The Pleasure Garden (1925)

Film: The Pleasure Garden (1925)

Stars: Virginia Valli, Carmelita Geraghty, Miles Mander, John Stuart, Karl Falkenberg

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Oscar History: Pre-dated the Academy Awards

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

(Throughout the year, in connection with our 'Saturdays with the Stars' series, I am watching every gap I have in Alfred Hitchcock's filmography in what we're calling 'Sunday Leftovers.'  Every two weeks, I'll be watching a Hitchcock film that I've never seen before as I spend 2021 completing his filmography)

Welcome, my friends to our first installment of "Sunday Leftovers," a series that is a one-time(?) companion to our "Saturdays with the Stars" series.  Every other week throughout the remainder of 2021, I will be watching one Alfred Hitchcock movie (chronologically) that I've never seen before, with the goal being that by the end-of-2021 I will have seen every one of the Master of Suspense's feature films.  We'll only be watching films that I've never seen before, and we won't be duplicating any of our 'Saturdays' viewings (every month we're taking a look at the career of one of Hitch's leading ladies), so I'll call out if we're skipping any because I've already seen it, but this week we start at the very beginning, and I see, for the first time, the very first movie to have Hitchcock get credit behind the camera: The Pleasure Garden.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie is part rags-to-riches, part melodrama, and part cautionary tale.  Like many future Hitchcock films, it features two women: Patsy (Valli) and Jill (Geraghty), both dancers in London who hope to find love & fame on the stage.  Jill is the more successful of the two dancers, and nearly doesn't get a job with Patsy in the show (Patsy takes care of her & gives her a room to stay in at the beginning of the movie), but she quickly gains fame & admirers, including Prince Ivan (Falkenberg), and in the process dismisses her noble fiancé Hugh (Stuart) and scorns Patsy, who marries a philanderer named Levet (Mander), who regularly cheats on her with a woman he meets in Africa.  The film's ending has a dark twist, with Jill largely successful in marrying the prince (though she continues to scorn Patsy), but Levet being killed after he murders his mistress (after she refuses to let him go back to his wife), and Hugh & Patsy living happily-ever-after, the only two morally upright characters in the picture.

The movie is his first, so it's not clear how much creative control he had, but there are hints of future scenes in his film's everywhere.  Particularly a sequence where a perverted older man uses opera glasses to get a better look at a young blond dancer reeks of Rear Window, and the two women (one good, one bad) competing against each other while also frenemies has hints of Stage Fright.  Also, leave it to Hitch to have a cute dog named Cuddles basically steal the whole movie.

The film's spirit is odd-but-works in the action-packed final third, as we get to see the murderous Levet haunted by an old mistress & his past betrayal (again, another Hitchcock motif), but the romance between Patsy & Hugh was rather bland.  Despite Valli being the bigger star at the time, it's Geraghty who gets the better part.  Jill is diabolical fun, and it's nice to be in the pre-Code where she's not punished for liking sex & money (though there's little closure with her character in the last act).  I saw the 60-minute version of this film (there appears to be a longer version, but I couldn't get a copy of it-anyone who has, let me know if we get more resolution with Jill's story arch).  Overall, it's a fun little movie-nothing super special compared to his later work, but a decent cautionary tale with hints of what Hitchcock would later produce.

OVP: The Prisoner of Zenda (1937)

Film: The Prisoner of Zenda (1937)

Stars: Ronald Colman, Madeleine Carroll, C. Aubrey Smith, Raymond Massey, Mary Astor, David Niven, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.

Director: John Cromwell

Oscar History: 2 nominations (Best Art Direction, Score)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2021 Saturdays with the Stars series, we highlight a different one Alfred Hitchcock's Leading Ladies.  This month, our focus is on Madeleine Carroll-click here to learn more about Ms. Carroll (and why I picked her), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

We are going to conclude our month devoted to Madeleine Carroll this week with a movie not too far away from our last film.  Picking Carroll as a Star of the Month was a tossup for me (there were other leading actresses from Hitch's early films that we could've gone with).  She obviously starred in two movies he directed, which lends a lot to her, but Carroll's fame was sharp but brief, and we'll talk about that below, but it also means that there's not a lot of opportunity for growth in her characters & acting style.  This is true once again for Prisoner of Zenda, a body-swapping tale set in 19th Century Austria where Carroll is asked to play the doted-upon beauty.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie is about a man named Rudolf (Colman), who is fishing when he comes across Colonel Zapt (Smith) and Captain von Tarlenheim (Niven), who are shocked by how much he resembles the soon-to-be king, Rudolf V (also played by Colman).  The king is a drunkard, and on the morning of his coronation it is found out that the wine has been drugged, thus Rudolf V cannot be coronated.  Since both of his aides are worried that without Rudolf there, his brother Michael (Massey) will steal the thrown he covets, they put Rudolf in his place, which fools most of the court, though eventually not Michael & his aide Rupert of Hentzou (Fairbanks), but there's a problem-the king's betrothed Princess Flavia (Carroll) is now in love with the imposter king, and before they can switch back, the real Rudolf is kidnapped by Rupert & Michael, with madness ensuing that eventually kills both men, and results in Flavia & the faux Rudolf falling in love, but having to stay apart out of her duty to her country.

The movie is fun, though more fun in the first half than in the second when it gets too melodramatic.  Not all of the cast works (Astor is badly misused as the leg of a Rupert/Michael love triangle), but Fairbanks is delicious as Rupert (I've never seen him this good), completely stealing the film, and I always David Niven (even if his part is small).  Carroll, as I mentioned, is kind of just there-there's a twinkle to her work here, but not much more, and certainly it's not a performance I would've paid attention to were I not looking at it from this angle.  Particularly coming a year after the abdication (in this film, of course, Colman in both the Wallis Simpson role to Carroll's Edward VIII decide that duty comes before love), there are more interesting things to focus on than Carroll's wallflower.

The film was nominated for two Academy Awards.  The Score was the first citation for Alfred Newman, who would during his long career win 43 Oscar nominations, so we will be hearing from him a lot in the upcoming years, and while he wrote some truly brilliant music, this is just fine.  It's the kind you'd expect from a swashbuckler, rousing but not that original.  The art direction is better (this is before Best Costume was a thing, otherwise that likely would've occurred, especially for Fairbanks' sexier looks), and has lots of great-looking sets though there's nothing that stands out as truly detailed in the movie.

As I said above, we will end our chapter focused on Madeleine Carroll here.  The actress would continue working in Hollywood for the remainder of the decade, acting opposite Henry Fonda, Fred MacMurray, Gary Cooper (again), and Bob Hope.  However tragedy would strike Carroll's life early in the 1940's, when her only sister Marguerite died during the London Blitz, and afterward devoted pretty much her entire existence to the war effort and beating the Germans (Dwight Eisenhower purportedly said she did more for the war effort than any other movie star).  This resulted in her eventually winning the Medal of Freedom and the Legion of Honor, but it also killed her career in film.  She'd make only three films after the war (most notably Otto Preminger's The Fan), and spent the rest of her life living with family in Europe, eventually dying at the age of 81 from pancreatic cancer.  Next month we're going to focus on a different actress, one who was a contemporary of Carroll's, but whose career took far different turns (and lasted many decades longer) on the big screen.

What's Joe Kennedy Up To?

Former Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-MA)

Last year, (now former) Rep. Joe Kennedy III tried and failed to win a Senate seat.  This was not a quixotic endeavor.  Kennedy led in numerous polls heading into the primary, but it was clear at the time that incumbent-Sen. Ed Markey was closing well, and it would be close.  Kennedy's loss was fairly large if you assume that he at some point was going to win the race (he lost by just over ten points), slimmer if you remember it's difficult to beat an incumbent senator.  At only 39, he'd become the first Kennedy in American history to lose an election in Massachusetts, and had therefore the first loss in an otherwise impressive young congressional career.

Kennedy's decision was looked at as impetuous and foolhardy by many, including me.  It was a calculated gambit, one that assumed that Kennedy (who has obvious presidential aspirations) wasn't willing to stand-in-line waiting for one of his state's Democratic senators to resign, but instead was going to force himself into the Senate, and therefore position himself in a perch that has been the home of many prominent Oval Office occupants, including Joe Biden & Kamala Harris.  This didn't work, and in some states that wouldn't matter.  Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, & Barack Obama all lost early races for Congress in their states and not only became presidential nominees, but actual presidents.  But the calculus for Kennedy is different.  He lost in a big way, with the grassroots of his party essentially rising up to stop him, and unlike those men, he lost in the age of the internet, where it's easier to brand someone a "loser" than it would've been in previous generations.  He also flailed and proved infallible (in a race he was once the favorite in) in a state with a robust blue bench, many of whom might have stood aside for Kennedy (assuming he was inevitable) before, but now not only know he can be beat, but know how to beat him.  He can still win, but it's the equivalent to playing poker when everyone else can see your hand.

Kennedy, though, is ambitious & I knew we weren't done with him in the political spotlight last year.  I assumed he might follow in the footsteps of his great-grandfather and get a high-profile ambassadorship within the Biden administration, perhaps taking a few years off but gaining the gleam of international experience.  However, so far Kennedy has not even had a whisper of a rumor regarding a spot in Biden's administration, and this week he announced an initiative called the "Groundwork Project."

Essentially, according to Kennedy "we're going to look far beyond traditional 'battlegrounds' or political hotbeds, to places that political power circles tend to write off as unwinnable, or unworthy of our time and attention."  It seems there will be a focus on Massachusetts, but that he will also help in other states, and he name-checked Georgia, which makes sense since he's clearly trying to emulate the work of Stacey Abrams, and get the kind of praise she won when she helped deliver the Peach State not only for Joe Biden, but also for Raphael Warnock & Jon Ossoff.

House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams (D-GA)

I spent a lot of last year second-guessing Stacey Abrams' decision, and I've said since that I was wrong (for the most part).  Abrams choice was surely magnanimous-she put in an extraordinary amount of groundwork & discipline to ensure that voters in her state turned out twice for someone other than herself, and it worked.  Those wins are huge, and helped win the White House and truly helped win the Senate majority.  Abrams now has free reign to not only get President Biden's and the DNC's ear on pretty much any campaign issue she wants, she also has clear access to a big prize in Georgia: next year's gubernatorial nomination.  Abrams might have had a challenge from Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms next year if Georgia hadn't gone so blue-people who criticized Abrams for not running herself would have pointed out that we've lost more than one seat due to Stacey Abrams' decisions.  But that's not the case-Abrams proved she can win Georgia, and she'll get her opportunity next year.  It remains to be seen if Abrams (who also clearly has presidential aspirations) long plan is correct here (if she had won one of those Senate seats, she might not have her dream job but she'd be sitting on a perch she could use to run for national office), but so far her strategy has been solid success if her goal is to ultimately be viable for president; any memory of her 2018 loss has disappeared (for now).

So you may think I'd give Kennedy the benefit-of-the-doubt here since I was wrong on Abrams, and to some degree I am.  Abrams proved that grassroots investment can pay off dividends, and it needs to be the wave of the future for the Democratic Party.  She also proved that you can get the political equivalent of a "W" even if you're not on the ballot if you're good at your job & make sure everyone knows you deserve credit.  But Kennedy is not Stacey Abrams, and more importantly, Massachusetts is not Georgia.  It was clear that Abrams' time out from politics was just that-she was rejoining after she showed the national party that she was not just a "respectable race" candidate, she was an actual candidate who could flip a red state.  And she had her sights on a governor's race that wasn't going anywhere.  

Joe Kennedy doesn't have this.  For starters, there's nothing he can do in Massachusetts to make himself be unbeatable again other than run for office.  Massachusetts is not a red/purple state that he can impress by electing candidates in unwinnable races (if he was from, say, Texas or Florida and had Abrams' success in getting 2022 victories, he could follow this game plan with success by then running statewide there in 2024 with everyone's blessing).  Massachusetts has purple state legislative districts, but they aren't super consequential, and he's not going to get the kind of national recognition that Abrams did...and even if he is able to transform this effort into success in a state like Texas or Florida, that still doesn't solve the argument that Kennedy is beatable in Massachusetts.  His strategy doesn't have the "high reward" that Abrams' strategy did, and so it's never going to work in the same way; no one is going to be impressed you beat a Republican in Massachusetts in the same way they are impressed when you do it somewhere like Georgia.

So if Joe Kennedy actually wants to be viable for national office someday (rather than just be a fundraiser/organizer, which is a noble profession & god bless those who do it, but that's clearly not what he's wanted in his career to this point), he can grassroots all he wants, but eventually he needs to run for office, and I think he's making a mistake by not taking on 2022.  In Massachusetts, short of running for his old seat against an incumbent (which tends to end badly for most), he needs to go for one of the two Senate seats or the governor's mansion.  The first two come with a problem for Kennedy, specifically Rep. Ayanna Pressley, who is an obvious contender for the next Senate opening & I would argue after 2020 the frontrunner for the next open seat (and waiting around for both Warren & Markey to retire AND assuming there won't be another young star that arises between then-and-now is a risky bet for Kennedy...six years is an eternity in politics).  So Kennedy's best bet to rebound from a high-profile win is to run next year for governor.

Gov. Charlie Baker (R-MA)

Kennedy, arguably, would be in a better position than you'd think to run.  While there are other Democrats who have long-coveted that position (particularly Attorney General Maura Healey), there is some reticence to run knowing that popular Gov. Charlie Baker (R) might seek a third term.  Kennedy getting into the race right away could scare off challengers, who won't want to go up against both him and Baker, and he could build a big enough lead that if Baker dropped out, he'd have a head start.  Kennedy's risk here is if Baker (who has mile-high approval ratings) runs for a third term, but even that is eyebrow-raising from my vantage.  Baker is not a "Trump Republican" but he's also not a Biden supporter...it's easy to see someone with Kennedy's money & name recognition running a scorched earth campaign, focusing exclusively on Biden voters (which is a winning strategy in the Bay State) & attacking Baker for not supporting the president enough.  It worked in 2018 for Republicans against people like Claire McCaskill & Joe Donnelly...it's plausible to assume that Kennedy could do it in 2022 against Baker.

But Kennedy isn't running, and as a result I wonder if he's unknowingly shutting the door to a future presidential bid.  Stars in politics only stay bright for a short while-the public moves on to newer, bolder flavors & it's harder to sustain if you don't have an office where the press pays attention to your races.  Kennedy's decision last year fell flat, and I get why he doesn't want to risk another "L" that would basically make him Martha Coakley.  But Jon Ossoff proved earlier this year you can go from loser to national star with one big bet on yourself, and if Kennedy is ever going to get himself back into the same conversation as the likes of Stacey Abrams & Jon Ossoff (i.e. potential future presidents) he's going to have to take that plunge...the longer he waits, the less people who will care when he actually announces.

OVP: Black Legion (1937)

Film: Black Legion (1937)

Stars: Humphrey Bogart, Dick Foran, Erin O'Brien-Moore, Ann Sheridan

Director: Archie Mayo

Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Original Motion Picture Story)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

I'm still finishing up some of the 2020 reviews that I know are important for the Oscar conversation (which is hitting high-gear next week with the Globes & the SAG Awards being announced next week).  However, as we start to wind down 2020-21 Oscar season in terms of viewing (even if predictions are just getting started), we'll begin to move back into classic cinema at a bigger clip.  I was doing "theme weeks" throughout the entirety of 2020 as part of quarantine, but as I'm focusing on a few side projects that require more of my time (including one for the blog!), we'll be moving away from that even if I might bring it out of its dormancy on occasion.  Instead, we're going to go back to random (oftentimes) Oscar-cited works from across the cinematic spectrum, though in some cases random will read more as prescient, which is the case with today's film Black Legion, which was the film that was "supposed" to be Humphrey Bogart's big break, but didn't really come of that (more below).

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie is a short message picture.  Bogart plays an affable, if unlucky guy named Frank Taylor who works at a factory and in the opening scenes seems like a surefire bet to become the plant foreman.  He & his wife Ruth (O'Brien-Moore) are ecstatic about this and what it may mean for their young family, but when they pick a different man for the job (one who has been studying the machinery rather than relying on gut instinct like Frank) who happens to be an immigrant, Frank becomes xenophobic & bitter.  This attracts the attention of a local secret organization called the Black Legion, who recruit Frank & with him start terrorizing local people who stand in Frank's way, with a particular focus on the immigrant community of the city.  Frank tries to escape the organization, but they threaten his wife & child, and he is eventually abandoned by his wife (ending up with a local "woman of ill repute").  His friend Ed (Foran) tries to save him, but is instead flogged, and while Ed is trying to escape, Frank kills him.  He realizes instantly his mistake, but still bows to the Black Legion until he takes the stand at a trial for Ed's murder, when he confesses everything and outs all of the Black Legion members in town.  The ending is a dour one for Bogart, with he & the rest of the men sentenced to life in prison.

Message pictures of this ilk were quite popular in the 1930's & 40's, and for the most part they've aged poorly.  The problem with issue pictures is frequently that they are no longer "hot button issues" years later, and thus it's hard to really comprehend what a movie would've meant in its time frame for a modern audience.  However, this is sadly not the case for Black Legion.  Just a few weeks after terrorists brandishing Confederate flags sieged the US Capitol, it's clear that racism & xenophobia are alive & well in the United States, and are in fact the platform of a major political party.  As a result, Black Legion is more relevant than ever.  The problem for the film is that it occasionally is so deliberate in telling its story, underlining who is "good" and who is "bad" (leaving only Frank in the middle), that it reads more like an after-school special than an organic film.

The movie is a noteworthy curiosity for two reasons (both of which are reason to check it out).  The first is that it's dark.  While the organization goes by "the Black Legion," it's clear to anyone (then & now) that the organization is meant to represent the KKK (so closely that the KKK sued Warner Brothers for using their patented logo, though the case was eventually dismissed).  I will admit on a random Wednesday night that I was not prepared to watch quintessential movie star Humphrey Bogart suckered into literally being a member of the KKK, and the initiation sequence (where Bogart basically signs a blood oath with the hate group at gun point) is shockingly raw.  

The second reason to like this is that Bogart is great.  The National Board of Review gave him the award for Best Actor at the time.  Though I didn't love his courtroom confession, the menacing hatred he feels combined with our natural instincts to trust Bogart (he's almost always the hero), make this is a chilling performance that plays off of his star persona.  This is likely giving the film too much credit (even if it works), because in 1937 Bogart wasn't a proper star yet.  Though he'd gained notice in movies like The Petrified Forest, this wasn't the big break many thought it'd be, and he'd wander the wilderness on the Warner Brothers lot until 1941's High Sierra, which transformed him into a legend.

OVP: News of the World (2020)

Film: News of the World (2020)

Stars: Tom Hanks, Helena Zengel, Mare Winningham, Bill Camp

Director: Paul Greengrass

Oscar History: 4 nominations (Best Sound, Score, Cinematography, Production Design)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

One of the comments I've heard the most about this year's Oscars is not from film fans, who ardently will argue with you that this was a "good year for movies" (a conversation for a later day, but it wasn't-every year has good movies that come out, but not every year can be a "great year for movies" because axiomatically if every year is a "great year" none of them are...and 2020 let us down in that regard even if there were some gems along the way).  Instead, it's from lay fans of movies who simply "haven't seen any of the films that are going to compete" and while I think this isn't quite fair, it's reality to admit that without a communal pop culture, without parties & office lunches, there aren't as many movies that have entered the zeitgeist or popular culture in the way that they normally would have.  This is true for News of the World, a film that stars everyman movie star Tom Hanks (who doesn't love Tom Hanks?), which would've been a hit in a normal circumstance.  It's a big, pleasant, well-crafted adventure film about Hanks & a young woman whom he must protect against the odds.  This is 100% the kind of movie my family would've watched as a collective over Christmas, and it's the kind that word-of-mouth would've made into a proper hit, potentially enough so that it'd be a Best Picture nominee in the vein of The Blind Side or The Help or Philomena (too popular to ignore).  Alas, without box office, News of the World has to stand on its pleasant but broad appeal, and likely won't be a big part of the Oscar conversation outside maybe Cinematography.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie centers on Captain Jefferson Kidd (Hanks) a Confederate soldier who in 1870 now travels from town to town, reading newspapers to the populace for 10 cents, giving them an idea of what's happening from city-to-city (think of it as a very early version of the evening news).  Traveling from one such city, he finds a lynched black man and along with him a young white girl named Johanna (Zengel), who has been living with the Kiowa tribe & whose family had been murdered on the prairie.  She doesn't speak English, but she does have an aunt-and-uncle that live a great distance from there who might be able to take care of her.  He initially tries to give her to a family to wait for the train to take her to her aunt-and-uncle, but soon learns that she'll run away in that situation, and takes her himself.  Eventually the two warm to each other as they face the rough-and-tumble world of a post-Civil War Texas, and come to find an understanding with each other.  When it's clear that he must put the demons of his old life behind him (he has been suffering from PTSD after the war, and the unfairness that he went to war but it was his wife who ended up dying before they could be reunited), he decides to adopt Johanna from her uncle-and-aunt (as they are not fit to take care of such a child), and they start reading the news across the country together.

The movie is routine, even if it's occasionally scary (such as a standoff with a group of men who are trying to kidnap Johanna).  There is no overarching villain (no baddie comes back repeatedly along their journey), and it isn't trying to break new ground.  The idea of a jaded adult gaining perspective from being forced to care for a child is the basis of hundreds, if not thousands, of movies, and so you know how this will end before we even meet Johanna.

That said, routine isn't always bad, and Tom Hanks continues his late career renaissance by breathing life into this figure.  He plays Kidd as too modern, too woke (and Hanks, who has been hit-or-miss with accents in his career, doesn't remotely attempt the Texas twang most of his costars are sporting, his northern California accent there throughout), but this is such a surface-level film it doesn't really matter. You want to see the two win, you want to see good triumph over evil, and on that populist appeal it delivers.  I name-checked The Blind Side and The Help above, which may have sounded like an insult, but I don't put it in that realm-it's not a bad movie.  It's just the kind of movie that, with Oscar, it's not the critics who will need to rally but audiences.  I suspect that won't happen, and thus this will be the film that does well on cable rather than with the Academy, but if you're looking for an uncomplicated, 2020 adventure film, you've come to the right place.

My Top 10 Films of 2020

 Well, we have a new president now, and while we'll have to wait several more months for the Oscars, it feels like it's time for me to call it quits on 2020.  On Sunday we took a look at my Top 10 films of 2020 that weren't from 2020...today we'll do the opposite, peaking at the Top 10 films of 2020 that did come from 2020.  These are listed alphabetically, and while it was not the year I would've hoped for cinematically, every one of these was a bright spot & is well worth your time (and some tred into that coveted "masterpiece" territory):

And Then We Danced

dir. Levan Akin

A look at how love can inspire passion, desire, and occasionally even joy in the most jaded of individuals, Akin's dancing romance gains its best moments not through despair, but through bleak hope.

Emma

dir. Autumn de Wilde

A saucy minx of a take on Austen, Emma Woodhouse has never been so essential, and her suitors never sexier than in this wicked, funny look at one of the author's most-cherished tales.

The Father

dir. Florian Zeller

Anthony Hopkins & Olivia Colman are an acting duet for the ages as they encounter the cruel reality of aging, and the complicated tensions of watching your parents growing older.

Mank

dir. David Fincher

Fincher bravely steps into the long shadow of Citizen Kane, and makes his own magnum opus focusing on a similar man trying to navigate his own destiny, and the unavoidable fate that awaits him. 

Never Gonna Snow Again

dir. Malgorzata Szumowska & Michel Englert

A challenging but darkly funny look at class, mysticism, & xenophobia, Never Gonna Snow Again avoids cliche and features an unnerving performance from lead actor Alec Utgoff. 

Nomadland

dir. Chloe Zhao

Frances McDormand strips away all of the curmudgeonly ticks that have made her famous to give us a thoughtful, moving look at a woman who lives in the edges of society, and finds the person she was meant to be.

Promising Young Woman

dir. Emerald Fennell

Provocative, unpredictable, with (yet another) brilliant performance from the criminally-underrated Carey Mulligan, Promising Young Woman defies convention through clever genre-hopping.

Soul

dir. Pete Docter

Pixar totally abandons any pretense of making a movie for kids with this meditative look at a jazz musician at the crossroads of life & death, but it finds grand meaning in the ways we define our success.

Undine

dir. Christian Petzold

With glorious performances from leads Paula Beer & Franz Rogowski, Christan Petzold continues his introspective series of hits with this knowing look at love, codependence, & time.

Wolfwalkers

dir. Tomm Moore & Ross Stewart

Tomm Moore finally wins me over not just in terms of the jewel-like animation (always a winner for him, and has tan-and-green ever looked better together?) but with a story that matches the playful imagination of his imagery.

OVP: Promising Young Woman (2020)

Film: Promising Young Woman (2020)

Stars: Carey Mulligan, Bo Burnham, Alison Brie, Clancy Brown, Jennifer Coolidge, Laverne Cox, Chris Lowell

Director: Emerald Fennell

Oscar History: 5 nominations/1 win (Best Picture, Director, Actress-Carey Mulligan, Film Editing, Original Screenplay*)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 5/5 stars

Few films this year have I watched and thought "this would be a total zeitgeist hit if movies were in theaters" more fully than after I finished Promising Young Woman.  Though it's in theaters, most people are still going to be seeing this at-home, away from water coolers & cocktail parties where it could be the center of discussion in the same way that Gone Girl was a few years ago, and that's a darn shame.  Promising Young Woman is a captivating feature, one that ruthlessly shifts genres from one scene to the other, and is a confident, incredible debut (seriously-how is this a debut film?!?) from Emerald Fennell, best-known to most audiences for her work on Call the Midwife and The Crown.  Few films this year have felt so relevant & iconic as you were watching them as this comedic thriller.

(Spoilers Ahead...and I mean it-don't read this if you haven't seen the movie) The movie is about Cassie (Mulligan) a 30-year-old woman who was once pursuing med school with a strong academic caliber, but now lives with her parents, working at a coffeeshop & regularly visiting nightclubs in a state of inebriation...or so we're intended to believe.  Though this was apparent if you saw the trailers, Cassie doesn't actually visit these nightclubs with the intention of hooking up or becoming intoxicated, but instead into seeing which guy will try to bring her home, and potentially try to have sex with her in her inebriated state (and then shows them afterward to be the creeps that they are for trying to hook up with a drunk girl, and lets them know they aren't "nice guys").

This all comes to a head when she realizes two things.  The first is that a guy from her past, Ryan (Burnham) is back and is interested in her romantically.  Cassie has not been open to dating a man in a serious way, but his charm & candor wear her down, and they begin dating.  Ryan lets her know that Al Monroe (Lowell), a fellow classmate of both of theirs, is back in the country about to get married, and Cassie knows that Al raped her (now-dead) best friend, who is the inspiration for her nightly bar trips.  Slowly, Cassie chooses between enacting revenge on those people who helped cover up for Al (including an old school dean and a former classmate, played by Alison Brie) or letting go of this anger & focusing on her relationship with Ryan.

Promising Young Woman puts a lot of care into every scene & every direction it takes.  Up until this point, it's an odd movie in that it seems to have two different stories that clearly cannot meld successfully.  Cassie has enacted revenge on all of these men, and likely needs to move on from this in order to have a healthy relationship with another guy, but she also has not gotten the catharsis she had from her friend Nina's death.  The movie upends what we'd expect (that she'll let it go, and that Ryan will be the guy who convinces her not "all men are bad") when we see a video of the sexual assault, and it turns out that Ryan was there that night.  Cassie then blackmails Ryan into giving her the location of Al's bachelor party...where she goes intent on revenge, but this backfires with a second twist, where Cassie is murdered by Al, and then eventually burned by Al & a friend before a failsafe plan Cassie had created leads to Al's arrest.

The movie sounds long, but it's not-it uses its screen-time judiciously and in service to its plot.  The care shows in aspects you wouldn't always consider.  The movie's soundtrack is crazy good (you'll want to download Paris Hilton's "Stars are Blind" afterward...this might be the best thing to ever happen to her music career), and the casting is sublime.  Fennell seems to have made a point of hiring "nice guy types" like Adam Brody, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and Sam Richardson to play the guys who try to date rape Cassie, to underline how we need to reconsider the benefit-of-the-doubt we give to boys-next-door in these stories.

The story might be offputting to some (particularly if you're invested in Bo Burnham's manic pixie dream guy, the twist with his character is a sucker punch), and there are flaws in the character arch's of this film if you think about it too much (particularly since we have no concept of who Cassie is without her Nina revenge story, other than she was once a "promising young woman"), but I don't think you'll care.  I know I didn't.  The film is so persistent, underlining difficult passages with ease, and is aided by a universally strong cast & script.  As a result, Promising Young Woman is that rare creation indeed-a pop culture phenom that actually lives up to its hype.

5 Thoughts On Rob Portman's Retirement

Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH)

Occasionally politics throws you a curveball, and this morning we got an announcement I did not expect.  Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), a two-term, conservative but mild-mannered senator from the Buckeye State, has announced he will not seek reelection in 2022.  This was not expected.  Portman was a prodigious fundraiser, and quite popular in his home state.  As you'll see below, he might've been the target of a rightwing challenger, but there are better options both in Ohio and in the Senate if the GOP wanted to go that route, so I doubt a fear-of-losing was the reason he left.  At 65, Portman has left office before (one could've seen a world where he was Secretary of State or Treasury in 2016 had it been Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio who were the Republican president rather than Donald Trump), and it's possible he'll come back in the executive branch, but this likely means the end of his elected political career.  Let's take a look at five thoughts I had as a result of this news.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH)

1. The Republican Field is a Free-for-All

Ohio Republicans have a wide bench of potential challengers to go after this seat, and considering that there is a slow list of spots for them to advance statewide (and all of the House R's are in the minority, which is pretty dull), I suspect we'll see a bonanza of Republicans get into this race.  Already Reps. Mike Turner & Steve Stivers are publicly musing about a run, and it's probable we'll see other names like former State Treasurer Josh Mandel (who has $4.3 million left in his campaign coffers that he could use for such a run), former Rep. Jim Renacci, and Lt. Gov. Jon Husted consider their options.  In 2018 Mitch McConnell tried publicly to woo author JD Vance into the race against Sen. Sherrod Brown, and he could run this time (which I suspect would complicate Amy Adams & Glenn Close's bids for awards glory this year as they starred in Vance's Hillbilly Elegy adaptation, and will now be in the awkward position of thanking a man who would need to hug Donald Trump pretty hard to win a seat).

And of course, it needs to be mentioned that Rep. Jim Jordan will give this race a serious look after Portman's retirement.  Jordan is a Trump die-hard whose involvement in the Ohio State University abuse scandal makes him a difficult sell in a general election (but his Trump allegiance's would help in a primary).  Ohio is a red state now (at its most charitable, it's pink), but it did elect a Democrat in 2018, and Jordan would be uniquely vulnerable in a primary (think Kris Kobach in Kansas) in a way none of these other men would be, so his entry into this race will be closely-watched.

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH)

2. Does Tim Ryan Finally Make His Move?

This race likely moves from "Safe R" to either "Likely" or "Leans R" depending on how you consider Jordan's chances.  That being said, at this juncture this is not a lost cause like Kentucky or South Carolina were in 2020, as Ohio is more marginal at the presidential level than either of those two states, and Jordan's potential entry is enough to give one pause.  The big question for the Democrats will be if Joe Biden's handling of the Covid virus is A) competent & considered so by the populace and B) if that has enough hold that Biden might be able to duplicate a scenario similar to George W. Bush in 2002 where Democrats could gain seats in a midterm.

In order to do that, they'll need to recruit a Tier 1 candidate who has to know that they might be entering a race that they have no way of winning without someone like Jordan on the ballot.  The best candidate I can think of (other than LeBron James, who probably isn't going to cut his lucrative basketball career short for a tossup Senate race) is Rep. Tim Ryan.  Ryan has forgone runs for statewide office repeatedly, but 2022 gives him the opportunity to pursue an open seat race and he might have to if he wants to stay in Congress.  Ryan's seat is a potential redistricting opportunity, as it's already shifting red & could go further in that direction after congressional reapportionment.  In 2012, Rep. Joe Donnelly was in a similar scenario, and managed to luck into a general election he would win, getting the Democrats a Senate seat that they couldn't hold, but at least got to occupy for six years.  Ryan could be in a similar scenario, though like the Republicans, there is a risk that the Democrats also screw up in the primary (nominating State Sen. Nina Turner would ensure the Democrats lose against any candidate, and it's not out-of-the-question she runs).  Ryan vs. Jordan would probably be a Slight R, but it has enough question marks that this would be a race worth watching.  It's worth noting that if Ryan won this race in an upset, it'd give the Democrats a seat not just in 2022, but also 2024/2026, and in some ways would counteract the loss of Susan Collins' seat last year until the Democrats have a chance to beat her again in five years (it'd also give Ryan, who clearly has designs on the presidency after 2020, a more traditional perch to pursue that office).

Sen. Portman with former President Trump

3. Does Portman Now Support Conviction?

The more immediate question for Portman is not who will replace him, but instead how does this impact the math on Portman's decision on impeachment.  Portman has been vocal about some of his frustrations with Trump, and while he has stated publicly that he doesn't know if you can constitutionally impeach a person who is no longer in office, this opens him up to voting against impeachment in a way he didn't have before.  A good corollary would be Sen. Pat Toomey, who after he announced he was not seeking office in 2022, seemed considerably more open to fighting against Trump.  Both men, it's worth noting, were not part of the Hawley/Cruz movement to decertify the election results in Arizona & Pennsylvania.  While it's unlikely that there will be enough Republicans to convict Trump, Portman does have a considerably larger berth to go against Trump without having to worry about his reelection after today.

Gov. Mike DeWine (R-OH)

4. Can Mike DeWine Breathe a Sigh of Relief?

Up until this morning, it was not Portman's seat that many ambitious Trump acolytes were looking at, but Gov. Mike DeWine's.  DeWine is unusual in that he has generally high approval ratings (he is well-liked on both sides for his approach to fighting the Covid-19 pandemic), but because of his outspoken attitude toward former President Trump, many in the GOP assumed that he was going to get a primary challenge, likely from either Renacci or Jordan.  DeWine was one of several Republicans (along with Doug Ducey & Brian Kemp) that Trump seemed intent on focusing in on in the coming year, and as a result was vulnerable despite being a sure-thing for the general election.  While he could still get challenged, all of those Republicans have a much better shot at winning higher office by pursuing the Senate, and without those Republicans running against DeWine, ambitious Democrats (like Ryan or Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley) are going to go after the Senate seat as well, since they know they can't beat DeWine in the general.  No one wins more than Mike DeWine with this retirement announcement.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI)

5. Will There Be More Retirements to Come from the Republicans?

Portman's retirement, as I stated above, gives the Democrats an opportunity, even if it doesn't give them a tossup or even a "Leans R" right out-of-the-gate.  That being said, you have to wonder if being stuck in the minority for the first time in six years might make some Republican senators reconsider staying in the US Senate.  Portman's announcement makes it three Republicans (along with Sens. Richard Burr & Pat Toomey) already who have retired, and it's only January 2021.

Some of the potential retirements (like Richard Shelby in Alabama) wouldn't matter in terms of partisan balance, but two senators to focus on are Iowa's Chuck Grassley & Wisconsin's Ron Johnson.  Grassley would be a similar scenario to Portman's-a seat where the Republicans might screw up, and the Democrats have a plausibly good bench (State Auditor Rob Sand being their best option, though Rep. Abby Finkenauer might also be competitive) that could take advantage.  Grassley is 87-years-old and a longtime creature of the Senate who seems intent on running again, but if he doesn't see a feasible path to the majority, it's possible he calls it quits.

Johnson, one could argue, might actually help the Senate Republicans if he retired (since he tends to be a lightning rod), but Wisconsin Republicans would need to find someone who plays well in the suburbs and can turn out Trump-level rural voters without Trump on the ticket (a recipe they couldn't make happen in 2018).  Wisconsin is one of the best shots the Democrats have at a pickup in 2022-a retirement from Johnson might indicate that he thinks that that shot isn't worth adding an "L" to his record.

OVP: Soul (2020)

Film: Soul (2020)

Stars: Jamie Foxx, Tina Fey, Graham Norton, Rachel House, Phylicia Rashad, Angela Bassett

Director: Pete Docter

Oscar History: 3 nominations/2 wins (Best Animated Feature Film*, Sound, Score*)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

Pixar has had an ebb-and-flow when it comes to making films for children versus for their parents.  Even from its feature-film beginnings with Toy Story, that film might have had flashy cowboys & astronauts for children, but the parents in the room understood that this was about getting older, and could look at their little Andy's & understand that they only got to be in this stage for so long.  Occasionally they went totally for kids (the Cars franchise), and in some cases it feels like it leaned more heavily onto the adults with only a few hints for the kids (Up had the dog & the boy scout child, but otherwise was about two old men battling it out as they aged).  Soul, though, takes Pixar to a new direction-while the colors are playful & occasionally the baby souls might feel like a way for children to latch on, this is a film entirely for grownups; this is the first Pixar, and perhaps first Disney animated, film where children are the afterthought.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie is about Joe (Foxx), a middle school music teacher whose passion is not in education but in the gigs he plays at jazz venues & nightclubs, where he is an excellent pianist but never got his big break.  When he finally does get a chance to jam with legendary musician Dorothea Williams (Bassett), he's so excited he doesn't realize there's a manhole in front of him, and he, well, falls through and dies.  This brings him to the "Great Beyond," essentially his afterlife, but Joe isn't ready to die, and attempts to escape from this place, but does so with 22 (Fey), a soul that has refused to leave the Great Beyond and start an actual life on Earth.  When the two go to Earth, they switch bodies, and slowly 22 learns about life (realizing it's worth living), and Joe understands that aspects of his life have been ignored & even run selfishly (he has had more impact than he knew).  This results in 22 getting the same "imprint" of hobbies as Joe, even though she's different, and so Joe (after jamming with Dorothea & realizing it wasn't as grand as he expected it), goes back to save her, and give her a chance at a true, unique life on earth.  In doing so, he is given a reprieve to return to his life from the Great Beyond, and he does, but with a renewed perspective to live life to its fullest.

Soul tries to do a lot, and that doesn't always work even in strong movies.  The third act is convoluted-the mythology of the Great Beyond is a bit too convoluted for a movie that's only 100 minutes long, and it does feel like we could've trimmed a bit of the body-swapping aspects as it wears out its welcome pretty quickly.  The film also borrows too much from previous Pixar messages, specifically Inside Out, and so it doesn't feel as special as it might've ten years ago.

That said, Soul is occasionally really wonderful.  The color scheme (so much purple and white) is a treasure (Pixar continues to just reach for the stars aesthetically), and the score is a dream.  It also has the gaul to not just make a film for adults, but a complicated one.  The conversations about not letting your dreams control your destiny is one that we all have to do.  Most of us don't get to have the job we had when we're ten, and we work in day jobs that pay the bills, but aren't what inspires us.  Soul challenges its viewers to ignore the voice in our head that says that we "failed" as a result, and instead to appreciate the dreams & the gifts that we have made for ourselves, and not let us be defined just by our careers in a world where that's what most of us feel defined by.  It's a good message, and an important one after a year of many of us losing our jobs (or more) or having an undue amount of stress that has us appreciating life more.  The film ends on a note of ambiguity but of realness.  Joe has hopes that he will take this experience and not fall back into the same rut, into the same shell of underwhelmed expectations-it's the hope we all carry as we move forward past trauma & close calls (like our collective 2020).  That Pixar is brave enough to admit that this is harder than it seems, and that it doesn't show the next chapter of his life is smart, and yet another sign that this movie is made for the adult-who-still-dreams.

Top 10 Films of 2020 (that aren't from 2020)

All right-we will be this week (likely on Tuesday if my plans are correct) unveiling my Top 10 of 2020.  However, in every year but this year especially, I see a lot of movies, and not just ones from the 2020 calendar.  In 2020 I saw 288 movies, some repeat viewings but many classics (or not so much) that I had never seen before, and I don't want to let something like chronology get in the way of celebrating great cinema.  As a result, I've included below my Top 10 films of 2020 that I saw for the first time (that didn't come out in 2020).  Enjoy (titles are listed alphabetically)!

Anatomy of a Murder (1959)

dir. Otto Preminger

A complicated look at sexual assault (and a surprisingly modern take considering its Classical Hollywood roots), this is a 3-hour film that never feels long, and has amazing work from Jimmy Stewart & Lee Remick.

Cabin in the Sky (1943)

dir. Vincente Minnelli

Ethel Waters steals the show in Vincente Minnelli's first musical, a landmark musical featuring an all-Black cast, and a picture that proves that "happiness is just a thing called Joe."

Honeyland (2019)

dir. Tamara Kotevska & Ljubomir Stefanov

A hands-off documentary that is so rich you almost feel it's a narrative feature; it's a challenging look at poverty, loss, & our ill treatment of the planet.

if... (1968)

dir. Lindsay Anderson

Malcolm McDowell shows early shadows of Alex DeLarge in this boarding school drama, a movie that even 50 years later is shocking in its frankness about sex & violence.

Letter from an Unknown Woman (1948)

dir. Max Ophuls

Impossibly romantic, Joan Fontaine & Louis Jourdan are iconic as two lovers who alternate between passion & indifference in this forgotten masterwork.

The Misfits (1961)

dir. John Huston

A more avant-garde western than you'd expect given the stars, The Misfits is a look at the faded west & its fight against modernity.  Career-best work from Marilyn Monroe & (dare I say it?) Clark Gable.

Paper Moon (1973)

dir. Peter Bogdonavich

A gemlike father-and-daughter buddy film (on screen & off), that gives both of the O'Neal's their best work.  Proof that A+ chemistry, writing, & cinematography can always sell a picture.

Paths of Glory (1957)

dir. Stanley Kubrick

Kubrick gives us one of the best "war is hell" examples brought to cinema, with a look at the cruel politics of battle (and the finest performance from Kirk Douglas I've ever seen).

The Red Shoes (1948)

dir. Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger

One of those films that is spoken about in near reverent tones by cinephiles, Powell & Pressburger's magnum opus lives up to the hype: a modern, gorgeous tale of tragedy.

The Wind (1928)

dir. Victor Sjostrom

One of the greatest silent films I've ever seen, Lillian Gish gives the performance of a lifetime as a woman driven near mad by the harsh winds of the prairie.

OVP: The Father (2020)

Film: The Father (2020)

Stars: Anthony Hopkins, Olivia Colman, Rufus Sewell, Imogen Poots, Mark Gatiss, Olivia Williams

Director: Florian Zeller

Oscar History: 6 nominations/2 wins (Best Picture, Actor-Anthony Hopkins*, Supporting Actress-Olivia Colman, Film Editing, Production Design, Adapted Screenplay*)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 5/5 stars

Movies are not reality.  This is true in obvious ways (you don't encounter dragons & aliens just randomly in real life), but it also is true in the sense that our approach to reality shifts when we're trying to decipher a movie compared to real-life.  I realized this shortly into Florian Zeller's debut film The Father, which is based on the Tony-winning play.  Despite the trailers being pretty clear about what I was getting into, in a movie about shifting narrative & direction, I kept expecting twists, confusion & more of a traditional thriller.  What I got, of course, was what was promised-a devastating look at aging, told in an almost fantastical way, and a jaw-dropping lead performance from Anthony Hopkins.

(Spoilers Ahead) The Father is not a movie that fits a traditional narrative-style, but essentially it's the story of Anthony (Hopkins), a well-to-do man who lives in an elegant London flat, and frequently gets visits from his daughter Anne (Colman), who is worried that he is getting too old to stay in his flat by herself.  She intends to go to Paris with her fiancé, and it seems wants to move him into a more manageable place since he's started having memory issues & she's worried about him being on his own. Initially we're meant to wonder just a little bit if Anne is telling the truth, as Anthony, though curmudgeonly, seems pretty lucid & together, if slightly forgetful, and he does have a beautiful apartment (and presumably wealth to go with it).

As the film unfolds, though, we find this isn't a thriller, and it isn't even clear what is reality.  Throughout the movie, we stay entirely in Anthony's purview, and as a result we don't know what's happening.  Anne, in some scenes, is moving to Paris whereas in other scenes she's not, and has been married for years to her previous husband-the actress who plays Anne shifts in select scenes to Olivia Williams, and time becomes a moving construct.  As we continue, we begin to lose our sense of self & position, we can no longer understand what is real in Anthony's world & what isn't...in much the same way that Anthony can't.  The film smartly decides not to tell us truly what happens until the very last scene, and even then, we wonder if the movie is landing on the truth, or if we will continue to spin past the credits.  

It's harrowing stuff, thinking about how this is what aging can do to you, and it's made better through Hopkins' work in the lead.  There's no hints of Hannibal Lecter, of Richard Nixon, of Robert Ford.  Hopkins creates his own man here, and pulls off a tricky part-this would be easy to milk for quick sympathy or trying to make his Anthony too cruel, but Hopkins gives him round edges & shows the unfairness for those around him of "good days and bad days" (as the cliche goes).  He's coupled with a terrific scene partner in Colman, who plays her Anne as the neglected child, the sister that lived (it's not always clear how, but her sister died years earlier & was obviously Anthony's favorite while Anne was favored by her mother).  You don't oftentimes see the effects of the relationship between "the non-favorite child & the non-favorite parent" onscreen without the comparison of the "favorite" being there, but both actors bring such a rich history to these parts that you can see it in the way that Colman's Anne, likely on the verge of a better happiness & with more of her life left to live, decides between duty & a (tested) love for her father, who never saw her as the daughter he cherished the most.

In general in 2020, I've been turned off by most stage-to-screen adaptations-they haven't adapted properly to the medium, and oftentimes feel too small or like they can't push their story to the big screen without growing pains, but The Father does it masterfully, to the point where you don't see the stage roots at all.  This is helped by excellent production design & in particular A+ editing, as we see little touches on the set move or bend so that we are always in the same, familiar apartment but things aren't quite right.  The effect is one where, like the early stages of dementia, things feel familiar but also off, and that prickly feeling stays with us as we rarely leave this apartment, giving us a true idea of the claustrophobia of Anthony's world.

OVP: The General Died at Dawn (1936)

Film: The General Died at Dawn (1936)

Stars: Gary Cooper, Madeleine Carroll, Akim Tamiroff

Director: Lewis Milestone

Oscar History: 3 nominations (Best Supporting Actor-Akim Tamiroff, Score, Cinematography)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2021 Saturdays with the Stars series, we highlight a different one Alfred Hitchcock's Leading Ladies.  This month, our focus is on Madeleine Carroll-click here to learn more about Ms. Carroll (and why I picked her), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

Madeleine Carroll's career in movies was relatively brief, and we'll talk about the end of it next week a little bit, but her two pairings with Alfred Hitchcock made her a marketable star in America, and as a result she signed a contract with Paramount, becoming the first really important British actress to get a star contract from a major studio.  This led, of course, to her working with the pride-and-joy of the Paramount lot, Gary Cooper, in The General Died at Dawn, our picture today.

(Spoilers Ahead) The plot of The General Died at Dawn is confusing.  Essentially what the movie is about is O'Hara (Cooper), a man living in a war-ravaged China, attempting to give ammunitions to the peasants to fight General Yang (Tamiroff), who is mad & acts as a tyrant in the countryside.  Judy's (Carroll) father is in league with Yang, and she's essentially tasked to "distract" him (i.e. use her feminine wiles to get after Cooper), but in the process of course falls in love with him.  In the end, Yang & Judy's father both die (the latter dying literally at O'Hara's hands, and yet the romance still remains a thing), and the ammunitions are saved.

The General Died at Dawn shouldn't work.  This is a film that is incredibly convoluted, with a tacked-on love story & nondescript character actors playing their parts as two-dimensionally as possible...but it does.  The film is moody, often disjointed, but that works in its favor somehow.  There's a madcap aspect to it, as if we're meant to be confused alongside Cooper's O'Hara that I liked about the movie, and it's way better than it has any right to be.

Part of that are the performances.  Carroll is great here, as is Cooper (and both are jaw-droppingly gorgeous).  Carroll, as we've seen this month, is an actress whose glamour & beauty got in the way of her getting to play a part to its fullest (the directors wanted to bring forward her looks more than her performance), but Milestone doesn't do that.  He actually allows Carroll to get some real acting in, and while she's tasked with a ridiculous part (the scenes where she essentially writes off her father are so bizarre), she shows she has the talent to sell an offbeat part to the audience.

The film won three Oscar nominations, to varying reviews.  The Score is fine if unimpressive (sturdy, standard-fare action movie from the 1930's sort of bounce), but the real winner is the cinematography.  Victor Milner's work here is some of the best I've seen from the mid-1930's, atmospheric & cool.  It recalls in some ways what we'd eventually get from Gregg Toland in The Long Voyage Home and Citizen Kane (though not quite that sophisticated)-using the lighting in a way you didn't really see in 1930's cinema, and it's genuinely impressive.  The film's third nomination is for Akim Tamiroff, and yes, he's sporting yellowface onscreen.  Even discounting the significant racism involved, Tamiroff's work here is rudimentary-he gives Yang very little other than a sense of menace, and there's no nuance or personality in what he's doing.  This was the first year of the supporting categories at the Oscars, and thankfully they quickly started picking better work than this.