Skip to main content

I want to see what love looks like when it’s triumphant. I haven’t had a good laugh in a week.

It Happened One Night
(1934)

(SPOILERS) In any romantic comedy worth its salt, you need to be rooting for both leads to end up together. That’s why, while each has its individual pleasures – and one is an unchallenged classic in every other department – the triptych of Andie McDowell ‘90s romcoms (Green Card, Groundhog Day and Four Weddings and a Funeral) fail on that score; she doesn’t elicit any degree of investment (ironically, she’s much better as a knockabout nun doing a dolphin impression in Hudson Hawk). Even Hanks and Ryan in Sleepless in Seattle are merely likeable; you can’t get that caught up if there aren’t any sparks flying (Crystal and Ryan, though). It Happened One Night has sparks in spades, the back and forth between Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert ensuring it’s as vital and versatile today as it was 85 years ago.

Night, of course, shares the rarefied plane of taking the five top Academy Awards with only two other films (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and The Silence of the Lambs), and one could cogently argue that it’s less attention grabbing, and thus less likely material for such a feat, than either of those. What it has though, courtesy of its stars, director Frank Capra and screenwriter Robert Riskin (his fifth of thirteen collaborations with Capra), is a deceptively light, assured touch. It’s in the nature of the romcom that the Academy is shy of deeming them truly worthy (besides The Apartment and Annie Hall – Pauline Kael called Nightthe Annie Hall of its day – before the invention of anxiety” – you have to start stretching your genre boundaries), with the consequence that those that have been recognised actually are genuinely very good, almost as if even the Academy had to sit up and take notice.

Peter Warne: Now, that’s my whole plot in a nutshell. A simple story for simple people.

The main characters may sound like clichéd types on paper – during a road trip to NYC, a pampered, spoiled heiress on the run falls in with hard-drinking, quip-happy journalist, such that the friction turns to affection as love gradually blossoms – because they are, but Capra and Riskin make that a virtue; just setting the proceedings in the world of the media savvy means the text is about as self-referential as it gets without breaking the fourth wall, the sale of the story of their story becoming a major plot point.

What really makes Night sing, though, is the dazzling chemistry between Gable and Colbert. The role was, and would remain, something of an exception for the former (Capra commented “He was never able to play that kind of character except in that one film. They had him playing these big, huff-and-puff he-man lovers, but he was not that kind of guy… he just wanted to play Clark Gable, the way the was in It Happened One Night, and it’s too bad they didn’t let him keep up with that” – yet the character is so iconic, it’s rumoured to have influenced the creation of Bugs Bunny). We’re more familiar with Cary Grant, say, in this kind of role, and if Gable isn’t, perhaps, an entirely convincing souse, he lends the material a rugged earthiness that effectively contrasts with Grant’s smoother portraits and is perfect as a counter to Colbert’s privileged remove. Like Grant, though, Gable can get away with a line like “What she needs is a guy that would take a sock at her once a day, whether it’s coming to her or not” and not make us think he really means it.

Colbert’s part of Ellie Andrews requires more heavy lifting by virtue of it being naturally less sympathetic – “the brat” – but she’s utterly captivating and beguiling, able to go round for round with Gable’s Peter Warne and show him up when he least expects it (“There’s a brain behind that face of yours, isn’t there?”). That said, much of the humour derives from Ellie taking offence, be it at Warne or someone else on the journey, the latter usually to Peter’s amusement (“When a cold mama gets hot, boy how she sizzles!” comments Roscoe Karns’ lascivious bus passenger).

Peter Warne: Why didn’t you take off all your clothes? You could have stopped forty cars.
Ellie Andrews: Oh, I’ll remember that when we need forty cars.

But there’s also the delight taken in the risqué, pushing gently against the boundaries of taste and decency in a (just) Pre-Hays Code environment. The odd couple pose as husband and wife, erecting “the walls of Jericho” (a blanket hung on a rope) between their beds to maintain decorum, and Peter baits Ellie by undressing in front of her (“Now, uh, according to Hoyle, after that, the, uh, pants should be next”).

But he’s still a very proper drunk scoundrel. When he unknowingly seduces her with romantic poetry and she throws herself at him (“Take me with you, Peter. Take me to your island!”) he sends her back to bed, later informing her “I don’t make it a policy to go running around with married women”. Once we’re into the territory of legal wedlock, however, the final verbal play of the trumpet needed to demolish the walls is the equivalent of Hitchcock’s train going into a tunnel at the end of North by Northwest. And, lest we forget, Colbert had already bathed in asses’ milk a couple of years previously in The Sign of the Cross, so she had a degree of sex siren cachet that was only emphasised by – in the film’s justifiably most famous scene – her flashing her stockinged leg as a hitch-hiking aid when Peter’s method (“Keep your eye on this thumb, baby, and see”) singularly fails.

This being Capra, while we’re served a light and effervescent romantic bauble, Night isn’t wholly divorced from the real world, in particular the Great Depression that Colbert’s privileged Ellie has hitherto been protected from, as she discovers when she has to stand in line to take a shower (I’m not sure that she comes away really liking it is the right kind of positive message, though). This is underlined by the flying trapeze sing-song camaraderie of the bus journey, and the mother who passes out, much to her son’s concern (“We ain’t ate nothing since yesterday”).

Capra isn’t particularly looking to find villains, though. The media and finance are generally not in the best of repute, and are initially tarred with a brush in that regard; Ellie’s father Alexander (Walter Connolly) is a super-rich Wall Street banker, and would usually be the bad guy who objects to his daughter’s match. As a devout Republican, though, Capra might have found such an obvious target a thorny one to come to grips with. Instead, it turns out dad’s right, and that playboy pilot King Westley (Jameson Thomas), the type who captivates the hearts and aspirations of the impoverished, is the cynical one, someone who knows when he’s hit the jackpot financially. Alexander is duly held up as a bad example by Peter (“It’s a matter of principle. Something you probably wouldn’t understand”), but he only really wants his daughter’s happiness and is more than delighted to be rid of Westley, even to the extent of furnishing him with a sizeable cheque when Ellie leaves him at the altar (“What happened? I haven’t the faintest idea”).

Joe Gordon: Agnes, get me a doctor. I’m going to have a nervous breakdown.

So too Peter’s boss Joe (Charles C Wilson), functioning as the equally tender-hearted mentor figure, but to Peter; set up as hard and overbearing – and only after that big story, regardless of the consequences – he ends up imparting pearls of wisdom when the young couple need them most.

Naturally, last-minute complications are required to step in the way of true love winning out too smoothly, thus making the eventual reuniting of lovers that much sweeter. Peter’s request to meet with Alexander over a “financial matter” relating to his daughter is an excellent shorthand means of announcing his purity of motive; this is first interpreted as characterising him as the gold-digger King Westley actually is, but then, when it’s revealed he’s only delivering Alexander a bill for $39.60 for expenses, he’s instantly confirmed him as more than alright in the parent’s books, with no further hoops to have to jump through to prove himself. It’s curious, though, that we don’t actually see the happy couple together after Ellie flees the ceremony; everything subsequent is second hand, be it via Andrews or the couple who own the motor court.

Colbert famously didn’t want to do the movie, and, in the first instance, didn’t have very high opinions of it after the fact either (“I just finished the worst picture in the world”). It also didn’t break out with the public until after its initial run; like The Silence of the Lambs, Night won Best Picture a full year after its first release, a relative rarity, with contenders tending to be jammed into the year-end awards season stage. As for Capra, he was a film away from augmenting his filmmaking outlook, towards producing “fantasies of goodwill”; that might be another reason why, freed from the burden of overt moralising themes or intent, It Happened One Night remains so accessible. A simple story for simple people, but deliriously witty and sharp with it.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).