Browsed by
Month: February 2013

Bill of Divorcement, A (1932)

Bill of Divorcement, A (1932)

“It’s in our blood, isn’t it?”

Synopsis:
A shellshocked veteran (John Barrymore) regains his sanity and returns home to find that his wife (Billie Burke) is now engaged to another man (Paul Cavanagh); meanwhile, his grown daughter (Katharine Hepburn) fears for her future with her fiance (David Manners) when she learns that her father’s mental illness may not be entirely due to the war.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Divorce
  • Father and Child
  • George Cukor Films
  • John Barrymore Films
  • Katharine Hepburn Films
  • Mental Illness
  • Play Adaptations

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary is spot-on in his lambasting review of this “stagy, hokey adaptation [directed by George Cukor] of Clemence Dane‘s bad play”. He accurately notes that “the overwrought characters take turns being the martyr”, without any relief in sight; indeed, for those who enjoy watching likable characters suffer (and/or Barrymore at his hammiest), this film should suit the bill nicely. On the plus side, Burke (in a substantial role) actually gives a reasonably nuanced performance, rather than resorting to her typically ditzy socialite mannerisms; knowing that she suffered the loss of her real-life husband (Flo Ziegfeld) during the filming adds gravitas to her portrayal. Meanwhile, Peary points out that the film “at least… has historical significance in that it featured skinny Hepburn’s screen debut”, and she alone makes it worth a one-time look. While producer David O. Selznick was apparently concerned that audiences wouldn’t take to Hepburn, she’s positively luminous here (thanks in part to gorgeous cinematography by Sidney Hickox); one can easily understand why she went on to become a major — if resolutely iconoclastic — Hollywood star.

Note: Hepburn’s creative collaboration with Cukor lasted throughout the next 17 years, resulting in a total of eight theatrical films, including the following titles: Little Women (1933), Sylvia Scarlett (1935), Holiday (1938), The Philadelphia Story (1940), Keeper of the Flame (1942), Adam’s Rib (1949), and Pat and Mike (1952).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Katharine Hepburn as Sydney Fairfield
  • Billie Burke as Meg Fairfield

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look simply out of historical curiosity.

Links:

My Man Godfrey (1936)

My Man Godfrey (1936)

“You’re more than a butler — you’re the first protege I ever had!”

Synopsis:
When a ditzy heiress (Carole Lombard) befriends a “forgotten man” (William Powell) she meets while on a scavenger hunt, she invites him to work as a butler for her family, and quickly finds herself falling in love with him — unaware that he’s really a wealthy businessman in disguise. Meanwhile, her resentful sister (Gail Patrick) is determined to make life miserable for Godfrey (Powell), while her father (Eugene Pallette) struggles to keep his family’s spending under control, and her mother (Alice Brady) amuses herself with her mooching protege (Mischa Auer).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Carole Lombard Films
  • Class Relations
  • Heiresses
  • Mistaken Identities
  • Romantic Comedy
  • William Powell Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary argues that the “interesting premise” of this “classic screwball comedy” — that “it is the bum who has manners and discipline [while] the society clan are wild”:

— is ruined by the plot “twist” (given away early) that Godfrey (Powell) is actually a millionaire in disguise. He posits that while screenwriters Eric Hatch and Morrie Ryskind “may have had praiseworthy intentions” by wanting “Powell to discuss cynically both the plight and the nobility of the unemployed during the Depression”, director “Gregory La Cava has trouble maintaining a humorous thread while injecting serious themes”; he argues that “if the film’s going to attempt social criticism, it shouldn’t be so timid about it”. He concludes his review by noting that the “film succeeds not because of the story or direction but because of the spirited performances”, with “suave Powell and daffy Lombard [possessing] some great moments together”.

I can’t quite agree with most of Peary’s sentiments, given that I find the fast-paced screenplay consistently clever and witty, and don’t have any problem with the way Powell’s mysterious character is written. Indeed, it’s likely that if the social themes were taken more seriously, the entire affair would ultimately be much less successful as a wacky screwball flick. Peary’s right, however, to call out the fine performances by Lombard and Powell, who do indeed possess great chemistry together; it’s especially touching to know that they were divorced, yet still affectionate enough towards one other to maintain good relations.

I’m also fond of the supporting performances throughout this ensemble piece — most notably gravelly-voiced character actor Eugene Pallette as the family’s harried patriarch, and fey Franklin Pangborn in an early bit role as the officiant for the scavenger hunt (a wonderful extended scene) that propels the plot into action.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Carole Lombard as Irene Bullock (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actresses of the Year in his Alternate Oscars)
  • William Powell as Godfrey (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actors of the Year in Alternate Oscars)
  • Eugene Pallette as Alexander Bullock: “Life in this family is one subpoena after the other.”
  • Franklin Pangborn in a bit part as a scavenger hunt official
  • Fine cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a genuine screwball classic. Added to the National Film Registry in 1999, and listed as #44 on AFI’s “100 Funniest Movies”.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Such Good Friends (1971)

Such Good Friends (1971)

“Now that the damage has been done, your husband’s care will be of the finest.”

Synopsis:
When her husband (Laurence Luckinbill) becomes increasingly ill after entering the hospital for minor surgery, a woman (Dyan Cannon) soon learns some disturbing secrets about their marriage.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Death and Dying
  • Dyan Cannon Films
  • Marital Problems
  • Otto Preminger Films

Review:
Otto Preminger’s directorial career went into serious decline during the last years of his life, as he helmed a series of surreal and/or puzzling oddities — the most notorious of which was the all-star musical flop Skidoo (1968). Unfortunately, Such Good Friends — based on a bestselling novel by Lois Gould — is yet another disappointment in his otherwise estimable oeuvre. With a screenplay by Elaine May (writing under the pseudonym Esther Dale), one has high hopes for the premise — but Preminger manages to botch the entire affair so badly that it’s impossible to tell what might have been done with the story in different hands. The tone is wildly uneven: clearly this was meant to be some sort of black comedy, but Preminger flits between failed attempts to mine the comedic premise — Luckinbill goes in to have a benign mole removed, and ends up in a coma, with his doctors increasingly defensive — and filming the material like a weighty drama about illness and infidelity. The result is that we never know whether the characters are supposed to be reacting to each other realistically or comically.

Making matters worse, we don’t like any of these characters — not even the protagonist (Cannon), whose plight we should presumably empathize with. Our distaste for Cannon’s spoiled housewife is cemented from her very first scenes, as she mutters, “Why did they abolish slavery?!” in frustration when her black maid can’t hear her petulant request to answer the doorbell. When events quickly turn more serious, she thankfully drops her characteristically ditzy screen persona and invests her character with gravitas and nuance, turning in what’s probably one of the best performances of her career. However, she’s at sea in the midst of a messy cinematic train wreck, one even her emotional investment simply can’t salvage.

Note: My opinion of this film diverges considerably from most other critics: Roger Ebert gives it four stars out of four, Stuart Galbraith IV of DVD Talk refers to it as “just about as good” as Annie Hall (!!!), and others point out the wittiness and elegance of the dialogue. It’s likely that my overall distaste for how Preminger handles the material is shadowing my ability to appreciate much else about it — but regardless, I consider this one to be a true clunker.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Dyan Cannon as Julie

Must See?
No; definitely feel free to skip this one.

Links:

Kid Millions (1934)

Kid Millions (1934)

“Go away! I can’t talk to an idiot!”

Synopsis:
When a nebbish (Eddie Cantor) discovers he’s heir to a fortune, he quickly becomes prey to a con-woman (Ethel Merman) and her partner (Warren Hymer); meanwhile, when traveling to Egypt to collect his inheritance, the daughter (Eve Sully) of an Egyptian sheik (Paul Harvey) becomes smitten with Cantor and attempts to snag him as her husband.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ann Sothern Films
  • Comedy
  • Con-Artists
  • Eddie Cantor Films
  • Egypt and Egyptology
  • Inheritance
  • Musicals
  • Roy Del Ruth Films

Review:
Roy Del Ruth directed this inconsequential Eddie Cantor musical-comedy, based on a fantastical “kitchen sink” storyline that’s essentially a series of excuses for comedic banter and absurd situations to emerge. Naturally, musical sequences are scattered throughout (the best starring the Nicholas Brothers), and there’s also a gratuitous romantic subplot between George Murphy and Ann Sothern (whose characters have little to do with the rest of the story, as far as I can tell). The film’s primary selling point is its truly surreal Technicolor finale (see still below), which — like everything else about the film — feels randomly tacked onto the storyline.

Note: Peary lists all but one of Cantor’s six Samuel Goldwyn titles in his GFTFF; now that I’ve finished watching the five titles he recommends, I’ve decided that two — Whoopee (1930) and Roman Scandals (1934) — are “must-see”, while the rest are strictly for fans.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A fun dance sequence by the Nicholas Brothers
  • The fantastical Technicolor ice cream factory finale

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for Cantor fans.

Links:

Strike Me Pink (1936)

Strike Me Pink (1936)

“When confronted with danger, be prompt — be rash — be bold; dominate the situation!”

Synopsis:
A meek tailor (Eddie Cantor) gains newfound confidence from a correspondence course, and is hired to manage an amusement park threatened by gangsters, who want to infuse it with crooked slot machines.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Character Arc
  • Comedy
  • Eddie Cantor Films
  • Gangsters
  • Musicals

Review:
This final entry in Eddie Cantor’s career at Samuel Goldwyn studios (where he made one big-budget musical per year, from 1930 to 1936) is reminiscent of Harold Lloyd’s comedies — so it’s not surprising to learn that Goldwyn originally wanted Lloyd for the lead role (indeed, the script was written with him in mind). The storyline is slight as can be (crooked slot machines?!), but film fanatics may be curious to check this one out simply to see Broadway chanteuse Ethel Merman in one of her relatively few early onscreen roles — here playing the shady nightclub singer Cantor is hopelessly in love with. Also of interest are some — er — interestingly choreographed dances (see still below).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • An opportunity to see and hear Ethel Merman in her prime
  • Some surreal dance sequences

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for Cantor fans.

Links:

Desk Set (1957)

Desk Set (1957)

“They can’t build a machine to do our job.”

Synopsis:
A team of reference librarians (Katharine Hepburn, Joan Blondell, Dina Merrill, and Sue Randall) at the Federal Broadcasting Company worry that their jobs are at stake when an efficiency expert (Spencer Tracy) arrives with a fancy new computer.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Gig Young Films
  • Joan Blondell Films
  • Katharine Hepburn Films
  • Play Adaptation
  • Romantic Comedy
  • Spencer Tracy Films

Review:
Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy’s second-to-last film together was this dry adaptation (directed by Walter Lang) of a Broadway play by William Marchant. Although the issue of human obsolescence in the face of an increasingly powerful electronic universe remains just as relevant today as ever, the subject matter as presented here comes across as hopelessly dated and simplistic, with the ultimate moral of the film — that computers can’t ever fully replace human ingenuity — a boring no-brainer for modern audiences. Meanwhile, the screenplay is badly paced and overly stagy, flitting here and there between various subplots and ultimately falling flat. With that said, Hepburn is as fully invested in her role as ever, and her solid rapport with Tracy remains a comforting treat. However, this one is ultimately only must-see for Hepburn/Tracy completists.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Katharine Hepburn as Bunny
  • Typically fine rapport between Tracy and Hepburn
  • Nice use of Cinemascope

Must See?
No, though of course Tracy/Hepburn fans won’t want to miss it.

Links:

Pat and Mike (1952)

Pat and Mike (1952)

“I don’t think you’ve ever been properly handled.”

Synopsis:
A shady sports promoter (Spencer Tracy) offers to help manage the professional career of a gifted female athlete (Katharine Hepburn) who finds herself strangely flummoxed whenever her professor-fiance (William Ching) watches her compete.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Aldo Ray Films
  • George Cukor Films
  • Katharine Hepburn Films
  • Romantic Comedy
  • Spencer Tracy Films
  • Sports

Review:
Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy’s seventh joint film was this jaunty romantic comedy situated within the cinematically unique world of women’s sports. The film’s unusual setting serves as its calling card, as we’re provided with a refreshingly ethnographic look at this milieu, with a handful of real-life female athletic stars (such as Babe Didrikson Zaharias and Alice Marble) appearing onscreen in “competition” with Hepburn. Hepburn was a gifted athlete in her own right, and is 100% believable in her role here; indeed, screenwriters Garson Kanin and Ruth Gordon — friends of Hepburn and Tracy — wrote the script with her talents in mind. Meanwhile, her rapport with Tracy (having fun playing a somewhat morally dubious character) is as predictably solid as always, and William Ching is fine in a humorous role as her jinxing beau.

The storyline itself, while slight, is drolly witty, and nicely handled by director George Cukor; I’m especially fond of scenes involving Tracy’s hoodish “colleagues”, who are disappointed by his decision to go straight with Hepburn — watch how Hepburn defends “her man” against them…

Note: Hepburn reportedly named this as her favorite film made with Tracy.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Katharine Hepburn as Pat
  • Spencer Tracy as Mike
  • A fascinating glimpse at ’50s “women’s” sports

  • Garson Kanin and Ruth Gordon’s Oscar-nominated script

Must See?
Yes, as a most enjoyable Tracy/Hepburn flick.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

Incredible Shrinking Woman, The (1981)

Incredible Shrinking Woman, The (1981)

“To my family, I’d become a doll — and to our dog, a chew-stick.”

Synopsis:
After exposure to a multitude of household chemicals, a housewife (Lily Tomlin) begins shrinking, much to the horror of her husband (Charles Grodin) and two kids (Shelby Balik and Justin Dana). Meanwhile, her husband’s boss (Ned Beatty) conspires with her doctors (Henry Gibson and Elizabeth Wilson) and the leaders (Tom Keller, Jim McMullan, and Pamela Bellwood) of a secret organization to capture Tomlin and use her blood as part of a plan for world domination.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Comedy
  • Fantasy
  • Lily Tomlin Films
  • Living Nightmare
  • Ned Beatty Films
  • Science Fiction
  • World Domination

Review:
Joel Schumacher made his directorial debut helming this reasonably entertaining — though clearly inferior — comedic follow-up to the 1957 sci-fi classic The Incredible Shrinking Man (1957) (based on Richard Matheson’s novel The Shrinking Man). In this modernized version of Matheson’s story (scripted by Tomlin’s long-time collaborator and parter, Jane Wagner), the protagonist is a woman instead of a man, and the proposed culprit for her situation — a deluge of household chemicals:

— plays upon newfound societal fears about environmental contaminants. Unfortunately, Tomlin is a bit too bland in the title role as a happily married housewife faced with the ultimate nightmare:

(though she has fun in a secondary role playing a helpful neighbor named Judith Beasley), and the screenplay misses out on ripe opportunities for more incisive social commentary — either about the contested role of housewives in a male-dominated society, or the escalating presence of unknown chemicals in our everyday lives. Sadly, the film eventually devolves into a silly world-domination subplot involving — sigh — a captive humanoid gorilla (famed makeup artist Rick Baker in a suit), rather than allowing Tomlin’s character to sink ever further into the horrors of increasing diminution (as is handled so effectively in the original film). However, while The Incredible Shrinking Woman is certainly no classic, the special effects are nicely handled, and it’s enjoyably loopy enough to merit a look by curious film fanatics.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Lily Tomlin as Judith Beasley
  • Impressive special effects and sets

Must See?
No, though film fanatics may be curious to check it out given its connection to Jack Arnold’s 1957 classic (and Matheson’s novel).

Links:

Windy City (1984)

Windy City (1984)

“I have nothing to say. I am not a writer.”

Synopsis:
An aspiring writer (John Shea) enlists the help of his childhood buddies in supporting their dying friend (Josh Mostel); meanwhile, he reminisces about a former girlfriend (Kate Capshaw) who has since become engaged to another man.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Friendship
  • Winning Him/Her Back

Review:
Two years after penning the uninspired screenplay for Francis Ford Coppola’s otherwise impressive One From the Heart (1982), Armyan Bernstein wrote and directed this dull ensemble piece about a group of lifelong friends growing up in Chicago and facing a variety of concerns. The film is eminently forgettable on every count, given that we don’t care about any of the poorly developed characters, who spout trite dialogue (“I guess some people aren’t replaceable”) and generally act like overgrown adolescents. There’s potential for something heartfelt in a subplot about a dying friend in the gang, played with pathos by Mostel (the one live spark in the bunch):

— but this is swallowed up by the shallow central narrative about Shea’s longing for his now-engaged former girlfriend (Capshaw).

Bernstein is clearly a film buff, given how many cinematic allusions he incorporates throughout his movie — i.e., the film opens on a scene of the boyhood friends watching an Errol Flynn swashbuckler on television:

and at one point the camera pans strategically past a revival theater marquee advertising A Guy Named Joe. However, these allusions simply highlight how shallow Bernstein’s own picture is. Ironically, Shea’s character (an aspiring writer, ostensibly based on Bernstein himself) breaks up with his girlfriend after they argue about his failure to work on his craft; she insists that he “has stories to tell”, while he yells back, “I have nothing to say” — a point we (sadly) can’t help immediately agreeing with.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Not much.

Must See?
No; definitely feel free to skip this one.

Links:

Woman of the Year (1942)

Woman of the Year (1942)

“You don’t think I can do all the ordinary little things that any idiot can do, do you?”

Synopsis:
A globe-trotting political journalist (Katharine Hepburn) and an easy-going sports writer (Spencer Tracy) fall in love, but find their marriage strained by Hepburn’s hectic lifestyle.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Career-versus-Marriage
  • Fay Bainter Films
  • Feminism and Women’s Issues
  • George Stevens Films
  • Journalists
  • Katharine Hepburn Films
  • Marital Problems
  • Romantic Comedy
  • Spencer Tracy Films
  • Strong Females
  • William Bendix Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that just as “Spencer Tracy’s sportswriter and Katharine Hepburn’s political columnist… can feel the chemistry” the first time they “lay eyes on each other”, viewers “can immediately feel the chemistry between the stars in their first scene together on screen”. He points out that we get to experience the unique “joy” of “watching their characters get to know each other”, given that we now know “we’re also watching the stars develop their inimitable interplay” — one that endured throughout their real-life romance as well as through eight additional films together. He argues that the “film is hurt by silly and overly sentimental plot contrivances, and because once they’re married neither character is very appealing”, but counters that “Tracy and Hepburn ride out the rocky road”.

I’m actually more a fan of Ring Lardner, Jr. and Michael Kanin’s Oscar-winning script than Peary is. While there are certainly some “silly… plot contrivances” — as when Hepburn “adopts a Greek orphan without consulting Tracy and then hasn’t the time to be a mother” — this is par for the course in a screwball romantic comedy like WOTY, which is never anything less than delightfully zany in its portrayal of Hepburn’s over-the-topness (after all, her “Tess” is shown speaking no less than half a dozen languages fluently!). Meanwhile, as Peary argues, “what’s most fascinating about the film is Hepburn’s uninhibitedly sexual performance”, with her “sexiness com[ing] from how she uses her eyes, voice, body, and, more significantly, her mind prior to lovemaking”. Indeed, Hepburn’s intelligence is a major turn-on — not just for Tracy (who secretly seems to love his wife’s genius), but for audience members, who can easily embrace Hepburn’s Tess Harding as a feminist icon for the ages. (Now this is the pioneering female journalist we wanted to see more of in A Woman Rebels!)

The enduring question about Woman of the Year is whether its views on gender roles and marital responsibilities have dated terribly (as Peary argues is the case with all the Tracy-and-Hepburn films). It’s true that the final scene — showcasing Hepburn’s disastrous attempts to make breakfast for her husband, a la Buster Keaton in The Navigator (1924) — would seem to hint that the characters have finally caved to sexist mid-century mores; but listen carefully, and you’ll find that this really isn’t the case. Indeed, while Hepburn is clearly made out to be the “villain” throughout the film — with poor, put-upon Tracy simply enduring her hectic lifestyle until he finally puts his foot down — the moral of the story isn’t that Hepburn should give up her phenomenal success for the sake of being a housewife. Rather, the lesson being taught is a remarkably modern one: the need for compromise and balance in any relationship.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Katharine Hepburn as Tess Harding (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actresses of the Year in his Alternate Oscars)
  • Spencer Tracy as Sam Craig (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actors of the Year in Alternate Oscars)
  • Plenty of believable onscreen chemistry between Hepburn and Tracy
  • Tess’s addled attempt to make breakfast; click here to listen to a fun podcast by www.thescarlettolive.com about “food in film” which briefly addresses this scene
  • An enjoyably witty screenplay by Ring Lardner, Jr. and Michael Kanin

Must See?
Yes, as one of Tracy and Hepburn’s most enjoyable pictures together.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links: