LEAP OF FAITH: WILLIAM FRIEDKIN ON THE EXORCIST - BFI London Film Festival 2019 - Day Four

Director Alexandre O Philippe seems to specialise in documentaries about iconic movies and the technical choices and consequences of how they were made. The last film of his that I watched and thoroughly enjoyed was 78/52, about the iconic shower scene in PSYCHO.  In that film he had a multiplicity of contemporary film-makers comment on what makes it technically so compelling.  In his latest film, Philippe interviews William Friedkin about the making of THE EXORCIST and the result is insightful but claustrophobic.  It's really interesting to hear Friedkin discuss what he decided to keep and reject from Bill Blatty's novel - the importance of the Iraqi prequel -and how much care he took over capturing the light and the natural soundscape of the bazaar and the archaeological dig. I also came away with a profound respect for Friedkin's knowledge of classical music, and his clear sense that he wanted a subtle sound-track, rejecting a more bombastic score from Lalo Schiffrin, and his friendship in the process! Most of all, I had no idea that Friedkin was so passionate about fine art - particularly Caravaggio, the Dutch masters and the impressionists. This documentary neatly shows how certain shots in THE EXORCIST are framed and lit to mimic Rembrandt. We also get a lot of discussion about how Friedkin cast Jason Miller as Father Karas, despite already having another actor on contract.

What's surprising is that Friedkin doesn't discuss the casting of the little girl or the morality of asking her to perform such disturbing scenes. It's also surprising that he's so confused as to the meaning of the pivotal final scene of the film. And on both of these points, and more generally, I felt this film could have benefited enormously from other voices - other film-makers or historians to put Friedkin's comments in context. Without that, the film became, sad to say, a bit claustrophobic and ultimately tedious.

LEAP OF FAITH has a running time of 104 minutes. The film played Venice and London 2019 and does not yet have a commercial release date. 

78/52 - Crimbo Binge-watch #6

78 setups - 52 cuts - 2 minutes - those are the metrics behind the infamous shower scene in Alfred Hitchcock's brutal masterpiece - PSYCHO.  In this meticulous and beautifully curated documentary we get an in-depth look at how that scene was storyboarded, edited and scored - why it works so well - and what meanings Hitchcock was trying to convey.   Director Alexandre O Philippe - of the superb THE PEOPLE VS GEORGE LUCAS - does an amazing job in assembling a wonderful cast of commentators and letting them speak.  He gets everyone from Janet Leigh's original body double, to her daughter Jamie Lee Curtis, to horror directors Eli Roth and Guillermo del Toro, to author Brett Easton Ellis.  He gets Danny Elfman who scored the remake, and countless expert cinematographers and editors who takes unto the technical detail of how PSYCHO's impact was achieved. The result is a doc that isn't for dilettantes but a film that will reward the Hitchcock fans looking for further insight. It was an absolute delight to watch.

78/52 has a running time of 91 minutes and is rated 15 for images of sexual violence. It was released in 2017.

iPad Round-Up 3 - THE PEOPLE VS GEORGE LUCAS

THE PEOPLE VS GEORGE LUCAS plays like a slick version of a YouTube fan doc. Alexandre O Philippe basically interviews a bunch of Star Wars fans and gives them a kind of group therapy space to discuss their love of the original trilogy and their sense of betrayal both at the changes that George Lucas has made to it, and to the travesty of the prequels. For me, this was a movie that perfectly articulated my own love-hate relationship with Lucas and made me feel less alone in my frustration.  

Along the way it explores interesting issues. The first is the tragic figure of Lucas - a man trapped in a prison of his own making.  The irony of the indie film-maker who has himself become the guardian of a capitalist franchise.  Francis Ford Coppola is particularly articulate on the idea that George Lucas never made the brilliant artistic films he could've done because he was trapped by the Star Wars monster. The second is the nature of "art"  and who owns it. 

The second big issue is whether the fans right to feel that because they have invested so much into the original trilogy, that Lucas is obliged to respect their feelings and not make any changes? Or is Lucas, as owner of the film rights, perfectly at liberty to do as he pleases?  Indeed, in an age of the internet, when geeks can come together in real time, creating a hysterical response to a cultural work, critiquing every line, are we just setting ourselves up for a fall? I can see this on the current fan forums for George R R Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire.  The hype is so great, any new novel is almost guaranteed to be a disappointment. And the emotional investment is so great, even the slightest change in the HBO TV show causes outrage. 

And what about all the collaborators who worked on those original films? Do the special effects guys whose effects have now been replaced with CGI been robbed of their contribution?  In other words, how far is the director really the auteur who can play God with a collaborative art-form?  Lucas clearly things he is God, the Creator, with the right to do as he pleases.  But have generations of film critics created a false perception of just how important the director truly is?  Is the director as deluded as the fans?

THE PEOPLE VS GEORGE LUCAS is thought-provoking, entertaining, and gives you a great sense of camaraderie.  It's well worth a watch, even if you're not a Star Wars fan, because it describes so clearly modern fan culture.  

And for the record, HAN SHOT FIRST!

THE PEOPLE VS GEORGE LUCAS played SXSW 2010 and was released in 2011 in the USA and on YouTube.  It is available to rent and own.