Auteur List: Billy Wilder - Discussion and Defenses

[Finch]

Unsurprisingly, One Two Three is very popular in Germany (or at least was when I lived there). But then so is The Fearless Vampire Killers (another film full of gags that don't land)..

[Rayon Vert]

Just rewatched Sunset Boulevard. I have no problem with the film’s status as a “masterpiece”, given how wonderfully creative and sophisticated it is – it’s like a follow-up to Sullivan’s Travels in terms of industry-savvy satires about Hollywood, and it’s interesting that both were Paramount films. It’s also a frequently stunning looking film. But maybe it’s the satire, or the strange mixture of drama and comedy and noir and romance with its high degree of irony, that never makes me engage with it that deeply on an emotional level; a less inventive film like The Lost Weekend, for example, resonates more with me.

Watching it this time, I really liked that moment when Joe winds up for the first time at the mansion, and we see Norma through the curtains (or blinds, I forget) and then Max (Stroheim) stepping out of the entrance - it feels like we’re stepping back into the past, as in another dimension frozen in time.

I do find the film sags just a bit around the middle when Joe has become habituated to his new context, and the narrative focus shifts more to Norma’s hopes for shooting with De Mille – some of the wind seems to go out of it, until eventually other developments create new tension. Regarding Joe’s motives,

Spoiler

what stuck out for me as something unexplained was why all of a sudden he succumbs to Norma’s advances, when he’d just made it clear not that long before that he wasn’t interested. It's never really explained why and if he fell for her charms temporarily, or if there was another motive.

[therewillbeblus]

Regarding Joe’s motives,

Spoiler

what stuck out for me as something unexplained was why all of a sudden he succumbs to Norma’s advances, when he’d just made it clear not that long before that he wasn’t interested. It's never really explained why and if he fell for her charms temporarily, or if there was another motive.

Spoiler

I think the lack of explanation fits with the idea that Joe doesn’t have a strong or secure identity. He flaunts his egotism because this is the easiest protector to cope with such a barren philosophy, but he also falls in with her for unclear reasons even to himself. My guess is that he pities her, pities himself, part of him believes they belong together via fatalism, and the part of him that lives on the surface can confuse sexual attraction with self-servicing his economic and tangible interests. He’s essentially wrestling with his sensitive empathic and cold selfish insides, and this drives him to act curiously but zombie-like, as a man without convictions. In some ways it’s the most grating example of the noir antihero because his existential disillusionment doesn’t find its way into latching onto one objective to drive him or believe in, and instead implodes into nebulous self-consciousness, revealing him to be pathetic rather than confidently detached.

I agree with your reasons why the film doesn’t fully work, which is a shame because many elements do and it’s filled with interesting explorations, only uneven when forming a whole.

[Rayon Vert]

Good reading of Joe, and your posts, like Sloper's, help interpret the character, but there's something a bit unsatisfying that we have to rely on these speculations. But it's a small point.

I'm glad you also find the film doesn't completely come off, just to see I'm not the only one who feels that way (although I also noticed domino didn't rate it very well). It still has a good chance of making my list, but more towards the bottom.

[therewillbeblus]

I think in a weird way, similar to my reading of One, Two, Three, Joe’s actions not making sense and his character being so uninteresting allows Wilder’s life-as-satire/cynicism-as-realism to become effective by layering these philosophical eviscerations both in the function of the narrative and through the filmmaking process. That doesn’t make either film good, but it does make each film more satisfying intellectually in a thematic context of Wilder himself.

[Finch]

Regarding the early scenes at the Desmond house, I agree with your sentiments RV, and I also think Waxman's score is particularly effective in that stretch; the mood is poignant and creepy.

