Green in Black and White - "How Green Was My Valley" (1941)

Mat here.

The next film we reviewed was 1941’s ‘How Green Was My Valley’, based on Robert Llewellyn’s book of the same name. It tells the story of Huw Morgan (Roddy McDowall) as he recalls his formative years growing up with his family in a small Welsh coal-mining village.

The once-happy family is soon embroiled in a mining strike, Huw’s sister (the very pretty Maureen O’Hara) has an ill-fated romance with the local pastor and Huw is sent off to a very nasty school, even though he wants to be in the mines with his father and brothers.

The acting from the entire cast is excellent, with Roddy McDowall putting in a very touching performance, and his parents (played by Donald Crisp and Sara Allgood) make a believable pair.

Whilst not a tear-jerker like ‘Terms of Endearment’ (or ‘Toy Story 3’), there are a lot of hard times for the Morgan family, and the emotion of the film is heightened by the Welsh folk songs sung by the townsfolk.

This film was shot in black-and-white because they couldn’t shoot in the United Kingdom due to WWII, and the area of California they filmed in did not match the colours of Wales at all.

‘How Green’ is also notable as it took the Best Picture award away from a film that is widely considered to be the greatest of all time: ‘Citizen Kane’. Apparently William Hearst’s vicious media campaign against Orson Welles and ‘Citizen Kane’ (his little ego was bruised from the lashing it received as the thinly veiled subject of the esteemed film) ensured it did not receive the votes from the Academy, only scoring one award (script) to ‘How Green’s five.

The five awards were Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor, Best Black-and-White Cinematography and Best Black-and-White Art Direction, and it was nominated for an additional five awards.

We both loved this movie, with all of its heart and tragedy. Danielle gave it 79 and I gave it 82.

"My Fair Lady" - (1964) - as the Queen of Transylvania puts it 'est charmant'

"Women are irrational, that's all there is to that! Their heads are full of cotton, hay, and rags. They're nothing but exasperating, irritating, vacillating, calculating, agitating, maddening and infuriating hags"

As a young girl lines like this infuriated me to no end and made it very hard to enjoy the musical numbers and pretty clothes. 8 year olds don't know much about irony and the portrayal of misogynistic snobs as representations of the English (and European-inspired) patriarchal caste system - they just think Prof Higgins is a knob and don't understand why Eliza didn't throw his damn slippers at his arrogant head!

Granted, I'd still like to see that (note to Emma Thompson who is currently working on the remake) but I can get a lot more positives from this movie and the enduring story of Pygmalion as presented in the 1964 Oscar winner, "My Fair Lady".

Everyone is familiar with the movie itself, I'm sure, Eliza Doolittle is plucked from the streets of London by the emotionally stunted phonetics expert Prof Henry Higgins to win a bet that it is only the cockney slur of their speech that keeps the 'common class' from ascending in society.

What had escaped my notice on earlier, more indignant viewings is that it is Eliza herself who seeks out his teachings to 'better herself' and gain employment in a flower shop. It is Eliza who works her butt off under his grating tutelage and endures hours of abuse with no sympathy from his equally unfeeling staff to grasp her class-raising grammar and enunciation and it is Eliza who decides to leave once the coup at the ball is achieved and who decides to return once Higgins has revealed his attachment to her and proven that he needs her far more than she needs him.

But gender power struggles aside, the really interesting stuff was the politicking that was going on behind the scenes of this film! Rex Harrison plays Higgins with the self-assuredness that he earned in the role on Broadway, but was mightily displeased that his Broadway leading lady (Julie Andrews) was not to be cast as his film Eliza.

The studio (specifically Jack Warner) decided she wasn't well known enough and wanted Audrey Hepburn for the role instead. Poor old Audrey (I think undeservedly) went on to cop decades of flack for this particular casting maneuvering. She spent months taking singing lessons on the understanding that it would be her voice used in the film, indeed she recorded all the songs for the movie and during filming her voice was what she was lip-syncing too, but the more accomplished Marni Nixon's voice was used in the end in all but a few sections of two songs (play the 'can you spot them' game for yourself!).

Julie got her revenge 3 years later though! By this time "Mary Poppins" and "Sound of Music" had made her a star and Jack Warner was begging her to star in his version of Camelot - she refused and because of this, Warner lost his 3 other leads. The film flopped and Warner was fired!

Almost like a real life Pygmalion!

As for the movie itself, the set work is done really well (although again, why can't they go outside just once?!) and the choreography and shot set-up is remarkable. The songs are well-known and timeless and the arrangements flawless.

And of course there's Audrey. Audrey is charming, I really don't care what anyone says! While the caterwauling and 'garn-ing' to begin with is painful to the ears, she does it with great comic timing and pathos and her dignified rise to the object of Prof Higgins eventual quasi-emotional awakening as he has 'grown accustomed to her face' is breathtaking and makes the movie the enduring classic it is today.

Overall, Mat scored it 65 and I gave it 78 and I'll be happy to watch it again with my new found perspective on just who was teaching who in this transformation marvel.

"Terms of Endearment" (1983) - Stays dear

Chick flicks often get a bad name and sometimes deservedly so. Often the female characters spend most of their time obsessing over every minutiae of small village life with their small minds occupied with nothing but quilting patterns and 'will he call' dilemmas. The male characters (if they make an appearance at all) are usually portrayed as shallow, insincere and 1-dimensional idiots.

I am so happy to report that none of those stereotypes hold true in this Best Picture Winner! The writing is superb and captures all the nuances and subtlety of the central mother/daughter relationship that leaves most outsiders utterly bewildered.

The supporting male cast, Jeff Daniels, Jack Nicholson and John Lithgow, while sometimes flawed, are completely believable and well-realised characters who play an important role in their women's lives, but are not central to their well-being or happiness.

Overall it is a picture about strength and the 'slings and arrows' we endure because we have to; but in the midst of the melodrama, there are moments of beautiful sweetness and levity between the cantankerous and repressed Aurora and her seemingly long-suffering daughter, Emma. Jack Nicholson's portrayal of the amorous astronaut is the stuff Oscars are made of, but in true chick flick style it is the female protagonists played with such pathos by Shirley Maclaine and Debra Winger that steal the show.

Whether it is Aurora arguing with her doctor at the head of a table full of male admirers about how old she actually is or Emma having a 'mother meltdown moment' in a supermarket, the ladies are always true to their characters and very true to life.

Mat scored it 85 and I gave it 83 and although it was heart-wrenching at times, it is easily one of the more rewatchable Oscar winners we have encountered to date simply for the care and beauty it takes and shows between these wonderful characters.

Around the World in 80 Days (1956) - felt like 100 days

Where to begin really…. So this was up against “The Ten Commandments” which I think beat it on the epic scale and “The King and I” which actually may be the only other film that could match this on political incorrectness.

I’m sure you’re all familiar with the concept; it’s 1872 and foppish, honour-bound Brit, Phineas Fogg makes a bet (for no apparent reason) that he can make it around the world in 80 days. What follows is the 50s version of a mismatched buddy road movie with Phineas and his Mexican side kick, Passepartout, played by Cantinflas, (who was the highest paid Mexican actor of the 20th Century).

So what follows is 183 mins (over 2 dvds!) of shockingly clichéd and stereotyped scenes from different countries on their whirlwind passage around the world; bull-fighting and flamenco dancing in Spain, elephant rides and human sacrifice in India and wild west brothels and arrow shooting, train-hijacking Indians in America. The best bit was probably when they save the Indian princess from ritual sacrifice only for us to discover that the heavily faked tanned damsel was played by Shirley Maclaine in what she has admitted was her most hideously miscast role.

David Niven is suitably uptight and obsessive-compulsive as the globe-trotting Phineas and Cantinflas is actually very impressive in the role reprised by Jackie Chan in the 2004 remake, bull-fighting his way through the movie and avoiding becoming the comic relief to no purpose.

Best of all, while painted up like an orange, Shirley Maclaine mercifully doesn’t attempt an Indian accent – which is explained away by her being ‘educated at Oxford’. It was interesting to get a look at the 1870s world through a 1950s lens and contains some incredible photography and very few trick shots. The main problem with the film is the sheer length. The entertainment value drops exponentially with every additional minute added and so many of the scenes are actually quite fun and interesting for the first 2 or 3 minutes, but once they’ve continued on for no apparent reason and supplied no further momentum or purpose to the overall story, they just get kind of boring. Overall Mat scored it 62 out of 100 and I gave it 54.

Saying goodbye to a friend - "Toy Story 3"

We had to make special mention of "Toy Story 3" the end of a trilogy and the end of an era, but most of all a beautiful example of what the movies should be.

Sweet, real and all heart.

Andy is all grown up and heading to college and leaving behind all childish things and this includes his old best friends. So what do you do when your sole purpose in life no longer needs you? You self destruct, then realise what life is all about and get on with it!

All in 3D splendour and fun.

Thank you Pixar! You have yet to disappoint.

"Grand Hotel" (1932) - A grand disappointment

This is the oldest Oscar winner we’ve watched to date, it won Best Picture at the 5th annual academy awards ceremony, before the nickname ‘Oscar’ was actually introduced to the Academy Awards (that didn’t happen officially until 1939).

Tellingly this is the only Best Picture Winner in 82 years to not have a single other nomination in any other category and we can really see why. I think this was possibly one of the first ‘mega-cast disasters’. Recent films under that category would include; “The Player” (1992), (actually anything by Robert Altman in the 90s) and “Valentine’s Day” (2010) – these are the movies that you pay your money to see and walk out shaking your head, rubbing sleep from your eyes and saying, “But it was such a good cast…”

And in the same grand tradition, “Grand Hotel” did have a stellar cast of who’s who in the 1930s. MGM broke the mould by using 5 of its top-ranked stars in this movie; Greta Garbo, John Barrymore, Joan Crawford, Lionel Barrymore and Wallace Beery. Prior to this film, the conventional wisdom was to only use one or two stars and keep costs down – after this movie, they realised it wasn’t as important to keep the costs down as it was to keep the egos in check!

Garbo wouldn’t speak to or even deign to be in the same room as Crawford. Crawford retaliated by constantly playing Marlene Dietrich songs between takes (Garbo and Dietrich had a long running rivalry). Beery insisted that for him to take the role of the amoral magnate he be the only cast member allowed to speak with a German accent (despite the entire film being set in Berlin and populated entirely with German characters like Felix von Gaigern and Flaemmchen) and reportedly did his best to steal every scene he shared with his famous co-stars.

If you, my dear readers are wondering why I’ve gone on for 4 paragraphs without mentioning the movie it’s because it was a colossal disappointment to us! It was the first Garbo movie for Mat and myself and despite her delivering one of the most famous lines in history, “I want to be alone”, her performance bordered on the ridiculous. Whether it was completely her interpretation of her character or the director getting back at her for insisting on reshoots so she had equal screen time with Crawford, or perhaps that she couldn’t actually act, she was painful to watch.

The majority of the relationships between the characters felt strained and false and even before we did some background reading we knew that this movie was not produced on a happy set. Several of the characters who were supposed to be in love seemed to actively despise each other.

The real disappointment was that it starts off quite promising. There are some witty script moments, with some true 30s snap and sass, “Oh, you're a little stenographess? Fascinating. I don't suppose you'd, uh, take some dictation from me sometime, would you?” [said while he has her up against a pillar]. Some of the establishing shots of the hotel and background characters are really spectacular, but overall it’s just let down by the haphazard dénouement of the story and the forced feel of the characters relationships and predicaments.

I scored it 46/100 and Mat a generous 42/100!

"Marty" (1955) - This ain't no dog!

We picked this because we were tired and it’s the shortest Best Picture Winner, but we were so glad we did! It kept us awake and interested and chatting long into the night! If there were one word to describe “Marty” it would have to be charming. Just charming.

It’s a simple story of two lonely people defying societal expectations, familial pressures and their own pasts to find happiness with each other; not because their families are at war, or one is from ‘the wrong side of the tracks’ or has some hideous disability, but just because they’re both kind of ordinary looking and have faced rejection far too many times. One of my favourite lines comes from Marty himself and sums up the feeling of the two main characters before they meet, “You don't get to be good-hearted by accident. You get kicked around long enough, you become a professor of pain.”

We follow their first date and watch as they gently encourage each other to come out of their respective shells and face life again. Then we see their struggles as they try and break out of the roles their families have happily but innocuously kept them in for so long; changing one part of any system will always necessitate change in the rest of the system, but those systems can be mighty resistant!

This is a beautiful, simple and charming movie that was a lot of fun to watch (despite the occasional cringe factor as Marty clumsily tries to compliment his new friend “You know, us dogs aren't really so much of the dogs that we think we are.”) and an odd and (through modern eyes) seemingly misogynistic outburst from Marty 2/3rds of the way in.

Overall I scored it 83% and Mat gave it, 76/100. We’d recommend this to anyone who has ever doubted they deserve to be loved or questioned if they would ever really find it.