Dance First
Samuel Beckett’s 1953 novel “The Unnamable” contains one of the most memorable lines in an English text “I can’t go on. I’ll go on.” This is how these words by the Irish poet, playwright, essayist and novelist are overarchingly understood. They convey clearly and simply, not least in themselves, the inconsolable anguish and the irrational tenacity that one might calls the crusade of modern man. They convey despair, and then they twist it. In a way, they are representative of the whole edifice of his work.
This film called ‘Dance First’ is based on the penultimate language of the playwright on ‘Waiting for Godot’ which is best renowned its unforgiving and absurd elements. “Maybe he’d gesture first and only think of the possible ways to pleasure the lady later,” was Estragon’s line as he fixed his sights on the gaffed little figure of Lucky who’d been turned into a slave by Pozzo. So much so has oppression oppressed Lucky that he seems to have difficulty in overcoming that.
In this particular fictional biopic directed by James Marsh who, let’s face it, is not likely to do Beckett any better than he did Stephen Hawking in the simplistic biopic about him “The Theory of Everything” from 2014 the problems of life are much more traditionally represented.
Shot in black and white in the style of old movies, the film almost cheerfully indulges in some of the things that are rejected in Beckett’s work, like soporific musical compositions (Benoit Viellefon), unpleasant characters who might seem ‘acceptable’ and could be considered ‘target figures’, and a few simple and uncomplicated turbulent love affairs that end in emotional devastation and resurrection. Except within the parameters it sets for itself, however, the film, purely black and white is mostly interesting rather than totally unpleasant. (But let this be underlined this film does not even care to give the “Dance first” quote the respect it has for Beckett the man and as a normal cretin per se, the movie just mentions it in passing towards the end that “he told a student this”).
This is partly due to the performance Gabriel Byrne gives as the older Beckett where he bears some of that stiff knitted intelligence. As Seth finds out, Beckett is remembered better for this as he won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1969. He was most upset over it and referred to it as a ‘calamity’ instead. More nearly in fact, however, the ceremonies are popularly depicted as rapture retribution as to a Beckett thought process normally confined to the safety of his glorious literary achievements, in a sjambok bad Beckett where he all but leaps out of his skin, recoiling in horror through the noise of the general, and actual honouring him, and actually proceeded to hop scotch over a substantial distance, even as, Burke, Burke, Burke the thing couldn’t join the award giving for its Cast in the cavernous angularity of the theatre, a futuristic Beckett (Byrne at some level ‘responds’ as Beckett) finds himself in a teleconferencing shed and gets some action with the audience or in a conversational forum, the missing lovers in the storm have received the Nobel socket.
Haven’t they donated it to Trinity College, his university? It should be noted that this conversation triggers memories of the male and female characters in his life. Let us start with his mother, who is both a genius and very hot-tempered, who is always at loggerheads with her son when it comes to his works. Lucia Joyce, who is the ‘glue’ between Beckett and the true object of his fascination, her father James (we all know him, the writer); Alfred Peron, the mate that taught Beckett French which then became his language in writing. (Pernon’s awful destiny has been assumed to influence the character of Lucky and his fortune). And more.
As regards the focus of the film itself, it does not take much interest in the life of the author. Looking at the important events in the life of Beckett, this is not a requirement. While young Sam (Fionn O’Shea) is quite shy of a man, which is so hard to imagine, he possesses a degree of confidence that women love, some of them were portrayed in this film by Maxine Peake and Sandrine Bonnaire. He moves to Paris in 1937 and becomes a member of the French Resistance during World War II and displays a great deal of bravery and resourcefulness.
Just as he encounters the BBC translator Barbara Bray (Peake), there is a sudden change as although his admiration for his wife Suzanne (Bonnaire) is evident, he cannot keep his eyes off her. This is the celebrated Beckett in the age of film who impersonates himself ‘What does a snake look like, to you?’ he demands of his other half.
What one does not see in the film, is much more his health hindered by medical problems (persistent cysts) and sporting prowess (he used to play cricket at a very good level), how he has had a very lengthy romance with the art collector Peggy Guggenheim long before his association with Suzanne Dechevaux-Dumesnil. And it makes things up placing him at the Noble Awards, in a non dream sequence when in fact he did not attend the ceremony. There are often the impression that what is expected of Samuel Beckett by the movie at the end is for him not to have been Samuel Beckett.
For More Movies Visit Putlocker.