Venturing into 1969 at the movies
It’s been a couple of weeks now and still, the latest creation from Quentin Tarantino, the world’s most famous and accomplished film geek, has yet to leave my psyche. My thoughts on the film, from the humor, to the poignancy, to the hysterical and emotional ending, keep multiplying as I get ready to attend my third screening of it this upcoming weekend. For those who don’t know, Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood has a trio of stars (Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt and Margot Robbie) leading a never ending cast of famous faces in the director‘s own free-flowing take on 1969’s Hollywood.
Hobbs and Shaw and The Lion King are currently holding on to the box-office the top spots with their respective fan bases, holds that don’t look to let up anytime soon. But it’s Tarantino’s movie that is still generating the kind of hype and talk that other titles could only dream of; and it’s easy to see why. The unmatched filmmaker has offered up a movie which blends fact and fiction, comedy and poetry for one of the most telling portrayals ever told of a tinseltown in transition.
Inspired by the time and place in which Tarantino’s film is set, I thought I’d revisit some of my favorite titles from the year Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood takes place. Sure, the film world of 1969 gave us the likes of Midnight Cowboy, They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? and Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, among a handful of other seminal films. Yet the year also gave way to a number of more underrated movies which represented the way filmmakers and audiences thought and felt about the era they suddenly found themselves in.
The April Fools
This offbeat romantic comedy remains one of the quintessential examples of how most genres were re-fashioned to be in keeping with the freethinking nature of the decade. The April Fools stars Jack Lemmon as a suburban husband and father who goes to the Manhattan penthouse of his boss (Peter Lawford, in an Oscar-worthy performance) to discuss a promotion only to find himself in the midst of a swinging cocktail party and locking eyes with a beautiful blonde (Catherine Deneuve), who happens to be the boss’s wife. On the surface, The April Fools appears to be a scandalous tale about two married people who spend the night traipsing around the city, while falling for each other in the process. In reality, The April Fools is an offbeat, slightly whimsical look at two individuals who have accepted lives at opposite ends of the spectrum only to encounter one another and realize that neither life was the one they were meant to live. The April Fools has some fun watching Lemmon be so out of place in the world the late 60s and Deneuve be so nonplussed by it. But the ultimate joy however lies in the beauty of watching these two people forego their societies and become liberated in their own respective ways as they fall in love in the process.
The Arrangement
“The girl knew about the wife. The wife knew about the girl. It was all part of…The Arrangement,” read the tagline for this later Elia Kazan effort about a successful advertising tycoon (Kirk Douglas) who embarks on a mid-life crisis when it comes to dealing with the life he built for himself which includes a loving wife (Deborah Kerr) and a complicated mistress (Faye Dunaway). Based on the director’s own novel, The Arrangement is definitely one of the more introspective films of the era as it examines the unstoppable nature of Madison Avenue advertising and it’s maddening effect of a man who feels himself being swallowed up by it. Kazan’s film manages a surrealist take on what should be an ordinary life hampered by the inexplicable feeling of having it all and not knowing what to do with it. Douglas does some of his best work in one of his most conflicted characters to date, sinking his teeth into every moment possible as he ventures into an emotional wonderland from which there may be no escape. Kazan also makes sure to do right by the female characters in The Arrangement, crafting them as women who transcend any stereotypes attached and are revealed to be just as complex as the main protagonist. Beyond the title referencing the careful juggling of two women, The Arrangement signifies the bargain and conditions we make with ourselves, agreeing to an existence we never thought we thought we would.
Take the Money and Run
Woody Allen’s second time at bat as a writer/director sadly isn’t as well regarded as it should be. Yet the effort shows an early experimental side of Allen when it comes to his level of comedy as it provides one of the earliest examples of the mockumentary. In Take the Money and Run, Allen plays Virgil Starkwell, one of the most notorious criminals of his generation who breaks in and out of prison while maintaining a romance with the love of his life, Louise (Janet Margolin). It’s easy to forget how innovative the movie was upon its release with the decidedly inept Virgil being considered a notorious lawbreaker and the whole film being presented in documentary style complete with narration. Standout comedic sequences include a pickpocket victim of Virgil’s whom he recognizes as an old high school friend who went on to become (much to Virgil’s surprise) a policeman and his escape from a chain gang in which he takes the entire gang with him all the way to a romantic reconciliation with Louise in their bedroom. Speaking of Louise, perhaps the most surprising aspects of the film was how Allen was able to skillfully blend the comedy with what ends up being a surprisingly tender love story. It’s obvious that the Woodman was still finding his footing in the late 60s, but Take the Money and Run shows that he was well on his way.
Topaz
Alfred Hitchcock closed out the 60s with this spy tale based on the bestselling novel of the same name. For a decade which began with Psycho and The Birds, Topaz was seen as a far cry from the shock, suspense and romance audiences had come to expect from the master. Yet the movie remains pure Hitchcock. A French intelligence officer (Frederick Stafford) finds himself recruited by an American government agent (John Forsythe) to uncover the head of a French spy ring known as “Topaz.” Leonard Maltin was right when he remarked that one of the biggest stumbling blocks when it came to audiences fully enjoying Topaz was the film’s lack of recognizable stars and how the whole experience was more akin to international cinema of the day as opposed to traditional Hitchcock. Still, there’s a level of excitement that comes through within the deftly layered intrigue that could only have been possible with Hitch at the helm. The film contains one of the most mysterious and nail biting openings of any Hitchcock effort and Topaz’s many glorious set pieces are a tribute to the legendary director’s unending visual prowess, in particular Carlotta’s death scene and the way her dress flows to the ground like a pool of blood. On the whole, the movie plays out like a continental puzzle spread across different countries and despite the director’s formalist tendencies, the real-life backdrop and the overall world of Topaz feels chillingly real.
What Ever Happened to Aunt Alice?
One of the more credible entries in the psycho biddy genre was this tale of a widow (Geraldine Page) with a habit for knocking off her housekeepers and pocketing their life savings. Things change however with the arrival of her newest domestic (Ruth Gordon), who has something mysterious to hide herself. Legitimized by the presence of the two leads, What Ever Happened to Aunt Alice? is a far cut above the typically exploitative nature of the beloved sub-genre. In fact, the movie only becomes campy and cliche when neither of the main actresses is gracing the screen with the kind of high caliber performances which made them legends. But there’s no doubt that two don’t know the kind of movie they’re in. Page’s laugh is evil fun and the image of Gordon about to bludgeon her employer (with a staute of St. Francis, no less) does provide the kind of enjoyment that have made these kinds of flicks so fun. Beyond the great acting and campy moments, What Ever Happened to Aunt Alice? manages an undercurrent of social commentary regarding what happens to women as they get older when the fear of financial instability and being generally forgotten about by the world sets in.
Looking at the different quality of all of the films, it’s easy to see how each title came to represent the spirit of 1969 in one way or another. The diversity of each one’s approach to telling their respective (oftentimes unconventional) stories shows just how layered and multifaceted the filmmaking landscape was during this time. “Hollywood is the Fonda’s and the Hondas,” remarked Patty Duke in an episode of the late-60s anthology series Night Gallery; and she was right. It was a time in the movies when the game was changed and one of the medium’s most fruitful and enriching periods lay upon the horizon. Today, the late sixties in Hollywood is considered one of the most eclectic and electric periods in cinema history thanks a collection of artists who were both bold and daring…and the generation of moviegoers who embraced them.
