Seven Samurai (1954) **1/2

Massive is the word that comes to mind when I think of acclaimed Japanese director Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai (1954).  Everything was massive: the set construction, the cast, the battle sequences, and the film’s running time of 207 minutes.  It was Kurosawa’s first samurai picture, and it set the bar for all others that would follow. Not only did it influence an entire generation of Japanese filmmakers, but it was also a blueprint for future Hollywood films like The Dirty Dozen (1967) and The Magnificent Seven (1960).

Set in 1587 Japan during one of its many civil war periods, the story is a simple one: a farming village of peasants are tired of having their crops and women carried off by bandits every harvesting season, so they decide to hire a samurai for protection.  They end up hiring seven samurai to not only defend the village, but to teach them how to do it for themselves.  Kurosawa refused to shoot the scenes in the village inside a soundstage and made his studio, Toho, construct an entire village on the Izu Peninsula. The scale of this endeavor was vast, and it only added to the hallmark of Kurosawa’s gritty realistic style.  The overlooking shots of the village from the surrounding mountains and forest is a testament to how much work went into building it. As a result, So Matsuyama was deservedly nominated for an Academy Award for Best Art Direction.

The cast is comprised of a core group of characters and hundreds of extras—as well as a stable of horses.  The seven samurai are played by Kurosawa regulars. Takashi Shimura (Ikiru, 1952) is Kambei, the reflective leader of the group. Toshiro Mifune (Rashomon, 1950) is Kikuchiyo, the comical but short-tempered wannabe samurai.  Daisuke Kato (Rashomon) is Shichiroji, a stoic man and good friend of Kambei. Isao Kimura (High and Low, 1963), is Katsushiro, a young warrior who wants to learn from others.  Yoshio Inaba is Gorobei, Kambei’s second-in-command. Minoru Chiaki (Throne of Blood, 1957) is Hayashida, a cheerful man who keeps up the group morale.  And, Seiji Miyaguchi (Ikiru) is Kyuzo, the complete badass swordsman of the group.  All seven men represent the different elements of the human personality. While Mifune’s Kikuchiyo is perhaps the most memorable of the seven, due to his character’s over-the-top personality, I think all of the men bring an incalculable amount of humanity to the roles they are playing.  They all embody the samurai code of bushido: frugality, loyalty, honor, and martial arts master. 

It is interesting to watch how the samurai prepare the peasants for the impending siege.  They instruct them on how to build fortifications and how to properly use a weapon.  Along the way they teach them discipline and responsibility.  All of these things are abundantly important for the massive three-day battle that they engage in with the bandits.  Trenches are dug and abatis and cheval de frise are constructed as means of defense, but eventually hand-to-hand combat is required.  Kurosawa’s decision to have the decisive battle scene take place in a torrential downpour was inspired.  Chaotic and frenetic, there is a cleansing element to it as well—by standing up for themselves the peasants have had years of misery washed away from them.  They are reborn.

My biggest complaint with Seven Samurai is that it is way too long. I know many people say the pace is quick, but they must have seen the edited version, because if they saw the film at its original length I can’t see how they would say that.  Had Kurosawa cut about thirty minutes the film would have run more smoothly for me.  Yet, other than it being a complete endurance test, Seven Samurai is a treat to watch.  As mentioned above, the battle scenes are intricately choreographed and shot from varying angles, which gives the viewer a bird’s eye view of the intricacies of battle design and implementation. 

On The Waterfront

On The Waterfront, 1954
Directed by Elia Kazan
Nominated for 12 Oscars, Won 8
Up Against: The Caine Mutiny, The Country Girl, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Three Coins in the Fountain

Terry Malloy used to be a prize fighter, but now he raises pigeons and works on the docks, running errands for the corrupt union boss, Johnny Friendly. One of the errands Terry has to run is telling a man named Joey that he found one of his missing pigeons and that he's put it on the roof for him to come and get, Terry knowing there will be men up there waiting for him to accost him. What he didn't know was that they were going to toss him from the roof of the building, killing him. Terry immediatly feels guilty, and that guilt builds when he starts falling in love with Joey's sister, Edie, while she tries to find out who killed her brother. While the two start falling in love, Terry realizes who much better life can be, and it's not the horrible place with all indecent people he's thought it has been. When Johnny Friendly continues to kill people, and Father Barry, a local priest, challenged by Edie that she "never heard of a saint hiding in a church", and to go out there and see what's going on, tries to find information on who killed Joey. Terry starts realizing he needs to tell the truth, and he needs to bring down Johnny Friendly in the process. 

