The Zombies, known for making one of the most famous psychedelic albums of all time, had a surprisingly varied career. Despite only having released two original lineup albums, one in 1964 and another in 1968, there’s enough studio or studio-passing tracks that there could have been an album a year from ‘64 to ‘68, and we could get even more if you count the solo eras of the two main members. Despite the consistent quality of music, one issue that would be hard to avoid with those hypothetical albums also afflicts Begin Here. There is a lack of cohesion. Some of these songs prioritize romantic singing and an environment-filling organ. Other tracks are beefy rockers with strangely less focus on the famous Colin Blunstone’s vocals and Rod Argent’s keyboard. The consequence of this is not a bad album, but an unfocused one. As such, treating this as a compilation helps the experience.
The opening track is “Road Runner”, which has a beautifully fiery lead guitar. Blunstone, like other singers like Roger Daltrey, can’t quite capture the elegance of original performer Bo Diddley, but is still good. That guitar and interplay with the drums really makes the song. “Summertime” plays to the band’s natural strengths. It’s a warm ballad with breathy vocals and nice harmonies. The keyboard has clear jazz influences. The bass and drums add a perfect backing to amplify the intended tone. While the group isn’t known for their covers, they’ve managed some extremely cohesive ones that add in the jazz and R&B leanings of the five living dead, a sound all their own.
“I Can’t Make Up My Mind” has similar positives, with more intense playing and singing. The organ, especially its solo, provides some class and texture. Without it, you’d basically have a different band, as it contrasts the hard hitting guitar and drums. “The Way I Feel Inside” showcases how strong Colin’s voice and Rod’s playing are, though compositionally and lyrically the track is too simplistic, so the intended effect of “less is more” isn’t reached. The full band demo adds some much needed energy. “Work ‘n’ Play” follows and is pretty jarring. It’s a nice reminder of the R&B, but is similarly dull and notably lacking any vocal work. Rod Argent plays harmonica and not very well, though the whole track coasts on being upbeat and fun, though it would have more value on a rarities compilation where this would be more of a curio than album filler.
“You’ve Really Got a Hold on Me/Bring It On Home to Me” is the third track to not have the magnetic and razor sharp playing of the band, but the vocal harmonies help make up for that. This shows how even though the band has a wonderful sound, they should have put more work into making their covers feel distinct. Colin’s vocals seem flat when compared to the originals, most notable in the section of the song that’s close to spoken word, where you’d expect Smokey Robinson to be aching his heart out. “She’s Not There” rightfully is one of the group’s most famous songs. It has all the previous positives. One favorite is the clean and prominent bassline thumping in the back. Every member gets at least a little section to show off, though the piece feels cohesive due to how tight they fit together and how infectious their spirit is.
“Sticks and Stones” is another rocker and cover. The electric drumming and amusing singing made this a personal favorite on the album, though it lacks the sophistication or exceptionally thoughtful playing of the best of the group. The rocking covers might work better in a live setting. The band is playing like they want to show off, but there’s obviously no audience to do that to. This is also a strange opener to a side. Why not pick something like the more exciting “She’s Not There”? “Can’t Nobody Love You” is another great one, due to Colin’s smooth voice gliding effortlessly off the organ and drums in this ballad. The name checking of other R&B singers is a favorite part, as if cementing this song into history.
Next are four originals in a row. “Woman” seems like a cover, but isn’t. Colin’s rocking voice feels more natural here, with his scream and the organ solo showcasing playfulness and more familiarity with the track, as if it was well rehearsed. There’s an added level of excitement, especially in the backing vocals. It’s like they really wanted to give their take on this type of song. “I Don’t Want to Know” and “I Remember When I Loved Her” are also derivative of the band’s influences, but the personal touches make it special. The vocal harmonies and on point playing are two of the biggest keys to success, which is something that propels any track they’re featured on. Loved Her has especially haunting keyboard, though also especially vapid lyrics. “What More Can I Do” is the best of these four. The singing and playing have a sense of tension, like the singer is pained by the conflict going on. There’s expectedly many little touches, like the drumming at the very end.
“I Got My Mojo Working” can be best defined as chaotic. The singing is dirty, notably less refined than what came before it. The instruments blast out, with the drums particularly blaring. A harmonica solo is the most telling example of this, seeming to defy a time signature. The track as a whole resembles an early punk band and as such is a little magical in its own right, but demonstrates the less mindful side of the Zombies and is frankly their weakest cut. It doesn’t at all fit with the other songs on this album, which seem to have a clear focus and intent. This one is by comparison an informal jam. It being the end of the album and having Argent singing lead makes it feel tacked on, as if to be a surprise. That might work in other circumstances, but here wastes the tension and pathos built up by the previous “romantic” tracks.
OVERVIEW
Begin Here isn’t just a strong debut, it’s many strong debuts. As was common at the time, the Zombies followed trends and here seemed to be trying to follow several trends. You could argue they were setting the groundwork. If the jazzy stuff was successful, they could build off that here. If the R&B material won, then they’d pursue that direction. To compare them to an influence of theirs, basically all Beach Boys songs have complex harmonies, which gives them a definable sound. The Zombies sometimes have complex harmonies, others more basic ones, and sometimes not any at all. The group may have been successful if they stuck in a lane, but it’s hard to deny the quality of what’s available. Even the weaker tracks have solid playing and Blunstone to love. Criticisms of either of those mainly come down to those elements just being serviceable, as opposed to exceptional.
No matter what anyone has or could say about this film, you can’t deny that it is one of the most definitive statements on the lifestyle it portrays. The tension and developments come from the varying, sometimes minor, ways that being a criminal affects people. Even when we get into tangents like the main character’s belle, her behavior is almost always colored by what she’s gotten herself into. Through her and the main character of Henry is a brilliant look at mobsters through simply watching a few of them live their lives. Beyond the core handful, most have very little to do, so the prominent cast are asked to tell us a very grand story, which they do through excellent acting and a rather long runtime. Ray Liotta as Henry Hill is the most relatable and humanized gangster. Despite this, and also that the movie features his narration and is based on a book Hill wrote, we avoid vulnerability or a complexity of emotions from him. He is almost always taking a situation and either trying to enjoy the ride or get out ahead. As such, it can be easy to forget at times what he’s a part of. Just as his goals are immediately and simply stated to be about living an easy life, we are asked to just enjoy the journey he is on. When things happen to him, we feel them as we’ve seen Liotta’s lively and realistic portrayal. He is mainly interesting in what he represents and brings out in others, especially with the paradoxical answer to the big question of whether or not this movie glorifies gangsters.
Joe Pesci as Tommy DeVito and Robert De Niro as James “Jimmy” Conway are hard to discuss without spoilers. Their point is to cover different types of behaviors and mentalities in the mob. De Niro as always has this effortless class that he always maintains with a smile or sliding a little bit of money to another. Pesci on the other end has an explosive temperament and whose callus attitude colors how these criminals manage to do what they do. His many memorable lines tell you what gangsters supposedly think. Karen Hill, played by Lorraine Bracco, represents the human aspect of the story. While the three men cover the corners of what it means to be a gangster and what it’s like, Karen often concerns herself with the fallout of whatever has happened. She also explains, frankly quite clearly, some reasons why someone would want to marry a gangster. Emotions are often plastered to Bracco’s face, which give relief to the dense scenes of violence.
The “gangster life” is depicted in a far rosier way than you might expect after seeing the later Scorsese flick The Irishman. In fact, one of the first scenes of the film is a romantic and inviting scene of 50s life. While more and more this perception is challenged, it doesn’t completely. The most telling example of this is that the last time we see Henry, he looks pretty good and not much older than in the 60s. In fact, all of the characters are shown as sympathetic and likable to a degree, like they are to be enjoyable and entertaining, almost letting you forget their gruesome crimes. The various killings or cadavers are treated as comedic or like just another thing to discover, with little look at the horror of it outside of what Henry witnesses.
The inviting and lively world makes for excellent pacing and an exciting story, which leads to this lifestyle’s portrayal as just as exciting. As a narrative, you can’t deny the intrigue in simply seeing various little events hit Henry and seeing in what little ways it affects him and how he tries to manage with changing stresses. Due to the slight ways problems buildup, you realize overtime how he progressively becomes less carefree. The narration suggests Henry probably survives and is in a relaxed state, which furthermore adds to the sense of this being an adventure. Those that get the bad end of the stick are not covered with great depth. Despite some narration from Karen, the story is essentially always on Henry, which gives minimal opportunity to turn your sympathies off or disconnect from him. An example of this is in the freeze frames, which detail important moments of Henry’s life. Many of the freeze frames showcase moments of Henry receiving something, which in turn color his life. While not exactly a freeze frame, the photographs of Henry just enjoying life with his gangster friends are the most important, telling us of how close he is to them, which makes for important contrast with the ending.
