West Side Story (1961)

Long on Superb Song and Dance; Short on Drama

★★★⋆☆

3½ Stars; MPAA Rating: Approved
Director: Robert Wise (dance director: Jerome Robbins)

West Side Story originated in a Broadway Musical of the same name which did well, but it was the movie that propelled it into a second run and much greater notoriety. The film garnered 11 Academy award nominations, winning 10 of them. However, it's very important to note among all those nominations, Best Actor and Best Actress were glaringly not among them (the singing for both was dubbed). It hasn't withstood the test of time as well as some other highly acclaimed film musicals from the 1960's. The plot is shamelessly based on Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, reset into mid-1950's era New York City tenement gangs (Jets and Sharks), the manner of which hasn't helped its aging.

What attracted so much attention from the academy? Put it into context in 1961. West Side Story was a huge break in the musical genre from the typical meringue and whipped cream musicals of the 1940's and 1950's, some of which were thinly veiled showcases for ballroom dance pairs like Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire, or a spectacular musical revue, and others of which featured very traditional song and dance. It contained syncopated rhythms and modern dance routines with a superb musical score by Leonard Bernstein. The style of the song and dance routines is completely different. Unfortunately, what could have been a more powerful movie was overwhelmed by the dance director, Jerome Robbins, not knowing when to call "cut" and let the movie move on. We end up with a film filled mostly by song and long dance routines at the expense of a potentially compelling dramatic story. The result is the drama being a vehicle shell to carry a song and dance spectacle instead of the singing and dancing being used to carry and punctuate the drama. Contrast it with the 1965 Best Picture, The Sound of Music (even though its Rodgers and Hammerstein music is much less edgier), 1972 Best Picture nominee Cabaret, 1979 Best Picture nominee All That Jazz, or with the 2002 Best Picture, Chicago. All these have more substance to their drama with song/dance that supports it instead of displacing it.

Impressively different music and dance when theatrically released in 1961, its song and dance are exceptional. However, the story's drama is stunted by it dominating the film, and it has suffered from that over the years as the edge to its music and dance has worn off.

MPAA Rating Note:
West Side Story was produced prior to the MPAA's rating tiers. Films were either "approved" and issued a certificate number or they weren't using the restrictive Hays Code that was strictly enforced in 1961. It was a "one size fits all" system, and theaters other than some "art houses" that specialized in foreign and small independent films would not exhibit movies that were not approved (with some very rare exceptions), nor would many newspapers carry advertising for films that were not MPAA "approved."

Kapò (1960)

WWII Concentration Camp Setting Examining
Values, Ethics, Morality and Survival

★★★★☆

4 Stars; MPAA Rating: Unrated (see rating note)
Director: Gillo Pontecorvo

Gillo Pontecorvo, one of Italy's best directors, made so very few films. The consensus is he was so fearful of not being able to do a film exactly right that it paralyzed his ability to start moving toward the production of one. Thus a half-dozen years separate this film from his next one, his seminal "The Battle of Algiers." We see a similar style, though, with his use of B&W in nearly a newsreel or documentary style of cinematography to convey the story visually. Both this and The Battle of Algiers received well deserved nominations for Academy Best Foreign Language Film Oscars.

The following review contains some spoilers . . .

A young Susan Strasberg, who had played Anne Frank in the Broadway stage Diary of Anne Frank production (but not in the film), plays the leading role of a 14 year old French Jewish girl living in Paris. On the way home from a piano lesson she witnesses her parents being rounded up for deportation to a concentration camp. In spite of her parents' pleadings to run away and hide, she runs toward them and is forced onto the truck. At the concentration camp, the children are separated from their parents and the adults are divided into groups. A young boy tells her they (the children) are all going to be killed the next day as he overheard SS guards discussing it. She seizes an opportunity to escape the shed and tries to find her parents. Instead, she's taken in by a non-Jewish criminal prisoner who turns her over to a prisoner doctor that gives her the identity of a deceased criminal prisoner (clothing and tattoo). Jewish internees wore yellow stars of David; non-Jewish wore inverted triangles with the color indicating criminal or political. The next morning she witnesses the naked children she had escaped from and her naked parents (with other adults) being herded off to their death in the gas chambers.

With a new identity as Nicole, a non-Jewish criminal prisoner, she stands a much better chance of survival compared to the Jewish and most of the political prisoners. The desire for survival results in her providing sexual services for the camp guards, and eventually becoming a Kapo, a prisoner-guard. The SS that operated the camps were insidious, using prisoners as prisoner supervisors and first line guards with billy-clubs, rewarding them with better food, better clothing and not having to perform hard labor. They favored using the criminal prisoners as Kapos. Some of them became notoriously brutal and aided in selections of those who would be exterminated. In this respect, Pontecorvo portrays the role of the Kapo with some accuracy, albeit omitting some of the severe brutality some Kapos inflicted.

As the war progresses, a group of Soviet Red Army POWs is interred in another section of the same camp. A clandestine relationship develops between Nicole (Strasberg) and one of the Soviet POWs. Ultimately, she is confronted with what she has become. This is the collision of her underlying values and morals with a fiercely strong desire and will to survive that finally comes to a head when it is clear the SS will not evacuate the camp to another further west, but liquidate all its prisoners there before they can be liberated by the advancing Soviet Army.

The result is a film that examines the conflict between the will to survive with moral and ethical values, through the eyes of a 14-16 year old girl (the film spans 2 years of internment). It's easy to lose sight of her age as the film progresses although there's a couple small reminders late in the movie. The one aspect that seemed contrived was the nature of the clandestine relationship she formed with the Soviet POW and how it was maintained. Unlike the rest of the plot that depicted the brutality of the concentration camps (with obvious restraint) this aspect of it wasn't entirely credible, but I also don't see how to get to the film's climax at the end without it. The ultimate questions this movie should raise in the viewer are what limits there are, or should be, on compromising values, ethics and morals in order to survive in that environment. It's most definitely not a "happy ending" film, but exposes the despair, nihilism and desperation one would expect to find in concentration camp internees.

MPAA Rating Note:
Like most foreign films, this one has never been submitted to the MPAA, and therefore holds an "Unrated" status. There is considerable restraint in not showing some things graphically on camera, but Pontecorvo leaves no doubt about what has happened out of camera view. I believe he did this judiciously to keep it from being heavily censored for violence content. Remember this movie was released in 1960 with many countries exerting much stricter control over content (including the MPAA in the USA) than is found today. In spite of this restraint I would give it a very hard PG-13 due to its depiction of WWII concentration camp brutality and would certainly use judgement about letting anyone under 15 view it, the minimum age a number of European countries have issued for it.

Through a Glass Darkly (1961)

One of Bergman's Strongest Films With Substantial Depth

★★★★★

5 Stars; MPAA Rating: Unrated (see rating note)
Director: Ingmar Bergman

Film as Art:
This is not a commercial entertainment film. It is intellectual, perhaps more than some of his others. If viewed superficially as a passive observer it presents a story that comes across as a flat narrative with a partially tragic ending. It has considerable depth in its metaphors, symbolism and underlying themes. That's where its power resides.

Bergman's Upbringing and Background:
Ingmar Bergman's background is important to understanding his films better. He was the son of a very strict Church of Sweden (Lutheran) priest who rose to become the royal chaplain to the Swedish royal court. Through a Glass Darkly continues Bergman's wrestling with the existence of God, and what He is, if He does exist. Bergman doesn't provide answers, but he does provoke questions. It's a theme that pervades other films preceding this one. Most notable is "The Seventh Seal" in which a knight wants confirmation of God's existence when Death comes to claim him, a question Death will not answer. Feeling he has not lead a worthy life, having spent it in futility with great disillusionment in The Crusades, delays Death with a chess game. Without spoiling it, the knight ultimately does accomplish something he feels worthy, and Death ultimately claims him, but without knowing an answer to his question of God's existence. A year prior is "The Virgin Spring" in which the father, whose daughter was robbed (of her fine clothing), raped and murdered, and who has wreaked revenge in killing the three who raped and killed her. Set in medieval Sweden between as it was being Christianized, we see a mix of heathen and early Christian practices. The father ultimately questions how God could allow such a cruel and painful death to his innocent young daughter, and allow him to murder her murderers in revenge.

The Film Title's Biblical Reference:
In "Through a Glass Darkly" its title references the new testament biblical metaphor from First Corinthians 13, the first epistle written by Paul and Sosthenes to the Christians in Corinth. Exact wording depends on translation and interpretation of "glass" as being a glass pane or a metal mirror (and some translations use "mirror"). Either way, what was used as "glass" then is assuredly not what we know to be glass today, less than clear and lacking flat surfaces. Mirrors then were polished metal plates (usually brass) that often came with a sponge containing fine pumice to polish it. They also were not perfectly flat. Looking through a "glass" or at a reflection in a mirror was known to give distorted images lacking fine detail and dimmer than what one would see directly. The "glass" or "mirror" interpretation doesn't matter, as it's the metaphor's meaning that's important. Paul and Sosthenes tell the Corinthians in this chapter that 'love" is the most important among the virtues, overriding all others, and characterizes what it is, but that we cannot know God completely in our worldly existence.

The Film:
The film has a "chamber" cast of only four, ostensibly on a remote island holiday, consisting of a widower father a young teenage son, his married daughter, and the daughter's husband. The tiny cast allows character development in substantial depth and the nature of these characters are not only revealed by their own actions, they are reflected in the dialog of others (hence the film's title). It isn't long before this family of four reveals itself comprised of dysfunctional members, with its dysfunctions amplified by the daughter's schizophrenia. She had very recently been treated but is beginning to relapse with bouts of increasing severity (the specific disease isn't stated but the symptoms are classic schizophrenia). Her expectation with the people she sees and voices she hears, is a coming of God for her with those people and that she must obey them. Ultimately her "vision" of God . . . or a god of some type, or perhaps a demon . . . as imagined in her schizophrenic delusions (interpret this as you will) . . . is revealed at the end, with another revelation of what the father considers God to be in a dialog with his son that immediately follows and ends the film. Bergman's interpretation of the content and meaning of First Corinthians 13 is played out with each of the characters expressing different portions of it. The audience is left to accept or reject it, in whole or in part, each to their own interpretation of God and Love, as they also perceive it for themselves, through a glass, darkly. That God remains "silent" throughout is pervasive of Bergman's films, not answering the questions his characters ask, but leaving his characters to answer those for themselves. The daughter's "revelation" is clearly a schizophrenic delusion, but even in the depths of her disease and psychological breakdown it's clear she also wants her question(s) about the nature of God to be answered.

This is a film, due to its depth, that bears watching more than once, especially for English-speakers that must use the subtitles, the dubbed English dialog track, or both. I recommend using both as their translations from Swedish to English have some differences. I found it easier to comprehend the film with these dialog interpretations combined which give a better sense of the original Swedish dialog's intent and meaning.

Bergman Film Casting (in general):
He spent many of his years directing plays during the autumn, winter and early spring, and directing his films during the theater's off season during the summer. Many of the same actors used in his stage plays were also used in his films, including this one.

MPAA Rating Note:
The MPAA tiered rating system as we know it today did not exist in 1961. Films were evaluated under a severely restrictive "one size fits all" Hays Code, and were issued a serial numbered certificate that would be displayed in the credits if it passed all their censorship criteria. Most theaters would not rent films that failed getting a certificate, and avoided "unrated" films (those not submitted) unless there was considerable critical acclaim and public demand (which did occur, but was rare).Through a Glass Darkly is unrated by the MPAA because it has never been submitted, which should not be a surprise. It was not made for US commercial distribution. Like most foreign films it was generally shown in art houses, and those theaters didn't care if a film was MPAA approved as most of their fare were not. Given widespread knowledge about its content now I doubt it ever will be as it costs $$$ to have the MPAA rate a movie. I would predict a PG-13 rating if submitted today although it's conceivable that it might be granted a badly misguided PG purely on lack of violence, lack of cursing, and its lack of explicit sexual content (with allusion in dialog for a very mature encounter). Its subject matter is intellectually quite mature and would be lost on most younger than about 15-16 years old. Those are the minimum ages in the UK, Finland and Sweden ratings for this movie that have similar but not identical criteria to the current MPAA system.