Language

Despite the fact that of the two popular music biopics currently on release, NOWHERE BOY clearly has the stronger cinematic credentials, we went to see SEX & DRUGS & ROCK & ROLL, the Ian Dury story as written by actor-turned-scenarist Paul Viragh and directed by TV helmer Matt Whitecross. Possibly because Fiona likes Ian Dury a lot, and possibly because she likes Andy Serkis, who plays Ian Dury, a lot.

What a remarkable figure Dury was: his music combines punk, funk and music hall, and he comes over on stage as a sort of sweary Essex Noel Coward, filtered through the wraith of Gene Vincent. Bizarre. And then there’s the wastage of half his body, caused by polio, giving him a marked limp. “On stage I try to sort of hover,” he says in the movie. “You’re putting that on,” someone once told him. “I thought I was trying to cover it up,” he replied.

The film is pretty creditable in many ways — the high-water mark for this kind of thing was set most recently by CONTROL, whose familiar structure of struggle, success and dissolution is echoed unavoidably in S&D&R&R, but the stylistic approach couldn’t be more different. In the film’s zanier scenes, deploying animation designed by the artist Peter Blake, and in its not-quite chronological structure, the movie is perhaps more influenced by 24 HOUR PARTY PEOPLE (which also featured Serkis), although it substitutes music video japery for the more interesting cod-Brechtian antics of Frank Cottrell Boyce’s witty script. While Michael Winterbottom apparently had no clue how to use the Factory Records music in that film, Whitecross does at least find room to let Dury’s songs register, via sustained concert sequences and linking montages. The concerts, though ridiculously hyped-up in their cutting, are effective, and provide a semi-fantastical framing structure whereby Dury appears to introduce and wrap up the movie, but the montages reveal a certain desperation to be interesting, which shouldn’t be a problem with such a colourful central character.

The film is a lot like the trailer, hectic and eager-to-please but with something interesting oozing through. Except the trailer leaves out a lot of the best bits for censorship reasons.

Serkis as Dury holds the movie together, more or less overcoming a central indecision in the script — is this Dury’s story or his son’s? It’s a very effective impersonation of Dury’s singing, his manner, his disability (Dury is an almost unique example of a disabled pop star), his charm and his self-destructiveness. Dury’s main musical collaborator, Chas Jankel, produced the film’s soundtrack and reported that working with Serkis was liking attending a seance.

Supporting cast is very fine, with young Bill Milner impressive as Dury’s son (a strange effect is created by the fact that Dury’s kids never seem to age, but why let that bother us?) and Toby Jones enjoyably snarling as an underwritten villain. The women in Dury’s life present a problem, falling into the same stereotypes as those in CONTROL, long-suffering wife and fun, faintly annoying girlfriend. One has our sympathy but we don’t especially want to hang out with her when the fun is elsewhere, the other can’t really hope for sympathy and is too much of a hanger-on to be compelling on any other level. The problem is endemic to the material: philandering musicians write uninteresting roles for the women in their lives. Still, that’s no excuse to show Olivia Williams hurling crockery at her husband, a wretched cliché forty years ago, and something unworthy of inclusion in the film even if it happened. Important note to filmmakers everywhere: just because something happened, that’s no reason to put it in a film. Or as Dury himself says, “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”

The biggest success is the consistently entertaining dialogue — at least as long as Dury is around — a lot of Dury’s witticisms are hoary old jokes, but he has an endless supply of them and no shame about trotting them out whether the situation demands it or not. His joy in the English language is evoked in a scene where he trades synonyms for “penis” with his son (although, I note sadly, there is no English synonym for “synonym”), but really illustrated by the songs themselves.

I was pleased to find a couple of my students at the same screening, and even more pleased to learn that at least one, the excellent Oliver, was already a fan. When Dury died ten years ago the student I mentioned it to had never heard of him. Progress!

Movie lovers can see the real Dury in THE COOK THE THIEF HIS WIFE AND HER LOVER and PIRATES.

21 Responses to “Language”

  1. Pleasingly, I learn that an Edinburgh College of Art graduate and friend of mine, Tim Clayton, worked on the trailer seen above.

  2. John Seal Says:

    I’m with Fiona on this one…both the wife and I are huge Dury and Serkis fans. I don’t believe he ever toured the States, but a few years before he died we went to an East London outdoor festival at which he was scheduled to perform. Sadly he was too ill to play, but at least we got to see Wreckless Eric!

    That said, I loathe the biopic genre in general and the musical biopic in particular. It is very hard to recreate the life of, for example, Ian Curtis without either reducing it to a boring ‘this happened then that happened’ scenario (which, in turn, gets savaged by the fans for overlooking, misrepresenting or eliding key events) or elevating the subject to mythical God-like genius status. It’s a tricky situation for any filmmaker…though contrary to general opinion, I think Alex Cox did quite a good job with Sid and Nancy (having Gary Oldman on hand didn’t hurt), and Christopher Munch threaded the needle with aplomb in The Hours and Times ( with a huge assist from Ian Hart…and whatever happened to HIM?). Other than those films I can’t think of any musical biopics that ‘do it’ for me.

    Nonetheless, if S & D & R & R gets a theatrical release over here, we’ll probably trek off to see it. I’ll be the one seething in the back row because the art director used an incorrect wallpaper design when depicting the Do It Yourself album.

    Now, about that Wreckless Eric movie…

  3. I can’t wait to see this because of Serkis, the great gargoyle of modern film. I’m not blessed or burdened with enough knowledge of Ian Dury to be bothered by what the film gets wrong biographically or stylistically.

    Bio films in general tend to run out of gas as they go along their chronological lockstep way, plus there’s that goddamn trope of circling back at the end to the One Thing From Childhood That Explains Everything: Ray Charles let his little brother drown; Howard Hughes had a clean-freak mom. (That last one was *really* unconvincing.)

  4. S&D&R&R uses flashbacks to try and get out of the lockstep, but the narrative still has that plod to some extent. Ditching the flashbacks and focussing on the relationship with his son would have actually emphasized what’s unusual here.

    Has anybody here seen Nowhere Boy yet? I have hopes for that one.

  5. I’ve read the script which is moving, and refreshingly free of any Beatles obsession. It’s a pretty simple story of a boy with a very confused family set-up discovering the weirdness of sex and the freedom of rock’n’roll (no drugs). There are some nice, subtle gags around the introductions of later-to-be-famous characters, but little nudge-nudge stuff. However, from what I hear, the casting of the male lead lets the side down to a large extent. I’ll give it a chance, though I was less than impressed with the beautifully photographed but dramatically insipid Control.

    I’m a bit conflicted re S&D&R&R as I am very keen on Dury (first two records I bought were Rhythm Stick (45) and Do It Yourself (LP) and I’m sure it will piss me off somehow, but it’s a must see, really. Saw Dury’s last tour, when he was dying, and it was a storming, emotional, wonderful experience. He’s sadly missed.

  6. I’d watch it, as I lived my late teen years through that period of music, and listened to a lot of it, Dury included. I hope it’s a bit more interesting bio than I’m used to seeing, since the story arc of bios of people who aren’t exactly big winners in life (and some who are) are distressingly similar.

  7. Jean Simmons RIP
    Kate McGarrigle RIP

  8. I’d say the Dury film walks straight into a lot of rock cliches, and there’s plenty of errors in cinematic taste and judgement and things to annoy. What saves it is the firm grasp of Dury’s appeal, his verbal skills and humour, which do enliven some of the more familiar set-ups.

  9. Andy Serkis is an astonishingly versatile actor. (His performance as Ian Brady in the TV film Longford is etched on my memory.) But, much as I admire him, I too am a little hesitant about seeing S&D&R&R, because I love Ian Dury even more and biopics so often disappoint.

    I only saw Dury live once but I’ve never forgotten it. It was at the outdoor ‘Fuck the Royal Wedding’ gig at Crystal Palace on the day in 1981 when most of the country was oohing and aahing over a doomed marriage. The only performer I’ve seen on stage with the same kind of Dickensian roguishness is, oddly, Rachid Taha.

  10. It’s worth seeing for Serkis Maximus. And it’s a great showcase for him, where some other movies have rather wasted his talents. Serkis was a Dury fan who met his idol and found him unpleasant face-to-face, so he doesn’t play it starstruck, but he does make the most of the man’s awesome charisma. The film may not add anything to cinema, but it at least allows Serkis. to shine, some of which luminance is the reflected glory of Dury.

  11. John Seal enquires about Ian Dury performing in the United States… yes, Ian did tour there in 1978, as opening act to Lou Reed. Ian also visited the USA briefly in 1980 (when he got up on stage with the Clash in Philadelphia and New York) and in 1995 when he filmed his appearance in The Crow: City of Angels. You can read all about in ‘Ian Dury: The Definitive Biography’ (Sidgwick & Jackson, UK), which I hope complements the very enjoyable S&D&R&R.

  12. Oh, hell, most (male) musicians I’ve met weren’t pleasant people, so that’s not exactly a strike against Dury. My favorite line when I was with musician friends was, “Musicians are such scum”, which they often agreed with! When I let them know I knew music pretty well, and occasionally played the unpleasantness faded to certain degrees. The funniest part is it knows no bounds – your local bar band frontman can have as much prima donna in him as known recording artists.

  13. Rock and roll is a selfish culture (and maybe jazz and opera are the same, I wouldn’t know), but think about it, Chuck Berry, John Lennon, probably the dude in Kings of Leon, all live in their little world (population 1). The art comes out of complete self-absorption and immersion in the music and lifestyle, which unfortunately often includes being cruel to the people around you. When was it any other way?

  14. Ken Russell’s biopics of Tchaikovsky, Liszt and Mahler suggest you may have a point.

  15. Will, thanks for the details…your book sounds terrific. And on a somewhat related note, thanks for writing Starry Eyes, one of my favourite pop songs!

  16. It’s alright that musicians are that way, really. I never had a problem with it except when their talent isn’t commensurate with their ego. Then I find them funny. I have a good friend who’s a fair songwriter (one out of every six is worth recording), but he insists on doing everything including singing and producing himself, which is not good – when playing and singing his sense of rhythm is so bad, I doubt Sunny Murray could play with him. I sure can’t. I play with him on occasion and wait for him to miss a beat or an entire bar of music while he’s onstage.

    Artists are the group I’ve always had trouble with. I find it very hard to gauge them. Some have an ego that won’t let you in a room, and some are so modest you’d think they worked in some minor craft instead of getting paid $3000 a piece.

  17. Oh, and some are self-deprecating on the surface but blazing with ego inside.

    My few experiences with receiving applause have convinced me that it’s dangerous stuff. Not that I’ll be backing away from it on that account.

  18. Oh yes, I see that in sidemen a lot, especially those who know music theory. Then you get the self-effacing front with the massive ego in back. Heck, I’ve even seen that syndrome in video store clerks.

    Applause always made me uncomfortable until I just figured it was for someone else (when you’re part of a band or in the cast of a play, that’s an easy rationalization). I think it’s an intoxicant for those who like it similar as gambling is to gamblers. Been around gamblers, and believe me, they get high like someone taking a hit of crank when they win.

  19. I also found, at the Milan Film Festival where the audiences can be very enthusiastic, that it’s addictive. I instantly wanted more, despite not having expected such a response or ever really encountered it before. And it’s particularly dangerous for a filmmaker alone at a festival because, as you say, the applause is really for a bunch of other people too, but they’re not there, so you can wind up feeling you earned it all. Intoxicating and sinister!

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.