THE AWFUL TRUTH (Leo McCarey, 1937, Columbia)

When it comes to a classic film like THE AWFUL TRUTH (Leo McCarey, 1937, Columbia), my writings and insights can provide very little to inform viewers.  The directing won an Oscar for McCarey, the actors are brilliant; Grant and Dunne are two of the most lauded performers ever and Bellamy was nominated for Best Supporting Actor in the film.  The writing is superlative and the film is a gem.  Rather, I am just going to list three of my favorite moments from the film, in no particular order.  Okay, as they happen in the film.

When Jerry (Cary Grant) invites himself and Dixie Belle Lee (Joyce Compton) to sit and have a drink with Dan (Ralph Bellamy) and Lucy (Irene Dunne) what proceeds is pure comedy.  The couples make small talk and then Dixie goes onstage and does her routine.  As the other three wince at the not so subtle nature of Dixie's routine, you almost have to wonder are they really laughing, barely able to hold in what is obviously a very funny moment?  Next, Dan explains to Lucy how much he loves to dance and insists (with Jerry's help) on taking her to the dance floor.  Jerry's delight as Dan prances around the dance floor with a horrified Lucy is great, but when he offers a tip to the maitre'd to have the song played again AND then the encore comes, is just a truly funny moment.  I love Cary Grant with this smugness to him, Dunne's faces are tremendous and Bellamy plays the yokel to great effect.  So good.

The next moment involves much of the same roles from the three characters.  Jerry is at Lucy's apartment when Dan pays a visit.  Hiding Jerry behind the door, Lucy is in a bad position when Dan insists on a kiss.  Who couldn't sympathize with Lucy at this point, knowing she doesn't want Jerry being a party to this.  We have the added benefit of seeing Jerry behind the door, ever so smug.  And then, Jerry starts with the pencil.  Lucy's laugh each and every time is awesome and it just takes the scene up each time Jerry prods her with the pencil.  Bellamy hits the man in love perfectly, confessing his heart with total love.  Again, great scene.

Finally we see Jerry get his comeuppance for all his glee at Lucy's expense.  Towards the end of the film there are a series of sequences in which a supposedly drunk Lucy makes life rather difficult for Jerry.  Dunne is spectacular, mockingly reprising Dixie's routine as well as causing general mayhem for all involved.  And to see the tables turned on smug Jerry finally makes it possible for them to come together again.

This film is truly one of the best screwball comedies.  It is lighthearted and funny and full of moments that are unforgettable.  I love this film so much.  If you have never seen it, please do, it is well worth it.

The Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer

I believe that if a film doesn't crack any of the gluttonous amount of top film lists often that film becomes overlooked.  There are many such films and these films have great merit and value.  Truly the only way to discover them is to make lists such as one of mine (watching every Cary Grant film) and then just checking them off one by one.  Such is the case with THE BACHELOR AND THE BOBBY SOXER (Irving Reis, RKO Pictures, 1947).  The film doesn't stand out as a timeless classic but there is just enough done within it to make it a really fine film.

Maybe the fact that the film follows pretty generic and formulaic studio standards holds it back.  The pacing of the film is tedious by today's standards which would turn off even the most diehard of cinephiles.  It is formulaic, meaning utterly predictable.  The action (and acting, more later) is stiff throughout the film although there are some truly hysterical moments.  That said, the film works because it lays out what it's intent is immediately, sticks to it closely and accomplishes what it wants.

The accomplished Cary Grant also helps to set this film to a higher standard.  In today's saturated "celebrity universe", where true stars don't exist as they once did to see a star such as Grant is utterly captivating.  Grant had a very rare ability to overshadow everyone else on screen.  Myrna Loy and Shirley Temple were huge stars in their own right, yet every time Grant is on screen you barely notice anyone else.  Now that could be his persona or maybe his acting ability.  In this film, he again does what I feel to be his best performing, comedic turns.  When Cary Grant allowed his persona to slip, to be made fun of a little this is when his work was total genius.  And there are moments in this film which he lets this happen, like when Dickie (Grant) and Tommy (Rudy Vallee) compete in the events.  Grant plays the total object of comedy and it is wonderful.

Interestingly I was not very struck by either Loy or Temple.  In particular the role of Susan Turner (Shirley Temple) should have been a transitional career one.  A huge child star, Temple couldn't adjust to adult roles and it shows in her performance.  Whether it was her performances or audiences not wanting to see her grown up, this is not a great role for her.  And Loy lags in comparison to Temple, not coming close to her excellent performances as Nora Charles in THE THIN MAN series.

The film does capture excellence in its writing and the screenplay won the Oscar that year.  Written by Sidney Sheldon (yes that Sidney Sheldon) the narrative is really striking.  Written today it would cause controversy and I can only imagine how it was viewed in 1947.  Dealing with a younger woman being in love with an older man this plot touches on some tried and true Hollywood tropes.  The older man/younger woman has been a Hollywood staple for years, in front of the camera in casting and behind the scenes on the casting couch.  A social stigma has existed through the years regarding this coupling, even through today.  For Sheldon to write about this topic at the height of the studio period, when the code was its strongest and before a film like LOLITA  had even entered a young Stanley Kubrick's mind is amazing.  The Oscar was surely deserved.

This film will be hard for contemporary audiences to view, unless you are a die hard cinephile who is willing to watch anything.  I loved it so what does that tell you about me?

VITO (Jeffrey Schwarz, HBO Documentary Films, 2012)

I particularly love when a documentary is made about an era in which I think I know the history and the people. And then I watch the documentary which is about a key figure from that era AND it is someone I never heard of before. It reminds me that we all never stop learning and to me that's a good thing. It makes me remember we are all smaller parts of a larger apparatus. Such was the case with the documentary VITO (Jeffrey Schwarz, HBO Documentary Films, 2012), a film that was not only touching and poignant but insightful as well. If a film can take you on a journey, especially one of discovery then it is doing its job. And VITO takes its audience on just such a journey. We gain insight into the life of a gay activist which is not overly stunning but we see his journey during the most revolutionary time in the history of gay activism. To be a part of such a movement, particularly on the ground floor as things are just getting started would have to be exhilarating. One thing that never ceases to amaze me are the struggles a gay person goes through and this film not only shows Vito's personal struggles but those that the entire gay community endured. Being gay in a world that doesn't accept you, one in which many would prefer you dead. Fighting for and earning basic human rights that others already enjoy. Then after much blood and many tears, after finally gaining a foothold in your world, being struck with the deadliest disease a community has known. AIDS was an unknown epidemic but was also a scourge to the gay community. To fight so hard and so valiantly for your cause and then be struck with an unknown killer, one which took many of your leaders. How brutal can a struggle be for people? Another eye opening moment for me was the struggle the earliest gay activists had amongst themselves, the factions that arose within the gay community. As a non gay male I don't often think of the gay community on those terms but after watching VITO I realize that I must. The final striking thing about VITO is just how full a man's life can be. Here was a man who died in his early 40's, yet his life was more full and will be remembered by more than most people could ever dream. Family and friends, causes and achievements, a life full of accomplishment. And to think, I had never heard of the film THE CELLULOID CLOSET. Well at least now I have another film to watch!

ALBERT NOBBS (Rodrigo Garcia, Lionsgate, 2011)

