The Philadelphia Story (1940)
IMDB Rating: 8.1
Runtime: 107
Language: English
Country: USA
Color: Black and White
IMDb Link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032904/
Director: George Cukor
Cast:
Cary Grant ... C. K. Dexter Haven
Katharine Hepburn ... Tracy Lord
James Stewart ... Macaulay Connor
Ruth Hussey ... Elizabeth Imbrie
John Howard ... George Kittredge
Roland Young ... Uncle Willie
John Halliday ... Seth Lord
Mary Nash ... Margaret Lord
Virginia Weidler ... Dinah Lord
Henry Daniell ... Sidney Kidd
Lionel Pape ... Edward
Rex Evans ... Thomas
I'll say it right off the bat...I'm a massive Katherine Hepburn fan! (Incidentally, did you know "Right off the bat" is a cricketing or baseball metaphor which means immediately. Didn't know that though I knew the expression. When I instinctively used it, I got curious...wondered "What ho! What does that mean?!" And So I looked...and then I found. So, like I said, 'tis but a cricketing/baseball metaphor which means immediately or fast...like how a ball rushes off, when hit by a bat! It goes..."right off the bat". Geddit? Shucks! But I digress.)
Right then, where was I? I was saying something off the bat, though that wouldn't quite be the case now that we've dilly-dallyed so. (Wonder where that one came from? Hmm. Well, I'll leave that for another time.)
Ahem! Let's see if I can get this car running. I, AM, a massive Katherine Hepburn fan!
And Ms.Hepburn was glorious in this movie. A veritable goddess...a queen :) Well if you saw the movie, you'd know why the smile was put after those two accolades. Why you ask is Mihir being so cryptic? Well, 'twas because in the movie, she wanted to be anything but a goddess and a queen. She just wanted to be human with all the frailties that go along with it.
And despite her goddesslike visage and demeanour, a very very beautiful human being she was indeed.
She's was, to repeat an adjective I used, GLORIOUS!
And I can not believe I've taken so damned long to see a Cary Grant movie! Duh! What was I thinking! I shall rectify that situation pronto! I have had quite a few of his movies...but it's just one of those things of "too much good stuff and not enough time." I can see now why some interviewer once said "Everybody would like to be Cary Grant," . Incidentally he quipped "So would I" to that. I can imagine that happening. He seems just the kind to say something like that.
He is effortlessly funny, divinely charming and almost ridiculously handsome. And I'm totally straight! (No homo-phobia...just putting it out there that he's totally a man's man. See if I was writing this around the time when this movie came out, I'd never have to explain this would I? What has the world come to when a guy can admire another guy without having to worry about shit. Bah!)
Well back to Mr.G. He was brilliant in the movie. As was Mr.S.
Mr.S, or James Stewart as he also likes to be known I'm sure was so...James Stewart!
The thing about these old movies and the actors back then is...the individuality. James Stewart, Edward G.Robinson, James Cagney, Humphrey Bogart, Errol Flynn, Gene Kelly, Fred Astaire, Clark Gable, Gary Cooper, Gregory Peck...even Cary Grant. Each of these guys was so...unique!
You could close your eyes, walk into a movie screening without knowing what's going on, you hear one line and you know right away who it was!
James Stewart was fabulous. The whole cast was fabulous. As was the movie.
So, I've been going on and on about the fabulousness of them all but what, you ask me, was the movie all about?
It was the story of a rich girl, a rich guy, a poor guy who becomes a rich guy and wants to marry said rich girl, a poor guy who writes and a poor dame who likes the said poor writer guy and the intricacies of their relationships. Makes for excellent viewing I tell you! Positively brilliant!
I shall not elaborate...because I truly believe you have to see this brilliant piece of movie making.
It could have been a P.G.Wodehouse novel for it's humour and complications and also for the way that things always seem to end quite nicely in one of his books.
One word for it. Brilliant!
The Moviemania Rating: 9/10
Like I said before, what the hell is the point of writing about a bad movie. Why even watch it!
I'll be very surprised if you find any movie on this blog that's not atleast a 7.
