Tag Archives: old blue eyes

You’re Welcome, Michael.

Posted on by under carrie's faves

I’m deviating a little from our usual, and hopefully Nikki and Brandie will just let me get away with it. I’m getting ready to go to Dragon Con (anyone else going? Anyone? Anyone? … Okay, then), so if it isn’t an Anne McCaffrey book or Joss Whedon, I haven’t been participating in anything recently. I’ve got to be prepared, you know.

(Anchors Aweigh, 1945) Frank Sinatra learning about women from Gene Kelly ... priceless!

However, on my drive to my big-girl job that helps to keep me from posting regularly (read: hardly ever), I decided that Frank Sinatra was in order. I just love him (see other posts on musicals such as High Society for further Sinatra worship). It got me to thinking: some of that is making a comeback. While it was once a little old-fashioned for someone my age to like Sinatra, Bing Crosby, Louis Armstrong, Peggy Lee (need I go on?) as much as I do, their musing is returning in the “current” market. Yes, the crooners are back. Am I pleased? Fairly. No, we haven’t gotten Old Blue Eyes back, and I doubt we ever will, but it’s increasing in vogue. Women again swoon, but this time it’s over the voices of men like John Mayer, who play a lot of acoustic melody and original pieces. However, the tones of these new pieces are true descendants of the jazz standards. Today’s crooners are also remaking the original pieces made famous in the lounges and films of a long-lost era (Michael Buble, the resident champion). Who can blame them? Perhaps we can begin to thank American Idol for this, as they are fans of recreating existing songs. The move is becoming popular (Glee, the multiple new renditions of “Over the Rainbow,” etc.). We like bringing the past back. Looks like classic film fans are not the only ones who miss it.

This is too awesome.

In film, however, we are not reverting back so much. Instead, we move ever forward into graphics, action, and of course, the 3D revolution. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy these as well, but in a completely different way from the classics. More importantly, though, we continue to comment that “they just don’t make actors/actresses like that anymore.” We said it during the Lucy Blogathon. We’ve said it about Cary Grant, Gregory Peck, Katharine Hepburn, etc. It’s the truth–they just don’t. In today’s film industry, would they have a place?

(1940) The Philadelphia Story, or Too Much Awesome for One Film.

I’d like to think they would, that that much talent just can’t be shut out. That’s what I tell myself. There is some evidence: Hugh Laurie, Alan Rickman, Kathy Bates–all brilliant. It’s a different kind of brilliance, but brilliant nonetheless. Johnny Depp is quite the current heartthrob, and, let’s face it–he can act. Is he William Holden? Not so much.

(Sense and Sensibility, 1995) Alan Rickman and Hugh Laurie in one room--in a film with Emma Thompson. Jane Austen really CAN put a lot of awesome in one room.

Music is moving back to the swing era a little. Fashion is going all over the place. Will the film industry follow? What I do know is that if Cary Grant or Gregory Peck are ever reincarnated, I will be an obsessive movie-goer.

But I'm pretty sure we'll never see this again ... Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch (To Kill a Mockingbird, 1962).

Code breakers.

Posted on by under hays code, tcm spotlight

This evening, TCM is featuring three films labeled “code breakers,” movies whose provocative, mature themes and scripts contributed to the breakdown of the Production Code Administration’s influence in Hollywood.

I’ve made my feelings about the Production Code clear in the past; censorship may seem to be a necessary evil to some, but in my eyes, deliberately stifling the creative spirit over the moral qualms of a few is tantamount to impeding (and sometimes, outright destroying) art. Still, it’s interesting to look back at Code-era films and see the deft ways in which filmmakers subtly (or in the case of tonight’s lineup, not so subtly) challenged the moral strictures of the Code, whether through innuendo, camera tricks, or other means.

The lineup tonight features three films from the 1950s, the decade in which the first really substantial challenges to the Code emerged.

First up is The Moon is Blue (airing at 8PM EST), released in 1953 and starring William Holden and David Niven as a couple of Lotharios determined to rid Maggie McNamara of her pesky virginity. Director Otto Preminger had a fight on his hands with the Production Code office from the very beginning–the movie was based on a controversial play of the same name by F. Hugh Herbert, and Joseph Breen, the head of the Code office, objected to the racy material and the use of terms such as “virgin” and “mistress” in the script.

Preminger made the movie anyway, and when it was denied a seal of approval from the PCA, the studio behind the movie, United Artists, used the controversy as a selling point for the film. And it worked: The Moon is Blue was a smash hit.

Though this was the first time a studio had ever dared to release a film without PCA’s seal of approval, it would hardly be the last. The next film in tonight’s lineup, 1955′s The Man with the Golden Arm (airing at 10PM EST), also directed by Preminger, faced some of the same difficulties with Breen’s office based on the source material.

