Showing posts with label Edmund Gwenn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Edmund Gwenn. Show all posts

February 25, 2026

The Trouble with Harry.

Review #2509: The Trouble with Harry.

Cast: 
Edmund Gwenn (Capt. Albert Wiles), John Forsythe (Sam Marlowe), Shirley MacLaine (Jennifer Rogers), Mildred Natwick (Miss Ivy Gravely), Mildred Dunnock (Mrs. Wiggs), Jerry Mathers (Arnie Rogers), Royal Dano (Deputy Sheriff Calvin Wiggs), and Parker Fennelly (Millionaire)

Produced and Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, #964 - The Ring (1927), #965 - Downhill, #970 - Mr. and Mrs. Smith, #977 - Frenzy, #1343 - The 39 Steps, #1739 - The Birds#1828 - Rebecca, #2014 - The Lady Vanishes#2032 - The Man Who Knew Too Much, #2374 - Blackmail [1929])

Review: 
"With Harry, I took melodrama out of the pitch-black night and brought it out into the sunshine. It's as if I had set up a murder alongside a rustling brook and spilled a drop of blood into the clear water. These contrasts establish a counterpart; they elevate the commonplace in life to a higher level."

I suppose it is hard to be the ugly duckling of a string of movies, but The Trouble with Harry is certainly a curious film in the work of Alfred Hitchcock. Of the eleven movies Hitchcock directed in the 1950s, it served as his only comedy (and one of just two that weren't thrillers, and the other was the based-on-a-true-story The Wrong Man [1956]). Of course, it wasn't his first comedy, as evidenced by Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941), but Hitchcock apparently was quite keen on doing this film the way he wanted, complete with doing it in VistaVision with primary filming in Vermont (well, at least until they needed leaves on the trees or scenes in a certain gym). There were a few firsts here too. This was the first Hitchcock movie with music by Bernard Herrmann, who he would work with all the way to Marnie (1964). It was also the feature film debut of Shirley MacLaine*. She was not even in her twenties when she moved to New York to try out acting, which had her go from a bit role in Me and Juliet on Broadway to being the understudy-turned-star of The Pajama Game (due to an ankle injury of the star). The result of stepping into the role on Broadway attracted attention by Hal Wallis that eventually saw her signed to a contract with Paramount Pictures (and, well, Hitchcock apparently was interested to do a film with a charming unknown). Based on the 1949 novel of the same name by Jack Trevor Story, John Michael Hayes wrote the screenplay in his third collaboration with Hitchcock (having previously done the screenplay for Rear Window [1954], To Catch a Thief [1955] before doing The Man Who Knew Too Much [1956). While the movie was not a big hit in the States, it did play fine in Europe for years and apparently the film was one of Hitchcock's personal favorites. Hitchcock had the film rights until his death, whereupon it made the rounds in reissuing in the 1980s. 

You might call it a morbid little movie or one of Hitchcock's more mellow efforts, one that might actually be thought of as filled with whimsical nature. So yes, it is a pretty warm and fairly enjoyable affair (one that even can thread the needle of suggestion when one character asks if they can sketch them in the nude). The body is there just to be there, because the mystery is peeling the layers of these peculiar people in this landscape (yes, even with some studio shots, you get some neat views of the autumn season) for 99 minutes. You either are with the film in its casual sly nature for all the things that come with a ride that basically handles death as if it really was just a case of "so it goes" (yes I am cribbing from Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five that had its own views about death, but, well, I actually did read that in college). Leading the way is Gwenn in one of his swansongs. This was among the last of Gwenn's films as an actor, as he appeared in two more movies (and one episode of Hitchcock's Alfred Hitchcock Presents) prior to his death in 1959 at the age of 81. He deftly handles it with the solid professionalism that comes with selling someone who really can just coast with some of the offbeat lines that come in observation and newfound zest, which probably overshadows Forsythe and his offbeat non-conformism (at least he wasn't going for "beatnik") a bit by comparison. Even as the youngest of the ensemble, MacLaine holds her own with a sense of odd grace and the type of confidence that leaves one invested in their lives and the wayward path that might come with being paired with Forsythe. Natwick rounds it out with solid dignity and understated charm, at least when one doesn't see the considerable age difference [28 years] between her and Gwenn. Rounding it out is Dano pulling out the humorless dry authority figure that mostly balances out the whims had by the main quartet, which I guess works out to how it goes in our everyday lives in sobering qualities. In general, it might not be among Hitchcock's best of the best, but it is a curious film you should seek out, one that has some amusing moments within a film full of peculiar characters brought to life with useful energy and a leisurely pace to make it all matter at the end.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Starting now, we're doing a song of the day. Enjoy at your own risk.

*Yes, that would be the younger sister of Warren Beatty. Go figure each actor would use modifications of their names for films, as she would use a modification of her middle name (MacLean) while, well, someone took off a "t" from their last name of Beaty

March 30, 2025

The Bigamist (1953).

Review #2363: The Bigamist.

Cast: 
Joan Fontaine (Eve Graham), Ida Lupino (Phyllis Martin), Edmund Gwenn (Mr. Jordan), Edmond O'Brien (Harry Graham / Harrison Graham), Kenneth Tobey (Tom Morgan, Defense Attorney), Jane Darwell (Mrs. Connelley), Peggy Maley (Phone Operator), and Lilian Fontaine (Miss Higgins, Landlady) Directed by Ida Lupino (#799 - The Hitch-Hiker#1651 - Never Fear, #1811 - Not Wanted, #1991 - Outrage#2189 - Hard, Fast and Beautiful)

Review: 
At last, here is a movie where a woman was directing herself for a major feature film, as this was apparently the first of its kind in the sound era. It just happened to be the sixth feature film by Ida Lupino and her near swansong. The Filmmakers, the company behind these films in collaboration with her then-husband Collier Young, wasn't merely just a vanity project, they released such movies as Charles Lederer's On the Loose (1951), Harry Horner's Beware My Lovely (1952). There were just two more movies released by the company after The Bigamist: Don Siegel's Private Hell 36 (released in 1954 and co-written by Lupino and Young) and Harry Essex's Mad at the World (1955). After co-writing two of her previous five movies as a director, this was one with a different type of writing: Lawrence B. Marcus and Lou Schor wrote the story while Young wrote the screenplay by himself. It should be mentioned that by this time, Young was married to Joan Fontaine, as if one was essentially writing about himself when talking about loving different women (actually it went both ways, Lupino married Howard Duff pretty quickly after she and Young were divorced). The company had to distribute the movie itself when RKO Pictures pulled out, and the company effectively went by the wayside in trying to get into self-distribution. Lupino continued to direct in television for several years afterwards while directing one more film: The Trouble With Angels (1965)*.

