“I don't know whats happening to me.
I get funny ideas.”
Targets (1969) is the first film from Hollywood renaissance man Peter Bogdanovich and it doesn't show at all. At least not in the sense that one would expect from a first film. I didn't even know it was his first film until it finished and I started looking for information on the internet about it. Hard Eight by Paul Thomas Anderson feels like a first film. Even Reservoir Dogs at this point looks a bit clunky compared to the films that Tarantino has grown into making. Maybe not “clunky” but some effects definitely seem a little, well, like the film devices of a filmmaker finding his voice.
Targets (1969) is the first film from Hollywood renaissance man Peter Bogdanovich and it doesn't show at all. At least not in the sense that one would expect from a first film. I didn't even know it was his first film until it finished and I started looking for information on the internet about it. Hard Eight by Paul Thomas Anderson feels like a first film. Even Reservoir Dogs at this point looks a bit clunky compared to the films that Tarantino has grown into making. Maybe not “clunky” but some effects definitely seem a little, well, like the film devices of a filmmaker finding his voice.
Targets
hits all the markers of what I look for when I watch movies,
including the all important, “Be under two hours long.” That's
not a rule, I've actually been itching to rewatch P.T. Anderson's The
Master
ever since I saw the Gibney doc, Going
Clear.
But most film should be under two hours long because most filmmakers
aren't as good or clever as they think they are and we're all living
under the gun in the 21st
century, metaphorically and literally, with more to do and less time
to do it.
It's
a movie about movies, which is another tick in another box on the
list of “Best Features To Find In A Movie”. I get my kicks on the
meta train. Did I mention at this point that I didn't know anything
about the film going into it? That's the way I like to view my
cinema, having no clue what I'm about to experience so that the story
is able to hit me in a way that I'm totally unprepared for (how often
is anyone actually surprised these day?).
I
started the film with the thought in my head that the movie was about
hitmen. For some reason I think I may have thought that Targets
was The
Killer Elite.
Or maybe a movie with Lee Marvin? I've had Lee Marvin on the brain
recently so maybe I'm just hoping every movie I put on is going to
have him in it. So the movie begins and I'm thinking, “Ok, lets see
these hitmen shoot at each other or something.” and the opening
title is over the scene of a Corman-esque European castle at night,
with lightning and thunder and there's Boris Karloff running around
and, is that Jack Nicholson too? What the hell is this movie?
No
sooner do I start to think, “Ok, well I guess this is some kind of
horror movie throwback” does the camera pull back to reveal a small
room full of film executives and Boris Karloff, watching the rushes
of his character, Byron Orlok. Also in the room is a surprisingly hot
Peter Bogdanovich and I only say “surprisingly” in that I didn't
think that he was probably ugly as a young man, but first coming to
know him as the shrink's shrink on The
Sopranos
I never thought of him as, well, young and hot. But he's got this
kind of intellectual sex appeal that just caught me off guard. Maybe
that's just me, I'm a mess.
There
are two storylines at play in Targets,
the
first is of Byron Orlok, an unapologetic and unashamed direct
allegorical character of Karloff. Orlok is a giant of old Hollywood
horror films, at one point remarking, “They used to say 'The Marx
Brothers make you laugh, Garbo makes you cry and Orlok makes you
scream!'”. There's a scene where Bogdanovich's character Sammy
Michaels visits Orlok at his hotel room and joins him in watching the
actual Karloff film, The
Criminal Code
on television. A publicity man for the studio is trying to convince
Orlok to do an appearance the following night at a drive in theater,
showing another actual Karloff film, The
Terror.
Michaels is trying to convince Orlok to do his script, promising him
that it's a real part not like the old monsters he used to play.
The
parallel storyline is of Bobby Thompson, who connects with the Orlok
story in the beginning by spotting him down the scope of a rifle he's
purchasing across the street from the studio. If you're thinking,
“Bobby Thompson? That sounds like the most American male name ever.
