Skip to main content

Back to the Feature: Papillon (1973)


I’d like to know what people were expecting when it was announced that Steve McQueen would be starring in another prison escape movie. No doubt some were anticipating another fun, adventurous, charmingly rebellious film much like The Great Escape. I would very much have liked to be in a theatre with such people when Papillon came out, partly of course to see the movie on the big screen, but also to see the dumbfounded reactions by an audience more accustomed to McQueen’s conventional coolness.
Papillon is based on the book of the same name by Henri Charriere, a.k.a. “Papillon” (for the butterfly tattoo on his chest), a pardoned French prisoner who escaped the penal colony of St.-Laurent-du-Maroni in French Guiana in 1941, after nine years’ imprisonment. It’s an incredibly fascinating story, even if it’s definitely not as true as it claims, and a very lucrative idea for a film adaptation. And Franklin J. Schaffner, the underrated director of movies like Planet of the Apes, and Patton, was certainly the right man for the job. He understood the sense of scale it needed as well as the grounded emphasis on friendship and determination.
Convicted of murdering a pimp, of which he claims innocence, Henri “Papillon” Charriere (Steve McQueen) is given a life sentence on a remote penal colony in French Guiana, known for being inescapable. On the trip over he meets an optimistic embezzler, Louis Dega (Dustin Hoffman), with whom he strikes a deal to protect in exchange for help in an escape attempt. Once in South America, the film follows Papillon’s attempts at escape, the consequences for his failures, and his growing friendship with Dega over the years until his final success.
There’s no mistaking the 1970s trace all over this movie. Like a number of movies of this time, it’s taking a proven genre of the Hollywood Golden Age, in this case the grand David Lean-style epic, but roughing it up. I see a lot of Bridge on the River Kwai in Papillon for example, but the latter makes a point to add more grittiness, bloodiness, and just general edginess. I imagine this was done, as with many Hollywood counterculture movies and beyond, to take advantage of the death of the Production Code, and try to realize a fuller potential in those old genres. It’s the same thing Chinatown did with noirs, and Papillon was certainly not the only movie to try and reinvent the epic in the 70s. Obviously things like the blood of a guillotined head hitting the camera, or Papillon eating bugs to survive in solitary, or a freaking leper colony, are inessential to a great epic, but they do help give this film an atmosphere. Schaffner really cares about atmosphere, focussing as often as he can on the filthiness and poor conditions of this prison to convey how rotten an experience serving out a sentence there would be. But at the same time the movie is really shot well. There are some strange technical choices sure, like how in a few instances, Schaffner uses a point of view camera where someone is being accosted or impaired visually and nowhere else in the movie; but the cinematography is quite nice and lush, unable to fully disguise the beauty of the landscape, particularly against the ocean. In a strange way it even works against the film, when Papillon’s been moved to Devil’s Island, a camp where prisoners are free within its bounds to their own devices. Despite its name, Devil’s Island looks like an idyllic home, and it becomes a little hard to believe Papillon would want to escape it, especially given what he suffered through immediately before.
Steve McQueen certainly goes through a lot in this movie. Not much the handsome bad boy star, his hair is thin and graying (white at one point), he’s scarred and wrinkled, emaciated after a total of seven non-consecutive years in solitary, and he’s even got rotted teeth. But apart from the physical transformation, McQueen also had to grapple with a fairly challenging character. Papillon is unbelievably driven and resilient, and it takes a lot to translate that. His experiences are unlike any a single man could undergo, which is one of the reasons many believe Papillon fabricated large parts of his book with other prisoners’ stories (I mean could anyone really survive seven years’ in solitary confinement with their mentality intact, let alone the permanent physical toll it would take?). Papillon is the most interesting character I’ve seen McQueen play and at the same time the best performance I’ve seen him give, something I really wasn’t expecting from an actor with such a standard acting output. This role required more commitment from him, more physical demands, and even a degree of stunt-work for the forty-three year old actor (who insisted on performing his own jump from a cliff himself and loved it). It definitely paid off; I’ve never been more engaged with a McQueen character more. Dustin Hoffman’s really quite good in this movie too, though not having to go to the same lengths as McQueen. He’s especially great in the final act of the movie where the weight of a decade is more apparent and he’s lost part of his mind. Dega has something of an Andy Dufresne streak to him, planning extensively for his release and to set himself up in the outside world, though relying too much on his wife setting him free. He’s a bit naïve, but makes for a good companion for Papillon. Indeed there’s a great comradery between the two characters and the actors have proficient chemistry. There are others who join their escape team, a cunning Woodrow Parfrey, and a young gay orderly played by Robert Deman, but the heart of the film rests with Papillon and Dega’s long-lasting friendship –one that manages to be bittersweet by the end.
But for all this the characters themselves aren’t completely compelling on their own. I doubt Papillon and Dega would garner much excitement in a different situation or with lesser actors. What really keeps Papillon engrossing is its great story. You want to see what happens to him not so much out of investment in him personally as much as pure curiosity given what he’s experienced so far. So much happens, and with such variety that it forces your attention. The unique environment sucks you in and provides a lot of potential for thrills as well as drama. In what other context would it work to have an episode where two men are ordered to subdue a crocodile? And yet it spends a lot of time with Papillon in solitary after his first escape attempt, the lighting keeping you on edge during these sequences for only illuminating part of his face and his disgusting food, so that when he comes out (or sticks his head through the cell slot for grooming) it’s more a surprise how much he’s regressed. The second, more elaborate and almost successful escape attempt isn’t even in the planning phase until about the halfway point. But the movie does earn its long runtime, especially in this second half with increasingly adventurous plot developments. Getting help from a leper colony is enough of an unexpected turn (though perfectly expected was Anthony Zerbe as their leader, who after The Omega Man seemed to be in the unusual predicament of being typecast as guys with marred faces); even more so is Papillon’s respite with a native tribe. This sequence in particular feels like a different movie, conveyed without dialogue due to the language barrier, a sense of mystery, and with a more serene, spiritual atmosphere. It’s a welcome departure for sure though. Given how peaceful it is for Papillon as he’s nursed back to health and falls in with this culture, how freeing, it’s even more unfair what happens to him subsequently. Luckily that final phase of Papillon’s journey is pretty satisfying itself. I can see why this had been a popular book -going off the screenplay it might read like Kidnapped or Mysterious Island.
I enjoyed watching this movie. And it made me think of other 70s epics like Aguirre, the Wrath of God, The Man Who Would Be King, The Deer Hunter, and of course Schaffner’s own Patton. Hell, it makes me more curious about some of his other movies like Islands in the Stream and The Boys from Brazil. Held together by rich cinematography, a rewarding, unexpected story, and an incredibly dedicated performance from McQueen, Papillon is not only a neglected gem of its era, but ardently cements a place as one of the best prison escape movies.

Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day