Band of Angels

Band of Angels Flawed but Yet Classy

By Kristin Battestella

On a bit of a whim, I decided to write about the 1957 Civil War drama Band of Angels.  Though likeable thanks to its stars, and I do like this film, I strangely found this flawed and uneven presentation tough to write about and reflect upon. Do the askew racial perceptions behind the camera ruin the style on screen?

Upon her father’s death, Amantha Starr’s (Yvonne De Carlo) “colored blood” is revealed, and she is subsequently sent to a slave auction and bought by a mysterious gentleman with a past, Hamish Bond (Clark Gable).  Hamish treats Amantha as an equal, despite animosity from maid Michele (Carolle Drake) and Hamish’s second Rau-Ru (Sidney Poitier). Raised with respect, education, and inheritance by Hamish, Rau-Ru nevertheless despises his position and escapes to join the Union Army.  As Amantha and Hamish warm to each other and develop an unusual love, the Civil War unfortunately comes calling.  Will Southern defiance split them apart?

 

1957, it turns out, was a little too soon for director Raoul Walsh (They Died with Their Boots On, Captain Horatio Hornblower, R.N.) to take on writer Robert Penn Warren’s (All the King’s Men) titular source novel.  The slavery presentation here can be just downright cruel. Either the bound are totally menial, ignorant, and subservient or happy nymphomaniacs who can’t get enough of taking the white master’s proffered treats.  The interracial storylines and culture clashes try to present some goodness, but the execution is too over the top and comes off as inappropriately fake:  “You white trash!” cue dramatic crescendo!  Naturally, demeaning terms like negress or worse are used, and it is indeed tough to hear today. However, such talk is meant to reflect the attitudes of the time onscreen- and it glaringly showcases the tone behind the camera, too.  There’s plenty of latent naughty and kinky innuendo about what these men do to keep their female slaves from getting “uppity”, too.  It all makes Band of Angels so ironic. The breaking of such shocking taboos, showing suicides and shamings- it would seem to make great strides in racial storytelling and portrayals. Yet the ills are inadvertently reinforced by the dated, flawed sensibilities and uneven filmmaking of the day.  Despite some lovely performances, these errors will make Band of Angels tough for many audiences. Things do get a little better when the Civil War enters the stage, though the schism is also subparly handled, or at the least, not recreated on the scope it should have been.  That is perhaps the worst part of Band of Angels- it could have been much, much more.

 And yet, there’s something delightful here, largely due to the outgoing grace from Academy Award winner Clark Gable (It Happened One Night, Gone with the Wind, Mutiny on the Bounty). Okay, he’s a little worse for the wear in 1957 compared to those inevitable “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn” memories and pre-war heights. He is long in the tooth and tough to believe now as a young, active leading man, but this adds an extra element to Hamish Bond.  There is a feeling of the old guard-onscreen and off- taking one final bow. Gable carries Hamish as an on form, timeless leading man nonetheless.  The opening bidding scenes are a little too much like the bazaar scene in Gone with the Wind, indeed, and yet Gable’s gentlemanly presence somehow turns this off-kilter mixed slavery melodrama into some sort of star-crossed Southern romance.  Back in the day, I’m sure some women would not mind being bought by Clark Gable for $5,000!   Band of Angels seems slower when he’s off-screen, and you wonder why in the heck Amantha has such an attitude about his treating her so well.  Really, only Rhett Butler can talk his way out of a duel with totally pimp-acity! (and no, I didn’t mean pomposity, either, like spell check thought.)  Hamish’s only fault is he is a little too grey and somewhat out of touch to Amantha and the changes happening around him.

Yvonne “the great Amantha Starr” De Carlo is far, far superior in The Munsters, The Ten Commandments, and McLintock!, oh yes.  Of course, she is without a doubt lovely as always, even when she is supposed to be uglied up. However, De Carlo is just too miscast and out of place. Was it really so unacceptable to have an actress who looked anything but white play a half-black heiress? This hypocritical start only makes Amantha’s actions tougher to swallow. She pouts about Hamish’s saving her from far worse sex and slavery, and then uses his position to pretend she is white and seek other men’s marriage proposals. Amantha hates Rau-Ru, but calls him for help when nasty white men would force themselves onto her!  I love, love Yvonne De Carlo, but the back and forth, up and down, and insipid backhanding from Band of Angels’ supposedly star character is sketchy at best, and downright unlikable and insulting at worst. Even with all the unkosher racial aspects aside, how is the audience supposed to root for a woman who turns out Clark Gable?

Thankfully, fellow Oscar winner Sidney Poitier (Lilies of the Field, In the Heat of the Night, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner) anchors Band of Angels beautifully. His Rau-Ru is classic and suave- the perfect young rival to Gable with the strength and education to gracefully buck the system and stereotypes presented.  Rau-Ru is menacing and threatening as Hamish’s almost pseudo-presumptive heir; he is obviously ready to rebel or supplant and is portrayed as a danger to the already delicate balance. But is the audience really supposed to believe that a slave discontented with his would be higher station and wanting freedom is a villain? Band of Angels gets the racial aspects at its core quite wrong, yes. However, Sir Sidney has the best-written dialogue here and delivers every word with real weight, honesty, and conviction. Rau-Ru’s tug and pull with Hamish is far more interesting than Amantha’s over the top scandal. You can see the off-screen ideologies of Gable’s day giving way to the Poitier’s movements to come. Band of Angels tries- I really think it does.  What it does well is quite classy thanks to the male leads, but the show is inevitably handicapped by the attitudes of the time. Oddly enough, this time capsule also makes the film all the more fascinating to watch.

 Yes, the costumes are a little inaccurate and the music is more fifties than 1850s, too. Fortunately, the gowns are still awesome, and all the colorful styles and Victorian vibes set the necessary tone. The men’s top hats and frocks are so, so much more stylish than today. The boys with their pants around their knees couldn’t handle Gable’s suave even if they tried! Granted, the sets are a little stock; this budget was definitely not on the scale of Gone with the Wind. The plants are also a little too, um, plastic! Some of the New Orleans flavors and panache is just right, but other times the underutilized French touches and clichés imply or presume too much.  Moreover, the over the top Southern accents and 19^th century via fifties dialogue may be tough to some- lots of stereotypical “hisself” talk with plenty of double negatives.  It doesn’t make up for all the off color ways by any means, but the grandiose looking staircases and courtyards are pretty pretty!

Strangely, I always think of Band of Angels together with the 1954 Charlton Heston mail order bride yarn The Naked Jungle, though I’m not really sure why.  I suppose both are a little preposterous to start and have classic men to carry what turns out to be a very flawed film. Again, the errors made here mean Band of Angels is not for everyone.  However, film students or social scholars may enjoy an examination of the movie’s mistakes and ill attitudes onscreen and off. Fans of the cast, lovers of sordid Tales of the South, or classic period piece audiences can also enjoy Band of Angels- classy, flawed, and all.  

San Francisco (1936)

Delightful San Francisco Gets Stuck in Your Head

By Kristin Battestella

Over the years, I’ve really only known one thing about the 1936 classic San Francisco, and that’s the titular song. Fortunately, Clark Gable, Spencer Tracy, and the 1906 San Francisco earthquake make for more than just a catchy tune.

Blackie Norton (Gable) spins the lavish lifestyle at his Barbary Coast nightclub, The Paradise, much to the continued chagrin of his life long friend Tim Mullen (Tracy) - the local priest. When Mary Blake (Jeanette MacDonald) auditions to sing at The Paradise, Blackie is charmed by her devotion, voice, and grace. However, Jack Burley (Jack Holt) of the Tivoli Opera House tries to steal Mary away from The Paradise- and she soon prefers Father Tim stalwart faith to Blackie’s ill devised political ambitions. Unfortunately, when the 1906 earthquake strikes San Francisco, romance and politics are quickly forgotten in search of something more.

