Browsed by
Month: January 2022

Ivan the Terrible, Part I (1944)

Ivan the Terrible, Part I (1944)

Comments 1 comment

“Only an undivided, legitimate throne will save Moscow from her enemies and internecine conflict!”

Synopsis:
In 16th century Russia, Ivan the Grand Prince of Moscow (Nikolai Cherkasov) is crowned as Tsar and married to Anastasia Romanovna (Lyudmila Tselikovskaya) — but his jealous aunt (Serafima Birman), traitorous comrade (Mikhail Nazvanov), and various ruling boyars aren’t happy with his increasing power.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Historical Drama
  • Royalty and Nobility
  • Russian Films
  • Ruthless Leaders
  • Sergei Eisenstein Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary points out that this “indoor epic” by Sergei Eisenstein has “remarkable visuals… but [is] ludicrously melodramatic and theatrical,” and he notes that “other than establishing a bond between Ivan and the peasants to suggest a similar affinity between Stalin and his subjects, it’s hard to figure out how Eisenstein is using his hero.”

Peary asserts that “Ivan comes across as a hero in a Wagnerian opera,” while “everyone else seems to be trying out for a Hollywood serial, perhaps Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers”:

… and he further notes that “the devious, swathed-in-black boyar princess Euphonia (Serafima Birman) would have been a great foe for Buster Crabbe.”

(Peary fails to point out how masculine-looking Birman is — to the extent that I didn’t know this character was female until I read about the actress. Meanwhile, her infantile son Vladimir — played by Pavel Kadochnikov — is remarkably femme. The gender bending between the two of them is quite noticeable.)

The picture’s storyline (part one of two) is fairly straightforward; as Peary writes, it “begins with Ivan’s coronation and marriage” (those are coins being poured over his head):

… “takes us on a war campaign” (to Kazan):

… and “after Ivan has gone from clean-shaven to having a short beard to having a mustache and short beard to having a beard that would make Rasputin envious”:

… it “concludes with…” — well, I won’t say. I’ll be back with my review of Part II shortly. For now, suffice it to say that I share Peary’s views on this overrated Eisenstein film, which seems to polarize critics (and viewers) into one camp or another. If you’re curious for a deeper dive into the film’s themes, however, be sure to check out the video essay by scholar Joan Neuberger in the Criterion DVD set Eisenstein: The Sound Years (but wait until after you’ve watched Part 2 to avoid tons of spoilers).

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine production design and cinematography

  • Sergei Prokofiev’s score

Must See?
Yes, for its historical significance, and because Part 2 is essential viewing which can’t be seen without this first film.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant
  • Important Director

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

Links:

Murderers Are Among Us, The (1946)

Murderers Are Among Us, The (1946)

Comments 1 comment

“I know there is no longer any point in healing mankind.”

Synopsis:
A German concentration camp survivor (Hildegard Knef) arriving back at her ruined apartment encounters a traumatized military surgeon (Ernst Wilhelm Borchert) who has been living there, and the two decide to share the space. Meanwhile, Borchert is unsure how to act when he encounters his former captain (Arno Paulsen): will he seek vengeance, or move forward into a career of healing and hope?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Doctors and Nurses
  • German Films
  • Survival

Review:
This German film is notable for being the first in a genre known as Trümmerfilm (or “rubble films) — that is, movies set within the detritus of bombed out cities after the end of World War II, and focusing on survivors’ experiences. Aesthetically speaking, such films are inherently dramatic:

… and this one is made even more so through the use of highly atmospheric cinematography:

While some have criticized the appearance of healthy-looking Knef as a supposed concentration camp survivor:

… it’s easy enough to forgive this given the unrelenting bleakness she’s surrounded by, and the fact that her character is meant to symbolize hope.

Indeed, the entire film should be viewed less as a realistic tale, and more as a meditation on the various coping mechanisms of German survivors. As the film opens, we see an elderly optometrist (Robert Forsch) in Knef’s apartment building assisting a young woman whose glasses need soldering:

When Knef comments to him, “You are still working here as if nothing had happened!” he shares with her his “good fortune” in being a hoarder:

“This is all I was able to rescue out of the rubble down in the cellar. People always used to laugh. I hoarded things for ages. Now all this old junk I kept over the years is my start to a new life.”

For Forsch, maintaining a daily work schedule is what keeps him sane and hopeful:

“I have a lot of work to do…. If [my son] is still alive, he will return home one day. The house will be ready and waiting for him. His father will await him.”

Next we see Knef interacting with drunken Borchert; sensing his pain, she convinces him it’s fine to share the space for awhile:

She focuses on busily cleaning her apartment and getting back to her art:

… while Borchert escapes once again into drink and women:

Although his skills as a doctor are vitally needed, Borchert is too traumatized to pick his career back up (“I can no longer bear to hear the moans of people in torment.”) Soon Borchert runs into his former captain (Paulsen), who is living a happy, stable family life, seemingly not at all concerned about the deaths he was responsible for just before the end of the war:

Borchert feels differently about this than Paulsen — but when he has a random encounter with a very sick young girl while out walking amongst the rubble, his perspective changes once again:

Yes, it’s all melodramatic — but the heightened narrative makes sense within the context of the surreal post-conflict landscape these individuals are inhabiting; and the final showdown offers some sense of the future “truth and reconciliation” that would necessarily begin to occur in Germany.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Highly atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
Yes, for its historical relevance, and as a fine little film. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

Way to the Stars, The / Johnny in the Clouds (1945)

Way to the Stars, The / Johnny in the Clouds (1945)

Comments 1 comment

“There aren’t any amateurs and professionals anymore; just good pilots and bad pilots.”

Synopsis:
In England during the early years of World War II, a new fighter pilot (John Mills) is assigned to work under a veteran flight lieutenant (Michael Redgrave) who marries his sweetheart (Rosamund John) and has a child. Meanwhile, Mills falls for a pretty young woman (Renee Asherson) living with her strict aunt (Joyce Carey), and over the years various American pilots — including a young father named Johnny (Douglass Montgomery) — are sent to join the RAF in their efforts.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Airplanes and Pilots
  • John Mills Films
  • Michael Redgrave Films
  • Military
  • Trevor Howard Films
  • World War II

Review:
Playwright Terence Rattigan wrote the screenplay for this British tribute to WWII flyers, who repeatedly risked their lives to engage in dangerous but essential work while juggling decisions related to romance, marriage, and kids:

Saying more about specific storylines would give away spoilers, so I’ll avoid doing that; suffice it to say that the realities of sacrifice aren’t sugar-coated here, and we see individuals managing complicated emotions.

Meanwhile, much fun is had with cultural and linguistic differences between the Brits and the Yanks (who nonetheless quickly learn to get along):

Interestingly, despite its very specific topic and setting, there are parallels between this wartime flick (shortened and released as Johnny in the Clouds in the U.S.) and Rattigan’s later Separate Tables (1958), given that both take place at least partly in a rooming house/hotel. In The Way to the Stars, Rosamund John plays the role of the “efficient hotel manager” (inhabited by Oscar-winning Wendy Hiller in Separate Tables):

… and Renee Asherson — last seen as Princess Kate in Laurence Olivier’s Henry V (1944) — plays a shy young woman (Deborah Kerr’s equivalent in Separate Tables) living under the thumb of an overly protective caretaker:

Note: Watch for Trevor Howard in his first credited screen role:

… and 15-year-old Jean Simmons in a brief bit as a singer in a club:

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine performances by Redgrave and Mills

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look by those interested in films of this period. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Children of Paradise / Enfants Du Paradis, Les (1945)

Children of Paradise / Enfants Du Paradis, Les (1945)

Comments 1 comment

“Dreams, life… They’re the same.”

