...for me to see a film starring Sidney Poitier that I didn't like. Of course I have my favorites, as well as others that I just "liked", but never a Poitier film that I didn't like. For me, Poitier was that rare film star that never made a mistake and always lifted us up higher. But tonight, finally, I've seen that one Poitier film that I dislike.
I want you to think for a minute about a very different film -- one not starring Poitier and not a drama. The comedy/drama "The Bishop's Wife" starring Cary Grant, Loretta Young, and David Niven. In that film the characters played by Young and Niven don't know exactly what Cary Grant's character is. To them, he's an enigma. But to us the viewer, we know he's an angel. In fact, it's crucial to the movie that we viewers no that. If we don't understand that, then the film doesn't work.
Similarly, this film would work so much better if we knew what Sidney Poitier's character is. The other characters in the film can be mystified by him, but we need to understand who and what he is. It really doesn't work for him to be an enigma for the viewer.
Having said that, I don't mean that the film is not an interesting film to watch; it is. But it's also a frustrating film. I wonder if this is Will Geer's finest role. I know that I can't imagine anyone else being quite so perfect in the part. I'm frustrated by Sidney Poitier's role in that one of Poitier's strengths is his powerful diction, even when he is speaking quietly; here he has probably the least dialog of any starring role he ever had. I've never cared for Bradford Dillman, but he does his job here. Beverly Todd is good here as the woman who takes a liking to the mysterious (almost) stranger. Ramon Bieri is very good as the rather bad-guy sheriff. Paul Winfield's role is an odd one...for him, so it's interesting. Also interesting to see Zara Cully (Mother Jefferson in "The Jeffersons") in a very different role.
Perhaps it's just the print they were showing on cable, but the film seemed rather grainy.
So, do I recommend watching this film. No. Nor do I recommend not watching it. I feel very neutral -- and personally disappointed -- in it. And what it comes down to is that I want the story teller to tell me the story. And here, the story teller doesn't fully tell the tale.
Don't read any further unless you've already seen the movie. (My opinion is that Poitier's character is a representative of God who is compiling a report card not of individual men and women, but of mankind).
I want you to think for a minute about a very different film -- one not starring Poitier and not a drama. The comedy/drama "The Bishop's Wife" starring Cary Grant, Loretta Young, and David Niven. In that film the characters played by Young and Niven don't know exactly what Cary Grant's character is. To them, he's an enigma. But to us the viewer, we know he's an angel. In fact, it's crucial to the movie that we viewers no that. If we don't understand that, then the film doesn't work.
Similarly, this film would work so much better if we knew what Sidney Poitier's character is. The other characters in the film can be mystified by him, but we need to understand who and what he is. It really doesn't work for him to be an enigma for the viewer.
Having said that, I don't mean that the film is not an interesting film to watch; it is. But it's also a frustrating film. I wonder if this is Will Geer's finest role. I know that I can't imagine anyone else being quite so perfect in the part. I'm frustrated by Sidney Poitier's role in that one of Poitier's strengths is his powerful diction, even when he is speaking quietly; here he has probably the least dialog of any starring role he ever had. I've never cared for Bradford Dillman, but he does his job here. Beverly Todd is good here as the woman who takes a liking to the mysterious (almost) stranger. Ramon Bieri is very good as the rather bad-guy sheriff. Paul Winfield's role is an odd one...for him, so it's interesting. Also interesting to see Zara Cully (Mother Jefferson in "The Jeffersons") in a very different role.
Perhaps it's just the print they were showing on cable, but the film seemed rather grainy.
So, do I recommend watching this film. No. Nor do I recommend not watching it. I feel very neutral -- and personally disappointed -- in it. And what it comes down to is that I want the story teller to tell me the story. And here, the story teller doesn't fully tell the tale.
Don't read any further unless you've already seen the movie. (My opinion is that Poitier's character is a representative of God who is compiling a report card not of individual men and women, but of mankind).