Cats and Dogs
There was the cat and there were lots of dogs in this film. For why?
I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?
There was the cat and there were lots of dogs in this film. For why?
I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?
[deleted]
I wrote the below review a while ago. The film is filled with "cats" and "dogs" references in the dialogue as well.
_____________
Philip Marlowe, the iconic private detective of the 1940s, wakes up to find himself in the 1970s. His first case is to feed his cat, and so he spends the first ten minutes of Robert Altman's "The Long Goodbye" scheming to placate his feline. In the apartment next-door several naked women cavort sexually, but Marlowe isn't interested. This is neither the permanently horny Humphrey Bogart of "The Big Sleep" nor a sexless modern update rendered impotent by female empowerment and women's liberation. No, this is a noir hero who suffers modern consciousness. He's long withdrawn from a world he no longer cares about.
Already we see Altman deconstructing both Marlowe and noir, peeling back the layers and undermining the familiar. Altman teases Marlowe, egging his movie with inside jokes, and doing his best to show the adolescent idyll in "Philip Marlowe" pictures. Altman's Marlowe has a cat instead of girlfriends, gives tips to the thugs tailing him and is always being caught up in real-life games, like the gatekeeper at the Malibu Colony who does Hollywood impersonations, or the film's soundtrack, which contains countless variations of the "The Long Goodbye", a mocking tune which plays in clubs, on the radio, in a Mexican band and even on a home doorbell. If, as Camus says, "irony is the force that overwhelms mythical value", then it is the aim of Altman's playful film to destabilize noir tradition. But it is not only "noir myths" that are being undermined, it is Marlowe's very world view that is being challenged.
Two events kick the story into motion. The first is Marlowe losing his cat. The great joke of "The Long Goodbye" is the way Altman populates his streets, landscapes and dialogue with references to cats and dogs. Marlowe sees the world in terms of docile cats and hostile dogs, and so when his feline goes missing, he understandably fears for its safety. Meanwhile, as Marlowe tends to his cat, his best friend Terry Lennox talks to a Malibu security guard with a penchant for mimicking movie stars. "Just remember that you don't understand!" Terry effectively tells the guard. This is Altman's direct instruction to both Marlowe and his audience. Significantly, when Terry later goes missing and is implicated in a crime, Marlowe is the only person in the film who fights for his innocence.
And so Altman mirrors cats and dogs. Note that Jim Bouton (the baseball player who plays Terry Lennox) was famously nicknamed "Bulldog" and that Marlowe's other buddy, his cat, disappears when Bulldog appears. One has not scared the other off. They are one and the same.
The film proceeds along playful lines until a single Coca-Cola bottle, rammed hard into the face of a beautiful young girl, turns parody into the real thing. Like Altman's use of Coca Cola bottles in "Thieves Like Us", this indicates the intrusion of violence. And so Marlowe steps outside of his comfortable bubble and enters the world one last time, his mission to redeem his friend. When he eventually learns that Terry is really guilty of crimes, Marlowe ruthlessly shoots his buddy in the head. Now long past disillusionment, Marlowe skips off down the road, "Hooray for Hollywood" blasting on the soundtrack. He's caught the bad guy, but there's no heroism here, no victory, only a sort of further disregard and total disenchantment.
And so Altman has inverted classic noir alienation. Faced with the greed, insanity, lust, vanity, self-delusion, lies, drunkenness, ineffectuality, ambition, murder, larceny and social climbing of others, Marlowe's mantra throughout the film was a casual: "It's okay with me." He knows the world is scum, but experiences no self-loathing as he isn't a part of it.
But when Terry Lennox is revealed to be a criminal, it's suddenly "not okay" with Marlowe. And so the noir hero now suffers the double helix of modern consciousness. Like the Malibu security guard who does countless impersonations, Marlowe knows everyone disguises their real thoughts and intentions by the roles they take on. Marlowe's flaw is that he refuses to abide by this, and so appears inept to everyone else. Thus, whilst most noirs use the voice-over to let the hero explain his thoughts, Altman's Marlowe never actually speaks to the audience. Instead, as a solitary modern man does, he mumbles to himself constantly. He has his own outdated moral code, his own sealed off world, wearing 40s suits and driving an antique car. Any man adhering to such a code, Altman contends, will experience dysfunction living and working in modern Los Angeles, a place of lies, false personas and cinema itself. Yes, Marlowe's anachronistic personality operates as his moral salvation, but it is also the root cause of his lack of success.
Visually, the film differs from most other noirs in its odd camera work. Altman's restless camera becomes a metaphor for both Marlowe's quest and the audience's confusion, always looking for a solution. There is no safe place to stand, no clear perspective from which to view the mystery.
The film's flaw is its final act. Marlowe wakes up in a hospital next to a goofy patient, chases comically after a car and then finds himself in Mexico where, in a brilliantly brutal scene, he guns down Terry Lennox. The contrasts, the pacing, are a bit unsatisfying. One wishes for a more drawn out showdown, some kind of meatier ending, but of course Altman's immediacy is the film's very point. Marlowe learns the truth and promptly makes a decision. The message is clear: "That ain't fine my me."
8.5/10 – Once subversive, "The Long Goodbye's" revolution has now become canonical. Worth two viewings.
"Rape is no laughing matter. Unless you're raping a clown."
Great review!
shareFine review.
As his final words Terry Lennox says something like "Marlowe, you were always a loser", to which Marlowe draws his gun and says, "Yeah, I even lost my cat".
The cat there represents innocence, because Marlowe has lost his final illusions, he has been faced to enter brutal reality. In the beginning he has a harmonic, although demanding, "relationship", with his cat, because he has created this innocence "bubble" in which he lives. Lennox as the idealised "true" friend is part of the same illusion. (Marlowe had even suppressed the knowledge that Lennox was a hood). When Lennox appears at an awkward time, with drama, the bubble bursts - the cat disappears. In the rest of the film Marlowe searches for the lost cat and friend alike, or rather, he tries to recreate / maintain the illusion he had that he was inhabiting a stable and sound world.
Take a look at yourself - they have a name for faces like that
"The cat there represents innocence, because Marlowe has lost his final illusions, he has been faced to enter brutal reality. In the beginning he has a harmonic, although demanding, "relationship", with his cat, because he has created this innocence "bubble" in which he lives."
This had never occurred to me, and I've seen this film many times. Great insight, romdal.
There, daddy, do I get a gold star?
A top notch review!
The cats and dogs thing I would have never in hundred moons ever seen. Thanks.
I've seen it, I'd guess eight times, and last night having the sort of annual shindig for the movie and what was most interesting: I've noticed non-film lovers respond and have the best insights into Altman's movies. There was all this chatter about the movie. Deep themes. Fine and good. Yes, but give me something new. New ideas. And it was the person who never watches movies, after the "Nothing Says Goodbye Like a Bullet" tagline was said, and it's damn cool. They said: "How much does a bullet cost?" All the "film" people were like that's a stupid question. No! As I'm thinking: That's good. Really good! Hold the phone here folks. And said go on, and they did: "The movie is just about the bullet at the end there. How much it cost Marlowe." It is. Great! That's genius. And it's true!!!!!!!!!! They weren't even really trying. When all the best ideas are born.
As when talking about the movie: it's all about the end. Yes, what did that one bullet cost Marlowe? That's what I think the movie is ALL about.
It cost him everything.
He's no longer apart from the "insanity, lust, vanity, self-delusion, lies, drunkenness, ineffectuality, ambition, murder, larceny".
He's FALLEN.
He's just part of that now.
Altman is showing us this arrogant guy who didn't really invest in the world, or was blithe to who people are, especially his close friends, and that cost him because when his view of people and the world was shown to be wrong...just like some punk he acted quick in a flash of rage, as he was mad at himself much more so than his buddy. And he became the part of the self-loathing pack: as violence, murder, is the ultimate act of self-loathing. He's really saying goodbye to himself as a human being with that bullet. That's what it cost him.
A brutal ending. But true. A marvelous film!
[deleted]
You do not deconstruct Chandler.
Chandler is the American Jane Austen and this adaptation is like one of those terrible Austen adaptations where the filmmakers haven't understood thing one. I love Altman most of the time but his career includes misses along with the hits.
This was not just a box office flop (they couldn't get anyone into the cinema to watch it until they started using Mad Magazine posters) but a miss and a big 'un, full of nasty smells, not the worst of which is the cock-eyed hommage to The Third Man at the end which starts with a cheesy cackle and ends in a rambunctious sneer.
On the bright side, Elliot Gould never a got another decent leading role, Sterling Hayden never got the chance to reprise his execrable impersonation of Ernest Hemingway and the blonde fluff, well she was never going to work again anyway.
[deleted]
I like Marlowe. I wrote my dissertation on Marlowe. So let me tell you. Elliot Gould, you're no Philip Marlowe.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
A good thought. There are definitely autobiographical incidents the chime with Chandler's lifestyle before he took up the pen, but on the whole, Wade is a picture of the successful Hollywood work-from-home-live-in-the-valley creative non-creative that Chandler despised.
You'll never get me down on one side of the Hammett/Chandler fence or the other as I think they are both amongst the best 20C American writers.
Hammett took crime out of the library and put it into the gutter, where most of it belongs. Chandler integrated it and was the first to latch onto and portray its systemic place in modern American culture.
Chandler's prose can occasionally wander but mostly it is a crisp, economic prototype which has had a lasting influence on most American writers who came after him (this was what I used to justify my somewhat off-piste selection of authors - picking up echoes of Hammett Chandler in Salinger, Heller, Bellow and Roth and so on)
[deleted]
Oops. Forgot the shaved.
shareI think Altman (and Brackett) understood Marlowe very well - and also his place (or lack thereof) in the 70s.
I think it´s actually the best of all Chandler adaptations. Beautiful, almost elegiac stuff. Cuts right to the marrow of the Marlowe mythos.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Entirely 'mythis' the point by failing to understand the heart of why Chandler created Marlowe in the first place.
How is it elegaic, exactly? What on earth is it elegising? Eliot Gould's career as an actor? There's no effort in Gould's work. He merely reprises the pseudo-professional hippy riff on medicine from his performance in MASH. I can understand why people might like this at first but for me it's as ugly, mannered and irritating as Angela Lansbury in Murder She Wrote and certainly contributes no more light to the mythos of detective fiction than you get from Jessica's feeble aura.
No crime author has ever spent more time describing what he intended. To understand and represent Marlowe, subverted, upright or inverted, you have to understand the boundaries about which Chandler was so utterly specific. Altman doesn't show any sign of it and frankly, I think its beyond Gould completely.
There are directors who can re-energise well-known genres or authors. Look at Granada's Sherlock Holmes, Lumet's Murder on the Orient Express or Herbert Ross's Seven Per Cent Solution, or even Clueless. You can also approach the classics sideways like Lost in Austen, Bleasdale's Canterbury Tales or Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead and end up in new or interesting places. This Altman movie doesn't do any of that.
But down these mean streets a man must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid. The detective in this kind of story must be such a man. He is the hero; he is everything. He must be a complete man and a common man and yet an unusual man. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a man of honor-by instinct, by inevitability, without thought of it, and certainly without saying it. He must be the best man in his world and a good enough man for any world. I do not care much about his private life; he is neither a eunuch nor a satyr; I think he might seduce a duchess and I am quite sure he would not spoil a virgin; if he is a man of honor in one thing, he is that in all things.He is a relatively poor man, or he would not be a detective at all. He is a common man or he could not go among common people. He has a sense of character, or he would not know his job. He will take no man's money dishonestly and no man's insolence without a due and dispassionate revenge. He is a lonely man and his pride is that you will treat him as a proud man or be very sorry you ever saw him. He talks as the man of his age talks-that is, with rude wit, a lively sense of the grotesque, a disgust for sham, and a contempt for pettiness. The story is this man's adventure in search of a hidden truth, and it would be no adventure if it did not happen to a man fit for adventure. He has a range of awareness that startles you, but it belongs to him by right, because it belongs to the world he lives in. If there were enough like him, the world would be a very safe place to live in, without becoming too dull to be worth living in.
The idea that Marlowe would shoot an unarmed man and then dance down the street afterwards like he just finished a shift in some EinsatzGruppe divorces the whole project from any Chandler mainstream or tributary. Much of the rest of it is no better. Like the Patricia Rozema Mansfield Park, if you changed the direct associations, the names of the characters and locations, people would have a hard time spotting anything Chandleresque at all.
Look at Chinatown and LA Confidential for films descended from Chandler. This Marlowe comes from parallel universe where the crew had all smoked one too many joints.
[deleted]
But it failed to strike the chimes as Chandler is in a whole different league to Spillane. Riffs and variations can't be played using the same instruments.
share[deleted]
To desconstruct anything you need to understand the plans.
Elliot Gould is simply playing someone else entirely. Himself.
[deleted]
OK. I watched it again.
I'm a bit older and more tolerant these days, I suppose. I still think the whole thing floats an of cloud of suspect smoke but I can see a bit more of Marlowe in the middle, after the catfood horrors finish and before the denouement.
But I still think Hayden and Pallandt suck and Bouton looks like an extre from Team America. 'Do your acting, Jim'.
[deleted]
Eric Winston Blair. The undisputed political heavyweight champion of the world. I'd love to have heard him on Anthony Blair and his very much less famous NCO, now thankfully departed.
I only peeked at the film versions for the same reasons.
[deleted]