I love when my favorite things get put together in mash-ups such as these! This time we have Stanley Kubrick characters inserted into Alfred Hitchcock/Jimmy Stewart movie scenes.
This video was put together by Gump and you can read about it here: GeekTyrant. I want to see more movie mash-ups of two brilliant directors! š
I’ve done a review of courtroom crime drama classic Anatomy Of A Murder, starring James Stewart, for the Argumentative August Blogathon hosted by MovieRob & by Ryan of Ten Stars Or Less. AND… this doubles as one of my own reviews for my IMDB Top 250 Challenge! This movie was ranked 203 out of 250 when I started my project on 01/01/2013.
You can read my review HERE. Thanks for letting me take part, guys! š
An IMDB review by me! Finally! I’ve been slacking…
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)
IMDB Rank: 208 out of 250 (as of 01/01/2013)
Directed by John Ford
Starring:
John Wayne
James Stewart
Vera Miles
Lee Marvin
Edmond O’Brien
Woody Strode
Andy Devine
John Carradine
Lee Van Cleef
Running time: 123 minutes
Plot Synopsis: (via IMDB)
A senator, who became famous for killing a notorious outlaw, returns for the funeral of an old friend and tells the truth about his deed.
My Opinion:
It’s me! Reviewing a Top 250 film on my own blog! I’ve really neglected this Top 250 project while I’ve let all of you review them for me instead. I’ve reviewed all of the Studio Ghibli films in the Top 250 but, besides those, it looks like my last review was of Unforgiven last September. And here I am now with another damn Western (which I watched last September. I’m so behind!). I have to say that of the two things I was dreading in the Top 250, Westerns & war movies, I’m far preferring the war movies so far. (Once Upon A Time In The West was pretty awesome, though).
So… John Wayne! This is the first & only John Wayne movie I’ve watched in my life. His movies were of such a different era that I really can’t relate to in any sort of way & I’ve never had any interest in exploring any of his films. I remember flipping through channels once as a teen & there was some John Wayne movie on where he was spanking a woman. Spanking?! Not in some weird, kinky, S&M way but I got the impression that she was maybe his wife & had disobeyed him or something so that was her punishment. (Okay – I can’t believe I just Googled “John Wayne Spanking” but I did & the movie was a year after this one & called McLintock!). Anyway, that sort of sexism just wouldn’t fly today so I can see why John Wayne films aren’t exactly popular amongst a new generation whereas the Sergio Leone Spaghetti Westerns still are. They’re beautiful, sweeping epics (I assume – I’m basing this only on Once Upon A Time In The West) while John Wayne’s “spanking movie” feels like it’s from 50 years before West instead of just five. Having said that, though, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is pretty good & nothing like the very limited knowledge I have of other John Wayne films which had a very old look & feel. I think the fact that it was in black & white helped to keep it feeling less “dated” in an odd sort of way plus I think “serious drama” works much better in the Western genre than “silly spank comedy”. Also, what helped a lot for me was the fact that James Stewart was in this. I love Jimmy! That’s what convinced me to watch this one instead of putting it off (unfortunately, it’s no longer in the Top 250 like it was when I started this project).
This is Liberty Valance. SPOILER: he gets shot…
I think this movie has a really good story & I liked the way it’s revealed in flashback as a small group of old friends gather for a funeral. James Stewart plays an educated lawyer & politician while John Wayne plays the rugged silent hero type but, hey – these are the exact kind of roles these two are known for & they’re perfect in this film. I’ll admit I got a little bored in the middle when the political stuff was going on (James Stewart running for some political something or other) but the scenes between Stewart & Wayne as well as the scenes involving the big baddie terrorizing the small community (Liberty Valance, played just right by Lee Marvin) were great. I also enjoyed the little bit of a love triangle between Stewart, Wayne & Vera Miles. So there are a lot of big stars in this one (including Lee Van Cleef although I can’t say I really remember him in it now – I don’t think it was a huge role). But my favorite actor in this (after Stewart) would be Woody Strode. He has a pretty big role as Wayne’s ranch hand & close friend. He was also in the incredible opening scene of Once Upon A Time In The West and has such a great look. I’d totally want to cast him in a movie if I ever made one (but he’s kind of not alive anymore). I looked him up & see that his last role was in that Sharon Stone/Leonardo DiCaprio Western The Quick And The Dead at the age of 80. Makes me want to watch that silly looking movie now – would be fun to see a young Leo again as well. Here’s Strode in this & West:
Summary:
I know I don’t have much experience with Westerns but I can say that, as someone who isn’t a fan of the genre, I thought The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance was pretty good. I really enjoyed the story plus the characters were very well-developed and you cared what was going to happen to them & to their close friendships. You love the goodies & hate the baddies in this one, which is really the point of all Westerns, isn’t it? It’s a shame this isn’t in the Top 250 anymore as young people keep voting in current shit like Interstellar, meaning all the older films are being overlooked and will now probably be totally ignored. This one is worth a watch if you like a decent good guy vs bad guy movie filled with revenge, love, loyalty and loss.
My Rating: 7/10
Today’s IMDB Top 250 Guest Review comes from James of Back To The Viewer. Thanks for the review, James! š Now let’s see what he has to say about Vertigo, IMDB rank 48 out of 250.
There are still some movies up for grabs if anyone wants to do a guest IMDB Top 250 review. You can find the list of remaining films HERE. See the full list & links to all the reviews that have already been done HERE.
Also, if you’d like to add a link to your IMDB review(s) on your own blogs, feel free to use any of the logos I’ve used at the top of any of these guest reviews.
When I volunteered to take on Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo for ‘Cinema Parrot Disco’s ‘IMDB Top 250 Challenge’ I was hoping to have a better experience compared to my first viewing. I was willing to give it a second chance after my first experience consisted of yawns and animosity but it wasn’t to be. Usually one to see the good in almost everything I seriously struggled with this one but here goes.
Before I get into the nitty gritty of Alfred Hitchcock’s ability to navigate his way around the human psyche I’d like to start off by addressing the BFI’s decision to adorn Vertigo with top honours on the ’50 Greatest Films of All Time’ list in ‘Sight and Sound’ back in 2012. Sparking an incessant debate two camps emerged. Firstly, those who agreed with the decision, or were at least impartial. Secondly, those Kanites who, through an act of self-excommunication, refused to allow their holy grail in the form of oneĀ Citizen Kane to be associated with anything lower than top spot. Refusing to align with the critics’ choice a fierce debate ensued which thankfully has died down since. What worries me here is the day Vertigo falls from grace. Will it come quietly or will it put up a fight grappling with the bell tower banister drenched in sweat, fearful of the dizzying descent leaving in its wake a tainted throne for the successor? Naturally what Hitchcock’s Mystery Romance boils down to is not a detective story but an allegory of his own directorial style. Hardly a revelation in the film studies world but ever a significant point. However, little attention is paid to the subtleties that hide in plain sight. The past plays such an important role inĀ Vertigo right up to the closing shots that it begs to wonder whether Hitchcock knew with some prescience of mind that his 45th feature was going to leave such a lasting and debatable impression on cinema culture.
On at least three occassions are the words ‘power’ and ‘freedom’ used in the same sentence. First by Gavin Elster when he recruits John ‘Scottie’ Ferguson to follow his wife, he mutters in reference to San Francisco’s colourful past “I’d liked to have lived here then. The colour and excitement…the power…the freedom.” But despite the colour Hitchcock employs, Vertigo makes for a dark mystery overtly presented in the second instance by the book shop owner and historian Pop Liebel. Also in reference to San Francisco’s past but specifically the dominant patriarchal society, “They had the power… and the freedom,” spoken as the room is gradually, masterfully consumed by darkness. Lastly, spoken by Scottie himself “the freedom and the power.” This last one has been sidetracked slightly through fear of revealing too much but the words stand alone and stand out, to me at least. Perhaps from my History education, or perhaps more likely from my curiosity. Why would Hitchcock make this point consistently throughout? Bringing it back to the earlier point that Vertigo is more about film direction then it could refer to the power and the freedom Directors enjoy in their choices and decisions. It’s no secret that Hitchcock had a very specific vision for his leading ladies and the efficacy with which he pulled it off is inarguably sublime, Kim Novak is just that.
