Scorsese is a director I admire for not only his prowess in creating evocative and iconic film, but for his conservation and historical connection to the industry itself. In relation to film conservation (preserving celluloid films which would otherwise whither and deteriorate), the director founded three non-profits: The film Foundation, World Cinema Foundation and African Film Heritage project.
It is uncannily rare that a filmmaker with such credit to his name as Scorsese retains that love of cinema throughout his life and pledges to preserve and protect the films he loves, which is why I believe this documentary is so fitting and characteristic!
This review will be split into four sections, as in Scorsese's documentary itself, debating and discussing his views on the evolution of cinema.
The Director as a Storyteller
"To direct a picture, a man needs humility. Do you have humility, Mr shields?"
Scorsese's opening section to his documentary involves his childhood fascination with film, beginning with 'A Pictorial History of The Movies' by Deans Taylor. His references to an early fascination with a medium he could not often view first-hand is relatable as someone from a lower-income background, with my own love for movies stemming from reruns and glimpses of The Prince of Egypt and Blazing Saddles on television.
I found his intrigue for westerns to be based less in cinematic critique of the medium and its often-sexist undertones, and more aligned with his own childhood nostalgia for films such as 'Duel in The Sun' (1946) by King Vidor. I therefore don't hold the western medium to the same esteem as Scorsese- after all, my film palate was nurtured on sci-fi, animated epics and other genres that restrain from the Americanisation that many westerns hold in their very nature.
Scorsese's note that his documentary only explores his subjective 'imaginary museum' is therefore telling: This documentary is not a journey through American Film, but a personal insight into Scorsese's own personal journey through American Film.
Notable films:
The Phenix City Story (1955, Dir. Phil Karlson)
Vertigo (1958, Dir. Hitchcock)
The Bad and The Beautiful (1952, Dir. Vincente Minelli)
The Big Parade (1925, Dir. King Vidor)
'The Bad and The Beautiful'
I found Scorsese's exploration of this film to be intriguing and telling of his own auteur signature of leaving danger out of the direct eye of the audience. In 'Cat People', a director and producer are made to create 'The Doom of The Cat Man', and Scorsese praises the film's exploration of not only working under constraints to create a nonetheless great film, but also the impossible restrictions on a director and their auteur signature during the 20th century 'Studio System'
The Director as an Illusionist
"The American Industry, it seems, never failed to embrace new technological developments."
Cinematic illusionism is important for audiences to absorb themselves into the director's world. Scorsese's highlighting of films such as 'Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans' (1927, Dir. Murnau) and The Ten Commandments (1923) makes clear that he finds intriguing the combining of emotive, all-encompassing and universal stories with fantastical editing components that bring viewers into a world of escapism.
Though I agree with Scorsese's above interpretation, his comments on certain controversial films throughout early cinema, such as 'The Birth of a Nation' (1915, Dir. Griffith). Though innovative through a contemporary lens, Scorsese's refusal to reference the blatant racism and support of the KKK within this film places a sour note on 'The Director as An Illusionist'. How can one acknowledge the feats of cinema yet not debate their social impact in film?
Notable films:
Some Came Running (1958, Dir. Minnelli)
Land of The Pharaohs (1955, Dir. Howard Hawks)
2001: A Space Oddysey (1968, Kubrick)
The changing frame of cinema
At this point in the documentary, Scorsese highlights the technological evolution of the cinematic frame, to a wide-screen composition. His references to films such as 'The Robe' (1953, Dir. Henry Koster) using widescreen as not only a marketing tool but also a new venture for grand and intimate cinematography was intriguing and makes me want to delve further into the history of directors during this turbulent moment in cinematic history.
The Director as a Smuggler
"Now it's time to look through the cracks in the system"
This section of the documentary discusses b-films and experimental political pieces. I agree with Scorsese's assessment that lower-budget films are able to express personal identity to a much greater degree: after-all, the capitalist tendencies of large studios or conglomerates such as Disney and Paramount mean that often, modern films political sentiments leave the cutting-room floor as sanitised, palatable narratives rather than raw and intentional.
Cat people's exploration of the heroine's fear of her own sexuality and the metaphor of the violent feline are clearly connected with the 1940's patriarchal society in which Tourneur is based. It led the way for a "more mature American cinema", states Scorsese, even if created on a lower budget.
Notable films:
Cat People (1942, Dir. Jacques Tourneur)
Letter From an Unknown Woman (1948, Dir. Max Ouphuls)
Scarlet Street (1945, Dir. Fritz Lang)
The Director as an Iconoclast
It was at this point that I began to question my own thoughts surrounding the history of film and what it means to be a notable and historic American director, particularly as Scorsese's love for D.W. Griffith was apparent. Personally, I believe that the idea of the art and the artist intertwined is particularly poignant in film, and caricatures found in Broken Blossoms and Birth of a Nation speak to the psyche of someone who creates through hatred and bigotry.
Scorsese, of course, comes from a somewhat privileged point of view as a white male American director. He cannot begin to understand why though directors such as Griffith and Polanski may have made their mark on cinematic history, many choose to refuse to celebrate their achievements. I once again considered this during the section in which Scorsese praises Lolita (1962), a film I view as controversial at the very least. It seems that though one must take into consideration directorial subjectivity, they must also take into account what directors are willing to ignore about their peers' behaviours and ideologies for the glamour of the end result.
I enjoyed 'A Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese Through American Movies', and believe it justifies its place well within the cinematic historical canon. However, due to my own personal boundaries regarding Hollywood, I have to question Scorsese's personal interpretation of what makes a film important or significant, or even what makes a film necessary for society to reflect.
⭐⭐⭐1/2
Comments