Ryan McNeil
I’ve always believed that some of us have taken spoiler culture a bit too far. While it’s true that from year-to-year that there are films that I want to experience “fresh”, I’m befuddled by those who would call knowing something that happens within the first scene a spoiler. Does it really ruin the experience of a film to know key details? Or is it just possible that a film is about more than its narrative structure?
What is one to make of a film that involves a twist or three…a film where the viewer knows all of them going in?
For me that was CHARADE.
Released in 1963, CHARADE begins with a man getting thrown from a train. We don’t know who he is, why he was thrown (or even if he was thrown), but the train speeds away and there he lays. The man, we are to learn, is Charles Lampert husband of Reggie Lampert (Audrey Hepburn) who is far away in the Swiss Alps around the time Charles exits the train so unceremoniously.
Upon returning from Switzerland, Reggie finds her apartment completely emptied out and Charles nowhere to be found. In short order, the police catch up with her and give her the bad news that her husband has died. All that the authorities were able to retrieve from the train is a small travel bag with a handful of meagre personal effects (a pen, an agenda, his wallet, a letter, toothpaste, and the like). It’s at Charles’ funeral that things get really weird. One by one, three strangers walk up to him as he lays in wake and make sure he’s really dead.
It’s shortly thereafter that an CIA administrator (Walter Matthau) calls Reggie into the American consulate to fill her in; Charles is believed to have pilfered $250,000 from the American government during a WWII OSS operation. Now not only does the government want it back, but so too do three former OSS operatives who helped Charles steal it (the three curious mourners).
Meanwhile, always lurking in the background is Peter Joshua (Cary Grant), a friendly American Reggie first met in Switzerland. Peter seems unusually determined to help Reggie, and unusually familiar with the moves of the former operatives/curious mourners/determined thieves.
Who can she trust?
I must pause here to give credit where it’s due. You see, I wasn’t sure where to begin this year’s Blind Spot series, and my brother suggested that CHARADE was the most fun.
Lordy was he ever right.
The film’s trailer began with an illustration of a blender being filled with “one part suspense, one part comedy, and one part romance”. It’s cliché of course, but it’s also spot-on. Besides Hepburn doing what she does best (more on that later), the film weaves some killer character actors in and out of a really well-crafted plot. There’s a mystery that keeps unfolding long after you think you’ve finally got a grip on it, some glorious goofiness from Cary Grant, some glorious schlubiness from Walter Matthau, and a bang-up team of character actors in Jame Coburn, George Kennedy, and Jacques Marin.
Basically, the film is one of the forefathers of some of my favorite modern heist films like OCEAN’S ELEVEN. It’s not just a mystery, but one that is being played out in a glamorous city in a glamorous age by actors that really wear their dresses and sport their suits. There’s high comedy and tense shoot-outs.
The only thing missing is a bit with a dog.
In an odd co-incidence, two days before I watched CHARADE, I re-watched JERRY MAGUIRE. I say co-incidence because MAGUIRE contains a clever moment where Renee Zellweger walks into a room before a date with Tom Cruise, and Tom’s response is:
“That’s more than a dress. That’s an Audrey Hepburn movie”
If I didn’t understand the line at the time, I certainly do now.
Hepburn has always been a style icon. For proof, just Google “Breakfast at Tiffany’s”, a touchstone in style that is better as a visual than it is as an actual film. Beyond TIFFANY’S, Hepburn also killed it in MY FAIR LADY, ROMAN HOLIDAY, and SABRINA. SABRINA is especially noteworthy since it was her first time being outfitted by Hubert de Givenchy. In CHARADE, Hepburn is outfitted by Givenchy again, and if it’s possible, the duo of Hepburn and Givenchy outdo what they achieved in SABRINA. It might seem strange for a straight dude to be going on and on about the dresses a woman wears in a film, but believe me – they are something to behold.
Hepburn could roll out of bed sprightly and charming, so she probably didn’t need any outside help to engage her audience. However, watching her play Scooby-Doo around 1963 Paris in get-ups like this, this, and this make CHARADE a true delight. How can you not want a young woman so classy and poised to be alright in the end?
To that end, CHARADE feels like the ultimate Audrey Hepburn film (The comment section is below. Bring it.) It combines the style of TIFFANY’S, with the exuberance of SABRINA or ROMAN HOLIDAY, and the unlikely romance of LOVE IN THE AFTERNOON. The film even has the cheek to reference a song in one of Hepburn’s previous outings.
Peter: “Here we are”
Reggie: “Where?”
Peter: “On the street that you live.”
Getting back to what I said off the top about spoilers, there are two key mysteries in CHARADE…well three, but I’ll leave that last one as a surprise for anybody who hasn’t seen the film and wants to keep some of the suspense.
The two key mysteries revolve around the true identity of Cary Grant’s character and where Lampert stashed the $250,00. As it happened, I knew the answers to both, since ten years back or so, I watched a lousy remake of this film directed by Brian de Palma (I didn’t realize it until I was 30 minutes in). Considering how much remakes like to tinker around with their source material, I was certainly amused to see that de Palma remained faithful to this original. However, it completely eliminated any sense of surprise in the final act.
So the $250,000 question is how much knowing those spoilers mattered.
From my perspective, knowing the details mattered very little. It allowed me to relax a bit and not worry about putting every piece of the puzzle together, and it pushed my attention to other elements of the film like the chemistry of Grant and Hepburn, and the overall stylishness of the movie. Furthermore, it’s the measure of a good “whodunnit” that it works even when you know the twist. It demonstrates that the film is not completely built on the fondation of a gimmick, and can in fact succeed on its own terms.
I’ve long been a believer that rewatching a film allows us a chance to soak up more than we do at first blush, since we can allow our attention to wander a little bit. To that end, CHARADE was a glorious journey to an established destination. It was the first blind spot that I could actually see out of the corner of my eye.
I usually post Blind Spot entries on the final Tuesday of every month. If you are participating, drop me an email (ryanatthematineedotca) when your post is up and I’ll make sure to link to your entry.
Here’s the round-up for January so far…
Amir Soltani watched STOLEN KISSES
Nikhat Zahra watched REBECCA
Beatrice watched BLADE RUNNER
Courtney Small watched MOTHER INDIA
Josh watched PARIS, TEXAS
Katy Cacolice watched THE DARJEELING LIMITED
Bob Turnbull – on time for once – watched both 42ND STREET and WEST SIDE STORY
Abstew watched CITY LIGHTS
Fisti watched THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER
Elina watched MEMENTO
Ruth watched IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT
Caitlin watched GANGS OF NEW YORK
Karamel watched THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI
Kate Bradford watched JURASSIC PARK
Andina watched WILD STRAWBERRIES
Jay Cluitt watched HAROLD & MAUDE
Andrew Robinson watched BREAKING THE WAVES
Mette Kowalski watched APOCALYPSE NOW
Chris watched DAS BOOT
Dani watched the holy hell out of THE HIDDEN FORTRESS
Dan Heaton watched CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS
Brittani Burnham watched THE DEER HUNTER
Will Kouf watched OLDBOY
Sean Kelly watched BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA
Mariah watched QUEST FOR FIRE
Steven Flores watched BIRTH OF A NATION
SDG watched ED WOOD
I wish that I had known you were going to watch this first! I’ve had this on my DVR for almost a year and was going to watch it last week but opted for something else. I would have watched it in preparation. Alas, I read your review and now I think I’m going to watch this tonight.
All I knew was that I was saving Blue/White/red for last. Beyond that, I could have jumped in at any point in the eleven titles that remained. Part of the fun of the whole series really – making up your own running order (or even switching one out if you so choose!).
Definitely give the movie a look. For my money it has aged splendidly.
Audrey is just perfect, isn’t she? She’s my ultimate idol.
Exceptionally perfect. Only she could spill her ice cream cone smack into a man’s lapel and have him come up smiling.
PS – If you decide that you wanna get in on the action, write a post and email me a link and I’ll add it to the list.
Hahah definitely!
Ooh thank you, I will come up with something!
