Plot Details: This opinion reveals major details about the movie's plot.

I have here proof that the reality of poor suckers looking for fame and/or fortune being exploited for our perverse entertainment was not something which materialized with the advent of the Jerry Springer show. Such a claim should probably not be that much of a surprise; after all, it was also in the good old days when people made a Sunday family picnic out of watching public executions and the like. The only difference between that and the situation depicted in They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (1969) is that the victims think that something good will come out of this degradation.

The story itself is based on a novel, but the situation was apparently common in the 1930's, and seems to have the distinct impression of being the Depression era's low-budget version of Survivor, except that the "stars" of this 1930's rage weren't narcissistic, upper-middle-class twits from a Hollywood back-lot, but genuinely desperate people; the true victims of the Depression. The "show" is a marathon dance tournament, where many couples dance and dance, or at the very worst, attempt to stay on their feet, for hours and hours...then days and days....until the last couple standing wins the big prize. And of course, as with any television show or sports event, this spectacle draws a crowd. And corporate entities sponsor individual couples, and get some exposure in the process, while the people carrying their advertisements on their backs grow more tired and gradually more insane.

The movie itself focuses on a number of people. The two main participants are played by Jane Fonda and Michael Sazzarian; they get together because Fonda loses her dance partner, and Sazzarian is coaxed into the competition by the master of ceremonies, played by Gig Young. There are also a number of notable characters; one couple with dreams of stardom in Hollywood, a couple whose female component is pregnant, and an old sailor who is reduced to earning (or trying to earn) cash by participating in these stupid marathons.

About 99% of the film's running time is exclusively devoted to the goings-on at the dance hall, and they are mighty grim! When you think of a dance hall, you think elegance, but this looks almost like the German concentration camps before the Jews were sent off to get gassed! Most of the people who are involved in this competition are poor and ragged to begin with, but even the ones who have a sense of style are reduced to looking like the poor and desperate people that the organizers want them to be. The would-be actress discovers during rest break that somebody has stolen her silk dress. Later, it turns out that Young's character was the culprit; he knew that the audience would not care for a classy dame dancing in one of these competitions. And that is what makes these contests much like watching Jerry Springer today -- the audience wants to be able to feel better than these people, so they have somewhere to aim their sympathy or any other emotions at. A seemingly elegant woman would look out of place -- she doesn't look ragged and hopeless enough. The fact that Young's character actually justifies the presentation of the contest in this way -- with words used by many analysts in discussing "reality" TV -- is a bit of a shock; it shows that immoral behaviour for entertainment purposes didn't begin with the advent of television.

But reality TV and other nasty spectacles would not have been successful if it weren't for the people watching them, obviously, and this movie certainly casts that same spell on us, the viewers. The movie is grim and sick, and just goes on and on, but it is morbidly fascinating. We always have a thing for this, whether it is watching Jerry Springer or Ricki Lake (which I watch occasionally, I have to say), to Survivor or Fear Factor (which I've never seen), or even the coverage of the September 11 terrorist attacks (not quite the same, I know, but almost everybody was glued to the progression of the terror). The events of this movie are, like I said, sort of a cross between Survivor and a war zone, as people lose their good qualities, and are reduced to greedy animals. During the contest, the MC organizes a race, a "derby" (with the appropriate horse-racing music); the couples have to run around the floor for ten minutes, and the last three couples are kicked out of the contest (the MC names the top three losers, rather than the winners, at the end). The camera picks up all these tired, sweaty, utterly desperate people running around the track, and when one guy falls down, the other half of the couple will scream either helpfully, angrily, or desperately for them to get back up. There is so much at stake here -- this isn't just a contest, but a need to make money, something that was very difficult to do in the Depression. This is why these people, whom I'd be tempted to call uneducated, depraved 1930's trailer trash, would subject themselves to such a pathetic embarrassment. But the scariest parts of the movie are when these people slowly go mad. They've been up for days, weeks....and a few of them are starting to think that spiders are crawling all over them! Somehow, this tops anything on any Survivor challenge.

I don't think that this movie is really a major masterpiece, but it is still very intriguing. It obviously is merely a filmed version of the book; a faithful and tasteful literary adaptation, with restrained and stoical direction (by Sydney Pollack). The performances are alright, but the most memorable ones are from Jane Fonda and Gig Young, which are both pretty brutal and cold. Fonda is always a pretty cold and steely sort, so it's no surprise to see her play her character in such a bitter, angry fashion; in this movie, anyway, she never, ever looks happy or cheerful. Gig Young is pretty cold too, even though his character is supposed to be the master of ceremonies. There's something in his voice that doesn't register correctly; his MC doesn't exactly exhibit the joy of performance, and he certainly doesn't give a damn about the people in the building. There is something pretty phony about his public melodrama; his "stories" about the wonderful, hard-working Americans who populate the dance floor -- that is to be expected. But he is also a repellent person in other ways; he's obviously screwing a few of these people in more ways than one, if you catch my drift! This is apparent in a rather mystifying scene with him and Fonda in his office; it's obvious that the two have some sort of lewd sexual encounter, but I wonder why Fonda's character would submit to it, even if it, in another example of Survivor-like jealousy and anger, apparently appears to be payback for Sazzarian's fooling around with the actress. Later on, there is a very touchy scene between him and the actress as she breaks down.

There's only one real flaw, but it is a major one: the use of flash-forwards almost demolish the shocking ending. These flash-forwards scream to you that something dreadful will occur in the closing shots, and so when it actually happens you might feel numb, but you won't feel a sense of horror over what is an irrational, nihilistic, but powerful and desperate statement. While there is a slight twist of our expectations at the conclusion, it still does not throw us off as much as it should.

Not knowing anything about the dance marathon craze, I can't say for sure whether the actual length of this movie's dance was typical or pure literary licence, although I highly suspect the latter. I don't think the movie is trying to be realistic; it wants to create a world totally devoid of anything except greed, desperation, hopelessness, exploitation, madness, and all the other negatives. And the implication at the end is that this cycle of twisted humanity is never ending. This movie is also, in a sense, a grim and never-ending dirge, but it is a morbid curiosity, and is worth seeing for that.



Recommended: Yes

Viewing Format: VHS
Video Occasion: Better than Watching TV