Skip to main content

"Rain" (1932) - 80~90 years too soon

What happens when you take a top glamor star of depression era cinema, and put her in an unglamorous role with deep moral themes about religious hypocrisy? You get a critical & financial bomb at the box office.  If your audience came in hoping to escape from their dire circumstances - and you give them a slow burning conflict of mores on opposite sides of the spectrum, they are not going to dig it. The critics will say the characters are ‘satisfactory’ or that the star is out of her depth. 

I say - Bpppffftt! If you took that movie and redid it shot for shot today - it would sell. You probably could not fill theater seats with it. We don’t go to see these kinds of movies anymore; however, there are any number of streaming services that could / should reproduce it. It is public domain now, so that door is wide open.


The director did a great job (even if he is uncredited). The story was based on a play - and I would argue that you could almost stage it the same as he shot it.


Joan Crawford was good. The plot summary says she played a prostitute - I am not sure how we know that from the film. She seemed more like a woman who was not in the least bit prim, but I failed to see anything she did or said that implied she was trading herself for money. The so-called supporting cast were good, but the one other actor who made the bill, Walter Huston was a little too much of a stereotype. I think his wife should have been and was, but I thought his portrayal was a bit flat for what that part needed. For example, I sort of guessed how the climax would happen about 5 minutes before we got there, but I don’t think he sold the buildup very well. I was a little confused about what happened until the 3 minutes of wrap-up before the end credits. I can place part of the blame on the sound guy and modern TV speakers. It probably would have been more obvious with a decent sound system. *


This is a pre-code movie, and so I was looking out for what would become code violations. In this case, the most obvious one was when one soldiers slapped Ms. Crawford on the bum as she danced. I happened once - you could not actually see it, but the foley artist earned their pay & Ms. Crawford certainly acted accordingly. I could hear Will Hays sigh and shake his head.


*I think if you can tell what is going on without sound, that is a pretty good director + actor combination. Joan Crawford passed that test with excellent marks. Walter Huston got a C-minus.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

They Live (1988)

 "They Live" (1988) is a movie I had never seen until last night when I went over to my sister's place. What a gem (my sister and this movie). Roddy Piper does some of his best work - which even for a Canadian is pretty dull. If, while watching it, you imagine that he never heard the director call 'action', then his performance makes total sense. Offsetting this is any scene where Keith David or Peter Jason are in. They are acting their butts of and are enthralling. (Just so you don't get confused - Peter Jason is neither Meatloaf nor Jason Sudekis' father ... You might think he is, but he isn't). The movie itself is a 94 minute indictment on Reagonmics, and gets plenty preachy. It would be under an hour of you cut out the establishing shots of people walking. But - THE REASON this movie needs to be seen - is a fight scene between Roddy and Keith. It goes on for 5+ minutes - you think it is over at least 3 times - it has all the beats of a professional...
Post a Comment
Read more

Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958) - it is a good deal better than the remakes

I got around to watching the original 1958 comedy caper film - the one that "Welcome to Collinwood" was pantomiming. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" is hilarious. It is 25 minutes longer than the remake and never once did I feel the need to check my watch. I even paused to go refill my water glass. There will be no problem telling who is who or how the story goes - it is well shot and characters are unique. The story is a simple and fun. Comparing the "BDoMS" and "WtC" - they are identical in terms of characters and scenes. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" street is terrific, and "WtC" is a slog. The biggest difference is seen in the dialog. In "Big Deal" the people just talk, like you might expect people to talk. They are funny, but not odd. The colloquialisms happen, but they aren't hard to see through. In "WtC", they are using a vernacular to make sure you are immersed deep in an Eastern European ethnic nei...
Post a Comment
Read more

Con Air (1997) - another example of the Jacob's ladder effect

As we work our way through Merry Cage-mas, an argument could be made that "Con Air" is a fever dream Nick Cage's character has just before dying during that opening bar fight. 1) Monica Potter has abs of steel and is supposedly pregnant with their daughter. She is so not pregnant looking. So much so that, I do not know how they would have been far enough along to ultrasound the embryo. Additionally, he has just walked off a fishing boat into the bar she works at after getting home from deployment - when was the child conceived? 2) Nick Cage is immediately arrested and  sentenced to seven years in prison. During the film he writes & received fully formed letters from this child. In them, he talks about all the things they used to do with each other. When did these things happen?  3) Upon making his way into the titular 'Con Air' plane, Nick Cage has a shrink wrapped bunny rabbit doll he bought for this little girl as a present. Where did that come from? The pri...
Post a Comment
Read more