I look forward to hearing what you thought of Scorsese's first foray into "Hollywood filmmaking" here. Write whatever you feel, but I encourage you to back up your thematic, dramatic and aesthetic likes and dislikes by referencing specific moments from the film. Please have your comments posted on here no later than Monday at 5 pm. And remember to bring a hard copy of what you've written with you to class on Tuesday. Thanks!
Thursday, September 20, 2007
ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE
I look forward to hearing what you thought of Scorsese's first foray into "Hollywood filmmaking" here. Write whatever you feel, but I encourage you to back up your thematic, dramatic and aesthetic likes and dislikes by referencing specific moments from the film. Please have your comments posted on here no later than Monday at 5 pm. And remember to bring a hard copy of what you've written with you to class on Tuesday. Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
ALICE DOESN’T LIVE HERE ANYMORE wasn’t that different from any other Scorsese film. Sure it wasn’t nearly as violent and the protagonist was a woman, but I thought it was still the same basic story. It was a lot like MEAN STREETS, as far as the main characters went. Alice was a lot like Keitel’s character, she couldn’t make up her mind. She’d say she’d want one thing, but she apparently didn’t want it enough to really pursue it. She’d just keep letting herself settle for less and then she’d be surprised when it would lead her into trouble.
One thing I really liked about the film was the almost constantly moving camera. I’m sure there’s still more to it than this, but I interpreted the moving camera to be a symbol for her life, constantly on the move and never really stopping. She isn’t ever really sure what she wants, and so she’s always looking for it, and I think the camera always moving almost acts like an indicator that she should be moving. The camera moves, and the audience wants to see her do something with her life, they don’t want to just watch a camera spin around someone, that just gets annoying, which for a while in the film I became a little annoyed with Alice and how she was never going to make it to Monterey.
My favorite shot in the film is the one where Alice finally gets a chance to play the piano for someone, and as she walks through the bar, the camera dollies right along side of her, finally settling next to a bar patron. The shot is great because she’s sitting about 20 feet from the camera, and being blocked by a bunch of crap on the counter of the bar. It’s a very claustrophobic feeling, and I think it really helps to get the viewer on the same wavelength as Alice. At that point, I’m sure she was afraid she’d screw up, and not only that, but she was in a totally alien atmosphere. She had to be feeling trapped in that tiny area. But as she plays and she gets more comfortable, the shots change to be a little more open and by the end of the song, the camera is much closer to her and nothing is obstructing our view of her.
As far as the ending goes, I thought the applause was great. It took me until the very last second of that shot to realize that none of the people on screen were clapping. It really makes you wonder, if they’re not clapping, is this in Alice’s head? I don’t think so, I think it was more like the music that Tommy was listening to in the car. That existed with him, and so these applause exist with Alice. Although I wouldn’t call the film a soap opera, Alice’s life at that point is very soap opera-ish, and the applause at the end just seem right. Everyone in the diner is watching, and when they get together, it just feels right. But I don’t think it’s a happy ending. Kris’s character isn’t going to change, and he shouldn’t. People rarely change habits, it’s really hard to do. I liked his character in the movie, but the guy has some issues, and he’s going to keep getting into arguments with Tommy and he’ll probably hit him again. When his last wife said she was leaving him, all he did was show her the door. The guy’s just like all the other men in Alice’s life, they’re all mostly violent and lazy assholes. Granted I think David is a lot better than any of the other men, I just don’t think it’s quite the happy ending that Alice thinks it is.
And I liked the film ending on Alice and Tommy. Ending on them together brings things back into perspective, that they’re really dependent on each other and it’s kind of a sweet ending. Especially compared to MEAN STREETS.
Comments on Alice doesn’t live here anymore
After Boxcar Bertha and Mean Streets, Scorsese set off to the west to make his first commercial movie starring Ellen Burstyn. Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore was also a challenge for Scorsese who was said to only be good in directing male actors. While still in post-production with Boxcar Bertha, Scorsese started rehearsals with the lead actors and incorporated improvisations, which were tape recorded and later added to the script.
After soothing credits we are thrown into a flashback of Alice’ life portraying her as a young and singing girl walking a path back to her family’s house. The scenery, which was shot completely in studio, is covered in red, and the disappearing sun sets the melancholic or almost tragic tone to the scene. One is easily reminded of the Wizard of Oz as little Alice passes her home, politely threatened by her mother to come to supper, and runs into the house leaving the audience with an echoed scream.
Scorsese’s choices make this flashback a kind of its own and it sets the tone for the main character Alice but it feels like a separate piece and one is surprised at the end of the movie when reminded of the flashback. However, given the circumstances of Alice, her husband and kid, one can understand the choices and decisions Alice makes based on her weird and sad childhood.
Alice is a wife and mother, struggling with a medium class repetitive every day life, a husband with anger issues and an ever-complaining smart kid. After the tragic death of her husband, she sets off together with her son to Tucson, Arizona to start a new life.
Scorsese uses many externally generated camera moves, throws it around to reflect the characters feelings and emotions. As Scorsese stated in previous interviews, the thing about violence that got his interest is the explosive and sudden nature thereof. And that’s exactly what Scorsese does in this movie. After an argument at the dinner table, Alice’ kid takes off and her husband too, leaving Alice alone in front of the entrance door. Out of nowhere she explodes, bangs against the window and shouts shortly after, “Socorro sucks!!” Also a few of Scorsese’s early editing tricks made it into the film when Alice talks to the wife of Harvey Keitel’s character and her kid interrupts them. She claps her hands, which is shown in an extreme close-up. It feels jerky, but hardly noticeable, that’s Scorsese.
The characters that interfere with Alice and her kid are all diverse and deep. One day Alice ends up in bed with another angry man played by Harvey Keitel, where parallels can be drawn to Who’s that knocking at my door? as they talk to each other shortly after Alice’ piano performance at the bar. The camera floats around as they both get to know each other, which creates a positive feel. The next day she is in a different city, and has to start all over again with finding a job and pleasing her little son. The driving scenes in between are also kept rather realistic since the music is only playing when the camera is in the car. Wide shots of the highway only have the sound of traffic.
Alice’ adventure resonates with earlier characters of Scorsese’s movies. She is constantly looking for a change and clashes against society. Her strong character gets her through though and she will eventually find redemption.
The script written by Robert Gretchell also adds tremendously to the success of this motion picture. While the beginning lines seemed a little odd when Alice apes her husband while telling a story at lunch, especially the great and funny lines between Alice and her kid create a relationship between them that is marked with tears of sorrow and laughter.
I enjoyed this film very much, especially Ellen Burstyn’s character jumping from one mistake into the other, but overall keeping her head up high and simply being human.
Brandon Schiffli
It is very interesting and surprising to see Scorsese go from Mean Streets to this film. Visually the tone is different from his previous films. However, the theme is very similar. The main character, like Mean Streets and Who’s that Knocking at my Door, is torn between two lifestyles that conflict with one another. It is also interesting to see a Scorsese comedy. It is most interesting to see what Scorsese has done with a main character who is a woman.
The beginning is almost separate from the rest of the film. Visually it looks like something out of a Tim Burton film. It is highly stylized and very dream-like, but there is nothing to suggest that it is a dream or a flashback. It is more of a prologue to the rest of the film. From then on, Scorsese uses a lot of his moving camera around Alice’s house. It almost seems out-of-place and different. This introduction of the adult Alice is very plain. The lighting is flat and even the shots get boring such as the kitchen table scene. It is such a contrast to the prologue. The film really takes off once Alice and her son go on the road trip.
The car scenes really give a sense of Alice’s personality and her relationship with her son. She is mostly annoyed by him, but he is the only guy in her life and she cares for him very much. This odd pairing makes for some great comedic scenes. Although she shows love for her son, for instance when they have the water fight together, there is a sense of regret with Alice. She is unhappy for having left her childhood dream of becoming a singer. She wants to pursue her dream, but she has to provide for her son. Plus, she might have had a good voice in her younger years, but she doesn’t have it now.
She attracts the wrong guys. Her first husband was a jerk. It was surprising to see her break down and cry when she heard the news of his death. However, her son points out that she is happier than ever since her husband died. She won’t admit it though. She gets into a relationship with Harvey Keitel’s character, who turns up being similar to her former husband. These moments really bring out the dramatic side of the story. The comedy comes out of real human moments, not gags. There are moments like these in Mean Streets.
There is Kris Kristofferson’s character, David, who is a genuine guy whom Alice really falls in love with, mainly because he forms a relationship with her son. However, her son rubs him the wrong way just as he does with Alice at times. It was strange to see David become so angry out of nowhere and for Alice to break up with him and then eventually get back together with him in the end. This is realistic. It would be too out-of-place if Alice and David formed a relationship, fell in love and lived happily ever after. This brought a sense of realism to the relationship.
Alice never makes it to her dream. It almost seems like she wanted to make her dream for her son, when it turns out that her son doesn’t care that much. He is happy the way they are. She is stuck in this small town working in a place she initially hated. Now she has friends in this place and a person that she loves. At least Alice isn’t gunned down at the end. This was really a fun, well put together film very different than what Scorsese is known for.
Tommy Somer
Scorsese 101
9/22/07
Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore Response
Okay, so Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore is basically Scorsese doing a Lifetime Original movie, his way. This is a vast departure for those who have grown to be fans of Scorsese staples It’s Not Just You Murray, Who’s That Knocking At My Door, and Mean Streets. Well then, so was Boxcar Bertha which won him some critical acclaim. Here again, we see Scorsese trying something new; perhaps out of his realm? Personally for me, I didn’t know what to expect, especially after reading the plot outline for the film then seeing that opening scene! So I began asking myself, could Scorsese make a film like this 1.interesting 2. entertaining, 3. thought-provoking, and 4. still be well, himself?
Well, one of those I thinks I’m sure of and more, he was Scorsese and some. His unique cinematography was still there. (I believe he used shots in Alice he’d eventually incorporate in Goodfellas sixteen years later.) His customary editing style was conspicuous here along with his use of music. All of his unique techniques and aesthetics were incorporated in Alice.
So Scorsese was being Scorsese. Okay. Yet! How’d I really respond to Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore? What I believe I saw last Tuesday for one hundred and twelve minutes was a good director taking a much larger step from his last film, and stepping further into the director he would become (and truthfully at that point already was.) I’d like to think the audience could clearly identify ALL the technical and aesthetic styles that Scorsese uses. Personally it seemed that the film “more comfortably” employed those same devices than his previous films. Another way of saying it is Mean Streets was Scorsese “finding and locking on” to those aesthetic and technical approaches whereas Alice saw Scorsese “tightening and perfecting” those same manners.
This is exactly how I reacted to Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore. Every scene, every shot, every frame seemed to be carefully orchestrated and designed for the one before and following it. I used the term before, yet Alice just seems real comfortable to me, and I believe it’s because the director has found his niche’ in how he wants the worlds of his films to very simply put be. Scorsese showed to me with this film that he’s found the swing he likes, his legs are locked in the batters box, and he’s 100% zoned in on the pitcher and on the ball.
I’ve never seen Taxi Driver, yet I always here about it. Now, I don’t know yet how I’m going to react when I see it, but a part of me is wondering if he went straight from Mean Streets to Taxi Driver instead of to Alice, would it be the same movie everyone talks about. I don’t know, but I’d bet dimes against dollars it wouldn’t. All I don know is that I can’t wait to see the next step forward.
It was very shocking for me to see the many differences of this movie to Martin Scorsese’s previous films. Scorsese’s first couple films were very rough on plot line and most of them had very violent scenes. I felt his previous films lacked your Hollywood traditional plot curve. Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore had all of the elements that make up a good story. An introductory beginning, a middle with many conflicts, suspense and resolutions, and an intense climax that resolved the thematic issues of the whole drama.
The first scene of this movie I did not particularly like. That might be partially due to the fact knowing how much money Scorsese spent on this scene. The lighting was extremely dark. I could not see very much detail in the shots because of how dark he lit the scene. Also, it did not seem to match, aesthetically or thematically, the rest of the film. It would have meant more to me if he would have went back to this scene later in the movie. It just seems very out of place. I could not tell if it was a dream Alice was having or real life as a child. Although, this was the one and only thing I did not care for throughout the whole film. The rest of the film was very exhilarating.
This film was Scorsese’s first test to see if he could direct women. I believe he did a fabulous job. In particular, I really like the scene when Ben breaks into Alice’s apartment looking for his wife. Scorsese set up this scene brilliantly. It was very fun and intense to watch. Ellen Burstyn did a beautiful job in this scene. Scorsese used a lot of movement with the camera to add even more suspense. He could have easily used stationary shots, but he decided to create movement with the camera in conjunction with his actors; in turn creating a very powerful scene.
Matt Fagerholm's reaction to
Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore
Since I have chosen to write about Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore for my first major paper, I’m going to keep my discussion of it here focused solely on my reaction toward it. What I think makes the film so exhilarating is how it proves that Scorsese can apply his distinctive style to a genre that doesn’t include the politics of a gangster society.
What a joy it is to watch the interplay between a mother and son that doesn’t feel contrived or sappy. When Alice (Ellen Burstyn) gets angry at her kid Tommy (Alfred Lutter), she doesn’t just mope around like a stereotypical suburban housewife. She slams her arms against a glass door, shrieking with rage, before opening the door and calling out to her son, “Socorro sucks!” That line is a putdown of Tommy’s sports team, and it makes Alice look about as juvenile as her son. They later engage in a ‘water fight’—which begins with them squirting each other in the face, and escalates into them throwing each other under a running shower.
Their relationship is the most interesting thing in the film precisely because it explodes with the spontaneity and messiness of real life. Tommy thinks of himself as a stand-up comedian, and is exceptionally verbal for his age (no wonder Woody Allen used him in Love and Death the next year). But he’s also self-absorbed, immature, and often annoying. In one of the film’s funniest scenes, he takes pleasure in driving his mother crazy by telling her the same incomprehensible joke over and over until she ‘gets’ it. “Do you know what nuts are?” he asks, to which his mother matter-of-factly replies, “Balls.”
Scorsese’s influence on the film can be seen most strongly in the character of Alice, who’s racked with Catholic guilt after the husband she’s frustrated with is killed in an accident (“God forgive me!” she wails). Alice has dreams of growing up to be a great singer, which is illustrated in the film’s dreamlike opening sequence that plays like a foul-mouthed Wizard of Oz.
Yet Scorsese isn’t intending to tell a straightforward ‘inspirational’ picture where a struggling single mother finds the love of her life that will make her dreams come true. It’s clear that Alice’s voice is not a particularly exceptional instrument, and though the man she ends up with, David (Kris Kristofferson, looking like Jim Henson’s body double), seems to be a good match, Alice is notorious for repeatedly making the same mistakes with different people. Her bad judgment leads her to sleeping with the monstrously chipper Ben (a terrifying Harvey Keitel), whom she ends up fleeing from. Alice always seems to be on the run throughout the picture, leaving behind empty rooms and ruined dreams.
In Scorsese’s first date with a larger budget and a major star Ellen Burnstyn I was skeptical that it would be good but was delightfully surprised. The idea of Scorsese going from Mean Streets to doing a bigger budget heartfelt dysfunctional romantic film seemed strange to me, but after seeing it there is still the Scorsese feel to the film with his similar camera movements, focus on the character and his ability to direct actors all seemed there.
Even though the there was little to no violence popping out of no where there was a lot more, that being the pure emotion pouring out of both Ellen and Kris throughout the film and even the older waitress at times. The emotion at times just seemed to build and jump out of nowhere and surprise me such as the scene any scene Ellen yells at her son.
Besides the emotion in the film the camera, which seemed to employ all the tricks that I expect from Scorsese’s seemed to be there even some new ones. It seemed to me that this film was an experiment in how far he could push himself as a director. Trying new techniques and using old ones that worked. Such as the camera behind the waitress when it follows her around the diner from behind or how Scorsese always seems to pick a character in a scene and follow that character more closely than others. I always love attention to detail such as how we see that Alice coming home from the funeral has taken off her wedding ring. This shot opens up with a man with a ring on shaking Alice’s and then after he’s done shaking her hand we see she has taken hers off.
Another aspect of the film that was pure Scorsese was the music and the way in which it was used. Like in the opening sequence, (which I thought was interesting, yet out of place), when the song says “Prove that I love you, I swear I don’t know, you’ll never know if you don’t know how to speak.” This song is always the theme of the movie in some ways because by the end Kris and Alice must speak to know that they love each other. They must prove it to each other because neither truly knows how the other feels. Yet with this song opening the film in the context of that scene it doesn’t seem quite relevant with the child actress swearing and the abusive mother.
All in all I enjoyed Alice though only for the Scorsese that I could see in the film. If this had been done by a director whos work I was not familiar with I don’t think I would have liked it nearly as much.
Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore
Scorsese takes one foot out of New York and thrusts it into Hollywood with his first “mainstream” film Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore. In this film, the technically adventurous role Scorsese plays as a director has somewhat taken a back seat to a director that is now working to get great emotion out of his actors. I think this is a big step in Scorsese’s career because I believe this is the first time, speaking for myself, that I have felt a great emotional attachment to any of the character’s he has shown us. As you live life along side Alice you want things to finally happen for her and you want to see the happy ending. Unfortunately, this is not how life works and Scorsese shows us that. No matter how many times Alice makes plans to move on and finally reach Monterey to live her dream she ultimately gets sidetracked and puts it all on hold. This quality about the film, the intense honesty of the story and its statement on life itself, is something I admired a lot when watching it. Life is a series of sidetracks and that’s just the way it is. I think Scorsese suggests that life is not always just peachy to us in the very beginning of the film with the strange flashback or perhaps dream of Alice’s childhood. The set pieces, the lighting, and the soundtrack all suggest that something is just slightly off. It also brings up the question of was this memory really Alice’s or was it merely that moment as she remembers it, skewed as time has inched forward? I could not help but be reminded of the strange and off-putting opening from The Elephantman when I began to rethink Alice’s intro.
The surreal opening of the film and the general path Alice’s life takes can even comment on the sort of existential crisis everyone has in life. Is the point of life to reach our fantasy or are the sidetracks we take really what life is all about? Is the reason Alice does not reach that dream at the end of the film because to finally reach our fantasy debases it into something we cannot handle or even worse, a nightmare? It is these kinds of questions that the film subconsciously brings up that elevate this film from being a typical Hallmark Movie of the Week to a film with greater depth, honesty, and heart not yet fully explored in Scorsese’s previous work.
I do not mean to suggest that this film is as big of a downer as maybe that last paragraph suggests. The film was definitely enjoyable and intensely comical. The relation between Alice and her son alone made me laugh almost every time they were on screen together. This relationship was another thing I really enjoyed about the film and the way the child is portrayed in the movie was a nice change of pace from the way children are normally depicted in films like this one. His smart ass wit and almost “wise beyond his years” quality was refreshing because it is most often the case that kids are more perceptive to what is going on around them than most adults. Rather than being the child who is tagging along with mother obliviously as life kicks them square in the chest, he is aware that things are askew and that life is not always idealistic. This only added to the honest quality the movie possesses as well as adding to my enjoyment of it.
Scorsese shows once again that he has an ace up his sleeve with this atypical film and that his growth as a filmmaker is blossoming quite nicely. I am really looking forward to further analysis of films as I have yet to fully grasp them completely from this kind of analytical standpoint, and with that said, bring on Taxi Driver.
Much was made of Scorsese’s attempt at commercial or mainstream success with Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, that one could easily assume, based on the hype, this wasn’t a Scorsese film at all. But, as he will prove over and over again, Scorsese is and has always been a Hollywood director. There was nothing surprising about his choice to do this film sandwiched between Mean Streets and Taxi Driver. There are many aspects of both films which mirror Hollywood’s influence: the Abbott and Costello style banter between Charlie and Johnny Boy in Mean Streets and the score by Bernard Hermann (the brilliant composer for many of Alfred Hitchcock’s finest films like Psycho and The Birds) in Taxi Driver, to name but a few. Superficially speaking, Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore doesn’t look like a Scorsese film—there are no gangsters or urban landscapes—but it certainly feels like one.
The opening sequence is one of the most intriguing and enigmatic in Alice. It stands apart from the remainder of the film in both its highly stylized nature and in its potential for unearthing what lies at the core of Alice’s character. She associates happiness with being in Monterrey, where she dreamt of becoming a singer as a child. The way this sequence was shot seems to indicate that this is not exactly what life was like for the young Alice, she merely remembers how happy she was when she had the luxury of escapist dreams at her disposal. This stands in stark contrast to her life as a domestic housewife, as the film opens. At this stage, she simply has no time for dreaming (not even with her best friend when they fantasize about Robert Redford); and by the time her husband dies, she is forced to go back to her childhood dreams (because she has nothing else to fall back on—no education or job experience) of singing. What is fascinating is this scenario begs the question: Do people really want their dreams to materialize? What is the nature of dreams, anyway? Does fulfilling one’s dream lead, ultimately, to happiness? And just what is happiness?
Perhaps, for Alice, those answers can be sought in the inverse of the previous questions. Certainly, what would make Alice unhappy is being without Tommy, her son. Losing her husband, her house, and her best friend is nothing compared to the despair and total loss of meaning that losing him would entail. Therefore, doing whatever it takes for Tommy’s happiness (school, music lessons, a cowboy outfit, etc.) far outweighs whatever Alice must endure to ensure that his needs are met. This means she is willing to put up with men constantly hitting on her (as in her first singing gig) but not willing to put up with violent, adulterous men (Ben (Harvey Keitel)) who might put Tommy in danger. She is willing to give up singing all together and move to Phoenix, where she is forced to become a waitress, a position she is obviously uncomfortable with because of its low level of prestige and because she is putting off her dream once more. In reality, however, we see that she is capable and quite good at waiting tables. Pretty soon, she seems actually to fit in well at the diner, despite a rough beginning. Once she meets David (Kris Kristopherson) and starts dating again, for the first time she and Tommy get a taste of what a happy family life might be. It would seem—in no small part because Tommy approves of David and can look up to him—that this is the dream life that Alice hoped for as a child, one that was simply happy. Only when she has a fight with David over his decision to discipline Tommy with a smack on the rump does Alice again turn back to the dream of singing. But, eventually she reconciles with David, who agrees to move with them so that Alice can attempt to fulfill her dream once more. Perhaps that is why it is ironic and appropriate to see a sign that reads “MONTERREY” in the background as Alice and Tommy walk down the street. Her dream is about happiness more than it is about singing; and her happiness is invested in Tommy’s happiness more than her own. Maybe the relationship will work out, maybe her singing career will work out and everyone will be happy; but, what I suspect is, regardless of how things eventually work out, happiness is something that will never emerge, not in the way that Alice has envisioned it. One place where it might be found is in the recognition of these human tendencies to misinterpret ourselves and what we want out of life. Then again, we might never know where to go or what to do when tragedy swoops in and ruins our lives, without having our dreams to guide us forward, through the wreckage and into a new and stable life.
It seems to me that Scorsese is very concerned with moments that are both interesting and revelatory, particularly as these moments arise from the performances given by the actors in his films. Maintaining a truthful and honest portrayal of his characters is central to an understanding of how Scorsese’s films work. The scenes in which Alice and Tommy are on the road are some of the most revealing and remarkable. In one such scene, Tommy complains of boredom and Alice just drives and admits that she is bored too. Nothing else happens in the scene, yet we learn that these characters are not afraid to be real people, i.e. real representations of real people. Alice is a film about real people with real problems; it’s funny and sad and really insightful.
After watching all that violence, 'Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore' was like a breath of fresh-air. It was very refreshing to see a female lead character in Scorsese's film. From what I've seen in class, seems like even at this point in his career he was still developing similar characters for his films. No doubt there is much similarity between all of his characters and the most prominent of these character traits would be indecisiveness. Just like any of his other characters, Alice is unable to reach her goals, due to her indecisiveness and distractions. After the 'flashback' the first instance of grown-up Alice's similarity to her younger self was revealed in second scene where she bangs on the door like a child after her son leaves. That scene kind of lays the foundation for the rest of the story as it sums up the character for the viewer. I really like that little instance of full circle right there in the beginning.
Knowing that the story is influenced by 'Alice in Wonderland' and 'Wizard of Oz', I would say that the story starts off much like these two movies, but is set in a much more realistic world and ends in a much more realistic way than a fairytale-like ending. In conclusion, it's an adaptation of these two films, just more realistic. The tragic and open end is pretty much what we've been seeing in all of his films. I wonder why he chose to do an adaptation of a fairytale for his first female-lead story? Probably he felt challenged and an adaptation would be less of a gamble. Although there wasn't a lot of gore and blood in this film, but the few scenes with violence were quite intense and kind of make up for Scorsese's love for violence. The opening scene was definitely a mood-setter and a window into Alice's mind and again its nice to see how Scorsese keeps bringing different meanings with the color red. The surreal opening was another 'new' thing that Scorsese tried in this film. A lot of first-timers!!!
There is an underlying theme of constantly trying and failing. Another parallel theme would be of Alice bringing up her son. Seems like he is a direct reflection of her personality. There is eeriness to the story, which comes through her and her son's ability to joke even in the weirdest and toughest of times. There was humor in the opening scene but the eerieness just took over. This kind of reminds me of Scorsese's other characters like, Johnny from 'Mean Streets' and the theme in "The Big Shave". The world is always a very tough place to be in most of his films and in this one particularly, it seems like the world she lives in is the antagonist. Although most of the themes are similar to his previous films, there is an obvious change in color palette, which was refreshing and unbelievable. It gave the film light-ness, which is absent from the previous films that we've seen.
I absolutely enjoyed all the car-scenes, as they seemed to be little transitions into new areas of their lives. He again used mirrors wherever he could, especially in the car-scenes. The use of music as diegetic sound was also clearly noticeable: Alice's singing in the bar and the music on the radio in the car. The camera work was again unconventional with fast pans, mechanical zooms and handhelds that worked well with the character and didn't take me out of the story. I really don't have any bad things to say about this film, it's my favorite of all the films we've seen in class up till now.
What has always attracted me to a Scorsese film is his brilliant mix of technique and direction. He is a studied filmmaker, which is often the type of filmmaker I prefer to ignore. I've come from the thought that people should attempt to make films based on their own thoughts and character. As film became an art that relates itself to its own creators it became less viable as a social statement. However, what has always attracted me to Scorsese, is his ability to draw from other filmmakers but still make his films personal, drawing realistic portrayals out of the actors he uses.
Perhaps it takes time for any director to knock out the kinks and make their first great film, one that doesn't call attention to other films, or does so in a way that keeps you from thinking of other films. What was interesting with Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore was the testament to Scorsese both progressing and degressing in various areas of his direction.
To focus on the way he progresses with this film I have to talk about Ellen Burstyn. Scorsese has created a character at times that may be far fetched or stereotyped, but the portrait that is painted by Burstyn is a vivid and thought provoking image. The unbelievable nature to some of the situations she is put through is like water under the bridge. Often times sentamentalist films are such schlock and difficult to put yourself through. But Scorsese is in full stride here, bringing forth a character that is every bit as believable as any of his biography films. There is a reason Scorsese has amassed the longest list of actor nominations, because he is the best at it, and this is a testament to that ability.
On the opposite end I've always felt Scorsese needs to harness he camera work. When he paints a perfect vision of setting he is able to relax his cinematography and focus more on story. When he is in New York City, he understands the streets, in return we see a more restrained camera work where we can digest setting and character. But when he is out of his element, it feels like he is a lost child, calling overt attention to certain lines, making the film feel forced and unavailable to differing interpretation. He practices differing ideas from the subtlty carries by Coppolla. Perhaps it is is OCD, forcing him to force, or perhaps he sees film as a form of manipulation and the camera as the sharpest object.
Either way, much of the camerawork in Alice... is both uncalled for and unnecessary. He is no longer a student, and as result shouldn't be making a reel for his skills. What is difficult to understand here, is how he digressed from Mean Streets, where he was unnafraid of letting a scene play with a base on his solid directing. It took away from an otherwise flawless film.
While on the surface it may appear that Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore is a radical departure for Scorsese, and to some extent it is, there are still all the tell tale hallmarks of the style which he exhibits in film such as Mean Streets as well as later films like Goodfellas and Casino. In terms of characters in the film, this is quite off the beaten path for him. A struggling single Mom traveling the countryside with her son is very different from his previous rough street hood oeuvre, on the surface at least.
I feel there are many similarities between this film and Mean Streets. In both films the main character has a split personality basically. They lead one life that is filled with trouble and misery of varying kinds, and they also have another side that strives for goodness and happiness. There is an inner battle between the two, in Mean Streets Charlie struggles to balance the life between his friends and thuggish associates and his girlfriend and their future. In Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore, Alice tries to reconcile the personality that is drawn into self-destruction relationships with abusive men, and her quest to reach Monterey, CA which she perceives as being the beacon of her happiness and freedom.
While I enjoyed the risks that Scorsese took with regard to this film, it ended up not being as powerful as his other films for me. I didn’t connect as well to the character because I think that Scorsese tried to infuse too much of his own personality into a situation where it didn’t fit. Scorsese and Alice are two diametrically different people, and the conflict and tension that are infused into the film didn’t work for me.
Personal Response - Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore
I really enjoyed watching Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore. It had great characters with great dialogue and a story line that was entertaining. The movie was about the search for happiness. Alice, after her husband dies, takes her son with her looking for work. She never really worked before except for being a singer so she tried to find a job in that industry. After taking a liking to an abusive man, she then tried to find another job in another town. She there found another man as she was working as a waitress. He wasn’t exactly the ideal man, but she fell in love with him. He provided her with something she was looking for, happiness. It becomes apparent that where she was going didn’t matter, as long as she found happiness somewhere.
I liked the beginning scene that was a flashback to what Alice’s character was like as a child. It shows that she had the same personality as a child, along with the dirty mouth. Her Mother is what kind of Mother she grew up to be, showing us that sometimes things never change. For instance, the guys she keeps falling for. She always falls for the guy who is charming at first, but then turns out to be abusive not only physically but emotionally as well. I also liked the red background in the beginning, Scorsese just loves that color.
The constant camera movement was a very good touch. I felt that it was a smart choice and made the audience get more involved in the story. It also could be viewed as a metaphor for how her life seems to keep moving from place to place throughout the movie. I think it helped the audience see everything there was to see. There was a scene where we are in David’s house. We get a better view of his house as the camera pans. It slowly reveled him and the boy playing the guitar.
I felt that Scorsese made a lot of good choices in the story that helped us get a better feel for who the characters really are. You see the boy being temped to do bad things, but he rejects them. It shows that his character isn’t all mischievous even though around his mother he seems to be that kind of kid. He does end up doing bad things like getting drunk and stealing the guitar strings. The fact that he makes different choices shows a well rounded character that is confused which most kids are at that age.
All in all, I really liked the movie. I was in to it all the way to the end. It felt like a Scorsese movie while I was watching it as well. There is a lot of swearing, troubled people faced with constant decisions, and of course the color red. I look forward to seeing Taxi Driver next week again. I haven’t seen it for about 5 years.
ps. Sorry I forgot to post this.
Response: Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore
Adam Van Vleet
9/25/07
Authorship: Scorsese
I’m not completely clear on my feelings for this film, I think I enjoyed it, but to what level and extent is still unclear to me. Alice’s greatest strength seems to be its ambiguity in regards to the story. As it was discussed in class the opening scene during Alice’s child hood, in which she stumbles through a studio set harkening back to John Ford westerns, but with a bleached red tint, is a good example of this ambiguity. The scene is unlike any other in the film and makes you feel as though it is being dreamed.
Even more ambiguous is the way Scorsese sends us into the present with the skipping of Alice’s voice track, and the shrinking of the screen matched with the sound of an airplane flying overhead, the airplane is important to this move. There is no airport, airplane, or even airmail visible in this film, but there is the sound of an airplane in key moments in the film, what does this mean? At the end of the opening scene, when Alice finds out that her husband is dead, and at the end of the film, all of these points are sound tracked with the sound of an airplane-flying overhead. Could this be some kind of expression of Alice’s need to leave, and I say leave with no qualifying noun, because that is another great ambiguity in the film, what is Alice leaving, home, work, life, sanity?
Scorsese and Burstyn seem to revel in the idea that when you leave home, you aren’t just leaving home, you are leaving much more, but the film takes a vary real approach to this idea, never really giving you the thing that she’s leaving or searching for. because in the end it is made abundantly clear that not even Alice is sure what she is leaving. The final scenes in which Alice reconciles with the Farmer where he tells her he is willing to take her to Monterey, and then in the vary next scene Alice is telling her son that she really doesn’t know if she wants to go to Monterey, gives you a moment to drink in the ambiguous nature of change, in Alice, but also in Scorsese.
Out of all of the Scorsese’s films that I have seen so far, Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore is the most different and removed in comparison to his other works. The primary reason behind this opinion is because the protagonist is a woman and not a man. Scorsese tends to focus on masculine story elements such as the violence in Mean Streets, or the testosterone-driven lust in Who’s That Knocking.
The dynamic relationship between a mother and her son is new territory for Scorsese and in my opinion he masters the natural chemistry needed to successfully accomplish the realism of that relationship.
To me there is nothing that better communicates the film’s theme than the last scene of the film where Alice and her son are walking alone down the sidewalk. The film is centered around them and their struggles together trying to make it in the world. Alice wants to be happy and successful as a singer after her husband dies, and her son wants to be noticed and have his presence acknowledged by others.
Scorsese even acknowledges in his interviews that the last two scenes in the script were switched around. The redemption scene at the end with Alice and Kris Kristofferson originally was the last scene in the film, but instead was switched with the scene that currently ends the film with Alice and her son. It shows that the relationship with her son is a more important one by having it end the film and succeed the scene with her and Kristofferson.
What Alice and her son don’t know, and they learn by the end of the film, is that it is no one else but each other that make one another happy. Throughout the film they are distracted by external wants and needs but they already possess everything that they could ever want to make them happy. Even though they get in each other’s way once and a while, they love each other so deeply that true happiness becomes impossible without being with each other.
A perfect example of this is when Alice is searching for her son in the car after demanding that he walk home alone. It is that moment in the film that she feels more alone than she had ever felt up to that point. She had already lost her best friend, her neighbor, her husband, and finally her son. She couldn’t survive without him, and her son couldn’t live without her.
No matter what man Alice is in a relationship with, the ultimate relationship is the one she has with her son. Scorsese does a great job exploring this powerful relationship and successfully captures the dynamic of the characters to bring it to the screen.
So, if Scorsese were to make a more conventional Hollywood feature, what would it look like? This somewhat reminds me of David Lynch doing Elephant Man, which was his journey of doing a more mainstream movie after doing smaller projects.
Alice may be the beginning of that back-and-forth Scorsese’s had with the studio system, where essentially half of what he does seems to serve the purpose of the studio. But he does it rather nicely, and he proved he can direct women as well as men. And, really, a well-done romance/drama will make anyone a hit in Hollywood.
The story makes a personal obstacle for me, as I’ve never found anyone with a passion for singing to be appealing. And, yes, part of that reason is because many people who long so sing simply aren’t particularly good at it. Alice isn’t really anything special. But, goddammit, she wanted to sing even when she was a little girl, and singing must be that innocent childhood thing she’s held onto her whole life.
Then, like so many stories, she gets pregnant and things change. I have to assume, since that tiny, strange-looking flashback starts the movie, that it has relevance to Alice’s situation with her son and abusive husband, who she stays with because, as she nearly tells her son, he was good in bed. And I have to assume, as she vigorously looks for a job singing, that the cherished idea of singing is also her cherished idea of how to be happy. A lot of people only do what they know. My grandfather should’ve given up farming years ago, but he keeps at it, because it’s all he’s ever known.
I liked Scorsese’s dealings with drama in this movie. When Alice busts out crying in gushes of tears, her son rolls his eyes. And it’s true: nearly every time someone is emotionally affected, there’s someone else who isn’t. And Scorsese has no score to back up the emotions, not really. He uses diagetic music. He makes a point of that in a scene where T. Rex plays on the car radio and can’t be heard when the camera moves away from the interior of the vehicle. He also uses no music during the big scene with David in the diner, when he tries to make up with Alice. So, with such choices, and with the continued use of camera movement, Scorsese sort of keeps his cinema verite approach, and the movie feels more real.
That’s not to say that there isn’t some surrealism. I mean, holy shit, where the fuck is that opening scene? It’s like Alice grew up on another planet. And the applause in the diner when Alice and David kiss – there is no applause. A great deal of this movie still has to be in Alice’s head. She’s just trying to be happy. Does her walk to that Monterrey sign at the end of the movie mean she’s reached happiness, since Monterrey’s been her goal all along? I don’t know; that might be too deep. But it’s a simple story, a well-done movie, and, come on, who doesn’t like watching Diane Ladd?
Post a Comment