THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE (1962)

(Week 10: John Wayne)

THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE (1962)

Directed by John Ford

from rikuwrites.blogspot.com

This is a film about an underdog and an unsung hero. James Stewart plays Ransom Stoddard, a young lawyer who opposes to the violence of the old west and tries to change its way by teaching the townsfolk to read. John Wayne plays Tom Doniphon, a typical western hero, except that here he finds himself at odds with a changing world. As most of the town is quick to follow Stoddard's way, Tom's merits slowly becomes irrelevant. The girl Tom likes, Hallie (played by Vera Miles), is indifferent to his valor and partial to the lawyer's intellect. 

The two men have to band together to protect the town from its villain. Lee Marvin plays Liberty Valance, the leader of a gang of outlaws that have been menacing the town. While not being as fleshed out as the two heroes, this role is crucial to the film; he presents Stoddard a series of challenges that tests his tenacity. It is unclear why Tom hadn't done anything about Liberty until now, since Liberty seems to be afraid of him to some degree. Perhaps he doesn't feel that he alone can overthrow the whole gang, or perhaps he knows that without Liberty as the town's villain, he would no longer be the town's hero. 

The film was shot in black and white, either due to low budget or to conceal the actors' age. Stewart and Wayne don't look like the young men that their characters claim to be, and to some degree that has an effect on the film. A young actor would have made Stoddard's youthful idealism more strongly felt. And with Wayne, Tom's refusal to change his way sometimes comes across as a part of his old age. A more appropriate casting would have made for a much different film. Having said that, both Stewart and Wayne give a powerful performance. They play their characters seriously and with a lot of heart. 

This is a western that offers what is familiar and expected while also providing a heartfelt story and memorable characters. This is one of those films that left me with a feeling of having experienced something really special, like it flipped a switch somewhere. It manages to tell a morality tale without being heavy-handed. THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE isn't just a good western but a really good film.

SUDDEN FEAR (1952)

(Week 9: Joan Crawford)

SUDDEN FEAR (1952)

Directed by David Miller

from bitlogger.blogspot.com

This film starts with a conversation about its male lead, Lester Blaine, an actor who isn't quite attractive enough to play a romantic hero. Joan Crawford's character, Myra Hudson, is the playwright who opposes to Lester's being in her play. She would soon learn that in life, unlike on stage, a man can be charming without being conventionally handsome or dreamy. 

This film could not be more perfectly cast. Jack Palance as Lester has a tremendous presence and is fantastic as a menace. Gloria Grahame plays his accomplice in a role that seems cut out for her. Crawford, by now an aging star with a struggling career, isn't taking much of a risk here but still gives a strong performance. Together they serve the story what it needs. 

And what a story it is. Lester seduces Myra, marries her and plots to murder her in order to take her money. When she accidentally finds out, Myra doesn't call the police but instead plans to murder him--obviously not your typical victim. You see her quickly transforms from a happy, somewhat saintlike woman to a terrified victim, then to a vengeful heroine. Crawford isn't afraid to get ugly here. She proves herself an authentic actress with raw emotion in a sequence where she discovers the truth. She goes from a state of bliss to heartbroken, to absolute terror. Her terrified face is candid and without composure, so unlike the elegant and pompous movie star she often appears to be.

from Mubi.com

The film is filled with suspense almost in every corner. The characters and their actions are unpredictable. Without spoiling anything, I would say that the ending surprised me, not the things that happened but how they did: I didn't expect Myra to turn out the way she did in the end, nor did I expect the moral with which the film concludes. The way the final murder is orchestrated, too, is witty and subtle.

I love a genre film that transcends its genre, and this is one of them. It proves that genre fiction can be well written, too, with substantial characters and well-developed story arcs, and is in fact more effective because of it. All these elements combined makes SUDDEN FEAR a great watch.

DUCK SOUP (1933)

(Week 8: The Marx Brothers)

DUCK SOUP (1933)

Directed by Leo McCarey

from myopera.com

I don't like slapstick comedy. I don't get it. And if you don't get it, you don't enjoy it. There are moments here that make me chuckle, moments that I thought are delightfully creative and surprising. But despite it being only a little bit over an hour long, I had a hard time sitting through this film.

I won't go too much further. The Marx Brothers made great contributions to the entertainment business, that is not to be dismissed. But their medium doesn't agree with my palate, so I can't write anything decent about their works.

So, come back next week for Joan Crawford!

ON THE WATERFRONT (1954)

(Week 7: Marlon Brando)

ON THE WATERFRONT (1954)

Directed by Elia Kazan

ON THE WATERFRONT is the quintessence of Oscar winners. It was made with an original screenplay (based on a series of articles rather than a play or a published story) with a progressive message, staring great actors in powerful roles, and featuring a score by one of the best composers of its time. It was nominated for 12 oscars and won 8. If it were made this year it probably would still win the award.

Honestly, I didn't fall in love with the film. I thought it was heavy-handed and too melodramatic at times. That said, it is constructed with so many fantastic elements that I can't deny its virtue. Certain scenes revisited inspire greater appreciation. The writing is so great, as magnetic as a theater piece, and so perfectly matched with some of the best actors in films. It centers around Terry Malloy, a young man torn between doing the right thing and risking danger. Other characters face the same dilemma, too, but the stake is higher for Terry because the bad guys are his friends, and the good guys consist of a girl he's in love with, who is also the sister of one of the mob's recent victims.

Marlon Brando won the film one of its eight oscars. A theater-trained actor, Brando never lets his good look take a lead nor lets his craft show. He brings so much of himself to the role you can't imagine him as anything else but the character you see on the screen. The famous taxi cab scene really is as powerful as they say it is. Brando, as seen here, is capable of both subtlety and melodrama, and he knows just when to do which. 

Brando is supported by a great cast of actors who hold their own without upstaging him. Karl Madden plays Father Barry, a priest who tries to lead the witnesses to testify against the mobsters. He serves as the voice of reason and the one who leads Terry to the light. Madden's performance is perhaps the most multidimensional of the film. He portrays Father Terry as a man who wants to do good not just to serve God but because he is truly a good man who believes in justice. His role as the priest doesn't overshadow the man behind it. Rob Steiger as Terry's brother also gives a powerful performance. His character has two dimensions: the ruthless mobster and the caring brother, and he makes both believable. The chemistry between him and Brando makes the magic of the taxicab scene possible. The only performance I don't care for is Eva Marie Saint's, who also won an oscar for this film. She has one of the biggest roles as the girl who sees the goodness in Terry and encourages it. She is competent, but she doesn't bring a lot of creativity to the role and seems flat in comparison to everybody else's.

Overall, I think everybody should watch this film once. And regardless of how you feel about it, you should watch it again, then again a few years later. Having watched some of the scenes repeatedly, I find myself more and more impressed each time. Like all works of art, it can't speak to everybody, but ON THE WATERFRONT reaches such a high level of excellency that it deserves to be appreciated by all who care about films.