A common theme is contrast between the brutality of being a gangster and something far more cheery, like community or upbeat music. The usage of “Frosty the Snowman” takes on an ironic approach when it plays over the outburst of a serious issue, representing when the positive attitude the film has at points changes. Earlier, young Henry has a cavalier attitude to his father beating him, which may as a bonus suggest Henry’s worse qualities come from childhood trauma. We see Henry meet a large group of gangsters, as if they’re celebrities for the young protagonist to admire. Henry later enters a club through a kitchen, with his nice suit and ability to do as he pleases going against the type of life he’s wanted to avoid around him.
There are plenty of fun little moments. One example of the tense pacing is the scene of one character going to look at dresses, with the slight strangeness and emptiness of the scene, as well as how long it goes on, creating this unnatural and uneasy vibe. Past established information about the characters add to the drama here. Another example is the excellent music, especially with the “Layla” scene. The final act gets quicker and puts you in the cocaine-fueled headspace. The famous last scenes are as good as its reputation proposes, summarizing the whole story in a powerful few lines and shots. One nitpick is the weaker scene of Tommy and Jimmy with the former’s mother. They seem to be trying to improvise something to say, reminiscent of a friend doing a silly Italian impression.
SPOILERS
Some miscellaneous comments include: The movie should have revealed why Paulie, played by Paul Sorvino, didn’t want Henry dealing coke, as that would punctuate the ending of the two characters. It doesn’t make much sense that Jimmy would want to kill Karen. It seems the reason for him doing this was to test if Karen trusted him, which would tell him if Henry trusted him. If he had killed her, that would just push Henry to the authorities even more. The reason this scene is in the movie is probably because in real life this basically happened, only there was an actual reason for Jimmy to whack her. Next, the very detailed look into seemingly any ol’ day of Henry’s life, as well as the very fast pacing, spoils that something “big” will happen, as otherwise we wouldn’t see so much of it.
Another way this film is less scathing against this lifestyle is that Henry is never shown to kill anyone and at points is disgusted by the violence, as if he is pure and worth rooting for. His friends that do do the acts are shown getting punished. In fact, the scene of Henry, Tommy, and Jimmy eating with Tommy’s mom seems to be humanizing all three, though also separating Henry from the others. He appears closer to the camera and covered in shadow, like he’s not part of them. The painting the mom shows depicts two dogs going in opposite ways, mirroring Henry feeling said conflict and distance. Later, the three digging up a body has beautiful lighting and use of darkness, making the experience cinematic. Tommy making a slightly humorous comment before dying, as if it’s to be taken lightly, is probably the only time this is an issue. His death is later taken with some weight, so it should have some here.
Even if Henry didn’t kill anyone, he did participate in a deadly system and support his friends until his own neck was on the line. The reason he doesn’t do the worst of it and gets off well at the end is for catharsis, to see the likable lead journey up and down and give relief in his reward. If we weren’t supposed to like him, why have the story lose tension and decompress itself with Henry escaping, instead of on some moment of him losing in a more real way, like going to prison? This is also very reminiscent of old movie tropes. In 1930s films with gangsters and criminals, oftentimes at least one reforms and is given some honor and/or a woman. No Limit and The Public Enemy are examples. This was done as a simple way to not let a bad person off the hook and if they are going to survive to the end, let them not promote a dangerous lifestyle. The difference between those and Goodfellas is that the hero gets into worse debauchery and doesn’t even honestly reform, but he is still living the same life in essence.
