Cinema Study II: Roman Polanski

[Johann]

With the recent announcement that his new film is another re-telling of Dickens' Oliver Twist, I felt Roman Polanski was good fodder for my second director study (it will be a monthly thing). My aim is to just give a broad, not-too-deep analysis of important directors- namely the OUTSIDERS.



Born Roman Liebling on Aug. 18, 1933 in Paris, Polanski has had an amazing, strange and at times tragic life.

He was separated from his parents at the onset of WWII. His mother died in a concentration camp, he was reunited with his father later. In the meantime he spent many months living with various families and people across Europe.

Whenever he went to the cinemas he was tremendously excited and had dreams of making films himself. He played bit parts in his friend Andrej Wajda's films in the 50's and got into the prestigious film school at Lodz. His short films showed great promise, and it wasn't long before he was working on his first feature released in 1962: Knife in the Water. It was a smashing success at all of the major festivals. Polanski was a man to watch. The Criterion Collection just released Knife as a 2-disc set with all of his important short films- an essential purchase. I'm getting mine for my birthday.

The clout he garnered for Knife allowed him to make a film for himself. He cast Catherine Deneuve in Repulsion 1965, one of the great horror classics. It won the Silver Bear at the Berlin Film Festival. His next film won the Golden Bear: Cul de Sac 1966. His career was taking off with no limits in sight.
Around this time he met Sharon Tate, an American actress who I must say is one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen. He lucked out with her...He cast her in the vampire spoof The Fearless Vampire Killers or "Excuse me but your teeth are in my neck" 1967. He also appears in the film as a bumbling vampire killer. Great cult film that I try to see once a year.

The next film in his canon was career-defining. Rosemary's Baby was a bestselling book and Roman turned it into a classic film. The film was a smash at the box-office and made it's director a household name. The genius of the film was the fact that you never see the baby. You just have this profound creepy feeling that something bad is going down in that crib. Genius horror film and it should be on every horror top ten list.

Romek's life took a horrifyingly bad turn when pregnant wife Sharon and three friends were brutally murdered at their home in Los Angeles by members of the Manson family. (Roman was out of town).

The press said that it was life imitating art, meaning the nature of Polanski's films have found their way into reality. Horseshit. It was total "at the wrong place at the wrong time", and I am amazed Roman didn't let the tragedy affect his work, meaning he didn't retire. No, he came storming back with a masterpiece of violence that was probably extremely cathartic: Macbeth. I
watch it a lot and it never wears thin. It's possibly the greatest adaptation of the play ever filmed. BUY IT ON DVD- your collection will thank you.

1973 saw the release of "WHAT?"- a 60's counterculture film based on voyeurism. I haven't seen it- I will try to track it down to give it perspective with the rest of my thread.

His next film is universally acknowledged as a true film masterpiece:Chinatown. It defined Polanski, Nicholson and Dunaway's careers all at once. A classic in the best sense of the word, this film is a must-see/buy. The script is also acknowledged as one of the best ever written for the screen and is a staple study at film schools everywhere. Jake Gittes is just as memorable as Rick in Casablanca. Polanski was at the top of his game.



The Tenant(La Locataire, 1976) is considered a vanity project by the egomaniacal Roman. I disagree. I love the film. It's the story of Trelkovsky, a man tormented by ghosts and fears. It stars Polanski in the lead, Shelly Winters as the concierge and Isabelle Adjani. It's dirt cheap on DVD-probably because people don't know what they're missing. Like the poster boasted: "Nobody does it to you like Roman Polanski".

When Sharon Tate was found dead, she had a copy of Tess of the D'Urbervilles on her nightstand. She told Roman it would make a great film, and he dedicated the film to her. Nastassja Kinski is INCREDIBLE in Tess. A 3 hour period film, it may be the crowning achievement for RP.

[anduril]

Aryan Papers by Roman Polanski or Milos Forman?


BTW, I agree Macbeth is great but Kurosawa's adaptations of Shakespeare have to be ranked up there. Also, what about Titus?

EDIT: Whoops... i think i misread you... my question re: Titus isn't relevant... but certainly Throne of Blood may deserve consideration alongside Macbeth... your thoughts?

[Johann]

Remember Aryan Papers' rights are owned by Kubrick. Do you know something I don't? I heard a rumour years ago that big names wanted to direct it, but nothing has come of it.

Throne of Blood is a killer, beautiful adaptation of Macbeth, but if judged against other versions it lacks the "shakespearean feel"- meaning: too japanese. Where's the "Out, damn spot!"?

Titus is the best shakespeare adaptation I've ever seen, but I can see people disagreeing. It's more of a personal feeling than an authoritative qualification.

[anduril]

Originally posted by Johann
Remember Aryan Papers' rights are owned by Kubrick. Do you know something I don't? I heard a rumour years ago that big names wanted to direct it, but nothing has come of it.

Haven't heard anything recently... just wondering which of those two directors could best implement this Kubrick project.

[Johann]

Both could bring the story to life, but I think Polanski is finished with injustice in film. The Pianist is the film most people will remember him for. (He struck a nerve with that one)

Aryan Papers has the potential to be as great as Schindler's List (out on DVD!), Life is Beautiful, Europa Europa, etc..

[Johann]

After the renewed recognition of Polanski as a consummate filmmaker with Tess, he didn't lay another film on the world until 1986: the year of his notorious Pirates.
The film is considered a cult classic but I wouldn't go that far. Walter Matthau is an actor whose fame has always been a mystery to me. He has a unique look and a quick wit, but I can't say I like him. In Pirates he's out to lunch. I don't know if it's his fault or Polanski's. The film is a giant, expensive mess. (Just like HOOK!-Julia Roberts as tinkerbell my ass)
Watch this film only if you're curious and like galleons.

Roman decided to go a little bit safer the next round, banking on box-office by signing 'ol stalwart Harrison Ford to Frantic, a great film (albeit a tad ridiculous in parts). Harrison is Dr. Richard Walker, a man in Paris with his wife Sondra. Sondra goes missing "tout suite", and Harrison spends the remainder of the movie tracking her down, "frantically". What I love about the film is the wicked soundtrack. If I were to name my top ten best soundtracks Frantic would be one of them. The tag-line is a little sucky, tho: They've taken his wife, now he's taking action!

Lunes de Fiel is one of my favorite guilty pleasure films. It's 2 hours and 20 minutes of controlled, exquisite madness. Peter Coyote is awesome as Oscar, a bitter wheelchair-bound passenger of a cruise ship. He crosses paths with Nigel (Hugh Grant), a soft-spoken chap who is about to lend an ear to some tantalizing sexual tales involving one Mimi.
Mimi is a goddamn bombshell. (She's Emmanuelle Seigner-the leather skirted chick in Frantic-Roman's wife). Man, can he pick 'em....

Mimi is what every man fears women are REALLY like. Purely vindictive, black-widowish, and capable of deception not seen since The Day of The Jackal. Peter Coyote is one conflicted dude: he tells of his wild nights with Mimi, how she did him wrong "She's a man-trap! Look what she did to me!" while you can tell he has fond memories of their romps.
See it, people. It's one of the best experiences I've had in front of the televison. There was news of a lavish DVD release last year, but no dice. WTF?! This film is pure Polanski. If you don't like it it's because you're a prude or have no sense of humour- yes, it is a comedy but the film won't tell you that.

Death and the Maiden. Absolutely riveting movie. Ben Kingsley is strapped to a chair by Sigourney Weaver: she takes her panties off in front of him and stuffs them in his mouth, duct-taping his trapper shut. You like? I like.
The ending should have you in an uproar if you've been following from frame 1.

The Ninth Gate is another riveting movie, but only if you are a fan of Polanski. The critics ravaged it and Roman himself said he wished he never released it. He hated making it & was disapointed with how it turned out. I don't understand. I loved it.
Why leave schlocky horror to hacks? Roman perfected that genre!
It's a masterpiece of phony thriller theatre. Get a few drinks in ya
and you'll be praising it just as much as me...

What can I say about The Pianist that hasn't been said already? These boards had an extremely engaging discussion about it a while back, and it was a film that had me choked up on more than one occasion. Palm D'or winner, Best Actor & Director Oscar winners- what more do you need?
If Roman never makes another film it's fine by me. The Pianist showed THE WORLD.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
His next film won the Golden Bear: Cul de Sac 1966. His career was taking off with no limits in sight.

I read that Polanski called Cul-de-sac his favorite film. This entirely British production is the neglected classic from Polanski's canon. A biting, mordant black comedy with a delicious, mannered performance by Donald Pleasence as an effeminate artiste living in a castle in the middle of a small barren island with a much younger French wife. The arrival of two criminals on the lam, one menacing and the other a goofy nerd, create complications.

I highly recommend this film. It's truly unique. Polanski has said it only got financed because of the unanimous acclaim and success of Repulsion. Anchor Bay recently released Cul-de-sac on dvd in the UK. I expect a Region 1 release someday. VHS copies can still be found though, especially in Canada.

[JustaFied]

Johann, thank you once again for another interesting, descriptive director profile. I should print these out, to help track down more of the works by these important filmmakers. I've only seen a handful of Polanski's films; "Cul-de-Sac" sounds interesting.

I saw "The Pianist" for the first time last week. It's an astonishing film, and Brody certainly deserved the Oscar for his performance. I have gone back and read some of the posts here from a year ago on this film. I disagree with those who thought it was too detached and impersonal. In many ways it was made to reflect the temperment of its main character, a rather quiet man whose life revolved around his passion for playing piano and his love of his family. That happy life was shattered with the German occupation of Poland, and his only hope was to restore it as much as possible. I felt slightly uneasy, however, at the possible parallels that could be drawn to Polanski's own life. Like the character in the movie, he was an artist whose life was shattered by outside forces. One of the life-changing events in Polanski's life was the murder of his wife, which was out of his control, but the other event, the rape (statutory) of the 13-year old girl, was something that he clearly brought on himself. It was a decision that he made, as was his fleeing the United States instead of standing trial. In that regard, he doesn't have the same claim to "victimhood" as does the character in the movie.

"Chinatown" is a classic for sure, but have you ever noticed that the plot doesn't really make sense? I've seen it a couple of times, and the last time it occured to me that many of the details of the politics of the "water grab" were illogical at places.

"Rosemary's Baby": also a classic - poor Mia Farrow looks terrorized throughout the entire film. Is she carrying the devil's baby or not?

[Johann]

Just happy to be spreading the gospel according to Polanski.


(sorry!, I've got Jesus on the brain a lot these days)

[anduril]

A polite request Johann... please don't put so many spaces in your post. I hurt my wrist while I was scrolling.

:-)

[Johann]

Ah, Kenneth...

Your rapist wit is straight from East Cheem. My motives for space had a purpose. Your quote-button blitzing was clearly laziness.

[anduril]

Laziness???? It requires more work to quote... you have to cut and paste the headers; arrange the quote properly; etc.

[Johann]

Just pushing your buttons, buddy...... :)

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by JustaFied
I've only seen a handful of Polanski's films; "Cul-de-Sac" sounds interesting.

Everything he directed during the '60s and '70s, with the possible exception of Vampire Killers and The Tenant, is absolutely required viewing. Everything he directed during the '80s and '90s, with the possible exception of Lunes de Fiel (aka Bitter Moon), is entirely elective.

the rape (statutory) of the 13-year old girl, was something that he clearly brought on himself. It was a decision that he made, as was his fleeing the United States instead of standing trial.

His 20+ year decline prior to The Pianist could be blamed partly on these events and their effect on the director. My point is not that his post-Tess output is not enjoyable, but that these films are clearly below the standards he set for himself as a young man.

"Chinatown" is a classic for sure, but the last time it occured to me that many of the details of the politics of the "water grab" were illogical at places.

I didn't notice the allegedly illogical details. Actually, it's the first time I read anything critical of Towne's script, awarded as best screenplay by the Writers Guild of America, American Academy(Oscar) and the Brit Academy (Baftas). On the other hand, the screenplay is so ambitious (mystery thriller, psychological character study, political expose, etc.) that a few illogical details shouldn't surprise.

[Johann]

Oscar is right (he understands Polanski): the films from 1959-1974 are absolute must-sees. This "era" for Romek is the reason he is such a revered director. It seems as if his years after Chinatown were spent groping in the dark, with sporadic scenes of genius. Tess and The Pianist are the only films he's made post-70's that shows he is a serious director.

His career is fascinating. I often wonder what he would have done had he not been dogged by scandal. His star was rising like the great tide at the time of Rosemary's Baby.