Sunday Morning! “Nightmare Alley” x 3

Rufus F.

Rufus is a likeable curmudgeon. He has a PhD in History, sang for a decade in a punk band, and recently moved to NYC after nearly two decades in Canada. He wrote the book "The Paris Bureau" from Dio Press (2021).

Related Post Roulette

8 Responses

  1. Doctor Jay says:

    I watched “The Power of the Dog” on Netflix. I liked it quite a bit, not the least since while I am not a rancher, nor do I come from ranchers, I’ve spent some time around them. Not in Montana so much as in British Columbia. Wranglers too, and that’s nearer to home, being as my sister had two horses, and that gave us a relationship with the local wrangler.

    That said, I’m at odds with many of the reviewers I’ve read, who describe Phil Burbank (Benedict Cumberbatch’s character) as “unthinkably horrible”. This seems like hyperbole to me. Phil, in the first reel, is sharp-tongued, to be sure, and there’s a bit of mystery to it, yes. And yet, his cruelty, to me, is neither unthinkable or unspeakable It seems like it’s pretty common and ordinary. Though mean, to be sure. I knew maybe half a dozen people like that growing up. (None of them were the aforementioned ranchers or wranglers, as it happens).

    For instance, in the first scene, Phil refers to his brother George (who runs the ranch with him) as “Fatso”. This doesn’t strike me so much as mean, as just a common sibling thing. Phil is mean to another character, Peter, and we are invited to speculate why. My speculation was dead on, so much so that this core idea of the film seemed like a cliche.

    Meanwhile we find that Phil has genuinely fallen for the ranching life. George handles finances and legal work, but Phil runs the operations. Phil castrates male calves with his own hands. Phil proposes toasts to the man who taught him all of this, and who remains the best rider known in those parts, Bronco Henry.

    SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER.

    Phil is gay, and fell hard with Bronco Henry. This does not offend me, but the notion that an audience would need this to explain why someone like Phil would fall in love with the cowboy life, does. Can a man who is highly educated, and who has certain refined tastes still love the outdoors and a rougher lifestyle, on its own, without the sexual kicker? Yes. Yes he can. One such man is me.

    So Phil’s rudeness to Peter was the act of a man in the closet. Phil is also cruel to Rose, Peter’s mother and a widow who marries George. To me, this was also clear. Phil is jealous of her, and how she disrupts his relationship with George. He also sees her as a faker and trickster. I would not have done what he does, but I don’t find it off the scale, as some have described it.

    This bothered me while watching, perhaps too much, because I missed an important part of the film’s payoff until reading about it after. There’s another line of action that plays across the screen that is so, very, very easy to overlook, and that makes this film great, and not so cliched, perhaps.

    Ultimately the film bends toward more sympathy for Phil, which I was definitely amenable to. Does that make me unspeakably horrible? Did I have an unusual life? I can’t say.Report

    • Rufus F. in reply to Doctor Jay says:

      I really want to see this and I cancelled Netflix a few years ago because I wasn’t watching much. Having said that, my ladyfriend has way too many streaming channels, so I might just get to see it in a few weeks when I’m at her place.

      It strikes me that having refined tastes is often movie shorthand for closeted homosexuality, which is a shame.Report

      • Doctor Jay in reply to Rufus F. says:

        Campion is very good at what she does. I thought this was going to be a cliche-ridden (but gorgeously shot and well acted) bit of tiresomeness, but it wasn’t. There’s more going on.

        Should you get to see it, report back! I’d love to read your take on it.Report

        • Rufus F. in reply to Doctor Jay says:

          You know, I’ve been meaning to delve deeper into her work. Earlier in the year, I finally got around to watching The Piano, and holy heck that was a good Movie (with-a-capital-M)!Report

          • dhex in reply to Rufus F. says:

            the piano is super nuts. it’s like a normie version of a miike film like visitor q. (or vice versa, really)

            you made this new adaptation seem really interesting (the spotify ads are not particularly compelling)Report

  2. LeeEsq says:

    Professor Bourdini thinking of his stage name, yes I know this joke is anachronistic, “I will combine America’s love of Chef Boyardee and Harry Houdini” to come up with the ultimate stage name. I will become the Great Bourdini.Report

  3. Burt Likko says:

    I am very likely the only member of the community who has seen the arthouse film I recently reviewed. Which is fine, this is always going to a pretty obscure movie. In somewhat more popular entertainment, I took it upon myself (inspired by a friend naming his new car “Shadowfax”) to re-watch the extended Lord of the Rings movies; after that is finished tonight (made it up to Faramir’s doomed raid on Osgiliath) another friend has challenged us to re-watch the Matrix movies in preparation for the fourth movie premiering later this week. I… may not do that; IIRC the second movie was heavy, loud philosophical soup and the third was very close to walk-out-of-the-theater unwatchable.

    However, I am going to be looking out for this new one from del Toro; have always enjoyed his love of finding beauty in the grotesque and his ongoing delight in the monster movies of his (and my) childhood. A noir from him sounds great.Report

    • Rufus F. in reply to Burt Likko says:

      I think it’s probably in his top 4 at least. It’s pretty great and I’d have to watch it again to put aside the book a bit more.

      I’m also sure I will see that arthouse film, which I’d never heard of until you reviewed it. I did watch Titane recently, which was weird as heck in a way that made me consider if acid flashbacks are a real thing.Report