Best Scene: Broken Cup.
Best Scene: Final Confrontation.
Best Scene: Train escape.
Best Scene: Final Battle.
Best Scene: Watching the boat.
Updated Overall Supporting
Next Year: 1947 Lead (I'll take any supporting suggestions as well)
Showing posts with label 1937 Alternate Best Actor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1937 Alternate Best Actor. Show all posts
Tuesday, 7 March 2017
Best Scene: Broken Cup.
Best Scene: Final Confrontation.
Best Scene: Train escape.
Best Scene: Final Battle.
Best Scene: Watching the boat.
Updated Overall Supporting
Next Year: 1947 Lead (I'll take any supporting suggestions as well)
Ronald Colman did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Major Rudolf Rassendyll and King Rudolf V in The Prisoner of Zenda.
The Prisoner Of Zenda is a very entertaining film about an Englishman filling for a distant cousin, a foreign King, in order to thwart a potential coup.
Now having previously mentioned the underrated status of Robert Donat perhaps Ronald Colman deserves a similar mention. Colman is not even granted the notoriety of a controversial Oscar win since no one seems to even remember he won an Oscar at all. That's a shame though given that Colman's presence in a film was basically a guarantee that there would at least be something worthwhile in the film. Well thankfully The Prisoner of Zenda is already an enjoyable adventure film, but it gets amplified all the more through the services of Colman in dual roles. We aren't given that much time with the one of the two roles, that being the King Rudolf who we meet briefly as he's somewhat taken aback by his doppelganger, yet soon enough welcomes him into his good graces. Colman again only has a few scenes as the King, yet makes use of them well to craft a separate character. Colman keeps the differences relatively slight, fitting given that most people are suppose to believe the other Rudolf is the King, but Colman does finds another personality in these few scenes. Colman grants a shyness and unease in his body language, as he's more distant, implying much more of a natural fear innate in a man who is aware that there are those who do not wish for him to succeed.
Colman uses his scenes as the King well which amplify his work as just plain old Rudolph. This is a bit more traditional Colman, but I mean that in a good way. Colman again brings that ease to his performance that makes him such a likable screen presence. Colman though manages to indicate something further in this by carefully realizing a man who is not burdened by responsibility, which the King is. When the King is drugged, then later kidnapped by those who wish to take the power for themselves, the common Rudolph is called upon to act as an imposter in order for the King to keep his title. Colman actually carries this lack of burden into his portrayal of Rudolph's method of impersonation. Colman brings this sort of carefree quality, although he portrays the proper intention to succeed most directly, particularly when a challenge arises, Colman always alludes to the peculiar state in some very knowing glances though. Colman manages to bring just the right touches of humor in these, in such small moments such as almost forgetting his lines, or just showing the way he's more than a little taken aback by all the attention he is receiving.
Colman finds the right balance in his work as he shows Rudolf conveying both the severity of the situation and the strangeness of it, all of course with his trademark charm thrown in for good measure. Colman proceeds though to properly realize the changing situation as Rudolf continues the act. This includes the complication of being encouraged to romance the King's intended the Princess Flavia (Madeleine Caroll). Colman is always a great romantic lead as he just seems to be able to strike that spark with no time at all, and that is the case here as well. Colman though again does well not to play it completely straight. He brings just the right undercurrent awkwardness in moments indicating the impersonation even while portraying honest infatuation. Not everything though is quite as complex as with Rudolf dealing with the film's true villain the henchmen Rupert (Douglas Fairbanks Jr.) who makes no excuses for his amorality. Colman is terrific in these scenes though by showing the way Rudolf is so keenly aware of almost the game he's playing against this man, as he and Fairbanks have a lot of fun as the two have a battle of wits along with the expected swordplay. Colman though is careful though to portray a genuine concern and passion for the King's safety as the situation becomes more severe. He's particularly good in the closing scenes of the film, including its thrilling climax, offering the right gravity to the situation. He's indeed effortless in the role, but Colman importantly provides the needed intensity showing the needed effort Rudolf must make to save the day as well as return to being just the common man. This is typically strong work from Ronald Colman that succeeds in making the film all the more enjoyable.
