Change Your Image
ReverendNate666
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Don't Look Now (1973)
Don't Look Now: Metamorphoses film mosaic
Nathan Duthoy
The Metamorphosis From Words To Film Mosaic
Don't Look Now, just by itself, as a title it has many implications, a warning that if you look one can experience something chilling and intense, or an advisement that everything before you is important and if you blink you will miss it. Like the novella of the same name, the film demands multiple viewings to fully comprehend. The themes are vast and touch most with sentiment and appreciation of art. I myself do not have a biased opinion about the superiority of film over the written word as I appreciate both and view both mediums as homage-like compliments to each other. Without literature film could not exist. Still, when I recollect experiencing both art forms of Don't Look Now, it is somewhat easy for me to conclude that the film touches a nerve in my being that the novella did not strike. This is not a condemnation of the novella, but this film is one of a rare kind as it has such power in its complexity and attention to detail that viewing it is a intensely involving quest for the psyche, that questions grief, the afterlife, Christianity, romance and the unanswered questions about extrasensory perception. That perception is shown by a man, the director Sir Nicolas Roeg, with unrivaled clarity of vision, while capturing the essence of the story. As I sit here writing and listening to the hauntingly beautiful soundtrack of this film it brings back the startling and incomparable images of the film that never leave one after they have seen the thrilling Gothic film. I remember the night I first saw it on a big theater screen for my editing class and I'd never heard of the movie or director, but chills were sent down my spine and I was afraid to walk alone to my car through the dark, looming parking lot of unknown terror. I believe the movie has much more redeeming value and it is no shock that it is the more acclaimed and popular of the two versions. This is a fitting task for me to expose the fallacy that novels are always better than the film version because I am passionate about literature and film. I long to be involved in the film industry some day, but for now I am using the case of Don't Look Now to expose this fallacy using my sources pertaining to the novella, film and film adaptation theory.
At first, when choosing my topic I thought Film Adaptation would be a daunting task because the sources I had been intending to use were in depth, dense, and I thought back to an optional paper I could have done on Don't Look Now back in my days at Pasadena City College, which was after the first time I viewed the film and immediately it resonated with me as a unforgettable film of such depth that it just went right over my head. I could not write on the lone topic of the uses of the color red in the film at that time, but now as I look at that task it would be far too easy. The effect was so profound on me, that I immediately ordered the film on VHS as it was not yet on DVD at the time and even though it is now, it is in the barebones format with no special features, which is a mockery to a film of such greatness that warrants a much more prestigious offering that presents the work of art in a respectable package. The paper I was assigned was optional which was to explore the motif of the color red in the film, I felt I was not quite ready for as the meaning of it was elusive to me, but now I am ready to explore most of the prominent themes in the novella and the film as I have had the time to absorb both and I have the vehemence to do both of these works of art the justice and well-deserved analysis they both warrant.
Adapting films is a difficult task especially when dealing with lengthy novels or when the primary source is convoluted, complex, and ambivalent and open to many interpretations. Films are a cooperative effort by a collection of minds, but in some cases like mine, an auteur (French term for author) is in control of the vision of the complete film including aspects like casting, editing, cinematography, and input on the screenplay. Nicolas Roeg the director of the film I am examining is a former cinematographer, and editor. Thus, Don't Look Now, is Nicolas Roeg's interpretation of Daphne Du Maurier's novella of the same name. The medium of novella is ideal for film as Stuart McDougal states in opposition to a source from a play, because "Film shares more methods of storytelling with the novel and short story" (4).
The main problem with adapting a literary source is deciding what to leave in and what to leave out. Words cannot always describe what is to be shown on the screen and what is on the screen does not, in essence, automatically reflect those exact words. This reminds me so much of the difference between the sign and signifier in that both need each other to explain what that concept is as a whole. A symbol does not contain an essence, but is assigned a word by an arbitrary convention or the ruling ideology. Through practice the symbol stands for what it signifies which are what such theorist as Ferdinand de Saussure outlined. But, used alongside one another they can express the same mood, tone, characterizations, themes, and even expand on them or imply other symbols. Everyone's interpretation is different of a novel as it is with a film, but a film manipulates and dictates exact visions and reflects one person's view of a story. In the case of Nic Roeg's work he is a perfectionist auteur who takes advantage of the tools of film to use its limitless spatial and temporal possibilities to expand a drama. Roeg also takes full advantage of his power to manipulate an audience as McDougal states that nowadays "a director has the means to focus our attention on minute details (through close-ups, zooms), suggest relationships (through editing), and present thoughts (through editing, point-of-view shots, composition, and the use of color) (4).
