The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions (Decade Project Vol. 4)

An ongoing project to survey the best films of individual decades, genres, and filmmakers.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#201 Post by domino harvey » Sat Jun 22, 2019 10:06 pm

If anyone wants to see George Sanders as a murdering, masochistic book forger who tries to pull off an elaborate public library heist while outsmarting some Nazis who are pissed that he sold them fakes, boy is Quiet Please, Murder (1942) the movie for you. Sanders is literally shown getting off to the idea of being hanged, this movie is nuts

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#202 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Jun 22, 2019 10:12 pm

That actually does sound pretty intriguing..

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#203 Post by domino harvey » Sat Jun 22, 2019 10:13 pm

For those without access to back channels, I would of course never point out that someone has uploaded the entire 66 minute film, which has no commercial release, to YouTube

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#204 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:31 am

I don’t know about the film overall, but going full tilt in graphically meditating on self-flagellation and masochistic behavior in order to satisfy the production codes was so much more satisfying than how most films handle ‘villainy’ in this era, even if it was absolutely ridiculous.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#205 Post by knives » Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:10 am

I finally got to that Sony Screwball set and boy is it a load of garbage. The only half decent movie isn't eligible and even that is an unfunny mess that happens to be charming because the characters aren't trying to rape or being raped constantly which can't be said of the the other films in the set. Hopefully no one else will see these films ever again.

My Sister Eileen (dir. Hall)
The '50s version of this is one of my all time favorites and I was curious about this Alexander Hall version for forever as a result. It's an interesting case of contrasts since while many of the same points are hit (including the director of the remake in the Fosse role) this has a much more expansive plot with a wider variety of characters that makes the central pair lost in the mess. Thematically that works really well for showing the difficulties of being a modern woman. Yet it is a couple steps short of the later film because the expansiveness also comes with an added wackiness that isn't my thing. I could easily see someone loving the more ridiculous elements like the prostitute played by June Havoc. This is definitely at worst an interesting movie. It is interesting how much more so this version emphasizes a danger of rape with nearly every man being a potential molester. It's a terrifying film at times only relieved by its tone. After all these screwballs that delight in abusing women it's a great change of pace.

She Wouldn't Say Yes (dir. Hall)
What a gross, disgusting, hateful, and stupid movie. I've liked Alexander Hall thus far, but this pushes the limits of enjoyment beyond anything else. I don't think I've seen a film that so strongly bases its plot of rape being totally cool. Russell tries her best to make this not awful, but that only works to make this film more disgusting. Was a worse movie ever made by someone except Stanley Kramer.

Too Many Husbands (dir. Ruggles)
I can work with a comedy without a single laugh, but not one without a single interesting character or conceit. This belamed Enoch Arden adaptation has two obnoxious idiots fighting over in the most hateful way a ditzy Jean Arthur who does nothing worth fighting over.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#206 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:01 pm

Laura (Preminger 1944). Not my favorite Preminger by any means but I probably enjoyed it more than any other previous time. It’s definitely a smartly and elegantly constructed film, with a slightly Rebecca-ish love-and-death aura and a quasi-ghostly touch (you’ve even got Judith Anderson there). The characters of Waldo and Shelby, and the way they’re fleshed out by Webb and Price, really is one of the best things about it.


The Body Snatcher (Wise 1945). Nothing too fancy here but nevertheless a fairly effective thriller and drama, with good atmosphere and a potent figure in the deranged killer. Both Karloff and Henry Daniell as Dr. MacFarlane give very solid performances for a film of this scope.


Panique (Duvivier 1946). Exhibit A in the argument for the director’s pessimism, as Hire’s cynical view of society is played out in the events that follow. Putting side that aspect, the film recalls a bit La Chienne in that again this is Michel Simon getting rolled by a petty criminal couple, though he strikes a decidedly more imposing figure here. All around a good enough film, but for me there’s nothing revelatory, and this certainly doesn’t measure up to his greatest films of the previous decade.


