Browsed by
Month: May 2013

Group Marriage (1973)

Group Marriage (1973)

“Two girls and three men — what do you call that?”

Synopsis:
A car-savvy young woman (Aimee Eccles) in a contentious but committed relationship with her bumper sticker-producing boyfriend (Solomon Sturges) has an affair with a parole officer (Jeff Pomerantz), who brings his girlfriend (Victoria Vetri) into their growing sexual household. Soon Vetri meets a hunky lifeguard (Zack Taylor) who rounds out their “group marriage” by convincing a lawyer (Claudia Jennings) to join their unusual living arrangement.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Claudia Jennings Films
  • Comedy
  • Counterculture
  • Sexuality
  • Stephanie Rothman Films

Review:
Four years after the release of Paul Mazursky’s Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice (1969), maverick feminist director Stephanie Rothman made this much bolder exploitation comedy about the same topic: poly-amorous relationships. While Mazursky’s film was notable for introducing this timely concern to mainstream audiences in a crowd-pleasing fashion, Rothman’s variation dares to take B&C&T&A‘s concerns to the next logical step, as the group of adults in question actually carry out their desire to experiment with shifting sexual partnerships and a communal living arrangement. The script is often clunky (a pair of onlooking gay male neighbors are especially poorly handled), and the performances less-than-fine-tuned — but one nonetheless gets the sense that Rothman is genuinely concerned with exploring what a “group marriage” might look like, and what some of the obstacles might be, including (surprisingly) one member’s ultimate desire for more freedom than even such a radically-conceived “marriage” allows for. Meanwhile, it’s refreshing as always to see Rothman’s attempts to infuse her female characters with unexpected strengths and skills — gorgeous Eccles, for instance, is a whiz at fixing cars, while Jennings is a no-nonsense lawyer.

Note: Watch for the film’s most unintentionally giggle-worthy moment, as Vetri encounters Taylor on the beach for the first time.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A clever spoof of shifting sexual mores

Must See?
Yes, simply to see one of Rothman’s iconic exploitation films — and as an interesting counterpoint to Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice (they would make a provocative double-bill).

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

Student Nurses, The (1970)

Student Nurses, The (1970)

“There are many things in medicine that are brutal.”

Synopsis:
Four sexy young women deal with various dramas while studying to be nurses: Sharon (Elaine Giftos) attempts to befriend an embittered, terminally ill patient (Darrell Larson); Phred (Karen Carlson) falls for an OB-GYN student (Lawrence P. Casey); Lynn (Brioni Farrell) accidentally becomes involved with a group of Chicano activists (led by Reni Santoni); and Priscilla (Barbara Leigh) gets together with a drug-dealing motorcyclist (Richard Rust) who impregnates her.

Genres:

  • Counterculture
  • Doctors and Nurses
  • Stephanie Rothman Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary argues that this “first of New World’s R-rated ‘nursing cycle'” — which earned Roger Corman a bundle of money — “is perhaps director Stephanie Rothman’s most solid work, effectively blending sex, comedy, action, and drama, and advancing a strong feminist viewpoint.” He notes that the four female leads “are all convincing”, and “set the pattern for future Rothman females”; and he points out that they “help and root for each other, without petty rivalries over men or careers”, while “mak[ing] all their own decisions, right and wrong”. He notes that “Rothman sets up personal and professional roadblocks for each, and makes it clear that for the women to triumph, they must earn their nursing diplomas”. Though it’s undeniably an exploitation film — primary emphasis is placed on the sex appeal of the four young nurses, and much of the silly narrative is soap opera-worthy — it nonetheless respectfully tackles a surprising number of socially relevant topics, including political activism, drugs, and a woman’s right to have an abortion. It’s interesting to note that Rothman wrote a rejected script for New World’s later release, The Student Teachers (1973), given what an abject mess this later flick turned out to be; indeed, watching the two films side by side clearly reveals what a difference an invested sensibility behind the scenes can make. The Student Nurses was followed up by four additional (non-Rothman-directed) entries in the “series”; check out DVD Talk’s review for a chuckle-worthy overview of how all five of the films are “thematically linked”.

