Film criticism for movie fans who want to think again about their cine chills and thrills.

THE MOVIE CHALLENGES

THE LIMEHOUSE GOLEM

UK, 2017

The phrase mixed reception is a cliché that suits the polite English. The Limehouse Golem, though, really has had a mixed reception. English film critics have been friendly and positive. Across the Atlantic the Americans have dismissed the movie as nothing more than routine TV fare. As the more objective Americans have realised, the film is not great. Peter Ackroyd writes novels, non-fiction and produces articles and criticism for newspapers and magazines. Ackroyd has influence, and his British friends have been obliged to overpraise a film that was based on his novel Dan Leno And The Limehouse Golem. The book feels like something written by an intellectual slumming in genre fiction. Bad things can happen when literary pretensions are added to basic thrillers. The dreadful Night Train by Martin Amis is a good example of a talented and serious writer underestimating the demands of popular fiction. Something similar happens in The Limehouse Golem. The film begins with Dan Leno telling us that this particular story will begin at its end. This is more than a tedious affectation. It is incorrect because the film begins half way through its narrative. Not only do we have the slumming of Ackroyd but Jane Goldman, who confuses violence with horror, has also added her thick-eared sensibility to the script. Anachronisms are avoided, and the actors make an effort but the dialogue never feels like real conversation. No one ever says ‘did you know that’ but there are too many moments of explanation and opinion.

The mystery element in the movie is basic, and that is being kind. God help us if Theresa May sees the film. Despite rising crime rates in the UK, increased violence and the mysterious disappearance of policemen from British streets the Prime Minister remains convinced that the police force can withstand even more cuts in its budget. By 2020 the budget will have been reduced by £700m. Without wishing to be fair to Theresa May, it has to be said that the police in The Limehouse Golem do dawdle.

maxresdefault

After seeing a scrawled phrase on a wall next to a Jack the Ripper style victim Inspector Kildare visits the reading room of the British Museum to check out the helpful reference left on the wall by the killer. Kildare finds a book on the original golem that happens to have across a couple of its pages a description of the recent murders. We can ignore that an awful lot has somehow been written in the margins of the pages. The book has been signed out of the Library by four people. All Inspector Kildare needs to do is check the handwriting of the four book borrowers and bingo he will have his killer. In a normal world the case would have been sorted by lunchtime and Kildare could have gone for a beer to celebrate. Instead the investigation is dragged out over several days and across various CGI assisted locations. Kildare and his assistant Constable George Flood even manage to somehow debate this nonsense as if it contains a complicated mystery. Note that the names inspired by the supposedly fertile imagination of Peter Ackroyd are awful. Kildare is bad enough but a playwright who is also one of the four suspects is writing something called Misery Junction. The idea is that the playwright lacks talent and misunderstands what qualifies as entertainment. This is not subtle, and neither is the rest of the film.

Women are the victims in The Limehouse Golem or are supposed to be. There are two women in the movie who qualify as sadistic monsters, and none of the rest would you introduce to Mother. The heroes that do exist are both male, and the denouement buries the feminist concerns in less time than it takes Inspector Kildare to ask for a sample of handwriting.

still-02

Nothing is suggested in The Limehouse Golem. The themes that do exist are suppression of women, the relationship of existence to performance and our vicarious relationship to violence. We do need drama and we spend too much time imagining our lives as the spectacle that they are clearly not. If all our work and effort is mainly performance then it has serious implications for what we think is ambition. The Limehouse Golem has several references to Jack The Ripper and it suggests that his mayhem was soon transformed by our imaginations and desires into a continuing spectacle that has had little concern for the suffering of his five female victims. All of this is interesting and valid but we only become aware of these ideas because someone is always on hand to tell us what to think.

THE LIMEHOUSE GOLEM

Peter Ackroyd lives in London and he likes the place. His non-fiction includes biographies of Dickens and other famous natives. Most of the time Ackroyd is attracted to supposed genius but in Dan Leno And The Limehouse Golem there is much about working class life in a music hall. Ackroyd creates a sympathetic role for music hall star and comic Dan Leno. In the movie the music hall scenes are well staged but none equal what Hitchcock achieved on a small budget in The Thirty Nine Steps eighty years ago. If the jokes by the performers in The Limehouse Golem are authentic, they are evidence that human beings have made more progress than we realised. If the jokes were created by Ackroyd and Goldman then they should be ashamed of themselves. The fusion between the Jack The Ripper legend and the artistic ambition of music hall performers ensures that The Limehouse Golem is different. But All About Eve combined with the savage slayings of a serial killer feels like a daft rather than an inspired idea, especially as the rivalry between the two women performers in The Limehouse Golem is thin cheese when compared to what happens in All About Eve.

film_thelimehousegolem

Elizabeth Cree and Aveline Ortega are the two female performers and rivals. Aveline is a meaningless reference to Inspector Abbeline, the policeman who investigated the Jack The Ripper murders. It is the kind of pun that can only be invented by the self-indulgent and self-regarding. Actress Olivia Cooke plays the waif who wanders into the music hall and dreams of becoming a comic. The actress is fine and she has important moments including one in front of a mirror that has a real effect and helps us remember what Cree sought in the attention of an audience. Cooke, though, does have to endure an awful lot of unbelievable silliness. Bill Nighy plays Inspector Kildare. His remote style keeps him at a distance from the melodrama, and on two occasions he redeems previously bad dialogue. It feels like ad-libs from an actor who has more wit than the scriptwriters. Daniel Mays and Eddie Marsan are reliable English actors and provide good cameos. The decision, though, to choose Douglas Booth to play Dan Leno is bizarre. Presumably someone in one of the many production companies who financed the film insisted upon a handsome male in the cast. Booth is a tall man who has the bearing of someone who has had a private education. This may sound unfair but Booth looks like a toff. He also has impressive cheekbones. Dan Leno was a short plain man ravaged by alcohol. His looks helped him play female caricatures. Booth in drag looks absurd. A film is not obliged to attempt reality but neither can we be expected to ignore cynical disregard for what defines a key character, especially as Ackroyd is good at identifying important aspects of Leno. The comic had a charitable nature and aspired to be a serious actor.

golem-2

Alfred Hitchcock was criticised for including a lying flashback in his unexciting 1950 movie Stage Fright. Because each of the suspects has to write down what Kildare found in the book in the Library, there are four flashbacks that refer to murders. Each of these untrue flashbacks is defined by violent gore. For those who want a definition of gratuitous violence it does not get much better or more stupid than this. Anyone who remains engaged after such repetition deserves credit for staying the course. One of the book borrowers is Karl Marx, so he becomes one of the suspects. Not sure why but there is something very unsettling in seeing a key architect of left wing thinking decapitate a London prostitute. No doubt it will make many smile but there is no need for ideological objections for it to feel like adolescent humour.

The episode with George Gissing is better but that becomes less interesting when the violence begins. Kildare, though, appears to have time to waste and he listens with patience. Although Bill Nighy is watchable as Inspector Kildare he is too old for the role. But with all those cuts in the numbers of British police that Theresa May has demanded Kildare may have a future as an unpaid pensioner volunteer. Efficiency targets will mean he will need to move at a faster pace than he does in The Limehouse Golem but from what we hear there are some desperate Chief Constables out there.

Howard Jackson has had seven books published by Red Rattle Books including novels, short stories and collections of film criticism. If you are interested in original horror and crime fiction and want information about the books of Howard Jackson and the other great titles at Red Rattle Books, click here.

THE MOVIE CHALLENGES

HOUR OF THE GUN

USA, 1967

Director John Sturges went to his grave knowing that he had at least made some classic Westerns. The Magnificent Seven and Bad Day At Black Rock are the obvious highlights in a fine career. Sturges, though, faltered after the success of The Great Escape in 1963. Hour Of The Gun appeared in 1967. The opening credits of Hour Of The Gun feature the gunfight at the OK Corral. The rest of the film is about what happened after the famous shootout. The credit sequence promises a lyricism that the rest of the film fails to deliver. In this opening scene there is an understated and mysterious moment. As the Earps walk down the main street of Tombstone, we see and hear a distant figure urge the Earps to reconsider what they are doing. Many years ago I walked the full length of Tombstone to the OK Corral, the same journey that Wyatt took with his brothers and Doc Holliday. It is not a short walk. Wyatt Earp had plenty of time to think about what he was doing.

No Western character has inspired Hollywood moviemakers as much as Wyatt Earp. The story of what happened in Tombstone between the Earps and the Clantons has obliged many actors to reach for their holsters. A few of these films have attempted a biography of Earp. Others changed the names of the protagonists but shamelessly recycled the history. Despite all this effort the character of Wyatt Earp remains as elusive as ever. Biographies like Tombstone and Wyatt Earp have their moments including a not to be forgotten performance by Dennis Quaid as Doc Holliday in Wyatt Earp. All, though, fail to convince. My Darling Clementine is supreme cinema from master filmmaker John Ford but romantic tosh.

MV5BNjI1ZTNjMzktYjI3Zi00Y2U0LTg0NzctMzE3YTQ4NDk4NTE5XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjUyNDk2ODc@._V1_

Wyatt Earp was a hard case that was interested in making money and having authority. The best of him stood up to other hard cases but the worst was not averse to taking advantage of the weaker. In Dodge City, and before he arrived at Tombstone, he was the local lawman that ran gambling and prostitution. In the revisionist movie Doc the conflict between the Earps and the Clantons in Tombstone is presented as an economic contest between two rival families who each wanted to control the town. The Earps did have economic interests in Tombstone but the Clantons were rowdy and unruly and their behaviour needed a law enforcement response.

