182. The Best Years Of Our Lives (1946)

Directed By William Wyler

Synopsis

Three servicemen return home after the Second World War and have to try to put their lives back together each one has their own problems adapting, but eventually all turns out for the best.

Review

This is a pretty good film, it won 7 Oscars and it is not hard to see why, the directing is inspired with a constant use of deep focus being used in the benefit of the plot, the acting is more then stellar, with a particular nod to one of my favourite actresses of the late 30's and 40's, Myrna Loy, who can deliver a line like no one else, with such dry humour that is at the same time sarcastic and tender.

Then you have the theme of the film, of course all ends well, we are at the time of the code after all and these men are heroes, they can't just all go to shit, but at least here the happy ending does not feel tacked on, even tough you are always expecting that something horrible is going to happen at the end of it, the happy ending does make sense.

Even if it does have a happy ending it is still a pretty strong condemnation of the conditions in which War Veterans found themselves after returning to the country that sent them out to war. The social consciousness of the film is actually pretty commendable, it is in no way glamorising war, while at the same time feeling deep compassion for those who fought in it.

So this is a film which is supremely well acted and directed, with an excellent script which can be both touching and funny, while at the same time having a strong social criticism element, and with its heart in the right place, what more could you want?

Final Grade

9/10

Trivia


From Wikipedia:

The film was well received by most film critics. Bosley Crowther of The New York Times hailed the film as a masterpiece. He wrote, "It is seldom that there comes a motion picture which can be wholly and enthusiastically endorsed not only as superlative entertainment but as food for quiet and humanizing thought... In working out their solutions Mr. Sherwood and Mr. Wyler have achieved some of the most beautiful and inspiring demonstrations of human fortitude that we have had in films." He also said the ensemble casting gave the "'best' performance in this best film this year from Hollywood."

A more recent critic, Dave Kehr is more reluctant to praise the film, but makes the case why the film is important today. He wrote, "The film is very proud of itself, exuding a stifling piety at times, but it works as well as this sort of thing can, thanks to accomplished performances by Fredric March, Myrna Loy, and Dana Andrews, who keep the human element afloat. Gregg Toland's deep-focus photography, though, remains the primary source of interest for today's audiences." David Thomson offers tempered praise: "I would concede that Best Years is decent and humane... acutely observed, despite being so meticulous a package. It would have taken uncommon genius and daring at that time to sneak a view of an untidy or unresolved America past Goldwyn or the public."

Not everyone was as complimentary. Iconoclastic critic Manny Farber called it "a horse-drawn truckload of liberal schmaltz."

Currently, the film has a 96% "Fresh" rating at Rotten Tomatoes, based on twenty-six reviews.

Excerpts from the film:

181. I Know Where I'm Going (1945)

Directed by Powell and Pressburger

Synopsis

Woman is getting married to rich man who for some reason is at some god-forsaken island in the inner Hebrides. Of course she never gets there, first because there is too little wind, then there is too much wind, then there is the dashing Richard Livesey who is penniless but not penisless.

Review

This is the second Powell and Pressburger film on the list and also the second film with Richard Livesey... and this film suffers tremendously from comparison with The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp. That film was a staggering masterpiece, this film is just quite good.

The story is really secondary to the whole thing, I would much rather focus on the pretty nifty location filming which is pretty spectacular for the time, with a whole film crew actually going all the way to the ass end of the universe to make this film, and the dialogue, which as per usual in Powell and Pressburger is polished to perfection.

This film keeps the tradition of making a showcase of British Eccentricity (tm), with the secondary characters being as, if not more interesting than the main ones which aren't as eccentric in order to make them more immediately accessible. So... it is a good film, it is not an heartbreaking work of staggering genius like Blimp, but it is perfectly serviceable.

