dwatts
03-22-2004, 08:14 PM
Huh, I did a search of this site, and there's never been a thread on Peeping Tom!
Well, we can correct that pretty quickly. Peeping Tom is a film I have read a lot about over the years. Most of what I have read has been positive criticism, which is in marked contrast to the reason people were writing about it, which was past negative criticism.
Directed by Michael Powell, this film is considered to have basically ruined his career. Salvaged by the likes of Martin Scorsese, the film has survived, and now could be said to have a strong cult following.
What's the storyline? Well, like all good films, there are several layers in this film that need to be peeled back. On the surface we have the story of a young man, tormented by his brilliant scientific father for all his childhood years, driven insane as he takes up his father's obsessions after his death. The obsession was a search for fear. How best to instill fear, that to film the death throes of an unsuspecting victim?
The saying goes that "love conquers all", and in the end it is love that finally ends the career of the lead here. It's a simple story, but it doesn't begin and end with the plot.
Why did this film create such controversy? Looking back from the stance of today, it really is hard to see what the fuss was about. At the time it was made, 1959, it clearly struck a nerve that made many feel uncomfortable. That the film was blasted by critics, and sold off to the lowest bidder, tells us all we need to know about what contemporaries thought of it at the time.
Perhaps is the dark foreboding that permeates every frame of the film? Despite rich colors, and well lit scenes, everything in it feels dirty, unclean. The lead performance is excellent, as Carl Boehm never lets up from his intense performance. The quickness at which his world falls apart once a woman works her way into his life, adequately displays how fragile he really is.
Or maybe it's the fact that basically, Mark Lewis, the central character, is making snuff movies. Long before talk of snuff movies was to make video nasty history, Peeping Tom was covering the topic with abandon. Mark films his victims as he kills them, and then goes back to view the footage at home, splicing in investigative footage taken the next day, after the bodies are found. There is an irony that, fast forward almost 50 years, there are people like me with home theater systems doing exactly what Mark is doing in this film - sitting in the dark, watching horror films.
If there are some areas where this film might disappoint, then those that insist on pigeonholing every film might well be to blame. Considered a classic British horror film, I wonder if that category really applies. Isn't this just another thriller, or murder film? What classifies it as horror? I don't know, as everyone seems to struggle with defining horror cinema. However, as a horror film, it doesn't have any of the required blood and gore, it's not gothic in the traditional sense (as was common at the time), and all the murders end up taking place off screen.
It should also be mentioned that the film has not aged well. The cameras Mark uses are laughably old. The shops, fashions, and location shooting is all antiquated and age the film far more than the story or performances do. Of course, one could argue that it actually makes this film even more difficult to watch. It's an odd world that somehow doesn?t seem quite real, how could it be with all this antique furniture?
The strange soundtrack doesn't make this any easier to watch, either. The music is more sounds really, with an almost total lack of melody.
Peeping Tom is one of those films that, if you're a fan of horror, you just have to seek out. Along with the likes of Salo, Cannibal Holocaust, and I Spit on Your Grave, it's a film many write about, and you want to see, even if it's only once. I'm not at all saying it's like any of those films, but if you do any reading about the history of the horror film, undoubtedly you will stumble upon mention of this film, and its effect on the career of the Director.
I watched the R2 Studio Canal version of this film. Shown in 1.78:1 anamorphic, the print isn?t perfect, but it is more than adequate. Criterion have also given this one the treatment, I can only assume their version is stellar. My copy is bare bones, with no extras of note (filmography and a single photo album of around 8 pictures).
I guess the thing I am left with after watching this film, is that I don't really feel a need to watch it again. That has nothing to do with whether I think it is a good film or not, rather it says something about the oppressiveness of the work. By hiding the gore and killings, and simply showing us this man going about his job, and then making snuff movies on the side, it's all too real in a way. You obviously don't associate with the guy, but on the other hand, you don't hate him either. His single obsession, to continue in the footsteps of his father, is overwhelmingly depressing and dark. I don't know when, or if, this one will hit my player again.
On the other hand, it is a film I am glad to own. I am glad to have had a chance to see it in a nice print, with its rich colors and spooky atmosphere. Perhaps the next time someone comes around, sees it on my shelf and says,
'Man, I've always wanted to see that", I'll put it on. In the mean time, I think the lead here might well have spooked me. In making such a repressive film, Powell succeeded, but at the same time he made something people won?t enjoy watching. Such is the frustration for some artists, I suppose.
Well, we can correct that pretty quickly. Peeping Tom is a film I have read a lot about over the years. Most of what I have read has been positive criticism, which is in marked contrast to the reason people were writing about it, which was past negative criticism.
Directed by Michael Powell, this film is considered to have basically ruined his career. Salvaged by the likes of Martin Scorsese, the film has survived, and now could be said to have a strong cult following.
What's the storyline? Well, like all good films, there are several layers in this film that need to be peeled back. On the surface we have the story of a young man, tormented by his brilliant scientific father for all his childhood years, driven insane as he takes up his father's obsessions after his death. The obsession was a search for fear. How best to instill fear, that to film the death throes of an unsuspecting victim?
The saying goes that "love conquers all", and in the end it is love that finally ends the career of the lead here. It's a simple story, but it doesn't begin and end with the plot.
Why did this film create such controversy? Looking back from the stance of today, it really is hard to see what the fuss was about. At the time it was made, 1959, it clearly struck a nerve that made many feel uncomfortable. That the film was blasted by critics, and sold off to the lowest bidder, tells us all we need to know about what contemporaries thought of it at the time.
Perhaps is the dark foreboding that permeates every frame of the film? Despite rich colors, and well lit scenes, everything in it feels dirty, unclean. The lead performance is excellent, as Carl Boehm never lets up from his intense performance. The quickness at which his world falls apart once a woman works her way into his life, adequately displays how fragile he really is.
Or maybe it's the fact that basically, Mark Lewis, the central character, is making snuff movies. Long before talk of snuff movies was to make video nasty history, Peeping Tom was covering the topic with abandon. Mark films his victims as he kills them, and then goes back to view the footage at home, splicing in investigative footage taken the next day, after the bodies are found. There is an irony that, fast forward almost 50 years, there are people like me with home theater systems doing exactly what Mark is doing in this film - sitting in the dark, watching horror films.
If there are some areas where this film might disappoint, then those that insist on pigeonholing every film might well be to blame. Considered a classic British horror film, I wonder if that category really applies. Isn't this just another thriller, or murder film? What classifies it as horror? I don't know, as everyone seems to struggle with defining horror cinema. However, as a horror film, it doesn't have any of the required blood and gore, it's not gothic in the traditional sense (as was common at the time), and all the murders end up taking place off screen.
It should also be mentioned that the film has not aged well. The cameras Mark uses are laughably old. The shops, fashions, and location shooting is all antiquated and age the film far more than the story or performances do. Of course, one could argue that it actually makes this film even more difficult to watch. It's an odd world that somehow doesn?t seem quite real, how could it be with all this antique furniture?
The strange soundtrack doesn't make this any easier to watch, either. The music is more sounds really, with an almost total lack of melody.
Peeping Tom is one of those films that, if you're a fan of horror, you just have to seek out. Along with the likes of Salo, Cannibal Holocaust, and I Spit on Your Grave, it's a film many write about, and you want to see, even if it's only once. I'm not at all saying it's like any of those films, but if you do any reading about the history of the horror film, undoubtedly you will stumble upon mention of this film, and its effect on the career of the Director.
I watched the R2 Studio Canal version of this film. Shown in 1.78:1 anamorphic, the print isn?t perfect, but it is more than adequate. Criterion have also given this one the treatment, I can only assume their version is stellar. My copy is bare bones, with no extras of note (filmography and a single photo album of around 8 pictures).
I guess the thing I am left with after watching this film, is that I don't really feel a need to watch it again. That has nothing to do with whether I think it is a good film or not, rather it says something about the oppressiveness of the work. By hiding the gore and killings, and simply showing us this man going about his job, and then making snuff movies on the side, it's all too real in a way. You obviously don't associate with the guy, but on the other hand, you don't hate him either. His single obsession, to continue in the footsteps of his father, is overwhelmingly depressing and dark. I don't know when, or if, this one will hit my player again.
On the other hand, it is a film I am glad to own. I am glad to have had a chance to see it in a nice print, with its rich colors and spooky atmosphere. Perhaps the next time someone comes around, sees it on my shelf and says,
'Man, I've always wanted to see that", I'll put it on. In the mean time, I think the lead here might well have spooked me. In making such a repressive film, Powell succeeded, but at the same time he made something people won?t enjoy watching. Such is the frustration for some artists, I suppose.