Yes, those are mostly French prints with French subtitles, many of them in the collection of the Cinematheque. Unfortunately, until new prints are struck, it is unlikely that there will be a similar series in North America anytime soon.Am I wrong to assume most of these prints are not coming from the Universal Fire scramble?
Mitchell Leisen
-
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:12 pm
- colinr0380
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
- Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
OK, now I'm jealous!Knappen wrote:Holy crap! There's a Mitchell Leisen retrospectiveat the Cinémathèque française while we Criterion guys are having our octoberfest in Paris.
- Scharphedin2
- Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 7:37 am
- Location: Denmark/Sweden
- Knappen
- Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:14 am
- Location: Oslo/Paris
I'm coming october 1st - the day I'm taking over the apt.
David, I think you may have missed the two following title pages. The titles you see at first glimpse are only the French titles from A to C. The most effective would be to use the calender to the top right.
Murder at the Vanities
Swing high, swing low
I'll simply provide the service for you all:
1933:
Cradle Song
Tonight is ours (Leisen co-director though not listed on the IMDb)
The Eagle and the Hawk (idem)
1934:
Bolero
Death takes a Holiday
Murder at the Vanities
Behold my Wife
1935:
Four Hours to kill
Hands across the Table
1936:
Thirteen Hours by Air
The Big Broadcast of 1937
1937:
Swing High, Swing Low
Easy Living
1938:
The Big Broadcast of 1938
Artists and Models Abroad
1939:
Midnight
1940:
Arise, My Love
Remember the Night
1941:
Hold Back the Dawn
I Wanted Wings
1942:
Take a Letter, Darling
The Lady Is Willing
1943:
No Time for Love
1944:
Practically Yours
Frenchman's Creek
Lady in the Dark
1945:
Masquerade in Mexico
Kitty
1946:
To Each His Own
1947:
Golden Earrings
Suddenly, It's Spring
1948:
Dream Girl
1949:
Song of Surrender
Bride of Vengeance
1950:
Captain Carey, U.S.A.
No Man of Her Own
1951:
Darling, How Could You!
The Mating Season
1952:
Young Man with Ideas
1953:
Tonight We Sing
1955:
Bedevilled
1957:
The Girl Most Likely
1967:
Spree (not announced)
Also:
Three episodes of the Twilight Zone
David, I think you may have missed the two following title pages. The titles you see at first glimpse are only the French titles from A to C. The most effective would be to use the calender to the top right.
Murder at the Vanities
Swing high, swing low
I'll simply provide the service for you all:
1933:
Cradle Song
Tonight is ours (Leisen co-director though not listed on the IMDb)
The Eagle and the Hawk (idem)
1934:
Bolero
Death takes a Holiday
Murder at the Vanities
Behold my Wife
1935:
Four Hours to kill
Hands across the Table
1936:
Thirteen Hours by Air
The Big Broadcast of 1937
1937:
Swing High, Swing Low
Easy Living
1938:
The Big Broadcast of 1938
Artists and Models Abroad
1939:
Midnight
1940:
Arise, My Love
Remember the Night
1941:
Hold Back the Dawn
I Wanted Wings
1942:
Take a Letter, Darling
The Lady Is Willing
1943:
No Time for Love
1944:
Practically Yours
Frenchman's Creek
Lady in the Dark
1945:
Masquerade in Mexico
Kitty
1946:
To Each His Own
1947:
Golden Earrings
Suddenly, It's Spring
1948:
Dream Girl
1949:
Song of Surrender
Bride of Vengeance
1950:
Captain Carey, U.S.A.
No Man of Her Own
1951:
Darling, How Could You!
The Mating Season
1952:
Young Man with Ideas
1953:
Tonight We Sing
1955:
Bedevilled
1957:
The Girl Most Likely
1967:
Spree (not announced)
Also:
Three episodes of the Twilight Zone
- Via_Chicago
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:03 pm
Until last night, I'd only seen one other Mitchell Leisen film, his wonderful 1937 comedy Easy Living. Now having also seen his late (1951) screwball-esque comedy The Mating Season, I'm beginning to understand davidhare's appreciation for Leisen in the context of an auteurist understanding. Indeed, even in these two films, separated as they are by some fourteen years (and a vastly changed Hollywood marketplace), one can discern some significant thematic and stylistic similarities (although I'm wont to actually engage in a direct stylistic comparison of the two films, since it's been some two years since I saw Easy Living) between the two pictures, suggesting continuity to Leisen's filmmaking and thematic concerns.
Like it's 1937 screwball predecesor, The Mating Season is not just a wickedly funny comedy, but also a thinly-veiled critique of American class distinctions. While the film trades in some pretty common stereotypes - the snobby, snooty upper crust versus the clever, economical lower classes - it is still not without its nuanced and sympathetic portraits of both classes. While a good portion of this is due to Ritter's wonderful lead performance (supporting, my ass), part of it also has to do with Leisen's immense talent for filming and framing his characters. His camera movements seem, in some sense, to be the great equalizer, framing his very unequal (economically speaking) characters completely on equal terms.
However, what distinguishes Leisen's films for me though is not this thematic preoccupation with class, but instead the lovely humor, the warm tones, and the utter delicacy of his filmmaking. While The Mating Season is an incredibly funny movie, it's Leisen's handling of the material that elevates it above a simple comedy. The film moves with so much assurance between moments of tremendously funny comedy and moments of moving tenderness. I'm reminded most explicitly of Ellen's first night working as Maggie's cook. We spend ten-fifteen minutes watching this very funny sequence of failed recognition, but then, only moments later, we're treated to a touchingly tender moment between mother and son. There are countless other examples of this (the McNultys in the closet, mother and son at the train station), and these just enrich the film in immeasurable ways.
I would have never watched this movie were it not for david's consistent praise for Leisen. So to david, thank you!
Like it's 1937 screwball predecesor, The Mating Season is not just a wickedly funny comedy, but also a thinly-veiled critique of American class distinctions. While the film trades in some pretty common stereotypes - the snobby, snooty upper crust versus the clever, economical lower classes - it is still not without its nuanced and sympathetic portraits of both classes. While a good portion of this is due to Ritter's wonderful lead performance (supporting, my ass), part of it also has to do with Leisen's immense talent for filming and framing his characters. His camera movements seem, in some sense, to be the great equalizer, framing his very unequal (economically speaking) characters completely on equal terms.
However, what distinguishes Leisen's films for me though is not this thematic preoccupation with class, but instead the lovely humor, the warm tones, and the utter delicacy of his filmmaking. While The Mating Season is an incredibly funny movie, it's Leisen's handling of the material that elevates it above a simple comedy. The film moves with so much assurance between moments of tremendously funny comedy and moments of moving tenderness. I'm reminded most explicitly of Ellen's first night working as Maggie's cook. We spend ten-fifteen minutes watching this very funny sequence of failed recognition, but then, only moments later, we're treated to a touchingly tender moment between mother and son. There are countless other examples of this (the McNultys in the closet, mother and son at the train station), and these just enrich the film in immeasurable ways.
I would have never watched this movie were it not for david's consistent praise for Leisen. So to david, thank you!
- myrnaloyisdope
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:41 pm
- Contact:
Glad to see some love for The Mating Season, which is definitely a keeper. Although I must say I am a little surprised you wrote an entire paragraph about the film and didn't mention Gene Tierney, for shame. What a gal.
Your next stop should be 1938's Midnight, which is wonderful and probably my favorite picture of his.
The tricky thing about searching for thematic continuity in the work of classic Hollywood directors is that for the most part directors just did the projects that were assigned to them. Sure Easy Living and The Mating Season have some thematic similarities, but I'm not sure it's the result of a conscious attempt by Leisen to incorporate the themes of class disparity in his films. He directed a lot of films in a bunch of genres, and he wasn't a screenwriter so I'm not certain you can look for thematic continuity in his work without ignoring all the work that doesn't fit.
The only directors from the era who you can see a consistent thematic arc are those who wrote their own screenplays ala Wilder and Sturges, or those whose reputation was such that they could choose their own projects such as Ford and Hawks.
I adore Easy Living, but for me it's much more of a Preston Sturges film than a Leisen film, and fits very neatly within the thematic concerns of Sturges' work. That's not to take away from Leisen's direction which I feel is very effective, but Leisen like many of his contemporaries was a professional whose effective, simple, and competent direction kept him in business for a couple of decades.
Your next stop should be 1938's Midnight, which is wonderful and probably my favorite picture of his.
The tricky thing about searching for thematic continuity in the work of classic Hollywood directors is that for the most part directors just did the projects that were assigned to them. Sure Easy Living and The Mating Season have some thematic similarities, but I'm not sure it's the result of a conscious attempt by Leisen to incorporate the themes of class disparity in his films. He directed a lot of films in a bunch of genres, and he wasn't a screenwriter so I'm not certain you can look for thematic continuity in his work without ignoring all the work that doesn't fit.
The only directors from the era who you can see a consistent thematic arc are those who wrote their own screenplays ala Wilder and Sturges, or those whose reputation was such that they could choose their own projects such as Ford and Hawks.
I adore Easy Living, but for me it's much more of a Preston Sturges film than a Leisen film, and fits very neatly within the thematic concerns of Sturges' work. That's not to take away from Leisen's direction which I feel is very effective, but Leisen like many of his contemporaries was a professional whose effective, simple, and competent direction kept him in business for a couple of decades.
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:39 pm
- Location: Lebanon, PA
Re: Mitchell Leisen
While I agree with the first part of your statement I take slight issue with the second. A director will still respond to certain aspects of a script and, in his/her shaping of a film, underscore those elements. It can even be unconcious and automatic. Leisen, as noted in several posts here, takes the scripts of Wilder and Sturges and makes romantic comedies out of what might otherwise be screwball comedies. A highly romantic aspect certainly typifies the Leisen work I've seen (admittedly not everything); in that, I think a key film in his CV is DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY, a film Paramount no doubt acquired as one of a number of projects that would "answer" Universal's success with weird subjects in the early 1930s. But rather than the kinky, sadistic qualities exhibited in ISLAND OF LOST SOULS or MURDERS IN THE ZOO, Leisen emphasizes the romatic aspects of the plot so successfully that the viewer easily accepts the ingenue's love for Prince Sirki, whose human disquise she has always seen through.The tricky thing about searching for thematic continuity in the work of classic Hollywood directors is that for the most part directors just did the projects that were assigned to them ... The only directors from the era who you can see a consistent thematic arc are those who wrote their own screenplays ala Wilder and Sturges, or those whose reputation was such that they could choose their own projects such as Ford and Hawks.
Now while it might be argued that this does not make an auteur of Leisen, it does mean that his work has an identifiable tone to it, much the same as the films of another non-auteur (according to some), George Cukor.
It may be this emphasis that the cynics Wilder and Sturges hated seeing brought to their material (and it should be added Leisen is nowhere near as successful in managing crowd slapstick as is Sturges - the automat scene in EASY LIVING is one of that film's few unsuccessful scenes, yet Sturges probably could have pulled it off with his eyes closed).
One can also cite the almost succulent way Carole Lombard and Fred MacMurray are photographed in HANDS ACROSS THE TABLE (has Fred ever looked so completely edible?) which does wonders to soften these two "heels," as someone here termed them, and make their attraction to each other in their first meeting more romantic than the script probably intended. Despite that, Leisen gives us that final image of Bellamy alone, possibly the most powerful one in the film, as if reminding us that for every two people who find happiness there's at least one who's bereft.
GOLDEN EARRINGS similarly builds a credible romance out of a situation where one character starts by basically using another.
Leisen may have successfully directed a number of comedies, but I think he's more properly a romantic director.
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:39 pm
- Location: Lebanon, PA
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I hadn't run across it; my apologies.Very true and I've made the same observation elsewhere I think.
It was an observation I made during a conversation with another film buff when we were discussing EASY LIVING some months ago. I hadn't seen it in many years & he'd sent me a DVDR of it. It caused me to delve into Leisen's films with more focus than previously and I've probably emerged with a whole raft of "fresh" observations that really aren't.
But I think that if Leisen had made more films along the lines of DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY, we'd be discussing him alongside Borzage rather than with Sturges.
- rohmerin
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:36 am
- Location: Spain
Re: Mitchell Leisen
A DVD of No time for love has been released in a good print in Spain. I didn't love like the rest of Leisen's films, but it's good enough for buying it.
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:39 pm
- Location: Lebanon, PA
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I sure didn't buy that special edition of MEET JOE BLACK because I was fascinated by Brad Pitt masticating peanut butter or Anthony Hopkins doing deer-in-the-headlights for two-plus hours. I've heard it is OOP, but some places might still have copies left. And it has shown up on TC< a few times.This may be common knowledge here but I couldn't find it posted: DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY was quietly released some time ago on a beautiful R1 DVD... as the main supplement on the 'Ultimate Edition' of MEET JOE BLACK, see DVD Price Search. If it's completely out of print, shoot me an e-mail.
- CRT
- Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 2:31 pm
- Location: At the Chateau Marmont, At Sofia Coppola's Beck and Call
- Contact:
Re:
I completely agree. Sturges is my favorite filmmaker, and Barbara Stanwyck probably my favorite actress, and this film near broke my heart that a film involving both of them could be this unfunny. I understand it's definitely more of a drama than a comedy, but the ONLY thing that had me in stitches in the entire length of the film was the overzealous speech to the jury at the beginning.Matt wrote:Remember the Night, despite its peerless cast and Sturges' contribution, is nigh on unwatchable. There's not a laugh to be found within miles of this film, and I believe Sturges had feelings similar to Wilder's after working on it. I guess you have to pay some kind of tribute to a guy who was so talentless as to inspire two great screenwriters never to let anyone else but themselves direct their scripts.
- Gregory
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Matt, now that (part of) that old post from you has been resurrected, may I ask whether Remember the Night was the main basis for taking a dim view of Leisen, or if there have been others that were equally disappointing for you? Like I said in my post on Hands Across the Table, I was a late convert to Leisen because I happened to see some of his lesser works first. I would certainly disagree that Remember the Night is one of these, but my point is just that I do find him an inconsistent filmmaker, albeit a great one.
- Matt
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I cringed when I saw Leisen's name come up in the credits for Remember the Night, but I had been turned off on him a long time before. I can't remember exactly what did it initially, but it's almost surely feeling that Midnight should have been, with that cast and those screenwriters, a shining diamond of comedy, a perfect blend of Lubitsch and Sturges. In my disappointment, I had to lay blame with Leisen because the film just feels like he didn't know what to do with it: it's so slack and uneven.Gregory wrote:Matt, now that (part of) that old post from you has been resurrected, may I ask whether Remember the Night was the main basis for taking a dim view of Leisen, or if there have been others that were equally disappointing for you?
In all truthfulness, though, I have not given the man a fair shake. I've seen far too few of his films to form such a strong opinion and, at the time of posting, had not yet seen Easy Living, a film which mostly does justice to its Sturges screenplay. I'd be willing to give Remember the Night another shot--with expectations lowered--if it turns up on TCM.
- Matt
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Oh, you're absolutely right. The only films of his I've seen are those written by screenwriters who went on to later fame as directors in their own right (and, uh, Golden Earrings and one of the Big Broadcast films, I think). Is Death Takes a Holiday a good place to start with a re-evaluation? I also have Murder at the Vanities in the Universal pre-Code set waiting to be watched.david hare wrote:Matt Not meaning to be rude but you should start by completely forgetting about Lubitsch and Sturges and just looking at someone altogether unique.
- CRT
- Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 2:31 pm
- Location: At the Chateau Marmont, At Sofia Coppola's Beck and Call
- Contact:
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I forgot Leisen did Hands Across the Table. That one is wonderful, as is Midnight. I guess I was just shocked at how unimpressed I was by Remember the Night. I guess I was expecting a masterpiece on scale of the Lady Eve when I saw both names involved.
- justeleblanc
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
- Location: Connecticut
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Midnight is wonderful. Remember the Night is less successful because the script was crap. I love Sturges, but he can't blame Leisen for a shitty script.CRT wrote:I forgot Leisen did Hands Across the Table. That one is wonderful, as is Midnight. I guess I was just shocked at how unimpressed I was by Remember the Night. I guess I was expecting a masterpiece on scale of the Lady Eve when I saw both names involved.
- CRT
- Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 2:31 pm
- Location: At the Chateau Marmont, At Sofia Coppola's Beck and Call
- Contact:
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I guess that has to be it. It's just hard to believe Sturges could ever write a bad script. One could suggest this was before his "Perfect" streak in the early 40's', but he wrote the screenplay for William Wyler's "The Good Fairy" before this, and that's a masterpiece.justeleblanc wrote:Midnight is wonderful. Remember the Night is less successful because the script was crap. I love Sturges, but he can't blame Leisen for a shitty script.CRT wrote:I forgot Leisen did Hands Across the Table. That one is wonderful, as is Midnight. I guess I was just shocked at how unimpressed I was by Remember the Night. I guess I was expecting a masterpiece on scale of the Lady Eve when I saw both names involved.
-
- Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:31 am
- Location: Somerset, England
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Among the Leisen films I particularly like are Arise, My Love, Kitty and Lady in the Dark. The latter, for all its obvious flaws, has probably the most explicit and "positive" gay male character I've seen in a Code-era Hollywood film, Mischa Auer's photographer who gets incredibly excited by a muscular male model. He even gets the last line, a withering comment on the cliched heterosexual wrap-up.
I'd love to see Take a Letter, Darling which sounds like a wonderful role-reversal comedy.
I'd love to see Take a Letter, Darling which sounds like a wonderful role-reversal comedy.
- Gregory
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I would also hesitate to suggest Death Takes a Holiday to anyone wanting to get a feel for (or reassess) the director. However, I think that in some key thematic respects it is Leisen's cup of tea, and he does some genuinely interesting things with it.
The comparison between the films Leisen and Sturges directed is an interesting one, although it naturally leads to questions of inferiority/superiority, which make me a little uneasy here. It does seem to me that people who are giving Sturges the upper hand are privileging writing and acting. Visually, Leisen's best films run rings around anything by Sturges, at least in my view. I do not mean this as a general insult to Sturges, some of whose work I treasure. David, I'm not quite sure exactly what you mean about everything hinging on the actors in the Leisen comedies. Also, I don't want to be disagreeable but in my view tempo is not the end-all-be-all of screwball comedy, which to me has more fundamental generic qualities that one can observe in Hands Across and others.
The comparison between the films Leisen and Sturges directed is an interesting one, although it naturally leads to questions of inferiority/superiority, which make me a little uneasy here. It does seem to me that people who are giving Sturges the upper hand are privileging writing and acting. Visually, Leisen's best films run rings around anything by Sturges, at least in my view. I do not mean this as a general insult to Sturges, some of whose work I treasure. David, I'm not quite sure exactly what you mean about everything hinging on the actors in the Leisen comedies. Also, I don't want to be disagreeable but in my view tempo is not the end-all-be-all of screwball comedy, which to me has more fundamental generic qualities that one can observe in Hands Across and others.
-
- Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:33 pm
Re: Mitchell Leisen
He didn't--Remember the Night is one of the best scripts he ever wrote. But it's melodrama with comedic moments, not a comedy with dramatic parts, like his 40s films. Had Sturges directed the film it might have been his masterpiece. As it is Leisen did a very good job--the acting and lighting are superb and he trimmed the endless getting-lost scene, along with some of the racist gags with Snowflake. However, his small-scale cuts and revisions often dilute the dramatic impact, especially when Leisen snips lines meant to appear more than once (like the first instance of the one about making a mistake and paying for it).CRT wrote:I guess that has to be it. It's just hard to believe Sturges could ever write a bad script.justeleblanc wrote:Midnight is wonderful. Remember the Night is less successful because the script was crap. I love Sturges, but he can't blame Leisen for a shitty script.CRT wrote:I forgot Leisen did Hands Across the Table. That one is wonderful, as is Midnight. I guess I was just shocked at how unimpressed I was by Remember the Night. I guess I was expecting a masterpiece on scale of the Lady Eve when I saw both names involved.
I read the script before watching the film and was bowled over--it's the most nakedly emotional script Sturges ever wrote, and that harrowing intensity of emotion doesn't quite make it into the film (which is still a classic).
- Svevan
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 7:49 pm
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: Mitchell Leisen
On Wednesday there was a mini-Leisen fest on TCM (which I just got access to; what've I been missing, honestly). I was only able to catch two of the flicks, unfortunately, and I'm kicking myself as a few that I've missed aren't available on DVD.
So I saw Midnight and To Each His Own. Great counterparts to each other as they're wildly different in plot and tone, but similar in other ways: high/low class conflicts, finances play a huge role in both, and both have lead female characters who make the best of their male-dominated society. Since these were my first Leisens, I haven't yet noticed any stylistic or visual traits specific to him, but I'm planning to watch more soon. Turns out I have a couple on DVD already in box sets, like the Dietrich set.
A lot has been said about Midnight so far in this thread (and it's totally wonderful), but not a lot about To Each His Own. This movie knocked me out. Perhaps it's been a long week, or perhaps I drank too much, but I was surprised at how the melodramatic plot captivated me and tugged at me - though emotionally true, the plot is not totally believable in parts. Yet it works because of de Havilland's honest performance and the film's lack of pessimism even as events get dire. Someone earlier mentioned Leisen's genre-mixing, and here he's got a great British WWII film (opening scenes reminded me of P+P, esp. Canterbury Tale), a women's issue film, a piece of small-town Americana, a romance, plus some comedy mixed in. I was surprised to laugh at moments that were otherwise very serious, including the heartbreaking and redemptive ending (I wanted to remember more lines, but the only one I can remember now is "The more I hear about these cozy little towns the more I appreciate the Bronx."). It's a longer film, and it goes so many different places yet still feels of one piece. I don't know what else to say right now but that I loved it.
It's playing on TCM again a week from Sunday (Mother's day, appropriately); watch it with your mom if you can, but if she doesn't want to, watch it by yourself. I'm definitely going in for another taste.
So I saw Midnight and To Each His Own. Great counterparts to each other as they're wildly different in plot and tone, but similar in other ways: high/low class conflicts, finances play a huge role in both, and both have lead female characters who make the best of their male-dominated society. Since these were my first Leisens, I haven't yet noticed any stylistic or visual traits specific to him, but I'm planning to watch more soon. Turns out I have a couple on DVD already in box sets, like the Dietrich set.
A lot has been said about Midnight so far in this thread (and it's totally wonderful), but not a lot about To Each His Own. This movie knocked me out. Perhaps it's been a long week, or perhaps I drank too much, but I was surprised at how the melodramatic plot captivated me and tugged at me - though emotionally true, the plot is not totally believable in parts. Yet it works because of de Havilland's honest performance and the film's lack of pessimism even as events get dire. Someone earlier mentioned Leisen's genre-mixing, and here he's got a great British WWII film (opening scenes reminded me of P+P, esp. Canterbury Tale), a women's issue film, a piece of small-town Americana, a romance, plus some comedy mixed in. I was surprised to laugh at moments that were otherwise very serious, including the heartbreaking and redemptive ending (I wanted to remember more lines, but the only one I can remember now is "The more I hear about these cozy little towns the more I appreciate the Bronx."). It's a longer film, and it goes so many different places yet still feels of one piece. I don't know what else to say right now but that I loved it.
It's playing on TCM again a week from Sunday (Mother's day, appropriately); watch it with your mom if you can, but if she doesn't want to, watch it by yourself. I'm definitely going in for another taste.
-
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:48 pm
- Location: hollywoodland, ca
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Wanted to chime in with some extra praise for To Each His Own--Leisen really balances the comedy and tear-jerking expertly. There's a nice give-and-take between Brackett's sharp, sarcastic script ("What started as love might end as diabetes") and the gentle touches Leisen supplies--I really like what he does with a glass of milk. It's not perfect (there's some typically atrocious child acting and a somewhat rushed ending), but there's a lot to love here. It's been a while since I saw it but more bits and pieces here have stuck in my mind than most movies I've seen since. It might also make a nice companion/counterpoint to the more straightforwardly nostalgic but no less wonderful Margie, made the same year.
- Red Screamer
- Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:34 pm
- Location: Tativille, IA
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Mark Rappaport's auteurist defence of Leisen on the occasion of his Cinémathèque française retrospective. I don't agree with all of what Rappaport says, but it's a good jumping off point for exploring Leisen's work (the Criterion Channel is a godsend for those of us in video rental wastelands, particularly for filmographies that are largely DVD-bound). Hat's off as well to David Hare's loving contributions in this very thread.
-
- Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:27 am
Re: Mitchell Leisen
Has anyone found a decent edition of Swing High, Swing Low? I ordered what I thought was a TCM edition recently only to discover that it was from another label and even more dire than the one I already had, which was pretty well unwatchable.
- DeprongMori
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:59 am
- Location: San Francisco
Re: Mitchell Leisen
I’m guessing that if the version of this Paramount film that’s being streamed on the Paramount+ service looks like it was dragged out of PD Hell that there’s probably nothing better out there.