Delivering a complex performance to say the least as Madelaine, Gavin Elster’s wife to whom Scottie is assigned, Novak moves effortlessly between the lines of vulnerable alluring damsel to tragic innocent caught in a web of deceit. James Stewart puts in a solid performance as Scottie and with Hitchcock at the helm it would have been rude to expect anything less. Outside players such as Midge, Scottie’s adoring friend, can only watch helplessly as he falls deeper and deeper into a spiral of psychological acrophobia mixed with a healthy dose of curiosity, passion, and obsession.
The reason Scottie is hired to follow Madelaine on her day to day travels is revealed by Elster during their first conversation on the matter. Elster informs Scottie that Madelaine of late tends to leave this world for another, her eyes cloud over and she is somewhere else. Eventually coming to and having no recollection of her whereabouts. Enough to fuel Scottie’s intrigue he tentatively agrees to report on Madelaine’s activities. In a warped plot that seems as ludicrous to us as it does to Scottie Elster believes his wife has become possessed by the ghost of Carlotta Valdes. Tragically befalling to her own maddening sickness Valdes committed suicide at the age of 26. Madelaine is 26 hence Elster’s apprehension over her mysterious activity. However, the relationship between Carlotta and Madelaine forged by Hitchcock seems strained and forced whereas the symbolic relationship between Carlotta and Scottie burgeons throughout, initially unnoticed but retrospectively significant.
What Hitchcock has produced withĀ Vertigo is a timeless tragedy perpetually spiraling, perplexing, and intriguing viewers. My first viewing ofĀ Vertigo was tainted by the anticipation of a gripping masterpiece. I left feeling a little unsatisfied and bemused, much like the original audiences upon its release way back in 1958. Despite what others have said in retrospect Vertigo will unfortunately never take the crown in my top 10 and the same can be said when put up against Hitchcock’s other features. North by Northwest and Rear Window do it for me, sorry Alfred. Given the resurgence of critical attention since its original re-evaluation in the 60s and even more so since 2012 with ‘Sight and Sound’s controversial decision my reaction to Vertigo remains unimpressed. It has some defining features, the iconic nightmare scene, psychedelic title sequence and the famous film making technique, dolly out-zoom in, but for all this auteuric style Hitchcock subdued his thrilling archetypes for the sake of a farfetched mystery that just doesn’t cut the mustard. Having said that I’m not one to discredit Hitchcock’s mastery behind the camera and these rare moments have warranted Vertigo a better rating than I care to get across in my review.
It was Worth my time to give Vertigo a second chance, and who knows perhaps with time it will grow on me. But that says it all really, if the greatest film of all time doesn’t do enough to impress me after two viewings then I’m going to need some of Scottie’s medicinal Brandy if it ever comes to a third.
Today’s IMDB Top 250 Guest Review comes from MIB of MIB’s Instant Headache. He previously reviewed this film HERE. Thanks for joining in, MIB! š Now let’s see what he has to say about It’s A Wonderful Life, IMDB rank 30 out of 250…
**WARNING: SPOILERS (but everyone has seen this, right?!) š
Itās A Wonderful Life
US (1946) Dir. Frank Capra
Confession time: despite this being an all time classic that regularly appears near the top of every āGreatest Ever Filmsā poll and is as much a pre-requisite at Christmas as turkey and presents, this is my first time viewing this film. I know, that is regarded as heresy for a film buff but Iām sure we all have some skeletons in our film viewing closets.
As we all know the plot revolves around a man named George Bailey (James Stewart) who has reached the end of his tether on Christmas Eve after a life time of doing everything for the people of his home town of Bedford Falls. With his family business on the brink of collapse and a possible jail term staring him in the face, George decides the best thing for his family is to disappear for good. As his friends and family all pray to a higher power to give George a break, an angel named Clarence (Henry Travers), who has yet to earn his wings, is sent down to talk George out of killing himself by showing him what life in Bedford falls would have been like had he not existed.
By the time this film arrived in 1946, Frank Capra had already built himself a reputation as one of Hollywoodās top directors, having conquered Tinsel Town with such notable hits as It Happened One Night (1934), Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936) and Mr. Smith Goes To Washington (1938) which also starred James Stewart. However it is this bittersweet Christmas tale, based on the short story The Greatest Gift by Philip Van Doren Stern, that remains his most regarded and enduring and influential work ā often imitated but never duplicated ā which surprisingly was not a box office hit.
The story is actually much deeper than any synopsis suggests, with the bulk of the 130 minute run time spent looking back over Georgeās life, by way of an introduction for Clarence to his client. George is a good guy even from his early days, demonstrated when as young boy he lost the hearing in his left ear after saving his younger brother Harry from drowning. Later on he stops his drugstore boss Mr. Gower (H.B. Warner) from accidentally poisoning a customer. When he turned 21 George was about to go college then travel around the world but the death of his father (Samuel S. Hinds) placing him in charge of their loan business Building and Loan, putting him at odds with the majority shareholder and local moneybags Mr. Potter (Lionel Barrymore), a grizzled and self-centred old man with a long standing grudge against the Bailey family.
Clarence doesnāt appear until the third act by which time, George has married his childhood sweetheart Mary (Donna Reed), had four kids and made many sacrifices to keep the business alive. Meanwhile everyone else has achieved the one thing that George always dreamed of: leaving Bedford Falls and seeing the world. Younger brother Harry (Todd Karns) becomes a war hero while best friend Sam Wainwright (Frank Albertson) makes his fortune in plastics, an investment opportunity George turned down! Via duplicity and pernicious manipulation Potter holds George accountable over the absence of $8000 from the company books, pushing him to his wits end. This leads to the Scrooge-esque travel to an alternate reality to help snap George out of his depressive and fatalistic funk.
Admittedly this doesnāt sound like the recipe for a feelgood Christmas movie ā then again neither does A Christmas Carol ā although the Christmas aspect is only pertinent for the finale rather than the plot as a whole, fundamentally making this is a film for all seasons, even though it seems to have latched onto the Christmas TV schedule (especially in the US) so it has morphed into a āChristmas filmā. Everything else is universal in its themes, with the main moral of the story appearing to reinforce the old adage about nice guys finishing last. And for the most part this is the case until the final act flips the whole story on its head to deliver the now iconic happy ending to stop us from joining George from jumping off that bridge.
With years of hype behind this film prior to my seeing it, I had a concern I may not enjoy it or understand why it has become such an evergreen treasure for film buffs. Thankfully I neednāt have been concerned. Firstly the story is so incredibly well crafted, almost ahead of its time, and has a timeless core idea that it could have been set in any timeframe (but donāt tell Hollywood that ā we donāt need a modern remake thank you!), making it so relatable to any generation. Secondly Frank Capra clearly has a vision beyond that of any other director of the time you care to name to make this work as a whimsical piece of comedy drama, giving equal weight to both facets rather than pandering to one over the other for commercial appeal.
Thirdly ā James Stewart. Could anyone else have taken the role? Cary Grant? Spencer Tracy? Clark Gable? James Cagney? Stewart has a difficult character to inhabit with so many layers to him. Aside from expecting us to believe that the then 38 year-old Stewart was a 21 year old student in the first act (yes really!), his performance is flawless and imbued with the requisite sense of humanity and humility, attacking the role with a perceptive energy and commitment required for such a character that is rarely off screen. He is supported by some of the finest character actors of the time, headed by the legendary Lionel Barrymore, who is almost Churchillian in his portrayal as the malevolent antagonist Mr. Potter.
So, is Itās A Wonderful Life worthy of the high esteem, lofty plaudits and classic status in which it revels? Quite simply ā yes! Iām just kicking myself for having waited so long to see it!
Today’s IMDB Top 250 Guest Review comes from Ruth of Flixchatter and was originally reviewed HERE as part of the BlindSpot series. Thanks for joining in on my IMDB Challenge, Ruth! š Now let’s see what she has to say about Mr Smith Goes To Washington, IMDB rank 108 out of 250…
There are still some movies up for grabs if anyone wants to do a guest IMDB Top 250 review. You can find the list of remaining films HERE. See the full list & links to all the reviews that have already been done HERE.
**WARNING: SOME SPOILERS
I didnāt realize that Iām doing another Frank Capra film back to back in the BlindSpot series! Well, I had initially wanted to do a James Stewart marathon after the Gregory Peck one, but I never got around to it. Well, I finally got to see it on Presidentās Day last weekend, what a fitting time it was and this film certainly lived up to its classic icon status. According to IMDb trivia, itās ranked #5 on the American Film Instituteās 100 Most Inspiring Movies of All Time (2006), and #26 Greatest Movie of All Time (2007) also by AFI.
Itās always wonderful to see when āthe actor and the role meets,ā that is when a role seems to be tailor-made for an actor that itās as he disappears into that character. I felt that was the case with Peck as Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird, and here, Stewart seemed to have become Jefferson Smith despite not being the first choice for the role. The role was for Gary Cooper whoās supposed to reprise a similar one he did in Mr Deeds Goes To Town (also by Capra), but he was unavailable. Having seen this film, I canāt picture anybody else but Stewart in the role.
Whatās interesting about this film is that even though the subject matter is about American politics, it doesnāt concern a specific party, weāre never told if Jefferson Smith was a Republican or Democrat. The state that he and Senator Joseph Paine (Claude Rains) come from was never mentioned, either. Itās a classic David vs Goliath story as Smith was a nobody in the grand political scheme when a governor of the unnamed western state picked him to replace a deceased senator. Heās picked because of his wholesome Boy Scout (or Boy Rangers in the film) image, the corrupt political boss Jim Taylor and his minions think Smithās lack of experience think heād be easy to manipulate. Of course things donāt go exactly to their plan.
The word āfilibusterā seems to have become a dirty word in Capitol Hill. Frankly I donāt know much about the intricate and twisted world of politics, so it was fascinating to see Smith getting lectured from his own secretary Clarissa Saunders on how to get a bill passed. Itās certainly one of my fave scenes from the entire film:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZFRP67sX8o
This is the first time I saw Jean Arthur in anything and her portrayal of Saunders is brilliant. Nice to see a smart and sassy female character, not unlike another heroine in another famous 1939 film, which took the Best Picture that year, Gone With The Wind. Now, Saunders is nowhere near as manipulative as Scarlett OāHara of course, but sheās also beautiful and knows her way around a manās world.
The whole conflict revolves around building of a dam by the Willett Creek, which is the same area of land where Smith wants to build his national boys camp. Naturally Smith is no match for the Taylor Machine in terms of money and clout, and the political Goliath is determined to crush David by any means possible. Having been *crucified* (thatās the exact word used by Rainsā character) by the Taylor Machine, Smith was ready to give it all up when Saunders persuaded him not to. That propels him to launch a filibuster to clear his name just before heās kicked out of the Senate.
I was totally engrossed in the story from start to finish, and the third act is certainly the most rousing part. Itās certainly an inspiring story told with an unapologetic sense of virtue. A dissenting voice against this film is perhaps that it lacks subtlety. At times perhaps the audience, especially those on the cynical side might feel theyāre being hit over the head with the morality lesson. But you know what, I happen to think itās great to see a film that celebrates goodness and everything we should aspire to as a human being. I wrote in this post that people may find a hero that stands for truth, justice and the American way so darn boring. I beg to differ on that front. Smith is no superhero, he has no superpower of any kind, but he certainly has the power to inspire others to stand up for whatās right no matter what the cost. In essence, thatās what a true hero is all about.
As I mentioned before, Stewart is perfectly cast as Smith and he certainly makes for a protagonist worth rooting for. The supporting cast is superb all around. Speaking of GWTW earlier, well, itās fun to see Pa OāHara here, aka Thomas Mitchell as journalist Diz Moore whoās in love with Saunders. My favorite is Claude Rains as the Senator whom Smith looks up to but ends up betraying him. His emotional struggle throughout the film is palpable and fascinating to behold and Rains has the charisma and gravitas to own a scene. Iāve only seen him in Casablanca before this, so Iām hoping to catch more of his films.
This film is full of rousing scenes as well as humorous moments. Smithās obvious naivete is amusing and endearing but never ludicrous. Thereās a hint of romance between Saunders and Smith, but yet it never took over the story which I thought was refreshing.
The ending doesnāt end with a neat little bow as our protagonist collapsed in exhaustion after talking non-stop for 24 hours, but he remains defiant and even hopeful to the end.
Jefferson Smith: I guess this is just another lost cause Mr. Paine. All you people donāt know about lost causes. Mr. Paine does. He said once they were the only causes worth fighting for and he fought for them once. For the only reason any man ever fights for them. Because of just one plain simple rule. Love thy neighbor. And in this world today of great hatred a man who knows that rule has a great trust. You know that rule Mr. Paine and I loved you for it just as my father did. And you know that you fight harder for the lost causes than for any others. Yes youād even die for them. Like a man we both knew Mr. Paine. You think Iām licked. You all think Iām licked. Well Iām not licked. And Iām gonna stay right here and fight for this lost cause. Even if this room gets filled with lies like these. And the Taylors and all their armies come marching into this place. Somebody will listen to me.
The change of heart of the antagonist may seem abrupt here but I think Mr. Paine have been convicted that what he did was wrong long before he finally had the courage to confess it.
Well, this is the third film from Frank Capra and I definitely see a definite pattern in his films. Thereās a timeless quality about it, as his film seems to be relatable for any era because its message and its ideals are not confined by a specific time frame. No matter what year it is, greed, oppression and exploitation are never a good thing, and weāll always root for someone who perseveres to rise above improbable odds.
Iām so glad I finally caught Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Itās definitely enjoyable and thought-provoking. A true classic that I certainly donāt mind watching again.
4.5 out of 5 reels
Rope (1948) – IMDB Rank #207
Watched 4/1/13
I find it interesting that Alfred Hitchcock has more movies than any other director has in the IMDB top 250 list. I love Alfred Hitchcock and have a nice big boxset of 14 of his movies so I figured I’d watch two of the three remaining films of his in the top 250 that I’d not seen (Rope & Shadow Of A Doubt, which I watched the night after Rope. Notorious unfortunately isn’t in the boxset so I’ll have to get ahold of that somehow!).
I enjoyed Rope. It’s not up there with the likes of Rear Window, Vertigo & Psycho for me (or The Birds – not even in the top 250! Boo!). It’s still very good, though. And James Stewart is in it. Love him. š
It was originally a play so the movie is that way – all set in one apartment. So it’s all about the character development & the building tension that Alfred Hitchcock did so well. You know – the type of movie they couldn’t make today because people would get too “bored”!
There were some really enjoyable characters in the movie, such as the maid (who I read wasn’t in the original play and was added by Hitchcock) and Jimmy Stewart’s character (who was changed quite a bit from the original character in the play). I also read that James Stewart didn’t like this movie later and thought he was wrong for the role. I really liked him in this, though – I’m most used to him in It’s A Wonderful Life, of course, so it was nice seeing him being so different from how he was in that.
Between the two I preferred Rope to Shadow Of A Doubt, which I’ll try to do at least a short review of soon.
My Rating: 7.5/10
And, if anyone cares, here’s a short little post I did on the three Alfred Hitchcock TV episodes that freaked me the hell out as a young child. š I absolutely LOVED Alfred Hitchcock Presents & The Alfred Hitchcock Hour (and The Twilight Zone!) from a very young age. I think it’s why I may not be completely right in the head now. :-p
https://table9mutant.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/alfred-hitchcock-2/
