6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
What a Life!!!, September 24, 2008
This review is from: Polanski: A Biography (Hardcover)
Christopher Sandford's unauthorized biography of the great Roman Polanski is eminently enjoyable, relaxingly readible and a perfect primer for a reader curious as to all things Polanskian. The book moves at a fine, fluid pace - as well-edited as the Maestro's best films. And what a life is herein related: from Hitler to Hollywood to the Swinging Sixties to Manson to child molestation charges to an Oscar! And most importantly the cultural contribution of a huge and varied canon of motion pictures that continue to excite and enthrall - it is all related herein in a most entertaining fashion. Is it the end-all book on Polanski? No. That would combine both biographical and cinematic analysis of a much more in-depth nature. Is the photographic section the best it could be? No. Most of the photos are banal, and there is much that could have been shown instead. (Do we really need a full page devoted to a picture of Manson?) I would have loved to have seen some of Polanski's artwork, as described in the text, for example. And one minor point, Welles' "A Touch of Evil"(as titled in this book; the actual title is "Touch of Evil") was not the "artistic template" for "The Ninth Gate" as the author contends on page 323 - rather it was Welles' "Mr. Arkadin." And...there are one too many sources that choose to remain anonymous in what they have to tell Mr. Sandford and thereby us about the Polish director, making some of the recollections suspect. But, despite these minor difficulties, the book is well worth reading. It was hard to put down - and lead me to a rewatching of my Polanski DVDs - and what a joy that is! I'm settling down to watch "Bitter Moon" now: a neglected masterpiece...one of the best films dealing with male/female relationships. Anyway - read the book and enjoy the films.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
interesting bio & a good read, September 29, 2008
This review is from: Polanski: A Biography (Hardcover)
I read this book by Christopher Sandford after reading Jonathan Yardley's favorable review in the Sept 7 '08 Washington Post book section. I wanted to know: how was Polanski affected by the murder of his wife Sharon Tate by the Manson gang? What surprised me from reading the book was the series of trajedies Polanski endured even before that: his mother perished in Auschwitz, his father was in a prison camp during WWII, Polanski lived as a scavenger on his own as a child during WWII, and he was nearly murdered after the war in a brutal physical attack. Movies became his escape, but an enormous amount of damage had been done to his psyche.
In the 50's he was accepted at Poland's National Film School where he was immediately recognized as a talent. "Knife in the Water" ('62) put him on the map and is one of 3 of his films recognized by Yardley as postwar classics (the other 2 being "Chinatown" and "The Pianist"). I remember seeing "Knife" for the first time many years ago on TV, captivated by its combination of eroticism and sense of dread. Only when the credits rolled did I realize who the director was. By the late 60's he was making "The Fearless Vampire Killers" and "Rosemary's Baby" and falling in love with and marrying Sharon Tate. You'd think someone who had suffered so much before deserved to find happiness. Not to be. The sense of dread when I began to read Chapter 5, titled "Manson," was enormous. After losing both his wife and unborn son, he was beaten down yet again. How much can one man take? Yet he came back to direct "Chinatown," on my short list of the finest movies ever made. But he also became a serial pedophile and fled the U.S. rather than face long-term jail time for raping a 13-year old girl. Settling in France, he began a relationship with then 15-year old Nastassia Kinski, leading to her starring in "Tess" ('79). When he made "Frantic" ('88) starring Harrison Ford he met and began dating the young actress Emmanuelle Seigner, now his wife, the mother of his 2 young children, and one of two saviors of his soul: the other being making movies.
Polanski is one of the most important film directors of the last half century. Sandford says that "The Pianist" is his masterpiece, but I agree with Yardley that "Chinatown" is that. I learned from the book that Polanski's best work derives from material of which he was not the original author. Robert Towne wrote "Chinatown," and Ronald Harwood wrote the screenplay for "The Pianist" (both won Oscars). Yet Polanski made significant contributions to both scripts, and he was and still is an acknowledged genius behind the camera.
Because Polanski did not consent to be interviewed for the book, there's still much that is unknown about him. The bibliography lists 10 books, of which "Roman by Polanski" ('84) by Polanski himself is the next I would read. But Sandford's "Polanski" is an excellent starting point for a student of cinema, Polanski, or his films. A tidbit: Johnny Depp met his wife Vanessa Paradis while filming Polanski's "The Ninth Gate" ('99).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
A hatchet job from a "fan", February 23, 2009
This review is from: Polanski: A Biography (Hardcover)
I'm not familiar with Mr. Sandford's other books so I have nothing to compare this volume with. From what I've seen here, though, I won't be rushing to the nearest bookstore to grab anything else he's written for fear it's as biased as this was.
As yet another admirer of Roman's, I have long ago learned to be extremely wary of anything anyone writes about him because it turns out to be incredibly biased and judgmental - especially the American and British brands, who really have it out for him.
Mr. Sandford's contribution to Roman's press file took an unexpected, unpleasant twist for me: He actually questions whether or not events happened in Roman's life and/or whether they happened the way Roman described them (which Mr. Sandford lifted from Roman's 1984 autobiography), and then, unbelievably, turns around and all but calls Roman a liar and offers I guess what could be termed the correct version of an event.
I caught myself aghast many times at these corrections and I found myself almost yelling at the book, "How would you know whether that happened or not, buddy, were you there?" (Judging from the author's picture on the back inside cover of the dust jacket, I doubt very much he was even a thought in the 1930's and 1940's.)
For the record: Roman's judgment at the time he wrote his autobiography in the early-1980's may have been a little off (as it would be for anyone attempting to clearly recall events from nearly 40 years earlier), but where does anyone (especially those who weren't even around) get off actually questioning whether these things happened or not?
Why is no other director subjected to the harassment and the stinging criticism Roman is constantly subjected to (and, I would surmise, really doesn't give a rat's a** about)?
There were just so many things wrong with this over hyped biography: Mr. Sandford went into detailed biographies of just about everyone associated with Roman (fillers?), he included detailed plot summaries of all of Roman's movies (completely unnecessary), and he included general pictures in the obligatory photo section near the middle of the book (stock photos of Jews heading towards the designated ghetto in Warsaw in 1940, better pictures of which can be seen on the DVD version of "The Pianist").
Speaking of pictures, was there a point in including the images of that goofball Manson and company? Why, why, why can't people write something about Roman (or even Sharon Tate) and *not* include images of certain freaks of nature? There is no other point to this other than creating further sensationalism to move a few more books. Bottom line: Hasn't the public been subjected enough to them over the years? Note to publishers worldwide: Include pictures of celebrities that haven't enjoyed a long and wide circulation.
Another thing I found extremely disturbing was Mr. Sandford's disparaging the victims of that horrible atrocity of 1969. No, none of the victims (and I loathe using that term to describe those people) were innocent, but it's so nice to see that, almost 40 years later, they continue to be disparaged in print - this time, by people who didn't even know them (and, for the record, neither did I, as I wasn't a thought in 1969, but I tend to favor accounts of people who had actual relationships with any of the "victims").
I mean what other murder victims would have things written about them so many years after their death that states that they had a "working knowledge" of a foreign language (Sharon was fluent in Italian, fluency and working knowledge of a language being very different things), or whose shady family past (Voytek Frykowski's) was so generously written about as well as his drug use and that of Jay Sebring's (along with Jay's alleged kinky sex life). Can the public see the same treatment with latter murder victims - or is everyone else sacrosanct? Perhaps I took that part of the book the wrong way, but I just felt as if the victims of those horrible nights of bloodshed in 1969 continue to see little to no respect.
And then the author just couldn't resist getting into the nitty gritty about the unfortunate 1977 rape incident. Between Roman's mother being gassed to the murder of his wife to the statutory rape incident, is it any wonder Roman declined to cooperate with the author? All anyone wants to write about Roman is the aforementioned three incidents in his life. Yes, while they have had a most profound effect on Roman and probably partially defined who he is today (and I'm only assuming), they're not the only things to have ever happened in his life.
Roman Polanski has led quite a life - he's traveled the world, met some of the most intelligent, gorgeous women in it (and married three of them), is cultured and yet isn't self-important, he's fluent in about 4 or 5 languages and is one of the most influential directors in the history of cinema (cliché, but true). This man possesses unmatched talent and his films are some of the most unique and so not Hollywood and, yet, appeal to the masses. He has always given conformity the one finger salute and yet he's constantly picked on for being unconventional because he'd rather not be a boring, predictable celebrity director.
All I ever wanted was to read a balanced account of his life and all I constantly see is people slamming him any and every chance they get - and all because he's not Hollywood enough. It's hopeless, but the beauty of it all is, Roman continues to do what he does best and proves, time and again, he's way ahead of the times ("Pirates," anyone?).
The only good things I can say about this book is that I agree that "The Pianist" is his masterpiece ("Chinatown" is okay, but too Hollywood for me) and I like the book's cover as it is one of my favorite photos of Sharon and Roman. Other than that, I think a two star rating is too generous for this volume.
Do yourself the favor and pass this one up because you're not missing anything. - Donna Di Giacomo
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
