Short Review: Sense & Sensibility (2008)

Jan. 10, 2011

9. Sense & Sensibility (2008)
TV mini-series

Starring Hattie Morahan, Charity Wakefield, David Morrissey, Janet McTeer, Dan Stevens, Dominic Cooper, Lucy Boynton

Directed by John Alexander
Screenplay by Andrew Davies
Based on the novel by Jane Austen

Plot: This is an Austen movie, so I feel like spelling out the plot is kind of beside the point. Those familiar with the genre know the blend of relationships, misconceptions, personal revelations and humor that her work usually includes.

Sidenote:This obviously isn’t an old movie, but I am going to try and review all of the movies I see—not just the oldies.

This isn’t my favorite Austen, but I liked it a little better than the 1995 adaption. It is a mini-series and I admit to finding the pace a bit languorous at times. (But maybe that’s just because I don’t have the best attention span.) I liked the character of Elinor, and Hattie Morahan who played her, but I wasn’t very invested in any of the male characters. As someone who has not read the book, I was also confused by some of the plot points and I didn’t always like how the story was presented on screen. Perhaps if I knew the novel I could fill in the cracks more. All in all, this isn’t a movie that I really loved. It wasn’t awful. Just kind of ‘blah’. It has fairly high IMDb ratings, though, so apparently lots of other people really liked it.

Short Review: The Man With the Golden Arm (1955)

Jan. 9, 2011

8. The Man With the Golden Arm (1955)

Starring Frank Sinatra, Eleanor Parker, Kim Novak, Arnold Stang, Darrin McGavin, Robert Strauss

Produced & Directed by Otto Preminger
Loosely based on the novel by Nelson Algren

Plot: After coming home from rehab, a heroin addict seeks to stay clean and deal with the things in his life that are holding him back.

I was hesitant to watch this movie in the first place, because the topic kind of scared me. Addiction IS scary and I wasn’t sure that I wanted to watch a film about it. Watching it pretty much just reaffirmed those feelings. Sinatra does give a good performance and Kim Novak was also excellent. I never really thought much of her as an actress, but she did really well in this role. Curiously enough, I found her character of Molly to be the most interesting one in the film. She has the perfect combination of mystery, beauty, brassy independence, and strength. Eleanor Parker was over-the-top and annoying—like she was supposed to be. Some of the secondary characters felt a bit cartoonish, though. The atmosphere was gritty and realistic and pretty depressing. But precisely the reasons why I find this film so repugnant is probably credit to Preminger—for creating a piece that expresses the devastation and hellishness of addiction. It is not a film that I ever wish to see again.

Short Review: Christmas Holiday (1944)

Jan. 7, 2011

7. Christmas Holiday (1944)

Starring Deanna Durbin, Gene Kelly, Richard Whorf, Dean Harens, Gladys George, Gale Sondergaard

Directed by Richard Siodmak
Loosely based on the novel by W. Somerset Maugham
Written for the screen by Herman J. Mankiewicz 

Plot: Two strangers meet unexpectedly, each separately trying to deal with previous rocky relationships. (That’s not a very good synopsis, though.)
I knew going in that this wasn’t a normal Deanna Durbin movie and I was fine with that. I knew that it was a dark film noir—and it is. I can only imagine how surprised audiences whodidn’t know that would be, however. The two leads (Deanna Durbin and Gene Kelly) play very much against type from their usual frothy musical fare. This is a film about love, obsession, and moving on. That’s all fine, but I just never felt invested in any of the characters. Dean Harens was especially dull and uninteresting. The plot was very simple and a great deal of the movie is told in flashbacks—which I usually don’t mind, but here it’s mostly stuff the audience already knows. It’s not that this is a painfully bad movie, it’s just not anything special (at least in my opinion). I also found the ending to be just a little over-dramatic. Oh, and despite the title, this isn’t really a Christmas movie—unless you like watching film noirs about crime and murder at Christmas time.

Short Review: White Christmas (1954)

I decided it would make more sense to just post one review at a time, even if it’s just a ‘mini review’.

Jan. 6, 2011

6. White Christmas (1954)

Starring Bing Crosby, Danny Kaye, Rosemary Clooney, Vera-Ellen, Dean Jagger, Mary Wickes

Directed by Michael Curtiz

Written by Norman Krasna, Norman Panama, Melvin Frank

Plot: A pair of song and dance men partner with a performing sister act to help an old Army general rejuvenate his failing inn…just in time for the holidays. 

Some may consider January 6 a little late to be viewing a Christmas movie, but I say it’s just in time for Epiphany! Really, this holiday classic makes for fine viewing any time of the year. Crooning Bing Crosby plays wonderfully off wise-cracking Danny Kaye. Vera-Ellen glides through the film demonstrating her accomplished dancing, and Rosemary Clooney has plenty of opportunities to showcase her husky and melodious voice. Filmed in VistaVision and bright, gorgeous color, this film is also a treat for the eyes as show-stopping numbers give way for countless Edith Head creations. The film is light, fun, and fluffy. Everything one would expect from a 1950s musical. Yet a very talented cast and classic Irving Berlin tunes elevate this film to share rank with the best of the genre. There are a few numbers or scenes that may have modern audiences rolling their eyes, but numbers like “The Best Things Happen While You’re Dancing” more than make up for the improbable or overlooked elements of the film. Though I think the best part of White Christmas is the opportunities it creates for quoting dialogue or in-jokes to your family all 365 days a year.

Mini Reviews: The Dark Mirror, The Snake Pit, The Heiress, We’re No Angels, Johnny Belinda

In honor of the new year, I have started recording on my Tumblr a mini review for each film I watch. I actually type up my thoughts and comments for each and every movie I watch, though I rarely post these reviews because they are largely made up of abstract ramblings. But I thought it would be fun to post an abbreviated review where I just write my over all view of the films. I have taken the ones I’ve done so far on Tumblr, added a bit more, and posted them here. Hopefully I can post more of them as I watch more films.

This batch is largely made up of Olivia de Havilland films, as I was kind of on an Olivia kick. If anyone has any other recommendations for good films she was in, let me know! (I have also seen Princess O’Rourke…and plan on watching To Each His Own and In This Our Life soon). Are her films with Errol Flynn enjoyable to someone who’s not a big fan of westerns?

But enough rambling. On to the reviews!

Jan. 1, 2011

1. The Dark Mirror (1946)

Starring Olivia de Havilland, Lew Ayres, Thomas Mitchell

Written & Produced by Nunnally Johnson
Directed by Robert Siodmak 

Plot: a film noir/mystery about identical twin sisters—one of them is guilty and one is innocent.

This was a very entertaining film with an incredible performance by Olivia—playing two people! The special effects were skillfully handled and impressive. I wish they would’ve explained more about the dark mirror, though. Trying to kept everything straight was a little confusing at times but the pacing was great and it really kept me interested and concentrating on the plot. I was kept guessing until the very end.

Jan. 2, 2011

2. The Snake Pit (1948)

Starring Olivia de Havilland, Mark Stevens, Leo Genn, Celeste Holm, Leif Erickson, Beulah Bondi, Betsy Blair

Directed by Anatole Litvak
Based on a book by Mary Jane Ward

Plot: About a woman in a mental hospital. 

This was one of the most amazing movies I’ve ever seen. The immersive realism that it achieved kept me riveted throughout. Olivia de Havilland gave one of the most terrific performances I’ve ever seen and all the other actors were also perfectly cast. This movie just touches on so many emotions and is one that I can definitely see myself rewatching. I could rattle on a long time about this movie, but in summary: I highly recommend it. 

Jan. 3, 2011

3. The Heiress (1949)

Starring Olivia de Havilland, Montgomery Clift, Ralph Richardson, Miriam Hopkins

Produced & Directed by William Wyler

Plot: A socially awkward heiress falls in love with a handsome young man. But does he really love her, or just her money?

I apologize in advance to those that feel differently, but I really hated this movie. The plot seemed thin and it was just very depressing. It went nowhere but down and then left you there—the end. The only positive things I can attribute to it are a lovely soundtrack and some skillful camera shots. I was really sorry that I didn’t like this movie. I wanted to! In some ways it seems similar to My Cousin Rachel, another movie which I didn’t like. I hate to say it because I was really becoming fond of Olivia as an actress, but here I just didn’t relate to her character or performance. I feel like I am missing something because so many people have stated what an incredible performance she gives here (which won her an Academy Award!). Please feel free to dish in the comments on your thoughts on this (and any of the films mentioned here).

Jan. 4, 2011

4. We’re No Angels (1955)

Starring Humphrey Bogart, Aldo Ray, Peter Ustinov, Joan Bennett, Basil Rathbone, Leo G. Carroll

Directed by Michael Curtiz

Plot: Three escaped convicts help a shopkeeper and his family out during Christmas.

It was fun to see Bogart in a light comedy like this. Ray and Ustinov round out the trio and together they make a quirky and humorous bunch. This movie was okay. Kind of fun but I guess I just don’t really like the black humor. I found some of the humor uncomfortable—like jokes about one of the convicts who was a rapist (of course he wasn’t called that, but still). Maybe I’m just taking it too seriously, though. Good to see once but not a favorite.

Jan. 5/6, 2011

5. Johnny Belinda (1948)

Starring Jane Wyman, Lew Ayres, Charles Bickford, Agnes Moorehead, Stephen MacNally, Jan Sterling

Directed by Jean Negulesco

Plot: A doctor helps and deaf and mute girl learn to communicate.

I decided to watch this film in honor of Jane Wyman’s birthday on January 5. I don’t really know how to describe this movie. Heartfelt is the only word that comes to mind, but it’s not cheesy, sentimental, Hallmark heartfelt. It’s just a very good film with wonderful performances by Jane Wyman and the rest of the cast. Based on a stage play, the story is original and engaging. At first I thought it would be like the Helen Keller story, but the setting—along with some significant dramatic turns—makes it unique. I was also impressed with the realistic mood and scenery of the film. Although it was nominated for a dozen Academy Awards, it only won Best Actress (for Wyman’s performance). Despite a few moments that were maybe just a little contrived, I heartily recommend this film. It is a classic movie in the best sense of the word.

It Had to Be You (1947)

I just watched It Had to Be You starring Ginger Rogers and Cornel Wilde, and I found it…puzzling. I kind of liked the movie. I felt like it had a lot of the elements of a fun film, I just didn’t always like how those elements were put together.

First off: Ginger. I am usually a big fan of hers so it surprised me to find her character of a flighty, babbling society girl rather annoying. I mean, I still like Ginger but she just seemed a little one-dimensional in this. Maybe that was what the movie called for, though, because it obviously doesn’t take itself too seriously. Amanda Cooper at A Noodle In a Haystack wrote a post about this film about a year ago, and I revisited it once I got the chance to finally see the film. For the most part, I concur with her thoughts. She writes:

Ginger used her “ingenue” voice for this one. She used to quite often when she was playing younger women, and it always frustrates me (to varying extents, depending on the movie). I don't think she needed it to seem young and fresh. Victoria could have been a much more interesting character if she had been allowed the depth of Ginger's real voice. Nevertheless, this is one movie where the ingenue voice doesn't bother me too much. I think if Rogers had been allowed (or maybe told?) to play Victoria as a more intelligent, mature woman, the potential of the movie would have been more fully realized.

I agree 100% with everything Amanda says in this paragraph, except for the fact that Ginger’s “ingenue” voice isn’t as annoying here. Obviously, I kind of thought it was. I like her observation that the character would’ve had more depth (yes, comedies can have depth!) if she was played differently. One of the things I really like about Ginger is her unique, REAL voice. Many actresses of the era had soft and mousy voices, stagey accents, or a shrill and high-pitched way of speaking. Thus Ginger’s natural voice (I don’t know how to describe it—kind of a tough, earthy drawl, maybe) is very refreshing and relatable. The fact that she attempts to speak in this film in the soft, breathy voice makes me feel like she was trying to be like all those other actresses. But she could’ve just done it because it seemed to fit the character or merely because the director told her to! In any case, I like her better with out it.

Okay, now that we have that out of the way…let’s get into the plot (which will include LOTS OF SPOILERS, so consider yourself warned.)

When the Indian popped up it had me scratching my head (figuratively speaking) trying to figure out what was going on. My mind was going something like this: “Is she dreaming? Is this a fantasy ? Oh, anytime now this will start making sense. He’s just a guy playing a joke on her, right? Hmm, nope, IMDb doesn’t say anything about it being a fantasy. Must not be. It’ll make sense here eventually…” You get the idea. I generally have trouble with suspension of belief type things and fantasy in general (though if it’s comedy, I find it a lot more agreeable. Bewitched, anyone?) so it’s not really a surprise that I didn’t grasp on sooner. The plot is pretty simple and that’s not what confused me. It was just a “where is this going” type of thing. And this does have a weird plot.

