Skip to main content

You’re going to have a lot of trouble getting in… but you’ll never get out.

Point Blank

(SPOILERS) The Cliff’s Notes for Point Blank require one to note its nouvelle vague influence (fractured time lines and the ilk), but the likelihood is that anyone coming fresh to the film now will be fully au fait with its various stylistic and narrative devices, so assimilated are they into the mainstream. Still striking, however, is John Boorman’s stylistic sensibility, coming on like a noir comic strip brought to life, yet shot through with Technicolor purpose. It’s an existential mood piece, yes, but it’s translated into the language of an action spectacle, one with a particularly dark sense of humour.

Steven Soderbergh hosted a commentary track for the movie with director John Boorman (the latter’s Hollywood debut), in which he admits to having stolen from Point Blank many times. That much is plain, but his copying is characteristically Xerox-thin, absence the attitude and point of view brought to bear by Boorman and star Lee Marvin (as Walker). Just look at The Limey, also built around an out-of-time revenger and concise in its length. Yet contrastingly rather flaccid when it isn’t energised by a ferocious Terence Stamp, and bearing the tell-tale signs of its somewhat turbulent readjustments in order to shape it into a passably functional state on screen.

Soderberg referred to Point Blank as a memory film, and there’s no argument that it encourages a less than entirely literal approach to its proceedings. It’s there in the framing, the architecture, the lighting and the claustrophobic sparsity of inhabitants. Is this Walker’s dying revenge fantasy, having been shot on Alcatraz by erstwhile accomplice Rees (John Vernon)? Chris (Angie Dickinson) seems to think so: “You died at Alcatraz, alright”. Boorman offered no opinion, admitting Walker could just as easily be a shadow or a ghost as the live article. But the soundtrack, before diving into our protagonist’s mission to secure his $93,000, repeats “a dream… a dream”, and frequently returns to Walker’s “dying” moments while offering disorientating montages (the clothed/unclothed Walker and Chris). Chris’ sister (Sharon Acker) earlier recalls “Suddenly we were together” of their failed romance, as if to emphasise that none of this is happening outside of a spontaneous imagination.

Indeed, I was in minded of Nicolas Roeg’s juxtapositions, his blurring of subjective, objective, and time and place. And let’s not forget he and Donald Cammell made their directing debuts in the gangster milieu too, just a short time later. Although, I doubt Roeg would ever have considered making a genuine crime movie (Cammell certainly did).

Boorman also lends a propulsion to the Point Blank that’s at odds with the often indulgently less focussed milieu of the art movie; indeed, there’s an idea, one that will afflict you mightily if you check out the recent The Green Knight or any of Terrence Malick’s latter-day offerings, that for existential ramifications to be worthy, they must be slow, languid, devoid of dramatic engagement. Point Blank is a vibrant riposte to such a pseudy perspective (as is the cinema of Michael Mann, at its best anyway).

Indeed, the picture’s a delight in its kineticism, be it Walker’s percussive footsteps as he pursues his dogged quest down corridors and through streets and up tall buildings; is it a coincidence that the titles of the same year’s The Prisoner, the existential spy series par excellence, also began each episode with an audible march down a corridor? Walker breaks into Lynne’s apartment, brandishing his handgun, and blows away the bed (later, he will do the same to Brewster’s phone). There’s a fight – among film reels – at a psychedelic night club where the band’s “Ow!” performance forms a punchy accompaniment. Rees takes a tumble over the penthouse suite balcony, his bedsheet unravelling as he goes, as if in parody, a twisted inversion of a fairy tale.

Brewster (Carrol O’Connor) delivers a very funny remonstration of Walker’s behaviour – bridling against an enraged antagonist with a very big gun – in which he charges “You’re a very bad man, Walker. A very destructive man!” and all but mocks him for his inability to comprehend that the Organisation just does not parlay in cash. As Chris Peachment put it in Time Out, Walker, a ’50s anachronism – Robert Altman would later lean into something similar with The Long Goodbye – is “increasingly puzzled and frustrated when he finds there is no money, because the Organisation is the world of big business run by respectable men with wallets full of credit cards” (credit cards soon to boast carbon credits; one wonders how the Organisation would get around that. Perhaps put Great on the payroll). Peachment also drew parallels with Godard’s Alphaville, whereby both “use the gangster/thriller framework to explore the increasing depersonalisation of living in a mechanised urban world”.

Walker is on a quest for answers, Number Six is plied for answers, and when answers finally come into play for both, they prove paradoxically elusive. We see Walker break into the numerologically significant Henley hotel, run by the Organisation (1111, or 11:11). Walker is ostensibly tracking down his money, yet that in itself is an existential McGuffin. What he really wants is more elusive (we never see him take his cash, if indeed it is cash in the package).

And like any quality existential musing, there’s ultimate doubt cast on the validity of his motivation; it turns out that Yost (Keenan Wynn) is Organisation man Fairfax, getting Walker to do his dirty work. Who are the Organisation, ultimately? Is Yost the man on top? Or like the Elite, is there always someone one level above? Boorman invoked Arthurian legend in respect of Yost (“the mysterious figure who comes and goes”). He’d be doing a lot more of that in the future.

Point Blank was based on a Donald Westlake novel (The Hunter), one later remade by Mel Gibson as Payback (with, famously, two different cuts, after Gibson had production designer John Myhre reshoot thirty percent of Brian Helgeland’s version). The cast – Dickinson, Wynn, Vernon, Acker; James Sikking would later play another hit man in Peter Hyams’ Narrow Margin, quite possibly cast in homage – are all good. This is arguably Marvin’s movie, however (albeit, one could readily imagine a more commercial take with James Coburn). It was Marvin who “transferred” his star approval he granted by the studio to Boorman, and thus his carte blanche.

Pauline Kael called the picture “Showoffy, brutal, somewhat inexplicable” determining that it was the director’s “virtuosity that is the star…Point Blank, she muttered, offered “more energy and invention than Boorman seems to know what to do with”. Other movies would subsequently attempt this seemingly effortless existential action pose (The Driver; Soderbergh, of course), but there’s a very thin line between pulling it off and making it seem either a pretentious doodle or emotionally inert, such is the manner in which many of the elements of the traditional thriller are pared down to essentials of dynamic and aesthetic.

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .