Tall:
The American Skyscraper and Louis Sullivan (*1/2)
review by Jon
Waterman
Near the turn of the century, architecture was on the verge
of a revolution. Buildings were slowly getting taller, but
there was still a limit as to how high they could go while
keeping the structural integrity intact. While the battle for
more height raged on, the battle of artistic expression in
buildings emerged. One school of thought took old world designs
and adapted them to be placed within modern structures. The
other school of thought, including Louis Sullivan, believed
that the aesthetics should look forward, not back, and try
to create something fresh and original.
Honestly, all of that talk about battles may be true, but
it doesn’t really capture the essence of this documentary.
The sense of struggle isn’t really portrayed and no real
threat is posed to the audience. Instead of it being New York
(Daniel Burnham) versus Chicago (Sullivan); classical versus
modern; bricks versus steel, the approach was much more docile
and co-existent. It made the film a little more boring. Perhaps
I just never recovered from the opening sequence.
The film starts with a long series of images that shows off
the beauty and, at the same time, mechanics behind buildings
against soothing music. The grainy 16mm film and the overall
sound quality and music choice gave off a feel of a segment
from “Sesame Street.” The length turned it from
poetic and nice to somewhat poetic and dull. The movie struggled
to find a consistent voice. It had to balance between teaching
the uninitiated and keeping it interesting for those already
in the know. Parts of the film would be great to show a grade
school class, so that they could learn the very basics of architecture.
It would work quite nicely were it to be a purely educational
piece, explaining how taller buildings came to be and how they
work. However, the whole historical aspect of the people involved
in creating skyscrapers just demolished the project.
After walking out, I still didn’t exactly grasp what
Sullivan had to do with anything. He seemed to want tall buildings
to be made, but the movie talked a lot about how he couldn’t
get much work after Burnham and his crew took over stylistically
following the 1893 World’s Fair. So, how he shaped the
downtown cityscape we see today is a little beyond me. I also
couldn’t walk down any particular street and point out
a Sullivan building. The movie dwells on Frank Lloyd Wright
a little too long. I suppose it’s noteworthy to show
that he was working under Sullivan, if only to further highlight
Louis’ importance in the architectural world, but I don’t
need to as much as was told.
Unlike the masters’ buildings, director Manfred Kirchheimer’s
film doesn’t exactly stand up. The structure is there,
but inappropriate and lends nothing towards what should be
the overall purpose of the film. There are some great shots
and it’s aesthetically pleasing. The narrator (that eventually
shows up) does a nice job, as well. This one could be interesting
for architecture buffs – and even better for younger
kids who may be interested, but if you know anything about
the history, you probably know this stuff already.
respond to jon@filmbrats.com
|