It’s not a musical per se, but song and dance plays a critical part in San Francisco. Oscar nominated director Woody Van Dyke (The Thin Man series) gives San Francisco a film within a film feel. There’s stage shows and dance numbers to observe; yes, but the table conversations and Barbary Coast drama is just as important. The movie is about the great titular song and Mary’s humble rise and high vocal cords, sure, but fellow Oscar nominee Robert Hopkins (Saratoga) and writer Anita Loos (Gentleman Prefer Blondes, The Women) give us multiple layers to unveil. Though lovely, the audience becomes quickly aware that San Francisco isn’t all about the music. There’s gentle religious debate, Victorian etiquette mixing with clubs, old wealth, class and marital status, crooked government, and more-especially when the earthquake pulls everything together. Indeed San Francisco captures as much of the pre-quake city’s scope as possible. I dare say a remake or another spectacle film dealing with the 1906 earthquake is due, but I fear today’s Hollywood would miss the fine balance between emotion and personal drama and quake hysteria- like the painful melodrama but stellar effects of Pearl Harbor or Titanic. San Francisco gets the action of the quake against the personal drama right.

I’m not a die hard Clark Gable (Gone with the Wind, It Happened One Night, Mutiny on the Bounty) fan but his Blackie Norton has the charm and business edge needed for the San Francisco heyday. Norton is as witty to his friends as he is to his competitors-and just as fast with the dames. Gable’s delivery is tight and clipped, and the humorous asides are great dead pans. There are however, some great quiet looks from Gable, too, allowing the soft side of Blackie to show. We can tell he likes Mary, and we know a jealous quip when we hear it. The audience likes Blackie, but can see his imperfect mix of loving Mary and using her talents at his club. Of course, San Francisco is not above showing Gable in all his thirties beefcake in a weird boxing scene between Blackie and Father Tim. Thanks to Gable’s fine performance, however, we don’t need to see Norton throw some punches to know he is going to take the politics of San Francisco by storm.

Boy, Spencer Tracy cornered the market on playing a priest back in the day! The Best Actor winner for Boys Town and Captain Courageous and Lead Actor nominee here matches Gable with religious guidance and ideological morality. The odds are stacked against Father Mullen in his hoped reformation of Blackie, but he can see the kind soul hidden behind the hip exteriors and is willing to stand up for his faith against his friend. While both men are charming, Tracy has a touch of jealousy and as much chemistry with MacDonald as Gable does. It’s a vague and unusual love triangle of sorts, but Tracy’s pull of good against Gable’s worldly ways is a delightful seesaw-and Tracy struts his godly charm in less screen time, too.

Jeannette MacDonald’s (The Merry Widow, Rose Marie) good girl Mary with the great voice is but a charming rookie on the Barbary Coast, but Blackie’s met his match in this preacher’s daughter all right. Her contractual loyalty to Blackie against Operatic stardom is lovely devotion compared to the gambling and loose stylings of San Francisco-but Mary’s hesitancy to fall in love with Blackie is beautifully done. Her innocence in religious debates with Norton is heartfelt and understandable. We want Mary to melt Blackie’s heart, but we don’t want him to change her. It seems so strange to me that Gable and MacDonald didn’t get along, for their onscreen repertoire is great. I also think it’s sad that Jeanette MacDonald’s star is probably lost to non-classic film or opera audiences. Casual move fans might know MacDonald more for her oft-onscreen pairings and supposedly off-screen romances with Nelson Eddy, but San Francisco proves her worth against other big actress singers of the day.

I would have liked more attention on the supporting players in San Francisco, but the layered drama doesn’t quite allow room for more beyond the leading trio’s complexities. Jack Holt (The Treasure of Sierra Madre) is juicy as Blackie’s witty operatic competition, and Three Stooges orchestrater Ted Healy- who died shortly hereafter- is equally charming as The Paradise’s snarky manager Mat. Gallagher and Shean alum and Marx Brothers writer Al Shean and Jessie Ralph (Camille, Little Lord Fauntleroy) are also perfection as the Opera House Professor and the aristocratic Mrs. Burley. Both take time to show Mary that San Francisco isn’t all bad and even has a lot of heart. However, the quake drastically changes everything for these supporting players, and they in turn make the most of their critical scenes and push our leads to where they need to be. The numerous Ziegfield girls and song and dance men also keep San Francisco’s club scene light and authentic, again maintaining the balance between drama and heyday.

Though charming, San Francisco might not be for all modern viewers. The early black and white photography hinders the supposedly big and happening New Year’s Eve bits, but the fires and quake destructions do look good. Some of the action early on also isn’t action at all, but merely folks standing on stage and lots of conversations or folks looking at other people while they sing. I think there might be some soft focus up close shots of Gable, too, but weren’t all the divas filmed as such back then? Also, if you don’t like ragtime music or earlier, operatic styles- then San Francisco is definitely not for you. Young folks might not even be able to understand the titular song’s lyrics or care about Mary’s great operatic debut. Now having said that, we are talking about a 75-year-old film that does in fact hold up musically and dramatically- beat that!

Now then, there’s no sense in me not talking about it, because we all know about the 1906 big one. Despite the limits of black and white and filmmaking of the time, San Francisco gives a dynamite, dramatic recreation of the earthquake. The destruction is powerful and shattering, the screaming women and numb survivors are utterly captivating, and the climatic action here is worth just as much as today’s overblown Pearl Harbor or Titanic. You don’t need a three-hour long, effects laden opus when you can show realistic terror, chaos, and aftermath. Thankfully, the late Victorian dresses, stage costumes, hats, and men’s capes in San Francisco all look great, too. In theory, 1936 Hollywood was not so far removed from San Francisco 1906 as we are now a century on, so a level of authenticity or vintage dressing is expected. Some of these old films have such great art decoration simply because there were more gently worn vintage artifacts available. It would be a lot tougher for Victorian San Francisco to be filmed on location with original fashions today, wouldn’t it? There are a little too many thirties jazz-esque bobs perhaps, and of course, there are a few stereotypical Chinese servants and iffy quips about Chop Suey; but the onscreen feelings of San Francisco captures both time periods with grace and style.

Fans of good old time splendor and dance numbers can take San Francisco all in good fun, as will classic film lovers. Quake historians and scholars might also like to take a gander, and those of a religious classroom can also find what they’re looking for in San Francisco. Tonight, leave your heart in San Francisco without ever leaving your couch!

In Defense of Blu-ray

A Case for Blu-ray

By Kristin Battestella

Overall, I think I’m pretty split on the powers of blu-ray. On one hand, it’s still dang expensive and sensitive, and the BD live interactive features are sometimes more trouble than they’re worth. However, the new video format gives action movies visual depth, packs everything you need on less discs, and makes classic pictures look twenty years younger. Here’s a list of old films revitalized by blu-ray and new pictures providing testimony.

The Wizard of Oz – Well, that’s a horse of a different color, literally! The sound is exceptional, the black and white is defined all over the gray spectrum, the Emerald City is emerald, and the poisoned poppies are red is red. Even if you’ve never cared for this 1939 children’s classic, you can see this Judy Garland staple as if for the first time. You can see the putrid green of the Wicked Witch of the West and find every detail in the makeup of The Scarecrow, Tin Man, and the Cowardly Lion. As I kid, I thought the Collector’s VHS was dynamite, but then you could barely see the flying monkeys. On blu-ray however, those monkeys look damn good. With such vivid color and lifelike fantasy, Dorothy’s quest doesn’t seem so juvenile and preposterous at all.

 
Star Trek (2009) – I think I’m the only person in the world who isn’t in love with J.J. Abrams update of this classic series. As a one-off Academy tale, I might enjoy it; but having Old Spock come back in time to tell Young Spock he’s now in an alternative reality? Yes, they’ve safely placed their reboot in this sanctioned new canon, but they miss out on some of the human story at the expensive of being new, young, and hip. How could you not have an old Spock talking to the young Sarek? Okay, I’m done ranting, because the action here shares the spirit of the Original Series while updated the franchise with all the modern visual delights. The spaceships and planets look enchanting, the warp speed is instantaneous, and the bridge of the new Enterprise looks sweet. Are the effects enough to charm audiences? Apparently so.

The Dark Knight – As the title suggests, this sequel to Batman Begins is a dark and melancholy picture. Christian Bale gets downright depressing as Bruce Wayne, and Maggie Gyllenhaal gives a sad send off to his lost love Rachel. Thankfully, blu-ray lets us see all the depth and dimension in all the nighttime and dark action sequences. The action is fast, furious, complex visually and mentally; and we can see it all without squinting. We see the black be clad Batman and the swish of his cape. Though Heath Ledger won the Oscar for his demented and psychological portrayal of The Joker, Aaron Eckhart’s fallen white knight Harvey Dent was more charming for me. Of course, his beautifully grotesque and deformed half as Two-Face looks dynamite, too. 

Gone with the Wind – The subtitles don’t match the dialogue and the white text is tough to see against Scarlett’s white prayer gown, but otherwise I can say nothing bad about the 70^th anniversary blu-ray release of this perennial classic. After decades of a choppy, flat, jumpy VHS-heavens to Betsy this looks marvelous. The colors are so vivid-every single one in the rainbow. The depth of light and shadow in indoor scenes and outdoor spectaculars is a treat to the human eye. The sound isn’t as voluminous as I might have preferred for such sweeping scores and Civil War destruction, but the most troublesome thing about this set is finding the four hours to watch undeterred. Yes, it’s overlong, full screen, the men are over the top-but one look into Vivien Leigh’s hypnotic eyes and you’re sold. The blu-ray set also caters to the obsessive fan’s delight, including a CD of the score, copies of memos from David O’Selznik, a hardback book, art prints, limited edition numbers, and almost another four hours of extras all in a sweet red velvet box. Whew!

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince – This latest adaptation of the famous boy wizard books is not an introductory piece-you have to really know and love all things Potter to appreciate the depth and hinted subplots here. It’s been a few months since I saw Order of the Phoenix and I was a little lost! Dumbledore finally gets his day, but is that where this movie is supposed to be? Or is it with all the budding romances, Malfoy and the Death Eaters, or the mysteries of Tom Riddle and the Half Blood Prince? Returning director David Yates never seems to make up his mind, and once again, the cast is not used to its full potential. I swear Maggie Smith, David Thewlis, Robbie Coltrane, Helena Bonham Carter, and Alan Rickman each only have two scenes. If you have such clout, well by golly show it! I complain yes, but these uneven story quibbles almost don’t matter compared to the dynamite look of the Half Blood Prince. The Quidditch looks real here, the dark clouds, evil swirls, and a half empty Hogwarts look like photographs not digital effects. Us muggles can believe in the magical underside of London when it looks this good. We’re past the cute and youthful awe trickery of magic here-its specialties are an understood given now. Blu-ray makes the world of Harry Potter seem not like fantasy, but reality.

So also, feel free to read our lengthy praise of both The Searchers and the original Planet of the Apes for more A plus blu-ray action. Of course, these are but a few of the treats available on blu-ray. As more affordable releases come out, blu-ray and digital copy will replace good old DVDs, just as VHS is now a thing of the past. Yes, the format is still touchy and delicate, as well as pricey in players and discs. For classics and action or effects laden pictures, however, blu-ray is decidedly spectacular and worth every penny for your favorites.