Skip to main content

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion
(1975)

(SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

If Connery seems unlikely casting – Omar Shariff turned the part down, obviously; Anthony Quinn was also considered – he must have thought he was onto something in terms of Middle Eastern grooves, as he then played a Saudi Arabian in the following year’s The Next Man. Connery’s as appealingly, ruggedly Scottish as the leader of a band of Berbers as he would be playing a very Scottish Spanish/Egyptian peacock in Highlander a decade later (Nadim Sawalha apparently had to give up in his attempts at teaching Connery an Arabic accent). Indeed, it’s his presence that really fuels the picture’s watchability. Which it needs to, since the back end turns on the not-Stockholm-Syndrome-really feelings of his former captives when he himself is held prisoner.

But Connery’s “lion”, opting to kidnap women and children because he discovers he has little recourse if he is to garner attention in an age where combatants no longer look each other in the eye while fighting – a very Milius, “When men were men” sentiment – is only half of the movie. The picture is loosely inspired by the 1904 Perdicaris affair, which saw President Roosevelt intervene in a kidnapping case in Morocco, a decision regarded as having helped with his re-election (Milius out-and-out makes it a canny publicity stunt on Roosevelt’s part, and let’s face it, short of actually vote-rigging, it’s a tried-and-tested formula).

Brian Keith’s Roosevelt is all-man, shootin’ and admirin’ stuffed bears: a man after Milius’ heart. But perhaps because the writer-director is clearly so in awe of the guy (who in turn develops respect for Raisuli) this plotline never feels as if it’s making fulfilling its potential. John Huston is good value as Secretary of State John Hay, but Huston always is. The President sends in the South Atlantic Squadron, must deal with a slippery sultan (Marc Zuber) and Raisuli’s brother the Bashaw (Vladek Sheybal). When there’s a betrayal, and Raisuli is captured by the Germans and Moroccans having been promised he will be unharmed, the Americans end up fighting the Germans, represented by Von Roerkel (most famous as the egg-sucking German tank commander in A Fistful of Dynamite).

This coming in a film where Roosevelt’s staff speculate “A world war. Now that would be something to go out on”. Making Milius’ comment, for all his flag-waving, that “You can take the politics to be any way you want, for or against the United States” actually quite reasonable. He’s clearly an interventionist, but his depictions are not without a sense of humour, as the final letter to Roosevelt suggests (“I like the lion must remain in my place, while you, like the wind, will never know yours”).

In his original conception, Milius wanted Katherine Hepburn for the kidnapped grandmother, changing this to younger mum Eden Pedecaris in order to get financing. He had Julie Christie in mind, but had to settle for Faye Dunaway, who then dropped out and was replaced by Candice Bergen. Bergen’s fine, but she doesn’t especially stand out (Milius opined that her range was limited and she was only concerned with how she looked. He also called Connery “sour and dour” but liked his performance; the feeling was sufficiently mutual that Sean brought Milius in for script doctoring duties on The Hunt for Red October). The director clearly enjoyed having Eden’s children (Simon Harrison and Polly Gottesman) see this as a grand adventure, complete with beheadings (“I had to kill those two or I could not trust the other two” explains Raisuli), cut-out tongues and ensuring swords have blood on them for appearances’ sake; Raisuli takes on the status of father figure, one who never had any intention of killing women and children.

Jerry Goldsmith provides the picture with a suitably rich, expansive (and Oscar-nominated) score, while Billy Williams’ cinematography brings the hoped-for Lawrence of Arabia vibe. That film had a much more persuasive screenplay, though, and commanding lead character. The Wind and the Lion is unable to fully embrace that boy’s own vibe, because the overgrown boy calling the shots ultimately gets in its way.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.