Synopsis:
In 19th century Paris, four men — a mime (Jean-Louis Barrault), an ambitious actor (Pierre Brasseur), a murderous criminal (Marcel Herrand), and a nobleman (Louis Salou) — are all attracted to a free-spirited woman named Garance (Arletty), who eventually settles with Salou but can’t stop thinking about Baptiste (Barrault), who has meanwhile married and had a child with an adoring actress (Maria Casares).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Actors and Actresses
  • Clowns
  • French Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Romance
  • Star-Crossed Lovers

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary is among the many critics and fans who consider this “fifth collaboration between director Marcel Carné and screenwriter Jacques Prévert” to be “one of the glories of the cinema, the romantic’s delight, the sophisticate’s cult favorite.” He notes that when it “opened in Paris in March 1945,” it was “quickly hailed as France’s Gone With the Wind: an epic, a re-creation of a nineteenth-century period (that of Louis Philippe) and setting (the Boulevard of Crime)”:

… and “a romance about a woman… who is coveted by all men who see her.”

However, he points out that “the real reason the French held it so dear was that it was one of the cornerstone films of le cinéma d’évasion” — i.e., “the French film industry’s brave response to the German occupation.” Indeed, he asserts, “It’s amazing that this affront to the Nazis, which celebrates a free France, could be made under the noses of the occupation authorities” — and while I don’t quite see how this film epitomizes a “free France”, I’ll agree it’s remarkable that Carne and his team managed to get it made at all under the circumstances, including “secret filming [that] took place over two years in garages and alleys, during which time time members of the French resistance were able to hide from the Gestapo because they were among the 1800 extras employed.”

Peary argues that this “film is a wonderful tribute to the people who have never been controlled by authority: lovers, mountebanks, rogues, criminals…, artists, the poor who crowd the inexpensive rafter seats, ‘gods’ (paradise) of the theaters, and, most of all, performers” — and he notes that it’s “a cry for a return to the past, for liberty, for solidarity between artists and their public, for solidarity among all French people.” I’m not sure I see all these themes playing out, but can appreciate how one might, especially at the time of the film’s release.

Meanwhile, Peary discusses the (fictional) role played by Arletty, in contrast to the three real-life people portrayed by Barrault (Jean-Gaspard Deburau), Brasseur (Frederick Lemaitre), and Herrand (Pierre-Francois Lacenaire). He notes that Arletty’s Garance is viewed by men “as an angel, a dream, a vision of beauty, [and] Venus,” and Peary himself sees her as “the symbol of Paris,” or even perhaps Paris itself: “beautiful, freedom-loving, full of memories, as proud of the gutter dwellers as of the elite, lover of every man, the betrayer of none,” “in whose presence hearts begin to flutter.”

Arletty was 47 at the time of the film’s release, and while she’s certainly alluring for une femme d’un certain âge, I find it fascinating that she’s so universally coveted by the four leading men in this movie — especially by Barrault (35 at the time), who has beautiful Casares (23 years old) waiting adoringly in the wings for him (though obviously, age and looks are beside the point when it comes to obsessive love).

Peary goes on to write that the “picture’s acting is superb,” that “Barrault’s mime performances” are classics” (agreed):

… that “the visuals are opulent,” and “the elaborate sets are rich in detail and historically accurate.”

Peary describes this film in further detail in his Cult Movies 2 book, where he elaborates on its “stolen kisses” theme (i.e., “people desire only those they cannot have”), discusses the poetry of Prevert’s script, and notes that “lithographs and woodblock prints of the period were studied” to bring about the truly impressive sets.

This lengthy movie — actually divided into two separate films — isn’t a personal favorite, but I can understand its appeal, and upon my rewatch of the beautiful restoration I found myself thoroughly enchanted by Barrault (not just his miming, but his overall performance).

