Regularly updated blog charting the most important films of the last 104 years.
Friday, November 28, 2008
320. Kumonosu Jo (Throne Of Blood) (1957)
Directed By Akira Kurosawa
Synopsis
Bitches are bitches, men are pussy-whipped.
Review
The above synopsis is obviously the original subtitle to Shakespeare's Macbeth, and Throne of Blood is an astonishing adaptation of the play. One of the great things about Shakespeare's plays is their universality, they deal with themes that are translatable into almost any culture and time, Macbeth could be set today among big business companies, in the stone-age between conflicting tribes or in space between aliens or whatever.
Kurosawa picks up on this and transports Macbeth into medieval Japan, making an amazingly great adaptation. Toshiro Mifune plays the pussy-whipped lord who is convinced by his wife to rise to and consolidate power through a series of murders. The guilt and paranoia destroy them both.
Kurosawa is particularly effective at creating environments and ambiances which work at an almost subliminal level. Then his characterisations are perfect, the ghosts more than scare, they freak you out, they are insidious. Kurosawa seems to have learned how to portray the supernatural with Mizoguchi and it tells. The movements are stylised, reminiscent of Noh theatre, the whole thing looks alien and familiar at the same time. The action sequences are breathtaking, the death of Mifune is one of the best deaths ever committed to screen. Say what you want about Kenneth Branagh, this is probably the best Shakespeare adaptation ever committed to screen. Japanese cinema fails to disappoint again.
Final Grade
10/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
Washizu's famous death scene, in which his own archers turn upon him and fill his body with arrows, was in fact performed with real arrows, a choice made to help Mifune produce realistic facial expressions of fear. The arrows seen to impact the wooden walls were not superimposed or faked by special effects (this is disputed, however, as cables are visible several times during the sequence and reverse motion photography was probably used), but instead shot by choreographed archers. During filming, Mifune waved his arms, ostensibly because his character was trying to brush away the arrows embedded in the planks; this indicated to the archers the direction in which Mifune wanted to move.
319. Le Notti Di Cabiria (Nights of Cabiria) (1957)
Directed By Federico Fellini
Synopsis
The film follows the life of a prostitute in Rome and her exploits looking for love. She doesn't really find it.
Review
Finally Italian cinema is moving slightly away from the emotional exploitativeness of Neo-Realism. There are of course elements of that trend still here, but it's about time to move on. There were two great Neo-Realist films: Bicycle Thieves and Rome, Open City, after that it all felt old hat. Fellini is the man to move us out of this, however.
The social realism of the film is present not only in the theme of it but in the portrayal of the downtrodden members of society not only in prostitution but people living in caves and the family that buys Cabiria's house. This is, however, tempered by more interesting and slightly surreal themes, from the night club she goes to with the film star to the film star's house and the magical/hypnotic show she attends and performs in, there is enough to keep you fascinated as you follow this woman's life.
Giulietta Masina as Cabiria is a great actress, as she had already shown in La Strada, here she allows to to at the same time find her annoying but also to empathise greatly with her situation. She is the ultimate "whore with a heart of gold" whose heart is constantly shattered. A very good film.
Final Grade
8/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
Fellini's wife, Giulietta Masina, plays Cabiria Ceccarelli, a feisty but naive prostitute in Ostia, then a seedy section of Rome. The name Cabiria is borrowed from the 1914 Italian film Cabiria, while the character of Cabiria herself is taken from a brief scene in Fellini's earlier film The White Sheik.
An old professor decides to drive from Stockholm to Lund in order to receive his jubilee degree. On the way he shares his car with a number of characters which make him put his life in perspective and finally come to terms with his past.
Review
As my wife said: "This is how you make a film with old people". This is true, she was particularly comparing this with Umberto D, the Italian neo-realist film which is also more than a little exploitative. Bergman has a much softer touch, so he can make emotional films without pulling on easy sentiment.
Bergman was famously a fan of Kurosawa and we can see the influence of life-affirming films like Ikiru in this film. The emotional trip of the old professor here is comparable to that of the main character in Ikiru, old people learn to turn their life around, to be better, to come to terms with their life before the end.
Bergman has the talent of including pretty complex dialogue in a film without making it sound completely out of place. He does it here, smartly underpinning the inner trip of his characters with sound philosophical thought. To this is a road-trip film, both a literal road-trip and an interior travel, the film is full of parallels between the present in the past, impressive dream-sequences and surreal recollections and they all contribute to the building blocks of the professor's life and personality. A beautiful, sad and life-affirming film.
Final Grade
10/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
The film won the Golden Bear for Best Film at the Berlin International Film Festival. It was also nominated for an Academy Award for Writing Original Screenplay.
The film is included on the Vatican Best Films List, recommended for its portrayal of a man's "interior journey from pangs of regret and anxiety to a refreshing sense of peace and reconciliation".
The film was the inspiration for Deconstructing Harry, written and directed by Woody Allen, in which a man (Allen) goes on a road trip to his former university to receive an honorary degree and on the way meets an assortment of characters and re-evaluates his life.
Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr are both going to get married in the near future to other people. While on a boat they fall in love with each other. They decide to meet in six months at the top of the Empire State Building if they still feel the same way and want to get married to each other. Well Deborah Kerr on her way to him has a close encounter of the being run over and paralysed kind, while he is up there thinking he is getting the dump of a lifetime. She goes one to teach annoying children how to sing, and he eventually finds out she is paralysed and they get together again.
Review
I know a lot of people love this film... I think it's a bit crap. On paper it shouldn't be... Cary Grant, Deborah Kerr and Leo McCarey are all good at their jobs, heck even great. Then you read the script... and you think this is a bit silly... then you get to the second half and you go: "Two fucking singing numbers with children? What the fuck is going on here?"
It is all too silly and heavy handed to appeal to people who like their cinema to be even slightly subtle. I am known to cry in loads of films, I can't even count how many films in this list have made me cry... at the end of this I just laughed my head off.
What is it with the two children singing numbers? They just sound out of place, they do nothing to advance the story or to flesh out any characters, as the children as completely inconsequential and have not existence outside those numbers... we would have been just as well served by just having established that Kerr finds her work with children rewarding and the children like her... the singing was perfectly excusable. Oh well... didn't like it. Oh and Cary Grant is a shit painter.
Final Grade
6/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
The film is considered one of the most romantic of all time, according to the American Film Institute. The movie was a remake of McCarey's 1939 film Love Affair, starring Irene Dunne and Charles Boyer. An Affair to Remember was almost identical to Love Affair on a scene to scene basis. McCarey used the same screenplay as the original film, which was penned by Delmer Daves and Donald Ogden Stewart.
Contributing to the success of the 1957 film is its theme song "An Affair to Remember (Our Love Affair)' composed by Harry Warren with lyrics by Leo McCarey and Harold Adamson. The song is sung by Vic Damone during the opening credits and then sung later by Deborah Kerr's character, a nightclub singer. Kerr's singing was dubbed by Marni Nixon, who also dubbed for Kerr in the film The King and I.
316. The Seventh Seal (Det Sjunde Inseglet) (1957)
Directed By Ingmar Bergman
Synopsis
Death comes for a Knight just returned from the Crusades. Before he dies the Knight wants to know what is beyond life. In order to gain some time he challenges Death to a game of chess. Well, he never finds out what is beyond, and he loses on purpose to save people whose life he cherishes.
Review
For a film which has gained the reputation of the ultimate art-house, obscure, dour film, The Seventh Seal is a surprisingly funny, interesting, tender, beautiful and deep film. We had seen Ingmar Bergman's light humoristic touch in the previous film of his here on the list, and even if this is ultimately not a feel good film, that touch is still here.
All the characters in the film are brilliant, even if they are not much more than allegorical characters as would befit a medieval passion play they are deep of thought and character... well most of them are.
The influence of the film has been wide-ranging, albeit more to the level of parody of superficial aspects of the film rather than an imitation of the existential explorations of the thing. This is quite sad really, while the existential dialogue can at times be heavy handed, it is often quite brilliant, succinct and insightful. Highly recommended, of course.
Final Grade
9/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
The Seventh Seal was Bergman's breakthrough film. When the film won the Special Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival in 1957, the attention generated by it (along with the previous year's Smiles of a Summer Night) made Bergman and his stars Max von Sydow and Bibi Andersson well-known to the European film community, and the critics and readers of Cahiers du Cinéma, among others, discovered him with this movie. Within five years of this, he had established himself as the first real auteur of Swedish cinema. With its reflections upon death and the meaning of life, The Seventh Seal became something of a figurehead for "serious" European films and, as such, has often been parodied in film and television.
Lets face it, your peers are assholes, and if Henry Fonda isn't in the room to fight the good fight they'll fry your brains because they wanna go watch the game.
Review
I don't like the jury system, it's stacked against the defendant, it is composed by people off the street, who, as we all know, are mainly morons and have little to no understanding of the law. I would rather let a collective of judges decide, at least they were trained for this. This film didn't make me change my mind, but it was a joy to watch.
12 Angry Men are also 12 great actors who manage to make 90 minutes closed in a room look riveting to us watching. The film is so tightly written, the performances are so inspired and the characters are all so believable that you suddenly get really wrapped up in the story.
One of the most interesting things about the film is to look at all the characters and their particular motivations and ways of acting, all are driven by something, a sense of justice, racism, family problems, selfishness, a wish to fit in... and in that way they all come to life in an exciting way that will keep you watching. Henry Fonda also plays one of the most admirable characters in the history of cinema here. The film is also not afraid to deal with questions of racism, class and immigration in ways almost unseen before it. A great film all around!
Final Grade 10/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
On its first release, 12 Angry Men received critical acclaim. A. H. Weiler of The New York Times wrote "It makes for taut, absorbing, and compelling drama that reaches far beyond the close confines of its jury room setting." His observation of the 12 men was that "their dramas are powerful and provocative enough to keep a viewer spellbound." However, it was not a popular success: the advent of color and widescreen productions resulted in the film receiving a disappointing box office performance.
Despite this, the film is today viewed as a classic, highly regarded from both a critical and popular viewpoint: Roger Ebert lists it as one of his "Great Movies,". The American Film Institute named Juror #8, played by Henry Fonda, 28th in a list of the 50 greatest movie heroes of the 20th century, named 12 Angry Men the 42nd most inspiring film, and later named the movie as the 87th best film of the past hundred years. In June 2008, it revealed its "Ten top Ten"—the best ten films in ten "classic" American film genres—after polling over 1,500 people from the creative community. 12 Angry Men was acknowledged as the second best film in the courtroom drama genre.
Moses supposes his toeses are roses, But Moses supposes erroneously. For Moses, he knowses his toeses aren't roses, As Moses supposes his toeses to be.
Review
Really, if you don't know the story it is about time you moved out of the rock. So Exodus... well it is a good story as mythical nation-foundation stories go. I still do not understand why I should believe it any more than Romulus and Remus founding of Rome or Ulysses founding Lisbon or any other mythical foundation story. Shit, even Romulus and Remus is more believable. Being suckled by a she-wolf takes a smaller leap of imagination. Hebrews living in Egypt for 400 years leave no archaeological evidence behind? A single mention on a single papyrus of the anally retentive Ancient Egyptians, known for their meticulous recording?
However, if the film was simply following the story of the Exodus I would be fine with it. An adaptation of a work of fiction is a great thing if well done. But the film decides to innovate, to add elements that make a hard to believe story impossible to believe. For a film that supposedly consulted a number of historians they did a pretty shit work. The Bible never mentions the name of the Pharaoh, so they pick Rameses II. RAMESES II?! Just the most prosperous, long-lived king of the entire history of Egypt? Known for his love to his Queen Nefertari (not Nefertiri as in the film), being one of the most prolific builders in history and a reign mostly of peace and abundance? A guy who had in the region of 100 children, lived to be 90 and ruled for over 60 years? God was surely not that pissed off with him. It makes very little historical sense, as well as being often wrong in simple historical facts, such as the name of the Queen, the fact that it was him and not his father Sethi who fought the Battle of Kadesh, that the battle ended in a tie and not a victory, that his father died quite young after only 11 years of reign...
I could spend several days poking whole in the historical bollocks of the whole film. Now I could spend some more days discussing the ethical content of the film... Moses does not give a shit about slavery, in the film there are slaves of many nations, but only the Hebrew ones matter. In fact there is a whole feeling that non-Hebrews are almost cannon fodder, their death is unimportant, nothing more than a means to an end, the racial politics of the whole thing are pretty disgusting. The film itself seems to recognise the ethical violence of the last plague by having the Egyptians threaten to kill the Hebrew first-borns before God decides to kill the Egyptians. Well no, that is not what happens in the story... God just does it, he doesn't need provocation.
Now... about the film. The acting is shit. Charlton Heston is a ham, no one gets off well, Yul Bryner is a cardboard cut-out of a tyrant, even the great Edward G. Robinson comes out shit. There are several moments where the dubbing of the voices is off, several moments of simply ridiculous script writing and acting. A cast of thousands does not cover-up for elementary failures Mr. DeMille. Why can't there be one good Bible movie? Come on, the stories have potential, just do it right, leave the hammy acting at home, I know you are playing Moses, but are the dramatic poses really necessary? Are the action hero sequences required? Shit the best film about the Exodus is probably the animated musical Prince of Egypt by Dreamworks. Oh! you have to watch almost 4 hours of this!!! Good riddance.
