I would classify this 1943 film as "war movie with a lot of comedy and a little romance". Destroyer is the story of the USS John Paul Jones II from the day her keel was laid to her acceptance as a fighting ship. Steve Boleslavski (more commonly known as Boley), is an old has-been sailor with a long and interesting history--much of which we discover throughout the film. He "built" the second John Paul Jones and manages to get himself aboard the new ship as First Chief. In the process, he pushes out the younger Micky Donohue. Old Navy and New Navy clash as the "Jonesy" goes out for her sea trials--twice. Regarded as unfit for duty, she's relegated to a mail carrier--much to the disgust of the crew. Lt. Commander Clark (the ship's captain and an old friend of Boley's), finds himself with numerous transfer requests on his hands. Boley manages to save the ship--in a figurative sense and literally--twice simply because of his love for her and the Navy. His little history lesson about Captain John Paul Jones was really one of my favorite scenes. (I persist in calling the ship "her" because it fits with the tenor of the film as the following quotation will show: When Kansas [played by the inestimable Edger Buchanan] asks Boley, "Why do you call a ship a 'she'?" Boley responds, "Because she's like a woman--she curves in the right places, wears a coat of paint, and squawks loud in an agrument.") While Old Navy (Boley) and New Navy (Donohue mainly) butt heads, Commander Clark sets up a little scheme to try to get them to work together--knowing both are good men and could learn a lot from each other. The scheme includes Boley's pretty daughter Mary, who just adores her dad and knows that if he gets kicked off the "Jonesy" it would break his heart. Not to give too much away, the scheme doesn't work out exactly like it was supposed to.... All told, I really enjoyed this film. The story was quite engaging. There was character growth in both the main characters, Dad is not portrayed as dumb (maybe a little set in his ways, but not stupid), and of course, Edgar Buchanan provided plenty of humor as Kansas. Brave, sacrificial manhood is encouraged, even while the old sailor tells the scared kids that it's alright to be scared--and even to cry! "It'll do you good..."
No language, no gore, a small amount of kissing...See below for my one big area of 'issue-taking'--it's a spoiler. Beware: spoiler! I don't agree with the "underhanded" way the Micky and Mary got married--most particularly Micky's chicken-ness in telling Boley about it. It's an example of how not to get married, even though there really was nothing wrong with the match so to speak--and if Boley hadn't been serving with Donohue, he probably would not have had any real objections.
0 Comments
This English film made in 1940 is an adaptation from the book by the same name. I imagine that had one read the book some issues, like the nature of Thomas Arnold's "revolutionary" ideas, would be somewhat clearer. Tom Brown's School Days is the joint story of Thomas Arnold, headmaster of Rugby (a boys school) and Thomas Brown, a student and son of one of the trustee's (at least I think that is what he was); also to a great extent it is the story of another lad, East. Dr. Arnold's dream is to reform boys schools, he desires to produce a generation of "God-fearing" men (I use quotation marks for that is the langauge of the film). He encourages manliness and honor in his boys. He decries cowardice for what it is. He expells boys for lying--for that is an outworking of cowardice. One of the main things he fights against is the bullying. Tom is bullied as the "new boy". Tom's bravery in the face of one particular incident inspires the boys of the "Forth Form" (I suppose that is much like a grade), to fight back against the school bully, Flashman, and his special henchmen.
I cannot say much more without spoiling the climax, but I will go so far as to say that Tom is faced with a choice that has the potential to cause him disgrace and/or heartache no matter which choice, the right one or the wrong one, that he ultimately makes. I found this film to be quite encouraging in it's protrayal of boys as young men--men who cry with a broken heart, rejoice with their friends, have compassion on the downtrodden, and fight bravely against bigger and stronger oppressors. The viewer is left rooting for the boys to be manly, Godly, brave young men. We are disappointed when they fail, but encouraged as they pick themselves up and face forward into the fray again. I'm actually interested in reading the book after watching the film. I'll admit the title of this 1940 film takes one aback. It is something of an op-ed against some unsupervised (not exactly sure what the director/producer meant by that) "charity" home for single mothers. The story opens with a young newpaper reporter (Glenn Ford) hearing of the "babies for money" adoption schemes from an old, kind-hearted doctor. He leaves the newspaper over it and starts his own independent research on the issue. The other half of the story is about a young, pretty widow who goes to a place called Mercy House for help. The scheming doctor and nurse try to coerce her into giving her baby up for adoption, claiming it will be better for both her and the baby. Their real motivation is the money they can get for the child.
The lives of the young widow and her friend, a fellow Mercy House inmate, become entwined with those of the reporter and kind doctor. There is nothing sexual about this film and the closest one gets to "romance" is the final shot in the film--it's actually quite sweet. The topic addressed is not so much un-wed mothers, but the treatment single mothers (whether un-wed, abandoned wives, or widows) and their children recieved at the hands of profiteering "charity" institutions. How much of the film was based on actual events and facts, I don't know. What I do know is it brought it's point across very clearly without condemning all charity organizations. Just because it's "charity", doesn't mean that it's good. The sale of a child (even if he gets into a good home) is immoral--not because one is getting the child adopted, but because of how it is done. For a B-movie the story really was pretty good. I found it engaging and while not explicitly Christian, I cannot recall (I watched this last week so please forgive me if I have missed something here) anything that really stuck out to me as bad theology. This 1990 adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson's book, ranks high up on the scale of my "favorite" movies. This movie is quite accurate to the book (which I have read--Stevenson being one my favorite "children's" authors). It is rare, at least in my viewing experience, for films made from books to be as closely aligned as this one is. The story follows young Jim Hawkins from the day the mysterious (and drunken) "Captain" Bones arrived at the Admiral Benbow Inn. When the Captain dies, Jim comes into the possession of the famous pirate Flint's map of Treasure Island, under some rather dangerous and disturbing circumstances. Soon he is aboard the Hispanola with Squire Trelawney, Dr. Livesey, Captain Smullet, Long John Silver, and a crew of (mainly) pirates. Upon reaching Treasure Island, the pirates and the remaining "loyal" men match wits and trade lead. At the center of the action is Jim Hawkins, acting with bravery and presence of mind. Ben Gunn also makes an apperence and helps in the fight against the pirates. There are a few things I would like to note: 1st--there is some language in this movie. One could cut it and not really lose any dialogue. It could certainly be worse, but that does not excuse profanity. (Most of it is in the form of the D- word.) 2nd--the music is outstanding and really adds to the film. Without the "olde English" style music, this movie would not quite have the 'real' feel that it does. Speaking of feeling real, there is one scene where Jim gets his first taste of being a sailor. I found myself rocking in the rhythm of the "Heave! Heave!"--partly due to the music, but partly because of the angle of the shot. (Not that this has anything to do with the storyline exactly...) 3rd--Jim is a manly youngster. In fact, Long John declares at one point (to the pirates), "He's more of a man than the lot of you!" (or something to that effect). This is quite encouraging and pleasing. He shows fear, but he overcomes it rather than succumbs to it. He is an honorable lad to the point that when he gives his word he will not go back on it, even if it results in his death. Jim is a loving, respectful son to his mother and a respectful young man towards his superiors. He's also not a bad hand with a pistol... 4th--there are some scenes that might frighten a young child. The main ones I'm thinking of occur close to the beginning with Blind Pew....he's scary enough looking with the rag over his eyes, but once that gets removed and one sees the makeup job, it can really give one a jolt. I remember the first time I saw this movie, I nearly jumped out of my skin. It's not so bad the second or third time around, but it's still startling. This is one of those movies that I want to watch again as soon as I'm finished with it, because it is just that good. |
RachealA Reformed Presbyterian girl who enjoys a good movie or a good book any ol' time. Archives
November 2016
Categories
All
Note: All images picked up online. No copyright infringment intended.
|