Change Your Image
Therese_Letanche36
I know how to read, write, and spell--such an accomplishment for my generation. I love the classics, and I'm proud of it : ))
Reviews
Christopher Strong (1933)
Wonderfully Ironic
This was the second Katharine Hepburn movie I ever saw, and I have to say that it impressed me enough to keep watching her in other films (to end up eventually loving her!).
The is the kind of movie that needs to be watched a few times before a viewer can fully understand and recognize all the plots, ironies, patterns, reflections, etc. The movie starts out with Cynthia as the woman who has never had a love affair, and Christopher as the man who's always been faithful to his wife. Meanwhile, Monica (Christopher's daughter) is having a love affair, and Bill is being unfaithful to his wife with Monica. Monica and Bill are the ones who bring Cynthia and Christopher together. When Cynthia and Christopher meet, it still seems unlikely that the whole situation will change. Cynthia imposes herself more and more onto the Strong family, until one can begin to get the sense that something is going on between Cynthia and Chris.
The family and Cynthia go to France, where the tables really turn. At a party, Monica has a one-night-stand with some random fellow (after being told she is not allowed to see Bill until he is divorced). At the very same party, Chris ditches his wife for Cynthia. The whole night ends with a very sappy boat-ride between Chris and Cynthia and with Monica going off with the man she met at the party. At this point, Cynthia is having a love affair with Chris, and Chris is being unfaithful to his wife. Monica has no boyfriend (just her one-night-stand) and Bill is being faithful to his wife.
When they return home, Bill and Monica end up having a fight about Monica being frivolous in France. Monica rushes to Cynthia and confides that she is going to commit suicide. Cynthia explains that suicide is not the way to go (which Cynthia herself ends up resorting to at the end of the movie) and encourages Monica to make up with Bill. It works, and Bill and Monica end up getting married. Eventually they find out that they are expecting a baby. . .and Cynthia finds out that she is expecting a baby as well. Christopher's baby, of course. Cynthia tries to tell Chris about the baby, but she keeps getting interrupted through his distraction with Monica's pregnancy.
One day, Chris and Cynthia go out to lunch at a place where they think that they will not be seen. Of course, Bill and Monica end up eating at the very same place, and Monica sees her father and Cynthia together. Monica and Cynthia have a fight where Monica says that Cynthia will never know anything about life, that Cynthia knows nothing about love and one day she will crash down in her plane and die, not knowing what life was about at all (which is the half-true prediction of Cynthia's fate).
Not long after, Cynthia goes up in her plane to break the altitude record. Someone tells her to put on her oxygen mask once she gets to a certain height, which is basically our big hint. She puts on her oxygen mask at the level at which she was told and begins to cry from behind the mask as she keep flying toward the goal height. She sees a montage of all her recent experiences with flying, with Chris, with life. Finally, she rips off the oxygen mask and plummets to her death, having broken the altitude record. She never tells Chris about her pregnancy.
This movie has such a sophisticated, complicated plot. You see the correlation of Monica and Bill's relationship with Chris and Cynthia's. Eventually the relationship situations become reversed, while remaining similar at the same time. The reflections of the relationships are like the symmetry of a butterfly's wings. . .or of a moth's (ha-ha). It's not really even the aviation that is important (although Cynthia does fly around the world at one point in the movie).
Sorry if I have some of the scenes out of order, it's been a long time since I've seen the movie. I just wanted to emphasize the irony of the plot. This movie is one of my all-time favorites, and although some filming and acting techniques are out of date, the overall story could stand the test of time. If you didn't like it the first time, watch it a few more times. I think you could appreciate it more that way.
Rembrandt (1936)
Very good. Much better than I thought it would be.
I thought "Rembrandt" was a very good movie. I expected it to not be very good because I had heard that Gertrude Lawrence's acting was not exactly cream of the crop. I thought it was not bad at all. She did a fine job. The reason I watched the movie was for Gertie. I knew I recognized the name "Elsa Lanchester" also. I just researched and found out that she played the character of Katie Nanna in "Mary Poppins". Duh. So for the record, Elsa Lanchester was from Mary Poppins. I hope it doesn't distract anybody else the way it distracted me. I didn't get to watch the movie as well as I would have liked to, because Elsa Lanchester was bothering me like crazy. I might have to watch it again sometime, if I can get my hands on it. It might be one of those movies where you have to watch it a few times to really GET it. Be prepared to watch it one day, and then again the next day. I really do recommend it, however. And also, a fine acting job by Charles Laughton. I've never heard of him before, but he did a very good job of making me believe he was truly miserable. A very good and classic movie.
Torn Curtain (1966)
Different. . .but good
I do not believe that this was Julie Andrews' best work. My aunt watched part of the movie with me, and she said that there was not too much need for Julie's character (Sarah Sherman). I agree, unfortunately, that there was not too much need for her, other than to give the film more variety, and also to add different points of perspective. At the beginning, you see many things, including Paul Newman's character, from her point of view, and as the movie progresses, you see things from his point of view. Sarah Sherman seems to disappear completely, until near the very end, She doesn't do much but walk around in the middle of the film, it seems.
Overall, I've only seen it once, and therefore do not have a very good understanding of characters, theme, or plot. (Usually I have to see a movie many times to really GET it. . .At least for those 2 hours or longer ones.) I still really did like it, and believe that Paul Newman was one great-looking guy. Quite dishy. Julie was the same as usual: Lovely. The entire thing was interesting and a little different than what I usually watch. If you want a taste of something different, I would recommend "Torn Curtain".
Star! (1968)
This movie is truly wonderful!!!!
I have to admit, I'm an incurable Julie Andrews fan, so it would only be right for me to like this movie. The first time I saw it, I thought it was rather confusing and hard to follow. I wasn't used to Julie playing a bit of a snobby lady, but I don't know what I was expecting. . .Maria Von Trapp? There's something very satisfying about seeing Julie play someone who is out of her wholesome image. Every time I watch Victor/Victoria, and even Darling Lili, I get the same feeling. I love it!!!
I've seen "Star!" many, many times by now. (I watched it for four nights in a row when I first bought it.) I now understand the whole story completely and I quite enjoy it every time. Julie's performance is wonderful. She's so good that you forget she's Mary Poppins. Daniel Massey and the rest of the cast are great too.
I learned very much about both Gertrude Lawrence and Noel Coward by watching this movie, and I've become fans of both of them, too. (Although my mom isn't so fond of the real Gertie's singing voice.) In conclusion, I don't see what took so long for it to take off. I love it!!!