Song of Songs, The (1933)
“I see you as an artist, Lily — you must believe it!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review: Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Morning Glory (1933)
“I know that I’m a great actress — the greatest young actress in the world!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
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:
Must See? Links: |
On Golden Pond (1981)
“You know, Norman, you really are the sweetest man in the world — but I’m the only one who knows it!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Unfortunately, however, I can’t profess to sharing Peary’s guilty fondness for this enormously popular film (the top-grossing movie of 1981), which I find not only calculated and derivative but poorly structured. The emotional pay-off we’re waiting for is clearly the reconciliation between Henry and Jane, yet Jane’s underdeveloped character is hardly onscreen, and the bulk of the film focuses instead on Henry’s mentoring of McKeon. In sum, narrative priorities are confused: if this was meant to be a film about an emotionally troubled young teen coming of age in a gorgeous setting under the guidance of a curmudgeonly yet caring grandfather-figure, then McKeon’s character needed to be written with much more depth and insight. Despite these serious complaints, however, the lead performances in OGP are certainly a joy to watch, and Hepburn and Fonda Sr. do indeed “rise above their roles”. As Peary writes, Fonda Sr. in particular is “wonderful in this role because he seems to really understand all his character’s strengths, quirks, self-doubts (especially in regard to aging), weaknesses, and flaws — particularly as a father”. Film fanatics will likely want to check out this film once simply to see him in his swan song (and to see Hepburn’s “energetic performance” as well). Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Murder, He Says (1944)
“They don’t dare kill you the way they killed that other feller!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
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:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Rainmaker, The (1956)
“Once in your life, you’ve got to take a chance on a con-man.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
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:
Must See? Links: |
Alice Adams (1935)
“I don’t know why he likes me; sometimes I’m afraid he wouldn’t if he knew me.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
Speaking as a female viewer, I can firmly attest that I don’t find the film any less disturbing than Peary; indeed, it’s nearly as depressing as Hepburn’s notorious downer of a debut film, A Bill of Divorcement (1932). I’m ultimately most in agreement with the assessment provided by DVD Savant, who notes that Alice Adams is “beautifully put together… but raises a number of issues that can’t be easily dismissed” — most specifically the puzzling nature of MacMurray’s attraction to Hepburn. Sure, she’s pretty, but he’s supposedly engaged to his wealthy (and equally pretty) cousin — so what in the world is he doing pursuing Hepburn? We learn absolutely nothing about him — he functions purely as a projection of Hepburn’s fantasies; while it’s clear as day that she’s putting him on, he simply grins at her like a vacuous dolt.
Also frustrating is the film’s tendency to shift in tone between poignant social drama and comedy; meanwhile, the utterly unrealistic denouement between Stone and Grapewin — as well as the obviously tacked-on happy ending (deviating from the original novel) — leave one feeling somewhat cheated (though Peary himself claims to “find [the ending] a relief after watching Alice suffer”). With that said, the film has much to recommend it — beginning with Hepburn’s passionately committed, nuanced portrayal as Alice. In his Alternate Oscars, Peary names Hepburn Best Actress of the Year for her work here, and it’s hard to argue with his choice. Although she’s an infuriating protagonist to sympathize with — not to mention frustratingly variable (one moment painfully awkward, the next coyly flirtatious) — Hepburn nonetheless brings her to achingly vulnerable life. Meanwhile, the supporting cast (consisting of many little-known faces) is excellent all around — most notably circus performer Fred Stone as Alice’s sad sack father; Frank Albertson as her wastrel brother (who perfectly embodies the cynical antithesis of Alice’s socially conscientious desperation); and droll Hattie McDaniel (in a “scene-stealing performance”) as Malena. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Little Women (1933)
“Christopher Columbus!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
Only once her character matures and moves to New York does Hepburn seem to relax into the role. Other key parts in the ensemble cast are nicely filled as well, with Paul Lukas particularly sympathetic as Jo’s older suitor (it’s easy to see why she would fall for him, despite the age difference):
and Douglass Montgomery a charming, easygoing “Laurie”. (It’s a shame Montgomery’s career never really took off.)
The deliberately episodic, relatively faithful Oscar-winning screenplay follows the cadences of Alcott’s coming-of-age novel nicely, while historically authentic sets and costumes help bring the story to life; fans of the book likely won’t be disappointed. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Bill of Divorcement, A (1932)
“It’s in our blood, isn’t it?”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Note: Hepburn’s creative collaboration with Cukor lasted throughout the next 17 years, resulting in a total of eight theatrical films, including the following titles: Little Women (1933), Sylvia Scarlett (1935), Holiday (1938), The Philadelphia Story (1940), Keeper of the Flame (1942), Adam’s Rib (1949), and Pat and Mike (1952). Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
My Man Godfrey (1936)
“You’re more than a butler — you’re the first protege I ever had!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
— is ruined by the plot “twist” (given away early) that Godfrey (Powell) is actually a millionaire in disguise. He posits that while screenwriters Eric Hatch and Morrie Ryskind “may have had praiseworthy intentions” by wanting “Powell to discuss cynically both the plight and the nobility of the unemployed during the Depression”, director “Gregory La Cava has trouble maintaining a humorous thread while injecting serious themes”; he argues that “if the film’s going to attempt social criticism, it shouldn’t be so timid about it”. He concludes his review by noting that the “film succeeds not because of the story or direction but because of the spirited performances”, with “suave Powell and daffy Lombard [possessing] some great moments together”. I can’t quite agree with most of Peary’s sentiments, given that I find the fast-paced screenplay consistently clever and witty, and don’t have any problem with the way Powell’s mysterious character is written. Indeed, it’s likely that if the social themes were taken more seriously, the entire affair would ultimately be much less successful as a wacky screwball flick. Peary’s right, however, to call out the fine performances by Lombard and Powell, who do indeed possess great chemistry together; it’s especially touching to know that they were divorced, yet still affectionate enough towards one other to maintain good relations.
I’m also fond of the supporting performances throughout this ensemble piece — most notably gravelly-voiced character actor Eugene Pallette as the family’s harried patriarch, and fey Franklin Pangborn in an early bit role as the officiant for the scavenger hunt (a wonderful extended scene) that propels the plot into action. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) Links: |
Such Good Friends (1971)
“Now that the damage has been done, your husband’s care will be of the finest.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review: Making matters worse, we don’t like any of these characters — not even the protagonist (Cannon), whose plight we should presumably empathize with. Our distaste for Cannon’s spoiled housewife is cemented from her very first scenes, as she mutters, “Why did they abolish slavery?!” in frustration when her black maid can’t hear her petulant request to answer the doorbell. When events quickly turn more serious, she thankfully drops her characteristically ditzy screen persona and invests her character with gravitas and nuance, turning in what’s probably one of the best performances of her career. However, she’s at sea in the midst of a messy cinematic train wreck, one even her emotional investment simply can’t salvage. Note: My opinion of this film diverges considerably from most other critics: Roger Ebert gives it four stars out of four, Stuart Galbraith IV of DVD Talk refers to it as “just about as good” as Annie Hall (!!!), and others point out the wittiness and elegance of the dialogue. It’s likely that my overall distaste for how Preminger handles the material is shadowing my ability to appreciate much else about it — but regardless, I consider this one to be a true clunker. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