Every art form has distinctive properties, so when making a film decisions have to be made on what to include in the interpretation. What works in a novel does not necessarily work in a film, but in my case study many of the techniques in the novella work in the film, as the novella is the closest to a perfect written medium for transformation into film. Still, many changes were made in my film examination and most of them for the better. Stuart McDougal aptly defines these decisions as contraction. He explains the usual process of contraction stating that "novels are contracted when filmed through the deletion of characters and incidents" (4).
There are many other decisions a director makes in preproduction that can influence the viewer's interpretation or expectations in a film. Casting is important because an audience may have a preconceived notion of certain actors and actresses. Don't Look Now, almost collapsed immediately as a project because Donald Sutherland was not available at the time and Nic Roeg was close to shelving the film until he was available, but by fate, he was freed from his prior obligations. Both Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland are both well-respected actors, but not movie stars like Jack Nicholson or another star who always seems to just play themselves. They transform into the characters they play, the grieving, bickering, but yet romantic couple of John and Laura Baxter. It is also important to point out that Nicolas Roeg chose someone without an English accent to play John Baxter, which differs from the short story and I feel adds a further effect making him seem like an outsider who would be even less capable at speaking Italian than an Englishman.
Literature and film have a binary relationship and rely on each other, not in the typical theoretical way as they are not opposites at all, but film is the progression of all arts. Film is a relatively new art form and so has a negative connotation as being unproven as a true respectable art form. Literature has the opposite connotation and is one of the oldest art forms, and without it film could not exist. Film is deeply indebted to Literature as it exists in the written form of a screenplay and uses text in the credits and as symbolic motifs like books that are lying around in the frame and the scene in the beginning where Laura Baxter uses an encyclopedia to answer a question her daughter asks how a lake can freeze and be flat if the world is round? John Baxter says a line in response, which is a theme of the film "Nothing is what it seems". The book in the opening scene on the nightstand is titled "Beyond the Geometry of Space" and it is no coincidence that it is glimpsed in the frame as Nicolas Roeg distorts and manipulates our view of space and time with elaborate editing techniques and cinematography. The book I believe is not a 'real' book, but there are many that exist with similar titles and discuss the same concepts like quantum physics, time travel, and the structure of space. Just like this book while watching the film , we jump back and forth through time and journey through Venice's eerie crevices of space. Literature contributes so much to film as it provides "models of plot, character, and ways of presenting thought processes" (McDougal 3).
This point about Literature being complimentary to film brings my mind back to a film teacher I had at Pasadena City College who was the direct opposite of me. He was a tool and my film friend in the class agreed. I liked Nicolas Roeg, and he liked Michael Bay. He had a dorky flat-top and I had long hair. These differences between us resonated when I turned in a short film which everyone in the class thought was intense and powerful, but he picked on me for flashing images of Philosophy books for symbolism and called the use of the written word, weak and not visual. Now I grin with content as I see many of my favorite film directors use this same technique to a great effect and I used the same technique without being full aware that it was modeled for me byfor me..
The Apple (1980)
The Classic homoerotic, cheesy, poppy, sappy,musical event of the 80's
I am in awe over the costume designs, set designs, musical numbers, etc. This movie is definitely the best portrayal of 1994 by far. The old 80s station wagons and 80s clothing are still very popular as anyone would imagine. After all, they are timeless classic trendsetting styles. This movie manages to be one of the most homoerotic movies of all time without a single gay sex scene! Every frame of this movie has something very pleasing (or discomforting) to the eye for the viewer to be entertained for all 80 minutes plus of this musical masterpiece. Go see this movie now. I gave into temptation and ate the forbidden fruit recently at the Nuart Theater and I haven't been the same since.