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
ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#376 Post by ntnon » Tue Sep 03, 2019 1:38 pm

Foreign Correspondent is decent enough, but it seems so false and contrived - perhaps that's just the passage of time? - that I can never quite enjoy it as much as it seems I should.

Fingers at the Window filled in some time, but even Lorraine Day and (a mostly off-screen) Basil Rathbone couldn't make the thin plot any more than watchable.

Murder in the Blue Room is a lot more fun, if lightweight. It seems to be a stock murder/ghost mystery designed to showcase a handful of song & dance routines, but the substance is well done. The Three Jazzybelles do a good job and even sneak in some metatextual fourth wall commentary a couple of times, which I appreciate. (And the 'walking' around to stay awake inrerlude has definite shades of Monty Python's Silly Walks, too..)

-Trying to compile a watchlist - and hoping to avoid overlooking films by cross-checking and comparing - I've been browsing a lot of resources on- and offline. The IMDb suggests nearly 14,000 films and over 8,000 shorts, but otherwise I'm finding broad similarities between top 100s, with curious omissions and coincidences. For instance, one major list shares much of its top 50 with both a Google filter, IMDb arrangements, Amazon customers and links here... but 6 films are only in one source. All six of those are on Criterion disc... I wonder if some listmakers and reviews deliberately weight the CC/J stamp of approval when compiling favourites? And clearly most lists are skewed by folk forgetting or missing certain viewing options.
- Equally, three of my favourite Christmas films - Christmas in Connecticut, The Bishop's Wife and It Happened on Fifth Avenue - are often left out of the running entirely.

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#377 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Sep 03, 2019 6:09 pm

The Bishop’s Wife is great and while I never felt compelled to do a write-up on the film, I’m glad you mentioned it as it’s a worthy contender for anyone’s list.

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#378 Post by domino harvey » Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:22 pm

It's def on my list. The sequence with the cab driver is among the most joyful moments of any film

ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#379 Post by ntnon » Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:50 pm

Yep. Looking over a "short"list of around 300 films, more than fifty seem deserving of particular favour even without revisiting them... which is ominous. Particularly since there are dozens I've never seen before - and many more not even on the list - likely worthy..

I rewatched The Seventh Victim, but while admiring of the acting and use of effective close-ups, it wasn't quite as good as I'd remembered. Tense at times, but ultimately 'lesser'.

So I spent the rest of the evening with Laura and Rebecca (time didn't permit adding Gilda too). Both initially tell the tales of the named, deceased, titular focus - directly, in flashback [L] or indirectly, through anecdote [R] - until that individual's body makes a surprise return around 30m before the end of each film. Laura's surprise return (and Dana Andrews' reaction) is certainly more impactful than Rebecca's (and Olivier's very-British mini-breakdown). Gene Tierney and Joan Fontaine are exemplary as easily-led and manipulated women, but what struck me most about Laura was the completely amoral, pathetic or undesirable traits shown by essentially the entire cast of - mostly male - characters. Rebecca's enduring legacy in my mind will be how Mrs Danvers' vindictive whisperings out-gaslight Gaslight in the subtle manipulations and seeding of desired actions and assumptions.

Both are excellent, though Rebecca seems too long, and Laura - even "extended" - too brief.

I wonder if any enterprising company could make money selling reproduction portrait paintings? Laura, the de Winter ancestor, Dorian Grey (before and after), the Blakeney ancestor with Pimpernel ring, etc...

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#380 Post by domino harvey » Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:59 pm

When he died, it was revealed Robert Osborne owned the original oil painting from Laura! If you’re interested in paintings in films from this period, I recommend Steven Jacobs and Lisa Colpaert’s the Dark Galleries, which is organized like a fake museum program walking “visitors” through a large number of significant works of art in Hollywood films of the 40s and 50s

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#381 Post by Roger Ryan » Wed Sep 04, 2019 8:47 am

ntnon wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:50 pm
...Dorian Grey (before and after)...
...and, if you want to see it in person, Ivan Albright's depiction of the "after" can be found at the Art Institute of Chicago. I always spend a few moments with it when visiting the museum.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#382 Post by Michael Kerpan » Wed Sep 04, 2019 9:59 am

Roger Ryan wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 8:47 am
ntnon wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 9:50 pm
...Dorian Grey (before and after)...
...and, if you want to see it in person, Ivan Albright's depiction of the "after" can be found at the Art Institute of Chicago. I always spend a few moments with it when visiting the museum.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater

User avatar
Black Hat
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm
Location: NYC

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#383 Post by Black Hat » Wed Sep 04, 2019 1:52 pm

Two should have watched by now flicks finally crossed off my list...

Sergeant York — I think this was the most successful film of Hawks' career, but also the one among his most popular not thought too highly of once critics reevaluated his career. While you get the sense because of certain flourishes stylistically (the war scenes, apparently shot by the second unit) — the construction of the subject matter focusing on a single person, an unsophisticated southern bumpkin, no woman (total departures for Hawks) — that this one probably wasn't completely Hawks' baby or that he was somewhat uncomfortable with the story. What Sergeant York still does however, is retain Hawks' strengths, first with his "3 great scenes, 10 ok scenes, no bad scenes" filmmaking philosophy and then his uncanny ability to draw surprisingly good performances from his actors, in this case Gary Cooper who is shockingly excellent here. Much of the criticism of the film has to do with its hokeyness and politics, but with the latter I find it silly because Hawks was apolitical in his work, the man was about entertaining through storytelling and understood that politics is the enemy of box office. I actually found this film's politics pretty negligible in comparison with other films of its time, especially when it comes to 'propaganda' which is a front this film has unfairly been attacked — Pearl Harbor happened when the film was already in theaters. With regard to hokeyness, some people are just hokey and that's ok as long as the character and story are interesting enough which York certainly is, plus the guy had legitimate questions about the nature of goodness vs the necessity of war which are impressively complex ideas to negotiate between and directly parallels what the United States was experiencing at the time. All in all I found this to be an incredibly entertaining and surprisingly complex Hawks film and I think those critics who dismiss the film are telling us far more about themselves than they are about Sergeant York.

The Westerner — After watching this one I shouldn't have been surprised to learn William Wyler cut his teeth making westerns. There is much that's striking about this film, so much to unpack. The first stand out is the film's photography and staging which consistently conveyed a sense of dread regardless of what was being said or rather agreed to between characters. The lighting is especially reminiscent of The Grapes of Wrath and unsurprisingly Gregg Tolland shot both, not to mention everything else visually additive to storytelling during these years. I was also stunned to see the relationship between Judge Roy Bean — in by far Walter Brennan's best role and the only one of his Oscars he deserved —and in Gary Cooper's typically beautiful masculinity. The thing about Cooper's Cole Harden here is his beauty is decisively more accented than traditional masculinity. This is happening despite his status as a possible outlaw, potentially menacing, certainly nomadic and mysterious character. It's a part that I don't think another actor could have played because the film travels in levels of explicit gayness that relies on an actor's ability to be simultaneously open and stoic without ever losing beauty which was Cooper's strength, as something of a straight man to project all sorts of themes off of. Wyler's signature melodrama comes not between Cooper & his love interest, easily the most uninspiring scenes of the film, but between Cooper and Brennan. These two are clearly in love and their attacks on one another are always crimes of passion, but when it comes to its inevitable end the villain is mourned with a sense of feeling that clearly indicates a loss of love. Really impressive, fascinating and smart film that's definitely going to be on my list, I didn't even know Gay Noir Westerns were a thing let alone a 1940 thing.

User avatar
Shrew
The Untamed One
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:22 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#384 Post by Shrew » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:33 pm

I like Sergeant York (though I don't think it'd make my top 10 Hawks films), but it is absolutely propaganda. It may not be in the pejorative sense, but it was crafted with the clear intent of getting the US into WWII, and to counter the American isolationist movement. It's the kind of thing, along with the Powell and Pressburgers from this decade, that should be pointed to as an example of "good" and well-crafted propaganda to complicate the notion that all propaganda is inherently bad.

A Foreign Affair (Wilder, 1948)
Why is this Billy Wilder film shot in the ruins of post-war Berlin and starring Marlene Dietrich and Jean Arthur in some of their last major roles not discussed more often? Because it’s bad. Or more accurately, half of it is great, and half of it is awful, which makes it not just bad but agonizing.

The good stuff is Dietrich and Berlin. The bad stuff is Jean Arthur and “leading man” John Lund, whose anti-charisma as a shady army captain exploiting the black market to win the favor of Dietrich’s ex-Nazi was surely a touchstone for Tobey Maguire’s loathsome turn in The Good German, yet the film centers him as the romantic hero. With Arthur, the problem is mainly Wilder and Brackett’s script, which wallows in some of the more misogynistic tropes of screwball; Arthur is a prim and proper congresswoman from Iowa, so of course she can’t see through Lund’s obvious shadiness, and instantly loses all sense of her former focus and bearing once she falls for him. She plays the character like a Capra hero, all parochial naivete, but instead of facing down the cynical world with her bucolic notions, Wilder wants to teach her the lesson. That challenge to blind ideals could work in theory, and the film does make valid arguments for allowing the moral grey area of Berlin’s black markets and fraternizing soldiers, but it comes across as a mean-spirited takedown of a powerful woman.

Especially because the object of her affections is such an obvious skeeve with no compensating charm. In the film’s pivotal scene, both in plot and overall quality, Lund tries to seduce Arthur by advancing toward her as she backs away, pulling out filing cabinet drawers to block his way while she recites “The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere” to drown out his come-ons. It… looks and plays like the build-up to a rape. The ending tries to fix this by repeating the scene with the genders reversed, but it only brings back to mind the initial sourness.

But Dietrich’s desperate Nazi-turned-lounge singer is great, hitting the perfect balance between sinister and pitiable. Both Arthur and Lund have much better chemistry with her than with each other. The accepted duplicity in Dietrich and Lund’s relationship allows the actors to play up the characters’ darker sides while adding some much needed sweetness—you know, actual chemistry. And the big scene with Dietrich and Arthur, in which Dietrich morally compromises Arthur by helping her get out of a nightclub raid, is great, and speaks to the great nourish film that could have been, if it weren’t so busy staging a screwball takedown of strawman American naivete.

Historical footnote: Iowa didn’t elect a single woman to congress until Joni Ernst in 2014. I blame this film.
Last edited by Shrew on Wed Sep 04, 2019 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#385 Post by domino harvey » Wed Sep 04, 2019 5:37 pm

The US military had recruitment tables set up in the lobbies of theatres showing Sgt York to sign up young men gung ho to fight right after seeing the film. It played for well over a year and was responsible for who knows how many recruits joining up. It is one of the most notable reminders of the social power and impact of film.

ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#386 Post by ntnon » Wed Sep 04, 2019 9:38 pm

Speaking of wartime propaganda... I, like the FBI, spent some time watching the House on 92nd Street. They foiled some subversive Nazis; I watched a straightforward but well-made film. Nothing was surprising, the tense moments were fairly obvious, and all the twists were standard. The voiceover about the greatness of the Federal Bureau was as imposing and earnest as any, and none of the actors seemed much above average. But, it was quite good for what it was.

Ingrid Bergman speaking Swedish and navigating 'normal' life (where 'normal' includes being shot and adopting a pseudonym to restart ones life..) and love in June Night seems a lot better than it probably is because of Ms Bergman's skill and the lyrical qualities of the language. Glad I bumped into this on the Channel.
Last edited by ntnon on Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#387 Post by therewillbeblus » Thu Sep 05, 2019 11:22 pm

Night Train to Munich: I remembered strongly disliking this early Carol Reed film, but on a second viewing those low expectations helped make this a serviceable wartime suspense-adventure film. Nothing creates too much tension here but that’s fine because taking itself too seriously by forcing stakes that don’t belong in this picture would likely cause the film to fold in on itself. Reed knows how to shoot a film and wisely chooses to use minimally invasive style (aside from that first tracking shot moving into the miniature), while the performances keep the same energy as the other elements, not passive but not too loud either. This results in a consistently comfortable genre picture that’s not trying to be anything else, though that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s worth seeing as the clean and mildly intriguing setup loses the little steam it had in the second half, settling for a degree of mediocrity too sour to recommend.

