Another old movie that I hadn't seen before, but thought I should. Maybe I should have thought again. Let's enumerate my problems with this film, shall we?
First of all, I'm not sure why we the audience are supposed to be rooting for Terry and Nicky to get together, considering they're an unfaithful couple of cheating cheaters. But I guess it's okay to dump your SO for someone you meet on a cruise if you're Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr. And your lurrrvvvvve is pure. I'm especially confused about why it's okay for Deborah Kerr to behave in this manner, since the guy she is unfaithful to, then dumps, is portrayed as kind, loving, generous, and hard-working, so loving and generous, that even after she dumps him, he wants nothing but the best for her, and continues to be supportive and generous and kind to her after she's had her Big Accident. Meanwhile Cary Grant's good points are that he's handsome and funny (i.e. that he's Cary Grant) and, oh, that he loves his grandmother. Other than that he's a spoiled wastrel useless playboy.
I'm wondering if there's a 50-years-ago societal thing playing in here that bypasses me: i.e. that we're supposed to be rooting for Cary Grant because he asks Deborah Kerr to marry him w/o apparently despoiling her, while meanwhile, she's been the mistress of the other (kind, loving, generous) guy for 4 years and that a wedding ring and pure (if basically adulterous) lurrrvvvvve trumps any kind of sordid love that has premarital boinking involved.
Also, I have a hard time conceiving of why these two men are so fascinated by Deborah Kerr anyway. Her character is basically insipid and personality-free, and the way she is costumed in this--the little Peter Pan collars buttoned up to her neck, the short curly matronly hairdo, the coral lipstick--makes her look fairly dumpy and not the beautiful woman I'm sure she was/was supposed to be. Maybe 1957 was just a really bad year for fashion, or maybe she's supposed to look uber-prim to show she really is a Good Catholic Girl despite her foray into being a kept woman.
Finally, the whole crux of the plot, that she prefers to let Cary Grant think she's jilted him rather than let him know she's been in a horrible accident and may not walk again, makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever. Who the fuck would *do* that?
Okay, so, thumbs down. I didn't hate it as much as Gigi, but why anyone would think this was the most romantic movie ever, I dunno.
xoxo
13 comments:
Not only was 1957 a really bad year for fashion, it was also a really bad year for movies. Actually, most of the 50's was, as the breakup of the Hollywood studio system, the divestiture of the studios by their financially supporting, theater owning corporate parents, the remarkable rise of TV, and the remarkable decline of movie theater attendance, all contributed to make some of the most controversy avert, conservative, reactionary, uncreative, and boring films ever made, due to the fear of losing even more of their paying audience (and thus, being so lame and conservative, driving them away in droves instead). [See current broadcast television for a similar conservative response to a dwindling audience, thus costing them even more audience cause there's not much reason to watch.]
I've never seen An Affair to Remember nor its original, Love Affair, so I can only comment on your post, rather than the actual film. However, I bet that the 50-year-old societal thing is, again, what were by then old fogey's in charge of the studios guess at what couldn't possibly offend the most conservative members of the audience, both the lack of despoilation and the lack of a visible personality. Also the lack of visibly attractive fashions.
The films of the preceding two decades actually allowed people to have real personalities and motivations and actions, even if they had to be somewhat disguised to get past the Hollywood Production Code... Which often makes them so much more interesting to watch.
Also, sounds to me like Affair is in the female-centric "weepie" genre, a genre that happily has all but disappeared but was quite popular up to the 1960s. I find most of those weepies all but unwatchable, but it may be that some of what drives you 'round the bend are simply expected standard tropes of the genre.
"Women's films" have been a staple in Hollywood almost right from the start. (Garbo's last silent, "The Kiss", takes no back seat to any film in terms of "whuh?"). Agreed that in the 50's they reached a bizarre sort of zenith in terms of vapidity, and An Affair to Remember is a classic example. (Don't forget about All About Eve, Peyton Place, Imitation of Life, A Star Is Born, etc. came around that time, too). Those 50's weepies were so bad, that they all but killed the genre entirely. (Sirk's All That Heaven Allows in '61 might have been the swan song). It was all I could do in film class in college to survive that part of the curriculum.
Every so often, since then, we've had to endure something ridiculous like Love Story, but it's hard to top those 50's bombs for sheer ludicrous-ness.
Oh, and beware to ever watch Sleepless in Seattle ever again for the Empire State thing. It's bad enough the first time, but when you are reminded of that which they're attempting to pay homage, it absolutely makes you want to throw up in your popcorn bucket.
Aw, c'mon you guys, don't dissuade me. I was seriously thinking of putting Peyton Place in my queue, if only because when we all were very little children, my mother used to watch the TV show based thereon and my impression was that it was something scandalous. I'm not sure *exactly* what the four or five year old Andrea conceived of as scandalous, but if you're telling me the movie isn't dirty (as dirty as a 50s movie could be, anyway) I'm gonna be sadly crushed. hahaha
As for Sleepless in Seattle, I'm sure my appreciation for that piece of "film" is tainted by the fact that I have never ever been able to stomach Tom Hanks *or* Meg Ryan, so both of them in the same movie is like being poked in the eye with a stick.
So I've been pondering what I would consider "the most romantic movie ever" and I'm kinda stumped. I'll get back with ya. In another post, probably.
Most romantic movie ever? Well, speaking of the 50's, it might have been Dial M for Murder, except for Grace Kelly doesn't get it in the end. (Adulterous wife emasculates her professional athlete husband until he's driven to get rid of her or die trying). Then there's Strangers on a Train... (Adulterous wife emasculates her professional athlete husband until he's driven to fantasizing about getting rid of her or die trying).
Hitchcock was a real sentimentalist.
Ok, I've changed my mind again... How about The Birds? (Adulterous socialite emasculates professional bon vivant by, among other things, having his true-blue ex-girlfriend mauled and mangled by murderous birds who just coincidentally happen to follow her around).
One of Hitchcock's more romantic (i.e. sexually twisted) tales is Rear Window. Guaranteed you'll enjoy Grace Kelly getting all lubricated about breaking and entering, and a wheelchair-bound Jimmy Stewart having to fend off the murderous rampage (of Raymond Burr of all people) that she's initiated with his flash camera is a lot of fun, too.
1.) Mr Barma, I think you've got some Issues. hahahaha But we love you anyway.
2.) Rear Window is my favoritest of all Hitchcock movies! What year was that? Okay, 1954. Because Grace Kelly's clothes *kicked ass* in that movie. Anyway, re-watching it recently, I was particularly taken by Jimmy Stewart's visiting nurse/PT/massage therapist. It's awesome seeing massage therapy in a movie that old.
Well, according to both the AFI and IMDB Casablanca is the most romantic movie of all time. I wouldn't argue with that, though I do find some of the other movies on both lists more than a little dubious as "romance".
Well, to be fair, the AFI's list is officially "Greatest Love Stories", not "Greatest Romances", but I think some of the voters were being ironic (I mean, Double Indemnity and Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf????). You can check out the list here:
http://www.afi.com/tvevents/100years/passions.aspx
but I'd say many of those films bite the big one as films, even some in the top 10 (including, apparently, An Affair To Remember).
On the other hand, The Lady Eve, The Shop Around the Corner, and Annie Hall would all rate right up there for me. (I'll note they chose the 1991 Disney animated Beauty and the Beast not the wonderful 1946 Jean Cocteau version, but the latter isn't American).
I actually think the IMDB list is better, though still with some oddities:
http://www.imdb.com/chart/romance
Both of those lists have much Hitchcock, though, and as much as I love Hitchcock I don't find most of his films particularly romantic (well, maybe excepting To Catch a Thief and Rebecca).
And neither list has one of my all time favorite, and favorite romantic, movies, A Matter of Life and Death (UK)/Stairway to Heaven(US) though it does include another Powell/Pressburger film, The Red Shoes.
The AFI list does have Swing Time and, as much as you hate musicals, that or another of the Astaire/Rogers RKO films should definitely be right up there.
And what about Before Sunrise huh?
Okay, in further cinematic exploration of the 50s, I *just* watched A Summer Place.
OMG, just like Butterfield 8, there's no effin' way I can rate this on Netflix. There's no way to indicate "so freakin' bad, it's AWESOME." Campilicious! And my new all-time favorite movie line, care of one Miss Sandra Dee: "Are you bad, Johnny? Have you been bad with girls?"
hahahaha
And my romantic movie commentary is definitely going to be a separate post all its own <---that's a teaser.
I think I take films too seriously. "So bad it's good" doesn't really work for me.
Well, unless it comes with a built-in MST3K commentary.
Cause after two hours of massive suckage, all I can think of is "God, that was two hours I wasted out of my life where I could have been watching a good movie instead".
I think that every time I get within 10 feet of a Douglas Sirk movie.
Why are you my friend, again? I weep for you that you cannot appreciate the beauty that is "Are you a bad boy, Johnny? Have you been bad with girls?" Sigh.
:-PPPPP
I don't know, I definitely appreciated the beauty of Fiona Apple purring about having been "a bad, bad girl", so maybe I'm not entirely past the point of potential redemption.
A little too anorexically skinny in the video, though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTpvjNn2BUM
100% agreed on Sirk. The guy IS bad melodrama personified. Horrifically prolific to boot. Everything of his from Magnificent Obsession through Imitation of Life (basically, everything he ever did from the mid to late 50's) is so bad that watching them ought to be used as the upgrade to waterboarding among the CIA's most heinous interrogation techniques. Gah, I'm still so disgusted to have wasted those hours of my life in College having to watch them...
However--
So-bad-its-good is absolutely a valid movie review category, provided you can understand the difference between Sirk bad and Plan 9 from Outer Space bad. (Or any old Lost in Space episode, for that matter, while we're on the genre). Gilligans Island is a shot in that direction, too, or any Peter Sellers Pink Panther movie. (Jury is still out on Steve Martin's...)
Post a Comment