Final Grade

8/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

One of the most complex scenes is the small boat battling through the Corryvreckan whirlpool. This was a clever combination of footage shot at Corryvreckan between the Hebridean islands of Scarba and Jura and the Gray Dogs (Bealach a'Choin Ghlais) between Scarba and Lunga. There are some long distance shots looking down over the area, shot from one of the islands. There are some middle distance and close-up shots that were made from a small boat with a hand-held camera. There were some model shots, done in the tank at the studio. These had gelatin added to the water so that it would hold its shape better and would look better when scaled up. Usually the way that waves break and the size of water drops is a give-away for model shots done in a tank. Then there were also the close-up shots of the people in the boat. These were all done in the studio, with a boat on gimbals being rocked in all directions by some hefty studio hands while other studio hands threw buckets of water at them. These were filmed with the shots made from the boat with the hand-held camera projected behind them. Even then, there was further trickery where they joined together some of the long and middle distance shots with those made in the tank in a single frame.

No clip of the film online, but here is one guy singing the theme:

180. Detour (1945)

Directed By Edgar G. Ulmer

Synopsis

A hitch-hiker is trying to get to his girlfriend. On the way he gets picked up by a nice enough guy that happens to die. Hitch-hiker assumes the guise of the dead man so he isn't a suspect of murder, until he takes in another hitch-hiker, a woman, who knows the guy is dead and wants to get in on some inheritance money.

Review

This is a pretty short film as the B movie that it is. It is a little over 1 hour. You probably already know this director, he was the set designer for M and Metropolis which were on the list, as well as Der Golem, an excellent film not on the list, and he directed another film that we've had here, The Black Cat with Karloff and Lugosi, probably my favourite B movie.

This film is a mixed bad really, the acting is not at all impressive, the sets are nearly non-existing, the story is slightly unbelievable and it was all done one a shoestring budget in 6 days. However, almost unexplainably, it is a compelling film, it has some creepy quality to it that makes you enjoy it.

This film immediately made me think of Lynch's Lost Highway, and it wasn't a coincidence, because Highway does take its inspiration from here. The film is actually quite unsettling, even if it is not really a horror story or anything of the kind, it is a succession of shitty events happening to a guy. Still pretty good, but as far from perfect as you could get, there is no polish here, but that's how you'd want it.

Final Grade

8/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

With re-shoots out of the question for such a low budget movie, director Edgar G. Ulmer made the decision to place storytelling conventions above continuity.

Detour's famous example of this is the reversal of the hitchhiking scenes. In order to parallel the westbound New York to Los Angeles travel of the character with right-to-left movement across the screen, many scenes had to be flipped. This caused the cars to appear to be driving on the wrong side of the road, and the hitchhiker to enter the cars on the driver's side.

She knows!:

179. The Lost Weekend (1945)

Directed By Billy Wilder

Synopsis

Drinking is bad mmkay? (writer is drunkard, life is crap, then he sees the light and goes back to writing).

Review

Okay from the synopsis you can't really tell that this is a pretty good film, except for one single point, the ending. I understand that this is probably no one's fault except the government's as the Production Code would probably never allow it to end with a neat suicide scene in the toilet. Which would have made this film a 10. I can't wait for the end of the production code, until then if I want grit I have to look to Europe. Still, this film got away with some things like a nice prostitute, real decadence and a pretty gruesome scene with a mouse and a bat.

Speaking of toilets, the production code also makes for a silly moment in the film, as they cannot show toilets on screen, when Milland steals the purse of a girl, he goes into the toilet but instead of going into a cubicle to get the money out and get rid of the fucking purse, as I usually do, he had to do it on the lavatory area while the bathroom attendant cleans his shoes... Oh well. I was probably the only person in the universe to be annoyed by this.

In the end the film stands out because of the performance of its main character, Milland plays the drunk incredibly convincingly and truly deserved his Oscar. In the end I deeply recommend the film as one of the few times in the mid forties where American cinema really strives for realism. Thumbs Up. Just a pity that it all ended with a Deus Ex Machina and a truly unconvincing recovery.

Final Grade

8/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

* Tribute was paid to the film in the Simpsons episode "A Star Is Burns": Barney Gumble's short film "Puke-a-Hontas" recreates several of the iconic images such as the main character lying on his bed surrounded by the detritus of his habit.

* In the 1994 film The Shawshank Redemption, Gilda is being screened when Andy asks Red for the Rita Hayworth poster; however, in the original Stephen King story, The Lost Weekend is screened.

* The film is mentioned in the Christmas Crackers episode of Are You Being Served? when the staff are given a less than impressively sized bottle of brandy for their Christmas pudding.

The Bat and Mouse scene:

178. Roma, Citta Aperta (Open City) (1945)

Directed By Roberto Rossellini

Synopsis

During the occupation of Rome the resistance remains active. The film follows a group of activists and their relations, progressively being more and more hounded by the Nazis. It doesn't end well.

Review

This is not the first neorealist film on the list, we had Visconti's Ossessione before, but because of copyright problems(Ossessione was lifting from The Postman Always Rings Twice) this was the first film that showed the world what neorealism is.

It could hardly have been a more potent film to start neorealism. The film is at the same time brutal and tender, the characters were lovingly developed from real life people, and played with obvious passion by the actors who in 1945 felt quite close to the thing.

Then there is a brutality underscoring the film which is truly shocking, the death of three of the main characters happens in pretty horrid circumstances, and altough the cameras cut away when they should it is still tremendously effective. Most of the film is filmed on location, with real people populating the street, some of the footage is almost documentary-like and all this ends up making this a pretty amazing and effective film. And hey what was the last time you saw a Nazi-Lesbian-Drug-Dealer?

Final Grade

9/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

Since early on, this film has been considered a quintessential example of neorealism in film, so much so that together with Paisà and Germania anno zero it is called Rossellini's "Neorealist Trilogy." Robert Burgoyne called it "the perfect exemplar of this mode of cinematic creation [neorealism] whose established critical definition was given by André Bazin." More recent scholarship points out that this film is actually less neo-realist and more melodramatic, while queer studies points out the "atrocious gay stereotypes" in the film.

Thank You Queer Studies! I didn't spot that myself! I have no brain!

Queer Studies, patronising you since 1989

Pina gets it from behind:

177. Les Enfants du Paradis (Children of Paradise, or Children Of the Gods) (1945)

Directed By Marcel Carné

Synopsis

A love pentagon in the mid 19th century Paris theatre world. A murderer, a mime, an actor, and a count all want Arletty. The ultimate MILF.

Review

So, in the trailer to this film it was called the French Gone With The Wind. Actually, it is better than that. There might not be Technicolor or Atlanta burning, but it is not far. The whole film is a delight, the acting, the setting, the dresses. There is something about French cinema when it is good that surpasses just about anything. When it is bad it is pedantic, presumptuous and egocentric. When it is good it is art at its best.

And this is French cinema at its best. It is three hours of astounding acting, Arletty who was already great in another Carné film, Le Jour Se Léve is now amazing here. She is way to old for her character, and she just isn't that pretty, but that woman has presence, elegance and that star-quality. Even if you might start off by not quite believing her image, you end up not caring, hey Baptiste isn't that pretty too. But you get why there would be such love for the ugly Baptiste, Jean-Louis Barrault is an amazing mime on screen. You might not like Mimes but he is something else. And talk about the writing, it's Jacques Prévert at his best, and that should be enough.

Then in a twist of fate, the murderer, the constant threat in the whole film, does something unexpected and you know that the film is not going to end as you expect it. The film's end is incredibly anti-climatic, but that is exactly how you would want it, because it does not kill this dream world, it goes on existing even after the curtain has gone down. Indispensable.

Final Grade

10/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

The film was extremely difficult to make, the external sets in Nice were badly damaged by natural causes, and exacerbated and compounded by the theatrical constraints during the German occupation of France during World War II. In fact, the extended production of Children of Paradise, which took place during 1943 and 1944, was a veritable tour de force of French spirit overcoming adversities in the wake of their military defeat. The passion and dedication of the team surrounding Carné for this film, who showed remarkable resilience in the face of potentially deadly adversity, and the undertone of defiance of the screenplay in the context of Nazi occupation, may explain, in part, why it became and remains the greatest French film of all times.

The Vichy administration had imposed a maximum time limit of 90 minutes for feature films, so the film was split into two parts - Le Boulevard du crime (The Boulevard of Crime) and L'Homme blanc (The White Man).

Noted critic Pauline Kael allegedly wrote "that the starving extras made away with some of the banquets before they could be photographed". Many of the 1,800 extras were Resistance agents using the film as daytime cover, who, until the Liberation, had to mingle with some collaborators or Vichy sympathisers who were imposed on the production by the authorities. Alexandre Trauner, who designed the sets, and Joseph Kosma, who composed the music, were Jewish and had to work in complete secrecy throughout the production and their work was credited to others in the credits.

The set builders were short of supplies and the camera crew's film stock was rationed. The financing, originally a French-Italian production, collapsed a few weeks after production began in Nice, due to the Allied conquest of Sicily in August 1943. Around this time, the Nazis forbade the producer, André Paulvé, from working on the film because of his remote Jewish ancestry, and the production had to be suspended for three months. Pathé Cinéma took over production, whose cost was escalating wildly. The quarter-mile long main set, the "Boulevard du Temple", was severely damaged by a storm and had to be rebuilt. By the time shooting resumed in Paris in early spring of 1944, the Director of Photography, Roger Hubert, had been assigned to another production and Philippe Agostini, who replaced him, had to analyze all the reels in order to match the lighting of the non-sequential shot list; all the while, electricity in the Paris Studios was intermittent.

Production was delayed again after the allies landed in Normandy, perhaps intentionally stalled so that it would only be completed after the French Liberation. When Paris was liberated in August 1944, the actor Robert le Vigan, who was, ironically, cast in the role of informer-thief Jericho, was sentenced to death by the Resistance for collaborating with the Nazis, and had to flee, along with the author Céline, to Sigmaringen. He was replaced at a moment’s notice by Pierre Renoir, older brother of French filmmaker Jean Renoir and son of the famous painter, and most of the scenes had to be redone. Vigan was tried and convicted as a Nazi collaborator in 1946. One scene featuring Vigan survives in the middle of the second part, when Jericho snitches to Nathalie.

Baptiste's father is played by mime and mime theorist Etienne Decroux, who was Jean-Louis Barrault's teacher. Many of his character's lines about theatre can be interpreted as ironic statements on his own work in corporeal mime.[citation needed]

Carné and Prévert hid some of the key reels of film from the occupying forces, hoping that Paris would be liberated by the time the film was completed

Witness:

176. Mildred Pierce (1945)

Directed By Michael Curtiz


Synopsis

Mildred Pierce wants the best for her child, but her child is a fucking brat which needs some spanking. Possibly (but not really) the inspiration for the Ramones' Beat On The Brat.

Review

This was an interesting film, as we have gathered by now Curtiz is quite an uneven director capable of the best and worse that this list has to offer. But here he does come up with the goods, well maybe not him as much as Joan Crawford who plays a great part here.

This film is really all about Joan's character, Mildred, a self-sacrificing, strong, working woman who suffers from a deep lack of talent for bringing up her kid. Veda, the child, is one of the most evil depictions of bratiness, ungrateful, materialistic bitch that she is. Oh and she's shtupping her mother's husband, the husband that she married to be able to give Veda her lifestyle.

So as you can see this is a bit Days of Our Lives, but it does something original by mixing family melodrama with film noir. There is a murder, it is told in flashback, it has a voice over, this time by a woman which is original in itself, but also covering family melodrama. Other than this nothing else s amazingly spectacular, it won't blow you away, the twist at the end is not shocking in the least, but still worth watching.

So it is a good film, well directed and superbly well acted.

Final Grade

8/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

Carol Burnett parodied the film on her television show in a sketch called "Mildred Fierce."

Rock group Sonic Youth's 1990 album Goo contains a song called "Mildred Pierce."

In one episode of the television series Gilmore Girls (season 6, episode 13) "Mildred Pierce" is used as a verb.

In the film version of V for Vendetta, a Mildred Pierce poster is visible in V's lair.

There are allusions to Mildred Pierce in Pedro Almodovar's Volver. Raimunda (Penelope Cruz) starts a successful restaurant as a result of the murder of her husband by her daughter, Paula.

Trailer, as usual completely unrepresentative of the film! Everything this leads you to believe is a lie:

175. Spellbound (1945)

Directed By Alfred Hitchcock

Synopsis

Ingrid Bergman is a psychoanalyst/psychotherapist aka Analrapist. So is Gregory Peck, or is he?! What happened to the real Dr. Anthony Edwardes who was supposed to come and take care of the mental hospital, now that Doctor Strangely-evil-faced has retired. Who could have wanted to kill his replacement?

Review

Well this was slightly disappointing, I love Hitchcock as much as anyone, but there really wasn't much to this film. The 1001 Movies book admits this and tells us to watch out for the great Salvador Dali created dream-sequence... and we do.

The dream sequence lasts what? 2 minutes? Maybe. And it is pretty good, it helps compound the utterly fallacious interpretation of psychoanalysis present in the film. No it doesn't work like that, sorry. I know I've had it done!

So, not that impressive, although it is always a pleasure to see Ingrid Bergman and Peck in a film, even if she is playing the bookish type, because she is a doctor, and therefore has no feelings, until she falls in love. And of course a woman in love relinquishes all her brain cells and cannot be trusted to be scientific. Thank you Mr. Hitchcock for that wonderful insight into the female psyche. Also look out for the completely stereotypical German doctor halfway through.

Final Grade

7/10

Trivia

Spellbound caused major contention between Alfred Hitchcock and producer David O. Selznick. Hitchcock was contracted to make films for Selznick, who ordered him to make a movie based upon Selznick's own positive experience with psychoanalysis. Selznick even brought in his own therapist as a technical advisor. She and Hitchcock clashed frequently.

Further contention was caused by the hiring of surrealist artist Salvador Dalí to conceive certain scenes of mental delusion. Selznick hated Dalí's ideas, and although much of his work was used, one dream sequence depicting Bergman turning into a statue of the Greek goddess Diana was cut. The footage apparently no longer exists (although some production stills have survived).

The film boasts an orchestral score by Miklós Rózsa notable for its pioneering use of the theremin. Spellbound was filmed in black and white, except for one or two frames of bright red at the conclusion when a gun is turned into the camera. This red detail was deleted in 16mm and video formats and was restored only for the film's DVD release.


The Dream:

174. Battle Of San Pietro (1945)

Directed By John Huston

Synopsis

The story of a battle in WWII around the village of San Pietro in Italy.

Review

This is a documentary which takes about 30 minutes to get finished. In the meanwhile it is a pretty surprising thing, you would hardly expect an American film from 1945 to be so unflinchingly realistic and so not a propaganda film.

This short film shows war a pretty ugly thing, there are people dying on shot, there are plenty of images of corpses, even towards the end there are shots of some Italian villagers exhuming the corpse of a lady who one of the men, completely distraught, kisses. And then you have countless shots which you have seen before lifted straight from here into countless films. In the end the film is more interesting than actually a pleasure to watch, but it does live on its own merits.

The American troops never come off as invincible or inherently superior (only morally) to their opposition. None of the tanks survives, there are several failures to take the hills around the village and it comes across as haphazard. This is probably why the film would later become a training film, to show troops the reality of they could expect and not some idealised fiction of war. Fascinating.

Final Grade

8/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

The film is unflinching in its realism (showing people dying on the field) and was held up from being shown to the public by the United States Army. Huston quickly became unpopular with the Army, not only for the film but also for his response to the accusation that the film was anti-war. Huston responded that if he ever made a pro-war film, he should be shot.

General George Marshall came to the film's defense, stating that because of the film's gritty realism, it would make a good training film; subsequently the film was used for that purpose. Huston was no longer considered a pariah; he was decorated and made an honorary major.

