Reviews (39)

Unhappy Landings !
I'm sure that many movie buffs will remember this fine, suspenseful thriller from the 60s. Jimmy Stewart is flying a cargo plane with an interesting assortment of male passengers across the Sahara desert, and he decides to battle through an oncoming sandstorm. The sandstorm wins ! The plane crash-lands in an ocean of sand--not without casualty--and our heroes are stranded, with limited supplies, under a brutal sun. The men waste several precious days on the assumption that help is on the way. They eventually realise that survival will depend on their own resilience and ingenuity.

Of course, we have one of the finest American actors in the lead, but Mr. Stewart is ably supported by a blue-chip international cast, including Richard Attenborough, Peter Finch, Hardy Kruger, Ernest Borgnine and Ian Bannen. As the sun gets hotter and with no rescue party in sight, this unfortunate group displays all of the human qualities that arise in desperate situations--resentment, fear, arrogance, assignment of blame, madness, cowardice and courage.

Richard Attenborough is the sensible voice of reason and compromise, which makes the scene where he finally "loses it", even more compelling. Peter Finch is the typical British "stiff upper lip " officer--stubborn and brave-- though I doubt that this role was much of a challenge to such a talented actor. Ernest Borgnine gets to chew up a little scenery as a guy who is pretty unhinged even before the plane crash--that blazing sun doesn't do him any good at all ! Well--it's 1965 and you need someone to play a brainy, cold, arrogant German--Hardy Kruger, come on down ! The other actors are excellent--Ian Bannen, in particular, is effective as a guy who would get under your skin even at the North Pole !

As another reviwer has noted, the film is perhaps longer than it needs to be, although it does give the characters plenty of time to interact with one another, and display the psychological aspects of the plot. After a while, you--the viewer--will also start to feel that oppressive heat and sand, and the tension of being trapped in this hell-on-earth. I can't really comment on the feasibility of the plan that Hardy Kruger's character comes up with to save everyone--I'm not an aeronautical engineer ! It certainly gives the film an exciting climax though.

I found the DVD picture to be beautiful--the sound typical for an almost 40-year old film.

"Phoenix" gave Jimmy Stewart another great role, later in his career, and with the supporting cast--and a liberal amount of suspense--this nice DVD could appeal to a variety of viewing tastes. Recommended.

GREAT CAST...great adventure
One of the great adventure movies of all time. I'm kinda surprised it hasn't been remade...it's a perfect little movie. Basically, we see the trevails of the survivors of a plane crash into the dunes of the Sahara. Their quest to find a way out is only part of the adventure...the human quarrels and intersecting interests are just as fascinating.

The movie has a slightly dated "manly" feel...there are no women, but it isn't a "tough guy" movie, a la, THE DIRTY DOZEN, let's say. These are military men, mostly, each with his own idea of how to escape. How all these efforts play out is at the heart of the movie.

Everyone is very good. Richard Attenborough is very good, and Peter Finch even better. What a underrated actor he was. He is certainly someone who should have had more work. Hardy Kruger is very fine...and his character holds the key to possible escape (and a VERY BIG humdinger of a surprise too!!). And James Stewart is at the top of his game. We so often remember him in romantic comedies like PHILADELPHIA STORY, and impersonators have done him no favors with their stammering, slightly dim-witted approach. When he was a mature actor (not an older, more feeble man)he could be very strong, and very unlikeable if need be. This is one of those roles. He is a convincing tough guy...not just a bland hero, but a hard-headed, sometimes wrong, leader. I put this right near the top of my Jimmy Stewart list.

If you haven't seen this movie, and you are an adult viewer who doesn't require lots and lots of noise and special-effects to have a good time...you MUST see this film. It is a nearly forgotten classic, in my estimation, and one that bears up very well with repeated viewings.

A gripping story of survival (and Jimmy stewart in the lead)
Any film with Jimmy Stewart in a leading role is sure to be a hit and Flight of the Phoenix doesn't disappoint.
A plane crash in the desert follows into a gripping two hour film of survival and hope. Led by Jimmy Stewart, the crew which include great acting talents like Richard Attenborough, Peter Finch and Ernest Borgnine courageously try to survive the desert heat, lack of water, and high tempers between crew members.
When all hope of a rescue is gone, an idea by a German model plane maker, to rebuild the crashed craft, initially not taken seriously by Jimmy Stewart, is eventually seen as the only option of survival and the movie climaxes into a gripping story of team effort and a race against time to get the plane flying. This is a highly recommended film that will have you on the edge of your seat right to the end. The film got 4stars because the UK DVD lacked even the simplest extra, like a trailer.

Flight got shortened
I had seen this movie probably half a dozen times over the years, and had always loved it. When it finally came out on DVD this year, I had to get it, but was VERY disappointed when I watched the DVD. As I was watching it, I kept saying to myself "this doesn't seem right"....and then I realized that there were quite a few shortened and even missing scenes from the original. Some of the missing scenes are quite significant. There is a scene where the group is moving the wing with the pulleys, and Capt. Towns stops them for no good reason, just to show that he is in charge. The whole scene where Towns and Dorfman have a silent standoff is missing, leading up to Dorfman asking the whole group "who is in authority here". I can go on and on with missing or shortened scenes. Very disappointing to me.I have read 35 other reviews and no one else has mentioned the shortened scenes. I am going to purchase the old VHS, to see the original version.

A forgotten classic?
I've seen this movie maybe half a dozen times and I'm pretty sure each time was a Sunday afternoon when I should have been doing homework. I think I made the right choice!

A decent cast for this movie, set in the unbearable heat of the central Sahara desert. Plane crashes and there is seemingly no way out. Someone has the idea of cannibalising the damaged plane to build another airplane to get them out of there as the only other way out is to walk and the surrounding natives are none too friendly. The design of the plane is undertaken by Hardy Kruger, who claims to have designed airplanes before. Unfortunately the only designs he has done are for children's model planes. Nevertheless, Attenborough, Stewart and the gang dig deep and finally make something flyable. But do they have enough cartridges to get the engines started? Watch and find out.

A gripping movie suitable for most ages. ... Read more

Reviews (216)

Go girl! Hitch's feminist fable.
Although Hitchcock listed this as one of his 2 favorite films, I had once viewed it as "closet drama" because of the limited set, conventional bad guy, passive good guy. The voyeuristic angle was interesting, even provocative to a point, but insufficient to save the movie from its sense of claustrophobic one-dimensionality.

That was before I viewed the film through the eyes of Grace Kelly. In one respect, the critical, pivotal moment in the movie is not when Kelly puts herself at risk in Raymond Burr's apartment, nor is it the film's climax with James Stewart fending off the murderer with his camera's flash bulbs. Rather, it's the moment when Hitchcock's camera (not Stewart's) shows Kelly's eyes suddenly open wide and come alive when she, too, becomes interested in the scenes being played out on the other side of the court yard.

At this point, within the first half of the film, Kelley drops her high society, fashion-model airs and her constant mothering of Stewart. She now spectates with greater curiosity and imagination than Stewart, and even though she questions these "rear window ethics" and characterizes her behavior as "ghoulish," it's clear she has become a major player, fully participating in the game of voyeurism, scopophilia, and fetishism that is normally assigned only to men who fail to emerge from an obsessively narcissistic and hedonistic childhood.

For the past 20 years feminist academics have been applying "male gaze theory" to just about every film in sight, and invariably to the discredit of the male. He is the subject; she's the object; he's the one who sees; she's the one who is seen; he owns the gaze in all of his power, pleasure, and guilt; she can only helplessly follow the gaze, experiencing a kind of masochistic pleasure at best.

In "Rear Window" Hitchcock, frequently depicted by feminist critics as a mother-obsessed misogynist, turns gaze theory on its head. Grace Kelly demonstrates that a woman can get as much pleasure from looking as do men--an irony of collossal proportions when we consider that as a high fashion model her role, if not job, is to be looked at and photographed.

But Hitchcock's film manages to liberate its central heroine's vision while preserving the "institutions" of marriage, motherhood, and femininity. What is the object of Kelly's pursuit while playing the game at its most intense moment? A wedding ring, which she flashes before the probing telescopic lens of Stewart. And at the end of the film, the camera makes clear that, pending his recovery from double castration (both legs are now broken), he will no longer go off on adventures without Kelly at his side. But then, of course, Hitch has his final little joke when, once Stewart goes to sleep, Kelly (now wearing pants) puts away her mountain-climbing magazine and replaces it with a high fashion title. Still, a radical film for Hitchcock and, for that matter, most other filmmakers.