Colman uses his scenes as the King well which amplify his work as just plain old Rudolph. This is a bit more traditional Colman, but I mean that in a good way. Colman again brings that ease to his performance that makes him such a likable screen presence. Colman though manages to indicate something further in this by carefully realizing a man who is not burdened by responsibility, which the King is. When the King is drugged, then later kidnapped by those who wish to take the power for themselves, the common Rudolph is called upon to act as an imposter in order for the King to keep his title. Colman actually carries this lack of burden into his portrayal of Rudolph's method of impersonation. Colman brings this sort of carefree quality, although he portrays the proper intention to succeed most directly, particularly when a challenge arises, Colman always alludes to the peculiar state in some very knowing glances though. Colman manages to bring just the right touches of humor in these, in such small moments such as almost forgetting his lines, or just showing the way he's more than a little taken aback by all the attention he is receiving.
Colman finds the right balance in his work as he shows Rudolf conveying both the severity of the situation and the strangeness of it, all of course with his trademark charm thrown in for good measure. Colman proceeds though to properly realize the changing situation as Rudolf continues the act. This includes the complication of being encouraged to romance the King's intended the Princess Flavia (Madeleine Caroll). Colman is always a great romantic lead as he just seems to be able to strike that spark with no time at all, and that is the case here as well. Colman though again does well not to play it completely straight. He brings just the right undercurrent awkwardness in moments indicating the impersonation even while portraying honest infatuation. Not everything though is quite as complex as with Rudolf dealing with the film's true villain the henchmen Rupert (Douglas Fairbanks Jr.) who makes no excuses for his amorality. Colman is terrific in these scenes though by showing the way Rudolf is so keenly aware of almost the game he's playing against this man, as he and Fairbanks have a lot of fun as the two have a battle of wits along with the expected swordplay. Colman though is careful though to portray a genuine concern and passion for the King's safety as the situation becomes more severe. He's particularly good in the closing scenes of the film, including its thrilling climax, offering the right gravity to the situation. He's indeed effortless in the role, but Colman importantly provides the needed intensity showing the needed effort Rudolf must make to save the day as well as return to being just the common man. This is typically strong work from Ronald Colman that succeeds in making the film all the more enjoyable.
Monday, 6 March 2017
Jean Gabin did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character of Pepe Le Moko.
Pepe Le Moko is the superior original film about a wanted thief who avoids police capture in Algiers by hiding in a densely populated district known as the Casbah.
Pepe Le Moko was remade the very next year as Algiers in 1938 in which the role was played by another Frenchman, Charles Boyer. Jean Gabin, who never broke out in America the way Boyer did, possibly because his English speaking accent unfortunately sounded a little goofy, though he was perhaps the most popular French dramatic actor of the period in France whereas Boyer was perhaps the most popular French dramatic actor in America. Boyer was Oscar nominated for that performance and it is interesting to see the separate interpretations to the character granted by Boyer and Gabin since they are rather different performers in style. Boyer's charisma stemming oddly enough from kind of a cold command, but Gabin is more directly charming. Gabin played a thief just the previous year in The Lower Depths, and he does offers that sort of suave style once again, but this is in no way a repetition of that previous performance.
Gabin is certainly suave as he was in the Lower Depths, but Gabin adjusts this properly to a "high class" type of criminal rather than the lower class thief he portrayed in that earlier film. Gabin was a quieter technically more innately likable sort there, whereas here Gabin plays the role with a bit more flamboyance fitting to a man who has become the obsession of the police force. Gabin brings a more overt style to the man, Gabin technically playing it up purposefully as a man who plays it up himself. Gabin, whenever Pepe is the presence of the police or a potential "fan", presents himself as the affable rogue he should be at least in their view. Gabin offers the right performance of a suave man who knows he's being suave. As he bargains a deal for some of his stolen jewels in the view of so many, Gabin infuses Le Moko with just the right assurance of a man living in success rather than a desperate man trying to find a way to make money.
Gabin of course offers the expected charm to the role and is very convincing as he wins the hearts of two separate women. This is in opposition to Boyer's methods in the same role where he provided more of the intensity within the charisma. Gabin though is more appealing frankly, but he importantly does not use this to simplify Le Moko as a simple romantic though. Gabin brings a harder edge to the role, as he cultivates this definite darkness in the role even within his most charming moments. There is this incisiveness within Gabin's eyes even as he negotiates a price for stolen goods seemingly with such ease. Gabin alludes to a far more intense figure than Le Moko likes to provide to most who see him. This darker side though only becomes all the more evident as Le Moko deals with members of his cadre who do not listen to his order directly. Gabin provides a more vicious edge fitting to a criminal, that is almost his true self that Gabin provides whenever Le Moko truly needs to take care business.
The one major element that was lacking in Charles Boyer's performance, which is only all the more evident when watching this performance, is the idea of Pepe Le Moko being technically a captive of sort in the Casbah. Boyer never seemed too uncomfortable with his life, and his downfall almost seems to come just by carelessness. Gabin crafts a far more captivating and complex depiction of Le Moko by giving weight to Le Moko's circumstances. Again Gabin reveals far more of the man within the margins, whenever we witness away from the crowd and within more vulnerable circumstances. Gabin portrays Le Moko without that confidence, or charm instead revealing a definite desperation within the man suffering from a sort of cabin fever within the Casbah. Gabin infuses so much discontent in the way he slowly conveys a growing unease in Le Moko as he lies alone, or seems to see that he is imprisoning himself by avoiding prison. Even in the central romantic relationship Gabin portrays on the edges of his charm a weakness showing that his desire for the woman, from outside the Casbah, also is a desire to escape the Casbah. Gabin slowly loses the character's "cool" throughout the film showing more and more the real man beneath it all from scene to scene. When he leaves the Casbah it is a far more emotional moment than it is in Algiers, because Gabin infuses this strange hope with hopelessness. As Gabin shows such pain as he is within the Casbah yet still in his eyes reveals this eagerness as though Le Moko is walking towards a wonderful dream. A far stronger finale comes in through Gabin as he strips down his work in the final moments of the film to reveal only a sad man beneath the fancy scarf no longer even able to hang onto the image he has crafted for himself. Gabin's work adds so much more substance to the story by making Pepe Le Moko so much more than just this "sly thief" who has a romance on the side that almost accidentally is his downfall. He gives an excellent performance by complicating the story with his striking realization of a man struggling to maintain freedom in mind as well as body.
Pepe Le Moko was remade the very next year as Algiers in 1938 in which the role was played by another Frenchman, Charles Boyer. Jean Gabin, who never broke out in America the way Boyer did, possibly because his English speaking accent unfortunately sounded a little goofy, though he was perhaps the most popular French dramatic actor of the period in France whereas Boyer was perhaps the most popular French dramatic actor in America. Boyer was Oscar nominated for that performance and it is interesting to see the separate interpretations to the character granted by Boyer and Gabin since they are rather different performers in style. Boyer's charisma stemming oddly enough from kind of a cold command, but Gabin is more directly charming. Gabin played a thief just the previous year in The Lower Depths, and he does offers that sort of suave style once again, but this is in no way a repetition of that previous performance.
Gabin is certainly suave as he was in the Lower Depths, but Gabin adjusts this properly to a "high class" type of criminal rather than the lower class thief he portrayed in that earlier film. Gabin was a quieter technically more innately likable sort there, whereas here Gabin plays the role with a bit more flamboyance fitting to a man who has become the obsession of the police force. Gabin brings a more overt style to the man, Gabin technically playing it up purposefully as a man who plays it up himself. Gabin, whenever Pepe is the presence of the police or a potential "fan", presents himself as the affable rogue he should be at least in their view. Gabin offers the right performance of a suave man who knows he's being suave. As he bargains a deal for some of his stolen jewels in the view of so many, Gabin infuses Le Moko with just the right assurance of a man living in success rather than a desperate man trying to find a way to make money.
Gabin of course offers the expected charm to the role and is very convincing as he wins the hearts of two separate women. This is in opposition to Boyer's methods in the same role where he provided more of the intensity within the charisma. Gabin though is more appealing frankly, but he importantly does not use this to simplify Le Moko as a simple romantic though. Gabin brings a harder edge to the role, as he cultivates this definite darkness in the role even within his most charming moments. There is this incisiveness within Gabin's eyes even as he negotiates a price for stolen goods seemingly with such ease. Gabin alludes to a far more intense figure than Le Moko likes to provide to most who see him. This darker side though only becomes all the more evident as Le Moko deals with members of his cadre who do not listen to his order directly. Gabin provides a more vicious edge fitting to a criminal, that is almost his true self that Gabin provides whenever Le Moko truly needs to take care business.
The one major element that was lacking in Charles Boyer's performance, which is only all the more evident when watching this performance, is the idea of Pepe Le Moko being technically a captive of sort in the Casbah. Boyer never seemed too uncomfortable with his life, and his downfall almost seems to come just by carelessness. Gabin crafts a far more captivating and complex depiction of Le Moko by giving weight to Le Moko's circumstances. Again Gabin reveals far more of the man within the margins, whenever we witness away from the crowd and within more vulnerable circumstances. Gabin portrays Le Moko without that confidence, or charm instead revealing a definite desperation within the man suffering from a sort of cabin fever within the Casbah. Gabin infuses so much discontent in the way he slowly conveys a growing unease in Le Moko as he lies alone, or seems to see that he is imprisoning himself by avoiding prison. Even in the central romantic relationship Gabin portrays on the edges of his charm a weakness showing that his desire for the woman, from outside the Casbah, also is a desire to escape the Casbah. Gabin slowly loses the character's "cool" throughout the film showing more and more the real man beneath it all from scene to scene. When he leaves the Casbah it is a far more emotional moment than it is in Algiers, because Gabin infuses this strange hope with hopelessness. As Gabin shows such pain as he is within the Casbah yet still in his eyes reveals this eagerness as though Le Moko is walking towards a wonderful dream. A far stronger finale comes in through Gabin as he strips down his work in the final moments of the film to reveal only a sad man beneath the fancy scarf no longer even able to hang onto the image he has crafted for himself. Gabin's work adds so much more substance to the story by making Pepe Le Moko so much more than just this "sly thief" who has a romance on the side that almost accidentally is his downfall. He gives an excellent performance by complicating the story with his striking realization of a man struggling to maintain freedom in mind as well as body.
Friday, 3 March 2017
Robert Donat did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying A.J. Fothergill also known as "Peter Ouranoff" in Knight Without Armour.
Knight Without Armour is a somewhat effective film that follows a British spy within the Russian revolution attempting to save a Russian countess.
Robert Donat again is one of the more underrated actors from the period known only today, if at all, as the man who beat James Stewart and Clark Gable for the 1939 best actor Oscar. Donat deserves more and here's a good example why in his role as a British ex-patriot recruited to spy for the Russians. The film's synopsis though might sound like it might offer a bit more complications with the whole being a spy thing, but really that is just the set up to place our hero into the setting. Old Fothergill's close calls come just with the habit of the Reds and the Whites executing whoever they feel like whenever they feel like it, they almost never come from him actually being a spy. This makes his performance perhaps a bit less duplicitous than you might expect, although this is not a criticism against Donat by any means. The character of Fothergill is simply a hero for us to follow through the chaos of the Russian Revolution.
Donat of course works very well as that hero as he has this very low key appeal to him. Donat finds charm just basically in his unassuming style which works particularly well for this role where his character wants to keep a low profile. Again though the spying is not focused upon too much in a way Donat does a good job of showing the way he fits in by being basically that guy off to the side in any given situation. Donat exudes the right lack of pretense showing a man who there is no reason to notice since it does not appear as though he means any harm to anyone. Although this approach works for awhile for Fothergill a problem arises when he crosses path with the Russian Countess Alexandra Adraxine (Marlene Dietrich) who he decides to save from certain death from the revolutionaries due to her family heritage and social standing.
Now I have to admit the biggest surprise for me in this film as Dietrich's performance since she's not doing that worldly colder style that defined many of her performance. Dietrich plays her character here with a certain naivety which I actually took be aback I have to admit. As one would expect the focus in the film becomes a romance between the two as they attempt to escape Russian alive. Donat, from what I've seen, seems particularly proficient at striking up chemistry with his co-stars. Even in very rushed circumstances he just seems to make it work, and that's is the case herre as well. They become quite the endearing pair and the romance feels honest, perhaps it's because Donat is just so likable. The two make it work and in turn make the film actually work as they manage to create an investment in seeing the two get out of it alive together. Donat furthers this though by offering such a genuine presence throughout the film. He creates so much of the tension through his silent reactions throughout the film, and is particularly effective later on in realizing the horror of the constant executions in such a nuanced fashion. Although I will admit going in I did expect a more complex character for Donat to work with, this is still another strong performance from the underrated actor.
Robert Donat again is one of the more underrated actors from the period known only today, if at all, as the man who beat James Stewart and Clark Gable for the 1939 best actor Oscar. Donat deserves more and here's a good example why in his role as a British ex-patriot recruited to spy for the Russians. The film's synopsis though might sound like it might offer a bit more complications with the whole being a spy thing, but really that is just the set up to place our hero into the setting. Old Fothergill's close calls come just with the habit of the Reds and the Whites executing whoever they feel like whenever they feel like it, they almost never come from him actually being a spy. This makes his performance perhaps a bit less duplicitous than you might expect, although this is not a criticism against Donat by any means. The character of Fothergill is simply a hero for us to follow through the chaos of the Russian Revolution.
Donat of course works very well as that hero as he has this very low key appeal to him. Donat finds charm just basically in his unassuming style which works particularly well for this role where his character wants to keep a low profile. Again though the spying is not focused upon too much in a way Donat does a good job of showing the way he fits in by being basically that guy off to the side in any given situation. Donat exudes the right lack of pretense showing a man who there is no reason to notice since it does not appear as though he means any harm to anyone. Although this approach works for awhile for Fothergill a problem arises when he crosses path with the Russian Countess Alexandra Adraxine (Marlene Dietrich) who he decides to save from certain death from the revolutionaries due to her family heritage and social standing.
Now I have to admit the biggest surprise for me in this film as Dietrich's performance since she's not doing that worldly colder style that defined many of her performance. Dietrich plays her character here with a certain naivety which I actually took be aback I have to admit. As one would expect the focus in the film becomes a romance between the two as they attempt to escape Russian alive. Donat, from what I've seen, seems particularly proficient at striking up chemistry with his co-stars. Even in very rushed circumstances he just seems to make it work, and that's is the case herre as well. They become quite the endearing pair and the romance feels honest, perhaps it's because Donat is just so likable. The two make it work and in turn make the film actually work as they manage to create an investment in seeing the two get out of it alive together. Donat furthers this though by offering such a genuine presence throughout the film. He creates so much of the tension through his silent reactions throughout the film, and is particularly effective later on in realizing the horror of the constant executions in such a nuanced fashion. Although I will admit going in I did expect a more complex character for Donat to work with, this is still another strong performance from the underrated actor.
Wednesday, 1 March 2017
Edward G. Robinson did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Nick Donati in Kid Galahad.
Kid Galahad is a decent enough film about a boxing promoter who finds a new prospect in an unassuming bellhop.
It has to be said that Edward G. Robinson is one of the most consistent of actors of the period as he just has a certain grace that was so rare from the period and seemed to so easily avoid that stiffness that some of even the better actors of the period would fall into. Kid Galahad is yet another example of Robinson just, well, owning a part with such from the first scene we see him in. Robinson just has his grasp on the material from his first scene as we see Nick trying to direct his boxer alongside his girlfriend "Fluff" Phillips (Bette Davis). Robinson brings that energy that does just jump of the screen which is a perfect fit also for such a character. He finds the sort of spark needed essentially to represent the fight of the fight granting the right passion as he attempts to control his fighter and win the match.
That fighter proves to be a bad investment and Nick begins to attempt to find anyone in order to beat his mob connected rival Turkey Morgan (Humphrey Bogart, by the way it seems one should never make any deal with Bogart in a pre-Maltese Falcon film). Robinson is quite good at being just kind of the man near the top but not quite. Robinson infuses the right personal style that is just big enough to be befitting of a guy who knows exactly what he wants even if it seems just a bit out of reach. Again Robinson is someone who usually is just fun to watch, and that is the case here. He enlivens even the weaker a scenes a bit by just his mere presence as he makes Nick a surprisingly endearing figure despite the fact that he doesn't exactly hide the fact that he is kind of a jerk. The Robinson though plays into this though grants again this certain elegance to Nick that somehow makes him for whatever reason the better jerk against Bogart, who is in full heel mode here.
