Buzz, Buzz, Buzz Went The Buzzer: Meet Me In St. Louis (1994)

I have a handful of genres or moment in film history where in I find myself rather certain that I will like everything from the are, whether it be New Korean Cinema, German Expressionism or Italian Realism, however, if you were to ask me four or so years ago when my love for cinema was initially burgeoning, I would never have even thought to guess that one of my favorite films genres would prove to be the technicolor musical, yet me deep affinity for Guys and Dolls, as well as a considerable admiration for Singin' In The Rain, it has come to my attention that, in fact, I do very much enjoy this particular time in musicals, although I can certainly name ones from the surrounding eras of which I love.  As such, it should not have come to a surprise that I too would enjoy Meet Me In St. Louis, which is a dazzling bit of music oriented cinema, one with some catchy, all be it simplistic songs, a segment of an unusual creepiness, not to mention one of the single greatest deliveries of the word "what" in the history of film.    However, what proved to be the greatest and most welcome revelation in the film was none other than Judy Garland, who like Marilyn Monroe was initially somebody I had boxed into a corner of Hollywood disaster icon, however, as I have done more film theory reading, particularly that related to feminist theory it has led me to appreciate certain performers in a new light, for Monroe it is her ability to perform against her objectification, while with Judy Garland I have come, within a single viewing of Meet Me In St. Louis, to understand what has allowed for her to become one of the most stalwart of icons for the gay community.  Her surprising amount of androgyny, personal life plagued by societal scorn as her constant desire for some form of comfort within her films explodes in a way very real and pertinent to the struggles of many gay individuals, males in specific.  Meet Me In St. Louis, in particular, shows viewers a Judy Garland that is clearly a little uncertain in her own body, but, nonetheless, embraces it in a manner so rich and rewarding that I could rewatch the film countless times only for her incomparable crooning...I am talking a Bing Crosby level of mastery.

Meet Me In St. Louis is a film centered on the Smith family, which is headed by the cantankerous father figure Alonzo (Leon Ames) whose desire for his family to attain middle class respectability and conservative normalcy affects every interaction, whether it be his eldest daughter Anna (Mary Astor) and her desire to be proposed to by a high school sweetheart, or the passing of his masculine privilege on to his son Lon (Henry H. Daniels Jr.), or simply trying to find a reasonable course of action for his daughter Esther (Judy Garland) who appears to be moving through her teenage years with a bit of confusion and uncertainty, although it is rather apparent that she has taken a considerable liking to the neighbor's son John Truett (Tom Drake).  It is precisely when a realization is made to Esther's feelings for John that big news shifts the household, it is realized that Alonzo will be required to move to New York in order to pursue a hefty promotion within his job, although this is much to the chagrin of the family who has worked so very hard to solidify their place in the ever growing St. Louis.  The narrative then focuses on the family preparing for their inevitable move, particularly Esther who must ween herself away from the loving John, in order, to assure her happiness in New York, void of her boyfriend.  It is during Christmas night when Alonzo hears Esther sadly singing Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas that he realizes his mistake in forcing his family on an exodus to the unwelcoming and bustling Big Apple.  At the last moment, before realizing that her father has changed her mind, Esther accepts a marriage proposal from John, although she warns him of the woes their engagement will face with a long distance factor, fortunately, they realize that changes allow them to pursue a life together within the city limits of St. Louis, ending spectacularly with the family, including their newest members enjoying the spectacle and wonderment of the World's Fair, which they all strongly believe serves as the moment to place the city on the world map.

So one could bemoan the problematics relating to the nuclear family as it relates to this film, just as easily as one could critique the film for embracing a clearly pro-middle class ideology and certainly these critiques would not be ungrounded.  However, I really want to consider the performance of Judy Garland in this film, one that is dressed and acted in androgynous manner.  While one could certainly chalk her specific look up to cinematographers and costumers/makeup artists adapting to technicolor, it is really quite hard to overlook the masculine features inherent to Garland in this film, whether it be her define jawline, or her unusually butch makeup.  Similarly, her singing in the film is notably deeper then her female counterparts, and often serves as a definably masculine aspect of herself within a feminine context.  Her appropriation of Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas, certainly hearkens back to Bing Crosby, as I noted earlier, adding yet another layer of androgynous performance.  It is also no accident that the two youngest daughters in the family perform cross-dressing for Halloween, not to mention Anna's tie dress, almost as if to add a layer of support to Esther and her divergent performance of femininity.  In an active sense, Esther also challenges traditional femininity in first her demand within her relationship to have a voice, one that discredits John's demand for an instantaneous marriage, not to mention disregards the lesser of male suitors, a decidedly unfeminine act for the era.  Ultimately, Judy Garland's performance within Meet Me In St. Louis is certainly not the most revolutionary ever enacted upon screen, but something is to be said about its divergences, if only to serve as a groundwork for her assured icon status within in the gay culture for decades to follow.

Key Scene:  The Trolly Song was a blast visually and aurally and well worth watching as a solo piece, although when Lon delivers a "what" in relationship to a bizarre proposition by Esther I could not stop laughing for the remainder of the film and well into the next day.

