The Devil and Daniel Webster

The Devil & Daniel Webster - Criterion Collection Another Tomatometer 100! This film begins slowly (I have always hated watching train wrecks, and with the Faustian overtones, undertones, and middle-tones, what else could it be?), but when we hear Daniel Webster (Edward Arnold) give his brilliantly expressive (albeit only marginally legal) speech to a jury of the damned, we begin to understand the awe in which our ancestors held this historical figure. Unfortunately, this film may be the only link anyone now has to the legend of Daniel Webster.

The story revolves around a friend of Daniel Webster, as he sells his soul for seven years of insane prosperity, and then panics when the payment comes due. Anyone with student loans understands his dilemma, but despite this, Jabez Wilson (Webster's friend) has long been out of the audience's graces. He has devolved into an addictive, unfaithful, and cruel man with a bad temper. We almost don't understand why Webster would defend him, except for the sake of Jabez's unendingly angelic wife, Mary.

Although some of these relationships make the plot seem typically (for the era) naive, some of the effects in this film, and some of the acting, feel quite innovative. The film won a very prestigious award for its musical score, as well, which I applaud.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lost in Austen

Image
My co-worker warned me about Lost in Austen . She said it was cheesy, and from the few clips forced on me by a very fanatically-inclined little sister, I would have completely agreed. In context, though, I think it all sort of fit, although it's not exactly Emmy material. I really liked what they did to this story, but my reasoning is a bit complex. I have read Pride and Prejudice perhaps seven times. The only books I have read more often are Heart of Darkness (8) and The Book of Mormon (?). That doesn't mean that I like the work, just that my professors did. I admit, I liked the book very well the first three times. The romance was classic and endearing, and the language was fluid and fun. Then came Austenmania, and I jumped ship. Jane Austen wrote some enjoyable stories, but I wouldn't rank her any higher than Georgette Heyer (this coming from the same person who ranks Shakespeare with Steven Spielberg). And at this point, having seen every version of P&P ever fil
Read more

The Fountain

Image
This film should only be watched once. As a second-time viewer, I knew approximately how it ended, and how the three epic stories tied together, but it wasn't pleasant to watch. It wasn't pleasant the first time, but at least the images were striking, and felt like some kind of voyage of discovery. Watching this again was a bit like watching The Sixth Sense for the fourth time. The impact had disappeared. For most of the film, the camera moved toward those truly frustrating close-up, poser shots that so irritated me about Master and Commander . I understand that these are pretty people, and they earn the money, and so they get close-ups, but when it doesn't enhance the plot or the artistic composition as a whole - when it doesn't create unity, then it has no place. Actors should understand that, and have a serious heart-to-heart with their directors about it. I usually enjoy watching Rachel Weisz, but in this film she seemed flat, passive, and enervated. To be fa
Read more

The Other Guys

Image
The critics may disagree, but I found this film just slightly more than a little frustrating. Mark Wahlberg's character was obviously trying to pull away from being Farrell's straight man, but I didn't quite understand the senseless anger thing. Were they mocking cop dramas? Are guys in cop dramas senselessly angry all the time? I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Eva Mendez was hilarious, though. All three of them set up some really great gags. The movie made me laugh, but I really don't think I'd give it four stars.
Read more