Around the World in 24 Frames 09.04.09: Shoot The Piano Player
Posted by Len Archibald on 09.04.2009
Truffaut introduces the "Dramedy" to the world...
Good Friday, fellow world travelers of film! I hope you have plans for the long weekend. I don't, and that's fine by me.
The Rant
There is no one particular thought process I have this week, so enjoy an a la carte of my thoughts on…Everything:
* Lindsey Lohan is considering posing for Playboy. This would have been more interesting five years ago.
* It is possible to know about the backstage antics of pro-wrestling and be a "smark", but still carry the attitude of just being entertained like a "mark". It's called being a complete fan. As much as I may be interested in who is getting a "push", who is "booking" and what future plans for storylines are, I'm not affected by it. Seriously, people – it's not rocket science, it's WRESTLING. Btw, CM Punk is the best thing in wrestling. He is as intriguing of an in-ring character since John Cena circa 2003. Yes, I think he will be *that* big. If he gets any bigger, I may have to question his "straight-edge" lifestyle.
* This time next year, I will not be living in the house I live in right now. If I say anything else, it may deter potential suckers/homeowners from purchasing it from us.
* The show is coming along nicely. I've been writing more comedy skits than Tina Fey. What's interesting about this is that I never considered myself a "comedy writer" – in fact, I still gravitate towards artsy-psychological/metaphysical trippy drama; but in learning the "art" (and it is an art) of comedic timing and delivering punchlines, I've learned to become a better dramatic writer, and anything that improves how I can emotionally manipulate the audience through the written word is okay by me. When I promised myself to be a complete filmmaker, I meant just that. We're going to be on a MASSIVE shooting schedule in the next few weeks. Actors will hate me, and I will guffaw a hearty, evil guffaw. DO WHAT I SAY!
* Disney bought Marvel. I'm not a comic-book geek, but even I became "old man yells at clouds" over this one. As long as they treat Marvel like Pixar and Miramax, this may be a hell of a ride for a long time. Pixar/Marvel makes my mouth water. I'm drooling right now.
* The trailer for James Cameron's Avatar has been released. December can't come quick enough for me.
* Chris Brown is a piece of shit.
* I have successfully made it through one week of political nihilism and I couldn't be happier. People put way too much faith in others that they don't trust in the first place, while two sides struggle over who can manipulate the majority based on their doctrine and agendas. No more talking points, no more Rush, no more Olbermaan. I've discovered nirvana (and found some good music along the way!)
* I am still pissed that North American audiences did not give Ponyo a chance. It doesn't matter, I will scoop this up the day it is released on DVD – and another great movie will be added to my collection.
* This column is the best thing to happen to me: It has given me the opportunity to re-visit movies I have not seen since I graduated high-school, and now that I'm older – I've gained a different perspective and a deeper appreciation for them. Ten years ago I couldn't sit through an Ozu film and now everything I watch of his is an event, simply because I better understand the art and craft of visual composition.
* I love my wife. I mentioned to her that I'd say something last week, but didn't - so here it is, Jess!
* This may go against everything I feel about the state of television today, but…God, I LOVE Project Runway and I can't help it! Between Heidi Klum (Seal must have…Something going on to snag her), Tim Gunn's wardrobe (which I may wind up stealing one day) or my past dealing with the fashion industry, I…must…watch…every…Episode!
* Chris Brown is STILL a piece of shit. That's all I have to say about that.[/end rant]
********************
I love movies. They represent escapism, art, intellect and spirituality. Some are nothing more than popcorn flicks, designed to ease the burden of "real-life" for a couple of hours. Some bring important issues to the forefront that challenges how we perceive our surroundings. The most important thing for me – if one is a serious film-goer – is to constantly expand and discover new movies. This includes experiencing stories told outside of North America.
Yes, I know: "I don't like to read while I watch movies". Well, neither do I, but I won't use that to prevent me from finding a great story within the screen. It is important, as human beings to discover other cultures and expand our perceptions of those different from us and how they see the world. There are reasons that Bergman, Kurosawa, Fellini, Ozu and Truffaut are important in the movie world – They are just great at what they do.
I intend to highlight a new film every week that is considered "foreign-language"; now that definition is simple, yet broad and complex. For example, if you need subtitles to understand the events of the plot, I will discuss it. If it is a film from a primarily English-speaking nation, but is *NOT* in English (i.e. Leolo or Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner from Canada), I will discuss. If it is a film from outside the U.S. and it *is* in English, I will not discuss (sorry, Brits & Aussies) – for now. My goal is to shed light on some of these gems, and help quell the insatiable appetites for those who can't live without seeing a new movie. Enjoy!
Tirez Sur Le Pianiste: Shoot the Piano Player (1960)
France
Dir: Francois Truffaut
Runtime: 92 min
When I sit and watch a movie, one of my personal critical assessments is whether or not the story organically takes me to a place that I didn't intend to end up in. Some films follow the "rules" of their genre note-for-note, and can make a 90-minute movie feel like three hours. Some follow the "rules" to a tee, only to throw twists for the sake of having a twist – it doesn't make sense and it can take the audience right out of it. Then, there are some films that don't follow any "rules" and create its own genre out of thin air. I have mentioned before that there are movies that created and killed a genre at the same time because of its own uniqueness. El Topo, Persona, Donnie Darko, Pulp Fiction and Stalker, for example.
Francois Truffaut's Tirez Sur Le Pianiste (Shoot the Piano Player) is another one of those films. Every time I have watched this film (along with other classics such as The 400 Blows and Jules and Jim), I get saddened over the fact that the genius behind the camera for these films left us WAY too early. This was Truffaut's second film after The 400 Blows. He would make Jules and Jim after this. Is there any other filmmaker in history to come right out of the gate and craft three genuine classics? I'm hard pressed to think of one.
Shoot the Piano Player follows the story of Charlie (Charles Aznavour, the famous French singer), a classically trained pianist who works in a bar in Paris. It seems off that someone like him would work someplace like that. He is shy, nervous about women and is a neurological mess all around. When we are first introduced, Truffaut crafts the story in a way where it seems as if he's been this way all his life. Then layers begin to peel and we see – like with any real human being – that events in his past made him the way he is. This is a testament to both the film and Aznavour, who strangely (and I feel, not coincidentally) resembles Truffaut himself. There was a method to the inspired madness of casting Aznavour in the title role.
This is the part where I explain to you that Shoot the Piano Player is in fact, a crime film – and why I love this movie so much. When the movie begins, we are introduced to Charlie's brother, Chico (Albert Rémy) running down the dark and slick streets at night, on the run from two pipe smoking, hat-wearing goons. They had done a job together and he scammed them out of money. Just as the chase is about to reach a fever pitch, he runs smack into a lamppost. An old man helps him up and they casually walk down the street – the man handing out advice about love. Once the man goes into his apartment, Chico runs off again. It comes out of nowhere and seems random, but that is the gift of Truffaut; he is purposely misdirecting the audience's attention elsewhere. When I first watched Shoot the Piano Player, I thought the movie was about Chico. Charlie seemed to become an apparition – a character out of the mist when we finally met him.
I think I understand what Truffaut was doing, here. In studying the crime genre, we have been subconsciously trained to accept stories either about the heroes (cops) or the villains (crooks). No one ever focused on those caught in the middle. It was like Truffaut was making the story up as he went along (he didn't.) He began the film about Chico – followed him being chased and when he wound up in the bar, noticed Charlie was the far more compelling character and stayed with him. He helps his brother escape in the opening moments. How does a classically trained pianist – or better yet, why would a classically trained pianist help a brother who is being hunted down by criminals? What compels someone of his nature to do so? This is the story – far more interesting than just following Chico, who in a lesser film would have been the protagonist.
There are many inspired moments of this kind of "misdirection" in Shoot the Piano Player. Truffaut takes a look back at Charlie's life through an extended flashback and reveals that he isn't who he says he is…Literally. Without spoiling anything, I will say that Charlie's choices in his life are a precursor to Roman Polanski's Chinatown, where a man fell in love with a woman he could not help and was crushed under the weight of past tragedy; so much so that he is willing to consciously change who he is internally and externally completely to avoid making the same mistakes. Charlie is a man who cannot come to terms with his past, so instead of facing it – he replaces it with a new reality and new life. Probably something he learned from his family.
But there's more to the movie than that. There was innovation that could only come from the French New Wave. Charlie walks down the street with Lena (Marie Dubois), a waitress who he has feelings for. He wants to hold her hand. He thinks this through overlapping dialogue – an internal monologue, if you will – of his thoughts and hopes and fears. This was a radical way to portray a character on screen, something that I'm sure Charlie Kauffman delighted in if he ever saw this film. There were also the staples of New Wave filmmaking; unexpected jump-cuts, a flowing camera and out of sequence shots. There is a throwaway shot of a character's mother that is so brilliantly funny because of its sudden randomness, that I can't help but wish I was around the discussion where Truffaut first explained the scene to anyone who listened.
One of the ways Shoot the Piano Player succeeds is through its flow. This is a story that begins one way and ends on the other side. The term "dramedy" had not been in fashion as of that time. One can walk into this film expecting a drama, and laughing raucously or expecting a comedy and be touched at moments of poignancy and melancholy. The fact that the movie weaves in and out seamlessly, without playing anything false is a rare feat to achieve. Some movies try to be too ambitious, not truly knowing if the story is a comedy or tragedy and the result is a disjointed, disconnected dew-mash of events. Shoot the Piano Player does not fall into this trap, simply by playing everything true to the end. Life can be sometimes funny, or it can break the toughest human under the weight of tragedy. Truffaut knew this and wisely knew which scenes needed comedy and/or drama, and how much to use.
Shoot the Piano Player is based on the Philadelphia-based crime novel, Down There by David Goodis, and Truffaut was wise in focusing on the character's back-story rather than the underbelly of the criminal world described in Goodis' tale. Charlie is a human being who wants two things: To play the piano, and have someone love him. It's not hard to relate to someone like that. We all have our creative vices and want someone to love us despite them.
There are certain filmmakers who understand the complexities of how a relationship works: John Hughes was able to perfectly capture the "Aw, shucks" love-at-first-sight dynamic in many of his films of the 1980's. Cameron Crowe took Hughes' example and went deeper beneath the surface through films like Say Anything and Almost Famous. Richard Linkletter, through his Before Sunrise/Sunset duo of films was able to encapsulate the philosophical meanings of love. Hitchcock took the concept of relationships on a darker, more twisted path through films like Psycho, Rear Window and his opus, Vertigo. Truffaut also understood that the best on-screen relationships were the ones that mirrored real life: where both parties have flaws and baggage from past heartbreak, which affects their decisions.
Charlie loves Lena, and Lena loves Charlie – but their past hinders an actual breakthrough in their relationship. Personally, I prefer to watch a movie where both parties can be right or wrong in a relationship at any given moment, with no positive weight given to either. Which is why I'm turned off by films like Maid in Manhattan, where the lovebirds are so perfect while the world is so evil, as opposed to liking a movie like Before Sunrise. In Shoot the Piano Player, equal time is given to no less than three major relationships that Charlie encounters: his deceased wife, Theresa (Nicole Berger), who emotionally crippled him over a revelation about his past career as a concert pianist; the prostitute, Clarisse (Michèle Mercier), who babysits his kid brother; and Lena, played by Marie Dubois with such a stunning innocence at first that it is a shock when she lashes out near the end of the picture at Charlie's boss, who suffers from the "Madonna/Whore Complex" – loving her from afar as a symbol of virtue until he is intimate with her or finds out she is intimate with another, diminishing her value.
There is a particular scene in Shoot the Piano Player that ascends it from "great" film to "instantly classic". Charlie is set to audition his talent at a building. He approaches the door and hesitates to announce himself, as a violin audition is taking place. There is also uncertainty of whether or not he should go through with the audition. At that moment, the door opens and an attractive young female violinist exits the room. Charlie enters. The camera holds on the woman's expressionless face, following her as she walks down the long hallway. As she is about to turn the corner, the boom and passion of notes from a piano blare on the soundtrack, causing the woman to pause for a nanosecond. That pause indicates the unbridled talent she competes against. She does not change expression. The camera continues to follow her as she exits the building. We never do see Charlie's audition, but the obvious was said. Not a word was spoken in that entire sequence, but it is the heart of the movie.
