A mediocre film carried by a marvelous performance...
Added 12/28/2009
I've spouted off a few times about my feelings towards Katharine Hepburn being an overrated actress. You know what's funny is that the more films I see with her the more I question why I ever criticized her in the first place. Sure, she is not my favorite actress out there, and I do feel quite a bit of `Nicole Kidman stigma' about her legend status (Kidman is another actress who I really enjoy yet consider hugely overrated because of her rabid fan base that refuses to acknowledge any flaws), but I must admit that she was one amazing actress and deserves a lot of the praise she has received.
Yes, I'm eating crow right now.
So, of all the wonderful performances I've been blessed with recently, one that stands out as superior and unforgettable for me is Hepburn's `Alice Adams'. This is one of those performances that totally carries the film (beings that the film itself is rather mediocre) and completely sells a character for the audience. Casting Hepburn as an underprivileged dreamer was inspired, beings that it is not a character she often played, and it gave her a chance to embrace all that made adolescence so tragically beautiful.
She is such a charming presence here, reminiscent of her younger sister Audrey, who I always considered the more graceful and charming of the two.
The film tells the story of young Alice who only wants to fit in with her `upper crust' friends and neighbors. When she meets the wealthy Arthur she decides to play up her social standing to impress him, but it is a lie she really can't substantiate. Her mother is quick to force Alice's father to do something about it, causing him to sever ties with his boss and friend in order to provide a better life (and more opportunities) for her daughter.
The script is full of holes, from the strangely awkward `secret formula for glue' to the odd way that Arthur seems naïve to Alice's obvious embellishments; and the ending itself is completely preposterous. Really though, Hepburn makes it all work somehow. The film is a forgettable mess, but her performance is outstanding to say the least. She really captures the devilish jitters that come with trying to be something you are not, only to have that something be the one thing you really don't need to be to get what you want. It's a beautifully awkward performance, which carries with it so much natural light and chemistry.
Fred MacMurray is also well used, if not a bit of a prop for Hepburn to use as she sees fit. Ann Shoemaker is the only supporting player that really carries her own weight. She actually develops a rich and beautifully tailored character. I thought that Frank Albertson was memorable, but his character was hollow and undeveloped (that whole side-plot with the money seemed uneven and underwritten). Fred Stone was terrible here, and Charley Grapewin wasn't any better. Their final moments (and their whole storyline really) were the worst aspects of the film for me.
And yet, I still say that this is a film you should see. Hepburn makes it very, very worth it. Many films around this time suffered from the studio's influence, and so it is hard to find films that really worked on every level (outside of some marvelously crafted foreign films), but it is still worth your time getting to see some of these older films, if not for a better understanding of cinema as a whole.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Classic Hepburn
Added 6/10/2007
If you like old black and white movies, you will enjoy watching some of the greatest actors in this classic drama.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Painful to Watch, for Various Reasons
Added 5/25/2007
Hepburn at her youngest and most beautiful, but a film flawed by cliché, casting, and motive. The movie comes from a Tarkington book that had inexplicably won a Pulitzer prize and is a lame expose of small town class systems and social climbing - Tarkington's book became a screenplay with none of the bite or insight of Sinclair Lewis' work. As to the casting, everyone except Hepburn delivers a 2 dimensional 30's-ish performance except the father who falls perilously close to muggery and caricature. He is a cross between the cowardly lion and a Little Rascal's parent.
Hepburn herself plays a young woman who is increasingly hypocritical and a liar in pursuit of a young man. The dinner sequence, justly remembered in Hollywood, shows her as luminous, bright, and brittle. However, it's all like watching Jerry Lewis play the idiot doomed to fail - very, very painful. The final redemption, after Hepburn becomes an honest woman, is less than believable. We had no character development of the Fred MacMurray character, so when he does the right thing, its because it's a Hollywood ending.
Leonard Maltin rated this 3 ½ in his guide - shame on you Leonard!
3 out of 5 people found this helpful.
|
Simply Darling!
Added 4/7/2007
A delightful movie from 1935 starring the late great Katherine Hepburn and Fred MacMurray. Katherine Hepburn plays a middle class girl trying to fit into an upper class society. Of course, she falls in love with a rich man who's totally smitten with her from the moment he sees her across a crowded room. Throughout the movie Alice tries to hide her embarrassment of her family's inappropriate etiquette and lack of funds. Fred MacMurray was just darling and full of charm and smiles as the smitten rich boy looking for true love. Hepburn and MacMurray provided excellent chemistry for this black and white film that still oozes with romantic feelings. I look forward to watching it again. Reviewed by M. E. Wood
3 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
Sweet and full of feeling
Added 12/22/2006
The success of Alice Adams hinges largely on Katharine Hepburn's performance, and she does a fine job bringing life and spirit to the part. Alice admires the beautiful and rich daughters of the wealthier families in her town; she longs for their life of privilege, fashionable clothes, and charming suitors. Her own family lives in a modest house; her father isn't a driven and ambitious type, and her brother doesn't behave respectably. Alice attends a social ball wearing an old dress, and puts on a brave face as hardly anyone looks her way. Then, miraculously, a wealthy and affable young man, Arthur Russell (Fred MacMurray), asks her to dance.
From that point, Alice tries to fool Arthur into thinking that her family is well-off. When he visits, she meets him out on the porch. She talks about all the language, dance, and music lessons she was supposedly gifted with as a child, and makes excuses for why her family's home doesn't look all that splendid. And among these rambling made-up stories are the real kernels of truth about Alice's character - her loneliness and naivete, her bold dreams and self-consciousness. While it's true that she's adopted some of the same values as the more genteel families, she's sympathetic in how she stands up for her family in the moments when it truly counts, and how she's kind and soothing to her parents as well, particularly her loving but often unassertive father (played wonderfully by Fred Stone).
Fred MacMurray, as Arthur, isn't given a role with great depth, but he brings to it what he can. His job is to be a dream, an ideal, and he plays Arthur with a certain inscrutability, so when the end of the movie comes, and Alice seems resigned to a life filled with more responsibility and less romance, his continued presence on her porch didn't strike me as particularly unrealistic (no more so than similar events in other romance movies).
As for Hepburn, she made me feel for her character, so that even while Alice was being foolishly pretentious, I felt kindly towards her (and at times embarrassed for her). I was moved towards the end, when - with her grand romance seemingly ended - she pushes aside her pain and stands up for her father. Hepburn renders a character who is naive, full of love and fancy, and refreshingly different in key ways from the more fashionable young ladies in town.
3 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
A mediocre film carried by a marvelous performance...
Added 12/28/2009
I've spouted off a few times about my feelings towards Katharine Hepburn being an overrated actress. You know what's funny is that the more films I see with her the more I question why I ever criticized her in the first place. Sure, she is not my favorite actress out there, and I do feel quite a bit of `Nicole Kidman stigma' about her legend status (Kidman is another actress who I really enjoy yet consider hugely overrated because of her rabid fan base that refuses to acknowledge any flaws), but I must admit that she was one amazing actress and deserves a lot of the praise she has received.
Yes, I'm eating crow right now.
So, of all the wonderful performances I've been blessed with recently, one that stands out as superior and unforgettable for me is Hepburn's `Alice Adams'. This is one of those performances that totally carries the film (beings that the film itself is rather mediocre) and completely sells a character for the audience. Casting Hepburn as an underprivileged dreamer was inspired, beings that it is not a character she often played, and it gave her a chance to embrace all that made adolescence so tragically beautiful.
She is such a charming presence here, reminiscent of her younger sister Audrey, who I always considered the more graceful and charming of the two.
The film tells the story of young Alice who only wants to fit in with her `upper crust' friends and neighbors. When she meets the wealthy Arthur she decides to play up her social standing to impress him, but it is a lie she really can't substantiate. Her mother is quick to force Alice's father to do something about it, causing him to sever ties with his boss and friend in order to provide a better life (and more opportunities) for her daughter.
The script is full of holes, from the strangely awkward `secret formula for glue' to the odd way that Arthur seems naïve to Alice's obvious embellishments; and the ending itself is completely preposterous. Really though, Hepburn makes it all work somehow. The film is a forgettable mess, but her performance is outstanding to say the least. She really captures the devilish jitters that come with trying to be something you are not, only to have that something be the one thing you really don't need to be to get what you want. It's a beautifully awkward performance, which carries with it so much natural light and chemistry.
Fred MacMurray is also well used, if not a bit of a prop for Hepburn to use as she sees fit. Ann Shoemaker is the only supporting player that really carries her own weight. She actually develops a rich and beautifully tailored character. I thought that Frank Albertson was memorable, but his character was hollow and undeveloped (that whole side-plot with the money seemed uneven and underwritten). Fred Stone was terrible here, and Charley Grapewin wasn't any better. Their final moments (and their whole storyline really) were the worst aspects of the film for me.
And yet, I still say that this is a film you should see. Hepburn makes it very, very worth it. Many films around this time suffered from the studio's influence, and so it is hard to find films that really worked on every level (outside of some marvelously crafted foreign films), but it is still worth your time getting to see some of these older films, if not for a better understanding of cinema as a whole.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Classic Hepburn
Added 6/10/2007
If you like old black and white movies, you will enjoy watching some of the greatest actors in this classic drama.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Painful to Watch, for Various Reasons
Added 5/25/2007
Hepburn at her youngest and most beautiful, but a film flawed by cliché, casting, and motive. The movie comes from a Tarkington book that had inexplicably won a Pulitzer prize and is a lame expose of small town class systems and social climbing - Tarkington's book became a screenplay with none of the bite or insight of Sinclair Lewis' work. As to the casting, everyone except Hepburn delivers a 2 dimensional 30's-ish performance except the father who falls perilously close to muggery and caricature. He is a cross between the cowardly lion and a Little Rascal's parent.
Hepburn herself plays a young woman who is increasingly hypocritical and a liar in pursuit of a young man. The dinner sequence, justly remembered in Hollywood, shows her as luminous, bright, and brittle. However, it's all like watching Jerry Lewis play the idiot doomed to fail - very, very painful. The final redemption, after Hepburn becomes an honest woman, is less than believable. We had no character development of the Fred MacMurray character, so when he does the right thing, its because it's a Hollywood ending.
Leonard Maltin rated this 3 ½ in his guide - shame on you Leonard!
3 out of 5 people found this helpful.
|
