Saturday, January 20, 2024

Trishtan Perez | I Get So Sad Sometimes / 2021

revealing the face

by Douglas Messerli

 

Trishtan Perez (screenwriter and director) I Get So Sad Sometimes / 2021 [20 minutes]

 

Philippines director Tristhtan Perez’s 2021 short film involves a young high school boy (Louie Caminade) who is living a fantasty life on the internet with what appears to be a mature man whose face has not yet been revealed to him.


     Using the handle of “Littleone,” the central figure of this film refuses also to reveal his face while yet permitting himself to reveal his ass to which the older figure, Lonley_Prince68 masturbates.

    Meanwhile, the young boy meets up daily with his high school friends, without every seeming to interact with them, although “Littleone’s” friend Marco (Russ Ligtas) attempts to make contact. But the “hero” of this piece keeps his distance, playing out his life on the internet.

     Gradually as the relationship between Littleone and Lonley_Prince68, the elder insists that the young boy reveal his face. And evidently during one long night encounter, the facial meetup occurs, resulting in a great disaster, which we eventually perceive is a revelation that Littleone’s adult fantasy is, in fact, his friend Marco.

     Devastated by the fact, Marco locks himself away even from his mother, allowing, eventually, only Marco to enter his room. But even that doesn’t appear to resolve the situation until finally the two engage in sex, and the young “Littleone” begins to come to terms with the situation that he may soon be losing even his fantasy lover to college, Marco insisting that he can join him in the new world into which he is soon traveling.

      Whether or not “Littleone” can assimilate the new demand is not answered. If nothing else, he is still frightened by realizing that his fantasy was, in fact, a person quite close to him, that the imaginary world outside his closed off world, was truly near him for all of his youth—a lesson may of us learn only decades later.

      Even his mother, confused by the situation, encourages him to return to Marco, and in that encounter begin to realize that he is not so “little” and isolated as he as for years perceived himself to be.

 

Los Angeles, January 20, 2024

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema (January 2024).

Clyde Bruckman and Harold Lloyd | Movie Crazy / 1932

trouble

by Douglas Messerli

 

Vincent Lawrence, Ernie Bushmiller, and Harold Lloyd (screenplay, based on a story of Agnes Christine Johnston, John Grey, and Felix Adler), Clyde Bruckman and Harold Lloyd (directors) Movie Crazy / 1932

 

Many of the thousands of Harold Lloyd admirers, draw the line at his talking picture performances. And it is true that in a movie such as his 1932 film Movie Crazy some of the sight gags that might have seemed hilarious in silent films lose their significance in the talkies. His kind of clumsy fussing with various objects such as a telephone, a folding automobile top, or simple hat seem static in the white noise of a sound film and in their silences, steal the movie’s rhythm. Lloyd’s high, sweet, soft-spoken voice, moreover, seems as intrusive as if Keaton and Chaplin might suddenly spout Polonius’s speech from Hamlet. With regard to these three comic performers Nora Desmond was absolutely right: they had “faces” which you simply couldn’t forget, and everything else was beside the point—the fact of which this movie, by its close, seems to confirm. Lloyd’s lost, nerdy innocence was all in his face, not in his war against the world’s solid objects which always seem to come alive in his encounter with them.

 


     Yet, overall, Movie Crazy is a rather funny and charming film, much better than the commentators have generally rated it. It is over-long, and the sappy romance—in which the Hollywood neophyte Lloyd (aka Trouble) engages with the two aspects of Mary Sears (Constance Cummings) as a smoldering Mexican temptress and the lovely blonde who is taken aback by the honesty of the “trouble” her suitor creates in the world around him—might have been cut in half despite the fact that it is Cummings who steers this film into its most successful comic moments.

     The long scenes where the would-be up-and-coming actor attends a formal dinner dressed mistakenly in a magician’s coat replete with endless strings of cloth, birds, eggs, a rabbit, a sprinkling corsage, and a cage of mice is accidentally set up by Sears’s unintended invitation; and the final fighting match with the villain of the piece, Vance (Kenneth Thomson), employs all the tricks of cinematic melodrama as Lloyd and Vance fight it out through a long take, the two jumping and falling from various heights, crashing crates, boxes, tables, chairs, and anything else they can get their hands on over one another’s heads, even continuing their battling while hanging upside down and, soon after, nearly drowning in a rising flood.



      This last scene—enacted to save what Lloyd believes is the endangered heroine—almost matches the kind of split-second timing of Keaton’s Steamboat Bill, Jr. to become a tour de force which turns the planned romantic melodrama into pure comedy, and which is what leads producer Wesley Kitterman (Robert McWade) to realize, just by observing Lloyd’s endlessly perplexed face, that the young actor is a true genius with whom must immediately sign a contract. So does Movie Crazy end most joyfully.

      It is all that goes on in-between that creates the film’s problems. In a sense, you might read Lloyd and Clyde Bruckman’s* film as a study in the age-old struggle between order and chaos, between the pretend social propriety of Hollywood and its roiling perverted underbelly which unintentionally Lloyd releases wherever he treads. If “Trouble” is beloved by nearly all who encounter him, it is the ham actor Vance and the director (Sydney Jarvis) of the silly melodrama in which Vance and Mary star and those like them who stand in Lloyd’s way to success—which, in this film, is the same as everyone’s “American Dream.”

 


    From the very first moment that the totally innocent Lloyd lands via train in Los Angeles—the total landscape of which in this film and other early movieland films is designated as “Hollywood”—he topples people, newsstands, cameras, and anything else he approaches to the ground. Everything that might previously have been functioning is immediately stopped. Clothes are wettened, ripped, torn, and stripped from bodies. Hairdos and hats become undone and broken. What was clean and shiny is muddied and sullied.

      Although actor Mary Sears describes him as “Trouble,” he might better be represented a force out of the apocalypse of John, the New Testament Book of Revelations.

     Cummings as Mary keeps him near her, if for no other reason, because of his uncanny ability to reveal the worse in the men she meets, particularly Vance. Protecting her just through his reflective innocence, with her new acquaintance’s help she perceives her current lover, Vance as a drunken slob and even herself as not quite as beautiful and alluring as she pretends, remarkably revealed simply through Lloyd’s parroting back Mary’s own comments to the man in an objective voice.


       Yet, she herself is part of the problem. As an actress, she lives a mirror-like world, a narcissian reality that Lloyd can’t comprehend. And she uses that fact to challenge and test his own love for what she conceives of as her “real” self, the blonde Mary Sears as opposed to the Spanish seductress in a dark wig with a silly accent who she is forced to perform as. The trouble is, of course, that Lloyd falls madly in love with both women, without being able to see the difference between the two, and with utterly no skill at separating out the real from the fake, which in this case almost causes him to lose the love of the woman for whom he’s truly fallen.

    Without any difficulty at all, however, Lloyd wreaks havoc upon that previously mentioned Hollywood party, revealing the outwardly sophisticated and well-behaved guests to be the absurdly ill-mannered, selfish beings they truly are.

     Whereas Chaplin and Keaton in particular, often laced their work with cross-dressing and queer references, Lloyd’s films have fewer of these incidents. In part, I suspect, it is that the character himself is a standard sort of “mamma’s (or even grandmother’s) boy—in Movie Crazy, for example, he leaves home and his mother’s deep love for a Hollywood career at the ripe age of 39—and perhaps out of fear that his character might truly be seen to be homosexual. In only few cases—Pinched (1917), Ask Father (1919), and For Heaven’s 

Sake (1926)—does he appear in drag or is involved in gay humor, and in those cases it is generally a part of a series of two or three other such events involving others individuals as well. In Movie Crazy, he dons a pair of women’s culottes because his own clothing is wet, and which makes perfect sense in the scene where he is completely dominated by the film’s female hero Mary when she first discovers that she loves him.

 

     In the hilarious party scene the escape of the white mice from his coat pocket (actually the coat of a magician who was hired to perform at the event), all the women run, but one terribly effeminate gentleman, in the tradition of the 1930s pansy craze, jumps upon a table and screams out endlessly as if being bitten by wolverines.

       Only such a complete sleuth of his fellow man’s evil inner beings could uncover the true nature of Vance, who is not simply the likeable drunk who Sally perceives him to be, but a highly jealous and violent man, who claims that if his girlfriend were ever to take up with another man, he would kill her.

        And it is for that very reason, when, after knocked out by the same villain, that Lloyd wakes up in the midst of the major last scene of the director’s film willing to do everything in his power to save the damsel he imagines in distress.

        Mary is presented as such a self-styled, strong figure in this film, that he need never worry about her; in a wonderful turnabout that Movie Crazy almost posits as a feminist act, it is Mary who must now worry about the “trouble” she has grown to love and willing weds herself to.

 

*Director, writer, and actor Clyde Bruckman deserves far more than a mere footnote, but he certainly needs a footnote, if nothing else, with regard to this movie. Bruckman seems to have been nearly everywhere in early Hollywood comedies, as co-author and often acting director to many of Buster Keaton’s best films, including Steamboat Bill, Jr. and The General; director and writer for Laurel and Hardy; long-time collaborator with Harold Lloyd; writer for W. C. Fields; and later gag writer for The Three Stooges and numerous other comedians. Often his name turns up with regard to the very best of their works.

       In this instance Bruckman, Lloyd’s favorite co-director, was signed up for the project, but his heavy alcoholism made him a no-show for post of the production. Nonetheless Lloyd insisted that he get full (and originally single) credit as the director.

      As the years went by Bruckman’s alcoholism became worse and he was given only grade-B movies for which to create gags, a problem often solved by his stealing his previous jokes, skits, and sometimes entire scenes for later films. In one instance, while working for The Three Stooges, he went too far, stealing an entire scene from Movie Crazy. By this time Lloyd was also a has-been, but remained determined to guard his former film rights, and sued Bruckman and won. Now penniless, his career ruined over the suit, Bruckman borrowed his friend Keaton’s pistol and shot himself in the head in a Santa Monica restaurant on January 4th, 1955. A note he left behind noted that he had no money to pay for his burial.

     Other than the fact he seemed to have no way out of his dilemma, no one seems to know quite what led him to suicide or, more importantly, to his massive consumption of alcohol that resulted in the end of his career. Some commentators have simply assumed that he was for years in deep depression, but no one knows whether or not that is true or what might have been the cause of his depression.

      Certainly he has become, as one might expect, the topic of deep rumor and speculation. And it is no accident, I believe, that Bruckman appears as a figure in the pages of Kenneth Anger’s totally unreliable Hollywood Babylon. Given what we now know to be true about many Hollywood figures whose behavior and desires might have ended their careers, perhaps there is some element of truth behind many of Anger’s examples of “fake news.” Bruckman worked with Keaton on Seven Chances and with Lloyd on For Heaven’s Sake, and in this film,with all with cross-dressing of LGBTQ figures.

 

Los Angeles, March 19, 2022

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (March 2022).

 

Michael Haneke | Amour / 2012

joining the dead

by Douglas Messerli

 

Michael Haneke (writer and director) Amour / 2012

 

Winner of the 2012 Cannes Film Festival’s Palme D’Or, Michael Haneke’s Amour is one of the least complex, in terms of plot, of his films to date. One might describe this work more as a character study of an elderly couple in love than a plotted narrative. As Elvis Mitchell in a pre-film interview with Haneke last evening at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s Bing Theatre reconfirmed, the director, the son of two actors, works well and intensely with his casts. Haneke admitted to selecting from 7,000 children for his masterful work, The White Ribbon; but in this work he selected cast members through his knowledge of their abilities and iconic status. The film’s central couple, Georges and Anne, could perhaps have been performed no better than by Jean-Louis Trintignant and Emmanuelle Riva. Isabelle Huppert, moreover, is perfect for the role of their daughter, Eva and her husband Geoff (with a British accent that slightly irritates Anne) is wonderfully realized by William Shimell.

       The film begins almost mundanely—and I warn those who have not yet seen this movie that I will reveal the entire film’s simple story—as the two piano teachers attend a recital, lovingly attuned to the evening as they repeat a ritual which they have performed, quite obviously, numerous times throughout their lives. But in the night, after the concert, Georges awakens to find Anne sitting up in bed. The next morning, she suddenly grows silent for a few minutes, remaining, despite his pleas to answer him, like a woman of stone. As he shuffles away to call the doctor, she comes alive once more, discovering that he has left on the kitchen water faucet. When he returns to find her seemingly as her normal self, he is confused, even a bit angry. Was she performing a kind dark joke? When he explains what has happened, Anne, in turn, is worried about his husband’s mental health.


     They soon discover, however, that Anne has had a stroke, and despite an operation, is now paralyzed on her left side. Returning from the hospital Anne makes Georges promise that he will never allow her to be hospitalized again. Further strokes follow, but, true to his word, Georges attends her personally, with the help during three afternoons a week of a visiting nurse.

       Slowly we see this loving couple begin the long, slow decline in health as they cope with everything from his helping her into a wheel chair, attending to her bathroom needs, and washing her hair. At first Anne is rather feisty, determined to find ways around her crises; but when she falls while he is attending a friend’s funeral, both begin to realize that her condition is quickly declining. Georges, moreover, is himself quickly aging, in part, through her constant need of attention.

       A surprise visit from one of her formal pupils, Alexandre, who performs a piece she has taught him, only reiterates what she has lost. It is one thing that she can no longer play the piano, but the music itself, which they once so joyfully shared, has now become a painful reminder of what she has now do without. So Haenke reminds us that even the remembered pleasures of the past do not always sustain us in our dying.

       Anne becomes depressed, almost seeking out death. Yet Georges reminds her that she would do what he is if it were the other way around. The caring has now become representative of their years of love, as each embracement of her becomes a kind of macabre dance with death.

       A second nurse is less patient with Anne than the other caretaker, brushing Anne’s hair with such harshness that the elderly woman calls out in pain. Georges quickly fires her, while realizing that he is himself having a more and more difficult time in caring for her, particularly since she often refuses to eat or drink. At one point when Anne stubbornly spits out the water he has tried several times to make her swallow, he slaps her cheek, immediately regretting the spontaneous act and apologizing, but he knows he has now crossed the line.

 

      Upon a surprise visit to her family—necessitated in part because of Georges refusal to answer the phone and messages—Eva finds the door to her mother’s room locked, with Georges suggesting that she come back another day. To his terrified daughter, he recounts their simple activities, his early rising because of her lack of sleep, his attempts to feed her, the stories he tells her to calm and reassure her. We have seen these activities in the process, his gentle strokings of Anne’s hands, his attempts to placate the wife who has become a bawling child, mumbling over and over again: “It hurts.”

       Eva is furious in disallowing her access to her mother, and he realizes his mistake, opening the door only to reveal a now thin, frail corpse-like figure lying upon the bed. The shock of the disintegration of this once vital figure brings both the daughter and Haenke’s audience to tears.

       We can now see that Georges himself can hardly move, seems himself about to fall. During one of Anne’s most painful outcries, the tired husband tries to calm his once beautiful wife with a childhood story that reminds one almost of a wicked fairy tale. As a child he had been sent to a summer camp in a castle, where the major focus was on group sports, an attempt to keep the children constantly moving. Not being the sporty type, as he describes himself, he was tortured by the regimen. The food, moreover, was terrible. When he refused he eat rice pudding, which, he reiterates he has hated all his life, he is punished by being forced to stay at the table for several hours. When he is finally released he has a fever, and falls into coma with diphtheria.

     In this frightful reminiscence we recognize his despair from the fears of his own increasingly diseased condition. He is faced with a dilemma all elderly couples who stubbornly attempt to retain their self-reliance and dignity must face: how to go on beyond the point where one knows one cannot. Georges suddenly grabs a large pillow and moves to suffocate his beloved wife. She is frail, has herself sought death earlier; yet Haenke does let the act be one of salvation and release, but displays its brutality as Anne thrashes about, kicks her legs, and attempts to survive. She does not.

       In the last few scenes, we see the aging Georges sealing shut the door to wife’s room, writing a long note, apparently in an attempt to explain his acts. In bed, he suddenly hears noises, and arises to find his wife finishing the dishes. She will be ready soon to go out, she says. And together they put on their coats as if they were planning to attend another concert or simply go for a walk. What we realize through this dream-like scenario, is that he has joined her, followed her into the dark night where her life has taken her. In the very last scene, Eva sits alone in the lit-up apartment, clearly pondering her parent’s long-lived love.

       It may be hard to understand this tale of pain, suffering, and murder as a love story, but that is what Haenke has created: a story of a couple who love one another so deeply that they have no choice but to destroy one another.

 

Los Angeles, October 2, 2012

Reprinted from Nth Position [England] (November 2012).

Alfred Hitchcock | Dial M. for Murder / 1954

key to the plot

by Douglas Messerli

 

Frederick Knot (screenplay, based on his stage play), Alfred Hitchcock (director) Dial M for Murder / 1954

 

Although Hitchcock’s 1948 film Rope was shot entirely on set, a New York apartment, his 1954 movie Dial M for Murder, although it contains a scene in a gentleman’s club and a vague montage within a courtroom, seems far more stage-bound than the earlier work. Every time I watch this film, in fact, I feel a sense of claustrophobia, in part, because in the small Wendice flat at 61A Charrington Gardens, the characters are for much of the film literally in each other’s faces, Tony Wendice (Ray Milland) intimately close to his cheating wife, Margot (Grace Kelly), Margot beginning the film with a kiss with her former lover, Mark Halliday (Robert Cummings), and, in later scenes, the murderer (Anthony Dawson) sprawling nearly on top of Margot, the Chief Inspector (John Williams) hovering over Tony’s every move.

 

     This film also has very little suspense going for it: we know who the killer is and the man behind him from near the beginning of the work, and we know his motives. And, accordingly, there is little action. Tony Wendice hires Captain Lesgate (Swann) to kill his wife so that he might inherit her money and to punish her for her long ago sexual transgression. His plans for the murder, including his involvement with the former school mate, is painstakingly detailed, in a long patch of dialogue, by Wendice himself. And, although, the murder actually fails, due to Tony’s machinations Margot is found guilty of Swann’s murder and sentenced to death. Even detective writer Mark is able to see through Tony’s veil of lies. The only unanswered question is how Mark and, perhaps the Chief Inspector, will save Margot and discover the labyrinthine “truth.” In short, much of this film creaks with a plot that Tony himself announces is “unrealistic.”

 


      Despite the work’s absolute staginess—or, one might argue because of it—this film works, mostly because of Milland’s delicious ability to placidly prevaricate, Cummings’ boyish loyalty to Margot, and Kelly’s gift of simply radiating a confused beauty.  And then there’s that hilariously complex plot to keep up all amused: Tony’s slow weekly withdrawals of bank funds to pay for the murder while hiding the fact from the police, his secret tracking of Swann, a shady character who even in his schooldays has committed numerous petty crimes against women before Wendice has tracked him down, and Tony’s voyeuristic stalking of the man at the dog races week after week. Add to that Tony’s accidental uncovering of Mark’s love letter to his wife, his fake blackmail attempts, the way he lures Mark into attending a stag party as a cover for his whereabouts the night of his wife’s murder, his planned-to-the-second telephone call to draw her out of the bedroom, etc. etc.—seemingly all for naught, since, when his watch stops, he’s late with the call, Swann nearly leaving, with Swann being murdered with the scissors Tony has asked his wife to cut out articles from his past tennis career.

       The only truly dramatic event of the film is the attempted murder, where Swann is poised over the intended victim almost as in act of sex before Margot, reaching for the scissors, thrusts them into his back, he impaling them even deeper with his fall to the floor. This scene is pure Hitchcock magic!

       What follows is almost a purposeful unweaving of the whole fabric of Tony’s lies, as he redirects the very acts he has used to hide his involvement—including his silence on the phone, his insistence that she not immediately call the police, the discovery of money on the murdered man, and entry through the front door—to his wife, freeing himself to guiltlessly end the relationship. Milland’s icy demeanor throughout makes him the perfect fiend.


       

     There is only one small element that has escaped this monster’s attention. The key found in Swann’s pocket, returned by Tony to his wife’s purse, is not the key to their flat, but to Swann’s own. Swann, thoroughly obeying Tony’s orders, has faithfully returned the house key to the rug upon the staircase outside the door. Since the inspector has switched raincoats with Wendice, and Margot, asked to return home, has no way to enter the flat, when the now keyless Tony checks the staircase, he reveals his guilt by his very entry.