The major flaw perhaps of the film is there is not quite enough Nick to go around, he's almost supporting though I will say that Robinson still is lead. The film though often drifts its focus towards hayseed boxer Ward "Kid Galahad" Guisenberry who just is an all around swell guy, and is purposefully as straight forward as it gets. All the drama really comes from Nick, and Robinson's performance. Again Robinson doesn't avoid the nastier side to the character as when Ward gets interested in Nick's kid sister, which Nick doesn't approve of. Although Robinson brings the needed intensity to Nick's anger he does still bother to attach it to this certain emotional devotion to her that conveys effectively the motivation. Robinson does not simplify the motivation at any point. Robinson delivers the right sort of disdain as he purposefully sets up the "Kid" to take a hard fall in a fight, though of course his friends prod him to reconsider. Nick has the last minute change of heart, which although I wish more time had been spent on it, Robinson absolutely delivers. He somehow even makes it work conveying his crisis of conscience though partially because of the motivation he had granted to earlier outrage. He not only makes it work though but he actually manages to make it quite moving by showing Nick's breakdown in such a restrain yet honest fashion. This might not be Robinson's best work, but it is an another example of the man's considerable talent.
It has to be said that Edward G. Robinson is one of the most consistent of actors of the period as he just has a certain grace that was so rare from the period and seemed to so easily avoid that stiffness that some of even the better actors of the period would fall into. Kid Galahad is yet another example of Robinson just, well, owning a part with such from the first scene we see him in. Robinson just has his grasp on the material from his first scene as we see Nick trying to direct his boxer alongside his girlfriend "Fluff" Phillips (Bette Davis). Robinson brings that energy that does just jump of the screen which is a perfect fit also for such a character. He finds the sort of spark needed essentially to represent the fight of the fight granting the right passion as he attempts to control his fighter and win the match.
That fighter proves to be a bad investment and Nick begins to attempt to find anyone in order to beat his mob connected rival Turkey Morgan (Humphrey Bogart, by the way it seems one should never make any deal with Bogart in a pre-Maltese Falcon film). Robinson is quite good at being just kind of the man near the top but not quite. Robinson infuses the right personal style that is just big enough to be befitting of a guy who knows exactly what he wants even if it seems just a bit out of reach. Again Robinson is someone who usually is just fun to watch, and that is the case here. He enlivens even the weaker a scenes a bit by just his mere presence as he makes Nick a surprisingly endearing figure despite the fact that he doesn't exactly hide the fact that he is kind of a jerk. The Robinson though plays into this though grants again this certain elegance to Nick that somehow makes him for whatever reason the better jerk against Bogart, who is in full heel mode here.
The major flaw perhaps of the film is there is not quite enough Nick to go around, he's almost supporting though I will say that Robinson still is lead. The film though often drifts its focus towards hayseed boxer Ward "Kid Galahad" Guisenberry who just is an all around swell guy, and is purposefully as straight forward as it gets. All the drama really comes from Nick, and Robinson's performance. Again Robinson doesn't avoid the nastier side to the character as when Ward gets interested in Nick's kid sister, which Nick doesn't approve of. Although Robinson brings the needed intensity to Nick's anger he does still bother to attach it to this certain emotional devotion to her that conveys effectively the motivation. Robinson does not simplify the motivation at any point. Robinson delivers the right sort of disdain as he purposefully sets up the "Kid" to take a hard fall in a fight, though of course his friends prod him to reconsider. Nick has the last minute change of heart, which although I wish more time had been spent on it, Robinson absolutely delivers. He somehow even makes it work conveying his crisis of conscience though partially because of the motivation he had granted to earlier outrage. He not only makes it work though but he actually manages to make it quite moving by showing Nick's breakdown in such a restrain yet honest fashion. This might not be Robinson's best work, but it is an another example of the man's considerable talent.
Tuesday, 28 February 2017
Henry Fonda did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Eddie Taylor in You Only Live Once.
You Only Live Once is a somewhat effective film, Fritz Lang always seems like he's being a little held back in his American films, about an ex-convict attempting to reform yet falling into a series of unfortunate circumstances.
As with his friend Jimmy Stewart very few of Henry Fonda pre-1939 films receive much mention. The period in the 30's is interesting for both of them as you can see the development towards their onscreen persona that they would be best known for. Fonda, like Stewart, was sometimes cast as the romantic lead often in very simple roles. That is what appears you'll find here in You Only Live Twice. There are hints of another turn, but early on it feels like it may be a fairly straight forward romance film between Fonda's Eddie and his wife Joan (Sylvia Sydney). As one would expect Fonda is charming enough, though his aw shucks routine never was quite as as endearing as old Stewart's. He still makes Eddie likable enough just as his fortunes begin to turn south because of his history as an ex-con.