Buy this movie it is a cinematic gem, I plan to upgrade to bluray soon as the technicolor seriously drips of the screen at times.

I'm Made Of Wax Larry. What Are You Made Of?: Night At The Museum (2006)

Sometimes a middle of the road, uncomplicated family friendly movie is exactly what a person needs to distract them from the very real and work heavy semester they will undertake in graduate school.  At least, this is what the Ben Stiller vehicle Night at the Museum provided for me last night as I attempted to forget about the fact that I will have very little free time until at least the end of April.  I will admit that I would never have given this family feature any credence, were it not yet another discovery as a result of buying DVD lots and being afforded copies of films that I had otherwise dismissed.  Of course, Night at the Museum was not a revelation in the same way some of the other films within this method of obtaining have proven to be, but that should not mean that I found it to be terrible.  For a feature focusing on one man's attempt to, on a cursory level, maintain the magical world of a museum coming to life at night, and proving his worth to a doubting son on a deeper level, it is really hard to think terribly about this film.  In fact, Night at the Museum gets its message out, leaves viewers happy with some decent special effects and certainly has enough cameos to make a viewer of any age ecstatic.  Furthermore, while I am wary to give Ben Stiller complete, unadulterated praise (despite adoring Tropic Thunder) it is hard not to love his commitment to such an absurd plot, so much so that you can believe him both as a man struggling to maintain his paternal identity, as well as a befuddled night guard placed in an absolutely incomprehensible level.  One cannot help but consider the possibilities of this notably star-studded film had the producers considered providing even a bit more time with the work, as opposed to clearly creating it as a quick money grabber, suitable for a handful of straight-to-DVD spinoffs.  Night at the Museum could have been a far greater and respectable film, but at the same time it could have been way worse and probably still made a considerable amount of money, it deserves acknowledgement at the very least and maybe even an earnest viewing cinephiles with even the most discerning of tastes.

Night at the Museum focuses on the constantly changing life of Larry Daley (Ben Stiller) a single dad living in New York, while attempting to make his various "big ideas" translate into money with little or no success, much to the disappointment of his ex-wife and son Nick (Jake Cherry) who is proving to take a liking to his mom's new husband and successful Wall Street broker Don (Paul Rudd).  Desperate to make a respectable living and assure his ability to stay close to his son, Larry agrees to take a job at a museum on the night shift, even though he has been warned of the headache that will invariably ensue with the notably odd job.  While the former employees seem quick to pass the torch to Larry, he, nonetheless, sees the work as a means to make money for doing next to nothing, however, during his first night on the job he realizes that working at this particular museum may be a bit more complicated than he initially assumed, especially since everything in the place comes to life thanks to an ancient Egyptian rune that adorns the wall above a sarcophagus.  Assuming it to be a bizarre hallucination it is not until Larry is confronted by the museum manager about some figurines being out of place that he realizes it is, in fact, something much more complex.  When it is revealed that the rune causing this magic to occur is of high value and sought after by a set of thieves with close ties to the museum, not to mention the threat by the director of Larry losing his job if he is to find another thing out of place, Larry plans a means to properly maintain the wily world of the museum.  This of course involves the help of his skeptical son and the eventual aid of one of the museums curators, for whom Larry has taken a liking.  It is through his ability to acknowledge history, as well as the promotion of unity amongst the disparate and famously jarring identities within the museum that Larry is eventually able to save his job, as well as the magic of the museum.  More importantly, Larry is able to gain the much desire respect of his son and assure their future together.

It seems a bit foolish for me to dig too heavily into the commentary within the film, but to ignore the notion of history within Night at the Museum would be equally foolish in my book, particularly its clear promotion of studying it in order to better understand one's own relationship with the world around them.  For Larry this has a very literal sense, in that he is forced to learn the ways of Mongolians, warring Romans and rambunctious cowboys, in order to maintain the museum from delving into complete chaos, not to mention learning the ways of a variety of animals as to assure that they do not maim one another.  This learning, while narratively manifesting itself with his relationship to the museum, nonetheless, reflects his own evolution, particularly considering that he is depicted as a spineless, self-loathing individual, emphasized by a poster in an elevator, as well as his own inability to get a job, or blame inventive competitors for his failures.  It is not until Larry gains knowledge that he is better able to navigate between his past failures and the promises of his future, going so far as to defy historically powerful figures like Attila the Hun, as well as deal with the tiny revolutions in his world, brilliantly visualized through the cowboys and Romans.  These tiny figures serve as an exceptional metaphor because in the films earlier portions it is clear that Larry is allowing for a series of small inconveniences and missteps to completely navigate his life.  Furthermore, it is no coincidence that when he learns to harness the power of a T-Rex and break a few members of the museum from glass freedom, or even tame an entire menagerie of animals that he finally asserts a self-esteem and authority that gains him respect from his colleagues, as well as his son.  Sure the antics of Larry taming the zoo have a great cinematic appeal, however, one must consider how these elements exist as a reflection of his life, as it is attached from the museum.

Key Scene:  Robin Williams is Teddy Roosevelt is Robin Williams...enough said.

Rent this film, by all means it is not close to worth owning, but who knows if you are in a bad mood or need to relieve some stress it is well worth affording a few hours towards.