Over a pivotal three-minute sequence in his studio, we follow the meticulous mechanics of Thomas’s process: he develops the photos in the darkroom and arranges them into a fragmented storyboard. The film’s image then shifts to the photographs themselves, constructing a slideshow narrative that begins with two lovers embracing, moves to the man noticing the camera, and ends with the woman standing beside a body. The possible murder is only revealed through a series of (eponymous) blow-ups, forcing both Thomas and the viewer to interpret the truth from increasingly grainy visual fragments.

As the slideshow rolls, Antonioni also inserts the ambient sound of trees and wind to the scene—sound that doesn’t belong in Thomas’s studio but rather seems diegetic to the photographic record itself. This auditory addition complicates the relationship between the “real” and its photographic representation, questioning the reliability of Thomas’ memory and instead suggesting an intrusion of his imagination.

Despite the fact that it is over fifty years old, I will not be spoiling the film, but will nevertheless note that this conception of the recorded and truth is echoed in its final scene. As Thomas watches a group of mimes play with an imaginary tennis ball, he begins following the arc of their movements and, eventually, hears the ball’s faint bounce for himself. In that sense, truth is for Antonioni less an objective fact than a consensual illusion—a lie upon which we all agree in order to make sense of an uncertain reality—with its photographic record perhaps as mutable as perception itself.

By the mid-70s, as new intelligence technologies emerged, themes of privacy and surveillance came into the focus of (particularly American) filmmakers. Alongside films like Klute and The Parallax View, Francis Ford Coppola’s The Conversation shifts its focal apparatus from image to sound, questioning the capacity of clandestine audio recording in the search for truth. The protagonist, Harry Caul, is an expert surveillance technician, obsessed with uncovering the content of a recorded conversation yet troubled by his inability to fully understand the intentions behind what he hears.

The pivotal construction sequence is, in Coppola’s film, entirely auditory (though the audience can see flashes of the recorded scene itself). As Harry listens to fragments of the titular conversation between two people in a busy plaza—isolating words, phrases, and tonal shifts as he tweaks the audio—those occasional glimpses of the visual, presumably imagined, suggest that his record is incomplete. Harry’s surveillance, while technologically advanced, only reveals as much as his own paranoia-clouded interpretative lens permits.

This dynamic between recorded sound and its interpretation becomes central to the film’s meaning. The Conversation paints surveillance technology as both enabling and restricting: it uncovers details but inevitably imposes their observer’s anxieties and biases. While the challenge of recording in Blow-Up is centred in the ephemerality of life and consequent elusiveness of truth, the struggle of The Conversation is an internal one, rooted in the limitations of human perception (regardless of technological development).

With Blow Out, released in the wake of Watergate and the political disillusionment of the 1980s, Brian De Palma unites image and sound, referencing both Blow-Up and The Conversation (along with occasional nods to the infamous Zapruder film). His protagonist, Jack, is a sound technician who accidentally tapes a political assassination. In this film, the “construction” scene sees Jack synchronising his audio-tape with photographic footage, finally creating a coherent and indisputable record of truth.

The meaning of De Palma’s film, however, lies in its insistence that undeniable truth can nevertheless be denied. In the darkly ironic finale, Jack is symbolically silenced beneath a spectacle of fireworks and patriotic pomp, and as he listens to the scream of a victim he could not save—now a crucial sound effect in a cheap thriller he is working on—Blow Out closes with a devastating commentary on the American ethos, which prizes appearance over substance. The film’s bleak vision, illustrated by its protagonist’s impotence in the face of public deception, suggests that even the most carefully assembled record of truth is not enough to guarantee justice.

In the progression from Blow-Up through The Conversation to Blow Out, the depiction of respective recording technologies reflects changing attitudes toward truth. For Antonioni, truth is a mutable construct we collectively agree to accept; for Coppola, it is the imagined end-goal which drives paranoia, susceptible to individual misinterpretation; and for De Palma, truth is rendered futile in the face of a political apparatus that manipulates reality for its own ends. The three films join together to reveal how technology, rather than bringing us closer to an objective reality, shapes our understanding and acceptance of truth—a truth that ultimately remains as elusive as the devices used to record it.

In the full 18-minute discussion, centered around Kenny's book, The World is Yours: The Story of ‘Scarface’, Mitchell tells Kenny that he appreciates the way that the people involved in the making of Scarface really seemed to open up to him in a new way, because Kenny approached them as artists, asking them to discuss their connection to the art of the film. Kenny discusses how it took a long time to get Michelle Pfeiffer to agree to be interviewed for the book, and how her perspective on things really surprised him. Mitchell also notes how Kenny writes about the physicality of Pacino's performances as Tony Montana and Carlito Brigante, etc., and how Kenny makes the case for De Palma as an actor's director. Listen to the conversation in full by clicking the image above.

Remastered CD reissue.
12-page CD booklet with liner notes by Daniel Schweiger.
Limited Edition of 1000 units.

In collaboration with Edward R. Pressman Film Corporation, Music Box Records proudly follows their IFMCA award-winning release of Bernard Herrmann’s 1976 Oscar-nominated score for Obsession by now going back to his collaboration, one that relaunched his career as well as boldly announcing a new Master of Suspense. Almost forgotten when editor Paul Hirsch was inspired to use Psycho as temporary music, the resulting collaboration between him, filmmaker Brian De Palma and Herrmann showed just how much diabolically inventive energy was left to his talent with 1973’s Sisters.