Ha! When I read your tweet into (“turned out not to be such a Blindspot”) I was afraid you meant you didn’t like it, and thus didn’t think it was worthy of being termed a blind spot. Glad to find out I was wrong about that! Charade is in my all-time Top 100. I just love it every time I watch it – knowing the twist(s) doesn’t make any difference at all to rewatch value. It’s also a great one to bring out for movie night with friends – I have yet to find anyone who didn’t enjoy it.
I will point out one interesting thing, though – Charade actually came out almost exactly a year before My Fair Lady (the “On the Street Where You Live” reference). I’m sure Hepburn’s casting in My Fair Lady was big news at the time, though, so maybe it had already been announced when they made Charade? I think it’s got to be pretty rare for a film to make a joke based on another film that hasn’t been released yet, which makes it kind of cool.
Oh ye of little faith…
There *was* one Blindspot entry from the first year that didn’t do much for me, and perhaps it says something that it was by far the most modern selection.
I’m not sure I’d want to be friends with someone who didn’t like CHARADE.
Holy Hell – I’d never have noticed that about the timing! I can’t think of any instance where a film makes a knowing wink like that to something that’s yet to happen. It’d be like Johnny Lee Miller calling Ewan McGregor “Jedi” in the middle of TRAINSPOTTING. Nice catch Jandy!
I only knew that Charade was 1963 and My Fair Lady was 1964. I had to look up the release dates. The casting was a big deal because if they had cast Julie Andrews, who originated the role on Broadway (where it set records by running from 1956 to 1962 – no, I didn’t know that, I just looked it up), it would’ve been her first movie and the producers were too scared to do that. Hence, Hepburn. And then Andrews taking Mary Poppins and winning the Oscar. But yeah, I can’t imagine they’d make such an odd, throwaway joke just based on a play that closed over a year earlier – it had to be based on Hepburn’s known casting in the upcoming movie version. If they did make it innocently, though – wow, prescient! 🙂
This one sounds really good too. I’m weird about spoilers, most of the time they don’t bother me, some I’ll actively go looking for (especially in TV shows) and others I shut out completely. The only times I’ve ever watched a film and was disappointed that I knew spoilers were Million Dollar Baby (someone came out of the showing ahead of time and loudly bitched about the ending) and The Skin I Live In (My co worker accidentally told me the big twist thinking it was a known plot point before he’d even seen it) I really wonder if I would’ve saw The Skin I Live In coming.
I think with those two it’s different because “the twist” is so wickedly unexpected. From about the ten minute mark onward in Charade (and lots of films like it), your brain knows that there is a puzzle to be put together. So at the end of the day, it doesn’t feel like the rug’s been pulled out from under you the same way it would with MILLION DOLLAR BABY or certainly THE SKIN I LIVE IN.
Thanks for adding me, even though I was late!
It’s fascinating what you said about spoilers. I’ve always, as far as I can remember, gone in blind with thinking that it will improve my experience a lot. Yet, I kind of feel like that’s not the case anymore – I can’t remember the last time I watched a film for the first time without feeling overwhelmed by trying to suck in the plot, the characters, the details, the chemistry, casting, costume design, etc etc etc. Yet, I don’t know the twist in Psycho, and god, I think it will be an incredible watching experience.
The film sounds so lovely! I think I’ll have a movie marathon with Hepburn films, I have an entire list of them that I want to see. And Grant, of course.
I’ll always add the latecomers! There was another addition after you, and there’s at least one more still to come.
Spoilers are a funny thing. On the one hand they put us into a particular mindset, bracing ourselves with what’s to come. On the other hand they can drastically alter the emotional impact a surprising pay-off can have.
Now get out there and watch Psycho.
This sounds like a fun film; I would definitely watch this one (another one to add to my watch-list). Aubrey Hepburn looks gorgeous in anything – she has a kind of charismatic beauty that allows her to look beautiful in anything she wears. Cary Grant’s a great actor and I haven’t been disappointed with his performance in films I’ve seen.
What is your avatar image? I really like that shot.
You’re right – you could put Hepburn in a burlap sack and she’d make it look like haute couture. It’s just the range of styles she wears in this movie that sets it apart a little bit. Or maybe I just love Audrey in a hat.
Very nice review! I haven’t seen Charade in ages but you made me want to watch it again and pointed out all the reasons why it’s a delightful mystery/romance. It has a little bit of everything, and who can argue about Cary, Audrey and Walter all in one movie?! Audrey’s clothing are the icing on the cake. 🙂
Can’t wait for next month’s blindspot!
It’s been on my to-watch list for-ev-errrr, so when it came time to populate my blindspot list for the year, it was an easy pull. Sometimes my to-watch list is where movies go to die.
Now that I’ve seen it, I’m thinking I’ll have to buy myself a copy sooner or later! It’s a vicious cycle.
Oh I love Audrey Hepburn. I’m pretty sure I’ll watch this in the future. By the way, it’s nice and cool doing this blogathon together. I wish I’d like my first movie more though.
Thanks Andina.
Because of the aura attached to a lot of these titles, it’s already an uphill battle when we finally sit down to watch them. But even putting aside their reputation, sometimes they just aren’t to our taste. There have been a few disappointments for me in the 25 films I’ve watched to date (namely LOCK, STOCK, AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS), but the good thing is that you can just shrug it off and move forward.
Good review, Ryan. I saw Charade last year, I thought the leads had excellent chemistry. A bit far fetched that Audrey Hepburn character knows none of her husband’s family or friends, yet is entertaining, with surprising developments.
Have you seen Arsenic and Old Lace (1944)? If not, you should. There’s even more goofiness from Cary Grant in that, and is probably my fav performance by him.
I caught ARSENIC for the first time a year or so ago and loved every second of it. It’s really awesome the way that Cary Grant can do goofy so well considering how much he’s known for charm.
You know I really dislike rewatching movies. Probably because I can retain the mystery/pattern within the story. I’ve just recently started a rewatch list of movies I’ve seen that I need to revisit.
In fact Charade is one where I’d seen it as a kid then again later as an adult. The whole mystery felt familiar but it was still really good. I love that about Hepburn and Grant. Part of Hepburns allure is that almost any movie she’s in the character is defined by her clothes and style.
This is how I know you and I have just met – because you haven’t heard my position on rewatching film. I’m a bit belligerent at times about getting people to rewatch things they *didn’t* like…not to mention rewatching things they did for added nuance.
I know a lot of people who share the same position as you though – where once is plenty. It’s actually not a bad idea, after all there are only so many hours in the day…and so many new films to watch!
I am curious to know what titles are on your list though.
The only Hepburn movie I’ve seen in Breakfast at Tiffany’s and if she’s even more stylish in this one, I can’t wait to see it! On spoilers, well, I actually now a lot of people that dislike going into movies without knowing anything. Personally, I enjoy doing that, but it’s nearly impossible these days, so I don’t mind having some small things ‘spoiled’.
(Sorry – Just realized I never responded to this)
Breakfast at Tiffany’s is more iconic than “good” at this stage, though I’d highly recommend reading Truman Capote’s novella. It’s much darker, especially in the way that things implied about Holly are much more overt. Besides CHARADE though, I’d also point you towards SABRINA, ROMAN HOLIDAY, FUNNY FACE, MY FAIR LADY, and LOVE IN THE AFTERNOON for “essential Audrey”
I really need to see this! It’s not on my BlindSpot list but now I wish I had included it. Btw, I love that BlindSpot graphic you’ve got here, may I *borrow* the design but swap out the background image? Thanks Ryan!
That should be okay, but check with Beatrice from http://bigscreensmallwords.blogspot.com/
…it’s her design.
What a coincidence, since it’s your 1st BS last year, now it’s mine on 2015! I remember that Jerry Maguire line, and I understand after watching various Hepburn movies.
I take this as a shameful reminder that I’m yet to give everybody’s Blindspot entries a proper read. I shall make sure to check yours out soon.
tell me – did you ever see that remake that I mentioned? The one with Mark Whalberg and Thandie Newton?
I haven’t seen it but I think it would be interesting now that I have seen the original. Would you recommend it?