Skip to main content

You run the job, but I run the show, and don’t forget it.

The Getaway

(SPOILERS) Sam Peckinpah at his most mainstream – The Getaway was a big hit – but he’s still decidedly on the untameable side. Although, in contrast to Alec Baldwin’s intimations, it seems screenwriter Walter Hill was entirely pleased with the way the director interpreted, and collaborated on, his material (take a look at how little the 1994 remake differs, and you’ll be left wondering what exactly Walter was paid for second time round). The Getaway’s a good movie, but it isn’t a great one; Hill excised the more outré aspects of Jim Thompson’s 1958 novel, so yes, there’s still infidelity and mistrust, and an entirely sordid subplot with an unseemly antagonist. But the cannibalism is out. Which is a wonder, as I’m sure Sam would have loved that.

As I’ll suggest when looking at the remake, there’s a key area where the 1994 version scores over the original; it certainly isn’t in the star wattage of Baldwin, or Roger Donaldson serviceably glossing up the enterprise (and diligently preserving functionally slow-mo action sequences). No, the key improvement is that Kim Basinger is by far a more believable criminal than Ali MacGraw, and Basinger and Baldwin a more believable (rift-stricken) couple.

Steve McQueen is uber-cool throughout, of course, something at least partly down to his having final cut, overruling Peckinpah’s choices of sometimes less flattering shots. That said, the opening scenes, of Doc McCoy worn down by the grind of prison life, being refused parole, and then, rather than leaping instantly into the sack when he reunites with Carol (tellingly late to collect him), he mutters disconsolately how “It does something to you inside”. He consequently requires a whole (unseen) night of wifey tending him, in order to rid this man’s man of whatever this alluded-to dysfunction may be.

McQueen moves well when it comes to the action. He’s particularly convincing giving chase to Richard Bright’s thief and laying him out cold in a train carriage. His dyspeptic attitude towards a couple of pint-sized punks with a water pistol is also amusing (“I’m going to break your little arm”). He also gets away with slapping Carol about a bit when he discovers she slept with Ben Johnson’s Jack Benyon (whom she also shoots). Also notable is that this is an era when the general public are highly attentive to wanted villains, yet the cops are simultaneously a fair call to be thoroughly disrespected (see also The Dukes of Hazzard, Smokey and the Bandit).

MacGraw, though. Pauline Kael, who laid into the actress with abandon for her Love Story performance, pulled no punches here either, calling her “the primmest, smuggest gangster’s moll of all time”. Kael considered her a terrible actress, and on this evidence, she wasn’t far wrong. In the interests of balance, it should be noted that MacGraw also hated her performance, so there weren’t many in her corner. There’s nothing on screen suggesting the smouldering passions Steve and Ali felt for each other during The Getaway’s making (you can read Robert Evans’ take on being cuckolded in The Kid Stays in the Picture, if you can stomach his wannabe-tough-guy prose).

Most of the rest of the cast land effectively, though. Johnson is more suited to a cameo than James Woods would be in the remake. Al Lettieri is a suitably slobby sleazeball psychopath, beat-for-beat reproduced in the 1994 version, except that Michael Madsen is rather tiresomely gleeful in his malignance. Rudy Butler hooks up with veterinarian’s wife Fran (Sally Stuthers), leading said veterinarian Harold (Jack Dodson) to hang himself. Kael called it gross (it’s out of the novel), but noted Peckinpah seemed engaged only by this part: “this type of artistic frustration only breeds misanthropy”.

Indeed, while an admirer of the director’s abilities, she called the movie a “sausage” (anyone would think it was Elvis), suggesting there was “no energy in the tossed-together script” and the picture was “long and dull and has no reverberations except of other movies, mostly by Peckinpah”. Not entirely fair, but it’s true that it’s some distance from the most essential Peckinpah and very much his modifying his approach to the benefit of major studio production. It still boasts many of his unruly quirks throughout, however, and there’s some very gritty cinematography from frequent DP Lucien Ballard; the garbage dump resembles a straight-up apocalyptic wasteland.

Thompson was initially hired to write his own screenplay, one that included the novel’s ending; in this, Doc and Carol reach the criminal haven kingdom of El Ray, across the border in Mexico, only to discover the cost of living is unsustainably high. This leads to criminals killing criminals for funds, since the alternative is being cast out to a nearby broken-down cannibal village; Doc and Carol are faced with the prospect of one killing the other in order to ride it out a little longer. McQueen objected to the turn as depressing, unsurprisingly, and Hill came in to save the day. Revelling in cannibalism is possibly a little too close to home for Hollywood. Peter Bogdanovich was attached at this time, but Evans tossed him because he insisted on then belle Cybill Shepherd starring (with hindsight, she couldn’t have been worse than MacGraw. Could she?)