The titular character in the film ALBERT NOBBS (Rodrigo Garcia, Lionsgate, 2011) is a waiter at a hotel in 19th century Ireland. His job is to preform any functions his specific guests may require. He does so stoically, reserved and unassuming. This character takes time getting started and much as the character goes, so to does the film. By the end of the film you sympathize with Nobbs, you want him to have his shop and his wife, you agonize with him as he sees his plans faltering. But something else's happening with Nobbs. He is emerging; strengthening before our eyes. The film is exactly like this because by films end you have become wrapped within the lives of the characters created within this world. This caring comes about through some good performances by its entire cast. The casting for the entire film is remarkable, each performer contributing to the larger film. It is the two women, Hubert Paine (Janet McAteer) and Albert Nobbs (Glenn Close) which take this cast from simply good to really great. McAteer and Close provide nuanced performances. They both show fragility while needing to exude strength to their outside world. It is this world which fascinates me most. Garcia crafts an excellent insight into 19th century life. His portrait is an intimate one. Every aspect of this world is done remarkably well and technical aspects of production shine. The makeup applied to make Close look more like a man was really good. The costumes were good suggesting a great job wardrobe. Those two aspects fall under production design and the world created for the film was authentic and felt real. And the writing and acting captured the essence of how men and women conducted themselves and did a stellar job of showing how influential social class used to be. The film is not for everyone but I rather liked it. It's quirky but real. It gives us real characters from a different era and time yet those characters are as timeless as today.

IN TIME (Andrew Niccol, 20th Cty. Fox, 2011)

The obvious joke after watching IN TIME (Andrew Niccol, 20th Cty. Fox, 2011) would be to demand of Justin Timberlake to receive your two hours back. It's too easy though and surely everyone associated with the film worked extremely hard to get it completed. Still, finding positive things to discuss is much harder than it appears with this movie. First and foremost, to be able to write, produce and direct a feature film is not only amazing but one hell of a shitty job. So I have to give Andrew Niccol credit for not only undertaking this task but for making a film that made money. The narrative to the film is actually a rather cool concept. Ultimately we already live in a world where time is our true currency, so Niccol's film is a great extrapolation of that. The film is highly stylized yet at the same time maintains a gritty realism to its overall look. The film is beautiful in every aspect, from cinematography to casting. BUT, the narrative for this film was awful. Here is a great indicator regarding a films narrative. Watch a film and never once question the narrative. No questions, good narrative, generally. Unfortunately for IN TIME I was asking questions about fifteen minutes into the film and never stopped. There were plot holes, continuity mistakes regarding the narrative, dropped story lines, randomly picked up story lines; this film had it all. At a certain point I turned to my roommate who I was watching the film with and told her "we are watching until the end, I want to see how bad this gets". And in that regard the film didn't disappoint. As Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried) ran to Will Salas (Timberlake) to get more time, to keep on living; as this unfolded exactly like it previously had between Will and Rachel (Olivia Wilde) I found myself rooting for random things to happen. Like maybe the space-time continuum would explode, or Will would trip, or anything but what did happen (surprise, she made it to him). These are things that shouldn't be happening when you are watching a film. Hey JT, can I get those two hours bud?

Rampart (Owen Moverman, Millennium Entertainment, 2011)

I often tell the story describing how one of my favorite television shows EVER had me completely hooked in its very first episode. THE SHIELD (Shawn Ryan) was a fantastic show, gritty and realistic, and it debuted right after the Rampart Scandal had rocked the LAPD. At the very end of the first episode, after taking great time to establish Vic Mackey (Michael Chiklis) and his team as well as the simmering corruption suspicions about Mackey by Captain Aceveda (Benito Martinez); on a drug raid Mackey shoots a team member. I knew right then and there this show was going to go to levels never before thought of for the crime/police genres and THE SHIELD never disappointed me in seven great seasons. Unfortunately not the same can be said for the film RAMPART (Oren Moverman, Millennium Entertainment, 2011). The film borrows heavily from the style THE SHIELD made its distinctive own. A protagonist cop falling apart at the seams professionally, at home and emotionally, extensive use of location shooting near the Rampart area and an abundance of handheld camera work helping to create authenticity. But unlike it's predecessor, the film carries no weight, it's narrative is lost and rudderless and other than a good performance by Woody Harrelson it is not a very memorable film. Let me start with the films narrative. Great hope abounded as James Ellroy was one of the authors of the script. I can only assume their was too much conflict in direction between Ellroy and Moverman (other co-author) as the narrative is convoluted at best, as the audience gets lost in a myriad of plots and sub-plots. Hard to follow, the narrative is also bloated and misleading and with its ending I believe to be incomplete. There simply is too many unexplained things going on and really no resolution to the film whatsoever. There is a line in the film where the retired cop Hartshom (Ned Beatty) tells Dave Brown (Harrelson) "this ain't your fathers LAPD". Really? Well guess what, RAMPART isn't your fathers L.A. CONFIDENTIAL (Curtis Hanson, Warner Bros., 1997). These shortcomings to the narrative aside I do feel that two excellent things stand out in regards to the film. The first would be the performance by Harrelson as Dave Brown. Brown is a man devolving, unraveling right in front of our eyes. He is losing his career, his family, his life and is powerless to stop the descent. Even when he comes clean to Kyle (Ice Cube) there is no salvation for this man. And Harrelson hits every nuance and note for the character. There is a barely caged emotion lying underneath the surface in this portrayal, a ferocity yearning to explode. Yet Harrelson sublimely keeps it smoldering at the edges. The other aspect of this film I particularly enjoyed was its cinematography. Now I may be in a minority with this opinion but the camera placement and lighting to this film were outstanding (I say this because my friend and viewing partner hated it). Completely unique, it de-centered the action and it's protagonist, furthering the splintering going on in the life of Dave Brown. The lighting was harsh and unflattering helping to paint a realistic mise en scene. The combination of both allowed its audience to be an inconspicuous part of the film, there amongst the muck and mire. The cinematographer to the film, Bobby Bukowski, really outdid himself with this work. I came away very impressed. Which is more than I can say for the film as a whole. Watch it because you should watch everything, because of Woody and the cinematography. Don't watch it if you expect to be blown away like Vic Mackey brushing an informant off his shoulder.

MY WEEK WITH MARILYN (Simon Curtis, Weinstein Co., 2011)

The most striking thing about MY WEEK WITH MARILYN (Simon Curtis, Weinstein Company, 2011) is that it is a film about actors with some incredible acting. Every actor involved with this production performed at high level. Michelle Williams, in the titular role, oozes Marilyn. She hits every nuance of one of the most troubled and iconic figures of film history. In just as difficult a role, Kenneth Branagh plays Sir Laurence Olivier spectacularly, showing the actors vanity, insecurity and presence. These two talented performers tackle playing icons, giants of the film industry and give just amazing performances. It is the lights shined upon these two icons which is most revealing. The film easily could have devolved into a romanticized look at these two stars yet it showed these two with all their flaws for the world to see. Marilyn, maybe the most recognized figure of the 20th century, struggled with insecurity and addiction to pills. Unable to cope with her fame or to acknowledge her place in the world, Williams hits every one of these parts of Marilyn. The most telling moment was as Marilyn (Williams) and Colin (Eddie Redmayne) are walking through Windsor Castle. As she approaches her fans, Marilyn smoothly transitions between innocent girl to Marilyn, seamlessly. This I feel was the essence of Marilyn. She could give the public every ounce of herself and Williams captures that perfectly. The film also speaks to the role of private lives versus public personas. Particularly during this period, the studios did an enormously successful job of managing what the public knew and believed about it's stars. And when Olivier (Branagh) reveals his true feelings to Colin regarding Marilyn, we see exactly this disparity. Olivier knows his fame is fleeting and along with that fame his youth and looks. The mirror that Marilyn provides to him serves to further depend his insecurity. And man, what an incredible amount of insecurity exists for these two icons, as surely exists for all performers. Finally, the self reflexivity of the film sets it apart for me. The several pictures within pictures, the narrative following the plot of a film being made and the manner in which the film strips down the elegance and glamour of filmmaking really make this film for me. Filmmaking is often a maddening and frustrating exercise in futility. Too many variable exist to allow it to run smoothly and this film showcases that nicely. MY WEEK WITH MARILYN is a very nice film, easy to watch and follow, and easy to lose yourself in its magical world.