The bizarre and fake-sounding laughter is perhaps the first sign of how unglamorous being a gangster can be, showing a fakeness to how everyone acts, probably because they don’t want to start trouble. While Henry celebrates the idea of being able to do anything he’d like, it progressively becomes clear to him that this means he could be killed unceremoniously as others can also do what they like. He is shown to be shocked by some of the mindless killings and violence of his friends. Even then, he shows loyalty to them until it seems that one of his friends is going to have him killed. Perhaps he would’ve taken a sentencing if it wasn’t for that? While the constant killings of Jimmy have their reasoning, it ultimately is what dooms him. Just like in The Irishman, we are following the one gangster that was lucky enough to escape a serious punishment or death. Another element of the story details the negative side early on…
Karen watching The Jazz Singer adds to the constant contrast of something heavy and something light, while also suggesting one way she copes with her stress, enjoying light entertainment, and probably relating to its story about a fellow Jew who feels ostracized by those around him. Whether or not she finds much fulfillment in life by the end is left ambiguous, though the answer is probably not. Her husband and her are left without the sort of money they could use for something like rehab for their cocaine addictions. Their clear lust for doing bad things also isn’t satisfied or tied off. In fact, with Henry it’s explicitly stated that he doesn’t want to stop. Karen’s desire to keep Henry in her life probably will not work out in her favor, as he is never shown having remorse for his cheating or wanting to stop. She even has to apparently have almost no contact with her parents out of fear that that will lead to someone getting in danger. While some say the movie is really about Karen and what happens to her, that is muted by how the last scenes are solely about Henry and how he feels. At that point, Karen loses autonomy.
The real point of her narration seems to be to give a more nuanced view of the events than what Henry could do alone. We get a good look of Jimmy’s ill will when she experiences what she thinks is a hit attempt from him. After just looking at Henry’s world, including him being late for his date, we’re pulled out of his view by hearing Karen’s feelings on the matter, as if she’s telling him the world is not all about him. While Karen’s usage as representing Henry’s homebase is serviceable for the story, there is a feminist critique in it and in other scenes. Women are sexualized quite a lot. You could argue the point of this is to show the excessive and joyous lifestyle Henry lives, but it goes a bit far. Karen giving Henry head only seemed to be there to grab any audience members who may not have been paying attention. The numerous scenes of women’s bodies suggests that that is essentially the big thing they’re adding to the story, perhaps a few more male butts in seats? The view that Karen is the “counterweight” to Henry is mere interpretation, and thus easier to miss than the sexualization.
The most damning the film is against gangsterdom is in how the principle characters act. Tommy takes to heart the “ability to do anything” that Henry falls for. This not only hurts many people around Tommy, but Tommy himself. His death being implied as coming from one of his reckless murders is one of the clearest cases of how this sort of thing can catch up to you. Jimmy trades in Tommy’s thoughtlessness for something seemingly better but just as detrimental. He’s honest to himself about how dangerous his surroundings are, which leads him to decide to kill most of his own friends. In turn, he’s also losing a lot of support for himself and giving Henry ammunition to turn against him. Him at all making Henry aware of his murders of their comrades is in itself foolish, but maybe he either wanted someone to trust or he wanted another opinion on the matter? Jimmy crying over Tommy’s death suggests the sense of humanity that the former is ignoring in others he kills and how inherently selfish he is. This speaks to the contradictions in doing what he does.
Jimmy’s understanding of his predicament probably influences his behavior. Maybe he gives people money to quickly get them on his good side and put them in a false sense of security? Maybe he helps Tommy with his killing, as he doesn’t want to get in heat? By extension, the character of Morrie represents Jimmy deciding to kill the others off. It seems the only reason Morrie was alive up to that point was that he owed Jimmy money. Once that was settled, Morrie irritated him, which in turn pushed Jimmy to realize that killing everyone would make things a lot easier for him, especially because the others were making poor decisions. Thus, it is possible that if everyone followed the rules, Jimmy wouldn’t have felt pushed to take them all out.
Henry challenges this lifestyle in a different way, with dishonor. While he keeps his nose out of the murders, he can’t resist the temptation to allow things to get in over his head. He shows an awareness of the threat of this when he promises his wife he won’t get imprisoned, as those that do make idiotic mistakes. If he was “logical”, he would understand that dealing coke, or at least doing it, would not end well. However, he bought into the idea of being able to do what he wants. He eventually gets so deep into his cocaine business, which he was told not to do, that his only options are to rat out all his friends, even Paulie who didn’t do him any wrong, or to die. Thus, he was forced to essentially break the bond with those he was so close to initially. He also yells at Karen in front of their child, leaving a bad impression on her. Despite this whole movie being Henry’s story, the children barely factor into it, as if he didn’t really care about them.
Beyond Henry not respecting the “family”, which is a concept often talked about, no one really does. The notable example is Jimmy and Tommy’s killings, which prove that the idea of them being family is just to create false security. Even if not intentionally, that is the product. Paulie on the other hand does show respect for the concept. When Henry makes a confession to him that could get Paulie in trouble and the former whacked for the trouble, Paulie helps him with some money. Henry then betrays him more. In turn, he is really betraying and disapproving the concept of the “family”, which seems to be what the movie is really trying to prove. It goes against both the moral gangster and the nameless gangster. These are people, but still out for themselves. Henry may have “won”, but most don’t. Despite all this, probably the reason Henry went to Paulie for money is because he did trust that his “family” would help him.
The ending showcases this dual mindset of Henry, who never shows remorse for his actions, just like with Jimmy and Tommy, he doesn’t regret it, and doesn’t show signs of stopping. However, his inability to ever back down does cost him. Jimmy, Tommy, and Paulie also don’t back down and end up in vastly worse positions, showing this was all more a matter of luck. Henry pointing them out in court punctuates how badly they’re being screwed by him for doing the same song and dance, while also mirroring the earlier court scene of Henry being celebrated for not ratting on anyone. What’s so brilliant about this finale is how it tells you what we’ve already learned, but makes it a revelation. Even when we’ve seen violence be glorified or Henry arguably take a lesson in some way or him defeat immense odds, he still wants to get ahead like any other gangster and isn’t so different, despite the contrast with how his life ends up. Just like how cheating through life hasn’t failed him yet, he probably will not stop trying. Paulie can be seen as the product of stopping the cheating. In fact, him ratting is simply another cheat, just as the other gangsters do in their lifestyle. He simply now can best cheat by following the rules, but that alliance is as temporary as Jimmy was to his life. As the final shot of Tommy shows, he even can be whacked and maybe even haunted if he accepts morality.
OVERVIEW
There is a definite comparison between the final shot and the ending of The Irishman, as does the ending music, saying what happens if you do things “My Way”, with the films showing the benefits and drawbacks of that through the lens of a life of crime. Whether or not Goodfellas glorifies that crime doesn’t matter in one important aspect; it doesn’t change whether or not the movie is good. In fact, it doesn’t matter much that it is such a thorough dissection of the “gangster life”, which seems to be a big reason why it’s so liked. The film is extremely exciting and interesting, with that and the essentially perfect pacing propelling it to masterhood.
See for a cop tasting some untested cocaine to make sure it’s actually cocaine.
For those not in the know, fan albums are the attempts of me and many others to take songs and put them on an album, typically they’re made to improve upon something, such as an existing album or to take non-album tracks and put them on an album.
The Flamingos are a fun little group to analyze, mainly known for their wonderful track “I Only Have Eyes For You”. They have had many other great cuts and this project hopes to make them more accessible. Another favorite is “Lovers Never Say Goodbye”. The group has had many lineups and some varying quality, but they provide a satisfying experience. From seemingly the genesis of the act in 1953 to the present, “The Flamingos” have been active with a 50s member. It’s one of those Ship of Theseus issues that is especially common with doowop acts. Thus, I’m defining “The Flamingos” by its three most prominent members: Jake Carey, Zeke Carey, and Paul Wilson. The three were constants, with one slight exception, from the beginning to 1964, at which point Wilson left and everyone else was more or less doing an oldies’ act with few recordings. For a more detailed history on the Flamingos, see https://www.uncamarvy.com/Flamingos/flamingos.html and http://theflamingos.com/history-of-the-flamingos/.
The first stable lineup had the following order: Jake Carey (bass), Zeke Carey (second tenor), Johnny Carter (first tenor), Paul Wilson (baritone), and Sollie McElroy (lead). They recorded thirteen tracks on the Chance label. Thus, our first album will be called…
“Carried Away” (Recorded After January 28, Before December 24, 1953)
“Plan for Love” (Recorded After January 28, Before December 24, 1953)
SIDE B
“You Ain’t Ready” (Recorded After January 28, Before December 24, 1953)
“Golden Teardrops” (Recorded After January 28, Before December 24, 1953)
“Blues in a Letter” (Recorded December 24, 1953)
“September Song” (Recorded December 24, 1953)
“Jump Children” (Recorded December 24, 1953)
“Cross Over the Bridge” (Recorded February 17, 1954)
“Listen to My Plea” (Recorded February 17, 1954)
The quintet then went to Parrot, but for only eight recordings. Halfway through their stay, Sollie was replaced with a Nate Nelson. He is sometimes considered the best of the lead singers. The outfit next went to Checker. The first four of which will be used to make the second LP.