The film stars Frank Sinatra as heroin addict Frankie Machine, with Eleanor Parker as his crippled wife, Zosh, and Kim Novak as his disapproving girlfriend, Molly. It is based on the notorious 1949 bestselling novel of the same title, written by Nelson Algren. As the book (and, subsequently, the film’s script) deals with the effects of drug abuse and addiction in a gritty, somewhat realistic manner, the PCA was not exactly eager to grant the film its seal of approval. Once again, Preminger made the film he wanted to make, and as with The Moon is Blue, United Artists released the picture without the Code seal. And, as before, the film was a great success despite this lack of approval.

Also in 1956, director Elia Kazan adapted a screenplay by Tennessee Williams (based on his one-act play 27 Wagons Full of Cotton) into a black comedy named Baby Doll (airing at 12:15AM EST). Starring Karl Malden as Archie Meighan, the ineffectual, sexually frustrated husband of child bride Carroll Baker (the titular Baby Doll), the movie flirts with the themes of pedophilia, adultery, and sexual deviance.

And yet, surprisingly, the film was awarded a PCA seal of approval. Don’t ask me how; maybe Breen was off that day. Despite this, though, the film reaped its share of controversy when the Catholic Legion of Decency (one of the driving forces behind the establishment of the Code in the first place, interestingly enough) condemned the film. Several Catholic leaders even forbade their congregants from seeing it. Because of the Legion’s movement to ban the film, Baby Doll was ultimately the only one of these three films not to turn a profit.

As you will see while (hopefully!) watching tonight’s lineup, in various ways, each of these films contributed to the eventual collapse of the Production Code’s influence in Hollywood. Thanks to directors like Preminger and Kazan, who were willing to challenge the status quo in an effort to put more realistic portrayals on the big screen, cinema today has very few–if any, really–boundaries. And though some arguably take that freedom too far, and the debate between morality and artistic liberty continues, at least we moviegoers have the option to watch more “adult” fare if we so choose.

And isn’t that what it’s all about, truly–the choice to watch whatever floats your particular boat, and to ignore whatever sinks it?

SUtS: Katharine Hepburn

Posted on by under 5-star films, best.films.ever., brandie's faves, carrie's faves, classic pairings, hahas, magnificent musicals, screwball legends, summer under the stars

Brandie’s choice: Bringing Up Baby (1938)

Airing at 12:00AM EST

There are a handful of movies I would personally label the funniest films of all time, and Bringing Up Baby would be near the top of that list. In fact, when I endeavor to introduce someone to the world of classic film, this is one of the first films I recommend viewing. It just sucks you in–in the very best way. And screwball comedy–of which this movie is one of the supremest examples–is always a great way to introduce a reluctant party into the world of classic cinema because … well, who doesn’t love to laugh?

Baby stars Katharine Hepburn as a dizzy heiress, Susan Vance, who falls head over heels in love with a hapless paleontologist, David Huxley (a sexily disheveled and bewildered Cary Grant). Through her machinations, David loses a very valuable bone–the “intercostal clavicle”–that belongs to the skeleton of a brontosaurus. Susan also inadvertently jeopardizes David’s attempts to secure a million dollars’ worth of funding for his museum. And to add to the craziness, Susan has recently received a rather intimidating gift–a large leopard named Baby–which she plans to take to her family’s farm in Connecticut, of all places. Add in a nosy aunt, a bumbling big-game hunter, a concerned psychiatrist, and an idiotic constable, and you can imagine the chaos that ensues.

Considering how hilarious and utterly charming this film is, it’s amazing to think today that this movie was once considered a notorious flop, even contributing to star Katharine Hepburn’s assignation as “box office poison” in the late 1930s. Hell, it’s difficult to think of a time when Kate Hepburn wasn’t considered a monumental success and a pinnacle of movie stardom. Her legendary career came complete with four Academy Awards for Best Actress–a feat unmatched by any other actress (or actor!) in the history of film–and a litany of iconic film roles opposite some of the biggest names to ever grace the screen. But once this film was completed, Hepburn, in the midst of a string of unsuccessful films, chose to buy out her RKO contract to avoid being cast in the low-budget drama Mother Carey’s Chickens (which had been assigned to Hepburn as a sort of studio punishment because of her poor box-office performance). She would spend the next two years on the stage until her triumphant return to the screen in 1940′s wildly popular The Philadelphia Story (also co-starring Grant; see Carrie’s rec below).

Hepburn and Grant made a total of four films together; in addition to Baby and Philadelphia, these included the delightful Holiday (1938) and the cross-dressing romantic comedy Sylvia Scarlett (1935). In each of their pairings, Hepburn and Grant are a wonder to behold–not only do they play off of one another very well, but their on-screen interactions demonstrate a true camaraderie and mutual respect that only heightens the chemistry between them.

And that chemistry was never more sparkling than it was in Baby. Grant, whose career began in vaudeville, takes a page from acrobatic silent screen legend Buster Keaton and throws his body around without reservation, all in pursuit of a laugh. And Hepburn is right there with him, shattering the normally reserved persona she had crafted in previous films and demonstrating a comedic timing that had heretofore only been hinted at in her career. Each brings out the best in the other, and neither was ever really able to capture that same effortless, effervescent magic with another co-star (though Hepburn came close with some of her later screen partnerships with Spencer Tracy, particularly 1949′s Adam’s Rib).

The film is not all about Hepburn and Grant, however; there are some great supporting performances, too. Charlie Ruggles is delightful as the befuddled Major Horace Applegate, who can’t understand why he’s hearing leopard calls in the middle of Connecticut. Walter Catlett, who plays the overzealous constable, Slocum, and May Robson, who plays Susan’s Aunt Elizabeth, are both sharply funny. And classic film fans might recognize the little terrier playing George, the dog who steals David’s bone: the same dog, Skippy, also played Asta in the Thin Man movies and almost stole the show in 1937′s The Awful Truth (also co-starring Grant).

It’s not hyperbole to say that Bringing Up Baby is one of the BEST DAMN FILMS ever made. If you have never had the opportunity to see this movie, this is your chance. You won’t stop laughing until the final credits roll.

Carrie’s choice: The Philadelphia Story (1940)

Airing at 2:00AM EST

I’m so excited- it’s Katharine Hepburn Day!!!!  Katharine Hepburn is one of my biggest heroines. She’s amazing, and I flat out adore her. The spunk. The attitude. The coolness. Her well-honed sneer and smooth sarcasm served her well in Hollywood, and especially in The Philadelphia Story.

I love this movie, and oddly, I love the remake High Society. It took me a while to decide which I preferred, and I’d like to take you through my debate very quickly. Actual debate took a number of years.

The Philadelphia Story has Katharine Hepburn playing a snide, wealthy young woman whose father has been discovered in a scandalous affair. To save face, her wedding (second marriage) is now open to the press, in particular a sleazy operation–with pictures. To make matters worse, her ex-husband is hanging around, “not” sabotaging the wedding. Father  believes he has done nothing wrong-no remorse–and Tracy (KH) wants to torture them all. Yes, cast KH, because, let’s face it, no one knows how to emotionally destroy with pitch-perfect style and class quite like her.  For this reason, she’s an awesome Tracy. Add to this that she’s starring …

… between Cary Grant and James Stewart, and the  most casual reader of this blog needs no further comments on the matter.

High Society: Bing Crosby, Grace Kelly, Frank Sinatra

Later, High Society does well, but Tracy, played by Grace Kelly (also talented and lovely, no argument) is not quite as, say, conniving and snarky as KH. Tracy is a little softer in this version, which has the added musical charms of Bing Crosby (Dexter, the ex), Frank Sinatra (Mike, the reporter) and Louis Armstrong (as himself, added to the plot because, let’s face it–he’s Louis Armstrong, and why not?) Because that trio is a trio I also adore, points to High Society. I also prefer the little sister (two different names in the different movies–go figure) in High Society. She’s just hilarious, and possibly a bit of a stronger character.

Yet, my winner is still The Philadelphia Story.  Don’t get me wrong–I’ll watch High Society any time I see that it’s on, and I own it. It’s great, but there is one essential element (other than the obvious–KH) that makes The Philadelphia Story work for me more than High Society.  That is a detail in the plot.

In the end (I guess a spoiler …), Tracy apologizes for her behavior and basically accepts a human fallibility. In High Society, she does this to her father, and while forgiving him and thus having a release would be acceptable, she actually capitulates and admits that she really is at fault and shouldn’t be angry that he humiliated the family by publicly cheating on Mother, even though he has never asked for forgiveness or admitted any wrong-doing. This bothers me. A lot. It always did bother me, but I pushed it aside.

Then I paid due attention to The Philadelphia Story. In this film, Tracy makes her admission to Dexter, who has actually done good things for her, and possibly was judged unfairly. He actually is there for Tracy and has some redeeming qualities, despite his imperfections.

Now, we can play philosophy a little here, for those who have seen these films. Part of the theme is loving someone unconditionally, even if unworthy. That’s great. Perhaps Tracy apologizing to her father was to solidify that, showing Tracy’s growth. She made a mistake and is still lovable, and so it’s a two-way street–Dad is lovable, too. Now, I’m great with forgiveness–it’s healthy. But they still went a little far. Tracy falls only short of condoning his behavior; she blames herself for how she felt about it and that actually seeing a problem with his long-term cheating is wrong, all the while actually taking responsibility for her single indiscretion. It does tie their parallels together, but not in any kind of realistic, human, very believable, or particularly healthy way (IMHO).

