Gaslight
“You want the prime minister of Malaysia killed, you can do it your own damn self. Now give me your cell, I’m calling a cab.”
Not an unenjoyable two hours, but Gaslight fell somewhat flat for me. As with many of the classics, it seemed to take longer to get where it was going than it needed to, perhaps because it’s a classic — I already know where it’s going, so it’s a matter of the film getting there with some flair, and slower bits or bits designed to ratchet up the tension by modulating the pace don’t work as well, because I know how it turns out.
Ingrid Bergman is another issue.
She’s not An Issue in the sense that she’s a negative, but…maybe I should have watched the other, earlier version of the film that was included on the DVD, because I’ve found that it’s difficult to evaluate a movie on its other merits when Bergman is onscreen. I had a similar experience watching Notorious — she’s mesmerizing, in a way that makes it hard to tell whether the movie around her is much good, or even whether her acting is worth a damn, although I think it is (she’s a bit overwrought here, but the Gaslight role calls for a lot of thankless “I’m LOSING my MIND” frantic staring and pleading, so it’s not her fault). I can’t explain exactly why. Yes, she’s beautiful and can really wear clothes; yes, there’s a startling resemblance in both face and voice between her and Isabella Rossellini; that doesn’t account for the fact that Charles Boyer, who does a creditable but hardly subtle job as her scheming husband, sometimes seems to be in a different movie entirely.
So, part of the reason the movie dragged for me is that I know the ending, but part of it is that so much of it becomes a living portrait of Bergman in various shades of wilting distress, versus a plot with any forward motion. I think not every director knew how to handle that dark-starness of hers without letting it take over, or whom to cast against it, although I did like Joseph Cotten, who had a particular talent for not allowing big screen presences to swamp his boat (viz. his role in Citizen Kane). Angela Lansbury is good, too, in a part that could have been way too broad (in several senses of that word).
Tags: movies
This is probably my favorite movie of ALL TIME. I have seen it a thousand times and will see it a thousand more. It never fails to make me furiously angry at how ridiculously stuuupid “Paowla” is. Come on! You *know* you didn’t hide that picture or lose that brooch. YOU KNOW IT!!! But then when I can’t find my keys or my iPod, I start to wonder: how hard would it really be for my husband to totally gaslight me?
And Nancy? Ooh, she’s the best saucy maid ever! It’s weird to think that Jessica Fletcher was once an awfully pretty girl.
I’m with you, Amy. This movie is one of my all-time favorites as well. And I also end up beside myself yelling at “Paowla” (HEH!).
I love this movie. I developed a big whopping crush on Joseph Cotten due to this and “Citizen Kane.”
BUT. This is the second movie I really like that Ingrid Bergman almost ruins for me (hello, Casablanca). I can’t stand her method of acting, her whole “oh, I cannot think for myself, I have no spine” style. Yes, that’s part of the script but — as you say — she’s overwrought to the point of being an eclair left out in the rain.
I second the Angela Lansbury note — she’s marvelous as the tarty maid.
I didn’t know the ending when I first saw it, so it still delights me to remember, but still: Ingrid Bergman, SHUT UP.
God, I love that movie. I think Bergman’s perfect, though I do agree her acting style is maybe a bit different than everyone else in the movie- she seems more real. It seems like you would just start by getting nervous and weird about things when treated that way, and slowly ratchet to madness. It probably seems slow because it’s a mood movie through and through. It’s all about establishing scene and relationship.
Angela Lansbury rocks.
I also love this movie because my co-workers and I like to come up with plans to gaslight our fellow workers. It’s a fun pastime. And only mildly disturbing, right? Hmm.
As long as men continue to paint any dissent by women as mental instability, emotion to excess, hysteria – or just plain madness – this movie has a role, not so much as a motion picture, or a piece of entertainment, but as a metaphor for the payoff to one gender of rendering the other unsure of the soundness of their perceptions.
I didn’t see Gaslight until a friend of mine said to me, “Quite trying to gaslight me.” I was completely confused by her response and she forced me to watch the movie with her. Immediately afterward, gaslight became one of my favorite verbs.
Yes, Angela Lansbury was fabulous. I saw her in “Samson and Delilah” and thought at one point Jessica Fletcher was smokin’ hot.
This is another one of those films that my parents made us watch – and we actually liked it. I agree with my dad that Charles Boyer had a habit of blathering on a bit, but in this film I thought he did a fine job. Somehow you get past the fact that Paula is supposed to be a teenager (but never looks like it) and that it makes no sense that ANYONE would fall for Boyer’s character (in my opinion). But I’ll always love the exchange between Boyer and Cotton:
Boyer: “The first time I saw you I knew you were dangerous to me.”
Cotton: “The first time I saw you, I knew you were dangerous to her.”
My mom made me watch this when I was 11. I loved it, but you can imagine my world view was altered a bit. “Because I am mad, I hate you!”
Yeah, I didn’t discover Lansbury’s hotness (and brilliance) until I saw Gaslight (maybe in high school?). Then I saw the Manchurian Candidate and discovered her SCARY hot brilliance.
And I looove Ingrid, especially in Notorious. And all Bogey’s stuff as well, while we’re at it. Of course, some old movies are truly better than others. But in general watching classics is just a matter of un-modernizing yourself as a viewer and embracing stylized qualities to scripts, actors, etc., that would never pass muster for current entertainment. You do or you don’t, depending on the flick or your mood or whatever. For me, classic films are the only place when I feel I don’t have to/want to call out Hollywood-peddled “Romance” as a sham– a sort-of return to a childlike lack of snark that contemporary films just don’t allow me.
Slightly off topic, but I happened to be thinking this morning about my favorite classic movies, which tend to be Cary Grant/Katherine Hepburn type romantic comedies. I was wondering why it’s so freaking impossible to make a decent romantic comedy anymore. I can’t even think of one that isn’t cringeworthy chick flick dreck. Well, one exception: Intolerable Cruelty, which is kind of a category unto itself. This weekend I accidentally watched Because I Said So on cable, and somebody please shoot me now.
I love this movie. I can’t be objective about Bergman, as I adore her so, but your description of that dark-star quality seems exactly right. I agree also that Paula is kind of a thankless role – gaspy and tightly wound. I’d be interested to know what you make of the 1940 version. The pacing seems of that one seems glacial to me. Gwen Ffrangcon-Davies gets credit for being slightly more believable as a mousey and insecure heroine, since her Bella lacks Bergman’s insistent glamour.
@rb: I too wish there more (or rather, any) romantic comedies that didn’t make me want to hide my eyes, or break things. Because I Said So just made me feel embarrassed for Diane Keaton.
If you need a comparison to view Bergman in a favorable light, check out the similar *Midnight Lace* with Rex Harrison and Doris Day. I understand that she had her place in 50’s and 60’s comedies, and you have to love dated rom-com movies like *Pillow Talk* and *That Touch of Mink.* But I defy you not to root for Harrison in this one. “Overwrought” doesn’t *begin* to describe her lousy acting, and Harrison’s elegant underplaying just makes it worse.