Ranting On...Weddings

Okay, you knew this was coming.  While we have celebrated love and marriage and weddings all week, I couldn’t help but add our Friday rant into the mix, and so I will be making a bit of a rant (and I apologize in advance to any of my friends who have done anything listed below at their weddings or will do it at a future ceremony-I promise I still had/will have fun!).

The big thing, though, that I want to point out as I list this rant is that as a whole, I don’t have as many pet peeves about weddings, but this is because my biggest gripe falls under a Catch-22 umbrella.  You see, my biggest pet peeve regarding weddings is not anything the bride-or-groom do, but instead the people who insert themselves into the wedding.

I remember Carrie Bradshaw complaining in an episode of Sex and the City (the source of all romantic knowledge) about how a wedding is the one day that is truly about celebrating you.  We all get birthdays (and as you get older, most everyone forgets when your birthday is anyway), and we all get funerals (but you don’t really get to know what happens at your own, unless you're Tom Sawyer), but weddings are truly the only day that all of your friends, family, and loved ones get together to celebrate you and the person you are committing yourself to for the rest of your life.  The day, therefore, should be something that is all about you and your personality (and your spouse’s admittedly).

But through the years, I have seen my friends do things at their wedding that they didn’t want to do.  They’ve invited people they didn’t want to come, increased or decreased the size of their wedding guest list based on insistence or sense-of-duty, and made the day something that they hadn’t envisioned, and I think that’s wrong.  While expense is always a factor (not all of us can get 2,000 guests on a yacht), if someone wants to have a small, intimate ceremony, that’s up to them.  If someone doesn’t want to make a big deal of their wedding, that’s up to them.  If someone wants a dozen bridesmaids and to wear an exact replica of the Princess Di dress and have their wedding reception at the Olive Garden, that’s between them and their MasterCard.  My big pet peeve is when others (let’s be honest here, primarily parents and siblings) try to force their beliefs onto the ceremony in a way that takes away from their vision.

This also relates to one of my other pet peeves-people who get mad when, during their engagement, someone else gets engaged that they are related to or best friends with.  Don’t propose within a one-month radius of the wedding ceremony if you are close enough to know the people involved well (and never propose at a wedding ceremony, as that is beyond tacky), but otherwise this is fair game.  Anyone who gets mad because their sister got engaged two months after them is just being petty and really showing massive, massive bridezilla points (unless it’s the parents who are paying for both weddings-they can gripe if they’d like).

I don’t have too many more peeves to air here, mainly because that point above applies to me too-it’s your wedding, not mine (presumably, unless my future husband is reading this post, in which case-hey, how’s it going, thanks for marrying me!).  I will offer a couple of suggestions, though, but feel free to ignore them:

-Please register for gifts.  If I’m invited to your wedding, you know I want to buy you something, and no, I’m not gift enough (I’ve met me, and if you’re going to buy me dinner and have me be part of your special day, you should get a blender along with my smiling visage).

-Please do a seating arrangement if there’s a dinner.  If it’s just a wedding ceremony or a hyper-casual, no dinner reception, you can skip this, but otherwise, as a single person who came to your wedding by themselves, a seating arrangement makes the dinner so much less awkward.  Having to either sit at the bar or hunt for someone else who is by themselves is such a bummer, especially after seeing someone proclaim their love to each other.

-In this vein, don’t be super offended if your single friends don’t stick around for the full dance.  This may seem rude (okay, it probably is rude), but again, as a single person, I know what they’re going through.  Wedding dances are a minefield of slow songs mixed in with Kelly Clarkson and Sir Mix-a-Lot, and it’s the worst to have to run to the “bathroom” every third song when you don’t have a date, or to be forced to slow dance with people platonically.  I promise, I heart you to pieces if I came, so don't feel I'm cutting out because I'm not having a good time.

And those are my rants on weddings (relatively tame, I’d admit).  And if you happen to be getting married soon, what are your rants about guests/people (crazy wedding guest stories are always fun).  Share in the comments!

Pick a Brother, Any Brother...

For those of you who saw a June Powell movie during Wedding Week and thought, "I love that movie," and then realized it didn't have a bunch of handsome brothers running around in technicolor-toned dress shirts, don't worry, I have your back.  

When you're gay, people often ask "when did you know you were gay?" and while that's a silly question that you usually respond with "when did you know you were straight," if we're being honest, it may have been the barn-raising dance in Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.  I don't know what was in the water up on the Pontipee farm, but my reaction to them certainly would have been similar to Julie Newmar's.  Below, you get to pick one brother (and only one brother-this isn't that kind of site!) to be your fake husband for wedding week.  Some of these guys became more famous than others, so picture quality will have a range.  And Tommy Rall has already been called.

Adam (Howard Keel)

Benjamin (Jeff Richards)

Caleb (Matt Mattox)

Daniel (Marc Platt)

Ephraim (Jacque D'Amboise)

Frank (Tommy Rall)

Gideon (Russ Tamblyn)

Whose your pick?  And for the curious, below is the famous barn-raising dance:

Can a Single Person Win the White House?

Since it is Wedding Week here on the blog, and since we try to discuss American politics on a daily basis, I thought it would be an interesting time to take a look at one of the odder taboos in American politics: the single politician and the White House.

This is probably one of weirder taboos in the political sphere, if only because most other “barriers” to the presidency have become more tolerant with time, rather than less.  We currently have an African-American president, and few would expect that the next African-American president will have to overcome the same sorts of hurtles as Barack Obama.  Similarly, women such as Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin have made it significantly easier and more likely that we’ll have a female president, if not in the next election, almost certainly in the next 10-20 years.

However, we’ve had a bachelor president: James Buchanan in 1856 (it’s also worth noting that Grover Cleveland wasn’t married yet when he initially became president).  Bachelors were regular fixtures in politics in the 19^th century, when the role of the First Lady was less public and the president’s personal life wasn’t broadcast on television and in magazines and on the internet.  Since then, though, the presidential spouses have become major figures on the campaign trail, and the public is far more interested in the president’s private life.  Women such as Eleanor Roosevelt, Jackie Kennedy, Nancy Reagan, Hillary Clinton, and Michelle Obama have had an enormous influence over issues in the United States, and people enjoy the image of the president as a family man, as someone who has a life that mirrors that of many Americans.  It’s worth noting that no major party presidential candidate has been unmarried since Adlai Stevenson, who was divorced when he mounted two unsuccessful attempts against President Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956.  The spouses of candidates are able to tackle more ground on the campaign trail and can help to “soften” the candidates during a particularly grueling and nasty campaign.  Think of how both Ann Romney and Michelle Obama gave speeches about the man behind the candidate in 2012, and think of how that sort of message wouldn’t resonate with almost any other person.  People can relate to knowing things about a spouse that no one else does, and will take others' word on it.

So, it’s obvious that being married is an advantage as a candidate and a president, but is it a deal-breaker?  The thing to consider is that there are a few different definitions of “single.”  I personally don’t feel that, for example, anyone would have the remotest qualm with a widower running for president, as all of the implied success in marriage would still be there.  A divorced person, though, runs into issues.  We’ve had presidential candidates who were divorced (Ronald Reagan, John Kerry, and John McCain), but it’s still rare and it’s worth noting that all three men were happily remarried before they set off on the presidential trail.  We’ve never had a divorced man who wasn’t remarried successfully win the presidency (Stevenson coming the closest), and the highest-profile divorced presidential candidate (Andrew Cuomo) is in a serious relationship and probably would be married prior to launching a campaign in 2016.  The reasons for this are myriad, and not easy to dissect without specific polling (and it’s hard not to see a Bradley Effect bias with this sort of questioning).  One could assume that voters wouldn’t want to have someone who doesn’t reflect the “American Dream” in office-successful at home and at work.  Despite protestations, there is still a pretty high stigma in the country surrounding either choosing remaining single or to remain single because you haven’t been successful in previous romantic relationships.  This is something that doesn’t seem to be deteriorating, despite our attitudes toward marriage and relationships themselves evolving.

