Skip to content 
Claudio Alves
Here at The Film Experience we love celebrating centenaries and yesterday was a big one. William Greaves was born in Harlem on October 8, 1926, and became one of the most important figures in 20th century American nonfiction filmmaking. More specifically, his legacy lies in documenting African American life. Symbiotic psychopathy Duology to more traditional fare, such as his profile of Ida B. Wells. american experience series. Greaves passed away in 2014, but his films live on in unconventional ways. Through the efforts of his son, director David Greaves, and granddaughter, producer Liani Greaves, the great filmmaker is gifting us new films from beyond the grave.
In fact, he’s inviting viewers to the most luxurious cocktail party held at the home of the one and only Duke Ellington. This will be a gathering of artists and intellectuals who are living pioneers of the Harlem Renaissance of the 20s and 30s. Or, as it already happened, in August 1972, when the party was held and the director recorded it all. It comes from that rich video. Once Upon a Time in HarlemThe work sat unfinished for half a century before being completed and premiered at Sundance earlier this year. Neon purchased the rights at that time and will release it in theaters next week, on October 16th. Meanwhile, this haunted party of a bygone era, a throwback to a much older day, is hitting the festival circuit, dazzling audiences everywhere it goes, including TIFF and NYFF.
Like many great movies, Once Upon a Time in Harlem We’ll guide you through how to approach it from the very beginning. But it does it more directly than you might expect, yet is at once blunt and poetic. “As part of a co-creative effort, I propose to make a series of great films about great people, all of whom are creations and metaphors of the Godhead.” – A doodle and an announcement of the author’s intentions in relation to William Greaves’ entire oeuvre. However, regarding specific cases Once Upon a Time in HarlemWho is this memo addressed to? To David Greaves, of course, who would complete his father’s work. In a way, it is a guide to how we, the audience, should understand the movie we are about to see.
Conceived jointly across multiple generations by the artist who planned, directed, and filmed it, the artist who recorded part of it and edited the rest, and two artists whose lineage and heritage were inherited, this work inherently contains the act of dialogue. It’s in the DNA of the movie. On that note, I would like to use this moment to defend young Greaves’ authorship of the film, if not the entire scene (he was one of the cameramen, and this should be acknowledged). The cut, the collision of images, is the problem of the movie, and even without it, it is the most fundamental part of the movie. It’s not a story, it’s not a narrative, it’s not a sound.
It is a Deleuzean image of time on top of a Deleuzean image of movement. It is a Soviet theory that has been proven over 100 years since it was first formulated. there won’t be Once Upon a Time in Harlem Without the younger generation of the Greaves family or their post-production partners in crime. If these artists hadn’t first looked at and engaged with material from 54 years ago, there wouldn’t be a conversation. think Once Upon a Time in Harlem Ready to welcome you with open arms into its home and community, its rooms and history, warm but not entirely soft and comfortable, and with an unconditionally giving nature.
Because what the camera discovers among the living legends of the Harlem Renaissance is not a monolith drunk on nostalgia and perfect unity, but a multitude of views on a variety of topics, including the value of the people in the room and those who, sadly, are dead and unable to attend. They share stories, sometimes spiteful gossip (catching poor Florence Mills astray) and disjointed archival footage from outside the party, and a lifetime of documents and recordings. Nonetheless, contradictions abound in this gathering of celebrities and their ghosts.
Writer Arna Bontemps came to think of the Harlem Renaissance as a prism through which to reflect all black experiences, from past to present, and says so. To further his argument, playwright and librarian Regina Andrews talks about how it is impossible not to be drawn into the Renaissance that is taking place, a feeling that extends beyond the boundaries of time and can be seen as the end of an era. Richard Bruce Nugent suggests that none of these men, now past the supposed prime age of their lives, could have imagined what that might mean.
When you are in the now, you don’t think that it will be recognized as old and important some distant tomorrow. William Patterson of the International Bureau of Labor Protection says the renaissance will never end, and a few minutes later Ida Mae Roberson, widow of Count Cullen, insists that her voice be heard and the assembled crowd embraces the notion of a legacy that lives on behind us. But the voices of dissent are also growing, and sometimes not so militant, and they are disappointed, tired, and defeated. Historian Nathan Huggins would like to believe that nothing is lost because of the differences of opinion among many people.
For example, actor Leigh Whipper believes that the youth of 1972 have already forgotten the past and do not look back or consider how it got to where it is today. His exhaustion is echoed through the other characters at the party, but it is expressed no better than the spy himself. It permeates the agony of an aging artist and the moments of disconnection. It is captured in the actor’s voice reciting a monologue he performed in 1943. moscow missionHe played the role of the emperor of Ethiopia at the time.
This became even more evident when, when asked to follow the film with another recitation, he chose a poem with a larger, more intimate meaning. The Harlem Renaissance lives on, perpetuated by the work and labor that immortalized their creators. The Harlem Renaissance died due to excessive obsession with key figures and erasure of groups. The Harlem Renaissance is neither one nor the other, but everything in between: the sadness in this orator’s sweet voice and the joy of a modern audience hearing it from an archive that many believed for decades would never see the light of day.
The Harlem Renaissance was a moment in history, but history is not a morgue. right? Perhaps I am currently leaning too hard on one side of the argument that includes black artists as part of a continuum and gives credence to this film as a timeless conversation that is contracted and transformed by the machinery of cinema. Maybe it’s the editing. Once Upon a Time in Harlem As for Greaves, I’d also like to think of the late politician who was able to directly intervene in the conversation 71 minutes after this cut began.
He and others in the documentary’s circle seem more hopeful than despondent, more interested in seeing the past as a vast, fertile land where new things can grow, rather than as a walled garden that can be observed from afar but not added to or taken from. To deny history is to deny yourself. Therefore, history is the self, it is us, it exists today, tomorrow and forever. And history, like movies, is memory. This film is about a party where memories are as intoxicating as the strongest drinks shared among friends.
That feeling is reflected in the image, as if you are at a party, looking at these people through the bottom of a cup full of brown liquor, and it contains a honey-like comfort. The interview segments set around the house, as Greaves stepped away with some partygoers for a quick one-on-one conversation, were much warmer lit, but dark around the edges, better distinguishing him from the group and maintaining the illusion of an intimate address to the audience through the camera and a strong time barrier.
In political parties, Greaves rarely isolates people, preferring to always include the reactions of others to what fellow friends or acquaintances, perhaps even rivals, are saying. The way some people look at each other while watching another person’s monologue can be as rewarding as the words themselves. This interest in the energy of the room as a place electrified by the exchange of assertive people is present not only in the cutting and composition of “scenes.” The composition itself captures this idea, with many master shots and always involving close-ups that seem to include someone’s face as much as the background or foreground, fragmentation or presumed subject of the take.
And if the material does not allow for this plurality, it is time to introduce a split screen, a stylistic move that may at first seem destructive. After some time, it made sense. Once Upon a Time in HarlemAs with many devices that initially puzzled me, to guess at the acclaim that lay at the feet of the film after its world premiere. Part of me still hopes this will just be a party document. Amazing Grace or Original Cast Album: Company see summer of the soul. But it must be acknowledged that it will never be a fly-on-the-wall exercise, as the presence of the camera is prominently noted and acknowledged.
So, have you ever been to a party full of storytellers talking about the past? It’s always a performance, and that’s still as true as anything you can put in front of a movie camera. The inserts I’ve already described sometimes break the flow, but not enough to sink the film. Would this document be a better film if it refrained from using archival images that distance the viewer from the physical space of the party, and instead leaned on illustration rather than pure memory? That may be so, but it will be less appealing to audiences with varying knowledge of the works of art and era being discussed, and this is a film that hopes to be nothing if not compelling.
It’s open arms again, a warm, welcoming embrace that allows for prickliness, but not too much. And is it that bad? The overly critical little voice in my head insists so. Still, of experience Once Upon a Time in Harlem It’s too fascinating, intoxicating, and enchanting to listen too intently to your inner naysayers. I want to hear William Greaves read his “In the Summer in the Quiet Woods” as the guests leave, history melting into the present, old images fading into the new, the same streets full of life and possibilities, human possibilities, movement, Renaissance.
Don’t miss it Once Upon a Time in Harlem At a movie theater if it’s playing near you. This is one of those movies you want to see with a crowd. A group of spectators in a dark room mesh with a group on a bright wall, a window to the past.