Author: Snugglecub

1942 – Walter Pidgeon

1942 – Walter Pidgeon

Mrs. Miniver

To be honest, I have mixed feelings about this nomination.  I’ve seen the film several times, and I really never gave the character of Mr. Miniver much thought.  And that’s the problem.  Was he the male lead?  Yes, I suppose, but was he really a leading man in the story?  I’m not really sure.  He seemed very much like a supporting character.  The story had a main character, which was, of course, Mrs. Miniver, played by Greer Garson.  But much of the time, Clem Miniver just seemed to be along for the ride.  He was almost always in the background, or sharing the screen with Greer Garson, and he had very few close-ups of his own.

And I have a particular problem with his performance.  He absolutely created a wonderful character.  He was likeable, handsome, and charismatic.  But he had a distinctly American accent.  I don’t know if that was intentional, trying to give the film an attachment to the American public, but he was the only actor in the movie that was not British.  And a single line would have solved the problem, mentioning somehow that Mrs. Miniver was married to an American man, but his national origin was never addressed.  And every now and then, though it was very inconsistent, he would attempt to have a British accent, but it was muddy, at best.  No, he was American, and there was no mistaking it.

Putting those things aside, he actually did a pretty good job.  He was a husband and father, and he did a wonderful job at both.  He was a loyal British citizen, taking part in the dangerous mission to rescue the soldiers at Dunkirk.  This wasn’t actually shown, of course, because this movie wasn’t about him.  It showed him leaving for the mission, and then he was shown returning from the rescue, but only through the eyes of his wife, Mrs. Miniver.  That was the only subplot that really was all about him… well, kind-of.

I want to make the point that I’m not saying he did a bad job.  He was excellent as Clem Miniver, but maybe a British actor might have served the film better.  Still, he had a wonderful on-screen chemistry with Greer Garson, so I suppose that counted for something.  I’m just glad he didn’t take home the Oscar.

1942 – Teresa Wright

1942 – Teresa Wright

Pride of the Yankees

I love Teresa Wright.  She was gorgeous, had a thousand-watt smile, and was a phenomenal actress.  In Pride of the Yankees, she played Eleanor Twitchell Gehrig, the wife of the famous baseball player, Lou Gehrig.  Wright created a likeable character that was a good match for Gary Cooper’s lead.  She was bright and cheery, and I think the actress did a very good job, earning her nomination.  And she had some pretty emotional scenes that allowed her to show off her skill in front of the camera.

Her main function in the film was to be Cooper’s love interest, and both the actress and the script did it right, because you have to have your romance in a biopic film.  Eleanor’s obvious interest in Lou upon first meeting him was nice and refreshing because she kept her emotions on low without being mean.  The love story took a little time to get going, and I liked the way Wright played it.  She understood what was needed, and she did a fine job.  And it didn’t hurt that she had a pretty good chemistry with Gary Cooper on the big screen.

But then later on in the film, as her husband’s tragic disease began to affect him, the tears started to flow, and she owned them.  Of course, as was the fashion in films of the 1940s, if you get sick, don’t tell your loved ones to spare them the pain.  So Lou didn’t want Eleanor to know, even though she actually did.  And to save face for Lou, Eleanor did what she had to, in order to avoid letting him know she knew. So she had to remain happy, even as she watched him physically decline.  Wright was so good in these scenes.  I especially applauded the absolute desolation on her face when she first learns of his terminal illness.

So this is one of those rare cases where a single actress was nominated for two different films in the same year.  This nomination was for Best Actress, but she was also nominated for her role in Mrs. Miniver in the Best Supporting Actress category, for which she took home an Oscar.  1942 was clearly a good year for Teresa Wright.  And this was just one year after another nomination the previous year for The Little Foxes.  Clearly, the movie-going public loved her, and so do I.

1942 – Gary Cooper

1942 – Gary Cooper

Pride of the Yankees

Gary Cooper is back again, playing the same character.  I mean, let’s be honest.  He was the same character in Mr. Deeds Goes to Town in 1937, and Sergeant York in 1941.  He was that man who is so good and American and wholesome, that he still has that gosh, gee whiz, attitude, even as an adult.  And I’ve seen him do other movies that had some grit, some realism.  But I guess this is the kind of role audiences wanted to see him play at the time.  I look forward to seeing him again in High Noon in 1953.  He still had the same squeaky clean image, but he was kind of a bad-ass there, too.

Here, he plays the historic baseball player, Lou Gehrig.  And I like that the movie wasn’t just about the tragic disease that claimed him.  It was there, but the film was more about his rise to stardom in the world of baseball and his relationship with his wife, Eleanor.  And Cooper was never a bad actor, so of course he did a fine job.  But if it was a role we’ve all seen him in before, more than once, why was he nominated for Best Actor?  I think I might know the answer.

On the surface, he didn’t have to stretch himself much.  It was old-hat for him.  But it you dig a little deeper, you find that he actually had to work very hard for the role.  Lou Gehrig was a famous ball player who was a little different than most of his peers.  He was a lefty, but Cooper was not.  Cooper had to learn to bat left-handed, throw left-handed, and catch right-handed, all completely opposite of what he would have been used to, what would have been natural for him.  And he did it so well, he was believable as one of the most famous lefty players of the time.

And of course, there was the last third of the film, the parts where his debilitating disease started to affect him.  There was drama there, which Cooper knew how to sell.  The scene where he collapses in the locker-room was heartbreaking to watch.  Also, the way he approached the final emotional scene where he says goodbye to the fans at Yankee Stadium was dramatic and heartfelt, a real tear-jerker moment.  So I think Cooper absolutely deserved his nomination.  But I’m also glad he didn’t win, especially since he had just won the previous year for Sergeant York.

1942 – Susan Peters

1942 – Susan Peters

Random Harvest

I’m not entirely sure how I feel about Susan’s performance in this movie.  There were times where she looked perfectly natural, like she belonged on the big screen.  But there were other times when she looked… off, somehow.  Almost like she was trying too hard to play the part right.  She was very beautiful, though it was an unconventional beauty.  There was something in the shape of her mouth that was both unusual and interesting at the same time.

But I don’t know if I would have nominated her for the Best Supporting Actress award, and here’s why.  The first time she is on the screen, she is supposed to be playing a girl of around fourteen or fifteen, named Kitty, the male lead’s step niece.  She has an instant attraction to him and within minutes, she starts making plans to marry him when she is old enough.  OK, we can blame the script for that one, but the way she played the starry-eyed teenager was just a little creepy.  There was an aggressive hunger in her eyes that was almost crazed, and I found it just a little disturbing.  She was like an instant stalker, and I don’t think I was supposed to see her in that light.  Like I said, part of that was the script, but part of that was Peters.

But I think what she did very well came later.  Once she was out of school, she approached him, and the scene where she sneaks into his office to wait for him was played pretty well.  She is still a very young girl, but she is trying to make herself seem older, like a better match for Charles.  Peters put just the right petulance and childishness combined with calculated maturity into that scene, and I thought she did a fine job.  She was good, because despite the airs she was attempting to put on, she allowed us to see the immaturity that was still there.  Well done, Peters.

And her final scene was very well-played, too.  She ends up leaving Charles the day before their wedding.  She finally stops deceiving herself into believing that he was really in love with her.  That must have been a difficult scene to shoot, but Peters really sold the idea that Kitty had a real revelation, not about Charles, but about herself.  I didn’t particularly like the character until that moment.  She finally showed some real maturity, but then her part in the film came to an abrupt close.

1942 – Ronald Colman

1942 – Ronald Colman

Random Harvest

OK, if we discount the basic premise of the movie and just enjoy it, Ronald Colman was actually pretty good.  He played a soldier who had sustained injuries during the war.  He suffered complete amnesia.  He didn’t know his name, where he was from, or what he is doing.  He meets a girl, falls in love, and starts a new life, even going so far as to marrying the girl and fathering a child. Then later, he suffers a slight blow to the head, and is miraculously cured.  Putting aside the fact that one head injury does not cure another, he returns to his old life and forgets about his wife and baby.  Then she finds a way to come back into his life as his secretary. 

Colman was a talented actor, and the first half of the movie really gave him a chance to show off his skills in front of the camera.  The scenes in the mental hospital, and the ones where he was first taken in by Greer Garson, were wonderful.  Colman’s sense of wordless confusion was powerful and intense.  You can see his effort, trying to make sense out of his life, but to no avail.  The second half of the film was pretty standard, but he was also a perfectly good romantic lead.

One of the challenges he faced while playing the part of Smithy / Charles Rainier is that he had to play two completely characters, who were really the same person.  And he did it.  Smithy had a much softer, gentler manner, while Charles, while not in any way mean or unfeeling, was harder and more calculating.  Each personality was distinct, but eventually, his curiosity about his missing years led him to investigate his past.  The two sides of his psyche begin to merge, and Colman was able to make that believable.  It was an interesting shift of in the way the part had to be played.  And it was appropriately gradual, not happening all at once.

I think Colman really deserved his nomination for Best Actor, though if I’m being completely honest, I’m shocked that his co-star Greer Garson was not nominated for Best Actress.  But that’s neither here nor there.  Colman played a part that I’ve never seen him play before, that of a man with no self-confidence, and a wounded, confusion always in his eyes.  It made for a rather dramatic role that allowed him to stretch himself as an actor, and he was clearly up to the challenge.

1942 – Walter Huston

1942 – Walter Huston

Yankee Doodle Dandy

I’ve been seeing this actor’s name pop up a lot more than I thought I would, and he always does a fine job. After seeing him in other films like The Devil and Daniel Webster and The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, I am coming to know him as an actor who is able to inhabit the characters he plays.  He transforms into each role, creating unique and distinct characters that are always appropriate and usually memorable.  This script didn’t exactly give him anything dynamic to work with, but he does show another side of his performance skills.  He sings and dances, something I’ve never seen him do, though his dancing wasn’t as energetic or intense as his costar, James Cagney.

Here he played Jerry Cohan, the patriarch of a Vaudeville acting family.  His wife and two children were all there willingly and gladly.  They all loved performing on the stage and they loved performing as a family act.  In this, he played the part of a good father, supporting his children in their endeavors, and taking joy in their successes, while still maintaining a healthy ego, claiming that he was a better actor than his son, George Cohen.  He played Jerry as a kind man who loved his family.

There was one memorable scene where he needed to physically punish his son for messing up a golden opportunity for the family’s act.  It was a conscientious decision, which made me like the character even more.  And when his wife chimed in, saying, “Not on the hand, he has to play the violin!” and then, “Not on the mouth, he has to sing!”  He listened, saying, “”Here’s one place without any talent!” and proceeded to spank his bottom.  That was a fun scene.

And even though the script didn’t give him a lot of opportunity to be dramatic, I have to mention his death-bed scene.  He is old and dying, and his mind has taken him back to his younger days when they were all pounding the Vaudeville circuit.  He was delirious and Huston really sold the scene beautifully.  It was a sad and dramatic scene, probably the most dramatic scene in the movie, and Huston made me feel for Jerry in his final moment.  Huston did a fantastic job and he was clearly an actor that the Academy loved, as this was his third Oscar nomination, though it wouldn’t be his last.  His winning nomination would come six years later in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

1942 – James Cagney (WINNER)

1942 – James Cagney

Yankee Doodle Dandy

James Cagney did it all here, and I guess I can understand why he won the Academy Award for Best Actor.  The role was both topical and historical.  It allowed him to sing, well, kind-of, and dance, and be both comedic and dramatic.  And after doing a little reading, my opinion is even stronger that the right man won the Oscar.  He was pretty darn good, better than I remember him being the first time I watched the film several years ago.  He was amazing, and here’s why.

As I was watching the movie, I was thinking that I didn’t care for the way Cagney spoke his way through the songs without really singing much.  And I didn’t care for the way he danced.  His legs were too stiff and his movements seemed jerky.  But apparently, the real George Cohan wanted Fred Astaire to play the part.  Astaire refused to play it because Cohan’s stiff-legged style of dancing didn’t go with his personal style.  Bring in Cagney who was able to mimic Cohan’s style beautifully.  And I picked up on it, not even aware that it was something to be picked up on.  And even the critics agreed that Cagney’s impersonation of Cohan was spot-on.

And it was 1942.  WWII was in full swing and war time films full of hyper-patriotism were needed.  And as an interesting anecdote, I going to quote Wikipedia.  “The New YorkTimes printed a front-page allegation that Cagney was a communist. Cagney refuted the accusation and Martin Dies Jr. made a statement to the press clearing Cagney.  William Cagney, one of the film’s producers, reportedly told his brother “We’re going to have to make the goddamndest patriotic picture that’s ever been made. I think it’s the Cohan story.”  So they did, and it worked.

In light of all that, I think Cagney knocked this out of the park.  He proved that he could sing and dance with the best of them.  He even had a fairly dramatic scene in which his father dies, and he cries over his death-bed.  And he also played the romance with Mary, played by Joan Leslie, quite well.  He was charming and handsome, and he was a delight to watch on the screen.  Many people only know Cagney from his gangster roles in film, but here, he proved that he was much more than that.  Well done, James!

1942 – Monty Wooley

1942 – Monty Woolley

The Pied Piper

I’d seen this movie before and wasn’t terribly impressed with it.  Monty Woolley played a stock character that didn’t have much depth.  Some, but not much.  He played the stereotypical British old man who is thrown into the extraordinary circumstances of World War II.  But I actually enjoyed the film more in this second watching than I did the first time.  I found more to like this time around, and Wooley’s performance was a sizeable part of that.

He is elderly and crotchety, named Howard, and he hates children… or does he?  As he tries to make his way out of France with the two children of some friends who have other responsibilities in those dangerous times, the journey is long and rough.  Along the way more orphaned children join his party, one at a time, until at last he makes it to England with a total of six young kids in tow.  And because of his proper British stoicism and bravery against the officers of the Third Reich, he not only reveals his affection for the children like a kindly grandfather, but he also has time to give the evil Nazi bad-guy a piece of his English mind.

So did he turn in a great performance?  Well, it wasn’t a bad one, but I don’t know If it was worth an Oscar nomination.  He was like an old bearded version of Leslie Howard, you know that British actor who plays the exact same British character in every film he is in, whether the character is British or not.  The same proper English gentleman, the same stereotypical stuffy aristocrat we’ve seen a thousand times before.  Yet, he did the role justice.  After all, that’s the way the part was written.  But I saw nothing new here, nothing out of the ordinary.

He had a couple of good scenes that stand out in my memory.  One was where he confronted the Nazi commander, professing his innocence to the accusation of being a spy.  The other is when he had to pretend to be an addled old man front of the SS.  Wooley did a good enough job, I suppose, but was is worth an Oscar nod?  The problem is that any more intense display of emotion would have been out of character for him.  I don’t know.  The role itself was just too cookie-cutter for my tastes, and Wooley didn’t seem to be challenged by anything about the part.

1941 – Mary Astor (WINNER)

1941 – Mary Astor

The Great Lie

Mary Astor was one of those lifers.  She acted in silent films, starting in 1921, and transitioned into sound films in 1929, and ended her film career in her final role in 1964.  That’s forty-three years in front of the camera, and her experience really allowed her to show what she could do.  Of course, the well-written script really worked in her favor, as well.  And she was gorgeous, to boot.  And this role had some meat on its bones for all the characters.

She played a world-class concert pianist at the peak of her career, named Sandra Kovak.  She was also a free-spirited party girl who had fallen in love with a man, who she impulsively married.  But she had jumped the gun, and an incomplete divorce prevented the marriage from being valid.  But when her man returned to his ex-fiancée, she reveals that she is pregnant with his child, and deep drama ensues.  Astor had just the right amount of arrogance and avarice to pull it off.  And she was certainly a villainess.  Upon learning that her conquest had married his ex, she straight-up tells the woman that she intended to steal him back.  She owns her wickedness, and is utterly unapologetic.  Honestly, I like that kind of a bad guy.

And Astor did something else that impressed me.  Whenever someone plays an instrument in a film, it is usually pretty obvious whether they are actually playing or not.  With Astor, I couldn’t tell.  She made me believe she was really playing the piano beautifully.  True, during some of the music’s more difficult passages, they strategically focused the camera on her face and not on her hands, but when they did show them, you could tell she was actually playing the piano.  And my research tells me I was not wrong.  The actress was really an accomplished pianist.

But more than that, Astor really dug into the emotional heart of Sandra Kovak.  Her best scene was during her pregnancy when she loses her mind and tries to set the house on fire.  She ends up screaming out of pure frustration and has to be slapped to bring her to her senses.  Then she breaks down into sobbing tears.  She was so good in that scene.  She played such a well-defined character that I’m not surprised she took home the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress.