Who was Barbara Stanwyck?

Born Ruby Stevens in Brooklyn, New York in 1907, Stanwyck’s childhood was not easy. Her mother died when she was four and her father subsequently walked out on the family. She was then placed in several foster homes. After quitting school at 14 she found work as a dancer and a chorus girl. Then in 1926, she was cast in the broadway play The Noose which brought her into the spotlight. Afterwards, she starred in the show Burlesque before moving to Hollywood. There she had some minor film roles but she received her big break by being cast in Ladies of Leisure. She went on to work with many great directors (Howard Hawks, Billy Wilder, Douglas Sirk) and stars (William Holden, Henry Fonda, Gary Cooper) across film and TV until her death in 1990.

Why is She Underrated?

As mentioned above Stanwyck’s name seems to be lost in general conversation when it comes to the great Golden Age actresses. Like Malcolm McDowell, if she is mentioned often it is only for one film (Double Indemnity). And many seem to view Stanwyck as a star rather than an actress.

But across her nearly 60-year career, there are many aspects to appreciate. Stanwyck was always a professional who was committed to getting the best from her costars and herself. She acted across many genres including, westerns, romance, comedy, noir, melodrama, and more. And at a time when many actresses could only inhabit certain stereotyped roles, Stanwyck played a variety of strong and determined women who felt real. Unfortunately, she received comparatively little high-profile recognition for much of her work outside of nominations and honorary awards. So today we are going to direct you to some great Barbara Stanwyck projects, to help more people appreciate her contribution to entertainment.

5 Great Barbara Stanwyck Performances

1. Stella Dallas – Stella Dallas

As Stella, Stanwyck showcases the working-class toughness that would define much of her career. But she also gets to demonstrate her emotional range. While we follow Stella’s journey through marriage, separation, and motherhood we laugh and cry equally because of Stanwyck’s wonderfully reserved and agonisingly authentic performance. For me, this is Stanwyck’s best work.

2. Sugarpuss O’Shea -Ball of Fire

Undoubtedly Stanwyck’s best 1941 role (that year she also starred in The Lady Eve and the underrated Meet John Doe). Her comedic delivery as the brash nightclub singer who captures the attention of researchers and gangsters is pitch-perfect. Her chemistry with Gary Cooper is enthralling and her screen presence magnetic. This movie truly demonstrates Stanwyck’s star power.

3. Phyllis Dietrichson – Double Indemnity

Stanwyck is unforgettable as the femme fatale who manipulates hapless salesman Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray) into killing her husband for a massive insurance payout. Stanwyck and MacMurray’s chemistry is electric, and her performance is so good that you are never sure if Phyllis is being sincere or lying. It’s the role she will forever be remembered for.

4. Norma Vale – There’s Always Tomorrow

Barbara Stanwyck and Fred MacMurray reunite in their fourth collaboration. This time Clifford Groves (MacMurray) longs to escape his stale marriage to be with the more exciting Norma (Stanwyck). The actors’ chemistry is still amazing in this more tender outing. But Stanwyck stands out. She invests Norma with a sense of longing, making the couple’s intimacy feel natural and the ending even more tragic.

5. Victoria Barkley – The Big Valley

While many of her contemporaries looked down on TV Stanwyck used it to show that, despite her increasing age, she could still be as tough as anyone else in the industry. As the ranching Barkley family matriarch, she commanded authority and respect. And her character became an icon to many.

With so many great roles it was hard to narrow it down to simply 5. So please check out some of Stanwyck’s other work and let us know your favourites.

Also Read: Underrated Actors: Malcolm McDowell

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Underrated Actors: Barbara Stanwyck appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

The Cinema At Home

I grew up in the great age of home video and watched numerous old films from the comfort of my own home and it wasn’t until I was an adult that I started seeing these sorts of films at the cinema. The cinemas I went to in my childhood didn’t really spend much time on old films, in fairness I think the cinema in Sunderland when I was a child had a grand total of two screens and so was busy enough keeping up with new releases. It was when I started going to independent cinemas that this became an option

A few highlights of seeing old films:

Casablanca – Already one of my favourite films this was a fantastic viewing and worth it just for the La Marseillaise scene on the big screen. Incidentally, I have also seen a play version of Casablanca where we were told to sing along with the La Marseillaise, lyrics were provided, which I wholeheartedly participated in and had to try and not do in the cinema screening.

Alien and Aliens – I was amazingly late in watching these films and saw them both in the space of one week at the cinema. I loved both of them and instantly saw any number of sci-fi films that came after these films in a different light, seeing where they got their influences from.

Jaws – Before I rewatched Jaws at the cinema all of the Jaws films had melded into one bad film, the poor quality sequels adjusting my memory of the original. Jaws is a spectacular film and worthy of seeing at the cinema and I am so glad I took this chance to reappraise it.

2001: A Space Odyssey – Another film that I already loved but watched as the final movie in all-night film marathon and I would advise against seeing such an unusual film on no sleep. The final twenty minutes of the film was even more bizarre than it’s meant to be.

