• About Amy Welborn
  • Homeschooling
  • Travel
  • Sex & Gender
  • Lent

Charlotte was Both

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« The Movies of 2021
Things that might not make sense »

Nightmare Alley (3)

December 18, 2021 by Amy Welborn

I saw the new, Guillermo del Toro-directed version of this yesterday.

First, here are links to my discussions of:

  • The 1946 novel on which it was based. Written – and this might interest you – by the first husband of Joy Davidman Gresham, who went on to become the wife of C.S.Lewis. A more extreme contrast in worldviews between William Gresham and C.S. Lewis is hard to imagine.
  • The 1947 film version, starring Tyrone Power.

I had never seen or been interested in seeing a del Toro film before, so I had no expectations going in other than a vague sense of what he’s about.

The film was, in the end, a disappointment. The basic – very basic – story was intact, but there was just something, especially about the first 2/3, which didn’t click for me. If I had a better vocabulary and framework for discussing film I could probably pin it down. I could say it was “slow,” but that’s problematic because “slow” is not necessarily a bad thing. The best I can do is to say that it lacked intensity – and you can, indeed, be both slow and intense. It’s not that there were wasted or meaningless scenes or dialogue. It’s that there was something missing – a through line of emotion or story that led me to disengage. There’s one reason for this related to plot that I’ll get to in a moment.

The design and atmosphere is effective. The acting mostly very good, although I just don’t like Toni Collette and never really have – her presence never seems to fit, to me.

So, you’re wondering, what is Nightmare Alley actually about?

As I said in my other posts on this, Nightmare Alley is essentially about need – the need to be heard and seen, the need to be recognized, the need to matter – and the lengths people will go to to have that need met and the able, willing and smart exploiters of that need – whether they be carnies, mentalists, spiritualists, psychologists or magicians.

The next moment Lilith’s [a psychologist] hand was through his arm, pressing it, turning him across the avenue to the apartment house where she lived, where she worked her own special brand of magic, where she had her locked files full of stuff. Where she told people what they had to do during the next day when they wanted a drink, when they wanted to break something, when they wanted to kill themselves with sleeping tablets, when they wanted to bugger the parlor maid or whatever they wanted to do that they had become so afraid of doing that they would pay her twenty-five dollars an hour to tell them either why it was all right to do it or go on doing it or think about doing it or how they could stop doing it or stop wanting to do it or stop thinking about doing it or do something else that was almost as good or something which was bad but would make you feel better or just something to do to be able to do something.

Which film version is better? Well, the 1947 is hampered by restrictions of the period, because there’s rough stuff in the novel. I will say, though, that the film doesn’t go as strongly in that formerly restricted direction as it could have. I mean, with a few less expletives, it could have almost passed a PG-13 rating. There’s a strong dominatrix vibe to Lilith’s relationship with Stan in the novel that really doesn’t come through, even in the present film.

And, of course, the new version is rougher, and therefore more realistic in atmosphere and setting, and you don’t have the affected acting and self-presentation that you see, especially in female characters, of that period. But, you know, Tyrone Power is very good in the original, playing the role a bit differently than Bradley Cooper does.

The end is different, too, but in a good way – in the new version. I won’t reveal the end, because it’s a great twist/full circle kind of thing – classic – but just now that the new version is faithful to the book, while the 1947 version tacks on, by studio insistence, a glimmer of hope that…isn’t in the book.

One thing that puzzles me, though, is how both versions adjust Stan’s motivation. The 1947 version strips it completely and makes Stan an orphan from childhood and with no discernible motivation for going full-on conman. The new version incorporates a bit from the book – Stan’s mother had an affair with her “voice teacher” and Stan blames his father for weakness.

But the novel, while complex and dark, seems to me to be fairly clear about Stan’s motivations in a way that wiping out all or most of his backstory renders opaque. From my post:

The greatest omission is related to Stan’s background. Gresham makes a great deal of this – not surprising, considering his own interest in psychoanalysis. In the movie, Stan had been orphaned as a child, and in the novel, he most definitely is not, and his family life plays a huge role in making him the man he is today – in a thoroughly negative way. As I said earlier, in Gresham’s vision, Stan is a con man because he was conned into believing that life was good and he was loved, and that illusion was shattered by his parents’ betrayal, not just of him, but of social norms and human decency. There’s a very clear motivation for Stan’s journey in the novel, but in the film, he just sort of pops up and is who he is.

But again, considering how Gresham positions all of this – to be honest, Stan’s issues are Oedipal – not surprising that it didn’t make it into a film in 1947! I will be interested to see if del Toro picks up this thread.

He doesn’t.

Last point: in the novel, Gresham takes much longer to trace Stan’s journey from carnie to spiritualist, and in fact, Stan starts a full-blown pseudo-religious group preying on the grieving and desperate. He’s the Elmer Gantry of spiritualists – but that’s missing from both film versions, hence, Gresham’s broader critique of religion in general.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Amy Welborn |

  • Header Image

    Rome, 2016

  • Coming March 2023




  • Books on Saints
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 9,695 other subscribers
  • It is what it is


    stories
    opinions
    observations
    photos.
    reviews

    Seeker Friendly.

  • Check out the new Substack
  • Fiction

    A short story about mothers, daughters, and why we believe what we say we believe…or not. 

    "amy welborn"

    Finalist for the J.F.Powers Short Story Award. Read on  Wattpad. 

    A novel

  • My son's novel
  • Hola.

    Amy Welborn
  • Follow Charlotte Was Both on Facebook. Get new posts in your newsfeed. Save wear and tear on the Internets.

    Follow Charlotte Was Both on Facebook. Get new posts in your newsfeed. Save wear and tear on the Internets.
  • In the past

  • Follow Charlotte was Both on WordPress.com
  • Copyright Notice

    © Amy Welborn and Charlotte Was Both, 2007-2022 Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited.

  • amywelborn.net

    amywelborn.org

  • INSTAGRAM

  • "It is interesting to take a close look at this entrance of the Child Jesus into the solemnity of the temple, in the great comings and goings of many people, busy with their work: priests and Levites taking turns to be on duty, the numerous devout people and pilgrims anxious to encounter the Holy God of Israel. Yet none of them noticed anything. Jesus was a child like the others, a first-born son of very simple parents. Today's the memorial of St. Angela Merici, founder of the Ursulines.  Today is the feast the Conversion of Paul. Some related images from my books. The Loyola Kids Book of Bible Stories, the Loyola Kids Book of Heroes, and the Loyola Kids Book of Catholic Signs and Symbols. More:. https://amywelborn.wordpress.com/2023/01/25/the-conversion-of-saul-in-poetry/ St. Francis de Sales, whose feast is today, invites us to focus first, on the reality of the present moment. How is God calling me to love here, now? From St. Francis de Sales, whose feastday is today: It's coming! For more: Pages from an English-language, but Belgian-originating Mass book for children from the 50's.  More at All right, here's another one. I'm trying to get better and more efficient at video for this app, so I'm practicing by doing reels and such related to this year's travel. Last time - my trip to Mexico in October. This time, our trip to England and Scotland from this past June:  Oxford, York, the Hadrian's Wall area, Lindesfarne, Edinburgh and London. Phew!

WPThemes.


  • Follow Following
    • Charlotte was Both
    • Join 454 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Charlotte was Both
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: