Sunset Boulevard
”Sunset
Boulevard” is a movie I have been looking forward to a long time. It is one of
those I have heard spoken of with great admiration, but never actually seen
before. That is a line that I have come to repeat a great many times over the
past few years and this is certainly a case in particular. I am not sure what I
expected, maybe a harsh critique of Hollywood or some spectacular performances,
but I certainly did not expect this to be a film noir. But film noir it is and
very much so.
We have a
story narrated in flashback with an opening scene revealing that something is
terribly wrong. The male lead is heading for his doom through a combination of
ill fate and personal failings and we have the most sublime and extravagant
femme fatale in movie history. Add to that a black and white cinematography
that emphasizes the dark, derelict and, well, bizarre and we are in solid film
noir land. I am not complaining, to me that is an added bonus, I love noir.
As a noir “Sunset
Boulevard” is interesting, even captivating, and as a viewer it keeps me at the
edge of my seat, not through some criminal scheme but with the tension between
the characters and the weirdness that seem on the edge of exploding into a
monumental disaster. When the disaster does happen, cause it does indeed, it
still feels unexpected and surprising and yet the most logical and fitting
conclusion to the story. That is not small feat. Billy Wilder has shown again
and again that can make excellent film noir (“Double Indemnity” for instance)
and I suppose it was a fitting framework for the movie.
Framework
is actually not a bad term, because the film noir cinematography and storyline
is not the main feature of this film. The main feature is Norma Desmond and all
she represents. Norma Desmond (Gloria Swanson) is an aging woman who used to be
a megastar back in the silent era. In the transition to sound she got left
behind like so many others of Hollywood’s great, but Norma Desmond remained in
the dream of her greatness unwilling and unable to face the reality that she is
not 25 years anymore and that her career is over and gone. Even the mansion she
lives in cries of has-been. When the male lead Joe Gillis (William Holden)
first arrives at the house he compares it to Miss Havisham’s mansion in “Great
Expectations” and that is truly a fitting comparison. Where Havisham stopped
time at her wedding Desmond stopped time when her career ended.
In a sense
the movie is a portrait of Norma Desmond and it is not difficult to imagine
this portrait being based on some real characters in Hollywood. Maybe Billy
Wilder had even been contacted by a Norma Desmond the way she contacts Cecil B.
DeMille. Who knows? It is through the eyes of Joe Gillis we see this woman. He
is down on his luck and with no small amount of sarcastic bitterness himself,
so when he describes her manners, gestures, ludicrous manuscript and raving
insanity it is both funny and immensely tragic. Should we laugh or cry at this
woman who fools herself and makes a laughingstock of herself in the eyes of
everybody else? Gillis despise her but he also pity her and so helps uphold her
illusion. Of course it helps that he needs her money and she still have loads
of it. In fact everybody around her helps her maintaining her illusion. Some
for her money, at the studio out of respect for what she used to be, her card
playing friends because they are of the same stock and some like Max, the butler,
(Erich von Stroheim) out of love.
Who are
Billy Wilder after in this movie? Is it the aging stars who will not face
reality who he intends to expose? Or is it the movie industry and all that
surrounds these stars that he is aiming at for their hypocrisy and leeching on
the poor insane? Probably both, but as much as Norma Desmond is revealed as a delusional
and dangerous spider queen there is also not a small amount of love for her and
her kind as if they were unjustly forgotten. Certainly it is a very intelligent
script and a stark portrait.
In
hindsight Gloria Swanson is the most unforgettable feature of the film. She was
not anywhere close to the first pick for the role, but I could hardly think of
anyone better. In some ways she was a Norma Desmond, having experienced the
stardom and adoration as a silent star, but failing to make the transition to
sound. The difference was that she had accepted her fate and was quite lucid
about it, yet I am sure it was not difficult to identify with Norma Desmond.
When she enters the gates of Paramount studios in her old car and relish at her
return it was also Swanson’s glorious return and Cecil B. DeMille was also her
old director with whom she had her great successes. Norma exclaims that without
her there would not be a Paramount and that too could be said of Gloria
Swanson. But similarities aside Gloria Swanson is magnificent as Norma Desmond.