Note: Click here to read a fascinating interview with Rothman.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • An interesting cinema verite depiction of various counterculture social milieus
  • A refreshing infusion of a social, political, and feminist sensibility into an exploitation flick

Must See?
No; I’m recommending Rothman’s Group Marriage as must-see, and all-purpose film fanatics need only check out one of her films. But of course this one will be of interest to fans of Rothman’s work and/or exploitation flicks.

Links:

Footlight Parade (1933)

Footlight Parade (1933)

“Aw, talking pictures — it’s just a fad.”

Synopsis:
The producer (James Cagney) of live musical prologues for movies struggles to come up with new concepts while dealing with his mercenary ex-wife (Renee Whitney), an in-house spy who is leaking his ideas to a rival company, and shady colleagues (Guy Kibbee and Hugh Herbert) swindling him out of his profits; meanwhile, his loyal secretary (Joan Blondell) — who harbors a secret crush on him — is distressed to see him falling for a two-faced gold-digger (Claire Dodd).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Busby Berkeley Films
  • Depression Era
  • Jimmy Cagney Films
  • Joan Blondell Films
  • Let’s Put On a Show
  • Musicals
  • Rivalry
  • Ruby Keeler Films
  • Spies

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “Cagney and Blondell make a good match” in this “Depression Era musical” — as do “Dick Powell and Ruby Keeler”, playing secondary romantic roles as (respectively) the protegee of a wealthy patron (Ruth Donnelly) and a mousy secretary who takes off her glasses and instantly becomes a performer.

Peary argues that while the movie is “great fun”, it “would be [a] touch better if [the] screenwriters had simply put in a few lines about how the success of the… numbers is as important to the welfare of the dancers and singers (who need jobs!) as it is to Cagney’s peace of mind” — a point which doesn’t bother me personally, given that Warner Brothers’ other two musicals released the same year (42nd Street and Gold Diggers of 1933) both did an admirable job covering that sociological base. Peary goes on to write that “with the plot out of the way, Busby Berkeley stages three of his greatest, most innovative, and sexiest musical numbers, back to back: ‘Honeymoon Hotel’, ‘By a Waterfall’ (with the chorines, shot from above, creating amazing patterns in the water), and ‘Shanghai Lil’.” Indeed, it’s Berkeley’s concluding masterpieces that constitute the film’s primary calling card — but the storyline itself remains a fun (if occasionally convoluted) backstage drama about an interesting historical topic (trailers have long since replaced live prologues), and it features fine performances by all involved.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • James Cagney as Chester Kent
  • Joan Blondell as Nan Prescott
  • Several exceptional Busby Berkeley-directed musical numbers



Must See?
Yes, as a classic Depression Era musical.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic

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

Links:

42nd Street (1933)

42nd Street (1933)

“Sawyer, you’re going out a youngster — but you’ve got to come back a star!”

Synopsis:
An aspiring chorine (Ruby Keeler) in Depression-era New York accidentally meets a performer (Dick Powell) who helps her break into a new show being staged by a stressed-out director (Warner Baxter) hoping to retire after one last hit; meanwhile, the show’s star (Bebe Daniels) tries to hide her long-time lover (George Brent) from her sugar-daddy (Guy Kibbee), who’s bankrolling the production.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Aspiring Stars
  • Busby Berkeley Films
  • Depression Era
  • Dick Powell Films
  • Ginger Rogers Films
  • George Brent Films
  • Let’s Put On a Show
  • Musicals
  • Ruby Keeler Films
  • Warner Baxter Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary accurately refers to this cult favorite as “the best of Warner Bros. thirties musicals, with wonderfully wild and innovative choreography by Busby Berkeley; strong, snappy direction by Lloyd Bacon; an enjoyable, well-written putting-on-a-show plot in the Broadway Melody tradition; a realistic glimpse of life in the musical theater; some social consciousness that other studios’ musicals lacked during the Depression; and a particularly fine cast”. He compares 42nd Street to Warner Brothers’ other two major musicals from the same year — Gold Diggers of 1933 and Footlight Parade — and argues that “this film is strongest because we root for the lead singers and dancers, the crew, and particularly the chorines (who have to put up with selfish slavedriver Marsh), whom we see in numerous montages working endlessly, desperately driving themselves past tears and exhaustion, their faces revealing that the show’s success means their survival”. He notes that while the “film has elements of camp”, it also “has unmatched vitality, a strong sense of unity among its characters, and a great deal of honesty”.