This movie came highly recommended to me by my boyfriends father. While he's more of a literature man instead of a movie man, I thought I'd take his recommendation seriously since he also spoke extremely highly of Annie Hall. So I put a hold on it at the library (subsequently it had a lot of other holds and it's taken me months to get it). But I popped the movie in just a day after getting it, and found myself enthralled by the story and by Marlon Brando. 

What, I thought, could've easily been a pretty 2D character, Brando turned it into a subtle performance, where we can clearly see Terry start to become more and more guilty and slowly realizing his philosophy of life isn't actually true. Brando was classy, with just enough tough guy to balance it out, that you knew he didn't realize believe what he said he did, and wasn't the bad guy that Edi'e father made him out to be. He was searching for something more, and Edie showed him what it was. 

The movie was well-told, and had many chilling and heartbreaking moments, including when Father Barry is praying over Kayo Dugan's body, and then starts to talk to the dozens of men around him about honesty, and cruxification, and some of the men start throwing food at him. And when Terry, beaten to a pulp, gets up and walks through all the men to enter the docks, after they declare they will only work if Terry is given work. 

The film had just enough amount of romance (doesn't Edie look like a mix of Jessica Chastain and Mia Wasikowski? Or at least I thought so, it was pretty uncanny) without making it too mushy. And had the right amount of action/crime in it. 

Overall, I thought this film was really well done; well acted, well directed, well written. It really deserves all the wins it received (including Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Writing, Editing and Art Direction), and deserves to be revered as a classic. Yes, I really enjoyed this film. 

Acting- 9/10
Directing- 8.5/10
Screenplay- 8/10
Music - 8/10
"The look"- 8.5 /10
Entertaining- 9/10
Emotional Connection- 8.5/10
Rewatchability- 8/10
Did I like It?- 8.5/10
"Total Package"**- 8/10  

 Total: 84/100

My Movie Year

Here's a very late entry into an awesome blogathon by Andy from Fandango Groovers.

My movie year would be 1954. I'll confess that 1939 had a better overall slate of films, but this year has four movies in my top 30 favorite films and three in my top 15. On the other hand, there are only two 1939 films in my top 100 list. Of course, other years had great lineups, such as 1959, 1974, 1976, 2006, and 2007, but this year stuck out due to the number of treasured films in it. So, 1954 gets my vote. Check out the ballot after the cut.

DIAL M FOR MURDER (Alfred Hitchcock)

ON THE WATERFRONT (Elia Kazan)

REAR WINDOW (Alfred Hitchcock)

SABRINA (Billy Wilder)

SEVEN SAMURAI (Akira Kurosawa)

Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (1954) ****

 

(This article is from guest contributor Rick29 and first appeared at http://classic-film-tv.blogspot.com/.  The rating in the title is my own.)

The Oregon Territory in 1850 provides the setting for this high-energy, colorful musical based on a Benet short story (which, in turn, was inspired by Plutarch’s “The Abduction of the Sabine Women”). Adam Pontipee (Howard Keel) is a hard-working “mountain man” who comes to town for supplies—and a wife. After announcing his plans to a storeowner, he adds: “I’m in no hurry…I got all afternoon.” He quickly settles on Millie (Jane Powell), a comely—but sassy—lass who chops wood, cooks, and milks cows. For Millie, it’s love at first sight and the chance to take care of her own home.

The honeymoon gets off to a rocky start when Millie discovers that Adam has six brothers. “Y’all live around here?” she asks. “Not ’round. Here,” replies one of the brothers. After overcoming her initial shock, Millie grows fond of her brothers-in-law…until they listen to Adam and take extreme measures to get their own brides.
The score by Johnny Mercer and Gene de Paul is a tuneful one. “Wonderful, Wonderful Day” and “When You’re in Love” are bright, pretty love songs. But Mercer’s best lyrics are reserved for “Lonesome Polecat,” a woeful lament sung by the lovesick brothers (a sample line: “A man can’t sleep when he sleeps with sheep”).

Michael Kidd’s spectacular choreography provides a perfect complement to the music. Kidd insisted that all the dance numbers derive from what the brothers were doing. Most critics consider the barn-raising scene to be the film’s showstopper. But I favor the dance where the brothers try to outshine their rivals from the town and the aforementioned “Lonesome Polecat,” in which the brothers cut and saw wood in unison with the musical beats.

The cast is uniformly fine, with Powell and Keel generating the required chemistry as the romantic leads. Four of the brothers were accomplished dancers (I think Matt Mattox, who plays Caleb, is the best). Russ Tamblyn, who had no prior dancing experience (he was an acrobat), is quite appealing as the youngest brother. It’s hard to believe it’s the same actor who would later played a key role in the wonderfully weird TV series Twin Peaks.

I first saw Seven Brides on The CBS Late Movie in the mid-1970s. I liked it well enough then, but my fondness for it has grown significantly over the years. See a good print of it, if possible, so you can enjoy the vibrant colors. Seven Brides for Seven Brothers inspired a mediocre, short-lived TV series and a very successful Broadway play.

It has also played in a key role in a running joke between my mother-in-law and me. In one scene in Seven Brides, Jane Powell's character fixes the brothers an incredible breakfast with everything you can imagine: flapjacks, sausage, eggs, biscuits, potatoes, etc. So when visiting my's wife folks, if my mother-in-law asks if I want something to eat in the morning, I always reply: "A Jane Powell breakfast would be nice." I never get one, though. But I do get to hear a lovely laugh in response.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1954

About the field: Wow, this was quite probably the most interesting line-up so far. It's far from being the best, but it was so colorful and I had much pleasure in it. Too bad that nowadays it's more about Garland vs. Kelly and they forget the other great nominees. My ranking was not as easy as I thought when I finished reviewing the ladies. There was one good, two very good, one very-very good and a timeless, amazing performance. My pick was very easy and I understand why people hate that loss. But the ranking:

5. Grace Kelly in The Country Girl

On the one hand, she's painfully miscast and in the beginning she has no weight. On the other hand, in the end her presence and effect is quite strong and is worthy of my praise. Not easy to judge it, but I myself missed her mysterious persona from her other movies, in other words, the essence of Grace Kelly.

4. Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina

This may not be Audrey Hepburn's best work, but I was utterly charmed and perfectly entertained by it despite its lack of great character development. But I laughed, I was moved, I cared about Sabrina and most of all, I had some kind of an emotional connection to her

3. Jane Wyman in Magnificent Obsession

Jane Wyman gives a satisfying, emotional and very moving performance, which however lacks depth. It might be also due to the weak points of the screenplay, but she wasn't able to be towering and truly impressive. Although everything is where is should be, the achievement is a bit too thin. Very strong work, though.

2. Dorothy Dandridge in Carmen Jones

must admit that I was totally charmed and mesmerized by the magnetic presence and extraordinary beauty of Ms. Dandridge, who gave a very exciting, wild, sexy and attractive performance as a very complicated woman. It's legendary status may be questionable, but it's a great achievement by a great talent.

1. Judy Garland in A Star is Born

If you travel 1000 years in time and see which performances people still remember, Judy Garland's in A Star Is Born will be one of them. Judy Garland's acting achievement is really one of a kind, a true and eternal classic, one that cannot be forgotten or overlooked by anyone who loves movies. This IS a performance for the ages.

So I can proudly announce

that my winner is...

Judy Garland in A Star is Born

There's justice sometimes.

So the ranking of the already reviewed years:

1. 1974
2. 1959
3. 1939
4. 2009
5. 1963
6. 1978
7. 1954
8. 1948
9. 2002
10. 1940
11. 1998

About the next year: Picking was so hard. I wanted to do two other years, but I did not get the movies after all and I was incredibly mad. So I was forced to find a year, which is interesting to me. So finally I found a fine year to do. The clues:

• Friendship forever
• #1 annoying fanclub for an actress and a nom
• (L) Tortured artists (L)

There was one right prediction from Joe, which was a bit late, but I just mention it.

So what do you think? Any observations, thoughts, request for the next years?

Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina

Audrey Hepburn received her second Best Actress nomination for playing Sabrina Fairchild a young girl falling for a businesman in Billy Wilder's romantic comedy, Sabrina. I think that Audrey Hepburn received the least votes from the five ladies as she won the previous year, starred in a very lightweight comedy. The genre was good to her as she won for Roman Holiday, but the competition was quite weak that year. But 1954 was all about Grace Kelly and Judy Garland.

Sabrina is quite probably the most entertaining movie of the five. It has some sentimental and soappy moments, but everything is so full of the wit and quick humor of Billy Wilder, that I quite easily overlooked these flaws and I really enjoyed this delightful experience. That directing nomination was not very worthy (come on, George Cukor got nothing for A Star Is Born). The acting is quite good too, but not very towering. Humphrey Bogart gives a very strong and memorable performance despite being a bit miscast, his early scenes are simply excellent. William Holden is quite good too, but sometimes he was too over-the-top.

Oh, Audrey, dear, beautiul, amazing Audrey. She had such shining beauty and real acting talent (unfortunately directors preffered her beauty to her acting talent). If there's one real superstar, a true icon in motion picture history, then it's quite definitely Ms. Hepburn. She really had style, grace and she solved even the silliest scenes with such dignity and dedication. Nowadays she's criticized for mostly relying on her charm, but I do not blame her for that since her roles demanded that from her (just look at The Nun's Story how many emotions she can create).

