sign in sign up
<<
Home , Armand Assante, Dog Day Afternoon, Find Me Guilty, Frederick Wiseman, Peter Finch, Prince of the City

arts arts April 12, 2011 Prince of City Prince of New Yo rk City The late director had a feel for the place and itsThpeoplee late director Sidney Lumet By Wesley Morris circumstances,hadurbanaandfeelother- for the place and its people GLOBE STAFF wise, bring out in a person some- idney Lumet’s chief thing you didn’t seeBycomingWesle. Hiys Morris circumstances, urban and other- preoccupation wasn’t movies, for instance, couldGLOBEbe STAFF wise, bring out in a person some- art. It was right and buffets of cutaways to the stoic, wrong in the American nonplussed, or terrifiedidnefacesy Lumeof t’s chief thing you didn’t see coming. His Scity, nearly always in bit players and extras.preoccupation wasn’t movies, for instance, could be New York. Lumet died Saturday His best films — fromart.1973’It wass right and buffets of cutaways to the stoic, morning. He was 86, and made ‘‘’’ on down — wrongare set inin the American nonplussed, or terrified faces of his first film in 1957, in his early New York, and when thecity,Monearlyunt always in bit players and extras. 30s, after having spent most the Rushmore ofSgreat New York New York. Lumet died Saturday His best films — from 1973’s directing television — directors is made, the selection serious television. That first committeemorningmight have. Hea toughwas 86, and made ‘‘Serpico’’ on down — are set in movie was ‘‘12 Angry Men,’’ and time figuringhisoutfirstwhosefilmheadin 1957, in his early New York, and when the Mount has there been a more sincerely goes alongside30s,Maafrtterin Scorsesehaving ’sspent, most the Rushmore of great New York volcanic movie about the law — Woody Allen1950’s, ands direcSpiketingLee’s.television — directors is made, the selection or a family of addicts (‘‘Long Cassavetes?seriousWarhol?teleI’d votevision.for That first committee might have a tough Day’s Journey Into Night’’), po- Lumet — if only for the warm, movie was ‘‘12 Angry Men,’’ and time figuring out whose head lice corruption (‘‘Serpico’’), bank illustrative opening montage of robbery (‘‘’’), ‘‘Dog Day Afhasternoon,there’’ whichbeen a more sincerely goes alongside ’s, TV (‘‘Network’’), or abotched skips aroundvolcanicNew Yorkmovielookingabout the law — ’s, and ’s. heist (‘‘Before the Devil Knows for an electricor asorfamilyt of troubleof addicand ts (‘‘Long Cassavetes? Warhol? I’d vote for You’re Dead’’)? finds it in aDacary’fulls Joofurnebankyrob-Into Night’’), po- Lumet — if only for the warm, Mostly, he dealt with crime bers. But thereliceiscorruptionmuch more(‘‘Serpico’’), bank illustrative opening montage of and corruption (political, psycho- where that came from — both in logical, ethical). But those senses that movie robberand in mosty (‘‘Dogof Lu-Day Afternoon’’), ‘‘Dog Day Afternoon,’’ which of order and propriety kept him met’s. TV (‘‘Network’’), or abotched skips around New York looking away from pulp and out of the Lumet mightheistha(‘‘Beve alsoforebe-the Devil Knows for an electric sort of trouble and gutter. He was trying to answer come the mostYou’influentialre Dead’’)?Ameri- finds it in a car full of bank rob- questions that transcend conven- can director ofMothe stlylast,50heyears.dealt with crime bers. But there is much more tional film genres. He wasn’t Consciouslyandor notcorruption, his movies’(political, psycho- where that came from — both in interested in pure evil — or pure vitality — the exhilaration of, say, goodness, either. Lumet brought ‘‘12 Angry Melogical,n,’’ ‘‘Thete Pahical).wnbro-But those senses that movie and in most of Lu- to life all sorts of venality and ker,’’ ‘‘Serpico,of’’order‘‘Dog Daandy Afproprieter- ty kept him met’s. desperation in the genre of ‘‘New noon,’’ ‘‘Netawwork,ay’’from‘‘Princepulpof theand out of the Lumet might have also be- York.’’ He was in a unique posi- City,’’ ‘‘The Vegutrdictert,.’’Heandwas‘‘Q&Atr’’ying— to answer come the most influential Ameri- tion to do so. He came to the is in the DNquestionsA of other moviesthat trandanscend conven- can director of the last 50 years. movies when Hollywood was TV. In 2007tionalalone, filmthe yeargenres.of He wasn’t Consciously or not, his movies’ transitioning from the 1940s and ‘‘Before the Devil Knows You’re ’50s comforts of the soundstage Dead,’’ you interestedcould sense Lumein puret evil — or pure vitality — the exhilaration of, say, and of moral tidiness to a wilder, coursing throughgoodness,the pareitheranoia-. Lumet brought ‘‘12 Angry Men,’’ ‘‘The Pawnbro- more visceral realism that was driven corruptionto life allthrillersorts‘‘Mofi- venality and ker,’’ ‘‘Serpico,’’ ‘‘Dog Day After- inextricable from the madness chael Claytondesper’’ andathauntingion in thethe genre of ‘‘New noon,’’ ‘‘Network,’’ ‘‘Prince of the roiling the country in the brotherly divideYork.of’’ He‘‘WewasOwninthea unique posi- City,’’ ‘‘,’’ and ‘‘Q&A’’ — and ’70s. Lumet was perfect for Night’’ and, to some extent, tion to do so. He came to the is in the DNA of other movies and that change. He brought together ‘‘American Gangster,’’ not to an old-fashioned moral sensibil- mention themoviesfraternalwhenplay-Hollywood was TV. In 2007 alone, the year of ity and on-location authenticity. ground of thetransitioning‘‘Ocean’s’’ moviesfrom the 1940s and ‘‘Before the Devil Knows You’re He was the most reliable you-are- and the half-jolly’50s comfor, half-dismats ofyedthe soundstage Dead,’’ you could sense Lumet there American director of the human touchandSpikofemorLeealusedtidinessfor to a wilder, coursing through the paranoia- ’70s. 2006’s ‘‘InsidemoreMaviscern.’’ (Whenal realismI that was driven corruption thriller ‘‘Mi- Lumet was born in Philadel- met with Lumet a couple of years phia, to a couple of Yiddish ac- ago, he toldinemextricableLee calledfromto the madness chael Clayton’’ and haunting the tors, but he lived most of his life warn him tharoilingt sometheof thacountrt touchy in the 1960s brotherly divide of ‘‘We Own the in New York. He knew and loved was indeedandLume’70t’s.s.) Lumet was perfect for Night’’ and, to some extent, the city, and was drawn to its In fact, mass-mediathat changcue.ltureHe brought together ‘‘American Gangster,’’ not to problems and the possibility of has finally goanneold-fashionedso bonkers thatmoral sensibil- mention the fraternal play- solving them, if only in fiction. ‘‘Network,’’itwhichy andLumeon-locat directiont- authenticity. ground of the ‘‘Ocean’s’’ movies Even better, he knew the people. ed from ’s nucle- MARK J. TERRILL//FILE Character, of course, is what ar bomb ofHea scriptwas, nowthe mostseemsreliable you-are- and the half-jolly, half-dismayed , who starred in Sidney Lumet’s ‘‘Dog Day Afternoon’’ and ‘‘Serpico,’’ presented the separates a Lumet picture from beyond timeless.thereOneAmericanof the greadirect tor of the human touch Spike Lee used for director with an honorary Oscar in 2005. many other directors’ — the way movie satires’70hass. become simply 2006’s ‘‘.’’ (When I Lumet was born in Philadel- met with Lumet a couple of years arts 6 BL[HE BOS[TN GLOBE L9PRIL 12, 2011 phia, to a couple of Yiddish ac- ago, he told me Lee called to tors, but he lived most of his life warn him that some of that touch in New York. He knew and loved was indeed Lumet’s.) the city, and was drawn to its In fact, mass-media culture problems and the possibility of has finally gone so bonkers that solving them, if only in fiction. ‘‘Network,’’ which Lumet direct- Even better, he knew the people. ed from Paddy Chayefsky’s nucle- MARK J. TERRILL/ASSOCIATED PRESS/FILE Character, of course, is what ar bomb of a script, now seems Prince of NeAlwPacino, whoYostarred in Sidnerky Lumet’sCit‘‘Dog Day Afternoony’’ and ‘‘Serpico,’’ presented the separates a Lumet picture from beyond timeless. One of the great director with an honorary Oscar in 2005. many other directors’ — the way movie satires has become simply

6 BL[HE BOS[TN GLOBEThL9PRILe la12,te2011director Sidney Lumet

had a feel for the place and its people By Wesley Morris circumstances, urban and other- GLOBE STAFF wise, bring out in a person some- idney Lumet’s chief thing you didn’t see coming. His preoccupation wasn’t movies, for instance, could be art. It was right and buffets of cutaways to the stoic, wrong in the American nonplussed, or terrified faces of Scity, nearly always in bit players and extras. New York. Lumet died Saturday His best films — from 1973’s morning. He was 86, and made ‘‘Serpico’’ on down — are set in his first film in 1957, in his early New York, and when the Mount 30s, after having spent most the Rushmore of great New York 1950s directing television — directors is made, the selection serious television. That first committee might have a tough movie was ‘‘12 Angry Men,’’ and time figuring out whose head has there been a more sincerely goes alongside Martin Scorsese’s, volcanic movie about the law — Woody Allen’s, and Spike Lee’s. or a family of addicts (‘‘Long Cassavetes? Warhol? I’d vote for Day’s Journey Into Night’’), po- Lumet — if only for the warm, lice corruption (‘‘Serpico’’), bank illustrative opening montage of robbery (‘‘Dog Day Afternoon’’), ‘‘Dog Day Afternoon,’’ which TV (‘‘Network’’), or abotched skips around New York looking heist (‘‘Before the Devil Knows for an electric sort of trouble and You’re Dead’’)? finds it in a car full of bank rob- Mostly, he dealt with crime bers. But there is much more and corruption (political, psycho- where that came from — both in logical, ethical). But those senses that movie and in most of Lu- of order and propriety kept him met’s. away from pulp and out of the Lumet might have also be- gutter. He was trying to answer come the most influential Ameri- questions that transcend conven- can director of the last 50 years. tional film genres. He wasn’t Consciously or not, his movies’ interested in pure evil — or pure vitality — the exhilaration of, say, goodness, either. Lumet brought ‘‘12 Angry Men,’’ ‘‘The Pawnbro- to life all sorts of venality and ker,’’ ‘‘Serpico,’’ ‘‘Dog Day After- desperation in the genre of ‘‘New noon,’’ ‘‘Network,’’ ‘‘Prince of the York.’’ He was in a unique posi- City,’’ ‘‘The Verdict,’’ and ‘‘Q&A’’ — tion to do so. He came to the is in the DNA of other movies and movies when Hollywood was TV. In 2007 alone, the year of transitioning from the 1940s and ‘‘Before the Devil Knows You’re ’50s comforts of the soundstage Dead,’’ you could sense Lumet and of moral tidiness to a wilder, coursing through the paranoia- more visceral realism that was driven corruption thriller ‘‘Mi- inextricable from the madness chael Clayton’’ and haunting the roiling the country in the 1960s brotherly divide of ‘‘We Own the and ’70s. Lumet was perfect for Night’’ and, to some extent, that change. He brought together ‘‘American Gangster,’’ not to an old-fashioned moral sensibil- mention the fraternal play- ity and on-location authenticity. ground of the ‘‘Ocean’s’’ movies He was the most reliable you-are- and the half-jolly, half-dismayed there American director of the human touch Spike Lee used for ’70s. 2006’s ‘‘Inside Man.’’ (When I Lumet was born in Philadel- met with Lumet a couple of years phia, to a couple of Yiddish ac- ago, he told me Lee called to tors, but he lived most of his life warn him that some of that touch in New York. He knew and loved was indeed Lumet’s.) the city, and was drawn to its In fact, mass-media culture problems and the possibility of has finally gone so bonkers that solving them, if only in fiction. ‘‘Network,’’ which Lumet direct- Even better, he knew the people. ed from Paddy Chayefsky’s nucle- MARK J. TERRILL/ASSOCIATED PRESS/FILE Character, of course, is what ar bomb of a script, now seems Al Pacino, who starred in Sidney Lumet’s ‘‘Dog Day Afternoon’’ and ‘‘Serpico,’’ presented the separates a Lumet picture from beyond timeless. One of the great director with an honorary Oscar in 2005. many other directors’ — the way movie satires has become simply

6 BL[HE BOS[TN GLOBE L9PRIL 12, 2011 April 12, 2011

By Wesley Morris, Globe Staff

Sidney Lumet's chief preoccupation wasn't art. It was right and wrong in the American city, nearly always in New York. Lumet died Saturday morning. He was 86, and made his first film in 1957, in his early 30s, after having spent most the 1950s directing television − serious television. That first movie was "12 Angry Men," and has there been a more sincerely volcanic movie about the law − or a family of addicts ("Long Day's Journey Into Night"), police corruption ("Serpico"), bank robbery ("Dog Day Afternoon"), TV ("Network"), or a botched heist ("Before the Devil Knows You're Dead")? Mostly, he dealt with crime and corruption (political, psychological, ethical). But those senses of order and propriety kept him away from pulp and out of the gutter. He was trying to answer questions that transcend conventional film genres. He wasn't interested in pure evil − or pure goodness, either. Lumet brought to life all sorts of venality and desperation in the genre of "New York." He was in a unique position to do so. He came to when Hollywood was transitioning from the 1940s and '50s comforts of the soundstage and of moral tidiness to a wilder, more visceral realism that was inextricable from the madness roiling the country in the 1960s and '70s. Lumet was perfect for that change. He brought together an old-fashioned moral sensibility and on-location authenticity. He was the most reliable you-are-there American director of the '70s. Lumet was born in , to a couple of Yiddish actors, but he lived most of his life in New York. He knew and loved the city, and was drawn to its problems and the possibility of solving them, if only in fiction. Even better, he knew the people. Character, of course, is what separates a Lumet picture from many other directors' − the way circumstances, urban and otherwise, bring out in a person something you didn't see coming. His movies, for instance, could be buffets of cutaways to the stoic, nonplussed, or terrified faces of bit players and extras. His best films − from 1973's "Serpico" on down − are set in New York, and when the Mount Rushmore of great New York directors is made, the selection committee might have a tough time figuring out whose head goes alongside Martin Scorsese's, Woody Allen's, and Spike Lee's. Cassavetes? Warhol? I'd vote for Lumet − if only for the warm, illustrative opening montage of "Dog Day Afternoon," which skips around New York looking for an electric sort of trouble and finds it in a car full of bank robbers. But there is much more where that came from − both in that movie and in most of Lumet's. Lumet might have also become the most influential American director of the last 50 years. Consciously or not, his movies' vitality − the exhilaration of, say, "12 Angry Men," "The Pawnbroker," "Serpico," "Dog Day Afternoon," "Network," "," "The Verdict," and "Q&A" − is in the DNA of other movies and TV. In 2007 alone, the year of "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead," you could sense Lumet coursing through the paranoia-driven corruption thriller "Michael Clayton" and haunting the brotherly divide of "We Own the Night" and, to some extent, "American Gangster," not to mention the fraternal playground of the "Ocean's" movies and the half-jolly, half-dismayed human touch Spike Lee used for 2006's "Inside Man." (When I met with Lumet a couple of years ago, he told me Lee called to warn him that some of that touch was indeed Lumet's.) In fact, mass-media culture has finally gone so bonkers that "Network," which Lumet directed from Paddy Chayefsky's nuclear bomb of a script, now seems beyond timeless. One of the great movie satires has become simply the way we live. Who else do we thank for ? There Lumet is in "Law & Order" and pretty much any long-form television show − "Homicide: Life on the Streets," "The Sopranos," "The Wire," "The Shield," "Damages," even "The Good Wife." A great show like "The Wire" didn't have the hubris Lumet did − or, rather, it had a reverse hubris. Things were a mess, and "The Wire" said there's nothing we can do to stop it. Lumet knew the world he worked in was inherently corrupt, but he took advantage of the power of artistic license in order to confer upon the morass a kind of justice. Dick Wolf, David Simon, David Chase, and the other serious-minded television auteurs all appear to have attended the Sidney Lumet Academy for Mining Art from Life. That moral tidiness, Lumet's attempts to impose order, seemed to contradict the social and political mayhem he oversaw. What you could feel at work in the latter going of "Serpico" and "Power" and "The Verdict" was the taming, episodic influence of the 1950s television where he cut his teeth. If the movies often fell short of greatness, Lumet seemed fine settling for very goodness in the name of dramatizing some larger problem. More than once in his great 1996 autobiography, "Making Movies," Lumet said you don't see good style, you feel it. Which might account for why so many actors considered him an actor's director. For starters: Al Pacino, , , , , , Philip Seymour April 12, 2011

the way we live. Who else do we ...From Montgomery to Mem- thank for Glenn Beck? phis,’’ but the featured lightning There Lumet is in ‘‘Law & bolts were out of his hands. Order’’ and pretty much any For a number of years, Lena long-form television show — Horne was Lumet’s mother-in- ‘‘Homicide: Life on the Streets,’’ law. So it would seem he had ‘‘The Sopranos,’’ ‘‘The Wire,’’ ‘‘The personal anecdotal evidence of Shield,’’ ‘‘Damages,’’ even ‘‘The the assorted scourges of . The Good Wife.’’ A great show like most hilarious scenes in ‘‘Net- ‘‘The Wire’’ didn’t have the hubris work’’ involved the leaders of the Lumet did — or, rather, it had a Black Power movement cutting reverse hubris. Things were a deals for their primetime show. mess, and ‘‘The Wire’’ said there’s Lumet never found another nothing we can do to stop it. script that would free him to Lumet knew the world he mock the economic prerogatives worked in was inherently cor- of radicalism — nor, for that rupt, but he took advantage of matter, did he find any script the power of artistic license in about race or black life as good as order to confer upon the morass the ones he had that were simply akind of justice. Dick Wolf, Da- about life. Anyway, ‘‘New Yorker’’ vid Simon, David Chase, and the constitutes a race in itself. other serious-minded television However, Lumet did make auteurs all appear to have attend- ‘‘,’’ the 1978 all-black ed the Sidney Lumet Academy musical version of ‘‘The Wizard for Mining Art from Life. of Oz’’ that would seem to have That moral tidiness, Lumet’s nothing to do with his larger attempts to impose order, PHOTOFEST (ABOVE); MGM/UA (BELOW LEFT); PHOTFEST/FILM FORUM body of work. But it’s much more seemed to contradict the social Clockwise from above: Sidney Lumet (left) with and on the set of ‘‘That aLumet movie than ‘‘Murder on and political mayhem he over- Kind of Woman,’’ Al Pacino in ‘‘Serpico,’’ Peter Finch in ‘‘Network.’’ the Orient Express’’ or ‘‘.’’ saw. What you could feel at work Its funked-out version of New in the latter going of ‘‘Serpico’’ York was a wonderland in which and ‘‘Power’’ and ‘‘The Verdict’’ Diana Ross — with the help of was the taming, episodic influ- , Nipsey Russell, ence of the 1950s television and Ted Ross — tries to find her where he cut his teeth. If the way back home to . So it’s movies often fell short of great- also an allegory for what was, at ness, Lumet seemed fine settling the time, the public’s perception for very goodness in the name of of Ross’s blackness. dramatizing some larger prob- ‘‘The Wiz’’ is the dreamiest, lem. More than once in his great druggiest thing Lumet did. It’s 1996 autobiography, ‘‘Making also one of the most affectionate. Movies,’’ Lumet said you don’t The long shots of the production see good style, you feel it. Which numbers were loving, as were might account for why so many those close, beautifully lit open- actors considered him an actor’s ing scenes set in the brownstone director. For starters: Al Pacino, Dorothy shares with her parents. Faye Dunaway, Peter Finch, Paul It’s true that Glinda the Good Newman, River Phoenix, Ar- Witch was light-skinned and her mand Assante, Philip SeymourHoffman,berg is; Ethanor an astute Hawke,comedian and all thoseshots great— swelling bit players.with swinging Lumet's shamestyle waseither moreus or thegodlike.actors. He wasnast y sister, Evillene (the price- Hoffman, , and allconductinglike Allen, humanHal As hbylighting, or Paul bolts. moods and colliding personali- Lumet, though, boldly turns up less ), was dark- those great bit players. Lumet’s WhenMazursk hisy. In moviesconversa workedtion, Lu- (andties. somTheose thatshif didn'tts and clashesnow do, morethe sovolume thanon theythe perseemedformances. to yearsskinned. But Horne played Glin- style was more godlike. He was met could be funny. But humor were crucial with Lumet. His They’re as stratospheric as the da, so you could also argue that, conducting human lighting bolts.ago), wastheyscarce achievedwith him. a deceptive,A new organicmovies intimacy.are generously Thatfull wasof ironicideas, sinceand awhatstereophonic we wereeffec watching,t is rather than reinforcing the an- When his movies worked (andparticularlyLumet release duringinspired his greatgroaning run in tonalthe ,comple xitwasy. a kind of publicachie streetved. Whentheater.his movies The hugenessdidn’t cient of skin-color value system that some that didn’t now do, moreanyso offrom hiscer subjectstain critics seemedabout bad manageablyTake life‘‘N-etsize.work. Even’’ The movie his most moltenwork, all youactorsgot wasseemmono. caught onbrought Horne too much grief, than they seemed to years ago), technique and crude staging. Chayefsky wrote is a satirical Either Lumet had been let down Lumet was just an ingenious they achieved a deceptive, organ-film byTh ata doesnman ’twhofeel true happensnow. Th toe be Sidneymelodrama. Lumet.Loosely There's, the sa tiresomethingis by an looselyactor he beliedocumentaryved in but -like son-in-lain w. ic intimacy. That was ironic sincethat traitcircumstantial − cool, observationalchaos seems to transparency.of television Lumetentertainment also believedand who in wasproceobviouslyss andwrong systemsfor a (his That was my first Lumet what we were watching, partic-nonfictionproduce corollarythe visual chaos.wouldPo seemlish tothe beend Frederickof civiliza tion.Wiseman).The melo- part — Sharon Stone in his re- movie, and the only one for ularly during his great run in the upstages the grit. The camera is drama, in part, involves the make of Cassavetes’s ‘‘Gloria,’’ or which I don’t have enough fin- 1970s, was a kind of public street Thatdynamic detachment— wide shots; comes,close-ups; in part,netw fromork employees shootingwho otherpro- people'sVin screenplays.Diesel giving ev It'serything so truehe thatge rs to count how many times theater. The hugeness of any ofLumethand-held wasn't photogra visualistaphy; inlong the, veinsgr amof andScorseseresist progr or Lee,amming or a populisthad in ‘‘Findthe wayMe Gu Stevenilty’’ — Spielbergor, in I’ve seen it. I spent my childhood his subjects seemed manageablyis; or stillan takastutees — comedianbut it’s not a charlikeac- Allen,junk. HalTh Ashby,e film’s achie or Paulvement Mazursky.is the caseIn conversation,of a romantic comedy Lumet couldcalling ‘‘The Wizard of Oz’’ the life-size. Even his most molten ter, per se. It’s a tool. In a fully the way those two seemingly such as ‘‘Just Tell Me What You white ‘‘Wiz.’’ Lumet’s version actors seem caught on film by abe funny.functioning But humorLumet picwasture, scarcethe withdispar him.ate geAnres newcome Lumettoget herreleaseWa inspirednt’’ or a drgroaningama such asfrom‘‘Pow- certainwasn ’t a hit. It wasn’t especially man who happens to be Sidneycriticsac aboutting and badthe writingtechniqueare alche- and crudeoff the staging.page onto Thata movie doesnscreen.'t feel trueer’’ (‘‘N now.etwork’’ Thefor circumstantialpolitical cam- great or even very good, but it has Lumet. There’s something loose-chaosmized. seemsYo u’tore produceforced to suspendthe visual chaos.The movie Polishis darkly upstagesfunny about the grit.paigns), The camerabecause heis couldndynamic’t find − widethe hear t, soul, grit, and feeling ly documentary-like in that trait your awareness that they’re the politics of entertainment and away to produce stereo. that binds Lumet’s movies to —cool, observational transpar-shots;separ closeate-ups;ingredients hand—-heldyou’r photography;e no the politics long,of politics. still takesBut it ’s− but it's Fonotr a aman character,whose movies per se.were It's aeach other. As a fantasy, it felt ency. Lumet also believed in tool. Inlong aer fullywatching funcantioningactor per- Lumet picture,also a movie theabout actingthe andlust for the writingboth asareconcre alchemized.te-and-asphalt You'reand authentically fantastical. Before process and systems (his non- forcedform to suspendin a screenpla youry tha awarenesst a cam- thatpower they'reand the separatepower of lust ingredients. It as socially− you'reand nopolitically longerac watchingtive the movie’s best number (‘‘A fiction corollary would seem toan actorera hasperformfilmed. inYo u’are screenplaywatching thatgives a cameraus black ra hasdicals, filmed.Marxist You'reas watchingLumet’s were, thehe ultimatenever dealt Brand New Day’’), Evillene is be ). the ultimate synthesis. talk, a kidnapping, statistics, and with race or class or the civil flushed down her throne. And That detachment comes, insynthesis.Th is probably sounds like many, many meetings. rights movement in the manner you get the sense that justice, in part, from shooting other peo- Thiswhat anprobablyy decent moviesoundsdirec liketor what any‘‘Net work’’decentis amoviemovie ofdirectorhigh shouldone might beex ablepect: tohead do,on. butHe with Lumet’s world, has, once again, ple’s screenplays. It’s so true thaLumett should the differencebe able to do, wasbut with beguiling.ideas, Realismand another just seemsdirector real. It'sshaped not onlymovie-star a movie.narr atIt'sion urbanand been served. Lumet wasn’t a visualist in the Lumet the difference was beguil- might have let them speak for newsreel footage into 1970’s veins of Scorsese or Lee, or a snapshotsing. Realism − swellingjust seems withreal. swingingIt’s themselves moods andwhile collidingletting