Raw L. The Ridley Scott Encyclopedia

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Sim) receives an invitation to meet his own death at ten

o’clock the next day. Adam traces the source of this invitation

to the Gentlewoman’s Charity League, a ladies’ club dedicated

to peace and nuclear disarmament. Every new member—all

of them married to prominent politicians—undergoes an

initiation ceremony, during which they are hypnotized. They

subsequently poison their husbands upon receiving the

appropriate stimulus by means of a telephone call. Although

ostensibly a ladies’ club, the brains behind the operation is

the butler, Randolph (JOHN CARSON), who has been con-

tracted by the Communists to dispose of the politicians and

thereby undermine public confidence in western govern-

ments. The three women in charge of the club, Faith, Hope,

and Charity (Amanda Bayntun, Sheila Grant, Lucy Griffiths)

eventually discover that Randolph has duped them. Adam

comes to the rescue by invading the club, rescuing Georgina

and ensuring that no further harm will come to the hapless

members. Randolph meets his death in a similar way as the

unfortunate politicians, as Hope poisons him.

As with all episodes of Adam Adamant Lives! “The League

of Uncharitable Ladies” was shot very quickly in the studios

with occasional filmed inserts. Directors had very little time to

plan set-ups; rather, they relied on the kind of techniques—

close-ups, two-shots and brief pans—developed in the low-

budget B-movies of previous decades (most of which were

equally rapidly filmed). In spite of such limitations, Ridley

Scott manages to create some memorable sequences. At the

beginning, when Harry is poisoned, Scott includes several

point-of-view shots, as the camera swirls around and around

in circles, suggesting Harry’s gradual loss of consciousness.

Scott achieves a similar effect later on, when Jarrot meets a

similar fate. The camera zooms towards Mrs. Jarrot’s (Joan

Paton’s) face—so close, in fact, that the image becomes

blurred—and then the screen momentarily fades to black.

Scott makes ingenious use of his London location.

Adam travels from his house to the club in his trademark

Mini-Cooper (registration number AA 1000); the landmarks

flash by in a series of rapid shots—Horse Guards Parade,

Piccadilly Circus—clearly indicating that Adam enjoys driv-

ing fast CARS around the streets. Such images also suggest

that “Swinging London” of 1966 is a place where life pro-

ceeds at a breathless pace.

Certain themes are raised in “The League of Unchari-

table Ladies” that crop up in Scott’s feature films. The mem-

bers of the ladies’ club—including Georgina—are reduced

to robots which can be made to believe and do anything

Randolph wishes. (Faith, Hope, and Charity believe they are

fighting for world peace and disarmament.) He admits that

he can “implant” suggestions in their minds, which can be

subsequently stimulated by means of a telephone call. This

notion of “implanting” is taken to a horrific extreme in

ALIEN, where the alien implants itself in Kane’s (JOHN

HURT’s) body. This issue of controlling people’s minds is

especially significant in BLADE RUNNER: we never really

know whether the central character Deckard (HARRISON

FORD) is a REPLICANT or not.

“The League of Uncharitable Ladies” makes some sig-

nificant points about gender construction. As an Edwardian

gentleman, Adam firmly believes that women should be seen

and not heard; as in other episodes of the series, he urges

Georgina to stay at home and not involve herself in poten-

tially dangerous situations. The same also applies to Mrs.

Jarrott, who is expected to fulfill her role as housewife and

not worry about her husband’s business affairs. However,

this episode shows several women challenging such stereo-

types. Georgina resolutely refuses to heed Adam’s advice,

while Randolph’s sidekick Prudence (Geraldine Moffat) is a

strong-willed personality employing a wide range of strate-

gies to bring men—including Adam—under her control.

Moreover, the club members are transformed from passive

figures into murderesses. As in Alien, Scott uses the fantasy

framework to explore issues of femininity. In the final scene,

however, the episode reveals a failure of nerve, as the male

characters reassert their dominant roles. Randolph dismisses

Charity (and her fellow club members) as misguided old

maids for daring to challenge his authority. Meanwhile

Georgina is left to run after Adam, crying “Wait for me!” In

spite of her aspirations, she will always remain his sidekick.

Critical reaction to the series on its premiere in 1966

was mixed, to say the least. The most charitable view was

expressed by the Sunday Times, which described it as “worth

watching,” even if it seemed like a poor imitation of The

Avengers. For a time the series featured as a cartoon strip in

the British boys’ comic Hotspur; a TV annual, featuring sto-

ries based on the series, appeared later in the year. Brian J.

Robb’s 2002 survey of Ridley Scott’s career compliments the

director on his use of “fluid movement” and “shaky, hand-

held techniques” in “The League of Uncharitable Ladies,” but

suggests that his innovations were compromised by the need

to “get the story told and concluded.” James Chapman’s

longer study of the series claims that “the unusual camera

angles and occasional blurring of focus” had a disconcert-

ing effect on viewers, “that creates a slightly unworldly feel.”

He believes that the series had a significant influence on later

time-travel adventures—for example, the Austin Powers tril-

ogy, where the eponymous hero was once again faced with

the difficulty of living out of his own time.

References

“Adam Adamant Lives!” Sunday Times, 26 June 1966, 36; James

Chapman, Saints and Avengers: British Adventure Series of the 1960s

(London and New York: I. B. Tauris Publishers, 2002), 140, 155;

Brian J. Robb, Ridley Scott: The Pocket Essentials (Harpenden, UK:

Pocket Essentials, 2002), 17.

200

■

“THE LEAGUE OF UNCHARITABLE LADIES”

LEGEND

US/GB 1985 r/t 89 min (original US release), 94 min (Euro-

pean release) col. Production Companies: Embassy Interna-

tional Pictures, Legend Production Company, Twentieth

Century-Fox and Universal Pictures. Producers:Arnon

Milchan and Tim Hampton. Director: Ridley Scott. Writer:

William Hjortsberg. Director of Photography: Alex Thomson.

Production Designer: Assheton Gorton. Music: Jerry Goldsmith

and Tangerine Dream. Cast: Tom Cruise (Jack), Mia Sara

(Princess Lily), Tim Curry (Darkness), David Bennent (Hon-

eythorn Gump), Alice Playten (Blix), Billy Barty (Screwball),

Cork Hubbert (Brown Tom), Peter O’Farrell (Pox), Robert

Picardo (Meg Mucklebones), Annabelle Lanyon (Oona).

The troubled production history of this film has been

recounted by PAUL M. SAMMON and Geoffrey M. Wright

in his online article “Unnecessary Destruction.”“The setting

for Legend is timeless ...It is not a film of the future, or of

the past. It is not even a story of now. The conflict between

darkness has been with us since the creation . . . and will

remain with us through eternity.” So said Ridley Scott in the

production notes to his fourth film, the genesis of which

came in the early 1980s, when the director expressed a wish

to produce a medieval fantasy that “would lie somewhere

between Cocteau’s LA BELLE ET LA BE

TE (1946) ...and

the Hollywood version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream

(1935).” Scott told Sammon that he wanted to make some-

thing “a little lighter” after BLADE RUNNER and ALIEN—

something that “children and everybody else could go to.”

He read a book called Symbiography (1973), written by

WILLIAM HJORTSBERG, a poet and novelist; and commis-

sioned him to write a screenplay tentatively called “Legend

of Darkness.”

According to James Olsen, the script went through fifteen

rewrites before Scott was satisfied, involving not only the

writer but other creative talents such as storyboard artist Mar-

tin Asbury. Financing was provided by Universal Pictures and

Twentieth Century-Fox; under the terms of the agreement,

Universal retained Legend’s North American distribution

rights, while Fox held the overseas rights (excluding those of

the United Kingdom). The budget was set at $25 million.

Shooting took place at Pinewood Studios in England.

The entire forest setting was built by designer ASSHETON

GORTON on the studio’s largest stage (also used for the

James Bond films); its total dimensions stretched to

2,721,600 cubic feet. Filming lasted twenty-one weeks; and

was interrupted at the end by a huge fire on 27 June 1984

when the entire stage burned to the ground, taking the for-

est set along with it. Ridley Scott explained to Sammon that

his “biggest headache was that after the fire I still had three

weeks of Forest filming left to do, and no Forest left to do it.

But Assheton Gorton had got ahead in building his other

sets, so we were able to make those work overtime.”

Legend’s bad luck continued into its preview phase in

Orange County, California, where audiences apparently

rejected the film outright. Scott himself claimed in a 2002

documentary “The Making of Legend” that some of them

were under the influence of hard drugs during the perfor-

mance. When the time came to release the film in the United

States, Sidney Sheinberg, the president of MCA, the parent

company of Universal Studios at that time, decided that Leg-

end needed some work to make it “better”—in other words,

more marketable. Scott worked with Sheinberg to re-edit the

film to emphasize the action elements and love story over

the larger issue of saving the world.

Legend was slated to be released in American theaters in

June 1985, but Universal canceled and rescheduled the date

for November 1985. At this time the film was released in

Great Britain, with a score by JERRY GOLDSMITH and a

running time of ninety-four minutes. The producers had

high hopes for the film, not only as a piece of entertainment,

but as an educational resource. A study guide was prepared

by Ian Wall for high school students, focusing both on the

film’s structural elements and on themes such as good vs.

evil or heroes and heroines. Reviewers expressed qualified

enthusiasm: Alexander Walker of the Evening Standard

called the film “a triumph of decorative form over thinness

of substance,” while David Castell of the Sunday Telegraph

felt that “a troubled production” had found “the happiest of

endings.” A Sunday Times profile, published to accompany

the film’s opening, congratulated Scott on his ability to “tai-

lor a film to suit a target audience.” However, the film failed

to attract substantial audiences, so Universal postponed the

American opening once again. The film was reduced to

eighty-nine minutes and the Goldsmith score replaced by a

more rock-oriented score from TANGERINE DREAM. One

associate of Scott’s was quoted by Pat H. Broeske as saying,

“Perhaps American teenagers don’t have imaginations. They

have had difficulty relating to our picture ...I think it’s sad

that they find it so difficult to enter a world of fairies and

elves and all.” Evidently there was no target audience in the

United States as there had been in Great Britain.

By May 1986 Universal had still not released the film, in

the belief that audiences would not accept TOM CRUISE’s

long hair. When Cruise made Legend, he was not yet a star;

but by early 1986 he had shot to fame with TOP GUN.

Nonetheless the spring release of Legend went ahead as

planned, the eighty-nine-minute version which Scott

described to Alan Jones as “much simpler,” designed for

audiences brought up on “sub-par montages all day long

which makes them impatient ...It’s a sad fact oflife but you

are obliged to take note of that. You would be a fool not to.”

Sadly, the new version sank without trace, critics largely dis-

missing it as empty and characterless with a weak storyline.

Vincent Canby of the New York Times described it thus: “[A]

LEGEND

■

201

slapdash amalgam of Old Testament, King Arthur, ‘The Lord

of the Rings,’ and any number of comic books ...Mr.Cruise

goes through all this nonsense gamely, as if it were an initi-

ation into a fraternity he wants very much to join.” Richard

Corliss of Time magazine called the film “as simple as a bed-

time tale.” The British sci-fi fanzine Starburst expressed dis-

appointment at the film from a director from whom they

expected “nothing short of perfection in terms of original-

ity and style ...There are no actors in his film with any par-

ticular presence on the screen, so that the whole thing

appears lop-sided in favour of the baddies, and no one gives

a cuss who rescues the unicorns.”

Box-office returns were equally disappointing, with only

$4.2 million taken on the film’s opening weekend (its total

cost eventually spiraled to $30 million). Nonetheless the film

received an Oscar nomination for Best Make-Up Design (for

ROB BOTTIN), as well as three BAFTA nominations

(British Academy of Film and Television Arts) for Best Cos-

tume Design, Best Make-Up Artist and Best Special Visual

Effects (for NICK ALLDER).

In March 1989, Universal re-edited the film for syndi-

cated television on its “Universal Debut Network”—a

slightly extended version of the original theatrical release

with the Tangerine Dream score. In March 1990, the film

was released on laserdisc in Japan with the Goldsmith score

and a running time of ninety-one minutes. As a result, per-

haps, of the film’s growing cult status, Scott collaborated

with his long-term video producer CHARLES DE

LAUZIRIKA to produce an “Ultimate Edition” DVD of Leg-

end, with a new 113-minute LEGEND: THE DIRECTOR’S

CUT plus deleted scenes and interviews with some of the

production’s main personalities. Universal released this DVD

on 21 May 2002.

The finished version of the film draws on diverse

sources, combining elements of classical European folktales

(such as those collected by the BROTHERS GRIMM) and

Judeo-Christian myth. But Legend is undoubtedly a fairy

tale. The film contains several elements characteristic of the

genre, such as fairy folk like Brown Tom (CORK HUB-

BERT), Screwball (BILLY BARTY), and Gump (DAVID

BENNENT), as well as certain plot conventions. There is

also the convention of showing Jack as incorruptible

throughout: clearly, resilience is a characteristic of CHILD-

HOOD. However, there is a thread of evil running through-

out the film which sets it apart from other fairy tales of

princesses and heroes and culminates in the final battle

between good and evil. The film establishes a balance

between the sinister and the sentimental by means of cine-

matic resources—lighting, sound, set design, montage, and

costume. Gorton’s forest setting offers the opportunity to

contrast the beauty of the green landscape with a dark, omi-

nous uncertainty. On the other hand, Scott deliberately

draws upon generic stereotypes to suggest that evil—as per-

sonified by Darkness (TIM CURRY)—is more exciting than

good. Lily (MIA SARA) sings to the unicorns, a moment

which according to Matthew Aitken seems “so terribly

clichéd that Scott causes the ‘beauty’ of the scene to lapse

into a somewhat removed sensibility.” By contrast, Darkness

embodies the classic form of Satan, an angel of death who

never goes away. Even though Jack destroys him at the end,

Darkness’s words resonate throughout the film: “You think

you have won. What is light without dark? I am a part of you

all. You can never defeat me. We [all human beings] are

brothers eternal.”

As with Blade Runner, Legend seems to have been influ-

enced by the work of JOHN MILTON, especially Paradise

Lost. Darkness’s lair resembles a hell on earth, with its end-

less passages, dungeons, and ever-present fire that threatens

to engulf Jack and his companions as they try to recover the

unicorn. Darkness seduces Lily and forces her into a macabre

dance of death with a bewitched gown: this empty garment

(animated by Darkness) chills the girl’s heart, after magically

wrapping itself around her body. When the dance finishes,

Lily has been transformed into a diabolic figure complete

with black lip-gloss. This transformation of the heroine from

an innocent into a monstrous-female reveals Scott’s concern

with the issue of FEMINISM. Milton’s work also influences

the film’s basic premise, as Darkness plots his revenge against

humankind by depriving the world of natural light. This

aspect of the film was emphasized in the trailer for the 1985

American release, which had Darkness exclaiming “There can

be no heaven without hell, no light without . . . me!!” accom-

panied by the tagline, “There may never be another dawn.”

The idea of an evil genius threatening to take over the world

crops up in Scott’s earlier work—for example, “THE

LEAGUE OF UNCHARITABLE LADIES.”

Lily’s transgressive act of touching the unicorns—even

though Jack expressly forbids her—not only invests Legend

with further Biblical echoes, but also ushers in a new ice age

where the world freezes over and everything is laid to waste.

Even the music box in Nell’s (Tina Martin’s) cottage, which

once played a merry tune while showing a young courting

couple, now only plays discordant notes. Gump observes

quite accurately that Lily has “upset the order of the uni-

verse.” The barren landscape of the frozen forest recalls the

deserted planet visited by the crew in Alien, while the notion

of a world in turmoil is evoked in the DYSTOPIA that is Los

Angeles in BLADE RUNNER. The settings might be differ-

ent, but the worlds are equally hellish. Scott used the same

unicorn shots in both Legend and BLADE RUNNER: THE

DIRECTOR’S CUT (1992).

Other shots in Legend echo Blade Runner, even though

they are used differently. A rising sun appears at the end of

Legend, signaling the dawn of a new day and the close of

202

■

LEGEND

Darkness’s reign of terror. In Blade Runner the same shot

appears as a backdrop to Tyrell’s (JOE TURKEL’s) office,

when Deckard (HARRISON FORD) encounters Rachael

(SEAN YOUNG) for the first time. In this film the sunlight is

contrasted with the artificiality of Tyrell’s world and the

people living in it. Sunlight regularly appears in Scott’s com-

mercials to signify an ideal world, notably in the 1970s com-

mercial for RADIANT WASHING POWDER.

Critical material on Legend has been scanty at best

since the film’s original release in 1985. The FAQ website

contains essays on “The Remnants of a Masterpiece” as well

as a guide to the extra footage in Legend: The Director’s Cut,

a history of the Legend DVD, a guide to the four available

versions of the film (American release, European release,

the Universal television version and the Director’s Cut), and

essays on “What’s Wrong with the Picture” and “The Lost

Films of Ridley Scott.” Paul M. Sammon’s Ridley Scott Close-

Up contains an essay on the film, talking about its troubled

production history but containing minimal analysis.

Richard A. Schwartz’s analysis in The Films of Ridley Scott

concentrates on “the interconnectedness of good and evil,”

something “consistent with ancient Greek mythology, East-

ern philosophy, and modern notions of a universe built on

paradox and complementarity rather than Christianity.”

Mikel J. Koven’s essay “Folklore Studies and Popular Film

and Television” surveys the existing popular literature on

the topic, and some of the films (Legend included) that take

up folklore topics. Juliette Wood’s “Filming Fairies” quotes

a reviewer who described the film as “cloyingly self-con-

scious” and concludes that “the film did not live up to

expectations” (the author does not define exactly what such

expectations are). Carole Auroet’s “Legend de Ridley Scott:

Un Patchwork Culturel,” an essay (in French) in Contes et

Legends à L’écran tries to rehabilitate the film by situating it

in the tradition of European folklore, Scott having drawn

on various traditions in an attempt to revitalize them for

contemporary filmgoers.

More general essays covering the themes explored by

Legend include Kerstin Westerlund-Shands’s “Female Fatal-

ity in the Movies” (1993). Arthur Lindley situates Legend in

the context of medieval films, with a more detailed analysis

of KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.

References

Matthew Aitken, “Legend: Ridley Scott (The Remnants of a Mas-

terpiece?),” Legend: Frequently Asked Questions, www.figmentfly

.com/legend/different4i.html (accessed 25 April 2008); Carole

Aurouet,“Legend de Ridley Scott: Un Patchwork Culturel,” in Con-

tes et Légendes a L’écran, Cinem-Action Condé-sur-Noireau, Cin-

emAction no.116 (Paris: Corlet Librarie 2005): 218–27; Pat H.

Broeske,“The Late, Late Show,” Stills 24 (February 1986): 13; Gor-

don Burn, “Daring to Be Cute,” Sunday Times, 24 November 1985,

56; Vincent Canby, “The Screen: Ridley Scott’s ‘Legend,’” New York

Times, 18 April 1986, C2; David Castell, “Legend,” Sunday Telegraph

(London), 1 December 1985, 14; Richard Corliss,“Legend,” Time,

12 May 1986, 98; “It’s Only a Movie,” Starburst 8, no.6 (February

1986): 39; Mikel J. Koven, “Folklore Studies and Popular Films on

Television: A Necessary Critical Survey,” Journal of American Folk-

lore, Spring 2003, 176–95; Arthur Lindley, “Once, Present and

Future Kings: Kingdom of Heaven and the Multitemporality of

Medieval Film,” in Race, Class and Gender in Medieval Cinema,ed.