The final point, of course, is that rumors plague candidates who have never been married.  Cory Booker, probably the country’s most prominent unmarried politician and the likeliest unmarried candidate to run for president in the near future, is a prime example of this.  Rumors regarding Sen. Booker’s sexuality as well as his romantic pursuits have dogged him the further he has stepped into the spotlight.  While all presidential candidates have to be dogged by their past in some fashion (just ask Bill Clinton), people are a lot more willing to forgive romantic entanglements prior to marriage (we all have things in that file we’d like to hide), but if you’re still single the question becomes do you still partake in such casual dating?  Fair or unfair (okay, it’s wildly unfair), what the media can sell is what gets broadcast, and a prominent unmarried politician’s dating life is more interesting than debates about healthcare or the economy.

I guess we won’t be able to know a definitive answer to this question until we have to cross the bridge.  It’s worth noting that governors have recently been elected to office and been single, with relatively little fanfare, but of course the presidency is a bigger deal (to prove this point, name the spouse of your governor).  It is, however a bizarre glass ceiling that’s already been shattered over a century ago that still seems to persist.

Picking Your Bridesmaids: A Guide

When you're picking out your bridesmaids, you have so many different options-you have your best friend from childhood, your college roommate, that random female cousin who is roughly your age, and so on and so forth.  Luckily, Paul Feig's 2011 film Bridesmaids gives you something of a guide on how to handle this:

The Best Friend from Childhood

Reason to Pick Her: You've loved her your whole life, she knows what song you used to sing into your hairbrush, who your first crush was, and how to give a speech that won't offend your parents (unless she hits the Chardonnay, and then everything is going to fly).

Reason Not to Pick Her: She tends to get a little jealous of your newer friends who have a more "married life conducive attitude," and occasionally hints that you might be in a lesbian relationship with your new best friend.

Chances She'll Get Drunk at the Wedding: 100%

Chances She'll Sleep with Your Brother: She likely won't-she remembers when he used to flush your Barbies down the toilet and had massive acne.

Her Idea of a Bachelorette Party: Something low-key, likely at your favorite restaurant from when you were growing up, even though you haven't been there in ages because you remember the time you went to second base with your high school boyfriend in one of the bathrooms.

Wedding Gift She'll Be Buying: You know she'll be making a scrapbook or a wonderful music box with a picture of you two as children.

Your New Best Friend

Reason to Pick Her: You spend all of your time now with her-she's at every social event, and unlike your old best friend, your new husband is pals with her husband at well (double date night!).  Plus, she can impeccably dress for any cocktail party and you just know that everything will be exquisite.

Reason Not to Pick Her: She tends to take control of every situation, and it is your wedding, isn't it?  Then again, the Fritz Bernaise dresses do look lovely.

Chances She'll Get Drunk at the Wedding: 0% (though she may drive some of the other bridesmaids to drinking through incessant nagging and one-upsmanship).

Chances She'll Sleep With Your Brother: None-she's married to your husband's best friend, so your brother is off-the-table.

Her Idea of a Bachelorette Party: A spa weekend in Vegas, with a trip to Celine Dion and plenty of well-coordinated female bonding and $20 salads.

Wedding Gift She'll Be Buying: She'll be getting your favorite band to randomly show up at the dance...and probably still that Baccarat candlestick set you once mentioned you liked.

Your Brother's Single Sister

Reason to Pick Her: You've been getting those darted looks from your future mother-in-law, and isn't this a great peace offering?

Reason Not to Pick Her: You're not 100% certain that she likes you, that she won't do something wildly embarrassing at the ceremony, or that she won't try to sleep with an air marshall on the flight to your bachelorette party.

Chances She'll Get Drunk at the Wedding: Most definitely, but don't worry about the impact it'll have on your open bar-she'll be packing her own flask.

Chances She'll Sleep with Your Brother: 100%, and she'll probably be describing it to you in an ill-timed honeymoon voicemail.

Her Idea of a Bachelorette Party: Going on a hiking safari with nothing but some boots and your wits to guide you through.

Wedding Gift She'll Be Buying: A dozen puppies that she was certain you would want and have room for in your starter house.

That One Cousin Who is the Same Age As You

Reason to Pick Her: You have four other friends that you could pick from, so to make the peace (and get your mother off your back), you go with the only cousin that happens to be your age.

Reason Not to Pick Her: Aside from Christmas (and the Christmas that is celebrated on January 6th, not the actual Christmas), you don't really see her often, and are a little concerned that she's not the same girl who you shared a group limo with at your Prom.

Chances She'll Get Drunk at the Wedding: She'll be drunk before the wedding.

Chances She'll Sleep with Your Brother: She won't sleep with your brother (she's family, after all), but she will have an over-share with you during the groom's supper about her husband's erectile disfunction.

Her Idea of a Bachelorette Party: Male strippers, and plenty of them (also, who is hogging the Jim Beam?)

Wedding Gift She'll Be Buying: A blender (but she'll also include the Rabbit website address in the card).

Your Sweet, New Friend

Reason to Pick Her: Because she knows that you want to be a princess on your wedding day, and is set to make that happen because she clearly knows this is going to be a happily ever after.

Reason Not to Pick Her: You have a feeling that she'll react worse to the caterer forgetting the vegetarian option than you will.

Chances She'll Get Drunk at the Wedding: She won't mean to, but two glasses of champagne and she'll be dancing the Hokey Pokey on the bar (while the DJ is playing "Lady in Red").

Chances She'll Sleep with Your Brother: Slim, but she will clearly comment to everyone about how cute he is.

Her Idea of a Bachelorette Party: Dress up as your favorite princess at Disney World!!!

Wedding Gift She'll Be Buying: A heart-shaped candy dish...that you didn't register for.

OVP: Royal Wedding (1951)

Film: Royal Wedding (1951)
Stars: Fred Astaire, Jane Powell, Peter Lawford, Sarah Churchill
Director: Stanley Donen
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Original Song-"Too Late Now")
Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

Continuing on with our wedding week OVP viewing, we have one of those films that is marketed as "classic" even though there's a good chance you've never heard of it: Royal Wedding, from 1951.  The film sure feels like a classic-it has golden age stars Fred Astaire and Jane Powell (though they oddly are not romantically involved, but instead are paired as brother-and-sister instead) and features singing-and-dancing in a bunch of well-orchestrated numbers that you've never heard of, but feel you should.  Is it a classic, though?  Let's take a look, shall we?

(Spoilers Ahead) The film opens for us with Tom and Ellen Bowen (Astaire and Powell), a brother-sister vaudeville dancing team (shades of real life, since Fred Astaire got his start with his sister Adele on the same circuit), and both have very similar attitudes toward love: they like love, they hate marriage.  Ellen, in what has to be the closest I've ever seen a 1950's studio film get to showing female empowerment through sexuality, juggles beaus on a regular basis (she doesn't have the heart to break up with them...though they're all pretty good looking and I suspect that Ellen just is having a fun time), and Tom is all work and just the occasional ladies' man.  The two of them are hired to go to England during the wedding season for the young prince and princess (clearly inspired by the recent wedding of Princess Elizabeth to Prince Philip, which had been enormous news around the world at the time).  Off-they-sail, and on the ship, Ellen meets a handsome young lothario named John Brindale (Lawford) who charms her and quickly becomes her one-and-only.  We also get a hilarious dancing number onboard the ship (did anyone else get massively freaked out by the wave crash during that cutaway and worry they'd accidentally started watching The Poseidon Adventure?), with Powell and Astaire being rolled around the floor, despite the tables, chairs, and other patrons of the performance staying stagnant.

Once in England, Astaire falls quickly for an English dancer named Anne (Churchill), whom he becomes enamored with despite her not having the verve one usually associates with an Astaire love interest (I know this is weird to say, but Powell and Astaire had such good chemistry you secretly wish the writers hadn't made them brother-and-sister, and instead had them falling in love), and both siblings wrestle with their attitudes toward marriage, to of course decide in the end that they should follow the prince and princess down the aisle.  With only ninety minutes of runtime, it's a very light and fluffy film, but not without anything to lend itself.

As I mentioned before, Astaire and Powell own the screen here.  Both absolute MGM pros who could sell pretty much any musical number, each radiates charisma and whenever they're playfully sparring with each other, the film comes to life (which is often).  You kind of wish that the entire film would just consist of the two of them going out and doing musical numbers, then running back to their dressing rooms and talking about their respective love lives and then going out and doing another musical number-I think I could watch that for hours.

The film isn't nearly as fun when they are apart, though.  I know that Powell got the film's Oscar nod for her solo number "Too Late Now" (which is beautiful, if a bit out-of-place in this light of a comedy), but they never achieve the sort of chemistry with their romantic counterparts that they do with each other.  Astaire in particular is saddled with Sarah Churchill, an actress with an extremely famous last name (her father was Winston Churchill) who made some waves as an actress in the 1940's and 1950's in television and cinema, with this being her most significant film.  Churchill had a tragic life (alcohol and failed marriages), and probably would make for an interesting biopic someday, but as an actress I wasn't impressed at all in her signature role.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Did you, like me, find yourself adoring this film way more than you thought you would?  Who thought "Too Late Now" deserved the 1951 Oscar?  And since it's Wedding Week-which casual wear dress was the better bridal gown-Powell's or Churchill's?  Share in the comments!

A Gay Marriage Update

Considering that it's Wedding Week on the blog (if the banner above didn't give you a hint, the tag below surely was a clue), so I thought it would be appropriate to check in where we're at with gay marriage, as several states are getting a whole lot closer and we may have at least one, if not two more states with legalized gay marriage by the end of Wedding Week (a present that we all would register for).  Here's my Top 8 states that are on-track for gay marriage next (and the adorable couple to the left are Larry Choate and Daniel Lennox, the first gay couple to ever be married at West Point, for the curious):

8. Nevada

One of the things I have discovered following the state-by-state battles for these laws to pass (aside from the fact that there is a very brave couple in Mississippi of all places trying to legalize gay marriage-more power to you!) is that states have odd laws.  From what I understand of the Nevada state law, a bill has passed both the State Senate and the State Assembly.  The next step would be that, provided that the legislature remains pro-gay marriage (VOTE!) in 2015, the legislature would pass the bill again and then the initiative would be on the ballot in 2016 (along with Harry Reid, a supporter of gay marriage).  That's a pretty long road ahead, but unlike a lot of other states, at least Nevada has a game plan and a time table, so it stays in eighth above Michigan, Florida, Arizona, and Ohio.

7. Colorado

Like Illinois and Hawaii, Colorado doesn't have same-sex marriage but does have civil unions.  The civil unions, though, do not have the same protections under the law as marriage does, so a court case has been filed in order to try and get the constitutional ban on gay marriage tossed out.  However, there isn't really a legal basis for the constitutional ban to be rescinded under state law (the ban is pretty clear, and was voter-endorsed), so this almost assuredly will require a ballot initiative, and insiders state that it, like in Nevada, will happen in 2016.  Again, this is a pretty long wait for a trending blue state, but like Nevada, it has a ground game.

6. Pennsylvania

Though Tom Corbett may be the most unpopular governor running for reelection next year, I doubt pretty severely that we'll be able to get a legislative victory through Pennsylvania anytime soon even if he loses his reelection race (the Republicans have gerrymandered the state legislative map to the hilt, and could control the legislature for decades unless the state's Democrats plan a well-timed wave in 2020).  The Democrats are pursuing the matter through the courts, though, which has increasingly worked well for them in blue states, and they are emboldened by the Supreme Court decision.  It's worth noting that all four of the states highest-profile Democrats (Rep. Allyson Schwartz, Sen. Bob Casey, Jr., Attorney General Kathleen Kane, and Rep. Joe Sestak) have all become pretty vocal supporters of the measure, which can only help since three of them have high profile primaries coming up and want to gain with liberal voters.  Most states that have passed the measure did so with the help of vocal elected officials.

5. Oregon

Oregon voters are in a bit of a quandary it seems, and unlike most of the other states on this list, they look near certain to pass the bill next year, rather than having a court case or legislative battle this year or further out game plan.  The reason for this appears to be that because the state has a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, they have to get the bill on the ballot, though there are court cases as well, so perhaps the ballot initiative (which has the support of Gov. John Kitzhaber, whom I believe was the first to sign it) will be a safety precaution by then.  Either way, whether by court case or ballot initiative, Oregon will almost assuredly have legalized marriage by next December.

4. Virginia

The Old Dominion is largely going to be influenced as much by a court case currently arguing that the state cannot legally dismiss gay marriages performed in other states as much by Tuesday's elections.  Considering that the Republican ticket is vociferously against legalizing gay marriage (and Terry McAuliffe is a pretty vocal advocate in favor of legalization), the state has a chance to send a clear message of where they want a potential bill to land in the next session.  A win for McAuliffe and down-ballot Democrats would bolster Virginia's position in these rankings.

3. Illinois

Illinois is a solid blue state with a Democratic governor who is practically begging the legislature to get the bill to his desk (Pat Quinn is probably the most vulnerable incumbent Democratic governor up next year, and would love a win in a state that supports gay marriage).  The holdup is in the State House, where a group of socially conservative and influential African-American preachers in Chicago have asserted an enormous amount of pressure on the legislature not to consider the bill.  The public is clearly behind such a measure, though, so this will be an interesting debate.  It's worth noting that this is of course President Obama's home state, and as a president that has supported gay rights more than any other, he surely wants them to have passed this before he leaves office, if not before the midterms.

2. New Mexico
New Mexico is in a unique position not seen anywhere else in the country.  Unlike every other state, New Mexico has no statutes for or against gay marriage, and eight counties are currently issuing gay marriage licenses, though others are not.  The State Supreme Court, at the urging of the state's county clerks, has recently heard a court case and will issue a judgment soon.  Judicial experts have said this is still a tossup, but the tide is clearly turning here.  The gay marriage debate has opened up a clear divide for next year's governor's race, as well, as incumbent Susana Martinez is against gay marriage while her likely opponent, Attorney General Gary King, is in favor of the law.

1. Hawaii
The Aloha State is currently in the middle of a special legislative session just to address the state's gay marriage law.  The State Senate passed a bill overwhelmingly endorsing gay marriage in the state, the governor is 100% behind the bill, major congressional players such as Sen. Brian Schatz and Rep. Colleen Hanabusa have urged the state legislature to pass the bill, and even President Obama has publicly spoken in favor of his home state getting behind the law.  The only things that really seem to be left to do is get the bill through the State House, which is overwhelmingly Democratic.  Hawaii could become the 15th state to legalize gay marriage as soon as Wednesday.

It's worth noting that gay marriage continues to make waves in other states, and I don't necessarily think these are the next eight states to make the jump, just the most likely at this juncture.  Let's keep in mind that Iowa came before a lot of solid blue states due to a random court ruling, and that could happen again.  I have a sneaking suspicion that in the not-so-distant future we're going to see a southern court rule in favor of gay marriage (there are lawsuits filed in almost every state in the union at the moment), making it the first state south of the Mason Dixon line to pass the law, and setting up the "end game" toward all fifty states backing equality.  Democratic representatives keep coming out in favor of gay marriage as well, which certainly helps the cause (Attorney General Roy Cooper, a potential gubernatorial candidate in North Carolina in 2016, was a recent convert).  But the message here is that there's a long way to go, and if you're in one of the 35 states that doesn't back gay marriage, make sure and vote and write your elected representatives urging them to allow us all to have a wonderful wedding week.

OVP: Father of the Bride (1950)

Film: Father of the Bride (1950)

Stars: Spencer Tracy, Joan Bennett, Elizabeth Taylor, Don Taylor, Billie Burke, Leo G. Carroll

Director: Vincente Minnelli

Oscar History: 3 nominations (Best Picture, Actor-Spencer Tracy, Adapted Screenplay)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

It seems fitting to start our wedding week OVP movies out with a classic happy ending tale (when I assembled the list, I just went with films that had "wedding" or "bride" in the title, so they might not all be traditional love stories).  One of the oddest things about this 1950 Vincente Minnelli picture is that many people today don't know it exists, despite the presence of Tracy and Taylor, as well as its high profile Oscar nominations.  When people think of Father of the Bride, they usually picture Steve Martin and Diane Keaton in the 1990's hit remake of the picture, but in fact there was a movie before Franz the  Wedding Planner.  Oddly enough, there was even a sequel with roughly the same plot as Father of the Bride II, except Joan Bennett didn't have to go through labor in that one.

