Woman in Gold.

This season of the Robert Burns Centre Film Club was concluded with the screening of the 2015 British/American film Woman in Gold directed by Simon Curtis who you may remember as the director of My Week with Marilyn (2011) and also the award winning 2008 TV drama starring Julie Walters A Short Stay in Switzerland. This season has included some very good movies from World Cinema, America and this season two very different films from the UK,  Still Life (2013) directed by Uberto Passolini and starring Eddie Marsan and Peter Strickland’s The Duke of Burgundy (2015) starring Sidse Babett Knudsen which in my humble opinion was the highlight of the season.

 

The young maria with her Aunt Adele Bloch-Bauer.

Getting back to Curtis’s latest outing we were informed by our host for the evening, Alec Barclay, that the movie was based on a true story and Alec gave us some very interesting background to a story that involved a famous painting and the women who eventually took the country of Austria to court in an attempt to get this valuable piece of art work back to its rightful owner.  I have replicated Alec’s introduction for your information something I believe will enhance your understanding and enjoyment of the movie adaptation:

‘Tonight’s film is based on a true story, which deals with the struggle to return valuable property looted by the Nazis during World War Two. The Nazis were highly organised in that scouts were sent into countries before they were invaded and works of art identified in private and public collections. Gestapo teams then moved in and removed the chosen works.

The film’s title refers to the portrait originally entitled ‘Adele Bloch-Bauer’. The subject was the Jewish wife of a successful Austrian banker and industrialist Ferdinand Bloch-Bauer. She was a socialite living in Vienna, the cultural centre of Austria, and achieved intellectual stimulation by surrounding herself with some of the great writers and artists of the day. Ferdinand wanted a portrait of his wife. Gustav Klimt was chosen for the work, who at that time was a successful painter at the height of his artistic powers. It is estimated that what Ferdinand paid for the finished article could have purchased a reasonable sized villa in the suburbs. Frank Whitford in his book entitled ‘Klimt’ puts the work into perspective. ‘The painting creates an impression of wealth, influence and sensuality by means of its rich and polished surface. Klimt shows Adele Bloch-Bauer not as she really was, nor even as she might have wished herself to be, but rather as her husband desired her to be seen by others. The portrait is adorned with ornament for much the same reason that she wore the gowns, furs and jewellery her husband gave her – not only to enhance her beauty but also to exhibit his taste and affluence: the painting, after all, was hung in a prominent position in the sitter’s home, where it proclaimed her husband’s artistic discernment and status. Itself one of Ferdinand Bloch’s possessions, the portrait depicts the other: his wife.’

The painting forms part of Klimt’s gold period, along with perhaps the more famous work, ‘The Kiss’. (Both these paintings reached a wide audience in the 70’s reproduced as posters and prints).  A second portrait of Adele, executed in a different style, was completed in 1912.

The work on the painting featured in the film was started around 1903/04 and took till 1907 to complete. There were around 200 working sketches produced during this time. The painting measures 54 inches by 54 inches and uses oil and gesso along with gold and silver leaf.

Affairs seemed to be common amongst the upper class in Vienna, and it was strongly rumoured that Adele and Klimt had a 12-year affair. Allegedly only her maid and physician were in on the secret. Testimony to this could be the fact that Adele appears as one of the figures in ‘The Kiss’, and also semi-clad in various other paintings. Like most notable artists, Klimt caused controversy and outrage, in his case by showing women in what was regarded to be highly provocative poses, sometimes verging on pornographic.

In January of 1925 Adele died suddenly of meningitis. Ferdinand turned her room into a shrine, the only decorations being the collection of Klimt paintings, which were the 2 portraits and 4 landscapes, and a photograph of Klimt at the bedside, along with fresh flowers. In her Will Adele had asked her husband to donate the paintings to the Belvedere, which is the Austrian State Gallery, but Ferdinand revoked this. However, the Belvedere was soon to become the keepers of the work when Hitler came to power.

