KOTOKO

I have mentioned a number of times on this blog how I am drawn to movies about mental illness.  There is something so interesting about the brain not functioning as it should and it usually gives a director a chance to explore the issue with quite inventive visuals.  Emotionally, if done well, these films turn out to be harrowing and can be quite frightening too.  Shinya Tsukamoto’s latest film “Kotoko” is one of these films.  It is a very personal and raw account about a single mother, who suffers from depression and a number of mental issues, trying to bring up her son in today’s violent world.

Living in the bustling city of Tokyo, single mother Kotoko is struggling to keep it together.  She suffers from a unknown disease which makes her see double, although this is not the normal version of that affliction.  Instead when she sees people, she sees a good and bad version of each person and she is never sure which version is the real one.  This terrifies her immensely and as a result she hides herself and her baby in their tiny apartment.  The only time she does not see double is when she is singing, which is something she obviously loves as it brings everything together and gives her the ability to focus properly.  However looking after a baby gives her little time to sing and cooping herself up in the apartment only intensifies her issues until she ends up having a serious breakdown.  Declaring Kotoko to be an unfit mother, her son is taken from her and put into the care of Kotoko’s sister, and will only be returned to her once she has gotten well again.  This proves a much harder task than anticipated as Kotoko’s downward spiral continues while she misses her child.  Her visions increase and her self mutilations become more regular as it appears that Kotoko will not be long for this world.  One day, though, when travelling on a bus absent mindedly singing to herself, she awakens another passenger who is mesmerized by her singing.  The passenger, Tanaka, turns out to be a famous novelist who ends up being obsessed by the disturbed girl, and begins following her in an attempt to get her to fall in love with him.  While she initially is uninterested, it is when Tanaka notices Kotoko’s problems that he really commits to her to try and get her healthy once more.  Has Kotoko finally found her way back towards happiness and a chance to have her son again?

“Kotoko” is an incredibly dark and emotionally powerful experience.  It is not an easy film to watch as it goes to a number of very uncomfortable places.  Kotoko is played by Japanese pop singer Cocco and she is devastatingly good in the role.  The reason why this is such a personal film is because a lot of the elements of the character of Kotoko come from Cocco herself.  She herself suffered from depression and repeatedly resorted to self harm and she is also a mother of a teenage boy.  “Kotoko” is Cocco’s acting debut and it is nothing like the vanity projects often seen by U.S singers doing their first movies.  In fact it is almost anti-vanity because she lets her fans see her in such a negative light, that it really is such a brave performance.  The fact that the character sings to find inner peace, you may think that this is when the pop star would come out and show her stuff but surprisingly all of the singing in the film is quiet and understated.  This is nothing like “Burlesque”, instead the musical pieces keep in tune with the intimate and emotional journey Kotoko finds herself on.  As I mentioned, Cocco’s performance is heartbreaking as she plays a very sick woman who finds herself doing terrible things.  She is in such an emotional state for the entirety of the film that I can only imagine how intense and tiring filming it would have been.  Throughout the film she is seen cutting her wrists, stabbing the hands of unwanted male suitors with forks, even attempting to kill her own child; she is almost constantly covered in blood but the emotional pain she is going through appears to be a whole lot worse than the physical.

Her saviour comes in the form of a guardian angel named Tanaka who is played by Shinya Tsukamoto himself.  Tsukamoto is no stranger to acting in his own films but initially had no intention of playing the role in “Kotoko” until Cocco encouraged him to take it.  As usual he is great in the role and actually brings a lot of dark humour with him into the picture.  One of the funniest moments in the film is when Tanaka breaks into Kotoko’s apartment and finds her bleeding profusely after cutting her wrists (sounds hilarious, right?).  First off he faints, but after he regains his composure, he begins to look for something to stop the bleeding in a panic.  He grabs the baby’s clothes which Kotoko refuses to use, and then he comes out with a diaper before finding a towel.  It may not sound funny, but it actually is and it gives the audience some relief from all of the darkness they have witnessed previous.  However due to the dark nature of the film, there is a lot of disturbing scenes with the Tanaka character too as he decides to become a human punching bag where Kotoko can unleash her anger out onto, instead of on herself.

Directorially Shinya Tsukamoto is at the top of his game again with “Kotoko”.  He never shies away from how disturbing the subject matter is and there is not a hint of sentimentality throughout.  He never judges Kotoko for her actions rather he just presents her story to us.  As usual Tsukamoto uses a lot of handheld camerawork and the “shaky cam” look is prevalent throughout.  It is funny how much I hate this type of look and style of filmmaking except it never seems to faze me when Tsukamoto uses it.  It always seems to have a point and here it represents just how disturbed Kotoko’s mind truly is.  Despite the use of handheld, “Kotoko” is a beautiful looking film filled with gorgeous colours.  Visually the film is most similar to Tsukamoto’s 2004 film “Vital” and like that film has a number of beautiful dance sequences, these scenes bookend both the start and end of “Kotoko”.  Tsukamoto made the brave decision to have the character of Kotoko be the film’s (unreliable?) narrator.  Narration can be so hit or miss in cinema and is often used lazily, but here I thought it added a lot to the film as it gave us more insight into what exactly was going through Kotoko’s head.  The other standout of the film is its amazing soundtrack.  A lot is done aurally in “Kotoko” particularly when she is having one of her attacks.  Interestingly Tsukamoto has stated that the film has the theme of an impending war strewn throughout but with the exception of a scene towards the end I never picked up on this at all.  His point is that he feels a lot of parents are terrified of the fact that a war may happen soon and the current generation of kids would have to fight in it.  Like I said, the notion of war went over my head, but I did pick up on the fact that he was saying that the world has gone crazy and is increasingly violent and for what purpose should we bring a child into this world now.

In relation to this, the “double” vision that Kotoko suffers from also comes from the amount of fear you have when you become a parent.  Suddenly things that once seemed so normal you look at with different eyes and can see how your child could hurt themselves on.  A common table is just that before children, but after you have kids it is dangerous due to the sharp corners on it.  This is a basic example, but I think that Kotoko fears for the safety of her child only amplify her mental condition.  It is definitely something I can relate to because I always see things from the negative point of view.  Actually negative is the wrong word, I always notice what could happen which takes the innocence away from certain things.

Tsukamoto’s films are known for their violence and “Kotoko” is a very violent film.  However unlike the majority of his other films the violence here is handled in a very realistic manner and as a result is likely to disturb a lot of viewers.  There is a scene towards the end that is particularly shocking especially if you are a parent and to be truthful I was stunned that Tsukamoto went as far as he did with it.  Apart from that scene there is a lot of self mutilation, so blood exists prominently in “Kotoko” so if you are squeamish you may want to beware.  A theme that was introduced in “Vital” reappears here in “Kotoko”, as Tsukamoto seems to indicate that the towering city of Tokyo contributes to the madness and insanity of people, which they seem to lose when moving to the country.  This is true in “Kotoko” as she appears her best in the film when visiting her son and sister at their country home.  In fact all of the characters who live in the country appear relaxed and normal as opposed to the intensity and speed of the city.

Overall I found “Kotoko” to be an incredibly disturbing and raw experience, as well as an emotional one.  However it was also a great one.  The lead performance from Japanese singer Cocco is outstanding (she also handled music and art direction duties on the film) and the film is anything like a vanity piece for her.  “Kotoko” goes to some dark places and corners of the mind but if this is the kind of cinema you respond to, you should rush out and watch Shinya Tsukamoto’s latest,; the man is once again at the top of his game.

4 Stars.

 

CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON

In remembrance of Halloween and in celebration of the recent blu-ray release of the classic and iconic “Universal Monsters” series, I have decided to review each title individually in chronological order, and the final review of the series is for “Creature From The Black Lagoon” that was directed by Jack Arnold and premiered on 5 March, 1954.

So we finally come to the end of my “Universal Monsters” reviews with 1954’s “Creature From The Black Lagoon”, which like “Phantom of the Opera” is also a unique title within the series as it is the only one that was shot in the 1:85 ratio as well as in 3-D.  It is interesting watching the entire series within a limited time frame because you notice little things that may not be obvious if watched months apart.  All of the films that were made in the 1930’s have a very similar atmosphere to them, while this entry from the 1950’s has a much different feel.  Gone is the darkness and grittiness of the earlier films and in its place is a kind of naivety, no doubt due to the Hays Code being in full effect.  However as different as the films feel, “Creature From The Black Lagoon” shares a common bond with the earlier films in the fact that this is such an entertaining film to watch and has a truly classic monster at its center.

After a unique fossil is found along the Amazonian riverbank, a scientific expedition is put together to try and find the rest of the remains of this creature.  When the group’s initial efforts to find anything prove fruitless, they decide to head further down the river to a black lagoon where they believe the rock that contained the fossil may have broken away from over millions of years.  While taking soil samples from the lagoon floor, two divers come face to face with the mysterious creature.  Confused by the sudden appearance of these strangers in his home, the creature begins attacking the trespassers, while at the same time finding himself attracted to the lone female of the expedition.  Science and infamy clash as the group fights amongst themselves over whether to bring back the creature dead or alive to show the world, or whether to just study it whilst it is living in its natural habitat.  Whatever the final decision may end up being, it doesn’t matter because the creature just wants these intruders gone.

