Winter of Douglas Fairbanks Jr.: The Young In Heart

January 30, 2025 / Lisa R. Howeler / 9 Comments

This winter I am watching Douglas Fairbanks Jr. movies for fun and this week I watched The Young in Heart. It was such a refreshing change after the disaster I felt Gunga Din was last week.

This movie was full of hilarious moments, charming characters, sweet transformations, and hopeful overtones.

I absolutely loved Douglas in this one. He played a more prominent role that in Gunga Din and was simply … shall I sound completely cheesy? Yes, I shall. He was completely delightful.

At one point I texted my friend Erin that a drunk Douglas is adorable.

You’ll have to watch the movie to know what I mean. I found this one for free on YouTube.

The Carlton family, of which Douglas is a part of in this movie, are not people you would want to know in real life. They are swindlers and grifters. They mooch off and manipulate people to scrape by in life.

We open the movie in the French Riveria with Douglas’s character (Rick) ready to marry a young woman whose father is rich.

The rest of Rick’s family — father Col. Anthony “Sahib” Carleton (Roland Young), mother Marmey Carlton (Billie Burke), and daughter George-Anne (Janet Gaynor) — are thrilled with this plan because they know it will also set them all up for a rich life. George Anne might be even more thrilled because then she can marry a poor Scottish man who she’s fallen in love with, and the rest of her family will support her financially.

Everything falls apart, though, when the police find out about the family and reveal their conniving ways to the family of Rick’s future wife. The family is told to get out of France and end up on a train where they meet a ridiculously sweet woman (Minnie Dupree) who has only recently come into a great sum of money.

Ironically, her last name is Fortune. George-Anne sets out to swindle the woman out of paying for their lunch but the plan expands as the woman explains she lives alone in a big mansion left to her by a former suitor. She is saying how lovely it would be if all of them came to stay with her when there is a train derailment. Their car tips and at first Rick and George-Anne believe the old woman has died. She’s still breathing so the siblings carry her from the car and George-Anne covers her with her own coat.

We begin to wonder if the family is rotten through and through and are still playing things up as the woman later recovers and invites the family to come live with her.

They take her up on the offer and an odd friendship begins to form between them all. Soon George-Anne begins to feel guilty about what they are doing so she suggests to the family that if Miss Fortune believes they are a respectable family she will be more willing to let them live there and maybe even leave them money when she leaves. To play up this ruse she suggests the men get actual jobs and she and her mother act like caretakers and women who don’t swindle people out of money.

This is all very baffling to the family, which has always cheated and stolen for a living. When the men decide George-Anne’s plan might work and go to look for jobs, the scenes that follow are some of the most hilarious tongue-in-cheek moments I’ve seen in a movie.

Spinning around in the background of the family’s drama is the romance between George-Anne and Duncan Macrae (Richard Carlson), who she originally considered marrying when she thought he was rich. Duncan learned she was a con-artist along with everyone else and was shattered but still ends up chasing her down on the train back to London to tell her he still loves her.

She tells him to get lost, believing he’s much too good for her and . . . well, you’ll have to see where all that ends up.

Rick is also having his own romance with Leslie Saunders (Paulette Goddard), a secretary and the engineering business he applies at for a job.

This is the second – or shall I say third – movie I’ve watched in recent months with Billie Burke and there is no mistaking that voice if you have seen The Wizard of Oz.

Yes, she is Glenda the Good Witch.

The screenplay for this movie was written by Paul Osborn and adapted by Charles Bennett from the serialized novel, The Gay Banditti by I. A. R. Wylie. That title certainly would have had a different connotation in the modern day, eh?

Anyhow, the novel appeared in parts in The Saturday Evening Post from February 26 to March 26, 1938.

The movie released in November of the same year. They certainly worked fast back then.

I found it interesting when I read that Broadway actresses Maude Adams and Laurette Taylor screen-tested for the role of Miss Fortune and that the footage is the only audio-visual samples that existed of both of them.

The movie was produced by – can you guess? Because it feels like every movie I write about lately is produced by him.

Yes. David Selznick. The man who produced what is considered one of the biggest movie triumps in the world — Gone with the Wind.

This movie was one of many he produced leading up to Gone With The Wind. The Prisoner of Zenda, which I wrote about a couple of weeks ago, was another. Goddard was actually rumored to be being considered to play Scarlet O’Hara in Gone With The Wind, which later, of course, went to Vivien Leigh.

While I was watching the part of the movie where Mr. Carleton goes to apply for a job, I was fascinated by the fancy car they showed. It was spinning like a pig on a spit at the front of the building and it was a very modern looking car and a very modern looking set up altogether.

According to Ultimate Car Page and Wikipedia,

The six-passenger 2-door sedan Flying Wombat featured in that scene was actually the one-of-a-kind prototype Phantom Corsair. The Phantom Corsair concept car was built in 1938 and designed by Rust Heinz of the H. J. Heinz family and Maurice Schwartz of the Bohman & Schwartz coachbuilding company in Pasadena, California.”

I also found it interesting that this was Gaynor’s last movie before retiring while she was at the top of her career. She made one last movie in 1957 called Bernardine.

Like I said above, I loved this movie. It was just what I needed to watch this week with so much sadness going on in the world. There was a lot of humor from all the cast but Douglas really had me smiling throughout. Not only because he is my latest old Hollywood star crush (watch out Paul Newman!).

Have you seen this one? What did you think of it?

Up next for my Winter of Fairbanks Jr. is: Having Wonderful Time (February 6)

The rest of the movies I will be watching include:

Chase a Crooked Shadow (February 13)

Sinbad The Sailor (February 20)

The Rise of Catherine the Great (February 27)

The Sun Never Sets (March 6)

You can also find my impressions of previous movies in the series, as well as other classic movies here: https://lisahoweler.com/movie-reviews-impressions/

Thanks to Cat from Cat’s Wire watching along with me this week. She wrote about her impressions of the movie here: https://catswire.blogspot.com/2025/01/the-young-in-heart.html

Classic Movie Impressions (Winter of Douglas Fairbanks Jr.): Gunga Din

January 24, 2025January 26, 2025 / Lisa R. Howeler / 5 Comments

Up this week for the Winter of Douglas Fairbanks Jr. is Gunga Din (1939), said to be one of his most famous movies.

I am going to let you know right up front that I rarely hate classic movies that I watch, but I pretty much hated this movie. This movie was a train wreck for me from beginning to end. Possibly a bit of a racist train wreck at that. It had a severe identity crisis — it wasn’t sure if it was a comedy or a drama.

For me this movie was Gunga Do..n’t.

When I first started it I thought, “Two of my favorite actors. Cary Grant and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr! Be still my heart!!!”

As I continued it, I thought things like:

“Are these guys supposed to be British?”

“What accent is that? Is he trying to do an accent? Why is he trying to do an accent?”

“Why didn’t they let the Irish actor just have an Irish accent? His British accent is horrible.”

“Douglas looks bored out of his mind and like he wishes he could get out of his contract.”

“Is that a white man painted brown to look Indian? And that one too? And that one? And…

First a snippet of the synopsis of the movie from TCM.com:

In an encampment of Her Majesty’s Lancers in Colonial India, the commanding officer (Montagu Love) is distressed by the cutoff of communications from an outpost ten miles distant. He wants three of his most dependable sergeants to embark on an investigative mission; however, the trio must first be pulled away from a bar brawl to receive their orders. The comrades in arms include the calculating Cutter (Cary Grant), ever dreaming of finding a cache of riches; the grizzled veteran MacChesney (Victor McLaglen); and the gentlemanly Ballantine (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.), whose sole focus is his imminent discharge and marriage to his fiancée (Joan Fontaine), much to the chagrin of his comrades.

Among the troops taken on the mission is the humble bhisti Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe), for whom life would hold no greater honor than to serve as regular Army. They arrive at the outpost to find the streets empty; the soldiers’ rousting of the homes turns up one small cluster of ostensible survivors.

Cutter’s drunken fixation with a legendary golden temple leads to a one-sided slugfest with MacChesney, a stint in the brig, and an audacious escape courtesy of Din and MacChesney’s beloved pet elephant. In their flight, Cutter and Din discover the mythical temple which, as they unfortunately learn too late, is also the gathering place of a criminal sect devoted to the Hindustani goddess of destruction Kali. Cutter offers himself to the cult to buy Din time to escape, and the quest for his rescue drives Gunga Din to its rousing conclusion.”

I don’t know what to say about this movie. I really don’t. It was a mix between a comedy and drama with a lot of racist undertones against the Indian people who Great Britain took over for no reason other than greed and power.

Then at the end they acted like these three idiots were heroes, when half of the people who died wouldn’t have if Cary’s character hadn’t been looking for gold.

To me it was a great big statement on imperialism and while the movie was trying o portray British patriotism I found it fairy sickening to watch them gun down Indians whose land it was in the first place.

And the music playing throughout this movie tried to make it seem like it was a goofy romp, even while the footage before our eyes tried to play it off as a serious epic. I was so thoroughly confused.

Also, Douglas Fairbanks Jr. looked so bored in much of this movie. It was like he was trying to figure out what was going on with the rest of us.

The movie was overbudget and took longer to film than promised, according to an article on TCM.com.

“Filming began in June of 1938 and was set to last for 64 days. Due to the working methods of director Stevens and to a studio anxious to produce its most prestigious picture to date, Gunga Din would ultimately go over budget, miss its release date of Christmas, 1938, and the shooting schedule would stretch well beyond the allotted 64 days to a total of 104 days.”

The movie was shot in the deserts of Lone Pine, California, and temperatures of up to 115 degrees took a toll on the cast and crew.

A number of scenes that involved journalist and poet Rudyard Kipling — who wrote the poem and short stories that the movie was based on — were cut at the request of his widow who knew that at that time audiences would have been shocked and laughed at the idea of a journalist being embedded with the army. This is something modern audiences wouldn’t even blink an eye at today.

I found it interesting that author William Faulkner worked on the original screenplay for $750 a week. I guess I always thought of him as more highbrow than writing screenplays for movies. In the end it wasn’t his screenplay that was used, but instead one by Charles MacArthur and Ben Hecht.

The expenses paid out for the movie was one reason the movie ended up costing the most of any movie that the RKO Studio had made so far at $1.9 million. Of course it wasn’t the most expensive movie released that year. That went to Gone With The Wind produced by David Selznick’s Selznick International Pictures and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer with $3.8 million.

Gunga Din only brought in $2.8 million but was re-released in 1941 and again in the 50s and gained back even more of it’s production costs over the years.

While I thought Douglas looked bored in this movie, he looked back on it with fondness, even though a biography on Cary reports that the veteran actor stole a scene from Douglas so Cary would look better.

From TCM.com: “In his biography Cary Grant: A Touch of Elegance, Warren G. Harris relates a story from the set in which “…Grant deliberately cheated Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., out of one of the most memorable moments in the picture. In a rooftop scene, Fairbanks had to wrestle with a native, pick him up and hurl him into the street below. Grant coveted the bit himself, so he told his co-star, ‘Doug, you really shouldn’t do this. It looks like you’ve killed the guy. It wouldn’t help your image. And you know your father would never have done such a thing on the screen.'” The ruse worked, and when Stevens asked for a volunteer for the shot, Grant jumped at the chance.”

This didn’t stop Douglas from still admiring Cary though because he later told another biographer writing about Cary: “ . . . .the most generous player I’ve ever worked with. He wasn’t just taking his salary. He was concerned that the picture be a good picture. He thought that what was good for the picture was good for him, and he was right. He was very shrewd that way. He was a master technician, which many people don’t realize, meticulous and conscious of every move. It might have looked impetuous or impulsive, but it wasn’t. It was all carefully planned. Cary was a very sharp and intelligent actor who worked out everything ahead. I called him Sarge or Sergeant Cutter, and he called me Ballantine right to the end of his life.”

There are other reviews online bothered by the racist undertones of the movie and just the confusing antics of the three main characters.

“I can see how the film would be epic at the time,” writes the author of Opus.ing.com. “But in this day and age, where epics are tossed off every six months or so, it’s hard to look past the film’s dated-ness and timely flaws. Not an unenjoyable film, but if you’re looking for a “classic” epic, you may wish to look elsewhere — and if you’re looking for an honest, unromantic view of British imperialism, you’ll definitely want to look elsewhere.”

This author also noticed Cary’s accent issues: “Far too much time is spent on the hijinks of the three officers, played by Victor McLaglen, Douglas Fairbanks Jr., and Cary Grant (whose accent seems to change with every scene), such that the titular character, an Indian bugler who wants more than anything to prove himself a soldier, easily becomes overshadowed.”

When I describe Cary’s accent issue, think Kevin Costner in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves.

Yeah.

That bad.

TCM admits that there have always been issues with the movie regarding it’s political correctness (for lack of a better term). The film was even banned in India.

“But as a pure adventurous lark,” writes TCM’s Jay Steinberg. “Gunga Din holds up as well now as then, and retains its place amongst the top films of 1939, Hollywood’s greatest year.”

If he thinks so….I will just agree to disagree.

Have you ever seen this one? What did you think of it?

Up next for my Winter of Fairbanks Jr. is: The Young At Heart

The rest of the movies I will be watching include:

Having Wonderful Time (February 6)

Chase a Crooked Shadow (February 13)

Sinbad The Sailor (February 20)

The Rise of Catherine the Great (February 27)

The Sun Never Sets (March 6)

You can also find my impressions of previous movies in the series, as well as other classic movies here: https://lisahoweler.com/movie-reviews-impressions/

I loved this history-filled post about the movie by Cat’s Wire.

Classic Movie Impressions: The Prisoner of Zenda

January 17, 2025January 17, 2025 / Lisa R. Howeler / 6 Comments

The Prisoner of Zenda (1937) is a cinematic spectacle. Grand halls, sweeping ballrooms, wildly decorated courtyards, and captivating costumes.

I absolutely loved it and am so glad I stumbled on to Douglas Fairbanks Jr. and decided to do a marathon of his movies to learn more about him so that I could discover this movie.

Douglas Fairbanks Jr. is not the leading man in this one but he steals the show in every scene he is in. He is deliciously evil.

The leading man, Ronald Colman, is absolutely amazing as well, especially since he is playing two parts in this one. He is so amazing I feel another marathon coming on but of his movies.

An article on TCM.com agrees with me about this version (Okay, I agree with the article).

“ . . . of all the dramatized versions of Anthony Hope’s 1894 tale of adventure, love and honor, the 1937 black-and-white movie version, produced by David O. Selznick for his Selznick International Pictures stands as the definitive adaptation.”

It is easy to see why this movie is called by critics one of the best “Swashbuckler” movies of all time. I say that since this is one of the original Swashbuckler movies without it we wouldn’t have Pirates of the Caribbean, The Princess Bride, and other more modern adventure movies.

And without the 1894 novel — The Prisoner of Zenda: Being the History of Three Months in the Life of an English Gentleman by Anthony Hope — we wouldn’t have had the movie at all. Anthony Hope Hawkins was a part-time lawyer who wrote the book in one month from what I read.

