Ernst Lubitsch and his touch of brilliance
Disclaimer: This post is better understood after watching the following movies of Ernst Lubitsch as it is structured around scenes from them.
Now the main post…
Movies are in the business of surprising the viewer or even sometimes shocking them. Of course, some instill a sense of something in you. That mysterious something is what makes the movie special. But in the end, every writer tries to be unpredictable. Some outrageous unforeseeable moments in films are referred to as having Lubitsch’s touch. And one must wonder why such a name? Well unless you see the works of the man himself, Ernst Lubitsch, you should not use it. Because he is the benchmark for writing what you can proclaim to be the true embodiment of unpredictability, comedies. But he is a little more than his renowned touch.
Old movies are easily repulsive or even prosaic. The explanation for such aversion is not an enigma. The primary reason for such disliking is you are not aware of the technical and other limits the writers and directors were working with those days. Moreover, knowledge about the historical time frame the movie is fixed in is an absolute necessity. Briefly put, watching an old movie without any biases mentioned above needs external work without which it is easy to fall into the trap.
Despite my personal opinion being that Lubitsch hovers over these pesky baits, it would be a fanatic prejudice to assert that Lubitsch is an exception. To be more interesting, I think these limitations gave his scenes a better subtext, most of which being naughty innuendos.
So firstly, let us look at something which is affected by not exactly the limitations of a particular timeline but something mandatory for filmmakers to satisfy for the sake of placating the masses. Retrospectively all old films may be considered niche but at one time they were the only form of entertainment for many and a novel attraction one wanted to get into. Moreover, financial constrictions necessitated and on many occasions dictated the length of the screenplay and thus a scene (now other more decadent dictators rule over films of the masses).
So Lubitsch needed to say a lot in a short time. This is where his montages exude brilliance. You can also include many subtle dialogues or obscure actions of the characters in this section of discussion as that also gives the viewer an idea of the plot and its characters. But most important is how he constricts time that is sprawled over weeks or months.
Take the movie Trouble in Paradise. He has to establish two points here. The relationship between the con man and his victim. The second point here is not something separate. It is the nature of the relationship which cannot be explicit for many reasons but is not limited to time. The relationship was dominated by him and it had a sensual flavor to it. Lubitsch establishes this in a few scenes cut one after the other where only affirmations and negatives are used. Rollback a few minutes and you can see he also used the same trick to establish how the victim has her own two smitten admirers who are being led astray by her. That montage may also be considered a precursor in setting up character dynamics.
Motifs or running jokes are cornerstones of some well-known films. Lubitsch takes it and utilizes the device in his way. In the movie The Shop Around The Corner, the musical cigarette box is one of those recurring objects that propel the narration forward. But in one particular scene, he uses it in a place that you would least expect but it turns out to be the most satisfying application. But the takeaway is not that he has utilized this adeptly but the variety in its usage.
This can be observed in the movie To be or Not to be. He has more than one motif or running joke here. All of those are positioned in the place you would least expect. From the title to Hitler, almost everything is a recurring joke here. It is almost as if he constructed the entire film around running gags. Astonishingly, the screenplay is structured in such a way that even the characters are birthed and nurtured using these gags. I am not going to disseminate disinformation that this is how Lubitsch operates but in this particular movie, he has modeled a comedy movie for posterity. If you are planning to make a film of this genre, you need to take a leaf out of this film. Because even in the purported solemn sequences you have the running gags. It may beg the question that do you have to abandon seriousness in pursuit of hilarity. I don’t think that’s the case here. Hitler was a megalomaniac who terrorized the world. You ameliorate some of the fear and intimidation not by making sad or tear-filled films but by ridiculing and making a joke out of the demon. This mockery continues throughout his films, heavily concentrated on dialogues.
This is probably where Lubitsch’s films are strong. Making a mockery of the seriousness. The most striking example is from the film Ninotchka where he upends a military execution scene. It is a depressing dilemma for the heroine and cruel ramifications may be afoot. But in that particular moment, Lubitsch subverts all those dangers and makes it cinematic brilliance.
Now for the dialogues. Writing dialogues is an art in itself. Movie making is something but dialogue writing is something else entirely. It is a make-or-break element of a movie. A piece of bad music, bad cinematography, or even bad acting to an extent will not kill a film provided dialogues are on point. But those dialogues cannot be independent of the movie. What the characters utter depends upon multifarious factors. Two primary governing variables for that matter are the general mood of the film and the pacing of the particular scene. As we have already established, Lubitsch is a master at subverting. But here is a catch. Subversion of an intense scene into an amusing one or vice versa can backfire in glorious ways. It could potentially break the film itself. That said, absolutely golden comedy scenes or sequences treaded this precarious position while intelligently shocking the audience into a burst of laughter. This is what Lubitsch does better than almost anyone, at least from his time.
His dialogues are never out of place. By this, I mean the coherence with and to the scene and movie is perfect. At the same time, the dramatic fleeting shift in the words diminishes the tension intensely or reverses the target of the conversation. Even more critical to this is the staging of the scene. Comedy is ultimately all about timing. Sometimes you have to hold it in a little longer and elevate the burning tension and some other times you have to be rapid in exchanging words between the characters while also dealing with actions and reactions happening simultaneously in the fore and background.
One of the prime examples of staging occurs in how Lubitsch establishes the relationship between Gaston ( Herbert Marshall) and Madame Colet ( Kay Francis) as well as Gaston and Lily ( Miriam Hopkins). Regarding the former, to be discreet about the intimacy he employs various visual cues, circumventing the codes of the studios back then. For the latter relationship, given it is one made out of scheming and thievery but a loving one nevertheless, Lubitsch starts them out as two strangers with sketchy intentions and then upends it to reveal they are in love. This again is aptly used in another portion of the movie, carried forward as the signifier of their love.
Ernst Lubitsch is not an intense filmmaker. His characters are not unhinged or morally corrupted. They are all people with desires and passions, portrayed not as typical villains or heroes but a part of the comedy cog, without whom the laughter wheel won’t spin. But he must not be spurned away citing the lack of seriousness. There are only a few filmmakers who understand comedy like him and how to stage it. He shows you how seriousness could be sneaked into comedy and how the amusement is one slip away from misery or fear. I understand comedy has grown a lot since his time, but rarely do you see characters like one in his movies. Just because it is a movie filled with jokes, he does not abandon the screenplay. An example concerning this is the movie The Shop Around The Corner. Despite the jokes and intensity in it, the characters are sketched so minutely with subtle dialogues issuing a call back later. The hypocrisy of the heroine or the conniving flattery of the promiscuous staff of the Matuchek Company. Lubitsch should be studied because he is proof that you don’t need to abandon one element from a movie to satisfy how it is advertised. He is what I would call an efficiently optimal filmmaker with a frequent burst of extraordinaire.
Do watch his movies and make him go viral. He deserves it, at least as a service for the art of filmmaking.
Originally published at http://thevicariousview.wordpress.com on May 15, 2022.