Around the same time, the Flamingos went to Decca and both Zeke Carey and Johnny Carter were drafted. The next recording lineup featured Tommy Hunt and Terry Johnson. Interestingly, Terry, who joined the act in 1956, is even today touring as the Flamingos, almost seventy years later! Tommy was touring as them as well in the 2010s, but I couldn’t find out if he’s still going, though he is alive. Due to the lack of Zeke, I’ve decided to declare this era not really the Flamingos. Seeing as Nate Nelson seemed to be the most emphasized member, I’ll call it…
Nate Nelson’s Flamingos Sing The Ladder Of Love And Ten More Cuts (1958) – YouTube
TRACKLISTING
SIDE A
“The Ladder Of Love” (Recorded April 19, 1957)
“That Love Is You” (Recorded April 19, 1957)
“Let’s Make Up” (Recorded April 19, 1957)
“Helpless” (Recorded August 15, 1957)
“My Faith In You” (Recorded August 15, 1957)
SIDE B
“Jerri-Lee” (Recorded August 15, 1957)
“Hey Now!” (Recorded August 15, 1957)
“Kiss-A-Me” (Recorded May 6, 1958)
“Where Mary Go” (Recorded May 6, 1958)
“Ever Since I Met Lucy” (Recorded May 6, 1958)
“The Rock And Roll March” (Recorded May 6, 1958)
The Decca era is one of the strongest “albums” here. The last change in labels that will be looked at is to End. These are some of the most acclaimed recordings the group did. This is also the era we started getting LPs. The first is called The Flamingos (1959). It was released by Checker and takes various recordings from various times and labels. While sources consider it their first proper album, I am demoting it to merely a compilation. However, afterwards we got four LPs that got the job done pretty nicely. Each album covers a recent and short timespan of recordings, though we have few recording dates. The albums are called Flamingo Serenade (1959), Flamingo Favorites (1960), Requestfully Yours (1960), and The Sound Of The Flamingos (1963). There appear to be only five non-album tracks before 1961, then eleven more strays from 1961-1964. I had the idea of taking some of those early strays and making them bonus tracks for the main albums, but I decided to pick the simpler option of just adding them to the beginning of my final album, though maybe it would be better to put them with other tracks recorded around the time they were? With or without those, it is still probably the strongest record despite the lineup changes, with the last tracks having a contemporary and catchy sound. It makes me suspect the later works by the group and its then former members are good, as the proper Flamingos were good all the way to the end.
This is a passion of mine and if one person likes what I do, I’ll feel honored. I like suggestions on what artist to cover next, so if you know of one you’d like me to look at, feel free to suggest ‘em!
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is known for a lot of things. On the very surface are the many quotable lines and big performances, which are both so fast paced that they arguably consume everything else at play in the story, such as the theme of attempting to grab power. The four principle characters all go for it at some point, with not all of them even being aware that they’re doing it. In the great tradition of classic American cinema, we get power in clothes, makeup, and boobs! Elizabeth Taylor is intentionally supposed to look older and dress casually, looking crotchety like she’s supposed to be, but also is extremely captivating, bringing an aura with how well her clothes fits her and how much character is in both the wardrobe and Taylor’s demeanor.
You are immediately hit with the intense loudness of the film. The two leads seem to be making a point to be as insufferable as possible and they frankly succeed. It is arguable if they are “realistic” due to just how unable they are to not throw out a deprecating quip. Those quips sure make the affair electrifying, but it adds a level of absurdity that probably is not desirable, like that they all want to be attention-grabbing to an audience. It is hard to see anyone as a real person, though one might feel the same way if they actually met someone like that in real life. There are few moments where we are supposed to feel for the two leads, but when they do the effect is jarring, especially when considering certain interpretations of the plot. They also seem to sometimes go for laughs, which maybe would work better on a stage, but not so much in this movie intended to be disturbing. “I am the Earth mother and you are all flops.”
The insults do serve the purpose of telling us a lot about the main couple. Martha, played by Elizabeth Taylor, often comes off as dead inside, with her behavior often driven by a desire to get focus or feeling, even from things that are really bad ideas. She even says she likes her husband’s anger. Taylor in turn seems to be making an effort to steal the scene every time she speaks. Her exaggerated and drawn out delivery, topped with repeating the same lines for emphasis is trying way too hard to get attention and to a degree numbs the audience to her performance. This works to compromise the character from reaching her full potential. Another problem with Martha is how she mostly only exists through the lens of her husband, with her behavior and backstory typically related to him in some way. This is most apparent when we’ll hear Martha speaking ill of her husband and we’re watching his reactions, showing that’s what is important.
Richard Burton as George does fall into some of the trappings that Taylor does, but includes some minor, but telling mannerisms that are quite fascinating. He also changes much more significantly than Martha. In the beginning, he almost comes off as a victim to Martha’s cruelty, though it later becomes apparent that’s not the case. Note how he also treats each character differently. Nick, played by George Segal, he seems to relate to and respect in some ways, but can also seem to play around with his emotions. Honey, played by Sandy Dennis, on the other hand is basically disregarded. Martha by contrast is never ignored by him. He often tries to project intelligence, unlike Martha.
The movie is characterized by a lot of very amusing stories about the characters’ pasts. For the sake of a tighter narrative, some probably should have been cut, especially considering how simple the ending is, in contrast to the “big” film. The stories do go to serve one theme of the movie, essentially wishing to constantly contort reality to what you would like it to be. Another consequence of this “telling stories” approach is that the picture becomes a bit predictable. You know you’re going to hear Martha say something about George, then George will about her. You also know how they’re going to deliver the information. Martha is brassy, while George acts like he’s sophisticated. The focal point of the film is the masculinity and other insecurities of George. One example of him failing to be what he wants is when he can’t get Martha to get the door or stop speaking ill of him. He might want to stay with her because despite Martha being very bombastic, she hasn’t left him. Martha often makes the men feel emasculated with her constant yelling and certain comments.
The cinematography filled with angles and consuming darkness work to make the house feel small and claustrophobic, more like a prison cell. Most of the movie lacking a score adds to this, as do the bits of quick editing, like when we sharp jump from the leads in the car to Honey humming and spinning in a circle. Another particular striking moment is Martha wandering around in the dark, with the camera keeping a large distance from her. The actors also sell how uncomfortable this situation is, even with the limitations. One such limitation is the simple fact that Taylor looks gorgeous and not that old, which takes away from the desired effect of her being past her prime. Burton also looks and is young, though is slightly more convincing as a middle-aged person. It’s even shown in the film that Taylor is desirable to others. Nick and Honey are audience surrogates in the beginning, before things get intense. Thus, the message may be that average people can end up how they do. In fact, Nick is not named in the film and “Honey” may just be a nickname.
SPOILERS
George appears willing to fight pointless battles just to keep Martha and others under his thumb. When George and Nick talk, especially outside, George appears to be trying to “win over” Nick, making him relate to him. His goal in this is unclear, but based on how empty his life is shown to be, perhaps he wants to keep himself busy or have a pawn to use against Martha? Earlier on, he argued with Nick about any random topic, probably to get him on edge for amusement, though you’d think this would make Nick like him less. Maybe the reason why is because things like Honey throwing up are embarrassing for Nick, so he feels a need to be accommodating to George, so as not to perform a social faux pa? The two men then have a nice enough conversation where they’re relating over their issues with their wives. For a time, Nick appears to get along with George.
A more likely theory is that while he does want to control others, George can’t resist insulting people he feels are beneath him due to his desire to have power. Based on his arguments with Martha, he clearly has basically no control. He probably feels especially threatened by Nick, so the young man doesn’t deserve respect as he thinks his work will lead to genes being rearranged, wherein “everyone will be like everyone else”. Perhaps he believes he is owed control over others as a man and doesn’t want to see a world where he is not afforded that? Thus, he says he is threatened. There’s one scene where he refuses to light Martha’s cigarettes, but says he will do things wherein he would be a heroic and level headed support to a woman. Another notable moment is when he’s embarrassed by Martha talking about times she had dominated over him. In turn, he feels a need to project confidence and do bold things because he can, like pretending to shoot Martha. Later, Martha insults Nick’s sexual performance, so she may have done the same with George.
When Nick and Honey are more receptive, they’re drinking. Such drinking is encouraged by George, possibly because it makes them more likely to do stupid things or at least just go along with him. One great moment is when we get a closeup on George’s hands as he fills Nick’s glass before the latter reveals personal information that will later be used against him. If his goal is to gain a sense of power, then more support will help his case. Admittedly, he’s not very good at this, with everyone scared of him by the end. In fact, if any new alliances were made, it would probably be between Honey and Martha. Honey gets taken more and more into what could be called the “fun part” of George and Martha, like when she yells “Violence!” and other quips. She probably likes that Martha is louder and more bold than what is expected of a woman, while Nick seems concerned about her not filling the expected womanly role in a marriage.
Another motif of the film is the battle between these women who both don’t have children and have a desire to be “dominating”, while the men are more submissive and are insecure about that. The messiness of the older couple’s house signifies Martha “failing” to be a housewife. Honey initially seems reserved, but is opened up by the events of the narrative. Honey seems to be blamed for stressing her marriage by not wanting children, as we get a large view of Nick’s distress over feeling forced to be with and accept her, as if that is something a woman just should do and you are not doing your womanly duty by not having them. Note how little Honey is delved into, like she’s just here for the others and thus her perspective shouldn’t be seriously considered. Martha’s sadness over not having children could be interpreted as the message of the film being that being childless devalues people, at least women. The scene of a lullaby-esque instrumental playing over Martha walking around and yelling for George plays into this, as if through it all she wants is to be in her relationship and without it she’s just aimless in life.
The ending seems like something intended for those that either would not understand the picture or want what could maybe be considered a happy ending. The revelation of the leads’ son being non-existent does not tell us much that we don’t already know, that these characters are empty and need something to fill their lives. That was already very evident based on their behavior. We have also already seen George’s desperation to do something that will really hurt Martha. Their son’s existence in the story only serves to be an “explanation” of why they’re so mean and also possibly to give some commentary that it is crushing to not be a parent, which might be a bit of a stretch or at least an outdated view.
While George lightly saying his son died represents the metaphorical death of their lie, the use of the term is clearly chosen for dramatic reasons, with Burton feeling like he is acting to a crowded theater, instead of like how a real person might say it. The acting is pushing so much to be dramatic. This ending perfectly describes why George has so few friends or support, he’s simply a very apparent nutter, though it’s hard to believe he hasn’t been kicked to the curb if he’s going to do things like this, at least from a “logical” point of view. However, right before we close out, George shows a bit of empathy for Martha, which according to some means he might become nicer. Far too little is done to suggest this and it would also be an unsatisfying ending due to how the character was written. His reforming is not strongly stated or implied, so it is easier to believe he hasn’t changed and is only pretending, so Martha can be hurt later.
This ending, that people like this essentially only survive by feeding off others, is more consistent and thought provoking than “Martha crying fixes their toxicity”, especially when considering that the two not distracting each other with attacks and the other’s presence would mean confronting their own insecurities. This is supported by scenes like Martha and George bonding by picking on Nick, calling him a houseboy. They clearly don’t know how to manage not playing mind games on another, at least with George. Otherwise, why would they stay together? Martha even says George makes her happy. Earlier outside the danceroom, Martha shows some awareness of their pathetic situation, same with when she says she is afraid of Virginia Woolf, representing her fear of facing reality. Thus, George here is really shown to have some level of control. Martha doesn’t have anything else to turn to. Even if she did make friends with Honey for a time, she and Nick leave at the end disgusted. No matter how manipulative George is, he seems constantly willing to put up with her, so she can metaphorically fight her demons through him. Still, even if George has power over her, he of course doesn’t have any real power, punctuated by how when he makes Martha cry at the end, everyone only listens because he’s basically forced them to, with Honey so drunk as to be out of tune with what’s going on. Yet, that all still may give him some personal satisfaction. The real edge of the film comes from the fact that while George and Martha may have succeeded in either having control and/or companionship, that’s basically doomed them based on their circumstances.
OVERVIEW
Despite how overly theatrical the dialogue and performances are, you can’t deny how interesting they are regardless. Part of the fun of this affair is wondering what’s being left unsaid, despite the fact that there are quite a few confessions that do tell us who’s thinking what. “Truth and illusion” is a line in the picture. Perhaps not taking the film at face value and instead as some sort of hyperbolic representation of its themes would make it work better? Still, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? does indeed answer the question in the title.
See for Richard Burton riding a swing and more importantly Elizabeth Taylor eating a chicken wing.
The Filme Diary 