Again, I may need to remind you that this all takes place within the essence of a crime film, so death and tragedy are commonplace (that isn't a spoiler – that should be expected.) What isn't expected is how on the mark Truffaut is in virtually every scene. Each moment in the film is given its own weight, whether lightened with comedy or marred with tragedy. When the film was released in 1960, it didn't carry the commercial appeal that The 400 Blows did, and actually forced Truffaut's hand in his approach to films – which led him to make Jules and Jim, which is more lighthearted, but no less tragic.
Bosley Crowther, upon his review from The New York Times panned Truffaut for being "haywire" and not choosing to side with pure comedy or drama. I don't think it was understood at the time that seriously funny comedy and seriously touching drama can co-exist (Crowther also made it a point to spoil a couple of moments of the film – which I HATE any reviewer doing.) It was almost as if some critics at the time were searching for something to blast Truffaut with, because his film debut was as audacious in nature in the same vein of Orson Welles or Jean-Luc Goddard (who introduced the world to Breathless the same year.) My only proof is that Truffaut did the exact same thing, mixing comedy and drama in Jules and Jim, and somehow it was an immediate commercial and critical success (despite the fact that Shoot the Piano Player is now considered by most to be the more superior film.)
Much has been documented about Europe's – and specifically, France's love of old American gangster movies. Goddard turned the genre on its ear with an homage and mockery in Breathless. Louis Malle made the incredible Atlantic City. Truffaut's gangster movie is different and brilliant in the fact that is not about a gangster, and it is not about cause-and-effect so much as it is about fate.
Shoot the Piano Player's legacy is a peculiar one; It opened with much anticipation, then was slammed by many critics finally to fizzle out at the box office. Years later was it re-discovered by film enthusiasts, historians and art-house theaters and lauded as one of Truffaut's greatest achievements. This summer, Judd Apatow directed Funny People, starring Seth Rogen and Adam Sandler. With a title like Funny People, one would expect it to be a laugh-out-loud comedy. It has its funny moments, but there is in fact, more of a dramatic element to it, with comedy sprinkled in. We also see this in the aforementioned works of Cameron Crowe (Say, Anything and Almost Famous.) Shoot the Piano Player was its ancestor.
Francois Truffaut.
Francois Truffaut was the face behind the French New Wave. His films were considered to be the most accommodating to Western audiences and Truffaut himself was thought to be the most accessible and appealing of those filmmakers. His one on one take with Alfred Hitchock, a published work simply called Hitchock/Truffaut is considered to be film school in a book. He understood the technology and the art of a picture, as well as crafting a complete story, with peaks and valleys. He worked with Steven Spielberg in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, where I'm sure any filmmaker in Spielberg's position would have been flabbergasted to have a chance to pick his brain. He left an insane body of work – enough for a lifetime, but still left the world too soon.
As stated earlier in my "rant", I feel myself becoming a more well-rounded writer by tackling comedy, something I never intended on approaching. While doing this, I have gained a better sense of understanding of using light and shadow (in storyline terms) to give a deeper sense of reality to a story. Life is not perfect. We all have our flaws and our grudges. We also have our triumphs and friends. It isn't until we mix that all together that we're able to gain a clear picture of who we are as people. Truffaut understood this – understood it from his first film – and created a film in Shoot the Piano Player that may best describe how people work on the inside and how it affects their choices on the snowy banks of their outside world.
Trailer for Shoot the Piano Player
Coming Attractions: The conclusion of The French New Wave; Godard's foray into commercial films, a triumph of art meeting the mainstream.
Questions or comments? Email me at aa24frames@aol.com!!!
awesome article len. i love reading what you have to say....especially your rants up top. and you're right, chris brown is still a piece of shit!
Posted By: amy (Guest) on September 04, 2009 at 07:30 AM
Do you think you'll do "Last Tango in Paris?" I recently saw it for the first time on one of the HBO's and wasn't that impressed with it, despite many people calling it a classic.
Posted By: JLAJRC (Guest) on September 04, 2009 at 05:09 PM
Copyright � 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.
