#657) Killer of Sheep (1978)

#657) Killer of Sheep (1978)

OR “Watts Going On?”

Directed & Written by Charles Burnett

Class of 1990

Both the poster and trailer are from the film’s 2007 release (the trailer even mentions the film’s NFR standing). More on that later.

The Plot: Stan (Henry G. Sanders) lives in Watts, Los Angeles with his wife (Kaycee Moore) and children, earning a living by working at a slaughterhouse. Stan’s work has made him disillusioned with life as he becomes more despondent and unhappy. And if you’re wondering what is the inciting incident that kicks of the real plot of this movie, I’ve got some bad news for you.

Why It Matters: The NFR calls the film “simultaneously naturalistic and poetic, witty and heartbreaking”, praising its “sympathetic yet clear-eyed portrait of a community”.

But Does It Really?: Full disclosure: My first attempt to watch “Killer of Sheep” ended 10 minutes into the movie when I realized I was not in the right mood to watch it. Cut to a week later and a full viewing of the film, and I still don’t think I was in the right mood. I’m glad there are people out there who love and champion “Killer of Sheep” (though the comparisons to neorealism make my eyes glaze over), and I’m glad the NFR had the foresight to induct it so early into their run, but it’s just not for me. Maybe it’s the lack of story, maybe it’s the overall bleakness, but even at 80 minutes “Killer of Sheep” was a slog to watch. Still, you got to hand it to Charles Burnett for devoting nearly a decade to get this movie made, as well as to everyone who has helped keep this film in the conversation of great movies. Of course “Killer of Sheep” is deserving of its NFR status, but one viewing is enough for me.

Shout Outs: Perhaps the most obscure NFR shout-outs on this list: One of the songs on the “Killer of Sheep” soundtrack is Paul Robeson’s cover of “The House I Live In”, the title number from the Frank Sinatra short of the same name.

Wow, That’s Dated: The main giveaway of the film’s ’70s setting is all the afros and jive talk. Other than that, a depressingly large amount of this movie doesn’t feel dated at all.

Seriously, Oscars?: Fun Fact: In order to be eligible for an Oscar, you need a theatrical run. We’ll get into the interesting theatrical history (or lack thereof) of “Killer of Sheep” in a second, but for now I’ll say that outside of a prize at the 1981 Berlin International Film Festival, “Sheep” didn’t pick up any awards until its 2007 “re” release.

Other notes 

  • Charles Burnett was part of the L.A. Rebellion, a group of Black UCLA film students in the late 1960s/early 1970s, fueled by political and social movements of the day, and irked by the popular wave of Blaxploitation films hitting theaters, to create more realistic films about their Black experience. “Killer of Sheep” was inspired by the people in Burnett’s life from growing up in Watts, and was Burnett’s thesis film to get his Master’s degree. “Sheep” was filmed on a budget of $10,000 on weekends across 1972 and 1973, with some additional scenes shot in 1975. A majority of the film was shot in and around Watts with a cast of non-actors (including Burnett’s daughter Angela as Stan’s daughter).
  • One of the films few professional actors, Henry G. Sanders was cast as Stan when Burnett’s first choice for the role didn’t make parole in time (!). Sanders does a good job of playing the character’s melancholia without making him too down or depressing. Since “Killer of Sheep”, Sanders has continued to grace our screens, working in film and plenty of episodic television.
  • Oh yeah, this is definitely one of those films you think about when you think of arthouse independent cinema: the black-and-white cinematography, the real-life locations, the less-than-stellar sound mix (there were scenes where I could hear a chair creaking better than I could the dialogue).
  • This is another NFR movie where I didn’t take a lot of notes. Unfortunately it’s not because I was so enthralled with the movie, it’s because nothing happens! Did I catch these people at a bad time? Should I come back later?
  • If nothing else, this film as a good soundtrack. Burnett wanted the film’s soundtrack to be “an aural history of African-American popular music”, which explains the presence of such greats as Scott Joplin, Paul Robeson, Louis Armstrong, and Earth, Wind & Fire. It helps break up the movie for me.
  • While researching this post, I re-read my write-up on “Bless Their Little Hearts“, a film by Burnett’s UCLA colleague Billy Woodberry and written by Burnett. Like “Sheep”, “Bless” also chronicles a working class Black man trying to raise a family and make ends meet in Watts. Both films have a slice of life “nothing happens” vibe to them, and yet something in “Bless” worked for me in a way “Sheep” didn’t. Maybe it’s the dramatic moments in the third act of “Bless” that have stayed with me. They at least gave me the sense that all of the previous scenes were building to something. The argument could be made that “Killer” also builds to something in the final moments, but I wasn’t entirely sold on that. It doesn’t help that the original song for that scene – Dinah Washington’s rendition of “Unforgettable” – was the only one that could not be cleared for the film’s eventual release, and replaced with Washington’s “This Bitter Earth” (played earlier in the film). Though seemingly inconsequential, this change of music alters how we perceive the final scene, ending on a slightly more optimistic note (if you will).

Legacy 

  • “Killer of Sheep” had its premiere in November 1978 at the Whitney Museum of American Art in Manhattan (appropriately enough, in Manhattan’s Meatpacking District). The film would play its share of festivals, but because Charles Burnett never planned to give his student film a theatrical release, he never paid the pricy licensing fees for the soundtrack, which became an issue years later. In the ensuing decades, “Killer of Sheep” would build up its reputation as an arthouse masterpiece (helped in part by its NFR induction) and play the occasional festival or museum exhibition. It was not until 2000, when the UCLA Film & Television Archive restored the film on 35mm, that talk of an official theatrical release began in earnest. Nearly six years was spent on maintaining the music rights to the soundtrack ($142,000 in total, paid in part with a generous donation from Steven Soderbergh) before “Killer of Sheep” finally got a proper theatrical release in spring 2007.
  • Charles Burnett’s next film was 1983’s “My Brother’s Wedding”, which had its own share of production woes and subsequent re-evaluations. His third movie, 1990’s “To Sleep with Anger”, found its way into the National Film Registry, as did the aforementioned “Bless Their Little Hearts”.
  • “Killer of Sheep” gets referenced from time to time, mainly in conjunction with other films by members of the L.A. Rebellion. A still frame from the scene of neighborhood kids jumping across rooftops was tinted red and used as the cover for the 2009 album “The Ecstatic” by Yasiin Bey (formerly Mos Def).

#656) Allures (1961)

#656) Allures (1961)

OR “1961: A Space Novelty”

Directed by Jordan Belson

Class of 2011

I normally don’t include warnings, but if you plan on watching “Allures”, the film contains a lot of flashing lights. I don’t consider myself to be photosensitive, but even for me it was a lot.

The Plot: There’s a couple of ways to look at “Allures”. On first viewing, I saw the film as a series of geometric patterns creating a cosmic experience when married to its electronic soundtrack. Filmmaker Jordan Belson described the film as “a combination of molecular structures and astronomical events mixed with subconscious and subjective phenomena – all happening simultaneously.” But of course, I prefer this quote from Belson which he used for his entire filmography: “It’s a glorious thing if you don’t expect an explanation.”

Why It Matters: The NFR gives a run-down on Jordan Belson, calling him “the master of ‘cosmic cinema'”. The write-up also includes another Belson quote about the film, which he called “probably the space-iest film that had been done until then.”

But Does It Really?: We have a lot of avant-garde filmmaking and abstract animation on the NFR, which makes it harder for a film like “Allures” to stand out among the crowd, which thankfully it does. I will say “Allures” is definitely ahead of its time, with this kind of space-age “trip” becoming common place in films made over a decade later, but totally revolutionary in 1961. “Allures” is very much what the kids would describe today as “no thoughts, just vibes”: Don’t overthink it, just let the sight and sounds wash over you. A pass for “Allures” as representation of abstract filmmaker Jordan Belson, and for giving me an excuse to not overanalyze another movie on this list and just enjoy it as intended.

Everybody Gets One: Jordan Belson was born in Chicago, but moved to California to study painting at UC Berkeley. While in the Bay Area, Belson was inspired to become a filmmaker by the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art’s “Art in Cinema” series (curated by fellow NFR filmmaker Frank Stauffacher). In the late ’50s, Belson began a collaboration with sound artist Henry Jacobs which became the Vortex Concerts; a series of light and sound shows projected inside the Morrison Planetarium at the California Academy of Sciences. “Allures”, as well as most of Belson’s subsequent filmography, is a direct continuation of his light show presentations: a series of images set to an electronic soundscape.

Title Track: “Allures” gets its name from “Etude aux allures”, a 1958 electronic music composition by Pierre Schaeffer that Belson had intended to use for one of his Vortex Concerts before the Morrison Planetarium abruptly ended the series in 1959. Although the name “Allures” remains, none of the Schaeffer soundtrack was used in the final film; the score is an original composition from Henry Jacobs.

Seriously, Oscars?: No Oscar nods for “Allures” or Jordan Belson. For the record: 1961’s Best Animated Short Oscar winner was the Yugoslavian film “Surogat” (aka “Ersatz”), which I learned today was used as inspiration for the “Worker and Parasite” segment on “The Simpsons”. It’s all connected!

We come to my favorite segment of the blog: instead of Other notes it’s time for Things I Thought I Saw During “Allures”.

  • A spirograph
  • A Magic Eye poster
  • The Warner Communications logo from the ’70s
  • The intro to “Family Affair”
  • Kirby?
  • Rover from “The Prisoner”
  • The seizure I’m about to have. Enough with the flashing lights!
  • Outtakes from “Off/On“.
  • Constellations (makes sense)
  • Fireworks
  • A plasma orb
  • My old Lite-Brite! Has my childhood Rosebud finally revealed itself?
  • A very bloodshot eye
  • More flashing lights! This is worse than “Pokémon”!
  • Glinda the Good Witch
  • The Janus Films logo. Oh wait, that’s the end of the movie.

Legacy 

  • Jordan Belson continued to create experimental shorts for the rest of his life, though his output diminished as he became more reclusive and began removing his films from circulation. Belson also provided special effects for the space-orbiting sequence in “The Right Stuff“, and his final film was 2005’s aptly named “Epilogue”. Jordan Belson died in September 2011 at age 85, with “Allures” making the National Film Registry three months later.

#655) Dixon-Wanamaker Expedition to Crow Agency (1908)

#655) Dixon-Wanamaker Expedition to Crow Agency (1908)

Directed by Joseph and Roland Dixon

Class of 2018

2025 UPDATE: The original version of this post was based on 3 ½ minutes of “Dixon-Wanamaker” I was able to find online. Another 45 minutes has recently resurfaced, and I’ve updated my thoughts on the film based on that. Thanks as always to Benjamin Wilson for finding this footage.

Around the turn-of-the-century, Indigenous tribes were considered a “vanishing race” by White America, and efforts were made to assimilate the tribes into quote-unquote American culture. Part of this effort was a series of expeditions led by pastor and self-ascribed Native American expert Joseph Dixon. Funded by department store magnate Rodman Wanamaker, the first Dixon-Wanamaker expedition in 1908 travelled to Crow Agency, Montana to meet with and document the Crow tribe. An avid photographer, Dixon and his son Roland took thousands of pictures (and of course film) of the tribe and their customs. Although Dixon’s intention was to present their lives “without any hint of the white man’s foot”, most of the results were staged for the camera and deemed by historians as “romanticized and commercialized”. This footage was projected at the Wanamaker’s flagship store in Philadelphia as part of an exhibition on Native Americans.

The available “Dixon-Wanamaker” footage is a seemingly random collection of shots, including various members of the Crow tribe and a handful of their customs. While there isn’t much to gauge about the Crow people in this footage, there is no doubt about this film’s historical significance. Of course the customs of any Indigenous tribe should be lived and practiced by their people rather than observed and studied by the likes of me, but the fact that any of this was documented and has survived is a mini-miracle and worthy of NFR induction.

Why It Matters: In keeping with the “historical significance” argument, the NFR’s write-up has no superlatives, only giving us an academic paragraph about the film’s production and preservation.

Other notes 

  • The additional 45 minutes I have seen are pretty much more of the same from the 3 ½ minute version, just longer. Why watch 10 seconds of a large caravan parading across the camera when you can watch 2 minutes?
  • To the best of my knowledge, most of this footage comes from one of the first Crow Fairs. Started in 1904 to celebrate the Crow people and their customs (which were in danger at the time of being wiped out completely), the Crow Fair is still an annual tradition, and the footage here includes many elements of the Fair that continue to this day, including a parade and a rodeo. Watching the Crow ride bucking broncos circa 1908 is interesting given that for some, this may in fact have been their first rodeo.
  • The notion that this film is from the Crow Fair would also explain the large group of White people appearing in these early shots. And I assume that’s Dixon trying to get onlookers to move out of the frame so the camera can get an unobstructed view.
  • Of course, any footage of the Crow in this era is good to have, but this all feels so staged. Other than the performative events of the Crow Fair, I’m not getting a sense of actual culture and traditions. I don’t walk away from this knowing anything about the Crow and their centuries long struggle to survive. Maybe the shoppers watching this at the Wanamaker’s display got more context, but then again maybe not.
  • Why are there nuns in this? So much for the whole “no White influence” credo. Why do Catholics have to spoil everything?
  • Towards the end we spend a lot of time at a memorial in the Crow reservation for members of the 7th Cavalry Regiment who died in the Battle of the Little Bighorn, aka Custer’s Last Stand. Much like the Crow people and their history, the Battle of Little Bighorn is too monumental to cover here (and I have no memory of how it’s portrayed in “Little Big Man”), but it is noteworthy as part of the Great Sioux War of 1876, the culmination of decades of fighting by the Crow to protect their land from the encroaching Sioux and Lakota tribes.

Legacy 

  • The first Dixon-Wanamaker expedition was successful enough to warrant two more. The 1909 expedition returned to Crow Agency, and a recreation of the Battle of the Little Bighorn was filmed with four Crow tribe members who were part of the original battle. The third and final expedition in 1913 was a nationwide journey to 89 different tribes dubbed an “expedition of citizenship” to support Native Americans becoming recognized as U.S. citizens (a status they would eventually receive in 1924). Despite the good intentions of Dixon and Wanamaker, the 1913 expedition was not well-received by every tribe, particularly those in the Southwest (Navajo, Hopi, Pueblo, etc.)
  • Although the film record of the 1908 expedition seemingly disappeared, the original nitrate was rediscovered in 1982 at a Montana antique store (and I hope some bartering was involved). The film was donated to the Smithsonian Institution’s Human Studies Film Archives, where it has been preserved. Additionally, Dixon’s extensive photography of the expedition has been archived at Indiana University.
  • Joseph Dixon continued to advocate for Indigenous people for the rest of his life, including his efforts to create a National American Indian Memorial, which started construction in 1913 and was never finished. Dixon died in 1926 at age 70, with Rodman Wanamaker passing away three years later at age 65.
  • Though all but forgotten now, Wanamaker’s department store was a major chain in the early 20th century. Although Wanamaker’s no longer exists, their original Philadelphia location was added to the National Register of Historical Places in 1976, and is currently a Macy’s. Fun Fact: Wanamaker’s Philadelphia store was the primary filming location for 1987’s “Mannequin”. Truly, nothing’s gonna stop us now.
  • Because I refuse to end this post with a “Mannequin” reference: the Crow people of Montana are still around and 12,000 strong. If you’re ever visiting Crow Agency in August, be sure to check out their annual Crow Fair!

#654) A Woman Under the Influence (1974)

#654) A Woman Under the Influence (1974)

OR “Rowlands in the Deep”

Directed & Written by John Cassavetes

Class of 1990

The Plot: “A Woman Under the Influence” is several days in the life of Mabel and Nick Longhetti (Gena Rowlands and Peter Falk). Mabel is a housewife with an undiagnosed mental condition, and Nick is a construction worker who loves his wife, but lacks the overall empathy and support she needs to help her deal with her condition. After a particularly troublesome incident during a party Mabel throws for their children, Nick makes the difficult decision to have her institutionalized. That’s about it as far as story goes, with John Cassavetes focusing more on the complexities and unexplored dynamics between these two characters.

Why It Matters: The NFR write-up is lacking in superlatives specific to the movie, giving us instead a rundown of Cassavetes’ influence on independent films. Also they refer to Gena Rowlands’ character as a New York housewife even though the film is clearly set in Los Angeles. Whoops. An essay by Cassavetes expert Ray Carney posits that the character of Mabel is a semi-autobiographical depiction of Cassavetes rather than Rowlands.

But Does It Really?: “A Woman Under the Influence” is perhaps the definitive American independent film: a movie created, produced, and released purely through determination and love of the game. John Cassavetes is a maverick of American film, and I’m glad the NFR inducted him so early into their run. This all being said, did I like the actual film? Well, yes and no. Yes because of the incredible work of Cassavetes, Falk, and especially Rowlands, no because of my own issues with the film’s subject matter and overall length. We’ll get into all of this in more detail as we go, suffice it to say that even though I won’t be ranking “A Woman Under the Influence” on my personal list of favorites, it’s a no-brainer for inclusion among this roster of important American films.

Shout Outs: Not in the film directly, but “Woman Under the Influence” was produced by Cassavetes’ company Faces International, which gets its name from Cassavetes’ “Faces“, a fellow NFR inductee.

Title Track: Now that I think about it, the movie never explains what exactly Mabel is “under the influence” of. We never see her take drugs, and she only drinks in one scene. Like everything else about this movie, there are no easy answers.

Seriously, Oscars?: Despite its small release, “A Woman Under the Influence” managed to be seen by enough people to garner a string of critics awards, and eventually two Oscar nominations. John Cassavetes lost the only Best Director nomination of his career to Francis Ford Coppola for “Godfather Part II“, and Gena Rowlands lost her first Best Actress nod to Ellen Burstyn in “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore”.

Other notes 

  • “A Woman Under the Influence” began as a play written by Cassavetes for his wife Gena Rowlands. Upon reading the play Rowlands quickly realized that the character would be too intense to perform on stage multiple times a week, and the material was adapted into a screenplay. Cassavetes self-financed the project (no studio was interested in a movie about “a crazy, middle-aged dame”), mortgaging his house and hiring a crew of students from the nearby American Film Institute. Peter Falk believed in the script so much he invested $500,000 of his own money into the project (which makes you wonder just how much they were paying him over at “Columbo”). The bulk of the film was shot in 1972, but delays in post-production shelved the film for two years.
  • Another trademark Cassavetes cost-cutting measure, several of the actors are family members. Cassavetes and Rowlands’ children Nick and Xan make appearances, and both of their mothers play the lead characters’ moms (with Lady Rowlands acting alongside her real-life daughter). The Longhetti’s eldest son Tony (great name, by the way) is played by Matthew Cassel, son of longtime Cassavetes collaborator Seymour Cassel.
  • As on the fence as I am about this movie, I gotta admit how great everyone is. Gena Rowlands as always is instantly compelling, and I stuck it out with her Mabel even during the more intense moments. Peter Falk manages to be the “Peter Falk type” we associate him with, but in this case it fits the character of Nick like a glove, and Falk somehow disappears into the character while maintaining his singular persona. Side note about Falk: If he looks directly into the camera, but only with his artificial eye, does that count as a fourth wall break?
  • Maybe it’s just where we were in terms of mental health issues in the 1970s, but it’s never specified what exactly is going on with Mabel. All we get is characters referring to her as “crazy”, with Nick at one point correcting them by saying she’s “not crazy, she’s unusual.” The internet has more or less diagnosed Mabel as being bipolar, but I’m siding with the movie and leaving her undiagnosed.
  • Hats off to Cassavetes, because I have no idea how you can direct a movie like this. Every scene is so natural and organic, I can’t imagine his direction being anything other than “Just be real.” This goes hand in hand with the cinematography by Mitch Breit and Al Ruban, who give the film its cinéma vérité style without drawing attention to itself. The cameras always feel like the proverbial fly-on-the-wall, capturing the action without ever knowing where it will go next. It’s all so natural I suspect that a 1974 audience was either in awe of the aesthetic or bored out of their minds.
  • Admittedly, my issues with the movie are based in my own personal biases. “Woman Under the Influence” is about what happens when your family lacks the emotional tools to support you in times of crisis. Most of Mabel’s family wants to help, but don’t know how to go about it; Nick in particular unable to articulate his frustration while still loving his wife. I found this all very distressing, but also recognize that this is very intentional on Cassavetes’ part. So, well done I guess.
  • My other issue with the movie is its length. I agree with critics of the time who said in essence, “It’s good, but does it have to be 2 1/2 hours?” Of course there are plenty of classic movies that are longer, but 148 minutes is a long time to watch a slice of life movie where “nothing happens”. In its favor, by the end of the film you feel just as emotionally drained as the characters do, something you can still achieve in under two hours but perhaps not with the same impact.
  • This was another movie where I didn’t take a lot of notes. I was simultaneously engaged with and turned off by this movie, ultimately concerned for Mabel and her future. Like “The Deer Hunter“, I’m glad I saw “A Woman Under the Influence”, but it’s going to be a while before I feel up to a rewatch.

Legacy 

  • “A Woman Under the Influence” premiered at the New York Film Festival, and despite its positive reception, John Cassavetes was unable to secure a distributor. Cassavetes self-distributed through his company Faces International, booking the film in art house and college campuses. In the ensuing years, “A Woman Under the Influence” has been reappraised and declared Cassavetes’ definitive film.
  • John Cassavetes directed five more films in his lifetime, including “The Killing of a Chinese Bookie” and “Opening Night”. His final film was 1986’s “Big Trouble” (a modern riff on “Double Indemnity“) before his death in 1989.
  • Gena Rowlands continued acting on film and TV for the next 40 years, earning a second Best Actress Oscar nod for 1980’s “Gloria” (also directed by Cassavetes), and picking up an Emmy nomination seemingly every time she was on TV. In 2015, Rowlands received an Honorary Academy Award as “an original talent” and “an independent film icon”. The award was presented to her by her son Nick Cassavetes.
  • “A Woman Under the Influence” is still considered a seminal piece of ’70s cinema. It is no coincidence that the 2003 documentary about the ’70s indie scene is called “A Decade Under the Influence”.

#653) All That Heaven Allows (1955)

#653) All That Heaven Allows (1955)

OR “Between a Rock and a Hard Place”

Directed by Douglas Sirk

Written by Peg Fenwick. Based on the novel by Edna and Harry Lee.

Class of 1995 

The Plot: Cary Scott is deeply unfulfilled with her life in Stoningham, New England; widowed and spending her time with her college-age children (Gloria Talbott and William Reynolds) and shallow acquaintances at the local country club. One day Cary strikes up a friendship with her arborist Ron Kirby (Rock Hudson), and is immediately drawn to his intelligence and free-living philosophy. The two begin a romantic relationship, but when they become engaged Cary’s friends question their age-gap and view Ron as a gigolo mooching off of Cary’s wealth. Will the stuffy societal norms of the 1950s keep Cary and Ron apart? And what’s with the lighting?

Why It Matters: While the NFR admits that at first glance the film is a “standard weepie”, its “rich visual texture” and “soaring emotional score” turn the subject into “a deeply disturbing, deeply compassionate portrait”. An essay by author John Wills takes a deeper dive into the film’s metaphorical imagery.

But Does It Really?: This was…interesting. I can definitely say I was more intrigued than entertained by “All That Heaven Allows”. Yes, it’s a highly-stylized melodrama, but it has that Douglas Sirk touch to it that keeps it watchable. No other movies look or sound like a Douglas Sirk production, and “All That Heaven Allows” is no exception; from its borderline avant-garde lighting to its incredibly progressive stance on what a woman’s life can or can’t be. Plus, it’s 89 minutes; points as always if you keep your story moving. “All That Heaven Allows” is on the list to represent Sirk’s run of artistic soap operas at 1950s Universal, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

Everybody Gets One: Shoutout to Conrad Nagel, seen here as Cary’s would-be suitor Harvey. Nagel was a silent film veteran, and a founding member of both the Academy of Motion Pictures of Arts and Sciences and the Screen Actors Guild.

Wow, That’s Dated: All the usual ’50s suburbia stuff, but at least here Sirk is commenting on its banality, so that helps.

Title Track: “All That Heaven Allows” is the last line of the poem “Love and Life” by John Wilmot. In the poem, all that Heaven allows is the present moment, but Sirk chose the title because it felt ironic within the film’s context: “As far as I’m concerned, Heaven is stingy.”

Seriously, Oscars?: No Oscar love for “All That Heaven Allows”. In fact, no Oscar love for any of Universal’s 1955 releases. Keep in mind that Universal was cranking out mostly B pictures back then. Heck, in 1955 their biggest star was still Francis the Talking Mule.

Other notes 

  • “All That Heaven Allows” got greenlit based on the success of another Sirk film: 1954’s “Magnificent Obsession”. Like “All That Heaven Allows”, “Magnificent Obsession” was based on a novel, starred Wyman as a widow who falls in love with Hudson amidst controversy, featured a supporting turn by Agnes Moorehead, and included a finale involving one of the leads’ near-death experience. “Obsession” was one of the highest grossing films of 1954, and Sirk was given a bigger budget and more creative freedom on “All That Heaven Allows”.
  • If Cary’s neighborhood looks familiar, it’s Colonial Street, the fake street on the Universal backlot. The houses and facades have been used for countless TV shows and movies, most notably “Leave It to Beaver”, “The Munsters”, and “Desperate Housewives”.
  • You know something is up with this movie once you see the stylized lighting in Cary’s house. You don’t see this kind of lighting outside of film noir or a Gene Kelly third act ballet. It’s distracting, but also much more visually engaging than other domestic dramas of the time; very much the mis-en-scene that film critics love pointing out about this movie.
  • I know it’s the point, but everyone at this country club is the worst. Mona’s a back-stabbing gossip, and Howard straight-up assaults Cary. It really says something when the nicest person in your community is Endora.
  • Most of my viewing was me marveling at how progressive this film is. Everything about “All That Heaven Allows” would fit right in with the more laidback character studies of the 1970s with its challenging of social norms and nuanced female lead. And yet here it is in the middle of a Hollywood “product”. A rare sight indeed.
  • I’ve realized I haven’t seen a lot of Jane Wyman’s filmography (and I’ve genuinely forgotten she was in “Lost Weekend“). I don’t have a lot to say about Wyman’s performance here, other than she’s good enough that I cared about Cary’s well-being throughout.
  • Rock Hudson: the ’50s answer to Fabio. Hudson doesn’t have much to do in this film, but he’s the perfect combination of standard ’50s he-man and sensitive lover the part calls for. I was waiting for the neighbors to start gossiping about his apocryphal marriage to Jim Nabors.
  • Continuing my inability to tell how old everyone is in classic movies: Wyman was 38 during filming, Hudson 30. Not so much a May-September romance as a May-April romance. There must not be a lot going on in this town if this is your big controversy.
  • Today in Coda-era profanity censorship: “Here’s to those who wish us well, all the rest can go to Hackensack”.
  • Interestingly enough, when Ron mentions his service in the war, I assumed he meant World War II. Turns out it was Korea.
  • Cary’s kids really got on my nerves. Why are they so upset about having to move if Cary and Ron get married? They’re both in their mid-20s. Find a roommate, you freeloaders!
  • Any movie scores points with me when there are character actor sightings. Among the party guests are Hayden Rorke (aka Dr. Bellows) and Eleanor Audley (aka Maleficent and the Evil Stepmother). Also at the party is – Howard again!? Oh no!
  • Sirk’s lighting design goes a little too far in Kay’s room when Cary consoles her. Do they live next door to a kaleidoscope?
“Good morning, Dr. Meacham.”
  • Hey it’s a Die Hard Not-Christmas movie! I haven’t had one of those in a while.
  • There’s a recurring thread in this movie about Cary buying a television. You never hear TV talked about so openly in the movies, especially in the 1950s when it was still the enemy as far as big movie studios were concerned. Universal had just started producing TV shows, so it seems they knew the writing was on the wall. And sure, getting a TV is all well and good, but wait until Cary sees who’s hosting “General Electric Theater“. She may end up shooting her screen Elvis-style.
  • [Spoilers] What in the hell is that ending? Just when you think things are wrapping up, there’s a last-minute curveball as Ron falls of a cliff and becomes unconscious. Sirk toyed with the idea of Ron dying at the end, but producer Ross Hunter convinced him that the film needed a happy ending. This movie is already dramatic enough, we don’t need a brush with death too. Haven’t these two gone through enough already?

Legacy 

  • “All That Heaven Allows” opened on Christmas Day 1955. Both critics and audiences were dismissive of the film, finding it inferior to “Magnificent Obsession”. The film found a second life in the early 1970s, thanks to Jon Halliday’s book “Sirk on Sirk” and praise from German filmmaker Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Douglas Sirk’s entire filmography was reappraised in the ’70s, with “All That Heaven Allows” coming out from its predecessor’s shadow and receiving acclaim for its own merits.
  • Douglas Sirk made a handful of films with Universal after “All That Heaven Allows”, including “Written on the Wind” (also starring Rock Hudson) and his final film: a remake of “Imitation of Life“.
  • Heir apparent to the Douglas Sirk filmography is Todd Haynes, whose films “Far from Heaven” and “Carol” both play on the “repressed ’50s housewife” themes of “All That Heaven Allows”. Also he’s got a new movie called “May December” which may also tread the same water. What say you, readers of the future?
  • Coincidentally, while I was writing this I learned about an HBO documentary about Rock Hudson subtitled “All That Heaven Allowed” that just premiered. What are the odds?
  • And finally, Ross Hunter would go on to produce such bloated all-star movies as “Airport” and the musical remake of “Lost Horizon”, still considered one of the worst movies ever made. What a delightfully odd filmography.