FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
A wealthy widow (Katharine Hepburn) attempts to convince a renowned brain surgeon (Montgomery Clift) to perform a lobotomy on her niece (Elizabeth Taylor) in exchange for a generous endowment to a cash-strapped mental hospital — but Clift soon learns that Hepburn’s request is motivated by a desire to suppress memories of her beloved son’s unsavory death.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Elizabeth Taylor Films
• Flashback Films
• Joseph L. Mankiewicz Films
• Katharine Hepburn Films
• Mental Breakdown
• Mercedes McCambridge Films
• Montgomery Clift Films
• Play Adaptation
• Tennessee Williams Films

Review:
Based on a one-act play by Tennessee Williams, this Gothic Freudian “horror” story — directed by Joseph Mankiewicz, with a screenplay by Gore Vidal and Williams — tells a surprisingly suspenseful tale of toxic secrets and dysfunctional maternal love, with “homosexuality, incest, lobotomy, [and] even cannibalism… discussed or implied”. The storyline revolves around a mysterious character (“Sebastian Venable”) whose figure we only glimpse briefly in flashback:

The fact that we never actually “meet” him adds to the power of the narrative, as we struggle to understand exactly what caused his gruesome death, and why his mother is so determined to conceal the truth about her enigmatic son. Vidal and Williams’ screenplay is wonderfully dense, full of hidden insinuations — indeed, one spends the entire movie in awe by how cleverly layers of implications are stacked. Sebastian was gay, no doubt about it, and his homosexuality drives the entire tragedy in question; yet this is never openly stated.

Katharine Hepburn is truly chilling in the pivotal role of Mrs. Venable — perhaps theater/cinema’s most inappropriately protective mother ever, she’s unafraid to make her character completely evil, and entirely unsympathetic.

Meanwhile, Taylor is equally fine in the challenging role as her troubled niece:

… who must deal not only with the trauma of what she saw and experienced while vacationing with Sebastian, but fear for her very life, as her (greedy) mother (Mercedes McCambridge) and brother (Gary Raymond) seem willing to “trade” her mind in exchange for financial recompense by Hepburn.

Gothic sets contribute to the film’s overall sense of psychological terror, while smartly chosen costumes — in particular Hepburn’s hideous “feather hat” (reminiscent of Cruella De Vil):

… accentuate the heightened melodrama of the material.

The only section of this undeniably dialogue-bound film that feels overly staged is the climactic finale, as all the “players” gather ’round to hear Taylor (who’s been given a “truth serum”) spill the beans about what, exactly, happened “last summer”.

The choice to literalize Sebastian’s death is probably necessary, but doesn’t prevent all sorts of lingering questions from remaining in viewers’ minds. While it’s not for all tastes, I’m recommending Suddenly, Last Summer for one-time viewing, as an engrossingly tawdry melodrama and for Hepburn’s unforgettable performance.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Katharine Hepburn as Mrs. Venable
  
• Elizabeth Taylor as Catherine
  
• Effectively “spooky”, Oscar-nominated sets
  

Must See?
Yes, as a powerful melodrama, and for the Oscar-nominated lead performances.

Categories

• Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Classic Film Guide Review
• Spinning Image Review
• TCM Article
• Bright Lights Article
• Tired Old Queen at the Movies Video Review

Synopsis:
While arguing with his wife (Andrea Marcovicci), a comic strip artist (Michael Caine) loses his right hand in a car accident, and soon comes to believe that the severed hand has taken on a life of its own.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Artists
• Disembodied Parts
• Horror
• Michael Caine Films
• Oliver Stone Films

Review:
Written and directed by Oliver Stone, this hokey psychological horror film about a necrotic, dismembered hand taking on a life of its own — guided by, or guiding, the will of its original owner — was apparently viewed as simply a paycheck-opportunity by Michael Caine, who nonetheless turns in a surprisingly invested (if occasionally overblown) performance. With just a couple of exceptions (i.e., Caine’s shower knob morphing into a metal hand), the special effects are laughably shoddy — which, interestingly enough, Stone himself acknowledges in the refreshingly candid, detail-filled commentary provided on the DVD release. Indeed, one’s opinion of the movie may alter somewhat after listening to Stone’s humble reflections; knowing some of the issues he faced (including lack of full creative control) gives one a bit more compassion for the end result. Regardless, this one is really only recommended for diehard horror fans, Caine completists, and/or those curious to see Stone’s early work.

Note: This is often cited as a remake of Robert Florey’s horror classic The Beast With Five Fingers (1945) — but all the two films have in common is a disembodied hand wreaking havoc, and a man going slowly insane because of it; the storylines are otherwise completely different.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• A committed performance by Caine
  
• Atmospheric cinematography
  

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Moria Review
• All Movie Guide Review
• Spinning Image Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
The socially awkward daughter (Olivia de Havilland) of a wealthy doctor (Ralph Richardson) falls in love with a handsome suitor (Montgomery Clift) who may or may not have mercenary intentions.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Father and Child
• Heiresses
• Historical Drama
• Miriam Hopkins Films
• Montgomery Clift Films
• Olivia de Havilland Films
• Ralph Richardson Films
• Revenge
• Spinsters
• William Wyler Films

Review:
Olivia de Havilland won a much-deserved Oscar for her nuanced performance in the title role of this surprisingly bleak historical drama, directed by William Wyler and based upon a play derived from Henry James’ novel Washington Square (1880). Although he doesn’t review the film in his GFTFF, Peary discusses de Havilland’s performance at length in his Alternate Oscars, where he agrees with the Academy in naming her Best Actress of the Year. He begins his assessment by stating that “even without makeup and wearing an unflattering coiffure, de Havilland is too pretty to play a woman who has never been courted” — so “she has the unfortunate task of presenting someone whose manner, lack of talent, and lack of personality make her such a bad catch that men avoid her despite her decent looks, $10,000-a-year inheritance from her mother, and the promise of great wealth when her father dies” — a “task” de Havilland achieves with complete conviction.

Peary further notes that “it’s obvious… [Catherine] has been deprived of love and affection her whole life by her father and other men”; when watching how she “endures her father’s subtle insults”, we can tell that “she has been his target for so long that she accepts them as part of the daily routine”. Indeed, seeing poor Catherine endure so much — and then watching her taken in by Clift’s charms, with only heartache of one kind or another sure to follow — is more than many viewers may want to subject themselves to. But de Havilland’s performance is so achingly vulnerable — and the screenplay (by Ruth and Augustus Goetz) so finely crafted — that we can’t help watching in morbid anticipation to see how Catherine will proceed. Ultimately, The Heiress becomes a tale of sad revenge, as Catherine suddenly realizes she has endured a lifetime of unwarranted mistreatment from her emotionally abusive father, and must tap into an inner strength she’s only beginning to realize she possesses.

While de Havilland’s performance is universally acknowledged as masterful, opinions differ widely on how successful (or not) Clift is as Catherine’s ambiguously-motivated suitor; personally, I find him nicely cast, with oodles of requisite charm and good looks, and fully believable as a closet cad. Meanwhile, Richardson gives a chilling performance as Catherine’s father (the things he says!), and Miriam Hopkins is convincing in a supporting role as Catherine’s over-eager Aunt Lavinia. Adding to the film’s power and authenticity are fine attention to period detail, skilled direction by Wyler, and a noteworthy score by the inimitable Aaron Copland. Film fanatics shouldn’t miss seeing this classic literary adaptation at least once.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Olivia de Havilland as Catherine
  
• Montgomery Clift as Morris
  
• Ralph Richardson as Dr. Sloper
  
• Miriam Hopkins as Aunt Lavinia
  
• Betty Linley as Mrs. Montgomery
  
• Fine sets and period detail
  
• Aaron Copland’s score

Must See?
Yes, for de Havilland’s Oscar-winning performance, and as a powerful film overall. Listed as a film with Historical Relevance and a Personal Recommendation.

Categories

• Noteworthy Performance(s)

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TV Guide Review
• DVD Savant Review
• NY Times Original Review
• TCM Article
• Tired Old Queen at the Movies Video Review

Synopsis:
A bright young girl (Peggy Ann Garner) in early 20th century Brooklyn idealizes her alcoholic father (James Dunn), whose inability to provide a steady income for his family causes enormous stress for his more practical wife (Dorothy McGuire).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Alcoholism and Drug Addiction
• Dorothy Maguire Films
• Elia Kazan Films
• Historical Drama
• Joan Blondell Films

Review:
Elia Kazan’s directorial debut was this lyrical adaptation of Betty Smith’s best-selling autobiographical novel, starring child-actor Peggy Ann Garner, who won an honorary juvenile Oscar that year in a role she seems born to play. Garner perfectly captures the range of emotions experienced by young Francie Nolan, including ambivalence towards her stern but loving mother, Katie (McGuire in one of her earliest significant roles); annoyance towards her carefree younger brother, Neeley (Ted Donaldson); intense desire for academic success (leading her to proactively pick out a better school for herself); and an abiding adoration for her hard-drinking father, Johnny — portrayed in an Oscar-winning performance by James Dunn, whose own struggles with alcoholism allowed him to empathize deeply with his character. Kazan’s gift for working with actors is in clear evidence throughout the film, as he pulls fine performances from his entire cast (including Joan Blondell as Francie’s oft-married Aunt Sissy).

Smith’s novel is divided into five “books”, shifting back and forth in time to tell the back-story of how Johnny and Katie met, and following Francie into young adulthood; thankfully, the film only attempts to cover one segment of the book, when Francie is 11 years old. The screenplay is gently episodic, portraying key memories from Francie’s youth: wandering wide-eyed through the five-and-dime; dragging home an enormous Christmas tree; witnessing how hard her mother works as a cleaner to support their family; and, in an especially notable scene, helping her mother during the early stages of childbirth (portrayed in a surprisingly realistic manner for the time). One could quibble that Johnny’s debilitating alcoholism is presented in far too tame a fashion — this is no Angela’s Ashes — but I think the choice is a fair one, given that it allows us to empathize more easily with Johnny, and reflects Francie’s own fond memories of her deeply troubled father.

Note: If you’re unfamiliar with the story, beware of a fairly major spoiler that tends to pop up when reading about the film online.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Peggy Ann Garner as Francie Nolan
  
• James Dunn as Johnny Nolan
  
• Dorothy McGuire as Katie Nolan
  
• Joan Blondell as Aunt Sissy
  
• Excellent attention to period detail
  
• Fine cinematography
  

Must See?
Yes, as an Oscar-winning classic with noteworthy performances. Nominated by Peary as one of the Best Films of the Year in his Alternate Oscars. Selected for preservation by the National Film Registry.

Categories

• Noteworthy Performance(s)
• Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Spinning Image Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A well-liked industrialist (Spencer Tracy) is urged to run for president as a Republican candidate by his power-hungry, newspaper-owning lover (Angela Lansbury), who is eager to manipulate his candidacy for her own purposes — but will Tracy’s estranged wife (Katharine Hepburn) help or hinder the process?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Adolph Menjou Films
• Angela Lansbury Films
• Frank Capra Films
• Katharine Hepburn Films
• Marital Problems
• Play Adaptation
• Political Corruption
• Spencer Tracy Films
• Van Johnson Films

Review:
Frank Capra’s stagy adaptation of Howard Lindsay and Russel Crouse’s Pulitzer Prize-winning play (loosely based upon a notorious affair between Republican nominee Wendell Willkie and newspaper editor Irita Van Doren) isn’t nearly as well-known or beloved as Capra’s two most famous political dramas, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) and Meet John Doe (1941) — perhaps due to a number of real-life political references which situate it a bit too firmly within its specific era. The film also suffers from both an uneven tone and an overly simplistic storyline: while it’s no surprise that a powerful man like Tracy’s aviation industrialist might be estranged from his wife and carrying on an affair with a much younger woman, Hepburn is simply too radiant, smart, and loyal for us to understand (without additional context) why nice-guy Tracy would stray from her. Sure, men are lured away from amazing women all the time — but despite Lansbury’s youth, she simply can’t hold a candle to Hepburn, either in appearance or personality. Indeed, as written (and acted), Lansbury’s “Kay Thorndyke” (what a name!) is a decidedly one-dimensional villainess (complete with a “Cruella De Vil” streak in her frosted hair), and ultimately comes across as little more than the personification of female power run amok.

Despite these serious caveats, however, the bulk of the storyline remains as relevant as ever in its exposé of the corrupt machinations behind any presidential campaign; and there’s plenty of smart dialogue sprinkled throughout to enjoy:

“No woman could ever run for President. She’d have to admit she’s over 35.”
“You politicians have stayed professionals only because the voters have remained amateurs.”

Indeed, one can’t help getting caught up in the story, and typically fine lead performances by Hepburn and Tracy add to its appeal. However, this one is only must-see for Hepburn-Tracy and/or Capra completists.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Katharine Hepburn as Mary Matthews
  
• Spencer Tracy as Grant Matthews
  

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• All Movie Review
• NY Times Original Review
• Slant Magazine Review
• TCM Article
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A journalist (Spencer Tracy) intending to write the life story of a recently deceased national hero encounters unexpected resistance from the man’s widow (Katharine Hepburn), who may have something unsavory to hide.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• George Cukor Films
• Journalists
• Katharine Hepburn Films
• Spencer Tracy Films
• Widows and Widowers

Review:
Often cited as MGM’s variation on Citizen Kane (1941), this intriguing wartime mystery — scripted by Donald Ogden Stewart, who also wrote The Philadelphia Story (1940) — afforded Hepburn and Tracy an opportunity to radically diverge from the roles they’d played the previous year in Woman of the Year (their first joint film). In this second onscreen collaboration, they don’t play lovers per se (though romantic chemistry certainly lurks as a constant possibility). Instead, all narrative energy is focused on Tracy’s relentless attempts to uncover the truth behind Hepburn’s deceased husband’s legacy; Tracy repeatedly puts his life in danger (this is wartime, after all!), and we’re never quite sure whether Hepburn will emerge as friend or foe.

Atmospheric cinematography and fine performances (by leads and supporting actors alike) make this one worth a look, though it’s only must-see for Hepburn/Tracy completists. Don’t read too much about it online if you’d like to remain surprised by its outcome.

Note: Check out this Wikipedia entry for a detailed overview of the film’s complicated production history and mixed reception.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Katharine Hepburn as Mrs. Forrest
  
• Spencer Tracy as Steven O’Malley
  
• Atmospheric cinematography
  

Must See?
No, though it’s definitely worth a one-time viewing.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• DVD Savant Review
• TCM Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A naive orphan (Marlene Dietrich) living with her aunt (Alison Skipworth) is seduced by a handsome sculptor (Brian Aherne) whose patron — a calculating baron (Lionel Atwill) — becomes immediately smitten with Dietrich, and determined to make her his wife.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Artists
• Brian Aherne Films
• Character Arc
• Lionel Atwill Films
• Love Triangle
• Marlene Dietrich Films
• Play Adaptation
• Rouben Mamoulian Films

Review:
Marlene Dietrich’s first Hollywood film with a director other than Josef von Sternberg was this adaptation (directed by Rouben Mamoulian) of a 1908 novel by Hermann Sudermann, about a sheltered peasant girl betrayed by her lover. The storyline is fairly inconsequential, functioning primarily as a vehicle for Dietrich to demonstrate dramatic range by portraying her character’s growth from sweet naif to cynical trophy wife to world-weary chanteuse. In addition to Dietrich’s multi-layered performance, the film is also notable for its atmospheric cinematography and production values (see stills below), and for a refreshingly frank pre-Code sensibility — fully nude statues are paraded before the camera, only barely functioning as a stand-in for Dietrich herself. While this one isn’t must-see for all film fanatics, fans of Dietrich and/or pre-Code films will certainly want to check it out.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Marlene Dietrich as Lily
  
  
  
• A refreshing pre-Code sensibility
  
• Fine direction (by Mamoulian) and art direction (by Hans Dreir)
  
  
• Victor Milner’s stark cinematography
  

Must See?
No, though it’s worth at least a one-time look.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• All Movie Guide Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
Upon arriving in New York, an aspiring actress (Katharine Hepburn) seeks mentorship from a veteran actor (C. Aubrey Smith) and attempts to impress a famous theatrical producer (Adolph Menjou) whose leading lady (Mary Duncan) is an incurable diva; meanwhile, a playwright (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.) develops a crush on Hepburn, and feels sorry for her naivete.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Actors and Actresses
• Adolph Menjou Films
• Aspiring Stars
• Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. Films
• Katharine Hepburn Films

Review:
Based on an unproduced* play by Zoe Akins (who wrote the 1930 Broadway hit The Greeks Had a Word for It, which was turned into a film in 1932), this hackneyed rise-to-stardom theatrical tale is best known for providing young Katharine Hepburn with her first Best Actress Academy Award. While he doesn’t review Morning Glory in GFTFF, Peary does briefly mention it in his Alternate Oscars, where he argues that, in hindsight, “Hepburn’s performance seems like one of her worst”, and that she “played her part just as her brittle, affected character would have”. I don’t think Peary’s harsh criticism is quite valid: as always, Hepburn fully embodies her character, and having watched a number of her performances recently, I was impressed by how distinguished this particular characterization is from all the others.

Unfortunately, the screenplay itself — other than possessing some typically refreshing pre-Code nuances — is pretty much a dud, and ends far too abruptly; indeed, I was astonished to see the closing credits emerging after just 74 minutes, when there was so clearly a need for an additional “act”. Meanwhile, the pacing is terribly off, with ample time and energy spent on Hepburn’s initial encounters with the other players, then an unexplained quantity of time suddenly lapsing for no apparent reason. Feel free to skip this one unless you’re an Oscar completist or a Hepburn fan.

* One wonders — why?

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Katharine Hepburn as Eva Lovelace
  
  

Must See?
No, though most film fanatics will likely be curious to check it out simply for Hepburn’s Oscar-winning performance.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• FilmSite Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A pollster (Fred MacMurray) in search of a missing colleague stumbles upon a family of creepy hillbillies who will stop at nothing to learn the location of treasure hidden in their house.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Black Comedy
• Fred MacMurray Films
• George Marshall Films
• Hidden Treasure
• Murder Mystery
• Old Dark House

Review:
Several years after directing Bob Hope and Paulette Goddard in the disappointing haunted house flick The Ghost Breakers (1940), George Marshall helmed this creatively zany riff on the genre, which features impressive special effects (see stills below), an enjoyably wacky storyline, quick pacing, and fine performances by the ensemble cast — including Fred MacMurray as the hapless protagonist; Marjorie Main as the murderous matriarch of the Fleagle clan; Helen Walker as “Bonnie Fleagle”; Peter Whitney (in a dual role) as a pair of pugilistic Fleagle twins; Jean Heather as the twins’ loopy, chant-singing sister; Porter Hall as Ma Fleagle’s most recent husband; and Mabel Paige as the clan’s senile “Grandma”. In his fun review of the movie, Dave Sindelar provides the following synopsis of its bizarre plot:

The movie features a hidden treasure, a whip-wielding Marjorie Main, poisoned and possibly radioactive water (it makes everything glow in the dark), two stupid twins (one with a crick in his back so you can tell them apart), a nonsense song that holds the key to the treasure, an escaped criminal, a woman disguising herself as an escaped criminal, an imaginary ghost named Smedley, a truck-powered hay machine, a “Lazy Susan” rotating table, poisoned gravy and Fred MacMurray.

To say much more about the plot would spoil the fun of watching it unfold; suffice it to say that — as Sindelar recommends — you should be in a “silly mood” before sitting down to enjoy this one.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Fred MacMurray as Pete Marshall
  
• Fine supporting performances by the entire ensemble cast
  
• Nifty special effects
  
  
• A clever screenplay with many fun sequences
  

Must See?
Yes, as a cult film and an enjoyably zany riff on the “old dark house” genre. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

• Cult Movie
• Good Show

Links:

• IMDb entry
• SciFilm Review
• DVD Savant Review
• TCM Article
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
In the midst of a drought, a spinster (Katharine Hepburn) living with her widowed father (Cameron Prud’Homme) and two grown brothers (Lloyd Bridges and Earl Holliman) finds her life changed forever when a charismatic huckster (Burt Lancester) comes to town selling rain.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Burt Lancaster Films
• Con Artists
• Katharine Hepburn Films
• Lloyd Bridges Films
• Play Adaptation
• Spinsters

Review:
Theatrical director Joseph Anthony helmed this dated, stagy adaptation of N. Richard Nash’s successful Broadway play, about a “plain” spinster who learns that she need only believe in her own beauty and femininity in order to snare the ultimate prize in life: a husband. Nash’s screenplay (he adapted his own work) would have us believe that Hepburn’s overly earnest father and brothers care more about marrying her off than just about anything else, despite the fact that she conveniently provides quite a comfortable home life for them. Meanwhile, the entire storyline is groaningly metaphorical, with Lancaster’s over-the-top con-artist bringing the promise of life (a.k.a. “rain”) to a “parched” soul:

and Hepburn’s dimwitted brother (Holliman) conveniently embodying a hot-blooded alternative to Hepburn’s dilemma in his romance with an aggressive local hottie (Yvonne Fedderson). With that said, Hepburn’s performance as a love-starved spinster is often quite heartbreaking, and the premise itself — two painfully shy and/or reluctant individuals need some serious intervention in order to find their way towards one another — is undeniably sweet; indeed, despite the film’s flaws, you can’t help caring what happens to Hepburn’s self-effacing protagonist.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Katharine Hepburn as Lizzie (named Best Actress of the Year in Peary’s Alternate Oscars)
  
• A sweet tale of reluctant romance
  

Must See?
No; this one ultimately remains simply a curio, and will likely be of most interest to Hepburn fans.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• All Movie Guide Review
• Digitally Obsessed Review
• TCM Article