Audie Murphy?
![]()
David Niven? Was he super popular before the war?
I do recall him starring in Bachelor Mother with Ginger Rogers, so maybe I answered my own question.
"It's true that we had a gentleman's agreement, but unfortunately, I am no gentleman."I don't know about popular, Niven was never really super-famous. He was more of a character actor and he appeared in many 30s movies in that capacity.
His biggest role ever was A Matter of Life and Death. He also fought in World War II so he had two careers, before 1940 and after 1945. I don't think he was much of a leading man after the war.
David Niven was a leading man into the 1970s, in many films. No idea where the idea that he was a supporting player came from.
As far as when he became a leading man—his first two leading roles were also in the last two films he made before the war, Bachelor Mother and Raffles in 1939.
The poster above is correct in suggesting Audie Murphy. Completely forgot about him.
I think you could make a case for Humphrey Bogart. Technically, not, as his first two starring roles came in High Sierra and The Maltese Falcon in 1941 right before American entry into the war. But those films were part of the emerging Film Noir genre, and I think the war was pretty important in giving birth to Film Noir with all its cynical anti-heroes and violence and such.
Film noir only intensified after WWII. The general malaise of war and its effects on unadjusted veterans gives plenty of story material. Reminds me of a quote from a film (definitely not a noir, A Foreign Affair) where a Captain explains that the war pushed him to go full speed ahead and once the war ended they expected him to stop, just like that. And well, he couldn't. I'd imagine that would be very difficult to deal with, as well as the trauma and suddenly not feeling useful anymore.
Our most glorified war, WWII, has always been a man's war—at least if we are to believe the movies. I don't think I've ever seen a classic film of the 40s/50s that dealt with how women felt in these circumstances or how they worked hard during it. Too much to wish for, but it would've been very interesting to see how they dealt with this while it was still fresh and could maybe not be so romanticized. But it wouldn't be the first time I've been ignorant of cool films; is there such a film out there?
Another topic of interest: have you ever watched a film where you either loved or hated it, but then on a second watch, you change your opinion?
Happened to me with The Palm Beach Story. On first watch, thought it completely plot less, nonsensical, and too crazy. Months later, I rewatched it and loved it. I finally got it, realizing that plot, although important, isn't the only thing to a movie.
edited 7th May '16 7:54:58 PM by LongTallShorty64
"It's true that we had a gentleman's agreement, but unfortunately, I am no gentleman.""Our most glorified war, WWII, has always been a man's war—at least if we are to believe the movies. I don't think I've ever seen a classic film of the 40s/50s that dealt with how women felt in these circumstances or how they worked hard during it."
Starring Claudette Colbert, Jennifer Jones, and Shirley Temple
Otto Preminger's In Harm's Way deals with the troubles of some women in wartime. It's especially daring for showing one of its GI heroes (played by Kirk Douglas) raping a servicewoman.
To get back to the original question about war being good for the movies...the fact is it was. Purely for the existence of such films as John Ford's The Battle of Midway, John Huston's The Battle of San Pietro and especially Let There Be Light both of which are considered masterpieces of the genre. War has always inspired art right from Homer's time to the war poetry of World War I...not that I subscribe to the "cuckoo clock" defense of conflict by Harry Lime in The Third Man. After all nobody went to war thinking of the great art that will come in books about the war.
Film Noir went through cycles. Like everything (The western, musicals etcetera). Precursors appeared in the 40s, Maltese Falcon, High Sierra, and obviously while it's not a noir, Citizen Kane codified noir lighting to a great degree and that was an immsensely influential film in that time. You also had Scarlet Street and Lang films. The Val Lewton and Tourneur films are considered noir-horror by some since the lighting there is quite noir-esque.
