Don’t Look Now: Exploring the Horror Genre to Portray the Destructive Power of Grief
Released 50 years ago next month, Nicolas Roeg’s masterpiece, set in the hauntingly beautiful city of Venice, took the horror genre to new heights by delving deep into the profound effects of grief. However, amidst the critical acclaim, it was a controversial love scene that stole the spotlight.
When the film hit theaters half a century ago, it was met with scandalous rumors that the passionate lovemaking between the film’s protagonists, portrayed by Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland, was not simply a simulated act. The Daily Mail sensationalized the scene, deeming it “one of the frankest love-scenes ever to be filmed” and predicting a censorship controversy akin to what surrounded “Last Tango in Paris.” It’s worth noting that no mention was made of Donald Sutherland, only focusing on the scrutiny Julie Christie would face.
While some may dismiss it as a mere storm in a teacup, Christie’s then-boyfriend, Warren Beatty, thought otherwise. Fueling the fire of hypocrisy, Beatty allegedly flew to London to investigate the alleged infidelity and demanded the scene be cut from the film. Ultimately, Roeg had to carefully edit the sequence to appease American censors.
Despite this scandalous backdrop, “Don’t Look Now” is a captivating film that delves into the intricacies of grief. Roeg, at the pinnacle of his filmmaking prowess, created a work that remains his greatest accomplishment. In a 2012 poll by Time Out magazine, it was voted the greatest British film of all time.
Nicolas Roeg, born in London in 1928 and devoid of any formal film education, began his career by working his way up through the film industry. Like British greats such as Alfred Hitchcock, Roeg learned his craft on the job. Influenced by his sister, an actor, Roeg developed a passion for film. In 1947, he started as a tea boy at Marylebone Studios and gradually climbed the ladder to become a clapper-loader, camera operator, and finally, a cinematographer.
If Roeg never ventured into directing, he would still be remembered as one of the greatest cinematographers of his time. His work included collaborating with David Lean on “Lawrence of Arabia,” François Truffaut on “Fahrenheit 451,” Roger Corman on “The Masque of the Red Death,” and John Schlesinger on “Far from the Madding Crowd,” where he first met Julie Christie.
Although Roeg initially collaborated with Lean on “Doctor Zhivago,” he was replaced early on due to clashes with Lean’s quest for classical perfection. Roeg’s dissatisfaction with the stringent demands of classical filmmaking led him to develop a more impressionistic style.
Roeg’s first solo directorial effort, “Walkabout” (1971), often goes unappreciated. Brilliantly lensed by Roeg himself, the film tells the story of two abandoned white children in the Australian Outback who find guidance in a wandering aboriginal boy. However, their interaction with the children and white civilization leads to tragic consequences for the aboriginal boy.
Nevertheless, “Don’t Look Now” stands as Roeg’s most immaculate and aesthetically satisfying work. It is a rare adaptation that won the author’s full approval, despite the extensive changes made to Daphne du Maurier’s original story. Roeg transformed the core of the film into an exploration of grief’s impact, necessitating a more dramatic representation than du Maurier’s original plot.
Thus, Roeg devised an emotionally devastating scene where John Baxter, played by Donald Sutherland, arrives too late to save his daughter, Christine, from drowning in a pond. Devastated by their loss, the couple travels to Venice, where John, an architect, is commissioned to restore a church. As he immerses himself in his work, Laura wanders through the city, desperately seeking a connection to her deceased child. Blind mediums offer a glimmer of hope. Throughout their journey, John catches glimpses of a figure resembling Christine amidst the narrow Venetian streets.
Roeg masterfully utilized color, particularly red, time jumps, and recurring motifs to evoke a sense of fate’s influence, possibly even the supernatural. However, beneath the surface, what truly captivates viewers is the film’s portrayal of the characters’ overwhelming grief—a boundless abyss that engulfs them in different ways.
Capturing the heart-wrenching scene of Christine’s drowning in a pond, clad in her red raincoat, presented its challenges. The actress who initially played Christine, Sharon Williams, was unable to endure submersion in the muddy pond even for a moment. As a result, a local farmer’s daughter was recruited, accompanied by her watchful father, to ensure her safety during the scene. This intensity and emotion paralleled the effect Roeg aimed to evoke in the audience.
The film bears resemblance to Alfred Hitchcock’s fascination with mistaken identities. At one point, John is mistaken for a Peeping Tom while following Laura to a séance. In another instance, he witnesses Laura, who has returned to England, floating by dressed in black on a barge, baffling him. Unbeknownst to John, this vision foreshadows events yet to unfold.
In a stunning twist, John finally confronts the small figure in red, believing it to be his daughter. However, he is tragically mistaken—the figure turns out to be an adult woman, a dwarf, and the serial killer haunting Venice.
Though acclaimed for its expert editing, seamlessly transitioning between past and present events, the film’s most exceptional editing was a response to external circumstances.
Daphne du Maurier’s original story did not include the provocative love scene between John and Laura, but Roeg felt it was integral to conveying the film’s core theme—the madness of grief. However, censors were unimpressed. In the United Kingdom, the film received an X rating, while the American authorities were adamant that no explicit sexual content be shown. To accommodate these concerns, Roeg interspersed the love-making sequence with shots of the couple dressing afterwards, amplifying the scene’s emotional impact. This portrayal highlighted that their passion was not a casual encounter between strangers, as often depicted in films, but an intimate expression of their shared despair.
Roeg once said, “One moment of truth in a film can be seen instantly.” This rings particularly true for the intimate love scene in “Don’t Look Now.” While Pauline Kael of the New Yorker criticized the film for its “distasteful clamminess,” most critics recognized its uniqueness and exceptional quality. Over the past five decades, the film has only solidified its reputation, with Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian dubbing it “the best scary movie in history” in his tribute to Roeg following the filmmaker’s death.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
