Thomas Mitchell | Kevin Barrett's Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Thomas Mitchell’

If You Don’t Know Why, I Can’t Tell You

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged Amy Fowler Kane, Best Actor Oscar (Cooper), Best Director Nomination, Best Film Editing Oscar, Best Original Song Oscar, Best Picture Nomination, Best Score Oscar, Clint Eastwood, Deputy Harvey Pell, Dirty Harry, Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darlin’, Frank Miller, Fred Zinnemann, Gary Cooper, General Comments, Grace Kelly, Helen Ramírez, High Noon (1952) — movie review, Hollywood, Ian MacDonald, Katy Jurado, Lloyd Bridges, Marshal Will Kane, Mayor Jonas Henderson, Movie Reviews, Quaker, Reviews, Thomas Mitchell, Very High to MUST See movie recommendation on May 27, 2026| 2 Comments »

“High Noon” (1952) — movie review
Today’s review is for the western‑drama “High Noon”, directed by Fred Zinnemann and starring Gary Cooper as Marshal Will Kane, the newly married lawman who finds out a vengeful outlaw is coming back on the noon train; Grace Kelly as Amy Fowler Kane, Will’s young Quaker bride whose pacifism clashes with the violence heading their way; Katy Jurado as Helen Ramírez, the businesswoman with ties to both Kane and the outlaw, and the only person in town who seems to understand what’s coming; Lloyd Bridges as Deputy Harvey Pell, the ambitious second‑in‑command who wants Kane’s job but not Kane’s burden; Thomas Mitchell as Mayor Jonas Henderson, who urges Kane to leave town “for the good of the community”; and Ian MacDonald as Frank Miller, the outlaw whose return sets the whole story in motion. The film unfolds almost in real time as Kane tries to gather support from the townspeople he’s protected for years — only to find out how quickly gratitude evaporates when danger shows up.

Background: I’ve seen this movie several times over the years — on TV, on DVD, and once on a streaming service when I was on a western kick. Strangely, it’s one of those westerns I only remember in general outline: Marshal stays, he fights, he wins, he rides away. LoL. “High Noon” was released in 1952 and became one of the most influential westerns ever made. It received seven Academy Award nominations and won four: Best Actor (Gary Cooper), Best Film Editing, Best Original Song (“Do Not Forsake Me, Oh My Darlin’”), and Best Score. It was also nominated for Best Picture and Best Director. Historically, the film is famous for its real‑time structure, its moral tension, and its political subtext: many critics see it as an allegory for the Hollywood blacklist and the cowardice of institutions under pressure. Whether you buy that or not, the film’s reputation as a landmark western is well‑earned. It’s also one of the few westerns where the “hero” spends most of the movie scared, frustrated, and abandoned — which makes it feel surprisingly modern.

Plot: The story begins on Kane’s wedding day. He’s just married Amy, turned in his badge, and is ready to leave town for a quieter life. Then word arrives that Frank Miller (a killer Kane put away) has been pardoned and is arriving on the noon train. Miller’s “gang” rides into town a few hours before he is due to arrive. Kane tries to leave, but his conscience won’t let him. He turns back, puts the badge on again, and starts asking the townspeople for help. One by one, they refuse: the judge flees, the mayor urges Kane to run, the church congregation debates morality versus practicality, and even his deputy refuses unless Kane promises him the marshal job. Helen Ramírez warns Amy that running from trouble doesn’t make it disappear. As the clock ticks toward noon, Kane finds himself alone. Amy, torn between her pacifist beliefs and her love for Will, boards the train to leave — but jumps off when she hears gunshots. The final showdown pits Kane against Miller and his gang in the empty streets. Amy saves Will’s life by shooting one of the outlaws (in the back), and Kane kills Miller. When the townspeople gather afterward, Kane throws his badge in the dirt and rides away without a word.

So, is this movie any good? How’s the acting? The filming / FX? Any problems? And, did I enjoy the film? Short answers: Yes; excellent; clean, tense filming; a few; absolutely.

Any good? Yes. “High Noon” is one of those rare westerns that feels both classic and surprisingly contemporary. The tension comes not from big shootouts but from watching a man realize the people he trusted won’t stand with him. The real‑time pacing works — the clock becomes a character. The story is simple, but the moral weight is heavy: duty versus self‑preservation, community versus convenience. It’s not a big, sweeping western. It’s a tight, focused one, and that’s why it still works seventy-plus years later.

Acting: Gary Cooper earned his Oscar. He plays Kane as a man who’s scared but determined, and the quiet moments (the pauses, the glances, the frustration) sell the character. Grace Kelly is fine, though her role is mostly reactive until the final act. Katy Jurado is the standout: calm, smart, and the emotional anchor of the film. Lloyd Bridges brings believable insecurity to Harvey Pell, and the supporting cast (the mayor, the judge, the townspeople) all feel like real people trying to justify their own fear. Nobody is doing flashy acting here, but everyone fits the story.

