Plot Intro
The Second World War has ended and three US servicemen return home, all suffering from varying degrees of PTSD. Al Stephenson (Fredric March) returns to his wife Milly (Myrna Loy - last seen in 1936’s The Great Ziegfeld) and daughter Peggy (Teresa Wright- last seen in 1942's Mrs Miniver), but struggles to adapt to his old job at a heartless, unforgiving bank. Fred Derry (Dana Andrews) returns to a nightclub dancing wife who he rapidly discovers to be insensitive and self-involved, so he begins a relationship with Peggy. Finally, Homer Parrish (Howard Russell), whose hands were blown off in an explosion and replaced with hooks, and finds it hard to adapt to life as an invalid.
The Best Years of Our Lives was released in 1946 and is all about the army returning home. It’s no wonder it became one of the most successful films of all time and beat Laurence Olivier’s Henry V and It’s A Wonderful Life to the Best Picture crown at the Oscars. You couldn’t get more relevant if you tried. It continues the 40’s trend of small-scale pictures involving everyday people dealing with everyday problems (last week’s Issue of the Week was alcoholism, this week is the war ending), a far-cry from the grandeur and opulence of the 30’s. It’s so small-scale that director William Wyler had the characters’ outfits bought off the rack, and the sets built small to create a sense of domestic realism.
With these ambitions in mind, it’s pretty successful. It explores various issues around servicemen returning home with empathy and subtlety, such as their struggle to go from the chaos of war to the relative peace of family life, their families’ struggle to sympathise with their pain, and their battle to gain employment (which proves difficult due to the employers’ refusal to see armed service as a skilled profession). Audiences at the time would have identified no-end. For us, it’s a thorough examination but more like a documentary; a vision of what life was like for these men and their families.
Homer has by far the most emotional storyline. In fact, I really wanted the film to be all about him, his family and his girlfriend who is desperately trying to prove that his disability is not an impediment for her love for him. His family are torn between trying to carry on as if his lack of hands is not something that bothers them, but are also concerned that it IS bothering him and are unsure how to discuss it. It’s a complex and heart-breaking situation, dealt with very tenderly and without turning too maudlin. But, for me, it is too brief due to Al and Fred’s less-powerful storylines taking up time. Al’s battle with egregious bankers is concluded very early and easily, while Fred’s love triangle is predictable right from the start. By concentrating solely on Homer, the film could have had as much punch as last week’s offering, and been trimmed down from it’s inordinate 172 minutes to a much neater 2 hours.
Having said that, we commented frequently on how inspiring and important this film must have been. The message is not a simple “soldier are heroes and should be treated as such”, but rather, “soldiers are heroes BUT they need help to readjust because, I don’t know if you noticed, but fighting a war is not all that glamorous and sometimes hurts”. Like Mrs Miniver, this film is Important with a capital I and provides our generation with insight into an aspect of the war we don’t tend to learn in Key Stage 3. It’s just a shame that the other two-thirds of the story didn’t live up to the standard set by Homer’s disability.
Highlight
The scene in which Homer and his girlfriend finally speak frankly about his disability and how it will affect their relationship. It’s not over-written, it’s sweet without being saccharine (always a plus for me), and sensitively acted.
Lowlight
Fred, for me, was the weak point of the film. His character and his storyline was pretty swiftly predicted by both of us- a quick re-write could have cut him out or reduced him to a supporting role.
Mark
6/10
This is a lovely film. What’s particularly great for me about it is that it follows three very different paths and shows us across the spectrum what life would have been like for returning servicemen. I also loved the realism with which the film attacks this subject. There are no hordes of cheering women and children, there is no glamour and indeed the returning heroes seem a little taken aback at times by the lack of any importance attached to their role as war heroes by the rest of the world. In one fantastic scene, Al has returned to his wife and children, and is being quizzed on Hiroshima by his teenage son. Al is intent on keeping the subject strictly on ‘them and us’ to the extent he presents his son with a dead Japanese soldier’s flag (inscribed with good luck messages from the ex-soldier’s family), but all his son wants to know about is the effects of the atom bomb in Hiroshima.
In fact, the sense that the war is embarrassing, and the rest of the world has moved on quickly is something that subtly pervades the entire piece. Marie (a fabulously villain-esque performance from Virginia Mayo) at one point turns to her war-sobered husband Fred and berates him for being stuck in the past. ‘Just move on’ she tells him heartlessly, before leaving him for another ex-soldier who wants to go dancing in nightclubs.
Unlike Paul, I found the three intertwining stories constantly engaging, and was actually drawn in by all three pathways. We have the financially successful (Al Stephenson) who returns to his banking job to be troubled by his conscience about how far his bank will go to help veterans, we have the dashingly handsome but impoverished Fred whose character has clearly changed since before the war, and finally we have the real star of the film Homer who must adapt to civilian life without hands. The way they progress is of no real shock, and it is much more a case of a story well-told than a groundbreaking narrative. But there’s no real dead air in this lengthy film, and I never once found myself wondering where we were in the story.
Tt has to be agreed that this film is given heart and grounding by the casting of a disabled ex-soldier as Homer (Howard Russell), we are aware here we are seeing how disabled - and specifically - hand-less men would actually cope post-war. The dexterity and confidence with which Russell opens a door, lights a match, or, in one beautifully underplayed moment, puts a wedding ring on is inspiring today - let alone back then when this rudimentary technology of hooks was all that was available.
The performances are to a tee understated (even Virgina Mayo’s small turn as the vicious Marie strikes real notes) and its a sharp, sweet piece. Little moments such as when Homer loses his temper at the prying kids in his family and shouts are tempered by his instant remorse and apology to the kids who are in tears themselves at having upset him. I think that’s possibly the best thing about this film - all the characters are understandable and (with the exception of Marie who is after all just a ‘good-time gal’) they all just want the best for each other. A perfect Sunday afternoon viewing.
Highlight
Like Paul, I think the moment when Homer and Wilma finally get to open up and talk to each other - and Wilma gets to tell Homer how little the hooks affect her love for him is a beautifully underplayed and real moment. I did end up a little teary.
Lowlight
There’s a moment when Fred is revealed as a war hero. It’s unnecessary, does nothing for the plot, and seems an eleventh-hour attempt to flesh out arguably the least interesting character.
Mark
8.5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment