A Matter of Life and Death (UK, 1946)
Directed by Michael Powell & Emeric Pressberger
Starring David Niven, Roger Livesey, Raymond Massey, Kim Hunter
Directed by Michael Powell & Emeric Pressberger
Starring David Niven, Roger Livesey, Raymond Massey, Kim Hunter
BFI Top 100: #20 (1999)
Nicholas
Meyer, the director of Star Trek II and
VI, once said: “Art
thrives on restrictions and things left out... Movies have a tendency
to do everything for you, too much – they can tell you where to
look, they can tell you what to hear, so as a director I’m always
curious at things that movies manage to leave to the imagination.”
Because film makes it very straightforward to show anything
(especially as technology improves), it is very easy for it as a
medium to take something enormously imaginative and reduce it down to
mere spectacle. C. S. Lewis approved of his Narnia books being
adapted on radio because it preserved the role of the audience’s
imagination; he was “absolutely opposed” to a TV version on the
grounds that it would reduce his anthropomorphic characters to
“buffoonery or nightmare”.
Regardless
of your views on Meyer’s work, or the many and varied attempts to
adapt Lewis’ stories, their words ring true when it comes to the
problem of depicting heaven or the afterlife on screen. Vincent Ward
and Peter Jackson both found to their cost that assaulting the
audience’s senses with bucket-loads of CGI is deeply alienating,
depriving both What Dreams May Come and
The Lovely Bones of
both the imagination and the tonal consistency
they desperately needed. The best films about “the undiscovered
country” are those which either only hint at its character (e.g.
the Grey Havens in The Return of the King)
or which put a subtle twist on something universally recognisable. In
this latter camp there is no better example than A Matter
of Life and Death, whose
depiction of the afterlife
remains compelling and influential more than 70 years on.
I
use the word ‘afterlife’ here, since describing the
black-and-white world as ‘heaven’ is somewhat problematic. The
whole plot of A Matter of Life and Death rests
on ‘heaven’ making a mistake – and by extension, God making a
mistake. Since God is by nature perfect, and therefore cannot make
even the simplest error, it isn’t helpful to characterise this as a
Christian heaven, either in itself or as one written with one eye on
an audience that hadn’t been through years of sermons and Sunday
school. The theological issues it raises are no less interesting
because of this, but to argue Powell and Pressberger’s film is
overtly ‘Christian’ simply because it deals with heaven, or
acknowledges its existence, is decidedly misleading. On
a purely narrative point, describing
this as a perfect heaven causes the ambiguity surrounding the central
character to collapse; if heaven can’t make mistakes, it makes it
much more likely that everything we see is only happening in his head
(more on that later).
Like
all the best theology (and certainly the kind we recognise in Lewis’
writings), the film addresses
deep ethical questions by
grounding them in situations we would all recognise. By conceiving of
the afterlife as an enormous bureaucracy or war room, with endless
secretaries taking calls, filing papers and moving points around on
maps, Powell and Pressberger entertain all manner of fascinating
ethical problems. How can God keep track of everything that happens
on Earth? How are decisions about life and death taken – and where
does free will (or
natural events like
the weather)
come into it? How would we do it in His shoes? And are angels as
perfect as God, or are they flawed creatures (as strongly
suggested by the story of Lucifer)?
For
a post-war audience, still in the throes of rationing and with the
welfare state looming on the horizon, this film takes their
earthbound, comic frustrations about bureaucracy, justice and
well-meaning incompetence and uses them to shine lights on spiritual
issues in an uncanny and resonating fashion. And while the modes of
dress and address may have
changed (we’ll come onto
that shortly), modern
audiences can also recognise these frustrations, either as something
innate to the human condition or as a hangover from the social and
political institutions of which we are the heirs. A Matter
of Life and Death remains
timeless precisely because its depiction of the afterlife and its
ethical dilemmas aren’t
wedded to one event or time
period – you could substitute David Niven’s pilot out for a
modern-day soldier and it would
still work.
There
are some details of A Matter of Life and Death which
are very much of its time. While none of them are deal-breakers,
insofar as they don’t derail the plot or destroy the central
conceit, some will require a little adjustment or at least patience
on the part of younger viewers. Like Spellbound from
the year before, this is a film in which “two people fall so deeply
and unquestioningly in love after only a few minutes of screen time”,
and unlike Alfred Hitchcock’s film our central couple can’t
off-set this by fractious bickering (though David
Niven’s playful banter does
help). Equally the courtroom-style debate in the
afterlife about love contains
a lot of references which will come across as quaint or obscure. We
get through on the basis of its audacious staging, and by
understanding what is at stake before the case is made; just as you
can follow a good courtroom drama without needing a law degree, so
you can follow this if you’re not actively repulsed by jargon and
appeals to old writers.
One
detail of its time which has aged well, without any form of polite
mitigation, is the use of Technicolor – or, in the afterlife, the
absence of it. Jack Cardiff’s cinematography is absolutely gorgeous
without being in-your-face:
the film is every bit as beautiful as Black Narcissus or
The Red Shoes after
it, and the decision to stage
Earth in colour with the other place in black-and-white is nothing
short of inspired. Not only does it go against our expectations, but
it reinforces the rigid order and mundane nature of the other world.
By setting up the temporal
realm as one of vivid beauty and variety (to the extent that even
angels mutter about us “being spoiled for Technicolor down here”),
it adds to the comedy of a spiritual bureaucracy trying to put things
right after a creative scenario which it had seemingly never
anticipated.
If
you are not spiritually inclined – whether towards Christianity or
anything else – it is perfectly possible to enjoy A
Matter of Life and Death on a
secular level. In doing so we lean towards the interpretation that
everything after Niven’s plane goes down happens only in his head;
it repositions the film from
being the progenitor of
Wings of Desire, The
Exorcist III and A
Life Less Ordinary to a
well-behaved ancestor of works like Brazil,
Jacob’s Ladder or
even Lost Highway.
There are good arguments on both sides, and the film’s strength is
never showing its hand, or at least not
showing it too soon (the presence of the borrowed book in both worlds
could be seen as an argument that there is more to Peter’s plight
than mere hallucination).
Like
Wim Wender’s film,
A Matter of Life and Death is
a very humanistic work, in both senses of the word.
From a religious reading, it
emphasises the dignity and beauty of the human condition, encouraging
free will and with God’s love for those made in his image winning
through. From a secular standpoint, it’s deeply interested in the
search for justice and morality, depicting
Peter and the other characters waging against a supernatural order
which seems just as
unjust as the natural one. We root for Peter as an individual
fighting against something which feels unfair, but we are never
allowed to stop questioning where such ideas of fairness come from.
The triumph of love over all else at the end is both a humanistic
happy ending of individuals beating the system and a Christian
message of love triumphing over the cold self-righteousness
associated with the law of
the Old Testament.
The
film’s use of chess is an
interesting extension of this ambiguity.
It’s not certain whether Ingmar Bergman was influenced by Powell
and Pressberger when he came to stage his own chess match in The
Seventh Seal, but
both films feature the same action: a man of war (whether knight or
pilot) trying to beat the supernatural in a battle of wits. The chess
match in A Matter of Life and Death is
a neat way of demonstrating the different phases of the battle Peter
is waging – something which could have been handled either entirely
in exposition or through over-the-top visuals. The ending is in one
sense a sacrificial mate: the queen (June) offers herself up to
protect the king (Peter), and through such a surprising tactic the
game turns in their favour.
The
performances in A Matter of Life and Death are
excellent across the board. David Niven has a tendency to always give
the same performance throughout his career, but here he’s the ideal
choice, giving a note-perfect turn which balances chivalry, charm,
wit and elegance like few others could. Kim
Hunter is a good match for him as June, managing to be earnest
without coming across as silly or naive, and Roger Livesey puts in
another highly enjoyable performance as Frank Reeves. Watch
out also for a brief appearance early on from a young and very
fresh-faced Richard Attenborough, a mere two years before his
chilling appearance in Brighton Rock.
A
Matter of Life and Death is a
terrific achievement which remains essential viewing even after all
this time. It’s on a par with The Red Shoes as
Powell and Pressberger’s joint masterpiece, combining a
thought-provoking storyline with believable characters, beautifully
crafted dialogue and stunning visuals. It remains one of the most
important and captivating films of its time, whose influence
continues to be felt through the fantasy genre. If you have never
seen it, you need to rectify that immediately.
NEXT REVIEW: Pretty in Pink (1986)
Comments
Post a Comment