The Best Years of Our Lives (1946) (1 Viewer)

[DennisBassi]

I love this movie and have watched it frequently throughout the past 40 years. I have never given a thought as to its length, not even knowing it is as long as has been stated in this thread. There are so many memorable, dramatic, touching scenes too numerous to mention. However, the one that effects me most deeply was when Al arrives home and no knows he’s coming. The scene in the hallway, Myrna Loy’s reaction... very few movies throughout my lifetime have affected me that deeply and it is just as powerful every time I see it.

 

[Tino]

I love this movie and have watched it frequently throughout the past 40 years. I have never given a thought as to its length, not even knowing it is as long as has been stated in this thread. There are so many memorable, dramatic, touching scenes too numerous to mention. However, the one that effects me most deeply was when Al arrives home and no knows he’s coming. The scene in the hallway, Myrna Loy’s reaction... very few movies throughout my lifetime have affected me that deeply and it is just as powerful every time I see it.

And that scene is based on his own homecoming to his wife Margaret.

 

[Malcolm R]

A different type of situation, but today, I watched Casablanca again in a movie theater and it reminded me that if it wasn't for Ingrid Bergman cutting her hair for "For Whom the Bell Tolls" Warner would've had her come back to re-shoot some scenes so they could change out the song "As Time Goes By" for another song. Talk about getting a lucky break for a studio.

Another story is that the studio also wanted to cut "Over the Rainbow" from The Wizard of Oz. There are a lot of dummies making decisions in Hollywood. Fortunately, sometimes they get thwarted. Who knows how many iconic moments have been lost due to studio meddling.

 

[Carabimero]

At the Academy Awards in '47, Best Years was up against a trio of adapted movies: Henry the V, directed by Lawrence Olivier; The Razor's Edge, directed by Edmund Goulding; and The Yearling, directed by Clarence Brown. Best Years won every Oscar it was nominated for except "Sound Recording," which went to The Jolson Story.

Best Years won Picture, Director, Screenplay, Editing, Music, Actor and Supporting Actor (Russell). Because no one thought Russell would win Supporting Actor, they gave him an honorary Oscar for bringing hope to veterans. Goldwyn took home the Thalberg, bringing the total number of statues earned by Best Years to nine. It also won what was then the equivalent of a Golden Globe for Best Picture.

 

[Bob_S.]

I'm glad this movie is getting the props it deserves. I saw it for the first time many, many years ago and became an instant classic for me. I'd probably place it in my top 10. I never really paid attention to the length, I could just watch it over and over. What I really liked about it was it gave you a glimpse of what every day life was like in an average hometown right after the war. Myrna was wonderful in it, my favorite performance from her. What a perfect wife. I love when she says, "How many times have I told you I hated you and believed it in my heart? How many times have you said you were sick and tired of me and that we were all washed up? How many times have we had to fall in love all over again?" What a commitment to marriage! Was thrilled when it came out on blu and was one of the first movies I played when I bought my 65 inch OLED. I really wanted to see it on a big screen.

 

[bujaki]

It's a perfect screenplay. There's hardly a false note in it.

 

[Tino]

Ill say it again.

A great movie can’t be long enough.

A terrible film can’t be short enough.

 

[jim_falconer]

So what should they have cut out if it's too long you? Perhaps just two returning vets instead of three?

This reminds me of the story of Herbert Yates telling John Ford that Republic's policy is to never release a film, that has a running time of over 2 hours. So right when the climatic fight started at the ending of The Quiet Man, John Ford had the projectionist shut the film down. When Yates asked what was going on, Ford replied that he could not take anything out from the film up to that point, so to follow Yates instructions, he ended the film at that point. Needless to say, Yates retracted his demand, and the film was released in it's present 129 minute length.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Ill say it again.

A great movie can’t be long enough.

A terrible film can’t be short enough.

For the most part, I agree.

But there are a few examples of great movies that I think would be even greater had they made some different editing choices. Two of my favorite examples of this are from 2012: "Marvel's The Avengers" and "Lincoln". They are both favorites and four star films to me. But I think if both of those films had ended one scene earlier, they would have been tremendously improved.

So I think it's possible for an all around great movie to still have room for improvement, or a couple rough edges that could have been smoothed before release. But I'd agree that there are fewer examples of that than great films that I wouldn't mind going on longer.

 

[Carabimero]

Talking about the score, Goldwyn wanted Newman, but he'd moved on to become musical director at Fox. Goldwyn then looked at Hermann, but he was tied up as well. In my opinion, that was a good thing. I love Hermann, but I am not sure he would have been the right composer for this picture. It was shortly after that when Newman recommended Friedhofer.

Wyler told Friedhofer that he wanted a score in the style of something Aaron Copeland would do, something "homey." Friedhofer later talked about how he used Copeland as an influence. The influence, he said, was mostly in pacing, in weeding out "Hollywood schmaltz." He wanted to do something simple and straightforward, like a folk score. He composed the score in the summer and fall of '46. In addition to winning an Oscar, it caught ears in the classical world. A British musicologist published a paper on it, praising it as "a proper example of movie music."

What I like about the score is that it mixes in orchestral expressions that aren't homey at all, but rather more like a martial fanfare, such as the opening theme. Later, when Homer is crying on the plane, looking out the window, it's not just a repeated phrase, bit it sounds more like a hymn to me.

Wilma's theme develops slowly, then comes to full bloom in Homer's bedroom, when she--finally knowing the details of his disability--accepts them. In the end, at the wedding, I love the strings and flute that like a gentle breeze push Fred and Peggy together (that same gentle breeze of strings and flute pushes Homer out of the car at the beginning of the movie when he'd rather visit Butch's bar than face his girl).

Fred, who for such a nice guy, has a theme Kozloff wonderfully describes in her book as "dissonant and disturbing." And then, when the nightmare theme comes back at the end, with Fred on the plane, the music takes over and truly tells the story in a way I have never seen music work in a movie before or since. Friedhofer said that when the four pans reveal the motors, that he "revved those motors musically." He called it “pure musical sound.” I call it pure musical genius.

As much as I like the score, I equally enjoy the long scenes when there is no music, so that when it comes, it has more effect. A full hour and a half of this movie has no music. And less than an hour--a little more than one-third of the picture--is scored. The rest of the time is filled with nightclub and radio music (not to forget Butch on the piano!). It's all so well done. In my opinion a great spotter doesn't just know where to put music, but where not to put it. Like most other things about this film, IMO, the spotting is first rate.

As to this business of Wyler hating the score, it's true. He did. But only until others he respected praised it. Then he realized he'd been wrong. When the score won an Oscar (and Wyler won a Thalberg), someone close to Wyler said, "He went home and wept."

 

[Carabimero]

Goldwyn's second wife saw an article in a 1944 issue of Time about Marines returning home from leave. She gave it to Goldwyn. A month later he hired Kantor to turn the article into a screenplay. Kantor grew up in a small city in Iowa near the Boone River. That's where the fictitious town in Best Years got its name. Kantor was a correspondent during WWII. The article Goldwyn showed him inspired Kantor's book Glory for Me. He gave the book to Goldwyn, then three weeks later submitted a screenplay. All the main characters are there, including supporting characters like Mr. Milton, and minor characters like Novak and Bullard. But both works, the book and script, reek of misogyny. Fred and Al quit their jobs because of "uppity women" that have taken over the workforce in their absence. A waitress refuses to serve Homer and another wealthy woman wants Al to deny a loan to her nephew.

So Goldwyn hired Sherwood to rework Kantor. Sherwood was a speech writer for FDR and earned three Pulitzers for his plays. Sherwood signed a contract to write Best Years in August of '45. He submitted a partial first draft in November, then brought his wife to Hollywood, where they lived with the Goldwyns. Sherwood, Goldwyn and Wyler had story meetngs for weeks, pouring out ideas and feelings. Wyler related his feelings on returning from the war, mainly the moment he was reunited with his wife "down a long corridor" like we see in the film. Wyler's experiences returning led to the creation of the taxi cab scene at the beginning of the picture.

Sherwood took all the ideas and produced a revised draft in early March of '46. A final shooting script was ready to go a month later.

 

[benbess]

As others have mentioned, one of the things that's brave about The Best Years Of Our Lives is the length. At 2 hours and 50 minutes it was almost an hour longer than most movies of the 1940s. That longer length allowed for all the main characters to have some depth. Backing the film at that length was something that Wyler and Goldwyn did that was essential to the stories told in the film.

Carabimero: You might possibly consider doing an article on this movie for some publication, or maybe even a video review on youtube? Just a thought.....

 

[Carabimero]

Carabimero: You might possibly consider doing an article on this movie for some publication, or maybe even a video review on youtube? Just a thought.....

Thanks. That's exactly what my wife said. When I told her I wasn't qualified because I am not a film historian, she said that I have seen the movie 85 times, read about it my whole life, and I was qualified to do it. So I thought about doing an audio commentary to be played with the movie, similar to the external one done for the director's edition of ST:TMP, and make it available for free download on my website. The problem with that is, no one would know to go there to look for it.

But I do appreciate the vote of confidence. I'll try and figure out something...

 

[benbess]

Thanks. That's exactly what my wife said. When I told her I wasn't qualified because I am not a film historian, she said that I have seen the movie 85 times, read about it my whole life, and I was qualified to do it. So I thought about doing an audio commentary to be played with the movie, similar to the external one done for the director's edition of ST:TMP, and make it available for free download on my website. The problem with that is, no one would know to go there to look for it.

But I do appreciate the vote of confidence. I'll try and figure out something...

You are totally qualified!!++

And an audio commentary would be a wonderful thing imho. A link here would help. I'd listen!

But, in addition, a different shorter article for this site or another site would also be most welcome. By shorter I mean several pages, but something that could be read in c. 10 minutes, rather than needing a c. 3 hour time commitment. I think you would have a lot to offer....

 

[Carabimero]

I just talked to my wife about it, and she supports the work it will take for me to produce a 170-minute audio commentary. If nothing else, I can upload it to You Tube and use a beep for people to sync the start of it with their own playback. I'm open to other suggestions as well.

Again, thanks for the vote of confidence. I think I needed some external validation (beyond my wife) that I was qualified. I'm currently finishing the special features on an upcoming BD release, but after that, I'm clear, so my next assignment is: THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES audio commentary!

Edit: I just realized I'm going to have to say something interesting for nearly 3 straight hours...My God...it's full of stars!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I'm not exactly sure, but I remember hearing before that there are some online communities that host fan-created audio commentaries.

 

[Carabimero]

I'm trying to get a prominent film historian to join me to add some credibility. The longest commentary I ever did solo was 93 minutes. I don't know much, but I know three hours passes quicker with two people commenting rather than one. Wish me luck in getting the partner I want for this project.

If not, I am prepared to go it alone.

 

[Carabimero]

I think my approach to this commentary is going to be taking the shooting script and breaking it down into production boards as if I was actually in preproduction and needed to create a shooting schedule. I've had just about every below-the-line job there is in Hollywood, including breaking boards. I'm sure they use a computer now, but back in my day (Hunt for Red October!), we used cardboard strips.

I'd take a script and number all the characters, props, wardrobe and locations. Then for every scene, I'd create a color-coded strip. The different colors indicated exterior or interior, or night or day. Once I had every character, prop, wardrobe and location numbered on separate strips (one for each scene), then I would pass the board on which I assembled these strips off to the location manager. They or someone else would use the strips to create a shooting schedule. The board gave the costume designer and prop master critical information, as well as many other folks.

I can't publish boards from any of the Hollywood pictures I worked on because of NDAs, but I can share an example of the boards I broke for one of my undergraduate movies. I can't express how useful breaking a script like this is.

By breaking down BEST YEARS like this, not only will I have an organized structure to put information in, but hopefully I will gain a fresh perspective that likely no one has had of this movie in 72 years. And that's what it's all about: seeing the relationship between old things in a new way.

I don't simply want to regurgitate the same stuff film historians already know. My goal is to amass more fresh, interesting information than I could possibly use in three hours, then, mixing old with new, take only the best of the best for a unique, exciting look into the making and history of BEST YEARS.

 

[TravisR]

Yesterday, I was going to make a suggestion that you have a fairly detailed script so you're not "umm-ing" and "like-ing" as you speak or have big gaps of silence but it seems like you've got the situation under control.

 

[Carabimero]

Yesterday, I was going to make a suggestion that you have a fairly detailed script so you're not "umm-ing" and "like-ing" as you speak or have big gaps of silence but it seems like you've got the situation under control.

It's tricky. I resist using a script as such because it tends to make the listening experience boring. If the listener even has a hint that I am reading something, they will bail within one minute. On the other hand, if I ramble, they'll eventually bail anyway. My approach will be to use a key-word outline for each scene. That key word, theoretically, will spark the memory of what I want to express. Then I have to put it in my own words on the spot. It makes it more engaging to listen to. If I can give the impression early on that I am going to talk knowledgeably and articulately about anything that seeing the movie might spark, I can retain listeners and gain credibility. My plan is to be "prepared but spontaneous."

I once talked to David McCullough when John Adams was in development at HBO. I asked him how he achieved such rigor in his books. He said it took him more than a decade to write some of his books because he had to read every letter that Adams, for example, wrote. When he came across a name in a letter, like James Bowdoin, for example, he had to go and read everything he could find about Bowdoin. And when he came across a name Bowdoin talked about, he had to go read everything he could find about that person. And on and on until he could go no further "sideways or back" into history. What that gave him, he said, was an opportunity to make a connection that no one else had ever made, because no one had ever seen the relationships between these people in the way he discovered. Over and over he talked about making connections. McCullough said that he'd often spend a week that led him down a dead end. But then he'd spend another week discovering a relationship between two people that no one, since that day, knew existed. Because he had to see that connection between two disparate sources. And that connection would change how he saw something else. He said it was so exciting that it became almost like an addiction to discover the next new connection.

That's what I want to do with Best Years. That's why this project could take a long time. I'm going to find every source I can, and trace it backwards and sideways. What this production board will give me, as I hopefully accrue a ton of information, is a context on which to place it within its relationship to the movie, so that I stay organized and on-point. Once I have enough interesting information, then I can work up my supporting details, build them into themes, and begin forming my keyword outline. I might rehearse the commentary once for timing, but no more. It needs to be as spontaneous as possible.

I hope the fun is going to be not just in the three hours I'll spend recording the commentary, but in the much longer journey I am about to take.