Children of Paradise most certainly remains a must-see classic at least once.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Jean-Louis Barrault as Baptiste
  • Pierre Brasseur as Frédérick Lemaître
  • Marc Fossard and Roger Hubert’s cinematography
  • Magnificent sets and overall production design
  • Mayo’s distinctive costumes

Must See?
Yes, as a foreign classic.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Genuine Classic

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

Links:

Henry V (1944)

Henry V (1944)

Comments 1 comment

“No king of England if not king of France!”

Synopsis:
In early 15th century England, King Henry V (Laurence Olivier) rallies his men to fight and claim the French throne, which he believes should rightfully be his.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Historical Drama
  • Laurence Olivier Films
  • Leo Genn Films
  • Niall MacGinnis Films
  • Play Adaptations
  • Robert Newton Films
  • Royalty and Nobility
  • Shakespeare

Review:
Laurence Olivier’s cinematic debut as a director was this enormously successful adaptation of Shakespeare’s Henry V, made during the height of Britain’s involvement in World War II. Olivier chose to creatively present the play in a hybrid fashion, beginning with panning over the historic Globe Theatre in Stratford-on-Avon:

… and then showing us the play opening up with audiences clearly present:

A Chorus figure (Leslie Banks) talks us through what we’re seeing:

… but it takes a while to understand what’s going on narrative-wise, given the play is presented in authentic Shakespearean English (not easily comprehensible to modern audiences). Instead, we focus on the colorful costumes and attempts at crowd-pleasing humor, as when the Archbishop of Canterbury (Felix Aylmer) keeps dropping the papers he’s reading while sharing news with King Henry about the state of France.

Henry proclaims his intention to go to war against France — but meanwhile, we’re introduced to peripheral comedic characters whose presence doesn’t make much sense (though at least Robert Newton is recognizable in one role):

Eventually the setting of the play broadens beyond the Globe, showing us Henry’s troops in France, preparing for battle. An extended sequence follows Henry walking incognito through the night to listen to his men:

The Battle of Agincourt comes next and is impressively filmed, reminding me instantly of the lengthy combat sequence in Eisenstein’s Alexendar Nevsky:

We also meet beautiful Princess Katherine (Renee Asherson), who converses with King Henry in a combination of French and English:

Overall, we get the gist of the storyline — though it surely will feel much less relevant to modern viewers than either Britons of Shakespeare’s time and/or viewers of the mid-1940s, who may have been more familiar with Shakespearean works. These days, it remains worth a look primarily for its innovation as a beautifully stylized presentation of a classic play — one which helped to rally British morale during some of its darkest years at war, as indicated in these quotes by King Henry:

“Once more unto the breach! Dear friends, once more; or close the wall up with our English dead!”

“On, on, you noblest English… Dishonor not your mothers!”

“The game’s afoot: Follow your spirit and upon this charge cry, ‘God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'”

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Laurence Olivier as Henry V (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actors of the Year in his Alternate Oscars)
  • Beautiful cinematography and sets

Must See?
Yes, once, for its historical relevance.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

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

Links:

Torment (1944)

Torment (1944)

Comments 1 comment

“A man of your learning shouldn’t care so much for respect bred from fear.”

Synopsis:
A teenage student (Alf Kjellin) suffering under cruel treatment at the hands of his Latin teacher (Stig Järrel) falls for a young tobacconist shop clerk (Mai Zetterling) who lives in constant fear of Järrel’s sadistic visits to her.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ingmar Bergman Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Scandinavian Films
  • Teachers

Review:
Ingmar Bergman’s screenwriting debut (after joining the Svensk Filmindustri on a one-year contract) was this film directed by his mentor, Alf Sjöberg, and loosely based on his own troubled experiences as a non-confirmist student. Unsurprisingly for a Bergman film, it’s both highly atmospheric and extremely dark, depicting the hell experienced by vulnerable students under cruel tutelage:

… as well as a lack of support or understanding at home (specifically in the form of a strict, uncompassionate father):

… and troubled individuals who reach out to one other physically for comfort and love.

