‘The Small
Back Room’ (1949) is a Powell and Pressburger film, made in association with
Alexander Korda’s London Films. It has a marvellous pedigree – following on
from such Archers’ classics as ‘A Canterbury Tale’ and ‘Black Narcissus’, the
latter sharing Kathleen Byron and David Farrar in lead roles. There is a good solid supporting cast too,
including Cyril Cusack, Sid James and Jack Hawkins. A noir atmosphere
comfortably envelopes the viewer, the film wraps itself around you like a heavy
blanket. Then there is the Powell and
Pressburger attention to detail, the highlighting of sights, sounds or figures
of speech that really make their films come to life. My favourite thing in this film is towards
the end, when Farrar’s character has to go and diffuse a bomb on Chesil
Bank. The crunching of pebbles and
Farrar’s struggle to walk over them, coupled with the wheeling cries of the
gulls. This is a moment of bliss, this
juxtaposition of the mundane and the tension of a bomb that could blow at any
second. This is one fantastic film – so why isn’t it up there with ‘A
Canterbury Tale’ or ‘…Colonel Blimp’?
Although ‘The
Small Back Room’ was critically well received at the time, and the internet is
full of appreciative reviews, contemporary audiences didn’t take to it and it
flopped at the box office. The reason for this can only be that the subject
matter put people off from going to see it. Although filmed in 1949, the story
is set in 1943, and the back room in the title references so called “back room
boys.” It looks at the scientists
involved in the study and development of weaponry. One sub plot covers the
discussions around a new gun, while the main story involves Farrar’s character (Rice)
tackling a new, unknown bomb that has been appearing at various locations. The
serious tone is enhanced further by Rice suffering with his prosthetic foot and
battling with the only thing that really helps him to handle the pain – Whisky.
It seems that it is this that put people off – guns, bombs, bravery and
personal misery. When you’re only just getting over suffering the same thing
yourself, the last thing you want to see at the cinema is more of the same.
It perhaps
shows us an anomalous period in cinema. These days we can’t get enough of the
1940s. We will take any opportunity to
commemorate events from this period, and films and books from or covering this
era remain popular. When the war itself
raged, many films boosted morale by showing the British at their fighting best,
whether this be ‘In Which We Serve’ at
sea or ‘Millions Like Us’ in the factories. I think that if ‘The Small Back
Room’ had actually been released in 1943 it may well have fared a lot better as
a dramatic look at how our brave scientists were cleverer than the Nazi ones.
But instead, it was released when the wartime adrenaline had stopped pumping,
and we were left with piles of rubble and worse rationing than ever. If film
was to reference any of this, it had better be aimed at cheering people up.
Another 1949 film was ‘Passport to Pimlico’, a story about rationing that
delivered a humorous look at why we should continue to put up with it –
focusing on the end result. It was just
time to look forward and not back for a while.
Due to bad
timing alone, ‘The Small Back Room’ is a forgotten classic. Please revisit it
and give it a little love.
***
Visit my new History Usherette Spin off blog...looking at the acting profession in the 1940s and 1950s including a fictional account entitled "When Britannia Poked Her Trident."
No comments:
Post a Comment