criterionforum.org

I can't stand Magnani, but I knew Michael has a strong effection towards her, so I tried to reserve myself. She was admittedly better here than she's been in other films, but I didn't care for her line readings at all and thought the chemistry between her and Brando was one-sided, with him carrying the brunt.

As for Joanne Woodward's acting abilities, get thee to Rachel Rachel and the Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-In-The-Moon Marigolds immediately! Her range is terrific though, from ice queen in Summer Wishes, Winter Dreams to sex comedy starlet in A New Kind of Love to just sex in the Long Hot Summer-- she's an actor like Arthur Kennedy or Robert Mitchum who makes a film better just by showing up.

i generally can't put up with Brando's, well, being Brando in the 50s and early 60s for very long...over acting was certainly his trademark, and he had a certain genius in doing it with some restraint, but it just always feels so forced that he loses me precisely when i'm supposed to be drawn in. But in this, the interplay between he and Mangani is really some of the most amazing back and forth I've seen. Granted, I adore Ms. Magnani, and thinks she's an absolute global cinematic treasure, but I can't see anyone matching Brando's machismo here with such equanimity. Just as he has the power to be over the top and restrained simultaneously, so too does she appear vulnerable yet full of strength and a willingness to escape her miserable confines. Just as Woodward wants Brando to spirit her away, Mangani wants him to anchor her in a new reality not ruled by fear....and we all know how well the South responds to change. He clearly fines this attractive coming as it does at the fulcrum of his own turning point....of wanting to ditch the flighty trollops for a real woman...and Magnani is the very personification of A Real Woman. There are moments of Brando doing what made him such an icon...the more minimalist monologues where he simply exudes cool...the opening with the judge, for instance, made me smile. If only he had done more of that in his career.

Their scenes together are pretty damned awesome to watch...I was lukewarm on this going in just because of the Brando factor, but whether it's the material, Lumet, or Magnani, or Brando himself at this stage, I think it's some of his best (re: not annoying) work and a really fun film. I'll take it over Streetcar any day.

Perhaps it's b/c I went in with lowered expectations, but I was very pleasantly surprised! My usual gripe about films adapted from plays is that the mise-en-scene tends to be overly stage-y (see: Danton or, more recently, Closer, neither of which I particularly liked), but I really like the way Lumet uses reflective surfaces in the store to get around this issue.

For the most part, all three of the leads really worked for me. I was especially drawn to Joanne Woodward's performance in the first half of the film, and I think one of the film's flaws is that her character disappears for such long stretches that any potential tension among her, Brando and Magnani just drops out. It was utterly expected that Carol would reappear at the end, but she's reduced to spectator status as the melodrama reaches its climax.

The other storyline that gets short shrift is Lady's relationship with Carol's brother. The brief bit we get may explain his drunkenness earlier on, but again, it's presented as a sketch, so I don't think enough info is given. It feels like The Fugitive Kind was probably a three-hour movie Lumet had to cut down to two.

Anyway, great director, great trio of stars, and a surprisingly (and pleasantly) twisted and weird screenplay. I'm really glad I took a chance on this one.

The Lumet interview on dic 2 of the CC release is interesting though it sheds little light on the process of any of the three leads. As a former actor this kind of thing intrigues me. Lumet explains that he had to shoot Brando's bird speech 32 times before he could get through it completely. I've watched the scene a couple of times but remain clueless as to exactly what Brando may have been stuck on. I suppose it's really not my business to know - Lumet admitted that he had no wish to delve into the specific psychological implications - but that emotional struggle doesn't register on film, does it? I wish it did. Regrettably, in this scene Brando, as Magnani puts it, just comes off as a peculiar talker.

Is this expected to be a lacklustre upgrade of the old DVD As was the case with Mamet’s House of Games?

From the lack of mentioning of a new restoration, yes.

Why did they even bother to upgrade this when they have no new material and just have to upscale the old DVD?
They could have easily replaced it with another title for January. Was it only because they wanted to have a Lumet double-feature?

Probably, and I also suspect since it was their last MGM title to be upgraded they just wanted to get it out (I don't know how much the Disney deal plays into licenses for MGM titles).