How dare they not stock my favorites!
In the Natalie Wood thread, commenter “Adrian” rightly wonders:
I’m not sure I quite get your complaint. I’m certainly sympathetic to your reverence for the classics. I live off them. I don’t watch television and see very few new movies. I have often said the studio systems, in their heyday, turned out more good movies in a week than now see release in a year. This is why I have a huge DVD library…Still, all things being equal if the movie is available…and can be rented on Netflix, what more can you ask for…“Splendor In the Grass” doesn’t get enough pulls to justify sitting on [a video rental store] shelf. I understand that.
Well, Adrian, I understand it too. I’m not knocking the video store.
I’m not sure what I’m knocking, because I’m aware that my stance is somewhat irrational about this, a sort of narcissistic “Why aren’t my favorites everybody’s favorites, and available everywhere?” kind of thinking.
It’s not as though most video stores don’t sport a smallish area devoted to the classics. But what they usually stock is random schlock, apparently what was on hand at some remainder store—plus “Casablance” and “The African Queen,” two oldies that have so far avoided sliding down the forgetfulness rabbit hole that seems to have affected so many other wonderful movies of the past.
“Splendor” is one of those sliders. It’s not just that it’s not available at stores, it’s that few people have even heard of it now, much less seen it. Yes, it’s outdated in many ways, with all its furor about “good girls” and “bad girls” and its prohibition on premarital sex. But the performances are—or should be—timeless.
Why do certain movies survive and not others? I don’t know. I seem to recall that, even when “Splendor” first came out, it got somewhat mixed reviews. I didn’t even see it until years later when it was shown on TV, and when I did I was stunned at how moving it was, particularly Woods’s performance, which I consider one of the best (perhaps even the best) acting in American cinema history. That such a work would be made, released, and then lost to later generations through neglect, while other extraordinarily inferior films line the walls of video stores, makes me both sad and even somewhat angry.
These feelings are probably silly, because I know that ’twas ever thus. Only a few masterpieces survive the march of history, and the art that fills any age is usually inferior, because no era can produce uniformly great work. I happen to think that the present two decades have been some of the worst ever for art of all kinds, but I’m also aware that something like that has been a common perception throughout history: nostalgia for the past, and the idea that things were so much better back when.
This viewpoint of mine is hardly limited to films. Don’t get me started on books! But what the hey—last spring, I recommended one of my favorites, and I’ll do so again [emphasis mine]:
A work of great art that was spawned by the 1918 pandemic is the long short story “Pale Horse, Pale Rider,” by Katherine Anne Porter. Porter herself was nearly a victim of the disease, as she describes in this work of fiction that is based on her own experiences. One of the now-neglected masterpieces of American literature (and a beautiful love story as well), it explains better than anything I’ve ever read what the horror of those times must have felt like to those who were there.
In my opinion, there should never be a call to use the phrase “neglected masterpieces.” Of course, I understand there always will be such a need. But still, it makes me sad.
Recently I had a work acquaintance (Mid 40’s) reply when I suggested “The Great Escape” as an excellent movie: “I never watch really old stuff.”
Its almost as bad as being offered the senior citizen discount at a restaurant
“I’m not sure what I’m knocking, because I’m aware that my stance is somewhat irrational about this, a sort of narcissistic “Why aren’t my favorites everybody’s favorites, and available everywhere?” kind of thinking.”
Well, on this side of the wall we have the Planet Earth. On the other side “Neo” Planet.
I’m sure I’d like Neo Planet except for the fact that the video stores there wouldn’t stock large numbers of film featuring exploding automobiles and buildings.
I hope my comment, particularly since it inspired a whole other post, did not come across as dismissive as to the sentiments behind what you were saying. I can’t tell you how many times I went into a Blockbuster’s and inspected each and every aisle several times and walked away with nothing.
Moreover, mentioning that Splendor was so cheaply available was probably prompted in my mind by other classics (David Lean’s “Great Expectations” being a good example) that, if available, are prohibitively expensive. Fortunately, I got my copy of GE before the price skyrocketed.
But I understand your sentiment when you broaden the context. It isn’t a question so much of the video store not having it as it is the evidence this gives to it not being esteemed highly enough to be found most anywhere. Imagine a library that carried none of the works of Dickens or Shakespeare.
Adrian: no, I didn’t think it was dismissive. That’s why I wrote that you “rightly” wondered. I thought it was an interesting question.
I really don’t understand why video stores still exist at all…between Netflix, RedBox, and other options, why do we need dingy rooms with awful fluorescent lighting and lame selections?
After all these stores are gone, I wonder if anyone will be nostalgic for them…
Could Splendour have fallen into shadow because it was made by Kazan? He was blackballed after testifying at HUAC, wasn’t he?
Thank you for posting the clip from it. Awesome. Must look up movie.
Unfortunately (or skillfully) Wood reminded me of our daughter before she got diagnosed and some medicine that helped. Even now we see some of that. The abrupt shutting of the shade, the inability to face anything…. SMall signs, but just right for someone on the mental edge.
Neo, I get your point, but — Netflix is (and has been for 6 years) my local video store. 2 minutes after I read your post and watched the video clip, I had the movie sitting #1 in my Netflix queue. I’m looking forward to watching a movie I’ve heard of but never seen. So – thanks!
–Mark
P.S. Now I wonder if someone at Netflix will see some momentary blip for this ancient movie and wonder – what caused that, exactly? 🙂
Neo, as someone who has always been a movie fan (I’ve seen four movies in the theater in a single day, and that’s not at a retrospective — we’re talking a 4pm matinee, an 8pm sneak with the 10pm movie, and a midnight movie to follow it up…) I’ve generally qualified as someone with a foot in both camps — I enjoy both older movies AND newer movies.
One of the issues, however, is that anyone born after MTV has a different expectation of pacing. I’m one of those people who saw The French Connection in the theater, and I recall how fast-paced the car chase in that seemed. The same for Bullett and even The Great Escape.
You watch them nowadays, though, and they border on laughable. To a young person, it’s like you or me watching the acting in a silent movie, so over-the-top that it’s not serious any more but all too often flat out comical. The action and pacing in older movies has a similar issue for younger people, in that it seems stodgy and slow to the point of boredom. “Okay, I get it. It’s a long ways. Can we get on with it, or did you want to show the scenery for another five minutes for a reason?”
That’s neither right nor wrong — they have grown up with a sort of visual shorthand and the ability to process visual information much quicker. They are missing out on a lot of great older stuff, sure — But you listen to some of the people who talk here and they smugly claim that they haven’t seen anything new that they liked — they don’t grasp that they are, for the most part, missing a lot of great cinema, too. Sure — there’s a lot of crap out there. Guess what, there was a heck of a lot of crap back then, too. For every Bridge on the River Kwai there was a Manos, Hand of Fate (Okay, okay — I exaggerate: There is only one ‘Manos’… thank God!).
There are a lot of good movies nowadays. Action pictures are easily orders of magnitude better, not just because of stunts and FX but because the directors understand action film techniques better. Most of the stuff by Luc Besson is very, very good — even the stuff he wrote and produced — Banlieiu 13, for example, or Wasabi — is good, escapist fun, as much as his more accessible films like The Professional, The Transporter, and The Fifth Element.
And there are still good talking heads pictures, too, often easily recognizable by certain actors in them, just as it used to be — Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Ed Norton, Ralph Fiennes, Jude Law, Kevin Spacey.
Those are this era’s Bogart, Grant, and Tracy. And no, that’s not heresy — I would put Norton and Spacey up against ANY of the old-school actors, and not just because acting has changed since the 50s after Brando, but because they are just flat out great actors.
I think that if you focus on any single decade as better than any others, or any era as better, you’re missing out on a lot of good movies. Each decade has dozens of movies that are as good as any other. I think the 1990s were the best, but that’s marginal, and it depends entirely on criteria.
But are you really going to say that The Shawshank Redemption isn’t as good as any picture made in the 40s or 50s? Really? Or that L.A. Confidential, isn’t as good as any film noir from the 40s? That The Incredibles isn’t as good as any Disney animated film? If you do, I think that’s a mindless bias speaking, not a valid assessment. And I say that as someone whose favorite Bogey isn’t one of the more well-known ones, but “Dark Passage”. African Queen, The Caine Mutiny, Treasure of the Sierra Madre, all excellent. But DP has a charm to it, even if it’s less polished.
=====
P.S. Extra Credit —
1947: That Way With Women
1949: Mother Is A Freshman
Compare the female leads in those two pictures, released just two years apart. When did the Feminist movement really, really begin? It wasn’t the sixties….