Lynn T. Ramey and Tison Pugh (New York: Palgrave Macmillan

2007), 16–29; Sean Murphy, “History of the Legend DVD,” www

.figmentfly.com/legend.different4k.html (accessed 25 April 2008);

James Olsen,“Script Drawing,” Starburst 8, no.3 (November 1985):

18–23; Paul M. Sammon, Ridley Scott Close-Up: The Making of His

Movies (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 1999), 76–85; Richard

A. Schwartz, The Films of Ridley Scott (Westport, CT: Praeger Pub-

lishers, 2001), 57; Ridley Scott, interviewed in Alan Jones, “Legend,”

Cinefantastique 15, no.5 (January 1986): 27; Ridley Scott, inter-

viewed in “The Making of Legend” (2002 documentary directed by

J. M. Kenny) included on Legend: The Ultimate DVD (Los Angeles:

Universal Studios, 2002); Ridley Scott, Production Notes on Leg-

end: The Ultimate DVD (Los Angeles: Universal Studios, 2002);

Alexander Walker, “Legend,” Evening Standard, 27 August 1985, 22;

Ian Wall, Ridley Scott’s Legend: A Study Guide (London, Twentieth

Century-Fox Film Co. Ltd., 1985); Kerstin Westerlund-Shands,

“Female Fatality in the Movies,” Moderna Sprak 87, no.2 (1993):

113–20; “What are the Differences Between the Four Confirmed

Versions of Legend?” www.figmentfly.com/legend/different3.html

(accessed 25 April 2008); “What is the Extra Footage in the Legend

Director’s Cut?” www.figmentfly.com/legend/different4c.html

(accessed 25 April 2008); Juliette Wood, “Filming Fairies: Popular

Film, Audience Response and Meaning in Contemporary Fairy

Lore,” Folklore 117 (December 2006): 279–96; Geoff Wright, “Leg-

end: What’s Wrong with the Picture?” www.figmentfly.com/legend/

different4a.html (accessed 25 April 2008); Geoffrey M. Wright,

“Unnecessary Destruction: The Lost Films of Ridley Scott,” Legend:

Frequently Asked Questions, www.figmentfly.com/legend/different4j

.html (accessed 25 April 2008).

Bibliography

James Clarke, Ridley Scott (London: Virgin Books Ltd., 2002),

83–97; Brian J. Robb, Ridley Scott (Harpenden: Pocket Essentials,

2002), 41–48.

LEGEND: THE DIRECTOR’S CUT

GB/US 2002 r/t 113 min col.

This version (restored by CHARLES DE LAUZIRIKA)

reconstructed the film in as close a form as possible to the orig-

inal version, produced prior to the cuts forced on Scott by Uni-

versal Pictures in 1985. It allows for greater character

development, accompanied by the JERRY GOLDSMITH

score. There is much more emphasis on setting—for example,

LEGEND

: THE DIRECTOR’S CUT

■

203

extra shots of the forest landscape and a greater focus on the

sounds of the birds in the trees. Lily (MIA SARA) sings sev-

eral new songs reflecting her state of mind at various points

in the action; one of these she uses to attract, and subse-

quently calm, a unicorn. There is one noticeable break in the

action (occasioned by a lack of suitable footage) when Lily

escapes from Blix (ALICE PLAYTEN) and Brown Tom

(CORK HUBBERT) tries to stand up to the goblins’ arrows.

The plot centers more on Jack’s (TOM CRUISE’S) need

to prove himself by rescuing Lily and destroying Darkness

(TIM CURRY). Every obstacle he encounters becomes a test

of his ability; rather like Hercules, he has to overcome a vari-

ety of perils. In his fight with Meg Mucklebones (ROBERT

PICARDO) Jack has firstly to distract her by using his shield

as a mirror while he fumbles with his sword. When he cuts

off her head, his line “I did it!” makes more sense than in the

1985 version, as he nearly loses his life in the process. Later

on, in a distinct allusion to the folktale “Jack the Giant-

Killer,” Jack is shown vanquishing Blunder (Kiran Shah),

much to his companions’ delight. Jack’s final test—kissing

Lily and rescuing her from the spell imposed on her by

Darkness—is described thus by Gump (DAVID BEN-

NENT): “Look what we’ve been through. Look where we

are. It is the greatest lesson we have learned. Only you can

solve this riddle.”

The Director’s Cut devotes more attention to the female

characters. Lily now seems more willful—someone who

does not accept Jack at the end, even though he vows to be

there for her always. Only time will tell if their relationship

will prosper. Oona (ANNABELLE LANYON) becomes a

lonely figure, as willful as Lily, who suffers the consequences

of overreaching herself when she is rebuffed by Jack. All she

can look forward to is a life of isolation. There is also a new

sequence in which Scott intercuts medium close-ups of Lily

and Oona trying to escape from the Great Tree. Neither can

see the other, but it is clear that the director wants us to

understand the similarities between the two. Both value self-

interest above anything else and suffer as a result.

The Director’s Cut also places more emphasis on the

unicorns, who are seen at the end wandering about the

forest. While they remain free, the world will be safe from

corruption.

Goldsmith’s rich, tuneful score gives the film an oper-

atic quality—every action now seems almost elemental. Jack

undertakes his challenges to save the world from Darkness;

Darkness, on the other hand, seeks to ensnare willing vic-

tims by offering them unlimited wealth—provided, of

course, that they renounce the enjoyment of natural light.

Bibliography

Andy Dursin, “Legend Resurrected,” Film Score Monthly 7, no.4

(May/June 2002): 13–15; Sean Murphy, “What Is the Extra Footage

in the Legend Director’s Cut?” Legend: Frequently Asked Questions,

www.figmentfly.com/legend/different4c.html (accessed 25 April

2008); “What are the Differences between the Four Confirmed

Versions of Legend?” Legend: Frequently Asked Questions, www

.figmentfly.com/legend/different3.html (accessed 25 April 2008).

LEHRER, JIM (1934– )

Commentator, journalist and the author of the book THE

LAST DEBATE, from which Ridley Scott produced his 2000

TV movie of the same name.

Lehrer has always been interested in presidential affairs

(the subject of the film). The New York Sun once criticized

him for offering “softballs” in the form of questions to can-

didates. Lehrer brushed such criticisms aside, claiming that

he is nothing more than an “old-fashioned purist ...I really

do believe the more information, the more points of view,

however crazy they may be to some people, the better off we

are in a democratic society. Let everybody speak and let

everybody have a voice and let’s assume everybody is just as

smart as we are and can figure it out and sort through it.”

Reference

Jim Lehrer quoted in Andrew Billen,“This Election Is News. If you

Want Entertainment, Go to the Circus,” The Times Section 2,2

November 2004, 6–7.

L’ENFANT SAUVAGE

France 1970 r/t 83 min b/w. Production Companies:Les

Films du Carrosse and Les Productions Artistes Associés.

Producer:Marcel Bebert.Director: François Truffaut. Writ-

ers: François Truffaut and Jean Gruault, from the novel

Mémoires et Rapport sur Victor de l’Aveyron by Jean Itard.

Director of Photography: Nestor Almendros. Production

Designer: Jean Mandaroux. Cast: Jean-Pierre Cargot (Victor,

enfant sauvage), François Truffaut (Le Dr. Jean Itard), Fran-

coise Seigner (Madame Guerin), Jean Dasté (Professor

Philippe Pinel).

1798: in a forest, some country people catch a wild child

who cannot read, write, or speak. Dr. Itard is interested in

the child and starts to educate him; everyone thinks he will

fail, but after a great deal of effort, the doctor achieves

results. Truffaut’s film based its premise on the classic

Enlightenment distinction between “reason” and “nature”

by showing the so-called “reasonable” citizens treating Vic-

tor as something to be derided rather than understood. Like

the Elephant Man in David Lynch’s film of the same name

(1979), Victor is made a subject for public exhibition. Even

when he is taken in by Dr. Itard, and supposedly given “sym-

pathetic” treatment, Itard always pretends that he can under-

stand the boy’s feelings. What the doctor cannot recognize

is that, to be truly free, Victor should be released once again

into the wild: something that can never happen, or the doc-

204

■

LEHRER, JIM (1934– )

tor will have failed in his task to “humanize” him. Through

this film Truffaut satirizes the notion of the Noble Savage;

in his view it is nothing but another form of colonization,

both physical and emotional.

Scott uses L’Enfant Sauvage as the basis for Jack’s (TOM

CRUISE’s) characterization in LEGEND. Although Jack is

an educated person, many of his body movements—espe-

cially at the beginning of the film—have been inspired by

Truffaut’s work. However, Scott approaches the notion of

colonization in a positive light: Jack, the wild child, is

“humanized” when he encounters Princess Lily (MIA

SARA). The wild child theme recurs once more in WHITE

SQUALL when Captain Sheldon (JEFF BRIDGES) lets the

boys go ashore and they put face paint on and run up the

hillside. On the boat, Sheldon’s wife Alice (CAROLINE

GOODALL) asks,“What are they doing?” to which Sheldon

replies, “Claiming their place in the world.” “Like Darwin

himself we would see blessed nature,” Chuck Gieg (SCOTT

WOLF) narrates as the boys go running on the island bare-

chested, while a tribal drumbeat can be heard on the sound-

track. “I finally understood Homer,” claims Gieg. “The

journey’s the thing.”

LE SOURD, PHILIPPE (?– )

A GOOD YEAR was his first English language film as direc-

tor of photography. The film portrays a golden vision of

PROVENCE as a world of perpetual sunshine, verdant land-

scapes and merriment. RUSSELL CROWE, who played Max

Skinner, admitted that having to live in this world for two

months was not hard work: “I loved waking up in Provence.”

However, the critic Kenneth Turan complained that, while

the photography of the film was gorgeous, “something vital

is missing in this all-too-leisurely film . . . a romantic com-

edy made by individuals with no special feeling for the genre

who stretch a half hour’s worth of story to nearly two hours.”

Reference

Kenneth Turan,“A Good Year,” Los Angeles Times, 10 November 2006,

www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/movies/cl-et-good10nov10,

1,5187991.story (accessed 30 January 2009).

LIOTTA, RAY (1954– )

Liotta specializes in playing psychopathic characters who

hide behind a cultivated charm. This helps explain why he

was cast as Paul Krendler in HANNIBAL, the enemy of the

eponymous central character (ANTHONY HOPKINS).

Liotta himself described the character as someone who “has

the opportunity and the know-how to make [Starling’s

(JULIANNE MOORE’s)] life miserable ...so that’s what he

does.” A seventy-thousand-dollar animatronic dummy of

Liotta was created for the final scene, which shows him eat-

ing his own brains: “They had all kinds of wires and things,

levers they’re pushing, opening the mouth.” Liotta had his

head shaved for the role, and enjoyed playing someone who’s

“filled with drugs yet is still awake while all this is happen-

ing. I think people will definitely remember this scene ...If

anything, it’s more explicit than in the book.”

Liotta’s Krendler is an unsavory character who takes

pleasure in harassing Clarice and taunting her with offen-

sive, sexist remarks. Even when he has been lobotomized at

the end of the film, he still imagines her as “an office girl.

Can you type and file? Can you take dictation? Take this

down: Washington is full of cornpone country pussy.” How-

ever, Krendler is not as clever as he thinks; when Mason

Verger (GARY OLDMAN) offers him a $500,000 bribe to

accept a forged postcard (allegedly written by Hannibal to

Clarice), Krendler responds, “I’m not sure I understand.”

Screenwriter STEVEN ZAILLIAN sums up Verger’s reaction

thus: “[He] sighs. Maybe he’s making a terrible mistake. Maybe

Krendler is just too stupid to be of any real use to him.” In

Hannibal’s view, Krendler deserves everything he gets—

including eating his own brains fried in butter: “Paul cer-

tainly won’t miss this—the prefrontal lobe is the seat of

manners.”

References

Ray Liotta, quoted in Jill Bernstein,“Eat Drink Man Woman,” Pre-

miere 14, no.6 (February 2001): 107; Steven Zaillian, “Hannibal:

Screenplay Based on the Novel by Thomas Harris,” Revision (9 Feb-

ruary 2000), http://sfy.ru/sfy.html?script=hannibal2001 (accessed

15 December 2008).

Bibliography

Charles Gant, “Looking Good, Fella,” Times Play, 9–14 February

2003, 5.

LOGAN, JOHN (1961– )

Chicago-born playwright and screenwriter who his first

major success on stage with Never the Sinner (1990) which

premiered in London in 1990 and received its first Ameri-

can performance five years later.

Logan started working with Scott on the abortive I AM

LEGEND project in 1997, working on a script based on

Richard Matheson’s 1954 novel. He recalled in an interview

that he went through six drafts in the space of five months:

“It was the most intensive work I’ve ever done in my life, and

it was absolutely thrilling, because we were going in, rein-

venting, and making very brave choices.” However, Logan

was removed from the project at Warner Brothers’ insistence

and replaced by screenwriter Mark Protosevich. The project

was eventually canceled in March 1998.

However Logan’s collaboration with Scott on the script

of RKO 281 actually did make it to the screen, but only after

considerable negotiation. The script was first created in

LOGAN, JOHN (1961– )

■

205

1997, at a time when the major studios were interested in the

project. But negotiations faltered; a reticence to make a

period film about a film, coupled with Ridley Scott’s own

demands, pulled the plug on a big-budget, big-screen film.

Logan was put off the project until HBO stepped in to

finance the project in collaboration with the BBC.

The original script was heavily altered to suit the

requirements of a $10 million budget, rather than the $30

million originally planned. Whole scenes were removed; for

example, an opening scene showing a woman (Orson

Welles’s mother) telling her young son, “You must have a

dream. A great dream worthy of you.” Several sequences

showing the making of Citizen Kane were removed—for

example, one where Welles is shown cajoling his actors

(including Agnes Moorehead and Dorothy Commingore,

both of whose roles were cut from the finished film) into

showing their emotions more directly on the screen.

