What defines a "Modern"-era film? To me, the critical years are 1939-1941, and the two films I am going to reference from that period are Gone With the Wind (GWTW), and Citizen Kane. Before Kane and GWTW, film was in its infancy; afterward, anything seemed possible.
Now, this is not entirely true, of course. Those of you who have seen Intolerance, Greed, The Last Laugh, and Abel Gance's Napoleon know of the power and glory of silent films. But when talkies became de rigeur in the late twenties, all of a sudden the medium was constricted by the limits of sound recording. The camera stopped moving for a time, and all people did was talk and talk and talk--it's probably no coincidence that there were more screwball comedies in the 30's than sweeping epics (Mutiny on the Bounty is about the only memorable one from that time).
And then, 1939 and GWTW. As an effort in film-making and story-telling, it's just as entertaining today as when it was released. The performances have aged well; the photography is gorgeous; the music stirring; and Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable simply captivating. If one could forgive the occasional racist portrayal (as in Prissy), it would still be well received if released sight-unseen today. And what a year for director Victor Fleming! People forget that he did not only GWTW, but also the Wizard of Oz both in the same year. Wow--imagine Spielberg completing ET one month and starting Schindler's List the next. It's that impressive.
In 1941 came Kane. Sometime I'll dissect it in greater detail (because modern audiences seem not to understand what the big deal is about) but here was a tale from Orson Welles and screenwriter Herman Manckiewicz that revolutionized the potential of film: 1) It established non-linear story-structure as a viable medium 2) It utilized the camera to its fullest capacity (must recognize the great Gregg Toland here, for he was the DP on it) 3) It succeeded on multiple, multiple levels: As a roman a clef bio of W.R. Hearst, as a mystery tale (almost film noir), as an acting vehicle for the 25 year old (!) Welles, as a debut directing vehicle for the 25 year old Welles (!!), and as a damned good and enjoyable picture that still entertains sixty-five years later.
Without Kane, there's no Pulp Fiction; without GWTW, there's no Titanic. Before 1939 films often seemed stodgy and stagey; after 1941, the medium was thrust into its maturity.
If you doubt this, watch the Best Picture winners from 1935, 36 and 37, and then watch the ones from 1948, 49, and 50. The difference in acting and film-making prowess is astounding, beyond any other 15 year period of motion picture history since the advent of talking pictures.
So the next time Kane or GWTW come on the tube, show a little respect. They laid a lot of groundwork for some great familiar films to come.
Now, this is not entirely true, of course. Those of you who have seen Intolerance, Greed, The Last Laugh, and Abel Gance's Napoleon know of the power and glory of silent films. But when talkies became de rigeur in the late twenties, all of a sudden the medium was constricted by the limits of sound recording. The camera stopped moving for a time, and all people did was talk and talk and talk--it's probably no coincidence that there were more screwball comedies in the 30's than sweeping epics (Mutiny on the Bounty is about the only memorable one from that time).
And then, 1939 and GWTW. As an effort in film-making and story-telling, it's just as entertaining today as when it was released. The performances have aged well; the photography is gorgeous; the music stirring; and Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable simply captivating. If one could forgive the occasional racist portrayal (as in Prissy), it would still be well received if released sight-unseen today. And what a year for director Victor Fleming! People forget that he did not only GWTW, but also the Wizard of Oz both in the same year. Wow--imagine Spielberg completing ET one month and starting Schindler's List the next. It's that impressive.
In 1941 came Kane. Sometime I'll dissect it in greater detail (because modern audiences seem not to understand what the big deal is about) but here was a tale from Orson Welles and screenwriter Herman Manckiewicz that revolutionized the potential of film: 1) It established non-linear story-structure as a viable medium 2) It utilized the camera to its fullest capacity (must recognize the great Gregg Toland here, for he was the DP on it) 3) It succeeded on multiple, multiple levels: As a roman a clef bio of W.R. Hearst, as a mystery tale (almost film noir), as an acting vehicle for the 25 year old (!) Welles, as a debut directing vehicle for the 25 year old Welles (!!), and as a damned good and enjoyable picture that still entertains sixty-five years later.
Without Kane, there's no Pulp Fiction; without GWTW, there's no Titanic. Before 1939 films often seemed stodgy and stagey; after 1941, the medium was thrust into its maturity.
If you doubt this, watch the Best Picture winners from 1935, 36 and 37, and then watch the ones from 1948, 49, and 50. The difference in acting and film-making prowess is astounding, beyond any other 15 year period of motion picture history since the advent of talking pictures.
So the next time Kane or GWTW come on the tube, show a little respect. They laid a lot of groundwork for some great familiar films to come.
posted by I. Michael Koontz | 5:45 PM
2 Comments:
'Grapes' is a great film; almost certainly John Ford's best effort in true cinema. It has a strong documentary-like feel (I think it, like 'Kane,' was photographed by Gregg Toland)and Henry Fonda's best performance.
For its time, it's almost revolutionary as a piece of neo-realism in the pre-'Bicycle Thief' era.
On the downside, it's also one of the most depressing films of its period and not half as fun to watch as GWTW or Kane. But as cinema, it belongs near the top of any All-Time Greatest list of American films.
BTW, my favorite John Ford films are 'The Searchers' and 'The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.' Both are definitely worth a rental.
There's a new John Ford collection that includes 2 disks on the Searchers, possibly the greatest Western ever (my choice is Red River, but that's for another blog post).
Valance, unfortunately, is not in that collection, but is worth a view--note that there's some similarities to Eastwood's The Unforgiven while you watch it.
Post a Comment
<< Home