Despite being decades old, Nicolas Roeg’s Don’t Look Now remains an uncompromisingly honest and staggeringly evocative motion picture which tackles the mysteries of life, death, fear, hope, love and grief. The movie stems from the pen of English writer Daphne du Maurier, whose works of literature are a rich source for filmmakers – her stories also formed the genesis for such Alfred Hitchcock movies as The Birds, Rebecca, and Jamaica Inn. While Don’t Look Now is not quite of the calibre of Hitchcock’s masterworks, Roeg succeeded in bringing to the screen the inherent eroticism that underpins Maurier’s writing which starkly contrasts the fear and tension of her themes. In translating the film to the big screen, a few significant changes were made to Maurier’s story, but the basic elements of the narrative remain in place.
As the story begins, it’s a dreary afternoon for the Baxter family until young Christine Baxter falls into a nearby pond and drowns. An undisclosed amount of time later, John (Sutherland) and Laura (Christie) Baxter are in the Italian city of Venice while John assists in the renovation of a local 16th Century church which is in a state of disrepair. While having lunch together, Laura meets two elderly sisters – Heather (Mason) and Wendy (Matania) – at a restaurant, the former of which is a blind psychic who claims she saw Christine safe and happy in the afterlife. The information visibly renews Laura’s psyche, and her demeanour improves dramatically. While initially sceptical and rather humoured by the event, John becomes increasingly disturbed as Laura obsesses about using the elderly sisters to communicate with Christine. When further messages reveal that their lives may be in grave danger, strange events begin to occur and John starts seeing a mysterious hooded girl, leading John to question whether the warnings may be for real.
The city of Venice was transformed into a character in itself here; mist-shrouded, labyrinthine and gloomy. The maze of streets seem to have been specifically designed to make unwary tourists lose their way, which in turn clouds John’s consciousness; rendering him unable to figure out exactly what’s happening. Don’t Look Now is usually categorised as a horror film of the supernatural variety, but it’s nothing conventional. There are no detectable poltergeists or spirits…or are there? Director Roeg possesses the canny ability to make the mundane appear sinister, and Don’t Look Now is consequently a fiendish exercise in keeping the audience wondering what things are significant, what things are merely happenstance, and what things are genuine signs that something horrible is right around the corner. This is the type of film which demands repeat viewings, as it needs to be studied frame-by-frame to fully grasp how intricately it was assembled.
For Don’t Look Now, Roeg and screenwriters Alan Scott and Chris Bryant set up a maze of subtle clues and suggestions which match the ominous labyrinth of alleyways, bridges, canals and streets which populate the Venice setting. Throughout the film, events from the past and the present intersect, often leaving you unsure as to whether you’re seeing a flashback, a flash-forward, or an event taking place in the present. While this works on one level to build tension, it works thematically as well due to the fact that the film is primarily concerned with the uncertainty of time. This theme is underscored by the numerous scenes in which characters arrive too late. Augmenting all of this is Roeg’s direction – he managed to build a powerful sense of impending doom throughout. Don’t Look Now is not the type of movie which relies on cheap thrills or exploitation elements to see it through.
Anthony Richmond’s cinematography and lighting is superbly atmospheric; painting the autumnal months in Venice with a spookily drab yet realistic colour palette. The colour red continually pops up throughout the film to symbolise two diverse things: memories of Christine, and possible threats toiling in the mundane. Due to the colours being so deliberately muted, red stands out each time it appears. However, there’s a great deal of symbolism throughout which grows increasingly heavy-handed and is too thickly ladled on. As a result, the film feels meandering. This is the type of movie that film students spend hours dissecting and writing thesis papers on, but this does not necessarily mean it is always entertaining. On the contrary, in fact – Don’t Look Now would’ve been superior and more effective if only it had been more direct. Fortunately, the wait is almost worth it for the finale, which is absolutely unforgettable.
As John and Laura Baxter, Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie are utterly remarkable; essaying a married couple who never feel anything less than authentic. A sex scene between the two is breathtakingly intimate, and their love-making is interspersed with subdued snapshots of them preparing to go out for dinner. For years, rumours have circulated that Sutherland and Christie got carried away and actually did the sexual deed on-camera. Roeg has insisted this is not true, but it’s easy to understand how the rumour got started – the scene is incredibly erotic, honest and raw in a way that’s rarely seen in films anymore.
Despite the film’s meandering nature, Don’t Look Now for the most part sustains a high level of tension through brilliant characterisation, white-knuckle set-pieces, and a constant fear of the unseen that’s seriously unnerving. Hollywood simply does not produce thrillers of this calibre anymore.
7.3/10
On the whole this isn’t a bad summation of a great, great movie but to say that ‘Don’t Look Now would’ve been superior and more effective if only it had been more direct’ is to completely miss the point of the film. It is the dream like, prophetic even portentous quality which makes the film so entrancing. If you take away the nuances of the piece then there is nothing left except a completely unremarkable thriller. For me the symbolism isn’t overdone but perfectly judged although I can understand your criticism.
I am surprised that you did not mention the opening sequence of Don’t Look Now which is one of the most extraordinary that I have ever seen – it is almost a film inside a film drawing together all the strands and themes which will be so prominent later on.
PS It is a British film and Hollywood have rarely if ever made ‘thrillers’ so brilliantly off key and poignant as this one
Tell me… Why does symbolism automatically make a film good? What is the point of heavy-handed symbolism? Every time a piece of obvious symbolism popped up, I just rolled my eyes. Cinematic symbolism is a director saying “Hey look at me! I’m clever!”. There’s just no point.
If Roeg eased up on the symbolism, Don’t Look Now would’ve been perfect; a well-acted, well-written, tense and engaging thriller. Why isn’t that enough?
I never said that symbolism automatically makes a film good and I repeat that I understood, if disagree, with your criticism of ‘heavy handed symbolism’ which I guess refers to the use of the colour red in particular as well as breaking glass and water amongst other things.
Personally I do not think that it is quite as simple as the director easing up on the use of symbols/cinematic makers to improve the film. Some of the most memorable aspects of the film are the images of the shattering glass when Sutherland’s character falls from the scaffold and the blotted image of the church at the beginning despite the symbols themselves being, as you say, obvious.
After all this is a horror movie, and a heavily gothic one at that, and therefore it follows (or subverts) its genre conventions. If the symbolism in this film says anything it is that the director recognises horror traditions and is attempting to do something different with them. If you take this away then you take away the essence of the movie and more importantly the tools which make it into a coherent piece.