For those seeing this film second, though, they'll be stunned to find that it is almost a scene-for-scene remake of the film.  We have Stanley (Tracy), an ornery old man in a happy home with his wife Ellie (Bennett) and their three children, the eldest of which is his beautiful daughter Kay (Elizabeth Taylor).  Soon, of course, Kay is bringing home a beau that is far more significant than the others named Buckley (Don Taylor), a relatively nice young man who would be a perfectly acceptable son-in-law, except of course that Stanley isn't ready for his daughter to grow up.

But grow up she does, and soon Stanley finds himself in the middle of wedding planning and in-law meet-ups and something of a midlife crisis (I loved the scene of Spencer Tracy beaming with pride to Joan Bennett when he can barely fit into his old tuxedo).  The film, which is quite short, gives Tracy a number of comedic scenes to exercise an acting muscle he was rarely asked to use (Tracy was the master of the melodrama and this was the only of his myriad Oscar nominations to be from a comedy).  Aside from the suit scene, his best comic scene is during the wedding rehearsal, where as the father-of-the-bride, he has a significant role but as a man not well-versed in such things, doesn't exactly get the concept of a wedding rehearsal.

The movie is at its best when its focusing on Tracy solo or when he's around Bennett, who is charming in a part that requires her to be little more.   They have a wonderful chemistry as a long-married couple, and I loved that they rarely quarreled, and when they did, it wasn't always his fault.  Stanley regularly needed reminders about how this was a "once in a lifetime" event, but you had to feel for the guy when he was writing out checks for bridesmaid presents to women he doesn't know or to an orchestra that no one really listens to or the movers that will take the stuff out of his living room for the reception only.

In the theme of wedding week, I will say that the bride's dress was absolutely lovely (Edith Head was loaned out specifically for this dress, and it shows)-Elizabeth Taylor was 17-18 when this was made, and couldn't have been more effervescent if she tried in that dress.  I also found some of the customs of the weddings strange, considering the film is over sixty years old.  I had never been aware of the bridesmaids walking separately from the groomsmen and I really didn't understand Tracy's objections to the wedding in a church (I figured most weddings at this time were in churches, but could someone well-versed teach me about this in the comments?).

The film could have used a bit more life from Taylor.  Though she would become a very accomplished actor later in life, Taylor's mannerisms were too childlike for my taste and she relied too much on the wide eyes and smile to make me appreciate her character.  Tracy is...fine in the lead role.  Tracy, an actor whom I don't have a lot of experience with (this is somehow my first of his nine nominated roles) doesn't seem right for comedy.  Had I not seen the remake, I would probably be a bit more forgiving (he can certainly sell some of the aforementioned scenes), but Steve Martin is such a wildly gifted comedian that it's impossible not to compare the two, and Martin comes out ahead even if this is a sturdier and stronger film.

Those were my thoughts-how about yours?  Were you aware that this film existed, and if you've seen both, which version of the film do you like the best?  Do you think Tracy should have prevailed over Jose Ferrer in the Best Actor race?  Share in the comments!

It's Wedding Week on Many Rantings of John!!!

It is Wedding Week on Many Rantings of John!!!  No, your daily blogger is not getting married this week (I'm still waiting on Darren Criss to call me back there), but a wonderful friend of mine named Diane is, and as a celebration, I thought we should do our first blog theme week.  So throughout the week, I'll be doing a myriad of posts related to weddings, marriage, brides, and the like (don't worry, I'll also be getting to Election Night recaps and theoretically the AHS write-up as well), but the big focus this week will be on love and matrimony.  Our first post will be up later today, so stay tuned!!!