review: The Bride Came C.O.D.

That was cute. I love screwball comedies. They take the edge off a day and are just fun entertainment.
This one is about an heiress (Bette Davis) who makes a rather rash decision fly to Las Vegas to elope with a man she has only known for 4 days. Much to the detriment of her father (Eugene Pallette). The pilot for the couple (James Cagney) convinces her father to hire him to bring the girl to Amirillo, unmarried, for the price of $10/lb - which will about cover the overdue amount left on the plane he owns. So he kidnaps her - but because of her wild antics, they crash by a ghost town with only one occupant (Harry Davenport).
It is quite delightful. Screwball comedies are not Cagney or Davis' strong points, but they are both delightful in this. Best part of the movie is a rather difficult car ride, and watching Cagney react to it.
It's nothing amazing, but a whole lot of fun :D
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex

For just a second, I want to lean away from the film itself and focus on one of the extras on the DVD I am watching. It is a cartoon from that time called "Old Glory" and yes, you got it, it is about American History. It starts with Porgy having trouble with the Pledge of Allegiance. He say he doesn't understand why he has to learn it, and then falls alseep to dream of Uncle Sam telling him our nation's history. He then wakes up and proudly salutes the flag and says the Pledge. It is a wonderful cartoon and it is something that makes you very proud to be American. Something a lot of people needed to see in those time - something I think we all need to see and hear today more often.

But the other point: Keep in mind, this was in 1939 - and so, the pledge Porky says is missing that phrase that so many people make a fuss over: "under God" This is a whole side matter, but I do think it is important to mention that this phrase was put into use in the 1950s during the Red Scare and the Communist witch hunts of the time. That is why I don't like the phrase - or rather, it is not that I don't like the phrase, but rather I don't like the intent of which it is used. And I don't like people thinking it is unpatriotic to not say the phrase now. Its not unpatriotic, its just not religious.

That aside - back to the film:
You just gotta love the early Technicolor films. There is something so spactacular about the color that even today's films can't match. The color is just so rich - even the browns and so forth. One of the films 5 Oscar Nominations was for Color Photography
I like this movie, and I don't. I like it because it has a lot of stars and is beautiful with its color, but I also think this is a little overacted. But not in a way I like. I don't mind a little bit of dramatics, but there is something about this movie that rubs me the wrong way.
I think Bette Davis is a genius - she is so transformative - but she's a little too bombastic for me in this. Maybe that is how she is supposed to be. I've never seen a calm portrayal of Elizabeth, but this borders on a little psychotic at times. This makes her a bit of a scene stealer - and I guess maybe she should be considering her real life counterpart - but that doesn't make for a very good film. Flynn is Flynn - I have only seen him in one type of movie as the charming swashbuckler - which he does well - but again, sometimes it can be a little much. One thing (and I feel bad about saying this), I don't believe they are in love at all. There are moments when I see them portraying love and acting so wonderfully, but you are aware it is acting. It does not seem real. Not to me, anyways. I will say that their sparring is quite believable though. This might be because Flynn and Davis did not like each other much. They were two very different people, so that naturally led to conflicts. And then apparently, the director, Michael Curtiz was rather hard to work with. So yeah, the tension scenes were quite good because I image there was a lot of tension on the set.
I guess the biggest thing I have against this movie is the politics. That is really all it is: politics. Trying to tell a love story about two people who aren't really in love because of politics is just a bad combination. What I mean by that is that this is not a love that just couldn't be - but a love that is not willing to be. Elizabeth and Essex say they love each other deeply, but neither one is willing to put aside their ambition, to give it all up to be with one another. It is a failed romance - and that is just hard to watch. And then there is Lady Penelope - I just can't understand why Essex would not fall in love with someone who so utterly loves him. It just doesn't makes sense. I guess what I mean by that is that they don't seem to have a past, a history, together, so there is no reason why we should believe that they love each other.
The supporting cast is amazing. Think of it: Alan Hale, Donald Crisp, Olivia deHavilland, Vincent Price, and a brand new Nanette Fabray (Fabres).
I don't know, but somehow this movie just did not click with me.
2 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Dark Victory

Tearjerker.
1939. What a year. The more I see of movies made in this year, the more I realize that it really was a golden year for Hollywood. I mean, Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind kind of swamped everything, but there are so many gems. This is one of them.
Story: a young, vivacious woman (Bette Davis) is having problems with her sight and her head. Call in a specialist (George Brent). I don't know all the medical lingo - but it is something with the brain, and they need to operate. They do, and the operation is a success, but you find out that it is also a failure because it only fixed the immediate problem. She is going to die. But she will be okay until just before, when she will become blind. The rest, I leave to you to see.
What makes this movie is the performances. Bette Davis is ... well, Bette Davis. She is so fascinating in this role - mostly because the character is just so good - despite herself. At first, she seems a little fake, but quickly you learn the difference between the facade and her personality. When you can tell the difference between an actress playing a happy woman, and an actress who is playing a woman who is playing at being happy, you know you've got something great on your hands.
George Brent is also quite wonderful in it. He goes from brilliant, no nonsense, to tortured lover to incredibly happy and ignorant. Geraldine Fitgerald is also quite subtle in her acting. It takes a while to see if she is good or not. The only thing I don't like is that so often she won't look at the camera or at someone. She is always diverting her eyes. Some of it is character, but the rest just seems odd. But I quite warmed up to her after a bit, and her character is so touching. Humphrey Bogart is quite out of his realm in this movie. He's not bad by any means at all, the character is just different. He plays the Irish stablehand. I think he got short changed in this film - but that is the studio system for you. He was a contract player, and he played the role they assigned him. The character isn't as developed as I would have liked. And if Bogart's character needed more, than Reagan really got the shaft part. He's just there. You hardly notice him at all except for the constant glass in his hand.
All in all, a very ... poignant film.
3 out of 5 stars

"The Petrified Forest"

, Be It's a little melodramatic and very dated, but I LOVE this movie! I adore the fact that it was a play before it was made into the movie. I like the setting, the way it was shot, and pretty much everything. I don't think it is lessened by its melodramatic elements.
Leslie Howard plays a wandering intellectual who finds himself in the middle of nowhere, Arizona. Bette Davis plays a girl longing to get out of the desert. Humphrey Bogart plays the gangster who takes everyone hostage. Yes, it is one of those pictures: a group of ransom people forced to be together in a small space. Like Lifeboat except in the desert with gangsters. Again, sounds corny, I guess, but it is amazing - I guess I am a sucker for this kind of story. Bogart is amazing in this movie. He is so studied in his character - he has a distinctinve walk, talk, look. He is so morose in this movie that you can't hate him. You're scared of him, but you're drawn to him. Howard is a little grand, but the character fits into that acting style so well. Bette Davis gravitates between appropriate and a little melodramatic. There is one scene where she practically yells her line, and I have to think that she forgot that she was not onstage. But in a way, her character is full of that drive, so it seems to be half-intentional.
I really want to get ahold of this script. Desperately.
Four and a half out of five stars.