My Favorite Preminger TrilogySPOILERS
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Otto Preminger
ecarle — 15 years ago(October 23, 2010 11:06 AM)
There are three Otto Preminger films that came out relatively close together and that I love to watch, over and over again. They are:
Anatomy of a Murder(1959)
Advise and Consent(1962)
In Harm's Way(1965)
These three films were from a period in which Preminger along with fellow Hays-Code-envelope-busters Alfred Hitchcock and Billy Wilder was peaking as a popular filmmaker. Preminger's name was above the title, he was the director and the producer an auteur.
At this peak, Preminger managed to hire major actors to anchor his filmsJames Stewart for "Anatomy," Henry Fonda for "Advise and Consent," John Wayne, Kirk Douglas(and Fonda again in a cameo) for "In Harm's Way." He surrounded these names with all sorts of great actorsthese were "all-star cast films."
Indeed, whereas Henry Fonda is top-billed in "Advise and Consent," the lead role of a savvy US Senate leader is skillfully played by an actor who hadn't had a big lead in years Walter Pidgeon and the movie as a whole is stolen by toad-like veteran Charles Laughton(easily converting his British accent into a dripping Southern one) as a wily Southern Senator. This would be Laughton's last role before dying of cancer.
There were five Preminger films from "Anatomy of a Murder" through "In Harms Way," . The other two were "Exodus"(1960) with young Paul Newman and Eva Marie Saint anchoring another all-star cast, and "The Cardinal,"1c84; which had a large cast but not a particularly starry one(newcomer Tom Tryon starred under Preminger's reportedly cruel and raging tutelage.)
I separate "Exodus" and "The Cardinal" away from "the trilogy" for several reasons. One is that they are both in color, and the Trilogy are joined together in black-and-white versimilitude. I've never seen "The Cardinal," but I've read of it, and it seems to lack both star power and the Realpolitik Savvy of the Trilogy. I have seen "Exodus" and that film, while good, buckles under its epic overlength and the seriousness of the project(with Paul Newman's overseriousness further dampening the proceedings.)
Meanwhile, "Anatomy," "Advise and Consent" and "In Harm's Way" all share certain qualities: they are witty, human, engrossing stories about "how American systems work"(the courts, the Congress, the military) All three films have a certain savvy about political infighting, bureaucracy, and the alliances of factions against one another.
All three films benefit from something that was very important to Preminger in those years: a kind of "seen from all sides" neutrality about the legal and political battles described in the films. This was most evident in the overtly political "Advise and Consent"(and also in "Exodus," which showed Middle East issues from the Jewish and Arab sides.) But "Anatomy of a Murder" suggested that folksy Jimmy Stewart might just be defending a very guilty man, and "In Harm's Way" demonstrated that in order to beat a common foe(the Japanese in WWII), American military factions would first have to fight among themselves for bureaucratic/leadership supremacy.
Preminger in these black-and-white epics took evident pleasure in showing how individuals interact with each other in group situations. Again, "Advise and Consent" showed this the best you see a roomful of Senators and realize that each individual man(and one woman) represents both an individual state and an individual point of view, all colluding and clashing in meetings and parties and vote showdowns. But "In Harm's Way" had some great scenes in which "teams" of military men faced off against each other, with John Wayne's heroic risk takers crossing swords with Dana Andrews' risk averse boys(even as Wayne's side wins, it loses..a lot of Wayne's team dies in battle.)
Preminger was out to break the Hays Code, and the trilogy does it in ways both adult and soap operatic. "Anatomy of a Murder" took up its controversial subject in the most responsible way: it is about a trial that centers on whether or not a woman was raped(thereby justifying her husband's psychotic killing of her rapist.) Preminger fought to get a discussion of such things as sperm, penetration and "panties" into a 1959 film(often discussed byJimmy Stewart!) and succeeded(Stewart's father expressed regret his son had made a "dirty movie," then saw it and recanted.)
"Advise and Consent" alluded to some of the usual adulterous DC hanky panky, but its big Hays Code issue was "homosexuality." The jury remains out as to whether or not Preminger's 1962 vision was sympathetic or exploitative. In discussing gay issues, Preminger was a hero in '62. HOW he discusssed them seems to look a little homophobic in 2010(strait-laced Utah Mormon Senator Don Murray is blackmailed over a gay affair, travels to a Manhattan gay bar to confront his accuserand commits suicide in shame, Preminger contended, because Murray was STILL gay and couldn't live with it.) Still, the gay subplot of "Advise and Consent' is always in the service of the f