Let’s talk about Larry Kent, Canada’s unsung prophet of counterculture cinema, and his *Vancouver Trilogy*. These films—*The Bitter Ash* (1963), *Sweet Substitute* (1964), and *When Tomorrow Dies* (1965)—are where the Beats crossed the border, rolled a cigarette, and said, “Eh, we’re staying.” If you’ve never heard of Kent, don’t feel bad. He’s not in the Criterion Collection or some film school syllabus. But these three films? They’re raw, wild, and unapologetically alive. They’re the sound of jazz horns in the middle of the Vancouver rain. They’re a time capsule of early ‘60s disillusionment with just enough existential dread to keep it spicy.
This was Canada’s answer to the Beatnik movement—a black-and-white rebellion against the polite Canadian stereotype. Kent didn’t care about pretty pictures or polished dialogue. He cared about *vibes*. And his vibes were jazzed-up, boozed-up, sexually liberated freefalls into the abyss. The trilogy doesn’t just capture Vancouver’s streets—it captures its *soul*.
---
### **The Bitter Ash (1963): Beatniks Behaving Badly**
Here’s where it all starts. *The Bitter Ash* is like a Canuck *On the Road*, but instead of dreamy wanderlust, it’s about gritty urban malaise. Kent plunges us into the lives of disillusioned youths navigating the gray zones of morality, ambition, and lust in a city that’s just starting to outgrow its small-town roots. There’s sex, betrayal, poetry readings, and some surprisingly cutting commentary on postwar middle-class values.
The characters are everything you’d expect from a Beat-inspired flick—artsy types, bohemians, and pretentious pseudo-intellectuals who think quoting Sartre makes them profound. But Kent doesn’t glorify them. He gets that these people are *messy*. They’re self-absorbed, desperate, and clinging to ideals that crack under the weight of real life. Vancouver here is cold and impersonal, and Kent’s handheld camerawork feels like a voyeuristic peek into a crumbling world.
Fun fact: This movie was so scandalous at the time (for its frank depictions of sex and counterculture) that it was almost *banned*. In Canada! The land of politeness and maple syrup! Imagine.
---
### **Sweet Substitute (1964): Sex, Jazz, and Suburbia**
With *Sweet Substitute*, Kent shifts his focus to sexual politics, and man, does he go for the jugular. This is a film about *desire*, baby. It’s about the tension between primal urges and societal expectations, and it does *not* hold back. The plot revolves around a love triangle, but the real star here is the undercurrent of frustration—sexual, emotional, existential.
This is Kent at his jazziest. The film practically swings with a beatnik sensibility, and Vancouver’s shadowy streets become a playground for broken dreams. The characters feel trapped—by marriage, by suburbia, by their own choices. It’s sexy, sure, but there’s a sadness to it, too, like the hangover after the party ends. Kent’s unflinching look at infidelity and emotional manipulation feels way ahead of its time.
And the jazz! Oh, the jazz. Kent uses music the way a good poet uses punctuation—sparingly, but with devastating effect. Every saxophone wail feels like a scream into the void.
---
### **When Tomorrow Dies (1965): Love Is a Cage**
The trilogy wraps up with *When Tomorrow Dies*, and by now, Kent is fully leaning into the cynicism. This one’s about relationships, too, but it’s less about lust and more about *control*. Love here isn’t liberating—it’s suffocating. The film tracks a woman torn between two men, but really it’s about the ways people use each other, intentionally or not.
This is Kent at his bleakest. The Vancouver of *When Tomorrow Dies* feels like a prison, all narrow alleys and oppressive interiors. The characters are restless, but no one’s going anywhere. It’s claustrophobic, uncomfortable, and utterly magnetic. Kent’s use of stark black-and-white cinematography hits hardest here—it’s like he’s scraping the paint off the walls of Canadian politeness to reveal the rot underneath.
---
### **The Beats, But Canadian**
Larry Kent wasn’t Kerouac or Ginsberg, but he was definitely their cinematic cousin—the one who fled to Canada, got a little drunk, and made movies that tore strips off the maple-leaf facade. The *Vancouver Trilogy* isn’t just Beat-inspired; it’s Beat *adapted*. It swaps America’s wide-open highways for Vancouver’s damp streets and cramped apartments. It trades romantic wanderlust for a colder, more biting realism.
What makes Kent stand out is his willingness to get ugly. The Beats were all about the beauty of the moment, but Kent sees through the veneer. His films show the messiness of living outside societal norms—the selfishness, the pain, the inevitable betrayals. And yet, there’s an undeniable poetry to his work, a rhythm that feels like a jazz solo spiraling out of control.
---
### **Larry Kent: Canada’s Gonzo Filmmaker**
So why isn’t Kent a bigger deal? Maybe because he didn’t play the game. His films were too raw, too gritty, too *real* for mainstream audiences. But the *Vancouver Trilogy* stands as a time capsule of a city and a generation on the brink. It’s a little messy, a little pretentious, but that’s the point.
Kent’s work isn’t polite, and it sure as hell isn’t easy. But it’s alive in a way few films are. It’s the sound of Vancouver’s soul cracking open, spilling out jazz, sex, and disillusionment. So, roll a cigarette, pour yourself a stiff drink, and dive in. Larry Kent’s *Vancouver Trilogy* isn’t just a series of films—it’s a vibe. A beatnik howl in the cold Canadian rain.
No comments:
Post a Comment