|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 22, 2022 14:44:47 GMT
This neglected film is from 1940.
And so it begins
This film initially hit screens just after the new year started in 1940. REMEMBER THE NIGHT is a holiday film and its dramatic finale occurs after a new year has been ushered in…with new hope for a woman who now has a chance to live the type of life she had long been denied.
The woman in question is played by Barbara Stanwyck. She and leading man Fred MacMurray were paired four times. Here they are surrounded by a bevy of fine supporting players, including Elizabeth Patterson, Sterling Holloway and Beulah Bondi who plays MacMurray’s kind-hearted mother.
The film is guided by one of Paramount’s most successful in-house directors, Mitch Leisen. Oh, and it doesn’t hurt that the screenplay is by one of the studio’s top writers, Preston Sturges.
But let’s go back to Stanwyck, shall we? A strong actress will be able to excel with the most basic story formulas, regardless of how well the script may be written, or who her leading man might be. As most classic movie buffs will testify, Barbara Stanwyck seems to have been the master since she did such a great job across so many different genres. But if you peel away the genre classifications, you can see that in a way she was often playing the same type of character…
In REMEMBER THE NIGHT, she’s a temptress who has the power to morally compromise MacMurray, cast as an otherwise upstanding guy. It starts when she is apprehended and convicted for shoplifting. A silly trial follows, and she is represented by a flamboyant defense attorney (Willard Robertson).
In the next part the trial hits a snag, and will resume after the upcoming holiday season. She is temporarily remanded into the custody of MacMurray, the lawyer who is working to prosecute her for her crimes. From here, she plays on his sympathies and manages to finagle an invitation to his family’s rural Indiana home.
The characterization and formula that is established will be repeated a few years later in DOUBLE INDEMNITY. However, that time she brings a more sinister edge to her portrayal of a corrupt woman and is again allowed to succeed in compromising MacMurray, with much more fatal results.
By the time we get to a later screen collaboration, Universal’s THERE’S ALWAYS TOMORROW, the formula is filtered through a romance drama. So in morally uptight America circa 1956, she is his ex-flame with the power to cause him to stray from his wife and family.
It could be argued that REMEMBER THE NIGHT is the strongest of all the pictures that Stanwyck and MacMurray made together, though I am sure fans of DOUBLE INDEMNITY may disagree. I say this because the formula was fresh and new, and this is the first time we see her work her feminine wiles on him.
But unlike the hard noir aspects of DOUBLE INDEMNITY or the defined adultery of THERE’S ALWAYS TOMORROW, this earlier picture is able to keep her character a bit pure. She’s still striving for a respectable life despite the horrible mistakes she’s made.
The sequence where MacMurray takes her to see her mother (Georgia Caine) is more impactful than any sequence in the other films. We learn what caused her to turn into the type of woman she became. When this ‘reunion’ does not go well, MacMurray feels sorry for her and takes her to meet his family. On his mother’s farm, she is able to achieve some closure with help from the sort of loving maternal figure she’s always needed. Also, she learns how to take ownership of her choices in life.
Per the production code, she is still going to pay for her crimes and make restitution, but she is going to get the happy ending she needs. And of course, he needs this happy ending for himself as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 22, 2022 15:34:49 GMT
Topbill, that ⇧ is a really insightful comparison of Stanwyck and Murray's films that they did together. Until you pointed it out, I hadn't seen the intriguing parallels, in particular, between this film and Double Indemnity.
My much-less-insightful comments (written a year ago) below.
Remember the Night from 1940 with Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck and Beulah Bondi
Remember the Night is an ahead-of-its-time Christmas movie. Sure, there's the surface trappings of a traditional 1940s holiday picture: two young, good-looking people fall in love despite some obstacles, which includes a hijinks-filled road trip home for the holiday. There's also a perfect "Christmas on the farm -" fluffy snow, a fresh-cut tree, gaslights, a barn dance - and plenty of presents and sacrifices all around, but then, (spoiler alert) it doesn't end all happy and perfect.
A New York City Assistant District Attorney, played by Fred MacMurray, feeling guilty, bails out a shoplifter, played by Barbara Stanwyck, right before Christmas because he "tricked" the judge into having her held until the trial resumes after the holiday. Once out, he doesn't know what to do with her, so when he learns she's from his home state of Indiana, and since he's driving there for the holiday, he offers to drop her off at her mother's home for Christmas and drive her back afterwards.
While she is immediately attracted to him, MacMurray, initially, is almost annoyed that he has to take her with him. It's a good Christmas romcom start, followed by the road trip home, where he begins to fall for her. Then, after a crushing scene where Stanwyck's mother brutally denounces her daughter in front of MacMurray (the first hint this isn't your ordinary 1940s Christmas movie), he takes her to his house for Christmas.
Cue the perfect on-the-farm Christmas with a loving mother, Beulah Bondi, and a kind spinster aunt. Mother Bondi embraces Stanwyck even after MacMurray tells her who she really is. Up to now, it's close to a Christmas-by-the-numbers effort as all that's left is for these two kids to admit they love each other, kiss and get married.
But MacMurray's sincerely kind mother, on the last night of the visit, pulls Stanwyck aside to tell her how hard her son worked to get to where he is and how marrying Stanwyck would wreck his career. Bondi is not mean or tiger-mom about it, she just lays the truth out for Stanwyck and leaves it up to Stanwyck to decide what to do.
On the ride home, MacMurray is all "when we get married," but Stanwyck tries to set him straight, despite desperately wanting to marry him. MacMurray even offers to let her escape in Canada (they drive through it on the way home), but level-headed Stanwyck sees the only chance at a future for them is for her to return and face the courtroom. Heck, you're so rooting for these two at this point, you almost want both of them to just stay in Canada and get married.
(Spoiler alerts) Back in the courtroom on Monday, when MacMurray tries to throw the case for Stanwyck, she stops him and pleads guilty. This is some serious sacrifice, which ends with Stanwyck on her way to jail, MacMurray saying he'll wait and she saying we'll see.
Perhaps Remember the Night is not more-well known or beloved because it doesn't have a neatly packaged, happy Christmas-movie ending. It's a more serious movie, which makes it, in a way, a better movie, but clearly not more popular.
It probably would have been more accepted if it had played down its Christmas elements (had even been released in the summer). Audiences might have embraced its realistic ending had they not first been "set up" for a happy Christmas one.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 22, 2022 15:48:45 GMT
Topbill, that ⇧ is a really insightful comparison of Stanwyck and Murray's films that they did together. Until you pointed it out, I hadn't seen the intriguing parallels, in particular, between this film and Double Indemnity.
My much-less-insightful comments (written a year ago) below.
Remember the Night from 1940 with Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck and Beulah Bondi
Remember the Night is an ahead-of-its-time Christmas movie. Sure, there's the surface trappings of a traditional 1940s holiday picture: two young, good-looking people fall in love despite some obstacles, which includes a hijinks-filled road trip home for the holiday. There's also a perfect "Christmas on the farm -" fluffy snow, a fresh-cut tree, gaslights, a barn dance - and plenty of presents and sacrifices all around, but then, (spoiler alert) it doesn't end all happy and perfect.
A New York City Assistant District Attorney, played by Fred MacMurray, feeling guilty, bails out a shoplifter, played by Barbara Stanwyck, right before Christmas because he "tricked" the judge into having her held until the trial resumes after the holiday. Once out, he doesn't know what to do with her, so when he learns she's from his home state of Indiana, and since he's driving there for the holiday, he offers to drop her off at her mother's home for Christmas and drive her back afterwards.
While she is immediately attracted to him, MacMurray, initially, is almost annoyed that he has to take her with him. It's a good Christmas romcom start, followed by the road trip home, where he begins to fall for her. Then, after a crushing scene where Stanwyck's mother brutally denounces her daughter in front of MacMurray (the first hint this isn't your ordinary 1940s Christmas movie), he takes her to his house for Christmas.
Cue the perfect on-the-farm Christmas with a loving mother, Beulah Bondi, and a kind spinster aunt. Mother Bondi embraces Stanwyck even after MacMurray tells her who she really is. Up to now, it's close to a Christmas-by-the-numbers effort as all that's left is for these two kids to admit they love each other, kiss and get married.
But MacMurray's sincerely kind mother, on the last night of the visit, pulls Stanwyck aside to tell her how hard her son worked to get to where he is and how marrying Stanwyck would wreck his career. Bondi is not mean or tiger-mom about it, she just lays the truth out for Stanwyck and leaves it up to Stanwyck to decide what to do.
On the ride home, MacMurray is all "when we get married," but Stanwyck tries to set him straight, despite desperately wanting to marry him. MacMurray even offers to let her escape in Canada (they drive through it on the way home), but level-headed Stanwyck sees the only chance at a future for them is for her to return and face the courtroom. Heck, you're so rooting for these two at this point, you almost want both of them to just stay in Canada and get married.
(Spoiler alerts) Back in the courtroom on Monday, when MacMurray tries to throw the case for Stanwyck, she stops him and pleads guilty. This is some serious sacrifice, which ends with Stanwyck on her way to jail, MacMurray saying he'll wait and she saying we'll see.
Perhaps Remember the Night is not more-well known or beloved because it doesn't have a neatly packaged, happy Christmas-movie ending. It's a more serious movie, which makes it, in a way, a better movie, but clearly not more popular.
It probably would have been more accepted if it had played down its Christmas elements (had even been released in the summer). Audiences might have embraced its realistic ending had they not first been "set up" for a happy Christmas one.
Re: the comments in your review, I agree that if this had not exactly been a holiday movie, the viewers might have been able to take the more serious tone at the end. But we know she's going to straighten her life out, whether she marries him after serving her sentence or not. Though the final kiss at the end does suggest he's going to wait for her and they will be reunited.
As for the scenes at the farm, I find it interesting that everything is so saccharine-sweet there...and despite being told Elizabeth Patterson's character is an aunt, she seems to function more as a love interest for Beulah Bondi's character. So I felt that there may have been some lesbianism embedded in the narrative, especially when the two women are allowed a screen kiss on the lips at the dance. In a way, this type of subtextual reading is interesting, particularly since Bondi's character is a more traditional and 'proper' sort of woman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 22, 2022 16:18:26 GMT
Topbill, that ⇧ is a really insightful comparison of Stanwyck and Murray's films that they did together. Until you pointed it out, I hadn't seen the intriguing parallels, in particular, between this film and Double Indemnity.
My much-less-insightful comments (written a year ago) below.
Remember the Night from 1940 with Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck and Beulah Bondi
Remember the Night is an ahead-of-its-time Christmas movie. Sure, there's the surface trappings of a traditional 1940s holiday picture: two young, good-looking people fall in love despite some obstacles, which includes a hijinks-filled road trip home for the holiday. There's also a perfect "Christmas on the farm -" fluffy snow, a fresh-cut tree, gaslights, a barn dance - and plenty of presents and sacrifices all around, but then, (spoiler alert) it doesn't end all happy and perfect.
A New York City Assistant District Attorney, played by Fred MacMurray, feeling guilty, bails out a shoplifter, played by Barbara Stanwyck, right before Christmas because he "tricked" the judge into having her held until the trial resumes after the holiday. Once out, he doesn't know what to do with her, so when he learns she's from his home state of Indiana, and since he's driving there for the holiday, he offers to drop her off at her mother's home for Christmas and drive her back afterwards.
While she is immediately attracted to him, MacMurray, initially, is almost annoyed that he has to take her with him. It's a good Christmas romcom start, followed by the road trip home, where he begins to fall for her. Then, after a crushing scene where Stanwyck's mother brutally denounces her daughter in front of MacMurray (the first hint this isn't your ordinary 1940s Christmas movie), he takes her to his house for Christmas.
Cue the perfect on-the-farm Christmas with a loving mother, Beulah Bondi, and a kind spinster aunt. Mother Bondi embraces Stanwyck even after MacMurray tells her who she really is. Up to now, it's close to a Christmas-by-the-numbers effort as all that's left is for these two kids to admit they love each other, kiss and get married.
But MacMurray's sincerely kind mother, on the last night of the visit, pulls Stanwyck aside to tell her how hard her son worked to get to where he is and how marrying Stanwyck would wreck his career. Bondi is not mean or tiger-mom about it, she just lays the truth out for Stanwyck and leaves it up to Stanwyck to decide what to do.
On the ride home, MacMurray is all "when we get married," but Stanwyck tries to set him straight, despite desperately wanting to marry him. MacMurray even offers to let her escape in Canada (they drive through it on the way home), but level-headed Stanwyck sees the only chance at a future for them is for her to return and face the courtroom. Heck, you're so rooting for these two at this point, you almost want both of them to just stay in Canada and get married.
(Spoiler alerts) Back in the courtroom on Monday, when MacMurray tries to throw the case for Stanwyck, she stops him and pleads guilty. This is some serious sacrifice, which ends with Stanwyck on her way to jail, MacMurray saying he'll wait and she saying we'll see.
Perhaps Remember the Night is not more-well known or beloved because it doesn't have a neatly packaged, happy Christmas-movie ending. It's a more serious movie, which makes it, in a way, a better movie, but clearly not more popular.
It probably would have been more accepted if it had played down its Christmas elements (had even been released in the summer). Audiences might have embraced its realistic ending had they not first been "set up" for a happy Christmas one.
Re: the comments in your review, I agree that if this had not exactly been a holiday movie, the viewers might have been able to take the more serious tone at the end. But we know she's going to straighten her life out, whether she marries him after serving her sentence or not. Though the final kiss at the end does suggest he's going to wait for her and they will be reunited.
As for the scenes at the farm, I find it interesting that everything is so saccharine-sweet there...and despite being told Elizabeth Patterson's character is an aunt, she seems to function more as a love interest for Beulah Bondi's character. So I felt that there may have been some lesbianism embedded in the narrative, especially when the two women are allowed a screen kiss on the lips at the dance. In a way, this type of subtextual reading is interesting, particularly since Bondi's character is a more traditional and 'proper' sort of woman.
Conversely, when aunts or siblings, etc., live alone together for many years, those relationships can take on a surrogate marriage look and feel even without any sexual subtext.
The other thing you see in a lot of movies from the '30-'50s is family members siblings, kids, parents and grandparents, etc., kissing on the mouth as a way of greeting, saying thank you or saying goodbye. I'm always a bit thrown by it, but it is quite common in movies of that era.
Thankfully, my not-affectionate family never did anything like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by galacticgirrrl on Dec 24, 2022 4:09:45 GMT
The other thing you see in a lot of movies from the '30-'50s is family members siblings, kids, parents and grandparents, etc., kissing on the mouth as a way of greeting, saying thank you or saying goodbye. I'm always a bit thrown by it, but it is quite common in movies of that era.
Interesting this has come up. It has been on my mind for a while but it is an odd topic to broach. This custom is totally foreign to me and it really pops out when I watch old movies. I finally googled it the other day as it must have come up again in All Mine to Give. This is NOT a custom of days gone past. There are a lot of posts dealing with this hot topic. I was also reminded of a huge controversy here in Canada when artist Lyla Rye had a video installation of her kissing her baby on the mouth. It became The mother of all controversies in 2003. And more recently in 2022: David Beckham reignites debate about ‘appropriate’ parenting after kissing 10-year-old daughter on the lips
Odd though that I haven't noticed it in any current tv or films if it is so common and acceptable. I did note on the subtext proposal that the scene with the wedding dress was very strange. Elizabeth Patterson wasn't very wistful, didn't linger on the letters and her response was quite flip, about toying with the idea of marriage one summer but getting over it rather quickly. The dress then went off to be dragged about in the hay of a barn dance, hardly the object of much sentimentality or importance. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 24, 2022 9:11:39 GMT
The other thing you see in a lot of movies from the '30-'50s is family members siblings, kids, parents and grandparents, etc., kissing on the mouth as a way of greeting, saying thank you or saying goodbye. I'm always a bit thrown by it, but it is quite common in movies of that era.
Interesting this has come up. It has been on my mind for a while but it is an odd topic to broach. This custom is totally foreign to me and it really pops out when I watch old movies. I finally googled it the other day as it must have come up again in All Mine to Give. This is NOT a custom of days gone past. There are a lot of posts dealing with this hot topic. I was also reminded of a huge controversy here in Canada when artist Lyla Rye had a video installation of her kissing her baby on the mouth. It became The mother of all controversies in 2003. And more recently in 2022: David Beckham reignites debate about ‘appropriate’ parenting after kissing 10-year-old daughter on the lips
Odd though that I haven't noticed it in any current tv or films if it is so common and acceptable. I did note on the subtext proposal that the scene with the wedding dress was very strange. Elizabeth Patterson wasn't very wistful, didn't linger on the letters and her response was quite flip, about toying with the idea of marriage one summer but getting over it rather quickly. The dress then went off to be dragged about in the hay of a barn dance, hardly the object of much sentimentality or importance. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 24, 2022 13:54:52 GMT
I agree with galacticgirrrl's comment about how Patterson's character doesn't seem too wistful about the wedding dress. Obviously, she kept it, but she never had plans of using it again with another man. The dress is almost a metaphor for a vagina (did I really just say that LOL).
One thing that plays into these types of relationships (I am referring to the one between Patterson's character and Bondi's character) is that during the code era, a writer or director had to feminize or 'dress up' (in this case literally) the lesbianism so that the film would be approved for exhibition.
Preston Sturges who wrote the screenplay was a heterosexual, but Mitch Leisen the director was a homosexual. And while there is no outward corroboration, I do think Beulah Bondi was a lesbian. So we have directors putting a slight LGBTQ spin on a straight man's script, and we have a possibly closeted gay actress who is bringing her own energy to the role. So it is easier to read the relationship between the two elderly women as a gay one, and I think I would perceive it this way even if they didn't have the mouth on mouth kissing scene...though that certainly puts it over for me.
I was reluctant to even mention my thoughts regarding this, because a lot of modern viewers still have trouble reading gay subtexts into classic movies and they think specific reviewers are trying to suggest something that may not really be there, etc. It doesn't spoil my enjoyment of the film, whether those two women are gay or straight...but I think if they are gay, and we have Sterling Holloway's effeminate character thrown into the mix, it is interesting how Stanwyck's character is maligned for being a crook, yet she and MacMurray are embarking on a more heteronormal relationship in this particular environment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Dec 24, 2022 14:31:31 GMT
Like so many things today, it's absolute views that leads to pitch battles.
Despite that some try to deny it, there was plenty of homosexual subtext in classic movies. For just one example, check out 1937's "Ever Since Eve," which has several gay, lesbian and, what today we'd call, sexually fluid characters (I wrote about the movie here: "Ever Since Eve" comments ).
Conversely, every time, in a classic movie, a man was friendly with another man or a woman with another woman doesn't mean there was a homosexual subtext as some pushing an agenda or who only see the world one way like to aver. I've heard some argue there was, but I've never see any homosexual subtext between Grant's and Stewart's characters in "The Philadelphia Story."
As is usually the case, the truth is somewhere in-between the extremes.
I've seen "Remember the Night" several times but never picked up on a lesbian angle in the two women (I'm going to look for it next time), but definitely saw Holloway's character as intentionally stereotypically gay. I think I missed the sisters as I had some distant cousins who never married and lived together their entire lives (my family didn't have much money and it was common for relative to do that in that earlier era), so it didn't ring any bells with me to see what had been a poor farming family (MacMurray talks about that) have two older women living together with an almost married feel.
I'm also still curious, especially in light of Galaticgirrl's comment about it not being a norm, why there was so much intra-family kissing on the lips in movies form the '30s-'50s. Why did Hollywood put that in so many movies if it wasn't a norm of the era?
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Dec 26, 2022 15:16:10 GMT
This neglected film is from 1955.
Halo is anybody there?
This Paramount treat is one of Humphrey Bogart’s last films. It is also one of the few films he made in color. It is based on a French play which had been adapted for Broadway, called ‘My Three Angels.’ The Broadway production featured actor Walter Slezak as the lead character, in the role which Bogart would take. The other two main roles on Broadway were played by Jerome Cowan and Darren McGavin.
McGavin’s role was minor in comparison to the other two. His character Alfred, renamed Albert in the movie, was beefed up so that someone of Aldo Ray’s stature could play him. Mr. Ray had become a star at Columbia and already enjoyed a certain clout at the box office. Cowan’s role was taken by Peter Ustinov who had made hit films in his native Britain and was looking to score with American audiences.
One of the key differences between the play and this film is that the ‘angels’ were still in prison on stage, working on repairs at their warden’s home. But here they have considerably more freedom as escaped convicts. I guess the idea of making them cons posing as problem solvers gives the story a bit of irony and dramatic tension. They do good deeds on the outside, but at any minute, they could get caught and sent back to the slammer.
In the other roles we have Basil Rathbone as a Scrooge-like store owner. And there is also Leo G. Carroll as the long-time manager of the business, who lives with a beautiful wife (Joan Bennett) and daughter (Gloria Talbott). Miss Bennett’s motion picture was in decline at this time. She had recently been involved in a real-life scandal that sent her producer husband Walter Wanger to jail for awhile. No word on whether or not he was an angel behind bars.
Contemporary critics complained that Paramount’s lavish effort was too close to the stage version. One reviewer said there were too many entrances and exits, with much of the action confined indoors. I don’t think this necessarily means the story and the performers cannot still engage the viewer.
Since events take place on Christmas Eve and on Christmas Day, we get the obligatory holiday cheer. Plus Bennett’s character is allowed to sing a Yuletide tune, which is one of the highlights of the film.
The studio remade WE’RE NO ANGELS in 1989, but the action was shifted from a store owner’s home to a church where the escapees posed as priests. Playing the crooks incognito as clerics were Robert DeNiro and Sean Penn. It did okay at the box office, but compared to the original it didn’t really have a prayer.
|
|
|
|
Post by cineclassics on Dec 27, 2022 20:01:26 GMT
This neglected film is from 1955.
Halo is anybody there?
This Paramount treat is one of Humphrey Bogart’s last films. It is also one of the few films he made in color. It is based on a French play which had been adapted for Broadway, called ‘My Three Angels.’ The Broadway production featured actor Walter Slezak as the lead character, in the role which Bogart would take. The other two main roles on Broadway were played by Jerome Cowan and Darren McGavin.
McGavin’s role was minor in comparison to the other two. His character Alfred, renamed Albert in the movie, was beefed up so that someone of Aldo Ray’s stature could play him. Mr. Ray had become a star at Columbia and already enjoyed a certain clout at the box office. Cowan’s role was taken by Peter Ustinov who had made hit films in his native Britain and was looking to score with American audiences.
One of the key differences between the play and this film is that the ‘angels’ were still in prison on stage, working on repairs at their warden’s home. But here they have considerably more freedom as escaped convicts. I guess the idea of making them cons posing as problem solvers gives the story a bit of irony and dramatic tension. They do good deeds on the outside, but at any minute, they could get caught and sent back to the slammer.
In the other roles we have Basil Rathbone as a Scrooge-like store owner. And there is also Leo G. Carroll as the long-time manager of the business, who lives with a beautiful wife (Joan Bennett) and daughter (Gloria Talbott). Miss Bennett’s motion picture was in decline at this time. She had recently been involved in a real-life scandal that sent her producer husband Walter Wanger to jail for awhile. No word on whether or not he was an angel behind bars.
Contemporary critics complained that Paramount’s lavish effort was too close to the stage version. One reviewer said there were too many entrances and exits, with much of the action confined indoors. I don’t think this necessarily means the story and the performers cannot still engage the viewer.
Since events take place on Christmas Eve and on Christmas Day, we get the obligatory holiday cheer. Plus Bennett’s character is allowed to sing a Yuletide tune, which is one of the highlights of the film.
The studio remade WE’RE NO ANGELS in 1989, but the action was shifted from a store owner’s home to a church where the escapees prosed as priests. Playing the crooks incognito as clerics were Robert DeNiro and Sean Penn. It did okay at the box office, but compared to the original it didn’t really have a prayer. Another solid directorial outing by arguably the most underrated great director of all-time, Michael Curtiz. Great holiday film (We're No Angels), great swashbucklers/adventure (Adventures of Robin Hood, Captain Blood), musical (Yankee Doodle Dandy), film noir (Mildred Pierce) and of course, one of the greatest of all films, Casablanca. Based off what I've read, and you mentioned Joan Bennett's career being in upheaval at the time, good friend Humphrey Bogart lobbied hard on her behalf to ensure she was cast in this film. |
|
|
|
Post by on vacation on Dec 27, 2022 20:29:38 GMT
re:kissing family on the lips-might be european. Mrs. Miniver kisses son on lips
|
|
|
|
Post by Swithin on Dec 30, 2022 2:15:02 GMT
Reading about the new film, Babylon, I am reminded of one of the great neglected Paramount films, also about the “classic” days of Hollywood: The Day of the Locust (1975). I think The Day of the Locust, directed by John Schlesinger with a screenplay by Waldo Salt and cinematography by Conrad Hall, is one of the finest films of the 1970s. Based on Nathanael West’s novel, the film takes place in the 1930s, culminating with a terrifying climax at the premiere of Cecil B. DeMille’s The Buccaneer (1938). The Day of the Locust has great performances by an amazing cast and deals with a group of Hollywood hopefuls who, coming to Hollywood to find fame and fortune in the movies, live in a rundown apartment building. If there are leads, they are probably Karen Black and William Atherton; but the film belongs to the entire ensemble, which includes Burgess Meredith (Oscar nominated), Geraldine Page, Billy Barty, and, in one of his greatest (maybe his greatest) roles, Donald Sutherland as Homer Simpson. It’s a sad, pessimistic film about people desperate to get into the movies, and the general public obsessed by Hollywood. It culminates in a harrowing climax where the whole world comes tumbling down. And, unlike some more contemporary films set in the 1930s, it looks the period. (Btw, Paramount Studios is featured in the film.)
 
Karen Black and William Atherton
Burgess Meredith
 
Donald Sutherland as Homer Simpson
 Jackie Earle Haley as Adore Locusts
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jan 9, 2023 1:57:42 GMT
Reading about the new film, Babylon, I am reminded of one of the great neglected Paramount films, also about the “classic” days of Hollywood: The Day of the Locust (1975). I think The Day of the Locust, directed by John Schlesinger with a screenplay by Waldo Salt and cinematography by Conrad Hall, is one of the finest films of the 1970s. Based on Nathanael West’s novel, the film takes place in the 1930s, culminating with a terrifying climax at the premiere of Cecil B. DeMille’s The Buccaneer (1938). The Day of the Locust has great performances by an amazing cast and deals with a group of Hollywood hopefuls who, coming to Hollywood to find fame and fortune in the movies, live in a rundown apartment building. If there are leads, they are probably Karen Black and William Atherton; but the film belongs to the entire ensemble, which includes Burgess Meredith (Oscar nominated), Geraldine Page, Billy Barty, and, in one of his greatest (maybe his greatest) roles, Donald Sutherland as Homer Simpson. It’s a sad, pessimistic film about people desperate to get into the movies, and the general public obsessed by Hollywood. It culminates in a harrowing climax where the whole world comes tumbling down. And, unlike some more contemporary films set in the 1930s, it looks the period. (Btw, Paramount Studios is featured in the film.)
Karen Black and William Atherton
Burgess Meredith
Donald Sutherland as Homer Simpson
Jackie Earle Haley as AdoreLocusts |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jan 9, 2023 2:00:56 GMT
This neglected film is from 1953.
Starring Ginger Rogers
Ginger Rogers made this film at Paramount just before she did BLACK WIDOW at Fox. In both productions she’s an aging actress struggling to stay on top. In BLACK WIDOW she commits murder, but in FOREVER FEMALE she doesn’t resort to such drastic measures. Of course, she is still deeply in denial, unable to face the facts that she can no longer convincingly play ingenue roles.
Because FOREVER FEMALE is a romantic comedy, there are plenty of amusing and sincere moments. The best relationship in the story is the one between Miss Rogers’ theatrical character and her producer slash ex-husband (Paul Douglas). They’re still connected to each other, and he still owes her thousands in unpaid alimony, which is a running joke in the movie.
At the same time Rogers develops a relationship with a rising playwright (William Holden). His new play is good enough for Douglas to produce, though it needs a bit of polishing. More importantly, it could be Rogers’ next triumph on Broadway. While things turn romantic between Rogers and Holden, to the consternation of Douglas, another character pops up.
It is an aspiring actress (Pat Crowley) who gains work as Holden’s typist. She thinks she should have the lead in the new play, not Rogers– who is clearly too old to be playing 19 or even 29.
The other relationship that we see in the story is the one that Rogers has with her adoring public (shades of Tallulah here). She is constantly on the go, always playing to others, but secretly wanting to be more down to the earth and acting her own age. The way she comes across is commented on by everyone else, including an assortment of local NYC theater types who add flavor to the proceedings– played by Marjorie Rambeau, James Gleason, Marion Ross, Jesse White and George Reeves.
But key to the story is the way Rogers’ behavior affects Holden as a writer. In a way Holden covered some of this in his earlier film for the studio, SUNSET BOULEVARD. In that production, Gloria Swanson was the over-the-hill star, with Holden ensnared in her grandiose plans for a comeback. Since Rogers doesn’t chew the scenery as much as Swanson, this is a more relatable story about growing older and it is grounded in reality.
Supposedly Miss Crowley’s part was intended for Audrey Hepburn, who had just scored a hit with ROMAN HOLIDAY. But Miss Hepburn was unavailable (she would team up with Holden a year later in SABRINA). So a talent search was conducted that led to Paramount discovering Crowley. While Crowley is certainly above average and does a nice job, I think Hepburn’s inimitable charm would have worked better. Mostly because the neophyte actress role is intended to come across as annoying in spots, and Hepburn would probably have made her more likable than Crowley does.
The story’s resolution is not very surprising. The older actress must concede her moment in the sun is over and graciously relinquishes the main role in the play to the newbie. This is a kinder version of ALL ABOUT EVE. She also decides to give up the hunky author and remarry her ex-husband.
But what makes FOREVER FEMALE forever good is the truthful performance that Ginger Rogers provides. It becomes a semi-autobiographical “workshop” where she is able to confront her own aging in an industry that values youth. She wisely turns it into a winning character part, while still retaining her status as the star.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jan 15, 2023 20:56:17 GMT
This neglected film is from 1954.
About Miss Booth
Producer Hal Wallis had a multi-picture deal with Shirley Booth at Paramount. When she wasn’t working on Broadway and earning more Tony awards, she found time to appear in this production for Wallis. They only made four feature films together in the 1950s. One assumes they would wait until the actress became available; and for just the right sort of script to come along that would suit her unique talents.
In ABOUT MRS. LESLIE, Booth is cast as Vivien Leslie, a lonely but well-intentioned boarding house owner. Her home, left to her by the late George Leslie (Robert Ryan), is located in Beverly Hills. Vivien Leslie is past her prime and has no children, but often looks after a neighbor’s teenaged daughter. Also, she has more than a passing interest in the blossoming relationship of two young boarders who work in Hollywood (Alex Nicol and Marjie Millar). It shouldn’t be said that Mrs. Leslie is an interfering busybody. She’s more of a mother hen landlady who’s genuinely fond of those that are entrusted to her care.
While there are subplots involving Mrs. Leslie and her renters in the present day, these bits of action function more as a framing device. They allow us a deeper understanding of the title character, but the bulk of the narrative takes place in the past. We learn how she met Mr. Leslie when she was singing in a New York City nightclub. And we see, during several lengthy sequences, the lasting relationship they shared.
Major spoiler. The twist in this story is that she was never really married. George Leslie (not his full name, just his first name and middle name) was not her husband at all. He was not a figment of her imagination, either. He was an industrialist she met, a real flesh and blood man she loved. Mrs. Leslie is so sympathetically portrayed by Booth that when we find out she had a pretend “marriage” with a man that already had a wife and kids, we can’t dislike her. In fact we only develop more sympathy for her.
On some level Mr. Leslie is a cad, because he never mentioned his wife. The film gets around the production code, because we are shown that George and Vivien slept in separate bedrooms when they went off on trips together. She is depicted as more of a paid companion who didn’t provide sex. Also, since Vivien did not know he was married during that time, she’s not presented as being immoral in any knowledgeable way. I won’t reveal how she finds out she was deceived in case you haven’t watched the movie yet. But that’s one of Shirley Booth’s best moments.
Vivien can’t un-love George Leslie, but she does go forward with the rest of her life. She opens a dress shop after leaving her job as a singer, and she becomes very successful in this new line of work. Later she inherits the home in Beverly Hills when George Leslie dies and attorneys for his estate want to buy her silence, to prevent his wife and children any future embarrassment.
It has shades of Citizen Kane and Susan Alexander. But this version of the story is about a woman’s sense of value and her self-worth. The title is ironic, because she’s not really Mrs. Anyone. She’s just a boarding house owner with a very interesting backstory. She’s someone who wanted to be loved and to love others.
|
|
