New Wave-or Gesture - Young & Bachmann

8/7/2019 New Wave-or Gesture - Young & Bachmann

1/10

New Wave-Or Gesture?Author(s): Colin Young and Gideon BachmannSource: Film Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Spring, 1961), pp. 6-14Published by: University of California PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1210062

Accessed: 20/10/2010 10:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unl

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or prin

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide rang

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new fof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize preserve and extend access to Fil
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1210062?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1210062?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal


2/10

6COLIN YOUNGIDEON BACHMANNew Wave-or Gesture?

The French New Wave may not have existed save in publicity, but iwas a useful gambit on that level: it convinced potential moviegoers thafilms without stars, without "production values," might stilbe well worth seeing. No comparable American phenomenon yet exists. Buthe rarity of active, independent American film-making is traceable morto systems of distribution and exhibition than to paucity otalent, imagination, or initiative. Unusual American films do somehow

find financing and get made-though often they quickly disappear, as did TAKEGIANT STEP, THE SAVAGEEYE, WEDDINGS AND BABIES, ON THE BOWERY, and somefilm-makers find they must rely on European festivals and personal roadshowingsto get their films before their intended public. (John Cassavetes's SHADOWis only now being released in the United States-by a British distributor.)A convenient label for independent American

film-making would be a help. So would be the existence of theaters with thstature of the National Film Theatre in London or the Cinematheque in ParisSo would be a flexible attitude on the part of the film unions, whose rigid crewrequirements, while understandable as an outgrowth of studio industrialrelations, sometimes irrationally restrict young film-makers. No low-budgetproducers wish to wreck the unions; but they too often find themselves

budgeted out of promising projects, largely by high crew costsThe film-.naker seeking to make personal films needs time above all-time for imagination, time for invention, both of which may in the end save moneyBut in Hollywood time is money, and the effects can be frightening: to thSanders brothers, for instance, facing $800-per-hour chargesfor overtime, desirable retakes and additional camera angles became aimpossible luxury. This pressure of time seems ridiculous to most independentfilm-makers, and many of them, like Irv Kerschner, seek some new basi(perhaps resembling that which prevailed on Cassavetes's SHADOWS) where patience,

improvisation, and ingenuity were allowed scope-through reshooting, of courseis never cheap. At any rate, there is a desperate need for some wayto escape the present situation, in which the first things an independentfilm-maker asks another are: How many days did you have? and How much did yougo over budget? Meanwhile, much work goes onIn the following pages Colin Young and Gideon Bachmannreport on current production by a variety of new film-makers. We also calattention to the review of Alex Singer's COLDWIND IN AUGUST, elsewhere in this issue


3/10

7JOHN CASSAVETESA whole school of criticism and perhaps of film-making is being built around the minor (al-though not insignificant) success of RobertFrank and Alfred Leslie's Pull My Daisy andthe first version of Shadows, which Cassaveteshimself disowns. These films undoubtedly con-tain qualities markedly absent in the contrivedsupermarketed romances produced in Holly-wood. But when an unusual film works withoutrelying on traditional form, it can scarcely beimitated without repetition. Thus it is interest-ing that the critics' enthusiasm for Shadowsoften leads them to make claims for its methodsand its style which mystify the author of thefilm. It is possible that a film-maker does notsee the implications of his work as clearly asothers. But Cassavetes knew what he was do-ing with Shadows. In a recent interview atParamount he told me:"When we shot Shadows we rarely had re-hearsals for the camera, even though Erich Koll-mar the cameraman likes rehearsals. I encour-aged him to get it first time, as it happened. Nowhe likes it that way. I seldom used master shotsas we know them [in which the entire action ofa scene is covered from one all-inclusive angle]. . . The first week of shooting was just aboutuseless. We were all getting used to each otherand to the equipment, but it was not becauseof the camera movement that we had to throwfootage out. In fact, when you try it, you findthat natural movement is easier to follow thanrehearsed movement, since it has a naturalrhythm."The actors they were using were from a classin an actors' school in New York which Cassa-vetes founded some years ago with Bert Layne.The film "grew" out of class exercises.

"Shadows from beginning to end was a crea-tive accident. We got the things we did be-cause we had nothing to begin with and hadto create it, had to improvise it. If we had hada writer, we would have used a script. . . . I in-vented, or conceived the characters of Shadows,rather than a story line. A lot was written downabout the characters, and before shooting began

the actors went out to do life study on thesecharacters. The boy who plays the part of thsinger (Hugh Hurd) went around trying to gea job, and finally got one in Philadelphia inthird-rate night club."The script, as such, did not exist until aftethe film was over. Then we made one up jusfor copyright reasons."Shadows shot ten weeks the first time aroundand to make the second version we shot againfor ten days and replaced about three-quarterof it. The first version was filled with what youmight call 'cinematic virtuosity'-for its ownsake; with angles and fancy cutting and a loof jazz going on in the background. But the onthing that came at all alive to me after I hadlaid it aside a few weeks was that just now andagain the actors had survived all my tricksBut this did not often happen. They barelcame to life. That's why the first version waa mess. When it was shown at the Paris Theatein New York the audience was helped along ba large group of my friends-but I guarantethat 90%of them didn't like it."

However, some people liked it enough tcreate a brouhaha in its favor. Jonas Mekas anGideon Bachmann ran it at the Young Men'Hebrew Association in New York for about siperformances to packed houses. When the second version came out this was attacked as aemasculation, as a commercial sell-out. "Thiis very insulting, of course," said Cassavetes"because as I think you'll discover when you sethe film, it is not a 'commercial' film in thusual sense. And I just did not think the firsversion was very good."The shooting was in every sense a co6perativventure. Much of the original money was "contributed" (following a radio appeal) and fromtime to time when they ran out of cash othepeople would give them enough to carry on foanother day-$100 from Josh Logan, somethinfrom Jose Quintero, Wyler, Robert Rossen, SoSiegel, Hedda Hopper."All this was terribly exciting, of course, buit is not something I am likely to do again. Itlike doing summer stock; it's a good experienc


4/10

::::::::::::i::i:i:i::::?;_::_:--_ii::i:j_:i:i::i-:_::i-~;:;:_::;_:-_:-:ii':ii,'_,i:~-i-ii':-iii:':iii-jii::---:_::::. :::::-:::j:::::::-:-::::-_:ii:_ii-:-_-i-_:::-_:_ :---:-:i-~iiiiiij?i-:i:: ii:i:-::?iiiii:iii:: _--: .. :i-ijiiiji:i__i--:::::_-:-(:-i::..:::::::i:--:::: : :::-:::::::::::::iCi-i:-i:i-il-i-i?-i::i:i:-::i:-:::::::::::::::::':'''-?'i':'iiBiii:ii:i/)iiiiiiijiiiiiii'iiiiii:i:iiiii:i:::?i:ii-iiiiiii?iii:i-i:i:i::::i::::::-:::::::i:::::-:::::: :?:::,::::::,i:i:iii''iii';iiiiiiii-i-i-iiii'i-iiii:ii~:i::::::.:i;:::-:i:i:--:i:-:i::::::::i:~:i:i::?:::iii::??:::'::::::ii-ici::-::::::;--:;:-:-:;::I,:::::_::i:-:i:l:_:-?:::j:?:::::iiii:ii'::"ii'i~iliili~ii-s~ii:i:iii'iiiiBij~iiBiiiliiiiiiiii~i-iiz~:is-Piii:i::~-? :~'i:i;:::::-::::?::?:??:?::::::::2:i:::::::::::::::::-::::::r:::?::::i2i-i?i:~~i-d:;I:i:_:'::::::::::ii::ii:i:.i::.::i::_:-:: :?:-:i::i:-::::-_:i:::::_?::::i:i?,:::::::::::::-:':::?:??l:''':'::i'i:-::i:::;:'?----'-"::'-'-':'?-::--~:---ii-'iiii:i:i-:iciii-ii~iiii:i;i:ii-iii:i:i::::?:::::::::::::i-i?ai-i:i:ii:,:::i:-:,::::_::i:: ..?:::-:-:-i-:---::I:::::::::::?i:'i"i:i:i:::?:::i:i:i:-:i:::_::I::::::::

