The Manchurian Candidate (1962)

Prior to World War II, America was A world power. After World War II, we were THE world power. Unlike Japan and all the various countries of Europe, there was no rebuilding necessary. It was much easier for us to get back to (more or less) business as usual. Suddenly we were top dog. So of course we suddenly became very preoccupied with maintaining this new status. Some might even call it paranoia. But can you really blame us? The Great Depression was still very prominent in our National Rearview. People could remember what it was like to be hungry. Trauma like that sticks with you. You might not be aware of it, but it's there. It's in the back of your mind waiting to be triggered. And so, practically overnight, New Deal Democrats like Frank Sinatra, Ronald Reagan, Charlton Heston and a significant portion of America were primed to be activated by the Republican Party's message of blatant self-interest. So what if two Kennedys and a King had to die? They sure as hell were not going to go hungry again.

Safe (1995)

There are few things more frightening in cinema than a well-composed, wide-shot. It's a blank slate on which anything could happen. Terror can enter the frame from any possible angle. And with the camera so far back, when something bad does happen, we the audience are helpless to do anything about it. We can only watch.

Todd Haynes was brilliant to adopt this aesthetic for Safe because even though the frame is filled with various sofas, walls and coffee tables, Carol is still effectively isolated. She is an alien in her own home and surrounded by things that could literally kill her. What is going to attack her next? No hyperbolic Requiem for a Dream editing needed. Trust me, you will never be able to look at a can of hairspray the same again.

Seconds (1966)

I think what makes this film most interesting is the time in which it was released. 1966 was certainly not the Kennedy 60's, but it was also not quite yet the Summer of Love. The Nation was in great flux and it was beginning to show at the multiplexes. Here we have a film released by a major studio, with a major star and a respected director that is undeniably cynical and also features a large helping of nudity. Was this Paramount attempting to aim younger? Was this a major Hollywood studio attempting to start life anew? I'm not sure if the parallel is perfect but it's something I've been chewing on. I've been chewing on a lot since I watched this film. Ideas about identity and happiness, about the young versus the old, about death. Rather than just making the film interesting for the moment (like the empty implementation of "hot-button issues" Christopher Nolan uses in the Batman films) these ideas wedge into your brain and make you reflect on your own life and the world in general. What is the point in changing the external if the internal remains rotten, unfulfilled or depressed? Can one ever be truly happy? This movie doesn't have the answers, but then again who does?

Seven Days In May (1964)

After The President (Fredric March) signs a nuclear disarmament treaty with the Soviet Union, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff begin plotting a coup d'etat.

*      *      *

Though I wouldn't go so far as to call this film a masterpiece, I love it for all the ways in which it deviated from the expectations set by its star, writer, director and subject matter. I went into this film expecting an unbelievably taught John Frankenheimer thriller (ie: The Manchurian Candidate), with a twist ending (courtesy of Twilight Zone creator Rod Serling) and lots of overly sincere, bleeding-heart speeches by liberal do-gooder Kirk Douglas. What I got instead was a rather calmly told and very well-articulated defense of our political process. There are even large chunks of this film where Douglas is nowhere to be found! And while the title alone might suggest a countdown to some sort of BIG moment, this film opts instead to end on a quiet note of subtle victory. As someone who watches lots of films, I live for little surprises like this. Hopefully reading this won't saddle your first viewing with unrealistic expectations....

The Parallax View (1974)

Three years after the assassination of a popular Presidential Candidate, people who were there start dying under mysterious circumstances. Enter ambitious reporter Joe Frady (Warren Beatty) to figure out what's going on and how this might all connect to The Parallax Corporation.

*      *      *

Like many film fanatics I'm prone to falling down rabbit holes. Sometimes it's a director, sometimes an actor, sometimes a genre. I have no control over it. I see a film or hear/read about something I want to know more about and then all of a sudden I am overtaken with the need to consume it whole. My latest obsession has been paranoid thrillers made between the late 60's and the early 80's.

By and large I find these films to be a pretty satisfying genre. Sure there's the occasional dalliance with by-the-numbers predictability and self-righteous earnestness (Three Days Of The Condor) but most are pleasurably taut exercises in cynicism and paranoia. The Parallax View is thankfully one of the latter.

At the start I was expecting something akin to my Condor experience only this time with Warren Beatty looking all rakish and socially minded. Fortunately this film was shot and directed by Gordon Willis and Alan J. Pakula. Their dark and distant aesthetic boarders on the experimental and virtually removes Beatty from the film all together while at the same time giving an eerie air to all of the proceedings. Who would have thought that long-shots of red, white and blue tables could illicit such chilling unease in an audience? Gordon and Alan did, and God bless them for it.

Bonus points for the presence of Thor in the brainwash montage!