You can get the whole film on Youtube, here is Part I of VI:

173. Murder, My Sweet (UK: Farewell, My Lovely) (1944)

Directed By Edward Dmytryk

Synopsis

There's so many twists and turns that this is complicated. Basically Marlowe is investigating a murder and theft of a jade necklace, while also investigating the whereabouts of Moose's ex-girlfriend Velma.

Review

Marlowe is one of the most interesting detectives in print and this is supposedly the best adaptation of Marlowe to the screen, so it is bound to be good. OF course this isn't the most popular version of Marlowe, Bogart would make the character almost synonymous with him after the Big Sleep.

Still this is a pretty fun film, there are plenty of things happening here, but unlike the Maltese Falcon it never goes too fast or too pointless for you to follow or care. The twists are believable but this is also because the main character is believable. He is expertly played by Dick Powell who wasn't really used to playing serious roles, but seems to do fine here. Hell, more than fine.

Much like Double Indemnity this is another film noir which really ticks all the boxes, there is the voice-over there is the shadows and the flashbacks and the anti-hero and all the dames. But also like Double Indemnity it is done really well and therefore avoids the falling into cliché which is the bane of many of these films.

Final Grade

9/10 (can't seem to give anything else lately)

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

Dick Powell was previously known only for light comedies and musicals, so the casting of him as Chandler's hard-boiled private detective antihero was a surprise to many. The studio changed the title from Farewell, My Lovely because they thought audience would think the film was a musical. Powell's performance is much debated by fans of Chandler and film noir; some think it too light and comic; others consider it the best interpretation of Philip Marlowe on film.

Beginning of the film, going into flashback:

172. Double Indemnity (1944)

Directed By Billy Wilder

Synopsis

Wife wants to get her husband killed with the help of an insurance salesman who makes a double indemnity policy on the guy. It all goes ape-shit.

Review

This is really the quintessential noir film, to the point of parody really. This is such a paragon of the whole noir genre that a lot of the elements here have been used again and again and again and again in film history. You know, homages as they like to say.

From the voice-over to he surreptitious meetings in supermarkets, to the cold hearted woman who is just a psycho playing men to her ends, it is all here. Even visually it is the perfect noir, the shadows the darkness the fact that almost all of it is played in flashback...

There are, however some quite unique elements to this film, I find it quite interesting for example that there is no detective here, all the investigation is done by a Claims Manager in a insurance company, actually making the insurance business look kind of interesting. The part of the "detective" is a brilliant one by Edward G. Robinson who gets some of the best monologues in the whole thing, and the guy who has seen it all in the insurance business.

So if someone asked you to show them what film noir is, this would probably be the ideal film to direct them to.

Final Grade

9/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

Both the director and the cinematrographer were big fans of the painter Edward Hopper and were clearly influenced by Hopper's use of shadow and isolation in his works. Raymond Chandler once remarked upon Wilder's admiration for Hopper and his efforts to introduce similar themes into his films. Billy Wilder is believed to be the anonymous benefactor who donated Hoppers to LA area museums.

Edward G. Robinson prized his reputation for professionalism and strong preparation. He reportedly did the tour de force scene where he puts the pompous insurance company president in his place while reciting lengthy actuarial tables verbatim in one take to the astonishment of everyone on the set including the actor playing the executive who is captured on film with his mouth agape.

For years, new employees who began work in the accident and life insurance policy sections at Mutual of Omaha were required to view DOUBLE INDEMNITY and write and essay on what they had learned.

Flirting Scene:

171. Ivan the Terrible (Ivan Grozny) (1944-46)

Directed By Sergei Eisenstein

Synopsis

Ivan the Terrible's solidification of power and his fight against the Boyars.

Review

Eisenstein's amazing film Ivan the Terrible is actually an unfinished work of which only two parts were made. While watching this you can tell that Eisenstein was much more comfortable in the silent medium than in sound, but this does not mean that he doesn't make something astonishing.

Eisenstein's silent roots are exactly what make this film great, the importance of image is very much a thing here, while other film-makers shunned it for the easier option of using dialogue to say what previously was said in images, there is no such laziness for Eisenstein.

The visuals are thoroughly spectacular, not only the directing with its expert use of shadows and symbolism but also in the sets, wardrobe etc. etc. and some amazing use of colour towards the end. I would actually like to see where he could have gone with colour. Unfortunately he died before he could do that.

Yes at times the acting is overly theatrical and visual but it strangely works in a film which is so dark, grotesque and infused with tragedy. There is really very little to quibble with, this is a film of undiminished brilliance. There will be image after image that will stay with you for ever. Fucking feast of the senses this was.

Final Grade

10/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

The first film, Ivan The Terrible, Part I, was filmed between 1942 and 1944 and released at the end of that year. The film presented Ivan as a national hero, and won Josef Stalin's approval (and even a Stalin Prize).

The second film, Ivan The Terrible, Part II: The Boyars' Plot, finished filming at Mosfilm in 1946. However, it was not approved by the government, because it depicted Ivan as less of a hero and more of a paranoid tyrant, a parallel Stalin did not appreciate. The film was banned by Stalin, and did not get its first screening until 1958, five years after his death.

The third part, which began filming in 1946, was not completed. All footage from the film was confiscated, and most of it destroyed (though several filmed scenes still exist today).

The score for the films was composed by Sergei Prokofiev.

Ivan is portrayed as a bird, with his robes acting as his wings, the constant thrusting and tilting of his head, and the feathery like nature of his hair and beard. The bird symbolism will shift from prey to predatory throughout the films.

Efrosinia is portrayed like a snake, to re-enforce her evil nature. Camera shots always have her coming from the floor up, much like a snake coils up to attack. Her clothing is always black, a traditionally evil color, and she wears a head covering giving her the appearance of a snake's bald head.

Alexei is portrayed as a dog to emphasize his loyalty. His hair is designed to mimic a dog's long, floppy ears, as well as his general mannerisms.


Some church scenes from the film:

170. Henry V (1944)

Directed By Laurence Olivier

Synopsis


*H3nry_5 has entred the room.

H3nry_5 - Does the Sallic law apply to the French throne?
Da KaRdInAl - Not really, my liege.
H3nry_5 - Well by golly let's get France for us then! Kick some froggy ass!
H3nry_5 - Hey Kate m/f?
K4t3_V4l0i5 - La hind, les nayls, le ilbou...

Review

So we all know the story, Henry V... how can the 4th sequel still be good? Well it can. Laurence Olivier was taken from active duty in WWII to come and produce, direct and star in this epic film.

One thing that you immediately get form this film is the idea that it is the direct ancestor of the great Technicolor epics of later decades. It lasts for hours, it has loads of extras and some pretty good battle scenes.

This film does however do more than the average epic. There are some pretty good effects here, firstly there's the interesting setting of the film in the Globe theatre, which has a pretty good diorama of London which you fly over at the beginning of the film closing in the theatre. Then there's the constant scenery made to look like Medieval illuminations. It doesn't look realistic but it doesn't need to and does manage to evoke an interesting idea of the time the work is set in. Then the acting is great.

There are a couple of minor gripes I have with the film, parts of it are excised, like the traitors. This is a patriotic British film, there are not British traitors. The problem with the film is that it attempts to be even more nationalistic than the original play, and that at times comes across as crass. But we have to report ourselves to the times the film was done in 1944, it is only natural that this should happen.

Final Grade

9/10

Trivia

From Wikipedia:

The original setting was inaccessible, as it was located in German-occupied France at the time, so the film was shot in Enniskerry, Co.Wicklow, Ireland. The chain-mail armour was actually spray-painted wool knitted by blind women. Many of the extras were servicemen, and it is said that you can tell the American servicemen as they wear their helmets at a jaunty angle.

Olivier agreed not to appear in a film for 18 months to encourage this one to attract as large an audience as possible. In return, he was paid £15,000, tax-free (about £460,000 in today's money).

In 2007 the film was digitally restored to High Definition format and re-released.

As the first of many Shakespeare films on here, here's a tribute to Shaky on film, there's a couple of images from Henry V: