Skip to main content

I'm no longer observing.


Altered States
(1980)

Ken Russell goes mainstream Hollywood, with pleasingly demented results. The late ‘70s and early ‘80s increasingly looks like a never-to-be-repeated golden era for science fiction, when invention and originality were par for the course. It’s difficult to imagine something so based on experimentation, and so experimental, being made today.


Russell was coming off several (unsuccessful) idiosyncratic biopics and was reportedly far down the list of choices for the film. Paddy Chayefsky had adapted his novel, based on the sensory deprivation work of scientist John C Lilly. Lilly’s experiments involved subjects spending periods of time in isolation tanks dosed up on psychoactive drugs. Critically, Chayefsky was on a high, having recently won an Oscar for Network, and reportedly hated what Russell did with his screenplay. Russell in turn claimed the writer was impossible to please. There’s no doubting the quality of the dialogue, which pays no concessions to the inattentive viewer and never feels the need to simplify or patronise (nor over-explain what can be surmised).


There’s little doubt that if you wanted a straight telling of a story, Russell’s not the guy to go to. And the hallucinatory scenes in the film are as amped up as you’d expect, full of (Christian) religious imagery and OTT back projection. The effect is sometimes just whacky and clichéd (the hell scenes lifted from Dante’s Inferno), at others weird and disturbing (Blair Brown behaving in the manner of the Komodo dragon William Hurt was fixated on moments before, a seven-eyed goat man suspended on a cross). 


Most impacting is the unsettling soundtrack, and ironically for someone better known for bludgeoning subtlety out of the screen, Russell exerts the strongest effect on the audience in the atmosphere he builds up before the (literally in one scene) fireworks begin; Hurt suspended in the tank, describing what he sees, and the incredulous reactions of his colleagues.


This was William Hurt’s big screen debut, and his natural tendency towards being a mass of neuroses percolates into a gripping central performance of a man with a grand obsession and tunnel vision to match. But the supporting players are superb too; Blair Brown’s understanding but pushed-away wife, the ever-cast-as-a sympathetic-boffin charm of Bob Balaban and a scene-stealing Charles Haid as the disbelieving and reluctant faculty supervisor.


Mason Parrish: I'm gonna show these to someone who can read them right, 'cause you're reading them wrong, that's all there is to it. Because no one is gonna tell me you de-differentiated your goddamn genetic structure for four goddamn hours and then reconstitued! I'm a professor of endocrinology at the Harvard Medical School. I'm an attending physician at the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital! I'm a contributing editor to the American Journal of Endocrinology and a I am a fellow and vice-president of the Eastern Association of Endocrinologists and president of the Journal Club! And I'm not going to listen to any more of your kabbalistic, quantum, friggin' dumb limbo mumbo jumbo! I'm gonna show these to a radiologist!


I hadn’t really taken in the ellipses of time in the opening sequences before. The film appears to begin in 1967, and really the party with everyone sharing joints to the sound of The Doors should have got that message across. Then there’s a leap of seven years and Hurt and Brown are married with kids, about to split up. The triptastic Mexico sequence follows before the main meat of the tale. We probably end up close to the time the film was made when all is said and done.


Thematically Altered States isn’t exactly subtle; here we have an individual so obsessed with finding the true self, the god within, that he can’t see the one meaningful aspect of his life (which inevitably involves saying those three words). That this doesn’t come across as trite is at least in part down to the performances, but also because the stakes involved never allow enough time for mawkishness (one can only dread what a Spielberg would have done with it). The moral seems slightly incongruous for the characterised infant terrible Russell, as it appears to encourage a position of limitation and restraint, of recognising that it is only through engagement with others and society as a whole that one can discover peace or comfort. The pursuit of knowledge for its own ends will result in destruction and mental disintegration. The central character forsakes his quest for (science-fuelled) spiritual enlightenment and retreats to a position of here-and-now humanism.


If Dick Smith’s physical effects look variable to todays eye, they have a tangibility that retains an impact. Hurt holding up a prosthetic-enhanced arm that is bulging and straining manages to be both fake-looking and alarming. But the later stages of his transformation, in particular the optically-enhanced corridor scenes at the climax still look incredible. 


Corridor shots are something of a motif throughout; Hurt first appears to Brown silhouetted in angelic light as he arrives at Balaban’s house, and later a similar but more subdued shot is used when she sees him following his regressed rampage (it must be noted that the caveman make-up is fairly unremarkable, but part of the problem may be that regressing to the state of primitive man isn’t that fascinating an idea in itself). 


The use of lighting effects also deserves a mention. In particular, the lightshow where Hurt is lost in the flotation tank and Brown has to rescue him recalls the striking white lighting that punched through doorways and windows in Spielberg’s Close Encounters (and later in Poltergeist).


There’s no doubt Altered States is replete with flaws, but they don’t prevent it from taking its place as a science fiction great. It’s such a peculiar and distinct film, a combination of two disparate personalities taking on already out-there material.  It was made at a time when studios were much more open to the genre in the hope they could have as big a hit as the one that other studio scored last month; despite the troubled production that relative freedom of expression shines through.

***** 


Here's the 1980 trailer:


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

It was one of the most desolate looking places in the world.

They Shall Not Grow Old (2018)
Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old, broadcast by the BBC on the centenary of Armistice Day, is "sold" on the attraction and curiosity value of restored, colourised and frame rate-enhanced footage. On that level, this World War I documentary, utilising a misquote from Laurence Binyon's poem for its title, is frequently an eye-opener, transforming the stuttering, blurry visuals that have hitherto informed subsequent generations' relationship with the War. However, that's only half the story; the other is the use of archive interviews with veterans to provide a narrative, exerting an effect often more impacting for what isn't said than for what is.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

It seemed as if I had missed something.

Room 237 (2012)
Stanley Kubrick’s meticulous, obsessive approach towards filmmaking was renowned, so perhaps it should be no surprise to find comparable traits reflected in a section of his worshippers. Legends about the director have taken root (some of them with a factual basis, others bunkum), while the air of secrecy that enshrouded his life and work has duly fostered a range of conspiracy theories. A few of these are aired in Rodney Ascher’s documentary, which indulges five variably coherent advocates of five variably tenuous theories relating to just what The Shining is really all about. Beyond Jack Nicholson turning the crazy up to 11, that is. Ascher has hit on a fascinating subject, one that exposes our capacity to interpret any given information wildly differently according to our disposition. But his execution, which both underlines and undermines the theses of these devotees, leaves something to be desired.

Part of the problem is simply one of production values. The audio tra…

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.