The 1948 Musketeers

George Sidney's 1948 adaptation of The Three Musketeers is the best one I've seen. It packs the novel's whole plot (including the second half, I mean) into it's 125-minute running time while still managing to pack in lots of farcical comedy with the four musketeers. This does, of course, mean that Queen Anne (Angela Lansbury) doesn't appear in the movie very much, but it means instead that Milady de Winter (Lana Turner) becomes the real focus. And what a focus!! I think Lana Turner looks more gorgeous than anyone I've ever seen in this movie. She appears in the most expensive outfits with her hair covered in jewels. She looks absolutely exquisite. Gene Kelly is way too old to be playing D'Artagnan, but who cares, honestly. His particular style of dance makes his fight scenes even more delightful. Anyway, this is the one. It makes full use of its gorgeous Technicolor photography, has great performances (including a brilliant Van Heflin and a charming Frank Morgan), and a breathtaking Lana Turner.

Tommy: the Movie

Honestly, I don't get it. This is very Ken Russell, and I like Ken Russell usually, but this annoyed me. You know... I think I'd feel differently if I liked the voices in this, but the only song that really worked for me were the Elton John number and the Tina Turner number. I like all of these actors, but I didn't like any of their voices in Tommy.

The Paradine Case (1947)

I wanted Hitchcock's The Paradine Case to be an intriguing curiosity and, well, I guess it is that; it's just not very interesting. There was lots of behind-the-scenes drama with this film. Hitchcock and David O. Selznick did not get along, and Hitchcock didn't want to cast Gregory Peck or Louis Jordan or Valli. (Incidentally, only Louis Jordan really works for the movie; Peck is definitely miscast.) But the trouble is that this screenplay just isn't that good. What should be an intriguing and tense mystery film with high stakes in the present becomes a kind of melodrama about the main lawyer and his wife and their relationship. It's not even interesting, although that gets most of the screen time.

The other very strange thing about the film is its runtime, which, once upon a time was 3 hours, was apparently cut down to 2 hours and 20 minutes, and then later 2 hours and 5 minutes and finally 1 hour and 55 minutes. Now, I'm not saying the whole thing wouldn't have been better at a longer runtime, because I seriously have a lot of doubts, but, well, maybe I am. I trust Hitchcock more than I trust Selznick, but with Peck in the lead...? I think the reason I would like to watch a longer cut (which, apparently, will now be impossible because the negatives have been destroyed) is that Ethel Barrymore got the film's lone Oscar nomination in 1948 for a supporting performance that lasts all of about 3 minutes in the current cut. Apparently much of this performance has been cut (and, I would imagine, much of Charles Laughton's work as well), and it definitely feels as though it's missing from this trimmed version.

Pete Kelly's Blues (1955)

Pete Kelly's Blues is a gangster movie musical where all the songs are diegetic and most of them are great – including numbers by Ella Fitzgerald and Peggy Lee. But this movie is awfully directed, and honestly I am still not really sure I understand what the film's conflict was or how it resolved. Edmond O'Brien plays a gangster and the most wooden Jack Webb (who also directed) plays the cornet-player Pete Kelly. O'Brien is taking most of the band's money, ok... I get that. But I think somehow this is supposed to be Kelly's fault. In any case everyone seems to resent him.

In any case, whatever this was it didn't work.