James and Noah Charney on the Campbell Conversations

Campbell Conversations

Program transcript:

Grant Reeher: Welcome to the Campbell Conversations, I'm Grant Reeher. We're about to head into a series of election related programs, so today, I'm changing the subject. Two guests, who have been on the program in the past to talk about their respective books, are back with me today to talk about a new book they've written together. James Charney and Noah Charney have coauthored, “The 12-Hour Film Expert: Everything You Need to Know about Movies”. Dr. James Charney is a practicing child and adolescent psychiatrist on Yale University's medical school faculty and he's the author of, “Madness at the Movies: Understanding Mental Illness through Film”. Dr. Noah Charney is an art history professor at the University of Ljubljana and specializes in art crime. And among his many books is, “The Collector of Lives: Giorgio Vasari and the Invention of Art”. James, Noah, welcome back to the program, it’s good to see you both.

James Charney: Thanks for having us.

Noah Charney: It’s good to see you too.

GR: Well, so congratulations on this book. And before we get into the book itself, there's just something, it's not a question, I just wanted to say it. I wanted to tell you both I was very touched with your acknowledgments and where you each write while you're grateful for the other. It was a very nice tonic, particularly these day, so thank you for that. And James, I'll start with you. A basic question, why is it important to have a deeper understanding of film rather than just watching them and saying, I like this, I don't like it. What do we gain with a deeper understanding?

JC : I think to understand how something works to affect your emotions and affect your level of interest and to be kind of tuned in to the mastery of the better films, and helps you kind of kind of distinguish between a film that might be a casual entertainment and one that is going to be that thought provoking or touch you in a more personal way. And so I think watching a movie just for the fun of it is wonderful. But very often, I think it's often better for you to go back and watch it the second time and at that point start noticing some things, the kind of things that we point out in our book.

GR: Well, on that note, you've convinced me to go back and re-watch a movie that stayed with me for a very long time, ”Memento”, because you trace the lineage of that back to Citizen Kane, which is a movie I'm very familiar with. So I'm very keen to go back and do exactly what you just said. On the book itself, Noah, the two of you, you divide up your lessons into subject based categories like Comedy, Western, Suspense and so on. And when I first thought of this topic before I actually saw the book, I imagined that the two of you might have more abstract topics like using dialog, flashbacks, using spoken narrative, special effects, that kind of thing. So just explain why you made the choices that you did in terms of dividing the book up in the way that you the two of you did.

NC: Well, the idea was to have the one-stop book for anyone interested in a deeper appreciation of film. So it's not meant to be in that zooming level of detail for any one of the particular genres or subcategories of things that we could study when we look at film, but meant to be that first gateway drug, shall we say, if you're interested in the subject. So the way we divided it is largely by genres, and but we didn't have time to include every genre in the book, not enough space. But I think people search by genres. If you go on to Netflix, for example, the categories are based on genres and I think it's the way that most people tend to think about movies, but they don't necessarily know what goes into the genres, even if they know what they like.

GR: Now, that makes sense. And so, well, I'm going to use the host's prerogative here, and I'm going to pick a couple of the subject areas that are in your book that I like, though I like them all, but some that I tend to spend a lot of time watching. And James to come back to you, the Westerns, what are the essential things that our listeners ought to know about Westerns?

JC: I think the most essential thing is that it is one of the first and most popular genres of movies going back to the silent age. And that there was a fascination with the whole concept of the ever expanding frontier and there's a lot of mythmaking about the Western and many of the myths are reinforced and played with in the in the best movies. And it was only probably not until the mid-1960’s that that there was an attempt to correct some of the myths of the West, particularly in terms of attitudes toward Native Americans and this whole sense of a certain grandeur about the lone outlaw kind of taking the law into his own hands.

GR: Has there been a, it seems to me the newer Westerns that I've been watching, whether they're series on Netflix or an actual movie itself, they've changed it seems to me, the way they think about the characters, but I'm having a hard time sort of putting it into words. What’s your sense of, has there been some sort of a tectonic shift in Westerns?

JC: I think there has. It's gone in fits and starts, and I'm not exactly sure where it is now, but definitely in the late sixties and early seventies, there was a sense of revising the story of the West and understanding that the white settlers and ranchers were not necessarily the good guys with the Native Americans being some version of evil and savage. And yet that was the message that many, probably for the first 30 or 40 years of the movies was what the stories were about. So that change happened in the late sixties and has been carried over. But it's also interesting that at a certain point the Western lost popularity and there are significantly fewer of them except lately on a lot of streaming services. All of a sudden Westerns are a thing. I'm not exactly sure why that is.

GR: Yeah. I'm thinking in particular of the, sort of the Kevin Costner series, there's like three different versions of it now. There's a prequel series to the other series.

JC: So, I'm not at all embarrassed to say I haven't seen any of those. (laughter)

GR: (laughter) Okay. Well, you can only watch so much. You're listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media. I'm Grant Reeher and I'm speaking with Noah and James Charney. The father and son teamed up to write, “The 12-Hour Film Expert: Everything You Need to Know about Movies”. So, Noah, I don’t know, maybe I was just sort of assuming each of you would have an expertise on one or the other. So don't take this as an insult, but I wanted to ask you Noah, what's the essential thing about film noir that I should know?

NC: It's a wonderful genre for someone like me, who is a professor of art history, because it has a very specific esthetic. And when we look at films and genres, they're usually things that are about them that have been established by early masterpieces of the genre that help set the tone for what comes. And then we come to expect those elements in newer versions of films within that genre. But the expectation of them doesn't detract from the fact that we like them. So if you have ‘meet cutes’ in romantic comedies, it happens in every romantic comedy, but that doesn't detract from it. If you have, you know, a gun-slinging shootout at high noon in Westerns, we expect that to happen and the expectation can be part of the fun. In film noir, we have a really dramatic aesthetic, lots of chiaroscuros. So just looking at a film, not knowing the film, a still, you can probably tell if it's film noir. They're often in black and white, even more modern ones. And they look at the dark underbelly of the world, particularly postwar world wars, involving espionage. We can expect that there will be dirty dealings, that there will be double crosses and things lurking in all those wonderful shadows we see.

GR: Interesting. So to follow up on that and maybe slightly different topic, but I suppose one might think of this film as being, have one foot in the film noir, but a smaller question, but one of my favorite movies is Alfred Hitchcock's, “The Birds” and I notice that the two of you put that in the category of suspense rather than horror. I remember seeing it as a kid and I thought of it as a horror movie. Tell me why it's a suspense movie instead.

JC: Oh, that's a good question. It's a suspense movie because it is, at least for me, a wonderful demonstration of a master of suspense in Hitchcock. And moment after moment I find suspenseful rather than terrifying. But you know, go figure. There are moments that are as scary as any horror movie. But I think the best of that movie is the moments where nothing is happening. But you're anticipating something terrible about to happen.

GR: Yeah, those crows aligning on the telephone wire line. Yeah, yeah I remember that.

NC: Maybe the distinction, Grant, that comes to mind with films like that, a lot of the genres bleed into each other. So you can even have, like, horror comedies about zombies and whatnot with slapstick elements, but with, “The Birds” the question, I think, is whether the thing that you're watching it for and that you come away with is the moments of suspense where nothing's happening, but you're anticipating it. And then there brief moments of violence or whether the violent action is the thing that's driving it, in which case that edge is more of the horror.

GR: That's true, yeah. If you think about Hitchcock movies, the actual violence is really short compared to everything else, right, right. Well, let me go back to the thing I mentioned before, and Noah, I’ll stay with you. Tracking “Momento”, seeing “Citizen Kane” in that movie maybe not many of our listeners have seen “Memento”, but it was relatively popular. Track that line, that lineage for me.

NC: Well, I think the main thing that comes to mind is manipulating time and the idea that there are flash-forwards and flashbacks and the audience is not entirely clear what's happening when and where to fit it into the timeline. And “Memento” is very clever in that the whole thing goes backwards. So we're seeing the end of the film first and then the penultimate scene to the first scene. “Citizen Kane” is an early example of using elements that are bouncing around in time, also bouncing around in terms of where shots are located, things happening in the background of shots that are important. But we are looking primarily at the foreground, and it forces you to study the shot deeply. Again, this is my art history background, I like when a film makes you look closely rather than just passively feeding you whatever it has to offer. So “Citizen Kane” is an early example of a lot of things that would become staples of more artistic direction.

JC: If I can just add something to that because I think, Noah, that was that was very impressive, I like that. But the other thing about “Citizen Kane” is that it is one of the very early examples of unreliable narrators in that you're having, people are interviewed and each one has a different take on Kane and none of them are the right one. Each one is one different person's perception. And I think that is also something that's central to “Memento”.

GR: That's interesting. You're listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media. I'm Grant Reeher and I'm talking with James Charney and Noah Charney. They are father and son, they’re both academics and they've combined to write, “The 12-Hour Film Expert: Everything You Need to Know about Movies”. So Noah, I'll ask you this question, the writer Joseph Campbell, made famous this notion that there is a common narrative arc of the hero's journey, which Campbell argued, you know, it goes across time, it goes across culture, you see it everywhere. And you can obviously see it in films, too. I mean, we talked about Westerns before, I think you can make the argument they fit in that. But, you know, I'm thinking of “To Kill a Mockingbird” the arc that Atticus Finch travels or “Star Wars”, you know, the arc that Luke travels. And you've written, Noah, about mythology in art. So I just wanted to hear your reflections about that, Campbell myth of the hero and how it fits into movies.

NC: Well, it's absolutely true. And there have been a handful of authors who have talked about how there's a finite number of stories that exist for us humans. And every story fits into one of a number of general categories. And we have things like a hero’s quest or a homecoming. And within those stories, they can be divided into acts. And understanding the basic superstructure that is in play in honestly, most film scripts, there's a three act structure or a five act structure, depending on how specific you want to get. And the three act structure is roughly divided into a half hour each. The first half hours establishing character and setting the scene, the time and place, the rules of the world that you're in, if it's sci-fi or fantasy, for example. Then there's the complication that launches the story at about the half hour marker. And then the middle part is the hero trying to figure out how to get out of the pickle that they're in or complete the quest. And then the final third is leading up to a climactic end that should in some way change the protagonist in a meaningful way that gives us some satisfaction. And this structure goes back to ancient Athens. People were writing plays using this format, and it seems to work for us humans. But I've also written about, the article of mine that gets the most mail is something I wrote for The Atlantic called the “Sitcom Code”, which is breaking down sitcoms into minute by minute formulae that works amazingly with almost every sitcom you could ever watch. And so this formula, from a writer's perspective, makes it easier to plug and play. And okay, what's the twist here, who are the characters? And it's the kind of thing that once you know to look for it, you can never un-see it. But to me, it makes it that much more interesting.

GR: That's interesting. So, James, I've got probably the hardest question I'm going to ask you, saved it for the father. What's the difference between a really good movie and a great movie?

JC: That is a hard question. A lot depends on who's watching and when you're watching. I think a great movie stands above time. In other words, it isn't, it may be about a particular time, it may be about a particular situation, but there's something about it that's elemental and that speaks to you not only depending on when you've watched it, but also in what mood you're in when you watch it, who you watch it with, and when you watch it again ten years later. A good movie may be terrific now and may and may wear not so well over time. I guess that's the difference.

GR: Yeah. I'm thinking of like, to put it, that I would put in the great movie category movies like “The Godfather” and “Goodfellas”. You know, it's just they're about different moments in time, but they're, yeah.

JC: Yeah, I would agree with those, yeah.

GR: Interesting. Interesting. So obviously, there's a question I want to ask you is how the two of you got along, father and son writing a book? Because I mentioned at the outset, it sounds like you obviously got along pretty well and you were able to at least publish the book. But tell me about that process. What were the biggest disagreements about? How did it go?

NC: Well, the process was really seamless and a lot of fun. And my father had finished his previous book, “Madness at the Movies” and it looked like he could use a hobby so, (laughter) you know, maybe we should do a book together. And I have a small series with the same publisher called The 12, or fill in the blank, I have, “The 12-hour Art Expert”. Coming out shortly is, “The 12-hour Author” about writing. And the, “12-hour Film Expert” seemed like something that was of interest to both of us. So first we made these lists, and some of the things I think for readers is the most fun is we have a film menu at the back of the book.

GR: I saw that, yeah.

NC: With recommended films in different genres that are not written up in the main text but are also worth considering. And so first we needed a big master list, and that's the fun part. And I had grown up watching lots of these classic films because back in the day my dad had on VHS cassettes, if we remember what those are.

GR: Oh yeah.

NC: I recorded about a thousand movies, recorded off the TV, skipping the commercials by pressing pause as much as possible, and I had seen most of them with him growing up, so I had a grounding in the films he liked, and that made it easier to find common ground.

GR: Yeah, that's interesting. And James, that must have been a labor of love.

JC: Well, it was a labor of love for me, and it was a labor of love to be able to share it with Noah and with his mom. And, and it is a labor of love sharing it with the grandkids.

GR: If you've just joined us, you're listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media and my guests are Noah and James Charney. So, Noah, if you had to pick one movie that you think is the best movie that most people have never heard of, and let's take it, most people in America. So there may be a movie that's famous someplace else, perhaps. But what do you think is the best movie that that we haven't heard of on this program?

NC: I have an art historian’s answer for you that's probably “Mirror” by Andrei Tarkovsky. Now Tarkovsky is a Russian filmmaker who is beloved of film studies majors, and nobody else has heard of him. And his films are very slow, they're almost like looking at very beautiful slide shows, but I absolutely love it. And if you're interested in art history, there are all of these references that you could play with the films he made. He only made, I think, eight films total. The most famous ones are “Nostalghia”, “Stalker”, “Solaris”, which was remade by George Clooney and a Hollywood version. And he's absolutely amazing, but he's a bit of an acquired taste, you have to be in the right mood for it. But if you're interested in artistic films, it doesn't get any better.

GR: Yeah, I think I've heard of “Nostalghia”, but I hadn't heard of “Mirror”, so I'll add that one to my list. James, this is a question about films in America, because you wrote a book about using films to, what do they reflect about what we think and what we know and can know about mental health. So, James, if I came down to Earth from Mars and I asked you for one movie, one film to best understand America, what would you recommend for me? I'm asking you the tough ones, I guess.

NC: Yes, you are. One film that represents America, (recording reflects a misspoken titles and crosstalk, followed by the answer) “The Best Years of our Lives”. I think it is it's a wonderful portrait of a middle-America at its best.

GR: Yeah. And it's got different classes in it, and it's got tragedy and hope mixed together. Very powerful. Yeah, that's, I like that answer. So we've got about, oh, I'd say five and a half, six minutes left and I wanted to do something a little different at the end and I'm glad we have some time for it. I want to ask you a series of relatively brief questions. You do have enough time to kind of give me a reason why. So it's not a pure lightning round, but it's kind of like a lightning round. And actually, given the time we have left, I may throw in mine, too. Now, I'll put in the dilettante's perspective here. But first of all and James as well, Noah we’ll start with you because, Noah what's the most important movie that's ever been made?

NC: The first one that came to mind was “All the President's Men”.

GR: Wow.

NC: And that was, that's my instant reaction because it's so good. But it also, it's important because it shows that we can't just be automatically beholden to authority. Sometimes we have to shake things up and ask deeper questions.

GR: Interesting. James, what would you say is the most important movie ever made?

JC: I think I don't know. I'd say that's a hard one. It would be hard for me to pinpoint the important film.

GR: Well, my mind went to the negative rather than the positive, I guess. And I was thinking of “Birth of a Nation”. But I don't know what the two of you would think about that.

JC: You know what, that was on the tip of my tongue. And for some reason, I was reluctant to say it. Yes, “Birth of a Nation” in part because it is an absolutely brilliant film about a very bad series of ideas and concepts and in many ways, it can stand as a warning to be to be wary of something that is brilliantly presented, but may have an underpinning of something that is dark and worrisome.

GR: Well, James, I'll stick with you the next one. Best film ever made?

JC: Well, then we're in the category of favorite film because every one of us has a best film. My favorite film of all is, “Singing in the Rain”. It's the film that puts me in a happy place every time I see it. It's the best antidepressant I know better than Prozac and it's a perfectly made film. I mean, the perfectly made film that people will point to is, “Casablanca”. And but that's, you know, that's a heartfelt drama. But if I want to put a smile on my face, “Singing in the Rain” is it.

GR: Noah, I have a feeling you're going to have a different answer on that one. What do you think is the best film ever made?

NC: There is a correct answer, which is, “Casablanca”. That's the one that gives you an A+ in class, because it's often used as the exemplar of the perfect film, from script to acting to casting, you name it. And I think it probably is from my perspective, too. But my favorite film is, “Airplane”, which is totally silly and ridiculous. And I've seen it probably several dozen times. So that has nothing to do with anything, but Casablanca is the correct answer you are looking for.

GR: I think in my top three, there's a film like that, and it's “This is Spinal Tap”.

NC: Oh, that's a classic.

JC: That's great, that's a great movie.

GR: So, Noah, next one. What's the worst major motion picture ever made? One where there was a significant amount of investment in it and it just was really awful.

NC: The first one that comes to mind was, “Waterworld”.

GR: Yeah, I thought of that.

NC: Because it famously had this enormous budget and it was just dreadful. And it lost a huge amount of money. And it was famous for being a total failure. So that's probably the one that I'm most people would say. I'm not sure if that's the A+ answer, but I'll give you that one.

JC: There's an interesting kind of caveat about that, which is very often a film that people think is an absolute disaster, I'm thinking of “Ishtar”, which is another film that people, at the time it came out it was the ultimate failure, written by and directed by Elaine May. And now people are starting to give it a second look and all of a sudden 25, 30 years later, they're saying maybe this may be a great film.

GR: Yeah, I thought it was, I enjoyed it. I thought it was funny, very funny at times. So the last one of these and we've only got about a minute left, James, you already said what your favorite movie was, so now I'm going to say, what's your second favorite movie after “Singing in the Rain”?

JC: My second favorite movie is another musical, I love musicals, “Yankee Doodle Dandy” for the same reason, starring James Cagney, a patriotic movie that he did to undo his gangster image and to go back to his roots because he was a vaudeville tap dancer before he was a movie star. And it's a biography of George M. Cohan, a superstar of the turn of the century at the beginning of the 20th century, who wrote music and was a triple threat. He wrote music, he directed he wrote scripts and he danced.

GR: Wow.

JC: James Cagney did all of those things. And again, there are numbers in there that just immediately make me smile.

GR: Well, Noah, in 15 seconds only. What's your favorite movie?

NC: “Manhattan” by Woody Allen. I absolutely love it. So that's the one I would point you to if “Airplane” has been checked out of the library.

GR: Well, we'll have to leave it there. That was James Charney and Noah Charney and again, their new book is, “The 12-Hour Film Expert: Everything You Need to Know about Movies”. If you like movies as much as I do, you'll love the book. Thanks for both of you for making the time to talk me.

NC: Grant, thanks so much for such a good interview. It's hard to balance with two people, so thank you.

GR: (laughter) My pleasure.

JC: I really enjoyed it. Grant, thank you very much.

GR: I did, too. You've been listening to the Campbell Conversations on WRVO Public Media, conversations in the public interest.