"~:~i:?~i::j:i;iiiii?i-i'iii::--:i:xiciii i::-:::--_:::i:_::::::?::li-i'iiiiOii:iiii;iii~ii::~~j?'?::?::?::;':':''':-:':::" ::::::::::ii'iiiii, :i:i:iii:i-:i-i-i:i-iiiiiijiiiii/i-:iii_~ii:i:::::::::::i:::'iiiii:iiii-iiiiiiiiiiiiii :::::.iiiiiiii::i:liiiiii:ii:iiiii?i?i;-i'''"i'iiiiiiii;"i~9~~.:- :i:i:?:----:i:-::.:..:i-::a:;:iX-&-i-8:"""'":iii:::'i-:::i-i~';'ii':ii:i-i:il:::i-i-,ii:I.i:i-iii:--_ii-::?::::::::1::-:':':i::::r::i;:ii:i-iiiiiii:iii:i?:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::--::-:''i"';z::i~i-!iiiiii:iiii? :i::::i-::-:i:?i:i:i:-:-:_... iiiiii:i-i;i::li'iiiiiiiiiiiii'iiiiiii iii;:ii:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~-,'-ir-.:jji:ii'i:i:':::l:i:i;:'-:'-:-::i:-::::: -:-:::::ii:-::?:::;::i-::::i:i: - --::::-:::::l::::?aii::ii---i:~wijii- : .:. `i':"-:-:-:::::::::~i-88ZC~iiiiiiiB::--i::-:i:::-:.':':"-~~~-:':X:: ::::::~::::::::::.:~::P:_`:1:-:1-:::::j?:::-::ijli:iiii$iii:iiii'':':I:::i:i::::::::i::::::i:::i:i:i:i::':':::l:':iiiiiiiii',--?::i:--i:::?:::-:-: :':'::::::::?::::::::::??::-::-::::i?::?::::: :::-:::::~ji:::1':-:ii:::.,ili':ilil::i:ili::. l;liasal;:?::iii-ii~iiiiiiilli-i-~wiil:Di:i:fnp:Pfi:61:i4ii:ili:-1_:i :i::,::-::-::,-::_-:::::.1;-:,._: : ?:::;::-:::--:::i:::-::::::a:-jjcii:iiii:iDi:i-i-~ilili-i--::::1:--_:ic::::-:::::::i:ii::::-i.?.iii:i:;'iiiii?:?,::::::;::: : iiiiii-i::i::i-ii::::':'::-:1::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i:::::::::::::-::::':: ::::::::::::::'::r:::--ji-iii-:i : ?::?:?? :::::-:-:::::::-::-:::-::I::_:::I:::::::: ::::::::::i:::::-:i::::i::::::_ : ::::i:i-i-i::i-i-i-i:i:i:iiii-i:i.~3~~r~i:i:lii:?i'-:i'"'~'''-''''''''''"::::''::'::':::: :;'::::::;::~::: : - ---: : :: .. : iijii:iiiiij~ -::ii::iili::i:::_iii::::j:::::i:irir:iil:-:l:i:iii:_i'ii'iii~:i:iiiii::::::::i:::

SHADOWS.

to have had. I couldn't do it again because, forone thing, I just wouldn't have the energy."However, Cassavetes has allowed certainworking methods to stay with him, and it islikely that they will influence his later work."I would, and I will continue to talk forhours with actors. In Shadows this was im-portant. Dreams come out in improvisation, notonly the exterior things. Furthermore, an actoris concerned with his dignity as a person-hewants this to show in the characterization. Thedirector has to service his actor in this way.And again reality is important to movies in away it is not to the theater. A theater audiencecompensates for the lack of reality-they donot expect to see things in gestures, or in theface. They expect to listen more. Movies haveto get them to see, as well as listen."Cassavetes is a young director settling down,but trying to do so on his own terms. This be-came quite clear when he was talking of hispresent project, a story called Too Late Blues(formerly Dreams For Sale) which he haswritten with television writer Richard Carr andwhich he will direct for Paramount starting inlate March. Bobby Darin and a television actressStella Stevens are in the cast, otherwise theactors are new. "Some of them are from Holly-wood," Cassavetes said, "some I have knownfrom my acting school contacts in New York.The man who plays drums in the band (BillStafford) I have known since we acted togetherin the army. Another of the actors was a fashiondesigner.

"I have been given the control I need casting. We had the money (about $375,0to shoot independently, but there was somewith this capital as one or two of the invewere questioning the commercial appeal ostory. However, I chose to shoot in a mstudio because of the facilities and the nical help. It seemed to me that these facare not always as well used as they mighand if I had the opportunity to make amounts to an art film in a major studio it wbe foolish of me not to. However, whenwork in a major studio, when the studiothe story (as they do now), you havevery clear in your own mind why you are If you are here primarily to make money,compromise is all right, in fact it becomeligatory. In my case, I have to know whdraw the line, and I have to be prepared toat any time. If I am prepared to quit rthan give in to changes, then I am safe.only when you are not prepared to do thisyou are in trouble ."Of course studios like Paramount exmake money, so why shouldn't they admI know where the studio stands on this fimine and I intend to make it as cheappossible, so that I hope it will make mfor them."But, other things being equal, I will pin future to work in a studio to working ontion with real sets, especially as in theof Too Late Blues when 98%of the filmteriors. There is a certain excitement yofrom location shooting that is sacrificed oset, because although nothing cannot beit remains artificial. But the battling thattion shooting involves I am happy to givEspecially in this case. It is a picturepeople, not places."Too Late Blues is a story of disillusionThe characters are jazz musicians who platogether, live well together, but had hadcommercial success. They play in parks "trees and some children on the basebalmond," they play for charities. It is a freThey play their own kind of music-noreally has to like it except themselves, and


5/10

make their social life fit their emotional needs.Into their tightly enclosed life comes a girl.Ghost Wakefield, the group's leader, brings herin and then at a crisis lets her down. His friendsbecome involved in a brawl and he cannotbring himself to fight. Losing face, he blustershis way out and offends everyone. The groupdisintegrates, the girl moves on, and Ghost be-comes the proteg6 of a rich benefactress. Soonhe is playing in all the correct clubs, at fancyprices, but he has lost his grip on the happinesshe knew before.

"What am I up to in my new film?"Cassavetessaid. "I am trying to show the inability of peopleto recognize that society is ridiculous. Hardlyanyone obeys the mores, but they respect them.If they are exposed breaking the mores theirlives can collapse."Our hero is not a coward, but when he isforced to fight he cannot. In covering up thisfailure he destroys everything else that is im-portant to him until he ends on rock bottom."Cassavetes began leafing through his script,selecting scenes to read from, and ending byacting out most of the film. His enthusiasm isinfectious, he readily creates the atmosphere ofhis scene. It would be easy to take directionfrom him. He is aware of the risks of shootingin a major studio where the overheads are press-ing. He believes that he has retained all thenecessary controls. He believes that he can make"independent" films for a major studio. Thus hebelieves he can do something most of his con-temporaries have failed to do. He does not putit this way, but it amounts to the same. He isenthusiastic about his cast, about his camera-man (Lionel Linden, who did I Want to Live!and part of Around the World in Eighty Days,and was cameraman on Cassavetes's TV showJohnny Staccato). "He is brilliant, imaginative,fast, knowledgeable." The studio thinks the filmwill make money, and that it will build onShadows. Cassavetes thinks so too, but clearly,in making a decision to come to Hollywood forfeature production, he has also decided to makefilms where the majority of technical and othertalent is available.

IRV KERSHNERThis, substantially, is also the decision of thother independents being discussed here. IrKershner is planning a film from a script bAlan Marcus, suggested by the career of a NewYork psychiatrist who treated schizophrenicpatients with "direct analysis." Marcus's scriptwhose preparation Kershner has underwrittensets up a very complex time progression-de-veloping a story with characters up to a certainincident, following first one character thenanother from the point of that incident, in suca way that the story-line is constantly doublingback and forth, filling in with information whichcould not have been presented by a method

which confined itself to one character's point oview. "This is not a realistic story, in the usuasense. Realism is all well and good, but therare so many other possibilities!" Kershner sanout this protest, almost bellowed it, as he pacedhis living room. "We cannot limit ourselves tthe straightforward plot film. We must movon. And we must take the time and use thtalent that these developments require."One of the requirements, of course, isprofessional cast. This is a very difficult scripand should properly be played by the people whad in mind when developing the characters.It is difficult to imagine Bergman's Wild Strawberries with an amateur cast, and ResnaisHiroshima Mon Amour might have been helpedby less inflexible performers in the leading rolesDENIS AND TERRYSANDERS

The decision to work with stars or other actorwith established reputations. and/or styles iusually forced upon the independent produceworking with Hollywood money. Some, like thSanders brothers, have found it profitable (although complicated) to "discover" a new actoand sign him up for a long period in the hopethat he will become popular. This is the case withGeorge Hamilton, star of Crime and Punishment, U.S.A. Although not a very good actorhe has established himself as something of afavorite. The Sanders are now working on


6/10

10two-picture contract with United Artists; UAapproached them last year, without seeingCrime and Punishment, but with the knowledgethat they had Hamilton. When they decidednot to use Hamilton, they went back with JohnSaxon for the first of their two pictures, WarHunt. That was acceptable.

In general, United Artists has script, majorcasting, and budget approval, but in the case ofWar Hunt (an original by Stanford Whitmore)only one person at the office had much to dowith the script (Doris Vidor). They gave theSanders $250,000, although this was later step-ped up another $15,000. This is a typical low-budget figure for United Artists for a featurewhich they expect to give a general release.Since their recent tie-in with Lopert, they aremoving into a lower budget level of $150,000,with the possibility of an art-house release.Denis Sanders said recently, "They are a marvel-ous company to do business with, from ourpoint of view." Terry Sanders added, "We stillprefer to work with lower rather than higherbudgets, because you can afford to take morerisks."War Hunt ( a working title only) has finishedshooting, and will be ready for viewing aboutthe end of May. Its leading character is aschizophrenic called Endore (John Saxon). Hetakes on other men's patrols, goes out withoutsupport behind the enemy lines (in Korea), andusually manages to kill someone. "A nightlyFrom WARHUNT.

iii....:: :: ??',i::

::::? : i~i:i~ii:::ii-iii

-:,,iii':iii:ai:ii:i-;-i-:

: i

.............

murder keeps him from tipping over. Hetains his equilibrium only in a battle sitSince he voluntarily takes on his compapatrols they have no reason to cross him.situation is complicated by the presence,platoon, of a young Korean orphan (TMatsuda) whom Endore has adopted.member of the platoon, Loomis (Roberford), objects to his hold over the boy anto pry the child loose. This angers Endolittle effect on the boy, and gets no supporthe other members of the platoon, who apared to accept the status quo. The inetragedy occurs. When a cease-fire is sigPanmunjon, and an area between the twois staked out as a No Man's Land, Endoregoes out at night, this time taking the bohim. They catch up with him in the mEndore stabs Loomis, the Captain shoodore and the boy runs off, deaf to their entto stay. The film will end with him disappover the trenches and hills. The Captainto Loomis, concerned about his wound.you all right?" he asks. Loomis, still lafter the boy, thinking of that and nbleeding, replies simply, "No.""The killing of Endore and the child'sconstitute an incident which most of thwill try to forget. They will wish it hhappened. But Loomis may never be aforget it. We think the film takes a nontrian view of courage. This in itself is ring. The story is not a record of somwhich actually happened but it is truthfuare concerned with moral as well as pcourage. Loomis does not have the pcourage of Endore, but he has the courhis convictions. He has the courage to popular. Through him we hope to shoproblem of retaining one's moral values"If people like Endore, who are crazappear normal or balanced only in war,follows that war is an insane condition. Cdescription is appropriate-war is the razation of the irrational. The problem of ais how to adjust to the impossible, the irrand the undesirable. Some make up anew reality, others simply block out the p


