Movie Review: The Shop Around the Corner (1940)

The Shop Around the Corner (1940)

starring James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan

supporting cast: Frank Morgan

In a fit of boredom, I've begun watching classic films again. I was just fortunate enough to find a James Stewart collection of movies during one of my last trips to the store and it just happened to include The Shop Around the Corner. I vaguely remembered this little title from several years ago,but nothing really stood out to me. So I decided to pay $2.50 for it so I could watch it again, without suffering through the bother of a scratched library disc. Talk about a great purchase!

For fans of classic cinema, The Shop Around the Corner is also known as being the 1st in a line of remakes: In the Good Old Summertime (1949) starring Van Johnson and Judy Garland and, of course, You've Got Mail (1998) starring Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan.

Based on a Hungarian theatrical play from 1937, The Shop Around the Corner takes place in Budapest and, remarkably, has nothing to do with World War II. Instead, it follows the love lives of two shop employees, Alfred Kralik (James Stewart) and Klara Novak (Margaret Sullavan). Each of them has been a letter correspondent to an individual who placed an advertisement in the newspaper desiring to correspond about social, literary, and intellectual interests. Naturally, the two are corresponding with one another! A fact made more amusing because in real life they're coworkers and can't stand each other!

The supporting cast includes: Frank Morgan (The Wizard of Oz), Felix Bressart, Joseph Schildkraut, William Tracy, and Sara Haden. A fine collection of actors offering both additional comic relief and serious drama and the reality of pain involved with infidelity.

There's something so utterly romantic about true love developing through letters. There is so much power in the written word. So much potential to share an intimate part of oneself so completely that the other person knows you fully. That is the love story in The Shop Around the Corner. Alfred and Klara dislike one another, sort of, in the real world, but that's only because the intimacy they've shared on the written page is not the same sort of intimacy one shares in the everyday, with coworkers and acquaintances. It's no wonder that neither of them suspected the other was their letter correspondent. In the day-to-day encounters, all they saw was the external while the letters allowed a glimpse of the internal. Two entirely different things.

Every once in awhile, classic Hollywood really delivered a winner . . . like The Shop Around the Corner. If you're at all familiar with James Stewart than you know he thrives on sharp, snappy dialogue. After all, he was my favorite part of The Philadelphia Story. So if there's one thing Samson Raphaelson is able to deliver it's that snappy dialogue associated with sophisticated romantic comedies of the eras. The pairing of Raphaelson' script and Stewart's acting is supremely brilliant. Frank Morgan remains a long-time favorite of mine, every since I saw him as the wizard in The Wizard of Oz. As for Margaret Sullavan, I've never seen her in any other role, but I liked her performance well enough that I want to test some of her other roles.

I honestly couldn't tell you why I didn't care for The Shop Around the Corner the first time I saw it, but I can say that I love it now. It's one of the most vibrant and delightful films of that transitional period between the 1930s and 1940s, a gem delivered by director Ernst Lubitsch.

While I already know this version is my favorite of the 3 films made from this story, I'll be watching In the Good Old Summertime and You've Got Mail sometime in the next couple of months, so stay tuned.

And if you've never seen The Shop Around the Corner, there's no time like the present! ❤ 

Read More

1940s Week: The Philadelphia Story (1940)

Written for 1940s Week hosted by An Old Fashioned Girl. ❤

Instead of focusing on fashion or strictly the era in this post for The Philadelphia Story I decided instead to focus on the characters and the plot. Yes, it's 1940s, and I admit that the guys are gorgeous in their suits, but the story itself is what needs to be discussed. Although I will say that Katharine Hepburn wears one of the most bizarre hats that I've ever seen in her scene in the library. It's just weird.

I am warning everyone ahead of time that this post is a bit of a harsh critique against The Philadelphia Story. So if this movie is one of your favorite classic films of all time, you may want to skip reading my post. I would hate to truly offend anyone, but I also am not going to hide the fact that this movie disturbs me on many levels and that, for me, it's not a comedy.

Go to my Classic Hollywood page to find all my Classic Hollywood reviews!

Fortunately, there are many other films from the 1940s and I've recently discovered that I LOVE Casablanca so I'll be writing on that film sometime this week, so stay tuned. ❤

Back to the post at hand, I've finally done something that I've been meaning to do for the last decade, but held off on doing because I didn't like it the first time I tried it. I've finally finished The Philadelphia Story.

Unfortunately, all I've managed to do is prove to myself that my dislike of a decade ago is justified.

BUT, I also discovered that my appreciation for James Stewart as a versatile and skilled actor is also justified.

Whereas Cary Grant always plays himself in every role I've ever seen him in, Jimmy Stewart proves himself, time and again, to be a character actor of the highest caliber. And, as it stands, he plays the only character in The Philadelphia Story that I genuinely liked, well, apart from Ruth Hussey in a secondary role as Liz Imbrie and little Virginia Weidler as Dinah, Hepburn's younger sister. This is, of course, nothing against Cary Grant as an actor. There is a certain comfort in knowing an actor will always be who you expect him to be, no matter the era or role, and I love Grant for that steadiness.

As for the film itself, are you familiar with it?

If not, the story goes something like this. Rich socialite (Hepburn) has a divorce under her belt (Grant) and is planning to marry a second husband (John Howard) only to have ex-husband show up two days before her wedding with a reporter (Stewart) and a photographer (Hussey) in tow from a local magazine to do a story on the proceedings, all because of blackmail, of course.

This movie is one of the most highly renowned in classic Hollywood history and I'll be hornswaggled if I know why. If you like it, my deepest and most profound apologies to you, but I can't understand it.

The majority of the film is spent with an extremely selfish young lady who has no moral compass whatsoever, and yet three men appear to be crazy in love with her. I suppose I could feel sorry for the poor little rich girl, but I don't, although I am happy to report that she and Grant's character do end up together again at the end of the film. Good because they deserve each other.

Yet even Stewart falls for Hepburn's high-brow attitude, drinks more champagne in a single evening than most people do in a year, and ends up nearly taking Hepburn to bed, a major part of the plot that becomes a big issue. The night before her wedding? I can't imagine why. This film is such a good example of an immoral lifestyle and makes no apologies for it.

I'll give kudos to the screenwriter, Donald Ogden Stewart, for two things. He wrote an extremely sharp, witty screenplay and alluded to illicit sex. I'm sure the daring immorality is what makes The Philadelphia Story so popular, even today. I, on the other hand, prefer to call a horse a horse, so even though Hepburn's and Stewart's characters did NOT actually sleep together, I was a bit amazed the script went as far as it did in intimating they might have. This isn't, after all, A Streetcar Named Desire, which was filmed over a decade later, and even then had to be tempered from the original play.

Yes, the comedic moments, what there were of them, were hilarious. The comebacks are quick and bright and so the dialogue lacked nothing. My sister even laughed, since I pleaded with her to watch it with me, and I didn't expect her to be that entertained. But about halfway through our interest started lagging, my eyes started drooping, and I couldn't believe anyone had paid Cary Grant $137,000 to simply perform as himself, regardless of whether he donated the money to British War Relief or not.

If viewers don't mind an immoral montage of modern marriage in 1940, then I'm sure The Philadelphia Story will delight. At least in A Streetcar Named Desire, immoral behavior is still immoral behavior and is supposed to leave a greasy, disgusting feeling in the pit of your stomach. But here we're supposed to gaily laugh and move on as if nothing had happened.

So, overall I consider The Philadelphia Story to be overrated and apparently a desperate attempt made by Katharine Hepburn to redeem her flagging career since she'd delivered several box office bombs prior to The Philadelphia Story. Yes, she gives an authentic performance, but I wouldn't wish that character on anyone. The one guy I think she should have married is the moral, upstanding man who was horrified that his bride-to-be may have slept with another man and can't remember. But, of course, he's the one she doesn't choose. Instead, she returns to the man who shoved her to the floor on his way out the door. No thank you.

My takeaway?

Jimmy Stewart is a genius. I loved every element of his performance, start to finish, and I can see why he won Best Actor at the Oscars that year. He deserved it.

As for the movie itself, at least I can say I watched it. And will say, in all honesty, never again. Not even for Jimmy Stewart.

Read More