Cornel Wilde was fabulous in this as George McKesson. He seemed to be having so much fun with the part and his role alone is reason enough to watch this film. Notice that I only say as George McKesson, though—not as Johnny Blaine, even though Wilde played both characters. That’s because, quite frankly, I found Blaine to be sooo dull and boring. It was like a different person…well he was, (or was he?) but I mean a different actor…wow this is confusing. It seemed that all the things that Victoria liked about him were because either it was what George did or because they were just supposed to be together because they played kissing games at her five-year-old birthday party. Huh? I know… It didn’t really make a lot of sense. If she liked George why didn’t she just marry him. Oh, but I guess she couldn’t because he was some sort of spirit/cupid? But then at the end it was like she did marry George because of the moccasins…right? Or was that just Johnny with those? Because Johnny is kind of stuck-up and George is just fun. He and Victoria need to be together. The movie should’ve been more a story about them, without Johnny. And Victoria needs to get a hold of herself. What was it that suddenly just before the end made Johnny turn around and forgive her? So many questions…

I realize this probably makes no sense. And that’s because it didn’t make a lot of sense to me, either. But the movie was still fun. I guess I just tend to over critique things. :) Cornel Wilde is great (best part of the movie) before he turns into the stuffed-shirt fireman, and Ginger isn’t as bad as I say. I’m just not used to seeing her in this type of role. It’s actually a pretty fun film. Just confusing. And yes, it is a fantasy. There are also some really fun scenes: including the one where they are playing gin, just about any scene with George, the dinner party, at the baseball game…lots of fabulous scenes.

Now that the initial shock of what’s-going-one-here has passed and I am completely prepared to not take the movie too seriously, I think this is one that I could definitely rewatch with pleasure.

Wow, I wrote a lot more here than I planned on. Also check out Amanda’s review. I promise it makes more sense than this one.

Quote from the film: "You can buy a lot of honor for three million dollars."

Christmas In Connecticut (1945)

You may have heard about the 12 Days of Christmas Movies that Sally from Flying Down to Hollywood is hosting. If not, head over to her blog for more info on it.  

 

For my movie I chose Christmas In Connecticut, a 1945 film starring Barbara Stanwyck, Dennis Morgan, Sydney Greenstreet (you may recognize him from Casablanca), Reginald Gardiner, and S.Z. Sakall (he was in Casablanca, too!). And this film just happens to be the one featured in the badge Sally made for the event (above).

It had been a while since I saw this movie, and I remembered it as a terrific and fun holiday/screwball comedy. It was all that, but sometimes I have a tendency to mentally overbuild movies I haven’t seen in a while. Sometimes I think the best way to view a movie is with no preconceived notions or expectations. Still, this is a very enjoyable movie that clips along at a steady pace and keeps the audience interested. 

The plot is really quite a clever one: Elizabeth Lane (Stanwyck), author of a successful feature in Smart Housekeeping magazine is roped into hosting a war hero (Morgan) at her Connecticut farmhouse with her family for the holidays. The only problem is…Elizabeth doesn’t have a farmhouse…or a family. And in real life, she knows nothing about the cooking and housekeeping topics she is so famous for writing about.

This was a great scene. I love how they are all hovering over. And isn’t
Stanwyck’s outfit adorable?

Though the plot is entertaining, and the script sufficient, what really keeps this film ticking is the great character actors and moments of screwball situation zaniness. It’s especially fun to see Elizabeth attempt to adapt to all the domestic activities that she is supposed to be such an expert on—from flipping flapjacks to trying to bathe a baby, Stanwyck is great as always. Dennis Morgan is perhaps one of the weaker links in the film, however (at least in my opinion). His role is basically to just stand around looking handsome in his uniform and [*SPOILER ALERT*] fall in love with Elizabeth from the moment he sets his eyes on her. I know this movie isn’t meant to be taken too seriously, but he just strikes me as a bit of a cad to run after a woman that he thinks is married. But maybe I’m just over-thinking things. I do give his character props for being cute with the baby. That was pretty adorable. While we’re talking about spoilers, what happened to Reginald Gardiner’s character at the end? Am I the only one who felt kind of sorry for him? [*End of spoiler*] The rest of the cast (even minor characters) are spot on, though, and this film has some really, really funny lines and sequences in it.

Holiday Cheer: 2/10 Although this takes place around Christmas, that is just the backdrop. A tree is trimmed and a carol is sung, but that’s not the main focus.

Feel-Good feeling: 6/10 The cozy New England setting and pure escapism of this comedy definitely give it some feel-good factor. It’s not really a warm-and-fuzzy type of film, though.

Overall, this is a a lovely screwball comedy that just happens to take place at Christmas. If you haven’t seen it, I would definitely check it out. Make some popcorn, grab your family, and enjoy this amusing and delightful flick.


P.S. An interesting trivia fact about this film that I did not know (thanks, IMDb) is that this farmhouse set was the same one used in Bringing Up Baby (1938).