As a renowned collector, Ferdinand also had some old German masters in his possession. A Doctor Friedrich Fuhrer, from the Gestapo, was tasked with collecting the Bloch-Bauer paintings. He knew that Hitler and Goering would be interested in the German work but not in the Klimt’s, so he sold the two portraits and a landscape to the Belvedere (and kept a landscape for himself). The gallery were keen to display the work, so as ‘Adele Bloch-Bauer’ was an easily recognised Jewish name, this was changed to ‘Lady in Gold’.

 After the war all the Klimt’s were reunited in the Belvedere, where they stayed for many years, with the ‘Lady in Gold’ becoming the Austrian equivalent of the ‘Mona Lisa’ and attracting many visitors. The painting was eventually sold to Ronald Lauder in 2006 for $135 million”.[1]

 

Maria and her husband attempt to escape the Nazis.  

The film not only deals with the struggle Adele’s niece Maria had in trying to recover what once belonged to her family but also goes back to when Maria Altman was a very young girl and takes you through her life starting in Vienna, demonstrating how the German National Socialists were accepted by the Austrians, the treatment of the Austrian Jewish families and how the Nazis took their belongings, valuables and their apartments, leading to Maria’s eventual escape to America with her husband leaving behind her beloved mother and father. This period of history is cleverly intercut with the present day where we find Maria living in Los Angeles and working in her dress shop. Its not until she discovers letters in her dead sisters belongings, which reveal an unsuccessful attempt to get the famous painting back, that she enlists the help of an inexperienced young lawyer, Randol (Randy) Schoenberg, to make a claim to the art restitution board in Austria which will eventually take this elderly Jewish lady on a ten year legal journey. 

Maria with her Lawyer Randy Schoenberg. 

Hubertus Czernin the Investigative Journalist. 

The film feature’s exceptional performances from Helen Mirren as Maria Altmann, Ryan Reynolds as Schoenberg with German actor Daniel Bruhl as the left leaning Austrian Investigative Journalist Hubertus Czernin. Also in significant, but small roles are Curtis’s wife Elizabeth McGovern and Jonathan Pryce. Some critics have accused the film of being dull but I found it quite the opposite in that it was a very interesting and thought-provoking film. Perhaps these critics did not have the benefit of Mr Barclay’s introduction?

The real Maria Altmann in front of 'that painting'

---

[1] Alec Barclay Introduction to Woman in Gold at the RBC 27^th May 2015.

Red 2

I think to be fair, it you enjoyed Red (2010) then I would expect you to also enjoy its sequel Red 2 (2013) but if you didn’t read no further!

If like me you’re a bit of a sucker for a noisy violent comic book adaptation then you’re probably still reading this blog.  Of course there no need to tell you that its an American action comedy film or that it was inspired by a limited comic book series of the same name written by Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner. This time the German director Robert Schwentke is not at the helm but the American Dean Parisot who I am told was responsible for episodes of Curb Your Enthusiasm. The cast is certainly as appealing even if we have lost the services of Morgan Freeman.

 

Helen Mirren don's the washing up gloves. 

Bruce Willis returns as Frank Moses who has fallen head over heals in love with Mary-Louise Parker’s character Sarah Ross (who can blame the old bugger) who now joins him on his gun-totting bullet flying adventures. Also part of the team are the LCD addled Marvin Boggs, you remember Marvin he’s the secret agent with the dodgy dress sense, and M16 assassin Victoria Winters who if not regularly piling up bodies gets withdrawal symptoms, Victoria is again played by the wonderful Helen Mirren. Added to the cast this time is Catherine Zeta-Jones as a very fetching Russian secret agent who has a crush on Frank. Also tied to our narrative in one way or another are Brian Cox head of the Russian secret service, David Thewis as The Frog who seems to collect very expensive bottles of wine and keys to red mercury bomb cupboards, Anthony Hopkins plays Edward Bailey a mad inventor of weapons of mass destruction and up to his neck in Project Nightshade? We daren’t leave out CIA man Jack Norton (Neal McDonough) for no other reason than he appears to kill every one he comes into contact with!

 

Catherine Zeta-Jones chills out on the sofa.

The story’s not that important and I won’t bore you with it at this stage but suffice to say it involves lots of shooting and blowing things up. My best advice is to suspend your disbelief, stick the old fleshy organ inside the mouth well and truly in your cheek, sit back and enjoy this humorous action packed adventure movie.

Mary-Louise Parkers's been up west.

O Lucky Man!

‘Realism is not a matter of showing real things, but of showing how things really are’[1].                       

Lindsay Anderson and writer David Sherwin made a total of three films featuring a character called Mick Travis all played by Malcolm McDowell, but besides having the same name they are not strictly speaking the same character and the stories aren't sequential but there is similarities between them and have always been termed the Mick Travis trilogy. The first of the three was If…. (1968). Which as I have explained before was meant as a metaphor for British Society and a condemnation of authority but specifically an attack on the absurdities of the British public school system. The second film in this ‘trilogy’ is O Lucky Man! (1973) an allegory on life lived in a capitalist society and an attack on the British class system.

 

The Coffee Salesman.

The Tycoons Daughter.

After the success of If…. McDowell wanted to work with the director again and suggested that he (McDowell) write a script based on his own early experiences as a coffee salesman. Anderson pointed out that good scripts are pretty rare and challenged the actor to come up with one, which he did! Originally called Coffee Man Anderson asked Sherwin to work up a script from Malcolm McDowell’s original ideas. These adventures of a coffee salesman became what Anderson called an epic “not in the sense of Ben-Hur but in a classical poetic sense of the term’[2]. It tells the story of a young man (Travis) who uses any means to get to the ‘top’. Firstly as the afore mentioned coffee salesman who gets awarded not only the prime area of North East England but of Scotland as well. There’s a beautiful comment from Mick when he is told he has to go to Scotland, he responded that he can’t possible go because he does not have any warm clothes with him! From salesman to scientific guinea pig. Then assistant to a business tycoon, who cons him into acting as his fall guy and serving a prison sentence, converted to near saintliness, almost martyred by a crown of down and outs he is trying to help and finally reaching an understanding of life by being hit around the head with the script of O Lucky Man! by the films director!

 

British justice at work.

One of Lindsay brilliant theatrical touches is to cast the same actors in different roles including Helen Mirren, who had just finished Ken Russell’s Savage Messiah (1972) and went on to appear opposite McDowell in Caligula some six years later, who plays Patricia the tycoons wayward daughter and a casting call receptionist. Other well-known actors who have two or more parts are Sir Ralph Richardson, Rachel Roberts, and Graham Crowden and Christine Noonan who both appeared in If…. Mora Washbourne, Brian Glover and Arthur Lowe who ‘blacks up’ as Dr Munda the dictator of Zingara a brutal police state.

 

The Dictator of Zingara.

Although it may not sound like it, it is a film about the real world but one that makes its point through comedy and satire, with words and music from Alan Price reinforcing and underlining the storyline in a clever and imaginative way. It did not do that well at the box office when it was first released but its satirical brilliance has now been recognised, just re-watch it and see the relevance it has to today.

---

[1] Bertolt Brecht.

[2] Lindsay Anderson DVD commentary1994.

Hitchcock and The Girl.

Alfred Hitchcock.

Sacha Gervasi’s attempt at a biopic of the life of the Leytonstone’s best-known son Hitchcock (2012) can be seen from two perspectives. Firstly a movie about movie making in Hollywood in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s at a transitional time in the studio’s history and to a certain extent this succeeds. Secondly, as a study of a perverted weirdo, which the film hints at, but generally glosses over. The plot is partly based on Stephen Rebello’s non-fiction book Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho. The movie covers the making of this 1960’s film from when Hitchcock acquired the rights to Robert Bloch’s gothic horror novel about the true-life killer and grave robber Ed Gein, up until the films release and non-critical success.   It exposes that while Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins) Stage Fright (1950) and Strangers on the Train (1951). 

is lusting after his latest blonde actress, Janet Leigh (Scarlett Johansson) his wife Alma Reville (Helen Mirren) is engaged in a flirtatious relationship with a younger man, the writer Whitfield Cook (Danny Huston) who had worked on two of Hitchcock’s previous scripts

Hitchcock gambled his reputation and re mortgaged his home to make Psycho and he no doubt made stars of some of his leading actresses but at what cost to their integrity? Gervasi’s film only hints at his perversity where we see Hitchcock spying on Vera Miles (Jessica Biel) via a peephole cut through the wall into her dressing room, dictating what clothes each actress should wear and the hair styles they should have not just on the set but at any time while under contract and God forbid if they get pregnant.

Janet Leigh.

I do agree with film critic Peter Bradshaw that this Hollywood movie was completely upstaged by the BBC/HBO TV play The Girl (2012) shown just before last Christmas. This was based on a 1983 book written by Donald Spoto about Tippi Hedren’s revelations that she was sexually harassed and abused when she worked under Hitchcock’s direction on two films, The Birds (1963) and Marnie (1964). The play also provides superior performances from its lead actors namely Toby Jones as Hitchcock and Imelda Staunton as Alma, better suited to the role than Helen Mirren. Sienna Miller gives a very satisfying performance as Hedren.

 

The out of favour Vera Miles.

The Girl’s most dramatics scene has Tippi Hedren cowing on an attic set while live birds are thrown at her ‘shitting and pecking’. The scene, which only lasts two minutes in the finished movie, was supposed to be filmed in one day with mechanical birds. Instead it took five days with live birds until one of them pecked Hedren’s left eye leaving a deep cut on the lower lid and she broke down and had to be taken home under sedation to receive medical care. Another example of the sadistic and cruel treatment of women from a man who said ‘Blondes make the best victims. They’re like virgin snow that shows up the bloody footprints’. Hedren was quoted as saying ‘I had always heard that his idea was to take a women, usually a blonde and break her apart’. During Marnie he actually asked her for sexual favours telling her she would never work in the film industry again if she did not grant his disgusting wishes, which obviously she did not.

 

Tippi Hedren with Hitchcock.

Our culture has a history of excusing or ignoring the excesses of famous men for example Jimmy Saville whose abuse, both mental and physical, of young girls over many years was allegedly ignored by the BBC.  Hitchcock hints that he was incapable of sex, admitting that ‘he could not get it up’ which begs the question was his attraction to blonde leading ladies a sick fantasist dream?  This ‘walrus dressed like a man’, his words not mine, makes your skin crawl. A bully who quoted indecent sexual rhymes that passed as humour, who was happy to punish his actresses if they did not curtail to his wishes and each of them treated like his own personnel possession. Not the most pleasant man to work with.

Jessie Matthews appeared in the only musical Hitchcock directed, Waltzes from Vienna (1934), and we are told in Michael Thornton’s biography Jessie Matthews that even at this early stage of Hitchcocks career he was one of highest paid directors in British films and was already accustomed to being the ‘star of the show’ and could not stand competition especially from the films young star who was at that stage ‘Britain’s first film goddess’. He was taken to task at the time by The Times newspaper for treating Jessie as ‘a not too important part of the films design’ She summed him up as a domineering young man who knew nothing about musicals and said that she and her female co-star Fay Compton, were unnerved by him because of his sarcasm and his well known reputation as a practical joker. Due to Hitchcock’s lack lustre direction and his famous distrust of actors the film was a flop, panned by the critics and has since become regarded as the worst film in his career.

As I said previously not the most pleasant man to work with.