It's a Wonderful Life (1946)

[Wiendish Fitch]

This year marks the 75th anniversary of one of the most popular Christmas movies ever made, and certainly one of the most referenced and parodied. While I've grown disillusioned with It's a Wonderful Life, most people still love it and I thought I'd make a topic so that those on opposite sides of the fence can discuss (I don't think there's a topic on it, anyway). If there are disagreements, let's be more Clarence the Angel and less Mr. Potter (fun a villain as he is).

[Spartan Girl]

Wow 75 years!

@Wiendish Fitch you aren’t alone, I’ve never liked this movie all that much. But James Stewart was such a gem, both on screen and real life.

[Morrigan2575]

It always surprises me that this was a financial and critical bomb when first released because it's such a staple of my childhood Christmas. I even remember when Ted Turner colorized it and TV made such a big deal about seeing it in color for the first time!  I'm glad that ended quick and we went back to B&W.

It's a good Christmas movie, maybe it's a little corny but, I think George's journey and realization regarding his life is still very poignant.

Plus I love the SNL lost ending (from the 80/90s) 😁 

 

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Morrigan2575

[Wildcard]

I've waffled between loving the movie, liking the movie, and trying to avoid it at all costs.

However, the Onion's review of the movie made me watch it in a different perspective.

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Wildcard

[mariah23]

75 years?!!  This the second time today I realized how old something was!  First my best friend’s son is nine today!  Where has the time gone?!

[AimingforYoko]

My two biggest beefs with this movie is that anyone would find Donna Reed unattractive in any circumstance and that George didn't kick Billy's ass until his leg got tired.

[Wiendish Fitch]

6 minutes ago, AimingforYoko said:

My two biggest beefs with this movie is that anyone would find Donna Reed unattractive in any circumstance and that George didn't kick Billy's ass until his leg got tired.

I hated Uncle Billy, he was a millstone around George's neck (well, pretty much everyone was, but that's beside the point).

 

[Bastet]

As I said in the TCM thread, I dislike the film because I hate the If he'd never been born act and the ending.

The sexism of Mary's Pottersville life being miserable is appalling (she's living on her own in the city and working in a library, all dowdy and bespectacled - the horror!), but the whole thing is ridiculous.  George is so vital that if he hadn't come along, everyone in Bedford Falls have wound up miserable?  Even accepting that, so what?  Why is their unhappiness so much more important than his, so that his life that's been a series of sacrifices and disappointments isn't painfully unfulfilling, it's actually wonderful because all those things he had to give up made all these people's (few of whom properly appreciated his sacrifice) lives wonderful?

Saying it's nice to help others is one thing, but this absolutely fetishizes an unhealthy degree of self sacrifice.

The ending I hate for how simplistic it is.  George was suicidal due to a lifetime of disappointment and resentment.  But, apparently, now that he won't be carted off to prison (because Potter is just going let it go once the money is back?), all his problems are over.  And this town he's so utterly stuck in, this life that bore no resemblance to what he'd wanted for himself, is actually where he's always been meant to be.

Terrific performances, but not a film I can sit through because its message ticks me off.

[starri]

9 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

It always surprises me that this was a financial and critical bomb when first released because it's such a staple of my childhood Christmas

There's a weird issue with copyright that actually kept it being from as readily available until the 80s.  As bizarre as this is to sound, people were more familiar with the gender-flipped remake It Happened One Christmas--which had Orson Welles in his "I will do anything you want, just pay me" phase of the end of his life as Mr. Potter--that ran originally in 1977 and then again for the next two years.

[Ohiopirate02]

2 hours ago, Bastet said:

 

The sexism of Mary's Pottersville life being miserable is appalling (she's living on her own in the city and working in a library, all dowdy and bespectacled - the horror!)

As a semi-bespectacled spinster librarian, I hate the idea that my life is the worst possible fate for Mary is George had never been born.  This also makes zero sense after seeing a young Mary fighting off suitors at the dance. 

Apparently the original fate of Mary was being married to an unfaithful Sam, but test audiences did not like Mary being with any man but George.  I have no idea why Frank Capra listened to them and changed the script.  If this is really the darkest timeline, then Mary should have been married to some other lesser man.  If not an unfaithful Sam, then some abusive drunk would have worked.

[scarynikki12]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Apparently the original fate of Mary was being married to an unfaithful Sam, but test audiences did not like Mary being with any man but George.  I have no idea why Frank Capra listened to them and changed the script.  If this is really the darkest timeline, then Mary should have been married to some other lesser man.  If not an unfaithful Sam, then some abusive drunk would have worked.

A test audience can provide a filmmaker with a point of view they hadn't considered and make changes for the better but this is definitely a situation where he should have stuck with the original plan. George begs Clarence to let him live again so it's not like the characters were committed to the alternative timeline. It was an opportunity to go as dark as possible (within Hays Code parameters of course) and Capra should have embraced it.

My issue with this movie has always been that it's framed as George should be grateful for a life where he sacrificed for everyone else. I wish it had been more that he tends to not notice how loved and appreciated he is and Clarence helps open his eyes to that with the final scene being actual proof. 

The final scene, absent the alternate timeline, is genuinely great. I love that all Mary had to do was tell people that George was in trouble and they didn't hesitate in their rush to help. No one needed any qualifiers beyond that he needed money. We see all the faces from earlier in the movie, including Mr. Two Hundred And Forty Two Dollars who shows up with money, a smile, and joking about if there's another run on the bank. The bank examiner throws in a couple bucks while the, I assume, district attorney tears up the arrest warrant with a smile so we know everything will be ok. Even though Potter owns the bank this is likely the end of his power in town. The wonderful, old, drafty house is filled with people who love and support George and it's the first time he's able to really see that. That should have been the point rather than the idea that sacrificing everything for everyone else is good and wanting anything for yourself is bad.

Uncle Billy is a tricky point for me because he absolutely never should have been entrusted with the money but the alternate timeline also made clear that he was sent to an insane asylum shortly after his brother died. George keeping him involved with the business kept him from ending up in a hellhole which is a good thing. Just like I've come to believe that George took some of the money Sam offered and went on a trip with Mary I've also decided that, going forward, George hires Uncle Billy an assistant to avoid further errors. That way he can keep giving Uncle Billy some responsibilities and have someone along to make sure things go smoothly. 

[SeanC]

6 hours ago, Bastet said:

The sexism of Mary's Pottersville life being miserable is appalling (she's living on her own in the city and working in a library, all dowdy and bespectacled - the horror!), but the whole thing is ridiculous.  George is so vital that if he hadn't come along, everyone in Bedford Falls have wound up miserable?  Even accepting that, so what?  Why is their unhappiness so much more important than his, so that his life that's been a series of sacrifices and disappointments isn't painfully unfulfilling, it's actually wonderful because all those things he had to give up made all these people's (few of whom properly appreciated his sacrifice) lives wonderful?

The needs of the many, and all that; he's literally keeping people out of slums.  The world has always depended on civic-minded people putting the common good first.

Also, for the most part George was already reasonably happy with his life -- he had a great family and lots of friends, and when we see him, e.g., giving the family their new house, he's enjoying himself.  He gets periodic reminders of things he'd once wanted to do and feels disappointed, which is natural, but it's only when the whole edifice seems to be crashing down that he starts spiralling.

[Blergh]

On 11/12/2021 at 8:01 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

As a semi-bespectacled spinster librarian, I hate the idea that my life is the worst possible fate for Mary is George had never been born.  This also makes zero sense after seeing a young Mary fighting off suitors at the dance. 

Apparently the original fate of Mary was being married to an unfaithful Sam, but test audiences did not like Mary being with any man but George.  I have no idea why Frank Capra listened to them and changed the script.  If this is really the darkest timeline, then Mary should have been married to some other lesser man.  If not an unfaithful Sam, then some abusive drunk would have worked.

Considering how her own mother was practically trying to force Mary into marrying the well-heeled heel Sam so SHE could get on easy street but ONLY because Mary had found George and loved HIM was she able to find the guts to stand up to her greedy female DNA Donor and live the life she herself wanted, I think the most likely alternate timeline would have been that she'd have been the abused wife of Sam and  herfemale DNA Donor would have been heaping tons of guilt to have her STAY a sitting duck to Sam's abuse just so the older woman could stay nice and comfie- regardless of how much Sam abused Mary. 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Blergh

[Suzn]

I don't know that I have a point to make that hasn't been made, but I've never understand why this movie is beloved by so many.  It's hard to see how one person could be responsible for the welfare of an entire town of people, on an individual level and the economy of the town.  So the fates decide that George cannot fulfill his dreams, but he is the key factor in the success and happiness of everyone around him. That degree of sacrifice is ridiculous.

Why was Uncle Billy given any important responsibility?

Why would Mary not marry someone else?  If the alternate version was for her to marry Sam, that would have been more likely at least.  But if she chose to remain single, why would that make her homely?  I know there is a whole disgusting trope that any woman not chosen by a man turns unattractive.

It ends that George knows he is loved and appreciated, but he gets none of his dreams fulfilled.  He can go on sacrificing his own wishes.

[Wiendish Fitch]

4 minutes ago, Suzn said:

It ends that George knows he is loved and appreciated, but he gets none of his dreams fulfilled.  He can go on sacrificing his own wishes.

Or he can become drunk with power with the knowledge that everyone's lives would suck without him, uses it to lord over people, and basically becomes Potter 2.0.

Damn, I do spend too much time on the internet if I'm trying to spin everything into a dark villain origin story...

[starri]

36 minutes ago, Suzn said:

I don't know that I have a point to make that hasn't been made, but I've never understand why this movie is beloved by so many. 

Aside from a lot of it being inertia at this point, I think it helps to look at the environment in which it was made.  Capra's most prolific period was a little more than a decade, in between It Happened One Night and this.  In there, you've also got Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, You Can't Take It With You, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.  Stories about how a little guy can make a difference, whether on the macro level, like Jefferson Smith, or the micro, like George Bailey had to have been very appealing to a country who had been through the double whammy of the Depression and WWII.

And then add to the movie really hitting its stride of being played on every single network in the 80s, when the common refrain was that the world was a terrible, dangerous place, and Capra's worlds where the good guys prevailed had to speak to people.

[magicdog]

On 11/12/2021 at 5:34 AM, Wildcard said:

However, the Onion's review of the movie made me watch it in a different perspective.

I think we may have a new slang phrase:  "Uncle Billy Bullshit"!!

I enjoy the film and it's ultimate message (that a man can make a positive difference in his little world) is still a good one.  It always bugged me that we never got to see Potter get his comeuppance (the SNL skit notwithstanding).  I recall reading he was supposed to drop dead, but Capra had to cut it for time.  Unusual given The Code at the time.

13 hours ago, Blergh said:

Considering how her own mother was practically trying to force Mary into marrying the well-heeled heel Sam so SHE could get on easy street but ONLY because Mary had found George and loved HIM was she able to find the guts to stand up to her greedy female DNA Donor and live the life she herself wanted, I think the most likely alternate timeline would have been that she'd have been the abused wife of Sam and female DNA Donor would be heaping tons of guilt to have her STAY a sitting duck to Sam's abuse just so the older woman could stay nice and comfie regardless of how much Sam abused Mary. 

I agree with this.  It would make sense for Mary to have married Sam Wainright if George hadn't been there.  He was pursuing her and her mother obviously preferred him over George at the time.  Believe it or not, I can imagine her giving the speech Tracy got in The Philadelphia Story!!  Essentially saying you're asking too much for your husband to be faithful to you, and the money makes it all OK.

[SomeTameGazelle]

2 hours ago, Suzn said:

But if she chose to remain single, why would that make her homely?  I know there is a whole disgusting trope that any woman not chosen by a man turns unattractive.

It's possible that Mary would have deliberately not bothered to make herself attractive if her experience had been that looking nice only caused creeps and losers to pay attention to her. And if she was pinching pennies she might not have wanted to spend money on clothes.

 

23 hours ago, starri said:

There's a weird issue with copyright that actually kept it being from as readily available until the 80s. 

It was sort of the opposite -- it came into the public domain earlier than it should have (1974, according to this writeup) so even though it had not been in demand before then, it was cheap for TV stations to broadcast and it became a beloved tradition through familiarity.

[starri]

2 minutes ago, SomeTameGazelle said:

It was sort of the opposite -- it came into the public domain earlier than it should have (1974, according to this writeup) so even though it had not been in demand before then, it was cheap for TV stations to broadcast and it became a beloved tradition through familiarity.

No, the film negatives and images were public domain.  The story was still under copyright through some convoluted thing.

[SomeTameGazelle]

6 minutes ago, starri said:

No, the film negatives and images were public domain.  The story was still under copyright through some convoluted thing.

The BBC item I linked addressed that aspect -- the decision that the story was protected came later and Republic Pictures regained the rights in 1993. However it was the gap between 1974 when the film was considered to have entered the public domain and 1993 when the rights were locked down again that created the modern popularity.

Edited November 13, 2021 by SomeTameGazelle

[supposebly]

I've never seen this movie but I'm amused every year at the vitriol this movie (and A Christmas Story, which I do remember from childhood) generates both here and back on TWOP. It sounds overall rather appalling. I'm still not sure of the plot but what I gathered over the years: George is miserable to the point of suicide because the town takes advantage of him/takes him for granted. There is a part where he sees what would happen to the town (and a spinster librarian) if he wasn't there. And the moral of the story is that it would be worse if he wasn't there? He should be grateful and appreciative. Don't tell me if I'm right, it's fun for me to speculate. Not enough to watch it.

 

[Constant Viewer]

On 11/12/2021 at 9:22 PM, scarynikki12 said:

The final scene, absent the alternate timeline, is genuinely great. I love that all Mary had to do was tell people that George was in trouble and they didn't hesitate in their rush to help. No one needed any qualifiers beyond that he needed money. We see all the faces from earlier in the movie, including Mr. Two Hundred And Forty Two Dollars who shows up with money, a smile, and joking about if there's another run on the bank. The bank examiner throws in a couple bucks while the, I assume, district attorney tears up the arrest warrant with a smile so we know everything will be ok. Even though Potter owns the bank this is likely the end of his power in town. The wonderful, old, drafty house is filled with people who love and support George and it's the first time he's able to really see that. That should have been the point rather than the idea that sacrificing everything for everyone else is good and wanting anything for yourself is bad.

Honestly I've always felt one of the points was that you never know how much you mean to other people or how appreciated you are until something like what happens to George occurs. Yes the whole Pottersville alternate universe is over the top, but I get that the intention was to show how one person can affect or have an impact on so many others. Perhaps they felt they had to make George the super sacrificing type to make that point. The last scene is one of my favorites and I always assumed George and Mary eventually went on a trip with all the extra money.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Constant Viewer

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, Constant Viewer said:

I always assumed George and Mary eventually went on a trip with all the extra money.

I'd have still had issues, but the movie would have been better with a final scene of the two of them on a ship headed overseas, finally at least fulfilling the travel prong of his myriad dashed dreams.  I don't want to have to assume; I want to know this poor guy got to do at least one of the desires he'd repeatedly had to give up.

9 hours ago, Suzn said:

That degree of sacrifice is ridiculous.

Yes, that's it for me - it's the degree that means I can't accept this film as an ode to putting the community over the individual (a philosophy I am generally in favor of, but generally is a key word; it's not healthy for any given person to always sacrifice, but, as I said, this film fetishizes it - for George, at least, since I note no one else was expected to follow suit).

[Spartan Girl]

9 hours ago, Constant Viewer said:

The last scene is one of my favorites and I always assumed George and Mary eventually went on a trip with all the extra money

I would have liked that if the ending had also involved the police figuring out that Porter was the one that stole the money. I’m not saying it would have had to be like the town going after Porter in SNL lost ending (which I love to this day), but any kind of that closure and comeuppance would have salvaged the movie for me.

[raven]

I guess I look at this differently then some people.  With the possible exception of George taking over the Building & Loan when his father dies, each instance of George making the choice between leaving and staying  - he stays willingly, sometimes happily.  As I said, when his father dies, the B&L board say they will dissolve unless George takes over, so he stays - he is literally on his way out the door, so this (to me) is the time that he's shown feeling the most pressure.    When his brother returns from war, the brother is ready & willing to take over - because the fiancee lets it drop that her father wants the brother to work for him, George decides to stay.  

George can't stand Potter, so when Mary offers up the honeymoon money, he jumps at the chance to keep the B&L going and keep everyone away from Potter's bank.   I don't think Mary would have offered it up if it weren't obvious that George was trying desperately to prevent a run on the B&L.  They are literally dancing around when they can close for the day with money in the safe.

The point to me is not self-sacrifice - it is choice.   When George is at his lowest point, after Potter steals the money (and though Billy is negligent, Potter is a thief who knew what he was doing); George believes that his life has been a series of wrong/bad choices.  He's not regretting not traveling - he's got the weight of the town on his shoulders and he believes everything he built was for nothing, that it was all going to come to ruin.  What he doesn't realize is that everyone in town, even those he hasn't helped (Sam, the guy who came to arrest him) believe in him implicitly and want to help him.   He doesn't have to have the weight of the town on his shoulders - he just needs some hope.

Though I don't think it was Capra's point, it's actually a good anti-suicide message - by holding on one more night (with the help of Clarence), George sees that his impulsive decision to jump would have been the wrong one.  Now maybe Clarence embellished things a bit but some facts can't be challenged, assuming things played out the same way, George's brother would have died without George; the pharmacist would have poisoned a child.    George needs to see that his choices have not led to ruin and that his life was worth living; he needs that hope and belief and it's restored, even before everyone rushes in to help him.

I really like Mary - she knows what she wants and gets some good shots "he's making violent love to me, Mother" and "who cares??" (about Sam) are well placed.  My friends and I though are endlessly entertained by "She's just about to close up the LIBRARY!!!!" - a fate worse than death, complete with dowdy clothes and glasses, lol.    I guess if you get married you don't need glasses? 

I don't think Mary would have married Sam - she didn't seem that interested in him - but I am confident she would have had a good life and that if she became a librarian who never married, she would have been perfectly content.  So I'm going with Clarence embellishing :)

Woof, that was a lot!  Obviously I enjoy the movie - it has a lot of fun parts, unintentionally funny parts and a good message for me.

[Browncoat]

23 minutes ago, raven said:

Though I don't think it was Capra's point, it's actually a good anti-suicide message -

I'm not sure I agree.  Most of us haven't saved our brother, or prevented the pharmacist from poisoning someone.  I frequently suffer bouts of clinical depression, and this movie just makes it worse.  What would the world be like if I'd never been born?  I can't see that I've made so much of a difference that it would matter.  I honestly can't watch the movie at all because it sends me into a spiral.

[nilyank]

The only reason that George was suicidal was because he felt he was out of options in getting of the mess with the missing money.  He tried to get Uncle Billy to remember where he lost the money. He tried to reach out to Sam but was unable to at that time. He didn't believe that any of his friends would have that kind of money. So, he swallows his pride and goes to Potter begging for a loan to cover the missing money and he puts up his life insurance up for collateral. Potter knowing he has the money twists the knife and tells George that he calling the authorities on him and that George is better off dead than alive (insurance policy). George still doesn't head to kill himself but instead goes to  Martini's to get a drink and runs into the one person besides Potter who doesn't like him for the moment.

It is after that he head to the bridge as George believes there is no way out to save himself, Uncle Billy and yes the old Building and Loan.

What George should have done was tell Mary what had happened. Because she literally saved the day. But then no Clarence, or what ifs.

As for Potterville in Clarence's what if, no George means the Building and Loan is taken over by Potter when his dad dies. As show with the introduction of Martini, George built affordable, decent housing for the people of Bedford Falls rather than the cheap slums that Potter had going. Although George doesn't go work with Sam and become ridiculously weathy, he does encourage Sam to purchase the closed factory in Bedford Fall that he can obtain to build his plastics which in turn bring good job opportunities for the people of Bedford Falls.

George was in a low point at the crux of the film and he didn't see how his sacrifices and choices meant anything in the final scheme of things. However I will agree with the poster above that for the most part George had a happy and yes wonderful life. Except for staying to run theer Building & Loan after his father died, he gave up the chance at building things, travelling and exploring outside of Bedford Falls for his family. He chooses Mary and the life that they will build together and he gives his younger brother a chance outside of Bedford Falls (college tuition and taking job with father in law).

Yes, he didn't have the flashiest car, the biggest house or frequent trips out of town (which he could have had when Potter offered him that job). He had Mary, their children, a town full of people that loved him and would help him no questions asked, and the knowledge that he was not insignificant and what he had done with his life has mattered.

I have seen this film so many times and if it comes on my screen, I always get sucked back into watching it. Jimmy Stewart is wonderful throughout the film and I always tear up on the last line of the film.

 

[Blergh]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

I would have liked that if the ending had also involved the police figuring out that Porter was the one that stole the money. I’m not saying it would have had to be like the town going after Porter in SNL lost ending (which I love to this day), but any kind of that closure and comeuppance would have salvaged the movie for me.

I would have liked it had the wheelchair pusher piped up that he only stayed with Potter long enough to keep from getting drafted in the recently ended WWII  but he was squealing over Potter's theft  because he wanted to do ONE good deed before he left Bedford Falls forever! 

[starri]

1 hour ago, nilyank said:

What George should have done was tell Mary what had happened. Because she literally saved the day.

This right here.

George is the hero of Bedford Falls, but Mary is the hero of the movie.  And frankly, I think that kind of thing is ahead of its time for 1946.

[Suzn]

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

I would have liked that if the ending had also involved the police figuring out that Porter was the one that stole the money. I’m not saying it would have had to be like the town going after Porter in SNL lost ending (which I love to this day), but any kind of that closure and comeuppance would have salvaged the movie for me.

That really should have happened.  It would have made a huge difference to the outcome.  Potter will go on taking advantage and dragging down those he can.

14 hours ago, Bastet said:

I'd have still had issues, but the movie would have been better with a final scene of the two of them on a ship headed overseas, finally at least fulfilling the travel prong of his myriad dashed dreams.  I don't want to have to assume; I want to know this poor guy got to do at least one of the desires he'd repeatedly had to give up.

Yes, that's it for me - it's the degree that means I can't accept this film as an ode to putting the community over the individual (a philosophy I am generally in favor of, but generally is a key word; it's not healthy for any given person to always sacrifice, but, as I said, this film fetishizes it - for George, at least, since I note no one else was expected to follow suit).

Exactly!  Sacrifice is right and good in some cases, but there should be balance with others sacrificing at the appropriate times.

 

Added:  I found the movie on Prime and was watching to refresh my memory.  The scene in the bar after the angel made George not be born.  So since George had not been born all the bar patrons and owner were now cruel assholes.  Apparently, George's existence transformed them into everything sweetness and light.

Edited November 14, 2021 by Suzn

[raven]

7 hours ago, Browncoat said:

I'm not sure I agree.  Most of us haven't saved our brother, or prevented the pharmacist from poisoning someone.  I frequently suffer bouts of clinical depression, and this movie just makes it worse.  What would the world be like if I'd never been born?  I can't see that I've made so much of a difference that it would matter.  I honestly can't watch the movie at all because it sends me into a spiral.

I was thinking more along the lines of "give it another day" then what the catalysts were for George giving it another day.   Regardless, it was an insensitive point for me to make. 

I apologize; my intention was not to make light of real life struggles and by using fiction as an equivalence to them, that is what I did. 

[Anela]

8 hours ago, Suzn said:

That really should have happened.  It would have made a huge difference to the outcome.  Potter will go on taking advantage and dragging down those he can.

Exactly!  Sacrifice is right and good in some cases, but there should be balance with others sacrificing at the appropriate times.

 

Added:  I found the movie on Prime and was watching to refresh my memory.  The scene in the bar after the angel made George not be born.  So since George had not been born all the bar patrons and owner were now cruel assholes.  Apparently, George's existence transformed them into everything sweetness and light.

I thought it was more that they were all miserable, living in a town that Potter ruled. It's always bugged my dad, that Potter wasn't shown getting caught with the money, that he got away with it. 

I have been suicidal, but I used to love to watch it every year. I can't remember when I started, but we moved here, when 90210 started, and I remember the one character watching it on Christmas Eve. NBC started playing it every year, and after a while, we started to watch it. It depends on what's happening in my own world, as to whether or not I watch it now, but I've always loved Clarence, and I think the two main actors are cute together. I grew up in a few areas where neighbours were that close. It's something I haven't experienced since I was eighteen, when we moved to the Midwest, funnily enough. People who have been here forever, are close. I had that mostly in England,

[Brn2bwild]

After reading this thread, I decided to watch this movie again.  It really holds up well... but what strikes me is how "short" it is at just over two hours long.  I'm so used to watching it on network TV with 5,000 adds bloating the length to 3 hours that I thought it was at least 2.5 hours long (which would put it in the company of standard Oscar fare and most Marvel movies).

[JustHereForFood]

I watched it few years ago, since I knew that it's a Christmas classic in English speaking countries and I was curious what you guys are watching. It was ok, but I was probably underwhelmed because I have seen many variations on the story before, that were inspired by this movie (the first one being the finale of Dallas when I was very little, that impressed me). That's the problem with some older works, you kind of become aware of them through Pop-Cultural Osmosis before actually watching/reading them and then they might leave you unimpressed. I had the same experience with Romeo and Juliet.

[Ohiopirate02]

14 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

I watched it few years ago, since I knew that it's a Christmas classic in English speaking countries and I was curious what you guys are watching. It was ok, but I was probably underwhelmed because I have seen many variations on the story before, that were inspired by this movie (the first one being the finale of Dallas when I was very little, that impressed me). That's the problem with some older works, you kind of become aware of them through Pop-Cultural Osmosis before actually watching/reading them and then they might leave you unimpressed. I had the same experience with Romeo and Juliet.

I had that same problem after the first time I saw It Happened One Night.  I grew up watching Mel Brooks movies and Spaceballs which is Star Wars meets It Happened One Night.  I had to go back and rewatch it to see the brilliance of the original.  

I had the same experience with Casablanca until I realized Casablanca is not some achingly romantic war story but a black comedy with a strong political statement.  Rick and Ilsa bore me. Give me Claude Rains's Louis any day.  

[Wiendish Fitch]

On 11/14/2021 at 12:19 AM, Bastet said:

I'd have still had issues, but the movie would have been better with a final scene of the two of them on a ship headed overseas, finally at least fulfilling the travel prong of his myriad dashed dreams.  I don't want to have to assume; I want to know this poor guy got to do at least one of the desires he'd repeatedly had to give up.

Yes, that's it for me - it's the degree that means I can't accept this film as an ode to putting the community over the individual (a philosophy I am generally in favor of, but generally is a key word; it's not healthy for any given person to always sacrifice, but, as I said, this film fetishizes it - for George, at least, since I note no one else was expected to follow suit).

Same. Let me be clear, I do not endorse the Ayn Rand-ian school of thought that selfishness is a virtue, the naked pursuit of self-interest, yada yada yada, because I think it does way more harm than good. 

That doesn't mean the opposite extreme is any better.

Hell, if anything, the level of self-abnegation that It's a Wonderful Life seems to endorse practically paves the way for the former line of thinking! It's important to put others first within reason, yes, but that doesn't mean you're not allowed to think about you, or say no, or set boundaries. Maybe I'm wrong, but I truly believe that your happiness matters just as much as the next person's. Not more, but certainly not less. Self-martyrdom is just as unattractive as narcissism.

That's what rubs me the wrong way about It's a Wonderful Life: only George is expected to give of himself and sacrifice, but everyone else can just demand, mooch, and take for granted that he'll always save the day. 

[Ohiopirate02]

45 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Same. Let me be clear, I do not endorse the Ayn Rand-ian school of thought that selfishness is a virtue, the naked pursuit of self-interest, yada yada yada, because I think it does way more harm than good. 

That doesn't mean the opposite extreme is any better.

Hell, if anything, the level of self-abnegation that It's a Wonderful Life seems to endorse practically paves the way for the former line of thinking! It's important to put others first within reason, yes, but that doesn't mean you're not allowed to think about you, or say no, or set boundaries. Maybe I'm wrong, but I truly believe that your happiness matters just as much as the next person's. Not more, but certainly not less. Self-martyrdom is just as unattractive as narcissism.

That's what rubs me the wrong way about It's a Wonderful Life: only George is expected to give of himself and sacrifice, but everyone else can just demand, mooch, and take for granted that he'll always save the day. 

Yep.  The town rallies together to save George,  but they do not learn anything from this (except, hopefully, never give Uncle Billy any responsibility).  They have not changed, only George.  And a cynical part of me believes the town only helps George this one time in order for him to be there to bail them out in the future.  

[Captain Carrot]

The horror of Mary as a librarian makes more sense if you realize that Capra spent a number of years in Pawnee Indiana, which has always had a negative opinion on the profession.

[Brn2bwild]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Yep.  The town rallies together to save George,  but they do not learn anything from this (except, hopefully, never give Uncle Billy any responsibility).  They have not changed, only George.  And a cynical part of me believes the town only helps George this one time in order for him to be there to bail them out in the future.  

I'm wondering if Sam Wainwright getting involved means the B&L could get a big investor who wasn't Potter, and who could potentially help George get the prosperity/stability he was missing before.

Btw., what is ZuZu short for?

[Constant Viewer]

34 minutes ago, Brn2bwild said:

Btw., what is ZuZu short for?

Maybe Susan or Suzanne?

[Ohiopirate02]

9 hours ago, Constant Viewer said:

Maybe Susan or Suzanne?

Suzanne in Polish is Zuzanna, and ZuZu could be short for that.  It still does not explain why George and Mary gave their daughter a foreign name when the rest of their kids have All-American name, and Bedford Falls is not a very multicultural town.  Except for the Martinis, every other character is a WASP. 

It does feel like someone with enough power behind the scenes snuck in the name maybe the character was named after someone's daughter or granddaughter.  

 

[Blergh]

Well, at the time,  there was a prominent  middle-age comic actress whose original given names were  Eliza Susan but who opted to use her childhood nickname and would be  billed as   ZaSu Pitts (1894-1963). Perhaps, with all the angst and struggles the Baileys were going through, they gave their youngest daughter a similar name as this performer in the hopes of getting as many laughs as possible. 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Blergh

[Suzn]

16 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Same. Let me be clear, I do not endorse the Ayn Rand-ian school of thought that selfishness is a virtue, the naked pursuit of self-interest, yada yada yada, because I think it does way more harm than good. 

That doesn't mean the opposite extreme is any better.

Hell, if anything, the level of self-abnegation that It's a Wonderful Life seems to endorse practically paves the way for the former line of thinking! It's important to put others first within reason, yes, but that doesn't mean you're not allowed to think about you, or say no, or set boundaries. Maybe I'm wrong, but I truly believe that your happiness matters just as much as the next person's. Not more, but certainly not less. Self-martyrdom is just as unattractive as narcissism.

That's what rubs me the wrong way about It's a Wonderful Life: only George is expected to give of himself and sacrifice, but everyone else can just demand, mooch, and take for granted that he'll always save the day. 

Very well said.  There is a balance point of thinking of others and thinking of yourself which is beneficial and healthy.  I do like what you said about self-martyrdom and narcissism!

15 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Yep.  The town rallies together to save George,  but they do not learn anything from this (except, hopefully, never give Uncle Billy any responsibility).  They have not changed, only George.  And a cynical part of me believes the town only helps George this one time in order for him to be there to bail them out in the future.  

They've left it to George to suck it up and go on being the savior of the town.  Sure he has been shown that people have some appreciation of him but he can go on carrying the burdens.

[Wiendish Fitch]

18 hours ago, Captain Carrot said:

The horror of Mary as a librarian makes more sense if you realize that Capra spent a number of years in Pawnee Indiana, which has always had a negative opinion on the profession.

Wow, another reason to think Frank Capra was a douchebag (I've done a bit of reading on him, and he sounded insufferable).

[raven]

6 hours ago, Suzn said:

They've left it to George to suck it up and go on being the savior of the town.  Sure he has been shown that people have some appreciation of him but he can go on carrying the burdens.

Thing thing to me is, he wasn't carrying a burden.  He felt like he was the burden; hence the Clarence intervention. 

From the beginning, George didn't want Potter to get his hooks further into the town, so he stayed.  He chose not to leave when he had opportunities to do so - always his choice, his neighbors didn't ask him to stay.  He ran his business well enough to buy a house, fix it up and support a family with a bunch of kids.  He had a happy marriage.  He didn't have Potter level money but they didn't seem to want for anything.  He was offered a better paying job by Potter and refused.  Europe isn't going anywhere if the Baileys want to save up.  

The town appreciated him through friendship, patronizing the B&L and paying their loans on time.  When Mary sent up the SOS, they responded with no questions asked.   I don't see the town people as leeches or George as a martyr.  George doesn't consider himself a martyr - he thinks he's a failure, which is abjectly wrong unless you're a miser like Potter, counting $$, and even then, George was doing just fine; not extravagant, just fine.

The differing perspectives are interesting.

[JAYJAY1979]

I viewed the movie as showing that all of us have an impact..such as saving his brother as a kid, finding the poison in the capsules, etc.

I do agree that the original plan to have Mary married to Sam would have been better.  If test audiences didn't like it because they liked her with George...doesn't that mean you did the job of making George and Mary a couple to root for?

And I love the ending with the whole town coming to help George when he's in need.  I'm a softie and refuse to let the cynicism of 2021 detract from that fact 

[Ailianna]

I wonder if the real problem with Mary and Sam in the alternate version was that people felt she was "cheating" by being with someone else.

[Dejana]

The movie is an adaptation of the short story The Greatest Gift by Philip Van Doren Stern. It's less than 50 pages long and the audiobook is pretty short, less than a half hour.  They really expanded the story for the movie.

The wife character (Mary) is married to someone else in the book's alternate universe. It always cracked me up as a kid, when Clarence melodramatically tells George that AU Mary is about to close the library. It was just so ridiculous and over the top that I couldn't get around to being offended by the not-great message about ummarried women. I can totally believe that movie audiences of the time wouldn't like seeing Mary married to (and presumably having offscreen sex with) another guy, or that it crossed some sort of nebulous line of the Production Code in how a "nice girl" was supposed to be depicted. It also makes George and Mary bigger soulmates, to show that it was either George for her, or no one.

I also take the story to be saying that we all have an impact and that kindness/generosity to others will end up being reciprocated, even if it's years down the line. The movie takes it to extremes for dramatic purposes, but I do think there are individuals who can have an outsized impact on the world. George's mental health issues seemed more acute and situational to me, as opposed to someone who dealt with depression as a life-long issue. I don't think a movie having a happy ending means that the characters wouldn't ever have any more problems or difficult times, if the story went on.

I watch a lot of movie reactors on YouTube, people in their twenties or younger, and It's a Wonderful Life can still resonate with newer audiences. They know it's a classic title but are too young to remember it as a ubiquitous staple of holiday TV. The showings on linear TV have been pretty limited for a couple of decades now.

Edited November 17, 2021 by Dejana

[starri]

21 hours ago, JAYJAY1979 said:

And I love the ending with the whole town coming to help George when he's in need.  I'm a softie and refuse to let the cynicism of 2021 detract from that fact 

I'm as big a misanthrope as it comes, but the end gets me every single time.

[shoregirl]

42 minutes ago, starri said:

I'm as big a misanthrope as it comes, but the end gets me every single time.

The end gets me every time. Sometimes the begining too when you hear everyone praying for George . 

 

On 11/15/2021 at 9:52 PM, Captain Carrot said:

The horror of Mary as a librarian makes more sense if you realize that Capra spent a number of years in Pawnee Indiana, which has always had a negative opinion on the profession.