Monday, April 03, 2006

Get your hankies ready


If you're a bloke you've probably just misinterpreted the above heading completely so let me start off by saying that if you're expecting an appraisal of certain European films of the 1970s you're out of luck.

The spark of inspiration for today's rambling monologue was a recent trip to the cinema to see THE WORLD'S FASTEST INDIAN, a thoroughly pleasing feel-good movie starring Anthony Hopkins as an older gentleman who traveled from down under to the USA to break a land speed record in the 1960s (using an old motorbike from the 1920s).

The tale, inspired by the real life story of speed enthusiast Burt Munro, sees Hopkins make the lengthy journey to the USA, touching the lives of various people along the way and overcoming all kinds of adversity in order to live his dream. In many ways it's like David Lynch's equally feel-good THE STRAIGHT STORY, only with more motorbikes and less lawnmowers.

Reviews have been kind, and deservedly so, but display a worrying pattern that has become all too prevalent in the cinema of the last few decades. They all seem to be along the lines of "unashamedly sentimental but..." - as if somehow this is a negative thing. I've no idea when it occurred exactly (my guess is sometime during the 1960s) but at some point in the past sentimentality in movies became illegal. I'd like to know why.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a cynic. I like bleak movies where everyone dies at the end and I've certainly received more than my fair share of enjoyment at watching innocents being torn limb from limb by bloodthirsty hoardes of the undead. However, I still can't understand why it is that a film that is made to make people feel happy is a bad thing. Why did a description such as "sentimental and wonderful" one day have to be replaced by "sentimental but wonderful"? One little word, yet it makes all the difference. I am on a mission to eradicate the "but" from the above phrase and reclaim the "and".

I enjoy watching the melodramas that Douglas Sirk churned out in the 1950s (in fact, I really ought to write something dedicated solely to them sometime) - sure, they're standard women's weepies that seem to consist mainly of assorted leading ladies swooning and crying while Rock Hudson acts all manly, but they look great and nobody makes films like them anymore. Somewhere along the way, it was decided for us that people don't want films like this.

I also love to watch Frank Capra's IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE on Christmas Eve every year - does that make me some kind of freak? No, I don't think so. Well, not any more than I already am, at least. And is it wrong to cry like a little girl when the cast of CAROUSEL start cranking out "You'll Never Walk Alone"?

Furthermore, is there anything wrong with celebrating the work of Michael Powell, Britain's greatest ever film maker, by choosing to watch one of his more sentimental efforts such as A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH or I KNOW WHERE I'M GOING? No, because they're great films. Not despite of their sentimentality either - rather because of it.

At a festival last year I saw a lovely little film entitled MARILYN HODGKISS' BALLROOM DANCING AND CHARM SCHOOL, starring Robert Carlyle, John Goodman and a whole host of other well-known stars. It's sentimental, it's nostalgic, it's emotionally manipulative... but it makes you feel good, so where's the harm? And yet, as I type, it has only just received a very, very limited release in the US and as yet I've heard no word of any UK theatrical release. Maybe I'm wrong and people just aren't ready for sentiment unless it's part of an inane romantic comedy.

So the object of today's sermon is simply to strike a blow against movie-going cynics everywhere. If THE WORLD'S FASTEST INDIAN is still playing near you, go and see it. When it's over and you've enjoyed it (because you will enjoy it) tell all your friends. And don't be ashamed to mention the fact that it's an emotionally manipulative, unashamedly sentimental, feel-good story. Just make sure that when you do describe it as such you don't follow it up with "but..."

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home