Both of these pictures were box-office successes, garnered awards, and the second, The Sting, reunited the two stars of the first with director George Roy Hill. The four year wait was worth it. Those stars, Paul Newman and Robert Redford, are, to this hetero eye, two of the best-looking men ever to have graced the screen. But beyond that quality (in fact well ahead of it) each is confident enough in his own presence not to go in search of scenes to steal - instead they play off each other beautifully.
Why do I mention villainy in my pretended exam question? Because beneath the wit and charm (and there is a lot of both) both characters in both films are unreconstituted crooks. The attractiveness of criminals is hardly a novel feature but rarely can it have been put in the hands of such reliable charm. You like Butch and Sundance; you pull for the grifters in The Sting. This ought (wearing a moralist's hat) to be a problem. that it is not, is commentary on the skill of the film-making and (getting all philosophical) on human nature.
As I review my rabbiting on, I realise that I have not distinguished the treatments of villainy in the two films. And here's the clever answer - there is no difference when push comes to shove and moral relativism is a dangerous game to play, particularly for someone who made his living as a lawyer. So I'll shut up and merely recommend both movies - I can't split them - 76/100 each.
No comments:
Post a Comment