Imagine you’re watching Double
Indemnity. Betty Davis appears at
the top of the stairs, dressed in her bathrobe, and slowly descends, the camera
lovingly focused on the glittering ankle bracelet. Just as Fred McMurray is about to comment on
it …
… the movie breaks for a commercial for Ivory Soap (99 and
44/100ths percent pure.)
Now, to get the full effect, imagine that the stunning,
high-contrast black-and-white photography is speckled with electronic “snow”. And, to make matters worse, the image keeps
scrolling upward or distorting like hallucinations on an acid trip.
When they return, and McMurray and Davis begin their
delicious, seductive banter (“What’s the
speed limit?” “Forty-five.” “How fast was I going, Officer?” “Oh, I’d say about 90”) the dialogue
sounds like it’s being transmitted between two tin cans connected with a length
of string. Instead of seeing the two
side-by-side, the camera focuses on whomever is speaking, one at a time (an
editing technique called “pan and scan.”)
Despite all that, this was increasingly how we watched
movies for the first few decades of television. Fuzzy picture and all, we managed to panic and
radically transform an entrenched, monolithic industry, all because it was far
more convenient to stay home with a lousy image than to go out for a good one.
It happened so suddenly.
In 1943, Americans spent over a quarter of their entertainment budgets
on movies; going to a theater was something you did just about every week. Yet by 1960, we were spending only 5% of that
budget on theaters. Movie revenues
dropped by a third in the 50s. The
hegemony of the Studio system collapsed, and despite desperate innovations like
Cinerama, epic stories and even 3-D, the little box with the fuzzy picture took
over.
The studios knew what was happening, and they did their best
to boycott TV by refusing to release any but pre-1948 films to television
distributors. So my formative years, the
years when I became a film lover, focused on gangster films, westerns, war
movies, screwball comedies, horror films, and even musicals made decades before
I was able to watch them. They were
butchered by local editors, cut into segments for the insertion of commercials
with little regard for narrative logic.
Often they were introduced by local celebrities, sometimes dressed in
bizarre costumes (remember Elvira, Mistress of the Dark?).
And yet, somehow the magic remained. Maybe there were even some advantages. For one thing, they were free, so we could
watch even more of them than our parents had in the theaters. They were there when we were sick at home
from school, or in the evening when we were supposed to be going to sleep. They were easy to watch, “B” formula movies
that were often predictable and reliable entertainment. And, given the technological barriers, they
demanded attention to watch, giving the lie to the prevailing argument that
television was a passive medium. Tough men
and tough women, the protagonists of the Depression era, were our first role
models.
The boycott broke down gradually, but finally the studios
had to give in. In 1961, NBC premiered Saturday
Night at the Movies; for the first time, we could watch prime-time movies, increasingly
in color, that were only about a year old. And you know what? As I grew into my teen years, I started going
back to the theaters. I was now a
cinephile—and I wanted to see movies without commercials intruding into them!
The other night, I watched The Bourne Legacy on On Demand.
Fast Forward, Pause, and Rewind were disabled, and, although the
commercials that had been inserted during its television broadcast had been
removed, the breaks for them were still there.
It was annoying, but it was also strangely nostalgic.
This was how we learned to love film.