The Fallen Idol: A mostly well-crafted film from a child’s perspective, showing promise early on as the unreliable narrator based on youthfulness with the childlike idolization of Richardson emphasized, making it impossible not to skew the lens of objectivity towards the subjective. The dynamics are fleshed out in bountiful scenes of mostly nonverbal relationship building, and most of the film’s successful moments are due to the commitment to the child’s vision, down to technical elements including low angled cameras a la Ozu. Unfortunately Reed doesn’t stick with the boy for the ‘mystery’ death scene, extending an objective eye for us to see what occurs and disrupting that dedication to a point of view that would likely have been far more rewarding if the audience was unaware of the source of the fall. I can appreciate that Reed is attempting to extinguish this mystery out of fear that it would serve as a distraction preventing our investment in how the relationship dynamics and information available to the protagonist shape his actions and non-actions in the long-winded ‘climax.’ However this choice, while unique, doesn’t make the most of what comes after it and we’re eventually left with a film of many strengths even if it doesn’t deliver on all fronts.

Five Graves to Cairo: A supremely entertaining wartime spy/adventure film. Wilder does right by placing the audience deep into the mystical location of an island on land, easing the transition of one’s transportation into a fantasy world by layering this within the fantasy of movies themselves. Characters are well-conceived and their developments and motivations are explored naturally. It’s a tight film, with no fat and plenty of exciting plot twists and scenes of interplay and action from verbal spats to violence. These 90 minutes strung together make for one of the breeziest revisits I’ve experienced as of late, and I mean that as a high compliment. This is one of Wilder’s best and most enjoyable films.

The Lost Weekend: This couldn’t be more different: a tough watch but a great movie about alcoholism that I’ve only seen once before a long time ago (and I likely won’t be seeing it anytime soon). Wilder wisely roots his story in an isolated composite of a man powerless over his compulsions and hits some realistic behaviors of the destructive alcoholic. Some of the mannerisms can come across as perhaps a bit animated or exaggerated to some but I think they’re mostly authentic, especially as this is about a man scraping against the lowest surface of his own rock bottom. Details such as the desperate search for a bottle gone missing in a blackout, hanging them out of the windows by strings, the obsessive preoccupations, the empty promises, the rationalizations, the stealing, or the final hallucination of the rats and bats during a state of delirium tremens are disturbing realities. The script is rather validating for its time and Milland is a deserving recipient of his Oscar, never settling for ham as he easily could have during these early years as the concept of alcoholism in the public eye was only just forming, long before it was appreciated and twenty years before the APA or AMA publically gave it a diagnosis and recognized it a disease. It’s a hard film to place on a list because it’s greatness is devoid of any entertainment. While there have been better films made on addiction since, this gets a lot right for its time and doesn’t feel too dated in depicting the universal traits that were there 75 years ago and will be just as relevant in another 75. Highly recommended but only if you’re interested in this kind of presentation and willing to engage with the film on this level.

Adam’s Rib: Tracy/Hepburn collabs aren’t usually my idea of a good time. As usual Hepburn finds her own interest in exercising her range swaying between the hyper independent persona and restrained dramatic sweetness in passion for the cause of her client, and gender, but this is nothing new and doesn’t quite work here. In general the comedy-drama line feels out of place, especially in the home scenes, but can also blur and transition well in some of the courtroom scenes. The tone changes overall don’t make for an effective cohesive film and ultimately fails for the rate at which it deters to campiness when attempting genuine commentary on sexual politics. Perhaps at the time this played well but it’s glaring now that the film’s mood choices don’t trust the content’s force. The movie is afraid to embrace the chance to take itself seriously enough when it should, and dramatic leaps or reversions to jokes fall flat more often than not. David Wayne and Judy Holliday do their best to add substance to the film but their scenes are too limited to make an impact that would warrant this film a recommendation. The last act in particular reaches for sobering complexities of gender dynamics and farcical humor at once in a cringing attempt at fusion to deliver satisfaction for all. What a misfire.

ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#388 Post by ntnon » Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:52 am

I really don't like - or know very much about - opera, but Susan Alexander Kane's singing doesn't seem quite as abysmal as the notices suggest. (Her protestations reminded me of Singin' in the Rain's Lena Lamont, which was interesting) ..but anyway. It's easy to overlook that beneath all the technical praise and platitudes, Citizen Kane also features a thoroughly well-written, well-acted and well-presented story. It's realistic, devastating, cynical and enjoyable. Possibly the trump card, though, is the end. In a few minutes we hear finally that "Rosebud" is irrelevant - a macguffin - and a piece of a puzzle; allegorical and symbolic and neither. And then when we see what it refers to... it does explain CFK. (And many people throughout history - perhaps Michael Jackson more than most.) And after that clever, layered and well-done reveal, we get the fantastic final dig of the credits echoing the subplot. Kane created a singer, and Welles created actors...

The Long Voyage Home is interesting, both as a general overview of the claustrophobic life of sailors and in its specific case studies: those who know no else, those who want out, those who are selflessly(ish) sequestering themselves, etc. More telling are the desperate mini-plots - violence-as-escapism, fear whipped into witchhunts, abject terror at literally sitting on a bomb... and a Scandinavian John Wayne for some reason.

User avatar
Feego
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Texas

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#389 Post by Feego » Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:38 am

I haven't been actively watching films for this project, but I thought I'd post about a few 1940s movies I have watched since the thread opened.

The first three are highlights from Warner Archive's Popeye the Sailor: Vol. 1 Blu-ray.

We’re on Our Way to Rio (1944)
Popeye and Bluto are best buds in this short (or at least they begin that way) as they head off to Rio for vacation together and encounter Olive Oyl as Carmen Miranda. The influence from Tex Avery’s Red Hot Riding Hood is pronounced to the point of plagiarism, with Popeye and Bluto contorting their bodies and howling like wolves in orgasmic response to Olive's samba. But there’s plenty of manic energy and beautiful, fluid camera movement that is reminiscent of Disney during the era.

Pop-Pie a la Mode (1945)
Popeye ends up on a desert island populated by black cannibals, and the film reaches a level of giddy racism that could almost be mistaken for parody. It’s a case where even as someone who is no stranger to cavalier political incorrectness in cartoons (and media in general) from this era, I still can’t totally grasp how the black=cannibal depiction was ever accepted as mainstream entertainment literally less than half a century before I was born. That said, the black characters are so far from resembling anything remotely human, and the whole thing is so manically absurd, that it’s still watchable as a freakshow relic.

Mess Production (1945)
This is my absolute favorite short on the Volume 1 Blu-ray. Olive Oyl clunks her head and wanders precariously in a trance through a factory works as machines threaten to kill her at every turn. It’s the most surreal offering in this collection, and my major takeaway was that it’s the closest any Famous Studios short I've watched has come to the brilliant Fleischer shorts. A few weeks later, I learned that it is in fact a loose remake of Fleischer’s 1937 Lost and Foundry.

Lonesome Lenny (1946)
Screwy Squirrel tries his best to escape the (literally) smothering love of big dopey dog Lenny. This is one of the most hilarious and anarchic cartoons I’ve seen in some time, and it's just full to the brim with zany chases and inventiveness. I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I didn’t make the connection between Lenny the dog and the character from Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, even though I’ve read the book (nearly 20 years ago). This connection highlights an even nastier streak in the film than I first perceived.

Great Expectations (1946, David Lean)
I hadn’t watched this in a long time, but after re-reading the novel earlier this year, this film didn’t quite match my fond memories. An exceptionally good cast is nearly faultless, but Guy Green's cinematography is the real star. The movie's first chapter, from Pip's encounter with Magwich to the latter's capture, is an absolute stunner. Green immerses us in the foggy marshes in which a child's nightmares might become reality. The rich atmosphere extends to the Gothic dwellings of Miss Havisham. Much of Dickens' satire of wealthy machinations is lost in the streamlining, but it still works as a series of wild coincidences and ironies. There are only two blips that keep this from totally soaring for me. Once Pip grows up, the story loses that sense of wonder and danger so well crafted in the first section. And Valerie Hobson, while not bad in the role of adult Estella, can't match the devastating impression left by younger Jean Simmons. It's tempting to think that if a more age-appropriate male lead had been cast (John Mills is fine but looks every bit of his 38 years), then 17-year-old Simmons could have played Estella all the way through.

