Those who
like to watch films will be familiar with the debate over whether the size of
the screen and the excellence of the sound system make any difference to the
quality of the experience. My vote is a qualified “Yes, they do”. I tried watching
Star Trek – the First Mission on the TV
the other evening but I didn’t start to enjoy it until I projected it onto my
big screen, turned up the surround-sound and was able to wallow in the special
effects. I concluded that, if a film lacks qualities that are emotionally,
intellectually or dramatically engaging, its only saviour is likely to be good,
hi-tech presentation.
Meanwhile, in
search of filmic fulfilment at the local cinema, I caught up with several new
releases. Troll Hunter was the first,
followed, in rapid succession, by Jane
Eyre, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy...and Drive. The trailers for all of these films promised that they were
un-missable (as they always do) and trailers are a very clever way of beguiling
potential customers. There we are, sitting comfortably, thankful that the
adverts have finished and anticipating something special. All they have to do
is employ their well-practised skills of creative editing to produce a
tantalising taste of what is to come.
I was duly
hooked for these four, all of which have impressive production pedigrees: they
are excellent right through from casting and acting, to lighting, camera work,
sound-tracks and editing. But films also need to have content and context which
is meaningful to their intended viewers. Tinker,
Tailor, Soldier, Spy... is set in the 1970’s and based on the intrigues of
the Cold War. It may have a perplexing plot (I haven’t read the novel on which
it is based) but it does have an historical background which is familiar and a visual
re-creation of the period which is accurate and evocative of times I have lived
through. Some of these qualities might count for less with a viewer from a
generation later but they were crucial for me.
Drive is a film with a background familiar
to me in a different way: I have seen other films like it. The world of organised
crime in Los Angeles is not my special subject and this film may or may not
represent it accurately. I hope that the unremittingly extreme violence it
portrays is a characteristic of the genre to which it belongs rather than a
real depiction of a few days in the life of a minor criminal: but I don’t know
and am therefore left suspended between fantasy and reality.
And who
needs another version of Jane Eyre?
Perhaps the cynical answer is that nobody does. But, since there are directors
who feel the need, we may as well enjoy the fruits of their labour. It’s a love
story which, historical setting apart, has universal appeal although, for me,
the history adds layers of fascination to the story. I was able, within a few
days of seeing the film, to visit Haddon Hall, Derbyshire, where much of the
filming took place. Haddon Hall is one of those places which can so easily
teleport us back through English history by the magic of its un-spoiled and enduring
presence in the midst of altered environs. The concurrence of the place, the
social history, the literary tradition and the love story make the film itself
meaningful beyond its undoubted technical attributes.
No comments:
Post a Comment