So, with her apology to Dexter, who actually is redeemed throughout the movie and who actually does show her unconditional love (which her father fails to do), I have to give the best of the two to The Philadelphia Story.

That said, definitely watch both. They’re fabulous.  And without question, make time for The Philadelphia Story. The lines are fabulous. The acting is fabulous. It’s a real winner and is Katharine Hepburn in a role written with her in mind–it simply can’t miss!

SUtS: Kathryn Grayson

Posted on by under ahh romance, brandie's faves, carrie's faves, magnificent musicals, summer under the stars

Carrie’s choice: Anchors Aweigh (1945)

Airing at 12:00PM EST

I AM SO EXCITED. It’s Kathryn Grayson day. Hello, DVR.  I adore her movies. That’s all there is to it. Make sure you read Brandie’s comments below because it was hard for me to decide what to watch. Just set your DVR and watch all of them.

Sigh.

That said, I adore the movie I’m recommending today, Anchors Aweigh.

It’s one of my favourites ever, even though I didn’t see it for the first time until a few months ago. I was more familiar with Kiss Me Kate, so it was odd seeing Kathryn Grayson without the blond hair. Or as nice like this character “Aunt Susie.”  Kate teams up with the brilliant Gene and Frank in a really fun comedy not unlike On the Town (which I’ve loved for years). So, this was a really easy sell for me. It’s a musical (obviously) about two sailors, one a “wolf” who is great with the ladies and the other wanting to be good with the ladies. Grayson plays Aunt Susie, raising her nephew who wants to be in the Navy, and thus is the catalyst for meeting the two sailors. While raising her nephew, she is trying to become a singer on stage and film. Sinatra falls in love with her, and let’s just say hilarity ensues.

This is the film that has the classic scene with Gene Kelly and Jerry the Mouse, shifting the obligatory dream sequence from a sound stage to animation cross-over (think Who Framed Roger Rabbit?).

Grayson adds her operatic singing style in several capacities, including a Latin-style flair. Although she’s fantastic with attitude, she pulls off the shy, somewhat naive, yet determined aspiring star quite beautifully, which says a great deal about her acting talents. It all combines to create a fun, star-studded (to be cliche) movie that is simply a must-see. It’s also available on DVD and in a Kelly/Sinatra Collection that I will review eventually…

Love this one… strongly recommend it. Enjoy!

Brandie’s choice: Kiss Me Kate (1953)

Airing at 2:00AM EST

When it comes to adaptations of Shakespeare’s work, you definitely have your hits and your misses. Sometimes, the straight performances are really well done (1993′s Much Ado About Nothing; both Laurence Olivier’s 1948 version AND Kenneth Branagh’s 1996 version of Hamlet, despite Olivier’s revisions of the original text); in some cases, they are decidedly not (1999′s A Midsummer Night’s Dream, which suffers from piss-poor casting; the horrendous 1996 Baz Luhrmann version of Romeo+Juliet). And some of the loose adaptations are really fun–I am particularly fond of 1991′s My Own Private Idaho, which is loosely based on Henry IV, Part I, and I will always have a soft spot in my heart for 1999′s 10 Things I Hate About You.

As with 10 Things, my recommendation for today, the delightful musical Kiss Me Kate, takes its cue from Shakespeare’s play The Taming of the Shrew, one of the Bard’s more enjoyable comedies. Now, the movie version of Cole Porter’s naughty musical has been cleaned up quite a bit (Hays office … grr), but the results are still enjoyable.

In the movie, Grayson plays Lilli, an actress who was previously married to Fred (Howard Keel, delightfully bombastic as always). The bickering couple must put aside their differences to co-star as Katherine and Petruchio in a musical production of The Taming of the Shrew (in a moment of meta-fantastic glory, the musical is called … Kiss Me Kate). But things are made even more complicated by the interference of a sexy dancer, Lois Lane (played by a phenomenal Ann Miller) and Lilli’s new fiance, a Texas rancher named, appropriately, Tex. In the midst of all the on- and off-stage drama, two enforcers arrive to receive payment for a gambling debt that has been erroneously assigned to Fred. The typical hi-jinks ensue.

Grayson plays the “shrew” with an underlying vulnerability that makes Lilli an endearing, albeit admittedly bitchy, character (perhaps that’s why I like Lilli so much …?). The combination with Keel is killer, and Miller, always underrated, is wonderful as Lois. Plus, look for choreographer extraordinaire Bob Fosse in a brief dancing cameo near the end of the film.

Overall, the movie, for all its latent sexism (which I try very hard to ignore so I can still enjoy this film … damn you, graduate school, for making me overanalyze every little thing), is still an enjoyable musical romp, with some awesome Porter tunes. Definitely worth a viewing (or three)!