A 96-minute film with all but three minutes taking place in the same room: that’s daring. It’s hard to believe, but director Sidney Lumet finds a way to make “12 Angry Men” move at an attention-holding pace while being hardly dull at all. Now that’s filmmaking. Lumet’s camera techniques and the phenomenal performances from the actors he captures makes “12 Angry Men” a terrifically interesting court drama that is so elemental but so profound.

In the opening minutes, a 12-man jury breaks into deliberation over a case where a teenager has been charged with killing his father. If found unanimously guilty, the boy will be executed. After a preliminary vote, every man votes guilty except for one juror played by Henry Fonda, who is afraid of being too quick to reach a verdict.

The story basically paints a picture of 12 strangers. If you follow closely, you can learn a lot about these people, but the point is that you learn a lot about them and what makes them tick as they argue and reason. The first thing achieving that requires is great acting. This film is loaded with classic actors of the ’40s and ’50s. It’s hard to really single out one performance as the best, though certainly Lee J. Cobb as Juror #3 is the most dramatic and he very much helps give the story an adrenaline boost when his character acts out.

But the most excellent aspect of this film, what pushes it above a lot of other drama, is Lumet’s directing choices in what is his first feature film. Filming in one room, it can be easy to put little thought into camera angles and movement, but Lumet considers everything very carefully and no single shot in the film feels arbitrary. The camera moves with incredible purpose, zooming in at perfect speeds and picking angles that best reveal the characters. Also, his attention to the idea of the heat in the room, the impatience, the confinement, all comes across in his directing. His angles start above the actors in the beginning and thus more impersonal, but the camera lowers more and more as the film goes on. You’re so interested in the story at this point that you don’t even notice, but you feel it. Lumet makes you feel much like a 13th juror and you begin to form your own opinion, bouncing back and forth (that is if Lumet and writer Reginald Rose did their job right, which they do.)

The film is—and this really isn’t a spoiler—without a climactic payoff for those that need a little something more or a resolution or mystery solved. You’re supposed to find it satisfying in the way that it reveals a bit about who we are and how we arrive at the moral conclusions we make. You’re supposed to learn so much about these characters that by the end you’re shocked that you never even learned their names. The film is like a social experiment on screen and it’s very realistic and yet still very interesting. It’s an absolute marvel for being stationary, dialogue-heavy film.

—

5/5 Stars

—

12 Angry Men
Directed by Sidney Lumet
Written by Reginald Rose
Starring Henry Fond, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Klugman, Jack Warden

“The Pink Panther” does not actually focus on Clouseau’s character as the legacy has left myself and the younger generations to believe. Sellers steals the movie (which in fact makes its climax rather awkward), but the plot focuses on a jewel thief named Sir Charles Lytton (David Niven) who is after the Pink Panther diamond from a princess (Claudia Cardinale). His mistress and accomplice is Clouseau’s wife (Capucina) and at a ski resort they attempt to get close to the princess and her diamond, with Mrs. Clouseau resorting to her womanly wiles to distract her husband and Sir Charles’ young nephew George (Robert Wagner).

This story takes quite some time to get going and frankly the film is a laughless bore for about 45 minutes. Sellers hasn’t quite gotten enough screen time to get into his slapstick groove going and the plot is all setup to this point. Then the farce truly begins, predominantly with the bedroom scene in which Mrs. Clouseau hides Charles and George in her room after her wacky husband comes home.

It’s a fact that the film was never intended to center on Clouseau, but when he was stealing his scenes, veteran director Blake Edwards should have made some adjustments or taken his liberties as co-writer of the script to favor Sellers a bit more. Our focus as viewers never hones in on any one character. As hard as we try to hone in on Clouseau, it doesn’t work because the story does not favor him.

As a comedy, the last hour redeems the snore-inducing first act with some terrific scenes like when two thieves find themselves in identical gorilla suits and the “getaway” scene with Clouseau and his men chasing after the thieves and everyone essentially going around in circles. It’s classic humor from the last decade of the 20th Century in which this type of humor was still considered in style.

But what lingers on after the film ends? Henry Mancini and our animated panther friend. Maybe those elements are not the best part of this film, but they’re responsible for the many follow ups and reincarnations of the series over the last 45-plus years.

—

3/5 Stars

—

The Pink Panther (1963)
Directed by Blake Edwards
Written by Maurice Richlin and Blake Edwards
Starring: Peter Sellers, Capucine, David Niven, Robert Wagner, Claudia Cardinale

Going into the Alfred Hitchcock masterpiece “Psycho,” it’s best that you know nothing — in fact Hitchcock wanted it that way — so this review will be succint and devoid of any synopsis beyond that of the basic plot summaries provided for the film. But truth is, the plot is only half the film’s genius. The rest belongs to the master of murder and suspense.

“Psycho” thrives on suspense. Without the constant feeling of paranoia from Hitchcock’s careful camera movements or from Bernard Herrmann’s vigorous string quartet, many parts of the film would feel long. At this point in his career, Hitchcock was so commanding of his craft that he achieves the desired effect from his audience with nearly every shot, whether it’s wanting us to focus on particular items or make specific assumptions about the mystery at hand.

Perhaps the most understated element of the film is Joseph Stefano’s screenplay. From what I gather about Robert Bloch’s novel, Stefano restructured the story to set up a jarring shift in the plot and encase the mystery in an even thicker container for Hitchcock to best utilize his skills. The script’s only major weakness is the scene right after the climax, which is pointless exposition explaining the previous events; something movie watchers don’t need today — though that’s arguably because Hitchcock made this movie.

For those that love Hitchcock’s style, “Psycho” is an instant classic and perhaps no film of his showcases it better. For those unfamiliar with his work, it’s not hard to see while watching “Psycho” what made his films so memorable. Even those who don’t have an eye for good filmmaking can even appreciate the entertaining suspense and constantly twisting plot of “Psycho.”

—

4.5/5 Stars

—

Psycho
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock
Written Joseph Stefano, Robert Block (novel)
Starring: Janet Leigh, Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, John Gavin

Few classic era film directors did comedy better than Frank Capra, if any. The over-the-top ridiculous dark comedy farce “Arsenic and Old Lace” is not the three-time Oscar winner’s usual cup of tea (there’s an inherent lack of romance), but he captures the adaptation of the play with a sense of humor that’s critical for a story so ridiculous.

Having seen the play myself, admittedly the comic twists and sheer outrageousness of some of the characters were less effective upon a second viewing, but it doesn’t detract from comprehending the comic genius of Joseph Kesselring’s original script. The moral of the story is that everyone’s crazy. Period.

“Arsenic” takes place in one afternoon and night in Brooklyn, where esteemed theatre critic and self-proclaimed marriage-hater Mortimer Brewster (Cary Grant) has taken refuge with his dear old aunts before taking off on his honeymoon with Elaine Harper (Priscilla Lane), a fact he’s publicly ashamed of. Not long into his stay, however, he discovers both sweet Aunt Abby (Josephine Hull) and Aunt Martha (Jean Adair) are in fact mercy killers who poison lonely old men without families and homes and bury them in the basement with the aid of Mortimer’s delusional brother, Teddy, who believes he’s Teddy Roosevelt. In an effort to sort it all out, Mortimer drives himself practically insane.

I’ve never had a bad thing to say about him, but this is a fine piece of total overacting by Grant. Part of it is the charm story and Capra’s vision to acknowledge its absurdity, but from his first discovery of the body in the window seat, Grant is up and over-the-top. It takes a bit away from the momentum, neglecting a steady accumulation of craziness, even if that’s not the film’s intention. Grant is much better in charming romantic roles and not as an all-out comedian, but he has some quality moments.

Capra’s creativity was no doubt limited by the confines of the story. It almost entirely takes place inside the Brewster home (convenient for the play, just not the movie). The Epsteins’ adaptation takes some liberties where possible, but it’s merely wiggle-room. The director leaves his mark in moments when the story hits a peak in terms of the physical humor. He also films some comically dark scenes when Mortimer’s loony brother Jonathan (Raymond Massey) returns with his accomplice Dr. Einstein (wonderful character actor Peter Lorre). Those two actors add more dimension to their performances which helps the film be taken a tad more seriously.

Amidst the chaos, however, “Arsenic and Old Lace” has a truthful ring to it. Sanity is a relative attribute and we should be so lucky as to possess it in the slightest bit. “Arsenic” doesn’t feel like some of the ’30s and ’40s classics before it, but it’s great fun and a real laugh. Who says every film has to be totally sane and by-the-book?

—

3.5/5 Stars

—

Arsenic and Old Lace
Directed by Frank Capra
Written by Julius and Philip Epstein, Joseph Kesselring (play)
Starring: Cary Grant, Josephine Hull, Jean Adair, Priscilla Lane

One has to judge “Gentleman’s Agreement” in the context in which it was made. This was a landmark film, one of the first socially responsible films in movie history that barely escaped the clutches of the government’s inquisition of communism in Hollywood as well as numerous movie industry bigwigs who didn’t want it made. Few films are true achievements in a socially relevant sense, even today, but “Gentleman’s Agreement” managed to reach that level in a time when the movie industry almost always kept its nose out of real-world issues.

The film’s focus is anti-Semitism in the United States, which more Americans had become aware of due to the crimes of the Nazis during the Holocaust. Initially a novel by Laura Z. Hobson, the title refers to the unspoken agreement between members of a community to not allow Jews to live in their neighborhoods. It tells the story of an investigative reporter named Phil Green (Gregory Peck) who decides the best way to report on the issue is to experience it firsthand, so he tells everyone he knows that he’s Jewish.

Judaism is abstracted in Moss Hart’s screenplay. Other than talking about anti-Semitism and John Garfield’s role as Phil’s Jewish friend David, there’s no actually Judaism in the film. Conceptually, however, it looms over the entire picture. The actual portrayal of anti-Semitism is small at first and grows into a few blatant acts that finally add some drama to the film.

Understandably, the film tries to be as equal parts a classic Elia Kazan romance with intimate and fragile characters the audience grows fond of quickly. In 1947, producers could never make a picture that dwelled entirely on an issue, let alone something as taboo and hush- hush as anti-Semitism. Romance was a must and “Gentleman’s Agreement” delivers that entertainment value. Phil’s romance with Kathy (Dorothy McGuire) is passionate and convincing, even if their arguments, spurred on by Phil’s devotion to his “project,” seem ticky-tacky.

Kazan transfers the passion of their rocky love to the film’s message of discrimination in the form of ignorance, not merely in outward verbal attacks or violence. Powerfully brought to light by Garfield’s character, “Gentleman’s Agreement” begins to introduce the concept of prejudice to the American people. That anti-Semitism can be as easily perpetuated by remaining silent as much as by acting out is something I would imagine the public needed to hear.

The scripts construction comes off slightly amateur, but with intention to spell out the issue at hand. Things take some time to get rolling and the plot can be slow at times, trying to find conflict in the small anti-Semitic errors some of the characters make, but the cast really holds it all together, conveying the urgency of the problem so well to the audience. How much clearer does it get than having an Oscar winner in Anne Revere, who plays Phil’s mother who has taken ill, deliver a passionate speech about wanting to live long enough to see a world in social harmony? If that doesn’t get your attention, then you haven’t quite found the true significance of “Gentleman’s Agreement.”

—

4.5/5 Stars

Gentleman’s Agreement (1947)
Directed by Elia Kazan
Written by Moss Hart, Laura Z. Hobson and Elia Kazan (uncredited)
Starring: Gregory Peck, Dorothy Maguire, John Garfield

Films about the movie industry are always interesting, but “Sullivan’s Travels” is in its own special niche in the show-biz comedy genre. The premise is about a successful musical comedy director who wants to make a serious picture about human suffering. The film opens with a dedication to the memory of clowns, buffoons — anyone who has dedicated their life to making people laugh. What do you think he will learn at the end of this story? It’s not revealed with the most impressiveness, but few themes ring as true as this film’s, especially to anyone with a love of the movies, especially classics.

Conceived during the Great Depression and premiering at the very beginning of World War II, what an important picture. “Sullivan” champions comedy, portrays Hollywood with a sense of humor yet asks it to look in the mirror and celebrates the golden age of Hollywood that came before it with numerous classic techniques.

John McCrea is John Lloyd Sullivan, a pictures director that wants to make a film of substance — he wants to adapt “O Brother Where Art Thou” (a title most cleverly used by the Coen brothers in their 2000 film) but his producers want … a little bit of sex. They tell him he knows nothing of human suffering and has no business making that kind of film. Sullivan sees it as a challenge and decides he’ll dress like a hobo and learn for himself in order to make his picture.

Try as he might to escape his Hollywood entourage, the humor of “Sullivan” is that Sullivan can never manage to escape Los Angeles. In the beginning he tries to shake them in a high- speed chase; one of the funnier and more classic scenes of the film. He’s in a go-kart of sorts with a 13-year-old and his friends in a giant caravan.

Along the way he meets a girl (Veronica Lake) who shows him some kindness and then when they’re thrown in jail and bailed out by his producers, he reveals himself rather quickly. She takes a liking to him, however, and they dress as hobos together jumping on train cars the next time out.

The brilliance of Preston Sturges’ story and script — aside from his punchy dialogue — is that despite it’s sincere message, it is not a drama about a guy trying to make a drama after years of comedies, but it’s a comedy. It’s not the funniest thing you ever saw and it hits you right over the head with just about everything instead of drawing it out and making it a bit more epiphanic, but it serves up a pristine reminder of what it’s about through use of the comedic techniques it champions.

If you love film — namely the classics — “Sullivan’s Travels” will find a way to your heart somehow. It’s a really perceptive film for 1941, a genre rarity in those days truthfully, and it celebrates what at least one genre of film is all about.

—

4/5 Stars

Sullivan’s Travels (1941)
Written and directed by Preston Sturges
Starring: Joel McCrea, Veronica Lake

The Charles Dickens classic “Great Expectations” could not have been in better hands than David Lean’s. Though his later works would be the ones to earn him accolades, this film is just as special. Few directors can make a film feel grandiose while still paying close attention to the details like Lean. “Great Expectations” is a film with as much power on-screen as the literary classic it came from. It also calls attention to what’s between the lines of Dickens’ pages.

It helps that the “Great Expectations” is a classic story: a young common boy who aspires to be a wealthy gentleman; a strange old woman who stays in doors and lives with her beautiful young daughter; a mysterious benefactor –all unique twists on conventional archetypes. The young Pip is a likable lad with a strong inclination for good who meets the old Miss Havisham and her daughter Estella who change his world view forever.

Lean’s choice of black and white is the first stroke of brilliance with this film. That’s simply the kind of story that “Great Expectations” is. Nothing to do with being an old novel, but when you think of the dark, shadowy mansion of Miss Havisham and the beginning scenes in the Church graveyard, light and dark is huge metaphor in Dickens’ story and there’s no better way to establish that contrast than use of black and white.

Then there’s the suspense and intrigue Lean brings to this story. The shadows and howling winds are just part of what makes this such an interesting film. Boiled down, the story of Pip becoming a gentleman is driven by the mystery of who his benefactor is (and partially what will become of his love for Estella). Without a lot of explicit conflict, that puts a lot of responsibility on Lean and needless to say he delivers. He increases tension at key scenes to drive up our interest and picks a few intensely compelling shots at crucial moments. He demonstrates an exceptional understanding of Dickens’ text.

Topping off the film are its memorable characters. Top-notch performances from John MIlls as 20-year-old Pip, Alec Guinness as his friend Herbert Pocket and some terrific character roles: Martita Hunt as Miss Havisham and Freda Jackson as the story’s lovable simpleton, Mr. Joe Dargery. Each character represents something substantial in a Dickens story and it’s abundantly clear in this sterling adaptation.

—

4/5 Stars

Great Expectations (1946)
Directed by David Lean
Written by Anthony Havelock-Allan, David Lean, Cecil McGivern, Ronald Neame, Kay Walsh, Charles Dickens (novel)
Starring John Mills, Valerie Hobson, Alec Guinness

In the wake of World War II, Alfred Hitchcock brought audiences “Notorious,” a romantic thriller with political undertones. To audiences of the era, I’m sure it was slightly scandalous. Not only in its dealing with Germans living in Brazil post-WWII and handling uranium, but also with its co-stars Cary Grant and Ingrid Bergman kissing on and off for an extremely long take. It’s safe to say that was particularly sensual for film in 1946, but for modern viewers, their love affair seems almost childish and unfounded. The one aspect of this film that has not withered over the last 60-some years, however, is the immaculate direction of Sir Alfred Hitchcock.

Hitchcock is not only a master of suspense in “Notorious,” but also of grace and creativity. His every directorial choice is inspired and brilliant, creating every emotion and audience reaction he could’ve possibly intended. From his elegant zoom-ins on a memorable key to his object-focused transitions such as bottles of wine, Hitchcock is what makes this film truly great. Writer Ben Hecht has certainly crafted a screenplay of carefully placed tension and brilliant turns of events, but it’s Hitchcock telling this story through the details that makes it a classic.

Grant and Bergman star as two people with a mission who fall for each other. He’s a government agent in charge of persuading her, the daughter of a German-born traitor who’s just been imprisoned, to go undercover in Rio. She must use her womanly wiles to gain access to the house of one of her father’s old acquaintances who has always had feelings for her. Tension between the two lovers rises when she marries him for the sake of the operation.

The romantic aspect of the film is definitely weak by modern standards. It’s got a juicy old- world feel that when things get tough for them, acts like it’s a whole lot more intense than it is. Grant and Bergman, however, do their part to charm the audience into going with it. Once you get over the hump that they’ve starting taking themselves way to seriously too soon, it becomes an intriguing part of the film.

As a thriller, after the first 45 minutes the film starts to pick up. Hecht and Hitchcock hold the film’s only secret over your head for as long as they can to keep your attention and it pays off. There’s something just classically suspenseful about our heroes trying to gain access to the restricted cellar at a party, but if the party runs out of champagne, they’ll get caught. Hitchcock keeps showing the number of bottles in the cooler diminishing and the tension builds. Classic technique and there’s nothing stale about it.

The political edge has also kind of worn down on this film. I can imagine that would feel like a bigger deal right after WWII, but today the undertones are too subtle to come across the viewer completely. Hecht’s storytelling, however, premise aside, is superb. Ultimately, even if the romance is a bit out there and the magnitude of the situation diminished over the years Hitchcock and “Notorious” have you hooked, as always, on what will happen next.

—

4/5 Stars

Notorious (1946)
Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock
Written by: Ben Hecht
Starring: Cary Grant, Ingrid Bergman

“It Happened One Night” is a classic love story yet its best feature is that it surprises you: it’s not chock-full of clichés (though not devoid of them either) and it has an enduring sense of humor that all generations can appreciate.

The film stars two classic screen actors in Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert playing Peter Warne and Ellie Andrews, one a recently fired journalist and the other a runaway heiress who meet on a bus to New York. For Peter, this scoop could save his career and for Ellie, well, she needs all the help she can get to make it to New York alive. The two develop an unlikely relationship exchanging humorous jabs as they bus, hitchhike and hijack their way and of course while neither will be the first to admit it, there’s no hiding their feelings for each other from the audience.

Classic films tend to rely on the prowess of their marquee actors and Gable and Colbert are terrific together. Both are humorous and play a wide range of emotions. Gable is one of those stars that has that intangible “it” factor that just makes him seem so incredibly important in every scene. There is a strong tension between them the entire film that is funny at times and romantically intriguing at others.

The writing, however, is what makes this a standout classic. The way Peter wiggles his and Ellie’s way out of tight situation, namely those that would result in Ellie being found out, is genius. Robert Riskin does some of the best witty dialog and scenes. The best parts of the film are when Peter and Ellie are alone, either in their motel room or out in the forest. The tension between them is highest and it makes the dialog that much better. This is a film that you remember the scenes. Like a play they all carry their own weight and interest. What happens next is not as important as what is happening.
“It Happened One Night” only suffers from a cliché ending. The humor shifts from wit to just laughing at the film in general because you know the inevitable will happen and anything that tries to stay in the way at that point is just–pointless. Anyone who loves classic situational and near-farcical comedy will love “It Happened One Night” and with good reason. It’s enjoyable for all generations but it’s very true to the era, definitely an escapist depression-era film because it concerns itself with the wealthy and pokes fun at them. There’s even a song though it’s incorporated in a more drama-focused way, no theatricality.

—

4/5 Stars

It Happened One Night (1934)
Directed by: Frank Capra
Written by: Robert Riskin, Samuel Hopkins Adams (short story)
Starring: Clark Gable, Claudette Colbert

Acclaimed writer/director Billy Wilder strikes again with another humorous and romantic comedy in “The Apartment.” But more important than another triangular love story from the “Some Like It Hot” creator is the actor he brought along with him: Jack Lemmon. Though “Hot” was his breaking out party, “The Apartment” really boasts the range of the funny, neurotic and charismatic Lemmon.

In this film, Lemmon plays C.C. Baxter, a lowly insurance worker hoping to climb the corporate ladder by “leasing” his primely located Manhattan apartment to four different company executives so they can entertain their mistresses. Baxter himself claims to be a humble bachelor, but his eye for the attractive elevator operator Fran (Shirley MacLaine) in his building tells us otherwise. Problem is, Fran’s still in love with another man and that other man happens to be Baxter’s boss, Mr. Sheldrake (Fred MacMurray).

Lemmon defines lovable protagonist as Baxter. From his goofy nasal voice early in the film as he tries to satisfy all his “clients” whilst carrying a cold to his fast-talking enthusiasm as he courageously asks out Fran. It’s almost too much when we see him alone in his apartment dancing from excitement or cleverly taking a hit to his reputation by letting his neighbors assume he’s a playboy. Watching him play second fiddle to Fran and Sheldrake’s unsettled affair through much of the film is almost difficult because we want him to be the one finding love.

MacLaine is marvelous as the down-on-herself, lovestruck Fran, the very beginning of what of course became a long and fruitful career. MacMurray is excellent too, playing a strong lead for so late in his career.

But it’s Lemmon’s performance and Wilder’s lovable story that make “The Apartment” such a classic. By 1960, no one could keep audiences from knowing that the two leads would fall in love, but the key was finding a different way to get them there. Wilder also pokes fun at a what was a touchy subject in the era of the “perfect American family” in rich married men going on dates with younger women. It’s that creative and light sense of humor hovering over all the drama that makes Wilder comedies so good.

—

4/5 Stars

The Apartment (1960)
Directed by: Billy Wilder
Written by: Billy Wilder, I.A.L Diamond
Starring: Jack Lemmon, Shirley MacLaine, Fred MacMurray

More than a half century after “Sunset Blvd.,” audiences are well aware that Hollywood is not all glitz and glamor — that there’s a stark reality. Yet despite that knowledge, “Sunset Blvd.” is still an eye-opening and deeply affecting motion picture today as it was in the 1950s. Because even though our “access” to Hollywood is greater than that of yesteryear, great film-making and chilling performances are timeless and that’s what this classic delivers.

Billy Wilder was already famous for his string of films in the mid-late ’40s, but “Sunset Blvd.” is in a category of its own. There’s something shockingly real about this noir drama. Maybe it’s the fact that actress Gloria Swanson, who plays faded silent film star Norma Desmond, was in need of a comeback herself, or that famous director Cecil B. DeMille plays a big role as himself, or that several old silent film stars such as Hedda Hopper and Buster Keaton appear in the movie as Norma’s friends. It’s kind of enchanting really, but doubly so because of the suspenseful tone of the film.

“Sunset Blvd.” is about a work-starved screenwriter named Joe Gillis (William Holden) who by coincidence ends up in the mansion of an old silent film star, Norma Desmond. Desmond has written herself a comeback (or return, as she prefers) role and convinces Gillis to redraft it. Oddly, however, she insists on him staying at her mansion, where he inevitably becomes her plaything.

The script by Wilder and longtime collaborator Charles Brackett (along with D.M. Marshman Jr.) creates some awkward but powerful moments, such as a New Years Eve party where Gillis discovers he’s the only guest. Although the beginning scene was a last-minute addition, the excellent shot of him floating in the pool is the first of many affecting images and scenes that Wilder has crafted with a touch of horror and creepiness to be truthful. Franz Waxman accentuates this tone with his suspenseful score.

But it’s way Gloria Swanson carries herself as the iconic Norma Desmond that generates the creepy effect. Head tilted back, she stares at you with those 1930s movie star eyes and moves her hands in such a manner that will terrify everyone just slightly. Not getting an Oscar win just goes to show what a great year for film 1950 was, though speculation is the film’s mildly negative portrayal of the industry could have been partly responsible. All the main characters in this film got nods but lost out on the prize in fact — and truth is all were deserving of being there.

It’s hard to see now, but Hollywood was all about reputation in those days. It was about the image and deceiving the public with glamorization of the business. “Sunset Blvd.” was a classic of its time for getting beneath the veil that Norma oh so cleverly has on when she goes to visit the great Mr. DeMille, but it’s a classic for all-time because of the subtle haunting quality of Wilder’s work and bewitching performance of Swanson.

4.5/5 Stars

Sunset Blvd (1950)
Directed by: Billy Wilder
Written by: Charles Brackett, Billy Wilder, D.M. Marshman Jr.
Starring: William Holden, Gloria Swanson, Erich von Stroheim, Nancy Olson

Three of the brightest stars in the golden years of cinema converge in “The Philadelphia Story,” a romantic comedy of great wit and sophistication. Although it would be unfair to say that the talent makes this film, Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn and James Stewart are far and away its best feature.

“Philadelphia Story”" was adapted from the stage production of the same name by Philip Barry. The play was written with the intention of reviving Hepburn’s stage career. It was brought to the screen with the help of Hepburn’s boyfriend Howard Hughes who purchased the rights for her as a gift.

Full of fast-talking highbrow humor, the material is unquestionably aimed at an upper-class audience, but not only in terms of taste, but also thematically. Created during the latter half of the Great Depression, “Philadelphia Story” makes the statement that class is insignificant, that it’s a non-existent social framework that purports itself as an indication of character. We obsess over class, something that couldn’t have been more true during the depression, and it’s a theme all the more impressive considering the film’s popularity and story of celebrity gossip and intrigue.

Hepburn stars as rich socialite Tracy Lord, who is about to marry working-class hero George Kittredge (John Howard), only her wealthy ex-husband, the wealthy and fantastically-named C.K. Dexter Haven (Grant) plans on spoiling the big day by sneaking in a tabloid writer (Stewart) and photographer (Ruth Hussey). The jig is up pretty quickly, but not without making things dreadfully difficult on Tracy.

Stewart might have won the Oscar, but this is Hepburn’s film. I’d agree with what Stewart once said: that the statuette was “deferred payment” for losing out in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” an undeniably superior role. Hepburn should have seen the glory for this film for her magnetizing and moving performance. Whether its her distinct and powerful voice or her variety of facial expressions, she’s got us tied on a string and she just plays with us throughout the ups and downs of her character. Tracy is not unlike Hepburn herself as a major public figure that feels worshipped more than truly loved or appreciated.

Stewart and Grant, however, deserve their due. Stewart pilots the best scene of the film when he pays a drunken visit to C.K.’s place late at night. Grant works his charms in a more subdued way as C.K. is more the subtle mastermind than the flashy performer of his schemes. Also worthy of mention is the dry and snide humor of Hussey’s character. She adds a really nice touch to the cast and keeps it balanced.

Although a bit sharper, more sophisticated and dialogue-heavy than most romantic comedies, “Philadelphia Story” is still a classic and it makes its class argument through those weaknesses in ways, making it a terrific film.

4/5 Stars

“The Philadelphia Story” (1940)
Directed by: George Kucor
Written by: Donald Ogden Stewart (screenplay), Philip Barry (play), Waldo Salt (uncredited)
Starring: Katherine Hepburn, Cary Grant, James Stewart

There’s something so timeless about “North by Northwest” and it’s not necessarily that it will echo with any generation. Cary Grant’s Roger Thornhill, for example, feels a little foreign among today’s thriller protagonists (accent aside) as a 50-year-old everyday man thrown into a mess of a government situation. The action is certainly not big-budget like modern films either with the exception of one explosion. The “it” that “Northwest” has is something more unique and a lot of it stems from great thriller writing and of course the direction of Sir Alfred Hitchcock.“Northwest” follows the story of how Thornhill is taken against his will and accused of being a man named George Kaplan. These men try and kill Thornhill results in him rushing to prove his innocence, which actually leads him deeper into the mystery of George Kaplan. The writing of Ernest Lehman is absolutely terrific and it seems a shame that Hitchcock never collaborated with him again. The dialogue is not only very pointed and helpful to the plot, but also the plot movement with its twists and turns and clever way of revealing information to the viewer is simply classic–no film in this film’s nearly 50 year old shadow has been able to eclipse it.

Then there is Hitchcock’s signature directing. No one seems to choose better moments to employ certain shot techniques than Alfred HItchcock. He knows how to turn the best parts of the film into highly memorable and often times unforgettable scenes. The crop-duster attack is easily one of the greatest scenes in thriller movie history. Conceptually, but especially direction-wise as it could be potentially boring or over-directed to be more intense. Instead, it finds its intensity from Hitchcock’s decision to let it build and fall back as the plane flies by and circles around again.

Perhaps the immediate impact of this film made it an instant classic and nobody wanted to borrow any obvious ideas or techniques–although the two-faced femme fatale played by Eva Marie Saint is certainly an archetype of a lot of these kind of movies. “North by Northwest” simply still stands out through its inventiveness and will always continue to do so.

4.5/5 Stars

“North by Northwest” (1959)
Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock
Written by: Ernest Lehman
Starring: Carey Grant, Eva Marie Saint