Duck Soup (Leo McCarey, 1933)

When told about the Marx brothers, I often think of Groucho. Until I watched Duck Soup, I didn’t know what his shtick even was. Were they silent comics, akin to Chaplin and Keaton? Did they transcend the talkie-divide like Laurel and Hardy? Were they lightning-fast talkers, in the same vein as Woody Allen or Henry Youngman? It turns out that the family of the Marx Brothers – Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Zeppo – are a bit of everything. Each sibling either prefiguring or directly influenced-by a specific comic of the past. Chico, the smart-talking but not-so-clever one.  Harpo, the physical silent one. Groucho, the intelligent, one-liner one. Zeppo, the one many forget. Considering their work included Duck Soup and A Night at the Opera (films that appear on the vast majority of ‘Best Comedies of All Time’ lists), it comes as no surprise that the extended runs playing at the BFI Southbank are a must-see for fans of the funnies and comedy connoisseurs.

Duck Soup, in particular, is a seminal starting point. Considered by some (including Barry Norman) as their masterpiece, the comics shine as innovative and inventive characters, that scene-after-scene, steal the show. When they are paired up, or bouncing off each other in a group, the gags are fireworks, snowballing and escalating to a crescendo of silliness that you cannot help but belly-laugh before it finishes. The plot is secondary to the snappy jokes that showcase the brothers ability to entertain. Akin to Matt Stone and Trey Parker’s Team America: World Police, this comedy of war is also a musical, whereby Groucho’s ‘Laws of administration’ only serves to highlight the self-serving attitudes of those in power, akin to how ‘America, F*** yeah!’ directs our attention to the arrogance of a superpower. In fact, though set within the fictional country of ‘Freedonia’ with a European look, the anthem includes the Star-Spangled inspired “Hail, Hail, Freedonia, land of the brave and free".

As with greatest comedies, Duck Soup has sequences that are unforgettable. Despite the imitators, they are still as fresh as they must’ve been when first screened. The energy and intelligence of the jokes complement the actors physical skill with their clearly pre-planned miming. The “Mirror” sequence, as a missing mirror prompts two Marx brothers to reflect each other seamlessly, is genius. What appears to be an unbroken scene, you can only marvel at the inventive selection of movements that run parallel to each other. A three-way scene between Chico and Harpo as they steal a hat, grab a leg and bonk each other on the head is mesmerising. We relate to the frustration of the straight man in between them, but we simply don’t know where it will lead. Suffice to say, it leads to somewhere unexpected and provides the theatrical bang the moment requires.

Woody Allen clearly owes a debt to the timing of Groucho Marx. Hilarious retorts such as “Go, and never darken my towels again” would slip straight into an Allen film. Duck Soup deserves to be placed on the pedestal it has been hoisted upon. It failed at the box-office on its initial release, moving Chico, Harpo and Groucho from Paramount to MGM – without Zeppo. Then they made A Night at the Opera.  It does include a joke of its era (always tricky with these older comedies) but it is throwaway, and can be ignored. The film on the other hand cannot be. When Freedonia call for help, we see a wonderful montage of elephants and dolphins crossing oceans and deserts to support. A joke that only gets better the longer the montage continues for. We desperately don’t want the film to end considering its short, crisp run time of only 68 minutes.

These brothers were a troupe of comedians who knew what jokes could be, and between the three of them, they learnt from the best of their time – Buster, Charlie and Harold all preceded them. But less than a decade from when talkies took over cinema, the brothers balanced physical, verbal and intelligence within Duck Soup, pushing them up the table to join their mentors as timeless comics. I can only hope that elephants, dolphins and film fans of every animal trait seek this film out during January - as I know I will.

This post was originally written for Flickering Myth

Make Way for Tomorrow (Leo McCarey, 1937)

"Fifty years go by pretty fast."

Introduction

Only yesterday I was sent my next rental from LOVEfilm (the UK's Netflix) and it was An Affair to Remember. It is a remake of Leo McCarey's 1939 film Love Affair. The funny thing is, both Sarah and I were unsure how An Affair to Remember got on the list at all and I think that this film - Make Way for Tomorrow - is the reason why. And that it was on the "1001 Movies to See Before You Die" List... as this film is too. The beauty of Make Way For Tomorrow  is something that makes it so special and that's why I look forward to Leo McCarey's other efforts, including An Affair to Remember...

Old-Aged and Beautiful

This film presents a fascinating insight into old age and the awareness of losing your loved ones. The two actors who play the old-age couple, strangely enough, were not that old when the film was made - relying on make-up to make them look old. Following from last weeks Touch of Evil review, it is interesting to note that Orson Welles stated that this film "would make a stone cry" whilst Ozu used this film as inspiration for his masterpiece Tokyo Story.

I vaguely recall a quote from Madonna whereby she mentioned how you always hear songs about people getting together and people splitting up - but never songs about staying together. This film shows that such a thing can be done. The older parents rely on their own middle-aged children to look after them and it is this juxtaposition between the arrogance of thier children combined with the parents simple expectations to be together. The narrative begins as the older parents reveal to their children that they need to move out of the family home because they can't afford it anymore - and this is relevant as the "Great" Depression had only just passed. The children are expected to look after their parents and, selfishly, they choose to split the parents up and placing the father in a different house to his wife rather than take on the 'hardship' of looking after the parents together. To make matters worse, the parents are split up across the whole of America - the parents moved to the east and west coast.

Young-Aged and Selfish

We watch parents who miss each incredibly whilst their children are incredibly selfish. Anita, daughter #1, decides not assist at all, one Son keeps schtum and doesn’t help at all. Daughter #2, Cora, looks after the father but is incredibly insulting to her fathers friends and she gives her Father no credibility whilst the final son, George, who looks after Mother, is the most likeable -  but his wife has a problem and does not assist with his Mother at all. In one instance she becomes incredibly uncomfortable as she holds a Bridge game which her MOther-in-Law interrupts. Her lowest point, I believe, is when she confronts her Mother-in-Law as she hides a, potentially unimportant, secret of her daughters.

I think we all know how selfish we can be sometimes - especially if we reflect to our attitudes and selfishness in our teenage years. I think, without being a Father myself, when I have a family, it will be difficult to sacrifice my own families comfortable-ness for the sake of my parents - especially when I can pass the buck easily enough to my own Brothers and Sisters and demand that they take responsibilty. But this film is not about the kids, its about the parents - and how, sometimes, the kids are not as important.

True Love

What is brilliant about this film is how it captures the beauty of a long-term relationship - something that you don't see on film that often. As a meal with the kids fast-approaches, the parents decide to bail completely and spend one final night together in New York. They visit restaurants and enjoy walks across the big apple reminiscing about how lucky they are to have each other. Its a beautiful sequence as the parents know they are dying and that time will pass.

This is compounded by sequences that precede the New York trip - especially one phonecall, whereby Mother and Father speak over the phone and it is clear that they are both unsure of how long they will live – will they die before seeing each other? These thoughts I cannot even comprehend as a twenty-something, but it is a thought that we should think about more often. Are we telling our partner how much we love them? Are we telling our family and children how much we love them? It seems, as you watch this film, there is never enough time. Every moment matters and yet we see the children who are clearly so self-centered - these touching moments are not considered by the children and, more importantly, the children have no idea how much their parents have sacrificed for the family (As an example, the parents have never been alone together for a holiday since honeymoon!)

What is the Point?

Having noted all these touching moments and the glimpses of beauty and tenderness between Ma n' Pa it raises other questions - Is it important for children to realise what they should do for their parents? Or should older parents dwell on these issues and reminisce and consider death? What about the view on family and marriage? This is where a striking problem lies - because though we see such beauty and happiness... we also see a little, how should I put it, regret. Because it seems to imply that, post-honeymoon, your life is pretty–much over…