Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

Directed by 

Richard Brooks

I've known about Cat on a Hot Tin Roof for quite a while and have always been somewhat interested in seeing it, but something always kept my interest at bay. I'm not sure what I expected, but what I got was a fabulous film. 

At its heart, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof - a Best Picture nominee at the Oscars in 1959 - is a simple story about a crumbling marriage, family politics, and the relationships between fathers and sons. 

Brick (Paul Newman) and Maggie (Elizabeth Taylor) seem to be in a loveless marriage, only staying with each other for convenience and to keep up appearances. They visit Brick's parent's estate to celebrate Big Daddy's (Burl Ives) birthday. Also in attendance are Big Mama (Judith Anderson), Brick's older brother Gooper (Jack Carson), Gooper's wife Mae (Madeleine Sherwood), and their brood of annoying, bratty children.  

In addition to celebrating Big Daddy's birthday, they're also celebrating good news from Big Daddy's doctor - the patriarch is not deathly ill, as was feared, but rather only has a mild stomach illness. It's revealed rather quickly, to everyone except Big Daddy, the doctor has lied to his patient and that Big Daddy does have terminal cancer and isn't expected to survive the year. This revelation causes much in-fighting between Gooper, Mae, and Maggie in regards to what will happen with Big Daddy's fortune, including his massive land and business holdings. Maggie just wants to make sure that Gooper doesn't cut Brick out of the family business, but Brick is too busy drinking away his sorrows to care much about it. 

Adapted from the Pulitzer Prize-winning play written by the legendary Tennesee Williams, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is filled with interesting characters with bizarre names or nicknames. It's a very small point, but I did have some trouble taking people called Brick, Gooper, Big Daddy, Big Mama and Sister Woman (Mae's oft-cited nickname) seriously. Even Maggie has a nickname - "the Cat", where the film gets its title. I guess these types of names were common in the South during the time, but as a modern "Yankee", they all seemed a little silly to me. 

Like I said, though, that's a small qualm. The characters themselves are so interesting, so well written that I was immediately pulled into the story. One of the things I really liked about the writing was how three-dimensional all the characters were. Everyone is flawed, everyone is at times likable and unlikable, and everyone grows as the film goes on. The dialogue is sharp - at times so sharp that you can feel the barbs ripping into whoever is on the receiving end - and the plot moves along at a brisk pace. I'm not sure who to credit more, Tennessee Williams or director Richard Brooks, who adapted the stageplay along with James Poe. I've never seen the play performed on stage, but I know lots of changes were made - much to the disappointment of Williams and Newman. Most of these changes, from what I've read, were made to eliminate the homosexual undertones in relation to Brick's character. I understand why this was done - the film had to comply with the limitations set forth by the Hays Code - but I can't help but feel that subplot would have added even more depth and intrigue to the film. Regardless of the differences between the film and original material and which writers deserve the credit, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is a wonderfully written film from start to end. 

Even a great script, though, can be completely undone by shoddy actors. Luckily, that's not the case here. I would say the film has three lead characters - Brick, Maggie, and Big Daddy. Each performer is sublime in their roles. 

* Newman's distinctive blue eyes glare up at one of his many adversaries *

Paul Newman has long been a favorite of mine, but in the last year I've discovered or rediscovered a wealth of his earlier performances that have made me love him even more. In Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Newman gets to show a slightly different side than I am normally used to seeing. Brick is an alcoholic, mean-spirited, and almost petty man. Even though he's thirty years old, he often times acts like a teenager. He's downright cruel to his wife in some scenes and I found myself - for the first time I can remember - hating a character played by Paul Newman. Of course, that's a sign of a good actor. Newman disappears into the role, rarely if ever exuding the charm and wit that accompanies most of his characters. Brick's constant drinking - though he oddly never becomes drunk - and petulant attitude slowly fade away, but there's no magical resolution for the character. Newman plays each scene terrifically and delivers every line with vigor and emotion. For a lot of actors, this would be a career-defining performance, but Newman is so good in so many other films that it might not even make my top five favorite performances from the actor. At the time, Newman was not the studio's first choice - or second or third, for that matter - as they originally wanted James Dean (who had died well before filming actually began), Robert Mitchum, Elvis, and Montgomery Clift (who all passed on the role). I'm sure Mitchum or Clift could have played Brick admirably, but I can't imagine any of them portraying the character as well as Newman did. For his work in the film, Newman received his first Oscar nomination for Best Actor, but like he was about to do time and time again, he lost to (I think) inferior competition.

* What a sight! Taylor could really wear a slip back in the day *

On a completely different side of things, Elizabeth Taylor is an actress I had essentially no experience with prior to this film. The only thing I had seen her in was The Flintstones, which isn't exactly representative of her abilities. Taylor shines as Maggie, a beautiful, determined, and loving woman who only wants to make up for past mistakes and hold her family together. Like I mentioned earlier, though, none of the characters are completely pure or innocent and Maggie is no different. The audience learns early on that Maggie comes from a poor family and her newfound wealth might play a big part in why she struggles so mightily to stay with a Brick, a man who seemingly hates her. Is she a "golddigger" or just in love? We don't ever get a real, concrete answer and Taylor makes us believe either could be the case. Maggie is often confident but fragile, expressive but timid, hateful but loving. Like Newman, Taylor also wasn't the original choice for the role. Marilyn Monroe, Lana Turner, and Grace Kelly all were considered or turned down the role before Taylor got the nod. I consider Kelly one of the most beautiful actresses ever, but even I don't think she would have been able to capture Maggie's smoldering sexuality and emotional openness like Taylor did, who was nominated for the Best Actress Oscar.

* Ives, looking powerful in a dark suit, laying down the law *

When Tennessee Williams wrote the role of Big Daddy, he had Burl Ives in mind. This shocked the theater community as Ives was known just as a folk musician at the time, but he more than vindicated Williams' decision as he earned rave reviews for his performance. When it came to cast the film adaptation, no one else was considered for Big Daddy. Ives, who I only knew as a singer and as the voice of Sam the Snowman in Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, was a delight in this film. His performance is full of charisma, humor, hostility, sadness, despair, and hope. Ives was a big man and occupies a lot of space when he's on screen, but even if he wasn't physically large, I still think he'd take up a lot of space - his vibrant personality seems like it would be all encompassing. Some performers just grab and hold your attention, no matter what, and Ives - just based on his portrayal of Big Daddy - strikes me as one of those performers. Big Daddy is a big character in many ways, but Ives' performance contains so many small, subtle moments, as well. It really is a remarkable performance and one that took me by complete surprise.

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is essentially a film with six characters. The three performances above are the leads, but without a talented supporting cast, it would not work nearly as well as it does. Big Mama, Gooper, and Mae all play important parts in the story and all three actors perform well throughout, though they don't have anywhere near as flashy characters. 

* This lobby card shows a tender moment between Sherwood, Anderson, and Taylor *

Madeliene Sherwood has, by far, the most thankless role in the cast. Mae is an annoying, jealous, scheming, and small minded person. Her character is specifically designed to antagonize Brick and Maggie and to suck up to Big Daddy. She makes snide comments about Brick's drinking and Maggie's inability to bear children. She instructs her children to sing songs about how much they love Big Daddy and how he's so wonderful. Even if the kids genuinely believe these things - and I don't think they do, they seem like the type of kids who only care about themselves - Mae comes across as horribly desperate for Big Daddy's time and affection and it's a delight when he doesn't fall for it. Mae is the closest thing to a villain that Cat on a Hot Tin Roof has and Sherwood, who also originated the role on Broadway, plays her perfectly. Rarely have I seen a character so in need of a slap to the face or, at the very least, a good telling off. Throughout the film, I was rooting for Mae to get her comeuppance. Sherwood had not only the acting chops for this type of role but also the face. It's the face of a woman who would instantly get on your bad side, which works perfectly for Mae.

Judith Anderson is probably the weakest member of the cast but still plays Big Mama fairly well. Big Mama is a bit of a stereotypical 1950's Southern housewife - she sides with her husband on everything and if he's not there, she's more than likely to follow the lead of her two grown sons, plus she's a bit of a harpy towards her daughter-in-law - but the character has moments of growth and rebellion. Anderson goes over the top a little too often for my liking as her acting style is much more theatrical. I'm not sure of Anderson's background, but it wouldn't surprise me if she was a stage actress before moving into films. That's obviously not necessarily a bad thing, but for me, that style has the tendency to become too much at times. Anderson never made me really believe in her character, even though she has some very good moments throughout the film. 

* What kind of nickname is "Gooper" anyway? *

Jack Carson is yet another cast member who was totally new to me, even though he had acted in 90 films by the time Cat on a Hot Tin Roof was released. Since I'd never seen him in anything, I didn't have any preconceived notions about Carson as an actor and he really surprised me. Gooper, as the older brother, should have had the family business handed to him, but has spent his life being compared to Brick and falling short for his parents' attention and support. Gooper is a good, kind man who only wants what's best for the family and it's burgeoning company. Of course, maybe he's not that good. If Maggie's correct, Gooper will simply cut Brick out of the company if he takes over. Carson's performance and the writing allow the character to go both ways, but I'd like to think Gooper is on the good side of things. Carson is charming and funny in his own peculiar way but carries heavy, emotional scenes just as well. There's a scene near the end where his performance had me near tears and the whole thing kind of snuck up on me. I think a lot of this has to do with Carson's work as Gooper - he is sneakily effective. He's never overly showy or dramatic, but instead just lets the character shine through. It's some very nice work, for sure. 

Considering the film is an adaptation of a stage play, it's not surprising to find that Cat on a Hot Tin Roof isn't a very cinematic film. For the most part, the action takes place indoors, in Big Daddy's huge house, but only three or four rooms are used. There aren't any flashy camera tricks or editing techniques, either. Richard Brooks, as a director, seemed to understand the most important aspects of this film were the writing and performances, and he stepped back and allowed them to shine. If Brooks had wanted to put his own spin on the film, it might have backfired, so I'm glad he knew how to use restraint. His work paid off, too, as Cat on a Hot Tin Roof earned him an Oscar nomination for Best Director.

That's not to say Cat on a Hot Tin Roof isn't an interesting film to look at. A great aspect is the gorgeous costume and set design. Since the characters are all wealthy, they are all decked out in beautiful clothes and surrounded by wonderful pieces of furniture in a glorious mansion. There's a scene in the basement with Big Daddy and Brick where they are practically overtaken by antiques and rugs and works of art. I think I could watch the film again and only pay attention to the background details and be almost as entertained as I was while watching the narrative unfold. 

The cinematography work by William Daniels - an Oscar winner who had a long career and was equally adept at shooting in black and white and color - is understated, but effective, a lot like Cat on a Hot Tin Roof's direction, now that I think of it. There are some wonderful shots, but when the film you're shooting stars two beauties like Taylor and Newman, those shots are probably going to be overlooked. While watching the film, I couldn't take my eyes off the stars, but while looking back at some stills, I became very impressed with the shot composition and lighting. I especially liked the way Daniels used shadows to help create a mood. Daniels was nominated for Oscar for Best Color Cinematography for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof but lost out to Gigi, the much flashier musical that won nine Oscars that year.

Here are some of my favorite shots, showing off the costumes, set design, and/or cinematography:

The music, what little there is, is one of the only failings of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Since there was a union musicians strike going on at the time, the film wasn't able to get its own personalized score and instead had to use bits of pre-existing music. This in of itself isn't a bad thing, but the way the music was used is what bothered me. For the vast majority of the film, there is no background music at all. When there is music, it swells melodramatically to underscore an emotional moment in the narrative. Very few things irk me as much as cheesy, over the top, unsubtle music. It's especially noticeable in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof as the music kicks in right at the emotional part, as if the audience wouldn't know to be moved by what's onscreen without a forceful nudging from the soundtrack. The music doesn't last long enough to be overbearing, but it's rather obviously manipulative. Honestly, I would have preferred no music to what was actually used.

When I watch a film, I'm much more concerned with the writing - including plot, characters, and dialogue - and the acting performances than with any of the other more technical aspects of filmmaking, so a film like Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is right up my alley. There are no fistfights or explosions, but it's still an exciting film. There's no nudity or sex, but it's still an unbelievably sexy film. And there's nothing otherworldly, exotic, or magical, but it's still a captivating, intriguing film that I hope to return to several more times.

Today, I rarely hear or read anything about it, which is a shame. I think if more people gave it a chance, they'd really enjoy it as I have. 

I wish someone would have urged me to check it out sooner. 

Consider yourself urged.

October Challenge and My Favorite Horror Films

I've heard of people in past years doing the "October Challenge" - where you watch at least one horror film per day for the entire month of October - but I'd never attempted it myself. Until this year.

I knew it would be fun - hey, any excuse to watch a movie, right? - but also frustrating. So many horror films are pure rubbish and I knew I'd be lucky if even half of my choices were any good.

In the end, the majority of the movies were below average - meaning a rating less than 5/10. Some were God awful and among the worst films I've ever had the displeasure of watching. Some were really bad but had some redeeming qualities. Some were below average and could have been decent if only a few more aspects had been better.

Thankfully, there were some solid selections, too. Some were enjoyable enough for one viewing, but I probably wouldn't watch again. Others were very good and a few more were great and even joined the group of my favorite horror films, which is included at the end of this post!

Here's a quick recap of some of the "memorable" titles:

The worst of the worst:

* Pinhead - the best part of an awful movie. Too bad he's onscreen for about five minutes total *

Hellraiser - 1/10 Holy hell, what an awful movie. Insultingly stupid, maddeningly convoluted, and frighteningly...boring. There's not one redeeming aspect in the entire film, which seemed to last three hours. There are about ten sequels, but I can't imagine ever willingly sitting through any of them since the consensus is this is the best of the bunch. Yikes.

* Just what the Alien franchise needed: Winona Ryder. To my dismay, Ryder isn't the worst part of this abomination *

Alien: Resurrection - 1/10 A stupid premise and terrible execution of every aspect adds up to make one of the worst films I've seen. There's not one redeeming aspect in the entire film. Even a cast made up of solid actors couldn't overcome the awful writing and lackluster direction. Sigourney Weaver, who was always engaging as Ellen Ripley, even looks bored. I've never seen a franchise fall apart like Alien did.

* Ooh, killers wearing a mask? That's something I haven't seen before... *

Preservation - 1/10 Wow, I'm really expanding my number of 1/10 ratings this month. This is another example of a film with no redeeming characteristics - the writing is pitiful (unlikeable, stupid characters, ridiculous "plot" points, and even boring villains), the acting is atrocious, and there are no thrills or suspenseful moments.

A few classics that I just don't get the appeal of:

* My favorite aspect of this mostly boring flick were the interactions between these two friends *

An American Werewolf in London - 3.5/10 Besides the special effects makeup and the hot nurse, there's not much to recommend.

* Even Spock, Hawkeye Pierce, and Dr. Ian Malcolm couldn't save this movie *

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) - 3/10 Mostly boring, cheesy, and overwrought but with some moments of genuine weirdness (what the fuck was up with the man-faced dog?!), plus Sutherland is almost always interesting.  

* Seriously, I don't get how that's a William Shatner mask. Even if it wasn't painted white, I can't see it *

Halloween - 3/10, down from 5/10 Upon rewatch (about 15 years after my first viewing), it's much dumber than I remember. Not scary or creepy or unsettling in the least and filled with annoying, unlikable characters. It's too bad Michael Meyers couldn't kill them all and then himself. The score and Michael's character design are the only redeeming features.

A few "moderate" recommendations - not great or anything, but worth checking out: 

* A happy moment together, before things quickly go down hill *

The Ones Below - 6.5/10 A solid, engaging thriller with some interesting and well-portrayed characters. Well done from a technical perspective (I especially liked the look of the film) but the predictable plot can't stand up to much critical thinking after the fact. I would have loved a different ending, too.  

* Some people really go all out on their Purge costumes - this is one of the cooler ones *

The Purge: Election Year - 6/10 The Purge series keeps getting better. Like the rest, Election Year isn't scary at all, but it is rather intense at times. Some good characters and decent performances with a script that actually makes sense. It all adds up to an enjoyable time. 

* A good landlord keeps an eye on his property. This guy is a GREAT landlord by those standards *

13 Cameras - 6.5/10 A very solid suspense thriller. No one aspect is fantastic or anything, but it's entertaining throughout. A big plus - the characters are surprisingly intelligent (for the most part) for a film of this nature. The villain was a little too much (would anyone really rent a house from this guy?) and the very end was a bit disappointing, but otherwise I have no big complaints.

* You might want to get that checked out before it spreads... *

Slither - 7/10 Funny, with lots of inventive gore and old school practical effects. Not scary in the least, but lots of fun. Reminded me a lot of a childhood favorite, Night of the Creeps. Campy fun for everyone!

Very good entries - highly recommended:

* This is the exact reason why you shouldn't go nosing around a stranger's house, especially in Texas *

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) - 8.5/10 Atmospheric with great production design, editing, and direction. Terrifying at times, deeply unsettling at other times. My only real complaint is with the shoddy acting from everyone other than Marilyn Burns.  

* A lot of terrible shit happens in bathrooms in horror films, did you ever notice that? *

Honeymoon - 7.5/10 I was very surprised with this one. Well acted (when a film has essentially two cast members, the performers better be very good), suspenseful, and creepy. I've seen a few of this type (person slowly transforming into something else) of film lately, but this is by far the best. Great ending, too!

* She's such a sweet old lady - what's the worst that could happen? *

The Taking of Deborah Logan - 7.5/10 I'm not usually a big fan of "found footage" films, but this one is well shot, well structured, and just genuinely creepy and scary. Some solid performances (especially from Jill Larson) and an interesting story, but it goes a little off the rails near the end.  

* The infamous "chestbursting" scene - even though I knew it was coming, it still managed to startle me *

Alien - 8.5/10 After three attempts (the beginning section is just not that interesting), I was finally able to get into this and it was well worth the effort. Atmospheric, exciting, and scary (thanks mostly to jump scares, but still) with some wonderful moments of suspense and dread. The full grown alien only has four minutes of screentime, but was used so effectively that I don't think I'll ever forget it. A great beginning to a below average (overall) series. 

* This is not a room you want to spend much time in *

Last Shift - 7.5/10 A very nice surprise! Tense, atmospheric, and genuinely scary with a solid lead performance and some great makeup/gore effects. It leaves some loose threads that, if you pulled at them, would unravel the whole plot. Best to just watch and get sucked in. If you can do that, you'll be thoroughly entertained. Note: Ignore the terrible poster/DVD artwork - it looks ridiculous and sells the film very short.

* If you hear a strange noise in your spooky basement, DO NOT go and investigate! *

The Conjuring - 8.5/10, up from 8/10 A fantastic, eerie and atmospheric horror film. Lots of legitimate scares, with great music and some really solid performances. I've seen it twice now and was still scared several times. 

The best of the best: 

* It's nearly impossible to choose a "favorite" shot from The Shining, but this two-parter is up there. The before... *

* ... and the after. This scene terrified as a kid and still creeps me out to this day *

The Shining (in the theater) - 10/10, up from 9.5/10 Simply stunning in every regard. Scary, creepy, funny, with fantastic performances and one of the most effective scores ever. My absolute favorite horror film and the theatrical experience made me love it even more.

The entire list of films I saw during the October Challenge: 

* denotes a rewatch

Honeymoon (7.5/10)
* Halloween (2007) (5.5/10, down from 8/10)
* Halloween II (2009) (2/10, down from 4/10)
* The Devil's Rejects (7.5/10, down from 9/10)
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (8.5/10)
The Inkeepers (3/10)
An American in London (3.5/10)
Contracted (4/10)
Hellraiser (1/10)
Haunter (2.5/10)
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (5/10)
The Taking of Deborah Logan (7.5/10)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) (3/10)
Slither (7/10)
The Ones Below (6.5/10)
The Last Winter (2.5/10)
The Wicker Man (2006) (3.5/10)
Alien (8.5/10)
Aliens (7/10)
Contracted: Phase II (2/10)
Alien 3 (4.5/10)
Alien: Resurrection (1/10)
* The Shining (10/10, up from 9.5/10)
Last Shift (7.5/10)
The Purge: Election Year (6/10)
* Halloween (3/10, down from 5/10)
The Houses October Built (3.5/10)
13 Cameras (6.5/10)
Maggie (4.5/10)
Lights Out (3/10)
Poltergeist (2015) (4/10)
Preservation (1/10)
House on Haunted Hill (1959) (5/10)
* The Conjuring (8.5/10, up from 8/10)

AVERAGE RATING: 4.85/10 (slightly below average)

Top 10 Favorite Horror Films (updated!)

Last year when I first started this blog, one of my very first lists was My Favorite Horror Films. Since then, my list has changed quite a bit so I wanted to share it with you again. Some - The Strangers, The Devil's Rejects and Halloween (2007) to be exact - have fallen off due to recent rewatches (and discovering I like them much less than before) and 28 Days Later just got pushed off by "new" and better competition.

I'll use the same caveat as last time: I didn't include some "horror" films that don't really fit the bill for me, so you won't find Jaws, The Silence of the Lambs, Se7en, or "horror comedies" like Shaun of the Dead, Zombieland, or Housebound. I'm only including films that genuinely scare or creep me out.

1. The Shining (1980)

The Shining is a film I enjoy a little more every time I watch it. I saw it for the first time when I was about 12 and was terrified by what I experienced. Now when I watch it, that terror has transformed into more of a feeling of unease and dread, but that doesn't mean The Shining is any less effective now than it was 20 years ago. Stanley Kubrick, who has a masterpiece (or close to it) in almost every genre he tackled, put together the best horror film I have ever seen and yet there is only a small amount of violence shown. The horror is more psychological, which is exactly what I like. It's a film that stays with me and I find myself thinking about it quite frequently - which might be the highest praise I can give any film.

2. Rosemary's Baby (1968)

Paranoia and fear are at the heart of Rosemary's Baby and those feelings have the ability to leap from the screen and infect the viewer. Even though I've seen the film several times, every time I watch Rosemary's Baby, I feel an immense sense of tension and despair. There's no logical reason for it - I know what happens to poor Rosemary - but I can't help it. That's a sign of an effective horror film, I think. It can circumvent your logical brain and still make you feel what the protagonist is going through.

3. The Babadook (2014)

There are two ways to think about The Babadook and both are equally disturbing and effective. 1) The main character (a mother to a slightly unbalanced six-year-old) is being tormented by a sinister demon of some kind or 2) The mother is suffering from a mental breakdown and is imagining all the things happening to her and her son. Either way, there is no shortage of suspense and outright terror. The two main actors were both terrific and everything about this film is nearly perfect. Lately, I've been disappointed by almost all of the new horror films I've seen, but The Babadook was a refreshing change of pace.

 4. Night of the Living Dead (1968)

The film that really kicked off the zombie sub-genre (you're welcome, The Walking Dead!), George Romero's classic, low-budget independent film combines legitimate horror with an undercurrent of political satire. There are a lot of reasons to love Night of the Living Dead, among them the impressive acting (mostly from amateurs making their film debuts) and the claustrophobic atmosphere, but the main reason I love the film is how it shows that anyone can make a great film, as long as they're dedicated and love what they're doing. George Romero took his passion, translated it to the screen and created a career for himself, an entire sub-genre of horror films, and a film that has entertained millions of people for almost 50 years. Very impressive, indeed.

5. Psycho (1960)

Since it's arguably Alfred Hitchcock's most famous film, Psycho doesn't really need an introduction. It's stood the test of time, spawned the slasher sub-genre, and still entertains people to this day, 56 years later. Not even a God awful remake (the Gus Van Sant disaster from 1998) could tarnish its reputation, and that's saying a lot!

6. Alien (1979)

I already discussed Alien briefly above, so I won't say much more here, other than mention that I was very surprised with how scary and creepy Alien turned out to be. Thanks to wonderful production design, a cast of fully developed and interesting characters, and a monster that gets the Jaws treatment (the alien hardly being shown ramps up the tension), Alien had me on the edge of my seat for the final two-thirds of the film.

7. The Conjuring 2 (2016)

When I saw the film this summer, I wrote a full-length review. Click here to read it!

8. The Mist (2007)

The Mist is a rare adaptation of a Stephen King work (a short story, to be precise) that improves upon the source material. The changes writer/director Frank Darabont made (especially the ending) were wonderful, but he also managed to keep the terror and sense of doom that King captured so well. A wonderful cast works together to create characters that you actually care about. The CGI creatures aren't the best (but they do look better in black and white, as Darabont intended) but that's a small complaint.

9. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Again, I just discussed this one above, but I'd like to go into detail in regards to perhaps my favorite aspect of the film: the set design. I don't know if I've ever seen such effective set design in such a low budget film. The house where Leatherface and his family of cannibals live is so damn creepy and unsettling! The furniture made of human bones and skin, the chickens in cages, and the whole unwashed feel of the place immediately set me on edge. Fantastic stuff, for sure.

10. The Ring (2002)

I'll admit I've never seen the Japanese original film Ringu that The Ring is a remake of, and I doubt I ever will. Maybe it's better, but when a film is as good as this one is, I don't need anything more. The Ring has an interesting premise, great makeup and special effects, a wonderful lead performance (from the always talented Naomi Watts), and a bunch of legitimately scary moments. The Ring is the last of five films on this list where a child is in immediate, horrifying danger - something that has always put me on edge, but does so even more ever since my son was born.


So, there's my list! What do you think? Do you like it more or less than last year's list, found here? Of course, I think it's a vast improvement, but I'm always eager for comments.

Thanks for reading!

Singin' in the Rain

Directed by 

Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly 

Musicals generally aren't my kind of thing and I tend to avoid them. There are only a handful that I really like and fewer still that I love and would consider among my favorite films.  

Now I can add one more title to that list: Singin' in the Rain was a marvelous viewing experience, practically from beginning to end. 

Widely considered one of the best - if not the best - movie musicals, it's something I've had a vague interest in for years, but never went out of my way to watch it. Thanks to a recent airing on TCM, I was able to catch it and, like a lot of the classics I've been watching recently, it's one that I wish I would have seen much sooner.

Singin' in the Rain is set in Hollywood in 1927 and centers on a film studio, Monument Pictures, and their stars reacting to the advent of "talkies". The new technology and way of working is, at first, laughed off as a trifle, but soon it is obvious talkies are the wave of the future and they have to race to keep up with the competition.

* A 1927 film premiere at Grauman's Chinese Theater *

Monument Picture's biggest stars are Don Lockwood (Gene Kelly) and Lina Lamont (Jean Hagen) a duo who have appeared in numerous silent film romances together. The studio consistently spreads rumors that the two are a romantic item off-screen, as well, and, even though Don vehemently denies it, Lina believes it to be true. Don's childhood best friend, Cosmo (Donald O'Connor) is a studio musician and piano player on all the Lockwood-Lamont features and is often brought along to premieres and other events.

After their most recent premiere, when mobbed by his adoring fans, Don jumps into a passing car and meets the beautiful Kathy (Debbie Reynolds). He's instantly smitten, but she rejects his advances. Of course, the two become an item and work together with Cosmo to save the day, in more ways than one. 

What transpires is a fun, energetic, and beautiful motion picture. There are numerous great, catchy musical numbers in addition to wonderful performances and a witty script. From a technical perspective, I can't imagine any other musical from the era (or from today, for that matter) surpassing Singin' in the Rain.

One of my only complaints is about the opening credits where the filmmakers decided to use a truncated version of the title song - Singin' in the Rain - along with the three main protagonists. It's entertaining, for sure, but has the adverse effect of spoiling the reveal of the song later and of establishing that Don and Kathy will become friendly. These are small qualms, but I can't think of any reason why the filmmakers would want to start the movie in this way. A different song could have been used and it could have just featured Kelly and O'Connor, thus keeping Reynolds' involvement a little secret.   

* From the opening credits - Kelly, Reynolds, and O'Connor dance around in the rain *

Singin' in the Rain is the first film I've ever seen with Gene Kelly and I'm anxious to see more. His performance as Don Lockwood is just so charming and funny and impressive, from a singing and dancing perspective. Kelly just exudes charm no matter what he's doing on screen, whether it be dancing along with his best friend, trying to woo Kathy, arguing with Lina or anything else. Kelly uses every ounce of that charm (not to mention his good looks and an impressive wardrobe) to make the audience fall for Don from the first frames of the film. Don seems like a guy you'd want to hang out with even if Kelly himself was - allegedly - a bit of a hard ass and perfectionist. There have been stories circulating for more than 60 years about his demanding nature on set and his reputation for making everyone do dozens and dozens of takes and work all day, just to get one particular move just right. For one sequence, Kelly had Reynolds perform so many times that her feet were bleeding by the end of the day. Of course, when the end result is so fantastic and the dance numbers appear perfect - at least to this untrained eye - you can hardly fault Kelly for acting that way. He knew what he wanted, knew how to get it, and did whatever it took.

* Kelly and Reynolds when they "meet cute" - a great moment in the film *

When a romantic comedy has a star of Kelly's magnitude, it needs someone equally talented and charismatic to play opposite them. Debbie Reynolds was more than up to the task. Her performance as Kathy is sly, witty, charming, and surprisingly sexy. I've only seen Reynolds in films from the last 20-30 years and was caught off guard by how beautiful she was as a young woman. And, considering she wasn't a trained dancer before being cast in the role, I thought she handled all the musical numbers exceptionally well. In fact, while watching her perform, I assumed she did have a background in dance - it wasn't until researching for this review that I found out otherwise. Reynolds faltered, just a little bit, with some of dramatic moments, but never to the point of taking me out of the film. All in all, she turned in a wonderful performance. 

* Reynolds surprised me with her dancing and stunning looks. Here, she pulls off a crazy outfit rather well *

The majority of the conflict in Singin' in the Rain comes directly from Lina Lamont, played wonderfully by Jean Hagen. Lina hates Kathy, especially when she finds out Kathy can sing, dance, AND Don is romantically interested in her, so Lina gets her fired. In addition to that, Lina's terribly grating voice - which obviously isn't an issue when they're making silent pictures - is hard to overcome when the studio decides to start making talkies. Don, Cosmo, and Kathy come up with an ingenious plan to overcome that obstacle, but it isn't long before Lina begins to exploit the situation. Hagen is the perfect foil in a film like this. She's devious and scheming, but not an awful person or anything. She does underhanded things but doesn't stoop to anything too evil. Hagen is very attractive and you can imagine her being a star in the 20's with very little difficulty. Lina's speaking voice is a greatly exaggerated New York accent and is very funny when it's first revealed. Hagen is the only main character without a musical number, but she still shows off considerable talents as a comic actress. Her reactions and timing are first-rate and she has more than enough personality to hold her own.

* Hagen - looking exquisite in full costume - as a character in the movie within the movie *

The last main cast member, Donald O'Connor, may have been my favorite of the film. Cosmo, as the best friend/comic relief character, could have just been a stock caricature, but instead is a blast to watch and shines in his solo number and alongside Kelly and Reynolds in several songs. O'Connor hit all sorts of comedy bases - like facial contortions, slapstick, and witty repartee - and hit them all very well, all while singing, dancing, and playing the piano! Whenever he was on screen, I felt my gaze pulled in his direction. His showcase moment came when Cosmo performed "Make 'Em Laugh". It's an impressive routine of physical comedy mixed with singing and dancing. While slapstick comedy isn't normally my cup of tea, I thought it worked very well here. I wasn't laughing out loud, but it was amusing and, more importantly, I was taken aback by how gifted O'Connor was from a dancing perspective. It's all the more impressive when you consider that O'Connor had a heavy smoking habit - he went through up to four packs per day! - and could barely breathe after each take. The performance impressed a lot of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, too, as they awarded O'Connor the Best Supporting Actor prize at that year's Golden Globes. Surprisingly, this would be one of Singin' in the Rain's very, very few major wins in the 1952/1953 award season. 

* O' Connor showing off his ability for facial contortions - just one of his many gifts *

The musical numbers are, by far, the main draw of Singin' in the Rain and they do not disappoint. By my count, there are a dozen of them in the film and they range from amusing and lighthearted - "Fit as a Fiddle", "Good Morning", and the aforementioned "Make 'Em Laugh" - to love ballads - "All I Do Is Dream of You", "You Were Meant for Me", and "You Are My Lucky Star" - but the main attraction, the showstopper in my eyes, is definitely the title song. The song, Singin' in the Rain, and accompanying dance number is probably even more famous than the film itself and it's a wonderful achievement in choreography and performance. Don is in love and doesn't care who knows it as he dances down a wet city sidewalk and into the deep puddles of the gutter, singing and twirling his umbrella. Kelly choreographed all the dance numbers in the film, but he deserves special attention for the fantastic work he put in during this nearly five-minute sequence. It's an even greater achievement when you know Kelly was very ill - 103-degree fever and potential pneumonia - during the two days it took to film the number. It's just another instance of Kelly being a perfectionist. Hey, at least he wasn't just pushing other people hard - he did the same to himself! 

* The most famous moment of the film - and one of the most iconic shots in film history *

* They're all smiles at the ending of the "Good Morning" routine, but Reynolds' feet were bloody from overwork *

One of my favorite aspects of the film - other than the marvelous song and dance numbers - is the plot itself, most notably the Hollywood angle. I tend to really enjoy movies about movies and Singin' in the Rain is no different. I love the behind the scenes look at film-making, even if it's exaggerated for comedic effect like it is here. When the frustrated director, Roscoe Dexter (Douglas Fowley), is trying to adapt to recording sound AND picture at once, it's a joy to watch. His interactions with the woefully unsuited for sound Lina are hilarious. He's got this big star but doesn't know what to do with her. The studio head, RF Simpson (Millard Mitchell), is also quite entertaining. He's probably a lot more affable than most real life studio heads and lends a bit of good-natured charm to the proceedings. In addition to the characters, I liked seeing the sets and how things worked during the time period. In this year's Hail, Caesar! from the Coen brothers, I was able to see similar aspects and I loved them there, too. That film is almost a love letter to the time period when Singin' in the Rain was made and the two films would make for a terrific double feature some night.  

*Behind the scenes - filming the movie within the movie *

Another great facet of the film is how visually stunning everything is. From a cinematography, production design, and costuming standpoint, Singin' in the Rain is one of the best I've seen. Depending on the scene in question, you might be wowed by the bright colors, impressive shadows, or even how fantastic the rain looks as it falls to the ground. During one scene, Don sets up an impressive display to express his love to Kathy. He brings her onto a sound stage, adjusts the lights, the backdrop, and even adds in wind effects. The end result is beautiful. In another, for a Broadway sequence in the film they're making, bright neon and costume changes are used effectively, as is the gorgeous Cyd Charisse. Throughout the entirety of Singin' in the Rain, I was in awe of the visuals. 

A collection of stills to highlight the film's beauty:

* I love the shadows and grand scale here *

* Kelly creates the perfect setting to profess his love to Kathy...*

* ... and then tells her how he feels *

* The rain glows magnificently, thanks to back lighting techniques *

* The Broadway sequence - bright lights and big dreams *

* Charisse shows A LOT of leg and captures Kelly's - and the audience's - attention *

Even though I really enjoyed a lot about the "Broadway" sequence - including the visuals, music, and Kelly and Charisse's dance routine - it didn't seem to fit into the film all that well. It takes up a good chunk of time and kind of slowed the pace down a bit too much for my liking. Since it's a part of the movie within the movie, this sequence doesn't add anything to the plot or help to develop any of the characters. It's very well done, but I wonder how the film would feel if it were excised completely? Or if it had been shortened to a few minutes rather than ten? Maybe the next time I watch the film, I'll try to fast forward through it, but then I'd miss some great stuff, too. 

Singin' in the Rain is nearly flawless from a technical level. In addition to the cinematography and direction, the editing is a strong suit. The "Broadway" sequence contains the only bad edit of the film, but it's not really due to any fault of the filmmakers. During a moment when Kelly and Charisse are dancing very closely together, there's an abrupt jump cut. It's a jarring moment made even more noticeable by the fact everything else is so smoothly handled. The cut was demanded by the censor board - reportedly because Charisse wrapped her leg around Kelly's waist - because the move was too suggestive. Apparently, the censorship committee thought movie audiences were too innocent to see a fairly standard dance move used by many ballet dancers at the time. It's strange to think about stuff like that now when pretty much anything can be shown. 

Some films are well received initially and then mostly forgotten as time goes on. Some are mostly ignored or unfairly slighted during their release, but then get reevaluated later. Singin' in the Rain fits somewhere in between. It was a big success commercially - the 5th highest grossing film in North America in 1952 - but not critically - like I mentioned earlier, it didn't win many awards - but it's held in much higher esteem now. The American Film Institute ranked it the #1 Greatest Movie Musical, #5 Greatest Film (regardless of genre), and has placed it on several other lists such as 100 Laughs, 100 Passions, and 100 Songs. In 1989, Singin' in the Rain was among the first 25 films selected by the Library of Congress to join the National Film Registry. 

Singin' in the Rain is definitely worthy of its "classic" status and I'm excited to see it again. Just before publishing this review, I ordered the 60th Anniversary Blu-ray set - it even comes with an umbrella! - so I can watch it again and devour all the special features. It seems like the kind of movie that would never get old or lose its charm. 

I can imagine people watching and loving it in another 60 years, it's just that good.