Victorian Beauty and Futuristic Horror -- The Time Machine

All of us have certain movies that capture something that speaks to our dreams. Usually I suppose they are the great dramas, but I have found that isn’t always the case. The Time Machine, released by MGM in 1960, mesmerized me as it began, even before the credits. It begins with silence, then the tiny ticking of a clock that moves across the screen. Then more clocks pass by, each with their own cadence, becoming a little larger and a little louder until finally London’s Big Ben gives its thunderous toll and the music crashes in to begin the title and credits. The Time Machine pulls you along from the picturesque, quiet Victorian age of great beauty, to excitement and action, and on to horrific futuristic events as the time traveler takes his journey.

George Pal produced and directed The Time Machine, based on H.G. Wells’ novel of the same name. The screenplay takes many liberties with Wells’ original novel, but then when has that ever been a problem for Hollywood? Pal’s other well-known movies include The War of the Worlds (1953), Houdini (1953) and Conquest of Space (1955). Pal had been an animator for most of his career, and his best movies carry his stamp of thrilling, larger-than-life story telling, with dynamic music and vivid, eye-popping color. However, with The Time Machine, Pal created more than just an action sci-fi movie. A great deal of the credit for the feel of this movie must include composer Russell Garcia, who set the stage for the Victorian age with lilting, Irish-sounding music of great sentimentality, and also created an electrifying, frightening score for the action sequences.  Cinematographer Paul Vogel brought the screen to dazzling life, and make-up artist William Tuttle, working on George Pal’s own design, helped to create one of the most famous monster tribes in sci-fi history, the dreaded Morlocks. The Time Machine was awarded an Oscar, for its special effects, considered groundbreaking for its time.

The story is that of H. George Wells (sound familiar?), played by one of my favorites, Rod Taylor. (Pal originally wanted Paul Scofield for the part of George, a role that doesn’t seem to be at all suitable for the great British stage actor. I believe that Rod Taylor, with his young and vigorous talent and singular mannerisms, fit the bill.) George is an inventor, a dreamer, unhappy with the world he lives in. He is preoccupied with the concept of time, and his house is filled with the most beautiful clocks you’ll ever see. George has invited a group of his friends to dinner, mostly practical businessmen, one a doctor who has little sense of humor (played by Sebastian Cabot in a wonderful harrumphing, stolid British manner), none of whom are the dreamer type, and one who is always happily soused. Then there is one of my most beloved best friend characters, a Scot named David Filby, played sweetly by Alan Young. (Sad to say, Alan Young is best remembered for his role in the TV series Mr. Ed as the owner of a talking horse.) George has not arrived for his own dinner, and his faithful housekeeper, Mrs. Watchett (Doris Lloyd) announces that George left instructions to serve dinner if he was detained. The men settle comfortably at the dining room table, when suddenly George appears in the doorway, disheveled, wounded, exhausted. He sits down and asks for food and wine. His friend the pleasant drunk pours a large glass of wine with shaking hands and unintentionally drinks it himself. Then George begins to tell his story.

George reminds the men of their dinner the week before, when he announced that he had built a machine that could move through time. The friends of course don’t believe it, and George brings out his miniature model. It is a small, exquisitely crafted little machine that looks somewhat like a sled with a sphere-shaped circle behind the traveler’s seat. George asks the doctor to give him a cigar to represent a time traveler, which he bends to fit in a seated position. He explains that if his experiment works, they will never see the machine again, as it will forever speed forward in time. He asks the doctor to use his own finger to throw the tiny switch. The little machine begins to hum, the sphere begins to twirl, and the chandelier above their heads tinkles and shakes. The humming grows louder, the sphere twirls until it blurs, then suddenly the machine is gone with a final whistling echo.

George is exhilarated with the success, but even having seen with their own eyes, his friends refuse to believe it could have happened. They leave in a group, thanking George for an interesting evening. George, angry and dismayed at their reaction, goes to his desk to write a note. Then David peeks around at him from one of the large chairs in front of the fire. “I thought I should stay,” he says. He tells George he is worried about him and wants to help. He learns that George is not interested in going into the past, but into the future. “I don’t much like the time I was born in,” George says. He thanks David for his concern, but says he would rather be alone.

After David leaves, George goes to his laboratory. The door opens, the music swells and there is the full-size Time Machine. What an exciting moment. The machine is absolutely stunning in every way. It is just like the miniature, incredibly crafted with brass engravings, velvet seat and gorgeous colors, a real thing of beauty. The camera follows George around the machine so that the audience can see its exquisite nature. The machine was designed by MGM art director Bill Ferrari, with George Pal’s direction that since he had loved his sled as a child, he wanted it to be sled-like. George climbs onto the seat, pulls the handle and begins his voyage into the future.

His journey is fascinating. He stops at different points in time, is able to see what becomes of his home and his friend, watches his city grow and sees its destruction and much more. The techniques used to show the passage of time, both slow and fast, are very clever and interesting. One of the most memorable is a store mannequin that George can see from his lab window. As time passes, the lady mannequin’s clothes change, going from chaste Victorian to modern short skirts and bathing suits. George feels a kinship with the mannequin because, like himself inside the Time Machine, she never ages. Cataclysmic events begin to occur, and George finally has to speed his way through time at a blurring rate. He stops in the 802nd century. There he finds a world that looks wonderfully evolved. Young beautiful people called the Eloi play and swim and somehow are fed without any work. (The word “eloi” means “My God” in Aramaic.) George notices that there are no old people, and also that the Eloi are strangely ignorant and uninterested in what goes on around them. Yvette Mimieux, only age 17, plays Weena, a young girl who does find interest in this strange man who has appeared from nowhere. Soon, George is to learn the true nature of the Eloi when he is made aware of the horror in that seemingly lovely world, another group that lives underground, the Morlocks.

That is as much of the story as you need to whet your appetite. I did not describe many of the exciting events of George’s journey so as to avoid spoiling everything for those who have not seen it. I would LOVE to tell the ending because it is one of my favorite movie endings, but I am restraining myself. Suffice it to say that The Time Machine does not disappoint. As an interesting note, George Pal kept the miniature time machine in his home until it was destroyed by a fire. The larger model was found years later in a thrift shop in California, covered with dust and in pieces. However, the lucky finder bought and restored it. What I wouldn’t give to have that beautiful thing – it would be the centerpiece of my living room!

George Pal hoped to make a sequel to the movie, and Rod Taylor was interested as well, but MGM rejected the idea. Perhaps that is just as well. This movie is unique and its reputation would likely only be tainted by what might be an inadequate sequel. I remember seeing a showing of The Time Machine on TV around 1995 that was hosted by Rod Taylor. He was of course 35 years older than when he played George, and with a wistful grin he said “It’s very strange to see myself so young as I find myself becoming more aged.” He loved being part of The Time Machine, and with good reason. It’s a damn good movie. (Well, if Rhett Butler can say damn, I guess I can too!)

The Ghost and Mrs. Muir - Reflections

It's 5:30 a.m., and I did not go to bed until 1:30 a.m.  I did not have to get up early this morning, but here I am, wide awake.  It is completely dark outside, the crickets are singing, my neighborhood is silent, and that is the time that I start to think and worry about anything difficult that is going on in my life.  At the moment, there is plenty to fret about.  Instead of just letting those thoughts whirl through my brain, I decided to write some thoughts  about a movie I have always loved, The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947, starring Gene Tierney and Rex Harrison). I watched it just last night, and it had its usual effect on me - I sighed and cried a lot.  It is beautifully filmed, incredibly romantic, and emotionally moving.  Composer Bernard Herrmann believed the score to be his best work, and even taking into consideration the incredible body of his marvelous work, I agree completely. 

The story of Mrs. Lucy Muir, a widow who rents a house by the English seaside and the ghost of Captain Daniel Gregg who haunts his house is fantasy at its best.  They fall in love, but Mrs. Muir becomes impoverished and in danger of losing her beloved house.  Captain Gregg helps Lucy write a book, his autobiography, the unvarnished tale of a seaman's life.  The book is published, Mrs. Muir is able to buy the house and all seems secure.  Captain Gregg, however, knows there can be no future for Mrs. Muir with him, despite their love, and he vanishes from her life, telling her as she sleeps that it has all just been a dream - "...and it will die, as all dreams must die upon waking."  I think I need another handkerchief.  Mrs. Muir meets a dashing scoundrel (George Sanders, the most charming scoundrel of all), and ends up alone in her house with her only family in the world, little daughter Anna (young Natalie Wood) and faithful servant Martha (the wonderful Edna Best).  The years pass, with the rolling ocean as the symbol of time, and Mrs. Muir grows old.  One night she dies quietly in her chair, and Captain Gregg comes back for her.  She takes his hands and stands up, young and beautiful again.  They walk side by side into the mist to the incredible music of Bernard Hermann.  How can you help sobbing like a child?

So I called my sister Amy, certainly a sucker for romance herself, but more pragmatic than I.  I wanted to know why this widow, with no apparent income except the royalties from one book, was able to keep her beautiful cottage by the sea for 50 years until her death.  Considering the life changes I am going through right now, it just didn't seem fair.  Amy said simply, "Becky, it's a movie."  Uh oh, reality came crashing down.  Our conversation had me laughing until my throat hurt.  We talked about how on earth she could have kept an old house by the sea, with wood that would warp, large lawn to mow, a servant that logically should be paid a salary (although you got the impression that Martha did all that work just for love), and a growing daughter to feed and send through school.  Not to mention that the kid was never around to bother her or get under her feet while the romances were going on.  All of that upkeep had to be done by someone, and they had to be paid, right?  How? Can one book finance an entire life?  Then the final blow -- the beauty of the love she always remembered as a dream and the reunion of the two lovers at the end.  Amy said, "Becky, that woman spent her life standing on a balcony looking at the sea for 50 years!"  She has a good point.  In the movie, 50 years goes by in about 5 minutes with the technique of the rolling sea.  In reality, it would be pretty boring.  My sister Amy was just what I needed last night!

Now, movie-lovers, don't descend upon me like an angry mob with torches and pitchforks for this little reflection.  I have loved The Ghost and Mrs. Muir all of my life and know it by heart.  I will always love it and cry every time with the wistful wish that life was really like that.  But as I wrote in my introduction to my site, movies have been a big part of who I am, for good or ill.  Sometimes it can have a negative side if you dive too deeply into the fantasy of it all.  I'm not worried though.  I will always have my sister to understand and pull me back down from the clouds when I float too high up.  I consider that to be the best of both worlds.

Ann Sheridan -- A Classy Lady With Earthy Style

The Lovely Ann Sheridan

Today is Ann Sheridan day on Turner Classic Movies. I thought it would be appropriate to do a tribute to one of my favorite actresses.  Throughout most of her career, Ann played women who were direct and earthy, with common sense and a subtle sensuality that never crossed the line to open sexuality. She was associated for most of her career with Warner Brothers, and played opposite many of their most prominent male stars such as Humphrey Bogart, George Raft, James Cagney and Errol Flynn. She became great friends with Humphrey Bogart after they starred together as brother and sister in San Quentin. After that movie, Ann and Bogart starting calling each other “Sister Annie” and “Brother Bogie.”(1)  Some of my favorite movies with Ann in her prime are Angels With Dirty Faces and City for Conquest with Cagney, They Drive By Night with Raft and Bogart, and Dodge City, Edge of Darkness and Silver River with Errol Flynn. Ann said of Flynn: “He was one of the wild characters of the world, but he had a strange, quiet side. He camouflaged himself completely. In all the years I knew him, I never really knew what lay underneath and I doubt if many people did.” (2)

Two films showed Ann’s real flair for comedy. She played wife to Jack Benny in George Washington Slept Here, a little different type for Ann as a rather ditzy but adorable wife. Later in her career, she played opposite Cary Grant in the comedy I Was A Male War Bride, where both Ann and Grant showed their comedic talents.