Peary notes that the “picture ends with a bang”, with a production number (“42nd Street”) that — in typical Berkeley fashion — is clearly “too elaborate ever to be performed on a real stage, with sections filmed from above, women used as props to form geometric patterns, closeups, dollies, pans, and an ending in which Berkeley thrusts his camera forward between the spread legs of numerous chorines who stand on a revolving stage”. Before this extravaganza, however, we’re treated to several other enjoyable numbers (check out the surreal final moment of “You’re Getting to Be a Habit With Me”, performed by Bebe Daniels), as well as an enjoyably sassy Pre-Code script. (My favorite throwaway one-liner is Ginger Rogers’ snappy retort to a snarky competitor in line at a casting call: “It must have been tough on your mother, not having any children.”)

Regarding the film’s reputation as campy, the primary element that causes one to guffaw these days is the notion that Keeler has any kind of viable or visible leading-lady potential; when Rogers gives away her own chance at fame, humbly allowing Keeler to take her place while citing Keeler’s superior dancing capacity, one literally gasps at the ludicrousness of her statement. Speaking of Keeler’s overall talents, this topic has been debated for years (a debate which continues on IMDb’s message boards). Peary — who writes bluntly in his Cult Movies essay that Keeler “taps like an elephant” — is not alone in his derision, but others come to her defense by noting that her unique tap style (known as “buck dancing”) was intentional, and deserving of the praise it received by critics at the time. My own two cents is that Keeler (or at least her character here) possesses nothing close to the requisite star-power needed to replace Daniels and wow the film’s fictional audiences — but she does adequately represent the fantastical notion that “any woman” might have a chance at fame, if only the stars align in just the right way; such was the power of escapist Depression-era cinema, of which this is likely the epitome.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • James Seymour and Rian James’ sassy Pre-Code script, full of unexpected zingers and scenarios:

    Male Dancer (to Una Merkal, sitting on his lap): Where ya sittin’ — where ya sittin’?!
    Merkel: On a flagpole, dearie — on a flagpole.

    Guy Kibbee (to Bebe Daniels): I’d like to do something for you — if you’d do something for me.

    George E. Stone (having just run into Ginger Rogers): Not ‘Anytime Annie’? Say, who could forget her? She only said ‘no’ once, and then she didn’t hear the question!

  • Many fun musical numbers — i.e., “You’re Getting to Be a Habit With Me”, “Shuffle Off to Buffalo”, and “Young and Healthy”
  • The especially impressive title finale number (“42nd Street”)
  • Busby Berkeley’s inimitable choreographic style

Must See?
Yes, as a genuine cult classic. Selected by Peary as one of the Best Films of the Year in his Alternate Oscars.

Categories

  • Cult Movie
  • Genuine Classic
  • Historically Relevant

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

Links:

Dames (1934)

Dames (1934)

“I’m free, white, and 21. I love to dance, and I’m going to dance!”

Synopsis:
A priggish multi-millionaire (Hugh Herbert) promises $10 million to his relative (Guy Kibbee) if Kibbee and his wife (Zasu Pitts) prove that they live morally upright lives; but the couple’s chance at wealth is compromised by both their performance-loving daughter (Ruby Keeler) — who is secretly dating a songwriter (Dick Powell) — and a blackmailing gold-digger (Joan Blondell) who takes advantage of innocent Kibbee.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Blackmail
  • Busby Berkeley Films
  • Dick Powell Films
  • Inheritance
  • Joan Blondell Films
  • Millionaires
  • Morality Police
  • Musicals
  • Ruby Keeler Films
  • Zasu Pitts Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary accurately writes that “Busby Berkeley production numbers give needed flash to [this] lackluster comedy and make it a suitable second feature to the Gold Diggers films, Footlight Parade, or 42nd Street.” Indeed, it’s the three finale numbers — most notably the surreally choreographed “I Only Have Eyes For You”, in which Ruby Keeler’s image is replicated ad infinitum — that will stick in one’s memory after the film is over; you’ll likely quickly forget most of the ho-hum plot, featuring an unconvincing (miscast?) Hugh Herbert as an “eccentric millionaire”, and Joan Blondell (“seven months pregnant at the time”) as a surprisingly unlikable blackmailer whose manipulative treatment of “befuddled” Kibbee doesn’t seem fair or justified.

Peary — clearly not an enormous Ruby Keeler fan — writes that she “does about 20 clunky tap steps to win a part in the show and does little else memorable except wear shorts” (!); and he further notes that Powell, while “obnoxiously brash”, “does a good job crooning”. Ultimately, this one is only must-see viewing for Berkeley completists — but the culminating numbers (including the “extravaganza [title] finale… featuring lots of beautiful chorus girls swooping into dramatic close-ups and… forming bizarre geometric patterns”) are most definitely worth a look.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Berkeley’s marvelous finale songs: “The Girl At the Ironing Board”, “I Only Have Eyes for You”, and “Dames”


Must See?
No, though it’s recommended for one-time viewing.

Links:

Bus Stop / Wrong Kind of Girl, The (1956)

Bus Stop / Wrong Kind of Girl, The (1956)

“I know she’s my angel — and that’s good enough for me!”

Synopsis:
While on his way to a rodeo competition with his buddy (Arthur O’Connell), a romantically inexperienced young cowboy (Don Murray) meets the woman of his dreams (Marilyn Monroe) at a saloon, and attempts to convince her to marry him by kidnapping her.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Betty Field Films
  • Cowboys
  • Don Murray Films
  • Hans Conried Films
  • Hope Lange Films
  • Joshua Logan Films
  • Kidnapping
  • Marilyn Monroe Films
  • Obsessive Love
  • Play Adaptations
  • Rodeo
  • Romance
  • Singers

Response to Peary’s Review:
In a decidedly dubious endorsement, Peary writes that “if you like William Inge’s play, you’ll be more than satisfied with this version, directed by Joshua Logan [and] scripted by George Axelrod”. Personally, I’ve never been a fan of Inge’s tale about an “infantile” cowboy who “pays no attention to [Monroe] when she attempts to say they are unsuitable for each other”, but who eventually “learns that men should respect women”, at which point “Monroe falls for the suddenly tender young man”. I agree with Peary that it’s “hard to watch Murray’s overly aggressive, obnoxious cowboy”:

and concede that “Monroe is sexy and beautiful and gives one of her best performances” — a frustrating dilemma for film fanatics, who will want to check this one out simply to see Monroe in “the film that won her the first critical praise for her thespian skills”, but will likely find themselves irritated by the vehicle itself. With that said, while Logan should have dialed Murray’s performance w-a-a-a-y back:

he does a nice job opening up the stagey scenario (originally taking place exclusively in a diner), and incorporating live rodeo footage:

— and he elicits fine performances from the rest of his cast (most notably Monroe, but also Eileen Heckart as Monroe’s coworker, Betty Field as the randy owner of the diner, Robert Bray as Carl the bus driver, and O’Connell as Murray’s father-figure friend).


Note: This would make a sociologically interesting double-bill with the similarly-themed Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (1954) — another ’50s film about male courting aggression taken to extremes.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Marilyn Monroe as Cherie (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actresses of the Year in his Alternate Oscars)
  • Eileen Heckart as Vera

Must See?
No, though of course it’s worth a look for Monroe’s performance.

Links:

There’s No Business Like Show Business (1954)

There’s No Business Like Show Business (1954)

“You start worrying about your kids the day they’re born, and you never stop. Even after they bury you, I bet you never stop worrying.”

Synopsis:
Married vaudeville team Terence (Dan Dailey) and Molly (Ethel Merman) Donahue become “The Five Donahues” when their children — Tim (Donald O’Connor), Katy (Mitzi Gaynor), and Steve (Johnnie Ray) — join them onstage; but Steve’s desire to join the priesthood and Tim’s struggles with alcohol while romancing a sexy singer (Marilyn Monroe) bring challenges to their family’s happiness.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Dan Dailey Films
  • Marilyn Monroe Films
  • Musicals
  • Vaudeville and Burlesque

Review:
As noted by Time Out’s reviewer, this disappointing 20th Century Fox musical — its first filmed in Cinemascope — features “[Ethel] Merman at her loudest:

… [Dan] Dailey at his crassest:

… and [Marilyn] Monroe, thank heaven, at her 20th Century Foxiest”.

Indeed, other than its Irving Berlin-ful score, Monroe will be the main draw for most viewers — though her supporting role here seems decidedly shoehorned into the narrative, and she’s paired with the worst possible choice of romantic interests in her entire movie career.

(No offense meant to O’Connor; they’re simply utterly mismatched. Ray would have been a much better choice — but his character is sent off into priesthood!)

Meanwhile, as pointed out by DVD Savant, “the production is rather garish and empty (an awful lot of wide screens full of billowing, sequined drapes)”, and while “this is supposed to [represent] the gaudy world of vaudeville… the final kiss of death is that a lot of the stuff Marilyn is made to wear here is just plain ugly” (!!).

While it possesses a couple of nicely staged and performed Berlin tunes, the movie’s sole point of interest for film fanatics is the chance to watch a handful of little-seen cinematic performers — Merman (primarily a Broadway star), Gaynor (primarily a voiceover singer), and Ray (primarily a musician) — onscreen; but the vehicle they’re given is such a clunker that it’s really not worth their efforts, or ours.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Monroe, O’Connor, and Gaynor performing “Lazy”
  • Merman and Gaynor performing “A Sailor’s Not a Sailor (‘Til a Sailor’s Been Tattooed)”
  • Vibrant CinemaScope cinematography and sets

Must See?
No; feel free to skip this one unless you’re a Monroe completist.

Links:

Suspect, The (1944)

Suspect, The (1944)

“Just to be suspected leaves a mark.”

Synopsis:
A kind shopkeeper (Charles Laughton) with an unbearably shrewish wife (Rosalind Ivan) befriends and romances a pretty young woman (Ella Raines). When his wife threatens to expose his affair with Raines, Laughton kills Ivan, making it look like an accident — but a suspicious investigator (Stanley Ridges) is convinced Laughton is guilty, and won’t leave him alone.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Blackmail
  • Charles Laughton Films
  • Ella Raines Films
  • Henpecked Husbands
  • Henry Daniell Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Homicidal Spouses
  • Robert Siodmak Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Charles Laughton gave one of his best but least-known performances” in this “outstanding melodrama” (set in 1902 London) about a “fat and middle-aged” but “kindly” tobacconist who is “unable to take [his] shrewish, shrieking wife Rosalind Ivan any longer”, so “kills her”. It features “expert, atmospheric direction by [Robert] Siodmak”, who pulls us ineluctably into this tale of a man who “makes his own decisions rather than being controlled by fate”, and is “caught because of a choice he makes” but “does not suffer guilt”. Indeed, we’re astonished to find ourselves actually rooting for Laughton, and perhaps even agreeing that he’s done the right thing — such is the seductive power of Siodmak’s direction, Laughton’s performance, and the taut screenplay (by Bertram Millhauser and Arthur T. Horman). As Peary writes, “Laughton’s a sweet soul and you have to resent the smug Ridges for wanting to arrest him, especially since Ridges takes advantage of Laughton’s decency”; with that said, the film ends on the perfect note for such a morally ambiguous scenario.

While Laughton’s performance stands above the rest, Ivan is effective and convincing as the wife any man would be desperate to get away from; it’s interesting to contrast her performance with that of Flora Robson in an earlier iteration of the same general story, We Are Not Alone (the latter based on a novel by James Hilton, who was apparently inspired by the real-life case of murderous Dr. Crippen). In Hilton’s version, not only is the husband (played by Paul Muni) completely innocent, but his wife is a much more complex villainess; here, however, there are no two ways around it: Ivan’s a true henpecking b*tch. Raines, meanwhile, is appropriately sweet as Laughton’s romantic interest — and it’s at least partly to her credit that we are easily able to believe someone so young and beautiful would genuinely fall for an older, less-than-physically-attractive man like Laughton. Finally, Henry Daniell is perfectly cast as the wife-beating “rotter” of a neighbor who propels Laughton towards his ultimate fate; in an interesting bit of trivia, he played a small role in We Are Not Alone as well (as the lawyer working to convict Muni).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Charles Laughton as Philip
  • Rosalind Ivan as Cora
  • Ella Raines as Mary
  • Henry Daniell as Mr. Simmons
  • Fine attention to period detail
  • Atmospheric cinematography
  • Strong direction by Siodmak

Must See?
Yes, as a most enjoyable unsung classic.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic

Links:

We Are Not Alone (1939)

We Are Not Alone (1939)

“Did you really think I’d allow them to be together for another minute?”

Synopsis:
On the brink of World War I, a kind doctor (Paul Muni) hires a down-on-her-luck Austrian dancer (Jane Bryan) to be a governess for his high-needs son (Ramond Severn) — but when his shrewish wife (Flora Robson) learns about Bryan’s troubled past and insists that she leave, unforeseen trouble soon emerges.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cecil Kellaway Films
  • Doctors and Nurses
  • Falsely Accused
  • Flora Robson Films
  • Governesses and Nannies
  • Marital Problems
  • Paul Muni Films

Review:
Edmund Goulding’s adaptation of James Hilton’s 1937 novel — about an overly kindhearted doctor whose attempt to help a struggling young Austrian refugee leads to his downfall — remains an overlooked treat from what is often referred to as Hollywood’s “golden year” (1939). The ever-versatile Paul Muni effectively portrays a man so genuinely kindhearted as to border on foolish naivete, committed to his stern wife to an extent far beyond what most would tolerate, and unable to foresee the ramifications of inviting a beautiful young girl into his household; it’s fascinating to watch the subtlety of his growing understanding as the depths of his wife’s intolerance and jealousy are revealed. Robson, meanwhile, is remarkable in the undeniably tricky role as his wife — her portrayal is far from unilaterally shrewish, instead demonstrating the wealth of conflicted emotions behind her character’s every statement and action; while we despise her choices, we nonetheless understand on some level the thrust and sincerity of her convictions. Finally, Bryan — a gifted, glowing actress who gave up her career in Hollywood shortly after marrying — manages to elevate her character from merely the “other woman” into a believable portrayal of a scared refugee genuinely grateful for the assistance Muni innocently affords her. Unfortunately, the storyline goes on for about half an hour too long, and eventually devolves into an unnecessarily metaphorical commentary on wartime prejudices — but the tale until then is a compelling one of a household torn apart by a tragic conflict of attitudes and priorities.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Paul Muni as Dr. Newcome
  • Flora Robson as Jessica Newcome
  • Jane Bryan as Leni
  • Atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a most enjoyable “forgotten” film.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

Wuthering Heights (1939)

Wuthering Heights (1939)

“Catherine Earnshaw, may you not rest so long as I live on!”

Synopsis:
When a traveler (Miles Mander) arrives at the estate of Wuthering Heights, a housekeeper (Flora Robson) recounts the tale of how its original owner (Leo G. Carroll) brought home a gypsy foundling named Heathcliff (Rex Downing), who was resented and belittled by Carroll’s son Hindley (Douglas Scott) but befriended by his daughter Cathy (Sarita Wooton). As they grew up, Heathcliff (Laurence Olivier) and Cathy (Merle Oberon) fell in love, though Cathy decided to marry her more “respectable” neighbor (David Niven) — but their love for one another would not die, even as Heathcliff eventually married Niven’s sister (Geraldine Fitzgerald) in revenge for the loss of Cathy.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cross-Class Romance
  • David Niven Films
  • Donald Crisp Films
  • Flashback Films
  • Flora Robson Films
  • Geraldine Fitzgerald Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Laurence Olivier Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Merle Oberon Films
  • Star-Crossed Lovers
  • William Wyler Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Emily Bronte’s harsh, haunting love story became one of the screen’s classic romances, thanks to director William Wyler, producer Sam Goldwyn, cinematographer Gregg Toland, and the inspired casting of Merle Oberon as Cathy and Laurence Olivier as Heathcliff”. He writes that “Goldwyn was chiefly responsible for the elegance of the film (with its lush music, vast two-room sets that are lit by candles and fireplaces, lovely costuming, romantic dialogue, handsome actors, and beautiful actresses) and reconstructing the Yorkshire moors in the Conejo Hills in California”. (According to TCM’s article “Behind the Camera”, “About 500 acres of the hills were stripped of their natural vegetation, and 15,000 pieces of tumbleweed were brought in and topped with purple-painted sawdust to resemble heather.”) Peary notes that working together, “Wyler and Toland (who used deep focus and close-ups that are diffused with soft candle-lighting effects) turn the [Wuthering Heights] manor into a haunted house: bleak, brooding, oppressive, dark with anger and hatred”; meanwhile, “the tumultuous atmosphere — with electrical storms, heavy rains, and driving snowstorms — perfectly defines ‘wuthering'”.

However, Peary argues that “too often the atmosphere conveys characters’ emotions that otherwise wouldn’t be evident from the acting alone”, and that “unlike in the book, the characters don’t come across as being forces of nature more than human beings”. He spends the rest of his review comparing the book (mostly unfavorably) with the film — and in his Cult Movies 2 essay on the film, he admits bluntly: “I like Wuthering Heights very much. Yet I am disturbed by how much [screenwriters Ben] Hecht and [Charles] MacArthur changed the novel”. He writes that while in the novel, “Heathcliff’s fight is with all who are civilized”, in the film his “anger is directed toward Cathy for marrying rich Edgar Linton (David Niven),” and “all that he intentionally does wrong — including marrying Edgar’s naive sister, Isabella (Geraldine Fitzgerald) — is his way of getting revenge.” Peary complains that Hecht and MacArthur’s “biggest crime is to turn Cathy into the film’s villain”, and writes that while the “film has a polished veneer”, the “issues are far more complex in the novel, as are the characters — and they are far more interesting”.

The film does — for better or for worse — reduce the novel’s complex narrative into a “simple” story of star-crossed lovers and revenge. However, as Peary writes, “there’s no denying that Oberon and Olivier are a wonderful couple, and their scene in the make-believe castle on Peniston Crag” — “original to Hecht and MacArthur”, who “wanted to humanize the characters” — is “one of the most romantic [and iconic] bits in cinema history”. He notes that “Oberon is surprisingly good” (this was almost certainly her best, most impassioned performance), and that Olivier’s “delivery has such strength that we tend to overlook those lines which make no sense”; he’s fully invested in his role. Ultimately, Olivier and Oberon make such a handsome, romantically tragic couple — representative of all would-be lovers kept apart either through fate or social constrictions — that we can’t help becoming involved in their plight, despite knowing from the beginning how things will turn out.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Laurence Olivier as Heathcliff
  • Merle Oberon as Cathy
  • Flora Robson as Ellen
  • Gregg Toland’s deep-focus cinematography
  • Impressive sets
  • Wyler’s confident direction

Must See?
Yes, as a cult classic.

Categories

  • Cult Movie
  • Genuine Classic

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

Links: