tentender

I am so psyched to write the first user review of this great film -- soon to be widely recognized as such, I imagine. (See New Yorker, NY Times, Variety etc. reviews -- they're ahead of me.)

"Digging for Fire" looks wonderful -- magical, even. Joe Swanberg, as natural a filmmaker as Samuel Fuller (the all-time greatest of the naturals), here has (for the first time?) chosen to shoot on 35mm Eastman color film in Cinemascope ratio. And the results are stunning -- particularly the beautiful night shooting.

As the narrative subject matter of the film involves (a) a couple in a conflicted moment and (b) the chance discovery of buried human remains, I was reminded of Rossellini's "Viaggio in Italia" -- and, surprisingly, Richard Brody (in The New Yorker) references Rossellini in his enthusiastic review. The Rossellini film -- though difficult and annoying -- is also mysteriously compelling. While Swanberg's film is far more viewer-congenial (oh alright -- "audience friendly"), a similar spiritual transformation of the characters takes place in both films. But, paradoxically, more satisfyingly in Swanberg's less explicitly and far less portentously "spiritual" film.

The acting -- from the wonderful Jake Johnson to Chris Messina in his tiny role to Judith Light and Sam Elliott as Johnson's in-laws and little Jake Swanberg as an adorable 3-year old (type-casting at its best) -- is superb -- an ensemble equal to the great assemblages Robert Altman used to gather year after year.

It seems Swanberg may have quite a nice future, for which let us be grateful.

(Side note: Interesting "Digging for Fire" is released the same weekend as Peter Bogdanovich's first film in 13 years, "She's Funny That Way" -- each opening in New York on one screen only -- try that one, too -- it's much better than the reviews would have you believe.)

This film is a pleasant surprise from cinema's greatest liar, Edgar G. Ulmer. (His claims for his career in interviews seem now to be regarded as largely preposterous -- many flat out lies, much inflation of his contributions...) But this is a nice, competent little comedy built from crime story elements, and quite enjoyable. Part of the surprise is the far-better-than-just-decent cast: Dick Haymes (ok -- none too great -- in the title role), Nina Foch, excellent as The Girl in The Story; Lionel Stander, as always both lively and believable, and Roland Young, looking sadly worn out. Below the title, there is Oscar Karlweis, a most appealing Viennese actor (and important on Broadway as Jacobowsky in the original production of "Jacobowsky and the Colonel," in the role Danny Kaye played in the film), Jean Casto (her only film role; she originated the role in "Pal Joey" (1940) that made Elaine Stritch a star in the 1952 revival -- which co-starred Lionel Stander!). Uncredited: Dort Clark (of "Bells Are Ringing") and John Lupton (of "Battle Cry"), both in small speaking roles. Lastly, Freddie Bartholomew appears in his final film role -- and, sadly, appears to have completely lost his talent. The role is terrible, and he's awful in it. Smart man to leave the business at this point.

As to the relation of this film to Ulmer's oeuvre -- well, don't make me laugh! But I will say that the absence of Ulmer's musical "genius," that fellow Erdody, is extremely welcome. As always with Ulmer, there is too much score, but this one is not as insufferable as the ones Erdody cranked out.

A sweet, entertaining film.

Very gratifying to see that this very well-made film has gotten such excellent reviews on this site. Preminger himself, when interviewed, rarely tried to make a case for his films that were considered minor or unimportant, nor did he encourage looking back. Consequently, if foolishly, critics have tended to dismiss such films, and especially the few he made before "Laura." What a delight, then, to find that "Danger, Love at Work" is an especially effervescent and sophisticated screwball comedy. And it is a very legitimate example, based on the essential "crazy family" format. It completely ignores the social consciousness aspect of the classic screwball ("You Can't Take It With You" and "My Man Godfrey" are otherwise close relatives), and benefits perhaps from this narrow focus on plot and character. And what characters! Mary Boland, who can sometimes annoy, fits in here very nicely as Ann Sothern's mother; diminutive Etienne Girardot -- a fascinating and lively little actor (his nervous performance here, as in "Twentieth Century" is priceless) as her father (and has a charming counterpart -- equally diminutive -- in "Uncle Goliath," a "back-to-nature" type); brother John Carradine (as a "post-Surrealist" painter); Walter Catlett as a philatelist uncle -- all delightful. Miss Sothern herself is every bit as charming as Carole Lombard (and has a rather less annoying role than Lombard's) in "Godfrey," and, besides, has a lovely vocal duet with Jack Haley on the title song. She really can sing! And here we have Haley two years before "The Wizard of Oz" -- nicely done, though no Cary Grant of course. Edward Everett Horton is, as always, superb, though his straight-man adversarial role here doesn't point up his own best strengths. Even Benny Bartlett as an 11-year-old Princeton graduate, scores nicely. As is typical of Preminger, there is not a single bad performance ("My Man Godfrey," on the other hand, has its Gail Patrick - - ghastly). (In bit parts, we even have Franklin Pangborn and Elisha Cook, Jr.) So here we have, in this man's opinion, a screwball comedy truly worthy of entering The Canon (if such there be).