While “Creature From The Black Lagoon” may not have the complexities or subtext of the films like “Frankenstein”, it is still a highly entertaining yarn.  It is such an easy film to watch and enjoy.  It is true that there is very little depth to it, but sometimes just being a good time in the cinema is enough and this film is definitely that.  From the look of the film, it is easy to see that this film didn’t have a huge budget, but whatever director Jack Arnold did have, it has ended up on screen because the film looks amazing.  The biggest highlight of the film is the creature himself and his make-up design.  The detail on the suit is just extraordinary but what I loved about it was that it when it moved, it felt real.  Although it is just a man in a rubber suit when the creature opens or closes his hands it feels organic, same when he breathes or when his gills move.  It actually feels like it could have been a monster that really existed in the past.  What I find most impressive about the design is that it hasn’t just been made to look cool but some thought has gone into the things an amphibious creature like this would need to survive.  The webbed feet and hands help him swim, the gills help him breathe and his sharp claws give him an ability to find food.  He looks and feels of his environment.  The creation of the suit and who the credit belongs to for making it is interesting as everyone now wants to take credit for it.  Universal’s head of make-up (after Jack Pierce departed) was Bud Westmore who unlike Pierce before him ran a whole make-up department.  Milicent Patrick was the actual designer of the look of the creature coming up with all of the initial drawings for it, so ultimately she should get most of the credit, however Westmore ended up publicly taking the credit for the creature’s creation.

For a film that is almost sixty years old, I am stunned at just how well the look of the creature has held up over time.  Personally I think it ranks in the top three best ever creature designs in cinema with Frankenstein’s monster and the xenomorph from “Alien” rounding out the list.  The creature looks his best when he is in his natural habitat underwater.  During these underwater scenes, a professional diver and swimmer played the role of the creature.  Ricou Browning was this man and his performance is just stellar.  He gives the creature character and we actually understand what is going on through his head just via his swimming styles.  The famous scene of the creature mimicking Kay (played by Julie Adams) and her swimming strokes whilst under her in the lagoon is deserved of its classic status.  Playful in nature, the swimming by the creature here is also very obviously alluding to sex.  It is in this moment that the creature falls in love with Kay, the first woman he has ever laid eyes on.  However in other scenes when he is attacking for instance, he swims in a very aggressive manner in a straight line towards his target, or if he is on the defence, he moves more strategically to outwit his opponent.  Browning seriously gives a performance whilst underwater and the suit looks just magnificent when wet too.

When the creature comes up on land (or the boat), the role is played by a stuntman by the name of Ben Chapman.  Through no fault of the actor in the suit, I just didn’t feel that the creature had the same impact as he does underwater.  This is the only time it feels like it could be a guy in a suit rather than an actual creature.  I will say that I loved the way the creature breathed when he was on land; it always looked like he was gasping for air, and that he would need to venture back into the water as soon as possible.  What is interesting about the creature is that although he kills a lot of people during the film, I would never call him a monster.  He is just an animal protecting his habitat and I am sure that if the expedition crew left him alone, he would never have attacked them in retaliation.  I’m sure if you wondered into a lion’s den unannounced and started fiddling with everything the exact same thing could happen.

The other thing that is so prominent when it comes to the creature is the score that accompanies his appearance every time he is on screen.  It is over-the-top and melodramatic as all hell, and quite intrusive (subtle wouldn’t be something I would call it either) but it actually becomes quite entertaining and adds to the enjoyment of the film.  Da-Daa-Daaaaa!!  Actually the whole of the score was done in quite a strange way, no doubt due to the budget, as music from previous Universal films are pilfered and added to scenes, with the rest of the score duties being split between three composers: Henry Mancini, Hans Salter and Herman Stein.  To be truthful, I wouldn’t call it very memorable with the exception of the creature’s theme which is bellowed every few seconds.  Da-Daa-Daaaaa!!!

As enjoyable as I found “Creature From The Black Lagoon”, it is very repetitive with the characters being on their boat, have to enter the water for a reason, fight the creature underwater, get back on boat, creature boards boat for a scare and then dives back into the lagoon, ready for the cycle to repeat again.  The repetition didn’t bother me too much but I found it amusing each time the characters re-entered the water.  That said the underwater sequences are brilliantly done with very nice cinematography and I always appreciate a film that can tell its story via visuals more than dialogue which is the case with “Creature From The Black Lagoon”.  In regards to story beats, I did like the fight between science and money which is shown throughout the film and in a nice change of pace for a “Universal Monsters” film, the scientist isn’t a madman.

When it comes to the acting in the film, everyone is serviceable but no-one is outstanding.  To be honest I had never heard of any of these actors before this film, but I must say that Julie Adams is incredibly fetching to look at (although I did get sick of her monotonous screaming).  The person that steals this movie though is Nestor Paiva who plays Lucas, the captain of the steamer that takes the scientists down the Amazon.  He is absolutely hilarious throughout the film and fills the screen with charisma.  It is a small role but he makes it memorable.

Overall I really loved the “Creature From The Black Lagoon” just for the fact that it was so entertaining.  I would love to comment on the 3-D technique that the film was originally shot in but alas I have not seen the film in that format.  From all reports though, it added to this already great film.  If there is one reason to see this film, it is because of its outstanding make-up design for the creature himself.  It is truly one of the greatest of all time and I cannot praise it enough.  The film itself is flawed and very repetitive but is such an easy watch, that it is very easy to recommend.  

3.5 Stars.

PHANTOM OF THE OPERA

In remembrance of Halloween and in celebration of the recent blu-ray release of the classic and iconic “Universal Monsters” series, I have decided to review each title individually in chronological order, and the latest review of the series is for “Phantom Of The Opera” that was directed by Arthur Lubin and premiered on 27 August, 1943.

“Phantom of the Opera” is a unique entry in the “Universal Monsters” series because it is the only one that was filmed in colour.  Apart from that, just in tone and feel, this does not feel like the other films in the series.  It is obvious that “Phantom of the Opera” had a much bigger budget than those previous films, it is full of large, colourful sets and is quite the spectacle, however the fun of the film has been sucked out of it and as a result this version of the classic tale is quite a dull and dusty affair.

This is the story of a lonely violinist, Claudin, who regularly plays at the Paris Opera House and from afar has fallen in love with a young opera understudy named Christine.  She barely knows the man exists and yet he believes in her talents one hundred percent and does everything in his power to help her get the best out of herself.  Every cent he makes from playing in the orchestra he puts towards vocal lessons for Christine with the world’s best teacher, all without her knowledge.  However soon the aging process takes its toll on poor Claudin and his hands no longer work well enough for him to keep his position in the orchestra.  Without any earnings to continue to pay for Christine’s lessons, he decides to try and sell his life’s work and for it to be published; a concerto he has composed that he is very proud of.  When he mistakenly believes the publishers plan to steal his work without paying him for it, Claudin explodes into a rage and kills one of the workers at the publishing house.  A further struggle ensues that ends with Claudin’s face being severely scarred, the poor man flees in agony and disappears.  Soon after strange happenings begin occurring at the Paris Opera House, and a tale of a Phantom haunting the place begins.  As madness takes over the mind of poor Claudin, he demands that Christine is given the starring role in the latest opera or everyone will suffer the consequences. 

While this adaptation of Gaston Leroux’s novel certainly is a beautifully produced affair, it has been completely sanitized and as a result much of the horror and darkness of the story is gone.  In fact I would argue that this version of “Phantom of the Opera” is even a horror film at all, instead it is much more of a drama with small horror elements added near the end.  The original story of the “Phantom of the Opera” is one of obsession and a love that is so strong that one is willing to sacrifice everything for it, it also is about bitterness when this love is not returned, but much of this is lost in the film.  The majority of the blame has to go to director Arthur Lubin whose handling of the material has turned this exciting and horrific story into a lifeless bore, complete with moments of silly comedy.  He never keeps the pace going and seems particularly impressed with the opera sequences in the film that the character of the Phantom ends up becoming a supporting player in his own film.  The biggest mistake Lubin makes though while highlighting these opera scenes is that the majority of them focus solely on Anatole Garron, the baritone of the film who is also in love with Christine.  This is a terrible misjudgment because if the film is going to have these long and involved opera scenes, they should definitely revolve around the character of Christine as she is the reason the Phantom is doing everything that he is doing.  As well as Anatole, there is also a third male character, Raoul, this time a policeman, who is also in love with Christine.  The fighting and one-upsmanship that goes on between Anatole and Raoul is where the majority of the comedy comes from and as silly as it is, I must shamelessly admit that I kind of enjoyed these little moments.  I thought that Nelson Eddy (Anatole) and Edgar Barrier (Raoul) had good chemistry between them and their combined comic timing was impressive, however this is the “Phantom of the Opera” and these scenes should have never been in the film in the first place.

Another major flaw with this film is the terrible miscasting of Claude Rains in the role of the Phantom.  In two of my previous “Universal Monsters” reviews I have sang the praises of Rains mightily but sadly he is all wrong for the role here.  Let me clarify that statement because he is actually not bad as Claudin, the poor violinist obsessing over Christine, but when he becomes the Phantom, the role just does not fit his strengths as an actor.  Suddenly the role has limited dialogue and this takes away Rains’ greatest asset, his amazing voice.  Don’t get me wrong, he gives his all in the role, but he just comes away looking really uncomfortable.  Again it is not all his fault though because the character of the Phantom in this adaptation has been handled really clumsily.  He never truly feels like a menace or a threat, nor do you get a sense of his haunting the Opera House causing terror among the people who work there.  We do not get to witness him living in the catacombs beneath the Opera House and his presence there is actually played for laughs.  Also when he is shown stalking the area it is usually by a shot of his silhouette on a wall standing and then running away.  It is incredibly dull and creates no atmosphere at all thus does not give the character a sense of grandness.

As I mentioned above, the Phantom basically becomes a supporting character in his own film, leaving the majority of the screen time to Nelson Eddy as he attempts to woo Christine himself.  Anatole is an annoying character, so full of himself, that it is a chore to spend so much time with him.  That said, Eddy does put in a competent performance in the role but the movie just should not have focused so much of its running time on him, this is the story about a love obsessed Phantom.  I must say that I was particularly impressed by Susanna Foster who played Christine.  She had an air of innocence and she represented a freshness on the screen.  It was easy to see how all of these men fell in love with her.  She may struggle a bit later in the film when she becomes kidnapped by the Phantom but overall I was happy with her performance and pleasant screen presence.

While it sounds like I absolutely hated this film that is not the case.  Technically it is a very well made film with the sets and costume design standing out.  The colour is also very impressive.  I am a big fan of the look of early Technicolor films (this was an early three-strip Technicolor film), it has a different quality to the films shot with the same format later in time.  I do not know how to explain it but it has quite a unique look to it which I really respond to.  Speaking of the visual side of things, there are some amazing shots in this film and some particularly impressive camera moves.  There is a crane shot early in the film when an opera is being performed which starts at stage level and goes upwards until the chandelier is also in shot, anticipating the famous scene at the end, that is just masterful.  In fact, the chandelier is often positioned in a lot of the great shots within the film with the shot from above it with the Phantom sawing the chain to cause destruction being a stand-out.  The film won “Best Cinematography” at that year’s Academy Awards and it is easy to see why, but for a story of such a gothic nature, I was disappointed that the cinematography didn’t represent it as best as it could have.  The only time you ever get any sense of a gothic atmosphere are the scenes in the catacombs at the end which are magnificent.  We finally get some horror and darkness and it is well worth it because these scenes are both gorgeous and atmospheric, only to be ruined by the ridiculous ending with the entire building collapsing (after a single stray bullet causes all the devastation).

Normally this is the part of the review where I praise Jack Pierce for his stellar make-up design but even here Pierce’s work seems watered down.  All we get is a single side of Rains’ face that is slightly scarred and the mask he wears to hide it is also quite bland (and purple?).  It just doesn’t scream of the genius that I am used to from Pierce’s work.  The original 1925 Lon Chaney version is famous for the unmasking scene where we finally see how grotesque a creature the Phantom is under his mask, and Chaney’s make-up design for it is justifiably considered a classic.  That same scene in this version of “Phantom of the Opera” is so anti-climactic because there is so little damage to Rains’ face that you find yourself thinking “so what?”.  Apparently Universal was worried about being too graphic in the reveal due to the number of soldiers returning from war with massive scarring of their own, and while you can understand this decision, sanitizing this moment ultimately hurts the film dramatically.

Overall, while “Phantom of the Opera” is not a bad film, it is not a good adaptation of the story.  It has been scrubbed far too clean that it has lost its identity as a horror story.  Although the film is also unevenly paced, it works better as a drama but the miscasting of the brilliant Claude Rains in the title role doesn’t give the film much chance to succeed, nor does the fact that director Arthur Lubin chose to focus more heavily on the Anatole character than the Phantom himself.  For the first time in one of my “Universal Monsters” reviews I have to state that this version of “Phantom of the Opera” is not the definitive one, which is still the 1925 Lon Chaney silent film (I missed my pointless twirling ballerinas in this version).  Personally I recommend you watch that instead of the grand spectacle but ultimately hollow film that is the 1943 version.

3 Stars.