Frankly, My Dear, Search This Blog

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

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Sunday Movie Review: "East Side, West Side" (1949)

Hi everyone,

I hope everyone had a good weekend! I had a great one; spent time with my friends (even got them to watch "Gone With the Wind"; I think there were mixed reactions) and even better, the weather has gotten chilly over here! In fact, it was so cold yesterday I wore boots, a sweater, and even gloves. Not exaggerating! Fall starts this week and I'm happy in my chilly element more than ever. I plan to savor winter. (And I don't feel so crazy anymore in doing so ever since some of you commented and let me know that you too love winter).

Before I do my review of "East Side, West Side", I will be revealing the faces behind this Here's Looking At You Kid that I should have done quite a while ago, only it indeed slipped my mind. Many apologizes!

Anyhow, thank you everyone who participated! I got some wonderful guesses. It appears that everyone happened to get the lady's face right -- it is indeed, the lovely Olivia de Havilland:


As for the man, I got a few of you who guessed it was either Robert Taylor or Gary Cooper. And the rest of you guessed Robert Taylor. Well, as it turns out, it is --


It's Coop!

***


Today, I have pulled the summary from IMDb because I felt the Netflix summary gave too many spoilers.

Brandon and Jessie Bourne has been married to each other for many years. A few years ago, Brandon had an extra-martial affair with Isabel Lorrison. Now she has come back to New York intending to start over with the relationship once again. Meanwhile, Jessie is attracted to Mark Dwyer, just arrived from a secret mission in Italy. [summary from IMDb]

The star-studded cast has:
  • Barbara Stanwyck as Jessie Bourne
  • James Mason as Brandon "Brad" Bourne
  • Ava Gardner as Isabel Lorrison
  • Van Heflin as Mark Dwyer
  • Cyd Charisse as Rosa Senta
  • Nancy Davis as Helen Lee
  • William Frawley as a bartender (!!)
Can you count all the stars? I was excited by the large number of big names in this. I hope everyone is familiar with Nancy Davis, who would later marry Ronald Reagan and become First Lady of the US, as well as William Frawley - who is our own Fred Mertz from "I Love Lucy."

I must say, I did find the plot to be a little far fetched. But if you can ignore some of the bumps and creases of it, I think it gives us a nicely polished view of elite 1940's Manhattan and the politics that its residents suffer through: romance, drama, murder.

Stany is really appealing as Jessie Pearce and I enjoyed her performance. She represents the sophisticated East Side woman in great contrast to Van Heflin's Mark, who is West Side, and yet they get along better and sparkle with more chemistry than Jessie and her own husband, Brad. Anyway, I think she does an excellent job and you can feel Jessie's many mixed feelings; her heartbreak, the fact that she does love her husband, but she cannot stand any longer what he is doing to her. Hard to play but Barbara is very good. 



Van Heflin does quite well with the Mark character; he and Stany have nice chemistry. At first I found Ava Gardner's "other woman" portrayal to be somewhat stereotypical but as the film progresses on, she cleans her up act even when she is given some pretty sorry lines to deal with. She is sultry above all, which is a necessity for her notorious character. In the end I found I liked how Ava played her and wished that her character would have been given more lines and camera time to work with. Anyhow, Ava does try her best with what she is given. I think she is at her very best in this scene --



All the supporting characters are wonderful. Nancy Davis sparkles as the nosy friend, Cyd is good as the nice Italian girl; William Frawley is only a bartender, of course, but a cheer for him, anyway.

Now it comes to James Mason. To begin with he is a character we do not like. We feel sympathy for Stany's Jessie, we are excited that Van Heflin is there to lend a shoulder for her to cry on, we don't like Ava's character either but we do get where she is coming from, and we are charmed by Cyd's Rosa. I found I didn't like James Mason's way of playing the Brad character at all. He fades, pales, to the selection of other actors he is playing against. He seems kind of out there; very one dimensional and no chemistry whatsoever with Ava. He is plain, like cardboard, just standing there; he lets the others carry on the film.