7/10

1one. War is a condition in which insanity be-comes invisible. We want to make the connec-tion between neurosis in private life and psycho-sis in war."This was a subject which they felt had a com-mercial application and yet was still somethingthey could have a commitment to. The storyfor their second film for United Artists has notbeen settled on yet.The question inevitably came up about theirrelationship throughout the production to thearmy. They had made a routine request,through the local representative of the Depart-ment of the Army, for Army coiperation. "But,"Terry Sanders said, "it was a little embarrassingasking them for their support. Our film is notanti-army, but it does show the army in a veryunfavorable light. In the end, anyway, theydecided not to support us. This did not maketoo much difference to the budget, and it wasprobably better not to have an official army manon the set all the time. He might have hadsome sort of psychological hold on us, just bybeing there. We preferred to do it alone."The results, so far as I have seen them, andwhat I have heard of the rest, seem convincingenough. There is little doubt that the occasionaluncertainties of Crime and Punishment, par-ticularly in dialogue scenes, will be gone here.And the action material is reportedly excellent.John Saxon as Endore has an extremely interest-ing quality. The editing is being done by JohnHoffman, for many years an assistant and col-laborator of Slavko Vorkapich. The camera workis by Ted McCord, who replaced Floyd Crosbyafter a few days of shooting.CURTIS HARRINGTONCurtis Harrington is completing his first feature,Night Tide. Unlike Cassavetes, who is planningto make an art film in a studio, Harrington in-tends his film for general release although, ashe admits, "There are some esoteric things init, including some unrealistic dreams, a per-formance by the painter Cameron as a mysteri-ous Woman in Black, and a rather completeexplanation by a fortune,teller (Marjorie Eaton)

of Tarot cards. I will be interested to sewhether this scene holds the audience's attention. But, on the whole, I made the film asstory teller, not on an abstract level as in mexperimental films."The script, also by Harrington, was based oan unpublished short story written a few yearagocalledSecretsof the Sea.The plot concerns a young sailor (DenniHooper), who falls in love with Mora (LindaLawson), a strange girl who believes herself tbe descended from an ancient race of sea peopl(sirens), and feels she is doomed to return tthe sea. She has been adopted by a retired seacaptain who operates a side show at Ocean Parand employs the girl as a mermaid. The twyoung men who had previously known Morboth drowned "in mysterious circumstances.Whenever the Woman in Black appears, Morbecomes frighened and sad. In the end, at onlevel, there is a perfectly logical explanation oeverything which happens, including the finatragedy, but the coincidental presence of thWoman in Black at key moments suggests theris more to it than chance.

"My audience will, I hope, identify with thyoung man," Harrington told me, "although hisituation is fantastic rather than real in thusual sense. There are two dream sequencein the film. They work in much the same waas I think do Buiiuel's, but I was not thinking othat at the time. And the film is not at all likBufluel's-the things which preoccupy me arnot those which concern him. Night Tide wouldbe too tender for him, I would think. But thdreams are there-one of them is presented asuch, and the other is less obvious. The linbetween dream and reality becomes very thinThe dreams are not unreal in the usual sense-I prefer the French irr6el. They are not so muchunreal as there is simply a shift in perceptionThese dreams represent the unconsciousness othe hero, so to that extent they are similar tBufiuel."

Considering Curtis Harrington's long expressed admiration of Josef von Sternberg,asked him if he thought Sternberg would likthe film.


8/10

12"Well, he's god, and I admire him, but hewould never indicate what he thought of mywork, or speak of his own."I think it is not generally understood that

it was not George Stevens so much as von Stern-berg who first introduced the long lap dissolve[in which one scene gradually replaces anotherby superimposition]. Stevens did not use it be-fore A Place in the Sun, and it is probable thatwhen he was preparing it he looked at von Stern-berg's treatment of the Dreiser story in his filmAn American Tragedy. Stevens used it againin Something to Live For, his next film, and ofcourse he used it to a lesser extent in Giant. Ithink in a couple of places I have used thedevice extremely effectively."To make the film Harrington took a leave ofabsence from his position as assistant to JerryWald at Twentieth Century-Fox. "I took aboutfour weeks shooting, and about the same edit-ing. I did the cutting with Jody Copeland. Ibenefited from his experience, particularly inthe dialogue sequences.""Directing this dialogue film was a new ex-perience. All my experimental films were con-ceived as silent films, then had sound added. Ihave not directed in the theater, and did nothave the benefit of practice in that kind of stag-ing. However, this was a fairly carefully con-sidered film, although the first scene involvinga large number of people gave me some trouble.After this first day I knew in advance what Iwanted, so I was fairly certain to be covered. Itwas only the first day that I was not, when Iand everyone else forgot to cover one importantline. I have had to do some pretty fancy cut-ting to get around it."I shot in master scenes for the benefit of theactors, not for my own taste. Dennis Hopper,being a 'method' actor, did not like working intruncated scenes. Thus more film stock wasused than I had planned-a difference of about$2,000. I rehearsed the key scenes here in myliving room for about a week before shooting,and this was of inestimable value for the per-formances. I also had one reading with theassembled cast, from beginning to end. Fromthis I learned a lot about the pacing required,

about the dramatic continuity which I was gointo have to catch."The schedule was determined by exigenciesnot by the script's continuity. But this did no

bother me, with the reading behind me. I hathe concept in mind. We struck to the scriponly occasionally changing lines on the set, thonly improvisation coming from the behavior othe actors." (Cassavetes had said that he wanot committed in advance to his dialogue anwould welcome changes by the actors, so lonas the sense of the scene remained.)Harrington's producer was Aram Kantariaa contract negotiator at MCA. Path6 laboratorin Hollywood put up the principal financingafter a little encouragement from another independent producer, Roger Corman. Then somfive or six other investors contributed moneyin amounts varying from $1,000 to $12,000Two of the largest contributors were regulafilm finance sources, but the others were friendThe money needed for completion was $5,000and this was obtained from Harrington's family(The directors of the French New Wave, Harrington pointed out, often had all their financinfrom family sources.) "We got our money without a distribution guarantee, and this is wherRoger Corman came in very useful. We knewabout Shirley Clarke's method of financing hefilm [see below], but I don't believe this methodwill work on the West Coast. We tried it at firsbut failed to find enough interested investorsThe type of person who backs plays in New Yordoes not exist out here. We thought we mighat one time have to go to New York for oumoney."Within the limitations of the budget, aftethe initial acceptance of the script by the backers, I was permitted complete freedom. I woulddoubtless have done things less simply if I hahad more time-the camera work would havbeen more intricate. . . . But I think you wilagree it worked out quite well."OTHERS

Meanwhile, others among the independentshave finished films. There is a second featur


9/10

1by Stanley Colbert, producer of Private Prop-erty, this one called Arena, from a script byJoseph Landos and directed by Buzz Kulik. Itwas financed by United Artists. Michael DuPontand Newton Arnold have completed The An-swer with private money, reportedly much ofit DuPont family money. Alex Singer has re-leased A Cold Wind in August and TomLaughlin is trying to find distribution for thefirst film of a trilogy, entitled Like Father, LikeSon (the general title of the trilogy is We Are AllChrist).

This discussion has scarcely taken us nearthe motives and ambitions of the individual film-makers, but the pattern is clear. There is con-siderable interdependency and cross-fertiliza-tion within the various companies at the levelof financing and technical help-War Hunt usesRoger Corman's assistant director, Floyd Crosbyand Ted McCord are most often asked to photo-graph, David Raksin is doing the score forNight Tide, and a theme for Too Late Blues.But the companies are scattered in their in-tentions and their story material. There is nounity of style or approach to subject matter.There is only a shared interest in film-making.This is not the independence Jonas Mekas istalking about. But it is also a far cry from theso-called independence of the larger star-dom-inated companies who use studios only asfacilities.Marlon Brando's company is as good an ex-ample of this as any. His One-Eyed Jacks turnsout to be a costly, competent period Western,with better than average playing and characteri-zation. They shot for six months and cut fortwo years (recently reshooting the ending in away more appropriate to the romantic fictionwhich precedes it).But the way of Brando, Gregory Peck, KirkDouglas, or Burt Lancaster (through Hecht-Lancaster) is not the way of the true inde-pendent. They are working within the safetiesof large budgets, expensive supporting casts(sometimes better actors than themselves), andextravagant stories. They are also surroundedby the soft-mulch system of committee editing

in which groups make decisions about story andperformance and structure-few individual judgments are risked. This is not the way of thindependent who wishes to take his own riskand make his own mistakes. To this extenCassavetes might be thought to speak for threst when he says, "Many artists fear that theywill never make another picture. To avoid failure at their own hands they relinquish controto others, and then blame others for any mistakewhich ensue. It is a cowardly way."It is a common way, but it is not the way othe director discussed here. If they have madmistakes, they are responsible. If they learn anare given another chance, they will improveBut at this stage it is at least important thathey should be supported in their attempt. Ieach of their films there will be something ovalue on which they might be encouraged tbuild. Until the distribution system exists whichcan ferret out the specialized audiences fospecial films, audiences must assume some of thresponsibility-and the distinction-for makintheir own discoveries. This is the least the filmmaker can ask.-CoLIN YOUNGSHIRLEYCLARKEOccasionally a film is made because one persodecides that it should happen. In most casethis one person is either a producer or at leassomeone who can make and carry through suca decision because he has either experience omaterial resources to fall back on. When ShirleClarke saw the off-Broadway play by Jack Geber upon which The Connection is based, shhad neither of those, except that she had madsome documentary films in 16mm and some experimental-poetic shorts. But in today's atmophere of what might be called the new Expressive American Cinema, anyone with the gutto try and the talent to carry it off can makefilm. And from all reports to date, The Connection appears to be one of those legendar"firsts" like Citizen Kane or Breathless, whicnot only excel filmically, but also set standardfor other film work. In short, The Connectiois important. There is no doubt that in man


10/10

14ways this will be a pace-setting film, from thepoints of view of form, impact, and method ofproduction.The film cost $167,000 to make. This amountwas raised-as money is raised in the legitimatetheater-through the syndicate approach. A"limited partnership" is formed, which meansthat shares in the film are sold to a large numberof small investors: in the case of this film, overtwo hundred of them. This type of financinghas the advantage of allowing complete artisticfreedom to the director, besides making it easierto raise the money itself, in smaller individualamounts than standard financing would havenecessitated. The film was shot on a single,closed set, representing a loft, which was con-structed in minutely realistic detail at NewYork's Production Center studios. The finishedfilm includes no shots not taken in that room,and it utilized a unique mobile camera, shotsof more than ten-minute duration in some cases,and lighting carefully simulating the fallingdusk during the film's two-hour length, whichrepresents two hours of actual elapsed time.The Connection also breaks other, long-estab-lished movie axioms. For one thing, the cameraplays a part in the film itself, and thus a newkind of audience identification is created, whichborders on audience participation; the camerarepresents the viewer. This, in fact, is part ofthe intention of its appearance: the actors (mostof them from the original cast of the play) areconfronted by its peering presence, and begin toact for it, so that their reality is geared to theintrusion of the spectator. This is as close asfilm has ever come to providing the creative"feedback" which live performances often causeas a result of the interaction between actor andaudience. The script for this unique method offilm-making was conceived by Shirley Clarkeand was written in collaboration with the play'soriginal author. Jack Gelber was present on theset during much of the shooting, and confer-ences between the two took place daily.The film was shot in nineteen days, and atthis writing is still being edited. It has beeninvited to be screened at the Cannes Festival,hors concours, as the special presentation ofthe Association des Auteurs et Realisateurs du

Cinema, which yearly invites one film becausit believes it to be of great importance thoughit has not been otherwise submitted.The film was shot with complete union crewsSome delays were caused by the fact that manof the camera movements and other technicathings had never been attempted before, anmore than once did the union men complai"You can't do that." In one case, Shirley Clarkfinally had to shoot a scene herself with a handheld camera, and thus one more technical impossibility was made possible. However, shavows that as a general principle she founmany of the union people ready to experimenwith new ideas.The importance of The Connection is not smuch in the manner in which it was made oin its final quality. It is important primarily because it was made, and because it was madwith a clear consciousness of audience participation. This is really a most important point, anone which ties in with the work of film-makerin Italy (Antonioni), Japan (Kurasawa), Franc(Godard), and Poland (Wajda), who are aworking toward the establishment of a newexpressive cinematic syntax, the basic elemenof which is greater allowance for public intellgence and discrimination. All the films madby these people, and The Connection perhapmost of all, are antifilmic in the sense that thedo not explain but present, and that only to thextent that nature presents itself to the artisto be moulded in his vision.In this sense, The Connection is probably thmost up-to-date work, culturally, that the UniteStates has produced for some time, and its appearance at this time ties in with other culturadevelopments outside of the cinema. Objectivism in literature, the revival of alienation itheater, some of the best of beat poetry, apoint to an increased transference of artisticreative responsibility to the recipient. ThuThe Connection cannot really be subjected tstandard criticism, which tends toward thestablishment of objective judgments on thperception level alone; rather, its final impacwill actually depend on the degree to whiceach viewer is able to give to it of his own substance and his own life.-GIDEON BACHMANN

New Wave-or Gesture - Young & Bachmann

Documents

Transcript of New Wave-or Gesture - Young & Bachmann