1942 – US
Director
John Huston
Starring
Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland, George Brent
|
A couple blurbs I read before watching this movie (which, by the way, did nothing to inspire me to watch this movie; Bette Davis did):
A neurotic southerner steals her sister’s husband then vies with her for another man.
(Turner Classic Movies)
A vile woman schemes to destroy her sister’s marriage and her subsequent engagement to another man.
(TV Now)
Neurotic. Vile. Can we find no way to talk about an unsympathetic female character without questioning her mental health or calling her physically disgusting?
Those may be fitting words for this despicable character, but what does it say about the person who dreamed the character up? I wanted to say this is the sort of character only a real misogynist could create, but the film is based on a novel written by a woman. I would like to find a copy of this book to see how far the director and screenwriter fell from the author’s intent, or how complicit the 1940s writer was in perpetuating this distorted image of women.
Equally troubling: what does all this say about the IMDb voters who have given this film a relatively high rating of 7.0? How is this film at all respected? The screenplay is weak, the story meanders, and the supporting actors are almost universally poor. That apart from any feminist concerns of mine. What are other people seeing here?
Oh, this kind of role angers me nearly as much as Davis’ positively simpering turn in The Petrified Forest, also apparently beloved by some. Can women in the golden age of Hollywood only be dolls or monsters? Even the indomitable Tracy Lord was finally made yare.
The film intends to demonstrate the horror of women who try to become men. There is nothing revolutionary about either sister; they are not ultimately meant to be seen as free spirits. Their father (who, incidentally, is probably more stereotypically feminine than anyone in this film, and intentionally so) made the mistake of naming them Stanley and Roy and giving them the personal and financial freedom of a man. Stanley drives her own car (fast) and won’t allow any man to “boss” her. When Craig tells Roy she’s intelligent, she notes, “that’s a trait every man admires — in another man.” The film posits that when intelligence, wealth and a mind of one’s own is crossed with feminine sexuality and manipulation, the product is Stanley: a selfish, revolting, psychopathic monstrosity. What saves Roy from the same fate is her final willingness to marry Craig.
Recommended only for woman-haters and forgiving fans of Davis. |
“Just follow your heart. That’s what I do.”
2004 – US
Director
Jared Hess
Starring
Jon Heder, Jon Gries, Aaron Ruell, Efren Ramirez, Tina Majorino
|
Possibly, it’s better than it is enjoyable.
That’s the best summation I could muster immediately after watching this random-to-a-fault film, which has exhausted me to the point of incoherence. Which, indeed, is probably not a word.
I’m ordinarily a fan of ‘quirky’ films, so I did expect to like this. But I think for quirk to work, you have to find a way to make the characters human, relatable and honest… and Wes Anderson and David O. Russell this is not. This is all non sequitur and bizarre physical comedy. The plot, such as it is, doesn’t evince itself until halfway through the film. And ultimately it has absolutely nothing to say: I feel like I’ve watched an 82-minute inside joke.
Also, that it clocks in at 82 minutes seems unreal to me. Felt like three hours.
I do believe comedy is the most subjective genre in film, and I am especially picky. But this one really got under my skin. Still, you may like it. More people than I can fathom seem to.
Stars for originality, but I suppose it fails to satisfy anything I look for in a film. |
|
Lauren, 27, librarian, & like you, obsessed with film. My tendency is to immerse myself in long & obsessive projects to the exclusion of all else, but you'll typically find a lot of classic Hollywood, 60s/70s world cinema, & contemporary awards bait on these pages.
Review archive — Favorite films — Viewing log
» The Godfather 1972, Francis Ford Coppola
» Avatar 2009, James Cameron
» Days of Heaven 1978, Terrence Malick
» The Young Victoria 2009, Jean-Marc Vallée
» Broken Embraces 2009, Pedro Almodóvar
» Nine 2009, Rob Marshall
» There’s Always Tomorrow 1956, Douglas Sirk
» Thunderbolt 1929, Josef Von Sternberg
» The Love of Sumako the Actress 1947, Kenji Mizoguchi
» Alibi 1929, Roland West
» Allure
» Awards Daily
» Bright Lights Film Journal
» Cinema Becomes Her
» Cinemaniacal
» Cinemascope
» Cinema Talk
» Classic Cinema Online
» The Classic Film Show
» The Classic Maiden
» Collective Contemplations on Cinema
» Critical Culture
» Criticker
» Fataculture
» Film Comment
» Film Int
» Greenbriar Picture Shows
» House of Mirth & Movies
» If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger...
» Jump Cut
» Kinovision
» Mango Grove
» Moo-girl's Movie Munchies
» Movie Morlocks
» Not Coming to a Theater Near You
» Obscure Classics
» An Oval Portrait
» The Pagan Agenda
» Rants & Musings
» Reverse Shot
» The Sam Hill
» Self-Styled Siren
» Senses of Cinema
» Shadowplay
» Sight & Sound
» Sin in Soft Focus
» Something Sweet, Something Tender
» They Shoot Pictures, Don't They?
» Through a Blog Darkly
» To Here Knows When
Friend me
|