The real locus classicus is 1945-1950, between Double Indemnity and Asphalt Jungle. Double Indemnity was the big influence, and you had so many crime movies. Film Noir was updating the gangster film of the 30s, the problems aren't social or ghetto problems, but it has to do with psychological issues, personal issues. A gangster movie has gangsters as hero-villains, noir movies have ordinary average joes and janes becoming criminals. Double Indemnity started that but you had other movies. John Garfield's major movies comes from this time: Postman Always Rings Twice, Body and Soul, Force of Evil, He Ran All The Way. You also had realism: like Louis de Rochemont's and Italian neorealism influences. So a lot of noir movies start shooting on location, Kazan's Panic in the Streets but also Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt. Jules Dassin's Naked City was another. Then The Asphalt Jungle moves into abstraction where the city isn't mentioned and the criminals are characters but also archetypes, and the style is self-consciously noir. You also had noir parodies in this time, The Band Wagon by Vincente Minnelli has a finale that spoofs Mickey Spillane, while Kiss Me Deadly, an adaptation of a Spillane novel is an over-the-top spoof and deconstruction (directed and written by guys who hated Spillane).
According to the original noir scholars, Raymond Borde and Etienne Chaumenton, this was the beginning, middle and end of the classic Noir era. But later scholars extend it all the way to 1958, including films by Fuller, Ray, Joseph H. Lewis, Lang's later films, Laughton's Night of the Hunter and mark the official end as Touch of Evil, a highly self-conscious, stylized and deconstructive look at genre, crime, law and order, and making subtext (American imperialism over Mexico and anti-hispanic racism) overt. In any case noir only worked in a climate of censorship. Under the code, the crime movies fell Beneath Suspicion so they could sneak stuff there. When censorship ended, it was no longer necessary.
I'm kinda fascinated by how Casablanca fits into the Film Noir canon. The style, the plot, the setting, and the character types fit the genre so perfectly. However, while the traditional film noir features characters whose criminal acts lead them to a tragic end, here the crimes the protagonists commit are against Nazi Germany and Vichy France, so not only are the heroes allowed to succeed in their criminal endeavors, but the film ends on a note of idealistic optimism that is pretty much the inverse of what you'd expect from a noir.
More Film Noir would have had happier endings if it wasn't for the Hays Code. Plus one of my all time favourite heist movies wouldn't have had its ending ruined if it wasn't to appease the same sort of freakish idjits in the British censor offices. I'm talking about the Jack Hawkins classic, "The League of Gentlemen". Whose ending had to be a downer according to articles I read about the film years after watching it for the first time.
Sad thing that a lot of you will never be able to see this wonderful little film.
I at least have a copy on VHS...
EDIT: I know this thread is for talking about more legitimate films and filmmakers, but his career does span this thread - anyone else know who K. Gordon Murray is?
edited 8th May '16 5:50:07 PM by Aldo930
"They say I'm old fashioned, and live in the past, but sometimes I think progress progresses too fast."![]()
![]()
I know there are some movies from the Hays Code era that pulled some tricks to make sure all criminal characters were punished by movie's end (as the Code demanded) but still allowing them happy-ish endings. Like the original 3:10 to Yuma (1957): it ends with the outlaw Ben Wade being sent to prison, but has him mention that the prison they're sending him to is one he's escaped from before, with the implication being that he'll probably escape again.
Occassionally they would sneak stuff in and slip one past the goalie.
But there aren't many cases of bad guys outright winning.
Hitchcock's Vertigo was one, the general release made no mention what happened to Gavin Elster. There is an alternate version though for some international markets where there's a scene announcing that cops are looking for Elster. Marnie is even closer, since despite being a kleptomaniac, Marnie gets rewarded with a marriage to a rich man and some therapy. I love the last line, where Marnie tells Mark Rutland, "Oh I don't want to go to prison." and her husband (who also used his Marital Rape License on her) confirms she won't.
Well, I think the production code was a little more tolerant of criminals whose behavior is due to mental illness, provided they were sent to treatment by the end. That's how Arsenic and Old Lace got away with having two of its lead characters be friendly, pleasant old ladies who also happen to have murdered nearly a dozen people.
I suppose I'm heathen for admitting that I really didn't enjoy Arsenic and Old Lace. Does it help that I really, really wanted to like it?
Not just a bunny, but a six foot bunny. It's one of my favorites because it's charming and whimsical, and Stewart does an excellent job in a pretty low-key comic performance. Then, as now, you don't get a lot in the way of subtle, or even dialed-back comedy, but this is a gem in that regard, and Stewart is excellent at it. It was apparently one of his favorite roles.
