Dr Strangelove (1964)

Gentlemen you can't fight in here, this is the war room!

Kubrick’s darkly satirical take on the threat of nuclear war in the 60s and some of the anti-Russian sentiments of the time is an absolute delight.  Released two years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, the film must have touched a raw nerve, and I could imagine some people being less than enthusiastic about some of the characters involved.

Brigadier General Jack Ripper (an excellent Sterling Hayden) puts his air base on condition red and sends signals to all the B-52 bombers stationed around Russia to proceed to their targets and carry out a nuclear strike. This is not an official order, and as soon as US President Merkin Muffley is alerted he calls all the top military minds to the War Room in the Pentagon. He then tries to avoid World War 3 by diplomacy; but one plane is not recalled...

At the heart of all the madness is a great cast. Peter Sellers is again fantastic as Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake (an RAF officer desperately trying to talk sense into Jack Ripper), President Merkin Muffley (desperately trying to calm down the Russian Premier over the phone) AND the bizarre Dr. Strangelove who seems to be a German expat but whose right arm has a mind of its own and keeps giving Nazi salutes. Where I said yesterday in Lolita that it was Sellers that stole the show, I feel that this time it is two of his supporting actors that are the highlights. Sterling Hayden (better know to me as McCluskey from The Godfather) is absolutely brilliant as the deranged Jack Ripper. Though Ruskie-hating seems to be endemic in the US military, Jack takes it one step further imagining that the Commies are after his bodily fluids! Clearly this is because humans require water to replenish their bodily fluids, whereas all the Russians drink is Vodka; and the conspiracy runs as far as putting fluoride in the water which saps his essence! He manages to play the role with all the gravitas of a commanding officer and a has a great screen presence.

George C. Scott is just fantastic and hilarious as Gen. 'Buck' Turgidson, the military head who reports the bad news of the imminent nuclear strike to the president. As well as being gung-ho about war with Russia, he is also like a schoolboy trying to hold on to his beliefs; attempting to plant a secret camera on the Russian Ambassador and worried that once the Ambassador is allowed unprecedented access to the war room that he will see the “Big Board” which tracks all of the bombers. Like Hayden he plays the role straight down the line, not even a hint of irony in his performance. It is much of Turgison’s script that provides the LOLs in the film. I must also mention Slim Pickens (no really, that’s his name) as Major “King” Kong, the pilot of the B-52 bomber. It is he who rides the nuclear bomb as it falls towards its target, and has become the iconic image from this film. Among Slim’s crew is a very young James Earl Jones; he doesn’t get much screen time, but is still effortlessly cool.

       

Another aspect of the film is the idea of the constant races between the US and Russia, the one-upmanship that both nations strive for, and the fear that there will be a gap in their knowledge with respect to the other. Both the space race and the arms race are mentioned, but when the Russian ambassador mentions that they have developed a Doomsday weapon the US president is horrified; until Dr Strangelove announces that they also have such a weapon as they feared a Doomsday gap! Equally, as the risk of nuclear fallout is discussed, the possibility of furnishing a deep mine shaft so that people may survive a holocaust is mentioned, a conversation that leads Gen. Turgidson to blurt out “We must not allow a mine shaft gap!”

A wonderful film full of great performances, and wonderful clashing images. The photography was all very gloomy, but I’m not sure if this was intentional or whether the transfer to DVD just wasn’t that great. Highly recommended, and at a snappy run time of 90 minutes, a thoroughly brilliant film to fill a short gap in anyone’s schedule.

Lolita (1962)

Lolita is the daughter of Charlotte Haze, a widow who has taken in a lodger: Professor Humbert Humbert who is soon to take up his position as Professor of French literature at the University of Beardsley. Humbert is immediately infatuated with the young Lolita, to the extent that he marries Charlotte in order that he can always be near her.

Based on a novel by Vladimir Nabokov, Lolita is all about forbidden love and sexual obsession. James Mason is the polite, slightly lecherous Humbert, whose obsession with Lolita moves from infatuation, through protective, to an awkward sexual relationship, until he finally becomes overbearing and delusional. All of which Mason communicates flawlessly. I’ve never seen James Mason in anything before this, so I’ve no idea if this is up to his usual standard. To me James Mason is the voice Eddie Izzard uses whenever he is acting out God’s part in a conversation! Though if he’s this consistent then that would account for why he has 154 titles to his name in IMDB!

As the film progresses it is clear that Charlotte Haze (Shelly Winters) is a very needy character but is charmed by the polite Humbert, completely unaware at his idolatry of her daughter. Winters is not in the same league as Mason, and although she is good she is a bit more from this school of acting. Casting a young girl for the complicated, mature role of Lolita can’t have been easy, but Sue Lyon copes very well. Only 16 when Lolita was released her character is a school kid through most of the film, but she plays off Mason very well and gives a very mature performance.

The stand out performance is definitely Peter Sellers. He lights up every scene he is in, whether he is drunk, dancing, talking non-stop, or masquerading as a German psychiatrist! He is an absolute delight, and I’m sure that it is his chameleon performance here that inspires Kubrick to cast him in his next film Dr Strangelove.

The film itself looks tremendous. Shooting in black and white, the interior shots are all beautifully composed, and there are some nice tracking shots in Charlotte’s house. The classical score complements the scenes that feature it very well, but it is fairly sporadic throughout the long running time of almost 150 minutes. Either that or the music was so complimentary and unobtrusive that I didn’t notice it. One time is was very noticeable was over the intro credits. The scene was simply someone painting a girl’s nails (we find out later that it would most likely have been Humbert, just one of the little ways that he fawns over Lolita), printed credits and beautiful classical music.

For all my praise of this film, all of which is deserved, I still don’t think that it was my kind of film. Of all the films in my Kubrick Collection, Lolita is the only one that I had not seen before, so I was able to watch it with no preconceptions. So when I say that it isn’t my kind of film, this is my initial gut feeling having thought about it for a few hours. I’m not really sure what I mean by that; it’s not that I couldn’t sympathise with the characters, or appreciate the performances, or the cinematography... I think I’m talking myself into liking it more and more! After all, I have been able to quickly bash out over 500 words! Maybe it requires a second viewing to nail down my feelings. But not just yet, I have 7 more films and a documentary to watch. Can’t wait.