Holiday Inn (Sandrich 1942). I don’t think this is nearly as bad as knives thinks of it but yes story- and acting-wise the charms are limited, there’s the blackface scene (and more offensively the line where Linda bemoans she won’t get to be “pretty” with the makeup on), and with Crosby along there’s an inescapable innocuousness. On the other hand, I counted at least seven full Astaire dance numbers here, a number of them quite terrific (including that drunk dancing routine), and this is where the movie periodically shines.


The Heiress (Wyler 1949).
This viewing really impressed on me how much sophistication there is to this film, an intelligence that also shines through consistently in the dialogue, notably in that scene where Dr. Sloper confronts Morris when he comes to ask for his daughter’s hand.
SpoilerShow
If there’s something potentially off-putting, it’s that the film, until the very end, keeps the true nature of Morris’s intentions impossible to know with certainty for the viewer, but from the beginning (and because of that beginning those doubts remain) there’s no reason to think that those intentions are genuine, since Catherine is presented as a woman without significant qualities, including a limited intelligence (she never doubts the suitor’s intentions, for example, improbable though they are), and yet this young man is immediately and intensely determined in his devotion and interest, which makes him, to the viewer, suspicious at the very least. One important consequence is that in the “romance” that follows, it’s not really possible to be all that emotionally involved in their seeming plight, or heartbroken when the doctor reveals his decision. Catherine is merely a figure of pity.
Now it’s hard to know whether to call this a fault of the film, or whether to think of it as an intentional aspect of its design. But the special and slightly (for me anyway) mysterious thing is that, regardless of that, the way the film unfolds afterwards in its narrative developments, and the way in which those events seem to bring out qualities out of Catherine that had not been present before – and turn her into a more expansive character –, somehow makes that question a secondary matter.

Wyler’s most significant strength is often said to be the acting, and this film is definitely evidence for this argument. The three leads are really exceptional, and they play a large part in giving those characters extra depth, including Dr. Sloper, who evokes sympathy (for his general lucidity and for his cerebral devotion to the protection of his daughter), despite his cold nature and paucity of empathy. This is also an extremely beautifully photographed film, where Wyler and Tover still retain occasionally Toland’s composition styles, but produce something more elegant and consistently pleasing than something like The Little Foxes.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#207 Post by domino harvey » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:22 pm

knives: Yep, those last two screwballs in your rundown are among the worst films ever made

Rayon Vert: I also recently rewatched Laura and I agree that it’s really Clifton Webb that makes the movie, though overall I think it’s a masterpiece so I obviously value it more than you. I was shocked to learn after this revisit that this was Webb’s first film since the silent era. He certainly should have won the Oscar over Barry Fitzgerald, but 1944’s Best Supporting Actor category is one of the all time greats this year for including 5/5 all memorable supporting actors from this era: In addition to Webb and Fitzgerald, you had Monty Woolley, Claude Rains, and Hume Cronyn. This is not always a category that reflects performers who stood the rest of time, but it sure did this year— actually, between 1944 and the previous year’s nominees (Charles Coburn, Charles Bickford, J Carrol Naish, Akim Tamiroff, and well Rains again), it’s a good survey of the best supporting actors of the 40s! (Though of course still lacking SZ “Cuddles” Sakall)

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#208 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:54 pm

Yeah Webb is my favorite there. Lydecker is a right a**hole but you can't help liking him!

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#209 Post by domino harvey » Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:58 pm

“I should be sincerely sorry to see my neighbor's children devoured by wolves” is one of the funniest lines ever written

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#210 Post by knives » Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:03 pm

What I think works with Webb, especially in light of the ending, is that he is not merely a sarcastic George Sanders type, but also has a quiet weirdness to him that makes him untrustworthy outside of his personality. It's a more complicated way to play with audience emotions for the type.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#211 Post by domino harvey » Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:41 pm

It's interesting that the three actors they looked at for the role, Webb, Laird Cregar, and Monty Woolley, all have a certain effeminate element to their performance style. I learned a new period colloquialism for this, by the way, in Rudy Behlmer's commentary: one of the suits (I think it was Zanuck) initially didn't want Webb because "he flies." Sanders of course played the Waldo Lydecker role in the Fox TV adaptation, to predictably fun results, but he lacks this element in his otherwise similar erudite approach. At the end of the day, more than anyone else in the cast, Webb just is too perfect in the role to imagine anyone else bringing the same flavor to it, and the suggestion that perhaps there is more than mere surface attraction/traditionally masculine "ownership" complications driving Waldo's possessiveness of Laura are part of what makes this such a rich film

