11 March 2015

THE DEVIL'S MUSIC

A review requested by Travis Neeley, with thanks for contributing to the Second Quinquennial Antagony & Ecstasy ACS Fundraiser.

By 1974, Brian De Palma had seven features under his belt, with the seventh, 1973's Sisters, having kicked off his legendary run of Hitchcock riffs. So we cannot possibly call Phantom of the Paradise, the director's eighth feature, made when he was 33, the work of a fresh and untried voice. But that's kind of exactly the way it feels: like an explosive volley from the id of some mad, unfocused genius who wanted to puke up some kind of incredibly personal and idiosyncratic new cinema onto the screen without formal training or any sense what he could and couldn't get away with. When that kind of untrammeled creativity meets with the relative classicism and polish of someone with De Palma's professional background, the results are formidable indeed: it's one of those miraculous "only in the '70s" movies that required the full faith and backing of a major studio despite how transparently the massively strange product was going to be a flop. Which it was, everywhere, except for the city of Winnipeg.

The title clues us in that this is to be, at some level, a dressed-up adaptation of Gaston Leroux's 1910 novel The Phantom of the Opera; it's also clear within minutes of the film's start that it's going to combine that story with the evergreen Faust legend (and this is does fairly well, though there's a stretch in the second act where the Phantom elements feel rather indifferently tacked-on). We are told in an opening narration by none other than Rod Serling of The Twilight Zone fame that the music world, circa 1974, is totally dominated by the machinations of Swan (Paul Williams), a genius label owner and manager with the power to create or destroy any music artist he wants. His current favorites are the immensely popular '50s throwback boy band the Juicy Fruits, whom he plans to use as the main act at the opening of his extraordinary new club, the Paradise. And one day after a Juicy Fruits rehearsal, he hears exactly the piece of music he wants them to play at that most august event: an ambitious cantata adapting the Faust legend into the modern day, written by earnest nerd Winslow Leach (William Finley). Swan has his hatchet man, Philbin (George Memmoli) promise a recording contract to Winslow, in order to acquire the music, but this is a fake-out; when Winslow shows up demanding an audience with Swan, he's framed as a drug dealer and sent to Sing Sing.

Eventually he escapes, and in an attempt to disrupt Swan's plans, he falls afoul of a record press, mangling his face and vocal cords. This doesn't slow down his attempts to stop the Paradise from opening; he steals a costume and skulks around, sabotaging whatever he can from the shadows. Swan quickly assumes it's easier to join forces than fight this phantom, and offers Winslow a contract, larded up with curiously Satanic passages about the ownership of souls. Given the chance to regain control of his Faust, Winslow leaps for it, and also uses it as an opportunity to give the pretty back-up singer Phoenix (Jessica Harper) a chance to have her wonderful voice give life to his music. But Swan, being the Devil, has plenty of double-crosses left to play, and the opening of the Paradise will still be on his terms, no matter what control Winslow thinks he has.

Recasting Phantom - or at least the 1943 Universal pictures adaptation of the book - as a satire of the 1970s music industry is already a bit batty, and it's the most levelheaded thing that De Palma's film ever does. Phantom of the Paradise is equal parts compendium of the director's interests as a cinephile - Touch of Evil and (naturally) Psycho are among the classics to be explicitly referenced - and showcase for the young Turk's visual flair. That same Touch of Evil homage doubles-down on Orson Welles by including two long tracking shots, presented side-by-side in split-screen, and occasionally showing the same action from different angles; it's the moment that most expressly looks forward to the De Palma of the future in a film that otherwise feels more like some unimaginable combination of Ken Russell and Peter Bogdanovich. Throughout, the director and cinematographer Larry Pizer favor extravagantly wide lenses, giving even the most innocuous moments a bulbous exaggeration that leaves the whole thing feeling utterly demented.

It doesn't take camera trickery to make Phantom of the Paradise look demented, though; the film's design is, as a whole, thoroughly crazed, creating a world of weird interior spaces that have one foot in reality and one foot in an acid trip, populated by some dazzlingly colorful make-up and costume designs slapped onto the game actors. And some of the actors don't even need that: in the central roles, Finley and Williams look like caricatures come to life, with the former's wild-eyed expressions and the latter's compact build and scrunched-up facial features (not to mention his snake-baby voice) making instant, profound impressions even before the plot kicks in.

The oddball imagery fits perfectly with the loopy sense of humor that De Palma uses to bring his unclassifiable hybrid of horror, parody, satire, and head comedy to life. It's probably not fair to say that Phantom of the Paradise is as-such funny; the closest it comes to outright jokes are the songs generously scattered throughout it, all of them written by Williams in a series of pastiches on '50s dead boyfriend anthems, surf rock tributes to cars, theatrical glam rock, and moony singer-songwriter ballads (and then there's the matter of the end-credits tune, "The Hell of It", a menacing combination of acerbic character assassination and jaunty piano riffs from out of the Old West) - a delightful soundtrack all told, one that's proudly campy and sly.

But I was about to talk about the comedy in the film, or anyway the lack of it. Phantom of the Paradise isn't really comic; but it's unstintingly absurd, far too random and lighthearted to function as any sort of horror, no matter how hard the images and plot nudge us in that direction. It's impossible to pin it down to genre, so even as the plot clicks out in exactly the way you assume it will (until it goes Surrealist in the last third), there's never a chance to get out ahead of the film. It always darts in its own direction, and watching it is a constant effort to keep up with its inventive insanity.

It's bravura cinematic spectacle with just enough literary antecedent and social commentary that it doesn't come across as shallow as the word "spectacle" implies. But the spectacle is still pretty wonderful: it's as wild and yet consistent in its aesthetics as anything I've seen of De Palma's (which is, to be fair, not very much), and certainly more exhilarating than some of his more iconic but also more containable efforts. It is silly and stylish in exactly the right measures, a hugely fun exercise in demented excess that launches acidic critiques at everything it can, without ever feeling the slightest bit sour. If it sometimes allows its twitchy weirdness to serve as its own justification, well, it works hard to earn that weirdness, and it's enormously satisfying to watch it sprawl out over the film's unrelenting 92 minutes.

9 comments:

  1. Love, love, love this movie, and I'm very glad that you enjoyed it. I don't know if this is the right place to go into an overview of De Palma, whom I can't really consider myself a 'fan' of (he's far too inconsistent for me to say that, but at any rate, I still love this, Blow Out (my very favorite, cosmic sadness and everything), and Carlito's Way, and really like a couple of others). The note about this film being "more exhilarating than some of his more iconic but also more containable efforts" is pretty on the nose; I can't think of many other directors where their most well-known films are also among my less favorite of their work (At a minimum, Dressed to Kill, The Untouchables, and especially Scarface. I half-thought of Carrie, since there's a lot of stuff in it that I love (basically, almost any scene with Sissy Spacek) and a little bit of stuff that really grates on me (the shower scene, the random intrusion of Sue Snell at various points in the movie, and that obnoxious, awful Pino Donaggio music that plays during the high-school montages)).

    Here, almost everyone seems to be on their game, but I feel like the MVP behind it all (which I think you implied, but didn't mention by name) is Paul Hirsch, doing some of the absolute best editing of his career. Having now watched the film, oh, 5 times since last June, I'm constantly amazed at how lightning-quick this movie feels, even at such a short runtime, and just how beautiful some of the scene transitions and montages are (the 'Phantom's Theme' one is probably my favorite, but everything from Winslow's escape from prison to his bombing of the Paradise feels perfectly cut together). It's just jam-packed with so many stylish, weird details, and while that should theoretically wear out on me before the end of the movie, it's made to feel even shorter than it has any right to be.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh, how I dearly love this movie.

    First, a story- Sometime in 1976, Phantom had already flopped, but Fox, urged on by De Palma (who felt the studio had bungled the marketing) had reissued the film. So it was that, by the time it came to my neighborhood, Phantom was playing as the B feature on double bills all over the city.

    I first saw it with Silver Streak on an outing with my dad and sisters. We all loved the movie immediately, as did the audience. Over the course of several weeks or months, we followed the movie on its journey around town, and wound up seeing it on double bills with Futureworld, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and The Rocky Horror Picture Show, which I'm proud to say I saw before it was a midnight movie.
    The moviegoing landscape of the 1970s was a strange and wondrous place.

    And WBTN is absolutely correct- editor Paul Hirsch is the real star here, although everyone involved is working at the top of their game. There's real magic in the way he stitches together scenes using footage that wasn't designed to cut together- see Swan's outfit change when he goes to watch the security video of the car bombing, and change back when he reemerges from the vault. And the end credit montage is so much fun. It's one of those few times in cinema where I watch it just to go "look at the editing!!"

    And the songs are really great, too. Aside from functioning in the movie itself, they're also....really great songs. Paul Williams more than deserved his Oscar nomination for this.

    It's my favorite De Palma movie for sure. Just love it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I love this movie's ongoing importance in Winnipeg lore. It sounds like a story Guy Maddin made up but it isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If ever a movie earned the description, "Crazy like a Fox", it'd be this one; it is unabashedly askew in every element, and yet it is also too shrewd and clever about that very fact to ever become tiresome or feel random for randomness' sake. The Phantom himself feels like the perfect encapsulation of that, too: he's a shockingly compelling central figure. The design, with its silver bird-like mask and pre-Darth Vader 70's Cyborg Black Leather, is simply delightful and immediately striking, and I absolutely LOVE the particular style of sound distortion effects they use for his voice (especially for how it enhances his many bouts of maniacal shrieking and/or laughter). The whole thing is just so deliriously FUN all over that it's kind of hard to resist.

    --Sssonic

    ReplyDelete
  5. "...as anything I've seen of De Palma's (which is, to be fair, not very much)"

    REALLY??? You being a formalist haven't seen "much" of De Palma, such a well-known director with easily-accesible movies? (and also my favorite filmmaker, but that's another matter). This urges me to plead "DE PALMA RETROSPECTIVE SOON!!!"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Merrick--I mean, how many donations to the ACS can you afford?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The thing with De Palma is, I'm in a similar boat as WBTN - The Untouchables does very little for me, I kind of actively detest Scarface (admittedly, as much for the culture it birthed as for the film itself - but I've also chilled a great deal towards Oliver Stone over the years), parts of Carrie I find sublime and parts of it I find interminable, and having seen everything he's done from Mission: Impossible forward (except for Passion), I've enjoyed virtually none of it.

    That said, some of my blind spots include Obsession, Sisters, Blow Out, and Dressed to Kill - so, like, all of his agreed-upon masterpieces, basically - and at least some of those will be part of my viewing diet sooner rather than later. Definitely not as a retrospective, maybe not on the blog at all, but one never can tell...

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't know that I'd call Obsession a masterpiece, but I beg you not to disregard The Fury! Aside from being utterly nutshit (albeit not in anything like the high register of shitnuttery that is Phantom), it has even more amazing editing from Hirsch and, in my opinion at least, a much more effective match between his sense of humor and a functional (if silly) thriller than other, more-praised films like Carrie.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So... Basically the good version of "The Apple", then? I don't know if I could possibly enjoy a "good" version of that story as much as that Golan-Globus monstrosity.

    Plus, I doubt that "Phantom" ends with the goddamn rapture.

    ReplyDelete

Just a few rules so that everybody can have fun: ad hominem attacks on the blogger are fair; ad hominem attacks on other commenters will be deleted. And I will absolutely not stand for anything that is, in my judgment, demeaning, insulting or hateful to any gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion. And though I won't insist on keeping politics out, let's think long and hard before we say anything particularly inflammatory.

Also, sorry about the whole "must be a registered user" thing, but I do deeply hate to get spam, and I refuse to take on the totalitarian mantle of moderating comments, and I am much too lazy to try to migrate over to a better comments system than the one that comes pre-loaded with Blogger.