Particularly if we're talking mid 20th
century.” then you're correct. Bobby Thompson is an allegory of
real life 1960s spree killer Charles Whitman, who shot and killed 16
people while wounding 32 others from a clocktower of a college campus
in Texas. Bobby Thompson is Charles Whitman, besides being a dead
ringer for him, he types a note on before murdering his family which
mirrors Whitman's story perfectly.
While
Orlok and Sammy talk the film business and the changing tastes of the
day, Thompson buys guys and bullets, lots of guns and bullets. He
buys these guns and bullets with incredible ease and a laid back air
that perfectly masks the killer inside.
Reading an interview Bogdanovich did with The Dissolve he talks about the genesis of the film, how it had to be done with Karloff, for a certain amount of money over a certain amount of days, how it was a “for hire” job that he and another person cranked out the script for and made it in that Roger Corman, no budget style. He talks about how the story is definitely about America's gun culture (and obviously Whitman) and the impact that gun violence has had on his own life. But he doesn't mention what appears to me to be the most interesting angle of the entire story (or if he does mention it, he doesn't give it the full airing it deserves) which is that of old horror versus new.
Reading an interview Bogdanovich did with The Dissolve he talks about the genesis of the film, how it had to be done with Karloff, for a certain amount of money over a certain amount of days, how it was a “for hire” job that he and another person cranked out the script for and made it in that Roger Corman, no budget style. He talks about how the story is definitely about America's gun culture (and obviously Whitman) and the impact that gun violence has had on his own life. But he doesn't mention what appears to me to be the most interesting angle of the entire story (or if he does mention it, he doesn't give it the full airing it deserves) which is that of old horror versus new.
At
one point in the film, Orlok holds up a newspaper with a headline
reading “YOUTH KILLS 6 IN SUPERMARKET” and makes a comment
regarding how no one will find his old monster movies scary anymore
because of how scary the real world has become. Yet in the climactic
moments of the film, it's Orlok who terrifies Thompson into
submission, lumbering towards him in the way that he menacingly
lumbered towards so many over the years in countless fright films.
Thompson represents “the new horror” not only of the cinema but
the world, for his horror is one without reason. He tells his wife at
one point (before shooting her in the stomach) “I don't know what's
happening to me. I get funny ideas.” There's no explanatory back
story for Thompson, we just see his life as it is. We do know that he
was in the army (like Starkweather) but he doesn't seem plagued by
flashbacks or even depressed. We see Thompson friendly, calm and
calculating as he murders his family then takes his act on the road.
New
horrors replace the old, yet the old horrors still have weight. The
uncertain madness of the 20th
century can buckle beneath the concrete, old world monsters of the
past. Perhaps the film is saying this on some level. Perhaps not.
There's
more subtle clues to Thompson's madness by way of the madness of
America as we see Thompson and his family constantly immersed in
television or radio. We lose our identities and the quietness of our
minds to the ever growing din of a mad and violent world.
While
all of this incredible commentary is going on, there's classic
Bogdanovich cinema love spilling out all over the place. Orlok
mentions The
Raven
at one point, while we hear a television ad for Anatomy
of a Murder
as well as the aforementioned Karloff films. Orlok wearily looks out
his window on his way to the drive in theater, where his path will
cross with Thompson's again and says despondently, “God what an
ugly town this has become.” The line bristles with reality and
purpose, both for Karloff's own world of the cinema and the greater
world at large.
Everything
in Targets
works on levels, giving the viewer a multitude of angles by which to
view the piece. It packs biting American social commentary as well as
genuine cinema appreciation into a violent, human, beautifully shot
and wonderfully acted hour and twenty six minutes. Targets
is like nothing else that Bogdanovich would go on to make which helps
give it an otherworldly glow, like a film that fell through the
cracks of another dimension where he develops a career making
grindhouse pics rather than academy award winning dramas and
comedies. If you want to see a film that feels like the bastard
grandfather of American
Psycho
and Ed
Wood,
see Targets.
I
was going to say “Take aim at Targets.”
but I'm not really writing with the goal of getting quoted for press
releases anymore which is a win for everyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment