Individuals with Unique Qualities 

The Apostle (1997), directed by Robert Duvall, with Robert Duvall, Farah Fawcette

This is one of those films, not about an actual person, but more a composite of a stereotypical personality that is so real that the film is bringing us into the life of a person who has lived this life.  This individual surely is an excellent representation of actual individuals who do exist, and have gone down the same path, a path that lead to where   Robert Duval takes us.  We see a film treatment that could very well be, easily, someone’s biography.

We see a character, that like the characters in other films, is truly unique, existed, deserves the interest and observation of us other human beings.

The apostle has a unique gift, like the subjects of most biographical films.  The gifts of these individuals, who are the subjects of our biographical films, are by no means the same.  Each person has traits that are different and unique and account for the person’s success.  I love these films; they are a lot of fun to watch, think about, and to experience.

The apostle has a truly unique gift and ability to get before groups and bring spirituality to the members, to elevate this spirituality to superstardom levels.  It’s a unique gift, found in few individuals, I suspect.

Like all the other subjects of the films in this category, the apostle has plenty of human frailties.  In the apostle’s case, anger, violence, and impulsiveness are a few – and they lead to his downfall.  These films help to remind us that human failings are present in all of us, even amongst those who reach unique levels in life.

Malcolm X (1992), directed by Spike Lee, with Drexel Washington, Spike Lee, Angela Bassett

Autobiographical and historic, this film presents to me more of what I want to know of my country, my fellow citizens, my brothers and sisters.  We are brothers and sisters.

The film is both very entertaining and impressive in its appearance, its portrayal of the African-American experience, and, what seems to me to be the break-through sights and sounds of the African-American marches and movements of the 40’s, 50’s, and 60’s.

Besides this for me, this film suggests the need for heroes for human beings, around which folks can coalesce for inspiration, pride, self-identity, respect.  Malcolm X was certainly such a hero.

Barry Lyndon (1975), directed by Stanley Kubrick, with Ryan O’Neal

Novel adaptations are a frequent filmmaking approach and do fall into various categorization types.  Often the classical literature is adopted, but also – mystery, crime, horror, popular works.   One would desire that the film make a good translation of the book’s essence on to the screen.

To really evaluate such translation success probably is much beyond the efforts and results of the overwhelming amount of serious comment and criticism made upon film.  So there is probably no real good idea of how such efforts of adopting the written word succeeds, as measured against some sort of standard – standards for what written word features are capturable by film adaptations, what works, what can’t work.  More discoveries about what makes good adaptations likely would be really interesting in this area.

I suspect the literature from which this film comes is similar in meaning as the film, and also suspect that such similarities are a good measure of the skills of the director.  In this case, the director’s skills are widely admired, and this film should and does reinforce such admiration.

Here in Barry Lyndon, we are dealing with the life story of a man, how a man goes about gaining types of success and, likewise, types of failures.  We are learning about what the man is about, his goods points, the bad ones, the opportunistic, the balancing codes of his conduct. 

Rocky (1975), directed by John Avildsen, with Sylvester Stallone

I was pleasantly surprised – this is an engrossing, absorbing film that is strong in its characterizations – of the working class, ordinary folks – who struggle to survive, and in the case of Rocky, to do a little better through some of the few alternatives they might have – such as boxing.

There’s an uplifting, inspiring feeling to Rocky, as we get to know him and gain some respect for him as a fairly decent, realistic guy who, given the chance, will apply himself and work hard.  He also shows care for other people as well as animals.

The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996), directed Miles Foreman, with Woody Harrelson, Courtney Love

This is an interesting, entertaining character study.   Foreman, as in Cuckoo and Amadeus, puts on the screen interesting characters that both take us into their faults and strengths.  Through his characters, we have a link to compassion.  Forman also puts the individual’s story within a larger context of the influence of the environment and cause and effect related to the characters we are watching.

In Cuckoo, it was characters within a mental institution.  In Amadeus, it was characters within genius, and in Flynt, its characters within pornography.  In all cases, portrayals are believable and seem biographically accurate and informative.  In Flynt, we see a likely fact – folks, who are occupied, pornographically, probably have more unhappy occurrences in their lives than most.

Crumb (1994), directed by Terry Zurgoff, with Robert Crumb and family

I am convinced from this documentary that Robert Crum is unique, prolific, innovative, interesting in his output.  I was overwhelmed at his drawings done as we watched and how he captured unique, innovative, and interesting interpretive aspects of the scenes he was drawing.

Another important aspect of this film was the relationship, the playing out, the explorations of the artist talking about and telling us of his artistic connections to his personality, subconscious, which is beyond easy explanation, and never really settled.  Crumb is driven, he creates as he goes.  There is a lot of uniqueness in his family. There is dysfunction in his environment, but we can sympathize and understand as we relate to him.

The film brings out characteristics that might be expected to be common among such personalities: passion, dedication, absorption, discipline, hard work, obsession, practice, continuous improvement, and an internal mechanism that has a way of combining such characteristics with a mystical talent for putting out a truly unique result.

Amadeus (1984), directed by Milos Forman, with F. Murray Abraham, Tom Hulce

This is a good examination of genius combined with being human, how excesses of genius interact with the needs of being human. Also, a good examination of reaction to such genius, and how jealousies, envies, and resentment can warp, distort, create evil -and power aspirations takes over.

The film’s story centers on the musical reflections of the genius Mozart as he plays them out against his needs for expression and acceptance.

We see this need for expression and acceptance, as Mozart pursues his creative impulse and obsession for making music.

Schindler’s List, directed by Steven Spielberg, with Liam Neeson, Ben Kingsley, Ralph Fienes

With outstanding filmmaking, we see an opportunistic businessman, out to make as much money as he can, transformed into a man of tremendous guilt and shame for not being able to do more to help his fellow human beings.

In a sense, Schindler’s guilt and shame reflects, hopefully, the shame and guilt of many of us.  This film reflects struggle and determination.

Patton (1970), directed by Franklin J. Schaffner, with George C. Scott, Karl Madden

This is a good documentary-like film, factually accurate.  The interaction between the characters is a big impact of the film.  The personality of Patton is a big impact.

This is a lot more than a war picture; it is about struggle, perseverance of personalities, of ideals, of systems, the battle between competitive entities within systems.  In Patton, and in this film, we see service, training, determination - related to country, and obligations of man, soldier to country, stand for importance.

Laurence of Arabia (1962), directed by David Lean, with Peter O’Toole, Anthony Quale, Omar Sheriff

This film is about a man who is not ordinary. Not necessarily great, but somehow different in such a way that, as he goes through life, he does that which most of us are unable to do.  A very interesting suggestion in this film is that individuals, doing things alone individually, do much of what is valuable in this world, alone.

Laurence was a man with different intuitions, behavior, and standards for himself that certainly set him apart.

Goodbye Mr. Chips (1939), directed by Sam Wood, with Robert Donat, Greer Garson

Whereas most biographical films tend to be treatments of individuals well known, this film is of a life not well known, at least outside the person’s circle of friends and acquaintances.  In fact, I am not even certain that Mr. Chipping (Chips) was really an actual person, although I suspect he was, or at least very strongly based on a real person.

By definition, biographical films examine a person’s life, it’s unique events, accomplishments, activities that have some interest, at least to the artists pursuing the film, and eventually to the viewers, for the film to be of any success.  And although Chips’ story may not be known, when the film was made, by no means were Chip’s accomplishments and activities not interesting.

This is a story of service to an organization, of service to a mission.  It is this aspect of the film that all of us (at least most of us) can relate to, because of our own organizational affiliations, and eventually the worth that we could get from these affiliations.

It is through Chips service, encompassing traits such as persistence, loyalty, growth, humor, and courage, that Chips achieves success in life, achieves self-respect, memories, happiness, and peace.  This has a universal truth ring to it.  And it may not be so inconsequential as a life’s goal - many people were very sad when they had to say their final goodbye Mr. Chips.

Reds (1981), directed by Warren Beatty, with Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, Paul Savino, Gene Hackman, Jack Nicholson

This film tells us, through this biographical treatment of John Reid, about an intellectual response to the times, the events going on in the history of the moment, the history of the period.  A large part of that particular period that the film deals with – the early 1900s – had to do with changes in the relationships between ruling classes and working classes.

We were in a period prior to the emergence of a large middle class, a class that really does not gain prominence until after World War II.  We were in a period in population growth and the growing awareness of the usefulness of industrialization to meet the needs of increased populations.  We were in a period of time when exploitation of the working classes by the ruling classes was real – it had been going around the world for a long time and was an ever present threat.  It would only be expected for thinking people to be thinking about and writing and pursuing these issues.

We see in this film an example, an introduction to how certain American intellectuals responded to the ruling/working classes’ tensions and movements of the times.  We glimpse at Russian ruling/working class situations and its governance progression and the imposition in that country of an intellectual ideology, an intellectual solution upon society.  (In the 1990s, more than 70 years later, the experiment was finally given up – intellectuals have their usefulness, but it is not in formulating plans for the governance of the rest of us.)

This film touches upon sociological subjects – working class versus ruling class issues; upon national/macro subjects – Russian development, American leadership decision making and choice.  Primarily, though, the story is of John Reid, a man of unique characteristics, talents, and skills that could propel him successfully in those life’s directions that he chooses for himself.  Through this film we learn of those characteristics, talents, and skills and the directions he chose.

Lust for Life (1956), directed by Vincent Minnelli, with Kirk Douglass, Anthony Quinn.

This biographical film captures well the sense that Vincent Van Gough had a mind that worked differently than most of the rest of us.  This difference appeared behaviorally, by outspokenness, extreme attention (almost the opposite of attention deficiency disorder), and a craving for expression of who he was.

Fortunately, for those who derived great pleasure from paintings, Van Gough’s expression found form in paintings

For Van Gogh, this opposite of attention deficiency disorder really does seem to be a part of his equation, his mix.  Rather than not being able to focus, he seems just the opposite.  Once Van Gogh’s mind had attention on a purpose, an idea, he could not let loose.  It seems he became so emotionally tied to what his attention was on that the tying depleted him mentally, emotionally.  It is as if somehow his sensing mechanisms for light and color and texture and form were so sensitive, so overworking, so off scale, it was as if he walked around overestimated, as a man who just had a camera’s flash bulb go off before his eyes, except for Van Gogh, the flash bulb kept going off.

But, whatever the explanation, Van Gogh was able beyond comparison, to transfer an extreme sense of positive emotional feeling and response to the light and color and texture and form of his awareness to canvass. And we are the beneficiaries of that process.

Gandhi (1982), directed by Richard Attenborough, with Ben Kingsley

This biography well portrays both the important accomplishments of one of the 20th Century’s most important individuals and also presents an entertaining story.  But, more than that, this film seems to capture well the character of the Indian people and the Indian subcontinent – the personalities of the people, some of the recent history, and the problems of a such a huge, diverse population.

Because of the importance of this region to the world in finding peace, harmony, and prosperity, this is a story needing to be well understood by all.

The Buddy Holly Story (1978), directed by Steve Rash, with Gary Busey

This film definitely is about a person with unique skills, skills of interest, skills that result in output of interest to us, of value to communities, and therefore, about a person of biographical interest.

Like for most, if not all, persons of biographical interest, much about the person perhaps is of routine encumbrances, but, then, there is something unique that accounts for the person’s output of interest. In Buddy Holly, our interest is expressed in about 30 minutes of music, perhaps 10 to 15 hit songs.

But, then those 30 minutes, 10 to 15 hit songs, represent such a profound impact on millions of people, that the creator and the creator’s process and results deserves biographical consideration.

My experience, my view is that for these “persons of biographical interest”, we can only conclude about our person that there is something “unique”, something “genius”, something “skillful”, something “biochemical”, that when combined with the person’s environment and the person’s drive, does produce the “biographical interest”, and we are left without really being able to further define what is the cause of the output of this “person of biographical interest”.

In fact, why go any further than the film;  this is what makes biographical film such a neat learning experience – films need not be any more analytical, are not, yet gives us exactly what we need.

Silkworm (1983), directed by Mike Nichols, with Meryl Strep, Kurt Russell, Cher, Craig T. Nelson.

Films that fall into the biographical genre, such as Gandhi, Lawrence of Arabia, Amadeus, and others, are usually on and motivated by the accomplishments of those well-known.  Not Silkworm.

But, nevertheless, there is much accomplishment by those not well known, and there is much inquiry to make, and much to learn, and much to admire about those accompaniments. This film shows that.

This is an entertaining film, dealing well with the complexities of human behavior, and how, out of the ordinariness of our lives, as complex as they are, we can rise up and shrine.

Karen Silkworm certainly served a good purpose in her life, and this deserves our attention. Films, such as this one, help to accomplish this goal.

Glory (1989), directed by Edward Zwick, with Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, Morgan Freeman.

This film is biographical – both of a white northerner of leadership level, and of a military unit – a regiment, which is made up of African-American soldiers and European-American officers.

The film, based on the surviving letters of the white, northern colonel commander of this Union Army unique unit, gives both some insights into the northern white handling of this situation, and of response by the African Americans to the situation.  The film provides history.

Birdman of Alcatraz (1982), directed by John Frankenheimer, with Burt Lancaster, Karl Malden.

