Thu 1 Oct 2009
Movie Review: ABSOLUTE BEGINNERS (1986).
Posted by Steve under Films: Comedy/Musicals , Reviews[6] Comments
ABSOLUTE BEGINNERS. Orion Pictures, 1986. Patsy Kensit, Eddie O’Connell, David Bowie, James Fox, Ray Davies, Mandy Rice-Davies, Sade Adu. Based on the novel by Colin MacInnes. Original music: Gil Evans; cinematography by Oliver Stapleton. Director: Julien Temple.
For me, this knockout of a movie musical was an absolute eye-opener. A veritable feast for the eyes and ears throughout, beginning with the opening narration by Colin (Eddie O’Connell):
It is as if the war and the postwar recovery were over at last, and the world changed in a magical instant from black-and-white to vivid color. It is the summer of the teen-ager, brought to life and personified by Colin the photographer, and Suzette (Patsy Kensit) the model. Youth and young love and … money. Bright lights and glitter are always followed by trouble. No roads are ever easy, and there are always obstacles along the way.
Success comes to Suzette first, and boy loses girl. Does that sum it up? Does boy win girl back? Don’t always be so sure.
Beautifully photographed throughout, with the best of late 50s London pop and rock, as seen through the visual lens of 1986. If David Bowie and Ray Davies (of The Kinks) do not play your kind of music, as they do mine, this may not be the movie for you, but the flash and brilliant color may win you back.
From the first sequence on, a melange of activity in a busy, thriving section of streets in a boisterous entertainment area in London, over two minutes long in one continuing shot filled with what looks like hundreds of musicians and dancers, I was caught up immediately. This is my kind of musical.
Colin again: “For the first time ever, kids were teenagers. They had loot, however come by and loot’s for spending. Where there’s loot, trouble follows.”
Can you say “sell out”?
And worse. The ending, incorporating as it does hints of class warfare (well, more than hints) and a well-choreographed racial riot that I’d have made several minutes shorter, but it is one of the four crucial parts of the book this film was based on, the events of which take place on four days in London — one a month — over an 18-year-old boy’s last summer as a teenager.
Even so, some reviewers have said that this movie misses the whole point of the book, which I haven’t read, but I have a feeling they may be right, that any message the film may have intended is lost among the magnificent colors, vivid imagery, and above all, the music. An overload, in fact, but truthfully? I didn’t mind it for a second.
October 2nd, 2009 at 2:51 am
The movie is fun on its own terms, but it does lose the book along the way. Better to take them as two different things and enjoy them for themselves.
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:19 am
In this book and City of Spades MacInnes became the first chronicler of teen age culture in England and particularly in the Notting Hill area where the influx of West African immigrants played a role in the opening of the culture in that area.
MacInnes was the son of novelist Angela Thirkell and an open homosexual at a time when it was illegal, and spent much of his life at the time of the novels on the run from police, Teddy boys, and even black neighborhood gangs. He was also known for being spectacularly rude, which won him few supporters. Despite his admiration for the West Indian culture he behaved like the Australian colonial he was, and won few friends for his attitude.
The film, despite the bits about the riots, misses much of the darker bits of the novel. The narrator in the book has no name, and while the music and bright colors capture one part of what MacInnes intended it does miss the more serious point. As a result the film was pretty universally panned, though I think it stands on its own as a musical — if not a particularly good rendition of MacInnes novel.
Of his later books Westward to Laughter (1969) is a notable novel of a young man’s adventures as a slaver and Three Years to Play (1970) a tale of Shakespearian actors, are both rollicking well written tales.
October 2nd, 2009 at 11:45 am
I really like this movie, too. Especially, as Steve says, the opening long take.
Julien Temple was one of the best music video directors of the 1980’s. Some of his videos that are favorites:
The Rolling Stones
Undercover of the Night
She Was Hot
The Kinks
Come Dancing
Don’t Forget To Dance
State of Confusion
Do It Again
Stray Cats
Rock This Town
Stray Cat Strut
Culture Club
Do You Really Want To Hurt Me?
Dexie’s Midnight Runners
Come On Eileen
ABC
Poison Arrow
David Bowie
Blue Jean
October 2nd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
David —
Yes, from the little I’ve read about this movie, I’ve gathered that when it was first released, it died at the box office. But even if the critics panned it (for not living up to the spirit of the novel), I’d’ve thought movie-goers would have enjoyed it anyway — and if they didn’t, I wonder why not.
I’ll have to read some more about it, which I haven’t so far.
Mike —
You’re right about Temple being well-known for his music videos. Here’s what I just found about him on Wikipedia:
“In 1986 he had the offer to direct the film version of Colin MacInnes’ book Absolute Beginners by Steven Woolley of Goldcrest Films. Absolute Beginners was one of the most expensive films in British history and the fate of the studios involved (as well as several careers) were riding on the success of the film. The film was a musical and not a straight adaptation of the book and this led to the film being heavily criticised for a lack of narrative, as well as being called a series of badly linked music videos. The film, like much of his music video work, reflects his ongoing interest in deeply saturated color American musicals of the ’40s and ’50s.
“The film was critically panned in the UK and a massive commercial flop, which partly resulted in Goldcrest going bankrupt and the British film industry entering a period of decline. Temple found himself being blamed personally for the failure but the film proved to have a small following in the United States…”
October 2nd, 2009 at 9:21 pm
MacInnes book, to use an inapt comparison, was something like the Catcher in the Rye of the Brit teen novel. Temple made it into a gaudy color musical cross between an MGM 50’s musical and an Elvis film.
Here the book isn’t well known so we can enjoy the music and flash, but imagine if it was a film of Catcher or some other iconic American novel of youth. The reaction to the film was out of proportion, but for whatever reason it marked the beginning of a long slump for the British film industry. Temple took the brunt of the blame whether he should have or not.
It’s a little as if someone had set out to film Catcher and the result had been Grease. We might appreciate the music, but there would be a lot of unhappy people even if it was entertaining.
October 2nd, 2009 at 9:24 pm
A great analogy, David. That the film flopped makes a lot more sense now. Thanks!
— Steve