So with that exception, this is a very well acted and interesting film. I just had many problems with this plot, though. It was kind of all over the place in my opinion. Here are the "bumps and creases" I found -- the Rosa character gets dropped quite fast, the mystery element was solved too easily (there is a mystery element indeed, and I was shocked by the simple way it is solved. I am used to Nick and Nora Charles, thank you very much), there were just some holes and it made it look a little sloppy.

The script is for the most part intelligent, though I did find some stupid exchanges, for example one scene where Isabel calls Jessie over to her apartment and starts rattling off about how Brad is all hers and Jessie, his wife, will only see him when Isabel permits and excreta. I found that a little too silly.

The ending is left open ended. Though mostly satisfying, it leaves a lot to the imagination. I guess we can't have it all.

Over all I found this film to be entertaining and interesting. The cast does a magnificent job (James excluded; I'm sorry, Mr. Mason!), and the weaknesses fall instead in the plot and script. I will have to give it a three and a half out of five stars. I would say to go ahead and watch it, too, only, it is not a perfect film.


***

Before I leave --


Happy birthday, Greta! Wow, how many birthdays did we celebrate this week?? Hmm..!




Sunday, August 28, 2011

Sunday Movie Review: "Forever Darling" (1956)

Bonjour!

It looks like we survived the hurricane at my place. Now, it's sunny and the sky is blue and there's a beautiful wind (whatever remains from Irene's destructive path) blowing through the trees. I'm glad, because today is the second to last day of my summer vacation (insert crying), and I want it to be beautiful, of course.

To tell you the truth, Irene wasn't that bad. The worst of it came when it was dark outside so all of it was a LOT of wind (you could hear all of it), and rain, and all of that. And... best of all.... WE DIDN'T LOSE POWER!!! I guess we totally lucked out because a lot of people lost power, and we also have one of those really annoying companies that supply power that are terrible when it comes to withstanding these sort of things. So yes, we totally got lucky. Over all, it wasn't a terrifying experience... but I did hear that fourteen people died from the storm, or due to things related to the storm, so that's pretty awful. I, for one, am done with natural disasters for now!

So, I watched two movies this week - I rewatched "Forever Darling", from my new Lucy box set, and then I watched, for the first time, "To Have and Have Not." I have "Now, Voyager" - I'm on a kind of Bette Davis high -  waiting for me in a red envelope from Netflix, but between all the craziness of the last days I haven't gotten a chance to get to it (I'll probably watch it tonight and save it for next week's review).

As you can tell by the title of this post, I am going to be reviewing "Forever, Darling." Now, here's the thing - as much as I love, love, love Lucy (and you all know how much I do, it's crazy) but "Forever, Darling" is really not that good of a movie. (In fact, Lucy said so herself: "I've been in a lot of stinkers, but this one was the stinkiest."). So. Why am I reviewing this one and not "To Have and Have Not", which in reality WAY better?

Because, and don't think ill of me, I'm sort of tired of doing reviews on good films!!! The last few have all been really excellent films and "To Have and Have Not" would be another one of those, and I was getting bored. So I decided to allow myself one bad film review for this week. And besides, my new header, as you can all tell, is now featuring the most stereotypical  photo of Ingrid EVER (hehe), because it's her birthday tomorrow!!!! So, of course she's going to be in my header.

But anyway, that's why I'm doing this movie and I hope all of you know what a great film "To Have and To Have Not" is.

Before I get on with the review, we're going to play a little game. Here's how it's going to work: I'm going to post a picture of a particular Old Hollywood actress as a child, and you all can leave me a comment with your guess. I won't tell you until maybe a day or two, and then I'll mention the comment-er who figured it out first. No prizes or anything, but it's fun to play.  See if you can figure it out!!


Don't be bashful... take a guess! ;)

***
I know... awkward poster... check out Desi's expression.... ho hum...

Lucy plays Susan Vega, a Californian housewife who has been married to scientist  husband Lorenzo (Desi) for five years. The honeymoon is since over and Susan finds herself spending way too much time with her snobby cousin Millie Updike (played by that chick from Gilligan's Island.. uh... what's her name?) and nearly turning into a clone of her. The first sign? She is swooning over James Mason at the movies. In a bizarre turn of events, Susan finds herself visited by her "guardian angel" who, ironically, looks exactly like James Mason. She has mixed feelings of resentment and then lust for the "angel", but in the end she looks to him for help to patch up her marriage. The angel's fix? To go on a camping trip with Lorenzo, one, that, of course, turns into a disaster...


The cast has got:

  • Lucille Ball as Susan Vega
  • Desi Arnaz as Lorenzo Vega
  • James Mason as The Guardian Angel Who Looks Exactly Like James Mason
  • Natalie Schafer as Millie Updike
  • And, in an appearance as the maid, Amy, Nancy Kulp
It is directed by Alexander Hall, who had been a beau of Lucy's - in fact, he was the guy she had been dating when she met Desi, and, in succession, dumped him for Desi (no hard feelings, I guess, especially if they got him to direct this bomber).

This was made in 1956. "I Love Lucy" was still on air and at the top of the ratings and Lucy and Desi were humongous stars. Their earlier film, "The Long, Long Trailer" (1953, at the peak of their popularity) had been a HUGE success and the expectations for this film were quite high. But, despite all of this, this movie failed to attract at the box office.

I can understand. This movie is all over the place. It is a comedy with an awkward sci-fi feeling hanging over it like a dark cloud on a sunny day. 


Susan Vega is not exactly a version of Lucy Ricardo, but a lot of her stems from our favorite zany redhead. Especially her pratfalls when they go camping - like getting stuck in a sleeping bag, poking a hole in the boat, etc. etc.

Lorenzo Vega is just one of those awkward, somewhat unbelievable characters. I think, of course, that Lucy and Desi do a good job with whatever material they are given, but a lot of it feels somewhat episodic and I think the whole guardian angel bit was just way out there.

It is said that Lucy and Desi originally wanted Cary Grant for the James Mason role, but he was out of their price range (the same thing had occurred on the set of "A Star is Born") so they had to settle for James Mason. James Mason doesn't get to do much, either. He walks through walls with awful special effects, and disappears for most of the camping trip but then shows up at the end to save the day. 


Is it just me... or is that a little creepy????

The Susan-Lorenzo marriage thing is kind of depressing. By this time Lucy and Desi's marriage was not completely broken up but it was on shaky ground. At least they loved each other in "The Long, Long Trailer" -- this couple is pretty distant and a lot of the time they're fighting in parralels to the real Lucy and Desi. I mean, one would think they're closer to their guardian angels then one another, really (Desi doesn't have one, but if he did she would look like Ava Gardner, who he dreams about. To this, I cracked, "She'd be a GARDNER angel!" Get it?? Get it?? Me and my bad puns... ).

What are the upsides to this film?

Well, if anything, I must say it's entertaining. I mean, you're not going to get bored with it or anything, that's for certain. Also, it has LUCILLE BALL in it so that's always a bonus, for anything, ever.


And hey! Lucy wears a lot of the stuff she wore on "I Love Lucy", so now know what they looked like in color, of course... I did a lot of, "That dress is yellow? But I thought it was white!", and all of that.

Also, I kind of liked the soundtrack for this film --


I think if you're a Lucy / Desi fan, you'll want to see it. And you can watch it right here on Youtube:

This is the whole movie, all in one, which is quite nice.

Over all, I'm going to give this a three stars out of five. I'm probably being quite generous, though.

***

That's all for this Sunday's review.  I'm off to enjoy Carole Lombard day on TCM. And don't forget to leave me your guesses! ;-)