Showing posts with label James Stewart. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Stewart. Show all posts

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Review - It's a Wonderful Life


December 20, 2012

It’s a Wonderful Life – U.S., 1946

During the Decembers of my childhood, viewing Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life was an annual tradition. It was shown on television every December, and it was so beloved that the owner of The Magic Theater would hold free screenings of it. It was his gift to the residents of Nevada City, Grass Valley, and all of the towns nearby. Perhaps because of this oversaturation, I developed a bit of a love-hate relationship with the film. What I could remember of it, I loved, but I hated the idea of sitting through it again. (Bear in mind that this was during my “black-and-white movies are boring” phase, which I didn’t really grow out of until after I graduated from high school.) In honor of the holidays this year, I decided it was time to give it another spin, to return to the wonderful small town of Bedford Falls and all of its joyful and optimistic residents. And like a movie character who returns to his childhood home after a long self-imposed exile, I now find it hard to resist saying that old cinematic cliché: I shouldn’t have stayed away for so long.

It’s a Wonderful Life is the story of George Bailey, a man whose instinct even as a young child is to fight, not to flee. This is a little ironic given the fact that his lifelong dream is to leave Bedford Falls and lead a life of excitement and purpose. See, George, like many young people, wants to be someone, and he’s convinced that he will never amount to anything in a small town. I suspect that many people these days would echo those sentiments, especially those with visions of being the next Internet-made millionaire. One reason George’s head is filled with visions of adventure and excitement is that a magazine featuring the world’s many exotic places and people has started publication – National Geographic. To people of George’s time, reading this magazine must have been the equivalent of watching the moon landing in 1969 or viewing Curiosity’s most recent discoveries on the surface of Mars. New world’s – be they terrestrial or intergalactic – stir in people the impulse to leave their comfort zone and explore, and so upon his graduation from high school, George Bailey is determined to go to college outside of Bedford Falls and then never look back.

However, life has a way of disrupting carefully-made plans and delaying lifelong dreams, sometimes forever. George’s dreams are put on hold after the death of his father, and they are further postponed after he agrees to take over his father’s business. He does this for the noblest of reasons, but it is clear that his heart is not entirely into it. The explorer in him still has dreams of scaling the world’s tallest mountains, and the architect in him still envisions himself building the kinds of skyscrapers that inspire awe in every person who sees them. His dreams certainly don’t include working at a bank for the rest of his life. I suspect that many viewers will see someone they know in George Bailey. He’s the person who loved singing but never got the chance to become a famous singer, the athlete who didn’t get a chance to play in the major leagues despite having considerable talent, the potential doctor who got a job in a factory because his family needed the money.

Like many of the small towns in films, Bedford Falls is a pretty marvelous place to raise a child in. It is a place where everyone knows each other, where it is normal to marry your high-school sweetheart, and where father always knows best. It is also a place where the men are all gentlemen and the women are generally the type any mother would love for her son to bring home. However, the film wisely does not build Bedford Falls up to be as idyllic as it could have, for doing so would result in George coming across as a bit of an ingrate. No, the world is changing, and Bedford Falls has its share of problems, most of them having to do with economics. There is a clear line between the haves and the have nots here, and therefore, the villain of the film is not the big city with its numerous temptations and vices, but the town’s wealthiest resident, Mr. Potter, who, if he had his way, would evict every struggling resident from their homes instead of extending them a helping hand. This George’s father did, and George has followed in his father’s footsteps. At one point, we become aware of Bailey Park, a section of town build from scratch and financed by loans from George’s bank, loans, it should be pointed out, which would never have been approved by any of the other banks, most, if not all, of which are owned by Mr. Potter. In fact, in one scene, we see what a Potter-financed city would look like, and like the alternate universe that Marty McFly steps into in the second Back to the Future film, it isn’t pretty. George, therefore, is David to Potter’s Goliath, and his bank is more like Bangladesh’s Grameen Bank than any of the major ones that exist today.

There is much to admire in It’s a Wonderful Life, from the beautiful way the film is structured to its smart and realistic screenplay by Francis Goodrich, Albert Hackett, Jo Swerling, and Frank Capra. Director Frank Capra gets impressive performances from his cast, in particular from the always reliable Jimmy Stewart. Part of what remains admirable about Stewart’s performance is that he never forgets two of George’s most memorable traits, his need to pursue his dreams and his spunk. In the film, we see George as a teenager displaying an impressive amount of swagger; we see this from time to time in George after he has grown up, too. Also memorable is Donna Reed as Mary. Mary sees something special in Bedford Falls, and in one crucial moment, she makes it clear that its residents come first. Reed plays the moment just beautifully.

Like many of the best films, It’s a Wonderful Life was a box office disappointment upon its initial release in 1946. It has since found a place in the hearts of both moviegoers and critics, and deservedly so. If there is a flaw in the film, it is its final act, which plays like a collection of flashbacks, the sole purpose of which seems to be to remind viewers of what they have already seen. Therefore, we’re told again about George’s ice rescue, his ear condition, his childhood boss, and so on. It is as if Capra and his co-writers didn’t think the audience would remember all that came before. However, while I suspect that most viewers will not need the reminder, I honestly can’t think of another way for the film to end.