Re his succumbing to Norma's advances, I read it more as, he has gotten to the point where he is most sympathetic towards her and he finds her company tolerable, so I think "his feelings for her" are more a case of Norma projecting what she would like her relationship to be onto the reality of what it is: Joe tolerates and kind of likes her in a "poor pitiable woman" way, but he doesn't go out of his way to encourage her feelings. He's pretty opportunistic as his reaction to the clothes salesman shows: he's initially shocked at the encouragement to exploit Norma's feelings but then his face changes as he realises that the salesman is onto something.

edited for clarity

[Finch]

Spoiler

As much as I like sloper's reading of Joe's behaviour when Betty arrives, I still struggle to find it completely convincing. Yes, Joe is feeling guilty over his own exploitation of Norma and he feels even sorrier for her when he learns the calls were about her car, but he is clearly in love with Betty and he looks very cross when he catches Norma in her attempted act of sabotaging his relationship with Betty. To go from that to showing Betty around in an attempt to get her to choose Artie over him in such a short space of time doesn't feel right.

[Rayon Vert]

Regarding the early scenes at the Desmond house, I agree with your sentiments RV, and I also think Waxman's score is particularly effective in that stretch; the mood is poignant and creepy.

Re his succumbing to Norma's advances, I read it more as, he has gotten to the point where he is most sympathetic towards her and he finds her company tolerable, so I think "his feelings for her" are more a case of Norma projecting what she would like her relationship to be onto the reality of what it is: Joe tolerates and kind of likes her in a "poor pitiable woman" way, but he doesn't go out of his way to encourage her feelings. He's pretty opportunistic as his reaction to the clothes salesman shows: he's initially shocked at the encouragement to exploit Norma's feelings but then his face changes as he realises that the salesman is onto something.

You say the mood is "creepy", but in that very early part I thought there was something also strangely comforting for Joe to land in this time-frozen haven (that will turn into a prison) - or I was projecting that myself into it.

Good points too, Finch, that help understand Joe's behavior at that moment further.

EDIT: I'm with you too in your problems with Joe's reaction to Betty at the end.

[therewillbeblus]

Midnight
This is a sweet take on deception, where a gold digger navigates her way into high society and fights love with a poor cabbie despite the magnetic pull of attraction. Somehow the writers succeed in their strategy to make us believe this act isn’t for superficial selfishness or ill-intention, but rather due to society’s messaging and hard-nosed conditioning from personal history. Again, painting the world as grey, Wilder and Brackett make us understand that marrying for money over love should withstand judgment until we hear out the reasons. Colbert has hers, and the film resists being too preachy with its smart humor, especially in classist jabs, even if at times it does spend a while expressing the ambiguity. I found this semi-didactic aspect more interesting than I did tiresome but it definitely chooses to walk the plank there, so mileage will vary. Personally I thought it was an excitable multicharacter farce with a beating heart that worked in its tonal balance.


The Emperor Waltz
Strange musical with a lot of awkward gags and numbers inserted into a period piece. I admired its unapologetic mixing of goofy mismatched characters and jokes into a baroque milieu, but more often than not the delivery felt careless. Worth seeing for a unique uneven pattern of supporting characters yuck it up in the background of some half-measured romanticism, peculiar numbers, and some decent gags, but again if these work it’s usually because they’re so out of place in context rather than humorous on their own.


The Spirit of St. Louis
I often find biopics, especially of this era, tiresome, but this was pretty solid. Aside from the mechanics of this type of film running in motion, there is an absolutely wonderful middle where the narrative takes a departure for Stewart to meditate on how his personality has led to the love of flying. What could be annoying metaphors, like his recollection of needing to stretch his legs longer than the bunks in the barracks, are instead profoundly affecting pared over an inspiring score, and we get to understand this man in this moment as a person who lives for greater freedom than the restrictions of his world allows, and in that finds purpose.

From that mindful hypnotic trance we arrive back in the narrative with a newfound respect for this story. Stewart’s internal monologue musing on what he sees, and his processing of how to utilize nature as a tool (i.e. the iceberg) become involving after this careful exploration of his passion. At times this self-talk fades into irritation but it’s inconsistently involving, which is more than I expected or could hope for. This won't make my list, but I'll give credit where credit is due: Wilder used a tiresome and recycled instrument in a new, exciting way and instilled energy into the kind of chronicle that rarely enthuses me.


Kiss Me Stupid
Ray Walston runs away with this movie as the crazed jealous husband protagonist, but Wilder directs a loose romp with restraint and sense to morph it into a silly set of animated gags rooted in a simple meta-scenario, and refrains from going off the rails like One, Two, Three. Dean Martin has a ball playing a shady version of himself sexing himself up to an exaggerated version of the persona as interpreted by the public in their fantasies. This all clicks here because the film operates as a fantasy, and a hilarious nightmare for an already jealous man to have to now fend off a heartthrob celebrity when he cannot even cope with kind innocent words from a prepubescent child.

I don’t know why I was reminded of The Wizard of Oz in this psychoanalytical fairy tale, but the entire film works as a joke on the paranoid, as well as a surreal exposition on how coping with chaos can build confidence and resilience as Walston works through his own insanity. The pathetic final chapter of La Dolce Vita played as an absurdist hedonistic cover for unmanageable emotions switches tones completely here while keeping with the same basic idea in the glorious middle section and propels the movie into greatness. The sketch flows into unbelievably amusing directions, and this winds up as both a dark sex-comedy and in a sweet place of growth that reconstructs the idea of marital trust as defined through series of hardships, cast in a light of cartoonish extremities.

Here is another example of a Wilder risk-film that goes all-out and happens to work with the deck stacked against it in a deafening mess of intrepid hits. While these fail more often than not, this one kills and is a lock for my list.

[Rayon Vert]

My memory of Kiss Me, Stupid is faded, but the way you describe it, blus, it sounds like you saw another movie than I did! (I see domino rates this very highly as well). Here were my original viewing notes just for the sake of comparison and offering another (less well articulated and thought-out!) opinion: a broad sex farce that has Dean Martin parodying himself. The plot is convoluted and far-fetched. The film features some slightly humorous moments, and it never completely fails to entertain, but on the other hand it never really takes off or transcends its limitations and has its fair amount of bad jokes as well. Ray Walston as the lead also fails to carry the part as would have a Jack Lemmon, but mostly it’s the material that’s so-so.

[therewillbeblus]

That’s a fair reading, and that’s why I find Wilder to be a sensitive director for favorites - he takes so many wild risks that what works for some won’t for others. One, Two, Three lands for plenty of people out there and even if I don’t get it, I do understand why the ones that work for me don’t for others (Irma la Douce, Kiss Me Stupid). I find Walston to be perfectly cast though, for Lemmon would have made this too naturally relatable, and instead we need an erratic lead for a madcap exposition to work for our a-ha moment of seedy maturation at the end.

[therewillbeblus]

Revisits:

Ninotchka
I’ve always liked this Lubitsch but it gets better every revisit and the culture clash gags uniformly hit this time. Wilder and Brackett’s script is a gold mine, though Garbo and the trio of comrades (who I’ve always loved as much as any characters in a Lubitsch film) are critical to making the words jump off the page and fire bullseyes. The satirical wit is quickly offhanded to a mismatched pairing that surprisingly blossoms into an investing romance against all odds. The Lubitsch strengths of blending the romantic drama and unhinged comedy are helped by the screenplay which seems to comprehend how both moods function, as well as how to rotate and melt the tones without feeling forced. Unfortunately the film doesn’t sustain the magic and loses steam in its back half, but comes together again for the cathartic finish. It's hard to think of a film that wrecks me with nonstop laughs like the first third of this one though.


The Seven Year Itch
I know I’ve seen this before but have no memory of it. If I had I surely would have skipped a rewatch. I hated every second of this movie, which plays like an inverted Kiss Me Stupid in conceptualization (here we get anti-jealousy via a male entertaining the possibility that one has more space to self-actualize sexually) and the use of a major star playing a bizarro-version of themselves. Not only did I not find any of this funny, interesting in its psychological and existential musings, or charming, but both leads and their chemistry were repelling in the shallowest way. Maybe this is how people who don’t like Kiss Me Stupid feel about that film, for this is what I imagine that movie would present like if the performances and acuity didn’t hit.