In came Peckinpah. But with McQueen wielding final cut, Jerry Fielding’s score was nixed in favour of a fresh paint job from Quincy Jones. And his is mostly a very good score, very vibey and discordant and arresting, although there’s a little too much harmonica thrown in for my tastes. Also to be seen are Slim Pickens as the cowboy who drives our protagonists to Mexico, Bo Hopkins, and John Bryson, as Benyon’s brother, bearing as distinct resemblance to Vic Reeves’ character Kinky-John, stand-up act employed by Vic Reeves' character Paul Baron, owner of the fourth best club in Hull.

Hill seemed proud of his “tossed together script”: “One of the pleasant surprises of my life was how little Sam changed my Getaway script while they were shooting. And I thought it came out to be a pretty good film – certainly well directed, well shot, and for the most part, well acted”. Yes, I’d suggest it’s abundantly clear to whom he’s alluding in the last part. Some would have this as McQueen’s last great part and last great movie (some will give him Papillon), and it’s certainly the last time he was exuding the particular brand of cool that made him a ’60s icon (Bullitt, The Thomas Crown Affair). The Getaway’s rather hollow, but as a brand product, that’s entirely apposite.

Popular posts from this blog

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Listen to the goddamn qualified scientists!

Don’t Look Up (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s testament to Don’t Look Up ’s “quality” that critics who would normally lap up this kind of liberal-causes messaging couldn’t find it within themselves to grant it a free pass. Adam McKay has attempted to refashion himself as a satirist since jettisoning former collaborator Will Ferrell, but as a Hollywood player and an inevitably socio-politically partisan one, he simply falls in line with the most obvious, fatuous propagandising.

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

You ruined every suck-my-silky-ass thing!

The Matrix Resurrections (2021) (SPOILERS) Warner Bros has been here before. Déjà vu? What happens when you let a filmmaker do whatever they want? And I don’t mean in the manner of Netflix. No, in the sequel sense. You get a Gremlins 2: The New Batch (a classic, obviously, but not one that financially furthered a franchise). And conversely, when you simply cash in on a brand, consequences be damned? Exorcist II: The Heretic speaks for itself. So in the case of The Matrix Resurrections – not far from as meta as The New Batch , but much less irreverent – when Thomas “Tom” Anderson, designer of globally successful gaming trilogy The Matrix , is told “ Our beloved company, Warner Bros, has decided to make a sequel to the trilogy ” and it’s going ahead “with or without us”, you can be fairly sure this is the gospel. That Lana, now going it alone, decided it was better to “make the best of it” than let her baby be sullied. Of course, quite what that amounts to in the case of a movie(s) tha

You just threw a donut in the hot zone!

Den of Thieves (2018) (SPOILERS) I'd heard this was a shameless  Heat  rip-off, and the presence of Gerard Butler seemed to confirm it would be passable-at-best B-heist hokum, so maybe it was just middling expectations, even having heard how enthused certain pockets of the Internet were, but  Den of Thieves  is a surprisingly very satisfying entry in the genre. I can't even fault it for attempting to Keyser Soze the whole shebang at the last moment – add a head in a box and you have three 1995 classics in one movie – even if that particular conceit doesn’t quite come together.

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

It’s always possible to find a good moral reason for killing anybody.

The Assassination Bureau (1969) (SPOILERS) The Assassination Bureau ought to be a great movie. You can see its influence on those who either think it is a great movie, or want to produce something that fulfils its potential. Alan Moore and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen . The just-released (and just-flopped) The King’s Men . It inhabits a post-Avengers, self-consciously benign rehearsal of, and ambivalence towards, Empire manners and attitudes, something that could previously be seen that decade in Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines (and sequel Monte Carlo or Bust , also 1969), Adam Adamant Lives! , and even earlier with Kind Hearts and Coronets , whilst also feeding into that “Peacock Revolution” of Edwardian/Victorian fashion refurbishment. Unfortunately, though, it lacks the pop-stylistic savvy that made, say, The President’s Analyst so vivacious.

This guy’s armed with a hairdryer.

An Innocent Man (1989) (SPOILERS) Was it a chicken-and-egg thing with Tom Selleck and movies? Did he consistently end up in ropey pictures because other, bigger big-screen stars had first dibs on the good stuff? Or was it because he was a resolutely small-screen guy with limited range and zero good taste? Selleck had about half-a-dozen cinema outings during the 1980s, one of which, the very TV, very Touchstone Three Men and a Baby was a hit, but couldn’t be put wholly down to him. The final one was An Innocent Man , where he attempted to show some grit and mettle, as nice-guy Tom is framed and has to get tough to survive. Unfortunately, it’s another big-screen TV movie.