Epstein a Go-Go
Another Thursday, another edition of The Forgotten over at The Daily Notebook.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
- Privacy
Another Thursday, another edition of The Forgotten over at The Daily Notebook.
This entry was posted on November 11, 2010 at 2:57 pm and is filed under FILM with tags Jean Epstein, Mauprat, Nino Constantini, The Daily Notebook, The Forgotten. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
shadowplay
November 11, 2010 at 5:17 pm
More Epstein? My God, where and how can I see this?!
I’ve only ever seen HOUSE OF USHER and was barely aware of Epstein’s other work.
As for his theory of photogenie…I wish more film-makers today would take it seriously. So many films are marred by performers whose acting may be more than adequate – but who just don’t look good on camera.
The classic example for me is Kenneth Branagh. A shapeless face, tiny eyes and no mouth. How on earth do you photograph that?!
November 11, 2010 at 10:46 pm
You don’t. On the other hand. . .
November 11, 2010 at 10:48 pm
Dennis is saluting Alan Clarke today
November 12, 2010 at 12:24 am
I don’t know. A wholesale move to photogenie in Epstein’s time would have robbed classic film of some great stars (I can’t think of Jean Gabin and photogenie together without giggling), and there have been some stars whom the camera loved but were mediocre actors at best.
November 12, 2010 at 12:27 am
There is no Ken Loach. There is no Mike Leigh. There is only Alan Clarke.
Photogenics versus essence is a mysterious thing. I deeply believe that if an actor has an interesting essence, they work with what they’ve got, and good looks are irrelevant. There are many bland pretty things who are pleasant to look at but mean nothing on the screen. And actors who wouldn’t win beauty contests but are riveting. Gerard Philipe used his beauty like a rapier. Michel Simon used his ugliness like a great joke.
Branagh is an awkward case because his appearance gives him nothing (Billy Crystal, no oil painting himself, says that Branagh has “anti-lips”) and whatever essence he has as an actor doesn’t photograph. He’s unphotogenic not because he’s unhandsome but because the camera can’t see his essence (or maybe his essence is phony actorliness, I don’t know).
November 12, 2010 at 3:20 pm
David E – many thanks for the link! Personally, I think Louis-Ronan Choisy Day should be a weekly (if not twice-weekly) event. He sings, he acts and he’s utterly exquisite…what more could anybody want?
On the other hand, the mythical appeal of Jean Gabin has always eluded me. I can’t think of a ‘classic’ French film that wouldn’t gain considerably by taking out Gabin and putting in Gerard Philipe, Jean Marais or Louis Jourdan. Do we have the technology to do that now?
As for Gabin’s modern-day equivalent, I gave up going to French films for much of the 80s. I was terrified that I might have to look at Gerard Depardieu in the nude!!
November 12, 2010 at 6:36 pm
Always a risk with Depardieu. Not a shy man.
David, you might like Moontide — I found that Gabin and Ida Lupino worked very well together, and he’s almost handsome at times.
November 13, 2010 at 1:38 am
Depardieu had what we here call a “beer gut” even back in the ’70s, around the time of Novacento. And yes, he did have a penchant for waving the flag while nude.
If physical appearance were above all, we might not have had star James Cagney, among others. Edward G. Robinson wouldn’t have been let near a cine lens, nor would Clive Brook, George Bancroft (okay, here I may be making David’s case), or Leslie Howard.
If women were judged by how big their balconies were, we may have lost many excellent actresses.
Also, think of all the fantastically ugly character actors we would have been robbed of!
November 13, 2010 at 11:41 am
I can’t imagine Epstein proposing that women should be cast on balcony-size alone. Must be more to this theory than that!
Indeed, looking at Finis Terrae, the theory seems to be applied in quite a flexible way. It’s enough for Epstein, I think, if people are interesting-looking, and have a personality that comes through. That ought to be the true meaning of photogenie.
This might seem to make the theory so personal, or whimsical, as to be useless, but I would say not: applying such a theory, however haphazardly, would still prevent Kenneth Branagh from appearing on screen.