Brief
reflections on themes and characters in “Three Days of the Condor”
Directed
by Sidney Pollack
Written
by Lorenzo Semple Jr and David Rayfiel
Based
on a novel by James Grady
Starring
Robert Redford, Faye Dunaway, Cliff Robertson and Max von Sydow
Entertaining,
thought-provoking and occasionally humorous, “Three Days of the Condor” is a
spy story that reflects the disbelief, disillusion and moral morass that
existed in the wake of the Watergate revelations, as the film focuses on the
enforced rapid moral maturation and loss of trusting innocence of principal
character Joe Turner.
Among other themes, the
film explores the relationship between the individual and the State, and the
lengths to which the State will go in the name of preserving and protecting its
interests, even showing willing to sacrifice a few individuals for the
perceived overall benefit of the State. Beneath a façade of co-operation,
humanity and diplomacy, the powers that be are ready to protect their interests
using whatever unscrupulous and vicious methods are necessary.
Of course, when exposed
to such underhand and potentially brutal tactics, innocent people may be
transformed or mutated by the situation they face as they fight for survival.
Joe Turner is relatively
innocent and happy-go-lucky. He is content to work for the C.I.A. in the
American Literary and Historical Society where he indulges his imagination and
plays a game of seeking plots, messages, strategies, codes or intrigues in
modern literature that might reflect government policies or inspire them. He
does not take his work too seriously and is happy and willing to pander to the
C.I.A.’s almost whimsical search, as he sees it, for information and
intelligence, and his attitude may well reflect the trusting faith of the
American people in its political and security organisations prior to Watergate.
The sole survivor, by
pure luck and circumstance, of a merciless and brutal attack on his workplace,
Joe soon learns to suspend trust and question everything and everyone. His loss
of confidence in colleagues and surroundings combined with his determination to
survive in the face of extreme danger transform or perhaps even corrupt him to
some degree, causing him to abduct and abuse another innocent, Kathy, whose
relatively humdrum life is suddenly modified by danger and excitement.
The lives and outlooks of
these two “innocents” are changed forever by these challenging events. As they
fight for their lives, a contagious amorality and questioning of dull social
convention add purpose, excitement and a savouring of life to their existence.
The façade of civilisation has slipped and they have been exposed to an
underlying reality of amorality where people in positions of authority act as
they see fit to advance or protect whatever position they adhere to, and where
people like them do what they must to outwit their pursuers and survive.
There is a suggestion
that there are secretive and discrete layers of government and security, and
responsibility and accountability seem to take second place to the exercise of
power, authority and personal perception. It appears that one may lose perspective
and abuse authority if actions are not overseen or restricted by legality or
morality, often at the expense of others’ possessions, freedom or even their
lives.
Joubert is perhaps the
ultimate example of adaptability to this morally fluid situation. He takes
pride in the standard of his work as an assassin but has learned not to
question or doubt the motives of those who pay him. He recognises no moral
hierarchy and he simply does what he must do to survive and be paid. He even
suggests that Joe could do worse than follow his example since, having seen the
reality behind the façade, he can never return to “normality”.
In the end, however, Joe
puts his trust in humanity, common decency and the press. He does not believe
the people or the government would sanction possible military intervention in
another nation to ensure access to precious resources (a situation that may
resonate with observers of modern political reality), and he threatens to
expose the plan he has uncovered inadvertently and cause huge embarrassment by
having his account of events printed in a newspaper.
However, this stand for
principle in what is essentially a modern film noir is challenged as Joe is
faced with two questions; will the press show the independence of spirit and
integrity necessary to print his story, and will a relatively apathetic and
self-centred public put legality and morality above its own comfort and interests?
Interesting questions that cast doubt on the tenets of our civilisation and
which underline the film noir roots of our film and it is left largely to the
audience to consider which direction events would take…
In interviews, Sidney Pollack
and Robert Redford claimed they only wanted to make a spy thriller and they
objected to various readings of their work but the storyline and
characterisations invite thought-provoking interpretation and I have to say I
think they were being somewhat disingenuous in their protests.
My thanks for taking the
time to read this article. I hope you found it of some value.
Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)
No comments:
Post a Comment