, Peter, ‘‘Any Which Way He Can,’’ in Premiere (New York), April 1993. Grenier, Richard, ‘‘Clint Eastwood Goes PC,’’ in Commentary, March 1994. Beard, William, ‘‘Unforgiven and the Uncertainties of the Heroic,’’ in Canadian Journal of Film Studies (Ottawa), vol. 3, no. 2, Autumn 1994. Welsh, James M., ‘‘Fixing the Bridges of Madison County,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), July 1995. Schickel, Richard, Cathleen Murphy, and Richard Combs, ‘‘Clint on the Back Nine/The Good, the Bad & the Ugly/Old Ghosts,’’ in Film Comment (New York), May-June 1996. Burdeau, Emmanuel, ‘‘Physique des auteurs,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1996. Greene, R., ‘‘Power and the Glory,’’ in Boxoffice (Chicago), Janu- ary 1997. Metz, Walter, ‘‘‘Another Being We Have Created Called ‘‘Us’’’: Point of View, Melancholia, and the Joking Unconscious in The Bridges of Madison County,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Austin, Texas), Spring 1997. Axelrad, Catherine, and Michel Cieutat, ‘‘Clint Eastwood,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1997. McReynolds, Douglas J., ‘‘Alive and Well: Western Myth in Western Movies,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), January 1998. Plantinga, Carl, ‘‘Spectacles of Death: Clint Eastwood and Violence in Unforgiven,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), Winter 1998. *** In 1992, after almost forty years in the business, Clint Eastwood finally received Oscar recognition. Unforgiven brought him the awards for Best Achievement in Directing and for Best Picture, along with a nomination for Best Actor. Indeed, this strikingly powerful Western was nominated for no less than nine Academy Awards, Gene Hackman collecting Best Supporting Actor for his performance as the movie’s ruthless marshall, ‘‘Little Bill’’ Daggett, and Joel Cox taking the Oscar for editing. It seems appropriate, therefore, that this film, which brought him such recognition, should end with the inscription ‘‘Dedicated to Sergio and Don.’’ For without the intervention and influence of his two ‘‘mentors,’’ directors Sergio Leone and Don Siegel, it is difficult to imagine Eastwood achieving his present respectability, let alone emerging as the only major star of the modern era who has become a better director than he ever was an actor. That is not to belittle Eastwood, who has always been generous in crediting Leone and Siegel, and who is certainly far more than a passive inheritor of their directorial visions. Even in his Rawhide days of the 1950s and early 1960s he wanted to direct; more than once Eastwood has told of his attempts to persuade that series’ producers to let him shoot some of the action rather more ambitiously than was the TV norm. Not surprisingly, they were reluctant, but they did in the end allow him to make trailers for upcoming episodes. He was not to take on a full-fledged directorial challenge until 1971 and Play Misty for Me, but in the intervening years he had become a massive box- office attraction as an actor, first with Leone in Europe in the three famous and founding ‘‘spaghetti westerns,’’ and then in a series of films with Siegel back in the United States, most significantly Dirty Harry. It is not easy to untangle the respective influences of his mentors. In general terms, because they both contributed to the formation of Eastwood’s distinctive screen persona, they helped him to crystallize an image which, as a director, he would so often use as a foil. The Italian Westerns’ ‘‘man with no name,’’ and his more anguished urban equivalent given expression in Dirty Harry’s eponymous anti-hero, have provided Eastwood with well-established and economical starting characters for so many of his performances. In directing himself, furthermore, he has used that persona with a degree of irony and distance. Sometimes, especially in his Westerns, that has meant leaning toward stylization and almost operatic exag- geration (High Plains Drifter, Pale Rider, the last section of Unforgiven), though rarely reaching Leone’s extremes of delirious overstatement. On other occasions, it has seen him play on the tension between the seemingly assertive masculinity of the Eastwood image and the strong female characters who are so often featured in his films (Play Misty for Me, The Gauntlet, Heartbreak Ridge and, in part at least, The Bridges of Madison County). It is, of course, notoriously difficult to both direct and star in a movie. Where Eastwood has succeeded in that combination (not always the case) it has depended significantly on his inventive building on the Eastwood persona. It is important to give Eastwood full credit for this inventiveness in any attempt to assess his work. His best films as a director have a richness to them, not just stylistically—though in those respects he has learned well from Leone’s concern with lighting and composition and from Siegel’s way with in-frame movement, editing, and tight narration—but also a moral complexity which belies the one- dimensionality of the Eastwood image. The protagonists in his better films, like Josey Wales in The Outlaw Josey Wales, Highway in Heartbreak Ridge, Munny in Unforgiven, even Charlie Parker in the flawed Bird, are not simple men in either their virtues or their failings. Eastwood’s fondness for narratives of revenge and redemption, furthermore, allows him to draw upon a rich generic vein in American cinema, a tradition with a built-in potential for character development and for evoking human complexity without giving way to art-film portentousness. In these respects Eastwood is the modern inheritor of traditional Hollywood directorial values, once epitomised in the transparent style of a John Ford, Howard Hawks, or John Huston (himself the subject of Eastwood’s White Hunter, Black Heart), and passed on to Eastwood by that next-generation carrier of the tradition, Don Siegel. For these filmmakers, as for Eastwood, the action movie, the Western, the thriller were opportunities to explore character, motivation, and human frailty within a framework of accessible entertainment. Of course, all of them were also capable of ‘‘quieter’’ films, harnessing the same commitment to craft, the same attention to detail, in the service of less action-driven narratives, just as Eastwood did with The Bridges of Madison County. And all of them, too, could make films which were less than convincing, though rarely without some quality, as Eastwood has done more recently with the overwrought Absolute Power and the rather unfocused Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. But in the end their and Eastwood’s real art was to draw upon EGOYAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 294 Hollywood’s genre traditions and make of them unique and percep- tive studies of human beings under stress. Though his directorial career has been uneven, at his best Eastwood has proved a more than worthy carrier of this flame. —Andrew Tudor EGOYAN, Atom Nationality: Canadian. Born: Cairo, Egypt, 19 July 1960; immi- grated to Canada, 1962; naturalized Canadian citizen. Education: Trinity College, University of Toronto, B.A., 1982. Family: Married Arsinee Khanjian (an actress); son: Arshile. Career: Associated with Playwrights Unit in Toronto, Ontario, Canada; director of Ego Film Arts in Toronto, 1982—; director of episodes of television shows such as Alfred Hitchcock Presents, 1985, Twilight Zone, 1985, Friday the 13th, 1987, and Yo-Yo Ma Inspired by Bach, 1997; director of stage productions, including Salome, 1996; member of jury, Cannes International Film Festival, 1996. Awards: Grant from University of Toronto’s Hart House Film Board; prize from Canadian National Exhibition’s film festival, for Howard in Particular; grants from Canadian Council and Ontario Arts Council; Gold Ducat Award, Mannheim International Film Week Festival, 1984, for Next of Kin; Toronto City Award for excellence in a Canadian production, Tor- onto Film Festival, 1987, International Critics Award for Best Feature Film, Uppsala Film Festival, 1988, and Priz Alcan from Festival du Nouveau Cinema, 1988, all for Family Viewing; prize for best screenplay, Vancouver International Film Festival, 1989, for Speak- ing Parts; Special Jury Prize, Moscow Film Festival, Golden Spike, Vallodolid Film Festival, Toronto City Award, Toronto Film Festi- val, and award for best Canadian film, Sudbury Film Festival, all 1991, all for The Adjuster; Golden Gate Award, San Francisco Film Festival, 1992, for Gross Misconduct; prize for best film in ‘‘new cinema,’’ International Jury for At Cinema and prize from Berlin International Film Festival, both 1994, both for Calendar; Genie awards for best picture, best director, and best writer, International Film Critics Award, Cannes Film Festival, Prix de la Critique for best foreign film, and Toronto City Award, Toronto International Film Festival, all 1994, all for Exotica. Address: Ego Film Arts, 80 Niagara St., Toronto, Ontario M5V 1C5, Canada. Films as Director: 1979 Howard in Particular (+ sc, ed, ph, ro as voices) 1980 After Grad with Dad (+ sc, ed, ph, mus) 1981 Peep Show (+ sc, ed, ph) 1982 Open House (+ sc, ed) 1984 Next of Kin (+ sc, pr, ed, mus) 1985 In This Corner (TV); Men: A Passion Playground 1987 Family Viewing (+ sc, pr, ed) 1988 Looking for Nothing (TV) (+ sc) 1989 Speaking Parts (+ sc, pr) 1991 Montreal vu par. . . (Montreal Sextet) (segment ‘‘En passant’’) (+ sc); The Adjuster (+ sc, mus) 1993 Gross Misconduct (TV); Calendar (+ sc, pr, ed, ph, ro as Photographer) 1994 Exotica (+ sc, pr) 1995 A Portrait of Arshile (ro) 1997 Bach Cello Suite νm4: Sarabande; The Sweet Hereafter (De beaux lendemains) (+ sc, pr) 1999 Felicia’s Journey (+ sc) 2000 Krapp’s Last Tape (+ sc) Other Films: 1985 Knock! Knock! (ro); Men: A Passion Playground (ed, ph) 1994 Camilla (as Director) 1995 Curtis’s Charm (exec pr) 1996 The Stupids (as TV Studio Guard) 1998 Jack & Jill (exec pr); Babyface (exec pr) Publications By EGOYAN: articles— ‘‘Ladies and Gentleman of the Jury,’’ in Cinema Canada, no. 156, October 1988. Interview with A. Pastor and D. Turco, in Filmcritica (Montepulciano), vol. 40, no. 396–397, June-July 1989. Grugeau, Gérard, ‘‘Entretien avec Atom Egoyan: les élans du coeur,’’ in 24 Images (Montréal), no. 46, November-December 1989. Interview with E. Castiel, in Séquences (Montréal), no. 144, Janu- ary 1990. ‘‘Théorème de Pasolini,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 400, June 1994. Interview with Marcus Rothe, in Jeune Cinema (Paris), no. 231, April 1995. ‘‘Family Romance,’’ interview with Richard Porton, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 23, no. 2, December 1997. With Tony Rayns, in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 7, no. 10, October 1997. Interview with S. B. Katz, in Written By (Los Angeles), vol. 2, February 1998. On EGOYAN: articles— 24 Images, Summer 1989. Film Comment, November-December 1989. New Statesman and Society, 22 September 1989. Nation, 13 July 1992. Maclean’s, 3 October 1994. Nation, 21 March 1994. Entertainment Weekly, 24 March 1995. Film Comment, November-December 1995. Film Comment, January-February 1998. The Observer, 9 April 1995. The Observer, 28 September 1997 Positif, special section, October 1997. Kino (Warsaw), February 1998. *** Given Atom Egoyan’s background and family history, the chief preoccupations of his films might seem all but inevitable. Born in Cairo to Armenian parents, he was taken to Canada as a child and grew up in Victoria, British Columbia, a town so full of British EGOYANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 295 Atom Egoyan expatriates it seemed like a colonial outpost. While he was still a child his father, an artist, began an extra-marital affair with a woman whose three children were all fatally ill. Small wonder if his films deal so insistently with problems of ethnic identity, broken families, aliena- tion, loss, and death. Add to these themes, at least in his earlier films, an uneasy fascination with the role of visual media in the modern world. Video in particular serves for Egoyan’s characters as an escape route, a form of do-it-yourself therapy that allows them to evade the unsatisfactory reality around them. In Family Viewing a husband and wife lie semi- naked side by side, neither touching nor speaking, grimly watching videos of their earlier couplings that the man has taped over scenes of his son’s childhood. When not viewing tapes, he calls up phone-sex lines. Two female characters in Speaking Parts, obsessed with a wannabe actor (and part-time gigolo), spend more time watching him on video than in the flesh. In The Adjuster, Egoyan’s most dreamlike and elusive film, a censor secretly videotapes the porn films she’s being shown—experience at third hand. Repeatedly, Egoyan’s characters try to reconstruct reality to fit their own yearnings. The protagonist of his first feature, Next of Kin, bored with his own bland WASP background, reinvents himself as the long-lost son of an expatriate Armenian family, It’s typical of Egoyan’s deadpan humour that the young man is accepted without question, though not looking remotely Armenian. Identity is a charade, and not even a well-acted one. Elliptical and enigmatic, intricately structured, Egoyan’s films have sometimes been called cold and contrived; though as Kent Jones notes, objecting to Egoyan’s work being contrived ‘‘is a little like reprimanding Monet for his loose brushwork or dismissing Schoenberg for being atonal.’’ As for ‘‘coldness,’’ Egoyan resolutely shuns sentimentality, even when dealing with so emotive a subject as the death of children, but there’s a soulful, troubled melancholy to his films that’s counterbalanced, but never cancelled out, by a concurrent sense of the absurd. This ambiguity of tone can often be unsettling, an effect the director fully intends. He stresses that his films are ‘‘designed to make the viewer self-conscious. I revel in that .... The viewer has to invest themself in what they’re seeing because then the emotions you are able to engage in are that much stronger.’’ The films often touch on disturbing territory—voyeurism, incest, paedophilia—and with their fragmented structure, give up their secrets only gradually. Sometimes, as in Exotica, a mordant study of need and exploitation set largely in a strip club, it’s not until the final EISENSTEIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 296 moments that we realise the full significance of what we’ve been watching—and not always even then. This mirrors the troubled outlook of his characters who rarely see anything whole, least of all themselves. Hilditch, lonely serial killer of lonely girls in Felicia’s Journey, never thinks of himself as a monster. In his own eyes he’s the kindest of men—just as Noah Render, the eponymous insurance man in The Adjuster, believes he’s acting out of pure compassion in sexually exploiting his clients. To date, Egoyan’s most explicit statement of the cultural and emotional dislocation central to all his films comes in Calendar, where he ironically casts himself as a photographer visiting Armenia who loses his wife (played by Egoyan’s own wife, actress Arsinde Khanjian) to a handsome guide. The film is at once funny and desolate, seemingly simple (by Egoyan’s standards) in its structure yet teasingly oblique. Khanjian is one of a number of actors (others include David Hemblen, Elias Koteas, Bruce Greenwood and Maury Chaikin) who constantly recur in Egoyan’s films, reinforcing the sense of a hermetic, inward-looking world. Venues are typically bland and drab—featureless modern hotels and offices figure frequently—without much intimation of life going on beyond the edges of the screen. Even when he portrays a community, such as the small provincial township of The Sweet Hereafter, there’s little sense of social cohesion: all the houses seem remote from each other, with each person or family trapped in their own separate universe. The Sweet Hereafter and its successor, Felicia’s Journey, marked a departure in Egoyan’s career, adapting material by others (novels by Russell Banks and William Trevor) instead of working to his own original scripts. Both films are sensitively crafted, keeping faith with their originals while further exploring his perennial themes of loss and disaffection. (‘‘All my characters,’’ he observes, ‘‘have had missing people in their lives.’’) In Felicia’s Journey, what’s more, Egoyan intriguingly maps his bleak, sardonic poetry on to the suburbs and industrial complexes of Birmingham. But the incorporation of other authorial sensibilities into his work seems to dilute the mix rather than enriching it; neither film achieves the intensity, or the complexity, of The Adjuster or Exotica. A vision as potent and idiosyncratic as that of Egoyan is perhaps best taken neat. —Philip Kemp EISENSTEIN, Sergei Nationality: Russian. Born: Sergei Mikhailovich Eisenstein in Riga, Latvia, 23 January 1898. Education: Educated in St. Petersburg and at gymnasium in Riga; Institute of Civil Engineering, St. Petersburg (studied architecture), 1914–17; studied Japanese at General Staff Academy, Moscow, 1920. Family: Married Peta Attasheva. Career: Sent for officer training, 1917; poster artist on front at Minsk, then demobilized, 1920; scenic artist, then co-director of Proletkult Thea- tre, Moscow, 1920; designer for Vsevolod Meyerhold’s ‘‘directors’ workshop,’’ 1922; directed Stachka, 1925; made professor at State Institute for Cinema, 1926; with Grigori Alexandrov and Edouard Tisse, travelled to Hollywood, 1929; signed for Paramount, but after work on various scripts, contract broken, 1930; refused a work permit by State Department, went to Mexico to work on Que Viva Mexico!; refused reentry permit to United States, after financier Upton Sinclair halts shooting and keeps uncut film; returned to USSR, 1932; began Sergei Eisenstein teaching at Moscow Film Institute, 1933; Behzin Meadow project denounced, production halted, 1937; worked on Pushkin film project, named artistic director of Mosfilm Studios, 1940; after finishing Ivan the Terrible, suffered heart attack, 1946; prepared a third part to Ivan, to have been made in color, 1947. Awards: Gold Medal, Exposition Internationale des Arts Décoratifs, Paris, for Strike!, 1925; Order of Lenin, 1939; Stalin Prize, 1st Class, for Ivan the Terrible, Part I, 1946. Died: In Moscow, 11 February 1948. Films as Director: 1923 Kinodnevik Glumova (Glumov’s Film Diary) (short film inserted in production of Ostrovsky’s Enough Simplicity in Every Wise Man, Proletkult Theater, Moscow) (+ sc) 1925 Stachka (The Strike) (+ co-sc, ed); Bronenosets Potemkin (The Battleship Potemkin) (+ sc, ed) 1928 Oktiabr (October; Ten Days That Shook the World) (co-d, co-sc) 1929 Staroe i novoe (Old and New) [film produced as Generalnaia linia (The General Line), title changed before release] (co-d, co-sc) 1930 Romance sentimentale (co-d, sc) 1933 Thunder over Mexico (unauthorized, produced by Sol Lesser from Que Viva Mexico! footage, seen by Eisenstein in 1947 and disowned); Death Day and Eisenstein in Mexico (also unauthorized productions by Sol Lesser from Que Viva Mexico! footage) EISENSTEINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 297 1938 Aleksandr Nevskii (Alexander Nevsky) (+ co-sc, set des, costume des, ed) 1939 Time in the Sun (produced by Marie Seton from Que Viva Mexico! footage); The Ferghana Canal (short documentary out of footage from abandoned feature subject on same subject) (+ sc) 1941 shorts edited by William Kruse for Bell and Howell from Que Viva Mexico! footage: Mexico Marches; Conquering Cross; Idol of Hope; Land and Freedom; Spaniard and Indian; Mexican Symphony (feature combining previous five ti- tles); Zapotecan Village 1944 Ivan Groznyi (Ivan the Terrible, Part I) (+ sc, set des, costume des, ed) 1958 Ivan Groznyi II: Boyarskii zagovor (Ivan the Terrible, Part II: The Boyars’ Plot) (+ sc) (completed 1946); Eisenstein’s Mexican Project (+ sc) (unedited sequences of Que Viva Mexico! assembled by Jay Leyda) 1966 Bezhin Lug (Bezhin Meadow) (+ sc) (25-minute montage of stills from original film assembled by Naum Kleiman, with music by Prokofiev) Other Films: 1924 Doktor Mabuze—Igrok (co-ed) (Russian version of Lang’s Dr. Mabuse der Spieler) 1929 Everyday (Hans Richter) (role as London policeman) Publications By EISENSTEIN: books— The Soviet Screen, Moscow, 1939. The Film Sense, edited by Jay Leyda, New York, 1942. Notes of a Film Director, Moscow, 1948. Film Form, edited by Jay Leyda, New York, 1949. Charlie Chaplin, Zurich, 1961. Que Viva Mexico, London, 1951. Drawings, Moscow, 1961. Ivan the Terrible: A Screenplay, New York, 1962. Sergei Eizenshtein, Izbrannye proizvedeniya (6 vols.), edited by P.M. Atasheva and others, Moscow, 1964–71. Film Essays with a Lecture, edited by Jay Leyda, London, 1968. Potemkin, New York, 1968. The Battleship Potemkin, text by Andrew Sinclair, London, 1968. Notes of a Film Director, New York, 1970. Collected Works of Sergei Eisenstein, edited by Herbert Marshall, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1971. The Complete Works of Sergei M. Eisenstein, edited by Marcel Martin, Guy Lecouvette, and Abraham Segal, New York, 1971. Eisenstein: Three Films, edited by Jay Leyda, New York, 1974. The Complete Films of Eisenstein, New York, 1974. Immoral Memories: An Autobiography, translated by Herbert Mar- shall, Boston, 1983. October and Alexander Nevsky, edited by Jay Leyda, New York, 1984. Iz tvorcheskogo naslediya S.M. Eizenshteina, edited by L. Kozlov and N. Kleiman, Moscow, 1985. Nonindifferent Nature, edited by Herbert Marshall, Cambridge, 1987. Eisenstein: Selected Works, Volume 1: Writings 1922–1934, edited by Richard Taylor, London, 1988. S.M. Eisenstein: The Psychology of Composition, edited by A.Y. Upchurch, London, 1988. Eisenstein: Selected Works, Volume 2: Toward a Theory of Montage, edited by Richard Taylor and Michael Glenny, London, 1991. By EISENSTEIN: articles— ‘‘Mass Movies,’’ in Nation (New York), 9 November 1927. ‘‘Mexican Film and Marxian Theory,’’ in New Republic (New York), 9 December 1931. ‘‘The Cinematographic Principle and Japanese Culture,’’ in Experi- mental Cinema, no. 3, 1932. ‘‘Through Theatre to Cinema,’’ in Theatre Arts (New York), Septem- ber 1936. ‘‘The Mistakes of Bezhin Lug,’’ in International Literature (Mos- cow), no. 1, 1937. ‘‘My Subject Is Patriotism,’’ in International Literature (Moscow), no. 2, 1939. ‘‘Charlie the Kid,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1946. ‘‘Charlie the Grownup,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1946. ‘‘The Birth of a Film,’’ in Hudson Review (Nutley, New Jersey), no. 2, 1951. ‘‘Sketches for Life,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1958. ‘‘One Path to Colour: An Autobiographical Fragment,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1961. Interview, in Interviews with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, New York, 1967. ‘‘La Quatrième Dimension du cinéma,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September/October 1976. ‘‘Sergei Eisenstein, Wilhelm Reich Correspondence,’’ edited by F. Albera, in Screen (London), vol. 22, no. 4, 1981. ‘‘A Postcard and a Letter from S.M. Eisenstein to Renaud De Jouvenel,’’ in Film Culture (New York), nos. 70–71, 1983. On EISENSTEIN: books— Rotha, Paul, Ivor Montagu, and John Grierson, Eisenstein 1898–1948, London, 1948. Arnheim, Rudolph, Film as Art, Berkeley, California, 1957. Leyda, Jay, Kino, London, 1960. Mitry, Jean, S.M. Eisenstein, Paris, 1961; revised edition, 1978. Montagu, Ivor, With Eisenstein in Hollywood, New York, 1969. Nizhny, Vladimir, Lessons with Eisenstein, New York, 1969. Geduld, Harry, and Ronald Gottesman, Sergei Eisenstein and Upton Sinclair: The Making and Unmaking of ‘‘Que Viva Mexico!,’’ Bloomington, Indiana, 1970. Moussinac, Léon, Sergei Eisenstein, New York, 1970. Brakhage, Stan, The Brakhage Lectures, Chicago, 1972. Mayer, D., Eisenstein’s Potemkin: A Shot-by-Shot Presentation, New York, 1972. Barna, Yon, Eisenstein, Bloomington, Indiana, 1973. Shlovskii, V., Eizenshtein, Moscow, 1973. Fernandez, Dominique, Eisenstein, Paris, 1975. Swallow, N., Eisenstein: A Documentary Portrait, London, 1976; New York, 1977. Ropars-Wuilleumier, Marie-Claire, and others, Octobre, Ecriture et idéologie, Paris, 1976. EISENSTEIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 298 Barthes, Roland, Image/Music/Text, New York, 1977. Marshall, Herbert, editor, Sergei Eisenstein’s ‘‘The Battleship Potemkin,’’ New York, 1978. Seton, Marie, Sergei M. Eisenstein, London, 1978. Aumont, Jacques, Montage Eisenstein, Paris, 1979. Ropars-Wuilleumier, Marie-Claire, and others, La Révolution figurée, Paris, 1979. Thompson, Kristin, Eisenstein’s Ivan the Terrible, a Neoformalist Analysis, Princeton, 1981. Leyda, Jay, and Zina Vignow, Eisenstein at Work, New York, 1982. Marshall, Herbert, Masters of the Soviet Cinema: Crippled Creative Biographies, London, 1983. Polan, Dana B., The Political Language of Film and the Avant-Garde, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1985. Yurenev, R., Sergei Eizenshtein, Zamysli, Fil’my, Metod, Vol. 1: 1898–1929, Moscow, 1985; Vol. 2: 1930–1945, Moscow, 1988. Aumont, Jacques, Montage Eisenstein, London, 1987. Christie, Ian, and David Elliot, editors, Eisenstein at 90, Lon- don, 1988. Christie, Ian, and Richard Taylor, editors, Eisenstein Rediscovered, London, 1991. Karetnikova, Inga, in collaboration with Leon Steinmetz, Mexico according to Eisenstein, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1991. Goodwin, James, Eisenstein, Cinema, and History, Urbana, Illi- nois, 1993. Bordwell, David, The Cinema of Eisenstein, Cambridge, 1993. L?vgren, H?kan, Eisenstein’s Labyrinth: Aspects of a Cinematic Synthesis of the Arts, Stockholm, 1996. Law, Alma, and Mel Gordon, Meyerhold, Eisenstein, and Biomechanics: Actor Training in Revolutionary Russia, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1996. On EISENSTEIN: articles— Wilson, Edmund, ‘‘Eisenstein in Hollywood,’’ in New Republic (New York), 4 November 1931. Montagu, Ivor, ‘‘Sergei Eisenstein,’’ in Penguin Film Review (Lon- don), September 1948. Seton, Marie, ‘‘Eisenstein’s Images and Mexican Art,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), September 1953. Harrah, D., ‘‘Aesthetics of the Film: The Pudovkin-Arnheim-Eisenstein Theory,’’ in Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Decem- ber 1954. Knight, Arthur, ‘‘Eisenstein and the Mass Epic,’’ in The Liveliest Art, New York, 1957. Sadoul, Georges, ‘‘Entretiens sur Eisenstein,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), 1960. Leyda, Jay, ‘‘Care of the Past,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1961/62. Leyda, Jay, ‘‘Missing Reel,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1965. Yourenev, Rostislav, ‘‘Eisenstein,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, Paris, 1966. Siegler, R., ‘‘Masquage, an Extrapolation of Eisenstein’s Theory of Montage-as-Conflict to the Multi-Image Film,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley, California), Spring 1968. Wollen, Peter, ‘‘Eisenstein: Cinema and the Avant-Garde,’’ in Art International (Lugano), November 1968. Henderson, Brian, ‘‘Two Types of Film Theory,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1971. Pleynet, M., ‘‘The ‘Left’ Front of Art: Eisenstein and the Old ‘Young’ Hegelians,’’ in Screen (London), Spring 1972. Kuleshov, Lev, ‘‘Kuleshov, Eisenstein, and the Others,’’ in Film Journal (New York), Fall/Winter 1972. Levaco, R., ‘‘The Eisenstein-Prokoviev Correspondence,’’ in Cin- ema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Fall 1973. Seydor, P., ‘‘Eisenstein’s Aesthetics: A Dissenting View,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1973/74. ‘‘Eisenstein Issue’’ of Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 89–90, 1974. Barthes, Roland, ‘‘Diderot, Brecht, Eisenstein,’’ in Screen (London), Summer 1974. Bordwell, David, ‘‘Eisenstein’s Epistemological Shift,’’ in Screen (London), Winter 1974/75 (see also Bordwell letter in Screen, Spring 1975). Perlmutter, R., ‘‘Le Gai Savoir: Godard and Eisenstein: Notions of Intellectual Cinema,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley, California), May/ July 1975. ‘‘Eisenstein Issue’’ of Cinema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Fall 1977. Gallez, D.W., ‘‘The Prokoviev-Eisenstein Collaboration,’’ in Cin- ema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Spring 1978. Goodwin, J., ‘‘Eisenstein: Ideology and Intellectual Cinema,’’ and H. Marshall, ‘‘A Note on Eisenstein’s Shot Montage . . . ,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (Pleasantville, New York), Spring 1978. Burch, Noel, ‘‘Film’s Institutional Mode of Representation and the Soviet Response,’’ in October (Cambridge, Massachusetts), Win- ter 1979. Gutiérrez Alea, T., ‘‘Alienation and De-Alienation in Eisenstein and Brecht,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), July/August 1981. Goodwin, J., ‘‘Plusiers Eisenstein: Recent Criticism,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (New York), Fall 1981. Selden, D.L., ‘‘Vision and Violence: The Rhetoric of Potemkin,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (New York), Fall 1982. ‘‘Alexander Nevsky Section’’ of Film Culture (New York), no. 70–71, 1983. Perry, T., ‘‘Sergei Eisenstein: A Career in Pictures,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), January/February 1983. Bordwell, David, ‘‘Narrative and Scenography in the Later Eisenstein,’’ in Millenium Film Journal (New York), Fall 1983-Winter 1984. Hogenkamp, Bert, ‘‘De russen komen! Poedowkin, Eisenstein en Wertow in Nederland,’’ in Skrien (Amsterdam), November/De- cember 1985. Taylor, Richard, ‘‘Eisenstein: 1898–1948-1988,’’ in Historical Jour- nal of Film, Radio, and TV (Abingdon, Oxon), Summer 1988. Christie, Ian, ‘‘Eisenstein at 90,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1988. ‘‘Eisenstein Lives,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), September, October, and December 1988. On EISENSTEIN: films— Aslem, Henk, Eisenstein in Nederland (Eisenstein in Holland), Holland, 1930. Attasheva, Pera (directed and scripted by), In Memory of Eisenstein, USSR. Seton, Marie, and John Minchinton, Eisenstein Survey, Great Brit- ain, 1952. Katanyan, V., S.M. Eisenstein (Sergei Eisenstein Film Biography), USSR, 1958. Eisenstein Directs Ivan (derived from previous film), Great Brit- ain, 1969. EISENSTEINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 299 Hudsmith, Philip, Eisenstein in Mexico, Canada, 1977. Eisenstein, S., ‘‘Le ‘Metamorfosi’ di Walt Disney,’’ in Filmcritica (Italy), vol. 36, no. 359–360, November-December 1985. Bulgakawa, O., ‘‘Eisenstein und die Deutschen Psychologen,’’ in Beitr?ge zur Film- und Fernsehwissenschaft (Potsdam), vol. 29, no. 32, 1988. Klegman, J., and others, ‘‘Kino totalitarnoj epohi,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), vol. 2, February 1990. Ropars, M.-C., ‘‘Relire Eisenstein: Le montage en expansion et la penseé dehors,’’ in Filmcritica (Italy),vol. 41, n. 410, Decem- ber 1990. Almendros, N., ‘‘Fortune and Men’s Eyes,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 27, no. 4, July-August 1991. Taylor, G.T., ‘‘‘The Cognitive Instrument in the Service of Revolu- tionary Change’: Sergei Eisenstein, Annette Michelson, and the Avant-Garde’s Scholarly Aspiration,’’ in Cinema Journal (Aus- tin, Texas), vol. 31, no. 4, Summer 1992. Kepley, V., Jr., ‘‘Eisenstein as Pedagogue,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film and Video (Reading), vol. 14, no. 4, August 1993. *** Sergei Eisenstein is generally considered to be one of the most important figures—perhaps the most important figure—in the history of cinema. But he was not only the leading director and theorist of Soviet cinema in his own lifetime, he was also a theatre and opera director, scriptwriter, graphic artist, teacher, and critic. His contem- poraries called him quite simply ‘‘the Master.’’ Eisenstein’s reputation as a filmmaker rests on only seven com- pleted feature films, but among them The Battleship Potemkin has consistently been regarded as one of the greatest films ever made. The pivotal scene in the film—the massacre on the Odessa Steps—has become the most famous sequence in film history and a paradigm of the montage techniques that were central to Eisenstein’s theories of filmmaking. Like many early Soviet filmmakers, Eisenstein came to cinema by a circuitous route. Born in Riga, then a largely German-speaking provincial city of the Russian Empire, he saw his first film on a visit to Paris with his parents when he was only eight: Les 400 farces du diable by Méliès. He was educated at a technical grammar school so that he would follow his father’s career as an engineer. Despite, or perhaps because of, his artistic bent, he was consistently given low marks at school for his drawing. Conversely, he consistently did his best in the subject of religious knowledge. In 1909 his parents separated and his mother went to live in St. Petersburg. On various visits to her, Eisenstein was entranced by his first taste of the circus and intrigued by his clandestine reading of her copies of Venus in Furs by Sacher-Masoch and Mirabeau’s The Torture Garden. Reflections of this can be detected in his later work. In 1915 Eisenstein entered the Institute for Civil Engineering in Petrograd, where he saw his first Meyerhold productions in the theatre. After the Revolution he abandoned his courses and joined the Red Army. He was assigned to a theatrical troupe, where he worked as a director, designer, and actor. In 1920 he was demobilised to Moscow and rapidly became head of design at the First Proletkult Workers Theatre. His first sets were for a production of The Mexican, written by Jack London, Lenin’s favourite writer. In 1921 he joined Meyerhold’s theatre workshop (he was later to describe Meyerhold as his ‘‘spiritual father’’) and worked on designs for Puss in Boots. Eisenstein’s first stage production, a version of Ostrovsky’s Enough Simplicity for Every Wise Man in 1923, included his first venture into cinema, Glumov’s Diary. This was inspired by the use of a short film in the Kozintsev and Trauberg production of Gogol’s The Wedding, which he had seen the year before. His production of Tretyakov’s Gas Masks in 1924 staged in the Moscow gasworks was an attempt to bridge the gap between stage ‘‘realism’’ and the reality of everyday life. It failed and, as Eisenstein himself put it, he ‘‘fell into cinema.’’ Eisenstein had already worked with Esfir Shub re-editing Fritz Lang’s Dr Mabuse for Soviet audiences in 1923, but he made his first full-length film—The Strike, set in 1905—in 1925. In this film he applied to cinema the theory of the ‘‘montage of attractions’’ that he had first developed in Enough Simplicity for Every Wise Man. Eisenstein was not the first to develop the notion of montage as the essence of cinema specificity: that honour belonged to Lev Kuleshov in 1917. Unlike Kuleshov, however, Eisenstein thought that montage depended on a conflict between different elements from which a new synthesis would arise. This notion developed partly from his study of Japanese ideograms and partly from his own partial understanding of the Marxist dialectic. It followed from the primacy accorded to montage in this theory that the actor’s role was diminished while the director’s was enhanced. Eisenstein’s view of the primacy of the director was to cause him serious problems on both sides of the Atlantic. In his silent films Eisenstein used amateur actors who were the right physical types for the part, a practice he called ‘‘typage’’: hence an unknown worker, Nikandrov, played the role of Lenin in October, released in 1927. Most of the parts in his second full-length film, The Battleship Potemkin, released in 1926, were played by amateurs. Even the local actors who appeared in the Odessa Steps sequence were chosen not for their professional training, but because they looked right for the parts. It was Potemkin that secured Eisenstein’s reputation both at home and abroad, especially in Germany, where it was a spectacular commercial success and attracted far greater audiences than in the USSR itself. Potemkin put Soviet cinema on the world map. After Potemkin Eisenstein started work on a film about collectivisation, The General Line, but broke off to make October for the tenth anniversary of the October Revolution. It was with this film that his serious problems with the authorities began. Critics were divided about the film. Some enthused about the birth of a new ‘‘intellectual cinema,’’ based on ‘‘intellectual montage,’’ which, like Brecht’s ‘‘alienation effect,’’ stimulated audiences to think rather than to react solely with their emotions. Other critics were troubled by what they saw as an overabundance of abstract symbolism that was, in the (officially inspired) catch-phrase of the times, ‘‘unintelligible to the millions.’’ When Eisenstein returned to The General Line and completed it in 1929, the Party’s general line on agriculture had changed and Trotsky had fallen from grace: the film therefore had to be re-edited to reflect these developments, and it was finally released under the title of The Old and the New. The political problems Eisenstein encountered with this project were to recur in all his subsequent film work in the Soviet Union. In 1929 Eisenstein went abroad with his assistants Alexandrov and Tisse, ostensibly to study the new medium of sound film. In his ‘‘Statement on Sound,’’ published in the summer of 1928, he had warned against the dangers of purely illustrative sound, as in the ‘‘talkies,’’ and argued for the application of the techniques of the EPSTEIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 300 montage of attractions to produce what he called ‘‘orchestral counter- point.’’ It was to be another ten years before he had the chance to put these ideas into effect. Eisenstein first visited Western Europe and then travelled to Hollywood to work for Paramount. From the outset he was subjected to a hostile press campaign characterising him as a ‘‘red dog’’ and a Bolshevik. After rejecting several of his film projects, Paramount cancelled his contract. He went on to start filming Que Viva Mexico! with funds provided by the socialist millionaire novelist Upton Sinclair. Eisenstein spent most of 1931 working on the film, but Sinclair was not satisfied either with the pace of progress or the escalating cost. Material for three-quarters of the Mexican film had, however, been shot when the project collapsed in acrimonious exchanges. Eisenstein returned to the Soviet Union in May 1932. He had accepted assurances from Sinclair that the raw footage would be shipped to Moscow so that he could edit it, but this assurance was never honoured. The Soviet Union that Eisenstein returned to was significantly different from the country he had left three years earlier. The political and economic changes associated with the first Five-Year Plan had led to concomitant changes in Soviet cinema, which was now run by an Old Bolshevik, Boris Shumyatsky, who was determined to create a ‘‘cinema for the millions.’’ After several abortive projects, includ- ing Moscow, a history of the capital, The Black Consul, which would have starred Paul Robeson, and a film version of Karl Marx’s Das Kapital, Eisenstein began making his first sound feature, Bezhin Meadow, in 1935. The film focused on the generational conflict engendered by the collectivisation programme, but it too was dogged with problems and was eventually stopped on the orders of Shumyatsky in March 1937. Eisenstein was forced to confess his alleged errors in public. This submission, together with the dismissal of Shumyatsky in January 1938, enabled him to start filming again. The result was Eisenstein’s most popular film, Alexander Nevsky, made in record time and released in 1938, but it was also the film that he regarded as his least successful. Nevertheless, it contains the best, and most famous, illustration of his technique of ‘‘orchestral counter- point’’ in the sequence of the Battle on the Ice. On the other hand, Nevsky to some extent gave Eisenstein the reputation of ‘‘court filmmaker,’’ particularly after he was awarded the Order of Lenin. It was because of this that, after the signature of the Nazi-Soviet Pact— and the subsequent withdrawal of Nevsky from distribution—Eisenstein was asked to direct a new production of Wagner’s Die Walküre at the Bolshoi Theatre. When not filming, Eisenstein taught at the State Institute of Cinema, where he had been head of the directing department since his return to the Soviet Union and where he was made professor in January 1937, shortly before the final crisis with Bezhin Meadow. He also devoted an increasing amount of time and energy to his theoreti- cal writings, but his magnum opus on Direction, like his other works on Mise-en-Scène and the theory of montage, remained unfinished at his death. Eisenstein’s last film, arguably his masterpiece of masterpieces, was also unfinished: filming of the first part of Ivan the Terrible was begun in 1943 in Alma-Ata, where the Moscow studios had been evacuated because of the war, and released in 1945. The film was an instant success and earned Eisenstein and his associates the Stalin Prize. While celebrating this award in February 1946, Eisenstein suffered a heart attack, a development that encouraged his premoni- tions of an early death at the age of fifty. He threw himself into a flurry of frenzied activity, completing his memoirs and Part 2 of Ivan and starting on Part 3. In Part 2, however, the historical parallels between Ivan and Stalin became too obvious and, although completed, the film was not shown until 1958. Eisenstein died of a second, massive heart attack in February 1948, just past his fiftieth birthday. He died very much under a cloud in his own country, but has since been universally acknowledged as one of cinema’s greatest creative geniuses and a towering figure in the culture of the twentieth century. Some of his most important theoreti- cal texts are only now being properly assembled and published, both in the Soviet Union and abroad. —Richard Taylor EPSTEIN, Jean Nationality: French. Born: Warsaw, 25 March 1897. Education: Collège Francais, Villa Saint-Jean, Fribourg; Ecole Centrale, Lyons, degree in medicine, 1916. Career: Met Auguste Lumière, 1916; founder of revue, Le Promenoir, 1920; hired as editor by Editions de la Sirène, 1921; directed first film, Pasteur, for Jean Benoit-Levy, 1922; signed to Pathé, 1923; joined Alexandre Kamenska’s Films Albatros, 1924; set up Les Films Jean Epstein, 1926; with sister, scenarist Marie Epstein, captured by Gestapo, saved from deportation through intervention of friends and Red Cross, early 1940s; taught at IDHEC after the war. Died: Of cerebral hemorrhage, in Paris, 3 April 1953. Films as Director: 1922 Pasteur; Les Vendanges 1923 L’Auberge rouge (+ sc); Coeur fidèle (+ sc); La Montagne infidèle; La Belle Nivernaise (+ sc) 1924 Le Lion des Mogols (+ adaptation); L’Affiche; La Goutte de sang (Mariaud) (uncredited d) 1925 Le Double Amour; Les Aventures de Robert Macaire 1926 Mauprat (+ pr); Au pays de George Sand (+ pr) 1927 Six et demi onze (+ pr); La Glace a trois faces (+ pr) 1928 La Chute de la maison Usher (+ pr) 1929 Finis terrae (+ sc); Sa Tête (+ sc) 1930 Le Pas de la mule (+ pr) 1931 Mor-Vran (La Mer des corbeaux) (+ pr); Notre-Dame de Paris (+ pr); La Chanson des peupliers (+ pr); Le Cor (+ pr) 1932 L’Or des mers (+ sc); Les Berceaux (+ pr); La Villanelle des Rubans (+ pr); Le Vieux Chaland (+ pr) 1933 L’Homme a l’Hispano (+ sc, pr); La Chatelaine du Liban (+ sc, pr) 1934 Chanson d’armor (+ pr, adaptation); La Vie d’un grand journal (+ pr) 1936 Coeur de Gueux (+ pr, adaptation); La Bretagne (+ pr); La Bourgogne (+ pr) 1937 Vive la vie (+ pr); La Femme du bout de monde (+ pr, sc) 1938 Les Batisseurs (+ pr); Eau vive (+ pr, sc) 1939 Arteres de France (+ pr); La Charrette fant?me (Duvivier) (d superimpositions and special photographic effects) EPSTEINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 301 1947 Le Tempestaire (+ pr, sc) 1948 Les Feux de la mer (+ pr); La Bataille de l’eau lourde (Kampen om tungtvannet) (Marin and Vibe-Muller) (d prologue) Other Film: 1921 Le Tonnerre (Delluc) (asst d) Publications By EPSTEIN: books— Bonjour cinéma, Paris, 1921. La Poésie d’aujourd’hui—Un nouvel état d’intelligence, Paris, 1921. La Lyrosophie, Paris, 1922. Le Cinématographe vu de l’Etna, Paris, 1926. L’Or des mers, Valois, 1932. Les Recteurs et la sirène, Paris, 1934. Photogénie de l’impondérable, Paris, 1935. L’Intelligence d’une machine, Paris, 1946. Le Cinéma du diable, Paris, 1947. Esprit de cinéma, Paris, 1955. Ecrits sur le cinéma, Paris, 1974–75. By EPSTEIN: articles— ‘‘Jean Epstein nous parle de ses projets et du film parlant,’’ interview with Pierre Leprohon, in Pour vous (Paris), 17 October 1929. Article in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1953. On EPSTEIN: books— Gawrak, Zbigniew, Jan Epstein, Warsaw, 1962. Leprohon, Pierre, Jean Epstein, Paris, 1964. On EPSTEIN: articles— Leprohon, Pierre, ‘‘Un Poète de l’image,’’ in Cinémonde (Paris), 28 February 1929. Wunscher, Catherine, ‘‘Jean Epstein,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), October/December 1953. ‘‘Epstein Issue’’ of Cinemages (New York), edited by Gideon Bachmann, vol. 2, 1955. Toussenot, R., ‘‘Souvenirs en l’honneur de Jean Epstein,’’ in L’Age Nouveau (Paris), October 1956. Haudiquet, Philippe, ‘‘Epstein,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, vol. 2, Paris, 1967. ‘‘Jean Epstein,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1978. ‘‘Jean Epstein,’’ in Travelling (Lausanne), Summer 1979. ‘‘Cinema Rising: Epstein in the Twenties,’’ special section in After- image (Rochester), no. 10, 1981. ‘‘Cine-mystique,’’ in Millenium Film Journal (New York), Fall 1981/Winter 1982. ‘‘A propos de Jean Epstein,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), October 1983. Magny, J., ‘‘1896–1930. Premiers écrits: Canudo, Delluc, Epstein, Dulac,’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), no. 60, July 1991. Kessler, F., ‘‘Fotogenie en fysionomie,’’ in Versus (Netherlands), vol. 1, 1991. *** Jean Epstein belongs to the generation of 1920s French filmmakers who were drawn to the cinema by the impact of the Hollywood productions of Griffith, Chaplin, and Ince. Gifted with a precocious intelligence, Epstein was one of a number of these filmmakers who had previously been interested in literature. He had already published books on literature, philosophy, and the cinema when he made his debut as a filmmaker with a documentary on Pasteur in 1922 at the age of only twenty-five. Three fictional features in the following year, including Coeur fidèle, which contains virtuoso passages to rank with the work of Gance and L’Herbier, put him in the forefront of French avant-garde filmmaking. The four films Epstein made during 1925–26 for the Albatros company run by the Russian emigré Alexandre Kamenka include two, L’Affiche and Le Double Amour, from scripts by Jean’s sister Marie Epstein. The spectacular Le Lion des Mogols, which featured a preposterous script by its star, the great actor Ivan Mosjoukine, was followed by Les Aventures de Robert Macaire, an adaptation of the play parodied by Fredéric Lema?tre in Carné’s Les Enfants du paradis. None of these are generally considered to be among Epstein’s best work, but they established him as a director after the controver- sies which had surrounded the showings of Coeur fidèle, and enabled him to set up his own production company in 1926. The films which Epstein both produced and directed are varied. He began with two films in which his own artistic aspirations were balanced by the demands of commercial popularity: an adaption of George Sand’s novel Mauprat, which had formed part of his child- hood reading; and Six et demi onze, again from a script by his sister. But the last two films of Les Films Jean Epstein were resolutely independent works. The short feature La Glace à trois faces is remarkable for its formal pattern, which looks forward to experiments in narrative structure of a kind that were still striking to audiences thirty years later when Alain Resnais made Hiroshima mon amour. Even more accomplished in terms of acting and setting, and as intriguing in terms of narrative, is Epstein’s atmospheric evocation of the dark world of Edgar Allan Poe, La Chute de la maison Usher. This tale of love, art, and madness is told in a marvellously controlled style which makes extensive use of slow motion and multiple superimposition. Just as the hero refuses to accept the division of life and death and, through the effort of will, summons back the woman he has killed through devotion to his art, so too Epstein’s film creates a universe where castle and forest, interior and exterior interpenetrate. After this masterly evocation of a world of northern imagination, a film that can rank with Dreyer’s Vampyr and serves as a reminder of Epstein’s part-Polish ancestry, the director largely withdrew from the world of Parisian film production. With only occasional forays into commercial filmmaking, Epstein devoted much of his efforts from the silent Finis terrae in 1929 to the short Le Tempestaire in 1947 to a masterly series of semi-documentary evocations of the Breton countryside and seascape. Epstein is a complex and uncompromising figure whose filmmaking was accompanied by a constant theoretical concern with his chosen medium. If the central concept of his 1930s writing—La photogénie— remains not merely undefined but undefinable, and he makes recourse EUSTACHE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 302 to notions of a magical or mystical essence of cinema that are unfortunately typical of the period, his theoretical work nonetheless remains of great interest. The republication of his complete works, Ecrits sur le cinéma, in 1974–75, demonstrated the modernity and continuing interest of his explorations of key aspects of the relation- ship between the spectator and the screen. —Roy Armes EUSTACHE, Jean Nationality: French. Born: Pessac, 30 November, 1938. Education: School in Narbonne. Family: Married, two sons. Career: Employee SNCF; TV researcher 1963; worked in various capacities for other directors, including Vecchiali, Rivette, Marc ‘O, Fieschi, from 1962; directed several TV documentaries (1968–80); directed first feature, 1973. Awards: Grand Jury Prize Cannes Festival and Interfilm Award, Berlin Festival for La Maman et la putain, 1973; César for Best Short Fiction film, Les Photos d’Alix, 1980. Died: Committed suicide Paris, 5 November 1981. Films as Director: 1963 Du c?té de Robinson (short) (+ sc, dialogue, ro as man in car) 1966 Le Père No?l a les yeux bleus (Santa Claus Has Blue Eyes) (Father Christmas Has Blue Eyes) (short) (+ sc, dialogue, Jean Eustache ro as ex-boxer); Les Mauvaises fréquentations (Bad Com- pany) (Title of double bill consisting of Du c?té de Robin- son and Le Père No?l a les yeux bleus) 1968 Aussi loin que mon enfance (short) (+ co-sc, co-d Marilù Parolini) 1969 La Rosière de Pessac (The Virgin of Pessac) (+ sc, ed, pr, ro as interviewer) (TV) 1970 Le Cochon (The Pig) (+ co-sc, co-ph, ed, co-d Jean-Michel Barjol) (for TV) 1971 Numéro zero (not released) 1973 La Maman et la putain (The Mother and the Whore) ( + sc, dialogue, ed, ro as Gilberte’s husband) 1974 Mes petites amoureuses (My Little Loves) (+ sc, dialogue) 1977 Une Sale histoire (A Dirty Story) (+ sc, dialogue) 1979 La Rosière de Pessac (+ sc) (for TV) 1980 Odette Robert (+ ed) (for TV) (shortened version of Numéro zero); Avec passion Bosch, ou Le Jardin des délices de Jér?me Bosch (+ ed) (for TV); Offre d’emploi (Job Offer) (+ sc) (for TV); Les Photos d’Alix (+ sc, ed) (for TV) Other Films: 1962 Les Roses de vie (short) (Vecchiali) ( asst, ro) 1964 Dedans Paris (short) (Théaudière) (ed) 1964 Les Taches (short) (Baudry-Delahaye) (ed) 1966 Jean Renoir, le patron (Rivette) (ed) (for TV) 1967 Les Idoles (Marc ‘O) (ed); L’Accompagnement (Fieschi) (short) (ed) 1970 Une Aventure de Billy le Kid (Moullet) (ed) 1974 Céline et Julie vont en bateau (Rivette) (ro as reader in library) 1977 Der Amerikanische Freund (Wenders) (ro as man in the bar) 1978 La Tortue sur le dos (Béraud) (ro as chief of police) Publications: By EUSTACHE: articles—- Interview, with Jean Collet, in Télérama (Paris), 15 January, 1967. Interviews, in Image et Son (Paris), no. 244, November 1970; no. 250, May 1971; no. 273, June-July 1973. Interviews, in Ecran (Paris), no. 17, July, 1973; no 64, Decem- ber 1977. Interview with Stéphane Lévy-Klein, in Positif (Paris), no. 157, March, 1974. ‘‘La Maman et la putain,’’ in L’ Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 142. Interviews in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 142, December, 1973; no. 284, June 1978; no. 320, February, 1981. Interviews in Cinématographe (Paris), no. 13, May-June 1975; no. 34, January 1978. Interview in Le Film Fran?ais (Paris), no. 1689, 11 November, 1977. On EUSTACHE: books—- Amengual, B, ‘‘Jean Eustache,’’ in Etudes Cinématographiques, Paris, 1986. Estève, Michel, Jean Eustache, Paris, 1986. Philippon, Alain, Jean Eustache, Paris, 1986. EUSTACHEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 303 Tierchant, Hélène, ‘‘Jean Eustache,’’ in Aquitaine: 100 ans de Cinéma, Bordeaux,1991. Forbes, Jill, ‘‘Jean Eustache,’’ in The Cinema in France, Lon- don, 1992. On EUSTACHE: articles—- Image et Son (Paris), no. 244, November 1970. Le Monde (Paris) 11 February 1971, 10 November 1977; 7 November 1981; 29 April, 1982. Les Cahiers du Cinéma, no. 187, February 1967; no. 247, July 1973; no. 284, January 1978; no. 285, February 1978; no. 306, Decem- ber 1979; no. 318, December 1980; no. 336, May 1982 . Serceau, M., J. Le Troquer, ‘‘La Maman et la putain,’’ in Téléciné, no. 181, September 1973. Callenbach, E., ‘‘La Maman et la putain,’’ in Film Quarterly, vol. xxvii, no. 4, Summer 1974. Cinema 72 (Paris); no. 195, February 1975; no. 196, March 1975; no.228, December 1977. Apec (Brussels), vol. 12, no. 4, 1974. Camber, Melinda, ‘‘Jean Eustache,’’ in The Times (London), 5 July 1975. Filmography in Film Dope, (Nottinghmam, UK) no. 14, March 1978. Magny, Joel, ‘‘Jean Eustache,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no. 276, Decem- ber, 1981. Film Comment, vol. 18, no. 1, January 1982; vol. 35, no.2, March- April 1999. La Revue du Cinéma, June 1984. Plazewski, Jerzy, ‘‘Sambojstwo turpizmu,’’ in Kino (Warsaw), vol. xviii, no. 1, January 1984. Reader, Keith, ‘‘The Mother, the Whore, and the Dandy,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), October 1997. Rouchy, Marie-Elisabeth, ‘‘La Passion selon Jean,’’ in Télérama (Paris), no. 2516, 1 April 1998. *** Although untutored in film, Jean Eustache refined his understand- ing during the 1950s at the Cinémathèque and developed his critical values through Rohmer and Godard at Cahiers du Cinéma, After his stultifying adolescence in Narbonne, the diffident village boy from Pessac rejoiced in the intellectual vibrancy of hedonistic Paris. The sixties brought experience initially as Vecchiali’s assistant for Les Roses de vie (1962) and in small film roles, but principally as an editor. In 1963 he resigned as a TV researcher to make Du c?té de Robinson. This début 16–mm autobiographical film contains the- matic and stylistic elements characteristic of later work. Two disaf- fected Parisian youths, failing to pick up partners, rob a married woman who rejects their advances. In quasi-documentary style, Eustache captured contemporary adolescent attitudes so skillfully that an enthusiastic Godard provided unused film stock from Masculin- Féminin for a second semi-autobiographical film, Le Père No?l a les yeux bleus (1966). Daniel (Jean-Pierre Léaud), employed as Santa Claus, discovers a confidence with women that deserts him out of costume. Successfully exploiting Léaud’s talent for playing diffident males, Eustache constructs an unforced account of the impoverished, class-conscious Daniel’s failures in a dull provincial town. The simple, direct camerawork bringing immediacy to everyday experi- ences places Eustache within the seemingly artless traditions of Lumière and Renoir. These first films were marketed collectively as Les Mauvaises Fréquentations (1967). Eustache developed his ethnographic, cinéma-vérité style (a label he testily rejected) though groundbreaking TV documentaries such as La Rosière de Pessac (1969) and Le Cochon (1970). The first chronicles Pessac’s festival honoring the village’s most virtuous girl, and seeking an unmediated, unobtrusive record of events, ‘the record- ing of reality without any subjective intervention or interference’, Eustache employed three independent camera crews, insisting on minimal camera movement with long takes simply edited in chrono- logical order. A decade later, exploring evolutions in moral and social values, he made a second version (La Rosière de Pessac, 1979). Collaboration with Jean-Michel Barjol in 1970 extended the de- tached, anti-auteurist style with Le Cochon, a matter-of-fact record of slaughtering a pig to make sausages. To avoid a single, dominant viewpoint, the co-directors filmed independently and, discarding TV’s traditional normative voice-over, left explanation in local patois. Eustache’s most personal seventies documentary was Numéro Zéro (1971) in which his blind, eighty-year old grandmother Odette Robert talks directly to camera for two unedited hours about her memories of village life. Initially refusing to falsify this exceptional, intimate journal by editing, in 1980 he finally sanctioned a truncated TV version, Odette Robert. Eustache’s unmediated images of provin- cial life mirror Jean Rouch’s non-interventionist records of African ceremonial, Les Ma?tres fous, (1955) and Parisian lifestyles, Chronique d’un été (1961). This defining ethnographic style was central to his critically acclaimed, black-and-white feature, La Maman et la putain (1973). With a meager 700,000–franc budget, Eustache economized by filming in his own apartment and local cafés to produce a remarkable three-and-a-half hour testimony to the moral angst of individuals grappling with the sixties sexual revolution. Alexandre (Jean-Pierre Léaud), unemployed and aspiring intellectual, jettisons his pregnant girlfriend Gilberte (Isabelle Weingarten) for an accommodating, self- sufficient businesswoman, Marie (Bernadette Lafont), before falling for Veronika (Fran?oise Lebrun), a promiscuous nurse. With its authentic settings, naturalistic dialogue, and discreet camerawork mostly using natural light, the film has a distinctly raw documentary feel. The characters’ uncompromisingly frank exchanges about sex- ual experiences and faltering relationships delivered to camera in medium close-up, may still shock, particularly Veronika’s closing, drunken monologue where in crude, visceral terms she pours out her confused feelings about sex and a woman’s needs in a relationship. Despite apparent spontaneity, all was pre-scripted with Eustache allowing few deviations. Success at Cannes allowed a long-cherished autobiographical project: Mes petites amoureuses (1974). In a film that arguably mirrors Truffaut’s Les Mistons (as La Maman et la putain might be considered a bleaker Jules et Jim), Eustache achieves a typically sensitive depiction of fumbling adolescent sexual experiences, though narrative development, dependent on voice-over, is uncharacter- istically episodic. Eustache’s interest in the blur between real and fictionalized experiences is confirmed with a dramatization of scopophilia in Une Sale histoire (1977). Here, a male simply tells a female audience of his erotic pleasure in secretly observing female pudenda while hidden in a café toilet. Two versions, one filmed as fiction with Michel Lonsdale as narrator, the other filmed as direct cinema with Jean-No?l Picq, the author, telling his story, provide comparisons between the listeners’ reactions to a personal, seemingly unrehearsed, account and EUSTACHE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 304 a staged narration. This experimental double telling distinguishes previous films, from Les Mauvaises Fréquentations, through the twice-made La Rosière de Pessac to the private and broadcast versions of his grandmother’s memories. In the eighties Eustache’s career was defined by TV work: a well- received programme reflecting on Bosch’s vision (Le Jardin des délices de Jér?me Bosch); a short about finding employment (Offre d’emploi); and an award-winning short about an actress recounting her life to a young man (Eustache’s son, Boris) though her photo album (Les Photos d’Alix). Here word and image vie for truth as Alix’s reminiscences seem to misrepresent the visual evidence. With only a slim portfolio of films and TV documentaries, Jean Eustache has nevertheless left his mark as a pioneering exponent of direct cinema which frequently privileges the spoken word within the visual medium, and as the director most accurately reflecting attitudes and anxieties of the sixties post-war generation. By refusing to compromise exacting personal standards to commercialism while severely testing loyalties through his difficult, self-deprecating, yet defensively assertive personality, he effectively condemned himself to mainstream cinema’s periphery. His male-centered films may be viewed as inherently sexist, upholding traditionalist patriarchal val- ues and subjecting passive females to the dominant, sexualized male viewpoint. Yet his sixties females, Marie or Veronika, project an assertiveness and professional self-sufficiency frequently lacking in his ill-adapted, immature, and feckless males. Largely autobiographi- cal, Eustache’s films capture both the passing of provincial traditions and the confusions of an uncertain generation facing the destabilizing challenges of newfound political and sexual freedoms. Feeling neglected by critics and public alike, Eustache grew increasingly self-absorbed and depressed. Leaving a TV short, La Rue s’allume, half-completed, on 5th September 1981, he shot himself. —-R. F. Cousins 305 F FáBRI, Zoltán Nationality: Hungarian. Born: Budapest, 1917. Education: Acad- emy of Fine Arts and Academy of Dramatic and Film Art, Budapest, diploma 1941. Career: Stage designer, actor, and director; interned as prisoner of war, 1941–45; at Artists Theatre, Budapest, 1945–49; artistic director of Hunnia Studios, 1949; made first feature, 1952; began collaboration with cameraman Gy?rgy Illés on Húsz óra, 1964; President of Union of Hungarian Cinema and Television Artists, and Professor at Academy of Dramatic and Cinema Arts, Budapest. Awards: Moscow Festival, for 141 perc a Befejezetlen mondatból, 1975; Grand Prize, Moscow Festival, for Az ?t?dik pecsét, 1977; received Kossuth Prize three times. Died: 23 August 1994, in Budapest, Hungary, of a heart attack. Films as Director: 1951 Gyarmat a f?ld alatt (Colony beneath the Earth) (co-d) 1952 Vihar (Storm) Zoltán Fábri 1954 Eletjel (Vierzehn Menschenleben; Life Signs) 1955 K?rhinta (Merry-Go-Round; Karussell) (+ co-sc, art d) 1956 Hannibál tonár úr (Professor Hannibal) (+ co-sc) 1957 Bolond április (Summer Clouds; Crazy April); èdes Anna (Anna, Schuldig?) (+ co-sc) 1959 Dùvad (The Brute; Das Scheusal) (+ sc) 1961 Két Félid? a pokolban (The Last Goal) (+ art d) 1963 Nappali s?tétség (Darkness in Daytime; Dunkel bei Tageslicht) (+ sc, art d) 1964 Húsz óra (Twenty Hours) 1965 Vizivárosi Nyár (A Hard Summer) (for TV) 1967 Utószezon (Late Season) 1968 A Pál utcai fiúk (The Boys of Paul Street) (+ co-sc) 1969 Isten hozta, ?rnagy úr! (The Toth Family) (+ co-sc) 1971 Hangyaboly (+ co-sc) 1973 Plusz minusz egy nap (One Day More, One Day Less) 1974 141 perc a Befejezetlen mondatból (141 Minutes from the Unfinished Sentence) (+ co-sc) 1976 Az ?t?dik pecsét (The Fifth Seal) (+ sc) 1977 Magyarok (The Hungarians) (+ sc) 1979 Fábián Bálint találkozása Istennel (Balint Fabian Meets God) (+ sc) 1981 Requiem 1983 Gyertek el a névnapomra Publications By FáBRI: articles— Interview with M. Ember, in Filmkultura (Budapest), April 1975. ‘‘Az emberi méltóság védelme foglalkoztat,’’ in Filmkultura (Buda- pest), September/October 1977. ‘‘Bálint Fábián’s Encounter with God,’’ in Hungarofilm Bulletin (Budapest), no. 4, 1979. Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), January 1980. Fábri, Zoltán, ‘‘Felkertek, megirtam. Elmondanom mar nem volt szabad,’’ in Filmkultura (Budapest), vol. 25, no. 5, 1989. On FáBRI: books— Nemeskurty, Istvan, Short History of the Hungarian Cinema, New York, 1980. Petrie, Graham, History Must Answer to Man: The Contemporary Hungarian Cinema, New York, 1981. On FáBRI: articles— Biographical note, in International Film Guide, London, 1965. Hanisch, Michael, ‘‘Zoltán Fábri,’’ in Regiestühle, Berlin, 1972. FASSBINDER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 306 Biofilmography in Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), no. 3, 1976. Nemes, K., ‘‘Egy életmü—a társadalom fejl?désében,’’ in Filmkultura (Budapest), September/October 1977. Revy, E., in Filmkultura (Budapest), March/April 1984. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 29 August 1994. Roth, Wilhelm, ‘‘Zoltán Fábri 15.10.1917 -23.8.1994,’’ in EPD Film (Frankfurt), October 1994. Obituary, in Film-Dienst (Cologne), 25 October 1994. Obituary, in Classic Images (Muscatine), October 1994. On FáBRI: film— Nádassy, László, director, Fábri portré, 1980. *** Having been a theatre director and designer, Zoltán Fábri began to work in films in 1950 and quickly discovered his true vocation. In 1952 he made his first film, Vihar, a drama about the collectivization of a village. K?rhinta, presented at Cannes in 1956 was astonishing for the beauty of its images and feelings, and for the appearance of a young actress, Mari T?r?csik, whom he picked again two years later for his film èdes Anna. Also in 1956 he made Hannibál tanár úr, the tragedy of a man broken by the pressure of his conformist milieu, with the outstanding Ern? Szabó in the main role. This film, honored at in the main role. This film, honored at the Karlovy Vary Festival in 1957, raised the problem of the heritage of a fascist past and indirectly attacked the oppressive atmosphere of the Stalinist period. Following the political events which supervened in 1956, it was excluded from Hungarian screens. In all of his work, nourished by Hungarian literature, Fábri deals with moral problems bound up with the history of his country, making use of a vigorous realism. Besides the meticulous composition of his narratives, and precise evocation of atmosphere and the milieu where they unfold, it is necessary to underline the importance given to his work with actors and his own participation in the creation of some set designs. Following a drama showing the present-day problems of life in the countryside, Dúvad, Fábri continued with Két félid? a pokolban, set in a concentration camp. The moral behavior of men in times of crisis, the confrontation of ideas and of characters, of cowardice and heroism, totally absorb him and are at the heart of all his films. In Húsz óra, made in 1964, he uses an investigation undertaken by a journalist as the starting point for a brilliant reflection on the impact in Hungary of political events in the recent past, confirming anew his abilities as an analyst and director. For this film he was again able to engage Gy?rgy Illés as cameraman, and they would continue a constant collaboration from that point on. Having given the Hungarian cinema an international audience, Fábri in 1968 directed a Hungarian-American co-production, The Boys of Paul Street, faithfully adapted from the popular novel by Ferenc Molnár, a touching story of childhood heroism. After Hangyaboly, a drama that unfolds behind the walls of a convent, with Mari T?r?csik, he made 141 perc a Befejezetlen mondatból, then returned to a moral analysis of the wartime period with Az ?t?dik pecsét, a work of deep psychological insight that received the Grand Prize at the Moscow Festival in 1977 and remains one of the director’s best films. With Magyarok and its sequel, Fábián Bálint találkozása Istennel, he traces in epic style and more conventional form the fate of the peasants in the period between the wars. In Requiem, he sets against the drama of a young girl the tragic consequences of the postwar political dislocations. In attempting thus to renew his method, he succeeds once again in powerfully expressing the message of a great moralist. Having received the Kossuth Prize three times, as well as being president of the Union of Hungarian Cinema and Television Artists, and professor at Budapest’s Academy of Dramatic and Cinema Arts, Fábri is a key figure of the Hungarian cinema. —Karel Tabery FASSBINDER, Rainer Werner Nationality: German. Born: Bad W?rishofen, Bavaria, 31 May 1946. Education: The Rudolf Steiner School and Secondary schools in Augsburg and Munich until 1964; studied acting at Fridl-Leonhard Studio, Munich. Family: Married Ingrid Caven, 1970 (divorced). Career: Worked as decorator and in archives of Süddeutsche Zeitung, Munich, 1964–66; failed entrance exam to West Berlin Film and Television Academy, 1965; joined action-theater, Munich, with Hanna Schygulla, 1967; first original play produced (Katzelmacher), action-theater closed in May, co-founded anti-theater, 1968; began making films with members of anti-theater, 1969; worked in German theatre and radio, and as actor, 1969–82; founder, Tango Film, independent company, 1971; with Kurt Raab and Roland Petri, took over Theater am Turm (TAT), Frankfurt, 1974; TAT project failed, returned to Munich to concentrate on film work, 1975. Awards: Golden Bear, Berlin Festival, for Die Sehnsucht der Veronika Voss, 1982. Died: In Munich, 10 June 1982. Films as Director (under pseudonym Franz Walsch): 1965 Der Stadtstreicher (The City Tramp) (+ sc, ed, uncredited pr, role) 1966 Das kleine Chaos (The Little Chaos) (+ sc, ed, role, uncredited pr) 1969 Liebe ist k?lter als der Tod (Love Is Colder than Death) (+ sc, ed, role as Franz, uncredited pr); Katzelmacher (+ sc, ed, art d, role as Jorgos, uncredited pr); G?tter der Pest (Gods of the Plague) (+ sc, ed, role as Porno Buyer, uncredited pr); Warum l?uft Herr R amok? (Why Does Herr R Run Amok?) (co-d, co-sc, co-ed, uncredited pr) 1970 Rio das Mortes (+ sc, role as Discotheque-goer); Whity (+ sc, co-ed, role as Guest in Saloon, uncredited pr); Die Niklashauser Fahrt (The Niklashausen Journey) (co-d, co-sc, co-ed, role as Black Monk, uncredited pr); Der amerikanische Soldat (The American Soldier) (sc, song, role as Franz); Warnung vor einer heiligen Nutte (Beware of a Holy Whore) (+ co-ed, sc, role as Sascha, uncredited pr) FASSBINDERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 307 Rainer Werner Fassbinder on the set of Eine Reise ins Licht (under real name): 1971 Pioniere in Ingolstadt (Pioneers in Ingolstadt) (+ sc, uncredited pr); Das Kaffeehaus (The Coffee House) (for television) (+ sc, uncredited pr); Der H?ndler der vier Jahreszeiten (The Merchant of the Four Seasons) (+ sc, role as Zucker, uncredited pr) 1972 Die bitteren Tr?nen der Petra von Kant (The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant) (+ sc, des, uncredited pr); Wildwechsel (Wild Game) (+ sc, uncredited pr); Acht Stunden sind kein Tag (Eight Hours Don’t Make a Day) (+ sc, uncredited pr) (shown on German television in five monthly segments); Bremer Freiheit (Bremen Freedom) (for television) (+ sc, uncredited pr) 1973 Welt am Draht (World on a Wire) (in two parts) (+ co-sc, uncredited pr); Angst essen Seele auf (Fear Eats the Soul) (+ sc, des, uncredited pr); Martha (+ sc, uncredited pr); Nora Helmer (for television) (+ sc, uncredited pr) 1974 Fontane Effi Briest (Effi Briest) (+ sc, role as narrator, uncredited pr); Faustrecht der Freiheit (Fox) (+ co-sc, role as Franz Biberkopf—‘Fox,’ uncredited pr); Wie ein Vogel auf dem Draht (Like a Bird on a Wire) (for television) (+ sc, uncredited pr) 1975 Mutter Küsters Fahrt zum Himmel (Mother Küster’s Trip to Heaven) (+ co-sc, uncredited pr); Angst vor der Angst (Fear of Fear) (+ sc, uncredited pr) 1976 Ich will doch nur, dass Ihr mich liebt (I Only Want You to Love Me) (+ sc, uncredited pr); Satansbraten (Satan’s Brew) (+ sc, uncredited pr); Chinesisches Roulette (Chinese Rou- lette) (+ sc, co-pr) 1977 Bolwieser (+ sc, uncredited pr); Frauen in New York (Women in New York); Eine Reise ins Licht (Despair) 1978 Episode of Deutschland im Herbst (Germany in Autumn) (+ sc, role, uncredited pr); Die Ehe der Maria Braun (The Marriage of Maria Braun) (+ story); In einem Jahr mit dreizehn Monden (In a Year with Thirteen Moons) (+ sc, ph, uncredited pr) 1979 Die dritte Generation (The Third Generation) (+ sc, ph, uncredited pr) 1980 Berlin Alexanderplatz (for television, thirteen episodes with epilogue) (+ sc, ph, role as himself in dream sequence, uncredited pr); Lili Marleen (+ sc, ph, uncredited pr) FASSBINDER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 308 1981 Lola (+ sc, ph, uncredited pr); Theater in Trance (TV docu- mentary) (+ commentary) 1982 Die Sehnsucht der Veronika Voss (Veronika Voss) (+ sc, uncredited pr, ph); Querelle (+ sc, ph, uncredited pr) Other Films: 1967 Tony Freunde (Vasil) (role as Mallard) 1968 Der Br?utigam, die Kom?diantin und der Zuhalter (The Bridegroom, the Comedienne, and the Pimp) (Straub) (role as the pimp) 1969 Fernes Jamaica (Distant Jamaica) (Moland) (sc); Alarm (Lemmel) (role as the man in uniform); Al Capone im deutschen Wald (Wirth) (role as Heini); Baal (Schl?ndorff) (role as Baal); Frei bis zum n?chsten Mal (K?berle) (role as the mechanic) 1970 Matthias Kneissl (Hauff) (role as Flecklbauer); Der pl?tzliche Reichtum der armen Leute von Kombach (Schl?ndorff) (role as a peasant); Supergirl (Thome) (role as man who looks through window) 1973 Z?rtlichkeit der W?lfe (Lommel) (role as Wittkowski) 1974 1 Berlin-Harlem (Lambert) (role as himself) 1976 Schatten der Engel (Shadow of Angels) (Schmid) (sc, role as Raoul, the pimp) 1978 Bourbon Street Blues (Sirk, Schonherr, and Tilman) (role) 1980 Lili Marleen (Weisenborn) (role) Publications By FASSBINDER: books— Antitheater, Frankfurt, 1973. Antitheater 2, Frankfurt, 1974. Stücke 3, Munich, 1978. Querelle Filmbuch, Munich 1982. Film Befreien den Kopf: Essays und Arbeitsnotizen, edited by Michael Toteburg, Frankfurt, 1984. Die Anarchie der Phantasie: Gesprache und Interviews, edited by Michael Toteburg, Frankfurt, 1986. The Marriage of Maria Braun, edited by Joyce Rheuban, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1986. Die Kinofilme 1, Munich, 1987. By FASSBINDER: articles— ‘‘Liebe ist k?lter als der Tod,’’ in Film (London), no. 8, 1969. Interview in Filmkritik (Munich), August 1969. ‘‘Imitation of Life: On the Films of Douglas Sirk,’’ in Douglas Sirk, edited by Mulvey and Halliday, Edinburgh, 1972. Interview in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1974/75. Interview in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1975. ‘‘Insects in a Glass Case,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1976. Interview in Cineaste (New York), Autumn 1977. ‘‘Ich bin das Gluck dieser Erde. Ach war’ das schon wenn’s so ware,’’ an interview with B. Steinborn and R. von Naso, in Filmfaust (Frankfurt), April-May 1982. Interview with P. Pawlikowski, in Stills (London), November/De- cember 1982. On FASSBINDER: books— Limmer, Wolfgang, Fassbinder, Munich, 1973. Jansen, Peter, and Wolfram Schütte, editors, Reihe Film 2: Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Munich, 1979. Eckhardt, Bernd, Rainer Werner Fassbinder: In 17 jahren 42 Filme— Stationen eines Leben fur den Deutschen Film, Munich, 1982. Iden, Peter, and others, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Munich, 1982. Raab, Kurt, and Karsten Peters, Die Sehnsucht des Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Munich, 1982. Foss, Paul, editor, Fassbinder in Review, Sydney, 1983. Hayman, Ronald, Fassbinder: Filmmaker, London, 1984. Phillips, Klaus, New German Filmmakers: From Oberhausen through the 1970s, New York, 1984. Katz, Robert, and Peter Berling, Love Is Colder than Death: The Life and Times of Rainer Werner Fassbinder, London, 1987. Elsaesser, Thomas, New German Cinema: A History, London, 1989. Lardeau, Yann, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Paris, 1990. Spaich, Herbert, Rainer Werner Fassbinder: Leben und Werk, Weinheim, 1992. Shattuc, Jane, Television, Tabloids, and Tears: Fassbinder and Popular Culture, Minneapolis, Minnesota Press, 1995. Elsaesser, Thomas, Fassbinder’s Germany: History, Identity, Sub- ject, Amsterdam, 1996. Watson, Wallace Steadman, Understanding Rainer Werner Fassbinder: Film as Private and Public Art, Columbia, South Carolina, 1996. Kardish, Laurence, editor, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, New York, 1997. On FASSBINDER: articles— Wilson, David, ‘‘Anti-Cinema: Rainer Werner Fassbinder,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 2, 1972. ‘‘Fassbinder and Sirk,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/ December 1975. ‘‘Gay Men and Film Section,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), no. 16, 1977. Oms, M., A. Micheu, and M. Meitzel, ‘‘à propos de Rainer Werner Fassbinder,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinématheque (Perpignan), vol. 32, Spring 1981. ‘‘Fassbinder Issue’’ of October (Cambridge, Massachusetts), Sum- mer 1982. Dossier on Fassbinder, in Cinéma (Paris), July-August 1982. Roud, Richard, ‘‘Biter Bit,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1982. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Explorations,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), September 1982. Riley, B., and H. Kennedy, obituaries, in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1982. MacBean, J.R., ‘‘The Success and Failure of Rainer Werner Fassbinder,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1982/83. MacBean, J.R., ‘‘The Cinema as Self–Portrait: The Final Films of R.W. Fassbinder,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 12, no. 4, 1983. Sirk, Douglas, ‘‘Obituary for Rainer Werner Fassbinder,’’ in Frame- work (Norwich), no. 20, 1983. Erffmeyer, T.E., ‘‘I Only Want You to Love Me: Fassbinder, Melo- drama and Brechtian Form,’’ in Journal of University Film Association (Carbondale, Illinois), Winter 1983. Feinstein, Herbert, ‘‘BRD 1–2-3: Fassbinder’s Postwar Trilogy and the Spectacle,’’ in Cinema Journal (Champaign, Illinois), Fall 1983. Katz, Robert, ‘‘Fear Ate His Soul,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), July/August 1985. FASSBINDERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 309 Krasnova, G., ‘‘Uber Rainer Werner Fassbinder,’’ in Beitr?ge zur Film und Fernsehwissenschaft (Berlin), vol. 26, no. 2, 1985. Silverman, K., ‘‘Fassbinder and Lacan: A Reconsideration of Gaze, Look, and Image,’’ in Camera Obscura (Baltimore), no. 18, 1989. Ruppert, P., ‘‘Fassbinder, Spectatorship, and Utopian Desire,’’ in Cinema Journal (Berkeley), vol. 28, no. 2, Winter 1989. ‘‘The Other Fassbinder,’’ in Wide Angle (Baltimore), vol. 12, no. 1, January 1990. Pflaum, H.G., ‘‘. . . ich hatte nur diese bestimmte Zeit. . . ,’’ in EPD Film (Frankfurt), vol. 9, no. 6, June 1992. Watson, W., ‘‘The Bitter Tears of Rainer Werner Fassbinder/Fassbinder Bogarde Letters,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 2, no. 3, July 1992. Naughton, Leonie, ‘‘Fassbinder: Ten Years On. . . ,’’ in Filmnews, vol. 22, no. 7, August 1992. ‘‘Fassbinder-Werkschau,’’ in Film und Fernsehen (Berlin), vol. 20, no. 4, August 1992. Shattuc, Jane, ‘‘Fassbinder as a Popular Auteur: The Making of an Authorial Legend,’’ in Journal of Film and Television (Boston), vol. 45, no. 1, Spring 1993. Nevers, C., and E. Andréanszky, ‘‘Le secret de Rainer Werner Fassbinder,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 469, June 1993. Shattuc, Jane, ‘‘Contra Brecht: Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Pop Culture in the Sixties,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), vol. 33, no. 1, Fall 1993. Medhurst, Andy, ‘‘The Long Take,’’ in Sight and Sound, vol. 6, no. 2, February 1996. On FASSBINDER: films— von Mengershausen, Joachim, Ende einer Kommune, West Ger- many, 1970. Ballhaus, Michael, and Dietmar Buchmann, Fassbinder produziert: Film Nr. 8, West Germany, 1971. Wiebel, Martin, and Ludwig Metzger, Glashaus-TV Intern, West Germany, 1973. Plater, Edward M.V., ‘‘The Externalization of the Protagonist’s Mind in Fassbinder’s Despair,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsyl- vania), vol. 11, no. 3, 1987. *** Rainer Werner Fassbinder was the leading member of a group of second-generation, alternative filmmakers in West Germany. The first generation consisted of Alexander Kluge and others who in 1962 drafted the Oberhausen Manifesto, initiating what has come to be called the ‘‘New German Cinema.’’ Fassbinder’s most distinguishing trait within the tradition of ‘‘counter-cinema,’’ aside from his reputa- tion for rendering fragments of the new left ideology of the 1960s on film, was his modification of the conventions of political cinema initiated in the 1920s and subsequent tailoring of these conventions to modern conditions of Hollywood cinema. He did this to a greater degree than Godard, who is credited with using these principles as content for filmic essays on narrative. In an interview in 1971 Fassbinder asserted what has come to represent his most convincing justification for his innovative attach- ment to story: ‘‘The American cinema is the only one I can take really seriously, because it’s the only one that has really reached an audience. German cinema used to do so, before 1933, and of course there are individual directors in other countries who are in touch with their audiences. But American cinema has generally had the happiest relationship with its audience, and that is because it doesn’t try to be ‘art.’ Its narrative style is not so complicated or artificial. Well, of course it’s artificial, but not ‘artistic’.’’ This concern with narrative and popular expression (some of his productions recall the good storytelling habits of Renoir) was evident early in the theatrical beginnings of Fassbinder’s career, when he forged an aesthetic that could safely be labeled a creative synthesis of Brecht and Artaud oriented toward the persuasion of larger audiences. This aesthetic began to form with Fassbinder’s turn to the stage in 1967. He had finished his secondary school training in 1964 in Augsburg and Munich. He joined the Action-Theater in Munich with Hanna Schygulla, whom he had met in acting school. After producing his first original play in 1968, the Action-Theater was closed by the police in May of that year. Fassbinder then founded the ‘‘anti- theater,’’ a venture loosely organized around the tenets of Brechtian theater translated into terms alluring for contemporary audiences. Although the 1969 Liebe ist k?lter als der Tod marks the effective beginning of his feature film career (Der Stadtsreicher and Das kleine Chaos constituting minor efforts), he was to maintain an intermittent foothold in the theater over the years until his premature death, working in various productions throughout Germany and producing a number of radio plays in the early 1970s. The stint with ‘‘anti- theater’’ was followed by the assumption of directorial control, with Kurt Raab and Roland Petri, over the Theater am Turm (TAT) of Frankfurt in 1974, and the founding of Albatross Productions for coproductions in 1975. When TAT failed, Fassbinder became less involved in the theater, but a trace of his interest always remained and was manifested in his frequent appearances in his own films. In fact, out of the more than forty feature films produced during his lifetime, there have only been a handful or so in which Fassbinder did not appear in one way or another. Indeed, he has had a major role in at least ten of these films. Fassbinder’s mixing together of Hollywood and avant-garde forms took a variety of turns throughout his brief career. In the films made during the peak of 1960s activism in Germany—specifi- cally Katzelmacher, Liebe ist k?lter als der Tod, G?tter der Pest, and Warum l?uft Herr R. Amok?—theatrical conventions, princi- pally those derived from his Brechtian training, join forces with a ‘‘minimalist’’ aesthetic and the indigenous energies of the Heimatfilm to portray such sensitive issues as the foreign worker problem, contradictions within supposedly revolutionary youth culture, and concerns of national identity. These early ‘‘filmed theater’’ pieces, inevitably conforming to a static, long-take style because of a dearth of funding, tended to resemble parables or fables in their brevity and moral, didactic structuring. As funding from the government in- creased in proportion to his success, the popular forms of filmmaking associated with Hollywood became his models. His output from 1970 through the apocalyptic events of October 1977 (a series of terrorist actions culminated in Hans-Martin Schleyer’s death, etc.) is an exploration of the forms of melodrama and the family romance as a way to place social issues within the frame of sexual politics. Whity, Der H?ndler der vier Jahreszeiten, Die bitteren Tr?nen der Petra von Kant, Martha, Faustrecht der Freiheit, and Frauen in New York are perhaps the most prominent examples. A self-reflexive pastiche of the gangster film is evident as well in Der amerikanische Soldat. This attention to the mediation of other forms ultimately began to assume the direction of a critique of the ‘‘art film’’: Warnung vor einer heiligen Nutte, an update of 8 1/2; Satansbraten, a comment on FAYE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 310 aesthetics and politics centered around the figure of Stephen George; and Chinesisches Roulette, a parody concerning an inbred aristocracy. The concern with the continuation of fascism into the present day received some attention in this period (specifically in Wildwechsel, Despair, and Bolwieser), but it became the dominant structuring motivation in the final period (1977–82) of Fassbinder’s career. Here there is a kind of epic recombination of all earlier innovations in service of an understanding of fascism and its implications for the immediate postwar generation. Fassbinder’s segment in Deutschland im Herbst (a collective endeavor of many German intellectuals and filmmakers) inaugurates this period. It and Die Ehe der Maria Braun, Lili Marleen, Lola, and Die Sehnsucht der Veronika Voss may be seen as a portrayal of the consolidation of German society to conform to the ‘‘American Model’’ of social and economic development. In einem Jahr mit 13 Monden, Berlin Alexanderplatz, and Querelle are depictions of the crisis in sexual identity, and the criminal and counter-cultural worlds associated with that process, in relation to ‘‘capitalism in crisis.’’ Die dritte Generation is a kind of cynical summation of the German new left in the wake of a decade of terrorist activities. This final phase, perhaps Fassbinder’s most brilliant cinematically, will be the one given the greatest critical attention in future years. It is the one which evinces the keenest awareness of the intellectual spaces traversed in Germany since the years of fascism (and especially since the mid-1960s), and the one which reveals the most effective assimi- lation of the heritage of forms associated with art and political cinema. —John O’Kane FAYE, Safi Nationality: Senegalese. Born: Dakar, Senegal, 1943. Education: Primary school in Dakar; Normal School in Rufisque, Senegal, Teacher’s Certificate, 1962; studied ethnology at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Paris; trained as a filmmaker at the Louis Lumière Film School, graduated 1974; University of Paris VII, Doctorate in Ethnology, 1979; studied video production in Berlin, 1979–80. Fam- ily: Divorced; one daughter: Zeiba. Career: School teacher, 1963–69; actress in Jean Rouch’s Petit à petit ou les Lettres Persanes, 1970; actress in her own short film La Passante, 1972; released her first full- length docudrama, Kaddu Beykat, 1975, which spearheaded her subsequent career as ethnologist-filmmaker. Awards: Prize, Festival International du Film de l’Ensemble Francophone (FIFEF), Geneva, 1975; Georges Sadoul Prize, France, 1975; Special Award, 5th Panafrican Film Festival of Ouagadougou (FESPACO), Burkina Faso, 1976; FIPRESCI International Film Critics Award, Berlin Film Festival, 1976; Award at the Carthage Film Festival, Tunisia, 1980; Special Prize at the Leipzig Film Festival, Germany, 1982; special tribute at the 20th Festival de Femmes de Créteil, France, 1998. Address: 10, rue Friant, 75014 Paris, France. Films as Director: 1972 La Passante (The Passerby) (+ ro) 1973 Revanche (Revenge) 1975 Kaddu beykat (The Voice of the Peasant) 1979 Fad’jal; Goob na ?u (The Harvest Is In) 1980 Man Sa Yay (I, Your Mother) 1981 Les ames au soleil (Souls under the Sun) 1982 Selbé et tant d’autres (Selbe and So Many Others) 1983 3 ans 5 mois (Three years five months) 1984 Ambassades nourricières (Culinary Embassies) 1985 Elsie Haas, femme peintre et cinéaste d’Haiti (Elsie Haas, Haitian Woman Painter and Filmmaker); Racines noires (Black Roots) 1989 Tesito 1996 Mossane Publications By FAYE: articles— ‘‘Safi Faye comme elle se dit,’’ interview with Jean Bernard, in Afrique nouvelle (Paris), 15 October 1975. ‘‘Entretien avec Safi Faye,’’ interview with Fran?oise Maupin, in La revue du cinéma, Image et son (Paris), February 1976. ‘‘Safi Faye—une Africaine derrière la caméra,’’ interview with Father Eichenberger, in Unir Cinéma (Saint Louis, Senegal), October-November 1976. ‘‘Entretien avec Safi Faye,’’ interview with Henry Welsh, in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), December 1976-January 1977. ‘‘Safi Faye,’’ interview with Catherine Ruelle, in L’Afrique littéraire et artistique (Paris), Third Quarter 1978. ‘‘La Passion selon Safi Faye,’’ interview with Moussa Traoré, in Bingo (Paris), August 1979. ‘‘Four Filmmakers from West Africa,’’ interviews with Angela Martin, in Framework (London), Fall 1979. ‘‘J’aime filmer sur un rythme africain,’’ interview with Marc Mangin, in Droit et Liberté (Paris), March 1980. ‘‘Jean Rouch jugé par six cinéastes d’Afrique noire,‘‘ interviews with Pierre Haffner, in Cinémaction, First Quarter 1982. ‘‘Safi Faye: Mossane, soit on se soumet, soit on explose,’’ interview with Catherine Demy, in Amina (Paris), July 1996. ‘‘Un film en Afrique, c’est la galère,’’ interview with Alassane Cissé and Madior Fall, in Sud Week-End (Dakar), 12 October 1996. ‘‘Entretien: Safi Faye,’’ interview with Olivier Barlet, in Africultures (Paris), November 1997. On FAYE: articles— Beye, Ben Diogaye, ‘‘Safi Faye, vedette du film Petit à petit ou les Lettres persanes 1968,’’ in Bingo (Paris), January 1969. Binet, Jacques, ‘‘Cinéma africain,’’ in Afrique contemporaine (Paris), January-February 1976. Marcorelles, Louis, ‘‘Le Prix Georges Sadoul 1975—L’Afrique et le Brésil au palmarès,’’ in Le Monde (Paris), 13 December 1975. Ghali, Noureddine, ‘‘Festival international du film de l’ensemble francophone,’’ in Cinéma 76 (Paris), January 1976. Binet, Jacques, ‘‘Cinéma africain,’’ in Afrique contemporaine (Paris), January-February 1976. FAYEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 311 ‘‘Les Pasionarias n’étaient pas au rendez-vous,’’ in Jeune Afrique (Paris), 12 March 1976. Holl, ‘‘Kaddu beykat,’’ in Variety (New York), 14 July 1976. Arbois, Janick, ‘‘Lettre paysanne,’’ in Télérama (Paris), 20 Octo- ber 1976. Vaugeois, Gérard, ‘‘Lettre paysanne,’’ in Ecran 76 (Paris), 15 December 1976. P, J-L, ‘‘Lettre paysanne,’’ in Positif (Paris), December 1976. Grant, Jacques, ‘‘Lettre paysanne, carnet de notes pour la paysannerie africaine,’’ in Cinéma 77 (Paris), January 1977. Moustapha, Mahama Baba, ‘‘Lettre paysanne de Safi Faye,’’ in Cinémarabe (Paris), March-April 1977. N’Daw, Ali Kheury, ‘‘Des paysans bien de chez nous,’’ in Le soleil (Dakar), 12 April 1977. Beye, Ben Diogaye, ‘‘Après le Festival de Royan, une réelle dialectique dans le dialogue des cultures,’’ in Cinéma 77, May 1977. Bosséno, Christian, ‘‘Lettre paysanne,’’ in Revue du Cinéma, Image et Son, October 1977. Hoberman, J, ‘‘Inside Senegal,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 6 February 1978. ‘‘Fad’jal,’’ in Le Film fran?ais (Paris), 4 May 1979. Taylor, Clyde, ‘‘The Screen Scene,’’ in The Black Collegian (New Orleans), May-June 1979. Mosk, ‘‘Fad’jal,’’ in Variety, 6 June 1979. Martin, Marcel, ‘‘Fad’jal,’’ Ecran 79, 15 July 1979. Courant, Gérard. ‘‘Fad’jal,’’ in Cinéma 79, July-August 1979. Paranagua, Paulo-Antonio, ‘‘Fad’jal de Safi Faye (Senegal),’’ in Positif, July-August 1979. Sylviane and Marie-Aude, ‘‘Un conte visuel qui, à travers des images en écho, transmet l’histoire d’un village,’’ in Des femmes en mouvement, April 1980. Schissel, Howard, ‘‘Africa on Film:The First Feminine View,’’ in The Guardian (London), 9 July 1980. Bachy, Victor, ‘‘Festivals et rencontres: les Journées Cinématographiques de Carthage 1980,’’ in Revue belge du cinéma (Brussels), no. 20, 1981. Bosséno, Christian, ‘‘Paysans,’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), Special Issue, 1982. Haffner, Pierre, ‘‘Sénégal,’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), Special Issue, 1982. Relich, Mario, ‘‘Chronicle of a Student,’’ in West Africa (London), 16 August 1982. Bassan, Raphael, ‘‘Quand nourriture rime avec culture,’’ in Afrique- Asie (Paris), 31 December 1985. Pfaff, Fran?oise, ‘‘Safi Faye,’’ in Twenty-five Black African Filmmakers, Westport, Connecticut, 1988. Pfaff Fran?oise, ‘‘Five West African Filmmakers on Their Films,’’ in Issue: A Journal of Opinion (Haverford, Pennsylvania), vol. 20, no. 2, 1992. Bouzet, Ange-Dominique, ‘‘Safi Faye, cinéaste à l’africaine,’’ in Libération (Paris), 15 May 1991. Amarger, Michel, ‘‘Cannes: Five African Filmmakers on the Croisette,’’ in Ecrans d’Afrique (Milan), First Quarter 1996. Mandelbaum, Jacques, ‘‘Mossane,’’ in Le Monde (Paris), 18 May 1996. Special, Alessandra, ‘‘Mossane,’’ in Ecrans d’Afrique (Milan), Sec- ond Quarter 1996. Hurst, Heike, ‘‘Mossane,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), Summer 1996. Sarr, Ibrahima, ‘‘Mossane de Safi Faye: La beauté magnifiée,’’ in Le soleil (Dakar), 9 October 1996. Amarger, Michel, ‘‘Réalisatrices d’Afrique,’’ in AFIFF [Association du Festival International de Films de Femmes] (Créteil), 1998. Bédarida, Catherine, ‘‘A Créteil, le Festival de films de femmes invite les cinémas d’Afrique,’’ in Le Monde (Paris), 3 April 1998. Bonnet, Sophie, ‘‘Légende vivante,’’ in Les Inrockuptibles (Paris), 8 April 1998. Guichard, Louis, ‘‘Mossane de Safi Faye,’ in Télérama (Paris), 8 April 1998. Bouzet, Ange-Dominique, ‘‘Mossane, beauté maudite,’’ in Libéra- tion (Paris), 8 April 1998. Baudin Brigitte, ‘‘Mossane: la femme africaine selon Safi Faye,’’ in Le Figaro (Paris), 9 April 1998. *** A pioneer woman director in the male-dominated realm of African cinema, Safi Faye is today, with a career spanning more than 25 years, the best-known independent African female filmmaker. Safi Faye met the French ethnologist and filmmaker Jean Rouch at the 1966 Dakar Festival of Negro Arts. Rouch encouraged Faye to engage in cinema and seemingly triggered her subsequent use of the camera as an investigative and pedagogical tool in ethnographic filmmaking, which, to this date, represents the bulk of her cine- matic output. Faye’s first black-and-white short, La Passante (The Passerby, 1972), illustrates the dreams and desires of a French and an African man as they watch a beautiful young African woman walk by. In a 1985 interview in Paris, where she mainly resides, Faye declared: ‘‘The female protagonist of La Passante is a foreigner who arouses a certain curiosity among the people of the country in which she is presently residing. She lives in a country where she is neither integrated nor assimilated. She is in Europe but her thoughts are in Africa. I am just like her, I define myself as a passerby.’’ Faye’s first significant film, Kaddu beykat (which means ‘‘the voice of the peasant’’ in Wolof, Senegal’s main African language), was made in 1975. Here, her perspective of her own ethnic group, the Serer, is a far cry from the often culturally distant and biased gaze of alien Western observers. Faye gives a voice to largely illiterate Senegalese farmers, who discuss their socioeconomic needs and political problems. Kaddu beykat, initially banned in Senegal, con- demns the colonial heritage of peanut monoculture and denounces the government’s lack of agricultural diversification to insure the welfare of the rural populace. Shot in a slow pace, depicting the close intimacy of man and nature and rural ritualistic gestures, Kaddu beykat is a black-and- white feature-length docudrama interpreted by non-professional ac- tors, farmers who were asked to play their own roles. Yet, upon the broader canvas of collective issues, Faye’s sympathetic lens also focuses on the fate of a young villager who migrates to Dakar in order to secure the traditional dowry that will enable him to marry. Falling prey to exploitation by urban employers, the young man returns to his deprived, yet morally sounder, pastoral lifestyle. Released in 1979, Fad’jal (which bears the name of the Serer village of Faye’s family) offers another analysis of sociocultural aspects of a Senegalese rural community. Using many of the same techniques (interviews and direct cinema) present in Kaddu beykat, the director shows how collective memory is conveyed by the elders FEJ?S DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 312 to the younger generations through the oral tradition. She also depicts how old values tend to disappear due to social changes from the migration of farmers to urban centers and foreign lands. Subsequently, Faye shot a series of documentaries in the same ethnographic vein, mostly commissioned by international organiza- tions and European television, related to conflicting dichotomies between indigenous traditions and socially destabilizing Western mores, an omnipresent theme in African cinema. Some of these films also include the topic of exile and its psychological effects. Faye’s Goob na ?u (The Harvest Is In, 1979) treats agricultural issues, and Man Sa Yay (I, Your Mother, 1980) illustrates the isolation of Senegalese guest workers in Germany. In Les ames au soleil (Souls under the Sun, 1981), the filmmaker stresses problems related to drought, health, and development and their effect on women and children in remote areas of Africa. Selbé et tant d’autres (Selbe and So Many Others, 1982) depicts the responsibilities of Senegalese village women after their husbands migrate to cities for work. On a more personal note, 3 ans 5 mois (Three Years Five Months, 1979–83) showcases Faye’s daughter and depicts how children easily adapt to foreign cultures. Ambassades nourricières (Culinary Embassies, 1984) explores the importance of culinary rites for displaced groups at- tempting to maintain their primary identity. Interviews with African, Asian, European, Latin American, and Middle-Eastern restaurant owners established in Paris highlight issues surrounding emigration and acculturation. Racines noires (Black Roots, 1985), documents a meeting of writers, painters, and stage and screen actors from Africa and the Black Diaspora in Paris. Through interviews and swift portrayals, Faye deftly delineates their aspirations. Elsie Haas, femme peintre et cinéaste d’Haiti (Elsie Haas, Haitian Woman Painter and Filmmaker 1985) examines the life and career of a noted Diasporic creator living and working in Paris. Tesito (1989) pays tribute to the collective organizational kills of fishermen’s wives in Casamance, Senegal, as they dry and sell fish to generate much of their fam- ily income. Faye’s film Mossane (‘‘beauty’’ in the Serer language) was begun in 1990 and finally released in 1996 due to legal problems with the French producers. This film reflects great visual polish and iridescent luminosity, whereas some of her first films were criticized for certain technical deficiencies. Mossane narrates the tale of a young woman of such rare charm and attractiveness that even spirits fall in love with her. Enamored of a young man of modest means, Mossane rebels against the marriage arranged by her parents, who are more sensitive to the monetary benefits of matrimony than to their daughter’s happiness. At first appearing to submit to her parents’ wishes, Mossane escapes during the marriage ceremony and embarks in a canoe to the middle of a river, where spirits claim her life. With songs of incantation, Faye creates a haunting atmosphere reminiscent of ancient Greek tragedies where the chorus comments on the action, and supernatural beings intervene to determine the fate of humans. Mossane may mark a turning point, a new artistic direction, in Safi Faye’s career. While reflecting her ethnographic interest in witness- ing daily domestic activities and animistic religious rites, it is truly a work of fiction, the contemplative style and mythic content of which are drastically different from the realism of her previous works. One wonders whether she will continue with fiction or return to ethnographic film research and documentation. —Fran?oise Pfaff FEJ?S, Paul Nationality: Hungarian. Born: Pál Fej?s in Budapest, 24 January 1897; became U.S. citizen, 1930. Education: school in Veszprem and at Kecskemet; studied medicine. Military Service: Served on Italian front, organized plays for soldiers, 1914–18. Career: Set designer for opera and for Orient-Film studios, 1918; director for Studio Mobil, from 1919; travelled across Europe, worked with Max Reinhardt and Fritz Lang, left for United States, 1923; medical research assistant at Rockefeller Institute, moved to Hollywood, 1926; signed to Universal, 1928; with cameraman Hal Mohr, de- signed crane allowing great camera mobility, 1929; signed to MGM, 1930; invited to Paris by Pierre Braunberger, 1931; director for Films Osso in Hungary, broke MGM contract, 1932; signed to Nordisk Films, 1934; went to Madagascar, 1935–36; signed to Svensk Filmindustri, travelled to Indonesia and New Guinea, 1937; director of Viking Fund, New York, 1941; later director of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. Died: In New York, 23 April 1963. Films as Director: (in Hungary): 1920 Pan; Lidércnyomás (Nightmare; Hallucination; Lord Arthur Saville’s Crime) (+ co-sc); Ujraél?k (Reincarnation); Jóslat (Prophecy) 1921 Fekete Kapitany (The Black Captain); Arsén Lupin utolsó kalandja (The Last Adventure of Arsène Lupin) 1922 Szenzáció (Sensation) 1923 Egri csillagok (The Stars of Eger) (+ sc, incomplete) (in United States): 1928 The Last Moment (Le Dernier Moment) (+ sc, ed); Lonesome (Solitude) 1929 Broadway; The Last Performance (working title: ‘‘Erik the Great’’) 1930 Captain of the Guard (Marseillaise) (co-d, uncredited); Menschen hinter Gittern (German version of George Hill’s The Big House) (in France): 1931 Fant?mas (+ co-sc) (in Hungary): 1932 Tavaszi zápor (Marie, légende hongroise; Une Histoire d’amour) (+ co-sc); Itél a Balaton (Storm at Balaton) (in Austria): 1933 Sonnenstrahl (Gardez le sourire) (+ co-pr, co-sc); Frühlingsstimmen (Les Voix du printemps) FEJ?SDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 313 Paul Fej?s (right) poses with the cast of The Last Performance (in Denmark): 1934 Flugten fra millionerne (Flight from the Millions; Les Mil- lions en fuite) (+ sc) 1935 Fange nr. 1 (Prisoner No. 1) (+ co-sc): Det gyldne Smil (The Golden Smile; Le Sourire d’or) (+ sc) (in Madagascar): 1935/36 Svarta Horisonter (Horizons noirs) series: 1. Danst?vlingen i Esira (Dance Contest in Esira); 2. Sk?nhetsv?rd i djungeln (Beauty Care in the Jungle); 3. V?rldens mest Anv?ndbara Tr?d (The Most Useful Tree in the World); 4. Djungeldansen (Jungle Dance); 5. Havets Dj?vul (The Sea Devil); 6. V?ra Faders Gravar (Tombs of Our Ancestors) (in Indonesia and New Guinea): 1937/38 Stammen Lever an (The Tribe Lives On); Bambu? p?ldern p? Mentawei (The Age of Bamboo at Mentawei); H?vdingens Son ?r d?d (The Chief’s Son Is Dead); Draken p? Komodo (The Dragon of Komodo); Byn vid den Trivsamma Brunnen (The Village Near the Pleasant Fountain); Tambora; Att Segla ?r N?dv?ndigt (To Sail Is Necessary) (completed by ?ke Leijonhufvud) (in Thailand): 1938 En Handfull Ris (A Handful of Rice); Man och Kvinna (Homme et femme) (co-d) (in Peru): 1940/41 Yagua (‘‘directed’’ by Yagua tribe shaman with Fejos controlling camera) Other Films: 1923 Land of the Lawless (Buckinham) (adapt) 1931 L’Amour a l’américaine (supervision) FELLINI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 314 Publications On FEJ?S: books— Dodds, John, The Several Lives of Paul Fejos, New York, 1973. On FEJ?S: articles— Bréchignac, Jean-Vincent, ‘‘La Carrière de Paul Fejos,’’ in Pour Vous (Paris), 31 January 1929. Doré, Claude, ‘‘Fant?mas reparait,’’ in Ciné-Miroir (Paris), 22 January 1932. Wunscher, Catherine, ‘‘Paul Fejos,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March 1954. Kraft, R., ‘‘Fejos’s Broadway,’’ letter in Films in Review (New York), April 1954. Molnar, Istvan, ‘‘Fej?s Pal es a Tavaszi Zapor,’’ in Filmkultura (Budapest), October 1960. Bidney, David, ‘‘Paul Fejos (1897–1963),’’ in The American Anthro- pologist (New York), February 1964. Balint, Lajos, ‘‘Fej?s Pal—A Tavolbalato,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), 15 July 1966. Haudiquet, Philippe, ‘‘Paul Fejos 1897–1963,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma (Paris), vol. 4, 1968. Ban, Robert, in Film, Szinhaz, Muzsika (Budapest), 17 August 1968. Petrie, Graham, ‘‘Fejos,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1978. Petrie, Graham, ‘‘Paul Fejos in America,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berke- ley), no. 2, 1979. ‘‘Fejos Issue’’ of Filmkritik (Munich), August 1979. *** Few directors have had such a curious and diverse career as that of Paul Fej?s, who was equally at home behind a camera directing entertainment features and documentaries or on anthropological expeditions to South America and the Far East. After an early career in his native Hungary that embraced medi- cine, painting, and play production, Paul Fej?s became a film director in the late teens. A trip to Paris persuaded him that he wanted to direct in the West, specifically the United States. In 1921 he arrived in America and started to work at the Rockefeller Institute. Eventually, Fej?s journeyed to Hollywood—despite his penniless situation—and made his first American film, The Last Moment, for $5,000, borrowed from Edward Spitz. An experimental drama in which a drowning man (Otto Matiesen) relives his life, The Last Moment was hailed by the Hollywood intelligentsia and enabled Fej?s to land a contract at Universal. The film also indicated that Fej?s was to be no ordinary Hollywood-style producer. He was going to use every technical trick the cinema offered in the creation of his films, whether the works were melodramas about magicians (The Last Performance) or screen adaptations of popular Broadway productions (Broadway). Paul Fej?s’s one genuine screen masterpiece (and the only one of his films which is readily available for appraisal today) is Lonesome, which uses cinéma vérité to provide a study of two lonely New Yorkers who spend a Saturday afternoon and evening at Coney Island. Not only are the visuals in Lonesome stunningly exciting, but the director manages to obtain realistic performances from his two stars, Barbara Kent and Glenn Tryon, neither of whom had previously shown much indication that they were capable of such performances. The director’s Hollywood career ended as suddenly as it had begun. There were arguments over the direction of All Quiet on the Western Front, a project which he cherished but which was assigned to Lewis Milestone. Fej?s returned to Hungary, where he directed Marie, generally considered the best pre-war production from that country. He also directed films in Austria and Denmark before embarking on a documentary filmmaking trip to the Far East, China, and Japan, where he made Black Horizons and A Handful of Rice, among others. In 1941 he joined the Wenner-Gren Foundation in New York. He spent the rest of his life directing anthropological research. —Anthony Slide FELLINI, Federico Nationality: Italian. Born: Rimini, Italy, 20 January 1920. Educa- tion: Catholic schools in Rimini, until 1938. Family: Married Giulietta Masina in Rome, 30 October 1943, one son (died). Career: Worked on 420 and Avventuroso magazines in Florence, 1938; caricature artist and writer in Rome, from 1939; through friend Aldo Fabrizi, worked as screenwriter, from 1941; worked on Rossellini’s Rome, Open City, 1944; screenwriter and assistant director, 1946–52; formed Capitolium production company with Alberto Lattuada for Variety Lights, 1950; formed Federiz production company with Angelo Rizzoli (subsequently taken over by Clemente Fracazzi), 1961. Awards: Grand Prize, Venice Festival, 1954, New York Film Critics Circle Award, 1956, Screen Directors Guild Award, 1956, and Oscar for Best Foreign Film, 1956, for La strada; Oscar for Best Foreign Film, for La notti di Cabiria, 1957; Oscar for Best Foreign Film, 1960, Palme d’or, Cannes Festival, 1960, and New York Critics Circle Award, 1961, for La dolce vita; Oscar for Best Foreign Film, for 8 1/2, 1963; Oscar for Best Foreign Film, and New York Film Critics Circle Award, for Amarcord, 1974; Special Prize, Cannes Federico Fellini FELLINIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 315 Festival, 1987; Special Oscar, honoring the body of his work, 1993; Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters, Columbia University, New York, 1970. Died: Italy, 31 October 1993. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1950 Luci del varieta (co-d, + co-pr) 1951 Lo Sceicco Bianco 1953 I Vitelloni; ‘‘Un’agenzia matrimoniale’’ in Amore in citta (Zavattini) 1954 La strada 1955 Il bidone 1956 La notti di Cabiria (Nights of Cabiria) 1960 La dolce vita 1962 ‘‘Le tentazioni del dottor Antonio’’ in Boccaccio ‘70 (Zavattini) 1963 Otto e mezzo (8 1/2) 1965 Giulietta degli spiriti (Juliet of the Spirits) 1968 ‘‘Toby Dammit’’ (Il ne faut jamais parier sa tête contre le diable) in Histoires extraordinaires/Tre passi nel delirio (anthology film) 1969 Block-notes di un regista (Fellini: A Director’s Notebook) (for TV) (+ narration, role); Satyricon (Fellini Satyricon) 1970 I clowns (The Clowns) 1972 Roma (Fellini Roma) (+ role) 1974 Amarcord 1976 Casanova (Il Casanova di Federico Fellini) 1978 Prova d’orchestra (Orchestra Rehearsal) (for TV) 1980 La città delle donne (City of Women) 1983 E la nave va (And the Ship Sailed On) 1986 Ginger and Fred (+ co-sc) 1987 Intervista (The Interview) (+ role) 1990 La voce della luna (The Voice of the Moon) Other Films: 1939 Lo vedi come . . . lo vedi come sei?! (Mattòli) (gagman) 1940 Non me lo dire! (Mattòli) (gagman); Il pirata sono io! (Mattòli) (gagman) 1941 Documento Z3 (Guarini) (sc/co-sc, uncredited) 1942 Avanti, c’e posto (Bonnard) (sc/co-sc, uncredited); Chi l’ha vistro? (Alessandrini) (sc/co-sc); Quarta pagina (Manzari and Gambino) (sc/co-sc) 1943 Apparizione (de Limur) (sc/co-sc, uncredited); Campo dei fiori (Bonnard) (sc/co-sc); Tutta la città canta (Freda) (sc/ co-sc); L’ultima carrozzella (Mattòli) (sc/co-sc) 1945 Roma, città aperta (Rossellini) (asst d, co-sc) 1946 Paisà (Rossellini) (asst d, co-sc) 1947 Il delitto di Giovanni Episcopo (Lattuada) (co-sc); Il passatore (Coletti) (co-sc); La fumeria d’oppio (Ritorna Za-la-mort) (Matarazzo) (co-sc); L’ebreo errante (Alessandrini) (co-sc) 1948 ‘‘Il miracolo’’ episode of L’amore (Rossellini) (asst d, co-sc, role as stranger mistaken for St. Joseph); Il mulino del Po (Lattuada) (co-sc); In nome della legge (Germi) (co-sc); Senza pietà (Lattuada) (co-sc); La città dolente (Bonnard) (co-sc) 1949 Francesco, giullare di Dio (Rossellini) (co-sc, asst d) 1950 Il cammino della speranza (Germi) (co-sc); Persiane chiuse (Comencini) (co-sc) 1951 La città si difende (Germi) (co-sc); Cameriera bella presenza offresi (Pastina) (co-sc) 1952 Il brigante di Tacca del Lupo (Germi) (co-sc); Europa ‘51 (Rossellini) (co-sc, uncredited) 1958 Fortunella (De Filippo) (co-sc) 1970 Alex in Wonderland (Mazursky) (role as himself) 1974 C’eravamo tanto amati (Scola) (guest appearance) Publications By FELLINI: books— Il Bidone, with Ennio Flaiano and Tullio Pinelli, Paris, 1956. Le notti di Cabiria di Federico Fellini, edited by Lino del Fra, Rocca San Casiano, Italy, 1957. La dolce vita di Federico Fellini, edited by Tullio Kezich, Bologna, 1960; New York, 1961. 8 1/2 di Federico Fellini, edited by Camilla Cederna, Rocca San Casciano, Italy, 1963. Giulietta degli spiriti, edited by Tullio Kezich, Rocca San Casciano, Italy, 1965; as Juliet of the Spirits, New York, 1965. La mia Rimini, Bologna, 1967. Tre passi nel delirio, with Louis Malle and Roger Vadim, Bolo- gna, 1968. Fellini Satyricon di Federico Fellini, edited by Dario Zanelli, Bolo- gna, 1969; as Fellini Satyricon, New York, 1970. Il primo Fellini: Lo sceicco blanco, I vitelloni, La strada, Il bidone, edited by Renzo Renzi, Bologna, 1969. Federico Fellini, Discussion No. 1, Beverly Hills, 1970. I clowns, edited by Renzo Renzi, Bologna, 1970; 2nd edition, 1988. Three Screenplays, New York, 1970. Early Screenplays: Variety Lights, The White Sheik, New York, 1971. Roma di Federico Fellini, Rocca San Casciano, Italy, 1972. Amarcord, with Tonino Guerra, Milan, 1973; published as Amarcord: Portrait of a Town, London, 1974. Federcord: disegni per Amarcord di Federico Fellini, edited by L. Betti and O. Del Buono, Milan, 1974. Il Casanova di Fellini: sceneggiatura originale, with Bernardino Zapponi, Turin, 1974. 4 film: I vitelloni, La dolce vita, 8–1/2, Giulietta degli spiriti, Turin, 1974. Fellini on Fellini, edited by Christian Strich, New York, 1976. Fare un film, Turin, 1980. Bottega Fellini. La città delle donne, with text by Raffaele Monti, Rome, 1981. Federico Fellini: Intervista sul cinema, edited by Giovanni Grazzini, Rome, 1983; as Federico Fellini: Comments on Film, Fresno, California, 1988. Ginger e Fred, with Tonino Guerra and Tullio Pinelli, Milan, 1986. 81/2 (Otto e mezzo), edited by Charles Affron, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1987. La strada, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1987. Fellini’s Cinecitta, London, 1989. By FELLINI: articles— ‘‘Strada sabarrata: via libera ai vitelloni,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Turin), 1 January 1953. ‘‘Ogni margine è bruciato,’’ in Cinema (Rome), 10 August 1954. FELLINI DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 316 ‘‘Enquête sur Hollywood,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Christ- mas 1955. ‘‘A Personal Statement,’’ in Film (London), January/February 1957. ‘‘Les Femmes libres de Magliano,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1957. Interview with George Bluestone, in Film Culture (New York), October 1957. ‘‘Crisi e neorealismo,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), July 1958. ‘‘Témoignage à André Bazin,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Janu- ary 1959. ‘‘My Sweet Life,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1959. ‘‘Su La dolce vita la parola a Fellini,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), January/February 1960. ‘‘The Bitter Life—of Money,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January 1961. Interview with Enzo Peri, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1961. ‘‘The Screen Answers Back,’’ in Films and Filming (London), May 1962. Interview with Gideon Bachmann, in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1964. ‘‘‘I Was Born for the Cinema’: A Conversation with Federico Fellini,’’ with Irving Levine, in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1966. Interview with Pierre Kast, in Interviews with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, Indianapolis, 1967. Interview with Roger Borderie and others, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May/June 1971. Interview, in Encountering Directors by Charles Samuels, New York, 1972. ‘‘Huit Entretiens autour du Casanova de Fellini,’’ with O. Volta, in Positif (Paris), March 1977. ‘‘The Cinema Seen as a Woman,’’ an interview with Gideon Bachmann, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1980/81. Interview with Gideon Bachmann, in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1985. Interview with J.-A. Gili, in Positif (Paris), February 1986. Interview in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), November 1986. Interview with Germaine Greer in Interview, December 1988. Interview with A. Samueli in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1990. Interview with Gideon Bachmann in Film Quarterly, Spring 1994. Interview with Liselotte Millauer in Interview, January 1994. On FELLINI: books— Bastide, Fran?ois-Régis, Juliette Caputo, and Chris Marker, editors, La Strada, Paris, 1955. Renzi, Renzo, Federico Fellini, Parma, 1956; Lyons, 1960. Solmi, Angelo, Storia di Federico Fellini, Milan, 1962. Rondi, Brunello, Il Cinema di Fellini, Rome, 1965. Budgen, Suzanne, Fellini, London, 1966. Solmi, Angelo, Fellini, New York, 1967. Salachas, Gilbert, Federico Fellini: An Investigation into His Films and Philosophy, New York, 1969. Novi, Mario, editor, Fellini TV: I clowns, Rome, 1970. Hughes, Eileen, On the Set of Fellini Satyricon: A Behind-the-Scenes Diary, New York, 1971. Pecori, Franco, Federico Fellini, Florence, 1974. Ketcham, Charles, Federico Fellini: The Search for a New Mythol- ogy, New York, 1976. Murray, Edward, Fellini the Artist, New York, 1976. Rosenthal, Stuart, The Cinema of Federico Fellini, London, 1976. Alpert, Hollis, Fellini: A Life, New York, 1981. Fruttero, Carlo, and Franco Lucentini, Je te trouve un peu pale: Recit d’été avec trente fantasmes feminins de Federico Fellini, Paris, 1982. Costello, Donald P., Fellini’s Road, Notre Dame, Indiana, 1983. Burke, Frank, Federico Fellini: Variety Lights to La Dolce Vita, Boston, 1984. Fava, Claudio F., and Aldo Vigano, The Films of Federico Fellini, Secaucus, New Jersey, 1985. Kezich, Tullio, Fellini, Milan, 1987. Ciment, Michel, Federico Fellini, Paris, 1988. Grazzini, Giovanni, editor, Federico Fellini: Comments on Film, Fresno, California, 1988. Bondanella, Peter, The Cinema of Federico Fellini, Princeton, New Jersey, 1992. Bondanella, Peter, and Cristina Degli-Esposti, editors, Perspectives on Federico Fellini, New York, 1993. Baxter, John, Fellini: The Biography, New York, 1994. Chandler, Charlotte, I, Fellini, New York, 1995. Tornabuoni, Lietta, editor, Federico Fellini, New York, 1995. Burke, Frank, Fellini’s Films: From Postwar to Postmodern, New York, 1996. Méjean, Jean-Max, Fellini, un rêve, une vie, Paris, 1997. On FELLINI: articles— Autera, Leonardo, editor, ‘‘Fellini e la critica,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), June 1957. Taylor, John, ‘‘Federico Fellini,’’ in Cinema Eye, Cinema Ear, New York, 1964. Ross, Lillian, ‘‘Profiles: 101/2,’’ in New Yorker, 30 October 1965. Harcourt, Peter, ‘‘The Secret Life of Federico Fellini,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1966. Walter, Eugene, ‘‘The Wizardry of Fellini,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1966. Eason, Patrick, ‘‘Notes on Double Structure and the Films of Fellini,’’ in Cinema (London), March 1969. Cox, Harvey, Jr., ‘‘The Purpose of the Grotesque in Fellini’s Films,’’ in Celluloid and Symbols, edited by Cooper and Skrade, Philadel- phia, 1970. ‘‘Fellini Issue’’ of L’Arc (Aix-en-Provence, France), no. 45, 1971. Julia, Jacques, ‘‘Psychanalyse de Fellini,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), May 1971. Chemasi, Antonio, ‘‘Fellini’s Casanova: The Final Nights,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), September 1976. Sarne, M., ‘‘Meeting Fellini,’’ in Films and Filming (London), April 1978. Comuzio, Ermanno, ‘‘Fellini/Rota: Un matrimonio concertato,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), July-August 1979. Burke, F.M. ‘‘Reason and Unreason in Federico Fellini’s I vitelloni,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 8, no. 2, 1980. Fumento, R., ‘‘Maestro Fellini, studente Angelucci,’’ in Literature/ Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), October 1982. Dossier on Fellini, in Cinématographe (Paris), January 1984. Polan, Linda, ‘‘With Fellini,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Sum- mer 1984. Gilliatt, Penelope, ‘‘La dolce vita,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), November 1985. ‘‘Fellini Section,’’ of Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Mary- land), vol. 15, no. 2, 1987. FELLINIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 317 Lavery, D., ‘‘‘Major Man’: Fellini as an Autobiographer,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Winter 1987. ‘‘Fellini Section’’ of Positif (Paris), December 1987. Pierson, Frank, ‘‘Fellini’s Magical 8 1/2,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), June 1989. Benigni, Roberto, article in Positif (Paris), May 1990. Cavazzoni, E., article in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1990. Lavaudant, G., article in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1991. ‘‘New Gigs for Old Pros,’’ in Variety (New York), 20 May 1991. Young, D., ‘‘Helmer at Odds over Ads,’’ in Variety (New York), 11 November 1991. Kauffmann, Stanley, ‘‘Regarding Fellini,’’ in New Republic (Wash- ington, D.C.), 25 May 1992. Schneider, K.S., article in People Weekly (New York), 18 Janu- ary 1993. Obituary in Times (London), 1 November 1993. Obituary in New York Times, 1 November 1993. Obituary in Los Angeles Times, 1 November 1993. Obituary in Chicago Tribune, 7 November 1993. Obituary in Newsweek (New York), 8 November 1993. Obituary in Variety (New York), 15 November 1993. Schneider, K.S., obituary in People Weekly (New York), 15 Novem- ber 1993. Kauffmann, Stanley, obituary in New Republic (Washington, D.C.), 31 January 1994. Schickel, Richard, ‘‘Send in the Clowns: An Aspect of Fellini,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1994. On FELLINI: films— Goldbarb, Peter, Fellini, for TV, Canada, 1968. Bachmann, Gideon, Ciao, Federico!, U.S., 1970. Fellini’s Cinema: Notes of a Director, Italy, 1992. *** Federico Fellini is one of the most controversial figures in the recent history of Italian cinema. Though his successes have been spectacular, as in the cases of La strada, La dolce vita, and Otto e mezzo, his failures have been equally flamboyant. This has caused considerable doubt in some quarters as to the validity of his ranking as a major force in contemporary cinema, and made it somewhat difficult for him to achieve sufficient financial backing to support his highly personalized film efforts in his last years. Certainly, few directors in any country could equal Fellini’s interest in the history of the cinema or share his certainty regarding the appropriate place for the body of his work within the larger film canon. Consequently, he has molded each of his film projects in such a way that any discussion of their individual merits is inseparable from the autobiographical details of his personal legend. Fellini’s early film La sceicco bianco gave a clear indication of the autobiographical nature of the works to follow, for it drew upon his experience as a journalist and merged it with many of the conceits he had developed in his early motion picture career as a gag writer and script writer. However, he was also an instrumental part of the development of the neorealistic film in the 1940s, writing parts of the screenplays of Roberto Rossellini’s Roma città aperta and Paisà, and his reshaping of that tradition toward an autobiographical mode of expression in La sceicco bianco troubled a number of his former collaborators. But on his part, Fellini was seemingly just as critical of the brand of neorealism practiced by Rossellini, with its penchant for overt melodrama. In a succeeding film, La strada, Fellini took his autobiographical parallels a step farther, casting his wife, Giulietta Masina, in the major female role. This highly symbolic work was variously interpreted as a manifesto on human rights, or at least a treatise on women’s liberation. In these contexts, however, it roused the ire of strict neorealists who regarded it as containing too much justification for political oppression. Yet as a highly metaphorical personal parable about the relationship between a man and a woman it was a critical success and a confirmation of the validity of Fellini’s autobiographi- cal instincts. This gave him the confidence to indulge in a subtle criticism of the neorealistic style in his next film, Il bidone. The film served, in effect, a tongue-in-cheek criticism of the form’s sentimen- tal aspects. In the films of Fellini’s middle period, beginning in 1959 with La dolce vita, Fellini became increasingly preoccupied with his role as an international ‘‘auteur.’’ As a result, the autobiographical manifesta- tions in his films became more introspective and extended to less tangible areas of his psyche than anything that he had previously brought to the screen. La dolce vita is a relatively straightforward psychological extension of what might have become of Moraldo, the director’s earlier biographical persona (I vitelloni), after forsaking his village for the decadence of Rome. But its successors increasingly explored the areas of its creator’s fears, nightmares, and fantasies. After establishing actor Marcello Mastroianni as his alter ego in La dolce vita, Fellini again employed him in his masterpiece, Otto e mezzo (8 1/2), as a vehicle for his analysis of the complex nature of artistic inspiration. Then, in a sequel of sorts, he examined the other side of the coin. In Giulietta degli spiriti (Juliet of the Spirits), he casts his wife as the intaglio of the Guido figure in 8 1/2. Both films, therefore, explored the same problems from different sexual perspec- tives while, on the deeper, ever-present autobiographical plane, the two characters became corresponding sides of Fellini’s mythic ego. Subsequent films continued the rich, flamboyant imagery that became a Fellini trademark, but with the exception of the imaginative fantasy Fellini Satyricon, they have, for the most part, returned to the vantage point of direct experience that characterized his earlier works. Finally, in 1980’s La città delle donne, which again featured Mastroianni, he returned to the larger–than–life examination of his psyche. In fact, a number of critics regarded the film as the ultimate statement in an ideological trilogy (begun with 8 1/2 and continued in Juliet of the Spirits) in which he finally attempts a rapprochement with his inner sexual and creative conflicts. Unfortunately, City of Women is too highly derivative of the earlier work. Consequently, it does not resolve the issues raised in the earlier two films. Several of Fellini’s films are masterpieces by anyone’s standards. Yet in no other director’s body of films does each work identifiably relate a specific image of the creator that he wishes to present to the world and to posterity. Whether any of the films are truly autobio- graphical in any traditional sense is open to debate. They definitely do not interlock to provide a history of a man, and yet each is a deliber- ately crafted building block in the construction of a larger–than–life Fellini legend which may eventually come to be regarded as the ‘‘journey of a psyche.’’ While the final credits on Fellini’s filmography are far from his best works, they nonetheless are fitting conclusions to what is one of the legendary careers in the history of world cinema. FERNáNDEZ DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 318 And the Ship Sails On is the wildly preposterous but uniquely Felliniesque tale of the miscellaneous luminaries who come together for an ocean cruise in which they will bid farewell to a just-deceased opera performer. Ginger and Fred is a sweetly nostalgic film because of its union of two of Fellini’s then-aging but still vibrant stars of the past, Giulietta Masina and Marcello Mastroianni. The Voice of the Moon, Fellini’s last feature—which did not earn a U.S. distributor— works as a summation of the cinematic subjects which had concerned the film maker for the previous quarter century. The most outstanding and revealing late-career Fellini is Intervista, an illuminating film (and characteristic Fellini union of reality and fantasy) about the production by a Japanese television crew of a documentary about the director. Fellini himself appears on screen, where he is shown to be shooting an adaptation of Kafka’s Amerika, a film that appears to be a typically Felliniesque extravaganza-in-the-making, complete with eccentric extras, surreal images, and autobiographical touches. We watch the filmmaker as he casts Amerika. We meet his various associates and underlings, from producers to actors, from casting director to assistant director. We see how Fellini directs his perform- ers and the steps he takes to inspire feelings and attitudes within them. And we are privy to the various crises, big and small, which are standard fare during the filmmaking process. Finally, Marcello Mastroianni and Anita Ekberg, who over thirty years before had co-starred in La dolce vita, appear as themselves. Mastroianni’s entrance is especially magical; the sequence in which he and Ekberg (whom, he remarks, he has not seen since making La dolce vita) observe their younger selves in some famous clips from the film is wonderful nostalgia. However, Intervista is primarily an homage to Cinecitta, the studio where Fellini shot his films. Revealingly, the filmmaker describes the studio as ‘‘a fortress, or perhaps an alibi.’’ Fellini first came to Cinecitta in 1940, when he was a young journalist. His assignment was to interview an actress for a magazine profile. This event is dramatized in Intervista; at various points in the film, the narrative drifts from images of the real Fellini, an artist in the twilight of a much-honored career, to a recreation of young Federico (played by Sergio Rubini) and his initiation into the world of Cinecitta.To fully appreciate this very personal movie about the movie-making process, you must be familiar with—and an admirer of—Fellini and his work. —Stephen L. Hanson, updated by Rob Edelman FERNáNDEZ, Emilio Nationality: Mexican. Born: In Hondo, Coahuila, 26 March 1904. Also known as ‘‘El Indio.’’ Family: Married 1) Gladys Fernández, 1941 (divorced), one daughter; 2) actress Columbia Domínguez (divorced), one daughter; 3) Gloria Cabiedes (divorced), one son; 4) Beatriz (divorced). Career: Took part in the rebellion of Adolfo de la Huerta against the Mexican government, captured and sentenced to prison, but escaped to United States, 1923; actor in California, returned to Mexico following amnesty, 1934; directed first film, 1941; served six months of four–and–one–half–year sentence for manslaughter, 1976. Awards: Best Film, Cannes Festival, for María Candelaria, 1946. Died: In Mexico City, 6 August 1986. Emilio Fernández (left) on the set of The Reward Films as Director and Co-Scriptwriter: 1941 La isla de la pasión (Passion Island) 1942 Soypuro mexicano 1943 Flor silvestre (+ role as Rogelio Torres); María Candelaria 1944 Las abandonadas; Bugambilia 1945 Pepita Jiménez; La perla (The Pearl) 1946 Enamorada 1947 Río Escondido (Hidden River) 1948 Maclovia; Salón México; Pueblerina 1949 La malquerida; Duelo en las monta?as; Del odio nació el amor (The Torch; The Beloved) 1950 Undia de vida; Victimas del pecado; Islas Marías; Siempre Tuya 1951 La bien amada; Acapulco; El mar y tú 1952 Cuando levanta la niebla 1953 La red (The Net); Reportaje; El rapto; La rosa blanca 1954 La rebelión de los colgados; Nostros dos 1955 La Tierra de Fuego se apaga 1956 Una cita de amor; El imposter 1961 Pueblito 1963 Paloma herida 1967 Un dorado de Pancho Villa (A Loyal Soldier of Pancho Villa) 1968 El crepúscolo de un Dios 1973 La Choca 1975 Zona roja 1977 México norte 1978 Erótica Films as Actor: 1927 The Gaucho (Jones) 1933 Flying down to Rio (Freeland) (as dancer) FERNáNDEZDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 319 1934 Corazón bandolero (Sevilla) (as Chacal); Cruz Diablo (De Fuentes) (as Toparca); Tribu (Contreras); Janitzio (Navarro) (as Zirahuén) 1935 Mariá Elena (Sevilla) (as dancer); Celos (Boytler) 1936 Marijuana (El monstruo verde) (Bohr) (as El Indio); Las mujeres mandan (De Fuentes) (as dancer); Allá en el Rancho Grande (De Fuentes) (as dancer); El superloco (Segura) (as Idúa); El Impostor (Kirkland) 1937 Adiós Nicanor (Portas) (as Nicanor); Las cuatro milpas (Pereda) 1938 Aquí llego el valentón (El fanfarron) (Rivero); Juan sin miedo (Segura) (as Valentín) 1939 Con los dorados de Villa (de Anda); Los de abajo (Con la División del Norte) (Urueta) 1940 El Charro Negro (de Anda); Rancho alegre (Aguila); El zorro de Jalisco (Benavides) (as Ernesto) 1958 La Cucaracha (I. Rodríguez) (as Coronel Antonia Zeta) 1961 Los hermanos de Hierro (I. Rodríguez) (as Pascual Velasco) 1962 La Bandida (R. Rodríguez) (as Epigmenio Gómez) 1963 El revólver sangriento (Delgado) (as Félix Gómez); Night of the Iguana (Huston) (as barman, also assoc d) 1964 Los Hermanos Muerte (Baledón) (as Marcos Zerme?o); Yo, el valiente (Corona Blake) (as El Cuervo); La recta final (Taboada) (as Lucio); Un callejón sin salida (Baledón) (as Antonio) 1965 Duelo de pistoleros (Delgado) (as Pancho Gatillo Romero); La conquista de El Dorado (Portillo) (as Indio Romo); Un tipo difícil de matar (Portillo) (as Ringo); Los malvados (Corona Blake) (as Emilio); The Reward (Bourgignon); Return of the Seven (Kennedy) 1966 El silencioso (Mariscal) (as Emilio Segura); The Appaloosa (Furie); The War Wagon (Kennedy) 1967 El caudillo (Mariscal); El jinete fantasma (Zugsmith); Cuando corre el alazán (Mendoza) 1968 El Yaqui (Martínez) 1969 The Wild Bunch (Peckinpah) 1971 Indio (de Anda) 1972 Derecho de asilo (Zece?a); El rincón de las Virgenes (Isaac); Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (Peckinpah) 1973 Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (Peckinpah) 1980 Las cabareteras (Cisneros); Una gallina muy ponedora (Portillo); Ahora mis pistolas hablan (Orozco) 1983 Mi abuelo, mi perro y yo (Fernández); Los amantes (Vega); Mercenarios (Cisneros); Under the Volcano (Huston); El tesoro del Amazonas (Cardona); Lola la trailera (Fernández) 1985 Cuando corrió el alazán (Perez) Publications By FERNáNDEZ: books— En su propio espejo (Entrevista con Emilio ‘‘El Indio’’ Fernández), edited by Julia Tu?on, Mexico City, 1988. By FERNáNDEZ: articles— ‘‘After the Revolution,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1963. Interview in The Mexican Cinema: Interviews with 13 Directors, by Beatriz Reyes Navares, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1976. On FERNáNDEZ: books— Riera, Emilio García, Historia documental del cine mexicano, vols. 1–9, Mexico City, 1969. Blanco, Jorge Ayala, La aventura del cine mexicano, Mexico City, 1979. Mora, Carl, Mexican Cinema: Reflections of a Society, 1896–1980, Berkeley, 1982. de Luna, Andrés, La batalla y su sombra (La revolución en el cine mexicano), Mexico City, 1984. Blanco, Jorge Ayala, La condición del cine mexicano, Mexico City, 1986. Fernández, Adela, El Indio Fernández: Vida y mito, Mexico City, 1986. Taibo, Paco Ignacio, El Indio Fernández: El cine por mis pistolas, Mexico City, 1986. de los Reyes, Aurelio, Medio Siglo de cine mexicano (1896–1947), Mexico City, 1987. On FERNáNDEZ: articles— ‘‘El Indio,’’ in Time (New York), 11 November 1946. Ellis, K., ‘‘Stranger than Fiction: Emilio Fernandez’ Mexico,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Washington, D.C.), Spring 1982. Cuel, F., and J.P. Royer, ‘‘Emilio Fernandez,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), April 1982. Tesson, C., ‘‘Portrait d’Emilio Fernandez en metteur en scène,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1982. Mraz, John, ‘‘Of Churros and Charros,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), no. 29, 1984. Obituaries in Hollywood Reporter, 8 and 19 August 1986. Obituary in Variety (New York), 13 August 1986. Obituary in Revue du Cinema, no. 420, October 1986. Dávalos, Federico, ‘‘Por México: La leyenda del Indio Fernández,’’ in Pantalla (Mexico City), November 1986. Vertrova, T., ‘‘Pamjati Emilio Fernandesa,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Mos- cow), no. 2, February 1987. Rozado, Alejandro, ‘‘Lo trágico en el cine de Emilio Fernández,’’ in Dicine (Mexico City), November 1987. *** If he did not already exist, it would be necessary to invent Emilio ‘‘El Indio’’ Fernández. His manneristic visual style, his folkloric themes and characters, and his distinctively Indian physiognomy made him an integral element of Mexico’s culture of nationalism, as well as the nation’s best-known director. Fleeing Mexico after the defeat of his faction in the rebellion of 1923, Fernández ended up digging ditches in Hollywood. As has been the case with so many Latin American artists and intellectuals, Fernández discovered his fatherland by leaving it: ‘‘I understood that it was possible to create a Mexican cinema, with our own actors and our own stories.... From then on the cinema became a passion with me, and I began to dream of Mexican films.’’ Making Mexican cinema became Fernández’s ob- session and, as is so often true of cultural nationalism, a short-term gain was to turn into a long-term dead end. Perhaps that which most distinguishes Fernández’s films is their strikingly beautiful visual style. Fernández and Gabriel Figueroa, the cinematographer, created the classical visual form of Mexican cin- ema. Ironically, their expressive cinematic patriotism was signifi- cantly inspired by foreign models—the most important of which was that of Sergei Eisenstein and his cameraman Eduard Tisse. Fernández FERRARA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 320 evidently saw Qué Viva Mexico! in Hollywood, and he later played the lead in Janitzio, a film influenced by Eisenstein and the documen- taries of Robert Flaherty and Willard Van Dyke. He even went on to ‘‘re-make’’ Qué Viva Mexico! twice with Maria Candelaria and Maclovia. Another important antecedent was Paul Strand’s photogra- phy in Los Redes, which must itself have reflected Eisenstein’s examples as well as Strand’s experiences in the Film and Photo League. Foreign models were prominent at a formal level, but nationalism was presumably communicated in the content of the visual images. The films of Fernández and Figueroa are a celebration of Mexico’s natural beauty: stony Indian faces set off by dark rebozos and white shirts, charros and their stallions riding through majestic cactus formations, fishermen and their nets reflected in the swirling ocean tides, flower vendors in Xochimilco’s canals moving past long lines of tall poplar trees; and over it all, the monumentally statuesque masses of rolling clouds made impossibly luminous by photographic filters. In the earlier films, the incredible beauty of the visual structures functioned as a protagonist, providing context for the story and resonating with the characters’ emotions. However, Fernández and Figueroa apparently became victims of their own myths, for their later films manifest a coldness and immobility which indicate an emphasis on visual form at the expense of other cinematic concerns. The dangers inherent in their ‘‘tourist’’ images of Mexico were ever- present, of course; but they became increasingly obvious with the petrification of the style. Fernández’s stories have been summed up by Carlos Monsivais, a leading Mexican critic, as ‘‘monothematic tragedies: the couple is destroyed by the fate of social incomprehension, Nature is the essence of the Motherland, beauty survives crime, those who sacrifice them- selves for others understand the world.’’ One is tempted to add: the Indian is a cretin, the charro a blustering macho, women are long- suffering and self-denying saints—and the revolution a confused tangle of meaningless atrocities. Fernández’s picturesque myths still retain vigor in the statist nationalism which dominates ideological discourse in Mexico. And, judging from the international attention that Fernández received for his early works, they were evidently also what the world expected from Mexican cinema. The pity is that Emilio ‘‘El Indio’’ Fernández did not demand a little more from himself. —John Mraz FERRARA, Abel Nationality: American. Born: The Bronx, New York, 1951. Educa- tion: Attended Rockland Community College, one year; State Uni- versity of New York at Purchase. Career: While at SUNY, made a number of shorts; formed Navaron Films with long-term collabora- tor Nicholas St. John; directed television special, The Loner, for NBC, 1988. Awards: Independent Spirit Award nomination for best direc- tor, Independent Feature Project/West, 1993, for Bad Lieutenant. Address: William Morris Agency, 151 El Camino Dr., Beverly Hills, CA 90212, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1977 Not Guilty: For Keith Richards (short); Nine Lives of a Wet Pussy (+ ed, role as Old Man) 1979 The Driller Killer (+ ed, role as Reno) 1981 Ms.45 (Angel of Vengeance) (+ role as 1st Rapist) 1984 Fear City 1985 ‘‘The Home Invaders’’ and ‘‘The Dutch Oven’’ episodes of Miami Vice (for TV) 1986 Gladiator; pilot episode of Crime Story (for TV) 1987 China Girl 1989 Cat Chaser 1990 King of New York 1992 Bad Lieutenant (+ co-sc) 1993 Body Snatchers 1993 Dangerous Game (Snake Eyes) 1995 The Addiction 1996 The Funeral; California 1997 The Blackout (+ co-sc); Subway Stories: Tales from the Underground (segment of TV series Love on a Train) 1998 New Rose Hotel (+ co-sc) 2001 R-Xmas (+ co-sc) Publications By FERRARA: articles— Interview with Julian Schnabel, in Interview, vol. 22, no. 12, Decem- ber 1992. ‘‘Abel down the Cable,’’ interview with N. Helms, in Fatal Visions (Victoria, Australia), no. 18, February 1995. ‘‘Abel Ferrara,’’ interview with L. Bear, in Bomb, no. 53, Fall 1995. ‘‘Cinq questions posees par Martin Scorsese,’’ interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), no. 500, March 1996. ‘‘Dealing with the Now,’’ interview with G. Smith, in Sight and Sound (London), April 1997. On FERRARA: book— Johnstone, Nick, Abel Ferrara: King of New York, New York, 2000. On FERRARA: articles— Newman, Kim, ‘‘The Street Where I Live—Abel Ferrara,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin, January 1988. Smith, Gavin, ‘‘In the Gutter,’’ in Film Comment, July/August 1990. Smith, Gavin, ‘‘The Gambler,’’ in Sight and Sound, February 1993. Hoban, Phoebe, ‘‘Raising Cain,’’ in New York, 1 February 1993. Adams, Mark, ‘‘Abel Ferrara: The King of New York,’’ in National Film Theatre Programme, May 1993. Article, in Velvet Light Trap, Autumn 1993. Taubin, A., ‘‘Abel Revamps,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 27 December 1994. Macaulay, S., ‘‘Bloody Thoughts,’’ in Filmmaker (Los Angeles), vol. 3, no. 2, 1995. FERRARADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 321 Abel Ferrara Webster, A., ‘‘Filmographies,’’ in Premiere (Boulder), June 1995. Trofimenkov, M., ‘‘Istina: $100 za gramm,’’ in Isskustvo Kino (Moscow), no. 1, 1998. *** According to Abel Ferrara: ‘‘There’s only one kind of film to make, the kind you go all out on. Maybe some people don’t like these subjects, but I don’t think there can be any other subjects.’’ To those horrified by the violence of his films he gives the uncompromising answer that ‘‘once you’re an adult, then that’s it; anything within the scope of an artist’s imagination has got to be portrayed, and if you don’t like it then leave.’’ Given his in-your-face, unflinchingly brutal, yet unquestionable and still-developing sense of style, it’s not surpris- ing to discover that the director he most admires is Pasolini (‘‘because he filmed his visions and did it without qualifications’’) and that the first film he remembers being taken to see was Douglas Sirk’s devastating, no-holds-barred melodrama Imitation of Life. Ferrara is undoubtedly one of the most notable American directors to have emerged during the 1980s. His films have aroused considerable controversy, but even those who dislike them would be hard put to deny their kinetic energy and verve, and the remarkable performances at the heart of many of them (for example, Zoe Tamerlis in Ms.45, Christopher Walken in King of New York, and above all, Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant). To his admirers, though, he has been greeted in much the same terms that were used to hail Scorsese on the release of Mean Streets. Thus, Jim Shelley in the Guardian, ‘‘Ferrara is American cinema’s most uncompromising maverick, someone who genuinely doesn’t give a damn and one of the few American directors who not only has some kind of personal ‘vision’ but has the single-minded determination to express it.’’ In the States Film Com- ment has championed Ferrara in much the same way as it did Scorsese in his early days; it named Ms.45 as one of the ten best films of 1981, and in 1990 Gavin Smith compared Ferrara’s films to what Scorsese and Schrader ‘‘might have made together if they had remained in orbit around Taxi Driver’s lurid nighttime New York and carried on exploring the pulp violence of Hardcore and Rolling Thunder and the ethnic obsessions of Mean Streets,’’ praising his ‘‘way-out melodra- mas bursting with outrageous excess’’ for their ‘‘hyperbolic style, a subversive vein of sociopolitical comment, and a no-holds-barred pulp inventiveness’’ reminiscent of early Jonathan Demme and Larry Cohen. FERRARA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 322 Ferrara began making eight-millimeter shorts at high school with his friend Nicholas St. John, who went on to script Driller Killer, Ms.45, Fear City, China Girl, King of New York, and Dangerous Game/Snake Eyes. Their first feature together was Nine Lives of a Wet Pussy, a love story with fantasy elements, which they made after forming Navaron Films. Their first film to garner any attention, however, was The Driller Killer, which became something of a cult hit on the drive-in circuit in the States. In Britain, by contrast, this story of a New York artist who goes crazy and starts attacking derelicts with an electric drill became infamous as one of the films which started off the ‘‘video nasty’’ panic in the early 1980s, and soon found itself totally banned both on film and video, the victim of a particularly rabid and ill-informed campaign by an ill-matched alliance of pro-censorship campaigners and a sensation-hungry and grotesquely hypocritical tabloid press which revelled in what it purported to condemn. In all the furor of condemnation and vilifica- tion, no journalist or critic actually bothered to see the offending item, of course. The only magazine that attempted (in vain) to stem the tide of outraged censoriousness was the British Film Institute’s Monthly Film Bulletin, which devoted several articles to this and other ‘‘videos maudits,’’ with the present writer daring to suggest that The Driller Killer was a film of ‘‘very considerable merit,’’ and horror guru Kim Newman noting that although ‘‘The Driller Killer has a collage of revolting sights and sounds unmatched since Peeping Tom and Performance . . . there is no denying the cheapskate proficiency with which Ferrara puts his films together, or the painful accuracy of his probing for the unhealthy nerve.’’ He also suggests that its central character, Reno (played by Ferrara himself), is ‘‘perhaps the only psycho in the movies to be driven mad by economic/environmental, rather than sexual/psychological, factors.’’ Whatever the case, any cinema in Britain that tried to show Driller Killer, or any shop that tried to rent or sell a video of it, would even today risk a visit from the police, a court case, and a hate campaign by the press. Ferrara’s next film, Ms.45 is the story of a mute young woman (Zoe Tamerlis) who is raped twice in a single afternoon and turns into an angel of vengeance (the film’s alternate title) by dressing up as a nun and blasting away at everybody until she is stabbed (put out of her misery?) by a female friend. It might be described as the first pro- feminist exploitation film. [Tamerlis claims an assault was made on her life because of the strong female avenger image she created in the film.] Thanks partly to the advocacy of William Friedkin, Ms. 45 was taken up and distributed by Warner Bros. In Britain, meanwhile, it was not released in cinemas and heavily cut on video. By this time Ferrara’s name spelled danger to an increasingly nervous British Board of Film Classification, although the fuss over The Driller Killer had brought him to the admiring attention of many horror aficionados. There followed the bigger-budget Fear City, starring Tom Berenger and Melanie Griffith. This story of the hunt for a psychopath who mutilates and kills strippers also failed to find a cinema release in Britain and was cut to bits on video. In the States, however, it brought Ferrara to the attention of Michael Mann, for whom he directed two first-season episodes of Miami Vice (‘‘Home Invaders’’ and ‘‘Dutch Oven’’) and the pilot of Crime Story, all displaying his customary style and verve. China Girl updated Romeo and Juliet (and West Side Story) to take in a love story set against conflict between the Chinatown and Little Italy districts of New York. Cat Chaser remains the best adaptation of an Elmore Leonard thriller to date (Alan Sharp provided the first-rate screenplay), even though Ferrara himself left the project before the ediing was completed to work on The King of New York. This is one of his very finest films. The story of a gangster with a moral streak (he wants to save a children’s hospital with funds raised from drug-dealing) pitted against three cops who break every moral code in the book, this is a truly stunning contemporary ‘‘film noir’’ and can also be read as a wry comment on Reaganite (and Thatcherite) ‘‘trickle down’’ economics, or as a very dark-hued Robin Hood for our times. Christopher Walken’s performance as the ambitious crook-with-a- conscience is nothing short of mesmeric. When he’s confronted on a subway by several black youths out to rob him, we see in his response to them what makes him ‘‘king of New York’’ for the 1980s. Instead of shooting the youths, he tosses them a wad of cash and tells them to report to his Plaze Hotel suite headquarters if them want more. Even more remarkable, however, is Harvey Keitel as the utterly ravaged, almost deranged cop in Bad Lieutenant, undoubtedly Ferrara’s darkest, bleakest, most tormented film, and a frighteningly intense addition to the cinema of abjection. This is also the film in which the curious religious streak, almost always present in Ferrara’s work, is closest to the surface. For although Bad Lieutenant presents us with an appalling catalogue of human turpitude, it is, ultimately, a story of redemption, and one presented in often quite explicitly Christian terms; as Mark Kermode put it in a perceptive review of the film in Sight and Sound, ‘‘like The Exorcist, the film frequently seems to revel in obscenity, but remains draped throughout in the pious clothing of the priesthood.’’ Similarly, Variety compared it to Ingmar Bergman’s The Silence in that it ‘‘tackled the subject of God’s absence from people’s lives in such a sexually explicit and morbid context.’’ The comparison with Bergman is also telling in that this harsh, tortured film, with its spare, elliptical, real-time narrative, delivers almost none of the conventional pleasures normally associ- ated with ‘‘Hollywood’’ cinema, coming across instead as a particu- larly angst-ridden, contemporary ‘‘art movie.’’ As such, it’s a film to admire rather than like, but it does prove triumphantly (as if proof were needed) that Keitel is an absolutely major talent and that Ferrara, as well as being a fine visual stylist, is a first-class actor’s director. As he himself put it: ‘‘the most fulfilling part of directing is to create a space for a performance. To be there for the actor, and to find the actors who can do it.’’ Much of Keitel’s performance seems to be improvised (for example, the infamous and queasy long-drawn-out scee in which he frenziedly masturbates whilst harassing two young female traffic offenders, all the while mouthing obscenities) but, just like Jack Nicholson’s celebrated dope-smoking scene in Easy Rider, one suspects it isn’t. As Ferrara himself puts it: ‘‘Improvisation is a funny concept because the basis of any great improvisation is great material, a great script, to begin with. And then it’s very hard to say where it starts and stops. These scenes have been discussed and worked on and written together, so who knows where that improv begins or where there are real lines.’’ In a different key altogether is Body Snatchers, the third feature film version (this time set claustrophobically in a sealed-off military base rather than a small town or big city) of Jack Finney’s classic parable of the loss of individualism and identity. It is the least successful of the trio, however, due to its trouble production history which involved multiple rewrites, the firing of its original director, and Ferrara’s stepping into that role well after pre-production. The result was neither as gripping as the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers directed by Don Siegel, nor as suffused in urban paranoia as Phil Kaufman’s 1978 remake. Dangerous Game reunited Ferrara with Keitel in a film-within-a- film which he has described as being like ‘‘Who’s Afraid of Virginia FEUILLADEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 323 Woolf? on acid.’’ Certainly it’s an extraordinarily reflexive and self- conscious work where it’s often made extremely difficult to work out the reality status of the images we’re watching, which is something of a new departure for Ferrara and seems to take us back into ‘‘art movie’’ territory. On the other hand, the remark by Keitel’s Eddie Israel, the director of Mother of Mirrors, the film-within-the-film, that ‘‘the ultimate is pain and suffering—that’s what it takes to survive’’ could well be taken — as evidenced by this and Ferrara’s next feature, The Addiction, a gloomy tale of vampirism among the drug culture — as a distillation of the Ferrara philosophy and a summary of the import of his entire oeuvre. —Julian Petley, updated by John McCarty FEUILLADE, Louis Nationality: French. Born: Lunel, France, 19 February 1873. Edu- cation: the Institut de Brignac and at the Petit Séminaire, Carcassonne. Military Service: Served with French Army, 1891–95, and 1915. Family: Married Jeanne-Léontine Janjou, 1895 (daughter married to filmmaker Maurice Champreux). Career: Worked in publishing in Paris, 1898; founder of satirical journal La Tomate, 1903; hired as writer by Alice Guy at Gaumont Studios, 1905; replaced Guy as director of Gaumont Productions, 1907; began series of ‘‘ciné- romans’’ (serials) with Judex, 1916; first president of the Societé des Auteurs de Films, 1917–18; moved, with Gaumont, to Nice, 1918. Died: In Nice, 26 February 1925. Louis Feuillade Films as Director (Feuillade wrote and directed an estimated eight hundred films; this partial listing includes all series titles and known non-series titles): 1906 Le billet de banque; C’est Papa qui prend la purge; Les deux Gosses; La Porteuse de pain; Mireille (co-d); N’te promène donc pas toute nue 1907 Un accident d’auto; La course des belles-mères; Un facteur trop ferré; L’homme aimanté; La légende de la fileuse; Un paquet embarrassant; La sirène; Le thé chez la concierge; Vive le sabotage 1908 Les agents tels qu’on nous les présente; Une dame vraiment bien; La grève des apaches; Nettoyage par le vide; Une nuit agitée; Prométhé; Le récit du colonel; Le roman de S?ur Louise; Un tic 1909 L’aveugle de Jerusalem; La chatte métamorphosée en femme; La cigale et la fourmi; Le collier de la reine; Les filles du cantonnier; Les heures; Histoire de puce; Le huguenot; Judith et Holopherne; Fra Vincenti; La légende des phares; La mère du moine; La mort de Mozart; La mort; La possession de l’enfant; Le savetier et le financier; Le printemps; Vainqueur de la course pédestre; 1910 Benvenuto Cellini; Le Christ en croix; Esther; L’Exode; Le festin de Balthazar; La fille de Jephté; Mil huit cent quatorze; Mater dolorosa; Maudite soit la guerre; Le pater; Le roi de Thulé 1910/11 ‘‘Le Film Esthétique’’ series: (1910: Les sept péchés capitaux, La nativité; 1911: La vierge d’Argos) 1910/13 ‘‘Bébé’’ series (74 films, from 88 to 321 meters length) (series begins with Bébé fume in 1910; final title is Bébé en vacances in 1913) 1911 L’aventurière, dame de compagnie; Aux lions les chrétiens; Dans la vie; Les doigts qui voient; Fidélité romaine; Le fils de la sunamité; Le fils de Locuste; Les petites apprenties; Quand les feuilles tombent; Sans le joug; Le trafiquant 1911/13 ‘‘La vie telle qu’elle est’’ series: (1911: Les vipères, Le mariage de l’a?née, Le roi Lear au village, En grève, Le bas de laine [Le Trésor], La tare, Le poison, La souris blanche, Le trust [Les batailles de l’argent], Le chef-lieu de Canton, Le destin des mères, Tant que vous serez heureux; 1912: L’accident, Les braves gens, Le nain, Le pont sur l’Abime; 1913: S’affranchir) 1912 Amour d’automne; Androclès; L’anneau fatal; L’attrait du bouge; Au pays des lions; L’Aventurière; La cassette de l’emigrée; Le chateau de la peur; Les cloches de Paques; Le c?ur et l’argent; La course aux millions; Dans la brousse; La demoiselle du notaire; La fille du margrave; La hantise; Haut les mains!; L’homme de proie; La maison des lions; Le maléfice; Le mort vivant; Les noces siciliennes; Le No?l de Francesca; Préméditation; La prison sur le gouffre; Le témoin; Le tourment; Tyrtée; La vertu de Lucette; La vie ou la mort; Les yeux qui meurent 1912/16 ‘‘Bout-de-Zan’’ series (53 films, from 79 to 425 meters length) [series begins with Bout-de-Zan revient du cirque (1912); final title is Bout-de-Zan et la torpille (1916)] 1912/13 ‘‘Le Détective Dervieux’’ series (1912: Le Proscrit, L’oubliette; 1913: Le guet-apens, L’écrin du rajah) FEUILLADE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 324 1913 L’agonie de Byzance; L’angoisse; Les audaces du c?ur; Bonne année; Le bon propriétaire; Le browning; Les chasseurs de lions; La conversion d’Irma; Un drame au pays basque; L’effroi; Erreur tragique; La gardienne du feu; Au gré des flots; L’intruse; La marche des rois; Le mariage de miss Nelly; Le ménestrel de la reine Anne; La mort de Lucrèce; La petite danseuse; Le revenant; La rose blanche; Un scandale au village; Le secret du for?at; La vengeance du sergent de ville; Les yeux ouverts 1913/14 ‘‘Fant?mas’’ series: (1913: Fant?mas, Juve contre Fant?mas, La mort qui tue; 1914: Fant?mas contre Fant?mas, Le faux magistrat) 1913/16 ‘‘La vie dr?le’’ series (35 films, of which 26 are preserved) [series begins with Les millions de la bonne (1913), and includes L’Illustre Machefer (1914), Le colonel Bontemps (1915), and Lagourdette, gentleman cambrioleur (1916)] 1914 Le calvaire; Le coffret de Tolède; Le diamant du Sénéchal; L’enfant de la roulotte; L’épreuve; Les fiancés de 1914; Les fiancés de Séville; Le gendarme est sans culotte; La gitanella; L’h?tel de la gare; Les lettres; Manon de Montmartre; La neuvaine; Paques rouges; La petite Andalouse; La rencontre; Severo Torelli 1915 L’angoisse au foyer; La barrière; Le blason; Celui qui reste; Le collier de perles; Le coup du fakir; La course a l’ab?me; Deux Fran?aises; L’escapade de Filoche; L’expiation; Le fer a cheval; Fifi tambour; Le furoncle; Les noces d’argent; Le No?l du poilu; Le sosie; Union sacrée 1915/16 ‘‘Les vampires’’ series (1915: La tête coupée; La bague qui tue; Le cryptogramme rouge; 1916: Le spectre; L’évasion du mort; Les yeux qui fascinent; Satanas; Le ma?tre de la foudre; L’homme des poisons; Les noces sanglantes) 1916 L’aventure des millions; C’est le printemps; Le double jeu; Les fian?ailles d’Agénor; Les fourberies de Pingouin; Le malheur qui passe; Un mariage de raison; Les mariés d’un jour; Notre pauvre c?ur; Le poète et sa folle amante; La peine du talion; Le retour de Manivel; Si vous ne m’aimez pas; Judex (serial in a prologue and twelve episodes) 1917 L’autre; Le bandeau sur les yeux; Débrouille-toi; Déserteuse; La femme fatale; La fugue de Lily; Herr Doktor; Mon oncle; La nouvelle mission de Judex (serial in twelve episodes); Le passé de Monique 1918 Aide-toi; Les petites marionnettes; Tih Minh (serial in twelve episodes); Vendémiaire 1919 Barrabas (serial in twelve episodes); L’engrenage; L’énigme (Le mot de l’); L’homme sans visage; Le nocturne 1920 Les deux Gamines (serial in twelve episodes) 1921 L’Orpheline (serial in twelve episodes); Parisette (serial in twelve episodes) 1921/22 ‘‘Belle humeur’’ series (1921: Gustave est médium, Marjolin ou la fille manquée, Saturnin ou le bon allumeur, Séraphin ou les jambes nues, Zidore ou les métamorphoses; 1922: Gaétan ou le commis audacieux, Lahire ou le valet de c?ur) 1922 Le fils du flibustier (serial in twelve episodes) 1923 Le gamin de Paris; La gosseline; L’orphelin de Paris (serial in six episodes); Vindicta (film released in five parts) 1924 La fille bien gardée; Lucette; Pierrot Pierrette; Le stigmate (serial in six episodes) Other Films: 1905 Le coup de vent (Le chapeau) (sc) 1906 La course au potiron (sc) Publications By FEUILLADE: books— Le Clos (play), with Etienne Arnaud, Paris, 1905. Les Vampires, with George Meirs, Paris, 1916. Judex, with Arthur Bernède, Paris, 1917 (and 1934). La nouvelle Mission de Judex, with Arthur Bernède, Paris, 1919. Tih Minh, with Georges Le Faure, Paris, 1919. Barrabas, with Maurice Level, Paris, 1920. By FEUILLADE: articles— ‘‘Naundor, la genèse d’un crime historique,’’ (under pseudonym P. Valergues), in Revue mondiale (Paris), 10 November 1904 through 25 October 1905. Manifestos on the series ‘‘Le film esthétique’’ and ‘‘La vie telle qu’elle est,’’ in L’Anthologie du Cinéma, edited by Marcel Lapierre, Paris, 1946. On FEUILLADE: books— Delluc, Louis, Cinéma et Compagnie, Paris, 1919. Védrès, Nicole, Images du cinéma fran?ais, Paris, 1945. Lacassin, Francis, Louis Feuillade, Paris, 1964. Prédal, René, Le Cinéma muet à Nice, Aix-en-Provence, 1964. Florey, Robert, La Lanterne magique, Lausanne, 1966. Lacassin, Francis, Ma?tre des lions et des vampires, Louis Feuillade, Paris, 1995. On FEUILLADE: articles— Beylie, Claude, ‘‘Louis Feuillade,’’ in Ecrans de France (Paris), 15 May 1959. Lacassin, F., and R. Bellour, ‘‘En effeuillant la Marguerite,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), March–June 1961. Florey, Robert, ‘‘Une Saison dans la cage à mouches avec Feuillade,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), June 1962. Fieschi, Jean-André, ‘‘Feuillade (l’homme aimanté),’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1964. Lacassin, Francis, ‘‘Louis Feuillade,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1964/65. Lacassin, Francis, ‘‘Les lettres de Léon Gaumont à Louis Feuillade,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no. 95, 1965. ‘‘Feuillade,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, vol. 2, Paris, 1967. Roud, Richard, ‘‘Maker of Melodrama,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1976. ‘‘Louis Feuillade,’’ in Film Dope (London), September 1978. Cartier, C., and M. Oms, ‘‘Quand Louis Feuillade cinématographiait à la cité de Carcassonne,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), Winter 1979. FEYDERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 325 ‘‘Fant?mas Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 July 1981. You, D., ‘‘Fant?mas et Judex au tribunal: Feuillade a-t-il cédé ses droits,’’ in Filméchange (Paris), Winter 1983. Lacassin, F., ‘‘Naissance d’un héros,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), April 1984. Pithon, R., ‘‘Retour à Feuillade,’’ in Positif (Paris), February 1987. Abel, R., ‘‘Before Fant?mas: Louis Feuillade and the Development of Early French Cinema,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Fall 1987. ‘‘Louis Feuillade,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 48, 1987. Oms, M., ‘‘Entretien avec Jacques Champreux,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 48, 1987. La Breteque, F. de, and M. Cade, ‘‘La petite bourgeoisie dans les films de Louis Feuillade,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 50, 1988. Masson, A., ‘‘Voila le passage secret! Sur Judex et sur Feuillade,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 383, January 1993. ’’Feuillade and the French Serial,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Austin, Texas), no. 37, Spring 1996. *** Louis Feuillade was one of the most solid and dependable talents in French cinema during the early twentieth century. He succeeded Alice Guy as head of production at Gaumont in 1906 and worked virtually without a break—aside from a period of war service—until his death in 1925. He produced some eight hundred films of every conceivable kind: comedies and contemporary melodramas, biblical epics and historical dramas, sketches and series with numerous episodes adding up to many hours of running time. Alhough most of these films were made from his own scripts, Feuillade was not an innovator. The years of his apprenticeship in the craft of filmmaking were those in which French producers reigned supreme, and he worked uncomplainingly in a context in which commercial criteria were paramount. For Feuillade—as for so many of his successors in the heyday of Hollywood—aesthetic strategies not rooted in sound commercial practices were inconceivable, and a filmmaker’s only viable ambition was to reach the widest possible audience. Most of Feuillade’s output forms part of a series of some kind and he clearly saw films in generic terms rather than as individually sculpted works. Though not an originator in terms of the forms or styles he adopted, he made films which are among the finest examples of the various popular genres he successively explored. Before 1914 his work is enormously diverse. It included thirty comic films in the series of La Vie dr?le, a group of seriously intended dramas in which a concern with the quality of the pictorial image is apparent (marketed under the banner of the Film esthétique), and a number of contempo- rary dramas, La Vie telle qu’elle est, with somewhat ambiguous claims to realism. In addition, he made some seventy-six films with a four-year-old child star, Bébé, and another fifty or so with the urchin Bout-de-Zan. But the richest vein of Feuillade’s work is the series of crime melodramas that extended from Fant?mas in 1913–14 to Barrabas in 1920. Starting with his celebration of Fant?mas, master criminal and master of disguise, who triumphs effortlessly over the dogged ordi- nariness of his opponent Inspector Juve, Feuillade went on to make his wildest success with Les Vampires. Made to rival the imported American serials, this series reflects the chaotic wartime state of French production. It is marked by improvised stories refusing all logic, bewildering changes of casting (necessary as actors were summoned to the war effort), economical use of real locations, and dazzling moments of total incongruity. Les Vampires reached a level that Feuillade was never able to duplicate. Subsequent works like Judex and especially La Nouvelle Mission de Judex are marked by a new tone of moralising, with the emphasis placed on the caped avenger rather than the feckless criminals. If the later serials, Tih Minh and Barrabas, contain se- quences able to rank with the director’s best, Feuillade’s subsequent work in the 1920s lacks the earlier forcefulness. It was the films’ supreme lack of logic, the disregard for hallowed bourgeois values—so appropriate at a time when the old social order of Europe was crumbling under the impact of World War I—which led the surrealists such as André Breton and Louis Aragon to hail Fant?mas and Les Vampires, and most of Feuillade’s subsequent advocates have similarly celebrated the films’ anarchistic poetry. But this should not lead us to see Feuillade as any sort of frustrated artist or poet of cinema, suffocating in a world dominated by business decisions. On the contrary, the director was an archetypal middle class family man who prided himself on the commercial success of his work and conducted his personal life in accord with strictly ordered bourgeois principles. —Roy Armes FEYDER, Jacques Nationality: Belgian. Born: Jacques Frédérix in Ixelles, Belgium, 21 July 1885, became French citizen, 1928. Education: the Ecole régimentaire, Nivelles, 1905. Military Service: Served in Belgian Army, 1917–19. Family: Married Fran?oise Rosay, 1917, three sons. Career: Worked in family’s cannon foundry, 1906–07; theatre actor in Paris, 1911–13, and in Lyons, 1913–14; also film actor, from 1912; assistant to film director Gaston Ravel, 1914; directed first film, for Gaumont, 1916; Les Nouveaux Messieurs banned in France for insulting ‘‘the dignity of parliament and its ministers,’’ accepted MGM offer and moved to Hollywood, 1928; MGM contract termi- nated, 1933; moved to Switzerland, 1942; producer in Paris, 1945. Awards: Best Foreign Film Award, New York Film Critics, and Best Direction, Venice Festival, for La Kermesse héro?que, 1935. Died: In Prangins, Switzerland, 25 May 1948. Films as Director: 1915 Monsieur Pinson, policier (co-d) 1916 Têtes de femmes, femmes de tête; Le Pied qui etreint (four episodes) (+ sc); L’Homme au foulard à pois (+ sc); Le Bluff (+ sc); Un Conseil d’ami (+ sc); L’Homme de compagnie; Tiens, vous êtes à Poitiers? (+ sc); Le Frère de lait (+ sc) FEYDER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 326 Jacques Feyder 1917 L’Instinct est ma?tre; Le Billard cassé (+ sc); Abrégeons les formalités! (+ sc); La Trouvaille de B?chu (+ sc); Le Pardessus de demi-saison; Les Vieilles Femmes de l’Hospice 1919 La Faute d’orthographe (+ sc) 1921 L’Atlantide (Missing Husbands) (+ sc) 1922 Crainquebille (+ sc, art d) 1925 Visages d’enfants (Faces of Children) (+ sc, art d); L’Image (+ co-sc, role); Gribiche (Mother of Mine) (+ sc) 1926 Carmen (+ sc) 1927 Au pays du Roi Lépreux (documentary) (+ sc) 1928 Thérèse Raquin (Du sollst nicht Ehe brechen; Shadows of Fear) (+ co-sc); Les Nouveaux Messieurs (The New Gentle- men) (+ co-sc) 1929 The Kiss (+ co-sc); Anna Christie (German version of Clar- ence Brown film) (+ sc) 1930 Le Spectre vert (French version of Lionel Barrymore’s The Unholy Night) (+ sc); Si l’Empereur savait ?a (French version of His Glorious Night) (+ sc); Olympia (French version) (+ sc) 1931 Daybreak; Son of India 1934 Le Grand Jeu (+ co-sc) 1935 Pension Mimosas (+ co-sc); La Kermesse héro?que (Carnival in Flanders) (+ co-sc) 1936 Die klugen Frauen (German version of La Kermesse héro?que) (+ sc) 1937 Knight without Armour 1938 Les Gens du voyage (+ co-sc); Fahrendes Volk (German version of Les Gens du voyage) (+ sc) 1942 La Loi du nord (made 1939; during Occupation titled La Piste du nord) (+ co-sc); Une Femme disparait (Portrait of a Woman) (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1913 First episode of series Protéa (Jasset) (role) 1914 Quand minuit sonna (role) 1915 Autour d’une bague (Ravel) (role); Les Vampires (serial) (Feuillade) (bit role) 1925 Poil de carotte (Duvivier) (sc) 1928 Gardiens de Phare (Grémillon) (sc) FEYDERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 327 1943 Maturareise (Jeunes filles d’aujourd’hui) (Steiner) (tech + ar- tistic supervision) 1946 Macadam (Back Streets of Paris) (Blistène) (art d) Publications By FEYDER: book— Le Cinéma, notre métier, with Fran?oise Rosay, Geneva, 1946. By FEYDER: articles— ‘‘Impressions de Hollywood, L’Ordre,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, edited by Marcel Lapierre, Paris, 1946. ‘‘Transposition visuelle,’’ in Intelligence du cinématographe, edited by Marcel l’Herbier, Paris, 1946. ‘‘Je crois au film parlant, Pour vous,’’ in L’Art du cinéma, edited by Pierre Lherminier, Paris, 1960. ‘‘La Kermesse héro?que,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), no. 26, 1965. On FEYDER: books— Jacques Feyder ou le Cinéma concret (anthology), Brussels, 1949. Bachy, Victor, Jacques Feyder, Paris, 1966. Ford, Charles, Jacques Feyder, Paris, 1973. Abel, R.D., French Cinema: The First Wave, Princeton, New Jer- sey, 1984. On FEYDER: articles— Chaperot, Georges, ‘‘Souvenirs sur Jacques Feyder,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), 1 July 1930. Obituary in New York Times, 26 May 1948. ‘‘Feyder Issue’’ of L’Ecran Fran?ais (Paris), 8 June 1948. ‘‘Feyder Issue’’ of Ciné-Club (Paris), 2 November 1948. ‘‘Jacques Feyder’’ in Film Dope (London), September 1978. ‘‘Jacques Feyder,’’ National Film Theatre Booklet (London), August 1983. ‘‘Dossier Jacques Feyder,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 40, Summer 1984. Courtault, D., ‘‘Les Frenchies en Californie,’’ in Cinémaction (France), no. 56, July 1990. Oms, M., ‘‘Dossier sur Le Roi Lepreux,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 57, 1992. On FEYDER: film— Antoine, Raymond, and Charles Van Der Hagen, Jacques Feyder et son chef d’oeuvre, Belgium, 1974. *** Underneath everything Jacques Feyder did was a great love and mastery of his medium that gave integrity and style to his work. As a young man he rejected the bourgeois background of his Belgian home and became an actor. He fell in love with the talented Fran?oise Rosay, who became his partner for life. He acted in the cinema of Victorin Jasset, Feuillade, and Léon Gaumont, then became a scriptwriter, and finally began directing. Feyder’s individual approach to La Faute d’orthographe did not commend itself to Gaumont, and Feyder raised the money to make the popular novel of Pierre Benois, L’Atlantide. This film, despite the presence of an ill-chosen Napierkowska in the lead, was an interna- tional success. The scenes shot in the Sahara under difficult condi- tions balanced the picturesque and exotic interiors, depicting an underground city. Dining out in Montmartre, Feyder and Fran?oise discovered a boy playing in the street. This child was little Jean Forest, whom Feyder directed with consummate skill in three films, Crainquebille, Visages d’enfants, and Gribiche. The first, based on the Anatole France story, added to Feyder’s reputation, while the second, shot with simplicity and sensitivity in the Haut Valais, Switzerland, showed that Feyder possessed a remarkable skill for directing child actors. Gribiche was his first film for the Russian-inspired Albatros Company. It intro- duced the designer Lazare Meerson, working in the Art Deco style. It also featured Fran?oise Rosay in her first major role. Following a pictorially beautiful Carmen, with a recalcitrant Raquel Meller in the title role, came Feyder’s masterpiece. Thérèse Raquin was shot in a German studio and featured Gina Manes in her greatest part. Zola’s sombre bourgeois tragedy was brought vividly to life. The details of the Raquin home, the human tensions, the unspoken words, and the looming shadows created an unforgettable effect. At the end of the saga, the old, dumb, and paralysed woman peers through those shadows to watch the dead bodies of the murderous lovers lying on the floor. This scene remains one of the great moments of cinema. After an irreverent satire on French politics, Les Nouveaux Mes- sieurs, which succeeded in getting itself banned, Feyder set out for Hollywood. He directed Garbo in The Kiss, her last silent film and one of her most intelligent roles. Feyder proceeded to tackle the sound film with European versions of Anna Christie, Le Spectre vert, and Olympia. In 1931 he directed Ramon Novarro in Son of India and Day Break before returning to France. Teaming up with his fellow countryman Charles Spaak he made in quick succession Le Grand Jeu, one of the best films of the Foreign Legion; Pension Mimosas, with Rosay in a great tragic role; and the delightful, decorative, and witty La Kermesse héro?que, a costume film that defies the ravages of time. The latter outraged the sensibilities of his fellow Belgians even as it delighted the rest of the world. Feyder directed Knight without Armour for Alexander Korda in London, Dietrich playing opposite Robert Donat. This story of the revolution in Russia featured an elegant Dietrich moving through picturesque landscapes and great buildings designed by Lazare Meerson in one of his last assignments. Feyder then went to Germany to make Les Gens du voyage in two versions. After this story of circus life he returned to France and made his last important film, La Loi du nord, with Michele Morgan. This story of a Mounted Police search for a murderer in the Far North still showed the Feyder quality. Shortly after its completion, France was invaded. Feyder chose to live in Switzerland during the war. He turned out a star vehicle for Fran?oise Rosay, Une Femme disparait, in 1941. He died in Switzerland in 1948, a year which also saw the passing of Eisenstein and Griffith. FINCHER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 328 Feyder was in the company of his peers. But in 1970 René Clair could still say ‘‘Jacques Feyder does not occupy today the place his work and his example should have earned him.’’ —Liam O’Leary FINCHER, David Nationality: American. Born: Colorado, 1963; raised in San Rafael, California. Career: Worked at an animation company as a teen; worked at Industrial Light and Magic, c. 1981–85; director of TV commercials and music videos for bands such as Aerosmith, Madonna, and Paula Abdul; founded Propaganda Films production company. Awards: Fantosporto International Fantasy Film Award for Best Film, for Se7en, 1996. Office: Propaganda Films, 940 North Mansfield Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90038. Agent: Creative Artists Agency, 9830 Wilshire Blvd., Beverly Hills, CA 90212. Films as Director: 1985 The Beat of the Live Drum 1992 Alien 3 1995 Se7en (Seven) 1997 The Game 1999 Fight Club Other Films: 1983 Twice upon a Time (Korty, Swenson) (special photographic effects); Star Wars: Episode VI—Return of the Jedi (Marquand) (assistant cameraman: miniature and optical effects unit) 1984 Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (Spielberg) (matte photography); The NeverEnding Story (Die Unendliche Geschichte) (Petersen) (matte photography assistant) 1999 Being John Malkovich (Jonze) (uncredited ro as Christo- pher Bing) Publications By FINCHER: articles— Interview in Sight and Sound (London), January 1996. Rouyer, Philippe, ‘‘Seven,’’ interview in Positif (Paris), no. 420, February 1996. Eimer, David, ‘‘Game Boy,’’ interview in Time Out (London), no. 1416, 8 October 1997. Probst, Christopher, ‘‘Playing for Keeps on The Game,’’ interview in American Cinematographer (Hollywood), vol. 78. n0. 9, Septem- ber 1997. Vachaud, Laurent, and Christian Viviani, ‘‘David Fincher: Le film d’action est sur le déclin,’’ interview in Positif (Paris), no. 443, January 1998. On FINCHER: articles— Taubin, Amy, and John Wrathall, ‘‘The Allure of Decay/Seven,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 6, no. 1, January 1996. Rolling Stone, 17 October 1996. Rolling Stone, 3 April 1997. Entertainment Weekly, 19 September 1997. National Review, 13 October 1997. New York Times, 31 August 1997. Smith, Gavin, article in Film Comment (New York), September- October 1999. *** David Fincher is a devotee of darkness. Scene after scene in his films takes place in cramped, sparsely lit rooms where malignancy seems to hang in the air like ineradicable damp. For the shadows that pervade his films are moral and psychological no less than physical. Using darkness as a metaphor for evil and danger is hardly original— it is the entire basis of film noir, for a start—but Fincher brings to the banal equation a degree of emotional intensity that reinvigorates it. The darkness in his films is organic, the element in which his characters swim. When the Narrator in Fight Club quits his bland, Ikea-styled apartment to move into the derelict Victorian mansion where Tyler Durden lives, it’s clear that he’s coming home. This leaky ruin, squalid and underlit, is where he spiritually belongs. On the face of it Fincher, with his dark sensibility and nervy, MTV-honed style, should have been the ideal director to take on Alien 3. It was the Alien series, after all, that had brought shadows into space, grafting the conventions of the Old-Dark-House horror movie on to a genre previously typified by brightly lit sets and gleaming, sterile surfaces. But Fincher found himself mired in a hopelessly jinxed project that had already chewed up and spat out two previous directors—not to mention a cinematographer, a small army of writers, and a lot of studio money. ‘‘I got hired for a personal vision,’’ he later recounted, ‘‘and was railroaded into something else. I had never been devalued or lied to or treated so badly.... I thought I’d rather die of colon cancer than do another movie.’’ The experience evidently left its scars; even with three far more accomplished films to his credit, Fincher claims not to enjoy directing at all, describing it as ‘‘kind of a masochistic endeavor.’’ Something of this penchant for willed self-torment transfers itself to his charac- ters, haunted as they are by their demonic alter egos to the point of possession. The actions and character of John Doe (Kevin Spacey), the sadistic serial killer in Se7en, increasingly obsess Brad Pitt’s young homicide detective until Doe is able to direct the cop’s will, using him as an instrument to complete his own murderous design. In The Game Michael Douglas’s rich banker becomes a puppet, jerked this way and that in the devious scheme devised by his scapegrace younger brother. The pattern is even there in embryo (literally) in the flawed Alien 3, with Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) impregnated by the Alien; but it reaches its logical conclusion in Fight Club, where Edward Norton’s Narrator and the dangerous, charismatic Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt again), disciple and manipulative guru, turn out to be one and the same person. This view of people as constantly in thrall to their dark side, ever vulnerable to takeover by their worst submerged instincts, might FLAHERTYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 329 David Fincher seem intolerably bleak were it not for the sense of subversive glee that underpins Fincher’s work. Gavin Smith, writing of Fight Club (though his comments apply, to a lesser degree, to the earlier films), refers to ‘‘a mocking sense of flux and liminality in its attitudes both formally and conceptually . . . insolence towards cinematic codes and conventions concerning authenticity and the narrative representation of space and time.’’ Fincher plays sophisticated mind-games with his audience, taking their cine-literacy for granted and teasing them to follow him as he switches between different levels of subjective and objective reality, just as John Doe cruelly teases the detectives on his trail. At their most achieved, his films contrive to have it both ways, being at once grim metaphysical statements of the human condition and intricate ludic conundrums set in hermetically enclosed worlds. Unsettlingly pleasurable, they at once defy us to take them seriously and challenge us not to. This kind of conceptual balancing-act requires the highest degree of precisely gauged scripting. When it’s lacking, as in John Brancato and Michael Ferris’s not-quite-cunning-enough screenplay for The Game, the movie lapses into ingenious spectator sport—diverting, but ultimately uninvolving. But at their most sublimely ambiguous, Fincher’s films can set up disquieting tensions in the viewer—as shown by the outraged reactions of certain critics to Se7en and Fight Club. Fincher talks of being ‘‘drawn to things that begin to dismantle the architecture, not of movies, but of the pact that a movie that’s responsible entertainment makes with an audience.’’ Such disruptive tactics are never likely to make for commercial smash-hits. But if this self-styled ‘‘malcontent and miscreant’’ can resist pressure to tone down the edginess and mordant humour in favour of something less disturbing, his future films—and his influence on mainstream Holly- wood cinema—promise to be, at the least, highly stimulating. —Philip Kemp FLAHERTY, Robert Nationality: American. Born: Robert Joseph Flaherty in Iron Moun- tain, Michigan, 16 February 1884. Education: Upper Canada Col- lege, Toronto, and Michigan College of Mines. Family: Married Frances Hubbard, 1914. Career: Explorer, surveyor, and prospector FLAHERTY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 330 Robert Flaherty for Canadian Grand Trunk Railway and Canadian Mining Syndicates, 1900s; worked for industrial entrepreneur William MacKenzie, search- ing for iron ore deposits along Hudson Bay, 1910–16; made first travelogue film, 1915; made first feature, Nanook of the North, 1922; made Moana with backing of Paramount (then Famous Players- Lasky), 1923–25; invited to work for Irving Thalberg at MGM, quit and formed company with F.W. Murnau to produce Tabu, 1928; made Industrial Britain for John Grierson’s Empire Marketing Board, 1931; moved to Aran Islands and made Man of Aran, 1932–34; made The Land for U.S. government, 1939–41; hired by Frank Capra to work in U.S. Army orientation film unit, 1942; made Louisiana Story, sponsored by Standard Oil, 1946–48. Robert Flaherty Foundation (later renamed International Film Seminars Inc.) established, 1953. Awards: International Prize, Venice Festival, for Louisiana Story, 1948. Died: 23 July 1951. Films as Director: 1922 Nanook of the North (+ ph, ed, sc) 1925 The Potterymaker (Story of a Potter) (short) (+ ph, sc) 1926 Moana (Moana: A Romance of the Golden Age. Moana: The Love Life of a South Sea Siren) (+ co-sc, co-ph, co-ed) 1927 The Twenty-four-Dollar Island (short) (+ sc, ph) 1931 Tabu (co-d, co-sc, uncredited co-ph) 1933 Industrial Britain (co-d, co-ph); The English Potter (short) (+ ph) (edited by Marion Grierson from footage shot for Industrial Britain); The Glassmakers of England (short) (+ ph) (edited from Industrial Britain footage); Art of the English Craftsman (short) (+ ph) (from Industrial Britain footage) 1934 Man of Aran (+ sc, co-ph) 1937 Elephant Boy (co-d) 1942 The Land (+ sc, co-ph, narration) 1948 Louisiana Story (+ co-sc, co-ph, pr) 1949 The Titan (+ sc, ph) 1967 Studies for Louisiana Story (+ sc, ph) (fifteen hours of outtakes from Louisiana Story edited by Nick Cominos) Other Films: 1945 What’s Happened to Sugar (David Flaherty) (pr) 1949 The Story of Michelangelo (co-pr) 1950 Green Mountain Land (short) (David Flaherty) (pr) 1951 St. Matthew’s Passion (ed, narration) (reedited version of Ernst Marischka’s 1949 Matthaus-Passion) Publications By FLAHERTY: books— Anerca: Drawings by Enooesweetof, revised ed., Toronto, 1959. Eskimo, by Edmund Carpenter with Frederick Varley and Flaherty, Toronto, 1959. By FLAHERTY: articles— Article on North Sea, a film by Harry Watt, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1938. Interview with Theodore Strauss, in the New York Times, 12 Octo- ber 1941. ‘‘How I Filmed Nanook of the North,’’ in Filmmakers on Filmmaking, edited by Harry M. Geduld, Bloomington, Indiana, 1971. On FLAHERTY: books— Rotha, Paul, The Film till Now, London, 1930. Flaherty, Frances, Elephant Dance, New York, 1937. Flaherty, Frances, Sabu: The Elephant Boy, New York, 1937. Rotha, Paul, Documentary Film, New York, 1952. Flaherty, Frances, The Odyssey of a Film-Maker: Robert Flaherty’s Story, Urbana, Illinois, 1960. Quintar, Fuad, Robert Flaherty et le Documentaire Poetique: Etudès Cinématographique No. 5, Paris, 1960. Cuenca, Carlos Fernandez, Robert Flaherty, Madrid, 1963. Klaue, Wolfgang, compiler, Robert Flaherty, Berlin, 1964. Agel, Henri, Robert J. Flaherty, Paris, 1965. Calder-Marshall, Arthur, The Innocent Eye: The Life of Robert Flaherty, London, 1970. Griffith, Richard, The World of Robert Flaherty, New York, 1970. FLAHERTYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 331 Hardy, Forsyth, editor, Grierson on Documentary, revised ed., New York, 1971. Levin, G. Roy, Documentary Explorations: Fifteen Interviews with Filmmakers, Garden City, New York, 1971. Barsam, Richard, Nonfiction Film: A Critical History, New York, 1973. Armes, Roy, Film and Reality: An Historical Survey, Baltimore, 1974. Barnouw, Erik, Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film, New York, 1974. Napolitano, Antonio, Robert J. Flaherty, Florence, 1975. Murphy, William T., Robert Flaherty: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1978. Williams, Christopher, Realism and Cinema: A Reader, London, 1980. Rotha, Paul, Robert J. Flaherty: A Biography, Philadelphia, 1983. Barsam, Richard, The Vision of Robert Flaherty: The Artist as Myth and Filmmaker, Bloomington, Indiana, 1988. On FLAHERTY: articles— Ramsaye, Terry, ‘‘Flaherty, Great Adventurer,’’ in Photoplay (New York), May 1928. Grierson, John, ‘‘Flaherty,’’ in Cinema Quarterly (London), Autumn 1934. Griffith, Richard, ‘‘Flaherty and the Future,’’ in New Movies (New York), January 1943. Rosenheimer, Arthur (Arthur Knight), ‘‘They Make Documentaries: No. 1—Robert Flaherty,’’ in Film News (New York), April 1946. Taylor, Robert Lewis, ‘‘Profile of Flaherty,’’ in the New Yorker, 11, 18, and 25 June 1949. Gray, Hugh, ‘‘Robert Flaherty and the Naturalist Documentary,’’ in Hollywood Quarterly, Fall 1950. Grierson, John, ‘‘Flaherty as Innovator,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), October/November 1951. ‘‘Flaherty in Review,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), November/ December 1951. Huston, John, ‘‘Regarding Flaherty,’’ in Sequence (London), no. 14, 1952. George, George L., ‘‘The World of Robert Flaherty,’’ in Film News (New York), no. 4, 1953. Manvell, Roger, ‘‘Robert Flaherty, Geographer,’’ in The Geographi- cal Magazine (New York), February 1957. Siepmann, Charles, ‘‘Robert Flaherty—The Man and the Filmmaker,’’ in Film Book I: The Audience and the Filmmaker, edited by Robert Hughes, New York, 1959. Flaherty, Frances, ‘‘Flaherty’s Quest for Life,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January 1959. Bachmann, Gideon, ‘‘Bob,’’ in Film (London), September/Octo- ber 1959. Van Dongen, Helen, ‘‘Robert J. Flaherty, 1884–1951,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1965. Barnouw, Erik, ‘‘Robert Flaherty,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1972. Corliss, Richard, ‘‘Robert Flaherty: The Man in the Iron Myth,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1973. Zinnemann, Fred, ‘‘Remembering Robert Flaherty,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), May/June 1976. ‘‘Robert Flaherty,’’ in Film Dope (London), February 1979. Ansara, Martha, ‘‘Richard Leacock: Robert Flaherty’s Apprentice,’’ in Filmnews, vol. 10, no. 6, June 1980. Serceau, M., and E. Bonpunt, ‘‘Le mythe du bon sauvage (de Flaherty à Perrault),’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), no. 25, March 1983. Lee, R., ‘‘Robert Flaherty: Free Spirit,’’ in American Cinema- tographer (Los Angeles), January 1984. Winston, B., ‘‘The White Man’s Burden,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1984/85. ‘‘The Innocent Eye: Robert Flaherty,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), September 1984. Barsam, Richard, ‘‘The Vision of Robert Flaherty,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1988. Eyman, S., ‘‘Sunrise in Bora Bora,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 26, no. 6, July-August 1990. Ruby, J., ‘‘Speaking for, Speaking about, Speaking with, or Speaking Alongside: An Anthropological and Documentary Dilemma,’’ in Journal of Film and Video (Atlanta), vol. 44, no. 1–2, Spring- Summer 1992. ’’The Flaherty: Four Decades in the Cause of Independent Cinema,’’ and Mark Langer, ‘‘Rethinking Flaherty: Acoma and Holly- wood,’’ in Wide Angle (Baltimore, Maryland), vol. 27, nos. 1–4, 1995. Leacock, Richard, ‘‘In Defense of the Flaherty Traditions,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 79, Winter 1996. On FLAHERTY: films— Romine, Charles, producer, Odyssey: The World of Robert Flaherty, for CBS-TV in cooperation with the Museum of Modern Art, broadcast 17 February 1957. Stoney, George, How the Myth Was Made: A Study of Robert Flaherty’s Man of Aran, for television, 1978. *** Robert Flaherty was already thirty-six years old when he set out to make a film, Nanook of the North. Before that he had established himself as a prospector, surveyor, and explorer, having made several expeditions to the sub-Arctic regions of the Hudson Bay. He had shot motion picture footage on two of these occasions, but before Nanook, filmmaking was only a sideline. Yet these years in the wilderness were to have a profound effect on Flaherty’s development as a filmmaker. First, the expeditions brought Flaherty into intimate contact with the Eskimo culture. Second, they enhanced his knowledge about the human condition in a natural setting. Third, the numerous evenings that he spent in isolation encouraged him to contemplate the day’s events by writing in his diaries, from which he developed highly skilled powers of observa- tion which sharpened his sense of photographic imagery and detail. Also a violinist and an accomplished storyteller, Flaherty had clearly cultivated an artistic sensibility before becoming a film director. Filmmaking became a compelling mechanism for expressing this sensibility. Flaherty turned to filmmaking not only as a means of creation but also to communicate to the outside world his impressions of Eskimo culture. He held a profound admiration for these people, who lived close to nature and whose daily existence was an unrelenting struggle to survive. The struggle ennobled this proud race. Flaherty sought to portray their existence in a manner that would illustrate the purity and nobility of their lives, a purpose underlying each of his films. Flaherty developed a method of working that was fairly consistent from film to film. The films about the people of Hudson Bay, Samoa, FLEMING DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 332 the Aran Islands, and the Louisiana Bayou demonstrate a more or less constant concern with people who live in natural settings. These geographical locations are incidental; others would have done just as well. Eskimo culture was the only one in which he was deeply versed. Nevertheless, the locations were chosen because they represented societies on the verge of change. Indeed, Flaherty has often been criticized for presenting his subjects as they existed years ago, not as he found them. But Flaherty saw his projects as the last opportunity to capture a way of life on film. Another consistent feature of Flaherty’s technique was the selec- tion of a ‘‘cast.’’ Although he pioneered the use of real people to re- enact their own everyday lives before the camera lens, he deliberately chose ideal types on the basis of physical appearance and even created artificial families to act before the camera. Flaherty worked without a plot or script, allowing for a maximum of improvisation. The Flaherty method entailed total immersion in these cultures in order to discover the basic patterns of life. Nanook represented the least difficulty because of his thorough familiarity with Eskimo culture. However, Moana and Man of Aran represented unfamiliar territory. Flaherty had to become steeped in strange cultures. His search for struggle and conflict in Savaii misled him and he later abandoned it. Struggle was more readily apparent in the Aran Islands, in terms of conflict between man and the sea; the hunt for the basking shark which he portrayed, abandoned in practice some years earlier, helps the audience to visualize this conflict. Flaherty’s technical facility also served him well. Generally he carried projectors and film printers and developing equipment to these far–off places so that he could view his rushes on a daily basis. Flaherty, a perfectionist, shot enormous quantities of footage for his films; the lack of a script or scenario contributed to this. He went to great lengths to achieve photographic excellence, often shooting when shadows were longest. In Moana he used the new panchromatic film stock, which was much more sensitive to color than orthochromatic film. He pioneered the use of long lenses for close-up work, a method that allowed him an intimacy with his subjects that was novel for its time. Flaherty’s films were generally well received in the popular press and magazines as well as in the more serious critical literature. Nanook was praised for its authenticity and its documentary value as well as its pictorial qualities. John Grierson was the first to use the term ‘‘documentary’’ to describe a film when he reviewed Moana. Subsequently, Grierson, through his filmmaking activities and writ- ings, began to formulate a documentary aesthetic dealing with social problems and public policy, subjects that Flaherty (except for The Land) tried to avoid. Nevertheless, Grierson’s writings, which were to influence the development of the modern sponsored film, had their foundations in Flaherty’s work. Their purposes were ultimately quite different, but Grierson gave due credit to Flaherty for working with real people, shaping the story from the material, and bringing a sense of drama to the documentary film. Man of Aran aroused the most critical responses to Flaherty’s work. It was released at a time when the world was beset with enormous political, social, and economic problems, and many enthu- siasts of documentary film believed it was irresponsible and archaic of Flaherty to produce a documentary that made no reference to these problems or concealed them from public view. Louisiana Story, on the other hand, was greeted as the culminating work of a master filmmaker. Recognized for its skillful interweaving of sound and image, one critic described the film as an audiovisual symphony. However, in today’s world of pollution and oil spills it is much more difficult to accept the film’s picture of the oil industry as a benign presence in the bayou. Although Flaherty made a relatively small number of films in his long career, one would be hard pressed to find a more influential body of work. He always operated outside the mainstream of the documen- tary movement. Both he and Grierson, despite their contradictory purposes, can be credited with the development of a new genre and a documentary sensibility; Flaherty by his films, Grierson by his writing. Watching today’s 16mm distribution prints and video cas- settes, it is often difficult to appreciate the photographic excellence of Flaherty’s work. Nevertheless, the clean lines are there, as well as an internal rhythm created by the deft editing touch of Helen Van Dongen. Although his films were improvised, the final product was never haphazard. It showed a point of view he wished to share. —William T. Murphy FLEMING, Victor Nationality: American. Born: Pasadena, California, 23 February 1883. Career: Car-racing driver and chauffeur, then hired as assistant cameraman at American Film Company, 1910; began working with Allan Dwan, 1911; cameraman at Triangle, under D.W. Griffith, 1915; joined photographic section of U.S. Army Signal Corps, 1917; cameraman for Walter Wanger at Versailles Peace Conference, 1919; Victor Fleming and Jean Harlow on the set of Reckless FLEMINGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 333 directed first feature, 1920; contract director for MGM, from 1932. Awards: Oscar for Best Director, for Gone with the Wind, 1939. Died: In 1949. Films as Director: 1919 When the Clouds Roll By (co-d) (private film featuring Douglas Fairbanks Sr., made for the Duke of Sutherland) 1920 The Mollycoddle 1921 Mamma’a Affair; Woman’s Place 1922 The Lane That Had No Turning; Red Hot Romance; Anna Ascends 1923 Dark Secrets; The Law of the Lawless; To the Last Man; The Call of the Canyon 1924 Code of the Sea; Empty Hands 1925 The Devil’s Cargo; Adventure; A Son of His Father; Lord Jim 1926 The Blind Goddess; Mantrap 1927 The Rough Riders (The Trumpet Call); The Way of All Flesh; Hula 1928 The Awakening 1929 Abie’s Irish Rose; Wolf Song; The Virginian 1930 Common Clay; Renegades 1931 Around the World with Douglas Fairbanks (Around the World in Eighty Minutes with Douglas Fairbanks) (+ role) 1932 The Wet Parade; Red Dust 1933 The White Sister; Bombshell (Blond Bombshell) 1934 Treasure Island 1935 Reckless; The Farmer Takes a Wife 1937 Captains Courageous; The Good Earth (co-d with Franklin, uncredited); A Star Is Born (Wellman) (d add’l scenes) 1938 Test Pilot; The Crowd Roars (Thorpe) (d add’l scenes); The Great Waltz (co-d with Duvivier, uncredited) 1939 The Wizard of Oz; Gone with the Wind 1941 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (+ pr) 1942 Tortilla Flat 1943 A Guy Named Joe 1945 Adventure 1948 Joan of Arc Other Films (incomplete listing): 1916 His Picture in the Papers (Emerson) (ph); The Habit of Happiness (Laugh and the World Laughs) (Dwan) (ph); The Good Bad Man (Passing Through) (Dwan) (ph); Betty of Greystone (Dwan) (ph); Macbeth (Emerson) (ph); Little Meena’s Romance (Powell) (ph); The Mystery of the Leap- ing Fish (Emerson) (ph) (short); The Half-Breed (Dwan) (ph); An Innocent Magdalene (Dwan) (ph); A Social Secre- tary (Emerson) (ph); Manhattan Madness (Dwan) (ph); 50–50 (Dwan) (ph); American Aristocracy (Ingraham) (ph); The Matrimaniac (Powell) (ph); The Americano (Em- erson) (ph) 1917 Down to Earth (Emerson) (ph); The Man from Painted Post (Henabery) (ph); Reaching for the Moon (Emerson) (co-ph); A Modern Musketeer (Dwan) (ph) 1919 His Majesty, the American (One of the Blood) (Henabery) (ph) Publications On FLEMING: books— Thompson, Frank, Between Action and Cut: 5 American Directors, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1985. Harmetz, Aljean, The Making of The Wizard of Oz, London, 1989. On FLEMING: articles— Obituary in New York Times, 7 January 1949. Reid, John, ‘‘The Man Who Made Gone With the Wind,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1967. Reid, John, ‘‘Fleming: The Apprentice Years,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January 1968. ‘‘Checklist—Victor Fleming,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), October 1977. Brownlow, Kevin, ‘‘Victor Fleming,’’ in Film Dope (London), February 1979. Gallagher, J., ‘‘Victor Fleming,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March 1983. *** Victor Fleming was a successful, respected director of some of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer’s biggest and most celebrated films (Red Dust, Captains Courageous, Test Pilot) as well as two undisputed Hollywood classics by the standards of popular taste, The Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind. Ironically, it is probably the enormous continuing popularity of the last two titles that has eclipsed Fleming’s personal reputation. Correctly perceived as producer-dominated, studio-influenced cinema, both Oz and Gone with the Wind are talked and written about extensively, but never as Victor Fleming films. They are classic examples of the complicated collaborations that took place under the old studio system. Although Fleming received direc- torial credit (and 1939’s Oscar as Best Director) for Gone with the Wind, others made significant contributions to the final film, among them George Cukor. Fleming served his film apprenticeship as a cinematographer, working with such pioneers as Allan Dwan at the Flying A company and D.W. Griffith at Triangle. He photographed several Douglas Fairbanks films, among them The Americano, Wild and Woolly, and Down to Earth. He developed a skillful sense of storytelling through the camera, as well as a good eye for lighting and composition during those years. After he became a director, his critical reputation became tied to the studio at which he made the majority of his films, Metro- Goldwyn-Mayer. Known unofficially as a ‘‘producer’s studio,’’ MGM concentrated on showcasing its well-known stable of stars in suitable vehicles. At Metro, Fleming was frequently thought of as a counterpart to George Cukor; Cukor was labelled a ‘‘woman’s director,’’ Fleming a ‘‘man’s director.’’ Besides being a close personal friend and favorite director of Clark Gable, Fleming was responsible for direct- ing the Oscar-winning performance of Spencer Tracy in Captains Courageous. His flair for getting along with male stars enabled him to create an impressive group of popular films that were loved by audiences, who saw them as ‘‘Gable films’’ or ‘‘Tracy films.’’ Both Henry Fonda (whose screen debut was in Fleming’s The Farmer Takes a Wife) and Gary Cooper (whose first big screen success was in FLOREY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 334 The Virginian) owed much of their early recognition to Fleming’s talent for directing actors. Fleming had a talent for spotting potential stars and understanding the phenomenon of the star persona. In addition to his work with male actors, he also played a key role in the career development of Jean Harlow. Under Fleming’s direction, she was encouraged to mix comedy with her sex appeal. The Virginian, Fleming’s first sound film, is an underrated movie that demonstrates a remarkable ability to overcome the problems of the early sound era, shooting both outdoors and indoors with equal fluidity and success. Fleming’s use of naturalistic sound in this film did much to influence other early films. However, Fleming’s work is not unified by a particular cinematic style, although it is coherent in thematic terms. His world is one of male camaraderie, joyous action, pride in professionalism, and lusty love for women who are not too ladylike to return the same sort of feelings. In this regard, his work is not unlike that of Howard Hawks, but Fleming lacked Hawks’ ability to refine style and content into a unified vision. Fleming’s name is not well known today. Although he received directorial credit for what is possibly the most famous movie ever made in Hollywood (Gone with the Wind), he is not remembered as its director. His work stands as an example of the best done by those directors who worked within the studio system, allowing the film to bear the stamp of the studio rather than any personal vision. —Jeanine Basinger FLOREY, Robert Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 14 September 1900. Education: Educated in Switzerland. Career: Actor/writer in Switzerland, 1918–19; writer for Cinémagazine and La Cinématographie fran?aise, Paris, then for Feuillade’s Studios, Nice, 1920; gagman, then director of foreign publicity for Douglas Fairbanks, Mary Pickford, and Rudolph Valentino, Hollywood, 1921–23; assistant director at MGM, 1924–26; left MGM to direct One Hour of Love for Tiffany, 1926; director for Paramount, 1928; returned to Europe, 1929, directed for UFA; returned to Hollywood, 1932; left filmmaking, became TV director, 1950. Awards: French Legion d’Honneur, 1950. Died: 16 May 1979. Films as Director: 1919 Heureuse Intervention (+ sc); Isidore sur le lac (+ sc); Isidore a la deveine (+ sc) 1923 Valentino en Angleterre (+ sc); 50–50 (+ sc) 1926 One Hour of Love; That Model from Paris (co-d with Gasnier, uncredited, + sc); 1927 The Romantic Age; The Cohens and the Kellys (Beaudine) (2nd unit d); Face Value; Life and Death of a Hollywood Extra (The Life and Death of 9413—A Hollywood Extra) (+ sc); Johann the Coffin Maker (+ sc); The Loves of Zero (+ sc) 1928 series of twenty-four shorts for Paramount featuring New York stage stars; Night Club; Skyscraper Symphony (+ sc, ph); The Pusher-in-the-Face; Bonjour, New York! (+ sc); The Hole in the Wall 1929 The Cocoanuts (+ co-d); The Battle of Paris (The Gay Lady); Eddie Cantor (+ sc); La Route est belle 1930 L’Amour chante (also directed German version: Komm’ zu mir zum Rendezvous, and Spanish version: Professor de mi Se?ora); Anna Christie (Brown) (d New York exteriors, uncredited) 1932 Le Blanc et le noir (co-d); The Murders in the Rue Morgue (+ co-sc); The Man Called Back; Those We Love; A Study in Scarlet (+ sc); The Blue Moon Murder Case; Girl Missing; Ex-lady 1933 The House on 56th Street; Bedside; Registered Nurse; Smarty (Hit Me Again) 1934 Oil for the Lamps of China (LeRoy) (d exteriors); Shanghai Orchid (d exteriors); I Sell Anything; I Am a Thief; The Woman in Red 1935 Go into Your Dance (co-d with Mayo, uncredited); The Florentine Dagger; Going Highbrow; Don’t Bet on Blonds; The Payoff; Ship Cafe; The Rose of the Rancho (Gering) (d add’l scenes, uncredited); The Preview Murder Mystery 1936 Till We Meet Again; Hollywood Boulevard (+ co-sc); Outcast 1937 The King of the Gamblers; This Way Please; Mountain Music; Daughter of Shanghai (Daughter of the Orient); Disbarred; King of Alcatraz 1938 Dangerous to Know; Hotel Imperial 1939 The Magnificent Fraud; Parole Fixer; Death of a Champion; Women without Names 1940 Meet Boston Blackie; The Face behind the Mask 1941 Two in a Taxi; Dangerously They Live; Lady Gangster 1942 The Desert Song (+ co-sc) 1943 Bomber’s Moon (co-d with Fuhr, uncredited); Roger Touhy, Gangster (The Last Gangster); The Man from Frisco 1944 Escape in the Desert (co-d with Blatt, uncredited); God Is My Co-Pilot 1945 Danger Signal; The Beast with Five Fingers; 1947 Tarzan and the Mermaids 1948 Rogue Regiment (+ sc); Outpost in Morocco 1949 The Crooked Way; Johnny One-Eye 1950 The Vicious Years (The Gangster We Made) Other Films: 1918 Le Cirque de la mort (Lindt) (role as le detective) 1921 L’Orpheline (serial in twelve episodes) (Feuillade) (asst d, role as an apache); Saturnin (Le Bon Allumeur) (Feuillade) (asst d, role as un gazier); Monte Cristo (Flynn) (historical advisor) 1922 Robin Hood (Dwan) (French sub-titles) 1923 Wine (Gasnier) (asst d) 1924 Parisian Nights (Santell) (asst d, tech advisor); The Exquisite Sinner (von Sternberg) (asst d); Time the Comedian (Leo- nard) (asst d) 1925 The Masked Bride (von Sternberg) (asst d); La Boheme (King Vidor) (asst d); Escape (Rosen) (asst d); Paris (Shadows of Paris) (Goulding) (asst d, tech advisor); Dance Madness (Leonard) (asst d); Toto (Stahl) (asst d) 1926 Monte Carlo (Dreams of Monte Carlo) (Cabanne) (asst d); Bardelys the Magnificent (King Vidor) (asst d) FLOREYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 335 Robert Florey (third from right) on the set of Till We Meet Again 1926 The Magic Flame (King) (asst d) 1927 The Woman Disputed (King) (asst d) 1932 Frankenstein (Whale) (sc) 1947 Monsieur Verdoux (Chaplin) (co-assoc d) 1948 Adventures of Don Juan (Sherman) (sc under pseudonym Florian Roberts) Publications By FLOREY: books— Filmland, Paris, 1923. Deux ans dans les studios américains, Paris, 1924; revised edi- tion, 1984. Douglas Fairbanks, sa vie, ses films, ses aventures, Paris, 1926. Pola Negri, Paris, 1926. Adolphe Menjou, with André Tinchant, Paris, 1927. Charlie Chaplin, Paris, 1927. Ivan Mosjoukine, with Jean Arnoy, Paris, 1927. Hollywood d’hier et d’aujourd’hui, Paris, 1948. Monsieur Chaplin, or Le Rire dans la nuit, with Maurice Bessy, Paris, 1952. La Lanterne magique, Lausanne, 1966. Hollywood années zéro. La Prehistoire l’invention, les pionniers, naissance des mythes, Paris, 1972. Hollywood Village: Naissance des studiós de Californie, Paris, 1986. By FLOREY: articles— From 1921 to 1926: several hundred articles for Cinémagazine (Paris); numerous articles for Parisian publications, including Pour Vous, Saint Cinéma des Prés, Ciné-Club, Le Technicien du Film, La Cinématographie Fran?aise, and Cinéma Interview in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1988. On FLOREY: books— Bourgoin, Stéphane, Robert Florey, Paris, 1986. Taves, Brian, Robert Florey: The French Expressionist, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1987. FORD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 336 On FLOREY: articles— Spears, Jack, ‘‘Robert Florey,’’ in Films in Review (New York), April 1960 (collected in his Hollywood: The Golden Era, New York, 1971) Higham, Charles, ‘‘Visitors to Sydney,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Summer 1962. Salmi, M., ‘‘Robert Florey,’’ in Film Dope (London), February 1979. Beylie, Claude, obituary in Ecran (Paris), 15 July 1979. Luft, Herbert, ‘‘Robert Florey,’’ in Films in Review (New York), August/September 1979. Taves, B., ‘‘Universal’s Horror Tradition,’’ in American Cinema- tographer (Hollywood), vol. 68, no. 4, April 1987. Comuzio, E., ‘‘Robert Florey,’’ in Cineforum (Italy), vol. 31, no. 304, May 1991. *** It is not easy to define Robert Florey’s status in the history of the American film. As a list of his films quite clearly attests, he was not a major director, but he was certainly an interesting and intriguing one who seemed able to keep abreast with trends and changes in the methodology of filmmaking. After working on a number of minor silent program features, Florey reached the peak of his artistic filmmaking career in the late 1920s with the production of four experimental shorts—The Life and Death of 9413—A Hollywood Extra, The Loves of Zero, Johann the Coffin Maker, and Skyscraper Symphony—that showed a skillful understanding of editing and the influence of German expressionist cinema. The best known of these shorts is A Hollywood Extra, which no longer appears to survive in its entirety, but which nonetheless illustrates Florey’s grasp of montage and satire. Florey never again returned to this form of filmmaking, but thanks to these shorts he was invited to direct a number of early talkies at Paramount. Aside from Cocoanuts, which is more Marx Brothers than Florey, these Para- mount features—notably The Battle of Paris—again demonstrate that the director was not only totally cognizant of developments in the sound film but also was able to bring ingenuity and fluidity to the medium. A crucial point in Florey’s career came in 1931 when he was asked to script and direct Frankenstein. Although some elements of the Florey screenplay are utilized, his script was basically scrapped and he was replaced as director by James Whale. Had Florey been allowed to keep the assignment, he would doubtless have become a major Hollywood director. Instead he was assigned Murders in the Rue Morgue, which, while it contains some nice atmospheric lighting effects as well as moments of surprising brutality, never achieved the cult popularity of Frankenstein. For the next twenty years Robert Florey toiled away as a reliable contract director, churning out pleasant and diverting entertainments. Even when he worked as co-director with Chaplin on Monsieur Verdoux, Florey saw his more daring directing ideas rejected by the comedian in favor of a static filmmaking style which Chaplin favored. Florey moved exclusively into television direction in 1950, and seemed very much at ease working on programs such as The Loretta Young Show, whose star and content suited his own conservative temperament. Aside from his work as a director, Robert Florey deserves recogni- tion as a commentator on and witness to the Hollywood scene. He loved cinema from his first involvement in his native France as an assistant to Louis Feuillade. That love led to his arrival in Hollywood in the early 1920s as a correspondent for a French film magazine. He eventually wrote eight books on the history of the cinema, all of which are exemplary works of scholarship. —Anthony Slide FORD, John Nationality: American. Born: Sean Aloysius O’Feeney (or John Augustine Feeney) in Cape Elizabeth, Maine, 1 February 1895. Education: Portland High School, Maine; University of Maine, 1913 or 1914 (for three weeks). Military Service: Lieutenant-Commander, U.S. Marine Corps, 1942–45 (wounded at Battle of Midway); in U.S. Naval Reserve, given rank of Admiral by President Nixon. Family: Married Mary McBryde Smith, 1920, one son, one daughter. Career: Joined brother Francis (director for Universal) in Hollywood, 1914; actor, stuntman and special effects man for Universal, 1914–17; assumes name ‘‘Jack Ford,’’ 1916; contract director for Universal, 1917–21; signed to Fox Film Corp., 1921; began collaboration with screenwriter Dudley Nichols on Men without Women, 1930; assem- bled film crew that became Field Photographic Branch of U.S. Office of Strategic Services, 1940. Awards: Oscar for Best Director, and Best Direction Award, New York Film Critics, for The Informer, John Ford FORDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 337 1935; Best Direction Award, New York Film Critics, for Stagecoach, 1939; Oscar for Best Director, for Grapes of Wrath, 1940; Oscar for Best Director and Best Direction Award, New York Film Critics, for How Green Was My Valley, 1941; Oscar for Best Documentary, for Battle of Midway, 1942; Legion of Merit and Purple Heart; Annual Award, Directors Guild of America, 1952; Grand Lion Award, Venice Festival, 1971; Lifetime Achievement Award, American Film Institute, 1973. Died: In Palm Desert, California, 31 August 1973. Films as Director: 1917 The Tornado (+ sc, role); The Trail of Hate (may have been directed by Francis Ford); The Scrapper (+ sc, role); The Soul Herder; Cheyenne’s Pal (+ story); Straight Shooting; The Secret Man; A Marked Man (+ story); Bucking Broadway 1918 The Phantom Riders; Wild Woman; Thieves’ Gold; The Scar- let Drop (+ story); Hell Bent (+ co-sc); A Woman’s Fool; Three Mounted Men 1919 Roped; The Fighting Brothers; A Fight for Love; By Indian Post; The Rustlers; Bare Fists; Gun Law; The Gun Packer (The Gun Pusher); Riders of Vengeance (+ co-sc); The Last Outlaw; The Outcasts of Poker Flat; The Ace of the Saddle; The Rider of the Law; A Gun Fightin’ Gentleman (+ co-story); Marked Men 1920 The Prince of Avenue A; The Girl in Number 29; Hitchin’ Posts; Just Pals; The Big Punch (+ co-sc) 1921 The Freeze Out; Desperate Trails; Action; Sure Fire; Jackie 1922 The Wallop; Little Miss Smiles; The Village Blacksmith; Silver Wings (Carewe) (d prologue only) 1923 The Face on the Barroom Floor; Three Jumps Ahead (+ sc); Cameo Kirby; North of Hudson Bay; Hoodman Blind 1924 The Iron Horse; Hearts of Oak 1925 Lightnin’; Kentucky Pride; The Fighting Heart; Thank You 1926 The Shamrock Handicap; Three Bad Men; The Blue Eagle 1927 Upstream 1928 Mother Machree; Four Sons; Hangman’s House; Napoleon’s Barber; Riley the Cop 1929 Strong Boy; Salute; The Black Watch 1930 Men without Women (+ co-story); Born Reckless; Up the River (+ co-sc, uncredited) 1931 Seas Beneath; The Brat; Arrowsmith; Flesh 1933 Pilgrimage; Dr. Bull 1934 The Lost Patrol; The World Moves On; Judge Priest 1935 The Whole Town’s Talking; The Informer; Steamboat round the Bend 1936 The Prisoner of Shark Island; Mary of Scotland; The Plough and the Stars 1937 Wee Willie Winkie; The Hurricane 1938 Four Men and a Prayer; Submarine Patrol 1939 Stagecoach; Drums along the Mohawk; Young Mr. Lincoln 1940 The Grapes of Wrath; The Long Voyage Home 1941 Tobacco Road; Sex Hygiene; How Green Was My Valley 1942 The Battle of Midway (+ co-ph); Torpedo Squadron 1943 December Seventh (co-d); We Sail at Midnight 1945 They Were Expendable 1946 My Darling Clementine 1947 The Fugitive (+ co-pr) 1948 Fort Apache (+ co-pr); Three Godfathers (+ co-pr) 1949 She Wore a Yellow Ribbon (+ co-pr) 1950 When Willie Comes Marching Home; Wagonmaster (+ co-pr); Rio Grande (+ co-pr) 1951 This Is Korea! 1952 What Price Glory; The Quiet Man (+ co-pr) 1953 The Sun Shines Bright; Mogambo 1955 The Long Gray Line; Mister Roberts (co-d); ‘‘Rookie of the Year’’ (episode for Screen Directors Playhouse TV series); ‘‘The Bamboo Cross’’ (episode for Fireside Theater TV series) 1956 The Searchers 1957 The Wings of Eagles; The Rising of the Moon 1958 The Last Hurrah 1959 Gideon of Scotland Yard (Gideon’s Day); Korea; The Horse Soldiers 1960 ‘‘The Colter Craven Story’’ (episode for Wagon Train TV series); Sergeant Rutledge 1961 Two Rode Together 1962 The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance; ‘‘Flashing Spikes’’ (episode for Alcoa Premiere TV series); How the West Was Won (directed ‘‘The Civil War’’ segment) 1963 Donovan’s Reef (+ pr) 1964 Cheyenne Autumn 1965 Young Cassidy (+ co-d) 1966 Seven Women 1970 Chesty: A Tribute to a Legend Other Films: 1914 Lucille Love, the Girl of Mystery (fifteen-episode serial) (Francis Ford) (role); The Mysterious Rose (Francis Ford) (role) 1915 The Birth of a Nation (Griffith) (role); Three Bad Men and a Girl (Francis Ford) (role); The Hidden City (Francis Ford) (role); The Doorway of Destruction (Francis Ford) (asst d, role); The Broken Coin (twenty-two-episode serial) (Fran- cis Ford) (role) 1916 The Lumber Yard Gang (Francis Ford) (role); Peg o’ the Ring (fifteen-episode serial) (Francis Ford and Jacques Jaccard) (role); Chicken-hearted Jim (Francis Ford) (role); The Bandit’s Wager (Francis Ford) (role) 1929 Big Time (Kenneth Hawks) (role as himself) 1971 Vietnam! Vietnam! (Beck, for USIA) (exec pr) Publications By FORD: books— John Ford’s Stagecoach, edited by Richard Anobile, New York, 1975. My Darling Clementine, edited by Robert Lyons, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1984. By FORD: articles— Interview with Lindsay Anderson, in Sequence (London), New Year issue 1952. ‘‘Rencontre avec John Ford,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), March 1955. FORD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 338 ‘‘Poet in an Iron Mask,’’ interview with Michael Barkun, in Films and Filming (London), February 1958. ‘‘Ford on Ford,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), July 1964. ‘‘Rencontre avec John Ford,’’ with Axel Madsen, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), July 1965. Interview with Jean Mitry, in Interviews with Film Directors, edited by Andrew Sarris, New York, 1967. ‘‘Our Way West,’’ interview with Burt Kennedy, in Films and Filming (London), October 1969. ‘‘Notes of a Press Attache: John Ford in Paris, 1966,’’ interview with Bertrand Tavernier, in Film Comment (New York), July/Au- gust 1994. On FORD: books— Mitry, Jean, John Ford, Paris, 1954. Haudiquet, Philippe, John Ford, Paris, 1966. Kitses, Jim, Horizons West, London, 1969. Baxter, John, The Cinema of John Ford, New York, 1971. French, Warren, Filmguide to The Grapes of Wrath, Bloomington, Indiana, 1973. McBride, Joseph, and Michael Wilmington, John Ford, London, 1975. Sarris, Andrew, The John Ford Movie Mystery, London, 1976. Bogdanovich, Peter, John Ford, Berkeley, 1978. Ford, Dan, Pappy: The Life of John Ford, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1979. Sinclair, Andrew, John Ford, New York, 1979. Anderson, Lindsay, About John Ford, London, 1981. Caughie, John, editor, Theories of Authorship: A Reader, Lon- don, 1981. Schatz, Thomas, Hollywood Genres: Formulas, Filmmaking, and the Studio System, New York, 1981. Reed, Joseph W., Three American Originals: John Ford, William Faulkner, Charles Ives, Middletown, Connecticut, 1984. Gallagher, Tag, John Ford: The Man and His Films, Berkeley, 1986. Stowell, Peter, John Ford, Boston, 1986. Buscombe, Ed, editor, The BFI Companion to the Western, Lon- don, 1989. Carey, Harry, Jr., Company of Heroes: My Life as an Actor in the John Ford Stock Company, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1994. Darby, William, John Ford’s Westerns: A Thematic Analysis, with a Filmography, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1996. On FORD: articles— McVay, Douglas, ‘‘The Five Worlds of John Ford,’’ in Films and Filming (London), November 1955. Barkun, Michael, ‘‘Notes on the Art of John Ford,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1962. Bogdanovich, Peter, ‘‘Autumn of John Ford,’’ in Esquire (New York), April 1964. ‘‘John Ford Issue’’ of Présence du Cinéma (Paris), March 1965. ‘‘John Ford Issue’’ of Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1966. Tavernier, Bertrand, ‘‘John Ford à Paris,’’ in Positif (Paris), March 1967. Beresford, Bruce, ‘‘Decline of a Master,’’ in Film (London), Autumn 1969. Anderson, Lindsay, ‘‘John Ford,’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), Spring 1971. ‘‘John Ford Issue’’ of Focus on Film (London), Spring 1971. ‘‘John Ford Issue’’ of Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), August 1971. ‘‘Special Issue Devoted to John Ford and His Towering Achieve- ment, Stagecoach,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), September/Octo- ber 1971. ‘‘Ford’s Stock Company Issue’’ of Filmkritik (Munich), January 1972. Editors of Cahiers du Cinéma, ‘‘John Ford’s Young Mr. Lincoln,’’ in Screen (London), Autumn 1972. McBride, J., ‘‘Drums along the Mekong: I Love America, I Am Apolitical,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1972. McBride, J., ‘‘Bringing in the Sheaves,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Winter 1973/74. Rubin, M., ‘‘Ford and Mr. Rogers,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1974. ‘‘John Ford (1895–1973) Issue’’ of Anthologie du Cinéma (Paris), March 1975. Dempsey, M., ‘‘John Ford: A Reassessment,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Summer 1975. Gallagher, Tag, ‘‘John Ford: Midway. The War Documentaries,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1975. Belton, J.R., ‘‘Ceremonies of Innocence: Two Films by John Ford,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison), Winter 1975. Budd, M., ‘‘A Home in the Wilderness: Visual Imagery in John Ford’s Westerns,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston), Fall 1976. Roth, W., ‘‘Where Have You Gone, My Darling Clementine?,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 63–64, 1977. Stowell, H.P., ‘‘John Ford’s Literary Sources: From Realism to Romance,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), Spring 1977. ‘‘John Ford Issue’’ of Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 2, no. 4, 1978. McCarthy, T., ‘‘John Ford and Monument Valley,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), May 1978. Ellis, K., ‘‘On the Warpath: John Ford and the Indians,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Washington, D.C.), vol. 8, no. 2, 1980. Combs, Richard, ‘‘At Play in the Fields of John Ford,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1982. ‘‘John Ford Section’’ of Casablanca (Madrid), January 1983. Roth, L., ‘‘Ritual Brawls in John Ford’s Films,’’ in Film Criticism (Meadville, Pennsylvania), Spring 1983. Bogdanovich, Peter, ‘‘Touch of Silence for Mr. Ford,’’ in New York, October 1983. Schickel, Richard, ‘‘Ford Galaxy,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1984. Stevens, G., Jr., and Robert Parrish, ‘‘Directors at War,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), July/August 1985. Gallagher, Tag, ‘‘Acting for John Ford,’’ in American Film (Wash- ington, D.C.), March 1986. Nolley, Ken, ‘‘Reconsidering Ford’s Military Trilogy,’’ in Litera- ture/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), April 1986. Wood, Robin, ‘‘Drums along the Mohawk,’’ in Cine Action! (Tor- onto), no. 8, 1987. Nolley, Ken, ‘‘Reconsidering The Quiet Man,’’ in Cine Action! (Toronto), no. 9, 1987. Bernstein, Matthew, ‘‘Hollywood’s ‘Arty Cinema’: John Ford’s The Long Voyage Home,’’ in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 10, no. 1, 1988. FORDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 339 Card, James, ‘‘The Searchers: by Alan LeMay and John Ford,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 16, no. 1, 1988. Gallagher, Tag, ‘‘John Ford’s Indians,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1993. Eby, Lloyd, ‘‘The Man Who Invented Westerns Explored the Ameri- can Character,’’ in Insight on the News, 20 February 1995. Manchel, Frank, ‘‘Losing and Finding John Ford’s Sergeant Rutledge (1960),’’ in Historical Journal of Film, Radio, and Television (Abingdon, England), vol. 27, no. 2, June 1997. On FORD: films— Haggard, Mark, John Ford: Memorial Day 1970, U.S., 1970. Bogdanovich, Peter, Directed by John Ford, U.S., 1971. Sanders, Denis, The American West of John Ford, U.K., 1971. *** John Ford has no peers in the annals of cinema. This is not to place him above criticism, merely above comparison. His faults were unique, as was his art, which he pursued with a single-minded and single-hearted stubbornness for sixty years and 112 films. Ford grew up with the American cinema. That he should have begun his career as an extra in the Ku Klux Klan sequences of The Birth of a Nation and ended it supervising the documentary Vietnam! Vietnam! conveys the remarkable breadth of his contribution to film, and the narrowness of its concerns. Ford’s subject was his life and his times. Immigrant, Catholic, Republican, he spoke for the generations that created the modern United States between the Civil and Great Wars. Like Walt Whitman, Ford chronicled the society of that half century, expansionist by design, mystical and religious by conviction, hierarchical by agree- ment; an association of equals within a structure of command, with practical, patriotic, and devout qualities. Ford portrayed the society Whitman celebrated as ‘‘something in the doings of man that corre- sponds with the broadcast doings of night and day.’’ Mythologizing the armed services and the church as paradigms of structural integrity, Ford adapts their rules to his private world. All may speak in Ford’s films, but when divine order is invoked, the faithful fall silent, to fight and die as decreed by a general, a president, or some other member of a God-anointed elite. In Ford’s hierarchy, Native and African Americans share the lowest rung, women the next. Businessmen, uniformly corrupt in his world, hover below the honest and unimaginative citizenry of the United States. Above them are Ford’s elite, within which members of the armed forces occupy a privileged position. In authority over them is an officer class of career military men and priests, culminating in a few near-saintly figures of which Abraham Lincoln is the most notable, while over all rules a retributory, partial, and jealous God. The consistency of Ford’s work lies in his fidelity to the morality implicit in this structure. Mary of Scotland’s Mary Queen of Scots, the retiring Nathan Brittles in She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, and outgoing mayor Frank Skeffington in The Last Hurrah all face the decline in their powers with a moral strength drawn from a belief in the essential order of their lives. Mary goes triumphantly to the scaffold, affirming Catholicism and the divine right of kings. Duty to his companions of the 7th Cavalry transcending all, Brittles returns to rejoin them in danger. Skeffington prefers to lose rather than succumb to modern vote-getting devices such as television. ‘‘I make westerns,’’ Ford announced on one well-publicized occasion. Like most of his generalizations, it was untrue. Only a third of his films are westerns, and of those a number are rural comedies with perfunctory frontier settings: Doctor Bull, Judge Priest, Steamboat round the Bend, The Sun Shines Bright. Many of his family films, like Four Men and a Prayer and Pilgrimage, belong with the stories of military life, of which he made a score. A disciple of the U.S. Navy, from which he retired with the emeritus rank of Rear Admiral, Ford found in its command structure a perfect metaphor for moral order. In They Were Expendable, he chose to falsify every fact of the Pacific War to celebrate the moral superiority of men trained in its rigid disciplines— men who obey, affirm, keep faith. Acts, not words, convey the truths of men’s lives; public affirma- tions of this dictum dominate Ford’s films. Dances and fights signify in their vigor a powerful sense of community; singing and eating and getting drunk together are the great acts of Fordian union. A film like The Searchers, perhaps his masterpiece, makes clear its care for family life and tradition in a series of significant actions that need no words. Ward Bond turns away from the revelation of a woman’s love for her brother-in-law, exposed in her reverent handling of his cloak; his turn away is the instinctive act of a natural gentleman. Barred from the family life which his anger and independence make alien to his character, John Wayne clutches his arm in a gesture borrowed from Ford’s first star, Harry Carey; in a memorable final image, the door closes on him, a symbol of the rejection of the eternal clan-less wanderer. Ford spent his filmmaking years in a cloud of critical misunder- standing, with each new film unfavorably compared to earlier works. The Iron Horse established him as an epic westerner in the mold of Raoul Walsh, The Informer as a Langian master of expressionism, the cavalry pictures as Honest John Ford, a New England primitive whose work, in Lindsay Anderson’s words, was ‘‘unsophisticated and direct.’’ When, in his last decades of work, he returned to reexamine earlier films in a series of revealing remakes, the skeptical saw not a moving reiteration of values but a decline into self- plagiarism. Yet it is The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, in which he deals with the issues raised in Stagecoach, showing his beloved populist west destroyed by law and literacy, that stands today among his most important films. Belligerent, grandiose, deceitful, and arrogant in real life, Ford seldom let these traits spill over into his films. They express at their best a guarded serenity, a skeptical satisfaction in the beauty of the American landscape, muted always by an understanding of the dangers implicit in the land, and a sense of the responsibility of all men to protect the common heritage. In every Ford film there is a gun behind the door, a conviction behind the joke, a challenge in every toast. Ford belongs in the tradition of American narrative art where telling a story and drawing a moral are twin aspects of public utterance. He saw that we live in history, and that history embodies lessons we must learn. When Fordian man speaks, the audience is meant to listen—and listen all the harder for the restraint and circumspection of the man who speaks. One hears the authentic Fordian voice nowhere more powerfully than in Ward Bond’s pream- ble to the celebrating enlisted men in They Were Expendable as they FORMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 340 toast the retirement of a comrade. ‘‘I’m not going to make a speech,’’ he states. ‘‘I’ve just got something to say.’’ —John Baxter FORMAN, Milos Nationality: Czech. Born: Kaslov, Czechoslovakia, 18 February 1932, became U.S. citizen, 1975. Education: Academy of Music and Dramatic Art, Prague, and at Film Academy (FAMU), Prague, 1951–56. Family: Married 1) Jana Brejchová, 1951 (divorced, 1956); 2) Vera Kresadlova, 1964 (divorced), two sons (twins), Matej and Petr; 3) Martina Zborilova, 28 November 1999, two sons (twins), Andrew and James (b. 1998). Career: Collaborated on screenplay for Fri?’s Leave It to Me, 1956; theatre director for Laterna Magika, Prague, 1958–62; directed first feature, Black Peter, 1963; moved to New York, 1969, after collapse of Dubcek government in Czechoslo- vakia; co-director of Columbia University Film Division, from 1975. Awards: Czechoslovak Film Critics’ Prize, for Black Peter, 1963; Grand Prix Locarno, for Black Peter, 1964; Czechoslovak State Prize, 1967; Grand Prize of the Jury, Cannes Film Festival, for Taking Off, 1971 (tied with Johnny Got His Gun); Oscar for Best Director, and Best Director Award, Directors Guild of America, and Silver Ribbon Award, Italian National Syndicate of Film Journalists, for One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest, 1975; Oscar for Best Director, for Amadeus, Milos Forman 1984; Golden Globe (USA) and Cesar (France) for Best Foreign Film, and Silver Ribbon, Italian National Syndicate of Film Journalists, for Best Director, Foreign Film, for Amadeus, 1985; Golden Globe for Best Director, for The People vs. Larry Flynt, 1997; Outstanding European Achievement in World Cinema, European Film Awards, for The People vs. Larry Flynt, 1997 Golden Berlin Bear, Berlin International Film Festival, for The People vs Larry Flynt, 1997; Special Prize for Outstanding Contribution to World Cinema, Karlovy Vary International Film Festival, 1997; Silver Berlin Bear, Berlin International Film Festival, for Man on the Moon, 2000; Lifetime Achievement Award, Palm Springs International Film Festival, 2000. Agent: Robert Lantz, 888 Seventh Ave., New York, NY 10106, U.S.A. Address: Milos Forman, The Hampshire House, 150 Central Park South, New York, NY10019, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1963 Cerny Petr (Black Peter; Peter and Pavla); (+ co-sc); Konkurs (Talent Competition) (+ co-sc) 1965 Lásky jedné plavovlásky (Loves of a Blonde) (+ co-sc); Dobrě placená procházka (A Well–Paid Stroll) (+ co-sc) 1967 Ho?í, má panenko (The Firemen’s Ball) (+ co-sc) 1970 Taking Off (+ co-sc) 1972 ‘‘Decathlon’’ segment of Visions of Eight (+ co-sc) 1975 One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest 1979 Hair 1981 Ragtime 1983 Amadeus 1989 Valmont 1996 People vs. Larry Flynt 1999 The Little Black Book; Man on the Moon Other Films: 1955 Nechte to na mně (Leave It to Me) (Fri?) (+ co-sc); Děde?ek automobil (Old Man Motorcar) (Radok) (asst d, role) 1957 Stěnata (The Puppies) (+ co-sc) 1962 Tam za lesem (Beyond the Forest) (Blumenfeld) (asst d, role as the physician) 1968 La Pine à ongles (Carrière) (+ co-sc) 1975 Le Male du siècle (Berri) (story) 1986 Heartburn (Nichols) (role) 1989 New Year’s Day (Jaglom) (role) 1990 Dreams of Love (pr) 1991 Why Havel? (Jasny) (narrator) 1992 L’Envers du décor: Portrait de Pierre Guffoy (Salis) (role) 1995 Heavy (Mangold) (misc. crew) 1996 Who Is Henry Jaglom? (Rubin and Workman) (role, as Himself) 1997 Cannesples 400 coups (Nadeau—for TV) (role, as Himself) 1998 V centru filmu—v temple domova (Janecek and Marek—for TV) (role, as Himself) 2000 Way Past Cool (Davidson) (pr); Keeping the Faith (Nor- ton) (role) FORMANDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 341 Publications By FORMAN: books— Taking Off, with John Guare and others, New York, 1971. Milos Forman, with others, London, 1972. Turnaround: A Memoir, with Jan Novak, New York, 1994. By FORMAN: articles— ‘‘Closer to Things,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma in English (New York), January 1967. Interview with Galina Kopaněvová, in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 8, 1968. Interview, in The Film Director as Superstar, edited by Joseph Gelmis, New York, 1970. ‘‘Getting the Great Ten Percent,’’ an interview with Harriet Polt, in Film Comment (New York), Fall 1970. ‘‘A Czech in New York,’’ an interview with Gordon Gow, in Films and Filming (London), September 1971. Interview in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), Novem- ber 1972. Interview with L. Sturhahn, in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), December 1975. ‘‘Milos Forman: An American Film Institute Seminar on His Work,’’ 1977. Interview with T. McCarthy, in Film Comment (New York), March/ April 1979. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), July/August 1979. ‘‘How Amadeus Was Translated from Play to Film,’’ an interview with M. Kakutani, in New York Times, 16 September 1984. ‘‘The Czech Bounces Back,’’ interview with C. Hodenfeld in Rolling Stone (New York), 27 September 1984. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), November 1984. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1984. Forman, Milos, ‘‘Celui a qui on pense en secret,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1984. Interview in Films (London), March 1985. Interview with T.J. Slater, in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Spring/Summer and Fall 1985. ‘‘What’s Wrong with Today’s Films,’’ an interview with J. Kearney, in American Film (Washington, D.C.), May 1986. Interview in Première (Paris), July 1987. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), December 1989. Forman, Milos, ‘‘L’opera muet,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1991 (supplement). Interview with Nell Scovell, in Vanity Fair (New York), Febru- ary 1994. Interview with Holly Millea, ‘‘Warning: Material Is of an Adult Nature. This Literature Is Not Intended for Minors’’ in Premiere (New York), December 1996. Interview with Cédric Anger and Frédéric Strauss, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1997. ‘‘Porn Again: The People vs. Larry Flynt,’’ an interview with Richard Porton, in Cineaste (New York), March 1997. ‘‘Porn in the USA,’’ an interview with David Eimer, in Time Out (London), 26 March 1997. ‘‘Defender of the Artist and the Common Man,’’ an interview with Kevin Lewis, in DGA Magazine (Los Angeles), March-April 1997. Interview with Rachel Abramowitz, in Premiere (Boulder), Janu- ary 2000. Interview with Courtney Love, in Interview (New York), Janu- ary 2000. Interview with Ian Spelling, ‘‘Hello, My Name Is Andy and This Is My Feature,’’ in Film Review (London), March 2000. On FORMAN: books— Bo?ek, Jaroslav, Modern Czechoslovak Film 1945–1965, Prague, 1965. Skvorecky, Josef, All the Bright Young Men and Women, Tor- onto, 1971. Henstell, Bruce, editor, Milos Forman, Ingrid Thulin, Washington, D.C., 1972. Liehm, Antonín, Closely Watched Films, White Plains, New York, 1974. Liehm, Antonín, The Milos Forman Stories, White Plains, New York, 1975. Vecchi, Paolo, Milos Forman, Florence, 1981 Slater, Thomas, Milos Forman: A Bio-Bibliography, New York, 1987. Liehm, Antonin, Pribehy Milos Forman, Prague, 1993. On FORMAN: articles— Dyer, Peter, ‘‘Star-crossed in Prague,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1965/66. Bor, Vladimír, ‘‘Formanovsky film a nekteré p?edsudky’’ [‘‘The Formanesque Film and Some Prejudices’’], in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 1, 1967. Effenberger, Vratislav, ‘‘Obraz ?loveka v ?eském film’’ [‘‘The Portrayal of Man in the Czech Cinema’’], in Film a Doba (Prague), no. 7, 1968. ‘‘Director of the Year,’’ International Film Guide (London and New York), 1969. Combs, Richard, ‘‘Sentimental Journey,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Summer 1977. Baker, B., ‘‘Milos Forman,’’ in Film Dope (London), April 1979. Cameron, J., ‘‘Milos Forman and Hair: Styling the Age of Aquar- ius,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 19 April 1979. Stein, H., ‘‘A Day in the Life: Milos Forman: Moment to Moment with the Director of Hair,’’ in Esquire (New York), 8 May 1979. Holloway, Ron, ‘‘Columbia U.’s Film School Now Attracts Europe’s Helmers,’’ in Variety (New York), 14 January 1981. Buckley, T., ‘‘The Forman Formula,’’ in New York Times, 1 March 1981. Kennedy, Harlan, ‘‘Ragtime: Milos Forman Searches for the Right Key,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), December 1981. Quart, Leonard, and Barbara Quart, ‘‘Ragtime without a Melody,’’ in Literature-Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 10, no. 2, 1982. Kamm, M., ‘‘Milos Forman Takes His Camera and Amadeus to Prague,’’ in New York Times, 29 May 1983. Jacobson, H., ‘‘Mostly Mozart: As Many Notes as Required,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1984. FORMAN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 342 Harmetz, Aljean, ‘‘Film Makers in a Race over Les liaisons,’’ in New York Times, 10 February 1988. ‘‘Four Who’ve Made It,’’ in Variety (New York), 25 October 1989. Dudar, Helen, ‘‘Milos Forman Takes a New Look at Old Loves,’’ in New York Times, 12 November 1989. Goodman, Walter, ‘‘Forman in His Own and Others’ Words,’’ in New York Times, 22 December 1989. Warchol, T., ‘‘The Rebel Figure in Milos Forman’s American Films,’’ in New Orleans Review, 1990. Wharton, Dennis, ‘‘Top Directors Get behind Film-labeling Legisla- tion,’’ in Variety, July 29, 1991. Cohn, L., ‘‘A Tale of Two Expatriate Filmmakers,’’ in Variety (New York), 29 January 1992. Newman, Kim, review of People vs. Larry Flynt in Empire (London), May 1997. Jensen, Jeff, ‘‘Moon Landing,’’ in Entertainment Weekly (New York), 10 December 1999. McCarthy, Todd, ‘‘‘Moon’ Trip Revelation: There’s No There There,’’ in Variety (New York), 13 December 1999. Travers, Peter, ‘‘Man on the Moon,’’ in Rolling Stone (New York), 30 December 1999. On FORMAN: film— Weingarten, Mira, Meeting Milos Forman, U.S., 1971. *** In the context of Czechoslovak cinema in the early 1960s, Milos Forman’s first films (Black Peter and Talent Competition) amounted to a revolution. Influenced by Czech novelists who revolted against the establishment’s aesthetic dogmas in the late 1950s rather than by Western cinema (though the mark of late neorealism, in particular Ermanno Olmi, is visible), Forman introduced to the cinema after 1948 (the year of the Communist coup) portrayals of working-class life untainted by the formulae of socialist realism. Though Forman was fiercely attacked by Stalinist reviewers initially, the more liberal faction of the Communist Party, then in ascendancy, appropriated Forman’s movies as expressions of the new concept of ‘‘socialist’’ art. Together with great box office success and an excellent reputation gained at international festivals, these circum- stances transformed Forman into the undisputed star of the Czech New Wave. His style was characterized by a sensitive use of non- actors (usually coupled with professionals); refreshing, natural-sound- ing, semi-improvised dialogue that reflected Forman’s intimate knowl- edge of the milieu he was capturing on the screen; and an unerring ear for the nuances of Czech folk-rock and music in general. All these characteristic features of Forman’s first two films are even more prominent in Loves of a Blonde, and especially in The Firemen’s Ball. The latter film works equally well on one level as a realistic, humorous story and on an allegorical level that points to the aftermath of the Communist Party’s decision to reveal some of the political crimes committed in the 1950s (the Slánsky trial). In all these films—developed, except for Black Peter, from Forman’s original ideas—he closely collaborated with scriptwriters Ivan Passer and Jaroslav Papousek, who later became directors in their own right. Shortly after the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, The Firemen’s Ball was banned and Forman decided to remain in the West, where he was working on the script for what was to become the only film in which he would apply the principles of his aesthetic method and vision to indigenous American material, Taking Off. It is also his only American movie developed from his original idea; the rest are either adaptations or based on real events. Traces of the pre-American Forman are easily recognizable in his most successful U.S. film, One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest, which radically changed Ken Kesey’s story and—just as in the case of Papousek’s novel Black Peter—brought it close to the director’s own objective and comical vision. The work received an Oscar in 1975. In that year Forman became an American citizen. The Forman touch is much less evident in his reworking of the musical Hair, and almost—though not entirely—absent from his version of E.L. Doctorow’s novel Ragtime. The same is true of the box-office smash hit and multiple Oscar winner Amadeus, and his later adaptation, Valmont. Of marginal importance are the two remaining parts of Forman’s oeuvre, The Well-Paid Stroll, a jazz opera adapted from the stage for Prague TV, and Decathlon, his contribution to the 1972 Olympic documentary Visions of Eight. Forman is a merciless observer of the comedie humaine and has often been accused of cynicism, both in Czechoslovakia and in the West. To such criticisms he answers with the words of Chekhov, pointing out that what is cruel in the first place is life itself. But apart from such arguments, the rich texture of acutely observed life and the sensitive portrayal of and apparent sympathy for people as victims—often ridiculous—of circumstances over which they wield no power, render such critical statements null and void. Forman’s vision is deeply rooted in the anti-ideological, realistic, and humanist tradition of such ‘‘cynics’’ of Czech literature as Jaroslav Hasek (The Good Soldier Svejk), Bohumil Hrabal (Closely Watched Trains) or Josef Skvorecky (whose novel The Cowards Forman was prevented from filming by the invasion of 1968). Although the influence of Forman’s filmmaking methods may be felt even in some North American films, his lasting importance will, very probably, rest with his three Czech movies. Taking Off, a valiant attempt to show America to Americans through the eyes of a sensi- tive, if caustic, foreign observer, should be added to this list as well. After the mixed reception of this film, however, Forman turned to adaptations of best sellers and stage hits. In the early 1990s Forman was inactive as a director, with a gap of almost seven years between Valmont and People vs. Larry Flynt. Valmont attempted to capture the spirit of his smash hit Amadeus but suffers in the comparison. Moreover, it was released after Stephen Frears’ superior Dangerous Liaisons, adapted from the same Choderlos de Laclos novel. Forman remains an outstanding craftsman and a first-class actors’ director; however, in the context of American cinema he does not represent the innovative force he was in Prague. Nevertheless, in the late 1990s he has returned to something like his earlier form with the somewhat idealistic People vs. Larry Flynt, the story of a pornographer’s efforts to keep his magazine on the newsstands in a fight for freedom of speech. The more melancholy Man on the Moon is a biographical film about the comedian Andy Kaufman, who died of cancer aged thirty-five, after a turbulent career that saw him first lauded and then dumped by TV networks nervous about his erratic style. Both films have re-established Forman as an arch commentator on American popular culture. Besides filmmaking, Forman has also been involved in the aca- demic world in recent years, accepting a position as professor of film FORSTDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 343 and co-chair of the film division at Columbia University’s School of the Arts. He also appeared onscreen in several small roles, such as Catherine O’Hara’s husband in Mike Nichols’ Heartburn, in which he was reunited with his One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest star, Jack Nicholson, and, oddly enough, as an apartment house janitor in Henry Jaglom’s New Years’ Day. He has appeared as himself in several documentaries. —Josef Skvorecky, updated by Rob Edelman and Chris Routledge FORST, Willi Nationality: Austrian. Born: Wilhelm Anton Frohs in Vienna, district of Margareten, 7 April 1903. Education: Grammar school. Family: Married Melanie Unterkircher, 1934; no children. Career: Comic and romantic actor on German-speaking provincial stages, from 1919; film debut, 1920; actor, Metropoltheater Berlin, Carltheater Vienna, Theater des Westens Berlin, and Apollotheater Vienna (operetta theaters), 1925, Lessingtheater Berlin and Renaissancetheater Berlin, 1927, and Deutsches Theater Berlin, 1928–31; film director, from 1933; founded Forst-Film company, Vienna, 1936. Awards: Gold Medal, Venice International Film Festival, for Maskerade, 1934; Count Sascha Kolowrat Cup, for Wiener M?del, 1950; Austrian Cross of Honor for Art and Science, 1961; German Film Prize, 1968. Died: Vienna, 11 August 1980, after a bladder operation. Films as Director: 1933 Leise flehen meine Lieder (The Unfinished Symphony) (+ sc with Walter Reisch) 1934 The Unfinished Symphony (with Anthony Asquith) (+ sc with Benn W. Levy); Maskerade (Masquerade in Vienna) (+ sc with Walter Reisch) 1935 Mazurka (+ ro) 1936 Allotria (+ sc with Jochen Huth); Burgtheater (Vienna Burgtheater) (+ sc with Jochen Huth, pr) 1937 Serenade (+ sc with Curt J. Braun, pr) 1939 Bel Ami (+ sc with Axel Eggebrecht, pr, ro as ‘‘Bel Ami’’ Georges Duroy); Ich bin Sebastian Ott (I Am Sebastian Ott) (with Viktor Becker) (+ pr, ro as Sebastian Ott/Ludwig Ott) 1940 Operette (+ sc with Axel Eggebrecht, pr, ro as Franz Jauner) 1942 Wiener Blut (Vienna Blood) (+ sc, pr, ro as director) 1943 Frauen sind keine Engel (Women Are No Angels) (+ pr) 1944/49 Wiener M?del (Viennese Maidens) (+ sc with Franz Gribitz, pr, ro as Carl Michael Ziehrer) 1951 Die Sünderin (The Sinner); Es geschehen noch Wunder (Mira- cles Still Happen) (+ sc with Johannes Mario Simmel, pr, ro as Bobby Sanders) 1952 Im Wei?en R??l (The White Horse Inn) 1954 Dieses Lied bleibt bei Dir (Kabarett; This Song Remains with You; Cabaret) (+ sc with Johannes Mario Simmel) 1956 Kaiserj?ger (Imperial Infantry); Le chemin du paradis (The Way to Paradise) 1957 Die unentschuldigte Stunde (The Unexcused Hour) (+ sc with Kurt Nachmann); Wien—du Stadt meiner Tr?ume (Vienna, City of my Dreams) (+ sc with Kurt Nachmann) Films as Actor: Silent Films: 1920 Der Wegweiser (The Road Sign) (Kottow) 1922 Sodom und Gomorrha (The Queen of Sin) (Kertész) (as extra); Oh du lieber Augustin (Dear Augustin) (Breslauer) 1923 Lieb’ mich und die Welt ist mein (Love Me and the World Is Mine) (Breslauer) 1924 Strandgut (Driftwood) (Breslauer) 1927 Die drei Niemandskinder (The Three Children of Nobody) (Freisler); Die elf Teufel (The Eleven Devils) (Zoltan Korda); Café Electric (Ucicky) (as Ferdl) 1928 Amor auf Ski (Love on Skis) (Randolf); Ein besserer Herr (A Distinguished Gentleman) (Ucicky); Die lustigen Vagabunden (The Merry Vagabonds) (Fleck); Die blaue Maus (The Blue Mouse) (Guter); Unfug der Liebe (Mischief of Love) (Wiene); Liebfraumilch (Froelich); Die Frau, die jeder liebt, bist Du! (You Are The Woman Everybody Loves) (Froelich) 1929 Die weissen Rosen von Ravensberg (The White Roses of Ravensberg) (Meinert); Fr?ulein F?hnrich (Miss Ensign) (Sauer); Der H?ftling aus Stambul (The Prisoner from Stambul) (Ucicky); Gefahren der Brautzeit/Liebesn?chte (Dangers of the Engagement) (Sauer) (as Baron van Geldern). Sound Films: 1929 Atlantic (Dupont) (as Poldi); Katharina Knie (Grune) 1930 Ein Burschenlied aus Heidelberg (A Student’s Song from Heidelberg) (Hartl); Zwei Herzen im Dreivierteltakt (Two Hearts in Waltz Time) (von Bolvary); Ein Tango für Dich (A Tango for You) (von Bolvary); Das Lied ist aus (The Song Is Ended) (von Bolvary) (as Ulrich Weidenau); Der Herr auf Bestellung (The Callboy) (von Bolvary); Die lustigen Weiber von Wien (The Merry Wives of Vienna) (von Bolvary); Petit officier . . . Adieu! (von Bolvary) 1931 Der Raub der Mona Lisa (The Theft of the Mona Lisa) (von Bolvary) (as Vicenzo Peruggia); Peter Voss, der Millionendieb (Peter Voss Who Stole Millions) (Dupont) 1932 Der Prinz von Arkadien (The Prince of Arcadia) (Hartl); Ein blonder Traum (A Blonde Dream; Happy Ever After) (Martin) (as Willy II); So ein M?del vergisst man nicht (Such a Girl Is Unforgettable) (Kortner); Brennendes Geheimnis (The Burning Secret) (Siodmak) 1933 Ihre Durchlaucht, die Verk?uferin (Her Highness the Sales- girl) (Hartl); Ich kenn’ Dich nicht und liebe Dich (I Don’t Know You but I Love You) (von Bolvary) 1934 So endete eine Liebe (Thus Ended a Love) (Hartl) 1935 K?nigswalzer (The Royal Waltz) (Maisch) (as Ferdinand) 1938 Es leuchten die Sterne (The Stars Shine) (Zerlett) (cameo as himself) 1944 Ein Blick zurück (A Look Back) (Menzel) (cameo) 1948 Leckerbissen (Tidbits) (Malbran) 1950 Herrliche Zeiten (Wonderful Times) (Neumann/Ode) FORST DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 344 Willi Forst 1952 Bei Dir war es immer so sch?n (It Was Always So Beauti- ful with You) (Wolff) (as film director); Weg in die Vergangenheit (The Way into the Past) (Hartl) (as famous conductor) 1955 Ein Mann vergisst die Liebe (A Man Forgets Love) (von Collande) (as Alexander von Barender); Die Drei von der Tankstelle (Three Good Friends) (Wolff) Other Films: 1937 Capriolen (Gründgens) (sc with Jochen Huth, pr) 1944 Hundstage (Dog Days) (von Cziffra) (pr) 1947 Der Hofrat Geiger (Privy Councillor Geiger) (Wolff) (pr) 1948 Die Frau am Wege (The Woman by the Road) (von Borsody) (pr); Das Kuckucksei (The Cuckoo’s Egg) (Firner) (pr) 1949 Die Stimme ?sterreichs (The Voice of Austria) (doc) (Langbein) (pr) 1952 Alle kann ich nicht heiraten (I Can’t Marry Them All) (Wolff) (sc) Publications By FORST: articles— ‘‘Mein Filmschaffen,’’ excerpt from the radio program Radio- Universit?t, Radio Vienna, Filmarchiv Austria. Willi Forst, ‘‘Filme kann man nur mit Freunden machen,’’ in Die Filmwoche, no. 16, 20 April 1932. On FORST: books— Bab, Julius, Schauspieler und Schauspielkunst, Berlin, 1926. Firner, Walter, editor, Wir und das Theater: Ein Schauspielerbilder- buch, Munich, 1932. Willi Forst in Bild und Ton, Berlin, 1941. Casiraghi, Ugo, Umanità di Stroheim ed altri saggi, Milano, 1945. Fuchsbauer, Hans, Wiener Film Bilderbuch, Vienna, 1946. Stanzl, Karl, Willy Forsts Bühnen- und Filmarbeit, Ph.D. Disserta- tion, University of Vienna, 1947. FORSTDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 345 Gesek, Ludwig, Gestalter der Filmkunst: Von Asta Nielsen bis Walt Disney, Vienna, 1948. Berger, Ludwig, Theatermenschen: So sah ich sie, Hannover, 1962. Forster, Rudolf, Das Spiel mein Leben, Berlin, 1967. Jürgens, Curd, . . . .und kein bisschen weise, Locarno, 1976. ?sterreichische Gesellschaft für Filmwissenschaft, editor, Willi Forst, Vienna, 1977. Dachs, Robert, Willi Forst: Eine Biographie, Vienna, 1986. Kramer, Thomas, and Martin Prucha, Film im Lauf der Zeit. 100 Jahre Kino in Deutschland, ?sterreich, und der Schweiz, Vi- enna, 1994. Fritz, Walter, Im Kino erlebe ich die Welt: 100 Jahre Kino und Film in ?sterreich, Vienna, 1997. Steiner, Gertraud, Traumfabrik Rosenhügel, Vienna, 1997. On FORST: articles— ?sterreichische Gesellschaft für Filmwissenschaft, editor, Filmkunst. Zeitschrift für Filmkultur und Filmwissenschaft, Vienna, 1977. Gillett, John, ‘‘Willi Forst,’’ in Film Dope (Nottingham) 17 April 1979. Frank, Arnold, ‘‘Bel Ami. Der Mann, den die Frauen liebten,’’ in Europa 1939. Filme aus zehn L?ndern, edited by Hans Helmut Prinzler, Berlin, 1979. Rühle, Günther, ‘‘Charmeur der Charmeure,’’ in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 13 August 1980. Witte, Karsten, ‘‘Adieu, Bel Ami,’’ in Frankfurter Rundschau, 13 August 1980. Buchka, Peter, ‘‘Bel Ami ist tot,’’ in Süddeutsche Zeitung, 13 August 1980. Holba, Herbert, ‘‘Willi Forst,’’ in Herbert Holba, Günter Knorr, Peter Spiegel, Reclams deutsches Filmlexikon. Filmkünstler aus Deutschland, ?sterreich und der Schweiz, Stuttgart, June 1984. Burghardt, Kirsten, ‘‘Zeichen weiblicher Erotik in Willi Forsts Die Sünderin,’’ in Der erotische Diskurs. Filmische Zeichen und Argumente, edited by Klaus Kanzog, Munich, 1989. Daviau, Gertraud Steiner. ‘‘Willi Forst. Bel Ami in the Third Reich,’’ in Modern Austrian Literature (Riverside, California), vol. 32, no. 4, 1999. Haider-Pregler, Hilde, ‘‘.... Das Theater h?rt nie auf. Willi Forsts Film vom Burgtheater,’’ in Modern Austrian Literature (River- side, California), vol. 32, no. 4, 1999. *** Willi Forst to date is the greatest talent in Austrian film history, with the possible exception of Billy Wilder, who had to emigrate. He was born in 1903 into the Viennese lower middle class; his father earned his living in the Biedermeier sounding profession of porcelain painter. The young Forst did not attend school any longer than was required—his ambition was a career on the stage. At the age of 16 he began acting in the provincial theaters of the former Austrian monar- chy, until in 1925 he could make the leap to the operetta stages of Vienna and Berlin. The experience gained in these early years provided him with a sound knowledge of the theatrical effects that pleased audiences. Forst could be found in the crowd of thousands in Kolowrat’s monumental film Sodom and Gomorrha (1922), and it was the flamboyant ‘‘film count’’ Sascha Kolowrat himself who discovered Willi Forst at the Apollotheater in Vienna and gave him his first ‘‘near’’ leading role in Café Elektric (1927) as the petty thief ‘‘Poldi’’ opposite the then equally unknown Marlene Dietrich. But Kolowrat died in the same year, and, like all of the enterprising talents from Vienna, Forst migrated to the film metropolis Berlin, where the opportunities were greater. Here he became a popular film actor playing in numerous films with most of the important directors, among others, Gustav Ucicky, Karl Hartl, and Geza von Bolvary, who, like Forst, had come from Kolowrat’s Sascha-Film to Berlin after the death of the count. His breakthrough to stardom came with Atlantic (1929), an early ‘‘Titanic’’ film, where he sings in a whiny voice on the sinking ship, ‘‘Es wird ein Wein sein und wir wern nimmer sein’’ (‘‘There Will Still Be Wine When We Are Gone’’), a foreshadowing of his later style: a lot of sentiment, always bordering on kitsch. But, as it happens, life itself is often kitschy enough. His career blossomed with the transition from silent to sound film. Now he could charm his way into women’s hearts not only by flattery and their kissing hands, but also by the erotic, velvet timbre of his voice, singing of flirtation, love, and pain, always with a core of truth in the words. A major success in Germany was Ein blonder Traum (1931) with Lilian Harvey, the fragile female leading star, actress, dancer, and singer of the early thirties in Germany. Willi Forst and Willy Fritsch compete for her favors; contrary to the usual pattern Willi Forst does not get the girl but is consoled with a Hollywood contract. Now an acknowledged film star, Forst returned to his beloved Vienna to make his debut as a director. Together with Walter Reisch, an Austrian scriptwriter in Berlin who had tailored nearly all of Willi Forst’s German roles for him, Forst coauthored the screenplay for the Schubert film Leise flehen meine Lieder (1933). Thus was the ‘‘Viennese film’’ born, with its inimitable blend of music and action. The film was romantic, but Forst did not dwell on a sugary Biedermeier image, but also showed the poor living conditions and class barriers. In 1934 he produced and directed the big production, Maskerade (1934), the film which launched Paula Wessely on her way to film stardom and Hans Moser as comic. This social comedy set in turn-of- the-century Vienna featured the big ball scenes of which Willi Forst became the unsurpassed master, and a frivolous love story ending very conservatively: the famous painter (Adolf Wohlbrück) chooses not the jaded, elegant society lady (Olga Tschechowa) as his wife, but the plain, wholesome poor girl (Paula Wessely), thus reflecting the contemporary ideological attitude toward women in the Austrian corporate state. Beginning with this big success Forst as actor, director, screenwriter, and producer dominated the Austrian filmmaking scene for the next fifteen years. In life as in film, he was the quintessential elegant Viennese gentleman. As a film maker he aimed at perfection. In 1936 he founded his Forst-Film company in Vienna, with headquarters in the elegant Philipphof next to the Opera House. In the meantime he had also acquired a large estate in the 14th district, half way between the two main studios in Austria, Sievering and Rosenhügel. In Bel Ami (1938), in which he also played the main role, he created his ‘‘trademark’’ protagonist: the gallant ladies’ man, charming, but no hero. Nazi bureaucrat Goebbels regarded Forst with suspicion but tolerated him because of his box office hits. When the FORSYTH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 346 Austrian film industry was unified by the Nazis at the end of 1938 into ‘‘Wien-Film,’’ Forst was allowed to keep his own company, which produced films exclusively for ‘‘Wien-Film.’’ Forst, granted lavish production budgets, was able to create his greatest films. Although his films had to fit into the concept of the propaganda ministry, he never made a political film. Goebbels wanted high-quality, entertaining films to distract people from the war. Forst turned to the past for his topics to avoid any political statements, and one can find a subtle form of resistance in the nuances he used to remind people of Austria. The Vienna Trilogy is Forst’s outstanding contribution from the war years: Operette (1940), Wiener Blut (1942), and finally Wiener M?del (1944/49). Forst dragged out the filming to save his large cast and crew from being sent to the front and only finished in 1949. Goebbels wanted him to play the anti-Semitic role of ‘‘Jud Süss,’’ but Forst escaped this threat. He was not seduced, as were colleagues such as Gustav Ucicky and Paula Wessely, into making political films for the rich financial reward they brought. Forst is the proof that one could remain decent even in those years. Curd Jürgens, whom Forst had discovered in Germany and included in several of his films, remem- bered that Forst always warned hm never to become involved in a political film, for they would all have to account for their actions at a later time. Ironically, after the war, Willi Forst would never resume his leading position in the film industry. He had to liquidate his company in 1950 and never really found his line again. He was used to unlimited budgets, but the funding for cinema after the war was meager. One film he made in Germany, Die Sünderin (1951), starring Hildegard Knef, created a gigantic scandal started by the church. A woman becomes a prostitute to earn the money for an operation for the man she loves; in addition, she is seen for a fraction of a second in the nude, as her boyfriend is a painter. At the end she kills him to spare him pain and takes her own life. His very last film, Wien—Du Stadt meiner Tr?ume (1957), a title that could also serve as his life’s motto, is set neither in the past nor the present. Forst recognized that he was out of phase with the time and withdrew entirely from the film business. He also sold his Viennese estate and lived in Brissago (Tessin, Switzerland) overlooking Lake Maggiore. Considering his importance to film, Willi Forst is not well enough known today. —Gertraud Steiner Daviau FORSYTH, Bill Nationality: Scottish. Born: Glasgow, 1947. Education: Studied at National Film School, Beaconsfield, Bucks., for three months, 1971. Family: One son, one daughter. Career: Left school at age sixteen and worked for documentary filmmaker Stanley Russell; set up Tree Films with Charles Gormley, 1972; producer of documentaries, 1970s; began working with Glasgow Youth Theatre, 1977; directed first feature, That Sinking Feeling, 1979. Awards: British Academy Award for Best Screenplay, for Gregory’s Girl, 1981; BAFTA Award for Best Screenplay, 1983; Honorary Doctorate, University of Glas- gow, 1983. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1979 That Sinking Feeling 1980 Gregory’s Girl 1983 Local Hero 1984 Comfort and Joy 1987 Housekeeping (Sylvie’s Ark) 1989 Breaking In 1990 Rebecca’s Daughter 1994 Being Human 1999 Gregory’s Two Girls Publications By FORSYTH: articles— Interview in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1981. ‘‘A Suitable Job for a Scot,’’ an interview with J. Brown, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1983. Interview with A. Hunter, in Films and Filming (London), August 1984. ‘‘The Forsyth Saga,’’ an interview with E. Stein, in American Film (Washington, D.C.), November 1984. Interview with Graham Fuller, in Listener (London), 19 Novem- ber 1987. Interview in Films and Filming (London), December 1987. Interview with L. Tanner, in Films in Review (New York), Febru- ary 1988. ‘‘Being Human,’’ an interview with Allan Hunter, in Sight and Sound (London), August 1994. On FORSYTH: books— Park, James, Learning to Dream: The New British Cinema, Lon- don, 1985. Roddick, Nick, and Chris Auty, British Cinema Now, London, 1985. Walker, Alexander, National Heroes: British Cinema in the ‘70s and ‘80s, London, 1985. Dick, Eddie, editor, From Limelight to Satellite: A Scottish Film Book, London, 1990. Hardy, Forsyth, Scotland in Film, Edinburgh, 1990. On FORSYTH: articles— Films Illustrated (London), August 1981. Falk, Quentin, ‘‘Local Heroes,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1982. Films (London), July 1983. Nave, B., ‘‘Humour ecossais: Local Hero,’’ in Jeune Cinema (Paris), April 1984. Malcomson, S.L., ‘‘Modernism Comes to the Cabbage Patch,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1985. Pym, John, ‘‘Housekeeping,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1987–88. FORSYTHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 347 Bill Forsyth Norman, Barry, ‘‘Heroic Effort,’’ in Radio Times (London), 1 De- cember 1990. Elley, Derek, in Variety (New York), 30 August 1999. *** For a while during the early 1980s Scottish cinema was virtually synonymous with Bill Forsyth. Today his work remains among the most original and distinctive to have emerged not only from Scotland but from Britain as a whole. The Forsyth oeuvre is rooted in a gentle and extremely charming offbeat view of the world which has affini- ties with a variety of comic traditions including Ealing comedy, Frank Capra, Jacques Tati, and Ermanno Olmi (Il Posto is practically a blueprint in tone and feel of Gregory’s Girl), but which maintains its own individuality and character. Forsyth’s choice of comedy as his mode of expression was partly dictated by the fact that his first two films were made on tiny budgets. In characteristically modest fashion he regarded comedy as more appropriate, being less self-indulgent and more fun to do for everyone involved. Crucially, the comic character of these films gave them a vitality which helped them transcend their budgetary limitations and, in the case of Gregory’s Girl, find a sizable audience outside Scotland. Forsyth’s charm lies in his attention to detail, particularly the various quirks and idiosyncra- sies of his characters, which are conveyed equally effectively through both image and dialogue. These characters are often marginalised individuals caught up in circumstances they are ill equipped to deal with. Forsyth finds a great deal of humour in their predicaments but he does so in a wry and generous manner which is never at the expense of the characters. Instead, his approach amounts to a celebration of the human spirit with all its foibles and shortcomings. Forsyth’s acute perception of human behaviour gives his films a depth which transcends their initial charm as quirky comedies. Gregory’s Girl, for example, is populated by dreamers lost in their various obsessions. The film centre is the first stirrings of sexuality in rather awkward male adolescents. Gregory is obsessed with the enigmatic and ultimately unobtainable Dorothy (a situation repeated in Local Hero with the unrequited love that Danny and McIntyre feel for Marina and Stella, respectively). But Forsyth also uncovers a variety of obsessions, ranging from a fascination with numbers to useless facts and cookery, that serve as expressions of the problems and confusions associated with adolescence; these obsession are FOSSE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 348 presented as, in essence, a redirection of sexual energy. Although equally obsessed with boys, the girls in the film are more knowing and sophisticated (Gregory constantly seeks advice on matters of the heart from his eleven-year-old sister) and wield greater control over their own destinies—Dorothy overcomes the sexist opposition of the coach to earn a place in the football team, while Susan ingeniously uses her friends to divert Gregory’s romantic attentions away from Dorothy and toward herself. Forsyth obviously has a great empathy with the female point of view, and it is no coincidence that Housekeeping, his most mature and accomplished work, concentrates totally on the relationship between two young girls and their rather eccentric aunt. Despite the generally upbeat ambience, Forsyth’s cinema has its darker side. There are poignant moments of irony in That Sinking Feeling, a film which, despite its quirkiness and innocence, features a group of teenagers attempting to cope with the problems of unemployment. The film is set against a bleak and crumbling urban landscape. Local Hero has a rather subdued ending, which compen- sates for the cozy and contrived resolution reached between beach- comber Ben Knox and Happer the oil tycoon; McIntyre resumes a life in Texas that he has come to regard as shallow and meaningless. Comfort and Joy is darker than its predecessors not only in theme but in visual style. It concentrates on one solitary character, charting his development from morbid introspection (after his girlfriend leaves him at Christmas) to fascination with the absurdities of the world around him. Despite Forsyth’s intention to make a gloomier film, Comfort and Joy appears rather whimsical when compared to the brutality of the real Glasgow ‘‘Ice Cream Wars’’ which occurred at about the same time. But Forsyth’s most serious effort by far is Housekeeping, his first adaptation and the first film that he shot outside Scotland. In explor- ing the dilemma of whether to conform to social expectations or opt out altogether, it successfully mixes very real moments of tragedy and grief (it is the only Bill Forsyth film to provoke real anxiety and even tears) with lighter and more familiar Forsythian observations and character traits. Housekeeping marks a major development in Forsyth’s career, demonstrating a greater emotional complexity and directorial assuredness. It opens out his cinema from its provincial Scottish roots while retaining the charm and warmth of his earlier work and suggests that we may not yet have seen the best of this major filmmaking talent. Since Housekeeping, though, Forsyth has not made any films that rival the work of his early career. Breaking In, a comedy which charts the relationship between a young thief (Casey Siemaszko) and his aging mentor (Burt Reynolds), was a dud. Being Human is an oddity—and a box office disaster—featuring Robin Williams as five separate characters from different eras of history, each of whom are laboring to attain satisfaction in their lives. Being Human is an adventuresome and well-intentioned project, to be sure. But the result is maddeningly uneven, and one hopes that Forsyth will be able to recapture the spirit of his first features. —Duncan J. Petrie, updated by Rob Edelman FOSSE, Bob Nationality: American. Born: Robert Louis Fosse in Chicago, 23 June 1927. Education: Amundsen High School, Chicago, graduated 1945; studied acting at American Theatre Wing, New York, 1947. Family: Married 1) Mary Ann Niles (divorced); 2) Joan McCracken (divorced); and 3) Gwen Verdon, 1960 (divorced). Career: Formed dance team, ‘‘The Riff brothers,’’ with Charles Grass, 1940; master of ceremonies in a night club, 1942; enlisted in U.S. Navy, 1945, assigned to entertainment units in Pacific; chorus dancer in touring companies, 1948–50; Broadway debut in Dance Me a Song, 1950; signed to MGM, Hollywood, 1953; Broadway debut as choreogra- pher with The Pajama Game, 1954; directed first film, Sweet Charity, 1968. Awards: Nine ‘‘Tony’’ Awards; Oscar for Best Director, and British Academy Award for Best Director, for Cabaret, 1972; also Emmy Award, for Liza with a ‘‘Z,’’ 1973. Died: Of a heart attack, in Washington, D.C., 23 September 1987. Films as Director: 1968 Sweet Charity (+ chor) 1972 Cabaret (+ chor) 1974 Lenny 1979 All That Jazz (+ chor) 1983 Star 80 Other Films: 1953 The Affairs of Dobie Gillis (Weis) (role); Kiss Me Kate (Sidney) (role); Give a Girl a Break (Donen) (role) 1955 My Sister Eileen (Quine) (chor, role) 1957 The Pajama Game (Donen and Abbott) (chor) 1958 Damn Yankees (What Lola Wants) (Donen and Abbott) (chor, dancer in ‘‘Who’s Got the Pain’’ number) 1974 The Little Prince (Donen) (chor ‘‘Snake in the Grass’’ num- ber, role) 1976 Thieves (Berry) (role) Publications By FOSSE: articles— ‘‘Inter/View with Bob Fosse,’’ with L. Picard, in Inter/View (New York), March 1972. ‘‘The Making of Lenny,’’ interview with S. Hornstein, in Filmmakers Newsletter (Ward Hill, Massachusetts), February 1975. Interview in Cinématographe (Paris), March 1984. On FOSSE: books— Altman, Rick, The American Film Musical, Bloomington, Indi- ana, 1989. Grubb, Kevin Boyd, Razzle Dazzle: The Life and Work of Bob Fosse, New York, 1989. FOSSEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 349 Bob Fosse (left) on the set of Star 80 Gottfried, Martin, All His Jazz: The Life and Death of Bob Fosse, New York, 1990. Beddow, Margery, Bob Fosse’s Broadway, Portsmouth, New Hamp- shire, 1996. On FOSSE: articles— Vallance, T., ‘‘Bob Fosse,’’ in Focus on Film (London), Sum- mer 1972. Gardner, P., ‘‘Bob Fosse,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), May/June 1974. Badder, D.J., ‘‘Bob Fosse,’’ in Film Dope (London), April 1979. Drew, B., ‘‘Life as a Long Rehearsal,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), November 1979. Braun, E., ‘‘In Camera: The Perfectionist,’’ in Films and Filming (London), January 1980. Valot, J., P. Ross, and D. Parra, ‘‘Bob Fosse,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), March 1984. Mizejewski, Linda, ‘‘Women, Monsters, and the Masochistic Aes- thetic in Fosse’s Cabaret,’’ in Journal of Film and Video (Boston), vol. 39, no. 4, 1987. Wood, Robin, ‘‘Cloven Hoofer: Choreography as Autobiography in All That Jazz,’’ in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Win- ter 1987. Obituary in Variety (New York), 24 September 1987. Obituary in Hollywood Reporter, 25 September 1987. Obituary in Films and Filming (London), November 1987. Kemp, P., ‘‘Degrees of Radiance,’’ in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), March 1988. *** Rex Reed once said of Bob Fosse (in a review of his performance as The Snake in The Little Prince), ‘‘The man can do anything!’’ Somewhat effusive, Reed’s comment nonetheless has more than a kernel of truth: Fosse won eight Tonys, one Oscar, and one Emmy over the course of his career. In fact, he garnered four of the awards (the Oscar for Cabaret, the Emmy for Liza with a Z, and two Tonys for Pippin) in one year. Fosse started his career as a dancer and choreographer on Broad- way and divided his time almost equally between directing for the FRANKENHEIMER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 350 stage and for films. All of Fosse’s films are musicals (with the exception of Lenny) and it is within this genre that he made significant contributions. The directorial choices employed by Fosse stemmed, not surprisingly, from his style of dancing and choreography: a type of eccentric jazz that isolates and exaggerates human motion, break- ing it up into small components. It has been noted that there appears to be little difference between the dance material for Fosse’s stage and film choreography. But the presentation of the dance is radically different. On the stage, only the performers could create the fragmen- tation of Fosse’s choreography. In film, the use of multiple camera set-ups and editing allowed an amplification of this fragmentation, essentially obliterating the dance material and the mise-en-scène. This style can be seen as the complete opposite of Astaire’s presentation, which strives to preserve spatial and temporal integrity. ‘‘I love the camera,’’ Fosse once said, ‘‘I love camera movement and camera angles. As a choreographer you see everything with a frame.’’ Camera angle and camera image become more important choreo- graphic components than the dancing. The dance routine itself is non- essential, subordinated to a more complex system of integration and commentary, as Jerome Delameter has noted. Fosse’s notions of integration and commentary drastically altered the structure of the American musical film. Reacting against thirty- odd years of the Arthur Freed musical, Fosse broke new ground in 1972 with Cabaret. No longer were the musical numbers ‘‘inte- grated’’ into the narrative with people singing to each other. All dance performances were logically grounded, occurring where they might be expected—on a stage, for example (and never leaving that stage, as Berkeley did)—and was distinctly separated from the narrative. The ‘‘integration’’ took place in the sense that each performance was a comment on the narrative action. In an interview with Glenn Loney for After Dark, Fosse shed some light on his approach. ‘‘I don’t think there is any such thing as a realistic musical. As soon as people start to sing to each other, you’ve already gone beyond realism in the usual sense.... I have generally tried to make the musical more believ- able.’’ Fosse did not seek to make the events more realistic, just more plausible and logical. Fosse expounded on his concepts of ‘‘believa- bility,’’ ‘‘integrated commentary,’’ and visual fragmentation of per- formance via camera angle and editing with All That Jazz, a film in which musical numbers are literal hallucinations, obviously separated from the narrative but still logically grounded within it. —Greg Faller FRANKENHEIMER, John Nationality: American. Born: Malba, New York, 19 February 1930. Education: La Salle Military Academy, graduated 1947; Williams College, B.A., 1951. Military Service: Served in newly formed Film Squadron, U.S. Air Force, 1951–53. Family: Married Carolyn Miller, 1954 (divorced, 1961), two daughters; remarried, 1964. Career: Worked as assistant director on such TV series as You Are There, Person to Person, and The Garry Moore Show, 1953–54; directed over 150 live TV shows, 1954–60; directed his first feature, The John Frankenheimer Young Stranger, 1957; formed John Frankenheimer Productions, 1963. Awards: Christopher Award, 1954; Bodil Film Festival Best American Film, for Seven Days in May, 1963; Emmy Award for Outstanding Individual Achievement in Directing for a Miniseries or a Special, for The Burning Season, 1994; Emmy Award for Outstand- ing Individual Achievement in Directing for a Miniseries or a Special, for Andersonville, 1996; Emmy Award for Outstanding Directing for a Miniseries or a Movie, for George Wallace, 1997; Ft. Lauderdale International Film Festival Robert Wise Director of Distinction, 1998; San Diego World Film Festival Lifetime Achievement Award, 1998; Casting Society of America Lifetime Achievement Award, 1998; National Board of Review Billy Wilder Award, 1999. Ad- dress: c/o John Frankenheimer Productions, 2800 Olympic Blvd., Suite 201, Santa Monica, CA 90404, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1957 The Young Stranger 1961 The Young Savages 1962 The Manchurian Candidate (+ co-pr, uncredited sc); All Fall Down; Birdman of Alcatraz 1963 Seven Days in May (+ co-pr) 1964 The Train 1966 Grand Prix; Seconds 1968 The Extraordinary Seaman; The Fixer FRANKENHEIMERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 351 1969 The Gypsy Moths 1970 I Walk the Line; The Horsemen 1973 L’Impossible Objet (Impossible Object); The Iceman Cometh 1974 99 44/100 Dead (retitled Call Harry Crown for general release in U.K.) 1975 French Connection II 1976 Black Sunday (+ bit ro as TV controller) 1979 Prophecy 1982 The Challenge 1985 The Holcroft Covenant 1986 52 Pick-Up 1987 Across the River and into the Trees 1989 Dead Bang; The Fourth War 1991 Year of the Gun 1994 Against the Wall (for TV); The Burning Season (for TV) (+ co-pr) 1996 Andersonville (for TV) (+ co-exec pr); The Island of Dr. Moreau 1997 George Wallace (for TV) (+ co-pr) 1998 Ronin 2000 Reindeer Games Other Films: 1991 Reflections on Citizen Kane (short) (doc) (ro as himself) 1999 The General’s Daughter (West) (ro as General Sonnenberg) 2000 Listen with Your Eyes (Benedikt) (doc) (ro as himself) Publications By FRANKENHEIMER: book— Andersonville: The Complete Original Screenplay, by David W. Rintels and James M. McPherson, Baton Rouge, 1996. By FRANKENHEIMER: articles— ‘‘Seven Ways with Seven Days in May,’’ in Films and Filming (London), June 1964. Interview, in The Celluloid Muse, edited by Charles Higham and Joel Greenberg, London, 1969. Interview with Russell Au Werter, in Action (Los Angeles), May/ June 1970. Interview with J. O’Brien, in Inter/View (New York), August 1971. ‘‘Filming The Iceman Cometh,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), January/ February 1974. ‘‘John Frankenheimer: An American Film Institute Seminar on His Work,’’ 1977. Interview with L. Gross and R. Avrech, in Millimeter (New York), July/August 1975. Interviews with R. Appelbaum, in Films and Filming (London), October and November 1979. Interview with P. Broeske, in Films in Review (New York), Febru- ary 1983. Interview in Films and Filming (London), February 1985. ‘‘Frankly Speaking,’’ an interview with K. Ferguson, in Photoplay Movies & Video (London), October 1985. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: John Frankenheimer,’’ in American Film (New York), March 1989. ‘‘Drive, He Said,’’ an interview with S. Modderno, in Movieline (Los Angeles), September 1989. Hoberman, J., ‘‘When Dr. No Met Dr. Strangelove,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), December 1993. ‘‘The Burning Season of John Frankenheimer,’’ an interview with Mary Hardesty, in DGA Magazine (Los Angeles), August-Sep- tember 1994. Pratley, G., ‘‘‘Andersonville’ Revisited,’’ in Kinema (Waterloo), Spring 1996. Lally, K., ‘‘Frankenheimer Meets ‘Dr. Moreau,’’’ in Film Journal (New York), August 1996. ‘‘Down under in Jungleland,’’ an interview with Jean Oppenheimer, in American Cinematographer (Hollywood), September 1996. ‘‘The Island of Dr. Moreau,’’ an interview with Michael Helms, in Cinema Papers (Fitzroy), October 1996. On FRANKENHEIMER: books— Pratley, Gerald, The Cinema of John Frankenheimer, New York, 1969. Champlin, Charles, John Frankenheimer: A Conversation, Burbank, California, 1994. Pratley, Gerald, The Films of John Frankenheimer: Forty Years in Film, Lehigh, Pennsylvania, 1998. On FRANKENHEIMER: articles— Mayersberg, Paul, ‘‘John Frankenheimer,’’ in Movie (London), Decem- ber 1962. Thomas, John, ‘‘John Frankenheimer, the Smile on the Face of the Tiger,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1965/66. Casty, Alan, ‘‘Realism and Beyond: The Films of John Frankenheimer,’’ in Film Heritage (New York), Winter 1966/67. Higham, Charles, ‘‘Frankenheimer,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1968. Filmer, Paul, ‘‘Three Frankenheimer Films: A Sociological Approach,’’ in Screen (London), July/October 1969. Madsen, Axel, ‘‘99 and 44/100 Dead,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1973/74. Drew, B., ‘‘John Frankenheimer: His Fall and Rise,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), March 1977. Combs, Richard, ‘‘A Matter of Conviction,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), no. 4, 1979. Cook, B., ‘‘The War between the Writers and the Directors: Part II: The Directors,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), June 1979. ‘‘Directors of the Decade: John Frankenheimer,’’ in Films and Filming (London), February 1984. Article by Frederic Rosen in Video (New York), December 1984. Scheinfeld, Michael, ‘‘The Manchurian Candidate,’’ in Films in Review (New York), vol. 39, no. 11, 1988. Levy, Shawn, ‘‘Year of the Gun: John Frankenheimer’s Sinister Formula,’’ American Film, November/December 1991. Career overview in Film (London), February 1992. Weinraub, Bernard, ‘‘A Director Trying to Reshoot His Career,’’ in New York Times, 24 March 1994. Zoller Seitz, Matt, ‘‘Those High-tech Shoot-em-ups Got the Formula from ‘The Train,’’’ in New York Times, 30 April 1995. FRANKLIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 352 Mather, Philippe, ‘‘Le futur dans le rétroviseur,’’ in Ciné-Bulles (Montreal), Autumn 1996. Askari, Brent, ‘‘Adapting Elmore Leondard: The Good, the Bad, and the Freaky-deaky,’’ in Creative Screenwriting (Washington, D.C.), Summer 1997. LoBrutto, Vincent, ‘‘The Surreal Images of Seconds,’’ in American Cinematographer (Hollywood), November 1997. *** The seven feature films John Frankenheimer directed between 1961 and 1964 stand as a career foundation unique in American cinema. In a single talent, film had found a perfect bridge between television and Hollywood drama, between the old and new visual technologies, between the cinema of personality and that of the corporation and the computer. Frankenheimer’s delight in monochrome photography, his in- stinct for new light cameras, fast stocks, and lens systems like Panavision informed The Manchurian Candidate, Seven Days in May, and Seconds with a flashing technological intelligence. No less skillful with the interior drama he had mastered as a director of live television, he turned All Fall Down and The Young Savages into striking personal explorations of familial disquiet and social violence. He seemed unerring. Even Birdman of Alcatraz and The Train, troubled projects taken over at the last minute from Charles Crichton and Arthur Penn, respectively, emerged with the stamp of his forceful technique. Frankenheimer’s career began to sour with Seconds, a film that was arguably too self-conscious with its fish-eye sequences and rampant paranoia. Grand Prix, an impressive technical feat in Super Panavision, showed less virtuosity in the performances. His choices thereafter were erratic: heavy-handed comedy, rural melodrama, a further unsuccessful attempt at spectacle in The Horsemen, which was shot in Afghanistan. Frankenheimer relocated to Europe, no doubt mortified that Penn, Lumet, and Delbert Mann, lesser lights of live TV drama, had succeeded where he failed. Despite a career revival with the 1975 French Connection II, a sequel that equaled its model in force and skill, Frankenheimer has not hit his stride since—at lease with regard to his big-screen projects. The director’s choices remain variable in intelligence, though by staying within the area of violent melodrama he has at least ceased to dissipate his talent in the pursuit of production values. Black Sunday is a superior terrorist thriller, Prophecy a failed but worthy horror film with environmental overtones, and The Challenge a stylish Japanese romp in the style of The Yakuza. Unfortunately, new directors who grew up with the Frankenheimer work as benchmarks do such material better. Frankenheimer’s late 1980s and early 1990s features—Dead Bang, The Fourth War, and Year of the Gun—did nothing to resuscitate his career, and were quickly forgotten as they made their way to video store oblivion. Only the 1987 theatrical re-release of The Manchurian Candidate, after decades of unavailability, earned Frankenheimer high critical praise. In fact, the film was atop many critics’ lists as among the best to come to movie houses that year. Additionally, the emergence of the high-tech thriller genre, so popular in the 1990s, has been critically traced back to The Train. From the mid-1990s, you might say that Frankenheimer returned to his profes- sional roots, re-crossing that bridge between theatrical films and television. He did not completely abandon big-screen features, direct- ing one generic espionage yarn (Ronin), one pedestrian crime tale (Reindeer Games), and an undistinguished adaptation of H.G. Wells’s The Island of Dr. Moreau. The last is of note only for the presence of Marlon Brando, hamming it up outrageously. By far Frankenheimer’s best films of the period—and most acclaimed work in years—are a quartet of fact-based, social issue-oriented TV movies. Against the Wall is a solid prison drama that retraces the events surrounding the 1971 Attica prison riots. The Burning Season is even better: an outstanding, politically savvy account of the life of Chico Mendes, the political activist/union leader who battled against the exploitation of those who toil in the Amazon rain forests of Brazil and paid for his valor with his life. The final two may be linked as chronicles of one aspect of the mid-nineteenth century and mid-twentieth century American South. Andersonville offers a vivid portrait of the infamous Confederate prisoner-of-war camp, where almost 13,000 Union sol- diers died; George Wallace is a solid biopic about the controversial anti-segregationist Alabama governor. All were above average, quali- ty-wise. Three of them even netted Frankenheimer Best Direction Emmy Awards. —John Baxter, updated by Rob Edelman FRANKLIN, Sidney Nationality: American. Born: Sidney Arnold Franklin in San Fran- cisco, 21 March 1893; also known as Sid Franklin, S.A. Franklin, Sidney A. Franklin, Sydney A. Franklin, and Sydney Franklin. Sidney Franklin (standing) on the set of The Last of Mrs. Cheyney FRANKLINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 353 Family: Father of producer-director Sidney Franklin Jr.; brother of director Chester M. Franklin. Career: Began working in the motion pictures as an assistant cameraman, 1913; co-directed his first short films with his brother, 1914; began directing features, 1916; began work as a director at Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1926; abandoned his career as director after The Good Earth, and became a producer, 1937; returned to directing with remake of The Barretts of Wimpole Street, 1957; resigned from MGM, 1958. Awards: Special Academy Award (Irving G. Thalberg Award) for ‘‘consistent high quality of produc- tion achievement,’’ for Mrs. Miniver, 1942. Died: Of natural causes in Santa Monica, California, 18 May 1972. Films as Director, with Chester Franklin: 1914 The Sheriff (short); A Ten–Cent Adventure (short) 1915 The Ash Can, or Little Dick’s First Adventure (Little Dick’s First Adventure) (short); The Baby (short); Dirty-Face Dan (short); The Dollhouse Mystery (short); Her Filmland Hero (short); The Kid Magicians (short) 1916 The Little Cupids (short); Little Dick’s First Case (short); Pirates Bold (short); The Rivals (short); The Runaways (short); The Straw Man (short); Let Katie Do It; Martha’s Vindication; The Children of the House; Going Straight (Corruption); The Little School Ma’am; Gretchen the Green- horn; A Sister of Six 1917 Jack and the Beanstalk (+ co-sc); Aladdin and the Wonderful Lamp; Babes in the Woods 1918 Treasure Island; Six Shooter Andy; Her Only Way; Forbidden City; Fan Fan; Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves Films as Director 1918 The Safety Curtain (+ co-sc); The Bride of Fear (+ sc); Confession (+ sc, story); 1919 The Heart of Wetona; The Probation Wife; The Hoodlum; Heart o’ the Hills 1920 Two Weeks; Unseen Forces (+ pr) 1921 Not Guilty; Courage 1922 The Primitive Lover; Smilin’ Through (+ co-adaptation); East Is West 1923 Brass; Dulcy; Tiger Rose 1924 Her Night of Romance 1925 Learning to Love; Her Sister from Paris 1926 Beverly of Graustark; The Duchess of Buffalo 1927 Quality Street 1928 The Actress (Trelawny of the Wells) 1929 Wild Orchids; The Last of Mrs. Cheyney; Devil May Care 1930 The Lady of Scandal; A Lady’s Morals 1931 The Guardsman; Private Lives (+ pr) 1932 Smilin’ Through 1933 Reunion in Vienna 1934 The Barretts of Wimpole Street 1935 The Dark Angel 1937 The Good Earth 1946 Duel in the Sun (co-d with Vidor and others, uncredited) 1957 The Barretts of Wimpole Street Other Films: 1919 The Man in the Moonlight (Powell) (ro); A Rogue’s Romance (Young) (ro) 1920 The Blue Moon (Cox) (ro); Down Home (Willat) (ro); Drag Harlan (Edwards) (ro unconfirmed) 1939 On Borrowed Time (Bucquet) (pr); Goodbye, Mr. Chips (Wood) (special acknowledgment) 1940 Waterloo Bridge (LeRoy) (co-pr) 1942 Mrs. Miniver (Wyler) (co-pr); Random Harvest (LeRoy) (pr); Bambi (Hand) (artistic contributor) 1943 Madame Curie (LeRoy) (pr) 1944 The White Cliffs of Dover (Brown) (pr) 1946 The Yearling (Brown) (pr) 1948 Homecoming (LeRoy) (pr); Command Decision (Wood) (pr) 1950 The Miniver Story (Potter) (pr) 1953 Young Bess (Sidney) (pr); The Story of Three Loves (Minnelli, Reinhardt) (pr) Publications By FRANKLIN: articles— Franklin, Sidney, ‘‘From Play to Picture,’’ in New York Times, 30 September 1934. On FRANKLIN: articles— ‘‘Sidney Franklin, Producer, Dies; His Mrs. Miniver Won Oscar,’’ in New York Times, 20 May 1972. *** Throughout his lengthy Hollywood career, Sidney Franklin worked as a director, producer, screenwriter, assistant cameraman, and actor. He was, however, no celluloid renaissance man. He was not an artist of the cinema, in the way that a Woody Allen or an Orson Welles is considered to be. Franklin was more of an all-purpose hand, one of the scores of film pioneers who in the early years of the 20th-century entered the industry almost by accident. (While eliciting a curiosity about film in his youth, he had toiled as a stock boy, travelling salesman, and factory and oil field worker prior to becoming an assistant cameraman at age 20.) Franklin then matured and flourished, as the industry matured and flourished, becoming first a director and then a producer. In the end he was a product of the Hollywood studio system and, even more specifically, a loyal and trustworthy employee of the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer movie factory. Franklin’s films range from the child-oriented comedy shorts and features he co-directed early in his career with his brother, Chester M. Franklin, to the polished dramas and comedies he directed at MGM during the late 1920s and 1930s and the high-profile dramas he produced during the 1940s. Through the mid-1920s, he directed a wide range of product, honing his craft and becoming a technically accomplished and reliable professional. Franklin’s best, most repre- sentative films are those he made at MGM, where he came to work in 1926, and he was adept at directing actresses and understanding their FREARS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 354 characters’ motivations. He was especially close to Irving Thalberg, the studio’s ‘‘Boy Wonder’’ production executive, and did well guiding Mrs. Thalberg—Norma Shearer—through several films, including The Actress, Smilin’ Through (which he previously had made as a silent, with Norma Talmadge), Private Lives, and The Barretts of Wimpole Street. He also directed Greta Garbo in Wild Orchids, and guided Louise Rainer to an Academy Award in The Good Earth. Franklin directed several adaptations of plays, all sophisticated comedies, including Molnar’s The Guardsman (the lone starring celluloid vehicle of Broadway legends Alfred Lunt and Lynne Fontanne), Robert E. Sherwood’s Reunion in Vienna, and Noel Coward’s Private Lives. His concern for detail, and maintaining the essence of the original material, is reflected in an article he published in the New York Times in 1934. ‘‘Even in Hollywood the play is the thing,’’ Franklin wrote. ‘‘We are grateful for good plays, we respect them and in translating them to the new medium we try our level best to do right by them. We realize we can get a good motion picture only by guarding with our lives the essence and structure which make the play important or significant.’’ Then he added, ‘‘Perhaps the greatest satisfaction that can come to a director is to hear some one [sic] say of one of our efforts: ‘It was as good as a play!’’’ In these remarks, Franklin amplifies a point that often is forgotten in a contemporary Hollywood ruled by high-concepts and special effects: without rich characterizations and a good story, you cannot have a good film. Still, the overriding fact of Franklin’s career is that, while his films as director exude class, and he served his stars well, they are not reflective of any individual artistic vision. Rather, they collectively mirror his studio’s patented luster. Upon completing The Good Earth in 1937—and after the premature death of Irving Thalberg—Franklin left directing; he returned only to assist King Vidor on David O. Selznick’s Duel in the Sun and direct a bland remake of The Barretts of Wimpole Street in 1957. Otherwise, he went on to produce some of MGM’s most prestigious pictures during the 1940s, from Waterloo Bridge, Random Harvest, and the Academy Award-winning Mrs. Miniver through The Yearling and Command Decision. With the exception of Mrs. Miniver, which benefits from the strengths of its director, William Wyler, all are products of a studio rather than an individual. —Rob Edelman FREARS, Stephen Nationality: British. Born: Leicester, Great Britain, 20 June 1941. Education: Studied law at Cambridge University, 1960–63. Career: Assistant at the Royal Court Theatre, 1964; assistant on films, from 1966; directed first film, 1967; director and producer for TV, from 1969, including Me! I’m Afraid of Virginia Woolf (series of plays by Alan Bennett, 1978) and Walter for Channel 4, 1982; also director of TV commercials. Awards: People’s Choice Award, Toronto Interna- tional Film Festival, for The Snapper, 1993; Douglas Sirk Award, FilmFest Hamburg (Germany), 1996; César Award for Best Foreign Film, for Dangerous Liaisons, 1988; Berlinale Camera, Berlin Inter- national Film Festival, 1989; Bodil Award for Best American Film, for Dangerous Liaisons, 1990; Silver Berlin Bear, Berlin Interna- tional Film Festival, for The Hi-Lo Country, 1999. Films as Director: 1967 The Burning (+ pr) 1971 Gumshoe 1975 Three Men in a Boat (for TV); Sunset across the Bay (for TV) 1978 Doris and Doreen (for TV); Me! I’m Afraid of Virginia Woolf (for TV); A Visit from Miss Protheroe (for TV) 1979 One Fine Day (for TV); Afternoon Off (for TV); Bloody Kids (for TV) 1981 Going Gently (for TV) 1982 Walter (for TV) 1983 Saigon: Year of the Cat (for TV) 1984 The Hit 1985 My Beautiful Laundrette 1987 Prick up Your Ears; Sammy and Rosie Get Laid 1988 Dangerous Liaisons 1990 The Grifters 1992 Hero 1993 The Snapper (for TV) 1994 A Personal History of British Cinema by Stephen Frears (for TV) (+ role as himself) 1996 The Van; Mary Reilly 1998 The Hi-Lo Country 2000 Fail-Safe (for TV); High Fidelity; Liam Other Films: 1966 Morgan, a Suitable Case for Treatment (Reisz) (asst d) 1967 Charlie Bubbles (Finney) (asst d) 1968 If... (Anderson) (asst d) 1973 O Lucky Man! (Anderson) (asst d) 1978 Long Shot (Hatton) (role as Biscuit Man) 1979 The Old Crowd (Anderson—for TV) (pr) 1997 Beyond Fear (Green/Wilkes—for TV) (exec pr) 2000 Unforgettable Richard Beckinsale (Garnsey) (role as himself) Publications By FREARS: books— Drawings by Film Directors: Diary Agenda 1995, New York, 1994. Typically British: A Short History of the Cinema in Britain (with Charles Barr), London, 1994. By FREARS: articles— Interview in Time Out (London), 10 November 1983. Interview with P. Merigeau and F. Guerif, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), November 1984. ‘‘Sheer Frears,’’ an interview with J. Saynor, in Stills (London), November 1985. Interview with Harlan Kennedy, in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1987. Interview in Inter/View (New York), April 1987. Interview with K.M. Chanko, in Films in Review (New York), October 1987. American Film (Washington, D.C.), December 1988. FREARSDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 355 Stephen Frears Interview with H. Merrick, in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), January 1991. Interview with L. Vincenzi, in Millimeter, February 1991. Interview with K. Vandemaele, in Skoop, April 1991. ‘‘One Foot in Hollywood,’’ interview with Ralph Rugoff, in Vogue, October 1992. ‘‘Keeping His Own Voice: An Interview with Stephen Frears,’’ Post Script, vol. 11, no. 3, 1992. ‘‘Rolling in the Isles,’’ interview with Gregg Kilday, in Entertain- ment Weekly, 28 January 1994. On FREARS: articles— ‘‘Song of Experience: Stephen Frears,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), May 1987. ‘‘Stephen Frears Section’’ of Positif (Paris), November 1987. Hunter, Mark, ‘‘Marquise de Merteiul and Comte de Valmont Get Laid,’’ in American Film, December 1988. Lindsey, Robert, ‘‘The Dangerous Leap of Stephen Frears,’’ in New York Times Magazine, December 18, 1988. Dancyger, K., ‘‘The Bigger Picture: A Consideration of the Influence of Journalism and Theatre on the Feature–Length Screenplay,’’ in Journal of Film and Video, vol. 42, no. 3, 1990. McDonagh, Maitland, ‘‘Straight to Hell,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1990. Merrick, H., ‘‘Un realisateur en liberte,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), January 1991. Quart, L., ‘‘The Politics of Irony: The Frears-Kureishi Films,’’ in Film Criticism, vol. 16, no. 1/2, 1991/92. Regosa, M., ‘‘Stephen Frears e la fenomenologia del politico,’’ in Cinema Nuovo, May/June 1992. Joshel, S.R., ‘‘Fatal Liaisons and Dangerous Attraction: The Destruc- tion of Feminist Voices,’’ in Journal of Popular Culture, vol. 26, no. 3, 1992. Saynor, J., ‘‘Accidental Auteur,’’ in Sight and Sound, April 1993. *** Like so many of his contemporaries in the British cinema, Stephen Frears began his directorial career in television, making dramas for the BBC and its commercial rival Channel 4. He has continued to bounce back and forth between film and television ever since. He first came to the moviegoing public’s notice as the director of 1971’s Gumshoe, a whimsical nod to American films noir of the 1940s that was laced with parodic, self-reflexive overtones. The comedy/drama starred Albert Finney—as a down-at-the-heel vaudevillian who, influenced by seeing too many Bogart movies, turns private eye to improve his fortunes—and Billie Whitelaw. It also had a music score by a then comparatively unknown Andrew Lloyd Webber. A gentle, FREARS DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 356 unassuming film, it has its adherents, but is an all but forgotten part of Frears’s filmography. During the 1980s, though, Frears directed a blistering series of features that established him as one of the more important British directors of the period. The breakthrough film was My Beautiful Laundrette, a movie partly funded by Channel 4 TV that also launched Daniel Day Lewis as an actor, brought Shirley Anne Field (a fixture of British New Wave cinema of the 1960s) back to the screen, and gave the screenwriter Hanif Kureishi his first substan- tial hit. Before My Beautiful Laundrette put Frears on the map, however, Frears made The Hit. It had a great cast (John Hurt, Terence Stamp, and Fernando Rey), and told the story of a small-time hood named Willie Parker (Stamp) who informs upon his partners-in-crime. Ten years later, he suddenly finds that his long-time hiding place has been discovered by his former associates who have put out a contract to have him terminated for squealing on them. Eric Clapton wrote the theme song for the film. The Hit is tense, well acted, and has an authentic air of despair and failure in its tightly constructed visuals, yet at the same time it manages to be quite funny. It reminds one of the Hammer psychologi- cal thrillers of the early 1960s, in which Jimmy Sangster’s scripts kept the audience guessing throughout; despite its failure to catch on (good reviews notwithstanding), it stands up well against more celebrated works in the British crime film genre, such as The Long Good Friday. But then came My Beautiful Laundrette, which took Frears out of the grind of ordinary television production and genre films, and afforded him a more luxurious canvas with which to work. Nevertheless, it is clear that his years in television and genre films, which requires working at a fast pace, prepared him for this moment by enabling him to wring every last value out of the film’s minimal funding. A titillating, cheaply exotic, and yet deeply romantic film, Laundrette is set firmly in the world of 1980s London, a barren, Thatcherite landscape of failing businesses, exploited workers, and simmering racial tension. The love affair between Johnny (Day Lewis) and the Asian Omar crosses the ‘‘barrier’’ of the heterosexual ruling faction and serves as an ‘‘affront’’ to the rigid class and racial barriers of an England caught in the grip of a pervasive economic depression. The film’s look is lush, multi-hued, and dreamy; it exists outside of time, as its protagonists most truly come to life outside the structures imposed upon them. With Laundrette, Frears aligned himself with a strong scenarist (Kureishi) who also sought to revitalize British cinema, and the iconic structures that had come to be taken as fixed points of reference in its landscape (Kureishi stated that one of his ambitions in writing the script for the film was to make a gay-themed British movie ‘‘without Dirk Bogarde’’). A surprise ‘‘art house’’ hit in the United States, the film revived Frears’s career as a director. He was thus able to plunge into a group of new works that consolidated his reputation. Sammy and Rosie Get Laid, another Kureishi script, was perhaps less successful than Laundrette, but it still did respectable business in the United States and Britain, and found several critical champions. Sammy and Rosie took the basic image of London in collapse posited in Laundrette several steps further. Sammy and Rosie is a clever re- interpretation of Godard’s vision of the city-as-apocalypse, with a Bu?uelian flair for surreal interruptions and a grimy look similar to that used by 1960s British directors like Tony Richardson and Karel Reisz. In the same year, Frears’s Prick up Your Ears, an examination of the life of gay playwright Joe Orton, from an Alan Bennett screen- play, received substantial critical acclaim both in England and the United States. Frears’s most successful and popular film up to that point, Dangerous Liaisons, owes a considerable stylistic debt to Roger Vadim’s 1960 Les liaisons dangereuses, a modern-dress version of the same text by Laclos. Vadim’s film featured Jeanne Moreau and Gerard Philipe; Frears’s film, from a screenplay by Christopher Hampton, is anchored by the brilliant performances of Glenn Close and John Malkovich, and succeeds because of the sense of period verisimilitude it creates. Frears’s camera seems almost a recording angel within the context of the film’s narrative; it is omnipresent, but never oppressive, and maintains a discreet distance, except in the climactic dueling sequence. Dangerous Liaisons does not strive to be sumptuous; rather, it plants the characters firmly within the context of the decor, and lets them do their work. Malkovich, in particular, has never appeared to better advantage, and the final shot of Glenn Close, after having been scorned in public, wiping her evening’s make-up off her face with brutal finality while regarding herself in her dressing room mirror, is one of the most despairingly triumphant moments in recent cinema history. Interestingly, Frears completely eschews the aggressive visual style of Laundrette and Sammy and Rosie in Dangerous Liaisons; rather, his camera seems entirely at the service of the actors. He frames them in introductory wide-shots in the classical studio manner before going in for intimate close-ups. In this, the film is a double period piece, recreating the British studio system and its inherent dependence upon actors, as well as the eighteenth-century period in which the fictive text is set. Perhaps because of this double classicism, the film has proven to be Frears’s most accessible and popularly praised work. Frears further consolidated his position in the cinema with The Grifters, his first film made in America. A noirish crime drama based on a novel by pulp fiction icon Jim Thompson, it featured Annette Bening, John Cusack, and Angelica Huston, and won critical and popular accolades all-around. After The Grifters, Frears switched gears with The Snapper, adapted from a novel by Roddy Doyle, the author of The Commitments—a book then successful film (by Alan Parker) to which The Snapper is a companion piece. It tells the story of a working-class family in Ireland (the same locale as The Commit- ments). When its eldest daughter, who is unmarried, becomes preg- nant, her relationship with her father is sorely tested. Made for British television but released theatrically in the U.S., the film is ultimately a warm portrait of family imperfections and loyalties. As is The Van, Frears’s next film, made in 1996. Also based on novel by Roddy Doyle, it completed Doyle’s Irish trilogy begun with The Commitments. The same year, Frears took over direction of the troubled produc- tion Mary Reilly, a distaff version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde told from the perspective of the housekeeper (Julia Roberts) who works in Jekyll’s (John Malkovich) home. The result, though visually impres- sive, was a ponderous period piece that collapsed under its own dreary weight at the box office despite the star power of Roberts in the title role. The Hero, an attempt by Frears at a Capraseque fantasy, was another misfire. Largely due to a charismatic lead performance by Woody Harrelson, Frears’ modern-day western The Hi-Lo Country, based on a novel by Max Evans, clicked better with audiences and FRI?DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 357 critics, though it lacks the grit that a Sam Peckinpah (who had long wanted to film Evans’ novel himself) might have brought to it. —Wheeler Winston Dixon, updated by John McCarty FRI?, Martin Nationality: Czech. Born: Prague, 29 March 1902. Family: Married actress Suzanne Marwille, 1932. Career: Actor in Prague and Bratislava, 1918; lab man, cameraman, and designer, 1919–21; began film acting, scriptwriting, 1922; began collaboration with Karel Lamac, 1924; billed as Mac Fri? on films made during occupation, 1940s; television director, from 1961; 1st Chairman, Union of Czecho- slovakian Film and Television Artists, 1965. Awards: Recipient of National Artist; Order of the Republic; Laureate; State Prize. Died: 22 August 1968. Films as Director (partial listing): 1928 Páter Vojtěch (Father Vojtech) (+sc, role) 1929 Varhaník v sv. Víta (The Organist at St. Vitus) (+ co-sc); Chudá holka (Poor Girl) (+sc) 1930 V?e pro lásku (All for Love) (+co-sc) 1931 Der Zinker (The Informer) (co-d); On a jeho sestra (He and His Sister) (co-d); Dobry voják Svejk (The Good Soldier Schweik) (+ ed) 1932 Kantor Ideál (Master Ideál); Sestra Angelika (Sister Angel- ica) (+ ed) 1933 Revisor (The Inspector) (+ ed); U snědeného krámu (The Emptied-out Grocer’s Shop) (+ ed); Pobo?ník Jeho Vysosti (Adjutant to His Highness) (+ ed); Zivot je pes (A Dog’s Life) (+ co-sc); Dvanáct k?esel (The Twelve Chairs) (co-d); S vylou?ením ve?ejnosti (Closed Doors) 1934 Hej rup! (Heave-ho!) (+ ed, co-sc); Poslední mu? (The Last Man); Mazlí?ek (Darling) (+ ed, co-sc) 1935 Hrdina jedné noci (Hero for a Night) (+ ed); Jáno?ík (ed, co-sc); Jedenácté p?ikázání (The Eleventh Commandment) (+ ed); A? ?ije nebo?tik (Long Live the Deceased) (+ ed, co-sc) 1936 Pater Vojtěch (Father Vojtech) (remake); Svadlenka (The Seamstress); Uli?ka v ráji (Paradise Road) 1937 Svět pat?í nám (The World Is Ours) (+ co-sc, role); Hordubalové (The Hordubals); Lidé na k?e (People on a Glacier) 1938 Krok do tmy (Madman in the Dark); Skola, základ ?ivota (School, the Basis of Life) 1939 Eva tropí hlouposti (The Escapades of Eva); Kristián (Chris- tian) (+ co-sc); Mu? z neznáma (The Reluctant Millionaire) 1940 Muzikantská Lidu?ka (Lidu?ka of the Stage; Musicians’ Girl); Baron Prá?il (Baron Munchhausen); Katakomby (Catacombs); Druhá směna (Second Tour) 1941 Tě?ky ?ivot dobrodruha (Hard Is the Life of an Adventurer); Hotel Modrá hvězda (The Hotel Blue Star) (+ co-sc) 1942 Barbora Hlavsová 1943 Experiment; Der zweite Schuss (The Second Shot) (+ co-sc) 1944 Po?estné paní pardubické (The Virtuous Dames of Pardubice); Prstynek (The Wedding Ring) 1945 13. revír (Beat 13) 1947 Varuj! (Warning!) (+ co-sc); Capkovy povídky (Tales from Capek) (+ co-sc) 1948 Návrat domu (Lost in Prague); Polibek ze stadionu (A Kiss from Stadium) (+ co-sc) 1949 Pětistovka (Motorcycles); Pytlákova schovanka (The Kind Millionaire) 1950 Past (The Trap); Zoceleni (Tempered Steel; Steel Town) 1951 Císa?v peka? a Peka?uv peka? (The Emperor’s Baker and the Baker’s Emperor) (+ co-sc); Akce B (Action B) (+ co-sc) 1953 Tajemství krve (The Secret of Blood) (+ co-sc) 1954 Psohlavci (Dog-Heads) (+ co-sc) 1955 Nechte to na mně (Leave It to Me) (+ co-sc) 1956 Zaost?it, prosím (Watch the Birdie!) (+ co-sc) 1958 Povodeň (The Flood); Dnes naposled (Today for the Last Time) 1959 Princezna se zlatou hvězdou (The Princess with the Golden Star) (+ co-sc) 1960 Da?buján a Pandrhola (A Compact with Death); Bilá spona (The White Slide) 1963 Krák Králu (King of Kings); T?i zlaté vlasy děda V?evěda (The Three Golden Hairs of Old Man Know-All) 1964 Hvězda zvaná Pelyněk (A Star Named Wormwood) 1966 Lidé z maringotek (People on Wheels) (+ co-sc) 1967 P?ísně tajné premiéry (Recipe for a Crime; Strictly Secret Previews) 1968 Nejlep?í ?enská mého ?ivota (The Best Woman of My Life) (+ co-sc) Publications By FRI?: article— Interview, in Closely Watched Films, by Antonín Liehm, White Plains, New York, 1974. On FRI?: book— Modern Czechoslovak film, Prague, 1965. On FRI?: articles— Hrbas, J., ‘‘Martin Fri?: Lidovy vyprávě?,’’ (in four parts) in Film a Doba (Prague), January through April 1972. Dewey, L., ‘‘Czechoslovakia: Silence into Sound,’’ in Film (Lon- don), no. 60. Taussig, P., Film a Doba (Prague), December 1983 and April 1984. Bartosek, L., ‘‘Scenes from the History of Czechoslovak Cinema,’’ in Czechoslovak Film (Prague), Summer 1985. *** Scion of a notable middle-class Prague family, Martin Fri? left the road marked out by family tradition at the age of sixteen to follow the uncertain path of a cabaret performer, actor, and filmmaker. In 1919 he designed a poster for Jan Stanislav Kolár’s film Dáma s malou nozkou (Lady with a Little Foot), and thus began his years of apprenticeship. He was by turns an actor, a scenarist, a film laboratory worker, and a cameraman. Of crucial importance to the young Fri? was his collaboration and friendship with Karel Lamac, the most FRIDRIKSSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 358 influential director in Czech film. Lamac taught him the film trade and enabled him to become familiar with the film studios of Berlin and Paris. In 1928 Fri? made his debut with the film Páter Vojtěch (Father Vojtech) and followed it immediately with his most important film of the silent era, Varhaník u sv. Vita (The Organist at St. Vitus), which dealt with the tragedy of a man suspected of murder. In the sound era Fri? quickly gained a position of prominence, chiefly through his ability to work quickly (making up to six films a year) and, no matter the circumstances, with surprising ease and dexterity. Comedy be- came his domain. His comedies, often produced in two–language versions (German or French), featured popular comedians as well as actors and actresses whose comic talent he recognized and helped to develop. First and foremost of these was Vlasta Burián, who appeared in the situation comedies On a jeho sestra (He and His Sister) with Anny Ondrákova, Pobo?ník Jeho Vysosti (Adjutant to His Highness), Dvanáct k?esel (The Twelve Chairs), Katakomby (Catacombs), and also in the film adaptation of Gogol’s Revisor (The Inspector). Fri? had much to do with shaping the film acting of Hugo Haas in such films as Zivot je pes (A Dog’s Life—the first Czech screwball comedy with Adina Mandlová), A? ?ije nebo?lík (Long Live the Deceased), Jedenácté p?ikázání (The Eleventh Commandment), and Uli?ka a ráji (Paradise Road). Together with Voskovec and Werich he made the social comedy Hej rup! (Heave-ho) and the modern political satire Svět pat?í nám (The World Is Ours). Then came Kristián (Christian), a social comedy with Oldrich Novy that is undoubtedly Fri?’s best work. But Fri? also demonstrated his directorial abilities in infrequent excursions into other genres. His Jáno?ík, a poetic epic about a leg- endary highwayman, is one of the pinnacles of Czechoslovak cinematography. Fri? showed sensitivity and an understanding of the atmosphere of the time in his film rendition of U snědeného krámu (The Emptied-out Grocer’s Shop), a story by the nineteenth-century Czech writer Ignát Hermann. He also made felicitous film versions of the dramas Hordubalové (The Hordubals), based on the novel by Karel Capek, Lidé na k?e (People on a Glacier), and Barbora Hlavsová. Following the nationalization of Czechoslovak filmmaking, Fri? aided in the development of filmmaking in Slovakia with his film Varuj. . . ! (Warning!). In 1949, in collaboration with Oldrich Novy, he fashioned his next masterpiece, Pytlákova schovanka (The Kind Millionaire), a parody of film kitsch. Following the successful costume comedy Císa?uv peka? a Peka?uv peka? (The Emperor’s Baker and the Baker’s Emperor) with Jan Werich, and an excursion into the biographical genre with the film Tajemství krve (The Secret of Blood), Fri? made a few films that were—for the first time, actually— neither a popular nor a critical success. Fri?’s last creative surge came at the beginning of the 1960s. He made fine adaptations for Czechoslovak television and directed Chekhov’s tales Medved (The Bear), Slzy, které svě nevidi (Tears the World Can’t See), and Námluvy (Courting), and once more returned to the studios. The tragicomedy Hvězda zvaná Pelyněk (A Star Named Wormwood) and the comedy Nejlep?í ?enská mého ?ivota (The Best Woman of My Life), the premieres of which he did not live to see, close out his final period of creativity. Fri?’s creation is the work of a solid and honest artist who demonstrated his talent in diverse genres from psychological drama to madcap comedy. He produced two masterful comedies, Kristián and Pytlákova schovanka, which can be numbered among the world’s best of the period. The best proof of the quality and vitality of his creative work is the fact that almost a third of the films he made are still shown in the theaters of Czechoslovakia, where they bring pleasure to new generations of viewers. —Vladimír Opela FRIDRIKSSON, Fridrik Thor Nationality: Icelandic. Born: Iceland, 12 May 1953. Education: Attended Icelandic University; self-educated in filmmaking. Career: Began making 16mm short films while still a student, 1970s; operated the Icelandic University film club, 1974–1978; founded the Reykjavik Film Festival, 1978; founded, edited, and wrote for Kvikmyndabladid, Iceland’s first film magazine; founded his own film production company, The Icelandic Film Corporation, 1984. Awards: Lubeck Nordic Film Days Audience Prize of the ‘‘Lubecker Nachrichten,’’ for Skytturnar, 1987; Lubeck Nordic Film Days Children’s Film Prize of the Nordic Film Institutes, Rouen Nordic Film Festival Young Audience Award and A.C.O.R. Award and Audience Award, for Born natturunnar, 1991; Lubeck Nordic Film Days Baltic Film Prize for a Nordic Feature Film, for Biodagar, 1994; Edinburgh Film Festival Channel 4 Director’s Award, Rimini International Film Festival Grand Prix, for A koldum klaka, 1995; Karlovy Vary Interna- tional Film Festival FIPRESCI Award, Rouen Nordic Film Festival Young Audience Award, for Djoflaeyjan, 1996. Address: c/o The Icelandic Film Corporation, Hverfisgata 46, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland. Films as Director: 1981 Eldsmiourinn (The Blacksmith) (doc) (short) 1982 Rokk in Reykjavik (Rock in Reykjavik) (doc) 1984 Kurekar Noroursins (Icelandic Cowboys) (doc ) 1985 The Circle (doc) 1987 Skytturnar (White Whales) (+ co-sc, pr) 1989 Sky without Limits (for TV) 1990 Pretty Angels (for TV) 1991 Born natturunnar (Children of Nature) (+ co-sc, pr) 1994 A koldum klaka (Cold Fever) (+ co-sc); Biodagar (Movie Days) (+ co-sc, pr) 1996 Djoflaeyjan (Devil’s Island) (+ pr) 2000 Englar alheimsins (Angels of the Universe) Other Films: 1997 Stikkfri (Count Me Out) (Kristinsson) (pr); Blossi/810551 (Kemp) (pr) 1998 Vildspor (Wildside) (Staho) (pr); The Tale of Sweety Barrett (Bradley) (co-pr) 2000 Dancer in the Dark (von Trier) (assoc pr) FRIEDKINDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 359 Publications By FRIDRIKSSON: articles— ‘‘Sank det nordiska viking a skeppet!,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), no. 1, 1994. ‘‘Cold Fever,’’ interview with P. Frans, in Film en Televisie + Video (Brussels), February 1996. ‘‘The Iceman Cometh,’’ interview with Andrew Johnston, in Time Out (New York), 11–18 March 1999. ‘‘Devil’s Advocate,’’ interview with Leslie Camhi, in Village Voice (New York), 17–23 March 1999. On FRIDRIKSSON: article— Ahlund, J., ‘‘Slagolikt kreativ,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), no. 1, 1994. *** Iceland is the Wyoming of Western European countries. It is sparsely populated, with a stark landscape that might resemble the surface of Mars. With this in mind, perhaps it is no great distinction to be recognized as the foremost Icelandic film director. But that precisely is what Fridrik Thor Fridriksson is. And, even though he hails from a country that is no cinematic mecca, he is a world-class filmmaker. Fridriksson began his career by directing several documentaries. His first, The Blackmith, is the portrait of an elderly tradesman and inventor who resides by himself in rural Iceland. In two others, Fridriksson began examining the impact of western culture on his homeland, a theme that reverberates throughout his work. Rock in Reykjavik explores the music scene in Iceland’s capital city. Icelandic Cowboys offers a portrait of his country’s first (and, to date, only) cowboy festival, an event organized by Icelandic country-western singer Hallbjorn Hjartarson. Fridriksson’s narrative films are appealingly quirky and crammed with wry humor, in a manner reminiscent of Jim Jarmusch, Hal Hartley, and the Kaurismaki brothers. They spotlight aspects of Icelandic life and culture; they are cinematic odysseys in which rural Icelanders flee their narrow, sheltered environs and explore what for them are the far reaches of the world (from the nightlife of Reykjavik to the pop culture-dominated United States); or they portray the effect of the country on foreigners who come to Iceland. At their core, they are deadpan comic-dramatic explorations of Iceland in transition, with Fridriksson eliciting a flair for delving beneath the surface of his characters. Most often, Fridriksson’s characters find themselves displaced; they are strangers in strange lands. In White Whales, his narrative debut, the strangers are Grimur and Bubbi, two rootless veteran whalers. The strange land is Reykjavik, where they decide to settle— and where they end up thoroughly disoriented. Children of Nature, Fridriksson’s first internationally acclaimed film, is the story of Thorgein Kristmundsson, an aged farmer and widower who has spent his life in Iceland’s outer reaches. His strange land also is Reykjavik, where he comes to live with his daughter and her children. Unable to adapt to this alien environment, he eventually sets out in search of his childhood roots; he is accompanied by Stella, a girlfriend from his youth, with whom he has become reacquainted while in a nurs- ing home. In Cold Fever (which, not surprisingly, was produced by Jim Stark, who is best known for his work with Jim Jarmusch), Fridriksson introduces foreigners to the Icelandic landscape. He charts the adven- tures of Atsushi (Masatoshi Nagase, who appeared in Jarmusch’s Mystery Train), a Japanese businessman who decides to go to Iceland and trek to the remote site where his parents died, to perform a ceremony so their souls can rest in peace. Upon his arrival, Atsushi is in for quite a bit of culture shock; throughout his journey, as he mixes with an assortment of lighthearted, idiosyncratic natives, he keeps describing Iceland as a ‘‘very strange country.’’ The vulgarity of America is personified by Jack and Jill, a pair of loud, violent hitchhikers Atsushi picks up while driving cross-country. Jack is garbed in a New York Yankees cap, and is unable to differentiate between a Chinese and a Japanese. When Jill is hungry, she demands a hot dog and Diet Pepsi. If much of Cold Fever is set amid Iceland’s austere, natural beauty, the landscape Fridriksson spotlights in Devil’s Island is a gloomy, junk-littered wasteland that is left over from the American military presence in the country during World War II. Devil’s Island, set in the 1950s, is the story of Baddi and Danni, brothers whose mother has married an American pilot and gone off to live in Kansas. They have been raised by their grandparents in the dismal environs of what once was an American military barracks. Baddi visits his mother and returns home thoroughly Americanized. His new black leather jacket, Elvis-inspired hairdo, and sneer mark the trappings that start an epic culture clash, pitting conventional Icelandic values against new-fashioned, rock ‘n’ roll-inspired attitudes. In Iceland there are no slick, media-created role models for a young person to emulate, so it is inevitable that Baddi becomes transfixed by American pop culture. At the same time, he has not been transformed into a fashionably alienated being who has found his salvation in his discovery of hot cars and rock ‘n’ roll. Simply put, Baddi is a selfish, egomaniacal moron. Fridriksson, like Wim Wenders, explores the inexorable impact of America on post-war Europe, yet he does not blindly rail against the Americanization of his homeland; he is not at all offended by the sociological displacement and cultural incursion that has materialized in Iceland during his lifetime. He either is amused by it, or is a curious observer of it. And in Movie Days, perhaps his most personal film, he directly examines how he himself has been affected by American culture. A valentine to Hollywood moviemaking, Fridriksson offers a portrait of a character who might be his alter-ego: Tomas, a young boy growing up in Iceland during the early 1960s, whose world is expanded upon discovering a universe of cowboys, spies, and monsters—all within the confines of a movie theater. As a heartfelt ode to the pop cultural influences of one’s youth, Movie Days may be favorably compared to Woody Allen’s Radio Days and Giuseppe Tornatore’s Cinema Paradiso. —Rob Edelman FRIEDKIN, William Nationality: American. Born: Chicago, 29 August 1939. Family: Married 1) Jeanne Moreau, 1977 (divorced); 2) Lesley-Anne Down, 1982 (divorced), one son; 3) Sherry Lansing. Career: Mailroom FRIEDKIN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 360 William Friedkin (standing with script) on the set of Twelve Angry Men assistant, then studio floor manager, WGN-TV, Chicago, 1955; TV director, 1957–67; partner, with Francis Ford Coppola and Peter Bogdanovich, in the Directors Company, 1973 (withdrew, 1974). Awards: Oscar for Best Director, for The French Connection, 1971. Agent: c/o Edgar Gross International Business Management, 9696 Culver Blvd., Culver City, CA 90232, U.S.A. Films as Director: 1967 Good Times 1968 The Night They Raided Minsky’s; The Birthday Party 1970 The Boys in the Band 1971 The French Connection 1973 The Exorcist 1977 Sorcerer (Wages of Fear) 1978 The Brinks Job 1980 Cruising (+ sc) 1981 Duet for One 1983 The Deal of the Century 1985 To Live and Die in L.A. (+ sc); Sea Trial 1986 Judgement Day 1990 The Guardian (+ co-sc) 1992 Rampage (+ co-sc) 1994 Blue Chips 1995 Jade 1997 Twelve Angry Men (for TV) 2000 Rules of Engagement Publications By FRIEDKIN: articles— ‘‘Anatomy of a Chase,’’ in Take One (Montreal), July/August 1971. ‘‘Photographing The French Connection,’’ with Herb Lightman, in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), February 1972. Interview with M. Shedlin, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Sum- mer 1972. ‘‘Dialogue on Film: William Friedkin,’’ in American Film (Washing- ton, D.C.), February/March 1974. ‘‘Mervyn Leroy Talks with William Friedkin,’’ in Action (Los Angeles), November/December 1974. Interview with R. Appelbaum, in Films and Filming (London), March 1979. Interview with R. Gentry, in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Spring/Summer and Fall 1986. Interview, in American Film, December 1990. ‘‘Greenland,’’ an interview with N. Segaloff, in Film Comment (New York), January-February 1993. ‘‘Lucifer Rising,’’ an interview with Mark Kermode, in Sight and Sound (London), July 1998. On FRIEDKIN: book— Segaloff, Nat, Hurricane Billy: The Career of William Friedkin, New York, 1989. Clagett, Thomas D., William Friedkin: Films of Aberration, Obses- sion, and Reality, Jefferson, 1990. On FRIEDKIN: articles— Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Friedkin Defends His Cruising,’’ in New York Times, 18 September 1979. ‘‘William Friedkin,’’ in Film Dope (London), September 1979. Gentry, R., ‘‘Louma Crane and William Friedkin,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), August 1985. Bornet, J., ‘‘William Friedkin: le chaos final,’’ in Revue du Cinéma, July/August 1990. Spotnitz, F., ‘‘William Friedkin,’’ in American Film, December 1990. Everschor, Franz, in Film-Dienst (Cologne), 23 April 1996. Jansen, Peter W., ‘‘Wege zu Lolita,’’ in Filmbulletin (Winterthur), August 1997. Vachaud, Laurent, in Positif (Paris), February 1998. Kermode, Mark, and Paul Burston, ‘‘Cruse Control/So Good It Hurts,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), November 1998. *** The success, both critical and commercial, of William Friedkin’s films has been uneven since the release of his first feature in 1967. Although his works span several different genres, they share some common thematic and technical characteristics. His heroes are nontraditional and find themselves in unconventional situations or environments foreign to the average viewer. Technically, Friedkin often seems more concerned with creating mood and establishing atmosphere than with the progress of the narrative or character development. His great attention to detail and characteristic use of FULLERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 361 long establishing shot sequences do create mood and atmosphere but often do not contribute to the film as a whole. In two of Friedkin’s early films, The Birthday Party and The Boys in the Band (both based on stage productions), the use of establishing prologues works very well. The Birthday Party begins with an early morning shot of a deserted beach. Empty canvas beach chairs look out over an unnatural vastness of sameness—a seemingly endless grayish blue ocean that disappears into a grayish blue sky. This slightly unsettling visual sets the mood for Harold Pinter’s play. To the beginning of The Boys in the Band, Friedkin adds a montage prologue that introduces all of the main characters. But these are the only personal interpretations evident in these two works. In The Night They Raided Minsky’s, Friedkin’s attention to detail successfully establishes 1920s period authenticity and adds to a rich- ness of character missing in his other works. The film was criticized, however, for having too broad a narrative told through overly long sequences that do not contribute to the story. This characteristic would prove to be a major flaw of several of Friedkin’s subsequent films. Friedkin’s two most popular films, The French Connection and The Exorcist, have some aspects in common. In addition to nontraditional heroes in unusual situations, both films have broad narratives expressed through similar filmic techniques: minimal dialogue; long, detailed sequences; and documentary-style use of the camera. The French Connection, Friedkin’s most critically acclaimed work, maintains a precarious balance between becoming tedious to watch and portraying the tedium and fatigue of Jimmy Doyle and Buddy Russo’s lives. Friedkin uses a long prologue to establish the drug operation in Marseilles. This sequence, filmed with little dia- logue and great attention to detail, not only serves to introduce the drug operation but also to contrast the lifestyles of French narcotics dealer Alain Charnier and New York City cops Doyle and Russo. This very long sequence is followed by another that establishes the cops’ personalities and beat. Consequently, it takes quite some time before the actual narrative begins. Friedkin’s ability to create atmosphere does work well in The French Connection because the environment itself, New York City, is one of the main characters. The city and its inhabitants are depicted in detail. The scenes—sometimes gritty, sometimes gory, sometimes dull—produce the urban reality, and at the same time reflect the reality of policework, which is also sometimes dull, but sometimes dangerous. The Exorcist, a commercially successful film, is tedious through- out. The film plods along through an excessively long opening sequence (the significance of which is never made clear), a pseudo psychological explanation of the character Father Karras, countless close-ups of ‘‘meaningful’’ facial expressions, and predictable stages in both the possession and exorcism of Regan MacNeil. Friedkin does succeed at times in creating tension and suspense, but this mood is not sustained throughout the film. Apparently, the shock value of watch- ing the disturbing physical transformation of Regan from young girl to hideous monster is enough to maintain viewer interest, since this continues to be a popular film. Sorcerer did not follow the trend of commercial success begun by the two previous films. A remake of Clouzot’s The Wages of Fear, Sorcerer is a good action adventure once the story finally gets underway. Like other Friedkin films, it is weighed down by several long introductory sequences. After these initial sequences, the use of documentary technique, including hand-held tracking shots, creates a reality of place that can almost be smelled and touched. Friedkin’s subsequent films contain his characteristic cinematic techniques. His filmic representation of the sadomasochistic homo- sexual subculture in New York City in Cruising is too realistic and brutal for many reviewers. Deal of the Century, although not commer- cially or critically popular, is a fair satire on the profitable business of selling arms to Third World nations, using an introductory sequence very effectively to set the tone. The Guardian, Friedkin’s first horror film since The Exorcist, was not well received critically or at the box office. As in The Exorcist, Friedkin employs an unconventional situation for the narrative and uses mood and atmosphere to gradually turn reality into a nightmare. Unlike the narrative in The Exorcist, however, this story of a yuppie couple who hire a nanny that feeds newborns to trees is told on a much smaller scale, but still is not consistently interesting. Jade, Friedkin’s most recent feature, has been criticized not only for unsuccessful attempts to establish mood that bog down the narrative, but also for unoriginal dialogue and stale action sequences. The screenwriter of Jade, Joe Eszterhas, is equally credited for the film’s flaws, along with Friedkin, in many critical reviews. —Marie Saeli FULLER, Samuel Nationality: American. Born: Samuel Michael Fuller in Worcester, Massachusetts, 12 August 1911. Military Service: Served in 16th regiment of U.S. Army 1st Division, 1942–45, awarded Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart. Family: Married actress Christa Lang, 1965. Career: Copy-boy and journalist, New York Journal, from 1924; crime reporter, from 1928; screenwriter in Hollywood, from 1936; screenwriter at Warner Bros., 1946–48; directed first feature, 1948; signed to 20th Century-Fox, 1951–57; TV director, 1960s. Died: 31 October 1997, in Hollywood, California. Films as Director: 1948 I Shot Jesse James (+ sc) 1950 The Baron of Arizona (+ sc); The Steel Helmet (+ sc, co-pr) 1951 Fixed Bayonets (+ sc) 1952 Park Row (+ sc, co-pr) 1953 Pickup on South Street (+ sc) [remade in 1968 as Cape Town Affair (Webb)] 1954 Hell and High Water (+ co-sc) 1955 The House of Bamboo (+ co-sc, role as Japanese policeman) 1957 Run of the Arrow (+ pr, sc); China Gate (+ pr, sc); Forty Guns (+ pr, sc) 1958 Verboten! (+ pr, sc) 1959 The Crimson Kimono (+ pr, sc) 1960 Underworld USA (+ pr, sc) 1962 Merrill’s Marauders (+ co-sc) 1963 Shock Corridor (+ pr, sc); The Naked Kiss (+ co-pr, sc) 1967 Caine (+ sc) 1973 Dead Pigeon on Beethoven Street (+ sc, role as United States Senator) 1980 The Big Red One (+ sc) 1982 White Dog 1983 Thieves after Dark FULLER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 362 Samuel Fuller 1989 Street of No Return (+ co-sc) 1990 Le Madonne et le dragon (for TV) (+ mus); The Day of Reckoning (for TV) (+ co-sc); Tales (series for TV) (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1936 Hats Off (Petroff) (sc) 1937 It Happened in Hollywood (Lachman) (sc) 1938 Gangs of New York (Cruze) (remade in 1945 as Gangs of the Waterfront) (Blair) (sc); Adventure in Sahara (Lederman) (sc); Federal Man-Hunt (Grinde) (sc) 1940 Bowery Boy (Morgan) (sc) 1941 Confirm or Deny (Lang, Mayo) (sc) 1943 Power of the Press (Landers) (sc) 1948 Shockproof (Sirk) (sc) 1951 The Tanks Are Coming (Seiler) (sc) 1952 Scandal Sheet (Karlson) (sc) 1953 The Command (Butler) (sc) 1965 Pierrot le fou (Godard) (role as himself) 1966 Brigitte et Brigitte (Moullet) (role as himself) 1971 The Last Movie (Hopper) (role as himself) 1974 The Klansman (Young) (sc) 1976 Der Amerikanische Freund (The American Friend) (Wenders) (role as The American) 1979 1941 (Spielberg) (small role) 1994 Girls in Prison (McNaughton—for TV) (sc) Publications By FULLER: books— Burn, Baby, Burn, New York, 1935. Test Tube Baby, New York, 1936. Make up and Kiss, New York, 1938. The Dark Page, New York, 1944 (published as Murder Makes a Deadline, New York, 1952). The Naked Kiss, New York, 1964. Crown of India, New York, 1966. 144 Piccadilly, New York, 1971. Dead Pigeon on Beethoven Street, New York, 1973. FULLERDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 363 Il etait un fois . . . Samuel Fuller: Histoires d’Ameriques, edited by Jean Narboni and Noel Simsolo, Paris, 1986. New York in the 1930s (Pocket Archive Series), New York, 1997. By FULLER: articles— ‘‘What Is Film?’’ in Cinema (Beverly Hills), July 1964. ‘‘Samuel Fuller: Two Interviews,’’ with Stig Bj?rkman and Mark Shivas, in Movie (London), Winter 1969/70. Interview in The Director’s Event by Eric Sherman and Martin Rubin, New York, 1970. Interview with Ian Christie and others, in Cinema (Cambridge), February 1970. ‘‘Sam Fuller Returns,’’ interview with Claude Beylie and J. Lourcelles, in Ecran (Paris), January 1975. ‘‘War That’s Fit to Shoot,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), November 1976. ‘‘Three Times Sam: The Flavor of Ketchup,’’ interview with R. Thompson, in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1977. Interview with Russell Merritt and P. Lehman, in Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 4, no. 1, 1980. ‘‘Samuel Fuller—Survivor,’’ an interview with T. Ryan, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), December/January 1980/81. ‘‘Fuller mis au défi par l’avocat du diable,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1982. Interview with A. Hunter, in Films and Filming (London), Novem- ber 1983. Interview in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), March 1984. ‘‘Conversazione con Samuel Fuller,’’ an interview with Gisella Bochicchio and B. Roberti, in Filmcritica (Siena), September- October 1989. Fuller, Sam, ‘‘Comment John Ford et Max Steiner ont fait mon film préféré,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1994. ‘‘A Fuller View,’’ an interview with Eric Monder, in Filmfax (Evanston), March-April 1995. On FULLER: books— Will, David, and Peter Wollen, editors, Samuel Fuller, Edinburgh, 1969. Hardy, Phil, Samuel Fuller, New York, 1970. Garnham, Nicholas, Samuel Fuller, New York, 1971. MacArthur, Colin, Underworld U.S.A., London, 1972. Amiel, Victor, Samuel Fuller, Paris, 1985. Caprara, Valerio, Samuel Fuller, Florence, 1985. Server, Lee, Sam Fuller: Film Is a Battleground, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1994. On FULLER: articles— Lee, Russell, ‘‘Samuel Fuller,’’ in New Left Review, January/Febru- ary 1964. Wollen, Peter, ‘‘Notes toward a Structural Analysis of the Films of Samuel Fuller,’’ in Cinema (Cambridge), December 1968. Canham, Kingsley, ‘‘The World of Samuel Fuller,’’ in Film (Lon- don), November/December 1969. Canham, Kingsley, ‘‘Samuel Fuller’s Action Films,’’ in Screen (London), November/December 1969. McArthur, Colin, ‘‘Samuel Fuller’s Gangster Films,’’ in Screen (London), November/December 1969. Belton, John, ‘‘Are You Waving the Flag at Me: Samuel Fuller and Politics,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), Spring 1972. McConnell, F., ‘‘Pickup on South Street and the Metamorphosis of the Thriller,’’ in Film Heritage (New York), Spring 1973. Cook, B., ‘‘Sam Fuller Lands with the Big One,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), June 1979. Valot, J., ‘‘Love, Action, Death, Violence: Cinema Is Emotion (sur quelques films de Samuel Fuller),’’ in Image et Son (Paris), July/ August 1980. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Sam Fuller’s War,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1980. ‘‘Fuller Section’’ of Image et Son (Paris), April 1981. ‘‘Fuller Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 November 1981. Dossier on Fuller, in Framework (Norwich), no. 19, 1982. Revue du Cinéma (Paris), April 1988. Sanjek, David, ‘‘‘Torment Street between Malicious and Crude’: Sophisticated Primitivism in the Films of Sam Fuller,’’ in Litera- ture/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), July 1994. Norman, Barry, ‘‘Why the French Love Samuel Fuller,’’ in Radio Times (London), 8 March 1997. Sinclair, Iain, ‘‘War Zone,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), March 1997. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 3 November 1997. Saada, Nicholas, ‘‘Goodbye Sam, Goodbye,’’ an obituary in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1997. ‘‘Leading Fearlessly,’’ an obituary in Sight and Sound (London), December 1997. Obituary, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), December 1997. Obituary, in Skrien (Amsterdam), December-January 1997–1998. Obituary, in Positif (Paris), January 1998. Obituary, in Séquences (Haute-Ville), January-February 1998. Simon, Adam, ‘‘Sam Fuller: Perfect Pitch,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), March 1998. Stevens, Brad, ‘‘Play It Again, Sam,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), April 1998. Obituary, in 24 Images (Montreal), no. 91, Spring 1998. Obituary, in Z (Oslo), no. 63, 1998. *** Sam Fuller’s narratives investigate the ways that belonging to a social group simultaneously functions to sustain and nurture indi- vidual identity and, conversely, to pose all sorts of emotional and ideological threats to that identity. Fuller’s characters are caught between a solitude that is both liberating and debilitating, and a communality that is both supportive and oppressive. Unlike Howard Hawks, whose films suggest the triumph of the group over egoism, Fuller is more cynical and shows that neither isolation nor group membership is without its hardships and tensions. Many of the films touch upon a broad kind of belonging, as in membership in a nation—specifically the United States (although China Gate comments on several other nationalities)—as a driving idea and ideal, national identity becoming a reflection of personal identity. For example, in Fuller films about the building of the West, such as Forty Guns, The Baron of Arizona, or Run of the Arrow, the central characters initially understand their own quests as necessarily divergent from the quest of America for its own place in the world. Even though the course of the films suggests the moral and emotional losses that such divergence leads to, the films also imply that there is something inadequate in the American quest itself, in the ways such a quest undercuts its own purity by finding strength in a malevolent FULLER DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 364 violence (the readiness of ‘‘ordinary’’ people in The Baron of Arizona to lynch at a moment’s notice), in mistrust and prejudice (unbridled racism in Run of the Arrow), or in political corruption. Similarly, in films such as House of Bamboo, Underworld USA, and Pickup on South Street, about criminal organizations infiltrated by revenging outsiders, the narrative trajectory will begin by suggest- ing the moral separation of good guys and bad guys, but will then continue to demonstrate their parallelism, their interweaving, even their blurring. For example, in Underworld USA, the criminals and crimefighters resemble each other in their methods, in their cold calculation and determination, and in their bureaucratic organization. Tolly, the film’s central character, may agree to map his own desire for revenge onto the crimefighters’ desire to eliminate a criminal element, but the film resolutely refuses to unambiguously propagan- dize the public good over personal motives. At a narrower level of group concern, Fuller’s films examine the family as a force that can be nurturing but is often stifling and riddled with contradictions. Not accidentally, many of Fuller’s films concen- trate on childless or parentless figures: the family here is not given but something that one loses or that one has to grope towards. Often, the families that do exist are, for Fuller, like the nation-state, initially presenting an aura of innocent respectability but ultimately revealing a corruption and rotted perversity. Indeed, The Naked Kiss connects questions of political value to family value in its story of a woman discovering that her fiancé, the town’s benefactor and a model citizen, is actually a child molester. Similarly, Verboten! maps the story of postwar America’s self-image as benefactor to the world onto an anti- love love story. A German woman initially marrys a G.I. for financial support and then finds she really loves him, only to discover that he no longer loves her. Love, to be sure, is a redemptive promise in Fuller’s films but it is run through by doubt, anger, mistrust, deception. Any reciprocity or sharing that Fuller’s characters achieve comes at a great price, ranging from mental and physical pain to death. For example, in Underworld USA, Tolly is able to drop his obsessional quest and give himself emotionally to the ex-gangster’s moll, Cuddles, only when he is at a point of no return that will lead him to his death. Against the possibility of love (which, if it ever comes, comes so miraculously as to call its own efficacy into doubt), Fuller’s films emphasize a world where everyone is potentially an outsider and therefore a mystery and even a menace. No scene in Fuller’s cinema encapsulates this better than the opening of Pickup on South Street where a filled subway car becomes the site of intrigued and intriguing glances as a group of strangers warily survey each other as potential victims and victimizers. Echoing the double-entendre of the title (the pickup is political—the passing on of a secret microfilm—as well as sexual), the opening scene shows a blending of sexual desire and aggression as a sexual come-on reveals itself to be a cover for theft, and passive passengers reveal themselves to be government agents. In a world of distrust, where love can easily betray, the Fuller character survives either by fighting for the last vestiges of an honest, uncorrupted love (in the most optimistic of the films) or, in the more cynical cases, by displacing emotional attachment from people to ideas; to myths of masculine power in Forty Guns; to obsessions (for example, Johnny Barratt’s desire in Shock Corridor to win the Pulitzer Prize even if that desire leads him to madness); to mercenary self-interest; to political or social ideals; and ultimately, to a profes- sionalism that finally means doing nothing other than doing your job right without thinking about it. This is especially the case in Fuller’s war films, which show characters driven to survive for survival’s sake, existence being defined in Merrill’s Marauders as ‘‘put(ting) one foot in front of the other.’’ Fuller’s style, too, is one based on tensions: a conflict of tech- niques that one can read as an enactment for the spectator of Fuller themes. Fuller is both a director of rapid, abrupt, shocking montage, as in the alternating close-ups of robber and victim in I Shot Jesse James, and a director who uses extremely long takes incorporating a complex mix of camera movement and character action. Fuller’s style is the opposite of graceful; his style seems to suggest that in a world where grace provides little redemption, its utilization would be a kind of lie. Thus, a stereotypically beautiful shot like the balanced image of Mount Fujiyama in House of Bamboo might seem a textbook example of the well-composed nature shot but for the fact that the mountain is framed through the outstretched legs of a murdered soldier. —Dana B. Polan 365 G GAáL, István Nationality: Hungarian. Born: Salgótarján, 25 August 1933. Educa- tion: Academy of Theatre and Film Art, Budapest, graduated 1959; studied at Centro Sperimentale, Rome, 1959–61. Career: Director and cameraman for Hungarian Newsreel Dept, 1961; directed first feature, 1964; director for Hungarian TV, from 1977. Films as Director: 1957 Pályamunkások (Surfacemen; Railroaders) (+ sc, ed) (short) 1961 Etude (+ sc, ed) (short) 1962 Tisza—?szi vázlatok (Tisza—Autumn Sketches) (+ sc, ed) (short); Oda—vissza (To and Fro) (+ sc, ed) (short) 1964 Sodrásban (The Stream; Current) (+ sc, ed) 1965 Z?ldár (Green Flood; The Green Years) (+ ed, co-sc) 1967 Krónika (The Chronicle) (+ sc, ed, ph) (short); Keresztel? (Christening Party) (+ sc, ed) 1969 Tiz éves Kuba (Cuba’s Ten Years) (+ sc, ed, ph) (short) 1970 Bartók Béla: az éjszaka zenéje (Béla Bartók: The Music of the Night; The Night Music) (+ sc, ed) (short); Magasiskola (The Falcons) (+ sc, ed) 1971 Holt vidék (The Dead Country) (+ co-sc, ed) 1977 Legato (Ties) (+ co-sc, ed); Naponta két vonat (Two Trains a Day) (+ sc, ed) (for TV); Vámhatár (Customs Frontier) (+ ed) (for TV) 1981 Cserepek (Buffer Zone) (+ sc, ed) 1985 Orfeusz es Eurydike (+ sc) 1989 éjszaka 1996 Római szonáta Other Films: 1962 Cigányok (Gypsies) (Sára) (ed, ph) (short) 1964 Férfiarckép (Portrait of a Man) (Gy?ngy?ssy) (co-ph) (short) 1967 Vizkereszet (Twelfth Night) (Sára) (co-sc) (short) Publications By GAáL: articles— ‘‘Un Réalisateur hongrois,’’ interview with J. Camerlain, in Séquences (Paris), January 1973. Interview in Cinema Canada (Montreal), April/May 1973. ‘‘Interviewing István Gaál,’’ in Hungarofilm Bulletin (Budapest), no. 4, 1977. ‘‘A Challenge and a Trial of Strength,’’ an interview in Hungarofilm Bulletin (Budapest), no. 5, 1983. Gaál, István, ‘‘Rendezoi vazlatok az Orfeuszhoz,’’ in Filmkultura (Budapest), January 1986. ‘‘Trambulin,’’ an interview with K. Fejes, in Filmkultura (Budapest), October-December 1993. Gaál, István, ‘‘Henri ‘de la Cinémathèque,’’’ in Positif (Paris), July- August 1995. On GAáL: books— Petrie, Graham, History Must Answer to Man, London, 1978. Nemeskurty, Istvan, A Short History of the Hungarian Cinema, New York, 1980. On GAáL: articles— Petrie, Graham, ‘‘István Gaál and The Falcons,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1974. Martin, M., and Y. Biro, ‘‘István Gaál, de Remous à Paysage mort: itinéraire d’un témoin,’’ in Ecran (Paris), March 1974. ‘‘István Gaál,’’ in Film Dope (London), September 1979. Predal, René, ‘‘István Gaál: les remous de la quarantaine,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), October 1981. P?r?s, G., in Filmkultura (Budapest), May/June 1984. *** The artistic personality of the film editor, cameraman, scriptwriter, and director István Gaál was formed by his study at the Higher School of Theatrical and Film Art in Budapest, where he arrived as a young electrical engineer determined to devote himself to the art of film. Here he shaped and precisely defined his artistic viewpoint in a classroom that is already legendary today as the meeting place of later notable personalities in Hungarian cinematography—Judit Elek, Pál Gábor, Imre Gy?ng?ssy, Zoltán Huszarik, Ferenc Kardos, Zsolt Kérdi-Kovács, János Rózsa, István Szabó, Sándor Sára, Ferenc Kósa, and others. Gaál took his first, already conspicuous step in a creative workshop, the experimental studio of Béla Balázs. The artistic path he chose was a difficult one, because it was the specific, individual form of documentary. In the course of his creative career he returns constantly to this basic source, but at the same time he applies its elements in his not very extensive but masterfully suggestive artistic film work. Gaál is one of the founders of the Hungarian new wave of the mid-1960s, which he inaugurated with Sodrásban, his deeply emotive debut. Not only did this work reflect the positive social events of the time, but the author also applied genuine elements of a subjectively motivated poetics. With every important subsequent film—and these are for the most part adaptations of his own literary work—Gaál reveals the strange world of the Hungarian countryside, a world of desolation and unromantically flat landscapes with scat- tered, lonely settings where solitary tree trunks, well-beams, and the GANCE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 366 whitewashed walls of old buildings occasionally loom. In this micro- cosm he uncovers human community, relationships, and problems of morality. In intimate episodes he manages to take up and treat delicate problems of the past and generalize them in the form of a profound philosophical drama that reveals the roots of violence and evil and the dangerous elements of apathy and indifference, despair and loneli- ness. At the same time, his films, with their limited dialogue and almost totally graphic conception, are poetic pictures that have dramatic tension. However, István Gaál is not the romantic poet of the countryside he may appear to be. In a brief moment and in simple fashion he suggests the atmosphere and the relationships among characters, and he is equally adept at capturing the essence of a hunting lodge in the wilderness, a depopulated village, or the smell of a provincial town. For him the environment is merely a symbolic medium, because each of his works offers a kind of parallel between the world of nature and human society, a metaphor with deep ideological and moral significance. There is a close union of all artistic components in films under his direction—a carefully constructed script, a poetic form of screen photography, simple non-illustrative music, and dramatically moti- vated editing, along with prodigious acting by the noted performers whom the director gets to ‘‘shed their theatrical skin,’’ enabling them to achieve quite a remarkable degree of expression before the camera. In the intervals between making his fictional film works, Gaál constantly returns to the pure documentary, which is for him a starting point and perhaps also an experimental station. But he shapes his documentaries with the same fire and originality. Here again, there is an alteration between people and nature, and a struggle between the two. In his most recent films, Gaál turns more to the inner world of his contemporaries. His works delineate masterful psychological por- traits in which there is more and more reflection of history on a general plane. His films are personal, poetically veiled confessions about present-day people, their problems and their relations. —Václav Merhaut GANCE, Abel Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 25 October 1889. Education: Collège de Chantilly; Collège Chaptal, Paris, baccalaureate 1906. Served with Service Cinématographique et Photographique de l’Armée, 1917. Family: Married (second wife) actress Odette Vérité, 1933. Daughter: Clarisse (Mme. Jacques Raynaud). Career: Actor at Théatre du Parc, Brussels, 1908–09; began selling screenplays to Gaumont, 1909; formed production company, Le Film Fran?ais, 1911; artistic director of Le Film d’Art, 1917; after death of first wife, travelled to United States, 1921; patented widescreen ‘‘Polyvision’’ process, 1926; patented ‘‘Perspective Sonore,’’ stereophonic sound process, 1929; directed Marie Tudor for television, 1965; lived in Nice, worked on screenplay for Christophe Colomb project, first begun in 1939, 1970s; reassembled Napoléon premiered in New York, 1981. Awards: Gold Medal, Union Fran?aise des Inventeurs, and Cinérama Gold Medal, Société des Auteurs, 1952; Théatre de l’Empire named for Gance, Paris, 1961; Grand prix national de Cinéma, 1974; César Award, 1980; Commandeur de la Légion d’honneur; Grand officier de l’ordre national du Merité, et des Arts et des Lettres. Died: In Paris, 10 November 1981. Films as Director: 1911 La Digue, ou Pour sauver la Hollande (+ sc) 1912 Le Nègre blanc (+ sc, role); Il y a des pieds au plafond (+ sc); Le Masque d’horreur (+ sc) 1915 Un drame au Chateau d’Acre (Les Morts reviennent-ils?) (+ sc); Ecce Homo (+ sc) (unfinished) 1916 La Folie du Docteur Tube (+ sc); L’Enigme de dix heures (+ sc); Le Fleur des ruines (+ sc); L’Hero?sme de Paddy (+ sc); Fioritures (La Source de beauté) (+ sc); Le Fou de la falaise (+ sc); Ce que les flots racontent (+ sc); Le Périscope (+ sc): Barberousse (+ sc); Les Gaz mortels (Le Brouillard sur la ville) (+ sc); Strass et compagnie (+ sc) 1917 Le Droit à la vie (+ sc); La Zone de la mort (+ sc); Mater Dolorosa (+ sc) 1918 La Dixième Symphonie (+ sc); Le Soleil noir (+ sc) (unfinished) 1919 J’Accuse (+ sc) 1923 La Roué (+ sc); Au secours! (+ sc) 1927 Napoléon (Napoléon vu par Abel Gance) (+ sc) 1928 Marines et Cristeaux (+ sc) (experimental footage for ‘‘Polyvision’’) 1931 La Fin du monde (+ sc) 1932 Mater Dolorosa (+ sc) 1934 Poliche (+ sc); La Dame aux Camélias (+ sc); Napoléon Bonaparte (+ sc) (sound version, with additional footage) 1935 Le Roman d’un jeune homme pauvre (+ sc); Lucrèce Borgia 1936 Un Grande Amour de Beethoven (The Life and Loves of Beethoven) (+ sc); Jérome Perreau, héro des barricades (The Queen and the Cardinal); Le Voleur de femmes (+ sc) 1937 J’accuse (That They May Live) (+ sc) 1939 Louise (+ co-sc); Le Paradis perdu (Four Flights to Love) (+ co-sc) 1941 La Vénus aveugle (+ sc) 1942 Le Capitaine Fracasse (+ co-sc) 1944 Manolete (+ sc) (unfinished) 1954 Quatorze Juillet (+ sc); La Tour de Nesle (+ sc) 1956 Magirama (+ sc, co-pr) (demonstration of ‘‘Polyvision’’ in color) 1960 Austerlitz (co-d, + co-sc) 1964 Cyrano et d’Artagnan (+ co-sc) 1971 Bonaparte et la révolution (+ sc, co-pr) Other Films: 1909 Le Portrait de Mireille (Perret) (sc); Le Glas du Père Césaire (+ sc); La Légende de l’arc-en-ciel (sc); Molière (Perret) (role) 1909/10 Some Max Linder short comedies (role as Max’s brother) 1910 Paganini (sc); La Fin de Paganini (sc); Le Crime de Grand- père (Perret) (sc); Le Roi des parfums (sc); L’Aluminité (sc); L’Auberge rouge (sc); Le Tragique Amour de Mona Lisa (Capellani) (sc) 1911 Cyrano et D’Assoucy (Capellani) (sc); Un Clair de lune sous Richelieu (Capellani) (sc); L’électrocuté (Morlhon) (sc) 1912 Une Vengeance d’Edgar Poe (Capellani) (sc); La Mort du Duc d’Enghien (Capellani) (sc); La Conspiration des drapeaux (sc); La Pierre philosophe (sc) 1914 L’Infirmière (Pouctal) (sc) GANCEDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 367 Abel Gance 1920 L’Atre (Boudrioz) (pr) 1929 Napoléon auf St. Helena (Napoléon à Saint-Hélène) (Pick) (sc) 1933 Le Ma?tre de forges (Rivers) (sc, supervisor) 1953 Lumière et l’invention du cinématographe (Louis Lumière) (Paviot) (commentary, narration) 1954 La Reine Margot (Dréville) (sc) Publications By GANCE: books— J’Accuse, Paris, 1922. Napoléon vu par Abel Gance, Paris, 1927. La Roué, scénario original arrangé par Jean Arroy, Paris, 1930. Prisme, Paris, 1930. La Fin du Monde, scénario arrangé par Joachim Renez, Paris, 1931. Mater Dolorosa, scénario original arrangé par Joachim Renez, Paris, 1932. Napoléon, as seen by Abel Gance, edited by B. Ballard, Lon- don, 1990. By GANCE: articles— ‘‘Qu’est-ce que le cinématographe? Un sixième art,’’ in Intelligence du cinématographe, by Marcel L’Herbier, Paris, 1946. ‘‘Les nouveaux chapitres de notre syntaxe,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1953. ‘‘Départ vers la polyvision,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), Decem- ber 1954. ‘‘Entretien avec Jacques Rivette et Fran?ois Truffaut,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1955. ‘‘The Kingdom of the Earth,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Decem- ber 1957. ‘‘Film as Incantation: An Interview with Abel Gance,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March/April 1974. On GANCE: books— Arroy, Jean, En tournant ‘‘Napoléon’’ avec Abel Gance, Paris, 1927. Daria, Sophie, Abel Gance, hier et demain, Paris, 1959. Icart, Roger, Abel Gance, Toulouse, 1960. Brownlow, Kevin, The Parade’s Gone By, New York, 1969. GANCE DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 368 Kramer, Steven, and James Welsh, Abel Gance, Boston, 1978. Icart, Roger, Abel Gance; ou, Le Promethée foudroyé, Lausanne, 1983. King, Norman, Abel Gance: A Politics of Spectacle, London, 1984. Groppali, Enrico, Abel Gance, Florence, 1986. On GANCE: articles— Epstein, Jean, ‘‘Mon ami Gance,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), August/September 1955. ‘‘Gance Issue’’ of L’Ecran (Paris), April/May 1958. Lenning, Arthur, ‘‘Napoléon and La Roue,’’ in The Persistence of Vision, edited by Joseph McBride, Madison, Wisconsin, 1968. Brownlow, Kevin, ‘‘Bonaparte et la révolution,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1971/72. Welsh, J.M., and S.P. Kramer, ‘‘Abel Gance’s Accusation against War,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston), Spring 1975. Gilliatt, Penelope, in New Yorker, 6 September 1976. Drew, W.M., ‘‘Abel Gance: Prometheus Bound,’’ in Take One (Montreal), July 1978. Nerguy, C., and Y. Alion, ‘‘Un Grand Amour de Beethoven,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 1 October 1978. Brownlow, Kevin, ‘‘Abel Gance,’’ in Film Dope (London), Septem- ber 1979. Allen, W., ‘‘Napoléon reconstructed,’’ in Stills (London), Autumn 1981. Obituary, in the New York Times, 11 November 1981. Cluny, C.M., ‘‘Abel Gance: trop grand pour le cinéma?,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), December 1981. Lafaye, C., obituary, in Cinéma (Paris), January 1982. Riley, B., obituary, in Film Comment (New York), January/Febru- ary 1982. Jeancolas, J.-P., ‘‘Abel Gance entre Napoléon et Philippe Pétain,’’ in Positif (Paris), June 1982. Icart, R., C. Lafaye, and L. Martin, ‘‘Tumultueux Abel Gance,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), May 1983. Icart, R., ‘‘Quand Abel Gance voulait travailler chez Franco,’’ in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 38–39, Winter 1984. King, Norman, ‘‘The Sounds of Silents,’’ in Screen (London), May/ June 1984. Virmaux, A. and O., ‘‘Deux amis,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), November 1986. Stojanov-Bigor, G., ‘‘Abel Gans,’’ in Kinoizkustvo (Sofia, Bulgaria), vol. 44, no. 6, June 1989. Virmaux, A., and O. Virmaux, ‘‘Quatre remarques sure le cycle Antoine,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), no. 204, November-Decem- ber 1990. On GANCE: films— Ford, Charles, and Jacques Guillon, Les éloquents, France, 1956. Kaplan, Nelly, Abel Gance, hier et demain (Abel Gance, Yesterday and Tomorrow), Paris, 1964. Brownlow, Kevin, Abel Gance—The Charm of Dynamite, Lon- don, 1968. *** Abel Gance’s career as a director was long and flamboyant. He wrote his first scripts in 1909, turning to directing a couple of years later, and made his last feature, Cyrano et d’Artagnan, in 1964. As late as 1971 he re-edited a four-hour version of his Napoleon footage to make Bonaparte et la révolution, and he lived long enough to see his work again reach wide audiences. Gance’s original aspirations were as a playwright, and throughout his life he treasured the manuscript of his verse tragedy La Victoire de Samothrace, written for Sarah Bernhardt and on the brink of produc- tion when the war broke out in 1914. If Gance’s beginnings in the film industry he then despised were unremarkable, he showed his charac- teristic audacity and urge for experimentation with an early work, the unreleased La Folie du Docteur Tube, which made great use of distorting lenses, in 1916. He learned his craft in a dozen or more films during 1916 and 1917—the best remembered of which are Les Gaz mortels, Barberousse, and Mater dolorosa. He reached fresh heights with a somewhat pretentious and melodramatic study of a great and suffering composer, La Dixième Symphonie. Even more significant was his ambitious and eloquent antiwar drama, J’Accuse, released in 1919. These films established him as the leading French director of his generation and gave him a preeminence he was not to lose until the coming of sound. The 1920s saw the release of just three Gance films. If Au secours!, a comedy starring his friend Max Linder, is something of a lighthearted interlude, the other two are towering landmarks of silent cinema. La Roue began as a simple melodramatic tale, but in the course of six months scripting and a year’s location shooting, the project took on quite a new dimension. In the central figure of Sisif, Gance seems to have struggled to create an amalgam of Oedipus, Sisyphus, and Lear. Meanwhile portions of the film that were eventually cut apparently developed a social satire of such ferocity that the railway unions demanded its excision. The most expensive film as yet made in France, its production was again delayed when the death of Gance’s wife caused him to abandon work and take a five- month trip to the United States. Like his previous work, La Roue had been conceived and shot in the pre-1914 style of French cinema, which was based on a concep- tion of film as a series of long takes, each containing a significant section of the action, rather than as a succession of scenes made up of intercut shots of different lengths, taken from varying distances. But in Hollywood, where he met D.W. Griffith, Gance came into contact with the new American style of editing. Upon his return to France, Gance spent a whole year reediting his film. On its release in 1923 La Roue proved to be one of the stunning films of the decade. Even in its shortened version—comprising a prologue and four parts—the film had a combined running time of nearly eight hours. Gance’s imagination and energy at this period seemed limitless. Almost immediately he plunged into an even vaster project whose title clearly reflects his personal approach, Napoléon va par Abel Gance. If La Roue was particularly remarkable for its editing (certain sequences are classic moments of French 1920s avant-garde experi- mentation), Napoléon attracted immediate attention for its incredibly mobile camerawork, created by a team under the direction of Jules Kruger. Napoléon thus emerges as a key masterpiece of French cinema at a time when visual experimentation took precedence over narrative and the disorganization of production offered filmmakers the chance to produce extravagant and ambitious personal works within the heart of the commercial industry. Gance’s conception of himself as visionary filmmaker and of Napoleon as a master of his destiny points to the roots of Gance’s style in the nineteenth century GARCíA BERLANGADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 369 and his romantic view of the artist as hero. The scope of Gance’s film, bursting into triple screen effects at the moment of Napoleon’s climactic entry into Italy, remains staggering even today. The 1920s in France was a period of considerable creative freedom. Given this atmosphere, a widespread urge to experiment with the full potential of the medium was apparent. If the freedom came from the lack of a tightly controlled studio system, the desire to explore new forms of filmic expression can be traced to a reaction against the situation imposed by Pathé and Gaumont before 1914, when film was seen as a purely commercial product, underfinanced and devoid of artistic or personal expression. This had been the cinema in which Gance had made his debut, and he was one of those striving most forcefully in the 1920s both to increase the possibilities for personal expressiveness and to widen the technical scope of cinema. He pioneered new styles of cutting and camerawork, as well as widescreen and multiscreen techniques. It is ironic, then, that the advent of the greatest technical innova- tion of the period left Gance stranded. The explanation for this lies less in the irrelevance of sound to his personal vision of the medium— he was pioneering a new stereophonic system with La Fin du monde as early as 1929—than the fact that new forms of tighter production control were implemented as a result of the greater costs associated with sound filmmaking. The 1930s emerge as a sad era for a man accustomed to being in the forefront of the French film industry. Gance, whose mind had always teemed with new and original projects, was now reduced to remaking his old successes: sound versions of Mater dolorosa in 1932, Napoléon Bonaparte in 1934, and J’accuse in 1937. Otherwise, the projects he was allowed to make were largely adaptations of fashionable stage dramas or popular novels: Le Ma?tre de forges, Poliche, La Dame aux camélias, and Le Roman d’un jeune homme pauvre. In the late 1930s he was able to treat subjects in which his taste for grandly heroic figures is again apparent: Savonarola in Lucrèce Borgia and the great composer—played by Harry Baur—in Un Grand Amour de Beethoven, but by 1942, when he made Le Capitaine Fracasse, Gance’s career seemed to have come to an end. Though a dozen years were to pass before he directed another feature film, Gance maintained his incredible level of energy. Refus- ing to be beaten, he continued his experiments with ‘‘polyvision’’ which were to culminate in his Magirama spectacle. He eventually made three further features, all historical dramas in which his zest, if not the old towering imagination, is still apparent: La Tour de Nesle, Austerlitz, and Cyrano et d’Artagnan. The French 1920s cinema of which Gance is the major figure has consistently been undervalued by film historians, largely because its rich experimentation with visual style and expressiveness was not accompanied by an similar concern with the development of film narrative. Gance’s roots were in the nineteenth–century romantic tradition, and despite his literary back- ground, he, like his contemporaries, was willing to accept virtually any melodramatic story that would allow him to pursue his visual interests. For this reason French 1920s work has been marginalized in accounts of film history that see the growth of storytelling techniques as the central unifying factor. The rediscovery of Gance’s Napoléon in the 1980s, though—thanks largely to twenty years of effort by Kevin Brownlow—has made clear to the most skeptical the force and mastery achieved in the years preceding the advent of sound, and restored Gance’s reputation as a master of world cinema. —Roy Armes GARCíA BERLANGA, Luis Nationality: Spanish. Born: Luis García-Berlanga Marti in Valencia, 12 July 1921. Education: Studied at Jesuit school, Switzerland; Valencia University; IIEC (School of Cinema), Madrid, 1947–50. Military Service: Served in División Azul (Blue Division) of Span- ish volunteers with German forces on Russian front, early 1940s. Career: Painter and poet, 1942–47; with Antonio Bardem, directed first film, 1951; several projects banned by censor, 1950s; began collaboration with writer Rafael Azcona on Plácido, 1961; professor at IIEC, 1970s; president of Filmoteca Nacional, 1980s. Films as Director: 1948/49 Paseo sobre una guerra antigua (as IIEC student); Tres cantos (IIEC student); El circo (+ sc, ed) (IIEC student) 1951 Esa pareja feliz (That Happy Couple) (co-d, ph, co-sc) 1952 ?Bienvenido, Mr. Marshall! (Welcome, Mr. Marshall) (+ co-sc) 1953 Novio a la vista (Fiancé in sight) (+ co-sc) 1956 Calabuch (+ co-sc) 1957 Los jueves, milagro (Thursdays, Miracle) (+ co-sc) 1961 Plácido (+ co-sc) 1962 ‘‘La muerte y el le?ador’’ (‘‘Death and the Woodcutter’’) episode of Las cuatro verdades (+ co-sc) 1963 El verdugo (The Executioner; Not on Your Life) (+ co-sc) 1967 Las pira?as (+ co-sc) 1969 Vivan los novios (Long Live the Bride and Groom) (+ co-sc) Luis García Berlanga GARCíA BERLANGA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 370 1973 Tama?o natural (Life Size) (+ co-sc) 1978 La escopeta nacional (The National Rifle; The Spanish Shot- gun) (+ co-sc) 1979 Cuentos eróticos (Erotic Tales) (collectively directed) 1980 Patrimonio nacional (+ co-sc) 1982 Nacional III (+ co-sc) 1985 La Vaquilla (+ co-sc) 1987 Moros y cristianos (+ co-sc) 1993 Todos a la cárcel (Everyone off to Jail) (+ co-sc) 1997 Blasco Ibá?ez (mini for TV) 1999 París Tombuctú (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1953 Sangre y luces (Mu?oz) (sc) (Spanish–language version of Georges Rouquier’s Sang et lumières) 1955 Familia provisional (Rovira Beleta) (co-sc) 1967 No somos de piedra (We Are Not Made out of Stone) (Sum- mers) (role) 1968 Sharon vestida de rojo (Lorente) (role) 1971 Apunte sobre Ana (Memorandum on Ana) (Galán) (role) Publications By GARCíA BERLANGA: book— Cuentos Eroticos De Navidad, Berkeley, 1999. By GARCíA BERLANGA: articles— ‘‘The Day I Refused to Work,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1961. ‘‘Cara a cara . . . Bardem—Berlanga,’’ in Cinema 2002 (Madrid), July/August 1980. ‘‘Berlanga Life Size,’’ interview with Katherine Kovacs, in The Quarterly Review of Film Studies (Pleasantville, New York), Spring 1983. Bagh, P. von, ‘‘Sensuuri, symbolit, sota,’’ an interview with P. von Bagh in Filmihullu (Helsinki), no.8, 1989. On GARCíA BERLANGA: books— Santolaya, Ernesto, Luis G. Berlanga, Vitoria, 1979. Perucha, Julio Pérez, Sobre Luis G. Berlanga, Valencia, 1981. Higginbotham, Virginia, Spanish Film under Franco, Austin, Texas, 1988. Deveny, Thomas G., Cain on Screen: Contemporary Spanish Cin- ema, Lanham, 1999. On GARCíA BERLANGA: articles— Cobos, Juan, ‘‘Spanish Fighter,’’ in Films and Filming (London), February 1958. ‘‘Grandeur nature,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), Novem- ber 1974. Les, J. Hernandez, ‘‘Luis Berlanga aujourd’hui et hier,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), April/May 1979. Acosta, J.L., ‘‘Berlanga—B. Wilder: Buscando un punto común,’’ in Cinema 2002 (Madrid), April 1980. Marías, Miguel, ‘‘El Patrimonio de Berlanga,’’ in Casablanca (Ma- drid), April 1981. Guarner, José Luis, ‘‘Luis G. Berlanga,’’ in International Film Guide 1981, London, 1982. ‘‘Spanish Cinema Section’’ of Cinéma (Paris), June 1984. Screen International (London), 25 June 1988. Guarner, J.L., ‘‘Bunuel ja perilliset,’’ in Filmihullu (Helsinki), no. 8, 1989. Filmihullu (Helsinki), vol. 6, no. 17, 1995. *** For many years in Spain strict censorship guidelines inhibited the development of a vital and creative film industry. The first original auteur of the post-Civil War period was Luis García Berlanga. When he began to make movies in the early 1950s, Berlanga and fellow filmmaker Juan Antonio Bardem were referred to as the two palm trees in the desert of Spanish film. Since then, and in spite of the fact that he could make relatively few films under Franco, Berlanga has remained one of Spain’s foremost talents. In the early years, the most important influence on Berlanga’s filmmaking was Italian neo-realism. At the Conversations of Salamanca (1955) Berlanga and other young directors enthusiastically supported it as an antidote to Francoist cinema, a way of making authentic films that dealt with the everyday problems of ordinary people. From his first movie, Esa pareja feliz, which he co-directed with Bardem in 1951, to his ‘‘trilogy’’ on the Spanish aristocracy, Berlanga has remained true to the spirit of Salamanca. In many movies he has exposed the pitfalls of Spanish society and satirized those institutions or individuals who take themselves too seriously, often using black humor to deflate their pretentions. Berlanga’s sympathies are with the underdogs of whatever social class, those who are victims of fate, institutions, or other forces they cannot control. In a number of his films we follow the efforts of an individual who wants to achieve something or attain some goal, struggles to do so, and in the end is defeated, ending up in the same or in a worse situation than before. This unfortunate outcome reflects Berlanga’s pessimism about a society in which the individual is powerless and in danger of being devoured. There are no winners in Berlanga’s movies; all of the victories are Pyrrhic. But never one to deliver messages or lessons, Berlanga expresses his pessimistic viewpoint with such verve, vitality and humor that audiences leave the theatre elated with the spontaneity and inventiveness of his films. Berlanga prefers working with groups of characters rather than concentrating on the fate of a single protagonist. Rarely does one individual dominate the action. Usually we move from one person to the next so that our point of view on the action is constantly shifting. This approach is supported by Berlanga’s distinctive camera style. He tends to use very long takes in which the camera surreptitiously follows the movement of the characters, the shot lasting as long as the sequence. (In Patrimonio nacional there are some takes that last six or seven minutes.) These sequences are not, however, the carefully arranged and choreographed efforts of a Jancsó. As Berlanga explains it, until he begins shooting he has no specific setup in mind: ‘‘What I do is organize the actors’ movements and then tell the cameraman GERASIMOVDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 371 how to follow them. When we bump into some obstacle, we stop shooting.’’ In shooting the often feverish activities of his characters in this way, Berlanga gives a fluid, spontaneous feeling to his films. His predilection for these shots expresses what Berlanga calls his ‘‘god complex’’—his desire to be everywhere at once and to express the totality of any scene. In his scrutiny of contemporary Spanish life, Berlanga is also attached to much older Spanish literary and cultural traditions, most notably to that of the picaresque novel, in which a pícaro or rogue is thrust out into the world and forced to fend for himself. At the bottom of the social heap, the pícaro is afforded ‘‘a worm’s eye view’’ of society and learns to be tricky in order to survive. The pícaro keeps hoping and waiting for a miracle, a sudden change in fate that will change his or her fortune in one stroke. Berlanga’s pícaros, whether they be naive like Plácido (Plácido) or noble like the Marquis of Leguineche (Patrimonio nacional), share the same hopes and tena- cious desire to survive. These characters, like Berlanga himself, are deeply attached to Spanish cultural traditions. In fact, one might even consider Berlanga to be a sort of picaresque hero who managed to survive the vagaries of the Franco regime and its system of censor- ship. A popular director since &iexclam;Welcome Mr. Marshall!, Berlanga has gone on to even greater success since Franco’s death with La escopeta nacional, a satiric look at a hunting party of Spain’s notables during the Franco regime. In this irreverent and amusing comedy and in its two sequels, Berlanga introduced himself and his vision of his country to a new generation of Spaniards. —Katherine Singer Kovács GERASIMOV, Sergei Nationality: Soviet. Born: Sergei Apollinarievich Gerasimov in Zlatoust, Ural region, 21 May 1906. Education: Leningrad Art School; studied scenic design at State Institute of Dramatic Art, Leningrad, 1920–25. Career: Joined FEKS group founded by Grigori Kozintsev and Leonid Trauberg, early 1920s; directed first film, 1930; head of Acting and Directing Master Class, Lenfilm Studios, 1931–41; in charge of Fighting Film Album No. 1, Moscow, 1941; continued war work, in charge of official films of Yalta and Berlin conferences, 1942–44; head of Central Newsreel and Documentary Studios, Moscow, 1944; Professor, Moscow Film School (VGIK), 1944–1970s; artistic supervisor, Gorki Film Studios, 1955; served as deputy to the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR, secretary of Soviet Union of Cinematographers, and on editorial board of Isskustvo Kino, 1970s. Awards: Red Banner of Labor, 1940 and 1950; Red Star, 1944; Peoples’ Artist of USSR, 1948; State prizes, for Uchitel, 1941, The Young Guard, 1949, and Liberated China, 1951. Died: 27 November 1985. Films as Director: 1930 Twenty-two Misfortunes (co-d) 1931 The Forest (+ sc) 1932 Solomon’s Heart (co-d, + sc) 1934 Do I Love You? (+ sc) 1936 Semero smelykh (The Bold Seven) 1938 Komsomolsk (+ co-sc) 1939 Uchitel (Teacher) (+ sc) 1941 Masquerade (+ sc, role as the stranger); Meeting with Maxim segment of Fighting Film Album No. 1; The Old Guard 1943 The Invincible (The Unconquerable) (co-d, + co-sc); Film- Concert Dedicated to the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the Red Army (Cine-Concert Dedicated to the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the Red Army) (co-d, + co-sc) 1944 Great Land (The Mainland) (+ sc) 1947 Molodaya gvardiya (Young Guard) (+ sc) 1950 Liberated China (+ sc) 1951 Selskiy vrach (Country Doctor) 1954 Nadezhda (+ sc) 1957/58 Tikhy Don (And Quiet Flows the Don) (+ sc) 1959 Sputnik Speaking (The Sputnik Speaks) (co-d, co-sc) 1962 Men and Beasts (+ sc) 1967 Zhurnalist (The Journalist) (+ sc) 1969 U ozera (By the Lake) (+ sc) 1972 Lyubit cheloveka (For the Love of Man) (+ sc) 1974 Materi i docheri (Mothers and Daughters) 1984 Lev Tolstoj Other Films: 1925 Michki protiv Youdenitsa (Mishka against Yudenitch) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (role as spy) 1926 Chyortovo koleso (The Devil’s Wheel) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (role as the conjuror); Shinel (The Cloak) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (role as the card-shark); Bratichka (Little Brother) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (role as the driver) 1927 S.V.D. (The Club of the Big Deed) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (role as Medoks); Someone Else’s Jacket (Boris Shpis) (role as Skalkovsky) 1929 Novyi Vavilon (The New Babylon) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (asst d, role as the journalist Lutreau); Oblomok imperii (Fragment of an Empire) (Ermler) (role as the Menshevik) 1931 Odna (Alone) (Kozintsev and Trauberg) (asst d, role as the chairman of the village soviet) 1932 Three Soldiers (Ivanov) (role as Commander of the Iron Regiment) 1933 Dezertir (Deserter) (Pudovkin) (role as the bonze); Razbudite Lenochky (Wake up Lenochka) (Kudryavtseva) (role) 1935 The Frontier (Dubson) (role as Yakov the Tailor) 1939 Chapayev Is with Us (co-sc); Vyborgskaya storona (New Horizons; The Vyborg Side) (Kozintsev) (role as the Social- ist-Revolutionary) 1944 The Yalta Conference (pr supervisor) 1945 The Berlin Conference (pr supervisor) 1955 Damy (Organisyan and Kulidzhanov) (artistic supervisor) 1956 The Road of Truth (Frid) (sc) 1958 Memory of the Heart (Lioznova) (sc) 1961 Dimy Gorina (Career of Dima) (Doblatyan and Mirski) (artistic supervisor) GERASIMOV DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 372 1962 U Krutovo Yara (On the Steep Cliff) (K. and A. Morakov) (artistic supervisor) 1963 Venski Les (Vienna Woods) (Grigoriev) (artistic supervisor) 1964 Sostyazanie (Controversy) (Mansurev) (artistic supervisor) Publications By GERASIMOV: books— Zhizn’, fil’ my, spory, Moscow, 1971. Vospitanie kinorezhisseva, Moscow, 1978. Kinostsenarii, Moscow, 1982. Kinopedagogika, Moscow, 1983. Stat’ i, ocherki, vospominaniia, Moscow, 1984. By GERASIMOV: articles— ‘‘Socialist Realism and the Soviet Cinema,’’ in Films and Filming (London), December 1958. ‘‘All Is Not Welles,’’ in Films and Filming (London), Septem- ber 1959. ‘‘A Clash of Conscience,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1961. Interview with Roger Hudson, in Film (London), Spring 1969. ‘‘V dobryi chas!,’’ in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), no. 10, 1976. ‘‘Soviet Cinema: Films, Personalities, Problems,’’ with others, in Soviet Film (Moscow), no. 271, 1979. ‘‘Akyual’nost’ istorii,’’ interview with G. Maslovskij, in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), September 1980. Interview in Isskustvo Kino (Moscow), December 1982. Interview in Soviet Film (Moscow), February 1984. Film a Doba (Prague), May 1986. On GERASIMOV: articles— Vronskaya, J., ‘‘Recent Russian Cinema,’’ in Film (London), Sum- mer 1971. ‘‘Sergei Gerasimov,’’ in Soviet Film (Moscow), no. 261, 1979. Obituary in Variety (New York), 4 December 1985. Wuss-Mundeciema, L., Sergei Gerassimow, and H.-J. Rother, ‘‘In memoriam Sergej Gerassimow,’’ in Film un Fernsehen (Frank- furt), vol. 14, no. 6, June 1986. Obituary in Soviet Film (Moscow), no. 6, 1987. *** The very survival of the brilliant, original, almost iconoclastic Sergei Gerasimov through turbulent eras of Soviet history has tended to obscure the importance of his early contributions to cinema. The somewhat stern image of a grim conservative headmaster he seemed to project to students at the Moscow Film School (VGIK) in the early 1970s was an antithesis of his prewar self. Gerasimov’s career started in Leningrad when, after graduating as a theatrical designer, he joined the ‘‘Factory of Eccentric Actors’’ (FEKS). He became one of the strongest and most original actors in Soviet silent cinema, with a special attraction to complex roles. Together with what he learned from Kozintsev and Trauberg, who directed most of the productions in which he appeared, his deep study of acting was an important part of Gerasimov’s apprenticeship as a filmmaker. Gerasimov cut his directorial teeth on three silent productions in the early 1930s, but it was not until 1936, with his first sound film Semero Smelykh (The Bold 7), that came into his own as a major talent. In this and his next film (Komsomolsk) he broke new ground in his choice of subject and in his sincere and unusually successful attempt to portray ordinary young people as varied, breathing, living human beings rather than animated heroic sculptures. His sympa- thetic direction of his young cast, together with his romantic but naturalistic scripts (pitting teams of young people against the ele- ments) achieved something approaching the elusive ideal of socialist realism. Gerasimov’s works were by far the most successful films of their genre during the 1930s. Uchitel (Teacher), released in 1939, com- pleted his trio of lyrical but unpretentious evocations of the new Soviet generation in the Russian countryside. Uchitel told the tale of a young man who leaves the bright lights of the city to return to his native village as a schoolmaster. This film begins, perhaps, to show some signs of the stress imposed by the increasing rigidity of official dogma, for it does not achieve the freshness of the previous two films. Yet, sadly, some seven years later Gerasimov castigated himself for not having adhered more strictly to the party line. ‘‘I loved the film,’’ he wrote, ‘‘and I still love it, despite the fact that it is far too polished . . . and not a little too obsequious in its attitude to Art.’’ By this time the war had intervened and Gerasimov (in 1944) had become a mem- ber of the Communist Party. Besides Gerasimov’s rural trilogy, his only other prewar feature, Masquerade, was a lavish version of Lermontov’s verse tragedy. He had certainly set himself an uphill task in trying to combine his FEKS style with the tradition of stage drama and dialogue in verse, although his own performance as ‘‘The Stranger’’ was an echo of his old FEKS philosophy and the Leningrad setting was spectacular. Although successful at the time, the film was criticized by the director himself, a stern exponent of ‘‘socialist self-criticism.’’ While he admitted that the film had helped him ‘‘refine his art,’’ he considered it ‘‘haphazard and unplanned’’ and lacking sufficient appreciation of Lermontov’s particular genius. During World War II, Gerasimov was put in charge of the documentary film studios. There he brought together the talents of feature directors and documentarists and once more proved his flair for encouraging good work from others. This led to his appointment in 1944 as head of the directing and acting workshops of the Moscow Film School (VGIK). Occupying this seminal position through the following thirty years, he had an enormous influence on the whole present generation of Soviet filmmakers. After the war Gerasimov’s own work seems to have swung dramatically from his self-effacing, sympathetic form of filmmaking to the grandiose style fashionable during Stalin’s final phase. Fadeev’s patriotic, lyrical novel The Young Guard would seem to have been ideal source material for a typical Gerasimov film, yet it turned out to be bombastic, pompous, and overblown. His other huge epic, And Quiet Flows the Don, shown in three full-length parts, unfortunately suffered from similar grandiosity. Apart from this foray into gigan- tism, and a documentary on China, much of Gerasimov’s post-Stalin GERIMADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 373 output saw a return to his themes of the 1930s. While he remained a highly competent director, however, he never quite recaptured the freshness of approach and lightness of touch that marked his ear- lier work. —Robert Dunbar GERIMA, Haile Nationality: Ethiopian. Born: Gondor, Ethiopia, 4 March 1946. Education: Studied acting at the Goodman School of Drama, Chi- cago, Illinois; University of California at Los Angeles, B.A., 1972, M.F.A., 1976. Family: Married Shirikiana Aina, 1983; five children. Career: Professor of Film, Howard University, Washington, D.C., 1975—; with wife, created film production and distribution enterprise consisting of Negodgwad Productions, Mypheduh Films (distribu- tor), Sankofa Books and Video (sales and rental), and Positive Productions (community development). Awards: Grand Prix Award, Lisbon International Film Festival, Silver Leopard Award, Lorcarno International Film Festival, and Prix de la Ville de Alger, for Mirt Sost Shi Amit, 1975; FIPRESCI Award, Berlin International Film Festival, London Film Festival Outstanding Production, and International Film Critics Award, for Ashes and Embers, 1983; Best Cinematography Award, FEPACO Film Festival (Burkina Faso), Oscar Micheaux Award, and First Prize, African Film Festival (Milan), for Sankofa, 1993. Address: Mypheduh Films, Inc., P.O. Box 10035, Washington, D.C. 20018–0035, U.S.A. Contact: Ada Babino, Nommo Speakers Bureau, 2714 Georgia Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20001. Films as Director: 1971 Hourglass 1972 Child of Resistance 1975 Mirt Sost Shi Amit (Harvest: 3000 Years) (+sc, pr) 1976 Bush Mama (+sc, ed, pr) 1982 Wilmington 10—USA 10,000 (doc) (+sc, pr) 1982 Ashes and Ambers (for TV) 1985 After Winter: Sterling Brown (doc) 1994 Sankofa (+sc, ed, pr) 1994 Imperfect Journey (doc-for TV) 1999 Adwa: An African Victory (+sc, pr, ed) Publications By GERIMA: articles— Daney, Serge, ‘‘Rencontre avec Haile Gerima (une Moisson de 3,0000 ans),’’ interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris) September- October 1976. Pfaff, Fran?ois, ‘‘De Quelle Moisson s’agit-il (dialogue avec Haile Gerima, auteur du film ‘‘la Récolte de 3,000 ans)’’ interview in Positif (Paris), no. 198, October 1977. Safford, Tony, and William Triplett, ‘‘Haile Gerima: Radical Depar- ture to a New Black Cinema,’’ interview in The Journal of the University Film and Video Association, vol. 35, no. 2, Spring 1983. Edelman, Rob, ‘‘Storyteller of Struggles: An Interview with Haile Gerima,’’ in The Independent (New York), October 1985. ‘‘Visual Footprint—The Battle for the Film Frame,’’ in Journey Across Three Continents, edited by Renee Tajima, New York, 1985 ‘‘Triangular Cinema, Breaking Toys, and Dinknesh vs. Lucy,’’ in Questions of Third Cinema, edited by Jim Pines and Paul Wileman, London, 1989. On GERIMA: books— Pfaff, Fran?oise, Twenty-five Black African Filmmakers: A Critical Study, with Bibliography and Bio-Bibliography, Westport, Con- necticut, 1988. Gray, John, Blacks in Film and Television: A Pan-African Bibliog- raphy of Films, Filmmakers, and Performers, Westport, Connecti- cut, 1990. Diawara, Manthia, African Cinema, Bloomington, Indiana, 1992. Yearwood, Gladstone, editor, Black Cinema Aesthetics: Issues in Independent Black Filmmaking, Athens, Ohio, 1982. On GERIMA: articles— Fieschi, Jacques, ‘‘Harvest: 3,000 Years de Haile Gerima (Ethiopia),’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), no. 19, June 1976. ‘‘Ethiopian Directs,’’ in Amsterdam News (New York), Novem- ber 1976. Fullman, E., ‘‘Wilmington 10—USA 10,000 Makes Its World Pre- miere,’’ in The Hilltop (Washington, D.C.), 17 November 1978. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Film: ‘Bush Mama’ Tells the Story of a Coast Ghetto,’’ in New York Times, 25 September 1979. Quam, Michael D., ‘‘Harvest: 3,000 Years. Sowers of Maize and Bullets,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), March 1981. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Ashes and Embers,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 23 November 1982. Derobert, E., ‘‘Bush Mama,’’ in Positif (Paris), October 1984. Howard, Steve, ‘‘A Cinema of Transformation: The Films of Haile Gerima,’’ in Cineaste (Berkeley), vol. 14, no. 1, 1985. Tassy, Elaine, ‘‘‘Sankofa’ Takes a Different Route to Theatres,’’ in Los Angeles Times, 25 January 1994. Porter, Evette, ‘‘Black Marketeering,’’ in Village Voice, 13 Septem- ber 1994. Millar, Jeff, ‘‘‘Sankofa’: Flourishes Undercut Powerful Saga,’’ in Houston Chronicle, 18 November 1994. Thomas, Kevin, ‘‘‘Sankofa’ Delivers Powerful Indictment of Evil of Slavery,’’ in Los Angeles Times, 12 May 1995. McKenna, Christine, ‘‘A Saga of Slavery Reaches the Big Screen’’ in Los Angeles Times, 29 May 1995. Hartl, John, ‘‘Film on Slavery Fights for Screenings,’’ in Seattle Times, 22 September 1995. Kernan, Michael, ‘‘‘Bush Momma’ (sic): Realities,’’ in Washington Post, 27 January 1997. Howe, Desson, ‘‘‘Adwa’ Overcomes All Obstacles,’’ in Washington Post, 19 November 1999. GERIMA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 374 Reaves, Michele, ‘‘Filmmaker Wins Fight for ‘Adwa’, in Washington Times (Washington, D.C.), 20 November 1999. Stack, Peter, ‘‘Ethiopian Victory Retold with Pride: Documentary Looks at 1896 fight with Italy,’’ in San Francisco Chronicle, 15 May 2000. *** ‘‘I’m a Third World, independent filmmaker,’’ declared Haile Gerima in a 1983 interview. He now resides in the United States ‘‘for many historical reasons.’’ Gerima—professor of film, philosopher, writer, producer, and director of a singular stature—has earned a unique place in film history as one of a handful of African filmmakers to earn international notoriety. Gerima arrived in the United States as a youngster of twenty-one with an interest in theatre and enrolled in acting classes at the Goodman School of Drama in Chicago, Illinois. ‘‘When I was growing up,’’ he reveals in the Los Angeles Times, ‘‘I wanted to work in theatre—it never occurred to me I could be a filmmaker because I was raised on Hollywood movies that pacified me to be subservient. Filmmaking isn’t encouraged or supported by the Ethiopian govern- ment.’’ He felt limited by theatre and was resigned, notes Francoise Pfaff, to ‘‘subservient roles in Western plays.’’ By 1970 he had discovered ‘‘the power of cinema.’’ He migrated to California to attend the University of California, where he earned Bachelor’s and Master of Fine Arts degrees in film. Influenced in part by the pioneering work of film luminaries Vittorio de Sica, Fernando Solanas, Tomás Gutiérrez Alea, and Med Hondo, Gerima makes films that tell of the human condition. He exploits the medium as a political weapon and as a catalyst for understanding and social change at the same time, consciously eschewing what he describes as the ‘‘narrative dictatorship’’ of Hollywood pictures. Gerima’s 1976 Bush Mama provides a striking example of this mission. The film presents a poignant contrast, produced as it was during the period of film history known as the ‘‘Blaxploitation’’ era. Gerima’s depiction of the travails of black life and culture are far- removed from that of the drug deals and revenge killings of Superfly (1972) and Foxy Brown (1976). Bush Mama is the story of Dorothy and her husband T.C., a discharged Vietnam veteran who thought he would return home to a ‘‘hero’s welcome.’’ Instead he is falsely arrested and imprisoned for a crime he didn’t commit. Theirs is a world of welfare, perennial unemployment, and despair. To some, the film may appear bleak and nihilistic with its stark black-and-white photography, but its message is moving and distinct. Issues of institutionalized racism, police brutality, and poverty remain sadly pertinent and the film, nearly twenty-five years old, retains its potency. For the production of Mirt Sost Shi Amit (Harvest: 3,000 Years) Gerima returned to his native Ethiopia to produce the tale of a poor peasant family who eke out an existence within a brutal, exploitative, and feudal system of labor. In 1985 he again focused his camera upon the travails of black urban life in the two-hour film, Ashes and Embers, the story of a moody and disillusioned black veteran of the Vietnam War. The film’s characters, notes Shepard in the New York Times, ‘‘are human rather than cardboard types.’’ Wilmington 10— USA 10,000 exposed the impact of racism and the short-comings of the criminal justice system by examining the infamous history of the nine black men and one white woman who became known as the ‘‘Wilmington 10.’’ Though now well established and respected as a filmmaker, Gerima’s path has not always been paved with gold. His name is not likely to be bandied about in the boardrooms of Hollywood studios, a reality he finds bittersweet. ‘‘I was never enamored of the film industry,’’ he reveals in the San Francisco Chronicle. ‘‘Every Holly- wood story is Eurocentric and if it isn’t, then it will simply be disregarded. So I never wanted to be part of an industry that fails to represent the world as it really exists.’’ ‘‘Money is an incessant worry for independent filmmakers and Haile Gerima is no exception,’’ notes Pfaff. Indeed, Gerima has endured his share of the indignities of being an independent filmmaker of color, including elusive funding, closed doors, and distributors refusing to show his film. ‘‘[S]ome indie black filmmakers,’’ notes Porter in The Village Voice, ‘‘are reluctantly becoming do-it-yourself distributors.’’ Gerima began his self-distribution by booking his films at ‘‘art’’ theatres—only to find they were not reaching the black community for which they were created. Now he distributes his films and that of other low-budget, independent filmmakers through Mypheduh Films, a distribution company that he and his filmmaker wife Sirikiana Aina established in 1984. He speaks with rancor of the ‘‘incestuous relationship’’ between Hollywood, theatre owners, and video stores. ‘‘We’ve been evicted from several theatres when Hollywood wanted use of the theatre,’’ he complained in the Los Angeles Times. ‘‘Why? Because if theatres don’t take whatever junk comes from the industry pipe, they won’t get movies they want in the future. . . Hollywood is incapable of allowing African Americans to make the films they want to make, what they want from us is hooligan movies.’’ ‘‘Spirit of the dead, rise up and claim your story!’’ is the haunting opening of what is probably Gerima’s most successful production, the 1993 film, Sankofa. It presents with brutal realism the horrors of African slavery. The story is revealed through the eyes of Mona, a modern-day woman who is ‘‘possessed by spirits’’ and transported back in time as the Shola, a house slave on the Lafayette plantation in Louisiana. The savagery and violence of the evil institution are clearly disturbing and go far beyond the safe and conventional images of slavery presented by Hollywood. In Sankofa, we hear the chilling sound of human flesh as it is seared with a hot branding iron and see the barren faces of the human cargo; women are stripped of all dignity and subject to the continual sexual exploitation of their owners; human necks are enclosed in iron shackles and rape is used as a tool of terror and domination. Some panned Gerima for his stylistic flour- ishes but the response by the black community was positive and enthusiastic. The film was well received and played to full houses for many weeks in major cities. Adwa: An African Victory is a compelling documentary drama of the largely forgotten history of the 1896 battle of resistance in which the Ethiopian people arose and united to defeat the Italian army. The film is skillfully interlaced with paintings, sound, music, rare histori- cal photographs, and interviews of ‘‘elders’’ who recall the details of the story of Adwa. It concludes with a dramatic recreation of the final battle. In spite of numerous limitations and against all odds, writer- producer-director Haile Gerima has succeeded in a tough industry for GERMIDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 375 nearly thirty years and has emerged as one of the more potent ‘‘outsider’’ voices in the history of filmmaking. —Pamala S. Deane GERMI, Pietro Nationality: Italian. Born: Genoa, 14 September 1914. Education: Instituto Nautico; studied acting and directing at Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografia, Rome. Career: Directed first film, Il testimone, 1946; retired from Amici miei project because of ill health, 1974. Awards: Oscar for Best Story and Screenplay, with Alfredo Giannetti and Ennio de Concini, for Divorce Italian Style, 1962; Best Film (co-recipient), Cannes Festival, for Signore e signori, 1966. Died: In Rome, 5 December 1974. Films as Director: 1946 Il testimone (+ co-sc) 1947 Gioventù perduta (Lost Youth) (+ co-sc) 1949 In nome della legge (Mafia) (+ co-sc) 1950 Il cammino della speranza (The Path of Hope) (+ co-story, co-adapt) Pietro Germi 1951 La città si difende (Four Ways Out) (+ co-sc) 1952 La presidentessa (Mademoiselle Gobette) (+ co-sc); Il brigante di Tacca del Lupo (+ co-sc) 1953 Gelosia (+ co-sc) 1954 ‘‘Guerra 1915–1918’’ episode of Amori di mezzo secolo 1956 Il ferroviere (The Railroad Man; Man of Iron) (+ co-sc, role) 1957 L’uomo di paglia (+ co-sc, role) 1962 Divorzio all’italiana (Divorce Italian Style) (+ co-sc) 1964 Sedotta e abbandonata (Seduced and Abandoned) (+ co-sc) 1965 Signore e signori (The Birds, the Bees, and the Italians) (+ co-sc, co-pr) 1967 L’immorale (The Climax; Too Much for One Man) (+ co-sc) 1968 Serafino (+ co-sc, pr) 1970 Le castagne sono buone (Till Divorce Do You Part) (+ co-sc, pr) 1972 Alfredo, Alfredo (+ co-sc, pr) Other Films: 1939 Retroscena (Blasetti) (asst d, co-sc) 1943 Nessuno torna indietro (Blasetti) (asst d) 1945 I dieci comandamenti (Chili) (co-sc) 1946 Monte Cassino (Gemmiti) (role) 1948 Fuga in Francia (Soldati) (role) 1959 Jovanka e le altre (Five Branded Women) (Ritt) (role) 1960 Il rossetto (Damiani) (role) 1961 La viaccia (Bolognini) (role); Il sicario (Damiani) (role) 1963 The Directors (pr: Greenblatt) (appearance) 1975 Amici miei (Monicelli) (co-sc, + credit ‘‘A Film by Pietro Germi’’) Publications By GERMI: articles— ‘‘Man Is Not Large Enough for Man,’’ in Films and Filming (London), September 1966. On GERMI: books Giacovelli, Enrico di, Pietro Germi, Firenze, 1991. Sesti, Mario, Tutto il cinema di Pietro Germi, Milan, 1997. On GERMI: articles— Passek, J.L., ‘‘Pietro Germi,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), February 1975. Monicelli, M., ‘‘Pietro Germi, mon amour,’’ in Ecran (Paris), Sep- tember 1976. Pattison, B., ‘‘Pietro Germi,’’ in Film (London), October 1976. ‘‘Pietro Germi,’’ in Film Dope (London), December 1979. Filméchange (Paris), Autumn 1984. Gincovelli, E., ‘‘Germi, il grande falegname,’’ in Castoro Cinema (Florence), no. 147, May-June 1990. Gili, Jean A., and others, ‘‘Redéc ouverte de Pietro Germi,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 406, December 1994. *** GILLIAM DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 376 Pietro Germi, though often regarded by scholars as fundamentally a neorealist director who made a transition in mid-career to social comedy, never actually considered himself to be an adherent to the style popularized by Roberto Rossellini. Like several other Italian directors achieving prominence in the late 1940s, notably Alberto Lattuada, Alberto De Santis and, of course, Vittorio DeSica, he produced films notable for breaking with prevailing themes that dealt with the immediate aftermath of World War II. His early works addressed themselves instead to the fundamental, even timeless, social issues affecting postwar Italy and in particular, those exempli- fied in the poverty of the island of Sicily. Germi’s early films, notably In nome della legge and Il cammino della speranza, owe as much, if not more, to the influence of American director John Ford as they do to neorealism. In Germi’s work, Sicily easily replaces Ford’s Monument Valley and the island’s traditional knife duels supplant the American director’s classic show- downs. In all other respects, the fundamental issues in Germi’s first few films differ little from a typical John Ford production like Stagecoach. Indeed the themes of the aforementioned Germi films (in In nome della legge, a clash between a young judge and the local Mafia over his attempts to enforce the law and, in Il cammino della speranza, the problem of illegal immigration) deal with problems not too far removed from those of the actual post-Civil War Ameri- can West. Interestingly, the fact that Germi dared to propose solutions to the problems that he examined in these and in succeeding films effec- tively removed him from the realm of pure neorealism which, as construed by Rossellini and his immediate followers, must limit itself merely to the exposition of a particular social condition. It cannot suggest solutions. Unfortunately, in a number of cases (Il cammino della speranza, in particular), the director’s solutions were overly romanticized, pat, and simplistic. During the latter part of the 1950s, Germi began to compress the scope of his social concerns to those affecting the individual and his relationship to the family unit, albeit as components of the larger society. In Il ferroviere and L’uomo di Paglia, however, he continued to be plagued by his penchant for simplistic and overly contrived solutions as well as a tendency to let the films run on too long. They are redeemed to some extent by their realistic portrayals of working class characters which. Though considered melodramatic by many reviewers at the time of their release, these characterizations have come to be more highly regarded. Germi corrected his problems in the 1960s by changing his narrative style to one dominated by satirical devices. Yet he did not compromise his family-centered social vision. Divorzio all’italiana, for which he won an Academy Award for best screenplay, Sedotta e abbandonata, and Signori e signore all magnify social questions all out of proportion to reality and thus, through the chaos that results, reduce the issues to absurdity. Divorzio all’italiana, in particular, is a craftsmanlike portrayal of the internal upheavals within a family, set in the oppressive atmos- phere of a small Sicilian village. It features the deft use of a moving camera that passes swiftly, almost intimately, through endless groups of gawking townspeople. In addition, the director’s use of actors, including Marcello Mastroianni and Daniella Rocca, as well as his own latent sense of humor, make the social commentary in this film quite possibly more penetrating than in his early neorealist films. Though Germi shifted over the length of his career from social dramas to socio-moral satires, his social concerns and his favorite setting for them—Sicily—remained constant. As is not normally the case with many artists of his stature, his most polished and commer- cially successful efforts also turned out to be the critical equals of his earlier and more solemn ones. —Stephen L. Hanson GETINO, Octavio See SOLANAS, Fernando E., and Octavio GETINO GILLIAM, Terry Nationality: American. Born: Terry Vance Gilliam in Minneapolis, Minnesota, 22 November 1940. Education: Studied political science at Occidental College, Los Angeles. Family: Married make-up artist Margaret Weston; three children: Amy Rainbow, Holly du Bois, Harry Thunder. Career: Associate editor, HELP magazine, and freelance illustrator, New York, from 1962; moved to London, 1967; illustrator and animator for Marty, We Have Ways of Making You Laugh, and Do Not Adjust Your Set, for TV, 1968; member of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, from 1969; directed first solo project, Jab- berwocky, 1977. Awards: British Academy of Film and Television Arts Special Award for Graphics, for Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1969; Montreux Festival Silver Award, for Monty Python’s Flying Circus, 1971; Best Director and Best Screenplay, Los Angeles Film Critics Association, for Brazil, 1985; Michael Balcon Award, Out- standing British Contribution to Cinema, 1987; Venice Film Festival Silver Lion, for The Fisher King, 1991. Address: The Old Hall, South Grove, Highgate, London N6 6BP England. Films as Director: 1975 Monty Python and the Holy Grail (co-d, + co-sc, anim, ro) 1977 Jabberwocky (+ co-sc, ro) 1981 Time Bandits (+ co-sc, pr, ro—uncredited) 1985 Brazil (+ co-sc) 1989 The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (+ co-sc) 1991 The Fisher King 1995 Twelve Monkeys 1998 Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (+ co-sc) 2001 The Man Who Killed Don Quixote (+ co-sc) 2002 Good Omens (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1971 And Now for Something Completely Different (co-sc, anim, ro) 1979 Monty Python’s Life of Brian (Jones) (co-sc, design, anim, ro) GILLIAMDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 377 Terry Gilliam (background) with Johnny Depp on the set of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas 1982 Monty Python Live at the Hollywood Bowl (co-sc, ro) 1983 Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life (Jones) (co-sc, anim, d some sequences, ro) 1984 The Secret Policeman’s Private Parts (Graef, Temple) (ro) 1985 Spies like Us (Landis) (ro) Publications By GILLIAM: books— Harvey Kurtzman’s Fun and Games, with Harvey Kurtzman, New York, 1965. Monty Python’s Big Red Book, London, 1972. The Brand New Monty Python Book, London, 1973. Sporting Relations, with Roger McGough, London, 1974. Monty Python and the Holy Grail, London, 1977. Jabberwocky, London, 1977. Animations of Mortality, London, 1978. Monty Python’s Life of Brian (of Nazareth), London, 1979. The Complete Works of Shakespeare and Monty Python, London, 1981. Time Bandits, with Michael Palin, London, 1981. Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life, London, 1983. The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, with Charles McKeown, New York and London, 1989. By GILLIAM: articles— Interview in Inter/View (New York), vol. 7, no. 6, 1975. Interview in Film Comment (New York), November/December 1981. Interview with D. Rabourdin, in Cinéma (Paris), February 1985. Interview with Nick Roddick, in Stills (London), February 1985. Interview with B. Howell, in Films and Filming (London), March 1985. Interview with M. Girard and A. Caron, in Séquences (Montreal), April 1986. Interview with D. Morgan, in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1988. Interview in Starburst (London), April 1989. Interview with P. Kremski, in Filmbulletin (Winterthur, Switzerland), no. 5/6, 1991. GILLIAM DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 378 ‘‘Terry Gilliam’s Guilty Pleasures,’’ in Film Comment (New York), September/October 1991. ‘‘Empire OneOnOne,’’ interview with Bob McCabe, in Empire (London), December 1998. On GILLIAM: books— Perry, George, Life of Python, London, 1983. Yule, Andrew, Losing the Light: Terry Gilliam and the Munchausen Saga, New York, 1991. On GILLIAM: articles— ‘‘Brazil Section’’ of Revue du Cinéma (Paris), March 1985. ‘‘Gilliam Section’’ of Positif (Paris), March 1985. Mathews, J., ‘‘Earth to Gilliam,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), March 1989. Turan, Kenneth, ‘‘The Awful Adventures of Terry Gilliam,’’ in Gentleman’s Quarterly, March 1989. ‘‘Gilliam Issue’’ of Cinefex (Riverside, California), May 1989. Ellison, Harlan, ‘‘Harlan Ellison’s Watching,’’ in Magazine of Fan- tasy and Science Fiction, May 1989. Van Gelder, L., ‘‘At the Movies,’’ in New York Times, 1 June 1990. Ciment, Michel, article in Positif (Paris), November 1990. Osborn, B., ‘‘The Fisher King,’’ in American Premiere (Beverly Hills), no. 5, 1991. Stefancic, M., Jr., ‘‘Kraljevi ribic,’’ in Ekran (Ljubljana, Yugo- slavia), no. 8, 1991. Panek, Richard, ‘‘A Writer’s Dream,’’ in Premiere, May 1991. Drucker, E., ‘‘The Fisher King,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), September/October 1991. Zagari, P., ‘‘Gil intoccabili,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Rome), November/ December 1991. Mandolini, C., ‘‘Terry Gilliam ou le triomphe de l’imaginaire postmoderne,’’ in Sequences (Montreal), January 1992. ‘‘Filmografie,’’ in Segnocinema (Vicenza, Italy), January/Febru- ary 1992. Smith, G., ‘‘War Games,’’ in The New Yorker, 25 May 1998. Frankel, Martha, ‘‘Terry Does Vegas,’’ in Movieline (Los Angeles), June 1998. *** ‘‘A trilogy about the ages of Man and the subordination of magic to realism.’’ So Terry Gilliam described the trio of films which stretched from Time Bandits through Brazil to The Adventures of Baron Munchausen. Gilliam has worked resolutely in the space between the two elements of magic and reality in all his work, hardly surprising in a man who first became widely known as the provider of brilliant, surreal animation sequences for the Monty Python comedy team in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Gilliam is very much a champion of imagination in his films in both visual and narrative terms. Despite his often surreal vision, however, the products of the imagination do not necessarily have to be fantastic. Love, for example—often a triumph of emotional imagination over reality—has been an important arena in Gilliam’s battle between magic and realism—comical and childlike in Jabber- wocky, bittersweet and adult in Brazil. For Gilliam, magic counterbal- ances what he perceives as the sterility of the rational, a view that is manifested in extreme form in the Orwellian nightmare world of Brazil. If love is perhaps the emotional expression of Gilliam’s magic, then visual and narrative fantasy is the conceptual. Elements of the fantastic have been ever-present in Gilliam’s work from his Monty Python days to the spectacles of Baron Munchausen (an island transformed into a giant fish, a ship gliding through a desert strewn with statues). His feature films often seem, in fact, semi-conscious attempts to recreate the world of his early animations in live-action. Fellow director Alex Cox has described Gilliam as a ‘‘highly skilled visualist,’’ a judgement which cannot really be disputed. (It is worth noting that Gilliam’s cinematographer for the dazzling Brazil was Roger Pratt, later to give a similar gloss to the mega-buck Batman.) Gilliam is often criticized, however, for opting for visual pyrotechnics at the expense of narrative solidity. The issue is clouded by Gilliam’s constant return to the fairy tale/fantasy format, where the requirement of narrative sense or continuity is arguably less strict anyway. Arthurian legend in Monty Python and The Holy Grail (co-directed with Terry Jones), Lewis Carroll’s nonsense world in Jabberwocky, time travel in Time Bandits, an insane world in Brazil, eighteenth-century tall tales in Baron Munchausen, and a psychedeli- cally garish Las Vegas in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas all exemplify Gilliam’s fascination with fantasy. Is Gilliam merely an escapist with a remarkably fertile imagination? In opting to under- mine the bedrock of dull rationality does he fail to offer anything in return? It is, after all, perfectly possible to make films which are funny and surreal and which have bite—satire as opposed to escapism. Gilliam’s defense against such charges is Brazil. Without Brazil, Gilliam’s output smacks a little too much of clownish entertainment. But with Brazil it is clear that the clown can also wear a sadder, darker face. For here, Gilliam opts to take on board the challenging burdens of rationality rather than trying merely to escape them. His vision has weight. If he escapes here it is through facing the deadening products of rationality and triumphing over them through a combination of acid ridicule and emotional willpower. The sights which influenced his perception of the story included a Los Angeles riot, and he has half- cryptically, half-menacingly described the setting of the film as ‘‘somewhere on the Los Angeles/Belfast border.’’ Brazil revealed depths to Gilliam’s talent which had only been glimpsed in his blackly comic Monty Python animations rather than his earlier features. Baron Munchausen, disappointingly, proved a regression back to escapism rather than a development of the inspired mood of Brazil (though the pressures of an ever-escalating budget cannot have helped). Perhaps the battle he had to fight with Warner Bros. over Brazil—first over a re-edit (read massacre), then over even releasing the film—had warned him against attempting anything with real edge. The Fisher King, Gilliam’s follow-up to The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, ranks with Brazil as among his most thoughtful works. The film, a dazzlingly visual allegory that offers a profound commen- tary on ethics in contemporary society, ponders a tarnished soul’s chance to reclaim a moral lifestyle. Its scenario (authored by Richard LaGravenese, rather than Gilliam) spotlights the plight of Jack Lucas (Jeff Bridges), a cold-hearted, self-centered radio talk show host who undergoes a personality crisis when one of his listeners, whom he has just crudely dismissed, promptly commits mass murder. Lucas is delivered from the brink of despair by a character who might have been concocted during Gilliam’s early Monty Python days, an odd- ball street person (Robin Williams) who is consumed with finding the Holy Grail and hooking up with an evasive young woman (Amanda Plummer). GODARDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 379 In 1995 Gilliam released Twelve Monkeys, a film set in post- apocalyptic America. Reminiscent of Brazil in its dark vision of the future, Twelve Monkeys concerns a criminal of the future (played by Bruce Willis) who is sent back in time to late twentieth-century America to gather information about a devastating plague that pushed survivors into a bleak underground existence. The film was more accessible to mainstream audiences than some of Gilliam’s earlier films (in part because of its big-name cast, which also included Madeleine Stowe and Brad Pitt), but still featured Gilliam’s signature cynicism about society’s dark underbelly. The filmmaker’s follow-up, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, was a complete misfire, and easily is his least-successful feature. It is an ill-advised visualization of Hunter S. Thompson’s 1971 book, in which the writer’s alter ego, Raoul Duke (Johnny Depp), and his lawyer, Dr. Gonzo (Benicio Del Toro), do Las Vegas while zonked to the gills. Thompson’s book may accurately capture a time and place; the film, though crammed with Gilliam’s patented visual wizardry, seems sorely dated and totally unnecessary. Gilliam’s films are brilliantly imaginative, though sometimes maddeningly uneven. He remains an outstanding talent who, unfortu- nately, works too infrequently on screen—and one wonders if he ever will approach the depth of vision he so successfully mined in Brazil. —Norman Miller, updated by Rob Edelman GILLIAT, Sidney See LAUNDER, Frank, and Sidney GILLIAT GODARD, Jean-Luc Nationality: French. Born: Paris, 3 December 1930, became citizen of Switzerland. Education: Nyon, Switzerland; Lycée Buffon, Paris; Sorbonne, 1947–49, certificate in ethnology 1950. Family: Married 1) Anna Karina, 1960 (divorced, 1967); 2) Anne Wiamzensky, 1967 (divorced). Career: Delivery boy, cameraman, assistant editor for Zurich television, construction worker, and gossip columnist (for Les Temps de Paris), in Switzerland and Paris, 1949–56; founded short- lived Gazette du Cinéma, writing as ‘‘Hans Lucas,’’ 1950–51; critic for Cahiers du Cinéma, from 1952; directed first film, Opération Béton, 1954; worked as film editor, 1956; worked in publicity department, 20th Century-Fox, Paris, with producer Georges de Beauregard, 1957; working for Beauregard, directed first feature, A bout de souffle, 1959; formed Anoucka films with Anna Karina, 1964; led protests over firing of Henri Langlois, director of Cinémathèque, instigated shut down of Cannes Festival, 1968; began collaboration with Jean-Pierre Gorin, editor of Cahiers marxistes-léninistes, 1969 (partnership terminated 1973); ‘‘reclaimed’’ work from 1969–72 as that of the Dziga Vertov group; established Sonimage film and video studio in Grenoble with Anne-Marie Miéville, 1974–75; moved to the Swiss town of Rolle, 1978; began the second stage of his directorial career, 1980; directed jeans advertisement, 1987. Awards: Best Direction Award, Berlin Festival, for A bout de souffle, 1960; Prix Pasinetti, 1962; Golden Lion, Venice Film Festival, for Prenom: Carmen, 1983; Honorary César, 1986; Lifetime Achievement Award, New York Film Critics’ Circle, 1994. Address: 15 rue du Nord, 1180 Roulle, Switzerland. Jean-Luc Godard Films as Director: 1954 Opération Béton (+ pr, sc) (released 1958) 1955 Une Femme coquette (d as ‘Hans Lucas,’ + sc pr, ph, bit role as man visiting prostitute) 1957 Charlotte et Véronique ou Tous les gar?ons s’appellent Patrick (+ sc) 1958 Une Histoire d’eau (co-d: actual shooting by Truffaut, + co-sc) (released 1961); Charlotte et son Jules (+ sc, dubbed voice of Jean-Paul Belmondo) (released 1961) 1959 A bout de souffle (Breathless) (+ sc, role as passerby who points out Belmondo to police) 1961 Une Femme est une femme (+ sc) 1962 ‘‘La Paresse’’ episode of Les Sept Péchés capitaux (+ sc); Vivre sa vie (My Life to Live) (+ sc, dubbed voice of Peter Kassowitz), ‘‘Il nuovo mondo (Le Nouveau Monde)’’ in RoGoPaG (Laviamoci il cervello) (+ sc, bit role) 1963 Le Petit Soldat (+ sc, bit role as man at railway station) (completed 1960); Les Carabiniers (+ sc); Le Mépris (+ sc, role) 1964 ‘‘Le Grand Escroc’’ in Les Plus Belles Escroqueries du monde (+ sc, narration, bit role as man wearing Moroccan chéchia); Bande à part (+ sc); La Femme mariée (Une Femme mariée) (+ sc); Reportage sur Orly (+ sc) (short) GODARD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 380 1965 ‘‘Montparnasse—Levallois’’ in Paris vu par . . . (+ sc); Alphaville (+ sc); Une étrange aventure de Lemmy Cau- tion (+ sc); Pierrot le fou (+ sc) 1966 Masculin-féminin (Masculin féminin: quinze faits précis) (+ sc); Made in U.S.A. (+ sc, voice on tape recorder) 1967 Deux ou trois choses que je sais d’elle (+ sc); ‘‘Anticipation’’ episode of Le Plus Vieux Métier du monde (+ sc); La Chinoise ou Plut?t à la chinoise (+ sc); ‘‘Caméra-oeil’’ in Loin du Viêt-Nam (+ sc, appearance); Le Weekend (Week- end) (+ sc) 1968 Le Gai Savoir (+ sc); Cinétracts (+ sc) (series of untitled, creditless newsreels); Un Film comme les autres (+ sc, voice); One Plus One (Sympathy for the Devil) (+ sc, voice); One A.M. (One American Movie) (+ sc) (unfinished) 1969 British Sounds (See You at Mao) (co-d, co-sc); Pravda (+ sc) (collective credit to Groupe Dziga-Vertov); Lotte in Italia (Luttes en Italie) (+ sc) (collective credit to Groupe Dziga- Vertov); ‘‘L’amore’’ episode of Amore e rabbia (+ sc) (completed 1967: festival showings as ‘‘Andante e ritorno dei figli prodighi’’ episode of Vangelo 70) 1970 Vent d’est (co-d, co-sc); Jusqu’à la victoire (Till Victory) (co-d, + sc) (unfinished) 1971 Vladimir et Rosa (+ sc, collective credit to Groupe Dziga- Vertov, role as U.S. policeman, appearance, narration) 1972 Tout va bien (co-d, + co-sc, pr); A Letter to Jane or Investiga- tion about a Still (Lettre à Jane) (co-d, + co-sc, co-pr, narration) 1975 Numéro deux (+ co-sc, co-pr, appearance) 1976 Ici et ailleurs (co-d, + co-sc) (includes footage from Jusqu’à la victoire); Comment ?a va (co-d, + co-sc) 1977 6 x 2: sur et sous la communication (co-d, + co-sc) (for TV) 1980 Sauve qui peut (La vie; Every Man for Himself) (+ co-sc, co-ed) 1982 Passion (+ sc) 1983 Prenom: Carmen (First Name: Carmen) (role) 1985 Hail Mary; Detective 1986 Grandeur et Decadence d’un Petit Commerce du Cinema (The Rise and Fall of a Little Film Company) (for TV) 1987 Soigne ta droite (Keep up Your Right) (ed, role); episode in Aria; King Lear (role) 1990 Nouvelle Vague (New Wave) (+ sc) 1990 Visages Suisse (Faces of Switzerland) (co-d) 1991 Allemagne Neuf Zero (Germany Nine Zero) (+ sc) 1993 Helas Pour Moi (Oh, Woe Is Me) (+ sc, ed) 1994 JLG/JLG—Autoportrait de Decembre (JLG/JLG—Self-Por- trait in December) (+ sc, appearance) 1995 Deux fois cinquante ans de cinema Francais (Two times 50 Years of French Cinema) (co-d, + co-sc, co-ed); Les enfants jouent a la Russie (The Kids Play Russian) (+ sc, ed, appearance) 1996 For Ever Mozart 1998 The Old Place; Histoire du cinema: Fatale beauté (+ sc, ed); Histoire du cinema: La monnaie de l’absolu (+ sc, ed); Histoire du cinema: Le conr?le de l’univers (+ sc, ed); Histoire du cinema: Les signes parmi nous (+ sc, ed); Histoire du cinema: Seul le cinema (+sc, ed); Histoire du cinema: Une vague nouvelle (+ sc,ed) 1999 éloge de l’amour (+ sc) 2000 L’Origine du XXIème siècle (+ sc) Other Films: 1950 Quadrille (Rivette) (pr, role) 1951 Présentation ou Charlotte et son steack (Rohmer) (role) 1956 Kreutzer Sonata (Rohmer) (pr); Le Coup du berger (Rivette) (role) 1958 Paris nous appartient (Rivette) (Godard’s silhouette) 1959 Le Signe du lion (Rohmer) (role) 1961 Cléo de cinq à sept (Varda) (role with Anna Karina in comic sequence); Le Soleil dans l’oeil (Bourdon) (role) 1963 Schehérézade (Gaspard-Huit) (role); The Directors (pr: Greenblatt) (appearance); Paparazzi (Rozier) (appearance); Begegnung mit Fritz Lang (Fleischmann) (appearance); Petit Jour (Pierre) (appearance) 1966 L’Espion (The Defector) (Levy) (role) 1971 One P.M. (One Parallel Movie) (Pennebaker) (includes foot- age from abandoned One A.M. and documentary footage of its making) Publications By GODARD: books— Jean-Luc Godard par Jean-Luc Godard: articles, essais, entretiens, edited by Jean Narboni, Paris, 1968; published as Godard on Godard: Critical Writings, edited by Narboni and Tom Milne, New York, 1986. Weekend, New York, 1972. A bout de souffle, Paris, 1974. Jean-Luc Godard: Three Films—‘‘A Woman Is a Woman,’’ ‘‘A Married Woman,’’ ‘‘Two or Three Things I Know about Her,’’ New York, 1975. Introduction à une véritable histoire du cinéma, Paris, 1980. Godard on Godard : Critical Writings by Jean-Luc Godard, with Jean Luce Godard and Annette Michelson, edited by Jean Narboni, New York, 1988. By GODARD: articles— Contributing editor of La Gazette du Cinéma (Paris), 1950; regular contributor to Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), 1952 through 1968, and to Arts (Paris), 1957 through 1960. ‘‘Charlotte et son Jules,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), June 1961. ‘‘Une Histoire d’eau,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), Septem- ber 1961. ‘‘Vivre sa vie,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), October 1962; also in Film Culture (New York), Winter 1962. Interview with Tom Milne, in Sight and Sound (London), Win- ter 1962. Interview with Herbert Feinstein, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1964. ‘‘La Femme mariée,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), March 1965. GODARDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 381 ‘‘Les Carabiniers,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), May 1965. ‘‘Deux ou trois choses que je sais d’elle,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), May 1967. ‘‘A bout de souffle,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), March 1968. ‘‘Struggle on Two Fronts,’’ an interview with Jacques Bontemps, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1968. ‘‘La Chinoise,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), May 1971. ‘‘Pierrot le fou,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), July/Septem- ber 1976. ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard . . . For Himself,’’ in Framework (Norwich), Autumn 1980. ‘‘En attendant Passion. Le chemin vers la parole,’’ an interview with Alain Bergala, Serge Daney, and Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1982. Interview with Don Ranvaud and A. Farassino, in Framework (Norwich), Summer 1983. ‘‘The Carrots Are Cooked,’’ an interview with Gideon Bachman, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1984. ‘‘Genesis of a Camera,’’ with J.P. Beauviala, in Camera Obscura (Berkeley), Spring/Summer 1985. ‘‘Godard in His ‘Fifth’ Period,’’ an interview with K. Dieckmann, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1985/86. ‘‘Colles et ciseaux,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1987. Godard, Jean-Luc, article in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 30, no. 2/3, 1988. Interview with Alain Bergala and Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1988. Transcript of Cannes Film Festival press conference, in Cinéma (Paris), June 1990. Transcript of Cannes Film Festival press conference, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), June 1990. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1990. Interview in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), October 1993. Interview with Andrew Sarris, in InterView, July 1994. Interview with Scott Kraft, in Los Angeles Times, 2 April 1995. Interview with Hal Hartley, in Chaplin (Stockholm), vol. 37, no. 1, 1995. Interview with J. Tykwer, in EPD Film (Frankfurt), November 1995. Article in Iskusstvo Kino (Moscow), January 1998. ‘‘Looking Back,’’ an interview with Geoffrey Macnab, in Sight and Sound (London), April 1997. On GODARD: books— Collet, Jean, Jean-Luc Godard, Paris, 1963; New York, 1970. Roud, Richard, Jean-Luc Godard, New York, 1967. Mussman, Toby, editor, Jean-Luc Godard: A Critical Anthology, New York, 1968. Cameron, Ian, editor, The Films of Jean-Luc Godard, London, 1969. Mancini, Michele, Godard, Rome, 1969. Brown, Royal, editor, Focus on Godard, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1972. Farassino, Alberto, Godard, Florence, 1974. Monaco, James, The New Wave, New York, 1976. Kawin, Bruce, Mindscreen: Bergman, Godard, and First-Person Film, Pinceton, New Jersey, 1978. Lesage, Julia, Jean-Luc Godard, a Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1979. Kreidl, John Francis, Jean-Luc Godard, Boston, 1980. Achard, Maurice, Vous avez dit Godard: ou J’m’appelle pas Godard, Paris, 1980. MacCabe, Colin, Godard: Images, Sounds, Politics, London, 1980. Walsh, Martin, The Brechtian Aspect of Radical Cinema, Lon- don, 1981. Lefevre, Raymond, Jean-Luc Godard, Paris, 1983. Bordwell, David, Narration in the Fiction Film, London, 1985. Weis, Elisabeth, and John Belton, Film Sound: Theory and Practice, New York, 1985. Andrew, Dudley, ed., Breathless/Jean-Luc Godard, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1987. Cerisuelo, Marc, Jean-Luc Godard, Paris, 1989. Desbarats, Carole, and Jean-Paul Gorce, L’Effet Godard, Tou- louse, 1989. Douin, Jean-Luc, Jean-Luc Godard, Paris, 1989. Paech, Joachim, Passion, oder, Die Einbildungen des Jean-Luc Godard, Frankfort, 1989. Locke, Maryel, and Charles Warren, eds. Jean-Luc Godard’s Hail Mary: Women and the Sacred in Film, Carbondale, Illinois, 1993. Bellour, Raymond, and Mary Lea Bandy, Jean-Luc Godard Son + Image, New York, 1993. Dixon, Wheeler Winston, The Films of Jean-Luc Godard (SUNY Series, Cultural Studies in Cinema/Video), Albany, 1997. Sterritt, David, The Films of Jean-Luc Godard: Seeing the Invisible, New York, 1999. On GODARD: articles— Moullet, Luc, ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1960. Fieschi, Jean-André, ‘‘Godard: Cut Sequence: Vivre sa vie,’’ in Movie (London), January 1963. Bellour, Raymond, ‘‘Godard or Not Godard,’’ in Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 14 May 1964. Sarris, Andrew, and Andrew Blasi, ‘‘Waiting for Godard,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Summer 1964. Kael, Pauline, ‘‘Godard est Godard,’’ in The New Yorker, 9 Octo- ber 1965. Metz, Christian, ‘‘Le Cinéma moderne et la narrative,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1966. Bertolucci, Bernardo, ‘‘Versus Godard,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), January 1967. ‘‘Godard Issue’’ of Image et Son/Revue du Cinéma (Paris), Decem- ber 1967. ‘‘Godard Issue’’ of Film Heritage (Dayton, Ohio), Spring 1968. Schickel, Richard, ‘‘The Trying Genius of M. Godard,’’ in Life (New York), 12 April 1968. Clouzot, Claire, ‘‘Godard and the U.S.,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Summer 1968. Farber, Manny, ‘‘The Films of Jean-Luc Godard,’’ in Artforum (New York), October 1968. MacBean, James, ‘‘Politics, Poetry, and the Language of Signs in Godard’s Made in U.S.A.,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1969. Sainsbury, Peter, ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard,’’ in Afterimage (New York), April 1970. GODARD DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 382 Goodwin, Michael, and others, ‘‘The Dziga Vertov Group in Amer- ica,’’ in Take One (Montreal), March/April 1971. MacBean, James, ‘‘Godard and the Dziga Vertov Group: Film and Dialectic,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1972. Kolkeon, R.P., ‘‘Angle and Reality: Godard and Gorin in America,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1973. ‘‘Director of the Year,’’ International Film Guide (London, New York), 1974. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘The Godard Film Forum,’’ in Film (London), Janu- ary 1974. MacCabe, Colin, ‘‘Realism and the Cinema: Notes on Some Brechtian Theses,’’ in Screen (London), Summer 1974. Lesage, Julia, ‘‘Visual Distancing in Godard,’’ in Wide Angle (Ath- ens, Ohio), no. 3, 1976. Gilliatt, Penelope, ‘‘Profile,’’ in The New Yorker, 25 October 1976. Lefèvre, Raymond, ‘‘La Lettre et la cinématographe: L’Ecrit dans les films de Godard,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), May 1977. Forbes, Jill, ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard: Two into Three,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Winter 1980/81. ‘‘Godard Issue’’ of Camera Obscura (Berkeley), Fall 1982. Burgoyne, Robert, ‘‘The Political Topology of Montage: The Con- flict of Genres in the Films of Godard,’’ in Enclitic (Minneapolis), Spring 1983. Lovell, Alan, ‘‘Epic Theater and Counter Cinema,’’ and Julia Lesage, ‘‘Godard and Gorin’s Left Politics,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), April 1983. Dossier on Godard, in Cinématographe (Paris), December 1983. ‘‘Godard Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), March 1984. MacCabe, Colin, ‘‘Every Man for Himself,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), June 1984. Gervais, M., ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard 1985—These Are Not the Days,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1985. Durgnat, Raymond, ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard: His Crucifixion and Resur- rection,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), September 1985. ‘‘Godard Issue’’ of Revue Belge du Cinéma (Brussels), Summer 1986. Wide Angle (Athens, Ohio), vol. 9, no. 1, 1987. ‘‘Godard Issue’’ of Cinéma (Paris), 30 December 1987. Ciment, Michel, ‘‘Je vous salue Godard,’’ in Positif (Paris), Febru- ary 1988. Francois Quenin, article in Cinéma (Paris), June 1988. Article in L’avant Scene Cinéma (Paris), April 1989. Colette Mazabrard, article in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1989. Michael O’Pray, article in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), Novem- ber 1989. Stam, Robert, ‘‘The Lake, the Trees,’’ in Film Comment, January/ February 1991. Riding, Alan, ‘‘What’s in a Name if the Name Is Godard?,’’ in New York Times, 25 October 1992. Klawans, Stuart, ‘‘Jean-Luc Godard: Son + Image,’’ in The Nation (New York), 23 November 1992. Sterritt, David, ‘‘Recognizing a Film Renegade,’’ in Christian Sci- ence Monitor (New York), 27 November 1992. Hoberman, J., ‘‘Picasso, Marx, and Coca-Cola,’’ in ARTnews (New York), February 1993. Eco, Umberto, ‘‘Do-It-yourself Godard,’’ in Harper’s Magazine (New York), May 1993. Stoneman, Rod, ‘‘Bon Voyage,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), July 1993. Dieckmann, Katherine, ‘‘Godard’s Counter Memory,’’ in Art in America (New York), October 1993. James, Caryn, ‘‘From France, Depardieu as God and Other Joys,’’ in New York Times, 18 February 1994. Sterritt, David, ‘‘Vive la cinema! French Film Series Erupts with Energy,’’ in Christian Science Monitor (New York), 25 Febru- ary 1994. Darke, Chris, ‘‘It All Happened in Paris,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), July 1994. Sterritt, David, ‘‘Ideas, Not Plots, Inspire Jean-Luc Godard,’’ in Christian Science Monitor (New York), 3 August 1994. Morice, Jacques, ‘‘4 x Godard,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), September 1994. Loiselle, Marie-Claude, ‘‘Poétique du montage,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), no. 77, Summer 1995. White, Armond, and Gavin Smith, ‘‘Double Helix. Jean-Luc Godard,’’ in Film Comment (New York), March-April 1996. Cohen, Alain J., ‘‘Godard et le passion du féminin: cas extrêmes de Marie du Armide,’’ in Vertigo (Paris), January 1996. Poquet, Marc, ‘‘Never Again For Ever Mozart,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1997. Jousse, Thierry, ‘‘Le savoir de l’aveugle,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), May 1997. Loiselle, Marie-Claude and others, ‘‘Jean Luc-Godard,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), no. 88–89, Autumn 1997. Price, Brian, ‘‘Plagiarizing the Plagiarist: Godard Meets the Situationists,’’ in Film Comment (New York), November-Decem- ber 1997. Dixon, Wheeler Winston, ‘‘For Ever Godard: Notes on Godard’s For Ever Mozart,’’ in Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury), April 1998. Dossier, in Positif (Paris), February 1999. On GODARD: films— Bazin, Janine, and others, Jean-Luc Godard, ou le cinéma de défi, for TV, 1964. Doniol-Valcroze, Jacques, Pour le plaisir, for TV, 1965. Thanhauser, Ralph, Godard in America, U.S.A., 1970. Berckmans, Jean-Pierre, La Longue Marche de Jean-Luc Godard, Belgium, 1972. Costard, Hellmuth, Der kleine Godard, West Germany, 1978. *** If influence on the development of world cinema is the criterion, then Jean-Luc Godard is certainly the most important filmmaker of the past thirty years; he is also one of the most problematic. Godard’s career so far falls roughly into three periods: the early works from About de souffle to Weekend (1959–1968), a period whose end is marked decisively by the latter film’s final caption, ‘‘Fin de Cinéma’’; the period of intense politicization, during which Godard collaborated (mainly though not exclusively) with Jean- Pierre Gorin and the Dziga Vertov group (1968–1972); and the subsequent work, divided between attempts to renew communication with a wider, more ‘‘mainstream’’ cinema audience and explorations of the potentialities of video (in collaboration with Anne-Marie GODARDDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 383 Miéville). One might also separate the films from Masculin-Féminin to Weekend as representing a transitional phase from the first to the Dziga Vertov period, although in a sense all Godard’s work is transitional. What marks the middle period off from its neighbours is above all the difference in intended audience: the Dziga Vertov films were never meant to reach the general public. They were instead aimed at already committed Marxist or leftist groups, campus student groups, and so on, to stimulate discussion of revolutionary politics and aesthetics, and, crucially, the relationship between the two. Godard’s importance lies in his development of an authentic modernist cinema in opposition to (though, during the early period, at the same time within) mainstream cinema; it is with his work that film becomes central to our century’s major aesthetic debate, the contro- versy developed through such figures as Lukács, Brecht, Benjamin, and Adorno as to whether realism or modernism is the more progres- sive form. As ex-Cahiers du Cinéma critic and New Wave filmmaker, Godard was initially linked with Truffaut and Chabrol in a kind of revolutionary triumvirate; it is easy, in retrospect, to see that Godard was from the start the truly radical figure, the ‘‘revolution’’ of his colleagues operating purely on the aesthetic level and easily assimilable into the mainstream. A simple way of demonstrating the essential thrust of Godard’s work is to juxtapose his first feature, Breathless, with the excellent American remake. Jim McBride’s film follows the original fairly closely, with the fundamental difference that in it all other elements are subordinated to the narrative and the characters. In Godard’s film, on the contrary, this traditional relationship between signifier and signified shows a continuous tendency to come adrift, so that the process of narration (which mainstream cinema strives everywhere to conceal) becomes foregrounded; A bout de souffle is ‘‘about’’ a story and characters, certainly, but it is also about the cinema, about film techniques, about Jean Seberg, etc. This foregrounding of the process—and the means—of narration is developed much further in subsequent films, in which Godard systematically breaks down the traditional barrier between fiction/ documentary, actor/character, narrative film/experimental film to create freer, ‘‘open’’ forms. Persons appear as themselves in works of fiction, actors address the camera/audience in monologues or as if being interviewed, materiality of film is made explicit (the switches from positive to negative in Une Femme mariée, the turning on and off of the soundtrack in Deux ou trois choses que je sais d’elle, the showing of the clapper-board in La Chinoise). The initial motivation for this seems to have been the assertion of personal freedom: the filmmaker shatters the bonds of traditional realism in order to be able to say and do whatever he wants, creating films spontaneously. (Pierrot le fou—significantly, one of Godard’s most popular films— is the most extreme expression of this impulse.) Gradually, however, a political motivation (connected especially with the influence of Brecht) takes over. There is a marked sociological interest in the early films (especially Vivre sa vie and Une Femme mariée), but the turning-point is Masculin-féminin with its two male protagonists, one seeking fulfillment through personal relations, the other a political activist. The former’s suicide at the end of the film can be read as marking a decisive choice: from here on, Godard increasingly listens to the voice of revolutionary politics and eventually (in the Dziga Vertov films) adopts it as his own voice. The films of the Dziga Vertov group (named after the great Russian documentarist who anticipated their work in making films that foreground the means of production and are continuously self- reflexive) were the direct consequence of the events of May 1968. More than ever before the films are directly concerned with their own process, so that the ostensible subjects—the political scene in Czecho- slovakia (Pravda) or Italy (Lotte in Italia), the trial of the Chicago Eight (Vladimir and Rosa)—become secondary to the urgent, actual subject: how does one make a revolutionary film? It was at this time that Godard distinguished between making political films (i.e., films on political subjects: Costa-Gavras’s Z is a typical example) and making films politically, the basic assumption being that one cannot put radical content into traditional form without seriously compro- mising, perhaps negating, it. Hence the attack on realism initiated at the outset of Godard’s career manifests its full political significance: realism is a bourgeois art form, the means whereby the bourgeoisie endlessly reassures itself, validating its own ideology as ‘‘true,’’ ‘‘natural,’’ ‘‘real’’; its power must be destroyed. Of the films from this period, Vent d’est (the occasion for Peter Wollen’s seminal essay on ‘‘Counter-Cinema’’ in After Image) most fully realized this aesthetic: the original pretext (the pastiche of a Western) recedes into the background, and the film becomes a discussion about itself— about the relationship between sound and image, the materiality of film, the destruction of bourgeois forms, the necessity for continuous self-criticism and self-awareness. The assumption behind the Dziga Vertov films is clearly that the revolutionary impetus of May 1968 would be sustained, and it has not been easy for Godard to adjust to its collapse. That difficulty is the subject of one of his finest works, Tout va bien (again in collaboration with Gorin), an attempt to return to commercial filmmaking without abandoning the principles (both aesthetic and political) of the preced- ing years. Beginning by foregrounding Godard’s own problem (how does a radical make a film within the capitalist production system?), the film is strongest in its complex use of Yves Montand and Jane Fonda (simultaneously fictional characters/personalities/star images) and its exploration of the issues to which they are central. These issues include the relationship of intellectuals to the class struggle; the relationship between professional work, personal commitment, and political position; and the problem of sustaining a radical impulse in a non-revolutionary age. Tout va bien is Godard’s most authentically Brechtian film, achieving radical force and analytical clarity without sacrificing pleasure and a degree of emotional involvement. Godard’s relationship to Brecht has not always been so clear-cut. While the justification for Brecht’s distanciation principles was always the communication of clarity, Godard’s films often leave the spectator in a state of confusion and frustration. He continues to seem by temperament more anarchist than Marxist. One is troubled by the continuity between the criminal drop-outs of the earlier films and the political activists of the later. The insistent intellectualism of the films is often offset by a wilful abeyance of systematic thinking, the abeyance, precisely, of that self-awareness and self-criticism the political works advocate. Even in Tout va bien, what emerges from the political analysis as the film’s own position is an irresponsible and ultimately desperate belief in spontaneity. Desperation, indeed, is never far from the Godardian surface, and seems closely related to the treatment of heterosexual relations: even through the apparent femi- nist awareness of the recent work runs a strain of unwitting misogyny (most evident, perhaps, in Sauve qui peut). The central task of Godard criticism, in fact, is to sort out the remarkable and salutary nature of the positive achievement from the temperamental limitations that flaw it. GóMEZ DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 384 From 1980 on, Godard commenced the second phase of his directorial career. Unfortunately, far too many of his films have become increasingly inaccessible to the audiences who had championed him in his heyday during the 1960s. Sauve qui peut (La Vie) (Every Man for Himself), Godard’s comeback film, portended his future work. It is an awkward account of three characters whose lives become entwined: a man who has left his wife for a woman; the woman, who is in the process of leaving the man for a rural life; and a country girl who has become a prostitute. In fact, several of Godard’s works might best be described as anti-movies. Passion, for example, features characters named Isabelle, Michel, Hanna, Laszlo and Jerzy (played respectively by Isabelle Huppert, Michel Piccoli, Hanna Schygulla, Laszlo Szabo, and Jerzy Radziwilowicz), who are involved in the shooting of a movie titled Passion. The latter appears to be not so much a structured narrative as a series of scenes which are visions of a Renaissance painting. The film serves as a cynical condemnation of the business of moviemaking-for-profit, as the extras are poorly treated and the art of cinema is stained by commer- cial considerations. Prenom: Carmen (First Name: Carmen) is Godard’s best latter- career effort, a delightfully subversive though no less pessimistic mirror of the filmmaker’s disenchantment with the cinema. His Carmen is a character straight out of his earlier work: a combination seductress/terrorist/wannabe movie maker. Her uncle, played by Godard, is a once-celebrated but now weary and faded film director named, not surprisingly, Jean-Luc Godard. It seemed that Godard had simply set out to shock in Hail, Mary, a redo of the birth of Christ set in contemporary France. His Mary is a young student and gas station attendant; even though she has never had sex with Joseph, her taxi-driving boyfriend, she discovers she is pregnant. Along with Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ, this became a cause celebre among Catholics and even was censured by the Pope. However, the film is eminently forgettable; far superior is The Book of Mary, a perceptive short about a girl and her constantly quarrelling parents. It accompanied showings of Hail, Mary, and is directed by long-time Godard colleague Anne-Marie Miéville. Detective, dedicated to auteur heroes John Cassavetes, Edgar G. Ulmer, and Clint Eastwood, is a verbose, muddled film noir. Despite its title, Nouvelle Vague (New Wave), an observance of the lives of a wealthy and influential couple, only makes one yearn for the days of the real ‘‘Nouvelle Vague.’’ The narrative, which focuses on the sexual and political issues that are constants in Godard’s films, is barely discernable; the dialogue—including such lines as ‘‘Love doesn’t die, it leaves you,’’ ‘‘One man isn’t enough for a woman—or too much,’’ ‘‘A critic is a soldier who fires at his own regiment,’’ ‘‘Have you ever been stung by a dead bee?’’—is superficially profound. King Lear, an excessive, grotesque updating of Shake- speare, is of note for its oddball, once-in-a-lifetime cast: Godard; Woody Allen; Norman and Kate Mailer; stage director Peter Sellars; Burgess Meredith; and Molly Ringwald. The political thriller Allemagne Neuf Zero (Germany Nine Zero), although as confusing as any latter- day Godard film, works as nostalgia because of the presence of Eddie Constantine. He is recast as private eye Lemmy Caution, who last appeared in Alphaville. Here, he encounters various characters in a reunified Germany. Helas Pour Moi (Oh, Woe Is Me), based on the Greek legend of Alcmene and Amphitryon and a text penned by the Italian poet Leopardi, is a long-winded bore about a God who wants to perceive human feeling; those intrigued by the subject matter would be advised to see Wim Wenders’ Wings of Desire and Faraway, So Close. JLG/ JLG—Autoportrait de Decembre (JLG/JLG—Self-Portrait in Decem- ber), filmed in and near Godard’s Swiss home, is a semi-abstract biography of the filmmaker. Its structure is appropriate, given the development of Godard’s cinematic style. Ultimately, it is of interest mostly to those still concerned with Godard’s life and career. —Robin Wood, updated by Rob Edelman GóMEZ, Sara Nationality: Cuban. Born: Havana, 1943. Education: Conservatory of Music, Havana. Career: Assistant director at Instituto Cubano del Arte e industria Cinematograficos (ICAIC), under Tomás Gutiérrez Alea, Jorge Fraga, and Agnes Varda, from 1961; directed first film, Ire a Santiago, 1964; shot and edited first feature, De cierta manera, 1974; original negative, damaged in processing, restored under supervision of Gutiérrez Alea and Rigoberto Lopez, 1974–76. Died: Of acute asthma, 2 June 1974. Films as Director: 1964 Ire a Santiago 1965 Excursion a Vueltabajo 1967 Y tenemos sabor 1968 En la otra isla 1969 Isla del tesero 1970 Poder local, poder popular 1971 Un documental a proposito del transito 1972 Atencion prenatal; Ano uno 1973 Sobre horas extras y trabajo voluntario 1977 De cierta manera (One Way or Another) Publications On GóMEZ: book— Chanan, Michael, The Cuban Image, London, 1985. On GóMEZ: articles— Chijona, Geraldo, and Rigoberto López, in Cine Cubano (Ha- vana), no. 93. Burton, Julianne, ‘‘Individual Fulfillment and Collective Achieve- ment,’’ in Cinéaste (New York), January 1977. Burton, Julianne, ‘‘Introduction to the Revolutionary Cuban Cin- ema,’’ and Carlos Galiano, ‘‘One Way or Another: The Revolu- tion in Action,’’ in Jump Cut (Chicago), December 1978. Lesage, Julia, ‘‘One Way or Another: Dialectical, Revolutionary, Feminist,’’ in Jump Cut (Chicago), May 1979. GORETTADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 385 ‘‘Special Issue,’’ Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 127, 1989. Paranagua, P.A., ‘‘Pioneers: Women Filmmakers in Latin America,’’ in Framework (London), no. 37, 1989. Paranagua, P.A., ‘‘Cineastas pioneras de America Latina,’’ in Dicine (Mexico), no. 37, November 1990. *** We shall never know all that Sara Gómez might have given to us. We have her one feature film, the marvelous De cierta manera, and a few short documentaries to indicate what might have been had she lived beyond the age of thirty-one. But we will never really know all that this prodigiously talented black woman was capable of. Sara Gómez could be seen as prototypical of the new Cuban directors. Entering the Cuban Film Institute (ICAIC) at an early age, she worked as assistant director for various cineastes, including Tomás Gutiérrez Alea, whose influence marked her work as it has so many young directors. During a ten-year period (1964–74) she fulfilled the usual apprenticeship among Cuban cineastes by directing documentary films. Documentaries are seen as an important training ground for Cuban directors because they force them to focus on the material reality of Cuba and thus emphasize the use of cinema as an expression of national culture. As Gutiérrez Alea noted, ‘‘the kind of cinema which adapts itself to our interests, fortunately, is a kind of light, agile cinema, one that is very directly founded upon our own reality.’’ This is precisely the kind of cinema Sara Gómez went on to produce, beginning work on De cierta manera in 1974 and finishing the editing of the film shortly before her death of acute asthma. Gómez’s early training in documentaries and the influence of Gutiérrez Alea is evident in De cierta manera. The film combines the documentary and fiction forms so inextricably that they are impossi- ble to disentangle. Through this technique, she emphasized the material reality that is at the base of all creative endeavor and the necessity of bringing a critical perspective to all forms of film. In choosing this style, which I call ‘‘dialectical resonance,’’ Gómez appeared to follow Gutiérrez Alea’s example in the superb Memories of Underdevelopment. But there is a crucial difference between the two films—a difference that might be said to distinguish the generation of directors who came of age before the triumph of the revolution (e.g. Gutiérrez Alea) from those who have grown up within the revolution. In spite of its ultimate commitment to the revolution- ary process, Memories remains in some ways the perspective of an ‘‘outsider’’ and might be characterized as ‘‘critical bourgeois real- ism.’’ However, De cierta manera is a vision wholly from within the revolution, despite the fact that every position in the film is subjected to criticism—including that of the institutionalized revolution, which is presented in the form of an annoyingly pompous omniscient narration. Thus, the perspective of Gomez might be contrasted to that of Memories by calling it ‘‘critical socialist realism.’’ The emphasis on dialectical criticism, struggle, and commitment is equally great in both films, but the experience of having grown up within the revolution created a somewhat different perspective. Despite its deceptively simple appearance—a result of being shot in 16mm on a very low budget—De cierta manera is the work of an extremely sophisticated filmmaker. Merely one example among many of Gómez’s sophistication is the way in which she combined a broad range of modern distanciation techniques with the uniquely Cuban tropical beat to produce a film that is simultaneously rigor- ously analytic and powerfully sensuous—as well as perhaps the finest instance to date of a truly dialectical film. Although we are all a little richer for the existence of this work, we remain poorer for the fact that she will make no more films. —John Mraz GORETTA, Claude Nationality: Swiss. Born: Geneva, 23 June 1929. Education: Law coursework at Université de Genève. Career: With Alain Tanner, moved to London, 1955; worked at British Film institute, 1956–57; television director in Switzerland, from 1958; formed production company ‘‘Groupe de 5,’’ with Tanner, Jean-Louis Roy, Claude Soutter, and Yves Yersin, 1968; directed first feature, Le Fou, 1970. Awards: Ecumenical Prize, Cannes Festival, for La Dentellière, 1977. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1957 Nice Time (co-d, co-sc) 1970 Le Fou (The Madman) (+ co-pr) 1973 L’Invitation (The Invitation) (co-sc) 1975 Pas si méchant que ?a (Not as Wicked as That; The Wonderful Crook) (co-sc) 1977 La Dentellière (The Lacemaker) (co-sc); Jean Piaget (The Epistemology of Jean Piaget) 1978 Les Chemines de l’Exile ou Les Dernières Années de Jean- Jacques Rousseau (The Roads of Exile) 1980 La Provinciale (The Girl from Lorraine); Bonheur toi-même 1983 La Mort de Mario Ricci (The Death of Mario Ricci) 1985 Orfeo 1987 Si le soleil ne revenais pas (If the Sun Never Returns); Le Rapport du Gendarme (for TV) 1991 L’Ombre; Visages Suisses 1994 Het Verdriet Van Belgie (d only) 1997 Le Dernier été (for TV) (d only) Publications By GORETTA: book— La Dentellière, Paris, 1981. By GORETTA: articles— Interview with G. Langlois, in Cinéma (Paris), April 1973. Interview with M. Boujut, in Cinema (Zurich), vol. 21, no. 1, 1975. Interview with D. Maillet, in Cinématographe (Paris), June 1977. Interview with Judith Kass, in Movietone News (Seattle), 14 August 1978. GORETTA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 386 Claude Goretta On GORETTA: articles— Delmas, J., ‘‘Tanner, Goretta, la Suisse et nous,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), September/October 1973. ‘‘Claude Goretta,’’ in Cinema (Zurich), vol. 20, no. 1, 1974. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Goretta’s Roads of Exile,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), no. 2, 1979. Milne, Tom, ‘‘Claude Goretta,’’ in Film Dope (London), April 1980. ‘‘La Dentellière Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 April 1981. Buache Freddy, ‘‘Claude Goretta,’’ in Revue Belge du Cinéma (Brussels), Winter 1985. Buache, F., article in Cinemaction, April 1990. Schlappner, Martin, article in Filmbulletin (Winterthur), January 1998. *** Claude Goretta’s gentle comedies and sensitive depictions of provincial naifs have been among the most successful Swiss films of the twentieth century. Although Goretta shares his countryman Alain Tanner’s preoccupation with Renoiresque evocations of landscape and lovable eccentrics, there is a sharp disparity between these two idiosyncratic Swiss directors. As Goretta himself has observed, ‘‘Tanner’s films always have a discourse, while mine do everything they can to avoid one.’’ Goretta’s first film, an experimental short called Nice Time, was in fact made with the collaboration of Alain Tanner when both men were affiliated with the British Film Institute. This impressionistic view of Piccadilly Circus, one of the sleazier parts of central London, prefigures both directors’ subsequent interest in whimsical vignettes with seri- ous, and occasionally acerbic, sociological underpinnings. Like many contemporary directors of note, Goretta served his apprenticeship in television. Many of his early television films were literary adapta- tions, including an adaptation of four Chekhov stories, Chekov ou le miroir des vies perdues. Goretta’s first feature film, Le Fou, featured one of his favorite actors, the distinguished character player, Fran?ois Simon. Despite a mixed critical reception, Le Fou was awarded a prize as the best Swiss film of 1970 by the Swiss Critics’ Associa- tion. L’Invitation was the first of Goretta’s films to receive wide- spread international recognition. This unpretentious comedy about the loss of inhibitions experienced by a group of office workers during GOSHODIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 387 a mildly uproarious party was ecstatically reviewed by British and American critics who casually invoked the names of both Bu?uel and Renoir for the sake of comparison. Pas si méchant que ?a fared less well with both the critics and public, although Gérard Depardieu’s charming portrayal of a whimsical thief was widely praised. Le Dentellière, an incisive character study of a guileless young beautician played flawlessly by Isabelle Huppert (in her first major role), received an even more rhapsodic critical reception than L’Invi- tation. Jean Boffety’s pristine cinematography and Goretta’s re- strained direction were singled out for praise, although several feminist critics cogently observed that Goretta’s reverence for the Huppert character’s enigmatic passivity was a singularly insidious example of male condescension. Les Chemins de l’exil marked Goretta’s return to his roots in documentary filmmaking. This leisurely biographical portrait of Jean-Jacques Rousseau stars Fran?ois Simon as the famed philosophe who remains one of the most celebrated figures in Swiss cultural history. La Provinciale was a somewhat muddled attempt to reiterate many of the themes first explored in La Dentellière, although Nathalie Baye’s performance was suffused with integrity. The Death of Mario Ricci was favorably received at the 1983 Cannes Film Festival. —Richard Porton GOSHO, Heinosuke Nationality: Japanese. Born: Tokyo, 1 February 1902. Education: Keio Commerce School, graduated 1921. Family: Married three times. Career: Assistant to director Yasujiro Shimazu, Shochiku- Kamata Studio, 1923; directed first film, Nanto no haru, 1925; moved to Daiei Studio, 1941; returned to Shochiku-Ofuna, 1945, then to Toho until 1948; established Studio 8 Productions, affiliated with Shin-Toho, 1951; worked for several studios, from 1954; also writer for television; president of the Japanese Association of Film Direc- tors, 1964–75; also director of the Japanese Haiku Art Association. Awards: Eleven films placed among Kinema Jumpo Best Films of the Year between 1927 and 1968; Mainichi Film Prize, Japan, for One More Time, 1947; Kun Yon-to Asahi Shoju sho Order of the Japanese Government, 1947; International Peace Prize, Berlin Festival, for Where Chimneys Are Seen, 1953. Died: 1 May 1981. Films as Director: 1925 Nanto no haru (Spring of Southern Island) (+ sc); Sora wa haretari (No Clouds in the Sky); Otokogokoro (Man’s Heart) (+ sc); Seishun (Youth) (+ sc); Tosei tamatebako (A Casket for Living) 1926 Machi no hitobito (Town People); Hatsukoi (First Love) (+ sc); Hahayo koishi (Mother, I Miss You; Mother’s Love); Honryu (A Torrent); Musume (A Daughter) (+ sc); Kaeranu sasabue (Bamboo Leaf Flute of No Return; No Return); Itoshi no wagako (My Loving Child) (+ sc); Kanojo (She; Girl Friend) (+ sc) 1927 Sabishiki ranbomono (Lonely Hoodlum); Hazukashii yume (Shameful Dream), Karakuri musume (Fake Girl) (+ co-sc); Shojo no shi (Death of a Maiden) (+ co-sc); Okame (A Plain Woman) (+ sc); Tokyo koshinkyoko (Tokyo March) 1928 Sukinareba koso (Because I Love; If You Like It) (+ co-sc); Mura no hanayome (The Village Bride); Doraku shinan (Guidance to the Indulgent; Debauchery Is Wrong) (+ co-sc); Kami e no michi (Road to God); Hito no yo no sugata (Man’s Worldly Appearance); Kaido no kishi (Knight of the Street); Haha yo, kimi no na o kegasu nakare (Mother, Do Not Shame Your Name) 1929 Yoru no mesuneko (Cat of the Night); Shin josei kagami (A New Kind of Woman); Oyaji to sono ko (Father and His Son); Ukiyo-buro (The Bath Harem) (+ sc); Netsujo no ichiya (A Night of Passion) (+ co-sc) 1930 Dokushinsha goyojin (Bachelors Beware) (+ co-sc); Dai- Tokyo bi ikkaku (A Corner of Great Tokyo) (+ add’l dialogue); Hohoemu jinsei (A Smiling Life); Onna yo, kini no na o kegasu nakare (Women, Do Not Shame Your Names); Shojo nyuyo (Virgin Wanted); Kinuyo monogatari (The Kinuyo Story); Aiyoku no ki (Record of Love and Desire) 1931 Jokyu aishi (Sad Story of a Barmaid); Yoru hiraku (Open at Night); Madamu to nyobo (Next Door Madame and My Wife; The Neighbor’s Wife and Mine); Shima to ratai jiken (Island of Naked Scandal) (+ add’l dialogue); Gutei kenkei (Stupid Young Brother and Wise Old Brother) (+ add’l dialogue); Wakaki hi no kangeki (Memories of Young Days) 1932 Niisan no baka (My Stupid Brother) Ginza no yanagi (Willows of Ginza); Tengoku ni musubu koi (Heaven Linked with Love); Satsueijo romansu: Renai annai (Romance at the Studio: Guidance to Love); Hototogisu (A Cuckoo); Koi no Tokyo (Love in Tokyo) 1933 Hanayome no negoto (The Bride Talks in Her Sleep); Izu no odoriko (Dancer of Izu); Jukyu-sai no haru (The Nineteenth Spring); Shojo yo sayonara (Virgin, Goodbye); Lamuru (L’Amour) 1934 Onna to umaretakaranya (Now That I Was Born a Woman); Sakura Ondo (Sakura Dance); Ikitoshi Ikerumono (Every- thing That Lives) 1935 Hanamuko no negoto (The Bridegroom Talks in His Sleep); Hidari uchiwa (A Life of Luxury); Fukeyo koikaze (Breezes of Love); Akogare (Yearning); Jinsei no onimotsu (Burden of Life) 1936 Oboro yo no onna (Woman of Pale Night); Shindo (New Way) parts I and II; Okusama shakuyosho (A Married Lady Borrows Money) 1937 Hanakago no uta (Song of the Flower Basket) (+ adapt) 1940 Mokuseki (Wood and Stone) 1942 Shinsetsu (New Snow) 1944 Goju-no to (The Five-storied Pagoda) 1945 Izu no musumetachi (Girls of Izu) 1947 Ima hitotabi no (One More Time) 1948 Omokage (A Vestige) 1951 Wakare-gumo (Drifting Clouds) (+ co-sc) 1952 Asa no hamon (Trouble in the Morning) 1953 Entotsu no mieru basho (Four Chimneys; Where Chimneys Are Seen) 1954 Osaka no yado (An Inn at Osaka) (+ co-sc); Niwatori wa futatabi naku (The Cock Crows Twice); Ai to shi no tanima (The Valley between Love and Death) GOULDING DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 388 1955 Takekurabe (Growing Up) 1956 Aruyo futatabi (Again One Night) (+ co-sc) 1957 Kiiroi karasu (Yellow Crow; Behold Thy Son); Banka (Elegy of the North) 1958 Hotaru-bi (Firefly’s Light); Yoku (Desire); Ari no Machi no Maria (Maria of the Street of Ants) 1959 Karatachi nikki (Journal of the Orange Flower) 1960 Waga ai (When a Woman Loves); Shiroi kiba (White Fangs) 1961 Ryoju (Hunting Rifle); Kumo ga chigireru toki (As the Clouds Scatter) (+ co-pr); Aijo no keifu (Record of Love) (+ co-pr) 1962 Kachan kekkon shiroyo (Mother, Get Married) (+ co-sc) 1963 Hyakumanin no musumetachi (A Million Girls) (+ co-sc) 1964 Osore-zan no onna (A Woman of the Osore Mountains; An Innocent Witch) 1966 Kachan to Juichi-nin no Kodomo (Mother and Eleven Child- ren; Our Wonderful Years) 1967 Utage (Feast; Rebellion in Japan) 1968 Onna no misoshiru (Women and Miso Soup); Meiji haruaki (Seasons of Meiji) Publications On GOSHO: books— Anderson, Joseph, and Donald Richie, The Japanese Film, New York, 1961; revised edition, 1982. Mellen, Joan, The Waves at Genji’s Door, New York, 1976. Bock, Audie, Japanese Film Directors, New York, 1978; revised edition, Tokyo, 1985. On GOSHO: articles— Anderson, J.L., and Donald Richie, ‘‘The Films of Heinosuke Gosho,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Autumn 1956. Gillett, John, ‘‘Coca-Cola and the Golden Pavilion,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1970. Gillett, John, ‘‘Heinosuke Gosho,’’ in Film Dope (London), April 1980. Tessier, Max, ‘‘Heinosuke Gosho,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), June 1981. ‘‘Heinosuke Gosho: A Pattern of Living,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), March 1986. Le Fanu, Mark, ‘‘To Love Is to Suffer,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1986. Niogret, H., ‘‘Heinosuke Gosho et la ma?trise du découpage,’’ in Positif (Paris), March 1987. Johnson, W., ‘‘The Splitting Image,’’ in Film Comment (New York), vol. 27, January-February 1991. *** Heinosuke Gosho began his career in 1925 as a disciple of Yasujiro Shimazu at Shochiku Studio. Young Gosho immediately proved his skill at the genre of ‘‘shomin-geki,’’ stories of the life of ordinary people, characteristic of his mentor’s work at that studio. Gosho’s early films were criticized as ‘‘unsound’’ because they often involved characters physically or mentally handicapped (The Village Bride and Faked Daughter). Gosho’s intention, however, was to illustrate a kind of warm and sincere relationship born in pathos. Today, these films are highly esteemed for their critique of feudalistic village life. Gosho was affected by this early criticism, however, and made his next films about other subjects. This led him into a long creative slump, although he continued to make five to seven films annually. The first film by Gosho to attract attention was Lonely Hoodlum of 1927, a depiction of the bittersweet life of common people, Gosho’s characteristic subject. In 1931 Shochiku gave him the challenge of making the first Japanese ‘‘talkie’’ (because many established direc- tors had refused). The film, Next Door Madame and My Wife, was welcomed passionately by both audiences and critics. It is a light and clever comedy that effectively uses ambient sounds such as a baby’s cries, an alarm clock, a street vendor’s voice, and jazz music from next door. Because every sound had to be synchronized, Gosho explored many technical devices, and used multiple cameras, differ- ent lenses, and frequent cuts to produce a truly ‘‘filmic’’ result. Gosho preferred many cuts and close-up shots, a practice he related to his studying Lubitsch carefully in his youth. Gosho’s technique of creating a poetic atmosphere with editing is most successful in Dancer of Izu, in which he intentionally chose the silent film form after making several successful talkies. Even after the success of these films, Gosho had to accept many projects which he did not want to do. He later reflected that only those films that he really wanted to do were well-made. For example, he found the subject of The Living most appealing—its protagonist tries to protest against social injustice but is unable to continue his struggle to the end. Gosho is believed to be at his best making films depicting the human side of life in his native Tokyo (Woman of Pale Night, Song of the Flower Basket, Where Chimneys Are Seen, and Comparison of Heights). However, the director also worked in many other genres, including romantic melodrama, family drama, light comedy, and social drama. He further extended his range in such films as An Elegy, a contemporary love story, and A Woman of Osore-zan, which is unusual for its unfamiliar dark tones and its eccentricity. His experi- mental spirit is illustrated by his story of the treatment of a disturbed child with color-oriented visual therapy in Yellow Crow. Throughout his career, Gosho expressed his basic belief in humanistic values. The warm, subtle, and sentimental depiction of likable people is character- istic both of Gosho’s major studio productions and his own indepen- dent films. —Kyoko Hirano GOULDING, Edmund Nationality: British. Born: London, 20 March 1891. Career: Stage debut in London, 1903; writer, actor, and director, London theatre, until 1914; New York stage debut, 1915; served with British Army in France, 1915–18; returned to America, worked as writer, 1919; hired by MGM as director/scriptwriter, 1925. Died: In Los Angeles, 24 December 1959. GOULDINGDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 389 Edmund Goulding Films as Director: 1925 Sun-up (+ sc); Sally, Irene and Mary (+ sc) 1926 Paris (Shadows of Paris) (+ sc) 1927 Women Love Diamonds (+ story); Love (Anna Karenina) (+ adapt, uncredited, pr, sc) 1930 ‘‘Dream Girl’’ episode of Paramount on Parade (+ role); The Devil’s Holiday (+ sc, music, song) [foreign language versions: Les Vacances du diable (Cavalcanti); La vacanza del diavolo (Salvatori); La fiesta del diablo (Millar); Sonntag des Lebens (Mittler); En kvinnas morgondag (Bergman)] 1931 Reaching for the Moon (+ sc); The Night Angel (+ sc, song melodies) 1932 Grand Hotel; Blondie of the Follies (+ co-lyrics, bit role as Follies director) 1934 Riptide; Hollywood Party (co-d, uncredited) 1935 The Flame Within (+ sc) 1937 That Certain Woman (+ sc) 1938 White Banners; The Dawn Patrol 1939 Dark Victory (+ song); The Old Maid; We Are Not Alone 1940 ’Til We Meet Again 1941 The Great Lie 1943 one episode of Forever and a Day; The Constant Nymph; Claudia 1946 Of Human Bondage; The Razor’s Edge; The Shocking Miss Pilgrim (Seaton) (d several scenes while Seaton ill) 1947 Nightmare Alley 1949 Everybody Does It 1950 Mr. Eight Hundred Eighty 1952 Down among the Sheltering Palms; We’re Not Married 1956 Teenage Rebel (+ music for song Dodie) 1958 Mardi Gras Other Films: 1911 Henry VIII (Parker) (role) 1914 The Life of a London Shopgirl (Raymond) (role) 1916 Quest of Life (sc, co-play basis) 1917 The Silent Partner (Neilan) (sc, story) 1918 The Ordeal of Rosetta (Chautard) (sc, story) 1919 The Perfect Love (Ralph Ince) (sc); The Glorious Lady (Irving) (sc, story); A Regular Girl (Young) (sc, co-story); Sealed Hearts (Ralph Ince) (sc, co-story); The Imp (Ellis) (sc, co-story) 1920 A Daughter of Two Worlds (Young) (sc); The Sin That Was His (Henley) (sc); The Dangerous Paradise (Earle) (sc, story); The Devil (Young) (sc) 1921 Dangerous Toys (Don’t Leave Your Husband) (Bradley) (sc, story); The Man of Stone (Archainbaud) (sc, co-story); Tol’able David (King) (co-sc); Peacock Alley (Leonard) (sc) 1922 The Seventh Day (King) (sc); Fascination (Leonard) (sc); Broadway Rose (Leonard) (sc); ’Til We Meet Again (Cabanne) (sc); Heroes of the Street (Beaudine) (co-sc); Fury (King) (sc; d erroneously attributed to Goulding in Library of Congress Copyright Catalogue); Three Little Ghosts (Fitzmaurice) (role) 1923 Dark Secrets (Fleming) (sc); Jazzmania (Leonard) (sc); The Bright Shawl (Robertson) (sc); Bright Lights of Broadway (Bright Lights and Shadows) (Campbell) (sc); Tiger Rose (Franklin) (co-sc) 1924 Dante’s Inferno (Otto) (sc); The Man Who Came Back (Flynn) (sc); Gerald Cranston’s Lady (Flynn) (sc) 1925 The Dancers (Flynn) (sc); The Scarlet Honeymoon (Hale) (sc, story; some sources credit story to Fannie Davis); The Fool (Millarde) (sc); Havoc (Lee) (sc); The Beautiful City (Webb) (sc, story) 1926 Dancing Mothers (Brenon) (co-play basis) 1928 Happiness Ahead (Seiter) (story); A Lady of Chance (Leo- nard) (adapt) 1929 The Broadway Melody (Beaumont) (story) 1930 The Grand Parade (Newmeyer) (sc, pr, songs) 1932 Flesh (Ford) (story); No Man of Her Own (Ruggles) (co-story) 1940 Two Girls on Broadway (Choose Your Partner) (Simon) (remake of The Broadway Melody, 1929) 1944 Flight from Folly (Mason) (story basis) Publications By GOULDING: book— Fury, 1922. GREENAWAY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 390 By GOULDING: article— ‘‘The Razor’s Edge,’’ in Life (New York), 12 August 1946. On GOULDING: articles— Time (New York), 19 May 1947. Obituary, in the New York Times, 25 December 1959. Sarris, Andrew, ‘‘Likable but Elusive,’’ in Film Culture (New York), Spring 1963. Brooks, Louise, ‘‘Why I Will Never Write My Memoirs,’’ in Film Culture (New York), no. 67–69, 1979. Walker, Michael, ‘‘Edmund Goulding,’’ in Film Dope (London), April 1980. Films and Filming (London), July 1983. ‘‘Edmund Goulding: Love, Marriage, Infidelity,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), January 1984. *** Our sense of Edmund Goulding is, of course, skewed by his frequently revived Grand Hotel and Dark Victory. These films are viewed today not as examples of the director’s art, but rather as star acting vehicles, the second also being seen as a prototypical ‘‘woman’s film.’’ It is generally assumed that such films were primarily authored by the studio and the stars. Yet, without suggesting that Goulding had a visual signature as distinctive as von Sternberg’s or a thematic/ ideological one as coherent as Capra’s, we must recognize the director’s personality in the care of the stagings and in the vitality of the performances complemented by those stagings. Grand Hotel seems, at first, a product of MGM’s collective enterprise rather than Goulding’s particular imagination. The sleek- ness of the writing, photography, and art direction are exemplary of the studio that defined cinematic luxury. The assembly of stars— Garbo, Crawford, Beery, John and Lionel Barrymore—in a ‘‘hotel’’ as grand as the studio itself would seem sufficient direction of the film. Yet we must give Goulding credit for the exceptionally involved choreography of faces, voices, and bodies in Grand Hotel when we look at the same stars in other movies of the period. The film’s numerous two-shots are organized with a nuance that makes us as attentive to the shifting relationships between those starry faces as we are to the faces themselves. And we need only see Garbo as directed by Clarence Brown or George Fitzmaurice to appreciate the contribu- tion of Edmund Goulding. He is exceptionally sensitive to the time it takes the actress to register thought through her mere act of presence. That sensitivity is not diminished when Goulding directs Bette Davis, whose rhythm is totally dissimilar to Garbo’s. In Dark Victory and The Old Maid the director presides over shots that permit us to perceive star and character simultaneously, a requisite of successful screen star performance. Goulding’s strength is in characterization, in creating the kind of atmosphere in which actors explore the richest areas within themselves, and in creating the visual/aural contexts that put such exploration in relief for the viewer. This is certainly the case in The Constant Nymph. Its precious narrative conceit—a soulful adolescent girl (Joan Fontaine) inspires an excessively cerebral composer (Charles Boyer) to write music with emotion—both re- flects the emotional qualities of Goulding’s films and displays the actors at their most courageous. For Goulding, the mature Joan Fontaine is able to sustain her impersonation of an impulsive, loving girl for the whole length of a film. And in Nightmare Alley, Tyrone Power is pushed to expose his own persona in the most unflattering light—the ‘‘handsome leading man’’ as charlatan. But that exposure, one of many in the films of Goulding, is also evidence of his affinity for the dilemma of the performing artist, vulnerable in the magnifying exposures of the cinematic medium and dependent on the director’s empathy if that vulnerability is to become a meaningful cinematic sign. —Charles Affron GREENAWAY, Peter Nationality: British. Born: Newport, Gwent, Wales, 5 April 1942. Education: Studied painting. Career: had first exhibition of paint- ings, London, 1964; worked as a film editor for the Central Office of Information, 1965–76; directed his first short film, Train, 1966; directed his first feature, The Falls, 1980. Awards: British Film Institute Special Award, for The Falls, 1980; Melbourne Film Festi- val Best Short Film, for Act of God, 1981; Cannes Film Festival Best Artistic Contribution, Seattle International Film Festival Golden Space Needle-Best Director, for Drowning by Numbers, 1988; Catalonian International Film Festival Best Director, for The Cook, the Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover, 1989; two prizes at Festival International du Nouveau Cinema et de la Video, for A TV Dante, 1990; Seattle International Film Festival Golden Space Needle-Best Director, Catalonian International Film Festival Best Film, for The Pillow Book, 1996; Istanbul International Film Festival Honorary Award, 1997. Films as Director/Screenwriter: 1966 Train; Tree 1967 Revolution; Five Postcards from Capital Cities 1969 Intervals 1971 Erosion 1973 H Is for House (+ ph, ed, voice) 1975 Windows (+ ph, ed, voice); Water; Water Wrackets (+ ph, ed) 1976 Goole by Numbers 1977 Dear Phone (+ ph, ed) 1978 1–100; A Walk through H (+ ed); Vertical Features Remake (+ ph, ed) 1980 The Falls (+ ed, narration) 1981 Act of God (for TV) (doc); Zandra Rhodes; Terence Conran (d only) 1982 The Draughtsman’s Contract 1983 Four American Composers 1984 Making a Splash (d only); A TV Dante—Canto 5 1985 Inside Rooms—The Bathroom (Inside Rooms: 26 Bathrooms, London & Oxfordshire, 1985) (doc) d only); A Zed and Two Noughts 1987 The Belly of an Architect GREENAWAYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 391 1988 Drowning by Numbers; Fear of Drowning (co-d) (+ narra- tion); Death in the Seine 1989 The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover; A TV Dante (co-d) (for TV); Hubert Bals Handshake (+ narration) 1991 Prospero’s Books; M Is for Man, Music, Mozart 1992 Rosa (d only) 1993 The Baby of Macon; Darwin (for TV) 1995 Stairs 1 Geneva (doc) (d only) (+ narration); Lumiere and Company (co-d) 1996 The Pillow Book (+ ed) 1997 The Bridge (d only) 1999 8 1/2 Women; Death of a Composer (+ narration) Other Films: 1968 Love Love Love (Nyman) (ed) Publications By GREENAWAY: books— A Walk through H, London, 1978. Verticle Features Remake, London, 1979. The Falls, London, 1980. The Droughtsman’s Contract, London, 1982. A Zed and Two Noughts, London, 1986. The Belly of an Architect, London, 1988. Drowning by Numbers, London, 1988. The Cook, the Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover, London, 1989. Fifty-five Men on Horseback, London, 1990. Prospero’s Books, New York, 1991. Flying out of This World, Paris, 1992; Chicago, 1994. 100, Hundert Objekte zeigendie Welt, Stuttgart, 1992. The World of Peter Greenaway, with Leon Steinmetz, Boston, 1995. By GREENAWAY: articles— Interview with Karen Jaehne, in Cineaste (New York), no. 2, 1984. Interviews with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), February 1984 and October 1987. Interview with E. Decaux and B. Villien, in Cinématographe (Paris), March 1984. Interview with Don Ranvaud, in Sight and Sound (London), Sum- mer 1987. ‘‘Architecture and Morality,’’ interview with J. Clarke, in Films and Filming (London), October 1987. Interview in Post Script (Jacksonville, Florida), Winter 1989. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), November 1989. Interview in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), March 1990. Interview with Gary Indiana, in Interview (New York), March 1990. ‘‘Food for Thought,’’ interview with Gavin Smith, in Film Comment (New York), May/June 1990. Interview with Marcia Pally, in Cineaste (New York), no. 3, 1991. ‘‘Paintbox-bilder,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), no. 5–6, 1991. ‘‘Die Moeglichkeiten dieser aufregenden Rahmen-Geschichten koneeen beliebig weitergesponnen werden,’’ interview with M. Bodmer, in Filmbulletin (Winterthur, Switzerland), no. 5/6, 1991. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), April 1991. ‘‘Notes de travail pour Les livres de Prospero,’’ in Positif (Paris), May 1991. ‘‘Past for the present,’’ interview with A. Cogolo, in Cinema & Cinema (Bologna), September/December 1991. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), October 1991. Interview with Lawrence Frascella, in Harper’s Bazaar (New York), November 1991. ‘‘Prospero’s Books—Word and Spectacle,’’ interview with M. Rod- gers, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), no. 2, 1991/1992. Greenaway, Peter, ‘‘Otvenot ferfi lohaton,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 2, 1992. Interview with D.E. Williams, in Film Threat (Beverly Hills), Febru- ary 1992. Interview with S. Turman, in Films in Review (New York), March/ April 1992. Interview with A. Berthin-Scaillet, in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), December/January 1992/1993. Greenaway, Peter, ‘‘Minden, ami el minden, ami halott,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 1, 1993. ‘‘Angyalokrol es szornyekrol,’’ interview with M. Tranchant and F. Ferney, in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 9, 1993. On GREENAWAY: books— Caux, Daniel, and others, Peter Greenaway, Paris, 1987. Barchfield, Christiane, Filming by Numbers: Peter Greenaway, Tubingen, 1993. Denham, Laura, The Films of Peter Greenaway, London 1993. Bogani, Giovanni, Peter Greenaway, Rome 1995. De Gaetano, Domenico, Il Cinema di Peter Greenaway, Torino 1995. Gorostiza, Jorge, Peter Greenaway, Madrid, 1995. Kremer, Detlef, Peter Greenaway Filme: vom Uberleben der Bilderun Bucher, Stuttgart, 1995. Bencivenni, Alexxandro, and Anna Samueli, Peter Greenaway: il cinema delle idee, Recco, Genova, 1996. Woods, Alan, Being Naked—Playing Dead: The Art of Peter Greenaway, Manchester 1996. Elliott, Bridget, and Anthony Purdy, Peter Greenaway: Architecture and Allegory, Chichester, West Sussex, 1997. Lawrence, Amy, The Films of Peter Greenaway, Cambridge, New York, 1997. Pascoe, David, Peter Greenaway: Museums and Moving Images, London 1997. On GREENAWAY: articles— Simon, L., ‘‘Music and Film: An Interview with Michael Nyman,’’ in Millenium (New York), Fall 1981/Winter 1982. Kennedy, Harlan, ‘‘Peter Greenaway: His Rise and Falls,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1982. Brown, R., ‘‘The Draughtsman’s Contract: From a View to Death,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), November 1982. Auty, Chris, ‘‘Greenaway’s Games,’’ in Stills (London), May/ June 1983. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘Peter Greenaway,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), September 1983. GREENAWAY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 392 ‘‘The Draughtsman’s Contract Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), October 1984. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘Of Natural History and Mythology Born,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), December 1985. ‘‘Peter Greenaway Section’’ of Positif (Paris), April 1986. Elsaesser, Thomas, and Tony Rayns, ‘‘Drowning by Numbers: Games of Love and Death,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), Octo- ber 1988. Bohringer, R., article in Positif (Paris), November 1989. De Feo, R., ‘‘Fantasy in Crimson,’’ in Art News (New York), March 1990. Trucco, T., ‘‘The Man Will Eat Literally Anything,’’ in New York Times, 1 April 1990. Acker, K., ‘‘The Color of Myth,’’ in Village Voice (New York), 17 April 1990. Van Gelder, L., ‘‘At the Movies,’’ in New York Times, 29 June 1990. Pally, Marcia, ‘‘Order vs. Chaos: The Films of Peter Greenaway,’’ in Cineaste (New York), no. 3, 1991. Canavas, C., ‘‘Das Kino, das (neue) Fernsehen, die Maleri und ihr Liebhaber Peter Greenaway,’’ in Filmbulletin Winterthur, Swit- zerland), no. 5/6, 1991. Ardai, Z., ‘‘Az undor titokzatos targya,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 12, 1991. Jacobs, K., ‘‘For Peter Greenaway, Movies Are a Dutch Treat,’’ in New York Times, 21 April 1991. Clark, J., ‘‘Filmographies,’’ in Premiere (New York), September 1991. Richard, F., article in Positif (Paris), October 1991. Frascella, L., ‘‘Britain’s Mavericks,’’ in Harper’s Bazaar (New York), November 1991. Rodman, H.A., ‘‘Anatomy of a Wizard,’’ in American Film (Los Angeles), November/December 1991. Zagari, P., ‘‘Gli intoccabili,’’ in Cinema Nuovo (Rome), November/ December 1991. Olofsson, A., ‘‘In pa bara skinnet,’’ in Chaplin (Stockholm), no. 5, 1992. Csake, M.C., ‘‘Az eltorhetetlen palca’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 7, 1992. De Gaetano, R, ‘‘Lo spessore della superficie,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo, Italy), January/February 1992. ‘‘Percorso fotografico nell’universo di Greenaway,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo, Italy), January/February 1992. ‘‘Filmografie,’’ in Segnocinema (Vicenza, Italy), January/Febru- ary 1992. Glombitza, B., ‘‘Peter Greenaway,’’ in Filmfaust (Frankfurt), Janu- ary/February 1992. Imparato, E., ‘‘Il corpo salvato,’’ in Cineforum (Bergamo, Italy), July/August 1992. Dolinska, R., ‘‘Falszywe dokumenty Petera Greenawaya,’’ in Kino (Warsaw), October 1992. Bodmer, M., ‘‘Technik und Handwerk,’’ in Filmwaerts (Hanover), Winter 1992. Kapp, H.J., ‘‘Musik, Zeit und anderes,’’ in Filmwaerts (Hanover), Winter 1992. Rother, R., ‘‘Aesthetik der Quantitaet,’’ in Filmwaerts (Hanover), Winter 1992. Berthin-Scaillet, A., ‘‘Comment cadrer le cinema de Peter Greenaway,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), December/January 1992/1993. ‘‘Filmographie: plongees dans l’oeuvre de Peter Greenaway,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), December/January 1992/1993. Serravalli, L., ‘‘Peter Greenaway: Propsero’s Books e la grande stagione del realismo barocco,’’ in Cinema Sud (Avellino, Italy), December/January/February 1992/1993. Lajta, G., ‘‘Vilagszertar,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 1, 1993. Kozma, G., ‘‘A legy es a mezespohar,’’ in Filmvilag (Budapest), no. 4, 1993. Masson, A., ‘‘Le bruit des nuages,’’ in Positif (Paris), January 1993. Peck, A., ‘‘M Is for Music, etc.,’’ in Positif (Paris), January 1993. O’Pray, Michael, ‘‘Peter Greenaway, in International Film Guide (London, Hollywood), 1998. *** An ancient Chinese encyclopedia, according to Borges, divides animals into ‘‘(a) those that belong to the Emperor, (b) embalmed ones, (c) those that are trained, (d) suckling pigs, (e) mermaids, (f) fabulous ones, (g) stray dogs, (h) those that are included in this classification, (i) those that tremble as if they are mad, (j) innumerable ones, (k) those drawn with a very fine camel’s hair brush, (l) others, (m) those that have just broken a flower vase, (n) those that resemble flies from a distance.’’ One is tempted to add, (o) those featured in Peter Greenaway’s films. The inclusion would seem appropriate for a filmmaker who has constantly displayed a fascination for the organic and the classificatory in a body of films that have themselves retained an art-house individuality within the broader criteria of popular success. Greenaway’s biography implies a deeper integration between life and his art than some critics might suggest. He grew up in post-war Essex, his father was an ornithologist—perhaps the quintessential English hobby—and the petit-bourgeois world of public respectabil- ity and private eccentricity seems to have left him with a taste for the contradictory that hallmarks his work (‘‘The black humour, irony, distancing, a quality of being in control, an interest in landscape, treating the world as equal with an image, these are very English qualities. I can’t imagine myself living abroad’’). He trained as a painter rather than a filmmaker, but his first exhibition, ‘‘Eisenstein at the Winter Palace,’’ indicated an interest that led him into film editing at the Central Office of Information, the government depart- ment responsible for informing the public in the unique ‘‘home- counties’’ voice of domestic propaganda. These years also saw Greenaway developing a crop of his own absurdist works—films, art, novels, illustrated books, drawings— with titles such as Goole by Numbers and Dear Phone, as well as directing (non-absurdist) Party Political Broadcasts for the Labour Party. They also saw the introduction of his fictional alter ego, Tulse Luper, archivist, cartographer, ornithologist extraordinaire (‘‘He’s me at about 65. A know-all, a Buckminster Fuller, a McLuhan, a John Cage, a pain’’). Nomenclature means a lot to Greenaway in determin- ing where one would be filed in the unfortunate event of a statistically (im)probable end. The Falls is a catalogue of victims of V.U.E. (Violent Unknown Event), with characters such as Mashanter Fallack, Carlos Fallanty, Raskado Fallcastle, and Hearty Fallparco. The epit- ome of absurdity was perhaps reached in Act of God, a film based around interviews with people who’d been struck by lightning in an attempt to find out what led to such an unpredictable event. But perhaps the most tickling piece of absurdity for Greenaway came in the commercial success of The Draughtsman’s Contract, his GRéMILLONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 393 first film made on a reasonable budget. It made an uncharacteristic concession to plot, characterization, and scenic coherence. A stylish, lavish, and enigmatic puzzle revolving around murder in a stately seventeenth-century English home, it soon became the subject of a mythical French film conference that discussed its title for five days, and gained popular fame as everyone asked what was it all about. But it made Greenaway’s name, and briefly contested box office ratings with the likes of E.T. and Gandhi, although Greenaway’s intended length was four hours—‘‘one suspects it was originally closer to Tristram Shandy than Murder at the Vicarage,’’ as one critic remarked. Greenaway’s ideas tend to work in twos. A Zed and Two Noughts took Siamese twins separated at birth and saw them cope with their grief at the death of their wives in a study in the decomposition of zoo animals. Belly of an Architect silhouetted the visceral mortality of Stourley Kracklite against his plans for an exhibition on a visionary eighteenth-century architect, Etiénne-Louis Boullée. But the dialectic seems more important than the ideas themselves, as Greenaway hints: ‘‘The important thing about Boullée—and this is where he’s very like a filmmaker, who tends to spend much more time on uncompleted projects than completed ones—is that very few of his buildings were constructed. I’ve taken that up in Kracklite’s fear of committal, being prepared to go half-way and no further, which is Kracklite’s position and maybe my position as well.’’ In this position Greenaway has always been most successful when casting strong leading actors. He secured Brian Dennehy as Kracklite, for instance, and the cast of arguably his most successful film, The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover, included Michael Gambon (the Thief) and Helen Mirren (his Wife). Greenaway’s ideas are always sufficiently ambiguous to resist trivialisation, but invariably involve death: Death and Landscape, Death and Animals, Death and Architecture, Death and Sex, Death and Food (cannibalism). But there are factors which make them more palatable. One of them is a taste for sumptuous framing (helped by cinematographer Sacha Vierney), in which he envisages an aesthetic complexity similar to that of the golden age of Dutch art, ‘‘where those amazing manifestations of the real world that we find in Vermeer and Rembrandt are enriched by a fantastic metaphorical language.’’ The other is his close collaboration with the composer Michael Nyman, whose insistent scores lend an inexorable quality to Greenaway’s sometimes spatial fabric of ideas. The films of Peter Greenaway continue to be consistently outra- geous and challenging. Drowning by Numbers is a bizarre, erotic concoction about three generations of women, each named Cissie Colpitts (and played by Joan Plowright, Juliet Stevenson, and Joely Richardson). Each Cissie is saddled with a husband who is lecherous or inattentive. And each one decides to murder her mate by drowning him. Madgett the coroner (Bernard Hill), who lusts after these women, agrees to list the deaths as natural. But the heroines hold the upper hand in the story, and Madgett’s fate proves to be beyond his control. Prospero’s Books is an original, daring adaptation of Shake- speare’s The Tempest, with almost all of the dialogue spoken by 87- year-old Sir John Gielgud (cast as Prospero, a role he played many times on stage). The other actors are little more than extras and, as in many of Greenaway’s works, there is a mind-boggling amount of nudity. Purist defenders of the Bard may find much to fault in Prospero’s Books, but the film remains noteworthy both for Gielgud’s splendid reading of the text and its exquisitely layered imagery and production design. The Baby of Macon, which featured Julia Ormond and Ralph Fiennes prior to their ascension to stardom, is a demanding drama. It is set in the seventeenth century and presented as a play being performed on a vast stage. The play depicts the birth and life of a saint-like baby. In typical Greenaway fashion, there is luminous cinematography (by the filmmaker’s frequent collaborator, Sacha Vierny) and production design. Some will find The Baby of Macon stimulating; others will think it overblown; and still others will be perplexed by it all. The Pillow Book is one of Greenaway’s more thoughtful features: a multi-layered, mind-massaging tale that is at once highly literate and deeply erotic. Greenaway’s heroine is Nagiko (Vivian Wu), a young Japanese woman, and his story spotlights how she develops the desire to have her body painted and thus transform herself into a living, breathing work of art. As he weaves his tale, Greenaway explores the relationship between art and eroticism. At one point, Nagiko declares, ‘‘I was determined to take lovers who would remind me of the pleasures of calligraphy.’’ Among the filmmaker’s other concerns are father-daughter bonds, and how the past relates to the present. The Pillow Book is (yet again) stunningly photographed by Sacha Vierny; the images are dazzling, and there is abundant use of split screens and other visual devices. Part of the dialogue is in Japanese and is translated not so much by traditional subtitles as calligraphy, which blends into Greenaway’s imagery and becomes an integral part of the film’s overall design. Indeed, watching the film is the equiva- lent of viewing a moving painting. Unfortunately, Greenaway’s subsequent feature, 8 1/2 Women, is arguably his most disappointing. The story of a businessman and his son who create a bordello in their Geneva home, 8 1/2 Women is inconsequential and boring—and a trial even for the filmmaker’s most ardent supporters. There are contradictions in Greenaway’s works, a fact that seems to openly provoke divided opinion. Some would suggest that the fecundity of his vision and intellectual rigor are the stuff of great cinema; others, while admitting his originality, would still look for evidence of a deeper engagement with film as a medium, rather than as a vehicle for ideas. Lauded in Europe, under-distributed in the United States, loved and reviled in his own country, Greenaway is, nevertheless, in an enviable position for a filmmaker. —Saul Frampton, updated by Rob Edelman GRéMILLON, Jean Nationality: French. Born: Bayeux, Normandy, 3 October 1901. Education: l’Ecole Communale de Saint-L?, Lycée de Brest, and Ecole des Cordeliers, Dinan; Schola Cantorum, Paris (studied with Vincent d’Indy), 1920. Military Service: 1920–22. Family: Married Christiane (Grémillon). Career: Film titler, editor, and director of short films, from 1923; worked in Spain and Germany, 1935–38; war cinematographer, from 1939; elected president of Cinémathèque GRéMILLON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 394 Jean Grémillon Fran?aise, 1944; president of C.G.T., film technicians union, 1946–50. Died: 25 November 1959. Films as Director: 1923 Chartres (Le Cathédrale de Chartres) (+ ed); Le Revêtement des routes (+ ed) 1924 La Fabrication du fil (+ ed); Du fil à l’aiguille (+ ed); La Fabrication du ciment artificiel (+ ed); La Bière (+ ed); Le Roulement à billes (+ ed); Les Parfums (+ ed); L’étirage des ampoules électriques (+ ed); La Photogénie mécanique (+ ed) 1925 L’Education professionelle des conducteurs de tramway (six short films) (+ ed); L’Electrification de la ligne Paris- Vierzon (+ ed); L’Auvergne (+ ed); La Naissance des cigognes (+ ed); Les Aciéries de la marine et d’Homécourt (+ ed) 1926 La Vie des travailleurs italiens en France (+ ed); La Croisière de L’Atalante (+ ed); Un Tour au large (+ ed, sc, music— recorded on piano rolls) 1927 Maldone (+ ed, co-music); Gratuités (+ ed) 1928 Bobs (+ ed) 1929 Gardiens de phare (+ ed) 1930 La Petite Lise (+ ed) 1931 Dainah la métisse (+ ed) (disowned due to unauthorized reediting); Pour un sou d’amour (no d credit on film; + ed) 1932 Le Petit Babouin (+ ed, music) 1933 Gonzague ou L’Accordeur (+ sc) 1934 La Dolorosa 1935 La Valse royale (French version of Herbert Maisch’s K?nigswalzer) 1936 Centinella alerta! (not completed by Grémillon); Pattes de mouches (+ co-sc) 1937 Gueule d’amour 1938 L’Etrange Monsieur Victor 1941 Remorques 1943 Lumière d’été 1944 Le Ciel est à vous 1945 Le Six Juin à l’aube (Sixth of June at Dawn) (+ sc, music) 1949 Pattes blanches (+ co-dialogue); Les Charmes de l’existence (co-d, co-sc, co-commentary, music advisor) GRéMILLONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 395 1951 L’Etrange Madame X 1952 Astrologie ou Le Miroir de la vie (+ sc, co-music); ‘‘Alchimie’’ episode of L’Encyclopédie filmée—Alchimie, Azur, Absence (+ sc) 1954 L’Amour d’une femme (+ sc, dubbed actor Paolo Stoppa); Au c?ur de l’Ile de France (+ sc, co-music) 1955 La Maison aux images (+ sc, music) 1956 Haute Lisse (+ sc, music adapt) 1958 André Masson et les quatre éléments (+ sc, music) Other Film: 1951 Désastres de la guerre (Kast) (commentary and co-music) Publications By GRéMILLON: books— Hommage à Jacques Feyder, Paris, 1948. Le Printemps de la Liberté, Paris, 1948. By GRéMILLON: articles— ‘‘Propositions,’’ in Comoedia (Paris), 27 November 1925. ‘‘Le Cinema? Plus qu’un art . . . ,’’ in L’Ecran Fran?ais (Paris), August 1947. ‘‘Jacques Feyder, ce combattant,’’ in L’Ecran Fran?ais (Paris), 8 June 1948. ‘‘Conférences sur Flaherty,’’ in Cinéma (Paris), no. 9–10, 1956. ‘‘Ma rencontre avec André Masson,’’ in Les Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 24 November 1960. On GRéMILLON: books— Jean Grémillon, Première Plan, no. 5, Paris, 1960. Agel, Henri, ‘‘Jean Grémillon,’’ in Cinéma d’aujourd’hui, no. 58, Paris, 1969. Sellier, Geneviève, Jean Grémillon: Le Cinéma est à vous, Paris, 1989. On GRéMILLON: articles— Hackett, Hazel, ‘‘Jean Grémillon,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1947. Kast, Pierre, ‘‘Exercice d’un tragique quotidien . . . ,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), August 1948. ‘‘Grémillon Issue’’ of Ciné-Club (Paris), January/February 1951. Laurent, F., ‘‘Sur Jean Grémillon,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), Febru- ary 1955. ‘‘Gremillon Issue’’ of Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 3 December 1959. Chevassu, Fran?ois, ‘‘Dossier Jean Grémillon,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), January 1960. Mayoux, Michel, ‘‘Jean Grémillon, cinéaste de la réalité,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), February 1960. ‘‘Grémillon Issue’’ of Cinéma (Paris), March 1960. Clair, René, ‘‘Jean Grémillon devant l’avenir,’’ in Lettres Fran?aises (Paris), 24 November 1960. Vivet, J.-P., ‘‘Hommage à Jean Grémillon,’’ in Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 September 1962. Billard, Pierre, ‘‘Jean Grémillon,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, vol. 2, Paris, 1967. Siclier, Jacques, ‘‘Portrait: Jean Grémillon,’’ in Radio-Télé-Cinéma (Paris), 24 November 1969. ‘‘Jean Grémillon,’’ in Dossier du Cinéma (Paris), 1971. Le Dantec, and M. Latil, ‘‘Jean Grémillon: le réalisme et le tragique,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), no. 40, 1978. Le Dantec, and M. Latil, ‘‘Le Cinéma de Jean Grémillon,’’ in Cinématographe (Paris), no. 41, 1978. Biofilmography, in Film Dope (London), October 1980. ‘‘Jean Grémillon Section’’ of Cinéma (Paris), November 1981. ‘‘Le Ciel est à vous Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 November 1981. ‘‘Grémillon Issue’’ of Filmkritik (Munich), April 1983. Detassis, P., ‘‘Jean Grémillon, ‘l’uomotramite’ tra due epoche del cinema francese,’’ in Bianco e Nero (Rome), October/Decem- ber 1983. Kast, Pierre, in Cinéma (Paris), December 1984. Ory, P., ‘‘Présence paradoxale de la petite bourgeoisie dan l’ouevre de Jean Grémillon,’’ in in Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 50, 1988. Ory, P., ‘‘Grémillon, le Grand,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 359, Janu- ary 1991. Bruyn, O. De, ‘‘Jean Grémillon ou l’art de la discrétion,’’ in Positif (Paris), no. 384, February 1993. Denny, J.S., ‘‘La collectoin Jean Grémillon de la Bibliothèque nationale,’’ in Cinémathèque (Paris), no. 4, Autumn 1993. *** Jean Grémillon is finally beginning to receive the international reputation most French film scholars always bestowed upon him. Although Americans have until recently been able to see only one or two of his dozen important works, he has generally been placed only slightly below Renoir, Clair, and Carné in the hierarchy of French classical cinema. Evidently, no one was more versatile than Grémillon. A musician, he composed many of his own scores and supervised all aspects of his productions scrupulously. Along with the search for a romantic unity of feeling and consistency of rhythm, his films also display an attention to details and locations that derives from his earliest documentaries. No one was more prepared than Grémillon for the poetic realist sensibility that dominated French cinema in the 1930s. Even in the silent period his Maldone and Gardiens de phare reveal a heightening of strange objects as they take on fatal proportions in these tense and dark melodramas. La Petite Lise displayed these same qualities, along with an incredibly imaginative and rigorous use of sound. It should be called the first poetic realist film, anticipating Carné’s work in particular. After a few years of obscurity, Grémillon re-emerged with Gueule d’amour, a Foreign Legion love story with Jean Gabin. Then came GRIERSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 396 a series of truly wonderful films: L’étrange M. Victor, Remorques, Le Ciel est à vous, and Lumière d’été. Spanning the period of French subjugation by the Nazis, these films capture the sensibility of the times with their wistful romanticism, the fatality of their conclusions, and their attention to social classes. Le Ciel est à vous must be singled out as a key film of the Occupation. Enormously popular, this tale of a small-town couple obsessed with aviation has been variously interpreted as a work promoting Vichy morality (family, small-town virtues, hard work) and as a representation of the indomitable French spirit, ready to soar beyond the temporary political restraints of the Occupation. Charles Vanel and Madeleine Renaud give unforgettable performances. Grémillon often sought mythic locations (mysterious villages in the Alps or Normandy, the evocative southern cities of Orange and Toulon) where his quiet heroes and heroines played out their destinies of passion and crime. Unique is the prominent place women hold in his dramas. From the wealthy femme fatale murdered by Gabin in Gueule d’amour to the independent professional woman who refuses to give up her medical career, even for love (L’Amour d’une femme), women are shown to be far more prepossessed than the passionate but childish men who pursue them. It is perhaps the greatest tragedy of French cinema that Grémillon’s career after World War II was derailed by the conditions of the industry. His Sixth of June at Dawn shows how even a documentary project could in his hands take on poetic proportions and become a personal project. Yet the final years before his death in 1959 (when he was only fifty-seven) were spent in teaching and preparing unfinanced scripts. This is a sad end for the man some people claim to have been the most versatile cinematic genius ever to work in France. —Dudley Andrew GRIERSON, John Nationality: Scottish. Born: Deanston, Scotland, 18 April 1898. Education: Glasgow University, degree in philosophy, 1923. Mili- tary Service: Served in Royal Navy, World War I. Family: Married Margaret Taylor, 1930. Career: Travelled to United States to study press, cinema, and other mass media, 1924–27; joined Empire Mar- keting Board (EMB) Film Unit under Stephen Tallents, London, 1927; produced and directed Drifters, 1928–29; became head of General Post Office (GPO) Film Unit when EMB dissolved and its Film unit transferred to GPO, 1933; resigned from GPO to form Film Centre with Arthur Elton, Stuart Legg, and J.P.R. Golightly, 1937; Film Advisor to Imperial Relations Trust, and to Canadian, Austra- lian, and New Zealand Governments, 1937–40; Film Commissioner of Canada, helped establish National Film Board of Canada, 1939–45; Co-coordinator of Mass Media at UNESCO, 1947; Controller, Films Division of Central Office of Information, London, 1948–50; Joint Executive Producer of Group 3, established by National Finance Company to produce feature films, 1951–54; became member of Films on Scotland Committee, 1954; produced and presented This Wonderful World for Scottish television, 1955–65. Awards: Com- mander of the British Empire, 1948; Golden Thistle Award, Edin- burgh Film Festival, 1968. Died: 19 February 1972. John Grierson (left) with Ralph Forster Films as Director: 1929 Drifters (+ sc) Other Films: 1930 Conquest (pr, co-ed) 1931 The Country Comes to Town (Wright) (pr); Shadow on the Mountain (pr); Upstream (pr) 1931/32 Industrial Britain (Flaherty) (pr, co-ed) 1932 King Log (pr); The New Generation (pr); The New Operator (pr); O’er Hill and Dale (Wright) (pr); The Voice of the World (pr) 1933 Aero-Engine (pr); Cargo from Jamaica (Wright) (pr); The Coming of the Dial (pr); Eskimo Village (pr); Line Cruising South (Wright) (pr); So This Is London (pr); Telephone Workers (pr); Uncharted Waters (pr); Windmill in Barbados (Wright) (pr) 1934 BBC: Droitwich (Watt) (pr); Granton Trawler (Cavalcanti) (pr, ph); Pett and Pott (Cavalcanti) (pr); Post Haste (pr); Six-Thirty Collection (Watt) (pr); Song of Ceylon (Wright) (pr, co-sc); Spring Comes to England (co-pr); Spring on the Farm (pr); Weather Forecast (pr) 1935 BBC: The Voice of Britain (co-pr); Coalface (Cavalcanti) (pr); Introducing the Dial (pr) 1936 Night Mail (Watt and Wright) (pr, co-sc); The Saving of Bill Blewett (Watt) (pr); Trade Tattoo (pr) GRIERSONDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 397 1937 Calender of the Year (pr); Children at School (Wright) (co-pr); Four Barriers (pr); Job in a Million (pr); Line to Tschierva Hut (Cavalcanti) (pr); The Smoke Menace (co-pr); We Live in Two Worlds (pr) 1938 The Face of Scotland (Wright) (pr) 1939 The Londoners (co-pr) 1951 Judgment Deferred (exec pr); Brandy for the Parson (exec pr) 1952 The Brave Don’t Cry (exec pr); Laxdale Hall (exec pr); The Oracle (exec pr); Time Gentlemen Please (exec pr); You’re Only Young Twice (exec pr) 1953 Man of Africa (exec pr); Orders Are Orders (exec pr) 1959 Seawards the Great Ships (treatment) 1961/62 Heart of Scotland (treatment) Publications By GRIERSON: books— Grierson on Documentary, edited by Forsyth Hardy, revised edition, London, 1966. By GRIERSON: articles— ‘‘Future for British Film,’’ in Spectator (London), 14 May 1932. ‘‘The Symphonic Film I,’’ in Cinema Quarterly (London), Spring 1933. ‘‘The Symphonic Film II,’’ in Cinema Quarterly (London), Spring 1934. ‘‘One Hundred Percent Cinema,’’ in Spectator (London), 23 August 1935. ‘‘Dramatising Housing Needs and City Planning,’’ in Films (Lon- don), November 1939. ‘‘Post-War Patterns,’’ in Hollywood Quarterly, January 1946. ‘‘Prospect for Documentary,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Sum- mer 1948. ‘‘Flaherty as Innovator,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), October/ December 1951. ‘‘The Front Page,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), April/June 1952. ‘‘The BBC and All That,’’ in Quarterly of Film, Radio, Television (Berkeley), Fall 1954. ‘‘Making of Man of Africa,’’ in Films and Filming (London), October 1954. ‘‘The Prospect for Cultural Cinema,’’ in Film (London), January/ February 1956. ‘‘I Derive My Authority from Moses,’’ in Take One (Montreal), January/February 1970. ‘‘The Golden Years of Grierson,’’ interview with Elizabeth Sussex, in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1972. ‘‘Grierson on Documentary: Last Interview,’’ with Elizabeth Sussex, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Fall 1972. On GRIERSON: books— Rotha, Paul, Rotha on Film, London, 1958. Rotha, Paul, Documentary Film, 4th Edition, London, 1964. Lovell, Alan, and Jim Hillier, Studies in Documentary, New York, 1972. Sussex, Elizabeth, The Rise and Fall of British Documentary: The Story of the Film Movement Founded by John Grierson, Berke- ley, 1975. Beveridge, J.A., John Grierson—Film Master, New York, 1978. Hardy, Forsyth, John Grierson: A Documentary Biography, Lon- don, 1979. Evans, Gary, John Grierson and the National Film Board: The Politics of Wartime Propaganda, Toronto, 1984. Ellis, Jack C., John Grierson: A Guide to References and Resources, Boston, 1986. Nelson, Joyce, The Colonized Eye: Rethinking the Grierson Legend, Toronto, 1988. Ellis, Jack C., The Documentary Idea, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1989. Aitken, Ian, Film and Reform: John Grierson and the Documentary Film Movement, London and New York, 1990. Chittock, John, editor, and Julian Petley, researcher and compiler, Researchers’ Guide to John Grierson: Films, Reference Sources, Collections, Data, London, 1990. Winston, Brian, Claiming the Real: The Griersonian Documentary and Its Legitimations, London, 1995. Ellis, Jack C., John Grierson: Life, Contributions, Influence, Carbondale, Illinois, 2000. On GRIERSON: articles— Lambert, Gavin, ‘‘Who Wants True?,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), April/June 1952. Ellis, Jack C., ‘‘The Young Grierson in America,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Fall 1968. Ellis, Jack C., ‘‘John Grierson’s First Years at the National Film Board,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston, Illinois), Fall 1970. Sussex, Elizabeth, ‘‘John Grierson,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1972. James, R., ‘‘Le Rêve de Grierson,’’ in Cinéma Québec (Montreal), May 1972. Ellis, Jack C., ‘‘Grierson at University,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evans- ton), Spring 1973. Dickinson, T., ‘‘The Rise and Fall of the British Documentary,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1977. Goetz, W., ‘‘The Canadian Wartime Documentary,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston), Spring 1977. MacGann, R.D., ‘‘Subsidy for the Screen: Grierson and Group Three/ 1951–55,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1977. Herrick, D., ‘‘The Canadian Connection: John Grierson,’’ in Cinema Canada (Montreal), September/October 1978. Cox, K., ‘‘The Grierson Files,’’ in Cinema Canada (Montreal), June/ July 1979. ‘‘John Grierson,’’ in Film Dope (London), October 1980. Ellis, Jack C., ‘‘Changing of the Guard: From the Grierson documen- tary to Free Cinema,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (New York), Winter 1982. Pratley, Gerald, ‘‘Only Grierson,’’ in Films and Filming (London), March 1982. Swann, P., ‘‘John Grierson and the G.P.O. Film Unit, 1933–39,’’ in Historical Journal of Film, Radio and TV (Abindon, Oxon), March 1983. GRIERSON DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 398 Ellis, Jack C., ‘‘The Final Years of British Documentary as the Grierson Movement,’’ in Journal of Film and Video (Boston), Fall 1984. Tomaselli, K., ‘‘Grierson in South Africa: Culture, State, and Nation- alist Ideology in the South African Film Industry: 1940–41,’’ in Cinema Canada (Montreal), September 1985. Donald, J., ‘‘Machines of Democracy: Education and Entertainment in Inter-War Britain,’’ in Critical Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 3, 1988. ‘‘Grierson Issue’’ of Historical Journal of Film, Radio, and TV (Abingdon, Oxon), vol. 9, no. 3, 1989. Forsyth, S., ‘‘The Failures of Nationalism and Democracy: Grierson and Gouzenko,’’ in Canadian Journal of Film Studies (North York, Ontario), vol. 1, no. 1, 1990. Pilard, P., ‘‘John Grierson et le cinéma documentaire,’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), no. 60, July 1991. Acland, C.R., ‘‘National Dreams, International Encounters: The Formation of Canadian Film Culture in the 1930s,’’ in Canadian Journal of Film Studies (North York, Ontario), vol. 3, no. 1, Spring 1994. *** More than any one other person, John Grierson was responsible for the documentary film as it has developed in the English-speaking countries. He was the first to use the word documentary in relation to film, applying it to Robert Flaherty’s Moana while Grierson was in the United States in the 1920s. Grierson took the term and his evolving conception of a new kind and use of film back to Britain with him in 1927. There he was hired by Stephen Tallents, secretary of the Empire Marketing Board, a unique government public relations agency intended to promote the marketing of the products of the British Empire. The first practical application of Grierson’s ideas at the EMB was Drifters in 1929, a short feature about herring fishing in the North Sea. Following its success, Grierson established, with the full support of Tallents, the Empire Marketing Board Film Unit instead of pursuing a career as an individual filmmaker. He staffed the Film Unit with young people, mostly middle class and well educated (many were from Cambridge University). Basil Wright, Arthur Elton, Edgar Anstey, and Paul Rotha were among the early recruits; Stuart Legg and Harry Watt came later, as did Humphrey Jennings. Alberto Cavalcanti joined the group shortly after it moved to the General Post Office and served as a sort of co-producer and co-teacher with Grierson. The training at the EMB Film Unit and subsequently the General Post Office Film Unit was ideological as well as technical and aesthetic. The young filmmakers exposed to it came to share Grierson’s broad social purposes and developed an extraordinary loyalty to him and to his goals. It was in this way that the British documentary movement was given shape and impetus. Grierson wanted documentaries to inform the public about their nation and involve them emotionally with the workings of their government. His assumptions were as follows: if people at work in one part of the Empire are shown to people in the other parts, and if a government service is presented to the population at large, an understanding and appreciation of the interrelatedness of the modern world, and of our dependency on each other, will develop and everyone will want to contribute his or her share to the better functioning of the whole. On these assumptions was based the first phase in Grierson’s lifelong activity on behalf of citizenship educa- tion. Phase one included some of the most innovative, lovely, and lasting of the British documentaries: Drifters, Industrial Britain, Granton Trawler, Song of Ceylon, Coal Face, and Night Mail. Phase two, which began in the mid-1930s, consisted of calling public attention to pressing problems faced by the nation, insistence that these problems needed to be solved, and suggestions about their causes and possible solutions. Since these matters may have involved differing political positions (and in any case did not relate directly to the concerns of the sponsoring General Post Office), Grierson stepped outside the GPO to enlist sponsorship from private industry. Big oil and gas concerns were especially responsive to his persuasion. The subjects dealt with in this new kind of documentary included unem- ployment (Workers and Jobs), slums (Housing Problems), malnutri- tion among the poor (Enough to Eat?), smog (The Smoke Menace), and education (Children at School). Unlike the earlier British docu- mentaries, these films were journalistic rather than poetic, and seemed quite unartistic. Yet they incorporated formal and technical experiments. Most notable among these was the direct interview, with slum dwellers in Housing Problems, for example, presaging the much later cinéma vérité method. The direct interview remains a standard technique of television documentary today. Grierson’s use of institutional sponsorship—public and private— to pay for his kind of filmmaking, rather than depend on returns from the box office, was a key innovation in the development of documen- tary. A second innovation, complementing the first, was nontheatrical distribution and exhibition: going outside the movie theaters to reach audiences in schools and factories, union halls and church basements. During the ten years between Drifters and Grierson’s departure for Canada in 1939, the sixty or so filmmakers who comprised the British documentary movement made over three hundred films. These films and the system they came out of became models for other countries. Paul Rotha, one of Grierson’s principal lieutenants, went on a six- month missionary expedition to the United States in 1937, and film people from America and other countries visited the documentary units in Britain. Grierson, meanwhile, carried his ideas not only to Canada, where he drafted legislation for the National Film Board and became its first head, but to New Zealand, Australia, and later South Africa, all of which established national film boards. The National Film Board of Canada stands as the largest and most impressive monument to Grierson’s concepts and actions relating to the use of film by governments in communicating with their citizens. During his Canadian years he moved beyond national concerns to global ones. The Film Board’s The World in Action, a monthly series for the theaters along March of Time lines, expressed some of these concerns. His ideas regarding the education of citizens required in a world at war, and a new world to follow, were expressed in major essays that have inspired many who have read them. ‘‘The Challenge of Peace,’’ reprinted in Grierson on Documentary, is one of them. It is for his many-faceted, innovative leadership in film and in education that Grierson is most to be valued. As a theoretician he articulated the basis of the documentary film, its form and function, its aesthetic and its ethic. As a teacher he trained and, through his writing and speaking, influenced many documentary filmmakers, not only in Britain and Canada but throughout the world. As a producer he was responsible to one extent or another for thousands of films, and he played a decisive creative role in some of the most important of them. In addition, he was an adroit political figure and dedicated civil servant for most of his life. Whether in the employ of a government or GRIFFITHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 399 not, his central concern was always with communicating to people (of a nation and of the world) the information and attitudes that he thought would help them to lead more useful, productive, satisfying, and rewarding lives. —Jack C. Ellis GRIFFITH, D.W Nationality: American. Born: David Wark Griffith on Oldham County Farm, near Centerfield, Kentucky, 23 January 1875. Educa- tion: District schools in Oldham County, Shelby County, and Louis- ville, Kentucky. Family: Married 1) Linda Arvidson, 1906 (divorced 1936); 2) Evelyn Baldwin, 1936 (divorced 1947). Career: As ‘‘Law- rence Griffith,’’ ‘‘Alfred Lawrence,’’ ‘‘Lawrence Brayington,’’ and ‘‘Thomas Griffith,’’ actor in regional stock companies, 1895–99; actor in New York and in touring companies, 1899–1906; actor for Edison Company and Biograph Pictures, also sold scenarios to Biograph and American Mutascope, 1907; director and scriptwriter for Biograph (approximately 485 one- and two-reelers), 1908–13; began association with cameraman G.W. (Billy) Bitzer, and with actress Mary Pickford, 1909; supervised Mack Sennett’s first films, 1910; made first film with Lillian and Dorothy Gish, An Unseen Enemy, 1912; joined Reliance Majestic (affiliated with Mutual), 1913; became partner in Triangle Pictures, 1915; travelled to Britain to aid war effort, 1917; engaged by Paramount, 1918; with Pickford, D.W. Griffith Fairbanks, and Chaplin, formed United Artists, 1919; built own studio at Mamaroneck, New York, 1920; directed three pictures for Paramount, 1925–26; returned to United Artists, 1927 (through 1931); directed his first talking picture, Abraham Lincoln, 1930; resigned as head of his own production company, resigned from United Artists Board and sold UA stock, 1932–33; returned to Hollywood to work on One Million B.C., 1939. Awards: Director of the Year, 1931, and Special Award, 1936, from Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences; Honorary Doctorate, University of Louis- ville, 1945. Died: In Los Angeles, 23 July 1948. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: (at Biograph): 1908 The Adventures of Dolly; The Redman and the Child; The Tavern Keeper’s Daughter; The Bandit’s Waterloo; A Calamitous Elopement; The Greaser’s Gauntlet; The Man and the Woman; For Love of Gold; The Fatal Hour; For a Wife’s Honor; Balked at the Altar; The Girl and the Outlaw; The Red Girl; Betrayed by a Hand Print; Monday Morning in a Coney Island Police Court; Behind the Scenes; The Heart of Oyama; Where the Breakers Roar; The Stolen Jewels; A Smoked Husband; The Zulu’s Heart; The Vaquaro’s Vow; Father Gets in the Game; The Barbar- ian, Ingomar; The Planter’s Wife; The Devil; Romance of a Jewess; The Call of the Wild; After Many Years; Mr. Jones at the Ball; Concealing a Burglar; Taming of the Shrew; The Ingrate; A Woman’s Way; The Pirate’s Gold; The Guerrilla; The Curtain Pole; The Song of the Shirt; The Clubman and the Tramp; Money Mad; Mrs. Jones Enter- tains; The Feud and the Turkey; The Test of Friendship; The Reckoning; One Touch of Nature; An Awful Moment; The Helping Hand; The Maniac Cook; The Christmas Burglars; A Wreath in Time; The Honor of Thieves; The Criminal Hypnotist; The Sacrifice; The Welcome Burglar; A Rural Elopement; Mr. Jones Has a Card Party; The Hindoo Dagger; The Salvation Army Lass; Love Finds a Way; Tragic Love; The Girls and a Daddy 1909 Those Boys; The Cord of Life; Trying to Get Arrested; The Fascinating Mrs. Frances; Those Awful Hats; Jones and the Lady Book Agent; The Drive for Life; The Brahma Diamond; Politician’s Love Story; The Jones Have Ama- teur Theatricals; Edgar Allan Poe; The Roué’s Heart; His Wife’s Mother; The Golden Louis; His Ward’s Love; At the Altar; The Prussian Spy; The Medicine Bottle; The Decep- tion; The Lure of the Gown; Lady Helen’s Escapade; A Fool’s Revenge; The Wooden Leg; I Did It, Mama; The Voice of the Violin; And a Little Child Shall Lead Them; The French Duel; Jones and His New Neighbors; A Drunkard’s Reformation; The Winning Coat; A Rude Hostess; The Road to the Heart; The Eavesdropper; Schneider’s Anti- Noise Crusade; Twin Brothers; Confidence; The Note in the Shoe; Lucky Jim; A Sound Sleeper; A Troublesome Satchel; Tis an Ill Wind That Blows No Good; The Suicide Club; Resurrection; One Busy Hour; A Baby’s Shoe; Eloping with Auntie; The Cricket on the Hearth; The Jilt; Eradicating GRIFFITH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 400 Auntie; What Drink Did; Her First Biscuits; The Violin Maker of Cremona; Two Memories; The Lonely Villa; The Peach Basket Hat; The Son’s Return; His Duty; A New Trick; The Necklace; The Way of Man; The Faded Lilies; The Message; The Friend of the Family; Was Justice Served?; Mrs. Jones’ Lover or ‘‘I Want My Hat!’’; The Mexican Sweethearts; The Country Doctor; Jealousy and the Man; The Renunciation; The Cardinal’s Conspiracy; The Seventh Day; Tender Hearts; A Convict’s Sacrifice; A Strange Meeting; Sweet and Twenty; The Slave; They Would Elope; Mrs. Jones’ Burglar; The Mended Lute; The Indian Runner’s Romance; With Her Card; The Better Way; His Wife’s Visitor; The Mills of the Gods; Franks; Oh, Uncle; The Sealed Room; 1776 or The Hessian Renegades; The Little Darling; In Old Kentucky; The Children’s Friend; Comata, the Sioux; Getting Even; The Broken Locket; A Fair Exchange; The Awakening; Pippa Passes; Leather Stockings; Fools of Fate; Wanted, a Child; The Little Teacher; A Change of Heart; His Lost Love; Lines of White on the Sullen Sea; The Gibson Goddess; In the Watches of the Night; The Expiation; What’s Your Hurry; The Restora- tion; Nursing a Viper; Two Women and a Man; The Light That Came; A Midnight Adventure; The Open Gate; Sweet Revenge; The Mountaineer’s Honor; In the Window Recess; The Trick That Failed; The Death Disc; Through the Breakers; In a Hempen Bag; A Corner in Wheat; The Redman’s View; The Test; A Trap for Santa Claus; In Little Italy; To Save Her Soul; Choosing a Husband; The Rocky Road; The Dancing Girl of Butte; Her Terrible Ordeal; The Call; The Honor of His Family; On the Reef; The Last Deal; One Night, and Then—; The Cloister’s Touch; The Woman from Mellon’s; The Duke’s Plan; The Englishman and the Girl 1910 The Final Settlement; His Last Burglary; Taming a Husband; The Newlyweds; The Thread of Destiny; In Old California; The Man; The Converts; Faithful; The Twisted Trail; Gold Is Not All; As It Is in Life; A Rich Revenge; A Romance of the Western Hills; Thou Shalt Not; The Way of the World; The Unchanging Sea; The Gold Seekers; Love Among the Roses; The Two Brothers; Unexpected Help; An Affair of Hearts; Romona; Over Silent Paths; The Implement; In the Season of Buds; A Child of the Ghetto; In the Border States; A Victim of Jealousy; The Face at the Window; A Child’s Impulse; The Marked Time-Table; Muggsy’s First Sweet- heart; The Purgation; A Midnight Cupid; What the Daisy Said; A Child’s Faith; The Call to Arms; Serious Sixteen; A Flash of Light; As the Bells Rang Out; An Arcadian Maid; The House with the Closed Shutters; Her Father’s Pride; A Salutary Lesson; The Usurer; The Sorrows of the Unfaith- ful; In Life’s Cycle; Wilful Peggy; A Summer Idyll; The Modern Prodigal; Rose o’ Salem Town; Little Angels of Luck; A Mohawk’s Way; The Oath and the Man; The Iconoclast; Examination Day at School; That Chink at Golden Gulch; The Broken Doll; The Banker’s Daughters; The Message of the Violin; Two Little Waifs; Waiter No. Five; The Fugitive; Simple Charity; The Song of the Wildwood Flute; A Child’s Strategem; Sunshine Sue; A Plain Song; His Sister-in-Law; The Golden Supper; The Lesson; When a Man Loves; Winning Back His Love; His Trust; His Trust Fulfilled; A Wreath of Orange Blossoms; The Italian Barber; The Two Paths; Conscience; Three Sisters; A Decree of Destiny; Fate’s Turning; What Shall We Do with Our Old?; The Diamond Star; The Lily of the Tenements; Heart Beats of Long Ago 1911 Fisher Folks; His Daughter; The Lonedale Operator; Was He a Coward?; Teaching Dad to Like Her; The Spanish Gypsy; The Broken Cross; The Chief’s Daughter; A Knight of the Road; Madame Rex; His Mother’s Scarf; How She Tri- umphed; In the Days of ‘49; The Two Sides; The New Dress; Enoch Arden, Part I; Enoch Arden, Part II; The White Rose of the Wilds; The Crooked Road; A Romany Tragedy; A Smile of a Child; The Primal Call; The Jealous Husband; The Indian Brothers; The Thief and the Girl; Her Sacrifice; The Blind Princess and the Poet; Fighting Blood; The Last Drop of Water; Robby the Coward; A Country Cupid; The Ruling Passion; The Rose of Kentucky; The Sorrowful Example; Swords and Hearts; The Stuff Heroes Are Made Of; The Old Confectioner’s Mistake; The Unveiling; The Eternal Mother; Dan the Dandy; The Revue Man and the Girl; The Squaw’s Love; Italian Blood; The Making of a Man; Her Awakening; The Adventures of Billy; The Long Road; The Battle; Love in the Hills; The Trail of the Books; Through Darkened Vales; Saved from Himself; A Woman Scorned; The Miser’s Heart; The Failure; Sunshine through the Dark; As in a Looking Glass; A Terrible Discovery; A Tale of the Wilderness; The Voice of the Child; The Baby and the Stork; The Old Bookkeeper; A Sister’s Love; For His Son; The Transformation of Mike; A Blot on the ‘Scutcheon; Billy’s Strategem; The Sunbeam; A String of Pearls; The Root of Evil 1912 The Mender of the Nets; Under Burning Skies; A Siren of Impulse; Iola’s Promise; The Goddess of Sagebrush Gulch; The Girl and Her Trust; The Punishment; Fate’s Intercep- tion; The Female of the Species; Just like a Woman; One Is Business, the Other Crime; The Lesser Evil; The Old Actor; A Lodging for the Night; His Lesson; When Kings Were the Law; A Beast at Bay; An Outcast among Outcasts; Home Folks; A Temporary Truce; The Spirit Awakened; Lena and the Geese; An Indian Summer; The Schoolteacher and the Waif; Man’s Lust for Gold; Man’s Genesis; Heaven Avenges; A Pueblo Legend; The Sands of Dee; Black Sheep; The Narrow Road; A Child’s Remorse; The Inner Circle; A Change of Spirit; An Unseen Enemy; Two Daughters of Eve; Friends; So Near, Yet So Far; A Feud in the Kentucky Hills; In the Aisles of the Wild; The One She Loved; The Painted Lady; The Musketeers of Pig Alley; Heredity; Gold and Glitter; My Baby; The Informer; The Unwelcome Guest; Pirate Gold; Brutality; The New York Hat; The Massacre; My Hero; Oil and Water; The Burglar’s Dilemma; A Cry for Help; The God Within; Three Friends; The Telephone Girl and the Lady; Fate; An Adventure in the Autumn Woods; A Chance Deception; The Tender Hearted Boy; A Misappropriated Turkey; Brothers; Drink’s Lure; Love in an Apartment Hotel 1913 Broken Ways; A Girl’s Strategem; Near to Earth; A Welcome Intruder; The Sheriff’s Baby; The Hero of Little Italy; The Perfidy of Mary; A Misunderstood Boy; The Little Tease; The Lady and the Mouse; The Wanderer; The House of Darkness; Olaf—An Atom; Just Gold; His Mother’s Son; GRIFFITHDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 401 The Yaqui Cur; The Ranchero’s Revenge; A Timely Inter- ception; Death’s Marathon; The Sorrowful Shore; The Mistake; The Mothering Heart; Her Mother’s Oath; During the Round-up; The Coming of Angelo; An Indian’s Loyalty; Two Men of the Desert; The Reformers or The Lost Art of Minding One’s Business; The Battle at Elderbush Gulch (released 1914); In Prehistoric Days (Wars of the Primal Tribes; Brute Force); Judith of Bethulia (+ sc) (released 1914) Films as Director: (after quitting Biograph): 1914 The Battle of the Sexes; The Escape; Home, Sweet Home; The Avenging Conscience 1915 The Birth of a Nation (+ co-sc, co-music) 1916 Intolerance (+ co-music) 1918 Hearts of the World (+ sc under pseudonyms, co-music arranger); The Great Love (+ co-sc); The Greatest Thing in Life (+ co-sc) 1919 A Romance of Happy Valley (+ sc); The Girl Who Stayed at Home; True-Heart Susie; Scarlet Days; Broken Blossoms (+ sc, co-music arranger); The Greatest Question 1920 The Idol Dancer; The Love Flower; Way down East 1921 Dream Street (+ sc); Orphans of the Storm 1922 One Exciting Night (+ sc) 1923 The White Rose (+ sc) 1924 America: Isn’t Life Wonderful (+ sc) 1925 Sally of the Sawdust 1926 That Royle Girl; The Sorrows of Satan 1928 Drums of Love; The Battle of the Sexes 1929 Lady of the Pavements 1930 Abraham Lincoln 1931 The Struggle (+ pr, co-music arranger) Publications By GRIFFITH: books— The Rise and Fall of Free Speech in America, Los Angeles, 1916. The Man Who Invented Hollywood: The Autobiography of D.W. Griffith, edited by James Hart, Louisville, Kentucky, 1972. By GRIFFITH: articles— ‘‘What I Demand of Movie Stars,’’ in Motion Picture Magazine (Los Angeles), February 1917. ‘‘The Motion Picture Today—and Tomorrow,’’ in Theatre Magazine (New York), October 1929. ‘‘An Old Timer Advises Hollywood,’’ in Liberty (New York), 17 June 1939. On GRIFFITH: books— Hastings, Charles, and Herman Holland, A Biography of David Wark Griffith, New York, 1920. Trauberg, Leonid, and Georg Ronen, David Griffith, Moscow, 1926. Huff, Theodore, A Shot Analysis of D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation, New York, 1961. Barry, Iris, and Eileen Bowser, D.W. Griffith: American Film Master, New York, 1965. Mitry, Jean, ‘‘Griffith,’’ in Anthologie du Cinéma, Paris, 1966. Brownlow, Kevin, The Parade’s Gone By, New York and Lon- don, 1968. Gish, Lillian, The Movies, Mr. Griffith, and Me, with Ann Pinchot, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1969. Henderson, Robert, D.W. Griffith: The Years at Biograph, New York, 1970. O’Dell, Paul, Griffith and the Rise of Hollywood, New York, 1970. Geduld, Harry, editor, Focus on D.W. Griffith, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1971. Lahue, Kalton, Dreams for Sale: The Rise and Fall of the Triangle Film Corporation, New York, 1971. Henderson, Robert, D.W. Griffith: His Life and Work, New York, 1972. Bowser, Eileen, editor, The Biograph Bulletins 1908–1912, New York, 1973. Niver, Kemp, D.W. Griffith: His Biograph Films in Perspective, Los Angeles, 1974. Wagenknecht, Edward, and Anthony Slide, The Films of D.W. Griffith, New York, 1975. Williams, Martin, Griffith: First Artist of the Movies, New York, 1980. Brion, Patrick, editor, D.W. Griffith, Paris, 1982. Brown, Karl, Adventures with D.W. Griffith, edited by Kevin Brownlow, London, 1983; revised edition, 1988. Mottet, Jean, editor, D.W. Griffith: Colloque International, Paris, 1984. Schickel, Richard, D.W. Griffith: An American Life, New York, 1984; also published as D.W. Griffith and the Birth of Film, Lon- don, 1984. Graham, Cooper C., and others, D.W. Griffith and the Biograph Company, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1985. Drew, William M., D.W. Griffith’s Intolerance: Its Genesis and Its Vision, Jefferson, North Carolina, 1986. Jesionowski, Joyce E., Thinking in Pictures: Dramatic Structures in D.W. Griffith’s Biograph Films, Berkeley, 1987. Lang, Robert, American Film Melodrama: Griffith, Vidor, Minnelli, New Jersey, 1989. Elsaesser, Thomas, and Adam Barker, editors, Early Cinema: Space- Frame-Narrative, London, 1990. Gunning, Tom, D.W. Griffith and the Origins of American Narrative Film: The Early Years at Biograph, Urbana, Illinois, 1991. Pearson, Roberta E., Eloquent Gestures: The Transformation of Performance Style in the Griffith Biograph Films, Berkeley, 1992. Simmon, Scott, The Films of D.W. Griffith, Cambridge and New York, 1993. Lang, Robert, editor, The Birth of a Nation: D.W. Griffith, Director, New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1994. On GRIFFITH: articles— Gordon, Henry Stephen, ‘‘The Story of D.W. Griffith,’’ in Photoplay (New York), June through November 1916. Feldman, Joseph, ‘‘The D.W. Griffith Influence,’’ in Films in Review (New York), July/August 1950. Eisenstein, Sergei, ‘‘Dickens, Griffith, and the Film Today,’’ in Film Form, New York, 1949; also in Sight and Sound (London), June, July, and November 1950. GRIFFITH DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 402 Stern, Seymour, ‘‘The Cold War against D.W. Griffith,’’ in Films in Review (New York), February 1956. Pratt, George, ‘‘In the Nick of Time, D.W. Griffith and the Last- Minute Rescue,’’ in Image (Rochester, New York), 2 May 1959. ‘‘Birth of a Nation Issue’’ of Film Culture (New York), Sum- mer 1965. Batman, Richard, ‘‘D.W. Griffith: The Lean Years,’’ in California Historical Society Quarterly, September 1965. Silverstein, Norman, ‘‘D.W. Griffith and Anarchy in American Films,’’ in Salmagundi (New York), Winter 1966. Meyer, Richard, ‘‘The Films of David Wark Griffith: The Develop- ment of Themes and Techniques in 42 of His Films,’’ in Film Comment (New York), Fall/Winter 1967. Casty, Alan, ‘‘The Films of D.W. Griffith: A Style of the Times,’’ in Journal of Popular Film (Bowling Green, Ohio), Spring 1972. ‘‘Griffith Issues’’ of Cahiers de la Cinémathèque (Lyons), Spring 1972 and Christmas 1975. ‘‘Griffith Issue’’ of Ecran (Paris), February 1973. ‘‘Griffith Issue’’ of Filmkritik (Berlin), April 1975. ‘‘Griffith Issue’’ of Filmcritica (Rome), May/June 1975. ‘‘Griffith Issue’’ of Films in Review (New York), October 1975. ‘‘Special Issues’’ of Griffithiana (Genoa), March/July 1980 and January 1982. Merritt, Russell, ‘‘Rescued from a Perilous Nest: D.W. Griffith’s Escape from Theatre into Film,’’ in Cinema Journal (Evanston), Fall 1981. Merritt, Russell, ‘‘D.W. Griffith Directs the Great War: The Making of Hearts of the World,’’ in Quarterly Review of Film Studies (Salisbury, Maryland), Winter 1981. Weber, A., ‘‘Des primitifs à Griffith,’’ in Cinémaction (Paris), vol. 23, November 1982. ‘‘Griffith Issue’’ of Avant-Scène du Cinéma (Paris), 15 Febru- ary 1983. ‘‘Griffith Sections’’ of Positif (Paris), December 1982, March 1983, and April 1983. Gunning, Thom, ‘‘The Movies, Mr. Griffith, and Us,’’ in American Film (Washington, D.C.), June 1984. Corliss, Richard, and Richard Schickel, ‘‘Writing in Silence,’’ in Film Comment (New York), July/August 1985. Neilan, Marshall, and R.S. Birchard, ‘‘Griffith—An Untold Chap- ter,’’ in American Cinematographer (Los Angeles), January 1986. Doty, Alexander, ‘‘D.W. Griffith’s Poetics of Place and the Rural Ideal,’’ in Journal of Comparative Poetics, Spring 1986. Rothman, W., ‘‘Hollywood Reconsidered: Reflections on the Classi- cal American Film,’’ in East-West Film Journal (Honolulu), vol. 1, no. 1, December 1986. Keil, C., ‘‘Transition through Tension: Stylistic Diversity in the Late Griffith Biographs,’’ in Cinema Journal (Austin, Texas), vol. 28, no. 3, Spring 1989. Merritt, R., ‘‘D.W. Griffith’s Intolerance: Reconstructing an Unat- tainable Text,’’ in Film History, vol. 4, no. 4, 1990. Literature/Film Quarterly (Salisbury, Maryland), vol. 18, no. 2, 1990. Simmon, S., ‘‘The Female of the Species. D.W. Griffith: Father of the Woman’s Film,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), vol. 46, no. 2, Winter 1992–93. *** Perhaps no other director has generated such a broad range of critical reaction as D.W. Griffith. For students of the motion picture, Griffith’s is the most familiar name in film history. Generally acknowledged as America’s most influential director (and certainly one of the most prolific), he is also perceived as being among the most limited. Praise for his mastery of film technique is matched by repeated indictments of his moral, artistic, and intellectual inadequa- cies. At one extreme, Kevin Brownlow has characterized him as ‘‘the only director in America creative enough to be called a genius.’’ At the other, Paul Rotha calls his contribution to the advance of film ‘‘negligible’’ and Susan Sontag complains of his ‘‘supreme vulgarity and even inanity’’; his work ‘‘reeks of a fervid moralizing about sexuality and violence’’ and his energy comes ‘‘from suppressed voluptuousness.’’ Griffith started his directing career in 1908, and in the following five years made some 485 films, almost all of which have been preserved. These films, one or two reels in length, have customarily been regarded as apprentice works, films in which, to quote Stephen Zito, ‘‘Griffith borrowed, invented, and perfected the forms and techniques that he later used to such memorable effect in The Birth of a Nation, Intolerance, Broken Blossoms, and Way Down East.’’ These early ‘‘Biographs’’ (named after the studio at which Griffith worked) have usually been studied for their stylistic features, notably parallel editing, camera placement, and treatment of light and shadow. Their most famous structuring devices are the last-minute rescue and the cross-cut. In recent years, however, the Biographs have assumed higher status in film history. Many historians and critics rank them with the most accomplished work in Griffith’s career. Vlada Petric, for in- stance, calls them ‘‘masterpieces of early cinema, fascinating lyrical films which can still affect audiences today, conveying the content in a cinematic manner often more powerful than that of Griffith’s later feature films.’’ Scholars have begun studying them for their charac- ters, images, narrative patterns, themes, and ideological values, finding in them a distinctive signature based on Griffith’s deep-seated faith in the values of the woman-centered home. Certain notable Biographs—The Musketeers of Pig Alley, The Painted Lady, A Cor- ner in Wheat, The Girl and Her Trust, The Battle of Elderbush Gulch, The Unseen Enemy, and A Feud in the Kentucky Hills—have been singled out for individual study. Griffith reached the peak of his popularity and influence in the five years between 1915 and 1920, when he released The Birth of a Nation, Intolerance, Broken Blossoms, and Way Down East. He also directed Hearts of the World during this period, a film that incorporates newsreel and faked documentary footage into an epic fictional narrative. A First World War propaganda epic, Hearts of the World, alone among his early spectacles, is ignored today. But in 1918 it was the most popular war film of its time, and rivalled The Birth of a Nation as the most profitable of all Griffith’s features. Today, it is usually studied as an example of World War I hysteria or as a pioneer- ing effort at government-sponsored mass entertainment. Although Griffith’s epics are generally grouped together, Paul Goodman points out that his films are neither so ideologically uniform nor so consistent as recent writers have generally assumed. With equal fervor Griffith could argue white supremacy and make pleas for toleration, play the liberal crusader and the reactionary conservative, appear tradition-bound yet remain open to experimen- tation, saturate his work in Victorian codes while struggling against a Victorian morality. Frustrated by his inability to find consistent GUERRADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 403 ideological threads in Griffith’s work, Norman Silverstein has called Griffith the father of anarchy in American films because his luminous movements in these epics never appear to sustain a unified whole. Yet, as Robert Lang observes, the epics do share broad formal characteristics, using history as a chaotic background for a fictional drama that stresses separation and reunification. Whether set in the French Revolution (Orphans of the Storm), the American Revolution (America), the Civil War (Birth of a Nation), or in the various epochs of Intolerance, the Griffith epic is an action-centered spectacle that manipulates viewer curiosity with powerfully propulsive, intrinsi- cally developmental scenes culminating in a sensational denouement. Griffith also made a much different sort of feature during these years—the pastoral romance. These have only recently received serious critical attention. In these films, which are stripped of specta- cle and historical surroundings, the cast of principal characters does not exceed two or three, the action is confined in time and space, and the story is intimate. Here, in films like Romance of Happy Valley, True-Heart Susie, and The Greatest Question, Griffith experiments with alternative narrative possibilities, whereby he extends the tech- niques of exposition to the length of a feature film. Strictly narrative scenes in these films are suspended or submerged to convey the illusion of near-plotlessness. The main figures, Griffith implied (usually played by Lillian Gish and Bobby Harron), would emerge independent of fable; atmosphere would dominate over story line. From the start, critics and reviewers found the near absence of action sequences and overt physical struggle noteworthy in the Griffith pastorals, but differed widely in their evaluation of it. Most of the original commentators assumed they had found a critical short- coming, and complained about the thinness of plot, padded exposi- tion, and frequent repetition of shots. Even Kenneth MacGowan, who alone among his contemporaries preferred Griffith’s pastorals to his epics, scored the empty storyline of The Romance of Happy Valley for its ‘‘loose ends and dangling characters.’’ More recent critics, on the other hand—notably Jean Mitry, John Belton, and Rene Kerdyk— have found transcendental virtues in the forswearing of event-cen- tered plots. Ascribing to Griffith’s technique a liberating moral purpose, Mitry called True-Heart Susie ‘‘a narrative which follows characters without entrapping them, allowing them complete freedom of action and event.’’ For John Belton, True-Heart Susie is one of Griffith’s ‘‘purest and most immediate films’’ because, ‘‘lacking a ‘great story’ there is nothing between us and the characters.’’ Equating absence of action sequences with the elimination of formal structure, Belton concludes that ‘‘it is through the characters not plot that Griffith expresses and defines the nature of the characters’ separation.’’ If these judgments appear critically naive (plainly these films have plots and structures even if these are less complex than in Intolerance and Birth), they raise important questions Griffith scholars continue to debate: how does Griffith create the impression that characters exist independent of action, and, in a temporal medium, how does Griffith create the impression of narrative immobility? By and large, Griffith’s films of the mid- and late 1920s have not fared well critically, although they have their defenders. The custom- ary view—that Griffith’s work became dull and undistinguished when he lost his personal studio at Mamaroneck in 1924—continues to prevail, despite calls from John Dorr, Arthur Lennig, and Richard Roud for re-evaluation. The eight films he made as a contract director for Paramount and United Artists are usually studied (if at all) as examples of late 1920s studio style. What critics find startling about them—particularly the United Artists features—is not the lack of quality, but the absence of any identifiable Griffith traits. Only Abraham Lincoln and The Struggle (Griffith’s two sound films) are recognizable as his work, and they are usually treated as early 1930s oddities. —Russell Merritt GUERRA, Ruy Nationality: Mozambiquian. Born: Louren?o Marques, Mozambique, 22 August 1931. Education: Educated in Mozambique and Portugal. Career: Attended IDHEC, Paris, 1952–54; Théatre National Populaire, 1955; assistant director in Paris, 1956–57; invited to direct Joana (unrealized), in Brazil, 1958; remained in Brazil until returning to Paris, 1967; following independence of Mozambique, returned to help plan film industry, late 1970s. Films as Director: 1954 Les Hommes et les autres (+ sc) (short, IDHEC diploma work) 1960 Oros (+ sc) (short, unfinished) 1961 O cavalo de Oxumaire (The Horse of Oxumaire) (co-d, + co-sc, unfinished) 1962 Os cafajestes (The Unscrupulous Ones) (+ co-sc) 1964 Os fuzis (The Guns) (+ co-sc, co-ed) 1967 ‘‘Vocabulaire’’ episode of Loin du Viêt-nam (not included in released version) (+ sc) 1969 Sweet Hunters (+ co-sc) 1970 Os deuses e os mortos (The Gods and the Dead) (+ co-sc, co-ed) 1978 A queda (The Fall) (co-d, + co-sc, co-music, co-ed) 1979 Mueda, memória e massacre (Mueda, Memory, and Massa- cre) (+ co-ph, ed) 1983 Erendira (+ sc) 1986 Opera do Malandro 1988 Fábula de la bella palomera (Fable of the Beautiful Pigeon- Fancier) 1989 Kuarup 1991 Me alquilo para sonar 1999 Monsanto (for TV) 2000 Estorvo (+ co-sc) Other Films: 1955 Souvenir de Paris (Théocary) (asst d); Chiens perdus, sans collier (Delannoy) (asst d) 1957 S.O.S. Noronha (Rouquier) (asst d, role) 1958 Le Tout pour le tout (Dally) (asst d) 1963 Os mendigos (role) 1969 Benito Cereno (Roullet) (role) GUERRA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 404 Ruy Guerra 1970 Le Ma?tre du temps (Pollet) (role); Le Mur (Roullet) (role) 1971 Les Soleils de l’Ile de Paques (Kast) (role); O homem das estrelas (Man and the Stars) (Barreto) (role) 1972 Aguirre, der Zorn G?ttes (Aguirre, the Wrath of God) (Herzog) (role) Publications By GUERRA: articles— Interview with J.A. Fieschi and J. Narboni, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), April 1967. Interview with Thomas Elsaesser, in Monogram (London), no. 5, 1974. Interview with Rui Nogueira, in Image et Son (Paris), Decem- ber 1974. ‘‘Filmen in Mozambique,’’ interview with F. Sartor, in Film en Televisie (Brussels), May/June 1981. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), June 1983. Interview with Serge Toubiana, in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), December 1983. Interview with M. Buruiana, in 24 Images (Montréal), Winter 1987. ‘‘Ruy Guerra: sonar con los pies sobre la tierra,’’ an interview with Luciano Castillo, in Cine Cubano (Habana), no. 134, 1992. On GUERRA: books— Johnson, Randal, Cinema Novo x 5: Masters of Contemporary Brazilian Film, Austin, Texas, 1984. On GUERRA: articles— Mardore, Michel, ‘‘Diaphragme à quatre,’’ in Cahiers du Cinéma (Paris), November 1964. Ciment, Michel, ‘‘Le Dieu, le diable et les fusils,’’ in Positif (Paris), May 1967. Zele, Van, ‘‘Os Fuzis,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), November 1969. Demeure, Jacques, ‘‘Pour un réalisme magique,’’ in Positif (Paris), January 1971. ‘‘Le ‘cinema n?vo’ brésilien Issue’’ of études Cinématographiques (Paris), no. 93–96, 1972. GüNEYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 405 ‘‘Ruy Guerra,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1981. Larraz, E., ‘‘Une collection hispanique: ‘Amours difficiles,’’’ in Cinemaction, October 1990. Maslin, Janet, ‘‘Director Returns to Garcia Marquez,’’ in New York Times, March 1, 1991. Lasarte, F., ‘‘Marquez og de levende billeder,’’ in Kosmorama, Fall 1991. *** A truly cosmopolitan artist, Ruy Guerra was born in Mozambique of Portuguese settlers, secured his higher education in Lisbon, and studied cinema at the Paris IDHEC. He was one of the leaders of the Brazilian cinema novo with two films that broke new ethical and aesthetic ground, Os cafajestes and Os fuzis. He shot Sweet Hunters in French and in English, and went back to Mozambique after it became independent to organize the newly born cinema industry. After returning he completed a documentary, Mueda, memória e massacre, before going to Mexico to adapt Gabriel García Marquez’s Erendira in 1983. Besides writing his own scripts, Guerra is the author of lyrics for Latin American pop songs (sung in particular by Baden Powell), and an actor in his own right (he took on roles in Herzog’s Aguirre and in Serge Roullet’s adaptation of Benito Cereno). The product of a cultural melting pot, Guerra’s style is hard to define. Very classical in form (except in the extraordinary Os deuses e os mortes, the epitome of Brazilian tropicalist aesthetics, which featured virtuoso camera movements and sequence shots), his style shows none of the external signs of modernity, such as non-chrono- logical sequences, manipulation of the sound track, or elaborate framing. On the other hand, it displays a very unusual use of rhythm, and makes use of a great variety of tempos in a way that is akin to that found in some Japanese films, such as those of Kurosawa. Guerra is preoccupied, even obsessed with the theme of frustration and disappointed expectations. Guerra’s interest in social issues was evident in his first film, Os cafajestes, about penniless young loafers in Rio who blackmail a girl after having taken photos of her in the nude. Os fuzis, set in the northeast of Brazil, pits a sergeant and four soldiers guarding a harvest destined for town (to profit the landowner mayor) against the covetous desires of hungry peasants. Thirteen years later Guerra shot a sequel, A queda (The Fall), with the same actors to show what happened to the characters after a decade spent in the big city. Os deuses e os mortes presents in grand operatic manner a feud between two families of farmers. This film reveals another aspect of Guerra’s personality: a taste for magic and dream, an interest in myths and surrealism. The economic and the psychic are bound together in this difficult and fascinating work. Sweet Hunters, Guerra’s most poetic film (with Sterling Hayden, Susan Strasberg, and Stuart Whitman), is set on an island where the three characters act out their obsessions and frustrated desires. Allan, a keen ornithologist, is waiting for the migration of birds, his wife Clea for the arrival of a man who has escaped from a nearby prison, and his sister for her departure. Given his interest in dreams and legends, Guerra was a logical choice to adapt García Marquez’s novella Erendira. The film is set in an imaginary country where a mythical and monstrous grandmother (Irene Pappas) sells her granddaughter as a prostitute. A picaresque tale of economic exploitation, with ironical characters and nightmar- ish situations, it offers a good synthesis of Guerra’s style even if the faithfulness of his adaptation does not allow him to give full vent to his ordinarily richer and more personal inspiration. —Michel Ciment GüNEY, Yilmaz Nationality: Turkish. Born: Yilmaz Putun in village near Adana in southern Turkey, 1937. Education: Educated in law in Ankara; studied economics in Istanbul. Career: Worked for film distribution company, 1952; began working with director Atif Yilmaz, 1958; sentenced to eighteen months in prison and six months exile for publishing ‘‘communist’’ novel Equations with 3 Strangers, 1961; began career in commercial cinema, as writer and actor, known as ‘‘Cirkin kral’’ (‘‘The Ugly King’’), 1963; founded Güney-Filmcilik production company, 1968; arrested on charge of sheltering wanted anarchist students, imprisoned without trial for twenty-six months, 1972 (released under general amnesty, 1974); alleged to have shot judge in restaurant, sentenced to twenty-four years hard labor (later commuted to eighteen years); while in prison, allowed to continue scripting films and overseeing productions, 1974–80; films banned following military takeover, 1980; escaped to France, 1981, stripped of Turkish citizenship. Awards: Best Film (co-recipient), Cannes Festival, for Yol, 1982. Died: Of cancer, in Paris, 9 September 1984. Yilmaz Güney GüNEY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 406 Films as Director: 1966 At avrat silah (The Horse, the Woman, and the Gun) (+ sc, role) 1967 Bana kursun islemez (Bullets Cannot Pierce Me) (+ sc, role); Benim adim Kerim (My Name Is Kerim) (+ sc, role) 1968 Pire Nuri (Nuri the Flea) (co-d, + sc, role); Seyyit Han ‘‘Topragin Gelini’’ (Seyyit Khan, Bride of the Earth) (+ sc, role as Seyyit Han) 1969 Ac kurtlar (The Hungry Wolves) (+ sc, role); Bir cirkin adam (An Ugly Man) (+ sc, role) 1970 Umut (Hope) (+ co-sc, role as Cabar); Piyade Osman (Osman the Wanderer) (co-d, + sc, role); Yedi belalilar (The Seven No-goods) (co-d, + sc, role) 1971 Kacaklar (The Fugitives) (+ sc, role); Vurguncular (The Wrongdoers) (+ sc, role); Ibret (The Example) (co-d, + sc, role); Yarin son gündür (Tomorrow Is the Final Day) (+ sc, role); Umutsuzlar (The Hopeless Ones) (+ sc, role); Aci (Pain) (+ sc, role); A it (Elegy) (+ sc, role as Copano lu); Baba (The Father) (+ sc, role as Cemal, the Boatman) 1974 Arkadas (The Friend) (+ sc, role as the friend); Endise (Anxiety) (co-d, + sc) 1975 Zavallilar (The Poor Ones) (co-d, + co-sc, role as Abu) (begun 1972) 1982 Le Mur (The Wall) (+ sc, role) Other Films: 1958 Alageyik (The Hind) (Yilmaz) (co-sc, role); Bu vatanin cocuklari (The Children of This Country) (Yilmaz) (co-sc, role) 1959 Karacao lanin kara sevdasi (Karacao lan’s Mad Love) (Yilmaz) (co-sc); Tütün zamani (Arlburnu) (role) 1960 Clum perdesi (The Screen of Death) (Yilmaz) (asst d) 1961 Dolandiricilar (The King of Thieves) (Yilmaz) (asst d); Kizil vazo (The Red Vase) (Yilmaz) (asst d); Seni kaybederesen (If I Lose You) (Yilmaz) (asst d); Yaban gülü (The Desert Laughs) (Utku) (co-sc); Dolandiricilar sahi (Yilmaz) (role); Tatli-Bela (Yilmaz) (role) 1963 ?lüme yalniz gidilar (The Dead Only Perish) (Yalinkilic) (sc); Ikisi de cesurdu (Two Brave Men) (co-sc, role) 1964 Hergün ?lmektense (Ceylan) (sc, role); Kamali zeybek (Hero with a Knife) (Akinci) (sc, role); Da larin kurdu Kocero (Kocero, Mountain Wolf) (Utku) (sc, role); Halimeden mektup var (Do?an) (role); Kocao lan (Demirel) (role); Kara sahin (Akinci) (role); Mor defter (Ergün) (role); 10 Korkusuz adam (Basaran) (role); Prangasiz mahkumlar (Ariburnu) (role); Zimba gibi delikanli (J?ntürk) (role) 1965 Kasimpasali (Akinci) (sc, role); Kasimpasali recep (Akinci) (sc, role); Konyakci (The Drunkard) (Basaran) (sc, role); Kirallar kirali (King of Kings) (Olgac) (sc, role); Ben ?ldükce yasarim (Sa iro lu) (role); Beyaz atli adam (J?ntürk) (role); Da larin o lu (Atadeniz) (role); Davudo (Kazankaya) (role); G?nül kusu (Gülnar) (role); Sayili kabadayilar (Kazankaya) (role); Kan G?vdeyi g?türdü (Atadeniz) (role); Kahreden kursun (Atadeniz) (role); Haracima dokunma (Kazankaya) (role); Kanli bu day (Ceylan) (role); Korkuszlar (Evin) (role); Silaha yeminliydim (Inci) (role); Sokakta kan vardi (Turkali) (role); Tehlikeli adam (Kazankaya) (role); Torpido Yilmaz (Okcugil) (role); ücünüzü de mihlarim (Olgac) (role); Yarali kartal (Dursun) (role) 1966 Burcak tarlasi (Utku) (sc); Aslanlarin d?nüsü (Return of the Heroes) (Atadeniz) (sc, role); Esrefpasali (Tokatli) (sc, role); Hudutlarin kanunu (The Law of Smuggling) (Akad) (sc, role); Yedi da in aslani (Seven Wild Lions; The Moun- tain King) (Atadeniz) (sc, role); Tilki Selim (Crafty Selim) (Hancer) (sc, role); Aanasi yi it do urmus (Kurthan) (role); Cirkin kiral (Atadeniz) (role); Kovboy Ali (Atadeniz) (role); Silahlarin kanunu (Atadeniz) (role); . . . Veda silahlara veda . . . (J?ntürk) (role); Yi it yarali olur (G?rec) (role) 1967 At hirsizi banus (J?ntürk) (sc, role); Seytanin o lu (Aslan) (sc, role); Balatli arif (Yilmaz) (role); Bomba Kemal (Kurthan) (role); Büyük cellatlar (Duru) (role); Cirkin kiral affetmez (Atadeniz) (role); Eskiya celladi (J?ntürk) (role); Ince cumali (Duru) (role); Kizilirmak-Karakoyun (Akad) (role); Kozano lu (Yilmaz) (role); Kuduz recep (Sa ir lu) (role); Kurbanlik katil (Akad) (role) 1968 Azrail benim (The Executioner) (sc, role); Kargaci Halil (Halil, the Crow-Man) (Yalinkilic) (sc, role); Aslan bey (Yalinkilic) (role); Beyo lu canavari (G?rec) (role); Canpazari (G?rec) (role); Marmara hasan (Aslan) (role); ?ldürmek hakkimdir (Ergün) (role) 1969 Belanin yedi türlüsü (Seven Kinds of Trouble) (Ergün) (sc, role); Bin defa ?lürüm (Aslan) (role); Cifte tabancali kabadayi (Aslan) (role); Güney ?lüm saciyor (Aslan) (role); Kan su gibi akacak (Atadeniz) (role); Kursunlarin kanunu (Ergün) (role) 1970 Imzam kanla yazilir (I Sign in Blood) (Aslan) (sc, role); Sevgili muhafizin (My Dear Bodyguard) (J?ntürk) (sc, role); Seytan kayaliklari (Devil Crag) (Filmer) (sc, role); Cifte yürekli (Evin) (role); Kanimin son damlasina kadar (Figenli) (role); Onu Allah affetsin (Elmas) (role); Son kizgin adam (Davuto lu) (role); Zeyno (Yilmaz) (role) 1971 Cirkin ve cesur (Ozer) (role); Namus ve silah (G?rec) (role) 1972 Sabte yar (G?rec) (role) 1975 Izin (Leave) (Gürsü) (sc); Bir gün mutlaka (One Day Cer- tainly) (Olgac) (sc) 1978 Sürü (The Herd) (?kten) (sc, pr supervision) 1979 Düsman (The Enemy) (?kten) (sc, pr supervision) 1981 Yol (The Way) (sc, pr supervision, ed) Publications By GüNEY: articles— ‘‘Entretien avec Yilmaz Güney (1977),’’ in Positif (Paris), April 1980. Interview with Michel Ciment, in Positif (Paris), June 1982. Interview with Marcel Martin, in Image et Son (Paris), July-Au- gust 1982. Interview in Casablanca, no. 36, December 1983. ‘‘Güney’s Last Journey,’’ an interview with C. Gardner, in Stills (London), October 1984. On GüNEY: book— Armes, Roy, Third–World Filmmaking and the West, Berkeley, 1987. GUTIéRREZ ALEADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 407 On GüNEY: articles— Weales, G. ‘‘Istanbul Journal,’’ in Film Comment (New York), January/February 1975. Kazan, Elia, ‘‘The View from a Turkish Prison,’’ in New York Times Magazine, 4 February 1979. ‘‘Guney Issue’’ of Positif (Paris), April 1980. Armes, Roy, ‘‘Yilmaz Guney: The Limits of Individual Action,’’ in Framework (Norwich), Summer 1981. Elley, Derek, ‘‘Yilmaz Güney,’’ in International Film Guide 1983, London, 1982. Giles, D., and H. Sahin, ‘‘Revolutionary Cinema in Turkey: Yilmaz Güney,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), July 1982. Rayns, Tony, ‘‘From Isolation,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Spring 1983. Bassan, R., ‘‘Le Mur: L’Itinéraire escarpé de Yilmaz Güney,’’ in Revue du Cinéma (Paris), June 1983. Obituary in Variety (New York), 12 September 1984. Finlayson, E., ‘‘Levantine Approaches: On First Looking into Güney’s Turkey,’’ in Monthly Film Bulletin (London), October 1984. Listener (London), 15 January 1987. Hellier, C., ‘‘Hope Deferred,’’ in Index on Censorship, vol. 20, no. 3, 1991. Naficy, Hamid, ‘‘Phobic Spaces and Liminal Panics: Independent Transnational Film Genre,’’ in East-West Film Journal (Hono- lulu), vol. 8, no. 2, July 1994. On GüNEY: film— Stempel, Hans, and Martin Ripken, Besuch auf Imrali (Portrait of Yilmaz Güney), 1979. *** Yilmaz Güney’s life was fully as dramatic as any of his films. The son of a rural worker, he supported himself through studies at university in Ankara and Istanbul. Though his career was interrupted by a series of arrests for political activities, he established himself as a scriptwriter and actor in the 1960s and developed a wide popular following. More than a film star in the conventional sense, he became something of a popular myth, a figure in whose sufferings and ruthless quest for vengeance the poor and oppressed could see their lives and aspirations reflected. When Güney turned to directing in the late 1960s, his first films were in the same commercial tradition as his early hits. But the early 1970s saw a fresh burst of creativity, brought to an end by a new prison sentence of two years. After his release he completed one of his most interesting films, Arkadas (The Friend), in 1974, before finding himself back in prison, this time on a murder charge for which he received a sentence of twenty-four years imprisonment. But even this could not put a stop to his career. He maintained contact with the outside world and continued scripting films, some of which, like Sürü (The Herd), achieved international success. When he finally made his escape from Turkey in 1981 he was able to work on yet another film he had scripted, Yol (The Way), which won the Cannes Grand Prix in 1982. Perhaps Güney’s major achievement as an actor-director in the early 1970s was to make the transition from the heroic superman figure of his early films, such as Ac Kurtlar (The Hungry Wolves), to the vulnerable individual of his later work. In the series of masterly films that begin with the ironically titled Umut (Hope) in 1970, the failure of the isolated individual acting alone becomes the uniting thread of Güney’s work. Already, in The Hungry Wolves, the picture of Turkish society portrayed by Güney is most remarkable for what is lacking: no concerned government to maintain the law, no self-help for the terrorized peasants, no acceptable role for women, no vision beyond instinctive revolt on the part of the bandits. These factors continue to form the background for the series of defeated individuals in both rural settings as in the bandit film A it (Elegy) and the urban environment as in Baba (The Father) and Zavallilar (The Poor Ones). The one film which posits a set of positive values is his last completed work as a director before his arrest in 1974, The Friend. But even here the vision is a dark one, for the intellectual hero (played by Güney) confronts an erstwhile friend with his empty life and thereby drives him to suicide. The next film Güney began, Endise (Anxiety), was completed by his friend and former assistant Serif G?ren following Güney’s arrest. He was to spend eight years in prison, but he continued to write film scripts indefatigably. Among his best films of this period are those which offer a vivid picture of the life of peasants in the still feudal world of his native district, Adana: Anxiety and The Herd, the latter directed by Zeki ?kten. Güney’s final Turkish work, Yol, which he edited himself in exile, is even wider in its scope, offering an image of the whole breadth of Turkey through its intercut stories of five detainees released from prison for a week who travel home to their families. Despite Güney’s strong political commitment, his films are social studies rather than overtly political tracts. He himself never failed to make the distinction between his political activity, which is directed towards revolutionary change in society, and his filmmaking. For Güney, the fictional feature film remained first and foremost a popular form, a way of communicating with a mass audience, and, as Yol shows, he used in an exemplary way the possibilities it offers for stating and examining the contradictions that underlie modern Turkish society. —Roy Armes GUTIéRREZ ALEA, Tomás Nationality: Cuban. Born: Havana, 11 December 1928. Education: Studied law at the University of Havana; attended Centro Sperimentale, Rome, 1951–53. Career: Worked with Cine-Revista newsreel organisation, late 1950s; following establishment of Instituto Cubano del Arte e Industria Cinematograficos (ICAIC) by revolutionary government, began making documentaries, 1959; later collaborated with younger filmmakers, in keeping with ICAIC policy. Awards: Union of Writers of the URSS Award, Moscow International Film Festival, for Historias de la revolucion, 1961; Grand Coral—First Prize, for Tiempo de revancha, 1982; Grand Coral—First Prize, for Hasta cierto punto, 1983; Silver Berlin Bear Award and Teddy Award, Berlin International Film Festival, Golden Kikito, Gramado Latin Film Festival, ARCI-NOVA Award, FIPRESCI Award, Grand Coral—First Prize, OCIC Award, and Special Jury Award, Sundance Film Festival, for Strawberry and Chocolate, 1994; Grand Coral— Second Prize, shared with Juan Carlos Tabío, Havana Film Festival, GUTIéRREZ ALEA DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 408 Tomás Gutiérrez Alea 1995, Jury Award, Ft. Lauderdale International Film Festival, 1996, Golden Kikito, Gramado Latin Film Festival, 1996, and Latin Amer- ica Cinema Award—Honorable Mention, Sundance Film Festival, 1996, all for Guantanamera. Died: Of lung cancer, Havana, 16 April 1996. Films as Director: 1947 La Caperucita roja; El Faquir 1950 Una Confusión cotidiana 1953 Il Sogno de Giovanni Bassain 1955 El Mégano 1959 Esta tierra nuestra (+ sc, ed) 1960 Asamblea general; Historias de la revolución (Stories of the Revolution) (+ sc) 1961 Muerte al invasor 1962 Las Doce sillas (The Twelve Chairs) (+ sc) 1964 Cumbite (+ sc) 1966 La Muerte de un burócrata (Death of a Bureaucrat) (+ sc) 1968 Memorias del subdesarrollo (Historias del subdesarrollo; Inconsolable Memories; Memories of Underdevelopment) (+ sc, ro) 1971 Una Pelea cubana contra los demonios (A Cuban Fight against Demons) (+ sc) 1974 El Arte del tabaco 1975 El Camino de la mirra y el incienso 1976 La última cena (The Last Supper) 1977 De cierta manera (One Way or Another) (+ sc); La Sexta parte del mundo 1979 Los Sobrevivientes (The Survivors) (+ sc) 1984 Hasta cierto punto (Up to a Certain Point; Up to a Point) 1988 Cartas del parque (Letters from the Park) (+ sc) 1991 Contigo en la distancia (Far Apart) 1993 Fresa y chocolate (Strawberry and Chocolate) 1994 Guantanamera (+ sc) Other Films: 1975 El Otro Francisco (The Other Francisco) GUTIéRREZ ALEADIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 409 Publications By GUTIéRREZ ALEA: book Las doce sillas, Havana, 1963. By GUTIéRREZ ALEA: articles ‘‘Individual Fulfillment and Collective Achievement: An Interview with Tomás Gutiérrez Alea,’’ with Julianne Burton, in Cineaste (New York), January 1977. ‘‘Toward a Renewal of Cuban Revolutionary Cinema,’’ an interview with Zuzana Mirjam Pick, in Cine-Tracts (Montreal), no. 3/4, 1978. Interview with G. Chijona, in Framework (Norwich), Spring 1979. Interview with M. Ansara, in Cinema Papers (Melbourne), May/ June 1981. ‘‘Dramaturgia (cinematografica) y realidad,’’ in Cine Cubano (Ha- vana), no. 105, 1983. Interview with E. Colina, in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 109, 1984. ‘‘I Wasn’t Always a Filmmaker,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 14, no. 1, 1985. Interview with Gary Crowdus, in Cineaste (New York), vol. 14, no. 2, 1985. Interview with J. R. MacBean, in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Spring 1985. ‘‘The Viewer’s Dialectic,’’ in Reviewing Histories: Selections from New Latin American Cinema, edited by Coco Fusco, Buffalo, New York, 1987. ‘‘Another Cinema, Another World, Another Society,’’ in Journal of Third World Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, 1994. West, Dennis, ‘‘Strawberry and Chocolate, Ice Cream and Tolerance: Interviews with Tomás Gutiérrez Alea and Juan Carlos Tabío,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 21, no. 1–2, 1995. On GUTIéRREZ ALEA: books Nelson, L., Cuba: The Measure of a Revolution, Minneapolis, 1972. Myerson, Michael, editor, Memories of Underdevelopment: The Revolutionary Films of Cuba, New York, 1973. Chanan, Michael, The Cuban Image: Cinema and Cultural Politics in Cuba Bloomington, Indiana, 1985. Oroz, Silvia, Os filmes que N?o Filmei: Gutiérrez Alea, Rio de Janeiro, 1985. Burton, Julianne, editor, Cinema and Social Change in Latin Amer- ica: Conversations with Filmmakers, Austin, Texas, 1986. Fornet, Ambrosio, editor, Alea: Una retrospectiva critica, Havana, 1987. Douglas, María Eulalia, Diccionario de Cineastas Cubanos: 1959–1987, Merida, Venezuela, 1989. Chanan, Michael, editor, Memories of Underdevelopment, Tomás Gutiérrez Alea, Director, and Inconsolable Memories, Lon- don, 1990. Paranagua, Paulo Antonio, editor, Le Cinema Cubain, Paris, 1990. Pick, Zuzana M., The New Latin American Cinema: A Continental Project, Austin, Texas, 1993. Tomás Gutiérrez Alea: poesí y revolución, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 1994. Evora, José Antonio, Tomás Gutiérrez Alea, Madrid, 1996. On GUTIéRREZ ALEA: articles Sutherland, Elizabeth, ‘‘Cinema of Revolution—Ninety Miles from Home,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1961/62. Adler, Renata, in New York Times, 10, 11, and 12 February 1969. Engel, Andi, ‘‘Solidarity and Violence,’’ in Sight and Sound (Lon- don), Autumn 1969. Crowdus, Gary, ‘‘The Spring 1972 Cuban Film Festival Bust,’’ in Film Society Review (New York), March/May 1972. Lesage, Julia, ‘‘Images of Underdevelopment,’’ in Jump Cut (Chi- cago), May/June 1974. Kernan, Margot, ‘‘Cuban Cinema: Tomás Gutiérrez Alea,’’ in Film Quarterly (Berkeley), Winter 1976. Burton, Julianne, ‘‘Introduction to Revolutionary Cuban Cinema,’’ in Jump Cut (Chicago), December 1978. West, Dennis, ‘‘Slavery and Cinema in Cuba: The Case of Gutiérrez Alea’s The Last Supper,’’ in Western Journal of Black Studies, Summer 1979. Alexander, W., ‘‘Class, Film Language, and Popular Cinema,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), March 1985. Burton, Julianne, ‘‘The Intellectual in Anguish: Modernist Form and Ideology in Land in Anguish and Memories of Underdevelopment,’’ in Ideologies and Literature, Winter-Spring 1985. West, Dennis, ‘‘The Last Supper,’’ in Magill’s Survey of Cinema: Foreign Language Films, edited by Frank N. Magill, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1985. Sanchez Crespo, Osvaldo, ‘‘The Perspective of the Present: Cuban History, Cuban Filmmaking,’’ in Reviewing Histories: Selections from New Latin American Cinema, edited by Coco Fusco, Buf- falo, New York, 1987. West, Dennis, ‘‘Cuba: Cuban Cinema before the Revolution and After,’’ in World Cinema since 1945, edited by William Luhr, New York, 1987. ‘‘Tomás Gutiérrez Alea,’’ in Film Dope (London), March 1988. Chanan, Michael, ‘‘Tomás Gutiérrez Alea: The Man in Havana,’’ in National Film Theatre Booklet (London), October/November 1989. Fornet, Ambrosio, ‘‘Alea: Diez notas en busca de un autor,’’ in Encuadre (Venezuela), vol. 11, 1992. Chávez, Rebeca, ‘‘Tomás Gutiérrez Alea: Entrevista filmada,’’ in La Gaceta de Cuba, September-October 1993. Padrón Nodarse, Frank, ‘‘La realidad en el cine cubano de los noventa,’’ in Dicine, vol. 57, 1994. Strawberry and Chocolate issue of Viridiana (Madrid), no. 7, 1994. González, Reynaldo, ‘‘Meditation for a Debate, or Cuban Culture with the Taste of Strawberry and Chocolate,’’ in Cuba Update, May 1994. Mason, Joyce, ‘‘State Machismo: The Official Versions of the State of Male/Female Relations,’’ in Cineaction, May 1986. Jaramillo, Diana, ‘‘El sabor de la cubanía,’’ in Kinetoscopio, May- June 1994. Yglesias, Jorge, ‘‘La espera del futuro,’’ in Kinetoscopio, November- December 1994. Cotler, Andrés, ‘‘Contradicciones cubanas: Fresa y chocolate,’’ in La Gran Ilusion, vol. 4, 1995. Espinasa, JoséMaría, ‘‘Fresa y chocolate: Un cuento de hadas,’’ in Nitrato de Plata, vol. 20, 1995. Mraz, John, ‘‘Memorias del subdesarrollo: Conciencia burguesa, contexto revolucionario,’’ in Nitrato de Plata, vol. 20, 1995. Martínez Carril, Manuel, ‘‘Gutiérrez Alea observa a Cuba desde adentro,’’ in Cinemateca Revista, January 1995. GUY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 410 Wise, Michael Z., ‘‘In Totalitarian Cuba, Ice Cream and Understand- ing,’’ in New York Times, 22 January 1995. Marsolais, Gilles, ‘‘Un humour décapant: coup d’oeil sur quelques films de Tomás Gutiérrez Alea,’’ in 24 Images (Montreal), no. 77, Summer 1995. Obituary in Cineaste (New York), vol. 22, no. 2, Spring 1996. Obituary in Variety (New York), 22 April 1996. Obituary in Cineaste (New York), June 1996. Obituary in Sight and Sound (London), vol. 7, no. 3, March 1997. Chanan, Michael, ‘‘Remembering Titón,’’ in Jump Cut (Berkeley), no. 41, May 1997. *** In 1946, when he was 17 years old, Tomás Gutiérrez Alea came into possession of a 16mm movie camera. As he related later in a Cinéaste essay titled ‘‘I Wasn’t Always a Filmmaker,’’ his first effort was a Kafkaesque comedy called Una confusion cotidiana (An Everyday Confusion). ‘‘The film was about ten minutes long, I worked with actors, and the experience was exciting and fun. From then on, I knew what I wanted to be.’’ Though he went to law school at the University of Havana (where one of his fellow students was Fidel Castro), he pursued his true interest even there, making two films for the Cuban Communist Party. He wasn’t a party member at that time, but was responding to a culture of student activism that had dominated his campus for the previous three decades. In 1951 Gutiérrez Alea went to Rome to continue his studies at the Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografia. He arrived just after the peaking of post-war neorealism, of which his new school was still very much a center of influence. One of his fellow students was Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Returning to Cuba two years later, the future director found minimal opportunity to pursue his profession, but a fertile landscape for his political and social activism. In his absence the country had been come under the military dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista. Gutiérrez Alea joined a group making a clandestine, neorealist- inspired film about charcoal burners, intended to expose the condi- tions imposed on the poor by American neocolonialism. The film, El Megano, which took a year to make, was shown once, at a 1956 screening on the University of Havana campus. It was then seized by the authorities, and the filmmakers were interrogated. That same year Gutiérrez Alea finally found paid work as a filmmaker, making short documentaries and humorous films for a weekly TV series called Cinerevista. He worked for a Mexican producer named Manuel Barbachano Ponce, who two years later would produce Luis Bu?uel’s Nazarin. After Castro came to power on December 31, 1958, Alea was recruited by the Cultural Directorate of the Rebel Army to make a documentary called Esta tierra nuestra (This Land of Ours). Meanwhile, the Revolutionary Government was establishing an of- ficial film production house called the Cuban Institute of Cinematographic Art and Industry; it’s first head was Alfredo Guevara, who had been involved in the making of El Megano. Gutiérrez Alea became one of its founding members. Over the next eight years, Gutiérrez Alea made another documen- tary and three feature films, including a satire on revolutionary excess called La muerte de un burócrata (Death of a Bureaucrat). Then in 1968 he began work on what was to become his most influential films, Memorias de subdesarollo (Memories of Underdevelopment). Based on a novella by Edmundo Desnoes called Inconsolable Memories, Gutiérrez Alea’s film combined its fictional elements with documentary footage to create a portrait of a bourgeois intellectual who wants to be a part of the revolutionary ferment going on all around him, but remains disconnected, watching the transformation of Havana society through binoculars from his apartment balcony. This breaking down of the barriers between fiction and reality was widely exploited in the Cuban film industry, and was to have a wide influence on world cinema when it was finally shown in America and France in 1973 and 1974. In America the National Society of Film Critics honored Memorias de subdesarollo by inviting its director to a ceremony to accept a plaque and a $2000 award. The U.S. State Department refused to grant Gutiérrez Alea a visa, and threatened the Society with legal action if it delivered the award in any other way. The New York Times editorialized on the situation on January 19, 1974: ‘‘The absurdity of such sanctions must be measured against the fact that the USA is now busily encouraging trade with the Communist superpowers. But the transmission of a prize for cultural achievement is treated as a subver- sive act . . . At a time when détente with the Soviet Union and the normalization of relations with Communist China are rightfully considered diplomatic triumphs, the suggestion that Cuban filmmakers might constitute a menace only exposes American officialdom to ridicule.’’ While Gutiérrez Alea always defended the Cuban revolution abroad, he also accepted the responsibility of critiquing it at home. This dual response is exemplified by the way he responded to the issues of oppression experienced by gay men and lesbians under the Castro regime. In 1984 the director participated over several issues of the Village Voice in a polemical discussion with Cuban expatri- ate cinematographer Nestor Almendros. This was in response to Almendros’ documentary about the official anti-gay oppression in Cuba called Improper Conduct. Gutiérrez Alea forthrightly defended the Cuban regime against what he viewed as Almendros’ ‘‘half-truths,’’ and tried to place the attitudes against homosexuality in a wider context of Cuba’s Catholic and Spanish traditions. Working in Cuba however, Gutiérrez Alea had already made one film, Hasta un cierto punto (Up to a Certain Point), which analyzed the machismo underlying anti-gay prejudice, and in 1993 he would produce a film, Frese y chocolate (Strawberry and Chocolate) which brought the issue to the forefront of political debate in Cuba. Because of deteriorating health, Gutiérrez Alea had to bring in a frequent collaborator, Juan Carlos Tabío, to co-direct this film. Tabío also served in the same capacity on Gutiérrez Alea’s final project, Guantanamera. The director succumbed to lung cancer on April 16, 1996, at the age of 67. He was widely eulogized as the brightest star of the Cuban cinema, at a time when it was matched in the hemisphere only by Brazil in its artistic excellence and social and political relevance. —Stephen Brophy GUY, Alice Nationality: French. Born: Born in Saint-Mandé, 1 July 1873. Also known as Alice Guy-Blaché and Alice Blaché. Education: Convent du Sacré-Coeur, Viry, France 1879–85; religious school at Ferney, GUYDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 411 and brief term in Paris; studied stenography. Family: Married Her- bert Blaché-Bolton, 1907 (divorced 1922), two children. Career: Secretary to Léon Gaumont, 1895; directed first film, La Fée aux choux, 1896 (some sources give 1900); director of Gaumont film production, 1897–1907; using Gaumont ‘‘chronophone,’’ made first sound films, 1900; moved to United States with husband, who was to supervise Gaumont subsidiary Solax, 1907; ceased independent pro- duction, lectured on filmmaking at Columbia University, 1917; assistant director to husband, 1919–20; returned to France, 1922; moved to United States, 1964. Awards: Legion of Honor, 1955. Died: In Mahwah, New Jersey, 24 March 1968. Films as Director and Scriptwriter: 1896 La Fée aux choux (The Cabbage Fairy) 1897 Le Pêcheur dans le torrent; Le?on de danse; Baignade dans le torrent; Une nuit agitée; Coucher d’Yvette; Danse fleur de lotus; Ballet Libella; Le Planton du colonel; Idylle; L’Aveugle 1897/98 L’Arroseur arrosé; Au réfectoire; En classe; Les Cambrioleurs; Le Cocher de fiacre endormi; Idylle interrompue; Chez le magnétiseur; Les Farces de Jocko; Scène d’escamotage; Déménagement à la cloche de bois; Je vous y prrrends! 1898/99 Le?ons de boxe; La Vie du Christ (11 tableaux) 1899/1900 Le Tondeur de chiens; Le Déjeuner des enfants; Au cabaret; La Mauvaise Soupe; Un Lunch; Erreur judiciaire; L’Aveugle; La Bonne Absinthe; Danse serpentine par Mme Bob Walter; Mésaventure d’un charbonnier; Monnaie de lapin; Les Dangers de l’acoolisme; Le Tonnelier; Transfor- mations; Le Chiffonier; Retour des champs; Chez le Maréchal-Ferrant; Marché à la volaille; Courte échelle; L’Angélus; Bataille d’oreillers; Bataille de boules de neige; Le marchand de coco 1900 Avenue de l’Opéra; La petite magicienne; Le?on de danse; Chez le photographe; Sidney’s Joujoux series (nine titles); Dans les coulisses; Au Bal de Flore series (three titles); Ballet Japonais series (three titles); Danse serpentine; Danse du pas des foulards par des almées; Danse de l’ivresse; Coucher d’une Parisienne; Les Fredaines de Pierrette series (four titles); Vénus et Adonis series (five titles); La Tarantelle; Danse des Saisons series (four titles); La Source; Danse du papillon; La Concierge; Danses series (three titles); Chirurgie fin de siècle; Une Rage de dents; Saut humidifié de M. Plick 1900/01 La Danse du ventre; Lavatory moderne; Lecture quotidienne 1900/07 (Gaumont ‘‘Phonoscènes’’, i.e. films with synchronized sound recorded on a wax cylinder): Carmen (twelve scenes); Mireille (five scenes); Les Dragons de Villars (nine scenes); Mignon (seven scenes); Faust (twenty-two scenes); Polin series (thirteen titles); Mayol series (thirteen titles); Dranem series of comic songs (twelve titles); Series recorded in Spain (eleven titles); La Prière by Gounod 1901 Folies Masquées series (three titles); Frivolité; Les Vagues; Danse basque; Hussards et grisettes; Charmant FrouFrou; Tel est pris qui croyait prendre 1902 La fiole enchantée; L’Equilibriste; En faction; La Première Gamelle; La Dent récalcitrante; Le Marchand de ballons; Les Chiens savants; Miss Lina Esbrard Danseuse Cos- mopolite et Serpentine series (four titles); Les Clowns; Sage-femme de première classe; Quadrille réaliste; Une Scène en cabinet particulier vue à travers le trou de la serrure; Farces de cuisinière; Danse mauresque; Le Lion savant; Le Pommier; La Cour des miracles; La Gavotte; Trompé mais content; Fruits de saison; Pour secourer la salade 1903 Potage indigeste; Illusioniste renversant; Le Fiancé ensorcelé; Les Apaches pas veinards; Les Aventures d’un voyageur trop pressé; Ne bougeons plus; Comment monsieur prend son bain; La Main du professeur Hamilton ou Le Roi des dollars; Service précipité, La Poule fantaisiste; Modelage express; Faust et Méphistophélès; Lutteurs américains; La Valise enchantée; Compagnons de voyage encombrants; Cake-Walk de la pendule; Répétition dans un cirque; Jocko musicien; Les Braconniers; La Liqueur du couvent; Le Voleur sacrilège; Enlèvement en automobile et mariage précipite 1903/04 Secours aux naufragés; La Mouche; La Chasse au cambrioleur; Nos Bon Etudiants; Les Surprises de l’affichage; Comme on fait son lit on se couche; Le Pompon malencontreux 1; Comment on disperse les foules; Les Enfants du miracle; Pierrot assassin; Les Deux Rivaux 1904 L’Assassinat du Courrier de Lyon; Vieilles Estampes series (four titles); Mauvais coeur puni; Magie noire; Rafle de chiens; Cambrioleur et agent; Scènes Directoire series (three titles); Duel tragique; L’Attaque d’un diligence; Culture intensive ou Le Vieux Mari; Cible humaine; Trans- formations; Le Jour du terme; Robert Macaire et Bertrand; Electrocutée; La Rêve du chasseur; Le Monolutteur; Les Petits Coupeurs de bois vert; Clown en sac; Triste Fin d’un vieux savant; Le Testament de Pierrot; Les Secrets de la prestidigitation dévoilés; La Faim . . . L’ occasion . . . L’herbe tendre; Militaire et nourrice; La Première Ciga- rette; Départ pour les vacances; Tentative d’assassinat en chemin de fer; Paris la nuit ou Exploits d’ apaches à Montamartre; Concours de bébés; Erreur de poivrot; Volée par les bohémiens (Rapt d’ enfant par les romanichels); Les Bienfaits du cinématographe; P tissier et ramoneur; Gage d’amour; L’Assassinat de la rue du Temple (Le Crime de la rue du Temple); Le Réveil du jardinier; Les Cambrioleurs de Paris 1905 Réhabilitation; Douaniers et contrebandiers (La Guérité); Le Bébé embarrassant; Comment on dort á Paris!; Le Lorgnon accusateur; La Charité du prestidigitateur; Une Noce au lac Saint-Fargeau; Le Képi; Le Pantalon coupé; Le Pla- teau; Roméo pris au piége; Chien jouant á la balle; La Fantassin Guignard; La Statue; Villa dévalisée; Mort de Robert Macaire et Bertrand; Le Pavé; Les Ma?ons; La Esmeralda; Peintre et ivrogne; On est poivrot, mais on a du c?ur; Au Poulailler! 1906 La Fée au printemps; La Vie du marin; La Chaussette; La Messe de minuit; Pauvre pompier; Le Régiment moderne; Les Druides; Voyage en Espagne series (fifteen titles); La Vie de Christ (25 tableaux); Conscience de prêtre; L’Honneur du Corse; J’ai un hanneton dans mon pantalon; Le Fils du garde-chasse; Course de taureaux à N?mes; La Pègre de Paris; Lèvres closes (Sealed Lips); La Crinoline; La Voiture cellulaire; La Maratre; Le Matelas alcoolique; A la recher- che d’un appartement GUY DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 412 1907 La vérité sur l’homme-singe (Ballet de Singe); Déménagement à la cloche de bois; Les Gendarmes; Sur la barricade (L’enfant de la barricade) 1910 A Child’s Sacrifice (The Doll) 1911 Rose of the Circus; Across the Mexican Line; Eclipse; A Daughter of the Navajos; The Silent Signal; The Girl and the Bronco Buster; The Mascot of Troop ‘‘C’’; An Enlisted Man’s Honor; The Stampede; The Hold-Up; The Altered Message; His Sister’s Sweetheart; His Better Self; A Revo- lutionary Romance; The Violin Maker of Nuremberg 1912 Mignon or The Child of Fate; A Terrible Lesson; His Lord- ship’s White Feather; Falling Leaves; The Sewer; In the Year 2000; A Terrible Night; Mickey’s Pal; Fra Diavolo; Hotel Honeymoon; The Equine Spy; Two Little Rangers; The Bloodstain; At the Phone; Flesh and Blood; The Paralytic; The Face at the Window 1913 The Beasts of the Jungle; Dick Whittington and His Cat; Kelly from the Emerald Isle; The Pit and the Pendulum; Western Love; Rogues of Paris; Blood and Water; Ben Bolt; The Shadows of the Moulin Rouge; The Eyes that Could Not Close; The Star of India; The Fortune Hunters 1914 Beneath the Czar; The Monster and the Girl; The Million Dollar Robbery; The Prisoner of the Harem; The Dream Woman; Hook and Hand; The Woman of Mystery; The Yellow Traffic; The Lure; Michael Strogoff; or The Courier to the Czar; The Tigress; The Cricket on the Hearth 1915 The Heart of a Painted Woman; Greater Love Hath No Man; The Vampire; My Madonna; Barbara Frietchie (co-d) 1916 What Will People Say?; The Girl with the Green Eyes; The Ocean Waif; House of Cards; 1917 The Empress; The Adventurer; A Man and the Woman; When You and I Were Young; Behind the Mask 1918 The Great Adventure 1920 Tarnished Reputation Other Films: 1919 The Divorcee (asst d); The Brat (asst d) 1920 Stronger than Death (asst d) Publications By GUY: book— Autobiographie d’une pionnière du cinéma 1873–1968, Paris, 1976; published as The Memoirs of Alice Guy-Blaché, edited by Anthony Slide, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1986. By GUY: articles— ‘‘Woman’s Place in Photoplay Production,’’ in The Moving Picture World (New York), 11 July 1914. Letter in Films in Review (New York), May 1964. ‘‘La Naissance du cinéma,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), April 1974. ‘‘Tournez, mesdames . . . ,’’ in Ecran (Paris), August/September 1974. On GUY: books— Slide, Anthony, Early Women Directors, New York, 1977. Elsaesser, Thomas, and Adam Barker, editors, Early Cinema: Space- Frame-Narrative, London, 1990. Bachy, Victor, Alice Guy-Blaché, 1873–1968: La première femme cinéaste du monde, Perpignan, France, 1993. On GUY: articles— Levine, H.Z., ‘‘Madame Alice Blaché,’’ in Photoplay (New York), March 1912. Ford, Charles, ‘‘The First Female Producer,’’ in Films in Review (New York), March 1964. Smith, F.L., ‘‘Alice Guy-Blaché,’’ in Films in Review (New York), April 1964. Lacassin, Francis, ‘‘Out of Oblivion: Alice Guy-Blaché,’’ in Sight and Sound (London), Summer 1971. Mitry, Jean, ‘‘A propos d’Alice Guy,’’ in Ecran (Paris), July 1976. Deslandes, J., ‘‘Sur Alice Guy: polémique,’’ in Ecran (Paris), Sep- tember 1976. Peary, Gerald, ‘‘Czarina of the Silent Screen,’’ in Velvet Light Trap (Madison, Wisconsin), Winter 1977. Dixon, W.W., ‘‘Alice Guy: Forgotten Pioneer of the Narrative Cinema,’’ in New Orleans Review, vol. 19, no. 3–4, 1992. *** Alice Guy was the first person, or among the first, to make a fictional film. The story-film was quite possibly ‘‘invented’’ by her in 1896 when she made La Fée aux choux (The Cabbage Fairy). Certain historians claim that films of Louis Lumière and Georges Méliès preceded Guy’s first film. The question remains debatable; Guy claimed precedence, devoting much effort in her lifetime to correcting recorded errors attributing her films to her male col- leagues, and trying to secure her earned niche in film history. There is no debate regarding Guy’s position as the world’s first woman filmmaker. Between 1896 and 1901 Guy made films averaging just seventy- five feet in length; from 1902 to 1907 she made numerous films of all types and lengths using acrobats, clowns, and opera singers as well as large casts in ambitious productions based on fairy and folk tales, Biblical themes, paintings, and myths. The ‘‘tricks’’ she used— running film in reverse and the use of double exposure—were learned through trial-and-error. In this period she also produced ‘‘talking pictures,’’ in which Gaumont’s Chronophone synchronized a projec- tor with sound recorded on a wax cylinder. One of these sound films, Mireille, was made by Guy in 1906. Herbert Blaché-Bolton joined the film crew of Mireille to learn directing. Alice Guy and Herbert were married in early 1907. The couple moved to the United States, where they eventually set up a studio in Flushing, New York. The Blachés then established the Solax Company, with a Manhattan office. In its four years of existence, Solax released 325 films, including westerns, military movies, thrillers, and historical romances. Mme. Blaché’s first picture in the United States was A Child’s Sacrifice (in 1910), which centers on a girl’s attempts to earn money for her family. In her Hotel Honeymoon of 1912, the moon comes alive to smile at human lovers, while in The Violin Maker of Nuremberg, two apprentices contend for the affections of their instructor’s daughter. GUZMáNDIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 413 The Blachés built their own studio at Fort Lee, New Jersey, a facility with a daily printing capacity of 16,000 feet of positive film. For its inauguration in February 1912, Mme. Blaché presented an evening of Solax films at Weber’s Theatre on Broadway. In that year she filmed two movies based on operas: Fra Diavolo and Mignon, each of which were three-reelers that included orchestral accompani- ment. Her boldest enterprises were films using animals and autos. Cataclysmic changes in the film industry finally forced the Blachés out of business. They rented, and later sold, their studio, then directed films for others. In 1922 the Blachés divorced. Herbert directed films until 1930, but Alice could not find film work and never made another film. She returned to France, but without prints of her films she had no evidence of her accomplishments. She could not find work in the French film industry either. She returned to the United States in 1927 to search the Library of Congress and other film depositories for her films, but her efforts in vain: only a half-dozen of her one-reelers survive. In 1953 she returned to Paris, where, at age seventy-eight, she was honored as the first woman filmmaker in the world. Her films, characterized by innovation and novelty, explored all genres and successfully appealed to both French and American audiences. Today she is finally being recognized as a unique pioneer of the film industry. —Louise Heck-Rabi GUZMáN, Patricio Nationality: Chilean. Born: Santiago de Chile, 11 August 1941. Education: Escuela oficial de cinematografia (EOC), Madrid, gradu- ated 1969. Career: After writing novels, joined Filmic Institute, Catholic University in Santiago, 1965; left for Spain, 1967; returned to Chile, joined Chile-Films (national film production company), heading Documentary Film Workshops, 1970; constituted Group of the Third Year to produce The Battle of Chile, imprisoned shortly after September coup d’etat, 1973; moved to Cuba, 1974, completed The Battle of Chile, 1977; moved to Spain, 1980. Films as Director: 1965 Viva la libertad (Hail to Freedom) (short) 1966 Artesania popular (Popular Crafts) (short); Electroshow (short) 1967 Cien Metros con Charlot (One Hundred Meters with Chap- lin); Escuela de sordomudos (School for Deafmutes) 1968 La tortura (Torture); Imposibrante 1969 Opus seis (Opus Six); El Paraiso ortopedico (Orthopedic Paradise) 1970 Elecciones municipales (Municipal Elections); El primer a?o (The First Year) 1972 La respuesta de Octobre (The Response in October); Comandos comunales (Communal Organization); Manuel Rodriquez (unfinished) 1974 La batalla de Chile: La lucha de un pueblo sin armas (The Battle of Chile: The Struggle of an Unarmed People) Part 1: La insurrección de la burguesia (Insurrection of the Bourgeoisie) 1976 Part 2: El golpe de estado (Coup d’état) 1979 Part 3: El poder popular (The Popular Power) 1983 La rosa de los vientos (Rose of the Winds) 1986 En el Nombre de Dios 1992 La Cruz del Sur 1997 Chile, la memoria obstinada (Chile, the Obstinate Memory) Publications By GUZMáN: books— La insurrección de la burgesia, edited by Racinante, Caracas, 1975. La batalla de Chile: La lucha de un pueblo sin armas, Madrid, 1977. El cine contra el fascismo, with P. Sempere, edited by Fernando Torres, Valencia, 1977. By GUZMáN: articles— ‘‘Le Cinéma dans la politique de l’Unité Populaire,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), November 1974. ‘‘La Bataille du Chili II,’’ interview with Marcel Martin, in Ecran (Paris), January 1977. ‘‘Politics and the Documentary in People’s Chile,’’ interview with Julianne Burton, in Socialist Review, October 1977. ‘‘La batalla de Chile,’’ interview with Carlos Galiano, in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 91–92, 1978. ‘‘Chile,’’ 3: Guzmán,’’ and ‘‘Chile,’’ in Framework (Norwich), Spring and Autumn 1979. Interview with Z. M. Pick, in Ciné-Tracts (Montreal), Winter 1980. On GUZMáN: books— Burton, Julianne, editor, Cinema and Social Change in Latin Amer- ica: Conversations with Filmmakers, Austin, Texas, 1986. King, John, Magical Realism: A History of Cinema in Latin America, London, 1990. On GUZMáN: articles— Gauthier, Guy, ‘‘Chili: la première année,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), March 1973. Gauthier, Guy, ‘‘La Bataille du Chili, première partie: L’Insurrection de la bourgeoisie,’’ in Image et Son (Paris), January 1976. Niogret, Hubert, ‘‘La Batalla de Chile: el golpe de estado,’’ in Positif (Paris), July/August 1976. Delmas, Jean, ‘‘La Batalla de Chile, deuxième partie: Le Coup d’état,’’ in Jeune Cinéma (Paris), February 1977. West, Dennis, ‘‘The Battle of Chile,’’ in Cineaste (New York), vol. 11, no. 2, 1978. West, Dennis, ‘‘Documenting the End of the Chilean Road to Socialism: La Batalla de Chile,’’ in The American Hispanist, February 1978. ‘‘La Batalla de Chile Section’’ of Cine Cubano (Havana), March 1978. Angry Arts group, ‘‘Battle of Chile in Context,’’ and V. Wallis, ‘‘Battle of Chile: Struggle of People without Arms,’’ in Jump Cut (Chicago), November 1979. Mouesca, J., ‘‘El cine chile?o en el exilio (1973–1983),’’ in Cine Cubano (Havana), no. 109, 1984. Obituary, in Variety (New York), 14 January 1991. *** GUZMáN DIRECTORS, 4 th EDITION 414 Chilean director Patricio Guzmán studied fiction filmmaking in Spain in the 1960s, but he eventually dropped plans to make fiction features when he returned to Chile during the presidency of the Marxist-socialist Salvador Allende (1970–73). Guzmán is above all a political filmmaker, and the intense everyday political activities in Allende’s Chile stimulated Guzmán to take to the streets and factories in order to make documentary records of those fast-paced events. In all three of his documentaries on Allende’s Chile—El primer a?o, La respuesta de Octubre, and La batalla de Chile—the director rejected archival footage and the compilation approach in favor of immersing himself in significant political events in order to obtain actuality footage. Guzmán’s success in obtaining meaningful and abundant actuality footage is due in large part to his (and his colleagues’) marked ability to understand and foresee the flow of political events. Political savvy coupled with rigorous and disciplined production techniques allowed Guzmán and his production groups to overcome formidable obsta- cles, including financial and technical difficulties. To film the three feature-length parts of the masterwork La batalla de Chile, the director and his collective had access to one 16mm Eclair camera and one Nagra tape recorder; film stock, unavailable in Chile, had been sent from abroad by a European colleague. During his stay in Allende’s Chile, Guzmán successfully combined his personal politi- cal militancy with his concept of the role of the filmmaker. Guzmán, a committed Marxist, wished to make films that would help Allende’s leftist Popular Unity coalition take power. Marx and Engels (Mani- festo of the Communist Party) viewed classes as the protagonists of history, and conflict as an inherent dimension of class societies; Guzmán follows this Marxist conception in that classes are the protagonists of his films and events are framed in terms of class conflict. In accordance with the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary view that there can be no peaceful transition to socialism before the repressive machinery of the bourgeois state is broken up and replaced, the first two parts of La batalla de Chile follow the military’s drift to the right as well as the anti-Allende activities of the opposition- dominated legislature. Both La respuesta de Octubre and part three of La batalla de Chile center on workers organizing as a class in order to achieve self-emancipation and transform the world created by the bourgeoisie. The style of the journalistic El primer a?o is unexceptional, and it was only with La batalla de Chile that Guzmán found a distinctive documentary style. This style is characterized by the frequent use of the sequence shot, which the director prefers because it is a synthetic device allowing spectators to see events unfolding in front of their eyes without breaks in the flow of the images. El primer a?o and La respuesta de Octubre have not circulated widely outside of Allende’s Chile. Inside Allende’s Chile, these documentaries were well re- ceived by working-class audiences. La respuesta de octubre was particularly popular with workers who, heartened to see their efforts to create worker-controlled industrial zones documented on film, facilitated the documentary’s distribution in the country’s factories. Guzmán’s international reputation as a documentary filmmaker has been secured by La batalla de Chile, hailed by both Marxist and non-Marxist critics in many countries as a landmark in the history of the political documentary. —Dennis West