Queen Norma Shearer: Avec Robert Montgomery Poll

I just had the pleasure of watching Private Lives (1931) which recently aired on TCM and I had managed to tape it. It's so difficult to find Norma Shearer films to watch (see my previous rant about this subject) that when I get the opportunity to see one for the first time I feel like I found a $10 bill I didn't know I had. This particular one was a treat because it's one of the many pairings of Norma Shearer with Robert Montgomery.

This duo, although not as famous as, say Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy or Doris Day and Rock Hudson, was a successful one in it's own right and produced some wonderful movies. My personal favorite one is Strangers May Kiss (1931). For those of you out there who are Norma Shearer fans (or Robert Montgomery fans), let me know which of these is your favorite by posting a comment (I love getting those).

Their Own Desire (1929)
The Divorcee (1929)
Private Lives (1931)
Strangers May Kiss (1931)
Riptide (1934)

The Asphalt Jungle: Images Speak

I had never put much thought into it but when I recently did a repeat viewing of The Asphalt Jungle (1950) for my film noir class, I kept thinking about the various publicity pictures and posters used to promote the film. They vary greatly and each says something different about the movie and the time it was released. It got me thinking, what goes into these works of art and photography? Because first impressions are everything, I'm sure that the creators of these promotional images thought very greatly about who the potential audience was and what would draw them in enough to pull out their wallet and fork over the cash to buy a movie ticket.

So I had some fun and let my mind run wild with the idea. I scoured the internet (okay I just Google'd) and picked 3 of my favorites to discuss.

This is by far my favorite one. I had discovered it a couple of years ago when I did my regular post-viewing research of The Asphalt Jungle. This image is straightforward and eye-catching. You've got all the main stars in the image and it's a clever shot of them from below. They are surrounding a pile of jewels which ties them all to the jewel heist which is at the center of the film. This is the image most representative of the film's story. It's not just about a convoluted robbery that goes bad, it's about several individuals who all have their own weakness that leads to their downfall.

This one confuses me greatly and downright irks me. It reminds me of the pathetic cover of a certain BBC-Austen miniseries in which the American packaging showcased 2 models instead of the actors because they were better looking than the actual stars. It's misleading and wrong! This particular poster tells the audience, "come watch this film because you'll see sexy Marilyn Monroe strut her stuff." Those poor lustful souls will only come away disappointed to have seen her in just 3 short scenes.

As I write this, I cannot help feeling like a hypocrite. I did come to find this film as a Monroe fan wanting to see more of her films. I liked the film for what it was and not necessarily for Monroe's role. Yet this title is often distributed as a Monroe film. I'm hoping that in a few years this will be known only as a very good film noir.

Let's ignore Marilyn Monroe scared face in the corner for a moment and look at the other elements of this image, which happens to be the DVD cover. This is quite good. In the background, you have the asphalt jungle and the tagline "The City Under the City" which is representative of both the underground scenes and the "underground" network of hoodlums. Then set below the city you have the 3 main people involved with the actual heist (versus those involved with only the planning of the heist); Sterling Hayden, the hoodlum, James Whitmore, the driver and Anthony Caruso, the box man ~ explosives. Then right below them you've got the sex, i.e. Monroe. Clever thing about this image, is that it's on a tilt symbolizing the impending downfall of these characters (except the sex, which survives of course).

Double Indemnity: Second Viewing

I didn't quite have the time before my first class to watch Double Indemnity (1944) two more times, but was lucky enough to be able watch it once in an interactive manner. By which I mean, I took notes while I watched. I sometimes notetake while watching films. My hands are pretty restless and taking a pen to paper has a tendency to calm me. Also, my mind becomes more alert as I'm actively searching for interesting things to write down. It makes for a more in depth movie experience.

My second viewing of the film was quite interesting. I'd been looking for minutae and subtleties that I may have overlooked during the first go. The language, lighting and plethora of staircases all stood out to me. Part of me wonders how much of what I get out of a film is what I am searching for (either consciously or subconsciously) and what the filmmakers put into it for the viewers to find. Here are some things that I discovered in my second viewing.

1. Robert Osborne -Any movie benefits from a Robert Osborne introduction. Always impeccably dressed, he welcomes you into the movie with fun facts and quips. If your lucky, he will tell you a particular scene or image to look out for. And am I the only one that thinks that loft-style studio is beautiful. Could I move in? I think Osborne should introduce every DVD, no matter what the film.


2. Edith Head - I didn't notice this the first time around, but caught her name in the opening credits. No wonder Barbara Stanwyck looks so stunning! The amazingly talented Edith Head dressed her. I wonder if she dressed the men? If so, I've got a few complaints. The main one being that Fred MacMurray's suits seem to hang on him while Edward G. Robinson seems to be bursting out of his.


3. Film Noir Language - "Dame" "Hot Potato" "Outfit" "Dimwitted" "Song and Dance", this movie is chock full of colloquialisms. Yet what I find so intriguing is the wit and banter and the heavy heavy flirting! I wonder how much of the intricately sexy language was a result of passing this film through the codes. Did the language have to be clever to convey all the sex that had to be censored?


4. Linear and Square - It's "straight down the line" until they get to the "end of the line." The plot movement is very linear. The sequence of events pertaining to the crime seem to happen back to back like a line of dominoes and the uncovering of the crime by Keyes (Edward G. Robinson) seems to happen in the same sequence as the crime does, it's just one step behind. Everything falls apart when Fred MacMurray's character breaks that line. The square element is the romantic entanglement which is at the heart of the story. Phyllis - > Walter - > Lola -> Nino. I could call it a circle, but this is film noir! It's all about the harsh angles.


5. Fire - Did anyone notice Fred MacMurray's amazing ability to light a match with his thumb? I found this oddly sexy. As though he was so pumped up with testosterone and adrenaline that he thought nothing of potentially burning his thumb with the match. It was just a faster way to light a cigarette.

Double Indemnity: First Viewing

In preparation for my first Film Noir class next week, I will be watching the classic, Double Indemnity (1944). I have already seen this film but it was some months ago and a refresher seemed necessary. Why watch this film again? Why not, I ask? For any of you who are repeat viewers, you will understand that each viewing of a film is its own unique experience. Minute subtleties overlooked on the first pass, reveal themselves during a new viewing. Sometimes even after 100 viewings of a favorite film, I will be surprised to discover something new and the feeling is equivalent to finding a $5 bill you didn't know you had. Plus repeat viewings are a way for us to intertwine an important movie into our lives. To badly paraphrase deconstructionist Jacques Derrida, single moments cannot be grasped, so to experience something one must repeat it; either the experience itself is repeated in the same form or in a similar form or the memory of it plays in one's mind.

Repeat viewings have always fascinated me. There are certain films that I feel lend themselves to that continued experience. As an experiment, I will document my reactions to each viewing of this film and will finish with a final round up of what I learned from my class. These are my impressions on my first viewing. Elapsed time does not help with my memory so I will only draw on what sticks out in my mind the most.

• Naughty Fred MacMurray - Most of you know him as the detective gone bad in Double Indemnity (1944) or the sleazy, womanizing boss in The Apartment (1960), but my mind's image of Fred MacMurray is quite different. To me, he is the loveable and charismatic actor of so many romantic comedies and dramas from the '30s and '40s. The rich but loving boyfriend of Katharine Hepburn in Alice Adams (1935), the morally righteous lawyer married to a pathological liar in True Confession (1937), or the poor lovestruck suitor who has to compete with an even more endearing wheel-chair bound Ralph Bellamy in Hands Across the Table (1935). To see him be a little bit bad in this film was confusing yet very exciting.



• The Wig - It stands out. Even director Billy Wilder thought it was a bit ridiculous. Yet one couldn't envision Barbara Stanwyck in the role of the conniving femme fatale without the curly, blonde wig. It's severe but she's severe. It's over the top, but she's over the top. It just works. And also there is something that happens to a woman when she goes blonde. Like Deborah Kerr in From Here to Eternity (1953), they go a little bit bad, or in Stanwyck's case a whole lot. However, this is all coming from a brunette who has a serious case of blonde-envy.



• Secondary Romances - They work. Period. I love them and oftentimes I find them more interesting than the primary romance. In this case, the forbidden love between rich daughter Lola and Nino who is poor and rough around the edges. Very intriguing.