The Greatest Show On Earth Reminds One How Exciting The Circus May Be.

The Good: Decent capturing of the time and place of the circus in the 1950s
The Bad: Light on plot, character and acting, No DVD bonus features.
The Basics: Despite some technical problems, The Greatest Show On Earth was not entirely predictable, making this circus lovestory melodrama worth seeing.


My wife has been subjected to so many Best Picture Oscar-winning films lately that she more often refuses allowing me to screen them in the house these days. Because I've had a bad cold the last few days, or perhaps because I started working the part of her job that she has loathed for months, when we returned home today and showered, she did not put up a fight when I asked to watch one of my Best Picture winners. And it was about halfway through The Greatest Show On Earth that she turned to me and remarked, "This isn't the worst Best Picture we've watched."

She's right, but at the same time, I found myself far more lukewarm to the film than she did. This might be the first time she has liked one of the movies I've had on more than I have! The Greatest Show On Earth," the 1952 Best Picture Winner is an annoying melodrama mixed in with all of the spectacle of an actual Ringling Bros. - Barnum and Bailey Circus. For the record, the only circus-related film or program I can recall enjoying was Carnivale (reviewed here!) and that was not for the carnival/circus related aspects. For me, it reinforced the same idea that sports movies leave me with: it is better to be at the real thing than to watch it on television. One of the unsurprising Best Pictures where the film's director did not win Best Director at the same time, The Greatest Show On Earth has moments which use obvious bluescreen shots or are framed so the truth menace or spectacle are edited out.

As the circus season begins, the show's manager for the Ringling Bros. - Barnum and Bailey Circus, Brad, is fighting to keep the circus on tour for a full season. As the financers try to whittle the circus down to ten weeks hitting only the major cities, Brad hires the Spectacular Sebastian as a performer for the center ring. This upsets Holly, who was going to be the center ring performer for the first time ever, but buys the circus a full season's run. As Sebastian and Holly compete for the audience's attention, Brad is pleased because the show is in the black.

One of the clowns, Buttons, appears to be a man on the run and Brad has to break-up a mob connection that is scamming customers on the midway. Holly oscillates in her affections between Brad and Sebastian, with whom the bond over high-flying stunts is more than just competitive, and the show looks like it will be the best ever. But when an accident sidelines one of the headliners, the dynamic between the leads changes and Brad's heart comes up for grabs!

The Greatest Show On Earth is very much a 1950s film, reinforcing gender roles of the time and keeping alive the notion that the people then lived in a simpler time. The movie features voiceovers which annoyingly characterize (repeatedly) the circus as a war machine. As well, there is a very contrived notion to much of the movie. The love triangles - Sebastian, Holly and Brad and Brad, Angel, and Klaus - are melodramatic and seem added to the movie mostly to give a plot and narrative to the film. In other words, this is not just a movie showing off the circus, it has some education on the behind-the-scenes elements of the circus and the melodrama of people when they are not performing.

The plot and character elements, however, are intercut with long segments where all the movie is doing is illustrating just what goes on at the circus. For my wife, this was quite satisfying because she had never attended a full circus. For me, it became less impressive because I went to the circus several times as a child. However, while the spectacle of the circus is impressive in real life, it is less so on film. Editing and framing minimize the danger of some of the show's best stunts and as a result, the film actually falls short of capturing the full spectacle of the circus.

As well, director Cecil B. DeMille not only frames shots poorly, but edits the movie terribly. There are a ton of bad cuts, between poor bluescreen shots that have multiple cuts and choppy cuts, like when Klaus begins to beat someone with a bat. The Greatest Show On Earth is an odd mix of obvious and impressive. The character elements are often predictable in a 1950's sensibility. As a result, while some bad things happen to virtually all of the characters, there is a sense that things will work out. As well, the way women are treated is awful, not only by men but by the way they talk about themselves.

The odd element is that The Greatest Show On Earth is like a ridiculous war story. The melodramatic way the members of the circus rally in order to make sure the show goes on, it presented almost the exact same way classic war stories develop relationships between characters where buddy loyalty and the importance of the mission is prioritized above all else. And while in war scenarios where the actions of the platoon do have huge consequences that can be exceptionally important, the entertainment of the circus is far less immediate and important, no matter how one dresses it up.

Charlton Heston plays Brad. . . melodramatically, but adequately. Similarly, Betty Hutton (Holly), Cornel Wilde (Sebastian) and James Stewart (Buttons) give adequate performances, but nothing truly extraordinary. This is not a defect of the actors, but of the characters they play, who are more "types" than individuals. Buttons is a man with a past who seems kindly and good. Sebastian is a cocky performer and Holly is a lovestruck woman who just needs to pick a guy to love. None of these are terribly original or impressive, so the actors have very little to work with.

On DVD, The Greatest Show On Earth is presented with no bonus features or special programming.

While I would argue that this is hardly one of the best films of all time and it took a bit to make it more than just an extended advertisement for the circus, it was entertaining and it held my interest and my partner's interest for the duration. It is certainly worth seeing, especially for those who have never been fortunate to attend the real thing.

[As a winner of the Best Picture Oscar, this is part of my Best Picture Project available here! Please check it out!]

For other classic movies, please check out:
Citizen Kane
Casablanca
Raiders Of The Lost Ark

6.5/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.




| | |

You Can't Take It With You Embodies Much Of What I Loathe About Comedies.

The Good: Moments of humor, Moments of performance
The Bad: Ridiculous, Light on character, Plot drown for theme and humor, DVD bonus features.
The Basics: With very dated madcap humor and lack of original characters, Frank Capra's You Can't Take It With You falls down as a comedy.


For those who do not follow my many reviews, I am not a huge fan of comedies, especially slapstick or madcap humor. I'm not a huge fan of older movies, either, so it will probably be obvious to most that I watched You Can't Take It With You because of my current project and I did not know anything about the movie before it began. Released in 1938, this comedy is a strange blend of a Frank Capra social message and "Monty Python's Flying Circus. That it seems Capra-esque is no surprise; You Can't Take It With You was directed by Frank Capra. That it is like Monty Python's Flying Circus is also true, but the similarities are remarkable. Humor in this film is largely based on non sequitors and circumstances abruptly change for the absurd like a character randomly playing the xylophone, which causes another character to dance compulsively.

Exceptionally dated, You Can't Take It With You has some charms, but they are few and far between. What isn't absurdist tends to be entirely campy as the film is high on its social message and light on character development (one suspects even in its day, You Can't Take It With You's character development was entirely predictable). As I often note in circumstances like this, this film was based on a play; this review is solely of the classic film You Can't Take It With You, not the play upon which it was based.

Tony Kirby has been promoted to Vice President of his father's bank and he has begun dating Alice Sycamore, a poorer woman with a somewhat crazy family. Tony's father, Anthony is obsessed with a new deal which will consolidate weapons manufacturers in the United States and make his banks a huge amount of money and in order to seal the deal, he needs an entire complex of properties which he has systematically bought up. There is one holdout on selling, though, and that is the Sycamore residence, which Grandpa Vanderhof absolutely refuses to sell.

Tony and Alice go out on a date and Tony is so smitten with her that the next night, he brings his stuffy parents over for dinner. As the family scrambles to get a dinner prepared, Anthony's machinations inadvertently change the course of the night when the IRS and police converge upon the Sycamore house and throw everyone there in jail for disturbing the peace.

To be fair, the peace is disturbed by the circus of people living and stopping by the Sycamore house. Senile Grandpa Vanderhof has a fireworks manufacturing plant in the basement and so explosions are frequently going off and the film starts with Grandpa Vanderhof recruiting the disgruntled Mr. Poppins from the bank to come and make toys and be happy as opposed to slaving away for Mr. Kirby at his thankless job. In fact, throughout You Can't Take It With You is a strong message of enjoying life and living free as opposed to servicing the Capitalist machine. There is a decent sense of 1930s socialism in the movie and that is fun to see now.

But the two essential character struggles are terribly predictable and even droll. Tony and Alice are a pretty classic love story with the girl from the wrong side of the tracks (metaphorically) and the wealthy (prince-like) man with the world on a platter. There are no real surprises and as a result, their character arc is not only predictable, it is fleshed out with scenes that have nothing to do with anything else. For example, while out on their date, the pair is in the park and they encounter a small gang of children who teach them to dance for a dime and the whole dance routine is a non sequitor on top of other non sequitors. And while the whole dancing sister at the house is a non sequitor that establishes the Sycamores as somewhat zany, the park dance number is pretty much a dated reference to studio-owned child actors.

The other major conflict comes between Grandpa and Anthony Kirby. These are essentially character types representing Freedom vs. Social Responsibility. Freedom, as is the lesson of the 1930s (sadly lost today), wins out almost every time. Anthony Kirby is greedy, snooty and successful, but deeply miserable. On the other hand, Martin Vanderhof is happy, free and lives within his means. He has many friends and well-wishers and his family loves him, whereas even Tony refers to his father as a stuffed shirt. But Capra telegraphs his entire story by having Grandpa give Anthony a harmonica and the banker takes the harmonica out frequently, musing about what is truly important in life.

These two very predictable arcs - will the bank truly take over everything at the expense of the happy Sycamores? Will Anthony learn what is truly important in time? - are broken up by ridiculous scenes at the Sycamore house filled with a cacophony of sounds and movements. The random elements, like the dancing, xylophone playing, and the presence of Siberian transient Kolenkhov (who wrestles with Anthony and breaks his glasses) help create the chaotic mood of the Sycamore house, but they are essentially zany, madcap humor bits that establish a mood, then beat it into the viewers head over and over and over again. This is not to say there are no funny bits. While the black characters are entirely stereotypes (a servant and her fiance) one has a great line early on and the scene with the IRS auditor is actually quite funny.

As for the acting, You Can't Take It With You features the acting talents of classic performers like Jean Arthur, James Stewart (this is actually the first film I've seen with the legendary actor!), and Edward Arnold. Arnold is fabulous as Anthony Kirby, despite the role being pretty limited and him being forced to play more of an archetype than an actual character. Arnold is wonderfully stiff as Anthony, perfectly embodying the stereotype of the stuffed shirt bureaucrat.

But it is Lionel Barrymore who makes You Can't Take It With You even remotely watchable. Barrymore plays Grandpa Vanderhof and it is a distinct departure from his role in, for example, Grand Hotel (click here for that review!). Barrymore plays an eccentric remarkably well and he is loose and friendly the entire film, even when his character is forced to ream out Anthony Kirby. Barrymore has a casual quality to him that makes him seem like the archetypal grandfather with an ease that seems natural and perfectly in character.

On DVD, You Can't Take It With You comes with no bonus features and the film-only version is pretty disappointing as a result.

Ultimately, You Can't Take It With You is too erratic and too predictable when it is not being entirely random. The result is a comedy that holds up poorly over the years.

[As a winner of the Best Picture Oscar, this film is part of W.L.'s Best Picture Project, by clicking here! Please check it out!]

For other comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Easy A
The Other Guys
Date Night

5/10

For other film reviews, please be sure to visit my index page for an organized listing by clicking here!

© 2010, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |