Daily Archives: Thursday, June 9, 2016

  • The Best Years of Our Lives

    William Wyler (1946)

    Perhaps the most remarkable thing about The Best Years of Our Lives, although the competition is keen, is that this story of three World War II servicemen returning to civilian life was completed and released as early as November 1946.  Samuel Goldwyn read a Time piece in August 1944 about the difficulties experienced by ex-servicemen and commissioned a treatment from a former war correspondent, Mackinlay Kantor, who produced a novella called Glory For Me (in blank verse), which Robert E Sherwood turned into the screenplay for William Wyler’s picture.  The Best Years of Our Lives was a huge commercial success and won seven Oscars.  If you Google posters for the movie you’ll find one that declares it to be ‘The Most Honored Picture of Our Time! … The Best Loved Picture of All Time!’   David Thomson ‘would concede that Best Years is decent and humane… acutely observed, despite being so meticulous a package’.  Pauline Kael finds ‘something absorbing about the banality of its large-scale good intentions; it’s compulsively watchable’.   In the 2012 top-10-of-all-time lists in Sight & Sound, the film was included by six critics and three directors, among them Francis Ford Coppola.

    The Best Years of Our Lives begins with the return of the three servicemen to their homes in a place called Boone City, supposedly modelled on Cincinnati.  For me, these homecomings were emotionally very powerful – partly because they made me think of what it might have been like for my father to come back to my mother and to York after four years as a POW, partly because William Wyler stages them very skilfully.  The local life glimpsed and the street sounds heard by the soldiers from inside the car they’re travelling in are made both familiar and newly-minted.  This commingling of things remembered and strange to the men is sustained once they’re back inside their homes and seeing their wives and families.  It’s hard to overstate how strongly many people in 1946 must have identified with the story as a whole and with these sequences in particular – especially as the film arrived in cinemas when the audience’s own memories of the previous year were still so fresh in their minds.  For people struggling to readapt to civilian life it obviously wasn’t necessary even to rely on memory.

    The film is schematic in various respects:  the trio represent each of the three armed forces and each man must cope with a particular type of legacy from the war.  The navy man, Homer Parrish, has been physically disabled.  The decorated airforce pilot, Fred Derry, has to go back to working in a drugstore.  The platoon sergeant, Al Stephenson, returns to a job in a bank which includes approving or not approving loans to other war veterans.  But these situations are detailed, and the characters written and played, in ways that transcend the schematism.  The three men didn’t know each other before the War.  They meet on a plane flying home, and they don’t expect to see each other again once they’re back in Boone City.  The happily married Al Stephenson celebrates in a local bar with his wife and daughter on the night of his return.  When he bumps into Fred Derry there, Fredric March expresses Al’s delighted surprise so well that he makes the instant reunion more than plausible.

    Al gets back home from Butch’s Bar considerably the worse for wear and March’s playing of this drunk scene and the next morning’s hangover is a masterpiece.  At the same time, he’s completely convincing as someone who works in a bank.  It’s a great performance.   Dana Andrews’s portrait of Fred is admirably disciplined:  he avoids sentimentality, in spite of the opportunities to indulge in it, and suggests very well, but not obviously, the erosion of Fred Derry’s self-belief back in Boone City.  Harold Russell, who plays Homer, was not a professional actor but really did lose his hands in World War II (while he was making a training film with the US 13th Airborne Division a defective fuse detonated an explosive that Russell was handling).  If you’re aware of these things, it’s hard not to view Russell’s contribution to the film in a different light.  He can act, however, so casting him in the role of Homer doesn’t come across as awkwardly exploitative.

    Myrna Loy shows plenty of wit as Al’s wife Milly – she and March are a very credible married couple – but the younger women are less well served by the script.  The role of Homer’s loyal girlfriend Wilma, played by Cathy O’Donnell, is thin and although Virginia Mayo is animated as Fred’s trampy wife Marie, the character is conceived in a censorious, puritanical way.  As Al and Milly’s daughter Peggy, Teresa Wright is less pious than usual and good in her early scenes with Dana Andrews:  as the relationship between Peggy and Fred intensifies and – because he’s a married man – creates tensions with her parents, Wright becomes more conventional.  Peggy’s teenage brother Rob (Michael Hall) is a feeble role – the character is more or less dropped after the opening scenes.

    William Wyler’s storytelling is clear and he gives The Best Years of Our Lives, which runs nearly three hours, an effortless momentum.  Wyler also allows some scenes between two characters, especially Al and Milly, to continue for what seems a daringly long time, and these are thoroughly rewarding.   The film does make some obvious liberal points but not everything is resolved in the way you expect.  When he bridles in public against the hard-nosed attitude of his boss (Ray Collins) towards loans for ex-servicemen, you expect Al to lose his job but life isn’t so simple.  He stays at the bank and you get a sense of the abrasive effect that his continuing misgivings will have on Al’s working life.

    28 December 2012

  • Battleship Potemkin

    Bronyenosyets Potyomkin

    Sergei Eisenstein (1925)

    Sergei Eisenstein (1898-1948) was in his mid-twenties when he made Potemkin (which neither Sally nor I had seen before).  It is amazing because it’s genuinely exciting and because the excitement is thanks entirely – unless you can engage with it as Communist propaganda – to Eisenstein’s art.  I’ve just seen three films at BFI in the Terence Rattigan season and each got a round of applause.  There was silence at the end of Potemkin in NFT1 and it felt more like disengaged than stunned silence – the silence of people miles away from the political landscape of the 1920s.  As propaganda less than a decade after the 1917 revolution, however, the film must have been almost unimaginably powerful to sympathetic audiences.  For example, the images of the sea, and of different kinds of light on the sea and the horizon, would surely have fused with the political message to give the triumphant mutiny of the sailors a cosmic dimension, and colossal emotional potency. The historical event on which the film is based happened in 1905 – the year the Russian Revolution didn’t quite happen.  The choice of this instead of events from 1917 remains impressive, as an expression of confidence in the historical inevitability of the revolution coming to fruition.

    The Odessa steps sequence (an invention according to David Thomson’s note used in the BFI programme) is astonishing.  First, because the editing – the choreography (some of the Cossack guards’ goose-stepping, as Sally said, is rhythmically seductive), the intercutting of different ‘stories’ – seems so far ahead of its time.  Second, because it’s nevertheless much rougher technically than it would be in a complex action sequence today, and as a result more real and upsetting.   The legends (rather a surfeit of these in the early stages) immediately remind us that the individual is to be subsumed in the mass yet, like Bertolucci making 1900 half a century later, Eisenstein is so naturally an artist that the component parts of the mass are a collection of vividly individual faces and bodies (especially in the steps sequence).  The political point-scoring is often very deftly incisive.  When the corpse of the seaman Vakulinchik is laid out on the Odessa pier, a placard ‘For a spoonful of  borscht’ placed on his chest, the working-class onlookers are respectful, even reverent; two better-dressed women peer a bit too closely, heartless voyeurs.   Throughout there are breathtaking compositions – and thrilling marriages of image and sound:  the original, stirring score has been newly recorded for this re-release.  And there’s the red flag flying brilliant in the monochrome (an effect imitated in the child’s coat in Schindler’s List).    Eisenstein wrote the screenplay with Nina Agadzhanova, Nikolai Aseyev and Sergei Tretvakov.  The cinematographer was Eduard Tisse.

    30 April 2011

Posts navigation