double feature
but not science fiction (this time)
tomorrow is election day in the united states. if you are eligible to vote, and have not already done so, please do! (and let’s be real with each other: if you don’t plan to vote for harris/walz, the unsubscribe button is at the bottom of this email. bodily autonomy is not up for debate, but it is on the ballot.)
i have somewhat inadvertently been watching a lot of classic movies lately. inadvertently as in, this was unplanned (not that my movie choices are a terribly organized thing under normal circumstances) and somewhat as in, once we started, we sort of decided to keep going—but also somewhat as in, we watch classics all the time.
last week i had an urge to watch gone with the wind. i don’t know why. twenty-odd years ago, i read the book and watched the movie (on two vhs tapes, natch) and, while it’s extremely watchable, that single viewing has sustained me just fine ever since. but i was in a mood and i had that urge and the movie was streaming, so i watched it.
when it was over, whichever streaming service it was on (max, i think?) suggested that i might also enjoy casablanca, which i've seen twice before and didn’t particularly enjoy. well, why not, i thought. i was fairly certain i disliked it because of the similar bogart film to have and have not, which i vastly prefer. also, i misremembered charles boyer being in it—i think i'd somehow combined claude raines and paul henreid in my head?—and i have been obsessed for some time with the vast chasm between my two favorite roles of his (love affair and gaslight) and was thinking casablanca might bridge the two. well, he isn’t in it, and it turns out that—even more than to have and have not—this isn’t a love story with a wartime backdrop. i was bamboozled by nora ephron’s romanticization of the movie (when harry met sally came out when i was eleven and i’ve probably seen it a hundred times).
casablanca is a war movie. i like it now that i understand that.
gone with the wind is also a war movie, and they were, in retrospect, a perfect double feature. both remembered for their (unsatisfactory) romances but both really about the effect the war(s) had, particularly on people not fighting in them.
as an aside about charles boyer, and also speaking of being bamboozled by nora ephron (i genuinely love her, i swear, and if it was possible i’d sit and debate these movies with her all day), i vastly prefer the 1939 love affair to the 1957 remake (by the same director!) an affair to remember. i do not find cary grant remotely romantic in the latter, and while debra kerr is delightful, i think she lacks a certain something that irene dunne brought to the role. anyway, charles boyer is almost unbearably romantic, in sharp contrast to his performance in gaslight as (film) history’s greatest monster. that performance is, in my mind, comparable to claude raines in notorious (with ingrid bergman—aha, i think i’ve traced my charles boyer casablanca confusion to the source).
and that brings me to this weekend, the one that just ended. letterboxd emails me when movies on my watchlist become available on streaming services (i assume they do this for everyone, i dunno), and they let me know that the apartment is now on freevee. well, i was under some misapprehensions about the plot of the movie, but i’ve adored every billy wilder movie i’ve seen and this one is so often mentioned as one of his best. we watched it.
the misapprehension: i was under the impression, for unknown reasons involving pieced-together bits of information, that this movie is about a man whose boss uses his apartment for sex teaming up with said boss’s scorned mistress to take him down. that is…not what this movie is about! although parts of it are nearly accurate.
the reality: every character in this movie is miserable. it’s a movie about sad people trying to find connection and what happens when they fail. it’s a movie about how terrible men are when given even a modicum of power, and one (extremely neurodivergent coded) man trying to participate in but ultimately deciding to reject that power.
would i like it more if it was more focused on the women these men hurt? of course i would. and i feel the same way about the movie we followed it up with: irma la douce, also directed by billy wilder and starring jack lemmon and shirley maclaine. it’s interesting move, having the screwball also be the (male) romantic lead (the screwball is almost always a dame—see katharine hepburn in bringing up baby or carole lombard in my man godfrey), but what can you do? it was a play first, which probably explains it. aesthetically, it’s the best movie i’ve ever seen. storywise, it would be nice if it was actually about irma. oh well.
an aside about screwball comedies: his girl friday is on nearly every list of the greats, and i cannot for the life of me understand why anyone thinks hildy counts as a screwball. if you have a theory, please tell me. the one i’m currently working with is nobody making these lists knows what a screwball comedy is.
a further aside: i came very close to getting a job writing a book about romcoms, and part of my pitch involved the evolution from screwball to romantic comedy. maybe i’ll write that as a standalone essay at some point.
anyway. it’s november, which means it’s noirvember, which i have not participated in the last couple years, despite loving film noir so much that my longtime username everywhere is noirbettie (i’m switching most over to annikaobscura, which i think suits me better now, but i still use noirbettie). we go hard on horror watches in october, and horror movies tend to have something film noir often lacks: moments of levity, of release. it’s no coincidence that i love horror comedies; i need the chance to come down from the constant tension. with noir, the overall mood is bleaker; what looks like romance turns into betrayal, or worse, indifference. there is almost never a breather. i still love noir, but i need more in general, and especially after a month (or several) of horror.
this year, we’ve decided that we’ll be doing classics november, which will probably include some noir. i've never seen phantom lady, which is on my list (i don’t have a list). i’ve also only seen the 1938 remake of holiday, and plan to watch the 1930 version. i wonder if, like love affair and an affair to remember (as well as rio bravo and el dorado, which i feel the same way about), i will prefer the first version. i’m also curious to see the 1930 version because monroe owsley is in it, and i am (slowly) reading chace verity’s new biography of his short life and career.
and since i’m on a double feature kick, i’m sure i’ll watch both. now taking suggestions for a companion movie to phantom lady, although i should warn you that i own it, in a film noir box set, and i think the dvd is double sided, so i may just watch whatever it’s paired with.