criterionforum.org

Then he's voting for Irma la Douce ten times? Sick.

Is that one "routinely dumped on"? I wasn't really counting it (though I do intend to vote for it)

I think you could make a case for all the comedies save The Apartment and Sabrina though I haven't dug into the crevices of the forum to find a routine for each. I don't recall The Major and the Minor being more routinely dumped on than Irma la Douce as of late, except for this conversation spurred by a few people seeing it within the last 24 hours.

Geez. Thanks for spoiling Buddy Buddy. Just hope all the comedy isn't drained out now that I know know Matthau and Lemmon get married.

Hepburn Twofer

Love in the Afternoon
I really wanted to like this after an intriguing setup with promise in Hepburn playing altruistic detective only to find the most monotonous endgame too quickly in Cooper's awful performance of a weak character. The entire film caves in on itself from here, and might have been able to regain its momentum if Wilder didn't lag us along for over two hours. What is with the guy and making such long movies, especially comedies? I guess Judd Apatow learned his trade from someone. The length can really work when there's substance, especially the romantic comedy-dramas that have enough ideas to fill their runtimes to the brim, but this film's length stretches any exuberance so thin it might not even exist. Even Hepburn fails to captivate once she makes her transformation, unlike...

Sabrina
I already rewatched this for 50s project a few months back and thoroughly enjoyed it yet again, but I guess the third time is the charm because I went from really liking to absolutely loving this one on another watch tonight. The film's beginning draws a fairy tale (something Wilder has a fondness and a talent for, half the time) with opening narration describing the family in a creative, gentle formalism that likely inspired The Royal Tenenbaums. The first act is incredibly heavy followed by pitch perfect comedy, with the cooking school in Paris, the letter reading cheerleaders at home, and the 'plastics' brotherly goof-off scene as clear highlights. Though my favorite dark comedy moment, perhaps in WIlder's entire career, is Hepburn “sh”ing the car engines after a grueling ten minutes of despair.

In this act, we are afforded the perspective of an onlooker fantasizing about penetrating the magical world that exists next door but feels outside of corporeal reach, an experience many have had in one way or another. The pitch-black pathos links up with romanticism before hitting us with gags that make us laugh out of this stupor and we are whisked away by Bogart's intrusion of the loneliness into a majestic space of light touch gracing all emotion. Once the transformation occurs the film takes on the vibe of a fairy-tale-as-reality shift more concretely, and though I missed the extensive range of mood fluctuation, they still exist but more welded together to create something that can flutter from beautifully serene to solemn in the blink of an eye, even a subtly sad delivery and brief camera lingering on a Bogart line changing effect immensely.

I can't say that this film maintains the same high for me throughout its runtime (the first part is just too perfect for that to be possible), but it does keep me interested and excited enough to call it one of Wilder's best, and the romantic threads spin in unexpected ways to assist. For a fantasy the narrative allows the characters' processing of what they want, need, and deserve to mold curiously, making a film that surely cannot be complicated wear complex layers of skin. There is an honest, objective angle on humanity through observation here without handholding or oversimplification. Even after three or four watches over my lifetime, two in the last six months, I still have a hard time looking for signifiers to predict clearly where the story is going, because even though I've seen it before, WIlder respects the emotions to remain indefinite until the end. It's a far more audacious choice than we'd expect or get from a 50s rom-com, and what we do get is a film so much denser than it appears to the naked eye. This is a rich picture, overflowing with passions of all shapes and sizes, and one that's worth paying extra close attention to while watching. It keeps growing on me, revealing new gems in the details, and is a lock for the upper tiers of my list.

The Fortune Cookie
The way I feel about this film is a lot like how I feel about fortune cookies... I don’t really like them at all, but I don’t hate them either. The first Lemmon/Matthau collab leaves a lot to be desired but their dynamic still retains some spark. Matthau plays a narcissistic slimeball lawyer with the right dose of immoral diversion to allow the reactions from Lemmon’s anxious sadsack to elicit the dissonance intended from a mismatched duo. The problem is that the material isn’t very funny, so there’s no lubricant to make the dynamic function as it should. If the film finds any humor that works it’s in the dopey detectives and the overall pathetic nature of the setup(2) to catch the setup(1), but even that isn’t really a case of gags-pulled-off so much as internal chuckles at potential that is never realized. I also get a kick out of how many chapters there are in this film; though not because this is supposed to be funny, but because it’s a misjudgment and odd idea that just doesn’t fit- a case of laughing 'at' rather than laughing 'with.'

If anything does work about this movie it’s the dramatic piece with the football player Jackson, and Lemmon’s sensitivity to his guilt. The exchange when Lemmon asks Jackson if he was drinking, out of genuine concern rather than to implicate him in a scheme, is pretty touching because the moment appears to be unnecessary fat to the plot (in an already bloated film- there is no reason this should be over two hours) yet it’s critical to the empathy and humanity of the respective characters. Jackson never gives straight answers about his alcohol use and in one later scene does get into trouble for his drinking, but we aren’t ever led to believe that he has a drinking problem that should cement any claim. Instead it’s a pointless exchange that curiously finds an ambiguous space with no intent other than to allow a moment of silence for goodness in people.

That’s a strange thing to say in a movie chalk full of awful characters. The wife, the brother-in-law, the insurance folks, and even Lemmon’s pitiful pushover are rough characters to like. The camaraderie between Lemmon and Ron Rich provides some moral development and movement into ethical confidence actualized, so that moves this plot along with more ease than some of the worse WIlder films, but I can’t argue for much actual earned merit- about the same response I had when I first saw this many years ago. I do want to hear why domino hates it so much though as this warrants nothing on either side of a shrug from me.


The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes
This one always played like an unspectacular aloof Holmes adaptation that nevertheless keeps me sporadically involved, probably solely because it's a Sherlock Holmes story. It's not a very captivating narrative, or a very good movie, but it's the kind of film that I might throw on if I'm sick as a piece of passive comfort. I am not currently sick (thank god) so I didn't like this nearly as much as I did a few years ago. There is an obnoxious amount of meandering and the action is pretty stale. Still, I suspect I like it more than most people, which isn't saying much.


Mauvaise Graine
Wilder’s debut, and it’s pretty bad. There are a few choice moments where groups of characters shuffle into the frame and their sly social mannerisms force cracked smiles. Otherwise the mood changes didn’t fluctuate with the acuity Wilder would develop later, and the apparent excitement occurring on screen (the rush of stealing cars, yeah!) died on arrival as if these were routine banalities. I can see hints of the romantic charm to come, and some intelligence in staging, but as an isolated film it’s a dud.


Avanti!
I haven’t seen this one since I was a kid, but I always remembered it as one of WIlder’s better late-works, and feel the same howevermanyyears later. The opening under-explained silent-comedy perversity is pretty great in how it unfolds, but the film never rises above that inspired moment while still being pretty good. Lemmon again plays an obnoxious character, this time more of a stuck-up asshole than a stuck-up wimp. The running jokes of his father’s laissez faire lifestyle continuously disturbing him work most of the time, and WIlder and Lemmon set the scene for this disruption to Lemmon’s expectations to be both situationally humorous and softly psychologically disturbing. One of the greatest pleasures of this film is how Lemmon gradually evaluates his (dis)satisfaction with his own self-serious approach to life in subtle expressions that never exaggerate tones but steal small dramatic inserts into the comedy, the same kind of delicacy he used better in Sabrina and The Apartment (and, though louder, but just as impressive, in Irma la Douce).

At first I was put-off by the jokes about Juliet Mills’ weight, and still am in spirit, but they find a way to emphasize Lemmon’s less charitable qualities without letting him off the hook in his general demeanor. His behavior causes harm to himself and others, and Wilder’s investment in exposing the dark sides to humanity doesn’t end in genre, a stance I’ve always admired about the director. Unfortunately she does little more than serve as a pre-aughts MPDG, but thankfully other attributes beyond her and general circumstance push this change on him. The Italian culture is lavishly attended to in the mise en scene, and the fantastical transportation into a novel setting provokes Wilder’s other typical ‘fairy-tale adventure’ framework for evolution to exist as inspired by antics.

This film is longer, but it breathes with exposition and repositioning plot developments, including character introductions and detailed setpieces, that sustained my engagement. There is some neo-noir structuralism in the expedition across acts, though ultimately I cared much less about the story than the mechanics of its formation. After the halfway mark the moving parts begin to feel a bit tiresome, and even with the supporting actors delivering some cute laughs I didn’t find the central duo’s chemistry to hold as much water in the long-term - although the eccentric pairing does deserve points in how bold it is to exist and formulate organically against expectations, even if it's more bizarre than compelling. Compared to the post-Kiss Me, Stupid works, this is certainly Wilder’s most objectively consistently entertaining film, even if do have a weird personal interest in Fedora.

1. Ace in the Hole - just as corrosive as Sunset Blvd. but it’s about the entire media rather than just Hollywood, which is what makes it his most relevant picture today. Easily my favorite.

2. Sunset Blvd. - Cynical and extremely entertaining film about making films. My only problem with it is it’s ridicule of Norma Desmond’s character. It seems to place as much blame on her for her downfall as it does Hollywood’s ruthless and sexist business practices.

3. The Apartment - I really shouldn’t like this film as much as I do. Totally opposite in mood and content to the first two. It’s hammy and sentimental, but the performances are great and the ending never fails to elicit a smile from me. The one truly powerful sequence is when Bud comes home to discover an unconscious Miss Kubelik.

I understand that The Apartment has more lighthearted humor and ends on a happier note than Ace in the Hole or Sunset Blvd, but I would hardly call a film about the ways in which we dehumanize each other and allows ourselves to be dehumanized in the name of so-called success (or love! Fassbinder describing love as a force of social oppression applies almost more here than in Sirk), I would hardly call such a film "hammy" and "sentimental." I usually watch it every year for the New Year, but skipped it in 2018, so by the time I returned to it again for 2019, I was almost stunned into submission at how relentlessly clear-eyed the film is about how debased Fran and Baxter are, and how debasing pretty much everyone (including Baxter) can be. The entire second half of the picture is a tight-rope walk between the genuine feelings and affection Baxter holds for his coworker, and calculated, efficiency-focused middle-management of a suicide. Hell, Sheldrake doesn't want to deal with one of his employees' (mistresses') personal problems? Have Baxter take care of it. The single greatest satire of capitalist bureaucracy in all of American cinema.

It's funny how negative this thread has been so far. I actually loved everything I had seen of Wilder until starting this project, so all his recognised masterpieces will be present on my ballot. Lest we forget too, this forum voted for The Apartment as the second greatest film of all time during the last round of the Lists Project.

---

I enjoyed the The Spirit of St. Louis last night. A couple of hours of James Stewart is always a pleasure and this film technically feels quite the achievement. Some of the air scenes are genuinely spectacular. I didn't know anything about Lindbergh prior to watching, and only subsequently did I learn that contemporary reviewers felt that Stewart was considered to be badly miscast (by about 20 years), and that Lindbergh has quite the colourful and notorious public and private life, which this film does not even think about depicting. Instead we just get Stewart playing his archetypal, white meat babyface, all-American hero, which means there is very different film still to be made with this story. Recommended, especially if going in blind, although you may feel a bit conned after doing some further reading.

In lieu of a Blu-ray, there's a nice, restored 1080p file floating around, which I guess comes from Amazon. Unfortunately upon the opening credits finishing last nice, the film switched to 16:9 and for some reason it is not available in the proper 2.35:1 CinemaScope in full HD. I don't think the missus would have appreciated me deciding not to watch the film at that point, so I beared it. If anyone knows where it is available properly, let me know and I'll buy it.

TMDaines wrote: Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:03 pm It's funny how negative this thread has been so far. I actually loved everything I had seen of Wilder until starting this project, so all his recognised masterpieces will be present on my ballot. Lest we forget too, this forum voted for The Apartment as the second greatest film of all time during the last round of the Lists Project.

Other than the one post of ridiculousness upthread, I don’t know of anyone here who has spoken negatively of it. Doesn’t mean they love Wilder on the whole, though

My reading of this thread isn't that people are negative about Wilder (apologies if I've added to that impression) - but some more shaded in their appreciation of him. Personally I think some of stuff is brilliant, some so-so, and a small amount of it awful - probably like most of the great directors.

I also love The Major and the Minor, which TMDaines clearly didn't!

Rayon Vert wrote: Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:25 pm My reading of this thread isn't that people are negative about Wilder (apologies if I've added to that impression) - but some more shaded in their appreciation of him. Personally I think some of stuff is brilliant, some so-so, and a small amount of it awful - probably like most of the great directors.

I feel the same way, and on my end since I already wrote thoughts on most Wilder I like in the 40s and 50s list projects threads so I'm rounding out with a lot of what I find middling or bad (though not all). However, I've tried to make a case for Wilder as a very interesting filmmaker where even his failures are only so because of his willingness to take extreme risks to flaunt his worldview and apply a diverse range of moods and ideas into a picture. I compiled a rough list of a ranked order last night and found that some of his worst films were ranked higher than others because of the audacity of what he was attempting. I would urge people to read between the lines of the discussion - what I find most rewarding about these projects isn't discovering a new flawless favorite, but analyzing films from new perspectives within the context of the filmmaker's own philosophies and historical body of work, regardless of whether I love them (Irma la Douce) or don't like them at all (One, Two, Three).

Blus, I've enjoyed reading your write-ups in that context. Though I've seen most Wilder-directed films (and quite a few of his screenplay-only authored ones), I don't consider that I have a good grasp of his themes, style, etc, as a director - except a vague sense of his penchant for satire, dark comedy, irony, etc.

It's funny because I think he has a very similar worldview to my own and yet so many of his movies cave in on themselves in trying to put too many ingredients in the soup, so to speak! Contextualizing his work can only go so far in some cases, like the Holmes, which is just so detached that a case could be made for a grey, objective de-romanticized portrait of the detective and his mysteries (though Wilder is no stranger to exploring both authentic and artificial romance as a means for emotional revelation). I don't really think that one works in his favor, and if anything about the movie does it's the ending where

Spoiler

Holmes, downtrodden, goes for the expected drug binge on a melancholy note, without any flair or dramatics or second thoughts. It's a pretty great depiction of the sad truth of an addict and lack of external cradling attention to stop this self-destruction.

Ace in the Hole
My favorite tonally-distinct ‘serious’ Wilder, though he's still up to his usual playful tricks. This is a morality play that begins like a fable, with Douglas coincidentally finding himself in a new place, stars aligning to shake up a narrative, like if the Devil from Faust dropped into a demented Alice in Wonderland in place of Alice. He presents as a man with a cynical outlook entering a magical land that is jovial and doesn’t support that view, only to go searching for avenues to exploit that very perspective for self-gratification. However, he's no cookie-cutter character, for here the 'evil' is personified and given the starring role, and we find out that he isn’t a metaphor at all but a fallible complex human being with a fragile ego who projects his bitter cynicism onto the world around him, thus forcing his worldview to come true. And while Douglas certainly does uncover the selfish side of even the expected humility in rural society, he is the independent variable that infects the milieu he steps foot in with poisonous attitude and intrusive control, which begs the question: is this exposition actually the 'truth' about people, or only an aspect that’s been manipulated and motivated by a deep-rooted conviction run rampant? Probably a bit of both.

If there's any issue here it's that Wilder’s interest in exploring moral compromise is a bit on-the-nose, but Douglas is perfectly cast as the noirish existential antihero whose only quest is to ascend back to the position he once had and thinks he deserves. All the pieces of noir are here, including a particularly cold femme fatale, though everyone plays their parts with an authenticity blended with the fantasy- the central acidic pairing are movie-star confident and yet transparently pathetic all the same. Douglas may spell it all out for us time and time again, but the overexplaining only cements how thin a veil he wears in the insecurity of his own vision of society and human nature. He needs to be loud, rigid, aloof, and fight for it constantly to make it true. Doesn't that say something about the invisibly pervasive good in humanity contesting his position from intangible space? That half of Newton's law might be hidden here, but Wilder knows it's there, just as he knows how people insert their wills with aggression to make tangible what is so uncomfortably unavailable.

The human psychology dissected in news reporting is ahead of its time and treating people as commodities is maybe as dark as Wilder has ever ventured. This also hits on the familiar theme of hollow facades of meaning, where even Leo is excited by the notion of fame in getting in the newspaper, but neither this publicity nor Douglas’ will give the men satisfaction or substance worth anything outside of a vacuum. I used to believe this film exposed the Hobbesian nature of people across sociopolitical lines, but now I gravitate more toward a fairy-tale angle of one man’s core beliefs externalized, and hitting on the vulnerabilities we all have to bend at the knee in favor of inherent selfish interest; less cynical-as-ideology and more of a magnifying glass on moral relativism. This is a glass half-full or half-empty pick-em, with humanity possessing both empathetic and selfish traits, and sensitive enough to be swayed in this social world. If the film is cynical it’s not about human nature being innately cold, but the possibly more terrifying truth that people’s commitment to morality is more delicate in its construction than we’d like to believe.

And yet there is growth, a conscience infiltrating Douglas and exploding his own facade of cynicism. Just because it's "too late" doesn't mean the sun has burnt out. To Wilder's credit, his film has a lot more depth than the simplified, dirty superficial surface we assess at face value. The problem is that the the action functions like its lead - brash and raw with intent, so we have to propel ourselves to independently dig in order to discover the more interesting side of the coin that is absent from our discernible peripheries, which may be more rope than some are willing to give this deceptively percipient film.

I also just revisited Ace in the Hole tonight. I'm with you on the film not damning the whole of humanity, but it sure magnifies the flaws, like that funny but painful moment when those initial visiting tourists hitch up their camper besides the tragedy to enjoy the "show". The film is definitely on the nose but it's a powerful indictment of the forces that corrupt media.

What struck me this time most though was just how gripping the film is right from the start, due in no small part to the way Douglas plays it. There isn't a bum note in the film, and that first half is just completely riveting, and it's got some great shots too. I didn't remember all the details and that moment is definitely powerful

Spoiler

when Tatum convinces the engineer to use the drill instead to lengthen the rescue time - we knew he was completely selfishly motivated by pure ambition, but we still kind of liked him until that moment, and Wilder doesn't spare us in violating our expectations and ambivalent sympathy for the protagonist. When moments later, Tatum slaps extremely hard the unsuspecting Lorraine, our shock and revulsion just go that much deeper.

Yeah definitely, I think it cheekily shines the mirror on us all in not as much how we can engage in immoral behavior but rather how easily we can disengage from attention to ethics for the sake of selfish gains (be it fame and money or just spectacle and pleasure like the scene you mention... hey we’re watching a movie about it right now and enjoying ourselves too!)

I see Douglas as the prime example of the individualistic western mentality run riot, which is amplified by a ‘me’ capitalist ideology, but his character underneath is akin to the “hurt people hurt people” saying. He’s so disillusioned and angry with the world that his engine runs on resentment, which spurns himself along with everybody in his path. Douglas is excellent in a performance that feels like a macho-aggressive version of Casey Affleck’s character in Manchester By The Sea, though outwardly destructive rather than self-destructive. Douglas isn’t interested in sex or camaraderie or even money so much as to have his identity validated, or more specifically to have his preferred narrative of himself acknowledged- the key difference being that he wants to be seen rather than hide away, except he hates people so much he wants that too.

This inner turmoil between what he thinks he should expect from society and what he really wants is so murky it destroys him and keeps him perpetually dissatisfied (another key theme for Wilder, the identity driven by realist American society, never better drawn than in The Apartment). It’s a tragic character, and one that I think we are supposed to pity, even if Wilder does give us a lot of reasons not to, as a kind of trick to see if we’ll get on his relativist wavelength.

Never Cursed wrote:On that note, Love In the Afternoon, Sunset Blvd, Some Like It Hot, People On Sunday, and Ball Of Fire are already there!

Because of this I caught sunset Blvd before it expired. It’s my first time seeing it in a home environment (this got shown to us on film in class and I’ve seen it at least twice in rep).

Spoiler

Still amazed by it, but this time around I found it disappointing that Norma goes insane in the end, it’s a little lazy and betrays the character they built up in the first half of the film, credit to Swanson making the impossible not only but become eternally iconic. If Norma’s eccentric, lonely and controlling self reacts with rage at her lover walking out and murdering him as a result that’s so much richer for the character than murdering him in a literal fit of insanity, then she would play up the insanity for the cameras as a calculated “temporary insanity” murder defense.

I still love the movie I just found my mind wandering that what if this revisit.

Fedora It's okay! And I don't even mean that begrudgingly. So that's nice. Tonally bizarre, yet still somehow even-keeled in pacing; a little too-obviously self-referential, though thankfully not self-reverential (having Holden open with a voiceover is rich); and flirting with a few interesting, if half-baked ideas about celebrity and cinema, the changing of the Hollywood guard and the enduring if metamorphosing reverence for the façade... It's interesting as a Late Work, at the very least. Some of the stuff in the deleted scenes is chuckle-worthy, and it seems odd to have removed it; if nothing else, including the rest of the Dutch at the lagoon scenes would've made it a little more apparent that the tonal bizarreness was at least intentional, if not entirely successful, rather than just half-hearted comedy to string you along until the drama commences. By no means a secret masterpiece, but of the five post-Apartment movies I've seen, I feel like this one had the fewest lows and the fewest lulls—which I would attribute to its relative brevity if the deleted scenes hadn't made me wish we had the 8-minute longer original cut. I kinda wish Indicator had gotten to this first; they probably would've dug that cut out, even if it ended up as an ungraded bonus.

Welcome to Team Fedora. I didn't see the deletes scenes so I'm curious what happens in the "Dutch at the lagoon" scenes to unmask the clear intention. As I said in my writeup I think the "tonally bizarre" vibe is definitely intentional but I respect that it isn't in-your-face about that when it is about everything else - a deeper self-reflexivity that hides its extent behind more obvious and glaring hammy in-jokes - which is what makes it work! I see this as one of his most complex works even if it doesn't land its intent fully, the dissection is bottomless.. one of those successful messes that can only be successful because it's so wildly scattered.

therewillbeblus wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 2:04 pm Welcome to Team Fedora. I didn't see the deletes scenes so I'm curious what happens in the "Dutch at the lagoon" scenes to unmask the clear intention. As I said in my writeup I think the "tonally bizarre" vibe is definitely intentional but I respect that it isn't in-your-face about that when it is about everything else - a deeper self-reflexivity that hides its extent behind more obvious and glaring hammy in-jokes - which is what makes it work! I see this as one of his most complex works even if it doesn't land its intent fully, the dissection is bottomless.. one of those successful messes that can only be successful because it's so wildly scattered.

We get a little more of the director, a little more of on-set Fedora playing the young, enchanting diva with all eyes on her, and it fully commits to slapstick for a whole minute:

Spoiler

there's a rapidfire sequence of the director calling for something, the first AD shouting "DUUUUUUUTCH!" then Dutch careening out from some dark corner, to turn on the fountain, run off and round up the chorines, etc., and, for example, cutting all that kills the minor visual gag of him suddenly being in waders when he has to "fix the lilies."

I don't know if you're region free, but I'd say it's worth importing the Eureka disc if you're a fan of the movie and can play it. The booklet also has a good essay by Wilder's Assistant about the film's production woes.

I am region free, I'll probably pick it up next time it's on sale but I missed the boat on the latest MoC Wilder sale. For such a weird presentation of overcooked tones, I'm surprised there weren't more of those moments in the finished film, though I'm not sure it needs it since we have Hildegard Knef to ham it up like no one has before. Her performance anchors the continual reminder of artifice as a tool for comprehending the thematic layers. It's impossible to ignore what she emits and that was enough for me.

A Foreign Affair
This one bothered me more than it should have, maybe because I felt that Dietrich was as awful as her character, maybe because Lund was as awful as his character, or maybe because Arthur's romantic shift was so out of left field that I lost all respect for her previously alluring character within the blink of an eye. Nobody in this movie is able to retain an endearing personality by the halfway mark, and WIlder and Brackett get cocky with their snide jolts and transform a romantic comedy-drama into none of the above by infusing too many 'dramatic' ideas into their portrait of the blurry lines of wartime ethical compromise. The scene after the raid where Dietrich shows Arther some selfless human decency is the best part and almost makes up for the questionable sexual politics that Wilder seems to be unaware of, since he is clearly trying to tackle this topic elsewhere in the film. I can see how he's trying to spare no one and spread around different flavors, perhaps to express the confusion in disenchantment of the time and place as reflected externally to fragile individuals latching onto affection as soon as they let their guards down, which is an attractive and intelligent theme, unfortunately handled with sloppy indifference.


The Front Page
Pointless adaptation that goes on too long especially in the back half. Matthau has a lot of potential to shine as Walter Burns but turns in a lowkey performance, allowing Lemmon to shine as Hildy, which he does - but the film is missing that wild Matthau persona and it's a shame he doesn't bring his skill set to the character that is just begging for it. Austin Pendleton is pretty inspired casting as Earl Williams though. This isn't terrible but it's not funny at all, and at a certain point I became disturbed that I wasn't watching His Girl Friday instead, especially as scenes were playing out that I've smiled and laughed at countless times in that masterpiece compared to my plateau of apathy at this stale rendition.


Buddy Buddy
This kind of film has been made many times before and since, and better, but I still got a rise out of the mismatched buddy comedy between cold criminal and emotional loser. The details just work: Lemmon's suicidal attempts, Matthau's "help" sans social skills, and Klaus Kinski looking and acting a different kind of ridiculous than he usually does! The sexual innuendo jokes land partly because they’re unexpected given the cast and crew, but mostly because they’re actually funny. Lemmon finds the perfect occupation for his recurring ‘uptight character’ - a TV censor, defining his prude nature by his occupation, a familiar Wilder dig on the shackles of Western cultures’ institutionally formed identity. Kinsli emasculate Lemmon dryly is a sight to see, and many gags work at Lemmon's expense by dressing the world around him as morally loose.

People, including the stars and director, have said that this doesn't feel like Wilder film to them, but it sure does to me. Beyond those thematic nods above, there is an ironic bite to an assassin playing good samaritan so that Lemmon won't interfere with his plot to kill a man. Selfishness disguised as altruism has always been good black comedy in my book and this is no different. It's not a great film, but the Lemmon/Matthau chemistry is better here than in the other two Wilder films by a mile, I laughed quite a lot (Lemmon's nonchalant offer at the end is so out of character that it celebrates this type of film that lives by going off the rails) and it's a strong note to go out on. I'm prepared to be the only one who thinks so though!


Now that I've seen and written something on every Wilder-directed film, here or in other decade threads, I've done exactly what I said I wouldn't do. But I guess can rank them now:

The Apartment
Irma la Douce
Sabrina
Kiss Me, Stupid
Ace in the Hole
Five Graves to Cairo
The Lost Weekend
Sunset Boulevard
Stalag 17
Witness For the Prosecution
Avanti!
Buddy Buddy
Double Indemnity
Fedora
The Spirit of St. Louis
The Emperor Waltz
Some Like it Hot
The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes
One, Two, Three
The Fortune Cookie
The Major and the Minor
The Front Page
A Foreign Affair
Love in the Afternoon
Mauvaise Graine
The Seven Year Itch

This list is so arbitrary and will likely change by submission (or even ten minutes from now), but it's worth noting that the back half is ranked based on how interesting I found the films rather than how good I think they were. For example, I don't think Mauvaise Graine or The Front Page are more painful to sit through than One, Two, Three, but the latter is subject to comparative analysis within Wilder's contextual body that provokes thought while the others simply bore me. Not that it really matters, as basically anything below Some Like it Hot could switch places with one another on any given day, except for the last film, which I think is both awful and uninteresting.

We're kind of synched right now, blus, because I also just rewatched A Foreign Affair tonight. I liked it well enough the first time without thinking it was great, but it definitely didn't hold up much this time. I'm with Drucker that the best thing about it is the on-location photography, but besides the Rossellini film there was also The Search and I Was a Male War Bride doing it. I had the same reaction that the characters are not that likeable and it's hard to relate to any of them. Also not an especially funny film. And I've also made the same observation to myself about the length of Wilder's films, which becomes a problem for several of the comedies and com-drams.

Buddy Buddy is a lean 90 minutes, and I highly suggest more people check it out. I was not expecting to like it so much, but I did just watch a string of awful bloated Wilders before it so context could be a factor...