Anne of Green Gables: The Sequel (1987)

Sept. 8-10, 2011

74. Anne of Green Gables: The Sequel (1987) [a.k.a. Anne of Avonlea]—REWATCH

Starring Megan Follows, Colleen Dewhurst, Wendy Hiller, Frank Converse, Jonathan Crombie
Directed by Kevin Sullivan

Plot: “Staying faithful to L.M. Montgomery's beloved books, this continuation of the award-winning miniseries picks up where the first installment left off, with redheaded heroine Anne Shirley (Megan Follows) beginning a new life as a teacher and an aspiring writer. She also encounters career hurdles and unfriendly townsfolk, but with her typical enthusiasm and good cheer.” (Summary from Netflix)

That first line of the summary above is actually wrong—this movie does not stay “faithful to L.M. Montgomery’s beloved books.” According to Wikipedia:

“When Kevin Sullivan was commissioned by CBC, PBS and The Disney Channel to create a sequel he started by combining many different elements of Montgomery’s three later books: Anne of Avonlea (1909), Anne of the Island (1915), and Anne of Windy Poplars (1936) into a cohesive screen story. Sullivan invented his own plotline relying on several of Montgomery’s episodic storylines spread across the three sequels, He also looked at numerous other nineteenth century female authors for inspiration in fleshing out the screen story.”

And IMDb:

“Though the American title is ‘Anne of Avonlea’, it is only partially based on that Lucy Maud Montgomery book (second in the series), and is in fact based on parts from books 2-4 in the series (out of 8). This was because Kevin Sullivan thought there wasn't ‘enough dramatic material for a film’ in the sequel ‘Anne of Avonlea’ alone.”

My point is that this sequel is not entirely faithful to the books…but it is still a wonderful movie. However, I basically grew up watching the two Anne films over-and-over. So I might be a bit biased by sentimental reasons.

This is almost embarrassing to admit, but before watching this the other day (probably the 164th time I've seen it) and doing a little Googling, I NEVER knew that this wasn't strictly based on the second novel! You see, I have read all of the Anne books except the first two. Back then I was young[er] and stupid[er] and thought since I had seen the movies that the books would be boring. Thus I never knew that the plot of this movie wasn't true to the book.

Clearly I need to read/reread the series very soon (it's been years since I first read them). Still a great movie, but I'm kind of a literary purist about some of these things. I wish that they would've followed the books more carefully and made future movies based on them (please, let's not even talk about the third movie—*shudder*—and that ghastly 'prequel' which I refuse to see). Part of me wishes for a remake of this series which follows the book more. But…I just have a hard time thinking that anyone else can play Anne, Marilla, Matthew, Rachel, Diana, etc. quite like this cast did.

Okay, so back to the film at hand. I think Megan Follows does an amazing job playing Anne. She gives so much life and spunk to the character.

{Click image for source} Is it just me or is Anne's hair not RED enough?

Love this picture

Jonathan Crombie I'm not totally fond of, though. He always just seemed a bit namby-pamby to play Gilbert (who in my opinion is one of the ultimate romantic heroes in fiction. So I’m kind of sad that I don’t love the actor who plays Gil). He’s not really awful, just not my favorite.

The rest of the cast is virtually perfect. Colleen Dewhurst as Marilla is wonderful, and Wendy Hiller is amusing in her scenery-chewing role (“drrrrenched”). I also really enjoyed the plot development of Katherine Brooke. Her character gets some fantastically quotable lines. For example: “What is to be the pill in all this jam, Miss Shirley?” and “Have you girls no propriety? This is not a Turkish bazaar!”

To summarize: this film has wonderful atmosphere, casting, costuming, characterization, romance, humor….and warmth to spare. It is really one of my favorite films and I never seem to tire of rewatching it. It may not be perfect but I enjoy it too much to really care. :)

My Foolish Heart (1949)

Sept. 4-5, 2011

72. My Foolish Heart (1949) 

Starring Dana Andrews, Susan Hayward, Kent Smith, Lois Wheeler, Jessie Royce Landis

Directed by Mark Robson

**REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**

Plot: “After a long absence, Mary Jane visits her schoolfriend Eloise, and Eloise's daughter Ramona. Eloise drinks too much and is unhappily married to Lew Wengler. Eloise falls asleep and remembers her time with her true love, Walt Dreiser, at the beginning of the Second World War. She recalls the events that lead up to her split with Mary Jane, and how Lew married Eloise rather than Mary Jane.” (from IMDb)

I really didn’t care for this one at all. Originally based on a story by J.D. Salinger which was published in The New Yorker, this film is a 98 minute soap opera tear-jerker.

I guess my main problem with this is that I couldn’t relate to the characters: I didn’t understand what Eloise saw in Walt. I thought it was irresponsible of the father to send his young daughter back alone to New York. I thought Walt was a jerk who really only wanted one thing from Eloise. Elle’s father and Walt were also rather chauvinistic in dealing with her expulsion. It bothered me that they treated the whole thing in this *wink*wink* manner. Didn’t they care about her future? She was just expelled! I also disliked Eloise for falling so cheaply and then marrying the wrong man on a rebound. Ugh! It was just frustrating, and honestly it all made me feel a little sick. I just found the characters’ motivations frustrating and unconvincing. Add to that the fact that the film is painfully predictable, and it’s not a winner in my book. 

I used to like Dana Andrews quite a bit, but I didn’t like his character at all in this. He really came across as insincere, haughty, and demeaning to Eloise (Susan Hayward). But maybe that was just me…?

Sorry for the grainy quality of these screencaps; the copy I viewed was rather poor.

Edith Head designed Hayward’s wardrobe.

I know this is supposed to be oh-so-romantic, but I really did not like the storyline at all. The two leads were supposed to be madly in love, but I did not feel much chemistry between them.

At first I felt like Susan Hayward was not that great in this, but I thought she got better—to the point of being quite excellent—as the film went on. She does a commendable job of showing the progression and emotion of her character. Especially near the the end of the film, I was really captivated by her ability to make me feel what Eloise was going through. Even though I thought her character made some stupid choices, it was still really sad.

Susan was nominated for a Best Actress Oscar for this role.

If you enjoy this type of weepy flash-back-to-first-love film, you might enjoy this. As you already know, I didn’t. But I could’ve just been in the wrong mood to watch a super sad film like this. It was kind of depressing!

Road House (1948)

Aug. 14, 2011

70. Road House (1948)

Starring Ida Lupino, Cornel Wilde, Celeste Holm, Richard Widmark
Directed by Jean Negulesco

Plot: “A nightclub owner frames a romantic rival for murder.” (from TCMDb)

I can’t remember where it was that I saw this clip (shout out if it was you and I’ll credit your blog),  but when I first saw it a month or so ago it made me want to check out this film. Luckily, I was able to get it through our state inter-library loan system, and I’m so glad I did! This film did not disappoint.

** THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS **

I didn't think I liked film noir, but this was really excellent. (Though I guess some would say that it's not technically noir because **BIG SPOILER** it has a happy ending.)

Speaking of the end, I kind of wonder what is supposed to have happened after the movie ends. Do they go to Canada? Are they acquitted?

Richard Widmark’s performance is one of the best parts of this film. It’s one I could watch over and over, I think, because he’s just so deliciously villainous in it. He manages to be both amusing and frightening at the same time.

Cornel Wilde’s role isn’t quite a showy as some of the other players in this, but he does a good job as the strong and steady man.

There's something about Ida’s character I didn't like. She's too sassy and sure of herself, and I don’t like how she plays up to Pete. Plus, it is rather hard to believe that their relationship is more than passing infatuation. It was difficult for me to really buy the chemistry between these two. It didn’t hinder my enjoyment of the film, though, because there’s so much more going on than just their relationship. Of course, Ida’s performance is top notch. I did have a hard time believing that her singing really drove that much business to the road house, though!

I love how she totally shuts down Cornel's character when he tries to dump her at the depot. One tough dame.

Celeste Holm is great in this as Susie. Even after the man she is kind of interested in falls in love with someone else, she is not vengeful or full of spite. She just does what is right and tries to help the them. She was also not afraid to face Widmark’s character. I did feel a little sorry for her, though, because I think she deserved to end up with Pete (though I know of course that the movie would not have worked out the same that way).

