Medium Cool - In Search Of Cassavetes
Thoughts On: Medium Cool (1969)
A news cameraman falls into a relationship whilst political and ideological structures in Chicago seem to be exploding.
Medium Cool is not a particularly good film, but it is clearly trying to do something of significance and make an impact in a rapidly changing cinematic industry, and, to a good degree, this is a success in such a respect. Following a reporter who falls for a single mother from the south during the summer of 1968 (a concentrated time of huge political upheaval across the world), this sometimes viscerally explores many key socio-political topics from civil rights, to revolution, to freedom of the press, the function of the press, the nuclear family, gender roles, racial divides, economic divides, etc. In many senses Medium Cool is a loose narrative collage of major liberal talking-points. It does not benefit too much from this.
The 60s, I cannot help feeling looking back as someone born in the 90s, was an important time that is often romanticised, yet, when looked at objectively and somewhat closely (as you arguably can in this film) were also chaotic and terribly pretentious - much like all times, I imagine, but with heightening factors adding emphasis in certain places. This translates to cinema rather unambiguously. With the explosion of a particularly political cinema (especially in experimental and independent forms) across the world in the 60s comes, in essence, young people who think they have all the answers to the world's issues becoming 'auteurs' - a term that gives stature and authority to a figure who does not necessarily earn it and can all too easily wear it on their sleeve after learning a few new words and gathering a crowd of students around themselves. One can argue this to be the case most easily in France with the French New Wave and figures such as Godard. I do not mean to reduce all filmmaking from the 60s and all that is attached in some way to auteur theory to pretence, but, there is a distinguishable set of films, a particularly political, 'unconventional' and 'rebellious' form of cinema, that consciously sits in a sphere that, maybe ironically, cannot recognise its own pretence - or is stubbornly proud of it (it can be hard to tell at times).
Medium Cool exists in this genre of film to some degree. This is not a self-aggrandising exploitation film, an obnoxious effort from cinema novo or another Third Cinema movement, nor is it an experimental, raving, very French, political manifesto. However, I could not help instantly seeing this to be an unsubtle, second-rate imitation of a John Cassavetes' picture - and not one of his best. The reason for this lies in the film's manifestation of tuphlodrama (more on this here) via formal trickery. Cassavetes and many alike generate off-beat performances and action through awkward editing that is too short in places, too elongated in others. Without invisible cinematic language and montage, a Cassavetes feels chaotic and dangerous; and the performances, whether they be subtle, brilliant or not, are always made to feel genuine--almost violently so. And that is maybe the best way one could describe the drama in Cassavetes films: subtle, yet violently real. The mastery Cassavetes exhibits in, especially, A Woman Under The Influence, is hinged upon an initial contrivance of an uncanny and uncouth feeling around the drama brought about via editing, cinematic language, pacing, sound design and the structuring of the narrative that soon gives way. The form of Cassavetes films is not the epicentre of the experience: the narrative, or, more so, the characters are. Cassavetes then guides our eye to see the world around his characters in one way (these techniques could be considered rather expressionist), but quickly allows his characters to step through and maintain the fore. We then start a film such as A Woman Under The Influence feeling almost offended that Cassavetes is putting such a world onto film in such a way, but, by the end of the film, we lament not Cassavetes' excruciatingly awkward presentation of mental disorders, instead, we accept the world as real and empathise with those within to the extent that your chest feels as if it may cave in. Such defines Cassavetes' mastery, and such is missing from Medium Cool.
Medium Cool focuses on form, but really has nothing to do with its narrative and nothing to say with its characters. The characters are loose archetypes seemingly typical of a more conventional Hollywood mode of filmmaking. This then very quickly boils down to a film about a rough, young, reluctant hero, a tortured and abandoned kid and a naive mother who is trying her best. There is no real complication about these characters and so they feel vaguely familiar, but not at all interesting. The mother, by the end, becomes a shell of a European art-cinema wandering female - we see this figure best represented in the cinema of Antonioni and played by Monica Vitti. That, quite bluntly, is all that could be said about character.
The greatest failure of Medium Cool is the fact that all is constructed around an attempt to self-reflexively clash the world of documentary and narrative, à la cinema verite. This then sees its characters wander into protests and rallies to literally represent the small sphere of family colliding with the wider political turmoil and, further, demonstrate a divide between the past (rural, traditional American life in the South) and the present. Because there is no subtlety in this transition between documentary and narrative modes, because the 'real-world' sequences are so awkwardly forced into the very loose plot, this cinema verite-esque mode of filmmaking feels spectacle-driven and the sequences in which it is used like set-pieces. Whilst there is then a certain uncanniness and force (maybe not a violence, this is not that impactful) about this, there is no subtlety, no complex characters and narrative meaning allowed to emerge through the form; and so this this falls flat--a lite and unimpressive Cassavetes-esque film. Furthermore, there is an air of distasteful propaganda about this film as the sequences that are meant to be 'real' only feel staged, and even if parts were not, the sound-design is almost certainly contrived, and so police officers and crowds are made to say things and make noises that they seemingly did not - the reality of protests grossly embellished so director, Haskell Wexler, can push an ideological point. This lack of genuity is another horrible mark on this film, which adds to its pretence and invalidates what little is said in the narrative.
Described above is all that makes this a pretty bad film. However, enveloping all is a robust and aggressive attempt at bringing something new to the screen with idiosyncratic cinematic language and themes that seemingly formulate a New Hollywood checklist. It is for this that Medium Cool is worth studying as a good exemplar of a film from the late 60s. And so, this is where I end. Whilst Medium Cool may not hold up today, its worth lies in its yearning to embody and represent a time. With that in mind, what do you think of this as a New Hollywood picture?
Previous post:
End Of The Week Shorts #76
Next post:
Gerald's Game - Eclipse
More from me:
amazon.com/author/danielslack
A news cameraman falls into a relationship whilst political and ideological structures in Chicago seem to be exploding.
Medium Cool is not a particularly good film, but it is clearly trying to do something of significance and make an impact in a rapidly changing cinematic industry, and, to a good degree, this is a success in such a respect. Following a reporter who falls for a single mother from the south during the summer of 1968 (a concentrated time of huge political upheaval across the world), this sometimes viscerally explores many key socio-political topics from civil rights, to revolution, to freedom of the press, the function of the press, the nuclear family, gender roles, racial divides, economic divides, etc. In many senses Medium Cool is a loose narrative collage of major liberal talking-points. It does not benefit too much from this.
The 60s, I cannot help feeling looking back as someone born in the 90s, was an important time that is often romanticised, yet, when looked at objectively and somewhat closely (as you arguably can in this film) were also chaotic and terribly pretentious - much like all times, I imagine, but with heightening factors adding emphasis in certain places. This translates to cinema rather unambiguously. With the explosion of a particularly political cinema (especially in experimental and independent forms) across the world in the 60s comes, in essence, young people who think they have all the answers to the world's issues becoming 'auteurs' - a term that gives stature and authority to a figure who does not necessarily earn it and can all too easily wear it on their sleeve after learning a few new words and gathering a crowd of students around themselves. One can argue this to be the case most easily in France with the French New Wave and figures such as Godard. I do not mean to reduce all filmmaking from the 60s and all that is attached in some way to auteur theory to pretence, but, there is a distinguishable set of films, a particularly political, 'unconventional' and 'rebellious' form of cinema, that consciously sits in a sphere that, maybe ironically, cannot recognise its own pretence - or is stubbornly proud of it (it can be hard to tell at times).
Medium Cool exists in this genre of film to some degree. This is not a self-aggrandising exploitation film, an obnoxious effort from cinema novo or another Third Cinema movement, nor is it an experimental, raving, very French, political manifesto. However, I could not help instantly seeing this to be an unsubtle, second-rate imitation of a John Cassavetes' picture - and not one of his best. The reason for this lies in the film's manifestation of tuphlodrama (more on this here) via formal trickery. Cassavetes and many alike generate off-beat performances and action through awkward editing that is too short in places, too elongated in others. Without invisible cinematic language and montage, a Cassavetes feels chaotic and dangerous; and the performances, whether they be subtle, brilliant or not, are always made to feel genuine--almost violently so. And that is maybe the best way one could describe the drama in Cassavetes films: subtle, yet violently real. The mastery Cassavetes exhibits in, especially, A Woman Under The Influence, is hinged upon an initial contrivance of an uncanny and uncouth feeling around the drama brought about via editing, cinematic language, pacing, sound design and the structuring of the narrative that soon gives way. The form of Cassavetes films is not the epicentre of the experience: the narrative, or, more so, the characters are. Cassavetes then guides our eye to see the world around his characters in one way (these techniques could be considered rather expressionist), but quickly allows his characters to step through and maintain the fore. We then start a film such as A Woman Under The Influence feeling almost offended that Cassavetes is putting such a world onto film in such a way, but, by the end of the film, we lament not Cassavetes' excruciatingly awkward presentation of mental disorders, instead, we accept the world as real and empathise with those within to the extent that your chest feels as if it may cave in. Such defines Cassavetes' mastery, and such is missing from Medium Cool.
Medium Cool focuses on form, but really has nothing to do with its narrative and nothing to say with its characters. The characters are loose archetypes seemingly typical of a more conventional Hollywood mode of filmmaking. This then very quickly boils down to a film about a rough, young, reluctant hero, a tortured and abandoned kid and a naive mother who is trying her best. There is no real complication about these characters and so they feel vaguely familiar, but not at all interesting. The mother, by the end, becomes a shell of a European art-cinema wandering female - we see this figure best represented in the cinema of Antonioni and played by Monica Vitti. That, quite bluntly, is all that could be said about character.
The greatest failure of Medium Cool is the fact that all is constructed around an attempt to self-reflexively clash the world of documentary and narrative, à la cinema verite. This then sees its characters wander into protests and rallies to literally represent the small sphere of family colliding with the wider political turmoil and, further, demonstrate a divide between the past (rural, traditional American life in the South) and the present. Because there is no subtlety in this transition between documentary and narrative modes, because the 'real-world' sequences are so awkwardly forced into the very loose plot, this cinema verite-esque mode of filmmaking feels spectacle-driven and the sequences in which it is used like set-pieces. Whilst there is then a certain uncanniness and force (maybe not a violence, this is not that impactful) about this, there is no subtlety, no complex characters and narrative meaning allowed to emerge through the form; and so this this falls flat--a lite and unimpressive Cassavetes-esque film. Furthermore, there is an air of distasteful propaganda about this film as the sequences that are meant to be 'real' only feel staged, and even if parts were not, the sound-design is almost certainly contrived, and so police officers and crowds are made to say things and make noises that they seemingly did not - the reality of protests grossly embellished so director, Haskell Wexler, can push an ideological point. This lack of genuity is another horrible mark on this film, which adds to its pretence and invalidates what little is said in the narrative.
Described above is all that makes this a pretty bad film. However, enveloping all is a robust and aggressive attempt at bringing something new to the screen with idiosyncratic cinematic language and themes that seemingly formulate a New Hollywood checklist. It is for this that Medium Cool is worth studying as a good exemplar of a film from the late 60s. And so, this is where I end. Whilst Medium Cool may not hold up today, its worth lies in its yearning to embody and represent a time. With that in mind, what do you think of this as a New Hollywood picture?
Previous post:
End Of The Week Shorts #76
Next post:
Gerald's Game - Eclipse
More from me:
amazon.com/author/danielslack