I’d love to hear a defense for this one from somebody, because as it stands it might be my least favorite Wilder.


Fedora
I always kind of liked this miscalculated array of half-throttled ideas, and on a revisit I liked it even more. First of all this is by no means a Great Movie, and what it tries to pull off is too bold to work (but I think that might be the point). Wilder attempts to make another noir about Hollywood personalities, but he splices Old Hollywood structuralism with the sharp perversities of 70s new age work, and paranoia thriller methods of traversing space (without the suspense) with romantic pastiche of icons in an era that was emerging away from these preoccupations. The humor is offbeat and perhaps intentionally not funny, while the action is hushed to detached anti-stress. Characters use 30s and 40s jargon and abrasively acute insults interchangeably as if stuck between time periods, and the flashbacks within flashbacks barely function as sensible within the film’s own internal logic.

So why do I like it? Well, somehow, this wacky refusal to stick to any particular mood, genre, or even decade allows the film to exist as a mystery more interesting than the one its story revolves around. Here is Wilder again taking ridiculous risks by throwing everything about cinema he enjoys at the wall, but here the wall is Fedora- the enigmatic idea of a person, of an era, of cinema, the signifier of our own subjective connotations- and so what sticks or doesn’t stick matters as little or as much as Fedora does. The entire purpose of this film is subtly exploitative of how we make meaning and move towards truth when that truth is just a creation of our own subjective desires. Fedora doesn’t matter but we make her matter, just as what does and doesn’t work about this transgressive film creates a fun joyride through an anti-mystery where the interest is in the details that succeed and fail at capturing our attention and eliciting our own sensations while we chase a vapid goal.

Everyone outside of our surrogate (in a tired, laconic Holden) gives such exaggerated performances that the milieu becomes a display of fakery so intense it shakes any seriousness the film has and shatters it, revealing the facades of our journey along with those of cinema and film history at once. The film demands that we relinquish any attitude other than marvel at artifice and the pleasures from superficial spectacle. Holden’s tantrum when he meets Fedora hilariously proves this point when he complains about how much he gave up for his long journey when we have been given no backstory or reason to care (and this is the halfway mark of the film!), just like we have a quiet interest but ultimate shrug towards Fedora herself.

I won’t go so far as to say that Wilder wants us not to invest in his film, but he wants us to be very aware of how we invest in it, and the personal feelings we have while we engage. The avenues he provides us for this process are through the dense mise en scene, colorful characters, flow of movement through time and space, and genre flexibility to create a tale of intrigue that is only interesting because of the superficialities that comprise its design, not the draw of the content or characters. Holden is a shell of a man who is so uninteresting that we are forced to look at the details around him to see the beautiful eccentricities Wilder finds curiosity, and meaning, in.

And then what of the thematic value? The emphasis on a person-as-idea being of greater value than a human being themselves is not new, but here it mirrors the idea of cinema as more important and useful because of our consumption and collective connotations than these vessels are actually worth. So Wilder is providing us a grab bag of these signifiers in a cocktail that doesn’t work but allows us to recognize each ingredient and what feeling that mechanism or genre-trope evokes in us, to give us a reel of movie history and our own role as consumer. Since it’s a B-service we can disengage enough to fully immerse ourselves in the mechanics of the art form’s simultaneous value and lack of, and this becomes a self-reflexive piece of work that is great because it’s a tasteless exposition on taste.

The pathetic reveal in this film reflects the insanity of the rationale and plotting to fulfill a personal goal of vanity that is fatuous, thereby making fun of itself and satisfying the larger meta-themes at play. I came away fully respecting about this exactly what I do about B-movies (and most importantly, aware of it): the pure enjoyment of a relaxed, comfortable cruise through contrivances and extravaganza; except WIlder is taking the genres and concerns of A-pictures and creates a B-movie out of them. I think that if you choose to take this film seriously at face value, it can only be terrible. But if you take it as a nasty regurgitation of motifs that betrays the seriousness of these films and these types of people, then it works on multiple levels. It's no coincidence that the "legend must go on" line said so self-seriously at the finale is immediately squandered, rebuffed and treated as a passing joke by the camera, as by this point Hollywood no longer cared about these ideas of icons in the way it did when Sunset Boulevard graced the screen. Wilder makes fun of his own movie now by imploding cinema with this one, surrendering to a new era of filmmaking while firing off some rounds before he goes.

[Rayon Vert]

I was considering a rewatch of The Seven Year Itch (which I definitely like a bit more than you!... maybe a lot given how wretched you feel it to be), and over the weekend, as I decided upon which Wilder films I'd pull out for this project for revisits, I went through my whole dvd/BR library, which is not sorted out in an alphabetical or any other way (I kind of like it like that, but it's very unpractical), and all filed in locked cabinets 2 rows deep, and 2 rows on top of one another, where I have to pull out all the rows to see what's behind. I managed to find all those I wanted except my BR ofThe Seven Year Itch. Needless to say your write-up has convinced me not to go through that exercise again.

[therewillbeblus]

I’ve decided that I am going to go against my original plan and instead revisit all the films I haven’t seen or I have a hazy memory of, which unfortunately is more than just a few. I doubt I’ll need to rewatch The Fortune Cookie though I suspect that doing so would be better than some of what’s on deck. Masochistic probably, but if I was ever going to finish off his work now’s the time. Plus I’m finding even some of the failures to be contextually compelling along Wilder’s self-reflexive nihilistic paradigm.

[senseabove]

Ball of Fire (Hawks, 1941) A surprising fizzle for me. I had this pegged as a hit in my unseen Stanwyck and Hawks lists, and she's fine in it, and it's fine fun for a time, but once the New Jersey shuffle starts in earnest, Stanwyck doesn't have anything to do but fret and the fire mostly goes out. The best of its comedy comes from its two distinct worlds living together, so it starts to drift once it abandons that to just eavesdrop on the pitiable blind leading the blind as they're duped and unwittingly headed to battle. To its credit, it balances mockery with empathy, so it feels more like a family member's just a little too on-the-nose ribbing, but it rests a little too much on caricatures just being caricatures for its empathy to ring true. My enjoyment may also have been dampened by coming to the same surprising conclusion about Cooper I had about Gable a while back: this man can't act? At least Gable plays a good cad and seems to have figured out as much. Cooper doesn't even seem to know what he's good at, and here only stumbles into some amusingly nebbish line readings once in a while, but Stanwyck doesn't have much to play against... I'd see this again in theaters, probably, as it seems like one where the easy pleasures might be more easily pleasurable when, on another go-round, I can just put aside the quality calculus and enjoy it.

[senseabove]

The Major and the Minor — And a surprising delight, this one! It's worth watching just for Ginger Rogers' unbelievably deft judgement of exactly how much any given scene needs of the absurd treacle that is playing an adult playing what other adults think of as adolescent behavior, and what is necessary in any given scene swings easily and often from too much through just right to not quite enough. The whole movie is anchored by her, and the final sequence, with one more shift in her performance, is the pudding the proof's in. While I knew Rogers was a great comedian and entertainer, I can't say I'd ever really paid attention to her as an actor before, but perhaps I wasn't looking for it. And I'm relieved that for the most part the script does well enough to not paint itself into what could have been, almost 80 years later, a disastrous corner (though I have to imagine there was a more detailed explanation scene written and excised for efficiency—and I can't believe this was remade, gender-swapped and ante-upped, with the title You're Never Too Young [italics mine, even if it is a title]).

Oddly enough, I think what lets it avoid that massive pitfall is Wilder's characteristic wordliness—which in most cases rightly gets called his cynicism. Even if it's not really there in the plot, there's a frankness and complexity throughout the characters that's almost pre-Code like, winking at the audience while still letting us infer more than a punchline. Maybe we can thank Wilder in particular for unearthing Rogers' deft tone-shifting skill*, as in fact the rest of the supporting cast, notably Milland's fiancé and the kid's father who gives the game away, are also excellent at playing the range from hamminess to earnestness. That earnestness throughout all the characters' suspicion, belief or disbelief, and opportunism is what makes Milland's uncle act on the train the right kind of creepy, for us, and yet still believably innocent for him (and thus weirdly honest about how creepy it is in spite of its innocence). We already know Rogers is street-wise, fed-up, and not willing to put up with very much, thanks to the first scene, yet that's also what makes the step-too-far of her going with Milland to the academy work: she has enough sympathy and self-preservation to want to help Milland out of the jam she got him into. I'll stop before I get into a play-by-play that I'd need to rewatch the movie to get through, but let it suffice to say that Wilder's first American directorial effort is likely headed onto my list...

*If I oughtn't, point me in the right direction. Or just point me in the direction of Rogers getting to act at least as much as entertain.

[TMDaines]

Sherlock was a reasonable way to spend a couple of hours, but I was a little puzzled as to why the Russian ballet section was in the film, and kept expecting it to go full circle at some point and make the connection. It was only afterwards I read about the production history and how the film ended up being only two episodes of a far greater epic. I wonder if the film would be better cut down with the Russian ballet section excised entirely. It serves no purpose and just delays the actual plot of the film from beginning.

The Major and the Minor did no service to making this a fun viewing project for both my wife and I to do together, so soon after Love in the Afternoon. More creepy, inappropriate relationships, although in this one the 'minor' engaging with the army cadets is actually far more unsettling than her relationship with the 'major', who were far closer in age both on screen and in real life. Even setting that aside, I'm just not sure I bought any of the deception enough and found the film entertaining enough regardless. 12 is a young age; make Ginger 15 and I'd maybe buy it.

[therewillbeblus]

I'm with TMDaines on The Major and the Minor, which I flat-out hated. I can usually give a film some rope even when it’s packed with dated concepts, but this premise - while amusing on paper - was painful to endure. The jokes stopped being funny immediately in relation to the con, though the film looks great and at least its construction of scenes can be externally admirable, even if the content repelled me. I'm not averse to finding the gold in films that have off-putting dynamics, quite the opposite actually, but Wilder's typically histrionic commitment to going all-out in trying to bleed his ideas out fails as he forces his actors to wring a bone-dry towel for comedy that just isn't there, or whatever was there is stunted by his bludgeoning. I can see how if one can get on this film’s wavelength there is a potential for amusement, but this film's mini-gags and overarching one-joke progression were so unbearable that any grievances I had with the narrative were distantly secondary. Sometimes Wilder trying too hard can work in spades, but man when it doesn't work, it's just the worst. I'll hand it to you, senseabove, that Rogers does a fine job here with what she's given. Unfortunately for me, I think what she's given is embarrassing material.

[Rayon Vert]

I'll just say it's a favorite of mine (and a lock-in for my list) and leave it at that!

[therewillbeblus]

I'm beginning to really understand how erratically Wilder dances on the razor's edge, especially with his comedies, as I go through these films again and for the first time. I can point to why I think those that work for me do while these don't, but in the end I believe where one finds treasure in his work is far less indicative of general taste-sharing than would be the case with other filmmakers.

[swo17]

To anyone nervous to support any of the Wilder comedies that routinely get dunked on here: don't worry, I'm voting for all of them

[domino harvey]

Swo, after he submits his list:

Sorry, I wasn’t really paying attention, I thought you all hated the Apartment

[swo17]

Such a hateable movie

[therewillbeblus]

To anyone nervous to support any of the Wilder comedies that routinely get dunked on here: don't worry, I'm voting for all of them

But he has more than 10 comedies, eve if we just include the ones that routinely get dunked on here!

[domino harvey]

Swo means Shakespearean comedies, so only those which end in marriages