This is Oscar awarding performance as I ever saw it. Wow! She steals the
picture in every sense of the word and without having seen Judy Holiday who
actually won the award I would still claim she was robbed. A statue for Swanson
would have had the added benefit of being a fitting lifetime achievement considering
that her career basically ended before she had a chance to win any (though she
was nominated twice before her career faded during the transition).
Billy
Wilder has included a ton of references, which makes this a great movie for
film nerds as well. Making Erich von Stroheim Desmond’s butler, first director
and first husband is both really weird and telling of the characters of Max and
Norma, but also fitting in the sense that Stroheim was also a “broken” director
(though he, once he gave up direction, became an excellent actor), he directed
Swanson in some of her most disastrous movies and the one they screen in the movie
was essentially the one that broke them both: “Queen Kelly”. Norma’s card
playing friends, the waxworks, as Gillis calls them, were in reality all stars
that did not make the transition, most notably Buster Keaton. Their inclusion
in the film is like an afterthought, but a very poignant one. There are many
more references and I can only recommend the extra material to the DVD which
revels in them and rightly so.
All this
fails to emphasize the brilliant script. Apparently Wilder did not allow a
single change to the dialogue and yet it is spot on. This movie is as stuffed
with quotable lines as “Casablanca” and many have entered the pop-culture
since. In fact the movie would be great if it was just Swanson saying her
wonderful lines. Just awesome.
I have not
mentioned Nancy Olson as Joe Gillis love interest although she was nominated
for an Academy Award. The reason is simply that apart from filling her role
well, she is quite forgettable next to the massive presence which is Gloria
Swanson.
Yes, I
loved this movie, no doubt about it. I think moviegoers where spoilt in 1950
having both “All about Eve” and “Sunset Boulevard” to watch. Two phenomenal
views on the entertainment industry and both with something so rare as
excellent female roles and truly original stories.
Absolutely. Gloria Swanson was my pick for Best Actress for 1950 (and it goes to answer your question of why All About Eve's actresses didn't win). This is such a meaty role and she tears into it so beautifully. I love everything about her performance.
ReplyDeleteThe actual Best Actress winner for 1950 was Judy Holliday in a film called Born Yesterday. It's not on the list, but it's worth your time. I'd still go with Gloria Swanson, but if you watch that, you'll understand why she won.
Ah, so many movies to see... A performance better that Bette Davis in All about Eve should be worth watching. I should check it out.
DeleteI just saw Queen Kelly in October and the history that Swanson and von Stroheim had on that seems to mirror their onscreen past relationship. Now that I have seen a lot more classic films I should watch Sunset Blvd. again.
ReplyDeleteI would love to see it, just to know what they are talking about. Is it really a total disaster?
DeleteSunset Boulevard is certainly worth a rewatch. I would imagine it will not be too long before I will watch it again.
Onscreen it's not a total disaster. It's just unfinished. It's about an hour and a half long then some text comes up describing all these other things that were going to happen to the characters. Apparently von Stroheim was envisioning a 5 hour movie and what was shot is only the opening.
Deletehaha, that sounds like von Stroheim! There never was a director with a bigger ego than him. It is Greed all over again.
DeleteA good thing about going through some of these films is the fact that I've watched many of them (like Sunset Boulevard), but it has been years since I've seen them. I'm a little worried some might not hold up as well as my memory thinks it will. Luckily, Sunset Boulevard does for many of the reasons you mentioned. I'm going to tackle All About Eve soon-haven't seen that one in many year either.
ReplyDeleteGood review.
There is a golden rule that says you should never return to a success. You will usually get disappointed and it rest better as a sweet memory (a rule Hollywood forgot many years ago...). In this of Sunset Boulevard however I think it is the other way around. There are so many elements in the movie, so much to latch onto, so much detail that this movie can and should be watched again and again.
Delete