Showing posts with label James Stewart. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Stewart. Show all posts

Thursday, July 01, 2010

"What's Up Doc?": A Review Of 1950's Harvey

Harvey
Directed by Henry Koster
Starring: James Stewart, Josephine Hull, Victoria Horne, Peggy Dow, Jesse White, Charles Drake, Cecil Kellaway, William H. Lynn
Grade: B

In order to relate to this film you must first regress to your childhood; did you at any time have an imaginary friend? If the answer is yes, and said friend was a six-feet-three-inches tall rabbit called Harvey, there is much in this film for you. If not, and the idea of a forty-two year old man talking to an invisible mythical creature is somehow not drawing on your experiences, then never fear, Harvey has enough bite and wisdom to make for raucously fun viewing.

Elwood P. Dowd, and his hearty feelings for friend Harvey, drive his sister Veta up the wall, and force her into a difficult decision about the future of their lives together. This leads to a frantic, sprawling chase, with many others being drawn into the family's troubles. Amidst this talk about Harvey, Henry Koster resists the temptation to dress a tall man in a bunny outfit. Harvey remains invisible for the entire film, only depicted visually once, in a portrait of Elwood and the rabbit together. By not drawing attention to the fantasy elements of the film, Elwood's reverence and insistence upon Harvey is conceded as a natural fixture of a worrisome equilibrious state. This isn't "normal" behaviour, but it is normality for Elwood and his family, who appear to have lived with the situation as it is for long enough.

For all of the implications about mental illness and the need to understand it, Harvey's presence as a legitimate figure is introduced too early, and the film's overall rationalisation of him instigates inconsistencies within the narrative. The problem therein lies in Veta's journey to the sanitarium to have her brother committed. The long appointment she has with the chief psychiatric advisor Dr. Sanderson encompasses hysterical remonstrations of how she simply can't cope with her brother's wild affection for a transparent creature, how it prevents Veta from entertaining guests, and her daughter Myrtle Mae from attracting suitors. The increasingly erratic tone of Veta leads the Doctor to assess that she herself is the insane one. During Veta's initial discussion with the Doctor she confesses to having sometimes seen Harvey, allaying the impression that she believes that he exists. Veta's turmoil in deciding between her brother's happiness and her social status is halted by her wrongful imprisonment, which feels as much of a punishment for her attempted actions as it does a trigger for the film's galavanting antics to be thrust into life. The regret that filters through Josephine Hull as Veta takes shape with every disappearing second of Elwood's impending hospitalisation. She shows such canny ability in using her roundabout hesitancy to demonstrate the impetuous nature of Veta as a loveable fusspot, in her way trying to please everybody even though she really can't. I don't think that Harvey creates enough of a predicament for Veta to allow us to understand why she intends to commit Elwood for believing in someone she knows herself is actually there, even if Hull does an excellent job in making this fact seem like something that Veta is desperate to banish to her sub-conscious.

As Elwood, James Stewart surveys the ratpack of unnecessary commotion before him like an infant watching older children play games he can't quite understand yet. He suppresses the wide-eyed goofiness of his persona to accomodate Elwood's studious pleasantries, since, after all, he is the most capable of seeing past the surface of life. Elwood never once speaks out-of-turn and yet exists to be out-of-turn, and Stewart recognises that the role calls for efficiency and dynamism as much as it does neutrality, encouraging understanding without appearing to, even though you sense that he needs people to like him to survive.

Harvey occasionally takes on this more self-important role as an indictment of how the mentally ill are treated, as a social embarassment that can only be remedied by imprisonment and pill-popping. While John Cromwell's Caged was dealing with the prison system in a much more damning fervour that year, Harvey rather shrewdly skirts about the issue by portraying Elwood as the most utterly harmless, easy-going, pleasant person you could ever wish to meet. It's an easy way of gaining sympathy for Dowd, and works mainly because the film's absence of a fiercely opposing, authoritarian character allows for everyone in Harvey to interact on a similar level. As Capra's You Can't Take It With You reinforced the importance of family and the triviality of finance, Harvey sends a message that generosity, kindness, and imagination supercede social reputation and traditional views of "normality". It reads as a screwball view of stability as culturally-rigid, cruel even, and a celebration of people's weaknesses as an integral, unashamed part of their character.

"Do Unto Others" is an old religious philosophy, but a lovely one, even more prominent than the ears of a giant imaginary rabbit, or Josephine Hull's interesting collection of hats. The beguiling energies of Harvey's stage heritage often assume the task of hurtling us towards an accepting conclusion, but I feel keenly subserviant towards its demands to be liked, since what it offers is so ultimately special. Harvey owes more to the nuances of James Stewart's rich portrayal than some will attest, but there's much to be said for its inimitable brand of faith.

Wednesday, May 05, 2010

1952, Year in Review: The Greatest Show on Earth

The Greatest Show on Earth
Directed by Cecil B. DeMille
Starring: Betty Hutton, James Stewart, Charlton Heston, Gloria Grahame, Cornel Wilde
Grade: C -

The closest modern equivalent to Cecil B. DeMille's oft-criticised Best Picture winner is probably 2008's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Not really because of any crossover with regard to plot (one film is about backstage tension among a circus troupe, the other about a man ageing backwards) but because the two pictures share a level of self-importance synonymous with Oscar Bait. While Button was beaten by Danny Boyle's Slumdog piledriver The Greatest Show managed to hold on for victory, amidst stiff competition from John Ford's The Quiet Man and legendary anti-Western High Noon.

Most frustrating about DeMille's picture is the feigned sense of grandeur that filters through it, spelled out by an intrusive booming narration that stresses the sensational and urges you to absorb the Serious Spectacle. The impetuous immediacy of DeMille's emphasis on scale -- not necessarily even style -- over substance feels all the more redundant as the narrative comparatively dwindles in complexity and ambition. The troupe of performers (the likes of which include Betty Hutton as a vivacious trapeze artist and James Stewart as a depressed clown) engage in some seriously unconvincing, self-conscious scenery, strewn with storm-in-a-teacup-style issues that feel extracted from films like William Wyler's The Best Years of Our Lives, but with no consideration for thematic relevance or involvement.

It's certainly true that The Greatest Show on Earth hasn't aged at all well - not least because the emphasis on technicolour showmanship and general business is so motivated towards seeming innovative for the early Fifties. With relative retrospective enlightenment the coarsely theatrical set-pieces that intersperse the film's misjudged melodrama are strangely laboured, and fail to engage enough to warrant their lengthy sojourn.

I do wonder how much influence DeMille had in Hollywood at this period. Just two years previous to this Norma Desmond had clamoured for his attention in the delicious Sunset Blvd. and he's still regarded as one of the most famous Producers of all time. I can't help but think though that Oscar made a cardinal error in bowing down to The Greatest Show on Earth, since every frame reads of arrogant, lazy filmmaking, to the extent where I don't see how anybody could ever believe that it attains the level of expectation and ambition that it purports to have.

Academy Awards

Wins:
Best Picture
Best Writing, Motion Picture Story

Nominations:
Best Director
Best Costume Design, Colour
Best Film Editing

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Men of the Thirties: 1939

And the Nominees Were:

Robert Donat - Goodbye, Mr. Chips
Clark Gable - Gone With the Wind
Laurence Olivier - Wuthering Heights
Mickey Rooney - Babes in Arms
James Stewart - Mr. Smith Goes To Washington

And the Winner Was:

Robert Donat - Goodbye, Mr. Chips

Gone With the Wind was the film of the year but I'd wager that Gable probably finished third and that the real tussle was between Donat and the nearly-as-saintly Stewart. Gable had won before and Donat was the only other guy previously nominated so probably a pretty standard victory.

My Ratings (in order of preference):-




**** James Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes To Washington

By the time Hitchcock's Rope and Ford's Liberty Valance rolled around James Stewart had the composed-logician-turns-dishevelled-activist act down to a tee, but it's none so effective than in Washington. Up against absurd establishmentarianism Stewart presents the ethics of Capra's film about corruption and coporate back-patting with a winningly gritty sense of underdog, palpably shaken by the rigid state of American politics and the apparent helplessness of its broken morality. It's similar to Cooper's turn as Longfellow Deeds, but while Deeds grappled with issues, Stewart's Jefferson Smith knows the issues and is distinctly unfamiliar with the protocol. A stranglehold of a performance, his eventual hair-tearing antics correlate with the assumed stance of the audience but don't undermine them. We're registering with Smith but he isn't such an assured vessel for the film's politics, and his over-eager desire to foist himself upon Washington and make an impression make his initial tentative steps into Senate life feel distinctly infantile.




**** Clark Gable in Gone With the Wind

Rhett Butler is both an elitist and a masogynist; even though his reputation is far from lofty and his success rate with women seems fairly enviable. Clark Gable proved that he was the perfect person to play the cocksure, non-committal Rhett, who believes he's above and beyond the hick mentality simply because he can get away with not doing an awful lot. Gable has to act opposite one of the best performances there's ever been, but don't be fooled. In a handful of scenes (particularly towards the end) the onus is upon him to turn the film's guilty indulgement of Scarlett O'Hara inside out, and give the film the kind of responsibility as an issue-driven melodrama that it very rarely feels the need to display. His drunken, rough seduction of Scarlett is a particular highlight; this man doesn't know how to be in a relationship or display vulnerability, and he sure as hell doesn't get any help from his other half.


** Robert Donat in Goodbye, Mr. Chips

I thought I was going to get away with ending this project without deeming a performance "hammy", and it's especially amusing that the term is not being used to describe one of the host of head-scatching performances by Paul Muni. Instead, the dishonour is bestowed upon Robert Donat, who plays the paternal schoolmaster Mr. Chips from his twenties to old-age and eventual death. Perhaps it's not so much Donat's fault as the off-putting facial hair he must navigate to get a word out? Nevertheless, the film gives him nothing to do but intersperse bits of tired wisdom to teenagers and occasionally well up with emotion at a moment of remeniscence. Points for effort but overall the turn came across as gimmicky and pedestrian.

* Laurence Olivier in Wuthering Heights

Even though I haven't read Bronte's "Wuthering Heights" it's plain to see that Wyler didn't do a great job with it. The film cuts from event to event with very little time for thought, and so one gets the impression that this version is stolidly faithful. Olivier's Heathcliff is by all accounts a brute, but you learn more about him through Merle Oberon's deft performance as Kathy than anything Sir Lawrence does. He lingers in the background of scenes like a neanderthal troll, and his Hunchback routine consists merely of staring at Kathy as if he'd just been deposited on this planet by an alien race. He fails to demonstrate either his feelings for the woman or the motivations of his character's questionable approach to marriage. Is Heathcliff underwritten here or just not done justice?

Unseen Nominees:-

Mickey Rooney in Babes in Arms

The Snubbed:-


**** Cary Grant in Only Angels Have Wings

As the boss of an air force outlet Grant's Geoff Carter reacts to the early death of a colleague quickly, there's no time for grief during war. It soon becomes apparent, however, that Carter has a similar approach to romance, and as Bonnie (Jean Arthur) does everything she can to make him say that he needs her he resists committing to anything but the job in hand. Only Angels Have Wings is of course a comedy (and a good one at that) but it's often sad, and Grant embodies the film's dynamism, screwball, and homage all at once, rousing people at their lowest and then skulking into resignation himself. A tour-de-force that doesn't come across as one, and a telling example of sociological impact of war.


***
John Wayne in Stagecoach

I have to admit to not much liking John Wayne -- his disarming brashness became a recycled part of his shtick well into the 1970's. At this very early point of his career he perhaps wasn't aware of what he needed to do to get by (the bare minimum for most of his films) and so he gives his character's plucky, reckless protector act a hint of desperation and backstory. If Wayne grew up in Western movies he wasn't quite a loner in 1939, and in Stagecoach his hostility is broader and deeper than a shrug and a trot.