Ch aypersonaef- enormouslities. Thosespecial-e shiftsvent docandu- clashesWe sley Morris can be reached at populist the way Steven Spiel- were notcrucialonly a withmovie. Lumet.It’s urban Hissnap- moviessky’ ares outr generouslyage intimida tefulland of tonalmentar complexity.y ‘‘King: A Filmed Record [email protected]. Take "Network." The movie Chayefsky wrote is a satirical melodrama. Loosely, the satire is APRIL 12, 2011 L[HE BOS[TN GLOBE LB 7 of television entertainment and the end of civilization. The melodrama, in part, involves the April 12, 2011 network employees who program and resist programming junk. The film's achievement is the way those two seemingly disparate genres come together off the page onto a movie screen. The movie is darkly funny about the politics of entertainment and the politics of politics. But it's also a movie about the lust for power and the power of lust. It gives us black radicals, Marxist talk, a kidnapping, statistics, and many, many meetings. "Network" is a movie of high ideas, and another director might have let them speak for themselves while letting Chayefsky's outrage intimidate and shame either us or the actors. Lumet, though, boldly turns up the volume on the performances. They're as stratospheric as the ideas, and a stereophonic effect is achieved. When his movies didn't work, all you got was mono. Either Lumet had been let down by an actor he believed in but who was obviously wrong for a part − Sharon Stone in his remake of Cassavetes's "Gloria," or Vin Diesel giving everything he had in "" − or, in the case of a romantic comedy such as "Just Tell Me What You Want" or a drama such as "Power" ("Network" for political campaigns), because he couldn't find a way to produce stereo. For a man whose movies were both as concrete-and-asphalt and as socially and politically active as Lumet's were, he never dealt with race or class or the civil rights movement in the manner one might expect: head on. He shaped movie-star narration and newsreel footage into 1970's enormous special-event documentary "King: A Filmed Record ... From Montgomery to Memphis," but the featured lightning bolts were out of his hands. For a number of years, was Lumet's mother-in-law. So it would seem he had personal anecdotal evidence of the assorted scourges of race. The most hilarious scenes in "Network" involved the leaders of the Black Power movement cutting deals for their primetime show. Lumet never found another script that would free him to mock the economic prerogatives of radicalism − nor, for that matter, did he find any script about race or black life as good as the ones he had that were simply about life. Anyway, "New Yorker" constitutes a race in itself. However, Lumet did make "The Wiz," the 1978 all-black musical version of "The Wizard of Oz" that would seem to have nothing to do with his larger body of work. But it's much more a Lumet movie than "Murder on the Orient Express" or "Equus." Its funked-out version of New York was a wonderland in which Diana Ross − with the help of Michael Jackson, Nipsey Russell, and Ted Ross − tries to find her way back home to Harlem. So it's also an allegory for what was, at the time, the public's perception of Ross's blackness. "The Wiz" is the dreamiest, druggiest thing Lumet did. It's also one of the most affectionate. The long shots of the production numbers were loving, as were those close, beautifully lit opening scenes set in the brownstone Dorothy shares with her parents. It's true that Glinda the Good Witch was light-skinned and her nasty sister, Evillene (the priceless Mabel King), was dark-skinned. But Horne played Glinda, so you could also argue that, rather than reinforcing the ancient skin-color value system that brought Horne too much grief, Lumet was just an ingenious son-in-law. That was my first Lumet movie, and the only one for which I don't have enough fingers to count how many times I've seen it. I spent my childhood calling "The Wizard of Oz" the white "Wiz." Lumet's version wasn't a hit. It wasn't especially great or even very good, but it has the heart, soul, grit, and feeling that binds Lumet's movies to each other. As a fantasy, it felt authentically fantastical. Before the movie's best number ("A Brand New Day"), Evillene is flushed down her throne. And you get the sense that justice, in Lumet's world, has, once again, been served. Wesley Morris can be reached at [email protected].