I won't bother writing about the bad ones. I'll let you discover them for yourselves :)
Right ho! Good night folks! :)
Had published the post and thought I'd go through it again. Just wanted to rectify one comment. If I do see a stinker...and it really really stinks...I'll tell you about it...and ask you to watch it too! :) Why the hell should be alone in my misery eh? :)
Heh.
Right then. Good night folks! (This one's the final one) :)
7 comments:
Yeah, I have watched this one. :) That poor guy you mean must be that tabloid reporter one. It was a hilarious movie alright.
Cary Grant's performance in the movie is effortless there. As for the leading lady, she was great, I guess, there is some goddess like dialogue in the movie too. But personally, I prefer the other Hepburn girl. :)
You speak of Ms.A. Hepburn.
Sure she was good...but Ms.K. Hepburn was something else!
I'd assume that a woman would love Ms.K more than Ms.A. More substance you know. But well, to each his own.
Yes, the poor writer guy was the tabloid reporter :) and the poor guy who got rich was the sap who wanted to marry Ms.K.H.
Fab movie indeed :) Glad you've seen it :)
Ahem, substance. How would you measure that. :P I like Audrey. I can watch Roman Holiday, Breakfast at Tiffany's again and again. Maybe I prefer Audrey's lost waif/innocent gal quality than Katherine's demigoddess one. To each her own. ;)
I don't know what you're thinking about missy but I say that with a clean mind.
It's not like Kaatherine was a buxom wench or something like that.
I just mean...substance. She was a strong independent woman! Bold and brave and wore pants!
I mean...she wore pants! When women were demure and pretty she said..."To hell with that! I shall wear pants!!"
Joking aside, I always thought and still think that while there are prettier women than her and some fine actresses too...she was a magnificent, glorious woman!
I'd much rather have a woman who is indubitably beautiful and womanly, as she was, but who can also take care of herself...and me when I need that too.
In Katherine Hepburn, I see that bold, brave quality. She's the kind of woman in whose hands you can comfortably give your life and know that it will be well taken care of :)
I, am lucky, for I have found such a woman. I think I see in Katherine what I have found in my little woman :)
I think, THAT, is why I like Katherine Hepburn so much! :)
Hey, when did say she was buxom or blah! :0
I didn't make my choice based on what kind of women they were in personal lives, but how they are onscreen. Katherine is like in-your-face-goddess. I fall for more innocent-waif-kinda persona, maybe that explains why I root for underdogs.
And though I understand what you mean when you say that you want a strong, brave, kickass woman who can at times take care of you. That is what a relationship IS about.
But but I can't resist but write this dialogue (Kate Winslet's) from the movie Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind:
"Too many guys think I'm a concept, or I complete them, or I'm gonna make them alive. But I'm just a fucked-up girl who's lookin' for my own peace of mind; don't assign me yours.
Though I am strong girl too, would take care of my man, fight the world for him if the need be, but still I am still this girl looking for a peace of my mind. I might not wear pants all the time (figuratively of course), at times I will be a lost waif. And I want my man to take that into account too.
As for you, its great that you have a found a woman you wanted and desired. God bless you (both, okay) and more! :)
Hahahaha :D I asked for it now didn't I? :)
I'm glad you said what you did. I can obviously NOT comment on what I give to my woman. I'm hoping it's enough...but what I did mean is...should I ever need someone to take care of things for me, which is very seldom, I need to know that I have an equal partner with me.
While, I'm all for being a gentleman, wait, let me rephrase. While I believe in being a gentleman and taking care of the little lady, it's always good to know that the little lady doesn't need taking care of. She chooses to have it as a luxury. Taking care of a woman who doesn't need it is just that much sweeter you know :)
I love pampering her...I love being extra nice...I know that I can do it not because she demands it, but because she deserves it.
THAT, is what makes it better :)
Like I said before, I'm lucky that way :)
That's fair enough, wanting an equal woman who doesn't need caring all the time. That dialogue (from Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind You watched that one, btw?) works both ways.
I agree with you at this point with certainty. :) Truce! ;)
Post a Comment