MonsterGirl 150 Days of Classic Horror #58 The Exorcist 1973 & The Omen 1976

THE EXORCIST 1973

Writing a simple overview of one of cinema’s most transformative films is like trying to thread a needle in a storm; A film like The Exorcist demands more than a cursory summary—it calls for careful observation, thoughtful analysis, and a deep engagement with its layers of meaning and influence. To do justice to its complexity, I need to take the time to revisit its images, its sounds, and its impact, allowing insights to develop gradually. For now, a true reckoning with its significance is something that’ll come further down the road at The Last Drive In. I might even try to talk to Linda Blair, who is doing incredible work rescuing dogs; she’s gone from Scream Queen to Savior. I had the amazing experience of meeting Linda at the Chiller Theater expo a few years ago. She is one of the most down-to-earth people and is passionate about her sacred mission. As a person who does serious rescue of cats, I can tell you how deeply that resonates with me.

The Exorcist (1973), directed by William Friedkin and adapted from William Peter Blatty’s novel, is a film that defies the confines of genre, merging psychological horror, theological inquiry, and visceral terror into a work that reshaped cinema. Its legacy lies not only in its ability to unsettle audiences but in its profound exploration of faith, doubt, and the human condition. Set against the backdrop of 1970s America—a time of cultural upheaval, waning trust in institutions, and existential anxiety—the film taps into primal fears while interrogating the tension between modernity and ancient belief systems. At its core, The Exorcist is a story of possession, but its true horror emerges from its unflinching examination of vulnerability: the vulnerability of a child’s body, a priest’s faith, and a mother’s love.

Friedkin, known for his documentary-style realism in The French Connection 1971, brought a raw, almost clinical precision to the film. His direction eschewed the gothic excess of earlier horror, grounding the supernatural in the mundane. The Georgetown townhouse where much of the film unfolds becomes a claustrophobic battleground, its ordinary details—a child’s bedroom, a winding staircase—transformed into sites of cosmic struggle.

Cinematographer Owen Roizman’s (Roizman’s filmography includes several landmark films that helped define the look of American cinema in the 1970s including The French Connection 1971, The Taking of Pelham One Two Three 1973, 3 Days of the Condor 1975, The Stepford Wives 1975, Network 1976) work is essential to this effect. His use of cold, naturalistic lighting and disorienting angles amplifies the unease, while the decision to refrigerate Regan’s bedroom to subzero temperatures to capture visible breath added a tactile, almost suffocating realism. The prologue in Iraq, shot by Billy Williams, contrasts starkly with the Georgetown scenes: the sun-baked ruins of Hatra, where Father Merrin unearths the Pazuzu amulet, evoke a timeless, mythic evil that will later invade the modern world.

The performances anchor the film’s emotional weight. Ellen Burstyn’s Chris MacNeil is a portrait of maternal desperation, her rationality crumbling as she confronts the unthinkable. Linda Blair, just 12 during filming, delivered a physically grueling performance as Regan, her transformation from sweet child to profane vessel achieved through Dick Smith’s groundbreaking makeup and Mercedes McCambridge’s guttural voicework. Jason Miller’s Father Karras, a psychiatrist-priest grappling with guilt over his mother’s death and his own crisis of faith, embodies the film’s central conflict: the struggle to believe in a world where suffering seems arbitrary. Max von Sydow’s Father Merrin, introduced in the film’s haunting opening, serves as a weary but resolute counterpoint—a man who has stared into the abyss and returned, only to face it again.

The film’s religious implications are as provocative as its horror. Blatty, a devout Catholic, framed the story as a “sermon” about the reality of evil and the necessity of faith. Yet The Exorcist is no simplistic morality tale. It juxtaposes Catholic ritual with scientific skepticism, as seen in Regan’s futile medical tests and Karras’s initial dismissal of possession as psychosis.

The demon Pazuzu weaponizes doubt, taunting Karras with his mother’s voice and exploiting his guilt. As film scholar Joseph Laycock notes, the film “connects the worlds of science and religion through their individual responses to the seen and unseen, and the known and unknown.” This ambiguity unsettled religious audiences: the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned it as “spiritual pornography,” while evangelical groups paradoxically used it to critique Catholic “superstition.” Yet for many, like critic Deborah Whitehead, the film’s power lies in its “exploration of the fragility of innocence and the battle between good and evil,” themes that resonated deeply in a post-Vietnam, Watergate-era America.

The film’s cultural impact is inseparable from its technical innovation. The exorcism sequence, filmed over four weeks in a freezing set, is a masterclass in sustained tension. Regan’s levitation, achieved through hidden wires, and her 180-degree head rotation, engineered with a mechanical rig, remain iconic. Yet the horror transcends spectacle. The infamous crucifix scene—Regan’s bloodied self-violation—disturbs not just for its graphicness but for its violation of sacred symbology.

Friedkin’s decision to use subliminal imagery, such as the demon’s face flickering in the shadows, preys on the subconscious, a technique Robin Wood likened to “the return of the repressed” in Freudian terms.

Music plays a pivotal role in the film’s dread. Rather than a traditional score, Friedkin employed preexisting compositions, most famously Mike Oldfield’s Tubular Bells. Its repetitive, minimalist piano motif becomes a sonic manifestation of creeping unease. Classical pieces, like Hans Werner Henze’s dissonant Fantasia for Strings, underscore the existential chaos, while the absence of music in key scenes—such as Regan’s spider-walk down the stairs—heightens the visceral impact. The sound design, from the demon’s growls to the bed’s violent shaking, immerses the audience in Regan’s disintegration.

Key moments linger in the collective psyche. The quiet horror of Detective Kinderman’s (Lee J. Cobb) visit, where he gently probes Chris about Burke Dennings’ death, juxtaposes bureaucratic routine with unspeakable evil. The “help me” scene, where Regan’s body contorts into a grotesque parody of crucifixion, merges religious iconography with body horror.

Yet the film’s most profound moment is its quietest: Karras’s final sacrifice. After begging the demon to inhabit him, he leaps to his death, a act of redemption that scholar Linda Williams interprets as “a vulgar display of power” giving way to “the terrifying voice of the primal self—an instinctual, unfiltered force that erupts from the deepest layers of the psyche, untamed by reason or morality.”

The Exorcist endures because it refuses easy answers. It is a film about possession, but also about the things that possess us all—guilt, grief, and the search for meaning. As Friedkin stated, “It’s not about a devil, but about the mystery of faith.”

Its influence permeates modern horror, like Hereditary’s familial trauma. Hereditary is a 2018 American supernatural psychological horror film written and directed by Ari Aster (Midsommar, 2019) in his feature directorial debut. The film stars Toni Collette as Annie Graham, a miniature artist and mother; Gabriel Byrne as her husband, Steve; Alex Wolff as their teenage son, Peter; and Milly Shapiro as their daughter, Charlie. Ann Dowd also appears as Joan, a mysterious acquaintance who befriends Annie.

Yet no film has replicated The Exorcist’s alchemy of technical virtuosity, philosophical depth, and raw emotional power. Half a century later, it remains a mirror held to our deepest fears: not of demons, but of the darkness within and the fragile light that struggles against it.

The Exorcist Curse: How a Horror Classic Became the Stuff of Legend

It has been written about endlessly, the legend of the “Exorcist curse,” which took shape almost as quickly as the film itself became a cultural phenomenon, fueled by a series of bizarre, tragic, and unexplained incidents that plagued the production and its aftermath. The combination of the film’s disturbing subject matter, its intense effect on audiences, and a string of real-life misfortunes gave rise to the belief that something sinister had attached itself to the making of the movie—a notion that persists in popular culture and horror lore to this day. I’ll dive deeper into these bizarre events and share more anecdotal wild stories about them in my future feature!

The curse narrative began during filming, which was beset by a remarkable number of accidents, injuries, and setbacks. One of the most famous and unsettling incidents was a fire that destroyed much of the MacNeil house set, where the story’s most harrowing events take place. The fire, reportedly caused by a bird flying into a circuit box, forced production to halt for six weeks and required the set to be rebuilt. What made the incident especially eerie was that Regan’s bedroom—the site of the exorcism and the film’s most disturbing scenes—was left completely untouched by the flames, as if protected or singled out by some unseen force.

Physical injuries were another recurring theme. Both Ellen Burstyn (Chris MacNeil) and Linda Blair (Regan) suffered significant back injuries during the filming of violent scenes, injuries that left lasting effects. Burstyn’s injury was so severe that her real scream of pain was used in the final cut of the film. Crew members were not spared either: a carpenter lost a thumb, a technician lost a toe, and other crew members reported strange accidents on set.

Perhaps most chilling were the deaths associated with the film. By some counts, as many as nine people connected to the production died during or soon after filming, including actors Jack MacGowran (Burke Dennings) and Vasiliki Maliaros (Father Karras’s mother), whose characters also die in the film.

Other deaths included Linda Blair’s grandfather, a night watchman, a special effects expert, the man who refrigerated the set, and the assistant cameraman’s baby. Jason Miller (Father Karras) lost his young son in a tragic accident during production. Mercedes McCambridge, the voice of the demon, suffered a personal tragedy years later when her son committed a murder-suicide.

The curse legend was further fueled by the involvement of Paul Bateson, an extra in the film who played a radiology technician. Years after the film’s release, Bateson was convicted of murder and suspected in a series of grisly killings in New York City.

Strange phenomena were also reported on set, such as objects moving on their own, including a telephone that repeatedly rose from its receiver and fell—adding to the atmosphere of unease.

The sense of dread grew so strong that director William Friedkin eventually asked the film’s religious advisor, Reverend Thomas Bermingham, to bless the set. While Bermingham initially refused, he later agreed to perform a blessing after the fire, hoping to calm the cast and crew.

The legend was amplified by the film’s unprecedented effect on audiences. Reports of fainting, vomiting, and even miscarriages during screenings were widespread, and some theaters provided barf bags or had ambulances on standby.

Evangelist Billy Graham famously declared that “there is a power of evil in the film, in the fabric of the film itself,” suggesting that the movie was literally cursed. During a premiere in Rome, a lightning strike toppled a centuries-old cross from a nearby church, further fueling rumors of supernatural involvement.

The “Exorcist curse” legend grew out of a perfect storm of real tragedies, eerie coincidences, and the film’s own terrifying content. The bizarre incidents—fatal accidents, mysterious fires, injuries, deaths, and even murder—blurred the line between fiction and reality, embedding the idea of a curse into the film’s legacy and making it one of the most notorious “cursed” productions in Hollywood history. You could say the film itself was ‘possessed.’

THE OMEN 1976

Few horror films have left as indelible a mark on cinema and popular consciousness as The Omen (1976), a chilling meditation on evil, fate, and faith that, like The Exorcist, transcends the boundaries of its genre. Directed by Richard Donner and written by David Seltzer (who was also uncredited for significant contributions to the screenplay of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory 1971), the film arrived in the wake of The Exorcist and rode a wave of 1970s fascination with the supernatural and the apocalyptic. Yet The Omen distinguished itself through a blend of psychological realism, operatic horror, and a profound engagement with religious myth, delivering not only shocks but a lingering sense of existential dread. Coming out of the theater, my head was still spinning from the arresting imagery and implications of the existence of good vs. evil, and the presence of forces beyond our control. It was a dark, rainy night, and even the prospect of my ritual Diner coffee and cheesecake with my mom didn’t quell the anxiety I was now experiencing.

At the heart of The Omen is the story of Robert Thorn, an American diplomat stationed in Rome, portrayed with grave authority by Gregory Peck. In a desperate, morally fraught act, Thorn agrees to secretly adopt a newborn boy after his own child is stillborn, sparing his wife Katherine (Lee Remick) the agony of loss. Unbeknownst to her, the child, Damien, is not theirs; he was born of a jackal. And as the years pass, the Thorns’ seemingly idyllic life in London is shadowed by a series of increasingly sinister events. Damien’s fifth birthday is marred by the shocking suicide of his nanny, who, under the influence of a mysterious black dog, hangs herself in front of the assembled guests, uttering the now-iconic line, “It’s all for you, Damien!” This moment, both theatrical and deeply unsettling, signals the film’s ability to turn moments of domestic celebration into scenes of horror.

When she comes crashing through the window, her body swinging above the stunned crowd, it’s as if the party’s polite melody is shattered by a single, discordant note—a crescendo in a symphony of terror that ripples through every guest on the lawn. In that instant, celebration curdles into shock in the air and is replaced by a collective, shuddering gasp. I still have a hard time not looking away when that moment hits. It doesn’t just startle—it reverberates, echoing long after the scene has ended, and that image of her hanging silhouette burned into my memory like the final, jarring chord of a nightmare overture. Sorry for the musical metaphor, but that’s the musician in me.

As Damien grows, the signs of his dark, otherworldly nature become impossible to ignore. Animals recoil in terror at his presence, he reacts violently to churches, and those who attempt to uncover the truth—priests, photographers, and even his own mother—meet gruesome ends.

The film’s violence is never gratuitous; instead, Donner and cinematographer Gilbert Taylor imbue each death with a sense of inevitability and cosmic retribution. The impalement of Father Brennan (Patrick Troughton) by a lightning rod during a sudden storm and the decapitation of photographer Keith Jennings (David Warner) by a pane of glass are staged with a balletic, almost operatic precision, making them some of the most memorable set pieces in horror cinema.

The cast’s gravitas elevates the material, grounding the supernatural in the everyday. Peck, whose own recent personal tragedies lent an added layer of pathos to his performance, brings a haunted dignity to Thorn’s descent from rational diplomat to desperate father. The suicide of his son, Jonathan, which occurred just two months before production began, was a devastating loss that deeply affected Peck, and it is widely noted that his grief informed and intensified his portrayal of Robert Thorn, a father tormented by fear and loss.

Lee Remick’s Katherine is equally compelling, her growing terror and isolation palpable as she comes to suspect the truth about her son. Harvey Spencer Stephens, in his film debut as Damien, delivers a performance of uncanny stillness and menace, his cherubic features belying the evil he embodies.

His blank, pale face and doll-like black hair have etched itself into our collective psyches—a hollow, soulless stare from eyes – the void where all colors sleep – the black ink of oblivion – that seem not merely to reflect evil, but to channel its very essence, opening onto a void that is both the embodiment of damnation and a passageway to hell itself.

Billie Whitelaw’s turn as Mrs. Baylock in The Omen is the kind of performance that is the very definition of insidious terror—a presence that doesn’t just unsettle, but infiltrates, quietly taking up residence in the corners of your mind.

Whitelaw, already revered for her intense collaborations with Samuel Beckett, brought a chilling subtlety to the role of Damien’s nanny— who moves through the Thorn household with a calm, unwavering purpose, her menace never loud or showy, but coiled and patient. She arrives with a polite smile but quickly reveals herself as the embodiment of evil’s quiet persistence. There’s nothing cartoonish or overblown about her menace; instead, she radiates a calm, almost maternal authority that makes her devotion to Damien all the more unsettling. Her presence transforms domestic spaces into sites of dread, and her scenes crackle with an unnerving tension—she doesn’t need to shout or snarl to command the screen.

Whitelaw’s Mrs. Baylock is unforgettable precisely because she plays the part with such conviction and restraint, letting the audience sense the abyss behind her steady gaze. When she dispatches those who threaten Damien, it’s done with the efficiency of someone carrying out a sacred duty, not a crime. It’s a testament to Whitelaw’s skill that Mrs. Baylock stands as one of horror cinema’s most memorable antagonists: she’s not just a servant of the Antichrist, but a chilling reminder of how evil can wear the most ordinary faces. Whitelaw’s performance earned her international acclaim and an Evening Standard British Film Award, and it remains a masterclass in how quiet intensity can be far more terrifying than any special effect.

The film’s religious implications are profound and disturbing. The Omen does not simply pit good against evil; it interrogates the very foundations of Christian belief, suggesting that evil is not merely the opposite of good but its necessary counterpart. As one critic observes, “The Omen is discussing the moral dimension of evil as not something opposite to the values of Christian religion, but as this religion’s integral component.”

The film draws on apocalyptic prophecy, particularly the Book of Revelation, and popularized the “mark of the beast”—the number 666—as a cultural touchstone. The narrative’s logic is inexorable: the Antichrist has come not through the machinations of cultists or the failings of the wicked, but through the well-intentioned actions of a loving father, suggesting that fate and evil are inescapable, woven into the fabric of existence.

This theological ambiguity is mirrored in the film’s treatment of the clergy. Priests and exorcists are depicted as desperate, often unstable figures, whose warnings are dismissed until it is too late. The film’s most chilling implication is that God and Satan may be two sides of the same coin, their messages equally cryptic and their influence equally pervasive.

As Robert Thorn’s rational investigation leads him from Rome to Israel, from the ruins of a burned hospital to a graveyard filled with the bones of the innocent, the film suggests that the search for truth is itself a kind of damnation.

My favorite composer of all time, the unsurpassed Jerry Goldsmith’s Oscar-winning score, is integral to the film’s power. Departing from traditional horror music, Goldsmith composed a choral, Latin-infused soundtrack that evokes the solemnity of a black mass. The track “Ave Satani,” with its inverted liturgical chants, became an instant classic, imbuing the film with an atmosphere of ritualistic dread and grandeur. Goldsmith’s music does not simply accompany the action; it amplifies the sense of doom, making the supernatural feel both ancient and immediate.

Cinematographer Gilbert Taylor, known for his work on Dr. Strangelove and Star Wars, brings a cool, clinical eye to the film’s visuals. The stately English settings—manor houses, cathedrals, and windswept cemeteries—are rendered with a sense of both beauty and menace. Taylor’s use of natural light and shadow heightens the film’s realism, while his compositions often isolate characters within vast, indifferent spaces, reinforcing the themes of alienation and cosmic indifference.

Key moments in The Omen have become part of horror’s visual lexicon: the nanny’s suicide, the baboons’ frenzied attack at the safari park, Damien’s silent resistance at the church steps, and the climactic race to the altar, where Thorn, driven to the brink, attempts to kill the child he once called son. The film’s final image—Damien, now adopted by the President of the United States, turning to smile directly at the camera—offers no catharsis, only the chilling suggestion that evil not only survives but thrives, hidden in plain sight.

The Omen was a commercial triumph, grossing over $60 million in the U.S. alone, and its influence is still felt in the genre and beyond. It spawned sequels, remakes, and countless imitations, cementing the figure of the child Antichrist as a staple of horror. More than this, it tapped into a deep well of cultural anxiety: the fear that evil is not an external force, but something intimate, familial, and inescapable. As critic John Kenneth Muir noted, the film resonated in a time of Western malaise, when “the world or the West was in terminal decline,” and the signs of apocalypse felt not just possible, but imminent.

Ultimately, The Omen endures because it refuses to offer easy answers or simple comforts. It is a film that confronts us with the possibility that evil is both everywhere and nowhere, that it can wear the face of innocence, and that the struggle between good vs. evil, what’s right and what’s wrong, isn’t always a matter of grand, heroic efforts. Instead, it often plays out in quieter, more personal ways—through our own uncertainties, doubts, fears, anxieties, and the heavy burden of knowing things we wish we didn’t.

In its blend of artistry, intellect, and terror, The Omen remains one of cinema’s most transformative and haunting achievements.

#58 down, 92 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

70s Cinema: Runaway Trains, Racing toward oblivion, Psycho-sexual machinations, and ‘the self loathing whore’ Part 2

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974)

 

1:23 pm. Grand Central Station, New York. A packed commuter train is hijacked. A ransom is set – at one million dollars. The subway is a closed system. For the four hijackers, surely there is no way out. But they have a deadly plan.

Directed by Joseph Sargent  (Colossus: The Forbin Project 1970, White Lightning 1973, predominantly a director for television series and made for TV movies- Gunsmoke, The Fugitive, The Man from U.N.C.L.E, The Invaders) with a screenplay by Peter Stone (known writer Charade 1963, Father Goose 1963, Sweet Charity 1969) The iconic sneeze which leads to one of the most memorable endings in 70s films was actually conceptualized by Stone. And based on the best-selling American crime novel by John Godey.

Stunning visual auteur and cinematographer  Owen Roizman (The French Connection 1971, The Exorcist 1973, The Stepford Wives 1975, Three Days of the Condor 1975, Network 1976, True Confessions 1981) and driving score by David Shire (The Conversation 1974, All the President’s Men 1976, Saturday Night Fever 1977, Norma Rae 1979). Like the score, the film itself begins with the sense of dialogue and characterizations just as accelerated as a runaway train. The initial part of the film is completely immersed underground with its murky greens, grays, and shadows lit only by the subway lamps.

Director Joseph Sargent instructed Owen Roizman to shoot the picture on a Wide Screen, which would create the effect of not having a high ceiling, the overhead and bottom of the screen being cut off giving the film more of the closeness and claustrophobia of being in a subway car. They filmed the picture at The Spike in Brooklyn which was totally closed off at the time. Director Sargent referred to it as “hell on earth” and actor Robert Shaw dubbed it “Dante’s Inferno.” Like The French Connection and 3 Days of the Condor also filmed by Roizman, these were films that were at a defining time in history portraying a gritty New York lensed with a perspective toward realism. The camera’s were lightweight, moved quickly through the streets, and utilized natural lighting. The colors are muted browns, faded greens, and grays. The film demonstrates the alienation of the city and the urban nightmare.

One of the films from the seventies utilizes the subway as a symbol of the ‘changing nature of the city partly from the perspective of its citizens primarily its commuters.

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974) is one of the most definitive films of the seventies that features an all-star cast of great character actors with standout performances by Walter Matthau as Lt. Zachary Garber, Tom Pedi as Caz Dolowicz who only gives a damn about his trains running on time.

“Oh, come on. If I’ve got to watch my language just because they let a few broads in, I’m going to quit. How the hell can you run a goddamn railroad without swearing?”

James Broderick as Denny Doyle’s head motorman, Dick O’Neill as the foul-mouthed Correll, Jerry Stiller as Lt. Rico Patrone, Rudy Bond as Police Commissioner, Kenneth McMillan as the Borough Commander, Doris Roberts as the Mayor’s wife.

And of course, our four colorful criminals, Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw) Mr. Green (Martin Balsam) Hector Elizondo (Mr. Gray), and Mr. Brown (Earl Hindman ) match the primary tones of the film. Their faces are obscured by disguises that are caricatures.  An interesting note the color of the men’s hats corresponds with their pseudonyms. In contrast to the earthy tones of the film, Garber wears a banana-yellow tie. Quentin Tarantino paid homage to the titular nicknames in his ultra-violent Reservoir Dogs 1992.

There is no real set-up or background relationship between the four hijackers. After seeing Martin Balsam exit a yellow cab, and Shire’s dynamic score comes into play, the film has an immediate tempo of being out of control. The film opens with one of the most popular scores of the seventies, David Shires, driving aural waves of dissonant jazz. With military-type snare drum rolls and resounding trombones and electronica. The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974) is perhaps one of the most iconic action thrillers of the seventies era. Opening with the dynamic life force of a pulsing New York City. Cabs, bodies in motion, unique to the city with its dialect “Fifty Foist Street” And the mania of people rushing down below in the subways, hot, grimy, and anonymous.

When subway line Pelham One Two Three which is a subway car that begins from the Lexington Avenue station is hijacked by four seemingly random criminals Mr. Green, Mr. Blue, Mr. Gray, and Mr. Brown all dressed in hats to match the colors of their pseudonyms, overcoats, black-rimmed glasses, and phony mustaches it throws the New York City transit into chaos. The Transit Authority personnel as well as the subway’s passengers are portrayed as stereotypically New Yorkers, rough around the edges of various ethnicities.

The train’s passengers are represented as a row of assorted stereotypes including the wise-but-kvetchy Jew, the “fairy,” the Black pimp, the hysterical Hispanic woman, the disarrayed mother who has no control over her children, the long-haired hippie, the tough as nails whore and the clueless drunk who sleeps through the whole nightmare. What comes off with this device is that the ordeal of the story is just an everyday occurrence on the New York City subway.

And these passengers are actually listed in the credits as The Maid, The Mother, The Homosexual, The Secretary, The Delivery Boy, The Salesman, The Hooker, The Old Jewish Man, The Older Son, The Spanish Woman, The Alcoholic (who sleeps through the entire seizure), The Pimp, Coed #1, Coed #2, The Hippie and The W.A.S.P. One of my complaints of seventies cinema — though it is one of my favorite sub-genres of cinema– is the inherent misogyny and easily permissive racism and homophobia.

Mr. Blue calmly informs them that they want one million dollars or they will execute one hostage for every minute they don’t receive the ransom.

Dick O’Neill’s gruffness is delivered fluently as he grunts over the microphone at Mr. Blue “Keep dreamin’ maniac!”

Walter Matthau, who is the master of owning any picture he’s in, throws out more hilarious one-liners which bring the much-needed levity to the nervous tension. That is not to say that Tom Pedi and Dick O’Neill veteran stage and character actors don’t supply their share of snarky New York witticisms.

While the commuting passengers are concentrating on getting to where they need to go, one at a time the four hijackers board the train. Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw who plays a very composed and menacing British Mercenary). Accompanying Mr. Blue is Mr. Green, the continually sneezing Martin Balsam (who was fired from the transit department as a motormen suspected of trafficking drugs in the train cars) Later Garber figures out that one of the hijackers must have knowledge of handling a train, “Somebody down there knows how to drive a train. You don’t pick that up watching Sesame Street.”

Mr. Green (Shaw) enters the conductor’s car and holds a gun on the head of motorman James Broderick. “I’m taking your train.”

They begin to set up their scheme. Hector Elizondo who plays Mr. Gray is an unstable psychopath whose infantile outbursts and uncontrollable belligerence show him capable of violence at any given moment. “I’ll shoot your pee pee off.” Later on Mr. Green tells Mr. Blue that he doesn’t trust Mr. Grey (Hector Elizondo who is playing to type) and to keep an eye on Mr. Gray “I also think that he is mad. Why do you think they threw him out of the Mafia.”

Lastly Mr. Brown enters with a box for long-stem roses. When the time comes, they pull out high-powered automatic weapons and announce their plans to the horrified New Yorkers.

George Lee Miles as the pimp and Mr. Green (Robert Shaw) exchange cutting remarks as commentary on the post-Vietnam weariness and racism. “What’s wrong dude? Ain’t you never seen a sunset before?”

While the takeover of Pelham One Two Three is underway, we are privy to the pressurized control room where the core of operations happens. Lt. Garber is showing a group of Japanese men who run the subway system in Tokyo, the works while throwing out wisecracks, “In the course of a normal work week, the average TA policeman deals with such crimes as robbery, assault, murder, drunkenness illness, vandalism, mishegas, abusiveness, sexual molestation, exhibitionism… “ means of mocking the four visiting Japanese executive’s assumed that they do not speak perfect English. Garber tells Rico- “Take these monkeys up to 13” Garber is enlightened after these very quietly polite men tell him that it was a most interesting tour.

The film boasts its built-in racism and visits its bias through a series of faux pas. Garber (Walter Matthau) has the privilege of his comedic traits and can get away with lines as when he meets Inspector Daniels who is black played by Julius Harris. Garber uncomfortable tells him, “I hadn’t realized you were… so tall.”

Kenneth McMillan veteran character actor adds his bellicose bluster to the film!

Of course, there are also the prevalent acceptable and misguided jokes in 70s films wielding homophobia. As seen in 70s films for example, the psychopathic drag queen in Freebie and the Bean (1974) and the flaming hitchhikers in Vanishing Point (1971) Garber assures the undercover long-haired hippie cop who’s been wounded and lying face down on the tracks, “We’ll have an ambulance here in no time, Miss.”

Along with his colleagues who assume they don’t speak English. Lt Rico ( Jerry Stiller ) adds his comedic genius for instance when he tells the executives, “We had a bomb scare in the Bronx yesterday, it turned out to be a cantaloupe!” 

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is not only a tight-moving tribute to the implicit action films that emerged during the seventies, but it is also dominated by some of the best dialogue of that decade’s action/thriller genre.

Once the hijackers have taken control of the subway train the command center tries to raise them on the radio.

“How come that gate isn’t locked?” “Who’s gonna steal a subway car?”

Once the control center realizes that something is wrong, they watch on the computerized board that tracks all the trains. The four men disconnected the last set of cars and released a group of passengers with the head motorman leaving the front car, the conductor, and 18 passengers.

“For Jesus Christ’s Sake, the dumb bastard is moving backward.”

Meanwhile, at the control center, they see that the train has stopped between stations. “Well stopped is better than backwards.”

They inform the passengers, “What’s happening is you’re all being held by four very dangerous men with machine guns.”

What the control center sees is that Pelham has powered off their radio and jumped its load. Mr. Green’s nose begins its trail of sneezes and eventual Gesundheits which will become part of the plot’s shtick.

Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw) in his usual chillingly sober manner tells Garber “Your train has been taken.” He informs Garber of three essential points. 1) Pelham is in our control 2) We have automatic weapons and 3) We have no scruples about killing. One of the most central forces of the suspense is how Robert Shaw’s unwavering voice sounds so wickedly, deliciously deadpan when he takes up that microphone to talk to Walter Matthau.

They want $1,000,000 for the release of the passengers. Garber asks “Who am I speaking to?”

Blue stiffly tells him, “I’m the man who stole your train.”

The old Jewish passenger asks Mr. Blue “Excuse me sir what’s gonna happen if you don’t get what you want?” “Excuse me, sir, we will get what we want.”

Earl Hindman as the more subdued Mr. Brown

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is a pragmatic depiction of inured and balsy New Yorkers at that time in the city. One of the passengers, the prostitute tells the hijackers, “What do you mean you’re hijacking the train? I have an important appointment.” 

Mr. Blue doing the crossword puzzle while making his deadly serious demands…

Mr. Gray “Hold it right there, cowboy!”

Caz Dolowicz “Who the fuck are you?”

Mr. Gray “Well you’ll find out if you take one more step!”

Caz Dolowicz “I’m warnin’ you, mister, that’s city property you’re fooling around with!

Mr. Gray “Well that’s too fucking bad!”

Caz Dolowicz Why didn’t you go grab a goddamn airplane like everybody else?”

Mr. Gray “Cause we’re afraid of flyin’! Now get back or I’ll shoot your goddam ass off!”

Caz Dolowicz “The hell with you, I’m comin’ on board!”

Mr. Gray “I warned ya, stupid!”

It is immediately after Mr. Green warns Mr. Blue that Mr. Gray is mad, that he opens fire on Caz Dolowicz. When Fat Caz (Tom Pedi) goes underground and tramples the tracks insisting to get aboard his train, crazy Mr. Gray opens up on him with his machine gun.

Nathan George (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1975) as Ptl. James who is monitoring the siege down in the tunnel. Rico asks if Caz Dolowicz is dead. “Wouldn’t you be Lt.?”

Dick O’Neill as Frank Correll bellyaches throughout the entire film. He does not care that the subway is under siege. He is the epitome of the perceived typical attitudes of an older generation of New Yorkers who only see the hijacking as an inconvenience to him for keeping his trains scheduled on time. “Screw the goddamned passengers.”  “What do they expect for their lousy 35c – to live forever?!”

Garber hears Mr. Green sneeze and there begins the first Gesundheit” “Thank you” replies Mr. Green casually.

The mayor (Lee Wallace) laughably resembles Mayor Koch who wouldn’t become Mayor until 1978-1989, is portrayed as an incompetent bureaucrat surrounded by his nurse, tissues and a trudge of indecision, who needs advice from the real brains in Gracie Mansion his wife Doris Roberts.

Frank Correll (Dick O’Neill) tells Garber “You’re playing grab ass with a bunch of goddam pirates.”

Garber follows his hunch and has them start to go through the files for any motormen discharged for cause. In the meantime, they are told to restore power, turn all signals green, and remove all police from the tunnel. With all the details worked out and going their way, Garber figures they also have a plan to make their escape out of the subway tunnels.

Everyone is baffled when Pelham starts to move too soon before Command Central has everything set up, and everyone in the control room keeps asking — who’s moving? Garber responds, “What’s the matter with everybody? How many hijacked trains we got around here, anyway?”

With the green lights on the train will be able to continue on without being stopped, and this doesn’t trouble Garber at first because he knows there is a safety catch involved referred to as “Dead Man’s Feature” which is a handle the train is equipped with in the event the motorman dies while driving the train and they need to come to a stop. Pelham stops below 18th Street. They haven’t cleared the tracks yet. Garber orders cops at every point of the tunnel and exits. They figure that the four won’t be able to get off the train without being stopped. What they don’t know is that Mr. Green has constructed a makeshift metal bar that acts as an arm to hold down the Dead Man’s Feature and while they sneak off by an exit in the Village the train and its passengers are now speeding out of control with all the green lights go and no way to stop it from heading toward a crash.

“No one’s on the breaks!” “There’s nobody driving the fucking train!”

My favorite, is Martin Balsam as Mr. Green aka Harold Longman rolling in the cash…

This is your EverLovin’ Joey saying hang on to your seats and stay tuned for Part 3!

70s Cinema: Runaway Trains, Racing toward oblivion, Psycho-sexual machinations, and ‘the self loathing whore’ Part 1


The early seventies witnessed a fertile moment in film-making that reflected a uniquely framed vision of sexual exploration and an ever-changing measurement of morality. The studios too were taking more risks with their films conveying realism. What developed on screen was an explosion of symbolic portrayals featuring sex and violence and explicit imagery for American audiences to process. With the arrival of the women’s movement during the mid-sixties through the seventies, until it was killed off in the eighties by Reagenism, these films did not push forward an evolved perspective or positive representation of women. Often the suggestion of women’s sexual freedom was portrayed as demeaning and counter-productive to women’s empowerment. As feminist theorist and critic Molly Haskell writes “The ten years from 1963 to 1973 have been the most disheartening in screen history.”

Conversely, men were portrayed as rogue outsiders and anti-heroes, not unlike noir figures but pushing the envelope with a hyper-violent masculinity often without the usual fatalistic culmination of judgment and universal law that bound their destiny. When they die, it is their decision, they are in a dance with death, and it is not an unmitigated penalty for breaking the rules. In particular, these themes are seen within the suspense-thriller.

The seventies offered a gritty, stylized world that enhanced and synthesized focus on the dark underbelly of society, cultural unrest, paranoia, masochism, neurosis, and psycho-sexual wiles. From American Cinema of the 1970s: Themes and Variations — Movies and the Exploitation of Excess by Mia Mask, “Women Take Center Stage: Klute and McCabe & Mrs. Miller- “For feminist critics and scholars, Alan J. Pakula’s Klute perfectly exemplifies this period’s ambivalence toward women, particularly in regard to its prostitute-heroine Bree Daniels (Jane Fonda). The film recasts and updates conventions of classic film noir by centralizing the investigatory/confessional pattern while making sexuality figure more obviously in the narrative.”

Klute (1971)

One man is missing. Two girls lie dead. …and someone breathing on the other end of the phone.

You’d never take her for a call girl. You’d never take him for a cop.

“There are little corners of everyone that are better left alone.”

Klute (1971) directed by Alan J. Pakula (The Parallax View 1974, All the President’s Men 1976, producer To Kill a Mockingbird 1962, Love with the Proper Stranger, Up the Down Staircase and director of Sophie’s Choice 1982) written by brothers Andy Lewis and Dave Lewis who mainly wrote for television drama series. Cinematography by Gordon Willis nicknamed The Prince of Darkness (The Landlord 1970, The Godfather 1972, The Godfather II 1974, The Paper Chase 1973, Annie Hall 1977).

Pakula on Willis and setting up the framing of the cinematography- “From the visual point of view, I wanted Klute to be a vertical film. And with Gordon Willis, the director of photography, I tried to go against the horizontal format of Panavision, by seeking out verticals. Horizontals open out, create a pastoral feeling, and I wanted tension. Bree’s apartment should have been seen as if at the end of a long tunnel. I framed a lot of shots with the back of another character in front, to mask a part of the screen, or made use of other sombre surfaces as masks, in order to create this feeling of claustrophobia which reflects the life of this girl.” – from 1972

The evocative score adds to the illusory tension and arresting mood of the film. The music is written by Michael Small (The Stepford Wives 1975, Night Moves 1975, Marathon Man 1976, Audrey Rose 1977, The Postman Always Rings Twice 1981, Black Widow 1987). Small’s haunting lullaby blankets the film in a pensive swaddle, with the uneasy tinkling of a piano like a childlike music box and vocalizations. The score awakens a voyeuristic ambiance as if someone is watching, which they are– throughout the entire film.

“New York City as a site of, and metaphor for, the extremes of urban existence.

It places them in film history, New York City history, and U.S. urban history more generally, finding that they offer an update on earlier century narratives of the connections between urban areas and deviant sexuality. In this modern version, it is not just a moral tale but also an economic one, where, because of the historical decline of the U.S.city and of New York in particular,sex work becomes a plausible, if unsettling means of support.These films find both narrative and spatial terms for advancing the contemporary anti-urban narrative, envisioning New York as an impinging vertical space and seeing possible redemption only in the protagonists leaving the city.” From Stanley Corkin’s Sex and the City in Decline: Midnight Cowboy (1969) and Klute (1971)-Journal of Urban History

The film stars Jane Fonda (who was coming off playing ingenues in Barefoot in the Park and Barbarella when she had her breakthrough performance in Sidney Pollack’s They Shoot Horses Don’t They? 1969) as call-girl Bree Daniels with complex inner life, Donald Sutherland as the quiet spectator detective John Klute, Charles Cioffi as psycho Peter Cable, Roy Scheider as pimp Frank Ligourin, Dorothy Tristan as Arlyn Page, Rita Gam as Trina Gruneman, Vivian Nathan as the psychotherapist, Morris Strassberg as Mr. Goldfarb, the nice old Jewish john who works in the garment district, and Shirley Stoler (The Honeymoon Killers 1969) as Mama Reese. With appearances by Jean Stapleton as Mr. Goldfarb’s secretary, Richard Jordan as the young man who kisses Jane Fonda in the bar scene, porn star Harry Reems at the Discothèque, and Candy Darling. 

The film brings into play various traditions of film noir as it lays out the search for the missing Gruneman and emphasizes the relationship between the cop and the call girl.

Klute was nominated for two academy awards, best actress and best screenplay, with Jane Fonda winning the Oscar.

From Mark Harris “menace seems to choke every frame, contains almost no violence at all”

The use of tape recorders as visually recurring iconography “finally deployed as a monstrous psychological weapon at the film’s climax.”

“When Alan J. Pakula began preparing for the production of Klute (1971), he screened a lot of Alfred Hitchcock films…{…} instead he came away dispirited at the thought that he was about to make might contradict one of Hitchcock’s central principles: “You don’t try to do a character study in a melodrama” Pakula said. “Klute, of course, is a violation of that.”

Klute features Donald Sutherland as the film’s protagonist John Klute, a Tuscarora Pennsylvania private investigator hired to locate a friend Tom Gruneman who has vanished in New York City and may be living a double life. Obscene letters to an NYC prostitute have been uncovered in his desk at work “written by a very disturbed man”. Gruneman went missing six months prior and John Klute offers to leave his suburban shelter to investigate in the big bad city. The trail leads Klute to a complicated and seductive New York call girl Bree Daniels an “emotionally introspective” prostitute (skillfully brought out by Jane Fonda). Bree is an unwitting connection to a brutal murder and Klute becomes her paternalistic protector/lover. Bree is shut off from her feelings, driven by her instincts of suspicion, ambivalence, and low-self esteem. “I wish I was faceless and body-less and be left alone.”

Bree is a complex character who seeks to emotionally remove herself from society through the flawed principle that she is in control of her life and her body. Frequenting a psychotherapist, going on modeling cattle-calls, (similarly, she is peddling her flesh, though legally and publicly) studying acting, smoking grass, and reading books like Linda Goodman’s Sun Signs, a primer of the seventies metaphysical movement. Living in her own private world of her Manhattan apartment with her calico cat, Bree surrounds herself with the only space that truly insulates and isolates her from the vicious and people-eating world. A world of sin, glitter, and wickedness. A world of voyeurs.

Klute watches as well as listens to Bree’s conversations recording equipment to tap her phone from his little dank room as one of her voyeurs. She tells him “Go get those tapes and we’ll have a party.”

“Men would pay $200 for me, and here you are turning down a freebie. You could get a perfectly good dishwasher for that.”

She also admits to him that she’s in the midst of paranoia “I’m afraid of the dark, it’s just nerves I’m a nervous broad.” But this is not paranoia, the fear is real… everyone is watching everyone else.

He watches her when she visits the old Jewish widow where Bree dresses like a cabaret singer, regaling the gentle Mr. Goldfarb of her nights in Cannes with a sophisticated older man not unlike himself. She tells Klute he never lays a hand on her. Klute’s silent, morally superior, unemotional manner seems to provoke Bree’s animosity toward family-type men and uptight provincial.

“What’s your bag, Klute? What do you like? Are you a talker? A button freak? Maybe you like to get your chest walked around with high-heeled shoes. Or make ’em watch you tinkle. Or maybe you get off wearing women’s clothes. Goddamned hypocrite squares!” When he asks her about the john who tried to kill her and beat her up, “he wasn’t kidding, usually it’s a fake out.”

She shrugs Klute off, “Look, will you please just try to get it from my side? A year ago I was in the life full time. I was living on Park Avenue. It was a very nice apartment, leather furniture… and then the cops dropped on me, they caged me. They started asking me about a guy, some guy, that I’m supposed to have seen a year before that. Two years ago! He could be in Yemen. Gruneman… what does that mean? It’s a name! I don’t know him! And they start showing me these pictures, and they don’t mean anything to me. And then they started asking me if I’ve been getting letters from some guy out in Cabbageville.”

After Bree comes down to Klute’s little room in her pajamas and they have sex, she mocks him “Don’t feel bad about losing your virtue. I sort of knew you would. Everybody always does.” Once Bree starts to feel some kind of emotion toward Klute, she feels the need to destroy it, she had more control over her tricks.

During her various appointments with her shrink, Bree asks her “Why do I still want to trick?” Her therapist becomes more forceful explaining that she can’t just fix Bree, telling her she has “no magic potion.”  “Cause when you’re a call girl you can control it. They want a woman and I know I’m good… And for an hour… for an hour, I’m the best actress in the world and the best fuck in the world.” “Why do you say you’re the best actress in the world.” “Well, because it’s an act.”

There is a bit of not only a slight intrusion of a laugh, in the midst of all the darkness when Bree is in bed with a john and she’s doing an acting job as if he’s turning her on while he’s on top of her, she coos for him- “Oh my angel! Oh my angel!” looking over his shoulder at her watch… It’s telling of how Bree can cut herself off from being a sex worker and the men she is with, how she aspires to be an actress, and basically how many women may feel while they are having sex they feel nothing. Bree is great at role-playing believes there is nothing wrong with it morally and doesn’t enjoy it physically.

Bree- “You don’t have to feel anything, care for anybody, just lead them by the ring in their nose. In the direction that they think they want to go in. Get a lot of money out of them in as short of period of time as possible. And you control it, and you call the shots, and I always feel just great afterwards.”

Therapist- “And you enjoyed it?” 

Bree- “No”

Therapist- “Why not? You said there’s nothing wrong with it. Why not?”

Bree- “Well there’s a difference. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it morally, I didn’t enjoy it physically. I came to enjoy it because it made me feel good. It made me feel like I wasn’t alone. It made me feel like I had some control over myself that I had some control over my life. That I could determine things for myself.”

We learn about Bree’s impressions of the world, her motivations, and hints at past trauma through the scenes involving sessions with her therapist (Vivian Nathan). As a neo-noir film, it follows that the heroine experiences alienation and is punished for her female sexuality and excesses. Even as the film opens depicting a scene at a ‘family’ dinner, the intrusion of Bree’s lifestyle shows the downfall and breakdown of the American family. Invading the bourgeois landscape, we see the tableau of desperate junkies, disco dives, and the pimp’s flat, — all decadent and corrupt secret underworlds of the city, damned for their self-indulgence, materialism, and perverted gratifications.

In some ways, there are certain divergences from the noir traditions of the 1940s. There is a linear movement in the narrative with the hero retaining control of the events, in contrast to the revolving story, reversals, and breaks in the plot. In terms of the investigation and the heroine’s sexuality, Bree’s place is different within the story, she is not the catalyst of Tom Gruneman’s fate she is the signpost to discovering his outcome. Therefore the relationship between John Klute and Bree is very different from what is usually the case in classic film noir. In this way, Pakula explores the potential of the genre through a contemporary lens. “The metaphoric power of noir conventions is brought into more conscious play” (Gledhill)

Another consideration of Pakula’s film depicting a feminist backlash is how the women are positioned as ‘objects’ and physical products, emblematic not only by the scenes where Bree is selling her body but where she sits in a line-up with other beautiful women waiting to be chosen for a modeling job. The agency executives’ heads are cut off in the scene which accentuates the human disconnection and impersonal enterprise of being picked for profitability and worth. Each one is scanned and then dismissed because of their perceived faults, both models and prostitutes symbolize the fetishization of desirability and society’s measurement of a woman’s value. If dissecting the film’s symbology more closely there are carefully placed clues as suggested by Judith Gustafson who observes the images behind the model’s impersonal scrutiny and the wall photos behind them of a face dotted in silver-like ‘bullet holes’ on either side depicted by the identical image yet in negative that makes the female face appear as an ‘alien being.’

“Has anybody talked to you about the financial arrangements? Well that depends naturally on how long you want me for, and what you want to do. I know you, it will be very nice. Well I’d like to spend the evening with you if its, if you’d like that. Have you ever done it with a woman before, paying her? Do you like it? I mean I have the feeling that that turns you on very particularly. What turns me on is because I have a good imagination, and I like pleasing. Do you mind if I take my sweater off. Well I think in the confines of one’s house one should be free of clothing and inhibitions. Oh inhibitions are nice, cause its always to nice to overcome. Don’t be afraid, I’m not. As long as you don’t hurt me, more than I like to be hurt. I will do anything you ask. You should never be ashamed of things like that. I mean you mustn’t be. You know there’s nothing wrong. Nothing. Nothing is wrong. I think the only way that any of us can ever be happy is to, is to let it all hang out ya know. Do it all and fuck it!”

When Klute meets Bree she toys with him, flaunting her independence and manifesting a casual attitude about his investigation. Her self-aligned liberation dictates contempt for convention and criticism. Hard-edged Bree enjoys her freedom though she is seduced by the need to pick up the phone and maintain her high-class status as a pimp-free call girl. Roy Scheider plays her old predatory pimp Frank Ligourin who flashes his Italian silk shirts and his Mephistophelean smile. Ligourin and call-girl Janie McKenna who was jealous of Bree are the ones responsible for sending Bree to the psycho John who beat her up. “put the freak onto Bree.”

Though it’s not what drives the story, in the darkened halls of the film is the sadistic degenerate Peter Cable (first-time actor Charles Cioffi), affluent businessman and friend and associate of the missing Tom Gruneman (Robert Milli), and detective John Klute.

Cable is a psychopathic misogynist who obsessively listens to the secret recordings of his exploits with Bree. He begins stalking her, suspecting that she may reveal his identity as the perverted John who beat her up and murdered her friend Janie and eventually kills another prostitute, a strung-out junkie Arlyn Page (Dorothy Tristan).

“Make a man think that he’s accepted. It’s all a great big game to you. I mean, you’re all obviously too lazy and too warped to do anything meaningful with your lives so you prey upon the sexual fantasies of others. I’m sure it comes as no great surprise to you when I say that there are little corners in everyone which were better off left alone; sicknesses, weaknesses, which-which should never be exposed. But… that’s your stock in trade, isn’t it – a man’s weakness? And I was never really fully aware of mine… until you brought them out.”

Pretty much into the beginning of the picture, we know who the killer is. The plotline is more focused on the journey and relationship/character study of silent John Klute and turbulent Bree Daniels, and drawing the killer out into the open. It is the examination of the darker side of human nature, collective disorder, and the undercurrent of psycho-sexual machinations as one of the central points of the film.

According to Joan Mellen not only is Klute a study in female sexuality, villain Peter Cable is the “projection of Bree’s self-contempt — a materialization of her fear of the dark.” Though the film presents an atmosphere of paranoia the threat is very real. Cable “He also represents what she believes she deserves, the all-destroying punisher who will make her pay for having bartered herself so cheaply.”

Jane Fonda’s Bree Daniels is shown in her room as Willis’ camera pulls back it informs us that she is afraid of the phone ringing and the menacing breather on the other end. This is when John Klute first shows up. There is an interesting correlation between the two men, the cop, and the killer. 

The idea that this film is feminist in nature because of the sexual freedom of it’s central character is best challenged by feminist scholar Christine Gledhill. “The ideological project surrounding this version of the independent woman stereotype is the same as when it emerged in the 1890s under the guise of the New Woman… However fascinating, different, admirable the would-be-emancipated woman, struggling to assert her own identity in a male world, and professing a new, nonrepressive sexual morality, in the end she is really neurotic, fragile, lonely and unhappy.”

Critic Pauline Kael had a much different experience of the film upon its initial release, she called Bree Daniels “one of the strongest feminine characters to reach the screen” Though Fonda’s brilliant performance creates a complexity worthy of analysis, in the end, she is still an object of male fantasy.

While the film’s critics focus mainly on feminist shortcomings there is also the understanding by some that it also shines a lens on masculinity. Klute “lacks dynamism” “sexless” and “out of place” perhaps or virtual psychopaths, and castrated males. Perhaps a commentary on men’s sweeping fear of the women’s movement and the transformations of femininity and masculinity. Also, an interesting observation by Mia Mask is how the protagonist John Klute and psychopath Peter Cable though essentially an antithesis of each other’s persona there is an element of a ‘doppelgänger motif’. Diane Giddis points at the threat of Cable, Bree’s potential killer can be seen as the incarnation of the emotional danger she feels threatened by with the emergence of John Klute. From the beginning of the film, “the two men are almost always shown in juxtaposition.” The morning after Bree gets the eerie ‘breather’ phone call from her stalker, Klute appears at her door.

“Like Cable, Klute appears uninvited at her door. He, too, spies on her through windows and from archways. He, too, violates the privacy of her telephone by secretly recording her calls, just as Cable secretly records his session with her. The film even emphasized these parallels by showing the men in similar shots…{…} Ultimately Klute and Cable are two sides of the same male personality. One side punishes women for their sexuality and power plays; the other neutralizes the threat by inviting child-like dependence.” –Judith Gustafson from Cineaste (1981) The Whore with the Heart of Gold

At the time of Klute’s release, it gave the appearance of not only a straight suspense story but a radical film, filled with contradictions between what feminist critics would say is artifice and what represents women in real situations. Within this ‘new American cinema’ the film purports to be about a ‘liberated’ heroine inhabiting the structure of a thriller with an homage to the femme fatales of film noir. The contradictory implications lie between the film’s ‘modernity’, psychotherapy, and the problem of women places it within a humanist realist tradition of European art cinema’ (Gledhill). Yet it also bares the stylistic qualities –a highly detailed visual polish and ‘baroque stereotypes’ in noir thrillers, an atmosphere predominately summoned by American films of the seventies. “The real world and fictional production” Gledhill asserts that stems from the Women’s Movement rather than studies in film theory. The idea of realism and genre are in total opposition to each other. Klute presents as an independent heroine yet each frame reveals the attack on Bree’s free will.

“While realism embraces such cultural values as ‘real life’, truth or credibility, genre production holds negative connotations such as ‘illusion’, ‘myth’, ‘conventionality’, ‘stereotypes’. The Hollywood genres represent the fictional elaboration of a patriarchal culture which produces macho heroes and a subordinate, demeaning and objectified place for women.”

And beyond the constructs of film noir, seventies thriller genre and criticism by feminist theorists of Pakula’s Klute, Bree Daniel’s conflicts are a universal struggle for women’s assertion of love vs the affirmation of self-determination. Bree’s uneasy self-reflection makes the perspective of a movie prostitute a breakthrough characterization. She isn’t a tragic figure nor is she weak or contemptible. Bree explores her compulsion and potential self-destructive behavior as a sex worker as an externalized symptom stemming from past mental and internalized physical injury and she strives to uncover the answers in her own way.

Pakula re-invents some of the noir traditions and places them within an examination of the modern world. With his masterful film, he strives not only for visual ecstasy, the dramatic flourish of the thriller genre, and though there has been acute dissection of his film, he seeks to divulge a truth that becomes a revelation of acting by Jane Fonda.

In a 2019 interview with Jane Fonda conducted by Illeana Douglas, Fonda refers to Alan J. Pakula whom she worked in subsequent films, Comes a Horseman and Rollover, as a “still director.” “He allowed time for things to happen.” Jane Fonda explains that she loves films from the seventies because there was time left for things to happen. “more silence, than words.”

During the rehearsal for Klute Jane Fonda in order to prepare for her role as Bree Daniels, arranged to spend a lot of time with call-girls, streetwalkers and madams. Prostitutes on the bottom rung, strung out from the underbelly of the city and very wealthy madams, whom Fonda said made it clear the more money the client the weirder the sexual appetites and fantasies. She also talked about her decade living in France where she got to know the legendary Madam Claude, famous for taking beautiful women and molding them into high price call girls. Jane Fonda got to know many of them. Many she met were tough, often sexually aggressive she she said, and also sexually confident. She had learned that often they were the survivors of sexual abuse. What she referred having their ‘agency taken away’. These women inspired Fonda to model Bree after them. This is why Fonda’s performance pivots so well from self-confidence to vulnerability.

Illeana Douglas compliments Fonda by telling her that there’s “something going on in your eyes” which made Fonda recall that acting instructor Lee Strasberg had told her the very same thing in his class, that something was going on in her eyes that made him think that more is going on.

Fonda also had what she calls a ‘hair epiphany’. She had just come off filming cult sensation directed by husband, Roger Vadim’s Barbarella where she had all those blonde waves. Her friend hairdresser Paul MacGregor who lived in the village worked on what is now her iconic hair style from Klute.

Jane Fonda worried that as a white privileged middle class actress couldn’t possibly bring to life a prostitute and make it believable. She insisted to her director Alan J. Pakula that he hire Faye Dunaway instead. Pakula burst out laughing.

Jane Fonda was allowed to add a lot of her own insight into the character of Bree, little details and director Pakula often took them as excellent suggestions that worked well with the story. For instance, it was Fonda’s idea to live in the apartment for weeks. She lay there at night as if she were Bree trying to get inside Bree’s head and summon up the things she would do within her private time. We don’t know the backstory behind Bree Daniels many permutations. We are only to privy to hints of the damage.

Jane Fonda conceptualized many of the set’s subtleties. What would Bree read, what would adorn her little space. She thought of having a cat, because cats symbolize independence and Fonda imagined that Bree’s persona wanted a companion that would be more like herself. In many ways, Jane Fonda dressed the set with these little introspective details. The film became a very personal experience for her. And one that initiated her feminist transformation. Even when she was smoking the spliff in her apartment, it wasn’t in the script but she spontaneously began to sing that little hymn, it was very natural and emphasized how real her character was. Fonda tells of how this was a very spontaneous improvisation as a plot detail that was not in the script but struck her at the moment.

Illeana Douglas also astutely pointed out that there was a lot of glamour to the film. There were moments where Klute was framed with close ups of Bree. Even with the evocative Cymbalon melody – the Klezmer (traditional Eastern European Jewish music) movement that guides the scene it reminds of the languid strut of Marlene Dietrich, the allure of Greta Garbo and had the flavor of night club singers in Paris and Germany. When I watched the incredibly thoughtful and in-depth interview it hit me how much that was true. I saw it as clear as day, that Jane Fonda’s aura did truly give off that mystique that essence of glamour of the great actresses’ personae. Superb fashion and costume designer Ann Roth chose the alluring dress that Bree wears when she visits the old man, Mr. Goldfarb. 

Jane Fonda also points out that Bree could have been a great actress but within her craft something would have triggered her to return to selling her body, which is a violation to the soul, and it’s very different than acting, as it comes from a deep place of trauma and the need to control and not open up her heart.

[voiceover] “I have no idea what’s going to happen. I… I just can’t stay in this city, you know? Maybe I’ll come back. You’ll probably see me next week.”

 This is your EverLovin Joey saying see you on the tracks! Part 2 coming up!

Â