one face of eve

i, like rachael, really regretted the loss of the witty, in control, female narrative from the novella version. i did also enjoy the film for itself, however–but, as usual, for telling a different story. remember that filmmaker from hutcheon who retold the story of the cuban political hero (i can't find/remember the exact reference now) because he felt that the story had been misrepresented? well even though i suppose this is fiction, the film's inversion of lonesome rhodes' guilt to marcia's guilt felt like that kind of adaptation. it wasn't just a matter of telling a different story–it was more a matter of saying "no, you've gotten this wrong; this is how it happened," this time making marcia more fully responsible for rhodes' behavior. a face in the crowd went from being a story of mutual blame back to blaming marcia as biblical eve for her 'original sin' of introducing the knowledge of fame to lonesome.

thus marcia moves from being this incredibly together, strong woman whom i'm pretty sure we all agree with when she tells lonesome to get out of her life, to this crazed, hands-clutching-her-face, edvard munch's "the scream" type of persecuted person who is suddenly supposed to be responsible for the antics of a grown man.

this theme is developed from the beginning by first portraying lonesome as an innocent, with no desire to want to tell anybody what to do about anything, and who slowly becomes power-crazed and selfish because of the role he is forced into by marcia and by the industry.

the end of the film, however, steps back from fully blaming eve for the fall of adam, in mel miller's final declamation to lonesome. he flatly remarks that audience's memories are short, and eventually someone will "give him another go" on a much cheaper venue, but that whatever he has from now on, it "won't be the same." once man has sinned, he has forever fallen…even in the entertainment industry.

as marcia and mel stand at the bottom of apartment and look up, listening to lonesome scream threats about suicide, mel again reinforces lonesome's culpability for himself by telling marcia not to listen to his rants. finally, she nods and gets into a taxi never to see him again. i was so glad that they didn't take this out of the movie.

A Face In the Crowd

So - I still have to finish the story, but I want to type this first.

I think that the film version really showed not only the rise and fall of a celebrity, but also the audience reaction - how an audience can build someone up and tear them down. Because in the end Lonesome Rhodes was really a sad character; I wish I'd seen whether or not he jumped, because then I could've judged in the end if he was sincere or not. I think - for better or for worse - that Andy Griffith really gave himself to the character. I know the laugh was a bit much, but it definitely wasn't the performance that I expected from him; it was better than I expected.

Face in the Mirror

One of the primary changes that A Face in the Crowd makes to the short story “Your Arkansas Traveler” is the insertion of an audience. The story could not include outsider reactions to the radio or television show, of course, because it was tied down to a first person narrator. Therefore, we got a cynical view of Lonesome Rhodes as a deceitful drunk. Of course, Lonesome is a deceitful drunk, but not to his adoring fans across the country, only to the less than innocent people producing his show and seeing his horrible personal life. The story does an admirable job of exposing the steamy underbelly of the entertainment industry, but in doing that it reduces the audience into an unthinking mob. Marcia admires Lonesome's charisma as much as it repulses her in the story. The film, on the other hand, provides a glimpse into the adoring crowds as they see themselves in Lonesome's “down home” charm.

The insertion of an audience reveals two elements of the world of marketing and media: the need for people to connect to personalities represented on TV and the radio, as well as the danger of that identification. The early shots of Lonesome “talking to” isolated housewives as they work in their homes. His sympathy towards and insight into domestic labor draws the isolated women into a community with Lonesome. Of course, his name connects with lonely people across the country, while his “grass roots wisdom” gives people a sense of authenticity. In the increasingly commercial culture of the 1950s, the audience seems desperate to connect with anything authentic, even if it is used to sell them something.

Even though the film does give a face to the audience searching for meaning and human connection, it still reduces Lonesome fans into a mob. Because Lonesome lacks any actual authenticity, he is able to play them like his guitar, manipulating their trust to increase sales and do his own dirty work. By seeing themselves in the television, people fall prey to the machinations of the advertising industry.

From Wyoming to Arkansas

I have to say, I really enjoyed the short story. I thought it was great to have a witty, female narrative. Unfortunately, I'm not having the same response to the film. One of the best aspects of the story is the Margy character and how she is the one person to not be bowled over by Lonesome's charm. She is a "northern intellectual" (if that's what you want to call it) and she finds his folksome nature fake. She has a sharp wit reminiscent of Rosalind Russell in "His Girl Friday." But this is completely lost in the film. The first setting is changed from Wyoming to Arkansas, which loses the north-south dynamic between the two. One of the weirdest changes to me is that she goes looking for him. That is the exact opposite of the story. What makes the story work is that he is dropped in her lap, whether she likes it not, and she has to content with what this means for her life. Changing her demeanor completely changes the dynamic. She's not supposed to sleep with him! The unconsummated love furthers that awkward relationship, but these changes really seem to ruin it.

P.S. Having said all that. I really liked the film, on its own, when not considered as an adaptation. The last scene was especially chilling and, I think, made up (some what) for the lack of tension between the two characters in the beginning of the film.

Lonesome Rhodes

After reading the short story, the mental image I have for Lonesome is Raymond's brother Robert from Everybody Loves Raymond. I'll be happier after the screening, because right now it's impossible for me to picture Lonesome as anybody but Robert, Raymond's brother.

Mahty

Just realized I forgot to post something after Tuesdays screening of Marty. My first thoughts after watching the film were that it was surprisingly faithful to the script while somehow managing a feature film length. The dialogue was very close, minus the ramblings of Marty. They filled it out a lot by taking time to set the scene. For example, the amount of time it takes for Marty to bring the dog home from the dance. That was one instance where a lot of additional dialogue was written in. The suicide dialogue was a bit of a surprise. This film was very close to the images I had in my mind, with the exception of the dog being not as doggish as I had imagined. I did notice, however, that the characters got on my nerves a little bit at times during the film, which made it harder for me to feel for them. Marty talked too much and Clara talked too little. She also had a hard-to-define quality about her that disturbed me slightly. In any case I found it harder to feel sorry for them in the film than in the screenplay.

selling out...or speaking to the audience?

maybe i'm just now obsessed with relating everything back to a gray flannel suit, but once again i felt as if, here was another fairly original, creative text which was reshaped into the same dominant middle-class narrative about trying to move up in the world, that we saw in give us this day. marty not only wants to move into an apartment, but now he wants to buy up the butcher shop, goes on a long soliloquy about how he always wanted to go to college and never got to, and finally brings in some mediocre psychology by commenting on his and clara's fear of "being on their own" and learning to move out from under the yoke of their parents.

now, i'm not necessarily judging the movie as bad (but am i right in thinking "gene kelly was married to her?") but maybe this is just part of what drew commented on earlier as the necessary adherence to the demands of the audience. and i suppose there's no saying that paddy chayefsky wasn't thrilled to be able to develop marty into a longer storyline–perhaps feeling that he could explore even more than just "latent homosexuality."

finally, i allow this: that the story is sweet. and that counts for something. i don't just mean "i liked it" because obviously that would not be a profound thing to say for a graduate student. i mean that chayefsky maintained a certain sincere warmth in marty's character and in his 'sticking to his guns,' as it were, to ask out clara again despite his friends' disapproval. his simple language, and his homeliness, and his mass on sundays with mother may be cheesy, but they're also endearing and something many audiences–both of the fifties and today–can identify with.

so i guess i'm saying i shouldn't fall into the snob category of chiding chayefsky for creating a film that is so much of the genre of fifties's middle class culture. after all, i've watched and loved virtually the same movie in about sixty different forms: twenty-seven dresses, bride wars, made of honor, the wedding date, princess diaries, etc.–and what will my kids say to me about that? exactly.