tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38454049.post7125859460885525995..comments2024-03-27T23:36:43.408-07:00Comments on Apocalypse Later Film Reviews: Notorious (1946)Hal C. F. Astellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16807389103456317098noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38454049.post-74872926887662118972010-02-13T14:31:56.253-07:002010-02-13T14:31:56.253-07:00(adding links)
Thanks for your comment.
I watche...(adding links)<br /><br />Thanks for your comment.<br /><br />I watched <i>Notorious</i> in 2004 and didn't have much of a clue who Cary Grant was. It took me a while to work out why he was so important and I think that's mostly because of an unfortunate choice of films to introduce me. <a href="http://www.apocalypselaterfilm.com/2010/01/arsenic-and-old-lace-1944.html" rel="nofollow">Arsenic and Old Lace</a> was his least favourite of his own films. <i>Notorious</i> has him on screen for a very short time. <a href="http://www.apocalypselaterfilm.com/2010/01/north-by-northwest-1959.html" rel="nofollow">North By Northwest</a> I still have problems with.<br /><br />I think Grant did what he needed to do in <i>Notorious</i>. The problem is that he was stuck with a part that inherently required him to be externally nondescript and inconsequential. It came with the job. Devlin is a character that we should look past not look at. His most telling scenes are the ones when he's not on screen, like the car scene when we watch Bergman and the cop, or the ones where he lets Bergman act around him (including the one we don't even know he's there until we read up on the film).<br /><br />Most of the films I watched from the Top 250 in 2004 I rewatched in 2010 to get further perspective before posting my reviews, having worked through so much in between. This was an exception. I think this was my fourth Cary Grant when I watched it in 2004. When I see it again it'll be after at least 41 of his films so perhaps I'll be able to see something more in depth than I did at the time.<br /><br />HalHal C. F. Astellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16807389103456317098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38454049.post-83013775927918833552010-02-07T03:09:44.398-07:002010-02-07T03:09:44.398-07:00So Rains is superb; what about Grant? Well, he doe...<i>So Rains is superb; what about Grant? Well, he does a superb job in depicting the nearest thing to an invisible man since, well, Claude Rains played the original for Universal. If the aim was for him to fade into the background so as not to be noticed, then he did what was required of him and I can respect him for such a lack of ego. He does that job superbly, but by definition that doesn't make a star turn and to my thinking Rains should have been up for a Best Actor Oscar rather than merely a Supporting one. So it goes. Sometimes it feels that T R Devlin is more of a cameo role, suggesting that Cary Grant is really a secret agent playing himself, more believable here than in North By Northwest, but cameos are supposed to be noticed and Devlin is all about not being noticed.</i><br /><br /><br />Is that all you saw in Grant's role as Devlin? A cameo? What did you want him to do? Ham it up on the screen? Personally, I think it's one of his best roles ever. Not because his character was "cool" or "mysterious". Because underneath the cool facade was an emotional man with an inferiority complex when it came to love and women.The Rush Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13667282586023023623noreply@blogger.com