LouisaMay Reviews

Storm Warning (1950)

Racism, AntiSemitism and 1950

[6/10 · 5 April 2012]

For those who feel the film wasn't ardent enough in its attack on the Klan, I wanted to point out that in the early 50s the hot button issue of the day was organized crime and the mafia. Many, if not most, Americans at that time shared racist and anti-semitic attitudes, and attacking the Klan on those grounds would not have had the effect it would have now. By positioning the Klan as an organized criminal gang,the filmmakers denied the Klan their ideological purity and their claim to 'cleaning up' communities. For those who protested the lack of Southern dialect in the film, you need to know the Klan was not uniquely Southern: it originated in Indiana and flourished up North as well. To this day white supremacist organizations are based in the North, and the two most segregated cities in the U.S. are Detroit and Chicago. Not limiting actors to a Southern dialect widens the perception of the problem. I'm not a Southerner, but I do think we need to be fair about this.

I Live for Love (1935)

When Supporting Actors Star

[9 November 2011]

The stars are foils for the fabulous supporting cast in this film --big name stars in the credits an hilarious reference to one of the movie's plot mechanisms, in which a big name star supposedly adds luster to a radio program. The supporting cast stars in this film, an acerbic send up of show business, both theater and newly popular radio. The film smacks by-then-dead vaudeville, then places both high toned "thea-tuh" and radio in the same category. With focus almost entirely on the supporting cast, who have all the great lines and embody the satire, the film moves at a good clip, challenging us not to give a hoot about the "stars'" love story. I found this film absolutely hysterical and laughed out loud through the whole thing.

Shoot the Moon (1982)

Great movie, more subtle than the violent emotions indicate

[10/10 · 26 April 2011]

For me the key to this great film was the scene where Finney and Keaton end up in bed together. In their conversation at this tender but honest moment after their marriage has ended, they wonder aloud what happened to them. He says, "I'm not a kind person." She says, "I'm not kind either." These soft spoken admissions, amid the chaos of the violence, and screaming emotional upheaval woven through the film, provided an answer to what went wrong in the marriage. It's clear they still love each other --the whole film is an illustration of this bond, and he says so to his daughter near the end of the film. But they've run into the mundane problems that eat away at long term marriages without means of overcoming them. What are these means suggested by the film? Kindness and compassion. Neither has kindness toward or compassion for the other. They love their children, and they're "good" people, not immoral. But they have no compassion, not even for their children. Without compunction they say and do things in front of the children that can harm them for life. Neither has any compassion for the other's suffering, or any ability to put themselves in the other's shoes. So at the end (SPOILER) when he lies bloody and beaten with his hand up for comfort from her, she refuses to take his hand, and the camera freezes on this moment.

The Rising of the Moon (1957)

A Major, Underrated Film

[8/10 · 25 May 2010]

This film, comprised of three vignettes, is about community, the community as it exists (existed) in Ireland --in short, Irish community. This strong sense of community is shown in three different contexts: rural, suburban/small town, and urban. Or, viewed another way, the film shows how moral choice, group frustration, and political conviction play out in the context of Irish community. I thought the film was superb. In the first vignette, we see how community supports a difficult, individual moral choice. In the second, how community pulls people together in fun to deal with a frustrating situation affecting everyone, but beyond individual control. In the third we see the impossibility of one country imposing its will on another in the context of a community of political conviction. The actors are all gifted, and the direction excellent. I liked the way the film's lighting darkened as it moved from rural to urban settings. To some the second vignette seems like a caricature, I saw it as satire --a group laughing at itself, not outsiders imposing stereotypes. It was like Italian movies poking fun at constant labor strikes, a story not to be taken at face value.

Merry Wives of Reno (1934)

Wry, Cynical, Hilarious

[8/10 · 30 July 2007]

Like other Warner Brothers comedies of the early 30s, pacing and sarcasm make this film. Here, it's the wry take on why marriages succeed or fail that makes the movie so funny. Never mind love, communication, or fidelity. What makes or breaks a marriage is how willing you are to admit you're an idiot too. So funny and so true-- just thinking about the premise makes me laugh. The acting is very good, the script, with asides too funny and too numerous to trivialize out of context, is even better. There is a whole philosophy here, a whole view of life that dispenses with the psychobabble prominent even then in a storm of hastily delivered truths. Slapstick abounds, although the sophisticated wit is the best thing about this movie.

Your Friends and Neighbors (1998)

"Those People" am YOU

[9/10 · 2 May 2007]

If you're a person (especially between 25 and 35), without emotional depth or without spiritual (not necessarily religious) inklings of something beyond yourself, you're morally adrift on a raft of tortuous narcissism. That's what this movie says. Not having emotional depth doesn't mean you don't feel things deeply; it means here you can't empathize with others. In fact the movie shows graphically that without the qualities and sensitivities we think make us most vulnerable, all we can be is mentally wounded, emotionally hurt, damaging to others. A more realistic, sensible portrait of narcissism and its discontents I've never seen. Everyone in this film is so focused on his or her self, nothing that could help can enter. Here is a world without anything transcendent, without even community through which to escape the prison of self absorption. Here is a take on contemporary America.

Slightly Scarlet (1956)

Sometimes You Think You Saw A Different Movie

[8/10 · 12 July 2005]

With the same title. You might think Slightly Scarlet is about Ben Grace: did he change or not? Then again you might think the movie is about June Lyons: did SHE change or not?

SPOILERS

If the movie's about June Lyons, the ending isn't ambiguous, and Ben Grace is a hero in more ways than one. And yes, she changed, and definitely for the better.

June's been in what we now lovingly call a co-dependent relationship --with her sister. Crazy Dorothy needs professional help, and June's been trying all her adult life to help her, successful only in being manipulated by Dorothy's psychotic reasoning. June keeps trying to do the impossible: make Dorothy's life better. Dorothy's a prop (a McGuffin, except we know a lot about her) She moves the plot. She's the agent of Ben's meeting and falling in love with June, and the cause of his becoming a hero. She's always at the wrong place at the right time. Dorothy shows us Ben's true attraction to the good sister through his rejection of her, even at her most seductive in a bathing suit. Dorothy claims she and Ben are alike. Ben shows they're not by his attraction to June. Even when Arlene Dahl steals a scene, as she sometimes does, her Dorothy reminds us of June's worries, June's hopes. We see Ben sinking into villainy, except in his relationship to June and Dorothy, which remains consistent and sincere throughout.

June's unable to have a relationship with a man because of Dorothy. June, so loyal, so caring, so worried, doesn't have time even for the man she loves, although that man needs her more than Dorothy does. Dorothy, remember, needs a psychiatrist, not a worried sister.

And so, as gorgeous June moves closer and closer toward a hideous spinsterhood devoted to the care of semi-conscious Dorothy, events take a turn for the worse AND for the better. Ben undergoes horrible torture to save June and Dorothy. He's still alive at the end, but we don't know certainly that he'll survive. We do know, in that last glance June gives Janson who's patting Dorothy reassuringly, that June's chosen her man over her sister. June smiles back at Janson and Dorothy (and Janson smiles knowingly at June), as June walks away behind the stretcher. There's someone who needs her and can benefit from her care, someone with a legitimate claim on her love and attention, and June follows him. June has been steadfast in her ethics, although her attention was misguided. We know if Ben lives, she'll help him. If he doesn't live, she's freed herself from her bondage to Dorothy.

This engrossing film has a lot of action, both physical and psychological. It's easy to watch but not simple. Oooh, that magnetic energy (great direction) between Ben and June. They can barely keep their faces apart in any interaction. Ben tries to be bad, but isn't making it. In the end he succumbs fully to love. A hero because he not only saves the women's lives, but also because he's rescued June from Dorothy. Could there be such a thing as a noir, chick flick? I think so.