Skip to main content

You didn’t come here to talk to me about button mushrooms and birds.

The Ipcress File
(1965)

(SPOILERS) It’s ironic that Harry Palmer is seen as the down-at-heel, scruffy sibling of James Bond (from then Bond co-producer Harry Saltzman) – the anti-Bond as Variety put it – since, in The Ipcress File at least, there may none of the opulence that comes with grand sets and villainous lairs, but it’s visually more stylish than any Bond movie, despite the drab London scenery and non-descript interiors (legendary Bond designer Ken Adam was nevertheless on hand to offer verisimilitude – he won the BAFTA over the also-nominated Goldfinger and “Cubby wouldn’t talk to me for the rest of the day”). Michael Caine’s career-making performance as kitchen-sink spy Harry Palmer may be the most obvious clue to the picture’s success (which included the sometimes-dubious honour of the BAFTA for Best British Film), but it’s Sidney J Furie’s direction that engraves it on your memory.

Ross: He’s a little insubordinate, but a good man.

That, and the fabulously jangly, cimbalom-driven John Barry score (“You’ve never seen a great movie with duff music” claimed Caine, just begging for examples where he’s proved wrong). Not everyone was impressed by Furie’s approach. While Variety generally rated the picture, it noted that Furie “sometimes… gets carried away into arty-crafty fields”, while Pauline Kael referred to it as “overwrought (and rather silly)”; it’s ironic that such an avowed De Palma advocate should have taken issue, as Furie’s approach strikes me very much akin to the results we might have seen had De Palma done a Le Carré adaptation (except Len Deighton – from whose novel this is adapted – delivers much more pulpy fun than Le Carré would ever serve up; spying is a serious business, not to be travelled lightly or frivolously).

Christopher Bray, author of bios on Caine and Connery, among others, expressed his own distaste for Furie’s approach in an essay for the Blu-ray. Predictably, it’s all gush for Caine, and how he manages to overcome his director’s gratuitous approach, with its “gimmicky framing and ponderous wide-angle shots”. Wait, there’s more: “Without Caine’s (admittedly highly stylised) naturalism, The Ipcress File would look and feel very badly dated”. Dated perhaps, since the approach is hardly common today (overt style tends to be out) but not remotely badly. He adds that “Caine never lets Furie’s more absurd camera set-ups put him off his stride”. He then effectively assumes anyone who likes it must have a taste deficit, and Caine is accordingly just being kind when he advocates Furie’s efforts: “less partial viewers (than Caine) have rarely been won over by his pyrotechnic style”.

Dalby: It isn’t usual to read a B107 to its subject, Palmer, but I’m going to set you straight. “Insubordinate, insolent, a trickster. Perhaps with criminal tendencies.”
Palmer: Yes, that’s a pretty fair appraisal – sir.

For some then, the relentless, flashy frenzy is simply too much, and I can understand that, but for me, the picture is consistent in its skewed signature that it’s as much a defining character as Palmer himself. Everything is off-beam, not quite right, in this paranoid milieu, and the Dutch angles – a level plane simply won’t do at all – and deep focus serve to emphasise the yarn as both heightened and unsettling. As Caine put it, “He films the whole movie as if someone else was watching him, and that was the idea”.

One might question how, with this versatility, Sidney J Furie ended up helming endless Iron Eagle movies – and the especially ignominious Superman IV: The Quest for Peace – particularly since he admits to being not in the slightest bit technically minded. The key ingredient appears to have been veteran DP Otto Heller (The Ladykillers, Peeping Tom), who imaginatively interpreted Furie’s demands (both Furie and Peter Hunt effusively sung Heller’s praises on the DVD commentary track). Reportedly, the elaborate approach taken was a consequence of issues with the script (going slow with a production filmed in sequence enabled rewrites, although Caine said that, even if nobody else did, “I liked the script. I thought it was great”). Heller also photographed the far less attention-seeking sequel Funeral in Berlin (with the decidedly un-experimental Goldfinger director Guy Hamilton calling the shots).

Also on hand, emphasising the crisp, lean telling – in contrast to Bond’s tendency to leisurely bloat by this point, even given he was supervising editor on Thunderball too – is editor Hunt (later the On Her Majesty’s Secret Service director, by leaps and bounds the best Bond movie, and the best shot one). Hunt assembled the initial cut without Furie present; the stylistic quirks of the shooting having led to tensions with the volatile Saltzman, who didn’t understand what he was going for. Fortunately, Hunt did: “the camera angles and style of direction actually drew the viewer in rather than excluding them” (unless you’re Christopher Bray). After shooting was finished, Saltzman barred Furie from the editing room – Hunt’s cut was almost exactly what Furie wanted, though – and excluded him from the Cannes premiere (Caine, while acknowledging his producer’s temperament, stressed that Saltzman was always very nice to him, releasing him from his seven-year contract following the picture’s success).

Palmer: I’d sooner have my automatic.
Dalby: You’ll use the Colt.
Palmer: I’ll use the Colt.

British spy movies tend to wear dourness as a badge of pride (The Spy Who Came in from the Cold was the winner of the BAFTA the following year), which is commendable in its way, but The Ipcress File still feels as sharp as a tack and as fresh as when it was first released, in no small part because the robust screenplay (from WH Canaway and Z Cars veteran James Doran) is allied with a rarely summoned energy and flair. Furie proves you don’t need elaborate set pieces – or indeed very much in the way of typically heroic action – when intrigue drives the material and is backed up by a director intent to reinforce that.

Carswell: He seemed very pleased.
Palmer: Well, he’s got a right comical way of showing it.

And then there’s Caine – this was the movie that made him, although it was surely only a matter of an admittedly long time, given the way he seemingly knew everyone who was anyone in London by that point anyway (Deighton, Barry, Terence Stamp) – whose Palmer always has a ready quip in response to a reprimand from a superior (his cocky, breezy impudence is reflective of his (younger) generation, Beatles included), and makes no secret that he isn’t in this career for the sense of duty; he ends up in the MoD after being done for army black marketeering, and his priority on being moved from Ross’ (Guy Doleman) to Dalby’s (Nigel Green) section is “Any more money?” (he’s pleased that he’ll be able to purchase a new electric stove). But we quickly see that he has both initiative and little time for the wheels of bureaucracy (there’s an amusing emphasis on different file codes, requisitions and requests throughout).

Palmer: Courtney, I am going to cook you the best meal you have ever eaten.

And he likes cooking (“He looks like a fag” came protests from the US studio). And birds. As soon as he arrives in Dalby’s outfit, he sits himself next to Jean Courtney (Sue Lloyd), whom he subsequently plies with whisky and Mozart (after first believing the intruder in his flat is out to murderise him). Alas, he gets the brush off for the last word in wooing, having doubtless seen Tom Jones (“No thanks, I’m not hungry”); he’s more successful second time round, though.

Ross: I think they’re playing very well.
Palmer: Tell me who wins.

One of my favourite scenes finds Ross, trying to get information on what’s going on in Dalby’s division, “bump into” Palmer in a supermarket, where the latter is shopping for button mushrooms – a reminder of an era where imports weren’t on tap, and so certain tinned goods were the height of luxury. Ross is, of course, reliably superior in tone, but it works both ways. Ross may be an upper (officer) class, but Palmer is an aesthete, and is later entirely unimpressed by an army band taking a stab at Mozart during a tête-à-tête; there are different sorts of snobbery in evidence.

The Ipcress File offers many memorable lo-fi sequences, from Palmer being led through a warren of rooms and passageways to his new post with Dalby, to the public library reading room scene in which he attempts to deal with Grantby/ Bluejay (Frank Gatliff) and the ensuing scuffle with Housemartin (Oliver MacGreevy) shot from inside a telephone box. The plot is equal parts zeitgeist, taking in the brain drain (in contrast to the later Alternative 3, scientists are not disappearing to Mars) and MKUltra (IPCRESS itself is a brainwashing technique: Induction of Psychoneuroses by Conditioned Reflex under Stress, rendering the scientists subjected to it useless) via a sound effect that suggests the BBC Radiophonic Workshop in overdrive, having first set up shop in Syd Barret’s head; it’s an effective aural shorthand for an assault on the senses, similar to the ‘proton-proton scattering device” Radcliffe (Aubrey Richards) was working on when he was kidnapped, before being returned as damaged goods.

Dalby: Congratulations Palmer, you’ve just killed an American agent.

The screenplay is adept at remaining elusive with information – Jock Carswell (Gordon Jackson) happens (very conveniently) on the vital IPCRESS clue but then (less so) is shot before he can get to the bottom of it. There’s a subplot with Palmer falling under suspicion of the Americans (Thomas Baptiste’s pipe-smoking Barney) that never really goes anywhere, but the sleight of hand of Palmer being abducted to Albania (Hungary in the novel) – before it transpires that he’s been in London all along – is highly effective, probably more so than in the novel, where there’s already been some actualglobetrotting (taking in Pacific neutron bomb tests and Beirut). The refrain “Now listen to me. Listen to me” and Palmer, with the aid of a bloody nail, attempting to resist the technique (“My name is Harry Palmer!”) are rightly iconic, emblematic of the era of British film (such that the latter gave rise to “My name is Michael Caine”), and it’s an impressive torture-and-escape sequence, subjective and tense.

Palmer: I might have been killed, or driven stark raving mad.
Ross: That’s what you’re paid for.

Just as effective is the ongoing absence of anyone for Harry to trust; Jean is informing on him, Ross is manipulating him, Dalby is unreadable, until that is, he’s identified as the traitor. Doleman, who played Count Lippe the same year in Thunderball, is devastatingly dry as Colonel Ross, an entirely worthy sparring partner for Palmer (happily, he would return for both sequels – unhappily, he’s entirely peripheral). Jackson is also great value, doing a lot with a little, such that it’s genuinely sad when he’s revealed in his car, stationary after the traffic lights change, shot in the head.

Caine, who picked out Palmer’s name (Deighton expressly omits to give him one in any of his adventures), unsurprisingly chose to stick with the character through two sequels – like his pal Connery, he knew the importance of clasping gainful employment as closely as possible when it finally arrived – neither of which could equal his first venture, but nor where they anything to be embarrassed by. Which couldn’t be said of the two back-to-back '90s reunions with the character (with no involvement by Deighton); it isn’t really enough that Caine says the experience making them was so unhappy, he decided to retire (a promise he kept for all of five minutes before Jack Nicholson rang him up). Nevertheless, if you can ignore those two – and luckily, they’re pretty below the radar, too inconsequential even to be ranked in the company of the actor’s truly renowned duds – it’s fair to say that this will remain his defining character. Not Alfie, or Milo Tindle, or Peachy Carnehan or Hannah and her Sisters’ Elliot, Harry Brown, or even his Ebenezer Scrooge, can come close. He is Harry Palmer.




Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

You're waterboarding me.

The Upside (2017)
(SPOILERS) The list of US remakes of foreign-language films really ought to be considered a hiding to nothing, given the ratio of flops to unqualified successes. There’s always that chance, though, of a proven property (elsewhere) hitting the jackpot, and every exec hopes, in the case of French originals, for another The Birdcage, Three Men and a Baby, True Lies or Down and Out in Beverly Hills. Even a Nine Months, Sommersby or Unfaithful will do. Rather than EdTV. Or Sorcerer. Or Eye of the Beholder. Or Brick Mansions. Or Chloe. Or Intersection (Richard Gere is clearly a Francophile). Or Just Visiting. Or The Man with One Red Shoe. Or Mixed Nuts. Or Original Sin. Or Oscar. Or Point of No Return. Or Quick Change. Or Return to Paradise. Or Under Suspicion. Or Wicker Park. Or Father’s Day.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

You know what I think? I think he just wants to see one cook up close.

The Green Mile (1999)
(SPOILERS) There’s something very satisfying about the unhurried confidence of the storytelling in Frank Darabont’s two prison-set Stephen King adaptations (I’m less beholden to supermarket sweep The Mist); it’s sure, measured and precise, certain that the journey you’re being take on justifies the (indulgent) time spent, without the need for flashy visuals or ornate twists (the twists there are feel entirely germane – with a notable exception – as if they could only be that way). But. The Green Mile has rightly come under scrutiny for its reliance on – or to be more precise, building its foundation on – the “Magical Negro” trope, served with a mild sprinkling of idiot savant (so in respect of the latter, a Best Supporting Actor nomination was virtually guaranteed). One might argue that Stephen King’s magical realist narrative flourishes well-worn narrative ploys and characterisations at every stage – such that John Coffey’s initials are announcement enough of his …

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…

What you do is very baller. You're very anarchist.

Lady Bird (2017)
(SPOILERS) You can see the Noah Baumbach influence on Lady Bird, Greta Gerwig’s directorial debut, with whom she collaborated on Frances Ha; an intimate, lo-fi, post-Woody Allen (as in, post-feted, respected Woody Allen) dramedy canvas that has traditionally been the New Yorker’s milieu. But as an adopted, spiritual New Yorker, I suspect Gerwig honourably qualifies, even as Lady Bird is a love letter/ nostalgia trip to her home city of Sacramento.

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…

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

Kindly behove me no ill behoves!

The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990)
(SPOILERS) It’s often the case that industry-shaking flops aren’t nearly the travesties they appeared to be before the dust had settled, and so it is with The Bonfire of the Vanities. The adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s ultra-cynical bestseller is still the largely toothless, apologetically broad-brush comedy – I’d hesitate to call it a satire in its reconfigured form – it was when first savaged by critics nearly thirty years ago, but taken for what it is, that is, removed from the long shadow of Wolfe’s novel, it’s actually fairly serviceable star-stuffed affair that doesn’t seem so woefully different to any number of rather blunt-edged comedies of the era.

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.