|
|
Post by morrisondylanfan on Jun 28, 2021 23:05:31 GMT
Hi all,after having heard about it for years,I finally got a chance to see this Michael Powell title for the first time, on the big screen. I was wondering what you think of the movie,and if anyone here remembers the reaction when it first came out? From the long opening tracking shot/POV,I was taken by how Powell was a decade ahead of his time with Tom, via the mix of highly-stylized camera shots performed with an eye on voyeurism, being something that the likes of De Palma and Argento would place a focus on in the 70's.  |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jun 28, 2021 23:23:36 GMT
I first read about it in More Classics of the Horror Film.
I saw it a few years ago.
I think the scene where he talks to the psychiatrist suggests he is looking for help but can't really get it.
There are thematic elements suggesting BF Skinner in the back story of the character and also the intrusiveness of technology--recording every intimate detail of things.
I am not surprised Scorsese is a fan of it because it is about a character trapped in behavior and cannot change and most of his well-known films are about characters who cannot change and don't. They affect everyone around them but they don't change in nature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Archelaus on Jun 29, 2021 0:37:37 GMT
I first watched it five years ago since I was definitely attracted to most people comparing it to a Hitchcock film. That said, I came to love it. As a cinephile, it's easy to know why particular film directors like it as much as they relate to it. Mark Lewis (portrayed by Carl Boehm) works as a focus puller and is an aspiring filmmaker himself. Photographing women is a fetish for some filmmakers or photographers, and Mark directs his subjects and has the same determination to get the perfect shot as a director would.
It was disheartening to learn it wasn't well-received during its initial release, but I can see why. Peeping Tom turns its audience into participants for voyeurism and scopophilia, and unlike Rear Window, there's no justification for it. Throughout the run time, we identify with Mark and his voyeurism; whereas in Psycho, Norman's voyeurism is limited to one scene and dressed around a murder that's then punished. Lastly, Psycho offers a medical explanation for Norman's perverse behavior whereas there is none that I recall as presented in Peeping Tom that would have reassured 1960s audiences of this strange phenomenon.
|
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on Jun 29, 2021 0:41:45 GMT
Peeping Tom (1960), directed by Michael Powell. Famously controversial thriller, hated at the time but now more respected, especially by film theorists. Powell said it ruined his career. A psycho photographs women as he murders them. He is building a film documentary of his life and includes the police investigation of the crimes and plans a big finish featuring his own death. I first saw this about ten years ago and did not much like it. I revere Michael Powell, but it seemed like the student effort of a lesser director. I was outvoted about 20-to-1 when I expressed this opinion in public. The film is widely held to be a masterpiece. I liked it a bit better this time, noticing more of the dark humor and little jokes Powell uses. The lampoon of the movie studio is obviously something close to his heart. Good to see Moira Shearer again. And I always enjoy Anna Massey, just 23 here. She's not classically pretty, but always interesting. Sticking with the genre, she was prominent in Frenzy (1972) twelve years later. She's still working and has been doing old lady roles for a long time. (Later: Anna Massey, 1937--2011, daughter of Raymond Massey, 125 acting credits in the IMDB). Maxine Audley is fine as the blind mother, always drinking but the only one who suspects our psycho. "The blind always live in the rooms they live under," she tells him; she's been listening to him moving around and guesses at his secrets. And yet. It still doesn't work for me. Carl Boehm is rather one note: shy, hardworking, always obsessing about his fetishes. He doesn't care if he gets caught, so why should we? Apart from sympathy for his victims... The music hammers the themes too hard. It seems to be an intricate Freudian essay, but does that make it a good film? The plot apparatus required to support the design grows clumsy and finally terribly overblown in the last minutes. Other Powell films had heart and depth and sweep which I don't find here. It is often compared with Psycho (1960), which appeared about the same time, but as a thriller Hitchcock's film is much more satisfying. Criterion DVD. Subtitle track but no control for it on the menu. I endured the 1993 commentary track by film critic Laura Mulvey, specialist in Phallocentrism and Patriarchy. I'm not qualified to critique PoMoLitCrit studies and will only say it's not for me. 
|
|
|
|
Post by morrisondylanfan on Jul 1, 2021 2:10:30 GMT
Peeping Tom (1960), directed by Michael Powell. Famously controversial thriller, hated at the time but now more respected, especially by film theorists. Powell said it ruined his career. A psycho photographs women as he murders them. He is building a film documentary of his life and includes the police investigation of the crimes and plans a big finish featuring his own death. I first saw this about ten years ago and did not much like it. I revere Michael Powell, but it seemed like the student effort of a lesser director. I was outvoted about 20-to-1 when I expressed this opinion in public. The film is widely held to be a masterpiece. I liked it a bit better this time, noticing more of the dark humor and little jokes Powell uses. The lampoon of the movie studio is obviously something close to his heart. Good to see Moira Shearer again. And I always enjoy Anna Massey, just 23 here. She's not classically pretty, but always interesting. Sticking with the genre, she was prominent in Frenzy (1972) twelve years later. She's still working and has been doing old lady roles for a long time. (Later: Anna Massey, 1937--2011, daughter of Raymond Massey, 125 acting credits in the IMDB). Maxine Audley is fine as the blind mother, always drinking but the only one who suspects our psycho. "The blind always live in the rooms they live under," she tells him; she's been listening to him moving around and guesses at his secrets. And yet. It still doesn't work for me. Carl Boehm is rather one note: shy, hardworking, always obsessing about his fetishes. He doesn't care if he gets caught, so why should we? Apart from sympathy for his victims... The music hammers the themes too hard. It seems to be an intricate Freudian essay, but does that make it a good film? The plot apparatus required to support the design grows clumsy and finally terribly overblown in the last minutes. Other Powell films had heart and depth and sweep which I don't find here. It is often compared with Psycho (1960), which appeared about the same time, but as a thriller Hitchcock's film is much more satisfying. Criterion DVD. Subtitle track but no control for it on the menu. I endured the 1993 commentary track by film critic Laura Mulvey, specialist in Phallocentrism and Patriarchy. I'm not qualified to critique PoMoLitCrit studies and will only say it's not for me. Hi WMC,thank you for sharing your great review. When the news reports of a suspected killer who was on the run being caught, one of the things that usually comes up,is the neighbors get interviewed and say things like "He kept to himself" and was a "Quiet guy." Rather then being shy, I felt that Bohm was expressing in his performance Lewis's desire to blend quietly into the background, such as when he tries to have a conversation on the set with a crew member in a discreet manner, and the way he downplays the size of his film collection, when people express curiosity/attempt to make him open up about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by timshelboy on Jul 1, 2021 10:18:04 GMT
 Wasn't born when it was released - first saw it on TV late 70s - came with much baggage in tow even then... maybe a slight anticimax but still a good movie. Makes a good double bill with FRENZY (both offer great aspect on seedier parts of London, wonderful location work and sense of place.. and we get Anna Massey in peril again). Didn't know Bogarde was first choice (Rank refused to loan him) and Laurence Harvey bailed.... the lure of Hollywood proving overwhelming and BUTTEFIELD 8 and THE ALAMO presumably looking like better bets... 
You might like this
|
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Jul 1, 2021 12:12:52 GMT
It’s a film I like without being a big fan but there is one part that has a personal touch for me. I was watching it in an art house cinema called The Everyman and my friend and I both laughed out loud when this line was spoken…
“Oh. I wanted to discuss that film at The Everyman.”
I also saw Michael Powell being interviewed at that cinema and at one point he appeared to doze off during one of the film clips. I’m not sure if he did fall asleep but I’d still say that was an awesome piece of self criticism.
|
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jul 1, 2021 16:15:52 GMT
I was watching it in an art house cinema called The Everyman In Hampstead?
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 1, 2021 16:27:46 GMT
"And yet. It still doesn't work for me. Carl Boehm is rather one note: shy, hardworking, always obsessing about his fetishes. He doesn't care if he gets caught, so why should we? Apart from sympathy for his victims..."
*This is why I feel Scorsese loved it--because that is how his characters are. They never change. Taxi Driver-- Travis Bickle doesn't change at all. He changes the people around him.
But I think Peeing Tom was trying to get help from the psychiatrist. He felt a connection to him. That's the impression I had on my first and only viewing.
Interestingly, this point about the killer being the central character made me think of Horrors of the Black Museum
and I looked it up and it says:
'It was the first film in what film critic David Pirie dubbed Anglo-Amalgamated's "Sadian trilogy" (the other two being Circus of Horrors and Peeping Tom), with an emphasis on sadism, cruelty and violence (with sexual undertones), in contrast to the supernatural horror of the Hammer films of the same era.'
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Jul 1, 2021 16:34:15 GMT
In “Peeping Tom” Powell is working in color – and what color! Vivid – lurid – primaries and combinations. An eye catching opening shot with bright colors and lighting in front of an obviously painted set puts an aura of unreality around the proceedings, making them even creepier. This film’s initial reception is the stuff of legend. In a 1997 documentary, “A Very British Psycho,” (included on the DVD), star Carl Boehm tells us that at its premiere, all of the movie stars and industry VIPs who attended were the first to be ushered out at the end. Powell, Boehm, and others were waiting in the theater lobby for comments and congratulations. The VIPs exited the auditorium, seemed to be headed for the reception line, then made a left turn and went out through the front doors leaving the film makers stunned. Boehm said that both he and Powell were deeply hurt. The film was withdrawn from most theaters after one week. Most critical reviews were savage. Powell left Britain for Australia soon after. One of the interviews on the documentary was with a modern British film critic who attempted a half-hearted defense of his 1960 colleagues. “We can look back and point out that they got it wrong, but in the context of their time…” He goes on to talk about social conditions, then pauses before saying, “But they did get it wrong.” They sure did.
Anna Massey is the young woman from downstairs who notices Mark (Boehm) and tries to get into his life. Massey lives with her blind and alcoholic mother who can chug a tumbler of Johnny Walker. In one tense scene, Mark finds the mother standing in the darkness of his apartment. “What are you doing here?” he asks. “The blind always visit the room just above them,” she replies. Is that a great line or what?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Jul 2, 2021 15:50:23 GMT
I was watching it in an art house cinema called The Everyman In Hampstead? That’s the one. Back then there was only one Everyman Cinema in London but it’s since become a chain.
|
|
|
|
Post by timshelboy on Jul 2, 2021 21:18:58 GMT
That’s the one. Back then there was only one Everyman Cinema in London but it’s since become a chain. the cinema was immortalised in song by Donovan circa 1968
|
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jul 3, 2021 0:08:12 GMT
That’s the one. Back then there was only one Everyman Cinema in London but it’s since become a chain. It was my first non-chain cinema. In the gap between leaving school and still trying to work out what to do with my life (ie being unemployed) I visited a few times. Bit of a culture shock....no "night lights", very old seating and coffee & cake instead of coke and popcorn Still remember some of the screenings I went to.... Taxi Driver & After Hours Highlander & Static Purple Rose Of Cairo, Broadway Danny Rose & Zelig.
|
|