The film reminds us that there has always been a struggle between those whose response to human suffering is cold and unemotional and those whose response is sympathetic and caring. It reminds us of the power and connection of communities and of the lifelong respect that comes with being a help to society. Moreover, it reminds us that sometimes life throws roadblocks at us for a reason, that sometimes we are more valuable in a field other than the one we would have chosen for ourselves. We should all be as rich as George Bailey. (on DVD and Blu-ray)

4 and a half stars

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Review – Shenandoah


October 27, 2011

Shenandoah – US, 1965

There’s a scene towards the beginning of Andrew McLagen’s moving film Shenandoah that grows in significance as events unfold. The scene takes place at the dinner table of Charlie Anderson (James Stewart), a widower with seven children and a large plot of land to manage. As the children sit at the dinner table quietly, Charlie Anderson begins the family prayer, which goes something like this: we did all the work ourselves, but thank you nonetheless. The prayer is delivered in a semi-comic way, and yet the message of the prayer is clear. This is a man who takes pride in having plowed the field, raised the horses, and grown the crops personally. This is not a man who purchases slaves and then just sits back and lets them do all the work while he reads or talks politics with guests. In fact, a conversation they have a moment later reveals that the family does not even own slaves. As one son explains it, how could he know the job was being done right if he weren’t doing it himself? This seems to be the consensus of the entire family.

And yet the Civil War is still a divisive issue in the family, for Charlie’s son Jacob (Glenn Corbett) is struggling with a deeply personal conflict: How can he be a Virginian and not be fighting for Virginia? Yet how can fight for Virginia without also fighting to preserve slavery? As the head of the family, Charlie has the final say, and his view can best be described as a practical one: If it doesn’t occur on his land, it doesn’t concern the family. The problem of course is that every passing moment brings the war closer to his doorstep, and it’s just a matter of time before it does encroach upon his property. And it’s only a matter of time before Jacob will look at his father and say aloud, “Does it concern us now?”

I half expected Shenandoah to borrow an element of Gone with the Wind and have Charlie realize the glory of the Southern cause and set off with his sons to the battlefield. To its credit, Shenandoah avoids this, opting instead to show that neither side has the moral high ground when it comes to the way the war is being waged. Both sides ambush the other side in ways that could hardly be described as heroic, and for every sympathetic characters on one side of the conflict, there’s another who could use a bit more empathy for the people facing him on the battlefield. And while Shenandoah is focused on Virginians, many of whom owned slaves, it avoids creating the discomfort in present-day viewers that accompanies Gone with the Wind. In that film, slaves are shown marching proudly to the frontlines to dig ditches for their enslavers. In contrast, Shenandoah gives us a truly great scene during which a young slave named Gabriel (Gene Jackson) embraces freedom for the first time and walks toward an unknown future with a newfound sense that nothing is impossible for him now.

There are other gems in the film: a touching conversation between a father and his prospective son-in-law, Sam (Doug McClure), on the difference between “liking” and “loving” someone, a brawl that adds a bit on much needed levity to a rather serious film, a wedding ceremony in which Jennie Anderson (Rosemary Forsyth) shows just how in love she is in a very unexpected and powerful way, and a conversation during which Charlie and his daughter-in-law, Ann (Katherine Ross), dispense advice on married life. Their insights are as true today as they were then. In addition, there’s a rather moving conversation between Charlie and the family doctor, in which the doctor details the toll the war is taking on him personally. It provides Charlie with an unexpected glimpse of how the war might affect him if his own sons join it.

I won’t reveal much more of the plot, except to say that eventually Charlie utters those expected words, now it concerns us, and yet even then Shenandoah continues to surprise. By the end of the film, so much has changed for these characters that you’re left with the impression that there was no one, northerner or southerner, that escaped the Civil War unscarred. In the closing moments of the film, Charlie stands one more time over the grave of his deceased wife, Martha, and tries to sum up all that has happened. His words fail him, as they would for most of us, for how does one really explain the devastation that war leaves in its wake?

As Charlie Anderson, James Stewart gives a truly terrific performance. He is stoic when he has to be, listens when he ought to, and at a key moment, displays the right amount of awkwardness during what would be an uncomfortable moment for any father. Stewart handles the scene perfectly. There will be some that say that Shenandoah slightly sugarcoats the Civil War by presenting the two sides in such an even manner. However, the film never wavers from its anti-slavery message, and it never presents one side as more of a victim as the other. The southern cause is not held up as the more noble one, just as northerners are not presented as always being the most righteous. This is an even-handed film about a family that finds itself caught in a middle of a battle that it can neither completely criticize, not fully embrace, and it remains as powerful today as it was in 1965. (on DVD)

4 stars