"De Palma", the amazing documentary on Brian De Palma

Almost exactly a year ago I saw "Truffaut/Hitchcock" and wrote a post about seeing it, and mentioned I was shocked not seeing Brian De Palma as one of the many directors interviewed, because he more than any other director channels a lot of Hitchcock in his movies.  I later read that he didn't do that documentary because he was involved with someone making a documentary just about him and his work.

So I just watched "De Palma", this very documentary... 

And it is amazing. And interesting. And educational.  So many documentaries about artists just want you to accept that their subject is an innovator.  "De Palma" breaks it down and shows you why he is.  Every film snob benefits from listening to a talented film maker explain his craft.  One who can really explain why he likes exceptionally long shots, certain split dioptre shots, and of course multiple Hitchcock references.

Of note, his first film starred Robert DeNiro in his very first film.  Sissy Spacek's very first role, was in his "Carrie", which was the first Stephen King adaptation. He jokes about how there have been so many version of Carrie made, that he can finally show to people why he did things differently as they make the mistakes that he argued with the studio to let him do it his way.

His section on Scarface is amazing, because he talks about having to have Oliver Stone removed from the set because this 'writer who had directed just one bad horror film' was trying to tell him how to direct his actors. And how Spielberg visited the set and helped find angles to shoot the final shoot out.

He has a few stories about Sean Penn that are amazing.  He makes a good tribute to Bernard Hermann who scored all his earliest work.

It's really good because as he goes through his filmography, he talks about things he learned along the way, and has no problem stating what was the weakest or best part of each picture. He actually has a lot to say that even a lot of fans of his work probably never heard before.  This isn't a studio made documentary aimed at getting easy views by talking about his classic films, and having much more famous directors or actors talk about their time with the man.  It is De Palma himself the whole time, and it gives his more obscure, offbeat projects get as much attention as his signature films.

He doesn't just cover up his failures by talking about studio battles, but brings up things he wish he had done differently, or he just couldn't make work.  You can see the sadness in his face when he talks about a movie that wasn't a big hit, even though it had big stars, followed a successful blueprint, and all he can think is that he couldn't possibly make a better film than he did. (He felt he could never make a better film than "Carlito's Way".) 

He hung out with Scorsese, Coppola, Spielberg, Lucas, and other big name directors. While his filmmaking friends have all at one time or another been household names, De Palma's never quite gotten the deep examination he's deserved.

As for the Hitchcock documentary, Brian De Palma didn't make himself available for that Kent Jones' pic because he wanted to reserve his comments about Hitchcock for this film.  He isn't shy about his admiration for Hitchcock, and states rather audaciously that he feels he is the only true heir to the master.  He also says with a lot of arrogance that Hitchcock and probably no other director ever made any truly great films before they were thirty or after they were fifty. 

I will say it feels a little weak the way it ends, but then again, so does his filmography after 1996.

My review on Hitchcock/Truffaut: https://keithmetcalfe.blogspot.com/2021/04/hitchcock-truffaut-review-of-2015.html

Hitchcock Truffaut, Review of the 2015 documentary

Hitchcock/Truffaut is a 2015 Documentary based on the famous book. The book with this title will be found on the bookshelves of every film major.  And certainly every director.

And I just found out about, and watched, the 2015 documentary based on the book.  How Meta is that?  It isn't just about the book, but features interviews with great directors talking about the importance of the book, what it meant to them, how they came across it. This includes greats like Martin Scorsese, Paul Schrader, David Fincher, Wes Anderson, Richard Linklater, and Peter Bogdanovich. (Notably absent, Brian DePalma.)

For those who don't know, the book was simply the recording of a week long interview between the director Francois Truffaut and Alfred Hitchcock, where they went over each and every one of Hitchcock's films. (Except the four he filmed after this book was written.)

In 1962, directors were being treated like artists, and Hitchcock was respected but not taken too seriously as he was simply too successful, and even dabbling (successfully) in television, which made him considered too 'studio' to be thought of as a great director. Truffaut even says in France older directors considered him a light entertainer, rather than a serious artist. And he wanted his book to prove that this was not the case.

Perhaps an equivalent snobbery is lobbied today against Spielberg, or Stephen King as a writer.

Me personally, I own a copy of the book after a film student in college, named Dan, told me about it, and pointed out in all the student films this book was always in the background or on a coffee table. And I read the appropriate section of the book right after I see a Hitchcock film. Between 2016 and 2018 I caught maybe twenty of Hitchcock's work on TMC (before comcast took that channel away from me). I had seen some of his most famous works before, but definitely not all 40 plus.

About a 3rd of this documentary is Hitchcock's own words from the interview, describing his work. Another 3rd are the great directors talking about what made Hitchcock great, which moments of his films really stand out to them, and his influence. The rest are spent with specific films, visual ideas he invented, who he made his films for, what defines a director 'artist', and other similar very interesting things.

One highpoint for me is a moment where Hitchcock is telling Truffaut about a scene in one of Truffaut's movies telling him that if he did it right, there wouldn't have been any dialog. It reminded me that Hitchcock started in silent films, and knows how to tell a story using only visuals.  And in another part, explaining his troubles with actors.  It is one thing reading Hitchcock's famous slights about what he thinks of actors, but to hear Hitchcock's own voice speak about how dare Montgomery Clift question where the script tells him to look because he isn't sure his character would do that. You can really hear the disgust in his voice.

Reading up on it, the director Kent Jones said that Brian De Palma declined to participate because of De Palma (2015). "Noah Baumbach and Jake Paltrow just did a movie about him. They worked on that film for about four years. I asked [De Palma] and he said he wanted to save what he thought about Hitchcock for their movie." Kathryn Bigelow was asked to speak in this film but she declined saying she was "too shy".

This is a really interesting documentary for anyone who enjoys films, and wants a masterclass in how to tell the story visually, or create suspense.