       Even now, however, Milland as Tony retains his cool, pouring himself up a large drink before, presumably, going off to prison and his ultimate hanging.

 

Los Angeles, February 10, 2013

Reprinted from International Cinema Review (February 2013).

 

 

Charles Martin | My Dear Secretary / 1948

spaghetti and meatballs

by Douglas Messerli

 

Charles Martin (writer and director) My Dear Secretary / 1948

 

This pleasant comedy has a predictable plot: playboy novelist Owen Waterbury (Kirk Douglas) is less interested in writing than in living the life of a noted writer—consuming women and money as an alcoholic does whiskey. As the story begins, in fact, he has just broken up with his former "secretary," and is in search of a shapely replacement. Speaking before an adult creative writing class, Waterbury meets Stephanie 'Steve' Gaylord (Laraine Day), suggesting that she apply for the job; once he perceives her assets, she is quickly hired. She determines to leave her current job working for bookstore owner Rudy Vallee in search of independent study, but quickly discovers, to her dismay, that Waterbury prefers doing almost anything but practicing his "art." His literary inspirations come and go within minutes.


     Between rejecting his advances and her attempts to reform him, Gaylord pens her own best seller, outdoing her former employer. He has no choice, since she has hooked him as well, but to marry her and reform. End of story? Fortunately not.      

    While these two carry out their timid romance, a whole cast of character actors rush in to make this film a comic delight. Most notable among them, is a sort of live-in butler-friend, Ronnie Hastings (Keenan Wynn). Writer and director Martins is quite obviously unsure of how to define his relationship to Waterbury; is he a kind of sardonic sponge, taking advantage of an old friendship or a sort of would-be lover, cooking, ironing, and housekeeping for his bachelor partner?* It hardly matters, for he is a failure at whatever he attempts except for the constant campy humor he dishes up to nearly everyone he meets, particularly the outrageous landlady, Horrible Hannah Reeve (played with perfection by Florence Bates). Instead of paying the rent, Waterbury awards her with Hasting's barbs:

 

                              Mrs. Reeves: I guess I'll run along.

                              Ronnie Hastings: Must you go? I was just poisoning the tea.

 

    The marvelous Irene Ryan plays Mary, a singing, tattle-tailing cleaning woman with permanent nasal drip; and gay actor Grady Sutton perfectly captures his role as soap-opera writing mamma's boy for whom “Steve” goes to work when her relationship with Waterbury fails, she matching his relationship with Ronnie by establishing her own association to a queer figure.

 

    Taxi-drivers, bookies, ex-lovers, a wannabe actress, and a detective run in and out of the Waterbury apartment to bring further comic mayhem into this pallid romance.

     None of this makes sense except as a kind of desperate attempt to keep the implausible relationship of the two leads from view. And it almost works. The director himself seems to be of two minds, bouncing his gifted cast back and forth between a slightly moronic romance or a series of comic riffs. Wynn's character is fortunately there to point out the inevitable choice:

 

                               Ronnie Hastings: Is it informal, or shall I bathe?

 

Or, as he later describes the role the aspiring actress, Dawn O'Malley, would play, based on Waterbury's non-existent book: "You have to be insincere and be a moron."

     Better that direction than taking the pious Gaylord and her marriage to Waterbury seriously. Or, for that matter even her own literary success. Fortunately, the comedy boils over the soggy romance:

 

                              Ronnie Hastings: I made a wedding breakfast...spaghetti and

                                                          meatballs.

 

Los Angeles, June 11, 2012

Reprinted from International Cinema Review (June 2012).

 

*The fact that Waterbury's romantic interest has a male nick-name, Steve, and a last name that suggests quite the opposite of a heterosexual relationship, Gaylord, further spices the pot

Preston Sturges | Hail the Conquering Hero / 1944

an honest man

by Douglas Messerli

 

Preston Sturges (writer and director) Hail the Conquering Hero / 1944

 

Preston Sturges’ Hail the Conquering Hero is one of his very finest comedies—which given the quality of most of his work is very high praise indeed. And, although nearly all his films are grounded in American culture, in its presentation of patriotic marines and small-town character types, it is perhaps his most American work.

 

    That is not to say that what Sturges shows us about American life is always positive. Small town boy Woodrow Lafayette Pershing Truesmith (Eddie Bracken) is the son of a Marine Corps hero father, “Hinky Dinky” Truesmith, who died a hero in World War I. The widow and mother of Woodrow (Georgia Caine) even keeps a shrine for her dead husband in her living room. The son, accordingly, has grown up with the lore of Marine Corps life and is determined to become a hero himself. The only problem is his chronic hay fever, for which he has been drummed out of the Corps. In utter embarrassment and depression, he has stayed in San Diego, working at the shipyard, afraid to return home.

     In a local bar, Woodrow coincidentally runs into a group of down-and-out Marines who have just spent their last dime. Treating them to a round of beers and sandwiches, Woodrow and the soldiers strike up a conversation wherein he reveals his situation. The eldest of the men, Sgt. Heppelfinger (the wonderful William Demarest) has even served with “Hinky Dinky” in World War I, recalling his heroic acts. While they speak, one of the soldiers, missing his own family, scolds Woodrow for not returning home and puts through a call to Woodrow’s mother so that he might tell her the truth. Regretfully, Woodrow reveals he will be returning home but in the bad telephone connection his admission of having “hay fever” is comprehended in the Truesmith kitchen as “jungle fever,” which leads his mother to believe he has been released as a kind of hero, having suffered in a battle. The whole event is even more complicated when Heppelfinger jumps on the line declaring Woodrow is a hero! Before the despairing ex-soldier has even comprehended the immensity of the Sergeant’s lie, he is bundled away by the soldiers onto a train, forced to redress in his uniform and awarded a couple of their medals, temporarily, so that he can return home proudly to his hometown.

      What no one might have imagined is that the whole town, with three bands in tow, have turned out to celebrate their war hero’s return. The blustery and fraudulent mayor (Raymond Walburn) has a speech in hand and Woodrow’s former girlfriend, Libby (Ella Raines), now a fiancée of the mayor’s handsome but bland son (Bill Edwards), determines to keep her new relationship a secret for a while so as not to spoil Woodrow's celebrated return.

 

      With great cornball hoopla, bands play, a young girl gives her memorized speech, and the mayor blusters forward as Woodrow is carried through the streets in absolute horror for the series of out-of-control deceptions and their consequences. At every attempt to speak out, however, his Marine friends jump forward to silence him, leaving Bracken with little to say other than representing his growing fears in a permanently-popeyed and dyspeptic look. A statue is planned, his mother’s remaining mortgage paid, each kindness further terrorizing the former truth-teller, while town citizens determine to draft him into running against the current mayor! It is a world gone mad, a community so desperate for heroes that the good and ordinary are seen as meaningless.

      Even Woodrow’s attempt to bolt is prevented by the protecting army of friends. Pretending to give into the demands to appear at a campaign rally, Woodrow confesses everything, returning home to pack with Libby trailing after, breaking off with her obedient beau and promising to run away with Woodrow, her former love.

     The stunned crowd is left in the always capable counterfeiting hands of Sgt. Heppelfinger, who praises Woodrow’s true courage in confessing the truth, which convinces the hypocritical citizens that Woodrow does indeed have the qualities they want from a mayor, drawing him back into fold before he can escape!

 

                Sgt. Heppelfinger: [after Woodrow reveals his discharge and leaves

                                              the auditorium] I just wanna tell you one thing, see.

                                              I've seen a lot of brave men in my life—that's my

                                              business. But what that kid just done took real

                                              courage.

 

      Sturges hardly misses a single aspect of American small-town hypocrisy: the mother’s embracement of the dead, the lover’s disloyalty, the mayor’s puffed-up chicanery, the soldiers' absolute delight in their own outrageous fables, even the church-goers disingenuous love of their fellow flock (only after believing Woodrow is a hero do they help his penniless mother). In short Sturges presents a small town world we all know from tales as vastly different as Tilbury Town, Winesburg, Ohio, and River City, Iowa, towns in which ordinary people are only too ready to buy into fraudulent myths of American desire.

 

Los Angeles, August 10, 2012

Reprinted from International Cinema Review (August 2012).

Index [listed alphabetically by director]

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.