NitrateVille.com

Crawford's "best performance to date" (Film Daily)...

Far from it, I think.

My feeling with her best work from the '30's is that it's in the films where she appears most natural, hardly acting at all, it would seem - Possessed, Dancing Lady, Grand Hotel, The Women...the roles came across as roles only she could've played.
In this film the seams are visible. She seemed to be only vaguely interested at times.

I didn't like it. My feeling is it tried to be a good picture but was a bit too clumsy about it.

Michael O'Regan wrote:Crawford's "best performance to date" (Film Daily)...

Far from it, I think.

My feeling with her best work from the '30's is that it's in the films where she appears most natural, hardly acting at all, it would seem - Possessed, Dancing Lady, Grand Hotel, The Women...the roles came across as roles only she could've played.
In this film the seams are visible. She seemed to be only vaguely interested at times.

I didn't like it. My feeling is it tried to be a good picture but was a bit too clumsy about it.

Personally, I started having trouble with Crawford about a year before THE WOMEN, but she did put in a good performance in that film. STRANGE CARGO was not really my cup of tea and I'm usually willing to give Borzage more than the benefit of the doubt. Crawford's performance didn't help but wasn't the only problem. I do think Borzage did much better at Metro than at Warner (one of the few directors who did, really). MOONRISE was the real surprise when I saw that one on TCM.

I kind of have a soft spot for this film, even though i'm not religious and i don't think it really works. But it's so offbeat with such surreal casting (who would have ever thought to put Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in a Christian allegory?) that i can't imagine how it got made, least of all at MGM.

greta

As I noted while writing about The Passing of the Third Floor Back, someone did try this kind of Jesus-walks-among-us-incognito tale every once in a while; another one is Tay Garnett's Destination Unknown, with Ralph Bellamy as a mysterious stowaway on a rumrunning ship. I guess it's what you do when you feel like doing something totally different...

I do like this film - with Ian Hunter as the mystical figure, Crawford and Gable ... it doesn't really work but it is off the beaten track and as such, interesting.

To me the unsung gem in Crawford's later MGM years is A Woman's Face. Unusually dark for MGM (and Cukor), almost noirish in tone if not visuals, and with Conrad Veidt in a sinister supporting role. I suppose it's this way because they had the original Swedish version as a model, but in any case, it's quite strong for that era in her career.

greta de groat wrote:who would have ever thought to put Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in a Christian allegory?

Maybe the same imaginative soul who teamed them as psalm-singers in Laughing Sinners...& then cast Gable as another preacher in Polly of the Circus.

John Belton wrote an eloquent defense of this film in his "Hawks, Borzage, Ulmer" (1974. ) Though not listed in
Limbacher, it was also one of those from that era released in a sepia version, which adds to its allure.

Mike Gebert wrote:To me the unsung gem in Crawford's later MGM years is A Woman's Face. Unusually dark for MGM (and Cukor), almost noirish in tone if not visuals, and with Conrad Veidt in a sinister supporting role. I suppose it's this way because they had the original Swedish version as a model, but in any case, it's quite strong for that era in her career.

I agree. An excellent picture.

Mike Gebert wrote:To me the unsung gem in Crawford's later MGM years is A Woman's Face. Unusually dark for MGM (and Cukor), almost noirish in tone if not visuals, and with Conrad Veidt in a sinister supporting role. I suppose it's this way because they had the original Swedish version as a model, but in any case, it's quite strong for that era in her career.

I just saw the Swedish WOMAN'S FACE and perhaps because I expected it to be better than the MGM version, I was surprised to find it somewhat inferior. Characters are not as well developed and the plot to kill off the kid is not made very clear. Bergman was fine but MGM definitely had a better cast, not only with Veidt but in smaller roles such as Albert Basserman and Marjorie Main (almost unrecognizable in her pre-Ma Kettle days). The framing story of Crawford's trial for murder with the story being told in flashback by each witness, works better than the traditional narrative of the Swedish version. And once the objective of killing the kid becomes known, viewers assume that Joanie's on trial for that, which is rather gruesome. The only bit that rings false is her curtain speech of wanting to be an ordinary housewife and cheat the grocer, etc. Perhaps MGM thought a little middle class pandering never hurts. It's too bad MILDRED PIERCE could not have used FACE's surviving characters because in many ways MILDRED is a sequel showing Anna Holm's later life. (Speaking of Ingrid Bergman, I have a similar theory about KEY LARGO being a sequel to CASABLANCA with Rick visiting the now-widowed Ilsa).