subscribe to this page
2006.
Focus is mainly on which films were popular from 1945-1949 and analyzes the themes expressed
within these movies. However, undercurrents of many of the themes in "The Philadelphia Story"
are covered within Gant's chapters:
Ch. Two: Re-invigorating the nation: popular films and American national identity
"The myth of classlessness"-- gives many examples from "The Best Years of
our Lives" that veterans who came home received issues of class to be resolved
which they quickly discovered were not; America was still perceived to be quite classist
"Modernizing the American hero"
"The Absent Father"
"Stars and Performance"
Bergman, Andrew Laurence. Depression America and Its Movies. University of Wisconsin: University of
Michigan Microfilms Inc, 1970.
Bergman offers a survey of how the film industry was affected by the Great Depression in
American history. He describes the changes that Hollywood underwent as a result of economic
crisis following the stock market crash in 1929. In addition to details of how general film-
making and production had to adjust to harder times during the Great Depression, Bergman
also notes the impact that the Great Depression had on the American public. For example,
the author explains how despite having less income to spend on leisurely pursuits, many
Americans started attending films in greater numbers during the Great Depression. This was in
no small part to the shifting cultural sentiments and attitudes of the time. Economic
hardship had a tremendous effect on how films were made and on who came to theaters to see
these movies.
Bergman's description of the movies produced during the years of the Great Depression
help to understand the immediate historical context that "The Philadelphia Story" was born
of. This perspective can be applied to how the film was influences by changes in the industry
as well as what was then popular with American audiences. In 1940 the United States was still
feeling the residual effects of the Great Depression and the movie industry could still
remember the harder times it had come across only a few years previous. Bergman explains that
1932 may have been the lowest point in Hollywood during the entire Great Depression; studios,
such as MGM were keenly aware of the financial risk that was taken with the production of
each film. This is an anxiety that should be kept in mind as an undercurrent that most likely
would have permeated behind the scenes in shooting "The Philadelphia Story". More importantly
perhaps is the statement that Americans wanted to see escapist films during this era. The
deprived public relished having a glimpse into the lives of the American over-privileged during
the Great Depression; the allure of the clothing, manner of speech, and general opulence of
the lives portrayed on-screen offered a temporary vacation from the dreary reality of the
unemployment lines. A chapter of Bergman's volume is titled "Federal Benevolence,
the Search for Authority, The Return of the Law, and Social Realism"; it reaffirms that
Americans were looking to have their values restored and moral codes re-validated during
this period. Watching members of the glamorous Philadelphia gentry celebrate a happy occasion
like a wedding would have offered an hour-and-a-half of escape from everyday life and a confirmation
that Americans were living a sound life.
Hodson, Joel C. "Chapter 1: Lowell Thomas and the Origins of the Popular Legend of Lawrence of Arabia." Lawrence of Arabia and American Culture: The Making of a Transatlantic Legend. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1995.
This article relates the crucial role Lowell Thomas had in perpetuating the legend of T. E. Lawrence and his exploits in Arabia. Although the author, Joel C. Hodson, acknowledges that even without the American reporter’s aid Lawrence would have garnered a reputation as a war hero, nevertheless it was Thomas who breathed the fire of legend into the Englishman. After spending July 1917 to March 1919 in Europe and Arabia, as a war correspondent to several American newspapers, although in name only, Thomas returned to America. Through a series of lectures and slide shows, and the publication of several biographies, Thomas exaggerated the adventures of Lawrence in the Arabian front, painting him as a figure more of legend than of history. Nonetheless, Hodson remains critical of some of the conniving reporter’s actions. It is clear that Thomas’s government-sanctioned mission of war propaganda was quickly forgotten in his personal desires for commercial success and lasting fame. As a result of these more selfish motivations, Thomas fabricated many stories of Lawrence’s campaign, and even claimed involvement in several battles of the Arab Revolt and a train demolition led by Lawrence’s Bedouin.
Joel Hodson’s article serves as an interesting piece of commentary on the effect that fabrication can have on the formulation of great public figures. It works as an interesting point of comparison between the methods that figures like the reporter, Thomas, and later the director of Lawrence of Arabia, David Lean, must utilize in order to dramatize history’s heroes. It seems that without the involvement of persons like Thomas, Lawrence's legend would not persist with the strength it has today. Perhaps this is why Robert Bolt, the writer of the screenplay for Lawrence of Arabia, chose to include the figure of the reporter within his film. It seems that life, just like film, needs its writers in order to create myths out of men.In this novel, author Christian Messenger analyzes the numerous factors that account for America’s love of The Godfather saga. By both objectively assessing the text of Puzo’s novel, and allowing himself to emotionally dive into it, Messenger offers a unique outlook on the effect of this work on American culture.
By looking at the time with which The Godfather was created, it is easy to see why it became such a phenomenal success. America was in a time of change. It had just gotten over the age of the Vietnam War and its many sociological consequences, just as the very power structure of the family and the country seemed to be changing everyday. Unsurprisingly, the release of the novel and shortly after, the film drew in massive numbers of fans who were ready and willing to believe in this sort of old-world philosophy of morals and business.
Once again, the idea of family is brought into sight. This would be the core of the story that would bring so many admirers back time and time again. The fact that audiences today still find an emotional connection to the film, as Messenger states, demonstrates that The Godfather holds a definitive plot in the recent history of American culture. Modern viewers are touched by the significance of family values in all that drives us. Messenger remarks that at points in the story, one is tempted to actually cheer for the cold-blooded murder of the enemies. The image of the family is so deeply rooted, that audiences take sides with the Corleone’s in their struggle for power.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1993.5.U6 H55 1990 v.6
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1993.5.U6 H55 1990 v.6
Call#: Annenberg Library Reference Ann Ref PN1993.5.U6 H55 1990 v.6
Call#: Annenberg Library Reference Ann Ref PN1993.5.U6 H55 1990 v.6
Call#: -
Call#: Van Pelt Library T14.5 .N93 1994
In this novel, author Christian Messenger analyzes the numerous factors that account for America’s love of The Godfather saga. By both objectively assessing the text of Puzo’s novel, and allowing himself to emotionally dive into it, Messenger offers a unique outlook on the effect of this work on American culture.
By looking at the time with which The Godfather was created, it is easy to see why it became such a phenomenal success. America was in a time of change. It had just gotten over the age of the Vietnam War and its many sociological consequences, just as the very power structure of the family and the country seemed to be changing everyday. Unsurprisingly, the release of the novel and shortly after, the film drew in massive numbers of fans who were ready and willing to believe in this sort of old-world philosophy of morals and business.
Once again, the idea of family is brought into sight. This would be the core of the story that would bring so many admirers back time and time again. The fact that audiences today still find an emotional connection to the film, as Messenger states, demonstrates that The Godfather holds a definitive plot in the recent history of American culture. Modern viewers are touched by the significance of family values in all that drives us. Messenger remarks that at points in the story, one is tempted to actually cheer for the cold-blooded murder of the enemies. The image of the family is so deeply rooted, that audiences take sides with the Corleone’s in their struggle for power.
Beidler also examines how the use of cinematography serves make The Best Years of Our Lives as true to life as possible. Most notabely, he delineates the production of “democratic shots,” in which innovative camera techniques allow for the focusing on all subjects and actions taking place in a given scene, allowing the audience to decide what to focus on. These “democratic shots” that encompass all action taking place within a given scene also lend the film the feeling of a home video. This point in particular is emphasized in the wedding scene at the end, where the guests’ mingling beforehand, the feeling of close quarters and sense of intimacy in Homer’s family’s small living room and anticipation of the bride are all conveyed through the filming. These insights into efforts to humanize the film and make it as accessible to audiences as possible plays a large role in understanding how the film was able to suceed in allowing people to relate to it, from plot to prop to filming. These less obvious qualities of the film, though small, contribute to audience’s ability to connect with it and its message, rendering it an effective tool in remembering of Word War II, specifically the profound way it changed everything.