Another deleted sequence shows an FBI agent coming to

question Herman Mankiewicz about Welles’s alleged Com-

munist affiliations, plus a short, rather nostalgic moment

where Welles and George Schaefer watch the Tara set from

Gone With the Wind being razed to the ground. Logan also

removed another sequence: Welles, in a nightclub celebrat-

ing the Children’s Milk Fund Benefit, performs a jaunty

song-and-dance version of the song “Disgustingly Rich” with

Rita Hayworth in front of the studio bosses, including Louis

B. Mayer. Clearly this is designed to show Welles’s contempt

for Hollywood, even while he attempts to make a living

there. The Hayworth role was cut from the finished film.

Logan also cut out another short exchange between Welles,

Mankiewicz and the cinematographer Gregg Toland, in

which they discuss the projected version of the life of Jesus

Christ. Mankiewicz remarks meaningfully that a good scene

might perhaps involve John the Baptist who “pulls your

[Welles’s] head out of the water and says, ‘Look up, and

behold your destiny.’” Needless to say, Welles ignores the

insult and asks instead whether the scene is from one of the

gospels. Finally, Logan removed another scene towards the

end of the script showing Hearst’s treasures being auctioned

off to a crowd of eager bidders.

Logan was brought in to refine the script of GLADIA-

TOR, which was originally written by DAVID FRANZONI.

He changed the name of the central character and added

the murder of Maxmius’s (RUSSELL CROWE’s) family, as

well as Commodus’s (JOAQUIN PHOENIX’s) unhealthy

interest in his sister and her son and a failed senatorial con-

spiracy against the emperor. In 2002 he was quoted in an

interview as saying that he would be beginning work on

the sequel to Gladiator: “It’s doing very well and it’s going

to be really exciting.” However, nothing concrete has

emerged to date.

References

Ethan James, “CC Report! John Logan Talks ‘Gladiator 2,’” Cinema

Confidential 12 February 2002, www.cinecon.com/news.php?id

=0212024 (accessed 6 December 2008); John Logan, “Draft Script

for RKO 281” (dated 1 May 1997), http://sfy.ru/sfy.html?script

=rko218 (accessed 16 November 2008); John Logan, quoted in

David Hughes, The Greatest Sci-Fi Movies Never Made,rev.ed.

(London: Titan Books, 2008), 137.

LOHMAN, ALISON (1979– )

Early roles include Alex in Wonder (2001) and White Olean-

der (2002). Cast as the fourteen-year-old Angela in MATCH-

STICK MEN, Lohman described her role thus in a

preproduction interview: “At first she thinks he’s [Roy] a lit-

tle dorky, the way he dresses and the way he keeps blinking;

she’s not sure what to make of him ...But the more time

she spends with him the more she likes him. I think she gets

a kick out of him. He makes her laugh.” Sean Bailey, one of

the film’s producers, offered further thoughts: “This is what

kids dream about. It’s exciting, like something they’ve seen

in movies . . . there’s a lot of pride in it, too, regardless of

[Roy’s] own conflicted feelings about his work, the truth is

he’s good at it and in some way I think he wants to show her

what he can do.”

As a twenty-something playing a fourteen-year-old,

Lohman tried to recapture what she described as the child-

ish look: “There’s something in their eyes, between age ten

and fifteen I think, it’s just that sort of ‘anything is possible’

[look] ...For me it’s all about dreaming. What does she look

like when she walks? What’s the look in her eye? It’s not

about, ‘Oh, on this move, I’m going to put my arm like that.’

It’s just the whole spirit, so that any way that I would move

would be right.”

That “look” as Lohman describes it, is most evident

during the scene where Angela persuades Roy to involve her

in one of his scams. Unable to contemplate the thought of

listening to more of her love life, Roy gives in and promises

to “show [her] one thing.” Angela’s reaction is typical of a

wide-eyed fourteen-year-old: “She nearly jumps for joy.

Kisses him on the cheek, getting toothpaste on her face, then

skips down the hall . . . she’s already frolicking into the

living-room.” In a scene reminiscent of Ryan and Tatum

O’Neal’s double-act in Peter Bogdanovich’s PAPER MOON

(1973), Roy and Angela embark on a con in the launderette,

with Angela playing the innocent girl and Roy the passerby

who just happens to be reading a newspaper. The two of

them undertake their roles perfectly—so much so that Roy

exclaims to Dr. Klein (BRUCE ALTMAN) that “she [Angela]

took right to it. She even helped me, this fourteen-year-old

girl, working these people with me ...I really liked it.It was

the best time we’ve had together.”

206

■

LOHMAN, ALISON (1979– )

In the “Director’s Commentary” to the 2004 DVD

release of the film, Scott emphasizes the fact that Angela

treated the idea of playing Roy’s daughter as a part of Frank’s

con; once she had finished, she would receive a cut of Roy’s

savings in payment. As the film develops, however, Angela

becomes more and more attached to the older man. When

she returns—albeit briefly—to his life as a nineteen-year-

old, with a boyfriend in tow, dressed in dark glasses and cut-

off jeans, she asks him whether he wants to know her real

name. Roy replies, “I know your name,” which prompts

Angela to smile and issue the parting shot: “I’ll see ya, Dad.”

The two of them might never meet again; but it is clear that

they enjoyed their relationship, as it helped both of them to

discover something about themselves.

References

Nick and Ted Griffin, “Matchstick Men: Shooting Draft” (14 Octo-

ber 2002), www.imsdb.com/scripts/Matchstick-Men.html (accessed

4 January 2009); Rebecca Murray, “‘Matchstick Men’s Impressive

Young Talent, Alison Lohman,” About.com Interview (September

2003), http://movies.about.com/cs/matchstickmen/a/matchlohman

.htm (accessed 7 August 2008); Production Information Matchstick

Men (Los Angeles: Warner Bros. Pictures, 2003), 10, 12; Ridley

Scott,“Director’s Commentary” to the 2004 DVD release of Match-

stick Men (London: Warner Home Video UK, 2004).

LONCRAINE, RICHARD (1946– )

Began his career in television on Play for Today before mak-

ing his debut with Brimstone and Treacle (1982). He then

became associated with successful films such as The Mission-

ary (1981) and Richard III (1995).

As director for the Ridley Scott-produced television

drama THE GATHERING STORM, Loncraine was initially

reluctant to do the project, as he thought that “Churchill was

a kind of a one note samba really. And this is my ignorance

as I found out, because it’s been an amazing learning curve.”

He believed that “with a film about Churchill as with, say,

Shakespeare, you have to ask yourself how you can make it

into an entertaining, accessible story and not just for people

who are only interested in modern history ...Churchill was

a bully we needed at the time to fight Hitler. He was also

funny, kind, generous, loved music hall songs and was a

great raconteur. Yes, he could be rude, aggressive and moody

too. I think he was a complete madman in the best sense of

the word, and certainly obsessed with power.”

Loncraine found the experience of filming somewhat

problematic: “Shooting period stuff in London is a night-

mare. All the buildings are clean so Angus Bickerton, who’s

doing our visual effects, is having to do wire frame work to

put dirt on them. Although it may be marginally better now,

England has never been a film friendly country.”

However, the experience of filming had its unexpected

benefits: “We were filming in an old abandoned empty house

outside London. I was there very early one morning . . . and I

found the props table in the corner where the propmen had

been cutting out pictures of Churchill—of the real Churchill

for reference, for what his clothes were like ...I found this

picture of Churchill, which I thought absolutely captured the

quality and the look and the way that I thought this man

should be ...I realized that I had picked out a picture of

Albert Finney ...I guess I had been living with the man, but

it was mixed up with pictures of the real Churchill.”

References

“Interview with Richard Loncraine,” The Gathering Storm: Artist

Interviews, www.hbo.com/films/gatheringstorm/cmp/interviews

.shtml (accessed 24 December 2008); Richard Loncraine, quoted

in “Out of the Wilderness,” Exposure, Spring 2002, 22–23.

LOS ANGELES

The city of Los Angeles features most famously in BLADE

RUNNER, where Scott creates a futuristic vision of the city

as a DYSTOPIA, largely deprived of humanity and domi-

nated by technology. In MONKEY TROUBLE and MATCH-

STICK MEN Scott’s vision is far less pessimistic. Monkey

Trouble creates a world of perpetual sunshine in which peo-

ple spend much of their leisure time walking, riding, skate-

boarding or enjoying the sideshows on offer. However, there

is an undercurrent of menace: the gypsy Azro (HARVEY

KEITEL) and his monkey rob people of their money; later

on Azro is seen pursuing the little girl Eva (THORA BIRCH)

in a desperate attempt to recover his monkey. Although we

have no idea what will happen to her, we are sure that she is

in danger. MATCHSTICK MEN contrasts the bright Califor-

nia sunshine and the neat suburban houses with the dingy

interior of Roy Waller’s (NICOLAS CAGE’s) house. This

emphasizes Roy’s reclusive nature; he believes he has agora-

phobia, but in reality it is entirely due to an unwillingness to

engage with life. Each episode of NUMB3RS is set in Los

Angeles—a city of perpetual sunshine and towering sky-

scrapers, yet, both downtown and the suburbs, a hotbed of

crime requiring the FBI agents’ constant attention.

Bibliography

Stephen Rowley, “False LA: Blade Runner and the Nightmare City,”

in The Blade Runner Experience: The Legacy of a Science Fiction

Classic, ed. Will Brooker (London and New York: Wallflower Press,

2005), 203–13.

LOVE VS. DUTY

A major theme explored in Ridley Scott’s films. In THE

DUELLISTS D’Hubert (KEITH CARRADINE) often ignores

his wife and family in his obsession with fulfilling the

LOVE VS. DUTY

■

207

requirements placed on him by the code of honor, which

requires him to fight repeated duels with Feraud (HARVEY

KEITEL). The same thing appears in the Ridley Scott-pro-

duced film THE BROWNING VERSION,where Crocker-

Harris’s dedication to the duty of being a public school

teacher renders him insensitive to his wife Laura’s (GRETA

SCACCHI’s) desires, as well as to the emotional needs of the

boys he teaches. Eventually given the nickame “the Hitler of

the Lower Fifth,” he seems dedicated to humiliating the boys

he works with, either by making fun of them or forcing

them to speak in front of the class. However, he comes to

learn the error of his ways, admitting in a climactic speech

at the end of the film that he has failed to teach with sym-

pathy, encouragement or humanity. Duty has overwhelmed

his basic goodness of heart. Maximus (RUSSELL CROWE)

is also faced with a similar dilemma in GLADIATOR—one

which leads to tragic consequences, as his loyalty to the

Roman army prevents him from looking after his family. As

a result they are easy prey for the Praetorian guards, who

come unexpectedly to their farmhouse and hang them. In

DAVID FRANZONI’s script Maximus’s reaction, when he

arrives home too late to rescue them, is predictable: “He falls

to his knees, crying in disbelief and anguish. He manages to

stand up and comes closer, tenderly touching his wife’s feet,

caressing them as though to comfort her. He falls to the

ground and passes out from the grief.” It is only when he has

avenged their death by killing Commodus (JOAQUIN

PHOENIX) and returning Rome to the people that he can

rejoin them in death.

In SOMEONE TO WATCH OVER ME, Mike Keegan

(TOM BERENGER) encounters a similar conflict, as he is

faced with the question of whether to abandon home, fam-

ily and a secure job in favor of a love affair with Claire Gre-

gory (MIMI ROGERS). Scott certainly sympathizes with

him—in the final sequence of the original script Mike and

Claire stare at one another, “not knowing quite what to

say.” However, the director makes clear that Mike has no

choice in the end; he has to return to his family and main-

tain the proper distance from Claire, to say good-bye.

Other police officers are faced with the same choice: Richie

Roberts (RUSSELL CROWE) in AMERICAN GANGSTER

sees his wife Laurie and son Michael move to Las Vegas

while he continues the fight against the drug barons in

New York, while Don Eppes (ROB MORROW) in NUMB3RS

is so committed to his work that he finds it incapable to

sustain a lasting relationship. In TRISTAN + ISOLDE the

two eponymous central characters (JAMES FRANCO,

SOPHIA MYLES) are unable to meet due to their commit-

ments to King Marke (RUFUS SEWELL). Isolde asks at one

point in the script: “If we lived in a place without duty . . .

would you be with me?” Tristan can give only one answer:

“That place does not exist.” BLACK RAIN explores a simi-

lar conflict through the main protagonist Nick Conklin

(MICHAEL DOUGLAS) and his Japanese counterpart

Masahiro (KEN TAKAKURA). Nick’s family life has been

destroyed due to obsession with his work; Masahiro

believes that duty prevails over everything else. If police

officers forget this then, in Masahiro’s view, they render

themselves open to dishonor. Such dedication is satirized

by the yakuza leader Sato (Kobo in the original script): “A

couple of thousand years they’ve [Japanese workers] been

bound by these little rules. Looking in. Always afraid. Ugly

little lives . . . ” The reverse is true of the Scott-produced

film IN HER SHOES. Maggie (TONI COLLETTE), a suc-

cessful lawyer, leaves her job, admitting to her fiancé Simon

(MARK FEUERSTEIN) that she only pursued a workaholic

life out of a fear of “what would happen to me without

those people [her colleagues] to please and those tasks to

get done.Like ...maybe ...those were the things holding

me together, and without them I’d fall apart.” Instead she

pursues an itinerant existence as a freelance dog-walker,

working as and when she pleases.

Other protagonists face more extreme choices. In G.I.

JANE Jordan O’Neil (DEMI MOORE) sacrifices her relation-

ship with her boyfriend Royce (JASON BEGHE) in pursuit

of her dream of completing her military training at the SEAL

camp. The soldiers in BLACK HAWK DOWN face a similar

dilemma: Shughart (Johnny Strong) tries to exchange a few

words with his wife prior to the raid on Mogadishu, but can-

not sufficient time to talk to her. All he can say is “I’m missing

you. I love you, baby” and put the satellite phone down.

Shughart’s wife rushes to answer, but is too late.

No such doubts affect the three recruits in the reality

show AMERICAN FIGHTER PILOT; they believe it is their

duty to complete their training to take on the responsibility

of protecting America from further attack in the post-9/11

era. The same applies to DON CHEADLE’s Government

Agent in THE HIRE: “TICKER,” who risks life and limb to

rescue a replacement heart from the hands of an enemy fac-

tion in an unnamed African country so that it can be given

to the existing ruler. Only then will peace be restored to the

nation. Russell Crowe’s Ed Hoffman makes a similar deci-

sion in BODY OF LIES, talking incessantly to his subordi-

nate Roger Ferris (LEONARDO DICAPRIO), even while

taking his young son Timmy (Chase Edmunds) to the bath-

room. However, his obsession with work does not make him

a better operative; on the contrary, it renders him even more

self-absorbed and unable to see the bigger picture of diplo-

matic relations between America and Jordan.

Sometimes characters have no choice; they have to sacri-

fice their personal lives in the line of duty. This is certainly the

case with the Soviet spy Yevgeny Tsipin in THE COMPANY,

208

■

LOVE VS. DUTY

who is told in no uncertain terms to sacrifice his Jewish girl-

friend Azalia Ivanova (Erika Marozsán) and commit himself

to “Mother Russia.” If he does not, he will never have the

chance to change the world. In THE GATHERING STORM,

Ralph Wigram (LINUS ROACHE) kills himself after having

illegally passed on classified information about German rear-

mament to Winston Churchill (ALBERT FINNEY). Although

the action was prompted by the best of motives (to ensure

his country’s future security), Wigram cannot endure the

strain it causes both himself and his family.

In other films, employees are forced to submit to the will

of their superiors, even when they know that the wrong deci-

sion has been made. In ALIEN Ripley (SIGOURNEY

WEAVER) decides not to let the infected Kane (JOHN HURT)

back into the NOSTROMO, as it violates Company rules. Dal-

las (TOM SKERRITT) overrules her, arguing that Kane is one

of the crew and therefore entitled to the same treatment as the

others. However, Dallas’s decision proves fatal, as it ultimately

leads to the corruption of the spaceship. Clarice Starling

(JULIANNE MOORE) suffers a similar experience in HANNI-

BAL. Despite her devotion to the job, she is ultimately forced to

submit to the will of her corrupt boss Krendler (RAY LIOTTA).

Hannibal Lecter (ANTHONY HOPKINS) suggests that her

devotion to the FBI has been futile:“You serve the idea of order,

Clarice—they don’t. You believe in the oath you took—they

don’t. You feel it’s your duty to protect the sheep—they don’t.

They don’t like you because they’re not like you. They’re weak

and unruly and believe in nothing.” Clarice’s only solution—

which she discovers by the end of the film—is to act according

to her own instincts, rather than those of her employers.

Other films put forward the opposite view—that per-

sonal relationships are far more important than job satisfac-

tion. In BLADE RUNNER Deckard (HARRISON FORD)

gradually discovers that the REPLICANTS—whom he is

supposed to destroy—have feelings of their own. This is

especially evident during his exchanges with Rachael (SEAN

YOUNG), in which he asks questions while Rachael

acknowledges her love for him. Deckard has learned through

bitter experience that emotions are far more important than

duty to one’s profession. This provides a pretext for the

happy ending (to the 1982 United States theatrical version

of the film), where Deckard and Rachael fly away from the

city to a verdant landscape. In the Ridley Scott-produced

comedy MONKEY TROUBLE the dedicated police officer

Peter (CHRISTOPHER McDONALD) remains dedicated to

his job, even to the extent of interrogating his stepdaughter

Eva (THORA BIRCH) on suspicion of harboring stolen

goods. At the end of the film, however, he realizes the impor-

tance of family life; he overcomes his initial reluctance to

allow Eva to keep a pet (on account of his allergy to animal

fur) and gives his permission. She has proved herself capa-

ble of being a good parent to Dodger the monkey; it is

Peter’s responsibility to follow her example.

References

Craig Bolotin and Warren Lewis, “Black Rain: Draft Script”

(November 1987), http://sfy.ru/sfy.html?script=black_rain_ds

(accessed 8 June 2008); Howard Franklin, Danilo Bach and David

Seltzer, “Someone to Watch Over Me” (revised 4 December 1986)

(Los Angeles: Columbia Pictures Corporation, 1987); Gladiator by

David Franzoni, revised by John Logan,” http://sfy.ru/sfy/html

?script=gladiator_ts (accessed 29 November 2008); Susannah

Grant, “In Her Shoes Script,” www.script-o-rama.com/movie

_scripts/i/in-her-shoes-script-transcript.html (accessed 17 January

2009); Ken Nolan, Black Hawk Down: The Shooting Script (New

York: Newmarket Press, 2002), 30; “Tristan + Isolde. Written by

Dean Georgaris,” www.imsdb.com/Movie%20Scripts/Tristan%20

and%20Isolde%20Script.html (accessed 23 January 2009); Steven

Zaillian, “Hannibal: Screenplay Based on the Novel by Thomas

Harris,” Revision (9 February 2000), http://sfy.ru/sfy.html?script

=hannibal2001(accessed 15 December 2008).

LUSTIG, BRANKO (1932– )

Executive producer on GLADIATOR, HANNIBAL, BLACK

HAWK DOWN, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, A GOOD YEAR,

and AMERICAN GANGSTER.

Croatian-born Lustig began his film career in Europe,

in Italian and Yugoslavian cinema, before moving to Amer-

ica and Germany in the early 1970s where he made Fiddler

on the Roof (1971) and Tin Drum (1979). He subsequently

worked on the mega-miniseries The Winds of War and War

and Remembrance for American television. He helped Steven

Spielberg produce Schindler’s List in 1993, winning an Oscar

in the process. It was Spielberg who recommended him to

Scott when the latter was seeking help with multi-location

work on Gladiator. For his work on this film, Lustig received

his second Oscar.

On Black Hawk Down Lustig worked hard to try and

smooth the production process, so that the crew could film

in Morocco: “I had some guarantees . . . that we could film

there ...The king and his ministers reacted positively . . .

feeling that it was about an historical event and was in no

way slanted against Muslims. They not only agreed to allow

us to film there, but also put up a great deal of Moroccan

military materiel, from tanks to Humvees and helicopters,

at our disposal.”

On Kingdom of Heaven Lustig had to cope with a spiral-

ing budget which ballooned to $130 million. He also had to

work with Scott on frequent changes to WILLIAM MONA-

HAN’s script. As in Black Hawk Down, Lustig had to work

in Morocco, a place he liked because he believed “the people

are very open, very honest. And when you’ve worked fifty

LUSTIG, BRANKO (1932– )

■

209