Change Your Image
marko-157
Reviews
Fog Over Frisco (1934)
Far before its time
Mysterious crime, unconventional way of solving it, witty dialog, fast paced events, car chasing, unexpected resolution... are we watching just another detective action film starring Mel Gibson? No, it is 1934 film Fog over Frisco. It is amazing how little has this type of film evolved in last 70 years or so. The only "improvements" we see in modern versions of action films are slimy kissing and love-making scenes, two dozen explosions and rolling stock of a smaller country destroyed. Oh, yeah, done to include something for everyone and to extend the film time to standard one and a half hour.
Well Fog over Frisco is what a good action film should look like. It is absolutely enough to have a bit more than a hour to tell everything. Of course, Dieterle could easily make a film a bit longer and the plot more understandable, but this amazing pace is what makes this film even more special. You are moving in the spiral of events so fast that it is necessary to see it twice to get everything straight.
But this is not all. We see some really exceptional acting here. Bette Davis makes from one seemingly tiny role more than some leading character actors did in the whole acting career. She is absolutely convincing as Arlene, a spoiled and bored rich girl and you can never see Bette in another film to be so beautiful, glamorous, amusing and enchanting. No wonder that most men in film really seem to be in love with her. Margaret Lindsay, who plays a real head role of her step-sister Val, isn't match for Ms. Davis, however she did her part correctly. Other notable performances include Donald Woods playing Tony and Hugh Herbert playing Izzy, who are convincing as a witty reporter - funny photographer pair.
This film is one of the most underestimated films in the whole history of Hollywood and is a must-see for 1930s film period.
20,000 Years in Sing Sing (1932)
An ambitious project slipped into confusion
This is a story about good-hearted crook Tommy Connors (Spencer Tracy), the warden of the prison he's in (Arthur Byron) and his girlfriend Fay Wilson (Bette Davis) in that order of importance. The warden agenda of order and fair treatment initially brings him in conflict with Tommy, but after Tommy realizes there is no other way, they get along much better. Warden even lets him to visit Fay in distress, which has fatal consequences.
The whole film is an ambitious attempt to describe situation in prisons, relations between inmates and the system and between inmates and beloved ones outside the prison. It indeed gives us insight into this issues, however the story lacks coherence. Because of poor screenplay and uninventive direction we are just jumping between different scenes. Furthermore, even after I watched corresponding scenes several times, I still do not get what exactly happened to Fay and what was her real medical state.
The only character that displays considerable inner feelings is well described by Spencer Tracy's fine acting. But I miss more depth from other two main characters. Bette Davis is pale portraying Fay, which is - to my amazement - presented as a refined girl. Despite Bette Davis does know how to make something even from seemingly minor characters, like the character of Arlene in largely underestimated film Fog over Frisco (1934), there is simply nothing seriously to act. Fortunately, she fought hard for better roles and showed us her abilities in later films. The rest of the crew is easily recognized as a standard reliable Warner Bros troupe which almost invisibly slips from one film to another.
It is worth watching Spencer Tracy in his early acting role (not so for Bette Davis) and for the objective review of prison life in 1930s. Even if this does not seems much, I think a good film lover should see it for a record.
The Shop Around the Corner (1940)
Predictable and pale story
This is a film, in which it is really difficult to write a comment without a spoiler, as after first twenty minutes you already know the end. There is no real plot and characters (not actors) are pale. Of course one has to admit that in the time film was made audience was not bombarded with extraordinary plots with breathtaking resolutions, nevertheless the story is plot-less even for these old standards.
Of course, the whole film, scenes, directing and acting is done perfectly, but the talents of director and actors are wasted on a bad screenplay. The story remains alive by the unbelievable virtue that one of the characters just don't get it - and we are not talking about a stupid person. There is no psychological aspect presented and it is quite unclear, what is the point of the story - is it better to get in love over the correspondence or in live? There is only few instances of humor and no film music worth mentioning (except for a lead tune, which is a well-known Gypsy song).
So, if you are looking for a Christmas or easy rest-your-mind-and-reason film, this is a right choice. You definitely do not want to watch it two times in a row, because there is absolutely nothing below the surface of the superficial story. Relatively high mark is only due to excellent craftsmanship of the director and actors.
Of Human Bondage (1934)
Well thought in every detail - acting, editing and music
Reading web sites on Bette Davis one can find instances where authors claim that there is nothing special about her acting. I even found a site which claimed that Bette Davis' success was probably due to her luck. But Ms Davis films of 1934 tell quite the opposite. The most evident example are two films that she did only few weeks apart: Fog over Frisco and On Human Bondage. Characters she played in these movies, though both being negative, are quite different. Arlene in the former is a beautiful, glamorous and frivolous heiress and much more likable character than Mildred in the latter, which is a pale, uneducated and impudent Cockney waitress. Needless to say that Ms Davis played both characters very authentic and with the same enthusiasm. But even that is not all. The point is that the former role, which would be wished by most actresses of the day, was the one she was forced to play. The latter role, which seemed to most actresses as undesirable, career destroying role, was the one she fought for ferociously for months. And it was the latter role that launched her among the greatest stars. So there is no question that Ms Davis knew from the start what she was doing.
The film, which tells about a medical student Phillip Carey (Leslie Howard) which falls unhappily in love with Cockney waitress Mildred Rogers (Bette Davis), has a few week points, but many more strong ones. The story is simply too big to be told in mere 83 minutes. For example, it is quite unclear why refined student found any interest in an impudent waitress in the first place. Well, there is one scene in which we are exposed to Ms Davis captivating eyes, but this is when his emotions are already fully evolved. Nevertheless, the integrity of the story is preserved by superior acting from Howard and Davis as well as fantastic Steiner's music which tells tons of emotions even when we do not see characters' faces. In fact the film is amalgamated by Phillip's walking sequences showing him from the back supplemented with shuddering two-tone repetition. Every detail is well thought - Max Steiner wrote a beautiful leitmotif for each women in Phillip's life, which is consistently used through the film. And a beautiful scene in which we see Sally's face in front of calendar is one of the sweetest scenes I've ever seen exactly due to Francis Dee's breathtaking beauty (Ms Dee was by the way considered to be too beautiful to play leading role in Gone with a Wind) as well as Steiner's captivating music. Camera movements between the some scenes is also original and refreshing.
But my strongest objection is that events are presented too two-dimensionally, which induce viewer that Mildred is an ultimate slut. The most disgusting characters ought to be men which lure her into relationship, despite well knowing that they will abandon her after taking use of her, but they, curiously, finished portrayed as likable characters. After all, Mildred always - in her own specific, but still a honest way - lets Phillip know that she despises him and had no interest in him. Which he just refuses to hear. It is Phillips masochistic nature connected to his club foot and infantile experiences that is the principal reason of his love problem. He is enslaved to his club foot as much as to Mildred and perhaps has to be free of both to start a normal life. Of course, selfish and impudent Mildred, after discovering voluntary Phillip's bondage to her, did its own share to make his life hell. Even taking into account that she exploded after realizing that the bondage has loosen, it is less than clear why would she burn Phillip's money (Maugham intended different in his novel). After all, she could as well steal it and drunk gallons of champagne.
For modern standards the film is a bit outdated, but each subsequent time you watch it, you can reveal new interesting details due to superior acting, fascinating music and original editing, so it does deserve the highest possible mark.
Pygmalion (1938)
Flawless production based on one of the best dramas ever
Greatest works of arts often do not acquire much popularity. They just might be too unattractive or unconventional to the wide audience. But that does not mean they should be left into historic oblivion, quite opposite. Such injustice was definitely done to film Pygmalion (1938). Based on the best drama by best English dramatist of 20th century, this film does not offer any other famous references. However, professional theatre actors (Hiller, Howard) did a simply perfect, flawless acting and directing (Asquith), editing (Lean) and music (Honegger) are all fantastic. I think they all did their best film performance of a lifetime. And moreover, Hiller's voice performance is most probably the very best in the whole film history.
Watch not this film if you are look for a careless amusement - in this case My fair lady is the appropriate choice. Watch it if you are looking for film classics and highly intellectual challenge. It is not one of 100 most popular British films of all time, but it should be on the 100 best British films list.