Tag Archives: movie reviews

23. All About Eve (1950)

Director: Joseph L. Mankiewicz 


Alex – 8.0   Elliot – 8.5  IMDB 7.5    Rotten Tomatoes 7.9

Alex’s Commentary

In our last movie,  All the King’s Men, we saw that a person can be blinded by political ambition. In All About Eve, we see that an actress can also be blinded by ambition. Eve Harrington (Anne Baxter) idolizes stage star, Margo Channing (Bette Davis), and plots to steal her role in a future Broadway production. The film is an interesting character study combined with an element of mystery – who really is Eve Harrington and what are her plans to achieve her goals? Who will she deceive and lie to in her quest? Both Ms. Baxter and Ms. Davis were nominated for Best Actress in a Leading Role and may have split the vote.  This resulted in a win for Judy Holliday for her performance in Born Yesterday, a play which I had a minor role in high school!cinemateca_allabouteve01

Joseph L. Mankiewicz won both Best Director and Best Writing, Screenplay, awards that I feel are well deserved. The script is intelligently written with more literary and theater references than I admit to fully comprehend, although the intent of the references is clear.

The strong cast includes George Sanders (Best Supporting Actor) who plays Addison DeWitt, a theater critic who wields power and influence and is despised by the theater community who are afraid not to include him in their activities for fear of reprisal.  Other standout performances are given Celeste Holm (Margo’s best friend Karen) and Thelma Ritter (Margo’s dresser/secretary Birdie until Eve usurps her position).

As one would expect in a film portraying the Broadway elite, the costuming is excellent and yielded Edith Head one of her eight Oscars for Best Costume Design. Nominated for record 14 awards at the 23rd Academy Awards (tied with Titanic (1997) and La La Land (2016)), the movie is enjoyable by those who like witty, fast-paced dialogue combined with backstage backstabbing and a few unexpected plot twists.

Elliot’s Commentary:

Based on the short story, “”The Wisdom of Eve”, written by Mary Orr , chronicles the story of a young super-fan’s immersion into a circle of theater friends.   Produced in 1950, All About Eve is our first film of the new decade.  The beginning of the proto-typical 1950’s suburban lives has become a reality across the country.  The threat of communism is spreading and the Korean War had started in June based on the China and Soviet-backed invasion of South Korea by the Northern communist regime.  The start of the conflict in Korea marks the first escalation of the Cold War following the power-struggle between the US, China, and the Soviet Union in the aftermath of WWII.  It was also during 1950, that the Red Channels pamphlet was published outing prominent members of the television, film, and radio committee as communist sympathizers.  Notable names listed in the pamphlet included Orson Welles, Leonard Bernstein, Arthur Miller, Lena Horne, Edward R. Murrow and Artie Shaw.  During this time, Hollywood pivoted from some of the more controversial subjects like antisemitism covered in Gentleman’s Agreement just a few years earlier, and played it safer with subjects relating even indirectly to controversial political topics.   While there was a dark haze hanging both over Hollywood as well as the Kangaroo court of the House Un-American Activities Commission (HUAC), All About Eve emerged as the best film to win an Academy Award for Best Picture since 1943’s Casablanca.

Joseph L. Mankiewicz won two Oscars for his directing and screenplay for his work on the film.  The screenplay is certainly deserving of the Oscar with some of the best dialogue that we’ve had in a movie thus far.  Bolstered by the amazing two-time Oscar winner Bette Davis (Jezebel and Dangerous), the star-studded cast brings Joseph L Mankewicz’s script to life.  Davis is joined in the film by Celeste Holm All-About-Eve-2(Best Supporting Actress from Gentleman’s Agreement), Hugh Marlowe, Anne Baxter, George Sanders (Best Supporting Actor win for All About Eve for his portrayal of play director Addison DeWitt and supporting character, Jack Favell, in the 1940 best picture winner, Rebecca)  and a very young unknown star at the time named Marilyn Monroe.   The film also marked Bette Davis’ comeback after a series of lackluster films at the end of her 18 year tenure at Warner Brothers.

While the film starts with Anne Baxter’s character, Eve, winning a significant theater prize, the film clearly shows the faces of a group of solemn faces gazing at the actress winning the award with a certain morose and dumbstruck expression.  Through flashback, we are taken to the group’s first encounter with Eve as a superfan who watches every single one of idol, Margo Channing’s (Bette Davis) performances from the standing room section of a theater in New York.  This dedication catches the attention of all-about-evethe kindly wife of the playwright, Karen Richards (Celeste Holm), and leads to Mrs. Richards introducing Eve to her close friend Margo Channing.   At this chance encounter, we meet the rest of the morose group of faces in the actresses changing room: Actress Margo Channing, Playwright Lloyd Richards (Richard Marlowe), and Margo’s boyfriend director Bill Sampson (Garry Merrill).   The meeting gives Eve the first opportunity to act as she uses her sob story of growing up poor, losing her husband in WWII, and theater and fandom as her one true escape from her life’s woes, to encapsulate the attention of the group.   Eve Harrington’s story in particular charms Margo through her naivete and flattery, and soon becomes a tenant in the actress’ life.   Within a day, Margo has moved Eve into her flat in New York and put her to work as an assistant, accountant, and friend/companion.

While there is some foreshadowing, with Eve trying on Margo’s dress from the play, the transformation from doting assistant to conniving and plotting understudy is pronounced but slow.  Eve’s move to throw a birthday party for Margo’s boyfriend, Bill Sampson, marks her first deliberate move to interfere in Margo’s affairs.  The party plays on several of Margo’s insecurities such as a pretty young woman encroaching on her territory with her younger boyfriend, Bill.  all about eve - davis thelma ritter dressing roomAdditionally, as multiple pretty young actresses vie for parts with several of the older producers, directors, and playwrights present at the party, Margo is left feeling old and out of demand by the new crop of competition.  Davis’ portrayal of Margo in this moment is vivid and brilliant, and very well informed by her status in the industry 10 years after her Oscar-winning prime.  As the party continues into the night, Margo filled with many very dry martinis is left at one of her most vulnerable.  This is also the moment in the film, Eve uses her new standing in the theater society to ask the playwright’s wife, Karen Richards, for the opportunity to serve as understudy in Margo’s long-running play since Eve has seen every production.

The film’s commentary on celebrity, fandom, envy, and even ageism in Hollywood/the stage, is biting and relevant even in today’s climate.   Marilyn Monroe’s character, Miss Caswell arrives at a party and is sent to entertain a portly producer, Max Fabian portrayed by Gregory Rattoff with this biting line “Why must all producers look like All-About-Eve-splashunhappy rabbits?”  To which her companion the director, Addison DeWitt, replies “Now go make him a happy”.  This sexual innuendo certainly hints at something more than just a friendly conversation, and Fabian’s appearance looks eerily similar to Harvey Weinstein.   While the film doesn’t quite escalate the conversation to the #MeToo movement of today’s Hollywood landscape, the intimation of the metaphorical casting couch is quite scandalous in the post motion picture production code of that era of Hollywood.

Cut to a week after the party and not only has Eve received the role of understudy in Margo’s play, but she has also hidden her new role from Margo until a matinee in which our lead actress was unable to attend.  Eve’s performance of one scene garnered great reviews and caused Margo to go into a slight frenzy after realizing that her part in the play, which was written for a 24 year old, might better suit Eve than our aging starlet.   The shift is truly solidified by a “prank” that Karen plays on Margo where she drained the gasoline tank of a car on the return from a trip to the countryside.  MV5BYjRlNmU0NGUtOWM2MS00NjFhLWJkOWUtNDNlMzIyMGNmNzg2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjkxMjM5Nzc@._V1_The car’s depletion of gas limited its ability to make Margo’s train back to New York on time, and gave Eve the break she needed as she gave an entire play’s performance to a group of newspaper critics.  Not only does Margo’s absence allow Eve an opportunity to shine in front of critics, but it also is the opportunity Eve uses to make a pass at Margo’s boyfriend, Bill Sampson.

Bill fortunately turns down Eve’s advance, but this scene is viewed by critic Addison DeWitt (George Sanders) who uses Eve’s vulnerability for a date and perhaps more.  Addison posts a glowing review of Eve’s performance while disparaging Margo’s age and ability to play the part.  It is in this scene as well, Addison digs deeper into Eve’s tale and begins to reveal doubt on her sob story that so enchanted the original group in the changing room.  As Eve’s veneer begins to fade, and we see her true Machiavellian nature she begins to come from the shadows and act more forcefully to get what she wants.  MV5BOWU5Zjc3MWEtMzJiOS00Mzc0LTg2NjUtMzBjNGM2YTUxZDU2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjkxMjM5Nzc@._V1_She maneuvers her way into Lloyd Richards’ new play in a part originally intended for Margo.  This gamesmanship leads us to the fateful night where Eve stands before her group of “friends” to accept the award for his stolen role and part.

Overall the film touches on a myriad of tropes that are as timeless as this film, sexism, ageism, fandom, and the perpetual search for celebrity.   This film inspired even more sinister movies with similar plots of obsession and becoming the object of your obsession such as The Talented Mr. Ripley, Single White Female, Black Swan and many more.  The screenplay of this movie was truly a work of art and the snappy and engaging dialogue is as timeless as the brilliant performances.  Of the films we have viewed throughout our journey, this was the first one that I had never seen to truly blow me away.   It is a classic in every right and a true masterpiece of 1950’s cinema.  If you have not had the pleasure of viewing this film, please spend the time to become acquainted with this masterpiece of cinematic achievement.



Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

22. All The King’s Men (1949)

Director: Robert Rossen


Alex –7.5   Elliot – 7.5    IMDB 7.5    Rotten Tomatoes 7.9

Alex’s Commentary:

This is a film I had not previously seen. Based on Robert Penn Warren’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel, All The King’s Men, the film follows the rise and fall of Willie Stark, a Midwesterner who’s passion to improve the lives of the poor and down-trodden leads him into politics. Played effectively by Broderick Crawford, MV5BNDA5MDg1YWMtMzcyYS00NjY0LWIzMTgtZWQ2YWQ5NGJiZGQ4XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTI3MDk3MzQ@._V1_Oscar winner for Best Actor, the story follows Willie’s transformation from unsophisticated do-gooder into maniacal leader of a political machine that will stop at nothing to accomplish Willie’s goals – goals which now center on Willie Starks’ personal agenda and far less on his constituency.

It is difficult not to draw comparisons with politicians of today and by that, I mean politicians in the most pejorative sense. Unfortunately, the story of leaders, whether it be executives, politicians, or anyone in a position of power, lining their own pockets at the expense of others is an age-old tale.  Although the premise of the story seems a bit contrived, that a person could change so dramatically in such a short period of time, it makes the viewer contemplate whether Willie did change or was he always a “bad” person without the opportunity to exploit his true nature.

One of the underlying themes repeated in the film is the notion that good things are borne from bad things.all-the-kings-men This is Willie’s way of justifying his wrongdoings if, ultimately, it results in a greater good. In other words, it is acceptable to bribe and pay graft if the result is a new hospital or highway. Of course, every highway, hospital, university or museum has the Stark name prominently displayed lest people forget who made it all happen. Interestingly, some of Willie’s campaign promises of free health care, free university education and no farmer losing his land to foreclosure can still be heard on the campaign trail today.

However, the film is more than the Willie Stark story, there are numerous subplots and rich character portrayals throughout. All the King’s Men is a blend of interwoven character studies that generate a feeling of excitement or, at a minimum, engage the viewer to watch with eager anticipation of what will occur next. The feel of the movie can be attributed to Robert Rossen, who was nominated in both the Best Director and Best Screenplay categories. Among the strong performances, include Best Supporting Actress winner, Mercedes McCambridge, who plays Sadie Burke, a political organizer working behind the scenes to promote Wille Stark to his people- the poor and uneducated (sounds vaguely familiar). Not that it detracts from the movie, but I believe the actress playing Ms. McCambridge was cast by a more attractive actress than originally intended for the character described in Robert Penn Warren novel.

I would be remiss not to mention John Ireland’s portrayal of Jack Burden, a newspaper reporter who’s writing aids in the rise of Willie Stark, and Burden’s ownc34e6b23bb093464fe40334d4f015e12 dubious slide from idealist to hatchet man. Also, Joanne Dru provides a solid portrayal of Anne Stanton; however, the notion that this socialite girlfriend of Jack Burden’s would become Willie Stark’s mistress seems far-fetched.

One of my favorite aspects of our Oscar Chronicle journey is watching films that take place in the period that the film is produced. All the King’s Men provides a wonderful glimpse into life in 1949 and the excellent black and white cinematography only enhances the experience. From the cars to the clothes to the daily activities of the people, it is interesting to see many things have changed and surprisingly, how many have stayed the same. I would encourage any film buff who enjoys stories surrounding politics or simply good character studies to watch All the King’s Men.

Elliot’s Commentary:

Based on the Pulitzer prize winning novel, ‘All The King’s Men’ by Robert Penn Warren, the film tells the story of Willie Stark, played with amazing presence by Broderick Crawford.  Broderick’s performance garnered him the Oscar for Best Actor.  Actress, Mercedes McCambridge, also won an Oscar for best supporting actress in the film for her portrayal as Sadie Burke, Willie Stark’s righthand woman throughout the course of the film.  The film chronicles Willie’s journey as he raises himself from rural farm life to the governor’s mansion.  Willie Stark stands out as a candidate in his small town of Kanoma County running for county commissioner due to the unfortunately maligned designation All_the_King_s_Men_Mercedes_McCambrdige_5as an honest politician.   Willie’s honesty and need to share the truth with the people during his campaigning is met with this biting response: “We all believe in free speech Willie- We got to, it’s in the constitution.” Essentially this quote damns free speech to a necessary evil that is not much appreciated in this small town.  We are also given an introduction into his character’s psyche, as a man having adopted the son of a friend who was too poor to support him and one who was victimized by the institution that fired his wife due to his exposure of the corruption of the system.  Willie was a cog in the political machine that society ran on, and he aimed to throw a wrench into works and really shake things up from the inside.

At the same time as our introduction to Willie is occurring, we see a glimpse into the life of the reporter covering Willie, Jack Burden played with great poise by the actor, John Ireland.  Jack grew up not far away from the rural county where Willie is running for office, but their worlds are separated not only by distance but also by a clear separation of socio-economic class.   The scenes comparing a world of sailing, tennis, dinner jackets, and cocktails compared to the farm life of Willie illustrate the true dichotomy of the two main character’s lives.  After learning more about Jack’s reluctance to settle into the life his family has offered, he is determined to do something that means something more than just the opulence imbued by his upbringing.   As Jack makes the pronouncement of his new mission, we learn that Willie lost the race for which he was running.   Undeterred by the setback of the loss, we see the real bootstrap mentality of Willie as he completes law school by correspondence in a montage that moves the timeline accordingly.

After Willie has received his law degree and began to practice law, an unfortunate catastrophe occurred at the school house whose construction had been a catalyst to Willie’s first unsuccessful political attempt.  Willie’s calls for investigation into the bidding for the construction contracts had fallen on deaf ears, and unfortunately the poor construction of the school house had caused an accident with a loss of multiple children’s lives.  In response, Willie filed civil charges against the state and began to give speeches across the country side in defense of cleaning of the state capitol from the corruption that had paved the way for this type of blatant cronyism.   all-the-kings-menWillie’s speeches made waves in the state capitol, inspiring a political party to back Willie as their representative for the gubernatorial race.  Unfortunately, the group backing Willie’s true intentions were to split the vote of the rival candidate and make way for their actual front-runner.

As Willie becomes aware of the plot, he gives in momentarily and breaches his normal tee-totaling ways in a moment of weakness.  As the man with normally unimpeachable character gives into drink, it broke a metaphorical barrier that was holding him back.   Willie Stark faces the town with a new resignation and thirst for blood as he leaves the facts and figures of his tax plan in the dust in favor of good old-fashioned populism and passion-based rhetoric.  The performance by Broderick Crawford in this scene is spellbinding and his charisma lights the screen on fire clearly earning his academy award.   Through his words resonating with his base in a way that a career politician never could, Willie’s meteoric rise catches the old guard by surprise.  Unfortunately, he began the race too far behind and is unable to reach victory in this first attempt.  As Willie loses the race, we also learn that Jack quit his reporting job because the paper stopped covering Willie out of fear that he actually could win.  Even in 1949, the link between capitalism, the media, and politics represents a detriment to candidates who do not have the interests of the corporate big-wigs in the forefronts of their platforms.  As we move to the next scene, Willie tells Jack that he knows how to win now.   This foreboding pronouncement indicates a real tonal shift as the audience bears witness to the character’s paradigm shift.

As weAll-the-Kings-Men-1949-00-45-13 enter the next stage of the film, Willie is now a hero of the people running four years later for his second attempt at governor.   While at first, we are hopeful that he is staying true to the character that we met on the farm all of those years ago, we are greeted now with insinuations that the money financing his new campaign is coming with strings attached -the same types of promises that he criticized in his first campaign for county commissioner.  This time, however, Willie won in a landslide and the audience is left with a lingering question, “At what cost?”.  Willie offers Jack a job at a rate 25% higher than he was making at the newspaper with the ominous concession, “Money? I don’t need money.  People give me things. Because they believe in me”.  Jack even brings Willie to his parent’s house, the world that seemed unreachable just a few short years earlier.  At this point, through power, Willie is able to breach the socioeconomic divide and win their support albeit with the caveat of continuing to broker deals despite the repercussions.   It is at this point in the film where we see the beginning of a pivot from a morality play to a cautionary tale.  It’s hard to not continually compare the fictional political landscape portrayed in the movie to our current political landscape in America.   Almost seventy years later we are still pursuing the same issues: healthcare, education, tax reform, and the menace of political corruption.

Willie’s descent from upstanding citizen, to womanizer and corrupt politician is hard to watch.   As he forces Jack down the rabbit hole too, it solidifies his transformation from hero to villain.  During the journey, he betrays friend and lackey Jack by forcing him to dig up dirt on his friends from home, while dating Jack’s old flame behind his back.   Jack’s moral quest to do something meaningful has now become a farce as he has enabled the most corrupt politician of all, one who outrivals even the institution that he rallied against.   The conflict intensifies to almost soap opera standards as Willie’s adopted son kills a young woman in a drunk driving accident.  3875441582_c5cbdef7baIn the aftermath, the woman’s father disappears when he refuses a bribe, and then the adopted son is paralyzed in a football accident.  After the father’s beaten body appears, impeachment proceedings begin against Willie.  Willie uses his popularity with the people for his own gain by convincing them that the news and media were lying and that he was telling them the truth.  This type of gaslighting to bend the will of the people has clear parables to other current events today.

What started as an enjoyable, captivating commentary on the political landscape spiraled into melodrama.   This film’s compelling story and great acting keeps the wheels churning as we watch the rise and ultimate demise of the politician whose original aims were true before he gave into the systemic corruption that the film alludes to as a necessary evil.  It states that good comes from bad, and that brute force and corruption will be a means to an end.  However, the film clearly shows the dangers of succumbing to those more base instincts in humanity.  The greed and thirst for power bleeds through the cracks of even Willie’s most noble intentions ultimately leads to his demise.   Overall, I enjoyed the film and appreciated the acting even as the story teetered over the edge of melodrama.   The score was a little corny in the film which accentuated bits of the melodrama and ultimately impacts the film’s relevance in the modern film cannon.




Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

21. Hamlet (1948)

Director:  Laurence Olivier


Alex – 7.0   Elliot – 7.2  IMDB 7.8  Rotten Tomatoes 8.4

Alex’s Commentary:

To be or not to be the best picture, that is the question. I’ve always viewed a “best picture” winner as a movie with a great original screenplay, amazing characters, a larger than life epic, or something unique that possibly we’ve never seen in a movie before. Obviously, Hamlet, being one of William Shakespeare’s greatest plays, is a well-known story with more memorable lines than I had remembered.  But is it a best picture? – I’m not so sure. The film was produced in England so it may be the first film we’ve watched that would be considered a “foreign” film. thw-2011-01-05-12h58m46s227However, I don’t believe this would unique enough to qualify for best picture.

The black and white production is atmospheric but stark and at times visually harsh. Similarly, the musical score I felt was overly melodramatic and distracting. Laurence Olivier, often considered one of the greatest Shakespearean actors, did win the Oscar for best actor and that is an award that is well deserved. He even proved to be an excellent swordsman. Is something rotten in Hollywood? I wouldn’t go that far but Hamlet is definitely not one of my favorite films. Good night sweet prince – on to 1949.

Elliot’s Commentary:

Hamlet is a take on William Shakespeare’s classic play that Sir Laurence Olivier directed and starred in.  The film won Sir Laurence Olivier two Oscars- one for his acting and one for best picture due to his producing role in the production of the film.  Olivier also appeared in an earlier best picture winner, 1940’s Rebecca directed by Alfred Hitchcock.  Hamlet was the second film that Olivier directed and his second Shakespearean adaptation. Olivier is considered one of the greatest actors of the 20th century and this version of Hamlet is considered his seminal work.  Olivier was the first film actor to be elevated to peerage (knighted) for his work in film by the queen.  While Olivier obtained four Oscars during his long and prolific career, Hamlet is the only film for which he won a best actor award.  Olivier’s other Oscars besides the two for Hamlet, came from a special award for his work on his first film, Henry V, and a lifetime achievement award given to the knighted actor in 1978.  screen-shot-2013-03-30-at-5-59-01-pmHamlet is also the first film that we have reviewed where the director was also the leading actor in the film. While Olivier did not win the directing award, his achievement of directing a best picture where he also won best actor clearly solidifies his place in the annuls of Oscar history.

While the previous two films we have viewed from the 1940’s dealt with the post-war malaise in American culture and the despicable rise of anti-Semitism in America in the 1940’s, Hamlet pivots away from reality and takes a stab at the escapist entertainment of the golden age of Hollywood.  This import marked the first non-American film to win best picture and was the first film version of Hamlet to include sound. There have been seven post-war versions of Hamlet including this 1948 version, “Grigori Kozintsev‘s 1964 Russian adaptation; a film of the John Gielgud-directed 1964 Broadway production, Richard Burton’s Hamlet, which played limited engagements that same year; Tony Richardson‘s 1969 version (the first in color), Franco Zeffirelli‘s 1990 version starring Mel GibsonKenneth Branagh‘s full-text 1996 version; and Michael Almereyda‘s 2000 modernization starring Ethan Hawke”.  While I had seen a few of the other aforementioned adaptations, this was my first time watching this 1948 version.   

While many of the shots in this depiction of Hamlet seem staged like the theatrical production, it takes the introduction of phantasmagoria to become more abstract.   Using close-up angles and fog, Olivier symbolizes the arrival of Hamlet’s father’s ghost. The special effects in the film held up well to modern standards in most scenes, with only the shots of the entire castle suffering from a lack of CGI or expensive budget.  On a somewhat related note, the voice of his father’s ghost coming from the helmet of his armor reminded me of how George Lucas styled Darth Vader in Star Wars.   Perhaps Lucas drew inspiration from this Olivier film.

Without writing too much of a book report on Hamlet, whose plot and subject matter is some of the most well-known in the entire cannon of English literature, I will instead focus on the cinematic elements.  This cerebral story, with many soliloquies and internal dialogue, has a tendency to drag a bit. With limited action for periods of time, the movie is largely saved by the peaks of action including flashes of violence and emotion. Hamley-Ophelia The acting is superb at parts, but does show flourishes of melodrama typical of earlier films.  Additionally, the sometimes dragging moments are disrupted by the hits of the Shakespearean dialogue with a performance of the “To Be or Not to Be” Monologue delivered with Olivier’s incredible acting chops.  Besides Olivier, the real star of this film is the soundtrack. Between the brilliant score played by the orchestra, the sound effects in the form of heartbeats and gusty corridors add tremendously to moments of introspection and eeriness.   

Overall, I found Hamlet to be a very traditional yet innovative portrayal of Shakespeare’s source material.   While the play was cut down to deliver a film 2.5 hours long, it still captured the major action and dialogue for which Hamlet is known.  In full honesty, Shakespearean English is not my favorite and watching this film was a little bit of a chore. Fortunately, there were sword fights and murder to break up the dense dialogue. Unfortunately, the film ceases to cross the line from cinema to entertainment for my particular tastes.   Olivier’s performance and direction breathed life into the already dramatic story and the themes of betrayal and loss are timeless motifs that will remain relevant for all time.  Additionally, in comparison to other best pictures which we have viewed throughout our journey, this film seemed to do much less to acknowledge the new realities facing post-WWII Europe/America.  While Hamlet is clearly a classical work, it’s hard to pivot from groundbreaking commentaries on antisemitism, treatment veterans returning after WWII and alcoholism that represented the subject matter of our last three entries.  I also preferred the films, The Red Shoes  and The Treasure of the Sierra Madre which were both better films than Hamlet in the best picture category that year.  With that said, in order to truly enjoy this film you really need to commit with both of your love of literature as well as the melodramatic style of 1940’s cinema.   

Tagged , , ,