The lesson I get from this, what I consider to be a really good film, is how we can find ourselves constrained in our lives, due to unavoidable events, whether it might be a birth learning disorder, or a life imprisonment sentence, yet even within such constraints, find exceptional meaning, and productivity, in life.  This, to me, is a very hopeful message that we can find and learn in this film. This biographical film demonstrates this lesson exceptionally well.

Each and every human being is constrained in many ways, some obviously more than others perhaps.   The mark of a life well lived is what appears, considering our constraints.

The Entertainer (1960), directed by Tony Richardson, with Laurence Olivier, Joan Plowwright, Alan Bates, Albert Finney

First, let me complain that the New York Times review of this film way back around 1960, when the film ran, is off the mark.  I do not think this is a film about a “washed-up, over the hill English music hall entertainer, consumed with selfishness, self-centeredness, and all the other characteristics that the New York Times reviewer attributed to Archie Rice.

But, rather this film is a “biography”, much like “The Apostle” is a biography of a stereotype – an evangelistic minister, in The Apostle’s case, and a pure entertainer in The Entertainer's case. 

Archie Rice’s attributes are those necessary to be “in the moment with total freedom”, the quintessential characteristic of an entertainer reaching the zenith of the trade.   The entertainer’s devotion, commitment, passion, personality, flexibility, self-absorption, and self-centeredness, amongst others, come across strong in this film.  This is exactly what one would expect a “pure” entertainer to be like.  A “pure “entertainer is always playing a part, always in the moment of a devised persona, never contemplating the next month’s payment schedule, the best investments, or whatever is on a “to do list”.

Perhaps, this is why Olivier so liked this role – the role was in fact exactly what he thought was his life’s role.

That Archie was having difficulty making a living is exactly what is expected of an entertainer.   “Living-wage and more” success as an entertainer is rare, very rare indeed, and to manage such success surely requires something other than being an entertainer.

The Glenn Miller Story (1953), directed by Anthony Mann, with James Stewart, June Allyson

Obviously, a “biographical” film, falling in my category of “individuals with unique qualities”, used to produce results of usefulness.

Although only a little familiar with Glenn Miller, from what little I do know, the film is accurate.  It is entertaining and informative.  Two aspects really standout: the treatment of the problems and development difficulties that a musician has in developing a long-lasting product that draws attention; and the emphasis in the film, and the way this emphasis comes about, on what it was about Glenn Miller that we most remember – the music he created.

Limelight (1952), directed by Charlie Chaplin, with Charlie Chaplin, Claire Bloom

He wrote it, directed it, choreographed it, and starred in it, and there is no doubt this film is about him – Charlie Chaplin.  This film is an auto-biographical glimpse being provided on aspects of his life and nature.  Are there any doubts?

The Great Ziegfeld (1936), directed by Robert Z. Leonard, with William Powell, Myrna Loy, Louise Rainer

Differently biographical , and an ok one at that, showing the personality of someone like Ziegfeld being brought to the “product” needed for success. 

As Ziegfeld said, a bookkeeper personality, always unhappy and worried, certainty was not Ziegfeld, and certainly could not have produced what he did.

Sergeant York (1941), directed by Howard Hawks, with Gary Cooper, Walter Brennan

Certainly, a biographical treatment, showing, probably realistically, where the heavy lifters (those who do the work) arise out of to achieve what needs to be done.

A good, through bits and pieces, look into the segments of this man’s life that were relevant to who he was.

Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942), directed by Michael Curtiz, with James Cagney, Joan Leslie, Walter Huston

I read recently that this was really not a film that was a “true” biography.  I strongly disagree.  In my mind, this film does what one wants a true biographical film to do.

The film shows well, very well, what is the characteristic, accomplishment that makes the biographical subject worthy of a film; why the subject is being remembered; the accomplishments that are important, unique worthy of emulation and interest; what the subject has done that is so unique.

For Cohan, of course, it is his music that have has become American iconic music, his music that moved a nation, his music and performance creation that contributed so much to a very important American industry (Broadway).

This film may not capture every one of Cohan's life milestones, but more important, it captures the essence of why George M. Cohan is the subject, and a lot of what went into making George M. Cohan worth remembering.

Henry V (1945), directed by Laurence Olivier, with Laurence Olivier

This is a story of ultimately, of an individual, and his characteristics, attributes, outlook, etc that relates to his accomplishments, as a king of England; his interaction with other English and foreign persons and rulers; and other events etc., related to Henry V, as Shakespeare relates them to us.

The film is biographical.