Ringing Freedom's Bell In Sunnyside, Washington & Beyond Since 2008
September 6, 2012 Leave a comment
Atlas Shrugged Part II has a new trailer available. The movie is set to open 10.12.12. Enjoy!
July 30, 2012 Leave a comment
This is the last post in this small series I am doing on Ernest Hemingway’s “A Farewell to Arms.” The book was great, the movies were okay.
The 1957 remake was in some ways better, and in some ways worse than the 1932 movie. It is in color, had a large budget, and the sound is much better preserved than in the 1932 movie. These are some of the good points.
On the flip side, Rock Hudson and Jennifer Jones were mismatched for the parts they were cast in. This is especially true of Jennifer Jones, who was too old for the part (being 37 at the time), and not even British. She seems to have totally forgotten to fake a British accent in much of the movie, and when she does, it comes off as inauthentic.
At the time, Jennifer Jones was the wife of the movie’s producer David O. Selznick; but who am I to suggest that had anything to do with the casting decision?
The movie has great visual backdrops, as it was shot on location in Italy and the Alps. The cast included literally thousands of extras. Before computer generated imagery made special effects relatively easy, it was required to actually have that many people if you wanted to show what an army on the move looks like.
For this, and its relatively faithful following of the book’s story, I give praise to the movie makers. This movie, like the 1932 version, was also subject to the censorship of the Motion Picture Production Code. This was industry self-regulation that affected most movies made from 1930-1968.
Interestingly, as I have been reading this book, and watching the movies, I heard a conservative talk show host on the radio reading the MPPC verbatim on his nationally syndicated program. He was suggesting that it would be better for America if Hollywood made at least a minimal attempt to provide movies and music that were more wholesome. (This is a sentiment I agree with, even while I disagree with the idea of censorship.)
As a child of the 1980′s, the thing I knew Rock Hudson for was allegedly engaging in homosexual behavior, and being the first big name celebrity to die of AIDS. It was interesting to watch this movie, seeing him in a production shot during his prime movie making days.
Also, in researching this review, I found out he was a friend of both Ronald and Nancy Reagan. While Hudson was seeking medical care in France, the Reagans placed phone calls on his behalf urging the French government to ensure he received the best possible care while overseas.
In addition to two movies made from the book, a TV mini-series was made in 1966 by the BBC and shown in the UK. I streamed the 1932 movie on Netflix, and the 1957 movie on Amazon. Unfortunately, neither service currently offers the 1966 TV mini-series.
While the 1957 movie did not receive very positive reviews (Ernest Hemingway publicly stated he disliked the movie), I will say this for Selznick: he fought hard to secure rights to make movies based on good literature.
Selznick is more highly regarded for his movie “Gone With the Wind.” It is a pity this movie did not turn out as nicely. It was the last one produced by Selznick.
Please support this blog with your contributions:
July 25, 2012 Leave a comment
This is the second in a short series of posts related to the novel “A Farewell to Arms” by Ernest Hemingway. In my first post on this subject, I reflected on the book and its continuing publication, following its release in 1929. This is the book that made Hemingway financially independent, but personal tragedy plagued him as well. As we have been taught in school, 1929 is the year of the famous stock market crash that precipitated the Great Depression. After the book’s publication, Hemingway wrote a letter to his father telling him not to worry about money. Unfortunately, the letter was delivered minutes after his father committed suicide.
In writing this post, I wish to focus on the 1932 movie made from the book. At the time I am writing this, the movie can be streamed on Netflix and Amazon, and can also be downloaded from the Internet Archive website (this movie is now in the public domain). It has been awhile since I watched a movie from this era, so it is important to realize some differences in how the movie is presented, as it contrasts from modern movie experiences. The film is in black and white. It has sound, but is not of the high quality we now expect in new releases. Special effects consist of smoke bombs, concussion sound effects, and small models that require the audience to play along by using their imaginations a bit. Still, it is a mostly faithful Hollywood adaptation of a book.
The movie stars Helen Hayes (who gets top billing in the credits) and Gary Cooper. Some scenes are shot using language that is almost verbatim from the book. Some parts of the book are omitted altogether (a necessity to keep movies at a reasonable length of time), and some parts of the movie are completely “Hollywood.” By that I mean it differs completely from the book in sections. Films of this era were subject to censorship, and credits show that this movie was “approved” for release to audiences. It needed to go through editing revisions before receiving the “approval”, however.
***SPOILER ALERT***
Some audiences responded negatively to the bleak ending where Catherine Barkley (the main character’s love interest) dies. An alternate ending was provided to many theater operators where she survives, turning it into a happy ending. Hemingway was reportedly furious over the movie studio’s decision to alter the ending of the story.
Despite approval from censors, the film was still banned in Australia and British Columbia (where Hemingway’s book was also banned). The book was also banned in Italy for its portrayal of the Italian retreat from Caporetto. In the United States, the main objection to the book was for its portrayal of sex, and its “vulgarity.”
Despite great advances in artists being able to express themselves freely, modern censorship cloaks itself in the shroud of “political correctness.” Despite the censorship, Hemingway continued to gain in popularity, and his work endures today.
In my opinion, it is unlikely that self appointed censors of the political left will successfully stamp out the popularity of proponents of traditional values any more than censors of the political right could stamp out the popularity of novels by such people as Ernest Hemingway (who the lefties now disfavor for his portrayal of women and homosexuality.)
Please support this blog with your contributions:
Eagle Watch
jimsweb.net