The DVD makes it all the more possible to read the visual dynamics of the film, permitting razor sharp stills of the principals' faces and eyes, disclosing the act of seeing to a degree never before possible.

Checking Out a Murder with Hitchcock
A daredevil confined to a wheelchair is the concept of Alfred Hitchcock's comedy-mystery "Rear Window", a man of action so bored with his confinement that he begins spying on the neighbors he can see across his Greenwich Village courtyard: the frustrated composer,the "interpretative dancer", the newlyweds, the desperately lonely spinster ... and the bickering couple. The wife suddenly disappears. Has she been murdered? L.B. Jeffries thinks so, and he convinces his fiancée Lisa (Grace Kelly) and the insurance company nurse Stella (Thelma Ritter) who visits him every day. (Jeffries, a professional photographer, has been temporarily disabled in an accident.) This set-up is perfect for Hitchcock, who loved tense situations in close quarters ("Life Boat", "Rope"), and who was in top form when he directed this masterpiece of entertainment in 1954. (There was a made-for-TV remake a few years back; according to... reviewers, it's pretty awful.) James Stewart was one of Hollywood's most popular personalities, but he was often mis-cast. He was pushing fifty when he played the 25-year old Lindbergh in"The Spirit of St Louis". Similarly, in "Rear Window" he's too mature for the lead. The part just weeps for William Holden. Stewart even takes his shirt off in a couple of scenes, revealing a pale, thin physique. The idea that Grace Kelly would travel all the way down from the East Sixties to Greenwich Village to spend the evening with him is a little ... well,unbelievable. Miss Kelly is almost as seductive here as she was in her next Hitchcock "To Catch a Thief".The Master was obviously infatuated -- but, then, who wasn't? She also had a droll sense of humor: the way she pronounces "weird" is priceless. Thelma Ritter and Wendell Corey give witty support. Raymond Burr, just a couple of years away from playing the most famous of fictional lawyers, is quite creepy as the killer Thorwald. The sound track is a mixed marvel of car traffic, distant voices, and snatches of music; it sounds great with stereophonic ear phones. About the only real complaint in John Michael Hayes' screenplay that the pragmatic might bring up: Doesn't Jeffries ever LOCK his door?

Trapped in a Sound Stage
I don't think this is Hitch's best film. It is highly ranked by film rating services, sometimes higher than Vertigo, but I can't agree. There's something claustrophobic about what is essentially a movie set. We are stuck in that lofty room with the big glass windows. Jimmy Stewart peers across a courtyard and observes New Yorkers in their habitat. When I was in elementary school we used to have projects called diorama's where we would take a shoebox and decorate it like a stage. Each apartment in Hitch's diorama showcases a mostly silent vignette, the gorgeous dancer and her boyfriends, the lonely-heart middle-age lady, the sex crazed newlyweds, and the guy who kills his wife. Stewart can watch all the fun, but with a broken leg, he can't leave the apartment to do anything about it. Hence, the suspense centers on Stewarts inability to maneuver when his girlfriend, fashion gal, Grace Kelly breaks into the killers apartment to find clues. We see the killer coming down the hall and Jimmy can't warn her from his perch. Stewart and Kelly are interesting as a couple with opposite interests. She's high fashion-society chick and he's a rough-it, world-traveling photographer. These differences never really resolve and Stewart appears maybe 15-20 years older than young marriage-scheming Grace. This is really a stage play with stage play lighting and a who-dun-it plot. Great suspense, yes, but not as good as Vertigo by a mile.

The Perfect Alfred Hitchcock Movie
North By Northwest and Vertigo are spectacular cinematic achievements but, for me, Rear Window is the one Hitchcock movie everyone must see. It is as perfect as a Hitchcock movie can be. One of the greatest American movies ever made. Not one false note. It is the movie I would show to someone who hasn't seen a Hitchcock movie but wonders what they're all about and why he's so revered. The tremendous psychological drama and cat and mouse suspense are perfectly tuned. Stewart turns in a brillantly nuanced performance as a morally dubious peeping tom. The film is about him, of course. Not about an unseen murder or a pieced together amateur murder investigation. Listen to the dialogue and observe the interactions between Stewart and his guests. Subtext and more subtext. Just perfect.

If you prefer souffle over meat or casserolle
5 stars as a piece of cinematic craft. 1 star as substance. another hitchcock exercise of excellent pacing, subtle humor and
droll commentary on the folly of human behavior, heavy on dramatic artifice, as are most of hitchcok's films. ... Read more

Reviews (28)

The man who invented big band!
"The Glenn Miller Story" can be enjoyed even by someone who's not a fan of big band or jazz music. It's for everyone especially music lovers of all tastes. Jimmy Stewart is cast superbly here and at times you're thinking you're watching the actual Glenn Miller himself and not the actor. The music of Glenn Miller is brought to life so magically with its captivating soundtrack filled with his most memorable tunes and melodies like "Chattanooga Choo-Choo" and the one everyone knows: "Moonlight Serenade." The colors on this film are vivid and make you wish you'd want to be there. It was indeed tragic to lose such a great musician all too soon. You still hear his music in movies, nightclubs, theaters and more. All in all, it is a neat movie to look at and to hear remembering the trombonist who became the leader of the band: Glenn Miller.

5 stars for the music.....as for the story.....well.......
This film is a typical Hollywood b.s. story. A lot of incidents were made up for the film, for example, the Chummy McGregor-Glenn Miller friendship going back to the Ben Pollock Orchestra days, which was years before they even met! And it's too bad Miller didn't come up with his "sound" so easily!!! About the parts of the movie that are true-to-life is the relationship between Glenn and Helen, as performed by two of my favorite actors, James Stewart and June Allyson.

However, the music in this film (orchestrated by Universal Pictures staff composer, Henry Mancini) more than makes up for the deficiencies in the story. The orchestra assembled does a excellent job re-creating Miller's hits (far better than some of the ghost bands later organized by the Miller Estate).

You'll enjoy the music, especially in stereo, just don't take the story seriously.

Also, the VHS version has a couple of scenes clipped to make the movie time out to 120 minutes. Hopefully, these scenes will be restored when the movie is released on DVD (in March, 2003, as a double feature with The Benny Goodman Story, another Hollywood b.s. bio-pic).

Here's a interesting factoid: Harry (Henry) Morgan ("Chummy MacGregor") actually appeared in a film with the real Glenn Miller, "Orchestra Wives". Unfortunately, they did not appear in any scenes together.

That Sound
This was the highest grossing American film of 1954; had he wanted to, James Stewart could probably have ended up owning Universal Studios, so vastly indebted were they to him at this stage for the string of hits he'd produced for them. Director Anthony Mann too. It's a pretty easygoing look at the not-so easygoing bandleader Glenn Miller from his earliest days as a sideman trombonist and arranger to his becoming the top pop musician in the United States. Very interesting and enlightening about the way Miller searched for his own distinctive sound to set him apart from the hundreds of other jazz bands of the day. It also pretty much set the tone for the mysterioso treatment that has ever since surrounded Miller's disappearance in the European theater during WW2 in 1944. The theories are that his plane crashed in England and has yet to be found, or that returning bombers from an unsuccessful mission accidentally dumped their loads on his plane over the Channel. Neither gets any exploration here; Miller just ascends into band heaven. Pretty good performances all around, especially the wonderful and always reliable George Tobias as the theater owner/agent.

Evocative and Amazing
It happens every time. When you watch a film with James Stewart in it certain things happen.

The film begins, we see Mr. Stewart appear in character, he is the same, tall ,lanky and charismatic. As the film proceeds on..slowly but surely, Mr Stewart becomes " That" character he is playing. Soon the viewer is hooked by the total talent of Jim Stewart , he invites us in to each character he is playing.

He is Glenn Miller for us here in this film. If we didnt see Glenn Miller while he was around this is a good chance to see a close example.It does not matter how accurate the film is really.
Those who carp about accuracy should pick up a biography. Those who love the mystique will watch and enjoy the timeless Glenn Miller through James Stewart.

I cant see Krupa or Satchmo in any biography , and for sure I cant hear them. In this film I can..with superb effect. A snapshot in time of our musical history.

Finally, I was not around during during the Miller era however,

after viewing this film .. " I was there"

C Pope

Another mistreatment of a classic
Let's clarify a couple of things.

First, this movie IS INDEED anamorphic, despite the claim of another writer that the package was wrong in claiming such.

Secondly, to expect any biographical picture out of Hollywood to NOT play loosely with the facts is expecting a bit much. After all, from "The Babe Ruth Story" to "JFK", Hollywood has always subscribed to the theory of "fictional biographies".

Frankly, I found this movie to be quite enjoyable. First, ANY movie with Jimmy Stewart has something going for it. Throw in some FANTASTIC music, and a great...albeit way to short...cameo by Louis Armstrong, and this movie is a real piece of cinematic history.

Unfortunately, Universal Pictures seems to have a different opinion, as they have given this picture a very bare-bones AND shabby release.

The picture, while widescreen AND anamorphic, has a VHS quality to it. Some portions had an "out of focus" appearance. But most distracting was a frequent pulsating color...going from bright to dull to bright...ad infinitum. In some instances, this REALLY distracted from the enjoyment of...and the concentration on...the movie.

Having seen other pictures from this era with wonderfully clear transfers, I can but only believe that this was merely the result of laziness, cheapness, or carelessness on the part of Universal.

As this is not considered a classic in most film circles, I doubt this movie will ever see a second release. So sad, as it could be so enjoyable with a good picture. As it is, I hate to say it, but I'd recommend against a purchase. ... Read more

Description

Katharine Hepburn reprises her triumphant Broadway role as a spoiled heir on the verge of marrying a snoot...but not if her ex-hubby (Cary Grant) and smitten reporter (James Stewart) can help it! ... Read more

Reviews (92)

True classic, beautifully preserved and re-released.....
Despite the fact that this film raises issues that are not very potent today, it remains to be a timeless classic because of its sheer artistic value. This great artistic value is largely due to the brilliant idea (the idea of creating a play about Kathrene Hepburn [not literally, of course], for Kathrene Hepburn), the plot itself, and film's charming and witty script. Hepburn is the only and true star in this story, although I can appreciate Stewart and Grant in their roles. But truly, it would not have mattered much artistically, if different supporting cast was chosen. Apparently, it did matter to RKO commercially a great deal. Thank God for that, because Stewart, Grant, Hussey, and Howard all added something to the film. The result is a story with a "love...well, let's just say, more than a usual triangle", that revolves around one Philadelphia society girl and a few of her eccentric family members. The DVD has an outstanding sound and picture quality. Cute little menu and original theatrical trailer are also included. It is nice to know that this great film will stay with us for generations to come and enjoy it.

See it............ NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is all I need to say:

Cary Grant Katharine Hepburn Jimmy Stewart GREAT PERFORMANCES ALL AROUND, ESPECIALLY FROM THE THREE AMAZING STARS AND RUTH HUSSET!

But I'll say more anyway.

Upper class lady Tracy Lord is about to be married to George Kittridge, general manager of Quaker State something or other (I haven't watched it for a month or so) after two years before divorcing CK Dexter Haven.

Spy Magazine big cheese Sindney Kidd sends Macauly Conner and Elizabeth Imbry to get an inside story on the wedding of Tracy Lord, and George Kittridge. They are to get inside via Tracy's ex husband Dexter, who decides to help for revenge against his ex-bride.

Hilarity ensues via needle sharp dialogue, carefully hidden gags, and terrific performances.

I haven't seen one movie by Cary Grant that I haven't liked; I have seen thrity-two. I Have only seen two Jimmy Stewart and Kate Hepburn that I didn't really enjoy a-piece, and I've seen about twenty or more of theirs.

And Cuckor's direction inspired many directors to choose alternative direction styles.

YES, BUY THIS ONE, YOU WON'T REGRET IT.
This is my absolute favorite performance by the great Katherine Hepburn. She is breathtaking and absolutely wonderful. Brilliant performances all across the board, an especially funny performance by James Stewart is just the icing on the cake. Cary Grant,one of my faves, also delivers a magnificent performance. Also worth mentioning is the very beautiful Ruth Hussey, whose potrayal of Liz is stunning. She was one of the most attractive actresses at the time, in my humble opinion. This movie is very funny and the sets and costumes are among the best Hollywood has ever offered. I highly recommend this as a must own.

Perfection!
So well written, so elegant! My favorite film.

The REAL High Society
Branded by Hollywood as "Box Office Poison" (usually the death blow to an actor's career), Katherine Hepburn put all of her eggs in this ONE basket, to prove she's still a force to be recconned with. Reprising her stage role, Kate secures the rights for the film version of "The Philadelphia Story". The trick worked. Katherine Hepburn was back as a big star on the Hollywood Sky.

Tracy Lord (Katherine Hepburn), a spoiled socialite scheduled to remarry when her first husband, C.K. Dexterhaven (Cary Grant) shows up as uninvited wedding guest. Add to the mix, Mike Connor (James Stewart) a reporter who is supposed to be covering the wedding for the tabloids but winds up falling for Tracy himself. The brief triangle has a predictable ending.

Less glamorous than the 1955 Technicolor Musical re-make "High Society" with Grace Kelly and Bing Crosby, this black & white Classic remains the superior production. Somewhat dated (definitely 1940s Movie Star Magazine material), this is still a groundbreaking romantic comedy. Ted Turner: Please keep your crayons away from this one!**** ... Read more

Description

James Stewart stars as Elwood P. Dowd, a wealthy alcoholic whose sunny disposition and drunken antics are tolerated by most of the citizens of his community. That is, until Elwood begins to claim that he has a friend named Harvey who is an invisisble six foot rabbit. Elwood's snooty socialite sister, Veta, determined to marry off her daughter Myrtle to a respectable man, begins to plot to keep Elwood's lunacy from interfering. ... Read more

Reviews (69)

Pookah Power!
Loving Veta thinks her brother Elwood has a problem. But Elwood feels he doesn't have a problem at all! Okay maybe he drinks a little, but when he is bothered by something he can always turn to his best friend, Harvey. Where is the problem in that? The problem stems from the fact that Harvey is a six foot three invisible rabbit. From this simple concept spins a most charming story about psychoanalysis.

The film was adapted from the Pulitzer Prize winning play of the same name and it never falls far from those roots. The entire film carries most of the dialogue and farcical scenes that thrilled theater crowds. The cast is stellar but the strongest performances come from Josephine Hull as Veta and from Jimmy Stewart's surprisingly dark turn as alcoholic Elwood P Dowd.

The DVD has a special audio introduction by Jimmy Stewart recorded just before his death. As it was shot, the film is in a pristine full-screen black and white and will keep purists happy. However, younger children may find the stage-like pacing and lack of color nothing short of deadly. Otherwise, this is a great family film sure to spur some interesting discussions.

Aren't We All A Little Crazy?
Jimmy Stewart stars as Elwood P. Dowd, a very ordinary man except for the fact he sees and talks to a large white rabbit (a pooka, actually). His overwrought sister Veta can't take it anymore, since he is ruining the chances of her daughter Myrtle Mae finding a suitable husband. She wants to get him committed to the Chumley Sanitarium. And that's when things begin to get very complicated for all concerned. As comedies go, Harvey isn't one of those riotous, laugh out loud howlers. It does have some laugh out loud moments, mostly supplied by the inimitable Josephine Hull as poor Veta. She's extremely funny, with her quavering, fluttery voice, and expressive eyes. The comedy is more gentle and rooted in human nature. Stewart hits all the right notes as Elwood, a terminally calm and happy man who seems much more at peace with himself and the world than the apparently sane people around him. He and the film leave you questioning what the harm is in a man who sees a big white rabbit, but loves life and making friends and who really disturbs no one. After all, don't we all have our own oddities and quirks - myself excepted, of course ;) .

One of James Stewart finest...
Elwood P. Dowd's (James Stewart) best friend is an invisible 6-foot rabbit named Harvey with whom he likes to spend his time with in bars drinking. This is something most people in Elwood's hometown find disturbing so his sister attempts to put Elwood in a mental institution. However, Elwood is perfectly happy with his situation and with Harvey. Harvey is a story that depicts two sides, one pessimistic and one optimistic. The gloomy side presents problems such as alcoholism, isolation, and cynicism. However, these negative issues are presented through light comedy and Elwood's positive view of life, which is a result of his friend Harvey. This story offers a blissful journey, which presents moments of self-reflection and amusement.

"Harvey and I warm ourselves in these golden moments."
Mostly everyone has had an imaginary friend at one time or another when growing up. Henry Koster's "Harvey" posits the notion that perhaps some imaginary friends are not imaginary after all. Yep, according to this film, it just might be true that there are invisible entities among us who are in actuality playful spirits. Therefore, think twice about dismissing the next person you see talking to no one in particular.

Elwood P. Dowd (James Stewart) is a simple man who is befriends everyone he meets. However, he does have one eccentric characteristic about him - his constant companion is an invisible rabbit who is over six feet tall named Harvey. Elwood always is keen to point his friend out but no one can see or has ever seen Harvey. Concerned about his mental health, Elwood's sister, Veta Louise Simmons (Josephine Hull) decides to have her brother committed to a sanatorium. The plan goes awry when the sanatorium staff mistakenly commits the wrong person and releases Elwood. A chase ensues when the situation is sorted out even though Elwood hasn't the slightest clue about what all the fuss around him is about.

"Harvey" is a cute film on one level and an insightful commentary on perception and sanity on another. Yet, it is a one-joke film that gets more and more tired as it goes along. Stewart brings much conviction to his role but his trademark charm is not enough to save the production. The screwball-comedy-inspired sequences at the sanatorium are amusing but are nothing people familiar with the genre have not seen before. "Harvey" is unfortunately too simple a film for adults and too slow for children. It boasts a great Jimmy Stewart performance but is one of the mid-tier films in his filmography.

Say Hello to Harvey
True insight comes from within-and it doesn't hurt to have an oversized friend giving you some guidance. Just ask Elwood, an eccentric bon vivant who has just that- a seldom seen, but often heard ( through Stewart ), six-foot-plus Rabbit friend, named Harvey.

Some in town just don't get it, and others even want to lock Elwood and Harvey away, so that they are out of view. Our two protagonists take it all in stride and teach those around them about the value of seeing the good in everybody instead of the bad.

Elwood is having too much fun to let life get in the way. Timeless film about societal concern of keeping up one's image, over substance and true friendship. One of James Stewart's best screen performances. ... Read more

Reviews (55)

Not made for the small screen
Like IMAX films released on dvd...what's the point? This was made for the biggest movie screens ever conceived.

I was lucky to see this film a few years ago in genuine 3-strip CINERAMA on an archival print from the original release. On the big screen it's an amazing experience. The uneven story fades away when one is viewing the spectacular cinematography. CINERAMA captured vast scenes in incredible richness and detail. It's an experience like no other.

On the small screen at home you mainly notice the technical flaws, the borders between the three separate images, and also the dated 1960's Hollywood "Old West" story. (Carroll Baker's makeup is never smudged, even when tilling the soil.) The first two segments are the best dramatically.

One aspect that is still great at home is the magnificent score by Alfred Newman. So save your money, buy the soundtrack, and head to Seattle, LA, or England or where ever you can find an exhibition of the real CINERAMA.

America's own "Triumph of the Will" -- Leni would be proud!
In a remarkable coincidence, the same day I saw "How the West was Won" at the Seattle Cinerama (03/01/03), the History Channel aired a program on the history of the wheel. One of the talking-head experts opined that the wheel's invention marked a fundamental change in human thought -- not only was there a technological solution to every problem, but nature could be bent to human will, forced to reveal her secrets and serve us.

This is the theme of "How the West was Won." It starts with the title, and extends to nearly everything in the film. The narration tells us that the land had to be wrested from nature and from the "primitive people" who inhabited (and by implication, infested) it. The chorus is continually singing about how "we're headed for the promised land" and those who are willing to work hard will be richly rewarded (except the Chinese railroad laborers, of course). We were justified in overrunning the continent because we are actually "doing something" with it -- as opposed to the Indians, who merely lived there in harmony with nature. Not having invented the wheel, they saw no further possibilities.

James Webb's script acknowledge the culture clash between the Americans and the native peoples, recognizing that the latter will have to eventually change or be destroyed. But this is peripheral to the celebration of the industry, hard work, and sacrifice of the Americans, who "tamed" the wilderness. The film ends with a nausea-inducing flyover of the California freeways (I sat next to a guy who'd taken Dramamine in anticipation of such scenes), followed by a flight under the Golden Gate bridge, firmly and unambiguously driving the point home.

"How the West was Won" is social propaganda, plain and simple. It's the kind of film that could change Osama Bin Laden's mind about destroying the US. (Maybe the State Department could arrange a screening...)

As a movie, there's no denying "How the West was Won" is wildly entertaining. Simply as cinematic spectacle, it works magnificently. There are films (such as "2001" and "Lawrence of Arabia") that even the finest video transfer cannot do justice to, and this is one of them. Sitting in the first few rows, you're so close to the screen that you can't take in all of it at once. When the camera tracks into a scene, the sense of physical motion is uncanny. (Can you say "stimulation of peripheral vision"? Sure you can.) And if you haven't seen a buffalo stampede, or a train crash, or a row of cannons firing in sequence on a (roughly) 30' by 90' screen -- well, you haven't lived, cinematically-wise.

Story-wise, there's so much material to cover the script cannot begin to do it justice, even in a film lasting 2½ hours. Characters are more types than individuals, and almost every performer is cast to type. (Eli Wallach, in particular, gets to do his "crazy Mexican outlaw" shtick, though without an accent.) It's only the efficiency and focus of the script that keeps the actors from looking altogether foolish. Other than (perhaps) Karl Malden, no one gives what would be considered a "real" performance.

The plot (which follows the Prescott family and its descendents over 50 years) is concocted to make Debbie Reynolds' character the sort of farm girl who wants to run off to the big city to become rich, so we're treated to several (mercifully brief) song-and-dance numbers. Her sister is played by Carol Baker, who falls head over heels in love with Jimmy Stewart's "aw-shucks" mountain man, and later "tames" him (as the film's conceit requires). The rest of the film rehashes just about every cliché of westerns and Civil War movies -- though entertainingly. The final sequence posits the "conquest" of the West as occurring when "the law" (in the form of George Peppard's marshall) arrives, to establish justice. But Peppard -- who says he wants to bring the bad'un to justice in court -- shoots him to death, anyway.

My five-star rating acknowledges this is a classic film -- not necessarily a great one.

I can't pass up the opportunity to trash Pauline Kael, who was not so much a hard-nosed-but-movie-loving critic as she was an empty-headed, loudmouthed [female canine]. Note how she uses the artistic limitations of a single sentence to craft a thoughtful, insightful commentary that will help the reader better understand this film...

"'How the West Was Lost' would be a more appropriate title for this dud epic, since, as conceived by the writer, James R. Webb, the pioneers seem to be dimwitted bunglers who can't do anything right."

Hello? Were we watching the same movie? "How the West was Won" might be politically incorrect, dramatically shallow, and little more than agit-prop -- but it's no dud. The Seattle audience -- which included many people sporting "No Iraq War" buttons -- just ate it up. "How the West was Won" is Hollywood middlebrow-populist entertainment at its best.

One final question... Where did they find a stunt man who looked like Agnes Moorhead?

Wake me when it's over
I kind of figured television was responsible for this... movie. HOW THE WEST WAS WON dvd comes with a featurette on the making of the movie, in which we learn that the movie studios developed the Cinerama process (three cameras shot the movie which was projected onto three specially designed screens. Think IMAX) to present an alternative "viewing experience" to compete with television.
Watching this on television, even in a letterbox edition, is excruciating. There are visible bars where the three screens meet. Often the color in one screen doesn't jibe with that of the adjoining screen.
Those defects could be corrected by digital manipulation, I suppose, but what's the point? The Cinerama screen was meant to wrap around the audience and a television screen is flat. What can't be corrected is the lack of close-ups and a surplus of dead space.
Almost all the action takes place in the center panel, and the closest we get to the action is in a medium shot. Most of the time there's nothing happening on the edge panels. Two-thirds of the screen is dead. The only time Cinerama seemed to shine was when chaotic action was swiftly coming at the audience, which is why we are so often treated to onrushing trains and galloping horses and stampeding buffalo shot from a camera in the ground. I think it would have taken a visual genius the likes of a Busby Berkeley to exploit Cinerama's potential without having to open the paddock.
The featurette also tells us HTWWW had a cast of 12,000. I guess maybe a dozen of them weren't miscast, but that's just a guess. The movie opens with Jimmy Stewart, out of character as mountain man Linus Rawlings, canoeing along a river while Spencer Tracy narrates over the action: '(The land) known only to the lonely trappers wandering its vastness in search of beaver...' One and a half scenes later Linus skids his bark next to the Prescott campsite and gives Carroll Baker a pelt to stroke....
Okay. I was bored. What can I say? At least I was paying attention. When Debbie Reynolds delivers a rousing rendition of 'Raise a Ruckus' for the despondent members of the wagon train I wasn't paying much attention at all. By the time Eli Wallach was glaring daggers at George Peppard's kids I was wondering whether or not one should fill in that little hole in the middle of a dvd when you make it into a coaster.

Middling story and atrocious transfer
I like westerns. My favorite entries in the genre are spaghetti westerns, those cheap, ultra low budget Italian takes on the American West. I always try to fit some of these movies into my viewing schedule, and when the day came where I considered it time to watch Sergio Leone's epic "Once Upon a Time in the West," I headed out to rent it. Imagine my surprise when I got home and saw that I inadvertently checked out "How the West Was Won" instead. I scratched my head, not familiar at all with the title. After all, I like westerns but I don't know a lot about the genre or the films I have yet to see. When I saw the cast list for this 1962 movie, I decided not to take it back without watching and seeing if I liked it. I think I would be remiss to have skipped this one on initial impression alone; the cast list reads like a "who's who" of mid twentieth century Hollywood. You've got Carroll Baker, Lee J. Cobb, Agnes Moorehead, Jimmy Stewart, Henry Fonda, George Peppard, Debbie Reynolds, Eli Wallach, John Wayne, Richard Widmark, Walter Brennan, Karl Malden, Carolyn Jones, Harry Morgan, Raymond Massey, and Robert Preston filling the roles. Spencer Tracy voices the narration. Howard Hawks and John Ford directed specific segments of the film. What a list of talent! Couldn't go wrong with a movie like this one, right? Wrong.

As amazing as it seems, "How the West Was Won" is not a very good experience. The movie runs for an eternity as it attempts to describe the different experiences in settling the American West. At the beginning of the film, the Prescott clan heads out to the West in search of farmland and a new beginning. Zebulon Prescott (Karl Malden), his wife Rebecca (Agnes Moorehead), and two daughters Eve (Carroll Baker) and Lilith (Debbie Reynolds) travel down the recently completed Erie Canal and travel out into what Illinois or Missouri. Along the way, they encounter a traveling fur trapper named Linus Rawlings (Jimmy Stewart), who stays with the family for a day or so, just long enough to fall in love with one of the daughters. After Zeb and Rebecca perish in an unfortunate rafting accident, Rawlings reemerges to take care of Eve and eventually establish a farm at the sight of the accident. These two will have children-one named Zebulon Rawlings (George Peppard)-who will eventually fight in the Civil War. Zeb Rawlings then leaves the family property to his brother as he moves further west fighting Indians for the railroads and working as a law officer. He ends up thwarting a nasty train robbery in Arizona some fifty years after his grandparents expired on that raft.

The other daughter, Lilith, ends up in St. Louis working as a dancer and actress when she learns that she inherited a gold mine in California. As she prepares to head west, a slick card shark named Cleve Van Valen (Gregory Peck) convinces Lily to take him along. There's a minor competition for Lily's affections between Van Valen and Roger Morgan (Robert Preston), another guy on the wagon train. The gold mine doesn't pan out in the end, so Lilith and Cleve end up falling in love and marrying, eventually going on to build and lose several huge family fortunes. Of course, Lily's travels to the coast are fraught with perils, such as an Indian attack on the wagon train and a song and dance number at a campsite. I kept hoping the filmmakers would insert a Donner Party type situation that would require Gregory Peck to consume either Robert Preston or Debbie Reynolds, but no such luck. In any event, the movie seems to focus more on the Rawlings clan than it does on Lily's experiences.

Sadly, many of the great actors in the movie rarely appear. Raymond Massey plays Abraham Lincoln, John Wayne and Harry Morgan are General William Tecumseh Sherman and General Ulysses S. Grant respectively, and Lee J. Cobb is a Marshal in Arizona. Even Eli Wallach as an outlaw is a ghostly shadow of the villain he played in Leone's "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly." The huge cast list highlights the central problem of the film, namely that the filmmakers tried to do too much. Very few of the characters we see receive proper development. The focus here is on shock and awe photography and scenery, not the individuals taking part in the events. "How the West Was Won" was the first film shot in Cinerama, and, I think, a prime example of how Hollywood abuses a new technology. We see the same thing going on today with the CGI effects in those top-heavy special effects bonanzas. Everyone wants to use a new cinematic technique, so much so that they rely solely on the effect and lose sight of the human element. A bit less spectacle and a lot more interaction between the cast would have helped this movie succeed.

I hate to say it, but the DVD version of this film could use a lot of work. You can literally see the two lines dividing the picture into three segments in the transfer. Not only is this enormously annoying, it's completely unacceptable. I can't believe the studio techs couldn't release a seamlessly restored version of this film. The disc does contain a short documentary detailing the Cinerama process along with a few bits about the stunts in the film, but the shoddy picture quality of the movie will dampen your enthusiasm for any extras. I imagine some people would like the actual movie better than I did though no one should settle for the poor transfer. I suggest waiting for a special edition disc.

Needs a better format, anamorphic
I saw the film in LA, at the original Cinerama, in the original
showing. This film is not going to be right until shown in
HDTV (HD-DVD), but for Pete's sake, why letterbox ?

What a trashy way to treat this classic. Stick a crowbar in your
wallet and spring for an anamorphic release. When the HD-DVD with
proper restoration shows up, I'll buy a copy of that, not rent. ... Read more

Reviews (67)

The Little Guys Triumphs
I have to admit that I have never been a big fan of Frank Capra's directing or the stories he chose. But this movie scores for me. James Stewart is simply amazing as Jefferson Smith, the naive young man who discovers that Washington and politicians are not what they seem to be. Jean Arthur, an actress who seems to be forgotten these days, is excellent as the secretary who has seen it all. Claude Rains and Harry Carey do well in supporting performances as a senator and the president of the Senate. The underlying themes about political corruption and the power of the people still work today. The scenes surrounding the filibuster are unforgettable, and you'll find yourself routing for the little guy, something I thought I was too cynical to do myself.

Jimmy Stewart's Finest Performance in Capra Gem!
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is a timeless, brilliant parable of Good Vs. Evil, played out in the U.S. Senate. Good is represented by Jimmy Stewart, in the film he SHOULD have won an Oscar for (MGM, trying to bolster 'Goodbye, Mr. Chips' at the box office, influenced it's Academy members to award Robert Donat with the statue; the following year, Stewart appeared in 'The Philadelphia Story', for MGM, and won Best Actor!). He is magnificent as Jefferson Smith, an idealistic youth leader, who is offered up as an innocent and gullible replacement for a Senate vacancy. Evil is personified by Claude Rains, as the suave and corrupt senior Senator, and Edward Arnold, brilliant as a ruthless party boss.

In many ways, 'Smith' is cut from the same cloth as Capra's earlier masterpiece, 'Mr. Deeds Goes to Town', and both films costar the radiant Jean Arthur, here cast as Smith's secretary. She is an old hand at understanding political wheelings and dealings, and at first, she considers her new boss a total idiot! But Smith's integrity wins her over, and with the help of reporter Thomas Mitchell (1939's busiest actor!), the three manage to outlast the forces of Evil, in the most rousing filabuster Hollywood has ever filmed!

Two supporting characters deserve special attention; Harry Carey, one of Hollywood's most beloved Western stars, plays a warm, sympathetic Vice President, in a small but very crucial role; and Beulah Bondi is terrific as Stewart's mother (she would play his mother again in the Capra/Stewart classic 'It's A Wonderful Life').

The new DVD edition offers the insights of Frank Capra, Jr., son of the legendary filmmaker, as well as trailers, vintage material, and a whole lot more!

If you've seen 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington' before, treat yourself with this lavish new edition! If you haven't seen it, you are in for one of the most wonderful cinema experiences you'll ever have, from the best year Hollywood ever had!

Simply put, this film is a masterpiece!

An All-American Film
This movie is perfect for July 4th..in fact, I watched this movie for the first time on this day! If you want to see how a bill is passed, what the Senate consist of in the government, how people in politics are after, great monuments like the Capitol and Lincoln, and a great storyline, this is the movie for you.
Jimmy Stewart played Jeff Smith, a Boy Scout ranger who loves America, was picked as a Senator. His honesty and rookie nature made him a ruse for the experienced Senators who are out to get him and throw him out of office with their lies. Meanwhile, he did find a friend who went with him all the way...his secretary, Clarissa (who falls in love with him). You will have to find out the rest of the movie what happens when people found out that Smith was telling the truth all along, and the bad guys.
This is a great movie!! Go watch it!

THE LAST "CONSERVATIVE" MOVIE?
In 1939, Frank Capra made "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington", starring Jimmy Stewart. I have sources that tell me a film was made 10 years later that depicted the Republican as a good guy, but I could not verify it. To the best of my knowledge, "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" is the last big screen film in which the Democrat was the bad guy, and even then it is only inferred. In Capra's classic, a Midwestern political machine based on the corrupt Democrat organization in Kansas City that Harry Truman rose to power in, is exposed by an idealistic young Senator (Stewart). Claude Rains plays the Truman character. He looked just like him, and in end gives a Senate floor mea culpa of his complicity with Democrat crimes, which is highly, precisely and to quintessential effect the same one "Give 'em hell Harry" should have given, but never did. All is not lost for the Democrats, however, because Stewart is still a Democrat, and the hope for the future. In reality, the Democrats just got more corrupt, and Hollywood would be their willing ally.

STEVEN TRAVERS
Author of "Barry Bonds: Baseball's Superman"
STWRITES@aol.com

The movie will not yield.
Frank Capra captures the heart of american patriotism without ever becoming preachy. Mr. Smith is equal parts civics lesson, romance, tense drama and at its heart: the perfect fish out of water comedy.

Jimmy Stewart is fantastic as Jefferson Smith an honorory senator who accidentally stumbles on corruption. Stellar performances were turned in by Jean Arthur, Claude Raines, Edward Arnold and Thomas Mitchell, but it is Stewart who dominates this film.

The phrase Capraesque gets bandied about with too much regularity these days when describing recent films. I would strongly reccomend Mr. Sith goes to Washington as Capra at his most Capraesque. ... Read more

Reviews (58)

"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
John Ford's "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" employs the time-tested storytelling device of playing off the idealist against the realist. When done right, engaging drama is created by the pairing of two such diametrically-opposed personas. However, when you up the ante by casting Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne to play the respective idealist and realist, you not only get engaging drama, but one heck of an entertaining film.

Attorney Ransome Stoddard (Stewart) is in a stagecoach destined for the western frontier. Before he reaches his destination, he and his fellow passengers are robbed by thief Liberty Valance (Lee Marvin). Stoddard tells Valance that society will punish him for his crimes but quickly learns that his words have little power in his new surroundings. Upon reaching the town Shinbone, Stoddard tries to bring civilized order to the untamed town but is told by Tom Doniphon (Wayne) that the ways of the Old West will die hard. Yet, both men eventually develop a bond of mutual respect for each other despite their differences. When Liberty Valance starts to terrorize Shinbone, Stoddard finds himself forced into a showdown with the outlaw - a confrontation that will in time become a legendary part of the small town's lore.

"The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" is a fascinating depiction of an important period in American history when civilization started to make its way westward. This was a time when frontier justice started to give away to written law and the local political structure started to become formalized. Ideological differences between the new and the old naturally arose and the characters of Stoddard and Doniphon embodied in microcosm the differences each side held toward each other. The manner in which Libery Valance is defeated and the way it is remembered also is an interesting commentary on how larger-than-life the heroes of the Old West became when their exploits were recalled. Stewart and Wayne are outstanding in their roles as expected and Lee Marvin and Vera Miles chip in with great supporting turns. Life in the Old West was about much more than duels in the streets and "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" effectively illustrates this point.

I'm Really Not a Fan of Westerns, But............
John Ford's "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" is a marvelous movie, regardless of how you feel about Westerns. This isn't a movie about outlaws, or something violent, but a study of the fight between old and new in our society. John Wayne's rugged cowboy represents the old, untamed west. Jimmy Stewart's refined and educated lawyer represents the order and civilized nature of a new west. Both clearly love the land they live on in different ways, and when the time comes to protect the people of the west from the evil Liberty Valance (played to perfection by Lee Marvin), they team up to save the day. In the end, Stewart's way of life, the way of progress, wins out. However, as can be seen by the memories the major characters have at the start of the film, the old west never really dies. The movie is just brilliant, with all the leads in top form, especially the forgotten Vera Miles as the woman both Wayne and Stewart love.

The law, or the gun

Director: John Ford
Format: Black and white
Studio: Paramount
Video Release Date: April 7, 1998

Cast:

John Wayne ... Tom Doniphon
James Stewart ... Ransom Stoddard (attorney)
Vera Miles ... Hallie Stoddard
Lee Marvin ... Liberty Valance
Edmond O'Brien ... Dutton Peabody (Editor of the Shinbone Star)
Andy Devine ... Marshal Link Appleyard
Ken Murray ... Doc Willoughby
John Carradine ... Maj. Cassius Starbuckle
Jeanette Nolan ... Nora Ericson
John Qualen ... Peter Ericson
Willis Bouchey ... Jason Tully (conductor)
Carleton Young ... Maxwell Scott
Woody Strode ... Pompey
Denver Pyle ... Amos Carruthers
Strother Martin ... Floyd
Lee Van Cleef ... Reese
Robert F. Simon ... Handy Strong
O.Z. Whitehead ... Herbert Carruthers
Paul Birch ... Mayor Winder
Joseph Hoover ... Charlie Hasbrouck (reporter for 'The Star')
Robert Donner
Larry Finley ... Bar X man
Shug Fisher ... Kaintuck (drunk)
Mario Arteaga ... Henchman
Sam Harris

Chuck Hayward ... Henchman
William Henry
Bryan 'Slim' Hightower ... Shotgun
Earle Hodgins ... Clute Dumphries
Stuart Holmes
Mike Edward Jauregui ... Drummer
Jack Kenny
Leonard Baker ... Man
Ted Mapes ... Highpockets
Montie Montana ... Politician on horseback
Bob Morgan ... Roughrider
Charles Morton ... Drummer
Jack Pennick ... Jack, Barman
Chuck Roberson ... Henchman
Buddy Roosevelt
Charles Seel ... President, election council
Slim Talbot
Charles Akins
Ralph Volkie ... Townsman
Max Wagner ... Poker game dealer
Blackie Whiteford
Jack Williams ... Henchman
Danny Borzage ... Townsman
Helen Gibson
Gertrude Astor
Anna Lee ... Mrs. Prescott (widow in stage holdup)
Jacqueline Malouf ... Lietta Appleyard
Eva Novak
Dorothy Phillips
Stephanie Pond-Smith

This movie is top heavy with some of the best stars in the business: John Wayne, James Stewart, Lee Marvin, Edmond O'Brien, Andy Devine, John Carradine, Denver Pyle and a host of lesser names. A classic tale of the old West, although it is in black and white--not a flaw for some of us.

The story is about a young lawyer, Ransom Stoddard (James Stewart) who comes West to practice law staright out of law school. He soon learns that in the West, the gun is more powerful than the law--although he is not willing to admit it, yet. He is robbed of all his money on the stagecoach, and discovers that almost everyone knows his robber, Liberty Valance, but no one, including the town Marshal, Link Appleyard (Andy Devine) is afraid to take on Liberty Valance. Everyone, that is, except Tom Doniphon (John Wayne), and he appears to be unwilling to get involved.

This sets up the conflict, and the story proceeds from there. This is a fine Western, entertaining, well acted (as one might expect) and well directed by John Ford, also as might be expected.

Joseph (Joe) Pierre

author of Handguns and Freedom...their care and maintenance
and other books

So what's all the fuss about?
I've been searching for the "best" western, and a couple of people recommended this one. It does bring up some interesting issues, but I'm still searching.

The movie, besides being stuffed with the usual cliches of the genre and the usual shoddy production values (obviously the whole thing was shot in a studio except for the train scenes at beginning and end), is a muddle.

What exactly is the message? It seems to be that we need to murder bad guys in order to control them, and that what passes for civilization is just a lie. This would seem to support the silly interpretation of the film as an allegory for our war on terror, but that doesn't quite work either. Liberty was out in the street and easily identifiable, whereas most terrorists are in hiding or are unknown. "Taking the law into our own hands" is what Valance's thugs try to do after he's killed, and look where it gets them.

Finally, neither way of life--the old Wild West nor the new more civilized West--looks like a very desirable condition. If we can believe this film (that is, take it as a metaphor), then in the old West everyone was too cowardly to stand up and face the bad guys except for the ineffectual representative of the new civilization, but Valance finally had to be shot from the shadows in a side street by the supposed "manly" John Wayne character--not a very nice allegory to base our country's behavior or character on.

However that may be, it's another second-rate Western. I'm beginning to believe that the whole genre is second-rate.

Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne's Definitive Western
John Wayne was never more of a tough cowboy than in this John Ford Masterpiece, Pilgrim, and James Stewart was never more the aw-shucks embodiment of educated idealism. Together they are rivals for Vera Miles, but they are also united against the outlaw who terrorizes the territory, Lee Marvin's Liberty Valance. Marvin is almost over the top as the evil Valance, but that is sort of the point - that he is a man universally recognized as evil. The question isn't "is Liberty Valance bad?" but rather which approach is more appropriate to combat him - fighting fire with fire (as exemplified by John Wayne's Tom Doniphon, the only man in the territory who is not intimidated by Liberty Valance) or whether "law and order" should prevail, as personified by Mr. Stewart's newly arrived Eastern Lawyer, Ransom Stoddard. The first time I saw this film the way that this central conflict was resolved surprised me - one of the biggest "twists" in the Western genre.

In my humble opinion it wasn't until Clint Eastwood's "Unforgiven" that another Western even approached the stature of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. ... Read more

Reviews (230)

Hitchcock's Masterful Tale of Neurosis and Obsession
Vertigo brilliantly and hypnotically displays many of Hitchcock's famous themes: the ordinary man caught up in a world of intrigue beyond his control (Scotty), the icy, mysterious blonde (Madeline), the smothering maternal figure (Midge), the obsession with the past, and the blurring of the line between illusion and reality. All of the aforementioned elements are enhanced by Bernard Hermann's passionate, romantic music, and combine to make this film one of Hitchcock's most complex, most richly rewarding films.

In "Vertigo," the characters and the viewing audience rarely know what is real and what is illusion. Many of the scenes in the film have a hazy, dreamlike quality: Madeline disappears behind and re-emerges from the Sequoia trees; Madeline steps out of the hazy, hotel light after her transformation as if she is a ghost reappearing from the past. Hitchcock brilliantly uses light, shadow and music to create a dizzingly uncertain atmosphere, forcing the audience to question what is really happening in the scene.

Scotty's obsession with the past and his desire to transform the charater "Judy" into his former love "Madeline" brings up an intriguing question. To what lengths will people go to change themselves to please the one they love? How much of their identities are they willing to give up for love? Madeline poignantly says to Scotty after he has asked her to change one thing after another about herself, "If I let you change me, then will you love me?"

"Vertigo" is a brilliant director working out his neurosis and obsessions through cinema. Luckily for the audience, the director is Hitchcock, and the film he has created is a fascinating, haunting masterpiece.

Absolutely the best film Hitchcock ever made
Everybody's got a favorite Alfred Hitchcock movie. Mine is VERTIGO. Everything about this movie is more than perfect. The performances from Kim Novak, James Stewart and Barbara Bel Geddes- beyond Oscar quality. The film is a masterpiece. There are multiple themes that are repeated throughout the movie, which make it subject to many repeated viewings. I've seen it many times, and I could see it all the time. Every time I see it, I find out something new. When you see John "Scottie" Fergeson going over the top, you'll have a hard time believing that it's Jimmy Stewart up on screen. Kim Novak is a beautiful, shimmering brilliance in her two- actually THREE roles (Madeline, Carlotta Valdes, Judy). And I found it hard not to sympathize with Barbara Bel Gedde's Midge. Alfred Hitchcock's meticulous direction pays off more than ever. The ending delievered such an emotional, psychological shock that I couldn't stop thinking about it. My advice to you: stop reading, go out and see VERTIGO. You won't regret it.

The very first shot is the best.
I watched Vertigo for the first time when I was about 12 years old - I remember I couldn't sleep well afterwards. I guess I was a little too young at the time to fully appreciate its scope. Watched it now again in its restored form on DVD.

In my opinion the best moment in the movie is the very first shot of the woman's mouth and face and her eyes - the look in her eyes - all in black and white - and then the introduction of colour - the spirals etc., and the ingeneous score. The score is incredible. Very efficient. It really gives the whole thing a dreamlike quality.

Generally, I don't like dark haunting movies too much. And Vertigo is haunting.
Most of the other Hitchcock movies have a kind of upbeat humour - an optimistic atmosphere. Take Psycho, for example. Yes, people get killed - but in a strange, almost perverse way the movie is almost funny. And, of course, there is a satisfying conclusion, a happy end. Not so in Vertigo.

Note that Hitchcock returned in subsequent movies - North by Northwest, Frenzy, Family Plot ...to his characteristic dark humour. That's why I think that Vertigo - while it deals with themes also present in his other movies - is something of an exception : there is no happy end and there is no relief for the audience.

Most of Hitchcock's movies deal with horrible things - like murder, the innocent being wrongfully accused and hunted by society, malice and intrigue,.. - but he always balances this with this typical British dark humour which in a way protects the audience and helps it to digest the on-screen violence. So this dark humour, this distancing of the audience, fulfills a very important function. For instance, after the shower scene in Psycho, we witness Norman Bates clean up the bathroom.
The same kind of dark humour - not quite as dark - can be found in some of the James Bond movies. Its always about helping the audience to accept what has just happened.

In Vertigo, this dark humour is missing and this accounts for its dark haunting quality.

Again, I am not much of a fan of obssesive love and all that - and probably neither
are most other people - and certainly Vertigo is not as much fun to watch as, say North by Northwest, but the score and the use of colours in it alone are worthy of our attention.

Darkest Hitchcock
"Vertigo" is a disturbing tour de force. You would probably have to roll forward to David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" and "Mulholland Drive" is find comparable weirdness. Is it Hitchcock's best? That's a tough question. Personally, I think "Notorious" is a better film, because the story fits easier into expectations of what a story should be, while at the same time being very edgey in matters of men and women, sex and love, and intrigue that blurs the lines. Everything about "Notorious" is balanced. But "Vertigo" takes chances few directors are willing to attempt, and that has to be recognized - especially when it involves a director with the abilities and genius of a Hitchcock. With that in mind, "Vertigo" is the important film, necessary if you want to fully understand Hitchcock.

"Vertigo" is about obsession. Ex-detective John Ferguson (Jimmy Stewart) is following the wife of an old friend, who fears his wife is losing her mind. It's a deadly scam, but you know that. The real story is Ferguson's descent. Stewart is excellent and increasingly strange as the movie progresses. Novak also works, but in a way she strikes the viewer as a deliberately coarser version of the Hitchcock "blondes." I don't pretend to be a Hitchcock specialist, but I've been spending this summer going through the major Hitchcock films, and I've noticed a few things that have me wondering over Hitchcock's creative arc in general. Blondes, yep. But look at the role of mothers. "Strangers on a Train" has psycho killer Walker's mother as a babying influence, and "Vertigo" has former Stewart girlfriend, played by Barbara Bel Geddes, visiting Stewart/Ferguson, and telling him "mother" is there for him. And check out the Nazi mother to mama's boy Claude Rains in "Notorious." The capper is of course the "mother" of Norman Bates in that movie explosion called "Psycho." What was it with Hitchcock and mothers? Also note that the swirl imagery of "Vertigo" reappears in the swirling drain of "Psycho."

"Vertigo" is a much more free-floating effort, and deserves all the praise. Narrative structure is allowed to slacken, and interior pathologies allowed to take priority, all amazing terrain for a director to explore - and to be allowed to explore by the dollar driven studios. The logic of the "story" is in fact is so suspended, that the fact that there is a murder and a murderer become secondary - they are merely triggers. Oh, Stewart/Ferguson eventually remembers he's a cop, but the difference in "Vertigo," which sets it apart from even "Psycho," is that it doesn't matter and darkness falls. And with it a final madness?

NOT his best! Why is everyone raving about this movie??
It's good, not great. The storyline is just too basic. Nothing really grabbed my attention. As far as the directing aspect of it, it may be one of his best. But also this may be his most boring film. It was a flop at the box-office. I'd like to know why it's considered his masterpiece. Am I missing something? This movie has little intrigue in comparison to his other films.

"North By Northwest" was by far his best.
"Rear Window" was great.
"The Birds" was very exciting to watch and was a great feat in film-making for its time with all those birds.
"Lifeboat" was good too.
"Psycho" would have been much better if I saw it for the first time without knowing what was going to happen.
"Dial M For Murder" has a great storyline with intrigue.

But as for "Vertigo", ehh.... not as good in comparison. It will be very good if it is your first Hitchcock movie to watch. ... Read more

Reviews (37)

Frank Capra + Moss Hart & George Kauffman = ??
A fine Frank Capra comedy featuring Jimmy Stewart at his most boyish and gangly, and Jean Arthur as the girl of his dreams. It's a comedy of mismatched lovers: Stewart plays the son of a cold-hearted business tycoon (Edward Arnold) who looks forward to the coming world war as a way to make a killing on the stock market. In the path of Dad's capitalistic machinations lies a family of carefree bohemian kooks, whose open, life-affirming attitude holds together the neighborhood where Arnold hopes to build his next munitions factory. And guess what? Surprise...!! Jean Arthur's character also just happens to be the object of his son's affections. Into this "Dharma & Greg"-like scenario, add Lionel Barrymore as her saintly, eccentric father, who was once a businessman but then dropped out and now spends his days smiling at life, following his passions, and encouraging others to do the same.

In all honesty, although the film is charming, it isn't Capra's best work -- adapted from a stage play by George Kauffman and Moss Hart, it shouts out its kookiness, and has the feel of an off-Broadway production gone awry. The scenes that are meant to show how wacky her family is often play out too broadly, with shouting and grand gestures and a flurry of chaotic action -- dancing, xylophone playing, cooking, painting, newspaper rustling, fireworks going off -- and all of it happening at once. It's too obvious and dramatically weak... Plus, Stewart really hasn't found his feet yet as a star actor. On the other hand, both Barrymore and Arnold give delightfully strong performances, and Jean Arthur is *always* easy on the eyes. Even when slightly muddled, Capra is still better than practically anything coming out comedywise from Hollywood today. A charming 'Thirties comedy.

Classic Capra Comedy!
The rich young son of an esteemed banker (Jimmy Stewart) falls in love with his secretary (Jean Arthur). His family disapproves, but graciously agree to meet with his girlfriend's family. Jean Arthur wishes to plan the meeting as an elegant dinner with her family's eccentricities somewhat constrained. When her boyfriend and his parents show up on the wrong day, all hell breaks loose. Jean Arthur's wise grandfather and patriarch of the family (Lionel Barrymore) helps sets things aright with his harmonica and a little sound advice. This hilarious classic pits an eccentric middle class family against their snobbish upper-crust potential in-laws. You'll roll on the floor laughing at Stewart's "scream" scene, the Russian ballet teacher, the jail-cell and courtroom sequence and more. One of Frank Capra's best!

Great film, Poor DVD
First of all, this film is great, and deserves to be owned by any classic movie fan. It has some of the greatest stars that have ever been on-screen, together! This is easily a favourite of mine, with Jimmy Stewart, Jean Arthur, Lionel Barrymore AND Frank Capra, you cant go wrong with watching this.

This film easily deserves the 5 stars, but I take one away because of this very disappointing release from Columbia on DVD. Many of Columbia's releases of classic movies on DVD have been poor ('Awful Truth' comes straight to mind) while others have great releases ('It Happened One Night' for an example).

I will start with the picture quality. It is full of scratching, throughout the film, and in all honesty, it does kind of look like a video. Still, saying this, it is actually watchable, but what a poor effort.

Now for the sound. Ok, this is the real problem. The sound is really quite bad. It is full of hissing, and becomes annoying. Its listenable, but oh, they could have done a lot better here.

The extras. Well, there isnt much to say really, is there? There are nothing for you on this disc.

This DVD is worth getting, but I only say this because of the film itself. What a poor release for such a wonderful film. Hopefully, Columbia will re-release this soon, with a better print, better sound, and some decent extras. If only this could have been more like their release of Capra's other classic, 'It Happened One Night'.

Dont avoid this DVD, but just dont expect much.

PLEASE NOTE: Since I am in England, I own the Region 2 release. It appears to be no different to this Region 1 release though.

very good movie
I'm playing a character in the play that this movie is based on, and so I watched this DVD to get a hint of what it could look like. First, the story is excellent! Do what you want in life; don't work your whole life doing something you hate! That is basically the Sycamore family's philosophy. But when the younger daughter in this household falls in love with the son of the wealthy Kirby family, trouble brews, landing the Kirbys and Sycamores both in jail! In the end, Kirby Sr. learns that maybe the Sycamores have something and gives the young couple his blessing, leaving everybody happy. The play is a little different from the movie, but with the addition of a simple harmonica, the movie is able to give the viewer a wonderful feeling in the end and reinforces the fact that everyone should do what makes him or her happy in life! I will say that the quality of the movie is not the greatest at times, but that's to be expected since it is an older movie. Other than that, it's great!

Warm & Wonderful
This is a gem of a movie. It's all madness & mayhem on the surface, and warm & cozy underneath. Like most of Frank Capra's movies, this is a morality play. The filmaker continues his favorite theme, downplaying the materalistic and embracing the things that really matter, love, both romantic & platonic, friends & family. This type of material might be a preachy bore in the hands of a person less skilled than Frank Capra, but he makes it work. Not only does it work, but the movie is hilarious. The cast is excellent, starring Lionel Barrymore, I would say at his best, but I never saw anything he was in where he wasn't great. Jimmy Stewart plays one of his nice guys here to the max & is terrific also. The rest of the cast is excellent as well. I especially loved the "mad Russian" played by Mischa Auer. Eddie Anderson steals every scene he's in whether he's speaking or not.
All in all, it's a fine ensemble cast, everyone is very good. Do yourself a favor, if you have an opportunity to see this, please do! ... Read more

Reviews (49)

Good film, less suspenseful than dramatic
There is great tension in this film, but the suspense is less frightening than we see in some of Hitchcock's other films.

What's really great about this film is the directorial art, in visuals and timing and setups -- and the acting is fabulous. How often did we get to see Stewart really flex his dramatic muscles in so complex and potentially somewhat dark and hard character? Song or no song, Doris Day does a fine job of acting through Que Sera-Sera, and it is artfully placed and used within the film for dramatic effect. Personally, I feel and understand her predicament, even though I don't find myself as involved with the characters as I do in Rear Window. That, however, may just be me, since Rear Window is my favorite Hitchcock film -- and I find it easier to identify with Grace Kelly's character than I do with this one.

Overall, a fabulous film, worth watching. If you get past the clothes and cars, you'd never know when it was made -- personally, I don't care!

Hitchcock Sleeper Classic now on WIDESCREEN DVD!!!!
The 1956 Widescreen Color "The Man Who Knew Too Much" is a remake of Hitch's 1934 Standard Screen Black & White British version. (Hitch didn't come to the United States until 1939). As he stated, "the 1934 version was directed by an amateur and the 1956 version by a professional."

This was to be the second of 5 brilliant films made from 1954 - 1960. (the others are; Rear Window (1954), Vertigo (1958), North by Northwest (1959) & Psycho (1960)). This was Hitchcock at his best, in fact these last 4 were voted to AFI's (American Film Institute's) top 100 films in the last 100 years (1998). So you can see why "The Man Who Knew Too Much" was overlooked. A definite sleeper classic!!!

Summary: James Stewart, wife Doris Day and son are on a vacation in Morocco. They are accidently swept up in an assassination plot to occur in London. The assassin group kidnaps their son as insurance of their silence and hold him hostage. Doris Days rare dramatic role is outstanding and her singing the Oscar winning song, ("Que Sera, Sera") high light this brilliant spy thriller. Jimmy Stewarts natural acting ability (Hitchcocks favorite male actor) pulls off being Doris Days husband.

The Anamorphic Widescreen Color presentation is excellent. The "Making of - with Patricia Hitchocks (Hitch's daughter) comments is very interesting & informative.

Que Sera Sera

Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Format: Color
Studio: Universal Studios
Video Release Date: August 3, 1999

Cast:

James Stewart ... Dr. Ben McKenna
Doris