The novel sold more than 30,000 copies in Britain and the U.S. and helped to establish the adventure genre that would later be explored even more by authors such as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. Rider Haggard. The book, according to an article to TCM, has never gone out of print and has continued to sell thousands of copies each year.

The movie is the most referenced Swashbuckler film, TCM further states, which is probably why it was remade at least seven (!!) more times over the years, including one only about 15 years after the 1937 version, which was not the first. There were actually two silent movies of the book made before this version.

The 1952 version was shot frame for frame, according to articles I read online. I think I might watch the one released in 1952 later on and then compare the two, but I highly doubt that the 1952 movie or any of the others (including two made-for-TV movies and three television shows) will top the 1937 one, especially when it comes to Douglas’s performance. Yes, Doug and I are on a first-name basis now. I feel that we are getting to know each other enough now that we can dispatch with the formalities.

When I first saw Douglas in The Rage of Paris, I immediately thought how much he reminded me of Cary Elwes in The Princess Bride – his smile, his delivery, his expressions.

In this movie that similarity came even more into focus and especially during an amazingly well-choreographed and filmed fencing scene between him and Colman.

The two enjoyed a sparring of words while sparring with their swords, reminding me of the scene between Elwes and Mandy Patinkin on the Cliffs of Insanity in The Princess Bride. Perhaps Golding was influenced by the movie? I don’t know but if I research any more for this post, I’ll never publish it.

Let’s finally get to the plot of the movie. Finally…I know!

We have an Englishman named Rudolf Rassendyll (Colman) who has gone to a small country located somewhere between Vienna and Bucharest (not named in the film, but in the book it was called Ruritania). He has gone there for a fishing expedition at the same time the king of the country is being coronated. Zenda is a small area in this unnamed country where there is good fishing and boar hunting and where the king, Rudolph V (also portrayed by Colman), has a hunting preserve and cabin. RudolfV and his advisors Col. Zapt (C. Aubrey Smith) and Captain Fritz von Tarlenheim (David Niven, who I recognized immediately from other movies I’ve seen him in) run into Rassendyll in the woods and realize how much the two look alike.

I’m a little confused by the scene where Rassendyll tells the king they look alike because of their ancestors — the king’s great-great-great grandfather and Rassendyll’s great-great-great grandmother — most likely had an illicit affair. In the beginning of the film, he acts like he’s coming to the country to hunt and knows nothing about the king or how much he looks like him but five minutes later in the film he’s telling the king he knows he looks like him and why. This is probably something that is explained better in the book.

All I can say is thankfully they both have the same British accent even though the King is from a kingdom in Eastern Europe, or they wouldn’t be able to understand each other. Har. Har.

Minor complaint. Let us move on.

This news from Rassendyll about their probable relationship cracks the king up and he invites Rassendyll back to his hunting cabin where they get completely roaring drunk and Rudolftalks about his coronation scheduled for the next day and his half-brother Duke Michael, who hates him. He also speaks of his cousin Princess Flavia (Madeleine Carroll) who he will wed shortly after the coronation. After everyone else is unconscious from drinking too much, Rudolfdecides to drink a bottle of wine gifted to him by Michael.

Uh-oh. Bad idea.

When Rassendyll wakes up the King is unconscious on the floor, drugged. The king’s advisor says the king isn’t dead, but he won’t be in any shape to be coronated that which means that Michael could be crowned instead. A plan is hatched to have Rassendyll pose as the king only for the coronation and then to be smuggled out of the country and sent back home.

Of course, we have foreshadowing here that tells us that all will not go as planned and, indeed, it does not.

Douglas portrays Robert of Hentzau, the henchman (for lack of a better word) of Duke Michael, the king’s brother who wants to take over the throne.

He shows up for the first time with a crooked, mischievous smile, like in many of his movies, and lets us know immediately he is the comic relief and a completely swarmy cad. A very attractive cad, though, I must say.

Let’s put it this way —Hentzau is all frat boy, and I could not stop watching him when he was on screen.

There was a lot about this movie I could not stop watching — the acting, the scenery, and the exquisitely detailed and breathtaking costumes designed by Ernest Dryden.

The Prisoner of Zenda was originally going to be released by MGM, but was bought by Selznick for his own studio, right around the same time he was working on Gone With The Wind (1939).

If MGM had produced it, they were going to use it as a vessel for more money makers from power team William Powel and Myrna Loy of the Thin Man movies. A musical was also a possibility. That all went out the window when Selznick bought it.

“Zenda was already a proven commodity in print, on the stage and in previous film versions,” writes Roger Fristoe for TCM.com. “And the recent abdication of England’s Edward VIII led Selznick to think that a story of kings and coronations would be timely.”

John Cromwell, a former actor who had previously only directed romantic dramas, was chosen to direct, which some questioned.

Selznick explained the decision had to do with Cromwell’s experience with European audiences.

“In doing a picture like The Prisoner of Zenda, which is aimed at least fifty percent toward a foreign market,” he wrote in a memo. “It becomes important to get a director who at least has the judgment and taste to respect the sensibilities of audiences which are sensitive, particularly in England, about the behavior of royalty.”

Cromwell had a lot of complaints about the cast, though, including Niven and Douglas, who he called lazy and overindulged. He even dismissed Niven at one point because he didn’t find his humor humorous. Ha. But Selznick overruled him and brought Niven back, saying he was bringing life to an otherwise dull role.

James Wong Howe was the cinematographer for the movie and his work was amazing, in my humble opinion. The various angles, the lighting, all of it.

Look at this fencing scene..the shadows on the walls..

The cinematography, great acting, and astounding costume and set design made this movie overwhelmingly enchanting.

There are a couple of scenes where Colman is filmed talking to himself and I was really interested to know how that was done before the days of digital special effects. Luckily the TCM article explained that for me.

“The special effects created by Howe included a subtle and convincing scene where Colman appears to shake hands with himself. A 3 X 4′ optical glass was placed in front of the camera, and Colman exchanged the handshake with a double, whose head and shoulders were subsequently matted out with masking tape on the glass. The scene was re-photographed with Colman in a different costume and everything matted out except his head and shoulders. When the images were combined, the effect was complete and quite realistic.”

Because I loved Douglas as Hentzau so much, I thought I’d close this post by sharing some quotes that show how delightfully jerky he is in the movie:

“I don’t like women who lie to me. They don’t usually do it, as a matter of fact. I usually do them to them.”

“Someone once called fidelity a fading woman’s greatest defense and a charming woman’s greatest hypocrisy. And you’re very charming. And Michael’s very busy and likely to be more so.”

[during his sword fight with Rupert, Rudolf Rassendyll “retreats” towards the drawbridge’s controls]: “You’d be a sensation in a circus. I can’t understand it. Where did you learn such roller skating?”

To Rassendyll: “Why don’t you let me kill you quietly?”

Rassendyll: Oh, a little noise adds a touch of cheer. You notice I’m getting closer to the drawbridge rope?

Henztau: You’re so fond of rope, it’s a pity to finish you off with steel. What did they teach you on the playing fields of Eton? Puss in the corner?

Rassendyll: Oh, chiefly not throwing knives at other people’s backs. (A reference to a previous scene).

Have you ever seen this version or any version of The Prisoner of Zenda?

What was your impression of it?

Up next in my series will be Gunga Din, one of his more famous movies, from what I’ve read.

The rest of the movies I will be watching include:

The Young At Heart (January 30)

Having Wonderful Time (February 6)

Chase a Crooked Shadow (February 13)

Sinbad The Sailor (February 20)

The Rise of Catherine the Great (February 27)

The Sun Never Sets (March 6)

You can also find my impressions of previous movies in the series, as well as other classic movies here: https://lisahoweler.com/movie-reviews-impressions/

Winter of Fairbanks Jr.: The Power of the Press

January 2, 2025January 2, 2025 / Lisa R. Howeler / 7 Comments

For the last couple of years, I’ve been taking a season or time period and watching movies with one actor or actress. I kicked it off in 2022 with a Summer of Paul by watching the movies of one of my favorite actors, Paul Newman.

Last spring it was Spring With Cary (Grant that is) and in 2023 it was the Summer of Marilyn.

This winter I’ve chosen Winter with Fairbanks Jr. (Douglas Fairbanks Jr.) because I just watched my first movie with him — The Rage of Paris — a couple of months ago and thought it would be fun to explore his other movies, which I know I’ve never seen before because before The Rage of Paris I had never even heard of the guy.

I’ve already written about The Rage of Paris, so I kicked off my marathon with the first movie Douglas Fairbanks Jr. had a lead in The Power of The Press (1928). It is a silent movie directed by Frank Capra. This movie is one of the shortest I’ve watched in my life at about 59 minutes long.

I can’t say I’ve ever watched a silent movie all the way through before this one, so this was a new experience for me. I ended up getting very caught up in the story, especially the crazy car chase scene, which had me captivated.

Right before the scene there was an odd clip where one minute Clem is being held at gunpoint and the film glitches and then the man with the gun is tied up, but I was willing to overlook that because of the age of the movie and how challenging editing could be.

I was surprised how much of the story I could follow even without having constant dialogue. The acting by the actors really was well done and I can imagine they would have been very good in a talkie too. Their expressions told me all I needed to know in each scene.

The movie is about a rookie reporter named Clem Rogers (Fairbanks Jr.) who is frustrated with being relegated to the weather desk. He wants a chance to cover a big story but the editor deflects his requests.

This rejection amuses some of the more seasoned reporters who like to mock Clem, trip him, and, quite frankly, bully him. Having been in newspapers for about 15 years, I can confirm that cub or rookie reporters do go through a bit of initiation session from the more experienced reporters. Usually, it is very affectionate and non-violent, luckily.

Clem finally gets his chance to cover a big story when everyone else is out of the office and he’s the only one available to run to the sight of a murder. The murder victim turns out to be the city’s district attorney.

Once on the scene, Clem shows what a rookie he is by losing his press pass and being denied entrance to the scene. Instead, one of the other reporters from the paper shows up and tells Clem to get back to the office because he’ll take it from there.

Clem is depressed and leaves the scene around the back of the building where he sees a woman climbing out of a window from the crime scene.

He tries to chase her down but she’s able to get away. Luckily a man sees Clem chasing her and asks what’s going on. Clem tells him she’s running from the scene of a murder and the man says he’d be shocked if the woman was involved because she’s the daughter of the city mayor.

This leads Clem to run back to the newspaper and tell his editor he has a breaking story — the daughter of the mayor killed the district attorney.

Clearly Clem was never taught to check his sources or even find sources for a story and neither did the editor because the editor runs with it and splashes it all over the front page that the woman is a murderer.

She’s crushed by this and confronts Clem after the paper comes out. For his part, Clem is strutting around the office like a proud peacock because of his big scoop.

The mayor’s daughter — Jane Atwill (Jobyna Ralston) — comes to Clem, though, and is like (summary ahead), “Excuse me?! Why would you tell the world I killed a man! You don’t know anything about me.”

I’ll give Clem some credit because he’s like (more summation), “Oh. Wow. I screwed up. I’m so sorry. I’ll ask my editor to print a retraction.”

Ha. Good luck, buddy. If there is anything an editor hates more than missing a big scoop it is printing retractions. You have to have a very, very good reason to retract a story that big and Clem is going to need to prove somehow that Jane is not guilty.

This launches the pair of them on an investigation to find out who the true killer is.

A total aside here, but I loved how Fairbanks Jr.’s hair looked like Leonardo DiCaprio’s, or many other young men, from the 1990s. In some ways the movie looked modern for that reason – or it looked like they’d cut a modern actor into an old silent film.

I watched this one on Amazon but while researching for this post, I found it for free on YouTube. As far as I know it is the full movie, but you might want to double check.

The information online is a bit conflicting, but a couple different sources say that The Power of the Press was Fairbanks Jr.’s first outright leading role. While he played bigger roles in other movies (including his first movie at the age of 13 in 1923) he had not yet had a lead.

His career really picked up in 1929 after he married actress Joan Crawford. That marriage ended in 1933 and he later married Mary Lee Epling, who he remained married to until she passed away in 1988.

I’ve been enjoying reading about Fairbanks Jr. on Prince of Hollywood (link here), a blog dedicated to him, in case you are interested in learning more about him as well: https://douglasfairbanksjr.wordpress.com/filmography/

Up next in my Winter of Fairbanks Jr. Movie Marathon is:

Morning Glory – staring Fairbanks Jr. and Katherine Hepburn (1933)

Here is my complete list of planned watches if you want to join in:

The Power The Press (January 2)

Morning Glory (January 9)

The Prisoner of Zenda (January 16)

Gunga Din (January 23)

The Young At Heart (January 30)

Having Wonderful Time (February 6)

Chase a Crooked Shadow (February 13)

Sinbad The Sailor (February 20)

The Rise of Catherine the Great (February 27)

The Sun Never Sets (March 6)

Classic Movie Impression: The Bishop’s Wife

December 21, 2024 / Lisa R. Howeler / 5 Comments

This weekend I watched The Bishop’s Wife (1947), which I have watched before but couldn’t remember the end of, so I watched it again.

The movie stars Cary Grant as an angel named Dudley who comes to earth to help Bishop Henry Brougham, (David Niven). Henry is so wrapped up in securing funding for a cathedral he begins to neglect his wife and daughter.

Dudley arrives at the Bishop’s house after the Bishop prays for God to help him with funding for the cathedral. Dudley tells him right up front that he’s an angel and he’s there to help him but introduces himself to others as Henry’s new assistant. He pretty much forces himself into Henry’s life and ends up charming the pants off all the women he meets and creating miracles for men, women, and children alike. At least one man, Henry’s retired professor friend (Monty Woolley), is very suspicious of him.

Henry isn’t really sure if he believes that Dudley is an angel, especially when the guy starts taking Henry’s wife, Julia, (Loretta Young) out on the town, having dinner with her, taking her skating, and buying her hats.

Still, Henry isn’t about to get distracted from his goal of building the cathedral and he ignores Dudley’s efforts to open his eyes to how much Julia needs him, plowing forward with fundraising instead.

L-R: Actors Cary Grant, David Niven and Loretta Young sit in the back of a car in a still from the film, ‘The Bishop’s Wife,’ directed by Henry Koster, 1947. (Photo by RKO Pictures/Courtesy of Getty Images)

I think Cary is supposed to be charming in this movie but instead I find him a bit devious. Maybe the goal of the movie is to leave the viewer trying to figure out if he is sweet or evil.

The site, The Viewer’s Commentary, had a similar feeling about Cary’s role and explains it better than I can.

“But, while I’m not certain “perfect” is necessarily the right word for Dudley as a character, I’m still not entirely convinced that the movie wasn’t actually trying to play him up as being in his right to step in on Henry’s marriage, either. This is based on the film’s affectionate depiction of his chemistry with Julia, the amount of sympathy the film has for her, and the apparent distaste it has for the stiff Henry beyond his admirable loyalty and good intentions.”

“That ice skating thing I mentioned before wasn’t some kind of non sequitur,” the post continues. “There’s a painfully long scene in which Dudley and Julia and their cab driver have a whimsical impromptu ice skating session where he romances her in front of everyone by secretly granting her expert skill while Henry toils away elsewhere, callously inattentive to Julia’s wifely needs. It would be one thing if it was intended to teach Henry a lesson about what could potentially happen, but it actually kinda left me with a gross feeling, given how wonderful it’s all supposed to be while knowing about Dudley’s infatuation – not to mention his manipulation of the situation and nonchalant demeanor when confronted about it.”

This is the scene in question:

At one point even Henry begins to wonder if Dudley is from heaven or hell and if he truly is trying to steal his wife from him.

It’s what I was wondering too and by the end of the movie . . . well if you’ve never seen it you will have to watch it and let me know what you think.

The movie is based on a book by Robert Nathan whose other fantasy romance, Portrait of Jennie, would later overtake The Bishop’s Wife on a literary level and later became a 1948 David Selznick movie.

According to an article on TCM.com, producer Samuel Goldwyn decided to take on this movie right after winning an Oscar for The Best Year of Our Lives in 1946.

Cary was originally set to play the Bishop, but as he read the script he began to suggest edits and finally decided he didn’t have the right part. He should be playing Dudley.

Later on, though, after the final casting decisions were made, Grant wanted to switch back.

Then there was the fact that Goldwyn didn’t like the set.

Niven wrote in his future autobiography, “The day before shooting was to start, Goldwyn decided that the interiors of the Bishop’s house were not ecclesiastical enough and ordered several sets to be torn down, redesigned and rebuilt. For three weeks, while this was going on, production was halted, then, two days after the cameras finally had a chance to turn, Goldwyn decided that Seiter’s hand was a little too heavy on the tiller: he was removed, paid his full salary and after a week, Goldwyn hired Henry Koster to start again from scratch – with another two weeks of rehearsal. All this must have cost Goldwyn several hundred thousand dollars….”

Niven was already struggling through the production because his wife tragically died during filming. Her fatal head injury occurred during a party game of “sardines” at Tyrone Power’s house. Her name was Primmie and she fell down a flight of cellar stairs after thinking she was running into a closet.

Problems further continued to plague the film when Cary and Loretta Young couldn’t get along part of the time.

Despite all of the hardships, the movie was well-received and remains a favorite Christmas film of many classic movie buffs today.

It was nominated for five Oscars but did not win any.

I’m not sure I found this movie as heartwarming as some of the Christmas movies I’ve watched, probably because I found it so difficult to read Cary in this one and was quite suspicious of him. I did, however, still enjoy the movie overall.

A few pieces of trivia about the movie for you:

I recognized the young actor who played the young George Bailey from It’s A Wonderful Life — Bobby Anderson —— in a snowball throwing scene in this film. I looked up his name and found out that Karolyn Grimes, who played Zuzu in It’s a Wonderful Life also played The Bishop and his wife’s daughter, Debby.

According to IMBd (I did not double check these to clarify they are true):

“At about 1:20, Henry and Julia are ready to make some Parish calls. Henry says to Julia, “We go first to the Trubshawes.” This is an example of David Niven’s attempt to mention the name of his friend (Michael Trubshawe) in every movie he made.”

“Over Cary Grant’s protests, a skating double wearing a mask with Grant’s features was used in the long shots of the complex skating routine. A skating double was also used for Loretta Young on all long shots.”

Market research showed that moviegoers avoided the film because they thought it was religious. So, Samuel Goldwyn decided to re-title it Cary and the Bishop’s Wife for some US markets, while adding a black text box with the question “Have you heard about CARY AND THE BISHOP’S WIFE?” on posters in markets where the film kept the original title. By adding Cary Grant’s first name to the title the film’s business increased by as much as 25 per cent.

“In Britain the film was selected for that year’s Royal Command Film Performance screening. Princess Margaret and her sister, the future Queen Elizabeth, both attended the screening of “The Bishop’s Wife” on November 25, 1947, at the Odeon Theatre in Leicester Square. According to David Niven, “The audience loved every second of it, and the Queen and Princess Margaret told me afterwards and at great length how much they had enjoyed it.”

Have you ever seen The Bishop’s Wife? What did you think of it?

*This post is part of the Comfy, Cozy Christmas Link Up for 2024. If you have a Christmas/holiday post you would like to share you can find the link HERE or at the top of the page here on my blog.

Classic Movie Impression: The Rage of Paris (1938)

December 5, 2024December 5, 2024 / Lisa R. Howeler / 6 Comments

I stumbled on The Rage of Paris, a movie from 1938, by accident when one movie I was watching on Amazon Prime ended and this one started. I ended up loving it and also fell in love with Douglas Fairbanks Jr. who I had never heard of before this movie.

Where had I been? He was so handsome and charming in this movie, which made me want to look up more information about him. I also now want to find more movies starring him. I feel a Winter or Spring of Douglas Fairbanks Jr. coming up

“Douglas Fairbanks Jr. must have been famous back in the day because his name is even in the title of the movie on Amazon,” I said to myself.

I later asked my mom and dad about him and they assured me he was very famous, but, Mom said, “That was way before my time, just so we are clear here.”

Mom and Dad were, incidentally, born in 1944. Fairbanks Jr. started his career much earlier.

Before we learn about him, though, I’ll share about the movie, which starts with the main character, Nicole de Cortillion, (Danielle Darrieux) a French woman in New York City, who is desperately looking for a job. There is a hilarious mixup where she asks the head of a modeling agency for work and he suggests a job with a photographer who wants female models who will model with drapes on – and nothing else. The photographer is impatient and wants the job done fast, she’s told.

Nicole is horrified and says she won’t do it, but when another model comes in and says she will, Nicole doesn’t want to lose the job and while the model and the head of the agency are chatting, she snatches the address from the top of the desk.

The only problem is that she’s grabbed the wrong address. The address she has is for a man simply looking for some proof photographs for an advertising campaign that doesn’t involve scantily clad women.

The man is Jim Trevor (Fairbanks) who is beyond confused when he walks into his office after a meeting and finds Nicole stripping to prepare for the photos.

It is one of the funniest scenes I’ve ever seen in a movie because it’s clear he doesn’t have any idea what she’s doing and both wants to stop her and not stop her. He tries to ask what she’s doing and she asks where his camera is. A very funny exchange occurs during which Jim starts to think this woman is looking for a quick buck in a very solicitous way.

I found a clip for you of the witty exchange:

Back at her apartment, her landlady says she’s kicking her out for not paying rent. Her neighbor, Gloria, (Helen Broderick) having it though and tells the landlady that she will cover her rent. She then brings Nicole into her apartment and tells her she wishes they could marry rich men and not have to worry about bills anymore. That’s when an idea strikes Gloria. She has a friend who is employed as a maitre’d at a famous hotel. Maybe he would give Nicole a job. They head to the hotel, but the man – Mike (Mischa Auer) – says he can’t give her a job because soon he’s going to open his own restaurant. All he needs is $3,000 to get the restaurant.

Another idea strikes Gloria when she sees all the women dancing with the wealthy men in the dining room. What if they have Nicole seduce a millionaire and marry him? Then she won’t have to find a job and she can also give money to Gloria and Mike. Gloria talks Mike into the scheme. They’ll rent a room at the hotel with his help. Gloria will pretend to be Nicole’s aunt and together they will set their eyes on millionaire Bill Duncan. If Nicole can convince him to marry her they’ve got it made.

All is going well until Nicole, Gloria, and Bill attend an opera and run into Bill’s friend – none other than Jim Trevor.

The scene where they recognize each other across two balconies is comedy gold.

I absolutely could not stop laughing.

I’ve left a clip of it that I found on YouTube here for you:

Nicole does her best to hide from Jim Trevors but it doesn’t work and when he gets her alone later in the evening he tells her she needs to tell Bill Duncan the truth – which is that she isn’t a rich baroness from Paris – but instead a poor girl trying to swindle him into marrying her.

She promises she’ll tell Bill Duncan but she double crosses Jim in a very funny scene that leaves Jim steaming and more determined than ever to make her tell the truth. The rest of the movie is him doing just this.

The Rage of Paris did well at the box office in 1938 and was nominated for two Venice Film Festival Awards, winning in the category of Special Recommendation.

I had never heard of either of these actors when I started the movie.

For some background on Douglas Fairbanks Jr. – his father, Douglas Fairbanks Sr., was one of cinema’s first icons, noted for swashbuckling adventure films as The Mark of Zorro, Robin Hood, and The Thief of Bagdad. Fairbanks had small roles in his father’s films American Aristocracy (1916) and The Three Musketeers (1921). Fairbanks Jr.’s mother was Anna Beth Sully, the daughter of wealthy industrialist Daniel J. Sully.

His parents divorced when he was nine and he lived part-time with his mother in France, New York, London, and California.

Fairbanks started acting at the age of 13 when he was given a contract simply because he was the son of a famous actor. The film he first starred in flopped, though, and he returned to Paris to continue his studies. He returned to Hollywood at the age of 14 and became a camera assistant at what he called “starvation wages.”

His father didn’t want him to get into acting at such a young age, but instead wanted him to continue his education.

He worked steadily from 1921 to 1956 but he took a break during World War II to become a highly decorated officer by serving in the U.S. Navy as a reserve officer. He was a part of many, many missions including one where he was part of a recruitment of 180 officers and 300 enlisted men for the “Beach Jumpers” program. This program was aimed at simulating amphibious landings with a limited force, operating miles from the actual landing but using deception to make the enemy believe it was the actual landing place.

I don’t like using Wikipedia as a source anymore for a variety of reasons, but according to their page on Fairbanks, “For his planning the diversion-deception operations and his part in the amphibious assault on Southern France, Lieutenant Commander Fairbanks was awarded the United States Navy’s Legion of Merit with bronze V (for valor), the Italian War Cross for Military Valor, the French Légion d’honneur and the Croix de Guerre with Palm, and the British Distinguished Service Cross.

Fairbanks was also awarded the Silver Star for valor displayed while serving on PT boats and in 1942, made an Officer of the National Order of the Southern Cross, conferred by the Brazilian government. . . . Fairbanks stayed in the US Naval Reserve after the war, and ultimately retired as a captain in 1954. In 1982, Fairbanks was awarded the German Federal Cross of Merit for his contribution to the relief of the needy in occupied Germany.”

He returned to acting after the war and starred in many “swashbuckling movies” as well as British films and television since he moved back to the UK after the war and stayed there for many years before moving to Florida (is it just me or do a lot of Brits move to Florida?).

As for his co-star, Darrieux, this was her first American film. She was a star in France before World War II. She started acting at the age of 14.

She continued acting during World War II and the German occupation of France, which was something she was frowned upon for. Later, though, it was believed she’d been threatened by the head of the only studio in operation at the time – owned by a German who threatened to have her brother deported if she didn’t perform.

Darrieux had a lengthy film career in France, the United States, and Britain, and starred in Lady Chatterley’s Lover (1955), whose theme of uninhibited sexuality led to its being proscribed by Catholic censors in the United States. She then played a supporting role in her last American film, United Artists’ epic Alexander the Great (1956) starring Richard Burton and Claire Bloom.

She acted from 1931 to 2002.

Later in her career she became involved in musical theater and even performed concerts in the 1960s. She passed away at the age of 100 in 2017. What a full life!

According to a blog dedicated to Douglas Fairbanks Jr., Darrieux’s life was tough at times, even if it was full, especially while filming The Rage of Paris.

^“Fairbanks remembers working with Darrieux fondly,” Elizabeth from the blog Douglasfairbanksjr.wordpress.com. “Unfortunately at the time, she was a victim of physical abuse at the hands of her husband. Filming had to be postponed for a short while as she recovered from a black eye given to her by her husband.”

The blogger goes on to say that Darrieux’s overbearing husband kept her from socializing too much with others on set. Thankfully, not long after the premiere of The Rage of Paris, Darrieux left her husband.

Fairbanks wrote in his memoir, “I’ve always hoped she was consoled by the fact that the picture turned out well and proved very popular.”

I also agree with the author of the blog who said she felt The Rage of Paris “contains one of the best on-screen chemistries and one of the best romantic build-ups on film.”

The chemistry between Darrieux and Fairbanks Jr. was incredible and I was sad to read that they only made one film together. If they were only going to make one film together, though, I’m glad it was this one.

So, tell me, have you seen this film or any of Douglas Fairbanks Jr.’s other films? How about Darrieux? Have you seen any other films by her? And should I have a Douglas Fairbanks Jr. marathon for myself this winter?

Comfy, Cozy Cinema: What We Did On Our Holiday

September 5, 2024September 11, 2024 / Lisa R. Howeler / 5 Comments

Last year Erin from Still Life, With Cracker Crumbs and I watched comfy cozy movies during the fall and we are doing it again this year.

This week we watched What We Did On Our Holiday (2014).

I wasn’t sure what to expect of this one but chose it based on the trailer I saw of it. I thought it would be cozy and fun. I should have read the descriptions better since it is called a “black-comedy.” Oops.

So, it wasn’t exactly what I had hoped it would be, but it was a pretty okay movie, with humor mixed in with …. well…. some disturbing elements. Not like deep, deep dark disturbing – just a bit depressing disturbing. Yet also uplifting. It is hard to explain unless you see the movie. I’m handling this post with care because while I want to share one of the biggest plot twists in the movie, I don’t want to ruin it for anyone who hasn’t seen it.

So let’s keep it simple for now – David Tennant (Doug) and Rosamund Pike’s (Abi) character are getting a divorce but they are also going to visit Doug’s family and don’t want them to know about the divorce. Doug and Abi live in England. Doug’s family is Scottish (David is actually Scottish too so he got to use his normal accent this time). They instruct their young children to keep it on the down-low that Mum and Dad are living in separate houses and have lawyers.

Well, we, of course, know that this is going to go off the rails pretty fast with these precocious, bright children the couple has.

Meanwhile, in Scotland, Doug’s brother, Gavin (Ben Miller), is planning a huge party for their father. He’s inviting all kinds of bigwigs and other family members that no one but him wants there. His wife is inching toward menopause or is just stressed from dealing with him, and is having a hard time controlling her emotions so she’s crying in the kitchen some nights.

Their son seems to be a bit awkward but also might be autistic and he wants to play the music he loves on his violin but his father wants him to study classical music for college.

Oh and Gavin is rich. Very rich. Because he is a financial something or other which sounded like he’s a conman to me.

The kids in this film are – as the British might say – brilliant. They are hilarious and bright and quick witted. Great actors for being so young.

There are two girls and a boy. The youngest (between 4 and 5) reminds me of a mix of my daughter and one of my nieces – mouthy and sharp in the best way.

The oldest daughter (about 10) records all her thoughts in a little journal to try to organize them and deal with the chaos happening around her.

The boy (around 7) lives in fantasy worlds in a way, but he’s also a kid so it’s okay for him to do that.

According to an article I read, the kids were essentially let loose and the adults worked around the things they would said. You can read more about how the kids and the cast grew a bond to make the movie seem more natural here: https://weminoredinfilm.com/2015/10/13/film-review-what-we-did-on-our-holiday-aka-british-kids-say-the-darndest-things/

There is a lot of serious subject matter in this movie but the humor that is woven throughout helps to alleviate that some.

I have to admit there were times I wasn’t sure whether to laugh or cry at the scenes in this movie. I think there was a healthy mix of both, to the point the kids had to check if I was okay.

It isn’t much of a spoiler to say that Grandpa (Billy Connelly) is sick and one reason Doug and Abi don’t want anyone to know they are getting a divorce is that they don’t want to upset Gordie/Grandpa.

There is a huge plot twist in the middle of this one that had me gasping, saying, “oh no. No way,” crying, and then laughing.

I wouldn’t say this is a movie I will watch over and over again because it was tough in a lot of ways – especially since I have parents who are older and dealing with health issues themselves. I would probably watch it again with a family member (not alone like this time) while holding on to my Teddy bear and a box of tissues, though.

When I say a box of tissues, don’t jump to the conclusion that this movie doesn’t offer some hope. It does and that hope is for all of us with dysfunctional families who are trying to figure out what being a “normal” family is.

The kids really make this film – overshadowing Tennant and Pike for me. In fact, they overshadowed all the “big name” actors in the film. I found the adult actors’ performances to be pretty blah in many ways.

This movie sat with me a few days after I watched it and I found myself thinking about some of the scenes and tearing up again.

I definitely felt this film had to have been filmed in Scotland and a quick look online showed that it was actually filmed in – Detroit?!

Ha! Just kidding. It was filmed in Glasgow and the Scottish Highlands in 2013.

According to Wikipedia, “The beach scenes were filmed at Gairloch. The family home of Gavin McLeod is in Drymen near Loch Lomond. The ostriches farmed by Gordie’s friend Doreen are actually located at Blair Drummond Safari Park.

Have you ever seen this one before? What did you think?

Read Erin’s impressions on her blog here.

Up next for our Comfy, Cozy Cinema is The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.

If you want to watch this one with us we will be posting our impressions next week.

Here is our full list for the entire Comfy, Cozy Cinema feature this year:

You can read Erin’s impression of the movie here: https://crackercrumblife.com/2024/09/05/comfy-cozy-cinema-what-we-did-on-our-holiday/

Link up here if you’ve written about the movie this week.

Comfy, Cozy Cinema: Tea with the Dames

November 9, 2023November 9, 2023 / Lisa R. Howeler / 10 Comments

For October and November, Erin from Still Life, With Cracker Crumbs and I will be watching cozy or comfy movies, and some of them will have a little mystery, creepiness, or adventure added in. You can find out about the other movies we watched by searching Comfy, Cozy Cinema in my search bar at the right.

This one was a different one this week because it was a documentary about four British actresses who are legends in theater, movies, and television. All four of them have been named “dames” by the British monarchy. This is the female equivalent of being dubbed a knight.

The documentary is a series of sit-down interviews with Dame Judi Dench, Dame Maggie Smith, Dame Joan Plowright, and Dame Eileen Atkins.

The documentary was made in 2018 and all the women were in their 80s. They are now in or nearing their 90s but all four are still alive.

All four women have been friends for probably 40 years or more.

If you haven’t heard of one or the other of these women, I’ll detail below some examples of what they’ve been in. Most would be familiar with Judi Dench and Maggie Smith at least.

I watched this documentary a few years ago and found it enchanting, hilarious, touching, and inspiring. I made my husband watch it with me and now I’ve made Erin watch it with me too.

The entire documentary consists of the women at Joan’s cottage where she used to live with actor Laurence Olivier, simply telling stories about their careers and families and the time they spent together as friends.

All four actresses have worked in theater, the small screen and big screen.

They all started in theater and hearing their early stories about those days was very interesting to me, even though I’ve never been interested in participating in it myself.

Judi Dench is well known for her work on British sitcoms (As Time Goes By and A Fine Romance. She stared in A Fine Romance with her future husband Michael Williams) but more prominently an entire line of movies from the Bond movies where she played M, to Shakespeare in Love where she played a queen. She also played queen in Mrs. Brown.

Her list of movies also includes Chocolat, Philomenia, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, and … well, there are tons of them. (A link to her work: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001132/)

Maggie Smith is most well known recently for Downton Abbey and Harry Potter. She played the Dowager Countess Violet Crowly in Downton Abbey and Professor McGonagall in Harry Potter. (a link to her work: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001749/)

Eileen has been in a ton of films and television as well, Paddington 2, Wicked Little Letters, The Crown, The Archers, Beautiful Creatures, etc., etc. (A link to her work: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0040586/)

Joan’s film list includes The Spiderwick Chronicles, Mrs. Palfrey at the Clairmont, Dennis the Menace, and 101 Dalmatians among so many others. (Here is a link to her work: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0687506/)

The documentary is pretty laid-back and easygoing. There are some great quotes from all four women about acting and life in general. They bounce off each other in hilarious exchanges between the women and the interviewer and the crew helping with filming. There is footage from their past films and plays woven throughout.

This is not a rated G film with Judi dropping a couple of f-bombs during the filming, especially in regard to a question about growing older.

Maggie is so funny because she seems unable to use the word “child” throughout. She refers to the son of Joan and Laurence (they call him Larry)’as “a small person.” Like when she tells a story about him she says, “When Richard was a small person…”

The story she tells is hilarious too. She once overhead Laurence Olivier begging his young son to tell him if he had thrown the key to his liquor cabinet down the dumb waiter.

“Richard, tell Daddy where the key is. Daddy needs his num-nums.”

Maggie laughs and says, “The idea that a great actor was reduced to using the word num-nums.”

I also really giggled at the conversation about how they each became dames.

Judi became one first and called Maggie when she became one and said, “Don’t worry…you can still swear.

“You can swear more actually,” Judi says with a laugh.

“You just do it privately,” Maggie snickers and speaks with a very posh accent.

Joan was a lady before she was a dame because she married Sir Laurence Olivier, Maggie points out.

“Well, darling, it is quite difficult to have two titles,” Joan replies. “People don’t know which one to use.”

“You’ll have to grapple with it, Joan,” Maggie smith says while the other women laugh.

There are also some very profound quotes from the women mixed in with the laughs.

At one point Judi is asked how people face the fear associated with acting.

“Fear is petrol,” she states in a matter-of-fact tone. “Fear is the petrol. It generates such an energy. Fear. Being frightened. If you can somehow channel it, it can be a help.”

I really love this documentary because it is a wonderful reminder of what women can do when they cast aside societal expectations and just go for their dreams.

These women had a passion for acting. They wanted success and went for it and didn’t let anything stop them. In a day and age where women had to fight for every crumb, they won the whole loaf and then showed other women how to do the same thing.

As I told Erin, I just love watching these women talk about their past but also teared up when they showed all the roles they have played. I mean these women were pioneers for women who were told they couldn’t play certain roles and couldn’t be mothers and wives AND successful in their careers at the same time.

Not only did they defy expectations but they completely exceeded them. I mean Judi Dench was literally in Shakespeare in Love for eight minutes and won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress. She is 88 years old and two weeks ago she recited a Shakespeare soliloquy from memory on the Graham Norton Show:

I found the documentary for free (with commercials) on Tubi but you can also rent it off various streaming services.

If you want to read Erin’s impressions of the documentary visit her blog: https://crackercrumblife.com/2023/11/09/comfy-cozy-cinema-tea-with-the-dames/

We are taking a break from the Comfy, Cozy Cinema for Thanksgiving but will be back next week for The Fishermen’s Friends and then on November 30 with a bit of Jane –Sense and Sensibility.

I’m not sure what we have on tap for December but stay tuned. If Erin and I don’t do a joint Cozy Christmas cinema together, I’m sure she and I with both be watching our favorites and sharing about them on our blogs.

Comfy, Cozy Cinema: Little Women (2019)

November 2, 2023November 2, 2023 / Lisa R. Howeler / 4 Comments

For October and November, Erin from Still Life, With Cracker Crumbs and I will be watching cozy or comfy movies, and some of them will have a little mystery, creepiness, or adventure added in.

This week Erin chose the 2019 version of Little Women. This movie is full of beautiful cinematography but it really isn’t my favorite version of this story, which as most of you know is based on the book of the same name by Louisa May Alcott.

Before I get into this, I want to explain that when I say it isn’t my favorite version of the story, I don’t mean that I do not like it. I did not like it at all the first time I watched it, but I watched it again and I see what the director (Greta Gerwig) was doing. I simply did not like it as much as others I’ve watched from the standpoint of how it relates to the novel. It is a very good movie when not compared to the source. I don’t know if that makes sense at all, but just know as you read on that I believe it’s a good movie.

I mean, this is the seventh version of this story on either the small or the big screen so the director and screenplay writer had to do something different. This something different was weaving the story of Jo March and her sisters and parents in and out of the present, which is actually the end of the book and other movies.

That’s what I didn’t like about this movie, but let me explain first a bit about Little Women Most of my readers might know that Little Women is the story of Jo March and her sisters Amy, Meg and Beth, as well as their mother Marmie and the young man Theodore (Teddy) Laurence (Laurie) who lives next door with his wealthy uncle. Jo is a writer and based on Louisa May Alcott herself. The other characters are based on her family.

Jo is a bit tomboyish and doesn’t really like to be “ladylike.” Her sisters Meg and Amy are more like young women were “supposed to be” back then (which is the 1860s, during the Civil War). Meg, the oldest, is studious and responsible. Amy is a bit of a brat in most movies, but she’s young and simply learning. Jo is often dramatic and a bit serious. Beth is the meek and quiet child who also becomes the sickly child later on.

The girls’ father is in the Civil War. Their mother cares about everyone and sacrifices a lot for the poor and her family.

Jo wants to become a novelist but her family faces many struggles, which eventually leads her to selling her stories to newspapers to help them earn money. That’s where this story begins. Since I am a traditionalist in some ways, I wanted the story to be told like it is in the other movies (I’m reading the book for the first time starting this week so I can’t say for sure how the book is written) – chronologically. I wanted to build up to the big moments, slowly learning about each character.

But that isn’t how this movie does it and that’s okay. It is a totally different way to tell the story and it is an interesting way but for me, the story seems disjointed and out of order.

With the drama of the ending of the story being shown in the beginning, I felt like the viewer had no time to get to know the characters and even know why Amy was upset at Laurie or why either of them are in France. We were just left wondering, “What in the world is going on here?” I didn’t feel attached to the characters because all I knew what Amy was standing in a ballroom yelling at Laurie. Laurie was drunk. Should I care that Laurie is drunk? Is he not usually drunk? What’s the deal?

So I guess in some ways this version of the story pulls the viewer along on a journey to learn why the characters are acting that way. It is a more modern way of doing it and I didn’t like that at first. It grew on me, though.

I do, however, like the actors in the movie, other than Timothy Chalamat as Laurie. I didn’t enjoy him as Laurie.

Saoirse Ronan is very good as Jo and Florence Pugh pretty good as Amy.

Emma Watson was okay as Meg and Eliza Scanlan plays Beth. I didn’t buy Laura Dern as Marmie at all. Like at all. She’s just the least Marmie actor in my mind and didn’t change my mind during her performance. She’s a great actress but I just couldn’t get her in my mind as Marmie.

I also could not get Meryl Streep in my mind as Aunt March. It was just like watching Meryl be Meryl. Of course, this is only because my brain is tainted with the other versions. Neither actress is bad in their roles, just not the characters from the book to me – and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. They made the roles their own.

This version is the third version of this story I have watched. I have watched the 1994 version with Kirsten Dunst, Winona Ryder, Christian Bale, Susan Sarandon (who I also didn’t see as a good Marmie), Claire Daines, and Trina Alverado.

If you’ve seen that version, then you remember the most beautiful scene with Claire Daines when Beth is (spoiler alert!) sick and passes away. It’s such a beautiful scene that I get weepy even thinking about it, let alone watching it. I will post it below, along with trailers or clips of all the movies I am mentioning here.

Earlier this year I also watched the 2018 PBS Masterpiece miniseries starring Anne Elwy, Willa Fitzgerald, Katherine Newton, Emily Watson, Angela Lansbury, and Michael Gabon.

The PBS version is very close to the book, I’d imagine, and the way the story is told is like watching the book come to life. The actors perfectly play each part as if the parts were written for them instead of them being shoved into the part to make it fit, which I felt happened with casting in some cases for the other two versions I’m mentioning here.

We are talking about the 2019 version, though, so let us get back to that version. The 2019 version feels like it has more activism about the role of women – like it was saying out loud what Alcott implied in the pages of the book. I don’t like when movies are preachy but this felt fairly natural instead of preachy.

From what I read, Gerwig wanted to direct the film when she heard it was being remade (yet again) because she said it had inspired her in her life and her career. She specifically wanted the film to be about, “the ambitions and dreams you have as a little girl and how they get stomped out of you as you grow up.”

The movie is produced and directed by women. The producer was Amy Pascal.

Gerwig wrote the screenplay using Little Women but also personal letters and writings by Alcott and other stories of hers.

One other good thing about the 2019 version is that it has James Norton portraying John Brooks. He is the actor from Grantchester and several other shows and Erin is in love with him. *wink* He is quite dishy and I didn’t mind looking at him for a while.

The 2019 version, like the others, still has a very sweet and downhome quality to it and I really like that as well.

A review in The New York offers a good overview of how this movie was written, produced and directed: “ . . . Gerwig’s “Little Women” is the tale of the birth of an artist—a female artist at a time that’s hostile to women and the telling of stories of women’s lives from women’s point of view. . . . her version of “Little Women” is about a free-spirited young woman whose ambitions threaten to detach her from her financially struggling family, and who discovers that her intellectual self-fulfillment and emotional development are inseparable from her devotion to her family.”

This reviewer, Richard Brody, also wasn’t impressed with Ronan’s performance as Jo.

“Ronan becomes a vessel for characters endowed with Gerwig’s creative fire, but not for the fire itself. (It’s unclear whether this is due to the nature of her own art or to its interface with Gerwig’s direction.) As a result, Ronan is not a powerful presence as Jo March: the character, famous for her anger, for her “temper,” comes off as unduly moderate, both inwardly and outwardly—not in conflict with herself, not repressing that rage, but merely claiming one that’s hardly in danger of bursting forth.”

Brody does see her performance as professional and good, though, and I do as well.

Now, which version would I recommend that someone who has never read the book to see? I would recommend the 2018 version if they want one closer to the book itself, but I would recommend all of them if you want a good movie. Just sit down and watch all of them one weekend and have fun doing it. It will be one of the most relaxing weekends you’ve ever had since they all check off the comfy, cozy, and homey boxes.

Erin has some great views on this movie that she shared with me earlier this week so check out her post on her blog here: https://crackercrumblife.com/

If you are interested in watching the rest of our movies with us, here is our remaining schedule:

Tea with The Dames (November 9)

A break for Thanksgiving

And

Sense and Sensibility (November 30^th)