Filming / FX: The filming is clean and deliberate. Zinnemann uses close‑ups, empty streets, and the ticking clock to build tension. The black‑and‑white cinematography gives the town a stark, almost brittle feel — like everything could crack under pressure. The editing (which won the Oscar) keeps the pacing tight. There are no “effects” in the modern sense, but the staging of the final shootout is crisp and easy to follow. The score, especially the recurring theme song, ties the whole film together and reinforces the sense of time running out.

Problems: A few. The townspeople’s cowardice is laid on pretty thick, and some scenes (particularly the church debate) feel a bit preachy. Amy’s pacifism is underdeveloped until the very end, which makes her final decision feel abrupt. The film’s political allegory (if you read it that way) can feel heavy‑handed. And the romance between Kane and Amy never quite feels lived‑in — aside from the age difference, they seem like two people who met last week. None of these issues ruin the film, but they do make some moments feel a little stiff.

Did I enjoy the film? Absolutely. “High Noon” is tense, thoughtful, and surprisingly emotional. The real‑time structure keeps you engaged, and Cooper’s performance carries the film. The final showdown still works, and the ending (Kane tossing the badge in the dirt) remains one of the great closing gestures in westerns (anyone else remember Clint Eastwood / Dirty Harry throwing his badge into a pond at the end of the original “Dirty Harry“? LoL). It’s a movie that sticks with you because it’s not really about gunfights. It’s about courage, loneliness, and what people do when doing the right thing is inconvenient.

Final Recommendation: Very Highly to MUST See Recommendation. “High Noon” is historically significant for its Academy Awards, its influence on the western genre, and its moral complexity. It’s a tight, well‑acted film that still feels relevant today. If you enjoy classic westerns, character‑driven stories, or films that build tension without relying on spectacle, this one is a MUST see. It’s a reminder that sometimes the bravest thing you can do is stand your ground — especially when nobody stands with you.

.
Click here (27 May) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Frankly My Dear, I Don’t Give A Damn

Posted in Faith Family and Friends, Family and Friends, General Comments, History, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged American Civil War, Best Actress (Leigh), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography (Color), Best Director (Fleming), Best Editing, Best Picture Oscar, Best Screenplay Oscar, Best Supporting Actress (McDaniel), Butterfly McQueen, Citizen Kane, Clark Gable, Family, General Comments, George Cukor, Gerald O’Hara, Gone With The Wind (1939) — movie review, GWTW, Hattie McDaniel, History, Leslie Howard, Mammy, Margaret Mitchell, Max Steiner, Melanie Hamilton, Movie Reviews, Old South, Olivia de Havilland, Post-Civil War Reconstruction Period, Prissy, Reviews, Rhett Butler, Sam Wood, Scarlett O’Hara, Selznick International Pictures, Tara Plantation, Tara’s Theme, Technicolor, Thomas Mitchell, Very High to MUST See movie recommendation, Victor Fleming, Vivien Leigh on January 12, 2026| 2 Comments »

“Gone With The Wind” (1939) — movie review
Today’s review is for the sweeping historical romance “Gone With The Wind” (1939), directed by Victor Fleming (with uncredited contributions by George Cukor and Sam Wood). The film stars Vivien Leigh as Scarlett O’Hara — the indomitable, manipulative, and endlessly compelling Southern belle whose willpower outlasts empires; Clark Gable as Rhett Butler — the rakish blockade runner whose charm masks a bruised idealism; Olivia de Havilland as Melanie Hamilton — the moral center of the story, all grace and quiet strength; and Leslie Howard as Ashley Wilkes — the gentleman dreamer forever caught between honor and desire. Rounding out the ensemble are Hattie McDaniel as Mammy (whose performance earned her the first Academy Award ever won by an African American actor), Butterfly McQueen as Prissy, and Thomas Mitchell as Gerald O’Hara. With its Technicolor grandeur, iconic score by Max Steiner, and monumental production scale, the film remains one of the most famous — and controversial — epics in cinema history.

Background: I came to “Gone With The Wind” with a very mixed attitude. This was a film which I had avoided for much of my life. The film (DVD) was a combined gift (with “Citizen Kane“) from my daughter who I fell into a conversation with about famous movies I’d never seen. She watched “GWTW” in one of her high school history or social studies classes. I’d never watched it for a number of reasons – the two main reasons were I wasn’t much interested in films “before my time”, particularly pre-1900 settings, and I’d heard it was a “Southern” viewpoint of the Civil War. Although born in Missouri, I was raised almost exclusively in San Francisco, California and I considered (was taught) “Southerners” to be traitors to the Constitution and to the country. Needless to say, I was not predisposed to entertain a positive “Southern” representation of either slavery or of the “Lost Cause”. Anyway, I watched (sat through) the film years ago and was not particularly impressed – but I was looking at it through different eyes…

Released in 1939, which is sometimes cited as Hollywood’s greatest single year, “Gone With The Wind” was a colossal production for Selznick International Pictures. Adapted from Margaret Mitchell’s Pulitzer Prize–winning novel, the film cost nearly $4 million — astronomical for its time — and became one of the highest-grossing films in history when adjusted for inflation. At the 12th Academy Awards, it won eight competitive Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Director (Fleming), Best Actress (Leigh), Best Supporting Actress (McDaniel), Best Screenplay, Best Cinematography (Color), Best Art Direction, and Best Editing, plus two honorary awards. Its historical significance is undeniable: it marked a turning point in Technicolor film-making, set new standards for epic storytelling, and remains a cultural touchstone — albeit one whose romanticized depiction of the (racist) antebellum South continues to spark debate.

Plot: Set against the backdrop of the American Civil War and Reconstruction, the film follows Scarlett O’Hara, the headstrong daughter of a wealthy plantation owner. Obsessed with Ashley Wilkes — who marries the gentle Melanie Hamilton — Scarlett’s jealousy and ambition drive her into a series of marriages, manipulations, and desperate survival strategies. As war ravages the South, Scarlett claws her way through starvation, loss, and ruin, determined to preserve her family’s plantation, Tara. Meanwhile, Rhett Butler enters her life as both foil and partner, matching her wit for wit and flaw for flaw. Their tempestuous relationship becomes the film’s emotional core, culminating in heartbreak, disillusionment, and the famous final line that has echoed through cinematic history. The narrative spans years, weaving personal drama with national catastrophe, and ultimately leaves Scarlett alone — but unbroken.

So, is this movie any good? How’s the acting? The filming / FX? Any problems? And, did I enjoy the film? Short answers: Yes; exceptional; visually stunning; several; yes.

Any Good? Yes. “Gone With The Wind” is a monumental achievement in classical Hollywood film-making. It balances intimate character drama with sweeping historical spectacle, and despite its length (nearly four hours), the narrative rarely drags. The film’s emotional beats — love, loss, pride, survival — still resonate. Yet it is also a film that must be viewed with historical awareness: its overly romanticized portrayal of the Old South and its depiction of enslaved characters reflect the prejudices of its era (the 1860s AND the 1930s). As cinema, it is extraordinary; as history, it is complicated.

Acting: Vivien Leigh delivers one of the most iconic performances in film history. Her Scarlett is fierce, flawed, magnetic, and utterly alive — a character who dominates every frame. Clark Gable’s Rhett Butler is equally compelling, blending swagger with vulnerability. Their chemistry is electric, even when the characters are at their most destructive. Olivia de Havilland brings warmth and dignity to Melanie, grounding the film’s moral axis. Leslie Howard, though miscast by his own admission, still conveys Ashley’s gentility and inner conflict. Hattie McDaniel’s Mammy is a standout — sharp, commanding, and emotionally rich — and her Oscar win remains a landmark moment in Hollywood history.

Filming / FX: The film is visually breathtaking. Shot in three-strip Technicolor, it remains one of the most beautiful color films ever made. The burning of Atlanta sequence is legendary — a massive practical set piece that still impresses. The production design captures both the opulence of plantation life and the devastation of war. Max Steiner’s score is lush and unforgettable, particularly the “Tara’s Theme” motif. The editing and pacing are remarkably controlled for such a sprawling narrative. While some matte paintings and rear-projection shots show their age, the overall craftsmanship is astonishing for 1939.

Problems: Several. The film’s portrayal of slavery and the antebellum South is deeply sanitized, perpetuating Lost Cause mythology and minimizing the brutality of the institution. The enslaved characters are written within the stereotypes of the era, which can be uncomfortable or offensive to modern viewers. The romanticization of plantation life is historically inaccurate and ideologically fraught. Additionally, the film’s length may challenge contemporary audiences, and some melodramatic elements feel dated. Still, these issues are part of the film’s legacy and must be acknowledged when evaluating its place in cinematic history.

Did I Enjoy the Film? Yes. As with many epics, “Gone With The Wind” demands reflection. Its emotional arcs, performances, and visual splendor remain powerful. The film is both a product of its time (late 1930s) and a towering achievement of classical Hollywood. Watching it today requires a dual lens — appreciating its artistry while recognizing its historical blind spots (mainly the overt racism of slavery). But as a cinematic experience, it remains compelling, immersive, and memorable.

Final Recommendation: Very High to MUST See recommendation — with context. “Gone With The Wind” is essential viewing for anyone interested in film history, epic storytelling, or the evolution of Hollywood craftsmanship. Its eight Academy Awards, groundbreaking Technicolor cinematography, and iconic performances secure its place among the most influential films ever made. At the same time, its overly romanticized depiction of the Old South demands critical engagement / comment. Approach it as both art and artifact — a masterpiece of film-making and a reminder of the narratives America once embraced. It is well worth your viewing time.

.
Click here (12 January) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.