पत्रकार स्टीव ओ'माल्ली एक राष्ट्रीय नायक की जीवनी लिखना चाहते हैं, जिनकी मृत्यु उनकी कार के पुल से नीचे गिर जाने से हुई थी. स्टीव को परस्पर विरोधी रिपोर्ट और किस्से सुनने को मिलते हैं, जो ना... सभी पढ़ेंपत्रकार स्टीव ओ'माल्ली एक राष्ट्रीय नायक की जीवनी लिखना चाहते हैं, जिनकी मृत्यु उनकी कार के पुल से नीचे गिर जाने से हुई थी. स्टीव को परस्पर विरोधी रिपोर्ट और किस्से सुनने को मिलते हैं, जो नायक की सच्चाई के बारे में उसे कई सवाल पूछने के लिए मजबूर कर देते हैं.पत्रकार स्टीव ओ'माल्ली एक राष्ट्रीय नायक की जीवनी लिखना चाहते हैं, जिनकी मृत्यु उनकी कार के पुल से नीचे गिर जाने से हुई थी. स्टीव को परस्पर विरोधी रिपोर्ट और किस्से सुनने को मिलते हैं, जो नायक की सच्चाई के बारे में उसे कई सवाल पूछने के लिए मजबूर कर देते हैं.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- Freddie Ridges
- (as Horace McNally)
- Jason Rickards
- (as Howard da Silva)
- Mourner
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- Forward American Boy
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- William
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- Reporter
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
- Boy
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
The plot is easily summarized. A reporter, O'Malley (Spencer Tracy) wants to write -- what? he's not certain -- a piece on an icon who people revere in the same way they might (say) Washington or Lincoln, The first part of the film is documents how to get to see the icon's wife. She's reclusive and her servants are dedicated to preserving her sanctity. What's behind this isolation? That in itself is a bothersome question for O'Malley. Something is not ringing right. She was the wife of a popular public figure. Why wouldn't she cooperate? As he digs, he finds he cannot write the story, at first because he does not know enough, and then because he knows too much of the wrong thing and finally because he suspects he does not know what is hidden from him and it is critical.
And as he untwists the Gordian knot that is presented to him, he finds there is duplicity and mendacity on every level. But nothing is as simple as it seems. Instead of writing about the icon, he picks the wife.
But that is not the depth of the film. The depth is revealed as we learn about the Hepburn character and Tracy's response. He moves from someone who can ignore genuine interest in him by a woman, (Audrey Christie), and seek his goal. What develops is first a genuine friendship followed by an admiration that transcends almost any other kind of relationship.
That is a very complicated situation to convey in the simple straight forward acting method of Tracy's (but he always manages to do what is required of him), and mysterious sophisticated quality that Hepburn always wears like some garment only given once by the gods who give such gifts.
This is not an easy exercise. Don't get caught in the datedness. Watch how the actors, directors and writers put together something that is admirable in its mixture of simplicity and complexity -- what others have called pealing the onionskin off the inion.
This was their second teaming and after the comedy of Woman of the Year, they tried a change of pace with a melodrama. Pearl Harbor was still fresh in everyone's minds and so was the discredited isolationist movement.
It's chief spokesperson was Charles Lindbergh on whom the character of Hepburn's husband Robert Forrest was based. Lindbergh's too close association with Germany tarred him for the rest of his life.
Here Robert Forrest is killed right at the beginning of the film as he drives over a bridge that's ready to collapse. The death of Forrest brings out the grief of a nation and reporters flock to his Manderley like estate.
One of those reporters is Spencer Tracy who by some chicanery gains entrance to the place and meets the widow Forrest and her husband's chief aide Richard Whorf. The place reeks of sinister and Tracy's curiosity is aroused. He also meets Margaret Wycherly who is Hepburn's mother-in-law. She's one batty old dame. A far cry from Gary Cooper's mother a year before who Wycherly played in Sergeant York.
Hepburn seeks to preserve her late husband's reputation at the risk of her own in sending Tracy out on a red herring. He discovers the truth and how he does it and the result therein is the crux of the film.
Tracy and Hepburn are at their professional best working for the first time with George Cukor who later guided them through Adam's Rib and Pat and Mike. Richard Whorf is very good as the malevolent aide.
After over 60 years the film still packs a powerful dramatic punch.
Like the peeling of an onion, the film reveals layer after layer of the people in the life of a giant, his relations with them, and the passions stirred by his presence ... and his causes. We see that it is wise to temper emotion with information in selecting our icons. While Tracy and Hepburn are quite good in their roles, it is the supporting cast which drives the film. Whorf, Da Silva and Craven are outstanding in key roles. The Bronislau Kaper score and excellent black and white cinematography preserve the quality of the drama and help it through its dated moments.
Spencer Tracy portrays a reporter-to-author who is to write the biography of a man recently deceased. The deceased was a very successful businessman who had launched a campaign for public office but was killed --- by accident, intention, or a combination of the two --- before he could claim his victory. And, it would have been a victory; The public was charmed by the man they believed embodied the American ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness... or success. Hepburn plays the widow of this 'man of the people', and, as such, someone who must be interviewed by Tracy. The more questions Tracy asks of those near and dear to his subject, the fewer answers he finds. Our reporter eventually comes to believe there is one American ideal with which his deceased subject did NOT agree: The equality of all men, regardless of race or religion.
Ever the typical skeptical journalist, Tracy won't begin to write for publication until he can fully answer a few interesting questions: Who had this man really been? Had he been the steadfast and lone American patriot all believed him to be ... or had he been a member of an organization whose primary goal was to raise one ethnic, religious, and racial group above the rest? Had he really been killed in an 'accident'? And, if not, had he been killed by those who agreed or disagreed with his political motives?
Also of interest to our journalist: How well had Hepburn's character known her husband? Does she agree with his political agenda? How much does she really know about the 'accident' that killed him. And, most importantly, how far would she... or anyone else... go to make sure her husband was remembered as an honest American?
This movie is a mystery / political thriller / morality play / who-done-it. It is also a lesson to 'be careful what you wish for' and highly recommended.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाLouis B. Mayer was very unhappy about the film's political content, thinking it noncommercial. Katharine Hepburn too felt that the storyline was too dull and needed to be pepped up with some romance. She complained to producer Victor Saville about this but he ignored her comments, so Hepburn went directly to Mayer who was only too happy to make the film into a more conventional Hollywood romance.
- गूफ़In the denouement scene in the arsenal, while standing near the safe, Christine begins wearing a rain coat which then becomes a fuzzy cloth coat.
- भाव
Christine Forrest: But what was really shocking to me, was the complete cynicism of the plan. Each of the groups was simply to be used until its usefulness was exhausted. Hates were to be played against hates. If one group threatened to get too powerful, it would be killed off by another group. And in the end, those poor little people who never knew to what purpose they were lending themselves would be in the same chains, cowed and enslaved.
- कनेक्शनEdited into Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid (1982)
- साउंडट्रैकMarcia Funebre
(uncredited)
from "Symphony No.3 in E Flat Major "Eroica", Op.55" (1806)
Music by Ludwig van Beethoven
played as background music during the funeral
टॉप पसंद
- How long is Keeper of the Flame?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Čuvari plamena
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $11,72,000(अनुमानित)
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $15,392
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 40 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.37 : 1