Miracle on 34th Street has such a sense of brevity and good humor that it is believable why it is a holiday classic, while also being extremely clever and layered in its messaging. This is all tied together with very solid performances. In the same way the film characters ask each other if Santa is or could be real, the actors never let into the absurdity of this, often taking it seriously. Doris Walker, played by Maureen O’Hara, tries to be pragmatic and open to all sides, while hard leaning to her view on child rearing that you should not lie by saying Santa is real. The film politely and confidently mocks her for whenever she insists on removing the sense of imagination kids have. Her and her daughter Susan, played by Natalie Wood to my surprise, in turn come off a little cold. Still, they aren’t treated as completely wrong.
John Payne as Fred Gailey acts not unlike a child and is rewarded for it. He has a strong sense of loyalty for Santa. Many characters in the movie talk about being honorable or moral, only to crumble when it’s more convenient for them to do something else. Fred is important as he is the one who doesn’t break to others. While no one in the movie is less than stellar, they simply do not compare to the big bundle of joy that is Edmund Gwenn as Kris Kringle. It isn’t explained why anyone believes he is Santa, but the inferred reason is that he is so positive and joyful that everyone can’t help but feel uplifted. He even resonates to the audience in how wholesome and unphased he is through various trials and tribulations. This effect is damaged by a brief section of the film, but he is always positive and constructive otherwise. He and others don’t forget to add some comedy, like when he analyzes psychologist Granville Sawyer or demonstrates to Doris his mental and physical health. Both are also necessary scenes to the plot, with the film avoiding elements that only serve to be filler.
There are two major themes at play. One is pushing to do the right thing vs. profit. There is an interesting symbiosis between the two. Everyone being initially too business minded is shown to hurt everyone, like when Macy’s intends to always pressure customers into buying their own products, even if they simply don’t have what they want. Kris’ desire to always do the right thing both benefits the company and people, though he went against the store’s rules in doing so. Once everyone knows and likes Kris to the point he’s part of the business, people start compromising their own values to protect him, instead of doing so to shut him down. Either option of doing the right thing or profit comes with risks.
While the picture clearly says what is right is to accept Kris, it is still in the best interest of Macy’s and the parents to make sure whoever is going to be interacting with their children is safe. Requiring such inspections, even when gratuitous, do serve to make sure it’s harder for nasty people to get through. Still, sometimes taking a chance or breaking the rules works, like when Doris needs a new Santa at the last minute, so asks Kris to play the part. Imagine if Kris was some drunkard that did something obscene on the float? Such rule breaking would not be looked on so positively, even when it at other times is celebrated.
The other theme is pragmatism vs. following what would be better off true. Just looking at Doris, she comes off as a bit vicious and cold in her business-minded world. If everyone did act like her, as they somewhat do in the court scenes, society would to a degree be more hostile and less enjoyable. Belief in Santa certainly does give children joy, though the movie sadly doesn’t comment on whether or not it’s a good thing for them to believe. Kris frees some people from their colder way of thinking by being so nice, but this is in a sense manipulation. No one wants to be a bad guy by shooting him down or they really accept him due to not wanting to accept someone so nice is really such an issue. Doris in turn struggles with thinking he could be threatening and delusional vs. how positive of an influence he is on her daughter and everybody else. It also is often difficult to be so astute as to be always doing the logical thing. Doris was letting her daughter hangout with Fred when he very well could have been bad. At the very least, he and Doris have conflict from disagreeing on what is best for Susan.
The film looks very cozy and Christmas-y, just determined to become a classic. Things like the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade become cinematic in how grand and busy it is, with Kris sitting atop one float like a God among men. While the movie never drops playing as a straight drama that happens to be about something ridiculous, there are a few opportunities for jokes. “But if you do, remember this: you can count on getting just two votes, your own and that district attorney’s out there.” “The District Attorney’s a Republican.” There’s also, “That baseball player sure looks like a giant to me.” “Sometimes people grow very large, but that’s abnormal.” “I’ll bet your mother told you that, too.” Finally, “Sometimes I wish I married a butcher or a plumber.” “My dear, if I lose this hearing, you may very well get your wish.”
SPOILERS
It is bizarre Santa would get so angry at Sawyer and even assault him. It does betray much of what the story is going for. Seeing as Sawyer was so accusatory to Kris, what if he felt so offended by Kris that he injured himself and claimed Kris did it? Or he witnessed Kris do something with his cane that was perfectly fine, but he saw it from such an angle that it looked bad? It’s in turn really weird seeing Kris briefly give up. Was he going to stay in the hospital forever and just let Christmas go because of such a minor matter? Fred cheers him up with some pretty obvious logic that he should’ve come to on his own. Only now, Kris has basically forced Fred to get in the heat of things to help him out. Even ignoring how this contradicts my interpretation of this movie, logically shouldn’t Kris hitting Sawyer prove Sawyer right? This does go to show the stupidity of trusting in anyone that they will do no wrong. Legally declaring Santa false at the trial, which was partially the fault of Kris, is said would have drastically negative outcomes for society.
The reason Kris gets out of his legal situation is because Fred advocated for him at great personal cost, which introduced to many people’s minds that Santa could be real. At that point, Santa’s existence is decided more over money and branding. Certain people admit to not believing Santa can be real in private, but then go out in public and at least say they aren’t sure. Children are used to manipulate those that don’t want to accept that they have lied about his existence, which does go to show how strange it is that we live in a society that would be dishonest about such a thing. Just like in real life, the public needs something that could pass as “proof”. Once they get it, they just jump on accepting this wild concept with bizarre implications instead of being more critical. In fact, the reason the trial became more about proving or disproving Santa is because Fred’s claim about doing so made for a great headline.
Kris is right that it’s better for Susan to be less serious and more about the absurdities of life, like pretending to be a monkey, as that is what makes life worth living. Susan is right that it’s better to have something useful like a house than toys. In being hard to convince of the validity of Kris’ claim of being Santa Claus, Kris is in turn more persistent in trying to prove her right and thus arranges for Susan and Doris to get the house the former wants. If they already were believers, he might not have seen the need. She and her mother aren’t any perfectly logical beings however.
At the end, Doris tells her impressionable child about believing in faith. Even if it is true that some concepts are so complicated that sense probably can’t reach them, so you only get there through faith, that still can often lead to trouble. We don’t see Doris do much transitioning from thinking Santa is definitely not real to thinking he is, which goes to show how people trust in emotions and concepts over facts, just like how she originally trusted strongly that Kris should be the parade Santa because of desperation. This even gets turned around on the audience as Kris never offers proof of being Santa Claus. We essentially have to take his word for it, which is arguably the point of the film.
OVERVIEW
This film wears the cloak of the courtroom dramas of the time. A commonality is for whatever we’re seeing to become a much bigger deal than originally hoped as. Miracle on 34th Street uses this convention to make a thoughtful and funny story about the strange places the human mentality can take us. As stated in the movie, sane people can end up in wards and crazy people can remain free. No matter what can be interpreted, the picture never forgets to be jolly and lighthearted, with Gwenn and the script exuding an infectious joy in how all the problems are very nice and the villains easily swayed. Regardless, the message of the ending is that anyone, even those that think out of the box or follow authority or try to do the right thing even when it can cost their livelihoods can do something insane under the right circumstances.
Christmas in Connecticut is a very charming and funny holiday film. Many wacky and bizarre things happen, with them generally being taken with a light heart. To epitomize this, John Sloan, played by Reginald Gardiner, finds the scheming of some other characters idiotic and doesn’t want to be involved, but is ultimately compelled to. It’s like the holiday spirit and comedic tone are forcing poor John into doing what the story needs, as if Christmas is this great force where magic happens. The basic concept of Barbara Stanwyck as Elizabeth Lane having to put on a fake life for the sake of pleasing her coworkers is a good hook and the movie delivers. Stanwyck is very likable, as usual. Stanwyck plays her humor-enhanced lines straight, letting the dialogue get the laughs. Her focus is on her believable character that doesn’t want to do something like interrupt or hurt anyone, but at the same time doesn’t want to lose personal things like her job or a new coat. When she does find something more stimulating and interesting, she lights up and is ready to take the world by storm.
There are a number of feminist themes at the heart of the story, which mostly revolve around Elizabeth. When she feels she has control, she takes it and enjoys it, often being fed up with those who in her eyes are not letting her just live. At around the one hour mark, she seems willing to do something she shouldn’t simply because it is finally giving her fulfillment. This is also in line with her character as this whole time she is pretending to be what is expected of a woman and considered to be the ideal, but she’s only doing it for money. A great performance of Stanwyck is when she yells about how tired she is of everything, which eventually gets to a good joke as a bonus. Arguably this “feminist” view is contradicted by her still just wanting love, but to counter that, most people want love and she doesn’t let her desire for such a thing get in the way of her job or independence. She in fact doesn’t seem to ever mind her job or wish she could be a housewife instead. Also, while she isn’t married, she claims to be, but still uses her own last name, which would suggest that in the lie she tells others she didn’t want to change it.
The other cast members essentially fill the role of giving non-comedic deliveries of comedic situations, which get laughs. Una O’Connor as Norah and to a lesser extent S.Z. Sakall as Felix Bassenak add a more wacky touch, seeming generally more animated than the others. Neither serve a crucial role, but work to steal the odd scene. Dennis Morgan as Jefferson Jones is one of the flatter, but also more important characters. He’s at his best in the beginning when he acts like this goofy guy that just wants some tasty food. The sight gag of him eating a well presented meal in a nice outfit on a raft in the middle of the water is hilarious. Another great shot is the romantic scene of two characters on a horse and carriage talking about their feelings, being surrounded by the pretty snow. The strong emotions of the characters have been just below the surface, so it doesn’t feel jarring when they finally come out, especially because the two now have privacy. The dialogue is very sweet and heartfelt. The scenes around this one are also funny.
SPOILERS
When Elizabeth first falls for Jefferson, she has a giant grin on her face and is about ready to abandon her facade for the sake of how good he makes her feel. Seeing as she probably thinks this will pass, she doesn’t go through with anything, such as a kiss. The scene gives us a nice chance to see Elizabeth be a little naughty, entertaining the possibility of being with this man. Another one of the most powerful scenes is at the end when Elizabeth is pleased to be arrested, as she will be with Jefferson and thus her marriage with John will be again put off, as if doing a social taboo can have the potential to free someone. Now that she knows she loves and wants to be with Jefferson, she lacks much of a care in the world, not even maintaining her lies when they fall apart as they to her have lost their value. This also represents her removing the mold expected of her, to be a wife and a mother in an overly idyllic scene. Even though she seems upset about losing her job, she is quick to move on to her next opportunity, not going to let things get her down. Beyond Elizabeth is Jefferson’s nurse and brief fiancée who similarly just “goes for what she wants” and doesn’t much worry about social judgment.
One issue, that also contradicts this theme, is Jefferson creepily forcing kisses on Elizabeth when she doesn’t want them. He predictably never gets in trouble for this. When Elizabeth learns that he is no longer engaged, they can in her eyes be together, which does go along with Elizabeth trying to be ethical, but also going for what she wants if there’s no reason not to have it. If you removed the lack of consent, Elizabeth going and kissing Jefferson at the end would be a great climactic moment that shows our lead finally getting what she was after. Morgan does still turn in a very good performance here, having this light in his eyes, like he is ravenous to be with Elizabeth. It’s a shame his energy here couldn’t have been used for a moment like when he finds out he doesn’t have to marry the nurse instead of on non-consensual gestures.
OVERVIEW
Ignoring any greater meaning, Christmas in Connecticut is consistently witty and well performed, with warm visuals and a sharp pace keeping the boat afloat and the 100-minute runtime feeling much shorter.
Skip to links if you don’t care about the reading.
For those not in the know, fan albums are the attempts of me and many others to take songs and put them on an album, typically they’re made to improve upon something, such as an existing album or to take non-album tracks and put them on an album.
I’ve decided to make a few revisions to my earlier fan albuming of the great Buddy Holly. 50s LPs’ common track sequencing is better than I’ve given it credit for, so I’ve decided to respect that. Thus, all these albums have twelve or thirteen tracks. I’ve also left alone the two official albums, so they can be slotted in. Conveniently, the amount of tracks recorded before those albums and the ones after fit the twelve or thirteen track rule nicely, so I won’t have to have pre and post “the main two” album tracks on the same LP. I’m unsure of what to do with the later official albums by the Crickets without Holly. Maybe I’ll do a stray track version and also a version that fixes the weak sequences?
As I like to do, I want to define what counts as a band track or a solo track. Based on the nature of these recordings, every track without Bob Montgomery is more or less solo Buddy, seeing as he was clearly the intended star of the show and most recordings credit him as a solo artist. However, seeing as there were band names and bandmates that have been unfortunately understated historically, “The Two Tones” name will be utilized for the period where the backing band was reasonably in flux, such as when Bob, Sonny, Jerry, and the various bass players were sometimes there and sometimes not. The members were mostly just Buddy’s friends and not session players. When Jerry and Joe are present, that’s what counts as “The Crickets”. Originally, I was going to utilize the fact that every Crickets track has Jerry and say he was the only necessary player to make something the Crickets, but defining a band by one person drives me crazy.
This next idea might be a little controversial. Seeing as Holly’s fellow musicians had identities and musical statements, I’ve decided to include recordings where Holly is backing another vocalist, specifically one of his bandmates. I will not be including every track to ever feature Holly, just the ones where someone was really in his circle. If Buddy and the Crickets formed in the 70s, they might’ve taken this approach, with someone else occasionally getting vocals for the sake of it. Finally, let’s have a little fun and build some alt history around this! There is certainly a lot of untrue information below, so be warned!
The History of Buddy Holly, as it pertains to his LPs
A young boy named Buddy Holley became interested in music in the late 40s. After recording a twelve-track album at home in 1949, he submitted it to Columbia Records to be released, but they responded back saying, “This sound quality is worse than a Charley Patton record.” Upon asking for the tracks back, Columbia admitted that confusing it for their own material, they junked it. Fortunately, one track was preserved on what Holley had intended to be a single for the album, “My Two-Timin’ Woman”. While future historians were hopeful there’d be a b-side, on the other end was merely “Chattanooga Choo Choo” by Glenn Miller and His Orchestra, albeit falsely credited to Buddy. As his interest in music grew, Holley began performing with artists. The first notable one was Bob Montgomery. While initially only doing informal jams, in mid 1952 they decided to become an official group. The two credited themselves, “Buddy and Bob” and at points under both of their full names. For the sake of symmetry, an “e” was added to the first letter of their names. Due to another artist being named “Buddey Folley and Bobe Montgomeery”, this was changed the other way, with both “e”s being removed. The two failed to obtain a recording contract, though continued to tape informal performances. Frequently during Montgomery’s hyena howling, the tape recorded burst, rendering the material lost. In a later interview, he went on to say, “I wish I wasn’t too cowardly to simply destroy all our recordings upfront, instead of being sneaky about it.”
Interested in other projects, Montgomery would occasionally leave the group. After a particularly thoughtless incident of him not showing up to a performance, Holly fired him. He was replaced by Jack Neal. During a recording session where the two cut two tracks, Montgomery returned to announce that he had a car now. Back in the fold, Buddy and Bob would continue to record and busk. Deciding to expand their group, the duo searched for more players. They only got as far as up the street, as Bob’s car broke down. Through the window they saw high school associates Sonny Curtis, Larry Welborn, and Don Guess, allegedly under the name, “The Beatles”. After a sprint under the name “Buddy & Bob & The Pidles”, Holly decided the name was too long and Montgomery’s name should be removed. After a disagreement and a power struggle, Montgomery left and took Welborn with him. When asked why, Welborn said, “I won’t be on some of these recordings, so I gotta go for this story to make sense.” After offering some wine and chocolates, Buddy won back the two, though not consistently. Curtis and Guess also were inconstant, with different people being available at any given time.
By the time thirteen tracks were finished, the group signed with Sun Records, who would distribute, after Buddy Holly strummed his guitar for three hours to get the record deal while Bob Montgomery and Sonny Curtis whistled “Sweet Adeline”. They were surprised this worked as they needed the talent scout to fill in on fourth. In trying to think of a name for the group, Buddy Holly came up with “Buddy Holly and his Holy Buddies”. Montgomery wanted it to go “Bob Montgomery is the most important member of this band.” Curtis reached a compromise between the two with “The Two Tones”. Holly thought his name would be included, which the others disagreed with doing. The encounter went as follows: “But there’s three of us, that name suggests there’s two. “Okay, then it refers to guitar tones.” “What’s that to do with anything?” “I don’t know, but we’ll kick you out if you keep at it.”
BUDDY HOLLY & THE TWO TONES – FOR THE LOVE OF TEXAS (Cover and title of re-release. Original omitted Holly’s name and was in a white sleeve.)
While the record didn’t make great waves commercially, it was considered strong enough for a follow-up to be put into motion, though the boys would have to record their own way as before. Holly tired of the folk sound and was determined to move on. Deciding to embrace more of the new genre of rock upon hearing Elvis Costello, Holly recruited drummer Jerry Allison. “He was so small, but could bang so loud,” he later said. Montgomery and Welborn soon left the group due to not wanting to leave folk. Holly, Curtis, Guess, and Allison proceeded to complete the album, with one folk side and one rock side.
BUDDY HOLLY & THE TWO TONES – BABY, WON’T YOU COME OUT TONIGHT? (Cover and title of re-release. Original omitted Holly’s name and was in a white sleeve.)
Decca, impressed with Holly’s singing ability, offered him a contract. It was agreed between him and Decca that he should be the sole singer and namesake. Curtis and Guess promptly left for this reason. “I’ve finally done it, I’m a star!” Due to poor rehearsals, Holly and Allison were fired and Curtis and Guess were brought in as a new act. When they didn’t gel as a duo, Holly was brought back in to stabilize them. Curtis’ country leanings proved problematic for what Decca wanted, so in Holly’s willingness to be the lead, accepted the poppier sound, as that meant he could sing lead. After a stint with percussionist Doug Kirkham, Allison was brought back as to quote Guess in an interview, “He was able to hit the drum.” The single “Blue Days, Black Nights” proved a success and more material was produced. Guess was considered to be an ill fit and flexing his clout, Holly had him briefly fired. As Curtis began to exert dominance, he had Guess come back. Holly then fired him again, to which Curtis again rehired him. After being rererefired and rererehired, Curtis proceeded to quit along with Guess.
Holly, not wanting to be pigeonholed to being considered part of a band, recorded some material with session men. Unbeknownst to him, Guess was among them, having been since hired by Decca for such recordings. It’s suspected by Holly historians that he had not noticed him due to having grown out a Walrus mustache. To the horror of the singer, the record was credited as “Buddy Holly & The Two Tones”. WIth the record done, Holly took two takeaways from his experience, he is sick of the Two Tones name and the material without Allison is simply too lacking for that reason. And thus, Jerry would be affixed to the fold, rendering Holly a member of a band.
Wanting to leave the band name behind him, Holly left Decca. Working on ideas for songs, Allison and Holly jammed out a series of covers over one night. Looking for a reliable bassist, they then got Larry Welborn. When asked why he rejoined due to originally leaving over a disagreement with the musical direction, Welborn simply said, “Money.” Despite these recordings not being intended for release, Sun Records obtained them through a bootlegger whose name, while not identified, used the pseudonym, “Todd From Germany”. For a quick buck due to his success at Decca, the material was released. While Holly was horrified, finally something was credited to “Buddy Holly”. The release just credited to “Buddy Holly” was a misprint that Holly himself witnessed. Afterwards, the name was changed to “Buddy Holly & The Two Tones”.
Upon release of Rip It Up, Holly shamefully announced it was a failure and he feared the worst for his career. Welborn promptly quit, but Allison later claimed to have had enough faith in Holly to think things would work out. Despite this, he auditioned to appear in other bands, though he was only accepted by vocal groups, who promptly fired him after hearing him sing. While Holly stayed home and practiced music, Allison was more sociable, often trying to meet new people. Through this he met Niki Sullivan. When Holly discovered Sullivan shortly thereafter, he was impressed. Allison later confessed that he thought Sullivan was Holly due to their similar appearance, and when he learned of his mistake, he pretended he knew all along. A recording of the “That’ll Be The Day” track was overdubbed with Sullivan’s vocals before being sent to producer Norman Petty. Petty liked the song so much that the group was recruited to record more. Needing a new bassist, Buddy Holly searched, ultimately finding the teenage Joe B. Mauldin. Upon Sonny Curtis turning down the offer, Niki Sullivan was christened as the group’s rhythm guitar player.
Before committing to the band, Petty had them back other artists, often without Niki, who was often not interested. These recordings were later released on an album. During the sessions for the group’s first LP, Norman Petty made a deal. Allison discussed it in a 2001 interview, “Norman knew that as just one act, our airplay was limited, so tracks were credited to different names: ‘Buddy Holly’, ‘The Crickets’, ‘Buddy Holly & The Crickets’, ‘B. Holley’, ‘Buddy, Jerry, n’ Joe’, ‘Buddy & The Hollies’, etc.” “That’ll Be The Day” was released as “The Crickets”, to distinguish it from the recent tarnish to Holly’s name and became a huge hit. Fans often confused Buddy for Niki, which frustrated Buddy as Niki was apparently absent from many tracks and thus didn’t deserve to be considered the star of the show. Niki in turn was sick of being pelted with flowers on the street. Still, the group was rejuvenated. They kept working and ultimately finished…
BUDDY HOLLY & THE CRICKETS – THE “CHIRPING” CRICKETS (Same as official version) (Cover and title of re-release. Original omitted Holly’s name.)
The success of the record caused the band to hit the road and begin touring extensively. While some feared this would cause Holly to become irritated, the opposite happened. He was so happy to be winning that he was reported as always having a smile, saving kittens from trees, and fixing Niki Sullivan’s glasses. Still, the touring and lack of obscurity caused the others to become exhausted. This got to the point of everyone wanting to take a break. To aid in stress, outtakes from the first album were used to fill some slots on the second Crickets album. Notably, the material was incomplete to the point of lacking much guitar. Speaking of guitar, Niki Sullivan while on break fell in love with a pretty fair maiden, whose name he did not know. He thus quit the group. Holly, Allison, and Mauldin then cut a few tracks from scratch and Holly overdubbed guitar lines on the outtakes.
BUDDY HOLLY & THE CRICKETS – BUDDY HOLLY (Same as official version) (Cover and title of re-release. Original omitted The Cricket’s name.)
Buddy Holly was praised for its distinct and innovative playing and more emotional and ballad-driven tracks, which had been considered not commercial enough for The “Chirping” Crickets. In the views of some, it was considered Holly’s magnum opus. Holly finally felt like he had made it. When Joe asked how he felt about an LP being credited to just his name, Buddy was said to act like he didn’t care, then was later heard cheering on the toilet. He licensed his image to commercials and merchandise and received increasing respect from his bandmates. He had essentially made two teenagers celebrities. Thus, Jerry and Joe had begun to show interest in recording their own music or backing other artists. They had to put a pause on this for the time being, as the next Buddy Holly & The Crickets record was due soon. In exchange for more money, they had to get the album out as soon as possible. The result focused on more lighthearted songs, even featuring two novelty numbers with lead vocals by Jerry Allison. Holly was lukewarm on them, but wanted to keep the peace, especially as that meant there were two fewer songs to come up with. This also meant he had more pull for a controversial decision.
Holly became interested in session players or otherwise new talent he hadn’t worked with. He felt limited by mostly having worked with teenagers with often different interests to him. To dip the toe in this new sound, he had three lead guitar parts played by Tommy Allsup, who was recruited as the band’s new guitar player, replacing Niki. Sonny Curtis had asked to rejoin, but was turned down. Joe was frustrated at not being featured on “Heartbeat”, which instead included George Atwood on bass. Buddy said Joe’s performance wasn’t up to his liking.
After listening to what had been finished, The Crickets felt they could do better. Unsure of where to go, the group focused on a second album of backing other people. Buddy was not particularly interested, but put his name to it, anyways. In looking for options for the next proper LP, Joe and Jerry felt they should reconnect with their past and start out by jamming with people they used to play with or see where trends were going with teenagers (which they of course were in tune with, being teenagers themselves). Buddy was interested in pop, especially that didn’t originate from Texas and thus he became interested in the New York music scene. Hoping to get a fresh start, Buddy formed a new band in secret consisting of Allsup, George Atwood, and Bo Clarke on drums, all of whom had appeared on the last Crickets record. This lineup cut two tracks before Holly felt it wasn’t working and fired them. Due to contracting reasons, Allsup remained a Cricket.
Holly was given a reminder his album of backing other artists was late. He then formed a new band with Sanford Bloch on bass, Ernest Hayes on piano, and Panama Francis on drums. After some recording, Francis proved an issue and was replaced with Phillip Kraus. After some recording, Kraus proved an issue and was replaced with Clifford Leeman. Holly returned to The Crickets and powered through to the end. The tracks without The Crickets would be saved for a solo project.
Niki Sullivan is not on this record.
BUDDY HOLLY & THE CRICKETS – THE SOUND OF THE CENTURY
TRACKLISTING
SIDE A
“Well… All Right” (3-31)
“Take Your Time” (4-5)
“Fool’s Paradise” (4-6)
“Think It Over” (4-7)
“Real Wild Child”
“Mona” (3-28)
SIDE B
“Lonesome Tears” (4-8)
“It’s So Easy” (4-9)
“Oh, You Beautiful Doll”
“Heartbeat” (4-10)
“Come Back Baby” (4-15)
“Reminiscing” (4-16)
“That’s My Desire” (From Buddy Holly (1958) bonus tracks)
Norman Petty – organ (tracks 2-4), percussion (track 9), piano (track 13)
Vi Petty – piano (tracks 3-4)
The Roses (Robert Linville, Ray Rush, David Bigham) – backing vocals (tracks 3-5, 7-9)
Glen “Bob” Clarke – drums (tracks 5, 9)
Tommy Allsup – lead guitar (tracks 7-8, 10)
George Atwood – bass (track 10)
King Curtis – tenor saxophone (tracks 11-12)
Al Caiola – guitar (track 13)
Donald Amone – rhythm guitar (track 13)
William Marihe – backing vocals (track 13)
Robert Bollinger – backing vocals (track 13)
Robert Harter – backing vocals (track 13)
Merrill Ostrus – backing vocals (track 13)
Abby Hoffer – backing vocals (track 13)
The Sound Of The Century was finished late, but still received massive acclaim, which put the pressure on for the group to best themselves. Holly, still determined to try a new style, went to his band, saying he wanted to go to New York and embrace more trends. Tommy felt Buddy had a stronger musical vision and thus wanted to go with him. The group, unable to meet in the middle, said they’d split for now. Jerry and Joe could continue as the Crickets, while Buddy would finally go solo. He was said to have missed them and that it’d be strange not having their names or the band listed on his future records. Buddy returned to work. After some recording, now with strings, asked to be included by executives, Bloch, Hayes, and Leeman proved to be an issue and were fired. With neither the backing other artists album or his solo album done, Holly felt desperate. He considered calling Joe, Jerry, and maybe Niki or Sonny, to finish his records, but he wasn’t willing to give up so easily and would try something slightly less desperate.
Following a lead, Holly went to Clear Lake, Iowa to the “Surf Ballroom”. He went to see up and coming country artist Waylon Jennings. He knew he had teamed up with Atwood and Clarke. During their performance, Buddy fell in love with Waylon’s style. Despite allegedly having intended to take the others and leave Jennings, Holly instead decided to have the three of them and Allsup back him. When asked why Buddy was asking for the others back, he said he wanted to do what was most comfortable for Waylon. Thus, the quintet did two tracks Waylon was working on. Buddy liked them so much he wanted them on his solo album, instead of the secondary release. Waylon then became sick and was unable to play, which caused the others to finish both records without him. Holly & His Buddies Volume 2 was released to decent rates, though not being considered as interesting or desirable. Holly was at least proud to have released it before 1958 and to have received a letter of congratulations from Jerry and Joe, who sent him a copy of their new single credited to “Sonny Curtis & The Crickets”.
BUDDY HOLLY – TRUE LOVE WAYS
TRACKLISTING
SIDE A
“Love’s Made A Fool Of You” (4-11)
“Wishing” (6-20)
“Early In The Morning” (4-12)
“Now We’re One” (4-14)
“When Sin Stops”
“That’s What They Say” (5-28)
SIDE B
“True Love Ways” (4-17)
“It Doesn’t Matter Anymore” (4-19)
“Raining In My Heart” (4-21)
“Moondreams” (4-23)
“Jole Blon”
“What To Do” (5-24)
PERSONNEL
Buddy Holly – lead vocals (tracks 1-4, 6-10, 12), rhythm guitar (tracks 1-2), lead guitar (tracks 5-6, 11-12)
Tommy Allsup – lead guitar (tracks 1-2), guitar (tracks 5, 11)
George Atwood – bass (tracks 1-2, 5, 11)
Bo Clarke – drums (tracks 1-2, 5, 11)
Unknown – rhythm guitar (track 2)
Al Chernet – guitar (tracks 3-4)
George Barnes – lead guitar (tracks 3-4)
Sanford Bloch – bass (tracks 3-4, 7-10)
Ernest Hayes – piano (tracks 3-4, 7-10)
David “Panama” Francis – drums (tracks 3-4)
Phillip Kraus – drums (tracks 3-4)
Sam Taylor – alto saxophone (tracks 3-4)
Helen Way – backing vocals (tracks 3-4)
Harriet Young – backing vocals (tracks 3-4)
Maeretha Stewart – backing vocals (tracks 3-4)
Theresa Merritt – backing vocals (tracks 3-4)
Waylon Jennings – lead vocals (tracks 5, 11)
King Curtis – saxophone (tracks 5, 11)
The Roses (Robert Linville, Ray Rush, David Bigham) – backing vocals (tracks 5, 11)
George Tomsco – guitar (tracks 6, 12)
Stan Lark – bass (tracks 6, 12)
Doug Roberts or Eric Budd – drums (tracks 6, 12)
Al Caiola – guitar (tracks 7-10)
Doris Johnson – harp (tracks 7-10)
Clifford Leeman – drums (tracks 7-10)
Abraham Richman – tenor saxophone (tracks 7-10)
Sylvan Shulman, Leo Kruczek, Leonard Posner, Irving Spice, Ray Free, Herbert Bourne, Julius Held, Paul Winter – violins (tracks 7-10)
David Schwartz, Howard Kay – violas (tracks 7-10)
Maurice Brown, Maurice Bialkin – cellos (tracks 7-10)
True Love Ways was another hit. Holly had already gotten started on recording demos in his apartment for his next record. Due to slimy deals that resulted in him making very little money, he had to start touring as soon as possible. Holly then bought a bus from 1927 and hit the road. They were stressful and cramped and resulted in Clarke and Atwood quitting. Jennings, feeling indebted to Holly, said he wouldn’t leave. The group soon found the young and spirited Carl Bunch, who Holly called “Jerry 2”. Unable to find a bassist as soon as anyone would like, Jennings was recruited. Touring continued to be a stressful endeavor, with everyone missing the ease of flying. As much could be said for Carl, who got frostbite. Possibly due to a reported disliking of Carl, Holly then chartered a flight for only him, Jennings, and Allsup. Ultimately and infamously, through contrivances, Waylon and Tommy were replaced by popular artists Ritchie Valens and The Big Bopper. The plane soon crashed after takeoff. Holly’s body wasn’t found.
