Saturday 14 September 2024

On TV: "Peterloo"


It's now clear that Mike Leigh's
Peterloo hasn't quite caught the public's imagination in the same way its predecessor, 2014's Mr. Turner, did. There would appear to be several reasons for this. Rather than a national-treasure performer playing a national-treasure artist painting vibrant London sunsets, Peterloo promises a lesser-known ensemble (toplined by Maxine Peake beneath a Vermeer bonnet) in a reconstruction of a little-known corner of British history - the 1819 massacre of peaceful protestors at a rally in Manchester - which resulted in a crushing defeat for the working classes. In its efforts to discuss the causes and ramifications of this under-discussed episode, the new film gets wordier and wordier with each scene; instead of Mr. Turner's pretty pictures, it commits to the dourness of pre-electrification Northern life in exactly the same way Leigh's tough Vera Drake committed to the dourness of the East End slums; and after two-and-a-half hours, it concludes with a downer ending that confirms the pessimist's view of history as, more often than not, a terrible slap in the face. I wondered whether any of the suits involved passed Leigh a note to inquire whether he couldn't in some way lighten matters up a touch, and then of course realised the famously ornery director wouldn't have paid them the blindest bit of notice anyway.

There may be something honourable in such intransigence, and there are still elements to admire here, notably in the film's evident scholarship, its management of scale and its historical veracity. From just a few minutes of onscreen activity, we can infer the performers had immersive training in how to best use the looms, angle grinders and printing presses by which the film evokes 19th century labour practices, and that Peake may very well have slept with the period potato peeler she's seen wielding at one point. Leigh has used Amazon money to purge from the frame anything that might scan as distractingly modern, and thereby recreate a dark age - one that, in the bright light of our touchscreen era, feels closer to feudalism than it does to the present - in which the fate of the British working classes was arguably sealed. (No nation-spanning French Revolution for us; instead, the protestors were driven into retreat, told to know their place, keep calm and carry on kowtowing. Or else.) There is, however, plenty of evidence to suggest that Leigh has become increasingly self-conscious in his efforts to (re)make history. The idiosyncratic choices of this director's previous period dramas (which include Drake, Turner and - best of all - 1999's Topsy Turvy) - arrived at spontaneously, either in workshop or on the day of filming - seem themselves to have been purged, and what's left behind betrays a familiar weakness of long-held passion projects: everything appears nailed in place, fussed over, vaguely lacquered. So much energy has been funnelled into Peterloo's recreation of life as it once was that actual life has been micromanaged out of it.

This is also, I think, a very specific take on history, which isn't always to the film's favour, as those early reviews questioning the simplicity of Peterloo's politics have flagged up. Leigh remains capable of dramatic subtleties and grace notes: I warmed to one workers' meeting, where an extremist young longhair can be heard screaming for the King's head, while centrist dad avant-l'heure Philip Jackson tries to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater. And the director's pre-existing commitment to the collective takes on a new edge in this context: Rory Kinnear's Henry Hunt, parachuted in from London in what other movies would doubtless position as the white-saviour role, is here defined as a snippy, metropolitan-elite snob who goes missing when the going gets tough, and doesn't even merit an epitaph in Leigh's eyes. (Peake, too, occupies no more than a supporting role; the varyingly unruly mob's the real star.) Yet Leigh's depiction of the ruling classes is forever more cartoonish than chilling, and these caricatures only add to the sense of an overly declamatory drama, wall-to-wall with wobbly-jowled, tophatted speechifying in which the same handful of sticking points are hammered to death. Long stretches of Peterloo would serve as unimpeachable civics lessons - they're like the twenty-minute collectivism scene that stopped Ken Loach's Land and Freedom dead in its tracks - but they're far less effective as drama or cinema than they are as a demonstration of oratorical technique.

What's missing from these scenes is any resonant debate - the debate Leigh set up very simply in a film like 2008's Happy-Go-Lucky by putting two individuals with radically different perspectives (there, Sally Hawkins' indelible Poppy and Eddie Marsan as her equally unforgettable driving instructor) in the same confined space. Peterloo is too grandiose for that, keeping its two tribes at arm's length for most of its duration, and busying itself with waffling that puts its conflict off - and off, and off again - until everything explodes at Peterloo in what the BBFC, somewhat deflatingly, describes as "moderate violence". The film's second half proves markedly stronger, with its poignant what-ifs, its glimpses of the victory that looked to have been within its huddled masses' grasp before the descent into pitched battle. You feel Leigh wants both the film and the massacre to serve as a rallying cry - an opportunity to learn from history, and improve on past results - yet on a scene-by-scene basis Peterloo treats that history as a done deal, rather than an ongoing struggle. Its box-office thud feels emblematic of a moment where the British Left, no less caught up in windy, angry, exhausting self-analysis, seems itself on the brink of defeat, while the working classes they once vowed to protect are being led towards the void by a new generation of oddbod toffs and poshos. "Liberty or death!," cry Leigh's rebels, shortly before setting off on what would, for some of them, be a fateful last march. To battle-scarred, experience-burnt 2018 ears, that might sound like another dangerously binary choice.

(December 2018)

Peterloo screens on Channel 4 at 11.55pm tomorrow.

Friday 13 September 2024

For what it's worth...




UK box office Top Ten (for the weekend of September 6-8, 2024):

1 (new) Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (12A)
3 (3) It Ends with Us (15)
4 (2) Deadpool & Wolverine (15) *
5 (4) Alien: Romulus (15) ***
6 (1) Despicable Me 4 (U)
7 (7) Blink Twice (15) **
8 (6) Inside Out 2 (U) ****
9 (re) Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (12A) **
10 (new) Firebrand (15)

(source: BFI)

My top five:
1. The Third Man 
2. Batman Forever [above]
3. Kal Ho Naa Ho


DVD/Blu-Ray/Download top ten: 

1 (1) Inside Out 2 (U) ****
2 (new) Twisters (12) ***
3 (2) Despicable Me 4 (U)
4 (3) A Quiet Place: Day One (15) ***
5 (new) Bad Boys: Ride or Die (15)
6 (7) Back to Black (15)
7 (17) The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (PG) ***
8 (14) The Garfield Movie (U)
9 (6) Furiosa: a Mad Max Saga (15) ****
10 (28) The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (12) ****


My top five: 
1. Furiosa: a Mad Max Saga

 
Top five films on terrestrial TV this week:
1. The Mask of Zorro (Saturday, Channel 4, 11.45am)
2. The Best Man (Sunday, BBC Two, 10pm)
3. Night at the Museum (Saturday, ITV1, 5.05pm)
4. The Outfit (Friday, BBC One, 10.40pm)
5. Peterloo (Sunday, Channel 4, 11.55pm)

Thursday 12 September 2024

In memoriam: Norman Spencer (Telegraph 11/09/24)


Norman Spencer
, who has died aged 110, was a writer, producer and production manager who played a crucial role in David Lean’s breakthrough films, including In Which We Serve (1942), Great Expectations (1946) and Oliver Twist (1948); towards the end of his life, he was reportedly the oldest man living in the Greater London area, and the second oldest man living in the United Kingdom overall.

Beginning as third assistant director on In Which We Serve and working his way up to unit manager on Blithe Spirit (1945) and associate producer on The Passionate Friends (1949), Spencer helped Lean define the notion of quality British cinema. Entertainments above all else, these collaborations were also emotionally expressive, and supported by the best craft the British industry could afford in the post-War years; like Spencer himself, they endured.

The pair parted ways creatively after rewriting The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) – where Spencer suggested The Colonel Bogey March be whistled rather than sung, the better to avoid censorship issues with the bawdy lyrics – meaning these early ventures typically lacked the scale of Lean’s later widescreen epics. Yet they were similarly rooted in considered storytelling, born of long brainstorming sessions over tea and coffee in Lean’s offices.

The results were hilariously comic in the case of Hobson’s Choice (1954), for which Spencer urged Lean to forsake his initial casting choice Roger Livesey in favour of Charles Laughton. (The script earned Spencer, Lean and Wynyard Browne a BAFTA nomination.) They were more poignant when addressing a seasoned Katharine Hepburn’s quest for love in Summertime (1955), its extensive Venice location work indicating the new, international direction Lean was travelling in. As the filmmaker put it, British soundstages were “a pitch-black mine… I prefer the sun.”

The pair fought several battles along the way. According to Spencer, Noël Coward doubted Lean’s capacity to adapt Blithe Spirit: “He said that David Lean had no sense of humour, he shouldn’t go anywhere near comedy, but he was wrong”. Lean only inherited The Passionate Friends after a cast revolt against original director Ronald Neame. The War Office repeatedly tried to halt production on Kwai, claiming a British officer would never behave as Alec Guinness’s Colonel Nicholson does.

Lean’s singular mix of perfectionism and distractibility, specifically his susceptibility to the opposite sex, posed its own challenges. Conceived as a vehicle for the director’s new wife Ann Todd, Madeleine (1950) proved a particular trial to shoot (“the marriage was going wrong”). As Spencer noted: “[David] was a huge womaniser: to my knowledge, he had almost 1,000 women. When we shot [Hobson's Choice] in the streets, people asked: ‘Who’s that good-looking actor?’ I had to say: ‘That’s not the leading man, it’s the director.” 

Spencer nevertheless persevered, returning to assist Lean on Lawrence of Arabia (1962), where he liaised with Morocco’s King Hassan II on locations, and sourced the many extras required for the film’s populous battle scenes. “We had to have a thousand camel saddles made, and we had to teach the camel riders in Morocco to ride in the way they ride in Jordan, which was a huge undertaking,” Spencer recalled. “But it had to be done, because the scenes had to match.”

Norman Leslie Spencer was born in Stockwell, London on August 13, 1914, two weeks after the outbreak of the First World War. He spent his childhood years in Essex, where the family relocated; after seeing his first film, aged nine, in Leigh-on-Sea, he pestered his parents for a toy projector.

Spencer left school aged fourteen and briefly worked as a commercial artist in central London, where he landed his first break. While painting a mural at a dance studio in Great Portland Street, the dancers told him various studios were hiring extras for crowd scenes, paying one guinea a day. Spencer duly volunteered his services at Pinewood, eventually appearing in barrack-room comedy Splinters in the Air (1937).

But it was over at rival Denham Studios where Spencer put down creative roots, appearing uncredited in the Marlene Dietrich/Robert Donat romance Knight Without Armor (1937) and as an athlete in A Yank at Oxford (1938). While apprenticing elsewhere – his first screen credit came as a clapper loader on the Madame Tussaud’s-set horror Midnight at the Wax Museum (1936) – he developed a profitable sideline as a stand-in, doubling for such stars as George Formby and Leslie Howard, and thereby earning an extra five pounds a week.

It was at Denham that Spencer first met Lean, then working as an editor: “We were both mad about film and started going to the pictures together with our wives. I remember one time David saying: ‘The sound is terribly low on this – let’s speak to the manager.’ The manager said loftily: ‘You don’t understand. The film comes to us and there's nothing we can do.’ David said: ‘Let me up to the projector room.’ Imagine David Lean being told he didn’t know about these things!”

Spencer was duly invited aboard when Lean formed Cineguild Productions with Coward and Neame in the wake of In Which We Serve’s success. Yet external circumstances meant he had to turn down a scheduled first assistant director gig on This Happy Breed (1944), Lean’s morale-boosting adaptation of Coward’s hit play: “Shooting was about five weeks away when I got my call-up papers. There was nothing anybody could do about it, and I was called up into the army.”

Following his Lean collaborations, Spencer himself branched out, overseeing the druggily existential road trip Vanishing Point (1971), a film as far from Lean as it was possible to get. Berated by critics – The New York Times’ Roger Greenspun called it “a movie about which I can think of almost nothing good to say” – Vanishing Point was embraced by young audiences who thrilled to its anti-authoritarian vibe. Spencer called it his most notable success as a producer: a scrappy idea – handed to him by the Cuban writer G. Cabrera Infante – converted into a major countercultural hit.

Later, Spencer operated as a middleman for journalist Donald Woods and director Richard Attenborough (who’d made his acting debut in In Which We Serve) on the project that became Cry Freedom (1987). This was a sweeping, awards-courting epic in the Lean vein, centred on the friendship between liberal South African Woods (Kline) and anti-apartheid activist Steve Biko (Denzel Washington); it was nominated for three Oscars and seven BAFTAs, winning Best Sound at the latter.

By that point, Spencer was an old hand, and British cinema had become far grander than the cottage industry he’d passed into fifty years before. Interviewed in 1999, he recalled the early days of working with Lean: “We started making films together and when we’d finished one, we’d always want to make another right away. We’d haunt bookshops, and he’d say, ‘Within nine feet of us is a wonderful idea for a film.’”

He married Barbara Sheppard in 1943, and is survived by the couple’s two children, including the actress Sally-Jane Spencer, who made her uncredited screen debut, aged four, in Lean’s The Sound Barrier (1952).

Norman Spencer, born August 13, 1914, died August 16, 2024.

On demand: "Speak No Evil"


The Danish shocker
Speak No Evil caused a minor commotion on the horror festival circuit in 2022, in part, one suspects, because it looked unlike anything else on the horror festival circuit at that time. With its not uncostly aesthetic of cosy furnishings and aspirational knitwear, it gains an odd, effective quality: it's a horror film that looks like the kind of genteel Susanne Bier endeavour that would happily, and altogether mildly, meet the needs of BBC4's Saturday night "upmarket Eurofilm" slot. Yet Christian Tafdrup's film gradually reveals itself to be a wolf in sheep's clothing, nasty in both its underlying messaging and onscreen execution; what's finally been dressed up here is a nationalist party's slogan of "you can't trust foreigners these days". A Danish couple - Louise (Sidsel Siem Koch) and Bjørn (Morten Burian) - befriend Dutch contemporaries Patrick (Fedja van Huêt) and Karin (Karina Smulders) on an idyllic Tuscan retreat; pointedly, they bond over their cultures' shared rejection of political correctness, although the meat-loving Dutch pair (who definitely voted for Wilders) prove more enthusiastic about this than the weaker-willed Scandinavians. The real trouble begins after the former invite the latter back to their remote Low Countries home, where the signs all's not right rapidly stack up: the hosts' heavyhanded treatment of their mute son (and dismissive treatment of his Arab babysitter), a dispute over paying for an expensive dinner, ominous soundtrack parps over shots of a windmill. The vibes are very distinctly off - and this, we are led to believe, is Europe as we find it a quarter of the way into the 21st century.

Tafdrup keeps one hand firmly on the dial that determines how off those vibes are, staging the whole film, from front to back, as a mounting series of transgressions, first conversational and only arguably forgivable, then physical (Patrick walking into a bathroom where Louise is showering, and peeping on the Danes making love), then fatal. The whole plot literally turns on a wishy-washy liberal's need to make nice: events deterioriate rapidly after mealymouthed wretch Bjørn returns to his hosts' place to retrieve a toy rabbit his daughter left behind after they fled in the middle of the night, and then has to justify taking the position he did. ("Why are you doing this?," he asks Patrick late on. "Because you let me," is the response.) This is demonstrably - and I might also say all too obviously - a film that hails from the same corner of the world that gave us the Lars von Trier variations, Thomas Vinterberg's The Hunt and those cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad; to find Speak No Evil as shattering as many on the festival circuit apparently did, you will need to have filtered out some fairly loud bait-the-libs snickering coming from behind the camera. One of the reasons Tafdrup made the film look as it does, you realise, is to sucker in exactly the audience whose lifestyle and attitudes he means to razz. (You too have to go along with it, in order for it to finally knock you out.) Some skill is involved in this, not least in delaying the reveal of precisely why the vibes are off, and the actors work well as a push-me-pull-you unit, taut passive-aggression giving way to actual aggression, even if I wasn't entirely sold on the bad decision-making required of the Danes to keep this ordeal going, nor finally the psychology of their tormentors. If you were feeling kindly, you'd say it was a well-engineered wind-up from a country that's come to specialise in winding the world up. If you're having an off day, you might be more inclined to label it brattish trolling, the movie equivalent of spending 95 minutes in the Breitbart comments section.

Speak No Evil is currently streaming via Shudder, and available to rent via Prime Video; an American remake opens in cinemas nationwide tomorrow, and will be reviewed here in due course.

Wednesday 11 September 2024

On demand: "Louisiana Story"


1948's Louisiana Story found Robert Flaherty picking up where he left off when World War II interrupted, with another peaceable, poetic, artfully constructed documentary-fiction hybrid, albeit now with an ominous sense of things to come. Non-fiction legend has it that the veteran filmmaker only got this one, his final feature before his death three years later aged 67, over the line thanks to a sizeable financial contribution from the Standard Oil Company. Yet a certain editorial nous is evident in the way Flaherty folds in this encroachment, and makes a film about a paradise being lost. First, he gives us the paradise: a small Cajun family unit (mutely devoted ma, "colourful" pa, their cheeky, gap-toothed offspring, his pet raccoon) living a broadly idyllic existence on the banks of the Mississippi. Then he introduces the complications, via signs of American modernity: the slick speedboat of the corporate forces pursuing an interest in this territory, its backwash capsizing our young hero's canoe; a vast oil derrick hoisted into position to blot the landscape; a soundtrack that suddenly fills with clanks and bangs. For a while, Flaherty gives his backers what they may have wanted from their investment. While the Pulitzer-winning score by Virgil Thomson busily signals progress, development and that everyone before the camera is going to be in the money once the desired black gold is struck, we watch
 the kind of friendly human faces one might have seen in early Esso or Shell commercials, lingering close-ups on drill bits and mining infrastructure, and cutesy-funny interactions between the boy and the engineers overseeing the project. (Here, the movie meshes with another of the era's forms of industrial filmmaking: Disney's live-action nature tales.)

Yet the overall picture we're looking at is markedly different from the unspoilt, essentially 19th century landscapes of Flaherty's Nanook and Tabu. In shifting his focus back to America, the filmmaker raises one of the bigger questions hanging over the second half of the 20th century: now that we've agreed war isn't the way forward, just how much is big business going to (be allowed to) take? You wouldn't necessarily have to stretch too far to see Flaherty constructing a parallel between the oil men tampering with nature and the frankly terrifying alligators floating down river, putting that cute raccoon (among other examples of local wildlife) in mortal danger. These are hunting grounds, after all, and it takes on-the-ground smarts, real resistance and unity, to outwit and see off such predators. Over the next 75 years, profits and waters would rise, the levees would break (if not the levies), and man would continue to pump petrochemicals into the sky and hope for the best; for much of that time, successive waves of documentarists (starting with the Direct Cinema movement spearheaded by Richard Leacock, one of Flaherty's assistants here) sought a back-to-basics purism that led to Flaherty being written off critically as either a figure of white paternalist condescension, a faker or a hopelessly wide-eyed naif. You can't fail to be struck by the wonder still present in this filmography - wonder at what's been put before the camera, that we should all see such sights - yet the films now appear far more complex, revealing and rewarding than any of the above labels would allow for: what Flaherty signed off with here is, at heart, an uncannily beautiful film about despoilment.

Tuesday 10 September 2024

The peacemaker: "GOAT: The Greatest of All Time"


It takes real chutzpah - or colossal testes - to title your latest star vehicle (and penultimate film)
GOAT: The Greatest of All Time. Such self-confidence may, however, come naturally to Vijay, the Tamil megastar who's reliably delivered hit after hit for his industry, most recently Leo, last October's slaphappy remake of David Cronenberg's A History of Violence. The new title represents a steep promotion for a performer historically referred to by the nickname "Thalapathy" (or "Commander"); it is also, we might surmise, canny positioning for a public figure about to leave acting behind for a career in politics as the head of a party reportedly converted out of his own fanclub. The new film presents as scarcely less derivative than Leo, apparently born of its leading man's late-career desire to have his own Mission: Impossible, 24 and True Lies, or - closer to home - something like the Hindi TV hit The Family Man crossed with one of those blockbusters in which Shah Rukh Khan (this era's foremost GOAT contender) faces off against another version of himself. 

Vijay's anti-terror agent Gandhi (note the name; it matters) is already leading a dual life as we find him: a living legend in the ill-maintained offices he shares with varyingly slovenly and disreputable colleagues, he's yet to reveal his true identity to his wife (Sneha), pregnant with the couple's second child, leading her to take all her man's nocturnal creeping as evidence he must be straying elsewhere. This long-game deception quickly unravels, as Gandhi is forced to juggle a family getaway with state business: bad news for the Thai cab driver he gets gunned down in the line of duty, even worse for Gandhi's young son Jeevan (S.J. Akhilan), removed from the picture by ne'er-do-wells at the exact moment his new sister arrives into the world. (In a film this manic in its plotting, it suggests less the circle of life than drive-thru reincarnation.) Thereafter our guy must prove himself both the greatest agent and greatest father of all time; if you might hope the greatest movie star of all time would lay on a bit more originality for our troubles, the film's messaging - particularly for someone entering politics in opposition to Modi's BJP - is rarely less than on point. This Gandhi learns that in affairs of state, as with matters of the heart, honesty is forever the best policy.

The bulk of this three-hour film, co-written and directed by Venkat Prabhu, more or less represents what our multiplex-bound actioners now are: long, loud, faintly mechanical and exhausting in their insistence on an agitating setpiece every twenty minutes, and prone to sometimes questionable intelligence. ("Some random group is protesting the reopening of our embassy," Gandhi is told when he touches down in Moscow; you'd hope MI6 would do better for Bond.) Yet GOAT is also never dull, broadly likable, and elevated by those humanising touches its lead addends amid the mayhem: a dry heave after he guns down one baddie, an amused chuckle after he sets two more against one another, some awareness this is dirty or silly work for a grown man to be doing (and watching), and hidebound material that can only benefit from being loosened up. After Gandhi is relegated to desk work - necessary rite-of-passage for any screen maverick - he enters one fight scene with a schoolboy's satchel slung over his shoulder; and there follows the film's grandest, most intriguing humanising gesture, as amid the kerfuffle, he catches a glimpse of his younger self. Now we suddenly have not just two Vijays for the price of one ticket, but also find ourselves present at a standoff between the Vijay of the present and the Vijay of the past. "V squared for victory," as the lyrics of one of Yuvan Shankar Raja's thumping songs reframes it, doubtless echoing sentiments voiced in early script meetings.

It obviously helps that Vijay, fifty this year, is younger and fresher-faced than Robert De Niro was circa The Irishman, but the deaging tech here is so effective you may start to wonder whether the star is passing off his actual son in this secondary role, but no, apparently that is him in attentively airbrushed form, a microchip off the old block driven to malice by the sins of his fathers. The inclusion of this character's backstory - albeit in a film drunk on backstory, that constantly feels a need to be explaining itself - is not unpromising. For one thing, it indicates that should Vijay one day wind up becoming PM of India - not improbable, given GOAT's weekend box-office - he might well be given pause before, say, bombing Pakistan or the Middle East into near-oblivion. Where our hero differs slightly from a Bond, Bauer or Ethan Hunt is that he's not primarily driven by vengeance, rather a need to clean up after his own mistakes, whether his absentmindedness as a father or his unthinking brutality as a tool of the state. In a film that has some fun with names - minor characters adapt the codenames Bose and Nehru at various points - there is good reason Gandhi is called Gandhi: he's set to working towards the preservation of peace, be that around the family breakfast table or inside the nation's bustling cricket stadia. It is still largely a family matter, one in which we're invited to cheer the father over the son, and in which women have nothing much to do save gyrate in songs and play damsel in distress. (If SRK remains the true GOAT in this viewer's mind, that may be because he can play many selves, stock a movie this deep with references to his back catalogue, and still find room for his co-stars to shine.) Vijay, to his credit, handles each development with a brisk professionalism that itself bodes well: leave it with me, every gesture tells us, I'll clear this up and have you home in time for at least the conclusion of tonight's IPL fixture. That's not necessarily a guarantee of GOAT status, but party political broadcasts have been much less entertaining and made far worse propositions to the electorate.

GOAT: The Greatest of All Time is now showing in selected cinemas.

Monday 9 September 2024

On demand: "American Dharma"


Another of Errol Morris's occasional feature-length studies of notable public figures, 2018's
American Dharma found itself mired in some controversy after its initial screenings, to the extent it barely travelled in the way last year's comparatively simpler The Pigeon Tunnel did. The controversy derived from Morris's choice of subject: Steve Bannon, the producer-director turned libertarian guru who had as much to do with the election of Donald Trump as anyone, and who has spent the years since roaming the globe preaching endless culture war. Here is one of those next-level bullshitters who, much like Jordan Peterson, Dominic Cummings and Andrew Tate, harnessed the power of the Internet to bolster his personal profile and briefly achieved notoriety in the mid-2010s before being comprehensively found out. (Bannon was sentenced to jail time in October 2022, having been found in contempt of a Congressional investigation into the events of January 6th; he is due to be released before November's election.) On the surface, Morris's film represents an effort to meet its subject in the middle: he sets Bannon, who must have entertained some suspicions, in a mock-up of Gregory Peck's briefing room from Twelve O'Clock High, a formative text of Bannon's youth, and invites him to talk about the notionally neutral subject of movies. Bannon, we learn, was for many years a regular at the Telluride film festival; he was inspired to go into filmmaking after seeing a Q&A Morris gave after a screening of 2003's The Fog of War; and the documentarist duly digs out clips from the cinematic hymn Bannon subsequently composed to Reaganism. (A more conventional Ronnie biopic starring Dennis Quaid has just opened in the US behind the Beetlejuice reboot: the undead walk among us anew.) Gradually, inevitably, the conversation expands beyond art to life, a sly process by which Morris begins to reveal something of Bannon's character and philosophy, and possibly how we all got to this fraught moment in history.

So who is Steve Bannon, exactly? The first of many contradictions: a garrulous lone wolf. A man on a perpetual war footing, who chiefly absorbed from mid-century American cinema not its romanticism or emotionality (he speaks neither of Sirk nor Doris Day), but its thick streaks of fatalism and paranoia. He has the down-and-dirty instincts of a tabloid muckraker - cf. his lipsmacking account of Anthony Weiner's downfall, which he helped engineer during his tenure at the right-wing website Breitbart - but sincerely regards himself as a latter-day Patton or MacArthur. (Even now, you suspect, he's probably sat in his cell, considering himself a prisoner-of-war: as Morris discovers, The Bridge on the River Kwai looms large in his mindset.) He has an armoury of stats to bolster his every argument, and could doubtless make up a few more if he were losing; in a pointed formal touch, Morris loads Bannon-derived headlines onto the screen like bullets in a chamber. Bannon even demonstrates blunt flashes of strategic brilliance, which collectively suggest how he outmanoeuvred the pinko-liberal snowflake Left in the summer and autumn of 2016. (Of course, dark arts and dirty money can only help.) The controversy resides in the extent to which Morris lets Bannon talk; the argument is that blowhards like this don't need another platform right now, and may be best left alone to blow themselves out. There is, certainly, material here that will be deeply discomfiting to liberal-minded viewers who've long since tagged Bannon as among the foremost boogeymen de nos jours. You may, for one, find yourself nodding in instinctive agreement with Bannon's anti-elite stance, and stirred by his calls for an urgent redistribution of wealth, for an end to pointless, costly overseas conflicts. (Even if you sense an innately bellicose individual starting to contradict himself once more.) At one point, Bannon declares a - granted, begrudging - respect for the support Bernie Sanders has drawn in recent years. His talk of dharma - interpreted here as duty or destiny - suggests this is not an entirely unspiritual man.

Yet in apparently allowing his subject to dictate the terms of this negotiation, Morris spots (and shows) how rapidly men of the libertarian stripe run out of niceties and pieties and drift towards far less appealing extremes. There is merit in letting Bannon get comfortable, to let him think he's winning the war of words, even as the words that then drop from his lips are enough to give anyone who hasn't swigged the MAGA Kool-Aid the most severe of pause and heartburn. When Morris sheepishly confesses he voted for Hillary, it's couched in a way Bannon can only ever hear as an admission of weakness - and yet it's also a palms-up show of honesty that lures Bannon into extending his generally contemptuous air into outright Islamophobia. Similarly, all Bannon's highfalutin talk of cryptocurrency - tool of a brave new world and a fully deregulated America - is finally revealed as a means of ripping off gamers with disposable income. There seems little point in taking the fight to Bannon in this context, because a) that's what he'd expect, and b) that's what he's spent his whole life training for. (The briefing room is his spiritual home.) Morris instead plays a longer, wilier game, exposing his subject as another grabby boomer who's constructed an elaborate ideology ("an apocalyptic rationalist," Bannon grandly dubs himself) to achieve his ends. We might still quibble with some of the archive on this particular project. Time and again, we have endure Trump's peacocking, which was insufferable at the time, and is barely less so now the candidate has descended into sub-Grampa Simpson, Hannibal Lecter-fetishising senility. Yet even this works towards a sense that what Bannon brought about back there wasn't the desired revolution so much as a short-term con job: a show of unimpeachable potency and will that needed smart(er) heads around - like Bannon, like Cummings - to spin and sell it to the masses. Bannon was still at it as Morris found him, insisting being cast out from the White House was a logical development so Trump could stand supreme on his own two feet; yet it seems equally plausible Trump was simply too dumb to realise what he was losing in banishing Bannon. (Hence 2020.) Morris, for his part, only succeeds in drawing his subject out of the dark and into the light. The Bannon he films is patently a dangerous man to have anywhere near a seat of public office - but that's why he was so effective in 2016, and that's why he's behind bars now. American Dharma is less the glowing portrait its fiercest critics insisted than it is the confessions of a pyromaniac.

American Dharma is currently available to stream here.