Citizen Kane (1941, Orson Welles)
Re-watching this for the first time in about 15 years, I am staggered all over again by just how visually forceful this movie is. For someone whose expertise was in the theatre and radio, Welles truly took full advantage of all a camera could do and probably pushed it to new heights. While not all of the innovations that are often attributed to this movie are accurate (this was not the first Hollywood movie to show ceilings!), it's as though Welles consumed every technical and narrative innovation since the silent era and reconfigured them into something wholly new and fully developed. Not a single shot passes that is not arresting in some way.

Even more confounding is that despite all of the stylization, performance is never lost. Welles' theatre roots are clearly visible in his generosity toward the actors, who are allowed to perform (sometimes to the rafters) quite freely. Kudos to his cast as well who all seem so comfortable on camera in what for most of them was their first movie.

What struck me the most on this viewing, however, was the film's elegiac quality. Everyone is familiar with Kane's death scene at the outset and the quest to discover what his final word meant. But as the reporter interviews Kane's various associates and acquaintances, there's a tragic element in all of their stories and performances, a sense that their vitality, youthful energy and ambition have come to an end, perhaps without ever having served any great purpose. Bernard Herrmann's mournful score underlines all of this.

I'd be remiss not to mention the film's occasional veering into zippy comedy, and it's a miracle that this is so well-balanced with the heavy tragedy surrounding it.

Duel in the Sun (1946, King Vidor)
Jennifer Jones gets seXXXed up as a fiery "half-breed" in a performance that’s often too loud for the movie, but I don't blame her because frankly I wish the movie was playing at her volume. Selznick was clearly still chasing the next Gone with the Wind, so the melodrama is tempered by overlength and his aim for prestige. King Vidor's direction is colorful and visually inventive, harking back to his silent-era days. Speaking of which, Lillian Gish's final scene is basically a bravura pantomime, and I'm convinced she received her Oscar nomination for this bit alone. I enjoyed seeing Gregory Peck affect a sleazier persona as a horny cad with an ass fixation. The climax is gloriously over the top and makes this unwieldy beast a must-watch.

Romance on the High Seas (1948, Michael Curtiz)
Doris Day hits it out of the park with her very first movie role. The opening with wet blankets Don De Fore and Janis Paige takes its time to let her in, but once Day steps up she adds greatly needed spark. Despite fourth billing, she is the star of the show, belting out some great tunes and sharing wonderful chemistry with Jack Carson. Her first rendition of "It's Magic" is enough to make anyone fall in love (and she gets to sing it twice more!). How this didn’t become her signature song is a mystery for the ages. The finale is a colorful bit of Busby Berkeley extravagance, but this is Day's vehicle all the way.

Meet Me in St. Louis (1944, Vincente Minnelli)
This is one of those movies I’ve caught in bits and pieces over the years but never sat and watched in its entirety. When I finally did recently, it was only to find out I had literally seen every second of this film already. The Halloween segment is my favorite, a mini masterpiece of childhood imagination and sense of adventure, respectful of the impenetrable worlds children design for themselves and gorgeously shot on a studio backlot. The autumnal atmosphere has never been rivaled in any other Halloween film I’ve seen. The rest of the film is virtually perfect in nostalgic tone, period recreation, and performance. The actors, particularly Mary Astor and Leon Ames as the parents, evoke a strong sense of family history, complete with barely expressed but fleetingly glimpsed resentments. The children’s morbid obsessions keep the film from becoming too saccharine. Without bursting into extravagant productions, the songs flow naturally from the narrative and allow the characters needed emotional expression.

Meet John Doe (1941, Frank Capra)
Like Capra’s previous Mr. Deeds and Mr. Smith, this starts out cute before plunging into the dark heart of America. While it repeats certain beats from the prior films, this is a bit messier all around in the best possible way. Cooper’s hero is less rooted in ideals and more easily swayed. "John Doe" has no qualms in the beginning about taking part in a dishonest scheme. He in fact enjoys the perks of his newfound comfort. He becomes wrapped up in the hogwash he dishes out, rejects it, and then embraces it again. Likewise, the film jumps from amusing newspaper satire to heartfelt pap and then back to satire and finally tragedy. Even the philosophy at the film's core, that we do away with traditional government and just love each other, is treated both earnestly and as ridiculous. This messiness adds realism, although it still reaches near horrific levels of exaggeration. As in the earlier films, we are treated to corrupt politicians and businessmen, but the most frightening characters are the American people themselves. When they gather by the hundreds in an arena on a rainy night, singing, praying, and pledging allegiance to this symbolic man, it's an uneasy sight that's captured with appropriately canted angles and moody lighting. They turn on a dime, ready to rip apart someone they just fawned over with blind devotion. Capra was indecisive about the ending, but what we get is perfect in the way it seems to wrap up everything but really solves nothing. The chaos this vision of America has created for itself cannot be contained or eradicated with any swift resolution.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#390 Post by swo17 » Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:03 pm

This is totally random but I just watched The Feminine Touch and, as much as I enjoyed it, I spent just as much of the runtime marveling at how well Brad Pitt and Leo DiCaprio could ape Don Ameche and Van Heflin in a remake

ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#391 Post by ntnon » Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:07 pm

Out of the Past has mixed motives, triple-crosses and two of the most-notable cleft-chins going. (Where was Cary Grant to fill in as a heavy?) Everybody is bad, or mostly-rotten and almost every character gets to shoot someone. I liked it, even if the twistiness made it occasionally hard to follow - and frequently hard to empathise: nobody acts like half those people did..

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#392 Post by domino harvey » Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:49 pm

swo17 wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:03 pm
This is totally random but I just watched The Feminine Touch and, as much as I enjoyed it, I spent just as much of the runtime marveling at how well Brad Pitt and Leo DiCaprio could ape Don Ameche and Van Heflin in a remake
I’m just glad someone finally watched this after me beating the drum for it all these years! Who could ever fill the shoes of Rosalind Russell though?

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#393 Post by swo17 » Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:55 pm

An object of universal desire so...Margot Robbie? Or do you mean outside the cast of the new Tarantino film?

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#394 Post by domino harvey » Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:56 pm

ntnon wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:52 am
I really don't like - or know very much about - opera, but Susan Alexander Kane's singing doesn't seem quite as abysmal as the notices suggest. (Her protestations reminded me of Singin' in the Rain's Lena Lamont, which was interesting) ..but anyway.
Opera, like the nuances of wine tasting and other wealthy pursuits, is a fantastically exacting art form that requires an “ear” and long cultural traditions and expensive / time-consuming education to discern the intricacies. And like wine, laypeople can still enjoy it and get a general sense of what works and what doesn’t, but while it’s been a while since I last saw it, my recollection is that there’s not much danger of anyone enjoying the warbling of Kane’s wife and her grab-bag tonalities

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#395 Post by domino harvey » Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:58 pm

swo17 wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 12:55 pm
An object of universal desire so...Margot Robbie? Or do you mean outside the cast of the new Tarantino film?
Wait, there are actors who aren’t in the new Tarantino film? 😲

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#396 Post by swo17 » Fri Sep 06, 2019 1:07 pm

Only Burt Reynolds, and only because he died

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#397 Post by domino harvey » Fri Sep 06, 2019 1:08 pm

One last self-sabotage of his career from that guy, Classic Burt

ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#398 Post by ntnon » Fri Sep 06, 2019 4:08 pm

The Stranger is slight, but stirring. Like Out of the Past (et al.) it's partly asking the timeless question: 'if you love someone, does their past change your feelings?' And then answers that question with the only really accurate one: of course not. New information changes everything, it's merely the degree to which it changes, or the strength of the feelings attempted to be modified. Thankfully, Edward G Robinson is there to casually push the main character a) towards to complete breakdown and b) into the path of a murderer.. The final fifteen-odd minutes are packed full of people inviting attack/death, but relatively-plausibly so - the desperate, sad invitations of trust lost, happiness dashed or usefullness outlasted.

ntnon
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#399 Post by ntnon » Fri Sep 06, 2019 4:21 pm

Feego wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:38 am
Citizen Kane (1941, Orson Welles)
Re-watching this for the first time in about 15 years, I am staggered all over again by just how visually forceful this movie is. For someone whose expertise was in the theatre and radio, Welles truly took full advantage of all a camera could do and probably pushed it to new heights...

Even more confounding is that despite all of the stylization, performance is never lost. Welles' theatre roots are clearly visible in his generosity toward the actors, who are allowed to perform (sometimes to the rafters) quite freely. Kudos to his cast as well who all seem so comfortable on camera in what for most of them was their first movie.

What struck me the most on this viewing, however, was the film's elegiac quality. Everyone is familiar with Kane's death scene at the outset and the quest to discover what his final word meant. But as the reporter interviews Kane's various associates and acquaintances, there's a tragic element in all of their stories and performances, a sense that their vitality, youthful energy and ambition have come to an end, perhaps without ever having served any great purpose. Bernard Herrmann's mournful score underlines all of this.
Something like that stood out for me, too - as Kane searches for happiness (i.e. an impossible return to the carefree days of youth) and yearns for his lost relationship with his mother (c.f. Freud), he can buy - and do - anything he likes, and yet everything he touches gets tainted or destroyed, despite his best intentions.

It's not just 'power corrupts', those at the top are lonely, and money isn't everything - it's an abject lesson in the limits of wealth and intention: you cannot just throw money at things. Talent and principles and family & friends are more important.
Feego wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:38 am
I'd be remiss not to mention the film's occasional veering into zippy comedy, and it's a miracle that this is so well-balanced with the heavy tragedy surrounding it.
The random chorus girl dancing routine struck me as both out-of-place and VERY in character..
Feego wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:38 am
Meet John Doe (1941, Frank Capra)
Like Capra’s previous Mr. Deeds and Mr. Smith, this starts out cute before plunging into the dark heart of America. While it repeats certain beats from the prior films, this is a bit messier all around in the best possible way. Cooper’s hero is less rooted in ideals and more easily swayed. "John Doe" has no qualms in the beginning about taking part in a dishonest scheme. He in fact enjoys the perks of his newfound comfort. He becomes wrapped up in the hogwash he dishes out, rejects it, and then embraces it again. Likewise, the film jumps from amusing newspaper satire to heartfelt pap and then back to satire and finally tragedy. Even the philosophy at the film's core, that we do away with traditional government and just love each other, is treated both earnestly and as ridiculous. This messiness adds realism, although it still reaches near horrific levels of exaggeration. As in the earlier films, we are treated to corrupt politicians and businessmen, but the most frightening characters are the American people themselves. When they gather by the hundreds in an arena on a rainy night, singing, praying, and pledging allegiance to this symbolic man, it's an uneasy sight that's captured with appropriately canted angles and moody lighting. They turn on a dime, ready to rip apart someone they just fawned over with blind devotion. Capra was indecisive about the ending, but what we get is perfect in the way it seems to wrap up everything but really solves nothing. The chaos this vision of America has created for itself cannot be contained or eradicated with any swift resolution.
Well written. It's a great juggling act of the contradictions, compromises and complexities of life. Stanwyck is in earnest... but she's being paid. Arnold is funding beneficial change... so he can take over government. Cooper believes, doesn't believe, cares and doesn't care about truth, honesty, baseball and morality. Arguably the most depressing moment is when the John Doe Club turns on him and disbands... but then realises the error of their ways and reunites. It's a perfect Life of Brian-esque exhortation to not need guidance, and just be good individuals.

Because it doesn't matter if John Doe is "real" so long as his words and inspiration are close enough to real. But... anything built on a lie, however right and useful, collapses easily. And the whims of the people are shaped as mich by reportage and feeling as belief and decency.

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

Re: The 1940s List: Discussion and Suggestions

#400 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Sep 06, 2019 4:45 pm

Feego wrote:
Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:38 am
I'd be remiss not to mention the film's occasional veering into zippy comedy, and it's a miracle that this is so well-balanced with the heavy tragedy surrounding it.
I forget where I read it, but didn't Welles himself declare that Citizen Kane was actually a comedy in his eyes? Probably to be perverse or contrarious to some degree, considering his persona and since it's clearly intentionally dramatic, but the comment definitely made me re-evaluate how much comedy is hidden outside of the obvious touches.

Post Reply