Kelly WandHammett
October 17th 2006 06:42
When I first saw this film, I really enjoyed it. It stunned me. Finding a copy should have been a cause for celebration in Camp Sprocket. A Wim Wenders’ film produced by Francis Ford Coppola for Zoetrope studios and featuring a score by John Barry? This should have winner written all over it. Why am I disappointed? Why was it that around half way through I began thinking of the film as a chore?
The story sounds interesting. It is a fiction based on real people but not on facts. Writer Dashiell Hammett finds himself helping the man he has based many of his short stories on. The case twists and turns through events that will find themselves retold in Hammett’s later stories. Being a fan of this kind of pulp writing, it holds a degree of intellectual fascination for me. Watching “The Maltese Falcon” right before this will certainly add a level of enjoyment to the proceedings. There is no point in getting post modern without knowledge of the frames of reference.
The set design and camera work make for a stunning pastiche of the hard boiled detective genre but therein may lay the cause of my disquiet. Maybe it was my mood but I found the film cold and the script seemed like it had been written for the stage. It is a hole that many of Wenders later films fell into and maybe I’m only seeing the seeds of that here.
Even ardent fans of this film will admit it isn’t Wenders’ masterpiece. Rumour has it that Coppola reshot large portions of it but rumour is rumour. They pass through the night like goods trains. I wasn’t born yesterday and I don’t have to believe in everything I read. It is still, after all, Wenders’ name on the marquee.
When Wenders gets his magic right it is stunning. When his dice is rolling true, he couldn’t snatch defeat from the jaws of victory no matter how hard he tried. “Paris, Texas” and “Wings of Desire” are the kinds of film that really earn him the much overused title genius. There is a lot of good stuff here – even great stuff.
There are the dames who’ll say they love you as they’re reaching for your wallet. There’s the dame whose love is true but she gets walked on like she’s carpet. There are the guys who’d break your teeth just as easy as they would look at you. You get the picture?
But where is the heart?
Is it possible that the fault is not with the film but with the reviewer?
No. I finally worked it out. I just didn’t give a shit about what happened to anyone in the film. It doesn’t matter how smart a film is if it is nothing more than a glorified crossword puzzle.
Hammett’s motivation throughout the film is the recovery of a short story that he is supposed to have mailed to his publisher. He got so far as to put the manuscript up to the lip of the post box before his friend tells him to do that later. Instead of taking the additional quarter of a second it would take to push the package in, Hammett puts it back in his pocket.
The glorified crossword puzzle doesn’t even make sense! Such stupidity in a movie pisses me off. I walked out of “Two Hands” the second the little prick buried the money in the sand. I didn’t want to spend the next hour in the company of anyone that stupid. I’m in such a cranky mood. I can’t even keep up the illusion of being a crime writer.
Maybe next time I watch “Hammett”, I’ll like it again. Maybe you’ll like it when you watch it. Maybe you won’t ever watch it. This film would like you to think it is just so damn enigmatic and I can’t decide whether it is or not. This film is a well crafted toy. If you are stuck in a room with it on a wet weekend (if we Australians will ever know such a thing again) it will prove a distraction. Don’t bother hassling the man at the video store. He won’t have heard of it anyway. Maybe you should go to a different shop.
By the way, this is a film primarily about a man’s growing disillusionment. I think I have nailed its tone perfectly. Maybe if you have enjoyed the review, this is the film for you. If you can identify with a man so bruised by life that he retreats into a shell you might just identify with Hammett. Maybe the fact that I’m still wrestling with my feelings about this film marks it out as something special.
Sometimes I like this film. Sometimes I don’t. I’m big enough that I can contradict myself.
The story sounds interesting. It is a fiction based on real people but not on facts. Writer Dashiell Hammett finds himself helping the man he has based many of his short stories on. The case twists and turns through events that will find themselves retold in Hammett’s later stories. Being a fan of this kind of pulp writing, it holds a degree of intellectual fascination for me. Watching “The Maltese Falcon” right before this will certainly add a level of enjoyment to the proceedings. There is no point in getting post modern without knowledge of the frames of reference.
The set design and camera work make for a stunning pastiche of the hard boiled detective genre but therein may lay the cause of my disquiet. Maybe it was my mood but I found the film cold and the script seemed like it had been written for the stage. It is a hole that many of Wenders later films fell into and maybe I’m only seeing the seeds of that here.
Even ardent fans of this film will admit it isn’t Wenders’ masterpiece. Rumour has it that Coppola reshot large portions of it but rumour is rumour. They pass through the night like goods trains. I wasn’t born yesterday and I don’t have to believe in everything I read. It is still, after all, Wenders’ name on the marquee.
When Wenders gets his magic right it is stunning. When his dice is rolling true, he couldn’t snatch defeat from the jaws of victory no matter how hard he tried. “Paris, Texas” and “Wings of Desire” are the kinds of film that really earn him the much overused title genius. There is a lot of good stuff here – even great stuff.
There are the dames who’ll say they love you as they’re reaching for your wallet. There’s the dame whose love is true but she gets walked on like she’s carpet. There are the guys who’d break your teeth just as easy as they would look at you. You get the picture?
But where is the heart?
Is it possible that the fault is not with the film but with the reviewer?
No. I finally worked it out. I just didn’t give a shit about what happened to anyone in the film. It doesn’t matter how smart a film is if it is nothing more than a glorified crossword puzzle.
Hammett’s motivation throughout the film is the recovery of a short story that he is supposed to have mailed to his publisher. He got so far as to put the manuscript up to the lip of the post box before his friend tells him to do that later. Instead of taking the additional quarter of a second it would take to push the package in, Hammett puts it back in his pocket.
The glorified crossword puzzle doesn’t even make sense! Such stupidity in a movie pisses me off. I walked out of “Two Hands” the second the little prick buried the money in the sand. I didn’t want to spend the next hour in the company of anyone that stupid. I’m in such a cranky mood. I can’t even keep up the illusion of being a crime writer.
Maybe next time I watch “Hammett”, I’ll like it again. Maybe you’ll like it when you watch it. Maybe you won’t ever watch it. This film would like you to think it is just so damn enigmatic and I can’t decide whether it is or not. This film is a well crafted toy. If you are stuck in a room with it on a wet weekend (if we Australians will ever know such a thing again) it will prove a distraction. Don’t bother hassling the man at the video store. He won’t have heard of it anyway. Maybe you should go to a different shop.
By the way, this is a film primarily about a man’s growing disillusionment. I think I have nailed its tone perfectly. Maybe if you have enjoyed the review, this is the film for you. If you can identify with a man so bruised by life that he retreats into a shell you might just identify with Hammett. Maybe the fact that I’m still wrestling with my feelings about this film marks it out as something special.
Sometimes I like this film. Sometimes I don’t. I’m big enough that I can contradict myself.
| 77 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by JohnDoe
Film & TV on DVD
We must disagree on thsi one, I really enjoyteh film and though I concur its not Wender's best, its still worth a screening at least.
Comment by Bob Short