When it comes to the films that have won Best Picture, the
1930s is a dichotomous decade. The films that took home the top prize seem to
be either cinematic works of wonder or disappointing duds. Scaling the zenith
are films like “All Quiet on the Western Front,” “Mutiny on the Bounty” and “Gone
with the Wind.” However, lurking at the base are films like “Grand Hotel” and “The
Great Ziegfeld.” Unfortunately for this week’s post, “You Can’t Take It withYou” is keeping company with the latter films.
Helmed by the great Frank Capra, “You Can’t Take It with
You” racked up seven Academy Award nominations, taking home the prizes for Best
Director and Best Picture in 1938. Based on the Pulitzer Prize-winning play of
the same name, “You Can’t Take It with You” concerns a pair of young love birds
played by Jimmy Stewart and Jean Arthur at their aw-shucks darndest.
Unfortunately, they’re from different sides of the tracks, causing Stewart’s banking
tycoon father and his snobbish mother to entirely disapprove of the match. To
make matters more complicated, Arthur’s eccentric family resides on a piece of
real estate smack dab in the middle of the way of a munitions monopoly scheme
overseen by Stewart’s father.
In many ways, this is a completely classic Capra film where
the intangible forces of love and family reign triumphant over the wealthy and
unfeeling forces of society. It’s a formula that played out to perfection in
other Capra films like “It Happened One Night” and “It’s a Wonderful Life.” And
even though “You Can’t Take It with You” follows the same recipe, what comes
out of the oven is not even close to being in the same league as Capra’s other
efforts.
One reason accounting for the funny taste is that Jimmy
Stewart and Jean Arthur have thin chemistry between them. Their controversial
romance is really the beating heart of the story, setting all other events into
motion. However, their characters are dull and don’t pull you in to root for
their love to succeed in the face of such great odds. Unfortunately, dull and
indifference can’t sustain the heavy lifting of any narrative and “You Can’t
Take It with You” is no exception.
Jimmy Stewart introduces Jean Arthur to his disapproving parents. |
However, this hope and optimism resulting from the film’s
perfectly packaged denouement are why I ultimately didn’t care for this movie.
It’s not that I’m some scrooge who can’t appreciate a predictably happy ending.
I’m a big fan of films like “It’s a Wonderful Life” and “The Miracle on 34th
Street.” But where those sentimental films differ is that “You Can’t Take It
with You” has an overly saccharine ending that leaves you drowning in
sentimentality, making it impossible not to roll your eyes at it all. I think
this type of aversion is maybe a commentary on modern-day thinking to shun too
much sentimentalism in favor of honest, gritty reality, particularly when it
comes to a character’s evolution.
Members of Jean Arthur's Eccentric Family. |
In the end, I wish they had taken it with them because “You
Can’t It with You” is a major disappointment, particularly given the film’s
pedigree. I’ve enjoyed so many of Capra’s other films, and I’ve always thought
Jimmy Stewart was one of the greatest actors, which makes witnessing this
collaborative dud that much more of a letdown. Fortunately, I can always go
back and watch “It’s Wonderful Life” to restore my faith.
Favorite Line: Truthfully,
there weren’t any lines in this film that I would tag as standing out to me. So
I decided not to include one as being a favorite. Better luck next time.
"In the end, I wish they had taken it with them"…
ReplyDeletethat was my favorite line :)
I'm enjoying these…I wish I could watch with you and a bowl of popcorn. xo
I wish you were here, too. Movies are always much more enjoyable with some good company.
DeleteI have to agree that It's a Wonderful Life has some darker shades to it than You Can't Take It With You, and that makes it a bit less syrupy.
ReplyDelete