As the film takes its darker turn, where Eddie is wrongly accused and convicted of murder as well as sentenced to death by the electric chair, Fonda is actually challenged within the role after this point. There is further challenge though in the structure of the film as well though which often gives as much of an emphasis on those around Eddie than Eddie himself. Fonda though actually is quite good even early on in conveying the underlying sense of discontent in Eddie as he is consistently given the short end for his background. He's mostly aw shucks, but he does grant bit of darkness in there alluding to the background as well. When he's actually put in prison Fonda helps to carry the tone away from the earlier lighter style to where it goes, and where it goes is actually fairly surprising. This is not a story about an innocent man being put away and it just focusing on him getting out. In fact it actually feels at least little bit like Straight Time with Eddie's descent basically caused by societies refusal to believe that he can reform.
When Eddie is taken to prison, and basically given a set date for his own death, Fonda's performance reflects the anguish of this. He drops any notion of an aw or shucks in his honest portrayal of the disbelief at his terrible luck, but also even a definite intensity portraying the man's hatred against the lot he's been given. As it seems as though nothing will turn in his favor the film actually depicts Eddie attempting suicide. It is a great scene for Fonda as he so powerfully exudes the despair in Eddie as he begins to fashion his "tool", but also still gives this certain discontent as though Eddie is doing it in part to at least get something his way for once. Eddie is saved though just to be killed which leads to an escape attempt. Again Fonda manages to take the role where it needs to go in depicting the viciousness in Eddie as he lashes out believing that almost everyone has wronged him. Fonda maintains a descent in Eddie even after he escapes with his wife and they go out on a lamb. He importantly never returns any happiness in Eddie even as they seem to have a chance, staying true to the character as kind of a broken man. The film itself could have been better if it gave more time for Fonda to develop this progression, though he does well with the little he has it doesn't quite have the impact it could have. The performance though is strong, while doesn't hit the heights of his later work, it does suggest that same talent.
As with his friend Jimmy Stewart very few of Henry Fonda pre-1939 films receive much mention. The period in the 30's is interesting for both of them as you can see the development towards their onscreen persona that they would be best known for. Fonda, like Stewart, was sometimes cast as the romantic lead often in very simple roles. That is what appears you'll find here in You Only Live Twice. There are hints of another turn, but early on it feels like it may be a fairly straight forward romance film between Fonda's Eddie and his wife Joan (Sylvia Sydney). As one would expect Fonda is charming enough, though his aw shucks routine never was quite as as endearing as old Stewart's. He still makes Eddie likable enough just as his fortunes begin to turn south because of his history as an ex-con.
As the film takes its darker turn, where Eddie is wrongly accused and convicted of murder as well as sentenced to death by the electric chair, Fonda is actually challenged within the role after this point. There is further challenge though in the structure of the film as well though which often gives as much of an emphasis on those around Eddie than Eddie himself. Fonda though actually is quite good even early on in conveying the underlying sense of discontent in Eddie as he is consistently given the short end for his background. He's mostly aw shucks, but he does grant bit of darkness in there alluding to the background as well. When he's actually put in prison Fonda helps to carry the tone away from the earlier lighter style to where it goes, and where it goes is actually fairly surprising. This is not a story about an innocent man being put away and it just focusing on him getting out. In fact it actually feels at least little bit like Straight Time with Eddie's descent basically caused by societies refusal to believe that he can reform.
When Eddie is taken to prison, and basically given a set date for his own death, Fonda's performance reflects the anguish of this. He drops any notion of an aw or shucks in his honest portrayal of the disbelief at his terrible luck, but also even a definite intensity portraying the man's hatred against the lot he's been given. As it seems as though nothing will turn in his favor the film actually depicts Eddie attempting suicide. It is a great scene for Fonda as he so powerfully exudes the despair in Eddie as he begins to fashion his "tool", but also still gives this certain discontent as though Eddie is doing it in part to at least get something his way for once. Eddie is saved though just to be killed which leads to an escape attempt. Again Fonda manages to take the role where it needs to go in depicting the viciousness in Eddie as he lashes out believing that almost everyone has wronged him. Fonda maintains a descent in Eddie even after he escapes with his wife and they go out on a lamb. He importantly never returns any happiness in Eddie even as they seem to have a chance, staying true to the character as kind of a broken man. The film itself could have been better if it gave more time for Fonda to develop this progression, though he does well with the little he has it doesn't quite have the impact it could have. The performance though is strong, while doesn't hit the heights of his later work, it does suggest that same talent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