Weathering the storm that the legendarily combustible musician brought to this tale of an innocent model and her possession by a seemingly dead twin (both played by Margot Kidder). The result of Herrmann’s outraged inspiration was one of his great, theme-filled scores. Particularly striking as it brought a new Moog electronic sensibility to join with his symphonic swings between romance and terror, Sisters once again brought the composer into the Hollywood eye while joltingly announcing the arrival of a stylistically fresh, homage-filled auteur of modern suspense cinema.

With Sisters’ complete scoring session elements proving lost after an exhaustive search in collaboration with the Edward R. Pressman Film Corporation, Music Box Records has painstakingly remastered the original CD edition to reprise its original album program with a knife-striking, bell-ringing orchestral malice that no mad doctor can rend asunder. Extensive liner notes by Daniel Schweiger (Obsession) features a new interview with Paul Hirsch on the turbulent scoring process with Bernard Herrmann that brought an iconically thrilling legend back to Hollywood life. The CD release is limited to 1000 units.

Mary-Ann Vaillancourt was 10 years old when the film premiered. She remembers coming to the now-defunct Garrick Theatre with friends to watch it.

"I stayed for two shows," she said. "And I did it again the next weekend. And I did it every weekend that I was allowed to come out."

Vaillancourt was one of the hundreds of people who showed up for the latest "Phantompalooza," a local event that, this year, marked the film's 50th anniversary.

Craig Wallace, a member of the Phantom 50th committee, said the two planned screenings of a restored version of the film sold out in a day and a half. A matinee, also featuring a Q&A with cast members, was added to meet the demand.

"Winnipeg has brought a lot of people from other provinces here, and they see what we see," said Dean Hunter, singer with Phantom tribute band Swanage, who's also on the committee.

"They might be from all over the world, but they love this movie as much as we do. And we just like to share it with them."

The celebration brought back a lot of memories for fans who attended the matinee Saturday.

Betty Moroz, from Garson, Man., was 14 when she first watched it.

"I thought it was kind of freaky back then," she said, but it stuck with her.

"It's very powerful, very moving. The music, the love and, what you would do for love. Anything for love."

"I have two copies at home," said Stephanie Starr, who came to the screening with her family.

"We love it. We've seen the movies many times before. And of course, you got to get the merchandise, right? I got a couple of buttons."

For other Winnipeggers like Tom Glenewinkel, the matinee was the first time they've actually seen the film.

"Everybody knows all the words to everything," Glenewinkel said. "It was just a great movie to watch, and just to be part of the experience of everybody enjoying it and getting into it."

Vaillancourt brought a C.D. of the movie's soundtrack to the matinee and newspaper clippings about the film she kept with her over the years. V She hoped to meet Paul Williams — star and composer in the film — who decades ago replied to her fan letter. V "'Dear Mary-Ann, thank you for your letter telling me how much you enjoyed Phantom.… P.S. I think I've only seen the movie about four times myself,'" Vaillancourt read, saying that at that point she'd seen the film about 10 times already.

"He made my whole day and my whole summer," she added. "The music is still phenomenal now, and I still listen to it if I want to just be able to sing along, every single word."

Fargeat has always gravitated towards a smorgasbord of different genres, including “action, Westerns, horror, body horror, sci-fi, fantasy”. The filmmaker tells me that she adored “everything that allowed me to go outside of reality and be in a world where the rules were different and were a great window to creative, often crazy imaginations. It goes from the first Star Wars trilogy to the movies from [David] Cronenberg, which had a big impact on me.” She also cites Paul Verhoeven’s RoboCop and the surrealism of David Lynch: “They all played specific roles at different ages of my life, building my imagination and my way of envisioning the world.”

Growing up in France, Fargeat recalls feeling “quite bored” and that everyday life was “inadequate”; the entertaining adventures and “sense of rebellion” in genre films provoked “strong emotions, whether it was fear, passion, thrill… I was feeling alive.” Dark comedy played a large role in her cinematic coming-of-age as well, particularly the silent satire of Charlie Chaplin. “It’s really two legs that I have with me,” she says. “The more genre, imaginative one, and the more satirical comedy—which is also something that creates strong emotions.”

In The Substance, satire converges with body-horror to metaphorically metamorphosize into its own beast. Fargeat lists Cronenberg’s The Fly as a definite inspiration for the literal metamorphosis featured in her film, as well as the enduring imagery of the blood tsunami pouring out of the elevator in The Shining, and, of course, the climactic prom scene from Carrie. (While the filmmaker admits that she hasn’t yet seen Society, it’s now on her watchlist since so many people have mentioned it after witnessing her penchant for grotesquely organic practical effects).

“All those movies, filmmakers have seen the work of other filmmakers who’ve digested what they’ve seen and what other filmmakers did,” Fargeat says. “I love the fact that there is some kind of common creativity somewhere that each one redigests in its own way, with its own world and its own theme. I truly believe that we are, in the end, the result of what we watch, what we read, what we’re exposed to, and all of this lives with us… We are growing ourselves, feeding ourselves from all those influences, whether they are conscious or unconscious.”