Hidden City

[MichaelB]

Full specs announced:

HIDDEN CITY
A film by Stephen Poliakoff
Charles Dance, Cassie Stuart, Bill Paterson, Richard E Grant

Released on BFI Blu-ray, iTunes and Amazon Prime on 13 May 2024

After establishing a fine reputation in British television drama, Stephen Poliakoff (Close My Eyes, Perfect Strangers) directed his first feature film in 1987. A mystery wrapped in conspiracy and secrets, Hidden City tells the story of James Richards (Charles Dance), a writer sucked into a search for a lost piece of film by Sharon Newton (Cassie Stuart), a video librarian. What they stumble upon are cover-ups, tense searches and possible danger. Released on Blu-ray and digitally by the BFI on 13 May, special features on the Blu-ray include a new director commentary.

With the help of Witold Stok’s excellent cinematography, Poliakoff has crafted a rich look into London’s dark history, with disused tram-tunnels and long-forgotten subterranean chambers serving as the backdrop to explore the depths of the British preoccupation with secrecy. Featuring a cast of stellar British talent including Richard E Grant and Bill Paterson, Stephen Poliakoff’s rarely seen directorial debut is a stylish thriller ripe for rediscovery.

Special features
• Presented in High Definition
• Newly recorded audio commentary with writer and director Stephen Poliakoff and film critic Michael Brooke
• Treasures from the BFI National Archive (1903-1947, 58 mins): a selection of archive gems, exploring some of the themes featured in Hidden City. The films: Cheese Mites (1903), Barging Through London (1924), Hop Gardens of Kent (1933), The City (1939) and Shown by Request (1947)
• Inside the BFI National Archive (2023, 1 min): a behind-the-scenes look at the work of the BFI National Archive
• ***First pressing only*** Illustrated booklet including Poliakoff's original introduction to his screenplay, a new essay on the film by John Wyver, a new interview with Stephen Poliakoff by Michael Brooke, new writing on Barging Through London and Hop Gardens of Kent by Ellen Cheshire and an essay on Public Information films and the National Archives by Sarah Castagnetti and Patrick Russell

Product details
RRP: £19.99 / Cat. no. BFIB1510/ 15
UK / 1987 / colour / 108 minutes / English language with optional descriptive subtitles / original aspect ratio 1.66:1 // BD50: 1080p, 24fps, LPCM 2.0 mono audio (48kHz/24-bit)

[MichaelB]

I can't speak for the rest of the package, but I was very happy with how the commentary recording session went - there was tons of stuff to talk about (Poliakoff cheerfully admitted that it was a classic case of a feature debut with rather too many ideas than it knew what to do with), and of course the film has become a fascinating historical artefact in its own right, capturing London at a certain point in time (pretty much the commentary's first observation is that the skyline looks totally different now) and indeed an era when archival research required serious legwork - you couldn't just sit in front of a computer screen (or take out your phone in the middle of the street) and call up tons of stuff instantly.

Although, of course - and we discuss this in some detail - this has led to the widespread myth that everything is now available online, which could hardly be less true, especially in the context of the kind of long-buried secrets at the heart of the film's narrative; this is precisely the sort of material that wouldn't have been digitised.

Oh, and I distinctly recall that Poliakoff did 90-95% of the talking, which is exactly how I hoped things would pan out (and I suspect this isn't a minority opinion!). In fact, he could easily have handled the whole thing solo, but I gather he likes having someone in the room with him to bounce stuff off and give him occasional prompts, and I was very happy to oblige. In fact, it went so smoothly that we finished well ahead of schedule.

[colinr0380]

Just on looking at the extra features, is that "Cheese Mites" film the first film that was officially banned in the UK? Not because of sex or violence but simply because there was the worry that seeing these microscopic mites in close up was something that could cause the public to stop buying the product?

[M Sanderson]

was really invigorated by this imaginatively shot look at the hidden spaces of old London and the intelligence secrets they conceal. While watching this I was wondering why more films that drift into spy thriller territory weren't shot like this. I'd wanted to see this Poliakoff for a long time and was really pleased when the BFI picked this up. London was depicted as an exciting place, that almost encourages us to look for a narrative (see the ending, which rather than hinting at a sequel, seems to hint at the possibility of a city so rich in history). and obviously nowadays, it fascinates to look back at when information was stored (often recklessly) on paper, in files and books. I found that this would make a great double bill with a Paul WS Anderson TV horror, the intriguing The Sight, actually a ghost story that could also fit into the genre of "psychogeography". Another story that was left open, to explore more histories and narratives, but which in this case didn't extend beyond the pilot.

[MichaelB]

Much to the annoyance of some of its old-school crew, the entire film was shot on location - Poliakoff insisted on that, and he was absolutely right to do so.

[M Sanderson]

glad he did. this film looks like few, in any, others.

[Mr. Deltoid]

A thesis, rather than a film, despite some striking camera work. The plot is draped formlessly around the fascinating conceit of London's hidden, underground arterial; a secret, occult history of the city documented in bureaucratic paper-form alongside an elliptical mystery edited into an old public-information-film that may, or may not, expose a larger historical conspiracy. Manna from heaven for hauntologists you would think? Unfortunately Poliakoff doesn't possess the dramatic chops to back up this conceit. Framing it as a noir-mystery, there's really no dramatic stakes at play here, with the writer/director taking intellectual digressions that he finds fascinating - how visual Media is corrupting the thought capacity of the young, the potential of recording and monetizing someone's dreams for profit, etc. - but which ultimately end up as more interesting diversions than the main mystery. What sounded great on the page reveals it's artificiality when transposed to the screen. There's too much coincidental incident and risible plot-turns, while the central pairing of Dance and Stuart is particularly lop-sided, with the latter noticeably out of her depth in the performance stakes, especially when set aside the weary gravitas of Chuck D.

[MichaelB]

For the record, Poliakoff strongly defends Cassie Stuart's performance in the commentary and says that she delivered exactly what he wanted from her. And one thing that watching a lot of Poliakoff productions back to back earlier this year really rammed home to me is that he's very fond of leading characters who are abrasive to an extent that many might find off-putting - in fact, I think I bring this up in the commentary at one point, and I don't recall him disagreeing.

[Mr. Deltoid]

For the record, Poliakoff strongly defends Cassie Stuart's performance in the commentary and says that she delivered exactly what he wanted from her. And one thing that watching a lot of Poliakoff productions back to back earlier this year really rammed home to me is that he's very fond of leading characters who are abrasive to an extent that many might find off-putting - in fact, I think I bring this up in the commentary at one point, and I don't recall him disagreeing.

Fair enough. I didn't watch this via the new BD, so I couldn't sample the commentary (it was more a 'try before you buy' watch). I admit, I'm not a great Poliakoff admirer, but I was willing to give this one a chance because I found the central idea quite compelling. Still, I found Cassie Stuart's performance just grating, like she'd wandered in from a Children's Film Foundation production or something. Still, glad to see BFI putting out these 80's British films. The BBC Screen 2 production Unfair Exchanges, directed by Gavin Millar, came to mind after watching Hidden City - a film that has similar occult-conspiracy undertones to this one, but one I feel is better realised. It's the BBC though, so no chance!

[colinr0380]

Framing it as a noir-mystery, there's really no dramatic stakes at play here, with the writer/director taking intellectual digressions that he finds fascinating - how visual Media is corrupting the thought capacity of the young, the potential of recording and monetizing someone's dreams for profit, etc. - but which ultimately end up as more interesting diversions than the main mystery.

That is what I really like about Poliakoff, where he edges closer to the Altman-style approach to a story of just observing groups of people forced into interacting which, like life, often does not have a specific pay off for the action, but its more about the mental journey the characters take as they go down the paved path towards somewhat pre-destined and inevitable endings. There is often no real climax but more a sense of leaving the characters with a little more understanding of the almost (willfully) lost in the mists of time events that brought them to their present moment in which they now exist. Which I think is particularly interesting for such filmmaking arising out of the ahistorical "no such thing as society" individualistic 1980s (its arguably a premonition of and closer to the Blairite philosophy of there being "no such thing as history", or rather "history is what I make it into, and I'll be judged by history only as I personally define it"). I mentioned 1999's Shooting The Past a while back, which is about a doomed photograph library and the stories contained therein (and as with Hidden City appeals to my long unfulfilled wishes of wanting to become a librarian/archivist), but the other Poliakoff series that also gets into this area is 2001's Perfect Strangers which takes on the then current genealogy fad as a big gathering brings an estranged branch of a family back into the fold, and we find out about all of the hidden secrets of that family along with the youngest member being introduced to them for the first time (Timothy Spall being in the Charles Dance type of 'dark sheep' equivalent abrasive role in that production).

Both Shooting The Past and Perfect Strangers have an interesting approach to 'recording and monetising someone's dreams for profit' too, with the more mercenary characters (either in selling off the useless collection; or interrogating various family members for their genealogy project) being the least sympathetic ones, because they are too harsh (too vulgar? too louche?) to really appreciate the value of the past in their haste to turn it into something of practical use. They are also too busy trying to pin down exact details, whilst it seems that Poliakoff's sympathies lie more with the dreamers who extrapolate their histories (of their city, their family, the images that they work with) into raw material to create new tall tales out of. 'Historical truth' isn't really a Poliakoff theme, despite that often being the bait and switch set up for his stories - the chance to explore a mystery, or to find out dark family secrets, or uncover a shadowy conspiracy, etc (which is perhaps where I could see his work frustrating audiences wanting that to have a kind of pay off). It often ends up taking on more of a certain freeform jazz-style 'historical vibe' quality instead.