October Man, The (1947)
“An injured brain isn’t always logical.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres:
Review: Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Shot in the Dark, A (1964)
“I suspect everyone!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Pink Panther, The (1963)
“I’m sure no one ever had a husband like you.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Dark Victory (1939)
“Confidentially, darling, this is more than a hang-over.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
… but must confront her own mortality when she begins “suffer[ing] vision problems” and learns that her “prognosis is negative”.
I wouldn’t necessarily choose the words “kind” or “appealing” when describing Davis’s “Judy Traherne”, given that she initially comes across as sullen, brash, and spoiled — “When I tell you to do something, do it!” she barks at her horse trainer, played by a notoriously miscast Humphrey Bogart:
— but she does indeed later “demonstrate a tremendous reserve of strength that few women in film have shown and it’s quite moving”. As with so many “Bette Davis films”, Davis is truly the highlight of the show here: Brent (her real-life lover) is more or less “stiff and wimpy as usual” as her surgeon/love interest:
… and while Peary refers to Fitzgerald as “superb”, I find her doting character oddly opaque.
With that said, the “direction by Edmond Goulding is both strong and sensitive”, and Davis’s character arc is compelling. As Peary notes, despite the “morbid” subject matter and the “tears caused by the drawn-out finale, the triumph of this woman at the point of death actually has a cheering effect”. Watch for Ronald Reagan in a supporting role as Davis’s consistently inebriated party companion.
Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Of Human Bondage (1934)
“There’s usually one who loves, and one who is loved.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
… but that it’s “worth watching” as “the film which really launched Davis’s career”.
In Alternate Oscars, Peary names Davis Best Actress of the Year for her performance as the “mean and menacing” Mildred, a “cold-hearted, money-loving opportunist who treats Philip like dirt” — or, in the words of New York Times film critic Mourdant Hall, “a heartless little ingrate”. In Alternate Oscars, Peary provides more detailed information on how and why Davis came to take on this role, which “no major Hollywood actress would consider playing” — she apparently “wasn’t concerned about image because no one really knew who she was after twenty-one pictures”, and she “figured [this was] her one shot at stardom”. Peary writes that this role “made such an impression because it was conceived and played in such an original manner” by Davis, given that her Mildred “isn’t especially pretty… or alluring” and “isn’t smart or knowledgeable”. He points out that she “is not a vamp, she is just cheap, stupid, and shallow” — which is precisely why Howard’s relentless obsession with her is so fascinating.
As Peary argues, Philip “hates himself for being a cripple… [and] Mildred is his punishment”. Indeed, Davis’s Mildred is a unique variation on a femme fatale: she’s clearly Philip’s undoing, yet he’s almost entirely responsible for their continued dysfunctional “relationship”. She could genuinely care less about him, but — almost to her own surprise — he continues to make himself available to her time and again; and so, as an inveterate manipulator, she takes easy advantage. Theirs is a morbidly fascinating dynamic — not one I find pleasant to watch, but certainly one film fanatics should see at least once. Note: Peary ends his review by stating he’s “never seen a film in which so many letters are read” — really? That’s somehow hard to imagine. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Categories Links: |
Mr. Skeffington (1944)
“I married the woman everyone else wanted to.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
… who’s never at a loss for suitors (who in turn come across more like a comedic Greek chorus than realistic supporting characters). Rains is as invested as always in the title role — but he’s really secondary to the proceedings; this tale should have been called Fanny Skeffington instead, given that it’s primarily concerned with tracking Davis’s predictably disastrous fall-from-grace, hastened by a convenient bout of appearance-wracking diphtheria. To that end, the final portion of the film — in which the hideously transformed Fanny finally gets her comeuppance — provides the most entertainment value, in a gruesomely baroque manner; one can’t help thinking of Davis’s later Grand Guignol performances when viewing her mask-like visage (see still below). Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Bad Girl (1956)
“Kindly allow me to choose my own friends!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres: Review:
Meanwhile, Wooland is simply forgettable as her conveniently understanding and handsome suitor. The best feature of the film is Sylvia Syms (in her screen debut) as the pretty young protagonist, who’s torn between a desire to remain her mother’s “good” eldest daughter, and her itch to explore the wild-and-woolly world of soul-corrupting jive. The screenplay becomes needlessly melodramatic in its final third, as Neagle and Syms are provided with further opportunities to explore their complicated mother-daughter dynamic, and the overall tenor of the film begins to feel more like a “women’s weepie” than anything else. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Devil Commands, The (1941)
“Your mother is not dead – not really. She’s come back to me!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
Also lifting the film a notch above average is a strong performance by Anne Revere, playing a quietly psychopathic “medium” whose love of money overrides all other concerns, even her own safety.
Other elements of the quickie screenplay (just over an hour long) feel somewhat conventional, but there’s certainly enough here — including a typically committed performance by Karloff:
… and atmospheric cinematography —
… to recommend this one for fans of the genre. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Paper Chase, The (1973)
“I need a way of living that I can rationalize!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
Indeed, in its depiction of Bottoms’ relentless quest to earn Houseman’s respect — and its overall presentation of the rigors of law school, complete with plenty of heady dialogue and ruthlessly competitive interactions —
The Paper Chase fully succeeds, and we remain enthusiastically engaged; as Vincent Canby points out in his review for The New York Times, it’s refreshing to see a movie that “acknowledge[s] the existence of a mind”. Unfortunately, however, this focus is interrupted time and again by a poorly developed romantic subplot, one which ultimately feels both contrived and unsatisfying.
Wagner’s character, while potentially fascinating, is insufficiently developed to earn our interest; instead, she functions merely as a distraction for Bottoms — someone who happens to conveniently possess an insider’s perspective on the man Bottoms is single-mindedly obsessed with. Meanwhile, Bottoms’ character eventually becomes so callously self-absorbed that we stop rooting for him — a dangerous outcome for a film predicated on whether or not our dauntless protagonist will succeed in his quest.
Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Barefoot in the Park (1967)
“Corie, if it’s a good marriage, it’ll last until 5:30.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres:
Review:
(Many actresses were apparently considered for the role of “Corie”, yet she’s so poorly written that it’s actually difficult to imagine anyone having better success with her than Fonda.) We’re presumably meant to sympathize with poor Redford’s character (a stand-in for Simon himself) — an every-man who simply wants to go to work and earn a living; but he’s so dull and under-written that we don’t care much for him, either. Another critical concern is that we aren’t given sufficient motivation to care about the ultimate survival of this couple’s sexually charged yet perilously unstable marriage, which suffers from seemingly irreconcilable personality differences (she’s free-spirited and likes to walk “barefoot in the park”, while he’s more conservative). Meanwhile, a critical subplot involving Fonda’s attempt to set up her single mother (Mildred Natwick) with an enigmatic foodie neighbor (Charles Boyer) is simply tiresome — as are the running “gags” about how tiny and elevated the couple’s new apartment is. Note: Simon would rework the basic concept of conflicting personality types attempting (unsuccessfully) to live together in his infinitely more clever and enjoyable comedy The Odd Couple (1968). Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
