Thursday, June 18, 2009

And it doesn't even have a beanstalk!

Gone With The Wind. Duel in the Sun. The Big Country. Giant.

Surely you recognize all those titles. They're the big, colossal white elephants none of us are supposed to like but most of us probably do. They don't get discussed much on the movie blogs because they're big, bloated, melodramas and everyone knows that when discussing melodrama on a movie blog it should be in black and white (but color is allowed for those made in the fifties and anything directed by Douglas Sirk), come in under two hours, and have nothing whatsoever to do with wide-open swaths of land. Think Stella Dallas, The Bad and the Beautiful, and Imitation of Life. If you happen to love melodrama (I do) then you probably already know that it is a sometimes denigrated genre. At the same time everyone still agrees there are some great ones in the mix, like those mentioned two sentences before. But the epic melodramas? Those are the ones we're supposed to make fun of, right? Well... Thing is, I like a lot of them and all this started swirling around in my head thanks to this photo in my possession from 1951:





That's George Stevens, Elizabeth Taylor (duh) and Ivan Moffat, the director, star and associate producer for A Place in the Sun. Later, in 1955, they would work together on Giant, released in 1956. And all of this is simply to say, I like Giant. Yeah, that's pretty much it. There won't be any big write-up on the rules of melodrama and white elephant melodrama and epic weepies. Nope. It's just that when I looked at the photo I remembered how much I liked Giant.

I believe the main strength of Giant lies with George Stevens direction which gives the slow meandering action a steady clipped pace so the viewer doesn't notice that, quite honestly, it's all very slow and meandering. Action and plotwise, nothing much happens in this movie but you wouldn't know it from Stevens direction. He's got the editing and photography down like no other, knowing to keep everything in medium shot 80 percent of the time, pull out to wideshot for isolation metaphors and emotional distance and use the closeup sparingly for menacing impact. And there's not a lot of empty quiet space between shots either. It may be dialogue free for many of those spots but it's not empty because Stevens is focusing on a look, or a leer, from Mercedes McCambridge or James Dean. And Stevens holds all those actors, and their differing styles, together through all of it, achieving a consistency in performance that keeps the viewer from noticing the jarring contrast between the high energy acting of Dean and the laid back delivery of Hudson.

And that takes us to the second strength, the acting. Not only does everyone acquit themselves quite admirably in this (and yes, I do think Rock Hudson is good in it - you got a problem with that?), especially Dean and McCambridge who are both superb, but they do so under the most ridiculous make-up conditions ever imposed on a big budget Hollywood movie. Latex, wigs and putty? Ha! You're joking right? No, no none of that here. Dean, Taylor and Hudson all age by having gray paint sprayed on their heads and someone in the makeup department grabbing a mascara pencil and drawing age lines under their eyes. Yes, fifteen years prior, Orson Welles went through hours of make-up application as he portrayed the aging Charles Foster Kane and somehow, almost two decades later, movie makeup had devolved into browsing the Benjamin Moore aisle at the hardware store and raiding the script girl's makeup bag.

Also, and this is not to be underestimated, Liz and Rock play characters named Leslie and Jordan Benedict, Jr (his nickname is Bick) and Jimmy's character is named Jett Rink. Just try and forget that character name. Go ahead, try. If you never see this movie again for fifty years and someone asks, "Hey, what was James Dean's character's name in Giant?" without breaking your stride you'll confidently reply, "Jett Rink." And then possibly you'll pull up the collar on your leather jacket, comb your hair back and say to your companion, "Let's blow this Popsicle stand." You will do this because just uttering the name "Jett Rink" will make you feel almost unnervingly cool.

And then there's that scene. You know... that scene. The one where Jett shows up covered in oil and starts spouting off to Bick and Leslie that he done struck it big and now he's a gonna be a rich'un, just like they are. And then Leslie tries to act happy for him but he so completely creeps her out that she just wants to run and Bick just wants to smash his face in. Yeah, that scene. Man, that scene rocks.

Finally, there's the finale, and as the first word in this sentence is "finally" I suppose it is only fitting that the last word is "finale." The finale of Jett Rink, drunken and bitter, as he mumbles a bunch of crap by himself in a big conference room that no one could understand anyway even if they had been listening. The lines spoken by Dean were unintelligible since his head was down for most of it and had to be redubbed by Nick Adams after Dean's death.

And lest I forget, Dennis Hopper plays the son of Rock and Liz and his character is named Jordan Benedict III. Seriously, Dennis Hopper plays someone named Jordan Benedict the Third.

So there you have it. Giant is a great big sprawling piece of entertainment with sharp direction, fine performances and a melodramatic script. If you've got the time, it's an enrich'un experience.

39 comments:

Peter Nellhaus said...

I saw this on the big screen in a double feature with Shock Corridor. The combination almost makes sense if you consider the films as examinations of the American psyche and, to a certain extent, racism.

I like some of the "big" Hollywood movies, but I don't feel like I have much to say about them. I did, however, use some credit card points to get the Criterion version of Spartacus.

Arbogast said...

I think big movies are almost always best discussed in small pieces. I don't have much to say about Gone With the Wind but I could go on for days about the crane shot of the wounded Confederate soldiers and (as I remember it) the creepy shot of Scarlett's mother lying in state. I like Giant a lot but also because of the behind-the-scenes stuff, like how James Dean shot Rebel Without a Cause during the filming because of Elizabeth Taylor's pregnancy and how that's Dennis Hopper doing Jet's drunken stagger at the banquet. I haven't seen the movie since I attended a special screening on the Yale campus back in, oh, '83 or '84. I need to see it again.

Greg said...

Peter, I have to agree with this: I like some of the "big" Hollywood movies, but I don't feel like I have much to say about them.

I like Giant a lot but that was about as in depth as I could go with it. It's more of a feeling, a sense of liking the bigness of it all and once that bigness is acknowledged it becomes difficult to provide a proper analysis for some reason.

And that's quite the double feature, I wonder who thought that one up.

Greg said...

Arbo, you know, I could really just discuss the Jett-strikes-it-rich scene and the banquet scene. The rest is fine and everything but those two scenes keep it going. And the way Dean looks as the aged Rink, with the gray, slicked back pompadour (which he managed to have as the young Jett Rink decades before they came into style in the fifties) and the sunglasses and slick suit. He's the ultimate power-hungry badass. I know it's a melodrama but I could easily envision him ordering the death of James Bond in another movie.

bill r. said...

I've never seen Giant, so screw you guys. I just always figured I'd hate it, until I finally saw Rebel Without a Cause, at which point I thought, "Okay, fine, I'll see Giant. I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Greg said...

Bill, it's a "you're into this kind of movie or you're not" kind of thing. I mean, I stand by my praise of Stevens and the cast but I also fully acknowledge it could be a huge bore for anyone either not in the mood or simply not caring for this type of soap opera. If you ever do rent it and get bored I would greatly urge you to fast-forward to any scene with James Dean, especially the oil one I described and the final banquet scene. Dean is fantastic in this role.

Ryan Kelly said...

I like Giant fine, but I'd have to disagree with the sharp direction comment. Stevens tended to make good films, but he'd also shoot everything from every conceivable angle to give himself a lot of options in the editing room. This leads to a rather bizarre discontinuity in a lot of his pictures (the moment that really leaps to mind for me is the first battle in the undoubtedly splendid Gunga-Din. Every time I watch it, I pretty much have no clue what's going on)

But, yes, I feel like Hollywood melodramas are about as under-rated as they come. Though of the first three films you mentioned, I'd take Gone with the Wind and especially Duel in the Sun (any Vidor is fine with me) over Stevens' Giant. I'd really love to catch a re-vival screening of Gone with the Wind some day, every time I watch it on TCM I can sense I'm missing something.

Krauthammer said...

I just want to pop my head in here to praise Stevens' American Trilogy, which has taken a few lumps for its self-seriousness and 'bigness' over the years by more enlightened critics.

So yeah, Giant is really god damn cool, though I think it does lose its way near the end.

Arbogast said...

the moment that really leaps to mind for me is the first battle in the undoubtedly splendid Gunga-Din. Every time I watch it, I pretty much have no clue what's going on

Proving that Stevens was ahead of his time. All action directors shoot like that now. I saw the first five minutes of Gladiator and thought, "Fuck this."

Speaking of Nick Adams, I heard he was a good friend of Elvis Presley's and used to do impersonations for the King all the time when they traveled together.

Greg said...

Ryan, with all due respect, you're chastising Giant for its visual discontinuity just moments before praising Gone With The Wind perhaps the most famously visually confused film ever made. Thanks to 783 directors, Producer Selznick and 17 different secretaries trying their hand behind the camera during its filming GWTW is visually fragmented like no other. Let's do a close-up, wait, shift the color to blue, no, no, wait, go to red, hold it, hold everything, give me silhouette, again. Oh, and pull the camera back signalling the end of the movie, only the movie isn't over, we just like pulling the camera back constantly in the middle of a fucking scene!

I find GWTW entertaining, all of the ones I mentioned I find entertaining. But Giant is more consistent in it's visual continuity by factors of ten.

Greg said...

Krauthammer, of the three I especially like Shane. In fact, it's a favorite of mine. Interestingly, that's the one of the three he didn't win an Oscar for.

And I agree on Giant. One should always only ever film the first half of an Edna Ferber novel. Somebody quote that, it's brilliant.

Ryan Kelly said...

But Gone with the Wind is so blatantly grandiose and operatic! It's a real Producer's picture, more about the spectacle of the images than anything else. That's part of it's power, but it's also part of my problem with it.

While Giant is definitely grandiose, I always felt Stevens on the whole went for a more 'realistic' tone, which may be why the discontinuity sticks out more (for me) in that picture.

And I love how "with all due respect" loosely translates to "My God, you are such an idiot". =P

Greg said...

From Wikipedia:

He (Nick Adams) and Elvis would go motorcycle riding late at night and stay up until all hours talking about the pain of celebrity and enjoying prescription drugs.

This of course eventually killed both.

And as to action movies in the present day I really do get angry a lot of the time, not because it's so difficult to follow the action (although it is) but because action scenes like fights or battles should be filmed like dance scenes. When the viewer can watch the choreography on the screen before them uninterrupted, it provides for a more riveting experience. It makes me angry that so many filmmakers today are too fucking stupid to understand that.

Greg said...

And I love how "with all due respect" loosely translates to "My God, you are such an idiot".

I did feel kind of odd writing that. I was like, "It's Ryan. Why am I prefacing this with 'with all due respect'? Shouldn't I be writing something like 'listen up pal'?"

kassy said...

One should always only ever film the first half of an Edna Ferber novel.

Brilliant, simply brilliant.

I own almost every Edna Ferber novel and my cat is named Ferber all because Giant is the first movie I remember seeing and it left quite the impression on me. I know it has its flaws but for sentimental reasons it's my favorite anyway.

bill r. said...

I don't like Gone With the Wind. What do you think of that!? I just spoke some truth, if you can handle it!

Okay, but really, I never much cared for it. I do like the crane shot Arbo mentioned, and you know who (supposedly) designed that shot? VAL LEWTON!

Greg said...

Kassy, Giant was one of the round the clock movies TBS used to run in the eighties. I probably saw it for the first time that way, a horrible to see it by the way, in 1982 or so. Which is just 16 years after its release, the equivalent of a 1993 movie today. Isn't that odd? It felt like an old, old movie but 1993 doesn't feel as old today because the allowable content changed so much between 56 and 82 and hasn't really changed at all between 93 and now.

And I'm glad you like my Ferber quote. Maybe Bartlett will get a hold of it.

Greg said...

Bill, I can't handle the truth (but I did order the code red if that helps).

I don't like GWTW intellectually speaking. That is, for the technical problems I related to Ryan and for other reasons like raid that Ashley gets hurt in which is clearly (and clearly spelled out in the novel) a KKK raid on those uppity Northern whites and freed slaves and how the move takes their side, the Klan members, rather than condemn them.

But entertainment-wise Gable and Leigh keep me amused throughout. If you could strip away so much else in that movie and just make it an hour and a half love/hate comedy with those two it would've worked so much better for me. They could call it Must Love Plantations or something.

Ann I. Ball said...

Like your blog! :)
I had no idea bloggers were "supposed to" make fun of a whole genre of films. When did we become snobbish?

Don't be ashamed. Movies are the fun art of the masses. Just enjoy them. :)

Ann I. Ball said...

@ Ryan Kelly
The Atlanta Film Festival Screens Gone With The Wind regularly, I think.

https://www.examiner.com/x-4861-Classic-Movies-Examiner~y2009m4d6-2009-Atlanta-Film-Festival-features-Gone-With-The-Wind-1939

Greg said...

Hi Ann, thanks for stopping by. I didn't mean literally cinephiles made fun of any sub-genre just that on the whole, big epic melodramas don't get much serious attention these days and I wanted to declare my love for them as a counter to that. I don't think any of us are ever ashamed about our opinons, of which we have many, or we wouldn't put them out there for all to see.

Arbogast said...

When did we become snobbish?

1975, for me.

Greg said...

It was The Eiger Sanction, wasn't it?

Flickhead said...

Nice shot of Barrie Chase with Mr. Cady.

Greg said...

Miss Chase's best line:

"Max Cady, what I like about you is you're rock bottom. I wouldn't expect you to understand this, but it's a great comfort for a girl to know she could not possibly sink any lower."

The Demarest said...

I sometimes think I love that picture of George Stevens talking to Dean in the car on the Marfa set as much as I like the movie.

Greg said...

Dean was the subject of some of the best stills and candid photos of any star I know.

BLH said...

The perception that the length of time between 56 and 82 seems more substantial than that between 93 and today might have something to do with the fact that it is more substantial by 10 years.

The point still makes sense, though.

Greg said...

Ha! How the hell did I screw that up? I probably forgot the sixties happened... again!

Marilyn said...

I love melodramas. I actually don't know most of the ones you mention because I hate James Dean. Carry on.

Greg said...

I actually don't know most of the ones you mention because I hate James Dean.

Giant is the only one with James Dean. Why would you not know Gone With The Wind, Duel in the Sun, The Big Country, Stella Dallas, The Bad and the Beautiful, and Imitation of Life because you hate James Dean?

Marilyn said...

OK, so I do know some of them. Nitpicker.

The Demarest said...

Speaking of epics, we should invoke the name Cecil B. DeMille here.

Arbogast said...

Ready when you are.

Greg said...

Okay, I'll start. The Ten Commandments is the all-time Biblical melodrama. I've seen it more times than I can count and it's probably responsible for my initial love of the Chuck.

Fox said...

I believe the main strength of Giant lies with George Stevens direction which gives the slow meandering action a steady clipped pace so the viewer doesn't notice that, quite honestly, it's all very slow and meandering....

I haven't seen Giant (I know!) but that thought of yours applies to A Place in the Sun too, I think. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I remember the feeling of loving it after leaving it even though I wasn't too wrapped up in the story (though I liked it).

I think critics have often talked of the tight competency of old directors like Hawks or Ford or Walsh, but I would argue (and I think you start doing that here) that people like Stevens and George Cukor and Vicente Minnelli (in his non-musical melodramas) took that controlled setting cinema to a more evocative and emotional place with the camera and staging of (still fairly basic) scenes.

It's like when you say:

"pull out to wideshot for isolation metaphors and emotional distance and use the closeup sparingly for menacing impact."

Yes. Physically, technically, it's a small shift, one that is maybe not elaborate to an eye that watched cinema slowly progress through the early years, but it was a big step forward... in hindsight.

Greg said...

I think critics have often talked of the tight competency of old directors like Hawks or Ford or Walsh, but I would argue (and I think you start doing that here) that people like Stevens and George Cukor and Vicente Minnelli (in his non-musical melodramas) took that controlled setting cinema to a more evocative and emotional place with the camera and staging of (still fairly basic) scenes.

I think that Minnelli, Cukor and Stevens get a high amount of praise though Fox so for me personally I don't think I'm saying anything new here, but maybe I'm saying something (and you too) that needs to be repeated again.

George Stevens had a revival of sorts in the eighties when his films were re-released alongside a well-received documentary about him, George Stevens, A Director's Journey, made by his son. And then he kind of fell away again.

I think Stevens was an excellent filmmaker with an excellent eye, having been a cinematographer for over 10 years and 60+ movies before becoming a director, which is why, frankly, I found Ryan's comment a little strange. I still don't see what Ryan is seeing in Giant or any of Stevens work. Hell, some of his movies, like Swing Time and Woman of the Year are perfectly shot. Watch the bar/seduction scene in Woman of the Year for a master class in how to shoot intimacy between two people falling in love.

Encore Entertainment said...

this was hilarious. loved the parts about Jett Rink

Greg said...

Thanks. As much as I like the movie I am always entertained by the "old age" make-up. Seriously, I did a better job making myself look old for Halloween one time back when I was ten.