Skip to main content

The Criterion Channel Presents: A Face in the Crowd (1957)

I’m much too young to say I grew up on The Andy Griffith Show, but I did watch it as a kid in occasional reruns and DVDs. It was a favourite of my dad’s at the age and I was curious by it, ultimately watching enough to understand and appreciate the show and its titular star. Andy Griffith was certainly a model of wholesomeness, engineered by the television show, and it informed his screen presence for decades following, up to his late career high point in Matlock -both TV characters being symbols of old-fashioned American principles around justice. And yet probably his best performance relished in the direct opposite of those themes, coming three years before Sheriff Andy Taylor made his debut on screens around the world.
A Face in the Crowd is a 1957 movie by Elia Kazan that imagines the rise to entertainment stardom and political influence of a know-nothing country bumpkin through a particular brand of television charisma that he is able to harness and weaponize for his own self-aggrandizing ends. An eerie story to be sure, viewed through the prism of nearly seventy years -though honestly even less than that. Here was a movie taking on the unwieldy power of mass media a full two decades before Network, that understood how television could sway the masses in America politically before the famous debate of the 1960 election proved it definitively. And at the heart of the story is a man who would indeed be a considerable figure within that medium with his own cultivated and recognizable brand of down-to-earth folksiness.
Of course it must be said that Andy Griffith was by all accounts a genuinely kind and charming person -which can’t be said for his alter ego here, Larry “Lonesome” Rhodes -plucked by radio journalist Marcia Jeffries (Patricia Neal) from an Arkansas jail where his exuberant demeanour and country singing talents on a “Face in the Crowd” program makes him an instant sensation. His own radio show follows -produced by Walter Matthau’s Mel Miller -suspicious of his character from the start, then a string of lucrative ad deals, and ultimately a TV program before he turns his fame towards political power-brokering; while his ego and unbridled lust for power grows.
The film, which was a flop on release, has naturally seen some renewed attention in the era of Trump -that even Griffith’s on-screen son Ron Howard alluded to when he spotlighted the movie for TCM last November, just days before the election. Lonesome Rhodes is not however a Trump analogue (he is perhaps a little more like Reagan in fact) -but there is some notable similarity in the populism he takes to, the relatable contract he’s able to quickly make with the public. He’s more of a loose cannon than other entertainment figures, he “tells it like it is”. On one of the first ads he partakes in, he makes fun of the company -which gets him in hot water before the company realizes their consumers appreciate his candor about the product and his edgy personality. There is a ‘Man of the People’ air about him in the ways he acts outside the norms. Sounds very familiar. It should be no surprise his biggest advertising gig comes as the spokesperson for male supplement pills, something I’m shocked enough made it into a movie in the 1950s.
Griffith’s performance of this is a lot of fun, as he goes for the ham but in an entirely believable fashion -in fact I think his performance would strike people as more realistic now than it was back then. He conveys the genuinely attractive buoyancy of this figure from the start, his unquenchable enthusiasm and everyman background. Yet he can flip the switch easily as well, showing off the character's sinister nature, a cunning not so obvious in his public persona. It makes perfect sense as an extension of his public persona though. The signs are there in the attitude he espouses, the products he endorses -he is quite openly lascivious towards the young Betty Lou (Lee Remick), a student at one of his events whom he subsequently marries. His charisma is subversive by nature, and as much as Kazan points the finger at mass media, he is cynical about the public as well. We know he is right to be.
Rhodes was loosely inspired by a few figures, combining into a uniquely distasteful amalgam of Will Rogers, Huey Long, and Billy Graham that is nonetheless a perfect image of cult of personality populism as it is seen today. Though curiously even Kazan could not imagine this character would seek political power for himself. Indeed for as relevant as the film is, it is beholden to some fictions once considered safeguard truisms. The biggest of them being the matter of Rhodes' fall once the con is exposed. As Paul Schrader so eloquently commented on Letterboxd: "the most insidious myth of the movies is the notion that demagoguery once exposed by the media, would be rejected by the general public." What causes everyone, even his own inner circle, to turn on him, would not make the slightest dent in any analogue's popularity today. Matt Gaetz still has loyalists for considerably worse than directly mocking his fans and political ally on live television. And unlike Mel's indictment, there would be no chance of Lonesome Rhodes being forgotten.

Criterion Recommendation: Amour (2012)
There's something about Michael Haneke's understated but heartbreaking Amour that seems to capture elder grief better than just about any other movie. Like Sarah Polley's Away From Her, it deals in devastating candor with the effects of the ailments of age on a romance. Emmanuelle Riva stars in her last great performance as Anna, a former music teacher who suffers a stroke that her doting husband Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant) is unprepared to tend to. With Isabelle Huppert's daughter living far away, they are forced to deal with the illness themselves in their Paris apartment, Anna determined not to be sent to a care home and Georges just as determined to honour her wishes. Dealing with difficult themes of love and age, mortality and even the moral question of euthanasia, it is a profoundly human movie above all else, and an astounding late career showcase for two of France's preeminent actors. On Haneke's part, it is a bleak film, even by his standards; but one that is overflowing with compassion and heart. It is impossible not to see some elderly loved one in one of these two characters, and though a humble film, I feel it is more than worthy of Criterion's graces.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more