Hour Of The Gun is not tosh. It is interesting, decent and even important but for all that the movie somehow falls flat. There are various reasons. The proclamation of historical accuracy at the beginning of the film invites an audience to expect authenticity and suspend disbelief. Sturges fails to deliver and if there is a heaven, he may be there right now wondering why. There are various reasons. The casting is not as disastrous as it was in Gunfight At The OK Corral, which Sturges made ten years earlier, but it is not right. Authenticity benefits from fresh faces and a different style. They do not bring realism but can supersede familiar theatrics. James Garner tries hard as Wyatt Earp but the supposed moral decline of the lawman as he seeks vengeance for the shootings of his brothers is beyond an actor noted for his charm. Jason Robards is watchable but he supplies scorn rather than the vicious temperament needed to make Holliday convincing. The great Robert Ryan plays Clanton but is underused. Hollywood paid good wages, so it should have been able to recruit decent support players. There is not one convincing cameo in Hour Of The Gun.

starz_svod-30223-Full-Image_GalleryBackground-en-US-1487883265762._RI_SX940_

For the film to have impact we have to witness a supposed hero become a self-righteous serial killer. It never quite happens. The film suggests the dark side of Earp but it always gives the Western hero excuses. Nuance and ambiguity have merit but it is a short route from them towards timidity, and Hour Of The Gun takes it although even muted realism about Wyatt Earp is welcome. The gunfights in the film where the outcome is determined by the speed of the draw are fair contests that never existed. Earp killed the people he did because he was strong and sharp enough to gain an advantage. This truth is hinted at in the gunfight at the train depot but the scene, which should have been a spectacular set piece full of suspense, is not well handled by Sturges. The point gets lost in our disappointment at the cinematic failure.

Edward Anhalt wrote the script for Hour Of The Gun. Anhalt has an admirable sensibility and conceptual skill. The strength of the movie is how it analyses the changing relationship between Holliday and Earp. Before the film is finished Doc Holliday is warning Earp about seeking vengeance. The irony is satisfying because we are watching a man be counselled and restrained by the devil on his shoulder. But Anhalt was a talented playwright who was tempted by Hollywood money. His best work was outside the movies. Hour Of The Gun would have worked better as a stage play with the emphasis on conversations between two men who have learnt much about themselves. In Hour Of The Gun no one appears to learn anything of significance. Holliday asserts that Earp will regret abandoning the law but that is about it. The decision by Earp at the end of the film to quit being a lawman is not a surprise but the reasons behind the decision are unexplained and unexplored. Earp spent much of the rest of his life as a gambler roaming the West. He became an alternative version of Doc Holliday. The two men were friends because they were alike.

garner 1

Earp only abandons the law when it proves ineffectual. When he can, he utilises the power of vested interests to give him the legal authority he requires. Earp is also a public sector employee willing to cut corners. For a brief period he is supported by Holliday, a man who is used to operating in a market where the winner takes all. All this is believable but it is undercut by the cinematic presentation of Sturges and the performance of James Garner, which ensure that we cannot forget we are watching a resolute hero. The truth, though, is that the story of what happened after the OK Corral gunfight is a dull one. Two public employees did what civil servants in Britain do often. They exceeded their responsibilities and bent the rules to suit themselves. Hour Of The Gun does not conceal the mundane element in the legend but its exposure weakens the action without ever providing enough intellectual interest. No one should object to subtlety, and there is no reason why an audience cannot be expected to think about what they are watching. But for that to succeed or be justified the moviemakers need to approach their material with integrity, and it is lacking in Hour Of The Gun. The subtlety on show feels like timidity.

Before Hour Of The Gun appeared in 1967 there were already precedents for realism in the Western. Man Of The West appeared in 1960. Gary Cooper is the hero with the dark past. Director Anthony Mann provides a bleak vision of human nature and somehow combines a King Lear tale with impressive action. Hour Of The Gun has historical detail and two contradictory characters but, when compared to Man Of The West, it is superficial. Sturges and Anhalt refuse to be honest about a tale of vengeance and murder, material that could have been interpreted as stylised horror. There is nothing wrong with characters that are not obvious heroes or villains but the darkness within Holliday and Earp is underexposed. Instead, we have the compromises in the life of a public sector employee presented as a Western adventure. The inevitable happens. Hour Of The Gun is interesting but dull.

hero_EB19671024REVIEWS710240301AR

Yet the film should be seen. A superficial man too willing to slay others is given the benefit of Hollywood glamour, and the result is an aesthetic confusion that pricks the conscience of the viewer. It may be an unintended consequence but, when we watch Hour Of The Gun, our relationship to violent drama becomes as baffling as the misunderstood men who inspired the tale. Earp is an action hero but we do not know how to respond to his confident courage. Something else stays in the mind, and it is the sense of entitlement that some people have. Although Earp and the Clantons are preoccupied with each other, there is no concern for how their behaviour affects the townspeople. People without power are invisible in Hour Of The Gun. Earp feels entitled to his vengeance and influence. He will not be denied. Holliday has appetites and expects comforts and pleasure beyond his enfeebled body. Neither man has a conscience about the privilege that enables them to cut corners. They are philosophical about the premature death of others and callous.

hour2

Those British Civil Servants who thought it would help their careers to accept impossible targets for reducing immigration into the UK were also willing to cut corners. Because their careers and privilege were so important, they were prepared to have legal British citizens removed from their homeland. No chance, though, of any of them becoming legends. Earp was lucky. He outlived his enemies and was able to present himself to writers as a hero. As hard as they try, the present British Government will not be able to rewrite their own history. The stain is already spreading and it will be remembered.