These are all themes that would continue to play out in Bergman’s later work, and it’s interesting (if not entirely satisfying) to see them here in a rather nascent and simplistic form. Thankfully, there are compassionate individuals on the sidelines of the bleak narrative, including the school’s headmaster (Olof Winnerstrand), shown here listening to another bullied student (Jan Molander) who has come to him for assistance:

… and Kjellin’s understanding mother (Märta Arbin):

Bergman was apparently asked to write a more optimistic ending for his film, and was allowed to take over directorial duties for this scene, which in his own words made him “more excited that I can describe.” Clearly he had found his calling!

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Martin Bodin’s atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for those interested in Bergman’s beginnings. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943)

For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943)

Comments 2 comments

“A man fights for what he believes in.”

Synopsis:
An American (Gary Cooper) fighting in Spain on behalf of the Republicans falls in love with a beautiful refugee (Ingrid Bergman) living with a group of gypsy fighters in the mountains — including violent Pablo (Akim Tamiroff), his “woman” Pilar (Katina Paxinou), and an aging guide (Vladimir Sokoloff).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Akim Tamiroff Films
  • Gary Cooper Films
  • Ingrid Bergman Films
  • Sam Wood Films
  • Spanish Civil War

Review:
This big-budget, nearly three-hour Technicolor adaptation of Ernest Hemingway’s bestselling novel about the Spanish Civil War was highly regarded by both audiences (who made it the second highest grossing film of the year) and critics (it received nine Academy Award nominations, winning one for Paxinou as Best Supporting Actress). Unfortunately, it hasn’t dated well at all, and comes across today as a beautifully filmed but overlong, drawn-out melodrama with far too much pancake makeup used.

The screenplay is apparently quite faithful to Hemingway’s novel, which audiences of the day were much more familiar with than viewers now would be; to that end, in his mostly rave review, Bosley Crowther of the New York Times noted:

“As often is the case with pictures which are based upon popular works, a thorough comprehension of this one may depend on whether one has read the book… The cosmic symbolism of [the leads’] regenerative love, set against a background of violence and the impending prospect of death, will barely be comprehensible only to those who have read the book.”

Exactly. Watching Cooper and Bergman fall instantly in love with one another here feels simply like inevitable Hollywood fare, given we don’t have much (if any) background understanding of their characters:

Anyone hoping to actually learn about the Spanish Civil War will be sorely disappointed, as it’s not even mentioned as such. We know there are Rebels (who must be good, given the famous actors playing them) fighting against Bad Guys, but that’s the extent of the nuance — other than a throughline focusing on the nefarious tactics of Tamiroff’s Pablo, who is shown in flashback overseeing brutal acts of violence:

… and whose loyalties we’re constantly made to question. Meanwhile, the Hemingway-ian dialogue in Dudley Nichols’ screenplay is often either laughable and/or offensive — as when the much-darker-skinned Paxinou rambles the following to Bergman:

Paxinou: Life is very curious. I would have made a good man. But, I’m all woman – and all ugly… Yet one can have a feeling *here* that blinds a man while he loves you. He thinks you are beautiful. And one day for no reason at all he sees you ugly, as you really are. And he is not blind anymore. Then you see yourself as ugly as he sees you – and you lose your man and your feeling. Then one day the feeling, that idiotic feeling that you are beautiful, grows inside you again, and another man sees you and thinks you are beautiful, and it’s all to do over again.

Poor Bergman herself, however, is given some of the worst clunkers:

“I do not know how to kiss or I would kiss you. Where do the noses go? Always I wonder where the noses will go.”

“I love you, Roberto. Always remember: I love you as I loved my father and mother, as I love our unborn children, as I love what I love most in the world, and I love you more. Always remember.”

“I’ll never go away from you. I loved you when I first saw you. I’ve always loved you, but I never saw you before.”

… at least until the final sequence between Bergman and Cooper, when Cooper takes back the prize — but I won’t spoil anything.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Ray Rennahan’s atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
Nope; you can skip this one unless you happen to be a diehard fan of Hemingway, Bergman, or Cooper.

