As always, David Bordwell's observations on very
specific aspects of film art prompt us to search through our mental movie
database for instances of particular cinematic techniques. Thinking about the
movies we watch in a "transversal" way is an efficient test for
checking how much attention we pay to film style, and trying to recall
films featuring a particular framing, cut, camera movement, mise-en-scene etc.
can actually turn out to be a surprisingly difficult and not always fruitful
operation.
A recent entry in Bordwell's blog is dedicated to the use of sound in Nightmare Alley, a 1947 film featuring the downfall of an unscrupulous man working as a barker in a traveling carnival. In particular, Bordwell analyzes a scene in which a police siren is heard, but we can't clearly determine whether this sound is subjective (like an auditory hallucination), objective (probably coming from an off-screen police car), or whether it eludes both categories. He then contextualizes the scene within the overall film, showing that ambiguous sound cues form a motif and in certain cases represent a sort of commentary on the action. I invite you to read his astonishingly detailed, insanely entertaining analysis.
Nightmare Alley merits
our attention because it employs sound in unusual ways. In fact, most 1940s
films conform to the stylistic palette available at the time, choosing unambiguously
between objective and subjective sound and abiding
by well-established conventions (for instance, subjective sound is typically
signaled by a rather close shot of the character hearing that
sound). Nightmare Alley instead challenges those norms, and
encourages us to think about things we normally take for granted in movies.
It seems natural at this point to ask
whether Nightmare Alley's innovative use of sound is a
one-off instance, or if more examples exist. Can you think of a film in which a
particular sound doesn't strictly respect the objective/subjective distinction?
Note that here we are not taking into consideration the diegetic/nondiegetic
categories applied to music. I came up with just one example, Sam Peckinpah's
Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (1974). Spoilers galore!
A brief synopsis. Bennie, piano player in a
kitschy bar for tourists in Mexico City, is offered a 10,000$ reward by two
strangers to behave Alfredo Garcia, an old acquaintance of him who has gotten
into trouble for having impregnated the daughter of a powerful Mexican boss
known as El Jefe. Bennie embarks on his truculent mission with his promiscuous
lover Elita, who informs him that Alfredo passed away the previous week in a
car accident. In spite of many hesitations on the part of Elita, they
eventually visit Alfredo's grave in order to retrieve his head and get the money,
but something at the cemetery goes horribly wrong: Elita is killed in an ambush
and Alfredo's head is stolen. Blinded by remorse and rage, Bennie will take no
prisoners in order to get the head back and find the man who ordered
the massacre.
Sound in Alfredo Garcia is
mostly used in fairly conventional ways, both objectively and subjectively. For
instance, driving back from Alfredo's grave Bennie is haunted by memories of
Elita singing, playing guitar, and repeating sentences she said on their outward
journey ("You're a nice gringo!"). In this case there's no doubt
that all this is happening in Bennie's tortured mind, firstly because Bennie
reacts to these sounds with grief-stricken rage and hysterical laughs, and
secondly because Elita's voice has a reverberating quality that
the other simultaneous sounds lack. Elsewhere in the film we have objective
sound ‒ what we hear is motivated by what's in or out of the frame.
Except for a single scene. After the film's
prologue in El Jefe's mansion, we see Bennie playing
Guantanamera in his tavern, when two henchmen of El Jefe
appear and start asking questions about Alfredo Garcia with clearly hostile
intentions. Intoxicated by the prospect of making money, Bennie hints that he
has information for them, so they show him a photo of Alfredo. At this point we
hear a faint but clearly audible sound of a car's brakes screeching with no
apparent source. What is the origin of this sound and what does it mean? Later
in the film we'll learn about Alfredo's death in a car accident, so we are
inclined to believe that the car screech is related to this
never-shown event; unfortunately, this association doesn't help us establish
whether the sound is objective or subjective. In fact, given that Bennie is still
unaware of Alfredo's death as the screech is heard, we cannot conclude
that it is a product of his imagination. On the other hand, if a car accident
had occurred somewhere outside the bar during the conversation, we would expect
some kind of reaction from Bennie and everyone present, but such is not the
case.
If sound ambiguity in Nightmare
Alley form a motif running through the film, in Alfredo
Garcia it is limited to the scene I have described. So what are we
going to do with it? Again, it seems logical to conclude that the car screech
cannot be explained merely in terms of objectivity/subjectivity, but is more
likely a hint addressed to us viewers stressing the idea of doom and
ineluctable failure, which is a main theme of the film. This explanation,
however, seems to me not entirely convincing. If the filmmaker intended to
foreshadow the story's tragic outcome, why put the emphasis on Alfredo's fate
instead of Bennie's?
I think there exists another possibility. Ever
since my first viewing I've thought that Alfredo Garcia had a certain supernatural thread running through it. Bennie's road trip with
Elita appears doomed from the start, not only because of the desperate,
abominable plan they're pursuing, but also because Bennie obstinately
ignores some ominous and almost biblical signs he encounters on the way: a
prostitute's beating, the crabs infesting his lower parts, the two Mexican
bounty hunters, a miraculously avoided car crash with a bus, the encounter with
the rapist bikers and, not least, the very fact that Alfredo Garcia is already
dead. Even a simple shot like the one above, showing a group of workers
asphalting the road with Bennie's red Chevy Impala in the background, in
retrospect acquires a sinister meaning once the story reaches its fatal
conclusion. There are possibly echoes of Don't Look Now here, Nicolas Roeg's film released the previous year about a man who fails to
acknowledge his psychic powers.
This is what I call a biblical undertone. |
This supernatural element emerges more
evidently, I think, in the film's second half. What we see is that Elita is
murdered at Alfredo's grave, while Bennie incredibly survives the attack. But
does he really survive? When he emerges from the earth where he has been buried
alive, it's like watching a resurrection, and from this moment on he is sort of
invulnerable, coming out unscathed from no less than five gunfights ‒ with Elita's killers, Alfredo's family, the two henchmen of El Jefe, the guards
who pay him the bounty, and finally with El Jefe himself and his bodyguards.
There's nothing "natural" or "realistic" about the way
Bennie accomplishes his mission. Everything happens in obedience to a
mysterious design, as though Bennie had been given a deferment from death
allowing him to take revenge on those responsible for Elita's murder. With
Alfredo's rotting head as travel companion, often framed in close-up as if it
was silently responding to his delirious soliloquies, in a sense Bennie can't
die because he is already dead.
Under this light the car screech could
acquire the meaning of a warning directed not at the viewer, but at Bennie.
Therefore, the hypothesis of a subjective sound is not to be dismissed too
hastily: after all, when Bennie learns from Elita about Alfredo's death, he
reacts with astonishment and surprise ‒ maybe also because the news comes as a
confirmation of that earlier premonition. Another cue for subjectivity is the close framing on the photo of Alfredo, which seems to suggest a psychological connection between Bennie, who is looking at it, and the sound we hear. Or am I stretching things too much?
Well, at least now you know why the blog's subtitle says "abstruse
theories". The original script could perhaps shed some light on the
matter, but unfortunately on the web I was able to find only transcriptions.
All in
all, I find the second hypothesis more plausible, because it sees the car
screech not as an isolated, capricious artifice, but as part of a buried (pass
me the term) supernatural subtext, which I think does exist. Anyway, the
question seems to have no clear-cut solution. I'd love to hear from you any
alternate explanation and more examples of ambiguous sounds as well. Please
just make sure not to overload the comment section as usual.
No comments:
Post a Comment