Orages

Although you might hear a lot of folks talk about the likes of Ingmar Bergman, Martin Scorsese, Akira Kurosawa or Alfred Hitchcock being the best directors of all time, to me this title could easily be claimed by the far less famous William Wyler. While his name is not so familiar today, you'd have a hard time finding any director who could come close to approaching the number of huge hits he helmed. Think about it...this guy made "Ben Hur", "The Best Years of Our Lives", "The Big Country", "Dodsworth", "Jezebel", "The Letter", "Little Foxes", "Mrs. Miniver", "The Heiress" and many other great films. He also received the Best Director Oscar three times! Talk about a great track record. However, in 1931, Wyler was still a relative unknown--working here for a second-rate studio (Universal) and with a B-movie script. And, his directing the film was THE reason I chose to see "A House Divided".

When the film begins, the seaman, Seth Law (Walter Huston), has just buried his wife. Instead of mourning, this cold-hearted beast goes to the nearby bar to celebrate...a berates his less rugged son Matt (Douglass Montgomery) for being a sissy because he's sad about this death! Then, showing the depth of his awfulness, Seth then almost immediately buys a mail-order wife. After all, he needs someone to clean, cook and take care of him. Matt is appalled. However, when the new bride to be arrives, she's not the lady he ordered. Instead, Ruth (Helen Chandler) is very young, small and pretty. She agrees to marry Seth anyway but soon he regrets it because Seth is a nasty pig who seems an awful lot like Bluto from the Popeye cartoons! In addition, she soon finds herself attracted not to Seth but Matt!

So why does the film only merit a 5? Well, the pacing is a serious problem. Since it's essentially a B-movie, the director was forced to have the film run at only about 60 minutes--and this meant cutting corners. So, Ruth changes her mind way, way too fast about Seth as well as Matt and it all just seemed rushed and, as a result, difficult to believe. Not a bad film but it misses the mark too often to be of any interest except to nuts like me who love Wyler's work...even his lesser stuff.

There was no way for me to go back in time an hour and tell myself not to watch A House Divided, since time travel doesn't exist. How I wish it did, because then I wouldn't have had to watch this very upsetting movie. If you're renting it because of the interesting title, I'd tell you to rent Walter Huston's Abraham Lincoln instead to hear him say the famous phrase, but after sitting through that lousy movie, I can't recommend it in good conscience.

In A House Divided, Walter Huston is made out to be a royal jerk in the opening scene. He and his son, Douglass Montgomery, attend his wife's funeral, and as soon as it's over, he drags them to the local bar and gets rip-roaring drunk. He sings, dances, starts fistfights, and encourages his son to do the same. He has no intention of grieving or letting his son feel his feelings. Then, he sends away for a mail order bride so he can get someone to do the chores around the house for free instead of hiring a new housekeeper. When Helen Chandler shows up, nineteen years old and afraid, Douglass feels he has a bond with her because they're close in age and don't particularly care for Walter. It's very clear it's only a matter of time before they fall in love.

Now here's the problem with the movie. Everything bad that happens, with the exception of the funeral scene, is Douglass's fault. Walter is gruff and a little crude, but he never does anything really wrong. Helen answered a mail order bride summons; she expects the guy who sent for her to not want to marry her? What is she complaining about anyway-her husband-to-be could have been a sadistic monster or someone enormously ugly. She gets Walter Huston! I don't understand. Her first impression of him is that he's handsome, a hard worker, generous with his money, well-liked in town, and prepared to give her a fancy wedding reception. He says, "I'll make you happy," and her response is, "I'm afraid." Do you understand her?

So, if you're a masochist and want to watch a movie where tons of bad things happen and for no reason Walter Huston is supposed to be the bad guy, be my guest. He does put his heart and soul into his performance, and under normal circumstances he might have gotten an Oscar out of it. Of course, he wasn't nominated by the Academy, which begs my famous question of, "What does it take?"

For those out there curious about the brief career of Helen Chandler due to her appearance in "Dracula," this is perhaps her finest showcase. Issued at the same time as "Frankenstein," this is another impressive early talkie from Universal, directed by the renowned William Wyler, well known for working with such diverse actresses as Bette Davis (who actually lost this role to Chandler), Vivien Leigh, Audrey Hepburn, and Barbra Streisand (earning no less than 3 Best Director Oscars). Walter Huston plays the widowed fisherman who sends away for a mail-order bride, only to end up with the much-too-pretty Chandler, who soon falls for his sensitive son (Douglass Montgomery), whom his father frowns upon as a weakling. The waterlogged climax finds Huston auditioning for his meaty role in "Kongo," made at MGM the next year. Billed under the name 'Kent Douglass' (for the fifth and last time), Montgomery had just completed James Whale's "Waterloo Bridge," opposite Mae Clarke, returning to Universal for 1935's "Mystery of Edwin Drood" (later cast as the surprise villain in 1939's "The Cat and the Canary"). Walter Huston was perhaps aided by son John, credited with dialogue, as he also would be on Lugosi's "Murders in the Rue Morgue" and his father's next Universal, "Law and Order"; the career of Helen Chandler virtually came to a halt by 1938 (she died in 1965).

I've never seen Walter Huston in anything in which he's not brilliant and this doesn't disappoint either. This dark and moody drama isn't particularly fun but it's a satisfying watch.

This is another great example showing what a great actor Walter Huston was. His character evokes the sense of a volcano just about to erupt but restrained by an impermeable layer of pure cold granite. He's a right nasty piece of work in this, a horrible thug without any likeable qualities whatsoever. But Huston being a proper actor still manages to captivate your imagination. He makes you want to know if he's really that unpleasant, whether under that rough stony exterior is a heart of gold but he only shows you that he's not hiding his feelings, he just doesn't have any. Even getting married by Emperor Ming doesn't cheer him up! Like his performance in KONGO, he's a cold hearted monster but he's also a believable damaged human being.

This isn't a typical 1930s picture. The only thing which dates it to that period is its early talkies style. It's set in the early 30s but it's not the 1930s we are familiar with. We are in a remote fishing village where gangsters and gold diggers are as alien to them as they are to us now. Places and macho societies like this were probably unchanged since the time of Moby Dick. The concept of a mail order bride, for woman to enter a life of serfdom in exchange for somewhere to live seems dumbfounding to us in our comfortable modern world but these were very desperate times. It's fascinating to get a glimpse into how we lived.

This is only William Wyler's third ever talkie so it's not going to be his best work but this is from the man who seven years later would make the best film ever, WUTHERING HEIGHTS so it's still superbly made. Although made by Universal, who weren't known for splashing the cash on their pictures, the production standards, for 1932 anyway are pretty good. The finale in the storm is quite impressive.

It's not particularly uplifting nor does it make you feel happier after you've watched it. It's a very serious dark drama so you need to be in the right mood for this. It is however a great story, a jaw-dropping insight into another world and if you want to see some great acting, you can't go wrong with this.

The film opens with the funeral of Walter Huston's wife who was also Douglass Montgomery's mother. Huston's incredibly strong performance as the fisherman father with little sympathy for anybody or anything but fishing, staying alive, and drinking at the local bar is riveting. He orders a mail-order bride through a magazine - to do the housework, cook, mend the nets - you get the drift. She arrives, but she's another who's taken the place of the original girl who had already married. She's also much prettier. Only 19 and one of six daughters to a Montana wheat farmer, the girl marries Huston. She falls in love with his son, Montgomery, a man his father thinks is weak. Among bit parts, you may spot Walter Brennan, Mary Foy, Gibson Gowland, Mary Gordon, Vivien Oakland, and Marjorie Main.

The action in the film is strong, the fluidity of the camera for the year really good. The final scene is spectacular, the camera work really magnificent, as Huston straps himself into a boat to go rescue his wife, who had gone out on the fishing boat when a storm breaks out. Why was Huston strapped to the boat you might ask? Because he's now crippled, without the use of his legs, thanks to a knock-down, drag-out fight with his son where he falls down a flight of stairs. It might seem like Huston is warming up for the part of Dead Legs in Kongo the following year, but then he'd been playing that part on the stage since 1926, so maybe THAT play was the warmup for THIS movie.

There's little that redeems the character played by Huston, but the performance is superlative. Helen Chandler gives what may be her best performance. Montgomery was never better. With William Wyler's direction in one of his early sound films, this is really a knock-out. You may remember that Wyler made "Dodsworth" with Huston later. He also made "Come and Get It" in 1936, a film that resonates with the same kind of theme and a strong performance from Edward Arnold.