Those that knew Holly, and even those that didn’t, were shattered. Norman Petty, not to turn down an opportunity to make money, licensed several old recordings of Buddy Holly, mainly from the Two Tones era, and overdubbed them with a band called The Fireballs. These were considered shoddy and like cash-ins, with people really wanting new material. Petty then found the apartment tapes and overdubbed them. Jennings insisted on being an advisor for the sake of accuracy and managed to convince Petty to not overdub certain tracks, as he had heard Buddy say he wanted things “As they had been – stripped back.” He only got Petty to go along with this when he said it would cost less.
Giant was considered a fitting tribute to Holly, feeling like a culmination of his different styles. His past band members and friends were reported to have liked the record. After Holly, Waylon Jennings and Tommy Allsup started solo careers. Niki Sullivan tried continuing his career, but soon essentially retired. Most of the minor players became session men and were always eager to do interviews and shows that focused on Holly. Jerry Allison, Joe B. Mauldin, Sonny Curtis, and to a lesser extent Norman Petty weren’t so inclined to remain in the shadow of their friend and mentor, and their story continues…
BUDDY HOLLY & THE CRICKETS – HOLLY & HIS BUDDIES VOLUME 1
TRACKLISTING
SIDE A
Jim Robinson – “A Whole Lot Of Lovin’”
Jim Robinson – “It’s A Wonderful Feeling”
Jack Huddle – “Starlight”
Jack Huddle – “Believe Me”
Sherry Davis – “Broken Promises”
Sherry Davis – “Humble Heart”
Fred Crawford – “By The Mission Wall”
SIDE B
Buddy Knox – “Swingin’ Daddy”
Buddy Knox – “Whenever I’m Lonely”
Gary Dale Tollett – “Go Boy Go”
Gary Dale Tollett – “Gone”
Gary Dale Tollett – “The Golden Rocket”
Gary Dale Tollett – “I Overlooked An Orchid”
Gary Dale Tollett – “Look To The Future”
Gary Dale Tollett – “Honey Honey”
PERSONNEL
Jim Robinson – lead vocals (tracks 1-2)
Buddy Holly – guitar (tracks 1-15)
Jerry Allison – cardboard box (tracks 1-2), drums (tracks 2-15)
Vi Petty – piano (tracks 2, 4)
Joe B. Mauldin – bass (tracks 1-4, 7-9, 14-15)
The Roses – backing vocals (track 1)
The Bowman Brothers – backing vocals (tracks 2, 4, 7)
Jack Huddle – lead vocals (tracks 3-4)
Sherry Davis – lead vocals (5-6)
Jack Vaughn – rhythm guitar (tracks 5-6)
Unknown – bass (tracks 5-6)
The Picks – backing vocals (tracks 5-6, 14-15)
Gene Medley – backing vocals (track 6)
Fred Crawford – lead vocals (track 7)
Norman Petty – organ (track 7)
Buddy Knox – lead vocals (tracks 8-9)
Gary Dale Tollett – lead vocals (tracks 10-15), guitar (track 14)
This is a passion of mine and if one person likes what I do, I’ll feel honored. I like suggestions on what artist to cover next, so if you know of one you’d like me to look at, feel free to suggest ‘em!
Flesh And Fantasy is an immediately atmospheric anthology fantasy film with a lot of interesting and inviting elements, while also some lowlights that are typical of the time. The dark and moody shots, mainly in the first short, look wonderful and bring a great creepiness to the whole affair. It’d be fun to think all these events happened in a short period of time, with mystical things going on around these different people. All the shorts have many spooky qualities that are interesting to think on, like a poignant line of dialogue. As an example, the discussion of a dead body is really morbid, with points like thinking if he wanted to die.
Regardless, a problem with the best and worst of this film is the dialogue. It’s usually incredibly on the nose, despite some great lines here and there. In my favorite of the segments, which is about a woman that feels she’s ugly, she calls herself hateful. She does seem well meaning, so it’s odd she’s prescribing that to herself. Let’s see her act in a hateful way, as opposed to just saying it. One person describes what she should be seeking to achieve, instead of leaving it unsaid and letting her get to that point on her own. Later, a shopkeeper comes in and just describes important details for the plot, despite it not making sense why he would care or feel a need to do so. The framing segments of men reading these shorts as stories are probably the worst example of this dialogue problem. They’re also just pretty unfunny. One of the men at a point just describes the “moral” of the first segment, as if it wasn’t obvious.
The shorts, especially their endings, are really incongruent. There isn’t much of a thematic throughline. It’s as if these were three unrelated stories stitched together. Another oddity is that the second goes straight into the third, but neither of the last two are connected to the first. This feels a little jarring, especially because it would probably be very easy to include something like a character of the second in the first. There was going to be another segment that didn’t make the cut. I’m curious if it would’ve been a fourth that maybe ties things together? Maybe it was replaced by one of the ones here, which would explain a lot?
In the first short, Betty Field as Henrietta is said to be horribly ugly. Camera effects and dark lighting are used to aid this. However, she is obviously extremely beautiful. It’s ridiculous to think that she is mockingly unattractive, as the character apparently is. She is also said to have an ugly personality by someone when all she did was not give a woman an outfit that she wasn’t then able to pay for. The narration of how Henrietta feels seems like a bad case of telling and not showing, though it’s slightly vindicated by being revealed to be said by a person played by Edgar Barrier with otherworldly qualities. Barrier gives a great presence and supernatural atmosphere to this story. Still, the explaining instead of showing isn’t ideal.
There is an interesting feminist commentary here. When Henrietta takes the “pretty” mask, the mannequin it was over has an ugly face. This can show how people try to cover up their negative traits. When she looks at herself in a reflection with and without the mask, she’s relaying a common experience of comparing and judging yourself against supposedly “perfect” standards. When Henrietta goes out with the mask on, it’s obvious she’s wearing a mask, but people around her talk about how beautiful she is, as if that was her actual face. Beauty standards sometimes reflect that it’s more desirable to look fake than like how average people look. Then again, that’s not to say Field isn’t already very beautiful.
At one point, the protagonist of the second short, Edward G. Robinson as Marshall Tyler, verbally says out loud alone that he can’t work or think, which is quite silly. That summarizes the move to more pulp fiction-styled stories, though the performances, even by Robinson, are quite good, especially when he has to confront the main ideas of the short. The second outing brings more horror to the show than the first segment did. Tyler talking to his reflection is both creepy and well filmed. It solves the issue of how we can know what he’s thinking when he would have no reason to tell anyone, while not being handled in a comical way, like if we simply heard his thoughts.
Charles Boyer as Paul Gaspar in the third short walking while imagining himself falling in his dream is a really striking image. There is also a beautiful discomfort to the shots of Gaspar and the audience as a seemingly endless drumroll plays. Later, a friend of Gaspar is understanding of him not doing his most dangerous stunt because he “only has to be wrong once.” Gaspar speaks to the part of people that is attracted to trouble. Some of his actions are very risky, but he does them anyway. Unfortunately, instead of focusing on an idea like a person afraid of, but attracted to, bad things, the movie doesn’t focus much on them. Gaspar kills some time with Barbara Stanwyck as Joan Stanley. Other times, we’re just going through the motions without much analysis of the story or what’s going on. How does Gaspar feel and think about all that’s happening?
There are a lot of little moments here and there that give some value to the whole proceedings. As an example, the first short has the best lines. “Perhaps we could put our time together and make it last twice as long?” The character of Podgers at one point amusingly walks up to someone with a cat in arms, as if to make him seem more witchy. In the credits, a costumer is described as serving “Miss Stanwyck’s Gowns”. An assistant of Gaspar is funny, probably doing the best job of injecting some comic relief. When Joan puts on the earrings that Gaspar earlier dreamed, he asks if he’s currently in a dream too, which is such a chilling moment. Despite this, the biggest issue with the third segment is that Stanwyck is phoning it in so hard. She doesn’t seem to care about any of this, having a weirdly wooden vocal.
SPOILERS (FIRST SEGMENT)
When Barrier’s character helps Henrietta, she starts to show more warmness, suggesting a little kindness was all she needed. Betty Field and Robert Cummings as Michael have such good chemistry that it’s easy to overlook the parts of their relationship that don’t make sense, namely how short their time together has been. Their discussions of their feelings are so realistically it’s at least a smidge believable they’d feel how they do about each other.
Henrietta and Michael have a very profound and relatable conversation. “I’ve never done anything else but wait, just working, walking, eating… eating sometimes, sleeping. When you have the time your mind will let you sleep, but that’s only… only just waiting for life. It’s not living.” “I know. You watch other people enjoying themselves, as if you were hungry and outside the window of a restaurant.” “And you don’t have enough money to go in.” The angst of these feelings is delivered very realistically, as if the actors really went through these issues. This sharp moment is offset by Michael not understanding how Henrietta could relate, considering how pretty she is. Ignoring that that’s obviously a mask she’s wearing, a pretty woman could still relate to this.
“If staying here meant staying for you.” “You hardly know me.” “I know your voice, the touch of your hand, your eyes. They’re what I was waiting for.” “But I wanted you to believe in yourself, not in me.” “Couldn’t that be the same?” This really captures the sense of ecstasy love can create. “I know your face is beautiful, because you are.” Probably the intended interpretation of this line is to foreshadow when the mask comes off and she has a face of makeup on. However, I like to interpret it as meaning that her personality is so beautiful that that glows up everything about her. As can happen with people in love, it can be hard to see the faults in others.
Henrietta’s insecurities speak very strongly when she’s asking Michael to forget about her and she’s not like what he believes, with her not wanting him to learn the belief is wrong. Seeing as this movie can’t resist outdated values, it’s a shame Michael is pressuring her to take the mask off. He continues to push her, instead of letting her decide that impartially. “I’m not anything like what you believe. I don’t want you to lose your belief by seeing me as I really am.” “But you created belief in me. That’s real and it includes belief in you. You can’t doubt that if I mean anything to you.” “I lied to you from the start. There wasn’t nobody looking for me. There never has been. I pretended I was beautiful to lead you on. I’m only telling you now because you mean so much to me.” Henrietta continues to criticize herself and call herself things like selfish. Yet, here she is trying to do what she thinks is best for Michael, despite the fact they both love each other. She’s internalized so much about herself and her face that she can’t handle someone else seeing it.
“What does it matter how you look? I’d love your face no matter what it is because it’s you.” “Oh, please go, I’m not asking for myself but for your sake.” “Won’t you believe in me? In my love, enough to rely on it.” Later he says, “You gave me belief in that miracle [love], won’t you let me give you belief?”, which is another great line. Henrietta apparently being pretty once Michael removes the mask does ring a little too hollow. There would be a much nicer message if she looked the same, but was still admired as beautiful. That beauty would probably be more evident if the lighting was brighter and she was smiling. The message of this installment seems to be that Henrietta really was ugly and just needed to become better looking, which is frankly absurd.
SPOILERS (SECOND SEGMENT)
Tyler being convinced to actually do the murder is a chilling moment, with a shadow of him talking to him about it. It gets more chilling when he tries to pick the right person and then justify how he’d be doing his victim a favor. Later, he gives poisoned medicine to a woman. When she asks how she can get more if it works, he says that if it works she won’t ever need any more. We see the lead become more broken when after originally having very strict standards for who he will kill, he simply looks around a room, wanting to get it over with, so as to fulfill other plans he made. Here, he’s putting himself over anyone else. Seeing him look at the others, who of course don’t know what’s in his head, is haunting.
Tyler’s humanity comes out when he realizes what’s become of him when he almost kills someone in a reasonably brutal way. He seems ashamed. While this isn’t commented on in the film, his first plan of killing someone would be reasonably difficult to trace back to him, but his plans become progressively more brutal to the victim and harder for himself to look innocent. Tyler killing Podgers, mainly because of the music, is a little too hammy. The fact that he is killing someone brutally and painfully in a public area suggests he was never really as normal or as much an everyman as he probably wanted to believe. This could be a commentary on how most people have dark qualities to themselves or could be driven to drastic behavior under certain circumstances.
The fact that Tyler wouldn’t find a better solution here speaks to him not ever really being standup. Why wouldn’t Tyler kill someone that’s terminally ill or a death row inmate that admits to their guilt, or better yet just not do a murder? You’d think his conscience would be really inflamed after killing an innocent person. The twist that the woman he tried to kill didn’t actually die because of him is such a good moment, restoring the sense of fear to our lead. Tyler’s confession to the police suggests he has basically gone mad, openly discussing his actions, but not taking any blame. It is a wonderfully tragic way to end the segment.
SPOILERS (THIRD SEGMENT)
Various elements of Gaspar’s morbid dream have come true. When he sees the girl in his dream in real life, you’d think he’d want to make sure she isn’t at his show, because then the dream couldn’t happen as he remembers it. However, he actually does his best to get her to come to the show. That woman is Joan. Gaspar constantly pressures Joan into being around him. It’s extremely creepy and makes it hard to like him, especially because she likes him back. When Joan doesn’t want to have dinner with him, he assumes there’s another man she’s hiding from him, which is really manipulative. Of course, there is really no reason for Joan to like Gaspar.
The second short basically says prophecies can’t be broken, then the third one does just that. There isn’t any comparison between the different ideas. We simply get one message, then the other. It’d be one thing if Gaspar did something to essentially break the prophecy, but here he just does the stunt he had failed in his dream for no other reason than to give a happy ending. More strange is that Joan is arrested for criminal activity. This comes really out of the blue and doesn’t have much to do with anything.
OVERVIEW
The film basically feels like three episodes of The Twilight Zone, albeit not as good. Still, the spooky nature of Flesh And Fantasy makes a fun experience that is worth at least one Halloween viewing, especially for fans of the famous Rod Serling series. Despite the problems, mainly formulaic story elements, there are lots of interesting bits to keep things rolling.
I Was A Male War Bride is a strange animal. Its objective is seemingly to be a wacky comedy, though it kills a lot of time on little stories that serve no purpose other than to squeeze out some laughs between Cary Grant as Henry and Ann Sheridan as Catherine. While their comedy is good, it’s not so necessary as to make these parts of the movie feel worthwhile. To keep the structure as similar as possible, this would work better as a mini-series or show, where each episode the leads get into a new adventure. There’s really no stable plot throughout, with things just happening. Even Sheridan’s character suddenly becomes far less important around the halfway mark.
This seems like it was all based around the absurdism of Cary Grant being a “bride”, with a big dose of satire for bureaucracy with an unnecessary romance and plot before it. Even the leads’ antagonism doesn’t amount to much as they eventually almost are perfectly aligned. Still, their confrontations are so much fun. The movie gets a lot better in the second half, where everything gets more and more wacky.
Catherine often seems determined to take a moral high ground over Henry while saying and doing things that annoy him. She comes off as extremely unlikable as a person, but is very funny. One of her best lines is, “Y’know, I’m sorry I thought when you came in here you were behaving like a stinker, but you’ve been a stinker for so long I just-” Grant has more good stuff. “Well I’d be delighted. I’ll explain to them. I think you’re repulsive.” Later there’s, “You wouldn’t.” “Yes, I would.” “I think you would.” Then, “Who is it?” “Cinderella.” “What do you want?” “My slipper.” The motorcar detaching from the bike is good, same with the gag of Henry by the train. There’s something very charming about Henry covering himself up in the rain.
At one point, Henry is really mad at Catherine and is laying into her. The intensity makes it especially funny, as well as one of Grant’s best moments in the film. He shows a less goofy side of himself. It’s amusing seeing how often Henry is frustrated about feeling like he’s not manly enough. One example is not liking being in the side motorcar. His manliness is often a theme of the film and arguably drives his stress and insecurities. Nothing is directly said about how this plays into his dynamic with the more “masculine” Catherine, unless one is to look at the subtext so hard as to risk making it up.
Miscellaneous comments include: It’s always a laugh to see women sleep with makeup on in movies, especially how none of it looks smudged or gets on the pillows. The kids with the motorcycle is another funny moment. Same with when Henry is asked questions about if he’s pregnant. Bizarrely, a woman trusts her baby with Henry, who is a complete stranger to her. The last few minutes are definitely the best of the film. Sheridan makes for a great straight man in them.
SPOILERS
Why would Henry sleep on the chair instead of knocking on the door to leave? Even if he was worried about waking Catherine, that would be the better option. It’s really creepy of him to then get in her bed. Why would he even do that? Henry, seeming determined enough to not disrespect Catherine that she wouldn’t tell him he’s trapped in her room, hilariously keeps knocking on the door with a housekeeper on the other end. Catherine thinks he’s the only one knocking.
Catherine letting Henry get arrested is really cruel. Henry seems way too quick to be forgiving of Catherine after all she’s done. With basically no setup as to why they’d want to do this, they start to admit they like each other, kiss, then get married. Are they just going to ignore all their conflict? Briefly, Catherine gets mad at him and just decides to not get married, then almost immediately changes her mind. Why include these weird turns that don’t amount to anything? We don’t really ever get a good reason why they wouldn’t be hating each other.
When Henry talks about turning “a man into a woman”, I wonder if the writers had been aware of, or were referencing, the few documented cases of transgender people. This was before the well known Christine Jorgensen came out. Henry’s look of “what am I doing?” on his face as he’s dragged up is golden. His adventures pretending to be a woman are a riot. People that recently saw Henry as a man now seem to not realize who he is in his wig. There is a wonderful anarchy here that “bureaucracies are so nonsensical that it can make men have to pretend to be women”. It’s so ridiculous as to be delightful.
OVERVIEW
While there’s not much of a point to anything, as things essentially just end unceremoniously at the finale, the experience is still solid, especially with Grant’s constantly annoyed attitude. That element is more prominent the further you go, with a great final joke that plays off of just how sick of everything Henry obviously is, making it more clever than your average last laugh. I Was A Male War Bride is structurally poor, but otherwise has a lot to like. As an example, all of Ann Sheridan’s outfits here are stunning.
ON THE CORNER AND OFF THE WALL
This movie has some personal significance to me. All on that I really can say is, “We’ll meet again. Don’t know where, don’t know when, but I know we’ll meet again some sunny day.”
Hellzapoppin’ does in many ways earn its stripes as a classic old comedy. The humor is frequently very sharp, capturing an unhinged wit that in some ways breaks from how you’d expect a film of this era to be. It even outmatches the Marx Brothers, who save for an odd moment here or there for Groucho, didn’t break the fourth wall. Ole Olsen and Chic Johnson don’t even accept that a fourth wall is there, continually destroying it.
The setup of the film is frankly genius, binning the concept of sanity and promising a surrealist anti-film. It’s suggested by our leads that they know this story and that it doesn’t even have a story. Thus, when it proceeds to have a relatively conventional narrative, it feels like the audience has been lied to. This is especially irritating considering that the movie seems to understand that some of its tropes are tired, like a romance. Admittedly, that romance is extremely minimized, but that just proves how unwanted it is. It doesn’t serve a purpose, so it’s just tacked on. Could they not have done a parody or twist on the format? Maybe Shemp Howard’s character of Louie wants to be the romantic lead, and tries to involve himself?
The original concept for the movie by director H. C. Potter fit better with the surrealist theme, so it’s a shame it was changed, especially considering the original ending was much better, though the new one still isn’t bad. As has happened in multiple comedies, a group of black performers get one scene and really steal the show, dancing and cutting the best number here, very jazzy. It feels tonally consistent with the nutty comedy, as opposed to most of the music which is far too straight in execution. That being said, the music is still good in its own right. Unfortunately, there is some sexual assault humor that is about as uncomfortable as it always is.
A more extreme deconstructionist approach could and should’ve been taken. The finale in particular is too like how something like a Three Stooges or Marx Brothers film would end. Imagine things begin getting out of hand for our leads, so they tell Louie to modify the movie in such a way to their advantage, like by removing something someone else has or shaking the film so someone falls down? The opening does pretty much deliver on what you’d want from this concept, even if it essentially is a lot of dropped potential.
SPOILERS
A lot of Chekhov’s guns go unfired, namely Martha Raye as Betty Johnson. Her desires in the movie are basically forgotten about. It wasn’t too surprising to learn that Shemp Howard was added in very suddenly, considering how superfluous he feels. It would’ve made sense to end the movie with him tying off his story, like if he decided to burn the film negative, but instead he just soon stops appearing. At one point, a mess is made where a lot of film is knocked around. I was hoping this would lead to something like the scenes being played out of sequence, as if they got scrambled or damaged. The framing device also doesn’t get much closure, barely featuring the leads. It appears that the originally planned ending would’ve addressed this problem. The happy ending is particularly dull considering the movie had earlier made fun of this story type. You were basically daring us to not care about these characters!
OVERVIEW
While there are issues, Hellzapoppin’ makes itself worth a watch due to its consistently strong wit and its few moments of being truly subversive, mainly in the ending, but as a whole it doesn’t stand as well as it promised.
Despite what people say, this is a great, great film. Zeppo’s dance number and Harpo’s harp solo are only some of the many highlights. You don’t even mind that the latter one is completely silent. I think I still prefer its sequel, A Night on the Balcony Floor (shame those bellends didn’t trust us to know what a mezzanine was).
The Paramount trailers
Paramount pretty boldly calls the Marx Brothers the funniest men on Earth after they made two films. Animal Crackers is called “Cocoa-nuttier than ever”. Amusingly, Zeppo doesn’t appear in Monkey Business’ trailer’s scenes from the movie. To be fair, Chico and Harpo aren’t shown doing anything funny, only a bit of music. My favorite part was when we saw the brothers in chairs facing away from the camera, then a wipe transitions them to now looking at it. The Duck Soup trailer is gloriously manic, just like the movie. If I watched the trailer back then without having seen a Marx movie, I’d really want to see it. I could not find trailers for the other two films.
1930s studio shorts
The old short films that basically serve to say, “These are the stars we have!” are a fun novelty, though the smaller the dose the better. They are admittedly boring, despite being valuable historical artifacts. Sometimes an announcer cracks a lame joke. In Hollywood on Parade B-5, Fredric March and Chico Marx seem to be having a lot of fun. Everyone else, not so much. In the “Search for Beauty” contest, some of the girls come off as pretty awkward. As would later be done in Copacabana, the song “Go West, Young Man” is mentioned. Chico’s costume is the best by far. What was the point of Wonderland of California? It doesn’t even showcase stars. The camera records things that feel completely random. Seeing 30s color footage of Animal Crackers is quite the treat, though.
La Fiesta de Santa Barbara visually looks quite good. There’s also some nice music. It is a little silly that a short about a non-white place would feature a white singer. It will not be the last short here to mention this being a place where “Men are men”. What does that have to do with anything? It also won’t be the last to mention Jack Benny. Ted Healy acts like he’s trying to steal the show. He was unsuccessful. A favorite bit of the short is when someone thinks he was in A Night at the Opera. He also says the movie features the four Marx Brothers, instead of three. To my pleasant surprise, Chester Conklin and Buster Keaton appear in this film. This is more of a Buster movie than anyone else. He gets a few fun moments, like looking for the bell he’s supposed to ring and the final joke. His vocal is very wooden, despite being an adept speaker in his sound movies. The film’s Marx connection is a few seconds near the beginning of Harpo (who does essentially nothing).
Sunday Night at The Trocadero is pretty bourgie. Groucho doesn’t get to be funny, though you do see him without a real or fake mustache. A guy does what would pass as a JFK impression. The Joe E. Brown joke is a favorite, while the blackface bit is not. The movie got a vocal laugh from me with, “One of you boys will be left to pay the check, while the other takes her home. Or maybe the girl will have to pay the check, while the boys take each other home.”
1930s miscellaneous
In “Wallace Kelly Movie Collection”, we get a cameo from Groucho’s book, Beds. In 1933, we get some nice bits of the four Brothers at an event (sourced from The Unknown Marx Brothers). That, and especially Groucho, Harpo, and Jackie Cooper’s go kart race really deserves to be restored and made more accessible. “Harpo Marx returns from stay in Russia” is a lot of fun. It’s only a minute and it features Harpo doing some typical shticks. It’s very amusing, though the women chasing isn’t my cup of tea.
The MGM (& Room Service) trailers
It’s great we got the brothers roaring in place of Leo the Lion preserved in the A Night at the Opera trailer. Harpo’s bit is especially good. Sadly, the trailer spoils the Stateroom scene. A Day at the Races uses footage from the very end of the movie. Room Service’s trailer spoils the movie. Groucho’s first scene in the Go West trailer is better than in the movie. There’s more comedic punch here. The introductions to the Marx Brothers in these trailers is reminiscent of the opening credits of the Paramounts, with their faces matched to their names in a punchy sequence. It’d be nice if the MGMs had this more interesting style in the movies.
It’s amazingly ironic when a man mentions that Sarah Bernhardt had announced her retirement over ten times, with the trailer then asserting that the featured film, The Big Store, will be the brothers’ last. Of course, it turned out to be their third last. This almost seems like a Marx joke, that they’d essentially have this punchline setup here that would years later be paid off with the release of A Night in Casablanca. Groucho calls it their “first farewell picture”. Store’s trailer is probably the best trailer of the lot due to the brothers filming new footage for it.
1940s studio shorts
The Miracle of Sound is in its own right a pretty quality short. It’s a charming and concise way to discuss sound technology. Not that it’s super technical or detailed, but for what it is it shines above the other studio shorts by being more focused on communicating a specific thing. The brothers are only represented by a little bit of Go West footage. It’s fun to hear things about controlling the volume of the actors’ voices. One film is noted to be “Happily Starring… Joan Crawford”.
1940s miscellaneous
Harpo got around doing little appearances. War Bond Rally (1943) features a few nice seconds of Harpo being silly. He’s only around briefly, and within the first few seconds. Stage Door Canteen has a fun Harpo cameo, with him doing a few of his bits (just like in the earlier “Russia” clip). The All-Star Bond Rally looks gorgeous, having a noir look. There’s also a special effect of photos of women talking that’s very convincing. No clue how they did that. Bob Hope is pretty dreadfully unfunny here, but he does get a good line roasting Bing Crosby. Crosby’s singing is also terrible, why not get anyone else to sing it? That being said, the song itself is no classic. Frank Sinatra does a great job at his. Harpo’s harp solo is beautifully melodic, well matching the tone of that dark visual aesthetic. He seems more proficient than in the Marx movies. This is possibly his greatest visually recorded solo of the 20s-40s.
Groucho singing “O The Desert O The Prairie” with Carole Landis is such a fun clip. Their energy is infectious. It’s unfortunate the quality is poor and they’re both looking at scripts, though they don’t act like they’re tiredly shooting off lines. “Chico Marx (1947)” is pretty nothing. Chico’s performance of “Matilda” is sadly very short in A Year to Remember. It’s a fun piece. The audio quality also leaves something to be desired. In his apparent first television appearance, Chico does a Love Happy bit pretty much just as it’s done in the movie. In 1949 newsreel footage, he gets a laugh or two.
Post-MGM trailers
A Night in Casablanca’s trailer also contains spoilers for some reason. It’s odd that the trailer for a movie like Copacabana would claim to be one of the greatest comedies ever, as if anyone would actually believe that. That’d cause audiences to be annoyed when it obviously fails that incredibly high standard. It’s nice seeing some of the footage in Love Happy not on the Blu-ray. The ending of the trailer does include some personal favorite bits from the film.
Bill Marx’ presentation of Home Movies
It’s so special seeing video footage that pre-dates The Cocoanuts. Hopefully earlier footage is found. The best bit in this collection is some video and audio of Harpo playing the harp, sadly it’s partially interrupted by Bill. Another highlight is Harpo doing play performances. He does a bit from A Night in Casablanca with his son. You might be able to infer that my least favorite part is when Harpo appears to lift up women’s dresses in a situation where their only real recourse is to laugh it off. To give him the benefit of the doubt, that whole bit could’ve been scripted. If not, that’s extremely creepy. More home movie footage not in that specific DVD release includes more tennis with Charlie Chaplin, early color Groucho, the three brothers relaxing in costume, and more of Harpo’s Moscow harp solo.
OVERVIEW
Over the course of all this footage is a secret Harpo short. In La Fiesta de Santa Barbara, he’s vacationing and later is at a presentation in War Bond Rally. He arrives home in Harpo Marx returns from stay in Russia. Once back, he does his normal shtick in Stage Door Canteen, where he runs off, he then runs into The All-Star Bond Rally. You could say afterwards he presents scenes with his brothers from The Big Store or while “vacationing”, he got into the misadventure he did in Too Many Kisses.
The necessity of seeing these shorts can be debated. They obviously have an appeal to fans. If you’re desperate for more Marx, they’re worth a look. Sometimes you’re only getting seconds or scenes from their movies. For the record, it appears that the brothers’ only appearance in Hollywood Out-takes and Rare Footage (1983) is their lion roaring from the Opera trailer.
In the ZaSu Pitts-Thelma Todd-Patsy Kelly series tradition, I get to confuse people by using one name to refer to a character and their actor!
For better and for worse, Love Happy’s objective doesn’t seem to be pure comedy, despite being labeled a Marx Brothers film. In truth, it is a Harpo Marx solo film and includes a sprinkling of light drama. While that for some is a huge turn off, to the point of putting the movie below other Marxmania in a ranking. If you can forgive that admittedly significant issue, it is an engaging film that is very Harpo and also a pseudo-fairytale.
The dark, starlight colors are so gorgeous to look at. It perhaps looks like how Harpo perceives the world. There’s a lot of great bits that feel like something Harpo thought up, sometimes as an ode to his character. Bits like Harpo’s coat being searched through would mean a lot more to someone following these movies than someone that’s just come upon this one. Cartoon logic is sometimes prevalent, with Harpo very adept at it. Scenes like Vera-Ellen as Maggie Phillips twirling towards Harpo have an ethereal nature that is so captivating.
Some characters have fairytale names, like Lefty Throckmorton, Alphonse Zoto, and Hannibal Zoto. There are other bits that suggest that theme; feeling you’ve achieved your dreams; collecting cats; and pretending to remove your eyes. This film is the most justified of all Marx movies in having a harp solo because of this. It’s such a fluttery instrument that doesn’t feel as home in the anarchic, early installments. Another thing unique about this movie is how 50s it looks. Other Marx movies, for obvious reasons, look 20s-40s. That light glam and brightly lit 50s scenery (that might be familiar to some in things like 50s commercials) adds to the vibe of this being dream-like. Despite this, there are seemingly some nods to silent cinema.
I’ve criticized previous installments for taking these great, immoral characters and trying to force them into “morality”. The brothers don’t seem adept to such moments. However, at points they are their classic selves to great effect. This time, Harpo seems to believe in this sympathetic version of his character and knows how to blend these two sides. If he was totally anti-social and unlikable, that would hurt this film’s endearing tone and charm.
Despite the focus on Harpo, Chico and Groucho managed their way into this, and they do have scenes of note. Groucho’s best bits don’t feel necessary to the movie. They’d be better served in a different one. Groucho as Sam Grunion is so awkward at the beginning, he looks around erratically and delivers these lines like he was told them seconds before shooting and is looking to see if others approve. Groucho’s narration is often unnecessary. Its only benefit is the occasional good line, like the one where Chico’s assistant is a monkey that wants “Shorter hours and longer bananas”. While this probably wasn’t intentional, it’d be amusing to think that this was a reference to Chico under or not paying his vaudeville partners.
The worst of it is when he describes certain characters’ relations to each other. Show, don’t tell! Because of the fairytale motif, the narration is not as bad as it could’ve been, as that’s a common trope. Groucho’s scene with Marilyn Monroe is very Groucho and he has a lot of fun with it. It has nothing to do with anything and probably should’ve been removed. That being said, imagine if this was a scene from a Sam Grunion solo vehicle? That’d be marvelous. It fits in a little, as he’s dressed like a wizard about to test our hero, with a frumpy assistant to boot! “Allow me to introduce you to the man who’s going to kill me.”
Chico as Faustino the Great feels very forced in. His scenes are lackluster, with his material lame and delivery misplaced. He seems way too confident in his lines, like he’s saying killer material. His first scene is probably the worst, due to being framed as some brilliant introduction. His delivery on the ice cream bit is extremely unnatural, but it’s so much so to the point of being funny, which probably wasn’t intentional. It also helps that we get some wonderful Harpo logic, with him pulling an ice cream out of his pocket. “That’s not what I want!” is a good line (makes sense in context (and not referring to the ice cream)).
Harpo expectedly has a million good moments. He shows his earlier side by stealing. While it’s for a good reason, the movie commits to him being a Robin Hood type. It’s not like he’s randomly a criminal or moral depending on what is required at any given point. There’s a lot of inventive gags related to him with food at the beginning. One scene is emblematic of silent films, with an expressive, clownish comedian and a score; no dialogue. There’s a nice gookie at one point, later he gives food to some men in a bull costume, and at the end has fun with a rope. There seems to be a rule that Harpo can make rope funny! The apple scene is probably the funniest bit of the film. There are two moments where Harpo tries to tell Faustino information. One is new and inventive, while the other is like ones in the past, now slower.
There’s some nice “world building” for Harpo, world building that would only really be interesting to longterm fans. This leads to some great jokes that seem like they were concocted from Harpo Marx’ mind, but for whatever reason this film doesn’t give him too much of those. In fact, sometimes Harpo is absent from the movie. Maybe he thought the romance plot was worth the screen time? (It isn’t) There’s a funnier Harpo scene in any other Marx movie than you’ll get here, but the more personal feeling to this one, especially with things like seeing where he lives, are more satisfying that some of the material of the past (particularly in the weaker films).
“It must be wonderful to be like you, Harpo. You live alone. That is you don’t need other people. You don’t depend on them. You never get hurt… Oh, Harpo, you’re wonderful.” It’s understandable why a fan of the early Marx films, and especially someone who hasn’t been enjoying this movie, would disdain this line. Harpo in the early films isn’t sympathetic or likable. This line is the sort of thing you would give to someone with at least a heart of gold, such as Charlie Chaplin’s The Tramp. Say what you will, but this specific movie doesn’t claim to be in continuity with the other movies and those lines are consistent with the film, him being an accidental hero. You can argue that is supposed to refer to his character across every Harpo appearance before and after this installment, as Maggie has had few seen interactions with Harpo and Harpo hasn’t demonstrated these qualities much in this one movie. It’s at the very least novel to see the man himself give his own view on how he takes his character.
“Mama wants to know… who made this mess?!” The musical numbers don’t feel Marxian or even like the material here. The songs aren’t mythical, instead feeling pulled from a random broadway show. Chico’s piano and Harpo’s harp solos are on top form, though; having a buoyancy and flavor. “Mr. Lyons, I know you wanna make a good impression, but-a please – don’t play better than me.” It’s also fun seeing Chico act like a music nerd.
Ilona Massey as Madame Egelichi is sometimes sexualized. Take her pointy breast outfit or even how she takes off her coat. Grunion almost grabbing her boobs is something that has to be seen to be believed. Surprised Faustino’s hat extending when he sees Egelichi’s legs made it passed the censors. The antagonists are often buffoonish. Sometimes to great effect, like the apple scene, and sometimes less so, like when we’re supposed to find them intimidating sincerely.
There are some errors. There’s a scene where someone is in the air and you can see the strings. The climax has some continuity errors, like different shoots were poorly blended together. Sometimes it’s pretty clear Harpo is wearing a wig. The rope in a scene at the end changes placement. There’s some moments of awkward exposition, like in Egelichi’s first scene. When the straight man characters talk to Mr. Lyons, they speak to him like they’ve been told he’s some fantastic guy. He responds like he’s trying to remember his lines.
Some of the minor characters, namely Maggie, just stop appearing around the end. It’s weird how much older Harpo is than his character’s crush. This concept would’ve worked better if his love interest was a lot closer to his age. Either her older or him younger, as this would’ve been a great 1920s silent film. That crush was set up to have some importance, only to have no payoff. Unfortunate, as there were some great ideas and scenes dedicated to that element.
SPOILERS
Lefty said he saw Harpo, but didn’t react to him when he was there. Lefty’s torture scene is pretty weird, with it being obvious he wasn’t really being hurt. Other awkward moments include Harpo being raided viciously by his crewmates for food. Madame Egelichi apparently puts Harpo in a trance. It’s hard to know what’s going on there. The usage of a trance does add more to the “fairytale” motif. If that was the intended takeaway, it’s hard to imagine how they thought the weird faces and sound effects were the best way to convey that. (Her taking off her coat apparently having some relevance here is reminiscent of the Doctor Who serial, The War Games) Her whispering to Harpo has a mildly fetishistic feeling. She speaks seductively.
Harpo being tortured is hardly comedic and makes a lot more sense as some sort of surrealist dream. Many scenes in this movie are like that. Also, Harpo’s torturing isn’t at all like Lefty’s earlier. You’d imagine that him just being physically injured would be a lot more effective than these mind games. At first, it was annoying that it appeared a chance for Harpo to communicate over the phone would be sidelined by Faustino reading his mind. However, we get good jokes from both situations.
Why would Faustino clap when someone mentions they should do the show for free? He’s only there for the money. In general, he seems way too invested for someone here for money that hasn’t even been paid. Faustino is a little creepy when he’s hitting on Egelichi. His love for her of course comes from nothing. It seemed a cat might be killed, but later it was confirmed they were not. Maybe Vera-Ellen didn’t know what to do in the harp scene, as she just walks away? Harpo’s crush on Maggie isn’t resolved. She mends with another male character and we never see what Harpo thinks of that.
An interesting subversion to normal movie tropes is that the villain saves the day. She pays for the show and doesn’t try to back out of it. Why doesn’t Egelichi goons just tell Maggie that the necklace belongs to them and if she can please help them find it? One later yells that they’ll murder her loud enough that Faustino can hear from outside the door. Some favorite parts of the finale are when Harpo defeats the baddies by blowing smoke into their face. Later, Harpo jiggles the necklace and notifies the goons where he is. That suggests he’s having fun and is enjoying the chase. There’s multiple scenes in the film where you can argue Harpo was going to kill himself for little reason. That’s surprisingly dark. Then again, fairytales are like that. Him flying over the edge of a building, holding onto a rope, is a stunning visual image. Harpo in the end walking off with the necklace nicely bookends the movie. In the beginning and here, he was stealing. It’s especially funny as he doesn’t even seem to have really wanted it until now.
OVERVIEW
I like to think that every Chico and Harpo in these films are the same. If you watched this movie without knowing the Marx Brothers, you’d be confused by Faustino and Harpo seeming to have a history together, but that not being explored or even explicitly stated. This is easy to miss as a fan as you know them together so well. The movie is aping on your knowledge of them. Even when they get a proper introduction in earlier films, their bond makes more sense with that knowledge. There’s little to contradict such a proposition. Go West is an exception because it’s set in the 1800s. You could also say there are two Chicos and Harpos, one set the more criminal and the other more moral.
It’s not necessarily very satisfying to say all the Grouchos are the same. While perhaps a contrivance could be cooked up for why Groucho often doesn’t seem to know who Chico and Harpo are at the start of the movies, why not go with the simpler answer that there are multiple Grouchos? This would mean this universe has one Chico, one Harpo, and is full of Grouchos! Sometimes Grouchos can be repeated. The Cocoanuts, Animal Crackers, and Monkey Business could sensibly feature the same four.
Even when looked at charitably, Love Happy is not for everyone. It does suffer from technical and story problems that suggest it was rushed together cheaply, and it was. That being said, if you give it a shot, you’re in for a treat. It’s a shame it couldn’t have been made under better circumstances and that we didn’t get any other Harpo solo vehicles.
Here is a rank of the fourteen Marx Brothers films, starting with the weakest and based on “being objective”: Go West, The Big Store, At the Circus, A Night in Casablanca, Room Service, Love Happy, A Day at the Races, The Cocoanuts, Horse Feathers, Animal Crackers, the I’ll Say She Is short, A Night at the Opera, Monkey Business, Duck Soup. Based on favoritism, it’d go: The Big Store, Go West, A Night in Casablanca, At the Circus, Room Service, Love Happy, A Day at the Races, Horse Feathers, Animal Crackers, the I’ll Say She Is short, The Cocoanuts, Monkey Business, A Night at the Opera, Duck Soup.
It’s strange seeing Groucho Marx in this often very standard romance-comedy. The Cocoanuts does that, but keeps the focus on the Marx brothers and doesn’t get too caught up in the duller elements. Here, Groucho often is just doing that inoffensive shtick, feeling like any other bit player. A fortunate distinction is he does get a number of great lines and moments, but there are sadly very few. His character name of “Lionel Q. Devereaux” does feel like a cross between the long and ridiculous names of the past and a name you might expect a slightly sleazy agent to have in a movie like this. The “Q.” is Groucho-y while the rest is non-specific.
Him being a sleazy agent is a nice idea and there are good jokes from that concept. Favorite lines include: “This is an outrage! You’ll hear from my lawyer… as soon as he gets a telephone!” He escapes a situation by saying, “I just remembered, I forgot to pay my income tax.” A Groucho-esque joke where he gets the setup is, “Don’t you have any nickel cigars?” “Yes, but they’re forty cents.” There’s also Devereaux being carried up stairs, the check gag, and him pulling a turkey out of his bag. That latter one feels more like a Harpo joke. The ending gives a lot of good material to Groucho. It was surprising how high energy and funny it was, with him mostly being like his classic character. Groucho’s wisecracks are overall toned down. He’s a step away from a straight role, which is very unsatisfying. This would work a little better if the movie committed to a new character type, but due to some of his gags and the greasepaint scene, it seems there was an attempt to make him like his older character.
Carmen Miranda as Carmen Navarro does feel like an afterthought. Despite her getting top billing, the focus is often on other characters. She does get some good laughs, though she’s not exceptional. “Lionel, I don’t mind if you give bad checks, but don’t do anything dishonest like stealing.” The other cast members and subplots are fine, but noticeably lesser when compared to the Groucho bits. Andy Russell is a decent enough singer and comedian. There’s a great bit where Devereaux says a nonsensical joke to Andy Russell and he looks on confused, the camera fading on him. It was unintentionally funny when Andy is having a conversation, then goes into song suddenly, with the transition pretty rough. None of the songs in the movie are that good, being pretty typical. That’s a shame as past Marx movies all have better songs, even when the comedy is bad. The difference is this movie’s tunes lack personality. The best one is the most lived in, Groucho’s comedic song. That being said, the female backing singers did a better job than him. It would’ve been better if Groucho sang it a little less goofily, only being a little silly.
The romance is expectedly dull. It gets more focus than other Marx ones, but it’s not as tedious as it could’ve been, possibly due to the acting being passable. The character of Steve Cochran as Steve Hunt is just begging to have a personality, but Cochran makes him too normal. Other negatives include lines like, “Let me have a check, a blank one, like the expression on your face.” Devereaux fumbles with hiding a fish. Just put it in your pocket, where it just was. Why have Devereaux be a former performer, only for him to only get one song and not do any other performing? Anne’s transition to a dream sequence is pretty rough, with her movement very awkward. “Go West, Young Man” has some lip syncing issues. It is fun that a hotel manager is named Mr. Green, a former Groucho character name. That being said, Mr. Green is just exposition: the character. He is apparently an insignificant person in Devereaux’s life, who gives him advice for some reason.
SPOILERS
It’s suggested early on that Devereaux is incompetent in general and inexperienced at being an agent. This could leave you to believe that the film will be about his incompetence in such a role. However, we quickly get to the point of him and Carmen being successful. Devereaux is mostly good at being an agent, though there are exceptions at times.
A lot of movies like this show the lead(s) in squalor, and later on in a nice place, showing that they’ve made it. We don’t get that here, with the latest living scene being set in an extremely dingy apartment, where they’ve lived all film. Steve Hunt says he’ll sue Devereaux if he can’t get Fifi and Carmen. Why would he care? He never seemed that into Carmen. This is just a way to push the stakes. A montage of Devereaux and Carmen/Fifi climbing to success features some footage we’ve already seen. How did Carmen kiss Steve with the mask on?
Devereaux performing for an audience including himself is a phenomenal bit of absurdism, one of the best bits of the movie. It makes stark contrast with the rest of the film, which is more realistic. Carmen complains about Fifi breaking up relationships, though she was knowingly being distant from Devereaux. Carmen staging a fight with herself is such a hilariously dumb idea. There’s nice bits in it, like her and Devereaux wrecking the room. When Fifi “goes missing”, someone yells, “My investment!” The romance is resolved haphazardly, with Steve openly saying he likes Anne, with no suggestion of him liking her beforehand. Why wouldn’t he have told her before unless he was too embarrassed? If he was, then why would he tell her at the end, especially in the way he did?
Themes of sexism recur throughout the film. Steve Hunt recurrently doesn’t respect women’s will. He goes after Carmen and only backs off when Devereaux says she’s going to wed him. Later, Steve says Fifi is his, as if he can just decide that she will be with him. He says if Devereaux comes between them, he’ll “break him in half” (in a scene with him giving a terrible line delivery, for the record). In Anne’s dream, she imagines Fifi as Steve’s secretary, seeming to want her there as that would be demeaning. Carmen’s way of proving she’s Fifi is quite absurd, by kissing various men, apparently so well they know she’s Fifi, even men she hasn’t kissed before. Other than Carmen kissing the men, these scenes aren’t played as comical, instead like this is all okay. This theme doesn’t appear intentional, though it can color the way you look at the movie. The female characters do seem to function around the male ones.
OVERVIEW
Copacabana is okay enough at giving us more Groucho. There’s some scenes without him, or where he’s not used that well. The ending and some first act scenes are solid. This could’ve been a really good thirty minute film if cut down.
We saw Paramount’s take on the Marx Brothers; MGM’s take on the Marx Brothers; and RKO’s take on the Marx Brothers, which is very similar to MGM’s. A Night in Casablanca has the advantage of being able to look at those old attempts and try to improve on them, being the only followup Marx film not made at most two years after the previous. It’s refreshing to see the brothers free from the limitations imposed by MGM. For that, we get some nice mischievous moments. However, the writers do seem to take some cues from the MGMs, as if they watched those in preparation. Many aspects are also like typical 40s cinema, which really is a shame. If someone cared and bothered to get a better script, we could’ve had something like a Paramount-styled movie. The fallbacks seem perhaps applied by mistake, unlike in MGM where those negatives were a creative decision.
In some ways, the film is a return to form, overall being a mix of previous Marx styles. Some of the antics, especially with Harpo, can be anarchic, but then there’s an over-the-top villain, unnatural romance, and the brothers seemingly being confined to mostly targeting that villain, as opposed to society as a whole. The “romance” gets so little screen time, with not even really a scene where there’s dramatic weight on how they’ll turn out, that it’s a wonder it wasn’t completely cut out. This movie tries harder than the MGMs to make the brothers logical, which is beyond unnecessary.
Groucho as Ronald Kornblow putting his umbrella on someone’s outfit is a favorite moment, as is: “You don’t have to sing for me. Just whistle.” “That reminds me, I must get my watch fixed.” Groucho gives a lovely performance, improving on how pathetic he was in At the Circus and Go West, and his decent one in The Big Store. Chico as Corbaccio once again is shorthanded. He does the MGM habit of having a friendship with the romance couple beforehand. Perhaps there was something cut, as Corbaccio is close enough to the couple that you think there’d be a scene representing that? He also condemns theft, though does do quite a bit of criminal activity. “I’m crazy about her, I’ve completely lost my head!” “Well, put your hat on your neck and get out.” is a favorite line. Corbaccio trying to convince someone to let him be their bodyguard is reminiscent of older films. Harpo as Rusty is as usual well served. He has the very funny candle joke and the bit of hosting at a restaurant (with Corbaccio). Both of those two also get very nice music solos.
Technical problems are common. The opening few minutes have bullet point pacing. “Establish a character, something happens with them, then fade to another (the fades in this movie will drive you crazy).” Such a pace is odd to the point of being amusingly bad, especially with the subject matter being relatively dark. There’s very sudden cutting at points, which suggests a certain scene was supposed to have a funny ending, which was then trimmed, possibly for pacing. Lines can even be cut off mid-sentence.
Sig Ruman as Count Pfefferman can be appreciated for trying to keep up with the brothers, though he has some straight scenes and bad lines that lessen his overall impact. The movie as a whole isn’t too much of a comedy, so he and the brothers feel out of place. Many 40s plots, especially concerning a war, a criminal trying to do something shady, and a sandy, lived-in area like Morocco can often go through the same beats. This movie goes through those beats. It fortunately stops so the Marxes can be funny, but the light drama elements clash uncomfortably. Exemplifying this is when after Kornblow gets his job and is obviously ridiculous and clownish, this is pointed out and an excuse is contrived for him to not be fired. This removes Groucho’s impact in dominating with his outlandish nature. This sort of acknowledgement of his character lessens his impact, due to the setting being more real.
Charles Drake as Lieutenant Pierre Delmar is definitely the least likable male lead of these movies. He is absent so much, typically only when the plot requires, that you can imagine no one had much faith in the character. Playing on him being this very American hardnose could’ve been funny, like if he wants to be the hero and save the day, but keeps getting pushed aside, but that’s not expanded on. Drake is so bad that you don’t mind just forgetting him when he’s offscreen or doing nothing. A ridiculous trope of this character type that’s played straight is when he grabs someone when they won’t give him information. Instead of Pierre getting the information, the movie wisely focuses on Rusty and Corbaccio’s attempt at such a thing.
SPOILERS
Miscellaneous comments include: The trope of Groucho being obviously phony, but the joke being no one calls him out on it, is desecrated worse than it has been in the past when Pfefferman tells some men about how he’s an imposter. Pfefferman just talking so loudly people can hear his evil plans is one of the more contrived plot conveniences. It seems Corbaccio was willing to risk Rusty’s life by giving him possibly poisoned food. Later, why wasn’t Rusty simply refused service if the hotel couldn’t risk him winning? Pierre’s love interest is in jail despite not having done anything, there being no explanation for why she’d be there, and us not seeing her taken there. The brothers moving around Pfefferman’s clothes is a highlight. Some of the things they do serve no function, and only drive him crazy. That being said, there is an overall point to them being there and destructive. You do have to wonder how Pfefferman doesn’t deduce that someone is moving around his clothes.
This movie has got some of the worst of the Marx Brothers, such as fighting baddies not unlike how handsome leading men do in cheesy movies. The Marx Brothers are the type to sit back and laugh at someone else doing that, or only involve themselves for the comedy of doing it. Their moment of doing that here is played straight. It’s not like the movie through and through commits to them being action heroes. It’s so weird seeing Groucho and Chico afraid for their safety. There’s no comedic flair, they’re just afraid. Kornblow yelling for help has similar issues. The last seconds being the brothers sexually harassing a woman in the way Harpo’s been since the early films does seem representative of them. That sort of sexual harassment humor is an unfortunate bit of history. For these reasons, and the final act following such a generic war movie plotline, makes this the worst Marx Brothers ending. Despite how bad the ending is, there are some positives, like when they knock a guy out of his truck, who amusingly has no reaction.
OVERVIEW
While I know that “Remember what happened in 1929?” referred to the stock market crash, it’d be amusing to think they were talking about the Marx Brothers starting their film career.
I would say that this is like a better version of the MGM formula, but then I remember that A Night at the Opera and A Day at the Races exist. While it has things like the brothers contradicting their character types and poor jokes, it does have quite a few highlights (as do all the MGMs, to be fair). There is the distinction of having the only really bad finale to a Marx movie.
A day after watching this I came to a sad realization, A Night in Casablanca is the last Marx Brothers movie. Sure, there is some media featuring all three brothers. Love Happy is officially considered the last, but in that case and all others, it’s more of a technicality. The formula isn’t Marx-like, and at least one brother only has a minor role. If you’re watching these movies in order, you should appreciate this fact about Casablanca, though don’t get your hopes too high for it.
The Filme Diary 