Ad Code

Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Lady in a Cage (1964)

Director: Walter Grauman
Writer(s): Luther Davis
Starring: Olivia de Havilland, James Caan, Jennifer Billingsley, and Rafael Campos




Lady in a Cage is a perfect example of what can happen when a movie is made well before its time.  Its relentlessly bleak themes feel right at home when compared to movies made today, yet the writing and acting are trapped in the ‘60s (when the film was made), creating a constant tug-of-war between two extremes.  There’s no doubt in my mind that the film’s pitch-black pessimism wins out in the end, but its problems undeniably weaken what could have been a powerhouse film.

The plot is deliciously simple:  Olivia de Havilland plays Mrs. Hilyard, a rich old woman who recently had hip surgery, and thus must rely on an elevator to transport her from one floor to another.  Right after her son leaves for a weekend trip, some careless workers knock a ladder into power lines right outside her home, cutting out her electricity—right as she’s between floors in her elevator.  At first, she believes it’s a city-wide issue, and that her power will be restored, so she refuses to press the emergency alarm; when she realizes, after a couple hours, that no help is coming, she begins to panic, and sounds the alarm.

Unfortunately for her, the only person that hears it is an alcoholic, who proceeds to break in and steal a toaster and some of her wine.  When he takes the toaster in to a local pawn shop to get money, three thugs (one of whom is a young James Caan, in his first feature film role) take note of a clearly homeless man with an expensive toaster and fine wines, and follow him as he heads back to the house to get more.  What ensues is a chain reaction of violence, and an overdose of cynicism; none of the characters pay any attention to the elderly woman in need of help, instead wondering how they can take advantage of the situation to help themselves.  It’s still strong viewing now; I’m surprised it didn’t break Hollywood back in 1964, when it was released.

Which brings me to the aforementioned problem of being caught in two distinct time zones.  The acting of today is far different than the acting of a half-century ago, which was more strongly reminiscent of acting for theater. Because of this, many of the performances are over-the-top, with Jeff Corey as the wino (who identifies himself in film as George L. Brady Jr.) being the guiltiest party.  His performance more closely resembles a cartoon character than an actual human being; the way he constantly licks his lips and his gratuitous obsession with wine frequently crosses the border into self parody, to the point I was hoping he would get killed.  I get that an alcoholic, just like any junkie, constantly needs to get his fix, but the film overstates this to the nth degree, making it feel terribly unnatural, and making him come off as more of a clown than a serious attempt at characterization.

De Havilland fares better, and earns some sympathy as the victim (as she should, by default), but she also puts a little too much into her performance.  The scenes where she is trapped inside the elevator alone (before the thugs come in and start wrecking her home) are wildly uneven; rather than efficiently building intensity, as they should, her lack of subtlety sometimes loosens the momentum.  I didn’t find it to be so distracting so as to become cringe-inducing, but dialing it back a bit could have really heightened the tension rather than hindering it.

The best performance is a young James Caan, who as the ringleader of the three thugs exudes a hatred and callous disregard for others that is chilling; the way he’s constantly grinding his teeth from side-to-side also manages to be intimidating, adding a depth to his character missing from the rest.  He’s cocky and confident, and that’s what makes him so fascinating, even as his actions repulse; you never know what he’s going to do next, or what’s going to make him snap, but you know it’s coming.  Mark my words:  If the other actors had turned in even half the performance that Caan does, that alone would be enough to take it from minor masterpiece to the level of Psycho or Halloween, as perceived by the masses.

I hesitate to say this, but Lady in a Cage is the perfect kind of candidate for a remake, or a “reimagining”, or whatever term Hollywood is currently using for “ripoff”.  Trust me, I’m against Hollywood remakes just as much as the next person (probably even more so), but this is the type where such a thought is appropriate:  It’s a very underrated, underseen film, and as terrible as modern updates turn out to be, there are at least a small percentage of moviegoers that would be made aware of the original, and seek it out.  As for the remake itself, with all the strides technology has made in the last fifty years, it would be interesting to see how the advent of, say, cell phones, or even the internet, could both create new obstacles, yet also offer faint glimpses of additional hope for the trapped heroine.  It could also add a new angle to its devastating bleakness: that even with all these newfangled devices and increasing robotization of the world, things haven’t changed at all in the last fifty years.

RECAP: Hindered partially by some dated writing and performances, Lady in a Cage is still an admirably bleak film whose themes are just as strong and relevant today as they were back then (perhaps even moreso).  It’s paced well, with a gradual increase in tension, due in large part to James Caan’s excellent performance as a ringleader for a group of thugs.  Despite its flaws, this is a movie that deserves to be far wider known than it is; even as it stands, it’s a minor masterpiece of the horror genre.  And the opening credits sequence is inspired kinetic lunacy!

RATING: 7.5/10 

TRAILER

No comments:

Post a Comment