The Worst Film Ever

Expected more

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The Bad and the Beautiful may seem at first to be yet another Hollywood film about Hollywood, but that is far from the case. The movie is extremely well made. Kirk Douglas turns in a great performance as Johnathan Shields, a manipulative, broken man who unravels as the film progresses. The film's structure is also very unique, jumping back and forth between flashbacks and the present day as we hear 3 differing accounts of the type of person Shields is. The film is lit in quite a moody way, where the characters almost emit a soft glow and the borders of the screen fade into black. I found this to be very impressive and it helped to accentuate this dramatic tale. The music also stands out, especially compared to other films of the same time period (that weren't musicals). I think this does a great deal to elevate the movie from average to great.

This movie is interesting because of how it show Hollywood from the inside out. I like how it is told in a flashback but it seems to lose my attention towards the middle of the film. It shows what was actually happening in Hollywood during the time the main character was making movies. I think since its Hollywood actors playing Hollywood actors the acting can be overdone as in a lot of these older movies. I think a lot of Hollywood is misunderstood and this movie could also be misunderstood. They want to show the real life of actors but they may make it more dramatic than the actual truth. Today, Hollywood is a different place and it seems as though actors have the best lives. We still hear of complaints of overwork. I think this is true with any job and can it can clearly be depicted on the screen during this movie.

Pretty searing portrayal of life in Hollywood. But the film is ultimately upbeat despite featuring a lot of dark moments. An earnest director (WALTER PIDGEON), a self destructive actress (LANA TURNER) and an indifferent writer (DICK POWELL) all come into contact with an ambitious producer (KIRK DOUGLAS). The film seems to say that ultimately films get made due to the ambition, ruthlessness and drive of the producer. In a way, the film lauds the Hollywood studio system while also showing its dark and ruthless side.VINCENT MINELLI uses a lot of tracking shots, it really is a great film to look at. LANA TURNER and ELAINE STEWART look sensational. GLORIA GRAHAME is a bit of a disappointment as the bimbo wife of DICK POWELL. KIRK DOUGLAS and DICK POWELL made the film for me.

Who is Jonathan Shields? That is the story Vincente Minnelli drama is trying to tell. There is a Orson Welles 'Citizen Kane' feel to the film, as there are three stories told about Jonathan Shields through eschews the traditional linear, chronological narrative and tells Shield's story entirely in flashback using different points of view, many of them from people that Shield done wrong to. The movie starts in Hollywood, screenwriter James Lee Bartlow (Dick Powell), movie star Georgia Lorrison (Lana Turner), and director Fred Amiel (Barry Sullivan) has been gather up by movie producer Harry Pebbel (Walter Pidgeon) to help Jonathan Shields (Kurt Douglas) with his newest movie, but each refuse, and tells Harry the reason why. The movie has a unreliable narrator to it, with each narrator recounts a different part of Shield's life, with each story partly overlapping follows a natural progression of events as Shields rises to fame. The movie is so like 'Kane', some critics are calling it 'Citizen Shields'. Each person's story is an act; so three people equal, three acts. The first narrator is the director that tells the story how Kurt Douglas launched his career with his help. The second act is told by the actress whom is the daughter of an also-failed father that become a strong and talented actress through Shields work. And the third act is taking a novelist and turning him into a credible and successful screenwriter. It's an amalgamation of so many stories that had been whirling around the industry for years. For some people, they believe Lana Turner's character is based on Diana Barrymore or Judy Garland. Kirk Douglas's Jonathan Shields is mixed with David O' Selznick, Darryl F. Zanuck & Val Lewton. Barry Sullivan's Fred Amiel on George Cukor of Gone to the Wind fame. For Dick Powell's character James Lee Bartlow, it's believe to be inspired by novelist Paul Eliot Green, William Faulkner or F. Scott Fitzgerald. Even the supporting cast might be based on real life characters such as supporting character Gilbert Roland whom play Gaucho might be a self-parody, but in my opinion I have a feeling it's based on Porfirio Rubirosa or better yet silent star Rudolph Valentino. Henry Whitfield (Leo G. Carroll) is mirroring Alfred Hitchcock. The three main actors (Turner, Powell, and Sullivan) are great in their roles. Everybody was outstanding in this film but Kirk Douglas stole the show. Kirk Douglas is great as the main role, playing the corrupt and amoral head of a major film studio in this Hollywood drama. For 1950's film, this movie has a lot of depth and comedy into it, that works. I was surprised to see the movie have women characters being alcoholic and sex addicts, rather than the charm roles they normally get in the films in those days. Supporting character Rosemary (Gloria Grahame) is one of those women characters. She was pretty funny in the role, but I don't agree that Gloria Grahame should have won the Oscar that year with her limited screen time,her ludicrous fake southern accent, as well, as the other actress who done better that year. Plenty of on-screen chemistry, tension and great casting make this film an outstanding drama. The only faults of the film are terms of its picture quality. We get a very nice, smooth looking transfer with much of the film grain and age related artifacts cleaned up. But there are moments where edge enhancement, shimmering and aliasing are so bad, you just can't help but get distracted away from the fine performances taking place underneath all that digital mess. When the image is free from these anomalies, contrast and black levels are superb. I also love the music. David Raksin, a marvelous composer as the film sports a jazzy and haunting tone similar to his later works in 'Laura'. Still this arrangement is over arranged and composer know his Jazz voicing but forgot a forceful melody line to add to it. Something like Cake decorations without the cake. Still, it's a cake worth eating. Check this movie out, for a great insight look at Hollywood.