"You'll never get ahead if you don't take care of what you have." - Doris Waddell, RIP

The late Ralph E. Williams with "Heidi" - morris mn

The late Ralph E. Williams with "Heidi" - morris mn
Click on the image to read Williams family reflections w/ emphasis on UMM.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

"It's a Wonderful Life" not really wonderful

December is when we see many entertainment features that wouldn't be appropriate for any other time of year.
When I was a kid, in the days before tapes and DVDs, you had to be sure to catch a particular holiday feature when it was scheduled on TV. You had only one chance. The "big 3" TV networks reigned.
Then, the spectrum of TV channels widened significantly. We saw the once unheard-of phenomenon of a particular show repeating itself on the same channel, maybe in the middle of the night. When I was a kid, there was "snow" on the screen at night. In early morning there was a test pattern.
There were growing pains with the expansion of TV channels. It was in that environment that "It's a Wonderful Life" became very high-profile. The Frank Capra Christmas movie was in the right place at the right time (albeit pulled from the storage bins).
It was an attractive option for TV programmers in that new frontier of a plethora of TV channels.
There is some legal mumbo jumbo that would help explain why. It's complicated but let's just say "public domain" was an element. That window is now closed so the movie is not seen as often.
Yes, legalities and economics rule, unbeknownst to many of us who twirl the dial - wait, there's no "dial" anymore - looking for fun Christmas TV fare.
The Capra movie will be considered a classic for a long time if for no other reason than many people slightly younger than me will associate it with their childhood. My generation feels nostalgic about "Bonanza" (with "Hoss," remember?).
Guys in their 40s will smile when reminded of watching Australian rules football on ESPN. Or, the days when MTV actually played music videos! OK, many older people share the sentiment!
"It's a Wonderful Life" came out in the year after World War II ended.
Many felt Capra, the producer and director, wasn't in his best form. The movie was not judged a classic at the time it was current. It disappointed at the box office.
Perhaps because top-tier Hollywood names were associated with it, it was nominated for five Oscars. It won none.
It wasn't until decades later that "It's a Wonderful Life" and "classic" might be uttered in the same sentence. Tremendous new life got breathed into it, in much the same way as The Three Stooges became a smash hit again thanks to late-afternoon "kiddie" TV shows. Who could have predicted?
This is why Hollywood lawyers are so busy protecting "rights" of their clients. There are Byzantine details of which we aren't (and weren't meant to be) familiar. We just "twirl the dial."
And because "It's a Wonderful Life" became so ubiquitous about 30 years ago, well, it must be a Christmas staple. It is now, regardless of the reasons why.
It doesn't deserve to be. Let's weigh some pluses/minuses.
In my view, "It's a Wonderful Life" does reflect the top-notch movie craftsmanship for its time - no doubt about that. It's a sharp-appearing movie. You can tell its creators wanted to tell a fairly complicated story.
Capra was known for populist themes. He was fresh from the war (like all of us) and had produced "propaganda" features to help the war effort. Whether this derailed his normal genius, we don't know. Maybe his best work was just behind him.
My own judgment is that the movie is based on a published work that didn't lead to the best results. It's based on a short story: "The Greatest Gift."
I don't know how strictly the movie followed the book - what liberties were taken etc. There are tons of Christmas stories out there. Couldn't Capra have commissioned a new one?
The movie is dreary in many respects. It shows considerable suffering and hardship. It shows the dichotomy of rich and poor. I don't think the dichotomy follows the real world. The movie portrays rich/poor in a way that exists more in a Hollywood scriptwriter's mind. In this sense it's an affront to the intelligence of the audience.
The critical reviews of this movie at the time of its release were mixed.
On the positive side I'll say the basic premise of the movie was excellent: a discouraged man who mutters "I should never have been born" is shown the fallacy of such a thought by an angel who is seeking to rise in the angel hierarchy. The angel shows what the world would be like if in fact George Bailey (Jimmy Stewart) had never been born.
The angel's power reminds of the ghosts in "A Christmas Carol."
The angel is played by Henry Travers who I feel is a major bright spot. The screen comes to life with his initial appearance, and he lifts your spirits just watching his countenance and how he plays his other-worldly role with genuineness and spark.
Travers lifts the movie from a pervading mood of gloom and defeatism.
The poor (or the un-rich) are truly downtrodden in this movie. It's as if they'd face certain misery without George Bailey. It's as if they'd be downtrodden peasants with no hope vs. the likes of "Mr. Potter," played by Lionel Barrymore.
Here the movie falls into a common Hollywood problem. We see characters that are caricatures from real life. "Mr. Potter" is grossly overdone just as the common folks fall too much into a stereotype.
Movies are often guilty of such pigeonholing. Movies oversimplify and they ask us to "suspend reality" a lot. It's like artistic license: sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. A dirty little secret among creative people is that they often don't have a clue whether a particular artistic venture will sail through these shoals.
"It's a Wonderful Life" doesn't quite make it.
The plot becomes seriously flawed as the movie nears its climax. "Uncle Billy" (Thomas Mitchell) absent mindedly misplaces the money, right? We have all done that sort of thing. We don't appreciate being reminded of it, especially by such a grotesque example of such a huge and essential sum of money.
"Mr. Potter" discovers he has the money. He knows where it came from. In real life, what person in his right mind would simply keep it? He knows it will cause unspeakable anguish. I wouldn't do this to my worst enemy.
"Mr. Potter" becomes more than just your usual selfish and narrow individual. He becomes "bad" in a caricatured, comic book type of way. So the movie loses its plausibility. It's monumentally depressing at this point.
We imagine ourselves in a "spot" like Uncle Billy, panicking to the point of desperation and having to tell your boss, who then becomes delirious with anger.
"Uncle Billy" seemed a little absent-minded to begin with. For him to flub so seriously and not be helped out by Mr. Potter, is too dreary a plot development for me to want to fathom. It's not entertaining.
The movie doesn't redeem itself at the end. For Bailey to be bailed out simply by free-will offerings just seems shallow and not too plausible.
George's treatment of his family at the height of his discouragement is disturbing. He seems on the verge of outright domestic abuse. He doesn't seem to have any real rapport with his kids.
He cheers up at the end because his friends give him money. How many of us could count on our friends like that? Even if we'd been selfless all of our lives?
What if his friends hadn't come through? The angel may have cheered George but this doesn't pay the bills (or the sanctions). Didn't George face the prospect of jail? At least Scrooge had money to begin with.
What real-life person would have looked on like Mr. Potter, knowing Bailey's life was potentially ruined just because he, Potter, had stumbled on a sum of money that wasn't his? Not to mention Uncle Billy's life being ruined.
We all know drama depends on conflict, on good vs. bad and rises and falls of key characters. When applied properly such formulas entertain.
"It's a Wonderful Life" misfires.
If the faults of this movie are due to the story "The Greatest Gift," then I'll repeat that the movie creators picked the wrong story. With the right story, Capra had plenty of genius left to render a true classic.
"A true classic" describes "Miracle on 34th Street" which deservedly is in the top list of all-time movies.
Many of us might place "It's a Wonderful Life" on such a list but I feel it's not due to merit. It's due to those days when many of us tuned to ESPN (in its infancy) to watch Australian rules football. Networks were stretching and groping to fill air time.
"It's a Wonderful Life" was available and economical to run. We assumed it was a great movie, not having read the legal mumbo jumbo that explained why it was on TV so much.
Have you noticed it's not on TV so much today? It's more scarce due to enforcement of something called "derivative copyright."
We can enjoy "It's a Wonderful Life" if for no other reason than it takes us back to our younger years when we became familiar with it.
On its own merit, the movie is not a classic.
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com

No comments:

Post a Comment