Ida’s face may not be traditionally beautiful, but it is very captivating. I want to see more of her movies (especially if they are all this good). She's just so unique. I don't really 'love' her yet, but I'm definitely intrigued by her. 

I can’t believe I didn’t get any screencaps with people smoking because there is an insane amount of it in this film. I know most old movies include some cigarette use, but this one seemed like it had an extra lot of it! Ida’s character in particular is rarely seen without a cigarette.

This film has a great dark, atmospheric feel.

Definitely see this. The performances, cinematography, plot, and dialogue are all really great.

Yeah, there are improbabilities and contrivances, but I didn’t really notice any of them during the film. I was too caught up in the plot to care about the details.

Oh, and if you have seen this, please recommend any other similar film noirs that you think I would like. I think I may be slowly changing my mind about this genre!

I’d Climb the Highest Mountain (1951)

 
July 7, 2011

61. I'd Climb the Highest Mountain (1951)

Starring Susan Hayward, William Lundigan, Rory Calhoun, Barbara Bates, Gene Lockhart

Directed by Henry King

Plot: "The simple told story, based on Corra Harris' biographical book, of a Methodist minister, called to a north-Georgia mountain-community in 1910 who, with his gently-bred new bride, meets the problems and crises of his circuit-riding congregation fearlessly and honestly." (From IMDb)

I originally saw this film when I was a kid, but for the longest time I couldn't recall the name of it. Then, one day I stumbled across this review that Laura had posted. That was it! I proceeded to immediately interloan it from my library system (thankfully they had it!). I'm really happy I found this film because it is quite a gem. At least I think it is—though my view could be altered a bit by nostalgia. I do think I view this film very differently as a twenty-year-old than I did at, say, age six or seven. If anything, I think that I am able to appreciate it more.

I can’t quite put my finger on what appeals to me about this movie. I think it is the honesty and simplicity of it. Despite having some sad moments, the film feels very calming. This tone is set with the voiceover of the older Mary that narrates the picture and strings together the different vignettes that comprise the story.

I also really like the two leads—William Lundigan and Susan Hayward—and I think their performances are what carries the film. I’m not even the type of girl who likes to go camping, but even I would consider moving to the backwoods and roughing it if it meant marrying someone as kind and nice (not to mention handsome) as William! In Laura’s review she mentioned that Jeanne Crain was originally slated to play Mary but backed out due to pregnancy. No offense to Miss Crain, but I am really glad that Susan Hayward got the role. I feel like she brings a lot of spunk to the part and keeps the character from being too bland and one-dimensional. It definitely makes me want to check out some more of her movies. Together, Lundigan and Hayward make a charming couple and their interaction feels very genuine.

As much as I enjoyed this movie, there is one part (where a tragic accident occurs) that really threw me. I did not remember it at all from my previous viewing and I wasn’t expecting it. But lest you think the film is all sadness, it’s really not. Mixed in with the more serious subject matter is a good deal of humor and fun. (Just watch out for that one part!)

In some ways, this movie is similar in subject matter to 1955’s A Man Called Peter, although that story is about a more famous minister and covers a longer amount of time. The setting also brings to mind films like The Music Man, Oklahoma!,  or Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (though this isn’t a musical, and the time period is probably closer to Anne of Green Gables or Pollyanna). So that should give you an idea of the ‘feel’ of the movie.

I wish I could make some screencaps (I watched it on VHS) from this because the Technicolor scenery, sets, and costumes are really quite lovely (I especially loved Hayward’s clothes). The lobby cards and black and white promotional stills (click on image for source) don’t do the film justice. Unfortunately, this isn’t available on DVD. It would be great if this could be restored and released, but I’m not sure what the status is on 20th Century Fox’s old films. (Anyone know?)

One thing that I might change about this film is to make it a little longer. At 88 minutes it breezes by, and I for one was sorry to see it end.

Come Live with Me (1941)

May 18 - June 2, 2011 <--it really did take me that long to finish this!

54. Come Live With Me (1941)

Starring James Stewart, Hedy Lamarr

Produced & Directed by Clarence Brown

Plot: "Illegal immigrant and showgirl Johnny Jones is due to be deported from the USA, her only hope is to get married…" (from IMDb)

Despite tepid IMDb reviews and a weak start, I found this film to be an enjoyable yet lightweight romantic comedy in the grand style that only the '30s and '40s could produce. That's not to say that it ranks among the best of the genre--some of the dialogue is a bit corny, there are plot points that don't make sense (or worse, are just dropped)--but all things considered, I can think of worse ways to spend an hour and a half. :) Hedy Lamarr is gorgeous and Jimmy Stewart is amusing--but a bit gangly and awkward as if he hasn't quite yet grown into his stardom.

Donald Meek makes a cameo appearance.

The title is taken from a Christopher Marlowe poem called “The Passionate Shepherd to His Love”. It begins…

“Come live with me and be my Love,
And we will all the pleasures prove
That hills and valleys, dale and field,
And all the craggy mountains yield.”

You can read the rest here.

Jimmy’s character recites part of this poem in the movie.

If you are interested in seeing this film, it can currently be viewed on YouTube.

**Please note that the pictures and graphics in this post are NOT MINE. You can find the original source by clicking on the respective image. If you are the creator and prefer that I not post your work, please let me know and I will promptly remove it.**

Marty (1955)

 
April 3, 2011

48. Marty (1955)

Starring Ernest Borgnine, Betsy Blair, Esther Minciotti, Augusta Ciolli, Joe Mantell, Karen Steele, Jerry Paris

Directed by Delbert Mann

Plot: “A touching story about two lonely people who have almost resigned themselves to never being truly loved.” (from IMDb)

This film was okay. Some parts I didn't like (a few of Marty’s ‘friends’ are very degrading) but the story overall was kind of nice. The themes it explores—loneliness, aging, self-acceptance—are ones that most of us can relate to (I know I can!). It was sweet to see the genuine relationship blossom between the two awkward protagonists. Some subplots are left unresolved, but I suppose that just makes it more realistic. This wasn’t my favorite movie ever, though I did enjoy it. If for nothing else, Ernest Borgnine's touching portrayal makes it worth watching.

 
I’m used to seeing Borgnine play tough guys, but this role definitely proved he had range.

 
According to IMDb, many scenes were filmed on location in the Bronx.

 
Borgnine won a Best Actor Oscar for his role in this film.

Betsy Blair, who plays Clara, was Gene Kelly’s first wife.

 
Marty and his mother (played by Esther Minciotti)

P.S. I just have to mention that I thought the whole thing with Mickey Spillane was hilarious—and so perfectly acted. I tried to find a YouTube clip but to no avail.

The Young Victoria (2009)

 
Mar. 27, 2011

46. The Young Victoria (2009)

Starring Emily Blunt, Rupert Friend, Paul Bettany, Miranda Richardson

Directed by Jean-Marc Vallée

Plot: "A dramatization of the turbulent first years of Queen Victoria's rule, and her enduring romance with Prince Albert." (from IMDb)

This was one of the best films I've seen in a long time. From the outset, the lively pace of the piece enticed me into the story. I found myself quite captivated by the visuals, music, emotions, and storytelling of the film. Often I watch a movie in the background, but this one garnered my full attention and kept me captivated throughout.

First of all, the casting was perfect. Blunt wonderfully conveyed the strong-willed yet vulnerable Victoria, and Friend was ideal as the kind gentleman who wins her heart.

Though some parts of the story seemed rushed, I rather liked the film's jaunty pace. I felt that in this case, as in poetry, superfluous words were unneeded to convey the heart of the story.

As for criticisms, I have few. ***SPOILER ALERT*** I do wonder why they included the false incident of Albert getting wounded, though. One would think such iconic royals had interesting enough lives without the aid of fictional embellishment. I also thought the gliding technique used at Victoria's first dance was a little jarring. But whatever my minor nit-pickings may be, none of these elements did anything to deter my wholehearted enjoyment of this film. It's one that I would love to watch over and over. Needless to say, I am hoping that unconfirmed rumors of a sequel are true!

 
This film won an Oscar for it’s costumes and its easy to see why—they are beautiful! I found this site that gives screen captures for each outfit. You may wish to check it out if you are an admirer of beautiful period clothes. I also found this other review when I was looking for photos. I thought the author did a great job of summarizing the beauty of this film.

 

If you can’t tell, I loved this film and highly recommend it to anyone who enjoys period dramas…or is just in the mood for a touching love story.

Pride and Prejudice (1995) – BBC Miniseries

 

Mar. 7, 8, 9, 2011 (<—this is 300 minutes, after all!)

42. Pride and Prejudice (1995)—REWATCH

Starring Colin Firth, Jennifer Ehle, Susannah Harker, Julia Sawalha, Alison Steadman, Benjamin Whitrow, Crispin Bonham-Carter

Directed by Simon Langton

Plot: "Jane Austen's classic novel about the prejudice that occurred between the 19th century classes and the pride which would keep lovers apart." (from IMDb, and a rather poor summary, but I assume most know the gist of the plot)

*****THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS*****

I always have a hard time pinning down my favorite P&P adaption. I like certain elements of all the ones I've seen—the 1940 one with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier, this version, and the 2005 film with Keira Knightley and Matthew McFadyen. I like this adaption because of the time the story has to develop and because it is usually regarded as the adaption most faithful to the original novel. But…

I'm glad I decided to rewatch this because I saw some things in a very different perspective. I guess there were mainly three things that jumped out at me. But before delving into those points, I feel like I should give some sort of warning to die-hard Austen fans. I'm afraid I might scandalize or offend you with what I am about to say…

First: I forgot just how stuck-up and sulky Darcy is. I know that he is always regarded as The Ideal Man, but I don't think I would ever want to be married to that type of person. He is certainly an interesting character and I enjoy the story, but I just think the whole Mr. Darcy thing is overrated. I understand that he is shy, awkward, willing to work on his faults, etc. but just imagine him on a bad day! I am happy to hear any arguments supporting the theory that he is Male Perfection Personified, though—so shoot away! (Personally, I can think of Austen men that I find much more agreeable. Just in this, I rather liked Col. Fitzwilliam. He seemed like a nice, handsome, steady, stable guy…without the glowering stares and mood swings.)

Second: I never really felt like Elizabeth loves Darcy (at least in this adaption) for who he is. Her attraction in this seems to begin when she discovers how rich he is, and she even admits this jokingly. Or is she joking?

Jane Bennet: No, seriously, Lizzy. When did you first know you were in love with Mr. Darcy?
Elizabeth Bennet: It came on so slowly I hardly know... but I believe I must date it from the time I first saw his wonderful grounds at Pemberley.

Third: The ending seemed to lack something. Despite the objections I listed above, none of these really hit me until near the end of the film. In fact, I greatly enjoyed most of this adaption. I found myself caught up in the tension between Elizabeth and Darcy, suppressing laughter at the funny parts, and enjoying watching the plot unfold even though I knew it well. But…the end. It felt like SUCH a let down. His second proposal seemed most ‘blah’. Her reaction was so subdued. And then the wedding. It just felt like it really lacked something. I still wasn't buying their attraction. I guess (don't shoot me for this) I like more how the ending was handle in the 2005 film--we can clearly see that they are in love with each other, they acknowledge their short-comings and false presumptions, and they live happily ever after.

Please don’t think I didn’t enjoy this at all, though. As I said, I still thought it was a great miniseries. I just noticed some things that I hadn’t before. But as to what I liked…

 
I loved how much is conveyed in all the looks.

Such beautiful penmanship! I wish I could write that nicely.

There were some lovely shots of the English countryside. The 2005 adaption also did a beautiful job of this.

 
This is one of my favorite scenes (how original, I know). I like it because of how awkward and nervous the usually up-tight Darcy is. This is evidenced in the fact that he requests after the well-being of her family twice in a very brief conversation. His character really begins to develop. We see that he is shy and tongue-tied and maybe just not as proud as Elizabeth thinks…

The STARE…there’s a lot of that in this movie.

Also quite a lot of this ^^^ (letter reading)