Ann had been seriously considered for the part of Ilsa in Casablanca, but lost out to Ingrid Bergman. Ann’s beauty put her into the pin-up girl category along with Betty Grable. She was given the nickname “The Oomph Girl”, and as she said: “…I loathe that nickname. Just being known by a nickname indicates that you are not thought of as a true actress … It’s just crap! If you call an actress by her looks or a reaction, then that’s all she’ll ever be thought of as.” (3)

Ann’s fear of being overlooked for her acting talent was certainly put to rest by what I consider to be her greatest role, that of Randy in King’s Row, with Robert Cummings and Ronald Reagan. The range of emotions she revealed in this difficult role took her from a teasing girl to a wise woman to a devoted wife forced to deal with horrifying events that required her to face her own feelings about love and the future. She was just marvelous in the part and in my opinion her extraordinary performance made this movie one of the great classics.

When Ann’s movie career began to decline as she got older, she tried her hand at television, where she appeared for a time on the soap opera “Another World.” She was beginning to work on another TV show when she fell ill.  Ann died of cancer in 1967 – she was only 51.

TCM is playing several of Ann Sheridan’s good movies today. My favorites coming up are City for Conquest at 4:30 EST, George Washington Slept Here at 6:15 and King’s Row at 9:45. Set your DVR to tape if you are not able to watch them today. You’ll love them!

(Footnotes extend credit to IMDb website.)

Richard III -- A Villain For The Ages

If you are not familiar with William Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of King Richard the Third, you are missing the greatest villain of stage and screen. To quote my own post announcing my intention to write about this monstrous man, "...Shakespeare puts most teenagers into a comatose state.” I don’t believe this would happen if people were introduced to Shakespeare not with sweet love stories or comedies, but with plays like Richard III.  As I also said, “If you like bloody battles, lustful seduction, raging jealousy ... dire prophecies ... and villainy, you will like Richard III."  Richard was so monstrous that no heir to the English throne has ever been given that name since his death.

Even Richard's coat of arms is ugly, a white boar with the translated motto "Loyalty binds me." Richard's loyalty was all to himself, and he never wavered in his obsession to grab the crown. He mowed down everyone in his path, be it brother, wife, friends, court advisors or two innocent children. He surrounded himself with men like himself, ambitious, without conscience and willing to murder in hideous ways at his behest. The best known of Richard’s murderers is James Tyrrel, a name almost as famous as Richard’s in the annals of villains of English history. Richard lived from October, 1452 to August, 1485. He only reigned for less than 2 years as king, from 1483-1485. His family, the House of York, had been at war with the House of Lancaster for 100 years, known as the War of the Roses. Richard was the last of the Plantagenet line which started in 1154 with King Henry II, father of Richard the Lionheart. After Richard III's defeat at the Battle of Bosworth, the House of Tudor reigned, beginning with Henry VII, father of the most infamous of that house, Henry the Eighth. Richard was also the last English king to be killed in battle.

As a point of history, there are two schools of thought about Richard. One is that he was indeed the great villain described in Shakespeare’s play as well as in memoirs of Thomas More and other sources. The other is that he was a much-maligned, decent man whose history was re-written by the people who defeated him, the House of Tudor. If you are interested in this argument, just pull up the websites for Richard III Society and Society of Friends of King Richard III. It is a very interesting debate. For our purposes here, however, I am writing about the Richard of Shakespeare’s incomparable play. The first, titled Richard III, was released in 1956 with Sir Laurence Olivier, the second by the same name in 1995 with Sir Ian McKellan. These are two movies of different eras, each brilliant in their own unique ways.

Laurence Olivier had produced and acted in movies of Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Henry V, all to great acclaim. Richard III was greatly anticipated, and it was released in 1955. Filmed in Technicolor, it was a cinematically beautiful movie. Olivier did take some license with Shakespeare’s play, particularly in opening the movie with some of Richard’s speeches in the previous play, King Henry IV, Part II. Olivier felt that this would give some clarity to the story as well as Richard’s personality, and though I tend to be a purist about Shakespeare, I agree that this enhanced the movie. As the court celebrates the triumph and crowning of Richard’s brother, Edward IV (Sir Cedric Hardwicke), Richard goes off by himself to bemoan the end of war and beginning of “…this weak, piping time of peace.”

Richard was born hunchbacked, with a withered arm and a lame leg, with fierce ambition and love of war. He was a bitter man who, in his words, was “cheated of feature by dissembling nature, deformed, unfinished, sent before my time into this breathing world scarce half made up, and that so lamely and unfashionable that dogs bark at me as I halt by them.” In an inspired style of film-making, Olivier delivers his lines directly to the audience, pulling them into his world and creating a bond with them. He acts with a raised eyebrow and subtle sarcasm, truly fantastic. As part of this scene, Olivier inserts from Henry IV, Part II, Richard’s hatred of his deformed body and ferocious determination to seize the crown: “What other pleasure can the world afford?...love forswore me in my mother’s womb…and am I then a man to be beloved?...I’ll make my heaven to dream upon the crown, and whiles I live to account this world but hell until my mis-shaped trunk that bears this head be round impaled with a glorious crown….many lives stand between me and home…And I, like one lost in a thorny wood, that rends the thorns and is rent with the thorns, seeking a way….toiling desperately to find it out, torment myself to catch the English crown, and from that torment will free myself or hew my way out with a bloody axe! Why, I can smile and murder whiles I smile…and wet my cheeks with artificial tears, and frame my face to all occasions….can I do this, and cannot get a crown? Tut, were it farther off, I’ll pluck it down!”

That is Richard. Everything he does stems from this description of himself and his desires. As fourth in line of succession, the King’s two very young sons and Richard’s own brother, the Duke of Clarence (Sir John Gielgud), stand in the way. Gielgud gives a remarkable performance of Clarence, particularly when he describes his prophetic dream about his own death while imprisoned in the Tower of London. Richard is also determined to marry the Lady Anne (Claire Bloom), of Lancaster royal blood, partly from lust, partly from desire for a further royal alliance to strengthen his aim. The fact that Richard had just killed Anne's husband in battle did not sway him from seducing Anne right by the coffin of her dead husband. Anne, a devastated wife and frightened, weak woman, allowed herself to be seduced by Richard's "honeyed words." This tells us that despite his appearance and villainy, Richard could charm like a snake. Richard even goes so far later in the story as to try to marry his own niece for further royal affiliation. As he moves inexorably toward his ultimate aim, Richard is assisted by the Duke of Buckingham (Sir Ralph Richardson) and the aforementioned murderer Tyrell. Horrific events abound, and the story is told superbly to its bloody end.

Olivier’s Richard III, with its stellar cast, superb performances and stirring music by Sir William Walton, was delivered to the public in a most unusual way. It was released in the United States on afternoon TV and at movie theatres simultaneously. An unfortunate effect of this first-ever type of release was that the box office revenue at theatres was dismal. It is hard to believe, but Olivier was then unable to get his next project off the ground, filming of Macbeth, because of the bad revenues and because his only backer, producer Mike Todd (husband of Elizabeth Taylor), was killed in a plane crash. However, when Richard III was re-released in 1966, it topped box office records in most major American cities, and today it is considered a masterpiece. Richard III was nominated for only one award, unbelievably, which was best actor for Olivier, but he lost to Yul Brynner in The King and I.

In 1995, Sir Ian McKellan, known to younger audiences from his role in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, decided to make his own Richard III. McKellan is a classically trained actor of stage and screen, and added his own unique touches to Richard. He also used the technique of speaking directly to the audience. However, McKellan’s Richard is put into a modern setting, bringing it to life in the 1930’s with a suggestion of Richard and his cohorts in Nazi-type uniforms, and the Tudor heroes in British-style uniforms. The costumes, particularly those of the women, are gorgeous, and the music is jazzy and contemporary with the 1930’s. Shakespeare’s language is intact, thank heaven, and is strangely unmarred by the modern setting. Perhaps this is because we have seen in the 20th century many monstrous rulers like Richard, particularly Hitler. It is familiar territory to modern audiences.

McKellan’s Richard is viciously gleeful, acting the atrocious events with laughter and a twinkle in his eye. He is simply marvelous. Some of the updated scenes are humorous, such as the beginning speech which takes place in the men’s bathroom. He does not insert the scenes from Henry IV, Part II, as Olivier did, except for the lines about being able to murder while he smiles. He grins and says “Plots have I laid”, then crooks his finger at the audience, compelling us to follow along. Another witty update portrays one of the most famous lines from the movie -- “A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse!” --- which here is Richard’s broken-down jeep in the midst of battle. The palaces are lovely, but the main setting for the film is dark and bleak, with strange buildings and landscape that create a chilling atmosphere.

The cast, which does not boast of as many “Sirs” as Olivier’s version, is sometimes unusual and works beautifully. Annette Benning plays Elizabeth, Edward IV’s wretched widow queen trying to protect her 2 sons, with great elegance and style, showing real acting chops. Jim Broadbent as the evil Duke of Buckingham is a cigar-chomping, pot-bellied businessman who helps Richard with a smile and a wink. Nigel Hawthorne as Clarence is pitiable, and performs the famous soliloquy in the Tower of London with subtlety and grace. Kristin Scott Thomas is the Lady Anne, devastated by her husband’s death, seduced by Richard, and pitifully aware of her downfall. Robert Downy, Jr. is a surprise as Elizabeth’s brother, Lord Rivers. Downey apparently wanted the part so much that he cleared his calendar after the offer from McKellan. He does well playing the part of Rivers as a loving brother and appealing drunk. I must say that one of my favorites of this great cast is Adrian Dunbar, who plays the murdering Tyrrel. In Olivier’s film, Tyrrel was willing to do the deeds, but seemed much more reluctant and sensitive about it, particularly with the little princes. But Dunbar’s Tyrrel is not reluctant or sensitive. Richard, having been told Tyrrel is the kind of man he is looking for, meets him in a hog barn where Tyrrel is feeding apple pieces to the pigs. Richard asks him “Darest thou resolve to kill a friend of mine?” to which Tyrrel answers in a blasé tone “Ay, my lord, but I had rather kill two enemies.” (It is plain Richard means the two little princes.) Richard then throws a piece of  apple into the pen, hits a hog with an apple hard enough to make him squeal, and the two men smile.   The ending of the film is done with dark humor, as we see Richard for the last time, going to his death laughing, to the strains of an old recording of Al Jolson's "I'm Sittin' on Top of the World."  Marvelous.

McKellan’s Richard III won two Academy Awards, for costume design and art direction. McKellan was not even nominated for best actor, in my opinion an inordinately brainless decision on the part of Academy members. As movie lovers know, that wasn’t the first Academy blunder, nor will it be the last. It is really shameful that McKellan’s performance was not given the kudos it deserved.

As for the historical arguments about Richard, well, we may never know if he was an ordinary guy or the nasty scoundrel of Shakespeare. And that is just as well. I would hate to lose Richard, the greatest villain of all.

Errol Flynn Adventures - Movies of World War II

I am the happy owner of a wonderful boxed set featuring my favorite actor, Warner Brothers release “Errol Flynn Adventures”. These are Flynn's World War II era movies, and they have been beautifully restored and are crystal clear in quality.  The set includes war-time newsreels, Warner Brother cartoons, military band shorts, and theatrical trailers..

The 5 films are a picture of an era and of Hollywood’s propaganda in bolstering the morale of a suffering citizenry. Some are more realistic than others, but all share a common bond of hope and determination to win that terrible war. Errol Flynn took some heat due to the fact that he did not fight in the war, and it did not help that the studio did not want it to be known that Flynn had tried every branch of the service and was turned down. He had a bad heart, malaria, history of tuberculosis and an injured back. The studio did not want their macho star’s image tarnished with any kind of disability, and this was a source of embarrassment to Flynn through the war years. It was his desire to make films to help the war effort, and he did so very effectively with the following movies:

Uncertain Glory (1944) is the story of Jean Picard (Errol Flynn), a thief and murderer sentenced to the guillotine in Nazi-occupied France. Inspector Bonet (Paul Lukas) has been chasing him down for years and is determined to bring him to justice. Through a series of circumstances, Picard and Bonet find themselves on the same side of a very strange exploit. In my opinion, this movie, although not very well known outside of classic movie buff circles, is one of Flynn’s finest performances. He is not dashing, not very charming, unshaven most of the time, a thoroughly reprehensible man. Flynn really shows his acting chops and gives a marvelous performance.

Director: Raoul Walsh. Music: Max Steiner

Edge of Darkness (1943) is the story of Gunnar Brogge (Flynn), a fisherman in a small village in Nazi-occupied Norway. Along with his love Karen (Ann Sheridan), her doctor father (Walter Huston), and the rest of the small village, underground activities against the Nazis are the focus of their lives. A really nasty Nazi Captain (Helmut Dantine, probably the most beautiful male villain on screen) has no conscience in his desire to blot out all patriotism and hope in these people. This film is strong, serious and very spiritual in nature.

Director: Lewis Milestone. Music: Franz Waxman

Objective Burma (1945) was Flynn’s personal favorite. A stirring and true story of a squadron trapped in the Burmese jungle trying to make their way out for rescue, the movie is hard-edged and quite realistic for the time. James Brown and Henry Hull co-starred. Flynn enjoyed it because he did not have to be a romantic lead this time, just a man in a man’s world.
Director: Raoul Walsh. Music: Franz Waxman

Desperate Journey (1944) is probably the most propaganda-type of any war movie I ever saw. It’s a Hogan’s Hero type of romp through the German countryside by a group of flyers trying to get out of Germany. Flynn, Ronald Reagan, Arthur Kennedy and Alan Hale are comrades in arms.  Most of the Germans are pretty stupid and easily tricked by our guys. Even the great Raymond Massey as a Nazi Major is made to look foolish. Even though a bit unrealistic, I just love this movie. It is full of humor, has enough pathos to keep it respectable, and was good for war-time morale.
Director: Raoul Walsh. Music: Max Steiner/Hugo Friedhofer

Northern Pursuit (1943) has Flynn playing Steve Wagner, a Canadian Mountie who stumbles across a Nazi colonel (Helmut Dantine again) who has landed in Canada to mount an offensive. The film is quite lovely in its portrayal of a snowy, icy Canadian wasteland, and the story is well-done.
Director: Raoul Walsh. Music: Adolph Deutsch

These movies have it all – wonderful actors, creative cinematography and soaring music that includes our own Anthem, La Marseilles and God Save the King -- patriotism in its purest form.  Flynn at his finest.

MISERY is the word!

By ClassicBecky
This picture may be a slight exaggeration of my situation, but it feels the same!  Knee injury, surgery, possibly more surgery -- enough boring details.  Suffice it to say that my poor blog has suffered accordingly.  I have not been able to finish my article on Richard III, Laurence Olivier's 1956 version and Ian McKellan's 1995 version.  I will be back at the desk writing just as soon as I am able.

In the meantime, I hope I have a better nurse than this....

"It's a quarter to three, there's no one in the place except you and me."

By ClassicBecky

That phrase from a great Sinatra song beautifully evokes the feeling of being awake in the darkest hours of the night.  In my case, the setting is not a bar but my darkened living room, and no one is in the place except me and my movies and books.  It's not a bad time, really.  I have always loved the night.  Sometimes, though, worries and fears easily surface and whisper in your ear.  So instead of a drink, or maybe even with one, I pull out an old familiar friend.  Sometimes it's a book I've read many times, sometimes a movie I know by heart.  I feel that tonight will be a long vigil, so my choice is two classic movies that I love.

Somehow, for me, the black and white films of  the 30's and 40's are my favorites for such times.  They aren't always particularly calm, quiet stories, they aren't always deep drama,  but they have a soothing, otherworldly quality that suits me at night.  One that I picked for tonight is a sweet and funny little detective story released in 1934 called Murder on the Blackboard.  My favorite crotchety spinster with wry humor and a good heart is Miss Hildegarde Withers, played so well by dear Edna May Oliver.  She is a schoolteacher who finds herself in the middle of a murder mystery and uses her particular talents of biting wit and action to follow the clues and reveal the murderer.  Edna May did two other movies as Miss Withers, The Penguin Pool Murders and Murder On A Honeymoon.  I wish she had done more.  

If I don't fall asleep, which I believe will be the case, I am putting on The Lodger, a 1944 film about a mysterious man (Laird Cregar) who shows up at a London home late one night looking for a room.  In the streets, newsboys are crying out headlines about Jack the Ripper's latest murder that very night.  I guess you can see where this is going.  Merle Oberon and my favorite dashing Englishman, George Sanders, find themselves enmeshed in the life of this menacing man.  It is a great film, rich with fog and shadows and sinister atmosphere. 

I might have picked one of Val Lewton's films of the early 40's, like Cat People or I Walked With A Zombie, perhaps something of the early 1930's, like  Dracula or The Werewolf of London, maybe one of the 1940's series The Saint with George Sanders.  All have the qualities of light and shadow, atmosphere and story that appeal to me. 

I wonder what you would choose in the dark hours of the night.

Coming Attraction

By ClassicBecky

Reading the plays of Shakespeare in high school has caused many a teenager to fall into a deep coma. But these plays were never meant to be just read, but to be experienced on the stage, and in our era, on film.  The difference between reading a play and seeing it is astounding.  Many people are unfamiliar with Shakespeare, or intimidated by the language, and have never given the movies a chance.  We're not talking about Romeo and Juliet or Midsummer Night's Dream here.  Oh no, nothing so light or romantic.

If you like bloody battles, lustful seduction, raging jealousy, witches and dire prophecies, dashing kings and villainy, you will like King Richard III, King Henry V, Macbeth and Othello..  I have always thought that school children would find a great interest in his plays if they were only taught not the romances or comedies, but rather the tragedies and the exciting stories of the English kings.  In my article to be posted later this week, I will review a sampling of the movies made from these types of plays. The different versions reflect the cultural stamp and controversy of each era in which the films were released, and will intrigue you and maybe even provoke interest in seeing them if you have not already done so.

I will be reviewing my favorites in pairs, each movie from a different movie era:  Laurence Olivier's and Kenneth Branagh's Henry V, Ian McKellan's and Olivier's Richard III, Roman Polanski's and Orson Welles' Macbeth, and Lawrence Fishburne's and Olivier's Othello.

Watch for my article to be posted later this week, called "Shakespeare On Film - You Don't Know What You're Missing!"

Everybody's Got One!

By ClassicBecky

All of us remember particular scenes in movies that touched, surprised, made us laugh or made us cry.  Here are three of my favorites.  What are some of yours?

The Hunchback of Notre Dame, starring Charles Laughton as the tragic Quasimodo, has two scenes that I have never forgotten.  In the first scene, Quasimodo has been unjustly accused of wrongdoing, lashed to a whipping post and cruelly beaten.  Laughton's portrayal of his angry humiliation and anguish is tour de force.  When the beating is over and he must stay bound in the hot sun, he begs for water and is only laughed at by the crowd.  Then the lovely gypsy girl Esmeralda (Maureen O'Hara) steps up to the whipping post and brings him drink.  The crowd falls silent, and there is only the sound of haunting music.  At first Quasimodo is ashamed and will not look her in the eye.  Then, in a moment of absolute trust and gratitude, he turns up his head to accept the water.  If you don't have a tear in your eye at that one, check your brain waves for a possible disorder.

The second scene is Esmeralda's hanging.  Also accused unjustly, the beautiful girl stands at the scaffold in front of the cathedral.  The crowd shouts its disapproval at first, but then falls silent.  In a moment of absolute silence, Quasimodo swings down from the top of the Cathedral on a rope, grabs Esmeralda in his arm and swings her back up to the top, shouting "Sanctuary, sanctuary!"  He holds her up for the crowd to see, the roar is deafening, and a magnificent choir sings Alleluia.  It is a moment never to be forgotten.

The Phantom of the Opera, Lon Chaney's silent version, was one of the first classic films I was ever lucky enough to see in a real movie theatre.  A very old lady played music throughout the film on a very old organ, and it was wonderful.  The scene that took my breath away was, of course, the unmasking of the phantom.  On a big screen, it drew gasps from the whole audience of modern moviegoers who have seen a lot, but who were just as terrified as the original audiences must have been.  After the initial horror, the phantom then reveals his shame and humiliation at having the girl he loves see his hideous face.  What a movie moment!

If you have something you would like to share that you have never forgotten, tell us in the comment format.  It's fun to discuss what memorable scenes other movie-lovers share.