After looking at Demme’s finest filmic effort, his Best Picture winning (and Best Director winning) thriller masterpiece The Silence of the Lambs, aswell his beautiful and stirring AIDS drama Philadelphia, it felt only right to venture into the films before and beyond that seminal classic. Starting in humble roots under low budget producer Roger Corman, the same ‘school’ that took in Brian De Palma and Martin Scorsese, Demme went on to form one of the finest careers in the independent film circle of the 80’s. Including his second greatest film effort his similarly iconic concert film Stop Making Sense chronicling a performance by Talking Heads (as can be read about in its own article released earlier on this blog). Demme went on to make high budgets drama, still imbuing into them the independent sensibilities that made him a name to watch. Those Corman roots can really not be underestimated and so let’s start with the best of those films, 1975’s Crazy Mama.

Credit

Crazy Mama (1975)

Credit

Brought in ten days before filming started , following the departure of Shirley Clarke, Demme seemingly had a pretty wild time bringing this bizarre story of a group of bank robbers to the screen. Completely re-writing the ending, which originally was going to be more in line with Bonnie and Clyde, Demme made a start in the sort of character based humour that would colour the rest of his career. Four years after her Oscar win, Cloris Leachman stars as a truly whacky and sexually vivacious mother setting out on a road trip with her daughter and own mother. Boosted by a more than solid soundtrack of jukebox hits, we start off with what seems to be a story of a family of women having a great time in Las Vegas, however upon this first night in the town, each member goes about their own mini-adventure and brings back somebody to join the crew. With a crew of now 7, the gang embark on a road trip robbing and pillaging as they go, all in the aim of taking back eventually reclaiming their family farm. Demme is clearly taking advantage of the looser studio backing to experiment with the sort of forms and narratives that will become the key tools in his director’s arsenal as budgets increase and his own autonomy grows. Where Crazy Mama falters in being a mess, it seriously prevails in having an infectious “good time vibe” about it, whilst also never underestimating the sheer talent of the talent involved. Multiple times Demme zones in on Leachman as she offers some more thoughtful acting in tandem to her wilder antics as Melba. Crazy Mama is certainly not the best film Demme ever made, but is certainly a first stop on the long road of his career, and is very much worth a watch in my opinion, even if it’s with a few drinks and a few friends for the pure purpose of revelling in its raucous nature.

Last Embrace (1979)

Credit

This Demme Hitchcock pastiche came hot off the heels off his many years under Roger Corman, and many cite this as one of Demme’s first early ‘real films’. I mean the vague nature and high-horseness of that phrase makes me a little sick, but I get the intention. Here Demme is working with big names and big stars, even big names in small one scene parts (Mandy Patinkin and Christopher Walken show up and barley make a dent on the overall running time, but are both suitably dynamic and wonderful as always). The films big star is Roy Sheider in a suitably manic turn as a PTSD ridden ex-spy now set on a mission to discover the truth behind a series of murders all it turns out relating to the abhorrent treatment of many Jewish women on first entry into America years ago. The film really does spend a somewhat surprising amount of time dissecting the history of Judaism in America and across his investigation Scheider crosses paths with many celebrated old Jewish character actors, not the least bit limited to Sam Levene and David Margulies. The film’s pacing is slightly tepid around the central mystery, however eventually does give way to a rather fun chase at Niagra Falls, which is even depicted with full spoilers in the poster. The film somewhat pits itself like a Vertigo feature, with an inherent perverted mystery and romance at the heart of a detective like tale. Demme himself even described the film as “a dark romance”. However ultimately the film just isn’t that thrilling. It’s the sort of film that I would gravitate to, eerie 70’s thrillers with actors I love and a director I also love just starting out, but when it comes down to it, there just isn’t that much to say about Last Embrace. It’s the sort of film that would come out in droves in the 70’s, one every week or so, but now feels like an absolute relic. The sort of film that has been lost to time, where the IMDB trivia page consists of comments such as “Actor Sam Levene played a character, Sam Urdell, who had the same first name as his own”. For Demme completionists one can very easily see the flickers of inspiration and filmic language that will come and only get better, but for most Last Embrace can be missed.

Melvin and Howard (1980)

Credit

Melvin and Howard for me is the first truly great Demme film and the first film that really signals in so many subtle and major ways exactly what we will come to know as a Jonathan Demme film – in particular the acute human sensibility that would colour the majority of his features. For many for instance the true story of possible fraudster Melvin Dummar would be the stuff of a whacky short or a courtroom feature pointing fun at the con-man antics of this ‘simpleton’. The story certainly is a very intriguing one, with Dummar claiming to receive a will from the eccentric reclusive director Howard Hughes following a one-time exchange they shared as Dummar drove into Las Vegas one night, finding Hughes wounded from a motorcycle accident on his way. Now that could be a whole film in itself, but Demme and the screenwriter Bo Goldman, make two chief decisions; firstly they take the titular Melvin’s story at complete face value and present it as the whole and complete truth, secondly they then choose to make this fantastical aspect of this man’s life not the focus of the film but rather the bookends, on either side of around an hour’s worth of time spent with Melvin and primarily his relationship with his on and off partner, Lynda Dummar and their child Darcy. The tone of the film is perfectly cemented in its two taglines; “Poor Melvin. All he wanted was to be Milkman of the month. Instead, he lost his job, his truck and his wife. Then Howard Hughes left him $156,000”. The second tagline is a little cleaner; “A true story?” As aforementioned however the films greatest success is that it removes the taglines question mark and instead adds a heap of sincerity and human emotion. I keep talking about human emotion as if it is not the grandest of things and isn’t wholly intangible. However the ease and triumph of all of Demme’s work is to infact make such things come as easy as the garnering of any other filmic emotion. It is of course apt to note the films Oscar relationship, with this somewhat surprisingly being the big forerunner in Demme’s Oscar career up until of course his deserved Silence of the Lambs sweep. The film won two of its three mnominations, with Bo Goldman taking home best Original screenplay, and Mary Steenburgen winning best supporting actress for her wonderfully delicate and touching performance as Lynda, already clearly announcing herself as a star with a great texture of performance in every role. The film’s third nomination if won would have marked the third win back to back to back for Jason Robards in Best Supporting Actor following his previous wins for All the Presidents Men and Julia. Both Robards and Steenburgen perfectly encapsulate what makes this film as successful as it is of course is – a tremendous and idiosyncratic focus on the bizarre nature of reality. Melvin and Howard really does signal what will come for Demme, and beyond that is a marvellous film in its own right.

Something Wild (1986)

Credit

I really don’t know if there is a film that I want to love to more than Something Wild. Although on every single watch my liking of the film grows and grows and my love of Demme’s work on the film and the performances of Ray Liotta and Jeff Daniels has never waned, I can’t exactly place why I don’t love this film more. There are a couple of reasons, but let’s start with the positives; after all this truly is one of Demme’s most beloved films in film circles. The film is the bizarre road trip odyssey from the mind of E. Max Frye, who hasn’t nessecerilly ever gone onto recreate the success of this film – chiefly I feel to the elevation and pure joy, then darkness, that Demme brings to the material. What starts as unbelievably fun and extremely whacky road trip, with Melanie Griffith’s wild (yes, that’s it) Lulu picking up Jeff Daniel’s very straight laced Charles as if by random to accompany her to visit her mother.  Demme has repeatedly talked about how what drove him to do the film was the constant shifting of the screenplay and how he frankly never knew what was going to happen next. This is very true and the screenplays very refreshing repeated re-aligning of genre and plot makes it a very watchable film, even if this constant shifting does sacrifice plot and narrative, it never sacrifices character. Demme does his best, and achieves, in making these early scenes wonderfully enjoyable and we more than go along with Lulu and Daniels. But then suddenly Demme takes great pleasure in slowing down the pace and bringing us into a nostalgic suburbia for Lulu’s high school reunion, with us now learning that Charles has been groomed for the role of her faux husband for this gathering. Again, just when we think the movie is going one way it shifts in another leading us into the greatest stretch of the film, it’s second half. In which we meet Ray Liotta as Ray Sinclair, Lulu’s ex-husband. This is pure and undiluted manic Liotta and his dangerous combination of insanity and sexual bravado reminds one of a manic combination of Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando. It’s at this point that the film takes on a darker edge and where Demme’s visual tools are repurposed now to not convey joy and excitement, but rather tension and fear. To put it frankly the film’s largest problem for me is Melanie Griffith, an actress whom I have never particularly liked and who I feel has sunk multiple films with immense positional. Here as Lulu, she is shrill when she should be strong and fierce, she is tepid when she should be humorous, everything she commits to just ultimately rising false, meaning that it really does take us a very long time to believe that Daniels would ever go ahead with the borderline ridiculous initial conceit of the film. Of course this is merley my opinion and I am well aware that many folks disagree with me. We only end up believing the set of events due to how we see it affect Daniels, rather than having it affect us as an audience. We believe Daniels has fallen for her, because that is what we are being shown, not what we actually believe would happen. It is Demme’s greatest strength that he makes the character of Lulu, beyond who is playing her, someone I eventually care for, even if don’t believe her when she is seducing. If one were to make this another collaboration between Demme and Michelle Pfeiffer than I serioulsy believe the film would be far better because of it. Many elements of later Demme can be sourced here, in particular an exquisite use of music and sound, concluding in one of the most wonderful closing credits I’ve seen in some time. Aswell as brilliant opening song from David Byrne, preparing us for the theme of wildness that we are about to view.

Married to the Mob (1988)

Credit

Now I knew I was going to at least like Married to the Mob; Pfeiffer, Demme, Baldwin, Modine, Stockwell, Cussack, Ruehl, an overall jaunty and wacky comedy vibe. However I was pleasantly surprised by just how much I absolutely loved every minute of this film. This was in fact my biggest Demme blind spot for years, and I’m so finally happy it’s filled. For me this is the movie that Something Wild has always wanted to be, every inch of this film just drips with creativity and exciting humour and boundless dynamism. There is a Demme regular we’ve yet to mention and that is of  course Tak Fujimoto, whose cinematography lit up and invigorated most of Demme’s movies, Married to the Mob is certainly no exception from the opening Rosemary Clooney scored Mambo Italiano credits straight into the Scorsese-lite mob hit, Fujimoto and Demme revitalise this classic gangster tale repeatedly with joyous inspiration and overall a remarkable sense of fun. It’s hard to say how much of it was on the page, Mathew Modine stated that on a first read he didn’t actually know what was funny about Barry Strugatz and Mark R. Burns script. Again, one can’t exactly pinpoint how much Demme effects or changes a script, but repeatedly Demme or the screenwriters make the more interesting choice than the easier one, a fine example of this would be making the smallest role of a guy telling Pfeiffer’s lead Angela where to get a job, be a spoons playing bedazzled street performer. It’s the little touches and this film is overflowing with them. As a huge fan of Michelle Pfeiffer’s work it comes as no surprise to me that this performance is but another shining example of her expert craft of balancing light comedy and serious drama, all with an undercurrent of touching human warmth. Demme’s movies are always frequently about the “odd-balls” of the world, and even in places where we don’t exactly think we’d find them, such as the world of organised crime, a place of straight laces and black suits – Demme’s inspired vision brings an incredible Pfeiffer to the forefront of a hilarious, visually thrilling and ultimately rather touching rom-com. Without, as aforementioned, ever losing sight on the pivotal humanity at the heart of any of it.

The Manchurian Candidate (2004)

Credit

Is The Manchurian Candidate better than a lot of the glut of Hollywood remakes of classic films that started in the 00’s and has frankly continued to this very day? Yes. Is The Manchurian Candidate better than the iconic original? No. Is The Manchurian Candidate worth a watch on its own merits... Well, yes. Demme with this film does what I feel any remake should do and makes certain changes, it’s a fun ‘what if’ scenario in a couple of scenes and the dynamics of the feature are played around with a little. Again, it’s nothing majorly different, but it does enrich the viewing somewhat. Overall I find that I can’t completely and whole-heartedly recommend this remake, as it does just do in so many ways what the original does, just either worse or just as good, nothing is ever really better. Demme’s visual flare is still there and does help the films manic and halluicgenic framing from time to time, which is again refreshing when it comes to the usual bland modernisations we received and still do receive. One would seriously not be unwarranted to note that this modernisation in so many ways is more relevant now, than it was in 2004, however still this Candidate does just fall a little flat overall. In the trio of lead roles we have some of our finest actors of all time, however for me the weakest link may very well be the best of the lot of them in Meryl Streep, for of the three she’s the one who leans more so into a lack of reinterpretation. Denzel Washington and Liev Schreiber however really do make the two characters they are playing their own, and in both cases a lot more emotionally volatile. However no matter how much inherent emotional violence and intensity is forced into the film, it never can reach the tremendous heights of John Frankenheimer’s original. It’s all that can really be said and it’s been said many times before me, but sometimes you just can’t beat the original.

Rachel Getting Married (2008)

Credit

For many Rachel Getting Married can be seen as a stunning culmination of all the things across Demme's widespread career that have made him the righteous success that he has always been, it in many ways could be seen as a pre-cursor to a third act of his career focussed in more human based dramas around the Cassavettes and Altman angle that he has always so appreciated. Following the large budget remakes of classic films that Demme started this decade off with, this feels like a true return to his independent roots. In the script of the film, a glorious piece by Jenny Lumet, through to the overall feel and sensibility of the feature. For instance even the sound here is removed from the explicitly crafted Byrne works from the 80’s, or the more effected Howard Shore scores of the 90’s, here there is no pre-recorded material and every song we hear is diagetic and performed live on-set. All in all Rachel is a touching family drama around the legacy of grief in a family unit, all coming to a head once more as our titular Rachel gets married at the family house in Connecticut. Anne Hathaway is our lead, a struggling former addict constantly on the edge of relapse as she suffers with how her addiction has effected herself and her family, whether it be her sister Rachel (played with stunning elegance by Rosmarie DeWitt), or her father (played with a controlled grief and power by Bill Irwin in perhaps the best performance in the entire film), aswell their now estranged mother (played in an all time incredible turn by Debra Winger, the sort that makes you wish for so much more on screen from her). Many of course rightly posit this as Hathaway’s film and a cynic would very easily point that this is an ideal Oscar Best Actress role, however Demme’s film and Lumet’s script so frequently avoids the melodrama and very possible over-sentimentality that would simply render the feature painfully false. The style is documentarian and very verite, it’s no surprise of course after Demme spending most of his time over the past decade making documentaries. It’s a truly human piece of work and as always with Demme, a beautifully realised one.

 -

Since Demme’s passing there has seemingly been a complete reappraisal of his works before and beyond his big Oscar successes. Too much too late in my opinion, I have always felt that such success and appreciation should never have been held in private realms amongst fans in indie film circles. Demme’s best feature was always his warmth and humanity, whether it be with those that we already sympathise with (such as those afflicted by diseases) or even brutal killers (whether it be through an admiration of wit or a conflicted acknowledging of the root of their evil). This is exactly the sort of warm, humour and texture that I think many films miss these days. So if we are to re-appraise Demme’s work after his passing, let us also make it a chief goal to keep the core of his films at the heart of modern cinema, and frankly modern life too.

-        -  Thomas Carruthers