Director: George Stevens
Awards / Honors
- 1 Oscar Win - Best Orginal Song ("The Way You Look Tonight")
- 1 Additional Oscar Nomination - Best Dance Direction
- #30 on AFI's 100 Years... 100 Passions list (2002)
- #43 on AFI's 100 Years... 100 Songs list - "The Way You Look Tonight" (2004)
- #90 on AFI's 100 Years... 100 Movies list (2007)
- In 2004, Swing Time was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant".
Running Time: 1 Hour, 43 Minutes
Format: DVD (not yet available on Blu-ray)
Odyssey Rating: 4 Stars (John - 4 Stars, Beth - 4 Stars)
John's Take
OK, so let me get this straight. In 1997 The Jazz Singer was ranked #90 on AFI’s 100 Years… 100 Movies list. In 2007, AFI published a new list and announced that it would do so every ten years thereafter “to mark changing cultural perspectives”. This resulted in the removal of The Jazz Singer from the list presumably – and while this is simply speculation on my part, I can’t imagine how it didn’t play a role – because of the significant amount of performance in blackface by Al Jolson. Yet the powers-that-be at AFI decided to replace The Jazz Singer at # 90 with another movie that contains a questionable blackface performance by the movie’s star…?
Exactly what “changes in cultural perspectives” are we talking about here? The fact that in 2007 people were more likely to rent Swing Time than The Jazz Singer? Was it that the questionable element of The Jazz Singer was more well know? Regardless, the whole thing strikes me as a little odd and not very well thought out.
Swing Time was a movie that neither Beth nor I had seen before we had started our Odyssey. Other than being aware that it was “Fred and Ginger” movie, we didn’t know anything about it. So there we are, minding our own business, enjoying the film immensely, when – BAM! – we get blindsided by the “Bojangles of Harlem” number. We both turned and looked at each other and Beth said “Who in their right mind thought that this was a good idea?” It was a good question.
And it was a shame too because the dancing done by Astaire in that routine is just incredible! I mean the whole number took something like three days to shoot. I know, I know – Astaire meant the routine to be a homage to Bill “Bojangles” Robinson and to his tap-dancing teacher John W. Bubbles, but it really doesn’t come across that way in 2010. For me, the scene just came across as offensive.
In The Jazz Singer post, I said that I found Jolson’s performance much less offensive than I found Astaire’s. I am still not a 100% sure why, but I have a few thoughts.
First, some modern reviewers of The Jazz Singer have expressed the idea of the blackface performance as a visual cue that the son of immigrants is embracing the cultural aspects of their new home. Personally, that sounds like revisionist hogwash to me; those reviewers are simply trying to make palatable something that isn’t. I would agree, however, that the blackface performance does, in a small way, feels like it belongs in the story. Jakie Rabinowitz wants to grow up to become a blackface vaudeville singer. Is that a good thing for him to want to be? No, of course not, but at least it sort of fits within the context of the story. Astaire’s performance in the “Bojangles of Harlem” routine, on the other hand, doesn’t have any sort of “narrative license” to fall back on. It isn’t “necessary to the story” that Lucky do a number for the club wearing blackface and a “minstrel-suit”. The powers-that-be in the production crew just thought it was good idea. They were wrong.
Second, and more importantly, I think I just expected better from the likes of a Fred Astaire. Whether it is finding out that Mark McGuire was taking steroids or that David Letterman was cheating on his wife, no one like it when their “heroes” let them down. Hollywood spends a great deal of time and effort perpetuating the idea of Film Legends; people that we, the general public, are supposed to look up to. So when Legends like Bing Crosby (Holiday Inn), Mickey Rooney (Babes in Arms, Breakfast at Tiffany’s), or Fred Astaire hit such a sour note, it is all the more noticeable. Astaire had input into this performance. He didn’t have to do it that way if he didn’t want to. Maybe it isn’t right to be more offended because Astaire is more famous than Jolson, but there it is none the less. If Hollywood wants to hold people up as examples of excellence then it should be OK to point out when those people made conscious, artistic choices that are clearly in bad taste.
So, is Swing Time a good film? Yes it is. Is it a great film? Aside from the “Bojangles of Harlem” number, yes it is. As one might expect from a musical comedy, the story isn’t particularly deep, but the acting is superb. Astaire and Rodgers play off each other perfectly and from this performance it easy to see why RKO would want them to make so many pictures together. And as one might expect from the legendary pair, the dancing is amazing. Even the “Bojangles of Harlem” number – looking at it on a purely technical level – is top notch.
So what is the final score? Well, it would have been a resounding 5-Star rating without the “Harlem” number. With it, Swing Time gets a very weak rating of 4-Stars. However, do not be surprised if this film goes the way of The Jazz Singer and does not appear on the 2017 AFI list of films.
John
No comments:
Post a Comment