Incidentally, bigamy is a considerable crime that could range from infraction (Utah) to a felony. Perhaps coincidentally, this movie was released in the same year that the "largest mass arrest of polygamist in American history" was done, in which Short Creek, Arizona had hundreds of Mormon fundamentalists arrested while children were removed from their families (some children never returned to their families). If it was made in a slightly different timespan, who knows what kind of exploitation would've been made about the sordid things that happen with living a double life. At any rate, it probably isn't too surprising to see the movie is a noir of its own, complete with a lengthy flashback that eventually will see a perhaps inevitable clash of the traps that come with the times one lives in within an 80-minute runtime. With a title like that, one might see the angle for someone to turn it into exploitation fare or something to perhaps preach to the pulpit, but what we really have is a movie with three solid leads that are presented with clear-cut honesty about the foibles that come with a person that simply does not want to decide between two women where he knows someone is going to get hurt. It is the kind of wishy-washy nature that could only happen with a man that has the particular status to be wrapped up in such a venture (some people have mistresses, others, well, have women). It helps to have a quartet like this, packed with two Academy Award winning actors with Fontaine and Gwenn and a future winner with O'Brien. You can see where O'Brien shines in the dilemma that comes with a man that cannot be hated but is instead found to be in a weird sort of road where one would wish him luck with a performance that rides the line of loneliness with commitment. His bout with lies and truth (the ones he tells to others but also to himself) tangle with ambiguity because you really don't know where he will find himself at the end of the prison road (beyond the money part). Fontaine may be his first love, but Lupino gave him something distinct as the other side of a coin wrapped with bare truths for a man who could not stand to be alone or "not doing the right thing". Lupino and Fontaine each play it straight to the point of what might as well be two sides of the same woman: distant on one side that one might forget really does love them and a side that is distinctly unsentimental but vulnerable. Gwenn handles his part with dry observation (as one does when mostly being inquisitive here). The movie isn't exactly as curious in its execution as say, The Hitch-Hiker, but at least it has enough of an ending in ambiguity to at least stick the landing. In short: one isn't seeing bigamy be endorsed on screen but instead one sees the idea that some marriages are suspectable to not being the "norm" than others, particularly when the gossip is around the corner. It ranks firmly in the middle of Lupino's other works but makes for a fair swansong to the run of Lupino movies for an era that didn't necessarily have many people like her making movies with something interesting to show on screen.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Okay, this sounded too tabloid, but I kid you not: Lupino also starred on a TV show with her husband Duff with Mr. Adams and Eve...as executive produced by Young.

October 7, 2024

The Walking Dead (1936).

Review #2267: The Walking Dead.

Cast: 
Boris Karloff (John Elman), Ricardo Cortez (Nolan), Edmund Gwenn (Dr. Beaumont), Marguerite Churchill (Nancy), Warren Hull (Jimmy), Barton MacLane (Loder), Henry O'Neill (Werner), Joseph King (Judge Shaw), Addison Richards (Prison Warden), and Paul Harvey (Blackstone) Directed by Michael Curtiz (#125 - Casablanca, #416 - Yankee Doodle Dandy, #505 - The Adventures of Robin Hood, #529 - Mildred Pierce, #719 - Mystery of the Wax Museum#1370 - Life with Father)

Review: 
Sure, of course Warner Bros. thought they could have some fun making a horror film. Sure, you can see the clear inspiration when it comes to having Boris Karloff star as a lumbering man back from the dead, particularly since this came out a year after Universal's Bride of Frankenstein (1935) ...but here it is arranged within the trappings of a gangster film. Of course, the obsession with trying to bring back people from a fate worse than a broken leg wasn't limited to the current day. The "perfusion pump", for example, is shown for a moment during the pivotal resurrection scene. This glass device was designed by Charles Lindbergh and Dr. Alexis Carrel to try and keep organs functioning outside of the body (the process can be explained better in articles such as this); Lindbergh wanted to find ways to help his sister-in-law, who had a bad heart. Labeled as a "mechanical heart" in some circles, Lindberg and Carrel were even featured on magazine covers for their invention (better ways of "organ perfusion" eventually came around in the next couple of years, naturally). In 1935, a film wad made called Life Returns, which featured the exploits of Dr. Robert E. Cornish, a biologist that had an interest in restoring life that tried using a teeterboard/see-saw to try and get the blood flowing of the dead...it technically worked, albeit not perfectly, on dogs (interestingly, the film didn't exactly get a great release). Incidentally, Karloff would star in two subsequent features in the following years dealing with resurrection with The Man They Could Not Hang (1939) and The Man with Nine Lives (1940), which took inspiration from Cornish. Evidently with this film, Karloff was slated with little dialogue to speak before he raised issue with said matter. Five people were given credit for the writing: Ewart Adamson, Peter Milne, Robert Hardy Andrews and Lillie Hayward wrote the screenplay, while Adamson and Joseph Fields wrote the story. The movie was directed by Michael Curtiz, a particularly busy director in the 1930s that had some experience in horror (among others in the 30+ films he did in the decade) with Doctor X (1932) and Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933).

Okay, you're going to love the way the "resurrected" man decides to handle being framed for murder. After he is brought back from being electrocuted, he seems to have developed a certain type of clot in his brain that gives him a strange knowledge of just who had framed him. Oh, but it gets better, he actually gets his revenge, in perhaps the most curious way possible. Of course, the film is pretty fast and loose at getting there with a 66-minute runtime. Karloff proves a quality knowing presence to unnerve the soul when it comes to second sight with select times to speak or just stare. The funny thing about this horror/crime feature is that there isn't really much of a villainous presence or even a ham actor. Gwenn might be the lead scientist presence, but it ends up coming off as just warm curiosity that is fine for someone with as much experience on stage and film as you'd expect from him (one can take a guess what film you would recognize that voice from). Churchill and Hull are serviceable enough when you consider that the rest of the folks don't have much to do besides being casually terrorized after the execution. Okay, so the array of deaths that happen in the film are done not by any one man but are actually a string of accidents that just happen to involve our lead character because of his "sense" of knowing who led to his death. Probably the most amusing is a guy nervous about who just stumbled in to confront him that decides to run only to encounter a train. The movie has plenty of shadows and fog to keep things looking ideal rather than just being a Frankenstein cheapie. In general, the movie is a quietly solid one, not rocking the boat too much in unnerving horror (the resurrection scene might be the most involving for the sheer execution of it, although the last scene is interesting) but generally working well with one's expectations. This is the kind of movie you can sense was made in a few weeks by professionals that came and went to get things done without too much fuss (five writers, but still) that will prove up to code.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

March 26, 2020

Life with Father.


Review #1370: Life with Father.

Cast: 
William Powell (Clarence Day Sr), Irene Dunne (Vinnie Day), Elizabeth Taylor (Mary Skinner), Edmund Gwenn (Rev. Dr. Lloyd), ZaSu Pitts (Cousin Cora Cartwright), Jimmy Lydon (Clarence Day Jr), Emma Dunn (Margaret the Cook), Moroni Olsen (Dr. Humphries), Elizabeth Risdon (Mrs. Whitehead), and Martin Milner (John Day) Directed by Michael Curtiz (#125 - Casablanca, #416 - Yankee Doodle Dandy, #505 - The Adventures of Robin Hood, #529 - Mildred Pierce, and #719 - Mystery of the Wax Museum)

Review:
"I put all the art into my pictures that I think the audience can stand."

What better way to accompany the 1940s than a family picture based on established material of the time? The film was based on the 1935 autobiographical book of the same name by Clarence Day, Jr, who had based it on episodes of humor in his family life, specifically his father in the 1890s. He died of pneumonia that year, but a follow-up book called Life with Mother was published posthumously in 1937. Two years later, the books were adapted into a play called Life with Father by Howard Lindsay and Russel Crouse, which ran for 3,224 performances in nearly eight years, and it still ranks as the longest running non-musical play on Broadway. The film was adapted to the screen by Donald Ogden Stewart (who you might recognize for his work on films such as Love Affair and The Philadelphia Story). It should prove no surprise that the film came from prolific director Michael Curtiz (who was 38 when he left Hungary for Hollywood, who could do a variety of genres through his own kind of visual style involving camera movement and lighting that combined with his intense style of activity (such as skipping lunch), with his friends nicknaming him "Iron Mike" for his fitness; in his 49-year career, he directed a total of 166 films before his death in 1962. 

It is evident from the roughly $4.7 million budget that Warner Brothers wanted to make a big achievement in making this book-turned-play-turned film an engaging one that draws on the humor that its brash patriarch inspires, with varying results. I can't necessarily say that this is a great comedy, since it does tend to veer on the edge of being dated, but there is a decent cast and useful production value that makes it a fair curiosity. Powell commands the film with fairly amusing results, drawing a few laughs in his attempts in family humor with his type of bluster that seems somewhat relevant for a family comedy. Dunne (in a role that she found rattlebrained that took coaxing to do from Curtiz) accompanies him with her own kind of charm, matching in dignity through fair chemistry with Powell. Taylor, who had risen to teen star earlier in the decade with National Velvet (1944), does well with grace whenever on screen, having the most presence among the teenagers and children despite having scattered focus. Gwenn contributes with warmth and dignity that is to be expected from him.  The film treads okay at 118 minutes, showcasing a 3-strip Technicolor tale of a comedy of manners that inspires chuckles more than yawns, even if it is entirely predictable (regardless of what era it was made in, I suppose). Life with Father is an average film with prominent talent and a prominent place because of its public domain status that makes it a decent gem worth looking for its look at a quirky family and the situations that come with them.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

November 22, 2014

Movie Night: Them!


Review #663: Them!

Cast
James Whitmore (Sgt. Ben Peterson), Edmund Gwenn (Dr. Harold Medford), Joan Weldon (Dr. Pat Medford), James Arness (FBI Agent Robert Graham), Onslow Stevens (Gen. O'Brien), Sean McClory (Maj. Kibbee), Chris Drake (Trooper Ed Blackburn), and Sandy Descher (Ellinson girl) Directed by Gordon Douglas

Review
Them! was one of the first films released dealing with nuclear created monsters, which were a big thing in the 1950s (that and alien invaders), with a unique opening credits sequence to boot. The words practically glow against the black and white background and rightfully so. The insects used for this film are giant ants, which for me is terrifying enough (swarms of ants are already creepy, imagine a swarm of GIANT ants), but hey. The sounds that the ants make is also pretty chilling. The characters are fine, they serve the purpose of advancing the story without being annoying, though seeing Edmund Gwenn is enjoyable. The effects are brilliant to watch, they especially look good underground when the lights aren't as lit, which makes them look more menacing. I like how the movie just flows well with itself, it doesn't get too convoluted, it has its moments of terror along with moments of action, and the sewer scene at the end is pretty good. What we have here is a finely crafted sci-fi film that helped popularize the nuclear monster/bug era.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

December 9, 2012

Movie Night: Miracle on 34th Street (1947).


Review #303: Miracle on 34th Street.

Cast
Edmund Gwenn (Kris Kringle), Maureen O'Hara (Doris Walker), John Payne (Frederick M. Gailey), Natalie Wood (Susan Walker), Porter Hall (Granville Sawyer), William Frawley (Charlie Halloran), Jerome Cowan (Thomas Mara), Philip Tonge (Julian Shellhammer), Alvin Greenman (Alfred), Gene Lockhart (Henry X. Harper), and Harry Antrim (R. H. Macy) Directed by George Seaton.

Review
Sometimes I review Christmas films, and the films either turn out good (#075 - Scrooge and #079 - A Christmas Carol), or...not so good (#082 - Christmas with the Kranks and #301 - How the Grinch Stole Christmas), but how does this film turn out? I think you know the answer to this by now. Gwenn practically steals the show, being the big driving spirit, giving a sense of magical wonder, essentially the best Santa I've ever seen, a kind and knowing Santa Claus, beard and all. O'Hara and Payne do a great job in their first time being reviewed here, both slightly going through a transformation with their characters and for the better. Natalie Wood does a respectable job (Second time reviewing her, first being #181 - Rebel Without a Cause), doing a better job then some of the child actors reviewed here, and at the small age of 8. The story is very interesting and imaginative, giving a feeling of Christmas (even if this film was released in May) in the right way. It is a tale of belief, and it gives a sense of hope that I haven't seen in a film in a long while. Truly this is a Christmas classic that has been watched for 65 years, and it will still be watched time and time again.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.