Links:

Day of Wrath / Vredens Dag (1943)

Day of Wrath / Vredens Dag (1943)

Comments 1 comment

“All things are revealed in God’s good time.”

Synopsis:
In 17th century Denmark, shortly after an elderly woman (Anna Svierkier) is sentenced to death for being a witch, a young woman (Lisbeth Molvin) married to a widowed minister (Thorkild Roose) — and bullied by Roose’s disapproving mother (Sigrit Neiiendam) — falls in love with Roose’s son (Preben Lerdorff) from a previous marriage.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Carl Theodore Dreyer Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Infidelity
  • Priests and Ministers
  • Scandinavian Films
  • Witches and Wizards

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “Carl Dreyer’s austere tale of witchcraft set in a small Danish village in 1623” — “based on Norwegian Wiers Jenson’s play Anne Pedersdotter” — is “quite haunting, like a slow Kafkaesque nightmare,” which perhaps reflects the fact that it “was made during Germany’s occupation of Denmark.” He points out that “it’s creepy watching all these brooding characters in black moving through the frame as if they were between funerals,” and notes that “many shots will stay with you.”

He asserts that the film brings up mixed feelings for us as viewers, given how Movin’s character shifts over the course of the screenplay. While at first “she was solemn and passive”:

… after having an affair with Lerdoff “she becomes a changed woman”: “she laughs, sings, and is an aggressive, sexual temptress.”

Meanwhile, although we are “troubled by the incestuous affair of Movin and Lerdoff” given that “Roose seems like a nice man who is loving to his wife,” we also recognize “he’s the same man who burns people for being witches.”

It’s ambiguous whether Movin (and Svierkier) are being presented as actual witches, but Peary argues (and I agree) “it’s likeliest that Dreyer is stating that within an oppressive religious environment in which most everything is regarded as a sin, a paranoid, persecuted person will regard almost all his or her natural feelings (from joy to lust) as being devil-inspired.”

One of Dreyer’s most ambitious and successful decisions with this movie is to spend significant time showing the ongoing persecution of elderly Svierkier; the horrors she endures aren’t dressed down in any way, and (shockingly) we see her nearly-naked body being tortured:

… before she’s burned alive while a choir of children sing “Dies Irae”. Indeed, we see the true dangers of expressing any individuality or joy in this deeply repressive and biblically austere culture, as embodied by Roose’s coldly condemning mother (Neiiendam):

Carefree scenes of characters escaping into nature for awhile offer temporary reprieve from the oppression:

… but it’s always short-lived. Check out TCM’s article for more details on the film’s production and Dreyer’s vision.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Lisbeth Movin as Marthe
  • Anna Svierkier as Marte Herlof
  • Highly atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a fine and provocative film by Dreyer.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem

Links:

One of Our Aircraft is Missing (1942)

One of Our Aircraft is Missing (1942)

Comments 1 comment

“Stand by to abandon aircraft!”

Synopsis:
When their bomber plane crash-lands in German-occupied Holland, six RAF crewmen (Godfrey Tearle, Eric Portman, Hugh Williams, Bernard Miles, Hugh Burden, and Emrys Jones) receive assistance from Dutch resistance fighters — including an English-speaking schoolteacher (Pamela Brown) and a woman (Googie Withers) pretending to be pro-German.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Airplanes and Pilots
  • Michael Powell Films
  • Peter Ustinov Films
  • Resistance Fighters
  • World War II

Review:
Made the year after 49th Parallel (1941), this joint effort by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger was the first title released under their new production company (The Archers), and showed audiences the “opposite side” of their previous wartime story (as implied in the top line of the poster; see above). The screenplay opens with an extremely compelling flight sequence which grounds us in the specifics of how pilots fighting for their lives might banter nervously while staying laser-focused (can you recognize Bernard Miles under all that equipment?):

Once the crew have parachuted safely to the ground (minus one, who is later found), we see the men’s adventures across the Netherlands — beginning with encountering kids playing in the countryside, who they must convince of their innocence (thankfully, Burden speaks a bit of survival Dutch):

Because this is a propaganda film, we sense that things will work out for our hardy protagonists — especially given how careful schoolteacher Brown is to ensure they really are who they say they are:

… and thus we can simply enjoy their clever tactics against suspicious Germans, which involve dressing up as Dutch:

… and hiding parachutes under the pews at a church where secret signals are sent by the organist:


Next we see a different brand of heroism, with Withers playing a double-life as a Nazi sympathizer while hiding a radio and helping the Resistance:

The entire film is beautifully shot by DP Ronald Neame, making it a pleasurable viewing experience. While this one is not must-see, it’s well worth a one-time look.

Note: Watch for young (slim) Peter Ustinov in a bit role (his feature-length debut) as a Catholic priest.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • The exciting opening flight sequence
  • Ronald Neame’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s recommended.

Links:

Ossessione (1943)

Ossessione (1943)

Comments 2 comments

“Living with him is impossible. He’s so filthy! So false!”

Synopsis:
When an unemployed vagrant (Massimo Girotti) arrives at a cafe owned by a middle-aged man (Juan de Landa), he has an affair with the man’s unhappy younger wife (Clara Calamai), and the pair soon find themselves plotting to be on their own.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Infidelity
  • Italian Films
  • Luchino Visconti Films
  • Star-Crossed Lovers

Review:
Luchino Visconti’s debut feature (generally cited as the first neo-realist Italian film) was this loose adaptation of James M. Cain’s 1934 novel The Postman Always Rings Twice. Viewers familiar with Hollywood’s two versions of Cain’s novel — Tay Garnett’s 1946 MGM classic and Bob Rafelson’s 1981 remake — will instantly recognize tensions in the opening scenes, as the bored, sexually unfufilled young wife of an older, overweight man is instantly attracted to a hunky stranger arriving at their place of business:

From there, however, the narrative takes slightly different turns than the more “faithful” Hollywood versions. A significant early subplot has Gino leaving to continue his itinerant lifestyle, meeting a young man (Elio Marcuzzo) on a train who offers to pay for his ticket, and who is clearly (though it’s not explicitly stated) attracted to Girotti:

A subsequent sequence with the pair in a one-bed hotel room once again indicates Marcuzzo’s unstated interest:

… but Girotti is exclusively obsessed with Calamai, and can’t stop talking or thinking about her. Sure enough, once they meet again at a carnival, where Girotti is carrying around a sign for Marcuzzo’s act:

… and de Landa is about to participate in an amateur singing contest:

… the wheels of fate are set in motion once again:

SPOILERS

… and we know de Landa is not long for this world. The murder itself takes place off camera — and other than Girotti being initially interrogated by police at the scene of the car crash:

… not too much more is made of the crime other than investigators continuing to pursue leads (i.e., there is no big court case, as in Cain’s novel and both Hollywood versions). Instead, we see Girotti and Calamai’s fraught love affair gradually falling apart, especially once Girotti learns about Calamai cashing in de Landa’s life insurance policy, and begins to suspect he’s been used. When Girotti falls for a flirtatious young ballerina (Dhia Cristiani) he meets at the park:

… tensions between the murderous couple (Girotti and Calamai) naturally rise even higher, eventually leading to the film’s tragic denouement. The entire story is atmospherically filmed, with good use of natural locales and extras, thus leading to its designation by many (though this is contested) as a prototype of Italian neo-realism. Be sure to check out TCM’s article for more information on the film’s production history and challenging release.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Massimo Girotti as Gino
  • Clara Calamai as Giovanna
  • Juan de Landa as Giuseppe
  • Atmospheric cinematography
  • Fine neo-realist location shooting in the Po Delta

Must See?
Yes, for its historical significance in Italian cinema, and as a powerful noir film. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant
  • Important Director

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

Links: