AestheticsAffinitiesAuteursDVDGreat ArtSome Came Running by Glenn Kenny

The dark at the top, and at the bottom, of the stairs, or, there's always "Bigger Than Life"

By March 8, 2010January 12th, 20265 Comments

Ray:MasonNicholas Ray and James Mason,Bigger Than Life, Ray, 1956

Two films of 1956 seem to turn one of the pre­dom­in­ant genres of the Eisenhower era on its head. In cer­tain very spe­cif­ic senses, Nicholas Ray’s Bigger Than Life and Douglas Sirk’s There’s Always Tomorrow are melo­dra­mas. Ray’s film, writ­ten by Cyril Hume and future James Bond scen­ar­ist Richard Maibaum, from a true-life chron­icle by Berton Roueché first pub­lished in The New Yorker, is the more flor­id, fant­ast­ic­al one, very close, in cer­tain respects, to a widescreen, col­or film noir, but this story of addic­tion and mega­lo­mania is still a melo­drama. Tomorrow, being a tale of impossible and unre­quited love, has a more con­ven­tion­al fit into the genre. What’s dif­fer­ent in both is that the main sub­jects are male, not female; neither of these are what the gen­re’s detract­ors could call “women’s pictures.”

In Life, James Mason’s Ed Avery, decent teach­er, hus­band, and fath­er, is pre­scribed cortisone to treat a poten­tially fatal med­ic­al con­di­tion. Overusing the drug, he goes mad, re-inventing him­self as a reac­tion­ary mar­tin­et and finally as a mur­der­ous prim­or­di­al pat­ri­arch in the mold of, he believes, Abraham. In Tomorrow (writ­ten by Bernard C. Schoenfeld from a story by Ursula Parrot), a suc­cess­ful toy man­u­fac­turer (Fred MacMurray), taken crassly for gran­ted by his petty, selfish family—a wife (Joan Bennett) and three kids at vari­ous stages of devel­op­ment­al awfulness—finds his zest for life renewed by an ini­tially entirely inno­cent encounter with an old flame (Barbara Stanwyck); his fam­ily’s sus­pi­cions of his revived friend­ship with the woman engender such resent­ment as to push him deep­er into the rela­tion­ship and very close to a rejec­tion of home and hearth. 

There are very few things that bore me to more tears than lit­er­ary or cine­mat­ic con­dem­na­tions of sub­ur­bia as soul-crushing hell­hole of con­form­ity. But Sirk and Ray were both smart enough artists, smart enough men, to under­stand that con­form­ity and banal­ity can blos­som in any social milieu, even that of the putat­ively clev­er and class­less and free. Conditions are states of mind, and each film has a very par­tic­u­lar way of depict­ing what “home” becomes for each of its fam­il­ies, and their heads. What each artist shows is so acutely spe­cif­ic as to com­pletely sidestep the stand­ard facile suburb-critique.


One lovely thing about the depic­tion of the Avery home in Bigger Than Life (pho­to­graphed by the spec­tac­u­larly under­rated Joe MacDonald) is how its prox­im­ity to Expressionism is really only a heightened real­ism. I grew up in a sub­urb­an house of ’50s vin­tage, and I recall how a single lamp in my bed­room could cast such long shad­ows. Hence, the sin­is­ter scene of the now dic­tat­ori­al Ed “coach­ing” son Richie (Christopher Olsen) with his home­work is both hugely creepy and not alto­geth­er far-fetched in its depiction.

Shadows
There’s Always Tomorrow was shot by the great Russell Metty, a fre­quent Sirk col­lab­or­at­or, in a tight­er 1.85:1 fram­ing. The way the cam­era moves as the fam­ily mem­bers crowd each oth­er out is mar­velously flu­id. Both films are remark­ably tight in con­struc­tion, with not a gra­tu­it­ous scene or even shot. Aside with their shared con­cern with male char­ac­ters, anoth­er affin­ity  I’m par­tic­u­larly taken with is in where both film situ­ate the locus of the fam­ily sick­ness: the stair­case of the sub­urb­an home. 

In Bigger Than Life the stair­case grows dark­er as the film inex­or­ably pro­ceeds to its post-Sunday-sermon mad scene, one of the greatest set pieces in all of cinema, cli­max­ing with Mason/Avery’s hor­rif­ic pro­nounce­ment “God was wrong!” And all along this center­piece of the house has func­tioned as a character…

Stairs
In There’s Always Tomorrow the stair­case func­tions for the most part as the bor­der of a sta­ging area, or a launch­ing pad for depar­tures from the house, or a second proscenium.

Tomorrow stairs

Tomorrow stairs 2
Until the very end, wherein the cam­era pulls back from this shot (which occurs not too long after the above shot fea­tur­ing the fam­ily por­trait from which MacMurray’s fig­ure is absent:):

Tomorrow jail
And as the cam­era pulls back from MacMurray’s char­ac­ter, who’s clearly hold­ing in his con­tempt for his sniv­el­ling, con­niv­ing chil­dren (from left, Gigi Perreau, William Reynolds, and Judy Nugent), we see Metty’s been shoot­ing from behind the stair­case­’s long dow­els, which now form the bars of MacMurray’s pris­on, as it were. 

Bigger Than Life comes out on DVD and Blu-ray on March 23, in spec­tac­u­lar edi­tions from The Criterion Collection. There’s Always Tomorrow was recently released in a won­der­ful ver­sion from the U.K. out­fit Eureka!/Masters of Cinema; a domest­ic edi­tion of the pic­ture is soon to come from Universal, part of a Barabara Stanwyck col­lec­tion that also includes Sirk’s All I Desire

5 Comments

  • Giles Edwards says:

    I retract the earli­er erro­neous “minor” com­ment even fur­ther hav­ing watched the MoC disc *again* for the second time in a week or so. Wonderfully rumin­at­ive and exhaust­ively ana­lyt­ic­al essay regard­ing the spa­cial geo­graphy of the block­ing (of which Sirk was such a mas­ter) in rela­tion to famili­al psy­cho­logy in the TOMORROW disc as well.
    It does lack a bawdy THEY LIVE-esque fist­fight that so mem­or­ably caps BIGGER THAH LIFE, though.

  • Goodvibe61 says:

    You are truly on a Douglas Sirk roll these days Glenn. And I must admit you’ve really piqued my curi­os­ity, as I’ve only seen a couple of his films, and those were awhile back. I’m gonna go over to Netflix and put everything they have into my queue. Can you tell me: of what they DON’T have over there, what should I seek out?

  • Cyril Hume not only wrote BIGGER THAN LIFE (with a little help from pro­du­cer James Mason, among oth­ers) but also FORBIDDEN PLANET (with a little help from Shakespeare). Was he really as tal­en­ted as those two films suggest?
    The pro­to­type of the middle-class-home-as-trap film, also fea­tur­ing a stair­case, might be Ophuls’ great THE RECKLESS MOMENT.

  • Asher Steinberg says:

    What each artist shows is so acutely spe­cif­ic as to com­pletely sidestep the stand­ard facile suburb-critique.”
    Sure – although I don’t know that I’ve ever seen any film from the 50s that one could label a facile suburb-critique (per­haps the bad ones are for­got­ten?) the way you can with Little Children, American Beauty, Rev. Road, Pleasantville, etc. That said, There’s Always Tomorrow played for me like a pretty inferi­or rethink of The Reckless Moment. Compare, for example, the end­ings. They’re the same story, really – Stanwyck leaves MacMurray to his spouse, Mason leaves Bennett to hers, the kids clasp their hands in joy that their par­ents’ threatened mar­riages are safe – but Ophuls’s is heart­break­ing, while Sirk’s is just snide. Everything in the Ophuls film is more nuanced, while in There’s Always Tomorrow you have the Failed Marriage and the Evil Kids who pre­vent their Poor Henpecked Father from run­ning off with his True Love. There’s very little empathy on Sirk’s part for the kids, whose reac­tion to their father­’s appar­ent infi­del­ity, after all, isn’t exactly unun­der­stand­able. And the pho­to­graphy, while gor­geous, at times is a bit of a dis­trac­tion (I feel the same way about a lot of James Wong Howe’s work), and only adds to the mor­ally over­de­termined qual­ity of the film. Even the begin­ning (“one day in Sunny California,” reads the title card – cut to a rainy day in California) is much too cut-and-dry, and really not so far in spir­it from a lot of the sub­ur­b­phobic dreck we’ve been sub­jec­ted to the last ten years. Same goes for the overt “Fred MacMurray is a broken robot” symbolism.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    As fond as I am of “The Reckless Moment,” which I con­sider a sub­lime mas­ter­piece, I’m rather dis­in­clined to use it as a cudgel with which to beat “There’s Always Tomorrow.” Pace Asher Steinberg, but I think the two are very dif­fer­ent films. It isn’t just the thrill­er ele­ment of “Moment” that sets it apart; it’s also the fact that it’s a kind of dual redemp­tion nar­rat­ive. Bennett gets her mar­riage back, Mason saves his own soul. Bennett’s char­ac­ter isn’t so much dis­sat­is­fied with her mar­riage as she is with its cir­cum­stances. In “Tomorrow” no one is redeemed; it’s a dark­er vis­ion over­all. Here, the view­ers’ sym­path­ies are (delib­er­ately) shaken up a good deal more; while one feels for MacMurray’s char­ac­ter, one also, at the begin­ning, sees him rather petu­lantly in deni­al of his pat­ri­arch­al duties, as it were. The reas­on Sirk does­n’t show much empathy for the kids, is, frankly, because they’re self-involved jerks who treat their fath­er with abject indif­fer­ence until the point when they sus­pect him of wrong­do­ing, as which point they pounce with even more petu­lance than MacMurray showed when he did­n’t get to take the wife out for their anniversary. It’s true that both film’s could bear the motto “No one is inno­cent,” but that’s hardly what you’d call an uncom­mon them­at­ic statement.