![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Scott was wearing those red polka-dot pajamas. What a shock they'll give the Devil!
Tonight I was really looking forward to watching Flight Commander (1930) on TCM, because that's the title under which Howard Hawks' The Dawn Patrol was filed after the pre-Code film was given a high-profile remake in 1938; I figured it would be a nice reward for an evening that prominently featured an MRI. (I wear earplugs, but still find the experience excruciatingly noisy.) I got about twenty-five minutes into the picture and it dropped right out of the buffer. Couldn't even wait until midnight. Thanks ever so, TCM.
A review will have to wait until I can get hold of the complete movie (which exists on DVD, but not in the Minuteman Library Network, thanks ever so to you, too), so about all I can record is that so far the two scripts are so scene-for-scene similar that I'm actively puzzled that a remake exists at all. Entire passages of dialogue are identical or differ by some rearrangement and vocabulary. With the possible exception of some graffiti1 and the romantic backstory mentioned below, I can't see any elements so Code-uncompliant that they would have prevented the original from being re-released. Everyone drinks like it's a race between the Germans and liver failure, but that's true in the '38 version, too. So the differences come out in the performances—Neil Hamilton as Brand is younger than Basil Rathbone, tougher-mannered but more visibly fraying; he keeps a bottle on his desk and starts drinking the moment he hears four planes come back from a seven-man mission. Aerodrome gossip says that he and Courtney fell out in Paris over a girl, but the real argument is Courtney's belief that his superior's lack of judgment and/or outright incompetence is what keeps the new recruits tumbling out of the sky like burnt leaves, not the major's helpless position in the relay of orders that he can neither amend nor assume himself. As Courtney, Richard Barthelmess doesn't have Errol Flynn's careless panache, but he doesn't need to: he has hard-bitten professionalism on his side and the world-weary edge that I have come to associate with the actor. He has no expectations of his own survival, but he takes as much care of his men as he can while he's still around to do it, protecting the less experienced pilots in combat and, if they survive, trying to ease them through the inevitable shock of losing their friends, just as Courtney is implied to have lost everyone but the inseparable Scotty, here played by an incredibly young Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., clean-shaven and gangling. He's the closest in type to his successor—David Niven—the joker of the squadron, absurdly debonair in the pajamas which he is wearing under his flying gear on the day he's shot down, having rolled out of bed with a hangover ten minutes before scramble. Courtney's line quoted in the subject header was exactly where TCM's streaming service cut out. I've seen this picture with different actors, so I know he's not dead, but I don't know how Barthelmess takes the discovery and I was looking forward to finding out.
I recognize that my ability to watch TCM on my computer at all is a privilege, but I still resent it. I'd feel a lot less bitter if I had access to this movie anywhere else at all.
1. Over the bar in the mess, someone has chalked "NO OBSCENE LANGUAGE." Someone else has come along and chalked out the "NO."
A review will have to wait until I can get hold of the complete movie (which exists on DVD, but not in the Minuteman Library Network, thanks ever so to you, too), so about all I can record is that so far the two scripts are so scene-for-scene similar that I'm actively puzzled that a remake exists at all. Entire passages of dialogue are identical or differ by some rearrangement and vocabulary. With the possible exception of some graffiti1 and the romantic backstory mentioned below, I can't see any elements so Code-uncompliant that they would have prevented the original from being re-released. Everyone drinks like it's a race between the Germans and liver failure, but that's true in the '38 version, too. So the differences come out in the performances—Neil Hamilton as Brand is younger than Basil Rathbone, tougher-mannered but more visibly fraying; he keeps a bottle on his desk and starts drinking the moment he hears four planes come back from a seven-man mission. Aerodrome gossip says that he and Courtney fell out in Paris over a girl, but the real argument is Courtney's belief that his superior's lack of judgment and/or outright incompetence is what keeps the new recruits tumbling out of the sky like burnt leaves, not the major's helpless position in the relay of orders that he can neither amend nor assume himself. As Courtney, Richard Barthelmess doesn't have Errol Flynn's careless panache, but he doesn't need to: he has hard-bitten professionalism on his side and the world-weary edge that I have come to associate with the actor. He has no expectations of his own survival, but he takes as much care of his men as he can while he's still around to do it, protecting the less experienced pilots in combat and, if they survive, trying to ease them through the inevitable shock of losing their friends, just as Courtney is implied to have lost everyone but the inseparable Scotty, here played by an incredibly young Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., clean-shaven and gangling. He's the closest in type to his successor—David Niven—the joker of the squadron, absurdly debonair in the pajamas which he is wearing under his flying gear on the day he's shot down, having rolled out of bed with a hangover ten minutes before scramble. Courtney's line quoted in the subject header was exactly where TCM's streaming service cut out. I've seen this picture with different actors, so I know he's not dead, but I don't know how Barthelmess takes the discovery and I was looking forward to finding out.
I recognize that my ability to watch TCM on my computer at all is a privilege, but I still resent it. I'd feel a lot less bitter if I had access to this movie anywhere else at all.
1. Over the bar in the mess, someone has chalked "NO OBSCENE LANGUAGE." Someone else has come along and chalked out the "NO."
no subject
I do love the way you put things.
no subject
Thank you!
I really was looking forward to this movie. Once I realized how closely the remake screenplay followed the original, it became much more like watching a new production of a familiar play, which was exciting all on its own. I can't usually compare interpretations of the same film role without also needing to take into account the differences between scripts and/or source material, like the plot significance afforded Adrian Singleton in the 1945 Picture of Dorian Gray or the way that the 1935 A Tale of Two Cities is a Christmas movie. The Dawn Patrol is close enough for theater. I suspect I will continue to prefer Rathbone's Brand to Hamilton's, but lean toward Barthelmess' Courtney rather than Flynn's. With Fairbanks and Niven to choose between for Scott, I don't think you could lose either way. But I want to see the other hour and twenty minutes of the movie to make sure.
no subject
Any chance TCM will show it again when your Internet can hold the connection better?
no subject
Not any time soon enough for them to list! That was the first thing I checked.
