Skip to main content

Somewhere out there is a lady who I think will never be a nun.

The Sound of Music
(1965)

(SPOILERS) One of the most successful movies ever made – and the most successful musical – The Sound of Music has earned probably quite enough unfiltered adulation over the years to drown out the dissenting voices, those that denounce it as an inveterately saccharine, hollow confection warranting no truck. It’s certainly true that there are impossibly nice and wholesome elements here, from Julie Andrews’ career-dooming stereotype governess to the seven sonorous children more than willing to dress up in old curtains and join her gallivanting troupe. Whether the consequence is something insidious in its infectious spirit is debatable, but I’ll admit that it manages to ensnare me. I don’t think I’d seen the movie in its entirety since I was a kid, and maybe that formativeness is a key brainwashing facet of its appeal, but it retains its essential lustre just the same.

Perhaps most impressive is that The Sound of Music is a three-hour musical that barely drags, and the drama of the piece propels it even when the – mostly very good, and ludicrously ear-wormy – songs aren’t front and centre. Very loosely based on Maria von Trapp’s 1949 memoir The Story of the Trapp Family Singers, the tale made it to the screen after a German film and sequel and the diversion of a planned US version into a Rogers and Hammerstein stage musical; it then found its way to Fox – who paid the equivalent of $10m for it – and quality adaptors in the form of Ernest Lehman and Robert Wise (both of whom collaborated on West Side Story). The latter was Lehman’s first choice, replacing William Wyler after doubts about his commitment surfaced.

What makes the picture interesting in part is the marriage of the shamelessly sugary with the “stark” (in family-viewing terms) spectre of fascism forever changing an idyllic way of life; the Von Trapps, and the audience, will always have those wonderful songs, but they’re brought to life on the doorstep of the devastation of their (luxuriant) way of life. Geoff Andrews in Time Out noted the lure of the material, despite its “reactionary” nature (a woman’s place being in the home, mothering etc), and suggested “the threat of Nazism is better evoked than in Cabaret”. It’s notable that, once the Captain (Christopher Plummer) and Maria (Julia Andrews) declare their feelings for each other, the world comes crashing down around them. Subsequently, there are only reprises of songs, and Wise (expertly) adopts the pacing of a suspense thriller as they are force to flee the country by way of a folk festival.

Much was said about reducing the “sweetness and sentimentality” of the stage version, from Wise and Lehman, and from Andrews too. Which didn’t prevent the brickbats, even from Plummer, who loathed the entire experience (“The Sound of Mucus”), loathed Andrews’ Miss Disney-ness (like “being hit over the head with a big Valentine’s Day card every day”) and sought comfort in the local victuals (I doubt he particularly relished having been dubbed either). His character remains the only lead not entirely unfrozen by Maria’s presence (Andrews is said to have credited his cynicism with keeping the picture – relatively – from indulging too much sentiment).

The Captain ought, by rights, to get on with the Nazis like a house on fire; he’s a humourless authoritarian rigidly disciplining his children for the benefit of the family unit (“The children don’t play, they march”). But Lehman takes care from the outset to stress that, whatever his domestic demeanour, the Captain has no sympathy with such doctrines. He wants shot of Rolfe (Daniel Truhitte), not because he’s wooing Liesl (Charmian Carr) – although that doesn’t help – but because he’s a Brownshirt. He also makes no bones about expressing his feelings to Herr Zeller (Ben Wright), leading directly to his receiving special treatment. At the conclusion, Lehman doubles down on portraying the divide as the Captain pleads with Rolfe, telling him “You’ll never be one of them” – a brown rag to a bull – and the latter reveals he has become a super Nazi when he summons his fellow Brownshirts.

It may be down to Plummer in part, but for me, the melting of the Captain’s heart is very sudden and not entirely persuasive (“You’ve brought music back into the house. I’d forgotten”). Indeed, the only conflict really arises from the brief machinations of the Baroness (Eleanor Parker), who has the good grace to admit defeat when she sees the writing on the wall. Elsewhere, the child’s eye view of the fascist threat is somewhat cloying (“Everybody’s cross these days, darling”; “Maybe the flag with the black spider on it makes people nervous”), but still infinitely preferable to the Roberto Benigni effect. The underlying message then, is surely that, if only Julie Andrews could have personally serenaded Adolf, all this might have been avoided. Which is to ignore the essential diktats of Hegelian dialectic, but this is a family musical.

In terms of the cast then, I can see how someone else might have been a better choice than Plummer (the mooted Connery could have been interesting), but he creates an undeniable tension (Pauline Kael, who I’ll come to, suggested “Even the monstrously ingenious technicians who made this movie couldn’t put together a convincing mate for Super-Goody Two-Shoes”; Plummer’s performance is “sinister, unpleasant, archly decadent”). Andrews is sickly sweet and super mumsy, more so here than in the more heightened and slightly brusquer, kindly-authoritarian realm of Mary Poppins. The actress might be likeable, but she isn’t loveable; she’s just too wholesome, sincere and lacking in the remotest trace of guile or edge. Thus, the only fair retort is the realisation that she fits the material tonally.

I was most taken with Charmian Carr as a lad (21 playing 16), and it bears noting Plummer was too. I hadn’t realised until now that’s TV’s Spider-Man as Friedrich. Richard Haydn is likeable as the capitalist-yet-stalwart-where-it-counts Max, while Parker brings some poise to the thankless role of the third wheel (“My dear, is there anything you can’t do?”) The kids are largely anonymous, though, aside from the oldest and youngest (Kym Karath: I want to show her my finger). Their motivation is also largely a wash. “How else can we get father’s attention?” they comment of treating previous governesses terribly; no need for probing psychoanalysis there.

I mentioned the change in tone and pace of the last forty minutes, and it’s marked how the Rogers & Hammerstein numbers fizzle at this stage. Something Good (the serenade) and Climb Ev’ry Mountain (Mother abbess, Peggy Wood’s song) are nothing special, and about the only point you might find yourself looking at your watch. And yes, I could do without the “Cuckoo” start of So Long, Farewell. Both times. But there’s a reason this soundtrack outsold every Beatles album except Sergeant Pepper during the 60s (and was the bestselling UK album in 1965, 1966 and 1968).

I should also mention that the last time I sat through The Sound of Music, it would have been a pan-and-scan, and I was consequently hugely impressed by the work of Wise and cinematographer Ted D McCord (his penultimate film) on this occasion. This is surely one of the most beautifully shot musicals ever shot, the more impressive for the seamless marriage of location and sets (a rarity during this era).

Kael, as I mentioned, was decidedly not seduced. Or rather, she clearly was but resisted it with every fibre of her pen tip (or clatter of her keys). Her diatribe is very familiar in essence, one those yearning for a past period (just the way the 1960s are now similarly summoned). She opined that its success and that of the “wholesome” it epitomises “makes it even more difficult for anyone to try to do anything worth doing, anything relevant to the modern world, anything inventive or expressive”.

Now, one might apply this weary resignation to superhero movies sucking the oxygen out of the auditorium (or plandemics, other than in China, natch) but fast forward a few short years and the invasion of the New Hollywood proved her argument nonsense (“The more money these ‘wholesome’ movies make, the less wholesome will the state of American movies be”). What was actually being seen, as others have documented, was the musical’s – along with that of the period epic, although by about his point that had spluttered and collapsed, largely thanks to Cleopatra – veneration as an answer to the might of television. By 1970, that was largely over, due to several costly flops, and it would be darker-tinged versions (Cabaret, Fiddler on the Roof) that kept what tattered flag there was left flying.

Kael questioned if The Sound of Music was “a tribute to ‘freshness’ that is mechanically engineered, so shrewdly calculated that the background music rises, the already soft focus blurs and melts, and, upon the instant, you can hear all the noses blowing in the theatre?” Further still, “The worst despots in history, the most cynical purveyors of mass culture respond at this level and may feel pleased at how tender-hearted they reallyare because they do”. Kael suggested the movie could only offend those who “loathe being manipulated in this way and are aware of how cheap and ready-made are the responses we are made to feel”, those who object to being turned into “emotional and aesthetic imbeciles when we hear ourselves humming those sickly, goody-goody songs”. She’s saying she hates herself for being carried along by its good vibrations, basically.

The question that follows, then, is why The Sound of Music merits such an excoriation. It’s a musical. Of course its mechanical and engineered. A few years later, Kael could be found singing the praises of Oliver! about as saccharine and wholesome a retelling of Dickens you could imagine (it even lets off Fagin). But The Sound of Music, “the sugar-coated lie that people seem to want to eat” and its “luxurious falseness” is really to blame. Worse still (bizarrely, and bafflingly, particularly from a movie critic) it makes “honest work almost impossible” such that “people who accept this kind of movie tend to resent work”. Okay…

Still, her take on Andrews is devastatingly on point (“The perfect, perky schoolgirl, the adorable tomboy, the gawky colt. Sexless, inhumanly happy, the sparkling maid, a mind as clean and well brushed as her teeth”). If one wishes to drill down to the truth in her statements, its merely that the movie industry is always going to plough wholesale into selling whatever makes them money at whatever time. But that will be sugar-coated one moment and riddled with Bonnie and Clyde bullets the next. Yes, it will try to sell agendas (wokeness right now, for example), but unless you make that pill tasty (a spoonful of sugar) it’s going to be rejected for its unvarnished, Oscar-laden absence of public interest.

So I come away giving thumbs up to The Sound of Music. Yes, both of them. It’s an absurd fantasy, for sure, but it’s a great musical. Plausibility wise, I was more perplexed by the logistics of making and producing the Lonely Goatherd puppet show than how impossibly nice Maria is. Perhaps, like Max, the movie makes of each of us “a very charming sponge”, but it’s hardly alone in movies across all eras in that regard.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe he had one too many peanut butter and fried banana sandwiches.

3000 Miles to Graceland (2001) (SPOILERS) The kind of movie that makes your average Tarantino knockoff look classy, 3000 Miles to Graceland is both aggressively unpleasant and acutely absent any virtues, either as a script or a stylistic exercise. The most baffling thing about it is how it attracted Kevin Costner and Kurt Russell, particularly since both ought to have been extra choosy at this point, having toplined expensive bombs in the previous half decade that made them significantly less bankable names. And if you’re wondering how this managed to cost the $62m reported on Wiki, it didn’t; Franchise Pictures, one of the backers, was in the business of fraudulently inflating budgets .

I must remind you that the scanning experience is usually a painful one.

Scanners (1981) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg has made a career – albeit, he may have “matured” a little over the past few decades, so it is now somewhat less foregrounded – from sticking up for the less edifying notions of evolution and modern scientific thought. The idea that regress is, in fact, a form of progress, and unpropitious developments are less dead ends than a means to a state or states as yet unappreciated. He began this path with some squeam-worthy body horrors, before genre hopping to more explicit science fiction with Scanners , and with it, greater critical acclaim and a wider audience. And it remains a good movie, even as it suffers from an unprepossessing lead and rather fumbles the last furlong, cutting to the chase when a more measured, considered approach would have paid dividends.

You seem particularly triggered right now. Can you tell me what happened?

Trailers The Matrix Resurrections   The Matrix A woke n ? If nothing else, the arrival of The Matrix Resurrections trailer has yielded much retrospective back and forth on the extent to which the original trilogy shat the bed. That probably isn’t its most significant legacy, of course, in terms of a series that has informed, subconsciously or otherwise, intentionally or otherwise, much of the way in which twenty-first century conspiracy theory has been framed and discussed. It is however, uncontested that a first movie that was officially the “best thing ever”, that aesthetically and stylistically reinvigorated mainstream blockbuster cinema in a manner unseen again until Fury Road , squandered all that good will with astonishing speed by the time 2003 was over.

We’re looking into a possible pattern of nationwide anti-Catholic hate crimes.

Vampires aka John Carpenter’s Vampires (1998) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter limps less-than-boldly onward, his desiccated cadaver no longer attentive to the filmic basics of quality, taste, discernment, rhyme or reason. Apparently, he made his pre-penultimate picture to see if his enthusiasm for the process truly had drained away, and he only went and discovered he really enjoyed himself. It doesn’t show. Vampires is as flat, lifeless, shoddily shot, framed and edited as the majority of his ’90s output, only with a repellent veneer of macho bombast spread on top to boot.

White nights getting to you?

Insomnia (2002) (SPOILERS) I’ve never been mad keen on Insomnia . It’s well made, well-acted, the screenplay is solid and it fits in neatly with Christopher Nolan’s abiding thematic interests, but it’s… There’s something entirely adequateabout it. It isn’t pushing any kind of envelope. It’s happy to be the genre-bound crime study it is and nothing more, something emphasised by Pacino’s umpteenth turn as an under-pressure cop.

Maybe I’m a heel who hates guys who hate heels.

Crimewave (1985) (SPOILERS) A movie’s makers’ disowning it doesn’t necessarily mean there’s nothing of worth therein, just that they don’t find anything of worth in it. Or the whole process of making it too painful to contemplate. Sam Raimi’s had a few of those, experiencing traumas with Darkman a few years after Crimewave . But I, blissfully unaware of such issues, was bowled over by it when I caught it a few years after its release (I’d hazard it was BBC2’s American Wave 2 season in 1988). This was my first Sam Raimi movie, and I was instantly a fan of whoever it was managed to translate the energy and visual acumen of a cartoon to the realm of live action. The picture is not without its problems – and at least some of them directly correspond to why it’s so rueful for Raimi – but that initial flair I recognised still lifts it.

Remember. Decision. Consequence.

Day Break (2006) (SPOILERS) Day Break is the rare series that was lucky to get cancelled. And not in a mercy-killing way. It got to tell its story. Sure, apparently there were other stories. Other days to break. But would it have justified going there? Or would it have proved tantalising/reticent about the elusive reason its protagonist has to keep stirring and repeating? You bet it would. Offering occasional crumbs, and then, when it finally comes time to wrap things up, giving an explanation that satisfies no one/is a cop out/offers a hint at some nebulous existential mission better left to the viewer to conjure up on their own. Best that it didn’t even try to go there.

You absolute horror of a human being.

As Good as it Gets (1997) (SPOILERS) James L Brooks’ third Best Picture Oscar nomination goes to reconfirm every jaundiced notion you had of the writer-director-producer’s capacity for the facile and highly consumable, low-cal, fast-food melodramatic fix with added romcom lustre. Of course, As Good as it Gets was a monster hit, parading as it does Jack in a crackerjack, attention-grabbing part. But it’s a mechanical, suffocatingly artificial affair, ponderously paced (a frankly absurd 139 minutes) and infused with glib affirmations and affections. Naturally, the Academy lapped that shit up, because it reflects their own lack of depth and perception (no further comment is needed than Titanic winning the big prize for that year).

You cut my head off a couple of dozen times.

Boss Level (2021) (SPOILERS) Lest you thought it was nigh-on impossible to go wrong with a Groundhog Day premise, Joe Carnahan, in his swaggering yen for overkill, very nearly pulls it off with Boss Level . I’m unsure quite what became of Carnahan’s early potential, but he seems to have settled on a sub-Tarantino, sub-Bay, sub-Snyder, sub-Ritchie butch bros aesthetic, complete with a tin ear for dialogue and an approach to plotting that finds him continually distracting himself, under the illusion it’s never possible to have too much. Of whatever it is he’s indulging at that moment.

I dreamed about a guy in a dirty red and green sweater.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) (SPOILERS) I first saw A Nightmare on Elm Street a little under a decade after its release, and I was distinctly underwhelmed five or so sequels and all the hype. Not that it didn’t have its moments, but there was an “It’ll do” quality that reflects most of the Wes Craven movies I’ve seen. Aside from the postmodern tease of A New Nightmare – like Last Action Hero , unfairly maligned – I’d never bothered with the rest of the series, in part because I’m just not that big a horror buff, but also because the rule that the first is usually the best in any series, irrespective of genre, tends to hold out more often than not. So now I’m finally getting round to them, and it seemed only fair to start by giving Freddy’s first another shot. My initial reaction holds true.