|
Post by lastgoodbye on Apr 20, 2010 19:00:24 GMT
A Streetcar Named Desire is a 1951 film adaptation of the play of the same name by Tennessee Williams. It was watered down to comply with the Hollywood Production Code because it was too controversial, so I suggest that if you like the film then you give the play a read, too. I'm not sure what else to say in the introduction... It's one of my favourite films. I like it, and apparently so does Jade and Sibz, and Josh likes the play. If that's not reccomendation enough, then I'm not sure what is. It won four Oscars, too. Here is a suprisingly good quality link, and you can watch it here on megavideo, but there's plenty of other streams knocking about online if you don't like those two. Possible points of discussion: * For those who have read the play too, how do the two compare? * Is it a sexist film/play? Towards women, or I suppose towards men, if you're that way inclined. * Is Blanche worthy of our sympathy? * The events at the end of the film... which character is the most to blame? * Isn't Marlon Brando hot? * To what extent do you agree that Williams presents Blanche as a tragic victim of her own desire? (this isn't my courswork question, promise )
|
|
|
Post by irrelevant on Apr 20, 2010 20:32:15 GMT
shall we make this the longest thread ever, gent's?
|
|
|
Post by irrelevant on Apr 20, 2010 20:32:39 GMT
and lad's, excuse me
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Apr 20, 2010 20:44:06 GMT
Uh, please do! I'm hoping since at least some of us did study/are studying it in school, there should be enough stuff to discuss.
Yay!
|
|
|
Post by husbandwifeheroin on Apr 20, 2010 20:53:19 GMT
I'm borrowing the DVD off a chum - I'll take notes for you Florence!
|
|
|
Post by Lemon Bloody Cola on Apr 20, 2010 21:19:20 GMT
Interpretations of works of art are entirely subjective. No such thing as "right" or "wrong" answers in these matters but... Anyone who answers "no" to theabove question (if the film is faithful to the play) is SCUM and should BURN. I first read the play when my then-girlfriend compared me to Blanche.. yeah I know, that's pretty much THE weirdest comment a dude's ever coped from his girlfriend in recorded human history.
|
|
|
Post by irrelevant on Apr 21, 2010 9:09:27 GMT
i'm going to re-watch this the moment i get the chance, then contribute lengthy amounts of analysis and discussion to this (glorious) thread.
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Apr 21, 2010 16:19:21 GMT
Why thank you, Joeb! And awesome, Anna Interpretations of works of art are entirely subjective. No such thing as "right" or "wrong" answers in these matters but... Anyone who answers "no" to the above question (if the film is faithful to the play) is SCUM and should BURN. I'm going to reply to this in SUPER SECRET CODE for those on the traditional skin, so people don't read spoilers before they've watched the film if they intend to: I basically agree. Blanche clearly has mental health issues and no one can blame her for that, simple as. However I always find that in order to feel "sympathy" towards someone (or a character), you have to like them at least a little bit, and I really don't like Blanche at all. Obviously she is meant to be irritating to the audience, but.. she's such a snob, to put it bluntly. Perhaps the reason she metaphorically fell so far is because she had herself strung up to high to begin with? She goes in there and judges Stella's home and lifestyle, when really (apart from the domestic violence, I hasten to add! but Blanche would have been disapproving even if this wasn't taking place) Stella is happy with her life and there's nothing wrong with it.
I think Williams must have wrote the play to get as much conflict in the emotions and judgements of the audience as possible. When the play was shown in America back in the.. forties or fifties or whenever (I think with a version where it wasn't directed by Kazan, and with the non-typical cast, though it could have been the original staging, I don't remember) the audience used to laugh at Stanley and approve of him when he hit the women, and in the rape scene even, as though it was a comic character. Critics have said that this obviously wasn't the reaction that Williams intended when he wrote it, but part of me suspects that he was purposely trying to present a morally tricky situation to see how people swallowed it. Why do you feel so much sympathy for her, Josh?
Oh, and then there's the fact that if she hadn't have treated Allan so cruelly then he wouldn't have shot himself in the head and she wouldn't have gone insane from guilt in the first place. Plus, we don't know how much losing Belle Reve actually was her fault; her family's home and stability could have been lost entirely because she was selfish, frivolous, self-obsessed, careless with money. And she slept with a 17-year-old boy who was under her care. Obviously I do feel sorry for her, because she was treated appallingly by Stanley, and Mitch, utterly betrayed by her sister (and Eunice), and the way society responded to her condition back in those days is unbelievably messed up. But before the events of the play occurred, she did some dumb shit. I don't know. How much sympathy is she actually worthy of? Also, Williams compared himself to Blanche repeatedly (I can't find a quote now, I used to have one though) so don't worry, you're in good company.
|
|
|
Post by Xteenuh on Apr 21, 2010 18:51:28 GMT
* Isn't Marlon Brando hot? Yes. Scorching. This is definitely one of my favorite movies evah not only for its story/fantastic characters and the tensions between them but also because this film to me is the epitome of Perfect Acting. Everyone's performances in this movie are spot-on and amazing, making everything about it so memorable and powerful in the end. So in turn this has to be an extremely well-directed film as well, dang, that Kazan always turned out some real good shit. I have not read the play,but I am definitely going to get on that eventually.
|
|
|
Post by allison on Apr 21, 2010 19:34:42 GMT
Just watched. I cried, my chest is still all tight. Going in to it, I had no idea what it was about; I should really stop seeing films I haven't any reference for. Knowing Tennesse Williams, I knew it would be depressing but I thought sinceit was from the early fifties it couldn't be too controversial/upsetting. A great movie, to be sure - good choice, Florence. I liked it but I won't be seeing it again.
I'm on an iPhone and can't white out text (I guess in this case 'black out') (also, I can't read what you wrote, Florence) so SPOILERS FOLLOW:
1. sexist? It didn’t strike me as sexist, but I could be persuaded either way. It seemed like an honest portrayal of a certain type of people, in a certain place, in a certain time, that isn’t as isolated in character, in setting, in history, as one would like to believe. So I don’t think that’s sexist. 2. I agree whole-heartedly with Josh. 3. who is to blame? I think that (with the exception of the rape) everyone acted how they thought they should. Blanche’s world was crashing, she retreated into her fantasy. Stanley resented Blanche and blamed her for his problems & inadequacies, he wanted to reveal Blanche’s lies – he didn’t understand how she’d suffered. Stella was trying to be the loving sister and the loving wife but her plate was so full. Mitch was shocked by what he’d heard about Blanche, felt hurt but still cared for her. I don’t think anyone was to blame, really, (except Brando for the rape, of course) because I think how it all panned out was the best option – for the whole second half of the film I was terrified, waiting for Blanche to kill herself. 4. brando. He is hot, I’m sure they intended everyone to think he’s hot. Very tricky, Elai Kazan! I should be ashamed of thinking such an abusive man is attractive, but I do. The character I most related to was Stella. 5. blanche as a tragic victim of her own desire. I don’t like the words ‘tragic’ and ‘victim’, they’re too biased. Blanche was a product of herself and her situation. There was a line, “Desire is the opposite of death.” If, in her youth, she suffered, it was from such intense emotions. If, at the end, it was desire which propelled Blanche, it was a desperate sort of desire, a sort wickedly near to death. Other remarks: Everyone was well played – Brando especially. It took me a little while to get used to Vivian Leigh. At times she played Blanche as if she were Scarlett O’Hara – and although their circumstances and actions may overlap at times, those characters were fundamentally NOT alike. I was also reminded of Norma Desmond in Sunset Blvd. (which came out the previous year). Anyway, Once Blanche’s character was unfolded, I realized Vivian Leigh’s acting was perfect. She deserved that Oscar. Karl Malden, on the other hand. . . what!? I felt no depth in his character. I laughed out loud at the shot in the first scene that Mitch meets Blanche when he turns and shouts directly into the camera. And on the docks, on their date, he looked like a clown, but it didn’t seem like in an intentional way. Good movie. Intense. Amazing characters. . .
edited to add:
in response to florence's last spoiler paragraph. i don't think Allan's death was entirely blanche's fault. i understood it as Allan not being a very good worker (which, even if you don't like your job, is pretty tough to take) and not getting recognition for his poetry (again, devastating) and having to grapple with his sexuality (which, in the south, is NOT accepted - especially in the first half of the 20th century). . . his wife - blanche - calling him worthless (or whatever she said) was probably the tipping point. blanche did not kill allan; he killed himself. blanche surely was one of the reasons which compelled him to take his life, but its not fully her fault. but she feels like it is. so she's got guilt - and, maybe more importantly, she's lost the ability to feel true desire. it is TOUGH to love someone with all your heart, and then not love them, like a switch was flipped. you feel empty and its scary. and if you cannot find another person to love like you loved that first person, you get anxious and desperate because you don't feel human, you feel like you're missing some integral part a person should have, and i think what's missing is pure desire. blanche realised that, and began her promiscuity - trying desperately to feel desire for someone. . . and for someone to desire her, too. cause she felt worthless after allan's death, worthless from guilt, and if someone would desire her then maybe that would show approval, or something. people get irrational when they go insane - they sleep with 17 year old boys, or spend money recklessly, or act violently. you're trying to get a reaction that makes sense, but nothing does, nothing works. if blanche is guilty of anything, its of the things she did to allan, but i think many people in her position would, in a fit of anger/disgust, say them, too; so i think she could be forgiven of that. as for the things she does between allan's death and the end of the play: those are actions of an insane person, if one doesn't think that's a worth justification, i think its at least reason for sympathy. i think many people don't realise that when someone like blanche hurts another person, she feels that hurt two-fold. all that hurt is a lot to bear.
as for being 'utterly betrayed' by stella & eunice, i don't think that's quite fair. what other options did they have, in that situation? stella and stanley were presumably struggling financially, and they'd just had a baby; they couldn't afford to take care of blanche, too - they did have the money, time, space, energy. and anyway, being in that house with stanley would not be healthy or safe for blanche (or stella, for that matter, because the way blanche rubbed stanley seemed to make him more likely to lash out at stella). stella couldn't leave stanley to support the baby AND blanche on her own, either (anyway, at that point i think stella didn't see leaving stanley as an option.) we don't see the way the decision is reached, but i'd reckon it was not arrived at easily (on stella's part, at least). i don't think she betrayed her sister - surely she regretted permitting blanche to be taken away (she leaves stanley) but i think actually it was the best thing.
also: in analysing the motives of blanche and stanley, i think one must take in to account class & status. stanley is a working class second-wave (eastern european) immigrant, i'm sure he feels a lot of resentment towards upper classes and people of those classes who blatantly display their wealth (like blanche). probably he's also used to the upper classes treating him like shit (the fact that stella never did that probably has a lot to do with how come he loves her); he's used to being on the defence against those richer than him. he also works damn hard, and i think that affects the way he sees money; he's upset by the offhand way blanche acts about the 'lost' plantation, because land and property like that would mean an awful lot to stanley; it would give him acceptance as a true american (which he really wants - he says something like, "i'm not polish, i'm american"). blanche, though, also sees the plantation as her claim to status. undoubtably she was raised with that mindset of privledge; the mindset where if you aint have it anymore, you fake it. you secretly mortgage the plantation; you dress nice; you play the part of aristocrat and maybe you yourself'll believe it, even. with the ruse is up and you can't fake it anymore (cause your plantation has been repossessed), you feel worthless and lost. blanche lost her status - which was a blow - but she kept up appearances - cause that's all she knew. stanley (working class) found that disgusting.
i don't know if i'm inferring too much here - or impressed my own experiences/feelings on these characters. that's what's cool, though, why we all interpret it differently.
|
|
|
Post by choolin firth on Apr 22, 2010 10:31:31 GMT
Florence, I need to discuss the last paragraph of your spoiler section! But I only will when more people have seen the film.
A Streetcar Named Desire is one of my all time favourite films. We were looking at it in our film class the other day and comapring the method acting of Brando with Vivien Leigh's British stage acting style and how they shouldn't work together but still do amazingly. The film was released when these two styles were overlapping; the major film stars were now younger and more appealing to younger audiences and the major film stars of the 30s and 40s, like Leigh, were becoming more old fashioned. It's the perfect film to demonstrate the changes in acting style over the decades. And it works, because the characters are meant to be like that. Stanley is meant to be animalistic and Blanche is dramatic and living in her own fantasy world, which I've always thought first derived from her being an English teacher. It's such a shame that the character reflected Vivien Leigh's real life mental health problems in a few years to come.
And the character most to blame: Stanley. Never has such a nasty, horrible character been portrayed on film. I mean, Blanche losing the house and coming to live with them had something to do with it, but she was just being over induldgent and making up for things she'd done wrong in her life with expensive items. Stanley pushed her over the edge.
|
|
|
Post by Teen Wolf on Apr 23, 2010 21:15:31 GMT
I have thid dvd but never watched it yet. my dvd player is broken but i can watch it on my compy. i'll get to that when i get back from work.
|
|
|
Post by husbandwifeheroin on Apr 24, 2010 11:04:10 GMT
Right, I've borrowed the DVD from a mate. I will watch, and probably post tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by irrelevant on Apr 25, 2010 7:31:20 GMT
as a precursor to the eventual lengthy and constructive analysis i intend to give (with enthusiasm as well), i wanted to say that *some* think i'm as fit as marlon brando in his prime (yes, even with torn shirt and all). « Last Edit: Today at 9:13am by minority chunk of florence»
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Apr 25, 2010 14:32:07 GMT
^ What! the hell. I actually didn't edit Joeb's post at 9.13am, or at any point. I was trailing through the damp woods of an army base at 9.13 this morning with my sergeant, collecting leftover equipment from the night exercise and trying to avoid the Marines cooking their breakfast in there. I was miles away from a computer, or phone with the internet. Miles away from anything. THIS CONFUSES ME. Did someone hack my account?
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Apr 25, 2010 14:38:44 GMT
Allison, I agree with the majority of your post, especially the bits about Allan. When I said Blanche was betrayed by Stella and Eunice, I didn't mean in helping her be put into the asylum as much as I meant Stella not believing that Stanley had raped her sister, and Eunice encouraging her to overlook it/pretend he didn't do it. In my eyes, that counts as a betrayal of Blanche, although Stella was obviously in a tricky situation. She knew that her husband had raped her sister, and she sided with him. Also, in the play, it ends with Stella and Stanley as a happy family with the baby (in the film they added in Stella leaving Stanley so it seemed like he was punished in some way for his actions).
|
|
|
Post by husbandwifeheroin on Apr 25, 2010 14:49:34 GMT
I just watched it and I don't get it at all. :s
|
|
|
Post by lastgoodbye on Apr 25, 2010 14:50:12 GMT
What don't you get? Ask away!
|
|
|
Post by husbandwifeheroin on Apr 25, 2010 15:31:35 GMT
Everything from about half an hour onwards, especially everything with Mitch.
|
|
|
Post by Xteenuh on Apr 25, 2010 19:00:05 GMT
Also, in the play, it ends with Stella and Stanley as a happy family with the baby (in the film they added in Stella leaving Stanley so it seemed like he was punished in some way for his actions). Wow, that's interesting. I always loved the film ending the way it did... that definitely puts things in a whole different light.
|
|