David O'ConnellFreaks/The Sacrifice
July 1st 2010 05:05
Though perhaps an odd pairing, these films were the showcase screenings of the past two weeks at Melbourne Cinematheque.
Tod Browning’s reputation is rightfully linked to Freaks more than anything else from his body of work. I first encountered it through a book funnily enough – Stephen King’s Danse Macabre - and for years pondered how its revered and infamous revenge scene would look. When I finally had the chance to see it a few years back I wasn’t disappointed. A furthur opportunity to see this maligned but seminal work on the big screen is not one to neglect and happily I can report that the film's impact has not been diminished by either time or changing tastes.
Browning takes us inside a traveling troupe, a freakshow that includes every manner of human oddity and perversion of nature, including a bearded lady, a human torso without arms and legs, siamese twins, and a pair of dwarfs. One of the dwarfs, Hans (Harry Earles) is besotted with the exotic and ‘normal’ Cleopatra (Olga Baclanova) who exposes her sinister designs on Hans after learning of the wealth he may possess. With her confidante, strongman Hercules (Henry Victor), by her side, she hatches a plan to marry the love-struck little man and then poison him.
Yes, taken at face value, you could argue Freaks is poorly acted by non-professionals, shoddily constructed, and with more than a whiff of turgid melodrama about it. But sometimes, in an effort to appreciate a work of art, you have to first appreciate its context and probe deeper at the reason for and means of its existence.
In that sense, the naked brilliance of Browning’s film becomes apparent, utilizing and breaking taboos with his casting and subject matter in ways that would never be replicated again. Ultimately, he argues, no external grotesquery can match the ugliness that pervades human nature with its propensity for greed and betrayal. Compared to the nasty quirks nature has bestowed on this odd carnival, the evil intentions of Cleopatra and Hercules are magnified tenfold.
One memorable sequence features an elaborate meal conducted in honour of the recent marriage. Things turn decidedly nasty after the assembled freaks, believing Cleopatra to now be a member of their fold, begin chanting a jaunty little ditty that ends with the jubilant cry, “One of us, one of us” to a mortified bride. Cleopatra is soon leaping about in paroxysms of rage, horrified at the thought - of the contamination! - of being lumped into the same category as these hideous mistakes of nature.
Freaks (1932) culminates in the classic, much-referenced scene that incontrovertibly showcases Browning’s gifts. Peeling out from under the caravans in the middle of a storm, the freaks come after the conniving pair in what is a sinister slog through the torrential rain and deepening mud. What’s most frightening is their calm, methodical approach. There are no histrionic verbal threats, no outlandish demented screams. This will be delicious revenge, calculating and justified, and as eerily as it plays out, I'm positive the audience shares a communal wish for it to be delivered slowly and without mercy.
The Sacrifice is a fascinating curtain call from master director Andrei Tarkovsky for numerous reasons, not the least of which is that it’s the best Ingmar Bergman film that Bergman never made. Not only was it filmed on the island of Faro where Bergman lived out his life and shot so many of his famous ‘chamber’ films from the second half of his career, but it was also financed by Swedish interests and includes a predominantly Swedish cast, including one of Bergman’s regular collaborators in Erland Josephson. And did I mention that Tarkovsky also used another legendary Bergman collaborator - cinematographer Sven Nykvist - to shoot his final film?
All these juicy factors conspire to produce a glorious film that is undoubtedly a work of art; one that's simultaneously complex, captivating and infuriating. The basic plot even echoes Bergman’s own Shame, in that we witness the final few moments of peaceful reverie experienced by a clan of people just before the onslaught of an unseen war which leaves them both physically and spiritually cut off – from the world and one another. The main focus is on Josephson’s Alexander, a former actor who uses his young child's companionship as an excuse to espouse his despair at the state of the world and the uselessness of words to capture meaning.
Predictably oblique, inscrutable, and laden with portent and poetic, abstract metaphors, the film lives and breathes through the soiled, decaying beauty of its imagery and the depths of spiritual hopelessness afflicting its main players, especially Alexander. There are patience-testing philosophical monologues aplenty, often captured in long, leisurely takes, and a remarkable sequence highlighting the desolate juxtaposition of fire and water saved for the cataclysmic finale.
Though a few dead spots prevent a last shot at utter perfection, Tarkovsky still weaves, over the course of two and a half hours, the kind of sustained cinematic magic only a master of the form is capable of. The stark final image, a bittersweet signifier of hope and renewal, is powerful affirmation of the genius of a man who, diagnosed with terminal cancer around this time, will forever be afforded lofty status in the league of world cinema luminaries despite his thin output of only seven feature length films.
| 245 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
The Sacrifice I still yet to see, so I didn't read your review, but I'm sure you loved it.
Strange combo double feature.
Comment by David O'Connell
20/20 Filmsight
Screen Fanatic
Then last night was the first of a 3 week season showing Perestroika-era Russian films which began with The Sacrifice.
Your review of Freaks is here mate.
Comment by ShaunK
Screen Adventure
you could have titled this review From the ridiculous to the sublime, although ridiculous isnt quite the most accurate description for Freaks, it's a good summation of the two in comparison - if you get my just.
Here's to you David - keeping it real for the true cinefile. I'm hoping to get big films out the way currently and then when I get more readers I'll move onto true gems like these two.
Do you have the Tarkovsky box set? I own all of his films except for the sacrifice
Awesome work as usual Dave
Comment by JohnDoe
Film & TV on DVD
Freaks is still very effective and there certainly an element of curiosity to it.
Sacrifice I haven't seen in a long time, but remember thinking it was not in the Directors upper echelon for me.
Comment by Matt Shea
Likewise, I've never seen Sacrifice, despite the fact that I'm a closet fan of Tarkovsky's often inscrutable work. The Bergman comparison really works.
Comment by David O'Connell
20/20 Filmsight
Screen Fanatic
I'm waiting for just the right moment to watch Andrei Rublev which is in my pile currently but I find it a very intimidating prospect to be honest!
Thanks JD, you must try to track The Sacrifice down if you can, but it seems to be one of Tarkovsky's more elusive works. You're right, it probably isn't his greatest film overall and yet is still absolutely remarkable in so many ways.
Cheers Matt! Ah Freaks, you have to see it. If only for those two classic scenes. On the surface there's mostly just a poorly acted melodrama but it's all about the context.
Inscrutable is a very apt word to describe most of Tarkovsky's output, that's for sure, but I guess it's the very challenging nature of it that keeps us re-watching and theorising about what the hell they all mean!
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Comment by David O'Connell
20/20 Filmsight
Screen Fanatic
Comment by ShaunK
Screen Adventure
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile