THE MAYOR AND THE MINOR (1942)

(Week 6: Ginger Rogers)

THE MAJOR AND THE MINOR (1942)

Directed by Billy Wilder

What's most incredible about this film is that it doesn't force us to believe in a ridiculous plot. Instead, it lures us into believing in it; just like the other characters, we believe her because we want to. 

Ginger Rogers stars as Sue Applegate, a woman who pretends to be twelve years old to get a half-price train ticket home. There isn't a moment here where her disguise looks believable, and the film doesn't pretend that it does. In the beginning we see the train conductors questioning her. The she meets "the major," who happens to have a serious eye problem, explaining how he could be so close to her and still not see the truth. When later she is exposed to a wider audience at the military institute, everybody believes her because they have reasons to want to, reflecting how people only see what they want to see.

Ginger Rogers is so charmingly unglamorous. Applegate doesn't come across as a witty, conniving woman. Instead she seems so jaded by life she would try anything. She doesn't get off on deceiving people seems surprised by how much she is able to get away with. At times she seems to be rolling her eyes at them. The film doesn't let us forget that she is a legendary dancer, but finds a way to incorporate her dancing in just the right moment. The scene where she dances becomes for me the most humorous scene of the film.

I won't pretend there aren't uncomfortable moments here, seeing Rogers in childish clothes being rocked in bed by Ray Milland, or later seeing him express his attraction toward her while he still thinks she's a child. There is reminiscence of Shakespeare "Twelfth Night" here, where the romance comes together so soon after the truth is revealed, as if the attraction had been growing all this time and repressed because the disguise was an obstacle. It didn't bother me too much, however, any more than it bothered Gingers' character. She knows he's attracted to her and she likes it rather than finds it creepy.

This is Billy Wider's directorial debut, and already he knows exactly what he's doing. The story is so beautifully orchestrated there seems to be no wrong notes struck. The supporting characters are so pitch perfect it seems as if he handpicked them himself. THE MAJOR AND THE MINOR is a cute little story that knows how it should be told and has no problems winning a place in the audience's heart. 

EASTER PARADE (1948)

(Week 5: Fred Astaire)

EASTER PARADE (1948)

Directed by Charles Walters

(from Allposters.com)

Many movie musicals rely too heavily on the fame of their stars to bring people to the theater. They don't even need a good plot or a good script, and the stars don't even have to be great singers or dancers, so long as they make money for the studios. Musical numbers are underlined and highlighted rather than seamlessly incorporated into the film. These are what makes them feel outdated and silly. Having seen a handful of these movies, I can't explain how surprised and delighted I was when I watched EASTER PARADE.

When Fred Astaire dances, your jaw drops. When Judy Garland sings, you gasp. These aren't just great performers; they are true stars. Their talents are literally extraordinary. No one can do what they do the way they do it, and that is what carries the film.

The story is pretty simple, but told with great charm. Astaire plays a famous dancer whose partner/lover quits on him. To get back at her, he picked a random dancer from a nightclub and insists that he can turn her into a dancing star. Garland, who isn't a stranger to dancing but certainly not a Ginger Rogers either, fills the role perfectly. Her awkwardness is so believable and charming it's hard not to adore her character. Astaire, though lacking a devastating good look and a masculine build, commands the screen as well as any traditional leading man does. His soul, for lack of a better word, is truly musical. That which makes him an extraordinary dancer makes his singing distinguished and potent, despite being deprived of a great big voice.

All the musical numbers flow smoothly into and out of the scenes. It is as if the film believes in its stars enough to leave them to do what they do best. The songs of Irving Berlin's drive the story forward as opposed to merely providing platforms for the stars to show off. Co-star Ann Miller as the departed lover also wows the audience in her numbers just as much as the couple. 

It must be noted that Astaire and Garland are, on top of all that, good actors. While the story doesn't demand much of their emotional range, it does give them opportunities to prove their talents through subtlety. They play their comedy straight and without being over-aware of it, providing the heartfelt acting that musicals require through every scene and every song in order to suspend the disbelief of such a grand medium. EASTER PARADE knows how to utilize its stars and doesn't work too hard to please its audience.

MARY OF SCOTLAND (1936)

(Week 4: Katharine Hepburn) 

MARY OF SCOTLAND (1936)

Directed by John Ford

(from katharine-hepburn.webs.com)

I don't expect every movie based on historical events to be accurate. Movies, most importantly, must entertain, while documentaries must be factual, even when the facts aren't so fascinating. MARY OF SCOTLAND, directed by John Ford, is neither historically accurate or entertaining; it makes no efforts to be factual or truthful. Overall, it is boring and depressing.

Rarely have I seen Hepburn so ineffective, so out of place in her elements. In general she exudes strength and charisma enough to play any queen, but here she seems overwhelmed by the awkwardness of the sets, costumes, and script, which underutilizes her massive range of emotions by confining her to the low octave, leaving her little room to be inspired and exercise her versatility. Not once did we see her disappear behind this role. 

The film is based on a play by Maxwell Anderson, one of the instances where dramatic writings don't translate well onto the screen. The theatrical structure seemed to have been thoroughly transformed for the cinema, leaving only its stiff, overwritten speeches. The actors, some of the best of their time, couldn't add enough color to these lines to make them sound less overwrought and irritating. The film has a serious shortage of emotional truth. You know, the truth that fiction must contain more than fact? That which makes us identify with the characters and their circumstances? It has none of that.

Watching this, it is hard not to remember two famous films that are based on the same historical events and characters: MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS (1971) and ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE (2007), both of which weren't well received by the critics, and neither allowed themselves to be bound by facts. Personally I think Vanessa Redgrave  (1971) embodies the character more gracefully than Hepburn, and both films effectively explore the complicated relationship between Elizabeth and Mary. (The 2007 version, over-the-top and mediocre as it may be, contains more moments of truth than Ford's version.) These women strongly believed they were born to be queens, and therefore they must be enemies. There is no reason otherwise for them to hate each other, and so many reasons for them to get along.

In John Ford's version, Elizabeth is portrayed by Florence Eldridge as an archetypal villain, and Mary her helpless victim. They are allowed one moment of truth, towards the end, wherein Elizabeth shows a hint of her vulnerability while explaining why Mary has to die. She almost becomes human but backs out too soon. Still, she came closer to being fully realized that most of the characters in this film.

I find the history of Mary and Elizabeth fascinating enough. It offers many possibilities of good drama. Unfortunately, this one misses all the marks and comes short of being a decent film. As a fan of both Hepburn and Ford, I'd soon rather forget all about this one. 

IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT (1934)

(Week 3: Clark Gable)

IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT (1934)

Directed by Frank Capra

"The Wall of Jericho" (from eastbayri.com)

Clark Gable is handsome and extremely charismatic. He possesses great qualities of a romance hero. It is no wonder that this movie would have launched him to stardom--he shines so brightly he hides the movie's flaws under his light. 

Personally romantic comedy isn't my favorite genre. When the focus is on people falling in love, the film just isn't very interesting or wholesome. But there are people to whom these stories appeal, and there are stories like these that, if well told, could appeal to skeptics like me.

This film has a thin little plot line that works around its stars. Both Gable and his leading lady, Claudette Colbert, set examples for many romantic comedy couples to come. Colbert plays Ellie, a bratty, temperamental heiress who has a dispute with her father over the man she had just married. She runs away and on the way meets an out-of-work journalist played by Gable.

They start off not liking each other, but there are moments when they work together and find pleasantry in each other's company. No surprise, they fall in love. You see what they like about each other, and you see them struggling against their feelings due to their circumstances. We see growth in both characters, particularly in Colbert's. These are basic elements of storytelling well played. I also like a few of its memorable, iconic elements, like "the wall of Jericho" or the hitchhiking scene. 

Both Gable and Colbert reportedly hated the script and didn't want to participate in the film. I can see why. The script itself is nothing without them. More than carrying the film, they gave it a lot of charm necessary for this kind of movie. Ultimately I wasn't much moved or impressed by the film. However, for the mark it has left in film history and for its achievement in storytelling, I would say that IT HAPPENED ON NIGHT is worth a watch. In the right mood, you might even like it.

HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE (1953)

(Week 2: Lauren Bacall)

HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE (1953)

Directed by Jean Negulesco

From the way they packaged this DVD, you wouldn't know that aside from Marilyn Monroe, this film actually has two other big stars: Betty Grable and Lauren Bacall. Monroe's part is actually the smallest and least thought out of the three, so that those who watch this film hoping to see a lot of Monroe would be disappointed. 

But Bacall is my favorite, and lucky for me her part is the biggest. Her story arc is one that we follow most intimately. The film is about three models living together and looking for rich husbands. Bacall plays Schatze, a shrewd divorcée whose finances are so bad she scrapes by by renting out her furniture. Well, not hers. The furniture belongs to Freddie Denmark, the mysterious man whose fancy apartment she is renting as a part of her plan to trap rich men. 

Grable and Monroe play hopelessly naive goofballs that buy into Schatze's ideal. Grable's character agrees to go with a married man to his "lodge," thinking she would meet other eligible millionaires. There ended up being just the two of them. She got sick and wasn't able to go home. Monroe's character is extremely nearsighted but refuses to wear glasses for fear of seeming unattractive to men. There isn't much to her storyline, but I did get a few laughs from watching her run into things.

(from filmhash.com)

These characters are delightful but unbelievable. It was hard to enjoy a movie with three story lines in none of which I could invest, due to their flimsy nature. Let me elaborate more on Bacall's character. Schatze doesn't believe that poor men are bad; she just would rather marry a rich one. Bacall, as always, comes across as intelligent and slightly rigid. She keeps the other girls in line and fends off the underserving men. Meanwhile she falls in love with two men, a rich older man and a poor age-appropriate one. Bacall seems out of place in such an old-fashioned, somewhat sexist plot where an intelligent woman would rather use her brain to reap men's wealth than acquire independence. She seems too smart to play a gold digger believably. (In contrast, Bacall would later recreate Katharine Hepburn's role of Tess Harding from WOMAN OF THE YEAR on Broadway, a woman whose husband was threatened by her success.) Schatze goes a great length to refuse the poor man she falls for and convince herself that she is in love with the wealthy one. By the end of the film you do wonder if she is really all that smart.

(from Amazon.com)

The overall plot is pretty hilarious. I reviewed the summary on Wikipedia right after watching the film and it still made me laugh. But the execution is poor. The script just isn't that funny or engaging or genuine. Schatze doesn't quite seem desperate enough for us to understand her necessity for a wealthy husband, and the other two characters are just too shallow to be taken seriously. It may be a feast for the eyes to see three very attractive women in such a glamorous way, but it is hard to sympathize with the characters of HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE.