Search

Search only in certain items:

40x40

Karina Longworth recommended Kitty Foyle (1940) in Movies (curated)

 
Kitty Foyle (1940)
Kitty Foyle (1940)
1940 | Classics, Drama, Romance
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"Next would be Kitty Foyle, which is the movie that Ginger Rogers won her Oscar for. She is obviously mostly remembered for a singing and dancing star from the Astaire and Rogers musicals, but this is a melodrama – there was no singing or dancing. It basically tells the story of a girl who grows up on the wrong side of the tracks and falls in love with a wealthy heir to a big Philadelphia fortune, and has to navigate romance and class and all of these different issues. It’s a very conservative film and it’s very didactic. It’s extremely problematic in a lot of ways, but I find it fascinating. The performance that she gives, though… I think a lot of times, some of these great stars, they win an Oscar for a movie that’s not their best work, or it’s sort of given as a consolation prize for them not winning for something that is a classic. I think people think that about Kitty Foyle because nobody watches it any more, and people only remember Ginger Rogers as a dancer, but her performance in this movie is stunning. The character she’s playing has to sort of take on different personas over the course of her life and with different people in her life. The way that Ginger Rogers performs those unique and distinct versions of the same person is just really incredible. Obviously, there’s a huge degree of difficulty to a career based on singing and dancing. I wrote about this in my book, but there’s that old line about Ginger Rogers that “She had to do everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in heels.” The whole idea of her stardom is about how much harder it is for a woman to do the same things that a man does. But all of that said, I think there’s a degree of difficulty to this performance that is the kind of thing that is really, true great acting and great stardom, but it’s the kind of thing where the labor doesn’t show, and so people don’t talk about it in that way."

Source
  
A Damsel in Distress (1937)
A Damsel in Distress (1937)
1937 | Comedy, Drama, Musical
10.0 (1 Ratings)
Movie Favorite

"My favorite film is a Fred Astaire film called A Damsel in Distress. It’s without Ginger Rogers, but it’s based on a P.G. Woodhouse book, who is my favorite author of all time, and he wrote the script. And it’s hilarious, and it’s wonderful. Astaire is amazing in it. Joan Fontaine is 22 years old. It’s beautiful, and it’s based on this wonderful Woodhouse book. I watch that at least once a year. And it’s got Burns and Allen, and they’re hilarious. It’s a great film."

Source
  
Ginger Snaps (2001)
Ginger Snaps (2001)
2001 | Horror, Mystery
8
8.8 (8 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Ginger Snaps is certainly a product of it's time. A couple of decades later and it's so painfully 2000s, however, it still offers something fresh to the werewolf sub genre.

The allegory of burgeoning womanhood and simultaneously turning into a force of nature is an effective one, and is realised well, thanks to its well written characters and solid cast. Katharine Isabelle and Emily Perkins do a fantastic job in carving a realistic portrayal of sisterhood and a challenging time in life. Mimi Rogers is great on her supporting role as well.
For a film that has some potential to be silly, Ginger Snaps plays the whole ordeal pretty straight and sticks the landing for the most part. Nothing comes across as goofy.
There's plenty of impressive practical gore on display and some decent creature effects to top it all off.

This movie has a huge following for a reason, and although it's a little dated these days, it's still an enjoyable horror with a surprisingly emotional centre.
  
Singin' in the Rain (1952)
Singin' in the Rain (1952)
1952 | Classics, Comedy, Musical

"I was a dancer, and this movie inspired me to become a dancer, I think. I grew up watching Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers films, and they really inspired me. I loved watching the big dance sequences in this film. Gene Kelly is phenomenal. I love that the film has fun looking into the transition from silence into sound in the movie world as well. It was a big challenge for a lot of actors to go from one to the other, and I think they have a really hilarious look at that transition. But also I think it’s these big dance numbers and big choreographed pieces with a hundred dancers on top of their game. You just wouldn’t see that anymore. You wouldn’t see sets like that either – the shots are just phenomenal."

