“Two old-fashioneds — for two old-fashioned people…”
|
Synopsis:
An elderly couple with financial problems (Beulah Bondi and Victor Moore) are forced to move into separate homes with their grown children.
|
|
Genres:
Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary notes, this “poignant classic” makes a “good argument for Social Security”. It’s beyond depressing to watch Moore and Bondi being separated from each other after years of happy marriage, but fortunately director Leo McCarey doesn’t demonize the grown children — instead, he makes it easy to empathize with their dilemmas as well. The problem here isn’t family values — it’s the harsh economic reality of the time, a situation which unfortunately hasn’t improved all that much over the years.
Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
- Excellent performances by Beulah Bondi and Victor Moore (only 49 and 61 years old, respectively, at the time of filming)
- One of the most authentic portrayals of problems associated with aging
Must See?
Yes. This is a sadly neglected gem.
Categories
(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)
Links:
|
Posted on August 30th, 2006 by admin
Filed under: Response Reviews
I wholeheartedly agree with the comment that ‘MWFT’ is “one of the most authentic portrayals of problems associated with aging.” The film’s premise is indeed an admirable one - so I would probably suggest that having a look at it isn’t a total waste. But I don’t think I can go so far as to call it a must. For me, the premise tends to break down under the weight of the film’s particulars.
I wouldn’t say that the main issue in the film is “the harsh economic reality of the time.” And it seems to me as well that the script *does* demonize the elderly couple’s children. (In fact, near the end of the film, Thomas Mitchell - the “favorite child” - even demonizes himself when he’s done nothing particularly wrong.) Economy notwithstanding, there’s little reason for the children (Mitchell aside) to behave as such clods.
But the film’s problems don’t end there. Apparently to point up the fact that Moore and Bondi are old, we get tons of inconsequential dialogue to highlight that. As well, in one extended sequence involving Bondi being left alone at night, her character appears oddly passive-aggressive and we begin losing sympathy for her. In another extended sequence, in which he is being taken care of while having a cold, Moore inexplicably becomes surly - when it might make more sense to raise hell against the a-hole daughter who is not tending to his needs at all.
I suppose, overall, I’m ambivalent about the film due to its somewhat inconsistent tone. I just don’t like it - nor does it seem appropriate. As directed by Leo McCarey (who generally seems to me to put his audiences first), there’s an unsettling amount of pandering in this picture - and I think I’d appreciate the film more if it were hard-hitting instead of heavy-handed.
At any rate, it seems likely the film in part inspired Ozu’s 1953 masterpiece ‘Tokyo Story’.
Note: for me, the one who runs away with this film is Maurice Moscovitch, as Moore’s friend Max Rubens; he brings a real dignity to his role - and perhaps my favorite moment in the movie is when he defends his wife’s cooking (in response to the aforementioned a-hole daughter).