Skip to main content

Mr. President, I stand guilty as framed!

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
(1939)

(SPOILERS) I’m by no means a die-hard Frank Capryte. His particular taste in earnestly extolled values can easily rub one up the wrong way, and when that blends with his later more cynical tack, the results are sometimes alarming (It’s A Wonderful Life is justifiably esteemed as a classic, but it’s also a deeply warped picture that finds cause for celebration in a man being resoundingly shat upon and manipulated by everyone he knows). Mr. Smith Goes to Washington saw the inception of this modified approach in the director’s work, where impossible goodness is pressed into service against the unvarnished corruption that lies at the heart of America. As a result, the viewing experience tends to swing wildly according to just how undiluted each side is being at any given moment.

Because James Stewart’s small-town, apple-pie country boy Jefferson Smith, the head of the Boy Rangers – a position ripe for aspersions these days, and perhaps should have been then too – thrust into Washington politics as a junior senator and finding himself up against a loaded system, is just too good to be true. Stewart gives a sterling performance of course, wholly believably committed and upright. But everything Capra throws at him is pure unvarnished naïve cheese, from his aw-shucks nervousness around senator’s daughter Susan Paine (Astrid Allwyn) to his really believing a bill in favour of a national boys’ camp is a valuable or meaningful notion.

Indeed, at this point in the proceedings, one might find oneself leaning towards Michael Lehmann’s scathing take in Trailers from Hell. Lehmann was then living in dread of a potential Vice President’s winning ticket and consequently saw Mr. Smith Goes to Washington as “a dangerous piece of political mumbo jumbo that has particular relevance in the day of Sarah Palin”. Essentially, Lehmann professed terror at the thought of traditional American values – which for him means flag waving patriotism and every concomitant negative he associates with the same – unleavened by political savvy proving the actual making of anyone in politics. And when you’re witnessing Stewart waxing lyrical about a boy’s camp, you are pretty much in agreement that this sap shouldn’t be let anywhere near the legislators and lawmakers.

Journalist: You’re not a senator. You’re an honorary stooge.

Except that isn’t the be all and end all of it, and Lehmann is way off in the conclusion he reaches, basically because his wish to make the movie all about the peril of a Palin is so thin. He went as far as expressing the view that Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’s “message is tremendously misleading and off target. It frightens me. It scares me to death. I don’t want anybody to ever see this movie”. Ironically, he’s effectively forwarding a reactionary position, one supporting the status quo. Lehmann, who made three great, unruly movies before conspicuously losing his verve, is attempting to deny what everyone knows. Not least the homespun Capra, who tended to push the positives. Of course, he doesn’t say that. What he says is doublespeak, suggesting that because Smith – who is, at any rate, a totem, and embodiment of a value, rather than a real person, designed as an equal and opposite contrast to the other side – is shining a light on the system, that means the message is that system would be better if he was its embodiment. You know, treating the movie literally. As if The West Wing were actually a reflection of reality in the remotest way.

Governor’s Son: He’s the greatest American we’ve got too, dad!

Now, while Stewart’s Smith can be frequently insufferable, I don’t think that remotely earns the movie Lehmann’s doomsaying. Further still, his viewpoint is all the more alarming for what he leaves out when he comments “The message of this film is that our government is run by corrupt cynics and that if we only had sort of down to earth, real, solid American values and patriotism then everything would be better. I don’t really believe that. I don’t believe that at all”. Let’s take that apart a little. Because Lehmann conveniently ignores addressing the “corrupt cynics” bit.

Is he saying it isn’t true (I mean, just look around)? If he is, well, his absurd innocence makes Smith seem a corrupt cynic. And that being the case, one is left with the natural conclusion of “Well, what could be worse?” His wheeling out Palin as reasoning is glib in the extreme. Anyone can brandish faux values as a means of attempting to appeal to the electorate while remaining utterly insincere beneath. Indeed, that’s exactly how all but the most naïve understand the system to work. If Lehmann objected to Smith because his populist honesty might inspire the dishonest to present themselves that way, I might understand it. But that would be assuming they weren’t wont to play that card anyway.

It’s because of the way politics works that Mr. Smith Goes to Washington’s treacly protagonist remains brutally on point and relevant. It’s no wonder there was discussion of the film’s suitability, due to its “generally unflattering portrayal of our system of Government”. Smith’s hero, Senator Joseph Paine (a typically note-perfect Claude Rains, and for me the highlight performance) is an entirely bought man, his status secured by businessman Jim Taylor (Edward Arnold). In Capra’s movie, Paine’s a bad apple, representing just one corrupt state, but we all know the implication. That no politician may enter office unless they are controlled by the elite (however you may wish to characterise “elite”).

The idea of a Smith, one who is untainted, is thus an evergreen and attractive one. It’s the reason anyone on board with Trump may be easy to mock, but they shouldn’t be. Because millions of voters respond to the idea that they might just get a politician for once who isn’t owned (he might not have been an aw-shucks yokel, but neither was he career politician, albeit a non-career politician mentored by the likes of Roy Cohn and Richard Nixon). One might take that further and suggest that, if QAnon is an AI programme (as some hold), then the entire design was banking on precisely that, on feeding the same appetite that turned Mr. Smith Goes to Washington into a huge hit nearly eighty years before. But in contrast to Lehmann’s take, there’s no fault here with problematic traditional values. Rather, the issue is starkly those corrupt cynics he chooses to let off the hook.

Would Smith have responded so strongly had his fight not hit so close to home (a dam being built on the land earmarked for the boy scouts)? Of course, he would, but it’s a weakness of Capra’s picture that it settles on both a yokel and a yokel-y mission. At the point Smith tells Paine he plans to study the bills he’s expected to vote on, there’s a slender hope this might become something actually politically versed. Alas, that potential is sent packing when Paine, a lawyer by profession, tells Smith even he doesn’t read them, and that “When the time comes, I’ll tell you how to vote”.

Smith: Why don’t you tell the people the truth for a change?

There’s also bile reserved for the press, but their fake news is more about opportunism than outright corruption in the corridors of power. Maybe eviscerating them would have been taking on too much. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington did, after all, come out a couple of years before Citizen Kane so did a number on Randolph Hearst; given the tycoon’s response, Capra was probably wise to pull his punches.

It’s also notable that, aside from the sacrificial Paine, very conveniently confessing through his troubled conscience – great as Rains is, the idea of a morally conflicted senator, one who has habitually made morally suspect decisions daily for years, is a stretch – the villains get away at the end. Or at least, Capra fails to show justice explicitly served. This is also true of It’s A Wonderful Life, and it might be the most realist element in his later movies.

There are some very enjoyable performances here. Jean Arthur continues her Capra collaborations and makes you believe she’d actually fall for a sap, which is an achievement in itself. Thomas Mitchell (Uncle Billy in It’s A Wonderful Life) plays the comic relief (“I got to go out and drink this over”). Harry Carey is the undisguisedly sympathetic President of the Senate, on Smith’s side while all around there are walkouts.

Pauline Kael offered Capra’s skillset a grudging respect even as she delivered some zinger put downs. She noted that Mr. Smith Goes to Washingtonhas more of the heartfelt in it than is good for the stomach, and it goes on for over two hours”. Which is definitely true; Capra’s pictures tend to favour making life difficult for themselves by outstaying their welcome. She also commented “No one else can balance the ups and downs of wistful sentiment and corny humour the way Capra can – but if anyone else should learn to, kill him”. Wise words there. As for Lehmann, it looks like he didn’t need worry. There never was any doubt the corrupt cynics would win out.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Big things have small beginnings.

Prometheus (2012) Post- Gladiator , Ridley Scott opted for an “All work and no pondering” approach to film making. The result has been the completion of as many movies since the turn of the Millennium as he directed in the previous twenty years. Now well into his seventies, he has experienced the most sustained period of success of his career.  For me, it’s also been easily the least-interesting period. All of them entirely competently made, but all displaying the machine-tooled approach that was previously more associated with his brother.

Ladies and gentlemen, this could be a cultural misunderstanding.

Mars Attacks! (1996) (SPOILERS) Ak. Akk-akk! Tim Burton’s gleefully ghoulish sci-fi was his first real taste of failure. Sure, there was Ed Wood , but that was cheap, critics loved it, and it won Oscars. Mars Attacks! was BIG, though, expected to do boffo business, and like more than a few other idiosyncratic spectaculars of the 1990s ( Last Action Hero , Hudson Hawk ) it bombed BIG. The effect on Burton was noticeable. He retreated into bankable propositions (the creative and critical nadir perhaps being Planet of the Apes , although I’d rate it much higher than the likes of Alice in Wonderland and Dumbo ) and put the brakes on his undisciplined goth energy. Something was lost. Mars Attacks! is far from entirely successful, but it finds the director let loose with his own playset and sensibility intact, apparently given the licence to do what he will.

So the devil's child will rise from the world of politics.

The Omen (1976) (SPOILERS) The coming of the Antichrist is an evergreen; his incarnation, or the reveal thereof, is always just round the corner, and he can always be definitively identified in any given age through a spot of judiciously subjective interpretation of The Book of Revelation , or Nostradamus. Probably nothing did more for the subject in the current era, in terms of making it part of popular culture, than The Omen . That’s irrespective of the movie’s quality, of course. Which, it has to be admitted, is not on the same level as earlier demonic forebears Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist .

I’m giving you a choice. Either put on these glasses or start eating that trash can.

They Live * (1988) (SPOILERS) Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of They Live – I was a big fan of most things Carpenter at the time of its release – but the manner in which its reputation as a prophecy of (or insight into) “the way things are” has grown is a touch out of proportion with the picture’s relatively modest merits. Indeed, its feting rests almost entirely on the admittedly bravura sequence in which WWF-star-turned-movie-actor Roddy Piper, under the influence of a pair of sunglasses, first witnesses the pervasive influence of aliens among us who are sucking mankind dry. That, and the ludicrously genius sequence in which Roddy, full of transformative fervour, attempts to convince Keith David to don said sunglasses, for his own good. They Live should definitely be viewed by all, for their own good, but it’s only fair to point out that it doesn’t have the consistency of John Carpenter at his very, very best. Nada : I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick a

Are you, by any chance, in a trance now, Mr Morrison?

The Doors (1991) (SPOILERS) Oliver Stone’s mammoth, mythologising paean to Jim Morrison is as much about seeing himself in the self-styled, self-destructive rebel figurehead, and I suspect it’s this lack of distance that rather quickly leads to The Doors becoming a turgid bore. It’s strange – people are , you know, films equally so – but I’d hitherto considered the epic opus patchy but worthwhile, a take that disintegrated on this viewing. The picture’s populated with all the stars it could possibly wish for, tremendous visuals (courtesy of DP Robert Richardson) and its director operating at the height of his powers, but his vision, or the incoherence thereof, is the movie’s undoing. The Doors is an indulgent, sprawling mess, with no internal glue to hold it together dramatically. “Jim gets fat and dies” isn’t really a riveting narrative through line.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

I think I’m Pablo Picasso!

Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) (SPOILERS) I get the impression that, whatever it is stalwart Venom fans want from a Venom movie, this iteration isn’t it. The highlight here for me is absolutely the wacky, love-hate, buddy-movie antics of Tom Hardy and his symbiote alter. That was the best part of the original, before it locked into plot “progression” and teetered towards a climax where one CGI monster with gnarly teeth had at another CGI monster with gnarly teeth. And so it is for Venom: Let There Be Carnage . But cutting quicker to the chase.

Isn’t sugar better than vinegar?

Femme Fatale (2002) (SPOILERS) Some have attempted to rescue Femme Fatale from the dumpster of critical rejection and audience indifference with the claim that it’s De Palma’s last great movie. It isn’t that by a long shot, but it might rank as the last truly unfettered display of his obsessions and sensibilities, complete with a ludicrous twist – so ludicrous, it’s either a stroke of genius or mile-long pile up.