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#212 Post by FrauBlucher » Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:32 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 4:09 pm
I’m surprised you didn’t mention Edward G Robinson, as I think this is his best performance and a great reminder that he could be called upon to do more than just show up and deliver his iconic presence in a film. 1948 was a good year for Robinson, too, as I just watched the turgid Arthur Miller adaptation All My Sons and while the rest of the cast are various degrees of awful (especially Burt Lancaster, who I’ve never seen give a worse performance— and it stretches even Hollywood credibility to buy him as Robinson’s son in the first place!), Robinson is incredible and single-handedly threatens to save the film by sheer will. It’s another textbook contender for best performance in a bad film, and just the range he showed in these two films hints at an alternate history where he was one of our most respected actors and not merely an easily-imitated icon with a funny voice (though generally I enjoy his presence in films even when he does phone it in solely to generate funds for his notorious art habit)

EDIT: And I just looked it up and Robinson’s other 1948 film is Night Has a Thousand Eyes, which is also a great (and starkly downbeat) noir with a moving perf from Robinson as a fake psychic who develops real powers and must use them to save the life of an innocent. What a shame the Academy couldn’t even throw him a nomination for any of these this year
This makes me even more surprised that you haven't seen or are not interested in seeing The Sea Wolf (1941). I know you said that you're not a fan of the Seafaring Swashbucklers but The Sea Wolf is nothing like those Errol Flynn films and others like it. Even the eras were different. This takes place in the mid to late 1800s, while those swashbucklers films are placed 100 years prior and maybe more. The Sea Wolf has a very strong Noir/Gangster feel to it. It's dark and psychological, brooding and it may be Robinson's most splendidly vile character which is saying something, considering he was Ricco and Johnny Rocco. The film has a terrific cast. Ida Lupino is the femme fatale and John Garfield is the rough and tumble upstart who becomes the thorn in Robinson's side.

I would wager that even if you don't love it like I do, you certainly won't dismiss it either. :)

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#213 Post by domino harvey » Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:36 pm

I have the Blu-ray, so I'll be sure to watch it soon. I revisited Scarlet Street last night after reading Foster Hirsch's excellent analysis and usage of it and Double Indemnity as twin exemplars of the Noir model in the first chapter of his book, so I'm more than willing to continue riding that sweet Edward G Robinson high, especially since he's so (intentionally) subdued in that one

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#214 Post by knives » Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:05 pm

The copy I had broke down twenty minutes, but those twenty minutes were mighty impressive to me. It has some of the most impressive lighting in a Curtiz film I've seen with a noir-ish mean edge. Plus Alexander Knox using his qualities for a real spiteful prat.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#215 Post by domino harvey » Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:01 pm

On the noir revisit tip, I rewatched DOA last night. Unfortunately it fared even worse than I remembered. The opening hook is still juicy, but this just fails on every other level and is quite embarrassingly bad. Acting: awful. Plot: idiotic. Pacing: inconsistent at best. Slide whistle: present. In retrospect, I think even that dumb 80s remake where Dennis Quaid superglues his hand to Meg Ryan was a markedly better film. DOA has to be the worst canonical, high-profile noir by a long-shot, unless my revisits turn up another contender I'd blocked out of memory

User avatar
HJackson
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#216 Post by HJackson » Wed Jun 26, 2019 12:52 pm

Agreed. Its reputation is inexplicable.

User avatar
Dr Amicus
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:20 am
Location: Guernsey

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#217 Post by Dr Amicus » Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:35 am

In Which We Serve (Coward & Lean): A rewatch - but I think it's about 30 years since the last time and the film grew on me considerably as a solid all-classes-in-it-together piece of flag waving. Strangely enough the most moving, in my eyes at least, moments involve Celia Johnson (as Coward's wife) - just watching her face at key moments (e.g. when her husband tells her war is all but certain or her toast to her rival, the ship) are more affecting than the deaths of some of the seamen. Solid, but Ealing's war films from the period are generally superior and more affecting - for a naval example see San Demetrio London.

Here Come the Huggetts, Vote Huggett, The Huggetts Abroad (all Annakin): The family from the really rather good Holiday Camp get their own series (with some changes to their children) and it doesn't start well. The first is a weak sitcom when their niece comes to stay - expecting a young girl they get a teenage Diana Dors. Cue hilarity - or not. An attempt to replay the touching one-on-one between Warner and Harrison is poor copy of the first film, and it's fairly forgettable. The second is much better as Pa Huggett (for various plot reasons) ends up standing in the local elecions. Amusingly satirical as our hero finds himself an unwitting pawn between the political parties (slightly oddly renamed the Moderates and the Progressives - even though both Churchill and Attlee are mentioned by name) and local politics comes in for a real skewering. As in the next film in the series, one of the pleasure is how competent the characters are - there's little patronising about their working class statiusand they are not treated as comic idiots. The final film sees them preparing to move to South Africa (where a daughter is emigrating with the husband she married in the first of the spin-offs) - much of the film is a cross-desert trek which ends up owing more to survival films than the average post-war British comedy. On the whole, recommended for those interested in post-war British cinema (they were produced by Gainsborough - better remembered for their period melodramas) as interesting curiosities.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#218 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Jun 29, 2019 2:12 am

Letter from an Unknown Woman: I still have a difficult time accessing Ophüls’s films at the emotional levels others do. This was always my least favorite of what I’d seen, though I’m happy to report that it improved in my esteem during a revisit. Like all Ophüls, the style is perfect and lends itself to framing action in ways that make moments between uninteresting characters as sublime as possible. What made the film work this time was the surrendering of expectations for these characters, and grasping onto the feeling of what it’s like to be in love to the point of total consumption, which is where the film succeeds. The arcs of the plot bother me in concept (the idea of not recognizing someone you shared tender moments with in only spans of a few years is unbelievable and rather offensive in a way). However, this time I felt more validated in doubting that we are supposed to align with the male character or relate to him, but instead focus our attention solely on Joan Fontaine. She is absolutely terrific in perhaps the most convincing and likeable of all Ophüls’s heroines, and even if her character isn’t interesting, the significant aspects of her perspective, not story, are relatable. Ophüls uses every skill in his craft to signify that beautiful and terrifying feeling of powerlessness in feeling a connection with another human being. Still, this wasn’t as impactful when looking beyond what works (even if it really, really works) and consequently probably won’t make the cut, but at the rate this jumped who knows, maybe it’ll be a new favorite on the next watch.

Apartment for Peggy: What starts as a rare example of finding comedy gold in nonchalant suicidal ideation slowly turns into a sweet and touching comedy-drama. The humor here is wisely primarily rooted in the generational dissonance between the main characters with clever focus on the cultural practices and normative attitudes of each group playing off of one another exposing the gap. The drama, on the other hand, centers more broadly on common life circumstances most people can relate to on some level (financial and marital hardships, bruised pride, transitional crises, loss). Some are banal and some are intense, but one never gets the sense that the film places any more attention or stock in any character or problem compared to another. The filmmaker, script, and perhaps most importantly, editor, take all the drama and comedy seriously in their authenticity and the film scores major points for remaining engaging without defaulting to manipulative or forceful plot points or character arcs, giving each issue ample breathing room without feeling like too much slack. A perfect example of this execution is a scene where the two men put together a piece of furniture, and the scene plays out in real time as they build this table. There are some humorous moments sparked by their dynamic mixed in with equally banal moments of simply two people working together. It’s powerful, funny, and real without extra dramatic weight and the scene builds to catharsis naturally and with confidence in the actors. I thought this was just fine until about the 30-minute mark when everything clicked into place and I realized I was watching something special. Definitely one of the better ‘discoveries’ of this project so far.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#219 Post by knives » Sat Jun 29, 2019 9:28 pm

Longer post later, but I completely agree vis a vis Peggy and really want to thank Domino for suggesting it. In a sea of dumb films I've watched lately it's smart, funny, and easily accessed. I found myself smiling in remembrance of the statistics joke several days after watching it.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#220 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:54 am

I’ll second that thank you to domino, as well as for The Woman in White, a drama that delivers both beautifully bright, serene moments of romance and dark noirish nastiness. The challenge of striking such a balance of moody extremes without feeling uneven is quite difficult, and after seeing enough films try and fail at these kinds of attempts I was continually awestruck by this film’s boldness and repeated accomplishments as it spun this pattern throughout a very twisty narrative with an effortless attitude. Any film that can keep me suspended with mystery, intrigue, and impending doom while leaving space for deeply felt romantic radiance without ever feeling the urge to leave one moment for the other is a winner. A strange film, in a world where films don’t often play by rules with the patience for this level of eclecticism, but boy I wish more would; for when they work, they really work.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#221 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Jun 30, 2019 11:03 am

Canyon Passage (Tourneur 1946). A likeable film and I’m fan of it even if I don’t think it ranks among the genre’s greatest. It’s fairly busy plot-wise but what I like most about it, beyond its beauty and different little components like Hoagy Carmichael’s Hi Linnet as something of a Greek chorus, is the accent on the relationships and characters, and the way a shades-of-grey character like George Camrose (Donlevy) is presented non-judgmentally. That dimension links it up with Ford’s westerns. Plus Susan Hayward always adds to anything she’s in.


Le Corbeau (Clouzot 1943).
I prefer Le Quai with its touches of humor, but of course this is a first-rate early paranoid thriller. I’d forgotten who the Corbeau was and assumed with an early shot that
SpoilerShow
it was the little girl and I spent most of the film this time, mistakenly of course, wondering why the director revealed the secret in plain view!
The relationship with Denise adds an emotional layer to what otherwise would have been a colder film. Some very good acting here, especially Larquey as the physically and morally towering Dr. Vorzet. The SC blu is a stunning looking upgrade.


Image
Ossessione (Visconti 1943). Important in the historical development of Italian film, but as a mixture of pulp and realism, Bitter Rice later did it a lot better (though the trashiness in the later film carries from story into style, not so in this much starker film). The director’s penchant for long, slow films is in evidence right off the bat. I’m a big fan of a solid half of his work, but the pace here really doesn’t help the material, and Clara Claramai is definitely watchable but the rest of the acting isn’t all that great. In fact it’s my least-liked rewatch to date.


49th Parallel (Powell 1941). The didactic propaganda elements really aren’t enough to dampen the qualities of this film. This is great fun and sometimes very fine film-making, but it also has some soul, especially in that segment with the Hutterites, which I think ranks unashamedly among the best work of the Archers. The broad way Olivier plays the French Canadian character (setting aside even the completely awful accent) hurts the beginning a bit, but once we leave that setting, into the escape before and after the farming community episode, the film really soars. Unfortunately the Leslie Howard episode, while still entertaining, dips just a little in quality. Still a fine film.


Day of Wrath (Dreyer 1943). Beyond the exactness aimed at in the acting, décor, blocking and photography, in many directorial touches (like selecting Lisbeth Movin who displays a perfect balance of angelic and devilish features) and in the convincing evocation of a world completely alien to moderns, I feel the film’s power lies in how it presents a picture of women accused of being witches, or confessing themselves to be, without - because in part of the realism in which this is portrayed – it being really possible to know. (The events on screen do lend credence to the view that the women are able to “call the living and the dead”, but there’s no really conclusive evidence beyond the characters’ words and reactions.) At the same time the film doesn’t seem to want to bring the viewer into these questions, so much as it just plunges him-her into this mysterious “other” reality. The film really achieves a power like few others to absorb you into a completely distinctive world.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#222 Post by knives » Sun Jun 30, 2019 3:37 pm

Longer post now:
Apartment for Peggy
Yep this is an odd ball of a film, but not in the way that phrase is usually used. It's instead strange for how forward and daring it is while adhering to classical models of stories. Just start with the colour cinematography. Everything here screams that the film should be a black and white little drama, yet even in this unrestored form it screams a tonally contradictory burst of joy that makes the movie more engaging. As weird an example as this will be the colour reminds me of Leave Her to Heaven where colour is also used to undermine narrative expectation and heighten certain emotional moments. It's also shockingly frank. Gwenn is a man who will be committing suicide and we dig in that quite deeply. Not only do we get a small catalog of methods, but also a real, serious debate on the topic that often has the argument for suicide winning. The academics and friends who try to argue against suicide come across as emotional and not taking Gwenn seriously.

Only Crain puts forth solid arguments. That also helps to breed a coherence with the film as a lot of the characterization stems from their arguments. Gwenn is decrepit and lives up to Crain's argument of a corpse while conversely Crain herself is a regular flibbertigibbet in the model of Susan Slept Here. Her pregnancy may make her represent the absolute source of life and Gwenn's only hope, but her personality forces it on everyone including myself as audience. For all the impressive elements this is the one that convinces me of the film's fundamental greatness. All of the actors including a surprisingly clothed William Holden embody their types so perfectly that they no longer are people, but representatives of one of the most difficult arguments in the history of humanity.

Johnny Eager (dir. LeRoy)
Generic crime film that would be completely mediocre if not for Van Heflin's oscar winning performance as a Taylor's gay second in command. Taylor's redemption is completely silly, but then so is Turner falling for him.

State Fair (dir. Lang)
Even by Hammerstein standard the lyrics here are embarrassing to the point where the film seems to give up halfway through them. Beyond that this is as forgettable a mediocrity as you won't remember fifteen minutes after a scene has passed.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#223 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:15 am

Caught (1949)
More stylish Ophüls, this time with less thrills from the moving camera and more stunning still photography framing characters in oddly angled positions within light and shadows conveying their moods appropriately and as needed. I went into this expecting more suspense, but thought it was a well-made but uninvesting melodrama. However, like Letters from an Unknown Woman this film succeeds not in caring about the characters but relating to feelings of said characters without coupling this through surrogate investment. From a distance Ophüls successfully explores unhappy characters reaching for connection through tangible signifiers (marriage, money, reproduction) for the wrong reasons and fooling themselves. Many can relate to the creation of romantic predicaments through fear-based actions and the projections that follow from ego-bruising and emotional pain. I’m really torn with this filmmaker because most of what I’ve read from others’ appreciations seem to involve the emotional connection instead of the more clinical observations I’m getting from his films and to his characters, and sometimes I wonder if I’m missing something or even analyzing these films ‘incorrectly’ if there is such a thing. Either way this is another film I respect more than like from Ophüls, but another one that I could see renting space in my mind and growing esteem for over time as it works on a few levels very, very well.

On the Town (1949)
I thought I had seen this before but boy was I wrong, and how blasphemous, and impossible, I now see it would be to forget this masterpiece! Where has this film been all my life? At times a perfectly staged Tati-esque mise-en-scene packed full of hidden witty details, at other times a perfectly paced and written build to acute verbal and visual gags and punchlines occurring sometimes simultaneously like a one-two punch, and finally a beautifully staged musical with versatile song and dance numbers and visualizations that break realities in new and exciting ways (I particularly liked the poster of Kelly’s “dream girl” coming to life and developing into a daydream so enticing I forgot what was happening in the narrative). Every second of this film sparkles and every moment is a surge of extravaganza that is perfectly accentuated and exaggerated to dazzling degrees. I’ve used the word “perfect” so many times in this writeup, probably because this is a perfect film. It’s still fresh and while I haven’t seen it nearly as many times as The Band Wagon, My Sister Eileen, Gold Diggers of 1933, Les Demoiselles de Rochefort, and Singin’ in the Rain, it’s destined to join the shortlist of musicals I adore and those that continuously restore my faith in movies as the most joyful art there is.

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#224 Post by nitin » Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:49 am

Therewillbeblus have you seen either of The Earrings of Madame De or La Signora De Tutti? Would be curious to know if your observations for those two are in line with your observations for Caught and Letter From an Unknown Woman.

User avatar
NABOB OF NOWHERE
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:30 pm
Location: Brandywine River

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#225 Post by NABOB OF NOWHERE » Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:54 am

nitin wrote:
Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:49 am
Therewillbeblus have you seen either of The Earrings of Madame De or La Signora De Tutti? Would be curious to know if your observations for those two are in line with your observations for Caught and Letter From an Unknown Woman.
And please add Sans Lendemain to that list for some super-saturated emotion.

Post Reply