Author: James Agee (The Nation)
Translator: csh
The translation was first published in "Iris"
Many of Hollywood's best creators have obviously grown during the wartime years. In my opinion, the most significant growth is John Houston—whether as an artist, a man, an intellectual, an uncompromising person, or a person who can do fine work under difficult circumstances. His "Battle of San Pietro" and "God Says There Is Light" can be said to fully prove the development of this kind of diversification. Therefore, with great enthusiasm, I look forward to his post-war works.
His first film after the war has made us wait for a long time, but the wait is certainly worth it. This "Blood Sands" is adapted from B. Trevin's novel of the same name. It may not be a completely satisfactory movie, but the power it contains makes me realize that in the history of American cinema, Houston’s talent may only be Second to Chaplin. The most exciting thing is that he is one of the film geniuses who are still active in the world, and his work still has room for development. Since 1927, there have been few films like "Blood Sands". I am very sure that these films will stay in the memory of qualified audiences together with the best silent films and win their respect. However, I think many people may not immediately realize that this film has achieved some amazing achievement (or a series of achievements). You will rarely see a good artist who insists on reducing his artistry. Houston rarely tells his story so directly that audiences tend to accept it purely. The story itself—a kind of beauty—may not be so exciting for today’s well-educated audience.
This story and Houston's approach to this story are basically close to folk art, which is an effect that only highly conscious artists can create. Whether it is "Blue Blood and Yellow Sand" or folk art, it can attract audiences from all over the world, and can influence audiences of different levels. The best poetry dramas and almost all the best movies have this similar effect. . It is an adventure story in name, but it actually explores the characters deeply through vivid actions. The characters and their actions present themselves on different levels, including political, metaphysical, moral, and most importantly, poetic. The way this story is presented on the screen is so pleasant, so I will summarize its plot as concisely as possible. In the early 1920s, three American homeless men (Walter Houston, Humphrey Bogart, and Tim Holt) hit their fortune in Tampico, and they decided to break into the sacred mountains of Mexico in search of gold. In the remainder of the film, the director further refined these three roles. He used many elements to achieve this goal: the difficulties they encountered and the difficulties encountered; the deep primitives that these modern primitives resisted. The world; the gold they found; their relationship with each other, etc. This is basically a tragic story, it is sometimes a disgusting, cruel story, but in most cases, it is a ridiculous savage satire comedy.
The above explanation is enough to show the richness of this story, which is reflected in its theme, semi-symbolic elements, metaphor, and image potential. Houston’s most exciting achievement is that he brought all these elements together. It all seems so simple, as if converging light on a convex lens: unless you watch attentively, everything you see is just such a real thing. , Clever story, so I suspect that the best audience for this film is the kind of man it portrays, but this group of people only see this film by chance.
But this single achievement can be broken down into many achievements. In my opinion, in many respects, "Blood Sands" is a unique movie: it is a very masculine movie; it is a very real movie in terms of understanding the role and understanding of men; one An unprecedented homeless movie, we see the life of the homeless, and the city in the eyes of the homeless; an unprecedentedly beautiful city movie; an outstanding portrait of Mexico and Mexicans; a delicate balance, we can learn from Every time the camera is set, every time I edit, I see Ted McCord's perfect photography skills. These skills are not pretentious, but full of emotion. In this film, there are no scenes that were shot for shooting, and there are no shots that "allow the audience to appreciate", and there will be no shots that have been delayed for too long. The camera is always set where it should exist. It never interferes with or abuses the objects it shoots, nor does it make its subject matter excessively dramatic. It does not deliberately create momentary beauty for the audience, or Special meaning. Among the films I have watched, "Blood Sands" is one of the most vivid and beautiful visually. In every shot, you can see the flowing air, light, vitality and freedom, all of which are so beautiful. Under Houston's superb control, his style is practically intangible, and at the same time highly universal. As far as I know, his film style may be the most vigorous and the purest among contemporary films, both in the United States and in the world.
There are still a few flaws in this film, most of which cause me very little trouble, and I don’t even bother to mention them. However, there is one element that makes me very resentful, that is the intrusion of background music. Although there is relatively little music in this film, and most of the music is above average, it should not use any music. I only hope that Houston can compete with films that use this kind of music. However, among the factors that bothered me in this film, there is only one essential element, which can be said to be one of the core elements of the whole story: that is the role played by Bogart. After all, this story explores gold and its impact on its suitors. Therefore, it is also a fable about all human life in the world. It also explores most of the issues of the essence of good and evil. There are many possibilities hidden in this fable, and Houston has already tapped some of them well. However, some of the more worth exploring content has been left out. Because Bogart’s role is incredibly loose and continues to cause trouble, it is impossible for Houston to show (or even imply) the true meaning of this issue because of his existence. It is easy for us to speculate that if there is a relatively restrained, less suspicious man in his place, then everything will be fine, and we will not even have a war. To some extent, this flaw may affect the effect of the film, but the reason why it appears so prominent is because the rest of the work is blameless.
It seems worth mentioning that the greatness of this film is still subject to certain controversy because the whole story failed to fully express the meaning contained in this theme. In other words, this time in "Hollywood", finally can only take responsibility for some minor defects. It seems that as long as you have enough talent, accumulated enough reputation, and are a good enough fighter, then you may also be able to shoot such a masterpiece in Hollywood. God knows what other directors can shoot now. However, if we can express our expectations, then I will count on Houston. As a military officer, he filmed "Battle of San Pietro" and "God Says Light"; as a Hollywood writer-director, he filmed "Blood Sands".
(This article first appeared in 1948.)
View more about The Treasure of the Sierra Madre reviews
