A Double Life (1947).

Review #2485: A Double Life (1947).

Cast: 

Ronald Colman (Anthony "Tony" John), Signe Hasso (Brita), Edmond O'Brien (Bill Friend), Shelley Winters (Pat Kroll), Ray Collins (Victor Donlan), Philip Loeb (Max Lasker), Millard Mitchell (Al Cooley), Joe Sawyer (Pete Bonner), Charles La Torre (Stellini), and Whit Bissell (Dr. Roland Stauffer) Directed by George Cukor (#479 - Travels with My Aunt, #974 - A Star is Born, #1355 - The Philadelphia Story, #1416 - My Fair Lady)

Review: 

Hey, you like movies about actors? You like movies that are basically noirs? You like a movie that basically ended up being a showcase for its lead star? Well, here's a movie for you. A Double Life, originally titled Imagination, was actually meant for Laurence Olivier but when he proved unavailable, it fell to asking Ronald Colman. You might recognize Colman (who moved over from England to America in the 1920s) from a wide variety of features such as Lost Horizon (1937) and Random Harvest (1942); Colman was coached by Walter Hampden in the Othello sequences. Apparently, George Cukor told a reluctant Colman (not exactly experienced in acting the works of Shakespeare) it would be the movie that might get him an Academy Award. The movie was written by Ruth Gordon and Garson Kanin as the first of six collaborations with Cukor as director, which included such films as Adam's Rib (1949) and Born Yesterday (1950). The film was a family affair in production, as it was produced by Michael Kanin (who in himself was known for script-writing such as Woman of the Year). First released in the holiday season of 1947 (in limited form first just to get it ready for the awards circuit), the film was a decent hit with audiences and garnered Academy Award wins for its music score and yes, an award for Colman as well. Colman spent the remaining years of his career doing a few appearances for radio & television alongside appearances in three feature films; Colman died in 1958 at the age of 67.

It is nice to have a film that can be both a showcase for a solid actor who had the voice and the timing to make a film basically work where a lesser actor could just make it feel like a strange joke (an actor getting too involved their craft does sound like it could be comedy). Sure, maybe it isn't as dark as it may wish to be to really stick its landing, and sure, it maybe has a bit of a struggle in making all of its 104-minute runtime work in making it really spooky in actual terror of losing oneself, but it is pretty neat to see anyway. Colman slips further and further into the muck of madness in a way that just seems so fascinating because of how unnerving it is to see the lines blur, and it helps that he sells the Shakespeare sequences (which are in the film quite a bit, as one expects) in the way one would hope to see in worthwhile devastation. The others in the cast are eccentric in parts when the pop in and out, most notably with Winters (eight years earlier, it was Cukor, hearing auditions for Gone with the Wind*, that told an auditioning teenaged Winters to go to acting school). She just has a certain type of spitfire charm that you could clearly see had potential to be more than just an object of curiosity, particularly since Hasso is merely just fine. O'Brien is at least dependable wherever he lurks, although again, you would think he would have a bit more to really play for tension when it comes to a movie that hangs onto a play involving a trio of tragedy, but so it goes. The film has a fascinating execution in the sights (editing, the lighting, pick one) and sounds one experiences at times involving Colman and the growing drumbeat in one's viewpoint. As a whole, A Double Life is a solid enough movie for those who like a film with a murky enough atmosphere and a solid lead to make the entire affair compelling for those who like to check out noirs every now and then.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Cukor was the original director in mind for the film before being replaced. By sheer coincidence, today is the 86th anniversary of its premiere in Atlanta.

The Gunfighter.

Review #2223: The Gunfighter.

Cast: 

Gregory Peck (Jimmy Ringo), Helen Westcott (Peggy Walsh), Millard Mitchell (Marshal Mark Strett), Jean Parker (Molly), Karl Malden (Mac), Skip Homeier (Hunt Bromley), Anthony Ross (Deputy Charlie Norris), Verna Felton (Mrs. August Pennyfeather), Ellen Corby (Mrs. Devlin), and Richard Jaeckel (Eddie) Directed by Henry King (#1687 - O Henry's Full House)

Review: 

On July 14, 1882, a body was found in the Arizona Territory with a gunshot in the head. It was revealed to be an outlaw associated with various cowboys in Cochise County along with Tombstone and people such as Wyatt Earp. It was none other than Johnny Ringo. The real Ringo was a pretty cut-rate killer, but the Ringo for this film is vastly different, and for good reason. The film was written by playwright/sometimes screenwriter William Bowers and William Sellers, as based on a story by Bowers and Andre de Toth (a steady director in his own right, such as Westerns), albeit with uncredited contributions by producer Nunnally Johnson (a playwright in addition to producing and writing films, most notably The Grapes of Wrath [1940]) and apparently Roger Corman. Corman, who worked as a messenger at Fox, was so annoyed at his suggestions being used without getting credit, soon left Fox for study at the University of Oxford. Anyway, this was the first film done in the 1950s for its director King, who had been working consistently since 1915 in a variety of genres that spanned from the original Stella Dallas (1925) to Twelve O'Clock High (1949). Fans of the Western will recognize parts of The Shootist (1976) that sure seem to have been inspired by this film (an old, famed outlaw coming into a town and seeing familiar faces). John Wayne, who starred in that film, apparently had a motivation to want the lead part for that film because of the fact that he had rejected starring in this film because of its initial starting point being at Columbia Pictures (as headlined by an executive he hated). Incidentally, Bowers stated that he had wrote the film with Wayne in mind but when approached by Wayne, he rejected selling it to him in favor of shipping it elsewhere (which resulted in more money but also the enmity of Wayne). 

There are plenty of Westerns about people with the hands to match with anyone when it comes to gunfighting, but you don't get as many in terms of interesting looks at the people who wish the attention would just end. It starts, interestingly enough, with a gunfighter shooting someone in defense in which we don't see their hands when it comes to that fateful gunshot. It is an efficient 85-minute movie that feels like it is occurring in real time when it comes to the tension that lies within trying to stay in town when others only a tool of confrontation. The choices matter most of all in this Western rather than grand landscapes or big towns when one man arriving into town is an event on itself. Sure, one could wonder what the film would be with Wayne, but Peck (drabbed in a period-looking moustache and all) erases those doubts with an efficient performance that is imposing to go along with a semblance of pity that reminds one of seeing an old alley cat; it may not surprise you to know that this was one of six films Peck did with King. He does so well with the film that he sells that fateful final scene (establishing just who really shot who to death) with all of the punch it is worth in expressing the "known gunfighter". Mitchell provides the ideal side of the coin in terms of reformed men with just as much dignity when matched with Peck for a solidly reliable performance. The rest of the cast is pretty good, with Malden being the most enjoyable in terms of character presence (he was in the original Broadway production of A Streetcar Named Desire), although Homeier's smarmy dandy presence is a suitable antithesis to Peck when it comes to opportunism that can be slapped away just as easily. The tension comes not in wondering if you are going to get some sort of, well, gunfight but instead comes from the tension of wondering just what will happen to our lead in his quest for some sort of fulfillment that doesn't involve a gun. It sure is packed with elements that make one seemed as trapped in a manner that might make you think you were in a noir. In the end, there is plenty to enjoy in terms of a solid cast and atmosphere that executes on a level worth every moment in the art of choices made through a gun in a frontier starved for attention. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Winchester '73.

Review #2010: Winchester '73.

Cast: 

James Stewart (Lin McAdam), Shelley Winters (Lola Manners), Dan Duryea (Johnnie "Waco Johnnie" Dean), Stephen McNally (Henry "Dutch Henry" Brown), Millard Mitchell (Frankie "High-Spade Frankie" Wilson), Charles Drake (Steve Miller), John McIntire (Joe Lamont), Will Geer (Wyatt Earp), Jay C. Flippen (Sergeant Wilkes), Rock Hudson (Young Bull), John Alexander (Jack Riker), and Steve Brodie (Wesley) Directed by Anthony Mann (#1048 - He Walked by Night and #1408 - El Cid)

Review: 

"The very idea of changing my whole thing from the sort of shy, fumbling fellow to the western was just my work. It's all hard work and dedication, to be able to make a go of it. And those were the things offered to me."

James Stewart believed that the real change added in being more of a presence in Westerns when it came to a new phase in his career was the increase of vulnerability, one that differed him from presences in the same genre such as John Wayne. It probably helps that Stewart was now in his forties and was getting back into the thick of more roles in film since his return from serving in the Army Air Forces during World War II, whether that involved It's a Wonderful Life (1946) or Call Northside 777 (1948). As such, 1950 (just as it was in 1948) saw him in numerous starring roles: this film, Broken Arrow, Harvey and The Jackpot; Stewart got to do the film with Universal in tandem with them making Harvey, by the way. Stewart worked with a wide variety of directors over his career, but he would work with Mann on eight films from 1950 to 1958, five of which were Westerns. The film was written by Borden Chase (brought in by Mann to do a re-write and best known as the co-writer of Red River) and Robert L. Richards with a story by Stuart N. Lake, and it was a script that had been bounced around a bit before it became a film, which evidently had Fritz Lang tapped to direct at one point before that went down the wayside, and it was Stewart who had picked Mann (after seeing scenes from Devil's Doorway) to direct in the first place; Mann had done a share of noirs before breaking in better with Westerns, which he did a handful in the 1950s. For the rest of the decade, Stewart would be involved in a variety of box office hits while having a fair share of time spent in the Western, which would serve him just as well in the next decade. 

It's a pretty good movie, rounding all of the bases that you could see in a routine Western while having a main character with absorbing intensity. The odyssey on just how much one gun can affect the lives of others in the West is a curious one, one told with visual acuity. It is not just some frazzled innocent looking for his gun, this is a trip of bloodshed because of the human quality of wanting something so bad they could kill for it. In a row of gunslingers of familiarity and blood, the one who knows how to adapt to the situation is the one who come out alive with the weapon in their hand, which makes for a film that likes to summarize atmosphere for effect that seems fresh that has been used as an argument for starting its own wave of Westerns. The hero is not just a symbol of something decent in the West or something, now he is just a man looking to stay safe on the frontier, by any means necessary.  You see many types of people here, trying to go with the flow of the wind that get touched by the power of the gun, whether that involves Indian traders or would-be robbers, and it makes a riveting odyssey. 

Stewart clearly prepared for the role to the best of his abilities, right down to practicing handling a weapon (obviously he did not do the trick shots in the film, but you get the idea). He proves brilliant in a role that could've simply been one of blandness with an actor less determined to show vulnerability or interest in playing it straight down the line. His odyssey matters to how we care about the layers that get revealed about why it is more than just an odyssey for a gun, which makes the final confrontation (with a lack of music) that much better. McNally makes a quality presence to counteract him as the adversary, efficient in establishing the threat without missing a beat. Winters was quoted as not particularly understanding the role she played, once being quoted as asking, "What does that tell you about the values of that picture? If I hadn't been in it, would anybody have noticed?" Granted, it is hard being the one prominent woman in a cast, but she does fine with it anyways, a weary presence of battered patience.  Mitchell and Duryea make solid supporting presences to the action on either side of the coin in the odyssey (mostly for the latter, as one always likes the adversary taking a licking). The film is generally involving for its 92 minute runtime in showing what really mattered in the West without falling right away to easy tricks or bland dialogue, instead treating one to a patient story about just what it took to survive with more than just a weapon in stock. It takes a certain impulse and certain timing to differentiate one gunslinger from another, which is captured to lean effectiveness by Mann and company here.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Singin' in the Rain.

Review #227: Singin' in the Rain.

Cast
Gene Kelly (Don Lockwood), Donald O'Connor (Cosmo Brown), Debbie Reynolds (Kathy Selden), Jean Hagen (Lina Lamont), and Millard Mitchell (R.F. Simpson) Directed by Stanley Donen (#137 - Bedazzled) and Gene Kelly.

Review
Eugene Kelly was born on August 23, 1912, which was 100 years ago. Kelly revolutionized dancing and singing in movies. You might be wondering why this is important to list. Because what I happen to review today is all that and more. The whole cast does a great job (especially Kelly and Reynolds) I have to admit, the music and songs are good. I have reviewed a musical before, let me use some words from it: "This is a good film with music in there that helps the story and does not ruin anything, unlike some other musicals," (#073 - The Lion King) In this film, the music does makes you smile and laugh at times and truly doesn't ruin a thing. After 60 years, the film's legacy has grown to be considered one of the greatest musicals/films ever.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.