The role of Sabrina is quite definitely neither the best nor the most memorable one in Audrey's career. The movie itself is one that you watch at Christmas on TV, when you have nothing else to do, let's face it. Audrey doesn't have big breakdowns or huge acting moments in it. It's really just an easy work solved quite properly and decently. The character seems to be very easy for Audrey, but you can never feel that she thought that it was nothing to her and did not have to care about it. You see the considerable amount of work Audrey put into this performance.

In the very first scenes, Audrey is just like a wild little angel having fun in the garden. She's often referred to as a kind of ugly duckling, but that's not really the case. Simply, Sabrina is just too young to be taken seriously. Her suicide attempt scene is just excellent and very adorable. She wants to inhale the exhaust fume of the car, but starts coughing and then she opens a window. It's so utterly loveable and charming, which is a greater achievement considering the fact that this is actually a suicide scene.

And actually, the best moments of Audrey's whole performance come at the beginning of the movie: like when she forgets to turn on the owen as she cannot concentrate because of her unhappy love life. Audrey is again just charming in those scenes.

However, the biggest flaw of her whole achievement in Sabrina comes after she returns from Paris. Sabrina's change is so sudden and fast that you really just cannot believe it. It's mostly the screenplay's fault, but Sabrina becomes a bit bitchy for a while (she tries to seduce William Holden quite hard and successfully from his bride) which disappears again quite suddenly. I felt that Audrey could have done much better with the development of Sabrina: she made her adorable and succeeded in grabbing the viewer's attention, but she never made Sabrina's changes credible.

Another thing goes against her, which is the screentime. The movie mostly focuses on Humphrey Bogart after a while and Audrey is in the background for some time. Fortunately that goes away, but then she wasn't really able to have an effect on me or make a lasting impression.

Somewhere around the end, she has a very quiet crying scene, when she cooks at Humphrey Bogart's office. I don't know why, but I was just so moved by her. Although that scene wasn't very pushy and came very subtly, it really had an effect on me and I just felt some warmth in my heart. It was just excellent. And if I'm talking about warmth, then I must mention how great it was to hear her singing La Vie en Rose. Gosh, it was just a piece of Heaven.

So, to sum up, this may not be Audrey Hepburn's best work, but I was utterly charmed and perfectly entertained by it despite its lack of great character development. But I laughed, I was moved, I cared about Sabrina and most of all, I had some kind of an emotional connection to her. First I thought this would be a 3.5, but I said, come on and gave her more for sentimental reasons. This is such a delightful achievement.

So, the final conclusion is due tomorrow! Stay tuned, though it won't offer much surprise, I imagine.

Judy Garland in A Star Is Born

Judy Garland received her first Oscar nomination for playing Esther Blodgett a.k.a. Vicki Lester a young girl who becomes a great star and an Academy Award winner in George Cukor's classic, the remake of the 1937 movie, A Star is Born. Nowadays, it's a consensus that Judy should have won the Oscar for this performance and ironically everyone thought that at the time as she was a real front-runner to pick up her award. She had everything: a great comeback role, huge singing and dramatic moments, a 3-hour-long movie. The rest is history.

A Star Is Born is a real classic, a true definition of a must-see. It's a very dramatic look at stardom, love, marriage, cruelty, alcoholism and Hollywood. Everything is very glamourous on the outside, but everything is rotten and pretentious inside. George Cukor was an excellent director, who made quite flamboyant movies, but they are classics and loved by everyone. He had such a talent in directing his actors: James Mason gives an excellent performance as Norman Maine, a desperate alcoholic has-been, who has only one important thing in his life, his wife. Had it not been for Marlon Brando's terrific performance in On the Waterfront, Mason would probably get my vote.

And yet A Star Is Born is not a classic because of George Cukor's directing or James Mason's acting or the great technical part. The reason is two words: Judy Garland. A towering performance rarely comes in any performer's life, sometimes never. But that moment came to Judy Garland in 1954, when she was doing the part of Esther/Vicki, a role of a lifetime. Now, I'm not a fan of Judy Garland. I have never been and I will probably never be, but I can recognize a great achievement. And this is such a work.

The role of Vicki is itself a real miracle: it has such huge opportunities to shine, that it's quite a miracle if anyone, who has at least mediocre talent, ruins it. But Garland went further with it: she created a living, breathing and natural character, who has so many emotions in herself and can only express them with music and singing. Judy really put her whole heart into it and we can see the result, which speaks for itself.

Even when we first see Esther, it's quite obvious that both her and Judy are amazing talents. It's quite complicated to play a talented person as it can easily be confused with the player. Actually, Judy Garland's life was more of a mix of Norman's and Esther's, so it's not the case. Esther is a unique character and her only connection with Judy is that only she could play Esther the way this character deserves it.

There's a brilliant monologue where Esther tries to express how much singing means to her: Garland lives these lines so thrillingly, that for a moment there's nothing else there, just her. Although this performance is full of unforgettable moments, this is the one that sticks with me the most because of its honesty and pure beauty.

Esther's initial doubts about Norman are perfectly handled by Garland. She never goes over-the-top or annoying, she perfectly found the balance. And the same goes for the scenes of grief in the end, when so many emotions come to the surface and the whole thing is just like a volcano. She does not only leave you speechless, but also moves, saddens and entertains you.

Also it's quite interesting how much humor Garland injected to this character. These moments are not too pushy or forced, they are always very natural and simply adorable. Like when she gets a real make-up and ends up being another dull blonde girl, her face is just hilarious.

And she sings too! Garland had an excellent voice, which had such a wide range and was soo powerful. Her musical numbers are simply flawless. Her show-stopping performance of Born In A Trunk is simply one of the best acted musical scenes in history. And this is quite a positive thing as I really dislike musicals.

Her legendary Oscar ceremony scene is also just heartbreaking. Judy displays so many emotions: fear, excitement, nervousness, embarassment, sadness, biterness and love that it almost burns the screen. The most unforgettable moment is when Norman accidentally slaps her and then she tries to help him. It's so incredible.

I have already mentioned the scenes of grief, but let me say something about her very last lines. When she says "This is Mrs. Norman Maine" in a very teary way, it's such an incredibly cathartic moment and it's really no shame if your eyes get a bit teary. Your heart goes out for her and Garland is simply unbelievable there.

If you travel 1000 years in time and see which performances people still remember, Judy Garland's in A Star Is Born will be one of them. Judy Garland's acting achievement is really one of a kind, a true and eternal classic, one that cannot be forgotten or overlooked by anyone who loves movies. This IS a performance for the ages.

So what do you think? It's time to give your last predictions! :-)

Dorothy Dandridge in Carmen Jones

Dorothy Dandridge made history when she became the first black woman to receive a Best Actress nomination for playing Carmen Jones in Otto Preminger's opera movie, Carmen Jones. Despite this nomination she did not have many other big roles. If I really think about it, then she may have been third in the voting process, but fourth or fifth is (unfortunately) more likely. It was mainly a so-called "two-horse race".

Carmen Jones is a... movie. I really don't know what to say about it. It's very interesting and entertaining, but probably it's mostly strange. Many people consider it a classic, but I think that might be due to the fact that it was very groundbreaking as there were only black people in the cast. Nevertheless, it's very enjoyable, though there are some moments which are hard to follow since the film slows down sometimes. The actors give quite tolerable performances, though Harry Belafonte is a bit annoying sometimes.

But it's the movie of Dorothy Dandgridge, everything is about her, we see her, we root for her, we hate and love her at the same time. First of all, I must say how unusually beautiful Ms. Dandridge was. She had a kind of wild charisma and she was so sexy and attractive. Yes, the key word for this performance is probably attractive. This role is neither baity nor demanding, but there's some kind of a force which makes you pay attention to Dandridge's acting.

Dorothy did not do her own singing, but that takes nothing away from her achievement. What she actually does in this movie is quite great and memorable. Plus during the singing scenes the face is so expressive that you can turn down the volume and you know what Carmen sings by only watching her.

I was instantly mesmerized by her presence in her very first scene, but that's also due to the great directing. Everyone in the movie looks at Carmen, so you have to do that too. There's a woman, who's lively, beautiful, sexy and you just cannot take your eyes off her. Dandridge has a very unusually magnetic screen presence, which makes her performance very sharp, natural and a bit rough, if you know what I mean.

Dorothy has her best scenes in the beginning where the guy named Joe has to take her to prison, while Carmen wants to both escape and seduce the guy. And along with Joe, we are certainly seduced too. She so perfectly portrayed the wild and restless nature of this woman, that it left me speechless. Again: it attracted my attention.

Another interesting aspect of the performance is that Dandridge never really tries to make the audience sympathize with her nor makes Carmen a tragic heroine. Instead she shows all the flaws of this very complex character and carefully (and invisibly) developes her. Though I must say that she should have concentrated a bit more on the development as every change in Carmen is a bit sudden.

Although I have been mostly raving about her, Dandridge's performance is not flawless: it's not as thin as Jane Wyman's yesterday, but it's much less emotionally effective. Although I was very much entertained by Dorothy, she did not really move me (she did not even try as I said). As I previously said, it's very interesting that she did not make Carmen a tragic heroine, but a little emotional connection with the audience would not have harmed her acting. And this is not a minor thing as in some way, a performer should connect to the audience emotionally.

However, I must admit that I was totally charmed and mesmerized by the magnetic presence and extraordinary beauty of Ms. Dandridge, who gave a very exciting, wild, sexy and attractive performance as a very complicated woman. It's legendary status may be questionable, but it's a great achievement by a great talent, who knew how to impress the audience. It's a very strong and deserving four.

So what do you think? Any predictions, observations, off-topic questions? Judy is next and her review comes tomorrow.

Jane Wyman in Magnificent Obsession

Jane Wyman received her fourth and final Best Actress nomination for playing Helen Philips, a woman who becomes blind in Douglas Sirk's movie, Magnificent Obsession. I think Wyman did not have much chance to win the Oscar over Grace Kelly and Judy Garland as she was a previous Oscar winner. I believe firmly though, that she was the third with the votes since the movie was a success (and along came another Jane Wyman-Rock Hudson movie, hat has become a classic).

Magnificent Obsession is a very weird, but extremely entertaining soap opera. The story is so unlikely and illogical that you just cannot take it seriously and by this, you have great fun while watching it. It's not a classic, but a fair movie anyhow with great actors. I realized with this movie and Pillow Talk how talented Rock Hudson was actually. He had a very strong charisma and a great screen presence. Too bad that nowadays he's more remembered because of his private life than his performances. Agnes Moorehead is again very reliable and gives a fair supporting performance.

Jane Wyman is an extremely interesting actress. On the one hand, she's not as legendary as some of her peers and she's not often talked about. On the other hand, every time I watch her, I feel satisfied by her performances. (I must admit though that this every time means two movies). She totally relied on her emotions, but was able to deal with the technical part of her performances too.

She was great at playing disabled women dealing with their condition. In Johnny Belinda she was deaf, here she's blind. Although the characters cannot be more different, they share a common thing: strength, courage and intelligence. I think Wyman was the best one at this and there has never been a performance ever since who's able to get across the feelings of such a condition. That's one thing.

Magnificent Obsession's Helen goes through a lot of tough events in this movie. Right at the beginning of the film, she loses her beloved husband. This is probably the least effective part of her performance as these scenes mostly focus on Rock Hudson's character rather than hers. She's there, uses all the opportunities, but she's nothing very special. Yet.

Her performance becomes truly interesting when Helen loses her eyesight in a very tragic and extremely over-the-top accident. It's so interesting to follow her emotions: she doesn't blame everyone, she doesn't break down, but there's some silent pain right there and some hope for the unlikely recovery. She's truly magical here.

The scenes of finding true love are also excellently handled by Wyman. She never becomes over-the-top or unnecessarily sentimental, she brilliantly found the balance in these sequences. I was impressed by her very much, but I cannot overlook a problem: the emotions she shows are astonishingly shallow and pale. It is astonoshing since the heartbreaking depths were the best things about her performance in Johnny Belinda. She was too simple and there was nothing complex about her acting.

There's one scene though, which is simply unforgettable. After she realizes the very unpleasant reality in Switzerland she goes on a date with Rock Hudson: here I felt that all the necessary emotions were there and I was certainly extremely moved by her occasionally. When she says "I always closed my eyes when I was dancing" or something like that, her performance really reaches the top and has a great effect on the viewer.

After that she disappears for a while and she's there only in the end, but she's very-very good and effective there, too. I felt that the emotions again were very real, but also not very complex and a touch of honesty would not have harmed her acting. However, as I said, it's quite moving and entertaining.

To sum up, Jane Wyman gives a satisfying, emotional and very moving performance, which however lacks depth. It might be also due to the weak points of the screenplay, but she wasn't able to be towering and truly impressive. Although everything is where is should be, the achievement is a bit too thin. Very strong work, though.

So what do you think? Predictions, opinions? Who should be next Audrey or Dorothy? I'm planning to do Garland on Thursday. So whoever you chose, will be reviewed tomorrow and the other one on Friday or maybe Saturday, if I don't have time.

Grace Kelly in The Country Girl

Grace Kelly received her second (and last) Oscar nomination and only award for playing Georgie Elgin, a woman married to an alcoholic has-been in the movie The Country Girl. Kelly's win caused enough controversy. Some loathe it, some think it's deserving. Actually she won by seven votes or so, which (according to the rumors) belonged to Judy Garland's old MGM bosses. So it was a great surprise that Kelly won over Garland, who seemed to be a shoo-in. I guess that the fact that she had the brilliant Rear Window (in which she was much better and more interesting) and Dial M for Murder might have helped her win.

The Country Girl is not a bad movie, but not a great one either. It's a decently made old movie, which has some drama in it, and yet it wasn't able to really impress me. The same goes for Bing Crosby's performance (well, only to a degree). He's unbelievable in some of the scenes but sometimes his performance slows down. Nevertheless, I can say that this is definitely Crosby's best performance in any movie and he richly deserved the nomination. William Holden is also good, but he got the least baity role.

Grace Kelly. A very familiar feeling came to me again after 2002 and some of 1978: dissatisfaction. It's really the worst thing that can happen as it means that the acting was actually good, but something kept me from totally embracing it. I had the same emotions I had with Nicole Kidman: there's one extremely moving scene, which stands out too much and makes the other parts look even weaker. But that scene is satisfying in a way.

First of all, I have to say (as many people before me) that Kelly was totally miscast as she was a) too young b) too inexperienced c) too beautiful (OMG, one could write thousands of pages about her beauty). People say that Susan Hayward started the so-called "acting for Oscar with baity, loud roles" tradition and that Grace Kelly is the origin of the deglam wins. I SO wanted to disagree and love her, but she really wasn't enough.

I was always trying to love her and embrace the character of Georgie, but the main problem is that Kelly didn't embrace the character herself enough to grab my attention. The weakest thing about her was her delivery of the lines: sometimes I felt as if she was at school saying a poem at a literature lesson. She did not connect the emotions to the dialogue and it caused a very mixed bag. I knew (and felt) that the emotions were inside her and she let some out with her face and eyes, but I did not get enough. And yet somehow she was able to make me sorry for her character and sometimes she even moved me.

However, she was able to build her character and show some development in it: Georgie is a bitter, incredibly sad and worried person who tries to control everything to prevent disaster and to protect his husband to whom she's very attached. I could always see how much Georgie was struggling, but not Kelly: she made it look quite easy actually.

As I said, in the beginning I had no emotional connection to the character of Georgie, but as the movie went on I got more and more close to her. There's a climatic confrontation scene between her and William Holden at the police station which is brilliant, and from there it seemed to me as if Kelly's performance got some life and by this, it became so much more interesting. This is especially visible in her last scenes, where she does not have much to say (and thank God she can rely on the emotions of her body) and her silence has so much weight.

Rating in this case is not very easy and I think that this may change. On the one hand, she's painfully miscast and in the beginning she has no weight. On the other hand, in the end her presence and effect is quite strong and is worthy of my praise. Not easy to judge it, but I myself missed her mysterious persona from her other movies, in other words, the essence of Grace Kelly. One part is around a 3, the other is around a 4, so it's somewhere around 3.5. Not easy, not easy. A weirdly effective and very uneven performance.

Just like in the case of Ginger Rogers and Nicole Kidman. A 4 wouldn't be fair I think.

The Next Year

Now it's time to move on and continue the fun with a very controversial and talked about year, which is talked about mostly because of two nominees. But let's see which one of them I prefer or I go with someone else.

1954

So the nominees were:

• Dorothy Dandridge in Carmen Jones
• Judy Garland in A Star is Born
• Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina
• Grace Kelly in The Country Girl
• Jane Wyman in Magnificent Obsession

So what do you think? Who's your pick? What's your ranking? Any predictions for my ranking? I am not sure either as I have previously seen only one of them.

I've already written Grace Kelly's profile, so she will be the first, but YOU decide who the next should be.

Carmen Jones (1954) ***

In 1954 the Supreme Court and Otto Preminger took two giant leaps forward for the Civil Rights Movement. With Brown v. Board of Education, Topeka, Kansas, the Court overruled Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) which had set up Jim Crow and the mantra of “separate but equal”. Now, all public schools had to become desegregated. By producing and directing Carmen Jones, a major studio production starring African Americans, Preminger showed Hollywood and America that a film comprised mostly of a minority cast could be hugely profitable and entertaining. The fact that he decided to carry on an affair for years with his leading lady, Dorothy Dandridge, is another issue—especially when you consider he was married and she was emotionally troubled. Nonetheless, this is a film that holds major cultural and historical significance and has been preserved by the National Film Registry.

Based on Bizet’s operatic masterpiece, Carmen, this musical stars Dorothy Dandridge in an Oscar nominated performance as Carmen Jones, man-eater extraordinaire. At the start of the film we meet Cindy Lou (Olga James), a sweet girl who goes to say goodbye to her boyfriend Joe (Harry Belafonte), who is leaving for flight school. They decide to get married before he leaves, but a complication arises when Carmen Jones enters the picture. Oozing sexuality and attitude, Carmen is either wanted or detested by every man she comes into contact. One of those who detest her, mainly because she blew him off, is Sgt. Brown (Brock Peters). So when Carmen gets into a fight with a co-worker for reporting her late, Sgt. Brown cancels Joe's leave and orders him to take Carmen to the authorities in Masonville.

On the ride, Carmen makes several passes at Joe, but he rebuffs her advances. This just seems to entice Carmen more—you know the lyrics to “Dat’s Love” right?

You go for me and I'm taboo
But if you're hard to get, I'll go for you
And if I do, then you are through
my baby, that's the end of you

In an attempt to cut the trip short, Joe decides to take a dangerous road to Masonville and the jeep ends up in a river. Carmen suggests they go to her grandmother’s house and catch the train to Masonville later that evening. In a scene reminiscent of Adam and Eve, except this time a peach is substituted for an apple, Carmen lures Joe into bed by brushing mud off his pants and giving him a peach. When he awakens the next morning he finds a note saying she loves him but she’s skipped town because she doesn’t want to go to jail. So instead, Joe finds himself locked up for allowing her to escape. When Cindy Lou visits him she sees a package with a rose inside sent from Carmen and she’s had enough.

While Joe is working in the stockade, Carmen is in Louisiana working at a night club. Bored and growing impatient for Joe’s release, Carmen is tempted by flashy prizefighter Husky Miller’s (Marvin Hayes) offer to take her and her friends Frankie and Myrt (Pearl Bailey and a striking Diahann Carroll) to Chicago and to lavish diamonds and furs on her. Oddly enough, Carmen decides to wait for Joe. I suppose this is the dichotomy of Carmen—she wants to make sure she has Joe before she returns to her usual ways. Anyway, Joe walks in the door the same evening this proposition is made, but Carmen’s joy is short-lived since Joe tells her he must leave immediately for flight school. Oh, no you didn’t! Carmen can’t believe any man would leave her for flight school and flies into a rage. Just then old Sgt. Brown appears and insults Joe, and tries to leave with Carmen. Joe beats him to a pulp, but then has to flee with Carmen to Chicago to avoid going to prison for hitting a superior officer.

Wanted by the military police for desertion, Joe must hide out in a run-down rented room while Carmen can come and go as she pleases. Carmen goes to visit Frankie, who is wearing diamonds and nice clothes, at Husky's gym to borrow some money. Frankie tries to persuade Carmen to leave Joe, but she refuses. When she returns to Joe with a bag of groceries, he asks her how she got the money and they have a heated argument and Carmen leaves and goes to Husky's hotel suite. While playing cards with her friends, she draws the nine of spades. Evidently there is some sort of voodoo omen that says if you draw this card your death is imminent. As such, Carmen decides she’s going to live her last days to the hilt and takes up with Husky and a whole lot of liqueur.

Having had enough of Carmen’s wayward ways, Joe goes to the gym and orders Carmen home. When Carmen refuses to leave, Joe threatens Husky with a knife. Of course, this exposes Joe and leads the military police to start looking for him in Chicago. While Carmen helps Joe evade capture, she’s done with him. This is too much for Joe, and during one of Husky’s fights, Joe pulls Carmen into a storage closet and after she refuses to leave with him he strangles her to death with his bare hands just before the police arrive and lead him off to jail. See, that voodoo stuff ain’t no joke!

Both Belafonte and Dandridge were singers, so it might surprise some to learn that their singing was dubbed by LeVern Hutcherson and Marilynn Horne. This was done because neither Belafonte or Dandridge had the necessary voices to carry off the operatic singing. Yet, rest assured that Pearl Bailey did her own singing on "Beat Out Dat Rhythm On A Drum". All of the music is from Bizet’s original Carmen. Oscar Hammerstein II wrote the modern lyrics for the film.

Dorothy Dandridge is phenomenal as Carmen. She truly deserved her Oscar nomination—even is she didn’t do her own singing. The performance is multi-faceted in that viewers get to see her play both a sensual woman of the world as well as a woman torn by a compassionate nature towards Joe. It must have been dazzling to be the first African American woman nominated as a lead actress. It’s a shame that she had so many problems off-screen and also that she was working at a time in Hollywood when black actresses weren’t given many chances to shine. Though she did get another opportunity with Porgy and Bess, the last few years of her career and life were pretty dreary.

The music is great and the story is compelling. A truly wonderful musical that is entertaining and well-acted. In addition, the historical significance of this film is extraordinary.