The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)

Was it the sun, the war or the addictive theme song that drove them all mad?
Intro.
I'm breaking one of my blog rules today, but for good reason.  I've seen The Bridge on the River Kwai many times already; there was a time when, as a teenager, I would watch it every day.  I'm not sure what it was about the movie that had such drawing power for me.  Maybe it was something about the utter futility of war that resonated with some of the usual teenage angst.  But that's a story for a whole other blog.  This weekend, after I realized that September had been turning into William Holden month, I decided to watch it again.  As I curled up to watch, I thought about how funny it seems that some actors become identified with one specific role.  Yul Brenner is a good example - for years he played The King in The King and I, and had a lot of trouble being cast outside of that role.  William Shatner is the same way; I just watched his new sitcom and yup, the thought was first "Captain Kirk" not William Shatner.  In much the same respect, watching from my generation's viewpoint, Alec Guiness was not known to myself or any of my friends as anyone but Obi-Won Kenobi.  That must have been awful for him, especially since he was first in such amazing films as The Bridge on the River Kwai, and gave what could be argued as the performance of a lifetime.

Overview (with a possible spoiler - sorry!)
The Bridge on the River Kwai begins with a company of British soldiers surrendering to the Japanese during WWII, somewhere in the thick Burmese jungle.  The men are marched into a prisoner-of-war camp, where the last two surviving members of the original camp are digging graves.  One of these men is Commander Shears, US Navy (William Holden), cynical and certain that everyone in the camp will eventually die.  Commanding the British troops is Lt. Col. Nicholson (Alec Guiness), and with him is medical officer Maj. Clipton (James Donald), who knows more about compassion than about the rules of war.  The Japanese commander is Col. Saito (Sessue Hayakawa), who advises the men to "be happy in their work." He is much like Nicholson in that both men will stick to their principles and refuse to lose face.  This stubborness leads to a difficult battle of wills when Saito orders that officers will do manual labor in his camp.  Nicholson refuses on the grounds that it is against the Geneva convention.  For that, he and all of his officers are shut up in small metal huts (called "the ovens") on the compound, right in the blazing heat.  Meanwhile, Shears, his fellow gravedigger, and one of the young men from the British soldiers decide to escape.  Only Shears makes it away from the guards alive, but he is hurt, lost and in the middle of nowhere.  He barely makes it into a village alive, where he recovers and then makes his way to a hospital on the coast.  Back at the camp, though, things do not bode well.  Clipton acts as a go-between for Saito and Nicholson, only to find that the men are close to identical and neither one believes in compromise.  In the end Nicholson prevails, and sets out not only to build a bridge in the allotted time-frame, but to build a better bridge that will stand the test of time.  As they push towards the short deadline, Nicholson begins to employ some of the measures threatened by Saito, but under Nicholson's direction, they pass as reasonable means.  So back to Shears in the hospital.  It turns out that an Allied team is being assembled to go and blow up the bridge.  Shears winds up volunteering (more like blackmailed into going).  It's rather difficult traveling, with the leader, Major Warden (Jack Hawkins), getting shot in the foot and then Japanese patrols showing up and such.  If you hadn't guessed it from the film's beginning, yes the bridge blows up.  But who does it and what is destroyed in the process is what ends the film with an even bigger emotional blow.

Highlights

You really can't get any finer acting.  Alec Guiness won an Oscar for Best Actor, and it was richly deserved.  Likewise Holden and Hayakawa give strong performances too.  However my favorite character, and one that really holds the heart of the film, is James Donald's Maj. Clipton.  We see a great deal as he does, as he is the only one to have conferences with both Saito and Nicholson during the standoff.  After seeing them both, stubborn and unwavering, he says "are they both mad?  Or am I going mad?  Or is it the sun?"  He reminds me a bit of Horatio in Hamlet in that he is very close to all of the proceedings, but most importantly he is alone, on a hillside, watching the horror of the bridge's explosion.  He is the only one left who can put words to it all - "Madness."

The film's construction was remarkable too, especially the bridge itself.  Filmed on location in Ceylon, some of the scenes with Shears and the Allied party are beautiful.  It's so well written too; I loved how they paid attention to both what was said and what was left unsaid.  In particular, Nicholson's speech at the end of the film about what a man leaves behind him when his life is through is both touching and yet still reserved, in keeping with his character.  That speech alone and how Guiness delivered it earned those Oscars.  On a side note about the Oscars, the film won for best Screenplay.  The writers were Pierre Boulle, who wrote the original book, Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson.  Foreman and Wilson had been blacklisted, so at the time of the film's release, only Boulle was listed as the writer, despite the fact that he didn't know much English.

Speaking of the book, I'd like to bring up what is often a debate between film scholars and literature scholars - book versus movie.  Usually I'm on the side of the book, with some exceptions (I liked The Godfather film better than the book).  In this case, I think it would be a tie.  What really struck me about the novel was just how similar Nicholson and Saito were.  They echo each other.  In the scenes where Clipton first talks to Saito and then immediately afterward talks to Nicholson, I thought I was reading the same pages over again - that's how close these two men were.  That parallelism comes across better on the page than on screen, though they do a very good job in the film.  I also started to think about what war films were truly about - the lower layer, if you will.  Specifically POW escape movies - is it something to do with bucking the system?  An escape from not only a physical prison, but an emotional one too?  The idea of an individual making it out to safety, the lone man against the world? (Think of Steve McQueen on that motorcycle in The Great Escape.)  I don't know enough about war genre studies, but I still think it's an interesting idea to keep in mind while watching.

Review and Recommendation
The Bridge on the River Kwai may be my favorite war film.  It's a classic by every standard.  I know a common downside people seem to cite is that it feels a bit long, but all of the details in writing and acting make it worthwhile.  All this time after I first saw the film and then picked up the book, I still recommend both the film and book very highly.

P.S. I forgot to mention that the theme song, "Colonel Bogey March" really is addictive.  I'm whistling it now just writing about it.  

Sabrina (1954)

Bogart's a little too old, Holden's a little too blond, but Audrey is just right.

Intro.

I think everyone is familiar with the story of Sabrina. An ordinary girl falls in love with a rich man who doesn't know she exists, she goes away and transforms into a lady and upon her return, he falls in love with her.  There's more to it, of course, but at its heart, Sabrina is in every sense a Cinderella story.  With a seemingly perfect combination like Billy Wilder, William Holden, Humphrey Bogart and Audrey Hepburn, Paramount was excited to see what a great film would be created.  They were right, though the off-screen story was far from a fairy-tale.

Overview
"Once upon a time, on the North Shore of Long Island, some thirty miles from New York, there lived a small girl on a large estate."  So begins the story of Sabrina Fairchild (Audrey Hepburn), the timid young daughter of the chauffer employed by the very wealthy Larrabee family.  She is in love with the younger of the Larrabee sons, David (William Holden), who is a playboy with three divorces to his name and no work ethic.  That ethic is instead present in his older brother, Linus (Humphrey Bogart), who is a regular workaholic with no time for fun.  Distraught because David doesn't know she exists, Sabrina tries to commit suicide, only to be stopped by Linus.  Her father has saved his money and sends her to Paris the next day to cooking school.  Over the next two years, she not only learns how to cook, but also how to live and returns to Long Island as a sophisticated, knowledgeable and absolutely beautiful lady.  David is quick to notice her now and finds himself ignoring his fiancee in favor of Sabrina.  Linus won't stand for that, though, as David's marriage is part of a company merger in a multi-million dollar plastics manufacturing deal.  So Linus decides to distract Sabrina so that she'll forget about David; he'll even pay her off it that's what it takes.  None of them expect what happens next, as Linus learns to loosen up some and winds up falling for Sabrina himself.  When Sabrina gets two tickets to sail back to Paris, just who will accompany her?   
 

Highlights

Sabrina has all of the charm and humor of a classic romantic comedy.  It is one of the best examples of the genre and I believe a lot of that has to do with the fine writing and even finer performances.  You can tell Bogart and Holden are well versed in acting, and even though this was only Audrey Hepburn's second film, she is captivating and ideal for the role.  I know I wouldn't want to be in her shoes as Sabrina, having to choose between Linus and David.  What a sweet, funny movie.  Sabrina proves my point that a great film doesn't need violence, awful language or sex to be entertaining.  I swear if you don't at least smile when David is getting broken glass removed from his rear end (yes, he sat on two champagne glasses) and Linus calls out "goodbye, Scarface," you don't have a sense of humor.

As I mentioned above, the back-stage story is even more interesting than the one on the celluloid.  I have a DVD of Sabrina, and watched the short documentary for the first time.  Like the film it was upbeat, innocent and featured a voice-over that sounded more like a trailer introduction than a documentary.  Originally Cary Grant had held the role of Linus, but had to back out one week before shooting began.  Paramount needed an older, well-established star and turned to Bogart.  This was unlike any role he had previously held, and he was excited for it.  He even remarked during production that "if I were as handsome as Bill Holden, I wouldn't have any doubts as to why Bacall married me."  That's all well and good, but I knew something was a bit off, so I pulled out my copy of Bogart by A.M. Sperber and Eric Lax (a fabulous book that I highly recommend!) and checked into it.

There's a very funny story from Bogart.  In 1939, Bogart was a bit upset that he took fourth billing after much younger William Holden in a film called Invisible Stripes.  On set, Holden insisted on doing a stunt by himself, where he drove a motorcycle with Bogart as the passenger.  The book has it written this way: "Bogart objected - 'That S.O.B., he'll crack it up!' - but Holden insisted. He promptly ran the bike into a wall.  Only egos were injured. (pg. 103)"  No wonder Bogart was a bit leary when he worked with Holden again. 

According to Sperber and Lax, Bogart was excited to do Sabrina, but that excitement faded once he realized that Holden and director Wilder were already buddies (they had just made Sunset Boulevard and Stalag 17 together), and along with young Hepburn, they formed a sort of clique that left the older star out in the cold.  As they wrote in their biography, Sperber and Lax talked about the private meetings and lunches between the others.  "Evidently no one thought of inviting Bogart.  Then again, probably no one observing one of the biggest stars in Hollywood, with one of the loveliest women waiting for him at home, would have guessed the wells of insecurity tapped by this exclusion." (pg. 492)  He just wanted to be asked, to be recognized.  He became difficult to work with, arguing and throwing tantrums, though he wasn't the only difficult one - Wilder was just as difficult, and would sometimes get Hepburn to pretend to be sick because he didn't have the day's script finished yet.  None of those problems show in the finished film, however.  Bogart and Wilder made peace a few years later, but what happened during the filming of Sabrina is still a part of Hollywood history.

One last point I should make is that the Paramount costume and wardrobe designer was Edith Head, whom I adore.  She designed all the gowns in What a Way to Go! and those absolutely jaw-dropping dresses for Grace Kelly in Rear Window.  So when Audrey Hepburn decided to ask new fashion designer Hubert de Givenchy to make her clothes for the post-Paris part of the film, I was a bit disappointed.  Not by the gowns, because they are gorgeous.  Still, I should say it must have been harder to make dresses for Audrey Hepburn that made her pretty but still a bit school-girlish.  And those were entrusted to Edith, who did as wonderful a job as ever.  I think I have a bit of a crush on her, or at least on her work.

Review and Recommendation
Sorry to make this such a long post!  All in all, Sabrina is a true classic.  Funny, charming and sweet, it's a perfect example of a romantic-comedy.  I highly recommend it for the great acting, the beautiful Audrey Hepburn, and those early dresses from Edith Head.  Can I say the obvious tagline?  Let your heart be stolen by Sabrina!

P.S. Bogart really is one of the best biographies I've ever read.  Maybe even the best.  It's by A. M. Sperber and Eric Lax, published by William Morrow and Company, New York, 1997.  No copyright infringement intended. 

A pile of nickels

I just wanted to take a few moments and update the status of this blog.  I'm trying to make it to 100 films by December 31, 2010.  It's been pretty difficult, but I feel like I can make it happen.  A lot of this is due to my friends who have been reading my posts and encouraging me to continue (thanks, guys!), even when I'm sure my incessant talking about things like Robert Mitchum singing or Tony Curtis impersonating Cary Grant or how fantastic Katharine Hepburn was is probably getting on their nerves. 

I've been trying to come up with ways to make this blog more interesting, so I'm in the process of adding a few things.  First are taglines for each review.  I'm only doing this because before each entry, I usually tell my co-worker Catherine about a movie I've just watched and wind up giving her a very brief, and usually silly, overview.  So you'll notice a few of these one-line descriptions, all meant in fun.  I'm also working on a session about Meaningful Films, where anyone can write about a film that has impacted his or her life.  So thanks for reading so far, and I hope you'll join me as I push on towards 100.

Sunset Boulevard (1950)

Intro.

Everybody knows the line.  "All right, Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up."  And just about everyone knows the image that goes with it - Gloria Swanson decked out in a gown and glitzy headpiece from the 1920's, descending the stairs, her chin up and huge eyelashes held on unblinking eyes.  I knew this line well, but had never seen the film which featured it: Sunset Boulevard.  I just watched it a few nights ago and I have to say, it's my new favorite film.  I've always liked movies about Hollywood and the film business, but Sunset Boulevard outdoes any of the others I've seen.  

Overview

Sunset Boulevard opens on its namesake following a squad of homicide police cars past palm trees and luxuriant mansions.  A voiceover tells us he's going to tell us the real story, before you get the messed up version from the reporters.  The police all gather around a swimming pool, where we see a dead man floating face-down.  The narrators says he's been shot twice in the back and once in the stomach.  He's "nobody important.  Just a movie-writer with a couple of B-pictures to his name."  We get a look at the poor guy's face again as the narrator adds, "poor dope.  He always wanted a pool."  Then the film goes back to six months earlier, and the narrator switches to telling us about himself.  His name is Joe Gillis (William Holden), and he's a penniless writer cranking out two stories a week which he can't sell.  The finance company shows up to repossess his car, but he says he lent it to a friend.  Joe of course does have the car, and goes to Paramount to talk to a producer friend of his about a story he sent in.  The reader's department has given the story a poor rating, so Joe's out of luck.  He goes to see his agent, who says that losing his car will be great because he'll be inspired to write more.  Just as Joe's driving back, the finance company guys spot him and start to pursue him.  Joe pulls into one of the big estates on Sunset Boulevard and hides in a deserted garage.  Safely hidden, he goes towards the house, thinking it's deserted.  That's why he is so startled to see a butler appear at the door and usher him inside.  Turns out that Joe has been mistaken for an undertaker because the homeowner's pet chimp has died.  And the homeowner is just as extravagent and outrageous as the house - her name is Norma Desmond (Gloria Swanson), famous silent film era movie star.  "You used to be big," Joe nods in recognition.  "I am big," she corrects him.  "It's the pictures that got small."  She asks Joe to stay and read the script she's been writing for several years - her big picture to mark her return to the screen.  She hires Joe to help her rewrite the script.  He spends the rest of the day there reading and when he wakes up the next morning, he finds all of his belongings have been moved in for him.  Before Joe realizes it, he becomes a kept man.  His car is repossessed, Norma won't let him leave, and soon she's buying him clothes and cigarette cases.  On New Year's Eve, she throws a party but he's the only guest.  He snaps, tells her he wants a life of his own, and storms out to go to his friend Artie's party.  He comes back, however, because Norma was so overcome, she took the razor from his room and slit her wrists.  She survived, but the night changed them both.  Joe stays with Norma after that and she confidently readies herself for her great return to the screen.  She even manages to go to Paramount and see Mr. DeMille, who doesn't have the heart to tell her that her script is awful.  While at the studio though, Joe sees Artie's girlfriend, Betty Schaefer (Nancy Olson), who proposes making a script out of one of Joe's old short stories.  He agrees to start meeting her late at night and continue working on the script.  There are a few complications though, as first Betty falls in love with Joe and then Norma discovers a copy of the script with Betty's and Joe's names on it.  It all comes to an end when Norma calls Betty to warn her about Joe, but Joe interrupts and tells Betty to come over and see his situation.  I won't give away exactly what happens, but it's a wonderful ride all the way to the very end, where the camera finally gives Norma her close-up.

Highlights
I love how Sunset Boulevard is written.  The dialogue and the narration are both outstanding.  Besides the line I quoted at the beginning of this post, there's also the wonderful descriptions and reflections of Joe Gillis.  He speaks like a writer, which is probably why it comes across so well.  He sees the big mansion and calls it "a big white elephant of a house."  He realizes how deeply troubled Norma is as he narrates, "she was still sleepwalking along the giddy heights of a lost career."  Then we have Norma's madness-induced lines like "no one ever leaves a star - that's what makes one a star."  Through it all we get a keen sense of Joe's cynicism and Norma's desperation.  That's what the film really comes down to - two people who have seen the dark side of Hollywood.

Gloria Swanson gives an amazing performance as Norma.  I didn't know it at the time, but Gloria had been a star back in the days of silent films, and those movies Norma watches are actually Gloria's old ones from the 20's.  As Norma, she is both pitiable and detestable - I really didn't make up my mind about her character until the very last scene, where you can't help but feel sorry for her.  The best word for her is denial.  In Joe's words, she's "still waving proudly at a parade that had long since passed her by."  Her fans, her friends, everyone in the cold world of show business has given her the brush, but she refuses to believe it.  Her denial is narcissistic perhaps, but very human.  She refuses to believe that she's getting older, that she's past the best years of her life.

Just as Gloria Swanson is a perfect fit as Norma Desmond, William Holden is just as perfect for the role of Joe Gillis.  I think very few actors could have delivered that dead-pan cynical narrative as well as Holden.  Maybe it was the kind of character he usually played or maybe it was a bit of his own personality, but there's something very engaging in his performance.  Just as engaging is the sweet, optimistic Betty, played by the beautiful Nancy Olson.  She too has been snubbed by Hollywood, but has adjusted rather well.  She and Norma are polar opposites, which may be why Joe is so drawn to Betty.  Their dynamic is fun to watch and gives the film a lot more depth.

Finally, I have to comment a little on the satiric look at Hollywood.  Entire books have been written about it, so I'm just going to make this short.  I loved how real shots of Paramount studios and Schwab's Drugstore were used - it gives a realistic feel to the film.  I also loved how real celebrities were discussed - Joe Gillis mentions Selznick, Tyrone Powers, Alan Ladd.  And to make it even better, Cecil B. DeMille appears as himself!  Also keep your eyes out for Hedda Hopper and Buster Keaton, also playing themselves.  It makes the impact of the film more pronounced, more identifiable. It also doesn't shy away from how quickly stars can be forgotten or how cruel fans and reporters can be.  We see it every day in pop culture headlines - which celebrities are in rehab, which are in jail, which are causing the latest scandal.  But when the publicity stops altogether, that can be the end of a career.

Review and Recommendation
Honestly, I could write a lot more about why Sunset Boulevard is a great movie, but I won't.  What I can do is give it one of my strongest "must-see" recommendations.  If I had a 5-star system, this would get 8 stars.  It's a film about films and movie-lovers everywhere will find something to like and admire.  It's easy to see why it won 3 Oscars.  So sit back, enjoy and be prepared for Norma Desmond to stare directly at you, you "wonderful people out there in the dark."

P.S. For any Stephen King fans out there, this film definitely reminded me of a non-gory version of Misery.  Don't believe me?  Watch it and see!

The Bad and the Beautiful (1952)

Tagline: Kirk Douglas has swagger to burn!
Intro.

When I talk about books with my friends and co-workers, we inevitably mention our growing "to read" piles - books that have been recommended or even lent to us, books we've been itching to read but haven't been able to find time for or books that we know we should read because they are classics or bestsellers.  This last group, books that we should read, I think can be applied to a sort of loose canon of literature.  You know, those books we were all expected to read in school.  I think the same idea of a canon can be applied to film as well.  We can focus it on world film as a whole or on films of a particular country.  If we took American films, for example, some classics in the canon would include The Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, you get the idea.  That got me thinking - what determines a film's place as a real classic?  On this site, I use the term "classic" loosely to mean any film more than 30 years old.  But you can't very well say two films like Carolina Moon and 12 Angry Men are classics in the same sense of the word.   Does it have to do with the number of Oscars a film wins?  Or the performances of the actors or actresses in their careers?  What about the place of a film within the history of Hollywood or in the film's culture?  What about the film's recognition in today's world (like how many people today have ever seen or even heard of films like The Life of Emile Zola or Grand Hotel - both are Best Picture Oscar winners)?  This is what I was thinking about when I saw that one of the films on my "should watch" list was on television.  The winner of 5 Oscars, The Bad and the Beautiful promised to be a great film, so I eagerly settled in to watch.

Overview
The Bad and the Beautiful starts with phone calls - one to a director, one to a beautiful woman, one to a writer.  All of the calls are from Jonathan Shields and all go purposefully unanswered.  All three of those people meet up at the house of studio head Harry Pebbel (Walter Pidgeon).  Washed out film producer Jonathan (Kirk Douglas) is ready after two years to make his comeback, but needs all three of those people to make the film with him.  As Harry pleads with them, each person tells the story of how Jonathan entered and then ruined their lives.  First up is director Fred Amile (Barry Sullivan), who met Jonathan when the latter first came to Hollywood.  Jonathan's father had been a big time producer and Jonathan aimed to do even better, but had to start at the very bottom.  Together, the two men began directing films back when they were very production-line oriented.  As the studio executive tells them, "I don't want to win awards.  I want to make pictures that end with a kiss and black ink in the books."  The men learn their trade through long hours and hard work, and finally make a really successful film.  Fred has a story outlined from a popular book and is dying to be lead director on his own picture.  But Jonathan is the one who can sell, and gets the picture made, though part of the bargain is to bring in an experienced director.  Fred disowns Jonathan, though back in the present tense of the film, Harry reminds him that Fred finally stopped hanging on Jonathan's coattails, became a great success on his own and has a great life.  Then the story switches to beautiful actress Georgia Lorrison (Lana Turner), who was discovered by Jonathan.  Her flashback shows us what a wreck she was - an alcoholic steeped in depression.  Jonathan takes care of her, teaches her to be a lady and gets her the role in his next big picture, despite the protests of the director.  Their fondness turns to love (at least on her part) and the night of the premier she is haled as the next great star.  But Jonathan isn't there to share her joy.  She goes to his house only to find him angry at her presence.  That's probably because he has another woman upstairs.  Completely crushed, she leaves him and almost has a car accident because she's crying so hard.  Thus, she blames him for using her.  Since then, however, she has continued to be a great star and studios everywhere are eager for her to work with them.  Finally the last story is told through the screenwriter, James Lee Bartlow (Dick Powell).  His connection with Jonathan started when he published his book on the history of Virginia.  Jonathan convinces him to come to Hollywood to turn the book into a film.  James is reluctant to stay and write the screenplay, but between Jonathan's influence and James's wife's desire to see Hollywood, he stays.  When he can't focus on the screenplay, Jonathan arranges for he and James to spend two weeks in the country.  He also arranges for a sexy actor called Gaucho (Gilbert Roland) to distract Mrs. Rosemary Bartlow (Gloria Graham), a charming Southern belle with a knack for disrupting her husband whenever he tries to work.  James finishes the script, but returns to Hollywood to find that Gaucho and Rosemary have been killed in a plane crash.  When the truth finally comes out, James disowns Jonathan.  So at last James, Georgia and Fred have to decide whether or not to give Jonathan another chance.

Highlights
I'm a big fan of flashbacks.  The way that The Bad and the Beautiful, uses three long flashbacks to tell the story of a man's life is very well done.  In fact, the whole film is very strong in its storytelling.  Part of it is the way it all ties together.  The three central characters (James, Georgia and Fred) all know of each other and appear in multiple flashbacks.  The opening itself is a great way to introduce the three of them as well as Jonathan - a man so hated no one will take his call.

Kirk Douglas carries the film so well.  He makes Jonathan both despicable and yet so endearing.  It's magnetism.  He can talk his way into or out of anything.  One word I thought of immediately was swagger.  The whole movie rests on how much swagger he has.  That and his perfect, unmovable hair.  But I digress.  Kirk Douglas should've won an Oscar for this performance - his character is the absolute epitome of everything we both love and hate about Hollywood.  I think that's why the film is such a classic.  It's not only about a man who will stop at nothing to get to the top, but also the story of old Hollywood, or at least the kind of story we want to see. 

Review and Recommendation
The Bad and the Beautiful has some great aspects and the Oscars it won (Art Direction, Cinematography, Writing, Costume Design, and Supporting Actress for Gloria Grahame) are deserved.  It's not as dark as most "inside Hollywood" films, but also not as light as say Singin' in the Rain.  While I don't think it's a "classic" as much as some other films, it is nevertheless a fine piece of movie-making history.  An all-around good film, I recommend it also for Douglas's fine acting and a great story.

The Moon is Blue (1953)

Intro.

As much as I am a fan of movies, I am also a bit of a television nut.  It helped that I lived with two friends during college who also watched a lot of television, and our inevitable "television nights" became a great refuge.  One of my favorites was (and still is) M*A*S*H, which I watched every day in reruns as a kid.   One episode I remembered involved some of the M*A*S*H surgeons, Hawkeye and BJ, trying to get a copy of a film called The Moon is Blue, which had recently been banned in Boston.  It's a pretty funny story of trying to wheel and deal in order to get that film, which turns out to be very inoffensive after all. I thought of that when I saw the listing on television and my curiosity got the best of me.

Overview

Donald Gresham is an easygoing architect, full of charm and swagger.  When he exchanges smiles with a pretty stranger, Patty O'Neill (Maggie McNamara), he has no idea what he is in for.  He follows her to the top of the Empire State Building, where they meet and begin talking.  He tries to pick her up and succeeds when one of his coat buttons comes off.  She offers to sew it back on, but he conveniently "loses" the needle.  So they head over to his office, where there are no needles.  Donald starts to realize that Patty is an odd mix of naivety and cynicism when it comes to men, and he becomes determined to pursue her.  They decide to go to dinner, but first Donald must change his coat (it's still missing a button, and that isn't fit for a restaurant), so he gets her to go to his apartment.  It begins to pour, so instead of a rain-drenched date, Patty offers to cook for them.  Donald leaves for the corner store to get some groceries.  While he's gone, his upstairs neighbor David Slater (David Niven) comes down and finds Patty.  They start to talk about love, marriage, children and he finds her to be very inquisitive and opinionated.  She only wants to marry an older man.  "I want to be appreciated, not drooled over," she says.  Oh and she adds, "romance is for bobbysoxers."  What she learns though, is that David's daughter, Cynthia (Dawn Addams), just broke up with Donald and is still very angry.  Donald returns, then Cynthia shows up and things go from funny to crazy.  One angry father, a black eye, lots of misunderstanding and two marriage proposals later, Donald and Patty end up where they started on top of the Empire State Building, but a lot happier.   

Highlights

I couldn't help but wonder how on earth such an innocent romantic comedy as The Moon is Blue could wind up breaking censorship codes so much it would be banned.  Turns out the director, Otto Preminger, set out to do just that - to test the limits of the Breen code.  The Moon is Blue was the very first film to use the word "virgin" as well as other banned words like "seduce" and "mistress".  And I think all of these words are used by Patty, who is a girl determined not to give in to playboys and keep her virtue until marriage.  There's no nudity, no blood and gore, no depictions of sex, just a few words.  However, all of the conversations center on sex, love, marriage and the like.  It isn't so much suggestive or erotic as it is a hard look at what relationships in the 20th century really were.  It's so different from films today, where there are no holds barred.  The more sex, violence and foul language, the bigger the hit seems to be.  Hollywood and American culture have both come a long way.  I'm just not so sure I like where we're headed.

Although it's a bit of a run-of-the-mill romantic comedy, The Moon is Blue does feature some good acting.  William Holden is charming as ever as Donald, but David Niven gives a great performance as an equally charming (though a bit more lecherous) playboy.  I think what surprised me the most was how good Maggie McNamara was.  A newcomer to the film business, she gives life to such a complicated role.  Patty is both a modern woman and an old-fashioned one.  You're torn the whole movie between thinking she's really smart and really naive.  The key moment in the film comes near the end of the film, where Patty hesitates outside of Donald's bedroom door, wondering if her morals are really what she wants them to be.  As David puts it, "understanding is almost as precious as virtue."  We don't know what she's really going to do and her hesitation speaks volumes.

Review and Recommendation
The Moon is Blue is a fun piece of Hollywood history.  Preminger eventually got those bans dropped, but the entire incident was the first blow to eventually bring down the staunch Breen code.  I recommend it as a light, entertaining romantic comedy not to be taken too seriously.  The ending is a bit too cute, but sometimes that's what we really want to see, right?  Good old fashioned comedy.

P.S. Want to read more about the Breen code?  Check it out here.

Adam's Rib (1949)

Intro.

I used to work at a customer service call center, where I answered around 80 phone calls a day.  Sometimes I thought I had heard it all, from the most colorful of obscenities to sweet, happy people who would sing to me.  From time to time my caller would make some old film reference which I would get (much to their delight).  I even got a few film recommendations, like Adam's Rib.  Now a couple thousand calls and a new job later, I came across a copy of the film and remembered the callers who told me to watch it.  As it starred Katharine Hepburn, I couldn't very well say no, and soon found myself a new favorite romantic comedy.

Overview (with a few spoilers - sorry!)
Young housewife Doris Attinger (Judy Holliday) suspects her husband Warren (Tom Ewell) of infidelity.  She tracks him down, catches him with his mistress and nervously pulls a gun on them.  Shaking all over, she fires off several rounds, one of which hits Warren in the shoulder.  Doris is brought up on charges of attempted murder, but manages to get the best defense lawyer on her side - Amanda Bonner (Katharine Hepburn).  The only problem is that Amanda's husband Adam (Spencer Tracy) gets assigned to the prosecution.  The resulting court trial challenges not only the definitions and prejudices of the law, but the marriage of Amanda and Adam.  Amanda argues that Doris was only defending herself and her family, and if a man had done what she did, no one would judge or blame him.  Adam argues that no one, not even Doris, can twist the law to forgive something that was clearly attempted murder.  As the case grows more intense, the drama at home between the Bonners worsens, no thanks to their neighbor Kip (David Wayne) who is in love with Amanda.  While Amanda does win the trial, Adam isn't quite finished as he figures out a way to make her realize that he was right all along in their domestic argument.  What results is a dramatic and hilarious conclusion about the one difference between men and women.

Highlights

Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn have amazing chemistry in all of their films, but this one is especially good.  Few couples I think could have really conveyed the love and respect the Bonners have for each other while still expressing their very stubborn opinions.  I liked how the strain on the marriage comes through gradually and erupts both in the courtroom and in their home.  Both Adam and Amanda have strong arguments and it's great to see them battle it out as they are both so well matched.

I love Judy Holliday.  One of my favorite musicals is Bells Are Ringing but that's mainly because it also stars Dean Martin and really they just make a great couple.  But in Adam's Rib, Judy gives a great performance as the slightly neurotic Doris.  Her interview with Amanda at the beginning is great:
                                    Amanda: "And how did you feel after you shot him?"
                                    Doris: "Hungry."
Doris with all her sweetness becomes the lightning rod for the whole trial.  The jury selection is even geared towards the defense.  Amanda asks each possible juror, "do you believe in equal rights for women?" and surprisingly some of them say of course not.  While hers is a cause for women and aimed to prove that Doris was only defending her home and her life, Amanda fails to realize that Adam's point is exactly that.  If Doris is to be treated equally, then the law should apply to her the same as to a man in that situation.  Their clash in the courtroom carries to the bedroom where Adam tells Amanda that he doesn't like what she's doing.  "Marriage is a law, a contract," he says.  "Are you going to outsmart that the way you've outsmarted all the others?"  Now that's good writing!

I was talking to some of my coworkers about this film and they brought up something called the Bechdel test.  Basically it's a standard test applied to films, books, etc.  The three rules are 1) it has to have at least 2 women in it, 2) they have to talk about 3) something other than men.  It all started with a comic strip, but the idea has really taken off, spawning lots of study and some interesting online debates like the ones here.  It's an interesting concept, especially as the commentors have mentioned that the test itself is like the letter of the law, but the film itself is the spirit - a film that passes the Bechdel test does not mean it is feminist-friendly.  It could even be anti-feminist.  Anyway, at first I got very upset because I think Adam's Rib is a great film for the feminist cause, but it didn't meet the requirements, as Doris and Amanda's conversation is all about Doris trying to kill her husband.  However, Amanda calls a few women to the stand to prove that women are the equals, if not superiors, of men.  We meet a prominent female chemist with more degrees than anyone could remember, a foreman with 383 workers under her (including her husband), and a vaudeville performer.  At least the conversation with the chemist does not involve men.  Katharine Hepburn embodied the feminist cause as early as the thirties; she was even banned because she insisted on wearing pants.  Her performance here is classic.  And just as we can argue over the Bechdel test, Amanda Bonner concludes for us all - "just as man is body and soul, law is letter and spirit."          
 

Review and Recommendation

Okay, this post is getting much too long, so I want to open it up for thoughts and comments.  I highly recommend Adam's Rib to everyone.  It's a great example of the legendary Hepburn-Tracy team as well as a film with such a strong leading lady. 

P.S. Special thanks to my coworkers Catherine and Rachel.  You guys rock!

High Society (1956)

Intro.

Normally, I hate remakes.  If a film isn't particularly good, then I can understand wanting to redo it, or if there's some big change or improvement (like making a silent film into a talking picture) that warrents a new film.  I also appreciate it when the new film's director pays homage or does something to respect the new film.  Case in point, Cape Fear.  The original Cape Fear from 1962 starred Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum.  When it was remade in 1991, Martin Scorsese made sure that both men had roles in the film (both of them play lawyers in the remake).  That shows class and respect.  High Society is a different kind of remake.  It takes the movie, The Philadelphia Story, and makes it into a musical.  As it has changed genres, the film loses some of its punch, but adds some beautiful songs.  It's enjoyable in a wholly different way, which is one of the reasons I like it.

Overview
Wealthy Tracy Lord (Grace Kelly) is getting remarried at her family estate.  Her ex-husband, C. K. Dexter Haven (Bing Crosby) however, lives next door and has opened his home to a jazz festival which will coincide with (and possibly ruin) her wedding.  Dexter is still in love with his ex-wife, despite her cool condescension of his work as a "jukebox hero."  Tracy's snobbery extends to her father, who has left home due to rumors of an affair with some showgirl.  Her wedding plans get even more complex when Spy Magazine threatens to run a tell-all story about Mr. Lord - a threat which is stopped in exchange for an inside scoop of Tracy's wedding.  The two magazine reporters, Mike Conner (Frank Sinatra) and Liz Imbrie (Celeste Holm), don't know about the deal, and hate their job almost as much as Tracy hates having them there.  If things couldn't get any harder for her, her father shows up unexpectedly, Mike starts to fall for her, and in the end her in tact virtue starts to crumble when a drunken late night swim with Mike leaves her uncertain of just how far they had gone.  Her fiancee refuses to marry her, thinking her unfaithful, and the resulting mess turns into a great ending after all.

Highlights
To judge this film on its own merits, it is a very fine piece of entertainment.  I wouldn't say it was the best musical I've ever seen, but certainly one of the most charming.  I mean, how can you resist Grace Kelly, Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra in a love triangle?  Each performer in the movie is definitely worth watching.

I think the music really adds to this film.  Songs like "True Love" and "You're Sensational" are well-performed and showcase the two singer-turned-actors.  I have always loved the Sinatra/Crosby duet, "Well, Did You Evah?" which is a funny portrait of the follies of the upper class.  You also have to laugh at the Sinatra/Holm duet, "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?"  And of course, we can't forget the jazz festival, which features none other than Louis Armstrong as himself (how cool is that?).

It's difficult to watch High Society and not compare it with The Philadelphia Story.  Each movie is fun, entertaining and features some great talent.  That being said, I think the point of the story - Tracy's fall from grace and final understanding that no one is perfect - is portrayed much more effectively in The Philadelphia Story.  In some ways, I consider that film to be a comedy-drama.  The characters are much more developed and fragile.  In the original, Dexter is an alcoholic and hit Tracy, which led to their divorce.  In High Society, their divorce isn't really explained except that Dexter is just another crooner.  Likewise, Mike's character is much more developed in The Philadelphia Story - he is a real person trapped in a job he hates who connects with Tracy after talking to her about his writing.  In High Society, Mike's a more of a plot device (I hate putting it that way!) used to make the story work.

The addition of music allows the film to not only be light-hearted, but to sort of poke fun at the upper class more so than the original film did.  One thing that really struck me in High Society is the scene where Tracy takes Mike to see the "graveyard" of the rich - mansions abandoned because the taxes are too high.  The world she belongs to is falling apart and she wants to make sure he realizes it isn't all about dinner parties and pink champagne.  But that is as serious as the film gets.  And I think that's really what they wanted to achieve - to take a comic look at the "rich and mighty", not a deeper one that borders on the dramatic.

Review and Recommendation
On its own, High Society is a fun, upbeat musical comedy.  Grace Kelly is magnificent, as are her two crooning suitors, Sinatra and Crosby.  The score is incredible, and I guarantee you'll have at least one of the songs stuck in your head afterward!  While not as deep or well-developed as The Philadelphia Story, the film achieves its purpose to entertain and to showcase three legends on screen together.  This is one remake I can love and recommend!

P.S. The original Cape Fear is still far better than the remake, by the way.

Macao (1952)

Intro.

In films, a "meet-cute" is the point in a story where two characters meet for the first time.  It's usually applied to romantic comedies.  Eli Wallach in the film The Holiday gives an example.  To paraphrase: suppose a man and a woman are both in need of pajamas, so they both go to the same men's department store.  The woman says she just needs a top; the man says he only needs bottoms.  They look at each other and that's it.  I have to say, even though the 1952 film Macao isn't a standout classic, it definitely has one of the funniest meet-cutes.  Onboard a ship heading for Macao, Jane Russell is in her cabin with a man she's trying to fend off.  She throws her shoe at him, but he ducks and the shoe goes right through the porthole and hits Robert Mitchum in the head as he's walking by.  He goes into the cabin with the shoe, sees Jane Russell, and that's it - a great meet-cute!

Overview

Cinderella jokes aside, Macao is really a film noir.  It opens on a ship bound for Macao, a place notorious for being 3 miles outside of police jurisdiction.  Headed there is nightclub singer Julie Benson (Jane Russell) and ex-GI Nick Cochran (Robert Mitchum).  Benson is short on money, so not only does she land a job at a local bar, but she picks Cochran's wallet.  He in turn gets stopped by the police, but she returns the money before he's arrested.  Meanwhile, Cochran teams up with another passenger, who gets him a job as an undercover special agent investigating a crime ring that just so happens to be run by Julie's new boss.  What follows is a web of crime, deceit and a blossoming romance between Nick and Julie.  Nick sets out to get Julie's boss, Lawrence Trumble, to take him on as a hired hand.  The idea is to get Lawrence to leave the safety of Macao and go to Hong Kong for some missing jewels so that the authorities can arrest him.  But the best laid plans often go awry, and after a shooting and a thrilling fight on Trumble's ship just shy of the 3 mile mark, the film comes to an end that's typical noir, though a bit happier.

Highlights

Both Robert Mitchum and Jane Russell give good, solid performances.  While not a standout film, it is nonetheless enjoyable and much of that is due to their chemistry.  This was their second film together, the first being His Kind of Woman, which is more of a noir parody.  As many reviewers on IMDb have said (and you should read those write-ups - they are much better than mine!), Macao is kind of a lighter film noir.  It is still "good triumphs over evil" rather than in some of Bogart's films or Mitchum's Out of the Past, where morality is an issue and the good and bad characters are hard to tell apart.   

Aside from that, the story was easier to follow than some noirs, partly because the script was so confusing, Robert Mitchum helped rewrite it as they filmed.  Also worth mentioning is Jane Russell's fabulous singing.  She does "One for My Baby" and the ironically named "You Kill Me."  She is quickly becoming one of my new favorite actresses.  Gloria Grahame is also featured in the film, though not in a leading role.  She nevertheless turns in a great performance as Margie, a woman you both love and hate.  You'll probably recognize Grahame from some of her other work, but for me she'll always be Violet from It's a Wonderful Life.  Overall, a good cast.

Review and Recommendation
Macao is an enjoyable film - it's easy to follow with enough suspense and romance to make for a good lighter film noir.  I recommend it to fans of Russell and/or Mitchum, and would say that it's a good film.  Not great, not horrible, but always entertaining.

Pal Joey (1957)

Intro.

I love hearing the backstories of films from TCM's host Robert Osborne.  For example, he explained that the story of Pal Joey began back in the 1930s as a Broadway play.  At one point it starred Gene Kelly, so when studios began trying to  make it into a film, he was their first choice.  However, due to the racy nature of the story and Hollywood's strict codes, it took a long while to be green-lighted.  Finally, Columbia Pictures made it, and cast their biggest star of the 1940s and 50s, Rita Hayworth.  They also cast up-and-coming star Kim Novak.  The problem was finding a leading man - Kelly wasn't available, so they tried Marlon Brando (who couldn't do it) and Jack Lemmon (who was still more or less unknown and Rita Hayworth did not want in the film).  At last Frank Sinatra was cast and the film was a perfect fit for him. 

Overview

Pal Joey feels almost like a Sinatra biography - or at least, the life he presented to the world.  The film opens with Joey (Frank Sinatra) getting thrown out of town for seducing an underaged girl.*  He winds up in San Francisco, where he looks up an old friend in the nightclubs on Barbary Coast.  He talks his way into a job as a singer and it's clear from his first performance that he excels at the job - women throughout the club start falling into a trance just listening to him.  It seems that the only one not affected is one of the chorus girls, Linda English (Kim Novak), who is a bit more reserved than the rest.  Joey pretends not to care about her, but then deliberately moves into the apartment next to hers.  Their first evening job away from the club is at a big fundraiser gala.  The much admired hostess Vera Simpson (Rita Hayworth) puts on a class act, but Joey happens to recognize her from her time as a famous stripper.  When the auction falls short of the monetary goal, Joey pipes up that he'd pay a thousand dollars to see her do her most famous routine right there on stage.  The bidding opens and the goal is met.  But that's only the beginning of an interesting push and pull between Vera and Joey.  Meanwhile, Linda starts to soften towards Joey, thanks to an adorable terrier named Snuffy.  Vera finally makes peace with Joey as well as a deal to open a new nightclub in Joey's name.  Joey's lifelong dream finally comes true, but is short lived as he realizes he's working with a very jealous woman.  The love triangle drives Joey to finally make his choice, but can both women live with it? 

Highlights

Pal Joey is a musical without feeling like a musical.  It's along the same lines as Gentlemen Prefer Blondes or Young at Heart: the songs are a natural part of the plot.  Almost all of the songs are done as nightclub performances, when you'd expect to hear them, not out in the middle of the street just for the heck of it.  And these songs are wonderful!  They are all Rogers and Hart numbers, and very familiar to many Frank Sinatra fans.  I loved hearing and seeing him perform some of my favorite songs like "I Could Write a Book" or "The Lady is a Tramp."  Rita Hayworth and Kim Novak each had some great numbers (like "Bewitched" and "My Funny Valentine"), though I learned afterward that they had both been dubbed.  Dubbed or not, it was still a great score and a lot of talent.

I want to talk briefly about icons.  I noticed that in this film, there's a part where a large poster of Joey is put up outside the Barbary Coast club.  That poster is one of the iconic Frank Sinatra images - it's the one where he's got his hat forward and his trenchcoat slung over his shoulder.  I mentioned before that this film was a perfect fit for Frank and it was.  I can't imagine anyone else in this role (except maybe Gene Kelly).  It's almost as if Angelo Maggio** had survived Pearl Harbor and was working the coast after the war.  Joey is the legend of Sinatra - singer, swinger, heartbreaker with all the swagger and bravado we know and love.  As much as I love Frank Sinatra, I know he wasn't the most handsome of leading men, but his voice and confidence more than make up for it.      

Rita Hayworth at this point in her career had already been a top leading lady for a number of years.  She was #1 at Columbia Pictures, having made her mark in films like Only Angels Have Wings (1939), Cover Girl (1944) and Gilda (1946)***.  Kim Novak had just started to rise, having made a huge success in the film Picnic only two years earlier.  As Robert Osborne said, this film was like a "passing of the crown" from Columbia's former leading lady to the new one.  Both women are great, talented actresses and each one does a phenomenal job in this movie.  I think Novak, Hayworth and Sinatra have equal roles in the film, though ultimately it does bring sharp focus to just Sinatra's character.  The film is a strong vehicle for all three performers and a must-see!

I have to mention some of the great lines in this movie.  First, upon seeing Joey sing for the first time, one of the chorus girls remarks how cute he is.  Her friend says: "You think everyone with pants is cute." To which the girl replies: "That's not true.  I like lots of people without pants."  Later on, Vera tells Joey he has "all the subtlety of a battering ram."  I think I've heard this line before, but never delivered as well as Rita Hayworth does it!  A few times we also hear the line, in reference to Joey, that "one false move and you're out on your Francis!"  I don't know how they came up with that line, whether it was really a figure of speech or not, but I laughed as Sinatra is a Francis.  Joey throughout the film spells out his words for emphasis, but never spells them correctly.  I wasn't sure each time if he was being funny or if he was uneducated.  For example, he spells classy "K-l-a-s-y".  Some of those misspellings Frank Sinatra kept using off stage - his line to Snuffy to get off the bed: "Get off, O-R-F, off!" was used during his performances at the Sands in the 60s.  Just another way that films cross into real life and legends are made.

Review and Recommendation

Pal Joey is a brilliant showcase for three legends of Hollywood.  It's a fun, energetic story full of romance and great music.  Maybe not one of the most famous of musicals, it's nevertheless an entertaining one and well worth watching.

Random Film Trivia:
* Sinatra was once arrested for "seduction and adultery in New Jersey in the 1930s.  Charges were eventually dropped, but the story stuck with Sinatra.
** Angelo Maggio was Sinatra's character in From Here to Eternity (1953); a performance which won Sinatra an Academy Award.  He wanted the part because he said it was a perfect fit for him and he wouldn't even have to act. 

*** For modern movie fans, Gilda was the film being shown in The Shawshank Redemption (1994), which is why Andy asks for Rita Hayworth.  The original story by Stephen King is called Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption.  I highly recommend both the film and the novella!  I got the movie listing from IMDb.

Rebecca (1940)

Intro.

Aside from the posting rules on my blog, I don't really have a system for picking films.  Usually I just get into phases where I watch a lot of films by the same actor, actress, director or something.  But I can't always choose, especially since my sources of films are 1) my own collection, 2) my friends' collections, 3) whatever's on cable, and 4) the library.  Luckily I've been getting to know some fellow classic film fans and sometimes swap DVDs.  My friend Jen just lent me Rebecca, insisting that I had to see it.  I've always loved Hitchcock, so I settled down a few nights back and watched.

Overview 

Rebecca opens in Monte Carlo, where a pretty young woman (Joan Fontaine) meets rich, handsome widower Mr. Maxim de Winter (Laurence Olivier) through her employer, the wealthy but annoying Mrs. Edyth Van Hopper (Florence Bates).  When Edyth takes ill, her young companion spends her time with Maxim, and the two begin a sweet romance.  It's a bit of a May-December love, but it's more than enough to make them both happy.  They marry and he returns with his new bride, the second Mrs. de Winter, to his grand estate, Manderley.  There is a shadow over the entire place, as the former Mrs. de Winter, Rebecca, drowned just off shore.  The second Mrs. de Winter can feel Rebecca's presence everywhere - her initials are on everything, the staff all seems to compare her to Rebecca.  Even Maxim has moods where he is cold and aloof.  Worst is the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson), who hates Mrs. de Winter as strongly as she loved (and still loves) Rebecca.  It seems that nothing Mrs. de Winter can do can make anyone like her and soon she grows even more shy and withdrawn, even considering suicide at one point (with coaxing from Mrs. Danvers that is).  One night a shipwreck off shore drags up Rebecca's sunken boat - the one she had died on and was never found.  Her body is onboard, which means that the body buried in the family plot had been misidentified.  An inquest begins and much bigger problems test the love of Maxim and his new wife.  Rebecca seems to have won for a time, but the story holds a few more unexpected twists and shocks than anyone expects.

Highlights 

The characters in this film are unforgettable.  The simple fact that our heroine, the shy, sweet girl who marries Maxim, has no name.  She is so overshadowed by Rebecca, she can't even claim a name other than "the second Mrs. de Winter."  That's a very powerful statement.  Nevertheless, she is the heart of this film - the audience can connect with her.  There's an entry on IMDb that says Olivier had wanted his girlfriend Vivian Leigh in the role, so he had been awful to Joan Fontaine.  Hitchcock used this to his advantage and told Joan that everyone on set felt that way - they all hated her.  He wanted to get her into the same frame of mind as her character and it must have worked - she is amazing!  Her leading man, despite how he may have acted off screen, is ever so charming and gentle with her as his bride, yet we can see the change come over him once they reach Manderley.  It's fine acting, subtle but moving.  And finally there's the amazingly evil Mrs. Danvers - what a villainous woman!  She reminded me a lot of Madame Sebastian from Hitchcock's film Notorious.  So stark, so chilling, I sure wouldn't want her mad at me!     

Okay, I know I geek out over every Hitchcock film's cinematography, but it's with good reason!  Rebecca is no exception - everything about it is beautifully orchestrated.  I loved especially how Manderley was filmed as Mrs. de Winter moved about it.  At times the shadows of light through the windows make it look like a church or a prison.  At one point we see her sleeping and the bars from the window are framed like a jail over her face.  She's trapped by this dead woman.  There are times when she is framed against massive structures like a giant iron-scrollwork window or the towering fireplace where she looks as small as she feels.  It's so well done, I can't really say enough.  Good framing and camerawork can tell more of a story than the actors, so when you combine those with such great talent as Olivier and Fontaine, you know it'll be a wonderful film.

Review and Recommendation
I loved this film.  It's smart, funny, and completely breathtaking.  It'll have you on the edge of your seat.  I highly recommend it to everyone, not just because of the suspenseful story or great acting, but for an example of film making at its finest.

P.S. I should note that this film was based on the book by Daphne du Maurier and comes highly recommended by my friend Catherine.  She also confirmed that the wife was unnamed in the book as well.  Thanks, Catherine!!

Picnic (1955)

Intro.

Very few people I know today who are in their twenties recognize the name William Holden.  I don't have an exact number, but in conversations with my friends, I've realized most of them know Cary Grant, Jimmy Stewart, Humphrey Bogart, but not Bill Holden.  In the mid-1950s, he was the leading male star in Hollywood, and known as America's Golden Boy.  I recommend most of his films (of the ones I've seen), starting with the epic The Bridge on the River Kwai.  But now I have to add Picnic to that list - what a great film!  And a perfect film to watch on Labor Day!

Overview

Picnic opens with a train slowing down in a small Kansas town and the engineer waking a passenger.  The passenger is a wandering vagrant (Bill Holden), who has an easy, friendly manner.  He goes to the first house he can find and asks for work.  The old woman, Mrs. Potts, tells him no one works on Labor Day and invites him to breakfast.  He soon is working in her yard anyway and without a shirt, which attracts the attention of next door neighbors: mother Flo (Betty Field), daughters Madge (Kim Novak) and Millie (Susan Strasberg), and their boarder, an aging, single schoolteacher named Rosemary Sidney (Rosalind Russell).  The man gets cleaned up and goes off to meet up with his old college buddy, Alan Benson (Cliff Robertson in his film debut).  Alan, son of the wealthiest man around, relives some good old times with Holden's character, who we learn is Hal Carter, the former college football hero.  Alan is taking his girl, Madge, to the Labor Day picnic and encourages Hal to take Millie.  The whole group, including Rosemary's date Howard, goes to the picnic and has a great time.  Madge is crowned Neewollah queen (a big honor in the town), uptight Rosemary relaxes as she enjoys a bottle of liquor smuggled in by Howard, and Millie starts crushing on Hal.  Things heat up after sundown, as Madge and Hal give in to a growing attraction and dance together.  It's a pretty intense performance that gets out of hand when a jealous Rosemary (who's already having problems dealing with the loss of her youth) breaks them up, tearing Hal's shirt.  Then teenaged Millie grows ill, having stolen the liquor to deal with her own jealousy.  After getting chewed out by almost everyone, Hal takes off, but Madge follows him.  They spend the night together, but come morning Alan has reported his car stolen (he had lent it to Hal).  Hal has to get out of town and Madge has to finally choose what she really wants out of life.

Highlights   
This was only Kim Novak's fourth credited film, but she is wonderful in it.  It's very easy to see why she rose to be such a big star.  She and William Holden make a good, believable couple, despite Holden being a few years too old for this role.  There was a 15 year difference in their ages, but I think Holden's charm and box-office appeal helped make the film a success.  Of course, I think the number of shirtless scenes probably didn't hurt either.  When I started watching the film, all I could think of was that the whole plot really revolved around his half-naked shots.  It makes sense then that the studio wanted the top male actor of 1955 in the role after it was turned down by the actor who had made it a hit on Broadway.  They wanted a built-in audience and they got it.      

I really liked how this film was shot.  There are so many elements that go into a frame, and in Picnic each one seems to fit together like a well-woven quilt.  Everything that is mentioned or seen once comes back later in the film - no loose ends.  The scene where Rosemary tears Hal's shirt is reminiscent of his arrival that morning when he took his shirt off to be cleaned (I told you the whole plot revolved on him being shirtless).  In the opening sequence, Hal cleans up at the river by a small waterfall - he returns to this same spot with Madge and then later when he is running away from the police.  It's a key point in the film, because it's at those falls where we learn the most about his character.  The shots themselves are also really well-constructed, particularly during the dance sequence, which features many shots at waist level.  All we see of Hal and Madge is from their elbows to their knees.  Framing alone can tell a great story.

Characters are great in this film.  You can't say the film is solely about Hal.  We learn just as much about Madge and Rosemary, and even quite a bit about Millie and Flo.  None of them are all good or all bad, but completely and entirely human.  They could be your next door neighbors.  Well, neighbors in 1955 maybe.  There's a side story about Madge and Flo too.  Flo is still hurt by her husband walking out on her some ten or twelve years earlier, and wants Madge to marry the "right kind of man" like Alan.  She keeps stressing that Madge should convince Alan to propose soon, before her beauty starts to fade.  At one point, Madge says "I'm only 19!" To which Flo responds, "Then next summer you'll be 20.  Then 21.  Then 40."  As if in answer to this warning, we see Rosemary, almost or already 40 and angry at still being an old maid.  Through the course of the picnic (and steady intake of alcohol), she goes from sarcastic to jealous to downright crazy.  Her resentment is aimed at the young lovers Hal and Madge, which is why she so viciously goes after Hal.  Howard, as boastful and unattractive as he first appears, becomes a sympathetic character by first helping Hal and then by marrying Rosemary.  Finally, Millie really makes an impact as the kid sister growing up.  During the course of one day she goes from being a stubborn tomboy to a lovely young lady.  She and Hal get along so well because in many ways he's still a fourteen year old boy.  Millie might still be a child, but she's also the one who has insight enough to tell her sister what to do in the end.

Picnic turns out to be no picnic for any of the characters, if you'll pardon the awful pun there.  It's a great film that encompasses not just one day in the life of these people or a holiday celebration in a small 1950s town, but also the hard choices we have to make about love and our own destinies.  I think Mrs. Potts says it best.  At the end, she admits that she liked Hal because he was so different and shook everyone out of their routine, everyday lives.  It's ironic since Hal only wanted to reinvent himself and have a shot at a normal life.  Whether he gets that or not is left up to us.      

Review and Recommendation
I loved this movie.  And not because William Holden was shirtless (although, I have to admit, he's really handsome).  It's masterfully done, with great cinematography, acting and story-lines.  It's one of the strongest character-driven films I've seen, and one of Holden's best performances.  It's also great to see Rosalind Russell and Kim Novak together, as two such talented actresses share the same screen!  I am definitely adding this to my Top Films list and recommend it to anyone interested in the real classics of Hollywood's golden age.

P.S. Thanks to TCM for all the movie backstory!  Also on their website, I saw that Picnic was remade in 2000 with James Brolin and Gretchen Mol.  I wonder if it can even come close to being as good as this version.

P.P.S. I was talking about this film at work the other day, and a woman in the breakroom told me that she had done the play of Picnic in high school and had hated it.  She said it was the worst play.  I think it could have been great if only Bill Holden had been there to take his shirt off.  It's always good to hear other people's responses to works - be it the film itself or the original play or book, the medium can often affect the story itself.      

None But the Lonely Heart (1944)

Intro.

I've gotten into the habit of always keeping a pen and a pad of paper with me when I watch old movies now.  Sometimes after a movie, I'll find a page covered in notes.  Other times, there won't be many, as I've been completely immersed in the story.  Only a very few times do I find a blank page, but such is the case with None But the Lonely Heart.  I'd like to say it was because the film was so engaging, but sadly, it was the opposite for me.  Although there is some wonderful acting, it does little to help the plot or the immensely slow progression.  Still, it deserves a write-up, so here goes. 

Overview
None But the Lonely Heart opens with Ernie Mott (Cary Grant) - a carefree, wandering vagrant.  He doesn't have any plans, doesn't have a real job, doesn't seem to have much going for him at first.  But as he returns to his home in a slum of London, we realize that he has one great talent - he can make friends with anyone.  Everyone, it seems, loves Ernie, and he makes his money doing odd jobs.  Most of all he both loves and hates his mother, Ma Mott (Ethel Barrymore).  Mainly he hates that she wants him to settle down and make something of himself.  Once he discovers she has cancer, he decides to try and make good by helping her run her general store.  It's far from easy though, as you can't sell to people who don't have money.  Both Ernie and Ma are offered roles in some local illegal activities and we see what each one will do to survive.  The film ends with Ma on her deathbed and Ernie realizing he can't run from responsibilities forever.

Highlights and Other Considerations

Ethel Barrymore won an Oscar for her performance in None But the Lonely Heart.  It was her first film in a number of years, and marked her return to Hollywood.  Cary Grant was nominated for his role as Ernie, but did not win.  Both of them turn in great performances - you truly feel that they have become these real, though not always likable, characters.  I read a review on IMDb about Grant's performance - apparently he felt closer to people like Ernie and had more in common with them than he did with the usual debonair men he usually portrayed.

It's films such as None But the Lonely Heart that make me feel like I can never be a movie critic, since I often disagree with them.  I didn't like the film.  It was slow, long and not very focused.  I can appreciate dark dramas with definite plot points or well-done character studies, but this film seems to be somewhere in the middle.  I wanted to see more into the relationships of this film or maybe even something more substantial happen in terms of plot.  Critics love this film, but fans didn't - it was a box-office bomb when it was released.  Some would argue that it was because Grant was cast against type.  I'm not so sure.  There are plenty of instances where actors cast against type did extremely well: when perpetual good-guy John Wayne was cast as the bad guy, he turned in one of his best performances in Red River.  Likewise, Humphrey Bogart broke from his usual roles in gangster films and hard-boiled detective dramas when he was cast as a romantic lead and completely redefined his career and the course of American film.  Surely no one can forget Rick Blaine in Casablanca.  I think Cary Grant did a wonderful job and was a natural in his role, but I wanted more.  I wanted more depth, more story, more substance.  Perhaps I will feel differently after another viewing, but I feel like a fangirl in this case because I can't see what the critics hail.  

Review and Recommendation

I can't recommend this film until I've seen it again.  An important film, it marked the return of legendary actress Ethel Barrymore, and features Cary Grant in an unusual character role that he brings to life effortlessly.  This film will doubtlessly be of interest to Barrymore fans and some die-hard Grant fans, but for now, I'm going to withhold judgment.

Side note: There's also a beautiful, haunting song by Tchaikovsky called "None But the Lonely Heart" that was recorded later with lyrics.  If you get a chance to listen, it's well worth it.  I think it could have even been Ernie Mott's theme song.  Something to consider!

12 Angry Men (1957)

Intro.

I know I've mentioned those films before that I swear I've seen, but can't remember.  Part of that may be due to a film's huge impact on American film history.  If there is such a thing as a Hollywood canon of films, 12 Angry Men must be on that list.  I was fortunate enough to have it on my DVR and finally got a chance to watch.

I learned on TCM that studios did not want to touch this film.  Henry Fonda had purchased the rights from the television version, and together with the screenwriter, Reginald Rose, the two personally financed the picture.  It was one of Henry Fonda's top three favorite films of his career (the others being The Grapes of Wrath and The Ox-Bow Incident), and it's easy to see why.  

Overview 

The film opens with the end of a trial - the judge is excusing the jury to go and deliberate the fate of 18-year old Puerto Rican boy who has been charged with first degree murder.  If found guilty, the death penalty is mandatory.  The twelve jurors file into the Jury Room and begin their deliberation.  They take an initial vote and get the result of 11 guilty, 1 not guilty.  What most of them thought would be a simple, open-and-shut case becomes a long afternoon debate on the hottest day of the year.  The lone holdout is Juror 8 (Henry Fonda).  He begins asking simple questions about the trial and asks for one hour to consider the case in exchange for a man's life.  Each point of the case comes up for debate.  We start to see that the case isn't just about a boy's guilt, but about the process of democracy and at what point you can sentence a man to die.  When the final verdict is reached, each man leaves the courthouse changed, yet each one remains nameless except for Jurors 8 and 9, who shake hands.

Highlights

The film feels a lot like one of those Hitchcock films that is completely contained in one space - in this case, a jury room.  The sweltering heat of the summer afternoon/evening with no air conditioning adds to the heated arguments between the jurors.  Even though it's only one room, the camera work and the fine acting keeps the film fresh and interesting.  There's a definite line of action - first in introducing each point of the court case and second in the number of men on each side (guilty or not guilty).  There are 5 votes in total during the film, and no two are held or filmed the same way.  In one, we only see the hands of the voters, in another we only see faces.  I feel like I could watch this film over and over and still notice something different.  It's a lot of subtle details, but details are what make a story pop.

On the surface, the film seems straightforward, maybe even simple in plot.  But the subtle undercurrent of deeper problems makes it compelling.  All of the acting is superb - these are the finest actors of the day.  Henry Fonda made a point of picking actors he admired the most to act in this film.  It is full of great talent and a complex web of stories, all of which add to the film's intensity.

I also really enjoyed how well-developed and dynamic the characters were.  Even though they remained nameless, each juror had his own personality.  It was fascinating to see what they talked about in the breaks between discussing the case and which juror talked to which.  It was also interesting to see who changed his vote and what it took.  Juror 10 couldn't get past his bigotry, Juror 3's problems with his own son influence his vote, Juror 5 had a similar background as the defendant, and Juror 9 used his age and experience to help sway several members.  The level of detail put into each character made this film not just a great courtroom drama, but one of the best character studies in film. 

Review and Recommendation

There is a lot to be said in favor of 12 Angry Men, but instead of writing a much longer post, I will simply say that this is an absolute must-see.  Not only is it a quintessential drama, but it is an important study in human nature.  It addresses some of the deepest questions in our society - questions on race, background, the justice system and who or what can determine absolute guilt.

P.S. Thanks to Catherine for getting on my case to watch this film.  Catherine, you were right!  Definitely a great movie!