5 Mini Reviews including "Manpower" & "Tea for two"

Five brand new mini reviews from me to you...

---

1. Romance in Manhattan (1935; Stephen Roberts)

GREAT (and kind of unknown) Ginger Rogers movie. Shows the reality of a nice illegal immigrant (Francis Lederer) that arrives to America full of hopes and dreams. But when his money is stolen, the only way he finds to stay in the country is living in the rooftop of an equally nice and very understanding girl (you know who) and her little brother. 

It was surprising to see Ginger in this kind of role, I mean, her mom Lela being sooooooo conservative and all. I liked the characters and I liked the interesting situations they showed, like how was the life of a kid selling newspapers in the streets or how people struggled to earn bucks during the Depression. I also loved the funny bits:

---

2. Week-end at the Waldorf (1945; Robert. Z. Leonard)

AVERAGE Ginger Rogers movie. It's a remake of Grand Hotel only with less brilliant performances, mood, dialogue, stories, etc.

In the 40s Ginger made great movies like Kitty Foyle and I'll be seeing you, but also very mediocre films like Tender Comrade (review), Lady in the Dark (review) and Once Upon a Honeymoon (review).
I don't like the way she plays adult women in some movies, assuming somehow always the same lordly, insipid expression. I don't know, if she was playing a movie star, I guess she could have done more than playing the stereotype.
The script doesn't help a lot, the stories are uninteresting, even when they tried to make them tragic (like an ill  soldier that is supposed to die, played by a very healthy looking Van Johnson and the girl that falls in love with him, played by Lana Turner). Forgettable movie.

---

3. Manpower (1941; Raol Walsh)

Like Joey would say of the "shepherd's pie" that Rachel tried to prepare but according to Ross smelled "like feet"...I LIKED IT! Well, this is a very unknown film, people over Imdb give it a 6.9 but I would give it a 7.4. That's a great difference. 

When the movie starts, it's raining cats and dogs at night, you can see the power lines and some lightnings. And you think "hey, I have never thought about this, but how do the guys at the power company manage to fix these things during the storms? And how did they in those times, with less equipment and technology?" and then [onomatopoeia for surprise] you notice  the movie is about that! Well, kind of.

Edward G. Robinson is a hard worker, tough and he's always trying to get "chicks" (he's no very lucky). George Raft is his best friend. They risk their lives trying to fix the wires and stuff. Then Marlene Dietrich arrives to their lives and messes all up. Well, not because she wanted to, but because Edward really falls in love and asks her to marry him. George Raft hates the girl because he thinks she's a cheater, thief, bad woman, etc.

But Marlene surprises them all with her choices and behavior. At least at the beginning. Eve Arden has also a part in this movie, but very little, although she has a few funny lines.

I liked this movie because it shows things how they are: the characters try to change, to take the right decisions, but that's not always enough; they try to make their best to please the rest and be happy, but that doesn't depend only on them. The leads are great in their roles, Edward being a bit naive; Raft being a protective friend; and Marlene portraying a woman that tries to settle down. The ending could have been better, but I liked it anyway. Great drama.

---

4. Tea for Two (1950; David Butler)

There are some musicals that understand that the music and dance sequences should fit the action and seem natural. And some don't. Tea for two has this problem. The story isn't good either: during the Depression a rich girl wants to give a lot of money to an ex boyfriend (that everybody describe as a con man) to make a musical show. But the girl's uncle, S. Z. Sakall lost a lot of money and only can offer a bet: if she doesn't say "yes" during the whole weekend, she will be allowed to finance the show.

So, you think that Doris Day's character is stupid because she want to give the money to such a man.
AND make up with him when they have no chemistry and she's really in love with a talented guy. And then things go beyond stupidity when she decides to invite the whole cast to rehearse at her house.
AND then people randomly sings/dance.
AND Doris randomly sings/dances with the guy she's in love with, but the rendition of one of my favorite songs, Tea for two, is not really memorable.
AND there's a woman that offends Doris but stays to sleep at her mansion because Doris has no personality whatsoever and only sings and smiles.
AND then you don't give a **** about the success of the show or the bet or anything.  

AND to make things worse this WHOLE STORY IS BEING TOLD IN FLASHBACK BECAUSE S.Z.SAKALL THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT STORY TO TELL TO HIS GRANDNIECE AND GRANDNEPHEW. My God. The only person that seemed sane was Eve Arden with her sharp remarks, but her character is lost in the movie.

But I have to say, I really LOVED two dance sequences I can't embed: Doris' tap dancing scene and the Charleston sequence. Watch them on Youtube and save your time.

---

5. The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming (1966; Norman Jewison)

Saw this one on TCM. It caught my attention because the cast included Eva Marie Saint, Alan Arkin (the bad guy from Wait Until Dark and Little Miss Sunshine's grandpa), Brian Keith and Carl Reiner. It was hilarious! A Russian submarine runs around off New England. They are very confused and don't have hostile intentions...but the villagers don't get it. Everyone start panicking and the fun begins :)

I liked everybody's performances, Arkin's was so great as the Russian Lt.Rozanov, with his accent and imperturbability; the whole Whittaker family was fun: Carl playing a whining dad, Eva always making serious remarks and the kid being so sarcastic and a real pain in the ass. And then we have the whole town, some old women that go in a crazy sidecar ride spreading the news, the stupid major, the uncoordinated police, etc etc.

I liked the tone of the movie: if they laughed about the Russians, the also laughed about the Americans. You could see that they were all human beings facing their fears and they even included a bit of romance between an American girl and a handsome Russian I wish run aground over here (the actor was John Phillip Law). Here's the trailer:

---

Well, hope you enjoyed! Have a great weekend.

5 first mini reviews of 2011 including awesome "Caged"

For some reason, I haven't been in the mood of writing reviews lately, even when I started the year very well in terms of the quality of the films I've seen. I had very low expectations with some of them but they impressed me; others, didn't. Today I finally managed to describe my feelings towards these five films, take a look:

Since you went away (1944; John Cromwell)

Who's in it: A lot of great actors, Claudette Colbert, Jennifer Jones, Joseph Cotten, Shirley Temple, Hattie MacDaniel, Agnes Moorehead, Lionel Barrymore, Robert Walker.

What's it about: The life of a family during the II World War.

The good: I like the movies about war that show the domestic life of the people who stay. It gives you more elements to understand historical events. I liked all the performances, but if I had to pick my favorite it would be Robert Walker's as the shy Corporal Bill. Even when it lasts more than 2 hours, it maintains the tension about the possible loss of the father in the war. David O. Selznick produced and wrote the screenplay, so expect a magnificent musical intro and intermission (by Max Steiner), varied locations and an overall well managed drama. On the frivolous side, I also liked this guy who played a minor character.

The bad: I didn't find any flaw. I only have a very personal thing with very melodramatic scenes, they always kind of distract me, no matter if they are needed and well acted.

Should I see it?: Yes.

The bigamist (1953; Ida Lupino)

Who's in it: Joan Fontaine, Ida Lupino, Edmund Gwenn.

What's it about: A guy marries Joan and then Ida. The end.

The good: I liked the performances by Ida and Edmund. Ida makes you feel that her character doesn't expect anything good from life and you understand why is she attracted to this unknown guy without asking questions; and even when Edmund's character is breaking the law, you could understand his acts. There's dramatic tension until the end. Also, I'm crazy about movies told in flash back, so kudos just for that. I loved the trip to see the famous actors houses in LA, like Barbara Stanwyck and James Stewart's (watch a tiny part of this scene).

The bad: I didn't like the end, so that's a big con. Joan and Edmund supposedly have a terribly boring marriage, but that's told and not shown, because when they're together I didn't notice they didn't get along. I found it kind of boring at some points.

Should I see it?: I know some of my fellow bloggers loved it, but in my humble opinion there are many movies you should see before this one.

Scarlet Street (1945; Fritz Lang)

Who's in it: Edward G. Robinson, Joan Bennett.

What's it about: Edward is a good person, efficient worker, but his life sucks. Then he meets bad Joan and when you think his life would be better, it painfully enters in the most terribly state of decadence.

The good: I liked everything in this movie. I even liked the ending despite the fact that it was far from what I was expecting. Edward's performance is terrific as always, Joan surprised me because she played an harpy but at the same time she showed a bit of decency that made you hate her but not completely. The real BAD guy is her boyfriend, one of the most despicable characters I've ever seen, a vicious, greedy bastard with not ethics or feelings. Fritz's usual dark photography fits very well the theme of the film, and makes everything even more painful to see.

The bad: Only that I wanted the bad guy to suffer more.

Should I see it?: If you're in the mood for a dark movie, totally.

Caged (1950; John Cromwell)

Who's in it: Eleanor Parker, Agnes Moorehead, Jan Sterling.

What's it about: A young Eleanor Parker is imprisoned because of a tiny criminal act and has to endure the terrible life in jail.

The good: I LOVED this movie. I loved it so much that I saw it twice. Eleanor Parker was surprisingly awesome in this film and I'm really impressed by her chameleonic appearance in the different films I've seen her in. She's able to show such vulnerably, such discomfort and frailty that you really suffer with her. This movie has another terribly cruel character, Evelyn Harper (Hope Emerson), the matron of the cell. She's an aggressive beast who thinks that prisoners are animals, and what's more terrible she has powerful contacts so she can't be dismissed by humanitarian Head of the prison played by Agnes Moorehead. It has great secondary characters and many intense and shocking situations to show so it's never boring. This is a movie that really makes you think of the reality of prisons and how people could change if they had a chance.

The bad: SPOILER -----When I saw it for the first time, I thought that they could have managed better the change in Eleanor's character personality, like showing it more gradually, but the second time I didn't care. 

Should I see it? YES!

In the good old summertime (1949; Robert Z. Leonard)

Who's in it: Judy Garland, Van Johnson, S. Z. Sakall, Buster Keaton.

What's it about: It's the same story of The Shop around the corner, You've got mail, etc...

The good: S. Z. Sakall! I always love to see him and here he funnily plays the owner of a music shop. Also, it's a pleasure to hear Judy singing. My favorite numbers were Play that Barbershop Chord (watch) and I don't care (watch). Plus, she's funny in this one. The story of two people hating each other when you know they're gonna end up together, is always fun. At the end, you can see Judy and her real life baby daughter, Liza.

The bad: There are some adapted situations that I felt kind of forced, like Van Johnson getting fired because he lend his boss' violin. One of my favorite scenes, the one when the couple is going to meet in a restaurant and he sends a co worker to check how the girl looks, here is delivered really fast and with less intensity. Plus some characters lost presence and identity in the adaption (the man who advices the couple; Keaton's character; etc).  

Should I see it? The shop around the corner and You've got mail are better in my opinion, but this one is fun anyway. 

That's all folks!

April is gone...so the [last] monthly review has come...

[I forgot to add the post title and Blogger took the first line I had to create the url direction...I hate when this happens]

This is the second and last monthly review because I think it's better if I review every movie right after watching it. I saw some films that I didn't include because I'm gonna add them in a complete filmography post I'm preparing. Anyway, April brought great movies to see. Let's go...

Carole was too good for this minor role. Anyway, she married William.

Man of the world (Richard Wallace, 1931)

Who’s in it: Carole Lombard + William Powell

What it's about: a con man falls in love with the nephew of one of the man he defrauded.

The good: William Powell is always attractive, and the movie depends on him; the romantic scenes are fine (they should be, since William and Carole married three months after the movie was released); there’s tension coming from the main character's ex-lover and “co-worker”; the ending was unpredictable.

The bad: Carole’s character was too good, simple and nice for her; saw it yesterday and now I don’t even remember what there was before the ending. 

Should I see it? Only if you are a fan of Powell or Lombard.

IMBD explains: "The title refers to the superstition that if three people light their cigarettes with the same match, the third person will soon die"

Three on a match (Mervyn LeRoy, 1932)

Who’s in it: Joan Blondell + Ann Dvorak + Bette Davis (+ Bogie)

What it's about: the story of three classmate girls, and how their lives change and connect when they grow up.

The good: interesting story, unpredictable switches, and the little boy was so cute; all the actors are fine, Bogie is very young (has few scenes though).

The bad: too melodramatic at some points; the way to show the passage of time was kind overblown and repetitive; Bette’s character seemed to have no life of her own and was a minor force in the movie.

Should I see it? Yes, it’s good overall.

One Edward G. Robinson here...

...and two of them here.

The whole town’s talking (John Ford, 1935)

Who’s in it: Edward G. Robinson + Jean Arthur

What it's about: a modest employee is confused with an awfully bad gangster ...and the latter takes advantage of the situation…

The good: Edward G. Robinson plays the two roles (employee-gangster) magnificently; you really believe they’re two different people; his employee is so kind, and sweet, and Jean is funny as always, loved the scene at the police station in which she starts to blame Mannon of everything, it’s hilarious; the story is unpredictable and interesting.

The bad: Nothing I guess.

Should I see it?: Yes, good movie.

 This belongs to the first tree quarters. 

Small town girl (William A. Wellman, 1936)

Who’s in it: Robert Taylor + Janet Gaynor + Jimmy Stewart

What it's about: A girl from a small town (yes, the small town girl) is sick and tired of her boring life and the dull people that surrounds her so she decides to go away with a young and handsome doctor from a big city…

The good: The first three quarters of the movie are great; Janet Gaynor knew how to play this kind of role, she looked vulnerable but she was also very funny; Robert Taylor is very good with his two sided character: on one hand he’s a despicable and conceited rich kid but on the other he’s a sensible doctor that takes good care of his patients.

The bad: In my opinion the last part is not very well developed, Robert’s character behaves awfully and Janet’s boring admirer (Stewart) proves to have great values, so the ending is kind of weird.

Should I see it? Yes, the first three quarters worth it.  

Alone in the woods. a romantic detail by Wilder and Brackett.

Arise, my love (Mitchell Leisen, 1940)

Who’s in it: Claudette Colbert + Ray Milland

What it's about: Reporter Augusta Nash (Colbert) and soldier Tom Martin (Milland) fall in love…just before World War II begins.

The good: everything; the script by Wilder + Brackett, filled with details, some funny, some emotive, but always interesting; the story is entertaining and captivating; the performances of the leads are delicious.

The bad: Nothing.

Should I see it? Of course.

William & Myrna: great chemistry again.

LOL

I love you again (W.S. Van Dyke, 1940)

Who’s in it: William Powell + Myrna Loy

What it's about: After his head is hit with a boat oar a role-model- man (Powell) recovers his first identity … a con man. The problem is that he's going back to a small town where he's very well known...

The good: The leads have their usual perfect chemistry; William Powell is great, funny and clever as always and his performance is solid; there are a lot of hilarious moment (loved the one with the scouts).

The bad: Loy’s character is kind of subordinated to Powell’s, and this isn’t very frequent in their movies; she doesn’t have many memorable lines.

Should I see it? Yes, it’s funny.  

What a beautiful couple were these two.

That Hamilton woman (Alexander Korda, 1941)

Who’s in it: Vivien Leigh + Laurence Olivier

What it's about: the love story of married Emma Hamilton and married English Naval officer Horatio Nelson.  
The good: the leads are great in their roles, and they (obviously) have chemistry; the story is very dramatic and the tension is very well managed; there are some great scenes.

The bad: the movie ends abruptly.

Should I see it? Yes.  

Seemed to be such a happy couple.

Rex Harrison's eye in detail.

Unfaithfully yours (Preston Sturges, 1948)

Who’s in it: Rex Harrison + Linda Darnell

What it's about: An orchestra director (Harrison) imagines different ways to confront her apparently cheating wife…

The good: the story is very original and unpredictable, Rex is great as the husband and his reactions from denial, to suspicion and then to anger are all good; there’s chemistry between the leads; there are great shots (like the the extreme close-up to Harrison’s eye); the last part is very funny.

The bad: Some scenes were very brutal and exaggerated for my taste and that didn’t seem very funny to me; the end is too fast and brief after all the hypothetical situations.

Should I see it? Yes, just because it’s something unique.  

"Tree"

"Rooster"

Johnny Belinda (Jean Negulesco, 1948)

Who’s in it: Jane Wyman + Lew Ayres + Charles Bickford + Agnes Moorehead

What it's about: a good and nice doctor (Ayres) teaches deaf-mute girl (Wyman) to communicate…but not all the men in town are that good and nice.

The good: everything! the story is so interesting and emotive; the way the show how these two people start communicating is so touching and memorable; the characters are so well played by the leads, Jane Wyman is great as the impaired girl (won Oscar), so vulnerable but at the same time with such a inner strength; Lew Ayres is excellent too; the girl’s dad (Charles Bickford) and her aunt (Agnes Moorehead) change their attitude to the girl in such believable and moving way; the bad guy (Stephen McNally) is really really bad and despicable; the movie is beautifully shot, there are some great countryside scenes. Everything is very well developed. 

The bad: Maybe that there's an unsolved case, but it didn't bother to me.

Should I see it? Saw it twice in two days.

Movies I couldn't finish because I fell asleep:

BO-RING.

Man-Proof (Richard Thorpe, 1938): Starring Myrna Loy as a girl in love with guy that marries another woman (Rosalind Russel in a part that was too simple for her). Zero chemistry, you really don’t understand why she loves him so much; and the scenes are boring and she argues all the time with other guy (obviously she will end with him). The only interesting thing was the personality of her mother, a liberal writer that gave her some advices.

Vulgar and violent.

The bank dick (Edward F. Cline, 1940): I didn’t get the humor of this movie; W.C. Fields’s character was really detestable and all the women seemed to be uneducated and violent. Una Merkel was there too but her character was boring and she didn't shine. I’m blaming this kind of movies for some awful and decadent comedy movies we have today (like Borat, and movies starring Ben Stiller, Mike Myers or Adam Sandler).