In 1939, MGM arranged to have two of their biggest
female starts, Norma Shearer and Joan Crawford together in George
Cukor’s “The Women”. The film was shot with an all-female cast
(animals included) and has remained famous for that, for it’s one
liners (Crawford’s final line is priceless as is daring for Hays
era Hollywood) and for the backstories of egos and rivalries between
the two leading actresses and Rosalind Russell.
The film’s admirable idea of an all-female cast,
something which was probably not ever done to this extent before or
since, disappoints quickly once the film starts. The reality is that
it’s treated as a gimmick; as the posters say, “it’s all about
men”. In reality it is all about promoting obedient and complacent
wives who get rewarded (Shearer, Joan Fontaine) against disagreeable
wives (Russell) or gold diggers (Crawford). Despite being written by
women, at times it feels incredible misogynist (starting with the
credits) with women being reduced to one dimensional figures – or
animal like behaviours, and the men implied to be simple things which are played by them.
Yet, the film has several good moments. There are
wonderful lines (the film was co-scripted by Anita Loos) – my
favourites are the aforementioned Crawford’s final line and one
involving a mention to a swastika (the actual shape) meaning it has being tainted by
history – I most recently watched the film at the BFI and the
audience laughed at the line and then immediately felt like they
shouldn’t have. There are also good scenes, brilliantly directed:
Crawford and Shearer’s first confrontation; all the scenes with
Olga the manicurist; the exercise sequence for Russell.
And there a lot of famous names in the film (the
cast is absolutely massive): Shearer, Crawford, Russell in career
changing role, Paulette Godard, Marjorie Main and Joan Fontaine are
probably those better remembered today. But they aren’t evenly
matched. Fontaine is painful to watch, and Russell is the main
reason I can’t love the film as much as others do. She overacts to
a degree that’s antagonises me and makes me wonder why she felt she needed
to do it like that. On the other hand, both Goddard and Shearer are
good; with Shearer giving one of her best latter career performances
(I prefer her performance in “Escape” but alas the film is much
worse, courtesy of Robert Taylor). Of the lesser known names, Lucile Watson as Shearer's mother is great, as is Hedda Hopper as the gossip columnist, antecipating real life.
But the best performance is undoubtedly
Crawford’s. In a clearly supporting part (I think she might even
appear less than Russell onscreen), she steals every scene she is in;
if the film has passed the test of time is in no small to her efforts.
Finally, Adrian's clothes. I think that too often Adrian created gowns that no sensible woman would ever wear but here, the clothes he designed for Russell's character are so excessive, so much more than required, that it helps tremendously put me off her character - too cartoonish for the rest of the film. Oh, and then there's the pointless Technicolor fashion show...
Finally, Adrian's clothes. I think that too often Adrian created gowns that no sensible woman would ever wear but here, the clothes he designed for Russell's character are so excessive, so much more than required, that it helps tremendously put me off her character - too cartoonish for the rest of the film. Oh, and then there's the pointless Technicolor fashion show...
No comments:
Post a Comment