Monday, April 13, 2009

1962: LA JETÉE

What’s it about?

A soldier in post-apocalyptic France is captured by the enemy and sent to a prison camp in dark catacombs under a city that appears to be Paris. In fact, all survivors of the war now live underground to escape the deadly radiation that permeates the surface of the Earth. Realizing that the irradiated world above no longer has the resources to support humanity, the enemy scientists begin work on a time travel program designed to cull necessary resources from the past and the future. Prisoners are used for the dangerous experiments -- and when it comes the French soldier’s turn, several subjects have already died or gone insane as a result of the experiments.

Sent successfully back in time, the soldier encounters a woman he remembers glimpsing once in his childhood. They strike up a friendship, and then a romance. The woman -- a memory of an almost forgotten pre-war world -- becomes a focal point for the soldier’s time traveling, and eventually he is able to visit the past almost at will. But no sooner does he realize this then the scientists fling him forward in time to beg help from humanity’s futuristic descendants. Knowing he will be executed after completing his mission, the soldier seeks a way to escape through time back to the days of his childhood and the woman he has grown to love.




Is it any good?

Only half an hour long, LA JETÉE is not a movie in the traditional sense. Instead, the story is told entirely through a montage of black and white still photographs combined with narration, music, and sound effects. As such, it’s very simple -- characters exist only as faces and short narrated descriptions. It’s less dramatic than even a radio play or a short story, and yet even stripped down to such bare essentials it is still very interesting indeed.

The short running time helps, of course. And even though the images themselves don’t move, they do change every few seconds. Paradoxically, this means that LA JETÉE often shows more of any particular scene that a typical motion picture does -- instead of cutting back and forth between two people exchanging dialogue during a two-minute scene, the photographs here can roam around and show the actors and environment from every possible angle. And each shot is carefully framed to communicate either information or emotion. Watching LA JETÉE isn’t like looking at photo stills or a storyboard for a movie -- it’s like paging through a book of carefully composed photographs.




The extreme simplicity of the movie also gives the story a fable-like quality that doesn’t really feel like any other sci-fi movie that has come before. In some ways, it feels so startlingly different that it seems it must have sprung fully-formed from the mind of a visionary, rather than being the natural product of organic developments in the genre. But even though there may not be film antecedents to LA JETÉE (and I don’t know for sure there aren’t), there were certainly many sci-fi novels and stories in the 1950s and 1960s that formed the tradition it draws from. So, taken in the context of the other movies of the time, LA JETÉE is a reminder of how little of the genre’s possibilities had yet been explored on film even by 1962.

Though the post-apocalyptic catacombs and the future world are briefly depicted, it doesn’t seem that LA JETÉE is really interested in speculating on fantastic worlds. Instead, it lingers on the ordinary world of every-day modern Paris, which is what the time-traveling soldier sees as fantastic. The movie is a meditation -- it’s absorbed in its own premise and in no hurry to trade quiet contemplation for action or character or plot. The basic story was later used by Terry Gilliam as the basis for his movie 12 MONKEYS (1995), but watching LA JETÉE is a very different experience indeed.




What else happened this year?

-- John Frankenheimer’s THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE casts Frank Sinatra and Angela Lansbury in a paranoid conspiracy thriller about brainwashing, McCarthyism, communist plots, and political assassinations.
-- Actor Ray Milland took one of his few turns as director with the nuclear war thriller PANIC IN YEAR ZERO!
-- I can’t really in good conscience recommend THE BRAIN THAT WOULDN’T DIE to anybody, but it has a couple unforgettable scenes at the very end. HANDS OF A STRANGER, on the other hand, is less memorable but overall a better movie about the same kind of themes.

If you only watch one sci-fi movie from 1962...

It might as well be LA JETÉE. It’s easier to watch than it sounds, but if you prefer something less experimental then go with THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE instead.

9 comments:

  1. Would you like to share your thoughts about it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I watched this in a class once! Actually, I watched half of it in a class. In any case I really liked it. The idea is pretty damned clever, and sort of a logical development of the style of film-making that's obsessed with capturing carefully-detailed set-ups. I mean, there are a lot of movies (a lot of Japanese movies) where nothing at all moves for minutes at a time anyway.

    I should probably watch the rest of this.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I guess it also makes sense, because when you think about it, most memories are in the form of song single moments or impressions in any case.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I also watched it in a class. We watched the whole thing, though. It was not the worst thing we watched in film class by a long shot, but I can't really say that I was a fan. I feel all close-minded and ignorant for my reasons, but really, it was just too experimental and, well, weird for my tastes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think classrooms are a pretty bad environment in which to watch experimental and weird movies. In fact, they are a pretty bad environment in which to watch any movie.

    But especially experimental and weird movies.

    ReplyDelete
  6. To be fair, it was in my college's brand new film classroom. The seats were only slightly less comfortable than movie theatre seats, and the projection screen was pretty big.

    ReplyDelete
  7. THEN I GUESS YOU JUST WATCHED IT WRONG

    ReplyDelete
  8. THIS IS WHERE I WATCHED IT
    http://ycp.edu/images/HUM_VRM.png

    ...
    ...
    IN RETROSPECT, THE SCREEN IS A LITTLE SMALLER THAN I REMEMBERED.

    ReplyDelete