Source
  
Swing Time (1936)
Swing Time (1936)
1936 | Classics, Musical, Romance
8
7.5 (2 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Entertaining Despite Some Flaws
Fucking blackface, am I right? I’ll warn you now if you plan to watch Swing Time: There is a blackface scene. In spite of this touch of ignorance, as a black man, I have to say that I rather enjoyed the movie. The plot: When John Garnet (Fred Astaire) gets cold feet on his wedding day, his fiance opts to give him another chance if he can find a way to earn $25,000. John is all for it until he falls in love with a dance instructor and tries to find every way in the world to avoid making the money.

Acting: 10

Beginning: 6
In the beginning John’s dance troupe tries to distract him by keeping him from getting married. They feel like if he doesn’t go through with it, he can keep working with them. Despite their efforts, it was much more annoying than it was funny. Not a great way to kick off the story.

Characters: 10

Cinematography/Visuals: 8
For the most part, the movie is cinematically gorgeous. I loved the dance numbers, well most of them anyway. It all reverts back to that damn blackface scene. It was an unnecessary piece of the film that did absolutely nothing for the story. Other than that, the movie is shot in a gorgeous fashion.

Conflict: 10
Most of the conflict stems from John’s rising feelings for Penelope the dance instructor (Ginger Rogers). You get the sense that they are meant to be together but John is working towards trying to be with another woman. You hope before the story’s end that he ends up in the right place. It’s a journey getting there.

Entertainment Value: 8

Memorability: 10

Pace: 10

Plot: 2
The premise and the way it unfolds is a miss for me. Fortunately the characters and setpieces were enough to carry the movie. it was a really hard buy-in for me.

Resolution: 10
While not perfect, the ending is a satisfying completion to the story. You can definitely see it coming the closer you get, but it’s still good. Great closure for the main characters.

Overall: 84
Not my favorite of the classics, Swing Time still deserves its place in history. As far as the blackface is concerned, I think we owe it to ourselves not to shy away from things that happened in history. Even the bad things. In spite being on the wrong side of history, I enjoyed it.
  
40x40

Natasha Khan recommended Bad by Michael Jackson in Music (curated)

 
Bad by Michael Jackson
Bad by Michael Jackson
1987 | Pop
8.9 (7 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"My first gig I ever went to, when I was nine, was at Wembley Stadium to see the Bad tour. When he died, I was in my bedroom in Brighton and I heard it on the radio and I just spontaneously absolutely burst into tears. Michael Jackson, when I was little, was just this God-like being. You know when you're little and you're singing in the car with your mum and your brother and the sister, the world is so good, there's nothing more fun and nothing better. I don't think I've ever listened to someone singing something with that much joy, he was channelling something so fucking out there and it's like he constantly had a bolt of creativity running through his body, like the way he danced and the way he moved. A consummate dancer, referencing Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers and James Brown and all these people that he channelled but made completely and uniquely his own. I saw a Spike Lee documentary the other night about Bad. Someone else wrote 'Man In The Mirror' but he took and did all of his - [mimics Michael Jackson] "I'm gonna make a change" - and all of that shit. It's just like, who else would do that? Who else would wear plasters all around their jacket? Who wears white socks with loafers and manages to make it look cool? Nobody was telling him to do that. He's just this fucking eccentric one-off. When he died, I thought the climate of music will never be like that again. It was like he was a child and his brain was a playground and anything he could think of, he bloody manifested that in the world; not many people can do that. The arc of music that he lived through, his education and his training all the way through, coincided with all these revolutions in music, music videos and dance. I just think that that was a one-off thing. I'm getting philosophical now [laughs], but I was watching Brian Cox the other day and his astro-physics thing and he put 50 stones all in a row on a desert floor and he was like "each of these stones represents billions of years in the history of the universe and where it's going to go." Then he went "here's one stone" and he showed about a millimetre of that stone: "in this bit, this is where the conditions were perfectly right for mankind to exist, this is this time, we're here now". When you think about culture and popular music from the 50s through 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, it does feel like there has been a bit of a cycle, and I've been lucky that I came in at the end of that cycle. People that were born in the 50s had it amazing, because they got to see fucking David Bowie and punk music, but Michael Jackson was a guy that happened in our lifetime. I get really passionate about music, but music, for some people, it's like a religion and he was like a fucking icon."

Source
  
The Philadelphia Story (1940)
The Philadelphia Story (1940)
1940 | Classics, Comedy, Romance
10
9.0 (4 Ratings)
Movie Rating
It's as good (maybe better) than you've heard
We all know of movies that you hear are considered a "classic", but you've never seen, and the few clips of the film you've seen does not, exactly, motivate you to check out the entire film. THE PHILADELPHIA STORY was one such film for me. This 1940 George Cukor production is lauded for it's dialogue, direction and the stellar performances of the cast - particularly the 3 leads, Katherine Hepburn, Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart.

Recently, I attended our monthly "Secret Movie Night" where we pack the Willow Creek Movie Theater on the 2nd Thursday of every month and get treated to a "Classic" Film (made before 1970) or a "New Classic" (made after 1970), but we don't know what the film is until it starts playing on the screen.

So...imagine how much my eyes rolled back into my head when I saw that this month's film was the aforementioned THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. I sighed to myself and said "all right, time to endure this one all the way through."

And...I couldn't have been more wrong. Almost from the start the script, pacing and witty dialogue of this Broadway-Play-Turned-Movie swept me away. Most certainly aided by the fact that 3 of the best movie stars of all time - at the peak of their abilities - were letting this wonderful dialogue roll off their tongues. This film is a "classic" in every sense of the word.

The plot is...inconsequential. Basically...Philadelphia socialite Tracy Lord (Hepburn) is getting remarried. Her ex-husband (Cary Grant) enlists the aid of a Journalist (Jimmy Stewart) to create havoc at the wedding.

But...this is a film where the journey, not the destination, is the fun of the flick. The 3 leads banter back and forth with each other, arming and disarming (and charming) one another with their quick wit and biting criticism. The Broadway Stage play was written, specifically, for Hepburn and she exceeds in this role. Here is a newsflash - KATHERINE HEPBURN IS A VERY GOOD ACTRESS - and I think this is the very best performance of the very best actress of all time (with apologies to Meryl Streep). She was nominated (but did not win) the Oscar for Best Actress for her performance (losing to a very deserving Ginger Rogers in KITTY FOYLE, I would have voted for Hepburn, but gotta give Rogers her due, she is very good as the titular KITTY FOYLE).

Stepping up to the plate - and matching Hepburn blow for blow - is, surprisingly, Stewart. I didn't really know the story of this film, so I was surprised where Stewart's character-arc went, especially in relation to his relationship with Hepburn. Stewart lost the Oscar in 1939 for his bravura performance in MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON (inexplicably losing to Robert Donat in GOODBYE MR. CHIPS), so the Academy made up for it's mistake by awarding Stewart the Oscar for Best Actor of 1940. This most certainly was a worthy Oscar-winning performance, but (if I"m going to be honest), pales in comparison to his work in MR. SMITH...

Looming over these two (and Tracy's impeding marriage to another person) is Cary Grant as Tracy's ex-husband, C.K. Dexter Haven. While Grant's role is the least showy of the 3, he commands the screen just with his presence whenever he shows up and strengthens this triangle with his strength of character.

The supporting cast is just as strong - Ruth Hussy (Oscar nominated for Best Supporting Actress) as a photographer, Roland Young (as the lecherous Uncle Willy) and, especially, 13 year old Virginia Weidler who is spunky, fun and smart as Tracy's kid sister. The only performer relegated to the back of the scenery is the bland John Howard as George Kittredge (the man Tracy is slated to marry). With Grant and Stewart on the scene, you know that Kittredge has no shot at getting Tracy Lord to the altar (or does he?).

All of these fine actors and the wonderful dialogue were put into the hands of the great Director George Cukor - who had 1 of his 5 Best Director Oscar Nominations for this film (he will win for MY FAIR LADY in 1964). He handles this film with skilled hands letting the actors (and the dialogue) "do their thing" without letting any of them overstay their welcome. It is a masterful job of directing and with strong actors (and off-screen personalities) like Hepburn, Grant and Stewart, he had his hands full.

Sure...it's a 1940's movie, so some of the "social situations" (mostly male/female dynamics) do not age particularly well, but Hepburn was a strong personality - certainly well ahead of the game in terms of equality of strength of the sexes, so these dynamics do not jump at us as strongly as it might have been in a lesser actress's hands.

If you haven't seen this film in sometime (or if you haven't seen it at all) - check out THE PHILADELPHIA STORY - you'll be glad you did.

Letter Grade: A+

10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)