Quick takes on 5 Polanski films

Going to look at some of controversial director Roman Polanski’s films. In my mind, probably a piece of shit as a human being, but he can make some fine films. Up first is Chinatown, considered one of the 2 or 3 best films he ever made. Its a neo-noir featuring a younger Jack Nicholson as Gittes, a private investigator and a good one. After Mrs Mulwray hires him to follow her husband, Gittes becomes embroiled in a mystery when the husband turns up dead, and the real Mrs Mulwray shows up to sue Gittes for his involvement. The mystery goes deeper than just a shadowy death, involving big money and government contracts, and Gittes can’t help himself but to keep pulling at strings to see where they lead. Excellent writing and superb acting with Nicholson and Faye Dunaway in the leads, the film is a fantastic look at the time and collective mind of 1974, when the USA was growing increasingly cynical, what with the failing of the government, our involvement in Vietnam, and a bleaker outlook on life in general. I loved it. ★★★★

Knife in the Water was Polanski’s first feature film, released in 1962, in his native Poland. It follows a simple premise, but the director is able to do something with it. Andrzej is a middle-aged man with a much younger wife, Krystyna. They are on the way to their sailboat for a weekend on the lake when they pick up a hitchhiker, a young man who never gives his name. What follows is a tense weekend full of pissing contests between the two men, who vie for the attention of Krystyna. Andrzej uses his knowledge of boating to ridicule the younger man. Though inexperienced, the man has a youthful exuberance for life that is infectious to Krystyna. Overall I thought the film was very average. I appreciated some moments, creating psychological tension with very little to work with, but I just wasn’t enthralled. Solid, but unremarkable. ★★½

Next up is Macbeth, obviously based on the famous Shakespeare play. I’m ashamed to admit I was unfamiliar with this one. Outside of its reputation as one of the top 3 of his plays, which is saying something of course, I honestly knew nothing about it. Maybe for that reason, going into it blind, I absolutely loved this film. How did I stay away from this story for so long?! The eponymous Macbeth is a Scottish lord and a legendary fighter. After (purportedly) fighting back a horde of enemies single-handedly, Macbeth and his longtime friend Banquo are returning home when they come across a trio of witches. The witches prophesies that Macbeth will become king, and it isn’t long until he is given that opportunity. King Duncan visits Macbeth’s house to celebrate his recent victory, and during the night Macbeth and his wife murder the king and pin it in some of the king’s entourage. The popular Macbeth is indeed named the new king, but almost immediately, he becomes paranoid that others want to take his power for their own. He has Banquo and other former friends and colleagues of his killed, and eventually he is surrounded by thieves and murderers, alone on the throne with no true friends. Things do not end well for old Macbeth. Grisly and sometimes disturbing, Polanski’s telling feels very real and modern (though it came out in 1971 and seems to use the text to the original play faithfully). It is easy to follow, lyrical to listen to, and entirely mesmerizing. A brilliant film. ★★★★★

Overall, I generally enjoyed Tess (based on Thomas Hardy’s classic work Tess of the d’Urbervilles). I have to say I liked it more a couple days later than I did immediately after viewing. It does offer for a lot of reflection. Tess is a beautiful young woman from a very poor family, but her parents have hopes that she can raise herself and them up from their situation. Tess’s dad has recently learned that his family name Durbeyfield is actually a crude version of an old aristocrat family, the d’Ubervilles. He sends Tess off to the surviving members of that ancient family in hopes that she can make an impression, but it turns out that the current d’Ubervilles are nothing more than a rich family who bought the name for its prestige, and aren’t d’Ubervilles at all. Tess’s situation doesn’t get any better, in fact, the whole film is basically one wrong turn after another for our heroine. She is pursued by a man she loathes, and is in love with a man who won’t have her. From the opening scenes, the viewer is struck by absolutely gorgeous cinematography, but what I can’t stop thinking about, is the care Polanski took to making this film. There are movies where directors make things happen, and others where the director lets things happen naturally. Tess goes at a leisurely pace (at nearly 3 hours long), but it never feels slow. And after Tess’s trials throughout, the ending seems very fitting. ★★★½

Cul-de-sac was the first dud that I’d seen of Polanski’s. It was his third film, after the above mentioned Knife in the Water and Repulsion. Honestly I don’t get what anyone sees in this film. A supposed black comedy, it is about a couple gangsters who are fleeing a botched job, who end up at a villa inhabited by a rich effeminate man and his sexually charged wife. What follows is a weird display of sexual tension, absurd wordplay, and over-the-top acting and dialogue. I wasn’t amused, I wasn’t engaged, and I couldn’t wait for it to be over. I kept waiting for some big “ah-ha” moment which never appeared. ★