Final Grade
5/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
Differences from the Bible:
There are many differences between the movie story line and the Exodus story as traditionally understood from the Bible. According to the commentary in the DVD, some details are taken from sources such as Josephus, the Sepher ha-Yashar, and the Chronicle of Moses, as well as the Qur'an. Some are fictional inventions.
In the film, the kings of Egypt are all named: Ramesses I, Seti I, Ramesses II. In the Bible, they are given no names but simply called "Pharaoh."
In the Bible, the wives of the Pharaohs are not even mentioned. In the film, we see a great deal of Queen Nefretiri. Her name is a variant of Nefertari, the Great Royal Wife of Rameses II. But Egyptian records show that Rameses loved Nefertari, while in the film Nefretiri hated him. The Bible says "The Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart", and the film makes clear that Nefretiri's schemes are the means through which God does this.
The story of Shiphrah and Puah (Exodus 1:15-21) has been omitted in the film. Some Talmudic commentaries identify them as none other than Yokheved and Miriam.
The name of the birth mother of Moses in the Bible is Yokheved (Hebrew) or Jochebed (English). In the movie, this is changed to "Yoshebel." She is shown as a very oppressed and endangered slave working on a construction project under hazardous conditions. This may be problematic, since a strong case can be made that the tribe of Levi was not actually enslaved. Perhaps because of this, at one point Yoshebel states: "We are Levites, appointed shepherds of Israel."
While Pharaoh's daughter is no longer mentioned again after the rescuing story in the Bible, the film follows Bithiah's life well into her later years. The story of her following the Israelites out of Egypt is taken from the Midrash.
In the Bible, Moses was 80 during the Exodus, so Bithiah must have been older still, yet in the film she is portrayed as relatively young and healthy enough to carry a child in the trek away.
Baka (as played by Vincent Price) is never mentioned by name in the Bible, and he is not specifically mistreating Joshua when Moses kills him. In the Bible, Dathan is not mentioned as having been a witness to the killing (though, the Bible does mention that, in another incident after Moses kills an Egyptian, he confronts two quarreling Israelites, one of whom accueses Moses of having killed an Egyptian. The Midrash identifies the Israelites as Dathan and his brother Aviram, which may have been the inspiration for this part of the story).
In the film, on the first Passover night, the Destroyer is seen with a crescent moon in the sky. But Passover always begins in the middle of the Hebrew month of Nissan, during a full moon.
In the film, the young Moses is a successful military commander who defeats a Nubian army and makes the Ethiopians allies of Egypt. This is sourced in Josephus, but is not in the Bible.
In Exodus 2:11-12, Moses "looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian and hid him in the sand." No such caution in the film: Moses jumps right in to fight the Egyptian. Instead of sensibly fleeing to Midian immediately, as he does in the Bible, he stays in Egypt and is arrested and exiled.
The movie adds a subplot about Joshua coming to Moses to beseech him to return to Egypt to free the Israelites.
In the Bible, Moses complains to the Lord that he is slow of speech, and of a slow tongue; in the film he only says "what words can I speak that they will heed?" DeMille considered having Moses stammer slightly, but Heston could not do it, and settled for speaking very slowly. Modern midrash asserts the relevance of the phrase "divine apostasia", which rehabilitates the term "apostasia" from its heretical or pejorative sense by defining it as an inability to articulate given the tools (or limitations rather) of language. This sense of the term apostasia asserts the moral humility and/or wisdom of silence or hesitance applied to speech and writing. The story of Zipporah performing an emergency circumcision on her son by Moses (Exodus 4:24-26) is missing in the film.
The film shows four of the Plagues of Egypt: Blood, Hail, Darkness, and Death of the Firstborn, omitting the rest. DeMille could not figure out a way to enact the plagues of frogs, flies and so on, without it coming out as unintentionally humorous.
In the Bible, Moses did not say, "If there is one more plague on Egypt, it will be by your word that God will bring it" as he did in the movie, and Pharaoh did not decree that the firstborn of each house of Israel would die, beginning with the son of Moses. This is taken from a Midrash that expands the Biblical narrative in order to explain the origin of the tenth plague.
In the Bible, God executes the tenth plague alone, not by sending the Angel of Death. Pharaoh may have drowned with his army in Exodus 15:19 (it is unclear; and if so, he was not Ramesses II). In the movie, he prudently stays in the rear and witnesses the parting of the waters.
In Exodus, the Israelites, led by Miriam, sing and dance to celebrate the death of Pharaoh and the Egyptian army, and their own liberation. In the film, they stand still in stunned silence.
The Biblical story of the attack by the Amalekites and the Battle of Rephidim has been omitted in the film.
The Biblical accounts of God supplying the Israelites with water, manna and quail are missing in the movie.
In the Bible, the reception of the Ten Commandments began as a national revelation, as opposed to the private one depicted in the DeMille film. The story of Moses and seventy Elders of Israel eating and drinking in the presence of God (Exodus 24:9-11) is not found in the film.
The story of Korah and his rebellion, which occurs much later in the Bible narrative, is conflated with that of the Golden Calf in the film. Korah himself plays only an assistant to the ringleader Dathan. Further, in the Bible, Dathan does not die during the Sin of the Golden Calf (nor do his brother Aviram or Korah), but during Korah's rebellion.
In the Bible, God gave Moses not just ten commandments, but 613 Commandments.
I am not sure a remake of Philadelphia Story was needed. In fact I am pretty sure it wasn't, Philadelphia Story is still the better film, if for nothing else for the fact that Jimmy Stewart and Cary Grand are much better comedic actors than Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra.
That being said there is something to Grace Kelly... yes it is grace Kelly at the pool that makes the remake worthy. Particularly sad however that this is her last part. From here she would marry prince Rainier of Monaco and enjoy driving in the Riviera. By the way my wife played as a child with Stephanie, her daughter heh. Who I had a crush for when I was about 5. Tiny world.
So the songs add very little to the film, it is fun to see Louis Armstrong showing up here, but again little is added. The film is a perfectly enjoyable but unnecessary remake of a better film. Oh well. Final Grade
7/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
High Society marked the final acting role for Grace Kelly before she became Princess of Monaco (the film was actually released three months after her marriage to Prince Rainier III of Monaco). At the time of the film's release, Sinatra and Holm were over forty and Crosby was fifty-three. Kelly, however, was only twenty-six and was actually the second consideration for the part of Tracy Lord, the original choice, Elizabeth Taylor, being unable to commit.
High Society would mark the first on-screen pairing of Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby, two of the most popular singers and actors of the 1940s and 1950s. They would act together again in the Sinatra-produced Robin and the 7 Hoods in 1964. This would be the second time that Bing Crosby and Grace Kelly acted together, the first time being in The Country Girl in 1954.
A mild mannered teacher gets a disease that can only be cured by the then new "wonder-drug" cortisone. He slowly gets addicted and starts to experience psychotic behaviour which almost destroys his life and that of those around him.
Review
James Mason plays what is probably one of the best parts of his life here, his shift in personality under the influence of cortisone is very believable and perfectly nuanced, and that is what really makes the whole film in terms of acting.
Interestingly for a film from the mid 50s, Bigger Than Life takes relish in destroying the image of perfect suburban post-war life. It all starts as it should, gardens, dresses, a child, playing American football in the lawn, couples in love... but the husband has to work nights to put food on the table. He is so ashamed of it that he refuses to tell his wife that he has taken a second job in a taxi company. And then he becomes psychotic.
The film's nightmarish qualities build up in a constant crescendo to Mason getting biblically inspired to do an Abraham on his only son. Unfortunately it all ends well, which kind of robs the audience of a properly gut-wrenching finale. Still, the film is gorgeous, its colours are warm and intense, the acting is superb and the whole thing is a joy to watch.
Final Grade
8/10 (the ending is a bit of a cop-out)
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
Though it was a box-office flop upon its initial release, many modern critics hail it as a masterpiece and a brilliant indictment of the conformist 1950s suburbia.
A true case of mistaken identity leads to the crumbling of a man's life and that of his family.
Review
In an interesting move Hitchcock makes a "based on a true story" film, it would be strange if the story didn't look like it was perfect Hitchcock fodder. This is one of Hitchcock's most uncomfortable films to watch, it has a sense of claustrophobia and almost Kafkian surreality that leaves a sour taste in the viewer's mouth.
The film is brilliantly cast, Henry Fonda has the exact look of earnestness necessary to pull off this character caught in horrible circumstances. The soundtrack by Bernard Hermann adds to the general feel of uneasiness in a perfect way.
Another interesting thing that can be seen here is Hitchcock's push for realism, possibly because this is a true story he seems to toy with ideas form Italian neo-realism, non-professional bit-parts, filming in the real locations etc. Again this works perfectly. A great film, even if it is very uncomfortable watching.
Final Grade 9/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
Alfred Hitchcock's cameo is a signature occurrence in most of his films. In The Wrong Man he can be seen (at the beginning of the film) in silhouette standing in a darkened street as he advises the audience the film is a true story. The prison scenes were filmed in a real prison. When Manny (Henry Fonda) is taken to his cell, one of the actual inmates shouts 'What'd they get ya for, Henry?'.
Pea Pods from SPACE replace the people of Santa Mira with exact replicas. Except for one man! Like Cocoon but evil!
Review
B-movies, particularly during the heyday of the Production Code could be some of the most interesting, original and deep films coming out of Hollywood. Such is the case with this film, often interpreted as a pro-McCarthy or anti-McCarthy film, it is in the end a great Sci-Fi film.
The fact that the political undertones of the film are so open to interpretation is a big part of its beauty, it is completely dependent on your perspective. The film makers claim that they had no political message, and this is perhaps true, but the political conditions of the time certainly influenced its feeling of paranoia and suspicion.
The acting isn't really stellar, there is a little tacked-on ending to the film, but all these are perfectly excusable for the type of production it is. The sense of paranoia and claustrophobia is, however, very effective throughout. The special effects are perfectly adequate as the idea of body snatching precludes the need for complex make-up or "monster suits". So a fun watch. Final Grade
9/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
The film has been read as both an allegory for the perceived loss of personal autonomy in the Soviet Union and as an indictment of McCarthyist paranoia about Communism during the early stages of the Cold War. as Adam Roberts wrote in Science Fiction; The New Critical Idiom:
Indeed [the film] can be read both as right-wing McCarthyite scaremongering—Communists from an Alien place are infiltrating our American towns and wiping out their American values, and the worst of it is they look exactly like Americans—and as left-wing liberal satire on the ideological climate of conformism that McCarthyism produced, where the lack of emotion of the podpeople corresponds to the ethical blind eyes turned by Americans to the persecutions of their fellows by over-zealous McCarthyites.
Despite the general agreement among film critics regarding these political connotations of the film, lead actor Kevin McCarthy said in an interview included on the 1998 DVD release that he felt no political allegory was intended. The interviewer stated that he had spoken with the author of the original novel, Jack Finney, who also professed to have intended no specific political allegory in the work.
In his autobiography, "I Thought We Were Making Movies, Not History", Walter Mirisch writes: "People began to read meanings into pictures that were never intended. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers is an example of that. I remember reading a magazine article arguing that the picture was intended as an allegory about the communist infiltration of America. From personal knowledge, neither Walter Wanger nor Don Siegel, who directed it, nor Dan Mainwaring, who wrote the script nor the original author Jack Finney, nor myself saw it as anything other than a thriller, pure and simple".
309. All That Heaven Allows (1955) (wrongly listed as 1956)
Directed by Douglas Sirk
Synopsis
A well-off widow falls in love with her gardener. People at the country club don't like her no more, her children think she is ruining her life, but in the end love prevails. Duh.
Review
What a melodrama! If the previous Douglas Sirk film on the list (which actually came out after this one), Written On The Wind was a template for Soap Operas like Dallas and Dynasty, this is the template for 100 more soaps, on love triumphing over social status and the gossip of others. Notice that this actually came out in 1955 and that the list has placed it in the wrong place.
For all those reasons and more, this is an exceedingly kitsch film. Rock Hudson seems to be perfectly aware of this, as in contrast to his performance on Giant, where he is very natural, here he hams it up to high heavens.
These problems of being overly melodramatic, hammy and kitsch actually make it pretty watchable. Elements like the annoying intellectual bespectacled daughter spouting mock-Freudian theory or the cartoony characteristics of the mother's high class friends all add to the fun of watching the film. Unfortunately this was not the film's intention.
Final Grade
7/10
Trivia
From Wikipedia:
All That Heaven Allows was the inspiration for Rainer Werner Fassbinder's Ali: Fear Eats the Soul (1974) in which a mature woman falls in love with an Arab man. The film was spoofed by John Waters with his 1981 film Polyester. Todd Haynes' Far From Heaven (2002) is an homage to Sirk's work, in particular All That Heaven Allows and Imitation of Life.
