Ian Thomas Malone

katharine hepburn Archive

Monday

11

August 2025

0

COMMENTS

Classic Film: Summertime

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews

Summer vacation possesses one allure that looms large over all the rest. Whether you travel to an exotic location like Venice, or even plant your feet up in your backyard for a few days off at home, summer provides the one thing we all need from time to time. What’s life without a little escapism? The 1955 film Summertime examines the life of a woman who perhaps waited a little too long for some release from her otherwise mundane existence.

Jane Hudson (Katharine Hepburn) is a single middle-aged woman traveling alone to Venice, Italy. A dream trip that she saved up years to go on, Jane is an upbeat woman who wears her emotions on her sleeves. She bonds quickly with the fellow guests at her pensione, but grows lonely when they all head out for their own adventures, leaving Jane to take in the marvelous city by herself, occasionally joined by a young street urchin Mauro (Gaetano Autiero).

Jane stumbles into an antiques shop, where she purchases a red goblet. Renato (Rosano Brazzi), the shopkeeper, quickly takes a fancy to Jane. Jane spends much of the next day infatuated with the thought of Renato, who returns her affection later that evening with a visit to her pensione. Jane quickly falls in love with Renato, though a conversation with his nephew reveals that Renato is a married man, estranged from his wife. Rather than express remorse for the deception, Renato attempts to flip the script, claiming that Italy operates by a different set of rules, chastising Jane for resisting lowering her standards.

Based on the stage play The Time of the Cuckoo, director David Lean shows off his penchant for epic cinematography, later displayed in his classics The Bridge on the River Kwai and Lawrence of Arabia, with his awe-inspiring depiction of Venice. Venice is essentially its own character in the film, an intoxicating playground for the disaffected in search of something to break the mundanity of life. Making great use of the city, Lean’s depiction of Venice looks breathtaking in Technicolor.

Hepburn carries the rather clunky screenplay, co-authored by Lean and H.E. Bates. Jane has an understated complexity to her character, a social butterfly who can’t shake the feeling that time has passed her by. While her obvious star power radiates in every scene, Hepburn elicits great sympathy for Jane through the subtle moments of profound sadness, the immutable sting of loneliness still resonating seventy years later.

The story starts to unravel by the third act. Renato is a mess. Brazzi plays him competently, but the sleaziness of the deception and his pitiful defense of his actions leave a bad taste that Lean does little to wash away. The 100-minute runtime overstays its welcome, though it’s hard to tire of the beautiful Venetian scenery. The subject matter is probably a little too complex for the remnants of the Hays Code era. 1955 was not exactly the best time to try to make the case for an adulterous summer fling.

At one point, Jane remarks that it’s better to leave a party before it ends. However true that may be, Renato is not much of a party. Summertime is a bit of a mixed bag. Lean’s filmmaking is always a sight to behold, and Hepburn is in peak form. The film is practically worth watching for those reasons alone. If only the story at the heart of the narrative received as much care as Lean gave to his gorgeous depiction of the city.

Monday

23

August 2021

0

COMMENTS

Classic Film: Sylvia Scarlett

Written by , Posted in Blog, Movie Reviews, Pop Culture

The Golden Age of Hollywood offers pretty slim pickings for queer-positive content for LGBTQ cinephiles. Gender variance is played almost exclusively for laughs, while broader gay representation tends to skew exclusively negative in the rare instances where homosexuality is even referenced at all. Being asked to offer transgender film recommendations is often just an exercise in figuring out which presents the least amount of cringe.

With all this in mind, 1935’s Sylvia Scarlett is an unusual outlier for a film centered on gender variance. Katharine Hepburn does a fabulous job in the lead role, remarkably transformed into “Sylvester” Scarlett as she flees France with her father, Henry (Edmund Gwenn), a hapless crook wanted for embezzlement. Henry’s inability to keep his mouth shut as to his crimes attracts fellow schemer Jimmy Monkley (Cary Grant) into their orbit, leading the three to team up for a series of cheap scams across England.

The first on-screen team-up of Hepburn and Grant is largely a disaster after its charming first act. Based on the Compton MacKenzie novel The Early Life and Adventures of Sylvia Scarlett, the film doesn’t have any obvious clue as to how to adapt a book into a feature. There isn’t really much of a narrative present across the 90-minute runtime, instead playing out like a series of loosely connected vignettes.

The comedy ends immediately after the narrative shifts gears away from the con job hijinks toward a bizarre romance between Sylvia and Michael Fane (Brian Aherne), who met the group during one of their “performances.” Michael is almost completely unphased by Sylvester revealing herself to be Sylvia, itself made weirder by the presence of Michael’s wife, Lily (Natalie Paley). Even stranger is how the film seems to forget about Jimmy, only for him to appear sporadically throughout the second half while throwing vague hints at also wanting a relationship with Sylvia.

The narrative offers no explanation for why Sylvia continues to occasionally present as Sylvester even after all the characters know who she is. There is no consistency from scene to scene beside the cast, almost no follow-through on any of the film’s storylines. The whole ordeal is a puzzling display of incompetence from director George Cukor, otherwise among the most talented filmmakers of his era.

Sylvia Scarlett does have some obvious appeal for LGBTQ audiences. Hepburn delivers a tactful take on gender variance in a film that is otherwise a disaster in practically every regard. It’s a stretch to call it nuanced in a narrative that looks like each scene was compiled without a second thought. LGBTQ audiences deserve better than the mess that is Sylvia Scarlett, but at least it is a respectful disaster.