Author Topic: A Look At Gene Kelly  (Read 5006 times)

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
A Look At Gene Kelly
« on: August 09, 2009, 04:59:32 PM »

Gene Kelly

Based on the following films, Gene Kelly has become one of my favorite actors and performers:

The Pirate
An American in Paris
Singin' in the Rain
Les Demoiselles de Rochefort


However, that's not a lot of films. So I want to go through his filmography as actor and director and see what else the rest of his stuff is made of. I would like to look at the kind of roles he plays, how he plays them, how he dances (clips!), and how good the films are. Posts will contain lots of spoilers so, yeah, don't read if you don't want them spoiled, I guess. This is the tentative list of the films I plan to cover.

For Me and My Gal (Busby Berkeley, 1942)
Cover Girl (Charles Vidor, 1944)
Anchors Aweigh (George Sydney, 1945)
The Pirate (Vincente Minnelli, 1948)
The Three Muskeeters (George Sydney, 1948)
Take Me Out to the Ball Game (Busby Berkeley, 1949)
On The Town (Stanley Donen + Gene Kelly, 1949)
Summer Stock (Charles Walters, 1950)
An American in Paris (Vincente Minnelli, 1951)
Singin' in the Rain (Stanley Donen + Gene Kelly, 1952)
Brigadoon (Vincente Minnelli, 1954)
It's Always Fair Weather (Stanley Donen + Gene Kelly, 1955)
Invitation to the Dance (Gene Kelly, 1956)
The Happy Road (Gene Kelly, 1957)
Les Girls (George Cukor, 1957)
The Tunnel of Love (Gene Kelly, 1958)
Inherit the Wind (Stanley Kramer, 1960)
Gigot (Gene Kelly, 1962)
What a Way to Go! (J. Lee Thompson, 1964)
Les Demoiselles de Rochefort (Jacques Demy, 1967)
A Guide For The Married Man (Gene Kelly, 1967)
Xanadu (Robert Greenwald, 1980)

If you got another film you want me to look at, go right ahead and mention it and I'll try and track it down.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2010, 07:29:46 AM by roujin »

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2009, 05:01:14 PM »

For Me and My Gal (Busby Berkeley, 1942)

For Me and My Gal is as sentimental as they come. It stars Judy Garland and Gene Kelly as vaudeville actors who take up together and try and make it big. They fall in love, things happen (like, uh, WWI), and Kelly must prove himself before the world. However, let’s look at Kelly’s introduction to the cinema.

The movie introduces him through this line of dialogue, “Say, he looks like an actor!” to which Berkeley cuts to Kelly exiting the train; he’s an actor and a remarkably confident one at that.


Kelly gladhandles the gentlemen and greets the dames with an utmost confidence, only to be met with indifference. His greeting to Judy Garland’s character is not particularly subtle. As soon as he sees her, he whistles, looks her up and down, approaches with a smile and ready to tip his hat.


 



Not only is he confident, he is aggressive. Even after being made fun of by Garland, he stands there amazed by her.


Kelly’s character is kind of a douche. He’s all smiles, sure, but when it comes down to it, he just acts like one. Some of the girls that are traveling with him want to use his dressing room since it’s closer to the stage, but since Kelly’s character is the top bill, he has rights to it. He makes all the girls get out of his dressing room and tips his hat to them as they leave. He’s the star. He’s a schemer, too. As soon as he gets wind of another acts’ plans to buy a new arrangement, he buys it before they do.


Kelly follows Garland to the train station and after she says goodbye to her brother, hits her up, all smiles and shit, with more smooth talk. He’s definitely condescending in the way he talks to her saying that sooner or later she’ll end up calling him “pet names.” He tries to talk her into dumping her act and joining him. Next to him, she’ll look like a “million bucks in nickels and dimes.” All of his words are calculated. He even fakes some self-pity and gets her to have some coffee with him. It’s all part of his plan to get Garland to realize that she should be partners with him. The scene/dance that follows is one of the most charming moments of the film but it’s made complicated by the duciplitious nature of Kelly’s character (something he later admits to, but you can’t be sure if he does it to be good or if it’s another scheme).


Kelly comes first in the film’s opening numbers. He gets out on the stage looking like a bum with clown shoes and greasepaint making himself ugly before the audience (not unlike his character offstage). He doesn’t share the spotlight with anyone, just like he likes it. Berkeley mostly lets Kelly overtake the stage and let him dictate how the scene plays out. The only time there’s a reaction shot of the audience is of Judy Garland critiquing him, once again showing his low standing with everyone else. He wins the audience over as can be assumed from the hollers in the soundtrack, but he doesn’t get far with Garland. I love those little weird pseudo sideways flips he does. I love how they’re kinda sloppy, playing up the tramp aspect. I’m pretty sure in later films, those flips are all done with finesse and style.


I spend time on these early moments in the film because it makes for such an interesting start for Kelly whom I think is extremely likable. Even though he’s kinda douchey in these moments, I can’t help but like him. However, he as a dramatic actor, he doesn’t particularly convince me. One of the film’s pivotal scenes and one of the more dramatic moments concerns Kelly getting the news that he’s being drafted. All throughout the film we’ve seen warnings of the upcoming war (WWI). Garland’s brother has even signed up to go. He receives the card just as soon as things start to look up for the couple. He grips the card, shuts the door, and hits one of the trunks unconvingly. His line delivery gets much quicker. But Kelly never really manages to convince. I think his face betrays him. Maybe I just can’t think of him as sullen.


The film is obvious propaganda. Kelly hurts his hand in order to get out of the draft so he can keep on being with Garland and get married to her, but this act causes Garland to leave him. After that, everyone starts hating on Kelly. Sure, Kelly had his reasons but that’s still no excuse for not fighting for Uncle Sam. He keeps on trying to sign up for the army in order to make it up to Garland (and redeem himself). Eventually, he ends up joining the war effort as an entertainer. And, of course, he gets the chance to redeem himself in the eyes of the audience and everyone else by actually participating in a dangerous mission.


By fighting for Uncle Sam, Kelly is able to win back the heart of Garland and win back the affections of the audience.


While this post is mostly about Kelly, the real start of the picture is Garland. The number is “After You’ve Gone” and in it she finds herself against a wall, swallowed up by her emotions. Berkeley cuts closer to focus on Garland’s face that reveals all of her feelings for Kelly. In this moment, she finds the strength to confront her inner fears and admit her love for Kelly that will set up the following scene with the singer that Kelly’s been running around with.


I know that sounds pretty trite and cheesy but until you’ve heard Garland just barely get out “Or more” at the end of this film, well, you won’t understand what I mean when I say that this is totally her film. She’s weird to me. I hated her in The Wizard of Oz way back when, I loved her in The Pirate (because she was playing insane in that one), was in indifferent to her in Meet Me in St. Louis. But, in here, she gets to shine much more than Kelly does. Kelly may go through the transformation but he never gets anything as sublime as “After You’ve Gone” which is a shame. That said, this still is a powerhouse of old-timey emotion. I have to say I loved it.

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19815
  • Knight to H3.
    • noffload.net - my blog
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2009, 05:45:12 PM »
This is fantastic. I'm not at all familiar with Kelly or his work (outside of Xanadu), but I suspect that this marathon will inspire me to get better acquainted. It'll be awesome to get your take on his career, how he evolves, etc.

Great first write-up!

a powerhouse of old-timey emotion.
;D
“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough”

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2009, 05:53:37 PM »
The film is available on instant netflixxx, by the way. Thanks for the compliments, smirnoff. Your marathons were the inspiration for this

Thor

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 6870
    • KTQ
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2009, 06:08:08 PM »
Fun! I haven't seen too many of these and will be interested to read along.

Prepare to have your heart ripped into shreds by the nightmare that is his appearance in Xanadu though.

Wanting for Thor what Thor wants for Thor.

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19815
  • Knight to H3.
    • noffload.net - my blog
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #5 on: August 09, 2009, 06:11:29 PM »
Props to whoever invented the movie marathon format :)
“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough”

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 25094
  • BLARRRGH!
    • Processed Grass
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #6 on: August 09, 2009, 07:53:41 PM »
Singin' in the Rain is not very good, but this thread is great.

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11514
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2009, 08:04:06 PM »
Singin' in the RainFLYmeatwad is not very good, but this thread is great.
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

Basil

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9810
  • Entrepreneur, spiritualist, healer.
    • Forced Perspective
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2009, 09:21:23 PM »
Yes, let's take a good look at this man.
I'm like Cold Stone: you either like me, love me, or gotta have me.

sdedalus

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *
  • Posts: 16343
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2009, 09:34:50 PM »
I approve of this thread.

I really should watch For Me And My Gal again.  It did nothing for the the first time around, but I don't really remember it.
-- sean, closer's dark roast "Dean of the Filmspotting Forum"

The End of Cinema

Twitter

"He was some kind of a man.  What does it matter what you say about people?"

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11514
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2009, 01:15:17 PM »
roujin, be a doll and find me The Cross of Lorraine.
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2009, 01:19:30 PM »

Cover Girl (Charles Vidor, 1944)

Cover Girl is mostly a vehicle for Rita Hayworth's talents (dancing, not singing; she was always dubbed over). But, Kelly is her equal in the film to me. Not that he does much more than he usually does, it's just I find him more interesting to watch than I do Hayworth. She doesn't really do much for me. Sure, Hayworth is fun to watch or whatever but I don't think I like her very much. She reminds me of Judy Garland. I think it's her hair. I don't like her hair. whoa, roujin, your criticisms are incredible! Anyway, the story's basically about how Hayworth wins some contest and gets to be the cover girl of this one magazine. This brings lots of business to the club that she works at (and which Kelly owns). However, all this fame leads to offers for her to move up to Broadway and she must decide if she wants to stay at Kelly's place (who happens to be her boyfriend) or move on to greener pastures. *shrug*

The film begins with a dance number that I've already forgotten. Hayworth dances along with the girls while Kelly watches from the side of the stage; a little bemused, a little embarrassed. He's dressed sharp and he's fit, like always. A damn handsome man.


Kelly is not really present in the early moments of the film. This is, after all, Hayworth's film. The early parts are the film concern Hayworth auditioning to be the cover girl, meeting some other dumb characters, whatever. Mostly Kelly just stands around being the boss (hello, Andy Samberg!) and haranguing the girls. Like a boss.


I don't know. It just seems so boring. I particuarly did not like the flashback stuff to Hayworth's grandma (also played by Hayworth). Just seemed like a way to pad out the movie with more numbers. They're enjoyable, but pretty unremarkable, I think.

There are some highlights, however. One of them is the "Make Way For Tomorrow" number. Silvers, Hayworth and Kelly go out into the night joyously, turn from the police, goof around with some young lovers, dance with the milk man, help a drunkard. It's their best moment together. And it almost makes me like Silvers. Almost.


Oh, yeah, there's the guy that plays the Donald O'Connor role in the film, Phil Silvers. He's pretty annoying. I mean, just look at him:


Anyway, the number "Put Me to the Test" is a little too similar to "Nina," (from The Pirate) both musically and how Kelly goes from girl to girl dancing and seducing each one. Kelly would go on to top himself in The Pirate but this is a nice test run for that. I think the similarity is in the way that Kelly sings "Put meee" and "Ninaaaaa." You decide.



"Long Ago (and Far Away)" is interesting only because it's as elegiac and flowing as the film gets and it isn't that much. They dance among the tables of their joint enraptured in their love while Silvers plays on the piano.


"Poor John" is another one of the flashback songs. The song is a mockery of one of the film's characters from another. Hayworth sings the song about her suitor and his mother. It's mean as CINECAST! and pretty funny.

While a lot of the numbers have things that are interesting or funny or whatever, only one of them is amazing. That number is "Alter-Ego Dance." Kelly literalizes his own inner conflict by having his reflection jump out from the glass window and into the street to try and control the real Kelly. According to Dave Kehr, Stanley Donen shot this entire sequence and it's as good as anything in Singin' in the Rain to me. So damn creative and funny. Sometimes it's a little kind of iffy in that the trick isn't perfect. The bit is so damn mobile, too, going from the lower level, up the stairs and down the fire pole, culminating like in a show of dominance that's preceded by both of the Kellys mastery of those goddamn twirls that he does. In For Me And My Gal, the twirls were sloppy because he was playing a bum character, but now they're all athletic and vigorous and awesome. It's too bad the rest of the film isn't at this level.


The 2nd best part of the film is the showcase of the Cover Girls. It basically turns into a display of all these pretty girls with one half of the screen showing which cover they're in and the other one having them look all pretty and hot for roujin. I can't ask for anything more. Plus, the transitions it uses when showing the girls is pretty cool. Pretty inventive and fun to look at.




Anyway, whatever, Kelly is fine in the film. Again, he doesn't really convince in the non-dancing parts of the film. Not because he can't act, but just because it's not a particularly interesting role. The film is marked down by these really dumb plot stuff that I couldn't care less about. I mean, you got your old millionaire trying to relive his youth, a more successful man trying to win the affectation of Hayworth and take her away from the guy who isn't that successful, you got bullshit, you got this movie. And, Rita Hayworth gets drunk. That matters, right?

Whatever, you don't own me, Kelly. I don't have to like everything you're in. Let's just take a picture together and make up.

Oh, apparently Kelly plays the same character that he does here in Xanadu.

« Last Edit: September 05, 2009, 01:23:45 PM by roujin »

Thor

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 6870
    • KTQ
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #12 on: September 05, 2009, 01:40:43 PM »
Keep it up lad!
Wanting for Thor what Thor wants for Thor.

duder

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4956
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #13 on: September 05, 2009, 01:45:33 PM »
Keep it up lad!

Yeah, I love these.
...

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #14 on: September 05, 2009, 01:48:41 PM »
Thanks. Next up, Anchors Aweigh! It's first in three Kelly/Sinatra collaborations!

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 19815
  • Knight to H3.
    • noffload.net - my blog
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #15 on: September 08, 2009, 03:26:32 PM »
I like how that guy calls oysters "ersters". What kind of accent is that?

Anyhow, good stuff.

Whatever, you don't own me, Kelly. I don't have to like everything you're in.[/center]

:D
“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough”

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #16 on: December 12, 2009, 02:21:01 PM »

Anchors Aweigh (George Sidney, 1945)

Anchors Away is a bloated film. It clocks in at over two hours, not all of which is particularly interesting or memorable. It's plot isn't particularly good and the execution leaves a lot to be desired. But it isn't really all that terrible. Gene Kelly and Frank Sinatra make for a really good team together. Kelly plays the "sea wolf," the guy around the ship known for his skill in getting the ladies. He tells the crew all his stories and teases them by describing his girlfriend. Sinatra, in what I'm assuming is an against type performance, is the shy one - "the romantical type" as they say. He doesn't know much about women and once he gets a leave, he has no idea how to get girls. So, the plot kicks in and Kelly and Sinatra hook up and go out to get Sinatra laid, er, I mean, a pure and chaste kiss.


While Kelly is fun and charming (it's in his genes or something), his character is the cocky know-it-all playboy that gets tiresome; and some of the songs and routines that he goes through are unpleasant. I get that it's all a joke and it's for fun, but it just annoyed me.

This number, in particular, struck me as being completely offensive:


It basically goes on to say that the girl who they both supposedly like is known throughout the Navy as being easy and kind of loosey and not very choosey. It kinda makes the whole romance angle of the story not ring very true. I mean, sure, Kelly is fun in the scene and Sinatra getting into it makes the scene even better, but it just left a bad taste in my mouth. Although, the whole song is made up to scare some guy off, it still seems like a low thing to do to me.

There's also this reliance in these cliches and cutesiness that I didn't like. For example, Kelly in two scenes plays around with children to show what a swell guy he is. I'm willing to forgive that largely because that penchant for cutesiness is what leads to, arguably, the film's most famous scene where Kelly tells the story of his visit to a magical word where there's no singing and dancing and Kelly has to show them what's what and gets all the toons to sing and dance (this is what dreams are made for, liquid dreams).. Great scene and it definitely shows his creativity in the choreography and all the cool stuff. Really loved the use of slo-mo. It actually may be my favorite part of the film. Maybe more dancing stuff should be done in slow motion to emphasize the poetics of movement.


Anyway, the real reason why this film is probably no good is because of its plotting and the way that it drags out the manufactured drama in favor of any sort of creativeness. There's moments where you forget all that stuff and you just thrive in just random moments in the friendship between Kelly and Sinatra ([noembed]my favorite being the part where they bounce on the bed during their musical number[/noembed]) and random parts where Kelly's athleticism is most evident, such as this particular moment in the 2nd of the film's fantasy sequences:


So, the film was a dud and way too long but I could see the Kelly/Sinatra relationship being better in another film where the particulars are done in a better manner. I'm still really looking forward to On The Town.

Editor's Note:

This is just creepy. Surely, there's another way of conveying that...

« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 02:38:31 PM by roujin »

flieger

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 7750
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2009, 02:36:19 PM »
Thanks roujin... Anchors Away does suck, as a whole.

roujin

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14113
  • it's all research
    • Cinema on the Road
    • Email
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2009, 02:47:06 PM »
It was alright. Just a little too interminable. . .

ses

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 13562
    • Sarah's Kitchen Adventures
Re: A Look At Gene Kelly
« Reply #19 on: December 12, 2009, 05:14:33 PM »
I remember liking it as a kid, then I watched it a few years ago, and had pretty much the same reaction.  I still like the scene with Jerry though.
"What do you want? You want the moon? Just say the word and I'll throw a lasso around it and pull it down. Hey. That's a pretty good idea. I'll give you the moon."

http://sarahskitchenadventures.blogspot.com/

 

love