(The issue wasn't my internet connection; the issue was the movie disappearing out of TCM's streaming service while I was watching it. I was able to play other movies just fine.)
no subject
The OCLC number is 830733600. (Along with the title, year, and director, this will help your library find it, should you wish to try ILL.)
no subject
You are amazing.
no subject
(If not, http://veehd.com/video/4825473_The-Dawn-Patrol-1930-mp4 )
no subject
It actually aired on TCM the other morning, which means it's in the buffer and I'm planning to watch it when I get home! (I have a queue of stuff I really want to watch and very little free time recently which is disastrous for my Patreon and possibly my mental well-being, but the TCM buffer has an expiration date, which provides incentive.) But thank you for the more permanent link.
no subject
Returning to this, because I rewatched it last night: Barthelmess's reaction is one of the single finest things I've seen from him (and I've generally been impressed by him as an actor).
Entire passages of dialogue are identical or differ by some rearrangement and vocabulary.
You probably know this already, but much of the aerial footage (and footage of enemy troops etc.) is lifted directly from the 1930 version; they obviously re-shot anything where the lead actors' faces needed to be visible, but re-used much of the rest. I find it fascinating that the technology's changed so hugely and visibly between the two films in terms of the ability to move the camera around while shooting sound scenes (and let the actors move around within scenes), while the aviation stunts are still cutting edge.
I don't know if you've had a chance to watch the rest of the 1930 version yet, but (having watched the 1938 version today*), there are two scenes in the second half which (while remaining broadly the same in outline) are written and played in significantly different ways.
Here is a random promo shot of the 1930 leads looking delightfully out of character (i.e. relaxed and happy): https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hrnfOypIiIA/U3X_P6zWBaI/AAAAAAAATFc/fV1OybNlJLU/s1600/aaawatch10.jpg
{*I figured I was massively earwormed by "hurrah for the next man who dies" anyway, so I might as well go whole hog.}
no subject
Excellent.
I don't know if you've had a chance to watch the rest of the 1930 version yet, but (having watched the 1938 version today*), there are two scenes in the second half which (while remaining broadly the same in outline) are written and played in significantly different ways.
I have not yet watched the original version—I will at least mention on DW/LJ when I do. You can talk to me about the differing scenes if you like; I am relatively spoiler-indifferent. You can also wait to see what happens when I hit them if you think that will be more fun.
Here is a random promo shot of the 1930 leads looking delightfully out of character (i.e. relaxed and happy)
I've got that photo! I always enjoy seeing Richard Barthelmess smiling; it seems rare in his sound films.
Speaking of, I just found out that TCM is showing The Patent Leather Kid (1927) in February. I've actually got it on my calendar. I've wanted to see it for years not just for Barthelmess, but because it was a favorite movie of my grandfather's: it was in fact the first movie he could remember ever seeing, at the Broadway Theater in Brooklyn. I never got the chance to watch it with my grandfather, but it's been on my list ever since.
no subject
At the moment, it's a moot point as I have not got any thoughts beyond "HUH, that's interesting"; maybe I'll have more once I've digested it further. It currently feels more like writing changes made to reflect the differing performances (and interactions between performances) than anything else.
no subject
Well, congratulations, I'm curious.
no subject
no subject
http://www.goldensilents.com/stars/richflight.jpg
(I'm glad the characters got to dance.)
no subject
I remember that you mentioned this somewhere -- how wonderful that you'll get to see it!
no subject
It's one of those somewhat thankless roles in which he doesn't get to do anything acting-wise except a) be noble and wholesome and b) adore Lillian Gish (who is very impressive), though he does also get to be part of the famous ice floe sequence. Which led to my having thinky thoughts about the emotional impact of effects which are clearly not fake-able within the technology of the time.
Discussion over at
http://kore.dreamwidth.org/1141029.html?thread=14839333#cmt14839333
no subject
So what did you think of the 1938 Dawn Patrol? I wound up investing most of my emotional energy in Basil Rathbone.
no subject
It feels like there's a lot more oxygen in the 1938 film; artistic choices aside, the technological shifts mean people can move more, the camera can move around within a scene, actors can play much more quietly and still be heard, so there's a lot more room for tonal contrast within performances, I think. The lighter moments can be lighter.
I don't know if (had I seen it first) I'd have found that made it more devastating, overall, but there's a lot of power in the sheer oxygen-less relentlessness of the Hawks version, including the constraints it's working within (the very confined sets and lack of movement within them); it's a meatgrinder and it doesn't ever let up.
I definitely prefer Barthelmess's Courtney to Flynn's, and think I would even without my biases re: the actors. He's already being ground down by his responsibility towards the kids in A-Flight at a point where Flynn is still dashing and careless; being put in command is a new kind of trauma, but the process of psychological destruction is not new.
He also handles the kids quite differently from Flynn (both in terms of how he plays it and how it's scripted at certain points), though I don't yet know how to describe the difference; it's not that one is gentler than the other, but they're manifesting that gentleness and care in very different ways.
(One of the two scenes I mentioned is the scene between Courtney and Donny.)
He also blows Flynn out of the water in terms of acting power at various points, notably his reaction to finding that Scott's alive (Flynn tries his best, but Barthelmess -- I did not know he could do that with his face and it completely destroys me).
no subject
no subject