Movie:"Cat People" (1942)

Well I must admit I don't understand why is this movie always referred to as "horror" when in fact it has purely "film noir" atmosphere,is constantly filmed in shadows and looks/feels like film noir,so for me - this IS film noir. If there are elements of horror in a story,so be it,it's more about audience than creators.

Simone Simon is very good (cute,sweet accent) as exotic beauty with dark secrets and hidden past,I thought she was adorable and in fact quite convincing in her transformations from girl-next-door into a dangerous woman possessed with jealousy - the rest of the cast is good but not exceptional and everything more or less depends on how good Simon is,but she holds the movie on her shoulders admirably. There is also a very interesting uncredited cameo of Elizabeth Russel as another "cat woman" who recognizes Simon in some restaurant and approaches her,asking "my sister?" - she had probably 1 minute on a screen but steals the scene,what a presence.

For me this is about movie magic - making something out of nothing,since it's apparent that scenography was second handed and budget was limited - and even with all this limitations movie ended up being great because idea was brilliant. Borrowed scenography and shoe-string budget and look at the results,a classic.

Movie: "Dancing Lady" (1933)

Filmed just a few years after "Broadway Melody Of 1929" this movie is a welcome improvement in the genre - I liked "Broadway Melody" but this is much better and not as wooden. Joan Crawford is actually very good in this movie - she plays a dancer who uses her charm and looks to get by in the business and there is something very appealing in her acting,I perfectly understand why she was so popular in her time because there is a humanity in her acting,vulnerability underneath the steel and survival facade. She is teamed with very classy and elegant Franchot Tone (her future husband) and Clark Gable (her lover at the time) and as this was not enough there is a bald skinny guy in his first movie role called Fred Astaire - surprisingly enough,Crawford more than holds her own in her dancing scenes with Astaire and she is actually not bad at all - she could act,dance,flirt,looks great on the screen and definitely had charisma.

In previous post I mentioned Benito Mussolini remembered as embodiment of evil (but he was writing love letters to a movie star he never met) and here we have Joan Crawford remembered today mostly as "Mommie dearest" but if you look at her movies,she was a very good actress indeed.

People: Anita Page & Benito Mussolini

Although I find Bessie Love far more interesting than her "sister" from "Broadway Melody of 1929" there is an interesting thing about Anita Page : apparently she was a big movie star in her time and between other love letters she was getting,there were several sent by Benito Mussolini who admired her in this very movie. Her mother was responsible for sending him Anita's pictures (as she did with any other fan mail) all of this against big MGM bosses who advised this is not such a good idea.

In light of Mussolini's later life,this puts a different angle on his character - we know him as political dictator and bad guy,but to find out he was writing love letters to a movie star (whom he only knew from a screen) well this shows there was a lovelorn hope and daydreaming in him - never mind Anita Page right now (by all accounts she didn't really act all those scatterbrained characters) - I am fascinated with the unexpected glimpse into a character of a man we all know as a epitome of evil fascist (and you can't forget those gruesome pictures of his death,hanged upside down with the crowd cheering) and this little story inexplicably fills me with sadness.

People: Bessie Love

I have to mention Bessie Love who really shines in "Broadway Melody of 1929" as my favorite character from the whole movie,she was such a sparkling cutie that I can't understand why after being nominated for Academy Award in this movie she somehow got lost in the industry and never achieved anything else.

She is full of energy,very sweet and apparently could act up a storm but is not very well known today - in any case I find her absolutely adorable and want to include her here in my own little shrine,let this be a tribute to Bessie Love,gone but not forgotten.

Movie:"The Broadway Melody" (1929)

The mother of

all

Broadway backstage musicals,"The Broadway Melody" (1929) turned out to be far more interesting that I expected.

I approached this movie thinking it would be ancient museum piece on the level with Al Jonson's work (over-acting and chest-beating as it were,since musical theatre at that point was still not far removed from vaudeville tradition and audience way back should have been able to see the star tearing the hair) but it turned out to be the cutest thing,real travel back in time.

Once viewer let himself being transported in late 1920s,it's all relatively easy - the story is simple but effective: two sisters arrive in New York full of optimism and dreams about making a career in musical theatre. One is sparkling with ambition and energy (older sister,Bessie Love) while the other is a ditzy beauty (Anita Page) who immediately falls in trouble because her looks attracts rich city slickers. What follows is a cute little mix up with lot of backstage bitching,old fashioned musical numbers,sisters argue,men pursue them,fame comes (but for wrong reasons - Anita ends up half naked on a stage) and at the end all is well although it's a bitter-sweet because its suggested that younger sister found her happiness in a marriage while the older sister will forever stay on the road as an entertainer. In other words,you can't have both - it's either career or a family life.

I was really surprised how much I enjoyed this - after all,it was made in 1929 - some later movies were far more old-fashioned than this. Human emotions are basically always the same (greed,ambition,disappointment and lust shown here could easily be focus of some new movie) and if you accept hammy acting (some actors have apparently not yet mastered new medium of sound movies) it is a fun entertainment. Two big celebrities of the time were alluded in the characters of Mr.Zanfield who is a Broadway producer and sleazy rich city slicker is called Mr.Warriner (after head of Warner Bros Studio),latter is creepy and has something of Bela Lugosi in him.

By far the best actress here is Bessie Love in a role of older sister who is full of fire and enthusiasm (just watch her dance in a hotel room) while her younger sister Anita Page is a somewhat wooden but I am not entirely sure was this intentional since it suits her character.There is a nice comic turn by stuttering old uncle Jed Prouty who usually cuts his stutter with a whistle,pity his role was not a bit expanded.

I actually really liked Bessie Love - what a cute little fireball,she has something of latter Doris Day/Betty Hutton spark and is a joy to watch,in fact she is supposed to be older and wiser sister,protective of her scatterbrained blonde bimbo younger sister but to be honest Bessie is prettier anyway,Anita Page is simply taller.

Interesting fact and perhaps a bit unusual,but I have to mention this: on a few occasions sisters show affections towards each other by kissing each other in the mouth.

Now,1929 or not,but I have never encountered sisters who are kissing each other in the mouth - peck on the cheek is one thing but mouth to mouth is another. It is not a big thing but it just looks out of space. I mean,younger sister goes away on a honeymoon and as a farewell kisses older sister in the mouth?

Movie:"A Dirty Shame" (2009)

When I saw John Waters classics for the very first time,I laughed for days.

I clearly remember myself walking across the bridge somewhere in centre of Amsterdam and bursting into giggling fit (and people from the tram watching me laughing alone in the street) because I would remember something funny from Divine's mouth. The parody and twisted humor was too good for words so I placed Waters movies in a special place in my heart - perhaps it is acquired taste and not for everybody,but if you dig Waters,you are on the same wave-lenght and in all probability my friend.

I still love John Waters - surely,once he "went Hollywood" his movies lost that irresistible trashiness but never mind. And yes,Divine is not with us anymore but we can't blame John Waters for that,although I must admit every time I watch new John Waters movie I am looking for Divine to pop out from somewhere,I really miss him.

"A Dirty Shame" was great fun - at least it started great and than it fizzled somewhere towards the end - but I laughed and laughed and had a great time so what.

Tracey Ullman (whom I remember as a singer way back in 1980s - does this make me old?) was great as a frumpy housewife-turned-nymphomaniac and there is a scene where she enters the car (right after something hit her over the head and she is still dizzy),turns on the radio,hears famous "Pussy Cat Song" (Pussy...Sore...Wet...Pussy),and horrified switches the radio off.Than she puts it on,because,after all,she is nymphomaniac now. I saw that scene several times and laughed out loud like a madman,alone in my ship cabin in the middle of the night,it really makes me laugh even now.

Everything else is typical John Waters poking fun at suburban morals and mainstream America. It is a bit too "teenage" occasionally (with its insistence on shocking the audience with sexual jokes,it gets tired eventually) but on the other hand it shows that Waters is still young inside. What I loved in his earlier movies with Divine was the fact that sexual jokes were just a part of the whole ridiculousness - there was so much more besides grossing out the audience with nudity and profanity - Divine would go head on against the religion,society,education system and the whole world - here the jokes are only about sex,so towards the movie it becomes a bit boring.

Movie:"A Star Is Born" (1954)

I grew up liking Streisand's 1976.version of "A Star Is Born" (and of course,its soundtrack) and being only vaguely aware there is an older original,I decided after all these years it is probably time to see the real thing. It turned out even 1954.famous version is not the original - for that I would have to find 1937. movie,some more research! - and it also turned out watching this elephant saga was not entirely pleasurable.

There is a beauty and excitement in approaching the movie without really knowing anything about it - you might simply end up being thrilled because everything is new,unexpected and fresh. On the other hand,it helps if you know that darn thing goes on for 3 hours,which I didn't know. I actually fell asleep and had to continue on another occasion when I convinced myself that I should get over with it - not exactly description of a good time.

It has been said that bad Hollywood producers ruined the movie because they cut out 30 minutes of original version and they destroyed everything,including Garland's chances to win Academy Award. And here am I now to say the movie is over-long (in original,restored version),staggers along with unconvincing characters who burst into song way too often and worse of all,I find both Garland and Mason annoying. First of all,the movie is built on assumption that Judy Garland is adorable beauty whose talent outshines everybody around,which she was not - just one look at her plump,short figure (too often surrounded with real beauties) and it is clear she was everything but. True,she had a good voice but it is old-fashioned,Ethel Merman belt-until-you-puke style with lots of windmill hand gestures and the movie has Garland singing simply too much (she was also one of the movie investors,in other words movie was about HER). Second,James Mason's character is creepy and is it not clear why would anybody follow him through thick and thin when the guy is

Incorrigible asshole who is pulling everybody down with him. Only Garland - who in that case could be described as self-destructive in her own way - wants to support such a character,but not really doing anything to shake him out of drunken stupor except of crying her eyes out.

I continued watching the second part of the movie,feeling a bit uneasy,knowing it will be an ordeal but it turned out fine - Garland is very convincing in her nervous breakdown (while wearing cheerful make up for a musical scene) and Mason eventually kills himself.

There is some good music in all of this,but too often its simply badly edited - now I'm talking about the full-lenght elephant - the way it was originally imagined this is simply too long and rambling + it could have been two movies instead of one.No wonder it was cut shorter and to be honest, I still like Streisand 1976. version. In fact,I might just watch it again.

Movie:"30 Century Man" (2010)

Interesting documentary about famously reclusive Scott Walker - who in front of the camera turned out to be not reclusive at all,in fact he is sweet and chatty and very articulate about his music and what he wants to achieve. One thing is clear - at the certain point guy became sick and tired of screaming fans and people turning up his car upside down,so he consciously left the pop music behind in order to create non-commercial music that he loved.

I absolutely adore his first four solo albums - they deserve to live forever,because they are such pieces of art. Sadly,his other work is either out of print (Walker basically erased everything from early 1970s catalogue and records new albums once in a decade) or completely off the wall and has nothing to do with classic 1960s sound. Surely it is unrealistic to expect Walker to repeats himself - he is real artist and transform himself to another dimensions,it is really up to you do you want to follow him there in some dark corners where he screams and yells while "musicians" beat pieces of meat with their fists as "instruments" - it's not for me,at this point.

Lots of celebrities are here to say something about Walker - some admire his work,others remember him for his pop star days when he was poster boy for screaming girls. It's funny to watch Lulu's face as she hears Walker's new music - she clearly recognizes the voice but is alarmed with what she hears now. Some try to find something positive about his new music (I think they pretend) while others - like Marc Almond - are simply honest and they admit they hate it.

I think - and this is at this point,who knows,I might change my mind later - that Walker's late music is far removed from pop field and as such is not "hummable" or "singable" or even easy to follow in a sense we are used to. As such it makes you wonder - what is point of it? - to put it plainly,it could be described as a madman's rant where previous moody singer with a golden voice now screams his manic depression out in the microphone. Could Scott Walker in fact,sing a melody again if he wishes so? I doubt.

I know this sounds little bit like Alice in Wonderland wondering what is the use of books without pictures,but I still love good,old-fashioned melody that can lift my spirit and I can whistle my head off with. There is a far bit of classical music I love that is not necessarily "hummable" but it still soothes the soul (or provokes any kind of reactions),what Scott Walker does now is perhaps better described as a "modern classical music" - and it's the world I usually run away as far as I can.

Books:"The Lost Symbol" (Dan Brown)

Dan Brown wrote several interesting thrillers before he struck big time with "Da Vinci Code" which turned into world phenomenon - I still remember how much I enjoyed the book years ago when I first read it and it surely inspired the whole branch of similar plotting/paranoia/real identity books. Just look in any bookshop and you will surely find stories about "real identity" of anybody from Old and New Testament - alas,it was interesting at first but than it became a bit much to see shelves full of them.

I suspected than Brown is now in a difficult position because industry probably expect him to follow with similar books - and it is hard to top something that might be life achievement,after all. Would he turn to something completely unexpected,like history or children novels? Or would he turn to another "Da Vinci" clone? I viewed his latest novel in bookshops with suspicion for some time before I actually succumbed to temptation and bought the darn thing.

Just as I expected,"The Lost Symbol" is "Da Vinci" clone,it was clear from the very first two pages. Nothing wrong with it,perhaps,except that it is predictable.Dan Brown became prisoner of his own fame and expectations publishing industry is placing upon him. Just like before,it's all about running in the dark corridors,big secrets,important people get mutilated and we are not sure is police involved in this or not. One thing I WAS sure was how it will end - I even knew the identity of the main baddie (and it made me wonder - same as i sometimes get in the movies - have I not,perhaps read too many thrillers so now they lost freshness to me?). I read it but more because I simply wanted to get over with it,than out of real curiosity or pleasure.

In a way it's a pity for Dan Brown - he is intelligent writer who can write really good when something inspires him - but now I'm afraid its too much to expect another world-shaking phenomenon from him. He should turn to something completely left-field and write for pleasure of writing,but the reality is probably different - judging by this novel he might continue writing lukewarm & predictable thrillers trying desperately to repeat success of "Da Vinci Code".

Movie:"The Ministry Of Fear" (1944)

What a great title - and not so great movie,after all.

Based on a novel by Graham Greene, it follows a main character who has been released from mental hospital (during the movie we find out why he was there in a first place) and finds himself in a web of a spy ring in a war-time London. I can't put my finger on it - is it financial limitations or the script or the acting or perhaps (gasp) director,but the truth is the movie starts very good,with the right amount of dark atmosphere and there is a magic in the air UNTIL the guy arrives in London,from than on everything loses the mystery and looks like another cute period piece. Interesting,because after all this is great Fritz Lang who made not one but two of my all-time favorite movies ("Metropolis" and "M") and I expected more from him.

In the main role is the actor called Ray Milland - now,I have hardly ever heard about the guy and suspect people on the street wouldn't know about him either. Still,intrigued about him I did some research and it turned out he wasn't just some supporting actor but a big star in his time,in fact the very next year he won Academy Award - it just shows how temporary fame is.

Movie:"The Letter" (1944)

"The Letter" (1944) could easily be mistaken for Josef Von Sterberg movie since it has that particular magic touch on camera and it has more beauty and substance in visual than in script,which is basically very simple adaptation of theatre play - characters are talking to each others around the table and the only thing director William Wyler can do is to move them around a bit in and out of the house,but you still feel this was originally done on theatre stage.

The beginning of the movie is brilliant - hot Singapore night on rubber plantation with people sleeping around and the gun shot scarring cockatoo,we witness the murder but are not in clear what exactly happened until halfway through the movie where details are explained. Thinking about the movie in retrospect I find it fascinating that the main star (for me) is not Bette Davis - who looks much better than I remember her,slim,elegant and fashionably clothed - and who is not only in almost every scene of the movie,but also won a Academy Award for this,but supporting actress Gale Sondergaard.

Sondergaard is a widow of the man Davis had shot and has only three (mute!) scenes - she hardly utters a sentence - and by God she walks away with the movie,her character more human and easier to understand than selfish and cruel Davis who manipulates husband and attorney. When these two finally meet,Sondergaard is supposed to be "different" and freaky because of her asian background but she stands there like a Goddess of revenge,proud and dignified without a word while Davis is her western counterpart,privileged in upbringing and head covered with a laced shawl,picking up a letter Sondergaard throws at the floor.

By the way Sondergaard was originally supposed to play Wicked Witch of West but she declined. I guess Margaret Hamilton was forever grateful for that.

Another actor worth mention is excellent James Stephenson as attorney torn inside between his friendship to Davis husband and guilt about lying in the court - the way he talks in the courtroom is memorable because viewer can feel his torment inside and at one point you actually expect him to tell the truth,instead protecting friend's wife. Everybody flutters around elegant and nice Davis (who couldn't possibly be a murderess because she is such a "nice lady") while widow Sondergaard stands ignored,because she is asian and therefore not worth mentioning. I could just kill Davis with my own hands.

"The Letter" was a huge success in its time and won Academy Awards galore, in my opinion it starts with a bang and goes lukewarm towards the end (director claimed the ending was forced upon him by Production Code) but still it has some excellent acting,solid script and very good music by Max Steiner.

I can actually imagine this being very effective on a theatre stage and wouldn't mind seeing it live.

Interesting curiosity: the actor who plays Bette Davis husband (Herbert Marshall) played also in original 1929. version but there he was different character.

Again,I will remember it mostly for excellent Gale Sondergaard who steals the movie with her three mute scenes. Davis might have won Academy Award but to me Sondergaard was the real winner.

Movie: "The Scarlet Empress" (1934)

No less figure than David Selznick complained that Josef Von Sternberg films dealt with "completely fake people in wholly fake situations" and case in point would be "The Scarlet Empress" (1934) where life of Catherine The Great is presented in such a way that Catherine herself would probably watch the movie without being aware it is about her - though the story is based on Catherine's diaries (her childhood and arrival on russian court,disposal of husband and the way she became omnipotent empress herself) Sternberg is too busy with cellophane to bother about the facts - his movie is all about artistic vision,shadows,lights and brilliant (often grotesque) scenography so never mind the real history.

Once the viewer accepts this has nothing to do with reality and Catherine The Great,it is a masterpiece and very pleasurable movie - no wonder audience at the time lapped it up since it has opportunistic and openly promiscuous main character who manipulates everybody around her into victory against baddies. Not sure how much the audience really got the art in Sternberg's work and his breath-taking german expressionistic visuals (just look at the ladies-in-waiting opening those heavy wooden doors,interiors of the castle or the royal dinner with those chairs that look more like Bluebird's castle than real russian court at the time) but movie surely stand the test of time because it is so unique and original that it simply can never became old-fashioned: it is a nightmare,a fairly tale and you will never again find anything like this elsewhere. Besides,the black & white movies always had special spell on me and I find myself watching them completely lost and drawn into them,like hypnotized into special world.

Louise Dresser is also very good as aged Empress who rules with iron fist,she treats young Catherine as a servant and though she is hard as nail,there is unexpected humanity behind all that posture,one imagines (and understands) that Catherine later probably turned into such kind of person.

Naturally the whole attention is usually focused on Dietrich but I must admit (as a afterthought) that she is simply brilliant marionette who does what Von Sternberg wants her to - sure,she inspired him and vice versa but without him she never reached that same peaks again (they made six movies together and than her movie career basically fizzled) and I wonder how would Sternberg worked if inspired by someone else - it's a interesting guess since he is the real artist here,movie is created by him and Dietrich just happened to be focus of the camera.

So far I have only seen "The Blue Angel" and "The Scarlet Empress" of Sternberg/Dietrich work so now I am really curious to see the rest.

Books: Girls like us

After prolonged silence,I am back to this blog - the reason why I haven't write anything for such a long time was that I was traveling & working way too much + asked myself who is ever going to read this anyway,after all I have my own diary - but than decided that this is for me and it might be pleasure to simply put down my musings about things that occupy me

I do travel a lot but it's what's inside my head that somehow seems more important that places outside.

To start with something interesting,here is a little essay about book "Girls like us" by Sheila Weller.

It is a triple threat,triple biography about Carole King,Joni Mitchell and Carly Simon - I wanted to read it for a long time but of course sailing around South Africa didn't help much so I couldn't believe when I found it by accident in some discount-books corner in Amsterdam,the book was simply waiting for me there and I didn't have to go through the whole internet order process.

It was very interesting and Weller had certainly done her research job carefully - she asked these ladies for permission to talk to their friends rather than to them (Simon was the only one who actively participated) - and not only there are hundreds of little stories and anecdotes about background of our favorite songs and albums,but she also cleverly connects King,Mitchell and Simon into (ahem) tapestry that at the same time reflects particular time when 1960s turned into 1970s and the whole social atmosphere. Surely,each of them was unique in her own way and each of them had her own share of troubles in beginning - King forever pregnant and balancing family and career,Mitchell hiding her real troubles behind artistic,icy persona,Simon being simply pushed around by guys in music industry who dismissed her because of her privileged background & attractive looks.

So far,so good - when book explored ladies beginnings and background,it was simply a matter of good research. But once they become successful,author unfortunately started to focus too much on lovers,husbands and love lives. While I understand that there is a huge audience who is interested in this,I found it a bit narrow-minded: I wouldn't mind some seriousness instead of backstage gossip and laundry list of lovers & husbands,no matter how fascinating they might be. At certain point I even became a bit bored with all this,it sounds better suited for "Vanity Fair" article (which eventually it was,abridged) than as a book. It became almost like Weller was more interested in husbands than into ladies themselves, I couldn't wait to finish the book and get over with it. Somewhere along the way music and art were pushed into background and what was supposed to be background became main focus - we got to know every man Carole King ever slept with but her music was rarely (if ever) discussed.

The good thing is - the book actually made me curious about Carly Simon's work. I am familiar with King and Mitchell but not so much with Simon so I collected some of her albums and decided to give them a proper listening,so far I was aware of her but never really listened carefully.