This is not really a review or an assessment of a film as such; really,
it is just a rough collection of scattered remarks. I hold the film in very
high regard. Composed in two different
Starbucks on Hudson Street
in May, 2014 – one near the Saatchi and Saatchi building and one a little
further uptown near Christopher
Street .
News
of first time screenwriters who pen spec scripts based on their own personal
life experiences and actually – miraculously, really - see the film get made
and released are always inspiring. The
ones that always spring to mind for me are Robert Mulligan with Summer
of 42; Douglas Day Stewart with An Officer and A Gentleman; and
James Toback with The Gambler. (Even
Sylvester Stallone and Rocky may qualify here.) I
say they’re inspiring because such news invariably entails something a little
more than just a desire to entertain or to make it in Hollywood – the
screenwriter believes so strongly in their message, they believe that the truth
they have to impart to us is so worth discussing in artistic terms, that their
desire to succeed just will not be denied.
As a matter of fact, there is a scene from the picture we are very
briefly mentioning here, Toback’s The Gambler, in which protagonist
Axel Freed, a professor of literature, gives a short lecture to his class on
this very subject of the will and desire.
Here’s
an excerpt from an article Toback wrote for Deadline Hollywood. It gives some background as to how he came to
write the script. Here’s the link to the
whole article, by the way:
“After graduating from Harvard in 1966 I taught literature
and writing in a radical new program at CCNY whose additional faculty included
Joseph Heller, John Hawks, William Burroughs, Donald Barthelme, Adrienne Rich,
Mark Mirsky and Israel Horovitz. I also wrote articles and criticism for Esquire, Harpers, The
Times, The Voice and
other publications. Most of all, I gambled — recklessly, obsessively and
secretly. It was a rich, exciting double life with heavy doses of sexual
adventurism thrown in for good measure. Inspired by the life and work of my literary
idol, Dostoyevsky, I embarked on the writing of The
Gambler intended
originally as a novel. Half way in, it became clear to me that I was seeing and
hearing the “novel” as a movie and I abruptly decided to turn it into one. When
I hit full stride I felt as if I were a recording secretary, simply putting
down on paper dialogue and images I heard and saw as if they were not sounds
and pictures at all but rather real life action existing in my brain.”
So as we see, the movie began as
a powerful personal vision. British
director Karel Reisz soon got involved with the project. Reisz, the author of one of the seminal texts
on film editing, was a director of realistic films with a “focus on characters
on the margins” as his obituary in The Guardian says. Certainly The Gambler qualifies
there.
He was also quite unlucky in the
way the executives he made pictures for handled them after they were finished
and ready. Toback’s article cited above
details this as far as The Gambler goes; Steven Bach’s Final
Cut, one of the truly classic insider accounts of Hollywood, chronicles
how Reisz’s next film, Who’ll Stop The Rain? was sabotaged
by the very studio he made it for!
(Incidentally, the picture was adapted from Robert Stone’s classic novel
Dog
Soldiers. Stone would go on to
write the terrific Hollywood bashing novel Children
of Light, and after reading Bach it’s easy to see why.)
The film itself is a bit of a
wonder, and the article linked to above is immeasurably helpful in
understanding it and the overall gambling sensibility. Lauren Hutton is an almost unreal presence on
the screen – why in the world was this woman not more of a star? In the title role James Caan is excellent as
an addicted gambler but not real convincing as a college professor. Paul Sorvino plays a role that’s kind of a
hybrid of the ones he played in Goodfellas and A Touch of Class. And in small roles we have many actors who
would become fairly well recognized over the years – Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs,
Burt Young, Vic Tayback, Antonio Fargas, James Woods. All of them are very capable here.
The script, though very powerful
and obviously authentic, is not without some problems – for example, Axel’s
girlfriend and mother, both featured prominently for a while, at a certain
point just drop off the screen. They
literally disappear. And the
Dostoyevskian existentialism is highly questionable as a working philosophy,
even given that we understand it’s the main character’s principal operating
principle.
No comments:
Post a Comment