And the lowlight – an accepted classic of cinema – Jules et Jim which was one of the most appallingly dull and annoying films I’ve ever seen.

One of the themes in the film Midnight in Paris is the common belief that some part of the past was inherently better than your present. I have long that the feeling that I missed out on things because I was born too late, by the time I had seen The Shining I had already seen The Simpson’s parody many times and that feeling of seeing The Shining without things like this was unobtainable. This specific type of nostalgia is probably not helpful but seeing old films in the cinema can be a simple way of getting a bit of that feeling of not missing out.

As has been said by many people there is an important social aspect to cinema and seeing a film in a crowded screen is a different experience to seeing it at home. I recently saw Aliens at the cinema (for the second time) and the person sitting next to me had clearly never seen the film before as they spent the entire film jumping out of their seat every five minutes. With an old film, there’s also the feeling that the people you’re with are all part of that film’s appreciation society – most people there will be fans of the film. In the queue waiting to see The Princess Bride the people in front of me struck up a conversation with me (breaking strict social conventions of being English) knowing at the very least I liked The Princess Bride which is more than most conversations with strangers have going for them.

Despite video, DVD, Netflix etc there is something special about seeing a film at the cinema. I am not a purist who screams at people who streamed a film rather than seeing it at a cinema or decry a filmmaker’s choice to release their film on Netflix rather than in cinemas, I see a diversity of platforms as a good thing. The “old films” that I have seen at the cinema, most I had already seen, many I owned on DVD, but I was overjoyed at the opportunity to see them in a cinema.

Also Read: The Ingredients Of A Cult Classic

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Why Do We Watch Old Films At The Cinema? appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

Synopsis

Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) has lately been walled up in his laboratory. So, his fiancé Elizabeth (Mae Clarke), her friend Victor (John Boles), and Henry’s former mentor Dr. Waldman (Edward Van Sloan) decide to investigate. Upon confronting him they find that Frankenstein aims to give life to a monster. Made by stitching together dead body parts and inserting an abnormal brain stolen from Dr. Waldman’s classroom. Ultimately Frankenstein succeeds. But can “The Monster” (Boris Karloff) be controlled?

What did I like?

Frankenstein works well for many reasons. First being its tight and well-paced script. In a short time-space, the script intrigues us with the mystery of Frankenstein. And then emotionally invests us through exploring Frankenstein’s motivations and how his various relationships affect him, and consequently the Monster. And because the film is full of interesting, now iconic, scenarios like the grave robbery, the monster’s introduction, the windmill finale, and more, it’s never boring.

Secondly, the cast is almost uniformly excellent. Mae Clarke, Edward Van Sloan, Frederick Kerr, and Dwight Frye particularly stand out, investing heart, humour, and discomfort where needed.

But the film also features two truly legendary performances. First being Colin Clive’s Henry Frankenstein. Clive really sells us on Frankenstein’s drive and ambition through his stern; occasionally frantic manner, without making him unlikable. But when The Monster enters the picture, Clive makes us empathise with his emotional vulnerability. As he takes responsibility for The Monster. And Boris Karloff’s portrayal of The Monster is unforgettable. Not only is he immediately frightening and imposing thanks to his tall frame and Jack Pierce’s iconic makeup design. But Karloff’s performance engenders a lot of sympathy. He feels like a vulnerable animal. Causing pain because he’s unfairly victimised or doesn’t know better. This makes us want to see him nurtured not persecuted. Because otherwise, the consequences could be deadly.

And there’s some brilliant technical work on display. The set and production design are fantastic. The classic romantic feeling of the period costumes and picturesque Victorian decorated sets and backlots greatly contrast with sets like Frankenstein’s gothic laboratory and the expressionistic graveyard. Which when combined with the inventive direction that has cameras gliding through rooms, interesting camera angles, and a lack of music creates a uniquely horrific and disquieting atmosphere.

What did I not like?

There are some flaws that prevent Frankenstein from being perfect. For one Henry’s emotional recovery and wedding seemingly happen only a few days after he decides to kill the monster. As it’s hard to believe that Dr. Waldman’s disappearance and discovery would take more than a few days to happen. And this short time frame does somewhat lessen the emotional impact of Frankenstein’s decision to destroy the creation he cared about.

The character of Victor also doesn’t contribute much to the story. His use as emotional support could easily have been filled by a more prominent character and the film would remain the same. Which isn’t helped by John Boles’ wooden performance. A shame as everyone else does such great work.

And the film has a fair amount of editing choices that can pull one out of the movie. As this is an older film before modern film language was perfected this is expected. But the breaking of the 180-degree rule in some sections as well as some imperfect matches between cuts and a sped-up crucial moment are unintentionally jarring.

Verdict

The script’s limited timeframe undersells some moments. Victor doesn’t add much to the story. And the bizarre editing choices can be nit-picked. But they pale in comparison to Frankenstein’s strengths. With stellar performances from most of the cast including iconic turns from Clive and Karloff, brilliant atmosphere thanks to inventive direction; beautiful set and production design and a well-structured script packed with iconic moments that keep you riveted till the end, love for Frankenstein will remain alive for years to come.

Rating: (4.5 / 5)

Also Read: Horrors On Horror Sets

The post Retro Review: Frankenstein (1931) appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

The Truman Show is a brilliant film. A short review but it gets to the point. In our difficult to socialise times, I have watched a number of old movies and decided to rewatch this film, which I hadn’t watched in years, and loved it as much as I ever did.

The Film

Jim Carrey plays Truman Burbank – a man who was adopted by a television company as a baby and has been filmed and broadcast to the world for just about every moment of his life. Everyone around him is an actor and the world as he knows it is completely controlled by the show’s director, Christof. Truman knows none of this and thinks he has a perfectly normal life. At the start of the film, events take a turn that lead Truman to suspect that there is something wrong with the world and he begins to pick at some of the loose threads of this reality.

Jim Carrey’s Performance

When I saw The Truman Show, Jim Carrey was the guy from The Mask and Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, a super over the top turned up to eleven comic actor and, at the time, I really liked that Jim Carrey. I daresay Jim Carrey’s involvement was what first made me want to see The Truman Show. Carrey’s performance was not only brilliant, it was surprising, I simply did not know this was something he could do. At times Carrey’s performance is genuinely heartbreaking. Memorable scenes are those of his young romance with one of the extras who tried to tell him the truth, to the conquering his phobia of the water to sail away from his fake home, to his final confrontation with Christof. There are a few moments of Carrey breaking out his wilder side, when Truman is realising something is wrong, and as we can probably assume this is him in the middle of a nervous breakdown it makes perfect sense. The fact that Jim Carrey was not even nominated for an Oscar has gone down in history as a famous “Oscar snub”.

After this film, Carrey would be considered a very talented actor – adept with comedy and drama, giving equally sensational performances in Man On The Moon and Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, whilst remaining a regular comedic actor.

And Laura Linney’s For That Matter…

While we’re talking about acting a quick note on Laura Linney, who played Truman’s wife (or rather the actor playing Truman’s wife). I had never picked up before just how sinister a character she is, more than any of the other actors she is tasked with keeping Truman in the dark – with the possible exception of the actors who played his parents. She undermines his confidence, she plays on his fears and while many of the actors and those making the show are lying to Truman many seem to have some kind of affection for him – not so much with Linney’s character.

The Audience

The show is hugely popular around the world and the film has a great deal of fun dealing with this and how the set works. There are legions of actors who simply exist to make it seem like a real town or the “adverts” that exist in the show – Laura Linney is fantastic at talking to Truman about new products like she’s in a commercial. We do see a number of people watching the show; there is a Truman bar that screens it non-stop, and the final third of the film has a lot of shots of people simply reacting to Truman’s escape attempt. Those watching are shown to be ecstatic when he does escape – one viewer is watching in the bath and as Truman’s boat is nearly capsized his frantic clinging to his shower curtain is amazing. Of course, there is the massive problem of the show’s audience – we are meant to see Truman as a prisoner, someone who has suffered, those watching the show have kept him in that prison.

Relevant Today

The Truman Show came out in 1998, just around the time reality television was really taking off. Obviously The Truman Show’s premise is a lot darker than actual reality television (well, most of it) the question of what an audience will watch for entertainment and ignore any associated moral problems is more relevant now than ever. The show’s director, Christof, passionately defends what he has done to Truman but even in the most benevolent light he has done terrible things to him – manufacturing phobias, killing Truman’s family members, regularly placing Truman in stressful situations. In the film, the show is a huge worldwide success, more than justifying the huge cost of making it, and it is a genuinely interesting question – would this show be popular in real-life?

Relevance To Me

I saw this film as a child when it first came out and it is very important to me. Before The Truman Show most of my favourite films were silly comedies and action/scifi blockbusters – this was one of the very first films I loved that could be called a “drama”. Now, there’s nothing wrong with silly comedies and blockbusters but that’s not all there is. The film, in an odd way, taught me something about myself. I saw the film at the cinema on the weekend, on Monday morning I was back in school and we were discussing what we did over the weekend. I said I watched The Truman Show and was asked if it was any good. I responded by praising the film in the most eloquent way my teenage self could. What I learned was that it’s not a good thing to like things too much, you’re not meant to love films or be passionate about them, they’re meant to be “okay”. And that could be applied to much of life – it’s just meant to be okay. To be passionate about something is to reveal part of yourself and to make yourself vulnerable – and that is something you should never ever do. Of course, not long after I realised this was nonsense and I embraced my love of films (and more) and my life is infinitely better for it.

And In Case I don’t See Ya, Good Afternoon, Good Evening and Goodnight

This really is an amazing film and would highly recommend it to just about anyone. It has just about everything – great acting across the board, an interesting and original idea, it’s funny, moving and meaningful. It is a film that will actually leave you happy and uplifted after being put through an arduous experience.

Also Read: 1994: The Year of Jim Carrey

The post The Brilliance Of The Truman Show appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.